TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
TVWD’s Emergency Preparedness Framework
Michael J. Britch
Portland State University
1
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
2
Abstract
This paper provides an important framework to address a catastrophic natural disaster facing our
region and a critical resource to the society needed to minimize the impacts of this event when it
occurs. The event is the Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) earthquake, which was last occurred
315 years ago. The CSZ fault is located off the Oregon coast extending 800 miles from the
northern California to British Columbia. It is expected to release a magnitude 9.0 earthquake,
similar to the one that devastated Tohoku, Japan in 2011. Water is a critical resource for the
community, essential for life and the economic viability of a region. This paper explores what is
known in the rapidly developing area of emergency preparedness and water systems. The
Tualatin Valley Water District (District), serving over 200,000 people in Washington County,
Oregon, is taking proactive steps to prepare itself to be more resilient for this type of event,
thereby minimizing the effects of it when it occurs. This paper explores current literature on the
topic, includes the result of a survey conducted to identify the current state of the District’s
preparedness, and presents a proposed emergency preparedness framework for the District to
ready for this kind of significant natural disaster.
Keywords: Cascadia subduction zone earthquake, water systems, emergency
preparedness, resiliency, framework.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
3
Introduction
Water is a critical resource. “The minimum amount of water required for survival varies
based on current weather conditions. The World Health Organization estimates that the basic
requirement for survival is 2 to 4 gallons per day per person, which accounts for drinking and
food, basic hygiene, and basic cooking need. In extreme situations, people require
approximately 1 gallon per person per day” (DHS, 2015b). Without water there can be no life.
It is essential. Adequate and reliable water supplies are also a necessary component to help
support a vibrant economy. As the second largest water provider in the State of Oregon, serving
approximately 200,000 people in Washington County which is part of the Portland Metropolitan
area, providing safe, reliable water to its customers is of vital concern to the Tualatin Valley
Water District (TVWD, District).
Disruption of safe drinking water supplies can have a profound impact on a community
or a region. This paper explores some of the kinds of events that can impact this supply,
including one of paramount importance to our region, the Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ)
earthquake. This paper begins by describing the purpose of this work followed by the
background and significance of the kinds of events that can impact water systems and based on
that, then key related research questions for this paper are described. Next the paper describes
the research methods used as part of this work. Then the findings from the research are
discussed. Finally a conclusion is provided.
Purpose
The focus of this capstone project pertains to an extremely large earthquake that will
someday affect our region, the Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake. This capstone project
focuses on understanding this event and as well as natural disaster preparedness and response for
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
4
utilities. Based on this it develops an emergency preparedness framework for a municipal water
agency and its related water infrastructure, such that if implemented, would result in a much
lower impact of the earthquake on the community and a shorter period of recovery with respect
to the water supply and distribution to the community. This capstone work also identifies the
estimated current level of preparedness for the District, which also serves as a preliminary gap
analysis with respect to complete preparedness for this event.
Oregon is located at the western edge of the North American tectonic plate. This
continental plate intersects several tectonic plates off the Oregon coast including the Juan de
Fuca, Gorda, and Explorer Plates. These plates intersect the North American Plate at a location
identified as the Cascadia Subduction Zone. Recent research indicates this fault ruptures on a
somewhat repeatable pattern. The recent research further suggests that a magnitude (M) 9
earthquake could be expected at any time (Wang, Raskin and Wolf, 2013). Awareness of the
Cascadia Subduction Zone Earthquake is a relatively new phenomenon with researchers only
beginning to understand the zone’s potential to release a devastating earthquake in the 1980s. As
described by the Oregon Resilience Plan it may take one month to one year for water
infrastructure to recover in the Valley and between one to three years along the coast (Wang,
Raskin and Wolf, 2013). The Cascadia Subduction Zone fault extends eight hundred miles from
Northern California to British Columbia. It is expected to release M9 earthquakes at regular
intervals with the last occurring approximately 300 years ago, but with an average frequency of
500 years, and a range of between as few as 200 years to as many as 1,000 years between major
events. The estimated economic impact for Oregon and Washington combined is $81 billion.
Besides from the prolonged ground shaking itself, damage can also occur from liquefaction,
earthquake induced landslides, and lateral spreading (DOGAMI, 2010). FEMA is currently
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
5
planning for the event. The key attributes of the event that is being planned for is illustrated in
Figure 1 (FEMA, 2014).
Figure 1. FEMA CSZ Earthquake Planning Scenario
Background and Significance
Many events can impact water systems, natural and manmade. Examples of some of
these and their impacts on water systems and the affected communities are described below. The
kinds of events described below include hurricanes like Sandy and Katrina, flooding in
Colorado, chemical spills such as what happened in West Virginia, and toxic algae blooms like
the event experienced in Toledo, Ohio. Another category of natural disasters can have an even
more devastating impact on water systems is earthquakes. This category of natural disasters is of
regional significance given the proximity of the Cascadia Subduction Zone fault that lies off the
coast of Oregon extending from northern California to British Columbia. This CSZ earthquake
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
6
is the focus of preparedness in this paper. When this fault ruptures again, it will have a profound
impact on the region, the likes of which has not been witnessed in recent times. However,
experts believe that it may be similar to the magnitude 9.0 earthquake that occurred in Tohoku,
Japan on March 11, 2011. Because of the length of the fault, the CSZ earthquake could have an
even more far reaching impact.
The effects of Hurricane Sandy illustrate some interdependencies between water systems
and other supporting infrastructure systems like transportation and the energy sector where
refueling generators became an issue. “During Hurricane Sandy in 2012, some parts of Long
Island, New York, lost their water supply due to a loss of electric power. Emergency generators
provided power to a majority of the water system on Long Island” (DHS, 2015a). Hurricane
Sandy was a major natural disaster that hit the northeastern part of the United States in October
2012. It included major flooding and destruction. It resulted in dozens of deaths. It became the
second most expensive natural disaster in the United States at roughly $68 billion, second only to
Hurricane Katrina that caused roughly $125 billion in destruction. Some of the lessons learned
included the need to have improvements in transportation, power, and communication systems.
It also raised the need to better address aging infrastructure and highlighted the need to be cost
effective in developing risk reduction strategies and to plan to implement improvements over
time (Hill, 2014).
Hurricanes can cause large metropolitan areas to experience wide spread outages of water
service. “After Hurricane Katrina in 2005, portions of New Orleans went without water for a
period of 2 months” (DHS, 2015b). In the aftermath and after $14 billion being spent on
upgrades to the levee system around New Orleans by the Corp of Engineers, a number of lessons
were learned. Some of these included the need to employ a risk reduction strategy when
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
7
deciding on which improvements to implement; an appropriate design standard needs to be
implemented coupled with a much better understanding of the disaster event; protection systems
must be designed to operate in union rather than as a conglomerate of disjointed projects; and
that rebuilding efforts can be significantly streamlined by using an expedited environmental
review process to address the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (Reid,
2013).
Flooding can also render water systems and source water unusable. In 2013 Colorado
experienced significant flooding that severely impacted water system including damage to
treatment plants and water mains. (DHS, 2015b). The Colorado flooding resulted in extensive
damage to areas of Colorado from what’s now recognized as a 1,000-year flood. Throughout a
period of six days, 17-20 inches of rainfall was recorded for Colorado’s Front Range. The
damage resulted in 10 deaths, 19,000 homes damaged, hundreds of miles of roads closed and $2
billion in property damage. Some of the key lessons learned include that due to the destruction
of roads, access to areas requiring repair of its infrastructure was hindered; emergency water
connections to other systems is important; controlling how accurate information is provided to
the public is important as inaccurate information was being put out on Facebook postings and
with tweets; that there was a huge benefit to having multiple supply sources for some
communities; and that good maintenance, good records, and having emergency response plans
are vital (Buehrer, 2013).
Manmade events also contaminate sources for drinking water as well, rendering the water
unusable. This was demonstrated recently by the chemical release in 2014 that affected 300,000
West Virginia residents (AWWA, 2014). This was a result of the release of a toxic chemical,
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
8
methylcyclohexane spill that led to a “do-not-drink” orders in the Charleston West Virginia area
(DHS, 2015b).
Eutrophication, cyanobacteria blooms caused by agricultural land run-off or releases of
sewage into source waters can also create problems related to source water for drinking water.
This occurring in Toledo, Ohio in 2014 that resulting in a “do-not-use water” order. In
particular, “toxic algae blooms from Lake Erie entered the Toledo, Ohio water system in the
summer of 2014,” affecting more than 400,000 customers (DHS, 2015b).
Of all types of natural disasters or other events that can impact water systems, perhaps
the most significant are earthquakes. Earthquakes and their impacts on water systems is the
primary focus of this capstone paper. For large earthquakes, their impact can be far reaching and
thus their impact on water system and the related communities can be significant. For Oregon
and the broader Pacific Northwest region, this is the kind of significant earthquake that has
occurred in the past and will be expected in the future.
Earthquakes impact water systems in many ways include damaging the associated
pipelines, pump stations, storage reservoirs and water treatment plants. “For example, a 7.2magnitude earthquake in Baja, California, damaged two water treatment plants due to the water
oscillating in storage tanks… During the 1994 Northridge earthquake in southern California,
three major transmission systems, which provide over three-quarters of the water to the City of
Los Angeles, were disrupted as a result of pipe damage in more than 1,000 locations” (DHS,
2015a). A reliable water supply is also a vital element in firefighting. The lack of this
reliability was demonstrated by the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake that also resulted in
extensive fire damage to the city. Firefighting capabilities during that event were rendered
useless due to the significant failures of the water system infrastructure (CREW, 2013). The San
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
9
Francisco Public Utility Commission is currently completing a $4.6 billion Water System
Improvement Program to significantly improve the resiliency of its water infrastructure for a
system that includes multiple active fault crossings (Landers, 2014).
