CN103955785A - Emergency capacity assessment method of power grid enterprise - Google Patents

Abstract

The present invention relates to the technical field of electric power systems, in particular to a method for evaluating the emergency response capability of power grid enterprises. Specifically, it provides a general criterion for the evaluation of emergency response capabilities of power grid enterprises, provides a scientific and convenient evaluation and identification method, and establishes emergency response capability evaluation for power grid enterprises. method assistance system. The invention includes establishing an index system, assigning index scores and an evaluation auxiliary system. The invention is convenient for continuous improvement of emergency management work of enterprises and ensures the effectiveness of emergency management work of power grid enterprises; it can help improve the professional level of emergency rescue organizations of power grid enterprises at all levels, and is convenient for evaluating the integration degree and correctness of emergency management work of power grid enterprises at all levels Recognize the emergency management capabilities and their development trends that constitute the bottom line of emergency management for power grid enterprises. It is convenient to review the emergency preparedness before the danger comes, so as to prevent and reduce the impact and loss caused by major accidents, and carry out emergency response activities in an efficient and orderly manner when major accidents occur.

Description

Evaluation method of emergency capacity of power grid enterprises

technical field

The present invention relates to the technical field of electric power systems, in particular to a method for evaluating the emergency response capability of power grid enterprises. Specifically, it provides a general criterion for the evaluation of emergency response capabilities of power grid enterprises, provides a scientific and convenient evaluation and identification method, and establishes emergency response capability evaluation for power grid enterprises. method assistance system.

Background technique

Since the 1990s, emergency systems, mechanisms and legal systems have developed and improved rapidly in the United States, Japan, Canada, Germany and other countries. In the United States, the National Emergency Management Association and the Federal Emergency Management Agency jointly compiled the "Assessment Method for State Emergency Capability Preparedness Assessment". The 2000 version of the "State Law" includes 1801 assessment elements, which can comprehensively assess the status of all aspects of emergency management in each state. FEMA obtains nationwide assessment data to understand the state of emergency preparedness across the country. Mainly for legal basis, hazard identification and risk assessment, hazard mitigation, resource management and logistics support, emergency plan preparation, command, control and coordination, communication and alarm, management and procedures, emergency command center facilities, training, drills, evaluation and correction 13 management functions including operations, crisis communication, public education and press release, funding security, administration and program management were evaluated. In Japan, in 2002, the Fire Department and the Institute of Disaster Prevention and Intelligence organized the "Review Conference on Regional Disaster Prevention Capabilities and Crisis Management Evaluation of Local Public Organizations". Its evaluation items mainly include crisis grasp and main assessment, disaster situation assumptions, disaster mitigation countermeasures, system reorganization, information communication system, education and training, and maintenance and improvement of activity levels, etc. During the evaluation process, the tables are mainly used to answer specific questions, and then the deficiencies in disaster prevention and crisis management can be directly corrected based on the results.

With the promulgation of the "National Overall Emergency Plan for Public Emergencies" issued by the State Council on January 8, 2006, the framework system of emergency plans in my country has initially formed. my country started the relevant research on urban emergency response capabilities in the "Research and Pilot Projects on Urban Sudden Major Accident Risk Control and Emergency Technology" (National "Tenth Five-Year Plan" scientific and technological research rolling plan), and conducted actual evaluations in pilot cities. Government emergency management departments at all levels have also started research and practice in this area.

The emergency management of State Grid Corporation is a precedent among domestic enterprises. It has accumulated a lot of successful experience in theory and practice and achieved good results. However, the emergency management assessment work is still in its infancy. Emergency capacity assessment is mainly used to assess the adequacy of resource preparation and the ability to engage in emergency rescue activities, and to clarify the needs and deficiencies of emergency rescue, so as to propose timely and comprehensive corrective measures. Due to the absence of a scientific emergency capacity evaluation system at this stage, the emergency management work is in the experience-based management stage, and it is impossible to evaluate and evaluate the emergency management of enterprises, and there is no scientific emergency resources and system construction and allocation principles.

Contents of the invention

Aiming at the above existing problems, the present invention provides a grid enterprise emergency capability assessment method, specifically a general grid enterprise emergency capability assessment method index system, and establishes an index assignment standard and a grid enterprise emergency capability assessment method auxiliary system. The purpose is to test the adequacy of emergency management and resource preparation of power grid enterprises and the ability to engage in emergency response and rescue activities. Through the systematic method, the needs and deficiencies in emergency management and rescue are discovered in time, so that it is convenient to propose comprehensive corrective measures in time.

The technical solution adopted by the present invention to solve its technical problems is:

Evaluation methods for emergency response capabilities of power grid enterprises, including establishing index systems, assigning index scores, and evaluation auxiliary systems;

(1) The above-mentioned establishment of the index system: select the index that has a greater impact on the emergency response capability from many operating data and parameters, and the index requirements are true and usable, and the system is complete enough; with "one case, three systems" as the core, for Comprehensive evaluation of the emergency response capabilities of power grid companies from four aspects: emergency prevention, emergency preparedness, emergency response, and post-disposal; constructively incorporate some indicators into the evaluation system to make the evaluation more comprehensive; the index system adopts a hierarchical The classic system structure is divided into two categories according to attributes: static indicators and dynamic indicators; under these attributes, four evaluation attributes of enterprise emergency capabilities are specifically divided, that is, according to the basic procedures of emergency management, "emergency prevention, emergency preparedness, In the four professional aspects of emergency response and post-disposal, the construction and management indicators of 13 subsystems, including "five systems", "six capabilities" and "two systems", are classified into these categories one by one. , and finally add the other indicators involved in the attribute itself one by one to improve the system;

(2) Assignment of the above-mentioned allocation indicators: including the classification of assessment indicators, assessment and scoring methods, assessment and assignment methods, and criteria for identifying emergency capabilities;

(3) The evaluation auxiliary system mentioned above: including system management, evaluation standard management, parameter confirmation and enterprise evaluation management.

