|
|
Earthquake Quarterly - Winter 2000
Table of Contents
From the Desk of the Executive
Director
Member Agency Reports from the
Interior States
FEMA's Project Impact: Spotlight on Seattle
Kingdome Demolition Benefits Science
Development of the 2000IBC and 1997 UBC
Seismic Codes
by Douglas S. Thompson, , Saiful
Islam, and Robert Bachman
American
Lifelines Alliance: Reducing Risks to Utility and Transportation
Systems from Natural Hazards
Earthquake
Consortia News
San Francisco Initiates Community Action Plan for Seismic Safety
WSSPC Updates
WSSPC Board Corner
From the
Desk of the Executive Director
Plans are well underway for The
National Earthquake Risk Management Conference September 17-22, 2000, at Seattle Airport
DoubleTree Hotel, SeaTac, Washington. James Davis, WSSPC Board member and California State
Geologist, has agreed to chair the Program Committee for the conference, and Ted Litty,
Elizabeth Lemersal of FEMA and Carl Mortensen of the USGS also have volunteered to take an
active role in the program development. We have also solicited input from our sister
earthquake consortia CUSEC and NESEC, and from CREW, in conference calls and meetings. The
themes for the 6 policy sessions are shaping up as a result of the collaborative process,
with the goal of having a conference that is national in scope and that has some clearly
identified outcomes.
To "prime the pump" for the Seattle
conference venue, this issue’s articles spotlight Project Impact in Seattle and
building codes. Project Impact’s outreach to homeowners has culminated in a bi-annual
event called Disaster Saturday, which is designed to educate homeowners on their regional
earthquake risks and provide specific information to help minimize its effects. Through
their Home Retrofit Program they are training homeowners to do some of the work
themselves.
The feature article deals with the history of
development of seismic provisions and their incorporation into building codes. I would
like to acknowledge the structural engineers who submitted this article: Douglas S.
Thompson, Saiful Islam, and Robert Bachman. A related article announces the formation of
the American Lifelines Alliance, a public-private partnership with the goal of reducing
risks to lifelines from natural hazards. We finish off with WSSPC news – from our
inland member agencies, committees, and Board activities and meetings. So mark the
conference dates and see you in Seattle!
^back to top
Member Agency Reports from the Interior States
ARIZONA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
ARIZONA DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
The Arizona Geological Survey (AZGS)
and the Utah Geological Survey completed the first phase of a cooperative research effort
to evaluate seismic hazards associated with the Hurricane fault in southwestern Utah and
northwestern Arizona. This research was jointly funded by the state surveys and the U.S.
Geological Survey NEHRP program. Our analyses indicate that parts of the Hurricane fault
ruptured during the early to middle Holocene, generating earthquakes with estimated
magnitudes of between 6.5 and 7. The results of our research are summarized in AZGS
Open-File Report 99-8. In cooperation with the Utah Geological Survey, we are beginning
further investigations to estimate the ages and lengths of young ruptures along other
parts of the Hurricane fault that will significantly improve our understanding of seismic
hazard in this rapidly growing region.
The AZGS is developing a map
summarizing earthquake hazards in Arizona (see below). In addition, we are developing
several smaller theme maps and illustrations depicting aspects of seismic hazard in
Arizona.
Despite the fact that Arizonans
experience a number of warning tremors (magnitude 3+) each year, the citizens continue to
view earthquakes as an illusion. The Arizona Council for Earthquake Safety accepted the
challenge to change this view and commissioned two general information products:
A video titled “Arizona
Earthquake Preparedness” (July 1999). In ten minutes, this video describes the risk,
recommends and gives examples of preparedness and mitigation activities.
A Fault and Historic Earthquake Map,
prepared by AZGS in cooperation with the Arizona Division of Emergency Management and the
Arizona Earthquake Information Center in Flagstaff (September, 1999). This
1:1,000,000-scale map shows Quaternary faults and historical earthquake epicenters in
Arizona as well as the potential dangers presented by earthquakes in neighboring states
and counties.
COLORADO
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
COLORADO OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Progress continues to be made in Colorado
to better understand the earthquake hazard and prepare for the next damaging earthquake. Another seismograph was recently installed in Fort
Collins as part of the Princeton Earth Physics Project. The Colorado Geological Survey
(CGS) maintains an Earthquake Reference Collection, which contains many hard-to-find
studies on Colorado’s active faults, historical earthquakes, and seismic hazard
evaluations. CGS also recently completed a report on
historical earthquakes in the state (Bulletin 52). The report will be released as a CD-ROM
in the near future.
A database of Quaternary faults and folds
in Colorado (CGS Open-File Report 98-8) contains descriptions of nearly 100 Quaternary
faults and folds. Product formats include hardcopies of the database, a 1:500,000-scale
map of the structures, and an optional CD-ROM with the faults and folds shown on a
1:250,000-scale base map. This project was jointly funded by state general funds and
mineral severance taxes and by grants from the USGS, NEHRP and Colorado Office of
Emergency Management (OEM). The database is formatted to blend with the USGS effort to
compile a nation-wide database on Quaternary faults and folds. A second database on late
Cenozoic faults and folds is currently in review and should be available in 1999-2000.
A map tentatively titled
“Earthquakes and Related Hazards in Colorado” is being prepared by the OEM for
distribution to the general public. The map is planned for release in conjunction with
Earthquake Awareness Week.
In a cooperative agreement between
the Colorado School of Mines and OEM, OEM submits several geologic hazards projects for
study by undergraduate students. The
projects involve real-world, open-ended engineering projects, a number of which
incorporate seismic hazards or seismic design criteria.
This program provides the students with opportunities to apply the knowledge
they gain though their classes in practical projects that can benefit the various
governmental agencies with whom they work.
The Colorado Earthquake Subcommittee
of the Colorado Natural Hazards Mitigation Council is preparing a one-page fact sheet on
Colorado seismicity for distribution to the media. A longer version of the fact sheet will
be available on the CGS web page late in 1999.
IDAHO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
IDAHO BUREAU OF DISASTER SERVICES
The Idaho Geological Survey (IGS)
continued an extensive annual program in hazard mitigation with the Idaho Bureau of
Disaster Services (BDS). Highlights from the past year follow.
The Bureau of Disaster Services
tracks six seismic networks in and around Idaho and reported 5 events M4.0 and greater for
the 12-month period ending June 30, 1999. No damage was reported. A
number of felt reports in the Snake River Plain near Jerome could not be instrumentally
verified, which points to a need for some basic level of instrumentation in the area.
