Emergency plan provides general response

To The Eagle:

In the April 21 issue of The Eagle, Dale and Sylvia Costich voiced complaints about the county's response to the Japanese tsunami.

It is interesting to note that when a public hot wash, (a discussion of the event and the response to it,) was held, neither were present to voice their concerns.

They speak of the county's Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) and specify items that should be in it as well as identifying what responders should do when responding. The plan is a comprehensive, all-hazards plan covering any hazardous condition which might occur. In the Washington State CEMP, neither earthquakes or tsunamis are specifically listed in the basic plan or Emergency Support Functions. This is because the plan assigns basic functions to agencies and departments and does not identify specific emergencies.

CEMPs today are slightly different from those of the past. Today, CEMPs must be National Incident Management System (NIMS) compliant in order for the county to receive Federal Emergency Management grants. The NIMS format identifies four functions of incident management, mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. Each of these functions assigns responsibilities to agencies and departments. As a result, the CEMP does not specify specific responder action but rather provides a general response that relies on the training and experience of the responders to determine how best to handle each situation. This causes the response to fit the severity of the incident as determined at the scene and provides the ability to step up or down the actions necessary for control.

The CEMP is not perfect. However, it has been developed, reviewed by the state and approved for use. The plan is dynamic and can be changed as needed. Each emergency and/or drill is a testing ground and reviewed after the event to highlight what went well and areas where improvement is needed. Just because the plan doesn't appear to cover every possible catastrophe in detail doesn't mean that it would not provide an efficient and timely response to an emergency.

The Costiches also mention the lack of pole mounted special sirens (a tsunami warning system) that would be activated by emergency personnel. The county has no money to provide such a system. State and/or federal grant money is not available for a tsunami warning system that is not in a tsunami impact area. Studies and computer models show that Cathlamet and Puget Island are not in a tsunami impact area. Perhaps the way to obtain such a system is for those worried about this lack of a warning system to purchase and install it.

People who want to be a positive influence may well volunteer to assist the county and neighbors in areas of their expertise.

Ron Kimmel

Puget Island