The emergency prevention mentioned mainly includes: the evaluation of the content of the emergency organization system, emergency plan system, and rules and regulations system;

The emergency preparedness mainly includes: training and drill system, emergency scientific and technological support system, team organization ability, comprehensive support ability, prevention prediction, monitoring and early warning system, and evaluation of emergency information and command system construction content;

The emergency response mainly includes: the evaluation of public opinion guiding ability and rescue handling ability;

The post-processing evaluation mainly includes: evaluation of restoration and reconstruction capabilities and continuous improvement capabilities.

The classification of evaluation indicators: According to the "Evaluation Standards", there are 4 first-level evaluation indicators, 13 second-level evaluation indicators, and 38 third-level evaluation indicators. The indicators are classified according to their numbers, that is, the third-level titles are divided by numbers. For the first-level indicators, second-level indicators, third-level indicators, fourth-level indicators and fifth-level indicators, the following provisions are made:

First-level indicators: such as 1 emergency prevention, 2 emergency preparedness, 3 emergency response, 4 post-treatment;

Secondary indicators: such as 1.1 emergency organization system, 2.2 support system;

Three-level indicators: such as 1.1.1 emergency organization, 1.2.1 risk analysis;

Level 4 indicators: such as 1.1.1.2 Emergency guarantee system;

Five-level indicators: such as 1.2.1.2.1 Vulnerable areas and vulnerability analysis.

The evaluation and scoring method mentioned above: An expert evaluation team composed of professional evaluation institutions or professionals outside the unit, in accordance with the established "Evaluation Standards", adopts an evaluation method that combines dynamic evaluation and static evaluation, and focuses on evaluating the actual performance of the evaluated enterprise. Emergency capability;

(1) Static inspection and evaluation: The method of verification is mainly adopted, and static inspection and evaluation of emergency management and emergency system construction is carried out according to this evaluation standard through methods such as listening to reports, checking materials, checking records, and checking physical objects. The static check score is 515 points, 64.37% of the total score;

(2) Dynamic evaluation: The actual test of the emergency management and disposal capabilities of the enterprise is mainly carried out by means of questioning and deduction. The dynamic test score is 285 points, accounting for 35.63% of the total score. The dynamic evaluation mainly adopts the following methods:

Examination: Create an emergency examination question bank. For the evaluation unit, select a certain proportion of members of the emergency leading group, department leaders, management personnel, and first-line rescue and repair staff to ask questions, inquire, and organize answering exams. The contents of the exam mainly include emergency awareness, emergency organization, emergency plan, emergency skills , Rules and regulations, training exercises related functions and common sense;

Drills: Classify and organize tabletop deduction and on-site actual combat drills, with no less than 3 evaluation drills for each assessment. Test the scientific rationality of the emergency plan and emergency mechanism from the actual combat, and test the ability to respond to emergencies; each evaluation drill shall be no less than 3 times, of which the special plan drill shall be carried out in the form of desktop deduction, focusing on the assessment of the overall emergency mechanism and process. 1 time, on-site disposal plan drills are mainly on-site actual combat drills, and no less than 2 times, comprehensively inspect emergency response and disposal workflows such as emergency prediction and early warning, emergency start-up, emergency response, command coordination, incident disposal, public opinion guidance, and information release , to test the scientific rationality of the emergency plan and emergency mechanism from the actual combat, and to test the ability to respond to emergencies;

Analysis and judgment: analyze the emergency response cases in the past three or five years, and combine the above-mentioned verification and evaluation situation, and aim at the construction of 13 secondary indicators of the emergency system, namely "five systems", "six capabilities", "two According to the construction of "one system" and the actual work situation, the emergency response capability of the enterprise is analyzed and evaluated, so as to obtain the sub-items of the emergency response capability of the enterprise and the status quo of the overall capability level.

The evaluation and assignment method described is: this "Evaluation Standard" adopts a scoring system, with a total score of 800 points. Evaluation items are given different index categories according to their different scores, and a detailed deduction standard is established for each evaluation item; determining the index weight can not only reflect the characteristics of the target system more truly, but also make the evaluation clear, In the power grid power supply capacity evaluation index system, the determination of the weight of each index directly reflects the guiding role of the power grid planning; for the setting of the index weight, it is mainly determined by expert consultation and direct experience, and then the result information feedback of the example can be used. Constantly revise the system.

The criteria for judging emergency response capabilities: it is to comprehensively measure the emergency response capabilities of the assessment objects through the total score rate and the score rates of various indicators; this standard divides the emergency response capabilities of power companies into four grades, and stipulates different score rates Intervals represent different levels of emergency response capabilities; during the evaluation, the scoring rates of the 13 secondary indicators are divided into four levels one by one, namely excellent, good, average, and poor. Among them, the excellent scoring rate should be ≥ 85%; 85 %>good score rate ≥75%; 75%>general score rate ≥60%; poor score rate should be less than 60%. At the same time, the overall emergency response capability is evaluated according to the overall score rate; score rate = actual score/should be scored × 100%.

The system management includes: realizing enterprise level, evaluation mode, evaluation cycle, user rights and other related parameter configuration functions; the evaluation standard management: including implementing functions such as static and dynamic evaluation standard management; the parameter confirmation includes: Realize the confirmation of evaluation-related parameters; the enterprise evaluation management includes: realizing enterprise static evaluation, dynamic evaluation, rectification management, evaluation report, evaluation report and other functions.

The evaluation auxiliary system adopts the J2EE framework to build a WEB information system; adopts a unified network protocol (HTTP) and standards, adopts a unified browser interface, and uses distributed technology to complete the power grid emergency capacity evaluation system;

(1) Industrial standards;

There are three industry standards for distributed object technology: MS's Distributed Component Object Model DCOM (Componet Object Model), OMG (Object Management Group)'s common object request broker structure CORBA (Common Object Request Broker Architecture) and SUN's J2EE. The fatal shortcoming of DCOM is its poor cross-platform performance, and it can only use Microsoft's platform from deployment to operation; the shortcoming of CORBA is that it is huge and complex, and the standard update is relatively slow; while J2EE simplifies and standardizes the development and management of multi-layer distributed systems. Deployment, widely supported by the industry, is often the preferred platform for enterprise-level distributed applications; J2EE provides a multi-layer distributed application model, which has JDBC technology for easy access to databases, and XML-based data exchange technology , component reuse capability, unified security model and flexible transaction control mechanism, and also provides comprehensive support for EJB, Servlets and JSP;

(2) System frame structure model;

The framework allows programmers to start specific system development on the basis of a general function that has been realized. It provides reusable abstract algorithms and high-level design, and can decompose large systems into smaller components, and can describe the relationship between components. Internal interfaces, these standard interfaces make it possible to build various systems through assembly on the basis of existing components; the general Web information system framework is a general system development model that conforms to the MVC design pattern;

(3) Evaluation process;

The system structure is divided into two parts: system management and evaluation management;

The system management part: mainly includes basic data maintenance, evaluation standard maintenance and related data management, data entry is performed by system administrators and relevant evaluation experts, basic data maintenance includes: configuration of enterprise level, configuration of company information, configuration of evaluation cycle, Configure user permissions and emergency related documents; maintenance of evaluation standards includes: standard manual maintenance, standard batch maintenance, evaluation standard confirmation; related data management includes: exam question bank management, generation of test papers;

The evaluation management part: mainly includes the evaluation report report, enterprise evaluation, and enterprise rectification. Enterprises or evaluation experts score each item according to the evaluation standards. The scores are displayed in the final evaluation report and evaluation report. The evaluation report report Including: evaluation report, company evaluation standard report, evaluation total score table, evaluation detailed table, evaluation difference table, evaluation grade results, evaluation comparison analysis chart; enterprise evaluation mainly includes: enterprise evaluation, online examination, calculation of points; enterprise rectification mainly Including: main problem rectification suggestions, rectification report and emergency document viewing;

The combined system structure is assessed by combining enterprise self-assessment and expert assessment, and each enterprise organizes self-assessment. The system administrator first checks whether the basic data of the self-assessed enterprise in the system is fully maintained and whether the evaluation criteria need to be modified. After completing the self-assessment and confirmation, the system administrator submits an application to the superior supervisory unit, which organizes experts or entrusts security experts with relevant qualifications. Evaluation intermediaries conduct expert evaluation;

The expert group draws expert assessment conclusions through on-site inspection, inquiry, inspection, verification, and exchange of opinions with business leaders and professional managers. Organize an expert evaluation summary meeting and announce the evaluation results; after the evaluation work is completed, the expert group should submit a written evaluation report and related evaluation statements to the superior competent unit and the evaluated unit;

The evaluated unit should organize relevant departments to formulate a rectification plan based on the self-evaluation results and expert evaluation results. The rectification plan must specify the rectification content, rectification measures, completion time limit, rectification person in charge and acceptance person; the rectification plan should be reviewed and approved by the supervisor and reported to the Filing by the superior competent authority;

The evaluated unit should summarize and report the completion of the unit’s emergency response capability assessment rectification plan in the middle and end of the year, put forward opinions and suggestions in a timely manner, conduct risk assessment on unfinished rectification projects, and revise the rectification plan if necessary, and implement closed-loop management;

Finally, the evaluated unit shall report the completion of the emergency response capability assessment rectification plan and the annual summary of the rectification work to the superior competent department.

Described system frame structure model: the general directory structure of the system includes the Images directory to store frame-related pictures, the script directory to place commonly used Web controls, and the Css directory to store style sheet files; the WEB-INF directory contains all Java class files and different database package file. Using the server web page template technology, dynamically combine the final display page; Action Servlet is the controller of the application, the entrance and distribution center of all requests, it determines the operation to be performed according to the address path requested by the server, and finds the corresponding processing class from Handermapping , responsible for processing server requests, collecting parameters, calling the corresponding Businesslogic class, and putting the processing results into HttpRequest/Http In the Session object, the information is formatted and processed at the same time. Determines the next page address path by interpreting the XML file.

In the system design, under the premise of fully meeting the functional requirements and main technical indicators specified in the technical requirements, follow the design ideas and principles of complete system, smooth and practical, safe and reliable, advanced and mature, and standardized standards for system design and equipment selection. Based on the present and facing the future, both the integration of existing systems and the development of future application systems are considered. Therefore, the design of this scheme is based on the following starting points:

Continuity of technology. The company's information system is generally based on B/S architecture, and the technical system from database, various middleware to system has been basically formed. This project uses the same system software (such as application server middleware, database, etc.) to maintain the continuity of technology ;

Wholeness. Integrate the integration of existing application systems and the expansion of future application systems into one system architecture, which is not only an operation management platform for application systems, but also a secondary development platform for application systems;

Advancement. Different from the traditional program code and data maintenance methods, the platform adopts a model-driven method to extract the internal structure of the application system's data, functions, interfaces, reports, etc. into various models that can be intuitively understood and maintained, and through the platform's The execution engine is converted into an actual running program, which greatly improves the automation of application system maintenance;

Reliability: including the reliability of hardware devices and the fault tolerance of software systems. The main equipment components and key components in the scheme are standard, mature and reliable products from well-known companies at home and abroad. Equipment and systems are put into use after rigorous testing. The tool software uses mature and excellent platforms and tool software, adopts modular design, has security management strategies and functions, and optimizes the system as much as possible.

ease of use. Provide a variety of convenient and easy-to-learn maintenance tools, no special professional technicians are required, and the method of system maintenance can be mastered through training, avoiding a lot of coding work, shortening the implementation cycle of the application system, and reducing the difficulty of daily maintenance;

openness. The integrated application system provides a program call interface based on Web Service, which can be easily integrated with other application software of the company to achieve a wider range of business integration.

scalability. In line with the idea of "on-demand customization and change on demand", the integrated platform can quickly configure application software that meets the individual needs of enterprises, adapts to future scalability requirements, and facilitates the expansion of application scope.

