Seite - 58 - in Book of Full Papers - Symposium Hydro Engineering

6. COMMUNICATION AND TRANSPARENCY 6.1 COMMUNICATION As in every emergency, effective and timely communication is critical. DWR faced many challenges in this regard. Communicating technical and nontechnical information relating to changing weather conditions and forecasts, reservoir, dam and spillway conditions, dynamic situational awareness, and associated risks proved to be difficult. DWR communication resources were limited and had little experience with emergency process and procedures. Under the Unified Command, CalFire brought significant emergency communication resources (people and equipment) and set the processes, procedures, and schedules in place. Call centers, standardized graphics and public messaging were key communication improvements. Integrating DWR and its contractors into the process provided effective on-the-job training. When CalFire demobilized out of the Oroville ICP, they left a much more effective emergency communication team. Many communication tools and activities were used to inform the responders, partners, other agencies, the media and the public. Global phone lists, written communication plans, set briefing schedules for responders, cooperating partners, the media and the public, public web cameras, daily photographs and drone videos, improved websites and incident websites, radio and television interviews, and live streaming media briefings and public meetings were all used during the Oroville Emergency Response phase. These tools continue to be used and improved during the Emergency Recovery phase. 6.2 TRANSPARENCY From the beginning, DWR’s Acting Director instructed management and staff to be transparent in responding to and recovering from this incident. This proved difficult in the first few days due the changing conditions of the incident, integration of a number of agencies, implementing the command and control organization and magnitude of the emergency and had to be regularly reinforced over time. Due to the size, scope, and public safety concerns of the incident, a number of normal design and regulatory process and procedures had to be modified. DWR took a high intensity, short duration, and no-fail approach to design and implementation of both short-term repairs and long-term recovery actions. This had to be done with DSOD and FERC regulators in the room to facilitate expedited design review and necessary approvals. This is easy to say but was difficult to implement for the processes and procedures that typically take weeks, if not months or years to complete, coupled with limited available staff, location of key specialists, and required third-party oversight. A project of this size, scope, and schedule had never been completed before and required unprecedented commitment by DWR, consultants, DSOD, and FERC, as well as the Independent Board of Consultants and DWR’s other partners. 58