Seattle Office of Emergency Management After Action Report CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE AFTER ACTION REPORT AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE JUNE 8 – 9, 2016 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................1-1 2. Exercise Review ..........................................................................................................................2-2 2.1 Exercise Objectives ......................................................................................................................... 2-2 2 1.1 Operational Coordination ........................................................................................................ 2-2 2 1.2 Mass Care Services ................................................................................................................... 2-2 2 1.3 Operational Communications .................................................................................................. 2-2 2 1.4 Situational Assessment ............................................................................................................ 2-3 2.2 Participating Organizations ............................................................................................................ 2-3 2.3 Exercise Play ................................................................................................................................... 2-4 2 3.1 EOC Operations Related to Operational Coordination ............................................................ 2-5 2 3.2 EOC Operations Related to Mass Care Services....................................................................... 2-6 2 3.3 EOC Operations Related to Operational Communications ...................................................... 2-8 2 3.4 EOC Operations Related to Situational Assessment ................................................................ 2-9 2 3.5 Policy Issues and Mayor, Cabinet, City Council Participation ................................................ 2-10 3. Actions Demonstrating Success .................................................................................................3-11 4. Seattle Cascadia Rising Improvement Plan Items .......................................................................4-14 5. Appendix – After Action Survey Results ....................................................................................5-18 On-Site Evaluations .............................................................................................................................. 5-18 On-Line Survey Results......................................................................................................................... 5-19 Understanding Roles ........................................................................................................................ 5-19 Understanding Plans ........................................................................................................................ 5-19 EOC Situational Awareness .............................................................................................................. 5-20 Player Training ................................................................................................................................. 5-21 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY More than 40 counties, major cities, tribal nations, state and federal governments, private sector businesses, and nongovernmental organizations across Washington, Oregon and Idaho participated in the region’s largest ever earthquake exercise the week of June 7th, 2016. Called Cascadia Rising for the subduction zone upon which the scenario was based, the exercise was designed to test the ability of Emergency Operations Centers at all levels of government to coordinate joint interagency disaster operations in response to a magnitude 9.0 catastrophic earthquake and coastal tsunami. It also incorporated practice of military support to civilian operations with National Guard and Department of Defense assets. The Seattle Office of Emergency Management facilitated the design of the Seattle portion of the exercise with the help of an interdepartmental committee, many of the members who also served on County and State exercise design teams. The design began in April of 2015. A series of exercise specific topics were presented and practiced at monthly city-wide Disaster Management Committee meetings starting in September of 2015. Topics covered: introduction to relevant plans, communications, resource management, critical transportation, mass care, policy development, infrastructure systems, and damage assessment. A series of three “All Hands on Deck” workshops were conducted for exercise participants in May of 2016. The Mayor’s Emergency Executive Board conducted exercise preparation at its quarterly meeting in May of 2016 and briefings for individual Councilmembers were conducted in the months preceding the exercise. The City has participated in a series of exercises like this over the last decade but never involving as many players from as many levels of government. The exercise also provided the opportunity to practice self-sufficiency given that a disaster of this magnitude would be unprecedented in its size, scope, and impact on our community and available resources. These exercises also provide great opportunities to draw public awareness to the threat of earthquakes and their consequences, prepare our responders, and ultimately improve our plans. Published – August 2016 1-1 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE EXERCISE REVIEW 2. EXERCISE REVIEW 2.1 Exercise Objectives This exercise focused on four core capabilities across the various levels of government. The City clarified during the exercise design process what each of those capabilities would look like at the municipal level. Below are the citywide objectives for the Cascadia Exercise. 2 1.1 Operational Coordination I. All City departments successfully describe their resource needs and shortfalls using the Seattle EOC resource request process. a. The Seattle EOC successfully communicates appropriate resource requests to King County and onto the WA State EOC. b. The Seattle EOC Logistics or policy team (as appropriate) provides input in regional discussions on prioritization of state and federal resources arriving into the area. c. The Seattle EOC Logistics section creates a plan for a logistics system to accept, move, warehouse, stage and distribute resources from all sources including local, state and federal. d. Demonstrate the ability of Seattle’s infrastructure departments to coordinate response and short-term recovery activities. II. Test the use of the Seattle (aka Zone 5) coordinator in the King County Emergency Coordination Center. III. Demonstrate the ability to coordinate debris removal by establishing objectives, clearance priorities, and identification of resources needed to carry out those objectives. IV. Demonstrate the ability to incorporate/integrate military assets (both National Guard and Department of Defense) into City of Seattle command level operations. 2 1.2 Mass Care Services I. Demonstrate the ability to develop and implement a multi-pronged sheltering strategy that leverages available resources to rapidly initiate sheltering services while procuring resources to build sheltering capacity. II. Demonstrate the ability to implement soft-sided sheltering as part of the sheltering strategy. III. Demonstrate the ability to implement campus sheltering plan with undamaged community centers and neighboring schools. IV. Demonstrate the ability to identify vulnerable populations and urgent unmet needs. 