Earthquake Quarterly - Spring 1996


This newsletter is a production of the Western States Seismic Policy Council
121 Second Street, 4th Floor San Francisco, California 94105
415/974-6422 fax 415/974-1747
e-mail: wsspc@wsspc.org
web address: http://www.wsspc.org

Steven Ganz, Executive Director
Andrea James, Administrative Assistant


Newsletter Subscription Form:
If you are interested in continuing to receive this free newsletter, fill out this section, copy it and send it to the WSSPC office.
Name: _______________________________ e-mail: ____________________________
Position: ______________________________ Agency/Company: __________________________
Address: ___________________________ City: ___________ State: ______ Zip: ________
Telephone: ___________________________ Fax: _______________ Web address: ______________________
Mail to: 121 Second Street, 4th Floor San Francisco California 94105 or fax it to: (415) 974-1747 or e-mail us at: wsspc@wsspc.org

Off to a Good Start - WSSPC News

WSSPC is approaching its half year anniversary in its new office in San Francisco and has exciting news to report. Two committees created by the Board of Directors are hopeful about receiving funding. The first committee, the Basin and Range Province Committee, is a group of state scientists and emergency managers who seek the most accurate and effective seismic hazard characterization and products for users in the region. A workshop will held within the year to bring the key players together to discuss the concerns of the region. The second committee is the Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Committee, established to promote efforts local and state governments can undertake to mitigate and prepare for tsunami hazards. This committee will host a workshop in Hawaii for addressing such mitigation efforts.

The Strategic Planning Committee is also moving ahead with its efforts to present a framework for discussion at the WSSPC Annual Conference in Polson. The plan will give our organization a focus to efficiently achieve our goals and serve the needs of the earthquake community. In fact, the Annual Conference Committee has been working hard to host a terrific conference in September of this year. For more information about the conference see the advertisement on page 4.

Another program just inaugurated is the WSSPC awards for recognizing achievement in different areas of mitigation, preparedness and response. This program will be both an effective way to share model programs throughout our region, as well as to offer the appropriate recognition for the hard-working efforts of the front line earthquake workers.

The World Wide Web Home Page has undergone a facelift and has a new easy to use interface that hyperlinks you to WSSPC information and to other related web pages. The WSSPC Annual Conference Proceedings and the WSSPC/ DOT Monograph have just been published and are available for ordering (see related story on page 6). Doug Bausch and the Arizona Division of Emergency Management have been very successful editing and producing these important documents.

WSSPC is focusing its efforts on working in partnership with other organization which have similar missions. We are an active member of the Earthquake Information Network (EIN), a consortium of earthquake information providers throughout the United States. The EIN brings together individuals who can pool resources with the goal of more efficient and improved technology transfer of the information to the end-users. We will be using this newsletter to inform our readers about the different agencies involved (see related story on page 3). WSSPC is also fostering ties with the Cascadia Region Earthquake Workgroup (CREW), and the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL), as well as trying to create a formal link with Japan.

Seismic Safety Advisory Boards Seismic Safety Advisory Boards are panels chosen to advise the state on seismic policy matters. These bodies are composed of volunteers from the private sector, universities, and the government. The backgrounds of these volunteers are in fields such as earth sciences, engineering, emergency services, social services and public policy. They are experts in the area of earthquakes, preparedness and response.

The functions of the advisory boards are the following:

• Advocate earthquake programs and seismic safety
• Prepare policy reports and draft legislation to advise the legislatures and administrative agencies
• Identify seismic hazards
• Coordinate the earthquake preparedness activities of responsible agencies, programs, and government levels
• Promote communication and the transfer of information between a wide range of earthquake related organizations
• Plan for the long term implementation, review, and maintenance of seismic safety programs
• Maintain an ongoing awareness of earthquake issues

Public Policy is not conducive to earthquake awareness. Because earthquakes are infrequent, they are generally a lower priority on legislative agendas. Benefits to seismic spending are usually not seen within an elected official's tenure and cost is immediate, but gains are not. Politicians may focus on short term goals but the advisory boards make long term commitments. The committee can create long-range policy goals and review agencies' progress as well as research and draft new legislation to be proposed when earthquake interest is high.