Research Questions
The Tualatin Valley Water District is the State’s second largest water utility serving
much of Washington County. Its mission is to provide quality water and customer service. It
provides safe, reliable drinking water to a service area population over 200,000; large industrial
customers like Intel, Maxim Integrated Products, Nike, and Resers Fine Foods; and two large
regional hospitals, St. Vincent and Kaiser Permanente. All of these industries and critical
customers are heavily reliant on having large supplies of water. Water is a vitally important
resource for a healthy and robust community. “Washington County is one of the economic
engines for the State, and that engine runs on water” (Duyck, 2013). This capstone work
proposes that there is no adequate framework specific to the needs of the District for emergency
preparedness that addresses all the elements for the District to truly develop itself into a resilient
water agency that is prepared to meet the needs of the community it serves related to providing
one of the most critical resources and human needs, safe drinking water.
There are two questions posed by this research. The first is what areas need to be
addressed for the District to be prepared for a major earthquake? The second research question
is what is the District’s current state of preparedness? These research questions relate to how a
public water utility can be effectively prepared for earthquakes, other natural disasters and
emergencies. This capstone work includes developing a framework to allow the District to be a
more prepared and resilient agency. While the proposed resiliency framework is being
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
10
developed to address this most significant natural disaster, it is also intended to be scalable and
applicable to lesser events.
Research Methods
This subject area is not only broad, but the understanding around it is in a state of
development. As such multiple research methods were employed, the second of which involved
multiple parts. The first research method involved literature review. A variety of sources were
available related to this issue. Many of the most recent, relevant documents were incorporated
into this work. Because of the importance of the broader emergency preparedness and disaster
recovery topic, there are many more references that could be reviewed, however, they are older
documents and less relevant to the specifics of the topic. Because this information on this topic
is growing rapidly, it was the intent to try to limit the literature to the most current sources, one
of which was still in draft form (NIST, 2015).
There were two parts to the data collection, the first relates to obtaining expert input and
the second relates to a survey that was developed and administered. Again, because of the
complexity of this issues, multiple sources of information were needed. This is a
multidisciplinary subject area. As part of this element of data collection, input from multiple
experts in different subject areas was obtained. This included experts in emergency preparedness
and response, key stakeholders in the District’s service area, water industry experts, and various
District staff who are the subject matter experts (SMEs) in a particular area of the District’s
operations.
The second part of data collection research method involved developing and
administering a survey. The survey included two parts based on the emergency preparedness
framework that was developed. For each of the framework elements that are discussed later in
this paper, District staff with knowledge of a particular element’s subject matter were asked to
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
11
assess the current state of the District’s preparedness and then to prioritize next steps for various
sub-elements of the preparedness framework.
The key information ascertained from the literature review and the data collection
methods are described in greater detail below. This includes a compilation of the key research
documents contributing to this capstone work. It includes the highlights of data collection of the
various expert input to the capstone work. The survey that was developed and administered as
part of the research methods is described in greater detail. Finally this section concludes by
describing the limitations associated with the research methodology.
Literature review. A literature review was used to understand the current top thinking
of the industry related to emergency preparedness frameworks for water agencies and to aid in
the development of the survey instrument used. The goal of this research is to elevate the overall
understanding of natural disasters in general as well as earthquakes and their impacts on water
systems. This allowed for the preparation and implementation of appropriate measures and
means to reduce the risks and overall impact of the event on the local region, and in particular its
water infrastructure, resulting in less overall impact and a more expedient recovery. All the
primary literature is relatively recent, within the last four years. Most of the literature is used is
very current, within the last two years. One document reviewed (NIST, 2014) was still in draft
form.
Documents that pertain to the subject of this capstone work pertain cross multiple
disciplines. As such the relevant literature needed to complete this research comes from many
sources and covers several topic categories. For this purposes of this literature review and
related discussion, the key literature is grouped and discussed in four separate, but related
categories. The first category of literature relates to those documents that serve in some way to
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
12
provide the authoritative direction for the development of emergency preparedness like what this
capstone work presents. The second category includes a variety of documents that relate to the
issue of emergency preparedness, response, and recovery at the national level. The third
category includes key literature pertaining to emergency preparedness, response, and recovery at
the regional level. And finally, the fourth category pertains to key recent literature that addresses
water infrastructure and related recommendations for preparedness for earthquakes. The key
literature that was reviewed as part of this capstone work is discussed below, grouped according
to the four categories identified above.
Directives for preparedness. There are several authoritative documents that provide
directives towards the issue of emergency preparedness and the topic of resiliency for
infrastructure. These include documents and/or directives that come at the national, state, and
District level. At the national level Presidential Policy Directive (PPD) 21 which was released
on February 12, 2013, provides direction for agencies to focus on critical infrastructure security
and resilience. It was intended to “advance[ ] a national unity of effort to strengthen and
maintain secure, functioning, and resilient critical infrastructure” (Obama, 2013). It states that
“it is the policy of the United States to strengthen the security and resilience of its critical
infrastructure against both physical and cyber threats.” PPD-21 provides a definition for
resiliency which it describes as “the ability to prepare for and adapt to changing conditions and
withstand and recover rapidly from disruptions. Resilience includes the ability to withstand and
recover from deliberate attacks, accidents, or naturally occurring threats or incidents” (Obama,
2013). This document provides an important foundational guidance directive for this capstone
work.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
13
At the state level is an important foundational document that provides direction
regionally for the advancement of emergency preparedness and the development of greater
resiliency. This document is the Oregon Resilience Plan which was released in February, 2013.
Activities related to this plan were initiated by House Resolution 3 which “won unanimous
support… on April 18, 2011” in the Oregon Legislature following the M9.0 earthquake in
Tohoku, Japan (ORP, 2013, p. iii). House Resolution 3 “directed the Oregon Seismic Safety
Policy Advisory Commission to lead the planning effort” (ORP, 2013, p. vii). The plan focuses
on addressing issues related to the earthquake hazard for Oregon due to an active off-shore
subduction zone fault. The goal of the plan is to improve overall infrastructure resiliency and
preparedness for this hazard thereby minimizing the impact immediately following the event as
well as potential long-term impacts. The Oregon Resilience Plan “maps a path of policy and
investment priorities for the next fifty years. The recommendations offer Oregon’s Legislative
Assembly and Governor immediate steps to begin a journey along that path. The plan and its
recommendations build on the solid foundation laid over the past quarter century by some of
Oregon’s top scientists, engineers, and policy makers” (Wang, Raskin and Wolf, 2013, p. viii).
This document at a regional level provides important guidance, particularly related to level of
service goals for water infrastructure resiliency, that are important to framework developed as
part of this capstone work.
Finally, at the District level as part of its 2015 - 2017 initiatives, is one that directly
relates to this work, “Develop & Implement District Resiliency Policy & Program.” This
initiative has not yet been developed, but its purpose is to provide the foundational elements
needed for the District to meet its emergency preparedness or resiliency goals, identify elements
that are necessary to reach those goal, and the establish a plan through which the goals within
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
14
each element can be achieved. The framework developed through this capstone work will serve
as the important foundational source for the District to begin formally addressing this issue.
National emergency preparedness, response and recovery documents. At the national
level, many recent documents pertain to the subject of emergency preparedness, response, and
recovery. These documents tend to have a broad perspective on the subject, although they do
contribute to the overall understanding related to the relevant issues to a certain degree. These
national level documents include ones by FEMA, the Department of Homeland Security, and the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). A final document though not truly
developed at the national level, Resilience by Design, was included in this category of the
literature review because of the importance of the broad level of understanding that it contributes
to understanding the significance of the impacts of these kinds of major events. The key
literature reviewed under this category is described below including its relevance to this capstone
work.
FEMA prepared an important document related to this work, the National Disaster
Recovery Framework (NDRF). It provides “a guide to promote effective recovery, particularly
for those incidents that are large-scale or catastrophic” (FEMA, 2011, p. 1). This document
provides a good and comprehensive broad framework for natural disaster recovery. It touches on
a number of elements contained within the emergency preparedness framework described later in
this paper. It also includes a number of framework elements contained in other reference
documents. The document provides an overall discussion of the timeline associated with disaster
recover, the importance of coordination and liaison activities, public communications, the
psychology and emotional recovery associated with disasters, and then proceeds to describe the
different elements of its framework. While this document presents a good overall framework
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
15
and parts of it are transferable to the proposed framework described later in this paper, it falls
short in providing the level of detail needed for the District to achieve its emergency
preparedness and resiliency goals. Its focus is more targeted at the federal government level.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released two documents very recently that
relate to this subject, one in February and one in March. The first reference (DHS, 2015a)
provided a general overview for policymakers on this issues associated with water system
infrastructure to provide “a baseline understanding of how water and wastewater systems
function and are managed.” While much of this material was generic in nature, there was one
section that was particularly useful that discusses dependencies between “critical infrastructure
sectors”. The second DHS document focuses on the effects and consequences of extended water
outages (DHS, 2015b). Understanding these impacts are important to developing a
comprehensive emergency preparedness framework that more fully addresses the needs of the
community served. It describes expands on the time-related impacts on water system outages (as
do other references). Finally, it identifies the importance of having redundancy with water
systems. The DHS document says, “Many water systems, but not all have redundancy in the
water supply and distribution. These include redundant sources (e.g., multiple lakes,
groundwater, and interconnections), redundant treatment capacity (e.g. multiple treatment
plants), and redundant distribution components (e.g. pumps and pipes)” (DHS, 2015b, p.6).
