Category Archives: Response

Texas Governor Expands Disaster Declaration

Texas Governor Expands Disaster Declaration

With the continued onslaught of severe weather and rising lakes and streams in the state, the Texas Governor expands the state disaster declaration to 46 counties in the state.

Texas has been experiencing one of the wettest–and most turbulent ones as far as severe weather goes–months since the 1980’s. All the severe weather does come with consequences however. The biggest step in the process of getting any outside aid to an area (especially from the federal level) is a disaster declaration from the State.

State Disaster Declaration Effects:

The State of Texas is limited to providing only in-kind assistance from individual agencies to counties and municipalities encompassed by a disaster declaration. A state disaster declaration comes after the request of a county and municipal emergency managers (County Judge and Mayor respectively). A state disaster declaration does allow for: (i) additional liability protection to government agencies and special/volunteer emergency workers, (ii) implementation of economic stabilization measures (e.g. wage, rent and price controls), (iii) curfews, (iv) access control, (v) implementation of curfews, and (vi) suspension of select codes and ordinances. These measures are only implemented to support response and recovery from a disaster or emergency condition. (i.e. if curfew is not needed, it would not be used).

Federal Disaster Declaration Effects:

The Federal Government is able to provide both in-kind and financial assistance to counties and municipalities encompassed by a disaster declaration. A federal disaster declaration is made by the President of the United States after request by the governor of a state. Federal disaster assistance comes in two forms: (1) Individual/Household Assistance and (2) Public Assistance. Individual/Household Assistance comes in the form of uninsured: medical care and evacuation, emergency shelters, food and clothing, mortgage and rent assistance, job placement, property cleanup and counseling. Public Assistance comes in one of seven different varieties aimed at supplementing available resources and help prevent conditions from developing which a community would not be able to reasonably recover.

Read the Governor’s Declaration here.

The current list of counties is:

  • Archer
  • Bastrop
  • Blanco
  • Bosque
  • Bowie
  • Caldwell
  • Cass
  • Clay
  • Collin
  • Comal
  • Cooke
  • Denton
  • Dewitt
  • Eastland
  • Fannin
  • Gaines
  • Garza
  • Grayson
  • Grimes
  • Guadalupe
  • Harris
  • Harrison
  • Hays
  • Henderson
  • Hidalgo
  • Hill
  • Hood
  • Houston
  • Jasper
  • Johnson
  • Kendall
  • Montague
  • Navarro
  • Newton
  • Nueces
  • Parker
  • Red River
  • San Jacinto
  • Smith
  • Van Zandt
  • Walker
  • Wichita
  • Williamson
  • Wilson
  • Wise
  • Zavala

Texas House Advances Bill to Establish Regional Search and Rescue Teams

Texas House Advances Bill to Establish Regional Search and Rescue Teams

With only two weeks left, the Texas House Advances a bill establishing search and rescue response teams in each of the Texas disaster response regions.

With two weeks left in the legislative session, the Texas House of Representatives advanced a bill establishing regional search and rescue teams to the floor vote. The next phase is for the bill to be considered by Senate Committee hearings and a vote by the full senate before moving to the governor for action.

This bill represents one of the only disaster management related legislative actions to advance from committee this legislative cycle. HB 1970 (defining a new disaster victim lighted identification system), 2376 (relating to the creation of a disaster relief fund), and 4085 (relating to state disaster declarations are made) were either withdrawn from the schedule or left pending in committee.

The State of Texas currently operates six field response regions. The state expects for this bill to have no impact on local government fiscal requirements, while adding nine state employees to administer the program and provide training to local entities. The concept behind this program would be to synchronize training and coordination among individual volunteers and volunteer organizations instead of creating a new organization of full-time employees.

With an estimated initial investment in 2016 of $12.5 Million into starting the program (equipment, facilities, hiring, and initial training), it is estimated that approximately $1.6 million will be spent annually on upkeep.

– Will

Read the State Committee Report here.

 

Sen. Schumer asks FCC to change law to allow Amtrak Police and Local Police to communicate

Sen. Schumer asks FCC to change law to allow Amtrak Police and Local Police to communicate

Current FCC regulation treats Amtrak Police as railroad personnel and not as Law Enforcement, making them unable to communicate with local law enforcement personnel via radio in case of emergency.

The history of railway security goes beyond the civil war to the protecting of gold shipments from the West coast to the East coast through the territories. As time progressed, railway corporations became responsible for providing their own security during transit. Today, many state penal codes (including Texas) recognize railway police as a separate and specialized form of law enforcement organization.

U.S. Senator Charles Schumer has asked the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to change a regulation which treats Amtrak Police as railroad personnel rather than law enforcement personnel. Though subtle, this treatment prohibits Amtrak police from having radio communication with local law enforcement and emergency management personnel in the event of an emergency on an Amtrak train passing through the jurisdiction.