IGS completed an urban earthquake
study of Idaho Falls using the SHAKE91 program. Ground response maps of period,
acceleration, and amplification were generated for characteristic and random earthquakes.
The results were presented at the annual Geological Society of America Rocky Mountain
Section meeting in Pocatello.
Field investigations of faults in the
Hells Canyon region continued in cooperation with the State of Oregon. A two-state team
conducted a field reconnaissance of potentially active structures on the Idaho side of the
canyon.
The hazard mitigation project has
also produced a GIS-compatible digital shaded relief map of the state. This map will be
the base layer for the fault and epicenter map as well as the state landslide database.
The state’s Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program used funds from recent disasters to fund three non-structural seismic
mitigation projects for Idaho schools. The projects reflect the diversity of the state
with respect to demographics and seismic hazard. BDS also supported Tremor Troops
workshops in two districts widely divergent in terms of size and threat.
BDS is working with the county
assessor’s office to import property data to use HAZUS to evaluate scenario
earthquakes on two active faults within 50 miles of Boise. The assessor is excited about
participating because he sees the results as a source for estimating preliminary damage
assessment following a destructive event. Experience gained from the assessment of
Boise’s building stock with HAZUS will be applied to Pocatello.
IGS conducted an annual teachers'
field workshop in northern Idaho in partnership with the BDS, FEMA, and the Idaho Earth
Science Teachers Association. The workshop included seismicity of the Lewis-Clark
structure, tectonic setting of the Purcell Trench, and Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings
in the city of Sandpoint, which has experienced MMI VI shaking from several historical
events. IGS and five participating teachers will design and develop exercises based on
their field experiences. Classroom activities will be tested and made available to other
educators at the annual state meeting. The project will also provide an inventory of all
of the classroom activities generated by previous workshop participants.
MONTANA BUREAU OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
MONTANA DISASTER AND EMERGENCY SERVICES DIVISION
"Earthquake Mitigation through
Public Education and Preparedness" is the theme of a project funded by the Montana
Disaster and Emergency Services (DES) and implemented by the Montana Bureau of Mines and
Geology (MBMG) Earthquake Studies Office (ESO). Elements of the program include: 1)
establishment of Montana's first broadband digital seismograph station expected to be
operational in the fall of 1999, 2) publication of a new Quaternary fault/recent
seismicity map of western Montana 3) membership in the Incorporated Research Institutions
for Seismology (IRIS), 4) publication of an earthquake information pamphlet, 5)
development of a traveling earthquake display board, and 6) installation of an
uninterruptable power supply system for the ESO.
The ESO has installed a new seismic data
acquisition/analysis system for the Montana Regional Seismograph Network with funding from
the USGS. With assistance from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health,
ESO expanded the seismograph network eastward into south-central Montana.
The Earthquake Studies Office is
participating in a Department of Defense research project (along with the University of
Idaho and Battelle Northwest Division) to characterize and discriminate between rockbursts
from the Coeur d'Alene mining district in north Idaho and natural earthquakes.
Another
research project in the works is expected to provide significant new data for the study of
local and regional earthquakes in the northern Rocky Mountains. The ESO, along with the
University of Colorado Boulder, University of Oregon, and University of Utah, will
participate in the
Yellowstone
Hotspot broadband array project funded by
IRIS/PASSCAL and NSF Continental Dynamics Program. An array of 31 broadband seismographs in
south-central Montana will record seismic waves from distant earthquakes that traverse the
mantle beneath Yellowstone National Park to study the deep structure.
On August 20, 1999, the largest Montana
earthquake in 25 years struck the Red Rock Valley of southwest Montana. With a body wave
magnitude of 5.3 and MMI =VI, this earthquake caused only very minor damage in the
epicentral area. Portable seismographs deployed to the epicentral area recorded
approximately 70 aftershocks over three days. A poster discussing the details and
implications of this earthquake and its aftershocks will be presented at the 1999 American
Geophysical Union meeting.
One of the
highlights of “Earthquake Preparedness Month”, recognized throughout the month
of October, was DES providing earthquake preparedness informational inserts to 14,000
State Employees’ paychecks. Some local schools, colleges, businesses, county and city
government employees received the inserts, and Montana Power Companyplaced earthquake
preparedness information in their October bills. DES
also provided a list of Earthquake Preparedness Resources to County Coordinators for their
preparedness actions. 200,000 bookmarks
were distributed to students within Montana's Public Schools describing mitigation,
preparedness, and the "Drop, Cover & Hold" drill. DES projects underway are
the creation of an earthquake poster and "Safety Spots". The “spots”
(brightly colored stickers) will be used by children to exercise their ability to identify
“Safe Spots” within their school or home.
MBMG and
DES have spent a significant amount of time this year with its outreach programs, and
reaching schools, businesses, and concerned individuals through the newly launched DES
website.
NEVADA BUREAU OF MINES AND GEOLOGY
NEVADA DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Earthquake programs in Nevada are
interconnected among state and local agencies through the Nevada Earthquake Safety
Council. Lead agencies for the state are the
Division of Emergency Management, Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology (NBMG), and the
Seismological Laboratory at the University of Nevada, Reno.
The Council facilitates public input, develops consensus about seismic
issues within the public and private sectors, and is the public advisory body for state
seismic policy and the Nevada Earthquake Risk Reduction Program of the Division of
Emergency Management. The Board of Directors
has 21 members representing business and industry; city, county, and state governments,
including the Assembly and Senate; geosciences; engineering; community organizations;
universities; building officials; insurance; and primary-secondary education.
The Nevada All Hazards Mitigation
Advisory Committee began to take shape during the year.
This committee will be advising the Division of Emergency Management, the
Division of Water Planning, and other state agencies regarding priorities for hazard
mitigation.
