CBRN Events and Mass Evacuation Planning

  • Stefano Marsella
  • Nicolò Sciarretta
Conference paper


Some natural or man-made disasters can oblige authorities to evacuate masses. Among such events, CBRN accidents are the most susceptible of obliging the sudden movement of people, but drawing an emergency plan related to mass evacuation is a complex matter, far more difficult than emergency plans normally needed even in the largest buildings. Alerting every person in a community and planning their movement to ensure they arrive safely and on time to the designated destination need both broader and more specific skills than preparing ordinary emergency plans. The most critical areas in such a discipline are the capacity of (1) calculating the time needed to alert using multimedia communication tools and (2) assessing the time history of the evacuation. Both the communication and the simulation issues are currently studied and still need to be improved. Nonetheless, tools already exist that, similarly to the performance-based approach used in buildings safety, allow one to estimate the time needed to inform and evacuate masses. In this manner, it is possible to engineer an approach to large-scale evacuation that follows the same path adopted by fire protection standards. The paper will analyze some aspects of the Fukushima event in 2011 that allow an understanding of the need for a better ability to manage mass evacuation through the use of specific simulation models and their integration with the emergency plans.


Mass evacuation Egress simulation CBRNe 


  1. 1.
    Quincy, M.A.: NFPA 1616 – Mass Evacuation and Sheltering Program 2017 Edition. National Fire Protection Association (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    CCCM Cluster: The Mend Guide Comprehensive Guide for Planning Mass Evacuations in Natural Disasters (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Los Angeles Operational Area. Mass Evacuation Process Guide. Los Angeles, USA (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    IAEA: The Fukushima Daiichi Accident Report by the Director General. Director General, pp. 1–222 (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    IAEA: The Fukushima Daiichi Accident: Description and Context of the Accident, vol. 1, p. 237 (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    The National Diet of Japan. The Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission. The National Diet of Japan, pp. 1–88 (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    ISO 16732-1 Fire Safety Engineering – Fire Risk AssessmentGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fukushima Prefecture, Fukushima Prefecture Disaster Management Plan (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kuligowski, E.D., Peacock, R.D., Hoskins, B.L.: A Review of Building Evacuation Models, 2nd edn. NIST Technical Note 1680 (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Public Warning Design Guidelines for FIA Messaging (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    González-Riancho, P.: Tsunami evacuation modelling as a tool for risk reduction: application to the coastal area of El Salvador. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 13(12), 3249–3270 (2013)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Appendix F: Hurricane Evacuation Models and Tools – Catastrophic Hurricane Evacuation Plan Evaluation: A Report to Congress (2017)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lumbroso, D., Central, L.: Modelling Mass Evacuations to Improve the Emergency Planning for Floods in the UK. The Netherlands and North America Spatial Vision Group Inc., North Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, C. Flanders Marine Institute, pp. 1–12 (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of National Fire and Rescue Services and Civil Defense – Ministry of the InteriorIstituto Superiore AntincendiRomaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Chemical, Materials and Environment EngineeringSapienza University of RomeRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations