OFFICE FOR THE COORDINATION OF HUMANITARIAN AFFAIRS

(OCHA)

Meeting of
International Search and Rescue Team Leaders
on lessons learnt and follow up to
the 1999 Turkey and Taiwan earthquakes

Neuhausen, Germany, 9 - 12 December 1999

UNITED NATIONS
The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not
imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United
Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities,
or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
 INTERNATIONAL SEARCH AND RESCUE ADVISORY GROUP
(INSARAG)

Meeting of International Search and Rescue Team Leaders

on lessons learnt and follow up to
the 1999 Turkey and Taiwan earthquakes
Neuhausen, Germany, 9 - 12 December 1999

Table of contents

I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
II WORK OF THE MEETING
III FUTURE MEETINGS
IV ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
V SPECIAL WORKING GROUP ON INTERNATIONAL
COORDINATION:
VI WORKING GROUP A ON LESSONS LEARNT: SYSTEM OVERVIEW
VII WORKING GROUP B ON LESSONS LEARNT: MANAGEMENT AND
COORDINATION
VIII WORKING GROUP C ON LESSONS LEARNT: OPERATIONS
IX WORKING GROUP D ON LESSONS LEARNT: TECHNICAL
SUPPORT/EQUIPMENT
X WORKING GROUP E ON LESSONS LEARNT: LOGISTICS
XI WORKING GROUP F ON LESSONS LEARNT: UN OSOCC/UNDAC
XII WORKING GROUP G: FIRE / NBC
XIII REPORT OF THE JOINT INSARAG / MCDA WORKING GROUP ON
TRAINING

Annex 1 Rapid Study Report on the International Search and Rescue

Response to the Izmit Earthquake, Turkey, August 1999
Annex 2 List of participants
 1

I    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The Meeting of International Search and Rescue (SAR) Team Leaders on Lessons
Learnt and Follow up to the 1999 Turkey and Taiwan Earthquakes, hosted by the Government
of Germany was held under the auspices of the International Search and Rescue Advisory
Group (INSARAG) and the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian
Affairs (OCHA), from 9 - 12 December in Neuhausen, Germany, 9 - 12 December 1999.   
The Meeting was co-chaired by    Mr. Gerhard Putman-Cramer, Deputy Director of OCHA
Geneva and Chief, Disaster Response Branch, and Mr. Dietrich Läpke, Deputy Director,
German Federal Agency for Technical Relief, Bundesanstalt Technisches Hilfswerk (THW).   
Mr. Toni Frisch, Deputy Director, Swiss Agency for Cooperation and Development and
Chairman of INSARAG, co chaired the closing session.   

2. The meeting was attended by 119 participants from 36 countries and two UN
agencies, representing many of the international SAR teams who had responded during the
aftermath of recent major earthquakes in Turkey and China to assist in urban search and
rescue and disaster relief operations, as well as representatives of the national emergency
management agencies of the affected countries.    For many of the participants, the meeting
provided an introduction to the INSARAG network of international emergency management
practitioners, its philosophy and the practical guidelines developed by its members for urban
search and rescue operations in an international setting.    Particular mention was made of the
INSARAG Protocols for Assisting and Affected Countries, the On-Site Operations
Coordination Centre (OSOCC), the recently approved the International Search and Rescue
Response (ISARR) Guidelines, the United Nations Disaster Assessment and Coordination
(UNDAC) Team and the OCHA Directory of International Search and Rescue Teams.

3. The meeting focussed on    presentations by the representatives of the affected

countries, providing an overview of the management of the emergencies and particularly the
coordination of the large number of international teams who had deployed to assist with
urban search and rescue operations.    In addition, for each emergency the leaders from a
selection of the teams deployed presented a report on the team's mobilization, deployment,
operations on site, conclusions and lessons learnt.    OCHA provided an summary report of
the UNDAC Team Mission deployed in response to each of the emergencies.

4. The importance of reactivating the work of all the INSARAG Regional Groups was
highlighted and proposed dates for future meetings were announced: the Regional Group for

1
 2

Africa/Europe would meet in Tunisia in November2000, a preparatory meeting of the

Regional Group for Asia/Pacific was planned for Spring 2000, possibly in Australia, and a
meeting of the Americas Regional Group would take place in October 2000.

5. Participants in working groups discussed various aspects of an international Urban

Search and Rescue deployment and presented lessons learnt and conclusions for
implementation.

2
 3

II    WORK OF THE MEETING

6. Mr. Rene Mally, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, representing the Government of

Germany, welcomed participants to the meeting on behalf of Mr. Joschka Fischer, German
Foreign Minister, and was particularly pleased to see representatives from so many countries,
many of which were newcomers to the INSARAG family.      The German Government had
sponsored the meeting in the belief that it would be timely for the teams responding to the
recent devastating earthquakes to share their experiences with the objective of improving
such operations in the future.    The magnitude of the damage caused, and the extensive area
affected by the Marmara earthquake of August 1999 had led to an impressive and rapid
international response and many of the teams present had deployed up to four times over a
period of only four months    to assist in the region of Izmit and Bolu in Turkey, to Athens,
Greece, and to Taichung county, China.

7. The German Government highly valued the work of INSARAG and believed the
meeting was an opportunity to work towards the INSARAG objectives of enhancing the
quality of assistance provided to a disaster stricken country and of strengthening the
partnership between emergency responders through personal contacts and working group
discussions.    Mr. Mally considered that the results of the present meeting would further
demonstrate how to strengthen the links between potential providing and receiving countries
at a practical level and to promote synergy among emergency practitioners.

8. Mr. Gerhard Putman-Cramer, Deputy Director of OCHA Geneva and Chief, Disaster
Response Branch, expressed the sincere gratitude of OCHA to the Government of Germany
for hosting this important meeting which welcomed both old and new members of the
INSARAG family.    He believed that their presence was vital, to strengthen the network of
emergency responders represented by INSARAG, and its regional groups.    In particular, he
underlined the importance of the participation of representatives from the countries affected
by the disasters, to share their viewpoint on the activities undertaken to assist their affected
populations.