The Amtrak Police Department’s over 500 sworn and civilian personnel at 30 locations in 46 states provide security for Amtrak employees, passengers and infrastructure safety and security. The Police Department consists of a: National Communications Center, Patrol Division, and Special Operations Division. The Special Operations Division consists of a K-9 Unit, Intelligence, Special Operations Unit, and Counter-Terrorism Unit.

As we develop our communications annex’s, ensuring the ability to communicate with adjacent agencies in an emergency can be the difference between life and death. Modifying FCC regulations allowing radio communication between Amtrak police and local police and emergency management will help ensure interoperability in the event of an emergency situation. The important thing is that once the FCC modifies existing regulations, is that law enforcement agencies and emergency management organizations amend their communications procedures to include Amtrak Police and the Amtrak Police National Communications Center.

– Will

Read the full article here.

Visit the Amtrak Police Department’s Web Site here.

Family Wants Changes to Operating Procedures

Family Wants Changes to Operating Procedures

A Firefighter’s Widow is calling upon the City of Dallas to make changes to the way things are done to help protect other firefighters, which may eventually cause changes to Emergency Operating Procedures.

Stanley Wilson, 51, died May 20, 2013, when he was crushed inside a collapsing condo during a six-alarm fire in northeast Dallas. His death prompted strife within the department, and answers were slow to come out. A 703-page draft report obtained by The Dallas Morning News reported issues with the deputy chief’s orders during the blaze, and cited a “culture of indifference” among firefighters to policies and procedures at the fire department.

Jenny Wilson has been asking for changes to be made to training and for fire-ground communications to be recorded. Though she is prevented from filing a lawsuit since her husband died in the line of duty, she is still seeking to have changes made at the city in an attempt to prevent this from happening to another family in the future.

How might this effect Emergency Management? Though the Emergency Manager isn’t directly responsible for making the changes Jenny Wilson is asking for, it is important to be aware of them. A change in the way incident response is done might very well change some of the Emergency Operating Procedures, documentation requirements during a disaster, and even the way the Emergency Operations Center functions. Also, even if this issue fades into the background, a disaster might bring it back to the forefront. This means Emergency Managers need to ensure their PIO’s are ready to deal with the issue.

Read the Dallas Morning News’ Full Article: Here

See the State Fire Marshall and City of Dallas’ Incident Reports: Here

– Will

CEW’s (Tasers) are not allowed on Airplanes

CEW’s (Tasers) are not allowed on Airplanes

Conducted Electrical Weapons (CEW’s) are not allowed to be carried by Law Enforcement on passenger airplanes in the US.

Many of you know that I am a Non-lethal Weapons Instructor for the Army, which includes Conducted Electrical Weapons (CEW’s) among other use of force tools. After receiving this notice from TASER International about this issue, I felt it was important for Emergency Managers to also be aware of the policy issues that might arise during the response planning process.

CEW’s are not allowed to be carried by Law Enforcement on passenger airplanes in the US, even though firearms are. The  IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations for commercial airplanes forbids the carrying of CEWs in both your carryon AND checked luggage on commercial airplanes:  “Electro shock weapons (e.g. Tasers) containing dangerous goods such as explosives, compressed gases, lithium batteries, etc., are forbidden in carry-on baggage or checked baggage or on the person.”  No exception is made for law enforcement officer.  These IATA regulations were adopted by the U.S. Department of Transportation’s PHMSA in 2012.  TASER International, along with the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI) and the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) have all written to the PHMSA requesting that the prohibition against officers’ carrying TASER CEWs aboard airplanes be revised.  Unfortunately, each of these requests has been denied.

If the prohibition against officers carrying CEWs on airplanes affects your agency, TASER International encourages you and your agency to also submit a request for a rule change with PHMSA.  If enough agencies advise PHSMA of the repercussions of the regulation on the law enforcement community then the PHMSA may consider a rule change.

A special thank you goes out to TASER International for continuing to be on the cutting edge of both technology and policy.

– Will

References:

2014 DOJ BATF Ltr to PHMSA

2014-06-13 Dept of Interior ltr to DOT re TASER

2015 PHMSA template

Nina Pham Lawsuit: Pause in the Process

Nina Pham Lawsuit: Pause in the Process

An abatement order was filed by the 68th District Judge because Texas Health Resources, whom Nina Pham is suing, was said to have filed for bankruptcy. TheTexas Health Resources has not filed for bankruptcy however, and the order was filed due to a clerical error at the courthouse. This means that we are still in the complaint stage and are waiting to enter into discovery. For those who don’t know, discovery is the phase of the trial in which the Plaintiff and the Defendant exchange information to gather enough evidence to completely substantiate or do away with the case if there is not enough evidence. (Note: the case doesn’t automatically go away if there is not enough evidence, it could likely either dissolve after a motion for summary judgement or get to trial and a jury determine the evidence doesn’t support them claim)

The order was vacated and the lawsuit continues processing. Leaving us all to still wait to find out whether this will be heard in court or settled without any new requirements being placed on Emergency Managers by the court.