2 1.3 Operational Communications I. Demonstrate the ability of the City’s primary 800 MHz Public Radio System to operate in a degraded communications environment and support Communications Operations Leads for the “Overarching and Joint Exercise Objectives” for Operational Communications (June 7th only) Published – August 2016 2-2 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE EXERCISE REVIEW II. Successfully demonstrate the ability of Seattle ACS volunteers to: a. Share information between the amateur radio personnel in the field and the EOC. b. Provide communication support to City departments and agencies by deploying ACS personnel to key City department operational hub locations. c. Provide 2 way communications between the City EOC and neighborhoods by supporting Seattle Neighborhoods Actively Prepare (SNAP) Teams, CERT and Communication HUBs (June 11th only) 2 1.4 Situational Assessment I. II. Test the ability of the Seattle EOC to collect, consolidate, synthesize, and disseminate damage assessment information from/to multiple City departments using a documented process. a. Demonstrate the ability of Finance and Administrative Services to assess departmentowned and operated facilities, analyze the collected data and disseminate information on damages and impacts to the EOC. b. Use of structural damage assessment process by building officials in Seattle DCI c. Successfully re-assess critical structures following aftershocks in a timely manner. Demonstrate the activation of the following department operation centers: a. Seattle IT - Information Technology Operating Center (ITOC) b. SDOT - Department Operation Center c. SCL – City Light Department Operation Center d. SFD – Resource Management Center 2.2 Participating Organizations The following organizations were represented in the EOC during the two day exercise: • 2-1-1 • Seattle Center • American Red Cross • Seattle City Budget Office • CrowderGulf - Debris Removal Contractor • Seattle City Light • Enwave Seattle (Seattle Steam) • Seattle Department of Construction & Inspections • EOC Auxiliary Communication Service • • Port of Seattle Seattle Department of Education and Early Learning • Public Health - Seattle & King County • Seattle Department of Human Services • Public School District - Seattle • Seattle Department of Neighborhoods • The Salvation Army • Seattle Dept of Human Resources Published – August 2016 2-3 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE EXERCISE REVIEW • Seattle Finance and Administrative Services • Seattle Office of Sustainability & Environment • Seattle FAS/Animal Shelter • Seattle Parks and Recreation • Seattle Fire • Seattle Police • Seattle Housing Authority • Seattle Public Library • Seattle Information Technology • Seattle Public Utilities • Seattle Channel • Seattle Transportation • Seattle City Attorneys Office • • Seattle Office of Emergency Management Tetra Tech (debris management contract monitor for SPU) • Seattle Office of Economic Development • University of Washington • Seattle Office of Housing • USCG Sector Puget Sound • Seattle Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs • WASHINGTON ARMY NATIONAL GUARD; 898th Brigade Engineering Battalion, 81ST Armored Brigade Combat Team 2.3 Exercise Play The City of Seattle conducted a communications exercise Tuesday, June 7th, to test the use of alternate means of communication – primarily amateur radio operators. The City fully activated its Emergency Operations Center with nearly 300 participants on June 8th and 9th to coordinate information, resource requests, situational awareness, operational coordination, plans of action, and policy development. The Mayor convened his Emergency Executive Board to address policy implications each day of the exercise. The City Council exercised its role for ratification of an emergency proclamation and emergency measures ordered by the Mayor and with the assistance of the City Attorney and City Clerk. Over the course of the two-day exercise the following products were developed: Bi-hourly Snap Shot Report 6 Situation Reports 2 Daily Consolidated Action Plans 2 Simulated Press Conferences 1 Policy briefing papers Spending authority increases, revising approach to damage assessment, fuel prioritization, debris removal Proclamation of Emergency 1 Emergency Orders Delegation of authority, request state and federal assistance, restrict sales of guns and ammo, authority to obtain fuel, Published – August 2016 2-4 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE EXERCISE REVIEW commandeering civilian services and equipment 2 3.1 EOC Operations Related to Operational Coordination In many activations of the Seattle Emergency Operations Center, representatives of King County, the State of Washington, FEMA Region X, and the Department of Homeland Security have sent representatives to sit side by side City staff to work through issues of coordination, information, resources, etc. This works particularly well when the cause of the activation is primarily local – such as May Day protests or the Seattle Seahawks Super Bowl victory parade. But in a northwest catastrophic earthquake, the number of staff at those agencies would be inadequate to distribute to all the EOCs that want them. As a result, this exercise demonstrated the time lag and overwhelming nature of many local EOCs making requests for information and resource requests of the County, State, and federal government. It was, however, a tremendous opportunity to practice emergency response operations with a representative of the Washington Army National Guard who participated both days in Seattle’s EOC. The representative was a significant asset and helped with every mission that could be at least partially remedied with National Guard assets and services. The resource request process developed by FAS and OEM and used by the Logistics Section worked as planned for the most part, though there were multiple requests for the same resource and some folks frequently mixed up the “tasking” feature of WebEOC with the “resource requesting” process. Resource requests were communicated to King County Emergency Communications Center (EOC) where some requests for resources belonging to the State (such as National Guard) or the Federal government (such as Urban Search and Rescue Teams) were forwarded to the State or FEMA. However, it was unclear during the course of the exercise whether the forwarding of requests was being simulated as a part of the exercise. Requests that were not life-safety related, such as a request for FEMA support for sheltering 20,000 people, did not reach FEMA during the two days. While the dialogue between SFD, SPD, and the National Guard in the Seattle EOC was timely and appropriate, the electronic process to document the need was slow. The City was only one entity that was requesting vital resources, such as Urban Search and Rescue Teams, law enforcement support, mass care supplies, etc. as one would expect in an earthquake that pummeled all of western Washington and Oregon. It was not easily evident how the decisions were being made about how to deploy those early assets arriving into the area. Seattle EOC staff was aware