Redundancy is an important consideration that has been incorporated into several of the
proposed emergency preparedness framework elements and sub-elements. While these
documents provide limited coverage of the related subject area, they do contribute to the broader
understanding of the issues related to preparedness and elements that need to be incorporated
into the District’s emergency preparedness framework.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
16
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is completing a framework
for community disaster resilience. In relation to this activity, a 75% draft “Disaster Resilience
Framework” (NIST, 2015) has been reviewed as part of this work. The document provides a
variety of information useful to this work including that related to the social and community
context for disasters and the interdependencies related to critical infrastructure systems (referred
to as the “built environment” by NIST) including water systems. The document provides a
framework to achieve community resilience as well as describes a methodology as to conduct a
gap analysis related to understanding the current state of an agency’s resiliency. The most
significant contribution that the NIST document offers related to this work is the thorough
development of the social context for disasters and a proposed methodology to implement
resiliency which is described in the Implementation Plan section of this paper. While this
document provides significant useful information related to critical infrastructure resiliency and
related emergency preparedness, it does not provide adequate detail nor is properly focused to
address the needs of the District as contained in the proposed emergency preparedness
framework presented later in this paper. Out of all the national level documents reviewed, this
document seemed to contain the most useful and relevant information to support the preparation
of the District’s emergency preparedness framework.
The final document I’ve included in the category of national level literature reviewed,
Resilience by Design, is not actually a national level document as I described earlier, but it does
include important broad related concepts and thus I included its discussion in this section. This
recent document is a report prepared for the mayor of Los Angles, Eric Garcetti, under the
guidance of Dr. Lucile Jones, a seismologist with the US Geological Survey, to address key areas
of seismic risk for the city. One of these key areas that the report focuses on is the water
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
17
infrastructure. This document provided important background on the impact of major natural
disasters on cities. Two of key points it makes relates to the impact on the economy of an area
impacted by a natural disaster citing Hurricane Katrina and the long-term economic impacts. It
also cites the 1906 San Francisco Earthquake and the impact on the population of a region. In
short, the economy suffers and people will leave the region if they don’t have a sufficient reason
to stay. The document states that “Lack of water would impede recovery and the long-term loss
of water could lead to business failure and even mass evacuation,” highlighting the two points
above (Jones, 2014, p. 6). These are really important foundational concepts that should be
considered as part of a planning for emergency preparedness, response, and recovery for any
major natural disaster. This thinking helped shape the development of the District’s emergency
preparedness framework and the thinking related to service area coverage.
Regional emergency preparedness, response and recovery documents. At the regional
level, there were two but related documents that were identified and reviewed for the purposes of
this capstone work. The first is the previously identified Oregon Resilience Plan and the second
is a document developed by the Cascadia Region Earthquake Workgroup (CREW). The Oregon
Resilience Plan (ORP) is an important foundational document supporting the proposed
emergency preparedness framework (ORP, 2013). It provides an overall understanding of the
Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake. It provides a thorough description of the how the
population will likely be impacted by the event and critical elements of systems that support
community needs and describes the functional requirements to lessen the impact. It also
describes the interconnectedness of critical infrastructure systems. Finally, it provides important
target level of service goals for water systems (and other critical utility systems) to strive for,
helping to provide methodology to achieve resiliency. It does provide a definition for resiliency,
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
18
however, for the purposes of this work, the definition of resiliency establish by Presidential
Policy Directive/PPD-21 is used.
The CREW document provided supplemental information to the Oregon Resilience Plan
(ORP), providing a condensed synopsis of the Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake with
complementary information to the ORP. It states that the “economic impacts would be
significant [if the earthquake happened today]: for Washington, Oregon, and California, the
losses have been estimated at upwards of $70 billion. While this is not as high as Japan’s
staggering $309 billion in estimated losses, the potential consequences of the great Cascadia
quake are sobering” (CREW, 2013, p. 8). While this document provides some good
supplemental information for additional context for the CSZ earthquake event, it still falls short
in providing an overall framework for emergency preparedness and seismic resiliency.
Water infrastructure documents. There were three documents that were identified and
reviewed that helped inform the development of the District’s emergency preparedness
framework related to different aspects of the water infrastructure itself. One of these, Resilience
by Design, was previously discussed and it is not elaborated on further here related to the actual
water infrastructure, although its materials were considered in the development of relevant
portions of the framework. The two other water infrastructure documents are described below.
Although they do primarily focus on the related infrastructure portions of the emergency
preparedness framework, they also provide information that helped inform other sections of the
framework as well.
The Water Research Foundation released a recent relevant document related to water
infrastructure, Recent Earthquakes: Implications for U.S. Water Utilities. This document
produced provides some good information and recommendations for both water infrastructure
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
19
itself and the importance of establishing level of service goals for policy makers. The document
provides a thorough recap of recent earthquakes and their related impacts on water systems. It
identifies methodologies to assess risks to water systems. It provides useful information related
to prioritization of improvements. The document addresses importance of outside resources and
provides some practical guidance stating, “An emergency response plan should provide for a
major increase in work crews, via outside contractors and/or mutual aid. The faster the crews are
available, the shorter the water outage times. For practical purposes, assume no more than about
a 100% increase in normal work crew size, unless the water utility has the ability to manage a
much larger crew size” (Eidinger and Davis, 2012, p. 23). This document provides useful
information that has been considered as part of the emergency preparedness framework
presented later in this paper.
The other water infrastructure related document pertains to the resiliency of the water
system in Charleston, South Carolina. This document provided a good overview of
considerations related to the water system infrastructure and critical water service locations. It
states that “With several critical facilities such as hospitals located in the study area, it is
imperative to improve the resiliency of critical lifeline systems such as water to advert
devastating consequences of an earthquake” (Piratla et al, 2014, p. 1222). The Charleston area
“is vulnerable to strong ground shaking, liquefaction-induced ground failures and other
earthquake hazards. In August 1886, an earthquake with moment magnitude (Mw) of ~ 7 and
centered about 30 km northeast of downtown Charleston caused major damage throughout the
region.” The impacts would likely be similar to the Portland Metro area. This document
primarily focuses on the specific water system infrastructure vulnerabilities and related hazards
and doesn’t go into other aspects required for an emergency preparedness framework. It does
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
20
however contribute to the understanding applied to the infrastructure portion of the District’s
emergency preparedness framework.
Data collection – expert input. Five areas of experts that provided input are described
below. These include those involved with emergency preparedness and response, key
stakeholders in the District’s service area, water industry experts, and various District staff who
are the subject matter experts (SMEs) in a particular area of the District’s operations as well a
family member who experienced a similar earthquake. Their input was essential to establishing
a more comprehensive understanding of the nature of disasters and the needs of the community
and the District.
Emergency preparedness and response expert input. There were two key opportunities
I participated in over the last 14 months where I received tremendous input from a variety of
emergency preparedness experts that significantly contributed to the development of the
District’s emergency preparedness framework. They were particularly instrumental in
understanding the issues around resiliency and supporting the preparation of the proposed
emergency response framework. The first was a training exercise I attended at FEMA’s National
Emergency Training Facility. The other was a two-day workshop sponsored by NIST. Each of
these and their relevance to the District’s emergency preparedness framework is described
below.
FEMA training. I participated in a week-long training at FEMA’s national emergency
training facility in Emmitsburg, MD from April 14 – 18, 2014. The title of the training event
was “Community-Specific Integrated Emergency Management Course (CS IEMC) - Earthquake
Hazard”. It included class instruction, a life-like earthquake response training exercise, and
afforded a tremendous opportunity to network and develop relationships with approximately 70
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
21
individuals from various Washington County, Oregon agencies. Many of them I’d likely interact
with in a real event. One of the key takeaways is the importance of building relationships with
potential natural disaster co-responders and critical stakeholders. This element was incorporated
in the District’s emergency preparedness framework. This concept was also emphasized in the
Presidential Directive, PPD-21.
NIST workshop. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) held a
workshop on February 18-19, 2015 in San Diego, California that I participated in. The workshop
was titled, “Disaster Resilience Workshop”, and focused on community resilience. The purpose
was review and provide feedback on a 75% draft “Disaster Resilience Framework” (NIST,
2015). The workshop included different presentations related to the different sections of the
draft framework including those related to the social and community context for disasters,
interdependencies related to critical infrastructure systems (referred to as the “built environment”
by NIST), and then various presentations on the different elements of the build environment
including water systems. The workshop also included breakout sessions focused on each of the
areas of the framework. I was able to participate and contribute as part of the sessions focused
on water systems. One of the important elements of that included my ability to dialogue with
important leaders in the recent thinking related to resiliency including Dr. Lucy Jones who was
responsible for the recent Resilience by Design document (Jones, 2014) and Dr. Craig Davis who
is responsible for the Los Angles water system and co-author in another one of my key literature
resources that I reviewed related to water systems and resiliency (Eidinger and Davis, 2012).
Discussions with these individuals as well as with other participants helped inform my thinking
on the topic of my capstone work and provided invaluable information.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
22
Key stakeholder expert input. Over the last 18 months the District has been working on
updating its water master plan. For the first time this document included a specific focus on
resiliency of the water infrastructure system. Through the course of the development of the
water master plan as part of an effort to understand the critical needs of the community in the
context of a natural disaster, I met with several key stakeholders that operate within the District’s
service area that provide vital services that are essential following a major natural disaster. This
included four meetings with the Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue District (TVFR), three meetings
with Washington County emergency planning staff, and a meeting with staff of an essential
health care provider within the District (St. Vincent Hospital). All of these meeting were
extremely valuable in understanding the needs of these key stakeholders related to a major
natural disaster, helping to inform the development of the District’s emergency preparedness
framework. These key stakeholders all have different needs and recognize the need for adequate
water supply.