9. Mr. Putman-Cramer briefly outlined the growth and achievements of the INSARAG,
with its secretariat in the United Nations, since its establishment in 1991, in the wake of the
Armenia earthquake. These included the provision of a forum for emergency response
consultations: the "INSARAG principle", which had been defined as the establishment of an

3
 4

informal network, involved in ongoing preparedness measures, which is activated particularly

upon the occurrence of an emergency situation.

10. INSARAG was working for a better understanding of international response

requirements in emergencies.    It promoted the view that international relief operations must
always be guided by real needs and never driven by the availability of resources and good
intentions.    Preparedness and good planning were prerequisites for a timely and effective
emergency response. Building on the experience of responders who have been involved in
relief operations at both the providing and receiving ends of international assistance,
INSARAG has incorporated the most important factors, promoting rapid and effective action,
into two protocols:    one for countries or teams ready to offer assistance, and the second for
countries requesting such assistance. INSARAG has created    the concept of the On-Site
Operations Coordination Centre (OSOCC) where all actors have a platform for coordination.

11. In Orlando, in June 1999, the International Search and Rescue Response (ISARR)
Guidelines were approved.    These now serve as a reference for international SAR teams,    to
assist them to operate in the most efficient and effective manner possible.

12. Mr. Putman-Cramer considered that INSARAG now    needed further impetus in the
functioning of its Regional Groups.    Three INSARAG Regional Groups had been
established:    for the Americas, Africa and Europe, and Asia/Pacific.    These were the
backbone of INSARAG, but they had not all been functioning optimally of late.    He hoped
that one of the major outcomes of this meeting would be their reactivation and revitalization.

13. Mr. Putman-Cramer outlined the work of OCHA's Disaster Response Branch (DRB)
which was the focal point for the coordination of international assistance in the aftermath of
sudden onset natural disasters. To assist in identifying international relief requirements in the
immediate relief phase of a sudden-onset disaster, OCHA, in close cooperation with national
emergency relief services,    established the United Nations Disaster Assessment and
Coordination (UNDAC) Team, which was designed for rapid assessment and field
coordination support in sudden-onset disasters.

14. Mr. Dietrich Läpke, as Chairman of the Africa/Europe Regional Group welcomed the
unprecedented response to participate in this lessons learnt meeting.    The    work of the
INSARAG, which was an informal network of emergency management practitioners, over
the last decade was now bearing fruit.    He summarized the main areas of work as: a mutual

4
 5

knowledge of members structures and capabilities; the definition of quality standards for
international teams; cooperation during relief operations; exchange of experience, particularly
at a technical level; capacity building in affected countries - which was an integral part of the
strategy of the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR) to which
INSARAG had been closely linked from the time of its inception.    The work initiated by
IDNDR would be continued by the newly formed International Secretariat for Disaster
Reduction (ISDR).

15. Mr. Läpke requested all participants to continue disseminating knowledge of

INSARAG within the disaster management community. He outlined the intensive schedule of
work for the meeting.   

16. Mr. Läpke introduced Mr.    Moncef Belkhir, Deputy Director of the Civil Defence of
Tunisia, Deputy Chairman of the INSARAG Regional Group for Africa/Europe and was
pleased to announce that the next meeting of the Regional Group would take place in Tunisia
in the autumn of 2000.

17. Mr. Arjun Katoch, Chief, Field Coordination Support Unit (FCSU), DRB, OCHA,
outlined the role of DRB, as focal point for the mobilization and coordination of international
assistance in response to sudden-onset natural disasters. This task was supported at the on
site, national and international levels.    The UNDAC system had been developed in
cooperation between the United Nations and members of INSARAG to provide a platform
for coordination at the national and on-site levels and link the provision of information on
damage and needs to the international level for the mobilization of assistance.    He requested
all international SAR teams to ensure that they informed OCHA Geneva when they were
mobilized, placed on standby and deployed to respond to a request for assistance in
international urban search and rescue.    The INSARAG webboard had been set up on the
Internet (http://wwwp.itu.int:8080/FCSU) to provide a focal point for the exchange of
information between relief teams deploying to emergencies.

18. Mr. Jesper Lund (FCSU) leader of the UNDAC Team deployed to Turkey in August,
summarized the UNDAC mission.    Initially the Team's arrival had been delayed awaiting
authorization.    The first members of the Team to arrive had set up a reception centre with the
national authorities at the airport. The following day members of the Team were able to carry
out an overall assessment by helicopter and on the ground and became aware of the extent of
the disaster. As a result, it was decided to establish an On-Site Operations Coordination

5
 6

Centre in Istanbul together with the local authority coordination centre.    The OSOCC had
been strengthened by officers from UN Agencies, particularly UNDP.    SAR Teams in the
different areas were requested to establish sub-OSOCCs where they were working and to
relay information back to Istanbul.    The information obtained was then forwarded to OCHA
Geneva and to the UN Office in Ankara.      This procedure was greatly hindered by the
damage to and overloading of the communications network in the affected towns.    In
addition, the UNDAC Team provided an environmental expert who assisted the national
authorities with environmental aspects of the emergency.   

19. Mr. Thomas Peter (FCSU, OCHA), participant in the UNDAC Team, responding to
the November earthquake in Turkey, underlined that the second earthquake affected a much
smaller area, the Turkish authorities were very quickly and effectively organized, the
UNDAC Team was on site very rapidly and that the international SAR teams benefited from
the knowledge acquired about fellow teams in the previous emergency.    The UNDAC Team
had established an OSOCC in situ with the Turkish military authorities coordinating the
response, initially in Duzce, moving later to Bolu. Meetings with SAR teams and other
resource providers for an exchange of information had been held at least twice a day.
UNDAC activities had also included further assessment of relief needs, during which
assistance had been provided from the capacity of the SAR teams.    The United Kingdom had
provided valuable communications and transport support, including the facilitation of a
helicopter.    An UNDAC member, with national support had manned a Reception and
Departure Cell at Istanbul airport. In conclusion, he stressed that cooperation with the
national authorities, UN Agencies and international SAR teams had been very effective.