that those decisions are complicated by competing criteria such as access into the damaged areas, where the resources can do the most good versus equitable geographic distribution, etc. However, there was inadequate communication and explanation of how those decisions were being made and how the City could participate. The City used a handful of senior level staff from various departments who have a broad-scale perspective of City services to represent Seattle at King County’s Emergency Coordination Center in Renton. Those representatives were joined by regional staff who represent the other 38 cities in the County. The intent has always been for those representatives, referred to as Zone 5, to be the City’s eyes and ears at the County to help identify regional policy, operational, information, or resources issues affecting Seattle and help coordinate solutions to those issues. So much of the exercise exposed the need for extraordinary resource requests, that the Zone 5 representatives were somewhat consumed checking on resource requests. It was, nonetheless, very valuable having someone from Seattle at King County. Published – August 2016 2-5 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE EXERCISE REVIEW Part of this exercise was to test the capabilities of National Guard and Department of Defense assets to deliver response and relief services throughout Washington and Oregon. The Washington Army National Guard posted a guardsman in the Seattle EOC who provided invaluable assistance in coordinating the types of equipment, services, assets, resources, and personnel that could be deployed to the area to accomplish various missions. There was excellent communication and coordination between Police, Fire, and the Guard regarding the need for Urban Search and Rescue Teams and law enforcement support. The Fire Department also noted that further work need to be done on how the Washington State Fire Services Resource Mobilization Plan can be better leveraged during catastrophic events. Exercise evaluators suggested pre-scripting those mission packages that will very likely be needed following an earthquake to speed in their delivery. According to the same evaluators, there were far more collaborative problemresolution conversations taking place in this exercise compared to a similar earthquake exercise in 2012. The EOC Logistics Section also suggested pre-scripting and prioritizing operational missions with more specificity than currently listed in the Earthquake Incident Annex. This would help Logistics in their consequent mission of locating resources to meet those priorities. One of the exercise objectives was to demonstrate the ability to coordinate debris removal by establishing priorities and identifying the resources needed to carry out the mission. Seattle Public Utilities worked closely with private contractors, Seattle Department of Transportation, and Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections to estimate the amount of debris that would need to be moved, stored, sorted, etc. There was a good understanding of the necessity to get roadways open as soon as possible and the need to deal with debris efficiently. The Seattle Public Utilities Debris Management Task Force, in conjunction with Public Health-Seattle King County, did put together a policy brief for Mayor’s Emergency Executive Board consideration regarding the removal of private debris constituting a human hazard both in the public right of way and on property. However, proceeding with removal prior to FEMA approval did constitute some financial risk because reimbursement levels were not guaranteed so the brief was not taken up by the Emergency Executive Board. Players soon learned the importance also of prioritizing what sites serve what priority purpose, e.g. Parks property may be ideal to temporarily store debris but not if you’re using it for sheltering or Community Points of Distribution. The exercise players in the EOC created a handful of mission-specific task forces in order to achieve inter-agency coordination and creative problem resolution. Task Forces were developed that addressed Mass Care and Sheltering, Vulnerable Populations, Fuel, and Debris Management. The success of this approach should be modeled at all levels of government to achieve the best outcomes with limited resources. 2 3.2 EOC Operations Related to Mass Care Services The EOC Health and Human Services Branch was faced with a scenario of 30,000 people left homeless, 20,000 stranded travelers, and devastating damage to buildings that serve as shelter sites, schools and human services. The Branch needed to assess what buildings were usable for sheltering, incorporate soft-sided sheltering procedures into the sheltering plan to develop enough shelter for 30,000 people, submit resource requests to support sheltering operations, and identify vulnerable populations and unmet needs. In addition, on day two the Parks Department laid out a grid for Published – August 2016 2-6 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE EXERCISE REVIEW soft-sided shelters at one of the identified sites, Lower Woodland Park. Sixteen City departments, offices and nongovernmental agencies staffed the Branch, with over 50 people participating at the EOC during the two days. Initial work focused on assessing and establishing shelters in key community center sites, public schools, and the Seattle Center. That effort yielded a capacity for a few thousand people. The campus sheltering concept using priority one community centers and adjacent schools was attempted; however, many of the priority one sites were damaged in the scenario and the public schools were not available. As a result, a successful modification of the approach was used which included using the community centers for feeding and accessible accommodations and setting up soft-sided sheltering in the adjacent fields. Work then focused on other large public venue buildings, such as Century Link and the Convention Center facilities for indoor sheltering, and on identifying land that could be used for soft-sided sheltering. This included conducting assessments, developing site specific plans and obtaining resources for available facilities. By the end of the exercise a capacity to shelter over 30,000 people had been confirmed and resource requests to support sheltering, such as staffing, accessibility, cots, feeding and pet care were in the process of being identified and submitted. A complementary plan was developed to shelter pets; however, initially not all sites would be able to have pet shelters on location. The Branch tested newly developed soft-sided sheltering procedures, and quickly adapted them to sites beyond those identified in pre-exercise planning. Overall, the strategy of planning for congregate tents and individually owned tents worked well, and the exercise will help inform further development of this process. Vulnerable populations were identified throughout the exercise and strategies developed to support access and unmet needs. This included interpretation and translation, support needed for high risk Aging and Disability Services case management clients, and medical support at shelters. On day two of the exercise, the Branch developed a Vulnerable Populations Task Force. This proved very successful in a more comprehensive analysis of vulnerable populations and resources that could be provided. While strategies were identified, the