How does this mesh with the National Response Framework?  From the local Public Works agency level...where most disasters, emergencies and incidents will be handled...there is the perception that there is too much duplication, redundancy and to a certain degree, contrary information.  Keep in mind most local agencies are fairly small and not organized along the paramilitary lines of police and fire and that our primary focus is on construction, development, maintenance and repair. To keep current and in compliance with federal guidelines, mandates, instructions and programs just on disaster preparation and response requires considerable staff time. Simplify and clarify, please!

Another consideration or concern is that local Public Works agencies differ considerably in structure; they are not uniform even in the same metropolitan area though they may be of comparable size.  

Immediately following the initial destructive blow of a disaster or crisis public works agencies must restore  the transportation infrastructure so that other first responders and aid relief agencies  can perform their duties.  This component, prompt restoration of access by vehicles, is critical for rescue, evacuation and short-term recovery efforts.

If the concept of "Resilience" is to assess risks, catalog vulnerabilties, mitigate and strengthen those weaknesses that is a vital undertaking. 

The following outcomes are those I consider more important to Public Works:

• Outcome 1.1.2: Stakeholders have been engaged continuously in the development of the National Strategy for Resilience.

• Outcome 1.1.3: An implementation plan for the National Strategy for Resilience has been developed and put into effect, in coordination with stakeholders.

• Outcome 1.1.5: Roles of all stakeholders in building national resilience are clearly described and accepted.

 Outcome 1.2.1: A National Resilience Research Working Group has been established

Outcome 1.4.4: Incentives are developed nationally and in the states to engage state, local and tribal governments, the private sector, and individuals in resilience activities.

Objective 2.3.4: The unique response and recovery requirements of catastrophic incidents are understood and addressed.

• Outcome 3.1.2: Based on identified risks, appropriate protective and mitigation measures are identified and implemented to reduce risk.
• Outcome 3.1.4: Critical infrastructure programs have incorporated measures to both harden and improve the resilience of essential systems and services (e.g., supply chain, communications, transportation, energy, health).
• Outcome 3.2.4: Organizations at all levels of government that have incident-management responsibilities routinely use the National Incident Management System.

• ·  Outcome 3.2.7: Steady state capabilities that provide core capacity for responding to and recovering from disasters have been enhanced relative to risk.

• Outcome 3.2.8: The status of critical resource logistics and distribution is visible to key stakeholders in real or near real-time.

• Objective 3.2.9: Robust communication capabilities are available during a disaster to support disaster response and recovery operations.

• Objective 3.2.10: National mutual aid processes and protocols routinely support response and recovery operations.

 Public Works agencies have an important role in both developing resiliency and in response to disasters, emergencies and even planned events. PW agencies are diverse in structure, organization and missions. Field employees do not receive the scope and extent of training for emergencies that police and fire disciplines do.   PW engineers and technicians also need better training if they will be responsible for assessing risks and vulnerabilities and for  designing and implementing mitigation measures.  Inclusion of Public Works in the ongoing NSR discussions is crucial.