|
Homeland Security & Understanding NIMS & Need to Secure Building Plans |
|
|
NCSBCS/AMCBO Public Sector Members Important Issues Call Summary - November 30, 2004 |
|
|
Participants:
Jack Phillips, Ventura County, CA Background on National Incident Management System: Claude Cooper opened the call by describing the Department of Homeland Security’s National Incident Management System (NIMS) and the work that AMCBO and NCSBCS are doing with DHS to help them better understand the role of building officials in natural and manmade disasters. NIMS, according to DHS, provides a consistent national template to enable Federal, State, local and tribal governments and private sector and non-governmental organizations to work together effectively and efficiently to prepare for, prevent, respond to and recover from domestic incidents, regardless of cause, size or complexity, including acts of catastrophic terrorism. NIMS is very similar to the Incident Command System and other systems used earlier by the fire services. Moreover, in creating NIMS, DHS has taken the approach that 85% of the responses to all types of disasters are similar. The problem that NCSBCS and AMCBO leadership have noted in their meetings with DHS, however, is that to date the functions of local and state building officials have not been adequately understood within DHS and therefore have been largely left out of the system. Mr. Cooper noted that, while it is DHS’ position that NIMS provides only a general overview of a national response and not specific details of the response (leaving that up to state and local government), in some places the NIMS documents do go into great detail (for example citing the role of veterinarians) but then does not address building official activities. Instead, NIMS appears to envision that state and/or local building officials are merely a part of the departments of public works everywhere in the nation. By 2007 NIMS will be the standard that state and local governments must adhere to if they are to receive DHS funding for disaster management, response and recovery. (Additional information on NIMS is found in the NCSBCS members’ monthly e-Bulletin and by visiting the FEMA website www.fema.nims.) Mr. Cooper noted that not only NIMS but also its supporting Universal Task List (UTL) and Target Capabilities List (TCL) either misunderstand or virtually ignore the role of building official. As an example of how important a role that building officials did play, he noted that in Richmond they had a major role in 2 hurricanes and a flood. Mr. Cooper said that his building department in those events had 25% of the responsibility and, in some cases, building departments have primary responsibility, especially for damage assessment, demolition and rebuilding. This is especially true as to the building officials’ role in dealing with private sector buildings, which is 90% of the built environment. Mr. Cooper noted that his objective was to make certain that DHS gets it right. NCSBCS/AMCBO Meetings with Department of Homeland Security & Federal Emergency Management Agency: A first step towards helping DHS better understand the role of the building official, was the invitation that NCSBCS and AMCBO extended to DHS to speak at the 37th Annual Conference in Salt Lake City, UT. Mr. Matt Bettenhausen, DHS Director of State and Local Intergovernmental Coordination, spent the afternoon of September 29 speaking and meeting with our members about NIMS and the National Response Plan. Following up on his presentation in Salt Lake City, Mr. Bettenhausen invited NCSBCS and AMCBO to participate in several DHS workshops related to NIMS and first responder communications. On October 12-14, NCSBCS President Cynthia Wilk and Executive Director Robert Wible participated in a workshop to develop Target Capabilities Lists (TCL) that support the Universal Task List (UTL). The UTL describes all of the actions that federal, state and local governments must undertake to support the National Incident Management System under 15 different major disaster scenarios. From that workshop NCSBCS and AMCBO gained a better understanding of areas where DHS needed more information about the role of building officials. As a result of the workshop, the two associations sought and obtained a round of follow-up meetings with DHS and FEMA officials in Washington, D.C., on November 19. Attending the meetings for NCSBCS and AMCBO were Claude Cooper, Cynthia Wilk, William Connolly (NCSBCS Past President and current chief of the Codes Division of the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs), and Robert Wible. Messrs. Cooper and Wible described the November 19 meeting with DHS which focused on NIMS and its supporting UTL. Mr. Cooper noted that DHS greatly appreciated building officials coming in to help DHS get the role of the building official right within NIMS and the UTL. He added that operating under several Presidential directives, DHS is on a fast track and a tight time frame to get input. DHS will begin to conduct national training on the NIMS in the next 30 to 60 days. On November 19, NCSBCS and AMCBO were invited to form a small task group to work with DHS to provide a building official’s perspective on the exact areas within the Universal Task List where building officials had task responsibilities. Mr. Cooper invited jurisdictions participating on this call to join in that work group. He added that they were looking to provide input to DHS on the UTL by close of business December 9 and that a conference call would be held on either December 2 or 3 with those interested in participating in this project. (Several jurisdictions noted their interest.) Mr. Cooper also described the outcome of a November 19 afternoon meeting on NIMS with the NIMS Integration Center (NIC) staff at FEMA. It had been hoped that a representative from FEMA’s NIC would be on this call, but they were unable to participate. Mr. Cooper noted that a FEMA representative will cover that topic during the upcoming December 20 or 21 NCSBCS/AMCBO Public Sector Members Important Issues Call. (See note at the end of this summary). There was some general discussion on NIMS and then Ms. Jones thanked Messrs. Cooper and Wible for their presentation