The use of the auxiliary system technical framework of the power grid enterprise emergency capacity assessment method is mainly to deal with some general requirements, such as page display, database operation, data verification and other functions. Using the framework development can save development time and difficulty. And can improve the stability of the system. In order to ensure the simplicity of subsequent system maintenance of the system, a unified system framework should be adopted when developing the system. According to the characteristics of the framework, ease of use, support for development, and the attributes of the project team to the framework, the technical framework we use for each subsystem mainly includes four levels: presentation layer, control layer, business logic layer and persistence layer.

System implementation requirements: based on B/S architecture, flexible system deployment and simple maintenance; graphical real-time data monitoring on the browser side; flexible configuration of graphical monitoring views according to user needs; flexible customization of report templates, automatic generation and reporting; providing standardized and unified data The integrated interface can adapt to the integration of different products; object-based storage and query of operation and maintenance data; authority and business logic are mutually integrated and complementary. We integrate the general logic in business logic into the authority system, which not only ensures the universality of authority, The fine-grained access control is guaranteed.

Advantage and effect of the present invention are:

1. It is convenient to continuously improve the emergency management work of enterprises and ensure the effectiveness of emergency management work of power grid enterprises; it can help improve the professional level of emergency rescue organizations of power grid enterprises at all levels;

2. It is convenient to evaluate the degree of integration of emergency management work of power grid enterprises at all levels and to correctly understand the emergency management capabilities and development trends that constitute the bottom line of emergency management of power grid enterprises;

3. Facilitate review of emergency preparedness before danger strikes.

The method of evaluating the emergency response capability of power grid enterprises is to prevent and reduce the impact and loss caused by major accidents, and to carry out emergency response activities in an efficient and orderly manner when major accidents occur, so as to achieve "high efficiency - the effect of rapid coordination and action within the system";" Orderly—command, make decisions and deploy according to pre-set procedures”; “Comprehensive—integrate various resources and mobilize internal and external forces”; “Moderate investment—safety emergency tasks according to the emergency response capacity of the enterprise, and do not exceed the capacity of the enterprise ".

Description of drawings

The present invention will be described in further detail below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments.

Fig. 1 is the framework model of the system of the present invention;

Fig. 2 is a schematic structural diagram of the evaluation system of the present invention.

Detailed ways

The present invention is a power grid enterprise emergency capability evaluation method, which involves three aspects, the main contents are respectively: establishment of index system, assignment of index points and evaluation auxiliary system. The specific work is divided into 6 stages, namely planning, Analysis, design, system implementation, testing, system rollout and support. It is mainly used to evaluate the adequacy of emergency management and resource preparation status of power grid enterprises and the ability to engage in emergency response and rescue activities. Through the systematic method, the needs and deficiencies in emergency management and rescue are discovered in time, so that it is convenient to propose comprehensive corrective measures in time. Grid companies should:

(1) Establish an indicator system.

First of all, from the many complex operating data and parameters, select the indicators that have a greater impact on emergency response capabilities, and the indicators must be true and usable, and the system is sufficiently complete. With "one case, three systems" As the core, comprehensively evaluate the emergency capabilities of power grid enterprises in four aspects: emergency prevention, emergency preparation, emergency response, and post-disposal. Constructively incorporate some indicators into the evaluation system to make the evaluation more comprehensive. "One case" refers to the establishment and improvement of the emergency plan system, "three systems" Refers to the establishment of a sound emergency management system, mechanism and legal system.

The indicator system adopts a layered classic system structure, sums up various factors that affect the power supply capacity of the distribution network, and divides them into two categories according to their attributes: static indicators and dynamic indicators. Under these attributes, several evaluation attributes of the enterprise's emergency response capabilities are specifically divided, that is, according to the basic procedures of emergency management, the contents of the four professional aspects of "emergency prevention, emergency preparation, emergency response, and post-disposal" are summarized, and the "five systems ", "Six Capabilities", and "Two Systems", the construction and management indicators of the 13 subsystems are classified into these categories one by one, and finally the remaining indicators involved in the attribute itself are added and improved one by one. system.

The "five systems" refer to the emergency organization system, emergency plan system, rules and regulations system, training and drill system, and emergency technology support system.

The "six capabilities" refer to team organization capabilities, comprehensive support capabilities, rescue and disposal capabilities, public opinion guidance capabilities, recovery and reconstruction capabilities, and continuous improvement capabilities.

"Two systems" refer to the prevention prediction and monitoring early warning system, emergency information and command system.

(1) Emergency prevention mainly includes: evaluation of the content of the emergency organization system, emergency plan system, and rules and regulations system;

(2) Emergency preparedness mainly includes: training and drill system, emergency scientific and technological support system, team organization ability, comprehensive support ability, prevention prediction, monitoring and early warning system, and evaluation of emergency information and command system construction content;

(3) Emergency response mainly includes: assessment of public opinion guidance capability and rescue and disposal capability;

(4) Post-disposal evaluation mainly includes: evaluation of restoration and reconstruction capabilities and continuous improvement capabilities.

(2) Allocation of index points.

1. Classification of evaluation indicators.

According to the "Evaluation Standards", there are 4 first-level evaluation indicators, 13 second-level evaluation indicators, and 38 third-level evaluation indicators. The indicators are classified according to their numbers, that is, the third-level titles are divided into first-level indicators and second-level indicators according to the numbers. Indicators, third-level indicators, fourth-level indicators and fifth-level indicators, and make the following provisions:

First-level indicators: such as 1 emergency prevention, 2 emergency preparedness, 3 emergency response, 4 post-treatment;

Secondary indicators: such as 1.1 emergency organization system, 2.2 support system;

Three-level indicators: such as 1.1.1 emergency organization, 1.2.1 risk analysis;

Level 4 indicators: such as 1.1.1.2 Emergency guarantee system;

Five-level indicators: such as 1.2.1.2.1 Vulnerable areas and vulnerability analysis.

