HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-23-2015 COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AGENDAerr r
o
WASH I NGIUN
CALL TO ORDER
A. Roll Call
City Council Study Session
February 23, 2015 - 5:30 PM
Auburn City Hall
AGENDA
Watch the meeti ng LIVE!
Watch the meeting video
M eeti ng vi deos are not avai I abl e unti 172
hours after the meeti ng has concl uded.
II. ANNOUNCEMENTS, REPORTS, AND PRESENTATIONS
III. AGENDA ITEMS FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION
A. Stormwater Management Program Update (10 minutes)* (Snyder)
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Auburn, Washington, approving
the 2015 Stormwater Management Program Plan and authorizing the Mayor to
include a copy of the program plan in the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit
Annual Report for 2014 to the Washington State Department of Ecology
B. System Development Charges - Fee Update (30 minutes)* (Snyder)
C. Comprehensive Water Plan (30 minutes) (Snyder)
D. Public Works Project No. CP1412, Community Center Youth Center
Conceptual Design Discussion (30 minutes)* (Snyder)
E. Resolution No 5129 - Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (15
minutes)* (Hursh)
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Auburn, Washington, adopting the
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP)
F. Resolution No. 5133 - Auburn Design Standards (10 minutes)* (Snyder)
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Auburn, Washington, amending
the City of Auburn Design Standards for its Downtown Urban Center Zone
IV. OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS
V. ADJOURNMENT
Agendas and minutes are available to the public at the City Clerk's Office, on the City
website (http: / /www.auburnwa.gov), and via e -mail. Complete agenda packets are
available for review at the City Clerk's Office.
*Denotes attachments included in the agenda packet.
Page 1 of 392
Page 2 of 392
At uRN m F O
WASH I NUO
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Stormwater Management Program Update (10 minutes)
Department: Attachments:
CD & PW Resdution No. 5131
2015 Stormwater M anagement Program Plan
- Final Draft
2014 Annual Report
Administrative Recommendation:
For discussion only.
Background Summary:
Date:
February 11, 2015
Budget Impact:
$0
The City of Auburn was issued a municipal stormwater permit by the Washington
State Department of Ecology in compliance with provisions of the State of Washington
Water Pollution Control Law and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (The Clean
Water Act).
Requirements of the Permit include the development and annual update of a
Stormwater Management Program Plan (SWMP Plan) which describes the actions
and activities to be implemented by the City in order to reduce the discharge of
pollutants.
The SWMP Plan is to include measures related to Public Education and Outreach,
Public Involvement and Participation, Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination,
Controlling Runoff from New Development, Redevelopment, and Construction Sites,
Municipal Operations and Maintenance, Compliance with Total Maximum Daily Load
Requirements and Monitoring. The Permit lists specific actions and methods that the
City must implement through the SWMP Plan.
The City of Auburn is accepting comments on the draft 2015 Stormwater Management
Program Plan. Written comments must be received by close of business on March 16,
2015. There will be a public hearing at the March 16th City Council meeting where
comments will also be accepted.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
DI.A AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 3 of 392
Councilmember:
Meeting Date:
Staff: Snyder
February 23, 2015 Item Number: DI.A
DI.A AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 4 of 392
RESOLUTION NO. 5 1 3 1
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AUBURN, WASHINGTON, APPROVING THE 2015
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PLAN AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO INCLUDE A COPY OF
THE PROGRAM PLAN IN THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT
DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM WESTERN
WASHINGTON PHASE II MUNICIPAL STORMWATER
PERMIT ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2014 TO THE
WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
WHEREAS, The Washington State Department of Ecology issues a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Western Washington Phase II Municipal
Stormwater Permit that regulates the discharge of stormwater from municipal
stormwater systems; and
WHEREAS, the City operates a municipal stormwater system and is regulated
under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Western Washington Phase
II Municipal Stormwater Permit; and
WHEREAS, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Western
Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit requires development and
implementation of a Stormwater Management Program Plan; and
WHEREAS, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Western
Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit requires submittal of the Stormwater
Pollution Program Plan to the Washington State Department of Ecology
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES as follows:
Resolution No. 5131
February 10, 2015
Page 1
DI.A Page 5 of 392
Section 1. The Stormwater Management Program Plan is approved for
implementation in the City of Auburn in substantial conformity with the agreement
attached hereto, marked as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 2. That the Mayor is authorized to implement such other
administrative procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directives of this
legislation, including submitting a copy of the Stormwater Management Program Plan to
the Washington State Department of Ecology.
Section 3. That this Resolution shall take effect and be in full force upon
passage and signatures hereon.
Dated and Signed this day of , 2015.
CITY OF AUBURN
NANCY BACKUS
MAYOR
ATTEST:
Danielle E. Daskam,
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Daniel B. Heid,
City Attorney
Resolution No. 5131
February 10, 2015
Page 2
DI.A Page 6 of 392
Resolution No. 5131
Exhibit "A"
CITY OF AUBURN
2015 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM PLAN
City of Auburn, WA
March 2015
CITY OF
AijBuRN
WASHINGTON
DI.A Page 7 of 392
Table of Contents City of Auburn 2015 SWMP Plan
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... ..............................1
1.1 Overview ............................................................................................................................ ..............................1
1.2 Regulatory Background ..................................................................................................... ..............................1
1.3 City of Auburn Regulated Area .......................................................................................... ..............................2
1.4 SWMP Implementation Responsibilities ............................................................................ ..............................2
1.5 Document Organization ..................................................................................................... ..............................2
2. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION ............................................. ..............................3
2.1 Permit Requirements ......................................................................................................... ..............................3
2.2 Planned 2015 Compliance Activities .................................................................................. ..............................3
3. PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH .................................................................................... ..............................4
3.1 Permit Requirements ......................................................................................................... ..............................4
3.2 Planned 2015 Compliance Activities .................................................................................. ..............................4
4. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND PARTICIPATION ........................................................................ ..............................6
4.1 Permit Requirements ......................................................................................................... ..............................6
4.2 Planned 2015 Compliance Activities .................................................................................. ..............................6
5. ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION ............................................................. ..............................7
5.1 Permit Requirements ......................................................................................................... ..............................7
5.2 Planned 2015 Compliance Activities .................................................................................. ..............................7
6. CONTROLLING RUNOFF FROM NEW DEVELOPMENT, REDEVELOPMENT, AND CONSTRUCTION SITES .... 9
6.1 Permit Requirements ......................................................................................................... ..............................9
6.2 Planned 2015 Compliance Activities ................................................................................. .............................10
7. MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE .................................................................... .............................12
7.1 Permit Requirements ........................................................................................................ .............................12
7.2 Planned 2015 Compliance Activities ................................................................................. .............................13
8. COMPLIANCE WITH TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD REQUIREMENTS ............................... .............................14
8.1 Planned 2015 Compliance Activities ................................................................................. .............................15
9. MONITORING ............................................................................................................................. .............................16
9.1 Permit Requirements ........................................................................................................ .............................16
9.2 Planned 2015 Compliance Activities ................................................................................. .............................16
APPENDIXA .................................................................................................................................. .............................17
ii
DLA HAPUB_WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \Swmps\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.Docx Page 8 of 392
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2- 1.2015 Stormwater Management Administration Program Work Plan ............... ..............................3
Table 3- 1.2015 Public Education and Outreach Work Plan ........................................ ..............................5
Table 4- 1.2015 Public Involvement and Participation Work Plan ................................. ..............................6
Table 5- 1.2015 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Work Plan ............................ ..............................7
Table 6- 1.2015 Controlling Runoff from Development, Redevelopment, and Construction Sites Work Plan ........ 9
Table 7- 1.2015 Municipal Operations and Maintenance Work Plan .............................. .............................11
Table 8- 1.2015 Compliance with TMDL Load Requirements Work Plan ......................... .............................13
Table 9- 1.2015 Water Quality Monitoring Work Plan .................................................. .............................14
to
DI.A Page 9 of 392
CITY OF AUBURN 2015
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PLAN
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Overview
This document presents the City of Aubum's Stormwater Management Program (SWMP). Preparation and
maintenance of this SWMP Plan is required by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) as a
condition of the Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit (the Phase II Permit). The
Phase II permit covers discharges from regulated small municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s). The
SWMP Plan is intended to inform the public of the planned SWMP activities for the upcoming year.
The permit to discharge stormwater is designed to reduce the discharge of pollutants, protect water quality,
and meet the requirements of the federal Clean Water Act.
Appendix A includes acronyms and definitions from the Permit to help the reader understand the City's
Stormwater Management Program.
1.2 Regulatory Background
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program is a requirement of the
federal Clean Water Act, which is intended to protect and restore waters for "fishable, swimmable" uses. The
federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has delegated permit authority to state environmental
agencies, and these agencies can set permit conditions in accordance with and in addition to the minimum
federal requirements. In Washington, the NPDES - delegated permit authority is the Washington State
Department of Ecology (Ecology).
In Washington, municipalities with a population of over 100,000 are designated as Phase I communities and
must comply with Ecology's Phase I NPDES Municipal Stormwater Permit. Auburn's population is below
the 100,000 threshold, so the City must comply with the Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit. About 100
other municipalities in Washington must also comply with the Phase II Permit, as operators of small
municipal separate storm sewer systems (VIS4s). Ecology's Phase 11 Municipal Stormwater Permit is available
on Ecology's website at
htW: / /www.ecy.wa.gov /programs /2yq /stormwater/ municipal /12haseIIww /wwphiWermit.html
The Permit allows municipalities to discharge stormwater runoff from municipal drainage systems into the
state's water bodies (e.g., streams, rivers, lakes, wetlands, and aquifers) as long as municipalities implement
programs to protect water quality by reducing the discharge of "non -point source" pollutants to the
"maximum extent practicable" (MEP) through application of Permit- specified "best management practices"
(BMPs). The BMPs specified in the Permit are collectively referred to as the Stormwater Management
Program (SWMP) and grouped under the following Program components:
■ Public Education and Outreach
• Public Involvement and Participation
• Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
• Controlling Runoff from New Development, Redevelopment, and Construction Sites
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DI.A Page 10 of 392
1: Introduction City of Auburn 2015 SWMP Plan
■ Municipal Operations and Maintenance
In addition to the SWMP components the Permit contains special conditions covering:
• Compliance with Total Maximum Daily load requirements
• Monitoring and Assessment
• Reporting Requirements
The Permit issued by Ecology became effective on August 1, 2013, was modified January 16, 2015 and
expires on July 31, 2018. The Permit requires the City to submit an annual report no later than March 31St of
each year beginning in 2015, on progress in SWMP implementation. The Permit also requires submittal of a
SWMP Plan which describes proposed SWMP activities for the current calendar year. The SWMP Plan is to
be updated annually and be included in the submittal of the previous year's annual report.
1.3 City of Auburn Regulated Area
The Western Washington Phase II Permit applies to operators of regulated small MS4s that discharge
stormwater to waters of Washington State located west of the crest of the Cascade Range (west of the eastern
boundaries of Whatcom, Skagit, Snohomish, King, Pierce, Lewis and Skamania counties). For cities, the
Permit requirements extend to those areas of each City that drain to MS4s. Most of Auburn drains to MS4s
that ultimately discharge into the Green River, the White River, or Mill Creek. In addition, some portions of
the City drain to regional infiltration basins.
1.4 SWMP Implementation Responsibilities
The Utilities Engineering Division in the Community Development and Public Works Department
coordinates the overall administration of efforts to comply with Permit requirements. The work plan tables
in each Chapter provide the lead departments for the associated task. Other major departments /divisions
included in the 2015 SWMP implementation are Maintenance and Operations (M &O), Human Resources
(HR), Development Engineering, Permit Center, Innovation and Technology (IT), and Parks.
1.5 Document Organization
The contents of this document are based upon Permit requirements and Ecology's "Guidance for City and
County Annual Reports for Western Washington, Phase 11 Municipal Stormwater General Permits." The
program components of this SWMP are organized as listed in the Permit:
• Section 2.0 addresses administering the City's Stormwater Management Program.
• Section 3.0 addresses public education and outreach.
• Section 4.0 addresses public involvement and participation.
• Section 5.0 addresses illicit discharge detection and elimination.
• Section 6.0 addresses controlling runoff from new development, redevelopment, and construction
sites.
• Section 7.0 addresses municipal operations and maintenance.
• Section 8.0 addresses compliance with TMDL requirements.
• Section 9.0 addresses monitoring.
Each section includes a summary of the relevant Permit requirements and a table showing the planned
activities for 2015. This document also includes acronyms and definitions in Appendix A for easy reference.
2
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DI.A Page 11 of 392
CITY OF AUBURN 2015
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PLAN
2. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION
This section of the SWMP describes Permit requirements related to overall Stormwater Management
Program administration, and planned compliance activities for 2015.
2.1 Permit Requirements
The Permit (Section S5.A) requires the City to fulfill the following actions during the 5 -year Permit cycle:
• Develop and implement a Stormwater Management Program (SWMP) and prepare written
documentation (SWMP Plan) for submittal to Ecology by March 31 of each year. The purpose of the
SWMP is to reduce the discharge of pollutants from the municipal stormwater system to the maximum
extent practicable and thereby protect water quality. The SWMP Plan is intended to inform the public
of the planned SWMP activities for the upcoming calendar year, and any actions to meet the
requirements of S7 Compliance with Total Maximum Daily Load Requirements, and S8 Monitoring.
■ Implement a program for gathering, tracking, maintaining, and using information to evaluate SWMP
development, implementation and permit compliance and to set priorities.
• Coordinate with other permittees on stormwater related policies programs, and projects within
adjacent or shared areas.
• Coordinate between City departments to eliminate barriers to compliance with the terms of the permit.
2.2 Planned 2015 Compliance Activities
Auburn has positioned itself to maintain compliance. Table 2 -1 presents the proposed work plan for the 2015
SWMP administration activities.
��Table 2-1. 2015 Stormwater Management Administration
Task ID
Program
Compliance
Timeframe
Revise and update the City's Stormwater
Utilities
The SWMP submittal is due
SWMP -1
Management Program Plan (SWMP Plan) to identify
Engineering
by March 31st of each year.
planned SWMP activities for 2015.
Utilities
Annual Reporting is due by
SWMP -2
Track program element implementation.
Engineering
March 31St of each year
beginning in 2015.
3
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DI.A Page 12 of 392
CITY OF AUBURN 2015
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PLAN
3. PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
This section describes the Permit requirements related to public education and outreach, and planned
compliance activities for 2015.
3.1 Permit Requirements
The Permit (Section S5.C.1) requires the City to fulfill the following actions during the 5 -year Permit cycle:
■ Prioritize and target education and outreach activities to specified audiences, including the general
public, businesses, residents /homeowners, landscapers, property managers, engineers, contractors,
developers, and land use planners to build general awareness and to effect behavior change with the
intent to reduce or eliminate behaviors and practices that cause or contribute to adverse stormwater
impacts.
• Have an outreach program that is designed to improve the target audience's understanding of the
problem and what they can do to solve it.
• Create and /or partner with existing organizations to encourage residents to participate in stewardship
opportunities.
• Measure the understanding and adoption of the targeted behaviors for at least one target audience in at
least one subject area. Use the resulting measurements to direct education and outreach resources
most effectively.
■ Track and maintain records of public education and outreach activities.
3.2 Planned 2015 Compliance Activities
The City plans to continue the program that has been developed over the last permit cycle. The target
audiences include:
• The general public
• Businesses (including home -based and mobile businesses)
• Residents /homeowners
• Landscapers
• Property managers
• Engineers, contractors, developers and land use planners
4
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DI.A Page 13 of 392
3: Public Education and Outreach
City of Auburn 2015 SWMP Plan
Table 3 -1 presents the work plan for the 2015 SWMI' public education and outreach activities.
61
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DLA Page 14 of 392
Table 3-1. 2015 Public Education and
Outreach
Compliance
Task ID
Task Description
Lead
Timeframe
Continue collaboration with other NPDES
municipalities through Stormwater Outreach for
Utilities
EDUC -1
Regional Municipalities (STORM) and Puget Sound
Engineering
Starts Here efforts to promote regional education and
outreach programs.
Refine education and outreach strategy to supplement
existing education activities. An example would be
Utilities
EDUC -2
evaluating the current pet waste cleanup education
Engineering
strategy and whether existing education activities
should be supplemented for better results.
Refinements to existing
public education and
Implement new or modify existing education and
outreach activities. An example would be
Utilities
outreach activities are on-
EDUC-3
implementing actions related to our Kid's
Engineering
going.
Day educational activities based on the evaluation
done after the 2014 event.
Staff training related to Surface Water Management
Manual Implementation/Technical Standards:
• Permitting
Utilities
EDUC -4
• Plan Review
Engineering
• Site Inspections
• Maintenance Standards.
Educate select city staff and elected officials to
EDUC -4a
develop a common level of knowledge related to Low
LID Core Team
2015
Impact Development stormwater management
techniques.
Inform public employees, businesses and the general
Utilities
EDUC -5
public of the hazards associated with illegal
Engineering
Ongoing
discharges and improper disposal of waste.
Provide stewardship opportunities such as planting
Planning and
2015
EDUC -6
native plants and invasive species removal at the
Public Works
Auburn Environmental park.
Divisions
Measure understanding and adoption of pollution
Utilities
EDUC -7
prevention and spill management by business
Engineering
February 2, 2016
property managers /owners.
61
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DLA Page 14 of 392
CITY OF AUBURN 2015
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PLAN
4. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND PARTICIPATION
This section describes the Permit requirements related to public involvement and participation, and planned
compliance activities for 2015.
4.1 Permit Requirements
The Permit (Section S5.C.2) requires the City to fulfill the following actions during the 5 -year Permit cycle:
• Provide ongoing opportunities for public involvement and participation through advisory boards or
commissions, public hearings, watershed committees, public participation in developing rate structures
and budgets, or other similar activities. The public must be able to participate in the decision - making
processes, including development, implementation, and update of the SWMP.
• Make the SWMP Plan and Annual Compliance Report available to the public, by posting on the City's
website. Make any other documents required to be submitted to Ecology in response to Permit conditions
available to the public.
4.2 Planned 2015 Compliance Activities
The City of Auburn has a history of including the public in decision making. Table 4-1 below presents the
work plan for the 2015 SWMP public involvement and participation activities.
6
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DLA Page 15 of 392
Table 4-1. 2015 Public Involvement and
Participation .
Compliance
Task ID
Task Description
Lead
Timeframe
PI -1
Provide public involvement opportunities for annual
Utilities
Public involvement
SWMP update.
Engineering
opportunities will be available
before the March 31, 2015
PI
Make SWMP document Report available to public by
Utilities
-2
posting on the City website.
Engineering
submittal.
6
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DLA Page 15 of 392
CITY OF AUBURN 2015
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PLAN
5. ILLICIT DISCHARGE DETECTION AND ELIMINATION
This section describes the Permit requirements related to illicit discharge detection and elimination (IDDE),
and planned compliance activities for 2015.
5.1 Permit Requirements
The Permit (Section S5.C.3) requires the City to fulfill the following actions during the 5 -year Permit cycle:
• Implement an ongoing program to detect and remove illicit discharges, connections, and improper
disposal, including any spills into the municipal separate storm sewers owned or operated by the City.
• Maintain a storm sewer system map, have ordinances that prohibit illicit discharges, and implement an
ongoing program to detect and address illicit discharges.
• Publicly list and publicize a hotline or other local telephone number for public reporting of spills and
other illicit discharges. Track illicit discharge reports and actions taken in response through close -out,
including enforcement actions.
• Inform public employees, businesses and the general public of hazards associated with illegal
discharges and improper disposal of waste.
• Train staff on proper IDDE response SOPS and train municipal field staff to recognize and report
illicit discharges.
• Summarize all illicit discharges and connections reported to the City and response actions taken,
including enforcement actions, in the Annual Compliance Report; identify any updates to the SWMP.
5.2 Planned 2015 Compliance Activities
Table 5 -1 presents the work plan for 2015 SWMP illicit discharge detection and elimination activities.
'n Iffmalm .-
77M
mpliance
Task Description
rTimeframe
IDDE -1
Continue to implement City -wide IDDE Program and
Utilities
Ongoing
develop any necessary supplemental IDDE activities.
Engineering
Continue to review and update storm system map to
Utilities
Ongoing
IDDE -2
address data gaps and Permit requirements.
Engineering /IT
IDDE -3
Integrate illicit discharge field screening into the public
Utilities
2015
facility and catch basin inspection programs.
Engineering
VA
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DI.A Page 16 of 392
5: Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
IDDE -4 Provided IDDE training to new hires in Utility
Engineering and Maintenance & Operations
City of Auburn 2015 SWMP Plan
Utilities
Engineering Ongoing
DLA Page 17 of 392
CITY OF AUBURN 2015
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PLAN
6. CONTROLLING RUNOFF FROM NEW DEVELOPMENT
REDEVELOPMENT, AND CONSTRUCTION SITES
This section describes the Permit requirements related to controlling runoff from new development,
redevelopment, and construction sites, and planned compliance activities for 2015.
6.1 Permit Requirements
The Permit (Section S5.C.4) requires the City to fulfill the following actions during the 5 -year Permit cycle:
• Implement, and enforce a program to reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff (i.e., illicit discharges) to
the municipal separate storm sewer system from new development, redevelopment, and construction
site activities. The program must apply to both private and public projects, including roads, and
address all construction /development- associated pollutant sources.
• Have adopted regulations (codes and standards), have plan review, inspection, and escalating
enforcement SOPS necessary to implement the program in accordance with Permit conditions,
including the minimum technical requirements in Appendix 1 of the Permit by December 31, 2016.
• Review, revise and make effective local development - related codes, rules, standards, or other
enforceable documents to incorporate and require Low Impact Development (LID) principles and
LID best management practices (BMPs) with the intent of making LID the preferred and commonly -
used approach to site development by December 31, 2016.
• Participate in watershed -scale stormwater planning under condition S5.C.4.c of the Phase I Municipal
Stormwater General Permit if required.
• Have adopted regulations (codes and standards) and processes to verify adequate long -term operations
and maintenance of new post - construction permanent stormwater facilities and BMPs in accordance
with Permit conditions, including an annual inspection frequency and /or approved alternative
inspection frequency and maintenance standards for private drainage systems as protective as those in
Chapter 4 of Volume V of the 2012 Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western
Washington by December 31, 2016.
• Provide copies of the Notice of Intent (NOI) for construction or industrial activities to representatives
of the proposed new development and redevelopment.
• Provide training to staff on the new codes, standards, and SOPS and create public education and
outreach materials.
• Record and maintain records of all inspections and enforcement actions by staff.
• Summarize annual activities for the "Controlling Runoff' component of the Annual Compliance
Report; identify any updates to the SWMP.
9
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DI.A Page 18 of 392
6: Controlling Runoff from New Development, Redevelopment
and Construction Sites City of Auburn 2015 SWMP Plan
6.2 Planned 2015 Compliance Activities
The City has a program to help reduce stormwater runoff from new development and construction sites.
Table 6 -1 presents the work plan for 2015 SW/MP activities related to runoff control for new development,
redevelopment, and construction sites.
10
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DLA Page 19 of 392
i U- .. =0
..
.
ID
Task Description
Lead
lance
MOMMPTask
Time meframe
Track and report construction, new development, and
Planning/ Permit
CTRL -1
redevelopment permits, inspections and enforcement
Center
On -going
actions.
Prior to clearing and construction, inspect all permitted
CTRL -1a
development sites that have a high potential for
Construction
On -going
sediment transport
CRTL -1 b
Inspect all permitted development sites during
Construction
On going
construction
Inspect all permitted development sites upon
CRTL -1 c
completion of construction and prior to final approval
Construction
Ongoing
oroccupancy
Inspect all permanent stormwater treatment and flow
control BMPs /facilities and catch basins in new
CRTL -1d
residential developments every six months until 90%
Construction
Ongoing
of the lots are constructed or construction has stopped
and site is fully stabilized
Conduct annual inspection of all treatment and flow
Utilities
CTRL -2
control BMPs /facilities (other than catch basins) — i.e.,
Engineering
On -going
private systems.
Begin process to update city code related to
Storm Drainage
CTRL -3
controlling runoff from new development,
Utility and
2016
redevelopment and construction site projects.
Building Division
Begin process to develop and adopt a stormwater
Storm Drainage
CTRL -4
management manual equivalent to the 2012
Utility and
Stormwater Management Manual for Western
Building Division
2016
Washington as amended in 2014.
10
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DLA Page 19 of 392
Controlling Runoff from New Development, Redevelopment
and Construction Sites City of Auburn 2015 SWMP Plan
11
DI.A Page 20 of 392
Begin process to review, revise and make effective
Storm Drainage
CTRL -5
development - related codes, rules, standards, or other
Utility and
2016
enforceable documents to incorporate and require LID
Planning
principles and LID BMPs.
Division
Provide copies of the "Notice of Intent for Construction
CTRL -6
Activity" and copies of the "Notice of Intent for
Permit Center
Ongoing
Industrial Activity" to representatives of proposed new
development and redevelopment.
Enforce local ordinances controlling runoff from sites
Construction
CTRL -7
that are also covered by stormwater permits issued by
and Code
Ongoing
Ecology
Enforcement
11
DI.A Page 20 of 392
CITY OF AUBURN 2015
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PLAN
7. MUNICIPAL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
This section describes the Permit requirements related to municipal operations and maintenance, and planned
compliance activities for 2015.
7.1 Permit Requirements
The Permit (Section S5.C.5) requires the City to fulfill the following actions during the 5 -year Permit cycle:
• Implement an O&M program, with the ultimate goal of preventing or reducing pollutant runoff from
municipal separate stormwater system and municipal O&M activities.
• Implement maintenance standards for the municipal separate stormwater system that are at least as
protective as those specified in the 2012 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington as
amended in 2014.
■ Conduct annual inspection of all municipally owned or operated permanent stormwater treatment and
flow control BMPs /facilities and perform maintenance as needed to comply with maintenance
standards.
• Inspect all catch basins and inlets owned or operated by the City at least once no later than August 1,
2017 and every two years thereafter. Clean the catch basins if inspections indicate cleaning is needed
to comply with maintenance standards.
• Check treatment and flow control facilities after major storms and perform repairs as needed in
accordance with adopted maintenance standards.
• Have SOPS in place to reduce stormwater impacts associated with runoff from municipal O &M
activities, including but not limited to streets, parking lots, roads, or highways owned or maintained by
the City, and to reduce pollutants in discharges from all lands owned or maintained by the City.
■ Train staff to implement the SOPS and document that training.
• Prepare Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs) for all heavy equipment maintenance or
storage yards identified for year -round facilities or yards, and material storage facilities owned or
operated by the City.
• Summarize annual activities for the "Pollution Prevention and Operations and Maintenance for
Municipal Operations" component of the Annual Compliance Report; identify any updates to the
SWMP.
12
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DI.A Page 21 of 392
7. Pollution Prevention and 0 &M for Municipal Operations City of Auburn 2015 SWMP Plan
7.2 Planned 2015 Compliance Activities
Table 7 -1 presents the work plan for 2015 SWMP activities relaxed to municipal operations and maintenance.
i Iiiii
.. 0
Task ID
Task Description
Responsible
Schedule Notes
Conduct annual inspection of all treatment and flow
MOW
control (other than catch basins) in the public system
Utilities
On -going
and perform maintenance as triggered by the
Engineering
maintenance standards.
Inspect 25% of the public catch basins before July 31,
MOM -2
2015 and perform maintenance as triggered by the
M &O
On -going
maintenance standards.
Perform street sweeping to reduce the amount of
MOM -3
street waste that enters the storm drainage
M &O
Ongoing
conveyance system.
Develop draft Low Impact Development maintenance
Utilities
MOM -4
standards, levels of service and inspection
Engineering
2015
procedures for adoption in 2016.
13
DI.A Page 22 of 392
CITY OF AUBURN 2015
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PLAN
8. COMPLIANCE WITH TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD
REQUIREMENTS
The federal Clean Water Act requires that Ecology establish "Total Maximum Daily Loads" (TMDL) for
rivers, streams, lakes, and marine waters that don't meet water quality standards. A TMDL is a calculation of
the maximum amount of a pollutant that a water body can receive and still meet water quality standards.
After the TMDL has been calculated for a given water body, Ecology determines how much each source
must reduce its discharges of the pollutant in order bring the water body back into compliance with the water
quality standards. TMDL requirements are included in the stormwater NPDES permits for discharges into
affected water bodies.
Stormwater discharges covered under this Permit are required to implement actions necessary to achieve the
pollutant reductions called for in applicable TMDLs. Applicable TMDLs are those approved by the EPA
before the issuance date of the Permit or which have been approved by the EPA prior to the issue date of the
Permit or the date Ecology issues coverage under the Permit, whichever is later. Information on Ecology's
TMDL program is available on Ecology's website at www.ecywa.gov /programs /wd /trn .
In accordance with Permit condition S7 Compliance with Total Maximum Daily Load Requirements the City
must comply with the following TMDL.
Name of TMDL
Puyallup Watershed Water Quality Improvement Project
Document(s) for
Puyallup River Vatershed Fecal Coliforru Total Maximum Daily Load — VaterQuality
TMDL
improvement Report and Implementation Plan, June 2011, Ecology Publication No. 11 -10-
040. htip://www.ecy.wa.gov/bibho/1110040.html
Location of Original
Puyallup river 16712, 7498, White River 16711, 16708, 16709, Clear Creek 7501, Swan
303(d) Listings
Creek 7514, Boise Creek 16706
Area Where TMDL
Requirements apply in all areas regulated under the Permittee's municipal stormwater
Requirements Apply
permit and discharging to water bodies listed within the specific requirement in this
TMDL section.
Parameter
Fecal Coliform
EPA Approval Date
September 2011
MS4 Permittee
Phase I Permit: King County, Pierce County
Phase II Permit: Auburn, Ed ewood, Enumclaw, Puyallup, Sumner
14
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DI.A Page 23 of 392
8. Compliance with Total Maximum Daily Load Requirements City of Auburn 2015 SWMP Plan
Actions required of the City under this TMDL include:
• Beginning no later than October 1, 2013, conduct twice monthly wet weather sampling of
stormwater discharges to the White River at Auburn Riverside High School to determine if specific
discharges from Auburn's MS4 exceed the water quality criteria for fecal coliform bacteria.
o Data shall be collected for one wet season.
o Data shall be collected in accordance with an Ecology- approved QAPP.
o Data collected since EPA TMDL approval can be used to meet this requirement.
These actions have been completed.
• For any of the outfalls monitored above showing discharges that exceed water quality criteria for
primary contact recreation: designate those areas discharging via the MS4 of concern as high priority
areas for illicit discharge detection and elimination efforts and implement the schedules and activities
identified in S5.C.3 of the Western Washington Phase II permit for response to any illicit discharges
found beginning no later than August 1, 2014.
This action has been completed.
• Install and maintain pet waste education and collection stations at municipal parks and other
Permittee owned and operated lands adjacent to streams. Focus on locations where people
commonly walk their dogs.
8.1 Planned 2015 Compliance Activities
Table 8 -1 presents the work plan for 2015 SWMP activities related to TMDL requirement compliance.
Task ID
. • I ,
Task Description
...
Responsible Schedule Notes
Include summary of activities conducted in TMDL
Utilities
TMDL - 1
area to address TMDL parameter (fecal coliform) with
Engineering
March 31, 2015
annual report to Ecology
Maintain pet waste education and collection stations
Parks
TMDL -2
at municipal parks and other public lands adjacent to
Department
On -going
the White River and it's tributaries.
15
H1PUB_WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DI.A Page 24 of 392
CITY OF AUBURN 2015
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PLAN
9. MONITORING
This section describes the Permit requirements related to water quality monitoring, and planned compliance
activities for 2015.
9.1 Permit Requirements
The Permit (Section S8) requires the City to either conduct Status and Trends Monitoring, and Effectiveness
Studies, or pay annually into a collective fund to implement monitoring through the Regional Stormwater
Monitoring Program (RSMP). The City committed in 2013 to pay $45,096.00 annually into the collective
RSMP monitoring fund for both Status and Trends Monitoring and Effectiveness Studies.
All permittees are required to pay into the RSMP to implement the RSMP Source Identification Information
Repository (SIDIR). Auburn's annual payment will be $2,614.00.
Payments are due to the Department of Ecology by August 151h each year.
The City is required to provide the following monitoring and /or assessment data in each annual report:
• A description of any stormwater monitoring or studies conducted by the City during the reporting
period. If stormwater monitoring was conducted on behalf of the City, or if studies or investigations
conducted by other entities were reported to the City, a brief description of the type of information
gathered or received shall be included in the annual report.
• An assessment of the appropriateness of the best management practices identified by the City for each
component of the SW-MP; and any changes made, or anticipated to be made, to the BMPs that were
previously selected to implement the SWMP and why.
9.2 Planned 2015 Compliance Activities
Table 9 -1 presents the work plan for 2015 SWMP monitoring activities.
E E
11Task
Compliance
Description
Lead
Timeframe
Pay $47,710.00 annually into the RSMP collective
MNTR -1 fund for implementation of Status and Trends
Utilities
Annual payment due by
Monitoring, Effectiveness Studies, and the Source
Engineering
August 15th.
Identification Information Repository.
16
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DLA Page 25 of 392
APPENDIX A
Acronyms and Definitions
The following definitions and acronyms are taken directly from the Phase II Permit and are reproduced here
for the reader's convenience.
40 CFR means Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which is the codification of the general and
permanent rules published in the Federal Register by the executive departments and agencies of the
federal government.
AKART means all known, available, and reasonable methods of prevention, control and treatment. See
also State Water Pollution Control Act, chapter 90.48.010 RCW and chapter 90.48.520 RCW.
All known, available and reasonable methods of prevention, control and treatment refers to the State
Water Pollution Control Act, chapter 90.48.010 RCW and chapter 90.48.520 RCW.
Applicable TMDL means a TMDL which has been approved by EPA on or before the issuance date of
this Permit, or prior to the date that Ecology issues coverage under this Permit, whichever is later.
Beneficial Uses means uses of waters of the state which include but are not limited to use for
domestic, stock watering, industrial, commercial, agricultural, irrigation, mining, fish and wildlife
maintenance and enhancement, recreation, generation of electric power and preservation of
environmental and aesthetic values, and all other uses compatible with the enjoyment of the public
waters of the state.
Best Management Practices are the schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance
procedures, and structural and /or managerial practices approved by Ecology that, when used singly
or in combination, prevent or reduce the release of pollutants and other adverse impacts to waters
of Washington State.
BMP means Best Management Practice.
Bypass means the diversion of stormwater from any portion of a stormwater treatment facility.
Census defined urban area means Urbanized Area.
17
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DI.A Page 26 of 392
Circuit means a portion of a MS4 discharging to a single point or serving a discrete area
determined by traffic volumes, land use, topography or the configuration of the MS4.
Component or Program Component means an element of the Stormwater Management Program listed
in S5 Stormwater Management Program for Cities, Towns, and Counties or S6 Stormwater
Management Program for Secondary Permittees, S7 Compliance with Total Maximum Daily Load
Requirements, or S8 Monitoring of this permit.
Co- Permittee means an owner or operator of an MS4 which is in a cooperative agreement with at least
one other applicant for coverage under this permit. A Co- Permittee is an owner or operator of a
regulated MS4 located within or in proximity to another regulated MS4. A Co- Permittee is only
responsible permit conditions relating to discharges from the MS4 the Co- Permittee owns or
operates. See also 40 CFR 122.26(b)(1)
CWA means Clean Water Act (formerly referred to as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act or Federal
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972) Pub.L. 92 -500, as amended Pub. L. 95 -217, Pub.
L. 95 -576, Pub. L. (6 -483 and Pub. L. 97 -117, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et.seq).
Director means the Director of the Washington State Department of Ecology, or an authorized
representative.
Entity means a governmental body, or a public or private organization.
EPA means the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
General Permit means a permit which covers multiple dischargers of a point source category within a
designated geographical area, in lieu of individual permits being issued to each discharger.
Ground water means water in a saturated zone or stratum beneath the surface of the land or below a
surface water body. Refer to chapter 173 -200 WAC.
Hazardous substance means any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance, product,
commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits any of the physical, chemical, or biological
properties described in WAC 173 - 303 -090 or WAC 173 - 303 -100.
Heavy equipment maintenance or storage yard means an uncovered area where any heavy equipment,
such as mowing equipment, excavators, dump trucks, backhoes, or bulldozers are washed or
maintained, or where at least five pieces of heavy equipment are stored on a long- term basis.
Highway means a main public road connecting towns and cities.
Hydraulically near means runoff from the site discharges to the sensitive feature without significant
natural attenuation of flows that allows for suspended solids removal. See Appendix 7 Determining
Construction Site Sediment Damage Potential for a more detailed definition.
Hyperchlorinated means water that contains more than 10 mg /Liter chlorine.
Illicit connection means any infrastructure connection to the MS4 that is not intended, permitted or used
for collecting and conveying stormwater or non - stormwater discharges allowed as specified in this
permit (S5.C.3 and S6.13.3). Examples include sanitary sewer connections, floor drains, channels,
pipelines, conduits, inlets, or outlets that are connected directly to the MS4.
Illicit discharge means any discharge to a MS4 that is not composed entirely of stormwater or of non -
stormwater discharges allowed as specified in this permit (S5.C.3 and S6.D.3).
18
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DI.A Page 27 of 392
Impervious surface means a non - vegetated surface area that either prevents or retards the entry of water
into the soil mantle as under natural conditions prior to development. A non- vegetated surface area
which causes water to run off the surface in greater quantities or at an increased rate of flow from the
flow present under natural conditions prior to development. Common impervious surfaces include,
but are not limited to, roof tops, walkways, patios, driveways, parking lots or stormwater areas,
concrete or asphalt paving, gravel roads, packed earthen materials, and oiled, macadam or other
surfaces which similarly impede the natural infiltration of stormwater.
Land disturbing activity means any activity that results in a change in the existing soil cover (both
vegetative and non - vegetative) and /or the existing soil topography. Land disturbing activities
include, but are not limited to clearing, grading, filling and excavation. Compaction that is
associated with stabilization of structures and road construction shall also be considered land
disturbing activity. Vegetation maintenance practices, including landscape maintenance and
gardening, are not considered land disturbing activity. Stormwater facility maintenance is not
considered land disturbing activity if conducted according to established standards and procedures.
LID means Low Impact Development.
LID BMP means low impact development best management practices.
LID Principles means land use management strategies that emphasize conservation, use of on- site
natural features, and site planning to minimize impervious surfaces, native vegetation loss, and
stormwater runoff.
Low Impact Development means a stormwater and land use management strategy that strives to mimic
pre - disturbance hydrologic processes of infiltration, filtration, storage, evaporation and transpiration by
emphasizing conservation, use of on -site natural features, site planning, and distributed stormwater
management practices that are integrated into a project design.
Low impact development best management practices means distributed stormwater management
practices, integrated into a project design, that emphasize pre - disturbance hydrologic processes of
infiltration, filtration, storage, evaporation and transpiration. LID BMPs include, but are not limited to,
bioretention /rain gardens, permeable pavements, roof downspout controls, dispersion, soil quality and
depth, vegetated roofs, minimum excavation foundations, and water re -use.
Material Storage Facilities means an uncovered area where bulk materials (liquid, solid, granular,
etc.) are stored in piles, barrels, tanks, bins, crates, or other means.
Maximum Extent Practicable refers to paragraph 402(p) (3) (B) (iii) of the federal Clean Water Act which
reads as follows: Permits for discharges from municipal storm sewers shall require controls to reduce
the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent practicable, including management practices, control
techniques, and system, design, and engineering methods, and other such provisions as the
Administrator or the State determines appropriate for the control of such pollutants.
MEP means Maximum Extent Practicable.
MS4 means municipal separate storm sewer system.
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System means a conveyance, or system of conveyances
(including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches,
manmade channels, or storm drains):
(i) Owned or operated by a state, city, town, borough, county, parish, district, association, or other
public body (created by or pursuant to state law) having jurisdiction over disposal of wastes,
19
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DI.A Page 28 of 392
stormwater, or other wastes, including special districts under State law such as a sewer district,
flood control district or drainage district, or similar entity, or an Indian tribe or an authorized
Indian tribal organization, or a designated and approved management agency under section 208
of the CWA that discharges to waters of Washington State.
(ii) Designed or used for collecting or conveying stormwater.
(iii) Which is not a combined sewer;
(iv) Which is not part of a Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POT as defined at 40 CFR
122.2.; and
(v) Which is defined as "large" or "medium" or "small" or otherwise designated by
Ecology pursuant to 40 CFR 122.26.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System means the national program for issuing, modifying,
revoking, and reissuing, terminating, monitoring and enforcing permits, and imposing and enforcing
pretreatment requirements, under sections 307, 402, 318, and 405 of the Federal Clean Water Act, for
the discharge of pollutants to surface waters of the state from point sources. These permits are
referred to as NPDES permits and, in Washington State, are administered by the Washington
Department of Ecology.
Native vegetation means vegetation comprised of plant species, other than noxious weeds, that are
indigenous to the coastal region of the Pacific Northwest and which reasonably could have been
expected to naturally occur on the site. Examples include trees such as Douglas Fir, western hemlock,
western red cedar, alder, big -leaf maple; shrubs such as willow, elderberry, salmonberry, and salal; and
herbaceous plants such as sword fern, foam flower, and fireweed.
New development means land disturbing activities, including Class IV General Forest Practices that are
conversions from timber land to other uses; structural development, including construction or
installation of a building or other structure; creation of hard surfaces; and subdivision, short
subdivision and binding site plans, as defined and applied in chapter 58.17 RCW. Projects meeting the
definition of redevelopment shall not be considered new development. Refer to Appendix 1 for a
definition of hard surfaces.
New Permittee means a city, town, or county that is subject to the Wlestern Wlashington
Municipal Stormwater General Permit and was not subject to the permit prior to August 1,
2013.
New Secondary Permittee means a Secondary Permittee that is covered under a municipal
stormwater general permit and was not covered by the permit prior to August 1, 2013.
NOI means Notice of Intent.
Notice of Intent means the application for, or a request for coverage under a General Permit
pursuant to WAC 173 - 226 -200.
Notice of Intent for Construction Activity means the application form for coverage under the
Construction Stormwater General Permit,
20
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DI.A Page 29 of 392
Notice of Intent for Industrial Activity means the application form for coverage under the
General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Industrial Activities.
NPDES means National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.
Outfall means point source as defined by 40 CFR 122.2 at the point where a discharge leaves the MS4 and
discharges to waters of the State. Outfall does not include pipes, tunnels, or other conveyances which
connect segments of the same stream or other surface waters and are used to convey primarily surface
waters (i.e. culverts).
Permittee unless otherwise noted, the term " Permittee" includes city, town, or county Permittee, Co-
Permittee, New Permittee, Secondary Permittee, and New Secondary Permittee.
Physically Interconnected means that one MS4 is connected to another storm sewer system in such a way
that it allows for direct discharges to the second system. For example, the roads with drainage systems
and municipal streets of one entity are physically connected directly to a storm sewer system belonging
to another entity.
Project site means that portion of a property, properties, or right -of -ways subject to land disturbing
activities, new hard surfaces, or replaced hard surfaces. Refer to Appendix 1 for a definition of hard
surfaces.
QAPP means Quality Assurance Project Plan.
Qualified Personnel means someone who has had professional training in the aspects of stormwater
management for which they are responsible and are under the functional control of the Permittee.
Qualified Personnel may be staff members, contractors, or volunteers.
Quality Assurance Project Plan means a document that describes the objectives of an
environmental study and the procedures to be followed to achieve those objectives.
RCW means the Revised Code of Washington State.
Receiving waters means bodies of water or surface water systems to which surface runoff is discharged
via a point source of stormwater or via sheet flow. Receiving waters may also be ground water to
which surface runoff is directed by infiltration.
Redevelopment means, on a site that is already substantially developed (i.e., has 35% or more of existing
hard surface coverage), the creation or addition of hard surfaces; the expansion of a building footprint
or addition or replacement of a structure; structural development including construction, installation or
expansion of a building or other structure; replacement of hard surface that is not part of a routine
maintenance activity, and land disturbing activities. Refer to Appendix 1 for a definition of hard
surfaces.
Regional Stormwater Monitoring Program means, for all of western Washington, a stormwater-
focused monitoring and assessment program consisting of these components: status and trends
monitoring in small streams and marine nearshore areas, stormwater management program
effectiveness studies, and a source identification information repository (SIDIR). The priorities and
scope for the RSMP are set by a formal stakeholder group. For this permit term, RSMP status and
trends monitoring will be conducted in the Puget Sound basin only.
Regulated Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System means a Municipal Separate Storm
Sewer System which is automatically designated for inclusion in the Phase II stormwater permitting
21
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DI.A Page 30 of 392
program by its location within an Urbanized Area, or by designation by Ecology and is not eligible
for a waiver or exemption under S1.C.
RSMP means Regional Stormwater Monitoring Program.
Runoff is water that travels across the land surface and discharges to water bodies either directly or
through a collection and conveyance system. See also " Stormwater."
Secondary Permittee is an operator of a regulated small MS4 which is not a city, town or county.
Secondary Permittees include special purpose districts and other public entities that meet the criteria
in S1.B.
Sediment /Erosion - Sensitive Feature means an area subject to significant degradation due to the effect of
construction runoff, or areas requiring special protection to prevent erosion. See Appendix 7
Determining Construction Site Sediment Transport Potential for a more detailed definition.
Shared water bodies means water bodies, including downstream segments, lakes and estuaries that
receive discharges from more than one Permittee.
SIDIR means Source Identification Information Repository.
Significant contributor means a discharge that contributes a loading of pollutants considered to be
sufficient to cause or exacerbate the deterioration of receiving water quality or instream habitat
conditions.
Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System means an MS4 that is not defined as "large" or
"medium" pursuant to 40 CFR 122.26(b)(4) & (7) or designated under 40 CFR 122.26 (a)(1)(v).
Source control BMP means a structure or operation that is intended to prevent pollutants from coming
into contact with stormwater through physical separation of areas or careful management of activities
that are sources of pollutants. The SW7v�'(2012) separates source control BMPs into two types.
Structural Source Control BMPs are physical, structural, or mechanical devices, or facilities that are
intended to prevent pollutants from entering stormwater. Operational BMPs are non - structural
practices that prevent or reduce pollutants from entering stormwater. See Volume IV of the
SWMMWIW (2012) for details.
Stormwater means runoff during and following precipitation and snowmelt events, including surface
runoff, drainage or interflow.
Stormwater Associated with Industrial and Construction Activity means the discharge from any
conveyance which is used for collecting and conveying stormwater, which is directly related to
manufacturing, processing or raw materials storage areas at an industrial plant, or associated with
clearing, grading and /or excavation, and is required to have an NPDES permit in accordance with 40
CFR 122.26.
Stormwater Management Program means a set of actions and activities designed to reduce the discharge
of pollutants from the MS4 to the MEP and to protect water quality, and comprising the components
listed in S5 (for cities, towns and counties) or S6 (for Secondary Permittees) of this Permit and any
additional actions necessary to meet the requirements of applicable TMDLs pursuant to S7 Compliance
with TMDL Bequinments, and S8 Monitoring and Assessment.
Stormwater Treatment and Flow Control BMPs /Facilities means detention facilities, treatment
BMPs /facilities, bioretention, vegetated roofs, and permeable pavements that help meet Appendix 1
Minimum Requirements #6 (treatment), #7 (flow control), or both.
22
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DI.A Page 31 of 392
SWMMWW means Stormwater Management Manualfor Wlestern Wlashington (2005).
SWMP means Stormwater Management Program.
TMDL means Total Maximum Daily Load.
Total Maximum Daily Load means a water cleanup plan. A TMDL is a calculation of the maximum
amount of a pollutant that a water body can receive and still meet water quality standards, and an
allocation of that amount to the pollutant's sources. A TMDL is the sum of the allowable loads of a
single pollutant from all contributing point and nonpoint sources.
The calculation must include a margin of safety to ensure that the water body can be used for the
purposes the state has designated. The calculation must also account for seasonable variation in water
quality. Water quality standards are set by states, territories, and tribes. They identify the uses for each
water body, for example, drinking water supply, contact recreation (swimming), and aquatic life support
(fishing), and the scientific criteria to support that use. The Clean Water Act, section 303, establishes
the water quality standards and TMDL programs.
Tributary conveyance means pipes, ditches, catch basins, and inlets owned or operated by the Permittee
and designed or used for collecting and conveying stormwater.
UGA means Urban Growth Area.
Urban Growth Area means those areas designated by a county pursuant to RCW 36.70A.110.
Urbanized Area is a federally - designated land area comprising one or more places and the adjacent
densely settled surrounding area that together have a residential population of at least 50,000 and
an overall population density of at least 1,000 people per square mile. Urbanized Areas are
designated by the U.S. Census Bureau based on the most recent decennial census.
Vehicle Maintenance or Storage Facility means an uncovered area where any vehicles are regularly
washed or maintained, or where at least 10 vehicles are stored.
Water Quality Standards means Surface Water Quality Standards, chapter 173 -201A WAC, Ground
Water Quality Standards, chapter 173 -200 WAC, and Sediment Management Standards, chapter
173 -204 WAC.
Waters of the State includes those waters as defined as "waters of the United States" in 40 CFR Subpart
122.2 within the geographic boundaries of Washington State and "waters of the state" as defined in
chapter 90.48 RCW which includes lakes, rivers, ponds, streams, inland waters, underground waters,
salt waters and all other surface waters and water courses within the jurisdiction of the State of
Washington.
Waters of the United States refers to the definition in 40 CFR 122.2.
23
HAPUB WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \SWMPs\2015 SWMP \Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan.docx
DI.A Page 32 of 392
City of Auburn Annual Report for 2014
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit
v� 4
1 �.
La o w- x--,
MUM
-:� .•.^ _ 77 ''ter �r..e*+►.
�y �MrSIMi+iat tz Sri
{' k
F
,.+� >�.�` � �• � . . v . � �`> tip_
DI.A Page 33 of 392
D
WQWebSubmittal - Search
Page 1 of 7
Submittals WQWebSubmittal
WQWebSubmittal Home WQWebPortal Home Help FAQs
Annual Report
Question Permit
Questions
Number Section
.. .............. . ................. .............................
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....................................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I ........................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1 S5,A,2
Attach updated annual Stormwater Management Program Plan (SWMP Plan). (S5,A,2)
Saved Document Name: Final Draft 2015 SWMP Plan_ 1_ 02102015_0140.pdf
...... ...............................
2 S9.D.5
Attach a copy of any annexations, incorporations or boundary changes resulting in an increase or
decrease in the Permittee's geographic area of permit coverage during the reporting period per S9.D,5,
............ . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..........
Not Applicable
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... ......... .. . . ............... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................ . ......................................
3 S5,A.3
Implemented an ongoing program to gather, track, and maintain information per S5.A,3, including
costs or estimated costs of implementing the SWMP.
...............................................................
Yes
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...............................
4 S5,A,5,b
Coordinated among departments within thejurlsdiction to eliminate barriers to permit compliance.
(S5.A.5,b)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... .......... . . . . ........
. . . . . . . .
Yes
............... I .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................ . ...................................... . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............................. . ....................
4b S5.A,5,b
Attach a written description of internal coordination mechanisms. (Required to be submitted no later
than March 31, 2015, S5.A,5.b)
..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................,.,.,.,.,,..,,,.
Saved Document Name: Internal Coord 20150204 draft_4b_02042015_0311.pdf
....................,..,.,,,... ,,,...,,,.,,,,..,,.,,,,............,... ....,,.,..,....................
5 S5.C.1.a,i
Attach description of public education and outreach efforts conducted per S5,C.1.a.1 and ii.
and ii
Saved Document Name: City of Auburn 2014 Public Education
...................... .............................,,........
Summary-5-02102015 _0141. p df
........................................................................................ ....,.,................,..,.,,.,,,,......,.,.,,,.,,,...,.,.,,,,..,.,,,.,...,.,..,....,.....,.,,....,..,..,....,.,..,.........,..............,,............,............................. ..... ...................................................................
6 S5,C,1,b
Created stewardship opportunities (or partnered with others) to encourage resident participation in
activities such as those described in S5,C.1.b,
........................ ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Yes ...............................
7 S5.C.1.b
Used results of measuring the understanding and adoption of targeted behaviors among at least one
audience in at least one subject area to direct education and outreach resources and evaluate changes
in adoption of targeted behaviors. (Required no later than February 2, 2016, S5.C.1,b)
Not Applicab .le
........................................................................................................................................-.,.............................,.,,............,.....,...,,.,.,,,,..,...,,.,.,,.,..,,.,..,.,....,,..,......,......,,..,,..,.,... ...............................
7b S5.C.1.b
Attach description of how this requirement was met.
........... . . . . ............... . ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8 S5.C.2.a
. . . . . . . . ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...............
Describe the opportunities created for the public to participate in the decision making processes
involving the development, implementation and updates of the Permittee's SWMP. (S5.C,2.a)
Public comments were requested on the draft SWMP Plan. A public hearing was held at a
City Council meeting for the public to comment, or written comments were accepted. The
.............. . ................ . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..............
draft SWMP Plan was available for review on the City's website.
. ............... . . .. . . . . . . . .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ . .......... . ...................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...............
9 S5,C,2,b
Posted the updated SWMP Plan and latest annual report on your website no later than May 31.
(S5.C.2.b)
....................... . ....... .........................................
Yes
. .................................... ,,.................................................. ,...,......,.,,,.,,,,.,,...,,.................. ........................................................................................ ,................................................................. ............ .,,,,..,..,.,.. ,.................. I...........
9b
Page 34 of 392
https:Hsecureaccess .wa.gov /ecy /wgwebportal/ wqwebsubmittal /ViewQuestionnaire.aspx ?Q... 2/10/2015
WQW&Submittal - Search
Page 2 of 7
S5.C,2,b
List the website address.
.................................
http:/ /www.auburnwa.gov /services/ utilities /storm_ drainage /storm water_p,ermit.htm
............................... ..... ......... ...,....,
10 S5.C.3,a,i -
Maintained a map of the MS4 including the requirements listed in S5,C.3,a,i. -vi.
vi
............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Yes
. . . . . . . .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............. . ........................ . ............................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . .
11 S5.C.3.b,v
Implemented a compliance strategy, including informal compliance actions as well as enforcement
provisions of the regulatory mechanism described in S5,C,3.b. (S5.C,3.b,v)
........................... ........ ... ............................. ....--
Yes
............................ .. .... ,............. ,.- ................ ....... ......... . .................. .............................................. .................................................. ................................... ........................ .......
12 S5.C,3,b.vi
Updated, if necessary, the regulatory mechanism to effectively prohibit illicit discharges into the MS4
per S5.C,3.b.vi. (Required no later than February 2, 2018)
.......... . . . . ............. . ...... . . ............................. . . . . . . . . . .
Not Applicable ................ . . .... . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................... . .................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...................
12b
Cite the Prohibited Discharges code reference
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................... . ......................... . .......... . ..................... . . . . . . .................................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13 S5.C,3.c,i
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Implemented procedures for conducting illicit discharge investigations in accordance with S5,C.3,c.i.
............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .........
Yes
. ..................... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..................... . ............................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................
13b S5.C,3,c,i
Cite methodology
Illicit Connection and Illicit Discharge Field Screening and Source Tracing Guidance Manual
.......... ............
MBDO. E). .................................................................................. ...........
14 S5.C.3,c,i
Percentage of MS4 coverage area screened in reporting year per S5.C,3.c.i, (Required to screen 40%
of MS4 no later than December 31, 2017 (except no later than June 30, 2018 for the City of Aberdeen)
and 12% on average each year thereafter. (S5.C.3)
.................................. . ......... ...............................
44
. ............................................. . .................................. . ................ .................... . . . . ........................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15 S5,C,3,c,ii
List the hotline telephone number for public reporting of spills and other illicit discharges. (S5,C.3.c.ii)
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
(253)931 -3048 ...............................
15b S5.C.3,c,ii
Number of hotline calls received,
...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
8 ...............................
16 S5,C,3.c,lii
Implemented an ongoing illicit discharge training program for all municipal field staff per S5,C.3,c,iii.
Yes.......................... ............................... ......................................................,..........................................._,,.........,........,........... ...............................
17 S5.C,3,c,iv
Informed public employees, businesses, and the general public of hazards associated with illicit
discharges and improper disposal of waste. (S5.C.3.c,iv)
Yes ............................................................................................. ...............................
17b S5,C.3.c,iv
Describe the information sharing actions. (S5,C,3.c,iv)
Field maintenance staff recieved training on BMPs to prevent stormwater pollution for the
work they perform, ECOSS and King County Local Source Control programs provided spill
prevention and source control technical assistance to businesses, postcards were sent to
neighborhoods where illicit discharges were investigated reminding residents to prevent
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
stormwater pollution. ...............................
18 S5,C.3,d
Implemented an ongoing program to characterize, trace, and eliminate illicit discharges Into the MS4
per S5,C.3.d.
.................... .............................. ...........
Yes...................,...,..,...,,.,,....,....,..,.,,...,,....,.................,..,.......,. ............................... ......................................................................................... ................................................ ,.......................... ,..............................................
19 S5,C,3.d,iv
Number of illicit discharges, including Illicit connections, eliminated during the reporting year.
(S5,C.3,d,iv)
......................................................................
29............,.,....,.,,.,..,.,,.,.,.....,....,,,,..,,,,........,.....,.....,............,..,.,,.,.,,..,...,...............,..,...,,..,..,.,....,.,,,,,...,.....,.,,.,.,..,,.......,..........,.......,...,,.,,...............,.,..,..........,...,......,,.,..,.,,.,,.,.,..........,.......,,...,..,,.,,„,.. ...............................
DI.A Page 35 of 392
https: / /secureaccess.wa. gov/ ecy/ wgwebportal/ wgwebsubmittal /ViewQuestiormaire. aspx ?Q... 2/10/2015
WQWebSubmittal - Search
Page 3 of 7
S5.C.3.d.iv Attach a summary of actions taken to characterize, trace and eliminate each illicit discharge found by
or reported to the permittee. For each illicit discharge, include a description of actions according to
required timeline per S5.C.3.d.iv
Saved Document Name: 1 Auburn IDDE Tracking Form Data_20_02042015_0122.pdf
1 S5.C,3.e Municipal illicit discharge detection staff are trained to conduct illicit discharge detection and
elimination activities as described in S5.C,3.e.
Yes
S5.C.4.a Implemented an ordinance or other enforceable mechanism to address runoff from new development,
redevelopment and construction sites per the requirements of S5.C.4.a.
Yes
24 S5.C.4.a.i Number of exceptions granted to the minimum requirements in Appendix 1. (S5.C.4.a.i., and Section 6
of Appendix 1)
0
25 S5.C.4.a.1 Number of variances granted to the minimum requirements in Appendix 1. (S5.C.4.a.i„ and Section 6
of Appendix 1)
D]
S5.C.4.b.i Reviewed Stormwater Site Plans for all proposed development activities that meet the thresholds
adopted pursuant to S5.C.4.a.i. (S5.C.4.b.i)
Yes
S5.C.4.b.i Number of site plans reviewed during the reporting period.
441
S5.C.4.b.ii Inspected, prior to clearing and construction, permitted development sites that have a high potential
for sediment transport as determined through plan review based on definitions and requirements in
Appendix 7 Determining Construction Site Sediment Damage Potential, or alternatively, inspected all
construction sites meeting the minimum thresholds adopted pursuant to S5.C.4.a.i. (S5.C.4.b.ii)
Yes
7b S5.C.4.b.ii Number of construction sites inspected per S5.C.4.b.ii.
8
8 S5.C.4.b.iii Inspected permitted development sites during construction to verify proper installation and
maintenance of required erosion and sediment controls. (S5,C.4.b.iii)
Yes
8b S5.C.4,b.iii Number of construction sites inspected per S5.C.4.b.iii,
32
9 S5.C.4.b.ii, Number of enforcement actions taken during the reporting period (based on construction phase
ill and inspections at new development and redevelopment projects). (S5.C.4.1b.ii, iii and v)
20
S5.C.4.b.iv Inspected all permitted development sites that meet the thresholds In S5.C.4.a.1 upon completion of
construction and prior to final approval or occupancy to ensure proper installation of permanent
stormwater facilities. (S5.C.4.b.iv)
Yes
1 S5.C.4.b.ii- Achieved at least 80% of scheduled construction - related inspections. (S5.C.4.b.ii -iv)
IV
Yes
DI.A Page 36 of 392
https: / /secureaccess.wa. gov /ecy /wgwebportal/ wqwebsubmittal /ViewQuestionnaire.aspx ?Q... 2/10/2015
WQW&Submittal - Search Page 4 of 7
32 S5,C.4.b,iv Verified a maintenance plan is completed and responsibility for maintenance is assigned for projects.
(S5,C,4,b.iv)
Yes
........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . ...................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .........................
. . .. . .
3 S5.C,4,c Implemented provisions to verify adequate long -term operation and maintenance (O &M) of stormwater
treatment and flow control BMPs /facilities that are permitted and constructed pursuant to S5.C.4, a
and b. (S5,C.4.c)
5 S5,C,4,c, iii Annually inspected stormwater treatment and flow control BMPs /facilities per S5,C 4.c,iii.
b S5,C.4.c.iii If using reduced inspection frequency for the first time during this permit cycle, attach documentation
per S5,C.4.c,iii
Not Applicable
S5.C.4.c.iv Inspected new residential stormwater treatment and flow control BMPs /facilities and catch basins E
6 months per S5.C,4,c,iv to identify maintenance needs and enforce compliance with maintenance
standards,
Yes
S5.C,4,c,v Achieved at least 80% of scheduled inspections to verify adequate long -term O &M. (S5.C4.c.v)
Yes
38 S4,C.4,c,vi Verified that maintenance was performed per the schedule in S5,CA.c,vl when an inspection identified
an exceedance of the maintenance standard.
Yes
138b S5.C.4.c.vi Attach documentation of any maintenance delays. (S5.C.4,c,vi)
Not Applicable
S5.C,4.d Provided copies of the Notice of Intent for Construction Activity and Notice of Intent for Industrial
Activity to representatives of proposed new development and redevelopment. (S5.C,4.d)
Yes
S5,C,4,e All staff responsible for implementing the program to control stormwater runoff from new
development, redevelopment, and construction sites, including permitting, plan review, construction
site inspections, and enforcement are trained to conduct these activities. (S5,C.4.e)
Yes
2 S5.CA.g Participated and cooperated with the watershed -scale stormwater planning process led by a Phase I
county. (S5.C,4,g)
Not Applicable
3 S5,C,5,a Implemented maintenance standards as protective, or more protective, or facility function as those
specified in Chapter 4 of Volume V of the 2005 Stormwater Management Manual for Western
Washington. (Cowlitz /Lewis counties apply until no later than June 30,2017 & City of Aberdeen apply
until no later than June 30, 2018, S5,C.5,a),
Yes
S5.C,5.a Applied a maintenance standard that is not specified in the 2012 Stormwater Management Manual for
Western Washington.
Not Applicable
. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ........................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................... . . . . . . . . . . . . ...........
. . . . . . . .
S5.C.5.a Please note what kinds of facilities are covered by this alternative maintenance standard. (S5.C,5.a)
DLA Page 37 of 392
https:// secureaccess. wa. gov/ ecy/ wgwebportal/ wgwebsubmittal /ViewQuestioiinaire.aspx ?Q.., 2/10/2015
WQWebSubmittal - Search Page 5 of 7
45 S5.C,5,a.ii Performed timely maintenance per S5.C.5.a.11.
Yes
46 S5.C.5.b Annually inspected all municipally owned or operated permanent stormwater treatment and flow
control BMPs /facilities. (S5,C.5.b)
Yes
6b S5.C.5.b Number of known municipally owned or operated stormwater treatment and flow control
BMPs /facilities. (S5.C.5.b)
245
............ ....................... ........................ . ... .................... . ............................................................. . ............................... .......................................................................................................................................... ................................................. .- .... ..........................................
6c S5.C,5.b Number of facilities inspected during the reporting period, (S5.C,5.b)
241
................................................................ .............................................................................................................................................................. ............................... ...............................
6d S5.C.5.b Number of facilities for which maintenance was performed during the reporting period, (S5.C.5.b)
25
7 S5.C.5.b If using reduced inspection frequency for the first time during this permit cycle, attach documentation
per S5.C.5.b.
Not Applicable
S5,C.5,c Conducted spot checks and inspections (if necessary) of potentially damaged stormwater facilities after
major storms as per S5,C.5,c.
S5,C.5.d Inspected all municipally owned or operated catch basins and inlets as per S5.C.54 or used an
alternative approach. (Required once no later than August 1, 2017 and every two years thereafter,
except once no later than June 30, 2018 and every two years thereafter for the City of Aberdeen)
Not Applicable
b S5.C.5.d Number of known catch basins.
12554
S5,C,5,d Number of catch basins inspected during the reporting period.
1756
S5.C,5.d Number of catch basins cleaned during the reporting period.
339
0 S5,C.5,d,i -II Attach documentation of alternative catch basin cleaning approach, if used. (S5,C.5,d,1 or li)
Not Applicable
1 S5.C,5.f Implemented practices, policies and procedures to reduce stormwater impacts associated with runoff
from all lands owned or maintained by the Permittee, and road maintenance activities under the
functional control of the Permittee. (S5.C.5.f)
Yes
2 S5.C,5.g Implemented an ongoing training program for Permittee employees whose primary construction,
operations or maintenancejob functions may impact stormwater quality, (S5.C,5.g,)
Yes
3 S5,C.5,h Implemented a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for all heavy equipment maintenance or storage
yards, and material storage facilities owned or operated by the Permittee in areas subject to this
Permit that are not required to have coverage under an NPDES permit that covers stormwater
discharges associated with the activity, (S5.C.5.h)
DI.A Page 38 of 392
https: Hsecureaccess.wa. gov /ecy/ wqwebportal / wqwebsubmittal /ViewQuestionnaire. aspx ?Q, .. 2/10/2015
WQWeb Submittal - Search
Yes
Page 6 of 7
54 S7.A Complied with the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)- specific requirements identified in Appendix 2.
(S7.A)
Yes
55 S7.A For TMDLs listed in Appendix 2: Attach a summary of relevant SWMP and Appendix 2 activities to
address the applicable TMDL parameter(s), (S7.A)
Saved Document Name: City of Auburn 2014 TMDL Summary_55_02102015_0143.pdf
S8.A Attach a description of any stormwater monitoring or stormwater - related studies as described in S8.A.
Saved Document Name: City of Auburn 2014 Monitoring Summary_56_02102015_0143.pdf
7 S8. B.1 Participated' in cost - sharing for the regional stormwater monitoring program (RSMP) for status and
trends monitoring. (S8.13,1)
Yes
8 S8.C.1 Participated in cost - sharing for the regional stormwater monitoring program (RSMP) for effectiveness
studies. (S8.C.1) (Required to begin no later than August 15, 2014)
9 S8, D.1 Contributed to the RSMP for source identification and diagnostic monitoring information repository in
accordance with S8.D.1 . (Required to begin no later than August 15, 2014)
G3 Notified Ecology in accordance with G3 of any discharge into or from the Permittees MS4 which could
constitute a threat to human health, welfare or the environment. (G3)
Yes
G3 Number of G3 notifications provided to Ecology.
16
G3.A Took appropriate action to correct or minimize the threat to human health, welfare, and /or the
environment per G3,A.
Yes_....__ _.__ .............
3 S4.F.1 Notified Ecology within 30 days of becoming aware that a discharge from the Permittee's MS4 caused
or contributed to a known or likely violation of water quality standards in the receiving water, (S4,F.1)
Not Applicable
4 S4.F.3.a If requested, submitted an Adaptive Management Response report in accordance with S4,F.3.a.
Not Applicable
S4. F. 3.d Attach a summary of the status of implementation of any actions taken pursuant to S4,17,3 and the
status of any monitoring, assessment, or evaluation efforts conducted during the reporting period.
(S4.F.3.d)
Not Applicable
G20 Notified Ecology of the failure to comply with the permit terms and conditions within 30 days of
becoming aware of the non - compliance. (G20)
Yes
G20 Number of non - compliance notifications (G20) provided in reporting year,
1
DI.A Page 39 of 392
lhttps;//secureaccess.wa. gov/ ecy/ wgwebportal/ wgwebsubmittal /ViewQuestionnaire.aspx ?Q... 2/10/2015
WQWebSubmittal - Search
G20
Attachments:
List the permit conditions described in non - compliance notification (s).
S5.C.4, S5.C.3
View Files Attached to Submission
Close
Ecology I -ionic, I WQWebPortal Horne I WQWeb Submittal home I I-IoIp I Release Notes I C0111.3ct US
SUbmiltals (WQWebSubmittal) Version 1.2 1 Data Disclaimer I Privacy Policy
Copyright D, Washington State Department of Ecology 2013, All Rights Reserved.
Page 7 of 7
DI.A Page 40 of 392
https:Hsecureaccess.wa. gov/ ecy/ wgwebportal/ wgwebsubmittal /ViewQuestionnaire.aspx ?Q... 2/10/2015
DacDescr Doc Name
DoaExt DoolD SubiD AppName
View
1 Auburn IDDE Trucking Form Data_2002042016_0122.
.pdf
332990 1487339 wqwebportal
View
Final Draft 2016 SWMP Plan_1_02042016_0311.pdf
.pdf
333046 1487339 wgwebporlal
View
Internal Coord 20160204 draft _4b_02042015_0311.pdf
.pdf
333047 1487339 wqwebportal
View
City of Auburn 2014 Public Education Summary_5_021
.pdf
334747 1487339 wqwebportal
View
City of Auburn 2014 TMDL Summary5502102015_0143..pdf
334750 1487339 wqwebportal
View
City of Auburn 2014 Monitoring Summary_56_02102016
,pdf
334751 1487339 wqwebportal
Close
Ecology I -ionic, I WQWebPortal Horne I WQWeb Submittal home I I-IoIp I Release Notes I C0111.3ct US
SUbmiltals (WQWebSubmittal) Version 1.2 1 Data Disclaimer I Privacy Policy
Copyright D, Washington State Department of Ecology 2013, All Rights Reserved.
Page 7 of 7
DI.A Page 40 of 392
https:Hsecureaccess.wa. gov/ ecy/ wgwebportal/ wgwebsubmittal /ViewQuestionnaire.aspx ?Q... 2/10/2015
City of Auburn Annual Report for 2014
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit
Question 1. Attach updated annual Stormwater Management Program Plan (SWMP Plan)
Attachment follows:
DI.A Page 41 of 392
Resolution No. 5131
Exhibit "A"
CITY OF AUBURN
2015 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM PLAN
City of Auburn, WA
March 2015
Full document attached to
Resolution No. 5131
DLA Page 42 of 392
City of Auburn Annual Report for 2014
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit
Question 4b. Attach a written description of internal coordination mechanisms.
Attachment follows:
DI.A Page 43 of 392
question 4b. pescrip lion of internal cO °rd °nation methods
SWMp component
ration it implementation
pdmintst of Perm
Coordination
with interconn
ected
between jurisdictions
Coordina On plan development an
d
M54 s anagenient Program
Stormwater M
updates
public Education and Outreach
_ _ ,O's building outreach
Behavior change Outreach
pI.A
Key Staff Positions p lead, lS) Support
Storm
s Coordinator ( WCiPC) t� }'
Water Clual" Programs
Drainage Engineer i5)
Storm Drainage Engineer �S}
WapC (J_)'
Drainage Engineer (S)
,n�C3PC (i-), Storm
and adoption of targeted
Of understanding
ineering Gr °up (S }' Solid W rite
CLPC (i-), Utilities Eng
nifty tS), Multimedia (S)
�L} }, Solid Waste
Group (S
n ineering
Utilities Eg
(S) Multimedia t5i
er (L },Environmental
ices Manag
Environmental se Sp
Parks Maintenance t5)
Program l ),
tl_}
Notes/Comments
with lead staff in other it
W aPC works Promote Perm
departments
to m
N th neighboring M54 managers
implementation.
WapC communicates public and
date process. CDPW sta{f'the
as necessary• suggestions•
WapC leads pfp{icials provide comments(
City elected
— In the
ineering staff participate
Utilities Eng for Regional
apC and U Outreach ote their events
,gional STorm�vater and prom Solid
RM) group e Water and
junicipalities IST' Storm Drainag , messaging,
City• ether to coordinate
vithinthe work to lonsupp °rt'
,Haste Utilities technical product
Multimedia provides staff participate in the
Utilities Engineering Tonal
WapC and outreach for Reg
Tormv�ater and promote their events
regional S CORM) group W ater and Solid
Municipalities The Storm Drainage, messaging,
within the City ether to coordinate
Waste Utilities worktog roduction support
Multimedia provides technical p coordinate
ices Program staff
orted by Parks
Environmental Sery which are supp
stewardship events eted
Department staff- ent and
adoption of tang
on measurem P _ or discussion by
Any Yeports to the Wa In the annual
behaviors are routed staff for inclusion future
inage Utility report helps refine
Storm Dra ,,formation'
. the rep
I reporti- inform
efforts.
1 orts \2014 RePo" \Internal coo0 a1g e24x�Fx 0j392
pU8_WRKS \Utd��es\ Storm \�PDE511 \Administration \Annua1ReP
Question 4b. Description of internal coordination methods
Public Involvement and Participation
Create opportunities for public participation in SWMP Plan
WQPC (L), Storm Drainage Engineer (S)
The WQPC schedules the public comment period and
updates
Supervisor (L), Storm Drainage Engineer (S), IT /GIS Division
public hearing to allow for comments on the SWMP
(S)
Plan.
Post SWMP Plan and Annual Report on City website
WQPC (L), Multimedia Department (S), Engineering
The WQPC coordinates with Multimedia or Engineering
Services Administrative Staff (S)
Services Administrative Staff to have the SWMP Plan
Prohibited discharge ordinance development /updates
WQPC (L), Storm Drainage Engineer (S), Legal Department
and Annual Report posted on the City's website.
Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
Mapping
Storm Drainage Technician (L), Design Technician
Storm Utility is conducting field inventory of storm
Supervisor (L), Storm Drainage Engineer (S), IT /GIS Division
drainage assets and coordinating with IT /GIS to update
(S)
GIS maps. The Design Technician Supervisor coordinates
with IT /GIS to ensure that capital projects are entered
into the City's GIS maps.
Prohibited discharge ordinance development /updates
WQPC (L), Storm Drainage Engineer (S), Legal Department
Storm Utility staff coordinate with the Legal Department
(S)
and others to update city code as required.
Program to detect and identify non - stormwater discharges
WQPC (L), Storm Drainage Technician (S), Water Resources
Spill or dumping reports are received at Maintenance
and illicit connections to MS4
Technician (S), Storm Division Crew (S)
and Operations (and through any other City staff). Once
received they are routed to the IDDE investigation team
(WQPC, Storm Drainage Technician, and Water
Resources Technician). The investigation team may
request assistance from storm maintenance staff if the
television truck, smoke testing, traffic control or
confined space entry are needed. The WQPC conducts
IDDE screening as part of the annual inspection of all
municipally owned or operated permanent stormwater
treatment and flow control BMPs /facilities.
Program to address illicit discharges, including spills and
WQPC (L), Storm Drainage Technician (S), Water Resources
Identified spills or illicit connections are initially
illicit connections, into the MS4
Technician (S), Storm Division Crew (S), Code Enforcement
addressed by the IDDE investigation team. Spill clean -up
(S)
often requires the assistance of storm /streets
maintenance staff. The IDDE investigation team works
with the Building Division and Code Enforcement to
address illicit connections.
Training for staff responsible for identification,
WQPC (L), Storm Drainage Technician (S), Water Resources
The WQPC ensures IDDE identification and reporting
investigation, termination, cleanup, and reporting of illicit
Technician (S)
training is conducted for new staff and that the IDDE
discharges, spills and illicit connections
investigation team is kept up to date in their training.
D I.A H. \PUB_WRKS \Utilities\ Storm \NPDES II \Administration \Annual Reports \2014 Report\Internal C13rW1a$cl-V 392
Question 4b. Description of internal coordination methods
�
WCLPC (L)
ew
sneer (L), Development Engineer (S
Redevelopment and Construction SDrainage Eng artment (5)
ment, ment, Storm Legal pep
Runoff from New Develop develop Construction Manager (S),
linance that addresses runoff from ro ects
_- .,.+.,nrnent and construction site p 1
site plan review, inspects °nand
Program for permitting, ublic projects
enforcement for private and p
uate long-term operation and
Program to verify adeq flow control
maintenance of Storm
water treatment and
gMPS /facilities
unity De
Asst Director of velopment Services (L) A
Ci Engineer (L), Development
Comm
Director of Engineering / tY Ineer (S), Construction
(Engineer (S), Storm Drainage Eng
Manager (S)
Make copies of "Notice of lntentfor Construalailable1t o
foes of new development and redevelopment
and "Notice of Intent for Industrial Activity'
Cepresentat
Drainage Englneer nt Engineer
(L), Developme
(L),
Resources Technician (S), Storm Drainage
ician (S)
the WQPC maintains records pertaining Illicit
Discharge Detection and Elimination.
e Engineer is the lead on code
the Storm Drain ag runoff from new ites
updates related to controlling
redevelopment and constructions es andand
development,
coordinates updates with Development
Construction management ensurA`l code change Bare
are communicated to review Pa meat
coordinated with the Leg staff prior to submitting
Developers work with planning staff
meet City zoning
plans to ensure that their p 1 ect l the City's Permit
e received through
standards and that environmental review is complete.
ment
Developer plans are the develop
Center. The plans are routed throng meat, Traffic
process including review by Develop
review p Construction and the Building
and Utility Engineers, rnent plans move
Department staff. Approved develop
to Construction for inspection by the Construction
Management I
Inspection and Stormwater proje iase. Public proects s
are
staff sta during the construction ph
consultants under City contract
designed ' +n house or by Construction
to meet City Stormwater standards. Inspection and
oversight is provide by Construction Insp
..,,.,ester Management Inspection staff' —
L Develop��ent Review Engineer
Development Engineer ( )
I(S)
sneering staff prepare and ensure that
eveloprnent Eng inspection Easement e and
ermanent Mainte roved and re orded for each
locuments are app Prior to recording, the documents
9evelopment project-
are reviewed and signed by the Storm Drainage
.Engineer. Annual City budget includes allocations for
nance of public Stormwater
operation and mainte
facties. sneer and his staff provide Notice
The Development Eng developers during the design
of Intent informal oto
of development
Storm \NPOES II \Adminisirat + °n \Annual Report5\2014 Report \jnternai CO age 2xof 392
H: \PUB WRKS \util+t+es\
Question 4b. Description of internal coordination methods
Train permitting, plan review, construction site inspection,
Asst Director of Engineering Services /City Engineer (L),
Training on the plan review process is conducted by the
and enforcement staff to conduct these activities
Asst Director of Community Development Services (L),
Asst Director of Engineering Services /City Engineer and
in the Stormwater Management Manual for Western
Development Engineer (L), Construction Manager (L)
the Development Engineer. Construction site inspection
Washington
and enforcement staff training is coordinated by the
Asst Director of Community Development Services and
Construction Manager.
Low impact development code - related requirements
Storm Drainage Engineer (L), Development Engineer (S),
The City has organized a core group to implement Low
Annual inspections of all municipally owned or operated
WQPC (S), Asst Director of Community Development
Impact Development. The group, led by the Storm
permanent stormwater treatment and flow control
Services (S), Building Official (S)
Drainage Engineer includes Permitting, Planning,
BMPs /facilities
Development Review, Building and Storm Drainage
Spot checks of potentially damaged permanent
Storm Division Manager (L), Storm Division Crew (S)
Utility management level staff.
Watershed -scale stormwater planning
WQPC (L)
The WQPC will ensure that watershed -scale stormwater
after major storm events
planning is addressed when required.
Municipal Operations and Maintenance
Implement maintenance standards that are as protective,
WQPC (L), Storm Division Crew (S)
The WQPC utilizes maintenance standards that are
or more protective, of facility function than those specified
equivalent to those in the Stormwater Management
in the Stormwater Management Manual for Western
Manual for Western Washington when inspecting public
Washington
treatment and flow control facilities. Maintenance and
Operations staff that are performing catch basin
inspection have been provided with equivalent
standards.
