First, time is of the essence.
Appropriate response actions taken in the first few minutes to hours can save many lives.
The individuals in the narratives experienced health effects within minutes to hours of the chemical’s release, demonstrating that response actions taken in the first few minutes to hours can save many lives. Early and accurate diagnosis of symptoms can alert responders to an ongoing event. Since prevention is far better than having to respond to chemical exposures, proper planning is essential to allow responders to take advantage of this window of opportunity. Thus, community-specific response guidance must be developed prior to the event.
Communities should assess their local threats and response capabilities during the planning process. The immediacy of health effects resulting from chemical exposures implies that local and state healthcare facilities will be quickly (albeit possibly briefly) overwhelmed with requests for medical treatment. Plans and protocols that contribute to the swift and accurate diagnosis of affected individuals and identification of the causative substance will help alleviate strains on first responders and healthcare providers. The short response window also means that response activities will often be led in large part by state, local, tribal, and territorial (SLTT) officials; communities should therefore plan to support these offices.
Second, uncertainty always exists.
Useful, reliable information to guide decisions is often not available in the initial stages of a response.
Useful, reliable information to guide decisions is often not available during the initial stages of a chemical incident response, which is particularly problematic given the often time-urgent nature of key response decisions. Responders should expect that situational awareness will be rudimentary and information gathering will be ongoing during the response, but even interim data can feed into decision-making. During the planning process, planners should identify the minimum information required to make key response decisions and determine how to obtain this information quickly. Default response actions should be developed to use when event-specific information is not available. Carefully crafted communications are key to maintaining public calm, trust and cooperation.
Many response activities can proceed in the absence of detailed information about the responsible chemical substance(s). However, when responders are forced to act without full knowledge of the identity of the substance(s) involved or the extent of contamination, they, the community, and the environment are at risk of continued exposure. Again, the rapid and continuous gathering and sharing of information can help mitigate this risk.
Third, recovery is complex.
Actions taken during the response have the potential to significantly reduce the time and cost spent recovering from the event.
Actions taken during the response to a chemical incident have the potential to significantly reduce the time and cost spent recovering from the event. For example, actions taken to minimize spread of contamination can limit the area that must be decontaminated and help protect critical infrastructure. Similarly, early efforts to identify exposed individuals can facilitate long-term medical care and monitoring. Therefore, both response and recovery needs should be considered while developing regional response plans. While SLTT officials in large part lead immediate response activities for chemical release incidents, federal officials may play larger roles in later recovery and remediation activities.