Accomplishments of the Nevada
Earthquake Safety Council during the past year include:
·
establishment of Community Emergency Response Team programs in
both Las Vegas and Reno;
·
increasing public awareness through broadcasts about local
earthquake activity on cable television;
·
continued use of the Planning
Scenario for a Major Earthquake in Western Nevada (NBMG Special Publication 20) in
emergency exercises, including one involving the urban search-and-rescue team from Las
Vegas in a constructed, collapsed building at the airport in Stead, north of Reno;
·
training of building officials and others in Applied Technology
Council courses;
·
support for Project Impact activities in Sparks, Nevada;
·
recommendations concerning the Nevada portions of the seismic
safety aspects of the proposed 2000 International Building Code;
·
updating the Council's Suggested
Guidelines for Evaluation Potential Surface Fault Rupture/Land Subsidence Hazards in
Nevada, including input from policy recommendations of the Western States Seismic
Policy Council;
·
release of the 107-page
Proceedings of the Conference on Seismic Hazards in the Las Vegas Region as NBMG
Open-File Report 98-6;
·
reports on progress of scientific investigations of faults near
urban areas and of the implications of recent earthquakes near Lake Tahoe (Incline Village
Earthquake, October 30, 1998, M 4.9) and southern Nevada (Scotty's Junction Earthquake,
August 1, 1999, M 5.7; Frenchman Flat on the southeastern part of the Nevada Test Site,
January 27, 1999; M 4.6);
·
endorsement of projects to improve the understanding of ground
motion around Reno and Las Vegas;
·
recognition of needs for upgrading the seismic network covering
Nevada; and
·
free distribution of brochures on Earthquakes in Nevada and How to Survive Them and
an earthquake epicenter map (NBMG Map 111) at various teachers' workshops, the State Fair,
and other venues. A portable seismometer that
records shock waves from kids jumping up and down has been a highlight at the State Fair.
Governor Kenny Guinn declared the
third week of February annually as Earthquake Awareness Week, for public awareness and
preparedness. The 1999 theme was “Get
Your Kit Together.” The University of
Nevada, Reno Seismological Laboratory and the NBMG organized a poster contest for schools. Selected posters from the contest were included in
the Nevada Earthquake Calendar. Winners of
each of four grade divisions in each county were sent certificates signed by the Governor. A statewide earthquake drill was held in schools,
and the general public participated in field trips to examine evidence of prehistoric
earthquakes.
Earth Science Week has been
officially designated as the second full week of October to recognize how important
geology and other Earth sciences are to society. Nevada
is planning various activities for Earth Science Week, including field trips to help
recognize earthquake hazards.
NEW MEXICO BUREAU OF MINES AND MINERAL RESOURCES
NEW MEXICO OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Seismological happenings in New
Mexico during the past year include several welcomed events. First, the Incorporated Research Institutions for
Seismology (IRIS) Program for Array Seismic Studies of the Continental Lithosphere
(PASSCAL) opened their instrument center on New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology
campus in Socorro. The center ships, receives, and repairs seismological instruments for
researchers to use worldwide. The group strengthens New Mexico Tech’s seismology
program and provides ties to IRIS and PASSCAL researchers everywhere. The center is also a local source for
seismological information sheets and posters.
Second, a poster with maps showing
recorded earthquakes of New Mexico from 1869-1998 was completed. Smaller maps also show the strongest 30 quakes and
the probabilistic seismic hazard of the state. This poster is available to classrooms and
is published with the help of FEMA, New Mexico Department of Public Safety, and New Mexico
Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources (BMMR).
Third, paleoseismological studies
have continued in several parts of New Mexico. USGS researchers completed a compilation
showing young faults in the greater New Mexico region entitled Map and Data for Quaternary Faults and Folds in New
Mexico (USGS Open-File Report 98-521). The
report describes all known aspects of each of the faults or groups of faults and is
published with the help of FEMA, the New Mexico Department of Public Safety, and New
Mexico BMMR.
Research has continued on individual
faults by geologists at the University of New Mexico, New Mexico Tech, Los Alamos National
Laboratories, USGS, and private consultants. Research has focused on urban areas of
Alamogordo, Albuquerque, Albuquerque-Santa Fe corridor, Los Alamos, and Socorro.
The Department of Public Safety is
continuing to prepare the state for earthquakes through planning at the state level and
educational outreach, with the help of New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology. The
Department funded students to help with New Mexico Tech’s seismic array, provided
students to quantify earthquake-education exercises for grades 7-12 (Seismic Sleuths),
established an earthquake education web site, conducted paleoseismic studies, and studies
of liquefaction potential of the Rio Grande valley in Albuquerque.
Earthquake education in New Mexico
received a boost with an afternoon of exercises and two days of field trips during
“Rockin’ Around New Mexico”, a workshop for teachers held in Taos. Teachers learned how earthquakes are generated,
whether they are predictable, how earthquake waves travel, and the effects of earthquakes
on structures.
Earthquake activity in New Mexico has
been low, with one swarm continuing west of Artesia.
UTAH GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
UTAH DIVISION OF COMPREHENSIVE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
The Utah Geological Survey (UGS),
with partial support from the USGS National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP),
has several major earthquake projects underway. Studies are continuing with the Arizona
Geological Survey on evaluating the paleoseismic history of the Hurricane fault zone. UGS
will trench fault scarps in alluvium near Cedar City and correlate and date displaced
Quaternary basalts from Cedar City to the Arizona border.
UGS recently completed a project with Brigham Young
University to prepare a Uniform Building Code soil-profile-type map of the Salt Lake
Valley to depict earthquake site response, and will modify this map for use by URS Greiner
Woodward Clyde, in conjunction with UGS and the University of Utah Seismograph Stations
(UUSS), to produce probabilistic and deterministic ground- shaking maps. These
ground-shaking maps will then be the basis for another project to derive scenario maps of
geologic effects of a surface-faulting
earthquake in the Salt Lake Valley to estimate losses and plan emergency response.
UGS is working with GEOHAZ
Consultants to produce a folio of GIS
earthquake-hazards maps (1:24,000 scale) for the Cache Valley area near Logan. We are also
updating Utah's Quaternary fault database to make it compatible with the USGS national
database used to produce the national
seismic-hazard maps.
Public-outreach efforts by UGS and
the Utah Division of Comprehensive Emergency Management (CEM) concentrated on earthquake
education. In a partnership with and funded by CEM and the University of Utah Earthquake Education Services, the UGS
participated in workshops to train earth-science teachers at the 3rd, 5th,
and 9th grade levels. UGS also taught teacher workshops for the Utah Office of Education, and participated
in the Utah Education Association annual conference. We helped organize a symposium on
"Earthquake Hazards in Extensional Regimes" for the 1999 Annual Meeting of the
Association of Engineering Geologists in Salt Lake City and led several field trips to
highlight the Wasatch fault, Hurricane fault, and
general earthquake hazards in Utah.