and introduced two emergency management personnel from her staff to talk about NIMS as it related to Florida’s experience with its four hurricanes this year. NIMS and Florida Hurricanes: Mr. Michael DeLorenzo, Preparedness and Response Bureau Chief, and Mr. David Crisp, Preparedness Section Chief, for the Division of Emergency Management, Florida Department of Community Affairs, were introduced. Mr. DeLorenzo noted that NIMS has not yet officially taken effect and won’t until after the first of 2005 and that all states and localities must be in compliance with NIMS by 2007. That being said, Mr. DeLorenzo noted that NIMS in many ways parallels Florida’s existing State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan which encompasses 27 different agencies and all volunteer organizations. Florida’s hurricane disasters and activation of this Comprehensive Plan started on August 11 and ended its response phase on November 3. (State now is in recovery phase of that plan). He reported that the state of Florida is now looking at over $42 billion in damages from the four hurricanes. Florida is organized into 7 areas and has 7 coordination teams, or Homeland Regional Domestic Security Task Forces. For the hurricanes, Florida invoked the EMAC (Emergency Management Compact). Through that compact, they had over 800 emergency staff from 35 states support the response phase of these disasters. On November 9, Florida began to look at NIMS against its existing Incident Command Management System in Florida. He noted that there should be limited modification between the two documents other than the fact that NIMS looks at a much wider range of different types of manmade and natural disasters than does Florida’s existing ICS system From this year’s hurricanes, Florida learned that, especially for rural counties, even the emergency response personnel and their command centers and homes were whipped out and so responders had to be brought in from outside the disaster area. Looking ahead, Florida will take a look at what kind of NIMS training they will need statewide to be in compliance by 2007. Mr. David Crisp added his perspective on similarities and differences between NIMS and Florida’s existing Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan. He noted that NIMS broader range of disasters (especially terrorism) warrants study and a look at how they may impact the state of Florida’s existing Emergency Support Functions (ESF). Mr. Crisp described several existing state disaster planning documents for public works, especially for water and for rural counties, and comparisons that are being made between NIMS, UTL and Florida’s ESF. He concurred with Mr. Cooper’s earlier statement that DHS told NCSBCS that the UTL’s would be a living document and would be modified over time based upon actual disaster experiences. Additional information on the NIMS can be obtained from the FEMA website www.fema.gov/prearedness/nims. Florida’s presentation ended with a brief review of the disaster housing situation. It was noted that originally it was estimated that some 10,000 units would be needed in the state and now some 8,400 had been installed. The need level currently, however, has gone up to 12,000 units. It was suggested that perhaps at a latter date a session on lessons being learned in post-disaster housing might be scheduled. (NOTE: NCSBCS and AMCBO will be joining the International Code Council, FEMA, State of Florida and other organizations in sponsoring a national symposium on lessons learned from Florida’s hurricanes that impact building codes and code enforcement on February 11-13, 2005, in Tampa. Importance of Securing Building Plans: Ms. Jones thanked Messrs. DeLorenzo and Crisp for their presentations and then turned the program over to its second topic on the need for state and local building departments to keep their building plans secure. Messrs. Wible and Cooper noted that during Matt Bettenhausen’s presentation at the joint annual conference, he expressed interest in steps that states and localities were taking to overcome problems associated with their existing open records acts that mandated that anyone could ask for and receive any building plan held by a jurisdiction. Mr. Cooper described how Richmond secures plans for sensitive buildings. Mr. Phillips, Ventura County, noted that under California state law they had similar problems but that they are restricting access. Florida noted that their legislature, in the wake of Columbine (Colorado), passed legislation excluding school buildings from being accessible to anyone but no other structures. The Kentucky State Fire Marshal, Al Mitchell, noted his state also had the open records act problem and that included issues like above ground storage tanks, also a potential target for terrorist action. It was noted that it would be a valuable service for NCSBCS and AMCBO to survey their members and compile and distribute "best practices" in this area including model legislation and executive orders that have been adopted restricting access to such blue prints. Messrs. Wible and Cooper said that NCSBCS and AMCBO leadership had already planned on doing this and had said that they would also share that information with DHS/FEMA as well. Mr. Wible reminded those members on the call that the new NCSBCS/AMCBO Public Sector Member’s Message Board, the Code Administrator Communicator, was a mechanism through which states and localities could share information about such best practices. (See November and December NCSBCS/AMCBO Members Bulletins or the NCSBCS website www.ncsbcs.org, for information on the Message Board.) Adjourn & Next Call: Monday, December 20, 2004 at Noon, with DHS/FEMA Speaker on NIMS/UTL/NRP The next NCSBS/AMCBO Public Sector Members Important Issues Call will be held on Monday, December 20, at noon Eastern Standard Time. The topic has been changed from nightclub disasters (now scheduled for the January 18 call) to provide time for the speaker from FEMA/DHS to talk about NIMS and NIMS Integration Center activities in support of getting state and local governments into NIMS compliance by 2007. Ms. Jones and Mr. Cooper both thanked everyone for being on the call and the call was adjourned at 1:20 p.m.
|
|