ASTM E3241-20
(Guide)Standard Guide for Coordination and Cooperation between Facilities, Local Emergency Planning Committees, and Emergency Responders
Standard Guide for Coordination and Cooperation between Facilities, Local Emergency Planning Committees, and Emergency Responders
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
6.1 Preparedness includes awareness and education for all community members that might be impacted by a hazardous materials accident, and creating expectations for the actions of all community members should an accident occur.
6.1.1 The point of preparedness is to minimize the impact of a chemical accident through the actions of all community members, rather than the actions of only facility and response agencies. These actions, when coupled with accident prevention and consequence reduction strategies, reduce the potential for hazardous materials accidents and minimize the consequences of those that do occur.
6.2 There is great potential benefit to facilities, communities, LEPCs and emergency responders in developing a common understanding of the chemical hazards and accident preparedness capabilities present in their communities. The common understanding can significantly minimize he consequences of hazardous chemical accidents (See NPFA 1600).
6.3 Coordination and cooperation must fit into the process for improving community preparedness.
6.3.1 Preparedness is based first on the community developing a broad awareness and understanding of the risks that are present, locally. Next comes a community-wide evaluation of which community members are most vulnerable to risks, the mechanisms or pathways of risks, and the existing capabilities to address those risks should an accident occur. The capabilities being evaluated include more than the ability of the first responders to take actions. It includes the capabilities of all community members to take appropriate actions.
6.3.2 Since all communities have capability gaps when evaluated against the risks present in the community, the subsequent step is strategic planning to fill those capability gaps with prioritization for these efforts developed by the community members. Again, improved preparedness is the goal, not simply focusing on response capacity.
6.3.3 Filling capability gaps requires the use o...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers new and anticipated state and federal regulatory programs that create an obligation to “coordinate and cooperate” on emergency preparedness planning between regulated facilities, local emergency planning committees (“LEPCs”) and emergency responders. The goal of this increased coordination and cooperation is to develop better community preparedness for potential accidents involving hazardous chemicals and hazardous waste. Currently, existing regulations do not adequately describe the expectations for the “coordinate and cooperate” process, that apply to each party working on emergency preparedness. This guide is intended to assist facilities, LEPCs, emergency responders, and other stakeholders in performing the coordinate and cooperate function at a community preparedness level.
1.1.1 As the outcome of the “coordinate and cooperate” process is community driven, it would be extremely difficult to create these expectations in regulation. Without further guidance or standards, these obligations could easily be misconstrued or ignored. The absence of standards for “coordination and cooperation” potentially subjects facilities to enforcement for noncompliance and, more concerning, fails to inform LEPCs, emergency responders and community members generally so they can identify opportunities for better preparedness in their communities.
1.1.2 Preparedness Planning versus Response—Emergency response activities are a specialized field involving programs of training, hazard awareness and specific types of equipment. Coordination and cooperation on emergency preparedness planning is not about emergency response. Instead, it is a whole-of-community process of awareness and education. The broad objective is that all community members ultimately understand the actions they should take to protect themselves, their families and property. All community members are stakeholders in the preparedness planning proc...
General Information
Relations
Standards Content (Sample)
This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
Designation: E3241 − 20
Standard Guide for
Coordination and Cooperation between Facilities, Local
Emergency Planning Committees, and Emergency
1
Responders
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E3241; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope stakeholders in the preparedness planning process and each
community needs to think expansively when inviting partici-
1.1 This guide covers new and anticipated state and federal
pants to the process.
regulatory programs that create an obligation to “coordinate
1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the
and cooperate” on emergency preparedness planning between
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the
regulated facilities, local emergency planning committees
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
(“LEPCs”) and emergency responders. The goal of this in-
priate safety, health, and environmental practices and deter-
creased coordination and cooperation is to develop better
mine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
community preparedness for potential accidents involving
1.3 This international standard was developed in accor-
hazardous chemicals and hazardous waste. Currently, existing
dance with internationally recognized principles on standard-
regulations do not adequately describe the expectations for the
ization established in the Decision on Principles for the
“coordinate and cooperate” process, that apply to each party
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recom-
working on emergency preparedness. This guide is intended to
mendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical
assist facilities, LEPCs, emergency responders, and other
Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
stakeholders in performing the coordinate and cooperate func-
tion at a community preparedness level.
2. Referenced Documents
1.1.1 As the outcome of the “coordinate and cooperate”
2
process is community driven, it would be extremely difficult to 2.1 Code of Federal Regulations:
40 CFR Part 68 Chemical Accident Prevention Provisions
create these expectations in regulation. Without further guid-
ance or standards, these obligations could easily be miscon- (“Risk Management Program”)
40 CFR Part 68.93 Emergency response coordination activi-
strued or ignored. The absence of standards for “coordination
and cooperation” potentially subjects facilities to enforcement ties
40 CFR Part 112 Oil Pollution Prevention (“SPCC” Pro-
for noncompliance and, more concerning, fails to inform
LEPCs, emergency responders and community members gen- gram)
49 CFR 130 Oil Spill Prevention and Response Plans
erallysotheycanidentifyopportunitiesforbetterpreparedness
in their communities. 49 CFR Part 194 - Response Plans for Onshore Oil
Pipelines
1.1.2 Preparedness Planning versus Response—Emergency
40 CFR § 262.250 Applicability.
responseactivitiesareaspecializedfieldinvolvingprogramsof
40 CFR § 262.265 Emergency procedures.
training, hazard awareness and specific types of equipment.
40 CFR Parts 350 – 372 Regulations under the Emergency
Coordination and cooperation on emergency preparedness
Planning, Community Right-to-Know Act
planning is not about emergency response. Instead, it is a
42 U.S. Code § 6921 Identification and listing of hazardous
whole-of-community process of awareness and education. The
waste
broad objective is that all community members ultimately
42 U.S. Code § 7412 Hazardous air pollutants
understand the actions they should take to protect themselves,
42 U.S. Code § 7601 (a)(1) Administration—Regulations;
their families and property. All community members are
delegation of powers and duties; regional officers and
employees
1
ThisguideisunderthejurisdictionofASTMCommitteeE50onEnvironmental
Assessment, Risk Management and Corrective Action and is the direct responsibil-
2
ity of Subcommittee E50.05 on Environmental Risk Management. Available from U.S. Government Printing Office, Superintendent of
Current edition approved Feb. 1, 2020. Published May 2020. DOI: 10.1520/ Documents, 732 N. Capitol St., NW, Washington, DC 20401-0001, http://
E3241–20 www.access.gpo.gov.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
1
---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------
E3241 − 20
42 U.S. Code § 7661f Small business stationary source 3.3 ResourceConservationa
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.