The Nation’s domestic incident management landscape changed
dramatically following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
This incident, along with the devastating hurricanes of 2005, had
a profound impact on every major metropolitan area in the country.
Today’s threat environment includes the traditional manmade
and natural hazards - wildland and urban interface fires, floods,
oil spills, hazardous materials releases, transportation accidents,
earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, pandemics, and potential disruptions
to the region’s energy and information technology infrastructure.
Additionally, we are now faced with the deadly and devastating terrorist
arsenal of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and high-yield
explosive weapons.
These complex and emerging 21st century threats and hazards
demand a unified and coordinated approach to domestic incident management.
The federal government responded with the introduction of the National
Response Framework (NRF) that is predicated upon the National Incident
Management System (NIMS). The City of Grand Junction (also referred
to as “the City”) has developed its Emergency Operations
Plan (EOP) based upon the structure of the NRF, utilizing the management
techniques of NIMS. The purpose of the City’s Emergency Operations
Plan is to reduce its vulnerability to major emergencies, including
terrorism; to minimize the damage that may occur; and to recover from
major disasters and other emergencies.
The EOP is an all-hazards plan that provides the structure and
mechanisms for local and regional level policy and operational coordination
for incident management. Consistent with the model provided in the
NIMS, the EOP can be partially or fully implemented in the context
of a threat, anticipation of a significant event, or the response
to a significant event. This EOP is designed so that one or more of
its components can be activated independent of the others, thereby
responding to the situation at hand with a maximum of flexibility.
Together, the City EOP and the NIMS integrate the capabilities and
resources of various governmental jurisdictions, incident management
and emergency response disciplines, nongovernmental organizations
(NGOs), and the private sector, for local or regional incident management.
(Revised by City 12/16; Res. 41-15, 9-16-15)
This Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) provides guidance to help
minimize loss of life, prevent injury, protect property, safeguard
the environment, and preserve the local economy in the event of a
major emergency.
History has proven that all emergencies and/or disaster situations
have certain commonalties. Today’s threats include a traditional
spectrum of human-caused and natural hazards such as floods, tornadoes,
hazardous material releases, transportation accidents, and disruptions
to the nation’s energy and information technology infrastructure,
but also deadly and devastating terrorist arsenal of chemical, biological,
and radiological weapons.
(Res. 41-15, 9-16-15)
(a)
Addresses emergency activities common to known hazards threatening
the City of Grand Junction as described in the current Mesa County
Hazard Mitigation Plan.
(b)
Establishes a comprehensive program designed to help prevent, prepare
for, respond to, and recover from natural, technological and human-caused
hazards.
(c)
Implements coordination of volunteer, community, private, State,
and federal agencies to coordinate with the City’s key organizations
during major emergencies.
(d)
Applies to nonroutine emergency events and is not intended to be
implemented for daily emergencies routinely handled by first responder
agencies and community organizations.
(Res. 41-15, 9-16-15)
(b)
State.
(1)
Colorado Disaster Emergency Act, § 24-33.5-700, C.R.S. et seq.
(Revised by City 12/16; Res. 41-15, 9-16-15)
(a)
Responsibility for overall development and maintenance of this Emergency
Operations Plan (EOP) is the responsibility of the City’s Emergency
Manager (EM). Maintenance of this document includes review and updating
of the plan and associated annexes. Additionally, the Emergency Manager
is responsible for document control. This includes distribution of
the plan and updating sections as required.
(b)
The EOP was adopted by Grand Junction City Council by resolution.
Functional and incident annexes will be approved and accepted by the
Emergency Manager and the agency head with responsibility for that
function.
(c)
This EOP is designed to be a flexible, dynamic document subject to
revision, as appropriate. EOP revisions may result from a variety
of causes such as:
(d)
Major revisions to this EOP must be approved through the same adoption
process as described above. Major revisions are those that significantly
alter or establish new policy.
(e)
Minor revisions must be approved by the City Manager, based on recommendations
from the Emergency Manager. The EOP will be reviewed at a minimum
of every two years or when it has been implemented.
(Revised by City 12/16; Res. 41-15, 9-16-15)
Emergency and disaster management activities are associated
with five defined phases: prevention, mitigation, preparedness, response
and recovery. These phases are naturally occurring divisions in the
emergency where the demands for resources change and the operational
strategies shift.
(Res. 41-15, 9-16-15)
Prevention happens when property and lives are protected by
those that identify, deter or stop an incident from occurring. Activities
that may include these types of countermeasures can include:
(a)
Heightened inspections.
(b)
Improved surveillance and security operations.
(c)
Investigations to determine the full nature and source of the threat.
(d)
Public health surveillance and testing processes.
(e)
Immunizations.
(f)
Isolation or quarantine.
(g)
Law enforcement operations aimed at deterring, preempting, interdicting,
or disrupting illegal activity.
(Res. 41-15, 9-16-15)
Mitigation refers to measures that reduce the chance of an emergency
happening, or reduce the damaging effects of unavoidable emergencies.
This is achieved through risk analysis, which results in information
that provides a foundation for typical mitigation measures including
establishing building codes, zoning requirements, and constructing
barriers such as levees. Effective mitigation efforts can break the
cycle of disaster damage, reconstruction, and repeated damage.
