WSSPC Awards in Excellence 1998

Award Recipients

Awarded Category: Research Projects

Program Name Kobe Earthquake Reconnaissance: Increasing Local Knowledge

Administering Agency Structural Engineers Association of Washington

Contact Person (Name/Title) Lynnell Brunswig, Administrator

David Swanson, Project Coordinator

Address PO Box 4250, Seattle, WA 98104

Telephone Number 206-682-6026

Fax Number 360-871-0994

1.	How long has this program been operational?Month: February Year: 1995
2.	What are the major purposes of this program? What problem(s) or issue(s) was it designed to address?
	In the early morning of January 17, 1995, a Richter Magnitude 7.1 earthquake struck the city of Kobe, Japan. Politically, Seattle and Kobe share sister city and port relationships. Geographically, both cities are urban and have "linear" infrastructures bordered by water and mountains. In addition, both cities are heavily reliant on port-related commerce and are known to be moderately seismic. Considering these factors and recognizing the implications the Kobe earthquake may have for the Pacific Northwest, the Structural Engineers Association of Washington (SEAW), in cooperation with the City of Seattle and the University of Washington, quickly formed a reconnaissance team of volunteer engineers and raveled to Kobe, Japan, to observe the earthquake damage. The seven day SEAW Kobe earthquake reconnaissance effort and resulting follow- up work was a "first-of-its-kind" for the Pacific Northwest by a private, non- profit group. The reconnaissance team included engineering specialists in geotechnical, buildings, bridges, and port facilities. The effort has heightened awareness of earthquake-related issues in the Pacific Northwest region and, consequently, bolstered the region’s earthquake preparedness planning and training programs. The main objective of the reconnaissance effort was to study the effects of the devastating earthquake and transfer that knowledge to Pacific Northwest design professionals and the various state, county, and local governmental agencies and special purpose port and utility districts.
3.	Describe the specific activities and operations of the program.
	Specific activities consisted of performing the field reconnaissance, documenting the findings in a written and illustrated report, and presenting the information to design professionals, government agencies, and the general public. To ensure that the knowledge was well disseminated, the SEAW team presented their findings at many technical and non-technical briefings throughout the Pacific Northwest and Alaska. Such audiences included:
	Structural Engineers Association of Washington Washington State Department of Transportation US Coast Guard, Facilities Design & Construction, Seattle US Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District Society of American Military Engineers Snohomish County, Development Services Division Professional Consultants of Snohomish County American Society of Civil Engineers, Waterway Committee Washington Public Ports Association Port of Everett Norwegian Commercial Club Ballard Lions Club Structural Engineers Association of Alaska US Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District State of Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities American Society of Civil Engineers, Alaska Chapter World Trade Center, Alaska
	A highlight was a SEAW sponsored technical briefing to over 230 design professionals in Seattle. As noted previously, the SEAW reconnaissance team also published a 124-page report that documented the team’s earthquake observations and findings and relates them to reducing the seismic vulnerability of the Pacific Northwest infrastructure. Over 500 copies of this document have been published and distributed throughout Washington, Alaska, Oregon, and California.
4.	Does this program take a new and creative approach or method? If yes, please describe.
	This effort did take a new and creative approach by providing a collaborative environment for engineers, researchers, and public transportation specialists to research the Kobe Earthquake and relate the lessons learned from that disaster to the Pacific Northwest. As stated previously, the effort was the "first-of-its-kind" for the Pacific Northwest by a private, non-profit group.
5.	What were the program’s start-up costs and source(s) of funding?
	Costs of the reconnaissance effort were approximately $2,000 per person for expenses and estimated direct salary costs of approximately $3,000 per person. Total costs for the initial reconnaissance effort are estimated at $45,000 for the 9 person SEAW team. Funding was largely based upon the team members’ ability to cover their own travel and labor expenses. A grant of $2,500 was proved by SEAW and a grant of approximately $4,000 was provided by USGS. Proceeds from an initial technical seminar and the available grant funds were used to technically edit, publish, and disseminate the SEAW reconnaissance report. Follow up technical and non-technical seminars were performed on a volunteer basis and were not funded.
6.	How many employees (full-time equivalent) work(ed) with this program? 8 FTE
7.	To the best of your knowledge, did this program originate in your state?
	Are you aware of similar programs in other states?
	This effort was the "first of its kind" for the Pacific Northwest sponsored by a private "non-profit" and public partnership. Similar programs exist through the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI) in California and American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Technical Council on Lifeline and Earthquake Engineering (TCLEE). However, the results and educational goals of these efforts are focused at the national level and are not always effective in reducing seismic vulnerability and increasing earthquake awareness at the local or regional level.
8.	Has the program been fully implemented? Yes
	If No, what actions remain to be taken?
9.	Is there evidence that the program has been effective in achieving its stated purpose(s)? Briefly summarize evaluations (pro and con) of how well the program has addressed the defined problem(s) or issue(s).
	It is hard to measure the influential benefits of the SEAW Kobe Earthquake reconnaissance effort and subsequent work; however, the following qualitative benefits have been noticed that are likely due in part to the reconnaissance effort:
	Increased regional awareness about earthquake preparedness by the engineering and public agency communities and greater inter-agency communication and interaction about earthquake emergency preparedness. Increased demand for post-earthquake building safety evaluation training (ATC-20), resulting with increased numbers of trained and registered volunteer engineer emergency workers. Increased knowledge about potential earthquake-related hazards and mitigation strategies among the engineering and public agency communities. Increased availability of earthquake-related seminars and training courses featuring regional presenters with local knowledge.
10.	How has the program changed since its inception? What limitations or obstacles might other states expect to encounter if they attempt to adopt this program?
	The SEAW Kobe earthquake reconnaissance effort was successful due to the efforts and dedication of each volunteer team member, their employers, and many others in Seattle and Japan who organized and assisted in this important effort. Each team member spent hundreds of volunteer hours on this project. During the initial organizing stages of the reconnaissance effort, SEAW learned that most funding sources for earthquake reconnaissance efforts were already pre-allocated to other earthquake research teams in the US; so a significant portion of the reconnaissance effort costs were donated by each team member’s employer. The following recommendations and subsequent benefits are suggested to provide an opportunity for future reconnaissance efforts:
	Distribute earthquake reconnaissance funding geographically throughout the higher seismic regions of the US to promote regional involvement in such efforts and, consequently, directly promote efficient and continued regional dissemination of this important information. Regions of higher seismicity should "pre-organize" an earthquake reconnaissance team to perform post-earthquake analysis and reporting. This effort could be "pre-organized" within the region’s Structural Engineers Association or local ASCE Section
	There is much more to learn about emergency preparedness and response, seismic design and construction, and mitigating the effects of earthquakes based on the experiences of our Japanese counterparts in Kobe. It is only through continued dedication, volunteer involvement, and available funding that much of this important information becomes available to the engineering and policy communities throughout the Pacific Northwest and Alaska.