Emergency Management Forum
dqbnez
w6l.docxIntroduction
Protective Action Recommendations, or PARs, are responses chosen by emergency response organizations to help shield populations from a given hazard. During the planning phases of emergency management, emergency planners will take possible hazards and assign certain PARs to each, depending on the appropriateness and feasibility of utilizing the PAR should an event occur. During the response phase of emergency management, it is up to those in charge of response (usually referred to as Incident Command, although this can vary), to choose the best protective action to recommend to the public. This decision would be based entirely on the situation at hand, including the number of available people to help disseminate the recommendation, the amount of time needed to follow the recommendation, and so forth. The public would then (hopefully) follow the PAR so as to shield themselves from the hazard.
Natural Disasters
This is easy to understand in the case of a natural disaster, partially because natural disasters often have warning signs that allow emergency managers to recommend protective actions to the public and allow the public at least some time to follow them. Take, for example, a hurricane. When planners in a hurricane-ridden area are planning for hurricane season, they can plan to evacuate the area or tell area residents to shelter in place. A good planner will provide a detailed plan of both possibilities and create a decision-making process to decide when to choose which action. An EOP (Emergency Operations Plan) may, for example, say that the area will be evacuated only if the storm is projected to be of a 5.0 magnitude or greater, and may choose sheltering in place (also called in place protection) for hurricanes of a lesser strength. They will base this criteria on their specific area, making considerations for population, structures, and so forth and then plan around these actions by creating possible evacuation routes, determining how to tell people which action to take, choosing possible shelters and supplying them with necessary equipment, and so on. This is all done prior to any storm, during the planning phases of an emergency.
Once a storm brews and is determined to be a hazard to the community, emergency managers, as a part of Incident Command, will decide, based on the criteria they created in the planning phase above, which PAR to tell the public to follow. In the case of Hurricane Katrina, for example, emergency managers were aware of the potential strength of the storm and ordered an evacuation. It was up to the public to decide whether or not to follow that order via the established evacuation routes. This is only done once a storm is imminent, as a part of response, and is based solely on the situation and the criteria set forth by planners.
Man-Made Disasters
In the case of man-made disasters, such as terrorism or industry-related disasters, the concept is slightly different because of the often-sudden onset of the disaster as well as the possibility of hazardous material exposure. To understand this, lets consider an accident at a plant that manufactures using a toxic chemical agent. Most industries or businesses have certain policies for industrial accidents that were planned for by emergency planners. These planners would have acknowledged the possibility of a chemical-based accident and would have chosen PARs based on the chemical agent, the appropriateness of the response, and the feasibility of carrying out the recommendation once an accident has occurred. They may have decided that in the event of an explosion, they would recommend evacuation and the use of expedient respiratory protection to those in the immediate vicinity whereas in the event of a leak into water or land they may have simply chosen evacuation. They would utilize information about the chemical, the safety risks of the action, and so forth to make these decisions and they would make them known in the plan. It is important to note that the PARs in a chemical incident would vary widely depending on the agent involved and the means of exposure. This is, again, all being planned and determined prior to an incident, during the planning phases of emergency management.
Once an accident occurs, say an industrial explosion, it would be up to Incident Command or a similar response mechanism to know the plan and choose the appropriate action. In the event of an explosion, planners said to use an evacuation and respiratory protection in the immediate area; knowing this, responders would assess the situation, deem the PAR appropriate and carry it out. A major consideration in the man-made disaster scenario is that the initial disaster has already occurred. Recommending a PAR is not usually to prevent or prepare for this type of disaster; it is to prevent further harm from coming to the surrounding population. In this case, the PAR’s goal is to prevent further deaths from possible secondary explosions and prevent further harm from chemical exposure. As such, you did not have to predict a possible explosion or know where the explosion was going to occur to make effective PARs.
Practically Applied
Now, let’s apply this concept to a deliberate act of terror, such as 9/11. During the events of 9/11, it was the hijacking of multiple planes and the use of those planes (basically) as missiles that sparked the PAR that led to the evacuation of the other World Trade Center Buildings, as well as the White House and other potential targets. The decision to evacuate was probably part of a plan somewhere, but the recommendation was not put into action until it became clear that places within the United States were going to be or already were under attack. The PAR to evacuate was, thus, not meant to prevent the harm that came to those in the Twin Towers, those in the Pentagon, or those is the four hijacked planes, but instead was meant to prevent harm to others that might meet the same fate.
Let’s say you are appointed to modify New York City’s emergency plan to include a terrorist attack involving hazardous materials exposure on the subway. Which PARs might you suggest depending on the specifics of the incident? Are all PARs generally acceptable for this type of event, or are some more preferred than others? What types of considerations made you choose the PARs you chose?
Note: This is only a basic, conceptual framework to help understand the use of PARs. Seriously considering and utilizing a PAR in a situation takes a huge amount of consideration and includes an infinite amount of factors, such as structural factors, transportation factors, available facilities factors, and so many more.
References:
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Accessed March 14, 2016, from http://training.fema.gov/hiedu/aemrc/booksdownload/fem/
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Accessed March 14, 2016, from
http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1828-25045-0014/cpg_101_comprehensive_preparedness_guide_developing_and_maintaining_emergency_operations_plans_2010.pdf
For Further Investigation...
FEMA Interactive web-based course, EOC Management and Operations
The Federal Emergency Management Agency offers free access to a number of interactive courses and simulations that we will be utilizing throughout the course. Please enhance your knowledge of the information we will cover each week by utilizing these resources.