2. Evaluation Scoring Methodology.

An expert assessment team composed of professional assessment institutions or professionals outside the unit, in accordance with the established "assessment standards", adopts an assessment method that combines dynamic assessment and static assessment, and focuses on assessing the actual emergency response capabilities of the assessed enterprise.

(1) Static review. The method of verification is mainly adopted, and the emergency management and emergency system construction are statically checked and evaluated according to this evaluation standard through methods such as listening to reports, checking materials, checking records, and checking physical objects. The static check score is 515 points, accounting for 64.37% of the total score.

(2) Dynamic evaluation. It mainly uses methods such as questioning and deduction to conduct actual tests on the emergency management and disposal capabilities of enterprises. The dynamic test score is 285 points, accounting for 35.63% of the total score. The dynamic evaluation mainly adopts the following methods:

Examination. Create an emergency exam question bank. For the evaluation unit, select a certain proportion of members of the emergency leading group, department leaders, management personnel, and first-line rescue and repair staff to ask questions, inquire, and organize answering exams. The contents of the exam mainly include emergency awareness, emergency organization, emergency plan, emergency skills, Rules and regulations, training exercises related functions and common sense.

Walkthrough. Organize desktop deduction and on-site actual combat exercises by category, and each evaluation exercise shall be no less than 3 times. Test the scientific rationality of emergency plans and emergency mechanisms from actual combat, and test the ability to respond to emergencies. Each evaluation drill shall be conducted no less than 3 times, of which, the special plan drill shall be carried out in the form of desktop deduction, focusing on the evaluation of the overall emergency mechanism and process, and the drill shall not be less than 1 time. Second, comprehensively inspect the emergency response and disposal workflows such as emergency forecast and early warning, emergency activation, emergency response, command coordination, incident disposal, public opinion guidance, and information release, and test the scientific rationality of the emergency plan and emergency mechanism from actual combat. Incident response capability.

Analysis and judgment. Based on the analysis of emergency response cases in the past three or five years, and the above-mentioned verification and evaluation situation, the construction of 13 secondary indicators for the emergency system, namely "five systems", "six capabilities" and "two systems" The construction and actual work conditions analyze and evaluate the emergency response capability of the enterprise, so as to obtain the sub-item and overall capability level status of the emergency response capability of the enterprise.

3. Evaluate the assignment method.

This "Evaluation Standard" adopts a scoring system, with a total score of 800 points, and the scores of each part are: 185 points for emergency prevention, 335 points for emergency preparedness, 180 points for emergency response, and 100 points for post-treatment. Each evaluation item is given different indicator categories according to its different points, and a detailed deduction standard is established for each evaluation item.

Determining the index weight can not only reflect the characteristics of the target system more truly, but also make the evaluation clear. In the evaluation index system of power supply capacity of the power grid, the determination of the weight of each index directly reflects the guiding role of the power grid planning.

For the setting of indicator weights, expert consultation and direct experience are mainly used for preliminary determination, and then the system can be continuously revised through the feedback of the results of the examples.

4. Criteria for judging emergency capabilities.

The emergency response capability of the assessment object is comprehensively measured through the total score rate and the score rate of various indicators. This standard divides the emergency response capabilities of power companies into four levels, and stipulates that different scoring rate intervals represent different emergency response capabilities.

During the evaluation, the scoring rate of the 13 secondary indicators is divided into four grades one by one, namely excellent, good, average, and poor. Among them, the excellent scoring rate should be ≥ 85%; 85% > good scoring rate ≥ 75% ; 75%> general score rate ≥ 60%; poor score rate should be less than 60%. At the same time, the overall emergency response capability is evaluated according to the overall score rate.

Scoring rate = actual score/should be scored x 100%.

(3) Evaluation assistance system.

Evaluation method evaluation auxiliary system for power grid enterprise emergency capacity: it is a software system for comprehensive evaluation of enterprise emergency capacity evaluation. It uses the standard of "Emergency Capacity Evaluation Method for Power Grid Enterprises" to analyze the emergency preparedness of enterprises and find out the emergency management and emergency capacity building. The advantages and disadvantages in the process, in-depth analysis of existing problems, put forward suggestions for improvement and construction direction, and finally achieve the organic combination of evaluation and construction, provide scientific basis for the rational allocation of enterprise investment and resources, and make better use of enterprise investment and resources benefit. The system realizes the evaluation of enterprises through static and dynamic methods. After three links of enterprise self-evaluation, expert evaluation and enterprise rectification, relevant evaluation reports, reports and enterprise rectification reports are obtained to reflect the details of the enterprise's emergency response capabilities. It is convenient for enterprises to improve emergency management work, ensure the standardization and effectiveness of emergency management work of power grid enterprises, and facilitate the evaluation of the integration degree of emergency management work of power grid enterprises at all levels.

The main functions are: system management, evaluation standard management, parameter confirmation, enterprise evaluation management.

The system management includes: realizing the configuration functions of relevant parameters such as enterprise level, evaluation method, evaluation cycle, and user rights;

The evaluation standard management: including realizing functions such as static and dynamic evaluation standard management;

The parameter confirmation includes: realizing the work of confirming parameters related to evaluation;

The enterprise evaluation management includes: realizing enterprise static evaluation, dynamic evaluation, rectification management, evaluation report, evaluation report and other functions.

The power grid enterprise emergency capability auxiliary evaluation system has the following technical characteristics:

1) The evaluation method adopts the combination of actual combat evaluation and static evaluation, and focuses on evaluating and evaluating the actual emergency response capabilities of the evaluated enterprises;

2) According to the evaluation results, it can provide enterprise managers with accurate, efficient, comprehensive and flexible information to help them make better analysis and decision-making;

3) The system automatically reminds the pending evaluation items, which is fast and efficient;

4) System integration, unified entrance, simple and convenient;

5) A unified "Evaluation Standard" is adopted to ensure the data consistency among various enterprises.

