Emergency management needs section-aware extraction from thick Emergency Operations Plan PDFs so annexes and chapters stay distinct. Which document capability should they apply?

Emergency management working with thick Emergency Operations Plan PDFs should apply layout analysis that preserves section structure so annexes and chapters stay distinct for retrieval and agents. EOPs are deliberately organized; collapsing annexes into one mush loses the ability to retrieve the right hazard annex or logistics chapter under time pressure. OCR text-line conversion that preserves section structure in the long EOP PDFs does not preserve sections because it only converts scanned EOP pages into raw text lines and throws away layout cues, so annexes and chapters merge into undifferentiated text and ranking suffers. Fixed-size chunking that preserves section structure in the long EOP plan PDFs does not preserve sections because fixed-size windows cut across headings and annex breaks by design, creating the same mush with slightly different mechanics. Named entity extraction that preserves section structure in the long EOP PDFs does not preserve sections because it only pulls isolated dates and contact names from EOP forms and discards the surrounding annex and chapter structure responders need. Exam caveat: long municipal EOP PDFs need layout-aware, section-preserving extraction—not OCR text-line conversion, fixed-size chunking, or named-entity extraction even when described as preserving section structure. Operational check: run layout analysis that tags annexes and chapters; chunk within section boundaries with annex labels retained; test retrieval for annex-specific procedures during tabletop drills; confirm hits cite the correct annex label before EOC systems depend on the index.