NLM Gateway
A service of the U.S. National Institutes of Health
Your Entrance to
Resources from the
National Library of Medicine
    Home      Term Finder      Limits/Settings      Search Details      History      My Locker        About      Help      FAQ    
Skip Navigation Side Barintended for web crawlers only

An Evaluation of Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Planning: Implications for Policy Improvement at the County Level in California.

Davis M; AcademyHealth. Meeting (2004 : San Diego, Calif.).

Abstr AcademyHealth Meet. 2004; 21: abstract no. 1568.

The California Endowment, The California Endowment Scholars in Health Policy at Harvard University, 10620 De Haven Avenue, Hansen Hills, CA 91331 Tel. 310.776.0406 Fax

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: 1. To evaluate the implementation of current federal and state hazardous materials emergency response planning policies at the county level 2. To determine the responsibilities of the different agencies involved in hazardous materials emergency response planning 3. To identify areas for improvement STUDY DESIGN: Federal laws, California legislation, and emergency response planning guidelines were analyzed for legal precedence and current practice pertaining to hazardous materials emergency response planning. Data were obtained from the Department of Pesticide Regulation for pesticide incidents from the years of 1999 to 2001. Census data was obtained from the US Census Bureau for 2000. Structured interviews with State, County and Local government agencies responsible for planning and responding to hazardous materials accidents were conducted, as well as interviews with residents of Earlimart, Tulare county, California. POPULATION STUDIED: Not applicable. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: 1. California's budget cuts have limited the ability of emergency response agencies to prepare for hazardous materials accidents.2. At minimum, emergency response plans are conducted undergo yearly reviews, which may simply include updating phone numbers.3. Some agencies are able to conduct tabletop exercises with a limited number of their staff. These exercises do not test all skills required for an actual response effort.4. No interagency drills are performed.5. The public and its needs, e.g. linguistic, are not included in the planning process.6. Bio-terrorism has a) increased funding for pre-hazard mitigation planning and b) heightened the awareness of the need to improve communication among different emergency response agencies at and between different levels of government.7. Hazardous materials emergency response planning is not viewed the same as bio-terrorism preparedness despite the fact that the protocols are the same for both. CONCLUSIONS: The legislation and guidelines reviewed are theoretically very comprehensive and sound in terms of outlining the process of hazmat planning and response. However, as the number of agencies responding to a hazardous materials accident increases, the chance of an ineffective response increases. Considering this, a few recommendations can be made to improve the current hazardous materials emergency response system. IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY, DELIVERY OR PRACTICE: The key to effective emergency management is rapid, well planned responses. And as first responders, county and local agencies need to plan and to practice working together to ensure an effective response to any type of emergency. Therefore, I recommend the following:1. Consolidate grant programs for emergency response efforts into larger partnership grants given to local governments with accountability provisions based on objective measures of outcomes or effectiveness.2. More state or regional oversight over county planning and preparation, recognizing that local responders begin the process and activation of the emergency response system in the state. 3. Interagency drills every 2 or 3 years for improved interagency coordination and communication.4. Ensure that resources used for bio-terrorism preparedness coincide with the needs for hazardous materials response planning and preparation.5. Pesticide-related disasters are different in nature and risks compared with other emergencies, like a fire, flood or civil unrest. Yet, all can be very dangerous and involve a large number of people.6. Inclusion of the public would enable emergency responders to assess needs, e.g. language needs, prior to an emergency.

Publication Types:
  • Meeting Abstracts
Keywords:
  • Accidents
  • California
  • Emergencies
  • Government Agencies
  • Hazardous Substances
  • Health Planning Guidelines
  • Legislation
  • Local Government
  • Natural Disasters
  • Terrorism
  • methods
  • hsrmtgs
UI: 103624602

From Meeting Abstracts




Contact Us
U.S. National Library of Medicine |  National Institutes of Health |  Health & Human Services
Privacy |  Copyright |  Accessibility |  Freedom of Information Act |  USA.gov