20. Mr. Richard van Hazebrouck, (THW, Germany) participant in the UNDAC team in
both Turkey earthquakes, informed that he was already in country when the second
earthquake struck. He was therefore able to take contact with the national authorities very
rapidly and establish the reception centre at the airport with UNDP officials and local
volunteers.    In Istanbul work had been coordinated closely with the Turkish Army and Red
Crescent.    Difficulties had been experienced with the departure of SAR teams because of
heavy incoming traffic for the very high level OSCE summit scheduled in Istanbul.

21. The principal lessons learnt were:

- in earthquake situations the UNDAC Team should be despatched as rapidly as

possible without waiting for an official request;

6
 7

- international urban SAR teams should inform OCHA when being

mobilized/deployed;
- it was imperative to have good telecommunications contact with SAR Teams in the
field;
- SAR teams should be requested to include liaison officers;
- in disasters covering such a wide area, it was necessary to have a coordination
mechanism established and accepted by all actors.

22. Mr. Hasan Ipek, Civil Defence of Turkey, explained the structure and activities of the
General Directorate of Civil Defence of the Ministry of the Interior, in cases of disaster which
include coordination of the other related Ministries, public institutions and foundations. In
addition the legislation governing the work of the institution cover emergency preparedness
and response procedures.    He referred to the responsibility of Governors of Provinces and
Towns regarding the organization, management, equipping and supervision of civil defence
within their jurisdiction.    The Marmara earthquake of 17 August 1999 was the greatest
disaster Turkey had faced, in terms of its magnitude and area affected.    He informed that as
of 5 December 1999, 17,391 persons were    reported dead, 43,953 injured and 244,383
buildings had been affected of which 66,441 had collapsed/heavily damaged, 67,242 had
suffered medium damage and a further 80,160 had    been affected.    He expressed his
Government's gratitude to the teams from 87 countries and 10 international organizations for
their support to the search and rescue efforts.    He detailed the disruption in the economic and
social life of the country that continued.

23. He also informed that as part of the lessons learnt from the tragedy, legislation had
already been launched for revised disaster plans to cope with a disaster of this magnitude,
including the development of qualified SAR teams not only for disasters in Turkey but to
respond in other countries.    New regulations were also being studied on the issues of
urbanization, location of industrial facilities, communications and transport links.    He
recognized the important role played by non-governmental organizations in the relief efforts.

24. Mr. Kamil Dogan Topaçlioglu, Civil Defence of Turkey, outlined the proposals for
strengthening urban search and rescue teams in Turkey, in the light of the recent experience.   
He pointed out that those teams located in the affected area were also often victims and
would inevitably need support from other regions.    He underlined the role to be played by
the Technical and Support Departments in the new units to be formed and that the issues of
indemnification and treatment of injuries to include non-governmental organizations and

7
 8

volunteers would be covered by the State.

25. Mr Feridan Celikmen, Rescue Chief of AKUT SAR team, Turkey, referring to the two
earthquakes pointed out that most live rescues were made by the local population within
hours of the earthquake.    Crushed and persons trapped and injured would be extricated by
specialized teams later.    He underlined the importance of preparedness measures for the
general public, which could take the form of training and distribution of material on measures
to be taken, first aid, initial reactions and behaviour.    He supported the use of standardized
markings for searched buildings by both national and international teams and the need to
communicate operation results to the central coordination centre.    He appreciated the support
provided by the United States Team to equip Turkish national SAR teams and requested
international assistance for the development of the national SAR capability.

26. Lt. General Erol Tutal, Turkish Army Corps Commander, coordinator of international
assistance to the November earthquake thanked all countries who had    provided assistance to
Turkey.    He outlined the activities of the Turkish Army in immediate response to the
earthquake.    He had established the Civil Crisis Management Centre in Bolu initially,
together with a reception centre for incoming teams.    The Coordination Centre consisted of a
section for national teams and another for international teams.    The activities carried out
covered assessment of damage, development of the plan for operations and evaluation of
operations carried out.    Resources mobilized included helicopters for the transport of the
injured, assessment and heavy machinery for moving rubble. All expertise in the region was
incorporated into the coordination structure.

27. Lt. General Tutal considered that lessons learnt were:

-need for an international agreement for the registration of highly-trained SAR teams;
- equipment needed to be standardized and used before the disaster
- forward planning for identification of disaster-prone countries of the world
- need for symposia and meetings of the present type to discuss issues raised
- the need had been demonstrated for pre-disaster planning:
- scenarios pre-planned ready for immediate implementation when necessary;
- need to establish procedures and responsibilities for coordination before the
disaster;
- need for a good evaluation of an assessment plan and its implementation.
28. Mr. Joseph Bishop, Emergency Management Consultant, OCHA, presented the Rapid

8
 9

Study Report on the International Search and Rescue Response commissioned by INSARAG
after the Izmit Earthquake, August 1999.    The Report covered the reaction by the
Government of Turkey, by Governmental and Non-governmental SAR Organizations, by the
Disaster Response Branch, OCHA, the arrival of the UNDAC Team and establishment of
OSOCC, Field Assessments and Coordination Missions, Sub-OSOCCs.    The Rapid Study
Report is attached as Annex 1 to the present document.

29. Mr. Bishop recommended that wider dissemination be given to existing instruments
and systems in order to provide an effective, efficient, safe and properly coordinated
international SAR response.    International SAR teams should bear in mind that they have co-
ownership and responsibility for coordination in an emergency situation.    Among other
recommendations, he underlined the need for OCHA to promote INSARAG, UNDAC and
the OSOCC concept amongst UN in-country offices and Governments of disaster-prone
countries.    He welcomed affected countries such as Turkey to the INSARAG family.    He
highlighted the need for SAR teams to implement the International Search and Rescue
Response Guidelines, to inform OCHA of their mobilization for deployment and to provide
liaison officers to support the OSOCC.

