HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council Workshop - Minutes - 06/17/2014 i
AL
O
(CENT
.'." Kent City Council Workshop Minutes
June 17, 2014
The workshop meeting was called to order at 5:14 p.m, by Council President Ralph at
the Kent Emergency Coordination Center (ECC), 24611 116th Avenue SE, Kent, WA
98030.
I
Mayor Cooke, Council President Ralph, and Councilmembers Boyce, Berrios, Fincher,
Higgins, and Thomas were present.
Kent Emergency Coordination Center. Dominic Marzano, Emergency Manager
displayed the room where the Mayor's Leadership Team meets during an emergency
event and displayed the Brightsign Communications System,
Marzano gave a program overview and discussed the center.
Brian Felczak, Program Manager gave an overview of the systems In the ECC and
positions. He also discussed the three activation levels.
Marzano discussed the legal authorities, Continuity of Government, city code, and the
responsibilities of those in the ECC versus those of the Mayor's Leadership Team in an
emergency. He also reviewed the Continuity of Operations (COOP) Plan.
Kimberly Behymer, Emergency Management Coordinator discussed public education
and the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Program.
Jennifer Keizer, Emergency Management Specialist highlighted the Emergency
Management Performance Grant (EMPG) and that It is utilized to purchase ECC
equipment and training.
Councilmember Ranniger arrived at 5,52 p.m.
Felczak provided an update concerning the Bakken Oil Trains. Marzano communicated
what an oil train derailment would entail and what a cleanup would entail.
Marzano discussed the Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned
Events. He noted that this new Framework Is streamlined and continues to facilitate a
systematic, coordinated and effective public, private and non-profit platform for
response. He reviewed the vetting process for the Framework and how it was
developed,
j
Council President Ralph thanked Marzano for his presentation.
The meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m.
Ronald F✓Moor , MMC
City Clerk
I
I
s
K1ENT
Vtaseuo...
(Cent City Council Meeting Minutes
June 17, 2014
The regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by
Mayor Cooke.
i
Councilmembers present; Ralph, Berries, Boyce, Fincher, Higgins, Ranniger, and
Thomas.
CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
A, From Council Administration Staff. Mayor Cooke communicated that King
County Councilmember Reagan Dunn would present the State of the County address.
B. From the Public. Mayor Cooke introduced King County Councilmember Reagan
Dunn.
King County Councilmember Reagan Dunn highlighted the approved $8.9 billion King
County budget, He stated that King County has an AAA Credit rating with Standard
and Poor's and has maintained services despite the recession. However, he stated
there will be a $25 million shortfall for the upcoming biennium, He stated that he
chairs the King County Flood Control District (KCFCD) and the Regional Transportation
Committee (RTC). He said KCFCD has had five clean audits with low overhead and
that 94 percent of the funds taxed go to straight to flood control projects. Dunn
highlighted several of the flood control projects, including those along the Green River.
He discussed the Briscoe Deslmone levee project and the flood walls. He also noted
that the City of Kent Is the lead agency for the Russell Road Upper Levee and
discussed the improvements. The Boeing Ecosystem Restoration Project (ERP) levee is
at 65 percent design and will be built in 2015, he announced. Dunn communicated
that the Russell Road Lower levee was funded $16 million last year as an early action
of the System wide Improvement Framework (SWIF) program with construction
scheduled for 2016. Councilmember Dunn discussed the SWIF Program and thanked
the City for their work and partnership on it.
Mayor Cooke thanked Councilmember Dunn for his participation with the Flood Control
District Advisory Committee. She communicated that the City may want to delay the
construction of the levee because it would affect what the Corps of Engineers Is doing.
Councilmember Higgins discussed the Boeing ERP and said Kent the City has battled to
get some of the flood walls installed. He noted that Kent and King County are doing a
lot of work with the assistance of the KCFCD and thanked Dunn for his assistance in
getting the work done.
i
Council President Ralph communicated that she is a WRIA-9 member. She thanked
Councilmember Dunn for being at the Council meeting and said it is good to have
representation that understands why we need to do these projects and protect the
environment,
i
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
A. Public Recognition. None.
I
Kent City Council Meeting Minutes June 17, 2014
B. Community Events. None.
C. Public Safety Report. Police Chief Ken Thomas noted that vehicle theft
investigations have led to 20 arrests in the City. He added that there haven't been
any arrests in residential burglaries and the number has been steady. He noted that
there have been four arrests in commercial burglaries and two arrests with vehicle
prowls. There were three robberies, a high number in one month, he said. He
communicated that the special investigations unit seized 9,5 poinds of heroin with two
guns and two pounds of cocaine with two handguns. Additionally, they seized 5 more
guns and over 6,000 in cash. He noted that there will be a Bike Bonanza which is a
fair with a bike rodeo for bicyclists. He noted that the event is June 28 and kids can
get their bicycles registered. National Night Out is August 5 and the deadline for
registration is July 31. Thomas presented Life Saving Awards to Officer Brienn
Johnson, Officer Randy Brennan, Officer Will Davis, and Officer Trevor Wolcott for their
actions in saving the lives of individuals.
Thomas replied to Mayor Cooke that the individuals responsible for auto thefts are not
being held for a long period of time because it is a property theft. Thomas added that
the City is working with the King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg and attempting to
hold them more accountable.
Acting City Attorney Pat Fitzpatrick noted that the City Attorney's office only
prosecutes misdemeanor offenses. He noted that when vehicle prowl type cases are
committed, the defendants usually have long criminal histories and his office requests
a high ball amount so they aren't released prior to their trial.
Thomas replied to Councilmember Ranniger and stated that there is so much meth
heading into this area that there isn't a need to produce it. He noted that the highest
drugs being utilized are meth and heroin.
D. Intergovernmental Reports. Council President Ralph discussed her attendance
at the Sound County Area Transportation Board meeting and WSDOT presented their
Highway 167 HOT lane plan. She communicated that the board received an update
from Sound Transit and that the public comment period for its long range plan is going
on now.
Higgins noted that the Regional Transit Committee meets tomorrow and they will
continue to discuss service reductions to Metro. He communicated that some
reductions will occur in September no matter what. There is a Sound Cities
Association (SCA) Board of Directors meeting next Wednesday. He announced that
both the SCA Board and the SCR Public Issues Committee were both against the Puget
Sound Air Agency membership increase. He concluded that he will be attending a
meeting of the ad hoc oil railway committee that was formed by the Association of
Washington Cities (AWC) this Friday in Spokane.
Councilmember Boyce communicated that he has a conflict and can only attend the
Regional Fire Authority meeting tomorrow, He asked for a Council volunteer to attend
the SCA meeting.
2
i
Kent City Council Meeting Minutes June 17, 2014
Mayor Cooke communicated that the Juneteenth celebration will be on Saturday at
10:00 am at Morrill Meadows Park.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Council President Ralph moved to approve Consent Calendar Items A through
K, seconded by Councilmember Thomas. Motion carried 7-0.
A. Approval of the minutes — Approve. Approval of the minutes of the workshop
and regular Council meeting of June 3, 2014.
B. Payment of Bills — Approve. Approval of payment of the bills received through
May 15 and paid on May 15 after auditing by the Operations Committee on June 4,
2014.
C. Oil Trains, Resolution - Adopt. The Mayor was authorized to sign Resolution No.
1892 seeking to protect the health, safety, and economic well-being of our local
citizens and natural resources from the potential impact of increased crude oil traffic
passing through Kent.
D. Public Works Agreement with Petersen Brothers for Emergency Guardrail
Services — Authorize. The Mayor was authorized to sign a Public Works Agreement
with Petersen Brothers Construction, Inc. to perform repairs of damaged guardrails on
an as needed basis, in an amount not to exceed $20,000, subject to the final terms
and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director.
I
E. Resource & Conservation Office Salmon Recovery Funding Board, Project
Funding Agreement for Mill Creek Side Channel (Leber) Project Construction -
Authorize. The Mayor was authorized to sign the Salmon Project Funding Agreement
in the amount of $159,460, direct staff to accept the grant and establish a budget for
the funds to be spent within the Mill Creek Side Channel (Leber) Restoration project.
F. Consultant Services Agreement with Jason Engineering Business, Inc. far
Materials Testing and Inspection for the 2014 Overlay Project — Authorize.
The Mayor was authorized to sign a Consultant Services Agreement with Jason
Engineering & Consulting Business, Inc., for Materials Testing and Inspection work for
the 2014 Overlay project in an amount not to exceed $43,660, subject to final terms
and conditions acceptable to the City Attorney and Public Works Director.
G. IT — Multimedia & Accounting Technician Position — Authorize. The Mayor
was authorized to increase the existing Multimedia Print Technician and Multimedia
Graphics Designer positions to 1.00 FTE each, and establish a new Accounting
3
i
I
Kent City Council Meeting Minutes June 17, 2014
Technician position subject to terms and conditions acceptable to the Human
Resources and Information Technology Director.
i
H. Microsoft Product Licensing — 2014 Enterprise Agreement — Authorize. The
Mayor was authorized to execute all documents necessary to enter into a two year and
eight month contract with CompuCom Systems, Inc., the reselling agent for Microsoft
Inc., to renew the Microsoft Enterprise Software Agreement, and to ratify all acts
consistent with this motion.
I
I. Print Shop Copier/Multi-Function Device Replacement — Authorize. The
Mayor was authorized to sign all documents necessary to purchase two Konica-Minolta
Multifunction Printing Devices not to exceed $124,000 plus applicable taxes and fees,
and to enter into a maintenance agreement subject to terms and conditions acceptable
to the Information Technology Director and City Attorney.
J. Parking Zone Amendment Ordinance — Adopt. The Mayor was authorized to
adopt Ordinance No. , amending Kent City Code 9.38 authorizing the Chief of Police to
suspend the enforcement of certain parking restrictions in order to protect the public
health, safety and welfare.
K. 112th Avenue SE Watermain Project — Accept as Complete. The Mayor was
authorized to accept the 112th Avenue SE Watermain Project as complete and release
retainage to TITAN Earthwork, LLC Project, upon receipt of standard releases from the
state and the release of any liens. The original contract amount was $1,811,541.01.
The final amount paid is $1,538,313.17.
Councilmember Higgins communicated tha tthe Oil Trains resolution was adopted with
this Consent Calendar,
OTHER BUSINESS
A. Downtown Design Guidelines, Ordnance — Adopt. Gloria Gould-Wesson
presented the Downtown Design Guidelines. She discussed what the guidelines consist
of.
Councilmember Thomas departed at 7:40 p.m.
Councilmember Boyce communicated that the Economic and Community Development
Committee (ECDC) wanted the entire Council to know what progress they are making
and be aware, He stated that the item came out of the committee by a unanimous
vote.
I
Council President Ralph noted that she Is very excited about this plan and thanked
ECDC Committee and the Land Use and Planning Board for their work. She said this is
what downtown will look like in the future,
Councilmember Fincher asked about the setbacks and Gould-Wesson noted that the
setbacks are specific to downtown and tied to the pedestrian map overlay. Gould-
4
Kent City Council Meeting Minutes June 17, 2014
Wesson stated that the guidelines and the contents are specific to the community that
comes up with them and the desires of the Council.
Councilmember Fincher discussed light pollution and Gould-Wesson noted that the
policies are intended to screen the lighting so it is cast down unto the streets and
sidewalks.
Councilmember Boyce moved to adopt Ordinance No. 4116 adopting
Downtown Design Review Kent City Code 15.09.046 and Kent Downtown
Design Guidelines update, as recommended by the Economic and Community
Development Committee, seconded by Councilmember Berros. Motion carried
6-0.