The UGS and CEM provide staff for the
Utah Seismic Safety Commission (USSC) and its committees. The USSC Geoscience Committee
and UGS empaneled a committee to define geoscience information needs of local governments
so that we can provide more pertinent and usable products.
The Schools
Subcommittee of the USSC initiated its “Prepared Schools” program. The Subcommittee, working from a survey that was
completed by schools in the state, indicated the level of preparedness in each school. From the results, the Subcommittee created a
binder that contained preparedness, planning, and curriculum information. The schools use this information to work towards a
school certification for “Effective Drills and Safe Surroundings”. To qualify for this certificate, schools had to
demonstrate that they conducted the necessary earthquake/disaster drills, identified
nonstructural hazards in their classrooms and around their schools, and started a school
safety committee. Over a hundred schools
participated in this year’s activities, which started with a Governor’s
proclamation. To assist the schools with
developing emergency plans, the CEM EPICenter will be hosting its “How To”
workshops for school districts.
The CEM EPICenter is
partnering with the Utah Museum of Natural History and UUSS on creating an interactive
earthquake display at the Museum. The
EPICenter and Museum are supplying part of the funding, while the UUSS are providing
maintenance support for active seismographs that will be on display.
The CEM EPICenter,
FEMA Region 8 Earthquake Program, UGS, and Salt Lake County Planning Department, acting as
the Coordination Group, have started a HAZUS Data Users Group. The initial project area for the HAZUS will be
Salt Lake County. Eventually, the
Coordination Group hopes to model all the earthquake-prone counties throughout the state.
This should take several years to accomplish, but should enable cities and counties to
control development in seismically hazardous areas.
WYOMING STATE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
WYOMING EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
Wyoming began participation in
FEMA’s Earthquake Program in the last quarter of 1998.
The program, administered as a joint effort between the Wyoming State Geological
Survey (WSGS) and the Wyoming Emergency Management Agency (WEMA), is operated from the
WSGS by James Case.
WSGS has been developing an updated
HAZUS analysis for Teton County, in western Wyoming.
We developed digital landslide coverage and a generalized soils map for the
County and are coordinating with Risk Management Solutions on modifying the census tract
analysis utilized by HAZUS. In addition, we
generated HAZUS scenarios, using default data, for five counties in Wyoming, and
demonstrated HAZUS at Wyoming’s GIS Legislative Workshop.
Close examination of the shelters
list provided with HAZUS prompted the WSGS, Teton County, Lincoln County, and the American
Red Cross to begin the process of identifying earthquake shelters for cities and Counties
in Wyoming. In Teton County, all landslides
and bridges that could be adversely affected by an earthquake were identified. A worst case scenario was then developed, which
resulted in numerous “islands” being formed because of landslides blocking roads
or streams and bridges being destroyed. Potential
earthquake shelters have been identified for each “island”, and they will be
modeled for structural integrity through the HAZUS software.
WSGS has been working with a
subcontractor at the University of Wyoming to generate the State of Wyoming’s first
searchable earthquake history webpage. Earthquake
data from the USGS’s National Earthquake Information Center, the U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation, and the University of Utah Seismograph Stations have been combined into a
single database. Data selected through a date
search can be displayed on a map of Wyoming showing counties and county seats. The web page will also serve current earthquake
reports on damaging earthquakes. Links to
sources used and other useful websites will be provided.
The WSGS and WEMA organized or
participated in numerous outreach- and planning-related activities over the last year.
WSGS worked with the Lander Valley 2020 Water Planning Committee to incorporate a
consideration of natural hazards in their long-range plans. WSGS met with Teton County and
Town of Jackson officials and the Chamber of Commerce to promote the Earthquake Plan and
natural hazards mitigation in northwest Wyoming. We
organized a Rapid Visual Screening Workshop for the joint 3rd Annual State Fire
Marshal’s Education Workshop / Wyoming Conference of Building Officials Annual
Meeting in Casper and participated in the Wyoming Association of Municipalities Elected
Officials Workshop where we showcased earthquake maps and reports. We worked with FEMA to
organize and conduct an Integrated Emergency Management Course in which the triggering
hazard was an earthquake in Casper. We also distributed FEMA 113 and FEMA 83 at the Home
Builders Show in Jackson.
^back to top
Project Impact: A Spotlight on Seattle
Over one year ago, the City of
Seattle launched their Project Impact Home Retrofit
program at Seattle's October 1998 Disaster Saturday.
Seattle's partners dedicated the preceding ten months to developing this
comprehensive approach enabling homeowners to reduce their home's potential for structural
damage. Disaster Saturday provided an
opportunity to couple the education of homeowners on their Regional earthquake risk with
specific information to help minimize its effects.
Seattle's partners have contributed
over 13,500 hours of volunteer time and almost $1,185,000 in partner match to Seattle
Project Impact. This community-wide effort
has assisted all three of Seattle's programs including Home Retrofit.
The School Retrofit goal is a
comprehensive program to reduce the potential for damage and injury from earthquake by
removing nonstructural hazards. The Hazard Mapping goal is to improve the identification of
natural hazards through the assessment of vulnerability and produce both landslide and
seismic hazard maps. All three of these
innovative programs were designed with the intention of expanding into the Region, to also
reduce disaster exposures in other jurisdictions.
At community events, the Home Retrofit planset display is a prominent, and
often referred to, feature of Seattle Project Impact.
These pre-engineered plansets were the product of a hard working committee
consisting of the City's Department of Design Construction and Land Use, University of
Washington, private sector engineers and architects, regional building officials,
contractors, and trainers. These plansets,
and the accompanying Home Retrofit Series, were developed to provide schematic drawings
and descriptions necessary to anchor a "standard" wood-frame home to the
foundation and increase sheer-wall strength. The
Boeing Company recently completed printing 15,000 copies of the Home Retrofit Series to
assist in the education of homeowners and building professionals. With the Home Retrofit planset and Home Retrofit Series, homeowners
and contractors can proceed to the next retrofit step of training.
There are two ways to retrofit a home
that fits the "standard"; either the homeowner or a contractor can complete the
work. Training courses were developed for
both homeowners and contractors to educate them on these new Home Retrofit standards and guidelines. By the end of 1999, over 1000 homeowners completed
the 2-hour Home Retrofit classes offered at
neighborhood centers and 160 contractors completed the 6-hour professional training
offered through the University of Washington, 57 of which are listed on a Contractor
Referral List for homeowners. While the
classes are the result of numerous partner contributions, Roger Faris of the Phinney
Neighborhood Association’s Well Home Program, has been the catalyst to the their
success. He worked on the development of both
courses, has taught all of the homeowner classes, has taught the majority of the
contractor courses, and actively promotes the training including carrying flyers
door-to-door. In recognition of his
remarkable personal contributions, Roger Faris was named the National Project Impact
Citizen of the Year at the December 1999 Project Impact Summit held in Washington D.C.
