The graphic pictures and stories of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina from 2005, the California wildfires, and the recent flooding in the Midwest are images not soon forgotten. Right now some parts of the country are in the midst of drought, other areas are hoping the levees will hold. Earthquakes may strike much of the country without warning. This year may be a bad one in a continuing cycle of increased tropical storm activity forecast for the next couple of decades. Floods, earthquakes, tornadoes, blizzards, ice storms, fire, heat waves, loss of utilities, and terrorist or activist activities can all have major effects on laboratory operations.

While it’s the catastrophic disasters with their alarming headlines that grab everyone’s attention, professional emergency managers have long recognized that, regardless of size and cause, their impacts at a local level are often similar. Because of this fact, emergency managers have long emphasized adopting an “all-hazards” approach to emergency planning and recovery. An all-hazards approach focuses on preventing the likely detrimental effects from any type of disaster and reducing the consequences from these effects. Emergency plans should use function-based planning and not incident-based planning. Power loss, for example, may be a result of many potential incidents (a windstorm, downed tree, ice storm, or even a car hitting a power pole). Regardless of the cause, there are actions that must take place to ensure the protection of employees and the samples, records, and operations contained within the facility.

One can think of emergency management as having four primary phases:

1. Preparedness: the planning and preparations required to handle an emergency or disaster.
2. Mitigation: the steps and activities related to preventing future emergencies or minimizing their effects.
3. Response: the actual activation of the emergency plan when the need arises.
4. Recovery: the actions needed to restore normal operations.

Let’s briefly touch on each of the four phases of emergency management. It should be pointed out that the approach described is scalable from the management of a large county forensic facility to the management of a small independent crime lab down to an individual laboratory.

Preparedness
This is perhaps what is traditionally thought of as emergency planning. This includes development of written plans and procedures to ensure critical operations are maintained. One recognized approach is to develop an emergency management structure that has elements that would be common to all emergencies (e.g. command structure, critical operations, etc.) and then develop specific annexes to deal with unique problems. Preparedness includes identification of essential supplies and actions, critical positions, specific roles and responsibilities, orders of succession and delegation of specific authorities, communication, and safety for staff.