B. Current Progress on the Briscoe Levee Project — Presentation. City Engineer
Chad Berrens discussed the current progress of the Briscoe Levee project. He noted
that the tree removal is completed and displayed photos of the project site. Reach 2
was also completed last Saturday, he said, and displayed a video on how the sheets
are driven into the ground.
Mayor Cooke thanked Public Works and the staff for their work on this project.
BIDS
None,
REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES, STAFF AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES
A. Council President. Council President Ralph communicated that the Council went
to the Emergency Coordination Center and discussed what would occur in an
emergency. She said Dominic Marzano communicated what the responsiblIUes would
be of all personnel, including the Mayor, Council, Mayor's Leadership Team, and the
assigned ECC staff. There was also a presentation given concerning the oil trains, she
said, noting that she is confident that the emergency management staff is doing all it
can to prepare in case of an emergency.
B. Mayor. Mayor Cooke noted that next week there is a panel who will be
interviewing the candidates for the Chief Administrative Officer and Finance Director
positions.
C. Administration. No report.
D. Economic & Community Development Committee. In the minutes.
E, Operations Committee. In the minutes,
I
I
F. Parks and Human Services Committee. Councilmember Ranniger
communicated that the June 19 meeting Is cancelled and has been rescheduled for
June 26 at 5pm in Council Chamber,
5
i
I
Kent City Council Meeting Minutes June 17, 2014
i
G. Public Safety Committee. In the minutes.
Councilmember Berrios highlighted that he observed the SWAT Team during the
cocaine bust and is Impressed with how they operate.
H. Public Works Committee. Councilmember Higgins communicated that the Puget
Sound Regional Council awarded the City two grants, one for $1.5 million to the City
for South Central pavement rehabilitation and $2 million for the Burlington Northern
grade separation. He also noted that there has been some erosion on the hill at SE
240th Street and a couple of ordinances were recommended in the Public Works
Committee for emergency work. He noted that the hill needs to be rebuilt to the edge
of the road.
i
I. Regional Fire Authority. No report.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
ACTION AFTER EXECUTIVE SESSION
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 7:59 p.m. /
1
Ronald F/M orV, MMC
City Clerk
i
I
l'
i
i
6
Regional Coordination Framework
for Disasters and Planned Events
for Public and Private Organizations in King County, Washington
YA
aA
r
i a
hisI i
k
February 2014
Emergency Management Partners,
As we arrive at another milestone in our regional planning efforts here in King County, we would like to
share a brief look back on the cornerstone efforts of the `Regional Disaster Plan' and its notable history.
It is reality that disasters don't respect jurisdictional boundaries, let alone economic environments. Our
citizens throughout King County expect the public,private, nonprofit and tribal entities to work together
in responding to and recovering from a disaster. Geographical King County is 2,134 square miles of
diverse terrain with over 1.9 million people, 39 cities,over 120 special purpose districts,two tribal
nations,and over 700 elected officials. With our population density,complex system of governance and
significant hazards we face,disasters present the need to plan for a coordinated response among
governments,non-profits and businesses.
In 1998, elected officials from Seattle, Suburban Cities and King County passed a motion(#10566)to
initiate the planning efforts of a`regional response plan and mechanism to share resources.' That effort
was pioneering new territory by establishing a cooperative and voluntary platform linking private
businesses,nonprofit organizations, government agencies, and special purpose districts. Through
collaborative planning and participation,hundreds of entities can behave in a coordinated manner,
provide assistance to each other and maintain their authority.
The King County Office of Emergency Management(KCOEM)began the `regional planning' effort in
1999 and formed the Regional Disaster Planning Task Force(now the Regional Disaster Planning Work
Group). Any and all partnering disciplines,agencies and organizations were invited to the table and
actively participated in taking the ground breaking steps to create the `Regional Disaster Plan for Public
and Private Organizations in King County.' Over a two-year period many meetings were held, numerous
ideas and concepts discussed and debated,and multitudes of briefings and updates all contributed to a
collaborative and transparent regional planning process. Throughout the process the multi-disciplinary
groups representing King County Emergency Management Advisory Committee(EMAC)and the King
County Regional Policy Committee were briefed and engaged. By early 2001,a Basic Plan and legally
vetted`Omnibus Legal and Financial Agreement' were completed,and then... September I Ith occurred.
All of us found ourselves in a new era. Our view of the world changed significantly post September 11 h
and we collectively recognized the need to be even more collaborative in our emergency management
efforts. Even the largest of cities would not be able to do it alone.The cumulative efforts of all those
engaged partners had moved the regional plan from a concept to the reality of an actual plan ready for
signature and implementation. In January 2002,with EMAC endorsement,the EMAC Chair Barb Graff
(City of Bellevue Emergency Management)and Co-Chair Bill Wilkinson(Port of Seattle)initiated the
inaugural promulgation of the`Regional Disaster Plan for Public and Private Organizations in King
County.' By December 2002, 99 cities, fire districts,businesses, schools,water and sewer districts and
nonprofits were official signatory partners.That same year the 9-11 Commission and the National
Association of Counties(NACo)formally awarded and recognized KCOEM for the regional
collaboration and planning endeavor—the`Regional Disaster Plan.'
Page 2 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
The original Regional Disaster Plan was designed using the model of the Federal Response Plan, i.e.basic
plan followed by a series of"Emergency Support Functions"such as communications and transportation.
Through the following years and various Presidential Directives(transitions to the National Response
Plan and the National Incident Management System),the Regional Disaster Planning effort continued to
engage regional partners from public,private,nonprofit and tribes and alternations were made to keep the
Plan current. Additional promulgations occurred with Plan updates and more signatory partners joined.
With the last official promulgation and signatory process in March 2008, and with continued interest
since then,there are currently 145 signatories.
Over time partners and the region have matured with additional focused planning efforts(mass care,
evacuation,regional catastrophic,etc.),putting the Regional Disaster Plan in a good position to evolve.
After over a year's work of transformation,the Plan(along with the associated Agreement, which is the
legal and financial document addressing sharing of resources;formerly the `Omnibus')are in a new state.
Embodying again true regional coordination,the Plan has transitioned to a new format: `Regional
Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events.' In a streamlined form,the new Framework
(like the former Plan)facilitates a systematic,coordinated, and effective response to multi-agency or
multi jurisdictional disasters or planned events that occur within the geographic boundaries of King
County. By leveraging existing plans,the Framework focuses on five key areas of coordination:
• Direction and Coordination
• Information Collection, Analysis and Dissemination
• Public Information
• Communications
• Resource Management
All emergency management partners will be provided the opportunity to review and comment on this new
and fresh Framework through an identified process. The goal is to roll out the Framework and Agreement
to all partners in January 2014 for official promulgation and signature. Regional Disaster Planning Work
Group and EMAC members will be active in informing and promoting the intent and benefits of the
Framework and Agreement.
The efforts put forth by the Work Group have been well coordinated, and the EMAC has been kept
apprised and has advised as needed. We look forward to your agency and organization officially joining
in supporting this Framework. Through this Framework,together we can assist one another in a more
coordinated response, which will ultimately assist in the quicker recovery of our communities and
economy.
Sincerely,
V
Dominic Marzano,Chair Gail Harris, Vice Chair
City of Kent Emergency Management City of Shoreline Emergency Management
Emergency Management Advisory Committee(EMAC)
Page 3 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 4 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Log of Changes
Date of
Change Description of Change Page #
Page 5 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Introductory Materials
Promulgation
The Regional Coordination Framework (formerly the Regional Disaster Plan) is intended
to embody the true essence of regional collaboration and coordination. From its
inception in 1998, by King County Motion #10566, this regional plan "... allows for
shared resources and cooperation within existing capabilities and is consistent with
emergency management priorities established by the governing body of each
jurisdiction, special district, organization or appropriate agency." The value of the
Framework that is that the organizational networking and administrative workload can
be coordinated in advance of a disaster, thus expediting the response capability from
partner to partner and throughout the region.
Approval and Implementation
The Regional Disaster Planning Work Group (RDPWG) is the inter-jurisdictional and
multi-disciplinary group responsible for developing, enhancing, and maintaining the
Regional Coordination Framework. The RDPWG consists of representatives from
regional partners and serves as a subcommittee to the King County Emergency
Management Advisory Committee (EMAC), which in turn serves as an advisory entity to
the King County Executive and the King County Office of Emergency Management
(OEM). All emergency management partners are included and encouraged to
participate throughout the review and vetting process.
Modifications to the Framework and its related documents are shared and distributed to
all partners. Ongoing reviews and feedback shall occur routinely. When Framework
modifications have been vetted through the RDPWG and initial review conducted by
partners, the RDPWG Chair/Co-Chair will present them to EMAC for review and
endorsement. In accordance with King County Motion #10566, "Any draft regional plan
proposed by the Emergency Management Advisory Committee (EMAC) should be
submitted through each jurisdiction, special district, organization, or appropriate agency
governing body for review and comment." Therefore, all updated documentation is
presented for `Open Comment' for at least 30 days. Emergency management partners
are responsible for reviewing and vetting through their internal channels for any
concerns and/or issues. Those concerns and/or issues that arise may be documented
and sent to the King County Office of Emergency Management. All comments will be
reviewed and addressed by the RDPWG, which will in turn recommend amendments
and/or changes to EMAC for consideration and recommendation.
Page 6 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
The RDPWG holds open meetings, keeps all partners apprised of work and products,
and provides reports to EMAC. According to King County Motion #10566, the RDPWG
in coordination with EMAC, will "...report to the regional policy committee periodically on
its progress in developing the plan, and bring forward to the regional policy committee
significant policy issues arising in the process."
Distribution
EMAC will formally endorse the Framework and associated Agreement, and through
their `letter of endorsement,' begin encouraging adoption by partners (public, private,
non-profit) within their respective jurisdiction, agency and/or organization. The King
County Office of Emergency Management will be responsible for collecting, gathering
and maintaining the emergency contact information for participating partners as well as
the signatory sheets for those partners who are signatory to this Framework's
associated Agreement.
In recognition of the expanding nature of this Framework and the partnerships it
encourages, a comprehensive distribution list cannot be provided within this document.
Please visit the King County Office of Emergency Management website for a full and
current listing of partners to the Regional Coordination Framework and signatories to
the associated Agreement.
http://www.kingcounty.gov/safety/prepare/EmergencyManagementProfessionals.aspx
Page 7 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Table of Contents
I. Purpose, Scope, Situation Overview and Assumptions.............................................................9
II. Concept of Operations...................................................................................................................11
III. Responsibilities...............................................................................................................................14
IV. Direction and Coordination ...........................................................................................................18
V. Information Collection, Analysis, and Dissemination................................................................21
VI. Public Information...........................................................................................................................23
VII. Communication...............................................................................................................................26
VIII. Administration, Finance, and Logistics........................................................................................28
IX. Document Development and Maintenance................................................................................31
X. Terms and Definitions....................................................................................................................33
XI. Authorities and References...........................................................................................................35
Page 8 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
I. Purpose, Scope, Situation Overview and Assumptions
Purpose
The Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events facilitates a
systematic, coordinated, and effective response to multi-agency or multi-jurisdictional
disasters or planned events that occur within the geographic boundaries of King County,
Washington. It provides a framework whereby cooperative relationships can be formed
among public, private, tribal and non-profit organizations in order to accomplish this
common goal. Through the implementation of this framework, the resources and
capabilities of the public, private, tribal and non-profit sectors can be more efficiently
utilized to minimize the loss of life and property and to protect the environmental and
economic health within King County.
The Regional Coordination Framework is a voluntary guide to regional response and
short term recovery actions. Signatory partners are those organizations from the public,
private, tribal, and non-profit sectors in geographic King County that are committed to
working together in accordance with this framework and have signed the associated
Agreement. There is no preferential treatment or priority given to those partners who are
signatory to the Agreement versus those who are not. The benefit of being a signatory
partner to the RCF and the Agreement is to save time during a disaster by having
decision making authority for jurisdictions already in place and on file.