Typically, earthquake awareness and concern are high after an earthquake has occurred but then it is to late. An advisory board is an inexpensive and effective means to keep the public aware. Because these boards are staffed with volunteers, cost is minimized to travel, facilities and other minimal expenses. The coordination of these committees is then done by a state employee who is already responsible for seismic safety. Thus, there is no additional cost. If or when an earthquake does occur, the damage is minimized due to the board's efforts and expenses are significantly less.
Earthquakes are unique hazards, a fact that further justifies the existence of advisory boards. Earthquakes are more widespread than most floods, tornadoes and windstorms. A decent sized earthquake can cause multi-state damage leaving people dependent on their own resources for up to 72 hours before relief can reach them. Secondly, outside of some western states, the public is unaware and unprepared in the event of an earthquake. These boards will heighten awareness and education throughout their regions. Lastly, risk management improves building, transportation, dams, and communication facilities which are beneficial in other disasters as well.
Earthquakes are also among the most manageable of disasters A region that is well prepared will experience less loss of life and damage. Prevention through an advisory board focused on seismic safety is cheaper than rebuilding and victim assistance after an earthquake. Some risk reduction expenses are more costly than others, and a Seismic Advisory Board compares costs to benefits in setting priorities. Preparedness is key in minimizing loss and damage. Boards improve safety and reduce risk.

Seismic Safety Advisory boards are necessary not only on the West Coast where earthquakes are more frequent, but also in the central and eastern states where the potential for damage is higher. This holds true for two reasons: unreinforced masonry building and a more consistent underlying rock that transmits shock waves further than in the west, thereby allowing earthquakes to spread farther. These areas have denser populations not familiar with earthquakes and proper methods of respond. Lastly, heavy industry causes a higher probability of damage from toxic waste, chemicals and collapses.

With one entity responsible, earthquakes become more of a focus for policy makers and public. A Seismic Safety Advisory Board has the long-term commitment to see real changes made towards reducing earthquake risk. Emergency management and preparedness is more cost effective than playing the odds and paying after a tragic event occurs.
______________
Seismic Safety Commissions will be a topic at the WSSPC Annual Conference in September at Polson, Montana. Additionally, a Seismic Safety Boards workshop will be taking place in Long Beach, California on December 3-5.

EQ STATS

THE TEN LARGEST EARTHQUAKES IN THE UNITED STATES

Mag Date Location

1. 9.2 March 28, 1964 Prince William Sound, Alaska
2. 9.1 March 9, 1957 Andreanof Islands, Alaska
3. 8.6 September 10, 1899 Yakutat Bay, Alaska
4. 8.3 September 4, 1899 Yakutat Bay, Alaska
8.3 October 9, 1900 Kodiak Island, Alaska
8.3 June 2, 1903 Cape Providence, Alaska
8.3 November 10, 1938 East of Shumagin Islands, Alaska
8. 8.25 April 18, 1906 San Francisco, California
9. 8.2 February 7, 1812 New Madrid, Missouri
10. 8.0 December 16, 1811 New Madrid, Missouri

THE TEN LARGEST EARTHQUAKES IN THE CONTIGUOUS UNITED STATES

Mag Date Location


1. 8.25 April 18, 1906 San Francisco, California
2. 8.2 February 7, 1812 New Madrid, Missouri
3. 8.0 December 16, 1811 New Madrid, Missouri (0815 UTC)
4. 7.9 January 9, 1857 Fort Tejon, California
5. 7.8 January 23, 1812 New Madrid, Missouri
7.8 March 26, 1872 Owens Valley, California
7.8 October 3, 1915 Pleasant Valley, Nevada
7.8 July 21, 1952 Kern County, California
9. 7.7 August 31, 1886 Charleston, South Carolina
10. 7.6 December 16, 1811 New Madrid, Missouri (1415 UTC)



Note: There is considerable difference of opinion about the magnitudes
of these earthquakes. For example, some sources list the magnitude
of the 8.6 Yakutat Bay earthquake as low as 8.0. On the other hand,
some sources list the Fort Tejon quake as high as 8.3. Similar
variations exist for nearly every event on this list (although
generally not so large as for this event).