Water industry expert input. Recently at the American Water Works Association
(AWWA) Pacific Northwest Section (PNWS) Conference I actively solicited input from the
audience on a presentation that I gave covering this material. Specifically the information I
solicited their input on was a draft version of the framework developed as part of this capstone
work.1 My presentation was one of many focused on emergency preparedness for water
agencies. Following my presentation, two individuals offered two minor suggestions that I
incorporated into my framework. Based on the limited response and in consideration of other
elements that were presented (both at this and other conferences and training events I’ve
attended) I believe that my proposed framework is one of the most comprehensive and complete
“TVWD’s Emergency Preparedness Framework”, presented at PNWS Conference in Bellevue, Washington on
April 27, 2015.
1
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
23
with respect to water agency emergency preparedness and resiliency. The feedback from this
group of experts related to the capstone topic was valuable to test a draft framework with
colleagues in the water industry and make refinements based on their comments.
District SME input. Several interviews with District subject matter experts were
conducted as part of the research. This includes interviewing District staff to ascertain feedback
on the preliminary presentation materials presented at the PNWS conference and review of the
preliminary framework materials with consultants with expertise in the area, These interviews
were conducted in person at various times during April, 2015. Because the proposed emergency
preparedness framework covers many disciplines and aspects of the District’s operations, input
by many of the District’s staff that have expertise in a given area was essential. Their review and
feedback was useful to help refine and validate the appropriateness of this framework.
Family member input. I interviewed a family member over the phone who went through
the 1964 M9.2 Alaska earthquake. This interview contributed to my understanding of what a
major earthquake is like and how it impacts an area. It also served to inform my greater
understanding of the psychological impacts of this kind of event on the community as well. The
interview was conducted in April, 2015. This interview provided useful information and context
that helped with the development the emergency preparedness framework.
Data collection – survey. A survey instrument was administered as part of the data for
the proposed research. The specific survey instrument was developed for each of the elements of
the emergency preparedness framework. The survey that was done following the
recommendations from NIST and the Oregon Resilience Plan to complete a gap analysis. The
survey was administered in person on May 5-6, 2015. The survey was done as a preliminary gap
analysis pertaining to the current estimated level of emergency preparedness compared to where
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
24
one would want to be. Three District staff completed each of the surveys for the different seven
elements of the proposed framework. The seven elements included a total of 26 sub-elements.
A total of 11 different respondents participated in the survey. Respondents were asked to first
identify between zero and 100, in increments of 5, the current level of emergency preparedness
for each sub-element of the framework. There were then asked to rank the order of the subelements related to the priority of what area to focus on first and then subsequently in what order
to work on other sub-elements. The three scores were average to represent an estimate of each
response.
Limitations of methodology. Due to time limitations, I did not focus on any one part of
the overall emergency preparedness goal in any great detail. It was not the intent of this capstone
effort to delve into any one element of the proposed framework or anyone of their sub-elements.
The primary focus was to establish and overall emergency preparedness framework that captures
and illustrates the overall key functional elements that must be focused on for an agency to be
truly resilient. Also, this work is solely focused on the District and its specific conditions of
operations, characteristics, and the environment for which it operates in. As such, the findings of
this work may or may not be entirely suitable for other agencies seeking to achieve the same
outcome and resiliency results. For example, the District does not currently operate its own
water treatment plant. Thus, those water agencies with treatment plants will likely have other
emergency preparedness elements that must be addressed.
Research Findings
There are three main components that are discussed in relation to this work. Each of
them is important to form a broader and more complete understanding of the topic of natural
disasters and related emergency preparedness and response for the water sector, though many are
equally applicable to other infrastructure sectors. NIST states that “Disaster resilience planning
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
25
must eventually include in depth understanding of a community’s interwoven social, political,
and economic systems; how they are supported by the built environment; a clear understanding
of their vulnerability and damage expected hazard events; and how any damage will impact
community recovery” (NIST, 2015, p. ES3). The first discussion area relates to the complexity
of the issue. This includes things such as interdependencies between sectors. The second relates
to the social context for disasters. As a service provider of a critical resource to the community,
it is important to have an understanding of the needs of the individuals and the community we
serve. Finally, the last section presents a proposed emergency preparedness that addresses the
first two sections as it lays out a compressive framework to serve as a model for water system
emergency preparedness and disaster response activities. Each of these three sections are
described in detail below.
Complexity of issue. The literature that has been reviewed, the training that I’ve
participated, as well as discussions I’ve had with colleagues all reinforce the notion of the
complexity of this issue. The DHS does a particularly good job illustrating the water sector
interdependence with other critical infrastructure sectors. This is illustrated below in Figure 2.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
26
Figure 2. Water Sector Interdependencies (source DHS, 2015a)
The Oregon Reliance Plan (ORP) and NIST documents communicate similar sentiments
about the complexity and interdependence of these critical infrastructure systems. The ORP
describes the interdependence between sectors such as transportation, energy, communications
and water and wastewater infrastructure. NIST likewise communicates these interdependencies
as well as others like internal and external dependencies, cascading failures, time dependency,
space dependency, and source dependency (NIST, 2015, Chapter 4).
The final complicating factor is the last CSZ earthquake reported occurred at 9:00 pm on
January 26, 1700, 315 years ago (ORP, 2013, pp. viii, 5). While we can look around the world
and witness the effect of other earthquakes like the M9.0 in Tohoku Japan on March 11, 2011or
more recently in Nepal, our region has no first-hand knowledge or experience related to these
kinds of events. “Many scientists believe that the Cascadia subduction zone event will be the
mirror image of the 2011 Tohoku earthquake that hit Japan” (ORP, 2013, p. 116). Furthermore,
the exact timing of the next event is unknown. These factors contribute to cause one to either not
take the required preparedness seriously and/or not want to support the expenditures needed to be
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
27
prepared as a community. A final interesting consideration is that the world’s population in 1700
was approximately 610 million people2. Currently, the world’s population is estimated at 7.3
billion people. There shear increase in the world’s population and the large-scale impacts for
these events further escalates the criticality of these events and the need for thorough
preparedness3.
Social context for disasters. As a service provider for a critical utility that serves a
communities basic and essential needs, it is crucial to understand those needs beyond strictly rate
payer perspective. In terms of a disaster, the environment that the service is provided for will
change depending on the nature of the event. To assist in the ability to be able to adequately
provide the necessary delivery of water for the community and to support the overall viability of
a community, it is important to have a broader understanding of the social context for disasters.
Understanding this broader social context “provides communities with a methodology to plan for
resilience by prioritizing buildings and infrastructure systems based on their importance in
supporting the social and economic functions in the community. [These] social and economic
functions of the community drive the requirements of the built environment” (NIST, 2013, Ch.2,
p.1). This section describes this social context in greater detail including understanding human
needs, psychological impacts of disasters, critical needs of the community, the long-term impacts
of disasters on communities, and impacts of disasters and recovery.
Human needs. As disasters become more severe, human needs can become more basic.
Chapter 2 of the NIST document discusses the social context for community resilience. It
World History Site. (2006). World population site. Retrieved from
http://www.worldhistorysite.com/population.html
3
Worldometers. (2015, May 9). Current world population. Retrieved from
http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/
2
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
28
presents these human needs based on Maslow’s hierarchy of need that reflect the psychology of
human needs. Maslow depicts this with different levels of needs as shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (NIST, 2015, Ch.2, p.2)
At its base are those needs associated with survival. “Survival includes physical
requirements, such as air, water, food, shelter, and clothing. If these needs are not met, the
human body cannot sustain life – people cannot live longer than 5 days without water and 6
weeks without food” (NIST, 2015, Ch.2, p.2).
The second level of Maslow’s hierarchy relates to safety and security and “includes all
aspects of personal, financial (economic) security, and health and well-being… They also must
know their families and friendship networks are secure. Individuals need financial safety (e.g.
job security, a consistent income, savings accounts, insurance policies, savings accounts,
insurance policies, and other types of financial safety nets” (NIST, 2015, Ch.2, p.2). The Oregon
Resilience Plan commenting on what it takes for recovery of the regional economy states that
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
29
“households must have their basic needs satisfied” (ORP, 2013, p. 21). Schools play an import
part related to the second level of Maslow’s hierarchy, safety and security. It is important for
families to know their children are safe. “Schools are primarily important as a place where
workers’ children can spend their days, thus freeing up parents to return to work” (ORP, 2013, p.
26). For there to be economic recovery, people need to go back to work. For people to go back
to work, they need to know their children are safe.
The third level of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs relates to a sense of belonging within
communities to various groups including “family, friends, school groups, sports teams work
colleagues, religious congregation, [ ] or belonging to a place or a location” (NIST, 2015, Ch.2,
p.3). These affiliations with these various groups and the related interconnectedness within the
community constitute the social networks of the individuals. With regard to the third level of
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, NIST describes communities as “places where people live, work,
play, and build their futures. Each community has its own identity based on its location, history,
leadership, available resources, and the people who live and work there. Successful communities
provide their members with the means to meet essential needs as well as pursue their interests
and aspirations” (NIST, 2015, Ch. 1, p.1).
The fourth level of Maslow’s hierarch of needs at the top relates to growth and
achievement. “Humans need to feel a sense of achievement and that they are respected in
society” (NIST, 2015, Ch.2, p.3). Completion of this capstone work would be an example of this
level for me in helping to achieve greater community resiliency related to a critical resource like
safe drinking water.