gaps were overwhelming and further discussion with the Branch on areas where communities have successfully approached these situations is recommended. Other recommendations are to work with the City’s ADA Coordinator to identify City subject matter experts who can help address accessibility issues as identified in the Americans with Disabilities Act; make demographic information and maps easily accessible to the Branch; and provide training on emergency management resources for vulnerable populations. The use of the task force model (in the Health and Human Service Branch case, a Shelter Task Force and a Vulnerable Populations Task Force) improved operations, enabled better coordination of agencies involved with those efforts, provided a clearer focus on the objectives, and improved tracking progress. A recommendation is to provide more training and exercises to the Health and Human Services Branch agencies on task force organization. The region could have used a Feeding Task Force as well. There were a number of areas identified for training including: how to determine when a shelter is ready to be opened, identifying shelter support and resources needed, using the National Shelter System database, and feeding resources and strategies during a disaster. Improvement is also needed in shelter and mass care coordination with other jurisdictions. The Branch contacted King County on day two for shelter coordination, but it was not clear that a regional shelter task force was being formed. The Branch also tried to participate in a Statewide Mass Care conference call, but it Published – August 2016 2-7 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE EXERCISE REVIEW was not clear who was receiving information about the call and what would be done with information provided during the call. A recommendation is to review use of the plans developed in the Regional Catastrophic Planning Program. Some additional recommendations include: In this scenario, it would be expected for federal resources to be funneled into the area to provide support to affected populations. A commonly used model in hurricane prone areas is the establishment of ‘Community Points of Distribution’ (CPOD) for commodities such as food, water, blankets, tarps, etc. There remains more planning to be done to coordinate the establishment and management of CPOD s between the Logistics Section of the Seattle EOC and the Health and Human Services Branch, as well as planning between Seattle, King County, the State and Federal government. 2 3.3 EOC Operations Related to Operational Communications On Tuesday, June 7th, Auxiliary Communication Services (ACS) (Seattle’s ham radio operator team) worked with Seattle City Light, Parks, and Seattle Department of Transportation to support communications between six department facilities and the North Seattle College serving as a coordination center. Voice and data communications were established between the facilities successfully demonstrating the use of amateur radio systems to communicate damage assessment information, resource requests, and general messaging. ACS successfully used its e-mailover-radio system to transmit detailed text based messages with attached data reports and HTML based forms. A total of 59 text based messages with imbedded or attached data were transmitted between the participating departments and the coordination center as well as many voice messages using the City’s network of amateur radio repeaters and simplex channels. On Wednesday and Thursday, June 8th and 9th, Seattle ACS staffed the EOC Communications Room using amateur radio (Very High Frequency/Ultra High Frequency/High Frequency) as well as 800 MHz and other systems to connect City departments, partner agencies and other Emergency Operations Centers – using both voice and data messaging. On Saturday, June 11th, Seattle ACS supported communications for an exercise involving the Seattle Hubs using Amateur and GMRS radio. These Community Emergency Hubs are spread throughout the city, more or less along the lines of the community districts. Communication channels were established between the Hubs and the Seattle EOC to transmit and receive damage assessment reports and other information using both voice and digital radio networks. Nine Hubs located across Seattle participated with 18 field Amateur Radio operators and nine operators at the Seattle EOC. The EOC transmitted public information updates on the hour and half hour using both voice and digital text radio systems. Overall the exercise provided departments the opportunity to use alternate communication tools. Some of the tools that showed promise included AlertTool (Seattle IT), Skype (SeattleIT), and Yammer (Seattle City Light). OEM will look at adding these tools to computers in the EOC to aid in communication with other critical facilities both inside and outside the City. There was also a strong desire from several participants to have a procedure for how the EOC will use cloud computing and file sharing such as SharePoint. Several departments also refined their communications needs during a disaster. For example, Finance and Administrative Services determined they will require more 800 MHz radios for use as backup communications and for communicating with field units supporting fueling operations during events. Published – August 2016 2-8 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE EXERCISE REVIEW 2 3.4 EOC Operations Related to Situational Assessment A function that has been in the planning stages since the last major earthquake exercise is whole community damage assessment – i.e. how to capture, diagnose, and display damage to critical infrastructure, government facilities, vital non-government facilities, etc. Cascadia Rising gave the City the opportunity to practice initial concepts of how this enormous task is to be accomplished. Information was collected and summarized by building damage, transportation system status, utility and communication status, damage to health, human service and school facilities, damage to private property throughout the community, and key damage outside but impacting the City of Seattle. Much more work on this very challenging task will continue with the lessons from practicing our initial concept of operations during this exercise. The initial work pre-exercise to coordinate how damage assessment information would be coming into the EOC from various departments made this very challenging task more manageable. However, in a real event would require a squadron of people, not a handful, to coordinate. The exercise helped to highlight specific data points that need to be captured as a part of damage assessment. An area needing work is providing information on what impacts to City Operations. Something may be damaged, but what are the impacts to the operation? What operational elements can still continue? To what degree are there limitations on city operations are there from the damage? Aspects of this should be incorporated into existing Essential Elements of Information Checklists. Further work is also needed on the process for evaluating business and residential damage assessment in the EOC. A more detailed process will need to address department roles, verification of damage, and data points that should be shared with the damage assessment team in the EOC. Further clarification will need to be done on the process for managing and synthesizing damage