Annual inspections of all municipally owned or operated
WQPC (L)
The WQPC conducts inspections of all municipally
permanent stormwater treatment and flow control
owned and operated permanent stormwater treatment
BMPs /facilities
land flow control BMPs /facilities.
Spot checks of potentially damaged permanent
Storm Division Manager (L), Storm Division Crew (S)
Storm maintenance staff under direction of the Storm
stormwater treatment and flow control BMPs /facilities
Division Manager perform inspections after storm
after major storm events
events to look for facility damage or maintenance needs.
Inspection of all catch basins or inlets at least once by
Storm Division Manager (L), Storm Division Field
The Storm Maintenance Division under direction of the
August 1, 2017 and every two years thereafter
Supervisor (S), Storm Division Crew (S)
Storm Division Manager is responsible for completing
catch basin inspection and maintenance in accordance
with the schedule outlined in the Permit.
Establish an inspection program designed to inspect all
WQPC (L), Storm Division Manager (L)
The WQPC is responsible for inspection of public
sites and achieving at least 95% of inspections
treatment and flow control facilities. The Storm Division
Manager is responsible for ensuring inspection of all
public catch basins.
D I.A N: \PUB_WRKS \Utilities\ Storm \NPDES II \Administration \Annual Reports\2014 Report\Internal CpgrtL7,Q604371bf 392
a` co -s- methods
t on of R1te0 Parks
Question 4b' pescrip or\cs Operatko anag rr l v'CLPC
o {Public W FaclUtles M
Asst Olre��P Manager
s to reduce
d Pfocea °{{ {rorr` a\\ \ands
O\ides an aintenance
>nt practices, p ocrated w,ta d road m
janelr�'a P� ni ed by the City,
1
ties o,
era
ntrc`nm Water
su
CO sto
irnPa 9 may
n npioYees ob {un� o s
maintenance i
ns
6o\{
ices
OPe`-atton servisor l�1
Pubic W °rks meteN suP
t picec'Lor °{ anagec ll>> Cent Fac`Ut�es Manager lei
Moue eee Greens Super`ntende
`C
n Pre ,Jention Poa storage
a Stormwateru prnent maintenance
arxt for all hea\Y e4 e facilities
and material st °rag
maintenance or repair
s eca0ns and
arnta'n record lea b � he GtY
s condo
OPeratIon of \N �s�'
Pubftc
Ogre ° t X51, eme workeeNpositlons l51
Sion Manage a tenan
, erneteN
e Manager vegetation
stormorelnag
\716A5 t>l
activit�e W a'pC lsl
rm prainage�eChnician
sto
2013, conduct charges rm Dr�Inage Technician �sl
Ober 1, water dis 0j '5'r(of vjznCe
(Ma` egegir,n'ng n° iweather sa ping ers d N`gh SchpO\ e W OPC �C� Sto
h \y `ie at Pub rges eXce d
cact`Ces'
Inentatron o {Pis {tom CrtY {
W QPC prePar d d es to reduce imPe Mst Dire ° e
ides and Pr°Ce ante actrvitres• X106 Marntb%e iOr
ids and rnalnteerat. . seNlces, Pa respOnsib \e
an er are
s
rb \ic W °rid Facilitres M Ices -at'on se�ice GO \{
,Aanage entrng tkil pup c W °rks Op en' supe�1 anagec
imP \e sst girect °r °{ Manager, Oen` d Facl\itles M
spa Maintens SuPer'ntenden taa Wing on best ter po\\utron
Urse �re2n sta� receive rrt st°rmw trainingt0
Co sure that new actices to Pr c\uding {O \ \oA S P
{ orr`gthe`ewo esinProcedoos, ntaa�n ° {trainingis
address c a or staWQPC• OPe`�tron se erces
require to the \ic W Orks tike uP tine
sube 5 Director wage and W a n nanc p5nd ns make
ion vn r
U P itro
r
7 YS orrna` �rpre veRtion�e�enanceWo {OetheCemQte ��ai
po\ \afro ,w a c \udinsan
o iti - {earn'
OPeraekpo \ \ut�on Prey ent�the SWPPPs In aIr
TheSeteams ` aate Vii{ needed6 mairrtenanma gement
view and uP ems` °ns an City asset rot`s and
re records °{ insP red into the ecords lrlsPeCr the
F \i r e WOPC r eN -'sio Ge and repair
enter
actNitres are ram �h `under suP
ware prog ce sta mmaintenan 55et
softcm Main tenan anagec record ana`ngthe a
Storm
sion M s\sts with
actN''es• w
1��G50{tare Proan' gr
t/
ork has
bee" comple
w ted.
been comp \eted
work has
t r
to
mo the Wh'te Rive itored that shoo aact recreatioc arge
{O ills 201Sp123�r�X o{ 3g2
Out{a \ \sm °n {or primary ri\Cjc1t s �p14Rep °n \�ntetnarcpO�jage++ii
For sec qua UtY crita�eas as high pr\ority
w es�gnate t{i °5e NPoE \� \Ad nist2t}On\Pnnua\ ReP °tom
dnV estigat \On N \pU6 wRK \UtilrGes \storm\
00,
Question 41b. Description of internal coordination methods
Install and maintain pet waste education and collection
Parks Maintenance Manager (L)
The Parks Maintenance Manager oversees installation
stations at municipal parks and other City owned and
and maintenance of pet waste stations and disposal
operated lands adjacent to streams. Focus on locations
Storm Drainage Engineer (L)
receptacles.
where people commonly walk their dogs
Monitoring Program.
Monitoring and Assessment
Status and trends monitoring
Storm Drainage Engineer (L)
The City is paying into the Regional Stormwater
Monitoring Program.
Effectiveness studies
Storm Drainage Engineer (L)
The City is paying into the Regional Stormwater
Monitoring Program.
Source identification and diagnostic monitoring
Storm Drainage Engineer (L)
The City is paying into the Regional Stormwater
Monitoring Program.
Reporting
Annual Reporting
WQPC (L), Storm Drainage Engineer (S)
The WQPC receives and compiles data related to
implementation of the Municipal Permit with the
assistance of the Storm Drainage Engineer. The WQPC
fills out the annual report and is responsible for
submitting the report to the Department of Ecology.
D I.A H. \PUB_WRKS \Utilities\ Storm \NPDES 11 \Administration \Annual Reports \2014 Report\Internal CP41GO14SIV 392
City of Auburn Annual Report for 2014
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit
Question 5. Attach description of public education and outreach efforts conducted per S5.C.1.a.i and
Attachment follows:
DI.A Page 50 of 392
City of Auburn 2014 Public Education and Outreach Summary
Public Education Activity
Target Audience
Comments
City Storm Drainage Web Site
General Public
City website provides general information on the
City's storm drainage program, links to the City's
SWMP and annual reports and lists the Spill
Reportin phone number.
City Storm Drainage Web Site
Private Storm Facility Owners
City website provides information on maintenance
and Managers
standards for private storm drainage systems.
Stormwater Outreach for
General public
Auburn participated in this regional public education
Regional Municipalities
program. PSSH branded information and items
STORM
were distributed.
Puget Sound Starts Here City
General public
The Mayor issued a proclamation that May was
Proclamation
Puget Sound Starts Here Month
Solid Waste & Recycling
Homeowners
Provided information on disposal options for
Newsletter
household hazardous waste and on keeping
hazardous waste out of stormwater. Included
reminder for pet owners to clean up pet waste.
Puget Sound Starts Here
Vehicle owners
The City advertised the Don't Drip and Drive
Don't Drip and Drive
campaign on it's closed circuit television channel in
Campaign
public facilities.
ECOSS Spill Kit Program
Business types included
Outreach and educational training was provided to
automotive, food service, gas
stations, grocery marts and
76 businesses in 2014. 46% of the businesses
contacted spoke English as a second language.
retail
Water Festival
Fourth and fifth grade students
311 Auburn students attended Water Festival 2014
where they learned about stormwater, pollution
prevention, wetlands, salmon, drinking water and
sanitary sewer issues through hands on activities
and presentations.
Natural Yard Care Workshops
Homeowners
The three workshops were attended by between 20
and 32 people per session (39 unique households)
from the south valley area of Auburn (Main St south
to the White River). Attendees learned that they
could have beautiful, healthy yards while reducing
their dependence on pesticides and fertilizer.
Kid's Day
School children and their
One day fair where approximately 1,500 children
parents
visited the Auburn Utilities booth and learned about
stormwater pollution prevention and other water
resource information.
Carwash Kit Program / IDDE
Property owners / managers
Kit checkout procedures continued to include a
process were the City verifies that a kit will function at
a site prior to it being check out for use.
Volunteer Vegetation Planting
General public
The City organized and led native plant planting at the
at the Fenster Nature Park
Fenster Nature Park.
Volunteer Mulching at the
General public
The City organized and led an event to spread wood
Reddington Levee Setback
chip mulch around native plants that had been planted
Site
at the Reddin ton Levee Setback Site.
Volunteer Vegetation Planting
General public
The City organized and led native plant planting,
at the Auburn Environmental
invasive species control and mulching opportunities at
Park
the Auburn Environmental Park. Approximately 150
volunteers participated.
DI.A Page 51 of 392
City of Auburn 2014 IDDE Education Summary
Public Education Activity
Tar et Audience
Comments
Rain Drain Postcard
Homeowners in areas where
Postcard was mailed to 63 residences in areas
illicit discharges are suspected
where illicit discharges had been identified.
Rain Drain Postcard - updated
Homeowners in areas where
Developed a new postcard to send to addresses in
illicit discharges are suspected
the vicinity of illicit discharges. Postcard reminds
residents that storm drains flow to the nearest river.
Includes illicit discharge reporting number and is a
"Puget Sound Starts Here" labeled product. Mailed
to 83 addresses in 2014.
Best Management Practices
Municipal operations staff
81 municipal maintenance staff attended the training
Training to Prevent
including Community
on stormwater pollution prevention related to the
Stormwater Pollution for
Development and Public
work that they perform.
Municipal Operations
Works Department and Parks,
Arts and Recreation
Department maintenance
workers
ECOSS Spill Kit Program
Business types included
Outreach and educational training was provided to
automotive, food service, gas
76 businesses in 2014. 46% of the businesses
stations, grocery marts and
contacted spoke English as a second language.
retail
I poop, you scoop ad
Ad was placed in the Lakeland
The Lakeland Hills area includes the drainage basin
Hills HOA newsletter
where Auburn has a fecal coliform TMDL.
Poop scoop information was
This information is distributed
The recycling newsletter is distributed in the
included in the City's recycling
City wide
Lakeland Hills TMDL emphasis area.
newsletter
DI.A Page 52 of 392
City of Auburn Annual Report for 2014
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit
Question 20. Attach a summary of actions taken to characterize, trace and eliminate each illicit
discharge found by or reported to the Permittee. For each illicit discharge, include a
description of actions according to required timeline per S5.C.3.d.iv.
Attachment follows:
DI.A Page 53 of 392
20141Iiicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Summary
7.Threat
Determination
and G3
NotrFcation-
10, Source 12. pollutant(s)
11- indicator
(constituteda
human
9 Now did you, earn abut
Idented:
TMraiethods, Testing:
threatto
3. Date incident health or the
7a.lmmediate roblem?
the p
Visual Natural Source
2- Unique initially Frequency environment)
6. Ereq
Response?
Referral
Visual recon Color,
indicators
identifier reported
No
yes Staff
Vehicle Fluids
1/23%2014 Naturally °°curing
Visual recon Not Use
814- 00182 discharge
Yes Staff Referral
Not Identifier
Yes
Spill or
Visual recon Not Used
814.00121 1)14(2014 One -time
Discharge
yes ERTS
Incident not found No
8100341 21 1012014
4
Vehicle FlW
Not Used
Yes Staff Referral
Visual recon
indicators Vehicle Flu!
Spill or NO
2(21/2014 One-time Sp
Staff Referral
Vial recon Visual
R14 -00460 Discharge No
Yes
3/3/2014 One time Spill or
R14 -1-- Discharge
Flow, Odor, SewageJS
Call from property °vyner Visual r Visual
Yes
intermittent
Yes
indicators,
Coliform test
R1A -00588 3/11/2014
Visual recon Visual indicators None F
Yes ERTS
3(10(2014 One time Sp l°r No
Vehic
R14-00640 Discharge
Refer Visual recon odor, Visual
ERTS, other Agency
indicators
No Yes
3/21/2014 one-time Spill or
R14 -00747 Discharge
Odor, Visual Ve
Visual recon
Visual observation indicators
Spill ar
3/27/2014 On Sp'
Yes
No
p
Visual recon Odor, Visual R
814 -0 07 9 6 Discharge
Staff Referral
indicators
Yes
Yes
3/28/2014 One -time Spill or
ft14 -D0805 Discharge
Visual recon Not Used
Yes ERTS
.. — 41712014 One time Spill or
No
14. Correction) 15. Final
Resolution explanations, and other comments:
Elimination Date 16. Field notes,
Method: s idend as Iran bacteria.
)urce or Cause: Reported problem Wa
No Action Needed 1(23/2014
bacteria ads were used
other (explain in 1/1412014 14. Spill of the oil a vehicle accident Absorbent p
to clean up coon location does not exist
'Icle Field 16) dace' lnterse identified were
2j3012014 RePort of oil on road su have been incorrectly be in
Other (explain in in Auburn. Streetsthat may
)rce Not Identified noted thatthe incident may
Feld 16) investigated. Ecology `»
Sumner instead of Auburn- a small
2112014 Report of $pill from vehicle collision. pavement sur ce.
amount of non - recoverable sheen on p rbant
No Action Needed
ehicle ossible. Pads were
3(4(2014 Report of vehicle duds tr° lla�n fluid as p Staff used a so
Other (explain in padsto pick up as much pill to catch additional
tehicle utter line at catch basinsto try
Field 16) placed in the g dispose
of on 314114"
fluid /sheen- Pads were collected and disp
results of a coliform test Ce�nteBased on the test
ethnic 419/2014 Preliminary son the
EducationlT connect ion orbroken e�orrrteminaed stormwater vra
Multifamily PTO Pe during storm events
al Assistance, results and that sew ed fromthep P
Enforcement, ground and diseharg
the correction Pr° cam sfumed over to enwfoas diected to
Problem Not ent. The proPe1'ty manage,
Ahated (explain in the building departrn vrater
toasewer deanout
inat torm
Field 16) pump residual contamed s
Correction is in PfOCess. ff responded. No
647365 Utilrty inspection sta
Based on ERTS# wasvisible.
Education/rechnic 3/11/2014 ort the reported aRivRy
evidence to su'nagemertt proctice information to the business
Industrial at Assistance, No provided best
Action Needed manager. the EPAthat a spit) had occured(nd
-fie C�tY recieved a call from fuel had spilled on the g
3(21/2014 par
vehicle.
Vehicle No Acb° ^Needed Staffvisned the site and found fuel from ap
Industrial, while persons unknown stem. The business
filled fuel entered a private storm sy booms to
The sp er had applied absorbant and
maintenance manager the spill -The manager
onse to determine what method to use
contain some ofthe oil, and had re No fuel entered the
was waitingior DOE resp .
to clean the parking lot and storm system
municipal M54. ce.Trail became
3/27/2014 Diesel shee=n tracked follow over la source fcou d be entified.
Other (explain in too diffuse befO
.ids Vehicle Field 16) release agent was released
lication sprayer were
ethnic 3128/2014 A sheen of Oil based contrfu, form
Educati °n(l from a construction site after forms Tha Pit flowed onto a
lion a heavy drain. The contractor
Form Constru at Assistance• set on a sidewalk during d into a storm
Ill Behavwrloperatio orousconcrete street an otential sources and
P problem by "Moving p
ns Modlfi -ti corrected thep thearea-
cleaned all remaining sheen from
on the schools
Ions of
4/7/2014 Maintenance contractor spitted approximately 15 P storm damage
No Action Needed heater /chiller unft and
e glycol Public School ethylene glycol - The EG dmined into theono^ e The pond
system which leads to the s of the state.pNo impact to the M54.
to wa
PUB _wRY3\UnittiesU`tasm \NPOE+In�p °`DOE IDDET2cVN65Pr�'�F� \1 �mIDDET2clung FOm+Datax� Page 54 of 392
H.\
2014 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Summary
porter, RP -9--y menr) Recnonse7 the problem? Methods: Testine: Identified= 13. Source or Cause: Method: Date 16. Field notes, explanations, and other comments:
R14 -00970 4/16/2014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes Staff Referral Visual recon Not Used Vehicle Fluids Vehicle Other (explain in 4/16/2014 Found oil sheen on road surface fortwo blocks, followed the trail
Discharge Field 16) into a shopping center and behind the building- Found where
absorbant had been applied and found a paper coffee cup full of
waste ol. Picked -up and bagged the coffee cup of oil and some
ofthe absorbent for disposal. The property management
company was called and a message left that more clean -up was
required.
R14 -01051 4/25/2014 NA No Yes Pollution Hotline Visual recon Color, Odor, None Found Source Not Identified No Action Needed 412512014 Anonymous caller reported diesel orantifreeze being dumped
Visual indicators intoasrormdrain. No evidence of dumping was found on site or
in the downstream storm system.
R14 -01061 412912014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes Pollution Hotline Visual recon Visual indicators Food Waste /Oil, Source Not Identified Other (explain in 4/29/2014 Investigation found that charcoal briquettes, ash and grease had
Discharge charcoal Field 16) been dumped into a catchbasin in an alleyway. Catchbasin and
briquettes downstream system were cleaned. A post card was sentto all
addresses in the vicinity notifying them that storm drains are for
min water only-
R14-01102 5/212014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes Pollution Hotline Visual recon Visual indicators Vehicle Fluids Vehicle Other (explain in 5/2/2014 Spill of motor oil from a vehicle accident Applied absorbant and
Discharge Field 16) sweptitupfordisposal. Street sweeperwas used to remove
residual absorbant
R14 -01176 519/2014 Unconfirmed No Yes ERTS Visual recon Visual indicators None Found Unconfirmed Report No Action Needed 51912014 Initial report ofan employee dumpingwaste liquids into a sewer
Report was called in to the EPA who forwarded the reportto WSDOE.
City investigators inspected the site and could find no evidence of
illicit discharge.
W14 -03957 5111/2014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes ERTS, Other Agency Visual recon Color, Visual Not Identified Source Not Identified Education/Technic 5/12/2014 Storm Utility staff responded to a report ofan unknown
Discharge Referral indicators al Assistance, substance in a City storm pond. Material may be latex paint but is
Problem Not verydilute. No evidence of dumping was found upstream ofthe
Abated (explain in pond. Postcards will be sentto the neighborhood reminding
Field 16) peopleto not use the storm system for waste disposal-
R14-01366 6/2/2014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes Staff Referral Visual recon Odor, Visual Sediment /Soil, Vehicle Other (explain in 6/2/2014 Semi truck and trailer drove off road into ditch that conveys a
Discharge indicators Vehicle Fluids Field 16) stream. Due to the accident oil, diesel and antifreeze were
spilled, contaminatingsoil and water in the ditch. Thetraileralso
lost its load of landscaping and soil amendments into the ditch
(bags of sand, rock, steer manure, potting soil and bark mulch).
DOE contracted with NRCto provide clean -up services forthe
contamination. Tow company contract employees helped
remove the trailer load-
R14-01706 713/2014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes Staff Referral Visual recon Visual indicators Vehicle Fluids, Vehicle Other (explain in 7/3/2014 Waste Management garbage truck rolled over and leaked
Discharge Dumpmg/Trash Field 16) hydraulic oil. Absorbent pads and granular absorbent were used
to contain and clean up the oil.
R24 8/1/2014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes Pollution Hotline Visual recon Not Used Vehicle Fluids Vehicle Other (explain in 8/1/2014 Oil spill from vehicle accident Applied absorbent and swept it up.
Discharge Field 16)
1125 7/28/2014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes Pollution Hotline Visual recon Not Used Vehicle Fluids Vehicle Other (explain in 7/2812014 Oil drained from a moving vehicle. Staff used absorbentto clean
Discharge Field 16) up areas where the oil had puddled. Vehicle could not be
located.
R28 7/29/2014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes Staff Referral Visual recon Flow, Odor Sewage /Septage Sanitary Overflow Other (explain in Sewage spill from a private sewage lift station serving a
Discharge Field 16) commercial / manufacturing development City staff contacted
the owner to stop the overflow. The City will be working with the
owner to prevent future overflows
R66 8/712014 One -time Spill or No Yes Staff Referral Visual recon Color Paint Public Entity (explain ii Other (explain in 81712014 Container of latex paintfell off of a City of Aubum truck and
Discharge Field 16) spilled approximately 1 gallon of paint ofthe road surface The
paint was washed from the road into the storm system and a
eduatortruck used to clean the water and paint from the catch
basins /manholes.
DI.A H: \PURwRKS\ui,1 eASt \NPDE511\IDDE\DOEIDDEr 1d.,SpreadsM1eeK \ 1AUb DDEh ngF D—.A- Page 55 of 392
7. Threat
Determination
and G3
Notification:
(constituted a
3. Date incident t
threatto human 10. Source 1
14. Correction/ 1
15. Final
2- Unique initially h
health or the 7a- Immediate 9. How did you learn about Tracing 11. Indicator 1
12. Pollutant(s) Elimination R
Resolution
Irlenseor p
R14 -00970 4/16/2014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes Staff Referral Visual recon Not Used Vehicle Fluids Vehicle Other (explain in 4/16/2014 Found oil sheen on road surface fortwo blocks, followed the trail
Discharge Field 16) into a shopping center and behind the building- Found where
absorbant had been applied and found a paper coffee cup full of
waste ol. Picked -up and bagged the coffee cup of oil and some
ofthe absorbent for disposal. The property management
company was called and a message left that more clean -up was
required.
R14 -01051 4/25/2014 NA No Yes Pollution Hotline Visual recon Color, Odor, None Found Source Not Identified No Action Needed 412512014 Anonymous caller reported diesel orantifreeze being dumped
Visual indicators intoasrormdrain. No evidence of dumping was found on site or
in the downstream storm system.
R14 -01061 412912014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes Pollution Hotline Visual recon Visual indicators Food Waste /Oil, Source Not Identified Other (explain in 4/29/2014 Investigation found that charcoal briquettes, ash and grease had
Discharge charcoal Field 16) been dumped into a catchbasin in an alleyway. Catchbasin and
briquettes downstream system were cleaned. A post card was sentto all
addresses in the vicinity notifying them that storm drains are for
min water only-
R14-01102 5/212014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes Pollution Hotline Visual recon Visual indicators Vehicle Fluids Vehicle Other (explain in 5/2/2014 Spill of motor oil from a vehicle accident Applied absorbant and
Discharge Field 16) sweptitupfordisposal. Street sweeperwas used to remove
residual absorbant
R14 -01176 519/2014 Unconfirmed No Yes ERTS Visual recon Visual indicators None Found Unconfirmed Report No Action Needed 51912014 Initial report ofan employee dumpingwaste liquids into a sewer
Report was called in to the EPA who forwarded the reportto WSDOE.
City investigators inspected the site and could find no evidence of
illicit discharge.
W14 -03957 5111/2014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes ERTS, Other Agency Visual recon Color, Visual Not Identified Source Not Identified Education/Technic 5/12/2014 Storm Utility staff responded to a report ofan unknown
Discharge Referral indicators al Assistance, substance in a City storm pond. Material may be latex paint but is
Problem Not verydilute. No evidence of dumping was found upstream ofthe
Abated (explain in pond. Postcards will be sentto the neighborhood reminding
Field 16) peopleto not use the storm system for waste disposal-
R14-01366 6/2/2014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes Staff Referral Visual recon Odor, Visual Sediment /Soil, Vehicle Other (explain in 6/2/2014 Semi truck and trailer drove off road into ditch that conveys a
Discharge indicators Vehicle Fluids Field 16) stream. Due to the accident oil, diesel and antifreeze were
spilled, contaminatingsoil and water in the ditch. Thetraileralso
lost its load of landscaping and soil amendments into the ditch
(bags of sand, rock, steer manure, potting soil and bark mulch).
DOE contracted with NRCto provide clean -up services forthe
contamination. Tow company contract employees helped
remove the trailer load-
R14-01706 713/2014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes Staff Referral Visual recon Visual indicators Vehicle Fluids, Vehicle Other (explain in 7/3/2014 Waste Management garbage truck rolled over and leaked
Discharge Dumpmg/Trash Field 16) hydraulic oil. Absorbent pads and granular absorbent were used
to contain and clean up the oil.
R24 8/1/2014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes Pollution Hotline Visual recon Not Used Vehicle Fluids Vehicle Other (explain in 8/1/2014 Oil spill from vehicle accident Applied absorbent and swept it up.
Discharge Field 16)
1125 7/28/2014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes Pollution Hotline Visual recon Not Used Vehicle Fluids Vehicle Other (explain in 7/2812014 Oil drained from a moving vehicle. Staff used absorbentto clean
Discharge Field 16) up areas where the oil had puddled. Vehicle could not be
located.
R28 7/29/2014 One -time Spill or Yes Yes Staff Referral Visual recon Flow, Odor Sewage /Septage Sanitary Overflow Other (explain in Sewage spill from a private sewage lift station serving a
Discharge Field 16) commercial / manufacturing development City staff contacted
the owner to stop the overflow. The City will be working with the
owner to prevent future overflows
R66 8/712014 One -time Spill or No Yes Staff Referral Visual recon Color Paint Public Entity (explain ii Other (explain in 81712014 Container of latex paintfell off of a City of Aubum truck and
Discharge Field 16) spilled approximately 1 gallon of paint ofthe road surface The
paint was washed from the road into the storm system and a
eduatortruck used to clean the water and paint from the catch
basins /manholes.
DI.A H: \PURwRKS\ui,1 eASt \NPDE511\IDDE\DOEIDDEr 1d.,SpreadsM1eeK \ 1AUb DDEh ngF D—.A- Page 55 of 392
DI.A H: \PURwRKS\ui,1 eASt \NPDE511\IDDE\DOEIDDEr 1d.,SpreadsM1eeK \ 1AUb DDEh ngF D—.A- Page 55 of 392
2014 Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Summary
7. Threat
Determination
and G3
Notification:
(constituted a
3. Date incident threatto human 10. Source
2. Unique initially health or the 7a. Immediate 9. Howdid you learn about Tracing 11. Indicator 12. Pollutants)
Identifier reported 6. Frequency environment) Response? the problem? Methods: Testin¢: Identified: 13. Source
14. Correction/ 15. Final
Elimination Resolution
Method: Date 16. Field notes. explanations. and other
DI.A H:\ PUB_ RxsUti1R \St \NPDE511 \IDDE \DDEiDDE cking5p.&he \l burnIDDETackingFOrmDat 1- Page 56 of 392
R595
9/30/2014
One -time Spill or
Yes
Yes
Police call
Visual recon
Visual indicators
Vehicle Fluids
Vehicle
Other (explain in
9130/2014
Auburn Police called and requested spill responsestaffto stand
Discharge
Field 16)
by at a rollovertruck accident in case fluids spilled during righting
and towing ofthe truck Staffprovided oversight as the truck was
righted and towed. Antifreeze spilled on the road shoulder and
on the road surface. Antifreeze spilled on the road surface was
immediately contained with absorbent for disposal.
R676
10/15/2014
One -time Spill or
Yes
Yes
Pollution Hotline
Visual recon
Odor, Visual
Vehicle Fluids
Vehicle
Other (explain in Fic
10/14/2014
Vehicle spilled fluids (gas and possibly oil) onto road surface.
Discharge
indicators
Absorbent was applied and cleaned up for disposal. Fluids did
not leave the road surface.
R772
10131/2014
One -time Spill or
No
Yes
Staff Referral
Visual recon
Odor, Visual
Vehicle Fluids
Vehicle
No Action Needed
10/31/2014
Report of a sheen on street runoff called in to the City. Staff
Discharge
indicators
responded and found sheen from a couple drip spots being
washed ofthe street by the rain. No recoverable fuel or oil was
present.
R693
10/15/2014
One -time Spill or
Yes
Yes
Pollution Hotline
Visual recon
Visual indicators
Vehicle Fluids
Vehiclefire
No Action Needed
10/16/2014
Runnofffrom fire fighting activities at a fire ofthree semitrucks
Discharge
discharged vehicle fluids into a short segment of piped system
and ditch line.
R804
11/10/2014
One -time Spill or
Yes
Yes
Staff Referral
Visual recon
Visual indicators
Latex paint
Resident
Education/
11/18/2014
Discharge of milky liquid into a catch basin was noticed bythe
Discharge
Technical
City's data inventory crew. No flow was entering the inlet to the
Assistance
pipe upstream. The storm crew smoke tested and televised the
pipeline and while that was occuring a neighboring property
owner told investigating staffthat he had washed out paint
brush into his driveway drain which is tied into the pipe. The
property owner was provided residential BMP information for
preventing stormwater pollution.
W152
11126/2014
One -time Spill or
No
Yes
Staff Referral
Visual recon
Visual indicators
Foam
Not identified
Educational
12/8/2014
Suds were discovered in a catch basin. Investigation upstream
Discharge
postcard mailed to
identified one other catch basin with suds. Continued
neighborhood
surveillance overthe next week didn't identify any further issues.
This issue is occuring in other areas ofthe City so may be from
natural causes. Samples collected on 12/10/2014. Analysis
indicated that surfactants were non - detect and fecal coliform
were within range for stormwater.
R987
12/1112014
One -time Spill or
No
Yes
Staff Referral
Visual recon
Visual indicators
Vehicle Fluids
Vehicle accident
No Action Needed
12/11/2014
Minor amount ofvehicle fluid spilled on road surface due to a
Discharge
vehicle accident during heavy rain. No fluid was recoverable. No
sheen was observed in adjacent catch basin.
R901
11/24/2014
One -time Spill or
No
Yes
Staff Referral
Visual recon
Visual indicators
Turbid water
Construction site
Issue had cleared
11/24/2014
Turbid water reported over the weekend. Inspection on Monday
Discharge
up by the time
morning showed no issue. Follow -up inspections were clear as
investigation
well.
R923
12/412014
One -time Spill or
No
Yes
Staff Referral
Visual recon
Visual indicators
Vehicle Fluids
Vehicle
No Action Needed
1214/2014
Non recoverable spill ofvehicle fluids was found_ Location was
Discharge
outside Auburn's jurisdiction.
R1008
12/15/2014
Unknown
No
Yes
Staff Referral
Visual recon
Visual indicators
Foam
Possibly natural
Upstream system
12/16/2014
Foam present in storm catch basin. No evidence of an illicit
causes
was inspected
connection or discharge. Similar issue is being seen around the
City indicating it may be from natural causes.
R1031
12/1812014
Naturallyoccuring
No
Yes
Staff Referral
Visual recon
Visual indicators
Iron bacteria
Natural cause
No Action Needed
12 /18/2014
Report of brown substance in ditch. Investigators determined
discharge
that It was iron bacteria.
R1035
12/18/2014
One -time Spill or
No
Yes
Staff Referral
Visual recon
Visual indicators
Plaster
Manufacturing
Refered to code
Open
Plasterfrom form manufacturing had been tracked into the
Discharge
enforcement
parking lot ofthe business. No evidence that it had made it into
the site discharge. Education regarding City code requirements
wasconducted. Code enforcement was called to enforce clean-
up.
R1064
12/23/2014
One -time Spillor
No
Yes
Staff Referral
Visual recon
Visual indicators
Pressure washing
Building cleaning
Education/Technic
12/23/2014
Commercial pressure washing company was washing a building.
Discharge
al Assistance
Much ofthe material being removed was bird nests and waste.
Provided BMP information and requested thatthey sweep up and
bag the solids as they were washed from the building to keep the
rain from washingthem into the storm system.
DI.A H:\ PUB_ RxsUti1R \St \NPDE511 \IDDE \DDEiDDE cking5p.&he \l burnIDDETackingFOrmDat 1- Page 56 of 392
City of Auburn Annual Report for 2014
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit
Question 55. For TMDLs listed in Appendix 2: Attach a summary of relevant SWMP and Appendix 2
activities to address the applicable TMDL parameter(s).
Attachment follows:
DI.A Page 57 of 392
City of Auburn 2014 Puyallup River Watershed Fecal Coliform TMDL Summary
Action
Comments
Completed second wet season of illicit discharge
Sampling throughout the drainage basin did not
investigative sampling within the drainage basin
produce results that would indicate the presence
draining the north end of the Lakeland Hills
of an illicit connection to the MS4.
neighborhood into the White River.
Install and maintain a pet waste education and
A pet waste education and collection station is
collection station.
installed and maintained at the off leash park in
Roe ner Park.
I poop, you scoop advertising.
An "I Poop, You Scoop" ad was run in the
Lakeland Hills Homeowner Association newsletter
Inspected catch basins and manholes within
As part of the City's data inventory staff inspected
drainage basin to identify all inlets /outlets.
and collected geographic data on approximately
95% of the storm catch basins and manholes
within the drainage basin. All inlets were verified
to ensure that illicit connections were not present.
No evidence of illicit discharge was noted.
H: \PUB_WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration\Annual Reports \2014 Report \City of Auburn 2014 TMDL Summary.doex
DI.A Page 58 of 392
City of Auburn Annual Report for 2014
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit
Question 56. Attach a description of any stormwater monitoring or stormwater - related studies as
described in S&A.
Attachment follows:
DI.A Page 59 of 392
City of Auburn 2014 Monitoring Summary
Monitoring
Purpose
Comments
Description
Fecal coliform
Illicit discharge
The "T" basin which drains a portion of the
sampling
investigation
Lakeland Hills neighborhood was identified
as a high priority area for illicit discharge
investigation under the Puyallup River
Watershed Fecal Coliform TMDL. Sampling
within the basin did not indicate the
presence of an illicit connection.
Fecal coliform
Illicit discharge
Confirmed that fecal coliform was present in
sampling
investigation
discharge from private property. Property
owner identified and repaired a broken
waste pipe.
Fecal coliform and
Illicit discharge
Investigating the source of foam found in
surfactant sampling
investigation
the storm drainage system. Insignificant
fecal coliform and no surfactants were
found. Determined that the foam was
naturally occurring.
H: \PUB_WRKS \Utilities \Storm \NPDES II\Administration \Annual Reports \2014 Report \City of Auburn 2014 Monitoring Summary.doc
DI.A Page 60 of 392
C -M OF
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject: Date:
System Development Charges - Fee Update (30 minutes) February 13, 2015
Department: Attachments: Budget Impact:
CD & P W System Development Charges Presentation $0
Technical M emoranda from FCS Group
Administrative Recommendation:
For discussion only.
Background Summary:
The City of Auburn has implemented System Development Charges (SDCs) as a part
of the funding available for its water, sanitary sewer and storm drainage utility
systems. Each new connection pays SDCs to buy into the use of the existing utility
systems infrastructure and to pay for expansions and upgrades necessary to serve
new connections. The current SDCs have not increased since 2006, but the need for
additional facilities to serve the growth in our community has continued to
increase. The costs to construct those additional facilities has also increased. City
staff has identified that modifications to the existing SDCs are needed to provide the
revenue necessary to pay for future new facilities and is therefore recommending to
the City Council proposed increases in water and sewer SDCs. Please note that staff
is not recommending an increase in the storm drainage SDC at this time.
Background
The existing utility facilities partially paid for by SDCs have included wells and springs,
reservoirs, water treatment facilities, pump stations, connections to the regional
Tacoma water system and purchasing permanent water supply capacity in Pipeline 5,
water transmission mains, sewer and storm interceptors, and sewer and storm pump
stations. Future needed facilities identified through the City's comprehensive planning
effort for its utilities will include Well 1, additional purchases of capacity from the
regional water system, Fulmer Well Field treatment and supply expansion, a new
reservoir in the Valley, new pump station expansions, larger diameter regional storm
water pipe improvements, and new sewer interceptors. The costs of future projects
that are attributable to rehabilitation, replacement, and maintenance were not included
in the costs for determining the SDCs.
DI.B AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 61 of 392
During 2014, the City's consultant, FCS Group, prepared an evaluation of the water,
sewer, and storm water SDCs, as described in the attached technical
memoranda. The former Public Works Committee of the City Council evaluated
various alternatives to balance the City's need for revenue to build infrastructure to
serve future growth with a desire to support continued robust growth. The Public
Works Committee concluded that without additional funding from the SDCs, future
growth may be limited by the City's ability to provide service, or the cost of future
improvements could be borne entirely by future development rather than being shared
with existing customers. The Public Works Committee recommended to the City
Council that the water and sewer SDCs should be increased beginning in 2015, while
the storm SDC should remain constant. The Public Works Committee also
recommended that the same water SDC would apply to all customer classes that use
a 3/" or 1" meter. The former Planning and Community Development Committee of the
City Council concurred with this recommendation. A summary of former committee
discussions and SDC recommendations are attached in "System Development
Charges (SDC), City Council Study Session, February 23, 2015 ".
The Committees also recommended that the SDCs should be modified by at least the
construction cost index (CCI) each year, with re- evaluation of the SDCs following
completion of the current updates of utility comprehensive plans. The Committees felt
that it was important to have consistent and continuous management of utility
connection fees to avoid long periods of time between needed updates to fees that
can affect the City's economic development efforts.
The City's 2014 Comprehensive Water Plan is nearing completion, including its capital
improvement program and associated financial analysis. Mayor Backus requested that
the discussion on SDC's planned in January 2015 be postponed to provide staff with
the opportunity to verify the parameters used in the 2014 SDC study with the financial
analysis in the proposed Comprehensive Water Plan and to conduct additional
outreach and communications with interested and affected parties.
The Plan's capital improvement program includes future project costs that are in
addition to the existing and future water system value that was presented in the SDC
evaluation. The Plan also includes a larger increase in the projected number of future
customers in addition to the total number of customers in the SDC evaluation. An
evaluation of these changes in the information provided verification that the water
SDC that was presented to the former Committees in 2014 is an acceptable
rate. Therefore, staff recommends that the water and sewer SDC changes as
proposed be considered for adoption at the March 16, 2015 City Council meeting.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
DI.B AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 62 of 392
Councilmember:
Meeting Date:
Staff: Snyder
February 23, 2015 Item Number: DI.B
DI.B AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 63 of 392
System Development Charges
(SDC)
City Council Study Session
February 23, 2015
DI.B Page 64 of 392
o efinitions
existing utility
. ►� t° connect to ent to "buy In
SDCS • new develOpm
Are charges for process
,d future
r permit
systems the building p tan
of ort Curren aintenance)
collected as part utilities to suppations and m
Are ex anded u of for open mers for
. in ne�v or p the City (n new Gusto
re f or build Belo meat In
A dev p wee" existing an
rowth and city betty 'lit
g erational equity utl y
tergen. terns . ting and future
Provide In the utility sys * costs
o f the eXls
the cost °f o ram. co
based on the e Capital Pr ansion
Are rade and eXp council
s for upg the City
system set by
nslVe Plan policies
Sed on ComPrehe a e 65 of 392 2
*capital Program
is ba P 9
Management Philosophies
�ko
Se
ra
Q
Ovitinuoll.,
.� Staff
Clonselsten'*o
OF= t
Recommended
DLB Page 66 of 392
3
n g �' °a s
Today
WAeet'
a ion of S�u�C I va
S rnmar�Ze
ev OrVvAec
�o
U
c uss�ones oppoTtuI�ty to
,mate
�Om e c ounca hange tioy-rovid. uSsx) rO pose Sc11eau�e fO-r
n SD�S
. discuss prOmmendea clang
of the recO
Page 6l 01 392
4
COTTen't SDCS
meter
3/4 � wafer t
ot- g �RCE�
le
2 424 � f OT o�iona��y reater er Equ�va
Water � �aCgeC metees aCe pCOp lde��la1 CuSt�m e U,�1t (�SLJ�
per serVlc
Sewer _ 1,162.0 per �owever�
. Stor'n � 2p06 ' Since
in of f eat Sinf c jjvc-fease
lneell _ a a sl�,'�
,.�P SD CS �aVhas - - 5
. �he se'se � Sll
„ ..
1986.
Page 6$ 01 392
2p14 SOC Era \cation
t ana\yZed
con su\tar X�st�ng utX��t
e . �a\ue 01 ,ary ex
��es Systems
rades
rs� °n5 & Upg 104%
pa _ „r� based �
. Cost °f neuGf �eXt 20
...�Pded °ve
ye°" � d
due an
on eX�st�rg �a - to t\jw
rowth ra ased nd
SIDCS
6:\\j\ced by ex
. R �Ure CO
StS
fu
cu Sto,mers
Page 69 01 392
PTolecIts 0
re
_...i
�r�rastr turel
41 or Vt���ty and Fu
Mai EX`St�rg
a oma pipeline 5
1nT
f wa�"e� capa cif ties �U water Stipp y
. FurC�ase 0 ea��'e��f aekanaNest � expa�sl��s
d tr e
• �eUs as o� of coal �r s'tat�On
. Bxpa". �awater'Pu eptors and'�um'P
iaci1itles opt a �a�eT ��terc p
Sez�
A ey re rm
. l�e`N wer and S�.o Tovements
dew se ater izn'P
s
Sta��� regional S��Tm pa9e�� °f 392
e\N
MID
�hnU
1d be updated because:
�5 �' nning
S D la
rehensive p s
. n connp . °n need
made durl g eXpansl
cisi°ns m � ing system 1 1 etc.)
policy de identlf y evv supp y
1. s Include e ance, n ion and
rocesse ed c°nv y e to inf lat
-processes
enlarg
ions 1 r time du
CeXtens change over
nsion costs ents
a � ern ns will not
5 stem exp or requir rojectio
2. y regular y rovvth p to meet
. creased osts and g ents or
In utdated c i aPr°vem
based ono desired
Charges . venue for 3 , C re future
suf f ic1ent re ons nsu
collect e eKpectatl coons to e
el-of _servic e
v rovvth pr °�
le cost and g of costs
reflect new •r fair share Pays for
Nee d to Ing their « rowth p
4' rs are pay tare that g
customers n olic1es s
nsive pia p
.. comprehe Page 7101,392
5, �tillty ,
g ro�vth
D� •B
0
103 SDC EVatiome
0
options to
onstdered mult�p�e
,et veve�Ue seeds
rnpCh
. rep
ommended °N''-
grease �n 2� 1� jof �nflat��n
. Fu11 In o6 rates only cease over a
• Adjust 2� reaUired Inc
. Phase �r the
� od
3 -year pef e required in
. phase th
5jeaf per1Od
,,
a
Uease over
Page ?2 of 392
0
Water SDC
Sewer SDC
Recommended SDC Changes
$2,424
$850
$6,272(1)
$2,327(2)
Storm SDC $1,162 $1,162(3)
For 3/4" and 1" water meter, per Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU)
(2) Per Residential Customer Equivalent (RCE)
(3) Per Equivalent Service Unit (ESU)
.-
Page 73 of 392
10
Comparison of
Water Utilities - 2015
Skyway dater & Sewer
Kirkland
Ke nt 6,9�
Auburn (Proposed) $6,272
Lacey $5,449
Sumner $4,523
Federal Way $3,892
Olympia ,456
Puyallup $3,130
Renton X2,80
Auburn (Existing ) $2,424
9"
133
$%,384
0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000
DLB Page 74 of 392
11
Skyway dater & Sewer
Olympia
Lacey
Kirkland
Auburn (Proposed)
Tumwater
Renton
Federal Way
Auburn (Existing)
Ke nt
Comparison of
Sewer Utilities - 2015
I
It IL
00,10 8 50
0
$0 $1,000
$3,32
$3,218
$3,056
$2,327
$2,290
$2,033
$ 1,916
$2,000 $3,000
-t-
$4,000 $5,000 $6,000
DLB Page 75 of 392
12
Sumner
Ie nt
Puyallup
Renton
Auburn (Existing)
Auburn (Proposed)
Olympia
Kirkland
0
Comparison of
Storm Utilities - 2015
$1,228
1,162
$1,162
1,000
$481
1,947
1,760
500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000
$2,450
$2,500
$3,000
DI.B Page 76 of 392
13
1
cCOM s
P\jq
FOvmev oc e �o SS �n
R d Sewe
wave an
�e fuU c�'ange �n oT all
,eme�t t
. Iz'�p 3/ 1„ meters
2 15 e Same SAC a Sto�m
�s S� mers �oTm SDC Se�Ne trnents,bu�"
C� o change in tie S � increases iov
�eannUa ��ostln
. Base f U�� nstruc tio ear ,a
S�C$ 0S � a� W/O'Per y 392 �otXe
mo
tAeeaed
ecltl'D On e�da't�o�s'
eco,�,m COLIVIC:1 tees SD�s in 2p15
�t11 f �Tme�
Co a�a SeweWater �'�St�meTs
TW tee, m S aU
C ��C� ementtl�e fu11 ��'a3g gL 1.. eieT f °T
� 1mP� SDI foT 2015 a Storm S� � �o�o per
� Use tie Sam � i1�e Stotm SD C,S fog, water, e�� ebut ot�ess t1�
� �o �han�e n�a� ea ��1� adlustm A-6,
� Base fug � � host lnaex L aaoptlon �Olf
�onstr erasion of
`Jean UXe CO eva�uat9
. And Sc �e nc�l Meeting for re' a9e�a °{ c&v-cecj�vo
. O OV�(Xe
0\.16
Questions?
DI.B Page 79 of 392
16
*:;> FCS GROUP Project Memorandum
Solutions- Oriented Consulting
To: Susan Fenhaus, Water Utility Engineer Date: September 19, 2014
Auburn, Washington
From: Karyn Johnson, Principal; Tage Aaker, Analyst
RE: System Development Charge (SDC) Update
A. INTRODUCTION
Members of the Public Works Committee have requested to see an additional water and sewer system
development charge scenario. This update addresses Committee comments regarding the length of
the phase -in period, customer growth assumptions, and implications of providing service to Lakeland
Hills, which is currently being served by Bonney Lake. There are no requested changes to the
stormwater charge at this time, therefore this memo does not address the stormwater utility. Lastly,
only "Approach A" results are shown in this memo because the committee has collectively expressed
a preference for the "Approach A" methodology during a previous committee meeting.
B. UPDATES FROM PREVIOUS ANALYSIS
131. PHASE -IN PERIOD
This SDC update assumes a five year phase -in strategy for the water and sewer system development
charges. Previous phase -in strategies assumed a three -year period, which aligned with the remaining
three -year adopted utility rate schedule.
132. CUSTOMER GROWTH
In previous iterations, we assumed a customer growth rate of 2% per year for water and sewer and
1% for stormwater based on City staff input. Committee members asked that this assumption be
revisited, which proved timely because new customer growth projections were recently made
available through the Water Comprehensive Plan effort. Based on projections provided within
Chapter 4 of the Plan, we estimate that customer growth will be approximately 1% throughout the
study period. The following exhibit details the underlying data for this assumption.
Exhibit B -1: Customer Growth
Single- family /Duplex
11,558
12,110
12,462
13,178
0.7%
Multifamily
1,007
1,133
1,248
1,429
1.8%
Commercial
1,145
1,348
1,693
1,926
2.6%
Mfg /Industry
45
49
52
60
1.4%
Schools
40
43
45
49
1.0%
City
30
33
35
38
1.2%
Irrigation
461
530
625
707
2.2%
Tots I
14,286
15,246
16,160
17,3i
1.0%
* Data based on Table 4.10 of draft Water Comprehensive Plan
Updated customer growth projections are not available for the sewer utility. Based on the similar size
of the water and sewer service areas, City staff recommends that the same annual growth assumption
***4 FC S GROUP P DRAFT Pa e 2 of 37
DLB Page 80 of 392
City of Auburn SDC Study
Five Year Phase -in Strategy
September 2014
(1 %) be used for the sewer utility. An annual customer growth assumption of 1% is now being used
in all three utility SDC calculations. Lower growth rates for water and sewer will mean a smaller
future customer base which lowers the denominator in the SDC calculation which will increase the
SDC if all else is equal.
B3. LAKELAND HILLS SERVICE AREA PROJECT
It was noted in a review with committee members and City staff that a water project in the capital
improvement plan would expand the water service area. However, the additional customers within
this service area were not reflected in the future customer base for the water SDC, which artificially
increased the calculated charge. The following two options were posed to City staff:
■ Exclude the project from the capital improvement plan altogether since the additional customers
are not currently reflected in the future customer base. This would reduce the dollar amount
included in the numerator.
■ Leave the project in the capital plan and add the estimated number of meter capacity equivalents
for the customers in this area to the future customer base.
In summary, both the project and the affected customers should either be included or excluded from
both the numerator (project dollars) and denominator (customer base in meter capacity equivalents).
City staff recommended excluding the project from the capital plan for the following reasons:
■ According to the current version of the CIP, the project is estimated to be completed by 2033 (the
last year of the study period). However, City staff said that this timing is not certain and could
potentially be delayed beyond 2033 which would push the project out of the study period.
Additionally, an update to the water comprehensive plan is currently underway which may
provide more clarity on the impacts of this project for a future SDC update.
■ The City does not currently have customer data on the potential service area. Staff would need to
request customer account and meter size data from Bonney Lake which could potentially be a
lengthy process and delay the SDC analysis.
C. WATER SDC PHASE -IN STRATEGY
Exhibit C -1 shows the effects of changing the growth assumption as well as removing the Lakeland
Hills Service Area project. Before changing the growth assumption from 2% to 1 %, the calculated
SDC was $5,124. Changing the growth assumption to 1% increased the calculated charge to $6,302.
The smaller growth assumption reduces the future customer base. This reduces the denominator in
the SDC calculation which increases the charge, all else being equal. When we removed the Lakeland
Hills project, the charge was reduced from $6,302 to $6,089, a decrease of $213.
Exhibit Gl: Water SDC
SDC Charge $2,424 $5,124 $6,302 $6,089
Incremental Change $2,700 $1,178 ($213)
Total Change $2,700 $3,878 $3,665
* **� FC S GROUP P DRAFT page 2 of 6
151.6 Page 81 of 392
City of Auburn SDC Study
Five Year Phase -in Strategy
September 2014
Exhibit C -2 shows the existing charge, the fully calculated Approach A charge, and an alternative
five year phase -in strategy. Based on historical trends, the phase -in strategy assumes an annual 3%
construction cost index (CCI) adjustment to arrive at the "End of Phase -In" 2019 charge. The fully
calculated Approach A charge of $6,089 increases to $7,059 after applying five years of 3% CCI
adjustments. The difference between $7,059 and $2,424 is $4,635. This equates to a $927 per year
increment when spread equally over five years.
Exhibit G2: Water SDC Phase -In
Water SDC Charge (Fully Calculated) $2,424 $6,089
Water SDC End of Phase -in Plan
$7,059
Average
Annual $ Increase
$927
2015
SDC During Phase - In
$3,351
2016
SDC During Phase - In
$4,278
2017
SDC During Phase - In
$5,205
2018
SDC During Phase - In
$6,132
2019
SDC During Phase - In
$7,059
D. SEWER SDC PHASE -IN STRATEGY
Exhibit D -1 shows the effect of changing the customer grow assumption. Before changing the
growth assumption, the calculated SDC was $1,837. Changing the growth assumption from 2% to 1%
increased the calculated charge to $2,259. The smaller growth assumption reduces the future
customer base. This reduces the denominator in the SDC calculation which increases the charge.
Exhibit D -1: Sewer SDC
SDC Charge $850 $1,837 $2,259
Incremental Change $987 $422
Total Change $987 $1,409
Exhibit D -2 shows the existing charge, the fully calculated Approach A charge, and an alternative
five year phase -in strategy. The fully calculated Approach A charge of $2,259 increases to $2,619
after applying five years of 3% CCI adjustments. The difference between $2,619 and $850 is $1,769.
This equates to a $354 per year increment when spread equally over five years.
Exhibit D -2: Sewer SDC Phase -In
Sewer SDC Charge (Fully Calculated) $850 $2,259
Sewer SDC End of Phase -in Plan
$2,619
Average
Annual $ Increase
$354
2015
SDC During Phase - In
$1,204
2016
SDC During Phase - In
$1,557
2017
SDC During Phase - In
$1,911
2018
SDC During Phase - In
$2,265
2019
SDC Durina Phase - In
$2.619
•:*:), FC S GROUP
151.6
DRAFT
Page 3 of 6
Page 82 of 392
City of Auburn SDC Study September 2014
Five Year Phase -in Strategy
E. SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES
The City can consider and evaluate the following options:
■ Maintain system development charges at current levels
■ Maintain current charges and apply an annual adjustment based on the previous year's actual CCI
change starting in 2015
■ Adopt the fully calculated charges under Approach A in 2015:
Fully calculated water charge: $6,089
Fully calculated sewer charge: $2,259
We recommend that the City apply an annual CCI adjustment on these charges until the next SDC
update is performed.
■ Adopt the five year phase -in strategies summarized in Exhibits C -2 and D -2
Note that the calculated charges reflect the maximum allowable charge per state SDC guidelines, and as a
matter of policy, the City may choose to implement charges below the calculated maximum to support
economic development.
F. SUMMARY OF COMPARISONS
F1. JURISDICTIONAL SURVEY
The following exhibits highlight how each utility's charges compare with other survey members.
Each utility's graph shows the existing rate, the fully calculated rate, and the first year of the five
year phase -in strategy.
Water's current charge is $2,424 which is the lowest among the survey group. The fully calculated
charge of $6,089 would leave Auburn as the fourth highest member of the survey group. The first
year of the five year phase -in would place Auburn above Renton and Puyallup and below seven other
jurisdictions.
•:4, FC S GROUP
151.6
DRAFT
Page 4 of 6
Page 83 of 392
City of Auburn SDC Study
Five Year Phase -in Strategy
Exhibit F -1: Water SDC Surve
Water SDC Comparison (Auburn Approach A)
Skyway Water & Sewer
_1,384
Kirkland
7M � $9,133
Kent
Oro" - $6,980
Auburn (Full Calc)
IMEMEMEMIJINJIMM $6,089
Lacey
$5,449
Sumner
$4,523
Federal Way
$3,492
Olympia
$3,456
Auburn (1st Yr of 5 -Yr Phase)
=$3,130 $3,351
Puyallup
Renton
JM ____M $2,809
Auburn (Existing)
MEIN= $2,424
September 2014
Sewer's current charge is $850 which is the lowest among those members with an SDC charge. The
fully calculated Approach A charge is $2,259 and would place Auburn above Federal Way and
Renton but still below five other jurisdictions. The first year of the five year phase -in would still
leave Auburn as the lowest charge.
Exhibit F -2: Sewer SDC Surve
Sewer SDC Comparison (Auburn Approach A)
Skyway Water & Sewer
Olympia
Lacey
Kirkland
Tumwater
Auburn (Full Calc)
Renton
$3,342
$3,218
$3,056
$2,290
$2,259
,2,033
Federal Way $1,916
Auburn (1st Yr of 5 -Yr Phase) JIMEM $1,204
Auburn (Existing) JIM $850
Kent $-
-5,696
**� FC S GROUP P DRAFT page 5 of 6
*
1518 Page 84 of 392
City of Auburn SDC Study
Five Year Phase -in Strategy
September 2014
F2. CURRENT CHARGE WITH CCI COMPARISON
The following exhibits compare the fully calculated Approach A charge as well as the charge for the
first year of the five year phase -in period with what the existing charge would have been if annual
CCI adjustments had been applied.
HxnWit P-S: Water
■ CCI Adjustment
■ Current SDC
♦Approach A
• Phase -In: 2015
son wan P-xzstzng �)UL plus c.c.z
Water SDC with CCI (2006 Base)
$6,089
$3,351
Z $3,273 $3,371
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Exhibit F -4: Sewer Comparison with
• CCI Adjustment
• Current SDC
♦ Approach A
• Phase- In:2015
isting SDC plus CCI
Sewer SDC with CCI (1996 Base)
$2,259
..... $1,560 $1,607
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
*!+> FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 6 of 6
15LB Page 85 of 392
•:; >FCS GROUP Research Request
Solutions- Oriented Consulting 1
To: Susan Fenhaus, Water Utility Engineer Date: August 1, 2014
Auburn, Washington
From: Karyn Johnson, Principal; Tage Aaker, Analyst RE: SDC History & Comparison
This brief document is the result of a request of information by the Public Works Committee.
Members had wanted to see how the SDCs would have changed over time if they had applied an
annual Construction Cost Index escalator to those charges. Years 2015 -2017 assume a 3% escalator.
fochibitA -1: Nummary
$6,000 SDC Summary Comparison
$5,124 ■ Current
$5,000 ■ Approach A
■ Phase -In: 2015
■ Adopted w/ CCI: 2015
$4,000
$3,482
$3,178
$3,000
$2,424
$1,837
$2,000
$1,523
$1162
$1,000 $
$
Water Sewer Storm
Exhibit A-2: Water SDC
rojection & Comparison
Water SDC with CCI (2006 Base)
• CCI Adjustment
■Current SDC $5,124
*Approach A
• Phase -In: 2015
$3,482
• $3,273 $3,371
$3,004 $3,085
$2,700
$ 2,772 $2,850 $2,925 %'
$2,577
$,
2 424
$2A99
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
* **;:), FC S GROUP Pagel of 2
151.6 Page 86 of 392
Exhibit A -3: Sewer SDC Pr(
■ CCI Adjustment
■ Current SDC
& Comparison
Sewer SDC with CCI (1996 Base)
$1,837
E
$1,560 1,607
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
•:*:), FC S GROUP
15LB
Page 2 of 2
Page 87 of 392
•:;> FCS GROUP Project Memorandum
Solutions- Oriented Consulting
To: Susan Fenhaus, Water Utility Engineer Date: May 20, 2014
Auburn, Washington
From: Karyn Johnson, Principal
Tage Aaker, Analyst
RE: System Development Charge (SDC) Update & Methodology White Paper - DRAFT
A. INTRODUCTION / BACKGROUND
In 2013, the City of Auburn (City) contracted with Financial Consulting Solutions Group, Inc. (FCS
GROUP) to perform a Water, Sewer, and Stormwater Cost of Service and System Development
Charge (SDC) Study. The SDC component of the study included an SDC White Paper, the goal of
which is to address general SDC background, philosophy, and alternative methodologies commonly
used in the industry and in compliance with Washington State legal precedence. SDCs were
developed for each utility under each alternative methodology evaluated herein. This memo updates
our previous draft (dated January 15th, 2014) and incorporates updated financial data as well as
requested phase -in strategies per City Council and Staff direction.
B. SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE BACKGROUND
Utility connection charges are imposed to recover system capital costs from new utility customers.
They serve two primary purposes: to provide equity between existing and new customers and to
provide a source of capital (equity) funding in support of system costs. SDCs are a form of utility
connection charge intended to recover the capital cost associated with providing system capacity, in a
manner proportionate to the estimated or projected system demands of a new customer. The charge is
imposed upfront on new development as well as on expansion or densification of development when
such actions increase requirements for utility system capacity.
Most municipal utilities operate as self - sufficient enterprises with utility system costs fully borne by
existing customers of the system. This means that existing customers have invested in the system
capacity that serves them and supported any excess system capacity available to serve growth. To
avoid dilution of the investment of existing customers, or the cost impact of adding more expensive
capacity to serve growth, a utility SDC allows new customers to make a similar investment
commensurate with the cost of system infrastructure needed to serve them.
Absent an appropriate SDC, existing customers support the costs of capacity needed for future
customers without equitable compensation for this support. In this case, the concept of "growth pays
for growth" has merit, as the absence of an equitable SDC would result in a subsidy of new
customers by existing customers.
As a term used in Washington statute, utility "connection charges" are referred to in the industry by a
variety of names, most commonly general facilities charges or system development charges. The
Redmond Town Center, 7525 166th Ave NE, Suite D -215, Redmond, WA 98052 ♦ 425.867.1802 Page 1
D1.13 Page 88 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
term system development charge, or SDC, will be used in this study to define the system connection
charge under development.
In addition to SDCs, there are also various charges that focus on local facilities costs, or the cost of
accessing the capacity- bearing system. These charges are often termed latecomer, in -lieu charges, or
local facilities charges, and are intended to equitably recover the capital cost of physical access to the
system, primarily as related to those portions of the system in physical proximity to the property
requesting service. This study does not address such charges. It is generally appropriate to impose
such charges in addition to the SDC, with the distinction being that the SDC provides capacity to
serve, while those other charges relate to the extension of service to a specific property.
SDCs are authorized under the general statutory revenue authority of cities embodied in RCW 35.92
(and largely in parallel in RCW 35.67). SDCs are charges for service that relate to the general
revenue authority defined in RCW 35.92.010, as further specifically detailed in RCW 35.92.025.
Under this guidance, they are intended to recover an equitable and proportional share of utility
system costs, leaving substantial discretion to the City to determine this equitable basis. This statute
and related Washington case law also provides guidance on acceptable methods for determining an
SDC.
C. SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY
C1. GENERAL METHODOLOGY
The basic approach to the SDC calculation can be shown in general terms as:
General SDC Methodology
Allocable Capital Cost
SDC =
Applicable Customer
Base
There are a variety of analytical and conceptual approaches to defining the capital cost and customer
base as used in this simplistic equation. There are also variations of this equation that reflect different
utility circumstances or policy preferences when defining system costs or an equitable share thereof.
Each of the approaches described in this memorandum is consistent with general parameters defined
by the RCW and legal cases as related to cities, and provides a rational basis for determining a fair
share of system cost. Therefore, they should all represent legally sound and acceptable alternatives
for the SDC.
The capital costs used in the SDC calculation are separable into the following general categories:
■ Existing system: These costs are associated with investments that the utility has made in
infrastructure that currently provides service to existing customers (and presumably has
capacity to serve growth to some extent).
•:*) FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 2 of 38
DI.B Page 89 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
■ Future capital projects: These costs relate to capital improvement projects that the
utility plans to undertake within a period of time specified in the utility's system planning
documents. These projects fall into one of three categories:
♦ Repair & Replacement Projects: These projects involve replacing aging
infrastructure that has degraded over time due to the wear and tear of use by
existing customers, and generally do not provide capacity for growth.
♦ Upgrade Projects: These projects broadly benefit both existing and future
customers without necessarily increasing system capacity. Examples might
include construction of an operations facility or improving system security.
♦ Expansion Projects. These projects primarily intend to increase system capacity
to serve growth. Examples would include water main extensions and investments
in conservation programs.
During the course of this study, three analytical approaches were documented. For each of the water,
sewer, and stormwater utilities, SDCs were calculated under these three approaches.
C2. SPECIFIC METHODOLOGIES
1. Average Integrated — Approach A
Average Integrated — Approach A
Future Project Costs: Future Project Costs:
Existing System Cost + Upgrade + Expansion
SDC =
Existing Customer Base + Future Growth Served
This integrated approach is commonly used to recognize that a utility both provides existing
infrastructure and plans to invest in future infrastructure to serve a growing customer base. Under
this approach, the entire existing system cost is included, plus all future costs that uyarade or expand
the system. This total conceptually represents the cost of the total system needed to serve the
projected total customer base, and is divided by the total existing and future customer base to
determine an average unit cost of the system. Under this generalized approach, future costs that
improve or expand the system are allocated in direct proportion to the share of the total future
customer base represented by future growth.
':.i FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 3 of 38
DI.B Page 90 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
2. Expansion Incremental — Approach B
Expansion Incremental — Approach B
Existing System Cost Future Project Costs:
Expansion
SDC = +
Existing Customer Base + Future Growth Served Future Growth Served
This variation of the Integrated Approach sums two distinct cost components to determine the total
charge, recognizing that systems sometimes commit existing capacity but must add incremental
elements of capacity to augment or extend the existing system. This approach effectively discounts
the buy -in by allocating only existing costs to all customers, and then adds an increment for future
expansion projects assigning these costs solely to future growth. Only future costs specifically
incurred to expand system capacity are included in this more detailed, incremental cost method.
3. Expansion & Upgrade Incremental — Approach C
Expansion & Upgrade Incremental —Approach C
7 Future Project Costs: Future Project Costs:
Existing System Cost + Upgrade Expansion
SDC = +
Existing Customer Base + Future Growth Served Future Growth Served
This variation of the Integrated Approach also sums two cost components to determine the charge.
This approach incrementally assigns future expansion projects solely to future growth. This approach
also includes a broader definition of growth - related costs when compared to Approach B. It adds to
existing costs future growth's share of upgrade projects that serve both future and existing customers.
Growth's share of future upgrade projects is generalized and allocated in direct proportion to future
growth's share of the total future customer base as opposed to a detailed project - specific basis.
Overall, this approach results in a larger allocation of future costs to growth than the other methods.
The exhibit below shows a breakdown of each Approach and how they compare in each of the
several following categories: Equity, Revenue Potential, Revenue Stability, Administrative Ease, &
Transparency.
':.i FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 4 of 38
DI.B Page 91 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
C3. SYSTEM COSTS CRITERIA
Each of these approaches has been applied in this study and the calculations and results are
documented in the ensuing sections specifically addressing water, wastewater, and stormwater.
Whenever a method combines existing and future system costs, care should be taken to avoid over -
allocating costs and capacity to new customers. The analytical method needs to recognize that the
resulting charge assembles the unit cost of capacity provided by the system, differing only in the way
that these system costs are allocated between existing and future customer groups.
In the development of an equitable SDC, system costs to be included in the charge should be
identified in a manner that satisfies three general criteria:
': *> FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 5 of 38
DI.B Page 92 of 392
Generally
Average
Expansion
Expansion &
Criterion
Accepted
Integrated
Incremental
Upgrade
Objectives/
Approach A
Approach B
Incremental
Standards
Approach C
Charge should reflect
Defines a consistent
Defines a
Defines both
Equity
a proportionate share
cost - sharing for all
reasonable share of
existing and
existing and future
cost shares, but with
of system costs and
customers new and
growth- induced
a heavy weighting
requirements
existing
costs
of future costs
Program is intended
Increases system
Increases system
Increases system
equity funding
Revenue
to provide a material
equity funding in
equity funding to
based on all costs
Potential
source of funding
proportion to
reflect existing and
potentially
toward capital
capacity cost
future capacity
attributable to new
program costs
increases
burdens imposed
growth
Predictability
Charge should not
Stable charge that
Greater volatility
due to expansion
Greater volatility
due to expansion
and Stability of
fluctuate wildly over
will increase in
anticipation of new
cost feature and
cost feature and
Charge
time
system costs
dependency on
dependency on
growth estimates
growth estimates
Update derives from
Requires careful
Requires careful
standard reports an d
analysis and
analysis and
Administrative
Charge should be
adopted plans. Only
allocation of
allocation of
Ease
simple to update and
apply
capital allocation
needed is between
growth- related costs
growth- related costs
Repair/Replacement
and revisits of
and revisits of
projects and Other.
growth forecasts
growth forecasts
Clear conceptual
Clear conceptual
basis. Applies
basis. Applies
subjective
Charge basis should
Clear conceptual
subjective
adjustment to buy -
be clear and
and analytical basis.
adjustment to buy-
in component that
Transparency
explainable, and
Avoids discrete
in component that
might be
minimize points of
allocation decisions
might be
questioned. Applies
dispute and subjective
that can introduce
questioned. Applies
project allocation
decisions
dispute.
project allocation
decisions that can
decisions that can
introduce dispute.
introduce dispute.
May appear to
compound charges.
C3. SYSTEM COSTS CRITERIA
Each of these approaches has been applied in this study and the calculations and results are
documented in the ensuing sections specifically addressing water, wastewater, and stormwater.
Whenever a method combines existing and future system costs, care should be taken to avoid over -
allocating costs and capacity to new customers. The analytical method needs to recognize that the
resulting charge assembles the unit cost of capacity provided by the system, differing only in the way
that these system costs are allocated between existing and future customer groups.
In the development of an equitable SDC, system costs to be included in the charge should be
identified in a manner that satisfies three general criteria:
': *> FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 5 of 38
DI.B Page 92 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
• That the asset and its cost be related to the system capacity, facilities, and improvements
serving new customers (nexus);
• That costs be incorporated and charges calculated in a manner that does not result in a
pyramiding of system costs, especially as related to both existing and future facilities;
and
■ That upon connecting to the system and paying the SDC, new customers will have
attained relative parity with existing customers in terms of contribution toward their
allocated share of system costs.
With respect to the first criterion, it is generally accepted that SDCs reflect general system costs and
need not specify or delineate specific facilities related to a specific customer location. In this sense,
system capacity is a generalized term referring to a common unit of service, rather than a detailed
assignment of shares of facilities unique to each customer location. To this end, the methods can
address system -wide costs and capacity, even while incorporating projects specific to smaller areas
of service.
The second criterion is intended to avoid the issue of double- charging in the specific methodology
being employed. The approaches summarized previously differ in what costs are included and how
they are incorporated, but all are structured with the intent that a new customer pays an equitable and
proportional share of existing and /or future system costs in terms of a growth charge. To do so, an
equitable method should ensure that the aggregate of components and costs, when used in the growth
charge, does not lead to an over - assignment of capacity and cost required to serve the new customer.
In the approaches assigning future costs, the new customer may appear to pay twice on future costs
first through the SDC and then later as a ratepayer. However, by paying the portion of future costs
directly allocated to them through the SDC, the corresponding cost is cash - funded and thus explicitly
not debt financed. Further, while the utility is likely to continue to use debt as a means for timely and
complete funding of projects, including growth projects, all customers constantly share the related
payment burden, both on their own behalf and that of other system users both connected and
anticipated. In short, ratepayers currently support growth costs through rates, and will continue to do
so, and this obligation is not waived by prior rate or SDC payments nor eliminated by imposing
SDCs. However, the overall debt and cost burden is lowered by the presence of SDC revenues, and
all ratepayers benefit proportionately from this resource, including the new customer.
The third criterion provides a conceptual basis for, or definition of, equity as a charge that provides
new customers general parity with existing customers. This does not require that new customers
make the same level of investment as made by existing customers; the result could neglect trends in
system costs or expenses to serve added customers. However, it does suggest that an equitable charge
is ultimately judged to reasonably reimburse existing customers for investments now available to
serve new growth and offset adverse impacts of adding capacity to the existing system. The range of
approaches outlined above is indicative of the range of perspectives and results that can reasonably
lead to an equitable SDC. They vary in the relative weighting of costs and definition of equity. The
approach ultimately employed will reflect the merits of equitable cost allocation in conjunction with
the values and objectives of the governing body for the utility.
The sections below provide a more detailed description of the existing cost basis, future cost basis,
and definitions of existing and future customer bases used in the general SDC methodology. It then
describes the use of this data to generate the three approaches to utility SDCs addressed in this study.
The determination of unique considerations and results for each of the three utility systems is
separately documented and discussed in subsequent sections.
':.i FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 6 of 38
DI.B Page 93 of 392
City of Auburn
a) Defining Existing System Costs
May 2014
The cost of the system is defined based on utility accounting records recording fixed assets. The
original cost of system assets is used as the basis for the cost of the existing system, even though it is
common in the industry to use system replacement cost or replacement cost net of depreciation as the
basis. The use of original cost is based primarily on a Washington court decision that determined
that the use of replacement cost, rather than actual original construction cost, was not consistent with
the statutory definition of system cost. As provided under Washington statute, up to ten years of
interest can then be added to the original construction cost. This is incorporated into the existing cost
basis by applying interest rates applicable at time of construction of each asset for up to ten years
based on age. Assets that were grant funded or donated to the utility by developers were excluded
from the calculated charge.
Another adjustment to the existing system cost basis is to deduct the net liability of outstanding
utility debt, recognizing that new customers will bear a proportionate share of this debt related to
existing assets through their utility rates. Therefore, the cost of those assets charged to new
development is offset to some degree by the remaining debt liability. Since the utility typically has
cash resources that are not included in the system cost basis, the net debt load is defined as total debt
minus outstanding cash and investments. This net amount is then deducted from the utility system
cost, reducing the basis for the SDC.
b) Defining Future System Costs
A utility capital improvement program (CIP) includes projects that address many needs, including
system expansion, system extensions, upgrades and improvements, and replacement of aged
infrastructure. In many cases, a CIP project can serve more than one of these purposes.
The CIP was reviewed by City engineers and assigned (or allocated) to three basic categories based
upon guidelines provided by FCS GROUP. The three categories include: repair and replacement,
upgrade, and expansion. For all methods, the projects or portions of projects attributed to repair and
replacement are excluded from the analysis, so that new customers are not charged for both an
existing asset and its replacement. At the other extreme, expansion costs are always included in the
charge. Depending upon the methodology, upgrade project costs may or may not be included in the
calculated SDC.
Unlike the provision and adjustment for existing debt, the cost of future projects is incorporated into
the SDC based on the share of cost attributable to future growth, regardless of intended financing or
funding methods. This is based on the charge being structured to reflect a pro rata share of system
costs. Future funding decisions do not alter that share, recognizing that all customers will share the
burden of future debt.
c) Defining Customer Base Served by the System
The determination of the denominator in the SDC calculation similarly involves policy and analytical
requirements.
In general, a key objective in defining the customer base is to provide an equitable allocation of costs
through the development charge. Toward this end, the metrics used to recover capacity -based costs
should be related to potential demand and provide proportionality that relates to system capacity
requirements. The basis for defining the system customer base is specific to each utility. The
customer base is defined in terms of existing connected customer base and planned future customer
base. Existing customer equivalents for each utility were derived from the utility billing system.
•:;) FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 7 of 38
D1.13 Page 94 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
• For Water, meter capacity equivalents (MCEs) were calculated based upon the number of
connected meters and their corresponding size.
• For Sewer, residential customer equivalents (RCEs) were based upon the average of four
recent quarterly reports from the City to King County. These reports provide a total
number of RCEs within Auburn's system each quarter.
• For Stormwater, equivalent service units (ESUs) were provided within the billing data
and were totaled to provide a current customer base.
The future customer base is typically defined in a manner consistent with the adopted CIP. The
analysis currently incorporates a twenty -year CIP (through 2033), so projected twenty year growth
above the 2013 customer statistics is calculated as an appropriate allocation basis.
Major large -scale projects might prove problematic if they provide capacity for much longer periods
of growth. The projection of customer growth for this study is based on growth estimates provided by
City during an on -site review in October 2013:
• Water: 2% Annual Customer Growth
• Sewer: 2% Annual Customer Growth
• Stormwater: 1% Annual Customer Growth
D. WATER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE
The development of the water system development charge (SDC) relies on City records related to
existing fixed assets, capital improvement plans, and customer records from utility billing. The
following discussion summarizes the development of the existing cost basis, future cost basis, and
customer base definition used to calculate the charge, followed by a summary of the alternative
charge methods and their results.
This study was conducted using the most recently available fiscal year financial records, in this case
the 2013 financial statements. For consistency, the analysis is then conducted considering January 1,
2014 as the hinge date separating existing and future customers and improvements. The resulting
calculated SDCs are summarized in Exhibit D -1 below.
Exhibit D -1:
Water SDC Calculation
ITotal System Development Charge per MCE $ 5,124 $ 5,313 $ 6,0061
Existing System Development Charge per MCE $2,424
Percent Increase / - Decrease from Existing 111%
Dollar Increase/ - Decrease from Existing $2,700
':,i FC S GROUP DRAFT
119% 148%
62,889 $3,58',
Page 8 of 38
DI.B Page 95 of 392
City of Auburn May 2014
D2. INPUT DATA FOR THE WATER SYSTEM SDC
Exhibit D -2: Summary of Input Data for the
Water SDC
$ 118,672,073
$ 118,672,073
Water
System Development
SDC Calculation
Average
Expansion
Expansion &
Input Data
Existing Cost Basis
(Approach A)
(Approach B)
Incremental
(Approach C)
Existing System Assets
$ 110,201,769
$ 110,201,769
$ 110,201,769 Original cost of plant -in- service as of end of year2013
Plus: Construction Work in Progress
10,812,019
10,812,019
10,812,019 End of year 2013 CWIP
Plus: Interest on Non-Contributed Plant
33,528,141
33,528,141
33,528,141 htereston assets upto a naximum 10- yearperod
Less: Contributed Capital
(28,063,765)
(28,063,765)
(28,063,765) Eg Developer don atons /contributed capital
Less: Outstanding Debt Net of Current Cash Balances
Customer Base (Meter Capacity Equivalents)
Existing Cash Balances $ 16,269,290
Ending cash &equivalents for2013 per Qty's S N P
Less: Debt Principal Outstanding (24,075,381)
19,955
19,955
Total principal outstanding for the ex fisting debt
Net Outstanding Debt Balance
1 (7,806,091)
(7,806,091)
(7,806,091) Debtprincipal outstanding, netof cash reserves
Total Existing Cost Basis
$ 118,672,073
$ 118,672,073
$ 118,672,073
Future Cost Basis (20 - Year CIP)
Repair& Replacement Projects
$ 46,010,700
$ 46,010,700
$ 46,010,700
CPfor2014- 2033(Escalated to2014$)
Upgrade Projects
20,554,000
20,554,000
20,554,000
CPfor2014 -2033 (Escalated to2014 $)
Expansion Projects
12,709,008
12,709,008
12,709,008
CPfor2014 -2033 (Escalated to2014$)
$ 79,273,708
$ 79,273,708
$ 79,273,708
Total Future Cost Basis (20 -year CIP)
Customer Base (Meter Capacity Equivalents)
Existing MCEs
19,955
19,955
19,955
2013 Estimated Meter Capacity Equivalents (MCEs)
Future MCEs(Incremental)
9,697
9,697
9,697
Incorporates annual growth through 2033 (2% annual)
29,652
29,652
29,652
Total Customer Base
b) Existing System
The cost of the existing water system is obtained from the fixed asset schedule acquired from the
City, which details original asset cost, acquisition year, and whether or not the asset was contributed
by a developer or other contribution. Existing system costs total $110.2 million, plus another $10.8
million for construction work in progress.
Additionally, interest is calculated and added to the existing cost basis as allowed by RCW
35.92.025, up to 10 years of accrued interest for each asset. Interest is computed for each asset based
on that asset's original cost and acquisition date using interest rates from the Bond Buyer Index from
the acquisition year (for assets acquired prior to 1953, the minimum interest rate in available records
is used). This calculation results in a total allowable interest adjustment of $33.5 million.
The total existing cost basis is reduced by the amount of those assets that were donated as well as
outstanding debt principal (net of available utility cash and investments). Total contributed assets
amounts to $28.1 million. Total outstanding debt principal totals $24.1 million. This amount is offset
by $16.3 million in utility cash, for a net outstanding debt burden of $7.8 million.
c) Future Capital Program
Future capital costs are obtained from the City's 20 -year water capital improvement plan for the
years 2014 -2033, which totals approximately $79.3 million in year 2014 dollars. (Note: The CIP was
originally given to us in 2013 dollars, so for this more recent update, we escalated cost estimates one
year forward to 2014 using 2013's actual ENR Construction Cost Index inflation of 2.57 %, then
rounded to the nearest $100). Each project was reviewed by City engineers and assigned into one or
more of the following categories: repair and replacement, upgrade, or expansion. One item of
significance is the Water Purchase project in the CIP. The original amount provided to us by the City
was approximately $21 million. This amount included two distinct portions: permanent ($10 million)
and reserve ($11 million). The permanent portion is assumed to be of use over the next twenty years,
': *> FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 9 of 38
D1.13 Page 96 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
and the reserve portion is assumed to be of use after the initial twenty years. Based on discussions
with the City, the SDC was calculated with only the permanent portion of the project included.
System repair and replacement (R &R) projects (or portions of projects) that replace existing system
assets are excluded from the SDC basis so that the system cost does not include duplicative costs for
a single system component. Projects identified as R &R total $46 million, and include general main
repair and replacements, reservoir painting, a well replacement, pump station replacements, billing
system improvements and other miscellaneous replacements. The costs of these projects are shown
in Exhibit D -3 and are not included in any of the SDC methods employed.
Expansion costs total $12.7 million and are included in all methods. These costs represent projects
or larger portions of projects that are entirely or predominately intended to expand capacity or
provide new service to be used by new development. The projects include Auburn's planned water
purchase, a new reservoir, new pump stations, and other miscellaneous projects. Note: In this
calculation, only the permanent portion of the water purchase is included.