6) The algorithm is simple and fast, only requires reasonable algebraic operations, has nothing to do with the network scale, and the calculation time is nanoseconds to ensure the accuracy of the evaluation results;

7) Adopt flexible modular layered design to ensure the stability, compatibility and scalability of the system.

8) According to the evaluation data, the evaluation standard proportion chart and comparative analysis chart of each enterprise are produced, which more intuitively shows the emergency response capability of the enterprise.

This system will use the J2EE framework to build a WEB information system. Adopt unified network protocol (HTTP) and standards, adopt unified browser interface, distributed technology, and use the latest technology to complete the power grid emergency capability evaluation system.

1. Industry standard.

There are three industry standards for distributed object technology: MS's Distributed Component Object Model DCOM (Componet Object Model), OMG (Object Management Group)'s common object request broker structure CORBA (Common Object Request Broker Architecture) and SUN's J2EE. The fatal shortcoming of DCOM is its poor cross-platform performance, and it can only use Microsoft's platform from deployment to operation; the shortcoming of CORBA is that it is huge and complex, and the standard update is relatively slow; while J2EE simplifies and standardizes the development and management of multi-layer distributed systems. Deployment, widely supported by the industry, is often the platform of choice for enterprise-class distributed applications. J2EE provides a multi-layer distributed application model, which has JDBC technology for easy access to database, XML-based data exchange technology, component reuse capability, unified security mode and flexible transaction control mechanism, and also provides support for EJB , Servlets and JSP full support.

2. System frame structure model.

The framework allows programmers to start specific system development on the basis of a general function that has been realized. It provides reusable abstract algorithms and high-level design, and can decompose large systems into smaller components, and can describe the relationship between components. Internal interfaces, these standard interfaces make it possible to build various systems through assembly on the basis of existing components. The general Web information system framework is a general system development model conforming to the MVC design pattern. Through this model, the complexity of system development will be greatly simplified, the program hierarchy will be clear, and debugging will be simple.

As shown in Figure 1, the framework public page in Figure 1 includes all the static pages related to the framework; the general directory structure of the system includes the Images directory to store framework-related pictures, the script directory to store commonly used Web controls, and the Css directory to store style sheet files; WEB- The INF directory contains all Java class files and package files for different databases. Using the server web page template technology, dynamically combine the final display page; Action Servlet is the controller of the application, the entrance and distribution center of all requests, it determines the operation to be performed according to the address path requested by the server, and finds the corresponding processing class from Handermapping , responsible for processing server requests, collecting parameters, calling the corresponding Businesslogic class, and putting the processing results into HttpRequest/Http In the Session object, the information is formatted and processed at the same time. Determines the next page address path by interpreting the XML file.

3. Evaluation process.

As shown in Fig. 2, Fig. 2 is a schematic structural diagram of the evaluation system of the present invention.

The system structure is divided into two important parts: system management and evaluation management.

The system management part is mainly about basic data maintenance, evaluation standard maintenance, and related data management. System administrators and relevant evaluation experts perform data entry. Basic data maintenance includes: configuring enterprise levels, configuring company information, configuring evaluation cycles, and configuring user permissions. , Emergency related documents; evaluation standard maintenance includes: standard manual maintenance, standard batch maintenance, evaluation standard confirmation; related data management includes: exam question bank management, generation of test papers.

The evaluation management part is mainly evaluation report, enterprise evaluation, and enterprise rectification. The enterprise or evaluation experts will score each item according to the evaluation standard. The score will be displayed in the final evaluation report and evaluation report. The evaluation report includes: evaluation report , company evaluation standard report, evaluation total score table, evaluation detailed table, evaluation difference table, evaluation grade results, evaluation comparison analysis chart; enterprise evaluation mainly includes: enterprise evaluation, online examination, calculation of points; enterprise rectification mainly includes: main problems View rectification suggestions, rectification reports and emergency documents.

Combined with the system structure, the enterprise self-assessment and expert evaluation are used for evaluation, and each enterprise organizes self-evaluation. The system administrator first checks whether the basic data of the self-assessed enterprise in the system is fully maintained and whether the evaluation criteria need to be modified. After completing the self-assessment and confirmation, the system administrator submits an application to the superior supervisory unit, which organizes experts or entrusts security experts with relevant qualifications. Evaluation agencies conduct expert evaluations.

The expert group draws expert assessment conclusions through on-site inspection, inquiry, inspection, verification, and exchange of opinions with business leaders and professional managers. Organize expert assessment and summary conferences, and announce the assessment results. After the evaluation work is completed, the expert group shall submit a written evaluation report and related evaluation statements to the superior competent unit and the evaluated unit.

The evaluated unit should organize relevant departments to formulate a rectification plan based on the self-evaluation results and expert evaluation results. The rectification plan must specify the rectification content, rectification measures, completion time limit, rectification person in charge and acceptance person; the rectification plan should be reviewed and approved by the supervisor and reported to the Report to higher authorities.

The evaluated unit should summarize and report the completion of the unit's emergency response capability assessment rectification plan in the middle and end of the year, put forward opinions and suggestions in a timely manner, conduct risk assessment on unfinished rectification projects, and revise the rectification plan if necessary, and implement closed-loop management.

Finally, the evaluated unit shall report the completion of the emergency response capability assessment rectification plan and the annual summary of the rectification work to the superior competent department.