The two events of magnitude greater than 9.0 are recomputed values
using the moment magnitude. For very large earthquakes, the moment
magnitude is considered to be a more accurate determination that the
traditional amplitude magnitude computation procedures. The

magnitudes of the Prince William Sound earthquake and the Andreanof
Islands earthquake were 8.6 and 8.1, respectively, using the
amplitude magnitude procedures. Note that all of these values can
be called "magnitudes on the Richter scale", regardless of the
method used to compute them.

Frequency of Occurrence of Earthquakes

Based on Observations since 1900

Descriptor Magnitude Average Annually

Great 8 and higher 1

Major 7 - 7.9 18

Strong 6 - 6.9 120

Moderate 5 - 5.9 800

Light 4 - 4.9 6,200 (estimated)

Minor 3 - 3.9 49,000 (estimated)

Very Minor < 3.0 2 - 3 about 1,000 per day
1 - 2 about 8,000 per day

Number of Earthquakes in the United States since 1900

Located by the US Geological Survey National Earthquake Information Center

Western US Eastern US Alaska Hawaii
(excluding AK/HI)
8 and higher 1 0 7 0
7.0 - 7.9 18 0 84 1
6.0 - 6.9 129 1 411 15
5.0 - 5.9 611 41 1886 36
4.0 - 4.9 3171 335 8362 315

Note that over 50% of all US earthquakes occur in Alaska.

Number of Earthquakes Worldwide for 1985 - 1994

Located by the US Geological Survey National Earthquake Information Center

Magnitude 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994

8.0 to 9.9 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2
7.0 to 7.9 13 5 11 8 6 12 11 23 15 13
6.0 to 6.9 110 89 112 93 79 115 105 104 141 161
5.0 to 5.9 1674 1665 1437 1485 1444 1635 1469 1541 1449 1542
4.0 to 4.9 4281 4476 4146 4018 4090 4493 4372 5196 5034 4544
3.0 to 3.9 1764 1942 1806 1932 2452 2457 2952 4643 4263 5000
2.0 to 2.9 935 1169 1037 1479 1906 2364 2927 3068 5390 5369
1.0 to 1.9 97 153 102 118 418 474 801 887 1177 779
0.1 to 0.9 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 2 9 17
No Magnitude 4240 3218 2639 3575 4189 5062 3878 4084 3997 1944

Total 13115 12718 11290 12711 14585 16612 16516 19548 21476 19371

As more and more seismographs are installed in the world, more earthquakes
can be and have been located. However, the number of large earthquakes
(magnitude 6.0 or greater) have stayed relatively constant. Note, in fact,
that the last decade has produced substantially fewer large earthquakes
than shown in the long-term averages in TABLE 1.

Magnitude vs. Ground Motion and Energy

Magnitude Change Ground Motion Change Energy Change
(Displacement)

1.0 10.0 times about 32 times
0.5 3.2 times about 5.5 times
0.3 2.0 times about 3 times
0.1 1.3 times about 1.4 times

TABLE 4 shows, for example, that a magnitude 7.2 earthquake produces
10 times more ground motion that a magnitude 6.2 earthquake, but it
releases about 32 times more energy. The energy release best indicates
the destructive power of an earthquake.

Focus on National Policy: Creating a Standardized Loss Estimation Methodology

The Methodology for Earthquake Loss Estimation, a risk assessment tool, standardizes on a national level the process of estimating potential earthquake losses in any given region. With an accurate assessment of hazards, earthquake reduction strategies will be more efficient and effective.

FEMA has sponsored the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) in developing this risk assessment tool for the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP). Ultimately, local, state and regional officials responsible for planning and stimulating mitigation efforts can utilize this methodology to reduce losses and better prepare for emergency responses and recovery following an earthquake.

The goal is to determine how earthquakes will affect the nation and how best to apply resources to reduce an earthquake's impact. With a consistent method, state and local governments will work more efficiently with NEHRP. NEHRP will be able to better determine the level of resources needed and more accurately allocate those resources.
The main uses of the Earthquake Loss Estimation Methodology are to:

• Mitigate the possible consequences of earthquakes
• Anticipate the potential nature and scope of the emergency response needed to cope with an earthquake related disaster
• Develop plans for recovery and reconstruction following such a disaster.