Seattle Project Impact is
aggressively working to increase awareness of the risk of earthquake damage and the
resources available. Seattle Project Impact
has launched a website, printed 2000 color posters, developed a bill/paycheck insert, runs
articles in various community newsletters, and effectively uses print, television, and
radio media. For example, the Seattle Times
Sunday Real Estate section ran a front cover story on the launch and one-year anniversary
of the Home Retrofit program, KIRO TV’s consumer reporter did a feature story on the
Home Retrofit class, and various radio stations have interviewed the local Project Impact
coordinator.
Disaster Saturday, a bi-annual
community event, is the hallmark of their outreach efforts.
Disaster Saturday invites members of Seattle Disaster Aid &
Response Teams (SDART) and the community to view exhibits, talk to experts, and attend
workshops on a variety of preparedness and damage prevention topics. The attendance levels at the last three Disaster
Saturdays exceeded expectations averaging 800 per event, and next the Disaster Saturday is
scheduled for April 1, 2000. Additionally,
the local television and newspapers, with a viewing audience and circulation over one
million, consistently cover the event.
As Seattle Project Impact looks to
the future, the sustainability and expansion of their programs is their focus. With the Home
Retrofit program off the ground through the generous support of partners and
substantial public interest, Seattle's long-term strategy is to maintain the on-going
commitments and resources, as well as support the exporting effort of the program beyond
City limits. Seattle is sharing their Home Retrofit program with numerous surrounding
jurisdictions and has already seen the program launched in two communities with more in
progress. Seattle Emergency Management staff
have frequently been invited to present the Project Impact philosophy, as developed for
Seattle, to a wide variety of audiences around the country.
As one of the pilot Project Impact
communities designated in 1997, Seattle is at the forefront of moving Project Impact from
implementation to long-term sustainability.
For more information, please contact
Seattle Project Impact Coordinator, Inés Pearce at 206-615-0288, or visit their web site
at www.cityofseattle.net/projectimpact.
^back to top
Kingdome Demolition Benefits Science
USGS researchers will
measure the seismic waves from the upcoming demolition of the Seattle Mariners’
Kingdome ballpark in March 2000. The Kingdome Seismic Hazards Investigation in Puget Sound
(SHIPS) is the third major scientific study led by the USGS in the Seattle area in the
past two years. The experiment will provide a better understanding of earthquake hazards
in an urban setting that will help build stronger, safer communities. SHIPS researchers,
led by Tom Brocher will install 200 earthquake-recording instruments in the backyards,
commercial business establishments, and in apartment buildings in the downtown area of
Seattle.
Cooperative efforts will come from the USGS, the
University of Washington, the State Department of Natural Resources and several other
institutions. The demolition of the Kingdome ballpark provides a unique opportunity for
USGS researchers to learn more about the Seattle fault, the geology of the 40-mile-long
Seattle basin, and how seismic waves travel through the soft soils in the area. Volunteers
to host an earthquake-recorder for a few days are being recruited via the USGS Web site at
http://www.geophys.washington.edu/USGS/DOCS/ships.html. (Tom Brocher, Menlo Park, CA
650/329-4737)
^back to top
Development of the 2000 IBC and
1997 UBC Seismic Codes
by Douglas S. Thompson, ,
Saiful Islam, and Robert Bachman
For over 40 years the seismic
provisions in the Uniform Building Code (UBC) have been based primarily on
recommendations by the Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC). These
recommended seismic provisions are contained in a document called SEAOC Recommended
Lateral Force Requirements and Commentary, commonly referred to as the Blue Book. This
Blue Book, like the UBC, has been updated regularly.
These recommended seismic provisions were submitted
by either the SEAOC Seismology Committee or the SEAOC Code Committee to the International
Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) for review, adoption and inclusion into the UBC.
In the distant past, building code provisions developed on the "national level"
through the American Concrete Institute (ACI), the American Institute of Steel
Construction (AISC) and the American Forest and Paper Association (AFPA), to name just a
few, were not as focused on seismic provisions as was SEAOC. Earthquakes had been
perceived as a local "California" problem.
The Federal Government began changing this
perception of seismic provisions twenty years ago with the creation of the National
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP). The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) was charged with the task of creating a document on national earthquake
regulations. The Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC) under the direction of FEMA was
then created and specifically assigned to create the Recommended Provisions for Seismic
Regulation for Buildings (NEHRP Provisions). This document first came out in 1985.
Both FEMA and BSSC continued with the updating of
the NEHRP Provisions on a three-year cycle, with revised provisions in the 1988 and
1991 editions. For the most part these provisions were not used by the model codes or by
the practicing engineers. This drastically changed when President Clinton signed an
executive order mandating that all new federal buildings must meet minimum standards set
by the 1991 NEHRP Provisions.
In 1995, the three national model code agencies,
Building Officials Code Administrators (BOCA), the International Conference of Building
Officials (ICBO) and the Southern Building Code Council International (SBCCI), voted
unanimously to work together in the creation and publishing of one model building code.
This one model building code would be called the International Building Code (IBC).
These national model code agencies have been publishing the National Building Code,
the Uniform Building Code and the Southern Building Code, respectively (see
Figure 1).
The International Code Council (ICC) was formed from
members of each of the three national model code agencies. The ICC then formed a group of
code writing committees (Occupancies, General, Structural, Means of Egress, and Fire
Safety), from these members, for the creation of the one national code. Provisions from
all three national codes were looked at in the formation of the IBC drafts.
At the time that the ICC was formed, both BOCA and
SBCCI had already adopted the NEHRP Provisions for seismic design. Also, the three
code agencies were leaning strongly towards the inclusion of the NEHRP Provisions
into the IBC. This presented somewhat of a problem for SEAOC and the western states
using the Uniform Building Code for its seismic provisions. The seismic provisions
in the Uniform Building Code were considerably more stringent than the 1995
NEHRP Provisions. After considerable negotiations with SEAOC, BSSC, and the National
Council of Structural Engineering Associations (NCSEA), SEAOC decided to support the 1997
NEHRP Provisions. As a compromise, BSSC agreed to allow SEAOC enough input and
comment to ensure that the provisions necessary to California practice would be included
into the 1997 NEHRP Provisions.
