Capability Target 1.5: Protective Action Decision Implementation for the Plume Phase

ASSESSMENT – DEMONSTRATION AND EVALUATION GUIDANCE

By observing the OROs’ capability to address the appropriate bullet points below and while considering the overall capability being assessed, the following key points of review and associated questions should be considered and will support an evaluation of this capability target.

OROs demonstrate the capability to:

  • Implement PADs, ensuring communication and coordination with all appropriate jurisdictions.
    • Were resources identified and utilized effectively?
    • Did OROs communicate and work together in an effective manner?
    • What type of coordination occurred on the implementation of protective actions?
    • Was the public kept informed and was the information provided relevant?
    • Were PADs implemented as directed?
    • What types of populations are in the plume exposure pathway EPZ (e.g., institutionalized, access and functional needs, non-English speaking, etc.)? Who is responsible for notifying each, and at what point during the incident?
    • Were there any gaps in resources identified? If so, how were they addressed?
  • Assist those with access and functional needs during the implementation of PADs.
    • What time was the order received for those with access and functional needs?
    • Were the facility/facilities receiving those with access and functional needs listed in the plans?
    • How were individuals with services animals addressed?
  • Communicate, coordinate, and implement protective actions for schools.
    • What school districts are located within the plume exposure pathway EPZ?
    • Who notifies school districts? How?
    • What was the protective action that the school took?
    • With regard to processing students, faculty, and staff, what sort of PADs were made?
    • At which ECL were the school districts notified?
    • If students were moved, which reclamation centers were they sent to? Which is the host school?
    • How were parents and/or guardians notified?
    • Are there schools located outside the plume exposure pathway EPZ that have students living within the EPZ? What arrangements are made for those students?
    • What type of transportation was provided to the students (e.g., bus, etc.)?
    • Who notifies the bus drivers?
    • Were there adequate buses available? And how do they communicate with the school?
    • Do the bus drivers know where to take the students? Are they trained on what to do?
    • Was the school evacuated during the plume? What means of monitoring and decontamination were used?
  • Communicate with transportation officials.
    • What transportation needs or resources were required?
    • Was a list of the transportation providers available?
    • Were transportation providers contacted?
    • How were needs for transportation-dependent individuals met?
    • Were designated pick-up points used?
  • Identify evacuation routes for the general public.
    • What evacuation routes were selected?
    • Were the direction of the wind/plume and/or other hazardous conditions considered in determining which evacuation routes were used?
    • How was this information communicated to the media and the public?
    • How were alterations to the pre-designated routes communicated to the media and the public?
    • Was the facility evacuated during the plume?
  • Make KI available to both institutionalized persons and the general public, in accordance with plans and procedures.
    • How was the decision to take KI disseminated to the public and institutionalized persons?
    • Did the ORO provide KI to the general public and institutionalized persons? If so, how was it distributed?
    • What quantities of KI are available?
    • Where is KI stored?
    • What dosages of KI are available?
    • What is the expiration date of KI? If there is an extended policy, where is the letter certifying the extension?
    • Did the ORO ensure that the KI is stored in a temperature-controlled facility?
    • What information was provided to the general public with regard to KI?
    • What instructions were provided for the use of KI?
    • Did the instructions include dosages and frequency to take KI?
    • Did the instructions include contradictions and side effects of using KI? How was it explained?
    • How was KI ingestion documented for institutionalized persons?
    • Did staff maintain lists of the institutionalized individual who ingested KI?