30. Mr. Shimuel Friedman, Commander of General Training Section, Home Front
Command, Israel, summarized the Rescue Task Force operations in the two earthquakes in
Turkey and the Greek earthquake.    He underlined that the Rescue Task Force was trained for
major accidents and incidents in Israel as well as to respond to major natural disasters.    In
August, the team had rescued 121 persons, extricated 141 dead, over a total of 144 hours
work in 6 days.    In November, the team had rescued one woman, working with a Turkish
team, extricated 22 dead during 120 hours of operations.    He informed that the Israeli Team
works on information received at coordination meetings, from local residents.   

31. He concluded:

- the importance of humanitarian help and solidarity had been demonstrated;

- the help of local translators was invaluable;
- it was impossible for the team to bring heavy machinery;
- logistics problems occurred because of the climate both in August and November;
- the presence of a representative from the Army or the local population attached to the
Israeli team had assisted greatly

9
 10

32. Colonel Paul Benedek, recounted the experience of 2 Israeli Defence Force Field
Hospitals in response to the Turkish earthquakes, located in Adapazari and Ducze. In the light
of these operations he stated that rapid decision-making and structural flexibility were
important life-saving factors for a field hospital.

33. Mr. Simo Wecksten, Leader of the Finnrescueforce Team, Finland, to the Marmara
earthquake in August explained that because of transport constraints, the team only carried   
light rescue equipment and optical search devices.    The Team composed of Team leader, plus
6 officers plus 15 multi skilled rescuers (with paramedical skills) reached Turkey 20 hours
after the order to deploy.    The local authorities provided transportation and an interpreter.   
Contact was made with the OSOCC by phone during transport to the area of operations in
Yalova. In addition to its SAR operations, the Team was requested to support the sub-OSOCC
by carrying out assessment trips in the area. He considered that although the sub-OSOCC was
working as well as possible, not all international SAR teams understood the importance of
coordination in the field.

34. Mr. K. D. Sommer, Austrian Forces Disaster Relief Unit, summarized the operations
of the AFDRU Team in the Marmara earthquake in August.    The 66-person team with 12
dogs had arrived in country just over 24 hours after the earthquake; it had received support
from the Austrian Consulate General but had difficulties in locating the OCHA Reception
Centre.    The AFDRU was assigned to the town of Yalova and commenced activities on 18
August at 11.00 a.m.    Initially there were little operational results from contacts with the
local authorities and operations were carried out in close cooperation with the local
population.    There were five international teams on site during the initial phase and the
AFDRU liaison personnel established a sub-OSOCC to facilitate communications between
them and with the OSOCC in Istanbul

35. Mr. Sommer considered the major lessons learnt:

- the initial assessment underestimated the dimension of the disaster, causing problems
for the operations elements of the team to meet the needs;
- once the lack of coordination in the mission area became apparent, Austrian liaison
personnel established a sub-OSOCC.

36. Mr. Dietrich Läpke thanked the presenters for their statements which had been most
interesting.    One revealing issue was the size of the response in each case compared to the

10
 11

extent of the earthquake. For the Marmara earthquake, there were some 92 teams, with
approximately 2,700 members who had rescued 144 persons.    For the Duzce earthquake, 42
teams had responded with some 1,488 members and 8 persons had been rescued.    For the
future it would be important to strike a better balance between the seriousness of the
earthquake and the number of rescuers.

37. Mr. Arjun Katoch provided an overview of the DRB response to the Taipei
earthquake, when a 6-person UNDAC team had been despatched.    Two Team members
worked with the central coordination centre in Taipei, while the remaining members carried
out a mission with the local authorities, contacting the teams in the field.    United States and
Australian experts had been made available to set up a departure cell at the airport in order to
interview departing teams.

38. Mr. Yan Ming Tang, Commission of Taichung County Fire Department, delivered a
report on the national response to the 21 September 1999 earthquake, with its epicentre in
Nantou Country.    As at 2 December 1999, 1,185 persons were reported dead with 8 missing
and 6,190 persons injured.    10,984 buildings had collapsed and 7,563 buildings partially
collapsed.    He expressed appreciation to the international SAR teams for assisting the
affected population and working so well with the local rescuers.    He particularly noted the
usefulness of the work of the search dogs.    Lessons learnt were that there was a lack of
communications, shortage of trained personnel and equipment at a national level.    The
damage to roads affected the response and eventually there was an excess of some relief
goods.

39. Mr. Michael Tamillow, summarized the response of the United States Urban Search
and Rescue Task Force to the Nantou County earthquake.    As with many other teams, this
had been the Task Force’s second deployment in two months, having recently returned from
Turkey.    He underlined how impressed the Advance Team had been at the preparedness of
the national emergency management organization which briefed them on arrival with a
detailed graphic presentation on the collapsed buildings and provided them with building
plans and city maps. Personnel from the Team were split into two alternating 12-hour shifts.
After some 35 hours on the ground operations were completed.    Although local officials
requested the team to remain to recover bodies, after negotiations taking account of the local
culture on the issue against the danger of buildings placing the team at risk, the team was
demobilized.    In the capital, while awaiting departure, a significant aftershock occurred and
the team was redeployed.

11
 12

Lessons learnt included, among others:

- the importance of using military air transport which could be refuelled in flight;
- the need to improve communications channels to receive updates on the disaster
situation en route;
- the need to load equipment when deploying so that essential lighting items could be
rapidly set up on arrival;
- need for procedures for tracking ongoing operations on different sites (which may be
in one building).

40. Mr. Mitsunori Shirakawa, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan, informed on the
response of the Japanese Disaster Relief Teams to Taiwan.    The Team totalling 110 officers
carried out its rescue activities from 21 to 27 September. He underlined the cooperation on
one 12-storey building with the Korean Team, where equipment was shared.    Assistance was
also offered to the Russian Team and a joint operation was carried out.    The Team had
particularly appreciated the warm reaction of the local population.