Many of the changes in the 1997 UBC
are a direct result of California changing from the Blue Book provisions to the NEHRP
Provisions and many of the changes found in the 1997 NEHRP Provisions are a
direct result of including concepts found in the 1997 UBC. These changes in the 1997
UBC were made as a transition to the 2000 IBC and the 1997 NEHRP
Provisions. Both the 1997 UBC and the 1997 NEHRP Provisions
were in most cases identical, and for similar building types would result in nearly
identical building designs.
Other problems arose in the development of the 1997
NEHRP Provisions. The 1994 NEHRP Provisions as written were not
acceptable as "code language" but rather more as a "reference
document". Also, there was not enough time for a regular "consensus
standard", as was used in the development of the 1994 NEHRP Provisions. To
assist the process, FEMA formed the Code Resource Development Committee (CRDC) through the
BSSC. The CRDC assisted the ICC committees in converting the 1994 NEHRP
Provisions into code language. The CRDC committee also helped in filling voids that
existed in the 1994 NEHRP Provisions. One of these voids was that the 1994 NEHRP
Provisions only recognized load and resistance factor design (LRFD or strength
design). In this case, the 1997 UBC was used as a model for the inclusion of
allowable stress design (ASD) into the document.
How seismic provisions will be developed in the
future
Now that the process of preparing the 2000 IBC
is complete, the process of how to incorporate revisions to the seismic provisions into
future editions of the IBC has yet to be determined. Currently, the BSSC is holding
meetings to determine how the seismic provisions should be developed in the future.
Although not yet finalized, the process seems to be heading towards adopting the seismic
provisions by reference as a "national standard". This would then be the same
process for adoption as is used for each of the material sections of the code.
The adoption by reference process has both
advantages and disadvantages. An advantage for this system would be to preclude a rapid
adoption process for massive changes, like that which occurred for the seismic provisions
in the 1997 UBC. This on the whole would be a more simplified process allowing
enough time for input and comment from all interested parties.
However, the disadvantage to this would preclude the
emergency enactment of lessons learned from earthquakes. One example of this would be the
emergency enactment of no longer allowing the "pre-Northridge" welded steel
connection. Through direction from SEAOC, the code section for this connection was removed
and re-written by ICBO, in the fourth printing of the 1994 UBC. Had a full
consensus process taken place, literally thousands of buildings would have been permitted
and built using the old connection that was now known to be flawed.
New provisions in the 1997 UBC
Related to seismic design in the 1997 UBC,
there were many significant changes in the code. The two most notable are 1) the
reliability/redundancy factor, and 2) the near-source factor.
Based upon lessons from past earthquakes, it has
been observed that structures with adequate redundancy perform better than structures
without adequate redundancy. Simply put, structures with redundancy have more elements
resisting the seismic forces or in other words, have not put "all their eggs in one
basket". Lateral resisting elements are shear walls, steel frames or concrete frames.
Prior to the 1997 UBC, similar structures were designed for similar forces. The
reliability/redundancy factor, in the 1997 UBC, has placed a penalty on structures
with lesser redundancy. This reliability/redundancy factor can place as high as a 50
percent penalty (or design force increase) requirement on structures.
Based primarily upon recorded ground accelerations
in the Northridge and Kobe earthquakes, ground accelerations from a seismic event can be
considerably higher at close proximity to the fault. Prior to the 1997 UBC, seismic
regions were merely divided into broad categories, that being seismic zones 0 through 4.
The California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (DMG), has
prepared a map book of known active fault "near-source zones" in California and
adjacent portions of Nevada. A "near-source zone" is defined as within 2
kilometers of a known fault zone. The maximum increase for near-source effects occurs
within 2 km. The amount of increase in the seismic force used for the design decreases
with distance from the fault and there is no increase at and beyond 15 km from the fault.
This "near-source zone" can place as high as a 100 percent increase in design
force requirements on structures.
New provisions in the 2000 IBC
Related to seismic design in the 2000 IBC,
one of the most significant changes from the UBC is the seismic zone mapping. Prior
to the 1997 UBC, the seismic zones had number designations. These zones were
from 0 to 4, with 4 being the area of highest seismic potential. California, for example,
has only two zones (3 and 4). The 2000 IBC has "Spectral Response
Acceleration" maps. These maps appear as contour lines. A CD-ROM will also be
provided with the IBC that will provide spectral values for a given longitude and
latitude.
Also related to seismic design, the 2000 IBC
also has another significant change. The 2000 IBC is specifically written to
include all types of structures except for one- and two-family dwellings. For design of
one- and two- family dwellings (residential), another new code has been created called the
International Residential Code (IRC). A potential problem with this new code
system is the IRC does not contain many of the stringent seismic provisions
contained within the UBC.
^back to top
American Lifelines Alliance: Reducing Risks to Utility and Transportation
Systems from Natural Hazards
The Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) have
entered into a cooperative agreement to establish the American Lifelines Alliance (ALA)
public-private partnership project, with the goal of reducing risks to lifelines (utility
and transportation systems) from natural hazards. ALA’s objective is to facilitate
the creation, adoption, and implementation of design and retrofit guidelines and other
American National Standards Institute (ANSI)-approved national consensus documents. These
documents, when implemented by lifeline owners and operators, will systematically improve
the performance of utility and transportation systems to acceptable levels in natural
hazard events. Formation of the ALA is in direct response to needs identified over 10
years ago and explicitly requested in the 1990 reauthorization of the National Earthquake
Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP).
Under the guidance of a working group, ALA
has identified lifeline systems for which non-consensus guidelines, standards, and
industry practices exist. ALA will take these existing documents, synthesize and improve
them, as appropriate, and shepherd the resulting documents through a formal consensus
process to develop nationally applicable guidelines. Each project will involve: a
Standards Developing Organization (SDO) for consensus development, representatives from
the appropriate sector of the utility or transportation agency community, and
representatives from the relevant manufacturing and technical consulting communities.
ALA is seeking sponsoring organizations and
stakeholders to co-fund and provide in-kind support to mutually beneficial efforts. In
some cases, existing practices are not sufficient enough to be put through a formal
consensus process. In these situations, the role of ALA may include funding or co-funding
studies and projects in order to improve or extend practices to the point where national
consensus is achievable.