The information provided by the methodology tool is as follows:

• Direct physical damage
• Direct economic and social losses
• Induced damage

Indirect economic losses

The key to the methodology is the software know as HAZUS. HAZUS must be user-friendly and have technical credibility to insure its widespread usage. At this time the software is undergoing studies in two pilot projects in Portland and Boston, as well as new pilot in CUSEC member states in the New Madrid Fault region.
HAZUS works by inputting data such as soil conditions, local geology, building stock, location, potential size of the earthquake and economic data. In HAZUS the input is manipulated to estimate potential losses. The level of detail in the analysis directly relates to the amount of input. Studies can be done on three different levels. Generally, state and local government officials can conduct level one and level two projects. Level three estimates will require detailed engineering and geotechnical input; the assistance of structural engineers and geologist will be necessary.

Furthermore, the Loss Estimation Methodology contributes to a "cross-hazards approach" in emergency preparedness. Eventually, flood hazard data will be imported into HAZUS so mitigation strategies can be identified for these hazards as well. Similarly, information on hazardous materials and fires following earthquakes which are necessary for earthquake loss estimations can be applied in "cross-hazards" mitigation strategies.

Benefits of a standardized loss estimation methodology are numerous. This tool will bring together key groups in the earthquake field that generally do not work together. By identifying where the highest needs are, limited national funds will be allocated to regions or multi-counties where mitigation and preparedness will make a large difference. It is a cross-hazards approach that can estimate loss from floods, fires and hazardous materials. Lastly, it will stimulate emergency planners in mitigation efforts, bringing about better preparation for emergency response and recovery because the need will be clearly identified.

Now Offering. . .In One Volume
"The WSSPC '95 Conference Proceedings"
and the
"Synopsis of Seismic Threats in the Western United States: Impacts to the National Transportation Infrastructure"

The Conference Proceedings are a comprehensive account of the Western States Seismic Policy Council's 1995 Annual Conference which was held September 18th through the 20th in Flagstaff, Arizona. The volume contains materials distributed at the conference, including the agenda, attendee roster, meeting abstracts and articles. Also included in the proceedings are the workshop and field trip presentations, speaker biographies and the WSSPC membership roster. This document enables the reader to obtain a complete record of this event, as well as have excellent reference material regarding seismic hazards.

The Monograph addresses the seismic threat through an assessment of the seismogenic zones impacting the western U.S., including the: San Andreas fault system; Cascadia and Aleutian subduction zones; Basin and Range Province; Rio Grande Rift; Intermountain Seismic Belt; Hawaiian Volcanic Chain; and, Marianas Subduction Zone. The document compiles available information on the history of the threat, damage estimates, and lessons learned from each region. A summary of the threat to transportation infrastructure is provided for each member state. Finally, a review of the status of the mitigation programs within each member state is presented.

This well-illustrated 220+ page document is available for purchasing at the WSSPC office for $15.00 (including shipping and handling). In addition, an interactive computer version of the monograph was produced by the support office that includes graphical interfaces between figures and text. The interactive version may be obtained by downloading wsspc95.zip and following instructions provided at the WSSPC -Web site. A limited number of versions on diskette were prepared with an easy-to-follow setup program that installs the interactive monograph on your IBM-Windows system with the necessary icons. These may be obtained from the WSSPC office on a first come first serve basis.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
WSSPC '95 Proceedings and Monograph Order Form:
Name: ________________________________ Job Title: _______________
Organization: _________________________ Phone: ( ) ___________
Address: _________________________________ Fax: ( ) ___________
City, State, Zip: _________________________ E-Mail: ________________


__ Publication $ 15
__ Interactive Program $ 5
Total $ ____

Payment: (payable to WSSPC)
o Check o State Voucher
o Credit Card Exp. Date: ___/___
Type: (circle one) VISA / MC/ AmEx
Card No. _______________________
Name on Card: __________________
Please complete the order form, enclose the fee(s) and mail to:
Western States Seismic Policy Council,
121 Second Street, 4th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94105
(we will also accept orders by fax or e-mail):
Telephone: (415) 974-6422, Fax: (415) 974-1747, e-mail: wsspc@wsspc.org
Visit the WSSPC web site at http://www.wsspc.org

ORDER TODAY

National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research
The NCEER Information Service
The National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (NCEER) and its Information Service were established in 1986. The mission of the NCEER Information Service is to provide a mechanism for the effective and timely transfer of knowledge to the earthquake hazards mitigation community, and to develop innovative methods for improving the accessibility of this knowledge. The NCEER Information Service has responded to thousands of requests for earthquake hazards mitigation resources in the past decade. These requests come from all corners of the world, and reflect a wide range of topical interests.