Scope
The RCF applies to any disaster or planned event that concurrently challenges multiple
jurisdictions or multiple disciplines within King County or affects a single entity to such a
degree that it relies upon external assistance. The Framework and the associated
Agreement are intended to be utilized in conjunction with other state and local
emergency plans, including but not limited to mutual aid agreements such as the Intra-
state Mutual Aid System (within Washington State), the Emergency Management
Assistance Compact (state to state), other public, non-governmental organization, tribal,
or private sector agreements, and the Pacific Northwest Emergency Management
Arrangement (States of Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and Washington and the Province of
British Columbia).
The Framework addresses strategic response activities and allocation of incoming
scarce resources for those disasters or planned events where normal emergency
response processes and capabilities become overtaxed, or where there is a need for
regional coordination of response operations shared situational awareness and
coordinated public information due to the complexity or duration of the disaster(s). The
Page 9 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
associated Agreement articulates the financial aspects of voluntarily participating in
accordance with the Framework.
Although the focus is on disaster response, the Framework assumes future coordinated
efforts to address regional protection, mitigation, preparedness, and recovery issues.
Likewise, while relationships with other counties and neighboring jurisdictions are not
specifically included in this Framework, they are not precluded from participating as a
partner.
The framework describes five key areas of coordination:
• Direction and Coordination
• Information Collection, Analysis and Dissemination
• Public Information
• Communications
• Resource Management
Situation Overview
Disasters and planned events can present unique challenges to the public and private
sectors for the efficient and effective use of resources, the protection of lives and
property, the protection of the regional economy, and the preservation of the
environment or other essential functions. Natural or human-caused hazards may have
impacts sufficient to require partners to seek assistance or manage emergency
resources and supplies through use of this Framework. Specific information about
natural or human-caused hazards may be accessed from emergency management
jurisdictions.
Planning Assumptions
• No perfect response is implied by the availability of this framework
• Local, regional, and state resources may not be sufficient to respond to all needs
in a timely fashion
• Damages to regional infrastructure may result in unreliable communications and
slow delivery or distribution of requested resources
• Impacts to some partners may require assistance from other partners, adjacent
counties, the State of Washington, Emergency Management Assistance
Compact partners, or the Federal Government and other entities
• Emergencies may require the establishment and/or multi-jurisdictional
coordination of emergency actions
• Participation in the Regional Coordination Framework is voluntary
Page 10 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
• Acquisition, use, and return of resources as well as the reimbursement for those
resources are guided by the associated Agreement
• Regional policy decision-making participants will vary from disaster to disaster
• All partners will comply with federal, state, and local legal obligations
• The King County Office of Emergency Management (KCOEM) will serve as the
lead for regional emergency management activities. KCOEM will activate the
Regional Communications and Emergency Coordination Center (RCECC) in
support of disaster response or planned event coordination, during which the
RCECC will be the focal point for information sharing and regional resource
coordination.
• First responders will continue to be directed by their incident commanders
• Each partner will retain its own internal policies, processes, authorities, and
obligations and organize and direct its internal organization continuity
II. Concept of Operations
In the event of a disaster or planned event requiring central coordination at the RCECC,
operational authority will remain with partners and local incident commanders. Local
procedures will be followed and Emergency Operations Centers or Emergency
Coordination Centers (EOCs or ECCs) staffed in accordance with partner plans.
Procedures governing internal actions will be maintained by the partner. All necessary
decisions affecting response, protective actions, and advisories will be made by those
officials under their existing authorities, policies, plans, and procedures. Use of and
adherence to the Regional Coordination Framework is voluntary.
The Framework provides a structure for disaster response operations that:
• Uses geographic divisions or zones of the county to:
o Facilitate coordination of information sharing
o Assist in the management of resource request processes, prioritization
and tracking
• Provides centrally coordinated emergency functions within the region utilizing the
King County RCECC
• Provides a mechanism for regional policy decision-making
• Augments existing mutual aid agreements by providing pre-designated legal and
financial ground rules for the sharing of resources
• Is consistent with the National Incident Management System (NIMS) and is
based on the Incident Command System (ICS)
Page 11 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
i
r
i4
1
King ( ounty 12egionitl h:ruergency C'coor(lin-Minn Z4-)nes
Figure 1: King County Emergency Coordination Zones (2012)
Geographic Divisions
Predetermined geographic divisions of the County have facilitated efficient preplanning
efforts as well as the sharing of information and coordination of priorities, operations,
and application of resources during a disaster or planned event. The three Regional
Emergency Coordination Zones correlate to the existing King County Fire Zones are
(see figure 1):
• Emergency Coordination Zone 1 — North and East King County
• Emergency Coordination Zone 3 — South King County
• Emergency Coordination Zone 5 - the City of Seattle
Each Zone may develop protocols and procedures for carrying out inter- and intra-zone
coordination and response functions. During the response to a disaster or planned
event, these zone coordination functions may operate through a Zone Coordinator from
the King County RCECC or in a decentralized location.
Organizations that provide services throughout geographic King County ("regional
service providers") may not have the resources to coordinate their service delivery and
response activities directly with all three Emergency Coordination Zones
simultaneously. Instead, these regional service providers may provide a single point of
coordination through the King County RCECC. Examples of regional service providers
include: public health/medical, banking and finance, energy, transportation, information
Page 12 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
and telecommunications, agriculture, emergency services, chemical industry, food,
water, etc. Regional service providers may provide a representative directly to the
affected zone and/or the King County RCECC.
Central Coordination
Where central coordination of regional emergency actions is needed, the King County
RCECC may provide a location from which to coordinate.
In accordance with the National Response Framework, the King County RCECC utilizes
a hybrid response organization that embeds subject matter experts into the Incident
Command System structure through Emergency Support Functions (ESFs). The ESFs,
listed below, represent fifteen broad categories that enable subject matter expertise, like
resources, and similar capabilities to be aligned into groups to aid coordination.
ESF 1 — Transportation ESF 9 — Search & Rescue
ESF 2 — Communications ESF 10 — Oil & Hazardous Materials
ESF 3 — Public Works & Engineering ESF 11 —Agriculture & Natural Resources
ESF 4 — Fire Response ESF 12 — Energy
ESF 5 — Emergency Management ESF 13 — Public Safety & Security
ESF 6 — Mass Care, Housing, & Human ESF 14 — Recovery
Services ESF 15 — External Affairs
ESF 7 — Resource Management ESF 20 — Military Support to Civil
ESF 8 — Public Health, Medical and Authorities
Mortuary Services
In its role as an Emergency Coordination Center, the King County RCECC facilitates
operational response at the regional level and supports operational response activities
that are managed at the local level; the RCECC does not make operational decisions
for local jurisdictions or partners unless specifically requested. Rather, the RCECC
facilitates regional support activities that have been developed collaboratively amongst
the appropriate stakeholders, represented through the ESFs and Zone Coordinators.
When the RCECC has been activated, Zone Coordinators and regional service
providers may coordinate their efforts from the King County RCECC, via their respective
ESF Coordinator, the EOC/ECC of their local emergency management jurisdiction or
most impacted partner. Coordination between regional service providers and partners
may be from locations remote to the RCECC by electronic means. Healthcare
organizations will coordinate through the Northwest Healthcare Response Network,
which will in turn coordinate with emergency management jurisdictions through ESF 8,
Public Health, Medical and Mortuary Services.
Page 13 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
When the RCECC has not been staffed by ESFs, partners will continue to coordinate
with other partners, contractors, or mutual aid partners and will brief their local
EOC/ECC or emergency management office (with emergency management jurisdiction
as defined in RCW 38.52) and the King County Office of Emergency Management
(KCOEM) Duty Officer if appropriate,. Partners should establish a relationship with their
local emergency management jurisdiction in advance.
Once the RCECC has been activated, the RCECC will be contacted through the main
RCECC email, radio talk group, or phone number. Information and resource requests
will be directed to the most appropriate combination of zone coordinator(s), logistics,
planning, or operations (ESFs) sections for their actions.
The King County RCECC Regional Communications and Emergency Coordination
Center (KC RCECC) facility is located at 3511 NE 2nd Street, Renton, Washington,
98056.
Transition from regional response to regional long-term recovery
Response efforts at the RCECC entail the immediate actions needed to protect lives
and safety of the population, protect or affect temporary repairs to infrastructure, and
protect property or the environment. Long-term recovery includes permanent repair,
relocation, or replacement of that infrastructure or property. Long-term recovery may
take months or many years depending on the nature of impacts. Long-term recovery
and potential federal assistance to tribal nations, the public and private sectors is
governed by the Stafford Act and other documents with specific terms including the
Code of Federal Regulations and Treaties. A separate document addresses regional
long-term recovery.
III. Responsibilities
In accordance with Ordinance 17075, King County Government has the responsibility to
foster cooperative planning within regional concepts to its emergency mitigation,
preparedness, response, and recovery efforts and to serve as the coordinating entity for
cities, county governmental departments and other appropriate agencies during
incidents and events of regional significance. In addition, King County shall enter into
mutual aid agreements in collaboration with private and public entities in an event too
great to be managed without assistance.
When an emergency impacts regional King County, the King County RCECC and local
EOCs or ECCs may be staffed to address the consequences of the emergency impacts
to the public, government, and regional partners or to support regional first responders.
Page 14 DRAFT-Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
This section of the framework introduces the concept of a regional coordination process
that may be needed to enact emergency powers, suspend or limit civil liberties,
coordinate executive decisions, determine strategies for the allocation of scarce
resources or transition into long term recovery. The diagram below describes the
structure and relationship of regional organizations in response. Also, see Direction and
Coordination as well as the Terms and Definitions at the end of this framework.
All Signatory Partners will:
• Identify an Emergency Point of Contact
• Work with their authorized emergency agency in their operations or coordination
centers as identified under RCW 38.52.070
• Develop, maintain, and utilize internal emergency plans and procedures
• Direct information and resource communications to their local Emergency
Operations or Coordination Center, or the RCECC Section as appropriate
• Equip and train a workforce to sustain emergency operations
• Participate in the development of this framework
• Seek and secure mutual aid documentation
• Abide by the caveats of the this Framework's associated Agreement
• Request regional decision-making on policy issues as needed
The mechanism for regional policy coordination:
• Collaboration on the execution of emergency powers, suspension or limitation of
civil liberties
• Collaboration to establish strategic priorities for the allocation of limited resources
in support of King County strategic goals and regional objectives
• Communicate with partners and the general public directly or to the public
through the RCECC Joint Information Center (JIC)
Elected and Appointed Officials will:
• King County Executive will Serve as the facilitator of the mechanism for regional
policy decision-making
• Establish and work through their authorized Emergency Operations or
Coordination Centers
• Utilize their established emergency and continuity plans
• Identify Emergency Points of Contact for the jurisdiction with full authority to
commit or request resources, personnel, and make decisions on behalf of the
jurisdiction
Page 15 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
• Work with and through their designated emergency managers for resource needs
that cannot be filled within their jurisdiction, mutual aid agreements, available
private sector sources, or within the emergency management zone
• Coordinate with private sector partners through their designated EOC or ECC
• Issue emergency proclamations and implement authorized emergency powers
• Coordinate selection and implementation of emergency powers through the
mechanism for regional policy decision-making
• Abide by the caveats of the this Framework's associated Agreement
RCECC Incident Manager will:
• Direct RCECC coordination activities
• Recommend formation of and composition of a mechanism for regional policy
decision-making
• Keep the those involved with regional policy decision-making informed of policy
issues, incident coordination and progress
• Communicate regional policy decisions to the RCECC staff
• Recommend and have drafted a County emergency proclamation as needed
• Work with and direct the Joint Information Center and functional sections of the
activated RCECC
• Host Zone Coordinators and regional partners as liaisons to the RCECC
• Establish and adjust regional objectives, identify policy issues, and allocate
resources with input from Zone Coordinators and regional service providers
• Facilitate regional situational awareness, Common Operation Picture and
information sharing with regional partners and the public
• Facilitate an effective and efficient resource management process
RCECC Joint Information Center will:
• Communicate information to the public, and partners, that may affect their lives,
safety, health, property, or services
• Implement a Joint Information System to assist in coordinating public information
Zone Coordinator(s) may:
• Represent the cities within their designated zone in the RCECC
• Collect and communicate information to the RCECC and the Incident Manager
• Collaborate with the Incident Manager to establish and adjust regional objectives,
identify policy issues, and allocate resources
• Direct partner representatives to seek resources within their zone before
forwarding requests to the RCECC
Page 16 , DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
• Request regional decision-making on policy issues with notice to the emergency
managers
• Maintain situation awareness on needed policy issues and resource requests
• Make limited operational decisions on behalf of their designated zone
• Facilitate information sharing between RCECC and Zone
RCECC Sections will:
• Develop situational awareness and support information sharing throughout the
region and up to the state.