Psychological impacts. My family experienced the March 27, 1964 M9.2 Alaska
earthquake. “This earthquake is the second largest earthquake ever recorded in the world after a
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
30
M9.5 earthquake in Chile in 1960. The duration of rupture lasted approximately 4 minutes”
(AEIC, 2002). The earthquake occurred on Good Friday at 5:36 pm. My mother who was in
Anchorage when the event occurred stated that “everyone went outside and sat down on the
ground. They watched the telephone poles sway back and forth” (Britch, 2015). She said the
event was scary. One of my sisters reportedly kept her coat and boots on for a week following
the event. Finally, my mother told me about the tragic story of an area in town where the ground
had liquefied. She said, “the ground opened up, two small boys fell in, and then the ground
closed.” These comments point to the fact of the intense psychological impacts of this kind of
event that is contained in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.
Critical needs of community. Healthcare facilities are one of the highest and most critical
elements of a community and must be treated as one of the most important facilities to be served.
“Essential healthcare facilities are critical for the life safety of the entire population” (ORP,
2013, p. 87). “The health care institution primarily meets the survival, and safety and security
needs of Maslow’s hierarchy… Each community must assess health care services provided to its
members and assign priority to those services rated as most critical” (NIST, 2015, Ch.2, pp.8-9).
Police, fire, and other emergency response service providers as well as other essential
critical infrastructure systems must also be considered a top priority in terms of resilience
planning. “The importance of emergency operating centers, police stations, and fire stations to
the post-earthquake response and recovery is widely recognized” (ORP, 2013, p. 80).
“[E]mergency operation centers and police, fire, and EMS stations… play and elevated
role…during the response and recovery phases of a disaster” (NIST, 2015, Ch.2, p.13).
Following the disaster, people will need to resupply food and medications. “It is unlikely
that a large proportion of the population currently stores more than a few days’ worth of food –
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
31
and probably stores even less water – in their homes” (ORP, 2013, p. 30). The availability of
goods that support survival (e.g. food and water) is critical during the response phase, suggesting
the importance of functioning stores, and the means to access them” (NIST, 2015, Ch2, p.13).
Banking will be important for people to be able to purchase goods. “The resupply of food is
dependent on a functioning banking system” (ORP, 2013, p. 31). These two sectors, key retail
areas and banking, are areas that should be considered as priorities related to the supporting
critical infrastructure after the more urgent needs of society and the community are met.
“Supermarkets, pharmacies, some big-box retail stores, and banks comprise a subset of buildings
that will be relied upon heavily following a disaster. The importance of having an ample supply
of basic provisions – such as food, water, medical supplies, and money – in affected areas after a
natural disaster has been underscored by many previous events” (ORP, 2013, p. 74). Figure 4
shows a prioritized list of critical building clusters by recovery phase.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
32
Figure 4. Buildings and Facilities in Clusters by Recovery Phase (NIST, 2015, Ch.3, p.9)
Long-term impacts. Long-term impacts include having the population leave and
prolonged economic impacts. The Oregon Resilience Plan states “Experience tells us that if a
business cannot reoccupy its offices within a month, it will either relocate, or dissolve.
Reoccupation of a business’s workspace depends on three principal factors: the building’s
structure must be safe; the workforce must be able to get to the workplace; and, the building’s
mechanical and utility systems must be up and running… When things break, they can no longer
be used to support economic activity” (ORP, 2013, pp. 17-19).
Population is an important consideration following a natural disaster. “Studies of
disasters during the recovery phase show that people are likely to relocate to another community
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
33
in search of new employment and/or economic gain (e.g. higher wages), or because they lost
access to their non-liquid assets” (NIST, 2015, Ch.2, p.2). “Research into disaster recovery
shows that the likelihood of people leaving a community increase when social networks are lost,
showing the importance of a sense of belonging within a community” (NIST, 2015, p.3).
Following the 1964 Alaska earthquake my mom said that “people left the state” (Britch, 2015).
In New Orleans, “the population is at approximately 75% of the pre-Katrina levels after 10 years
[ ] and it may be decades before New Orleans fully recovers from the event. (NIST, 2015, p.
ES2).
The long-term economic impact to a region can mean that during its recovery that it
doesn’t achieve the growth it would have normally expected to achieve. “Damage inflicted by
the disaster may ripple through the economy reducing population, output, income, and
employment over both the short and long run [ ]. Several recent case studies suggest that, in the
15 years following a major disaster, outcomes (population, employment, or income) fell 10 – 15
percent below levels they might otherwise have reached in the absence of the disaster (ORP,
2013, p. 26). An unprepared community often faces decades of recovery and may never achieve
full restoration” (NIST, 2015, p. ES1). “The economy is a mechanism by which most human
needs are satisfied. While not all needs are provided for, the economy produces goods and
services that fulfil some element of survival, safety and security, belonging, and growth and
achievement through Maslow’s hierarchy. Some needs are met through the direct consumption
of goods and services (e.g. food and shelter). Other needs are satisfied as the result of a
functioning economy” (NIST, 2015, Ch.2, p.5).
“The built environment is integral to the [ ]
economy… Disruptions to individual components of the built environment have the potential to
ripple through the economy… [P]laces of employment are vital during the recovery phase by
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
34
keeping the labor force in place while maintaining the tax base.” (NIST, 2015, Ch2, p.13). The
Oregon Resilience Plan states following the expected Cascadia event that the recovery will be
complicated by “the resulting reduction in the tax base [which] will make recovery efforts more
difficult” (ORP, 2013, p. 63).
Impact and recovery. NIST describes the resiliency of a community in terms of
functionality and recovery time. “Functionality is a measure of how well a building or
infrastructure system is able to operate and perform at its intended purpose. Recovery time
provides a measure of how long a building or system function is unavailable or is operating at a
reduced capacity. Recovery time also provides and indirect measure of pre-event condition of
the system, the performance of the system during the event, and the level of damage sustained”
(NIST, 2015, Ch. 1, p.4). How NIST depicts this is shown in Figure 5.
Figure 5. Resilience in Terms of Functionality and Recovery Time
The Oregon Resilience Plan highlights this with its recommendations “that Oregon start
now on a sustained program to reduce the vulnerability and shorten the recovery time to achieve
resilience before the next Cascadia earthquake inevitably strikes our state” (ORP, 2013, p. xvii).
Greater preparedness and resilience means there’s less damage and fewer impacts to the
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
35
population. “The availability of food, water, medical supplies, and money will be critical to the
speed of the recovery of the communities affected by the seismic event” (ORP, 2013, p. 76).
“The basic principle of the resilience triangle is that the smaller the triangle, the higher
the resilience. Higher resilience requires minimal reductions in critical lifeline services after a
disaster, speedy recovery of those services, and an overall improved service level as a result of
rebuilding damaged systems and implementing better systems” (ORP, 2013, p. 185).
NIST states that “All communities recover, but the length of recovery and ultimate
outcome depends on planning, preparedness, mitigation, response, and facilitation of the
recovery. A disaster resilient community recovers quickly and to a better state than before the
event occurred” (NIST, 2015, p. ES1).
Emergency preparedness framework. This section of the research findings specifically
addresses the first research question, “What areas need to be addressed for the District to be
prepared for a major earthquake?” This emergency preparedness framework was developed with
a thorough understanding of the Cascadia Subduction Zone earthquake and the impacts of
natural disasters on communities and related water system impacts. The framework represents a
proposed plan for preparedness that recognizes the multidisciplinary aspects of this kind of event
as well as the societal needs of the community. It represents a new way of thinking about
earthquake preparedness and a new, detailed framework to achieve it that currently doesn’t exist
in the industry or related literature.
There are several documents and models that exist that provide sound recommendations
for emergency preparedness. These include the Oregon Resilience which also identifies others
such as the “ongoing earthquake resilience planning from San Francisco, California (SPUR,
2009) and the State of Washington (Washington Seismic Safety Committee, 2012) as good
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
36
models to follow” (ORP, 2013, p. 2). The NIST framework that is currently under development
is also an excellent resource related to emergency preparedness and resiliency planning (NIST,
2013). These models and frameworks, however, fall short with respect to addressing the specific
resiliency needs of the District which are directly influence by its business practices and
circumstances of its systems, environment, and operations. As such, a framework specifically
focused on the direct emergency preparedness and resiliency needs is required for the District to
achieve its desired emergency preparedness and resiliency goals. The following sections present
the framework which should serve as the model for the District to use to achieve its emergency
preparedness and resiliency goals.
The proposed emergency preparedness framework for the District is shown below in
Figure 6. It includes seven main elements. These include policy & liaison, business systems,
infrastructure, resource planning, communications, finance, and response planning. The
elements of the emergency preparedness framework are intended to represent different areas of
that the District that must address to achieve its resiliency goals. Each of these elements along
with their corresponding sub-elements are described below.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
37
District Resiliency
Policy & Program
Policy &
Liaison
Business
Systems
Infrastructure
Resource
Planning
Commun
-ications
Finance
Response
Planning
Governance
Software
Planning
Human Capital
Procedures &
Protocols
Capital for
Ongoing
Operations
Training &
Preparations
Resiliency
Policies
Hardware
Design
Standards
Critical
Inventory
Community
Engagement
Insurance
Operations
Formal &
Informal
Agreements
Enterprise
Architecture
Condition
Assessment
Key Stockpile
Locations
Long-term
Financial
Planning
Emergency
Response Plan
Building
Relationships
Internet
Connectivity
Redundancy
Vulnerability
/Risk
Assessments
Security &
Public Safety
Level of
Service Goals
Delegated
Authority
Figure 6. Proposed District Emergency Preparedness Framework
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
38
Policy & liaison. This element of the framework pertains to broader governance, policy
and relational aspects of emergency preparedness. It includes six sub-elements, governance,
resiliency policies, formal and informal agreements, building relationships, level of service
goals, and delegated authority. Each of these are further described below.
