SurvivalRing

Rich Fleetwood on Survival & Preparedness - Founded/Established 1997

Local Civil Preparedness Standards

Standards for Local Civil Preparedness CPG 1-5
November 1980
(Supercedes CPG 1-5, April 1978, which may be used)

NOTICE

This Civil Preparedness Guide, which was published by the former Defense Civil Preparedness
Agency (DCPA), will continue in effect until revised and updated by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). Any references to DCPA found in this publication shall be construed to mean FEMA.

STANDARDS FOR LOCAL CIVIL PREPAREDNESS

Developed jointly with the National Association of State Directors for Disaster Preparedness, and the United States Civil Defense Council.

Developed in cooperation with:
The Council of State Governments
National Association of Counties
National League of Cities and United States Conference of Mayors
International City Management Association
American National Red Cross
International Association of Chiefs of Police
International Association of Fire Chiefs
International Association of Fire Fighters
National Fire Protection Association
National Sheriffs’ Association
U.S. Civil Service Commission
U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service

NOTE TO READERS

This 1978 edition of the Standards is updated from the 1972 version in several ways. Some of the Standards have been revised to reflect the concept of risk orientation. This means that larger cities and other jurisdictions which could face blast and other direct effects of nuclear weapons need certain additional elements of preparedness. For example, an EOC providing some degree of blast protection is desirable in a high risk jurisdiction, and warning fanout to the public must be rapid.

In the 1972 version, emergency planning was covered in Standard Five. This has been changed to Standard Three, since emergency planning provides a basis for establishing requirements for facilities and equipment and for trained personnel (now covered in Standards Four and Five, respectively).

The concept of Nuclear Civil Protection (NCP) has been added to Standard Three, on emergency planning. NCP plans provide for two options:

(1) Protection of the population essentially in-place, at or near their places of residence,

(2) Orderly relocation of people from high-risk areas to low-risk host jurisdictions during a period of severe international crisis, should time and circumstances permit implementation of relocation plans. NCP planning for the relocation option is expected to be conducted into the 1980’s, with direct Federal support and the consent and participation of States and localities.

Note for Civil Preparedness Directors or Coordinators:

These Standards for Civil Preparedness have been developed jointly by local, State, and
Federal civil preparedness professionals. They are provided as an aid in implementing the major emphasis of civil preparedness.

This emphasis aims at improving the ability of local governments to act swiftly and effectively to save life and preserve property if the community is threatened or hit by any kind of emergency or disaster-whether a peacetime emergency or enemy attack upon the United States. This requires making effective, coordinated use of all assets available to the community, from the executive talents of its top officials; to its police, fire and other forces; to its ambulances, hospitals, and medical professionals; to shelters to protect its citizens.

This in turn requires emphasis on people and training them to work together. These Standards should be used in training new and experienced local Civil Preparedness Directors/Coordinators at Federally conducted or sponsored training activities, and in on-site assistance or conferences at the community level. The Standards are also intended for use by local Directors in analyzing the level of readiness of their community, as a basis for making improvements.

If you are a new local Director or Coordinator, we recommend you look first at the outline of duties at pages 1 to 2 of the Standards. Then you will want to look at Standard Two for more details.

If you are a new Director or Coordinator in a smaller rural community, we would like to call to your attention the discussion on emergency plans for the smaller jurisdictions at pages 20 to 21.

The Standards should be brought to the attention of county commissioners, mayors, and city managers-both individually and at meetings of their associations. It should be stressed that both the Federal Government and the States are doing everything they can to help local governments to improve their readiness for emergencies-but that success depends, in the last analysis, on the support given by local chief executives.

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION
Purpose of Standards………………………………………………………………………1
Duties of Local Civil Preparedness Directors/Coordinators………….1
Background for Use of Standards…………………………………………………..2
Use of Standards………………………………………………………………………………2
Building Emergency Readiness………………………………………………………2
“Fully-Qualified” vs. “Minimum-Level” Standards………………………….2
Risk Areas………………………………………………………………………………………….2

STANDARD ONE – ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF CIVIL PREPAREDNESS
1. Statement of Purpose……………………………………………………………………..5
2. Joint-Action vs. Individual Jurisdiction Approach………………………..5
3. Organizing Local Civil Preparedness Action…………………………………5
4. Administration of Local Civil Preparedness Program…………………..6

STANDARD TWO – THE LOCAL CIVIL PREPAREDNESS DIRECTOR/COORDINATOR
1. Position and Responsibilities of the Local Civil Preparedness Director/ Coordinator………9
2. Civil Preparedness Staffing for Jurisdictions of Various Sizes…………………………………………10
3. Selection, Qualifications, and Salary of Local Director/Coordinator…………………………………11
4. Professional Training and Growth………………………………………………………………………………………12

STANDARD THREE – TANGIBLE COMPONENTS OF EMERGENCY READINESS.- LOCAL GOVERNMENT EMERGENCY PLANS
Need for Local Emergency Plans……………………………………………………………….15
Local Planning Process………………………………………………………………………………15
Hazard Analysis…………………………………………………………………………………………..15
Organization and Content of Local Government Emergency Plans………..16
Nuclear Civil Protection Planning……………………………………………………………….16
1. Fully-Qualified Emergency Planning Standard…………………………………….17
2. Minimum-Level Emergency Planning Standard……………………………………21

STANDARD FOUR – TANGIBLE COMPONENTS OF EMERGENCY READINESS: FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
1. Emergency Operating Center……………………………………………………….23
2. Shelter…………………………………………………………………………………………….23
3. Radiological Defense…………………………………………………………………….24
4. Warning System…………………………………………………………………………….25
5. Emergency Communications……………………………………………………….26
6. Emergency Public Information……………………………………………………..26
7. Law Enforcement…………………………………………………………………………..27
8. Fire Service…………………………………………………………………………………….27
9. Rescue……………………………………………………………………………………………27
10. Emergency Medical……………………………………………………………………….27
11. Public Works Engineering…………………………………………………………….27
12. Emergency Welfare……………………………………………………………………….28
13. Schools………………………………………………………………………………………….28

STANDARD FIVE – TANGIBLE COMPONENTS OF EMERGENCY READINESS: TRAINED PERSONNEL
1. Training Required for Local Government Personnel……………………………………………………………29
2. Training for Personnel Required to Supplement or Extend Governmental Capabilities……30
3. Training for the Public…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….34

STANDARD SIX – INTANGIBLE COMPONENTS OF EMERGENCY READINESS: ABILITY TO EXECUTE EMERGENCY PLANS
Evaluating Local Ability to Execute Plans……………………………..35
1. Fully-Qualified Readiness Standard……………………………….35
2. Minimum-Level Readiness Standard………………………………36


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.


STANDARD ONE

ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF CIVIL PREPAREDNESS

DISCUSSION

This Standard outlines steps needed in the organization and administration of civil preparedness, and includes information on budget levels needed to support civil preparedness programs.

Standard One primarily applies to single counties, cities, or other local jurisdictions. However, jurisdictions will often find it advantageous to join together in “joint-action” civil preparedness programs. This includes employing a full-time professional civil preparedness Director/Coordinator, who can work with chief executives and heads of operating departments in the counties or other jurisdictions in the area, help them develop emergency plans and preparedness, and assist in coordination of operations should an emergency occur.

STANDARDS

1. Statement of Purpose

Each local jurisdiction needs an officially approved statement of purpose for its civil preparedness program. In some States it appears in the State statute and is applicable to all localities. In some States it is desirable to include it in local ordinances (see item 3b below). In any case, it should be incorporated in the local government’s emergency plan (see Standard Three).

A sample Statement of Purpose is as follows:

“It is an operational assumption of the Civil Preparedness program that existing agencies of government will perform emergency activities related to those they perform in normal times. Auxiliary groups will be formed and trained, under the direction and control of the operating department of government they are to support, and non-governmental groups will be assigned emergency missions, as necessary to develop a capability to augment, or supplement, existing agencies of government in responding to emergencies. A basic purpose of the local civil preparedness agency, and its (Director) (Coordinator), shall be to provide for coordination of the operations of all such governmental and non-governmental forces in emergencies, and to provide those unique civil preparedness skills and capabilities not available in existing government organizations. The civil preparedness (Director) (Coordinator) shall also inform the operating departments of government of those special conditions arising out of a nuclear attack which would call for a modification of traditional operating techniques.”

The foregoing statement of purpose, or one similar, clearly distinguishes the civil preparedness agency, and its Director/Coordinator, from the operating agencies of government. Hence, civil preparedness is not the police department or the fire department, nor does it desire to usurp their roles; but these departments are a part of civil preparedness action. The civil preparedness agency is a coordinating agency, and a reservoir of unique skills and capabilities.

2. Joint-Action vs. Individual

Jurisdiction Approach

The decision to establish and maintain a separate civil preparedness program or to join with one or more other jurisdictions to form a joint agency should be decided by fully considering the resources, the hazards, the people, and the jurisdiction’s requirements.

Each jurisdiction should determine, in conjunction with the State civil preparedness agency, whether it should establish and maintain its own civil preparedness program, or whether its needs will be better met by joining together with one or more other jurisdictions. The joint-action approach usually results in more progress for a given investment, particularly in the case of counties or municipalities of low population. Joint programs are often advantageous even for cities and counties with a larger population. Joint-action arrangements are usually voluntary, and each jurisdiction involved must agree to participate, by appropriate official action. However, some States’ statutes may require some form of joint action.

The State civil preparedness office can advise whether the State statutes authorize joint action for civil preparedness, and if so, what local ordinances or resolutions would need to be enacted. The State can also give advice on how other joint-action arrangements (if any) in the State have worked out, and on such practical details as the sharing of costs between the jurisdictions involved.

Where a jurisdiction decides to enter into a joint-action arrangement with one or more others, the steps described in the balance of this Standard must be adapted as required by the fact that two or more jurisdictions are involved.

3. Organizing Local Civil Preparedness Action

The following eight-step checklist is provided as a guide in organizing for local civil preparedness. It should be followed to the extent applicable in a specific jurisdiction, adapting the steps as necessary in light of the local situation (including any adaptations required by a joint-action approach):

a. Meeting of Executives – The chief executive and his department heads should be brought together to be oriented on the civil preparedness program and to be made aware of their emergency responsibilities. Representatives of the State civil preparedness agency will frequently be available to assist in the conduct of this meeting.

b. Ordinance – Unless provided for by State statute, local legislation must be enacted to provide legal authorization and support for the local civil preparedness program and activities, both in normal times and during emergency periods. It should include an appropriate Statement of Purpose, and should be in conformance with State legislation. If there is a model ordinance for use in localities within the State, this should be used as a point of departure, with local legal counsel adding any special provisions needed locally. The civil preparedness ordinance or other appropriate ordinance should extend the authority of local government to non-government personnel who may support regular government forces during an emergency (e.g., auxiliary policemen, or shelter managers).

c. Local Civil Preparedness Director/Coordinator – The local chief executive or other appointing authority must select an individual with the education, experience, initiative, and imagination needed to coordinate and carry forward, on behalf of the chief executive, a civil preparedness program for the protection of the population and of public and private property. If the jurisdiction is participating in a joint-action arrangement with other jurisdictions, the Director/Coordinator must be acceptable to each participant. (See Standard Two.)

d. Training of local Director/Coordinator – The Director/Coordinator must take training available from or through the State civil preparedness agency, to begin developing the professional expertise he (or she) requires. (See Standard Two.)

e. Hazard Analysis – The local Director/Coordinator assisted if necessary by State or Regional personnel, should prepare a “hazard analysis” for the jurisdiction. Potential hazards from nuclear attack are identified in Publication TR-82, “High Risk Areas”, and State and Federal personnel can assist local jurisdictions in identifying peacetime hazards to which they may be exposed.

f Initial Assessment of Local Emergency Readiness – The local Director/Coordinator assesses the jurisdiction’s existing level of emergency readiness using these Standards. This assessment may be made by the Director/Coordinator himself, or it may be conducted with advice and assistance from State or Regional personnel. The assessment covers both tangible and intangible elements of readiness, as outlined in Standards Three through Six. It should be prepared in close conjunction with local operating department heads and the chief executive. This assessment should take into consideration those risk factors which may influence particular Standards.

g. Development of Action Plan to Increase Readiness – Based on this initial assessment, the local Director/Coordinator develops an “action plan” covering specific steps to increase local readiness, including both short and long-term actions. State and Regional assistance may be available in the development of the local action plan, and the action plan may specify State or Regional assistance to be provided to the locality. Actions may include procuring equipment or facilities needed for emergency operations, training, emergency planning, and exercising the local emergency organization and plan.

h. Development of a Local Program Paper – After assessing the current status of local preparedness, the local Director/Coordinator may wish to use the local Civil Preparedness Annual Program Paper to set forth an orderly plan for the improvement of those preparedness items below minimum Standards. Although the programming portion of the form is required for local participation in Federal assistance programs, localities should avail themselves of this management aid even if no assistance is being requested.

4. Administration of Local Preparedness Program

a. Federal and State Assistance – The local Director/Coordinator must see that the jurisdiction participates to the maximum in Federal and State assistance available for the civil preparedness program- This includes matching funds for personnel and administrative expenses, matching funds for supplies and equipment, loans of excess Federal property, grants of radiological monitoring equipment, and other assistance. Through fully funded contracts, the Federal government provides other forms of support particularly for training and planning designed to improve local readiness.

Details are available from the State civil preparedness agency. The local Director/Coordinator should also become familiar with assistance available under other Federal programs which can strengthen local emergency capabilities, such as grants or assistance in such areas as law enforcement, highway safety ambulance procurement, and emergency medical services.

b. Budget – Experience shows that an adequate level of funding is essential to the development of effective local emergency readiness. Funding must include local appropriations, but total funding can be increased up to double the local investment by obtaining Federal matching funds for eligible expenses.

The level of funding required for developing local emergency readiness varies somewhat from one part of the country to another, and may vary even for two similar localities within a single State, depending on the tasks assigned to the local civil preparedness agency.

State civil preparedness agencies can advise on funding levels required for a given local jurisdiction, taking into account special local circumstances or assignments.

The fact that smaller jurisdictions require higher per capita funding to provide even minimum-austere preparedness is a strong argument for the joint-action approach discussed above. By pooling funds, smaller jurisdictions can often get improved emergency readiness at lower per capita cost.