ALA will use the following systematic
procedure for assessing the performance of utility and transportation systems subjected to
natural hazards, and identifying actions to reduce their risk. The following procedure
also defines the scope of activities that ALA intends to support:
1. Identify and Quantify the Natural Hazard
· Use existing nationally or regionally accepted maps and
other data.
· Apply probabilistic hazard analysis to establish hazards
for evaluation of individual components, which can be used for procurement specifications.
· Use multiple scenario representations to quantify
hazards for evaluation of a spatially distributed lifeline system.
2. Identify and Quantify the Expected Damage States of
Components within the System
· Use component fragility curves to represent the
probability that the component will be in a given damage state, as a function of the
intensity of the hazard. The fragility curves are established by using engineering
analysis procedures to assess the behavior of the component at various natural hazard
intensity levels, and correlations between numerical results of the analysis and
designated damage states. Random and systemic uncertainties in input data, engineering
analysis procedures, and damage state correlations are considered.
3. Assess the Damage States and Functionality of the System
Components when Affected by a Natural Hazard
· Use scenarios in conjunction with fragility curves to
determine component damage states, incorporating uncertainty in location and amount of
damage.
· Assess the functionality of each component when it is in
the given damage state.
4. Evaluate System Functionality
· Incorporate component functionalities from each scenario
into a system model, and assess the system’s ability to accommodate post-hazard
service demands.
· Consider reduction in user serviceability of the system,
service restoration time, and life safety threats.
· Incorporate operator experience and expertise.
· Evaluate multiple damage-state scenarios.
· Aggregate the results for either individual scenarios or
multiple scenarios.
5. Identify and Evaluate Impacts of the Loss or Reduction
of System Functionality
· Consider external impacts such as financial losses by
customers or users, and government services impacts.
· Consider internal impacts such as direct cost of damage,
revenue loss, liability, and loss of public support.
6. Provide Guidance to the System Owner Regarding Selection
of:
· Criteria for specification of acceptable performance.
· Criteria for new construction to minimize losses in
future events.
· Alternatives to mitigate unacceptable performance of
existing systems.
· Possible non-engineering methods to reduce post-hazard
impacts of lifeline damage, such as system enhancement, post-hazard emergency response,
and recovery plans.
When ALA-sponsored national consensus
guidelines are applied to a specific utility or transportation system, the likely
performance of the system in a natural hazard occurrence is quantified, and guidance for
possible mitigation actions is provided.
It is anticipated that each consensus
document will have a "home" in an SDO. This will ensure that the documents will
be reviewed and updated on a regular basis, so that they remain current with respect to:
new hazards data, system performance evaluation procedures, and changes in society’s
acceptable levels of risk.
To further facilitate natural hazards risk
reduction activities by system owners, ALA will also undertake outreach programs to
encourage the implementation of natural hazards risk reduction measures. These outreach
programs will consider the many paths by which natural hazard risks can be reduced within
the diverse types and sizes of lifeline systems. Concerns over budgeting, coordination
with other internal programs, management support for risk reduction, and regulatory issues
will be addressed. Also, those who are currently implementing natural hazards risk
reduction programs will be asked to identify particularly useful guidelines and standards,
as well as barriers to their implementation. ALA will coordinate these efforts with other
public/private partnerships such as FEMA’s Project Impact.
^back to top
Earthquake Consortia News
CUSEC
Appoints New Executive Director
W. R. Padgett, board chairman of the
Central United States Earthquake Consortium (CUSEC), has announced the appointment of 36
year-old Alabama native James "Jim" M. Wilkinson, Jr. to serve as CUSEC’s
new Executive Director.
Wilkinson, an Olive Branch, Mississippi resident, is
no stranger to the CUSEC mission, having served as the Mitigation Specialist for the
multi-state earthquake preparedness coalition since 1994. Prior to CUSEC, Wilkinson was
the Earthquake Program Manager for the Mississippi Emergency Management Agency in Jackson.
Wilkinson has an urban and regional planning degree from the University of Southern
Mississippi.
"Jim is highly qualified for this very
demanding position," said Padgett, the director of Kentucky’s emergency
management agency. "He knows the emergency preparedness ropes and he knows many of
the key players all over the region, including Kentucky, confronted with the New Madrid
Seismic Zone (NMSZ) risk." Padgett said Wilkinson’s chief goal is to continue
development of interstate strategies for earthquake preparedness, response, recovery, and
mitigation.
Headquartered in Memphis, CUSEC represents ten
states in the southeast, seven of which are the charter states that would be most affected
by an earthquake in the NMSZ: Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi,
Missouri, Tennessee; and ten associate states: Alabama, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, North
Carolina, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Virginia. Established in 1983 with
funding support from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, CUSEC’s primary mission
is the reduction of deaths, injuries, property damage and economic losses resulting from
earthquakes in the Central United States.
^back to top
San Francisco Initiates Community Action Plan
for Seismic Safety
PROGRAM SUMMARY
The Department of Building
Inspection (DBI) is initiating a program to evaluate the seismic risks facing San
Francisco as part of a program to review and update, if needed, code requirements related to seismic safety and
post-earthquake repair. The program will be undertaken by consultants under the direction
of DBI’s Technical Services Section.
Phase I, beginning in January,
2000, is in initial
planning phase in which the Applied Technology Council (ATC), a non-profit
organization which focuses on seismic issues, will develop criteria and a work-plan to
guide the contracting for the major Phase II contract. The amount of this Phase I contract will be less than $50,000.
ATC’s Phase I work will include holding a
series of community meetings to determine the concerns of various stakeholder groups,
preparation of a technical plan for a series of risk analysis and hazard mitigation
studies, preparation of a Scope of Services for these studies, and development of a
Management Plan for overseeing the studies and projects.
Phase II will be initiated with a
Request For Qualifications (RFQ) to be issued in January, 2000, incorporating
the studies and programs from the
Phase I initial planning study. This is estimated to be a two-year program of detailed risk analysis of San
Francisco’s building stock and estimates of earthquake impacts on buildings and,
subsequently, on other aspects of City activities. The estimated cost of Phase II work is
about $400,000.
Included in Phase II will be a review of
post-earthquake building repair standards in light of recent FEMA rule changes, a review
of current seismic retrofit standards, and an enhancement of DBI’s post-earthquake
inspection program using ATC-20 procedures. Also addressed will be the vulnerability of
various types of San Francisco housing stock and impacts on operational capacity of
various building types after an earthquake.