Claims (9)

1. The evaluation method of emergency capacity of power grid enterprises, which is characterized by: including establishing an index system, assigning index scores and evaluation auxiliary systems; (1) The above-mentioned establishment of the index system: select the index that has a greater impact on the emergency response capability from many operating data and parameters, and the index requirements are true and usable, and the system is complete enough; with "one case, three systems" as the core, for Comprehensively evaluate the emergency response capabilities of power grid companies from four aspects: emergency prevention, emergency preparation, emergency response, and post-disposal; constructively incorporate some indicators into the evaluation system to make the evaluation more comprehensive; The indicator system adopts a layered classic architecture, which is divided into two categories according to attributes: static indicators and dynamic indicators; Under these attributes, four evaluation attributes of enterprise emergency response capabilities are specifically divided, that is, according to the basic procedures of emergency management, the four professional aspects of "emergency prevention, emergency preparation, emergency response, and post-disposal " are summarized, and the "five systems ", "Six Capabilities", and "Two Systems", the construction and management indicators of the 13 subsystems are classified into these categories one by one, and finally the remaining indicators involved in the attribute itself are added and improved one by one. system; (2) Assignment of the above-mentioned allocation indicators: including the classification of assessment indicators, assessment and scoring methods, assessment and assignment methods, and criteria for identifying emergency capabilities; (3) The evaluation auxiliary system mentioned above: including system management, evaluation standard management, parameter confirmation and enterprise evaluation management. 2. The power grid enterprise emergency response capability evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The emergency prevention mentioned mainly includes: the evaluation of the content of the emergency organization system, emergency plan system, and rules and regulations system; The emergency preparedness mainly includes: training and drill system, emergency scientific and technological support system, team organization ability, comprehensive support ability, prevention prediction, monitoring and early warning system, and evaluation of emergency information and command system construction content; The emergency response mainly includes: the evaluation of public opinion guiding ability and rescue handling ability; The post-processing evaluation mainly includes: evaluation of restoration and reconstruction capabilities and continuous improvement capabilities. 3. The power grid enterprise emergency response capability evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The classification of evaluation indicators: According to the "Evaluation Standards", there are 4 first-level evaluation indicators, 13 second-level evaluation indicators, and 38 third-level evaluation indicators. The indicators are classified according to their numbers, that is, the third-level titles are divided by numbers. For the first-level indicators, second-level indicators, third-level indicators, fourth-level indicators and fifth-level indicators, the following provisions are made: First-level indicators: such as 1 emergency prevention, 2 emergency preparedness, 3 emergency response, 4 post-treatment; Secondary indicators: such as 1.1 emergency organization system, 2.2 support system; Three-level indicators: such as 1.1.1 emergency organization, 1.2.1 risk analysis; Level 4 indicators: such as 1.1.1.2 Emergency guarantee system; Five-level indicators: such as 1.2.1.2.1 Vulnerable areas and vulnerability analysis. 4. The power grid enterprise emergency response capability evaluation method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The evaluation and scoring method mentioned above: An expert evaluation team composed of professional evaluation institutions or professionals outside the unit, in accordance with the established "Evaluation Standards", adopts an evaluation method that combines dynamic evaluation and static evaluation, and focuses on evaluating the actual performance of the evaluated enterprise. Emergency capability; (1) Static inspection and evaluation: The method of verification is mainly adopted, and static inspection and evaluation of emergency management and emergency system construction are carried out according to this evaluation standard through methods such as listening to reports, checking data, checking records, and physical verification; the score value of static inspection is 515 points, 64.37% of the total points; (2) Dynamic evaluation: The actual test of the enterprise's emergency management and handling capabilities is mainly carried out by means of questioning and deduction; the dynamic evaluation score is 285 points, accounting for 35.63% of the total score; the dynamic evaluation mainly adopts the following methods: One is the examination: establish an emergency examination question bank; for the assessment units, select a certain proportion of emergency leadership team members, department leaders, management personnel, and front-line rescue and repair staff to ask questions, inquire, and organize answer examinations. The content of the examination mainly includes emergency awareness, Emergency organization, emergency plan, emergency skills , rules and regulations, training and drill related functions and common sense; The second is drills: desktop deduction and on-site actual combat drills are organized by category, and each evaluation drill is no less than 3 times; the scientific rationality of the emergency plan and emergency mechanism is tested from the actual combat, and the ability to respond to emergencies is tested; each evaluation drill is quite a lot 3 times, of which the special plan drills are based on desktop deduction, focusing on evaluating the overall emergency mechanism and process for no less than 1 time, and the on-site disposal plan drills are mainly on-site actual combat drills, and no less than 2 times are used to comprehensively test emergency prediction and early warning, emergency response Start-up, emergency response, command and coordination, event handling, public opinion guidance, information release and other emergency response and handling workflows, test the scientific rationality of emergency plans and emergency mechanisms from actual combat, and test the ability to respond to emergencies; The third is analysis and judgment: analyze the emergency response cases in the past three or five years, and combine the above-mentioned verification and evaluation situation, and aim at the construction of 13 secondary indicators for the emergency system, namely "five systems", "six capabilities", " The construction of the "two systems" and the actual work situation are analyzed and evaluated to analyze and evaluate the emergency response capabilities of the enterprise, so as to obtain the sub-items of the emergency response capabilities of the enterprise and the status quo of the overall capability level. 5. The emergency response capability evaluation method of power grid enterprises according to claim 1, characterized in that: the evaluation and assignment method is: this "Evaluation Standard" adopts a scoring system, with a total score of 800 points, and the scores of each part are respectively: emergency response 185 points for prevention, 335 points for emergency preparedness, 180 points for emergency response, and 100 points for post-treatment; each evaluation item is assigned a different index category according to its different score value, and a detailed deduction standard is established for each evaluation item; Determining the index weight can not only reflect the characteristics of the object system more truly, but also make the evaluation clear. In the evaluation index system of power supply capacity of the power grid, the determination of the weight of each index directly reflects the guiding role of the power grid planning; For the setting of indicator weights, expert consultation and direct experience are mainly used for preliminary determination, and then the system can be continuously revised through the feedback of the results of the examples. 