Shelter-In-Place (2005)Howell, W. Nathaniel Abstract: The attacks on U.S. soil on September 11, 2001, and widespread concern with the continuing possibility of terrorist incidents in this country, have skewed the axes of American society in two conflicting directions. On the one hand, they have thrust us into a troubling future in which we face a new sense of danger where we live; we and our neighbors felt safe for most of the last century from the kind of violent threat common in many other societies. Both our feelings of invulnerability and of difference have been seriously challenged. To counteract our loss of “innocence,” institutions of government have embraced an unfamiliar concept of “warfare” at home and abroad for the foreseeable future.
Marshall , M. Abstract: Dr. Gregory Saathoff, of University of Virginia 's Critical Incident Analysis Group (CIAG) and UVA law professor Richard Bonnie make the case for voluntary quarantining during a biological attack, known as community shielding. Keeping people at home is the first step to combating a biological attack. The next step is to have an existing plan in place that assigns responsibility to local government officials on how services, communication, and other necessities would be delivered to community members if a biological agent is introduced into a city or town.
National Institute for Chemical Studies Abstract: Sheltering in place as a public protective action has received large amounts of attention as a result of the submission of Risk Management Plans (RMP). Although sheltering in place has been used by emergency management officials for many years, very little data have been collected on how it has been used and its effectiveness. Both supporters and critics alike have expressed interest in such a collection of data about sheltering in place.
Shumpert, Barry Abstract: Shelter-in-place has found increasing acceptance as an effective protective action option for communities participating in the Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program. Studies have confirmed that it can provide optimum protection under certain accident conditions. However, emergency managers and planners, as well as the public, continue to be troubled by the need to end sheltering when the plume has passed in order to avoid sustained exposure to the small amount of agent that has penetrated the shelter. One of the concerns posed by this necessity is uncertainty regarding what hazards will then be faced in the environment outside the shelter and what actions can be taken to avoid those hazards.
Sorensen, John H. and Barbara M. Vogt Abstract: Expedient sheltering involves the use of common materials to enhance the safety of a room inside a building against the impacts of a chemical plume. The central premise behind taping and sealing with duct tape and plastic is to reduce airflow into a room. This paper reviews issues associated with the use of expedient sheltering materials and the effectiveness of this strategy.
Sorensen, John, Barry Shumpert, and Barbara Vogt Abstract: Appropriate protective action recommendations or decisions (PARs/PADs) are needed to achieve maximum protection of a population at risk. The factors that affect protective action decisions are complex but fairly well documented. Protective action decisions take into account population distributions, projected or actual exposure to a chemical substance, availability of adequate shelters, evacuation time estimates, and other relevant factors. To choose in-place sheltering, there should be a reasonable assurance that the movement of people beyond their residence, workplace, or school will endanger the health and safety of the public more so than allowing them to remain in place. The decision to evacuate the public should be based on the reasonable assurance that the movement of people to an area outside of an affected area is in the best interest of their health and safety, and is of minimal risk to them. |