STANDARD TWO

THE LOCAL CIVIL PREPAREDNESS DIRECTOR/COORDINATOR

DISCUSSION

The selection, development, and retention of a competent, professional local civil preparedness Director or Coordinator is of major importance to all jurisdictions. With such a professional, jurisdictions will be better able to attain an adequate level of readiness to conduct lifesaving operations in major emergencies, whether peacetime or attack-caused.

This Standard outlines the responsibilities of the position, and establishes criteria for the employment of local Directors/Coordinators, for their training, and for appropriate salaries.

The fact that this Standard describes the functions and responsibilities of a professional Director/Coordinator does not necessarily mean that this should be a person who has no other duties. Larger jurisdictions will require a full-time professional, but in smaller jurisdictions, civil preparedness may not be a full-time job, just as many other functions of government do not require full-time employees. However, local Director/Coordinator duties should be performed by a competent and professionally qualified person who:

(1) will be able to function on a full-time basis as a Director/Coordinator during periods of emergency; (2) has received adequate training; (3) has the confidence and support of the elected heads of government; and (4) can work effectively with the other agencies and services in the jurisdiction.

STANDARDS

1. Position and Responsibilities of the Local Civil Preparedness Director/Coordinator

a. Position – Each jurisdiction shall be served by a professionally competent local civil preparedness Director/Coordinator, who shall report directly to the chief executive, or whomever the chief executive designates. Where two or more jurisdictions support a civil defense agency under joint- action arrangements, the Director/Coordinator shall report directly to each of the chief executives, or to a council of chief executives or similar group, as established by the participating jurisdictions.

b. Responsibilities in Non-Emergency Periods – The essence of the Director/Coordinator’s job in non-emergency periods is to act on behalf of the chief executive to build readiness for coordinated operations in both peacetime and attack-caused emergencies. This requires working with the operating departments of local government, with non-governmental groups, and with the public. These are primarily staff, not ‘command,” functions. Where the Director/Coordinator serves un- der joint-action arrangements, the responsibilities described below apply to each participating jurisdiction.

Major responsibilities of the local Director/Coordinator include:

(1) Taking the lead in coordinating the development of emergency preparedness, e.g.:

(a) Development of local government emergency plans outlining which governmental forces and supporting groups will do what, under various emergency contingencies, by coordinating the planning of all departments and groups with emergency missions (as out- lined in Standard Three).

(b) Development of an Emergency Operating Center (EOC) facility (or facilities, as required), as well as EOC staffing and internal procedures to permit key executives to control coordinated operations by local forces, under emergency conditions (as outlined in Standards Four and Six).

(c) Arranging for exercises to give local officials practice in directing coordinated operations under simulated emergency conditions (as outlined in Standard Six).

(2) Developing unique skills and capabilities not found in existing departments of government (e.g., development of radiological monitoring, warning, damage assessment, and shelter systems, including trained personnel; and assisting police, fire, and other operating departments with radiological defense and other training needs (as outlined in Standards Four and Five).

(3) Providing or arranging for training needed by the public at large (as outlined in Standard Five).

(4) Administering the jurisdiction’s civil preparedness program.

The test of the Director/Coordinator who is doing the job well can be briefly stated: Is he (or she) taking the lead effectively in developing local capabilities to conduct coordinated operations in extraordinary emergencies, making maximum use of all public and private resources available to local government?

To be an effective Director/Coordinator requires two things: (1) The necessary personal qualities, and professional training and expertise; and (2) the active support of the chief executive and of the local governing body. The chief executive is responsible for all emergency preparations, and this responsibility cannot be delegated. But, the Director/Coordinator should be delegated the authority needed to develop emergency readiness, working with the heads of key operating departments that have emergency responsibilities.

The Director/Coordinator can, and desirably should, assist the chief executive and local government in additional areas, growing out of his responsibilities in building emergency preparedness. For example, he may develop expertise in procedures and criteria for Federal-assistance programs other than the civil preparedness program, and be able to assist local department heads in applying for assistance in such areas as law enforcement, highway safety, communications procurement, or emergency medical services.

c. The Director/Coordinator’s Responsibilities During Emergencies – During a peacetime or attack-caused emergency, the chief executive is in overall command. The sheriff or chief of police, fire chief, and other department heads command the operations of their forces. Hospital and news media staffs, and other groups with emergency responsibilities, carry out their functions in coordination and cooperation with the emergency operations of governmental forces.

During emergencies, the Director/Coordinator acts as principal advisor or aide to the chief executive on local government emergency operations. His major responsibility is to assure coordination among the operating departments of government (and with higher and adjacent governments), primarily by seeing that the Emergency Operating Center functions effectively. He also assists the chief executive in assuring execution of operations, plans, and procedures required by the emergency.

2. Civil Preparedness Staffing for Jurisdictions of Various Sizes

a. Local Director/Coordinator – The local civil preparedness Director/Coordinator must be available for emergency duty 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, if or when an emergency occurs. The amount of effort he (or she) needs to invest in developing emergency readiness depends upon the amount of work to be done, and this is closely related to the size of the jurisdiction. Minimum standards for employment of a Director/Coordinator are as follow, subject to reasonable modification to meet local needs and situations:

(1) A full-time paid Director/Coordinator shall be employed (a) in all cities of approximately 25,000 population or greater; (b) in all counties of approximately 15,000 population or greater; and (c) in all joint-action groupings of two or more jurisdictions.

(2) A paid Director, working at least half-time, shall be employed (a) in cities between approximately 5,000 and 25,000 population; and (b) in counties between approximately 5,000 and 15,000. In both instances, however, the employment of a full-time Director/Coordinator is strongly recommended. The half-time Director/Coordinator shall be a person also serving the local government in some other non-elective paid capacity (with total employment being full-time), unless otherwise approved by the State.

(3) Jurisdictions of less than approximately 5,000 population shall employ a Director/Coordinator meeting each of the following criteria, except if specifically waived by the State on a case-by-case basis:

(a) The Director/Coordinator shall serve local government in some other, non-elective paid capacity (total employment being full- time or as near thereto as feasible).

(b) As a minimum, the Director/Coordinator shall work no less than 8 hours per week on civil defense and disaster preparedness duties, and as much additional as required to conduct an adequate program as described in these Standards.

(c) The Director/Coordinator shall be paid a salary commensurate with the extent and difficulty of the duties of the job and with other salaries paid by local government.

b. Supporting Staff-At least a half-time paid Deputy Director/Coordinator should be employed in jurisdictions with between approximately 50,000 and 75,000 population, and a full-time paid deputy should be employed in jurisdictions with more than approximately 75,000 population.

In all jurisdictions, competent persons should be designated and trained for civil preparedness functions such as operations, shelter, communications, and radiological defense-to carry out these functions in emergencies as well as to assist in developing readiness for emergencies. In larger jurisdictions, these positions should be full-time paid, to assure professionally competent services, rather than assigning the functions to other government employees, “in addition to regular duties.”

The need for such professional positions within the local civil preparedness agency will depend in part on how many elements of the program have been delegated to operating departments (e.g., the fire department or health department may handle the radiological defense program). In small jurisdictions, specialist positions such as Radiological Defense Officer may be filled by a suitably qualified volunteer, such as a college or high school physics instructor, or an engineer from a local industry.

The possibility of securing a military reserve Mobilization Designee (MOBDES) to fill such positions should be considered- State civil preparedness offices can assist in securing MOBDES personnel –

In all jurisdictions, the local Director/Coordinator requires stenographic or typist support. In smaller jurisdictions the stenographer or typist can often assume additional duties, and act as an administrative assistant.

c. Minimum professional Staffing of Civil preparedness Agency-Total civil preparedness agency professional staffing (the Director/Coordinator plus other professionals, not counting clerical or stenographic employees) will vary considerably from one jurisdiction to another, depending on local organization and the tasks assigned. State civil preparedness agencies can advise on staffing levels required by specific local jurisdictions, in light of local conditions and needs.

The following standards for minimum professional staffing are provided as general guidance, subject to reasonable adaptation to meet local needs:

Population                                                  Equivalent Full-Time
(Approximate)                                          Professional Positions
Over 1,000,000                                              15 to 40
500,000 to 1,000,000                                      6 to 15
250,000 to 500,000                                          4 to 6
100,000 to 250,000                                          3 to 5
50 to 100,000                                                    2 to 3
25 to 50,000                                                   1¼ to 2
15 to 25,000                                                      1 to 1¼
5 to 15,000                                                       ¼ to 1
Under 5,000                                                   1/5 to ¼

3. Selection, Qualifications, and Salary of Local Director/Coordinator

a. Selection – Vacancies in paid civil preparedness Director/Coordinator positions shall be filled by selection procedures designed to secure the best- qualified person available. Local governments may elect not to give their Director/Coordinator merit- system tenure, although the position should provide reasonable job security if it is to be filled by a well-qualified professional.

If the jurisdiction needs assistance, State personnel departments or civil preparedness agencies can provide guidance on selection procedures. A written job or position description should be developed for the Director/Coordinator position, and State civil preparedness agencies can provide examples.

Selection procedures include; (1) Wide publicity, to get as many qualified applicants as possible; (2) administering a written test, if desired (bearing in mind that most people with poor scores on a written test will not do well on the job, but that there is no assurance that all people with high scores will do well); (3) oral interview by a board of 3 to 5 local government executives or others experienced in job interviews and selection of employees; (4) personal interview by the local chief executive of the highest-ranked candidates, to select the candidate who appears to be best qualified, and who would be compatible with the chief executive and his department heads; and (5) a probation period of six months to a year for the candidate to prove himself capable on the job.

Similar selection procedures should be used in filling other professional positions in the local civil preparedness agency.

b. Qualifications – The oral interview board and chief executive should look for the following experience and personal traits in applicants for the local civil preparedness Director/Coordinator position:

(1) Experience – Applicants should have experience of 1 to 6 years (depending on the size and needs of the community) in such areas as:

(a) Planning, organizing, coordinating, implementing, and directing a major phase of a local government program, or a program of a major business or industry; or

(b) Providing emergency or safety services for large groups of people and requiring frequent contacts with public officials; or

(c) Organizing a community-wide program involving large numbers of citizens to engage in a civic program on a volunteer basis.

(2) Personal – Since the bulk of the Director/ Coordinator’s responsibilities will involve contacts with the heads of local government departments, as well as officials from other government levels, applicants should show leadership qualities, and an ability to manage and coordinate the civil preparedness program. In addition, applicants should have the ability to meet and deal with the public effectively, and be reliable and trustworthy. According to field studies, personal traits considered important for the civil preparedness Director/ Coordinator, by chief executives and other local officials, included enthusiasm for the job, ability to work with others, integrity, friendliness, cooperativeness, ability to coordinate and expedite, administrative ability, and reputation and stature within the community. Probably the most important single personal trait is dedication to the civil preparedness program.

In evaluating candidates, interview boards and chief executives should keep in mind the duties of the local Director/Coordinator in emergency periods. They should ask themselves, “Would I place confidence in the recommendations and advice of this applicant, in making decisions that could affect the preservation of life and property, in an emergency affecting this jurisdiction?”

c. Salary – The salary provided for the position of civil preparedness Director/Coordinator must be adequate to attract and retain a competent professional. This requires paying a salary commensurate with those for other local government positions of a similar degree of difficulty and responsibility. Where a person already serving in local government is assigned the additional duties of part-time Director/Coordinator, an appropriate salary should be paid for the additional duties.

State civil preparedness agencies can advise on salaries paid in communities of similar size and complexity that have competent, professional local Directors or Coordinators, who are conducting adequate civil preparedness programs as described in these Standards.

4. Professional Training and Growth

A person selected for the position of Director/ Coordinator should either have or soon get the special knowledge and skills needed to perform the tasks described in Standard Two.

a. Qualifications-The unique professional qualifications required by the Director/Coordinator primarily include:

(1) Ability to prepare the community to conduct coordinated emergency operations under extraordinary circumstances where normal cooperative procedures are not sufficient. This is the most important single qualification.

(2) Ability to provide for developing unique emergency skills and capabilities not found in operating departments (e.g., warning, shelter, radiological defense).

(3) Ability to advise operating departments of special disaster conditions that would call for modification of normal operating techniques. These range from fallout and other effects of nuclear weapons, to conditions created by other hazards that could affect the jurisdiction. The Director/Coordinator must be the person in government who analyzes such potential hazards, and their effects on local operations.

b. Professional Training – Standards for professional training of the Director/Coordinator are set forth below. Note that training standards are related to the size of the jurisdiction, and thus to the type of Director/Coordinator it should have- not necessarily the type of Director the jurisdiction actually has.

(1) Smaller jurisdictions (approximately 5,000 population or less): First year, successfully complete the home study courses “CD, U.S.A.,” “The CD Director/Coordinator,” and “Introduction to Radiological Monitoring,” and in addition, attend a basic management work- shop conducted by the State agency, when such a workshop is available. Every second year thereafter, attend an NCP seminar or advanced workshop if available. In addition, complete Phase I of the Career Development Program within two years and any new home study course for local Directors/Coordinators within one year from the time such courses become available. It is also highly desirable that Directors/Coordinators enroll in the remaining phases of the Career Development program, which is the primary vehicle for continued professional training, and in courses in the areas of emergency operations planning and radiological defense.

(2) Medium sized jurisdictions (cities approximately 5,000 to 25,000, counties 5,000 to 15,000): The Director/Coordinator shall meet the first-year criteria in (1) above and shall in addition complete Phase I of the Career Development program within the first 16 months of employment. In the second and each succeeding year, the Director/Coordinator shall attend a State-conducted workshop or seminar, if available. In the second or third year, he or she shall complete Phase II of Career Development. In addition, it is highly desirable that in subsequent years he or she complete Phases III and IV of the Career Development program, and courses in emergency operations planning and radiological defense.

(3) Larger jurisdictions (cities over approximately 25,000, counties over 15,000): The Director/Coordinator shall meet the first and second year criteria in (2) above and shall also successfully complete Phases III and IV of the Career Development program during the third and fourth years. In addition, it is highly desirable that the Director/Coordinator successfully complete additional Civil Preparedness courses, including the Career Development Graduate Seminar, and courses in emergency operations planning and radiological defense, as well as college or university courses in public administration or fields related to the professional development of the Director.

