Rethink Mass Notification

Properly dealing with emergencies demands integration of plant systems.

By Joe Wilson, Federal Signal

1 of 5 < 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 View on one page

Emergency mass notification at chemical plants traditionally has focused on audible and visual signaling devices such as sirens, horns, warning lights, beacons, public address and intercom systems. To alert anyone off site -- including fire, police and medical first responders -- communications often were limited exclusively to auto-dialing systems. Since September 11, 2001, the threat of terrorist attacks has prompted plant managers to re-evaluate their approach to both internal and external emergency mass notification. For obvious reasons, this need is particularly important for facilities that process, use, store and distribute hazardous chemicals.

Approximately 7,000 facilities -- roughly half of the nation's chemical plants -- are at high risk of a catastrophic accident or terrorist attack, according to an April 2007 report by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Just 101 of the most dangerous plants place more than 80 million Americans within range of a worst-case toxic gas leak, explosion or terrorist attack, according to "Chemical Security 101," a report issued in November 2008 by the Center for American Progress, Washington, D.C. (For more on that report, see: "How Should Industry Tackle Threats.")

Chemical facilities not vigilant about emergency planning and preparedness may find their procedures far lag "best practice," if not border on being inadequate. Despite the oversight of bodies such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Environmental Protection Agency and DHS, shortcomings have ranged from insufficient audible coverage for indoor plant warning systems, to confusing menus of tonal alerts, to inadequate contingency planning if key personnel are unavailable to initiate emergency plans. Employee and management training that's either insufficient or infrequent also has surfaced with disturbing regularity.

Compliance with government directives clearly is driving this comprehensive re-assessment of emergency mass notification planning, systems and resources. Proliferation of new software-driven technology riding on existing network topologies, and deployment of seamless multi-device interoperable communications both within and outside the facility also is at play. Additionally, there's the ongoing trend toward integrated systems, which in this instance means unifying disparate mass notification devices and systems to achieve the highest possible levels of monitoring, redundancy, reliability and operational simplicity.

System Integration And Interoperability
Safety warning, communications and security requirements traditionally have been addressed through individual systems dedicated to specific needs. These systems have grown in complexity and expanded in number to encompass everything from public address, intercom, telecommunications, paging, text messaging, voice messaging, e-mail and general alarm, to real-time Internet Protocol (IP)-based communications.

Integrating disparate components such as sirens, signaling beacons, fire/gas systems and public address now is critical for ensuring effective redundancy and monitoring for emergency communications and warning. This is because the automation that accompanies integration of audible, visual and digital systems significantly speeds incident response times while also providing decision-makers with invaluable up-to-the-minute data as emergency events unfold.

1 of 5 < 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 View on one page
Show Comments
Hide Comments

Join the discussion

We welcome your thoughtful comments.
All comments will display your user name.

Want to participate in the discussion?

Register for free

Log in for complete access.


No one has commented on this page yet.

RSS feed for comments on this page | RSS feed for all comments