Governance. Governance relates to established overall hierarchical structure of the
agency and how well it operates. The District was established under Oregon Revised Standards
(ORS) 264. ORS 264 provides the requirements associated with its governance including Board
members, establishing eminent domain authority, and other powers bestowed on it by the State
(State of Oregon, 2011). The District has a five member elected Board, a Chief Executive
Officer, and five department managers. A well-defined and well-operating internal governance
system is necessary for a resilient agency. NIST states that “Community resilience requires
governance structure that sets direction and provides services” (NIST, 2015, ES2).
Resiliency policies. Policies are required for emergency preparedness and resiliency
extend beyond the norm of typical operations. As such, even identifying what policies are
needed for critical operational conditions can be a challenge, but their establishment is essential.
Their development requires ongoing planning to understand what will be needed during periods
of emergency operations. Examples of policy topics (excluding level of service goals which is
described further below) include seismic valves on reservoirs and to what extent will water be
treated as a regional resource in the event of a major natural disaster. With first, seismic valves,
some of the issues that need to be considered include things like “is it okay to deliberately shut
off portions of our water system?”, “will you do this only on certain reservoirs?”, and “what are
the issues and risks associated with shutting off water in certain areas?” In regard to the second
example, water being shared as a regional resource, this is one that we have not yet discussed.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
39
This policy issue came to mind during the FEMA training exercise that I participated in in April,
2014 in Emmitsburg, MD. The question is should all the regional water agency resources be
managed to serve the overall highest priorities of the region rather than each water agency
focusing solely on their respective needs. This policy issue has not been addressed and
undoubtedly will be a difficult one to solve. NIST states that “precious resources can be
allocated based on a community-wide evaluation that prioritizes needed improvements (NIST,
2015, Ch.1, p. 2).
Formal and informal agreements. Having both formal and informal agreements are
important to being prepared to respond to natural disasters. Examples of formal agreements
include those for mutual aid with other agencies, agreements for service professionals and
contractors to provide assistance following a natural disaster, and those related to the use of
interties between different water systems. Related to broader agreements, the Oregon Resilience
Plan states that “Oregon needs to form cooperative agreements (by a specific timeframe) with
other states before the earthquake disaster” (ORP, 2013, p. 163).
Recently, the District has operated several interties with a neighboring utility to provide
an enhanced source of water to their service area while their main water supply was out of
service due to a construction project. To be able to contractually provide them with water during
this period, it required an intergovernmental agreement to be in place that was approved both by
our Board and their mayor. Informal agreements can be like the ones we have other area water
partners or utility agencies like Clean Water Services whose operations facility is across the
street from our location where we provide assistance and/or use of equipment from time to time
as needed. The informal relationships also involve sharing information and lessons learned.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
40
Building relationships. Relationships are crucial to successful emergency response as I
learned during my FEMA training in April, 2014. What I realized was that if you know the
person on the other end of the phone during a crisis, you have much greater assurance that the
information you are getting is credible and that they will do what they say they will do. The
discussion provided by DHS (DHS, 2015a) indicates that having strong relationships with coresponding agencies is important. The Oregon Resilience Plan recommends that the Oregon
Office of Emergency Management utilize its “public-private sector position to help ensure
coordinated planning, information sharing, and interoperability among critical organizations and
agencies. The position will also ensure that work being performed by this entity and its partners
helps provide public education and outreach to local, county, and state agencies and
organizations” (ORP, 2013, p. 175). PPD-21 states that “effective partnerships with critical
infrastructure owners and operators … are imperative to strengthen the security and resilience of
the Nation’s critical infrastructure” (Obama, 2013).
Level of service goals. Level service goals are important for preparedness as they serve
to provide the vision for the desired operational state during a disaster event. They are truly a
policy sub-element as well because they should formally be adopted by elected officials.
However, due to their importance they are treated separated from other emergency preparedness
policies. The District has recently adopted preliminary level of service goals related to the
desired operational state and key priorities of water distribution through the development of its
2014 Water Master Plan. These goals are being developed consistent with the guidelines
established by the Oregon Resilience Plan and with a 50 year goal for implementation. NIST
and the Water Research Foundation Web Report #4408 also stress the importance of level of
service goals.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
41
Delegated authority. The final sub-element relates to delegated authority. During an
emergency, a response should follow an established emergency response structure. The District
uses the Incident Command System (ICS) which is what firefighters and other emergency
response professionals use. This structure provides the framework for different positions within
the response structure, their roles and responsibilities, and the delegated lines of authority. To be
prepared, an agency must be adept in the use of these systems and have established lists of
trained personnel who can fill in the various roles. This is further important because this
structure is the common system that will likely be used across the event.
Business systems. This element includes the various information technology (IT)
systems; control systems including supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA); financial
systems; and other hardware, software, and database systems necessary for the District to
function. Four sub-elements have been identified and are described below.
Software. All of the District’s business and information systems require software that is
functional, but also that can be integrated into an overall operational emergency response. As
PPD-21 indicates, resiliency pertains to both natural and manmade threats like cyber terrorism.
As such, software systems must be robust and resilient on many layers. Without this it would be
impossible to conduct normal water system operations and controls, financial transactions,
customer services as well as other vital services. All of the District’s informational systems like
GIS, AutoCAD, and related mobile solutions all require effective software. Without functional
information systems and operational software, emergency response and recovery activities will
be severely hampered.
Hardware. Having robust and resilient hardware like servers, desktop and laptop
computers, mobile devices, and instruments that provide critical operational information are
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
42
equally as important as software. The two go hand and hand. Additionally, electrical gear at
operational facilities must also be resilient. Recently with changing codes, electrical gear must
now be certified by shake tests in laboratories to be considered seismically resilient.
Enterprise architecture. The enterprise architecture structure that relates both software
and hardware and the related connectivity through the internet must also be resilient. The
information technology (IT) realm is an ever changing environment. Functionality and
resiliency must be addressed in light of current IT best business practices. Recently the District
completed its own IT Master Plan to assess the current state of its IT infrastructure, potential
vulnerabilities, and to establish a proposed enterprise architecture to provide greater reliability
and resiliency.
Internet connectivity redundancy. With business systems even more reliant on internet
connectivity, for example with web-hosted solutions and cloud-based storage of data,
maintaining and having access to the internet is even more important for disaster response and
recovery activities. Having redundant and/or contingency connectivity to the internet is
important, otherwise recovery efforts may be hampered.
Infrastructure. This element includes those activities related to the development of
resilient infrastructure. It includes items such as design standards that address seismic issues;
programs that address existing aging infrastructure that is necessary to support critical operation
of portions of the District’s transmission, storage, and distribution system; condition assessment
work related to critical District infrastructure; and planning and design associated the overall
infrastructure resiliency. Chapter 8 of the Oregon Resilience Plan, Water and Wastewater
Systems, is particularly important to the Infrastructure element of the overall emergency
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
43
preparedness framework (ORP, 2013, pp. 203-240). The related sub-elements are described
below.
Planning. Planning is important to be able to identify the key locations where water is
most important to be delivered to following a disaster. This requires, as it did with the District,
discussions with other key stakeholders like hospitals, fire and emergency responders, and
County emergency planning stakeholders. Planning also allows an agency to have discussions
with staff, management, and elected officials to establish the desired state of the infrastructure
(related to establishing level of service goals as previously discussed). Another valuable
opportunity that the District discovered through the planning activity is that it provided an
opportunity to think about how it might be useful to have the its system operate differently
during in response to a disaster and plan for that future functionality through new infrastructure.
The final part of this sub-element is to develop the prioritized list of infrastructure projects that
can be implanted as part of a long-term capital improvement plan (CIP).
Design standards. New standards are needed for both new and existing infrastructure to
achieve the desired state of resiliency. For new standards, some of this has been articulated in
literature, some of which has been reviewed as part of the literature review for this capstone
project. Much of this, however, is still an evolving effort. The District through its efforts and
efforts associated with its new regional water supply along with its supply partners is attempting
to advance portions of infrastructure seismic design standards. Most of the infrastructure that the
District will rely upon in the future exists today. As such, design standards are also required to
address gaps in resiliency of existing infrastructure once the condition of the existing
infrastructure is known to a level that supports identification of deficiencies.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
44
Condition assessment. As indicated above, if the condition of existing infrastructure is
unknown, its resiliency is unknown. Thus the ability to predict whether or not the established
level of service goals can be met is uncertain. As such, substantial investments will be required
by the District conduct investigations of its infrastructure to ascertain its condition. Once this is
known, prioritized improvements can to take place harden the infrastructure. This can also be
phased in with other capital improvement projects.
Vulnerability/risk assessments. To assist in the effort to providing water to critical
customers following a natural disaster, it is important to understand where the vulnerabilities to
the infrastructure and risks to the overall system exist. This can be done both at specific facilities
or more globally as the District has done through GIS with soils hazard maps prepared by
DOGAMI. Using this information along with attributes of the District’s pipeline infrastructure
in GIS, a fragility analysis of its system was conducted recently as part of its Water Master Plan
work using procedures established by the American Lifelines Alliance (ALA). The results of
these type of analyses can be used in conjunction with identified critical customers and critical
infrastructure to help better focus prioritization of projects. The Oregon Resiliency Plan state
that “Oregon needs to mobilize on vulnerability assessments of pre-disaster inventories and
systems” (ORP, 2013, p. 163).
Resource planning. This element includes identification of critical resources needed for
the District to meet its level of service goals following a natural disaster or other emergency
event. These resources include staff and other critical human capital; required critical inventory
of materials, parts, equipment, and fuel. This element also includes the planning and
implementation related to stockpiling materials at critical locations within the District as well as
addressing security and public safety issues. Sub-elements are described below.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
45
Human capital. For the agency to respond to natural disasters, adequate staff and other
human resources with the requisite skill sets are required. For the District, this requires staff
across all business lines, however, those with planning, engineering, operations, and construction
skill sets may be more critical immediately following an earthquake.
