Resources

LEGISLATION

Ministry of Labour and Citizens' Service

An Introduction to Unified Command - Joining Forces Under the Incident Command System

 

 

The following is an introduction to unified command. Unified command is an important aspect of the Incident Command System for emergency planning and response in British Columbia, Canada. The focus of this topic is on environmental emergencies, and how government agencies and a company can work co-operatively and synergically. (Updated: May, 2001).

Table of Contents

Preface

The Incident Command System (ICS) is a frequently used organizational structure employed by government and industry to jointly manage major emergencies.

An understanding of rationale, concept and the application of unified command with other government jurisdictions (provincial, federal, and/or local governments) and, in the case of a spill, the responsible party (spiller) is considered pivotal to effective response.

Unified command is an important aspects of the BC Emergency Management System (BCERMS) standard for site management in British Columbia Canada. The establishment of a unified command is often described in industry response plans, provincial emergency response plans (e.g. BC Marine Oil Spill Response Plan, BC Inland Oil Spill Response Plan and the BC Hazardous Material Response Plan) and in some federal plans 1 (e.g. CANUWEST Transboundary Plan for British Columbia and the States of Washington, Idaho, and Montana). Unified Command is also endorsed by the Pacific States/BC Oil Spill Task Force under a Pacific Coast agreement.

Back to top

Introduction

This paper is focused on Unified Command to foster a common understanding so that agencies and industry can work towards developing an effective, concerted response.

The effective management of a large emergency requires the coordination, participation, and support of those that have functional responsibilities (fire fighting, police, ambulance); jurisdictional responsibilities (local, provincial, federal governments); and legislated responsibilities (spiller or responsible party). The approach to address these varied interest is by unified command and responder integration - the joining of forces.

The main premise of unified command is that the responders - whether government or industry - generally hold common goals such as the protection of people, property, and the environment. As such, there is a common desire to achieve mutually-agreed-on response strategy and tactical action plans. Unified command assists in meeting these common goals and response objectives.

Back to top

Rationale and Concept

The need for unified command is created by incidents having no regard for jurisdictional boundaries, and authority's not normally legally confined to a single jurisdiction or agency.

The concept of unified command simply means that all departments (police, fire, ambulance), agencies (local, provincial or federal governments) and industry who have a functional, jurisdictional, or legal responsibility at an incident contribute to the process of:

  • determining overall response strategy and objectives;
  • insuring that joint planning for response activities will be accomplished;
  • insuring that integrated operations are conducted;
  • making maximum use of all assigned resources; and
  • keeping track of financial costs.

The process of unified command encompasses consensus decision-making, teamwork, sharing/delineating activities, and sharing responsibilities, rather than the more traditional "Command and Control" approach whereby there is one authority. The latter model often leaves important stakeholders only as advisors, providing input only when asked.

Back to top

Participants

A unified command structure is implemented when the incident:

  • involves more than one jurisdiction (e.g. local government, provincial and/or federal agencies);
  • one or more jurisdictions and a company (e.g., spiller); or
  • multiple types of emergency services (e.g. fire, police, ambulance, public health, haz-mat responders, social services, etc.).

Back to top

Types of Unified Command

There are two basic types of unified command — single-jurisdiction and multi-jurisdiction.

Single-jurisdiction, unified command occurs when several departments such as police, fire, ambulance, and/or public health share management responsibility within one jurisdiction such as a municipality. An example would be a railway accident that released a hazardous product within a single municipality (see figure below). For single jurisdiction, a unified command structure could consist of an official to represent each responding agency such as fire, police, ambulance, and the responsible company/owner.

 

The second type of unified command is multi-jurisdiction, where the incident crosses jurisdictions such as federal, provincial or local governments, or one or more jurisdiction is involved with a company (e.g. spiller). An example would be a marine oil spill affecting provincial crown lands and a federal harbour. For multiple jurisdictions, a unified command structure could consist of an official to represent each jurisdiction involved such as: the provincial government, the federal government, and the responsible party (see figure below).

