protective action guides for radiological/nuclear incidents november 1, 2005 craig conklin...

Protective Action Guides for Radiological/Nuclear Incidents

November 1, 2005

Craig Conklin

Department of Homeland Security

2Craig Conklin November 1, 2005

Background

TOPOFF 2 Highlighted Lack of Consensus on Clean-up Levels

Radiological Dispersal Devices (RDD) and Improvised Nuclear Devices (IND) Preparedness Working Group Takes Lead to Resolve Clean-up Issue

Efforts Coordinated With Office of Science and Technology Policy Homeland Security Council


Consequence Management Subgroup

Department of Homeland Security

Environmental Protection Agency

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Department of Energy

Department of Defense

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

Centers for Disease Control


Sources of Guidance

National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements

International Commission on Radiological Protection

International Atomic Energy Agency

Health Physics Society

American Nuclear Society

State Programs

Academia


Existing Federal Guidance

Manual of Protective Action Guides and Protective Actions for Nuclear Incidents

Accidental Radioactive Contamination of Human Food and Animal Feeds: Recommendations for State and Local Agencies

Potassium Iodide as a Thyroid Blocking Agent in Radiation Emergencies


Existing Protective Action Guides

Early Phase Sheltering Evacuation Administration of Potassium Iodide

Intermediate Phase Relocation Food and Water Interdiction

Late Phase Site Restoration and Clean-up


PAG Principles

Prevent Acute Effects

Reduce the Risk of Chronic Effects

Require Optimization to Balance Protection With Other Important Factors

Ensure That Actions Taken Result in More Benefit Than Harm


Protective Action Guides (PAGs)

Are NOT Absolute Standards

DO NOT Define “Safe” or “Unsafe” Levels of Exposure or Contamination

DO Represent Approximate Levels at Which the Protective Actions Are Justified

DO Provide Flexibility to Be More or Less Restrictive Based on the Unique Characteristics of the Incident and Local Considerations


Guidance Objectives

Aid Decision Makers in Protecting The Public

First Responders

Other Emergency Workers

Balance Social and Economic Impacts

Timely Return to Normalcy Critical for Minimizing Adverse Impacts


PAGs for RDDs and INDs Limit Responder Exposure – 5 rem (or greater)

Sheltering – 1-5 rems

Evacuation – 1-5 rems

Administration of KI – FDA Guidance

Relocation – 2 rems 1st year, 500 mrem/yr in subsequent years

Food Interdiction – 500 mrem/yr

Drinking Water – 500 mrem/yr (EPA basis under development)

Clean-up - Optimization


Operational Guides Access Controls During Emergency Response

Operations

Relocation Areas

Critical Infrastructure Utilization in Relocation Areas

Temporary Access to Relocation Areas for Essential Personnel

Transportation and Access Routes

Property Control for Release of Property to Non-impacted Areas


Clean-up/Recovery Strategy

Due to Extreme Range of Potential Impacts Workgroup Determined That a Strict Numerical Approach Was Not Useful

Site-specific Remediation and Recovery Strategies Should Be Developed Using Principals of Optimization

Must Include Appropriate Stakeholders in Decision Making Process


Optimization Flexible Process for

Determining Societal Objectives

Developing and Evaluating Options

Selecting the Most Acceptable Option

Public Health and Welfare

Public Acceptability

Costs and Resource Availability

Technical Feasibility

Long-term Effectiveness

Projected Land Usage

Size of Impacted Area

Type of Contamination


Process Overview

Goals Transparency

Inclusiveness

Effectiveness

Key Characteristics Flexibility

Scalability

Iterative


Process Implementation

Takes Place At/Near Incident Location

Utilizes Following Teams/Work Groups Decision Making Team (DMT)

Recovery Management Team (RMT)

Stakeholder Working Group (SWG)

Technical Working Group (TWG)

Federal, State and Local Representation


Decision Making Team

Membership Secretary of Department of Homeland Security

Governor of Affected State

Local Mayor, County Executive, Etc.

Responsibilities Make Final Clean-up Decision(s)

Commit Funding and Resources

Resolve Difficult Issues or Elevate Them to the President


Recovery Management Team

Membership Selected by the Decision Making Team DHS Representative State and Local Officials Federal/state Lead Technical Agency Co-chaired by State and DHS Official

Responsibilities Provide Oversight and Guidance Ensure Effective Wok Group Interaction Ensure Effective Community Involvement Prioritize Options for the Decision Making Team


Stakeholder Working Group (SWG)

Membership Selected by Recovery Management Team

Federal, State, Local and Tribal Representatives

Non-government Organizations

Exact Selection and Balance Is Incident Specific

Co-chaired by State or Local and DHS Official

Responsibilities Represent Local Needs and Desires

Provide Input on Site Restoration and Proposed Clean-up Options


Technical Working Group (TWG)

Membership Selected by Recovery Management Team Federal, State, Local, and Tribal Subject Matter Experts Co-chaired by State and Federal Lead Technical Agencies

Responsibilities Provide Expert Input on Economic and Technical Issues Consider Input From Stakeholder Working Group Review Analyses Performed by Lead Technical Agencies Provide Reports to Recovery Management Team


Recovery Process

TWG Develops Options Based on SWG Input

TWG Briefs RMT and SWG on Options’ Feasibility, Costs, Strengths and Weaknesses

TWG Forwards Sound, Reasonable and Balanced Recommendation(s) to RMT

RMT Transmits Recommendation(s) to the Decision Making Team for Final Action


Recovery Process (cont)

Decision Making Team Informs Public Of Process, Recommendations Analyzed And Final Decision; Seeks Public Comment

Public Comments Are Considered And Incorporated As Appropriate

Final Decision Is Then Implemented

Effectiveness Of Operations Continually Evaluated


Future Activities

Scheduled to be Published in Federal Register

60-day Public Comment Period

Publish Final Guidance in Late 2006


Closing Statements

Primary Goal Is Provide a Flexible Approach for Responding to RDD/IND Incidents

This Is Not a Rejection of Other Cleanup Methodologies or Approaches

This Guidance Is Not Intended to Be Used for Cleanups Conducted Under Other Programs


Questions?

protective action guides for radiological/nuclear incidents november 1, 2005 craig conklin...

Documents

protective actions

radiation protection

balance protection

unsafe levels of exposure

mremyrdrinking water

radiologicalnuclear

approximate levels

access routesproperty