The courses specified above are those now available, and this Standard will be revised if and as other relevant training becomes available. The efforts of a competent and qualified Director/Coordinator are the key to emergency readiness. Professional training, in turn, is essential to being an effective local Director/Coordinator. Therefore, the training specified above must be completed (or have been applied for) unless the State, with Regional concurrence, evaluates the local Director/Coordinator’s job experience and study as being equivalent to the formal training described. Experience in actual disaster operations should be given special weight in evaluating equivalent experience. (However, successful completion of the Career Development program requires actual completion of the Phase II, III, and IV courses; i.e., equivalent study or experience can be substituted for Phase I only )

c. Staff Training – Staff members of the local civil preparedness agency, other than the Director/ Coordinator, shall take professional training as required for adequate job performance. Standards for training of professional staff members (paid and volunteer) are set forth below. (Standards for training of radiological defense personnel are set forth in Standard Five, and standards for training and exercising the local EOC staff are in Standard Six.)

(1) Smaller jurisdictions (approximately 5,000 population or less): All professional staff members shall successfully complete the home study course “CD, U.S.A.” In addition, it is highly desirable that professional staff members complete other available home study courses concerning skills or knowledge needed in their positions, and attend State-conducted workshops and NCP seminars if attendance is approved by the State and training is available.

(2) Medium-sized jurisdictions (cities approximately 5,000 to 25,000, counties 5,000 to 15,000): Staff members who serve as Deputies or in equivalent roles shall receive the same training as specified for the Director/Coordinator in a jurisdiction of this size (see item b(2) above). Other professional staff members shall successfully complete the home study course “CD, U.S.A.”; shall attend a State-conducted workshop or NCP seminar every second year, if attendance is approved by the State and training is available; and shall complete home study and resident courses which cover areas in which particular staff members require specialized skills or knowledge (e.g., courses in emergency operations planning such as the Civil Preparedness Planning Workshop and in radio- logical defense.) In addition, it is highly desirable that such other staff professionals complete other available home study and resident courses, including Phases I and II of the Career Development program.

(3) Larger jurisdictions (cities over approximately 25,000, counties over 15,000): Staff members who serve as Deputies or in equivalent roles shall receive the same training as specified for the Director/Coordinator in a jurisdiction of this size (see item b(3) above). All other professional staff members shall successfully complete the home study course, “CD, U.S.A.”; shall attend a State-conducted work- shop or NCP seminar every second year, if attendance is approved by the State and training is available; and shall complete home study and resident courses which cover areas in which particular staff members require specialized skills or knowledge (e.g., courses in emergency planning such as the Civil Preparedness Planning Workshop and in radiological defense). Those other staff members who serve full-time shall successfully complete Phases I and II of the Career Development program. In addition to the foregoing, it is highly desirable that staff professionals other than those serving as Deputies or in equivalent roles complete other available home study and resident courses.

(4) Professional experience and study may be substituted for the formal training outlined above, if evaluated by the local Director/Coordinator as equivalent, and if the State concurs in this evaluation. (However, successful completion of the Career Development program requires actual completion of the Phase II, III, and IV courses; i.e., equivalent study or experience can be substituted for Phase I only.)

(5) In jurisdictions of any size, all newly assigned military reserve Mobilization Designee (MOBDES) personnel shall complete the home study course “CD, U.S.A.” In addition, it is highly desirable that MOBDES personnel take additional home study and resident courses as agreed with the local Director/Coordinator. For suggested MOBDES training, see Annex C of Civil Preparedness Guide 1-11, “Defense Civil Preparedness Mobilization Designee Program”; special consideration should be given to the Emergency Readiness Exercise Development Course.


STANDARD THREE

TANGIBLE COMPONENTS OF EMERGENCY READINESS: LOCAL GOVERNMENT EMERGENCY PLANS

DISCUSSION

This standard establishes criteria for the emergency plans that provide a basis for local readiness. Also, the process of emergency planning allows the jurisdiction to establish its requirements for facilities and equipment (Standard Four) and for trained personnel (Standard Five). Thus, emergency planning is a prerequisite to all other emergency readiness activities.

Need for Local Emergency Plans

Conducting coordinated operations in peacetime or attack-caused emergencies is basically executing or carrying out local emergency plans. The payoff from emergency operations is the lives that are saved and the property that is preserved. This payoff results from the forces that have emergency missions doing “the right thing at the right time,” making maximum effective use of existing resources and capabilities.

Taking prompt and effective action in emergencies is facilitated by planning. Experience in peacetime disasters has shown repeatedly that when emergency plans are known to the heads of local operating departments and their forces, and operations are conducted in accordance with these plans, reaction times are reduced and coordination improved. On the other hand, “paper plans” prepared by the civil preparedness Director/Coordinator alone, with little participation by local operating departments, are of little value-because they are not used. Thus the development of a written plan is not an end in itself, because having a written emergency plan does not guarantee that actual operations will be effective. But the process of planning that leads to the development of a written plan is extremely valuable. This is because the local officials who are responsible for emergency operations have spent time determining which local forces will do what, should various emergencies arise, and how operations will be coordinated.

Written plans are valuable for training, and to familiarize new local executives with their duties in emergencies. Plans also provide a point of departure for Increased Readiness actions to improve and activate civil preparedness capabilities in periods of heightened risk, such as a hurricane watch or an international crisis.

Local Planning Process

The local government’s emergency plan should therefore document and reflect a planning process conducted by a local government planning team. This team should include representatives from each department of local government with an emergency mission, and from each non-governmental group to which such a mission should be assigned (e.g., news media, county medical society, Red Cross Chapter). The chief executive himself should if possible participate in the work of the planning team.

The emergency planning process should be led and coordinated by the local civil preparedness Director/Coordinator, on behalf of the chief executive. As part of this planning leadership, the Director/Coordinator is responsible to inform the planners of local operating departments, as well as non-governmental planners, of the special conditions arising out of nuclear attack or peacetime disasters that would call for a modification of traditional operating techniques. Training and on-site assistance in local emergency planning includes the Civil Preparedness Planning Workshop and assistance from professionals of the State and the Regional offices. In many jurisdictions, the local planning agency can play an important role in emergency planning, working in close cooperation with the civil preparedness Director/Coordinator and planners of the operating departments.

Hazard Analysis

The starting point for local emergency planning (or for updating existing plans) is an analysis of specific hazards deemed likely to confront the jurisdiction.

Publication TR-82, “High Risk Areas”, identifies general areas which could face high risk from blast and other nuclear weapons effects should the U.S. be attacked. State and Federal personnel can assist local jurisdictions in identifying more precisely the nuclear weapons effects they could experience. State and Federal personnel can also assist local Directors in identifying potential peacetime hazards (e.g., slowly developing natural disasters such as hurricanes or floods; rapidly developing natural disasters such as earthquakes, tornadoes, or flash floods; and technological emergencies such as major air crashes, major industrial accidents, transportation or nuclear-reactor accidents involving a potential radiological hazard, or energy shortages.)

The hazard analysis thus specifies the threats for which the local plan will outline the who, what, where, and how of coordinated emergency operations. Accordingly, hazards should be described as specifically as possible. For example, the analysis for a coastal jurisdiction should specify the area that could be flooded by a storm surge caused by a hurricane, and the number of people who should therefore be evacuated during the warning period.

Organization and Content of Local Government Emergency Plans

No standard format or organization is specified for a local government’s emergency plan. Some States have established formats for local plans, to assure compatibility with the State’s emergency plans, and where this is the case, local plans should be in the State’s format.

While the organization of local plans is not specified, there are a number of emergency functions that should be covered in the plans of each local jurisdiction. First, it is essential that the local plan outline the organizations, systems, and procedures which add up to the jurisdiction’s basic emergency operating capability. This refers to the jurisdiction’s ability to handle any of the types of major emergencies identified in the hazard analysis.

The elements of this basic operating capability are usually reflected in the jurisdiction’s Basic Plan and in certain additional parts or annexes in the overall local emergency plan. The Basic Plan is a relatively brief “umbrella” for the balance of the emergency plan, and as such covers organization, responsibilities, and operations in any type of emergency.

The parts of the local plan which reflect the basic operating capability are those of general applicability, outlining functions needed in any emergency severe enough to call for coordinated emergency operations. These supporting parts of the plan are often designated as annexes to the Basic Plan, and should cover: (1) Direction and Control, spelling out local emergency organization for centralized direction of coordinated operations by key officials. Emphasis is on EOC organization and functions. (2) Warning, spelling out responsibilities and procedures for warning the population of impending threats. (3) Emergency Communications. (4) Emergency Public Information, spelling out responsibilities and procedures for getting official information and instructions to the public promptly, before, during, and as necessary after an emergency.

Radiological Defense for both peacetime and attack emergencies is sometimes also covered in an annex of general applicability. However, it is preferable to cover radiological defense operations for attack emergencies separately from those for peace- time emergencies (e.g., a transportation accident involving radioactive material, or a severe accident at a nuclear power plant). This is because different concepts of operation, assessment methodologies, and protective actions are involved in peacetime radiological emergencies.

The balance of the local plan addresses operations which may be required in specific types’ of emergencies. One method of organizing a local plan is illustrated in Annex 1 to FCDG Appendix G-l .2,2 a plan for the “City of Brownville”. In addition to a Basic Plan and annexes thereto, the Brownville example includes separate “Parts” for differing situations and hazards (e.g., enemy attack, natural disaster), and each Part includes annexes as required to spell out operations by local government departments. The Brownville plan is provided as an example only, however, with no implication that local plans must follow the same format. Additional guidance on emergency planning is provided in CPG 1-6, “Disaster Operations,” and publication MP-67, “Improving Your Community’s Emergency Response.”

Nuclear Civil Protection Planning

The Federal government encourages and assists localities in full-spectrum emergency planning, including a range of potential peacetime hazards as outlined above. However, it is also essential (and required as a condition of eligibility for Federal assistance) that each jurisdiction’s emergency plan provide for civil defense operations during periods of severe international crisis and of attack.

The term Nuclear Civil Protection (NCP) planning refers to development of plans providing the following two options: (1) Protection of the population against nuclear attack effects essentially in-place, in jurisdictions throughout the U.S., at or near their places of residence. (2) Orderly relocation of people from areas of potential high risk from the direct effects of nuclear weapons, should national authorities elect to implement relocation plans during a severe crisis, and time and circumstances permit relocation, as well as the reception, care, and protection of relocated people in low-risk host areas.

NCP planning for the in-place protection option includes development or updating of both (1) a local community shelter plan (CSP) allocation, including standby information materials for the public; and (2) emergency plans, based on the CSP allocation, covering local government operations for sheltering the population. This type of NCP planning has been underway since 1966, and many localities will need to update in-place protection plans, as new shelter surveys provide a basis for revising CSP allocations. Surveys and operations plans in low-risk areas will continue to stress fallout protection, while those in high-risk areas will be based on use of best-available blast as well as fallout protection.

NCP planning for the relocation option includes both local and State4evel planning for relocating people from high-risk areas, during a period of severe international crisis, to low-risk jurisdictions. High-risk jurisdictions thus require plans covering operations to relocate the people during a crisis, and then to maintain security in the risk area, to keep essential industry in operation by commuting key workers, and to shelter any persons still in the risk area in best-available shelter should an attack occur. Low-risk host jurisdictions, in contrast, require plans covering reception and care of relocated population, and provision of fallout protection for use in case of attack.

NCP planning is risk-oriented, in that plans needed by high-risk and low-risk jurisdictions will differ, as outlined above. Also, most low-risk jurisdictions will need plans for the contingency of hosting risk-area population in case of crisis relocation. Some low-risk jurisdictions, however, are far enough from high-risk areas that they will not need to act as host areas; NCP plans in such low-risk communities need cover only in-place fallout protection for the residents.

Certain additional nuclear-related contingencies should be covered in local emergency plans, where applicable. These may include (1) plans for peacetime radiological emergencies (e.g., a transportation accident involving radioactive material, or a severe accident at a nuclear power plant); (2) plans for warning the population should warning ever be received of an accidental missile launch, or any other unauthorized or unexplained incident involving a possible detonation of a nuclear device; and (3) plans for a possible threat by terrorists or criminals, involving an alleged nuclear device or weapon.

Also, the amount of detail contained in a local emergency plan is determined by the population of the jurisdiction, the shelter and other resources it has, and the size and complexity of its governmental structure. In a smaller rural county, civil preparedness requirements are not as complex as in a large city, and the emergency plan should be correspondingly less elaborate.

STANDARDS

1. Fully-Qualified Emergency Planning Standard

Each jurisdiction shall have an emergency plan developed by an interdepartmental planning process as discussed above, plus checklists or standing operating procedures, as required. The plan shall be based on currently existing resources and operational capabilities-not on assumed capabilities that do not exist. Where the jurisdiction is participating with one or more others in a joint-action arrangement, a combined emergency operations plan may be pre- pared (e.g., a city-county plan). Such plans shall cover operations by the forces of all jurisdictions involved, and shall specify arrangements for direction and control by the executives concerned.

a. Jurisdictions of Approximately 5,000 Population or More – The jurisdiction’s plans cover each of the functions or elements below that is applicable. If the State has specified a format for local plans, this shall be followed. Otherwise, local plans may be organized either by function or by governmental department, with all necessary functions assigned to an appropriate agency.

(1) CSP Shelter Allocation – A shelter allocation has been developed, based on Community Shelter Planning (CSP), and specifying what all of the people in the jurisdiction should do or where they should go, in case of attack emergency (e.g., to public shelter and/or to home basements). This allocation must be updated periodically to reflect current shelter survey data, population changes, or other factors.

In high-risk areas, the allocation provides for use of space providing best-available blast as well as fallout protection; if an All-Effects Survey has been completed for the jurisdiction, best-available blast protection identified by the Survey has been used in the CSP allocation. In low-risk areas, the allocation provides for use of best-available fallout protection; if a Host Area Survey has been completed for the jurisdiction, best-available fallout protection identified by this survey should be used in the allocation, plus consideration of home basements.

Public information materials have been prepared, based on the CSP allocation, containing advice for each citizen in the jurisdiction on “where to go and what to do” in case of attack warning. These materials may have been published and distributed in peacetime, but newspaper mats or photographic negatives must be available, to permit redissemination during a crisis period as local “news” rather than an information project funded by the Federal Government.