• Receive, allocate, track resource issues from county departments and regional
partners. Any resources that cannot be provided from within the geographic
county shall be attained via contract or forwarded onto the state for action.
• Manage and retain documentation in support of the incident.
• Serve as network control for regional radio communications between regional
Emergency Operations or Coordination Centers
Local Authorized EOCs and ECCs will.
• Work within their organization's and zone's resources and capabilities before
requesting resources from the RCECC
• Communicate resource requests to the RCECC Logistics Section and their Zone
Coordinator in the RCECC when availability within their zone has been
exhausted
• Include private sector, non-governmental sector, and tribal nations in local EOC
decisions, information sharing and resource management
• Utilize the appropriate mechanism for resource requests to the RCECC
• Support the functions and protocols established in this framework
• Have or can quickly get the authority to commit available equipment, services,
and personnel to the (borrowing) organization
• Participate in decision making conference calls or physical meetings as
appropriate and conditions allow
Emergency Contact Points will:
• Be in an established line of succession that includes names, addresses, and 24-
hour phone numbers for each partner
• Make emergency contact information available to regional partners, King County
OEM, and the RCECC when staffed
• Have or can quickly get the authority to commit available equipment, services,
and personnel to the (borrowing) organization
Page 17 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
• Participate in decision-making conference calls or physical meetings as
appropriate and conditions allow
Resource Lenders will:
• Make available such resources as will not deter the Lender of the ability to
continue efforts toward its own response objectives
• Abide by the conditions described in the this Framework's associated Agreement
Resource Borrowers will:
• First seek and exhaust access to resources within their organizational authority
• Seek mutual aid and commercial resources within their emergency management
zone
• Request resources through the King County RCECC in accordance with the this
Framework's associated Agreement
State of Washington will:
• Seek and accept damage reports and situation reports from the King County
RCECC
• Accept and process resource requests received from the King County RCECC
• Seek sources of assistance to fill regional King County logistical needs
• Proclaim a state of emergency, if warranted
Federal government will.-
• Provide response assistance to the State of Washington as available and
requested under a state proclamation of emergency
• Direct appropriate federal agencies to lend assistance to the State of Washington
where possible
• As appropriate, declare a state of emergency in support of response and
recovery from the impacts of an emergency in Washington State and/or to
regional tribal nations
IV. Direction and Coordination
The Regional Coordination Framework does not carry the authority of code. It is a
voluntary agreement between partners to the Regional Coordination Framework and the
associated Agreement and any annexes that may be crafted for the benefit of the
region. King County and each authorized emergency management agency within King
Page 18 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
County are required to have, maintain, and implement their own emergency plans in
accordance with Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 38.52. Similarly, other public
entities, private sector, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and tribal nations may
maintain plans that describe how they will direct and manage emergencies within their
scope of authority. The National Incident Management System (NIMS), National
Response Framework and King County Ordinance 17075 are the basis for the regional
direction and coordination function described here.
Purpose
The purpose of this section is to identify a mechanism for regional policy decision-
making, a process for policy coordination and strategies for the allocation of limited
resources to regional disasters within established criteria and priorities.
Situation and Scope
Tactical direction and control of resources available to onsite/on scene incident
commanders remains within the established organizational direction of the incident
commander. See this Framework's associated Agreement.
Loaned employees remain the employees of the lending organization while under the
direction of the borrowing organization during their assignment.
Where regional policy decision-making is needed, elected officials may enact
emergency powers, suspend or limit civil liberties, coordinate executive decisions,
determine strategies for the allocation of scarce resources under proclaimed
emergencies. Regional Partners may not be bound by all of the regional decisions
made. Decisions may impact regional partners that are not signatories to the
Framework's associated Agreement.
All political subdivisions retain the authority to direct requests for assistance to the
Washington State Governor's Office and the State Emergency Management EOC.
Establishing Regional Decision-Makinq
Regional policy decision-making may be informed by the King County Executive, Local
Health Officer, the legal representative(s) of cities and tribal nations as required by the
disaster and subject matters experts as necessary. Initial coordination between
impacted regional partners may occur through the initiation of a conference call by the
King County RCECC, the request for such coordination by one or more Zone
Coordinators, or at the request of one or more partners. Subsequent meetings, whether
at the RCECC or by conference call will be scheduled and announced to all authorized
emergency management agencies in sufficient time to allow maximum participation.
Page 19 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
Coordination meetings and call announcements will include representatives from
authorized emergency management agencies under RCW 38.52.070 and tribal nations.
The interests of private sector and non-governmental organizations should be
represented by their most appropriate authorized emergency management agency.
The King County Executive or designee will facilitate the meetings whether virtual or
conducted at the RCECC. Partners and representatives participating in regional policy
decision-making may vary from disaster to disaster depending on the experienced
impacts to the region. All partner representatives must have the authority to represent
their organization for consensus decision-making and commitment or request
resources. Verification of personnel will be conducted internally through local EOCs or
ECCs.
- - - - - -- - - -- - --- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -
t AuthorityforKC Mechanism Appropriate 1
1 Government& for Consensus Elected RDCFPolicy 1
1 Unincorporated on Regional Officials 1
L1 Areas Decisions 1
I 1
L#
l I 1
I 1
tiC a �..n r
Zonc 1,3,S VOW=
Coordinators
l
Officials to Agency
Jointinformotion , finergemyAdonoger
System()IS)with - InformationCoordination
Partners Center
°o KC�CG
p e ated
;n
_// \_� °
"', � &
-----— — L — — — nerge—
' Management
Incident Agencies/
Coordination °prutn3ron C OEM Partners Key
ECC bury Coadlnato"
Pre- ( E., -,,,:
Officer
getiVation �- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - � s._e...
Figure 2: Information and escalation flow for regional policy decisions
Establish regional response priorities, policies, and decisions
Information guiding the decision-making process will be made available to all partners
prior to the conference call or physical meeting.
Page 20 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
Policy deliberations will occur between the County Executive and whichever cities and
tribal nations are needed to participate in regional policy decision-making. When
regional decision-making is needed, all attempts will be made to come to consensus on
all decisions.
General criteria for policy decisions will include doing the most good possible within
each category and may include but is not limited to:
• Preservation of life, safety and preservation of human health
• Caring for vulnerable populations
• Preservation of public infrastructure and property
• Protection of the regional economy
• Protection of the environment
• Preservation of private property
The King County Incident Manager will assign someone to document the
announcement of the conference call and/or physical meeting, the participants and
attendees, the agenda, decisions, next steps, and known or anticipated future
conference calls or meetings times/dates and locations as may apply.
Policy decisions will be communicated through local Emergency Operations and
Coordination Centers and disseminated via the Joint Information System.
V. Information Collection, Analysis, and Dissemination
For the purposes of the Regional Coordination Framework, the collection, analysis, and
dissemination of information include Situational Awareness and Public Information.
Situational Awareness
Situational awareness is knowing what is going on around the region, understanding
what needs to be done in the region, and distributing such information to regional
partners.
Purpose
The purpose of this section is to describe the process of how the region establishes and
maintains situational awareness during regional incidents and events. This process is
critical to effectively create stability, implement response, and undertake recovery within
the region. With this process documented, the region will have a major component of its
Common Operating Picture (COP) established.
Page 21 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
Situation and Scope
Situational awareness is developed by timely and accurate information about the level
of impact, resources currently utilized in the response, resources available to support
the response, and perceived needs of the jurisdiction, partner and public. Each entity
manages the information and needs specific to that entity and its area of responsibility.
When entities share their specific situational awareness with each other and partners
develop an understanding of each other's impacts and needs, a Common Operating
Picture is created. The development and management of situational awareness and a
Common Operating Picture are vital to effective and efficient response and proactive
planning on a regional level.
Responsibilities
It is expected that all partners (public entities, tribal nations, private sector, and non-
governmental organizations) manage their own situational awareness streams. When
disasters occur, impacted partners will consolidate damage and situational information
with their most appropriate emergency management jurisdiction EOC or ECC. Local
EOCs and ECCs will relay all appropriate information to the King County RCECC. The
region's situational awareness and Common Operating Picture are dependent on all
streams of information.
The County Zone Coordinators will play a pivotal role by incorporating information from
their related geographic areas into the region's COP. The King County RCECC will
have the responsibility to collate these streams into a shared situational awareness as
part of the region's COP.
Concept of Operations
Information collection, analysis, and dissemination are critical elements that must be
maintained before, during, and after a disaster. Through coordination and collaboration,
KCOEM and regional partners support a regional information management strategy
through all phases of emergency management with a particular emphasis on both
preparedness and response to ensure a smooth transition into a response drive
information management cycle.
Since situational awareness is part of a larger COP, an information management cycle
(often referred as a reporting cycle) will be developed to facilitate regional partners
providing their information streams. The cycle will identify when information will be
collected and distributed.
The 24 hour cycle of the regional planning clock consists of two operational shifts within
the RCECC, beginning at 0700 and 1900 respectively. In general, the RCECC will
Page 22 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
compile information and publish it in a situation report every 12 hours. Additionally,
snapshots, brief updates to the more complete situation report, may be generated every
3 hours. Partners are expected to maintain the capability to share and receive
information and to actively participate in information sharing within the region.
Recognizing that not every incident will occur on a timetable to easily fit within the 24
hour planning clock established; the King County RCECC may adjust the planning clock
as necessary but will always strive to attain a 0700 and 1900 cycle. One benefit of the
planning clock is the pre-determined sequence of events that are necessary to best
prepare for and inform critical decision making throughout the response coordination.
The planning clock recognizes the importance of sequencing events where the
collection and analysis of available information is followed by internal briefings,
distribution of information to partners and the public, internal and external conference
calls, and objective setting for future operational periods. The schedule of these
information management steps recognizes the local and national media deadlines for
the morning work commute (usually about 0430) and the evening commute deadline
(usually about 1500).
Fundamental products of situational awareness such as snapshots, situation reports,
etc., are designed to represent the current situation and ultimately project the future
status of an incident or event. Essential elements of information will be identified for
each disaster or planned event. At a minimum the following essential elements of
information will be incorporated within snapshots, situation reports:
• Current situation or situation update
• Availability of regional services
• Local operation and coordination center activation status(es)
• Impact on and response by geographic area (i.e. city or zone) or Emergency
Support Function (i.e. transportation, public health, utility, etc)
References
• Zone 1, 3, and 5 Situation Report Templates
• KC RCECC Situation Report and Snapshot Templates
• King County CEMP
• List of Plans-Reference to "Plans Inventory"
VI. Public Information
A cooperative and technically effective use of the media, Internet, social media
channels, and community warning systems will provide the best chance of conveying
life-safety and public awareness information to large numbers of at-risk people.