6. The method for evaluating emergency response capabilities of power grid enterprises according to claim 1, characterized in that: The criteria for judging emergency response capability: it is to comprehensively measure the emergency response capability of the evaluation object through the total score rate and the score rate of various indicators; This standard divides the emergency response capability of power companies into four levels, and stipulates that different scoring rate intervals represent different emergency response capability levels; During the evaluation, the scoring rate of the 13 secondary indicators is divided into four grades one by one, namely excellent, good, average, and poor. Among them, the excellent scoring rate should be ≥ 85%; 85% > good score rate ≥ 75%; 75% > general score rate ≥ 60%; poor score rate should be less than 60%; at the same time, evaluate the overall emergency response capability according to the overall score rate; Scoring rate = actual score/should be scored x 100%. 7. The method for evaluating emergency response capabilities of power grid enterprises according to claim 1, characterized in that: The system management includes: realizing the configuration functions of relevant parameters such as enterprise level, evaluation method, evaluation cycle, and user rights; The evaluation standard management: including realizing functions such as static and dynamic evaluation standard management; The parameter confirmation includes: realizing the work of confirming parameters related to evaluation; The enterprise evaluation management includes: realizing enterprise static evaluation, dynamic evaluation, rectification management, evaluation report, evaluation report and other functions. 8. The method for evaluating emergency response capabilities of power grid enterprises according to claim 1, characterized in that: The evaluation auxiliary system adopts the J2EE framework to build a WEB information system; adopts a unified network protocol (HTTP) and standards, adopts a unified browser interface, and uses distributed technology to complete the power grid emergency capacity evaluation system; (1) Industrial standards; There are three industrial standards for distributed object technology: MS's distributed component object model DCOM (Componet Object Model), OMG (Object Management Group)'s common object request broker structure CORBA (Common Object Request Broker Architecture) and SUN's J2EE; DCOM The fatal shortcoming of CORBA is poor cross-platform performance, and only Microsoft's platform can be used from deployment to operation; the shortcoming of CORBA is that it is huge and complex, and the standard update is relatively slow; while J2EE simplifies and standardizes the development and deployment of multi-layer distributed systems , is widely supported by the industry, and is often the preferred platform for enterprise-level distributed applications; J2EE provides a multi-layer distributed application model, which has JDBC technology for easy access to databases, XML-based data exchange technology, Component reuse capability, unified security model and flexible transaction control mechanism, also provides comprehensive support for EJB, Servlets and JSP; (2) System frame structure model; The framework allows programmers to start specific system development on the basis of a general function that has been realized. It provides reusable abstract algorithms and high-level design, and can decompose large systems into smaller components, and can describe the relationship between components. Internal interfaces, these standard interfaces make it possible to build various systems through assembly on the basis of existing components; the general Web information system framework is a general system development model that conforms to the MVC design pattern; (3) Evaluation process; The system structure is divided into two parts: system management and evaluation management; The system management part: mainly includes basic data maintenance, evaluation standard maintenance and related data management, data entry is performed by system administrators and relevant evaluation experts, basic data maintenance includes: configuration of enterprise level, configuration of company information, configuration of evaluation cycle, Configure user permissions and emergency related documents; maintenance of evaluation standards includes: standard manual maintenance, standard batch maintenance, evaluation standard confirmation; related data management includes: exam question bank management, generation of test papers; The evaluation management part: mainly includes the evaluation report report, enterprise evaluation, and enterprise rectification. Enterprises or evaluation experts score each item according to the evaluation standards. The scores are displayed in the final evaluation report and evaluation report. The evaluation report report Including: evaluation report, company evaluation standard report, evaluation total score table, evaluation detailed table, evaluation difference table, evaluation grade results, evaluation comparison analysis chart; enterprise evaluation mainly includes: enterprise evaluation, online examination, calculation of points; enterprise rectification mainly Including: main problem rectification suggestions, rectification report and emergency document viewing; The combined system structure described above is assessed by combining enterprise self-assessment and expert assessment, and each enterprise organizes self-assessment; the system administrator first checks whether the self-assessment enterprise basic data in the system is completely maintained, whether the assessment criteria need to be modified, After completing the self-evaluation confirmation, submit an application to the superior competent unit, and the superior competent unit will organize experts or entrust a safety evaluation intermediary agency with relevant qualifications to conduct expert assessment; The expert group draws expert evaluation conclusions through on-site inspection, inquiry, inspection, verification, and exchange of opinions with enterprise leaders and professional managers; organizes an expert evaluation summary meeting and announces the evaluation results; after the evaluation work, the expert group should report to the superior The unit and the assessed unit submit a written assessment report and related assessment statements; The evaluated unit should organize relevant departments to formulate a rectification plan based on the self-evaluation results and expert evaluation results. The rectification plan must specify the rectification content, rectification measures, completion time limit, rectification person in charge and acceptance person; the rectification plan should be reviewed and approved by the supervisor and reported to the Filing by the superior competent authority; The evaluated unit should summarize and report the completion of the unit’s emergency response capability assessment rectification plan in the middle and end of the year, put forward opinions and suggestions in a timely manner, conduct risk assessment on unfinished rectification projects, and revise the rectification plan if necessary, and implement closed-loop management; Finally, the evaluated unit shall report the completion of the emergency response capability assessment rectification plan and the annual summary of the rectification work to the superior competent department. 9. The power grid enterprise emergency capability evaluation method according to claim 8, characterized in that: described system frame structure model: system general directory structure includes Images directory to store frame-related pictures, script directory to place commonly used Web control, Css directory Store style sheet files; WEB-INF directory contains all Java class files and package files for different databases; server web page template technology is used to dynamically combine the final display page; Action Servlet It is the Controller of the application, the entrance and distribution center of all requests. It determines the operation to be performed according to the address path requested by the server, and finds the corresponding processing class from Handermapping, which is responsible for processing the server's request, collecting parameters, and calling the corresponding Businesslogic class , put the processing result into the HttpRequest/Http Session object, and format the processing information at the same time; determine the next page address path by interpreting the Extensible Markup Language file.