The major outcome of Phase II of the CAPSS program
will be the development of a comprehensive estimate of the risks facing San
Francisco’s various types of buildings and their occupants due to earthquakes and
proposals for plans and programs for actions which would demonstrably reduce those
earthquake risks.
For further information please contact Laurence
Kornfield, Chief Building Inspector at 415-558-6244.
^back to top
WSSPC Updates
OSSPAC Appoints New Chairperson
Oregon’s Earthquake Commission, the
Oregon Seismic Safety Policy Advisory Commission (OSSPAC), has voted in Yumei (Mei Mei)
Wang of the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries as the new Chairperson.
Chris Thompson of Degenkolb Engineers has been appointed as the new vice chair. Kicking
off the Y2K, Wang has focused the 18-person Commission to develop earthquake safety
legislative concepts for schools, hospitals, and fire stations. Wang has created two new
standing committees: Legislation and Education, which will help shape and carry the
legislation. Commission members Senator Peter Courtney and Representative Randy Leonard
will introduce and support the following legislation in the 2001 session:
· Earthquake safety in Oregon schools
· Earthquake preparedness of hospitals and fire stations
· Annual Statewide Earthquake Drills
Mei-Mei can be reached at 503-731-4100 ext. 226
A Request for Support of
NSF’s EarthScope initiative and USGS’s Advanced National Seismic System
MEMORANDUM
TO: National Emergency Management Association
(NEMA)
Association of American State Geologists (AASG)
FROM: Board of Directors, Western States Seismic Policy
Council (WSSPC)
RE: Support for NSF’s EarthScope initiative and
USGS’s Advanced National Seismic System
We request that NEMA, AASG, and
their individual members consider supporting the U.S. Array component of the National
Science Foundation’s EarthScope initiative and the U.S. Geological Survey’s
Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS).
Both programs have great potential to
better understand earthquake hazards and thus help build stronger, safer communities. Both
programs are national in scope.
It is important to recognize that these two
initiatives are distinct and complementary. NSF’s U.S. Array and EarthScope focus on
fundamental understanding of Earth structure and active deformation, whereas ANSS focuses
on enhancing our capabilities to detect earthquakes, provide real-time warnings, provide
data that will greatly assist in immediate response to earthquakes in urban areas, and
improve earthquake-resistant building designs.
In 1997 WSSPC approved the following policy
recommendation concerning seismic monitoring networks. "Because seismic monitoring
networks are vital for earthquake hazard characterization and because there is an
insufficiency in available data, WSSPC advocates the continuation and expansion of seismic
monitoring networks, including strong motion instrumentation, by support from state and
federal agencies. WSSPC further recommends existing networks be interconnected by
compatible hardware and software."
Thank you for your consideration.
Basin and Range Province Committee Update
The Basin and Range
Province Committee is moving forward developing a generic set of guidelines for state
clearinghouse activities. The subcommittee on the guideline development has reviewed and
evaluated the example from California and has decided after discussion to do a re-write of
that plan. A tentative outline has been developed for a plan and the re-write tasking is
being planned. During a conference call on state clearinghouses, several scenarios were
reviewed including clearinghouse management, location logistics, and interstate personnel
resources and usage. The next step is to explore specific state approaches to the
organization and mobilization for clearinghouse activities.
The workshop that was planned for spring
has been postponed due to funding limitations and evolving needs for the workshop. We now
plan a meeting on the clearinghouse plan at the WSSPC annual meeting, and a workshop in
Spring of 2001. Contact has been made with the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
to participate in the clearinghouse process. Further work by the Committee included the
development of rosters for potential clearinghouse participants, development of generic
forms for clearinghouses, and compiling of important scientific questions to be addressed
in the post-earthquake environment.
Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Committee
1. The committee drafted and
submitted two letters to the Board of Directors. One letter supports the interchange of
tsunami technical and educational information among the coastal members of WSSPC. The
other letter informs Congress about the Western States Seismic Policy Council Tsunami
Policy Recommendation 99-1 approved at the Annual WSSPC Conference in September, 1999.
2. The committee supports a tsunami field trip for
the The National Earthquake Risk Management Conference in Seattle rather than a symposium.
Mark Darienzo talked with Bob Bucknam of the USGS about leading the field trip and
developed a preliminary field trip itinerary to be complimentary with the field trip
planned by Washington State.
^back to top
WSSPC Board
Corner
Plans for The
National Earthquake Risk Management Conference September 17-22, 2000 are well underway. A
preliminary schedule is found elsewhere in this issue of EQ. The conference is
national in scope and sponsored by WSSPC, FEMA, USGS, and CREW. WSSPC will host a meeting
of the state seismic safety boards and commissions, on Sunday September 17 to start the
conference. Field trips will follow the next day: one guided trip will focus on a Project
Impact retrofit project, a base isolated structure, Port of Seattle, and Seattle fault;
the other trip, possibly self-guided, will look in detail at tsunami deposits. Six plenary
sessions on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday will explore the policy aspects of Lessons
Learned from the Pacific Rim, Real-Time Warnings, Costs of Disasters, Does Mitigation
Pay?, Building Codes for the 21st Century, and Public Policy. WSSPC will award National Awards in
Excellence and will solicit nominees from throughout the U.S. from NESEC and CUSEC. The
WSSPC Annual Business Meeting will be held on Friday, September 22. The USGS/AASG meeting
will be held following the National Conference on Friday and Saturday.
The Board received an audit report for the fiscal
year ending November 30, 1999, and has voted to accept the report and implement the
recommendations of the auditor. The accountant was engaged to provide future oversight of
the WSSPC finances on a monthly basis, complete tax returns, and audit WSSPC next year. To
augment income, the Board decided to bill the affiliate members for dues in 2000, after
having suspended their dues in 1999, and decided to accept advertisements for EQ:Earthquake
Quarterly newsletter.
The Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Committee chaired by
Mark Darienzo drafted two letters which were sent out to WSSPC voting members and WSSPC
coastal members. The Board drafted a statement of support for the Advanced National
Seismic System (ANSS) (see facing page). The Board also reviewed the Strategic Plan with
an eye towards updating the plan.
Robert Bezek, WSSPC Board member from Wyoming,
volunteered to be the Corresponding Advisor to the American Lifelines Alliance, a new
cooperative effort between FEMA and the American Society of Civil Engineers. The project
is described in this issue of EQ.
The next Board meeting is scheduled for March 16-17,
2000 in Washington, D.C. at FEMA offices.
^back to top |
|