Page 23 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events ,
Regional Coordination Framework
Purpose
The purpose of this section is to establish a regional Joint Information System (JIS) that
will support emergency response through the effective development, coordination, and
dissemination of emergency public information in the event of a wide-spread emergency
or disaster within King County. The expected outcomes of this coordinated planning
effort are intended to facilitate:
• Coordinating communications between agencies, tribal nations, and
organizations with the media and public for accurate and consistent messaging,
• Establishing a central point for information distribution on behalf of partners
needing public information assistance as well as facilitating regional information
coordination,
• Expanding the utility of electronic notification systems to include online multi-
organizational systems to intentionally enhance information sharing amongst
partners.
• Establishing and/or utilizing redundant community warning systems to ensure
messaging is sent to impacted areas by the most expedient means possible.
Situation and Scope
When multiple regional partners recognize a need to coordinate the distribution of
emergency information to the public, a Joint Information System may provide a process
for consistent messaging. A Joint Information System may include a wide range of
public, private, non-governmental, or tribal partners to include partners from beyond the
geographic boundaries of King County.
Responsibilities
All partners are invited to contribute to this communication capability. While there are
some agencies, prescribed by law or designated authority, that are responsible to enact
specific systems, such as the Emergency Alert System and other jurisdictional or
community warning systems (i.e. reverse 911 capabilities), it is with the combined and
coordinated use of all our collective communication systems that we can reach the
broadest number of people with the most accurate information..
Public and Tribal Entities
E911 Centers in King County, The King County RCECC, Public Health - Seattle
& King County, cities, special purpose districts, and Tribal EOC's, National
Weather Service, Washington State Emergency Management Division, are all
examples of public sector organizations and Tribal Nations with warning and
Page 24 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
notification capabilities. These organizations use their access to electronic
notification systems, websites, web based systems, reverse dialing from 911
database, social media, PIO's, media releases, phone banks, trap lines, and
volunteers who hand deliver information to disseminate and receive critical
information.
Private Sector
Private partners can aid in warning and notification by coordinating the release of
critical information or receiving information through their own internal
communication processes and working within the Regional Joint Information
System (see below for definition) to disseminate and receive critical information.
Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)
Non-government organizational partners also aid in reaching the more vulnerable
populations that may not receive warning messages from more traditional
means. Ensuring that NGOs support the receipt and dissemination of critical
information is critical to meeting the needs of vulnerable community members.
Concept of Operations
This section assumes that regional partners will establish a public information function
to provide emergency information and warning to their respective communities and
constituent's before, during, and after a disaster or planned event. This emergency
information function should include the coordination of information with other affected
organizations. For the purposes of the Regional Coordination Framework, we are
addressing the need to coordinate for a wide scale disaster with regional impacts.
Notification and Warning
There are multiple warning systems that currently exist throughout all levels of
government that provide alert and warning notification to governmental agencies as well
as the public. Details on specific systems can be accessed through the appropriate local
emergency management jurisdiction. Non-governmental, private and non-profit partners
should be familiar with the various systems available through their respective
emergency management jurisdiction. All partner organizations should also be familiar
with the various systems utilized by partner emergency management jurisdictions to
activate support personnel and Emergency Contact Points identified in accordance with
this Framework. All partner organizations are encouraged to use their agency's email,
social media sites, and phone systems to pass on appropriate warnings to employees
and customers.
Page 25 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
Joint Information Centers/System (JIC/JIS)
Joint Information Centers (JICs) are physical and centralized locations from which
public affairs and critical emergency information responsibilities are performed. JICs
facilitate operation of a Joint Information System (JIS) — the mechanism used to
organize, integrate, and coordinate information to ensure timely, accurate, accessible,
and consistent messaging across multiple jurisdictions and organizations.
The King County RCECC will activate a regional JIC/JIS as needed to verify and align
various streams of information, and release timely messages to the media, key
stakeholders, and the general public. This information is issued in cooperation with
affected jurisdictions, agencies, and organizations. Regional partners may be asked to
send a representative to assist with JIC/JIS operations, either through direct support
within the JIC or via remote access (phone, internet, video conferencing). This does not
preclude any jurisdiction, agency, organization, or Tribal Nation from issuing information
that pertains to them exclusively; however it is highly recommended that the regional
JIC/JIS be informed of those communications.
References
• King County CEMP ESF 15
• King County Emergency Coordination Center Operations Manual
• King County Public Information Officers (PIO) Procedures Guidelines
• Regional Joint Information Center (JIC) Manual
VII. Communication
The ability to communicate through a variety of different mediums in order to share
timely information and to gain accurate situational awareness is critical during disasters
and planned events. During a large scale regional disaster it is paramount to sound
decision-making.
Purpose
The purpose of this section is to establish a communication process where regional
partners will have the capability to access information "lines" to the King County
RCECC, while establishing one central location to collect, prioritize, and disseminate
information. These access modalities can generate from several different technologies.
Redundant systems are in place for better odds of gaining access during times when
many of these communication modes may not be functional.
Page �DRAIT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
Situation and Scope
This section of the Framework describes the communications process and systems
needed to manage information collection and distribution during a disaster or planned
event as the organizational structure expands and contracts within geographic King
County.
Responsibilities
It is expected that all partner organizations will endeavor to obtain and maintain a
variety of ways to communicate their status and resource needs to their respective
emergency management jurisdiction and the King County RCECC during disasters and
planned events. The King County Office of Emergency Management will test these
internal communication systems on a regular basis to ensure communication
connectivity with regional partners. Maintaining communication connectivity is critical to
successful response during a disaster. It is expected that regional partners will work
with KCOEM to maintain their internal communications systems, test them, and improve
upon them as resources allow.
King County RCECC may act as a network control manager for radio frequencies and
talk groups used to maintain situation awareness, support decision-making, manage
resources, or to continue regional services.
Concept of Operations
To facilitate internal communication for situational awareness, partners have a variety of
means at their disposal to give and receive information.
Emergency communications includes tools, processes, interoperability, and redundancy
that govern the management of information, warning and notifications, decision-making,
and resource management. Survivable infrastructure is an important element of the
support needed to ensure continuous communications within and between regional
partners. Available tools may include email, regular phone service, cell phones, 800
MHz radios and talk groups, VHF radio frequencies, amateur radio, facsimiles, the
internet, social media, reverse 911 programs, or other technology.
King County, in cooperation with other local jurisdictions and organizations, will support
regional collaboration and information sharing. The RCECC will serve as the primary
information hub for regional communications including a regional Common Operating
Picture. Information on operational or policy topics may be posted as available.
Page 27 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
References
• King County Communications Plan
• Tactical Interoperable Communications Plan
Vill. Administration, Finance, and Logistics
This section to the Regional Coordination Framework describes the maintenance of the
document and the management of resources in response to emergency impacts to
geographic King County. The financial management of costs and expenses incurred
during an emergency is covered in the associated Agreement to this Framework.
Resource Management
Mutual Aid is considered the pre-agreed sharing of resources between entities to
support response activities. During a disaster or planned event, requests for mutual aid
within the zone should be the first call for help. During a disaster or when requests for
mutual aid cannot be granted, any threatened participating organization can request
resources from other participating organizations. This document facilitates the sharing
of resources amongst regional partners willing and able to share resources.
The Resources section of the Regional Coordination Framework Agreement addresses
resource lending and borrowing protocols. When a disaster is large or complex enough
to initiate an emergency proclamation from the city, county or state level; various
emergency powers may be enacted to aid and support resource management. Only
jurisdictional cities, counties and tribal nations can sign an emergency proclamation. If
further support is needed, the chief elected official or their successor/designee of the
affected partner will proclaim an emergency, and then contact their designated Zone
Coordinator or other Point of Contact and/or the King County RCECC to request further
assistance.
Assistance may be requested by using one of the following mechanisms:
• A request or supply of resources under the auspices of this Framework's
associated Agreement, or
• A request or supply of resources under the auspices of Intra-State Mutual Aid or
Emergency Management Assistance Compact, or
• A request or supply of resources under the auspices of another form of mutual
aid or other assistance.
Page 28 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
Resource management involves knowing what resources are available to the region or
county (inventory), identifying them based on what they are and what they can do (type
and kind) and developing procedures and protocols for their use (request, dispatch,
demobilization/recall).
Purpose
The purpose of this section is to describe a resource management process which
regional partners within King County will follow in a disaster.
Situation and Scope
This section of the Framework describes the processes for management of regional
finance and logistics during and after a disaster impacting regional partners to the
Regional Coordination Framework and associated Agreement. This Framework
expands on those principals described under Intra-State Mutual Aid RCW 38.56 for
sharing resources.
Responsibilities
Regional partners will endeavor to obtain the ability identify, inventory, request, deploy,
track and recall the critical resources needed to respond to, and recover from, any
disaster.
Logistical and resource coordination will be through the three King County Emergency
Coordination Zones and the King County Regional Communications and Emergency
Coordination Center (RCECC).
The staff of the activated RCECC will coordinate and support regional resource
management activities in collaboration with the region's Resource Management
Workgroup through all phases of emergency management. Since resource
management is critical to a successful resolution during a disaster, it is important that
each regional partner commits to establish a process to describe, inventory, request,
deploy and track resources within their jurisdictions and to work in a cooperative effort
with the King County RCECC.
Equipment, supplies, and personnel needed by partner organizations should be sought
first from within their own agency/jurisdictions/organization, other local sources, mutual
aid agreements, then within the King County Fire/Emergency Management zone, and
then from King County RCECC. Resource needs beyond the capacity of the local level
and King County will be forwarded to the State of Washington or through the State to
the Federal Government.
Page 29 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
Regional Coordination Framework partners will follow the legal and financial guidelines
established in the associated Agreement.
In situations where important resources are scarce, the regional decision-making
mechanism may be utilized to recommend strategies for resource management. The
King County Executive, or designee, still retains the authority for King County
government resource priorities and distribution. As noted earlier and also reflected in
the Framework's associated Agreement, all entities retain authority over their resources,
and respective elected officials retain authority over their government resource priorities
and distribution. See Direction and Coordination.
Concept of Operations
King County Office of Emergency Management maintains a 24/7 duty officer capability
to assist partners during events when coordination needs arise. When activated for
disasters or planned events, the RCECC will be the focal point for resource
management for all regional partners within King County, King County government and
unincorporated areas.
KC RCECC, in cooperation with other local jurisdictions, will
• Provide technology to assist with the primary tasks associated with resource
management
• Manage a process to describe, inventory, request and track resources
• Activate these systems before and during a disaster/event
• Dispatch resources before and during a disaster/event
• Deactivate/demobilize or recall resources during or after a disaster/event
The KC RCECC will accept resource requests utilizing information provided on
accepted forms. The resource requests will be accepted by: phone, email, radio,
facsimile, hardcopy or any verifiable electronic method. Confirmation of receipt with the
requestor will be made as soon as possible.
Requests for resources should be stated in terms of need (i.e. type and kind, mission
requirements, etc.) and the particular resource if known. Should clarification of the
request be required, follow-up may be conducted by a RCECC Logistics Section staff
member, appropriate Zone Coordinator, or appropriate ESF representative.
The KC RCECC will update the resource request status, ensuring full disclosure of
where the request is within the process. All requested resources will be tracked through
completion of assignment as many resources will be in high demand amongst the many
regional partners within King County. Effective and efficient response coordination is
Page 30 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
aided by expeditious reassignment of resources from partner to partner rather than
having a high demand resource is completely demobilized from the disaster and
returned to its parent organization prior to reassignment to another requesting partner.