Upgrade projects (projects that benefit both existing and future customers by upgrading system
reliability or performance, even if no explicit increase in capacity is provided) total $20.5 million.
Various upgrade projects include upgrades to a reservoir, to pump stations, to a PRV station, to a
support center, to wells, and to other miscellaneous projects. Additionally, there is a project to
provide service to Lakeland Hills Area currently served by Bonney Lake, but within the City Limits
of Auburn. This is an upgrade project per City Engineers.
Exhibit D -3: 20 - Year Capital Proiect Summary for Water
Well I Improvements
$ -
$
$
$ -
Fulmer Well Field Improvements
$ 1,794,900
$
$
$ 1,794,900
Water Purchase
$ -
$ 10,105,808
$
$ 10,105,808
Coal Creak Springs Phase 1 Rehabilitation
$ 697,500
$ -
$ 2,789,800
$ 3,487,300
Valley Seance Area New Reservoir
$ 2,256,500
$ 2,256,500
$ -
$ 4,513,000
Academy Pump Station #1 Pump Replacement
$ 1,089,800
$ -
$ 1,089,800
$ 2,179,600
Lea Hill Booster Pump Station Expansion and Rezone
$ 256,400
$ 256,400
$ 512,800
$ 1,025,600
Lea Hill New Pump Station
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ -
Water Right Re- Allocation - Valley Wellfield Improvements
$ 2,307,700
$
$ 2,307,700
$ 4,615,400
Provide Seance to Lakeland Hills Area Currently Served by Bonney Lake
$ 5,128,300
$
$ -
$ 5,128,300
Green River PS Emergency Power
$ 353,900
$
$ 353,900
$ 707,800
Well 4 Power & Chlorination
$ 978,600
$
$ -
$ 978,600
Well 5 Upgrade
$ 974,400
$
$ 974,400
$ 1,948,800
Well Inspection and Redevelopment Program
$ 276,900
$
$ 1,107,700
$ 1,384,600
Water Repair &Replacements
$ -
$
$ 21,364,600
$ 21,364,600
Lakeland Hills Reservoir Improvements
$ 384,600
$
$ 384,600
$ 769,200
Comprehensive Water Plan
$ 707,700
$
$ 707,700
$ 1,415,400
Well 7 Emergency Power
$ -
$
$ -
$ -
Maintenance and Operations Expansion
$ 90,300
$ 90,300
$ 45,100
$ 225,700
MIT Master Meters
$ 98,500
$ -
$ 393,900
$ 492,400
Street Utility Improvements
$ 2,051,300
$
$ 8,205,300
$ 10,256,600
Lea Hill PRV Station Improvements
$ 230,800
$
$ 230,800
$ 461,600
Water Meter& Billing System Improvements
$ 307,700
$
$ 1,230,800
$ 1,538,500
West Hill and Coal Creek Springs Chlorination Improvements
$ 153,800
$
$ 153,800
$ 307,600
Reservoir Painting
$ -
$
$ 3,846,200
$ 3,846,200
Utilities Field Operation Support Center
$ 102,600
$
$ -
$ 102,600
Game Farm Park Pump Station Replace Pump
$ 311,800
$
$ 311,800
$ 623,600
Tota I
$ 20.554.000
$ 12.709.008
$ 46.010.700
$ 79.273.708
d) Water Customer Base
In total, there were approximately 13,500 estimated connected customers in 2012 based on data from
the utility billing system. Since individual connections can vary greatly in potential water demands,
the connections are further analyzed by a breakdown of water meter size (converting accounts to
meter capacity equivalents-or MCEs). Within the water industry, standards for water meter
•:;> FCS GROUP DRAFT Page 10 of 38
DI.B Page 97 of 392
City of Auburn May 2014
capacity are established by the American Water Works Association, and provide a basis for
weighting meters relative to their potential maximum flow rates. For example, a 3 -inch meter is
rated to deliver 300 gallons per minute as a maximum instantaneous flow rate, as compared to 30
gallons per minute for a standard 3/4 -inch meter, which is most commonly installed for single - family
residences. Based on this, 3 -inch meters are weighted by a factor of 10 equivalent standard meters.
Similar factors are used for each applicable meter size. Since the system is presumed to be
constructed in a way that can facilitate this potential capacity, this is what is used within the
customer base to calculate the charge.
Using those meter standards, a meter equivalent basis for defining the customer base is developed,
which introduces proportionality between the request for service and the capacity that is required
based on meter size. After weighting the installed meter base by meter flow equivalency factors, the
approximately 13,500 meters were determined to be equivalent to 19,564 standard 3/4 -inch meters in
terms of total flow capacity in 2012. When applying one year of projected customer growth the total
number of MCEs is estimated to have reached 19,955 in 2013. Based upon the 2% annual growth
estimates provided by the City, the customer base would grow by 9,697 meter equivalents between
2014 and 2033 to reach a total customer base of 29,652 MCEs as of the end of the CIP planning
period (2033).
D3. CALCULATION OF ALTERNATIVE CHARGE METHODS
Exhibit D -4:
the SDC under Approaches A, A and C
Costs Allocated to Future Customers Only
Existing Assets + Interest
Repair & Replacement Projects
Upgrade Projects
Expansion Projects
Total
Allocable Number of MCEs
Future SDC Cost Component
12, 709, 008 12, 709, 008
$ - $ 12,709,008 $ 12,709,008
9,697 9,697 9,697
$ - $ 1,377 $ 1,377
Costs Allocated to Existing & Future Customers
Existing Assets + Interest
$ 118,672,073 $ 118,672,073
$ 118,672,073
Repair & Replacement Projects
- -
-
Upgrade Projects
20,554,000
20,554,000
Expansion Projects
12,709,008
$ 139,226,073
Total
$ 151,935,081 $ 778,672,073
Allocable Number of MCEs
29,652 29,652
29,652
Integrated SDC Cost Component
$ 5,724 $ 4,002 $ 4,695
Ifotal System Development Charge per MCE i 5,124 $ 5,313 $ 6,006
Existing System Development Charge per MCE $2,424
Percent Increase /- Decrease from Existing
Dollar Increase/ - Decrease from Existina
111% 119% I 148%
;2.700 $2.889 $3.58,
The data previously summarized above forms the basis for the SDC calculations as shown in Exhibit
D -4. The following discussion summarizes the unique basis of each charge.
■ Integrated Approach A: The total amount to be included within the charge is defined as
the sum of the existing cost basis of $119 million, the cost of upgrade projects of $21
':.i FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 11 of 38
DI.B Page 98 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
million, and the cost of expansion projects of $13 million. This results in a total water
system cost of $152 million. This is divided by the entire projected customer base of
29,652 meter equivalents to determine a system cost of $5,124 per meter equivalent.
■ Integrated Approach B: The total cost of the existing system, $119 million, is divided
by the total customer base (29,652 meter equivalents) to arrive at a buy -in charge of
$4,002 per meter equivalent. The cost of expansion projects ($13 million) is divided by
the projected 9,697 MCEs of growth to arrive at a cost of growth charge of $1,311 per
meter equivalent. These two charges are added together to produce a total SDC of $5,313
per meter equivalent.
■ Integrated Approach C: The system cost allocable to both existing customers and
growth is defined as the sum of the existing system cost of $119 million and the upgrade
project cost of $21 million. This total amount, $139 million, is divided by the total future
projected customer base of 29,652 meter equivalents to arrive at a unit cost of $4,695.
Capacity expansion projects totaling $13 million are divided by future growth of 9,697
meter equivalents, resulting in a unit cost of $1,311. The sum of these two components
results in a total system cost of $6,006 per meter equivalent.
D4. SDC SCHEDULE & REVENUE IMPACTS
The following Exhibit provides a schedule of rates for the various alternatives discussed above. The
meter equivalency factor implied by the current SDC schedule for the 10 inch meter is 56.09,
whereas the proposed factor based upon AWWA specifications suggests the factor be 76.67. We
recommend that this factor be updated to match the best practice standard of 76.67 for systems with a
3/4" meter base.
Exhibit D -S: SDC Schedule
a 3/4" Meter Base
0.75
$
$
2,424
1.00
1.00
1.00
8,872
$
4,048
1.67
1.67
1.50
$
$
8,072
3.33
3.33
2.00
32,011
$
12,920
5.33
5.33
3.00
$ 85,415
$
24,240
10.00
10.00
4.00
$
$
40,408
16.67
16.67
6.00
283,326
$
80,792
33.33
33.33
8.00
$
$
129,280
53.33
53.33
10.00
$
135,971
56.09
76.67
Note: "Factor" is the Equivalent Flow Factor for a given meter size
$ 5,124
$
5,313
$
6,006
$ 8,557
$
8,872
$
10,030
$ 17,062
$
17,691
$
20,000
$ 27,310
$
28,317
$
32,011
$ 51,239
$
53,127
$
60,059
$ 85,415
$
88,563
$
100,118
$ 170,779
$
177,072
$
200,175
$ 273,256
$
283,326
$
320,292
$ 392,847
$
407,324
$
460,469
Each of these alternatives will have an impact on SDC revenues. Exhibit D -6 shows three different
growth scenarios for the customer base: 0.50 %, 0.89% and 2.00 %. The 0.50% assumption is the
growth rate used in the City's rate revenue model in its recent rate update. The 0.89% is the
calculated annual growth rate based upon five years history of water SDC revenue. The 2.00% figure
is the assumption used in calculating the denominator (customer base) in the SDC.
For reference, the existing charge would generate approximately $430,000 if annual growth is 0.89%
(the five -year average). Approach A's charge would generate approximately $910,000, Approach B
would generate approximately $940,000 and Approach C would generate approximately $1.07
million.
* **4 FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 12 of 38
DI.B Page 99 of 392
City of Auburn
Exhibit D -6:
Annual Revenue Impacts for each Approach under Various Growth
May 2014
Growth Scenario 0.50% (Rate Model) 100 $ 240,000 $ 510,000 $ 530,000 $ 600,000
Growth Scenario 0.89% (5 -Year Avg.) 177 $ 430,000 $ 910,000 $ 940,000 $ 1,070,000
Growth Scenario 2.00% 1 (Rate per City) 399 $ 970,000 $ 2,040,000 $ 2,120,000 $ 2,400,000
Note: Annual SDC Revenue Assumed in Model is $320.000 and is not linked to a growth rate
Note: Figures rounded to the nearest $10,000
The following graph shows five years of historical SDC revenue as another point of reference of
historical performance. As can be seen from these historical years, SDC revenue can be very volatile
even when the unit development charge remains the same. Even in a small sample size of five years,
the highest annual SDC revenue is over two times that of the lowest year (2011 compared to 2013).
The scenarios above are driven by two key assumptions: customer growth rate and the selected
system development charge level. The scenarios are not meant to imply a guaranteed, level revenue
stream. It is possible that high customer growth coupled with a relatively low charge could generate
similar revenues as a relatively high charge coupled with low customer growth.
Exhibit D -7: Historical Water SDC Revenue
Historical Water SDC Revenue
$700,000
$600,000
$419,000
$500,000
- - - - - -- - - - --
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$-
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
� Water SDC Revenue - -- Average
D5. ALTERNATIVE SDC SCHEDULE (3/4" & 1 " SAME SDC)
During this recent update, City staff discussed a new policy which mirrors a growing trend within the
utility industry. It is the City's new policy that the smallest installed water pipe size will be F.
However, it is possible that either a 3/4" or F meter could be connected to this 1" pipe. In fact, the
3/4" meter measures low -flow more accurately and is also able to accurately meter higher flows
coming through a 1" pipe; for these reasons, it is not uncommon for a customer to have a F pipe and
a 3/4" meter.
•:;> FC S GROUP
DRAFT
Page 13 of 38
Page 100 of 392
City of Auburn May 2014
The alternative scenarios presented in this section would set the schedule of charges so that 3/4"
meters and 1" meters would have the same charge, whereas typically 3/4" meters have the smallest
charge and 1" meters would have a different, larger charge. Exhibit D -8 shows a new schedule of
charges where 3/4" and 1" meters have the same charge with the proposed factors being based upon a
1" meter base flow. Exhibit D -9 shows a schedule of charges where 3/4" and 1" meters have the
same charge with the proposed factors being based upon a 3/4" meter base flow. Exhibit D -9 is most
similar to the original schedule presented in Exhibit D -5. Ultimately, this is a policy choice for
decision makers within the City of Auburn, and each set of schedules has defensible traits. As an
informational side note, the City of Renton currently has a structure similar to that shown in D -9
(same charge for the smallest two meter sizes with factors based on the smallest meter size not the 1"
meter), except that Renton has a 5/8" meter base rather than a 3/4" base which leads to higher meter
factors.
':.i FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 14 of 38
DI.B Page 101 of 392
City of Auburn May 2014
E. SEWER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE
The development of the sewer SDC relies on City records related to existing fixed assets as of the
end of 2013, capital improvement plans, and customer records from the quarterly report to KC Metro.
Exhibit E -1 provides a summary of the sewer SDC calculation alternatives.
E2. INPUT DATA FOR THE SEWER SYSTEM SDC
Exhibit E -2:
Data for the Sewer SDC
Existing Cost Basis
Existing System Assets
Plus: Construction Work in Progress
Plus: Interest on Non - Contributed Plant
Less: Contributed Capital
Less: Outstanding Debt Net of Current Cash Balances
Existing Cash Balances $13,838,476
Less: Debt Principal Outstanding (8,727,152
Net Outstanding Debt Balance
Total Existing Cost Basis
Future Cost Basis
Repair & Replacement Projects
Upgrade Projects
Expansion Projects
Total Future Cost Basis (20-year CIP)
stomer Base - Residential Customer Equivalents (RCEs)
Existing RCEs
Future RCEs (Incremental)
Total Customer Base
b) Existing System
$ 91,757,823 $ 91,757,823 $ 91,757,823 Original cost of plant -in- service as of end of year 2013
2,372,710 2,372,710 2,372,710 End of year 2013 CWIP
21,870,695 21,870,695 21,870,695 Interest on assets up to a maximum 10 -year period
(39,886,851) (39,886,851) (39,886,851)E.g. Developer donations/ contributed capital
Ending cash balances for 2013
Total principal outstanding forthe existing debt
- Debt principal outstanding, net of cash reserves
76,114,377 I $ 76,114,377 I $ 76,114,377
$ 28,818,700 $ 28,818,700 $ 28,818,700 ClPfor 2014- 2033 (Escalated to 2014$)
2,977,100 2,977,100 2,977,100 ClPfor 20 1 4 - 2033 (Escalated to 2014$)
1,215,400 1,215,400 1,215,400 CIP for 2014 - 2033 (Escalated to 2014 $)
$ 33,011,200 $ 33,011,200 $ 33,011,200
29,425 1 29,425 29,425 2013 Estimated Residential Customer Equivalents (RCEs)
14,299 14,299 14,299 Incorporates annual growth through 2033 (2% annual)
43,7251 43,725 43,725
The cost of the existing sewer system is obtained from the fixed asset schedule acquired from the
City, which details original asset cost, acquisition year, and whether or not the asset was a
contributed by a developer (based upon the asset description of "Developer" or "Contribution ").
Existing system costs total $92 million, plus another $2.4 million for construction work in progress.
Additionally, interest is calculated and added to the existing cost basis as allowed by RCW
35.92.025, up to 10 years of accrued interest for each asset. Interest is computed for each asset based
on that asset's original cost and acquisition date using interest rates from the Bond Buyer Index from
':.i FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 15 of 38
D1.13 Page 102 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
the acquisition year (for assets acquired prior to 1953, the minimum interest rate in available records
is used). This calculation derives a total allowable interest adjustment of $22 million.
The total existing cost basis is reduced by those assets that were contributed, as well as outstanding
debt principal (net of available utility cash and investments). Contributed assets total $40 million.
Total outstanding debt principal totals $9.0 million. This amount is offset by $13.8 million in utility
cash and investments, for a net outstanding debt burden of zero dollars. If cash balances exceed total
debt principal outstanding, the additional cash does not get added to the existing cost basis.
c) Future Capital Program
Future capital costs are obtained from the City's 20 -year sewer capital improvement plan for the
years 2014 -2033, which totals approximately $33 million in year 2014 dollars. (Note: The CIP was
originally given to us in 2013 dollars, so for this update, we escalated cost estimates one year
forward to 2014 using 2013's actual ENR Construction Cost Index inflation of 2.57 %, then rounded
to the nearest $100). Each project was reviewed by City engineers and assigned into one or more of
the following categories: repair and replacement, upgrade, or expansion.
System repair and replacement (R &R) projects, or portions of projects, functionally replace existing
system assets. These are excluded from the SDC basis so that the system cost does not include
duplicative costs for a single system component. Including projects wholly assigned as R &R, and
portions of other projects allocated as an R &R element, a total of $29 million in projects is identified.
Major projects include general main repair and replacements including street related repair and
replacement, a pump station replacement, a comprehensive plan update, and work on the M &O
building. The costs of these projects are shown in Exhibit E -3 and are not included in any of the
SDC methods employed.
Expansion costs total $1.2 million and are included in all methods. These costs represent projects or
larger portions of projects that are entirely or predominately intended to expand capacity or provide
new service to be used by new development. The projects include a pump station upgrade, a vactor
decant facility, and an M &O building expansion.
Upgrade projects (projects that benefit both existing and future customers by upgrading system
reliability or performance, even if no explicit increase in capacity is provided) total $3 million.
Various improvement projects include a pump station upgrade, river crossing improvements, a
comprehensive plan update, an M &O building upgrade, and a utilities field operations center.
d) Sewer Customer Base
The customer base for the sewer SDC charge was sourced from the quarterly reports Auburn sends to
King County for the sewer treatment charge. One single family account is assumed to be one
':.i FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 16 of 38
D1.13 Page 103 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
residential customer equivalent (RCE) and non - single family's actual flows are divided by 750 cubic
feet per month. The average number of RCEs for 2012 totaled 28,848 RCEs which consists of 11,454
residential accounts and 17,394 non - residential RCEs; the estimated total in 2013 is 29,425 RCEs
when applying a year of projected customer growth.
The 29,425 RCEs are escalated based upon growth factors provided by City engineers specific to the
sewer system and customer class. For this analysis, we are assuming 2% growth per year through
2033. With these growth projections, the customer base would grow by 14,299 residential customer
equivalents from 2014 to 2033 to reach a total customer base of 43,725 RCEs as of the end of the
CIP planning period (2033).
E3. CALCULATION OF ALTERNATIVE CHARGE METHODS
Exhibit E -4:
the SDC under Approaches A, B, and C
Costs Allocated to Future Customers Only
Existing Assets + Interest
$
$
$
Repair & Replacement Projects
Upgrade Projects
-
Expansion Projects
1,215,400
1,215,400
Total
$
$
1,215,400
$ 1,215,400
Allocable Number of RCEs
14,299
14,299
14,299
Future SDC Cost Component
$
85
$ 85
Costs Allocated to Existing & Future Customers
Existing Assets + Interest
$
76,114,377
$
76,114,377
$ 76,114,377
Repair & Replacement Projects
-
-
-
Upgrade Projects
2,977,100
2,977,100
Expansion Projects
1,215,400
-
Total
$
80,306,877 I
$
76,114,377
$ 79,091,477
Allocable Number of RCEs
43,725
43,725
43,725
Integrated SDC Cost Component
$
1,837
$
1,741
$ 1,809
Total System Development Charge per RCE
$
1,837
1,894
Existing System Development Charge per RCE $
850
Percent Increase / - Decrease from Existing
116%
115%
123%
Dollarincrease/ - Decrease from Existing
$
987
$
9761
$ 1,044
The data summarized above forms the basis for the SDC calculations as summarized in Exhibit E -4.
The following discussion summarizes the unique basis of each charge:
• Integrated Approach A: The total amount to be included within the charge is defined as
the sum of the existing cost basis of $76 million, the cost of upgrade projects of $3
million, and the cost of expansion projects of $1.2 million. This results in a total sewer
system cost of $80 million. This is divided by the entire projected customer base of
43,725 RCEs to determine a system cost of $1,837 per RCE.
• Integrated Approach B: The total cost of the existing system, $76 million, is divided by
the total customer base (43,725 meter equivalents) to arrive at a buy -in charge of $1,741
per RCE. The cost of expansion projects ($1.2 million) is divided by the projected 14,299
• **4 FC S GROUP
DRAFT
Page 17 of 38
DI.B Page 104 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
RCEs of growth to arrive at a pure cost of growth charge of $85 per RCE. These two
charges are added together to produce a total SDC of $1,826 per residential equivalent.
■ Integrated Approach C: The system cost allocable to both existing customers and
growth is defined as the sum of the existing system cost of $76 million and the upgrade
project cost of $3 million. This total amount, $79 million, is divided by the total future
projected customer base of 43,725 RCEs to arrive at a unit cost of $1,809. Capacity
expansion projects totaling $1.2 million are divided by future growth of 14,299 RCEs,
resulting in a unit cost of $85. The sum of these two components results in a total system
cost of $1,894 per RCE.
E4. SDC SCHEDULE & REVENUE IMPACTS
The following Exhibit provides a schedule of rates for the various alternatives discussed above as
well as a summary of sample annual SDC revenue estimates.
Exhibit E-5: Sample Annual Revenue Impactsfor each Approach under Various Growth Assumptions
Alternative Charges
Average Expansion Expansion &
Sewer SDC Existing Integrated Incremental Upgrade
Charge (Approach A) (Approach B) Incremental
(Approach C)
All Customer Classes per RCE development •-
Growth Scenario 0.50% (Rate Model)
Growth Scenario 1.44% (5 -Year Avg.)
Growth Scenario 2.00% (Rate per City)
150 1 $ 128,000 1 $ 276,000 $ 274,000 $ 284,000
432 1 $ 367,000 1 $ 793,000 $ 789,000 $ 818,0001
6001 $ 510,000 I $ 1,103,000 $ 1,096,000 $ 1,137,000
Note: Annual SDC Revenue Assumed in Model is $300, 000 and is not linked to a growth rate
Note: Figures rounded to the nearest $10,000
Each of these alternatives will have an impact on SDC revenues. Exhibit E -5 shows three different
growth scenarios for the customer base: 0.50 %, 1.44% and 2.00 %. The 0.50% assumption is the
growth rate used in the City's rate revenue model in its recent rate update. The 1.44% is the
calculated annual growth rate based upon five years history of sewer SDC revenue. The 2.00% figure
is the assumption used in calculating the denominator (customer base) in the SDC.
For example, the existing charge would generate approximately $367,000 if annual growth is 1.44%
(the five -year average). Approach A's charge would generate approximately $793,000, Approach B
would generate approximately $789,000 and Approach C would generate approximately $818,000.
Below is a graph showing the historical revenue for Sewer SDCs for an additional point of reference.
•:;> FC S GROUP
DRAFT
Page 18 of 38
DI.B Page 105 of 392
City of Auburn
Exhibit E -6: Historical Sewer SDC Revenue
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
Historical Sewer SDC Revenue
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Sewer SDC Revenue - -- Average
0
May 2014
F. STORMWATER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE
The development of the stormwater SDC relies on City records related to existing fixed assets as of
the end of 2013, capital improvement plans for 2014 and beyond, and customer records from utility
billing. Exhibit F -1 provides a summary of the stormwater SDC calculation alternatives.
• **4 FC S GROUP
I
DRAFT
Page 19 of 38
Page 106 of 392
City of Auburn
F2. INPUT DATA FOR THE STORMWATER SYSTEM SDC
Exhibit E -2: Summary of Input Data for the Stormwater SDC
May 2014
Stormwater
F.7-t-,
SDC
Calculation
Expansion &
Slystern Development Charge Components
liput Data
Existing Cost Basis
Average
Integrated
(Approach A)
Expansion
Incremental
(Approach B)
Upgrade
Incremental
(Approach C)
Notes
Existing System Assets
$ 62,343,464
$ 62,343,464
$ 62,343,464
Original cost of plant -in- service as of end of year 2013
Plus: Construction Work in Progress
2,992,064
2,992,064
2,992,064
End of year 2013 CWIP
Plus: Interest on Non -Contributed Plant
21,654,564
21,654,564
21,654,564
Interest on assets up to a maximuml0- yearperiod
Less: Contributed Capital
(16,009,663)
(16,009,663)
(16,009,663)
Eg. Developer donations / contributed capital
Less: Outstanding Debt Net of Current Cash Balances
Existing Cash Balances $ 16,447,159
Ending cash balances for 2013
Less: Debt Principal Outstanding (9,693,126)
Total principal outstanding as of end of 2013
Net Outstanding Debt Balance
-
-
-
Debt principal outstanding, net of cash reserves
$ 70,980,428
$ 70,980,428
$ 70,980,428
Total Existing Cost Basis
Future Cost Basis (20 -Year CIP)
Repair& Replacement Projects
$ 17,790,200
$ 17,790,200
$ 17,790,200
ClPfor2014- 2033 (Escalated to 2014$)
Upgrade Projects
6,387,700
6,387,700
6,387,700
ClPfor2014 -2033 (Escalated to 2014 $)
Expansion Projects
3,230,700
3,230,700
3,230,700
CIP for 2014- 2033 (Escalated to 2014$)
$ 27,408,600
$ 27,408,600
$ 27,408,600
Total Future Cost Basis (20 -year CIP)
Customer Base (Equivalent Service Units)
Existing Equivalent Service Units
60,502
60,502
60,502
2013 Estimated Equivalent Service Units (ESUs)
Future Equivalent Service Units (Incremental)
13,322
13,322
13,322
Incorporates annual growth through 2033 (1 % annual)
73,824
73,824
73,824
Total Customer Base
b) Existing System
The cost of the existing stormwater system is obtained from the fixed asset schedule acquired from
the City, which details original asset cost, acquisition year, and whether or not the asset was a
contributed by a developer (based upon the asset description of "Developer" or "Contribution ").
Total existing system costs total $62 million, plus another $3 million for construction work in
progress (CWIP).
Additionally, interest is calculated and added to the existing cost basis as allowed by RCW
35.92.025, up to 10 years of accrued interest for each asset. Interest is computed for each asset based
on that asset's original cost and acquisition date using interest rates from the Bond Buyer Index from
the acquisition year (for assets acquired prior to 1953, the minimum interest rate in available records
is used). This calculation derives a total allowable interest adjustment of $22 million.
The total existing cost basis is reduced by the amount of contributed assets as well as outstanding
debt principal (net of available utility cash and investments). Contributed assets total $16 million.
Total outstanding debt principal totals $9.7 million. This amount is offset by $16 million in utility
cash and investments, for a net outstanding debt burden of zero dollars. If cash balances exceed total
debt principal outstanding, the additional cash does not get added to the existing cost basis, and the
net impact on the existing cost basis is zero.
c) Future Capital Program
Future capital costs are obtained from the City's 20 -year stormwater capital improvement plan for the
years 2014 -2033 (plus the 2013 CIP), which totals approximately $27.4 million in year 2014 dollars.
(Note: The CIP was originally given to us in 2013 dollars, so for this update, we escalated cost
estimates one year forward to 2014 using 2013's actual ENR Construction Cost Index inflation of
•:;) FCS GROUP DRAFT Page 20 of 38
D1.13 Page 107 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
2.57 %, then rounded to the nearest $100). Each project was reviewed by City engineers and assigned
into one or more of the following categories: repair and replacement, upgrade, or expansion.
System repair and replacement (R &R) projects, or portions of projects, functionally replace existing
system assets. These are excluded from the SDC basis so that the system cost does not include
duplicative costs for a single system component. Including projects wholly assigned as R &R, and
portions of other projects allocated as an R &R element, a total of $17.8 million in projects is
identified. Major projects include general repair and replacements including street related repair and
replacement, a pump station replacement, a comprehensive plan update, Mill Creek Wetland
Restoration, work on the M &O building, and other various replacement projects. The costs of these
projects are shown in Exhibit F -3 and are not included in any of the SDC methods employed.
Upgrade projects (projects that benefit both existing and future customers by upgrading system
reliability or performance, even if no explicit increase in capacity is provided) total $6.4 million.
Various improvement projects include pump station upgrades, improvements to reduce and control
flooding, M &O building improvements, Utilities Field Operation Support Center improvements, Mill
Creek Wetland Restorations, and other various projects.
Expansion costs total $3.2 million and are included in all methods that incorporate future capital
costs. These costs represent projects or larger portions of projects that are entirely or predominately
intended to expand capacity or provide new service to be used by new development. The projects
include a composting facility, improvements to reduce and control flooding, a Vactor Decant
Facility, and other various projects.
Exhibit F -3: Scheduled Capital Projects for Storm Drainage
I _ Year (Current 201a r
Repair & Replacement /System Improvement Projects
$
-
$
$
12,308,000
$
12,308,000
Repair and Replacement associated with transportation projects
$
2,051,300
$
$
2,051,300
$
4,102,600
30th Street NE Area Flooding, Phase 2
$
171,800
$
515,400
$
-
$
687,200
Eastridge Manor Outfall replacement
$
230,800
$
-
$
230,800
$
461,600
Composting Facility
$
-
$
1,025,700
$
-
$
1,025,700
30th Street NE Area Flooding, Phase 3
$
295,900
$
887,700
$
$
1,183,600
West Main Street Pump Station Upgrade
$
1,164,100
$
-
$
$
1,164,100
Pump Station Replacement/ Upgrade
$
923,100
$
-
$
2,153,900
$
3,077,000
Vactor Decant Facility
$
-
$
276,900
$
-
$
276,900
M &O Building Expansion /Upgrade
$
246,200
$
246,200
$
123,100
$
615,500
Comprehensive Plan Update
$
628,200
$
-
$
628,200
$
1,256,400
Utilities Field Operation Support Center
$
102,600
$
$
-
$
102,600
Mill Creek Wetland 5k Reach Restoration
$
294,900
$
$
294,900
$
589,800
Bypass at 2nd and G Street SE
$
278,800
$
278,800
$
-
$
557,600
Total
$
6,387,700
$
3,230,700
$
17,790,200
$
27,408,600
d) Stormwater Customer Base
The residential equivalent metric for the stormwater system is referred to as equivalent service units
(ESU). The average number of ESUs throughout 2012, derived from the utility billing system, totaled
59,903; the estimated total in 2013 is 60,502 ESUs when applying a year of projected customer
growth. For informational purposes, per City Fee Schedule, one ESU is considered equal to 2,600
square feet of parcel coverage by impervious surfaces.
The 60,502 ESUs are escalated based upon growth factors provided by City staff, the annual growth
rate assumed is 1 %. With this assumption, the customer base would grow by an estimated 13,322
':.i FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 21 of 38
DI.B Page 108 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
equivalent service units between 2014 and 2033 to reach a total customer base of 73,824 ESUs as of
the end of the CIP planning period in 2033.
F3. CALCULATION OF ALTERNATIVE CHARGE METHODS
Exhibit F -4: Calculating the SDC under Approaches A, B, and C
The data summarized above forms the basis for the SDC calculations as summarized in Exhibit F -4.
The following discussion summarizes the unique basis of each charge.
• Averaged Integrated (Approach A): The total amount to be included within the charge
is defined as the sum of the existing cost basis of $71 million, the cost of upgrade
projects of $6.4 million, and the cost of expansion projects of $3.2 million. This results in
a total stormwater system cost of $81 million. This is divided by the entire projected
customer base of 73,824 ESUs to determine a system cost of $1,092 per ESU.
• Expansion Incremental (Approach B): The total cost of the existing system, $71
million, is divided by the total customer base (73,824 equivalent service units) to arrive at
an integrated charge of $961 per ESU. The cost of expansion projects ($3.2 million) is
divided by the projected 13,322 ESUs of growth to arrive at a pure cost of growth charge
of $243 per ESU. These two charges are added together to produce a total SDC of $1,204
per equivalent service unit.
• Expansion & Upgrade Incremental (Approach C): The system cost allocable to both
existing customers and growth is defined as the sum of the existing system cost of $71
million and the upgrade project cost of $6.4 million. This total amount, $77 million, is
divided by the total future projected customer base of 73,824 ESUs to arrive at a unit cost
•:;) FC S GROUP
DRAFT
Page 22 of 38
DI.B Page 109 of 392
Stormwater SDC
Stormwater System Development Charge Components
Calculation
Average
Integrated
Expansion
Incremental
Expansion
Incremental
&
Upgrade
SDC Calculations
Costs Allocated to Future Customers Only
(Approach A)
(Approach B)
(Approach
C)
Existing Assets + Interest
$
$
$
Repair & Replacement Projects
$
$
$
Upgrade Projects
$
$
$
-
Expansion Projects
$
$ 3,230,700
$
3,230,700
Total
$
$ 3,230,700
$
3,230,700
Allocable Number of Equivalent Service Units
13,322
13,322
13,322
Future SDC Cost Component
$ -
$ 243
$
243
Costs Allocated to Existing & Future Customers
Existing Assets + Interest
$ 70,980,428
$ 70,980,428
$
70,980,428
Repair & Replacement Projects
$ -
$ -
$
-
Upgrade Projects
$ 6,387,700
$
$
6,387,700
Expansion Projects
$ 3,230,700
$
$
-
$ 80,598,828
Total
$ 70,980,428
$
77,368,128
Allocable Number of Equivalent Service Units
73,824
1 73,824
73,824
Integrated SDC Cost Component
$ 1,092
$ 961
$
1,048
Total System Development Charge per ESU
1092
S 1,204
$
1,291
Existing System Development Charge per ESU $1,162
Percent Increase / - Decrease from Existing
-6%
4%
11%
Dollar Increase / - Decrease from Existing
($70)
$42
$129
The data summarized above forms the basis for the SDC calculations as summarized in Exhibit F -4.
The following discussion summarizes the unique basis of each charge.
• Averaged Integrated (Approach A): The total amount to be included within the charge
is defined as the sum of the existing cost basis of $71 million, the cost of upgrade
projects of $6.4 million, and the cost of expansion projects of $3.2 million. This results in
a total stormwater system cost of $81 million. This is divided by the entire projected
customer base of 73,824 ESUs to determine a system cost of $1,092 per ESU.
• Expansion Incremental (Approach B): The total cost of the existing system, $71
million, is divided by the total customer base (73,824 equivalent service units) to arrive at
an integrated charge of $961 per ESU. The cost of expansion projects ($3.2 million) is
divided by the projected 13,322 ESUs of growth to arrive at a pure cost of growth charge
of $243 per ESU. These two charges are added together to produce a total SDC of $1,204
per equivalent service unit.
• Expansion & Upgrade Incremental (Approach C): The system cost allocable to both
existing customers and growth is defined as the sum of the existing system cost of $71
million and the upgrade project cost of $6.4 million. This total amount, $77 million, is
divided by the total future projected customer base of 73,824 ESUs to arrive at a unit cost
•:;) FC S GROUP
DRAFT
Page 22 of 38
DI.B Page 109 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
of $1,048. Capacity expansion projects totaling $3.2 million are divided by future growth
of 13,322 ESUs, resulting in a unit cost of $243. The sum of these two components
results in a total system cost of $1,291 per ESU.
F4. SDC SCHEDULE & REVENUE IMPACTS
The following Exhibit provides a schedule of rates for the various alternatives discussed above as
well as a summary of sample annual SDC revenue estimates.
Alternative Charges
Average Expansion Expansio
Stormwater SDC Existing Integrated Incremental Upgrad
Charge (Approach A) (Approach B) Incremer
(Approacl
All Customer Classes per ESU development charge
r' r•
Growth Scenario
0.50%
(Rate in City Model)
306
$355,000
$334,000
$368,000
$394,000
Growth Scenario
0.66%
(5 -Year Avg.)
402
$467,000
$439,000
$484,000
$518,000
Growth Scenario
1.00%
(Rate per City)
611
$710,000
$667,000
$736,000
$789,000
Note: Annual SDC Revenue Assumed in Model is $200,000 and is not linked to a growth rate
Note: Figures rounded to the nearest $10, 000
Each of these alternatives will have an impact on SDC revenues. Exhibit F -5 shows three different
growth scenarios for the customer base: 0.50 %, 0.66% and 1.00 %. The 0.50% assumption is the
growth rate used in the City's rate revenue model in its recent rate update. The 0.66% is the
calculated annual growth rate based upon five years history of water SDC revenue. The 1.0% figure
is the assumption used in calculating the denominator (customer base) in the SDC.
For example, the existing charge would generate approximately $467,000 if annual growth is 0.66%
(the five -year average). Approach A's charge would generate $439,000 Approach B would generate
approximately $484,000 and Approach C would generate approximately $518,000.
Below is a graph showing the five — year average as well as the annual SDC revenue for the prior
five years for the Stormwater Utility. This can help provide reference for the various SDC revenue
scenarios.
Exhibit F -6: Historical Stormwater SDC Revenue
Historical Stormwater SDC Revenue
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
fi Stormwater SDC Revenue - -- Average
•:;> FC S GROUP
DRAFT
Page 23 of 38
Page 110 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
G. SUMMARY OF CALCULATED CHARGES & OPTIONS
The following summary provides a summary of the existing SDCs for each of the three utilities as
well as their respective calculated alternatives.
G1. SDC RESULTS
Each of these three integrated approaches is equitable and defensible, and the selected methodology
will likely depend on decision makers' policy and philosophy of "growth pays for growth." However
in order to be the most equitable and defensible, we would recommend that the same approach be
selected for all three utilities. For example, we would not recommend selecting Integrated A for
water, Integrated B for sewer, and Integrated C for stormwater. We would recommend selecting
either approach A, B, or C for all three utilities. The following exhibit displays the existing charges
and alternative approaches graphically.
It is our recommendation that in between future SDC updates, the City escalate the currently adopted
SDC each year by the prior year's ENR Construction Cost Index. This allows for the nominal charge
level to keep pace with inflation as well as help mitigate or avoid large swings in SDC charges the
next time a new charge is calculated and adopted.
* **4 FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 24 of 38
DI.B Page 111 of 392
City of Auburn May 2014
G2. OPTIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION
The following points help frame the City's options:
■ Keep current SDCs and make no changes.
■ Keep current SDCs and make annual inflationary adjustments based on historical CCI.
■ Adopt one of the new approaches (A, B, or C) and implement corresponding charges for
each utility, but do not escalate each charge by annual Construction Cost Index (CCI).
Charges would be updated through a future SDC study.
• Adopt one of the new approaches and implement new charges for each utility. In
subsequent years, escalate each charge by annual CCI to keep pace with inflation.
• Adopt one of the new approaches but phase into SDC levels. If the City chooses the
phase -in alternative, we recommended escalating the currently calculated SDCs with
three years of projected CCI and phasing into that higher level. By phasing in the SDC
charges over three years (thereby not adopting the fully calculated rates starting in 2015),
the City will be foregoing revenue from new connections as a result of having charges in
place that are lower than fully calculated charges (i.e. "falling behind" in equitable
revenue recovery).
H. LESS COMMON SDC METHODOLOGIES
There are other less common (but still valid) methodologies that were not discussed in the analysis
above. Based upon Auburn's current specific utility circumstances, FCS GROUP did not believe the
following approaches were applicable. A brief summary and sample calculation formula are provided
for informational purposes only.
1. System Buy -In Approach
System Buy -In Approach
Existing System Cost
SDC =
Existing Customer Base
This approach reflects the average investment made by existing customers, ensuring that a new
customer makes an investment commensurate with the average investment in infrastructure already
made by existing customers. It determines the cost of the existing system and allocates this cost over
either the existing customer base or the existing system capacity. This approach is often utilized in a
fully mature utility system with little to no growth, where most costs are already embedded in
existing system investments. This approach increases system equity funding in proportion to growth
in customer base and is a stable charge based upon cumulative costs.
• **4 FC S GROUP
DRAFT
Page 25 of 38
DI.B Page 112 of 392
City of Auburn
2. System Growth Approach
SDC =
System Growth Approach
Future Project Costs:
Capacity Expansion
Future Growth Served
May 2014
Most applicable in rapid growing systems with major expansion needs, this approach determines the
charge using a method comparable to impact fee methods used in Washington State. This approach
isolates and focuses on future growth - related capital projects that expand capacity and serve new
growth and allocates those costs solely to future growth. This approach is best for new or rapidly
growing systems. It fails to recognize existing capacity investments that serve growth. It also
generates funding well below investment costs of capacity serving new growth. It is subject to large
swings as capital projects and growth estimates change, and it requires careful analysis and allocation
of growth - related costs and consistent growth forecasts.
I. JURISDICTIONAL RESEARCH
11. SURVEY OF CHARGES
There are several graphs below that show a comparison of connection charges by Jurisdiction and
Utility service. The charges within Section I1 are current SDCs in 2014.
There are two parts to Section I. The first part shown in I1 simply compares the charges from several
jurisdictions. The second part shown in I2 shows a detailed methodology table for five of the
jurisdictions per the Scope of Services. For I1, we included more jurisdictions than are shown in I2 to
help provide deeper context, especially if certain jurisdictions in I2 did not have a charge for a utility
service. This was most common in stormwater. Additionally, in each individual utility graph (water,
sewer, or storm), there may be additional jurisdictions than are shown in the combined graph. For
example, Sumner and Puyallup were included in the water and stormwater surveys but not the sewer
portion because their SDC includes collection and treatment and it would not be a fair comparison.
Additionally, all of the municipal participants in LOTT were included in the sewer survey, but may
not be included in other utility surveys depending on the circumstances.
Auburn's current combined SDC charge is lowest out of all the jurisdictions surveyed for this portion
of the study. It is even lower than Federal Way, Lacey and Skyway Water & Sewer (Seattle was used
for Skyway's stormwater survey, since their jurisdictions overlap with Seattle per District website)
which do not have stormwater SDC charges. Approaches A and B place Auburn among the average
charge within survey group, and Approach C places the City as the second highest in the survey. The
"$" label indicate no charge for the given utility and service.
* **4 FCS GROUP DRAFT Page 26 of 38
DI.B Page 113 of 392
City of Auburn
Hxnibit 1 -1: 1 otai connection ( -narge by ✓urisaichon
$11,075
• Storm
• Sewer
• Water $9,076 :L $9,190:
- $8,667
$8,052 : $8 342
$7,875 L --------
$2,097
$6,665 $1,076
$6,070 $481
$5,408
$4,436: $1,228
Auburn Federal Renton Kirkland Olympia Auburn Auburn Lacey Kent Auburn Skyway
(Existing) Way (Approach (Approach (Approach Water &
A) B) C) Sewer
May 2014
Note: Survey charges were current as of May 2014 and may or may not be in the process of being updated.
Auburn currently has the lowest water SDC in this survey group. Any of the newly calculated
approaches places Auburn in the middle to upper end of the survey group.
Hxhibit 1 -2: Water connection charge / S)VU Survey with 1014
Water SDC Comparison
Kent
$6,980
Auburn (Approach C)
$6,006
Lacey
$5,449
Skyway Water & Sewer
$5,379
Auburn (Approach B)
$5,313
Auburn (Approach A)
$5,124
Sumner
$4,523
Federal Way
$3,492
Olympia
$3,456
Puyallup
$3,130
Kirkland
$3,128
Renton
$2,809
Auburn (Existing)
$2,424
•:;> FC S GROUP
I
DRAFT
Page 27 of 38
Page 114 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
Auburn also has the lowest sewer SDC of all of the survey participants that have a charge (Kent does
not have a sewer SDC). All three approaches yield a charge that remains lower than the other
jurisdictions in the survey.
Hxnzdzt 1 -s: k)ewer c:onnectzon c:narge — (- ouecnon rortions
Sewer SDC Comparison
Skyway Water & Sewer
Olympia
Lacey
Kirkland
Tumwater
Renton
Federal Way
Auburn (Approach C)
Auburn (Approach A)
Auburn (Approach B)
Auburn (Existing)
Kent
13
$850
,696
$3,342
- $3,218
- $3,056
N $2,290
$2,033
$1,916
$1,894
$1,837
$1,826
r KC Metro) with 2014 Charges
Auburn's existing stormwater charge is on the low end of the spectrum. Approach A yields a charge
that is slightly lower than the existing charge. Approaches B and C would place Auburn higher than
Renton, but still below the highest three charges from Sumner, Kent, and Puyallup. Olympia's charge
also incorporates additional charges above the $1,076 for trip generation considerations.
Exhibit 1 -4: Stormwater Connection Charge with 2014 Charges
Storm SDC Comparison
Sumner
Kent
Puyallup
Auburn (Approach C)
Renton
Auburn (Approach B)
Auburn (Existing)
Auburn (Approach A)
Olympia
Kirkland
Skyway WSD (City of Seattle)
Federal Way
Lacey
•:;> FC S GROUP
I
$2,097
- $1,760
$1,291
$1,228
$1,204
i1,162
,092
,076
DRAFT
$2,450
Page 28 of 38
Page 115 of 392
City of Auburn
12. SURVEY OF METHODOLOGIES
May 2014
Per the Scope of Services, we chose five jurisdictions for the detailed methodology survey. The jurisdictions we chose all received treatment
from King County or the Lacey, Olympia, Tumwater & Thurston County (LOTT) Alliance. This allows for meaningful comparisons since
Auburn also receives wholesale sewer treatment services. The methodology portion of this survey is current as of 2013. The Single — Family
Charge survey portion was conducted in 2013 and then updated in 2014 to account for any charge updates in the new year.
Exhibit 1-5: Detailed Methodology Survey for Five (5) Jurisdictions
City
utility
Charge Schedule
Methodology
CIP
Existing Cost
Future Cost
Credit Available?
Single - Family
Charge
Stormwater
Sq ft of impervious area being added /2600,
Approach B
10 Year
No credit available to new connections per
$481
then use rounded -down result x $481 00
conversation with Public Works
City
Based upon meter size, the 5/8" x 3/4"
of
Sewer
charge is $3,056 and increases based on
Approach A
20 Year
No credit available to new connections per
$3,056
Kirkland
AWWA meter capacity ratios up to a
conversation with Public Works
$244,480 for a 8" meter
Based upon meter size, the 5/8" x 3/4"
If meter is upsized for fire sprinklers, the new
Water
a
a
charge is $3,128 and increases based on
Approach A
6 Year
connection wouldn't pay the SDC on the
$3,128
AWWA meter capacity ratios up a
upsized amount
$250,240 for a 8" meter
$1,947 for a single family residence Non
City will renew credits for the stormwater
Stormwater
single family charge is based upon new
Approach B
10 Year
charge on a case by case basis For
$2,097
impervious square feet at the rate of $0 78
example, credits may be given if pervious
per imp square foot ($1,947 - 2,500 sf)
structures (e g pavement) are installed
City of
Sewer
—
—
No System Development Charge for Sewer —
Kent
Based upon meter size, the 3/4" charge is
Per City contact, there are no credits
Water
$6,481 Charges increased based upon
Approach A
20 Year
available that offset the system development
$6,980
meter size and AWWA standard meter
charge
ratios
•*;4 FC S GROUP
DRAFT
Page 29 of 38
DI.B Page 116 of 392
City of Auburn
Exhibit I -6:
Detailed Methodology Survey. for Five (5) Jurisdictions (Continued... )
May 2014
City
Utility
Charge Schedule
Methodology
CIP Existing Cost
Future Cost
Credit Available?
Single - Family
Charge
Stormwater
-------------------------- --- ----
--- ---- --- ---- --- --- ---- No System Development Charge for Stormwater---------------------------------------------------------
The amount of the sewerage general
facilities charge levied on a particular piece
City
of propert y shall be equal to the number of
of
equivalent residential units estimated to be
Sewer
used by said property multiplied by the rate
Proposed Method:
6 Year
Per contact with City, no credits are offered
Collection Portion
Lacey
per equivalent residential unit determined as
Approach B
Only $3,218
set forth in _MC 13 16 027(B) Non
residential ERUs are defined as 900 cf of
water consumed per month
The charge for a 5/8" meter is $5,141 and
Water
increases based on AWWA meter capacity
Approach B
20 Year
Per contact with City, no credits are offered
$5,449
ratios up to a $210,474 for a 6" meter
Stormwater (City)
-------------------------- --- ----
--- ---- --- ---- --- --- ---- No System Development Charge for Stormwater---------------------------------------------------------
CityOf
The amount of the sewer capital facilities
y
(CFC) charge for single family is $1,916 for
Federal
sewer (Lakehaven)
the collection portion only For new non
Approach A
10 Years
Per contact with City, no credits are offered
Collection Portion
single family connections the sewer CFC is
Only $1,916
levied on a per equivalent residential (ERU)
Way
unit basis which is 220 gallons per day
The amount of the water capital facilities
Supply: Total Cost Basis
(CFC) charge for single family is $3,492 For
(Future +Unused
Water (Lakehaven)
new non single family connections the water
Capacity) ERUS Future
P y) (
10 Years
Per contact with City, credits are offered
y'
$3,492
CFC is levied on a per equivalent residential
+Unused Capacity)
(ERU) unit basis which is 255 gallons per
Non - Supply: Approach A
day
Skyway
Stormwater (City
of Seattle)
-
No System Development Charge for Stormwater-------------- - - - - -- --
Water &
The charge for a 5/8" X3/4" meter is $5,696
Sealer
and increases based on AWWA meter
Approach A
10 Years
Per contact with the District, no credits are
$5,696
Sewer
capacity ratios up to $455,693 for a 8"
available for new construction
meter
The charge for a 5/8" X3/4" meter is $5,379
District
and increases based on AWWA meter
Approach A
10 Years
✓
Per contact with the District, no credits are
$5,379
capacity ratios up to a $430,315 for a 8"
available for new construction
meter
•*;4 FC S GROUP
DRAFT
Page 30 of 38
DI.B Page 117 of 392
City of Auburn May 2014
J. SDC PHASE -IN STRATEGY (ALTERNATIVE)
After reviewing draft SDC results in early 2014, City Council's direction was for FCS GROUP to
provide options for phasing in the calculated SDC charges. Phase -in strategy options are presented
below.
The SDC phase -in strategy assumptions are noted below:
■ Phase -In Duration: The phase -in horizon will span three years: 2015, 2016, and 2017.
This timeline coincides with the remaining years of adopted rate increases per Ordinance
6401.
■ Annual Increase by Construction Cost Index (CCI): By phasing in the SDC charges
over three years (thereby not adopting the fully calculated rates starting in 2015), the
City may be foregoing revenue from new connections as a result of having charges in
place that may be lower than fully calculated charges (i.e. "falling behind" in equitable
recovery). To mitigate this shortfall, as well as to avoid falling further behind in nominal
SDC rate levels, we recommend that the fully calculated charges (shown in the Exhibit
J -1 for reference) be increased by three years of CCI then phased -in by equal dollar
amounts over three years.
For example, consider Approach A under the Water utility for which the calculated charge is $5,124.
Instead of phasing the Water charge from $2,424 to $5,124 by 2017, we recommend phasing the
existing charge to $5,599. We arrive at $5,599 by increasing the full calculated charge of $5,124 by
three years of CCI, which is assumed to be 3.00% per year based on historical trends. The charge
would then increase by $1,058 per year for each of 2015, 2016, and 2017 ($5,599 - $2,424 = $3,175
$3,175 - 3 yrs. = $1,058 per year). Phase -in schedules are provided in the following sections.
For each utility, a phase -in strategy has been developed. Along with the actual SDC rates for each
year, a sample revenue projection is also provided. Depending upon the growth scenario and
calculation approach, a revenue figure representing the sum of three years revenue is shown.
* **4 FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 31 of 38
DLB Page 118 of 392
City of Auburn May 2014
J2. WATER PHASE -IN STRATEGY
There are two scenarios within this section as shown below.
• Option 1: City keeps the current SDC OR selects one of the non - phased -in approaches.
We assume here that the selected charge remains the same throughout the study period
(2015 — 2017). This provides a baseline revenue number to compare the phase -in
approach to.
• Option 2: City decides to phase -in selected charge throughout study period; the existing
charge of $2,424 can be gradually increased each year.
Option 1 — Exhibit J -2: This section shows the projected three -year revenue for each approach and
growth scenario — using the full SDC calculation, assuming the City selects a charge and maintains
the same charge over the next three years. For example, under the Approach A charge ($5,124), total
three -year revenues vary from $1.5 to $6.1 million depending the growth scenario (E.g. 0.50%
scenario: $5,124 X 100 MCEs X 3 years = $1.5 million).
Exhibit J -2.
SDC Calculations and Resulting 3 -Year Revenue
ASSUTT1eS LU'14 Gaicuiatea Gnarges Aaoptea Tor zui o, zui 6, ana zui t
Growth Scenario 0.50% (Rate Model) 100 1 $ 730,000 1 $ 1,530,000 $ 1,590,000 $ 1,800,000
Growth Scenario 0.89% (5- YearAvg.) 177 $ 1,290,000 $ 2,730,000 $ 2,830,000 $ 3,200,000
Growth Scenario 2.00% (RateperCity) 399 $ 2,900,000 $ 6,130,000 $ 6,360,000 $ 7,190,000
Note: Figures rounded to the nearest $10, 000
Option 2 — Compare the "Approach A" range of $1.5 to $6.1 million from above with the range of
$1.4 to $5.4 million in the table below in J -3. Once again, the first range is based on assuming a
water charge of $5,124 for each 2015, 2016, and 2017 as shown under Approach A. The latter range
is based on using charges $3,482 in 2015, $4,541 in 2016, and $5,599 in 2017. The resulting charge
in 2017 of $5,599 is higher under the phase -in scenario than in Exhibit J -2, but the charges in both
2015 and 2016 are lower.
Exhibit J -3: Water SDC Phase -In Strategy (Option 2)
Growth Scenario 0.50% (Rate Model) 100 1 $ 770,000 1 $ 1,360,000 $ 1,400,000 $ 1,550,000
Growth Scenario 0.89% (5- YearAvg.) 177 $ 1,370,000 $ 2,420,000 $ 2,490,000 $ 2,760,000
Growth Scenario 2.00% (Rate per City) 399 $ 3,080,000 $ 5,440,000 $ 5,600,000 $ 6,210,000
•:;> FC S GROUP
I
DRAFT
Page 32 of 38
Page 119 of 392
I Alternative Charges
Vater SDC - Three Years of eel Increase
Existing Approach A Approach B Approach 1-
Charge
3hase - In Approach: 2015 SDC
$2,499 $3,482 $3,551 $3,804
3hase - In Approach: 2016 SDC
$2,574 $4,541 $4,678 $5,183
3hase - In Approach: 2017 SDC
$2,649 $5,599 $5,805 $6,563
Growth Scenario 0.50% (Rate Model) 100 1 $ 770,000 1 $ 1,360,000 $ 1,400,000 $ 1,550,000
Growth Scenario 0.89% (5- YearAvg.) 177 $ 1,370,000 $ 2,420,000 $ 2,490,000 $ 2,760,000
Growth Scenario 2.00% (Rate per City) 399 $ 3,080,000 $ 5,440,000 $ 5,600,000 $ 6,210,000
•:;> FC S GROUP
I
DRAFT
Page 32 of 38
Page 119 of 392
City of Auburn May 2014
J3. SEWER PHASE -IN STRATEGY
There are two options within this section:
• Option 1: City does not change the current SDC OR selects one of the non - phased -in
approaches. The selected charge remains the same throughout the study period (2015 —
2017)
• Option 2: City decides to phase -in selected charge throughout study period; the existing
charge of $850 can be gradually increased each year as a phase -in strategy.
Option 1 — Exhibit J -4: This section shows the projected three -year revenue for each approach and
growth scenario — using the full SDC calculation, assuming the City selects a charge and maintains
the same charge over the next three years. For example, under the Approach A charge ($1,837), total
three -year revenues vary from $790,000 to $3.2 million depending the growth scenario (E.g. 0.50%
scenario: $1,837 X 144 RCEs X 3 years = $790,000).
Exhibit J -4: SDC Calculations and Resulting 3 -Year Revenue
Sewer SDC Charge ' $850 1 $1,837 $1,826 $1,894
Assumes zuT4 Laicuiaiea unarges Aaoptea Tor zuTa, zuTu, ana zuT i
Growth Scenario
Growth Scenario
Growth Scenario
0.50%
1.44%
2.00%
(Rate Model)
(5- YearAwg.)
(Rate per City)
144
442
577
$ 370,000
$ 1,130,000
$ 790,000
$ 2,430,000
$ 790,000
$ 2,420,000
$ 820,000
$ 2,510,000
$ 1,470,000 $ 3,180,000 $ 3,160,000 $
3,280,000
Note: Figures rounded to the nearest $10,000
Option 2 — Compare the range of $790,000 to $3.2 million from above with the range of $700,000 to
$2.8 million in the table below in J -5. Once again, the first range is based on assuming a sewer
charge of $1,837 under Approach A for each 2015, 2016, and 2017. The latter range is based on
using charges $1,236 in 2015, $1,621 in 2016, and $2,007 in 2017 as shown under Approach A. The
resulting charge in 2017 of $2,007 is higher under the phase -in scenario than in Exhibit J -4, but the
charges in both 2015 and 2016 are lower.
•:;> FC S GROUP
I
DRAFT
Page 33 of 38
Page 120 of 392
City of Auburn
Exhibit J -S: Sewer SDC Phase -In Strategy (Option 2)
Charge
Phase - In Approach: 2015 SDC $876 $1,236 $1,232 $1,256
Phase - In Approach: 2016 SDC $903 $1,621 $1,613 $1,663
Phase - In Approach: 2017 SDC $929 $2,007 $1,995 $2,069
Growth Scenario 0.50% (Rate Model) 144 $ 390,000 $ 700,000 $ 700,000 $ 720,000
Growth Scenario 1.44% (5- YearAvg.) 442 $ 1,200,000 $ 2,150,000 $ 2,140,000 $ 2,200,000
Growth Scenario 2.00% (Rate per City) 577 $ 1,560,000 $ 2,810,000 $ 2,790,000 $ 2,880,000
Note: Fiqures rounded to the nearest $10, 000
J4. STORMWATER PHASE -IN STRATEGY
There are two options within this section:
May 2014
• Option 1: City does not change the current SDC OR selects one of the non - phased -in
approaches. The selected charge remains the same throughout the study period (2015 —
2017)
• Option 2: City decides to phase -in selected charge throughout study period; the existing
charge of $1,162 can be gradually increased each year as a phase -in strategy.
Option 1 — Exhibit J -6 in this section shows the projected three -year revenue for each approach and
growth scenario — using the full SDC calculation, assuming the City selects a charge and maintains
the same charge over the next three years. For example, under the Approach A charge ($1,092), total
three -year revenues vary from $1.0 million to $2.0 million depending the growth scenario (E.g.
0.50% scenario: $1,092 X 306 ESUs X 3 years = $1.0 million).
Exhibit J -6.
SDC Calculations and Resulting 3 -Year Revenue
Assumes zui4 uaicuiaiea Vnarges Haopiea Tor zuio, zuib, ana zui i
Growth Scenario 0.50% (Rate Model) 306 $ 1,070,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,100,000 $ 1,180,000
Growth Scenario 0.66% (5- YearAvg.) 402 $ 1,400,000 $ 1,320,000 $ 1,450,000 $ 1,560,000
Growth Scenario 1.00% (Rate per City) 611 $ 2,130,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 2,210,000 $ 2,370,000
Note. Fiqures rounded to the nearest $10, 000
Option 2 — Compare the range of $1.0 million to $2.0 million from above with the range of $1.1
million to $2.2 million in the table below in J -7. Once again, the first range is based on assuming a
stormwater charge of $1,092 for each 2015, 2016, and 2017. The latter range is based on using
charges $1,172 in 2015, $1,183 in 2016, and $1,193 in 2017. Because of the relatively small increase
above the existing charge in each of the stormwater approaches (when compared to water and sewer),
':.i FC S GROUP DRAFT Page 34 of 38
DI.B Page 121 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
the differences in revenue ranges between Option 1 and Option 2 are not as significant and in some
cases are relatively the same.
Exhibit J -7: Stormwater SDC Phase -In Strategy (Option 2)
Phase
Phase
Phase
- In Approach:
- In Approach:
- In Approach:
2015
2016
2017
SDC
SDC
SDC
$1,198
$1,234
$1,270
$1,172
$1,183
$1,193
$1,213
$1,264
$1,316
$1,245
$1,327
$1,410
Growth Scenario 0.50% (Rate Model) 306 $ 1,130,000 $ 1,080,000 $ 1,160,000 $ 1,220,000
Growth Scenario 0.66% (5- VearAvg.) 402 $ 1,490,000 $ 1,430,000 $ 1,520,000 $ 1,600,000
Growth Scenario 1.00% (Rate per City) 611 $ 2,260,000 $ 2,170,000 $ 2,320,000 $ 2,430,000
Note: Roures rounded to the nearest 510. 000
•:;> FC S GROUP
I
DRAFT
Page 35 of 38
Page 122 of 392
City of Auburn May 2014
J5. JURISDICTIONAL COMPARISON - 2015 PHASED -IN SDC
In this section, the SDC comparison charts are updated to show the 2015 SDC phase -in rate (the first
year of the phase -in) for Auburn alongside the existing SDCs of the other jurisdictions. For
comparison purposes, the combined jurisdictional charges are shown with and without the phase -in
approach. Auburn's combined charges go from the middle to upper range to the lower range when
accounting for the phase -in strategy. Note: Survey charges were current as of May 2014 and may or
may not be in the process of being updated.
E hibit J-8
,:;> FCS GROUP
DRAFT
Page 36 of 38
Page 123 of 392
$11,075
■ Storm
■ Sewer
$9,076
■ Water
$8,667
$7,875
$2,097
$6,665
$1,076
$6,305
$5,996
6,070
- -- -'
$481
`- - - - - --
$5,408
19213
$1,228
51,
$4,436
,
$1,162
�
•;�
Auburn
Federal Auburn
Auburn
Renton
Auburn
Kirkland
Olympia
Lacey
Kent
Skyway
(Existing)
Way (Approach
(Approach
(Approach
Water&
Sewer
A)
B)
C)
Exhibit J -9: Total Connection Charge by Jurisdiction (Without
Phased -in
SDCs)
$11,075
■ Storm
■ Sewer
$9,076
$9,190
- - -_
■ Water
$8,667
-
$8,052
� $8,342 �
$1,291
$7,875
$2,097
$1,076
$6,665
$6,070
$181
$5,408
$1,228
$4,436
$1,162
Auburn
Federal Renton
Kirkland
Olympia
Auburn
Auburn
Lacey
Kent
Auburn
(Approach
Skyway
Water&
(Existing)
Way
(Approach
(Approach
C)
Sewer
A)
B)
,:;> FCS GROUP
DRAFT
Page 36 of 38
Page 123 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
Auburn currently has the lowest water SDC in this survey group. The 2015 phased -in approaches
place Auburn in the middle portion of the survey group whereas the non - phased -in SDCs range from
the middle to the higher part of the survey group.
Hxntbtt ✓ -1 u: water connection c:narge (wttn rnasea -in
Water SDC Comparison
Kent
Lacey
Skyway Water & Sewer
Sumner
Auburn (Approach C)
Auburn (Approach B)
Federal Way
Auburn (Approach A)
Olympia
Puyallup
Kirkland
Renton
Auburn (Existing)
$6,980
$5,449
$5,379
$4,523
$3,804
$3,551
_ $3,492
$3,482
_ $3,456
. $3,130
. $3,128
' $2,809
$2,424
Auburn also has the lowest sewer SDC of all of the survey participants that have a charge (Kent does
not have a sewer SDC). All three 2015 phased -in approaches for sewer yield a charge that remains
lower than the other jurisdictions in the survey.
Hxntbtt J -11: Sewer Uonnectton charge — c otlectton Yorttons
Sewer SDC Comparison
Skyway Water & Sewer
Olympia
Lacey
Kirkland
Tumwater
Renton
Federal Way
Auburn (Approach C)
Auburn (Approach A)
Auburn (Approach B)
Auburn (Existing)
Kent
$3,342
$3,218
- $3,056
. $2,290
' $2,033
$1,916
$1,256
$1,236
$1,232
$850
•:;> FC S GROUP
I
DRAFT
,696
Phased -in SDCs)
Page 37 of 38
Page 124 of 392
City of Auburn
May 2014
Auburn's existing stormwater charge is on the low end of the spectrum. The 2015 Approach A yields
a charge that is slightly higher than the existing charge. Approaches B and C would place Auburn
just higher than Renton, but still below the highest three charges from Sumner, Kent, and Puyallup.
Olympia's charge also incorporates additional charges above the $1,076 for trip generation
considerations.
tX17Ibzt J -1 L: J7ormwater C.onnectzon Charge (With Fliasea- in
Storm SDC Comparison
Sumner
Kent
Puyallup
Auburn (Approach C)
Renton
Auburn (Approach B)
Auburn (Approach A)
Auburn (Existing)
Olympia
Kirkland
Skyway WSD (City of Seattle) $-
Federa, way $-
Lacey $-
•:;> FC S GROUP
I
$481
- $2,450
$2,097
- $1,760
' $1,245
' $1,228
$1,213
$1,172
$1,162
$1,076
DRAFT
Page 38 of 38
Page 125 of 392
*:;> FCS GROUP Project Memorandum
Solutions- Oriented Consulting
To: Marin Chaw, Financial Planning Manager Date: January 10, 2014
Auburn, Washington
From: Karyn Johnson, Principal
Tage Aaker, Analyst
RE: System Development Charge (SDC) Update & Methodology White Paper
A. INTRODUCTION / BACKGROUND
In May 2013, the City of Auburn (City) contracted with Financial Consulting Solutions Group, Inc.
(FCS GROUP) to perform a Water, Sewer, and Stormwater Cost of Service and System Development
Charge (SDC) Study. The SDC component of the study included an SDC White Paper, the goal of
which is to address general SDC background, philosophy, and alternative methodologies commonly
used in the industry and in compliance with Washington State legal precedence. SDCs were
developed for each utility under each alternative methodology evaluated herein.
B. SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE BACKGROUND
Utility connection charges are charges imposed to recover system capital costs from new utility
customers. They serve two primary purposes: to provide equity between existing and new customers
and to provide a source of capital (equity) funding in support of system costs. SDCs are a form of
utility connection charge intended to recover the capital cost associated with providing system
capacity, in a manner consistent with and proportionate to the estimated or projected system demands
of a new customer. The charge is an upfront charge imposed primarily on new development, although
also applicable to expansion or densification of development when such actions increase
requirements for utility system capacity.
Most municipal utilities operate as self - sufficient enterprises with utility system costs fully borne by
existing customers of the system. This means that existing customers have invested in the system
capacity that serves them and supported any excess system capacity available to serve growth. To
avoid dilution of the investment of existing customers, or the cost impact of adding more expensive
capacity to serve growth, a utility SDC allows new customers to make a similar investment
commensurate with the cost of system infrastructure needed to serve them.
Absent an appropriate SDC, existing customers support the costs of capacity needed for future
customers without equitable compensation for this support. In this case, the concept of "growth pays
for growth" has merit, as the absence of an equitable SDC would result in a subsidy of new
customers by existing customers.
As a term used in Washington statute, utility "connection charges" are referred to in the industry by a
variety of names, most commonly general facilities charges or system development charges. The
term system development charge, or SDC, will be used in this study to define the system connection
charge under development.
Redmond Town Center, 7525 166t` Ave NE, Suite D -215, Redmond, WA 98052 ♦ 425.867.1802 Page 1
DI.B Page 126 of 392
City of Auburn January 10, 2014
In addition to SDCs, there are also various charges that focus on local facilities costs, or the cost of
accessing the capacity- bearing system. These charges are often termed latecomer, in -lieu charges, or
local facilities charges, and are intended to equitably recover the capital cost of physical access to the
system, primarily as related to those portions of the system in physical proximity to the property
requesting service. This study does not address such charges. It is generally appropriate to impose
such charges in addition to the SDC, with the distinction being that the SDC provides capacity to
serve, while those other charges relate to the extension of service to a specific property.
SDCs are authorized under the general statutory revenue authority of cities embodied in RCW 35.92
(and largely in parallel in RCW 35.67). SDCs are charges for service that relate to the general
revenue authority defined in RCW 35.92.010, as further specifically detailed in RCW 35.92.025.
Under this guidance, they are intended to recover an equitable and proportional share of utility
system costs, leaving substantial discretion to the City to determine this equitable basis. This statute
and related Washington case law also provides guidance on acceptable methods for determining an
SDC.
C. SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE METHODOLOGY
C1. GENERAL METHODOLOGY
The basic approach to the SDC calculation can be shown in general terms as:
General SDC Methodology
Allocable Capital Cost
SDC =
Applicable Customer
Base
There are a variety of analytical and conceptual approaches to defining the capital cost and customer
base as used in this simplistic equation. There are also variations of this equation that reflect different
utility circumstances or policy preferences when defining system costs or an equitable share thereof.
Each of the approaches described in this memorandum is consistent with general parameters defined
by the RCW and legal cases as related to cities, and provides a rational basis for determining a fair
share of system cost. Therefore, they should all represent legally sound and acceptable alternatives
for the SDC.
The capital costs used in the SDC calculation are separable into the following general categories:
• Existing system: These costs are associated with investments that the utility has made in
infrastructure that currently provides service to existing customers (and presumably has
capacity to serve growth to some extent).
• Future capital projects: These costs relate to capital improvement projects that the
utility plans to undertake within a period of time specified in the utility's system planning
documents. These projects fall into one of three categories:
* *3 FCS GROUP
Page 2 of 31
D1.13 Page 127 of 392
City of Auburn January 10, 2014
♦ Repair & Replacement Projects: These projects involve replacing aging
infrastructure that has degraded over time due to the wear and tear of use by
existing customers, and generally do not provide capacity for growth.
♦ Upgrade Projects: These projects broadly benefit both existing and future
customers without necessarily increasing system capacity. Examples might
include construction of an operations facility or improving system security.
♦ Expansion Projects. These projects primarily intend to increase system capacity
to serve growth. Examples would include water main extensions and investments
in conservation programs.
During the course of this study, three analytical approaches were documented. For each of the water,
sewer, and stormwater utilities, SDCs were calculated under these three approaches.
C2. SPECIFIC METHODOLOGIES
1. Average Integrated — Approach A
Average Integrated — Approach A
Future Project Costs: Future Project Costs:
Existing System Cost + Upgrade + Expansion
SDC =
Existing Customer Base + Future Growth Served
This integrated approach is commonly used to recognize that a utility both provides existing
infrastructure and plans to invest in future infrastructure to serve a growing customer base. Under
this approach, the entire existing system cost is included, plus all future costs that uparade or expand
the system. This total conceptually represents the cost of the total system needed to serve the
projected total customer base, and is divided by the total existing and future customer base to
determine an average unit cost of the system. Under this generalized approach, future costs that
improve or expand the system are allocated in direct proportion to the share of the total future
customer base represented by future growth.
2. Expansion Incremental — Approach B
xpansion Incremental — Approach B
Existing System Cost Future Project Costs:
Expansion
SDC = +
Existing Customer Base + Future Growth Served Future Growth Served
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 3 of 31
DI.B Page 128 of 392
City of Auburn
January 10, 2014
This variation of the Integrated Approach adds two distinct cost components to determine the total
charge, recognizing that systems sometimes commit existing capacity but must add incremental
elements of capacity to augment or extend the existing system. This approach effectively discounts
the buy -in by allocating only existing costs to all customers, and then adds an increment for future
expansion projects assigning these costs solely to future growth. Only future costs specifically
incurred to expand system capacity are included in this more detailed, incremental cost method.
3. Expansion & Upgrade Incremental — Integrated Approach C
Expansion & Upgrade Incremental — Approach C
F� Future Project Costs: Future Project Costs:
Existing System Cost + Upgrade Expansion
SDC = +
Existing Customer Base + Future Growth Served — Future Growth Served
This variation of the Integrated Approach also adds two cost components to determine the charge.
This approach incrementally assigns future expansion projects solely to future growth. This approach
also includes a broader definition of growth - related costs when compared to Approach B. It adds to
existing costs future growth's share of upgrade projects that serve both future and existing customers.
Growth's share of future upgrade projects is generalized and allocated in direct proportion to future
growth's share of the total future customer base as opposed to a detailed project - specific basis.
Overall, this approach results in a larger allocation of future costs to growth than the other methods.
The exhibit below shows a breakdown of each Approach and how they compare in each of the
several following categories: Equity, Revenue Potential, Revenue Stability, Administrative Ease, &
Transparency.
Criterion
Generally
Accepted
Objectives/
Standards
Average
Integrated
Approach A
Expansion
Incremental
Approach B
Expansion &
Upgrade
Incremental
Approach C
Charge should reflect
Defines a consistent
Defines a
reasonable share of
Defines both
existing and future
Equity
a proportionate share
cost - sharing for all
existing and
cost shares, but with
of system costs and
customers new and
growth- induced
a heavy weighting
requirements
existing
costs
of future costs
Program is intended
Increases system
Increases system
Increases system
equity funding
Revenue
to provide a material
equity funding in
equity funding to
based on all costs
Potential
source of funding
proportion to
reflect existing and
potentially
toward capital
capacity cost
future capacity
attributable to new
program costs
increases
burdens imposed
growth
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 4 of 31
DI.B Page 129 of 392
City of Auburn
January 10, 2014
C3. SYSTEM COSTS CRITERIA
Each of these approaches has been applied in this study and the calculations and results are
documented in the ensuing sections specifically addressing water, wastewater, and stormwater.
Whenever a method combines existing and future system costs, care should be taken to avoid over -
allocating costs and capacity to new customers. The analytical method needs to recognize that the
resulting charge assembles the unit cost of capacity provided by the system, differing only in the way
that these system costs are allocated between existing and future customer groups.
In the development of an equitable SDC, system costs to be included in the charge should be
identified in a manner that satisfies three general criteria:
• That the asset and its cost be related to the system capacity, facilities, and improvements
serving new customers (nexus);
• That costs be incorporated and charges calculated in a manner that does not result in a
pyramiding of system costs, especially as related to both existing and future facilities;
and
■ That upon connecting to the system and paying the SDC, new customers will have
attained relative parity with existing customers in terms of contribution toward their
allocated share of system costs.
With respect to the first criterion, it is generally accepted that SDCs reflect general system costs and
need not specify or delineate specific facilities related to a specific customer location. In this sense,
system capacity is a generalized term referring to a common unit of service, rather than a detailed
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 5 of 31
DI.B Page 130 of 392
Generally
Average
Expansion
Expansion &
Criterion
Accepted
Integrated
Incremental
Upgrade
Objectives/
Approach A
Approach B
Incremental
Standards
Approach C
Predictability
Charge should not
Stable charge that
Greater volatility
due to expansion
Greater volatility
due to expansion
and Stability of
fluctuate wildly over
will increase in
anticipation of new
cost feature and
cost feature and
Charge
time
system costs
dependency on
dependency on
growth estimates
growth estimates
Update derives from
standard reports an d
Requires careful
Requires careful
Administrative
Charge should be
adopted plans. Only
analysis and
allocation of
analysis and
allocation of
Ease
simple to update and
apply
capital allocation
needed is between
growth- related costs
growth- related costs
Repair/Replacement
and revisits of
and revisits of
projects and Other.
growth forecasts
growth forecasts
Clear conceptual
Clear conceptual
basis. Applies
basis. Applies
subjective
Charge basis should
Clear conceptual
subjective
adjustment to buy -
be clear and
and analytical basis.
adjustment to buy-
in component that
Transparency
explainable, and
Avoids discrete
in component that
might be
minimize points of
allocation decisions
might be
questioned. Applies
dispute and subjective
that can introduce
questioned. Applies
project allocation
decisions
dispute.
project allocation
decisions that can
decisions that can
introduce dispute.
introduce dispute.
May appear to
compound charges.
C3. SYSTEM COSTS CRITERIA
Each of these approaches has been applied in this study and the calculations and results are
documented in the ensuing sections specifically addressing water, wastewater, and stormwater.
Whenever a method combines existing and future system costs, care should be taken to avoid over -
allocating costs and capacity to new customers. The analytical method needs to recognize that the
resulting charge assembles the unit cost of capacity provided by the system, differing only in the way
that these system costs are allocated between existing and future customer groups.
In the development of an equitable SDC, system costs to be included in the charge should be
identified in a manner that satisfies three general criteria:
• That the asset and its cost be related to the system capacity, facilities, and improvements
serving new customers (nexus);
• That costs be incorporated and charges calculated in a manner that does not result in a
pyramiding of system costs, especially as related to both existing and future facilities;
and
■ That upon connecting to the system and paying the SDC, new customers will have
attained relative parity with existing customers in terms of contribution toward their
allocated share of system costs.
With respect to the first criterion, it is generally accepted that SDCs reflect general system costs and
need not specify or delineate specific facilities related to a specific customer location. In this sense,
system capacity is a generalized term referring to a common unit of service, rather than a detailed
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 5 of 31
DI.B Page 130 of 392
City of Auburn
January 10, 2014
assignment of shares of facilities unique to each customer location. To this end, the methods can
address system -wide costs and capacity, even while incorporating projects specific to smaller areas
of service.
The second criterion is intended to avoid the issue of double- charging in the specific methodology
being employed. The approaches summarized previously differ in what costs are included and how
they are incorporated, but all are structured with the intent that a new customer pays an equitable and
proportional share of existing and /or future system costs in terms of a growth charge. To do so, an
equitable method should ensure that the aggregate of components and costs, when used in the growth
charge, does not lead to an over - assignment of capacity and cost required to serve the new customer.
In the approaches assigning future costs, the new customer may appear to pay twice on future costs
first through the SDC and then later as a ratepayer. However, by paying the portion of future costs
directly allocated to them through the SDC, the corresponding cost is cash - funded and thus explicitly
not debt financed. Further, while the utility is likely to continue to use debt as a means for timely and
complete funding of projects, including growth projects, all customers constantly share the related
payment burden, both on their own behalf and that of other system users both connected and
anticipated. In short, ratepayers currently support growth costs through rates, and will continue to do
so, and this obligation is not waived by prior rate or SDC payments nor eliminated by imposing
SDCs. However, the overall debt and cost burden is lowered by the presence of SDC revenues, and
all ratepayers benefit proportionately from this resource, including the new customer.
The third criterion provides a conceptual basis for, or definition of, equity as a charge that provides
new customers general parity with existing customers. This does not require that new customers
make the same level of investment as made by existing customers; the result could neglect trends in
system costs or expenses to serve added customers. However, it does suggest that an equitable charge
is ultimately judged to reasonably reimburse existing customers for investments now available to
serve new growth and offset adverse impacts of adding capacity to the existing system. The range of
approaches outlined above is indicative of the range of perspectives and results that can reasonably
lead to an equitable SDC. They vary in the relative weighting of costs and definition of equity. The
approach ultimately employed will reflect the merits of equitable cost allocation in conjunction with
the values and objectives of the governing body for the utility.
The sections below provide a more detailed description of the existing cost basis, future cost basis,
and definitions of existing and future customer bases used in the general SDC methodology. It then
describes the use of this data to generate the three approaches to utility SDCs addressed in this study.
The determination of unique considerations and results for each of the three utility systems is
separately documented and discussed in subsequent sections.
a) Defining Existing System Costs
The cost of the system is defined based on utility accounting records recording fixed assets. The
original cost of system assets is used as the basis for the cost of the existing system, even though it is
common in the industry to use system replacement cost or replacement cost net of depreciation as the
basis. The use of original cost is based primarily on a Washington court decision that determined
that the use of replacement cost, rather than actual original construction cost, was not consistent with
the statutory definition of system cost. As provided under Washington statute, up to ten years of
interest can then be added to the original construction cost. This is incorporated into the existing cost
basis by applying interest rates applicable at time of construction of each asset for up to ten years
based on age. Assets that were grant funded or donated to the utility by developers were excluded
from the calculated charge.
':.i FCS GROUP Page 6 of 31
D1.13 Page 131 of 392
City of Auburn
January 10, 2014
Another adjustment to the existing system cost basis is to deduct the net liability of outstanding
utility debt, recognizing that new customers will bear a proportionate share of this debt related to
existing assets through their utility rates. Therefore, the cost of those assets charged to new
development is offset to some degree by the remaining debt liability. Since the utility typically has
cash resources that are not included in the system cost basis, the net debt load is defined as total debt
minus outstanding cash and investments. This net amount is then deducted from the utility system
cost, reducing the basis for the SDC.
b) Defining Future System Costs
A utility capital improvement program (CIP) includes projects that address many needs, including
system expansion, system extensions, upgrades and improvements, and replacement of aged
infrastructure. In many cases, a CIP project can serve more than one of these purposes.
