Five Year Report
1993-1997
•Table of Contents
•Acknowledgments
•Executive Summary
•Introduction
•Methods
•Results
•Discussion/Recommendations
•List of Figures / Tables
•Definitions
•OERS Council Membership
|
|
Discussion/Recommendations
The magnitude of the potential and actual public health threat from hazardous material
incidents in Oregon has not been characterized previously. The HSEES program has
provided an opportunity to evaluate whether public health resources should be targeted
to address these hazards. The standardized nature of data collected by multiple states in
the HSEES system also allows a comparison of differences in patterns of hazardous
material incidents in Oregon relative to other states.
In the five years of Oregon HSEES events summarized in this report, several consistent
patterns have emerged. Events have occurred most often at fixed facilities. Over the
five year period, the percentage of fixed facility events showed little variation, ranging
from 62.8% to 78.8% of the total. The same approximate proportions held true for the
other 13 states participating in HSEES. For the five year summary of all 14 states,
80.1% of the total 24,571 events occurred at fixed facilities.
Most events involved the release of only one substance. For the five years of Oregon
data, 90% of all releases were one chemical, compared to 93.9% single chemical
releases for all 14 states combined.
A minority of events involved injuries or illnesses. For Oregon HSEES, 18% of events
involved victims. For all 14 HSEES states only 8.4% of events resulted in victims. It is
not clear at present why the percent of events involving victims is so much higher in
Oregon. When injuries occurred they usually involved employees and did not require
hospital admission. Most victims (41.7%) were transported to the hospital for treatment
but not admitted; 35.4% were treated at the scene. For the 14 states combined, 65% of
all victims were transported to the hospital for treatment but not admitted and 16.4%
were treated on the scene. Differing policies on transportation to hospital may account
for the differences between all states and Oregon. For example, some company policies
require transportation to hospital for a check-up for all employees near a spill, regardless
of symptoms. However, it is still not clear what accounts for the greater number of
victim- events reported. Trends in the number of victim-events in Oregon in future
years may shed light on this problem.
Our findings regarding the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) by responders
and employees lead to three recommendations. 1) Emergency responders need to be
aware that appropriate PPE should be worn prior to responding to a spill event in order
to prevent exposures to hazardous substances. In addition, awareness of the increased
potential for a spill or release to occur at the scene of an emergency response is essential
to preventing exposures and injuries. 2) Employees of all types require further training
in responses to accidents, spills, and releases. In particular they need to be aware of the
PPE that is available and it's proper use before, during, and after an emergency event.
3) "Turnouts" for firefighters need to be evaluated for their adequacy for preventing
injury in spill events.
The HSEES system has also provided the opportunity to examine the centralized OERS
reporting system more closely. As described earlier, the percentage of HSEES events
first identified through OERS increased from 70% in 1993 to 76% in 1997. As part of
the HSEES event investigation process, notification of OERS about all events involving
hazardous substance releases has been encouraged, regardless of whether the event
required a response by a public agency or responders to the event needed assistance
from a state agency. This encouragement has been effective with utility and
transportation companies in particular, as well as local fire departments in increasing
OERS notification.
There are three major benefits of encouraging reporting of all hazardous substance
emergency events to OERS: (1) appropriate agencies are alerted to ongoing incidents
and are better prepared if the situation should escalate and require their assistance; (2)
notified agencies may be aware of potential hazards or complications which are
unknown to the on-scene commander and can be communicated in a timely manner; (3)
notifying OERS provides a centralized repository for information on events making it
possible to observe long term trends. As more companies and agencies become aware
of the benefits of OERS, the percentage of HSEES events identified through OERS
reports should continue to grow, thus increasing the effectiveness of the Oregon HSEES
surveillance system.
The characteristics of hazardous substances emergency events in the state were not
known prior to Oregon's participation in the HSEES surveillance program. This
information has been and will continue to be of value both to emergency response
agencies, emergency planners, and responsible parties in developing plans to reduce the
number of hazardous substances releases and to reduce the resulting morbidity and
mortality when releases do occur. The increased effectiveness of the Oregon HSEES
system will enable improved feedback to industry, responders, and the general public
and improvement in the health of the people of Oregon.
|