information in the EOC Plans Section. Other procedural elements that need to be addressed and incorporated into checklists include: • Leveraging outside agency assistance. For example, the Red Cross offered to evaluate damage on infrastructure buildings to be used for shelters, or other external organizations such as The American Institute for Architects or Structural Engineers of Washington that are able to pull subject matter experts from across the country • Process for reassessment of key facilities including the triaging of priority assessments. This will enable a more effective use of resources from SDCI and other departments to quickly assess critical infrastructure following aftershocks. Part of this also includes making sure that rapid evaluation processes are in place, socialized, and trained to. Any reassessment process should also incorporate the concept of recanvasing structures for vulnerable populations. • Aerial Damage assessment. Further research is needed in order to better understand how the City can leverage aircraft and aerial reconnaissance to aid in real-time damage assessment. Given the sensitivities of the issue and its potential impact on privacy, exercise participants recognized this issue requires a much broader discussion and should include stakeholders and the county and state level. Published – August 2016 2-9 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE EXERCISE REVIEW • Process for resolving conflicting information. Damage assessment team members reported that a lot of time was spent chasing down contradictory information. There was also the issue of consolidating damage assessment information from the multiple departments. Physical consolidation of information was time consuming. Information was scattered in different reports from different departments. Those department reports were in various formats including word, excel, and hard copy formats. Picking through the reports and then entering the data took time and took talented people away from other priorities. The question is whether aspects of the information collection from departments could be automated and if so, to what extent that could be done in WebEOC. The exercise illustrated the challenges of incorporating department level damage assessment information into a single platform (WebEOC) or trying to leverage a geographic information system, such as ArcGIS Online. Part of that issue also includes how to display mapped features. There were also issues with obtaining a picture of what was occurring outside of Seattle. In some cases, that information was necessary to make decisions regarding the deployment of resources inside the City. Access to a regional damage assessment map that is populated with the appropriate information is one possible solution to addressing this issue. A real time information map would decrease reliance and wait time on periodic reports pushed out by the County ECC. 2 3.5 Policy Issues and Mayor, Cabinet, City Council Participation The Mayor convened his Emergency Executive Board daily to be briefed on the current situation and to answer policy related issues identified by EOC personnel. Various department directors and Mayor’s office staff briefed the Mayor on the situation in the community and the issues being dealt with in the EOC. With advice from members of his Emergency Executive Board, the Mayor made policy decisions regarding a variety of things including: • Policy regarding fuel: The Mayor authorized the taking of fuel from private sources to meet life safety and high priority missions. • Policy regarding response expenses: The Mayor affirmed that departments should not let budgetary concerns get in the way of life safety and high priority missions. He also asked that we affirm with departments that their expenditures need to be coordinated through Finance and Administrative Services at the EOC with City Budget Office awareness. • Policy regarding building inspection: The Mayor affirmed the priority and process the Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections uses to tag building regarding post-earthquake safety. • Policy regarding a possible curfew: The Mayor declined to impose a curfew after consulting with his Emergency Executive Board. • Policy regarding Firearms and ammunition sales: The Mayor signed an emergency order restricting the sales of firearms and ammunition The Mayor issued a proclamation of emergency and a variety of emergency measures which, after a rich discussion with City Council and the City Attorney, were all ratified (one with amendment) by the City Council. The process of recommending policies and ratifying emergency orders went according to plan having been practiced numerous times in the past. The emergency measures dealt with a wide variety of topics from delegation of authorities to department directors, to formally requesting state and federal assistance, to discontinuing the sale of firearms and ammunition. Published – August 2016 2-10 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE ACTIONS DEMONSTRATING SUCCESS 3. ACTIONS DEMONSTRATING SUCCESS Through the course of the two days of EOC play, there were numerous examples that illustrated players successfully working together to assess the situation, solve problems, obtain resources and develop plans of action as they would following a major earthquake. Some of the most significant examples of these are captured below: • The Mayor, senior Mayor’s Office staff, Cabinet, City Council, City Attorney, City Clerk, and Municipal Court were all involved in the play of the exercise exposing each to what would be expected of them in their various disaster roles and providing an opportunity to enact their roles and responsibilities with one another. • The Zone 5 Coordinators were helpful in resolving information conflicts with the King County ECC in real time. One example was clarification on an email related to the Regional Shelter Plan. • A Fuel Task Force assembled representatives of Finance and Administrative Services, Seattle Transportation, State, University of Washington, National Guard, Seattle Police, and private sector to help address fuel shortage. Work included developing fuel prioritization policy for the Mayor’s Emergency Executive Board to consider. • Police and Fire worked together to co-locate operations at the Southwest Precinct due to fire stations being uninhabitable in the immediate area. • Seattle Police requested additional law enforcement assets from the National Guard to assist with critical infrastructure security. Issues with tracking the request were successfully worked out thanks to the collaboration between ESF-13 representatives and the National Guard Liaison. • EOC representatives worked directly with the National Guard liaison to identify frequency allocations that allowed for City-National Guard communications in the field. They also assisted in identifying and securing multiple radio communications channels that allowed King County to reach the City. This was the only way to communicate between personnel in some cases. • Seattle Public Utilities, Seattle Transportation, and Seattle Police were working together to mitigate a sinkhole that as opening up near King Street Station. A representative from Parks was also helping to enter task requests into WebEOC while the departments were coordinating with their DOC’s. • Finance and Administrative Services, Seattle Public Utilities, Police and Fire