The borrowing organization will maintain status and resource information for effective
and efficient resource use. Resources committed to a disaster will remain available to
that incident site until they are released by the on-scene command structure or re-called
by their own organization.
When resources are no longer needed, they will be released and demobilized by the on-
scene Incident Commander/Manager, the organization that made the initial request, or
the RCECC Incident Manager. The requestor must ensure that the resource is in the
agreed upon condition prior to returning to the lending agency or vendor. In addition, the
requestor must communicate the resource status to the KC RCECC for tracking.
References
• Memorandum of Understanding for Coordinated Policy and Decision Making
During an Emergency
• Resource Typing System Governance Document
• King County CEMP ESF 7 Resource Support
• KC RCECC Resource Request Process
• Revised Code of Washington 38.56
IX. Document Development and Maintenance
Planning Limitations
This Framework and associated Agreement forge new territory as a cooperative
agreement among public and private organizations, and as such, may not have
completely anticipated the issues in public/private cooperation and resource sharing.
During simulations, exercises, or real disaster, interactions may occur that illustrate
shortcomings in the design that would require modifications or clarifications in this
Framework.
In a situation where the King County RCECC cannot perform the duties outlined in this
document, those duties could be assumed by the Washington State EOC.
Regional partners to this Framework will make every reasonable effort to prepare for
their responsibilities identified within this document in the event of a disaster. However,
all resources and systems are vulnerable to natural, technological and human caused
Page J31DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
i
Regional Coordination Framework
disasters and may be overwhelmed. Regional partners can only attempt to respond
based on the situation, information and resources available at the time.
There is no guarantee implied by this Framework that a perfect response to a disaster
or planned event will be practical or possible. Regional partners, including their officials
and employees, shall not be liable for any claim based upon the exercise of, or failure to
exercise or perform a public duty or a discretionary function or duty while carrying out
the provisions of this Framework.
Training and Exercises
Training
Training is a vital component to helping all regional partners understand the purpose
and scope of the document. Collaboratively, regional partners are responsible for
training their organizations to the purpose, scope and operations of the Framework. The
King County Office of Emergency Management is responsible for assisting potential
partners with training their community or organization. The training effort can be
accomplished through presentations to public, private and nonprofit organizations on
the benefits of working within the auspices of the Regional Coordination Framework.
Exercises
Exercises are conducted to determine if the Framework is operationally sound.
Exercises of the Regional Coordination Framework may be conducted collectively as a
county region, by zone or by individual partner. Evaluations of exercises will identify
strengths and weaknesses encountered during the exercise and may identify necessary
changes to the document and components. In conjunction, training may also be
identified to facilitate in overall effectiveness of the Framework and its support
documents.
Ongoing Document Development and Maintenance
This framework has been developed and will be regularly updated by the Regional
Disaster Planning Work Group. The Work Group consists of representatives from
regional partners and serves as a subcommittee to the King County Emergency
Management Advisory Committee (EMAC), which in turn serves as an advisory entity to
the King County Executive and the King County Office of Emergency Management
(OEM).
The King County OEM will ensure continuity of the Regional Disaster Planning Work
Group, which will coordinate updates to this document. King County OEM will maintain
Page 32 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
and publish the Framework and supporting materials on the King County OEM web site
at http://www.kingcounty.gov/prepare.
Suggested changes will be considered yearly and can be mailed to: King County Office
of Emergency Management, 3511 NE 2nd Street, Renton WA 98056. Faxes will be
received at (206) 205-4056. Telephone messages can be left at OEM's general number:
(206) 296-3830. The King County OEM Plans Manager is the staff person specifically
tasked with the maintenance of the Regional Coordination Framework, its associated
Agreement and any annexes to the Framework.
Modifications to this Regional Coordination Framework and its associated Agreement
will be developed by the Regional Disaster Planning Work Group and then submitted to
the Emergency Management Advisory Committee for review and comment. Further
vetting with regional partners beyond the membership of EMAC will also be conducted.
X. Terms and Definitions
`Agreement' — refers to identical agreements executed in counterparts which bind the
executing signatory partners to its terms and conditions to provide and receive
Emergency Assistance. The terms and conditions of the Agreement are all identical and
the execution of the Agreement binds a signatory partner to all other signatory partners
who have executed identical Agreements in counterparts. To be effective for purposes
of receiving Emergency Assistance, this Agreement and the Regional Coordination
Framework must be fully executed and received by the King County Office of
Emergency Management.
`Borrower' — refers to a signatory partner who has adopted, signed and subscribes to
the associated Agreement, and has made a request for emergency assistance and has
received commitment(s) to deliver emergency assistance pursuant to the terms of the
Agreement.
`Disaster' — refers to but is not limited to, a human-caused or natural event or
circumstance within the area of operation of any participating partner causing or
threatening loss of life, damage to the environment, injury to person or property, human
suffering or financial loss, such as: fire, explosion, flood, severe weather, drought,
earthquake, volcanic activity, spills or releases of hazardous materials, contamination,
utility or transportation emergencies, disease, infestation, civil disturbance, riots, act of
terrorism or sabotage; said event being or is likely to be beyond the capacity of the
affected signatory partner, in terms of personnel, equipment and facilities, thereby
requiring emergency assistance.
Page 33 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
`Emergency Contact Points' — refers to the persons, in a line of succession, listed on the
Emergency Contact Information Form to be submitted to the Zone Coordinator and the
King County Office of Emergency Management by each partner. The list includes
names, addresses, and 24-hour phone numbers of the Emergency Contact Points of
each partner. The people listed as Emergency Contact Points will have (or can quickly
get) the authority of the partner to commit available equipment, services, and personnel
for the organization. Note: The phone number of a dispatch office staffed 24 hours a
day that is capable of contacting the Emergency Contact Point(s) is acceptable.
`Emergency Operations or Coordination Center (EOC/ECC)' — refers to a location from
which coordination of emergency response and recovery functions can be hosted.
`Framework' — 'Regional Coordination Framework for Public and Private Organizations
in King County' ("Framework") means an all-hazards architecture for collaboration and
coordination among jurisdictional, organizational and business entities during
emergencies in King County.
`Lender' — refers to a signatory partner who has signed the Agreement and has agreed
to deliver Emergency Assistance to another signatory partner pursuant to the terms and
conditions of the Agreement.
`Long-term Recovery' — (FEMA description) refers to the phase of recovery that may
continue for months or years and addresses complete redevelopment and revitalization
of the impacted area.
`National Incident Management System' (NIMS) — (FEMA description) refers to the
systematic, proactive approach to guide departments and agencies at all levels of
government, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector to work seamlessly
to prevent, protect against, respond to, recover from, and mitigate the effects of
incidents, regardless of cause, size, location, or complexity, in order to reduce the loss
of life and property and harm to the environment.
`RCECC' — refers to the King County Regional Communications and Emergency
Coordination Center; the location from which information and resource management is
conducted in support of disasters or planned events.
`Region' — refers to geographic King County and its adjacent jurisdictions.
`Regional Partners' — refers to all public, private, non-governmental, or tribal
organizations that may or may not be signatory/subscribing organizations to the
Regional Coordination Framework, the associated Agreement and its annexes.
Page 34 �DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
`Regional Policy Decision-Making' — refers to the mechanism established to enact
emergency powers, suspend or limit civil liberties, coordinate executive decisions,
and/or determine strategies for the allocation of scarce resources under proclaimed
emergencies.
`Regional Service Providers' — refers to those organizations, both public and private,
that provide services to the region. These may include but are not limited to: adult and
juvenile detention facilities, water and sewer utilities, power companies, transit, food
distribution, or other services.
`Response' - (FEMA description) refers those capabilities necessary to save lives,
protect property and the environment, and meet basic human needs after a disaster has
occurred.
`Short Term Recovery' — (FEMA description) refers to the phase of recovery which
addresses the health and safety needs beyond rescue, the assessment of the scope of
damages and needs, the restoration of basic infrastructure and the mobilization of
recovery organizations and resources including restarting and/or restoring essential
services for recovery decision-making.
`Signatory Partners' — refers to those organizations signatory to the associated
Agreement of the current Regional Coordination Framework.
`Zones ' — refers to those geographic areas conforming to the fire response zones in
King County and designated Zone 1 (north and northeast county), Zone 3 (south and
southeast county to include Vashon Island), and Zone 5 (the City of Seattle).
`Zone Coordination Function' — refers to those activities that may include pre-planning,
training, or information collection and resource status activities within a particular Zone.
`Zone Coordinators' — refers to those individuals who may perform the Zone
Coordination Function.
XI. Authorities and References
RCW 38.52.070 (summary)
Incorporated jurisdictions in King County are mandated by RCW 38.52.070 to perform
emergency management functions within their jurisdictional boundaries. Although
Page 35 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
Regional Coordination Framework
special purpose jurisdictions and private businesses are not mandated under RCW
38.52, this framework allows such entities to participate in this regional response plan.
RCW 38.56 Intrastate Mutual Aid System (summary)
Code that describes the sharing of resources between political subdivisions of
Washington State, documents like mutual aid agreements, and others governing the
terms under which resource may be borrowed, loaned, and reimbursement protocols.
King County Ordinance 17075, May 2, 2011
The King County Office of Emergency Management is tasked with regional coordination
in disaster preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation by King County ordinance
17075.
Excerpts. "The mission of the office of emergency management shall be to provide for
the effective direction, control, and coordination of county government emergency
services functional units, to coordinate with other governments and the private, non-
governmental sector, in compliance with a state-approved comprehensive emergency
management plan, and to serve as the coordinating entity for cities, county
governmental departments, and other appropriate agencies during incidents and events
of regional significance.
And,
"Foster cooperative planning at all levels to enable a uniform and rational approach to
the coordination of multi-agency and multi-jurisdictional actions for all regional
mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery efforts."
The Washington Mutual Aid Compact (WAMAC)
The Washington Mutual Aid Compact (WAMAC) is the operational implementation of
the Intrastate Mutual Aid System and provides for resource sharing between
governments in response to a disaster which overwhelms local and mutual aid
resources. The elements of this Regional Coordination Framework are designed to work
in conjunction with the operational elements of WAMAC.
Mutual Aid Agreements
Any participating organization may enter into separate emergency assistance or mutual
aid agreements with any other entity. No such separate agreement shall terminate any
responsibility under the Regional Coordination Framework or associated Agreement.
Page 36 DRAFT—Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events
AGREEMENT
Regional Coordination Framework
for Disasters and Planned Events
for Public and Private Organizations
in King County, Washington
February 2014
Regional Coordination Framework AGREEMENT
Updating Process of former "Omnibus Legal and Financial Agreement"
As the development of the `Regional Disaster Plan' began in 1999,there was also a need to
create a `mechanism to share resources.' The Plan focused on establishing a cooperative and
voluntary platform linking private businesses, nonprofit organizations, government agencies,
and special purpose districts. A legal document was needed to address emergency assistance
covering the legal and financial obligations of partners sharing personnel, equipment
materials and/or support during a disaster.
Back in 1999 to 2001, legal advisors from King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office and
several other public and private entities worked together to frame the appropriate legal and
liability language forming the `Omnibus Legal and Financial Agreement.' The Agreement
withstood the legal review and approval of many public,private and nonprofit organizations
that thereafter signed onto the Plan and Omnibus.
As the Plan transitioned and evolved into the `Framework,' the time was also appropriate to
revisit the Omnibus. Over the twelve year tenure of the Omnibus, mutual aid methodology
and practices had evolved at the regional, State and Federal levels; as well as alterations in
the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA)public assistance arena.