-Will

Read the full article here: http://www.texaslawyer.com/top-stories/id=1202719819778/Judge-Vacates-Order-After-Clerical-Error-in-Nina-Pham-Lawsuit?mcode=1202615023694&curindex=0&slreturn=20150209114115Nina+Pham+lawsuit

Outdated 911 Systems: Could this be the TJ Hooper all over again?

Could this be the TJ Hooper all over again?

In 1932 a case was decided by the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals called the T.J. Hooper (60 F.2d 737).  In this case, the owner of two barges and a tug owner were held liable to the owner of the cargo they were towing when the barges were lost in a storm. Most interesting to this case is that the tugs were found to be unseaworthy because they did not carry radio receiving sets, which would have allowed the crew to receive weather updates and possibly avoid the storm. This is important because at the time, radio receiving sets were customary but not required on tug boats.

This is the second article in a series that I have came across that talk about the hazards of outdated 911 technology, though newer technology is available and customarily used across the country. Realistically, this is due in part to funding; however, this is strikingly similar to the T.J. Hooper case in 1932. Could our use of outdated 911 systems be a T.J. Hooper incident waiting to happen? It’s hard to tell with so many governmental immunities to tort claims, but it is something to consider and counsel should analyze with their emergency management team.

– Will

Read the full article here: http://www.emergencymgmt.com/next-gen-911/No-Data-911-Calls-Misrouted-Outdated-Tech.html

Pennsylvania’s Outdated Law Impacts Funding for 911 Systems, Officials Say

This article is a perfect reason why law matters so much to emergency management. In this case, Pennsylvania’s Public Safety Emergency Telephone Act allows for a cost sharing method for financing local 911 systems. The act authorized $1.50 surcharge monthly for land line telephone subscribers and $1.00 surcharge monthly for cell phone. With the move of many telephone service subscribers from land lines to cell phones the fund began to lose money and is to the point that it needs to be reworked completely in order to keep up with the demand and costs associated with keeping 911 systems operational and up to date in the state.

-Will

Read the full article here: http://www.emergencymgmt.com/next-gen-911/Pennsylvanias-Outdated-Law-Impacts-Funding-911-Systems.html

Open Carry and Shelter Operations: Do they mix well?

I saw this article come across my news feed this morning and it begged the question. How will Open Carry and Shelter Operations mix in a disaster? Will you have to force people to leave their weapons in their car, lock them up in a safe at the shelter, or let them in? Obviously this has some security issues embedded into it, but more importantly are their possible constitutional issues with declaring a shelter to be a “gun free zone”?

What are your thoughts?

– Will

Read the full article here: http://www.fox4news.com/story/28091640/lawmakers-in-austin-to-discuss-open-carry

Should Background Checks Be Required for Emergency Volunteers?

Should Background Checks Be Required for Emergency Volunteers?

This is a great article asking the hard question whether disaster volunteers need to have background checks before being allowed to act on behalf of the disaster relief organization. Though the article specifically questions it’s applicability to CERT (Community Emergency Response Teams) this is something that all volunteer organizations should think about because of possible vicarious liability.

Basically, vicarious liability is when one person/organization is liable for the harm caused by someone else. Right now no states require volunteer organizations to do background checks, but many have passed statutes making the background checks more available.

Though government entities can be protected by something called “governmental immunity”, it won’t necessarily prevent a lawsuit every time. More importantly is that if the volunteer organization is sued, then it could very easily bankrupt that organization and detrimental to a community.

This issue gets even harder when considering organizations rarely have time to do background checks on spontaneous volunteers. Spontaneous Volunteers are those who appear during or immediately after a disaster or emergency to help and are not part of a regular trained or certified volunteer pool.

On one hand, if you do background checks on everyone, you have a “checked” volunteer pool, but since you spent a ton of money (about $20 or more each) on background checks, you can’t pay for CPR or First Aid Training and don’t have enough money to purchase equipment. On the other hand if you have all sorts of training and equipment, but someone who didn’t have a background check does something (like steal or intentionally hurt a disaster victim) the entire organization loses credibility.

This is a really hard issue to resolve with many legal as well as public policy factors to consider.

– Will

Read Brittany Shammas’ full article here: http://www.emergencymgmt.com/disaster/Should-Background-Checks-Required-Emergency-Volunteers.html