(2) Basic Plan and Annexes – The jurisdiction has developed those parts of the overall emergency plan needed to outline its basic ’emergency operating capability, including a Basic Plan and supporting parts or annexes outlining functions needed in any severe emergency. The Basic Plan is a brief “umbrella” for the balance of the emergency plan. It shall include planning assumptions, based on a hazard analysis identifying peacetime and attack-caused hazards that have or might reasonably be expected to affect the community. It includes a brief statement of the purpose of civil preparedness in the jurisdiction. (See Standard One.) It also assigns emergency missions to the departments of local government, and to non-governmental groups, and designates the person in charge of decision-making during an emergency (i.e., the chief executive). It references any mutual-assistance agreements with other jurisdictions, and covers procedures for requesting military or other State or Federal assistance. It shall be signed by the chief executive, and have any other approvals necessary under local or State law. The Basic Plan and annexes should be reviewed and as necessary updated to assure the plans are current.

Supporting parts of the local plan, applicable in any type of emergency, may be designated as annexes to the Basic Plan, and may include:

(a) Direction and Control – This part of the plan covers operation of the EOC, to permit direction and control of coordinated operations by key officials. It shall include duties of each member of the EOC staff including the Radiological Defense Officer (RDO), displays, internal EOC procedures, etc., and use of locally available communications for operations directed from the EOC. If the community has public shelters, the organization of shelters (e.g., into shelter complexes, with headquarters reporting to the EOC) shall be identified.

(b) Warning – Covers procedures for receipt of warning of peacetime hazards or enemy attack, and for dissemination of warning to the population by all means available (may include warning assignments for siren-equipped vehicles), as well as procedures for alerting key officials.

(c) Emergency Public Information – Planning for emergency public information includes making written agreements with radio, television, or Community Antenna Television facilities serving the jurisdiction for disseminating warning information to the public. Plans also include operations by news media to support local government in getting emergency information to the public promptly, by establishing procedures for a centralized source of official guidance and instructions for the people in a major emergency. For the nuclear attack threat, the plan shall include provisions for crisis use of “In Time of Emergency” newspaper, radio, and television materials, and dissemination of local Community Shelter Planning instructions for the public, as well as Crisis Relocation Planning instructions. Written agreements should be made for dissemination of EPI materials to the public.

(3) Plans for Major Contingencies – Depending upon the size and complexity of the community, and the potential emergencies identified by the hazard analysis, additional contingency-oriented plans will usually be required, such as a hurricane disaster plan. These may be designated as major subordinate “Parts” of the local plan if the Brownville format is used. As applicable, the jurisdiction has developed plans covering:

(a) Increased Readiness Operations – includes overall local plans for operations in periods of heightened risk (e.g., hurricane watch, or international crisis). Where the locality must bring its EOC, public shelters, or other facilities to full operational status during a crisis, or conduct accelerated training, the IR plan shall spell out who/what where. (See Standards Four and Five.) Standard Four describes requirements for crisis shelter marking and stocking plans, as part of overall local Increased-Readiness plans. IR plans for periods of severe international crisis cover general operations to improve readiness, in both high-risk and low-risk jurisdictions, applicable primarily to readiness to protect the population in-place. Should States or localities be advised that operations are contemplated for crisis relocation of population from high-risk areas (see subparagraph (d) below), crisis relocation plans would be implemented.

(b) Operations in Peacetime Emergencies – Covers overall local plans for operations in peacetime emergencies that the hazard analysis has identified as potential threats to the community (e.g., tornado, major industrial or transportation accident, radiological incident, earthquake, civil disorder, hurricane, air pollution, flood, and emergencies created by an energy shortage). Annexes or appendices shall be included as necessary to spell out functions of local operating departments or services with emergency responsibilities. Appropriate checklists and standing operating procedures shall be included as necessary (e.g., inventories of publicly or privately owned operational equipment available to the jurisdiction; and call-up and alerting lists). Annexes and standing operating procedures are discussed in subparagraphs (4) and (5) below.

(c) Nuclear civil Protection Plans for In-Place Protection – The jurisdiction has developed operational plans, based on the CSP shelter allocation, for operations to protect the population in best-available shelter against attack effects. Plans cover actions during attack emergencies, from Attack Warning and movement to shelter through the In-Shelter and Shelter Emergence periods. Annexes or appendices, and standing operating procedures, shall be included as necessary, as discussed below.

(d) Nuclear civil Protection Plans for the crisis Relocation Option – The jurisdiction has, if applicable, developed plans for the contingency or option of crisis relocation. (Note: In-depth planning for the relocation option will be undertaken primarily as assistance becomes available from Federally-supported NCP planners. However, localities should develop plans as thoroughly as possible, with State assistance, pending availability of assistance from NCP planners. Such assistance may not be available for some local jurisdictions for several years.)

Plans for high-risk jurisdictions cover (i) allocation of risk-area population to appropriate host jurisdictions, including preparation of standby emergency information materials for the public; and (ii) risk-area operations for the initial relocation movement, for providing security in the risk area, for keeping essential industry in operation through commuting key workers from nearby host areas, and for sheltering persons still in the risk area in best-available blast protection in case of attack.

Plans for low-risk host jurisdictions cover operations for (i) reception and care of relocatees from risk areas (e.g., temporary lodging, feeding); and (ii) provision of fallout protection for both residents and relocated risk-area population. State4evel plans will provide for logistic support of relocated population (e.g., provision of food to outlets in host jurisdictions, medical support, and law enforcement support.) Host-jurisdiction planning for fallout protection will be based on results of the Host-Area Survey, which identifies best-available fallout protection, as well as facilities whose protection factor against fallout can be improved by actions taken during the crisis period.

(e) Post-Shelter Operations – Covers local actions for the conservation and use of life-supporting resources (food, petroleum products, etc), in consonance with the State Emergency Resources Management Plan.

(4) Annexes or Appendices – These cover missions, functions, and operational execution of plans on a department-by-department or function-by-function basis. Separate annexes (e.g., for police operations) are normally prepared for peace time emergency and for attack operations, although in some cases a single annex may suffice. Each of the following functions that is applicable in the jurisdiction shall be covered (and additional functions, if necessary):

(a) Radiological Defense – A radiological defense (RADEF) Annex must be developed by each jurisdiction having responsibility for the direction or conduct of emergency operations. This Annex should cover operations in NCP contingencies as applicable, and provide for the protection of people and resources by means of an ready radiological defense system. For each jurisdiction, the Radiological Defense System shall include (in order of priority) (i) a shelter radiological monitoring capability; (ii) a self-protection radiological monitoring capability to provide self monitoring by personnel in emergency services, vital facilities and essential industries (police, fire, public works, hospitals, power plants, food distribution, etc.), and exposure control for emergency workers during emergency operations in the post shelter period; (iii) a radiological monitoring, reporting and assessment capability to provide a network of weapon effects reporting stations (monitoring stations) and an analysis and assessment capability within the EOC; and (iv) a radiological decontamination capability. RADEF operations should also be included in the annexes of the appropriate emergency services-e.g., fire, police, public works, rescue, medical.

A detailed SOP should be completed and coordinated with operating organizations where applicable for the following: (i) distribution of RADEF sets in bulk repositories; (ii) the shelter annex; (iii) EOC operations, including analyses and display of RADEF information in the EOC’s, and the receipt of aerial monitoring data from the State; (iv) radiation exposure control of emergency workers in recovery operations; (v) decontamination; (vi) crisis training of radiological monitors for shelters; (vii) crisis augmentation of additional RM’s for weapons effects reporting stations and for emergency services and vital facilities; and (viii) crisis augmentation of RADEF personnel assigned to EOC operations. Separate annexes should also be developed for those peacetime radiological hazards to which the jurisdiction may be exposed (see CPG 1-6 on Radiological Accidents and Nuclear Facility Accidents, if required for the jurisdiction).

(b) Fire – Covers operations of the regular fire service, as augmented by any trained auxiliaries (Support Assistants for Fire Emergency).

(c) Rescue – Covers operations of all rescue services (may be included in annex of responsible service, e.g., the fire department).

(d) Police – Covers operations of police or sheriffs forces, as augmented by any trained auxiliaries. For the nuclear attack threat, in localities with public shelters, covers police assignments to assist movement to shelter, and for maintenance of law and order in shelters. In all localities, provides for security of vital facilities. Where crisis relocation planning has been conducted, police plans of low-risk host jurisdictions cover operations for traffic control, including movement control and parking for risk-area population assigned to the host jurisdiction, and other law enforcement activities.

(e) Public Works Engineering – Covers operations of city or county engineering or public works departments, local utilities, plans for radiological decontamination of vital facilities and essential industries, etc. In low-risk host jurisdictions PWE plans should cover operations, if needed, for crisis actions to improve fallout protection of “upgradable” facilities identified by the Host-Area Survey, and also for crisis construction of expedient shelters, if needed.

(f) Emergency Health and Medical-Health – medical operations are normally the responsibility of the local health department, but can only be accomplished with the active cooperation of the health professions and the staffs of hospitals and other medical facilities. Therefore, this annex shall be prepared by or in close cooperation with the local medical society, hospital administrators, and others concerned. Also, hospital disaster plans and the health-medical annex(es) of the local government emergency plan shall be related to and in consonance with each other. Where appropriate, plans shall cover use of Packaged Disaster Hospitals available in the local jurisdiction. In many jurisdictions, “Emergency Medical Services Councils” can be a valuable source of assistance in planning and operations.

The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals requires an accredited hospital to have developed a disaster plan which is rehearsed at least once a year, preferably as part of a coordinated disaster exercise in which other community services participate. The local civil preparedness Director/Coordinator should work with the appropriate hospital administrators, and the local medical society, to assure that such disaster plans are realistic in terms of (1) the disasters that might occur, and the resulting case load; and (2) resources that are available in the jurisdiction.

(g) Emergency Welfare – The local welfare department is responsible for emergency operations, but the annex shall be prepared in close cooperation with the American Red Cross chapter and pther voluntary agencies that have emergency welfare capabilities. Plans for peacetime emergencies shall pro- vide for feeding and sheltering (housing) of persons displaced by a major disaster. Any understandings with the Red Cross or other non-governmental agencies shall be included. Where crisis relocation planning has been conducted, emergency welfare plans of low- risk host jurisdictions emphasize operations for reception and care of risk-area population assigned, including temporary lodging in “congregate care” facilities identified by the Host-Area Survey.

(h) Schools – School disaster plans shall be related to and in consonance with local government emergency plans, and shall therefore be developed by or in close cooperation with school officials.

(i) Industry – Industrial disaster plans shall be related to and in consonance with local government plans, and shall be developed by or in close cooperation with industry representatives.

(5) Standing Operating Procedures – These shall be developed by operating departments concerned, as necessary to supplement and detail annexes. An SOP important to both peacetime and attack-emergency operations is an inventory of publicly and privately owned operational equipment or resources that would be available to the jurisdiction in emergencies (e.g., earthmoving equipment). SOP’s for attack emergencies shall include provision for sheltering the dependents of emergency service personnel (e.g., policemen, firefighters, auxiliaries). Other SOP’s that may be needed include warning system procedures, call-up or alerting lists, RADEF system procedures, decontamination priorities and procedures, and specific traffic control and shelter assignments of police and other personnel. All governmental and auxiliary personnel with emergency assignments should be issued an appropriate identification card.

b. Fully-Qualified Emergency Planning Standard for Jurisdictions of Approximately 5,000 Population or Less-Emergency plans shall cover all operations and functions required, similar to those outlined above for larger jurisdictions. The operations required would be fewer and less complex, however, and the plan accordingly less elaborate.

Nuclear Civil Protection (NCP) plans will differ for high-risk and low-risk jurisdictions. Many smaller low-risk jurisdictions will need plans for hosting operations should crisis relocation be implemented; Federally-supported NCP planners will provide direct assistance for this type of contingency planning. Other low-risk jurisdictions may not need to act as host areas in case of crisis relocation, and their NCP plans would need to cover only operations for protecting their own residents from fallout. High-risk jurisdictions on the other hand will need to provide for best available blast protection to accommodate the needs of essential workers who commute to the risk area.

In a smaller rural county, the CSP shelter allocation may call for most of the people to use the basements of their homes for shelter, and to improvise additional fallout protection there, with a relatively few people to move to public shelters. If few homes have basements, the citizens would have to be instructed on how to improvise fallout protection (above ground, in homes, or by constructing earth-covered shelters outdoors).

Increased-Readiness actions, to be taken during an international crisis, would include getting CSP-type information to the people, on where to go, and what to do in case of attack. Emphasis would be on the fallout hazard, how to improvise additional protection, and how to protect live- stock, and plans should provide for the use of “In Time of Emergency” newspaper, radio, and television materials. Other Increased-Readiness actions may include training Radiological Monitors for shelters and any additional Radiological Monitors needed for weapons effects reporting stations and for self-support of emergency services and vital facilities; training additional Shelter Managers if needed for public shelters; or improvising an EOC facility.

If crisis relocation plans were implemented, host jurisdictions would complete preparations for, and then undertake, operations for reception and care of population from high-risk areas. In most cases, crisis actions to develop additional fallout shelter would be essential.

In case of attack, warning to go to fallout protected areas would need to be disseminated by all means available. The county would need weapons effects reporting stations with communications to a Radiological Defense Officer at the EOC. The RDO would analyze the reports and make estimates of the length of time people would need to remain in shelter, for broadcast to the population. These analyses would be supplemented by information and advice on the fallout hazard from the next higher level EOC, normally a State area or district headquarters.

The key county officials at the EOC would need communications to cities or villages within the county: to a point of entry to the Emergency Broadcasting System, to permit broadcasting information to their citizens; to EOC’s in adjoining counties; and to the State area EOC. These could be primarily telephone.

Only in exceptional cases would there be a need for large-scale emergency operations during the warning and in-shelter periods. In counties with a large amount of public fallout shelter, as in a cave or mine, law enforcement forces would need to assist the people to move to shelter, by traffic- control and parking operations. If a nuclear weapon burst in or near the county, organized firefighting operations would be needed if people in shelters were threatened by fire. In the absence of such conditions, fire, police, and other forces would take shelter from fallout in the same way as the rest of the citizens.

After fallout radiation had decayed to the point where the population could leave shelters, county government would be responsible for public safety1 health, and welfare operations to assist their own citizens, as well as any injured or uninjured survivors from damaged areas. They might also be called upon to send forces to assist in operations in damaged areas, and they would need to institute relatively simple procedures for the emergency control and use of food, gasoline, and other life essential resources and initiate decontamination procedures.