In 2012 a subcommittee of the Regional Disaster Planning Work Group began the process to
revisit the Omnibus language. The subcommittee existed of legal advisors from King
County, City of Auburn and City of Seattle and emergency managers from King County,
Seattle, Bellevue, Zone 1, Zone 3 and Washington State. Through several meetings
leveraging the guidance and expertise of the legal and mutual aid subject matter experts
involved,the subcommittee finalized the current draft of the `AGREEMENT for
Organizations Participating in the Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and
Planned Event for Public and Private Organizations in King County, Washington.' A large
percentage of the original language has stayed the same with a few language and terminology
updates. The key areas of adjustment include:
New Changes
Document re-titled to 'Agreement' —simpler title; Replaced 'Omnibus Legal and Financial
Agreement'
Replaced 'Plan' wording throughout document with `Framework'
Replaced 'Omnibus' wording throughout document with 'Agreement'
Terminology changes made by replacing 'borrower' and 'lender' with 'requester' and
'responder'
Adjusted language in 'Article I—Applicability' to say "...located in King County.";
Replaced"...in and bordering eo ra hic King County."
Updated verbiage in 'Article 1I—Definitions' on 'Basic Plan' and 'Package' since it is now a
'Framework'
Cleaned-up language in 'Article lI—Definitions' on 'Emergency'
Cleaned-up language in 'Article II—Definitions' on 'Emergency Contact Points'
Updated respective sections with correct King County Office of Emergency Management
address; Former '7300 Perimeter Road' address
2 DRAFT—AGREEMENT,Regional Coordination Framework
Regional Coordination Framework AGREEMENT
Updated verbiage in `Article IV—Role of Emergency Contact Point for Signatory Partners
Renaming to and cleaned-up language in `Article VI—Payment and Billing'; Formerly titled
`Article VI—Payment for Services and Assistance'
Cleaned-up language in `Article VIII—Requests for Emergency Assistance'
Removed section `IX—General Nature of Emergency Assistance'; Repetitive of existing
language
Renaming to `Article IX—Provision of Equipment'; Formerly `Article X—Loans of
Equipment'
Renaming to `Article X—Provision of Materials and Supplies'; Formerly `Article XI—
Exchange of Materials and Supplies'
Renaming to `Article XI—Provision of Personnel'; Formerly `Article XII—Loans of
Personnel'
Renaming to and cleaned-up language `Article XII—Record Keeping'; Formerly `Article
XIII—Record keeping'
Renaming to and cleaned-up language `Article XIII—Indemnification, Limitation of
Liability, and Dispute Resolution'; Formerly `Article XIV—Indemnification and Limitation
of Liability'
Articles following have been renumbered and renamed appropriately
3 DRAFT—AGREEMENT,Regional Coordination Framework
Regional Coordination Framework AGREEMENT
AGREEMENT
for Organizations Participating in the Regional Coordination Framework
for Disasters and Planned Event
for Public and Private Organizations in King County, Washington
This AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into by the public and private
organizations who become signatories hereto ("Signatory Partners") to facilitate the
provision of Emergency Assistance to each other during times of emergency.
WHEREAS, the Signatory Partners have expressed a mutual interest in the
establishment of an Agreement to facilitate and encourage Emergency Assistance
among participants; and
WHEREAS, the Signatory Partners do not intend for this Agreement to
replace or infringe on the authority granted by any federal, state, or local
governments, statutes, ordinances, or regulations; and
WHEREAS, in the event of an emergency, a Signatory Partner may need
Emergency Assistance in the form of supplemental personnel, equipment, materials
or other support; and
WHEREAS, each Signatory Partner may own and maintain equipment,
stocks materials, and employs trained personnel for a variety of services and is
willing, under certain conditions, to provide its supplies, equipment and services to
other Signatory Partners in the event of an emergency; and
WHEREAS, the proximity of the Signatory Partners to each other enables
them to provide Emergency Assistance to each other in emergency situations.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and
agreements hereinafter set forth, each Signatory Partner agrees as follows:
Article I - APPLICABILITY.
A private or public organization located in King County, Washington, may become a
Signatory Partner by signing this Agreement and becoming bound thereby. This
Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts.
4 DRAFT—AGREEMENT,Regional Coordination Framework
Regional Coordination Framework AGREEMENT
Article II - DEFINITIONS.
A. 'Assistance Costs' means any direct material costs, equipment costs,
equipment rental fees, fuel, and the labor costs that are incurred by the
Responder in providing any asset, service, or assistance requested.
B. `Emergency' means an event or set of circumstances that qualifies as an
emergency under any applicable statute, ordinance, or regulation.
C. `Emergency Assistance' means employees, services, equipment,
materials, or supplies provided by a Responder in response to a request
from a Requester.
D. 'Emergency Contact Points' means persons designated by each Signatory
Partner who will have (or can quickly get) the authority to commit available
equipment, services, and personnel for their organization.
E. 'King County Emergency Management Advisory Committee ("EMAC")' is
the Committee established in King County Code 2.36.055.
F. 'Regional Coordination Framework for Disasters and Planned Events for
Public and Private Organizations in King County' ("Framework") means an
all hazards architecture for collaboration and coordination among
jurisdictional, organizational and business entities during emergencies in
King County.
G. 'Requester' means a Signatory Partner that has made a request for
Emergency Assistance.
H. 'Responder' means a Signatory Partner providing or intending to provide
Emergency Assistance to a Requester.
I. 'Signatory Partner means any public or private organization in King
County, WA, that enters into this Agreement by signature of a person
authorized to sign.
J. 'Termination Date' is the date upon which this agreement terminates
pursuant to Article V.
Article III - PARTICIPATION.
Participation in this Agreement, and the provision of personnel or resources, is
purely voluntary and at the sole discretion of the requested Responder. Signatory
Partners that execute the Agreement are expected to:
5 DRAFT—AGREEMENT,Regional Coordination Framework
Regional Coordination Framework AGREEMENT
A. Identify and furnish to all other Signatory Partners a list of the
Organization's current Emergency Contact Points together with all
contact information; and .
B. Participate in scheduled meetings to coordinate operational and
implementation issues to the maximum extent possible.
Article IV - ROLE OF EMERGENCY CONTACT POINT FOR SIGNATORY
PARTNERS.
Signatory Partners agree that their Emergency Contact Points or their designees
can serve as representatives of the Signatory Partner in any meeting to work out the
language or implementation issues of this Agreement.
The Emergency Contact Points of a Signatory Partner shall:
A. Act as a single point of contact for information about the availability of
resources when other Signatory Partners seek assistance.
B. Maintain a manual containing the Framework, including a master copy
of this Agreement (as amended) and a list of Signatory Partners who
have executed this Agreement.
C. Each Signatory Partner will submit its Emergency Contact Information
Form to the King County Office of Emergency Management
("KCOEM"). KCOEM will maintain a list showing the succession in all
the Signatory Partners. This list will include names, addresses, and
24-hour phone numbers of the Emergency contact points (2-3 deep) of
each Signatory Partner. Note: the phone number of a dispatch office
staffed 24 hours a day that is capable of contacting the Emergency
contact point(s) is acceptable.
Article V - TERM AND TERMINATION.
A. This Agreement is effective upon execution by a Signatory Partner.
B. A Signatory Partner may terminate its participation in this Agreement
by providing written termination notification to the EMAC, care of the
KCOEM, 3211 NE 2nd Street, Renton WA 98056, or by Fax at 206-
205-4056. Notice of termination becomes effective upon receipt by
EMAC which shall, in turn, notify all Signatory Partners. Any
terminating Signatory Partner shall remain liable for all obligations
incurred during its period of participation, until the obligation is
satisfied.
DRAFT—AGREEMENT_ Reuional Coordination Framework
Regional Coordination Framework AGREEMENT
Article VI - PAYMENT AND BILLING.
a. Requester shall pay to Responder all valid and invoiced Assistance Costs within
60 days of receipt of Responder's invoice, for the Emergency Assistance services
provided by Responder. Invoices shall include, as applicable, specific details
regarding labor costs, including but not limited to the base rate, fringe benefits rate,
overhead, and the basis for each element; equipment usage detail and, material cost
breakdown.
b. In the event Responder provides supplies or parts, Responder shall have the
option to accept payment of cash or in kind for the supplies or parts provided.
c. Reimbursement for use of equipment requested under the terms of this
Agreement, such as construction equipment, road barricades, vehicles, and tools,
shall be at the rate mutually agreed between Requester and Responder. The rate
may reflect the rate approved and adopted by the Responder, a rate set forth in an
industry standard publication, or other rate.
Article VII - INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.
Responder shall be and operate as an independent contractor of Requester in the
performance of any Emergency Assistance. Employees of Responder shall at all
times while performing Emergency Assistance continue to be employees of
Responder and shall not be deemed employees of Requester for any purpose.
Wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment of Responder shall
remain applicable to all of its employees who perform Emergency Assistance.
Responder shall be solely responsible for payment of its employees' wages, any
required payroll taxes and any benefits or other compensation. Requester shall not
be responsible for paying any wages, benefits, taxes, or other compensation directly
to the Responder's employees. The costs associated with requested personnel are
subject to the reimbursement process outlined in Article XI. In no event shall
Responder or its officers, employees, agents, or representatives be authorized (or
represent that they are authorized) to make any representation, enter into any
agreement, waive any right or incur any obligation in the name of, on behalf of or as
agent for Requester under or by virtue of this Agreement.
Article Vlll - REQUESTS FOR EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE.
Requests for Emergency Assistance shall be made by a person authorized by the
Requester to make such requests and approved by a person authorized by
Responder to approve such requests. If this request is verbal, it must be confirmed
in writing within thirty days after the date of the request.
7 DRAFT—AGREEMENT,Regional Coordination Framework
Regional Coordination Framework AGREEMENT
Article IX - PROVISION OF EQUIPMENT.
Provision of equipment and tools loans is subject to the following conditions:
1. At the option of Responder, equipment may be provided with an
operator. See Article XI for terms and conditions applicable to use
personnel.
2. Provided equipment shall be returned to Responder upon release by
Requester, or immediately upon Requester's receipt of an oral or written
notice from Responder for the return of the equipment. When notified to
return equipment to Responder, Requester shall make every effort to
return the equipment to Responder's possession within 24 hours
following notification. Equipment shall be returned in the same condition
as when it was provided to Requester.
3. Requester shall, at its own expense, supply all fuel, lubrication and
maintenance for Responder's equipment. Requester shall take proper
precaution in its operation, storage and maintenance of Responder's
equipment. Equipment shall be used only by properly trained and
supervised operators. Responder shall endeavor to provide equipment in
good working order. All equipment is provided "as is", with no
representations or warranties as to its condition, fitness for a particular
purpose, or merchantability.
4. Responder's cost related to the transportation, handling, and
loading/unloading of equipment shall be chargeable to Requester.
Responder shall submit copies of invoices from outside sources who
perform such services and shall provide accounting of time and hourly
costs for Responder's employees who perform such services.
5. Without prejudice to Responder's right to indemnification under Article
XIII herein, in the event equipment is lost, stolen or damaged from the
point the Requestor has the beneficial use of the equipment, or while in
the custody and use of Requester, or until the Requestor no longer has
the beneficial use of the equipment, Requester shall reimburse
Responder for the reasonable cost of repairing or replacing said
damaged equipment. If the equipment cannot be repaired within a time
period required by Responder, then Requester shall reimburse
Responder for the cost of replacing such equipment with equipment
which is of equal condition and capability. Any determinations of what
constitutes "equal condition and capability" shall be at the discretion of
Responder. If Responder must lease or rent a piece of equipment while
Responder's equipment is being repaired or replaced, Requester shall
reimburse Responder for such costs. Requester shall have the right of
subrogation for all claims against persons other than parties to this
-. „
g DRAFT—AGREEMENT,Regional Coordination Framework
Regional Coordination Framework AGREEMENT
Agreement that may be responsible in whole or in part for damage to the
equipment. Requester shall not be liable for damage caused by the sole
negligence of Responder's operator(s).