Critical inventory. To make repairs following and earthquake adequate physical
resources, equipment, tools, and parts are required. If one contemplates the potential regional
magnitude of this event (see Figure 1) and consider the lead-time needed to secure certain parts
and inventory during times of normal operations, it is readily apparent that establishing certain
levels of critical inventory is paramount to improving the response and recovery effort.
Key stockpile locations. Considering the transportation interdependencies discussed
previously and in consideration of the multiple bridges and overpasses that must be traversed
even in Washington County (notwithstanding the likely downed poles, power lines, and other
debris in the roads that will occur as the result of a major earthquake), having stockpiles of
critical inventory at key locations is considered strategically important to successful response and
recovery activities.
Security and public safety. This sub-element is one of the items identified as feedback by
one of the members in the audience when I presented on this topic at the PNWS Conference in
April.4 There are several aspects of this element that would be relevant to the proposed
framework including security related to District facilities, procedures to keep staff and assisting
resource safe, and the means to confirm the safety of the water supply itself for public
consumption as portions of the water system are being brought back online. This last part
4
Feedback provided by Ed Parry, P.E., Regional Engineer for the Washington Department of Health, Office of
Drinking Water.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
46
requires sampling of water, available testing labs, and related qualified staffing to conduct the
testing.
Communications. FEMA has indicated that communications “is one of the most common
types of failures during disasters” (FEMA, 2014). This element includes the development of
established procedures, protocols and systems necessary for both sharing information with
District staff, external parties, as well as the collection of reliable information related to the
condition of the District’s transmission, storage, and distribution systems. A second sub-element
pertains to community engagement. There are two sub-elements which are described below.
Procedures and protocols. Having established procedures, protocols, and pre-established
communication materials and systems (e.g. use of GIS to create mapping) are vitally important to
successful communications in response to various events. The District staff has found this to be
true. This is also supported in the literature. There are a number of potential audiences for these
communications including staff, key stakeholders and regional partners, elected officials,
customers, and the media. “The media institution, at all levels meets many of Maslow’s
hierarchy of needs [including] safety and security needs, by providing information, interpretation
and surveillance to the masses” (NIST, 2015, Ch.2, p.11). Furthermore, good communications
are necessary to support effective recovery efforts, system diagnosis, and repairs by staff and
assisting resources.
Community engagement. This was the other sub-element identified as feedback by
another member in the audience during my PNWS Conference presentation.5 The feedback
received related to a program the Eugene Water & Electric Board is using to develop community
resiliency with other critical partners in the area like the American Red Cross and the United
5
Feedback provided by Jill Hoyenga, Planner III with the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB).
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
47
Parcel Service. This community engagement program was described the next day in a
presentation by Jill Hoyenga (Hoyenga, 2014).
Finance. This element includes those activities necessary for the collection, processing,
and disbursement of funds and associated systems,6 procedures, and policies. The sub-elements
are described below.
Capital for ongoing operations. Capital for ongoing operations is essential. Staff and
various vendors must be paid. One agency found following a moderate earthquake that disrupted
power several days, that it was desirable to have an adequate amount of cash on hand as the
business systems typically employed and normal banking services were not available.7 Once
systems have been restored and staff is available to return to normal duties, customer billing can
resume. An important part of this sub-element pertains to reimbursement and receiving disaster
relief funds from FEMA. Once a presidential disaster has been declared, FEMA can provide
financial disaster relief funds up to 75% of the incurred costs (FEMA, 2014). For these funds to
be obtained, the requests must be processed using the appropriate tracking, procedures, and
forms that FEMA requires. Thus being competent with this this is essential to receive significant
federal financial reimbursement.
Insurance. The District is insured through the Special District’s Association of Oregon
(SDAO) and insurance coverage they provide. The areas of coverage by insurance should be
compared against could be provided by FEMA, the State of Oregon, or potentially other sources.
The goal is to have optimize covered to the desired level and to the extent that coverage is
affordable.
6
Software and hardware systems covered separately above as part of the Business Systems element of the
emergency preparedness framework.
7
Personal communications. Comments provided by Dave DiSera from EMA Inc., consultant to the District for the
development of an IT Master Plan, May 6, 2015.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
48
Long-term financial planning. As described previously as part of two separate subelements, level of service goals and planning, certain long-term objectives for the system are
desired. As such, the related infrastructure must be planned for both in terms of the actual
infrastructure but also its affordability and the timing of its implementation. This requires sound
long-term planning that considers demands on scarce financial resources as well as impacts on
rates.
Response planning. This element includes those activities needed to train and prepare
staff (and their families) for emergency response. Items associated with this element include
training and other preparations, operational activities, and the development of an emergency
response plan. Sub-elements are described below.
Training and preparations. There are various important aspects of this sub-element.
One is that staff and other key partners and stakeholders regularly are trained to a variety of
training exercises of different size and levels of complexity. In relation to 9/11, Rudolph
Giuliani said you have to have “relentless preparation”.8 He said that they didn’t specifically
have a plan for 9/11, but that they were still prepared by training for a variety of different
scenarios had similar elements. It is also important that staff are trained on using critical
equipment (e.g. satellite phones), ICS procedures, forms, checklists, etc… Finally your staff and
their families need to be prepared. Referring back to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, people will
not want to come back to work without knowing that their families are safe. Thus both staff and
their families need to be prepared. The Oregon Resilience Plan states that “Post-earthquake
response can also be impeded if emergency responders must first devote time to finding shelter
and safety for their own families before they are available to help others” (ORP, 2013, p. 90).
8
Rudolph Guiliani, Keynote speech, American Water Works Association (AWWA) Annual Conference and
Exposition, Boston, MA, June 9, 2014.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
49
Operations. Training around a variety of operational activities is also vitally important,
especially with systems as complex as the District’s system. These include things like testing
and operating interties with neighboring water agencies and operating the system in alternate
ways that provide greater flexibility. Finally, it is recommended that agencies fully understand
the logic that is programmed into their instrumentation, controls, and SCADA systems. Based
on recent operational events, this last part became evident following an operational event that
occurred that made staff aware question if the current status of the controls and logic reflect what
may be desired to achieve emergency preparedness and resiliency goals.
Emergency response plan. There are several important aspects related to an emergency
response plan. One is that prior to an event, staff in conjunction with other emergency
responders should compare notes on what the priorities should be identified. Secondly plans and
associated resources needed for damage assessment should be planned for. Finally, there is a
plethora of standard operating procedures (SOPs) that should developed and then practiced to
enhance their effectiveness during an emergency response.
Survey results. This section of the research findings specifically addresses the second
research question, “What is the District’s current state of preparedness?” This was accomplished
through the use of the survey instrument that was developed and administered for this capstone
project. The survey instrument that was administered had two areas of information that it sought
to provide initial insight on. The first is an initial emergency preparedness gap analysis. The
second is an initial prioritization of work element. The results pertaining to each of these is
described below.
Initial gap analysis. One of the key goals of the Oregon Resilience Plan is to “identify
steps needed to eliminate the gap separating current performance from resilient performance”
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
50
(ORP, 2013, p. x). The first step is to identify a current level of preparedness relative to where
one would want to be. This survey conducted as part of this work provides a first glimpse
through a self-assessment by District staff as to the current level of preparedness. The average
responses for emergency preparedness for the seven different elements of the framework are
shown in Figure 7.
POLICY & LIAISON
63%
BUSINESS SYSTEMS
52%
INFRASTRUCTURE
53%
RESOURCE PLANNING
38%
COMMUNICATIONS
63%
FINANCE
76%
RESPONSE PLANNING
53%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Response Average
Figure 7. Estimated Current Level of Preparedness
Prioritized Work Elements. Within each of the elements of the emergency preparedness
framework, prioritization of the work on each of the sub-elements was also established through
the survey instrument that was administered. The highest priority sub-elements that should be
focused on first are shown below:

Policy & liaison: Level of service goals.

Business systems: Hardware.

Infrastructure: Condition assessment.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
51

Resource planning: Key stockpile locations.

Communications: Establish procedures and protocols.

Finance: Capital for ongoing operations.

Response planning: Training & preparations and emergency response plan (tied).
Implementation plan. An implementation plan will be developed following approval of
the proposed emergency preparedness framework by the District. It would include the
identification for each of the different elements of the framework a specific list of activities,
timelines and overall schedule for implementation of the framework, and required resources to
accomplish the work. It serves as an overall work plan for implementation of the framework.
One of the first steps it to conduct a more elaborate gap analysis with greater
participation by District staff. The Oregon Resilience Plan identifies target levels of functionality
and corresponding recovery times for each of the different critical infrastructure systems. NIST
states that “Understanding the gaps between desired and actual performance are determined for
specific clusters of buildings and infrastructure systems and can then inform short and long term
solutions. In the short term, the gaps can be addressed with interim plans for emergency
response and temporary actions. In the long term, new construction can be designed to the
designated performance goals and the existing infrastructure can be retrofit as appropriate”
(NIST, 2015, p. ES6). NIST proposes in a flow chart that includes the elements and sequence of
steps to achieve community resilience. Figure 8 depicts NIST’s proposed framework to achieve
community resilience.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
52
Figure 8. Flowchart for Developing Community Resilience Plan (NIST, 2015, ES 4).
With regards to implementing the emergency preparedness framework, it is proposed that
the methodology illustrated in the NIST flowchart be applied to the implementation of the
overall framework and its elements and sub-elements as well.
