Oregon Local Emergency Planning Committees “Providing Opportunities for Improvement in Preparedness and Response”

 Where We’ve Been  Where We Are Today  Looking To The Future  What’s Working  Assistance Available

 1984 – Bhopal India incident  1985 – Institute West Virginia incident  1985 – Oregon begins collecting hazardous substance information from facilities  1986 – Federal EPCRA established  1986 – Oregon integrates EPCRA information into the Hazardous Substance Information Survey

 1986 – Governor assigns SERC duties to the Interagency Hazard Communication Council (IHCC)  SERC / IHCC designate entire state as single planning district, establish LEPC 1986 – 2005 Single statewide LEPC struggles to address EPCRA directives 1986 – 2005 Single statewide LEPC struggles to address EPCRA directives 2005 – IHCC abolished, SERC duties reassigned to State Fire Marshal 2005 – IHCC abolished, SERC duties reassigned to State Fire Marshal

 2007 – State Fire Marshal directs staff to begin transition to localized LEPCs  2011 – 9 LEPCs developed at the county level, recession issues impede progress SERC support maintained for existing LEPCs SERC support maintained for existing LEPCs Program and personnel moved to Administration Program and personnel moved to Administration  2013 – Changeover in Personnel  th LEPC developed and promotion to additional counties begins  Planning Districts codified in OAR at county / multi-county level

 Eight LEPCs involved in emergency plan development projects  Clatsop County plan completed in April 2014 Plan developed by EM personnel Plan developed by EM personnel All facilities included in the plan All facilities included in the plan Reviewed by the SERC Reviewed by the SERC  Series of recommendations made Annual review now due Annual review now due

 Three LEPCs using multi-year process to complete the plan requirements  Mid-Valley (Linn/Benton) on second year of plan development utilizing contractor Five high-priority facilities included in first draft of the plan Five high-priority facilities included in first draft of the plan Plan completed in September 2014 utilizing contractor Plan completed in September 2014 utilizing contractor  Reviewed by the SERC, recommendations made Contactor being used for second phase to include an additional five facilities during 2015 Contactor being used for second phase to include an additional five facilities during 2015 High priority placed on evacuation component High priority placed on evacuation component

 Three LEPCs using multi-year process to complete the plan requirements (cont.)  Lane County in first year of multi-year plan development Inclusion of high priority facilities Inclusion of high priority facilities Utilizing interns from the University Utilizing interns from the University Conducting walk-throughs of facilities in addition to plan development Conducting walk-throughs of facilities in addition to plan development Using meetings for Q&A / work sessions Using meetings for Q&A / work sessions

 Three LEPCs using multi-year process to complete the plan requirements (cont.)  Columbia County hires contractor to collect information from subject facilities Information to be incorporated into plan template Information to be incorporated into plan template Project being overseen jointly by LEPC and Fire Defense Board Project being overseen jointly by LEPC and Fire Defense Board

 One LEPC involving all facilities in single year project (cont.)  Umatilla County utilizing contractor Collect information from subject facilities Collect information from subject facilities Incorporate information into planning template Incorporate information into planning template Project overseen by LEPC Project overseen by LEPC

 One LEPC addressing plan development through grass-roots effort  Lincoln County utilizing LEPC to develop plan Toledo FD leading the effort Toledo FD leading the effort Use meetings to review planning elements Use meetings to review planning elements Coordinate with subject facilities and answer questions Coordinate with subject facilities and answer questions Facilities review their plans to address applicable planning element Facilities review their plans to address applicable planning element Other elements to be addressed by the LEPC, in general Other elements to be addressed by the LEPC, in general

 Morrow County  Submitted application to hire contractor during grant cycle  Anticipate doing all facilities in single year project  Multnomah County  Has identified organization to manage grant funds  Will submit application during

 Klamath County  New County Emergency Manager would like to get LEPC back up and running  Exploring possibility of working cooperatively with Lake County  Coos County  Difficulty moving forward after retirement of person spearheading efforts  LNG Facility project consuming everyone’s time

 Oregon is getting some new LEPCs!  Tillamook County  Fire Defense Board votes to establish LEPC  Expecting to have initial startup in June  Douglas County  Fire service is primary driver  Approached local safety committee with proposal to incorporate LEPC responsibilities into existing group  Initial startup scheduled for June

 Oregon is getting some new LEPCs!  Marion County  Primary driver is emergency management  Approached their Emergency Management Advisory Committee with proposal to address the responsibilities  Emergency Manager already laying ground work by submitting grant application for county wide commodity flow study

 Oregon is getting some new LEPCs!  Three counties want to establish LEPC but no set date(s) yet  Clackamas  Harney  Yamhill

 Multi-year Projects  Prioritizing subject facilities based on risk to the surrounding community  Enables enhanced evaluation and improved communications with facility  Provides more time to focus on facilities of greatest concern to emergency responders  Easier to fit projects into grant timetable  Manageable workload  Review results and refine the process

 Exercises – keep it simple to start  Tabletops identify the gaps quite well  Low cost (can be supported through the grant)  Straightforward to produce / coordinate  Can be completed in a few short hours  Good practice for more elaborate exercise  Move to functional or full scale when ready

 Meeting Frequency  Newer LEPCs meeting monthly gets the group up and running faster  Program and responsibilities stay at the front of everyone's mind while in “learning mode”  Gets everyone acquainted with each other faster  More consistent attendance

 LEPC is on solid ground and planning project in full swing  Could move to meeting every other month  LEPCs that meet quarterly seem to struggle  Spend time reviewing where they’ve been  Attendance falters  Missing one meeting creates a 6 month gap

 Staying ahead of the grant  Look at project proposals throughout the year  Don’t wait for submission timelines to begin building the request  Provides more time to accomplish  Less stress when not working under strict timeline  More time for thought and review of proposal  Can get more people involved

 Take the time to create comprehensive By-Laws  Include “911 satisfies notification to LEPC”  Include “OERS call satisfies notification to the SERC”  LEPC members covered under the OTCA  Identify someone who can keep meeting minutes and distribute agenda  Don ‘t be afraid to take a major role

2 – FTE dedicated solely to LEPC support 2 – FTE dedicated solely to LEPC support Samples – Emergency Plans, By-Laws, Exercises, committee projects Samples – Emergency Plans, By-Laws, Exercises, committee projects Emergency Plan Template Emergency Plan Template Promotion and educational materials Promotion and educational materials Website suitable for compliance with public notification requirements Website suitable for compliance with public notification requirements Community Right-to-Know facility and substance information in customized reports Community Right-to-Know facility and substance information in customized reports

Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness (HMEP) Grant Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness (HMEP) Grant Specifically dedicated to LEPC support Specifically dedicated to LEPC support Plan development contractors Plan development contractors Exercise expenses and coordinating contractors Exercise expenses and coordinating contractors Hazardous Materials related training Hazardous Materials related training Commodity Flow Studies Commodity Flow Studies HazMat focused Conference/travel expenses HazMat focused Conference/travel expenses