The CIP was reviewed by City engineers and assigned (or allocated) to three basic categories based
upon guidelines provided by FCS GROUP. The three categories include: repair and replacement,
upgrade, and expansion. For all methods, the projects or portions of projects attributed to repair and
replacement are excluded from the analysis, so that new customers are not charged for both an
existing asset and its replacement. At the other extreme, expansion costs are always included in the
charge. Depending upon the methodology, upgrade project costs may or may not be included in the
calculated SDC.
Unlike the provision and adjustment for existing debt, the cost of future projects is incorporated into
the SDC based on the share of cost attributable to future growth, regardless of intended financing or
funding methods. This is based on the charge being structured to reflect a pro rata share of system
costs. Future funding decisions do not alter that share, recognizing that all customers will share the
burden of future debt.
c) Defining Customer Base Served by the System
The determination of the denominator in the SDC calculation similarly involves policy and analytical
requirements.
In general, a key objective in defining the customer base is to provide an equitable allocation of costs
through the development charge. Toward this end, the metrics used to recover capacity -based costs
should be related to potential demand and provide proportionality that relates to system capacity
requirements. The basis for defining the system customer base is specific to each utility. The
customer base is defined in terms of existing connected customer base and planned future customer
base. Existing customer equivalents for each utility were derived from the utility billing system.
• For Water, meter capacity equivalents (MCEs) were calculated based upon the number of
connected meters and their corresponding size
• For Sewer, residential customer equivalents (RCEs) were calculated based upon the
number of residential customers plus converting non - residential usage into RCEs using
the standard defined by King County Metro which provides treatment for the City's
sewage (One RCE equals 7.50 ccf per month)
• For Stormwater, equivalent service units (ESUs) were provided within the billing data
and were totaled to provide a current customer base.
The future customer base is typically defined in a manner consistent with the adopted CIP. The
analysis currently applies a current year plus twenty -year CIP, so projected growth over the current
year (2013) plus next twenty years is calculated as an appropriate allocation basis.
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 7 of 31
D1.13 Page 132 of 392
City of Auburn January 10, 2014
Major large -scale projects might prove problematic if they provide capacity for much longer periods
of growth. For this reason, the City instructed FCS GROUP to run two SDC scenarios for the Water
Utility — full Water Purchase amount (includes the permanent and reserve portions) versus only the
permanent Water Purchase amount. For the purposes of our analysis, we assumed the permanent
portion of the Water Purchase amount in our detailed water SDC within Section D. The City
informed us that the permanent portion of the water purchase fit well within our 20 -year timeline. We
calculated an SDC using the full Water Purchase plus additional customer growth (corresponding
with additional capacity beyond 20 -years of customer growth) in Section E.
The projection of customer growth for this study is based on growth estimates provided by City
during an on -site review in October 2013:
• Water: 2% Annual Customer Growth
• Sewer: 2% Annual Customer Growth
• Stormwater: 1% Annual Customer Growth
D. WATER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE —
PERMANENT PORTION OF WATER PURCHASE
The development of the water system development charge (SDC) relies on City records related to
existing fixed assets, capital improvement plans, and customer records from utility billing. The
following discussion summarizes the development of the existing cost basis, future cost basis, and
customer base definition used to calculate the charge, followed by a summary of the alternative
charge methods and their results.
This study was conducted using the most recently completed fiscal year financial records, in this case
the 2012 financial statements. For consistency, the analysis is then conducted considering January 1,
2013 as the hinge date separating existing and future customers and improvements. The resulting
calculated SDCs are summarized in Exhibit D -1 below.
Exhibit D -1: Summary of Water SDC Calculation
* *3 FCS GROUP Page s of 31
DI.B Page 133 of 392
City of Auburn
D2. INPUT DATA FOR THE WATER SYSTEM SDC
Exhibit D-2: Summary of Input Data for the Water SDC
ding Cost Basis
Existing System Assets
Plus: Construction Work in Progress
Plus: Interest on Nort- Contributed Plant
Less: Contributed Capital
Less: Outstanding Debt Net of Current Cash Balances
Existing Cash Balances $17,382,682
Less: Debt Principal Outstanding (22,882,432
Net Outstanding Debt Balance
Total Existing Cost Basis
Future Cost Basis (20 - Year CIP)
Repair & Replacement Projects
Upgrade Projects
Expansion Projects
Total Future Cost Basis (20 -year CIP)
tomer Base (Meter Capacity Equivalents)
Existing MCEs
Future MCEs (Incremental)
Total Customer Base
b) Existing System
January 10, 2014
$ 105,136,754 $ 105,136,754 $ 105,136,754 Orginal cost of plant- in -servce as of end of year 2012
9,189,882 9,189,882 9,189,882 End of year 2012 CWIP
32,679,160 32,679,160 32,679,160 Intereston assets uptoamaximuml0- yearpenod
(27,657,826) (27,657,826) (27,657,826) CWC, Grants, and other contributed capital
g cash balances for 2012 per City Rate Model
pnncipaI outstanding for the existng debt
pnncipal outstanding, net of cash reserves
E 113,848,220 1$ 113,848,220 1 $ 113,848,220
$ 49,749,5 49749500 $ 49,749,500 lP ffor 20113 -2033
9,6 029,734,650 ,734 , , 33
13,993,806 13,993,806 13,993,806 ClPfor2013 -2033
$ 93,477,956 E 93,477,956 $ 93,477,956
19,564 1 19,564 1 19,564 2012 Calculated Meter Capacity Equivalents (M B)
10,088 10,088 10,088 Incorpoates annual growth 2013 -2033 (2 %annual)
29,6521 29,6521 29,652
The cost of the existing water system is obtained from the fixed asset schedule acquired from the
City, which details original asset cost, acquisition year, and whether or not the asset was contributed
by a developer or other contribution. Existing system costs total $105.1 million, plus another $9.2
million for construction work in progress.
Additionally, interest is calculated and added to the existing cost basis as allowed by RCW
35.92.025, up to 10 years of accrued interest for each asset. Interest is computed for each asset based
on that asset's original cost and acquisition date using interest rates from the Bond Buyer Index from
the acquisition year (for assets acquired prior to 1953, the minimum interest rate in available records
is used). This calculation results in a total allowable interest adjustment of $32.7 million.
The total existing cost basis is reduced by the amount of those assets that were donated as well as
outstanding debt principal (net of available utility cash and investments). Total contributed assets
amounts to $27.7 million. Total outstanding debt principal totals $22.9 million. This amount is offset
by $17.4 million in utility cash and investments, for a net outstanding debt burden of $5.5 million.
c) Future Capital Program
Future capital costs are obtained from the City's 20 -year water capital improvement plan for the
years 2014 -2033 (plus the 2013 CIP), which totals approximately $93.5 million in year 2013 dollars.
Each project was reviewed by City engineers and assigned into one or more of the following
categories: repair and replacement, upgrade, or expansion. One item of significance is the Water
Purchase project in the CIP. The original amount provided to us by the City was approximately $21
million. This amount included two distinct portions: permanent and reserve. The permanent portion
is assumed to be of use over the next twenty years, and the reserve portion is assumed to be of use
after the initial twenty years. Based on discussions with the City, the SDC was calculated with and
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 9 of 31
D1.13 Page 134 of 392
City of Auburn
January 10, 2014
without the reserve portion. Section D presents the SDC calculation without the reserve portion and
Section E presents the SDC calculation with the reserve portion.
System repair and replacement (MR) projects (or portions of projects) that replace existing system
assets are excluded from the SDC basis so that the system cost does not include duplicative costs for
a single system component. Projects identified as R &R total of $50 million, and include general main
repair and replacements, reservoir painting, a well replacement, pump station replacements, billing
system improvements and other miscellaneous replacements. The costs of these projects are shown
in Exhibit D -3 and are not included in any of the SDC methods employed.
Expansion costs total $14 million and are included in all methods. These costs represent projects or
larger portions of projects that are entirely or predominately intended to expand capacity or provide
new service to be used by new development. The projects include Auburn's planned water purchase,
a new reservoir, new pump stations, and other miscellaneous projects. In this scenario, only the
permanent portion of the water purchase is included.
Upgrade projects (projects that benefit both existing and future customers by upgrading system
reliability or performance, even if no explicit increase in capacity is provided) total $30 million.
Various upgrade projects include upgrades to a reservoir, to pump stations, to a PRV station, to a
support center, to wells, and to other miscellaneous projects. Additionally, there is a project to
provide service to Lakeland Hills Area currently served by Bonney Lake, but within the City Limits
of Auburn. This is an upgrade project per City Engineers.
Exhibit D -3: 20 - Year Capital Project Summary for Water
Water Capital Improvement Plan EM
20 - Year (Current
2013 $)
Project
777 7m
$ 1,840,000
Expansion
$
kepla.ement
$ 1,840,000
$ 3,680,000
Fulmer Well Field Improvements
$ 7,265,000
$
$ -
$ 7,265,000
Water Purchase
$ -
$ 10,105,806
$ -
$ 10,105,806
Coal Creak Springs Phase 1 Rehabilitation
$ 680,000
$ -
$ 2,720,000
$ 3,400,000
Valley Service Area New Reservoir
$ 2,200,000
$ 2,200,000
$ -
$ 4,400,000
Academy Pump Station #1 Pump Replacement
$ 1,062,500
$ -
$ 1,062,500
$ 2,125,000
Lea Hill Booster Pump Station Expansion and Rezone
$ 250,000
$ 250,000
$ 500,000
$ 1,000,000
Lea Hill New Pump Station
$ 1,350,000
$ 1,350,000
$ -
$ 2,700,000
Water Right Re- Allocation - Valley Wellfield Improvements
$ 2,250,000
$ -
$ 2,250,000
$ 4,500,000
Provide Seance to Lakeland Hills Area Currently Served by Bonney Lake
$ 5,000,000
$
$ -
$ 5,000,000
Green River PS Emergency Power
$ 345,000
$
$ 345,000
$ 690,000
Well Power& Chlorination
$ 1,199,150
$
$ -
$ 1,199,150
Well 5 Upgrade
$ 950,000
$
$ 950,000
$ 1,900,000
Well Inspection and Redevelopment Program
$ 300,000
$
$ 1,200,000
$ 1,500,000
Water Repair & Replacements
$ -
$
$ 22,180,000
$ 22,180,000
Lakeland Hills Reservoir 5 Improvements
$ 375,000
$
$ 375,000
$ 750,000
Comprehensive Water Plan
$ 690,000
$
$ 690,000
$ 1,380,000
Well 7 Emergency Power
$ 515,000
$
$ -
$ 515,000
Maintenance and Operations Expansion
$ 88,000
$ 88,000
$ 44,000
$ 220,000
MIT Master Meters
$ 96,000
$ -
$ 384,000
$ 480,000
Street Utility Improvements
$ 2,100,000
$
$ 8,400,000
$ 10,500,000
Lea Hill PRV Station Improvements
$ 225,000
$
$ 225,000
$ 450,000
Water Meter & Billing System Improvements
$ 400,000
$
$ 1,600,000
$ 2,000,000
West Hill and Coal Creek Springs Chlorination Improvements
$ 150,000
$
$ 150,000
$ 300,000
Reservoir Painting
$ -
$
$ 3,750,000
$ 3,750,000
Utilities Field Operation Support Center
$ 100,000
$
$ -
$ 100,000
Game Farm Park Pump Station Replace Pump
$ 304,000
$
$ 304,0001
$ 608,000
Total
$ 29,734,650
$ 13,993,806
$ 49,749,500
$ 93,477,956
d) Water Customer Base
In total, there were approximately 13,500 estimated connected customers in 2012 based on data from
the utility billing system. Since individual connections can vary greatly in potential water demands,
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 10 of 31
DI.B Page 135 of 392
City of Auburn
January 10, 2014
the connections are further analyzed by a breakdown of water meter size. Within the water industry,
standards for water meter capacity are established by the American Water Works Association, and
provide a basis for weighting meters relative to their potential maximum flow rates. For example, a
3 -inch meter is rated to deliver 300 gallons per minute as a maximum instantaneous flow rate, as
compared to 30 gallons per minute for a standard 3/4 -inch meter, which is most commonly installed
for single - family residences. Based on this, 3 -inch meters are weighted by a factor of 10 equivalent
standard meters. Similar factors are used for each applicable meter size. Since the system is
presumed to be constructed in a way that can facilitate this potential capacity, this is what is used
within the customer base to calculate the charge.
Using those meter standards, a meter equivalent basis for defining the customer base is developed,
which introduces proportionality between the request for service and the capacity that is required
based on meter size. After weighting the installed meter base by meter flow equivalency factors, the
approximately 13,500 meters were determined to be equivalent to 19,564 standard 3/4 -inch meters in
terms of total flow capacity. This value represents the total customer base as of 2012 in terms of
meter equivalents. Based upon the 2% annual growth estimates provided by the City, the customer
base would grow by 10,088 meter equivalents between 2013 and 2033 to reach a total customer base
of 29,652 ERUs as of the end of the CIP planning period (2033).
D3. CALCULATION OF ALTERNATIVE CHARGE METHODS
Exhibit D -4: Calculating the SDC underApproachesA, B, and C
System Development Water
SDC Calculation
Average
Expansion
Expansion &
Incremental
Costs Allocated to Future Customers Only
(Approach A)
(Approach 13)
(Approach C)
Existing Assets + Interest
$
$
$
Repair & Replacement Projects
Upgrade Projects
-
Expansion Projects
13,993,806
13,993,806
$ 13,993,806
Total $ $ 13,993,806
Allocable Number of Equivalent Service Units
10,088
10,088
10,088
Future SDC Cost Component
$ -
$ 1,387
$ 1,387
Costs Allocated to Existing & Future Customers
Existing Assets +Interest
$ 113,848,220
$ 113,848,220
$ 113,848,220
Repair & Replacement Projects
-
-
-
Upgrade Projects
29,734,650
29,734,650
Expansion Projects
13,993,806
$ 157,576,676
$ 113,848,220
$ 143,582,870
Total
Allocable Number of MCEs
1 29,6521
29,6521
29,652
Integreated SDC Cost Component
$ 5,314
$ 3,839
$ 4,842
otal System Development Charge per MCE
6,229
Existing System Development Charge per MCE
$2,424
Percent Increase /- Decrease from Existing
119%
116%
157
Dollar Increase/ - Decrease from Existing
$2,890
$2,803
$3,805
The data previously summarized above forms the basis for the SDC calculations as shown in Exhibit
D -4. The following discussion summarizes the unique basis of each charge.
■ Integrated Approach A: The total system cost is defined as the sum of the existing cost
basis of $114 million, the cost of upgrade projects of $30 million, and the cost of
expansion projects of $14 million. This results in a total water system cost of $158
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 11 of 31
DI.B Page 136 of 392
City of Auburn
January 10, 2014
million. This is divided by the entire projected customer base of 29,652 meter equivalents
to determine a system cost of $5,314 per meter equivalent.
■ Integrated Approach B: The total cost of the existing system, $114 million, is divided
by the total customer base (29,652 meter equivalents) to arrive at a buy -in charge of
$3,839 per meter equivalent. The cost of expansion projects ($14 million) is divided by
the projected 10,088 ERUs of growth to arrive at a cost of growth charge of $1,387 per
meter equivalent. These two charges are added together to produce a total SDC of $5,227
per meter equivalent.
■ Integrated Approach C: The system cost allocable to both existing customers and
growth is defined as the sum of the existing system cost of $114 million and the upgrade
project cost of $30 million. This total amount, $144 million, is divided by the total future
projected customer base of 29,652 meter equivalents to arrive at a unit cost of $4,842.
Capacity expansion projects totaling $14 million are divided by future growth of 10,088
meter equivalents, resulting in a unit cost of $1,387. The sum of these two components
results in a total system cost of $6,229 per meter equivalent.
D4. SDC SCHEDULE & REVENUE IMPACTS
The following Exhibit provides a schedule of rates for the various alternatives discussed above. The
meter equivalency factor implied by the current SDC schedule for the 10 inch meter is 56.09,
whereas the proposed factor based upon AWWA specifications suggests the factor be 76.67. We
recommend that this factor be updated to match the best practice standard of 76.67 for systems with a
3/4" meter base.
Each of these alternatives will have an impact on SDC revenues. Exhibit D -6 shows three different
growth scenarios for the customer base: 0.50 %, 0.92% and 2.0 %. The 0.50% assumption is the
growth rate used in the City's rate revenue model in its recent rate update. The 0.94% is the
calculated annual growth rate based upon five years history of water SDC revenue. The 2.0% figure
is the assumption used in calculating the denominator (customer base) in the SDC.
For reference, the existing charge would generate approximately $440,000 if the growth in 2014 is
0.92% (the five -year average). Approach A's charge would generate approximately $960,000,
Approach B would generate approximately $950,000 and Approach C would generate approximately
$1.13 million.
* *3 FCS GROUP
Page 12 of 31
DI.B Page 137 of 392
City of Auburn
ExhibitD -6: 2014
Revenue Impacts for each Annroach under Various Growth
January 10, 2014
Growth Scenario 0.50% (Rate Model) 98 $ 240,000 $ 520,000 $ 510,000 $ 610,000
Growth Scenario 0.92% (5 -Year Avg.) 181 $ 440,000 $ 960,000 $ 950,000 $ 1,130,000
Growth Scenario 2.00% (Rate per City) 391 $ 950,000 $ 2,080,000 $ 2,050,000 $ 2,440,000
Note: Annual SDC Revenue Assumed in Model is $320.000 and is not linked to a orowth rate
Note: Figures rounded to the nearest $10,000
The following graph shows five years of historical SDC revenue as another point of reference of
historical performance. As can be seen from these historical years, SDC revenue can be very volatile
even when the unit development charge remains the same. Even in a small sample size of five years,
the highest annual SDC revenue is over two times that of the lowest year (2008 compared to 2011).
The scenarios above are driven by two key assumptions: customer growth rate and the selected
system development charge level. The scenarios are not meant to imply a guaranteed, level revenue
stream. It is possible that high customer growth coupled with a relatively low charge could generate
similar revenues as a relatively high charge coupled with low customer growth.
Exhibit D -7: Historical Water SDC Revenue
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
Historical Water SDC Revenue
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
� Water SDC Revenue - -- Average
E. WATER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE - FULL
WATER PURCHASE COST
The City requested that FCS GROUP run a scenario where the entire Water Purchase project cost is
included in the SDC calculation. The total project cost as provided is $21,073,743. According to our
current copy of Resolution No. 4986, the permanent portion of the Water Purchase project is
estimated to be $10,105,806, with the remaining cost ($21,073,743 - $10,105,806 = $10,967,937)
assumed to be represented by the reserve portion of the purchase. This means the total expansion
project dollars included in the SDC calculation will be increased by $10,967,937.
•:;> FCS GROUP
DIU
Page 13 of 31
Page 138 of 392
City of Auburn January 10, 2014
However, we cannot simply add the $11 million to the SDC numerator without considering the
additional customers this water could serve. We were instructed by the City to assume that the
permanent portion of the water purchase would serve the next twenty years of customer growth. The
permanent portion is 4 MGD, while the reserve portion is 6 MGD, for a total of 10 MGD. If 4 MGD
is able to serve the next twenty years, we will assume that the 6 MGD will be able to serve an
additional 30 years beyond the initial twenty years [(6 - 4) * 20 Years)] for a total of 50 years of
water supply. This is consistent with language in the resolution that states this purchase helps Auburn
meet "their projected 50 -year water supply needs." We calculated customer growth for the next 50
years instead of the next 20 years as assumed in Section D. We then added the additional reserve
water purchase cost ( —$11 million) to the SDC cost numerator. The newly calculated total customer
base changes from 29,652 to almost 53,000 as a result of using 50 years of growth, which matches
the water purchase useful horizon. The resulting charges can be seen in Exhibit E -1.
Water SDC Calculation
Average Expansion Expansion &
System Development Charge Components Integrated Incremental Upgrade
(Approach A) (Approach B) Incremental
(Approach C)
Total Sv-4.eTr DevelonTreTt Ciarue ner ITCE 3.138 S 2.851 S 3.404
Existing System Development Charge per MCE $2,424
Percent Increase /- Decrease from Existing
Dollar Increase / - Decrease from Existino
29% 18% 40%
$714 $427 $980
It is important to note that we did not assume any additional capital costs (other than the reserve
portion of the Water Purchase) that may be needed to serve an additional 30 years of customer
growth beyond the original SDC horizon of 2033. Without an adopted CIP beyond the initial twenty
years, we cannot include additional capital costs into the SDC for years 2034 — 2063.
The detailed calculation of this scenario can be seen in Exhibit E -2. The numbers highlighted in
yellow represent changes when compared to the numbers in Section D. Expansion costs increased,
but so did the total customer based as a result of including an additional 30 years of customer growth.
The calculated charges here in Section E are significantly less than those calculated in Section D.
*:.i FCS GROUP Page 14 of 31
DI.B Page 139 of 392
City of Auburn
Exhibit E -2: Full SDC Calculation with a Increased Future Capital Component
January 10, 2014
System Development Charge Components
Water
SDC Calculation
Average
Integrated
Expansion
Incremental
Expansion &
Upgrade Notes
Incremental
Input Data
Existing Cost Basis
(Approach A)
(Approach B)
(Approach C)
Existing System Assets
$ 105,136,754
$ 105,136,754
$ 105,136,754 Original cost of plant -in- service as of end of year 2012
Plus: Construction Work in Progress
9,189,882
9,189,882
9,189,882 End of year 2012 CWP
Plus: Interest on Non -Contributed Plant
32,679,160
32,679,160
32,679,160 Interest on assets upto a maximum 10 -year period
Less: Contributed Capital
(27,657,826)
(27,657,826)
(27,657,826) CAC. Grants, and other contributed capital
Less: Outstanding Debt Net of Current Cash Balances
Existing Cash Balances
$17,382,682
Ending cash balances for 2012
Less: Debt Principal Outstanding
(22,882,432)
Total principal outstanding forthe existing debt
Net Outstanding Debt Balance
(5,499,750)
(5,499,750)
(5, 499, 750) Debt principal outstanding, net of cash reserves
Total Existing Cost Basis
$ 113,848,220
$ 113,848,220
$ 113,848,220
Future Cost Basis (20 - Year CIP)
Repair& Replacement Projects
$ 49,749,500
$ 49,749,500
$ 49,749,500 CIP far 2013 -2033
Upgrade Projects
29,734,650
29,734,650
29,734,650 CIP far 2013 -2033
Expansion Projects
24,961,743
24,961,743
24,961,743 CIP far 2013 -2033
Total Future Cost Basis (20 -year CIP)
$ 104,445,893
$ 104,445,893
$ 104,445,893
Customer Base (Meter Capacity Equivalents)
Existing MCEs
19,564
19,564
19,564 2012 Calculated Meter Capacity Equivalents (WEs)
Future MCEs(Incremental)
34,147
34,147
34,147 Incorpoates annual grow th2013- 2063(2 %annual)
Total Customer Base
Calculations
53,711
53,711
53,711
JPDC
Costs Allocated to Future Customers Only
Existing Assets + Interest
$
$
$
Repair& Replacement Projects
Upgrade Projects
-
Expansion Projects
24,961,743
24,961,743
$
$ 24,961,743
$ 24,961,743
Total
Allocable Number of Equivalent Service Units
34,147
34,147
34,147
Future SDC Cost Component
$ -
$ 731
$ 731
Costs Allocated to Existing & Future Customers
Existing Assets + Interest
$ 113,848,220
$ 113,848,220
$ 113,848,220
Repair& Replacement Projects
-
-
-
RBRproiectsexcluded from all SDC meth ods
Upgrade Projects
29,734,650
29,734,650
Expansion Projects
24,961,743
$ 113,848,220
$ 143,582,870
Total $ 168,544,613
Allocable Number of MCEs
53,711
53,711
53,711
Integreated SDC Cost Component
$ 3,138
$ 2,120
$ 2,673
Total System Development Charge per MCE
$ 2F38
$ 2,851
$ V 3,404 rvmxirunnAllow able Charge per WE
Existing System Development Charge per MCE
$2,424
Percent Increase / - Decrease from Existing
29%
18%
40
Dollar Increase / - Decrease from Existing
$714
$427
$980
F. SEWER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE
The development of the sewer SDC relies on City records related to existing fixed assets as of the
end of 2012, capital improvement plans, and customer records from the quarterly report to KC Metro.
Exhibit F -1 provides a summary of the sewer SDC calculation alternatives.
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 15 of 31
DLB Page 140 of 392
City of Auburn
ExhibitF -1
Summary of SDC Calculation
JTotal System Development Charge per RCE
Existing System Development Charge per RCE
Percent Increase / - Decrease from Existing
Dollar Increase / - Decrease from Existing
$ 850
January 10, 2014
r Sewer
$ 1,785 $ 1,771 $ 1,8381
110% 108% 116%
$ 935 $ 921 $ 988
F2. INPUT DATA FOR THE SEWER SYSTEM SDC
Exhibit F-2: Summarvoflnput Data for the Sewer SDC
Existing Cost Basis
Existing System Assets
Plus: Construction Work in Progress
Plus: Interest on Non - Contributed Plant
Less: Contributed Capital
Less: Outstanding Debt Net of Current Cash Balances
Existing Cash Balances $12,072,579
Less: Debt Principal Outstanding (9,047,902
Net Outstanding Debt Balance
Total Existing Cost Basis
Future Cost Basis
Repair & Replacement Projects
Upgrade Projects
Expansion Projects
Total Future Cost Basis (20-year CIP)
$ 90,509,379 1 $ 90,509,379 $ 90,509,379 Original cost of plant -in- service as of end of year 2012
1,694,876 1,694,876 1,694,876 End of year 2012 CWIP
20,754,429 20,754,429 20,754,429 Interest on assets up to a maximum 10 -year period
(39,024,564) (39,024,564) (39,024,564) CAC, Grants, and other contributed capital
Ending cash balances for 2012
Total principal outstanding for the existing debt
- - - Debt principal outstanding, net of cash reserves
$ 73,934,120 $ 73,934,120 $ 73,934,120
$ 29,765,000 $ 29,765,000 $ 29,765,000 ClPfor2013 -2033
2,940,000 2,940,000 2,940,000 ClPfor2013 -2033
1,185,000 1,185,000 1,185,000 ClPfor2013 -2033
$ 33,890,000 $ 33,890,000 $ 33,890,000
tomer Base - Residential Customer Equivalents (RCEs)
Existing RCEs 28,848 28,848 28,848 2012 Calculated Residential Customer Equivalents (RCEs)
Future RCEs (Incremental) 14,876 14,876 14,876 Incorpoates annual growth 2013 -2033 (2% annual)
Total Customer Base 43,725 43,725 43,725
b) Existing System
The cost of the existing sewer system is obtained from the fixed asset schedule acquired from the
City, which details original asset cost, acquisition year, and whether or not the asset was a
contributed by a developer (based upon the asset description of "Developer" or "Contribution ").
Existing system costs total $91 million, plus another $1.7 million for construction work in progress.
Additionally, interest is calculated and added to the existing cost basis as allowed by RCW
35.92.025, up to 10 years of accrued interest for each asset. Interest is computed for each asset based
on that asset's original cost and acquisition date using interest rates from the Bond Buyer Index from
the acquisition year (for assets acquired prior to 1953, the minimum interest rate in available records
is used). This calculation derives a total allowable interest adjustment of $21 million.
The total existing cost basis is reduced by those assets that were contributed, as well as outstanding
debt principal (net of available utility cash and investments). Contributed assets total $39 million.
Total outstanding debt principal totals $9.0 million. This amount is offset by $12.1 million in utility
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 16 of 31
D1.13 Page 141 of 392
City of Auburn
January 10, 2014
cash and investments, for a net outstanding debt burden of zero dollars. If cash balances exceed total
debt principal outstanding, the additional cash does not get added to the existing cost basis.
c) Future Capital Program
Future capital costs are obtained from the City's 20 -year sewer capital improvement plan for the
years 2014 -2033 (plus the 2013 CIP), which totals approximately $34 million in year 2013 dollars.
Each project was reviewed by City engineers and assigned into one or more of the following
categories: repair and replacement, upgrade, or expansion.
System repair and replacement (R &R) projects, or portions of projects, functionally replace existing
system assets. These are excluded from the SDC basis so that the system cost does not include
duplicative costs for a single system component. Including projects wholly assigned as R &R, and
portions of other projects allocated as an R &R element, a total of $30 million in projects is identified.
Major projects include general main repair and replacements including street related repair and
replacement, a pump station replacement, a comprehensive plan update, and work on the M &O
building. The costs of these projects are shown in Exhibit F -3 and are not included in any of the
SDC methods employed.
Expansion costs total $1.2 million and are included in all methods. These costs represent projects or
larger portions of projects that are entirely or predominately intended to expand capacity or provide
new service to be used by new development. The projects include a pump station upgrade, a vactor
decant facility, and an M &O building expansion.
Upgrade projects (projects that benefit both existing and future customers by upgrading system
reliability or performance, even if no explicit increase in capacity is provided) total $2.9 million.
Various improvement projects include a pump station upgrade, river crossing improvements, a
comprehensive plan update, an M &O building upgrade, and a utilities field operations center.
d) Sewer Customer Base
The customer base for the sewer SDC charge was sourced from the quarterly reports Auburn sends to
King County for the sewer treatment charge. One single family account is assumed to be one
residential customer equivalent (RCE) and that non - single family's actual flows are divided by 750
cubic feet per month. The average number of RCEs for 2012 totaled 28,848 RCEs which consists of
11,454 residential accounts and 17,394 non - residential RCEs.
The 28,848 RCEs are escalated based upon growth factors provided by City engineers specific to the
sewer system and customer class. For this analysis, we are assuming 2% growth per year from 2013
through 2033. With these growth projections, the customer base would grow by 14,876 residential
* *3 FCS GROUP
Page 17 of 31
D1.13 Page 142 of 392
City of Auburn
January 10, 2014
customer equivalents by the year 2033 to reach a total customer base of 43,725 ERUs as of the end of
the CIP planning period (2033).
F3. CALCULATION OF ALTERNATIVE CHARGE METHODS
Exhibit F -4: Calculating the SDC underApproaches A, B, and C
The data summarized above forms the basis for the SDC calculations as summarized in Exhibit F -4.
The following discussion summarizes the unique basis of each charge:
• Integrated Approach A: The total system cost is defined as the sum of the existing cost
basis of $74 million, the cost of upgrade projects of $2.9 million, and the cost of
expansion projects of $1.2 million. This results in a total sewer system cost of $78
million. This is divided by the entire projected customer base of 43,725 RCEs to
determine a system cost of $1,785 per RCE.
• Integrated Approach B: The total cost of the existing system, $74 million, is divided by
the total customer base (43,725 meter equivalents) to arrive at a buy -in charge of $1,691
per RCE. The cost of expansion projects ($1.2 million) is divided by the projected 14,876
RCEs of growth to arrive at a pure cost of growth charge of $80 per RCE. These two
charges are added together to produce a total SDC of $1,771 per residential equivalent.
• Integrated Approach C: The system cost allocable to both existing customers and
growth is defined as the sum of the existing system cost of $74 million and the upgrade
project cost of $2.9 million. This total amount, $77 million, is divided by the total future
projected customer base of 43,725 RCEs to arrive at a unit cost of $1,758. Capacity
expansion projects totaling $1.2 million are divided by future growth of 14,876 RCEs,
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 18 of 31
DI.B Page 143 of 392
Sewer SDC
System Development Charge Components
Calculation
Average
Integrated
Expansion
Incremental
Expansion &
Upgrade
Incremental
SDC Calculations
Costs Allocated to Future Customers Only
(Approach A)
(Approach B)
(Approach C)
Existing Assets + Interest
$
$
$
Repair & Replacement Projects
Upgrade Projects
-
Expansion Projects
1,185,000
1,185,000
Total
$
$ 1,185,000
$ 1,185,000
Allocable Number of Equivalent Service Units
14,876
14,876
14,876
Future SDC Cost Component
$ -
$ 80
$ 80
Costs Allocated to Existing & Future Customers
Existing Assets + Interest
$ 73,934,120
$ 73,934,120
$ 73,934,120
Repair & Replacement Projects
-
-
-
Upgrade Projects
2,940,000
2,940,000
Expansion Projects
1,185,000
-
$ 78,059,120
$ 73,934,120
$ 76,874,120
Total
Allocable Number of RCEs
1 43,7251
43,7251
43,725
Integreated SDC Cost Component
$ 1,785
$ 1,691
$ 1,758
Total System Development Charge per RCEs
$ 1,785
$ 1,771
$ 1,838
Existing System Development Charge per RCE $
850
Percent Increase /- Decrease from Existing
110%
108%
116%
Dollar Increase / - Decrease from Existing
$ 935
$ 921
$ 988
The data summarized above forms the basis for the SDC calculations as summarized in Exhibit F -4.
The following discussion summarizes the unique basis of each charge:
• Integrated Approach A: The total system cost is defined as the sum of the existing cost
basis of $74 million, the cost of upgrade projects of $2.9 million, and the cost of
expansion projects of $1.2 million. This results in a total sewer system cost of $78
million. This is divided by the entire projected customer base of 43,725 RCEs to
determine a system cost of $1,785 per RCE.
• Integrated Approach B: The total cost of the existing system, $74 million, is divided by
the total customer base (43,725 meter equivalents) to arrive at a buy -in charge of $1,691
per RCE. The cost of expansion projects ($1.2 million) is divided by the projected 14,876
RCEs of growth to arrive at a pure cost of growth charge of $80 per RCE. These two
charges are added together to produce a total SDC of $1,771 per residential equivalent.
• Integrated Approach C: The system cost allocable to both existing customers and
growth is defined as the sum of the existing system cost of $74 million and the upgrade
project cost of $2.9 million. This total amount, $77 million, is divided by the total future
projected customer base of 43,725 RCEs to arrive at a unit cost of $1,758. Capacity
expansion projects totaling $1.2 million are divided by future growth of 14,876 RCEs,
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 18 of 31
DI.B Page 143 of 392
City of Auburn
January 10, 2014
resulting in a unit cost of $80. The sum of these two components results in a total system
cost of $1,838 per RCE.
F4. SDC SCHEDULE & REVENUE IMPACTS
The following Exhibit provides a schedule of rates for the various alternatives discussed above as
well as a summary of sample annual SDC revenue estimates.
Exhibit F-5. Sample Revenue Impactsfor each Approach under Various Growth Assumptions
Alternative Charges
Average Expansion Expansion &
Sewer SDC Existing Integrated Incremental Upgrade
Charge (Approach A) (Approach B) Incremental
(Approach C
All Customer Classes per RCE development charge $ 1,785 $ 1,771 $ 1,83T
Note: Annual SDC Revenue Assumed in Model is 5300, 000 and is not linked to a growth rate
Note: Figures rounded to the nearest $10,000
Each of these alternatives will have an impact on SDC revenues. Exhibit F -5 shows three different
growth scenarios for the customer base: 0.50 %, 1.50% and 2.0 %. The 0.50% assumption is the
growth rate used in the City's rate revenue model in its recent rate update. The 1.50% is the
calculated annual growth rate based upon five years history of sewer SDC revenue. The 2.0% figure
is the assumption used in calculating the denominator (customer base) in the SDC.
For example, the existing charge would generate approximately $375,000 if the growth in 2014 is
1.50% (the five -year average). Approach A's charge would generate approximately $788,000,
Approach B would generate approximately $782,000 and Approach C would generate approximately
$812,000.
Below is a graph showing the historical revenue for Sewer SDCs for an additional point of reference.
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 19 of 31
DLB Page 144 of 392
City of Auburn
CL. u:,.r...,.:....1 C ------ On.- A.......,.....
January 10, 2014
G. STORMWATER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE
The development of the stormwater SDC relies on City records related to existing fixed assets as of
the end of 2012, capital improvement plans, and customer records from utility billing. Exhibit G -1
provides a summary of the stormwater SDC calculation alternatives.
* *3 FCS GROUP
JIM
Page 20 of 31
Page 145 of 392
City of Auburn
G2. INPUT DATA FOR THE STORMWATER SYSTEM SDC
Exhibit G-2: Summary of Input Data for the Stormwater SDC
Existing Cost Basis
Existing System Assets
Plus: Construction Work in Progress
Plus: Interest on Non -Contributed Plant
Less: Contributed Capital
Less: Outstanding Debt Net of Current Cash Balances
Existing Cash Balances $ 15,422,794
Less: Debt Principal Outstanding (9,737,340
Net Outstanding Debt Balance
Total Existing Cost Basis
Future Cost Basis (20 -Year CIP)
Repair& Replacement Projects
Upgrade Projects
Expansion Projects
Total Future Cost Basis (20 -year CIP)
Comer Base (Equivalent Service Units)
Existing Equivalent Service Units
Future Equivalent Service Units (Incremental)
Total Customer Base
b) Existing System
January 10, 2014
61,468,926 $ 61,468,926 $ 61,468,926 Original cost of plant -in- service as of end of year:
1,083,761 1,083,761 1,083,761 End of year 2012 CWIP
20,956,907 20,956,907 20,956,907 Interest on assets uptoamaxinnuml0 -year period
;15,633,686) (15,633,686) (15,633,686) CAC, Grants, and other contributed capital
Ending cash balances for 2012
Total principal outstanding for the existing debt
- Debt principal outstanding, net of cash reserves
67,875,908 1 $ 67,875,908 1 $ 67,875,908
$ 19,658,250 $ 19,658,250 $ 19,658,250 ClPfor2013 -2033
5,317,300 5,317,300 5,317,300 CIP for 20,3 -2033
8,908,550 8,908,550 8,908,550 CIP for 2013 -2033
$ 33,884,100 $ 33,884,100 $ 33,884,100
59,903 59,903 59,903 2012 Calculated Equivalent Service Units (ESNs)
13,921 13,921 13,921 Incorpoates annual growth 2013 -2033 (1% annual)
73,824 73,824 73,824
The cost of the existing stormwater system is obtained from the fixed asset schedule acquired from
the City, which details original asset cost, acquisition year, and whether or not the asset was a
contributed by a developer (based upon the asset description of "Developer" or "Contribution ").
Total existing system costs total $61 million, plus another $1 million for construction work in
progress (CWIP).
Additionally, interest is calculated and added to the existing cost basis as allowed by RCW
35.92.025, up to 10 years of accrued interest for each asset. Interest is computed for each asset based
on that asset's original cost and acquisition date using interest rates from the Bond Buyer Index from
the acquisition year (for assets acquired prior to 1953, the minimum interest rate in available records
is used). This calculation derives a total allowable interest adjustment of $21 million.
The total existing cost basis is reduced by the amount of contributed assets as well as outstanding
debt principal (net of available utility cash and investments). Contributed assets total $16 million.
Total outstanding debt principal totals $9.7 million. This amount is offset by $15.4 million in utility
cash and investments, for a net outstanding debt burden of zero dollars. If cash balances exceed total
debt principal outstanding, the additional cash does not get added to the existing cost basis, and the
net impact on the existing cost basis is zero.
c) Future Capital Program
Future capital costs are obtained from the City's 20 -year stormwater capital improvement plan for the
years 2014 -2033 (plus the 2013 CIP), which totals approximately $34 million in year 2013 dollars.
Each project was reviewed by City engineers and assigned into one or more of the following
categories: repair and replacement, upgrade, or expansion.
':.i FCS GROUP Page 21 of 31
D1.13 Page 146 of 392
City of Auburn
January 10, 2014
System repair and replacement (R &R) projects, or portions of projects, functionally replace existing
system assets. These are excluded from the SDC basis so that the system cost does not include
duplicative costs for a single system component. Including projects wholly assigned as R &R, and
portions of other projects allocated as an R &R element, a total of $19.7 million in projects is
identified. Major projects include general repair and replacements including street related repair and
replacement, a pump station replacement, a comprehensive plan update, Mill Creek Wetland
Restoration, work on the M &O building, and other various replacement projects. The costs of these
projects are shown in Exhibit G -3 and are not included in any of the SDC methods employed.
Upgrade projects (projects that benefit both existing and future customers by upgrading system
reliability or performance, even if no explicit increase in capacity is provided) total $8.9 million.
Various improvement projects include pump station upgrades, improvements to reduce and control
flooding, M &O building improvements, Utilities Field Operation Support Center improvements, Mill
Creek Wetland Restorations, and other various projects.
Expansion costs total $5.3 million and are included in all methods that incorporate future capital
costs. These costs represent projects or larger portions of projects that are entirely or predominately
intended to expand capacity or provide new service to be used by new development. The projects
include a composting facility, improvements to reduce and control flooding, a Vactor Decant
Facility, and other various projects.
Exhibit G-3: Scheduled Capital Projects for Storm Drainage
Improvement Stormwater Capital
Proiect
Repair & Replacement /System Impro\,ement Projects
$
Upgrade
-
$
..
-
$
13,000,000
$
13,000,000
Repair and Replacement associated with transportation projects
$
2,100,000
$
-
$
2,100,000
$
4,200,000
30th Street NE Area Flooding, Phase 2
$
167,500
$
502,500
$
-
$
670,000
Eastridge Manor Outfall replacement
$
250,000
$
-
$
250,000
$
500,000
Composting Facility
$
-
$
1,000,000
$
-
$
1,000,000
30th Street NE Area Flooding, Phase 3
$
288,500
$
865,500
$
$
1,154,000
West Main Street Pump Station Upgrade
$
1,135,000
$
-
$
$
1,135,000
Pump Station Replacement /Upgrade
$
900,000
$
-
$
2,100,000
$
3,000,000
Vactor Decant Facility
$
-
$
270,000
$
-
$
270,000
M &O Building Expansion /Upgrade
$
240,000
$
240,000
$
120,000
$
600,000
Comprehensive Plan Update
$
700,000
$
-
$
700,000
$
1,400,000
Utilities Field Operation Support Center
$
100,000
$
-
$
-
$
100,000
Mill Creek Wetland 5k Reach Restoration
$
588,250
$
-
$
588,250
$
1,176,500
Bypass at 2nd and G Street SE
$
271,800
$
271,800
$
-
$
543,600
Hidden Valley
$
-
$
-
$
300,000
$
300,000
BNSF Utilities Crossing
$
-
$
-
$
500,000
$
500,000
30th St NE Area Flooding Ph 1
$
1,348,500
$
1,348,500
$
-
$
2,697,000
AWS Flooding Phase 1 & 2
1 $
819,000
$
819,000
$
-
$
1,638,000
Total
1 $
8,908,550
$
5,317,300
$
19,658,250
$
33,884,100
d) Stormwater Customer Base
The residential equivalent metric for the stormwater system is referred to as equivalent service units
(ESU). The average number of ESUs throughout 2012, derived from the utility billing system, totaled
59,903.
The 59,903 ESUs are escalated based upon growth factors provided by City staff, the annual growth
rate assumed is 1 %. With this assumption, the customer base would grow by an estimated 13,921
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 22 of 31
DI.B Page 147 of 392
City of Auburn
January 10, 2014
equivalent service units between 2013 and 2033 to reach a total customer base of 73,824 ERUs as of
the end of the CIP planning period in 2033.
G3. CALCULATION OF ALTERNATIVE CHARGE METHODS
Exhibit G -4: Calculatina the SDC underADDroachesA. B. and C
Costs Allocated to Future Customers Only
Existing Assets + Interest
$
$
$
Repair & Replacement Projects
$
$
$
Upgrade Projects
$
$
$ -
Expansion Projects
$
$ 8,908,550
$ 8,908,550
Total
$
$ 8,908,550
$ 8,908,550
Allocable Number of Equivalent Service Units
13,921
13,921 1
13,921
Future SDC Cost Component
$
-
$ 640
$ 640
Costs Allocated to Existing & Future Customers
Existing Assets + Interest
$
67,875,908
$ 67,875,908
$ 67,875,908
Repair & Replacement Projects
$
-
$ -
$ -
Upgrade Projects
$
5,317,300
$
$ 5,317,300
Expansion Projects
$
8,908,550
$
$ -
Total
$
82,101,758
$ 67,875,908
$ 73,193,208
Allocable Number of Equivalent Service Units
73,824
73,824
73,824
Integreated SDC Cost Component
$
1,112
$ 919
$ 991
Total System Development Charge per Equivalent Service $
2
$ 1,559
$ 1,631
Existing System Development Charge per ESU $
1,162
Percent Increase / - Decrease from Existing
4%
34%
40%
Dollar Increase / - Decrease from Existino
($49.88)
$397.36
$469.38
The data summarized above forms the basis for the SDC calculations as summarized in Exhibit G -4.
The following discussion summarizes the unique basis of each charge.
• Averaged Integrated (Approach A): The total system cost is defined as the sum of the
existing cost basis of $68 million, the cost of upgrade projects of $5.3 million, and the
cost of expansion projects of $8.9 million. This results in a total stormwater system cost
of $82 million. This is divided by the entire projected customer base of 73,824 ESUs to
determine a system cost of $1,112 per ESU.
• Expansion Incremental (Approach B): The total cost of the existing system, $68
million, is divided by the total customer base (73,824 equivalent service units) to arrive at
an integrated charge of $919 per ESU. The cost of expansion projects ($8.9 million) is
divided by the projected 13,921 ESUs of growth to arrive at a pure cost of growth charge
of $640 per ESU. These two charges are added together to produce a total SDC of $1,559
per equivalent service unit.
• Expansion & Upgrade Incremental (Approach C): The system cost allocable to both
existing customers and growth is defined as the sum of the existing system cost of $68
million and the upgrade project cost of $5.3 million. This total amount, $73 million, is
divided by the total future projected customer base of 73,824 ESUs to arrive at a unit cost
of $991. Capacity expansion projects totaling $8.9 million are divided by future growth
•:;) FCS GROUP
Page 23 of 31
DI.B Page 148 of 392
City of Auburn
January 10, 2014
of 13,921 ESUs, resulting in a unit cost of $640. The sum of these two components
results in a total system cost of $1,631 per ESU.
G4. SDC SCHEDULE & REVENUE IMPACTS
The following Exhibit provides a schedule of rates for the various alternatives discussed above as
well as a summary of sample annual SDC revenue estimates.
Exhibit G -5: Sample Revenue Impacts for each Approach under Various Growth
Customer Classes per ESU development charge
$ 1,1621 $ 1,112 $ 1,559 $ 1,631
Each of these alternatives will have an impact on SDC revenues. Exhibit G -5 shows three different
growth scenarios for the customer base: 0.50 %, 0.55% and 1.0 %. The 0.50% assumption is the
growth rate used in the City's rate revenue model in its recent rate update. The 0.55% is the
calculated annual growth rate based upon five years history of water SDC revenue. The 1.0% figure
is the assumption used in calculating the denominator (customer base) in the SDC.
For example, the existing charge would generate approximately $380,000 if the growth in 2014 is
0.55% (the five -year average). Approach A's charge would generate $363,000, Approach B would
generate approximately $510,000 and Approach C would generate approximately $533,000.
Below is a graph showing the five — year average as well as the annual SDC revenue for the prior
five years for the Stormwater Utility. This can help provide reference for the various SDC revenue
scenarios.
Exhibit G-6: Historical Storm water SDC Revenue
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
Historical Stormwater SDC Revenue
2008 2009
* *3 FCS GROUP
2010 2011 2012
Stormwater SDC Revenue - -- Average
Page 24 of 31
DI.B Page 149 of 392
City of Auburn January 10, 2014
H. SUMMARY OF CALCULATED CHARGES
The following summary provides a summary of the existing SDCs for each of the three utilities as
well as their respective calculated alternatives.
ExhibitH -1: Summary of Calculated Charaes Across all Utilities
Water (Full Water Purchase)
(50 Years Customer Growth)
Water (Permanent Portion Only)
(20 Years Customer Growth)
Sewer
Stormwater
MCEs - Water Meter Size 1 $ 2,4241$
MCEs - Water Meter Size 1 $ 2,4241$
RCEs - Flow Based 1 $ 850 I $
Equivalents per KC Metro
Impervious Area 1 $ 1,162 1 $
3,138 $ 2,851 $ 3,404
5,314 $ 5,227 $ 6,229
1,785 $ 1,771 $ 1,838
1,112 $ 1,559 $ 1,631
Each of these three integrated approaches is equitable and defensible, and the selected methodology
will likely depend on decision makers' policy and philosophy of "growth pays for growth." However
in order to be the most equitable and defensible, we would recommend that the same approach be
selected for all three utilities. For example, we would not recommend selecting Integrated A for
water, Integrated B for sewer, and Integrated C for stormwater. We would recommend selecting
either approach A, B, or C for all three utilities.
I. LESS COMMON SDC METHODOLOGIES
There are other less common (but still valid) methodologies that were not discussed in the analysis
above. Based upon Auburn's current specific utility circumstances, FCS GROUP did not believe the
following approaches were applicable. A brief summary and sample calculation formula are provided
for informational purposes only.
1. System Buy -In Approach
System Buy -In
Existing System Cost
SDC =
Existing Customer Base
This approach reflects the average investment made by existing customers, ensuring that a new
customer makes an investment commensurate with the average investment in infrastructure already
made by existing customers. It determines the cost of the existing system and allocates this cost over
either the existing customer base or the existing system capacity. This approach is often utilized in a
fully mature utility system with little to no growth, where most costs are already embedded in
* *3 FCS GROUP Page 25 of 31
DLB Page 150 of 392
City of Auburn
January 10, 2014
existing system investments. This approach increases system equity funding in proportion to growth
in customer base and is a stable charge based upon cumulative costs.
2. System Growth Approach
System Growth Approach
Future Project Costs: In
Capacity Expansion
SDC =
7Future Growth Served
Most applicable in rapid growing systems with major expansion needs, this approach determines the
charge using a method comparable to impact fee methods used in Washington State. This approach
isolates and focuses on future growth - related capital projects that expand capacity and serve new
growth and allocates those costs solely to future growth. This approach is best for new or rapidly
growing systems. It fails to recognize existing capacity investments that serve growth. It also
generates funding well below investment costs of capacity serving new growth. It is subject to large
swings as capital projects and growth estimates change, and it requires careful analysis and allocation
of growth - related costs and consistent growth forecasts.
J. JURISDICTIONAL RESEARCH
J1. SURVEY OF CHARGES
There are several graphs below that show a comparison of connection charges by Jurisdiction and
Utility service. The charges below are as of 2013, unless the 2014 charge is known.
There are two parts to Section J. The first part shown in J1 simply compares the charges from several
jurisdictions. The second part shown in J2 shows a detailed methodology table for five of the
jurisdictions per the Scope of Services. For J1, we included more jurisdictions than are shown in J2
to help provide deeper context, especially if certain jurisdictions in J2 did not have a charge for a
utility service. This was most common in stormwater. Additionally, in each individual utility graph
(water, sewer, or storm), there may be additional jurisdictions than are shown in the combined graph.
For example, Sumner and Puyallup were included in the water and stormwater surveys but not the
sewer portion because their SDC includes collection and treatment and it would not be a fair
comparison. Additionally, all of the municipal participants in LOTT were included in the sewer
survey, but may not be included in other utility surveys depending on the circumstances.
Auburn's current combined SDC charge is lowest out of all the jurisdictions surveyed for this portion
of the study. It is even lower than Federal Way, Lacey and Skyway Water & Sewer (Seattle was used
for the Survey since part of Skyway's jurisdictions overlap with Seattle per District website) which
do not have stormwater SDC charges. Approach A places Auburn closer towards the middle of the
survey group, but Approaches B and C place it towards the upper end.
* *3 FCS GROUP Page 26 of 31
DI.B Page 151 of 392
City of Auburn
Exhibit] -1: Total Connection Charge by Jurisdiction
Skyway Water & Sewer
Auburn (Approach C)
Auburn (Approach B) $5p227 $1,771
Kent 0"Oop"""
Auburn (Approach A)
Lacey $5,141 $3,036
Olympia $3p209 $3pI99
Kirkland 1
Renton $2p809 $2pO33
Federal Way $3p492 $1p916
Auburn (Existing)
$- $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000
■ Water ■ Sewer ■ Storm
January 10, 2014
Auburn currently has the lowest water SDC in this survey group. Any of the newly calculated
approaches places Auburn in the upper end of the survey.
Exhibit] -2: Water Only Connection Charge
Kent
Auburn (Approach C)
Skyway Water & Sewer
Auburn (Approach A)
Auburn (Approach B)
Lacey
Sumner
Federal Way
Olympia
Puyallup
Kirkland
Renton
Auburn (Existing)
$-
Water
481
9
:1•
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
$7,000
JIM
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 2'] of 31
Page 152 of 392
:1•
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 2'] of 31
Page 152 of 392
City of Auburn
January 10, 2014
Auburn also has the lowest sewer SDC of all of the survey participants that have a charge (Kent does
not have a sewer SDC). Every single calculated approach yields a charge that is still lower than the
other jurisdictions in the survey.
�x171bitJ-3: sewer uniy connection
Skyway Water & Sewer
Olympia
Kirkland
Lacey
Tumwater
Renton
Federal Way
Auburn (Approach C)
Auburn (Approach A)
Auburn (Approach B)
Auburn (Existing)
Kent
Sewer
- couection Foruons
1,696
$- $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000
TT or KC Metro)
Auburn's existing stormwater charge is on the low end of the spectrum. Approach A yields a charge
that is slightly lower than the existing charge. Approaches B and C would place Auburn higher than
Renton, but still below the highest three charges from Sumner, Kent, and Puyallup.
•:;> FCS GROUP
JIM
Page 28 of 31
Page 153 of 392
$3,19
$3,056
$3,036
$
$2,22
$2,033
$1,916
$1,838
1,785
1,771
MI
$850
1,696
$- $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000
TT or KC Metro)
Auburn's existing stormwater charge is on the low end of the spectrum. Approach A yields a charge
that is slightly lower than the existing charge. Approaches B and C would place Auburn higher than
Renton, but still below the highest three charges from Sumner, Kent, and Puyallup.
•:;> FCS GROUP
JIM
Page 28 of 31
Page 153 of 392
City of Auburn
Exhibit) -4: Stormwater Connection Charge
Storm
Sumner $2,450
Kent $1,947
Puyallup $1,760
Auburn (Approach C) $1,631
Auburn (Approach B) $1,55
Renton $1 228
Auburn (Existing) $1,162
Auburn (Approach A) $1,112
Olympia $1,000
Kirkland $481
Skyway WSD (City of Seattle) $-
Federal Way $-
Lacey $-
$- $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000
•:;> FCS GROUP
JIM
January 10, 2014
Page 29 of 31
Page 154 of 392
City of Auburn
J2. SURVEY OF METHODOLOGIES
November 2013
Per the Scope of Services, we chose five Jurisdictions for the detailed methodology survey. The Jurisdictions we chose all received treatment
from King County or the Lacey, Olympia, Tumwater & Thurston County (LOTT) Alliance. This allows for meaningful comparisons since
Auburn also receives wholesale sewer treatment services.
Exhibit) -5: Detailed Methodology Survey for Five (5) Jurisdictions
City
utility
Charge Schedule
Methodology
CIP
Existing Cost
Future Cost
Credit Available?
Single - Family
Charge
Stormwater
Sq ft of impervious area being added /2600,
Approach B
10 Year
No credit available to new connections per
$481
then use rounded -down result x $481 00
conversation with Public Works
City
Based upon meter size, the 5/8" x 3/4"
of
Sewer
charge is $3,056 and increases based on
Approach A
20 Year
V
✓
No credit available to new connections per
$3,056
Kirkland
AWWA meter capacity ratios up to a
conversation with Public Works
$244,480 for a 8" meter
Based upon meter size, the 5/8" x 3/4"
If meter is upsized for fire sprinklers, the new
Water
a
a
charge is $3,128 and increases based on
Approach A
6 Year
connection wouldn't pay the SDC on the
$3,128
AWWA meter capacity ratios up a
upsized amount
$250,240 for a 8" meter
$1,947 for a single family residence Non
City will renew credits for the stormwater
Stormwater
single family charge is based upon new
Approach B
10 Year
charge on a case by case basis For
$1,947
impervious square feet at the rate of $0 78
example, credits may be given if pervious
per imp square foot ($1,947 - 2,500 sf)
structures (e g pavement) are installed
City of
Sewer
—
—
No System Development Charge for Sewer —
Kent
Based upon meter size, the 3/4" charge is
Per City contact, there are no credits
Water
$6,481 Charges increased based upon
Approach A
20 Year
available that offset the system development
$6,481
meter size and AWWA standard meter
charge
ratios
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 30 of 31
DI.B Page 155 of 392
City of Auburn
Exhibit] -6: Detailed Methodology Survey for Five (5) Jurisdictions (Continued...)
November 2013
City
utility
Charge Schedule
Methodology
CIP Existing Cost
Future Cost
Credit Available?
Single - Family
Charge
Stormwater
—
-- No System Development Charge for Stormwater
The amount of the sewerage general
facilities charge leved on a particular piece
City
of property shall be equal to the number of
Collection Portion
of
Sewer
equivalent residential units estimated to be
by by the
Proposed Method:
6 Year
Per City,
Only:
Lacey
used said property multiplied rate
per equivalent residential unit determined as
Approach B
V/
V/
contact with no credits are offered
Current: $3,036
set forth in _MC 13 16 027(B) Non
Proposed: $3,369
residential ERUs are defined as 900 cf of
water consumed per month
The charge for a 5/8" meter is $5,141 and
Water
increases based on AWWA meter capacity
Approach B
20 Year V/
V/
Per contact with City, no credits are offered
$5,141
ratios up to a $210,474 for a 6" meter
Stormwater (City)
—
-- No System Development Charge for Stormwater
Cityof
The amount of the sewer capital facilities
y
(CFC) charge for single family is $1,916 for
Collection Portion of
Federal
Sewer (Lakehaven)
the collection portion only For new non
family the CFC
Approach A
10 Years V/
V/
Per contact with City, no credits are offered
Charge: $1,916 (2014
single connections sewer is
leved on a per equivalent residential (ERU)
Charge)
Way
unit basis which is 220 gallons per day
The amount of the water capital facilities
Supply: Total Cost Basis
(CFC) charge for single family is $3,492 For
(Future +Unused
Water Lakehaven
new non single family connections the water
Capacity) ERUS Future
10 Years
Per contact with City, credits are offered
$3,492 2014 Char
( Charge)
CFC is leved on a per equivalent residential
, Unused Capacity)
(ERU) unit basis which is 255 gallons per
Non-Supply: Approach A
day
Skyway
Stormwater (City
of Seattle)
-- No System Development Charge for Stormwater
Water &
The charge for a 5/8" X3/4" meter is $5,696
Sewer
and increases based on AWWA meter
Approach A
10 Years
✓
Per contact with the District, no credits are
$5,696
Sewer
capacity ratios up to $455,693 for a 8"
available for new construction
meter
District
The charge for a 5/8" X3/4" meter is $5,379
L
and increases based on AWWA meter
Approach A
10 Years V/
V/
Per contact with the District, no credits are
$5,379
capacity ratios up to a $430,315 for a 8"
available for new construction
I
meter
•:;> FCS GROUP
Page 31 of 31
DI.B Page 156 of 392
FCS GROUP I Executive Summary
Solutions- Oriented Consulting ✓
To: Martin Chaw, Financial Planning Manager Date: January 15, 2014
Auburn, Washington
From: Karyn Johnson, Principal
Tage Aaker, Analyst
RE: Executive Summary for System Development Charge (SDC) Study - DRAFT
A. STUDY GOALS
In May 2013, the City of Auburn (City) contracted with Financial Consulting Solutions Group, Inc.
(FCS GROUP) to perform a Water, Sewer, and Stormwater Cost of Service and System Development
Charge (SDC) Study. The SDC component of the study included an SDC White Paper, the goal of
which is to address general SDC background, philosophy, and alternative methodologies commonly
used in the industry and in compliance with Washington State legal precedence. SDCs were
developed for each utility under each alternative methodology evaluated herein. A survey of SDC
methodologies for five neighboring communities was also conducted (cities of Kirkland, Kent,
Lacey, Federal Way and Skyway Water /Sewer District). As some of these jurisdictions include
wastewater treatment expenses in their SDC charges, only the collection portion of their wastewater
SDC charges are presented for comparability.
B. STUDY CALCULATION METHODOLOGIES
The SDC study calculated three different charges for each utility, using three distinct methodologies:
B1. AVERAGE INTEGRATED -APPROACH A
This approach is commonly used to recognize that a utility both provides existing infrastructure and
plans to invest in future infrastructure to serve a growing customer base.
SDC =
Average Integrated — Approach A
Existing System Cost + Future Project Costs: + Future Project Costs:
Upgrade Expansion
Existing Customer Base + Future Growth Served
According to our methodology survey, this approach has been used by Kent, Kirkland, Federal Way,
and Skyway W/S District.
Redmond Town Center, 7525 166th Ave NE, Suite D -215, Redmond, WA 98052 ♦ 425.867.1802
JIM
Page 1
Page 157 of 392
City of Auburn Executive Summary January 15, 2014
132. EXPANSION INCREMENTAL -APPROACH B
This approach allocates the cost of existing infrastructure proportionately to all customers (existing
and future) and adds an increment by allocating future expansion costs to future customers.
Expansion Incremental —Appro
Existing Sy7-cost7 Future Project Costs:
Expansion
SDC = +
Existing Customer Base + 7Future Growth Served Future Growth Served
According to our methodology survey, this approach has been used by Kirkland, Kent, and Lacey.
133. EXPANSION & UPGRADE INCREMENTAL -APPROACH C
This approach segregates and allocates the cost of existing, expansion and future growth to existing
and future customers.
Expansion & Upgrade Incre —Approach C
Future Project Costs: Future Projec
Existing System Cost + Upgrade Expansion
SDC = +
Existing Customer Base + Future Growth Served Future Growth Served
According to our methodology survey, this approach was not used within those five jurisdictions.
DI.B * **4FCS GROUP DRAFT Pa e 2 Of �58 of 392
City of Auburn Executive Summary
C. CRITERION SUMMARY
January 15, 2014
DI.B *v*' >FCS GROUP DRAFT PaaSgef �59 of 392
Generally
Average
Expansion
Expansion &
Criterion
Accepted
Integrated
Incremental
Upgrade
Objectives/
A
Approach A
Approach B
Incremental
Standards
Approach C
Charge should reflect a
Defines a consistent
Defines a reasonable
Defines both existing
and future cost
Equity
proportionate share of
cost - sharing for all
share of existing and
shares, but with a
system costs and
customers new and
growth- induced costs
heavy weighting of
requirements
existing
future costs
Program is intended to
Increases system
Increases system
Increases system
equity funding based
Revenue
provide a material
equity funding in
equity funding to
on all costs
Potential
source of funding
proportion to capacity
reflect existing and
potentially
toward capital program
cost increases
fixture capacity
attributable to new
costs
burdens imposed
growth
Predictability and
Charge should not
Stable charge that
Greater volatility due
to expansion cost
Greater volatility due
to expansion cost
Stability Of
fluctuate wildly over
will increase in
anticipation of new
feature and
feature and
Charge
g
time
system costs
dependency on
dependency on
growth estimates
growth estimates
Update derives from
standard reports and
Requires careful
Requires careful
Administrative
Charge should be
adopted plans. Only
analysis and
allocation of growth-
analysis and
allocation of growth-
Ease
simple to update and
capital allocation
related costs and
related costs and
apply
needed is between
revisits of growth
revisits of growth
Repair/Replacement
forecasts
forecasts
projects and Other.
p
Clear conceptual
Clear conceptual
basis. Applies
Clear conceptual and
basis. Applies
subjective adjustment
Charge basis should be
analytical basis.
subjective adjustment
to buy -in component
clear and explainable,
Avoids discrete
to buy -in component
that might be
Transparency
and minimize points of
allocation decisions
that might be
questioned. Applies
dispute and subjective
that can introduce
questioned. Applies
project allocation
decisions
dispute.
project allocation
decisions that can
decisions that can
introduce dispute.
introduce dispute.
May appear to
compound charges.
DI.B *v*' >FCS GROUP DRAFT PaaSgef �59 of 392
City of Auburn Executive Summary January 15, 2014
D. STUDY RESULTS
The following exhibit provides a summary of the existing SDCs for each of the three utilities as well
as their respective calculated alternatives.
Each of these three approaches is equitable and defensible, and the selected methodology will likely
depend on decision makers' policy and philosophy of "growth pays for growth." However in order to
be the most equitable and defensible, we would recommend that the same approach be selected for all
three utilities. For example, we would not recommend selecting Integrated A for water, Integrated B
for sewer, and Integrated C for stormwater. We would recommend selecting either approach A, B, or
C for all three utilities.
■ Water: Each Approach results in a charge that is more than double the current charge.
■ Sewer: Each Approach results in a charge that is more than double the current charge.
■ Stormwater: Approach A's charge is slightly lower than the existing charge. Approach B
and C would increase the existing charge by $139 and $260 respectively.
Exhibit D -2 compares the existing charge to the alternative approaches for each utility.
Exhibit D -2: Alternative Comparison by Utility
$7,000
$6,229
■ Existing
$6,000
—
$5,314 $5,227
■ Average Integrated (Approach A)
$5,000
Expansion Incremental (Approach B)
$4,000
■ Expansion & Upgrade Incremental
(Approach Q
$3,000
$2,424
$2,000
$1,838
$1,162 $1,112 $1,301 $1,422
$1,000
$850
$0
Water Sewer Stormwater
DI.B *v*' >FCS GROUP DRAFT Pa�a4ef �60 of 392
City of Auburn Executive Summary January 15, 2014
E. STUDY SURVEY
The following series of graphs illustrate how the City compares to other jurisdictions. The charges
below are as of 2013 (the current year at the time of analysis) unless the 2014 charge was known
(Renton and Federal Way charges are 2014 charges).
Auburn currently has the lowest water charge in this survey group. Any of the newly calculated
approaches places Auburn in the upper end of the survey.
Exhibit P--z: water L.onnection Lhar e
Water
Kent
Auburn (Approach C)
Skyway Water & Sewer
Auburn (Approach A)
Auburn (Approach B)
Lacey
Sumner
Federal Way
Olympia
Puyallup
Kirkland
Renton
Auburn (Existing) $2,
$- $1,000 $2,000 $3,000
$6
$6,2
79
481
9
$5,
$5,-14
$5,227
$5,14
M $4,523
1 $3492
1 $3,209
$3,13
$3,12
$2,809
24
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
$7,000
DI.B 'v' >FCS GROUP DRAFT Papa 5g of
1761 of 392
1761 of 392
City of Auburn Executive Summary January 15, 2014
Auburn also has the lowest sewer charge of all of the survey participants that have a charge (Kent
does not have a sewer charge). All three approaches yield a charge that remains lower than the other
jurisdictions in the survey.
�xnibit L -s: Sewer connection Wnarge - f-ouection Portions
Skyway Water & Sewer
Olympia
Kirkland
Lacey
Tumwater
Renton
Federal Way
Auburn (Approach C)
Auburn (Approach A)
Auburn (Approach B)
Auburn (Existing)
Kent
Sewer
or
I
1,696
$- $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000
,C Metro)
Auburn's existing stormwater charge is on the low end of the spectrum. Approach A yields a charge
that is slightly lower than the existing charge. Approaches B and C would place Auburn higher than
Renton, but still below the highest three charges from Sumner, Kent, and Puyallup.
txnibit C -4: mormwater connection
Storm
Sumner
Kent
Puyallup
Auburn (Approach C)
Auburn (Approach B)
Renton
Auburn (Existing)
Auburn (Approach A)
Olympia
Kirkland
Skyway WSD (City of Seattle)
Federal Way
Lacey
$2,450
$3,19
$3,056
$3,036
$1,947
$1,760
$1,422
,301
228
62
2
$2,22
$2,033
$1,916
$1,838
1,785
1,771
MI
$850
or
I
1,696
$- $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000
,C Metro)
Auburn's existing stormwater charge is on the low end of the spectrum. Approach A yields a charge
that is slightly lower than the existing charge. Approaches B and C would place Auburn higher than
Renton, but still below the highest three charges from Sumner, Kent, and Puyallup.
txnibit C -4: mormwater connection
Storm
Sumner
Kent
Puyallup
Auburn (Approach C)
Auburn (Approach B)
Renton
Auburn (Existing)
Auburn (Approach A)
Olympia
Kirkland
Skyway WSD (City of Seattle)
Federal Way
Lacey
$- $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000
*v*'iFCS GROUP DRAFT Pa e 6 of
DI.B �62 of 392
$2,450
$1,947
$1,760
$1,422
,301
228
62
2
$
$1
$1,
$1,1
$1,000
$481
$- $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000
*v*'iFCS GROUP DRAFT Pa e 6 of
DI.B �62 of 392
City of Auburn Executive Summary January 15, 2014
F. STUDY DATA & ASSUMPTIONS
The following section summarizes the sources of the data that were incorporated into the SDC study.
• Existing System Costs: The cost of the existing assets within each system was based
upon fixed asset schedules acquired from the City. This data contained original asset cost,
acquisition year, and whether or not the asset was contributed by a developer or other
contribution (donated assets are excluded from the calculated charged).
• Future System Costs: Future capital costs were based upon capital improvement plan
(CIP) documents provided by the City. These plans covered a twenty year time period
(2014- 2033). These project costs were then categorized by City engineers into one of
three categories: repair and replacement, upgrade, or expansion. In some cases, a single
project was split between two or three of these categories based upon functional purpose.
■ Customer Base: The basis for the customer data varied by utility:
♦ Water Utility: Water customer data was derived from the utility billing system.
Each customer account and associated meter size was converted into meter
capacity equivalents (MCEs). For example, a 3 -inch meter is rated to deliver 300
gallons per minute as a maximum instantaneous flow rate, as compared to 30
gallons per minute for a standard 3/4 -inch meter, which is most commonly
installed for single - family residences. Based upon this ratio, 3 -inch meters are
weighted by a factor of 10 equivalent standard meters.
♦ Sewer Utility: Sewer customer data was sourced from the quarterly reports
Auburn sends to King County for the sewer treatment charge. The data takes the
form of residential customer equivalents (RCEs). Per King County, one single
family account is one residential customer equivalent (RCE) and non - single
family's actual flows are divided by 750 cubic feet per month to convert to RCEs.
♦ Stormwater Utility: Stormwater customer data was derived from the utility billing
system. Equivalent service units (ESUs) were provided within the billing system
data and were totaled to provide a current customer base. One ESU is considered
equal to 2,600 square feet of parcel coverage by impervious surfaces.
• Customer Growth: These growth figures were provided by City staff:
♦ Water: 2% Annual Customer Growth
♦ Sewer: 2% Annual Customer Growth
♦ Stormwater: 1% Annual Customer Growth
DI.B *v' >FCS GROUP DRAFT Pa
P1 of 392
AtAuRN
WASH I NUO
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject: Date:
Comprehensive Water Plan (30 minutes) February 12, 2015
Department: Attachments: Budget Impact:
CD & PW No Attachments Available $0
Administrative Recommendation:
For discussion only.
Background Summary:
The City is in the process of updating the Comprehensive Water Plan. The final plan
will consist of two large binders; one with chapter data and one with appendices. This
is a large amount of information to review, especially at one time. We also have a
deadline to submit the plan to Washington Department of Health (DOH) that is quickly
approaching. This discussion will complete the review process started in November
2014 and continued in January 2015 which divided the chapters for review of the
preliminary draft plan into smaller segments. Reviewing the plan in this manner will
allow us to meet the DOH deadline.
November 2014 - Chapters 2 -6 were reviewed with Public Works and Planning &
Community Development Committees. These chapters include information on
Planning Considerations, Policies & Criteria, Water Requirements, Existing System,
and Water Resources.
January 2015 - Chapters 7 -9 were reviewed at a Council Study Session. These
chapters include information on Water Quality, Water Use Efficiency, and System
Analysis.
February 2015 - Chapters 1, 10 -12 will be reviewed at a Council Study Session on
the 23rd. This includes an Introduction chapter and information on Capital
Improvements Plan, Financial, and Operations & Maintenance. The Executive
Summary is also included.
Appendices will only be included in the final document, unless specific data is
requested.
DI.0 AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 164 of 392
A binder with Chapters 2 -9 was provided to the councilmembers. Chapters 1, 10 -12
and the Executive Summary are being distributed prior to the February 23rd study
session for inclusion in the previously provided binder.
An electronic version of the Preliminary Draft Comprehensive Water Plan can be
found on the City's website at
http: / /weblink.auburnwa.gov/ External /ElectronicFile.aspx ?docid= 256143 &dbid =0
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember: Staff: Snyder
Meeting Date: February 23, 2015 Item Number: DI.0
DI.0 AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 165 of 392
c m OF
AUBURN
WASH I NG1K)N
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject: Date:
Public Works Project No. CP1412, Community Center February 12, 2015
Youth Center Conceptual Design Discussion (30 minutes)
Department:
CD & PW
Attachments:
Project Summary
Administrative Recommendation:
For discussion only.
Background Summary:
Budget Impact:
$0
This project will design and construct a community and youth center at the north end
of the Les Gove Community Campus. The community and youth center will provide
approximately 21,000 square feet of building space to be used for educational,
cultural, and social activities. Emphasis will be made on creating spaces that will
attract teens and encourage cross - generational interactions with the existing
neighboring Senior Center. The community and youth center will be created by
renovating the City's existing Parks, Recreation and Arts Administration Building
(approximately 7,300 square feet) and adding approximately 13,700 square feet of
new building space.
The project team is presenting the Schematic Design, which defines the building
footprint, general form, and conceptual floor plan based on high -level programming
needs. These drawings will be presented at the Council Study Session on February
23rd. The team's focus has been on developing a design that can be constructed
within the City's schedule and budget while still meeting the project goals.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Councilmember: Staff: Snyder
Meeting Date: February 23, 2015 Item Number: DI.D
DI.D AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 166 of 392
DLD AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 167 of 392
AUBURN COMMUNITY AND YOUTH CENTER
PROJECT SUMMARY
February 12, 2015
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This project will design and construct a community and youth center at the north end of the Les
Gove Community Campus. The community and youth center will provide approximately 21,000
square feet of building space to be used for educational, cultural, and social activities. Emphasis
will be made on creating spaces that will attract teens and encourage cross - generational
interactions with the existing neighboring Senior Center. The community and youth center will be
created by renovating the City's existing Parks, Recreation and Arts Administration Building
(approximately 7,300 square feet) and adding approximately 13,700 square feet of new building
space.
PROJECT BENEFITS
• Allows the City to expand educational and recreational programs.
• Promotes opportunities for cross generational and cross cultural interactions.
• Provides teens their own place to hang -out in a positive environment that encourages health,
learning, socialization, and fun.
• Creates a central community gathering space.
CREATING SPACES
Community Center:
• Multi- Purpose Room - public and private events, classes, exercise, meetings, and city -wide
celebrations (250 person capacity), divisible into 3 rooms.
• Classroom /Meeting Room
• Fitness Room — cardio and resistance machines
• Administration — offices and work areas for City Parks, Recreation and Arts administration staff
• Storage — tables, chairs, programming resources
Youth Center:
• Youth Activity Area - multi - functional space intended for informal uses such as gathering, games
and socializing as well as structured programs such as performances.
• Arts Classroom
• Computer Lab
• Youth Center Staff offices
• Entry and Reception Area — separate entry and reception desk
Shared Spaces:
• Lobby— multi - functional to include reception, art, gathering and overflow from the Multi -
Purpose room.
• Teaching/ Warming Kitchen — the existing kitchen is renovated and expanded to serve the
Youth and Community Centers and for cooking classes
• Outdoor Gathering Areas
DID Page 168 of 392
ENGAGEMENT and OUTREACH
City staff structured the public outreach and engagement with city elected officials and the
community to make sure that the site plan and building design were developed with the perspective
of and input from users and stakeholders.
✓ November 4, 2014
— Project Kickoff /Eco- Charrette, brainstormed project goals, measures of
success, and environmental considerations.
✓ November 4, 2014
—Joint City Council and Junior City Council Meeting, presented project and
received feedback.
✓ December 9, 2014
— Les Gove Community Campus Committee Report, reported summary of
project kick - off /eco- charrette.
✓ January 13, 2015 -
Neighborhood Meeting, discussed project with residents /owners in adjacent
neighborhood.
✓ February 10, 2015
— Community Groups Meeting, discussed project with specific community
groups.
• February 23, 2015- City Council Study Session, present schematic design
• February to August — Public engagement through internet, virtual open house, social media
• April 2015 — City Council Study Session, provide project update
• June 2015 — City Council Study Session, provide project update
• August 2015 — City Council Meeting, Award Construction Contract
• August 2015 — Community Meeting after project award to discuss construction schedule and
impacts and building design /programming.
• August 2015 to June 2016 — Public engagement through internet and social media.
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Design and Permitting
Bidding
Construction
Grand Opening
PROJECT BUDGET
November 2014 —June 2015
July 2015 —August 2015
August 2015 —June 2016
June 2016
Design and Permitting $1.9 million
Construction, Furniture, Commissioning $6.7 million
Project Contingency $0.4 million
Total $9.0 million
CURRENT STATUS
The project team is currently finalizing the Schematic Design, which defines the building footprint,
general form, and conceptual form based on high -level programming needs. The team's focus has
been on developing a design that can be constructed within the City's schedule and budget while
still meeting the project goals.
DID Page 169 of 392
c m OF
AUBURN
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject: Date:
Resolution No 5129 - Comprehensive Emergency February 9, 2015
Management Plan (15 minutes)
Department: Attachments: Budget Impact:
Administration Agenda Bill No 5129 $0
Resdution No 5129
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Administrative Recommendation:
Discussion only.
Background Summary:
The City of Auburn is required under RCW 38.52 and WAC 118 -30 to have a
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan and to update that plan every four
years. The last plan was adopted in 2009. The 2015 plan reflects all current state and
federal requirements have been met. This plan serves as a guide to all disaster
response, recovery, mitigation, and planning efforts conducted by the City. It should
be noted that the State of Washington granted the City a one -year extension due to
the change in City administration and the State received this plan in 2014 and
subsequently approved it.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Municipal Services, Public Works
Councilmember:
Meeting Date:
Staff: Hursh
February 23, 2015 Item Number: DI.E
DI.E AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 170 of 392
CITY OF *�
B AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
�� WASHINGTON
Agenda Subject: Adoption of 2015 City of Auburn Comprehensive D
Date:
Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) ?
??
Department: A
Attachments: B
Budget Impact:
Administration R
Resolution No. 5129 N
N/A
Administrative Recommendation:
City Council adopt Resolution No. 5129 and the 2015 City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency
Management Plan (CEMP).
Background Summary:
The City of Auburn is required under RCW 38.52 and WAC 118 -30 to have a Comprehensive Emergency
Management Plan and to update that plan every four years. The last plan was adopted in 2009. The 2015
plan reflects all current state and federal requirements have been met. This plan serves as a guide to all
disaster response, recovery, mitigation, and planning efforts conducted by the City. It should be noted
that the State of Washington granted the City a one -year extension due to the change in City
administration and the State received this plan in 2014 and subsequently approved it.
Reviewed by Council & Committees: R
Reviewed by Departments & Divisions:
❑ Arts Commission COUNCIL COMMITTEES: ❑
❑ Building ❑ M &O
❑ Airport ❑ Finance ❑
❑ Cemetery ❑ Mayor
❑ Hearing Examiner ® Municipal Serv. ❑
❑ Finance ❑ Parks
❑ Human Services ❑ Planning & CD ❑
❑ Fire ❑ Planning
❑ Park Board ®Public Works ❑
❑ Legal ❑ Police
❑ Planning Comm. ❑ Other ❑
❑ Public Works ❑ Human Resources
❑ Information Services
Action:
Committee Approval: ❑Yes ❑No
Council Approval: ❑Yes ❑No Call for Public Hearing
Referred to Until
Tabled Until
Councilmember: S
Staff: Miller or Hursh
Meeting Date: ? ?? I
Item Number:
AUBURN* MORE THAN YOU IM�age Y71 of 392
RESOLUTION NO. 5129
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AUBURN, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE CITY OF AUBURN
COMPREHENSIVE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLAN (CEMP).