It creates safer communities by reducing loss of life and property
damage. For example, the rigorous building standards adopted by 20,000
communities across the country are saving the nation more than $1,100,000,000
a year in prevented flood damages. It allows individuals to minimize
post-flood disaster disruptions and recover more rapidly. For example,
homes built to National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) standards incur
less damage from floods. And when floods do cause damages, flood insurance
protects the homeowner’s investment, and lessens the financial
impact on individuals, communities, and society as a whole. For example,
a recent study by the Multi-hazard Mitigation Council shows that each
dollar spent on mitigation saves society an average of $4.00.
(Res. 41-15, 9-16-15)
Preparedness activities increase a community’s ability
to respond when a disaster occurs. The National Incident Management
System (NIMS) defines preparedness as “a continuous cycle of
planning, organizing, training, equipping, exercising, evaluating,
and taking corrective action in an effort to ensure effective coordination
during incident response.”
This preparedness cycle is one element of a broader national
preparedness system to prevent, respond to, recover from, and mitigate
against natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other manmade disasters.
Typical preparedness measures include developing mutual aid
agreements and memorandums of understanding, training for both response
personnel and concerned citizens, conducting disaster exercises to
reinforce training and test capabilities, and presenting all-hazards
education campaigns. Unlike mitigation activities, which are aimed
at preventing a disaster from occurring, personal preparedness focuses
on preparing equipment and procedures for use when a disaster occurs,
i.e., planning.
Preparedness measures can take many forms including the construction
of shelters, installation of warning devices, creation of back-up
lifeline services (e.g., power, water, sewage), and rehearsing evacuation
plans. Two simple measures can help prepare the individual for sitting
out the event or evacuating, as necessary. For evacuation, a disaster
supplies kit may be prepared and for sheltering purposes a stockpile
of supplies may be created. These kits may include food, medicine,
flashlights, candles and money.
(Res. 41-15, 9-16-15)
(a)
A well-rehearsed emergency plan developed as part of the preparedness
phase enables efficient coordination of resources. Response actions
carried out immediately before, during, and after a hazard impact
are aimed at saving lives, reducing economic losses, and alleviating
suffering. The response phase includes the mobilization of the necessary
emergency services and first responders in the disaster area. This
is likely to include a first wave of core emergency services, such
as firefighters, police and ambulance crews.
(b)
Response actions may include activating the Emergency Operations
Center (EOC), evacuating threatened populations, opening shelters
and providing mass care, emergency rescue and medical care, firefighting,
and urban search and rescue. Response begins when an emergency event
is imminent or immediately after an event occurs. Response encompasses
the activities that address the short-term, direct effects of an incident.
Response also includes the execution of the Emergency Operations Plan
and of incident mitigation activities designed to limit the loss of
life, personal injury, property damage, and unfavorable outcomes.
As indicated by the situation, response activities include:
(1)
Applying intelligence and other information to lessen the effects
or consequences of an incident.
(2)
Increasing security operations.
(3)
Continuing investigations into the nature and source of the threat.
(4)
Ongoing public health and agricultural surveillance and testing processes,
immunizations, isolation, or quarantine.
(5)
Specific law enforcement operations aimed at preempting, interdicting,
or disrupting illegal activity, and apprehending actual perpetrators
and bringing them to justice.
(6)
Restoring critical infrastructure (e.g., utilities).
(7)
Ensuring continuity of critical services (e.g., law enforcement,
public works). In other words, response involves putting preparedness
plans into action.
(c)
One of the first response tasks is to conduct a situation assessment.
Local government is responsible for emergency response and for continued
assessment of its ability to protect its citizens and the property
within the community. To fulfill this responsibility, responders and
local government officials must conduct an immediate rapid assessment
of the local situation.
(Res. 41-15, 9-16-15)
(a)
Actions taken to return a community to normal or near-normal conditions,
including the restoration of basic services and the repair of physical,
social and economic damages. Typical recovery actions include debris
cleanup, financial assistance to individuals and governments, rebuilding
of roads and bridges and key facilities, and sustained mass care for
displaced human and animal populations.
(b)
Recovery differs from the response phase in its focus; recovery efforts
are concerned with issues and decisions that must be made after immediate
needs are addressed. Recovery efforts are primarily concerned with
actions that involve rebuilding destroyed property, reemployment,
and the repair of other essential infrastructure.
(c)
The goal of recovery is to return the community’s systems and
activities to normal. Recovery begins right after the emergency. Some
recovery activities may be concurrent with response efforts.
(d)
Recovery is the development, coordination, and execution of service-
and site-restoration plans for impacted communities and the reconstitution
of government operations and services through individual, private
sector, nongovernmental, and public assistance programs that:
(1)
Identify needs and define resources.
(2)
Provide housing and promote restoration.
(3)
Address long-term care and treatment of affected persons.
(4)
Implement additional measures for community restoration.
(5)
Incorporate mitigation measures and techniques, as feasible.
(6)
Evaluate the incident to identify lessons learned.
(7)
Develop initiatives to mitigate the effects of future incidents.
(e)
Long-term recovery includes restoring economic activity and rebuilding
community facilities and housing. Long-term recovery (stabilizing
all systems) can sometimes take years.
 |
(Res. 41-15, 9-16-15)