Conclusion
This research project proposed to answer two research questions, “What areas need to be
addressed for the District to be prepared for a major earthquake?” and “What is the District’s
current state of preparedness?” These questions were both clearly answered by this capstone
work. Answering the first resulted in the development of an emergency preparedness framework
that is described in the research findings section of the paper, a detailed framework addressing
the multidisciplinary aspects and societal needs associated with an earthquake. The second
question, also described in the research findings section of the paper, establishes a clear
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
53
identification of the District’s current level of preparedness and identifies key areas within the
framework elements to focus on first.
Water is essential for life. Without it humans cannot survive. Nor can a region
experience economic viability without it. Safe, reliable water is conveyed to the community
through an essential network of infrastructure including pipelines, pump stations, storage
reservoirs, and treatment plants. All of this infrastructure is a risk in our region due to a
catastrophic natural disaster known as the Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) earthquake. It is
expected to release a magnitude 9.0 earthquake, similar to what occurred in Tohoku, Japan in
2011. The last time it occurred was 315 years ago.
Water systems are necessary for a variety of essential life safety elements following a
natural disaster. Essential healthcare facilities can’t operate and firefighting can’t occur without
it. The impacts of loss of water to a region has been experienced in a devastating way with the
1906 San Francisco earthquake where much of the city burned because of broken water
infrastructure. More recently natural disasters like hurricanes Katrina and Sandy have had
devastating impacts on their respective regions including impacts to the water systems. The
Presidential Policy Directive/PPD-21 calls for improved resiliency of our nation’s infrastructure
to natural disasters as well as manmade threats. The Oregon Resilience Plan specifically focuses
on what it would take for Oregon to be more prepared for the CSZ earthquake.
The industry and its approach to natural disasters like earthquakes is rapidly evolving
based on its understanding from recent events as well as growing attention at the federal, state,
and local level to be prepared for these types of catastrophic events. However, there is no clear
nor concise document that would prepare a water agency for the specific steps it would need to
follow to be prepared for this type of event. Addressing the issue can be overwhelming.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
54
Voltaire, a French philosopher in the late 1600’s and early 1700’s, said, “Don't let the perfect be
the enemy of the good.” It is important to begin work to improve system resiliency and to do it
now. Einstein said, “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we
created them.” The kind of thinking it takes to address the issue of a major natural disaster like
the CSZ earthquake, in particular related to water systems, needs to be different than the thinking
that was used when the systems were originally designed and constructed.
The Tualatin Valley Water District (District) is working to significantly improve the
resiliency of its agency and the services it provides to be prepared for this kind of event. This
includes the development of target level of service goals to meet the needs of the community
following this kind of event. The stakes are high. Minimizing the loss of functionality and the
length of recovery time following a major earthquake is critical. Doing so will benefit not only
individuals, but the community as a whole and the economic viability of the region. To do this,
an emergency preparedness framework has been developed to identify all the different elements
of the District that need to be addressed for it to be resilient for this kind of natural disaster as
well as lessor events. This framework encompasses different aspects of recommendations for
preparedness from the current industry thinking while being tailored to the unique characteristics
of the District and its service environment. If successfully followed and implemented, the
generation that experiences the next CSZ earthquake and the generations that follow will reap the
benefits of this critical thinking and preparedness.
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
55
Supporting Materials
This section contains the results of the survey that was administered for the different
elements of the emergency preparedness framework.
Summary of survey emergency preparedness results.
Element
Response Planning
Finance
Communications
Resource Planning
Infrastructure
Business Systems
Policy & Liaison
Response
Average
High
68%
83%
73%
50%
75%
62%
88%
Low
45%
62%
53%
28%
15%
30%
45%
53%
76%
63%
38%
53%
52%
63%
Gap
47%
24%
37%
62%
47%
48%
37%
Policy & liaison survey results.
Framework Sub-element
Initials
Estimated Level of Resiliency (%)
100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10
Governance
Resiliency Policies
Formal & Informal Agreements
Building Relationships
Level of Service Goals
Delegated Authority
NK
MJ
MB
NK
MJ
MB
NK
MJ
MB
NK
MJ
MB
NK
MJ
MB
NK
MJ
MB
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
5
0
Priority
Rank
3
6
6
2
3
3
4
4
4
6
5
5
1
2
1
5
1
2
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
56
Business systems survey results.
Framework Sub-element
Initials
Estimated Level of Resiliency (%)
100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10
Software
Hardware
Enterprise Architecture
Internet Redundancy
PM
LO
MB
PM
LO
MB
PM
LO
MB
PM
LO
MB
5
0
5
0
5
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Priority
Rank
3
2
3
2
1
1
1
4
2
4
3
4
Infrastructure survey results.
Framework Sub-element
Initials
Estimated Level of Resiliency (%)
100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10
Planning
Design Standards
Condition Assessment
Vulnerability/Risk Assessments
PB
RS
MB
PB
RS
MB
PB
RS
MB
PB
RS
MB
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Priority
Rank
3
2
3
4
4
4
1
1
1
2
3
2
Resource planning survey results.
Framework Sub-element
Initials
Estimated Level of Resiliency (%)
100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10
Human Capital
Critical Inventory
Key Stockpile Locations
Security & Public Safety
NK
MJ
MB
NK
MJ
MB
NK
MJ
MB
NK
MJ
MB
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Priority
Rank
1
1
1
3
4
2
2
2
3
4
3
4
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
57
Communications survey results.
Framework Sub-element
Initials
Estimated Level of Resiliency (%)
100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10
Establish Procedures &
Protocols
Community Engagement
FR
MM
MB
FR
MM
MB
5
0
5
0
5
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
Priority
Rank
1
1
1
2
2
2
Finance survey results.
Framework Sub-element
Initials
Estimated Level of Resiliency (%)
100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10
Capital for Ongoing Operations
Insurance
Long-Term Financial Planning
PM
JC
MB
PM
JC
MB
PM
JC
MB
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Priority
Rank
1
2
1
2
3
3
3
1
2
Response planning survey results.
Framework Sub-element
Initials
Estimated Level of Resiliency (%)
100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10
Training & Preparations
Operations
Emergency Response Plan
MJ
TV
MB
MJ
TV
MB
MJ
TV
MB
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Priority
Rank
2
1
1
3
3
3
1
2
1
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
58
Bibliography
AEIC. (2002, November). The great Alaska earthquake of 1964. Retrieved from
http://www.aeic.alaska.edu/quakes/Alaska_1964_earthquake.html
AWWA. (2014, January 10). Chemical leak in West Virginia source water [Electronic mailing
list message].
Britch, R. (2015, April 22). Interview by Mike Britch [Personal Interview]. 1964 Alaska
earthquake.
Buehrer, J. (2013). Colorado floods test endurance, skill of utility personnel. Opflow, 39(12), 1015.
CREW. Cascadia Region Earthquake Workgroup, (2013). Cascadia subduction zone
earthquakes: A magnitude 9.0 earthquake scenario Oregon Department of Geology and
Mineral Industries Open-File Report 0-13-22.
DHS. Department of Homeland Security, Infrastructure Sector Assessment. (2015a).
Infrastructure system overview: Water systems Office of Cyber and Infrastructure
Analysis.
DHS. Department of Homeland Security, Infrastructure Sector Assessment. (2015b). Extended
water outage: Infrastructure system overview Office of Cyber and Infrastructure
Analysis.
DOGAMI. (2010). Coming to terms with seismicity. Cascadia, Winter, 3. Retrieved from
www.OregonGeology.org
Duyck, A. TVWD Board Meeting. Beaverton, OR. 15 May 2013. Public Testimony.
Eidinger, J and Davis, C. (2012). Recent earthquakes: Implications for U.S. water utiliites, Web
Report #4408, Water Research Foundation, Denver, CO.
FEMA. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
(2011). National disaster recovery framework. Washington DC:
FEMA. (2014, April). In Scott Porter (Chair). Cascadia subduction zone earthquakes: A
magnitude 9.0 earthquake scenario. Emergency Management Institute Communityspecific integrated emergency management course, Emmitsburg, MD.
Hill, D. (2014). Fighting back. Civil Engineering, 84(1), 49-55.
Hoyenga, J. (2105, April). Resilient Lane County: A partnership to cultivate a culture of
preparedness. Awwa Pacific Northwest section conference, Bellevue, Washington.
Jones, L. City of Los Angeles, (2014). Resiliency by design. Los Angeles.
Landers, J. (2014). San Francisco nears start of last pipeline improvement project. Civil
Engineering, 84(1), 27-28.
NIST. (2015, February). The social context for community resilience. Disaster resilience
framework: 75% draft for San Diego, CA workshop, San Diego, CA.
Obama, B. The White House, Office of the Press Secretary. (2013). Presidential policy
directive/ppd-21
TVWD’S EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
59
Priatla, K., Fisher, K., Andrus, R., Simonson, L., & Farahmandfar, Z. (2014). Evaluating the
Resiliency of the Water System in Charleston, South Carolina against Liquefaction
Hazard Through the Use of Seismic Hazard Maps. ASCE Pipelines 2014, 1217-1228.
Reid, R. (2013). Defending New Orleans. Civil Engineering, 83(11), 48-67,83.
State of Oregon, “Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 264 — Domestic Water Supply Districts."
Last modified 2011. Accessed September 21, 2013. http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/264.html.
Wang, Y., Raskin, J., & Wolf, E. Oregon Seismic Safety Policy Commission (OSSPAC), (2013).
The Oregon resilience plan: Reducing risk and improving recovery for the next Cascadia
earthquake and tsunami. Retrieved from website:
http://www.oregon.gov/omd/oem/pages/osspac/osspac.aspx