WHEREAS, RCW Chapter 38.52 and WAC Chapter 118 -30 require
counties and cities within the State of Washington to establish emergency
management organizations and emergency plans for the protection of persons
Plan was adopted in 2009 and is required to be updated every four years; and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan provides
the City with a method to address the City's preparedness for handling and
responding to disasters and emergencies, and assisting citizens to be prepared
in the case of disasters or emergencies; and
WHEREAS, the City's Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan has
been updated to reflect changes in local, state, and federal laws and regulations;
NOW, TH ORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Purpose. The City Council of the City of Auburn hereby
adopts the City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan, dated
January 2015.
Resolution No. 5129
February 4, 2015
DI.E Page 1 Page 172 of 392
Section 2. Implementation. The Mayor of the City of Auburn is hereby
authorized to implement such administrative procedures as may be necessary to
carry out the directions of this resolution.
Section 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect
upon passage and signatures hereon.
SIGNED and DATED this
ATTEST:
Danielle Daskam,
City Clerk 11
Daniel B. He
City Attorney
Resolution No. 5129
February 4, 2015
DI.E Page 2
day of February 2015.
Nancy Backus
MAYOR
Page 173 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
City of Auburn, Washington
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
January 2015
D I . E Page 174 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
Revised January 2015 2
D I . E Page 175 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Table of Contents
EMERGENCY CONTACT NUMBERS ........................................................ ...............................
5
FOREWARD............................................................................................... ...............................
7
LETTER OF PROMULGATION .................................................................. ...............................
9
DISTRIBUTION PAGE ................................................................................. .............................11
RECORD OF REVISIONS ........................................................................... .............................13
BASICPLAN ................................................................................................ .............................15
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................... .............................15
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS ........................... .............................18
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ........................................................... .............................19
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS .................................................................. .............................22
INCIDENT MANAGEMENT ACTIONS ..................................................... .............................26
ONGOING PLAN MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE ........................ .............................31
REFERENCES......................................................................................... .............................31
ATTACHMENTS....................................................................................... .............................32
APPENDICES.............................................................................................. .............................33
APPENDIX 1: DEFINITIONS ................................................................ .............................35
APPENDIX 2: ACRONYMS .................................................................. .............................45
APPENDIX 3: AUTHORITIES AND REFERENCES .............................. .............................47
APPENDIX 4: TRAINING, DRILLS, AND EXERCISES ......................... .............................49
APPENDIX 5: DISTRIBUTION LIST ..................................................... .............................53
EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTIONS ...................................................... .............................55
ESF 1: TRANSPORTATION .................................................................. .............................57
Attachment 1: City of Auburn Evacuation Plan ...................................... .............................62
Attachment 1 -a: Public Pre - Printed Evacuation Instructions .................. .............................74
Attachment 2: Snow and Ice Routes ..................................................... .............................75
Attachment 3: Lahar Evacuation Routes ............................................... .............................76
ESF 2: COMMUNICATIONS AND WARNING ....................................... .............................77
Attachment 1: Warning Dissemination .................................................. .............................85
Attachment 2: Field Warning /Evacuation Instructions ........................... .............................86
ESF 3: PUBLIC WORKS AND ENGINEERING .................................. .............................87
Attachment 1: Windshield Survey Form ................................................ .............................93
ESF 4: FIREFIGHTING .......................................................................... .............................95
ESF 5: EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT .................................................. .............................99
Attachment 1: Essential Elements of Information ............................. ............................103
ESF 6: MASS CARE, HOUSING, AND HUMAN SERVICES ................. ............................105
Attachment 1: King County Regional Shelter Concept of Operations ... ............................111
Attachment 2: King County Shelter Types ............. ............................... ............................112
Attachment 3: King County Sheltering and Mass Care Decision Tree .. ............................117
ESF 7: RESOURCE SUPPORT ............................. ............................... ............................119
ESF 8: PUBLIC HEALTH AND MEDICAL SERVICES .......................... ............................125
ESF 9: SEARCH AND RESCUE ............................ ............................... ............................131
ESF 10: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RESPONSE ... ............................... ............................135
ESF 11: AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES ....................... ............................139
ESF 12: ENERGY .................................................... ............................... ............................145
ESF 13: PUBLIC SAFETY AND SECURITY ............ ............................... ............................149
ESF 14: LONG TERM COMMUNITY RECOVERY AND MITIGATION ... ............................153
ESF 15: PUBLIC INFORMATION ............................ ............................... ............................159
ESF 20: DEFENSE SUPPORT of CIVIL AUTHORITIES ......................... ............................163
Attachment 1: Military Organizations .................... ............................... ............................166
Attachment 2: Examples of Military Resources and Services ............... ............................167
Revised January 2015 3
D I . E Page 176 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
SupportAnnexes .........................................................
............................... ............................169
SA 1: DIRECTION
AND CONTROL ...................... ............................... ............................171
Attachment 1:
Emergency Management Organization Chart ............... ............................185
Attachment 2:
EOC Organization Chart -- Level One ........................... ............................186
Attachment 3:
EOC Organization Chart -- Level Two ........................... ............................187
Attachment 4:
EOC Organization Chart -- Level Three ........................ ............................188
Attachment 5:
EOC Organization Chart -- Level Three with Incident Management Team
(I M T) .....................................................................
............................... ............................189
Attachment 6:
Functional Responsibility Matrix ..... ............................... ............................190
SA 2: FINANCIAL
MANAGEMENT ........................ ............................... ............................191
SA 3: WORKER HEALTH AND SAFETY ........... ............................... ............................197
Revised January 2015 4
IDLE Page 177 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
EMERGENCY CONTACT NUMBERS
If immediate emergency or disaster assistance is required, contact ValleyCom:
24 -Hour Emergency Telephone: 911
For non - emergency assistance, please contact:
Auburn Police Department: 253 - 931 -3080
Auburn Emergency Management: 253 - 876 -1925
Valley Regional Fire Authority: 253 - 288 -5831
The City of Auburn's 2014 Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) will be
distributed electronically as well as hard copy. A redacted version will be available on the City of
Auburn's website at http: / /www.auburnwa.gov.
Revised January 2015 5
D I . E Page 178 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 6
D I . E Page 179 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
FOREWARD
The City of Auburn sincerely appreciates the cooperation and support from those agencies,
departments, and local jurisdictions that have contributed to the development and publication of
the 2015 City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP).
Coordination of the CEMP represents a committed and concerted effort by the City of Auburn,
Valley Regional Fire Authority, and other local jurisdictions to emergency management. The
CEMP demonstrates the ability of a large number of agencies to work together to achieve a
common goal.
Special recognition for the document preparation and integration of materials into this plan go to
the City of Auburn Emergency Management Committee and the City of Auburn Emergency
Management Division, without whose efforts this document would not have been produced.
The CEMP is one of many efforts to prepare all people in the City for emergencies and
disasters. The CEMP is formatted to be consistent with the King and Pierce County CEMPs and
the Washington State CEMP, as well as the National Response Framework (NRF), complete
with Emergency Support Functions (ESFs) as single function activities. Standardized plans
throughout the State help improve interoperability between local, county, state, and federal
levels of government. The CEMP improves our ability to minimize the impacts of emergencies
and disasters on people, property, economy, and the environment of the City of Auburn.
Michael Hursh
Director of Administration /Director of Emergency Management
City of Auburn
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 7
D I . E Page 180 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 8
D I . E Page 181 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
LETTER OF PROMULGATION
To All Recipients:
With this notice, we are pleased to officially promulgate the 2015 City of Auburn Comprehensive
Emergency Management Plan (CEMP). It is intended to provide a structure for standardized
plans and procedures through the City and to facilitate interoperability between local, county,
state, and federal agencies.
Every effort has been made to ensure that the City of Auburn's CEMP is compatible with the
King County, Pierce County, and Washington State CEMPs, the National Response Framework
(NRF), the National Incident Management System (NIMS), the Revised Code of Washington,
and other local, county, state, and federal regulations. It will be tested, revised, and updated as
required. All recipients are requested to advise the City of Auburn Emergency Management
Division regarding recommendations for improvements.
The format of the CEMP the City of Auburn supports that of the National Response Framework
(NRF). It specifies the authorities, functions, and responsibilities that pertain to establishing
collaborative action plans between local, county, state, federal, volunteer, and other public and
private sector organizations. It also contains detailed information on participant Emergency
Support Functions as single function activities. The CEMP will help minimize the impacts of
disasters and other emergencies in the City of Auburn by ensuring responder safety and
accountability, saving lives, protecting property, preserving the environment, and sustaining the
economy.
Finally, as a reminder to the City of Auburn elected officials and employees and other public and
private organizations, the primary response and recovery goals for emergency management in
any hazard that impacts the City are to support the City and other local jurisdictions during an
emergency or disaster and to maintain a comprehensive internal process for conducting daily
business before, during and after an emergency or disaster.
Adopted pursuant to City of Auburn Resolution 5129 by the City Council of the City of Auburn,
Washington at its regularly scheduled meeting on February XX, 2015.
Nancy Backus
Mayor
City of Auburn
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 9
IDLE Page 182 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 10
D I . E Page 183 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
DISTRIBUTION PAGE
This plan will be distributed to all participating City Departments, Valley Regional Fire Authority,
King and Pierce County Emergency Management Agencies, Washington State Emergency
Management Division, neighboring cities, and other response entities.
See Appendix 5, Distribution List, for full distribution details.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 11
D I . E Page 184 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 12
D I . E Page 185 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
RECORD OF REVISIONS
Change # Date Entered Contents of Change Initials
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 13
D I . E Page 186 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 14
D I . E Page 187 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
BASIC PLAN
INTRODUCTION
It is the policy of the City of Auburn's government, in order to protect lives, property, and the
economic base of the community, and in cooperation with other public and private
organizations of the community, to endeavor to mitigate, prepare for, respond to, and
recover from all natural and technological emergencies and disasters.
The normal day -to -day functions of many local agencies will be interrupted by disaster
conditions. Therefore, the employees and equipment of those agencies can readily be
committed to the support of disaster response and recovery efforts. The mission of this plan
is to develop well defined operational procedures to ensure an effective, organized response
to save lives, assist disaster victims, minimize injury and damage, and protect property.
B. Purpose
This plan establishes the emergency management functions and responsibilities of the City
of Auburn and specifies those functions that are the responsibility of King or Pierce County
Emergency Management Agencies, as well as public and private organizations that aid in
the response and recovery from any hazard that could impact the City.
The plan is also intended to do the following:
• Establish who is in command in case of a disaster.
• Clearly designate disaster related functions assigned to government agencies based
upon capabilities and mandated responsibilities.
• Identify available sources of equipment and manpower in government agencies to utilize
during disaster events.
• Identify resources, manpower and equipment available from the private sector and
general public to provide assistance during disasters.
• Identify and clarify funding sources of manpower and other resources during disasters.
• Provide coordination between agencies to achieve assigned function.
• Organize volunteers when it is determined that there is a need.
C. Scope and Applicability
This Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) is a local level emergency
management plan designed to describe the emergency /disaster response of the City of
Auburn, Washington. This plan is designed to work in concert with the emergency
management plans of both King and Pierce Counties.
This CEMP is intended to be both "generic" and "hazard specific ", covering the entire range
of emergency and disaster situations, from natural disasters to the technological hazards
created as a byproduct of our modern society.
This CEMP considers that emergencies and disasters are likely to occur as described in the
King and Pierce County Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Assessments, and describes:
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 15
D I . E Page 188 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
• Functions and activities necessary to implement the four phases of emergency
management: mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery.
• Responsibilities identified in City ordinances and other applicable laws, as deemed
appropriate.
D. Incident Management Activities
This plan enumerates the responsibilities of City departments and other entities involved in
various aspects of emergency management in the City of Auburn, including prevention,
preparedness, response, and recovery actions.
The National Incident Management System (NIMS) provides a nationwide template enabling
Federal, State, local, and tribal governments and private- sector and nongovernmental
organizations to work together effectively and efficiently to prevent, prepare for, respond to,
and recover from domestic incidents regardless of cause, size, or complexity. Therefore, it
is the policy of the City of Auburn to apply the principles of NIMS to all incident management
activities.
E. Authorities
This CEMP is developed under the authority of the following local, State, and Federal
statutes and regulations:
a. Auburn City Code, Chapter 2.75: Emergency Preparedness
b. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
c. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
d. State Revised Code of Washington (RCW)
i. 35.33.081, Emergency Expenditures — Nondebatable Emergencies
ii. 35.33.101, Emergency Warrants
iii. 38.52, Emergency Management
iv. 38.56, Intrastate Mutual Aid System
V. 39.34, Interlocal Cooperation Act
vi. 49.60.400, Discrimination, Preferential Treatment Prohibited
e. Washington Administrative Code (WAC)
i. 118 -04, Emergency Worker Program
ii. 118 -30, Local Emergency Management /Services Organizations, Plans and
Programs
iii. 296 -62, General Occupational Health Standards
f. Federal Public Law:
i. 93 -288, Disaster Relief Act of 1974, as amended by Public Law 100 -707, the Robert
T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act
ii. 96 -342, Improved Civil Defense Act of 1980, as amended
iii. 99 -499, Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986, Title III,
Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know
F. Key Concepts
1. All disaster operations will be in coordination with King and Pierce County Emergency
Management Agencies and conducted or overseen by City personnel. Those efforts will
be supplemented, as necessary, by trained volunteers and by the local workforce.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 16
IDLE Page 189 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
2. When local resources have been exhausted or overwhelmed, the Mayor, Director of
Emergency Management, or their designees may request additional resources through
King or Pierce County Emergency Management Agencies or directly through the
Washington State Emergency Operations Center.
3. All City departments are designated the responsibility for providing personnel and
equipment in support of disaster preparedness, mitigation, and response, and recovery
as directed by the Mayor or Director of Emergency Management, including providing
trained staff members to work in the Emergency Operations Center.
4. It is the policy of the City that no services will be denied on the basis of race, color,
national origin, religion, sex, age, sexual orientation, or disability. Additionally no special
treatment will be extended to any person or group in an emergency or disaster over and
above what normally would be expected in the way of City services. Local activities
pursuant to the Federal and State Agreement for major disaster recovery will be carried
out in accordance with RCW 49.60.400, Discrimination, Preferential Treatment
Prohibited and Title 44, CFR 205.16, Nondiscrimination. Federal disaster assistance is
conditional upon compliance with this code.
5. In order to carry out the responsibilities identified above, all department heads are
directed to establish emergency organizations within their respective departments, ready
and capable of fulfilling disaster missions, as specified in this Plan. Further, all
department heads are expected to designate at least one staff member to serve on, and
actively contribute to, the Emergency Management Committee.
6. Fire services are provided to the City of Auburn by the Valley Regional Fire Authority,
which also serves the cities of Algona and Pacific, KCFD #31 and portions of the
Muckleshoot Indian Reservation. Station 31 (Headquarters) is located at 1101 D ST NE.
Additional stations are: Station 32: 1951 R ST SE; Station 33: 500 182nd Ave E; Station
34: 31290 124th AVE SE; Station 35: 2905 C ST SW; and Station 38: 133 3rd AVE SE,
Pacific.
7. Mutual Aid — The City of Auburn is a signatory to the King County Regional Coordination
Framework (RCF). The RCF provides for sharing of resources between public, private,
and non - profit organizations throughout King County, which are paid for by the
requesting agency. The City is also included in the Washington Mutual Aid
Compact/Washington Mutual Aid System, which provides for resource sharing between
municipalities throughout the State.
8. The Auburn Police Department, located at 340 E Main St, Suite 201, provides law
enforcement services within the City. There are two substations; one is located at the
Outlet Collection of Seattle, 1101 Outlet Collection Drive SW and the other is at 3004
Auburn Way S. The Auburn Police Department has Notice of Consent agreements in
effect with 174 law enforcement agencies in the State of Washington pursuant to the
Washington Mutual Aid Peace Officers Powers Act (Chapter 10.93 RCW). This includes
all surrounding agencies. The Auburn Police Department is also a participant in the
Valley SWAT Team, Valley Crisis Communications Unit (CCU) and two regional drug
task forces — Tahoma Narcotics Enforcement Team (TNET) and Valley Narcotics
Enforcement Team (VNET).
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 17
IDLE Page 190 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS
The City of Auburn is located in King and Pierce Counties, in the south Puget Sound area of the
State of Washington, approximately 20 miles south of Seattle. Auburn has an area of 29.83
square miles, with 28.17 square miles located in King County and 1.66 square miles located in
Pierce County. Approximately 74,860 individuals reside within Auburn, with approximately
67,300 of those living in the King County portion and 7,560 in the Pierce County portion. 2010
Census data showed the population comprised of 49.4% males and 50.6% females. The
elevation of the City at Main St. and Auburn Ave. is 84 feet and latitude 47.3072 N; longitude
122.2283 W. The lowest elevation in the city is 43 feet and the highest is 650.
State Route 18, State Route 167 and State Route 164 provide major highway access to the
City. The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company and the Union Pacific Railroad
Corporation provide freight rail service. Passenger rail service is limited to commuter trains (see
below) although Amtrak does utilize tracks within the City.
Transportation assets in Auburn include the Auburn School District, with their transportation
facility located at 615 15th St. SW, which serves their entire district. Public transportation is
primarily provided by King County Metro bus services, with a terminal located at the Auburn
Transit Station downtown. Pierce County Transit provides morning and evening weekday
shuttles between the Lakeland Hills neighborhood in southeast Auburn to the Auburn Transit
Station. Sound Transit also provides limited stop regional bus service. Passenger rail service is
provided between the cities of Seattle and Tacoma by Sound Transit, with the Sounder
commuter train making morning and evening stops at the Auburn Transit Station.
Valley Communications (ValleyCom), located in unincorporated King County, between the cities
of Auburn and Kent, WA, provides 911 dispatching services for police and fire response.
The City Maintenance and Operations Division is located at 1305 C Street SW and is
responsible for all streets within the City, with the exception of State Highways 18, 167, and
164. The State Department of Transportation (DOT) Highway Maintenance Shop is located at
26620 West Valley Highway, just north of the Auburn city limits. State DOT is responsible for the
state highways located within the City.
The City of Auburn is served by four public school districts, only two of which have facilities
located inside the City limits (Auburn School District and Federal Way School District).
Together, they offer 14 elementary schools, 4 middle schools, and 4 high schools. Other
districts providing service in Auburn do not have facilities located within the City limits. Five
private schools exist in Auburn, including one boarding school hosting international high school
students. Additionally, Green River Community College, with an enrollment of nearly 10,000, is
located in Auburn on the east hill. It also serves a large number of international students.
The major employment industries in Auburn are Services (17.9 %), Administrative Support staff
(15.6 %) and Professional (15.3 %). The local hospital is the Multicare Auburn Medical Center,
located at 202 N Division St. There is also an urgent care facility, operated by MultiCare, located
at 202 Cross St. SE. There are three nursing homes, four assisted living /boarding homes, and
15 adult family homes located in Auburn.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 18
DI.E Page 191 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Assumptions
1. The King and Pierce County Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Assessments (HIVA)
provide information on potential hazards threatening the City. The City does not maintain a
separate HIVA but contributes to the county level ones based on their existing processes.
Disasters have occurred in the City and will occur again, some with warning and others with
no warning at all.
2. It is assumed that any of the noted situations could create significant property damage,
injury, loss of life, and /or disruption of essential services in the City. These situations may
also create significant financial, psychological, and sociological impacts on residents of and
visitors to the community and the City governmental organization itself.
3. It is reasonable to assume that, with impending incidents including, but not limited to,
storms, floods, and acts of terrorism, warnings will be issued to enable some preparation
prior to the event. Other disasters, such as earthquakes and lahars, will come with no
advance warning.
4. In the event of widespread disaster, there will not likely be any significant assistance from
nearby communities, counties, State, or Federal agencies for 72 hours or longer. In this
situation, the City will need to rely on available City resources and those of non - profit
organizations, businesses, and residents within the City for initial response operations.
5. The City may receive requests to provide support to other jurisdictions with both resources
and sheltering during emergencies and disasters not affecting the City
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
This CEMP identifies responsibilities of City departments, outside agencies, and other
organizations.
Emergency Support Functions (ESFs) establish mitigation, preparedness, response, and
recovery activities. There is either one department or agency or joint departments or agencies,
with primary responsibility for each ESF. Other agencies and /or organizations may have ESF
support roles. ESFs numbered 1 — 15, and 20 correspond to the Washington State
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan and the National Response Framework
numbering system.
A. City of Auburn
1. General Responsibilities
The following are basic responsibilities for emergency management operations provided
by and through City government. Detailed responsibilities and essential activities are
found in the appropriate ESFs and Appendices to this document. Department Standard
Operating Procedures (SOPs) or Continuity of Operations (COOP) plans detail how
individual departments shall perform their responsibilities as delineated in the Basic
Plan, ESFs, and Appendices. Direction, control, and coordination of emergency
management activities undertaken in accordance with the City of Auburn CEMP are
outlined in SA 1: Direction and Control.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 19
D I . E Page 192 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
a. The City Council will be convened pursuant to ACC 2.06.040 to perform legislative
duties as the situation demands, and shall receive reports relative to Emergency
Management activities.
b. The Director of Emergency Management for the City will be appointed by the Mayor.
The Director shall be responsible for the organization, administration, and operation
of the emergency management organization, and shall serve as incident commander
for any occurrence with significant city -wide impact, when so directed by the Mayor.
c. The Emergency Operations Board, comprised of the Mayor and all City Department
Heads, shall oversee emergency operations and provide policy recommendations to
the City Council during emergency and recovery periods.
d. The Emergency Preparedness Manager shall be appointed by the Emergency
Management Director. The Manager shall direct and coordinate development,
implementation, and maintenance of all City emergency management related plans.
The Manager facilitates coordination with outside agencies and organizations
involved in emergency management, provides public education and information
related to disasters, and manages the Emergency Operations Center during
disasters.
e. The Emergency Management Committee shall be comprised of representatives of
each City department, as well as representatives of other public and private entities
that have a significant role in emergency management within the City. The
Committee is responsible for providing input into all City emergency management
related plans and for staffing the Emergency Operations Center during a disaster.
f. Each City department has basic responsibilities in the four phases of emergency
management: mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery.
2. Limitations
It is the policy of the City of Auburn that no guarantee of a perfect response system is
implied by or should be inferred from this plan. As City assets and systems may be
overwhelmed, the City can only endeavor to make every reasonable effort to respond
based on the situation, information, and resources available at the time.
3. City Departments:
a. Ensure that employee work areas are safe, clear of equipment and supplies that may
compromise ingress and egress routes, and that no equipment or supplies can injure
employees.
b. Develop Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and /or Continuity of Operations
(COOP) plans designed to reestablish or maintain department operations after a
disaster, including notification of critical personnel, assessment of damage and
resources, identification of critical department functions, and estimated time to open
for business.
c. Participate in emergency management training, drills, and exercises to test
department and City plans and procedures.
d. Train department employees on emergency and disaster plans and procedures to
ensure operational capabilities to facilitate an effective response. This includes
NIMS- mandated training for all non - temporary employees.
e. Provide department resources (supplies, equipment, services and personnel), as
coordinated through the Emergency Operations Center (EOC).
f. Follow procedures to document all costs associated with disaster response and
recovery operations.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 20
IDLE Page 193 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
B. Local Agencies /Organizations
1. Valley Regional Fire Authority
a. Provide and /or coordinate all fire suppression, technical rescue, hazardous materials
incident response, and emergency medical services in the City.
b. Assist in providing communications support.
c. Provide representation to the EOC, if requested, and as resources allow.
2. Auburn School District
a. Provide public shelter facilities through agreements with the American Red Cross
(ARC), if requested and as resources allow.
b. Conduct damage assessments on school -owned facilities and provide situation
reports to the EOC.
c. Assist with transportation, if requested and as resources allow.
d. Provide representation to the EOC, if requested and as resources allow.
3. King and Pierce County Emergency Management
a. Coordinate emergency management activities in the County, protect lives and
property, and preserve the environment.
b. Provide information regarding county -wide activities and resource availability.
4. King and Pierce County Health Departments
a. Coordinate and provide environmental health services.
b. Coordinate and provide emergency health services, including, but not limited to,
communicable disease control, immunizations, and quarantine procedures.
c. Advise on public health matters, if requested.
d. Order quarantines as necessary
e. Provide a representative to EOC, if appropriate and as resources allow.
f. Supervise the food and water quality control program.
5. King and Pierce County Sheriff's Offices
a. Provide assistance with crime prevention and detection programs, crowd and traffic
control, search and rescue operations, and other law enforcement activities, if
requested and as resources allow.
6. King County Metro and Sound Transit
a. Provide assistance with transportation, if requested and as resources allow.
C. State
Emergency Management Division
a. Through the Washington State CEMP and the State Emergency Operations Center
(EOC), coordinate all emergency management activities of the State to protect lives
and property and to preserve the environment.
b. Take appropriate actions to mitigate the effects of, prepare for, respond to, and
recover from the impacts of emergencies or disasters.
c. Coordinate requests for various services such as specialized skills, equipment, and
resources in support of State and local government emergency operations.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 21
D I . E Page 194 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
D. Federal
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
a. Provide assistance to save lives and protect property, the economy, and the
environment.
b. Facilitate the delivery of all types of Federal response assistance to state and local
governments.
c. Assist states in recovering from an emergency or disaster.
E. Residents and Visitors
Because of the nature of an emergency or disaster, government may be limited in its
response capabilities. The City encourages residents and visitors to be self- sufficient for at
least 7days in the event of an emergency or disaster.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. General
1. The classification of non - charter code city as provided in the Optional Municipal Code
Title 35A, Revised Code of Washington, is adopted as the classification for the
government of the City of Auburn, Washington. (Ord. 2402 § 1, 1969).
2. The plan of government for the City of Auburn, Washington is the mayor - council plan of
government as provided for in the Optional Municipal Code, Title 35A, Revised Code of
Washington. (Ord. 2402 § 2, 1969).
3. The Revised Code of Washington (RCW) Chapter 38.52, Emergency Management,
empowers local governmental entities to establish a program to deal with emergencies.
4. Local governments are responsible for ensuring that provisions are made for continuity
of government during emergencies within their respective jurisdictions.
5. City government will retain the authority and ultimate responsibility for direction and
control of its own disaster operations, use of resources, and application of mutual aid
within its own boundaries.
6. The City is provided fire protection, technical rescue, hazardous materials response and
emergency medical services by the Valley Regional Fire Authority (VRFA).
7. Disaster operations will be in coordination with other local agencies and organizations
and conducted or supervised by City personnel. Those efforts will be supplemented as
necessary by trained volunteers and by the workforce available within the local area.
Resources obtained from the County, State and from Federal agencies will also be
utilized.
8. The Director of Emergency Management, has been delegated the responsibility for the
development and maintenance of the City's CEMP and the coordination of emergency
preparedness and management activities within the City.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 22
D I . E Page 195 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
9. Other public and private organizations, school districts, and volunteer organizations may,
under mutual agreement, operate in coordination with this CEMP.
B. Overall Coordination of Incident Management Activities
1. The Mayor is head of the executive branch and the City Council makes up the legislative
branch of City government. The legislative branch of the City is responsible for overall
policy direction within the City, and the executive branch is responsible for
implementation of that direction.
2. The Director of Emergency Management is appointed by the Mayor (Ord. 6428 § 2013).
In that role, he /she oversees and provides policy recommendations to the Mayor and
City Council during emergency and recovery periods and is responsible to ensure the
development and maintenance of the CEMP.
3. The Director of Emergency Management, or designee, is responsible for directing all
emergency management operations and programs throughout City government and
preserving City records.
4. Emergency management activities are conducted so as to follow the Incident Command
System (ICS) to the maximum extent possible.
C. Concurrent Implementation of Other Plans
The CEMP is the core plan for emergency management. This CEMP employs an
Emergency Support Function (ESF) approach. This approach identifies sources of direct
assistance and operational support through the EOC that the City may need in order to
address hazard mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery from an emergency or
disaster.
1. The Basic Plan presents the policies, and concept of operations that guide how the City
will conduct mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery activities.
2. The Appendices describe emergency management activities and give details supporting
the Basic Plan.
3. The ESFs describe the mission, policies, concept of operations, and responsibilities of
the primary and support agencies involved in implementation of activities.
4. Other plans, authorities, protocols, and guidance that may be used before, during, or
after disasters and emergencies within the City of Auburn include:
a. City of Auburn Emergency Management Duty Officer Manual
b. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
c. City of Auburn Continuity of Operations Plans (by individual departments)
d. King and Pierce County Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Assessments
e. King and Pierce County Regional Hazard Mitigation Plans
f. King and Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plans
g. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
h. National Response Framework
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 23
IDLE Page 196 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
D. Organizational Structure
The day -to -day organizational structure of departments will be maintained; to the extent it is
practical to do so, for major emergency and disaster situations, with the understanding that
all departments have an obligation to assign personnel to the Emergency Operations Center
(EOC) and the labor pool as requested. All departments and the City will operate within the
Incident Command System (ICS) structure, as set forth in NIMS.
E. Principal Incident Management Organizational Elements
Various City departments have personnel and other resources, including specialized
vehicles and heavy construction equipment, available to deploy during disasters and
emergencies. Each department is responsible for keeping track of its available personnel
and equipment and reporting availability directly to the EOC during an activation. These
include the following:
Administration
a. The Director of Emergency Management is responsible for overall Incident
Command activities during a disaster or large -scale emergency when so directed
by the Mayor. He /she has the responsibility to lead the Emergency Management
Board to oversee the event as appropriate.
b. Public Affairs Division is responsible for coordinating public information activities
related to a disaster or emergency, including operation of a Joint Information
Center (JIC) if needed.
c. Emergency Management Division is responsible for coordination with internal
and external stakeholders and EOC management.
d. Human Services Division coordinates post- disaster recovery efforts for residents.
e. Facilities Division oversees all buildings owned by the city and is responsible for
conducting rapid damage assessments of them as well as coordinating
emergency and long -term repairs.
2. Police Department
a. Provides law enforcement services within the City, as well as rapid damage
assessments during disasters.
3. Community Development and Public Works Department (CDPW)
a. Maintenance and Operations and Engineering maintain all City -owned critical
infrastructure, including streets, water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, dikes and
bridges within the city. Responsible for conducting rapid damage assessments
on City owned facilities during disasters and emergencies.
b. Community Development Services is responsible for organizing and conducting
both rapid damage assessment and detailed building inspections of both City
owned facilities and those critical to the needs of the community at large.
4. Parks, Arts, and Recreation Department
a. Open and operate disaster shelters for City employees and the general public, as
well as to provide support to CDPW in some areas.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 24
IDLE Page 197 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
F. Emergency Response and Support Teams (Field Level)
Trained and certified federal teams described in the Concept of Operations of the National
Response Framework may be available to assist in incident management, setup of
response facilities, and to provide additional expertise and capability. They include
representatives from the federal Emergency Support Functions. They will integrate into the
Joint Field Office when it is established.
G. Defense Support of Civil Authorities
1. The Department of Defense (DOD) is authorized to deploy support to local jurisdictions
during disasters and emergencies to assist.
2. DOD support is described in the Concept of Operations of the National Response
Framework (NRF). DOD responds to requests for assistance during disasters and
emergencies when local, state or federal resources are overwhelmed. This support is
provided on a reimbursable basis.
3. Emergency Support Function (ESF) 20 details the Department of Defense (DOD)
support that is available.
H. Law Enforcement Assistance
The Auburn Police Department is the agency of primary jurisdiction within the City under
routine circumstances and during emergency operations. The Washington Mutual Aid Peace
Officers Powers Act, RCW 10.93, provides law enforcement with mutual assistance
capabilities between jurisdictions. Mutual aid agreements exist with local law enforcement
agencies and letters of mutual support exist with various law enforcement agencies
throughout the state. Supplemental law enforcement assistance should be requested
through the EOC, when activated, with the understanding that in a significant regional event,
outside assistance will not be available for some time.
Law enforcement support that may be available to deploy to the City of Auburn during
disasters and emergencies includes, but is not limited to, the following:
Local Agencies (mutual aid /notices of consent)
a. Pacific Police Department
b. Algona Police Department
c. Kent Police Department
d. Federal Way Police Department
e. Sumner Police Department
2. County Agencies (mutual aid /notices of consent)
a. King County Sheriff
b. Pierce County Sheriff
3. State Agencies
a. Washington State Patrol
b. Washington National Guard
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 25
D I . E Page 198 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
4. Federal Agencies
a. FBI
b. BATF
c. Secret Service
d. Federal Protective Services
e. Department of Homeland Security
These are federal government resources described in the Concept of Operations of the
National Response Framework. Federal agencies may be requested to provide public
safety and security during disasters and emergencies. ESF #13 provides guidance on
the integration of resources to support incident management functions.
INCIDENT MANAGEMENT ACTIONS
It is the policy of the City to conduct emergency and disaster preparedness and mitigation
activities in an effort to reduce and minimize the effects of a major emergency or disaster.
When a major emergency or disaster occurs, departments shall use the following general
checklist as a basis for managing their disaster operations:
1. Establish Incident Command following procedures established by each department.
2. Report to a pre- determined site to manage department operations.
3. Account for personnel.
4. Assess damages to facilities and resources.
5. Assess personnel and resources available.
6. Assess problems and needs.
7. Report the situation, damages, and capabilities to the EOC.
8. Send designated department representatives to the EOC.
9. Carry out department responsibilities and assigned tasks.
10. Continue assessment of and report to the EOC regarding department resources, needs,
damages, actions etc.
11. Keep detailed and accurate records, document actions, costs, situations, etc.
A. Notification and Assessment
Federal, State, local, tribal, private- sector, and nongovernmental organizations report
threats, incidents, and potential incidents using established communications and
reporting channels. The established communication channel for receiving and
disseminating threat and operational information for hazards, disasters, and
emergencies for the City of Auburn is through King or Pierce County Emergency
Management (or their respective EOC /DOC, if activated) to the Washington State
Emergency Management Division (or the Washington State Emergency Operations
Center, if activated).
2. Suspicious activity, terrorist threats, and actual incidents with a potential or actual
terrorist nexus are to be reported immediately to the regional Joint Terrorism Task Force
(JTTF) in Seattle. The FBI will make subsequent notifications to other federal and state
agencies as appropriate.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 26
D I . E Page 199 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
B. Activation
It is the mission of the City to provide vital services to the community during emergency
conditions while maintaining a concern for the safety of City employees and their families. In
the event of a widespread disaster that necessitates the activation of the EOC, the following
procedures shall be followed:
During non -work hours: All employees are encouraged to ensure the safety and welfare
of their families and homes. After making any necessary arrangements, all designated
employees are required to report to work pursuant to department standard operating
procedures (SOPs) and Continuity of Operations Plans.
2. During work hours: Departments shall make every effort to allow employees to check
promptly on the status of their families and homes, provided that doing so does not
compromise emergency response functions as defined in this CEMP.
3. Directors from each department will determine the instances when an allowance for time
off for unusual circumstances will be made for any employee.
4. The Mayor, Director of Emergency Management, or designees may activate the EOC.
Any City department may also request that the EOC be activated. Additionally, the EOC
may be activated at the request of an outside agency such as King or Pierce County
Emergency Management or other governmental entity to support their operations,
subject to approval by the Mayor, Director of Emergency Management, or designees
when the level of operations requires it. Requested staff will report to the EOC to
coordinate response efforts and support field operations. The EOC will be activated at a
level appropriate to the specific emergency or disaster.
5. The City's primary EOC is located at 1 E Main St., Suite 380. The designated alternate
EOC location is the Auburn Justice Center at 340 E Main St., Suite 201.
6. In the event of communications failure during an emergency or disaster, any City facility
or temporarily established site may act as a remote EOC for its local area until
coordination can be established from the EOC. Each site may serve as a command
post, staging area, triage station, communications center, or in any other functional
capacity appropriate for the situation.
7. Any City facility may be utilized as an EOC in the event that the primary and alternate
sites are rendered unusable by the event.
8. Each Department has one or more designated Department Operations Centers (DOCs).
Department personnel are to respond to these centers as directed in their departmental
emergency plans. DOC locations are:
• Administration (City Hall): 25 W Main St.
• Legal Department (City Hall): 25 W Main St.
• Public Works M &O: 1305 C St. SW
• Community Development and Public Works (Annex): 1 E Main St., 2nd Floor
• Parks Admin: 910 9th St. SE
• Parks Maintenance: 1401 C St. SW
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 27
IDLE Page 200 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
• Police: 340 E Main St., Suite 201
• Finance (Annex): 1 E Main St., 3rd Floor
• HR /Risk /Property Management (City Hall): 25 W Main St.
• Innovation & Technology (Annex): 1 E Main St., 3rd Floor
A map is provided to each employee in their disaster backpack that includes these
locations.
C. Requests for Assistance
When a major emergency or disaster occurs, it is anticipated that departments and other
responding organizations will organize their areas of responsibility into manageable units,
assess damages, and determine needs. If agency resources cannot meet the needs created
by the disaster, additional assistance may be requested through existing mutual aid
agreements, through the King County Zone 3 Coordinator, through King or Pierce County
Emergency Management, or directly from the State Emergency Operations Center. In the
event of a Proclamation of a Local Emergency, the deployment of resources will normally be
coordinated through the EOC (if activated). Resources to support City operations may be
placed at staging areas until specific assignment can be made.
D. Pre - Incident Actions (Preparedness and Mitigation)
Preparedness involves taking steps to ready the City and the community for emergencies
and disasters while mitigation involves actions taken to protect lives and property.
1. Long term mitigation activities, both pre- and post- disaster, are covered in detail in the
King County Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan (RHMP), to which the City is a signatory.
Auburn's portion of the RHMP includes detailed lists of prioritized activities that can be
taken to reduce risk in the community.
2. Public Health and Safety: Initial safety efforts focus on actions to detect, prevent, or
reduce the impact to public health and safety. Such actions can include environmental
analysis, plume modeling, evacuations, emergency sheltering, air monitoring,
decontamination, infectious disease tracking, emergency broadcasts, etc. These efforts
may also include public health education; site and public health surveillance and testing
procedures; and immunizations, prophylaxis, and isolation or quarantine for biological
threats coordinated by Health and Human Services (HHS) and State and local public
health officials.
3. Responder Health and Safety: The safety and health of responders is also a priority.
Actions essential to limit their risks include full integration of deployed health and safety
assets and expertise; risk assessments based upon timely and accurate data; and
situational awareness that considers responder and recovery worker safety. A
comprehensive location and /or operational response safety and health plan is key to
mitigating the hazards faced by responders. These efforts include incident hazard
identification and characterization; implementation and monitoring of personal protective
equipment selection, use, and decontamination; exposure sampling and analysis; worker
health and safety risk analysis; health and safety monitoring; and development /ongoing
evolution of the site - specific safety and health plan.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 28
IDLE Page 201 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
4. Property and the Environment: Responders may also take incident mitigation actions to
protect public and private property and the environment. Such actions may include, but
are not limited to, sandbagging in anticipation of a flood, or booming of environmentally
sensitive areas in response to a potential oil spill.
5. Specific preparedness activities for each department include:
a. Establish policies and procedures for department chain of command and succession
of authority.
b. Designate primary and alternate locations from which to establish direction and
control of department activities during an emergency or disaster.
c. Identify and obtain necessary equipment and supplies which may be needed to
manage department activities.
d. Identify the information needed to manage department activities including how it will
be gathered, stored, and accessed.
e. Decide how department management relates to the EOC and who should report
there when an emergency or disaster occurs.
f. Encourage development of employee response teams from within their department.
g. Establish procedures to ensure the ability to activate personnel on a 24 -hour basis.
h. Make staff available, when requested by the Director of Emergency Management or
Emergency Preparedness Manager, or EOC Manager, for appropriate training and
emergency assignments, such as EOC activities, damage assessment, and liaisons
with other agencies and organizations. All costs for these activities shall be the
responsibility of the respective department.
i. Maintain an updated inventory of key department personnel, facilities, and equipment
resources.
E. Response Activities
Once an incident occurs, the priorities shift from prevention, preparedness, and incident
mitigation to immediate and short -term response activities to preserve life, property, the
environment, and the social, economic, and political structure of the community. In the
context of a terrorist threat, simultaneous activities are initiated to assess regional and
national -level impacts, as well as to assess and take appropriate action to prevent and
protect against other potential threats.
During the event, the Director of each department, with concurrence of the Director of
Emergency Management, shall:
1. Assess the impact of the event on department personnel, facilities, equipment, and
capabilities.
2. Report any observed damage through the respective department's chain of command to
the EOC on a continuing basis.
3. Keep complete records of costs, expenditures, overtime, repairs, and other disaster -
related expenditures.
4. In coordination with the EOC, direct the execution of emergency operations plans and
perform appropriate incident mitigation activities designed to limit the loss of life,
personal injury, property damage, and other unfavorable outcomes.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 29
IDLE Page 202 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
5. Response actions may also include immediate law enforcement, fire, ambulance, and
emergency medical service actions; emergency flood fighting; evacuations;
transportation system detours; emergency public information; actions taken to minimize
additional damage; urban search and rescue; the establishment of facilities for mass
care; the provision of public health and medical services, food, ice, water, and other
emergency essentials; debris clearance; the emergency restoration of critical
infrastructure; control, containment, and removal of environmental contamination; and
protection of responder health and safety. Though the City does not have the direct
capability to perform all of these functions, it will take steps to ensure that the functions
are carried out as needed.
6. During the response to a terrorist event, law enforcement actions to collect and preserve
evidence and to apprehend perpetrators are critical. These actions take place
simultaneously with response operations necessary to save lives and are closely
coordinated with the law enforcement effort to facilitate the collection of evidence without
impacting ongoing life- saving operations.
7. In the context of a single incident, once immediate response missions and lifesaving
activities conclude, the emphasis shifts from response to recovery operations and, if
applicable, hazard mitigation.
F. Recovery Activities
Recovery involves actions needed to help individuals and communities return to normal
when feasible. The Joint Field Office (JFO) is the central coordination point among Federal,
State, local, and tribal agencies and voluntary organizations for delivering recovery
assistance programs.
All response and recovery activities are detailed in SOPs, and appropriate State and
Federal recovery guidelines. The process for collecting and analyzing data, developing
objectives and action plans, and documenting critical incident information in the EOC is
guided by SOPs. Following the event, the Director of each department, with the concurrence
of the Director of Emergency Management, shall:
1. Continue to report any observed damage and assess community needs.
2. Prioritize recovery projects and assign functions accordingly.
3. Coordinate recovery efforts and logistical needs with supporting agencies and
organizations.
4. Prepare documentation of the event, including the event log, cost analysis, and
estimated recovery costs.
5. Assist in establishing disaster assistance offices to aid private businesses and residents
with individual recovery.
6. Assess special community needs and provide information and assistance, as deemed
appropriate.
G. Demobilization
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 30
IDLE Page 203 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
When the Director of Emergency Management or designee determines that activation of the
EOC is no longer required, he /she will disseminate instructions for demobilization from
emergency management activities at the conclusion of an event. Planning for demobilizatior
will commence upon initial activation of the EOC.
ONGOING PLAN MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE
A. Coordination
Ongoing plan management and maintenance requires coordination with the whole
community. The City of Auburn Emergency Preparedness Manager will coordinate with all
agencies and organizations that have a role in incident response management for the
development and execution of policy, planning, training, equipping, and other preparedness
activities. This will primarily be achieved through the use of the City's Emergency
Management Committee, which includes representatives from the City, neighboring cities,
the Muckleshoot Tribe, and various non - profit and private organizations located within
Auburn.
B. Plan Maintenance
The Emergency Preparedness Manager will ensure that exercises of this plan are
conducted on an annual basis, except in years when there are actual EOC activations.
EOC activations will be used in lieu of exercises for plan evaluation and maintenance
purposes.
2. After - action reviews (AAR) will be conducted for all EOC activations and exercises for
the purpose of identifying lessons learned and incorporating them into future plan
updates. AARs will include corrective action plans as necessary.
3. This plan will be completely updated every four years (at a minimum), with supplemental
updates done as the need arises. The complete update will be submitted to the
Washington State Emergency Management Division for review prior to formal adoption.
C. NIMS Integration
1. NIMS is a system mandated by HSPD -5 that provides a consistent, nationwide approach
for Federal, State, local, and tribal governments; the private sector; and non - profits to
effectively and efficiently together to prepare for, respond to, and recover from domestic
incidents, regardless of cause, size, or complexity.
2. To provide for interoperability and compatibility among Federal, State, local, and tribal
capabilities, NIMS includes a core set of concepts, principles, and terminology.
3. It is the policy of the City of Auburn that all emergency management activities will be
conducted in accordance with NIMS and that the City will remain fully compliant with
NIMS.
REFERENCES
1. City of Auburn — Ordinance 6088, 2007, Emergency Preparedness
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 31
D I . E Page 204 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
2. City of Auburn — Ordinance 6428, 2013, Director of Emergency Management
3. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
4. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
5. King County Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Assessment
6. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
7. King County Regional Coordination Framework
8. Pierce County Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Assessment
9. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
10. RCW 35.33.081, Emergency Expenditures- Nondebatable Emergencies
11. RCW 35.33.101, Emergency Warrants
12. RCW 38.52, Emergency Management
13. RCW 38.56, Intrastate Mutual Aid System
14. RCW 39.34, 1 nterlocal Cooperation Act
15. RCW 43.43, Washington State Patrol -State Fire Services Mobilization Plan
16. RCW 49.60.400, Discrimination, Preferential Treatment Prohibited
17. WAC 118 -04, Emergency Worker Program
18. WAC 118 -30, Local Emergency Management/Services Organizations, Plans &
Programs
19. WAC 296 -62, General Occupational Health Standards
20. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
21. Public Law 93 -288, Disaster Relief Act of 1974, as amended by PL 100 -707, the Robert
T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act
22. Public Law 96 -342, Improved Civil Defense Act of 1980, as amended.
23. Public Law 99 -499, Superfund Amendments & Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986, Title
111, Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know
24. Title 44, CFR, Section 205.16 — Nondiscrimination
25. National Response Framework
26. National Incident Management System
ATTACHMENTS
None.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 32
IDLE Page 205 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
APPENDICES
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 33
D I . E Page 206 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 34
D I . E Page 207 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
APPENDIX 1: DEFINITIONS
Term
Description
ACCESS (A Centralized
Statewide law enforcement data network controlled and administered by
Computer Enforcement
the Washington State Patrol. Used primarily for law enforcement
Service System)
functions, this network also provides the capability to send warning and
notification of emergencies from state and federal organizations to local
jurisdictions.
Administration and
Responsible for all costs and financial /administrative considerations of
Finance Chief
the incident. Part of the Command and General Staff, reporting to the
Incident Commander.
After Action Report (AAR)
A narrative report that presents issues found during an incident or
exercise along with recommendations on how those issues can be
resolved.
Alternate Facility
An alternate work site that provides the capability to perform minimum
essential departmental or jurisdictional functions until normal operations
can be resumed.
Amateur Radio Emergency
The American Radio Relay League (ARRL) public service arm for
Service (ARES)
providing support primarily to non - government agencies during an
emergency /disaster. A primary user of the AIRES is the American Red
Cross.
AMBER Alert
Abducted Minor Broadcast Emergency Response Alert sent out locally
or from the State law enforcement agencies over the EAS system.
American Red Cross (ARC)
Non - profit organization that provides support of mass care, sheltering,
communication, and other services in times of disaster. Relies on
volunteers to carry out operations.
Annex
The purpose of an annex is to describe operations for a particular
function. It defines the function and shows how activities of various
participants in the functional organization are coordinated. The annex is
action - oriented. It is written for, and preferably by, the person
responsible for controlling resources available to accomplish the
objectives of the function in any large -scale emergency. It is a
substantial, freestanding plan that is specific to carry out a task.
Examples: Fire Mobilization Plan, Hazmat Plan, Pet Care Plan.
Appendix
An appendix contains details, methods, and technical information that
are unique to specific hazards identified as being likely to pose a threat
of disaster in the community. Appendices should be attached to
functional annexes. Appendices are supplementary, helper documents,
frequently changing but without specific direction. Examples: non-
critical lists such as phone lists or annual lists of events.
Area Command
An organization established to oversee the management of (1) multiple
incidents that are each being handled by an ICS organization, or (2)
large or multiple incidents to which several Incident Management Teams
have been assigned. Area Command has the responsibility to set
overall strategy and priorities, allocate critical resources according to
priorities, ensure that incidents are properly managed, and ensure that
objectives are met and strategies followed. May be established at an
EOC or at some location other than an ICP.
Call Center Supervisor
Volunteer or staff member assigned to supervise call takers.
Call Takers
Volunteers or staff assigned to answer phones in either the EOC or the
public call center.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 35
D I . E Page 208 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Term
Description
Clear Text
The use of plain English in radio communications transmissions. No ten
codes or agency- specific codes are used when using clear text.
Command Staff
The Command Staff consists of the Safety Officer, Liaison Officer, and
Public Information Officer, who report directly to the Incident
Commander.
Communications Unit
In incident command structure, responsible for providing communication
services at an incident, whether it be by phone, radio, in person, etc...
Comprehensive
Dedicated 2 -way Very High Frequency (VHF) low -band radio system.
Emergency Management
Provides direction and control capability for state and local jurisdictions
Network (CEMNET)
for administrative use, and during an emergency or disaster. This is an
emergency management net belonging to and managed by the
Washington State Military Department, Emergency Management
Division.
Comprehensive
A required plan which addresses the mitigation, preparation, response,
Emergency Management
and recovery activities associated with emergency /disaster situations.
Plan (CEMP)
Concept of Operations
User - oriented document that describes the characteristics for a
(CONOPS)
proposed asset or system from the viewpoint of any individual or
organizational entity that will use it in their daily work activities or who
will operate or interact directly with it.
Continuity of Government
Measures taken by a government to continue to perform required
(COG)
functions during and after a severe emergency. COG is a coordinated
effort within each branch of the government to continue its minimum
essential responsibilities in a catastrophic emergency.
Continuity of Operations
An internal effort within individual components of a government to
(COOP)
ensure the capability exists to continue essential functions across a wide
range of potential emergencies, including localized acts of nature,
accidents, and technological or attack - related emergencies.
COOP Emergency
The individuals, identified by position, within the jurisdiction that are
Response Team
responsible for ensuring the essential functions are performed in an
emergency and for taking action to facilitate that performance.
Critical Customers
Organizations or individuals for which a state department or local
jurisdiction performs mission - essential functions.
Damage Assessment
The process of determining the magnitude of damage and the unmet
needs of the community as the result of a hazardous event. Estimation
of damages made after a disaster has occurred which serves as the
basis of the Mayor's proclamation of emergency.
Debrief /Debriefing
A meeting held after an event or disaster to discuss what happened,
lessons learned and to discuss what may or may not be shared with the
public.
Delegated Authority
An official mandate calling on the individual holding a specific position to
assume responsibilities and authorities not normally associated with that
position when specified conditions are met.
Duty Officer
Generally refers to the person designated to intake and assess
emergency events on a 24/7 basis.
Direction and Control
The emergency support function that defines the management of
emergency response and recovery.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 36
D I . E Page 209 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Term
Description
Disaster
An event, expected or unexpected, in which a community's available,
pertinent resources are expended, or the need for resources exceeds
availability, and in which a community undergoes severe danger,
incurring losses so that the social or economic structure of the
community is disrupted and the fulfillment of some or all of the
community's essential functions are prevented.
Disaster assessment
Estimation of damages made after a disaster has occurred which serves
as the basis of a Proclamation of a Local Emergency.
Disaster Recovery Center
A temporary facility where, under one roof, representatives of Federal
(DRC)
agencies, local and state governments, and voluntary relief
organizations can process applications from individuals, families, and
business firms.
Donated Resources
Volunteer labor, donated equipment, and donated materials. If tracked
appropriately, may be used to satisfy the matching requirements of
federal disaster relief funds.
Emergency Alert System
A federally mandated program established to enable the President,
(EAS)
federal, state, and local jurisdiction authorities to disseminate
emergency information to the public via the Commercial Broadcast
System. Formerly known as the Emergency Broadcast System (EBS), it
requires broadcasters to relay emergency information. This system is for
immediate action emergencies where the public needs to be informed.
Example, dam failure, hazmat chemical cloud.
Emergency
A sudden, usually unexpected event that does or could do harm to
people, resources, property, or the environment. Emergencies can
range from localized events that affect a single office in a building, to
human, natural, or technological events that damage, or threaten to
damage, local operations. An emergency could cause the temporary
evacuation of personnel or the permanent displacement of personnel
and equipment from the site to a new operating location environment.
Emergency Management
The preparation for and the carrying out of all emergency functions to
mitigate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from emergencies and
disasters, to aid victims suffering from injury or damage resulting from
disasters caused by all hazards, whether natural or technological, and to
provide support for search and rescue operations for persons and
property in distress.
Emergency Management
The individual within each political subdivision that has coordination
Director
responsibility for jurisdictional emergency management.
Emergency
City of Auburn volunteers trained to manage communications functions,
Communications Team
including phones, radios, and social media.
(EmComm)
Emergency Coordination
See Emergency Operations Center.
Center (EOC)
Emergency Management
Agreements that provide for jurisdictions in different states to provide
Assistance Compact
resources or other support to one another during an incident.
(EMAC)
Emergency Management
The EMC is responsible for participating in the emergency management
Committee (EMC)
planning process, as well as to provide trained and qualified individuals
to carry out coordination functions during and event. Each department is
required to have at least one representative on the committee. The
committee will also include public and private agencies whom have
direct responsibilities within the CEMP.
Emergency Management
Washington State Emergency Management Division, responsible for
Division (EMD)
coordinating state -wide emergency management activities.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 37
D I . E Page 210 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Term
Description
Emergency Medical
Emergency Medical Services provides care to the sick and injured at the
Services (EMS)
scene of any medical emergency or while transporting any patient in an
ambulance to an appropriate medical control, including ambulance
transportation between medical facilities. It commonly includes trained
and licensed emergency care providers and specialized transportation
vehicles.
Emergency Operations
A central location from which overall direction, control, and coordination
Center (EOC)
of a single community's response to a disaster will be established. The
EOC is generally equipped and staffed to perform the following
functions: collect, record, analyze, display, and distribute information;
coordinate public information and warning; coordinate government
emergency activities; support first responders by coordinating the
management and distribution of information and resources and the
restoration of services; conduct appropriate liaison and coordination
activities with all levels of government, public utilities, volunteer and civic
organizations, and the public.
Emergency Operations
The staff person assigned to manage the EOC during an activation or
Center Manager
exercise.
Emergency Operations
See Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan.
Plan (EOP)
Emergency Protective
Actions taken by jurisdictions before, during, and after a disaster to save
Measures
lives, protect public health, and to prevent damage to improved public
and private property.
Emergency Support
Emergency Support Functions are functional annexes to the basic
Function (ESF)
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan. They outline the general
guidelines by which organizations will carry out the responsibilities
assigned in the plan, i.e., how response to a disaster or emergency will
be handled.
Emergency Work
Work that must be done immediately to save lives and to protect
improved property and public health and safety to avert or lessen the
threat of a major disaster.
Emergency Worker
Emergency worker means any person, including but not limited to, an
architect registered under Chapter 18.08 RCW, a professional engineer
registered under Chapter 18.43 RCW, or a volunteer registered under
RCW 38.52/WAC 118.04 who is registered with a local emergency
management organization for the purpose of engaging in authorized
emergency management activities or is an employee of the state of
Washington or any political subdivision thereof who is called upon to
perform emergency management activities.
Essential Functions
Those functions, stated or implied, that jurisdictions are required to
perform by statute or executive order or are otherwise necessary to
provide vital services, exercise civil authority, maintain the safety and
well -being of the general populace, and sustain the industrial /economic
base in an emergency.
Essential Operations
Those operations, stated or implied, that state departments and local
jurisdictions are required to perform by stature or executive order or are
otherwise deemed necessary.
Essential Personnel
Staff of the department or jurisdiction that are needed for the
performance of the organization's mission - essential functions.
Evacuation
A protective action which involves leaving an area of risk until the
hazard has passed.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 38
D I . E Page 211 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Term
Description
Event
A planned, non - emergency activity. ICS can be used as the
management system for a wide range of events, e.g. parades, concerts
or sporting events.
Facility
Any publicly or privately owned building, works, system, or equipment
built or manufactured, or an improved and maintained natural feature.
Land used for agricultural purposes is not a facility.
Federal Disaster
See Presidential Declaration.
Declaration
Federal Emergency
Agency created in 1979 to provide a single point of accountability for all
Management Agency
federal activities related to disaster mitigation and emergency
(FEMA)
preparedness, response, and recovery. FEMA provides technical
advice and funding for state and local emergency management
agencies, manages the President's Disaster Relief Fund and
coordinates the disaster assistance activities of all federal agencies in
the event of a Presidential Disaster Declaration.
Finance/ Administration
Responsible for all costs and financial /administrative considerations of
Section
the incident. Section Chief reports directly to the Incident Commander.
First Responders
Those in occupations that require they respond immediately to an
emergency event. Example: firefighters, law enforcement officers,
emergency medical services personnel, public works.
Force Account
Ajurisdiction's own labor forces and equipment.
Government Emergency
A service providing priority access telephone dialing during circuit
Telecommunications
overload conditions.
Service (GETS)
Governor's Proclamation
A proclamation by the Governor in accordance with RCW 43.06 and
of a State of Emergency
38.52 which activates the State of Washington Comprehensive
Emergency Management Plan and authorizes State resources to be
used to assist affected political jurisdictions.
Hazard
Something that is potentially dangerous or harmful, often the root cause
of an unwanted outcome.
Hazard Identification and
The HIVA is a comprehensive plan that is the result of a systematic
Vulnerability Analysis
evaluation of a jurisdiction's existing natural and technological hazards.
(HIVA)
It includes a vulnerability assessment to such hazards and provides
guidance for mitigation efforts.
Hazard Mitigation
Any measure that will reduce or prevent the damaging effects of a
hazard.
Hazmat
Hazardous Materials
Hazmat Team
Team with specialized training to response to hazardous materials
incidents.
Incident
An occurrence or event, either human - caused or natural phenomena,
that requires action by emergency services personnel to prevent or
minimize loss of life or damage to property and /or the environment.
Incident Action Plan (IAP)
The strategic goals, tactical objectives, and support requirements for the
incident. All incidents require an action plan.
Incident Command Post
A centralized base of operations established near the site of an incident.
(ICP)
That location at which primary command functions are executed; usually
collated with the incident base.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 39
D I . E Page 212 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Term
Description
Incident Command System
The combination of facilities, equipment, personnel, procedures, and
(ICS)
communications operating within a common organizational structure for
the purpose of coordinating the response to any event. An all- hazard,
on -scene functional management system that establishes common
standards in organization, terminology, and procedures, provides a
means (unified command) for the establishment of a common set of
incident objectives and strategies during multi- agency /multi - jurisdiction
operations while maintaining individual agency /jurisdiction authority,
responsibility, and accountability, and which is a component of the
National Interagency Incident Management Systems (NIMS). An
equivalent and compatible all- hazards, on- scene, functional
management system.
Incident Commander (IC)
The individual responsible for the management of operations at the
scene of an incident.
Incident Period
The time span during which an incident or event occurs.
Incidents of National
Those high- impact events that require a coordinated and effective
Significance
response by an appropriate combination of Federal, State, local, tribal,
private sector, and nongovernmental entities in order to save lives,
minimize damage, and provide the basis for long -term community
recovery and mitigation activities. All Presidential declared disasters are
considered Incidents of National Significance.
Individual Assistance (IA)
Supplementary Federal assistance available under the Stafford Act to
individuals, families, and businesses; includes disaster housing
assistance, unemployment assistance, grants, loans, legal services,
crisis counseling, tax relief, and other services or relief programs.
Integrated Public Alert &
It is a modernization and integration of the nation's alert and warning
Warning System (iPAWS)
infrastructure. Provides public safety officials with an effective way to
alert and warn the public about serious emergencies using EAS, WEA,
NOAA and other public alerting systems from a single interface.
Interoperable
Alternate communications that provide the capability to perform
Communications
minimum essential departmental or jurisdictional functions, in
conjunction with other agencies, until normal operations can be
resumed.
Joint Information Center
A facility that may be used by affected utilities, state agencies, counties,
(JIC)
local jurisdictions, and /or federal agencies to jointly coordinate the public
information function during all hazards incidents. May also be
conducted virtually.
Liaison Officer
The point of contact for assisting or coordinating agencies.
Local Emergency
A proclamation by the Mayor or his /her designee in accordance with
Declaration
RCW 36.40.180 and 38.52.070(2) which activates the City of Auburn
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan and the liability
protection and resource procurement provisions of RCW 38.52.
Local Emergency Planning
A local planning group appointed by the State Emergency Response
Committee (LEPC)
Commission (SERC) to fulfill the planning requirements for a Local
Planning District under the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act (SARA) of 1986. As the planning body for preparing local hazardous
materials plans.
Local Resources
The combined resources, of the type needed to respond to a given
hazardous event, of the City and of the private sector. In any request for
state or federal resources, the requesting jurisdiction must certify that
local resources have been, or soon will be, exhausted.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 40
D I . E Page 213 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Term
Description
Logistics Chief
In the incident command structure, responsible for resource
management and responding to resource requests. Oversees Logistics
Section. Reports directly to the Incident Commander.
Logistics Section
In Incident Command structure, responsible for providing facilities,
services, and materials for an incident or event.
Major Disaster
As defined in the Stafford Act, "Any natural catastrophe (including any
hurricane, tornado, storm, high water, wind - driven water, tidal wave,
tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, mudslide, snowstorm,
or drought), or, regardless of cause, any fire, flood, or explosion in any
part of the United States, which in the determination of the President
causes damage of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant major
disaster assistance under this Act to supplement the efforts and
available resources of states, local governments, and disaster relief
organizations in alleviating the damage, loss, hardship, or suffering
caused thereby."
Message Controller
A volunteer or staff member charged with recording and distributing
paper based messages in the EOC or public call center.
Message Distributors
In the Incident Command structure, responsible for routing information
about resources reporting to the incident, resource status, and
administrative and tactical traffic
Military Department
Refers to the Emergency Management Division, the Army and Air
National Guard, and Support Services.
Mitigation
Any sustained actions taken to eliminate or reduce the degree of long-
term risk to human life, property, and the environment from natural and
technological events. Mitigation assumes our communities are exposed
to risks whether or not an emergency occurs. Mitigation measures
include but are not limited to: building codes, disaster insurance, hazard
information systems, land use management, hazard analysis, land
acquisition, monitoring and inspection, public education, research,
relocation, risk mapping, safety codes, statutes and ordinances, tax
incentives and disincentives, equipment or computer tie downs, and
stockpiling emergency supplies.
Multi- Agency Coordination
A system by which multiple agencies coordinate response and limited
(MAC)
resources.
Mutual Aid Agreement
A formal or informal agreement for reciprocal assistance for emergency
(MAA)
services and resources between jurisdictions.
National Incident
A concept that provides for a total approach to all risk incident
Management System
management; NIIMS addresses the Incident Command System (ICS),
(NIMS)
training, qualifications and certification, publications management, and
supporting technology. NIMS outlines a standard incident management
organization called Incident Command System (ICS) that establishes
five functional areas -- command, operations, planning, logistics, and
finance /administration - -for management of all major incidents. To
ensure further coordination and during incidents involving multiple
jurisdictions or agencies, the principle of unified command has been
universally incorporated into NIMS. This unified command not only
coordinates the efforts of many jurisdictions, but provides for and
assures joint decisions on objectives, strategies, plans, priorities, and
public communications.
National Response
The plan that establishes the basis for the provision of federal
Framework (NRF)
assistance to a state and the local jurisdiction impacted by a
catastrophic or significant disaster or emergency that result in a
requirement for federal response assistance.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 41
D I . E Page 214 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Term
Description
National Warning System
The federal portion of the Civil Defense Warning System, used for the
(NAWAS)
dissemination of warnings and other emergency information from the
National or FEMA Region Warning Centers to Warning Points in each
state. Also used by the State Warning Points to disseminate information
to local Primary Warning Points. Provides warning information to state
and local jurisdictions concerning severe weather, earthquake, flooding,
and other activities affecting public safety.
Non - Essential Personnel
Staff of the department or jurisdiction who are not required for the
performance of the organization's mission - essential functions.
NORTHCOM
Military structure that provides command and control of Department of
Defense (DOD) homeland defense efforts and coordinates defense
support of civil authorities.
Objectives
The specific operations that must be accomplished to achieve goals.
Objectives must be both specific and measurable.
Officer
The Incident Command title for individuals responsible for Public
Information. Liaison and Safety.
Operational Period
In Incident Command, the period of time scheduled for execution of a
given set of operation actions such as specified in the Incident Action
Plan
Operations Chief
In an incident command structure, a representative of the principal first -
response agency having overall incident management responsibilities in
the field; responsible for coordinating support to individual incident
commanders. Oversees the Operations Section. Reports to the Incident
Commander.
Operations Sections
In an Incident Command structure, responsible for all tactical operation
at the incident.
Order of Succession
The order in which and conditions under which the responsibilities and
authorities of a public official are passed to another official when the
original holder of the responsibilities and authorities is unable or
unavailable to exercise them.
Plan Maintenance
Steps taken to ensure the plans are reviewed regularly and updated
whenever major changes occur.
Planning Chief
In an incident command structure, responsible for situation analysis and
anticipating future response or recovery needs and activities. Oversees
the Planning Section. Reports directly to the Incident Commander.
Planning Section
In incident command structure, responsible for the collection, evaluation,
and dissemination of information related to the incident, and for the
preparation and documentation of IAPs
Preliminary Damage
The joint local, state, and Federal analysis of damage that has occurred
Assessment (PDA)
during a disaster and which may result in a Presidential declaration of
disaster. The PDA is documented through surveys, photographs, and
other written information.
Preparedness
The range of deliberate, critical tasks and activities necessary to build,
sustain, and improve the operational capability to prevent, protect
against, respond to , and recover from domestic incidents. Within the
NIMS, preparedness is operationally focused on establishing guidelines,
protocols, and standards for planning, training and exercises, personnel
qualification and certification, equipment certification, and publication
management.
Presidential Disaster
Formal declaration by the President that an Emergency or Major
Declaration
Disaster exists based upon the request for such a declaration by the
Governor and with the verification of Federal Emergency Management
Agency preliminary damage assessments.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 42
D I . E Page 215 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Term
Description
Public Assistance (PA)
Supplementary federal assistance provided under the Stafford Act to
state and local jurisdictions, special purpose districts, tribes, or eligible
private, nonprofit organizations.
Public Information Officer
The person designated and trained to coordinate disaster related public
(PIO)
information and media relations.
Radio Amateur Civil
Volunteer ham (amateur) radio operators who provide reserve
Emergency Service
communications within government agencies in times of extraordinary
(RACES)
need. Although the exact nature of each activation will be different, the
common thread is communications.
Radio Operators
Staff or volunteers assigned to operate radios in the EOC radio room or
in the field.
Radio Room Supervisor
Staff member or volunteer assigned to supervise the people and
activities in the EOC radio room.
Recovery
A short -term and long -term process. Short -term operations restore vital
services to the community and provide for the basic needs of the public.
Long -term recovery focuses on restoring the community to its normal, or
improved, state of affairs, including some form of economic viability.
Recovery measures include, but are not limited to, crisis counseling,
damage assessment, debris clearance, decontamination, disaster
application centers, disaster insurance payments, disaster loans and
grants, disaster unemployment assistance, public information,
reassessment of emergency plans, reconstruction, temporary housing,
and full -scale business resumption. Also, the extrication, packaging,
and transport of the body of a person killed in a search and rescue
incident.
Regional Coordination
A mutual aid agreement specific to King County, which encompasses
Framework (RCF)
government agencies, non - profit organizations, and private businesses.
Response
The actual provision of services during an event. These activities help
to reduce casualties and damage and to speed recovery. Actions taken
immediately before, during, or directly after an emergency occurs, to
save lives, minimize damage to property and the environment, and
enhance the effectiveness of recovery. Response measures include,
but are not limited to, emergency plan activation, emergency alert
system activation, emergency instructions to the public, emergency
medical assistance, staffing the emergency operations center, public
official alerting, reception and care, shelter and evacuation, search and
rescue, resource mobilization, and warning systems activation.
Robert T. Stafford Disaster
(Public Law 93 -288, as amended) - The act that authorizes the greatest
Relief and Emergency
single source of federal disaster assistance. It authorizes coordination
Assistance Act
of the activities of federal, state, and volunteer agencies operating under
their own authorities in providing disaster assistance, provision of direct
federal assistance as necessary, and provision of financial grants to
state and local jurisdictions as well as a separate program of financial
grants to individuals and families. This act is commonly referred to as
the Stafford Act.
Search and Rescue (SAR)
The act of searching for, rescuing, or recovering by means of ground,
marine, or air activity any person who becomes lost, injured, or is killed
while outdoors or as a result of a natural or human - caused event,
including instances of searching for downed aircraft when ground
personnel are used. Includes DISASTER, URBAN, and WILDLAND
SEARCH AND RESCUE.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 43
D I . E Page 216 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Term
Description
Shelter in place
A protective action that involves taking cover in a building that can be
made relatively airtight. Generally, any building suitable for winter
habitation will provide some protection with windows and doors closed
and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning system turned off.
Increased effectiveness can be obtained in sheltering by methods such
as using an interior room or basement, taping windows and doors, and
other more elaborate systems to limit natural ventilation. To be used as
a protective action, sheltering requires the ability to communicate to the
public when it is safe and /or necessary to emerge from the shelter.
Stafford Act
See Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance
Act.
Staging Area
In an Incident Command structure, the location where incident
personnel and equipment are assigned on an immediately available
status.
Task Force
A group of any type and kind of resources with common
communications and a leader temporarily assembled for a specific
mission.
Technical Specialist
Personnel with special skills who are activated only when needed.
Terrorism
The unlawful use of force or violence committed by an individual or
group against persons or property in order to intimidate or coerce a
government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in
furtherance of political or social objectives.
Unified Command
An application of ICS used when there is more than one agency with
incident jurisdiction or when incidents cross political jurisdictions.
Agencies work together through the designated members fo the Unified
Command, to establish a common set of objectives and strategies and a
single IAP.
Urban Search and Rescue
Locating, extricating, and providing for the immediate medical treatment
(USAR)
of victims.
Urban Search and Rescue
A 62 member organization sponsored by the Federal Emergency
task force
Management Agency in support of Emergency Support Function 9. The
task force is trained and equipped to conduct heavy urban search and
rescue and is capable of being deployed to any disaster site nationwide.
US- NORTHCOM
See NORTHCOM.
Warning and Information
Advising the public of a threatening or occurring hazard and providing
information to assist them in safely preparing for and responding to the
hazard.
Washington State Mutual
Mutual aid agreement covering all cities, counties, and state agencies in
Aid Agreement
Washington State.
(WAMAC/WAMAS)
Weapon of Mass
Any weapon or device that is intended or has the capability to cause
Destruction (WMD)
death or serious bodily injury to a significant number of people through
the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous chemicals or
their precursors; a disease organism; or radiation or radioactivity. Any
explosive, incendiary, or poison gas, bomb, grenade, rocket having a
propellant charge of more than four ounces, missile having an explosive
or incendiary charge of more than one - quarter ounce, minor device
similar to the above; poison gas; any weapon that is designed to release
radiation or radioactivity at a level dangerous to life.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 44
DI.E Page 217 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
APPENDIX 2: ACRONYMS
APD — Auburn Police Department
ARC - American Red Cross
ARES - Amateur Radio Emergency
Services
ARNORTH — Army component of
NORTHCOM.
CCU — Valley Crisis Communications Unit
CDPW — Community Development and
Public Works Department
CEMP - Comprehensive Emergency
Management Plan
CERT — Community Emergency Response
Team
COAD — Community Organizations Active in
Disasters
COOP — Continuity of Operations Plan
DHS — Department of Homeland Security
DOC — Department Operations Center
DOD - United States Department of Defense
DOT — Department of Transportation
DSCA — Defense Support of Civil
Authorities
DSHS - Department of Social and Health
Services
EAS - Emergency Alert System
EMCOMM — Emergency Communications
Team
EMD - Washington State Emergency
Management Division
EMS - Emergency Medical Services
EOC - Emergency Operations Center
ESF - Emergency Support Function
FAA - Federal Aviation Administration
FEMA - Federal Emergency Management
Agency
HHS — Health and Human Services
HIVA -- Hazard Identification and
Vulnerability Assessment
HSEEP — Homeland Security Exercise and
Evaluation Program
HSOC — Homeland Security Operations
Center (DHS)
HSPD — Homeland Security Presidential
Directive
IC - Incident Commander
ICP - Incident Command Post
ICS - Incident Command System
iPAWS — Integrated Public Alert and
Warning System
IT — Innovation and Technology Department
JIC -Joint Information Center
JOC — Joint Operations Center
JTTF — Joint Terrorism Task Force
LEPC - Local Emergency Planning
Committee
MAMC — Multicare Auburn Regional
Medical Center
MRC - Medical Reserve Corps
MSCA - Military Support to Civil Authorities
MYN — Map Your Neighborhood
NAWAS - National Warning System
NIMS - National Incident Management
System
NOAA - National Oceanic Atmospheric
Administration
NORTHCOM — US Northern Command
NRF — National Response Framework
NWACP - Northwest Area Contingency Plan
NWS — National Weather Service
PDA - Preliminary Damage Assessment
PIO - Public Information Officer
PSAP - Public Safety Answering Point (911
answering point)
RCF — King County Regional Coordination
Framework
RCW - Revised Code of Washington
RHMP — Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan
SAR - Search and Rescue
SARA — Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act
SBA - Small Business Association
SOP - Standard Operating Procedures
TNET — Tahoma Narcotics Enforcement
Team
UC - Unified Command
USCG - United States Coast Guard
USAR - Urban Search and Rescue
ValleyCom — Valley Communications
Center (local PSAP /911 center)
VNET — Valley Narcotics Enforcement
Team
VRFA — Valley Regional Fire Authority
WAC - Washington Administrative Code
WAMAS —Washington State Mutual Aid
System
WMD - Weapons of Mass Destruction
WSDOT - Washington State Department of
Transportation
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 45
DI.E Page 218 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
DI.E Page 219 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
APPENDIX 3: AUTHORITIES AND REFERENCES
This Appendix is a compilation of references used in the completion of this version of the City of
Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan. References include City, County, State,
and Federal codes and regulations as well as plans and widely used standards.
Codes and Regulations
City of Auburn
■ Auburn City Code 2.75, Emergency Preparedness
Washington State
• RCW 10.93, Washington Mutual Aid Peace Officers Power Act
• RCW 35.33.081, Emergency Expenditures — Nondebatable Emergencies
• RCW 35.33.091, Emergency Expenditures — Other Emergencies - Hearing
• RCW 35.33.101, Emergency Warrants
• RCW 35.33.111, Forms — Accounting — Supervision by state
• RCW 35A.38, Emergency Services
• RCW 38.52, Emergency Management
• RCW 38.52.020, Declaration of policy and purpose
• RCW 38.52.070, Local Organization and Joint Local Organizations Authorized —
Establishment, Operation- Emergency Powers, Procedures
• RCW 38.52.110, Use of Existing Services and Facilities — Impressment of Citizenry
• RCW 38.56, 1 ntrastate Mutual Aid System
• RCW 39.34, 1 nterlocal Cooperation Act
• RCW 40.10.010, Essential Records — Designation — List - Security and Protection —
Reproduction
• RCW 42.12, Vacancies
• RCW 42.14, Continuity of Government Act
• RCW 43.21 G, Energy Supply- Emergencies and Alerts
• RCW 43.43, Washington State Patrol - State Fire Service Mobilization Plan
• RCW 47.68.380, Search and Rescue
• RCW 49.60.400, Discrimination, Preferential Treatment Prohibited
• RCW 68.50.010, Coroner's Jurisdiction over Remains
• Section 7 of Article VIII of Washington State Constitution
• WAC 118 -04, Emergency Worker Program
• WAC 118 -30, Local Emergency Management/Services Organizations, Plans, & Programs
• WAC 296 -62, General Occupational Health Standards
Federal
• Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101 — A guide for All- Hazard Emergency Operations
Planning
• Public Law 93 -288, Disaster Relief Act of 1974, as amended by Public Law 100 -707, the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act
• Public Law 96 -342, Improved Civil Defense Act of 1980, as amended.
• Public Law 99 -499, Superfund Amendments & Reauthorization Act (SARA)of 1986, Title III,
Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know
• Superfund Amendments and Re- Authorization Act of 1986 (SARA Title III)
• Title 44, CFR, Section 205.16 — Nondiscrimination
D I . E Page 220 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Plans
city
• Auburn Police Department — Standard Operating Procedures
• City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
• City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
County
• King County Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Assessment
• King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
• King County Regional Disaster Plan
• Pierce County Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Assessment
• Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
State
• Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
• Washington State Department of Transportation Disaster Plan
• Washington State Emergency Communication Development Plan
• Washington State Emergency Management Disaster Assistance Guide for Local
Governments
Federal
• American Red Cross Disaster Plan
• American Red Cross Disaster Services Regulations and Procedures: Survey /Damage
Assessment
• Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 as amended by the Americans with Disabilities
Amendments Act of 2008, Public Law 110 -325
• National Response Framework
• Interstate Mutual Aid Compact
• National Search and Rescue Plan
• Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act of 2006, Public Law 109 -308
• Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101 v2 Guide for All- Hazard Emergency Operations
Planning
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 48
IDLE Page 221 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
APPENDIX 4: TRAINING, DRILLS, AND EXERCISES
PURPOSE
To identify and establish methods of meeting the training and educational needs of City of
Auburn (City) employees responsible for responding to emergencies and for community -wide
educational programs geared at self - preparedness.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
The Emergency Preparedness Manager will be responsible for ensuring that City staff receives
training in specific emergency management skills and related professional development.
Public education programs will be made available upon request, and as resources permit, to all
segments of the community to increase awareness of hazards, explain how best to safely
respond, and promote self - preparedness. The Emergency Management Division will work with
public and private partners to offer the following programs:
• Schools: Information on local hazards and how to prepare for and respond to their
effects will be provided to students, faculty, and school administrators. The development,
standardization, and practice of emergency plans will be encouraged.
• Community Groups: Information on local hazards and how to prepare for and respond to
their effects will be provided to neighborhood and community groups. Those groups will
be encouraged to participate in Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) and
Map Your Neighborhood (MYN) programs to build disaster response and organizational
skills designed to increase neighborhood resiliency.
• Businesses and Non - Profits: Information on local hazards and how to prepare for and
respond to their effects will be provided to the business and non -- profit communities.
These communities will be encouraged to engage in business resumption and
contingency planning, as well as CERT training.
• City Employees: Information on local hazards and how to prepare for their effects will be
provided to City employees. CERT training (or components of CERT training) will also
be made available to them.
The City will utilize the full -range of exercise types including discussion, tabletop, functional, and
full -scale exercises.
Each City department is responsible for ensuring that their employees are trained in the
concepts of the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) and in the department -
specific standard operating procedures (SOPs) or Continuity of Operations (COOP) Plan. The
Emergency Management Division will regularly offer training on the CEMP and will assist
departments in SOP and /or COOP training.
Every non - temporary City employee and elected official is required to complete ICS 100 (or
G402 for elected officials) and IS 700 training within six months of hire to ensure the City's
continued compliance with NIMS. The Emergency Management Division will offer the courses
as- needed and will assist employees with taking them on- line..
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 49
D I . E Page 222 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Certain City employees are required to complete more advanced levels of NIMS compliant ICS
training. This includes:
• Supervisors: ICS 200
• Mid -Level Managers and designated EOC Section Chiefs: ICS 300 and IS 800,
• Senior Managers /Department Directors, designated Incident Commanders and EOC
Managers: ICS 400
• EOC Section Chiefs /Incident Commands /EOC Managers: FEMA position specific
and /or IEMC training,
Generally, an employee is required to complete each new level of training within 6 months of
being hired or promoted. The Emergency Management Division will identify these employees
and provide them with information on upcoming training opportunities as appropriate. The City
will use outside resources to provide specialized training, if appropriate.
