A new study by the Virginia Department of Emergency Management found that most people in the National Capital Region would follow instructions to stay where they are after a radiological dispersion device, or â€œdirty bomb.â€Â The survey, “Population Behaviors in Dirty Bomb Attack Scenarios:Â A Survey of the National Capital Region,” explored how people get their information in an emergency, information sources residents trust, the amount of advance preparation people have completed, and the actions they would take under increasing levels of personal threat.
According toÂ the Department, three scenarios â€“ at minimum, moderate and maximum hazard levels â€“ were created for the survey, starting with a single dirty bomb released in the region, but not near the survey respondent. The maximum level involved a situation with multiple dirty bombs released throughout the region and exposing the population to radiation. The scenarios were varied to learn the effects of four factors: the level of hazard, whether the respondent was at home or at work, whether there was prior notice of the event, and the source of information and instructions about the event.
Among the overall findings from the report (which was done for the state by the University of Virginia Center for Survey Research and the Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems):
* Of those at home during the event for all three scenarios, nearly 80 percent decided to stay home.
* For those at work during a minimal event (in which no shelter-in-place order is given for the respondentâ€™s area), only 41 percent would stay at work, with 33 percent leaving to go home.
* For those at work during a moderate or maximum event when a shelter-in-place order is given, approximately 70 percent would stay at work.
Other findings include:
*The president, the Department of Homeland Security and the governor were cited as the most trustworthy sources of information, with the youngest respondents giving the president the highest level of trust.
*During the first 48 hours after a major local emergency, whether they chose to stay or to evacuate, residents expect emergency managers to supply information about the emergency and help with any needed decontamination, more than they expect food distribution or anti-looting patrols.
*About 54 percent have prepared a personal emergency plan, an emergency supply kit, or arranged a meeting place away from home for use by family members. Only 13 percent had done all three.
This appears to be a thorough, comprehensive study of an important issue — how the public would react to a dirty bomb — that has been discussed extensively on the blog. The findings would seem to report the good news that most citizens would be willing to ’shelter in place’ in their homes if that was the correct response and would follow instructions from authorities during a dirty bomb emergency. It also appears to show a relatively high level of knowledge about the dirty bomb threat among Washington-area residents.
As officials will be using the report to help develop emergency plans for the National Capital Region and surrounding areas, I would offer a couple of thoughts.Â I would be encouraged by the findings. But I do think that the unfamiliarity and newness of a radiological device that Americans have never experienced is something that really cannot be fully captured in a survey.Â These numbers might lead the authorities to think that there isn’t as much need for public education about the dirty bomb and other threats or more explanation about ’shelter in place’ vs. evacuation, or discussion of how workplaces and schools would be integrated into the response (ie. will parents be willing to stay home or at work if they don’t know what their kids are doing). That would be the wrong conclusion.
I am also concerned that there may be a little too much confidence among the survey respondents in the capacity of emergency responders (including the survey result: “During the first 48 hours after a major local emergency, whether they chose to stay or to evacuate, residents expect emergency managers to supply information about the emergency and help with any needed decontamination.”) That may not be the case in a post radiological situation. There needs to be more information provided on what those expectations really should be when it comes to radiation. And, the time to do it is not after the incident has occurred.
The survey will not only provide data for emergency planning but also help raise the profile of the issue of dirty bomb civilian response. I hope the authorities in National Capital Region and across the nation will also use it in helping to better educate and prepare their residents for this important — and unfortunately somewhat likely — possibility.