Smaller jurisdictions can meet the fully-qualified standard for emergency planning by;

(1) Developing a written plan according to State guidance or formats covering operations required, including any necessary alerting lists; or

(2) Developing a Basic Plan as outlined in Civil Preparedness Guide 1-6, “Disaster Operations, A Handbook for Local Governments”, July 1972; plus warning plans, alerting lists, etc., as required by the State civil preparedness Director/Coordinator. The action checklists in the Handbook, for attack-caused and peacetime emergencies, may be used as part of the local plan, provided that blanks in the checklists have been tilled in as specified by the State (e.g., where to request support in various types of emergencies). This alternative approach, based on the Disaster Operations handbook, may be used only if approved by the State.

2. Minimum-Level Emergency Planning Standard

a. RADEF – To meet the minimum level RADEF planning standard, each jurisdiction shall have developed the RADEF portion of the following:

(1) Basic plan

(2) EOC operations plan or annex; including analysis and display of RADEF information in the EOC, and reporting to higher EOC

(3) Increased-Readiness plan or annex, including accelerated expansion of RADEF capabilities during an international crisis (e.g., accelerated training of additional RADEF personnel needed and crisis distribution of RADEF sets stored in bulk repositories).

(4) Shelter operations plan or annex for protecting population either in-place or after crisis relocation

b. Jurisdictions of Approximately 5,000 Population or More (other than RADEF) – To meet the minimum-level standard for other than RADEF, jurisdictions of approximately 5,000 population or more shall have developed an emergency plan including at least the following: Basic Plan plus annexes covering Direction and Control, Warning, Communications, Emergency Public Information, and Radiological Defense. In addition, the local emergency plan shall cover Increased-Readiness operations, and there shall be a CSP shelter allocation for the jurisdiction, with public information materials based on the allocation ready for dissemination during a crisis period. If appropriate, and if direct assistance has been provided by the State, the jurisdiction shall also have operational plans for the contingency of crisis relocation.

c. Jurisdictions of Approximately 5,000 Population or Less (other than RADEF) – Smaller jurisdictions shall have developed an emergency plan using one of the approaches described in paragraph lb above, but the plan need not include alerting lists or other standing operating procedures.


STANDARD FOUR

TANGIBLE COMPONENTS OF EMERGENCY READINESS: FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

DISCUSSION

Readiness to save lives and protect property during a peacetime or attack caused emergency or disaster requires a basis of tangible assets. Many of these assets already exist in local jurisdictions, while others have to be specially developed, as outlined in this Standard.

STANDARDS

1. Emergency Operating Center

Each jurisdiction shall have an EOC facility from which key officials can exercise direction and control in extraordinary emergencies, whether peacetime or attack-caused. The EOC facility shall have adequate working space for emergency operations; communications to local operating forces, as well as to higher-level and adjacent local EOC’s; and shall have all maps and displays needed by the key executives to understand developing emergency situations as a basis for decision-making.

Where a county and one or more municipalities conduct combined operations, a single EOC facility may suffice, but in larger cities, support EOC’s may be needed.

a. Fully-Qualified EOC – The EOC facility is ready at all times for emergency operations and meets Federal criteria including the following;

(1) Protection – The EOC must have PF 100 or better fallout protection. (In jurisdictions identified by the Federal government as facing potential high risk from fallout radiation, a PP of approximately 200 is highly desirable, though not required for the “fully-qualified” rating.) EOC’s should have their communications and electrical systems protected against electromagnetic pulse (EMP). In addition (though not required for the “fully-qualified” rating), EOC’s in areas of high risk from direct effects of nuclear weapons should include protection against blast over- pressures of 15 pounds per square inch. It is also highly desirable that such EOC’s have back-up, quick~rect antennas to replace those damaged from direct weapons effects, or high winds of hurricanes and tornadoes.

(2) Emergency Power – A reliable source of emergency power must be provided to carry the demand loads of the EOC, with a l4-day fuel supply.

(3) Communications and Warning – The EOC contains communications equipment and facili- ties required to support its mission, as outlined in section 5 below of this Standard for the “fully-qualified” level of emergency communications. Included is capability to receive and disseminate warnings.

(4) Operational Facilities – The EOC has an Operations Room or similar central area for use by key officials, equipped with maps and displays needed to understand developing emergency situations, and adequate working space for other operational functions. Operational supplies needed are on hand.

(5) Life Support – The EOC has adequate ventilation for the emergency staff (15 cu. ft. per min. per person to the occupied space, of which at least 5 cfm shall be outside air), It also has food and medical supplies, independent water and sanitation systems, and other equipment and supplies (in-place) to sustain emergency operations for a two-week period without outside support.

(6) Day-to-day Use – The EOC is used on a day-to-day basis by the local civil preparedness agency and in addition is used daily for an emergency-related purpose. Desirably) this is 2~hour use for police, fire, or ambulance dispatching, but as a minimum, the EOC is used on a day4o-day basis by a representative of at least one emergency service department of government (in addition to the civil prepared- ness agency) which has an emergency function or assignment in the EOC.

b. Minimum-Level EOC – The EOC is ready for emergency operations, and meets at least the following minimum operational requirements:

(1) Fallout protection of PP 100 or better;

(2) a reliable source of emergency power for the EOC load, with a 14-day fuel supply;

(3) minimum-level communications capability as outlined in section 5 below of this Standard and capability to receive and disseminate warnings;

(4) adequate space for emergency operations, with minimum essential displays in place.

2 Shelter

a. Fully-Qualified Shelter Standard – To be fully- qualified, a jurisdiction shall have brought to full operational status all shelter spaces identified by the National Shelter Survey, which are planned for use under the local community shelter plan allocation (part of local Nuclear Civil Protection plans), except that stocking with RADEF Instrument sets and food and water may, if necessary, be completed during a crisis period. Shelters planned for use are (1) licensed; (2) marked (or there are detailed Increased-Readiness Plans including who/what/where/how-for marking such facilities during a crisis); (3) stocked with food, medical supplies, sanitation supplies, and water, if Federally-furnished supplies are still available and useable (or there are detailed Increased-Readiness plans for stocking such facilities during a crisis with locally-procured food and other austere survival supplies); and (4) have shelter management guidance in place (e.g., wall charts, pamphlets, etc. describing how to organize and run any shelter, as well as a diagram showing where the shelter areas are located in each facility). In addition, it is highly desirable that there be a telephone instrument (or other means of communication with the EOC) located in the shelter area of each facility planned for use.

b. Minimum-Level Shelter Standard – The jurisdiction meets criteria 2.a(2) and (3) outlined above for marking and stocking. In lieu of having general shelter management guidance and RADEF Instrument Sets pre-positioned in shelters, such guidance material and RADEF Instrument Sets are available in the jurisdiction, and there are written plans to place them in shelters during a crisis period.

3. Radiological Defense

a. Fully-Qualified RADEF Standard. To be fully- qualified, a jurisdiction shall have:

(1) Obtained the number of shelter RADEF sets required for shelters planned for use in the jurisdiction’s Nuclear Civil Protection plans (for the in-place protection and the crisis relocation options). Sets should normally be stored in bulk repositories where proper and secure storage is available. At least one set of radiological instruments should be obtained for each public shelter planned for use. An additional set may be obtained for each 1,000- person capacity to a maximum of 6 sets per large facility. In large buildings, shelter areas that are separated by three or more floors may be considered separate shelters and issued a set of instruments; the population factor would then be determined for each shelter area.

(2) Obtained the number of dosimeters and chargers required for use by emergency workers for post-attack exposure control and recovery operations. These should be stored in bulk repositories. An average of one CD V-750 charger should be provided for each 25 high range dosimeters. One dosimeter should be provided for each two emergency workers.

(3) Obtained the number of radiological instrument sets required by emergency services, vital facilities and essential industry personnel (e.g., fire, police, public works, medical, rescue, utilities) for monitoring radiological fallout and, where appropriate, for use in peacetime incident monitoring. These instrument sets would primarily be located at the emergency service or facility; however, in some instances, a portion of the instruments may be located in a local bulk repository. Each emergency service and vital facility location should have a minimum of one radiological instrument set; however each emergency service group that is expected to conduct independent operations should have a RADEF set. The total number of sets required by the jurisdiction will be dependent upon each service’s emergency operations annex and the number of vital facilities and essential industries identified in the jurisdiction.

(4) Designated weapons effects reporting stations and have equipped each station with one radiological instrument set. Weapons effects reporting stations should be designated so as to provide for (a) geographical coverage, (b) communications, and (c) protection from radiation. To provide adequate geographical cover- age in metropolitan/urban areas, stations should be no more than two to three miles apart. In rural areas, stations should be no more than seven to ten miles apart. Stations should be located where reliable communications will be available for reporting radiological data from the weapons effects reporting station to the EOC. Radio communications which do not rely on commercial power are preferred. A communications capability using telephones will be accepted as a minimum; however, when this method is relied on primarily, an alternate communications capability must be provided for a portion of the weapons effects reporting system. A PF of 40 or better is desirable for weapons effects reporting stations; however, crisis upgrading can be planned to improve the station’s fallout protection.

(5) Inspected and maintained all RADEF equipment within the jurisdiction in accordance with the schedule provided by the State Maintenance and Calibration facility. This should include provision for annual inspection and operational check of the radiological instruments by the jurisdiction. Defective instruments will be replaced by the State maintenance facility.

(6) Obtained replacement batteries from the State maintenance facility for all radiological equipment at least once every two years.

b. Minimum-Level RADEF Standard. To meet the minimum-level RADEF standard, the jurisdiction must have:

(1) Obtained at least 75% of the number of shelter RADEF sets required for shelters planned for use in local Nuclear Civil Protection plans.

(2) Obtained at least 75% of the number of dosimeters and chargers required for use by emergency workers for postattack recovery.

(3) Obtained at least 75% of the number of RADEF sets required for use by emergency services and vital facilities (e.g., fire, police, medical, rescue, utilities).

(4) Obtained equipment for at least 75% of the required weapons effects reporting stations. Each station must have at least one means of communicating with the EOC.

(5) Maintained all RADEF equipment within the jurisdiction in accordance with the schedule provided by the State Maintenance and Calibration facility.

(6) Obtained batteries for all operational RADEF equipment at least once every two years.

4. Warning System

Warning is an area where “risk orientation” is of special importance. This is because of the great life-saving payoff from getting warning to people facing imminent danger from a tornado, the blast and heat effects of nuclear weapons, or other hazard where rapid action can save many lives. Accordingly, the warning standards outlined below for high-risk areas are more stringent than those for low-risk areas.

For high-risk areas, the overall aim is to give the population both an alerting signal (e.g., from a siren) and an explanation of the threat, and what to do about it, shortly after initiation of warning. (For attack threats, this is after warning initiation by one of the National Warning Centers; for tornado or other peacetime threat, this is after warning initiation by the National Weather Service or other source of warning). In low-risk areas, the need for rapid warning is not as great. This difference in warning needs is reflected in the standards below.

a. Fully-Qualified Warning Standard – To be fully qualified, a jurisdiction deemed to face high risk from blast effects of nuclear weapons, or from tornadoes or other peacetime hazards in which rapid warning is essential, shall: (1) Be served by a warning point, manned 24 hours per day, where warning is received directly over the National Warning System (NAWAS).

(2) The warning point has the capability to immediately and simultaneously sound public warning signals, initiate alerting of key officials, and initiate emergency public information to supplement the warning signal.

(3) Be able to alert through public warning systems at least 85% of the urban population, preferably by sirens but in their absence by other means such as industrial sirens or whistles.

(4) Achieve full dissemination of warning, alerting and emergency public information within 3 to 4 minutes of receipt of warning.

(5) Have communications links and procedures to assure receipt of severe-weather warning from the National Weather Service.

(6) Have arrangements with local radio and television stations to get warning information to the public.

(7) Have arrangements for warning the rural population as well as any urban population not covered by outdoor warning devices, as by telephone fanout or sirens on police or fire vehicles.

(8) Test the operation of all warning system equipment periodically (minimum of once per month).

(9) Have emergency power as appropriate for warning equipment.

In addition, it is highly desirable that high-risk jurisdictions provide indoor warning for schools, industries, and similar places of public assembly. The fully-qualified warning standard for low-risk jurisdictions is the same as that for high-risk jurisdictions except that the jurisdiction (1) need not be served by a Warning Point having direct access to NAWAS, but may receive warning via fanout from such a Warning Point, provided this occurs no more than 10 minutes after initiation of warning; and (2) has 75 percent or greater outdoor warning coverage for its urban population.

b. Minimum-Level Warning Standard – The minimum level warning standard for a high-risk jurisdiction is the same as the fully-qualified standard above, except that outdoor warning coverage for the urban population is 70 percent or greater.

A low-risk jurisdiction meets the minimum-level standard if it (1) has procedures by which a higher level, 24-hour warning point can reach appropriate local officials directly, to notify them to activate local warning devices; and (2) has outdoor warning coverage for at least 50 percent of its urban population. In addition, it is highly desirable that a low-risk jurisdiction have procedures to warn the rural population, and the urban population not covered by outdoor warning devices.

5. Emergency Communications

(NOTE: The following applies only to a jurisdiction which has an EOC meeting at least the minimum-level EOC standard in lb above. If the local EOC does not meet this standard, the jurisdiction does not meet either communication standard outlined below.)

a. Fully Qualified Emergency Communications Standard – The jurisdiction has communications facilities and equipment adequate to permit key executives to direct and control emergency operations. This includes:

(1) Wire line communications with the following forces or facilities which have missions assigned in the local emergency plan; (a) Primary local operating forces (e.g., police, fire public works, and similar forces, which in most cases are governmental, and with RADEF monitoring stations); (b) other forces (e.g., hospitals, ambulance dispatch points; transportation companies, or other local groups or forces with emergency capabilities, such forces often being non-governmental in nature); (c) radio or TV stations serving the jurisdiction; (d) public shelters or shelter complex headquarters (where such facilities have telephone instruments in or reasonably accessible to the shelter areas within the facility); and (e) the next higher level EOC (e.g., for a county, the State-Area or State EOC; for a city, the county EOC, if separate from the city’s EOC).

(2) Reliable radio backup communications with the forces and installations listed in (1) preceding, with radio base stations located in the EOC, subject to these exceptions: Radio communication is needed with most but not all RADEF monitoring stations, as noted in section 3a(4) above in this Standard, on radiological monitoring; and backup radio communication with shelters is desirable but is not required to meet the “fully-qualified” standard. It is also highly desirable that radio communications located in the EOC be used on a day-to-day basis, as the centralized emergency services communications for the jurisdiction. In larger jurisdictions, it is desirable that there be a mobile communications vehicle available for use at a major disaster scene.