The Emergency Preparedness Manager, in coordination with the Director of Emergency
Management, is responsible for ensuring that drills and exercises are conducted to evaluate the
effectiveness of the CEMP and to determine future training needs.
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. City of Auburn
City Departments
a. Develop SOPs or COOPs that define employees' operational responsibilities during
an emergency or disaster.
b. Provide necessary training, in coordination with the Emergency Management
Division, to enable employees to carry out those responsibilities.
c. Provide input for after - action and corrective action reports.
2. Emergency Management Division
a. In coordination with the Director of Emergency Management and outside agencies
as appropriate, design, conduct, and evaluate drills and exercises to determine the
effectiveness of the City's emergency management programs and employee training.
b. In coordination with all City Departments and outside agencies as appropriate,
coordinate the writing and dissemination of exercise related after - action reports,
including recommended corrective action measures.
c. Design, coordinate, evaluate and report corrective actions in accordance with the
Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) guidance.
B. Local Organizations
1. Valley Regional Fire Authority (VRFA)
a. As requested, assist the Emergency Management Division in the design,
implementation, and evaluation of drills and exercises to determine the effectiveness
of the City's emergency management programs and to ensure coordination of efforts
during a real event.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 50
IDLE Page 223 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
2. Multicare Auburn Medical Center (MAMC)
a. As requested, assist the Emergency Management Division in the design,
implementation, and evaluation of drills and exercises to determine the effectiveness
of the City's emergency management programs and to ensure coordination of efforts
during a real event.
3. All other support agencies
a. Participate in training and exercises, if requested and as resources allow.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 51
D I . E Page 224 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 52
D I . E Page 225 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
APPENDIX 5: DISTRIBUTION LIST
NAME
DEPARTMENT OR AGENCY
PLAN #
Nancy Backus
Mayor
1
Rich Wagner
Deputy Mayor
2
John Holman
Councilmember
3
Claude DaCorsi
Councilmember
4
Wayne Osborne
Councilmember
5
Largo Wales
Councilmember
6
Bill Peloza
Councilmember
7
Yolanda Trout
Councilmember
8
Bob Lee
Police Chief
9
Rob Roscoe
Director of HR /Risk & Property Mgt
10
Shelley Coleman
Finance Director
11
IT Director
12
Dan Heid
City Attorney
13
Kevin Snyder
CDPW Director
14
Daryl Faber
Parks, Arts & Recreation Director
15
Jeff Tate
CDPW Asst. Director, Planning
16
Sarah Miller
Emergency Management EMC
17
EOC
Emergency Management
18
EM Office
Emergency Management
19
Randy Bailey
CDPW Asst. Director, M &O EMC
20
21
Ingrid Gaub
CDPW Asst.Director, Engineering EMC
22
Jeff Dixon
Planning Manager EMC
23
Aaron Barber
Emp Rel /Com ensation Mgr EMC
24
25
Tom Ushing
Building Division Manager EMC
26
Mike Hirman
Police Commander EMC
27
Brian Petty
Recreation Manager EMC
28
Patrick Mamaril
Support Specialist [EMCI
29
Dana Hinman
Public Affairs/Marketing Manager [EMCI
30
Bob Brooks
Financial Planning Manager [EMCI
31
Mike Miller
Parks Maintenance Manager EMC
32
33
Lisa Moore
Facilities Manager
34
Michael Hursh
Director of Administration /EM Director
35
Neil Wachter
Asst City Attorney EMC
36
Radine Lozier
Senior Center Supervisor
37
Chris James
Police Records Manager
38
39
Mike Gerber
VRFA
40
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 53
D I . E Page 226 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
Basic Plan Revised January 2015 54
D I . E Page 227 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTIONS
Revised January 2015 55
D I . E Page 228 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
Revised January 2015 56
D I . E Page 229 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ESF 1: TRANSPORTATION
LEAD: Community Development and Public Works (CDPW)
SUPPORT: City: Innovation & Technology (GIS)
Police
Parks, Arts, and Recreation
Emergency Management
Local: Auburn School District
County: King County Transportation Department
Pierce County Transportation Department
King County Metro Transit
Sound Transit
State: Washington State Department of Transportation
Washington State Emergency Management Division
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
1. To provide guidance and direction to ensure effective coordination and utilization of the
transportation system during emergency situations.
2. To provide identification of emergency transportation routes for the movement of people
and materials.
3. To provide for the coordinated evacuation of the population from an area of high risk in
the event of a threatened hazard.
B. Scope
This Emergency Support Function (ESF) addresses emergency transportation issues
including capabilities, routes, and resources needed for the ability to deliver relief services,
supplies, and the ability to move people.
POLICIES
A. The Transportation Coordinator in the Emergency Operations Center (EOC), with assistance
from internal departments and outside support agencies, has primary responsibility for
emergency transportation activities within the City of Auburn.
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 57
IDLE Page 230 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. The Community Development and Public Works Department (CDPW) will provide a
representative to the EOC who will serve as Transportation Coordinator. This will generally
be an employee from the Transportation Section of the Engineering Division.
B. The Transportation Coordinator will coordinate transportation activities within the City.
C. Transportation infrastructure may sustain significant damage in a disaster. The damage will
influence the means and accessibility level for relief services and supplies.
D. Disaster responses which require transportation capacity may be difficult to coordinate
effectively immediately following an emergency or disaster.
E. The requirement for transportation capacity during the immediate life saving response phase
may exceed the availability of City readily obtained assets.
F. Where the local ground, water, or air transportation systems have been severely disabled,
local political subdivisions (cities and counties) will act to restore transportation systems and
equipment on a priority basis.
G. Metro Transit, Sound Transit, and the Auburn School District may, subject to the conditions
of the disaster and availability of operators and equipment, support emergency operations
with buses, vans, or trains upon request of the City.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. The CDPW Department shall provide damage assessment of streets, overpasses,
pedestrian /bicycle routes, traffic signals, and other transportation facilities. The department
shall provide for emergency repair and restoration of city -owned transportation facilities and
coordinate the repair of facilities owned by other agencies that are essential to the
functioning of the City's transportation network.
B. As the extent and transportation needs resulting from an emergency or disaster are
identified, the Transportation Coordinator, in conjunction with CDPW Department, will
identify the most efficient and effective method of operating the transportation system to
appropriately respond to the emergency or disaster.
C. If local capabilities in meeting transportation needs are exceeded, additional resources or
assistance may be obtained through existing mutual aid agreements and /or contracts
through private vendors. Requests for additional assistance should be coordinated through
the Transportation Coordinator.
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. City of Auburn
1. All City Departments
a. Designated staff report to the EOC for duty
b. Notify EOC of observed and reported damage to the transportation system.
c. Provide transportation resources and support, as requested and available.
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 58
IDLE Page 231 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
d. Maintain accurate records of all personnel and equipment usage time to facilitate
reimbursement.
e. Support recovery efforts as identified in the SOPs.
f. Support appropriate local, State, and Federal agencies as conditions warrant and
within the realm of local plans and procedures.
g. Provide situation and status reports, as requested.
h. Participate in debriefing and critiques organized by the Emergency Management
Division or individual City departments.
2. Community Development and Public Works Department
a. Develop policies and procedures to ensure delivery of adequate fuel sources for City
resources during an event.
b. Identify emergency routes and alternative methods of transportation to be used
during an emergency.
c. Maintain an inventory of equipment (signs, barricades, paints, etc.) that is readily
available to be used to respond to road closures and detour route marking in the
case of an emergency or disaster.
d. Maintain a list of transportation assets owned by the City (buses, vans, etc.) and
organizations with which the City has mutual aid agreements, as well as
organizations that might have transportation assets available to the City for use
during an emergency or disaster.
e. Establish a system for dispatching and tracking repair crews and equipment hours of
work /use.
f. Provide a representative to serve as the Transportation Coordinator in the EOC.
g. Coordinate operational strategies with county and state transportation systems to
ensure an integrated approach to transportation issues.
h. Immediately notify the EOC of partial or total road closures and detours.
i. Place signs, barricades, and traffic control devices, as needed, to promote orderly
traffic flow and protect the public from unsafe conditions.
j. Arrange for delivery of emergency fuel sources.
k. Coordinate assessment and reporting of damage to streets, bridges, and other
transportation routes.
I. Select detour routes and make appropriate changes to traffic control devices to
improve the safety and efficiency of the transportation network.
m. Provide for the safe and effective operation of streets and walkways through debris
removal.
n. Conduct minor street and structure repair as directed by CDPW DOC or the EOC.
o. Decide when to re -open closed roads and coordinate activities necessary to
accomplish this.
p. Request additional resources or assistance through mutual aid agreements, existing
contracts, or the EOC.
q. Arrange for needed City vehicle maintenance and support.
r. Conduct detailed assessment of all streets, bridges, and other transportation routes.
s. Develop a list of all damaged transportation facilities, establish priorities, and
estimate repair costs.
t. Coordinate the return of the transportation system to normal operations.
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 59
IDLE Page 232 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
3. Innovation & Technology— GIS Division
a. Work with CDPW Department to determine types of maps needed during an event.
b. Ensure that the EOC is supplied with current paper maps related to transportation;
coordinate the number, type, and geographic section with the transportation section
of the CDPW Department. Maps will be printed and stored at the CDPW DOC as
well as the EOC.
c. Ensure that electronic maps related to transportation are kept updated and readily
available for emergency purposes.
d. Create and print additional maps as directed by the Transportation Coordinator
during an event.
e. Update existing maps to reflect any permanent changes to the transportation system
that resulted from the event.
4. Parks Department
a. Coordinate with the CDPW Department to supplement their work force during an
event.
b. In coordination with the CDPW Department, provide for the safe and effective
operation of streets and walkways through debris removal.
5. Police Department
a. Coordinate with the CDPW Department to identify emergency routes and alternate
methods of transportation to be used during an emergency.
b. Report transportation infrastructure damage to the EOC.
c. Provide support for traffic control.
d. Request placement of traffic control devices to affect orderly traffic flow.
e. Recommend detour routes.
f. Coordinate with the Transportation Coordinator to assist in re- opening of closed
roads..
6. Emergency Management Division
a. Develop plans and agreements to utilize transportation assets belonging to outside
organizations.
b. Facilitate resource inventory and tracking systems.
c. Conduct public education campaigns to alert residents of emergency transportation
and evacuation routes.
d. Ensure that EOC staff has access to resources necessary to perform transportation
functions.
e. Compile information on personnel and equipment usage to be used for
reimbursement purposes.
f. Assist in locating funding sources for transportation infrastructure repair and /or
replacement.
B. Local Organizations
1. Auburn School District
a. Provide a representative to the EOC, if requested and as resources allow.
b. Coordinate with the EOC for the provision of school district transportation assets to
assist in meeting emergency transportation needs, as resources allow.
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 60
IDLE Page 233 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
2. King and Pierce County Transportation Departments
a. Coordinate county -wide transportation route recovery projects with affected agencies
and jurisdictions.
b. Provide support to the City in re- opening transportation routes.
c. Provide information to the City on closed routes outside the City limits that may
impact City transportation needs.
3. Regional Transit Agencies (Metro and Sounder)
a. Provide a representative to the EOC, if requested and as resources allow.
Coordinate with the EOC for the provision of agency assets to assist in meeting
emergency transportation needs, as resources allow.
4. Washington State Department of Transportation
a. Coordinate repair and recovery projects on state maintained highways.
b. Provide information to the City on closed routes that may impact City transportation
needs.
5. Washington State Emergency Management Division
a. Coordinate State and Federal response for transportation assistance, if requested by
local or county government.
REFERENCES
1. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
2. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
3. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
4. King County Regional Coordination Framework
5. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
6. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
7. Washington State Department of Transportation Disaster Plan
8. National Response Framework
ATTACHMENTS
1. City of Auburn Evacuation Plan
a. Pre - Printed Evacuation Instructions
2. City of Auburn Snow and Ice Routes Map
3. City of Auburn Lahar Evacuation Map
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 61
IDLE Page 234 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Attachment 1: City of Auburn Evacuation Plan
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose of Plan
The purpose of the Evacuation Annex is to provide the guidelines necessary for the City of
Auburn to conduct an organized and efficient evacuation of all, or part, of the City
population.
The plan is not meant to identify routes for evacuation, but is meant to provide the
information, tools and guidelines that officials will need in the event the City of Auburn (City)
orders an evacuation.
This plan will rely on the City's Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) for
establishing command structure, identification of resources, and coordination protocol
between neighboring jurisdictions and other levels of government.
B. Scope
This Evacuation Plan is specific to the City of Auburn. This plan is designed to be a subset
of the City's Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP), which is designed to
work in concert with the emergency management plans of both King and Pierce Counties,
as well as the State of Washington and the National Response Framework (NRF). The
City's CEMP defines the geographic scope and population of the City which must be
considered in an evacuation. All issues not specifically addressed in this plan will be found
in the CEMP in the appropriate ESF.
C. Authorities
This plan is developed under the authorities of the local, state, and federal statutes and
regulations that are listed in the CEMP.
CRITICAL ASSUMPTIONS
A. Regulatory issues in State of Washington relevant to conducting an evacuation:
• The City is responsible for evacuations that occur within the City limits and may only
issue an evacuation order after the Mayor or his /her designee has proclaimed a civil
emergency.
• King and Pierce County Emergency Management will support the City with carrying out
evacuation and sheltering activities.
• King and Pierce County Emergency Management will coordinate with federal, state,
volunteer and private agencies, however, primarily coordination is the responsibility of
the City.
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 62
IDLE Page 235 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
B. Local Parameters
Localized site - evacuations due to small incidents will be handled using the Incident
Command System as outlined in the CEMP. The Incident Commander is authorized to take
measures designed to protect lives and does not require a Mayor's proclamation to do so.
C. Local Limitations
It is assumed that in cases of large -scale evacuation, City resources will rapidly become
overwhelmed. It is likely that assistance will be required from all surrounding jurisdictions
and this assistance will need to be coordinated at the Zone or County level.
It is assumed that the City will issue notices of evacuation areas and provide final
destination locations when possible, but will not force those to leave who refuse.
All evacuation announcements, notices and related information will be provided in English.
The City owns limited wheel -chair accessible vehicles. In an evacuation scenario with
suitable notice, the City will rely upon mutual aid agreements, including the King County
Regional Coordination Framework, to procure suitable transportation for all those who need
to leave the area. For short notice events, such as a lahar, it will not be possible to call upon
those agreements due to the extremely compressed time -frame and the influx of traffic
fleeing the lahar path from the south. Residents, workers, or other people or groups that
cannot assist themselves will only receive assistance from the City if resources are
available, which is not likely in a lahar scenario. Schools, nursing homes, and other facilities
with large numbers of people and limited transportation must plan for their own
transportation in case of an evacuation in this scenario.
Coordination of security in evacuated areas is the responsibility of the Auburn Police
Department and may be conducted by APD, by police agencies responding under mutual
aid, by private security under contract, or by requested military forces, and will be
accomplished at a level deemed appropriate under the circumstances at the time. Given that
evacuation orders are only given when a hazard presents a threat to life safety, it is unlikely
that evacuated areas will be actively patrolled since it is the City's policy not to put the lives
of first responders in jeopardy to protect property. Security in evacuated areas will primarily
consist of limiting or blocking access to the evacuated areas until such time as a reentry
process is established. When a re -entry process is established, those tasked with security
will follow the process set forward by the Incident Commander.
HAZARDS
A. All hazards
All known hazards have been identified in the King and Pierce County Regional Hazard
Mitigation Plans (RHMP). This annex is designed in such a way as to be usable for all types
of hazards.
B. Likely hazards of note for jurisdiction
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 63
IDLE Page 236 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Auburn's portion of the King County Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan highlights the hazards
that are more likely to occur within Auburn. Among the most significant with the potential for
evacuation are lahar, flood, and hazardous materials incidents.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
Evacuation operations occur in four stages: 1) Evacuation of the population; 2) Support of
mobile (passing through) evacuees; 3) Reception of evacuees and; 4) Support of agencies
performing 1 -3. Local government is responsible for the development of a plan to evacuate and
provide mass care services for the public in the event of an emergency. Local government will
perform one or more of the functions listed above. The Counties and State will assist in this
effort, however the majority of resources will initially come from local jurisdictions.
RESPONSIBILITIES
King and Pierce County Offices of Emergency Management, as well as the Washington State
EOC, will support local government units with carrying out evacuation and sheltering activities,
however the responsibility to request and utilize resources rests with the local government unit,
in this case the City.
At the local level, four types of evacuations have been defined. They are:
1. Site Evacuation:
A small -scale localized evacuation may be needed as a result of a severe weather
event, hazardous materials incident, major fire, bomb threat, or civil disturbance. Site
evacuation involves a small number of people. This typically includes workers at the site
and people from adjacent occupancies or areas. The people are easily evacuated and
collected upwind or outside the hazard zone. Evacuation holding times are typically
short, generally less than an hour or two, and people are permitted to return to their
businesses or homes.
2. Intermediate Level Evacuation
Intermediate level involves a larger number of people and a larger area. This level
effects homes and businesses away from the initial incident area, however still generally
effects less than 100 people. People may remain out of the area for two to four hours or
longer. Evacuation completion times will be somewhat longer than a site evacuation but
generally rapid. Collecting, documenting, and controlling the evacuees becomes more
difficult. Off -site collection sites or shelter areas will need to be determined and
managed. Some evacuees will leave the area on their own or at the direction of their
employers. Site perimeters become larger and perimeter security requires more
resources. Close coordination between involved departments and agencies will be
required. The EOC may be activated to support incident activities, as the situation
warrants.
3. Larae Scale Evacuation
Large scale evacuation could be required in the event of a significant natural or
technological disaster or a terrorist threat or attack. Thousands of people could
potentially be evacuated and rapid initiation of the evacuation process may be required.
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 64
IDLE Page 237 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Evacuees may be out of their homes and businesses for many hours or days.
Evacuation completion time frames will be extended. Evacuation shelters and dormitory
style shelters will need to be located, opened, and managed, either by the City of Auburn
or by supporting cities. Documentation and tracking of evacuees will become more
important and more difficult. Close coordination with all responding agencies will become
more critical. Evacuation sites and perimeters will become extended and require many
more resources to maintain. Security of the evacuated area will become a larger
concern. The EOC will be activated to support the incident activities.
4. Mass Evacuation
Mass evacuation could be required due to an event that has, or may cause, a major
disaster in the City of Auburn and /or the surrounding area. The situation may require the
implementation of regional, multi - jurisdictional evacuation and sheltering operations,
utilizing mutual aid agreements and the King County Regional Coordination Framework
(RCF). Entire portions of the City may need to be evacuated for an extended period of
time. Large -scale reception operations would be required and sheltering needs would be
regional in nature. Local resources will not only be part of the evacuating population, but
will also be almost immediately exhausted. Significant regional, state, and federal
assistance will likely be required to support evacuation and sheltering operations.
EVACUATION OPERATIONS
The sequence of an evacuation can be divided into six phases in the following order:
1. Incident Analysis
2. Warning
3. Preparation to Move
4. Movement and En -Route Support
5. Reception and Support
6. Return
Within each of these phases different steps may occur. This portion of the plan identifies tools
and resources that could be utilized in an emergency evacuation situation. It is likely that some,
but not all, of these tools would be used and the Incident Commander will direct the
development of specific evacuation plans and routes at the time of the emergency, specific to
the hazards known at the time of the event. However, some evacuations are predictable and
can be planned in advance (dam breaks, Iahars, some floods, etc). Where a known hazard
exists that can be adequately planned for, evacuation areas and routes will be planned in
advance to the greatest extent possible and made available both to the public and to City
officials and responders.
The following pages detail the responsibilities of each ICS section for each of the six evacuation
phases.
A. Incident Analysis
1. Command
Decisions to evacuate will be made on a case -by -case basis, except in response to
known hazards such as dam breaks and Iahars. The decision to evacuate will depend
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 65
IDLE Page 238 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
entirely upon the nature, scope, and severity of the emergency. Other factors to consider
are the number of people affected, the actions necessary to protect the public, and the
length of time available in which to effect evacuation. Those decisions may be made
singularly or jointly by the on -scene Incident Commander(s), the Emergency
Management Director, or the Mayor. Though it is preferable to have an evacuation order
signed by the Mayor (or designee) for any evacuation larger than a "Site Evacuation ",
the safety of the public is our foremost concern and evacuations that are necessary to
immediately protect lives will not be delayed due to the lack of such an order.
There are three types of evacuation notices:
Evacuation Alert
This alert is issued when it is believed that a hazard has a high probability of posing a
significant threat to people living in an area of risk. People and businesses are
encouraged to prepare to leave the danger area, however the decision to evacuate will
be in the hands of the individuals. This type of alert might be used when it appears that a
flood event is probable but is still 72 hours away from occurring.
Evacuation Request or Warning
This evacuation order is issued when it is believed that though the possibility of a hazard
is high, the potential impact is low to moderate. Again, the decision to evacuate is solely
the responsibility of the individuals. This type of notification might be used when it
appears that a flood event is highly probably but is still 48 hours away from occurring.
Mandatory Evacuation Order
A mandatory evacuation order is issued when it is believed that both the probability and
impact of a hazard are high and that the lives of the public, and any responders
attempting to assist them, will be at grave risk. Though ultimately the decision to
evacuate still rests with the individual, those who choose not to heed the order will,
whenever possible, be warned that the availability of emergency responders to assist
them will be severely hampered or non - existent. Whenever possible, responders will
utilize the guidelines contained in ESF 2: Communications and Warning for gathering
information from residents who refuse to leave. It is understood that the City of Auburn
will not dedicate resources to force the evacuation of those who refuse to leave, even if
doing so will save their lives. Resources will be dedicated to assisting in the safe
evacuation of those who voluntarily leave. This order might be used when flooding is
projected to occur within the next 24 hours or is occurring now.
2. Operations
The Field Incident Commander will be responsible for assessing the situation and
performing the following tasks as necessary:
• Conduct rapid size -up and determine the need to evacuate
• Determine initial evacuation boundaries
• Appropriately staff the command post and field ICS organization
• Order the alert of outside agencies and departments
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 66
IDLE Page 239 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
• Provide the EM Director and /or EOC Manager with pertinent details and current
status
3. Planning
The Planning Section will gather information on current conditions, projected conditions,
and any additional hazards and re- evaluate the initial evacuation area, recommending
any necessary adjustments.
4. Logistics
The Logistics Section will provide for all requested logistical needs and will look ahead to
identify future resources needs and availability (based on information provided by the
Planning Section).
5. Finance
The Finance Section will ensure compliance with existing disaster financial policies,
make recommendations for emergency policies, and establish administrative controls to
manage the expenditure of funds, provide reasonable accountability, and secure
necessary documentation for bill payment and reimbursement requests. They also assist
the Logistics Section with purchasing and acquisition needs.
B. Warning and Notification
The decision to evacuate must be carefully considered with the timing and nature of the
incident. Some incidents, such as a White River lahar, will trigger immediate evacuation
notices and movement. Other incidents will require a much more organized and supervised
effort to relocate people. Although evacuation is an effective means of moving people out of
a hazard area, anything larger than a site evacuation should be considered a measure of
last resort due to its complexity and the stress it puts on both the public and responders.
1. Command
The decision to evacuate, warn, and notify rests with the Incident Commander or
Emergency Management Director. Whenever feasible, this decision will be made in
conjunction with the Mayor or designee. Lives will not be put in jeopardy however
awaiting confirmation of such order from a higher authority. A PIO will be added to the
Command Staff if not already assigned in order to facilitate Communications, Warning,
and Public Information requirements.
2. Operations
Once the decision to evacuate has been made, notifications will be made utilizing the
process and procedures outlined in ESF 2, including the Field Warning /Evacuation
instructions contained in ESF 2 Attachment 2 and CodeRed usage outlined in
Attachment 3. Instructions will be provided in an appropriate manner utilizing the format
contained in ESF 1 Attachment 1 "Public Pre - Printed Evacuation Instructions ". Public
notifications will also be made in accordance with ESF 15.
Door -to -door or neighborhood evacuation instructions will be determined based on the
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 67
IDLE Page 240 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
,'most good for the most number' philosophy, recognizing that there may not be sufficient
time or personnel to reach every single person. It is important to note that in case of a
lahar, which leaves a potential 90 minute window in which to evacuate the valley floor, it
will not be possible to perform any notifications other than mass media and CodeRed.
City personnel efforts will be concentrated on removing personnel and equipment from
harms way in order to safeguard our ability to assist those in need after the event
occurs.
3. Planning
The Planning Section will be responsible for all planning associated with the evacuation,
including identification of alternate routes and planning for re- entry.
4. Logistics and Finance
Refer to responsibilities listed in the "Incident Analysis" section.
C. Preparation to Move
The third phase in the evacuation function is to prepare to move those in the affected area.
To successfully implement a large -scale evacuation, it is essential that all affected
communities, regions, and the state work together prior to and during the evacuation
process. An effective evacuation is closely dependent upon the provision and coordination
of evacuation information and instructions.
1. Command
Once the decision has been made to evacuate, the Incident Commander or Emergency
Management Director shall direct personnel to carry out the necessary activities and to
determine whether Unified Command with other organizations is necessary. Command
will also have the responsibility for approving the evacuation plan created by the
Planning Section.
2. Operations
The actual evacuation process will typically be managed and executed by the
Operations Section, as an Evacuation Branch, upon receipt of an evacuation plan
approved by the Incident Commander. Other ICS Branches will be implemented as
needed. Groups within the Evacuation Branch may include, but are not limited to:
Transportation, Public Information, Police, Staging, Reception, and Shelter.
3. Planning
The Planning Section will be responsible for all evacuation planning for which pre -plans
do not exist, in cooperation with all involved departments and agencies. Any evacuation
plan will be approved by the Incident Commander prior to implementation. Evacuation
planning considerations include, but are not limited to:
a. Command structure: single jurisdiction, multiple jurisdictions (Unified Command), or
large area (Area Command).
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 68
IDLE Page 241 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
b. Communications needs and availability. Whenever possible, evacuation operations
will be conducted on separate channels from response operations and routine traffic.
c. Implementation of a building marking /recording system that incorporates three
designations: 1) Occupants have been informed and will evacuate; 2) Occupants
notified but refused to evacuate; and 3) Notification attempted but no occupant
available to receive (information should be posted on doors in that event).
d. Need for a mobile command post
e. Procedures for security and admission to restricted areas
f. Procedures for identifying those with authority to travel in restricted areas
(emergency vehicles, essential personnel, etc.)
g. Number of buildings to be notified and number of personnel needed to conduct
notification in a given time period
h. Availability and issuance of personal protective equipment and devices when
needed.
i. Ability to shelter -in -place versus evacuation as appropriate and ability to convey such
information to building occupants.
j. Ability to brief all incident personnel on evacuation or shelter -in -place procedures,
building marking /recording system, and critical life safety information.
k. Criteria that must be met before re -entry will be allowed and identification that must
be provided by occupants before they will be allowed to re -enter the impacted area.
I. Availability of neighboring jurisdiction, regional disaster plan, county, state, and
federal assets to assist in evacuation.
4. Logistics and Finance
Refer to responsibilities listed in the "Incident Analysis" section.
D. Movement and En -route Support
Transportation to evacuation and sheltering locations remains primarily the responsibility of
individuals ; however the City will assist with transportation to the extent it is able.
1. Command
Command responsibilities remain the same as in the previous section.
2. Operations
If outside transportation assets are available for large scale evacuations, transportation
pick -up points will be established for those who do not have their own transportation.
Pick -up points must be sufficiently large to accommodate the anticipated number of
evacuees and transportation assets and must be easy for evacuees to find. Staging
areas will be established to organize and direct any incoming transportation assets and
to route them to the appropriate pick -up and drop -off locations. Whenever possible,
evacuees will be informed of their destination prior to boarding provided transportation.
Depending upon the situation, law enforcement assets may need to be utilized as
escorts for transportation in order to move people from pick -up points to evacuation or
shelter sites. These escorts can also provide necessary communication between the
transportation assets and Incident Command. If escorts are not used, it is imperative that
some reliable method of communication be established between the transportation
assets and Incident Command.
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 69
IDLE Page 242 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Evacuation routes must be coordinated with outside jurisdictions and agencies whenever
jurisdictional boundaries are crossed. This coordination may be long -term in nature.
Efficient and rapid communication between all impacted jurisdictions is essential.
3. Planning
The most likely area of Auburn to require evacuation is the valley floor. There are limited
transportation routes available for evacuation from the valley floor to higher ground. Not
only are there a limited number of routes, the majority of the routes also have limited
capacity, due to their being two -lane roads. Several State routes run through and near
the City and every effort must be made to coordinate usage with the State and other
impacted jurisdictions. The primary form of transportation out of the hazard area will be
private vehicles owned and operated by the evacuating public, even in instances such
as a lahar where people are specifically told to walk out of the area. Additional modes of
transportation should be identified by the Planning Section to accommodate those who
do not have their own transportation.
The City of Auburn owns very limited transportation assets. Through the Regional
Coordination Framework the City has access to Auburn School District, Sound Transit,
and King County Metro busses, as well as other assets. Activation of those assets is
time consuming and potentially costly. It is not reasonable to believe those assets would
be available with short - notice; however they would likely be within a matter of hours,
assuming the event is localized. If the event is more regional in nature, the assets
available to the City of Auburn may be limited or non - existent.
Before announcing evacuation routes to the public, it is critical to determine evacuation
and /or shelter points as well, so that people have a destination in mind when they
evacuate. If these evacuation or shelter points are located outside the City, maps will
need to be provided or evacuation routes will need to be well marked. Traffic conditions
along evacuation routes need to be monitored and adjustments made as necessary to
maximize throughput.
4. Logistics and Finance
Refer to responsibilities listed in the "Incident Analysis" section.
E. Reception and Support
The requirements for mass care support will vary depending upon the nature, type, and level
of the evacuation and event. If evacuation points are utilized, they will be operated as "safe
zones" where water, restrooms, and ample parking are made available when possible. The
majority of services required for Reception and Support are covered under ESF 6: Mass
Care.
1. Command
The high demand for mass care support during a large -scale evacuation will likely
necessitate partnerships between a variety of government, non - profit, and even private
organizations. Guidelines for this can be found in ESF #6. Command will need to ensure
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 70
IDLE Page 243 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
appropriate Liaisons are setup between all involved agencies.
2. Operations
The Operations Section will be responsible for staffing any shelters activated within the
City limits, according to the guidelines in ESF #6. All shelter locations, whether "official'
or "unofficial' must be reported to the Planning Section for accurate tracking.
3. Planning
The City is responsible for providing shelters, shelter staffing, and shelter supplies within
the City limits to the extent that it can do so. These efforts may be supplemented by the
American Red Cross, Salvation Army, and a variety of other non - profit and private
organizations. It will likely take several days before those resources arrive and can be
utilized, particularly in the event of a large -scale disaster. The Planning Section must
take these factors into account when preparing plans for reception and support. Refer to
the ESF #6 Shelter typing list for specific types of shelters that may be needed and their
individual requirements.
4. Logistics and Finance
Refer to responsibilities listed in the "Incident Analysis" section.
F. Return
1. Command
The decision to return evacuees to their homes rests with the Incident Commander or
Emergency Management Director. No other agency or individual may authorize mass
reentry, however all relevant decision - makers will be included in the process and all
relevant information will be utilized.
2. Operations
If re -entry is to be restricted or partial, the Operations Section must have procedures in
place to properly identify residents, support personnel, first responders, contractors,
insurance adjusters, media, and others who have legitimate reasons to be in the
previously closed area. Staffing for re -entry points must be obtained, including additional
law enforcement personnel if necessary. Transportation may need to be provided for
those who were transported out of the area initially. The Incident Commander will be
responsible for determining when re -entry has been completed and making appropriate
notifications. At this point, Operations may become primarily a human services oriented
section and appropriate staff must be added to provide those services and related
information.
3. Planning
The Planning Section will develop the re -entry plan in conjunction with all involved
sections, departments, and agencies. Re -entry priorities include:
• Life Safety
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 71
IDLE Page 244 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
• Physical Security
• Damage Assessment
• Service Restoration
• Information Dissemination
Prior to re -entry being allowed, the closed area must be thoroughly inspected and
analyzed to ensure the safety of returning residents. The assessment should include, but
not be limited to:
• Structures and trees are stable (or unstable ones are clearly tagged out)
• Initial damage and safety assessments have been completed
• Leaking or ruptured gas lines have been capped or repaired
• Downed power and other utility lines have been repair or do not pose a safety hazard
• Water and sewer lines have been repaired
• Search and rescue operations are complete
• Hazardous materials have been removed or appropriate warnings issued
• City water is safe to drink or appropriated notices have been made (boil water
orders, etc.)
• Major transportation routes are passable and debris has been cleared from right -of-
way
• Flood waters have receded
• All significant threats to public safety have been eliminated or mitigated
The public will be notified of re -entry status using the communications methods identified
in ESF #2 and ESF #15.
4. Logistics and Finance
Refer to responsibilities listed in the "Incident Analysis" section.
ADMINISTRATION
This plan should serve as a guidance document for the City of Auburn, in conjunction with the
CEMP, for dealing with evacuation emergencies. This plan shall be incorporated into the CEMP
and adopted /updated on the same schedule.
A. Resource Management
Evacuations can be resource - intensive. General guidelines exist, within this plan and
elsewhere, on the types and numbers of resources necessary to conduct an evacuation.
The resources needed will depend on a variety of factors, including incident size, location,
time of day, and others. The City has available to it additional resources via the King County
Regional Coordination Framework and other mutual aid agreements. Resources will be
managed in such a way that unused /unneeded resources will not be retained, but instead
will be made available to other jurisdictions that may need them.
B. Supportive Agreements
Nearly any medium or large scale evacuation will initially overwhelm the City's available
resources. Large incidents may overwhelm available resources for several days or longer.
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 72
IDLE Page 245 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
The City, through the previously mentioned agreements, may reach out to neighboring
jurisdictions, counties, the state, non - profit organizations, and the private sector to obtain
needed personnel, technical assistance, and supplies.
C. Emergency Funding Mechanisms
The need for additional resources is likely to put extreme strain on existing City funds.
Though in a major disaster, federal assistance is likely; funds must first be expended locally
and then reimbursed by the federal government. There is no guaranteed timeline for when
that reimbursement will take place. All agreements and understandings entered into for the
purchase, lease, or use of equipment and services will be in accordance with the provisions
of Auburn Municipal Code and procedures. A declaration of emergency by the Mayor, or
designee, may suspend select rules and regulations; however, it is critical that the City
Finance Department, either in their capacity as Finance Section or in daily operations, be
involved in major purchase issues to ensure adequate funds exist to pay for them. Any
changes or special procedures the Finance Section puts in to place during an emergency
must be clearly communicated to the Emergency Management Director, Incident
Commander, EOC Manager, and others who may have spending authority. It is critical that
all expenditures, finance procedure changes, and other finance related matters be
thoroughly documented in order to seek reimbursement from the federal government should
it become available.
D. Post - Incident After Action Reports
The City recognizes the value of conducting a debriefing of those parties involved in disaster
incidents. This allows for review of how the evacuation was executed and helps to illustrate
what can be done to better prepare the City for the next event. Debriefings and after - action
reports will be conducted after every significant evacuation event.
PLAN REVIEW AND MAINTENANCE
Planning is an on -going process. As a result, this document is likely to change and adapt in
order to reflect growth and change within the City. As part of the City's CEMP, this plan will be
reviewed annually and updated not less than every four years. The process for review and
maintenance will follow that of the CEMP.
TRAINING AND EXERCISES
On -going training and exercises based on this plan will ensure that new hazards and changes in
the City can be addressed. This plan will be trained and exercised in conjunction with the
CEMP, following the procedures put forth in that document.
APPENDICES
Transportation Resource List
Evacuation Maps (based on known hazards and prepared by GIS)
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 73
IDLE Page 246 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Attachment 1 -a: Public Pre - Printed Evacuation Instructions
Whenever an emergency has the possibility of becoming life threatening you may be asked to
prepare for an evacuation.
When you are directed to evacuate, take the following steps:
1. Stay calm — gather your family
2. Gather only what you need
a. This leaflet
b. Maps of the area
c. Pets and pet supplies
d. Extra clothing and blankets
e. Eyeglasses, dentures, prescriptions, other medications, and a first aid kit
f. Supplies to care for your children or elderly household members
g. Portable radio or TV, flashlight, fresh batteries
h. Checkbook, credit cards, cash
i. Drivers license, and /or other identification
3. Your children in school will be taken to the evacuation center /shelter for their school area
and the school will make arrangements for you to be reunited with them. Please do not
go to the school until requested to do so.
4. Turn off your appliances and lights and lock your doors on the way out.
5. Be prepared to walk to safety depending on the nature of the emergency.
6. Do not use more than one car for your family. Take neighbors who need a ride.
7. Tune radio to any news radio station (such as KOMO 1000 AM or KIRO 97.3 FM) for
emergency information and 1700 AM for information specific to the City of Auburn.
8. Follow the directions of officials who may be stationed along emergency routes. They
are there to make the evacuation safe for everyone.
9. IF YOU CHOOSE NOT TO EVACUATE, please realize that emergency responders may
not be able to reach you for several days, or even weeks. You should prominently
display your name and other vital statistics, along with next of kin information,
somewhere on your person or securely attached to your residence. This will assist
officials in identifying you should you die during the event.
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 74
IDLE Page 247 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan_
Attachment 2: Snow and Ice Routes
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 75
IDLE Page 248 of 392
Snow Ice Routes AiifltjJLN
i -- ------
r p
Z
j -
it
1 17
71,
ee
i% - - - - — - -
yr
r.6r ron—M W�r.
ff]
ED A� wrYrr,.y f-- e, l M ch. ft,
L5 10 wGo- f—r W"J. rMthA-M F — --- — —1
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 75
IDLE Page 248 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Attachment 3: Lahar Evacuation Routes
ESF #1 Revised January 2015 76
DLE Page 249 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ESF 2: COMMUNICATIONS AND WARNING
LEAD: Innovation & Technology (Communications)
Emergency Management (Warning)
SUPPORT: City: Police
Community Development and Public Works
Communication /Multimedia Division
Local: ValleyCom
Valley Regional Fire Authority
County: King County Emergency Operations Center
Pierce County OEM
State: Washington State Emergency Management Division
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
1. To provide for and maintain a communications system to ensure the efficient flow of
information during emergency or disaster operations in the City of Auburn.
2. To provide or supplement alerting and warning of an impending or occurring emergency
or disaster to key officials and the public.
B. Scope
1. This ESF addresses all communication and warning assets available to the City,
including AM radio, 2 -way public safety radio, 911, voice and data links, telephone and
cellular systems, National Warning System (NAWAS), Emergency Alert System (EAS),
iPAWS, NOAA Weather Radios, amateur radio, TV21, CodeRed, Internet resources,
and others.
2. This ESF specifically does not address Amber Alert procedures, as those are the
responsibility of the Auburn Police Department (APD) and are covered under APD
Manual of Standards 5.14.2.9.G — Amber Alert. All of the systems listed ESF 2 can be
utilized to rebroadcast an Amber Alert issued by Auburn Police, however the issuance of
the alert itself is outside the scope of this ESF.
POLICIES
A. It is the policy of the City to develop a hazard warning system supplemental to, not
substituting for, the warning systems provided by county, state, and federal agencies and
local media. Moreover, residents are anticipated to be aware of any hazardous situation for
which there is significant media attention, such as severe weather or flooding.
Consequently, and supplemental to information being provided by other sources, the City
will attempt to make a reasonable effort to warn the public of hazardous situations that could
result in an increased risk to the community. The reasonableness of the effort will depend on
the nature of the hazard, when emergency management officials are made aware of a
ESF #2 — Communications and Warning Revised January 2015 77
D I . E Page 250 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
hazardous situation, the quality and quantity of information available, communications and
warning resources available, media attention, and other situationally dependent factors.
In accordance with RCW 38.52.110, in responding to an emergency or disaster, or the
threat of emergency or disaster, the Mayor or Director of Emergency Management or
their designee "are directed to utilize the services, equipment, supplies, and facilities of
existing departments, officers, and agencies of the state, political subdivisions, and all
other municipal corporations thereof including, but not limited to, districts and quasi -
municipal corporations organized under the laws of the State of Washington to the
maximum extent practicable, and the offers and personnel of all such departments,
offices, and agencies are directed to cooperate with and extend such services and
facilities upon request notwithstanding any other provision of law.
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. Reliable communications capabilities are necessary at all levels of government for day -to-
day communication, warning of an impending emergency or disaster, disaster response and
recovery operations, and coordination between the local, county, state and federal
governments and response organizations.
B. Routine day -to -day modes of communication will be utilized to the degree that they survive
the disaster.
C. City government may request assistance by contacting King or Pierce County Emergency
Management or by contacting Washington State Emergency Management Operations
Center directly if necessary.
D. The City is subject to a variety of emergency or disastrous events requiring rapid
dissemination of warning and /or other emergency information to local officials and /or the
public. Emergency or disaster warnings may originate from any level of government;
however most disaster forecasting resources are located within the federal government.
E. The National Warning System ( NAWAS), established by the federal government, is the
primary means of receiving and disseminating warning(s) to the state and local officials
within Washington State. The Washington State Warning Point is operated 24 hours a day
by the Washington State Emergency Operations Center, with operation assistance provided
by the Washington State Patrol. The City's NAWAS receiving point is ValleyCom, a 24 -hour
PSAP facility.
F. Notification of a threatening situation may also come from the National Weather Service, via
NOAA Weather Radio or the media, the amateur communications community, or the public.
G. Initially, the City will focus on coordinating lifesaving activities and reestablishing
communications and control in the hazardous area.
H. Initial reports of damage may be fragmented and provide an incomplete picture of the extent
of damage to telecommunications facilities.
Weather, damage to roads and bridges, and other factors may restrict entry of emergency
communication nodes into the area.
ESF #2 — Communications and Warning Revised January 2015 78
IDLE Page 251 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
J. Test of local warning systems will be conducted periodically to familiarize government and
the public with their use.
K. In the event that public instructions need to be translated into languages other than English,
the City will utilize in -house translators whenever possible, followed by translators that may
be made available through King or Pierce County Emergency Management, the American
Red Cross, or other sources. Situations may arise however when no translators are
available and instructions or messages are not able to be translated.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. Communications
City of Auburn
a. 1 E Main ST; STE 380 serves as the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) for the
City and shall be the focal point for coordinating the communications systems of the
City during hazardous event.
b. The EOC is equipped with an emergency generator. The generator fuel is provided
via an on -site fuel tank which provides sufficient fuel for approximately 72 hours.
c. The City has no fixed civil defense sirens or public address systems. Warning of
imminent or existing danger can be accomplished by use of fire, police and public
works vehicles using mobile sirens and /or public address speakers.
d. The City owns and operates 1700 AM, a 10 -watt radio station capable of transmitting
emergency information. The radio station is advertised in various City literature and
variable message display signs can be placed throughout the City, directing people
to tune to the radio station. The radio station can also be set to rebroadcast over
TV21.
e. The City pays for a subscription to CodeRed, a reverse calling system. This system
can be used to provide emergency information via phone, e-mail, text, or mobile app
to all or selected parts of the City.
f. City departments may establish communications control centers within their own
Department Operations Centers (DOCs) to coordinate their own resources during a
hazardous situation. However, coordination with the EOC will be critical to the City's
ability to effectively coordinate and respond to an event.
g. Communication operations in the EOC may consist of the following positions and
tasks:
1) Communications Unit Leader — Develop a communications plan, coordinate
phone, radio, and other message traffic. Transmit information via various
emergency and non - emergency notification systems as needed.
2) Message Controller — Receive information from various sources and either
distribute, post, or catalog it.
3) Message Distributors (runners) — Receive written messages from various points
within the EOC and deliver those messages to the intended recipient, passing
them through the Message Controller in most instances.
4) Radio Room Supervisor — Coordinate activities within the radio room, including
assigning radio operators to amateur radios, public safety radios, and other city
radios as needed. Provide assistance as needed.
5) Radio Operators — Transmit, receive, and record radio transmissions as needed,
pass messages to runners, and maintain a log of communications activities.
6) Call Center Supervisor — Ensure adequate help is available to answer EOC
and /or public call center phones and provide assistance as needed.
ESF #2 — Communications and Warning Revised January 2015 79
IDLE Page 252 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
7) Call Takers — Answer phones within the EOC and /or public call center, transfer
calls, record messages and pass to runner as appropriate.
8) IT Specialist — Ensure phones, computers, and other IT related equipment
operates correctly within the EOC. Provide advice and remote assistance to City
units in the field who may be experiencing IT difficulties, as appropriate.
2. Valley Communications (ValleyCom)
a. ValleyCom is located in unincorporated King County between Auburn and Kent and
functions as the Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) for most of South King
County, answering 911 calls for service and providing dispatching services via the
800 MHz regional radio systems for the Auburn Police Department, VRFA, and a
variety of other emergency and non - emergency response agencies. ValleyCom also
serves as the initial communications, alert, and warning point for emergency
management activities in the City of Auburn.
3. Emergency Alert System (EAS)
a. The EAS is a communication and warning tool that operates through designated
radio and television stations. It is intended to provide local officials with the means to
disseminate prompt, reliable emergency information, instructions, and warning in the
event of an emergency or disaster.
b. The EAS may be activated by contacting the King County Emergency Management
Duty Office, the King County Sheriff's Office Communication Center, or the
Washington State Emergency Management Duty Officer.
c. The designated EAS radio station for this area is 710 AM KIRO, though most local
radio and television stations will rebroadcast the information.
4. Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (iPAWS)
a. Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS) allows emergency messages
to be broadcast directly to cellular phones via cellular broadcast towers. It can
broadcast the same messages as the EAS, but is accessed via a specific request to
King or Pierce County Emergency Management.
5. Communications Capabilities
a. The City currently has the following communications and warning capabilities:
1) E -911 Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) (ValleyCom)
2) Commercial Telephone
3) Cellular Telephones
4) Satellite telephone
5) Two -way radio
(i) 800 MHz public safety radios
(ii) VHF city -wide system (primarily used by Public Works)
(iii) CEMNET state radio system for direction and control
6) National Warning System (NAWAS) information received via ValleyCom
7) EAS system
8) ACCESS (state -wide centralized law enforcement computer system)
9) NOAA Weather Alert Radios (in some City facilities, private facilities and
residences)
10) Amateur radio communications team, with radios available in key City facilities
and the EOC, operated by trained volunteers.
11) CodeRed (aka Auburn Alert) reverse emergency telephone calling system, which
includes e -mail, text messages, and a mobile app.
ESF #2 — Communications and Warning Revised January 2015 80
IDLE Page 253 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
12) TV21 government access cable television station
13) 1700 AM 10 -watt radio station
14) Internet resources, including e -mail, City website, mailing lists, and other assets
6. Warning
a. Whenever City officials are alerted to the threat or occurrence of a hazardous event
that increases the risk to the community, the EOC will be activated at the appropriate
level and the situation monitored. Depending on the circumstances, monitoring could
be a prolonged activity or result in the immediate activation of the local information
and warning system.
b. Monitoring will consist of the accumulation, display, and evaluation of relevant
information, release of appropriate public- information advisories, and alerting
response agencies, City personnel, and outside organizations of the situation.
c. As soon as it is apparent that the public must be provided information and /or must
take some action to prepare or protect itself, the local warning system will be
activated, as deemed appropriate and as time and resources allow. Warning could
take the form of one or more of the following activities:
1) Activation of the EAS
2) Broadcast of information over AM 1700 and TV21
3) Activation of CodeRed for an impacted area or the entire City
4) Use of audible sirens and public address systems by Police and VRFA personnel
5) Activation of volunteer resources
6) Posting of signs or notices
7) Providing warning information to local and regional media outlets for broadcast
8) Posting of information on City website, social media outlets, and City e-mail lists.
d. Other methods as the situation dictates
Public information, advisories, and warnings will be updated as necessary until the
hazard has subsided.
e. Notification of residents and visitors regarding emergency information and
instructions may be handled through the EAS, door -to -door by uniformed City
personnel or volunteers, mobile - public- address systems, or any other means
available to the Incident Commander at the time.
f. The Public Information Officers for the City will send emergency public safety
information through conventional methods such as e-mail or fax in addition to any of
the previously mentioned methods. Refer to ESF 15 for more comprehensive public
information capabilities.
ESF #2 — Communications and Warning Revised January 2015 81
IDLE Page 254 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. City of Auburn
Emergency Preparedness Manager
a. Confirm the EOC is maintained in a configuration to support the warning system and
efficient and effective communications.
b. Ensure a coordinated communications plan exists for City radio usage.
c. Include communications and warning as part of the city -wide emergency
management training program.
d. Ensure sufficient trained PIOs exist among City personnel and that they are able to
effectively utilize all applicable communication and warning tools.
e. Ensure Emergency Communications Volunteers have sufficient training to perform
during an emergency.
f. Ensure adequate coordination of public information efforts and warnings among City
personnel.
g. Activate volunteer resources necessary to support the incident's communication
needs.
Manage the internal communication functions of the EOC.
2. All City Departments
a. Train personnel in proper radio protocol, including limiting communications during
emergencies and yielding to EOC communications.
b. Designate representative to ensure correct communication messages are relayed
from the DOC to the EOC.
c. Make personnel available to the EOC to support or assist with the warning effort, if
requested, as feasible, and without jeopardizing their primary mission.
3. Public Affairs and Marketing Manager
a. In coordination with Emergency Management Division, develop and maintain
procedures to provide emergency public information and warning.
b. In coordination with Emergency Management Division, train sufficient personnel from
multiple City departments in emergency public information and warning methods.
c. Develop appropriate notification lists and procedures for activating the public
information and warning systems in order to effectively reach the broadest population
base possible.
d. Coordinate public information and warnings with the Emergency Preparedness
Manager, EOC Manager, and /or Incident Commander as appropriate.
e. Disseminate public information and warnings as above.
f. Assist Emergency Preparedness Manager with dissemination of recovery and
assistance information.
4. Police Department
a. Develop and maintain procedures to provide communications and warning support
and services when requested by the EOC.
b. Train personnel in proper warning methods, including proper dissemination of
warnings received via ACCESS teletype.
c. Make personnel available to the EOC to assist in the warning effort, if requested, as
feasible, and without jeopardizing their primary mission.
d. Disseminate warnings received via ACCESS teletype to appropriate City personnel.
ESF #2 — Communications and Warning Revised January 2015 82
IDLE Page 255 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
5. Innovation & Technology
a. Ensure all city communication systems are adequately tested.
b. Ensure adequate backups exist for city communication systems.
c. Ensure IT staff are sufficiently trained to maintain systems during an extended
emergency.
d. Assign at least one staff person to the EOC to handle critical communication issues.
B. Other Organizations
Valley Regional Fire Authority
a. Develop and maintain procedures to support the City communications and warning
services when requested by the EOC.
b. Train personnel in proper warning methods.
c. Make personnel available to the EOC to assist in the dissemination of information
and /or warning effort, if requested, and as feasible, and without jeopardizing their
primary mission.
2. ValleyCom
a. Function as the regional E9 -1 -1 Public Safety Answering Point
b. Provide communications and dispatch services to law enforcement, fire, EMS, and
other agencies.
c. Provide public access and 24 -hour answering of emergencies through the E9 -1 -1
reporting system for the safety of life and protection of property.
d. Provide direct access via the E9 -1 -1 emergency number for the speech and hearing
impaired, using the TTY for the deaf and hard of hearing or other method.
e. Provide direct access via the E9 -1 -1 emergency number for non - English speakers
using available language translation services.
3. King and Pierce County Emergency Management
a. Activate the EAS when requested.
b. Distribute emergency public information as requested by local EOC.
4. Washington State Emergency Management Division
a. Assist local officials in disseminating emergency instructions to affected communities
as needed.
b. Coordinate with local and federal agencies on the release of emergency information
and instructions.
REFERENCES
1. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
2. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
3. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
4. King County Regional Coordination Framework
5. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
6. RCW 38.52.110, Use of Existing Services and Facilities — Impressment of Citizenry
7. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
8. Washington State Department of Transportation Disaster Plan
9. National Response Framework
ESF #2 — Communications and Warning Revised January 2015 83
IDLE Page 256 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ATTACHMENTS
1. Warning Dissemination
2. Field Warning /Evacuation Instructions
ESF #2 — Communications and Warning Revised January 2015 84
IDLE Page 257 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Attachment 1: Warning Dissemination
Local, County, State, and Federal agencies routinely issue warnings of impending or occurring
disasters and emergencies via the state -wide ACCESS teletype system. This system is located
within the Records Unit of the Auburn Police Department. Upon receiving a warning of an
impending or occurring natural or man -made disaster, the Records Unit will immediately make
the following notifications:
1. On -duty Police Department field supervisor
2. On -duty or on -call Police Department Commander
3. Emergency Management Duty Officer
4. Assistant Police Chief
5. Police Chief
6. On -duty or on -call Public Works staff
Records Unit personnel tasked with making notifications will receive verbal confirmation from
each person being notified to ensure the warning is clearly received and understood.
ESF #2 — Communications and Warning Revised January 2015 85
D I . E Page 258 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Attachment 2: Field Warning /Evacuation Instructions
Though field warnings will primarily be handled by law enforcement and /or fire personnel, other
City employees and volunteers may be called upon to assist in the efforts. Following are general
directions to follow when providing warning or evacuation information to the public.
1. Drive slowly the length of all streets in the warning area. Use the siren or other means to
get people's attention. If you are assigned to go door -to -door, ensure you account for
every house in your assigned area.
2. If driving, stop at appropriate intervals and use the public address system to announce
the message provide by the EOC or Incident Commander. DO NOT DEVIATE FROM
THE MESSAGE. If assigned to go door -to -door, ring the doorbell and knock vigorously
on the door of each residence, loudly announcing who you are and your intentions.
When someone comes to the door, deliver the message. Again, DO NOT DEVIATE
FROM THE PROVIDED MESSAGE.
3. Do not use force of any kind to ensure that people leave.
4. If you encounter a resident who refuses to leave, log the address and, as time permits,
attempt to get the names of the people who are not evacuating and their out -of -area next
of kin information. If there is not sufficient time or if the resident does not want to give
this information, request that they prominently display their name and pertinent
information either on their person or someplace visible within their residence to expedite
identification should they not survive the event. Depending on the urgency of the
warning /evacuation, do not delay subsequent notification to gather information or give
additional identification instructions.
5. Direct residents to use the designated evacuation routes to the nearest safe area or
reception area, as appropriate. Provide them maps if available.
6. Continue to travel your designated area until all residents have been notified or warned.
7. Upon completion of notifications in your assigned area, inform your immediate
supervisor so that the EOC can be updated. Relocate to the staging area unless given
another assignment.
ESF #2 — Communications and Warning Revised January 2015 86
IDLE Page 259 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ESF 3: PUBLIC WORKS AND ENGINEERING
LEAD: Community Development and Public Works Department (CDPW)
SUPPORT: City: Finance Department
Police Department
Local: Valley Regional Fire Authority
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
1. To provide for effective coordination and operation of public water (potable and fire
protection), sanitary sewer, storm drainage, and street transportation facilities required to
meet essential needs during major emergencies and disasters, and to provide for the
orderly restoration of such facilities affected by an emergency or disaster.
2. To address technical advice and evaluations, engineering services, construction
management and inspection, emergency contracting, and emergency repair of water,
sanitary sewer, storm drainage, and transportation infrastructure.
B. Scope
This Emergency Support Function addresses activities including:
1. Participation in mitigation and preparedness activities, and in needs and damage
assessment immediately following an event.
2. Emergency clearance of debris to allow for reconnaissance of the damaged areas and
passage of emergency personnel and equipment for lifesaving, life protecting, and
health and safety purposes during response activities.
3. Operation and emergency restoration of critical transportation routes. .
4. Operation and emergency restoration of critical public facilities including water, sanitary
sewer, and storm drainage facilities.
5. Emergency demolition or stabilization of damaged structures and facilities. The
damaged structures are designated by the State and local jurisdictions as immediate
hazards to the public health and safety, or as necessary to facilitate the accomplishment
of lifesaving operations.
6. Emergency contracting to support the above - referenced activities.
7. Technical assistance to the Building Division including structural inspection of private
residences, commercial buildings, and structures, as resources permit.
ESF #3 — Public Works and Engineering Revised January 2015 87
D I . E Page 260 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
POLICIES
A. The City of Auburn has the right to collect for any costs incurred by its authorized
representatives, contractors, and sub - contractors in carrying out any necessary work on
private property, including debris removal, demolition of unsafe or abandoned structures,
removal of wreckage, and administration costs.
B. Permitting fees and normal inspection procedures will stay in effect following a disaster
unless otherwise directed by the Mayor.
C. It is the policy of the City to provide Utility services to lands and facilities under the City's
jurisdiction, either directly or through contract. Other services, such as debris collection or
fee adjustments, may be established by the Mayor, if deemed necessary.
D. Large -scale debris removal and disposal is covered in the City of Auburn Debris
Management Plan.
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. A major emergency or disaster may cause extensive damage to property and the
infrastructure. Structures may be destroyed or severely weakened. Homes, public buildings,
bridges, and other facilities may have to be reinforced or demolished to ensure safety.
Debris may make streets and highways impassable. Public utilities may be damaged or
partially or fully inoperable.
B. Access to the disaster areas may be dependent upon the re- establishment of ground routes.
In many locations, debris clearance and emergency road repairs will be given top priority to
support immediate lifesaving emergency response activities.
C. Rapid damage assessment of the disaster area will be required to determine potential
workload and priorities.
D. The City shall be responsible for its own emergency repairs and restoration of services. All
requests for assistance will be forwarded to the EOC, which will coordinate any needed
outside resources.
E. Assistance from the State or Federal government may be needed to clear debris, perform
damage assessments and structural evaluations, make emergency repairs to essential
public facilities, reduce hazards by stabilizing or demolishing structures, and provide
emergency water for human health needs and firefighting. It is understood however, that
these resources take several days to mobilize and respond and that the City should
anticipate no state or federal assistance for at least seven days following a major disaster.
F. Significant numbers of personnel with engineering and construction skills, along with
construction equipment and materials, may be required from outside the disaster areas.
G. Following an earthquake, aftershocks will require re- evaluation of previously assessed
structures and damages.
ESF #3 — Public Works and Engineering Revised January 2015 88
IDLE Page 261 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. City of Auburn
1. The CDPW Department will assign a qualified staff member to the EOC to serve as the
primary coordinator of utilities functions for the City.
2. The CDPW Department will assign a qualified staff member to serve as the primary
coordinator of engineering functions for the City.
3. The CDPW Department shall provide damage assessments and provide for emergency
restoration of all City -owned utilities and street transportation facilities.
4. Priority shall be given to utilities and street transportation facilities that provide critical
and essential life safety services, such as to the Multicare Auburn Medical Center.
5. Additional assistance may be obtained through existing mutual aid agreements,
contracts with public and private agencies and /or through regional, county, or state
agencies.
6. The following utility systems operate within the City:
Public /City Owned Privately Owned
Water Electric power
Sanitary Sewer Natural gas
Storm Drainage Telephone /Fiber Optic /DSL
Cable /Satellite Television
These systems, with some exceptions, generally have the following aspects in
common:
• They provide services to individual properties, both public and private.
• Most systems have a trunk or trunks from which distribution or collection branches
service each property.
* All or substantial portions of each system reside underground.
7. The CDPW Department shall provide damage assessment of City -owned buildings and
facilities.
8. Time permitting and resources allowing, the CDPW Department may provide damage
assessment for other public buildings and facilities and rapid damage assessment for
privately owned critical facilities located within the City of Auburn (VRFA, shelter
locations, medical facilities, etc.).
9. The CDPW Department plans for emergency actions in the following phases:
a. Phase 1
1) Rapid damage assessment.
2) Provide a qualified staff member to coordinate City -wide rapid damage
assessment efforts from the EOC.
ESF #3 — Public Works and Engineering Revised January 2015 89
IDLE Page 262 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
3) Provide building inspectors to sweep affected areas and report damage to the
EOC.
b. Phase 2 — Emergency Permitting and Inspections
1) Review damages and assist application process.
2) Issue permits.
3) Permit construction.
4) Provide inspections.
c. Phase 3 — Abandoned Buildings
1) Identification.
2) Inspection.
3) Coordinate demolition.
4) Legal process.
B. Other Organizations
1. Valley Regional Fire Authority
a. Assist in rapid damage assessment, as personnel and resources allow, and report
findings to the EOC.
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. City of Auburn
CDPW Department
a. Community Development Services.
1) Provide post -event serviceability determination of facilities and structures.
2) Provide support to Valley Regional Fire Authority in the safety evaluation of
structures during rescue operations.
3) Expedite permitting and required inspections, as appropriate and as resources
allow.
4) Coordinate damage assessment and post- disaster safety inspections of City -
owned buildings and facilities.
5) Coordinate with local engineering firms for additional assistance with inspections.
6) Coordinate damage assessment and post- disaster safety inspections of public
assembly buildings (shelter locations, commodity distribution facilities, medical
facilities, etc.) if requested and as resources allow.
7) Enforce City ordinances and State law regarding construction during new or
reconstruction efforts prior to and after an emergency or disaster.
8) Provide for the demolition of damaged and /or abandoned structures posting a
threat to human safety.
b. Engineering Services
1) Document damages and costs related to damage sustained to street
transportation and utility infrastructure during the emergency or disaster.
2) Coordinate damage assessments and post- disaster safety inspections of city -
owned bridges.
3) Assess hazards associated with damage to streams, shorelines, and steep
slopes, and make recommendations for repair and /or mitigation.
4) Coordinate with local engineering firms for additional assistance with the above
hazard assessments.
ESF #3 — Public Works and Engineering Revised January 2015 90
IDLE Page 263 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
5) Coordinate with the EOC and PIO on public information.
6) Assist the Community Development Services with damage assessment of
buildings and facilities, as requested by the EOC.
c. Operation Services - Water Division
1) Conduct damage assessments of City -owned water facilities.
2) Maintain operation of public water supply, storage, pumping, and distribution
systems.
3) Provide for priority restoration of critical water facilities.
4) Provide temporary repair of damaged water infrastructure.
d. Operation Services - Sanitary Sewer Division
1) Conduct damage assessments of city -owned sanitary sewer facilities.
2) Maintain operation of public sanitary sewer collection, conveyance, and
pumping systems, assist in meeting public sanitation needs, and control
wastewater pollution in the environment.
3) Provide for priority restoration of critical sanitary sewer facilities.
4) Provide temporary repair of damaged sanitary sewer infrastructure.
e. Operation Services - Storm Drainage Division
1) Conduct damage assessment of the City -owned storm drainage system and
assist in the assessment of the rivers dike systems.
2) Maintain operation of the public storm drainage collection, conveyance, and
pumping systems.
3) Provide for priority restoration of critical storm drainage facilities, including the
rivers, dike systems.
4) Provide temporary repair of damaged storm drainage infrastructure, and assist in
maintenance of the rivers dike systems.
f. Operation Services - Streets Division
1) Provide debris removal, emergency protective measures, emergency temporary
repair, and /or construction to maintain passable vehicular circulation of priority
routes.
2) Provide damage assessment of streets to the EOC.
3) Provide for priority restoration of essential streets.
4) Designate potentially usable roads and bridges.
5) Establish and maintain evacuation routes as directed by the EOC.
6) Coordinate road closures through the EOC.
7) Provide temporary repair of damaged City roads and bridges, if possible. Provide
road blocks, barricades, signs, or flaggers, as requested and resources allow.
2. Police Department
a. Provide assistance in implementing street closures and detours.
b. Provide perimeter control to bar access to unsafe locations, if requested and as
resources allow.
c. Assist in rapid damage assessment (windshield survey) efforts as requested.
3. Finance Department
a. Solid Waste
1) Coordinate debris removal and disposal with contracted service providers for
solid waste, pursuant to the City of Auburn Debris Management Plan.
ESF #3 — Public Works and Engineering Revised January 2015 91
D I . E Page 264 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
B. Other Organizations
Valley Regional Fire Authority
a. Provide support in rapid damage assessment, debris removal, and emergency
protective measures, if requested and as resources allow.
REFERENCES
1. City of Auburn Debris Management Plan
2. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
3. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
4. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
5. King County Regional Coordination Framework
6. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
7. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
8. National Response Framework
ESF #3 — Public Works and Engineering Revised January 2015 92
DI.E Page 265 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Windshield Survey Form
(see next page)
ESF #3 —Public Works and Engineering Revised January 2015 93
D I . E Page 266 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
CITY OF AUBURN EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT CITY OF
WINDSHIELD SURVEY FIELD FORM
WASHINGTON
Observer /Unit #
District
DATE
TIME
DAMAGE PRIORITY (check one)
P1 ❑ (report immediately) P2 ❑ P3 ❑
BUILDING INFORMATION
Type: (check one) I Residential ❑ Multi - Family ❑ T Business ❑ I Public ❑ I School ❑ I Other ❑
LOCATION /ADDRESS
Nearest Cross Streets
PROBLEM(S)
I. INJURIES REPORTED OR OBSERVED:
Yes ❑ No ❑
If yes, estimate number:
Immediate assistance required
Yes ❑
No ❑
II. FIRES OBSERVED: Yes ❑ I No ❑
If yes, nature of fire (natural gas, live power lines, hazardous materials, etc.):
III. SIGNIFICANT BUILDING DAMAGE: I Yes ❑ No ❑
If yes, description (i.e., multi -story collapse, partial collapse, occupied, etc.):
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARD PRESENT: Yes ❑ No ❑
If yes, what (natural gas, live power lines, hazardous materials, etc.):
V. INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT:
Road impassable:
Yes ❑
No ❑
Water lines broken:
Yes ❑
No ❑
Power lines down /arcing:
Yes ❑
No ❑
Gas Leak:
Yes ❑
No ❑
VI. DESCRIPTION /COMMENTS:
SUBMITTED TO EOC & RECEIVED BY:
DATE /TIME:
LOGGED ❑
MAPPED ❑
FILED ❑
ESF #3 — Public Works and Engineering Revised January 2015 94
DI.E Page 267 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ESF 4: FIREFIGHTING
LEAD: Valley Regional Fire Authority
SUPPORT: City: Police Department
Emergency Management
Community Development and Public Works
State: Washington State Patrol
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
To identify the City of Auburn's support activities relating to fire services within the City.
B. Scope
This Emergency Support Function addresses the City's support activities in relation to the
detection and suppression of fires as the City has no direct role in the provision of these
services.
POLICIES
A. The City of Auburn receives fire suppression services from the Valley Regional Fire
Authority (VRFA), a municipal corporation authorized under RCW 52.26 and charged with
the provision of fire suppression services to the City as identified in scope of the VRFA Fire
Authority "Plan ".
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. The National Incident Management System (NIMS) will be used for all fire related operations
within the City.
B. The City will function in a support role to the VRFA for fire services in the City.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. The VRFA provides fire protection services both inside and outside of the City.
B. VRFA is the lead agency for fire suppression operations within the City.
C. VRFA serves multiple cities and as such, will allocate fire resources during emergency
incidents using established best practices, incident triage, and methodologies.
D. A VRFA representative will report to or establish communication with the EOC when
requested by the City.
E. As authorized by their Board of Governance, VRFA participates in several intrastate mutual
aid agreements, which may include, but is not limited to, Washington State Fire Mobilization,
King County Mutual Assistance, and Pierce County Mutual Assistance.
ESF #4 - Firefighting Revised January 2015 95
IDLE Page 268 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. City of Auburn
1. Emergency Management Director
a. Function as, or appoint a, liaison officer to work directly with VRFA representative in
the EOC or other location as needed..
2. Building Division
a. Provide technical expertise in the evaluation of damaged structures, if requested and
as resources allow.
3. Police Department
a. Provide incident scene security, traffic control, and evacuation, if requested and as
resources allow.
4. Community Development and Public Works Department
a. Provide regular maintenance to hydrants located within the City.
b. Conduct testing of hydrants located in the City and forward any hydrant out of
service or other deficiencies to the VRFA including notification when repairs are
completed.
c. Ensure adequate water pressure to hydrants located within the City, as resources
allow.
d. Ensure a sufficient quantity of water is available for fire protection, as resources
allow. Notify the VRFA of any deficiencies in the water delivery system as
appropriate.
e. Provide operational support with equipment, trained staff, traffic control, and utilities
control during an emergency or disaster.
f. Work with other water purveyors that serve the City to complete the above activities
as needed.
B. Other Organizations
Valley Regional Fire Authority
a. Provide fire suppression and control and imminent life- safety services within the City.
b. Provide a representative to the EOC, if requested and as resources allow.
c. Provide regular status reports and information regarding fire operation and resource
needs to the EOC, when activated and if requested.
d. Assist in warning the public of evacuations, traffic routing, and /or traffic control, if
requested and as resources allow.
e. Support evacuation and recovery efforts, if requested and as resources allow.
2. Washington State Patrol
a. Coordinate State Fire Mobilization Plan, including requests for mutual aid.
REFERENCES
1. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
2. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
3. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
4. King County Regional Coordination Framework
ESF #4 - Firefighting Revised January 2015 96
IDLE Page 269 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
5. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
6. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
7. National Response Framework
8. Valley Regional Fire Authority Standard Operating Procedures and "Plan ".
9. Fire Defense Mobilization Plan
10. RCW 39.34, Interlocal Cooperation Act
11. RCW 43.43, Washington State Patrol — State Fire Services Mobilization Plan
ATTACHMENTS
None.
ESF #4 - Firefighting Revised January 2015 97
D I . E Page 270 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank
D 1. EE" #4 - Firefighting Page 271 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ESF 5: EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
LEAD: Emergency Management Division
SUPPORT: City: GIS
CDPW
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
1. To collect, process, analyze, disseminate, and use information about a potential or
actual emergency or disaster situation.
2. To provide guidance in reporting response and recovery information to local and state
emergency management agencies.
B. Scope
This Emergency Support Function (ESF) addresses the informational needs of the
Emergency Operations Center (EOC) for assessing a disaster situation and supporting
related response and planning efforts. Incident Command is not addressed in this ESF, but
instead in the Basic Plan and in SA #1.
POLICIES
It is the policy of the City of Auburn (City) to disseminate current and accurate information, and
request the same from outside agencies and volunteer organizations, during times of EOC
activations or potential activations. The analysis of this information and planning for anticipated
resources will occur in support of emergency or disaster response and recovery activities.
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. To identify urgent response requirements during an emergency or disaster, or the threat of
one, and to plan for continuing response, recovery, and mitigation activities, there will be an
immediate and continuing need to collect, process, and disseminate situational information.
B. Information will be provided by field personnel, responders, volunteers, the public, the
media, and others.
C. Information collection may be hampered due to many factors including: damage to
communications systems, communications system overload, damage to transportation
infrastructure, effects of weather, smoke, and other environmental factors.
D. Urgent response requirements during an emergency or disaster, or the threat of one, and
the plan for continued response and recovery activities, necessitates the immediate and
continuing collection, processing, and dissemination of situational information.
E. Information, particularly initial information, may be ambiguous, conflict with information from
other sources or with previous information from the same source, or be limited in detail.
ESF #5 — Emergency Management Revised January 2015 99
IDLE Page 272 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. Whenever any part of the City is threatened by a hazard that could lead to a large -scale
emergency or disaster, or when such an emergency or disaster situation exists, the EOC will
be activated at the appropriate level to assess the situation.
1. The Planning Section will:
a. Collect, record, and disseminate information to the appropriate staff and facilitate the
dissemination of information to appropriate field personnel and responders.
b. Display and analyze information for future response and recovery needs
2. The Operations Section will:
a. Display and analyze information for immediate response needs.
b. Coordinate interdepartmental issues
B. Information analysis will include, as appropriate:
1. Assessment and display of the hazard's impact and potential future impacts, including
the boundaries of the affected area and the distribution, type, and magnitude of the
damage.
2. Maintaining a current status of emergency response activities, resource needs, and
requests, and the status of critical facilities.
3. Establishing priorities in the event of resource scarcity.
4. Consolidation of information into logs and reports to keep others informed and to
document relevant activities.
C. Planning will include, as appropriate:
1. Using the analyzed information to identify trends and determine courses of action for
responding to a hazard or its effects. Planning will focus on response strategies and
resource requirements beyond those needed for immediate response, attempting to
anticipate future actions and needs. The planning horizon may be the next hour, 24
hours, or weeks, depending upon the scenario and situation.
2. Planning information will be shared with King and Pierce County Emergency
Management, neighboring agencies, Washington State Emergency Operations Center
(SEOC), and other EOC functional positions. Where possible, it will also be incorporated
into appropriate visual displays.
3. The planning staff, in coordination with the operations staff, will recommend courses of
action for immediate and future activity, including the need for specific resources
identified as part of the planning process.
4. Once a planning cycle has ended, the planning staff will immediately commence
planning for the next cycle.
D. Whenever information is lacking, contains insufficient detail, is ambiguous, or is conflicting,
recommendations or decisions will be made based on the best analysis possible under the
ESF #5 — Emergency Management Revised January 2015 100
IDLE Page 273 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
circumstances using the combined talents of the staff then assembled.
E. Analysis and planning will continue until the EOC is deactivated, though it may continue long
after deactivation. Analysis and planning functions may be transferred to individual City
departments following deactivation.
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. Emergency Preparedness Manager
Ensure development of EOC procedures for coordinating information management,
including flow, recording, dissemination, display, analysis, use, and reporting.
2. Ensure development of EOC procedures for information analysis and planning.
3. Maintain the EOC in a configuration to support the analysis and planning function.
4. Include analysis and planning as part of the citywide emergency management training
program.
5. Ensure development of policies and procedures to assist the EOC with obtaining
appropriately trained personnel to support EOC functions.
B. Innovation & Technology Department— GIS
1. Ensure GIS staff is appropriately trained and have access to sufficient tools to provide
real -time data display services (mapping and plotting) during an EOC activation.
2. Obtain appropriate data from the EOC Planning Section to produce appropriate visual
displays.
3. Work closely with Planning Section to ensure that information is displayed appropriately
and is accessible.
C. CDPW Department — Planning Division
1. Ensure Planning Division personnel are sufficiently trained to staff the Planning Section
of the EOC.
D. All City Departments
1. Report observed damage information to the EOC in accordance with established
damage assessment protocols, including windshield survey data, inspection data, and
other tools.
2. Continue to provide additional disaster related information to the EOC as it becomes
known.
ESF #5 — Emergency Management Revised January 2015 101
IDLE Page 274 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
REFERENCES
1. City of Auburn CEMP Basic Plan: Appendix 4: Training, Drills, and Exercises
2. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
3. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
4. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
5. King County Regional Coordination Framework
6. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
7. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
8. National Response Framework
ATTACHMENTS
1. Essential Elements of Information
ESF #5 — Emergency Management Revised January 2015 102
IDLE Page 275 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Attachment 1: Essential Elements of Information
The essential elements of information, which may or may not be immediately or readily available
to City staff, but are of common need to one or more response activities, may include the
following:
OVERALL DISASTER INFORMATION
1. Boundaries of the disaster area
2. Social /economic /political impacts
3. Jurisdictional boundaries
4. Status of transportation systems
5. Status of communication systems
6. Access points to the disaster area
7. Status of utilities
8. Hazard specific information
9. Weather data affecting operations
10. Seismic or other geophysical information
11. Status of critical facilities
12. Status of key personnel
13. Status of disaster or emergency declaration
14. Major issues /activities
15. Overall priorities for response
16. Status of upcoming activities
17. Status of community housing and shelter
18. Status of critical public health issues (water supply,
19. Extent of damage to private property
20. Potential future impacts of the disaster /emergency
IDLE ESF #5 — Emergency Management Revised January 2015
food, sanitation, etc.)
Page 276 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank
ESF #5 — Emergency Management Revised January 2015 104
D I . E Page 277 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ESF 6: MASS CARE, HOUSING, AND HUMAN SERVICES
LEAD: Parks, Arts, and Recreation Department
SUPPORT: City
Human Services Division
Building Division
Emergency Management Division
Police Department
M &O Division
Public Information Officer
Human Resources Department
County: Seattle /King County Public Health
King County Office of Emergency Management
King County Animal Control
Regional:
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
American Red Cross
To coordinate the provision of mass care, shelter, and individual assistance for residents
and City employees impacted by an emergency or disaster who are unable to care for
themselves.
B. Scope
This Emergency Support Function (ESF) addresses the sheltering and mass care needs in
the City of Auburn during a major emergency or disaster and the coordination regional mass
care offerings through the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) in coordination with King
and Pierce County Emergency Management and the American Red Cross.
POLICIES
A. It is the policy of the City of Auburn to conduct mass care and shelter operations in close
coordination with surrounding agencies and King and Pierce County Emergency
Management in order to avoid duplication of effort and to combine and share resources as
may be practical.
B. Shelters operated by the City of Auburn will be operated under American Red Cross
standards, guidelines, and procedures to the greatest extent possible in order to facilitate
joint management with the American Red Cross whenever feasible.
C. All mass care services will be provided without regard to economic status or racial, religious,
political, ethnic, or other affiliation.
D. The City of Auburn will not operate "Medical Needs" or "Skilled Care" shelters intended for
the medically fragile or medically dependent. These shelters require specialized equipment,
personnel, and expertise which the City of Auburn does not possess and these shelters fall
ESF #6 —Mass Care, Housing, and Human Services Revised January 2015 105
D I . E Page 278 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
under the purview of King County Public Health, which will facilitate their operation on a
county -wide basis.
E. All offered mass services will be provided in compliance with the Americans With Disabilities
Act and other federal and state laws related to access and functional needs.
F. The City may provide temporary housing as available, either via employee shelters or other
accommodations, for City employees and their families who require assistance during a
disaster.
G. In accordance with the Federal Pets Act, the City will make available pet shelter facilities to
the extent practical, recognizing that the City has limited ability to provide these services
directly and must rely upon mutual aid available through King and Pierce Counties.
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. Mass care requirements during a large emergency or disaster may overwhelm social service
agencies.
B. The opening of shelters in the City will be coordinated by the Emergency Management
Division, who will coordinate with surrounding agencies, King and Pierce Counties, and the
American Red Cross as appropriate.
C. The Parks Department, in cooperation with the Emergency Management Division, will
coordinate City resources and services necessary for shelter and mass care operations and
management, including employee needs.
D. Each sheltering situation is unique and requires close coordination and possibly inspection
of facilities prior to a shelter site being announced. Schools in particular have a primary
responsibility to their students and are not a first choice for shelters during the school year.
E. Whenever possible, shelters will be operated using standards created by the American Red
Cross.
F. The City has limited capacity and capability for sheltering. Once the City has identified that it
has met or will soon meet, those limits, the appropriate County will be notified so that
regional sheltering can be initiated.
G. The City has limited capacity and capability for pet sheltering. Once local resources are
expended, Auburn Valley Humane Society, other non - profit organizations and King or Pierce
County Animal Control will be contacted to operate or coordinate larger shelters.
H. The City has no capacity for large animal sheltering. Large animal sheltering is coordinated
by King or Pierce County Emergency Management, with the nearly large animal shelter
being located at the Enumclaw Fairgrounds.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. Mass care provides for the immediate survival needs of victims through group services and
facilities.
ESF #6 —Mass Care, Housing, and Human Services Revised January 2015 106
IDLE Page 279 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
B. Mass care will normally be carried out during and immediately after an emergency or
disaster, until individual services can be provided. Mass care services are usually provided
for less than a week. Local government is responsible for coordinating resources needed in
an individual community and may utilize the services of the American Red Cross, Salvation
Army, or other non - profit or private organizations.
C. The impact of a disaster may necessitate the provision of emergency food, water, shelter,
clothing, childcare, healthcare and mental health care for disaster victims and disaster
workers. Crisis support and training will also be required for City staff and volunteers.
D. Delivery of appropriate services will be coordinated to the greatest extent possible through
the local EOC, which in turn will coordinate with the Zone Coordinator and /or the County
and State Coordination or Operations centers. Whenever possible, the services provided will
be consolidated to central locations, with individual City's contributing staff and supplies to
the larger effort to achieve economies of scale that cannot be accomplished at the local
level.
E. Mass care includes such basic human needs as emergency medical care, emergency
shelter, and provisions of emergency food, water, supplies, and medicine.