41. Mr. Beat Künzi, Swiss Disaster Relief Team, Switzerland, made a presentation on
behalf of the joint Austrian/German/Swiss Team and on technical aspects of the earthquake.   
This was the first occasion when such a joint team had been deployed as a single structure.     
The logistics of the    joint operation had led to a delay of 22 hours in deployment. The Team
had made available a Liaison Officer to work with the UNDAC Team and OSOCC. He noted
the particular nature of the building collapses in Taiwan, which had posed a new challenge
for search and rescue.
He considered the major lessons learnt included:- the need for bilateral agreements
regarding response already in place with a potentially affected country;
- the need for assignments to be known on arrival;
- the importance of official contact persons in country;
- the benefits of continuous contacts with the local authorities and the OSOCC;
- within the Team, the need to separate the functions of coordination and operations;
- many teams responding did not have sufficient experience or good equipment;

42. Mr. Jin-Jon Choy, Fire Chief Commander, Korea, introduced the work of the Korean
119 Team during the Turkey earthquake in August and Taiwan.    The 39-member Team’s
operations in Turkey had covered the period 20 - 30 August.
In conclusion, he considered that:
- outdoor camping by the team members had saved response time, particularly in the

12
 13

case of aftershocks;
- while they had carried food and water for two weeks, they had needed grey water for
showers and hygiene purposes;
- the 119 team had not witnessed information sharing during operations nor any
coordination with other international teams. In Taiwan, the team had successfully
extricated a survivor.

43. Mr. Vladimir Boreyko, EMERCOM of Russia,    made a presentation on the activities
carried out by the EMERCOM Team in the two earthquakes in Turkey and in Taiwan,
including the deployment of a field hospital. EMERCOM had also deployed an IL76
firefighting aircraft to Turkey in August and had participated in efforts to extinguish the oil
refinery fire in Turkey in cooperation with German and Swiss technical experts. In Taiwan
the expertise of EMERCOM officers had been used in cooperation with less experienced
local SAR personnel. In November in Turkey EMERCOM SAR personnel had assisted with
assessment.

44. Participants to the meeting then took part in Working Groups on the following issues:
Special Working Group on the Improvement of International Coordination after the
experience of three major disasters; Working Groups on International Search and Rescue
Response Guidelines: System Overview, Management and Coordination, Operations,
Technical Support/Equipment, Logistics, UN OSOCC / UNDAC, Special Working Group on
Fire.

45. The Reports from these Working Groups were presented in plenary, and are contained
in chapters V to XII below. In addition the INSARAG/MCDA Working Groups on Training
presented a report on their joint meeting, see chapter XIII below.
46. A presentation was made by Ms.Sezin Sinanoglu, United Nations Development
Programme, Turkey, on the activities being carried out by UNDP as a follow-up to the two
earthquakes in Turkey.    UNDP Staff had been deployed to the OSOCCs set up to work with
the national authorities with the UNDAC team.    UNDP was now engaged in medium- and
long-term projects to strengthen the disaster response capability in Turkey.

47. A Search and Rescue Field demonstration was carried out by teams from Austria,
Germany and Switzerland and participants were able to visit an exhibition of technical
products and vehicles for use in emergency situations.

13
 14

48. Following the presentation of the Reports of the Working Groups, Mr. Toni Frisch,
Chairman of INSARAG, thanked the participants for their work during the meeting. He
welcomed this opportunity to extend the cooperation within INSARAG to many countries not
formerly present in its meetings, particularly countries in Asia.    He underlined that the body
was not political but brought nations together to achieve practical results in more effective
disaster management practices in emergencies. In the future he looked forward to an even
wider dissemination of the knowledge and achievements gained within the INSARAG
network.    He trusted that all participants would ensure that the results of this meeting would
be widely distributed within their countries to the relevant institutions, including academic
bodies involved in disaster management.

III      ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

49. All participants expressed sincere gratitude to the German Government for having
hosted the meeting and in particular to Mr. Dietrich Läpke, Mr. Claus Höllein and the many
volunteers from THW who had ensured the success of the meeting.    Appreciation was also
expressed for the CD-Rom distributed to all participants with the text of the International
Search and Rescue Response (ISARR) Guidelines, which would facilitate their wider
dissemination.

IV      FUTURE MEETINGS

50. The next meeting of the INSARAG Regional Group for Africa/Europe would take
place in Tunisia, in November 2000.

51. Following discussions during the present meeting, a preparatory meeting of core
members of the INSARAG Group for Asia Pacific was planned for March 2000, possibly in
Australia, with the intention of re-activating the group later in the year.

52. The United States announced it would host a meeting of the INSARAG Group for the
Americas in Colorado in September 2000.

V      SPECIAL WORKING GROUP ON THE IMPROVEMENT OF

INTERNATIONAL COORDINATION presented by Mr. Arjun Katoch, OCHA

14
 15

53. The Working Group reached the following conclusions on the issues discussed:

Coordination    at the International Level

The trigger for the deployment of SAR Teams had to occur in the light of information
available from the affected country and consideration of the needs required.    In any event
organizations deploying teams should inform OCHA once their teams were mobilized with
details of that deployment.

The UNDAC deployment would take place as soon as possible after the occurrence of
a major event affecting an urban area and teams were requested to take into consideration
transporting UNDAC Team members to the affected countries.

The issue of information exchange on the developing situation was of paramount

importance and to assist this FCSU had established a Webboard on the Internet to enable
disaster managers involved to take part in real-time information exchange.

Coordination at National Level

It was important to distinguish between the UNDAC team overall responsibility to

support the authorities of the disaster affected country and the in-country United Nations
system in the assessment of damage and needs as well as the mobilization and coordination
of incoming international response resources and its role in the OSOCC, particularly
regarding international urban search and rescue teams.

The OSOCC will continue to be used after the SAR phase is over for ongoing
assessment of relief needs.

On-Site Coordination

Disaster-affected countries should be aware of the need for early activation of the
local emergency management authority (LEMA) component of OSOCC

The members of the UNDAC team could only form the core of OSOCC - support will
always be required from search and rescue expertise, in-country specialists and United
Nations agencies.