coordinated with the National Guard on establishing a single logistics staging area for all four departments. The collaborative effort showed the benefit of having all the agencies in one room where they could work together to try to come up with solutions that allowed everyone to function. • On Day 1, Seattle Information Technology’s liaison in the EOC was able to work with the Logistics Section (in the EOC) to clear up a delay affecting a fuel request that was necessary to keep all of the City’s phone systems from shutting down. Published – August 2016 3-11 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE ACTIONS DEMONSTRATING SUCCESS • Seattle Information Technology’s liaisons in the EOC were able to work directly with the ESF-2 role by submitting resources requests for the department’s operating center through the Logistics process and at the same time perform the Logistics Communications Support role. This is serving two functional areas for the department. • EOC leadership: o According to evaluations, “established clear expectations, was accessible and able to answer questions, kept the balls rolling and maintained their calm.” They also worked with all branches in the EOC to narrow the initially very broad objectives into more discrete missions to ensure the City was focused on the highest priorities. o Ran down rumors of inaccurate information with King County OEM partners – easy to do because we know each other so well already. • Seattle Public Utilities and the Health and Human Services Branch coordinated on co-locating shelter and debris sites at 2 separate locations. • Seattle Information Technology successfully activated their department operating center (ITOC) using AlertSeattle. • Seattle Information Technology successfully worked with their Department Operating Center (ITOC) on identifying damage to information technology infrastructure and communications outages while trying to mitigate issues by offering alternate options. • The Health and Human Services Branch: o Worked with the Office of Economic Development and Visit Seattle (representing the hotel association) to determine whether there were hotel rooms available for sheltering first responders, stranded City staff and commuters, as well as visitors. o Coordinated unaccompanied youth in shelters and elsewhere. Plans were developed that identified who they were and relocated to an available shelter to facilitate family reunification. o After identifying the Convention Center as a possible shelter location, worked with Logistics to get approval to request that the State enter the request into their WebEOC system. • The Vulnerable Populations Task Force, which included the Human Services Department, Seattle Housing Authority, Office of Housing, Seattle Center, Parks, Aging and Disability Services, Seattle Public Library, American Red Cross and Salvation Army, identified specific needs that would face people with access and functional needs. One of the many highlights from their activities was the collaborative effort between the Seattle Housing Authority, Seattle Center, and Parks to identify services that would already be available at specific shelter sites and what was needed. Resource requests were then submitted to address access and functional needs at the shelters. • Parks, Red Cross, Seattle DCI, and the Seattle Housing Authority all worked together to develop a plan and provide resources to facilitate the rapid inspection of community centers. The plan involved incorporating Published – August 2016 3-12 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE ACTIONS DEMONSTRATING SUCCESS personnel without training in damage inspection to be able to rapidly communicate what they were seeing so that trained personnel could be more effectively utilized. • Public Health successfully collaborated on solving problems related to access to opiate replacement medications, and cold storage for fatalities. • Logistics validated the EOC resource request process. Team members reported they were able to work with Purchasing to identify contracting options, and verified with the requestor on details missing from resource requests. Team members were also able to effectively manage requests that came in by phone. The section also worked with the Planning Section, SDHR, King County and State partners on locations for CPODs and then keeping up on their status including if they were online, fully stocked and staffed. • Logistics successfully resolved issues related to the fueling of generators, self-contained kitchens, and alternate fuel sources once the City's supplies ran dry. • The EOC Logistics Section successfully coordinated with City Light for downed power lines, to get Meals Ready to Eat (MREs) and tents delivered, and the Human Services Department for shelters. • When the City was out of resources, ACS was able to provide communications devices to vendor fuel truck drivers that allowed for communication and coordination of fuel deliveries around the City of Seattle. • ACS volunteers staffed the phone lines. The volunteers learned to work through Web EOC to gather the information needed to locate functions and individuals. ACS also was able to establish email communications with the State EOC during the exercise. • The JIC successfully coordinated with the Human Services Branch on shelter status and communicating that information to the public. Published – August 2016 3-13 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE SEATTLE CASCADIA RISING IMPROVEMENT PLAN ITEMS 4. SEATTLE CASCADIA RISING IMPROVEMENT PLAN ITEMS Some tasks are relatively easy to address and those are assigned an, “Expected Date of Completion.” All others are likely to take some time given their complexity and/or current departmental priorities. As such these items are marked, “FSPU” which stands for, “For Strategic Plan Update.” These items will be incorporated into the annual update of the City-wide Emergency Management Program Strategic Plan. Lead IP # Issue Key Action Steps to Resolve the Issue Responsible Due Date Agency 16.1 Multiple resource requests cause the need to prioritize what is focused on first: supplies for shelters, engineers for damage assessment, etc. Pre-script obvious post-earthquake missions to make it easier to prioritize and improve coordination and support to response and recovery operations. Examples: Urban Search and Rescue Teams, Community Points of Distribution, fuel, etc. FAS FSPU 16.2 There was a need to coordinate on the acquisition and allocation of limited fuel with neighboring jurisdictions. This impacted operations inside the City. As a stakeholder, assist King County in revising and/or developing a regional fuel plan. FAS FSPU 16.3 EOC Logistics Section’s Mutual Aid Unit was overwhelmed with managing and tracking the requests up to the County. Develop a plan that includes recruiting and training City personnel from other departments to staff the Mutual Aid Unit during activations of the City’s Emergency Operations Center. FAS FSPU 16.4 CPOD points were identified, but not all of the support logistics and planning was clearly understood or communicated. For example, how would supplies get to the locations. As a stakeholder, work with King County and the State to develop plans that coordinates the establishment, management, training and exercise of CPOD s between the Logistics Section of the Seattle EOC and the Health and Human Services Branch as well as planning