An Incident Commander within the unified command would be selected as the overall spokesperson. This person would also be responsible for final arbitration of strategic and tactical decisions. The overall spokesperson/arbitrator can change to reflect an evolving incident situation (e.g. from an initial vessel casualty to protracted shoreline cleanup operations). Each Incident Commander can also speak on behalf of their government or company.

 

Back to top

Action Plans and Operations

Unified command goes beyond the joint development of a response strategy by the Incident Commanders. Unified command may also include the sharing of action planning (PLANNING SECTION), tactical operations (OPERATIONS SECTION), supply and services (LOGISTICS SECTION), and financial management (FINANCE SECTION). It would be mutually agreed by the Incident Commanders which agency/department would assume the roles of general staff (SECTION CHIEFS AND COMMAND STAFF). The objective is to full integrate functional elements (fire fighting, health services) or jurisdictional elements (shoreline protection, vessel salvage, communications) into one team that co-locates at one facility (Command Post).

Decisions for these staff roles would generally be based on greatest jurisdictional involvement, individual qualifications, and accountability. An essential task of the unified command is to establish a mutually satisfactory incident management organization that reflects all interests, resources, skills and knowledge of the stakeholders.

Back to top

Frequently Asked Questions

Question 1 - Do titles change once a person becomes a member of unified command?

No. Those who comprise a unified command may bring with them their own titles and representation. For example, there may be a Fire Chief representing a municipality, a Provincial Incident Commander representing a provincial emergency response team, and an Incident Manager representing a company. It is not necessary to relinquish/change title because you still represent your government, department or company. As a spokesperson, however, you must clearly delineate between being the "spokesperson for the unified command team" versus a "spokesperson for your affiliation". The former takes a neutral role and speaks on the mutually agreed on response strategy and the unified command organization. The latter addresses your affiliation's specific involvement. A typical scenario would be a media conference where participants of unified command are seated. Each may introduce themselves according to their original/official titles, but only one person is the "spokesperson" for the unified team.

Question 2 - Is it prudent to have industry, who is the responsible agent for the incident, as part of the unified command?

Yes. Unified command should comprise of the primary stakeholders with functional, jurisdictional, and/or legal responsibilities. A company who has a corporate and legal responsibility to respond would be a primary stakeholder — i.e."polluter pay principle". The overriding premise of effective response is the protection of people, property, and the environment as the foremost goal. To ignore a primary stakeholder with the equipment, personnel, and funds to respond could compromise this goal.

Question 3. How do other supporting (resource) provincial ministries or federal departments or minor stakeholders, such as non-government organizations (NGOs), and interest groups, participate in response strategy and action planning?

In fulfilling a response function(s) or in planning. For supporting ministries (agencies), such as health or social services, they can fulfill a function, or groups (branches) of functions such as health impact monitoring. An important function the planning section is to identify other stakeholders affected by an incident, and bring them together so that they may air their concerns or provide legitimate information to assist in action planning. The people who make up the unified command should, for the most part, represent interests of all the minor stakeholders and be entrusted by supporting agencies. The role of the Liaison Officer within Command is to ensure stakeholder interests are heard and met.

Question 4. How far down the response organization does a unified command team extend?

As far as mutually agreed on. In general, unified command begins with the primary (lead, key) stakeholders being identified, meeting and selecting a spokesperson (and final arbitrator of issues). The initial tasks are to devise a mutually accepted response strategy and to establish the response organization and staffing needs to meet the strategy.

 

___________________________________________

1 The Canadian Coast Guard (Fisheries and Oceans Canada), though adopted the Incident Command System for major marine spills, does not endorse unified command as stated in their national policy (4.2) within their National Marine Spill Contingency Plan. Where there is a Responsible Party, the Canadian Coast Guard will take a monitoring (oversight) role, but where there is no Responsible Party (e.g. mystery spill) or poor performance, the Canadian Coast Guard policy calls for takeover of response management.