15
 16

International SAR teams should be willing to include one UNDAC member from the
country as part of    their standard operating procedures (SOP) for deployment
It was recommended that the first SAR team to arrive at the airport of an affected
country should leave a staff member there to organize the reception of later teams

The terminology of sub-OSOCC should be used for coordination centres in multiple

sites

The United States of America had agreed to run an exercise/training module for the
OSOCC detachment of SAR teams

Promotion of INSARAG

Discussions had shown that there was a need for an international Convention on the   
Principles and Procedures for urban SAR operations

Links should be established between the United Nations and the university/academic
systems involved in disaster management training in member countries

Disaster-response-related meetings should be utilized to promote INSARAG and its

work.

A meeting of earthquake-prone countries should be held to discuss their

responsibilities, as set out in the ISARR Guidelines.

There was an urgent need to develop promotional materials (such a posters, leaflets)
for INSARAG

VI      INSARAG INTERNATIONAL SEARCH AND RESCUE RESPONSE

SYSTEM OVERVIEW
presented by Mr. Chuck Mills and Mr. Simon Salin

54. The ISARR Guidelines on Development Assumptions, System Overview, Code of

Ethics were reviewed and the following conclusions were reached:

16
 17

The guidelines that where issued are not only to be considered an aid for the SAR
Team members of INSARAG, but also for every other organization or developing country at
risk that may eventually require the assets of INSARAG.

The SAR Teams should not expect the interpreters assigned to assist them would
understand the technical terms required in their operations, without advance briefings and
orientation.

SAR Teams must anticipate providing for the protection, health-care, lodging, and
feeding of other assigned assets (interpreters, guides, drivers) while they are assigned to a
mission.

The decision on where to install the OSOCC Reception Centre will be determined by
the size of the mission and the method of arrival used by the majority of the SAR Teams. In
most instances, it will be located at the largest airport closest to the disaster site, but
consideration should be given to including land entrances into the affected country.

Teams should consider bringing specialists for situations that LEMA cannot support
(for example heavy lifting equipment). This will facilitate the on-site operations and ensure
that there is a consistent efficient use of resources in the affected country.   

Special supplies, like lumber for shoring, should be arranged and made available by
LEMA for SAR Team use upon its arrival in the affected country. This will speed the process
of beginning life-saving operations.   

It might occur that the local government is not able to fulfill its responsibilities. In that
case it is up to the OSOCC to take a more active role in the coordination of the basic tasks to
keep the rescue process ongoing and maintain the remaining infrastructure.   

In worst-case scenarios, SAR Teams may need to take a more pro-active approach to
the management of operational sites. This may be due to the enormity of the disaster, the fact
that the LEMA is overwhelmed by its tasks, or more practical issues as a result of the
situation. This approach cannot be taken without the approval of LEMA in any instance.

Consideration should be given to further development of the Assumption Criteria of

17
 18

the affected country into a Guideline to ensure that it is able to take a more defined role to
receive international SAR Teams.

Additional emphasis should be placed on preparing SAR Teams for the particular
characteristics of the culture of the affected country prior to their arrival.

The development of a SAR Team should be entirely dependant on a local need for
such a resource, rather than its exclusive use in an international assignment.

SAR Teams should consider enhancing their mission as it transitions from rescue to
the effective and efficient delivery of other forms of humanitarian assistance (building tents,
medical care, cutting firewood).

Provision should be made to ensure that continuous training and exercises are
conducted within the INSARAG family. This will play a major role in assuring on-site
effectiveness, lessening human suffering.

An annual revision of the INSARAG Directory must be performed to ensure SAR

Team capacity and capability remains constant.

VII      SAR TEAM MANAGEMENT

presented by Mr. Michael Tamillow and Ms. Ellen Theilaker

55. The ISARR Guidelines on Team Management, Planning, Public Information Safety
And Security, Engagement / Disengagement, Mobilization were reviewed and the following
conclusions were reached:

The United Nations should investigate the possibility of establishing over-flight

approval (permission) for responding SAR Teams/

There was a need for better identification of locations where situation assessments
information can be acquired (for example: UN / Internet / MCDA Field Manual /
EMERCOM Prognosi Institut).

Potentially-affected countries need to be introduced to the Guidelines to help facilitate

arrival of SAR Teams during disasters.

18
 19

Information of restrictions placed by the affected countries need to be included in

press releases / sitreps from the United Nations.

The ISARR Guidelines should have a suggested time-frame established, regarding   

when a SAR Team should be back to readiness.

SAR Teams should have supplies of units of blood on hand for its members.

Standards for international search dogs should be developed and adhered to.

Standards should be developed for SAR Team uniforms.

XIII      SAR TEAM OPERATIONS

presented by Mr. Joseph Bishop and Mr. Stefan Duda

56. The ISARR Guidelines on Search Operations, Rescue Operations, Medical

Operations were reviewed and the following conclusions were reached:

Additional information on collapsed buildings should be included in the OSOCC

Information Briefings and situation reports.

Information should be made available to in-coming SAR Teams on contacting the

LEMA and who is the lead authority (Civil Protection, Central Government, Military).

With reference to the Medical Guidelines, concerning the terms "Critical Cases,
Moderate Cases, and Minor Cases" and the numbers of patients assigned, the original
intention was to use the figure as a benchmark in preparedness for the SAR Team prior to
deploying internationally. In this instance, without the supporting equipment stock list of
pharmaceuticals, the numbers used should not be considered. It is intended that the team is
capable of providing care for its team members (and canine), victims encountered in rescue
operations, and others encountered during a mission.

To prevent the loss of critical medical information during patient hand-off, a

multi-lingual patient assessment form should be developed and implemented.

19
 20

There is no written rule on when to transition from SAR team tools and equipment to
the use of heavy equipment. Many times it will be dependant upon the capability of the team
itself, or the decision of LEMA to move from "Rescue" to "Recovery".

Health hazards are common to a disaster and must be constantly assessed to ensure
the safety of SAR team members. Dust is common in this type atmosphere and respiratory
protection should be provided to team members when they issued their personal protective
equipment (PPE).