between Seattle, King County, the State and Federal government. FAS FSPU 16.5 No city blanket contracts in place to handle the shipment of large quantities of goods, equipment, etc. Establish emergency blanket contracts with freight companies or brokers. FAS FSPU Published – August 2016 4-14 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE SEATTLE CASCADIA RISING IMPROVEMENT PLAN ITEMS Lead IP # Issue Key Action Steps to Resolve the Issue Responsible Due Date Agency 16.6 Although the fuel prioritization task force was a success, additional work needs to be done on triaging fueling requests based on need and supplies on hand. For example, how do you determine who gets supplies first when there are only 1000 gallons and 100 emergency/life safety needs. Design and deliver a fuel prioritization tabletop exercise with the objective of exposing some of the issues when you have limited fuel. FAS FSPU 16.7 Seattle could identify its own shelter and resource needs; however, the entire Puget Sound region was in a similar situation and would have benefitted from region-wide shelter coordination. Work with King County, the State of Washington, and FEMA Region X to identify how regional shelter needs and supporting resource requests can be coordinated. HSD FSPU 16.8 A feeding plan was developed during the Regional Catastrophic Planning efforts but did not appear to be used during the exercise to address food needs for approximately 30,000 people. Provide orientation training to the Regional Catastrophic Feeding Plan and determine what improvements need to be made to Seattle’s Feeding Appendix based on lessons from Cascadia Rising. HSD FSPU 16.9 Strengthen the capacity to address disproportionate impact that can occur to community members due to language, culture, income, access and functional needs, etc. Work with the City’s ADA Coordinator to identify City subject matter experts who can help address accessibility issues. Provide training on emergency management best practices and resources for vulnerable populations. HSD FSPU 16.10 The soft sided sheltering plan needs additional detail on maximum density and pet management issues. Develop a formula for soft-sided sheltering per acre, work with Public Health – Seattle & King County on environmental health aspects, and include instructions on whether pets could stay with their owners in tents. HSD FSPU 16.11 There could have been better coordination between the City and Seattle Public Schools on managing the student population following disasters. Coordinate with the Seattle Public Schools as they review their student sheltering plan to strategize on how the City and SPS can complement each other’s sheltering efforts in a catastrophic event. HSD FSPU Published – August 2016 4-15 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE SEATTLE CASCADIA RISING IMPROVEMENT PLAN ITEMS Lead IP # Issue Key Action Steps to Resolve the Issue Responsible Due Date Agency 16.12 The damage assessment process needs further refinement. Continue work on development of the City’s overall damage assessment plan and associated departmental and EOC procedures. A key component is to integrate functionality of ArcGIS and WebEOC closely to avoid double work, redundancy, and inconsistency. Also automate the updating of asset, task, and incident related statuses rather than performing these tasks manually. 16.13 Seattle received little or no communication on the status of resource requests that were forwarded to King County and/or the State. For example Seattle was unable to obtain status updates on its request for USAR teams. As a stakeholder, work with King County and the State to develop and/or test processes for communicating the status of resource request OEM FSPU 16.14 The Mayor’s Emergency Executive Board and Mayor’s staff could use more training on the key elements of emergency plans. Provide high level training on key plans to the Mayor’s Emergency Executive Board and Mayor’s staff. OEM FSPU 16.15 Zone 5 representatives to the King County ECC had difficulty in triaging needs and checking on the status of open resource orders from the City. Develop procedures for Zone 5 representatives and train to them. OEM FSPU 16.16 There were challenges with managing information and requests related to “missions”. For example, being able to track resources and tasks (and assign priorities) for setting up a shelter for 200 people. Develop procedures that integrate the concept of EOC missions with prioritization, information management, tasking, and resource requesting into EOC operations. OEM FSPU 16.17 Seattle was not notified that the State ran conference calls during the exercise. As a stakeholder, work with the State to establish and communicate state-wide conference calls. OEM FSPU Published – August 2016 OEM FSPU 4-16 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE SEATTLE CASCADIA RISING IMPROVEMENT PLAN ITEMS Lead IP # Issue Key Action Steps to Resolve the Issue Responsible Due Date Agency 16.18 There was a lack of clarity on Seattle plans for addressing temporary storage of decedents As a stakeholder, work with Public Health – Seattle & King County to develop procedures for management of decedents when regular County fatality management procedures are not feasible OEM FSPU 16.19 There was a lack of clarity on route clearing in areas surrounding Seattle which impacted operations inside the City. As a stakeholder, assist King County in revising and/or developing a regional plan on route clearing. SDOT FSPU Published – August 2016 4-17 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE APPENDIX – AFTER ACTION SURVEY RESULTS 5. APPENDIX – AFTER ACTION SURVEY RESULTS The City of Seattle conducted a series of activities designed to evaluate the effectiveness of the exercise. There were 3 parts to this evaluation process: 1. On-Site Evaluation: The City of Seattle had 25 persons evaluate the exercise during the course of the 2 days. Evaluators were given guidance on what to look for and assess. They also were encouraged to provide feedback on what worked and what didn’t work based on their training and experience. Their evaluation guides were collected from them at the conclusion of their participation in the exercise. 2. On-line survey: All participants including controllers and evaluators were asked to complete an on-line survey consisting of 30 questions. The survey included open-ended questions designed to collect information on their experience during the exercise. The responses helped to build the agenda for the after action conference. 