F. The EOC will coordinate the identification of safe areas of the city, inspection and clearance
of potential shelter locations, identification of safe travel routes, assessment of the
appropriate number and location of shelters, etc.
G. Victim lists and disaster assistance inquiries will be coordinated within the EOC, which in
turn will work closely with the Counties, the Red Cross, and other organizations with similar
information to provide a uniform message to the public on these topics.
H. Public information regarding shelter availability and locations shall be coordinated through
the designated Public Information Officer for the City or EOC, utilizing the County JIC as
appropriate.
I. The range of services needed by disaster victims will depend upon the emergency and
could include temporary housing, furniture, building and repair supplies, and occupational
and mental health services.
J. Insurance companies, local human service organizations, and various City, County, State,
and Federal government agencies will provide individual assistance to disaster victims.
K. In the event of a Presidential Disaster Declaration, additional assistance may become
available to eligible individuals. This may include cash grants, low interest loans, food
stamps, disaster counseling, and unemployment benefits.
L. Individuals or families may arrive at shelters in recreational vehicles. They may choose to
utilize some or all of the services provided in the shelter.
M. Individuals may arrive at shelters with pets. Whenever practical, pet shelters will be co-
located (on the same property) with human shelters to facilitate animal care by pet owners.
Pets or companion animals are not allowed in human shelters due to safety and health
concerns. Service animals will be allowed in shelters, however may be challenged to verify
the service provided by their animal. Reasonable accommodations will be made to allow
ESF #6 —Mass Care, Housing, and Human Services Revised January 2015 107
IDLE Page 280 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
bona fide service animals into mass care shelters, including separation of the individual and
their service animal from the rest of the population, however such separation is not
guaranteed and it may not be possible to accommodate all requests.
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. City of Auburn
Parks Department
a. Act as lead department for emergency shelter operations and mass care.
b. Open shelters upon request of the EOC, utilizing City personnel and trained
volunteers for staff. Shelter locations will be determined by the EOC, taking into
account the location of displaced individuals and the condition of potential shelter
facilities.
c. Coordinate the provision of food, clothing, shelter, first aid, and other services to
disaster victims, utilizing the resources of the City, non - profit organizations, and
private companies.
d. Develop plans and coordinate utilization of City facilities and park sites for use as
shelters or staging areas, in coordination with the Emergency Management Division.
e. Develop plans to house and feed impacted City employees and their families during
disaster operations, when those employees do not have ready access to resources
in their own communities.
2. Emergency Management Division
a. Maintain current list of potential shelter locations, based upon information from the
American Red Cross and other sources.
b. Encourage potential local shelter facilities to sign American Red Cross shelter
agreements.
c. Coordinate and organize a local Community Organizations Active in Disaster
(COAD) group to bring potential local resource providers together prior to disaster.
d. Ensure that identification and inspection of potential shelter locations is coordinated
in the EOC during a disaster.
e. Assist the Parks Department with donation management services.
3. Human Services
a. Coordinate local non - profit and private resources to meet short term needs of
disaster survivors.
b. Serve as focal point for long -term human services needs of disaster victims, in
coordination with local, county, state, and federal agencies.
c. Assist in locating a facility to serve as local disaster recovery center as needed.
4. Building Division
a. Provide structural and building safety inspections of potential shelter sites prior to
shelters opening.
5. Police Department
a. Provide or coordinate security, crime prevention, crowd control, traffic control at
shelter locations in the city, as resources allow.
b. Assist in identifying and monitoring safe travel routes to shelters, in conjunction with
CDPW.
ESF #6 —Mass Care, Housing, and Human Services Revised January 2015 108
IDLE Page 281 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
c. Assist in coordination of emergency pet and large animal sheltering, via the Animal
Control Officer.
6. Maintenance and Operations Division
a. Coordinate disposal of solid waste from shelters, in conjunction with Solid Waste
Division.
b. Coordinate water availability at shelters.
c. Assist in crowd and traffic control by providing temporary traffic control devices and
barriers.
d. Assist in identifying, monitoring, and maintaining safe travel routes to shelters, in
conjunction with Police Department.
e. Makes vehicles and personnel available to Parks Department to transport donated
and procured mass care supplies to shelters and other locations.
7. Public Information Officer
a. Coordinate the dissemination of public information concerning mass care and
individual assistance, ensuring proper information is provided to and by all relevant
partner organizations.
8. Human Resources Department
a. Identify employees and their families who may need disaster related assistance.
b. Assist Parks Department with disaster related employee services.
B. Local Organizations
1. Auburn Valley Human Society
a. Coordinate emergency pet sheltering within the City of Auburn.
2. Non - profit organizations
a. Various organizations, including the American Red Cross, Salvation Army, various
religious organizations, and others may provide a variety of donated goods and
services after a disaster, which will be done in coordination with the Parks
Department, Human Services Division, or Emergency Management Division.
3. Private (for - profit) organizations
a. Various businesses may provide donated or purchased goods and services for the
benefit of disaster victims. This will be done in coordination with the Parks
Department, Human Services Division, or Emergency Management Division.
4. All local organizations which provide goods or services which may be useful after a
disaster, whether non - profit or for - profit, will be encouraged to become part of the local
Community Organizations Active in Disaster group, organized by the Emergency
Management Division, in order to provide more efficient services during the disaster.
C. County
1. King and Pierce County Emergency Management
a. Coordinate the location, staffing, and supplies for regional shelters, in conjunction
with all impacted jurisdictions.
ESF #6 —Mass Care, Housing, and Human Services Revised January 2015 109
IDLE Page 282 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
b. Coordinate with the American Red Cross and other large service organizations for
the provision of shelters and supplies regionally.
2. King and Pierce County Animal Control
a. Coordinate the location, staffing, and supplies for regional pet shelters, in conjunction
with all impacted jurisdictions and non - profit organizations.
REFERENCES
1. American Red Cross Shelter Operations Guide
2. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
3. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
4. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
5. King County Regional Coordination Framework
6. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
7. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
8. National Response Framework
ATTACHMENTS
1. King County Regional Sheltering Concept of Operations
2. King County Regional Shelter Types Table
3. King County Regional Sheltering and Mass Care Decision Tree
ESF #6 —Mass Care, Housing, and Human Services Revised January 2015 110
DI.E Page 283 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Attachment 1: King County Regional Shelter Concept of Operations
King County Regional Concept of Operations
For
General Population Shelters
Updated May 26, 2009
The King County Shelter table has been established by the King County Mass Care Workgroup
to establish a common operating platform for shelter operations county -wide. The shelter table
takes into consideration the potential need for individual cities to be able to offer some sort of
shelter in their jurisdiction, while balancing the availability of regional resources and the concept
that no person in need will be turned away based on jurisdictional boundaries.
The intent of the Workgroup is to recommend that jurisdictions coordinate shelter services to
maximize the efficient use of scare resources. Toward this goal, jurisdictions are encouraged to
consolidate dormitory shelters while offering local warming /cooling centers as able and needed.
Jurisdictions must evaluate what level of effort they can adequately support and sustain for the
anticipated length of the event, taking into consideration staff, supplies, facilities, and other
related needs.
The Workgroup recommends that all jurisdictions offering shelter services adopt and utilize
sheltering procedures endorsed by the American Red Cross in order to facilitate the potential
operation of multi - jurisdiction shelters. The Workgroup further recommends that all jurisdictions
in King County adopt the shelter typing system created by the Workgroup.
In a wide - spread regional disaster, the availability of resources from other local jurisdictions and
the American Red Cross will be severely limited, thus collaborative regional shelters will be the
standard in those situations.
ESF #6 —Mass Care, Housing, and Human Services Revised January 2015 i l l
IDLE Page 284 of 392
City of Auburn
Attachment 2: King County Shelter Types
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
The King County Shelter types have been established by the King County Mass Care Workgroup to establish a common operating platform for
shelter operations county -wide. They take into consideration the need for each individual City to be able to offer some sort of shelter in their
jurisdiction, while balancing the availability of regional resources. The intent is to encourage jurisdictions to offer the shelter services they are able
to, but to recognize that when local resources are expended, or insufficient to begin with, regional shelters will become necessary in order to
leverage available resources from all involved jurisdictions. The shelter typing system encourages all jurisdictions offering shelter services to adopt
and utilize sheltering procedures endorsed by the American Red Cross in order to facilitate the operation of multi - jurisdiction shelters. No jurisdiction
is prohibited from opening their own shelter of any type, however they must take into consideration the availability of resources to support it,
recognizing that local shelters are the sole responsibility of the jurisdiction that opens them, until and unless outside resources are available. In a
wide - spread regional disaster, the availability of resources from other local jurisdictions and the American Red Cross will be severely limited, thus
collaborative regional shelters are highly encouraged in those situations.
CATEGORY
LEGAL
AUTHORITY
DIRECTION/CONTROL OF
SHELTERS
ORGANIZED BY
EVENT
EXAMPLES
RESOURCES NEEDED
RESOURCE SOURCES
Regional Dormitory Mega-
Jurisdiction or
American Red Cross (ARC),
County, City, SP
Windstorm,
Current event
Federal Support; Zone
Shelter ( >500 capacity).
Tribal Execs thru
County, City, Special Purpose
District, Tribes, ARC,
Power Outage,
information, public
Coordination Centers;
KCECC, Private
(SP) Districts, Tribes, Private
Private Sector.
Earthquake,
education, prepared
State Resources, County, City,
Sector. County
Sector.
Supported by all
Terrorism,
meals, sanitation,
SP District, Tribes ARC, Non -
coordination
jurisdictions in
Volcanic
sleeping, first aid, ADA
Governmental Organizations
necessary due to
region.
Eruption
access, security, pet
(NGOs), Faith, Private Sector
resource
shelter nearby (see
constraints.
below)
Zone dormitory shelter
Jurisdiction or
ARC, KC Parks, City, SP
County, City, SP
Hazmat,
Current event
County, City, SP District,
( <500 capacity)
Tribal Execs thru
Districts, Tribes, Private Sector
Districts, Tribes,
Earthquake,
information, public
Tribes, ARC, NGOs, Faith,
Zone 1 = North County
KCECC or Zone
ARC, Private Sector.
Flooding,
education, prepared
State Resources
Zone 3 = South County+
Coord Center.
Supported by all
Winter Storm
meals, sanitation,
Regional Coordination
Vashon
Zone or County
jurisdictions in Zone.
sleeping, security, ADA
Framework (RCF), Zone
Zone 5 = Seattle.
coordination
access, first aid, pet
Coordination Centers.
necessary due to
shelter in separate
resource
location (see below)
constraints.
ESF #6 — Mass Care, Housing, and Human ServicesRevised January 2015 112
DI.E Page 285 of 392
City of Auburn
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
CATEGORY
LEGAL
DIRECTION /CONTROL OF
ORGANIZED BY
EVENT
RESOURCES NEEDED
RESOURCE SOURCES
AUTHORITY
SHELTERS
EXAMPLES
Local dormitory shelter
Jurisdiction or
County, City, SP District, Tribes,
Local jurisdictions.
All Hazards,
Current event
City, SP District, Tribes, ARC,
(dependent upon local
Tribal Exec
ARC.
localized
information, public
Faith, NGOs,
jurisdiction resources,
education, prepared
Mutual Aid, Inter -local
typically <100 capacity)
meals, sanitation, utilities,
Agreements, RCF, Private
sleeping, first aid,
Sector
security, ADA access; pet
shelter in separate
location (see below)
Severe weather shelter
Jurisdiction or
County, City, Multiple Agency
County, City, SP
Severe Winter
Sanitation, utilities,
County, City, Multiple Agency
(Provides overnight -only
Tribal Exec, or
Partnership, SP District, Tribes,
District, Tribes
Weather
sleeping, security, ADA
Partnership, SP District, Tribes
sleeping quarters for
ARC, faith -based
ARC
access.
ARC, NGOs, Faith, Private
homeless and general
Optional: Human
Sector
public during severe cold
services information,
weather events.)
warm /cold drinks and
snacks. Pets per facility
policy.
Medical Needs Shelter
Public Health
KC Public Health
Public Health
All Hazards
Nursing staff, in- patient
County, City, SP District,
(Patients have no acute
beds. Medical Reserve
Tribes, ARC, Faith,
medical needs but require
Corps staff.
State Resources,
some medical surveillance
RCF, Zone Coordination Center
and /or special assistance
Activations, Private Sector, all
beyond what is available in
health -care providers.
a standard shelter).
ESF #6 — Mass Care, Housing, and Human ServicesRevised January 2015 113
DI.E Page 286 of 392
City of Auburn
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
CATEGORY
LEGAL
DIRECTION/CONTROL OF
ORGANIZED BY
EVENT
RESOURCES NEEDED
RESOURCE SOURCES
AUTHORITY
SHELTERS
EXAMPLES
Skilled Care Nursing Home
Public Health
KC Public Health
Public Health
All Hazards
Sick call team, acute
County, City, SP District,
Evacuation
care, oxygen, Medical
Tribes, ARC, Faith,
(Patients who require
Reserve Corps staff,
State Resources,
recurring professional
nursing staff, in- patient
RCF, Zone Coordination Center
medical care, special
beds.
Activations, Private Sector, all
medical equipment, and a
health -care providers.
level of care usually only
available in Hospitals or
Skilled Care Facility.
Medical Surge
Public Health
KC Public Health
Public Health
All Hazards
Sick call team, medical
County, City, SP District,
(Patients who need acute
records, acute care,
Tribes, ARC, Faith,
medical care such as
pediatrics team, oxygen,
State Resources,
individuals experiencing
medical reserve corps
RCF, Zone Coordination Center
trauma or injury. In case of
staff, administration,
Activations, Private Sector, all
disease outbreak or certain
nursing staff, in- patient
health -care providers.
other disasters, a significant
beds.
portion of the population
may be immediately thrown
into this category as a result
of the incident.)
Disaster Meal Site (Meals to
Jurisdiction or
County, City, SP District, Tribes,
County, City, SP
All Hazards
Prepared meals, current
County, City, SP District, ARC,
general public when normal
Tribal Exec
NGOs, ARC
District, ARC Faith,
event information and
NGOs, Faith Community,
food distribution channels
NGOs
education; basic
Private Sector
disrupted, or for emergency
sanitation; ADA access
responders)
ESF #6 — Mass Care, Housing, and Human ServicesRevised January 2015 114
DI.E Page 287 of 392
City of Auburn
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
CATEGORY
LEGAL
DIRECTION /CONTROL OF
ORGANIZED BY
EVENT
RESOURCES NEEDED
RESOURCE SOURCES
AUTHORITY
SHELTERS
EXAMPLES
Warming /Cooling Center
Jurisdiction or
County, City, SP District, Tribes,
County, City, SP
All Hazards
Current event
Mutual Aid, Inter -local
(Provide respite for general
Tribal Exec
EOCs
Districts, Tribes,
information, heating or
Agreements, volunteer and
public on a drop -in basis).
Faith, NGOs, private
A/C, basic sanitation,
faith -based resources; local
ADA access. Optional:
staffing, ARC, NGOs
public education, drinks,
snacks.
Pet Shelter Facility
Jurisdiction or
Local jurisdiction will address
Same as Type 3 and
All Hazards
Pet food, water, cages,
Pet Owners, Shelter agencies,
(May be set up in close
Tribal Exec
4 shelters
leashes, vet support,
state Ag, County Gov agencies,
proximity to dormitory
Shelter agencies,
volunteers, sanitation
volunteer agencies, private
shelter to house pets of
State Ag County Gov
supplies and plan,
business,
shelter occupants.)
agencies/ Tribes;
tracking plan, pet
volunteer agencies,
contract, shelter SOP;
private business.
off -site storage facilities,
security plan
Lost & Found Pet Shelter
Local, county,
Local jurisdictions and County
See Pet Shelter
All Hazards
See Pet Shelter
County facilities, state Ag,
(shelter for household pets
Tribal Execs
Animal Control; Shelters cross-
volunteer agencies, private
whose owners are unknown
leveled at KCECC
business
or can't be located).
Individual Home /Apartment
Individual
Individual Resident; Business
Individual Resident;
All Hazards
Family Plan, Skills;
Individual family budget,
Residence; Workplace-
Resident;
Owner /Employees
Possible linkage with
Disaster Supplies; pet
Purchases from vendors;
Shelter at Home /Work (for
Business Owner
CERT,
supplies. Event
Business Continuity of
individuals able to be
Neighborhood
information from media
Operations (COOP) Plans
independent for own shelter
Teams; Workplace
(radio, TV, print).
and care).
Business Plans,
Supplies; safe room for
shelter in place from
hazmat
ESF #6 — Mass Care, Housing, and Human ServicesRevised January 2015 115
DI.E Page 288 of 392
CA °f Aug
MEGA
AUTHOR�T�
CATEGORY
to Jurisdiction
Shelter set up Tribal
Livestock coated Executive
h °use
eas•
uirallsubu ban ar
erg�'7opErn URC, Sp
NEEDED
BY ENW''' `Eg water, -
pRGANIZEp Epp Lwestock food, areas', vet C
OL OF All Hazards {enced, secure olunteers,
`T10N�CpNTR support, care
(ER Tonal Shelter agenC\es, supplies,
S e State Agnculture sanrtati\on er
Zon , Reg tracking system, own
a as_0cal Government shelter SO? ,
County tads,
tens agencs,volunteer o site storage security
Tribe
organ {Pag�sm plan
ess
,anuary 2015
ESF 06 _ NOsing, and
HUman Se�icesRevised
Mass Care,
OvE
Eck o Late e st Nq
ock
\(olunteer
and liv
i�zat�ons', County Gov
,�:�es, prly ate business
Page 2B9 of 3g2
A16
City of Auburn
Attachment 3: King County Sheltering and Mass Care Decision Tree
Attachment 3: King County Sheltering and Mass Care Decision Tree Can people stay with friends/
family, in hotels /motels, in their
own RVs, or will they require
overnight sheltering? Can they
sleep in their homes as long as
other mass care services are
available?
WhoNVhat Require
needs to Shelter
Refer to King County Shelter Table and be
Concept of Operations for specific sheltered?
details related to this tree.
People
KC Regional Shelter Task Force
Updated 5/26/2009 Animals
General
Population or
Medically
Pets or,.
as/will even
displace people from
C4NO General -
Yes. their homes or interrupt
Start Here
Population
re
Pets
Livestock ar
\ Other
Do you have
Do you have YES
sufficient facilities,
sufficient facilities,
staffing, and
staffing, and
have
supplies to support
supplies to support
cilities,
this shelter for the
this shelter for the Send
and
duration of the
duration of the regional shelters
support
Cshelter
event?
event?
forthe
YES NO
YES NO
Open Livestoc k ECC for
of the
t?
Shelter tance
YES NO
Open Pet eter II KC ECC for
assistant
NOTE Estimate the size of
the general population
shelter to be 10% of the
displaced population
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
NOTE Medically dependent
refers to individuals who
require specialized medical
care in order to survive, such
as ventilators
Dependent
Ca CC or YES
KC Public Health
for assistance
Open General Call KC ECC for
Population Shelter assistance
Reevaluate
Regularly and Modify
as Necessary!
Consider Disaster
Meal Site
Do you have
sufficient facilities,
staffing, and
supplies to support
this for the duration
of the event?
YES NO
O Meal Site
Will meal provision
allow people to
stay in their
homes?
NO
7 onsi er other
forms of shelter or
assistance OR No
Action Needed illi
Open Warmin
Cooling Facility
All requests routed to King
County ECC must include
specific need, including
estimated shelter type,
capacity, and duration
King County ECC 206 - 296 -3830
King County Public Health 206 - 296 -4606
Consider '
non - shelter
mass care
facilities
Climate Controlled
Facilities
Will access to
climate controlled
respite allow
people to stay in
their homes?
YES NO
Consider
Warming /Cooling
Facility
Do you have
sufficient facilities,
staffing, and
supplies to support
this for the duration
\ of the event? /
Consider other
forms of shelter or
assistance OR No
Action Needed
TMC ECC for
assistance
ESF #6 — Mass Care, Housing, and Human ServicesRevised January 2015 117
DI.E Page 290 of 392
as/will even
displace people from
Yes. their homes or interrupt
Start Here
)etermine vital services
Duration
No
\ Other
NOTE Medically dependent
refers to individuals who
require specialized medical
care in order to survive, such
as ventilators
Dependent
Ca CC or YES
KC Public Health
for assistance
Open General Call KC ECC for
Population Shelter assistance
Reevaluate
Regularly and Modify
as Necessary!
Consider Disaster
Meal Site
Do you have
sufficient facilities,
staffing, and
supplies to support
this for the duration
of the event?
YES NO
O Meal Site
Will meal provision
allow people to
stay in their
homes?
NO
7 onsi er other
forms of shelter or
assistance OR No
Action Needed illi
Open Warmin
Cooling Facility
All requests routed to King
County ECC must include
specific need, including
estimated shelter type,
capacity, and duration
King County ECC 206 - 296 -3830
King County Public Health 206 - 296 -4606
Consider '
non - shelter
mass care
facilities
Climate Controlled
Facilities
Will access to
climate controlled
respite allow
people to stay in
their homes?
YES NO
Consider
Warming /Cooling
Facility
Do you have
sufficient facilities,
staffing, and
supplies to support
this for the duration
\ of the event? /
Consider other
forms of shelter or
assistance OR No
Action Needed
TMC ECC for
assistance
ESF #6 — Mass Care, Housing, and Human ServicesRevised January 2015 117
DI.E Page 290 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
ESF #6 —Mass Care, Housing, and Human Services Revised January 2015 118
D I . E Page 291 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ESF 7: RESOURCE SUPPORT
LEAD: Emergency Management Division
SUPPORT: City: Human Resources Department
Finance Department
Police Department
Community Development and Public Works Department
Parks Department
All City Departments
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
To provide the most efficient coordination of resources in order to effectively respond to an
emergency or disaster.
B. Scope
This Emergency Support Function (ESF) addresses provisions for, and coordination of,
resources for all City departments during the immediate response to an emergency or
disaster and for subsequent response and recovery operations. Coordination includes the
effort and activity necessary to evaluate, locate, procure, and provide facilities, material,
services, and personnel.
POLICIES
A. In accordance with Section 7 of Article VIII of the Washington State Constitution, "no county,
city, town, or other municipal corporation shall hereafter give any money, or property, or loan
its money, or credit to or in aid of any individual, association, company, or corporation,
except for the necessary support of the poor and infirm, or become directly or indirectly the
owner of any stock in or bonds of any association, company or corporation ".
B. In accordance with RCW 38.52.070, "each political subdivision, in which any disaster as
described in RCW 38.52.020 occurs, shall have the power to enter into contracts and incur
obligations necessary to combat such disaster, protecting the health and safety of persons
and property, and providing emergency assistance to the victims of such disaster. Each
political subdivision is authorized to exercise the powers vested under this section in the
light of exigencies of an extreme emergency situation without regard to time - consuming
procedures and formalities prescribed by law (except mandatory constitutional
requirements), including, but not limited to, budget law limitations, requirements of
competitive bidding and publication of notices, provisions pertaining to the performance of
public work, entering into contracts, the incurring of obligations, the employment of
temporary workers, the rental of equipment, the purchase of supplies and materials, the
levying of taxes, and the appropriation and expenditures of public funds ".
C. In accordance with RCW 38.52.110, in responding to a disaster, "the governor and the
executive heads of the political subdivisions of the state are directed to utilize the services,
equipment, supplies, and facilities of existing departments, offices, and agencies of the
state, political subdivisions, and all other municipal corporations thereof including but not
ESF #7— Resource Support Revised January 2015 119
IDLE Page 292 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
limited to districts and quasi municipal corporations organized under the laws of the state of
Washington to the maximum extent practicable, and the officers and personnel of all such
departments, offices, and agencies are directed to cooperate with and extend such services
and facilities to the governor and to the emergency management organizations of the state
upon request notwithstanding any other provision of law."
D. In accordance with RCW 38.52.110, "the chief executive of counties, cities and towns and
the emergency management directors of local political subdivisions appointed in accordance
with this chapter, in the event of a disaster, after proclamation by the governor of the
existence of such disaster, shall have the power to command the service and equipment of
as many citizens as considered necessary in the light of the disaster proclaimed:
PROVIDED, that citizens so commandeered shall be entitled during the period of service to
all privileges, benefits and immunities as are provided by this chapter and federal and state
emergency management regulations for registered emergency workers."
E. In accordance with RCW 38.56, the City is a member of the Washington Intrastate Mutual
Aid System and may request resources from any political subdivision in the State which has
not opted out of the system. It is understood that the City will reimburse any jurisdiction
which provides resources under this system.
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. The City will not have all of the resources, either in type or quantity that may be required to
combat the effects of all potential emergencies or disasters.
B. Each individual department is responsible for inventories of their own resources and for
reporting same to the Emergency Management Division or the EOC when requested.
C. The Logistics Section of the EOC will track all unassigned staff and volunteers. When the
EOC is not activated, this function will be performed by the HR Department.
D. All unassigned personnel and volunteers will report their location and availability to the
nearest Department Operations Center (DOC) or EOC and that information will be tracked
by the Logistics Section in the EOC, if activated, otherwise by the HR Department.
E. The Human Resources Department is responsible for handling claims for workers
compensation from credentialed volunteers and City personnel, and this function will be
coordinated by the Finance /Admin Section in the EOC when activated.
F. The Emergency Management Division is responsible for managing damage and
compensation claims from emergency workers eligible for such under WAC 118 -04 and for
submitting those to the Compensation Board and to the State.
G. The Emergency Management Division is responsible for purchasing, maintaining, and
tracking disaster supplies to be issued to employees. This includes, but is not limited to,
emergency backpacks, emergency food and water, and other supplies as resources allow.
H. Weather conditions, damage to transportation routes, or other factors may restrict access to
a disaster site or to a storage area and affect the availability and distribution of resources.
ESF #7— Resource Support Revised January 2015 120
IDLE Page 293 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Department Operations Centers will have available, or have immediate access to, resources
and vendor lists for the most commonly used or anticipated resources used during an
emergency or disaster. This information will also be made available to EOC personnel.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. During an emergency or disaster, or the threat of one, the EOC may be activated to
coordinate the response and support of City departments and other responding agencies
with evaluation, planning, information, and resource management.
B. During urgent preparedness or response activity, resources will only be provided upon the
request of recognized field command personnel, such as an Incident Commander, or upon
direction of the Emergency Management Director or EOC Manager.
C. The EOC will be activated on a case -by -case basis to support the resource needs of the
restoration and recovery effort. As resource needs diminish, staff may provide coordination
services without EOC activation.
D. During restoration and recovery activities, resource requests are to be made to the Logistics
section of the EOC.
E. To the maximum extent possible, the continued operation of a free - market economy using
existing distribution systems will be utilized.
F. Mandatory controls on the allocation, utilization, or conservation of resources can be used
when necessary for the continued protection of public health, safety, and welfare. Whenever
possible, voluntary controls are preferred.
G. A successful and efficient response and recovery effort relies heavily upon the involvement
of the whole community. To that end, the community is encouraged to involve themselves
in community based pre- disaster activities. This includes active involvement in the
Community Organizations Active in Disaster (COAD) group, which gathers resources
information and distributes procedures as part of the preparedness process.
H. Close coordination will be maintained with Federal, Tribal, State, County and Local officials
and volunteer associations directly involved in the event. The priority of tasks will be
determined by EOC staff.
The resources of the City will be used to the extent practicable and in accordance with the
provisions of RCW 38.52.110. City departments will retain sufficient quantities of applicable
resources in reserve to meet City needs, as appropriate. Should City resources be
insufficient, additional resources may be procured or requested through the following:
1. Private sector purchase.
2. Mutual Aid and Interlocal Agreements, including the King County Regional Coordination
Framework and the Washington Intrastate Mutual Aid Agreement.
3. Private sector resources, in accordance with the provisions of RCW 38.52.110 (Use of
Existing Services and Facilities — Impressment of Citizenry), upon a Governor's
declaration of disaster.
ESF #7— Resource Support Revised January 2015 121
IDLE Page 294 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
J. Ensuring adequate staff to respond during an emergency or disaster is essential.
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. City of Auburn
Emergency Management Division
a. Ensures deployed and available resources are inventoried and that an updated
inventory list is available in the EOC and in each DOC.
b. Coordinates requests for out -of -area resources through the use of EOC staff.
c. Provides both disaster preparedness and response training to employees.
d. Coordinates with all departments to ensure accurate reporting of disaster - related
costs, in conjunction with Finance Department.
e. Provides trained emergency radio volunteers to provide communications from
remote or communications damaged sites.
f. Trains and pre- identifies disaster volunteers.
g. In conjunction with Community Development and Public Works, develops standard
operating procedures for city -wide resource management. Develop and maintain
disaster - specific policies and procedures to acquire equipment, materials, supplies,
contract services, and equipment maintenance during an emergency or disasters.
h. Identifies resource distribution and storage areas.
i. Ensures there are enough adequately trained personnel and /or volunteers to carry
out EOC activities and schedules them appropriately.
j. Ensures that the essential needs of EOC staff are accounted for (food, shelter, rest,
mental health, etc.).
k. Develops plans for managing donated goods and services, whether those goods and
services are donated for City use or public use.
2. Human Resources
a. Develops plans for employee and family notification during an emergency.
b. Develops procedures and coordinates the registration of temporary emergency
workers and volunteers on behalf of the City, in coordination with the Emergency
Management Division.
c. Provides staff to serve in the Logistics and /or Finance Sections of the EOC.
3. All City Departments
a. Inventories personnel, major equipment, and supplies and provides a listing to the
Emergency Management Division prior to a disaster and directly to the EOC during a
disaster.
b. Coordinates resource use under emergency conditions through the EOC.
c. Monitors and processes time sheets, rosters, overtime requests, and event specific
activity logs.
d. Assesses the impact of the event on available resources and identifies repair,
maintenance, and replenishment needs.
e. Provides appropriate staff to support the EOC, as requested, to ensure the following
activities occur:
1) Procures equipment, materials, supplies, contract services, equipment
maintenance, and negotiate leases for grounds, offices, or space required by the
City, as directed by the Emergency Management Director.
2) Coordinates the allocation, utilization, and conservation of resources.
ESF #7— Resource Support Revised January 2015 122
IDLE Page 295 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
3) Verifies that local resources are exhausted, or are about to be, prior to requesting
resources through mutual aid channels.
4. Finance Department
a. Establishes "Emergency Purchasing Agreements" with local businesses for use
during emergency or disaster operations.
b. Develops and maintains policies, a Continuity of Operations Plan, and Standard
Operating Procedures (SOPs) for the department's disaster responsibilities.
c. Establishes project codes to track disaster expenses for reimbursement.
d. Establishes all necessary special accounts for the receipt of monetary donations.
e. Assists in identifying sources of disaster funds, if departmental budgets are
exceeded.
f. Ensures disaster - related expenditures are made in accordance with applicable laws,
regulations, and accounting procedures.
g. Coordinates with all departments to ensure accurate reporting of disaster - related
costs, in conjunction with Emergency Management Division.
h. Develops procedures for collecting and processing emergency time cards and for
paying City employees.
5. Police Department
a. In coordination with Community Development and Public Works and Valley Regional
Fire Authority, identify passable routes for transport of goods and people.
b. Provides or coordinates security and mobile radio communications at distribution
centers, if requested and as resources allow.
c. Provides or coordinates security at the entrances of the EOC, for access control and
logging purposes.
d. Provides or coordinates security at DOC sites, as requested and as resources allow.
6. Community Development and Public Works Department
a. In coordination with the Police Department and Valley Regional Fire Authority,
identifies passable routes for transport of goods and people.
b. Assists in the transport of goods and people, if requested and as resources allow.
c. In conjunction with Emergency Management, develop SOPs for city -wide resource
management. Develop and maintain disaster - specific policies and procedures to
acquire equipment, materials, supplies, contract services, and equipment
maintenance during an emergency or disasters.
7. Parks Department
a. Assists in the transport of goods and people, if requested and as resources allow.
b. Assist in distribution of goods and commodities to the public, via established shelter
locations or other identified points of distribution.
REFERENCES
1. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
2. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
3. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
4. King County Regional Coordination Framework
5. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
6. RCW 38.52.020, Declaration of policy and purpose
ESF #7— Resource Support Revised January 2015 123
IDLE Page 296 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
7. RCW 38.52.070, Local Organization and Joint Local Organizations Authorized —
Establishment, Operation — Emergency Powers, Procedures
8. RCW 38.52.110, Use of Existing Services and Facilities — Impressment of Citizenry
9. RCW 38.56, Intrastate Mutual Aid System
10. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
11. Washington State Constitution, Article VIII, Section 7
12. National Response Framework
ATTACHMENTS
None.
ESF #7— Resource Support Revised January 2015 124
IDLE Page 297 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ESF 8: PUBLIC HEALTH AND MEDICAL SERVICES
LEAD: Emergency Management Division
SUPPORT: City: Police Department
Public Information Officer
All City Departments
Local: Valley Regional Fire Authority
Regional: King and Pierce County Public Health
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
1. To coordinate the support of health, medical, and mortuary services in the City of Auburn
during an emergency or disaster.
2. To provide a format for the City to support a health, medical, or mortuary services
emergency in cooperation with King or Pierce County Medical Examiner's Office, Valley
Regional Fire Authority (VRFA), King County Medic One, the King or Pierce County
Public Health Departments, and /or another related organization by participating in an
Incident or Unified Command system depending on the type, severity, and needs of the
specific incident.
3. To identify the role of all the agencies that might possibly be involved in a health,
medical or mortuary services emergency in the City of Auburn.
B. Scope
This Emergency Support Function (ESF) addresses the identification and coordination of the
City's health, medical, and mortuary needs during an emergency or disaster. This includes
the following:
• Assessment of medical and health needs
• Health surveillance and communicable disease response
• Medical care personnel
• Medical and health equipment and supplies
• Patient evacuation
• In- hospital care
• Mental health
• Public health information
• Vector control (rats, pests, etc.)
• Potable water, wastewater, and sanitation
• Solid waste disposal
• Mortuary services and victim identification
• Hazardous materials (spills and releases)
ESF #8— Public Health and Medical Services Revised January 2015 125
D I . E Page 298 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
POLICIES
A. The City will support the efforts of King and Pierce County Health Departments, VRFA, King
County Medic One, the King and Pierce County Medical Examiner's Offices, or other related
organizations regarding health, medical, and mortuary services in the City.
B. King and Pierce County Public Health Departments provide guidance to the City, County,
and other agencies and individuals on basic public health principles involving safe drinking
water, food sanitation, personal hygiene, and proper disposal of human waste, garbage,
infections or hazardous waste, and communicable diseases.
1. The County Health Officers, or designee, may implement quarantine policies and /or a
health order when required due to incidents of mass communicable disease exposure,
or contamination of food, water, and environmental resources.
C. Representatives of County departments will coordinate their county -wide responsibilities
from their respective County Emergency Operations Centers. In instances where an event is
contained within the Auburn city limits, those organizations may send representatives to the
City of Auburn EOC.
D. Unified Command will be used in all incidents relating to health, medical, and mortuary
services that are criminal in nature or that require a police investigation be conducted.
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. The City of Auburn does not provide health, medical, or mortuary services of any type and
assists in these functions in a support role only.
B. VRFA and Medic One, along with private ambulance companies, provide emergency
medical care in the City of Auburn.
C. A significant natural or technological disaster or terrorist event could overwhelm local
medical facilities and services requiring emergency coordination of casualties. This
coordination will generally be the responsibility of VRFA, Medic One, and area hospitals.
D. Area hospitals, including Multicare Auburn Medical Center, clinics, nursing homes,
pharmacies, and other medical and health care facilities may suffer severe structural
damage, be destroyed, or be rendered unusable in a disaster.
E. A major emergency or disaster could pose public health threats to food, water, and personal
heath.
F. Damaged manufacturing facilities, waste processing and disposal facilities, sewer lines, and
water distribution systems and secondary hazards such as fires could result in toxic
environmental and public health hazards to the surviving population and response
personnel.
G. The damage and destruction of a catastrophic disaster will produce urgent needs for mental
health crisis counseling for disaster victims and response personnel.
ESF #8— Public Health and Medical Services Revised January 2015 126
IDLE Page 299 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
H. Disruption of sanitation services and facilities, loss of power, and massing of people in
shelters may increase the potential for disease and injury.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. Public Health
King and Pierce County Health Departments
a. Provide or coordinate health and environmental health services and activities within
the City (including pandemic disease planning and response), including:
1) Identification of health hazards
2) Implementation of disease control measures, including examination, testing,
treatment, vaccination, isolation, or quarantine, when appropriate.
3) Coordination with the Department of Ecology to assess the public health risk
from a hazardous materials spill.
b. Report to local officials and the public regarding health conditions, warnings, and
public information utilizing available means of communication and information
dissemination.
c. Provide limited medical support and sanitation services (identifying health hazards
and making recommendations) to mass care facilities when activated.
d. Provide the medical support and mechanism for distribution of prophylaxes to the
public and emergency personnel, if warranted by threat of disease.
e. Provide oversight of potable water supplies, including those operated by the City.
B. Emergency Medical Services (EMS)
1. The primary objective of EMS in an emergency or disaster is to ensure that basic and
advanced life support systems are organized and coordinated to provide prompt,
adequate, and continuous emergency care to disaster victims. These may include, but
are not limited to:
a. Identification and coordination of medical resources.
b. Identification of potential sites and support staff for temporary emergency clinics.
c. Emergency care at shelters and mass care facilities.
d. Coordination of medical transportation resources.
2. Both King and Pierce Counties have mass casualty plans that detail operational
concepts and responsibilities to assure that EMS in the area will be capable of providing
mass casualty emergency medical services during an emergency or disaster.
3. Basic and advanced life support services are provided by VRFA, Medic One, and
various private ambulance companies within the City of Auburn. Mutual aid between and
among EMS providers is utilized to make the most efficient use of available resources.
4. Hospitals and other medical providers and facilities will respond according to their
established emergency response and disaster plans.
C. Mortuary Services
1. The King and Pierce County Medical Examiner's Offices have jurisdiction over bodies of
all deceased persons within their county boundaries (RCW 68.50.010), with the
ESF #8— Public Health and Medical Services Revised January 2015 127
IDLE Page 300 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
exception of incidents that fall under the jurisdiction of the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), the State of Washington, or the military.
2. Both King and Pierce Counties have Mass Fatality Plans that detail operational concepts
and responsibilities to assure that mass fatalities are dealt with in the most appropriate
way.
3. The Medical Examiner's Offices will coordinate support of local mortuary services, as
needed. Local funeral directors may assist in emergency mortuary services, if requested
and at the discretion of the Medical Examiner.
4. If local resources for mortuary services are exceeded, the State and /or Federal
government may provide supplemental assistance. The Medical Examiner may make a
request for such assistance through his /her respective county EOC or to the Washington
State Department of Health.
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. City of Auburn
All Departments
a. Designate appropriate staff to support public health, medical, and mortuary services
from the EOC during an event, as requested.
b. Provide resources to be involved public health, medical, and mortuary service
organizations, as requested and as available.
c. Ensure that departmental Continuity of Operations plans contain contingencies for
staffing in the face of pandemic disease outbreak.
2. Emergency Management Division
a. Prior to an event, work with local medical providers to establish lines of
communication to be used during an emergency or disaster.
b. Coordinate with any voluntary disaster medical organization that may exist within the
City of Auburn, ensuring lines of communication exist for information exchange and
activation. Ensure that county Public Health agencies are aware of these resources.
c. Provide logistical support to health and medical providers in the City of Auburn as
requested and as resources allow.
3. Public Information Officer
a. Coordinate closely with public health, medical, and mortuary service organizations
during and event to ensure consistent public messaging.
4. Police Department
a. Provide or coordinate crowd and traffic control, law enforcement operations, and
crime scene investigations, if requested and as resources allow.
b. Coordinate additional security support for local hospitals and clinics, if requested and
as resources allow.
c. Coordinate quarantine enforcement with the King or Pierce County Health
Department, if requested and as resources allow.
d. Provide assistance to the Medical Examiner's Office with mortuary operations if
requested and as resources allow.
ESF #8— Public Health and Medical Services Revised January 2015 128
IDLE Page 301 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
B. Local Agencies
1. Valley Regional Fire Authority
a. Coordinate all aspects of emergency medical care and transportation of patients at a
specific scene, including but not limited to triage, treatment, transportation, and set-
up for an initial morgue area, and provide incident status and operations needs to the
DOC /EOC at regular intervals.
2. Local Healthcare Providers
a. Request mutual aid and medical logistics support through established healthcare
logistics mechanisms, utilizing the City of Auburn EOC logistics process only when
those channels fail, when the request is non - medical in nature, or when extra
coordination is needed between the healthcare provider and the City.
C. County
King and Pierce County Public Health Departments
a. Provide current and accurate information to the City of Auburn EOC, both for internal
use and public dissemination.
b. Organize and mobilize public health services during an emergency or disaster.
c. Identify and coordinate activation of additional health professionals, when
appropriate, including any voluntary disaster medical organization that may exist
within the City of Auburn.
2. King and Pierce County Medical Examiner's Office
a. Assume overall responsibility for emergency mortuary services, including but not
limited to selection of suitable facilities for emergency morgues and ensuring
qualified personnel are assigned to operate them.
b. Keep all necessary records and furnish the local EOC with a periodic status report
update and casualty list.
D. Federal
1. Department of Agriculture
a. Under guidelines of the Food and Drug Administration, work with State and local
governments in establishing public health controls for the proper disposal of
contaminated food and drugs.
2. Department of Health and Human Services
a. Assist State and local communities in taking protective and remedial measures for
ensuring sanitary food and potable water supplies, adequate sanitary systems,
rodent, insect and pest control, care of the sick and injured, and control of
communicable diseases.
b. Assign professional and technical personnel to augment state and local forces.
REFERENCES
1. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
2. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
3. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
4. King County Regional Coordination Framework
ESF #8— Public Health and Medical Services Revised January 2015 129
IDLE Page 302 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
5. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
6. RCW 68.50.010, Coroner's Jurisdiction Over Remains
7. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
8. National Response Framework
ATTACHMENTS
None.
ESF #8— Public Health and Medical Services Revised January 2015 130
IDLE Page 303 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ESF 9: SEARCH AND RESCUE
LEAD: Police Department
Valley Regional Fire Authority
SUPPORT: City: Emergency Management Division
Community Development and Public Works
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
The purpose of this ESF is to provide for the support of search and rescue resources that
may be operating within the City of Auburn.
B. Scope
This ESF addresses wilderness, suburban /urban, and structural search and rescue
operations, and includes ground, air, and water operations.
POLICIES
A. Search and rescue means the acts of searching for, rescuing, or recovering persons whom
have become lost, injured, or are killed as a result of natural, technological, or human
caused disaster. Refer to RCW 38.52.010.
B. The chief law enforcement officer of each political subdivision shall be responsible for local
search and rescue activities (RCW 38.52.400) and the Police Chief is responsible for search
and rescue operations in the City of Auburn.
C. The City of Auburn has no direct search and rescue assets and relies upon the assets of
King and Pierce counties to conduct non - structural search and rescue functions within the
City. The Valley Regional Fire Authority provides structural search and rescue operations
with the City and serves as the Incident Commander for all such operations.
D. The respective outside organizations are responsible for coordinating administrative
services for their search and rescue activities.
E. King and Pierce counties will activate and coordinate their non - structural search and rescue
assets at the request of the Police Chief.
F. Valley Regional Fire Authority will activate and coordinate their structural search and rescue
assets in response to events that require them or at the request of the Police Chief or
Director of Emergency Management. VRFA will be responsible for prioritizing use of their
structural search and rescue assets across their entire service area.
ESF #9 — Search and Rescue Revised January 2015 131
D I . E Page 304 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. People may become lost, injured, trapped, or killed, during and emergency or disaster,
requiring search and rescue activities in the City of Auburn.
B. An emergency or disaster may cause building collapse, leaving persons in life- threatening
situations requiring prompt structural search and rescue actions.
C. Large numbers of people are likely to initiate their own search and rescue activities in
response to a large event. Some of these individuals will have been trained through CERT
or other programs, but most will not have. Historically, 95% of people rescued are assisted
by other victims, so the self- initiated response of the public must be anticipated.
D. Responders will not have sufficient resources to manage spontaneous volunteers and it will
not be possible to account for them all, however procedures must be in place for registering
as emergency workers those who can be accounted for.
E. Access to damaged sites or event locations may be limited. Some sites may initially be
accessible by only air or water.
F. The Police Chief has the authority to formally limit access to impacted sites where search
and rescue operations are underway (RCW 38.52.400).
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. The Emergency Operations Center (EOC) may be activated to provide coordination and
logistical support to search and rescue operations conducted in the City.
B. The Police Chief, or designee, is the Incident Commander of non - structural search and
rescue operations in the City and of overall events which may contain a structural search
and rescue component. The Police Chief will not directly command structural or technical
search and rescue missions.
C. VRFA provides the Incident Commander for structural or technical search and rescue
operations that consist primarily of fire, medical, and heavy rescue operations that are
localized to a specific incident.
D. The Incident Commander will request search and rescue assets via the appropriate county
or other agency. Specialized teams, including water, confined space, high angle, and heavy
rescue will be requested through VRFA, who will obtain them via existing mutual aid
agreements.
E. WSDOT is responsible for the conduct and management of all aerial search and rescue
efforts in the State.
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. City of Auburn
Police Department
a. Establish Incident or Unified Command, as appropriate.
ESF #9 — Search and Rescue Revised January 2015 132
IDLE Page 305 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
b. Coordinate search and rescue operations.
c. Request appropriate search and rescue resources.
d. Conduct and document all investigative activities.
e. Provide on -site security, if appropriate.
2. Emergency Management Division
a. Request Washington EMD mission number for search and rescue incidents where
outside resources are requested or volunteers are used.
b. Open and manage the EOC as needed to support search and rescue operations.
c. Coordinate logistical support between search and rescue assets and their home
organizations, as needed.
3. Public Works
a. Provide equipment and qualified operators for search and rescue operations, if
requested and as resources allow.
4. Building Division
a. Provide technical expertise in the evaluation of damaged structures, if requested and
as resources allow.
B. Local Agencies
1. Valley Regional Fire Authority
a. Command and conduct technical rescue operations and /or request the resources to
do so.
C. County
1. King and Pierce County Emergency Management
a. Provide non - structural search and rescue assets, if requested and as resources
allow.
REFERENCES
1. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
2. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
3. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
4. King County Regional Coordination Framework
5. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
6. RCW 38.52.400, Search and Rescue Activities — Powers and Duties of Local Officials.
7. RCW 47.68.380, Search and Rescue
8. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
9. National Response Framework
ATTACHMENTS
None.
ESF #9 — Search and Rescue Revised January 2015 133
D I . E Page 306 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
ESF #9 — Search and Rescue Revised January 2015 134
D I . E Page 307 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ESF 10: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RESPONSE
LEAD: Police Department
Valley Regional Fire Authority
SUPPORT: City: Community Development and Public Works
Public Information Officer
State: Washington State Patrol
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
The purpose of this ESF is to provide for the support of hazardous materials responses
within the City of Auburn.
B. Scope
This ESF addresses the support provided by the City of Auburn to hazards materials
responses.
POLICIES
A. Federal and State regulations require that local jurisdictions form Local Emergency Planning
Committees (LEPCs). It is the responsibility of each LEPC to develop a Hazardous Material
Response Plan. Planning may include coordination with outside agencies, recognition
procedures, safe distance for places of refuge, site security, control procedures, and a list of
required personal protective equipment. LEPC functions for the City of Auburn are handled
by the King County LEPC, managed by King County Office of Emergency Management.
B. Valley Regional Fire Authority will be incident command for all non - criminal hazardous
materials incidents within the City, except for those on State highways, and will follow their
applicable policies and procedures.
C. Unified Command will be used for all hazardous materials incidents that include a criminal
investigation, including terrorism.
D. Washington State Patrol is responsible for coordinating hazardous materials incident
responses that occur on state highways.
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. Hazardous materials incidents can occur anywhere at any time; however, railways,
freeways, and industrial areas are places of higher than usual occurrence.
B. The possible effects of an emergency could range from a small cleanup problem to the
evacuation of residences, businesses, and other facilities.
DI.E ESF #10 — Hazardous Materials Response Page3908 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
C. Properly trained and equipped local emergency responders can handle most hazardous
materials incidents.
D. Protective actions that may be necessary for the public in affected area may include
sheltering, evacuation, and the protection of animals, water, and food supplies. The choice
of protective actions will depend on many factors including the magnitude, severity and
urgency of the situation, the characteristics of the area, population affected, weather, and
road conditions.
E. A natural or technological disaster could result in a single or numerous situations in which
hazards materials are released in the environment.
F. Emergency exemptions may be needed for disposal of contaminated materials.
G. The City does not have personnel specifically trained for hazardous materials response and
will act solely in a support role for hazardous materials operations.
H. The City does have technical specialists in Public Works, Planning, Police, and other areas
who do have specialized knowledge and /or training applicable to hazardous materials
incidents. These personnel will be made available as appropriate to assist with hazardous
materials events.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. Incident or Unified Command will be utilized for all hazardous materials events.
B. The City will assist VRFA, WSP, and other responding agencies as requested and as
resources allow.
C. Hazardous materials incidents may require multi - disciplinary response from fire services,
law enforcement, emergency medical services, environmental protection, fish and wildlife,
and other agencies.
D. The National Incident Management System (NIMS) will be used to manage all hazardous
materials incidents, in accordance with local, state, and federal laws.
E. Requests for additional assistance maybe routed either through ValleyCom or through the
Emergency Management Division /EOC which will make requests through the appropriate
county or the State.
F. State agencies will respond to hazardous materials incidents according to appropriate State
and Federal laws, regulations, and other agency plans.
G. Federal agencies and resources will be utilized if local and state capabilities have been
exceeded and /or if federal response is required under federal laws, regulations, or plans.
DI.E Page ESF #10 — Hazardous Materials Response 133609 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. City of Auburn
1. Emergency Management Director (or designee)
a. Function as liaison between city responders and VRFA during hazardous materials
incidents with no criminal component.
b. Initiate and be active in Unified Command during hazardous materials incidents that
contain a criminal component, including terrorism.
2. Public Information Officer
a. Serve as the PIO for the City, coordinating information with all other response
agencies to create a clear and consistent message.
3. Police Department
a. Assist with perimeter and traffic control at hazardous materials incidents, if requested
and as resources allow.
b. Provide responders specially trained in CBRNE if requested and as resources allow.
4. Community Development and Public Works
a. Assist with perimeter and traffic control at hazardous materials incidents, if requested
and as resources allow.
b. Provide equipment and staffing to assist in containment, as requested and as
resources allow.
c. Provide technical specialists from the Engineering and /or Maintenance and
Operations divisions if requested and as resources allow.
d. Implement and or coordinate protection measures to ensure the safety of the water,
sewer, and storm water systems.
B. Local Agencies
Valley Regional Fire Authority
a. Command and conduct hazardous materials operations and /or request the resources
to do so.
b. Make necessary immediate protective action decisions for the public and emergency
workers.
c. Participate in Unified Command with other involved agencies as appropriate.
C. County Agencies
1. King and Pierce County Public Health
a. Coordinate with the Washington State Department of Ecology to assess the public
health risk from hazards materials spills.
2. King and Pierce County Emergency Management
a. Activate appropriate warning systems, as requested.
b. Support incident operations with information and resource coordination, if requested.
c. Assume responsibility for emergency notifications, evacuations, and warnings for
unincorporated areas of their respective counties that may be impacted by incidents
that occur in the City.
DLEESF #10 — Hazardous Materials Response Page 310 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
3. King and Pierce County Sheriff's Offices
a. Assist with perimeter control, warning, evacuation, and traffic control, if requested
and as resources allow.
D. State Agencies
1. Washington State Patrol
a. Serve as Incident Command for hazardous materials incidents occurring on state
highways and freeways.
2. Department of Ecology
a. Provide on -scene coordination, technical information, containment, cleanup, disposal
and recovery, environmental damage assessment, chemical analysis, and evidence
collection for enforcement actions for non - radioactive hazardous materials incidents.
b. Maintain a list of cleanup contractors, equipment, and technical and scientific
personnel for non - radioactive hazardous materials.
c. Coordinate damage assessments of moderate and major spills by activating the
State Natural Resource Damage Assessment Team, when appropriate.
3. Department of Health
a. Serve as the lead agency in Unified Command for incidents involving radioactive
materials.
b. Provide technical personnel and equipment for use with radioactive materials.
c. Provide advice and guidance regarding the health hazards relating to hazardous
materials.
d. Provide technical assistance, sample collection, laboratory analysis, risk
assessment, and control information relative to incidents involving hazardous
materials.
REFERENCES
1. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
2. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
3. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
4. King County Regional Coordination Framework
5. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
6. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
7. National Response Framework
8. Superfund Amendments and Re- Authorization act of 1986 (SARA Title III)
ATTACHMENTS
None.
DLEESF #10 — Hazardous Materials Response Pagel 3$1 1 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ESF 11: AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES
LEAD: Parks, Arts, and Recreation Department
SUPPORT: City: Emergency Management Division
Public Information Officer
Police Department
Community Development and Public Works Department
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
The purpose of this ESF is to coordinate efforts to provide safe handling of food, water, and
donated goods to persons unable to provide for themselves following a major emergency or
disaster.
B. Scope
This ESF provides for the management, safe handling, and distribution of food stocks,
water, and donated goods for the needs of people within the City of Auburn during and
immediately after a major emergency or disaster.
POLICIES
A. The City will coordinate with county, state, and federal officials, as well as with non - profit
organizations to organize the distribution of food, water, and donated goods.
B. The City will not accept unprocessed donated goods during a time of disaster. Only those
goods that can quickly be placed into the community will be accepted.
C. The City will keep on -hand sufficient food and water to support all City employees for at
least 7 days following a disaster.
D. The City will educate individuals and businesses regarding the need for them to be
responsible for their own food and water for at least 7 days following a disaster.
E. The City will encourage the public to only donate cash and specifically requested goods
following a disaster.
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. A wide variety of outside agencies have the ability to provide mass care services, including
coordination support. The City will work with all of these organizations in providing for the
needs of the community.
B. King and Pierce County Public Health will provide guidance to the City and to individuals to
ensure the safety of food and water made available to the public.
ESF #11 —Agriculture and Natural Resources Revised January 2015 139
DI.E Page 312 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
C. The distribution of food, water, and donated goods will be a community -wide effort that will
be coordinated by the City.
D. The City has limited experience in coordinating the distribution of foods, water, and donated
goods in large quantities and will rely upon the expertise of outside agencies and
organizations to accomplish these tasks whenever possible.
E. If not handled properly, food, water and donated goods can become vehicles for illness and
disease transmission, which must be avoided.
F. Food warehouses located in the City are not available for the sole use of the City and must
be considered a regional resource.
G. Unprocessed and unsolicited donations of goods will arrive in the City after a disaster,
however the City does not have the capacity to process them. Unsolicited goods that cannot
be immediately placed into the community will be set aside until volunteers or other
organizations can process them. It is highly probable that many unsolicited donations will
not be appropriate for use and will have to be disposed of during the recovery process.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. General
1. During an emergency or disaster, the City will coordinate with local non - profit and private
sector organizations for the management of food, water, and donated goods.
2. Management and procurement of food and water in the City for disaster victims and
workers will be coordinated by the Logistics Section in the EOC, with the assistance of
the Finance /Admin Section. They will coordinate with county, state, and federal
resources as appropriate.
3. Distribution of goods will be coordinated by the Parks Department.
4. Food, water, and other goods may be distributed using a Point of Distribution (POD) or
Community Point of Distribution (CPOD) concept, using centralized locations in the City
from which to distribute commodities. Local organizations, both public and private, may
have staff members trained to assist in this function. The Emergency Management
Division will actively work with members of the Community Organizations Active in
Disaster (COAD) to identify locations for CPODS and organizations that can provide
staffing for them.
5. King and Pierce County Health Departments will provide information on preventative
measures to be taken to reduce contamination of food, water, crops, and livestock, as
well as information /recommendations for the safe storage and distribution of emergency
food. Information will be disseminated in accordance with ESF 2.
1. Food supplies in most retail outlets will be gone in 72 hours or less if re- supply routes
are impacted. Close coordination between the food sector and the City is essential to
ESF #11 —Agriculture and Natural Resources Revised January 2015 140
IDLE Page 313 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
keeping those routes open and food supplies available.
2. The Logistics section in the EOC will be responsible for procuring food, while the Parks
Department will be responsible for managing and distributing it.
3. Emergency food stocks will be purchased or procured under the provisions of RCW
38.52.070, Local Organization and Joint Local Organizations Authorized —
Establishment, Operation — Emergency Powers, Procedures.
C. Water
1. City residents obtain their drinking water from the City's public water supply, as well as
from privately owned wells.
2. The Logistics Section in the EOC will be responsible for procuring potable water should
local water systems fail.
3. Water supplies may be severely impacted during flooding, severe winter storms (frozen
and ruptured pipes), and earthquakes (cracks, pipeline failures, etc.).
4. The Community Development and Public Works Department does not have sufficient
personnel, equipment or supplies to completely repair the entire City water system after
a major event, such as an earthquake, and will need outside assistance to complete
recovery efforts.
5. Any event that disrupts water distribution may also cause water supplies to become
contaminated.
D. Donated Goods
1. During and immediately following a disaster, individuals and businesses become very
generous in donating both money and goods to the impacted area. This outpouring of
support often overwhelms local government and social service agencies trying to
manage donated goods.
2. The Logistics Section in the EOC will track offers of donations and volunteer assistance
and will utilized donated goods to fulfill resources requests anytime possible.
3. The Parks Department will coordinate unsolicited donated goods and resources, in
conjunction with the Emergency Management Division, which may have staff and
volunteers trained in donations management.
4. In a major region -wide event, the management of donated goods will not only tax
government and voluntary agencies, but the donated goods could be both generous and
inappropriate, causing many of them to go unused and be disposed of.
5. Nationally donated goods will be coordinated through either King or Pierce County EOC
or the Washington State EOC.
ESF #11 —Agriculture and Natural Resources Revised January 2015 141
IDLE Page 314 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
6. The Logistics Section in the EOC will make every effort to evenly distribute goods
throughout the City based on need.
7. Donated goods are divided into two categories: solicited goods and unsolicited goods.
a. Solicited Goods — Specific items that are identified by the City as being "needed" and
that the City has specifically asked for.
b. Unsolicited Goods — Items donated by the public which are neither asked for nor
specifically needed for the particular event.
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. City of Auburn
Emergency Management Division
a. Coordinate the purchase and storage of food and water supplies that will sustain City
employees for 7 days following a disaster.
b. Coordinate with local voluntary agencies and private organizations prior to events to
verify their readiness and availability, as well as to clarify roles and responsibilities in
food, water, and donated goods distribution. This will be accomplished through the
use of the Communities Organizations Active in Disaster (COAD) group.
c. Identify potential sites for holding donated goods, food, and water supplies.
d. Educate individuals and businesses regarding the need for them to be responsible
for their own food and water for at least 7 days following a disaster.
2. Public Information Officer
a. Coordinate the release of information and instructions regarding food, water, and
goods distribution with all involved agencies and organizations.
3. Police Department
a. Provide or coordinate security at food, water, and donated goods storage areas and
crowd control at distribution sites, if requested and as resources allow.
4. Parks Department
a. Provide one or more representatives to staff the Logistics Section in the EOC as
needed.
b. Coordinate with City departments and relief agencies regarding transportation and
distribution of food and water to City staff and the public. .
5. Community Development and Public Works Department
a. Develop and maintain SOPs to restore water services as quickly as possible after an
event.
b. Work with the Logistics Section to identify potable water supplies and backup water
supplies
B. Local Agencies
1. Various non - profit organizations will provide disaster victims with food, water, clothing,
shelter, first aid, and other immediate needs following a disaster. These efforts must be
coordinated with the Emergency Management Division prior to an event and with the
EOC during an event to ensure resources are allocated in the most beneficial way.
These organizations will be encouraged to join the Community Organizations Active in
ESF #11 —Agriculture and Natural Resources Revised January 2015 142
IDLE Page 315 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Disaster (COAD) group in order to maintain regular contact with the Emergency
Management Division.
C. County Agencies
1. King and Pierce County Emergency Management
a. Receive resource requests from local government and attempt to fill them though
regional or state -wide distribution chains.
2. King and Pierce County Health Departments
a. Analyze water samples from sources of potentially contaminated water and make
appropriate recommendations.
b. Provide guidance on handling donated food items during a disaster.
REFERENCES
1. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
2. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
3. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
4. King County Regional Coordination Framework
5. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
6. RCW 38.52.070, Local Organization and Join Local Organizations Authorized —
Establishment, Operation — Emergency Powers, Procedures
7. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
8. National Response Framework
ATTACHMENTS
None.
ESF #11 —Agriculture and Natural Resources Revised January 2015 143
DI.E Page 316 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page left intentionally blank.
D I . SF Page #11 — Agriculture and Natural Resources 143417 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ESF 12: ENERGY
LEAD: Community Development and Public Works Department
SUPPORT: City: Police Department
State: Department of Commerce, Energy Division
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
1. To provide for the effective utilization of available electric power and petroleum products,
as required to meet essential energy needs of the City during an emergency or disaster.
2. To facilitate the coordination with private and public utilities required to meet essential
needs during an emergency or disaster.
B. Scope
This ESF addresses:
1. Assessing energy systems and infrastructure damage, supply, demand, and
requirements to restore such systems, to the extent possible.
2. Assisting City departments and agencies in obtaining fuel for transportation,
communication, emergency operations, and other critical uses.
3. Helping energy suppliers to obtain equipment, specialized staffing, and transportation to
repair or restore service to pre- disaster levels.
POLICIES
A. The City will prioritize energy needs based on protection of lives, safety of personnel and the
public, protection of property, and preservation of the environment.
B. The City will provide prioritized lists for service restoration to utility service providers as
requested.
C. The City will distribute fuel based on the priorities set in A above.
D. The City will not attempt to repair energy systems for which it does not have responsibility.
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. Puget Sound Energy provides electric power and natural gas service inside the City limits.
B. The Public Information Officer will coordinate information regarding electricity and natural
gas service with Puget Sound Energy.
ESF #12 - Energy Revised January 2015 145
IDLE Page 318 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
C. A severe natural disaster or other significant event can sever key energy and utility lifelines,
constraining supply in impacted areas, or in areas with supply links to impacted area, and
also affect fire fighting, transportation, communication, and other critical lifeline functions
needed to ensure public safety.
D. There may be widespread power system failures following an event, which may take weeks
to repair.
E. There may be extensive pipeline failures, including natural gas and petroleum products,
which may take weeks to repair.
F. There may be hoarding of fuel in areas where shortages have occurred.
G. The City has its own gasoline and diesel fuel pumping station, with sufficient stocks to last
approximately 72 hours under normal use. In disaster situations, it is likely this stock will last
less than 72 hours. It is also likely that restocking will be limited or non - existent for some
period of time after a disaster.
H. The City, under existing building and fire codes, has the authority to disconnect utilities to
buildings or structures when deemed necessary during an emergency.
Puget Sound Energy, under a Proclamation of Local Emergency, may be granted the
authority to go on to private property to evaluate and repair utilities that jeopardize public
safety, property or the environment.
Ruptures of electrical and petroleum lines can represent potential sources of environmental
contamination and /or safety hazards.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. The occurrence of a major disaster could destroy or disrupt all or a portion of the City's
energy system.
1. The electrical power industry within Washington is organized into a network of public and
private generation and distribution facilities that form the Northwest Power Pool. Through
such networks, the electrical power industry has developed a capability to provide power
under even the most extreme circumstances.
2. The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) can access local
petroleum supplies and major oil companies to facilitate the delivery of adequate
amounts of emergency petroleum fuel supplies and may be requested through local
emergency management channels.
B. To the maximum extent possible during a disaster, energy systems will continue to provide
services through their normal means.
C. If energy shortages exist, requests to meet needs will be submitted through existing
emergency management channels. Actions may be taken to curtail use of energy until
normal levels of service can be restored or supplemented. These resources, when curtailed,
will be used to meet immediate and essential emergency needs.
ESF #12 - Energy Revised January 2015 146
IDLE Page 319 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
D. The Mayor or Emergency Management Director may authorize the fueling of non -City
owned vehicles (emergency services, essential utilities, etc.) from city gas and diesel
supplies, provided that a complete accounting is made for future reimbursement by the
requesting organization.
E. Energy information will be furnished to emergency officials at all levels to inform the public
on proper use of services.
F. As needed or requested, energy service providers will compile post- emergency damage
assessment reports, service restoration estimates, and other information and provide them
to emergency officials at all levels of government.
G. "To protect the public welfare during a condition of energy supply alert or energy
emergency, the executive authority of each State or local governmental agency is hereby
authorized and directed to take action to carry out the orders issued by the government
pursuant to this chapter as now or hereafter amended. A local governmental agency shall
not be liable for any lawful actions consistent with RCW 43.21 G.030 as now or hereafter
amended taken in good faith in accordance with such orders issued by the Governor."
(RCW 43.21 G.050).
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. City of Auburn
Community Development and Public Works Department
a. Serve as liaison and coordinate response and recovery efforts between City
departments and local utility companies, as appropriate.
b. Provide support in securing areas where electrical or natural gas incidents pose a
danger to the public.
c. Provide assistance in implementing road closures and detours for roadways and
providing access to utility service providers to repair damage.
d. Support and maintain franchise agreements, letters of understanding, contracts, etc.
with private utilities responsible for electricity, natural gas, and pipeline fuel transport
to ensure response and recovery operations are conducted in an orderly manner and
in citywide priority sequence to the greatest extent possible.
e. In coordination with other City departments, identify priorities for energy service
restoration.
f. Coordinate fuel needs, in conjunction with the Logistics Section, for transportation,
communications, emergency operations, and critical facilities.
2. Police Department
a. Provide or coordinate support in securing areas where electrical or natural gas
incidents pose a danger to the public.
b. Provide or coordinate assistance in implementing road closures and detours for
roadways.
B. State Agencies
1. Washington State Department of Commerce, Energy Division
a. Provide assistance to local jurisdictions in assessing damage to energy systems.
ESF #12 - Energy Revised January 2015 147
IDLE Page 320 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
b. Coordinate restoration of energy systems statewide and provide assistance to local
jurisdictions with energy needs.
REFERENCES
1. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
2. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
3. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
4. King County Regional Coordination Framework
5. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
6. RCW 43.21 G, Energy Supply — Emergencies and Alerts
7. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
8. National Response Framework
ATTACHMENTS
None.
ESF #12 - Energy Revised January 2015 148
D I . E Page 321 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ESF 13: PUBLIC SAFETY AND SECURITY
LEAD: Police Department
SUPPORT: City: Community Development and Public Works Department
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
1. To provide for the effective coordination of law enforcement operations within the City
during an emergency or disaster.
2. To provide support for local and State law enforcement operations.
B. Scope
1. This ESF addresses law enforcement and security activities within the City.
POLICIES
A. Under emergency or disaster conditions, law enforcement activities are the responsibility of
the local law enforcement agency within the jurisdiction.
B. Law enforcement units supplied by other levels of government will operate under the
direction and control of the designated Incident Commander, but can be recalled by their
jurisdiction at any time.
C. The Police Department will maintain normal policies and procedures whenever possible, but
may make adjustments when necessary to protect life, property, and the environment, in
accordance with City of Auburn Police Department MOS 18: Critical Incidents /Unusual
Occurrences.
D. During any emergency, the first priority for response is life safety, including the lives of first
responders. For this reason, lives will not put in harms way to protect property or the
environment.
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. General law enforcement problems are compounded by disaster - related community
disruption.
B. Law enforcement personnel will be responsible for conducting windshield surveys within
their assigned districts and reporting results back to either their DOC or the EOC, whichever
is active.
C. Many routine calls for service will not be handled during a disaster, while law enforcement
personnel are focused on life safety events. Prioritization of calls for service will change as
the event fluctuates, and how calls are prioritized will remain with the DOC or EOC.
ESF #13 — Public Safety and Security Revised January 2015 149
D I . E Page 322 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
D. The capabilities of local law enforcement may be strained or exceeded. Supplemental
assistance may be requested utilizing existing mutual aid agreements or notices of consent
or via the EOC.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. The Emergency Management Director is designated as the City's Incident Commander in
situations which require a full (Level 3 with IMT) activation of the EOC.
B. The Police Chief will designate a police representative to assist with coordination in the
Operations Section of the EOC.
C. If an emergency occurs within the City, the Police Department will exercise overall authority
for law enforcement activities and responsibilities.
D. On -scene management of all incidents will follow the National Incident Management System
(NIMS) and will utilize the Incident Command System (ICS).
E. Unified Command shall be utilized when multiple departments or jurisdictions respond to the
same incident and there is joint responsibility.
F. The on -scene Incident Commander will provide regular status reports and coordinate all
requests for additional resources through the EOC.
G. The Washington Mutual Aid Peace Officers Powers Act, RCW 10.93, provides law
enforcement with mutual assistance capabilities between jurisdictions. Mutual aid
agreements exist with local law enforcement agencies. Supplemental law enforcement
assistance should be requested through the EOC, when activated.
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. City of Auburn
Police Department
a. Ensure all Police personnel are trained in MOS 18.
b. Provide routine and non - routine law enforcement activities within the City during a
disaster.
c. Conduct post- disaster windshield surveys in impacted areas.
d. Provide or coordinate security and perimeter control at incident scenes and the EOC
during activation when appropriate.
e. Provide support to the King and Pierce County Medical Examiner's Offices in the
investigation, identification, recovery, and management of deceased persons.
f. Provide support to the EOC in the dissemination of emergency warning information
to the public, as requested.
g. Organize completion of Traffic Control Plans as related to road closures and efficient
traffic flow.
2. CDPW Department
a. Provide temporary traffic control measures /devices and operational control of traffic
signals, as requested.
ESF #13 — Public Safety and Security Revised January 2015 150
IDLE Page 323 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
REFERENCES
1. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
2. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
3. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
4. King County Regional Coordination Framework
5. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
6. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
7. RCW 10.93, Washington Mutual Aid Peace Officers Powers Act
8. National Response Framework
ATTACHMENTS
None.
ESF #13 — Public Safety and Security Revised January 2015 151
D I . E Page 324 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
ESF #13 — Public Safety and Security Revised January 2015 152
D I . E Page 325 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ESF 14: LONG TERM COMMUNITY RECOVERY AND MITIGATION
LEAD: Emergency Management Division
SUPPORT: City: Economic Development Division
Human Services Division
Public Information Officer
Innovation & Technology Department
Human Resources Department
Community Development and Public Works Department
Finance Department
All City Departments
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
To provide a standardized system to collect, report, and evaluate information related to an
emergency or disaster and the response necessary to facilitate the community's transition
from an emergency situation to the resumption of normal activities.
B. Scope
This ESF addresses long -term recovery and mitigation activities required to return a
community to normal after a major emergency or disaster. It also addresses disaster
assistance and services provided to the City and non - profit organizations (Public
Assistance) and individuals in the community (Individual Assistance).
POLICIES
A. The recovery efforts for the City in a large disaster will initially be coordinated from the EOC,
under the direction of the Emergency Management Director.
B. After the initial recovery efforts are underway, or if the EOC has not been activated, recovery
efforts will be coordinated by the Emergency Management Division.
C. Departments are responsible for reporting observed damage to the EOC in accordance with
ESF 3, or directly to the Emergency Management Division when the EOC is not activated.
D. Detailed damage assessment will be conducted by the Community Development and Public
Works Department and will commence as soon as possible after initial damage surveys are
complete.
E. Damage assessment information will be reported to King and Pierce County Emergency
Management by the Emergency Management Division as requested and as required for
reimbursement purposes.
F. In the event of a state or federal disaster declaration, individuals, families, and businesses
with losses will be referred to outside agencies for individual assistance whenever those
resources are made available. This activity is typically coordinated by King and Pierce
ESF #14 — Long Term Recovery Revised January 2015 153
D I . E Page 326 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
County Emergency Management, with local information disseminated by the City.
G. When individuals, families, and businesses are not eligible for aid via individual assistance
programs, or when such programs are not made available, assistance programs will be
coordinated by the Economic Development Division and the Human Services Division as
appropriate.
H. Costs related to the event, including public facility damage and response costs, remain the
responsibility of the impacted agency, though state and /or federal assistance may be made
available.
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. The capability to recover from any emergency or disaster is dependent upon the timely
receipt of accurate information. This information is used to determine priorities based on
needs and the availability of resources.
B. All City departments are responsible for inventorying, documenting, and reporting damage
to their facilities, as well as reporting time worked by their employees and volunteers, to the
Emergency Management Division.
C. The Emergency Management Division will compile and forward damage reports to the
respective counties as requested.
D. There are two types of damage assessment: Rapid, as covered in ESF 3, and Detailed,
which documents the specific losses incurred by both public and private entities. Detailed
assessment is used to justify state and federal disaster declarations and requests for
significant assistance.
E. Initial reports of damage may be fragmented, incomplete, and inaccurate and must be
followed up on by those charged with compiling complete and detailed damage
assessments.
F. There will likely be a shortage of individuals qualified to assess damage.
G. Depending on the nature of the hazard and availability of resources, the City may conduct
structural inspections of privately -owned structures and businesses to determine whether
they are safe to enter and /or occupy. Those facilities with a life safety component will have
the highest priority (hospitals, medical facilities, shelter locations, etc.). The property owner
or occupant will be responsible for subsequent engineering evaluations to determine
corrective action or to appeal the City's evaluation
H. King and Pierce County collect damage assessment information for individuals and
businesses within the City of Auburn and will report that information to the City upon
request.
The City has a FEMA approved Debris Management Plan, which is incorporated by
reference into ESF #14.
ESF #14 — Long Term Recovery Revised January 2015 154
IDLE Page 327 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. Following an event that requires activation of the EOC, the EOC may remain open to
coordinate initial recovery and restoration activities. In the event the EOC was not activated,
or a large number of people are not required to coordinate these efforts, recovery and
restoration activities will be coordinated by the Emergency Management Division and
carried out by their respective departments.
B. During the response phase of an event, EOC staff will document reported damage through
the City, evaluate community needs, and commence planning for recovery and restoration.
Resources and services will be arranged, as necessary for meeting urgent community
needs.
C. No single City Department has the resources necessary to survey and assess damage
throughout the entire City in a timely manner. All departments capable of providing
appropriate staff will do so and will be coordinated by the EOC or the Emergency
Management Division.
D. Damage assessment teams will be supplemented using mutual aid and qualified volunteers.
E. Rapid damage assessment will be carried out by existing field staff, pursuant to ESF 3.
F. The Emergency Management Division will coordinate and compile damage assessment
information supplied by all departments, prepare required county, state, or federal reports
regarding damage, and will act as the primary point of contact for state and federal
reimbursement.
G. Damage assessment will be conducted in two phases: Rapid, as specified in ESF 3, and
Detailed, as specified below:
1. A detailed damaged assessment is needed to document the magnitude of private and
public damage for planning recovery activities, to justify requests for state and federal
assistance, and to meet the information needs of the public.
2. Detailed damage assessment will generally begin following the completion of response
activities to protect life and property. Depending on the nature and magnitude of
damage, detailed assessment could last for several weeks.
3. Detailed damage assessment of city -owned facilities may be conducted by the
Community Development and Public Works Department, or other qualified personnel,
either employed, contracted, or otherwise retained by the City to perform such services.
4. Damage will be documented in such a way as to facilitate completion of preliminary
damage assessment forms by the Emergency Management Division.
5. The Emergency Management Division will collect all damage information and complete
the preliminary damage assessment forms made available by the State. These forms will
be submitted to King and Pierce County Emergency Management as appropriate.
ESF #14 — Long Term Recovery Revised January 2015 155
IDLE Page 328 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
6. Damage assessment forms must generally be provided by the County to the State prior
to any public assistance being made available.
7. Information contained on these forms may be made available to the public pursuant to
public information laws and information releases will be coordinated between the
Emergency Management Division and the City Public Affairs and Marketing Manager.
H. Individuals, families, and businesses seeking post- disaster assistance will be referred to the
appropriate Disaster Field Office or local resources as appropriate.
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. City of Auburn
Emergency Management Division
a. Solicit, receive, document, evaluate, and disseminate damage assessment
information if the EOC is not activated.
b. Ensure appropriate City employees and volunteers are trained in damage
assessment process, procedure, and techniques.
c. In conjunction with other departments, develop a list of essential public and private -
owned facilities requiring the highest priority for safety evaluation and approval of
any required repair work.
d. Develop and maintain relationships with community organizations and businesses to
facilitate recovery and restoration resources and services.
e. Recommend policy and provide direction on emergent issues not otherwise
addressed or those for which there is disagreement or confusion regarding
responsibility, scope, duration, coordination, or procedure.
f. Coordinate debriefings, complete after - action reports, and recommend revisions to
the CEMP and other plans.
g. Compile and submit all cost recovery related paperwork to appropriate agencies.
h. Maintain all official records used to request reimbursement.
2. Public Information Officer
a. Inform the public of available services and assistance programs and encourage
damage reporting.
3. All City Departments
a. Assist in development of a critical facilities list.
b. Ensure staff is trained on damage reporting procedures.
c. Perform immediate assessments of work areas after an event and report information
to EOC or DOC.
d. Direct relocation of department staff pursuant to COOP plans, in coordination with
the EOC if possible.
e. Provide staff to assist with county, state or federal official site visits.
f. Utilize project tracking to document all incident related expenses
4. Finance Department
a. Document all expenditures relating to disaster recovery and restoration efforts.
b. Ensure disaster - related expenditures are made and documented in accordance with
applicable laws, regulations, and accounting procedures.
ESF #14 — Long Term Recovery Revised January 2015 156
IDLE Page 329 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
c. Assist City departments with documenting disaster - related expenditures.
d. Conduct financial and cost analysis of emergency and disaster efforts.
e. Assist in identifying internal and external funding sources for disaster - related
expenditures if department budgets are exceeded.
f. In conjunction with the Parks Department and the Community Development and
Public Works Department, ensure adequate resources and trained personnel are
identified to conduct debris removal activities. Develop plans and procedures for
managing debris removal activities, including recycling issues, solid waste collection,
and pick -up and disposal of hazardous materials [refer to the City of Auburn Debris
Management Plan].
5. Human Resources Department
a. Manage the compensation for injury and claims process arising from the event.
6. Innovation & Technology Department
a. Work to ensure or restore telecommunications services and computers within City
facilities.
b. Provide damage assessments of communications and computer systems in all City
facilities.
7. Community Development and Public Works Department
a. Community Development Services
1) Assist and advise the public with relevant recovery activities, including, but not
limited to building and safety inspections, land use and zoning information, and
permits assistance.
2) Provide expertise and recommendations for reconstruction, demolition, and
structural mitigation during the recovery and restoration period.
3) Review development standards and building codes, making recommendations
for improvements based on lessons learned from specific events.
4) Provide representatives to staff the Planning Section of the EOC, including the
Planning Chief position.
b. Engineering Services
1) Develop and implement procedures for conducting urgent and detailed damage
assessment and post- disaster safety inspections of city owned transportation and
infrastructure facilities.
2) Develop policies and procedures for addressing storm water, surface water, and
drainage issues on public and private property.
3) Provide a representative to the EOC who will serve in the Operations Section.
c. Operation Services
1) In conjunction with the Parks Department and the Solid Waste Division, ensure
adequate resources and trained personnel are identified to conduct debris
removal activities. Develop plans and procedures for managing debris removal
activities, including recycling issues, solid waste collection, and pick -up and
disposal of hazardous materials.
2) Identify temporary storage locations for disaster - related debris.
3) Remove debris from right -of -ways, and repair transportation infrastructure
damaged during the event, focusing on critical "lifeline" routes.
ESF #14 — Long Term Recovery Revised January 2015 157
IDLE Page 330 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
REFERENCES
1. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
2. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
3. City of Auburn Debris Management Plan
4. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
5. King County Regional Coordination Framework
6. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
7. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
8. National Response Framework
ATTACHMENTS
None.