Care must be taken when extricating patients from a structure to ensure they have
been properly immobilized, with definitive treatment started.

It is common for SAR teams to have medical "Fixed Assets" that will remain with the
team, even during patient transfer. In some instances, medical teams may differ in
their equipment carried, but it should be kept in mind that the intent of the function is
to take care of the team’s own team members.

IX      SAR TEAM LOGISTICS

presented by Mr. Steffen Schmidt and Ms. Marion Biegert

57. The ISARR Guidelines on Base of Operations (BoO), Communication and Logistics
(in general) were reviewed and the following conclusions were reached:

The importance was highlighted of sending an advance team to find an appropriate

BoO site in cooperation and coordination with OSOCC/LEMA.

The selection and decision on placement of the BoO site is based on

recommendations from OSOCC/LEMA depending on what is reported on team capabilities
and sufficiency and the team leader’s overall considerations - especially on overall safety and
security.
The BoO site selection is often in competition with selection of sites for local
rehabilitation .

Sports areas are generally good campsites - large areas and fenced.

20
 21

Types of tents for the BoO need to be balanced to different possibly harsh climates.

A high degree of hygiene in camp is important in order not to decrease team

performance.

Sewage and waste management needs to be maintained and worked out in

coordination with local authorities

Pre-assigned bands and frequencies should be established for OSOCC/UNDAC/areas/

key functions.

It is important to development and disseminate an overall communications plan and

radio sketch with specific team call signs.

It should not be forgotten that communication is also face-to-face communication.   

Local mobile networks, cell phones, computers, Internet access provided by private
companies provide other possibilities.

The importance was underlined of performing long-range logistics planning in order

to develop and maintain supply and resupply lines.

A mechanism should be developed to allow SAR teams to share resources.

The need should be noted of extra supplies for local employees: food, protection
equipment.

On-site "rest rooms" should be provided in order not to violate health and hygiene
concerns.

Teams should use a combination of bottled water and water purification units based
on considerations on weight/ volume/ need/ cost.

Equipment should be boxed and palletized in accordance to international air cargo

standards and the potential need for offloading by hand.

21
 22

X      TECHNICAL SUPPORT
presented by Mr. Per-Anders Berthlin and Mr. Martin Hornung

58. The ISARR Guidelines on Identification, Marking, Signalling, Information Gathering,

Quality of Search were reviewed, together with future Guideline Development and the
following conclusions were reached and general comments made:

Identification:    How to preserve the markings (particularly on collapsing buildings)? 

The sign should be drawn on other (not affected) buildings or on the ground with a
directional arrow to building in question.    Unfortunately markings are removed by local
citizens so the same building may be searched again.

Marking: Training and field use should be made of the Structure and Victim Location
Marking Systems to ensure that all international SAR teams become familiar with the manner
in which to use them.

If there is a marking system in use by the local authorities, consideration should be

made to either implement it, or incorporate it into use by the SAR teams. In any case, a
complete briefing should be done with all SAR teams to ensure that they are all using the
same method.

Structure marking should be applied to any side of the building that could become a
means of entry for a SAR team. This will prevent needless duplication of work by other
teams that approach the structure from a different point.

Team names or abbreviations that are used in Structure Marking should be well
known to all teams operating in the disaster area. For example, the German team may be
identified as THW, rather than Germany.

A method should be included in the Guideline to update or revise a Structure Marking

that is clear and consistent to all.

Signalling: With regard to on-site signalling, the suggestion was made to only have an
"Evacuation" signal, rather than the three listed in the Guideline. Using this format would

22
 23

allow the team to concentrate on the task at hand.

Mapping: GPS-coordinates should be used

Future Development: A Guideline should be developed on Structural Engineering.    It

must include definitions of engineering terminology, including collapse patterns (structural
integrity), heavy lifting equipment, and the use of specialized tools    (theodolite).

Guideline on Equipment Stock: this Guideline must not only cover the minimum of
equipment carried by the SAR Team.
General Comments:

Consideration should be given to producing the Guidelines in the form of a field

handbook that would have greater use in the field by reducing the bulk of a notebook. This
handbook should have useful English translations, as well as mapping symbols and the
marking system.

The Search Guideline should clearly identify the importance of surveillance and
information gathering. Care should be taken to ensure that building managers, residents, and
pedestrians are thoroughly interviewed (and the data analysed) to ensure that all pertinent
information is obtained.

The Identification and Marking Guideline should stress that Structure Marking is only
a tool to be used as a measure of information sharing. The most important facet of this
function is the reporting of information back to LEMA (or OSOCC) so that it can be
considered for operation assignment and mission determination.

A method of coordinating the Structure Marking, as it applies to the level of search

performed should be developed. For example, there are three levels of search (physical,
canine, and electronic). Identification of which of these methods has been used should be
included in the exterior Structure Marking.

Emphasis should be placed on ensuring that the SAR team does not become known as
a "victim-hunting" team. Teams should remain focussed to tasks assigned and not infringe or
“freelance” into other assigned areas.

23
 24

Verification of the appropriateness of using a red cross or crescent should be made. In

most instances, that would identify a person as a member of the IFRC, which may or may not
be a certified medical provider. Consideration should be given to changing to the EMS
Star-of-Life emblem that is now recognized as a medical provider.

XI      UNITED NATIONS OSOCC

presented by Mr. Thomas Peter and Mr. Tim Nonner

The purpose of the Working Group was to provide background information on the
UNDAC/OSOCC concept and its interaction with sending and receiving countries.    Work
took the form of a brainstorming session to determine responsibilities of: OCHA/OSOCC,
SAR team (ST), Sending Country (SC), Receiving Country (RC).    The following
prioritization of results was made

Clear distinction of a request for assistance with urban search and rescue should
appear in OCHA Situation Reports (OCHA).
Information regarding SAR deployment should be transmitted to OCHA (capacity,
date/time, entry point) (SC).

Verification on whether assistance is needed should be ensured before deployment

(SC).

Reception centre(s) should provide information such as security, maps, important

cultural issues, in-country system, regional SAR teams, transport, etc.    (OSOCC).

