Advances in Fire and Process Safety pp 73-90 | Cite as
Evaluating the Functionality of Industrial Emergency Operations Center (EOC) by Weighted Scoring Technique
Abstract
In performing an efficient emergency response plan, one of the key elements is having a properly designed and well-equipped Emergency Operations Center (EOC). Lack of EOC functionality may even lead to the failure of the whole crisis management plan (CMP). Despite the significance of industrial EOC, there is not any guideline or well-established recommended practice in design and equipping these centers. In this paper, a comprehensive checklist giving recommendations on design and equipping EOCs is presented. Necessities in different fields such as configuration and layout, communication facilities, stationery and office supplies, welfare and eventually procedures are listed. Also, an evaluation method based on weighted scoring technique is offered to examine the functionality of EOC and compare the different design options.
Keywords
Emergency Operations Center Weighted scoring Evaluation Functionality Industrial crisisReferences
- 1.Abdolhamidzadeh, B., T. Abbasi, D. Rashtchian, and S. Abbasi. 2011. Domino effect in process-industry accidents: An inventory of past events and identification of some patterns. Journal of Loss Prevention 24: 575–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.Canter, L.W. 1996. Environmental Impact Assessment. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
- 3.Eldson, G. 2010. EOC facility checklist: Avoiding surprises. Disaster Resource Guide Quarterly 15 (2).Google Scholar
- 4.ENISA. 2013. Retrieved from European Union Agency for Network and Information Security. http://www.enisa.europa.eu/activities/risk-management/current-risk/bcm-resilience/glossary/c-d.
- 5.Fagel, M.J. 2011. Principle of Emergency Management and Emergency Operations Centers. NW: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Koo, Y.-H., Y.-S. Yang, and K.-W. Song. 2014. Radioavtivity release from the Fukushina accident and its consequences: A review. Progress in Nuclear Energy 74: 61–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Mariano, A., V. Kourafalou, A. Srinivasan, H. Kang, G. Halliwel, E. Ryan, et al. 2011. On the modeling of the 2010 Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill. Dynamics of Atmospheres and Oceans 52 (1–2): 322–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Meshkati, N. 1991. Human factor in large scale technological systems’ accident: Three Mile Island, Bhopal, Chernobyl. Industrial Quarterly 5: 131–154.Google Scholar
- 9.Meshkati, N. 2006. Safety and human factors considerations in control rooms of oil and gas pipeline systems: Conceptual issues and practical observation. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE) 12 (1): 79–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Michigan State Police. 2003. Design recommendations and criteria for emergency operations center. Michigan: Michigan State Police Emergency Management Division.Google Scholar
- 11.Shrader, K. 2008. Designing and effective operating center for city of Martinsville, Virginia. Martinsville, Virginia: Fire EMS Department.Google Scholar
- 12.Stufflebeam, D.L. 2000. Guidelines for developing evaluation checklists: the checklists development checklist (CDC). Evaluation Check list Project.Google Scholar
- 13.Tseng, J., C. Shu, J. Horng, C. Kuan, and H. Hsu. 2007. Planning an emergency respone center in southern Taiwan science park. IChemE.Google Scholar
- 14.US Army, C. 2008. Emergency Operation Center Planning and Design. US: US Department of Defence.Google Scholar
- 15.Welker, T. 2003. Design component of a modern emergency operation center (EOC) for city of clearwater. Florida: National Fire Academy.Google Scholar