(3) A reliable source of emergency power, with a 14-day fuel supply, for emergency communications (this requirement will be met in most cases by the EOC emergency generator and its fuel supply).

(4) Critical communications (e.g., radio base stations) in jurisdictions facing potential high risk from blast effects of nuclear weapons, or from tornadoes or hurricanes, shall be located below-grade, to provide some protection against blast and wind damage. In addition, it is highly desirable (though not required for the “fully- qualified” rating) that critical communications in blast risk areas be in EOC’s or other areas affording protection against blast overpressures of up to 15 psi, and be shock-mounted.

(5) In areas of high risk from direct weapons effects, hurricanes, or tornadoes it is highly desirable (though not required for the “fully-qualified” standard) that there be back-up, quick-erect communications antennas to replace those damaged.

(6) In all areas it is highly desirable (though not required for the “fully-qualified” standard) that communications systems be protected against electromagnetic pulse (EMP) so that there will be at least an 80 decibel (10,000 fold) reduction in the unattenuated EMP. This applies particularly to the principal direction and control radio base station and to remote control facilities (if any).

b. Minimum-Level Emergency Communications Standard-The jurisdiction meets criteria outlined above for the “fully-qualified” standard, with the following exceptions: In item (2), radio base stations may be located elsewhere than in the EOC, provided they have fallout and other protection at least equal to that afforded by the EOC; they have a reliable source of emergency power, with a 14-day fuel supply; and there are reliable radio communications between the EOC and the facility where the base station is located. Also in item (2), there need not be radio backup communications with “other forces”.

6. Emergency Public Information

a. Fully-Qualified Emergency Public Information Standard – The jurisdiction (1) has on hand emergency public information and guidance materials for all contingencies likely to confront the community, ready for immediate dissemination via local news media (includes standby emergency public information materials based on the CSP shelter allocation, and the CRP, if completed, as well as materials for broadcast and newspaper use, based on “In Time of Emergency,” “Disaster Operations,” or similar sources); (2) has reliable means of communicating between the EOC and the news media, with periodic tests conducted; and (3) has access from its EOC to broadcast station(s) serving the area. Stations designated to be part of the EBS system should have a fallout protection factor of 100, and a reliable source of emergency power with a 14-day connected fuel supply, and be linked to an EOC by a remote pickup unit radio.

b. Minimum-Level Emergency Public Information Standard – The jurisdiction meets criteria noted above for the “fully-qualified” standard with the exception of item (3).

1 Law Enforcement

a. Fully-Qualified Law Enforcement Standard – The jurisdiction has (1) police communications tied in to the local EOC; (2) protection for the police dispatch center (if not in the EOC) of the same level as recommended for the EOC; and (3) one set of radiological monitoring instruments assigned for each patrol vehicle.

b. Minimum-Level Law Enforcement Standard – The jurisdiction meets criteria for the “fully- qualified” standard with the exceptions that in item (2) the dispatch center has best-available existing protection (desirably PF 100 or better); and in item (3) there is one radiological monitoring set available for each four patrol vehicles.

8. Fire Service

a. Fully-Qualified Fire Service Standard – The jurisdiction has (1) fire service communications tied in to the local EOC; (2) protection for the fire dispatch center (if not in the EOC) of the same level as recommended for the EOC; and (3) one set of radiological monitoring instruments assigned for each fire company or equivalent unit.

b. Minimum-Level Fire Service Standard – The jurisdiction meets criteria for the “fully-qualified” standard with the exceptions that in item (2) the dispatch center has best-available existing protection (desirably PF 100 or better); and in item (3) monitoring instruments are available but not actually distributed to fire companies.

9. Rescue

a. Fully-Qualified Rescue Standard – The jurisdiction has (1) rescue communications tied in to the local EOC; (2) protection for the rescue dispatch center (if not in the EOC) of the same level as recommended for the EOC; and (3) one set of radiological monitoring instruments assigned for each rescue vehicle.

b. Minimum-Level Rescue Standard – The jurisdiction meets criteria for the “fully-qualified” standard with the exceptions that in item (2) the dispatch center has best-available existing protection (desirably PF 100 or better); and in item (3) there is one radiological monitoring set available for each four rescue vehicles.

10. Emergency Medical

a. Fully-Qualified Emergency Medical Standard – The jurisdiction has (1) centralized dispatch of ambulances, with ambulance and related emergency medical communications tied in to the local EOC; (2) two-way communications between ambulances and hospitals; (3) protection for the ambulance dispatch center (if not in the EOC) of the same level as recommended for the EOC; (4) one set of radiological monitoring instruments assigned for each ambulance; and (5) provided radiological monitoring sets as required by each hospital in the jurisdiction.

b. Minimum-Level Emergency Medical Standard – The jurisdiction meets criteria for the “fully-qualified” standard with the exception that in item (3) the dispatch center has best-available existing protection (desirably PF 100 or better); in item (4) there is one radiological monitoring set available for each four ambulances; and in item (5) one radiological monitoring set has been provided to each hospital.

11. Public Works Engineering

a. Fully-Qualified Public Works Engineering Standard – The jurisdiction has (1) provided for the use, in emergencies, of both public and private engineering facilities, equipment, and supplies; (2) completed a detailed inventory of engineering resources; (3) tied PWE communications in to the local EOC; (4) provided as necessary for use of PWE resources from other jurisdictions, by mutual aid agreements; (S) where applicable, assigned one set of radiological monitoring instruments to each PWE field team with an emergency assignment; and (6) provided radiological monitoring instruments as required for vital facilities located within the jurisdictions (e.g., water works, power plants, telephone companies, etc.); and (7) developed plans and procedures for the radiological decontamination of vital facilities and essential industries.

b. Minimum-Level Public Works Engineering Standard – The jurisdiction meets criteria for the “fully-qualified” standard with the exceptions that in item (1) arrangements for use of private engineering resources are general rather than specific; in item (2) the resource inventory is by general category rather than in detail; there are no mutual-aid agreements of the type noted in item (4); and in items (5) and (6) monitoring instruments are available in the jurisdiction, rather than actually distributed to PWE teams and vital facilities, provided there are plans for crisis distribution.

12. Emergency Welfare

a. Fully-Qualified Emergency Welfare Standard – The jurisdiction has (1) completed a detailed inventory of facilities and equipment with emergency welfare potential (e.g., schools, churches, motels, restaurants); and (2) designated specific resources for use in major emergencies (e.g., congregate care facilities identified by the Host Area Survey, or otherwise, have been designated for use by hurricane evacuees or crisis relocatees).

b. Minimum-Level Emergency Welfare Standard – The jurisdiction meets criteria for the “fully-qualified” standard except that the inventory of resources is general rather than detailed, and provisions for emergency use of facilities and equipment are not detailed to the level of individual facilities.

13. Schools

a. Fully-Qualified School Standard – Schools in the jurisdiction (1) have been surveyed (desirably by Qualified Shelter Analysts) for best-available protection against attack effects (fallout in all areas, and direct effects as well in blast high-risk areas); (2) have brought to full operational status school shelters planned for emergency use, as described in the Shelter standard in 2 above; and (3) receive warning directly from the Warning Point serving the jurisdiction. In addition, it is highly desirable (though not required for the “fully-qualified” standard) that school buildings in areas subject to tornadoes be analyzed to deter- mine the best-available areas for protection against tornadic winds.

b. Minimum-Level School Standard – Schools in the jurisdiction meet criteria for the “fully- qualified” standard except that in item (2) detailed Increased-Readiness plans for bringing shelter to full operational status may be substituted for having done so prior to a crisis.


STANDARD FIVE

TANGIBLE COMPONENTS OF EMERGENCY READINESS: TRAINED PERSONNEL

DISCUSSION

Readiness to save lives and protect property during an extraordinary emergency requires special training for personnel, in addition to the facilities and equipment covered in Standard Four. Training standards are established for three groups: (1) personnel of existing departments of government; (2) personnel to be trained in special civil preparedness skills, to supplement or extend the capabilities of government; and (3) the public at large, or special subgroups of the public, such as high school students. (Training for the staff of the local Emergency Operating Center is covered in Standard Six, while training for the local Civil Preparedness Director and staff is covered in Standard Two.)

Training in civil preparedness skills develops capabilities that can be of substantial value to the jurisdiction. For example, training regular police personnel and firefighters in radiological monitoring increases their capabilities for operations in case of a peacetime accident involving radioactive materials. Also, the police department or sheriff’s office may train a group of auxiliary policemen to support the regular force during major emergencies. These auxiliaries can be used to assist the regulars in controlling traffic at athletic contests, fairs, or other events involving large numbers of people.

Trained rescue personnel or auxiliary firemen can help local government departments in meeting unusual or even day-to-day needs. Radiological monitors may be given additional duties as tornado-spotters, or to report on rising rivers or environmental hazards.

STANDARDS

1. Training Required for Local Government Personnel

Police, fire, and other local government personnel may need special training on operations in extraordinary emergencies, in addition to the training and experience they already have in law enforcement, firefighting, etc. This includes training on nuclear attack and natural disaster effects and on the jurisdiction’s emergency plans for both. The purpose is to assure that the operating personnel are fully apprised of all of the possible hazard effects, understand how these effects would impact on local operations, and know what their tasks are during the resulting emergency operations. Also, included is training to qualify members of police, fire, and other operating forces to conduct the radiological monitoring needed for each service’s operations. Certain additional training is desirable, as in explosive ordnance reconnaissance, rescue techniques, and medical care training extending beyond first-aid (e.g., EMS basic training courses such as the 80- to 120-hour course, Emergency Medical Technician-Basic; and/or the Advanced First-Aid and Safety Course of the American National Red Cross). Further training in advanced life support is provided in the 500- to 800-hour course for Emergency Medical Technician Paramedic).

a. Training for Regular Police Personnel

(1) Fully-Qualified Police Training Standard – For the jurisdiction to be fully qualified, police (or sheriff’s) personnel must have received the following training, plus refresher training as necessary:

(a) All police personnel have been trained on nuclear attack effects, on hazards that could be caused by peacetime disasters, and on the locality’s emergency plan, with emphasis on the police portions thereof. Training for regular police personnel on nuclear attack effects and operations may be based on the Part A course developed in cooperation with the International Association of Chiefs of Police, “Law and Order Training for Civil Defense Emergency.”

(b) Enough police personnel have been trained as radiological monitors to assure that the police force can conduct its own monitoring in case of nuclear attack or a peacetime radiological incident. The number of personnel to be trained will be established by the chief of police or sheriff, in consultation with the civil preparedness Director/Coordinator, but the number of monitors should be sufficient to assure that one trained man is available for each police vehicle. The minimum training required is completion of either the HS-3 home study course, “Radiological Monitoring,” plus the related 8 hours of practical application, or the 16-hour Radiological Monitoring Course. In addition to the foregoing, it is recommended that police personnel receive training in Explosive Ordnance Reconnaissance, rescue techniques, and medical care courses noted above.

(2) Minimum-Level Standard for Regular Police Training – For the jurisdiction to meet the minimum level standard, police personnel must have received the following training:

(a) Personnel down through the level of sergeant or the equivalent have been trained on nuclear attack effects, peacetime-disaster hazards, and the locality’s emergency plan; and

(b) Enough radiological monitors have been trained to assure that one trained man is available for each four police vehicles.

b. Training for Regular Firefighters

(1) Fully-Qualified Firefighter Training Standard – For the jurisdiction to be fully qualified, paid or volunteer firefighters must have received the following training, plus refresher training as necessary:

(a) All firefighters have been trained on nuclear attack effects, on possible peace-time disaster hazards, and on the locality’s emergency plan, with emphasis on the fire service portions thereof. Training for regular firefighters on nuclear attack effects and operations may be based on the Part A course developed in cooperation with the International Association of Fire Chiefs, “Support Assistants for Fire Emergency.”

(b) Enough firefighters have been trained as radiological monitors, from each company or equivalent unit, to assure one man on duty at all times, in case of nuclear attack or a peacetime radiological incident. The minimum training required is completion of either the HS-3 home study course plus 8 hours of practical application or the 16-hour Radiological Monitoring Course. In addition to the foregoing, it is recommended that firefighters receive training in Explosive Ordnance Reconnaissance, rescue techniques, and medical care as outlined above under police training.

(2) Minimum-Level Standard for Regular Fire- fighters’ Training – For the jurisdiction to meet the minimum-level standard, paid or volunteer firefighters must have received the following training:

(a) The officer in command of each company or equivalent unit has been trained on nuclear attack effects, peacetime disaster hazards, and the locality’s emergency plan; and

(b) Enough firefighters have been trained as radiological monitors to assure one man on duty at all times with each company or equivalent unit.

c. Warning Personnel – Personnel manning the local warning system require orientation and training (primarily on-the-job) to assure rapid and effective dissemination of attack, severe-weather, and other warning to the population. (“Other warning” includes procedures for warning the population in case of an accidental missile launch.)

(1) Fully-Qualified Warning Standard – The jurisdiction has (a) one employee assigned responsibility for all warning matters who spends as much time as required; (b) warning point personnel providing 7-day, 24-hour cover- age who either work full-time on warning or are employed as dispatchers, communicators, etc. with warning duties part of their regular responsibilities; (c) provided on-the-job training for warning point personnel, including operation of equipment and procedures for receipt of attack and severe-weather warning and its dissemination to the public (via warning system and local broadcast stations); (d) periodic tests for warning point personnel, including procedures for both attack and severe-weather warning; and (e) trained all personnel needed for a full severe-weather spotting network.

(2) Minimum-Level Warning Standard – The jurisdiction meets criteria in item (c) of the “fully-qualified” standard, and a severe-weather spotting network (if needed) exists but is not complete.

d. Training for School Personnel – Schools in the jurisdiction should have disaster plans which are integrated with the local government’s emergency operations plan (as noted in Standard Three). Also, school personnel require training to meet assigned emergency responsibilities.

(1) Fully-Qualified School Standard – For schools in the jurisdiction planned for use as attack or peacetime-disaster shelters (a) the full requirement of Radiological Monitors and Shelter Managers has been trained and assigned from faculty and/or administrative staff; (b) local school officials (superintendent, principals) have been oriented on local government emergency plans; in addition, it is highly desirable that such officials participate in local government emergency exercises.

(2) Minimum-Level School Standard – Schools planned for use as shelters have at least one faculty member trained in shelter management and one in radiological monitoring, and meet item (b) of the 4’fully-qualified” standard.

2. Training For Personnel Required To Supplement or Extend Governmental Capabilities

Most jurisdictions require additional personnel to supplement or extend the emergency capabilities of local government. Some local fire or police forces may require trained auxiliary personnel for service in peacetime or attack-caused emergencies, and most localities will also require trained personnel to serve as Shelter Managers, Radiological Monitors, and Radiological Defense Officers. Dual-use missions should be sought (e.g., radiological monitors trained and assigned as tornado spotters or flood watchers.)

a. Radiological Defense Personnel-Each jurisdiction requires trained radiological monitors (RM’s) to operate radiological instruments. ‘(Ms are required for the jurisdiction’s shelters, for personnel of emergency services, vital facilities and essential industry in order that they may protect themselves from radiation, and for the network of weapons effects reporting stations. There is a requirement for at least one monitor for each public shelter facility identified in the community’s shelter plans. Plans should include procedures for training shelter monitors in a crisis period. Plans should include using all available local resources including TV for this training. There is a requirement for two RM’s for each set of instruments issued for self-protection monitoring and four RM’s for each weapons effects reporting station. At least half of this requirement should be operationally ready at all times with plans and procedures established for training of the remaining half in a crisis period. Minimum training for RMs for self protection and for the reporting stations only is successful completion of the HS-3 Home Study Course “Introduction to Radiological Monitoring” plus the follow-on RM-Practical (Practical Application and Use of Civil Preparedness Radiological Instruments).

Each jurisdiction responsible for directing and conducting emergency operations under enemy attack conditions requires trained Radiological Defense Officers to provide technical advice and recommendations. A minimum of two Radiological Defense Officers (RDO’s) should be trained to provide for two-shift coverage at each EOC. For jurisdictions of over 25,000 population, at least one assistant RDO per shift should be trained. In jurisdictions of over 250,000 population, at least two assistant RDO’s per shift should be trained. In larger jurisdictions where emergency services (fire, police, rescue, medical, etc.) have their own operations center which is in charge of coordinating and directing emergency operations, at least two emergency service personnel should be trained as Radiological Defense Officers, to provide two-shift coverage. Minimum training for RDO’s and assistant RDO’s is successful completion of the RDO Basic Course or equivalent. The senior RDO for communities of 25,000 or over should also have completed the RDO Advanced Course. Each jurisdiction should develop a capability to train operationally ready radiological monitors. The jurisdiction should also develop a capability for crisis training of additional radiological monitors, shelter monitors and additional RADEF staff for EOC operations in accordance with their plan. The number of instructors required will depend upon the number of monitors required to be trained during a crisis, and the number of EOC’s where crisis augmentation of the RADEF staff is planned. Radiological Defense Instructors should complete the Radiological Defense Instructor Workshop. Personnel to be trained for radiological defense operations should be drawn wherever possible from local, State or Federal government employees who are available locally and who do not have conflicting emergency assignments.

(1) Fully-Qualified Standard /br Training Radiological Defense Personnel – The jurisdiction has trained and assigned the personnel needed in accordance with the above requirements.

(2) Minimum-Level Standard for Training Radiological Personnel – The jurisdiction must have:

(a) Plans and procedures for crisis training RM’s for Shelter.

(b) Trained and assigned at least one RDO.

(c) Provided update/refresher training for assigned RDO’s at least once every two years.

(d) Trained and assigned at least 50% of the number of radiological monitors required for weapons effects reporting stations and for emergency services, vital facilities, and essential industries.

(e) Plans, procedures and instructors for training additional RM’s for emergency operations of (d) above during a crisis period.

(i) Provided update/refresher training for at least 50% of the trained and assigned monitors in the jurisdiction within the last two years.

(g) Contacted all RADEF personnel (RDO’s and RM’s) at least semiannually to determine their continued availability and willingness to serve in their assigned capacity.

b. Shelter Managers – Each jurisdiction that has public shelters requires trained Shelter Managers (SM’s). The number of trained shelter managers required averages one for each 150 persons planned to be sheltered in public shelters, with no less than two SM’s for each facility planned to be used. Shelter Managers shall be assigned to all facilities planned for local use, even if the PF is less than 40. As with RM’s, Shelter Managers shall be contacted at least twice a year, to determine if they are still available and willing to serve. Replacements shall be recruited and trained as necessary, and SM’s still available to serve should be given refresher orientation on their duties and assignments at least every two years. Shelter Managers should be trained in conjunction with the American Red Cross, whenever possible, so they can serve as managers of congregate care facilities established for natural disaster evacuees or victims, or crisis relocatees, as well as in case of attack upon the U.S. and activation of fallout shelters.

(1) Fully-Qualified SM Standard – The jurisdiction has trained and assigned its total requirement for SM’s for existing public shelters planned for use.

(2) Minimum-Level Standard for SM’s – The jurisdiction has trained and assigned at least half its requirement OC SM’s, provided there is at least one SM assigned to each existing shelter planned for use. Provision of shelter management guidance in all existing public shelters planned for use may be considered as meeting the requirements for the minimum-level Standard in lieu of having trained SM’s. The jurisdiction shall in addition have detailed (who/what/where/how) Increased-Readiness plans for accelerated training of additional SM’s needed, during a crisis.

c. Auxiliary Police – Many chiefs of police and sheriffs have determined, in consultation with the local civil preparedness Director/Coordinator, that a force of trained auxiliaries is required to support the regular force during emergencies. The number of auxiliaries required for attack-emergency operations will vary widely, depending on such factors as the number of public shelters, and the need for police personnel for movement to-shelter and in-shelter law enforcement, for a mobile force, and for security of vital facilities. Thus, requirements for police auxiliaries are determined by the process of emergency planning. Should crisis relocation plans be activated, low-risk counties could experience a large influx of evacuees from high-risk areas, and thus need a substantial number of auxiliaries, to augment the regular police in such duties as traffic control, supervision of vehicle parking, and patrol activities. Studies in test cities suggest that the need for auxiliaries may vary within a range of from 2 to 5 auxiliary policemen for each regular. Thus, the number of auxiliaries needed should be established by detailed analysis by local police planners. However, pending such analysis, a figure of 4 auxiliaries for each regular may be used, if the chief of police or sheriff agrees that this rule of thumb is satisfactory.

(1) Fully-Qualified Auxiliary Police Standard

For the jurisdiction to be fully qualified, the local law enforcement agency has trained its entire requirement of auxiliary personnel, in at least the Part A course, “Law Enforcement in Civil Defense Emergency.” It is also highly recommended that half or more of the auxiliaries complete the Part B course; that they have on-the-job training with the regular force; and that they take additional training in Explosive Ordnance Reconnaissance, radiological monitoring, rescue, and medical care extending beyond first aid.

(2) Minimum-Level Standard for Auxiliary

Police-To meet the minimum level standard for auxiliary police training, the local law enforcement agency has trained at least half of its requirement for auxiliaries in the Part A course.

d. Support Assistants for Fire Emergency (Auxiliary Firefighters) – Many fire chiefs have deter- mined, in consultation with the local civil preparedness Director/Coordinator, that a force of trained auxiliaries is required to supplement the regular fire service. Such “Support Assistants for Fire Emergency” (SAFE) are trained to make them useful in limited roles in support of the regular fire service, during emergencies. SAFE personnel would be needed primarily in or near jurisdictions facing potential high risk from the blast and heat effects of nuclear weapons, where organized firefighting could have a significant impact on the number of survivors. However, the number of SAFE personnel required should be determined by local fire service officials, based on emergency planning for the jurisdiction. An important factor to be considered is the need to provide relief personnel for the regular fire service, primarily if firefighters must operate in areas of fallout contamination, which could limit the time each man could serve. A figure of four SAFE personnel for each regular firefighter may be used, if the fire chief agrees that this rule of thumb is satisfactory.

(I) Fully-Qualified SAFE Standard – For the jurisdiction to be fully qualified, the local fire service has trained its entire requirement of SAFE personnel, in at least the Part A SAFE course. It is also highly recommended that half or more of the SAFE personnel complete the Part B course; and that they take additional training in Explosive Ordnance Reconnaissance, radiological monitoring, rescue, and medical care extending beyond first aid.

(2) Minimum-Level Standard for SAFE Training – To meet the minimum-level standard for SAFE training, the local fire service has trained at least half of its requirement for SAFE personnel in the Part A course.

e. Rescue Personnel – Localities may require trained rescue personnel to supplement the capabilities of the fire service or other local forces, during emergencies requiring rescue of trapped or injured persons. Rescue forces should be under the operational control of the fire service or other department within which they normally operate. In the absence of a detailed analysis of local needs, a rule of thumb of two trained rescue personnel per 1000 population may be used.

(1) Fully-Qualified Rescue Standard – The local fire service or other responsible department has trained its entire requirement of rescue personnel in at least the Basic Rescue and Light Rescue courses or the equivalent. (See Instructor Guides 14.1 and 14.2.) It is also highly recommended that rescue personnel receive training in radiological monitoring, and in medical care extending beyond first aid (in particular, the Emergency Medical Technician Basic course).

(2) Minimum-Level Standard for Rescue Personnel – The responsible local department has trained at least half of its requirement for rescue personnel.

f. Health Personnel-Special training of health personnel for disaster medical services can contribute substantially to the effectiveness of health and medical operations in disasters. Local civil preparedness Directors/Coordinators should work closely with local health officers, medical societies, and others concerned to assure that necessary training is conducted.

Training packages, developed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration/DOT are available through the States to train Emergency Medical Technicians. These packages include instructor manuals, student or resource texts, and visual aids. The first is Emergency Medical Technician-Ambulance, an .80- to 120-hour course for ambulance attendants consisting of both classroom instruction and training and experience in a hospital emergency department. The second (for which the first course or equivalent is prerequisite) is a 500- to 800-hour course in advanced life support techniques for Emergency Medical Technicians (Paramedic). Procedures vary from State to State for deploying these courses. In some States, the Governor’s Representative for Highway Safety is the lead agency while, in others, it is the State Health Department. Where doubt exists, first contact should be with the Health Department. Current EMT training courses focus almost exclusively on individual medical emergencies (i.e., cardio-vascular, traffic accidents, gunshot wounds, etc.) rather than mass casualty problems associated with disasters. Health personnel should participate in annual rehearsals of hospital disaster plans, which are required by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals, and also in radiological monitoring courses.

(1) Fully-Qualified Health Training Standard – All personnel required have received training in appropriate courses; such as those noted above, and radiological monitoring. In addition, appropriate hospital and medical personnel have participated in the annual rehearsals of hospital disaster plans and other exercises involving mass casualty problems.

(2) Minimum-Level Health Training Standard – Half of the personnel required have been trained in appropriate courses. Hospital and medical personnel have rehearsed disaster plans as required in (1) above.

g. Emergency Communications Personnel – In many jurisdictions, all personnel needed for emergency communications are government employees, but in others additional personnel are needed to operate equipment needed for communications in an emergency.

(1) Fully-Qualified Communications Standard – The jurisdiction (a) has assigned responsibility for communications operations to a Communications Officer; (b) has trained staff who are assigned to operate communications equipment on a daily basis; and (c) has trained additional personnel as needed to augment the existing staff; if amateur radio operators are used, they have been given on-the-job training based on a December, 1971 “Manual for Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service (RACES).”

(2) Minimum-Level Communications Standard – The jurisdiction meets criterion (a) noted above for the “fully-qualified” standard but in lieu of (b) and (c) has trained personnel available to operate communications in an emergency who have demonstrated proficiency in an exercise (or actual emergency) at least every other year; training for any radio amateurs is based on the 1971 RACES manual.

h. Emergency Public Information Personnel-The emergency public information (EPI) function is one of the most important elements of local preparedness, as disaster experience shows that citizens want, need, and will respond to action advice and instructions from officials of their governments. An effective emergency information capability requires close and continuing involvement by local news media personnel.

(1) Fully-Qualified EPI Standard – Key local government officials and media editors, program directors, and news personnel have, as appropriate, been involved in EPI planning, are thoroughly familiar with pre-prepared materials, know their roles and procedures for EPI dissemination, and have practiced them in exercises or used them during actual emergencies. (The prepared materials include those based on the CSP shelter allocation, for in-place protection; those which may be prepared reflecting crisis relocation planning; and those of general applicability, based on “In Time of Emergency.”)

(2) Minimum-Level EPI Standard – Representatives of local news media have been involved in EPI planning, and are familiar with general EPI objectives and plans, and with EOC procedures. Key government officials and media representatives meet at least annually to review their roles and actions in an emergency.

i. Public Works Engineering Personnel – Personnel to conduct engineering operations in disasters should include government public works engineering (PWE) staffs, and desirably key supervisors of private construction and engineering organizations with a capability to assist in emergencies.

(1) Fully-Qualified PWE Standard – All required PWE personnel have been trained on nuclear attack effects, peacetime hazards, and the local emergency plan, and in rescue techniques and first aid. As applicable, PWE personnel have been trained as Radiological Monitors to provide in-service monitoring capability.

(2) Minimum-Level PWE Standard – The jurisdiction meets criteria for the “fully-qualified” standard with the exceptions that only supervisory personnel have been trained on disaster effects and the local plan, and that approximately half of PWE personnel have received rescue, first aid, and radiological monitoring training.

j Emergency Welfare Personnel – Personnel to conduct emergency welfare operations in large scale emergencies normally include staff from the local welfare department, augmented extensively by voluntary groups such as the Red Cross, and in many cases by volunteers from other sources. As plans are developed for the option of crisis relocation, training and organizing personnel for emergency welfare functions will take on increased importance, particularly in low-risk host jurisdictions.

(1) Fully-Qualified Emergency Welfare Standard – All personnel required for welfare operations in a major emergency have been trained or have had on-the-job experience in a major peacetime emergency.

(2) Minimum-Level Emergency Welfare Standard – The jurisdiction has trained only a cadre of emergency welfare personnel, rather than the full complement required.

3. Training for the Public

Full emergency readiness requires that the public be trained in survival techniques and self-protection. A public information program can help develop citizens’ understanding of actions they may be advised to take during emergencies.

a. Emergency Medical Training – Training includes courses such as Red Cross First Aid training courses and the like. (Note: Criteria provided below may be changed, following reexamination of the subject of individual health and medical training by Federal, State, and local civil prepared- ness personnel.)

(I) Fully-Qualified Standard – The jurisdiction has trained one person per family in an appropriate emergency medical course.