It was important to register/track SAR teams and NGOs and maintain a contacts list of
involved actors (OSOCC).

The importance was also highlighted of maintaining information updated on the

situation and results of operations (SAR, OSOCC, OCHA).

Daily meetings should be held with SAR teams (OSOCC).

Information links should be maintained between the OSOCC and Sub-OSOCC(s)

(OSOCC).

24
 25

Responding SAR teams should be self-sufficient for 10 days (SC).

Responding SAR teams should include a capacity to establish an initial OSOCC or to

provide liaison personnel for the OSOCC, irrespective of their SAR deployment capacity
(SC).

It was of prime importance to establish SAR reception and departure centre(s) at entry
/ departure points (OCHA / OSOCC / first SAR team).

Where the area of the emergency was extensive, it was necessary to establish an
OSOCC and Sub-OSOCC(s) (OSOCC / SAR Teams).

Provision should be made to support customs clearance, issuance of visas (OSOCC /

LEMA)

Certain types of support should be provided to SAR teams (interpreters, maps,

transport, grey-water, heavy machinery) (OSOCC / LEMA)

It was necessary to prepare and maintain an assignment plan (grid) for SAR team(s)
and to promote regional cooperation of teams (LEMA / OSOCC).

Sending countries should be aware of and implement international SAR guidelines

(SC).
SAR teams should ensure that their preparations are made in accordance with   
International SAR Response Guidelines (SC)

Separate guidelines should be developed for a receiving country (INSARAG/OCHA)

Checklists should be prepared for SAR teams and to cover the tasks of a receiving
country (INSARAG/OCHA).

XII      WORKING GROUP ON FIRE

Presentation by Mr. Edward Pearn and Mr. Johann Goldammer

25
 26

Since experience had shown that secondary effects of natural and techno genic
disasters required additional specialist advice in conjunction with SAR response and other
humanitarian aid missions, it was considered that the INSARAG family offers an appropriate
structure to consider this issue.    The Working Group made the following recommendations:

The formation of three sub-groups was suggested, covering (1) Wildland fires, (2)
Hazardous materials (HAZMAT) and (3) Industrial fires.    The following terms of reference
were proposed:

INSARAG-Fire is a global network of specialists in dealing with industrial fires,

wildland fires and HAZMAT incidents affecting populations and the environment.

INSARAG-Fire is organized in regional nodes.

INSARAG-Fire has been initiated by a Core Group of the INSARAG Regional Group
for Africa/Europe and will seek the establishment of Fire groups in the Regional Groups of
the Americas and Asia-Pacific.

In order to provide a link to UNDAC, OCHA should provide a one-week introduction

course related to the UNDAC system.

Preparation of self-protection guidelines were proposed for HAZMAT specialists in

SAR teams (to cover NBC issues).

The development of an INSARAG-Fire questionnaire was proposed to be carried out

by the chair and members of the group.    It would be drawn up on the basis of the OCHA
SAR questionnaire and circulated at an international level.

The involvement of existing international structures would be activated by calling on

international organizations already in place such as: Industrial Fire - CTIF, HAZMAT - ICE
(International Chemical Environment System, Europe) and TUIS (Transport - Accident -
Information and Assistance System), Wildland Fire - GFMC (Global Fire Monitoring
Centre).

It was proposed that INSARAG-Fire be involved in joint international (United

Nations and other) meetings and exercises such as: BALTEX FIRE 2000 (Baltic Exercise for

26
 27

Fire Information and Resources Exchange), Finland; INTERSCHUTZ 2000, in conjunction

with THW, Germany; TRIPLEX 2000, Sweden; Meeting of INSARAG Regional Group for
Africa/Europe, Tunisia.

A continuous exchange of information through the Internet should be encouraged and

appropriate Internet-based information systems should be developed for Industrial Fire and
HAZMAT incidents.

The existing Global Fire Monitoring Centre network should be utilized initially.

Mr. Arjun Katoch, INSARAG Secretariat, pointed out that the proposals should be
submitted to the International Search and Rescue Advisory Group for comments before
implementation and that the implementation of such activities would depend upon the
provision of the necessary resources to the Secretariat. There was no consensus on the
appropriateness of, or need to, establish an INSARAG working group on Fire in view of the
numerous already international existing deal with fora that this subject.     

XIII      UNITED NATIONS INSARAG / MCDA TRAINING SYSTEM

presented by Mr. Norbert Fürstenhofer and Mr. Arno Umfahrer

The Working Groups responsible for the UN-INSARAG / MCDA Training systems
had held a further joint meeting and discussed the structure of the system.    It was planned at
three levels: Awareness Level, Operations Level and Staff Level.    The one-week Response
Awareness Course was targeted at persons with anticipated career responsibilities in the area
of international humanitarian relief. Its purpose was to provide personnel with a minimum
knowledge and understanding of international emergency and disaster response operations,
with a special focus on the United Nations role.   

At an Operations Level the one-week United Nations Civil/Military Cooperation

(CIMIC) Course was targeted at persons directly involved in the execution and
implementation of humanitarian relief operations (team leaders/commanders, field staff
members).    Its purpose was to enable participants to understand the specifics of civil and
military relief operations in the emergency environment.

The future United Nations/INSARAG Emergency Response Operations Course would

target the same group, and would be aimed at enabling participants to implement the

27
 28

operations procedures of the ISARR Guidelines. Finally, successful participants in the

Operations Level Courses could attend the Staff Level United Nations CIMIC Staff Course,
with the aim of enabling participants to deploy to a disaster-stricken country in order to
optimize the procedures of an international response operation.   

The focal points for training issues were: Mr. Jesper Lund, FCSU, OCHA (Secretariat
INSARAG), Mr. Joseph Reiterer, Military and Civil Defence Unit (MCDU), OCHA, Colonel
Norbert Fürstenhofer, AFDRU (Chairman of the MCDA and INSARAG Groups on Training,
Mr. Arno Umfahrer, AFDRU (Training Coordinator)

28