3. After Action Conference: This conference was a 3-hour meeting designed to bring together exercise participants and evaluators to review what worked and what didn’t work so well during the exercise. The conference format as an open discussion was divided in to the four parts. Each part was a discussion of activities related to each of the four overarching objectives that Seattle was focused on during the exercise. On-Site Evaluations Dozens of emergency management professionals from a variety of City departments as well as the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory volunteered to help control, simulate, and evaluate the exercise. Following the doctrine of the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program, Exercise Evaluation Guides were developed to assist evaluators in looking for expected actions and determining whether players had met the objectives. Literally hundreds of message injects painted the picture of damage, impacts, problems, and dire circumstances to which players responded. After reviewing the Exercise Evaluation Guides, it appears from the perspective of our evaluators that EOC personnel either partially or fully met the expected actions even when the expected action was hopeful creativity in the face of novel situations. How Players Described Their Exercise Experience Using One Word Published – August 2016 5-18 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE APPENDIX – AFTER ACTION SURVEY RESULTS On-Line Survey Results Seattle OEM released an electronic survey to evaluate the success of the EOC activation. More than 76 responses were returned. The following are selected questions from the participant survey. In your opinion, was unity of effort achieved in the Seattle EOC during the exercise? Yes................................................................................................ 91.0% No ................................................................................................. 9.0% Understanding Roles Answer Options The exercise helped me understand my role and that of my agency. The exercise helped me understand role of other agencies who are a part of the City of Seattle or who are in the Seattle EOC The exercise helped me understand role of other jurisdictions (e.g. King County, State, or Federal) Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Strongly Agree Agree N/A 0% 5% 8% 45% 41% 1% 0% 0% 3% 61% 30% 7% 0% 12% 20% 50% 14% 4% What ESF or functional group did you work in? Question Response Percent Response Count 7.4% 5 0.0% 2.9% 2.9% 29.4% 13.2% 1.5% 4.4% 11.8% 4.4% 7.4% 4.4% 10.3% 0.0% 0 2 2 20 9 1 3 8 3 5 3 7 0 ESF-1, 3, or 12: Roads, power, Water & Wastewater, Transit, Rail, or Airports ESF-3: Facilities, Building Inspections ESF-2: Telecommunications & Information Technology ESF -4, 8, 9, or 10: EMS, Fire Fighting, & Rescuing ESF-6: Mass Care, Sheltering, or Animal Services ESF-7: Logistics ESF-9: Health & Medical ESF 13: Law Enforcement ESF-15: Joint Information Center Plans Section Admin Section Exercise Design and Control (controller, evaluator, or SimCell) Other Don’t Know Understanding Plans Question The exercise helped me identify strengths & weaknesses in my agency's plans or operations. The exercise helped me identify strengths & weaknesses of citywide plans (e.g. earthquake annex) Published – August 2016 Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A 0% 1% 12% 61% 22% 4% 0% 4% 26% 38% 20% 12% 5-19 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE APPENDIX – AFTER ACTION SURVEY RESULTS Question Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree N/A 0% 13% 42% 24% 9% 12% The exercise helped me identify strengths & weaknesses of regional plans (e.g. RCPG) EOC Situational Awareness The EOC briefing process led by the EOC Director was helpful. Yes................................................................................................ 95.5% No ................................................................................................. 4.5% The (time) length briefing was: Too long ........................................................................................ 9.1% Too Short ...................................................................................... 3.0% Just right ....................................................................................... 87.9% Please rate the environment and support services provided at the EOC Answer Options EOC Check-in Restrooms Cleanliness EOC Cleanliness Availability of Supplies Lighting Noise Levels Lunch Call Taking Outstanding! (5) V Good Good Fair Poor (1) Rating Average 35 32 40 25 36 16 36 20 23 21 19 23 21 29 21 20 6 8 8 13 8 17 5 17 2 1 0 4 1 4 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 4.33 4.30 4.48 4.06 4.39 3.82 4.41 4.05 Rate your experience using WebEOC Answer Options I was able to log into WebEOC. I was able to find information in WebEOC. I was able to use WebEOC to provide me situation awareness during the exercise. I was able to place a resource request in WebEOC. I was able to track a resource request in WebEOC. I was able to use WebEOC to locate people or phone numbers. 53 26 20 11 15 20 Somewhat Challenging to Do 2 18 18 12 14 2 0 3 39 10 12 10 4 3 30 17 8 9 0 5 31 Easy to do 3 6 3 Very Difficult to do 1 4 4 N/A 1 2 5 I want more training on how to use WebEOC Yes................................................................................................ 51.4% No ................................................................................................. 48.6% Published – August 2016 5-20 CITY OF SEATTLE AFTER ACTION REPORT – CASCADIA RISING EARTHQUAKE EXERCISE APPENDIX – AFTER ACTION SURVEY RESULTS Do you feel that over the last 2 years (between exercises) that your EOC skills and abilities: Improved ....................................................................................... 87.5% Stayed the same ........................................................................... 6.3% Decreased .................................................................................... 6.3% The Situation Reports provided useful information Yes................................................................................................ 87.9% No ................................................................................................. 12.1% The Snapshot Reports provided useful information Yes................................................................................................ 83.8% No ................................................................................................. 16.2% Player Training In additional to the questions below, over half of the respondents indicated that they felt that the Seattle EOC All Hands on Deck training was of the most value in preparing them for the exercise. Including this exercise, How many Seattle EOC activations have you worked? (note working multiple days at the EOC for the same event counts as 1 activation). 1-3................................................................................................. 70.6% 3-5................................................................................................. 8.8% 5-10............................................................................................... 5.9% More than 10................................................................................. 14.7% Please indicate which of the following training opportunities you have taken prior to the exercise: Answer Options Introduction to WebEOC Basic EOC Operations Intermediate EOC Operations Advance EOC Operations All hands on Deck Training held on 1 of the following 3 dates: 5/11, 5/12, or 5/18 DMC Meeting – Sept 2015 - CASCADIA PREP #1 – Review of CEMP/EOP/EQ Annex DMC Meeting – Oct 2015 – CASCADIA PREP #2 – ESF2/Communications DMC Meeting – Dec 2015 - CASCADIA PREP #3 - Resource Management DMC Meeting – Jan 2016 - CASCADIA PREP #4 – Critical Transportation DMC Meeting – Feb 2016 – CASCADIA PREP #5 – Mass Care DMC Meeting – March 2016 – CASCADIA PREP #6 – Policy Practice DMC Meeting – Apr 2016 – CASCADIA PREP # 7 – Infrastructure Systems DMC Meeting – Apr 2016 – CASCADIA PREP #8 – Damage Assessment Other (please specify) Published – August 2016 Response Percent 82.0% 77.0% 57.4% 54.1% 72.1% 14.8% 11.5% 14.8% 14.8% 16.4% 13.1% 16.4% 18.0% 5-21