Following are some of the services provided by the NCEER Information Service:

Collection of Materials: a comprehensive collection of materials on earthquake engineering, hazards mitigation, preparation, response and recovery, societal aspects of disasters, and related topics is continually enriched through new additions. The collection is cataloged, and records are available on the Internet for worldwide access. NCEER's collection includes not only books and journals, but maps, standards, vertical file materials and ephemera, clippings, and audio-visual materials. Materials from our collection can be loaned or photocopied on request.

Reference Support: The NCEER Information Service takes an active role in disseminating knowledge to the hazards community. Queries are received and responses are made via telephone, telefax, e-mail, letter, walk-in visits, and during exhibits and presentations. The user community includes researchers, engineers, educators, students, hazards practitioners, designers, planners, government agencies, and the general public. Most small fee.

QUAKELINE" Database: A comprehensive bibliographic database, established in 1987, and now including 30,000 citations, has become a major reference tool in earthquake hazards mitigation. QUAKELINE provides unique coverage of research results and practical applications in the field. Publications from around the world are represented in this database, available to the worldwide community via the Internet as well as on the CD-ROM, and the Earthquakes and the Built Environment Index. Users can access QUAKELINE on the Internet, by visiting NCEER's World Wide Web site at http://nceer.eng.buffalo.edu, or via gopher at nceer.eng.buffalo.edu.

NCEER Information Service News: This monthly newsletter is distributed to nearly 700 readers around the world. Each issue contains close to fifty pages of current awareness information, including announcements, a comprehensive meetings list, calls for papers, new library acquisitions, items of interest, selected computer searches, and the tables of contents of current journals. This publication is offered electronically on the NCEER Gopher and World Wide Web site.

NCEER Electronic Resources: The NCEER World Wide Web site, the NCEER Gopher and the NCEER Anonymous FTP provide worldwide electronic gateways for Internet users seeking earthquake hazards mitigation information. Within these electronic systems, users have instant access to such items as the QUAKELINE database, the latest issue of the Information Service News, a collection of over 600 "Selected Computer Searches" (bibliographies) on subjects from A to Z, the SAC LIT Database, NCEER software, listings of NCEER technical reports, and numerous other items. The Web site also encourages exploration of other Internet resources by providing direct connections to other relevant Internet sites. NCEER Internet resources are located at:
NCEER World Wide Web Home Page: http://nceer.eng.buffalo.edu
NCEER Gopher and Anonymous FTP: nceer.eng.buffalo.edu

Bibliographies and other publications: A continuous stream of focused, user-oriented resources is produced by NCEER Information Service staff, including these popular items, which are available by request, or on the electronic sites mentioned above:

• Guide to Strong-Motion Records
• FEMA Publications: Seismic Safety of Buildings
• FEMA Publications: Seismic Safety of Lifelines
• The SAC LIT Database

SAC LIT Database: This specialized database was compiled by the NCEER Information Service under contract with the SAC project, a joint venture of the Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC), the Applied Technology Council (ATC) and the California Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering (CUREe). It provides information potentially relevant to the investigation of damage to steel moment frame buildings caused by the 1994 Northridge earthquake. CD-ROM, diskette and Internet versions of the SAC LIT Database include a downloadable user interface for searching, displaying and retrieving records. This database is available on request from the NCEER Information Service, or is directly downloadable from the NCEER World Wide Web and Gopher sites.

To request any of the materials or services mentioned above, contact:
NCEER, Information Service
304 Capen Hall State
University of New York at Buffalo
Buffalo, NY 14260

telephone: 716-645-3377
telefax: 716-645-3379
e-mail: nceeris@acsu.buffalo.edu
WWW: http://nceer.eng.buffalo.edu
Gopher, Anonymous FTP: nceer.eng.buffalo.edu

This article was written by Patricia Ann Coty