Respond to the following discussions from classmates (X4) with approximately 175 words or more each. Include a reference to each response. Be thoughtful and insightful and it must demonstrate critical thinking and analysis.
1.In my opinion, I feel that all six awareness guidelines are very important, however if I had to pick two it would be recognize incidents and know and follow the on scene and security protocols. The reason that I picked recognize incidents because out text tells us it is critical to being able to identify, categorize, and initiate the response to conditions discovered on the ground (Radvanovsky, 2013, pg. 67).
This guideline is invaluable in my eyes because we need to be able to identify the hazard or incident so we know how and who will respond.
The example that I could use would be a fire at an apartment complex, who would respond? Well the normal people that everyone sees is the firemen and police. The fireman are there to put out the fire and the police are there to control the road so no further harm will come to the citizens. However, most likely you will also have the gas company to shut of the gas and maybe the electric company to confirm or deny it wasn't an electrical fire. In shorter terms if we know what it is we can send the right people the first time so the job gets done or they can further identify other hazards.
The next guideline I feel that is important is know scene security and Control procedures because our text states that ultimately the goal is to be able to protect persons, property, and critical operations while pre- serving enough data and information so as to be able to form a clear picture of the incident (Radvanovsky, 2013, pg. 69).
It is important to protect anyone, property, and or parallel operation that are not affected by the incident or inadvertently harmed, contaminated, or die because the site was not protected correctly. Another critical aspect of this it needs to be secured because there are investigative aspect of the scene so that first responders can get a clear and concise pictures of what happen at the scene whether it be
2. In my opinion, based on the required readings and my life experiences, I believe that the two most important awareness level guides are, "Recognize incidents", and "Know the measure of self-protection. As a lifeguard, I've had my share of incidents where I've had to implement all of these steps when saving the life of a victim.
The reason I chose "Recognizing incidents" as the most important awareness level is because when I first started my training, I had no idea what the signs were for an incident. Unless someone is aware it can take a lot of time to understand that an incident is occurring. For Example, I was once off duty at a beach enjoying the weather and water, when all of a sudden I see a young man possibly in his late teens running toward the water and then swimming as far as about 200 yards out.
He seemed to know what he was doing and my first impression was that he was a professional by how fast he was swimming. Then I see him waving his arms and coughing. Due to my training I knew he was drowning and ended up saving his life. Incidents at times aren't easy to recognize. That's why trained professionals should always be on the lookout for anything that can happen.
"Know the measure of Self-protection" in my opinion is the second most important awareness level due to my life experience. As a lifeguard, our main job is to save people from drowning. But that can become a hard thing to do when the person your saving is twice your size, an avid body builder, and due to human nature tries to hold you down as you try to save him so that they can breeze. I learned all about self-protection the hard way when I almost drowned trying to save a victims life due to the victims level of panic.
One way, we're taught to counter this is by swimming away from the victim and then either under, or around them and then try to re-approach the victim. It worked well in theory and in training, but when I had to apply this in real life, the person would turn toward me whichever way I went. I tried to over-power the person as my second course of action, but it didn't work. My last course of action which I didn't want to do but was trained to as a last resort was to punch the victim in the nose, and then approach, which finally worked.
3. Identify an example of a recent situation involving the handling and removal of hazardous material.
After reviewing the National Transportation Safety Board website, I found an incident that occurred on August 27, 2016, at New Martinsville, West Virginia. A tank car containing 90 tons of liquefied compressed chlorine experienced a crack at the loading facility. The liquefied compressed chlorine was released and "formed a large vapor cloud that migrated south from the Axiall facility along the Ohio River valley" (National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), 2016).
The effects of the chlorine gas could be fatal if it is absorbed or inhaled through the skin. The incident caused 10 people to be treated for injuries. There was vegetation damage due to the incident; however, there were no reports of contaminated water.
Describe what the personnel involved did right.
On January 2016, the tank car was sent in for a five year interiror inspection which is required by Axiall Corporation's guidelines on chlorine tank cars. During the inspection, they found corrosion on the bottom of the tank shell. The tank car was repaired by Rescar between January and June 2016. "The work included interior cleaning, ultrasonic thickness testing, removing internal corrosion, weld buildup intended to restore the shell thickness in corroded locations, and postweld stress-relief heat treatments" (NTSB, 2016).
Explain what they could have done better.
According to the report, "the tank car, built by ACF Industries in 1981, had water capacity of 17,380 gallons, and its original shell thickness was 0.7751 inch. It was equipped with an ACF 200 stub sill underframe" (NTSB, 2016). During a recent inspection, the Federal Railroad Administration noticed defects in some of the tanks equipped with the ACF 200 stub sill, which included tank head cracks, pad-to-tank cracks, sill web cracks, and tank shell buckling that sometimes led to hazardous materials incidents. This tells me that proper maintenance and inspections may not have been conducted on the tank car. In the military, you are required to conduct Preventive Maintenance Checks and Services (PMCS) before you conduct any mission. I have discovered numerous deficiencies while conducting PMCS that may have avoided accidents.
4. I chose to review an accident report that involved the release of nearly 7,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia from a burst pipe during the transfer of the liquid from a delivery truck into a stationary container at Tanner Industries (NTSB, 2009). The accident occurred due to the use of incompatible hosing that induced a chemical reaction resulting in a burst pipe in the hosing.
(NTSB, 2009). One person died from the accident as well as hospital evaluations and treatments for 14 other people that inhaled the toxic gas. (NTSB, 2009). It is important to note that while there may be contention to whether or not HAZMAT drivers should be considered first responders, they do have special training and a responsibility to protect the hazardous material they transfer.
On a positive note, the individuals directly involved (delivery and receiving personnel) recognized the incident, understood the immediate dangers, quickly departed the immediate area where the toxic gases lingered, and made reports to 911 as well as to both companies (delivery and receiving). One driver even used a respirator to prevent inhalation of the gases during his escape to fresh air. This is significant because initial reporting would have been delayed if the personnel were not able to get to safety and make the reports.
The reports allowed a representative from the receiving company to make recommendations to emergency management personnel about the dangers to the nearby neighborhoods. To that point, emergency management personnel established a command post to ensure that the effects of the incident were properly mitigated. The fire department personnel ensured that no one was in the danger zone and a search party looked for any effected people to understand the extent of the incident.
On the downside, the employees delivering and receiving the HAZMAT could have exercised more care while inspecting the hosing to ensure compatibility before starting the transfer. It is also apparent that the delivery personnel were not intimately familiar with the shut-off valves or close enough to actuate the shut-off valves during the incident, which allowed more toxic gas to escape into the environme
Although the official first responders arrived on scene within ten minutes, they could have taken early actions to restrict traffic near the incident until air samples were safe. Per Radvanovsky & McDougall (2013), "First responders should be very familiar with...being able to clearly identify the core risks and consequences associated with the conditions on the ground" (p. 67).
In reality, it took over an hour to take the precautionary measures. It is unclear from the report if any injuries would have been avoided if precautions were taken earlier. The essential point is that the report indicates that the official first responders failed to take immediate actions.