Article X - PROVISION OF MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES.
Requester shall reimburse Responder in kind or at Responder's actual replacement
cost, plus handling charges, for use of partially consumed, fully consumed or non-
returnable materials and supplies, as mutually agreed between Requester and
Responder. Other reusable materials and supplies which are returned to Responder
in clean, damage-free condition shall not be charged to the Requester and no rental
fee will be charged. Responder shall determine whether materials and supplies
returned are "clean and damage-free" and shall treat as partially consumed or non-
returnable materials and supplies if found to be damaged.
Article XI - PROVISION OF PERSONNEL.
Responder may, at its option, make such employees as are willing to participate
available to Requester at Requester's expense equal to Responder's full cost,
including employee's salary or hourly wages, call back or overtime costs, benefits
and overhead, and consistent with Responder's personnel union contracts, if any, or
other conditions of employment. Costs to feed and house Responder's personnel, if
necessary, shall be chargeable to and paid by Requester. Requester is responsible
for assuring such arrangements as may be necessary for the safety, housing, meals,
and transportation to and from job sites/housing sites (if necessary) for Responder's
personnel. Responder shall bill all costs to Requester, who is responsible for paying
all billed costs. Responder may require that its personnel providing Emergency
Assistance shall be under the control of their regular leaders, but the organizational
units will come under the operational control of the command structure of Requester.
Responder's employees may decline to perform any assigned tasks if said
employees judge such task to be unsafe. A request for Responder's personnel to
direct the activities of others during a particular response operation does not relieve
Requester of any responsibility or create any liability on the part of Responder for
decisions and/or consequences of the response operation. Responder's personnel
may refuse to direct the activities of others. Responder's personnel holding a
license, certificate, or other permit evidencing qualification in a professional,
mechanical, or other skill, issued by the state of Washington or a political subdivision
thereof, is deemed to be licensed, certified, or permitted in any Signatory Partner's
jurisdiction for the duration of the emergency, subject to any limitations and
conditions the chief executive officer and/or elected and appointed officials of the
applicable Signatory Partners jurisdiction may prescribe in writing. When notified to
return personnel to Responder, Requester shall make every effort to return the
personnel to Responder promptly after notification.
9 DRAFT—AGREEMENT,Regional Coordination Framework
Regional Coordination Framework AGREEMENT
Article XII - RECORD KEEPING.
Time sheets and/or daily logs showing hours worked and equipment and materials
used or provided by Responder will be recorded on a shift-by-shift basis by the
Responder and will be submitted to Requester as needed. If no personnel are
provided, Responder will submit shipping records for materials and equipment, and
Requester is responsible for any required documentation of use of material and
equipment for state or federal reimbursement. Under all circumstances, Requester
remains responsible for ensuring that the amount and quality of all documentation is
adequate to enable reimbursement.
Article XIII — INDEMNIFICATION, LIMITATION OF LIABILITY, AND DISPUTE
RESOLUTION.
A. INDEMNIFICATION. Except as provided in section B., to the fullest
extent permitted by applicable law, Requester releases and shall indemnify,
hold harmless and defend each Responder, its officers, employees and
agents from and against any and all costs, including costs of defense, claims,
judgments or awards of damages asserted or arising directly or indirectly
from, on account of, or in connection with providing, or declining to provide, or
not being asked to provide, Emergency Assistance to Requester, whether
arising before, during or after performance of the Emergency Assistance and
whether suffered by any of the Signatory Partners or any other person or
entity.
Requester agrees that its obligation under this section extends to any claim,
demand and/or cause of action brought by or on behalf of any of its
employees, or agents. For this purpose, Requester, by mutual negotiation,
hereby waives, as respects any indemnitee only, any immunity that would
otherwise be available against such claims under the Industrial Insurance
provisions of Title 51 RCW of the State of Washington and similar laws of
other states.
B. ACTIVITIES IN BAD FAITH OR BEYOND SCOPE. Any Signatory
Partner shall not be required under this Agreement to indemnify, hold
harmless and defend any other Signatory Partner from any claim, loss, harm,
liability, damage, cost or expense caused by or resulting from the activities of
any Signatory Partners' officers, employees, or agents acting in bad faith or
performing activities beyond the scope of their duties.
C. LIABILITY FOR PARTICIPATION. In the event of any liability, claim,
demand, action or proceeding, of whatever kind or nature arising out of
rendering of Emergency Assistance through this Agreement, Requester
agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend, to the fullest extent of the
law, each Signatory Partner, whose only involvement in the transaction or
{) . DRAFT—AGREEMENT,Regional Coordination Framework
Regional Coordination Framework AGREEMENT
occurrence which is the subject of such claim, action, demand, or other
proceeding, is the execution and approval of this Agreement.
D. DELAY/FAILURE TO RESPOND. No Signatory Partner shall be liable
to another Signatory Partner for, or be considered to be in breach of or default
under this Agreement on account of any delay in or failure to perform any
obligation under this Agreement, except to make payment as specified in this
Agreement.
E. MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION. If a dispute arises under the terms
of this Agreement, the Signatory Partners involved in the dispute shall first
attempt to resolve the matter by direct negotiation. If the dispute cannot be
settled through direct discussions, the parties agree to first endeavor to settle
the dispute in an amicable manner by mediation. Thereafter, any unresolved
controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Contract, or breach
thereof, may be settled by arbitration, and judgment upon the award rendered
by the arbitrator may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof.
F. SIGNATORY PARTNERS LITIGATION PROCEDURES. Each
Signatory Partner seeking to be released, indemnified, held harmless or
defended under this Article with respect to any claim shall promptly notify
Requester of such claim and shall not settle such claim without the prior
consent of Requester. Such Signatory Partners shall have the right to
participate in the defense of said claim to the extent of its own interest.
Signatory Partners' personnel shall cooperate and participate in legal
proceedings if so requested by Requester, and/or required by a court of
competent jurisdiction.
Article XIV - SUBROGATION.
A. REQUESTER'S WAIVER. Requester expressly waives any rights of
subrogation against Responder, which it may have on account of, or in
connection with, Responder providing Emergency Assistance to Requester
under this Agreement.
B. RESPONDER'S RESERVATION AND WAIVER. Responder
expressly reserves its right to subrogation against Requester to the extent
Responder incurs any self-insured, self-insured retention or deductible loss.
Responder expressly waives its rights to subrogation for all insured losses
only to the extent Responder's insurance policies, then in force, permit such
waiver.
1 1 DRAFT—AGREEMENT,Regional Coordination Framework
Regional Coordination Framework AGREEMENT
Article XV -WORKER'S COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYEE CLAIMS.
Responder's employees, officers or agents, made available to Requester, shall
remain the general employees of Responder while engaged in carrying out duties,
functions or activities pursuant to this Agreement, and each Signatory Partner shall
remain fully responsible as employer for all taxes, assessments, fees, premiums,
wages, withholdings, workers' compensation and other direct and indirect
compensation, benefits, and related obligations with respect to its own employees.
Likewise, each Signatory Partner shall provide worker's compensation in compliance
with statutory requirements of the state of residency.
Article XVI - MODIFICATIONS.
Modifications to this Agreement must be in writing and will become effective upon
approval by a two-thirds affirmative vote of the Signatory Partners. Modifications
must be signed by an authorized representative of each Signatory Partner. EMAC
will be the coordinating body for facilitating modifications of this Agreement.
Article XVII- NON-EXCLUSIVENESS AND PRIOR AGREEMENTS.
This Agreement shall not supersede any existing mutual aid agreement or
agreements between two or more governmental agencies, and as to assistance
requested by a party to such mutual aid agreement within the scope of the mutual
aid agreement, such assistance shall be governed by the terms of the mutual aid
agreement and not by this Agreement. This Agreement shall, however, apply to all
requests for assistance beyond the scope of any mutual aid agreement or
agreements in place prior to the event.
Article XVIII - GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITY.
This Agreement is subject to laws, rules, regulations, orders, and other
requirements, now or hereafter in effect, of all governmental authorities having
jurisdiction over the emergencies covered by this Agreement or the Signatory
Partner. Provided that a governmental authority may alter its obligations under this
Agreement only as to future obligations, not obligations already incurred.
Article XIX - NO DEDICATION OF FACILITIES.
No undertaking by one Signatory Partner to the other Signatory Partners under any
provision of this Agreement shall constitute a dedication of the facilities or assets of
such Signatory Partners, or any portion thereof, to the public or to the other
Signatory Partners. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to give a
l� DRAFT—AGREEMENT,Regional Coordination Framework
Regional Coordination Framework AGREEMENT
Signatory Partner any right of ownership, possession, use or control of the facilities
or assets of the other Signatory Partners.
Article XX - NO PARTNERSHIP.
This Agreement shall not be interpreted or construed to create an association, joint
venture or partnership among the Signatory Partners or to impose any partnership
obligation or liability upon any Signatory Partner. Further, no Signatory Partner shall
have any undertaking for or on behalf of, or to act as or be an agent or
representative of, or to otherwise bind any other Signatory Partner.
Article XXI - NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY.
Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to create any rights in or duties to any
third party, nor any liability to or standard of care with reference to any third party.
This Agreement shall not confer any right, or remedy upon any person other than the
Signatory Partners. This Agreement shall not release or discharge any obligation or
liability of any third party to any Signatory Partners.
Article XXII - ENTIRE AGREEMENT.
This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement and supersedes any and all prior
agreements of the Parties, with respect to the subject matters hereof.
Article XXIII - SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS.
This Agreement is not transferable or assignable, in whole or in part, and any
Signatory Partner may terminate its participation in this Agreement subject to Article
V.
Article XXIV - GOVERNING LAW.
This Agreement shall be interpreted, construed, and enforced in accordance with the
laws of Washington State.
Article XXV - VENUE.
Any action which may arise out of this Agreement shall be brought in Washington
State and King County. Provided, that any action against a participating County may
be brought in accordance with RCW 36.01.050.
13 1DRAFT—AGREEMENT,Regional Coordination Framework
Regional Coordination Framework AGREEMENT
Article XXVI - TORT CLAIMS.
It is not the intention of this Agreement to remove from any of the Signatory Partners
any protection provided by any applicable Tort Claims Act. However, between
Requester and Responder, Requester retains full liability to Responder for any
claims brought against Responder as described in other provisions of this
agreement.
Article XXVII -WAIVER OF RIGHTS.
Any waiver at any time by any Signatory Partner of its rights with respect to a default
under this Agreement, or with respect to any other matter arising in connection with
this Agreement, shall not constitute or be deemed a waiver with respect to any
subsequent default or other matter arising in connection with this Agreement. Any
delay short of the statutory period of limitations, in asserting or enforcing any right,
shall not constitute or be deemed a waiver.
Article XXVIII - INVALID PROVISION.
The invalidity or unenforceability of any provisions hereof, and this Agreement shall
be construed in all respects as if such invalid or unenforceable provisions were
omitted.
Article XXIX - NOTICES.
Any notice, demand, information, report, or item otherwise required, authorized, or
provided for in this Agreement shall be conveyed and facilitated by EMAC, care of
the KCOEM, 3211 NE 2nd Street, Renton WA 98056, Phone: 206-296-3830, Fax:
206-205-4056. Such notices, given in writing, and shall be deemed properly given if
(i) delivered personally, (ii) transmitted and received by telephone facsimile device
and confirmed by telephone, (iii) transmitted by electronic mail, or (iv) sent by United
States Mail, postage prepaid, to the EMAC.
14 1DRAFT—AGREEMENT,Regional Coordination Framework
Regional Coordination Framework AGREEMENT
fADD SIGNATURE BLOCKS]
15 1DRAFT—AGREEMENT,Regional Coordination Framework