1 / 9

history

history. The early years In the 1970s, DOE’s focus was on security and energy contingency planning Before 1985, there were few formal EM requirements for DOE facilities. History of Emergency Management Within the DOE System. Accident outcomes

gavin
Download Presentation

history

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. history

  2. The early years In the 1970s, DOE’s focus was on security and energy contingency planning Before 1985, there were few formal EM requirements for DOE facilities History of Emergency Management Within the DOE System

  3. Accident outcomes In March 1979, a nuclear plant accident near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, exposed weaknesses in emergency planning programs and led to re-shaping emergencypreparedness Emergency preparedness requirements for commercial industry were upgraded and enforced Historical Impact ofThree Mile Island (TMI)

  4. Changes included Addressing interface issues among local, state, andfederal governments, and utilities Defining emergency planning basis Establishing planning standards and evaluation criteria Developing guidelines for Emergency Action Levels (EALs) and emergency classifications Establishing meteorological criteria Developing alert and notification guidance New Standards After TMI

  5. New Standards After TMI (cont.) Changes included • Requiring emergency planning zone evacuation time estimates • Establishing minimum onsite staffing requirements • Requiring specific emergency response facilities • Upgrading and coordinating Emergency Public Information (EPI) planning, including thecreation of Joint Information Centers (JICs)

  6. Accident outcomes A Union Carbide chemical facility disaster in Bhopal, India, had a tragic impact on public and worker health and safety The disaster was followed by a similar toxic gas release in Institute, West Virginia Operator error was a causal agent in both cases Facilities and communities were not prepared Public awareness of risk of sudden, accidental releases of hazardous chemicals was heightened Impact of Bhopal—December 1984

  7. New Federal Regulations The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title III requires chemical release reporting, hazardous chemical inventory reporting, emergency preparedness, and coordination between chemical facilities and communities The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulation, 29 CFR 1910.120, requires emergency planning, preparedness and training, and emergency response for hazardous materials Resulting U.S. Changes

  8. Accident outcomes Disaster in the Ukraine caused tragic and long-lasting public health consequences Operator error was the causal agent Few facts provided, and officials deliberately withheld data from the public about radiation releases Greater emphasis on providing emergency medical response and offsiteplanning and coordination Renewed attention on providing emergency public information (EPI) Chernobyl—1986

  9. Emphasis placed on DOE to match commercial industry Emergency Management (EM) standards Site requirements for EM addressed through the DOE Order 5500 series Framework establishedfor DOE planning, preparedness, and response Emergency preparedness becamea start-up and restart issue for DOE facilities Formation of the Emergency Management Issues Special Interest Group (EMI SIG) network in 1986 Emergency Management Impact at Department of Energy Sites

More Related