ESF #14 — Long Term Recovery Revised January 2015 158
D I . E Page 331 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ESF 15: PUBLIC INFORMATION
LEAD: Public Affairs Division
SUPPORT: City: Emergency Management Division
All City Departments
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
1. To ensure sufficient assets are mobilized during emergencies or disasters to provide
accurate, coordinated, and timely information to impacted individuals, first responders,
governments, media, tribes, and the private sector.
2. To provide resource support and mechanisms to implement a local Joint Information
Center (JIC) when necessary and supplementing first responder public information
officer operations with JIC resources.
B. Scope
This ESF details the establishment of support positions to coordinate communications to
various audiences. It applies to all City departments that may require public information
support, or whose public information assets may be utilized during an emergency or
disaster.
2. The context of this ESF is emergency or disaster situations that exhaust or nearly
exhaust the capacity of local public information officers or in other situations where
additional support is requested.
POLICIES
The City recognizes the importance of providing vital information to the community during times
of emergency or disaster. The City will endeavor to work with all involved agencies to ensure
that information provided to the community is consistent, accurate, complete, and promptly
delivered using all appropriate means of communication. The City will coordinate the
development and dissemination of all disaster - related public information through a designated
Public Information Officer(s).
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. The Emergency Management Director will appoint a qualified Public Information Officer
(PIO) for each operational period of an incident where public information is required. The
PIO will act as the focal point for coordination and dissemination for public information, as
approved by the Emergency Management Director.
B. The Emergency Management Director may appoint Assistant PIOs when needed, or as
requested by the primary PIO.
ESF #15 — Public Information Revised January 2015 159
D I . E Page 332 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
C. Media briefings will normally take place at City Hall, where adequate parking and media
facilities exist. Alternate locations will be identified at the time of the incident should City Hall
not be available. Unless absolutely necessary, media briefings will not take place at the
EOC.
D. The PIO shall utilize checklists and worksheets for guidance when preparing public
information notices during an emergency or disaster.
E. A wide variety of communications tools may be utilized to disseminate public information,
including, but not limited to: print, radio, and television media, websites, social media, e-
mail, printed materials, public safety and amateur radio systems, and the Emergency Alert
System (EAS).
F. In some circumstances, it may become necessary to release emergency public information
from field command posts. In this event, the Incident Commander at the Command Post
shall notify the EOC and the primary PIO as quickly as possible to ensure consistent
information releases.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. Overview
1. The PIO, as authorized by the Emergency Management Director, will act as the focal
point for coordination and dissemination for public information and will coordinate with
other PIOs as appropriate.
B. Objectives
The public information objectives during an emergency or disaster are:
a. To inform the public and City employees of the presence of a hazardous situation, its
effects, and proper counter measures.
b. To coordinate the City's release of public information to the media.
c. To inform the public on protective measures that can be taken during an emergency
and the availability of disaster assistance after an emergency.
d. To control rumors and provide timely and accurate information.
C. Dissemination
1. The PIO will determine the methods for dissemination of local emergency information
and instructions, with authorization of the Emergency Management Director and in
coordination with other City departments.
2. Information will also be disseminated to the Mayor, City Council, field personnel, and
other City employees so they are aware of what is being released to the public. Once
informed, all personnel are authorized to repeat to the public whatever public information
has been provided to them, to ensure that the public receives prompt replies to their
inevitable queries.
3. Dissemination of public information regarding City activities and services relating to an
emergency will be reviewed and coordinated with the primary PIO.
ESF #15 — Public Information Revised January 2015 160
IDLE Page 333 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
4. A Joint Information Center (JIC) may be established to coordinate emergency public
information in situations where multiple jurisdictions are involved in the emergency
response. A JIC will typically be a function of the County during a large -scale event, but
may be implemented on the local level when appropriate.
5. Public Information Officers will have access to current distribution lists for media and
other public contacts.
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. City of Auburn
Emergency Management Director (Incident Commander or EOC Manager as
appropriate)
a. Appoint a PIO for each operational period of the EOC.
b. Represent the City at press conferences, public meetings, and other public events,
along with the Mayor and relevant department heads.
c. Approve all press releases and briefings
d. Support the PIO in coordinating all press releases and briefings.
2. Public Information Officer(s)
a. Organize press conferences, public meetings, and other public events as
appropriate, and represent the City at same.
b. Receive Emergency Management Director (IC or EOC Manager as appropriate)
approval for all press releases and briefings.
c. Coordinate with involved departments and other local agencies when information is
to be released via EAS or other shared information systems.
d. Gather and coordinate emergency public information for timely release to the public.
e. Notify appropriate agencies to assist in the dissemination of emergency public
information.
f. Give regular information briefings to City officials, news media, and the public, as
authorized by the Emergency Management Director.
g. Provide information to City departments that can be released to the public.
h. Recommend appropriate location(s) for public official and media briefings to the
Emergency Management Director.
i. Monitor media coverage and public reaction and perceptions in order to identify
rumors and misinformation as soon as possible. Prepare and disseminate
corrections as appropriate.
3. All City Departments
a. Provide pertinent and timely information to the EOC through department
representatives regarding field activities and emergency public information
recommendations and needs.
b. Notify the PIO of rumors and misinformation so that corrections can be prepared and
disseminated.
c. Coordinate all information release with the PIO.
d. Provide staff to be trained as PIOs at the request of the Public Affairs and Marketing
Manager or Emergency Management Division.
e. Provide trained PIOs to the EOC or other departments as requested and as
resources allow.
ESF #15 — Public Information Revised January 2015 161
IDLE Page 334 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
REFERENCES
1. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
2. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
3. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
4. King County Regional Coordination Framework
5. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
6. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
7. National Response Framework
ATTACHMENTS
None.
ESF #15 — Public Information Revised January 2015 162
DI.E Page 335 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
ESF 20: DEFENSE SUPPORT OF CIVIL AUTHORITIES
LEAD: Police Department
Community Development and Public Works
SUPPORT: State: Washington State Military Department - EMD
Washington State Military Department - National Guard
Federal: Federal Emergency Management Agency
Department of Defense - ARNORTH /US NORTHCOM
INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
1. To describe the circumstances and conditions under which units of the Washington
State National Guard and the Department of Defense (DOD) can provide military support
civil authorities.
2. To describe the procedures used to obtain military support.
B. Scope
1. This ESF addresses all requests for military support originated by the City of Auburn
through King or Pierce County Emergency Management following a proclamation of civil
emergency.
POLICIES
A. The Police Department shall serve as liaison between the EOC and military forces located
within the City which are providing law enforcement related services
B. Community Development and Public Works shall serve as liaison between and the EOC and
military forces located with the City which are providing services related to the CDPW
mission areas.
C. All military forces remain under, and will follow, the military chain of command.
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. The City may request military assistance to assist in disaster operations and civil
emergencies.
B. The military is capable of providing a wide range of support to local governments during an
emergency or disaster.
C. Military assistance is considered supplemental to local efforts and will not be requested
unless and until applicable local resources have been, or will imminently be, exhausted.
ESF #20 —Defense Support to Civil Authorities Revised January 2015 163
D I . E Page 336 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
D. Military support may be delayed until a state of emergency is proclaimed by the Governor or
a Presidential Disaster Declaration has been issued.
E. It may take 48 hours or longer to receive military assistance.
F. When deployed to provide military support to civil authorities, military forces will work under
the direction of local authority, but will retain their unit integrity and chain of command.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. Resource requests are submitted through the appropriate county emergency management
agency, which then routes them to the State if they are unable to be fulfilled with existing
resources. The state may use military assets to fulfill routine resources requests during a
disaster or emergency.
B. All requests for military assistance, except requests during imminently serious situations as
described herein, will be submitted to the Washington State Emergency Operations Center
through the applicable county emergency management office.
C. If the City is aware of a specific military asset that would fulfill the resource request
submitted, that information should be included in the request.
D. In an imminently serious situation, the City may request assistance directly from the military.
An imminently serious situation is one in which there is an imminent threat to life and /or
property which will cause human suffering. A military unit commander can respond to direct
requests for assistance, if:
1. An imminently serious situation exists.
2. The military unit is capable of providing the type of support requested without
degrading its primary national defense commitments.
3. The military unit is the only source of help available including the private sector, or
the only source of help including the private sector that can response in time to
support the City in alleviating the situation.
4. The Mayor has issued a proclamation of civil emergency.
5. The City government is willing to certify to military authorities that conditions 1, 3,
and 4 (above) exist.
6. The City agrees to assume the costs incurred by the military unit to provide the
requested support.
E. The base commander of a military installation has the authority to respond to immediate life -
threatening emergencies. Requests made under these circumstances may be made directly
to the local installation. Assistance from the U.S. Coast Guard and the Military Assistance to
Safety and Traffic (MAST — Joint Base Lewis- McChord) may be requested through
Washington State SEOC. All other requests for military assistance must be submitted to
SEOC via the appropriate county emergency management agency.
ESF #20 —Defense Support to Civil Authorities Revised January 2015 164
IDLE Page 337 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
F. The National Guard may be available following activation by the Governor. Requests for
National Guard assistance must be submitted to SEOC via the appropriate county
emergency management agency.
G. To obtain National Guard assistance, the City must demonstrate that the need is beyond its
capability or that a special capability provided only by the military is immediately required.
H. Under the Posse Comitatus Act, Federal military forces cannot engage in direct law
enforcement activities, such as arresting individuals or conducting surveillance. However,
they are allowed to provide indirect support, such as loaning equipment or providing
technical assistance to civilian law enforcement agencies.
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. City of Auburn
Police Department
a. Determine if and when a recommendation will be submitted to request military
assistance for law enforcement related activities.
b. Identify suitable staging areas and coordinate logistic support with the
responding military unit, as appropriate.
c. Coordinate activities to ensure efficient use of requested assets.
2. Community Development and Public Works
a. Determine if and when a recommendation will be submitted to request military
assistance for CDPW mission related activities.
b. Identify suitable staging areas and coordinate logistic support with the
responding military unit, as appropriate.
c. Coordinate activities to ensure efficient use of requested assets.
REFERENCES
1. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
2. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
3. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
4. King County Regional Coordination Framework
5. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
6. Military Support to Civil Authorities Plan, Headquarters I Corps and Joint Base Lewis -
McChord
7. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
8. National Response Framework
ATTACHMENTS
1. Military Organizations
2. Examples of Military Resources and Services
ESF #20 —Defense Support to Civil Authorities Revised January 2015 165
IDLE Page 338 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Attachment 1: Military Organizations
NOTE: all requests for military assistance must be coordinated through the King or Pierce
County Emergency Operations Center and requested via the Washington State Emergency
Operations Center or Duty Officer.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Seattle, WA
Washington Army National Guard
Camp Murray, WA
Madigan Army Medical Center
Tacoma, WA
364th Expeditionary Sustainment Command (USAR)
Marysville, WA
B Company, 214th Aviation Regiment (USAR)
Joint Base Lewis- McChord, WA
Navy Region Northwest
Silverdale, WA
Naval Station Everett
Everett, WA
Navy Engineering Field Activity NW
Poulsbo, WA
Naval Submarine Base Bangor
Silverdale, WA
62nd Air Force Wing
Joint Base Lewis- McChord, WA
ESF #20 —Defense Support to Civil Authorities Revised January 2015 166
D I . E Page 339 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Attachment 2: Examples of Military Resources and Services
(not all inclusive)
Washington Military Department
• Aircraft for transportation and reconnaissance
• Vehicles and drivers to assist with transportation
• Vehicles for transporting sand and sandbags
• Personnel to assist in securing roadblocks
• Limited mass feeding
• Civil disturbance operations /area security patrols
• Perimeter security /quarantine
• Limited military engineering
• Mobile /fixed communications
• Delivery of supplies
• Emergency shelter
• Limited emergency electrical power
• Urban search and rescue
• Limited emergency medical aid
• Limited potable water
U.S. Department of Defense Assets
• Medical assistance
• Patient evacuation
• Urban fire suppression
• Communications equipment
• Debris clearance for emergency access
• Damage assessment and structural evaluation of buildings
• Demolition
• Water supply
• Service restoration for critical facilities
• Contract and construction management
• Electrical generation
ESF #20 —Defense Support to Civil Authorities Revised January 2015 167
D I . E Page 340 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
ESF #20 —Defense Support to Civil Authorities Revised January 2015 168
D I . E Page 341 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Support Annexes
Revised January 2015 169
D I . E Page 342 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
Revised January 2015 170
D I . E Page 343 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
SA 1: DIRECTION AND CONTROL
PURPOSE
A. To provide for the effective direction, control, and coordination of emergency management
activities undertaken in accordance with the City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency
Management Plan (CEMP).
B. To ensure continued operation and continuity of City government and its functions during
and after and emergency or disaster.
C. To ensure preservation of public and private records essential to the continued operations of
government and the private sector.
POLICIES
A. The City Council has adopted Chapter 2.80 of the Auburn City Code to implement the
provisions of RCW 42.14, the Continuity of Government Act, for the continuation of local
government due to incapacitation because of an emergency or disaster.
B. The City will coordinate its activities with surrounding cities, counties, State, Federal, and
Tribal governments and with other jurisdictions within both King and Pierce counties.
C. Each City Department shall be responsible for creating Continuity of Operations (COOP)
Plans specific to their mission areas, which are also compatible with the CEMP.
D. The Director of Emergency Management, has authority for the direction and control of
emergency operations.
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. Following a hazardous event, the City will continue to be exposed to the hazards noted in
the King County Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan and may have sustained sufficient
damage, including loss of life and destruction of infrastructure, that traditional emergency
services may be overwhelmed.
B. Activation of the Emergency Operations Center (EOC), with appropriate staff and resources,
can facilitate coordination of disaster response and recovery activities thereby reducing
personal injury and damage to property and the environment.
C. The EOC will only be activated to the level needed to efficiently coordinate the response to
the emergency or disaster at hand and staffing recommendations will be made by the EOC
Manager. Several levels of activation are included in the EOC Position Guidebook(s).
D. The EOC may be activated at the request of any impacted Department, at the request of an
outside agency, upon the recommendation of the Emergency Preparedness Manager, or at
the discretion of the Director of Emergency Management.
E. The effects of an emergency or disaster on personnel and infrastructure, as well as family
responsibilities, may cause delays in activating the EOC.
SA #1 — Direction and Control Revised January 2015 171
D I . E Page 344 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. General
1. Direction, control, and coordination are conducted along the general guidelines shown in
Attachment 1 — Emergency Management Organization Chart, Attachments 2 -5 —
Emergency Operations Center Activation Levels, and Attachment 6 — Functional
Responsibility Matrix.
2. Continuity of government is ensured through leadership succession, backup
communications systems, alternate operational locations, and preservation of essential
records.
B. Direction and Control
1. Emergency management in the City is established by RCW 38.52, Emergency
Management. Other city, county, and state laws and ordinance provide guidance for how
the City conducts business during an emergency or disaster. (See Appendix 3,
References).
2. In accordance with ACC 2.75, direction and control of disasters and emergencies in the
City is delegated to the Director of Emergency Management, in his /her capacity as
Incident Commander, when so designated by the Mayor.
3. Appropriate individuals may operate during emergencies and disasters from the primary
EOC, an alternate EOC, or DOCs,
4. Direction and control can be conducted using the existing communications systems that
are available to City employees.
C. Coordination
1. The EOC provides the means for coordinating resources and assets necessary to
alleviate emergency or disaster impacts on residents and public entities. Coordination
occurs with local, county, state, tribal, and federal agencies, as well as special purpose
districts, voluntary organizations, and the private sector.
D. Continuity of Government
City Council and Mayor
a. RCW 42.14, the Continuity of Government Act, establishes provisions for the
continuation of government in the event its leadership is incapacitated.
b. RCW 42.12, Vacancies, provides for filling vacant elective offices by the City Council.
The line of succession for elected City officials shall be the Mayor, followed by the
Deputy Mayor, with further designations specified in ACC 2.80.030.
c. ACC 2.75 designates the Director of Emergency Management and further
designates the Director of Emergency Management as the Incident Commander for
City -wide emergencies.
d. Should it become necessary for the Director of Emergency Management to assume
City -wide administrative duties due to line of succession requirements, he or she will
appoint an interim Director of Emergency Management to ensure continuity of
SA #1 — Direction and Control Revised January 2015 172
IDLE Page 345 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Emergency Management functions.
2. Essential Records Preservation
a. All departments shall identify records essential for continuity and preservation of
government and provide for their protection as required by RCW 40.10.010,
Essential Records — Designation - List - Security and Protection — Reproduction and
as outlined by the State Archivist.
E. Emergency Operations Center
1. The City will coordinate emergency and disaster activities from a central location,
referred to as the EOC, which has facilities and amenities to facilitate such activities. The
primary EOC is located at 1 E Main ST; Suite 380. The Auburn Police Department,
located in the Auburn Justice Center, 340 E Main St. Suite 201., may serve as an
alternate EOC
2. The purpose of the EOC is to be the focal point of the City's response to an emergency
or disaster and to be a central support and coordination point for City departments. The
EOC will:
a. Collect, record, analyze, display, and distribute information.
b. Create and maintain situational awareness and a common operating picture, to be
disseminated to all City departments.
c. Coordinate public information and warning.
d. Coordinate City government emergency activities
3. The EOC may be activated to whatever level is deemed appropriate for the specific
circumstances. Recommendation for initial activation of the EOC is the responsibility of
the Director of Emergency Management or the Emergency Preparedness Manager, who
will then also make staffing and activation level recommendations. Citywide and
interagency coordination of information, resources, and plans will take place in the EOC.
In general, the EOC will be activated and physically staffed during any situation in which
one or more City departments require coordination with outside agencies or in which one
or more departments face critical resource shortages. Level one EOC activation may
take place from a location other than the designated primary or alternate EOC locations
if the necessary functions can be adequately performed. Such locations might include
any Department Operations Center or the Emergency Management Office.
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. General
1. General responsibilities for City departments are identified in the Basic Plan, under
Responsibilities. Attachment 6, the Functional Responsibility Matrix, identifies lead and
support departments, agencies, and other responders as they related to the emergency
support functions identified by this CEMP.
2. Administrative and response policy decisions affecting the City are made by the Policy
Group in the EOC, lead by the Mayor, with the support of the City Council. The EOC will
be informed of all policy decisions that impact response and recovery efforts. The role of
the Policy Group is to deal with the policy issues brought about by the circumstances of
the emergency or disaster, not to determine on -going or long -term City policies.
SA #1 — Direction and Control Revised January 2015 173
IDLE Page 346 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
3. Department Directors may be required to be part of the Policy Group, hold a position in
the EOC, and /or oversee their own departments from their respective DOCs.
4. Overall direction and control of department resources and operations rests with each
individual department, recognizing that all large incidents will have a single or unified
Incident Command System in place. Overall coordination of information, resources, and
preparation of the City -wide Incident Action Plan rests with the Incident Commander if
one has been designated. Otherwise, this function falls to the EOC and the EOC
Manager.
5. Each department shall have a pre- designated location from which to establish direction
and control of its respective activities in an emergency or disaster. These locations will
be referred to as Department Operations Centers (DOCs). Department Directors are
responsible for ensuring their departments maintain sufficient documentation,
communicate and coordinate with the EOC, and follow established procedures for
resource needs. Each department engaged in field operations will assign
representative(s) to the Operations Section in the EOC to ensure a direct link between
the DOC and the EOC.
6. Because of the complexity of emergencies and disasters, departments and individuals
may find themselves responsible for functions or operations that do not normally fall
within their scope of responsibility. They will further find that they must work closely with
other employees, departments, and outside agencies in order to ensure the success of
the operation.
7. Personnel in the EOC handle coordination issues, including coordination of operational
decisions that significantly affect more than one department. The Incident Commander,
Director of Emergency Management, or EOC Manager will keep the Mayor and /or Policy
Group apprised of major events, decisions, or activities associated with the emergency
or disaster. The Mayor and /or Policy Group will inform the EOC of all policy decisions
concerning the event.
B. City of Auburn
The Emergency Management Program for the City of Auburn is organized pursuant to
ACC 2.75. The appointed Director of Emergency Management is designated by the
Mayor and in -turn appoints an Emergency Preparedness Manager. The Emergency
Preparedness Manager is responsible for day -to -day emergency management activities
in the City, including training, exercises, planning, and compliance activities. The
organization includes an Emergency Management Board, which is chaired by the Mayor
and vice - chaired by the Director of Emergency Management during non - emergency
times. All Department Heads are members of the Emergency Management Board. The
Board's responsibility is to provide policy recommendations to the City Council during
emergency and recovery periods and to provide policy direction for development and
maintenance of the emergency operations plan. During an emergency, the Board is
chaired by the Director of Emergency Management and is charged with providing overall
policy direction for the incident.
2. The organization also includes an Emergency Management Committee, which is chaired
by the Emergency Preparedness Manager. The committee includes representatives
SA #1 — Direction and Control Revised January 2015 174
IDLE Page 347 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
from all City departments as well as those outside organizations with a defined role in
emergencies and disasters. The Committee is charged with ensuring the City has a
complete and current emergency operations plan and with ensuring appropriate staff are
trained and made available to work in the EOC upon activation.
3. During an emergency or disaster, those assigned to either the Board or the Committee
may be placed into differing roles in the EOC, depending on the requirements of the
incident.
4. RCW 42.14, the Continuity of Government Act, allows local governments to conduct the
affairs of the jurisdiction outside the territorial limits of the jurisdiction in the event it is
impossible or impractical to continue operations at the usual locations. Decisions to
relocate local government shall be the responsibility of the City Council and the Mayor
and be based upon the circumstances of the emergency or disaster or upon the
recommendation of staff. RCW 42.30.070, the Open Public Meetings Act — Times and
Places for Meetings — Emergencies — Exceptions, allows for City Council to take
expedited actions in times of emergency, at a place and time other than their regular
meeting, without giving public notice. The Mayor may request a meeting of the Council in
times of emergency pursuant to these RCWs.
C. City Council
1. Establish emergency management policy and budget, prior to, during, and after an
incident sufficient to fulfill the requirements of the City's preparedness, mitigation,
response, and recovery activities.
2. For the duration of an event, maintain liaison with the EOC Policy Group via the Mayor
and establish a presence in the EOC Policy Group if requested by the Mayor.
3. Communicate to the EOC via the Mayor, the status of various neighborhoods and any
public concerns that exist in the City.
4. Communicate to the public only that information which is approved by the Mayor or
Incident Commander for dissemination.
5. Attend emergency City Council meetings called by the Mayor pursuant to RCW 42.14
and RCW 42.30.070 to conduct urgent business of the City.
6. Provide for the continuity of the legislative branch and temporarily fill any vacancy of an
elected position by appointment.
7. Upon request of the Mayor, host and accompany VIPs and governmental officials on
tours of the emergency /disaster area.
D. Mayor
1. Sign proclamations of emergency as warranted by the incident
2. Preserve the continuity of the executive branch of government.
SA #1 — Direction and Control Revised January 2015 175
IDLE Page 348 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
3. Provide for the implementation of planning, including drills and exercises, for the
preparedness of persons and property within the City in the event of an emergency or
disaster.
4. Provide visible leadership in the community, through direct visits, press conferences,
and other means, providing interviews to the media as arranged by the Public
Information Officer.
5. Host and accompany VIPs and governmental officials on tours of the
emergency /disaster area.
6. Provide for the coordination of local, State, Federal, private, and volunteer organizations
and resources before, during, and after an incident.
7. Provide for the appointment of a Liaison Officer to serve in the Incident Command
structure to act as the point of contact for outside organizations and agencies.
8. Approve activation of the EOC as recommended by the Director of Emergency
Management or other staff.
9. Call emergency meetings of the City Council to pass ordinances and conduct other
urgent business pursuant to RCW 42.14 and RCW 42.30.070.
E. Director of Emergency Management (through the Emergency Preparedness Manager or
Division as appropriate)
1. Ensure emergency preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery activities are
carried out within the City. Develop plans necessary for utilization of local resources in
disasters.
2. Ensure training programs and emergency operations drills are carried out within the City.
3. Coordinate local, State, Federal, private, and volunteer organizations and resources
before, during, and after an incident, in consultation with the Mayor as appropriate.
4. Appoint a Liaison Officer during an event to serve as the point of contact for agency
representatives from assisting organizations and agencies outside of City government, in
consultation with the Mayor as appropriate.
5. Appoint a Public Information Officer for each operational period, as appropriate.
6. Establish and maintain communications with the Mayor (Policy Group), the Public
Information Officer, and EOC Section Chiefs.
7. Activate the EOC when necessary to coordinate disaster response activities of all City
departments during disasters or other emergencies. Advise King and /or Pierce County
Emergency Management when the local EOC has been activated.
8. Provide initial warning of impending disaster to public officials and local emergency
response departments, provide instruction to the general public before, during, and after
emergencies, and minimize rumors. A communication link to the local Emergency Alert
SA #1 — Direction and Control Revised January 2015 176
IDLE Page 349 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
System via King and /or Pierce County Emergency Management may be vital to the
transmission of information critical to the life safety of responders and the public.
9. Manage EOC operations during activations.
10. During City -wide Incident Management Team activation, approve all decisions and
actions by City personnel through the use of an Incident Action Plan.
11. Request disaster mission number from Washington State EMD if volunteers will be
assisting in the event, to provide medical and equipment loss coverage to the volunteers
pursuant to RCW 38.52.
12. Establish command structure and implement the appropriate EOC level and personnel
assignments to manage the event.
13. Establish immediate priorities.
14. Develop and implement strategic goals and tactical objectives based upon the situation
and priorities established.
15. Ensure planning meetings and briefings are scheduled and conducted with elected
officials and EOC personnel and approve all press releases.
16. Approve and authorize the implementation of the Incident Action Plan (IAP).
17. Provide interviews to the media, as arranged by the Public Information Officer.
18. Implement the City -wide recovery plan.
19. Ensure all EOC personnel maintain an individual Activity Log Sheet.
20. Approve plan for demobilization of resources.
21. Prepare the after action report.
22. Appoint a Logistics Chief to accept requests for additional resources from City
personnel, residents, and departments and to coordinate supplemental resources
supplied by local private organizations or from the state and federal level.
23. Assist the Mayor, as needed, in drafting and submitting local proclamations of
emergency.
24. Ensure mechanisms are in place to register spontaneous volunteers at the time of an
event.
25. Coordinate and manage the message control function in the EOC, including staffing,
logging, and message delivery.
26. Act as the City's agent for coordinating and requesting FEMA assistance post- disaster.
SA #1 — Direction and Control Revised January 2015 177
IDLE Page 350 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
F. Public Information Officer
1. Obtain prior approval and authorization from the Incident Commander, Director of
Emergency Management, or EOC Manager for all press releases and briefings.
2. Prepare and coordinate all press releases and briefings.
3. Provide press releases to the EOC and other City Departments prior to public release if
possible.
4. Coordinate with affected jurisdictions to ensure the public receives accurate and
consistent information.
5. Assist in the preparation of briefings to the Mayor, public and elected officials, and EOC
staff.
6. Response to media and public information calls, as appropriate.
7. Establish rumor control hotline, as needed.
G. Department Directors
1. Oversee and provide policy recommendations before, during, and after an emergency or
disaster as part of the Emergency Management Board, pursuant to ACC 2.75.
2. Provide staff to support the efforts of the EOC.
3. Identify and train specific staff members to function as Public Information Officers prior to
an event, upon the request of the City Public Affairs and Marketing Manager.
4. Work with the Finance Section to document all expenses.
5. Assist the City Clerk and Innovation & Technology in identifying and preserving essential
department records.
6. Assign staff members to the Emergency Management Committee (EMC) to carry out
development, maintenance, and implementation of the CEMP.
7. Develop and maintain policies and SOPs for the department's disaster responsibilities.
8. Document emergency related activities and costs.
9. Provide direction and leadership to department staff while fulfilling emergency
management responsibilities.
H. City Employees
1. Develop individual and family plans for use during an event.
2. Be prepared to respond, as needed, in the role of an emergency worker, assuming that if
the disaster is severe enough and communications are down, they will have an
SA #1 — Direction and Control Revised January 2015 178
IDLE Page 351 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
assignment and should attempt to find a way to reach the City.
3. In the event the City is not reachable, report to the nearest other government agency to
offer assistance, if appropriate.
4. Respond to a designated area with proper clothing and equipment, as directed.
5. Be prepared to assist in whatever capacity assigned, regardless of regular assignment.
I. City Attorney
1. Provide legal advice to elected officials, the Mayor, the Director of Emergency
Management, and City Departments as it pertains to emergency response or disaster
recovery.
2. Review contracts for emergency work and procurement.
3. Provide legal review of emergency plans and supporting documents to ensure
compliance with local, State, and Federal laws.
4. Prepare a Proclamation of Emergency, if appropriate.
5. Obtain appropriate signatures for ratification of any Proclamation of Emergency.
J. Human Resources
1. Provide a representative to assist in the Planning, Logistics and /or Finance and
Administration Sections in the EOC.
2. Develop plans for employee's family notification and support during disaster activities.
3. Develop, in coordination with the Emergency Management Division, procedures to
coordinate the registration of volunteers as temporary emergency workers on behalf of
the City.
4. Manage the compensation for injury and claims process arising from the disaster, in
accordance with ACC 2.75.
5. Provide for continuity for Court operations, as feasible.
6. Continue to operate the Municipal Court as efficiently as possible in order to maintain
due process of law in civil and criminal justice matters.
7. Develop plans and procedures to relocate courtrooms to continue necessary judicial
process during emergencies or disasters.
8. Work with Building Division to assess and prioritize City -owned building damage /repairs.
9. Utilize Facilities Division to provide minor rapid repairs to critical facilities that will enable
them to quickly be placed into service.
SA #1 — Direction and Control Revised January 2015 179
D I . E Page 352 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
10. Identify staff and field support personnel to support emergency operations, including
staffing of the Emergency Operations Center.
11. Coordinate with other departments for the provision of emergency staff and field support
through the response and recovery phases.
12. Coordinate the hiring of emergency personnel.
13. Document emergency related activities and costs.
14. Support response and recovery activities as requested.
K. Finance Department
1. Provide a representative to serve in the Finance and Admin Section of the EOC.
2. Advise City officials and the Director of Emergency Management on financial matters.
3. Supervise and maintain the financial systems and records of the City.
4. Arrange for emergency cash management and banking services.
5. Establish all necessary special or project accounts for the receipt of donations and cost
reimbursements filed under local, state, and federal laws.
6. Assist in identifying sources of disaster funds if department budgets are exceeded.
7. Ensure disaster related expenditures are made in accordance with applicable laws,
regulations, and accounting procedures, while making provisions for modified
procedures during the time of a declared emergency.
8. Coordinate and implement the City Debris Management Plan.
9. Monitor and process time sheets, rosters, and overtime requests.
10. Develop alternate methods of payroll and vendor payments in case of general system
failure during an emergency or disaster.
11. Ensure documentation processes exist for emergency related costs.
12. Maintain a list of all local vendors used by the City and provide to the Emergency
Management Division on a quarterly basis.
13. Assist in the procurement of equipment, materials, supplies, contract services, and
equipment maintenance in conjunction with the Logistics Section in the EOC.
14. Negotiate leases for grounds, offices, or space required by the City.
SA #1 — Direction and Control Revised January 2015 180
IDLE Page 353 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
L. City Clerk
1. Provide a representative to the Planning Section in the EOC, as requested.
2. Provide information and direction to departments on requirements for the identification
and preservation of essential records.
3. Maintain official records of elected officials.
4. File, maintain, and store all incident documents for the official history of the emergency
or disaster.
M. Innovation & Technology
1. Provide a representative to support the needs of the EOC as requested.
2. Provide City departments with guidance and direction for the protection of computer
hardware, software, data, and telephone systems.
3. Provide telecommunications (telephones, faxes, cellular phones, radios) and computer
support to all City Departments, with emphasis on the EOC and DOCs.
4. Assist in identifying and acquiring alternate communications systems during an event.
5. Provide liaison for coordination with telephone service providers for the re- establishment
of telephone service to the City government.
N. Parks, Arts, and Recreation Department
1. Provide a representative to serve in the Operations, Planning, or Logistics Sections of
the EOC, as requested.
2. Activate, manage, and support mass care shelters at sites selected within the City, or
assist with regional sites as appropriate.
3. Provide mass care services to both disaster victims and emergency workers in the form
of food, blankets, cots, and other disaster relief supplies and services.
4. Coordinate services with the American Red Cross and other non - profit agencies as
appropriate.
5. Assign staff to attend American Red Cross disaster shelter training.
6. Provide emergency protective measures and debris removal activities in conjunction with
the Public Works Department.
7. Provide transportation to emergency worker and the public as needed and if resources
allow.
SA #1 — Direction and Control Revised January 2015 181
IDLE Page 354 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
O. Police Department
1. Provide a representative to serve as the Incident Commander, Operations Section Chief,
or Police Operations Representative, as appropriate.
2. Maintain law and order and provide physical security in and around the affected area
with the City.
3. Provide command and control for field operations through established command posts,
as appropriate.
4. Participate in initial citywide damage assessment (windshield surveys), as appropriate.
5. Provide emergency traffic and crowd control.
6. Provide direction and traffic control for evacuation efforts, as appropriate.
7. Provide support to the King and Pierce County Medical Examiner's Offices as
appropriate.
8. Assist King and Pierce County Medical Examiner's Offices with temporary morgue
management and security, if requested and as resources allow.
9. Provide support in the dissemination of emergency warning information to the public, as
requested.
10. Develop emergency and evacuation plans for facilities under department management.
P. Community Development and Public Works Department
1. Provide representatives to serve in the Operations, Planning, Logistics, and /or other
sections in the EOC.
2. Coordinate and compile initial damage assessment and safety evaluation of essential
City owned facilities and non -City owned critical facilities.
3. Develop policies and procedures to acquire supplies and services during an emergency
or disaster when the EOC Logistics Section is not activated.
4. Establish a centralized location where the impacted community can receive information,
direction, and assistance directly related to rebuilding and recovery efforts.
5. Assist in windshield surveys, provide emergency protective measures, emergency and
temporary repairs and /or construction for water, wastewater, surface water, and streets.
6. Develop policies, procedures, and permitting process for the rapid rebuilding of the
community and resumption of business following the incident, including the waiver of
certain review and permit requirements where emergency work is necessary to protect
lives or property during an emergency or disaster.
SA #1 — Direction and Control Revised January 2015 182
IDLE Page 355 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
7. Provide support to the VRFA in the safety evaluation of structures during rescue
operations.
8. Provide support to the VRFA in hazardous materials incident response as requested.
9. Enforce City ordinances and State laws regulating construction during new or
reconstruction efforts prior to and after and emergency or disaster.
10. Provide support to other City Departments regarding critical areas during recovery
efforts.
11. Maintain a list of all businesses in the City and provide to the Emergency Management
Division as requested.
12. Provide expertise and recommendation for reconstruction, demolition, and mitigation
during recovery period.
13. Provide support to City -wide evacuation planning.
14. Install, maintain, and operating all parking and traffic control devices and assist with
access and traffic control measures.
15. Provide assessment of transportation routes, identify alternate routes, and provide
temporary thoroughfares and bridges for emergency vehicles.
16. Develop plans and recommendations for effective motor vehicle and pedestrian traffic
flow and safety during and after a disaster.
17. Provide emergency debris removal from City properties and public areas.
18. Develop policies and SOPs for providing and maintaining the sanitary sewer system,
storm drainage system, lift stations, and water supply.
19. Coordinate and prioritize public utility restoration.
20. Coordinate with private utilities for the restoration of critical and essential facilities and
services.
21. Assist the VRFA with rescue operations, if requested and as resources allow.
22. Coordinate fuel dispensing services for emergency equipment and vehicles and others
who may be authorized by the Mayor or Director of Emergency Management.
REFERENCES
a. City of Auburn Duty Officer Manual
b. City of Auburn EOC Manager Manual
c. King County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
d. King County Regional Coordination Framework
e. Pierce County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
f. RCW 38.52, Emergency Management
SA #1 — Direction and Control Revised January 2015 183
IDLE Page 356 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
g. RCW 40.10.101, Essential Records —Designation List —Security and Protection —
Reproduction
h. RCW 42.12, Vacancies
i. RCW 42.14, Continuity of Government Act
j. RCW 42.30.070, Open Public Meetings Act — Times and Places for Meetings —
Emergencies — Exceptions
k. Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
I. National Response Framework
ATTACHMENTS
1. Emergency Management Organization Chart
2. EOC Organization Charts
3. Functional Responsibility Matrix
SA #1 — Direction and Control Revised January 2015 184
D I . E Page 357 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
SA 1: DIRECTION AND CONTROL
Attachment 1: Emergency Management Organization Chart
Auburn City Council
Mayor
i
i
i
i
Director of
Administration/
Emergency
Management Director
Emergency
Preparedness
Manager
Emergency Management
Board
(All Department Heads)
Emergency Management
Committee
(All Departments + Outside
Agencies)
Day -to -day management of the City of
Auburn Emergency Management
organization, pursuant to ACC 2.75 and
RCW 38.52. This diagram is not indicative of
an Emergency Operations Center (EOC)
activation. See following pages for EOC
activation levels.
SA #1 — Direction and Control Revised January 2015 185
D I . E Page 358 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
SA 1: DIRECTION AND CONTROL
Attachment 2: EOC Organization Chart -- Level One
Monitoring activation, may involve physical
setup of the EOC in a standby mode or
function from regular work stations,
depending on the nature of the incident. Key
personnel will begin to monitor events,
gather situational awareness information,
evaluate required resources, and forecast
future impacts. Personnel will generally be
limited to Emergency Management staff and
a Public Information Officer, though
generally at least one Department
Operations Center will have been activated.
The Emergency Management Director,
Mayor, and City Council are kept apprised of
the situation, but are not located in the EOC.
EOC Manager
PIO H� Call Taker
C
VRFA Parks
DOC — — — — DOC
Public Works _ _ j _ _ Police
DOC DOC
SA #1 — Direction and Control Revised January 2015 186
D I . E Page 359 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
SA 1: DIRECTION AND CONTROL
Attachment 3: EOC Organization Chart -- Level Two
Coordination activation, requires physical presence in the EOC. An EOC Manager and Public Information Officer (PIO)
will be assigned to the EOC, along with representatives of departments actively involved in the event /incident. The EOC
Manager will recommend staffing levels for the EOC consistent with current and projected incident activity. Typically this
type of activation will occur when two or more departments are actively involved in event/incident activities. The function
of this activation level is to facilitate face -to -face communication between involved departments and to support logistics
needs in the field. EOC staff may include representatives of outside agencies. The Emergency Management Director,
Mayor, and City Council are kept apprised of the situation, but are not generally located in the EOC.
SA #1 — Direction and Control
DI.E
Revised January 2015
Page 360 of 392
187
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
SA 1: DIRECTION AND CONTROL
Attachment 4: EOC Organization Chart -- Level Three
Liaison Officer
PIO
This is a full activation of the EOC, with all sections staffed. The purpose is to continue facilitation of department -to- department communications and to handle logistics
on a city -wide basis. The Planning section is focused on situational awareness, gathering IAPs from the individual DOCs and compiling them. This level does not direct
field operations in any manner, though decisions may be made regarding resource allocation. The Emergency Management Director, Mayor, and City Council are kept
apprised of the situation and may or may not be located in the EOC, depending upon the circumstances.
SA #1 — Direction and Control
DI.E
Revised January 2015
Page 361 of 392
188
Operations
Communications
Chief
nternal Branch
Finance /Adman
External
Branch
Public Works
VRFA
Rep
Liaison
Parks
Auburn School
Rep
District Liaison
MuIticare
Unit Leader
Leader
Auburn Liaison
This is a full activation of the EOC, with all sections staffed. The purpose is to continue facilitation of department -to- department communications and to handle logistics
on a city -wide basis. The Planning section is focused on situational awareness, gathering IAPs from the individual DOCs and compiling them. This level does not direct
field operations in any manner, though decisions may be made regarding resource allocation. The Emergency Management Director, Mayor, and City Council are kept
apprised of the situation and may or may not be located in the EOC, depending upon the circumstances.
SA #1 — Direction and Control
DI.E
Revised January 2015
Page 361 of 392
188
Communications
Branch Director
Finance /Adman
Logistics
Phone /IT
Chief
Chief
Specialist
Procurement
Supply Unit
Unit Leader
Leader
Radio Room
Call Center
Supervisor
Supervisor
Food Unit
Leader
Radio
Call Takers
Operators
Message
Message
Distributors
Distributors
This is a full activation of the EOC, with all sections staffed. The purpose is to continue facilitation of department -to- department communications and to handle logistics
on a city -wide basis. The Planning section is focused on situational awareness, gathering IAPs from the individual DOCs and compiling them. This level does not direct
field operations in any manner, though decisions may be made regarding resource allocation. The Emergency Management Director, Mayor, and City Council are kept
apprised of the situation and may or may not be located in the EOC, depending upon the circumstances.
SA #1 — Direction and Control
DI.E
Revised January 2015
Page 361 of 392
188
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
SA 1: DIRECTION AND CONTROL
Attachment 5: EOC Organization Chart -- Level Three with Incident Management Team (IMT)
Policy Incident
Group Commander
Operations
Chief
Internal
Branch
Public Works
Rep
Parks
Rep
Police
Rep
External
Branch
PIO �—H Safety Officer
Liaison Officer
Logistics
Financ e
EOC Manager
Chief
Chief
Support
Service
FL—C_—o—st — Unit Time Unit
EOC Comms Food /Supplies
Branch
Branch
Leader Leader
Branch Du Unit Leader
Supply Unit
Comms Unit
Procurement
Uni t Leader
phone /IT
Specialist
Facilities Unit
Medical Unit
Radio Room Call Center
Supervisor Supervisor
Ground
Support Unit
Food Unit
Radio Call Takers
Operators
Message Message
Distributors Distributors
Adds executive level policy- making to the EOC functions when an overwhelming event has impacted the City and decisions need to be made regarding service priorities and
expectations on a city -wide basis. The IMT conducts the city -wide Incident Command Function and is lead by the Chief of Police as the Incident Commander. The remainder
of the ICS positions are filled by department directors (or their designees) as appropriate. IMT activation adds a policy- making component to the emergency management
organization, lead directly by the Mayor. The policy group may consist of department directors not serving on the IMT, City Council members, and others as appropriate.
The Incident Commander serves as the direct link between the Policy Group and the IMT, conveying decisions made by the policy group to the IMT and conveying incident
information to the policy group.
SA #1 — Direction and Control
DI.E
Revised January 2015
Page 362 of 392
189
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
SA 1: DIRECTION AND CONTROL
Attachment 6: Functional Responsibility Matrix
CEMP Responsibility Matrix
It is assumed that most departments will have some interaction with each ESF. This matrix is intended to provide a quick reference to primary
and secondary responsibilities for each function.
Department
Basic
ESF
1
ESF
2
ESF
3
ESF
4
ESF
5
ESF
6
ESF
7
ESF
8
ESF
9
ESF
10
ESF
11
ESF
12
ESF
13
ESF
14
ESF
15
ESF
20
Administration
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
City Attorney
X
X
X
Finance
X
X
X
X
HR
X
X
X
IT
X
X
X
X
X
X
Parks
X
X
X
X
X
X
CDPW
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Police
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
SA #1 — Direction and Control
IDLE
Revised January 2015
Page 363 of 392
190
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
SA 2: FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
PURPOSE
A. To provide guidelines for fiscal and administrative functions in support of the City of
Auburn's emergency services during an emergency or disaster.
POLICIES
A. In emergency situations, political subdivisions have the power to enter into contracts and
incur obligations without regard to time - consuming procedures and formalities prescribed by
law (except mandatory constitutional requirements) including, but not limited to, budget law
limitations, and the appropriation and expenditure of public funds as identified in the Revised
Code of Washington (RCW) 35.33.081, Emergency Expenditures — Nondebatable
Emergencies.
B. Expenditures necessary for the immediate survival of persons endangered by an emergency
or that may be incurred by a disaster may not exceed the legal limitations of the budget
unless the City Council passes a resolution authorizing a budget amendment.
C. The emergency or disaster response capabilities of the City will be built upon the capabilities
of existing departments, augmented by volunteers and reassignment of regular personnel to
duties that are more urgent during an emergency period.
PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS
A. An emergency or disaster may require the expenditure of large sums of money by the City.
B. Financial operations will be carried out under compressed schedules and intense public
pressures, necessitating expeditious (non- routine) procedures, but with no lessened
requirement for sound finance management and accountability.
C. A Presidential Disaster Declaration will permit funding from the Federal Disaster Relief Fund
under the provisions of Public Law 93.288, Disaster Relief Act of 1974, as amended by
Public Law 100 -707, the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act.
D. Actions, decisions, conditions, and expenses must be documented in an emergency or
disaster to recover Federal and State funds and to provide for legal documentation.
E. Sufficient administrative personnel will be available to perform support tasks.
CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
A. Authorization of Emergency Expenditures
1. Emergency expenditures are not normally integrated into the budgeting process.
Nevertheless, disasters occur on a periodic basis requiring substantial and necessary
unanticipated obligations and expenditures.
SA #2 — Financial Management Revised January 2015 191
D I . E Page 364 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
2. Local political subdivisions will incur disaster related obligations and expenditures per
the provisions of RCW 38.52.070(2) as follows:
a. In carrying out the provisions of this chapter each political subdivision, in which any
disaster as described in RCW 38.52.020 occurs, shall have the power to enter into
contracts and incur obligations necessary to combat such disaster, protecting the
health and safety of persons and property, and providing emergency assistance to
the victims of such disaster. Each political subdivision is authorized to exercise the
powers vested under this section in light of the exigencies of an extreme emergency
situation without regard to time - consuming procedures and formalities prescribed by
law (excepting mandatory constitutional requirements), including, but not limited to,
budget law limitations, requirements of competitive bidding and publication of
notices, provisions pertaining to the performance of public work, entering into
contracts, the incurring of obligations, the employment of temporary workers, the
rental of equipment, the purchase of supplies and materials, the levying of taxes, and
the appropriation and expenditures of public funds.
3. The City is authorized to make the expenditures necessary to meet emergencies without
further notice of hearing as provided by RCW 35.33.081, Emergency Expenditures —
Nondebatable Emergencies:
a. Upon the happening of any emergency caused by violence of nature, casualty, riot,
insurrection, war, or other unanticipated occurrence requiring the immediate
preservation of order or public health, or for the restoration to a condition of
usefulness of any public property which has been damaged or destroyed by
accident, or for public relief from calamity, or in settlement of approved claims for
personal injuries or property damages, or to meet mandatory expenditures required
by laws enacted since the last annual budget was adopted, or to cover expenses
incident to preparing for or establishing a new form of government authorized or
assumed after adoption of the current budget, including any expenses incident to
selection of additional or new officials required thereby, or incident to employee
recruitment at any time, the city or town legislative body, upon the adoption of an
ordinance, by the vote of one more than the majority of all members of the legislative
body, stating the facts constituting the emergency and the estimated amount
required to meet it, may make the expenditures therefore without notice or hearing.
B. Record Keeping
The City, when expending resources in response to a proclaimed emergency or disaster, will
maintain detailed records during such emergencies or disasters to meet the financial and
account requirements of the Federal or State funding agency. Records will be kept in such a
manner that emergency or disaster related expenditures and obligations of local
departments and agencies can be broken out and identified separate from regular or
general programs and activities.
Complete and accurate records are necessary to:
1. Document requests for assistance and ensure maximum eligible reimbursement.
2. Facilitate reimbursement under approved applications pertaining to proclaimed local
emergencies.
SA #2 — Financial Management Revised January 2015 192
DI.E Page 365 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
3. Audit reports and records. Detailed records will be kept from the onset of the emergency
or disaster, including but not limited to:
a. Appropriate extracts from payrolls, with any cross - references needed to located
original documents.
b. A schedule of City equipment used or copies of invoices for rented equipment.
c. Invoices, warrants, and checks issued and paid for materials and supplies used on
the job.
d. Copies of contracts for all work performed by an outside agency.
C. Federal and State Reimbursement
Emergency or disaster related expenditures and obligations of local political subdivisions
may be reimbursed under a number of Federal or State programs. Reimbursement of
approved costs for work performed in the restoration of certain public facilities may be
authorized by the Federal or State government after a major disaster declaration by the
President or under statutory authority of certain Federal agencies. The Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) provides funding to public entities through the Public
Assistance program. Other agencies that may provide post- disaster funds to public agencies
include, but are not limited to:
• Washington State Department of Energy — FCAAP Grants
• US Department of Transportation — Trans Aid
• US Fish and Wildlife
• FEMA Mitigation Program
• US Army Corps of Engineers
• Federal Highway Administration (for "on- system" roads)
• Natural Resources Conservation Service
1. Before a Presidential Disaster Declaration
After an occurrence that may result in a declared major disaster or emergency, the
Counties will assess damages and prepared an estimate of labor and damage costs.
These assessments are provided directly to the counties by local jurisdictions and must
be completed quickly after an event and, on occasion, while the event is still in progress.
The Counties then forward these Preliminary Damage Assessments (PDAs) to the
Washington State Emergency Operations Center. If expenditures within a particular
county and /or the state have exceeded a preset threshold, the governor will request a
Presidential Disaster Declaration.
2. After a Presidential Disaster Declaration
Once a disaster declaration is made by the President, Joint Field Offices are opened and
staffed by FEMA and the State, for the purpose of administering disaster assistance
programs. Public assistance meetings are held with impacted jurisdictions and moneys
are made available through established processes.
SA #2 — Financial Management Revised January 2015 193
IDLE Page 366 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
D. Audits of Disaster - Related Expenditures and Obligations
1. Audits of local disaster - related emergency expenditures will be conducted during the
normal audit period. Federal disaster assistance projects will be audited after the
completion of associated work and records must be kept for 6 years.
E. Fiscal Procedures
1. Each City department shall designate personnel to be responsible for documentation of
emergency or disaster - related expenses within their department.
2. Emergency or disaster expenditures will come from currently appropriated local funds in
accordance with RCW 35.33.081, Emergency Expenditures — Nondebatable
Emergencies and RCW 35.33.091, Emergency Expenditure — Other Emergencies —
Hearing.
3. The Finance Director, or designee, will be responsible for identifying sources of internal
funds to meet emergency or disaster related expenses that are incurred.
4. Regular "normal" approval procedures for expenditures may be modified to
accommodate the circumstances associated with the emergency or disaster.
5. Records shall be kept in a manner that distinguishes between day -to -day operations and
emergency or disaster expenses.
6. The Emergency Preparedness Manager shall coordinate documentation of city -wide
financial records and expenditures resulting from an emergency or disaster and shall
serve as the City's Primary Applicant Agency for FEMA reimbursement.
7. Alternate methods of payment and payroll processing shall be established in case of
computer system failure.
F. Administrative Procedures
1. Each City department shall designate personnel to be responsible for the documentation
of emergency operations within their respective department.
2. During emergency operations, non - essential administrative activities may be suspended.
Personnel not assigned to essential duties may be assigned to other departments in
order to provide support services.
3. Records of disaster operations activities shall be kept in a manner that distinguishes
them from day -to -day operational reports, service work requests, and payroll records.
4. When appropriate, disaster reports and expenditures shall be coordinated, and
documentation for State and /or Federal reimbursement and /or assistance programs
shall be prepared and submitted to the appropriate State and Federal agencies.
5. Volunteer emergency workers used during emergencies and disaster operations shall be
registered with the City as outlined in the Washington Administrative Code (WAC)
SA #2 — Financial Management Revised January 2015 194
DI.E Page 367 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
118.04, Emergency Worker Program and all donated hours tracked. Volunteers who are
pre- registered will be issued City Volunteer Identification cards. Spontaneous volunteers
will be registered on -site and their identity verified with government issued photo -ID.
6. In any event where volunteer emergency workers are used, the Emergency
Management Division will obtain a mission number from Washington State EMD. All
volunteers, their arrival and departure times, the nature of their work, and any injuries or
personal equipment losses will be documented for future reimbursement and claim
issues.
7. City departments may streamline permit processes based on the circumstances created
by the emergency or disaster.
8. City departments shall identify and prepare plans for alternate processing methods of
essential documents in case of computer or automation system failure.
G. Electronic Information Management
The Innovation & Technology Department is responsible for the protection and restoration of
electronic and computer hardware, software, connectivity, and data. The personnel from this
department will work with a designated employee from other departments to identify
mission — critical Innovation & Technology equipment with redundancy for emergency
operations.
H. Records Preservation and Retention
1. The City Clerk is responsible for establishing and publishing policy for essential record
preservation to ensure continuity of City government.
2. Directors of each department are responsible for records preservation in their respective
departments.
RESPONSIBILITIES
A. All City Departments
1. Prepare emergency fiscal procedures for the operation of their respective departments
2. Designate personnel responsible for documenting emergency or disaster - related
expenses at the department level.
3. Coordinate with Emergency Management in preparation and submittal of documentation
for reimbursement or assistance from Federal or State agencies.
4. Identify all repair and recovery actions and coordinate those through the EOC or the
Emergency Management Division for resolution.
5. Maintain documentation regarding injuries and lost or damaged equipment caused by
the emergency or disaster and provide this information to Risk Management, Finance, or
Emergency Management as requested.
SA #2 — Financial Management Revised January 2015 195
IDLE Page 368 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
This page intentionally left blank.
SA #2 — Financial Management Revised January 2015 196
D I . E Page 369 of 392
City of Auburn Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
SA 3: WORKER HEALTH AND SAFETY
All emergency operations will adhere to the applicable occupational safety and health laws. The
following are specific laws passed by the State of Washington Legislature that pertain to
occupational safety and health. The laws listed here are hosted on Washington State's Office of
the Code Reviser web site.
Chapter 43.05 RCW —Technical Assistance Programs
Title 49 RCW — Laboi
Chapter 49.17
Chapter 49.19
Chapter 49.22
Chapter 49.26
Chapter 49.70
r Regulations
— WISHA Act
—Workplace Violence in Healthcare
— Safety — Crime Prevention
— Asbestos
— Right to Know
Title 70 RCW — Public Health and Safety
Chapter 70.74 — Explosives
Chapter 70.77 — Fireworks Act
Chapter 72.23 — Public and Private Facilities for the Mentally III
Chapter 72.23.400 — Workplace safety plan
Chapter 72.23.410 —Violence prevention training
Washington Administrative Code
Chapter 298.800 — Safety and Health Core Rules
SA #3— Worker Health and Safety Revised January 2015 197
D I . E Page 370 of 392
c m OF
AUBURN
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject:
Resolution No. 5133 -Auburn Design Standards (10
minutes)
Department:
Community Development &
Public Works
Attachments:
Resdution No. 5133
Exhibit A - Design Standards DUC Zane
Administrative Recommendation:
Date:
February 17, 2015
Budget Impact:
$0
Discuss eliminating awnings as a required design feature on downtown buildings in
favor of allowing awnings as an optional feature with design guidelines.
Background Summary:
During the Downtown Business Summit, a strong sentiment about the damaging
visual and experiential effect of poor awning and canopy design resonated with the
Mayor, City Council, and business owners. A business owner brought up the fact that
awnings and canopies are currently required in the Downtown Urban Center, which
goes against consultant advice and conventional design wisdom. As we work toward
improving the appearance of our Downtown Urban Center Zone, the City needs to
give business owners more flexibility and design options; over - mandating limits
creativity and applies a one -size fits all to buildings with different scales and attributes.
Finding smart solutions to facade design requires removing an unnecessary
requirement to provide awnings and canopies.
The language retains mention of awnings and canopies, but provides more guidance
on how to achieve awning and canopy designs that enhance the attractiveness of
downtown. The revisions and additions clarify the purpose of awnings, lighting
requirements for awnings, as well as awning, canopy, and overhang materials and
styles that are considered appropriate in Downtown Auburn.
Reviewed by Council Committees:
Other: Planning, Legal Department
Councilmember: Staff: Snyder
Meeting Date: February 23, 2015 Item Number: DI.F
DI.F AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 371 of 392
DLF AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED Page 372 of 392
RESOLUTION NO. 5 1 3 3
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, AMENDING
THE CITY OF AUBURN DESIGN STANDARDS FOR
ITS DOWNTOWN URBAN CENTER ZONING
DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the City of Auburn maintains and publishes Design Standards
for its DUC Downtown Urban Center zoning district, which are intended to
provide standardization of design elements for consistency and to assure public
safety; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Auburn City Code 18.29.070, the Downtown
Auburn Design Standards may be amended periodically to respond to new
development conditions or to address emerging issues; and
WHEREAS, the Auburn Department of Community Development and
Public Works has prepared revisions to the Downtown Auburn Design Standards,
to provide updated standards for building design relating to protection of
pedestrians from the elements.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN,
HEREBY RESOLVES as follows:
Section 1. That the Downtown Urban Center Design Standards related
to building design and weather protection shall be amended as provided in by the
proposed revision to Downtown Urban Center Design Standards document
attached hereto as Exhibit A, to be effective as of March 9, 2015.
Section 2. That the Director of the Community Development and Public
Works is authorized to implement such administrative procedures as may be
Resolution No. 5133
February 18, 2015
Page 1 of 2
DI.F Page 373 of 392
necessary to promulgate and publish this revision to the Downtown Urban Center
Design Standards.
Section 3. That this Resolution shall take effect and be in full force
upon passage and signatures hereon.
Dated and Signed this day of , 2015.
CITY OF AUBURN
NANCY BACKUS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Danielle E. Daskam, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Daniel B. Heid, City Attorney
Resolution No. 5133
February 18, 2015
Page 2 of 2
D I . F Page 374 of 392
Exhibit A
Downtown Urban Center
City of Auburn Design Standards
ADOPTED 2/12/07-
AMENDED 4/14/08, 06/9/08, 06/16/09, o4��05/24/10;.
REVISION EFFECTIVE 03/09/2015
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
May March 9, 2015a
DIT Page 375 of 392
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Definitions /Architectural Terms
II. Guidelines Applicable to All Development
Site Design Parking Lots and Garages
-- Screening and Landscaping
-- Pedestrian Connections
- -Width / Spacing of Driveways
Shielded Lighting
Screening Service Areas
Public Plazas
Building
Design Entrances
Ground Level Details
Base / Middle / Top
Upper Level Setbacks
Treating Blank Walls
Use of Neon
Parking Structures
Screening Rooftop Equipment
Energy Efficiency
Sign Design Integration with Architecture
Creativity
Landmark Signs
Ground Signs
III. Guidelines Applicable to Pedestrian Streets
Site Design Limitation on Driveways
Location of Parking
Location of Drive - Through Lanes
Building
Design Land Use Mix
Proximity to Sidewalk
Ground Level Transparency
Weather Protection
Sign Design Pedestrian Orientation
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
May 9, 20158
DI.F
2
Page 376 of 392
DEFINITIONS /ARCHITECTURAL TERMS
These words shall have the following meanings for the purposes of these guidelines:
a. Articulation - in art and architecture, is first of all a joint. Expanding from that definition, articulation is also
a method of styling the joints in the formal elements of architectural design. Through degrees of
articulation, each part is united with the whole work by means of a joint in such a way that the joined parts
are put together in styles ranging from exceptionally distinct jointing to the opposite of high articulation —
fluidity and continuity of joining. In highly articulated works, each part is defined precisely and stands out
clearly. The articulation of a building reveals how the parts fit into the whole by emphasizing each part
separately.
b. Belt Course - A molding or projecting course running horizontally along the face of a building.
c. Boxed Cabinet Signs - is a permanent sign that is mounted on the face of a building that is roughly
rectangular in shape and provides for internal illumination and changing the message of the sign by
replacing a single transparent or translucent material such as a Plexiglas /lexan face. This definition is
meant to distinguish between a cabinet sign that is essentially a rectangular box and one that follows the
outlines of the letters of the sign, or an "outline cabinet sign."
d. Canopy - means a cover over a sidewalk providing protection from the rain, which is constructed of
durable, permanent materials.
e. Cornice - upper section of an entablature, a projecting shelf along the top of a wall often supported by
brackets.
f. Director - means the director of the Auburn Pplanning and Ddevelopment Ddepartment.
g. Neo- traditional – Design concept that promotes a more livable and alive lively community for residents;
more sustainable since it preserves land by encouraging more compact development and reduces air
pollution and carbon dioxide emissions by creating new opportunities to walk and bike rather than using a
car; and mixed -use with a combination of commercial and residential development.
h. Outlined Cabinet Signs - is a permanent sign that is mounted on the face of a building that roughly follows
the shape of the text of the sign and provides for internal illumination. This definition is meant to
distinguish between a cabinet sign that follows the outlines of the letters of the sign and one that is
essentially a rectangular box or a "boxed cabinet sign." An "outlined cabinet sign" will be treated more like
an "individual letter sign" where the area of the sign is calculated based on the actual outlined shape of
the sign.
Parking, structured - means parking contained within an enclosed building either part of or designed to
appear like it is part of the larger building complex, or a freestanding structure devoted exclusively to
above -grade parking.
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
May 9, 20158
3
D I . F Page 377 of 392
Personal service uses — means uses such as hair salons, nail salons, custom tailoring, dry cleaning, and
similar related uses. Personal service uses can also include banks.
k. Plinth - a block used as the base of a column or other upright support.
Public art - means any form of painting, mural, mosaic, sculpture, or other work of art, so long as it can be
appraised as a work of art and its value as such documented, displayed on the exterior of a building, at or
near the pedestrian entrance, or on a public plaza, and visible to users of the public right -of -way at all
times.
m. Plaza - means an open space that is visible and accessible to the public at all times predominantly open
to the sky, and for use principally by people, as opposed to merely a setting for the building.
n. Street level retail - means uses providing goods and services, including food and drink, adjacent to,
visible from, and directly accessible from the public sidewalk.
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
May 9, 20158
4
D I . F Page 378 of 392
GUIDEONES APPL1CABLE TO ALL DEVELOPMENT IN DOWNTOWN
GUIDELINES APPLICABLE TO SITE DESIGN
1. PARKING LOTS AND GARAGES
Intent: Reduce the visual impact of surface parking lots
and garages
A. General
1. Parking shall be located over, under, behind, or to the side of buildings.
Parking structures are strongly encouraged.
2. All parking lots shall meet the design and construction standards of
ACC 18.52 unless modified herein.
Parking stall standards for 90 degree stalls in structured parking
facilities shall be 18 feet in length and 9 feet in width. All other
dimensions shall meet ACC 18.52.
3. Compact parking stalls shall be permitted but only 30% of the parking
provided may be dedicated to compact parking.
B. Screening and Landscaping
1. Surface parking lots consisting of ten or more stalls shall feature
landscaped planter beds at a ratio of one to every six (6) stalls. Each
planter bed shall include at least one tree, a minimum caliper of two (2)
inches at the time of planting.
2. The minimum planter size shall be 100 square feet. Planters shall be
protected by concrete curbs and shall also feature shrubs and /or
groundcover.
3. Surface parking lots located adjacent to any street (excluding alleys)
shall be screened by one or a combination of the following:
a. Low walls made of decorative concrete, masonry, or other similar
material, not exceeding a maximum height of 30 inches.
b. Raised planter walls planted with a minimum of 80% evergreen
shrubs, not exceeding a total height of 30 inches
c. Landscape plantings consisting of trees (of which at least 80% are
deciduous) and shrubs and groundcover materials (of which at
least 80% are evergreen).
d. All plant material used for parking lot screening shall provide clear
views between 30 inches and eight (8) feet above the ground
surface, for visibility and safety.
e. Planting areas shall be a minimum of five (5) feet in width and
shall be irrigated.
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
May 9, 20158
Mr
'$ —V, -9 V - 11
�`I ¢+-. f1-f Eli �-�-►
5
D I . F Page 379 of 392
G VIDELNES APPLJCABLE TO ALL DE VEL OPMENT IN DOWNTDVM
PARKING LOTS AND GARAGES (Cont.)
C. Pedestrian Connections
1. Pedestrian connections not less than five (5) feet wide shall be
provided through parking lots to building entrances, sidewalks
and /or transit stops.
2. Pedestrian connections should be clearly defined by at least two
of the following:
a. Six (6) inch vertical curb in combination with a raised
walkway;
b. Textured paving, including across vehicular lanes, such as
unit pavers, stamped and scored concrete;
c. Bollards;
d. Trellis;
e. Continuous landscape area at least three (3) feet wide and at
least on one side of the walkway;
f. Pedestrian -scale lighting to aid in wayfinding.
D. Width / Spacing of Driveways
1. Driveways should not exceed 24 feet in width at the property line.
Distance between curb cuts should not be less than 100 feet,
measured from the outer edge of the driveway aprons.
2. The sidewalk pattern and material shall continue across the
driveway.
2. SHIELDED LIGHTING
Site Desil,,w �
un9 1r -,
r
Pedesvrear ccnne dion ihrc Th parki q .Lot
Intent: Ensure that exterior site lighting contributes to the
character of the site such as accentuating architectural features (e.g., building entrances)
and does not disturb adjacent development
A. Only City- approved standard fixtures shall be used for public sidewalk lighting.
B. All site lighting shall be shielded from producing off -site glare, either
through exterior shields or through optical design inside the fixture, so
that the direction of the light is downward.
rs'max.
aiang
C. The maximum height allowed for parking lot lighting is 24 feet. The w kwras
g p g g g� r
maximum height along pedestrian walkways is 16 feet.
FBI
Site lighting should be appropriate to create adequate visibility at night,
evenly distributed to increase security, and coordinated with adjacent landscaping to avoid casting
long shadows.
E. Incorporate electrical service into lighting fixtures for seasonal ornamental lighting.
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
May 9, 20158
C.
2s max
D I . F Page 380 of 392
GUIDELINES APPLICABLE TO ALL DE VEL OPMENT IN DOWNTOWN
3. SCREENING OF TRASH I SERVICE AREAS
Intent: screen trash storage, loading and service areas from public view
A. Trash and service areas shall be placed away from streets.
B. All service, loading and trash collection areas shall be screened by a
combination of masonry walls and planting, with similar character to the
design of the building it serves. If landscaping cannot be accomplished
due to existing site conditions (e.g. existing parking areas) then the
Planning Director may approve artistic features on the face of the
masonry wall in place of landscaping.
C. Loading and service areas shall not face any residential areas, unless no other location is feasible.
Effort should be made to buffer impacts to residential areas.
4. PUBLIC PLAZAS
Intent: If included in the development, ensure public plazas are readily accessible for
use and offer a pleasant environment
A. Public plazas must abut and be within three (3) feet in elevation of a
public sidewalk. Ramps shall be provided consistent with ADA
standards.
B. At least ten (10) % of the plaza area shall be planted with trees and
other vegetation.
C. Plazas shall include adequate lighting, allow for penetration of
sunlight, and provide seating in the form of low walls, benches and /or
tables and chairs.
D. Accessory site features such as, waste receptacles, street furniture
and movable planters shall be of compatible design to the main
building served by the plaza.
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
May March 9, 20158
7
D I . F Page 381 of 392
GWDELYNES APPLlCABLE TO ALL DEVELOPMENT DOWNTOWN
1. ENTRANCES
Intent: ensure that entrances are easily identifiable
and accessible from streets and sidewalks
A. Main building entrances should be oriented to the
property line abutting the primary street rather than to a
parking lot.
B. Locate primary entrances so that they are visible from the
public right -of -way. The entry should be marked by
architecturally prominent elements such as canopies,
ornamental lighting fixtures and /or fixed seating that offer
visual prominence and a sense of safety.
2. GROUND LEVEL DETAILS
Intent: reinforce the character of the streetscape
A. Street - oriented fagades of commercial and mixed -use
buildings shall be designed to be pedestrian - friendly through
the inclusion of at least four of the following elements:
1. Kickplates for storefront windows;
2. Projecting window sills;
3. Pedestrian scale signs;
4. Canopies;
5. Plinths for columns;
6. Containers for seasonal plantings;
7. Ornamental tilework;
8. Medallions;
9. Belt courses;
10. Lighting or hanging baskets supported by
ornamental brackets;
11. An element, as approved by the City, which meets the
intent of this section.
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
May March 9, 20158
DI.F
Builds , Design �
6" Marx
J6. ate+
�fw
r / rte; .I- up
P
M.
Page 382 of 392
GWDELfNES ARPL1CABLE To ALL DE VEL OPMENT IN DOWNTOWN
Buildino D siapt
3. BASE I MIDDLE I TOP
Intent: primarily emphasize the street level, but also
create a visually interesting skyline
A. Buildings above 30 feet in height should distinguish a "base" at
ground level using articulation and materials such as stone,
masonary, or decorative concrete.
A. The "top" of the building should emphasize a distinct profile or
outline with elements such as a projecting parapet, cornice, upper
level setback or pitched roofline. Materials shall be coordinated
within the project.
B. The "middle" of the building should be distinguished by a change in
materials or color, windows, balconies, stepbacks and signage.
UPPER LEVEL SETBACK
Intent: reduce the apparent bulk of multi -story buildings and
maintain pedestrian scale
A. Building fagades abutting streets shall have an upper level setback
at a height 25 -40 feet above grade, with a minimum depth of ten (10)
feet.
B. New structures that have frontage on Main Street shall be designed
to reflect the scale and rhythm of historic Main Street and retain the
Main Street pedestrian scale.
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
May 9, 20158
DI.F
N
Page 383 of 392
5
_ J ES Ar ALL DEVELOPMENTIN DOWNTOWN
Buildino D siapt
TREATMENT OF BLANK WALLS
Intent: reduce the visual impact of blank walls by providing visual interest
A. Blank walls visible from the public street longer than 30 feet shall
incorporate two (2) or more of the following features:
1. Vegetation, such as trees, shrubs, ground cover and /or vines
adjacent to the wall surface;
2. Artwork, such as bas - relief sculpture, murals, or trellis
structures
3. Seating area with special paving, lighting fixtures and seasonal
plantings; and /or
4. Architectural detailing, reveals, contrasting materials, or other
special interest, consistent with character of the downtown.
USE OF NEON
Intent: encourage the use of neon as an architectural embellishment in keeping with the character
of downtown.
A. Neon may be allowed to emphasize unique building
features.
B. Neon may be used as artwork or as graphic symbols that
portray the nature of the business.
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
May March 9, 20158
1USTIC£
CENTtR
10
D I . F Page 384 of 392
VA
E:3
0UYDEL.INES APPLICABLE TO ALL DEVELOPMENT IN DOWN TOWN
�rri�r�irr,� l�t•�rt�rr �
PARKING STRUCTURES
Intent: reduce the visual impact of structured parking located above grade
A. At ground level, free - standing parking structures shall comply with
guidelines addressed under `Ground Level Details.'
B. Upper levels of structured parking should be screened or treated
architecturally by two or more of the following:
1. Roughly square openings rather than horizontal
2. Planting designed to grow on the fagade
3. Louvers
4. Expanded metal panels
5. Decorative metal grills
6. Spandrel (opaque) glass
7. An element, as approved by the City, which meets the intent of
this section.
C. Lighting fixtures within garages should be screened from view from
0
the street.
In order to provide a safer environment, parking structure illumination
should be designed to a maximum uniformity ratio (proportion of
average to minimum illumination) of 4:1.
rstc�•� -
ROOFTOP EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS AND
SCREENING
Intent: screen rooftop mechanical and communications
equipment from the ground level of nearby streets and
residential areas
A. Mechanical equipment shall be screened. Screening shall
be integrated with the architecture of the building.
B. An access easement to rooftops shall be provided to the
City, which will allow the installation of devices for wireless
coverage and maintenance of those devices. The applicant
shall also provide access to power on rooftops to be used for
City wireless facilities. The parameters of the access
easement and location of devices shall be approved by the
City. Any cabling and /or power shall be secured so the
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
May March 9, 20158
VisiB a c�mmrmicatiarz eo., u° of is tirdasieaNs
11
D I . F Page 385 of 392
facilities are not damaged by other activity on the roof.
C. The applicant shall install an outdoor speaker system and AM receiver, to receive the City's Main
Street radio signal, on any new commercial structure within the Downtown Urban Center zone. The
property owner and /or building owner shall be responsible for the outdoor speaker system and any
repairs or maintenance.
D. Utility equipment such as power and gas meters shall be painted to match the structure.
E. Private utility cabinets (e.g. Comcast, PSE) shall be screened with landscaping where feasible.
GUIDELINES APPLICABLE TO ALL DEVEL OPMENT W DOWNTO'dVN
1. LANDMARK SIGNS
Intent: preserve the unique character of the downtown
A. Retain existing historic signs (as determined by the City) that -�
feature the character of the area, wherever possible.
r
2. INTEGRATION WITH ARCHITECTURE
Intent: ensure that signage is a part of the overall design of a project and not additive or
an afterthought
A. The design plans for buildings and sites shall identify locations and
sizes for future signs. As tenants install signs, such signs shall be in
conformance with an overall sign program that allows for advertising
which fits with the architectural character, proportions, and details of
the development. The sign program shall indicate location, size, and
general design.
B. New signs shall not project above the roof, parapet or exterior wall
unless part of an integral architectural feature. Signs mounted on a
roof are not allowed.
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
May March 9, 20158
� t
12
D I . F Page 386 of 392
0UYDELAES APPL1CABLE TO ALL DE VEL OPMEN T?k DOAA'TQ'rV,e'
K3
4.
st,"!� DeNi1!? �
CREATIVITY
Intent: encourage interesting, creative and unique approaches to the design of signage
A. Signs should be highly graphic in form, expressive and
individualized. Signs should convey the product or service offered
by the business in a bold, graphic form
B. If a projecting sign is designed by a graphic design
professional and includes a non - verbal, three - dimensional symbol
that succinctly conveys the nature of the business and constitutes
a dominant proportion of the overall design, the sign may be
allowed to exceed the maximum area otherwise allowed by 50 %.
GROUND SIGNS
Intent: ensure that signs are not principally
oriented to automobile traffic
A. All freestanding signs shall be ground (monument) signs no
higher than five (5) feet. Pole signs are prohibited.
B. The area around the base of any ground sign shall be
planted with shrubs and seasonal flowers.
C. Backlit signs are permitted if the sign meets all other
standards for signage in this document and Chapter 18.29.
D. Internally -lit signs are p permitted when located
adjacent and oriented to Auburn Way North /Auburn
Way South street frontages and only with electronic
message center signs in accordance with Auburn
City Code Chapter 18.56 Signs. If an internally lit
sign is utilized, the sign shall also conform to all
other applicable standards for changing message
center signs as described in this same chapter.
E. Boxed cabinet signs are prohibited in the Downtown
Urban Center zone. Z/
F�E
F. Outlined cabinet signs are permitted only if the sign
meets all other standards for signage in this
document and Chapter 18.29.
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
4March 9, 20158
ULF
13
Page 387 of 392
ADWIDNAL GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPMENT SITES ADJACENT TO PEDESTRIAN STREETS
ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES FCR
DEVELOPMENT SITES ADJACENT TO
PEDESTRIAN
STREETS
1. LIMITATIONS ON DRIVEWAYS
Intent: maintain a continuous sidewalk by
minimizing driveway access
A. Curb cuts are prohibited on Main Street and also on other Pedestrian I
Streets, unless access from no other street is available.
2. LOCATION OF PARKING.*,
Intent: reduce the visual impact of parking
and enhance the pedestrian experience
A. Parking shall be located under or behind buildings or within structures. I S T , a EE r f .
B. On all Pedestrian Streets, surface parking lots are not permitted :x
between the building and the right -of -way.
� i-
3. LOCATION OF DRIVE - THROUGH LANES
Intent: preserve a safe and comfortable
pedestrian experience"
B. Drive - through lanes are not allowed between the building
and the public right -of -way on Pedestrian I Streets.
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
4March 9, 20158
14
Page 388 of 392
ADDfTtONALOLRDFtf NFS FOR DEVELOPMENT SITES ADJACENT To PEDESTRIAN STREETS
trildi n ; c .vi,; rr �
1. LAND USE
Intent. ensure a rich, uninterrupted mixture of
lively activities aimed at people on foot
A. Along Pedestrian I Streets, ground floor uses that
face the sidewalk shall be retail, restaurant or personal
service uses.
B. Along Pedestrian II Streets, ground floor office and
residential uses are also acceptable when facing the sidewalk.
2. PROXIMITY TO SIDEWALK
Intent. reinforce an active pedestrian experience
along Pedestrian Streets
A. Buildings along Pedestrian Streets shall be set immediately
at the back of the sidewalk, with the exception of providing open
space for public use such as plazas, courtyards and seating areas.
B. Water run -off from canopies /awnings should be controlled by
gutter or other means.
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
4March 9, 20158
15
Page 389 of 392
ADDITIONAL CUOELiNES rO.R DEVELOPiYEkT S1 TES ADJACENT TO PEDESTRIAN STREETS
3.
4.
GROUND LEVEL TRANSPARENCY
Intent. strongly encourage that structures provide a visual connection with pedestrians
between activities inside and outside of buildings
A. Along Pedestrian I Streets, a minimum of 80% of any ground
floor fagade (between two (2) feet and 12 feet above grade)
facing a street or public space shall be comprised of clear,
"vision" glass. Placement of office equipment or other
similar items shall not be located along the clear vision glass
fagade that would completely inhibit the visibility into and out
of the building space.
B. Along Pedestrian II Streets, a minimum of 60% of any
ground floor fagade (between two (2) feet and 12 feet above
grade) facing a street or public space shall be comprised of
clear, "vision" glass. Placement of office equipment or other
similar items shall not be located along the clear vision glass
fagade that would completely inhibit the visibility into and out
of the building space.
C. Along Main Street, doors and windows should reflect the
historic Main Street rhythm of 25 -foot wide storefronts.
D. Frosting, tinting, or other similar glass affects that inhibit the
visibility into and out of the building space is prohibited.
WEATHER PROTECTION
Intent. provide pedestrians with protection from the
weather and en_ga_gin_a exterior space to sit, eat, and
walk
A. While canopies, awnings, and other types of overhangs are
not required, Gcanopies. awnings, and other types of
overhangs may&#a4 be pmvided- included
if they provide
protection from the weather (including solar protection from
radiant heating or fading), help create an inviting place for
outdoor seating or dining area, or enhance the feeling of
safety through integral lighting.
B. The minimum depth of any canopy, awning, or other type
of overhang shall be fe it (^` fee must be in proportion to the
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
4March 9, 20158
Y
. . . L , i f r
ffor
1
minimum
1 4' deep
13-12 leer
above
srdsv;a'k
16
Page 390 of 392
use. The vertical dimension between the underside of the
canopy.-G-r-awning, or other type of overhang and the
sidewalk shall be at least eight (8) feet and no more than
twelve 121 feet.
C. Canopies awnings, and other types of overhangs shall
be of-shed or marquee style, except that bowed awnings
may be used over arched windewsbuilding entrances and /or
windows.
D. Weather protection can be combined with the method used
to achieve visual prominence at building entrances.
D-. E. Canopies not made of a combined metal and glass assembly that allows transmission of light and
that extends three feet side -to -side beyond a door or building opening must have integral lighting
systems, sconce lighting, or some other additional lighting to prevent dark, shadow - filled spaces
under the canopy, awning, or other type of overhang.
ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPMENT S ITES ADJACENT TO PEDESTRIAN STREETS
1. PEDESTRIAN ORIENTATION
Intent: provide signs that activate and strengthen
the pedestrian realm
A. Signs shall be primarily oriented to pedestrians, rather than
people in vehicles. The following are types of signs are
encouraged along Pedestrian Streets:
1) Blade signs (projecting over sidewalk)
2) Window signs (painted on glass or hung behind glass)
3) Logo signs (symbols, shapes)
4) Wall signs over entrance.
B. Monument signs are permitted on pedestrian streets only if
the following are met:
1. The sign is setback from the back of sidewalk;
2. Does not create a sight distance hazard;
3. Does not block pedestrian access;
4. The sign is providing pedestrian wayfinding and not
oriented to vehicles; and
5. Does not conflict with requirements to meet the
American with Disabilities Act.
C. Signs shall be evaluated with respect to size, scale, and
relationship to other signs, function, location and other
factors.
City of Auburn Design Standards
Downtown Urban Center Zone
4March 9, 20158
ULF
1
17
Page 391 of 392
Pedestrian Streets
City of Auburn Design Standards 18
Downtown Urban Center Zone
24 March 9, 20150 Page 392 of 392
ULF