(2) Minimum-Level Standard – One person has been trained per four families.

b. Public Information – Civil preparedness activities should be publicized, especially those which will require some degree of public knowledge of actions to be taken during an emergency.

(1) Fully-Qualified Public Information Standard – The jurisdiction has established and maintains a fully cooperative relationship with the news media; media participate actively in public information on civil preparedness.

(2) Minimum-Level Public Information Standard – The jurisdiction has a public information program, but contacts with media representatives are not regular and sustained.


STANDARD SIX

INTANGIBLE COMPONENTS OF EMERGENCY READINESS: ABILITY TO EXECUTE EMERGENCY PLANS

DISCUSSION

Local emergency readiness is the ability actually to conduct coordinated operations in extraordinary emergencies, making maximum use both of existing governmental forces and resources and of non-governmental groups (doctors, hospitals, news media), that have emergency capabilities. Emphasis is on tying together, and making operationally effective, local capabilities in the areas of facilities and equipment and of trained manpower. This means the ability to execute emergency plans. This Standard establishes criteria for evaluating the ability of local governments to conduct such coordinated emergency operations.

Evaluating Local Ability to Execute Plans

The major responsibility in executing emergency plans is upon key local officials, to direct and control coordinated lifesaving operations in emergencies of any type. This requires not merely plans reflecting the local organization for emergencies, but workable plans that have been exercised by the responsible officials under actual or simulated emergency conditions. A vital element of local ability, to conduct coordinated operations is workable EOC internal procedures, that have been practiced by the entire EOC staff. This includes the disaster analysis group, communicators, map plotters, and others who make the EOC work, in addition to the decision-making team comprised of the key executives.

Local readiness for emergencies, to assure that all forces with lifesaving capability would actually “do the right things at the right time,” is built by a repetitive cycle of planning, exercising, planning, and so on. The local ability to conduct coordinated emergency operations can always be improved, and the level of a given locality’s readiness must necessarily be evaluated on the basis of judgment. Criteria for making these judgments are outlined below.

The most important judgment is that of the local chief executive and his department heads, as these are the people responsible to conduct coordinated operations in an emergency. To what degree do they feel that their community has developed the “mechanics of coordinated disaster response”?

The role of the local civil preparedness Director/Coordinator is to supply a professional judgment on the locality’s ability to conduct coordinated operations, on which “mechanics” need improvement, and on how to make these improvements. Personnel from the State and the Region can also help in making advisory evaluations.

STANDARDS

1. Fully-Qualified Readiness Standard

To be evaluated as fully-qualified in the area of ability to execute emergency plans, a community must have developed and trained the entire local emergency organization, including but not limited to the EOC staff to the point where there is high confidence of its ability to (a) conduct effective coordinated operations within its own jurisdiction; and (b) coordinate operations effectively with other jurisdictions and other levels of government.

That the jurisdiction has attained the fully-qualified level of readiness may be demonstrated by (a) successful operations in a major peacetime disaster or emergency, that seriously affected the jurisdiction and required coordinated operations controlled from the local EOC, and that also required extensive coordination and operations with other levels of government; OR (b) successful participation in emergency exercising as follows:

a. Total-System Exercises-These are locally- tailored exercises involving all key local officials, and EOC and other personnel, and two or more such exercises shall have been held- Total-system exercises are appropriate and useful only when the community has developed its emergency procedures and organization to the point where all elements can be exercised and tested together. Total-system exercises are designed and conducted to meet the following objectives:

(1) Exercising the making of coordinated responses and assignment of resources under simulated peacetime disaster or attack conditions (a fallout-only or a fallout-blast-fire situation, as appropriate in the locality). whether based on a peacetime or attack-caused disaster scenario, the exercise shall include problems for all elements of the local emergency organization, requiring maximum use of existing local capabilities. Half or more of the problems shall be such as to require operational coordination between at least two services. The exercise shall be tailored to the jurisdiction’s actual organization and EOC and other procedures.

(2) Exercising decision-making and operations involving all elements of the local emergency organization. This shall involve the entire EOC staff. In addition, it is strongly recommended that all other key elements of the local emergency organization be involved to the maximum extent possible (e.g., selected police and fire units, radiological monitors, shelter managers, Shelter Complex Headquarters staffs, communications personnel,’ hospital administrators and staffs, welfare group directors, news media personnel, and others with emergency assignments outside of the EOC). Hospital disaster plans can be exercised in conjunction with the exercise involving other elements of the jurisdiction’s emergency organization. In cases where it is not possible to involve the majority of the organization outside the EOC, simulation techniques may be used to represent such groups. However, any capability or organization simulated must actually exist, and evaluators must have reasonable confidence that such group could actually have carried out the functions that were represented by simulation in the exercise. (E.g., if the radiological monitoring organization is simulated, it must be an actual capability even if radiological monitors were not physically located at monitoring stations of in shelters during the exercise. Confidence that the RM organization could actually have carried out the functions simulated shall be based on previous sub-system exercises or training involving the RN organization.) Thus, total-system exercises differ from many of the Emergency Operations Simulation (EOS) exercises that localities have had in that EOS’s often simulate emergency organizations and capabilities that do not exist, or are not fully ready to operate.

(3) Identifying additional training needed. Total-system exercises are designed and conducted to identify any additional training needed by elements of the local emergency organization (e.g., radiological monitors, regular police and fire units, Shelter Complex Headquarters, etc.). Such additional training shall have been conducted following the first and subsequent total-system exercises.

(4) Identifying further modifications or improvements needed in local plans or procedures (including internal EOC procedures). Such modifications or improvements shall have been made following the first and subsequent total system exercises.

b. Ability to Design and Conduct Own Exercises -To be evaluated as fully-qualified, the jurisdiction shall have developed the capability to design and conduct its own exercises with minimal State or Regional support, and have conducted local exercising at least once annually. It is strongly recommended that after the first two or three total-system exercises, the jurisdiction con- duct a surprise exercise, with knowledge of the time and content limited to the chief executive and local civil preparedness Director/Coordinator.

c. Lateral and Multi-Level Coordination-To be evaluated as fully-qualified, the jurisdiction shall have demonstrated a capability for lateral and multi-level operations and coordination, in addition to operations and coordination needed within it’s own boundaries and relating to its own emergency forces. Means for developing and demonstrating this capability may include: (1) Two-community total-system exercises (e.g., involving use of mutual-assistance plans that were jointly developed); (2) local to next higher EOC exercise (e.g., city-county, or county State Area, using reporting systems specified by the State); or (3) local-State-Regional (or local-State-Regional- National) exercises, such as the “CDEX” exercises.

Exercises that emphasize multi-jurisdiction or multilevel coordination are designed with some or all of these purposes in view: (1) Making joint, coordinated responses to simulated peacetime or attack;caused emergencies; (2) exercising mutual- assistance plans or agreements between jurisdictions; (3) exercising procedures for military sup- port of civil governments in civil preparedness emergencies; or (4) meeting the information needs of other echelons (e.g., by emergency reporting).

It is strongly recommended that exercises be designed and conducted that cover both intra- jurisdiction and multi-level operations simultaneously (e.g., local total-system exercises, as de- scribed in paragraph la, that are related to and conducted simultaneously with CDEX-type exercises). Regions and States can assist local Directors/Coordinators in the preparation of such exercises.

2. Minimum-Level Readiness Standard

To be evaluated as meeting the minimum-level standard in the area of ability to execute emergency plans, a community must have developed and trained the local emergency organization, including but not limited to EOC staff, to the point where there is reasonable confidence that the jurisdiction could conduct coordinated operations effectively in an emergency. The jurisdiction need not have conducted total-system exercises as described in paragraph 1a, and it need not have conducted exercises or operations with other jurisdictions or other levels of government.

That the jurisdiction has attained the minimum-level readiness standard may be demonstrated by (a) successful operations in a peacetime emergency that required coordinated operations controlled from the local EOC; OR (b) a sequence of exercising, planning, and training activities generally equivalent in terms of overall results to the consecutive steps outlined below:

a. Demonstration of Need for Coordinated Operations-The jurisdiction has participated in activities that have demonstrated to local officials the need for coordinated operations in major emergencies, including the need for interdepartmental planning to establish the emergency organization and assign missions. (See Standard Three.) Means to demonstrate these needs to local officials include films, conferences, and seminars, but the means that is often most effective is the conduct of an Emergency Operations Simulation (EOS) exercise, available through the State training program or Regional support contracts. An EOS demonstrates to local officials one system for exercising centralized direction and control to deal with the effects of a peacetime or attack emergency.

b. Development of Locally-Tailored Emergency Plans and EOC Procedures-The jurisdiction has developed its own, locally-tailored emergency contingency plans (including local emergency organization and assignment of responsibilities, as outlined in Standard, Three), and a working EOC. This includes an EOC layout or configuration; the necessary EOC displays, message forms, and procedures for processing information; and assignment of EOC personnel, with job or position descriptions for each-all tailored to local organization and needs.

Means to develop the foregoing plans and procedures include courses (such as the Civil Preparedness Planning Workshop); on-site assistance by State or Regional professionals; and/or an EOS or other exercise, tailored to the locality’s organization and plans. Representatives of non-governmental groups with emergency functions have participated in planning (e.g., news media personnel, doctors, hospital administrators, etc.). The jurisdiction’s locally-tailored plans, as well as its EOC organization, staffing, and procedures, have been shown to be workable in an SOS or other locally-tailored exercise. It appears that the decision-making team of key executives would be able to conduct coordinated intra-jurisdiction operations effectively, based on common knowledge of the situation as displayed in the EOC, and the supporting EOC staff functions reasonably efficiently.

c. Improving EOC Capabilities and Capabilities of Forces and Groups Outside the EOC – There has been at least one exercise within the last two years. The jurisdiction has done the training and exercising necessary to improve the ability of the EOC decision-makers and staff to direct coordinated operations, and it has also developed the organization and capabilities outside of the EOC that are needed for actual emergency operations. These non-EOC capabilities have in general been developed to at least the “minimum level” as outlined in Standards Three through Five. Emphasis has been on training all the necessary elements of the local emergency organization and on improving plans and procedures, as shown necessary by critiques of an SOS exercise or otherwise.

External capabilities include radiological monitors trained in reporting weapons effects or other disaster effects to the EOC. RM’s have been assigned to monitoring stations or to shelters, or may be organic to the police, fire, or other forces of government. (See Standard Five.) If the jurisdiction has sufficient public shelters, Shelter Complex Headquarters have been organized and are trained in securing reports from shelter managers in public shelters, and either dealing with problems in shelters or requesting assistance via the Shelter Officer in the EOC.

The local health officer, doctors and hospital administrators, and ambulance services have done any additional planning needed for the movement and treatment of mass casualties resulting from a peacetime or attack-caused emergency. The heads of the welfare department and voluntary agencies have done any additional planning needed for the feeding, housing, and other care of people affected by nuclear-attack or peacetime emergencies (e.g., persons who have evacuated areas threatened by flood or hurricane). The local Emergency Public Information Officer and the news media have done any additional planning needed on getting emergency information and advice to citizens before, during, and after emergencies.

EOC capabilities have been improved as needed. These may include specific mechanics of EOC operation, such as handling communications, message processing, or posting maps and displays. The disaster analysis group, headed by the Radiological Defense Officer(s), has been given any practice needed in receiving reports from radiological monitors, analyzing them, and producing and displaying information on disaster effects in a form that is understandable and useful to the key executives, as a basis for making decisions.

Means for making necessary improvements may include classroom instruction, seminars, work- shops, on-the-job training, and sub-system exercises. Examples of sub-system exercises include (1) scenarios and problems to give radiological monitors and the EOC disaster analysis group practice in reporting and analysis of the radioactive fallout or other hazards; (2) exercises for shelter managers, shelter complex headquarters (if required), and the EOC Shelter Officer on reporting and dealing with problems in public shelters; (3) exercises for health-medical professionals and hospital and ambulance staffs in movement and treatment of mass casualties; (4) exercises for governmental and voluntary welfare staffs in the care of disaster victims or refugees; and (5) exercises for news media and Emergency Public Information staffs in getting information and advice to the citizens.

Seminars or workshops for local executives may consider what specific Increased-Readiness actions would have to be taken in a crisis period, what department or group would be responsible for taking these actions, what resources would be required, and how these would be obtained.


END OF FILE – STANDARDS FOR LOCAL CIVIL PREPAREDNESS

Updated: June 20, 2009 — 8:34 pm

The Author

Rich Fleetwood

Rich is the founder of SurvivalRing, now in it's 20th year, author of multimedia CDs and DVDs, loves the outdoors, his family, his geeky skill-set, and lives in rural Missouri, just a few miles from the Big Muddy. Always ready to help others, he shares what he learns on multiple blogs, social sites, and more. With a background in preparedness and survival skills, training with county, state, and national organizations, and skills in all areas of media and on air experience in live radio and television, Rich is always thinking about the "big picture", when it comes to helping individuals and families prepare for life's little surprises. Since 1997, he has provided guidance, authentic government survival history, and commentary on why we all need to get ready for that fateful day in the future, when we have to get our hands dirty and step in to save the day. He is an award winning videographer (2005 Telly Award), has received state and national scholarly recognition (2006 New Century Scholar and All USA Academic Team), and is a natural with computers, technology, gadgets, small furry mammals, and anything on wheels. Rich likes making friends, solving problems, and creating solutions to everyday issues. He doesn't mind mixing things up, when there is a teaching moment ready to happen. As a constitutional conservative, he's staying quite busy these days. The SurvivalRing Radio Show at www.survivalringradio.com will be coming back SOON!

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Connect With Us at
Twitter Twitter | FaceBook Facebook | LinkedInLinkedIn | Quora Quora | Instagram Instagram | Pinterest Pinterest | Youtube Youtube | Tumblr Tumblr
SurvivalRing © 2018
Contact Us | Advertise | Terms of Use | GDPR | TradeMarks | Privacy | Fair Use | Sitemap | F.T.C
Social Media Disclosure | Earnings Disclaimer | Anti Spam Policy | D.M.C.A.
Site Design by Richard Fleetwood - Founder / Director of SurvivalRing.org
Copyright © 1997-2018 SurvivalRing.org/SurvivalRing Media - All Rights Reserved. -
SurvivalRing is the Trademark (TM) & Service Mark (SM) of all SurvivalRing Media Projects
THIS WEBSITE HOSTED BY SURVIVALRING.ORG - Comments Welcome!