> I can't agree more with how they assess at the time of initial response v. the time required for a good root cause analysis... A night and day difference, that must be acknowledged in any further discussions.
I would add that this difference also extends to the data these two groups collect as they do their work. The kinds of information required for real time decision making required by first responders is very different from a root cause analysis.
Over the 10 or so years I have been collecting hazmat headlines for the Division, I have seen that first responders are primarily interested in resolving the situation, including getting traffic control information for the public. (For example, today I saw plea from firefighters in Colorado to the public to not take back gravel roads to detour around the main road closures due to the fire. Traffic jams were developing on the back roads.)
My experience in collecting information after the fact for either an incident report or a Lessons Learned report focuses on elements present before the event occurs and sometimes that information is obscured by the decision-making required of the first responders. I accept that the limitations imposed on the follow up investigations are necessary to safely respond to the event, but it can be frustrating to have what appears to be a rich learning opportunity come up empty. This is a good reason for collecting key information before the event occurs when possible.
- Ralph
Ralph Stuart, CIH, CCHO
Environmental Safety Manager
Keene State College
603 358-2859
ralph.stuart**At_Symbol_Here**keene.edu
---
For more information about the DCHAS-L e-mail list, contact the Divisional membership chair at membership**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org
Follow us on Twitter **At_Symbol_Here**acsdchas
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post