Earthquake (C) Study Group
Earthquake (C) Study Group Page
Joint Executive (EX) / Plenary Committee Summary Report
Fall 2009 Meeting Summaries Index

The Earthquake (C) Study Group met Sept. 21, 2009. During this meeting, the Study Group:

• Discussed details of an earthquake education event planned for Dec. 8, which will cover such topics as:
• State-of-the-art social sciences on how to educate and motivate the public to prepare for an earthquake.
• Details of the coordination activities involved in producing the 2009 Great American Shakeout drill in California, the largest drill in U.S. history to date.
• How the incorporation of the latest scientific research into earthquake models is showing a significant decrease in modeled losses.
• Current issues and challenges in mitigation, including proposed solutions and approaches.

• Received an update from the Earthquake Consumer Guide drafting group, which met for the first time Sept. 3. The group discussed the various topics that should be included within the guide and decided that an introductory section would be drafted for review by the group. The drafting group will meet during the Fall National Meeting to review the draft introductory section and to further discuss the outline and content of the brochure. 

• Received a presentation titled “Federal and State Initiatives to Address the Earthquake Threat, Including Details on a 2011 National Level Exercise,” by Jim Wilkinson (Central U.S. Earthquake Consortium—CUSEC). The New Madrid Seismic Zone (NMSZ) Catastrophic Planning Project is to create a comprehensive preparedness plan for a catastrophic earthquake in the NMSZ, based on the most advanced impact assessment techniques and new response and recovery methodologies. The project is scenario-driven and involves the eight CUSEC states, with the support of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). It encompasses CUSEC’s multi-state planning priorities: (1) multi-state coordination; (2) communications; (3) search and rescue; (4) emergency medical; (5) transportation; (6) public information and education; and (7) response coordination. The planning project is to culminate with a national-level exercise, set for May 2011, to test the various plans developed over the course of the planning initiative at the local, state and federal levels.

An NMSZ catastrophic event would have a tremendous impact on infrastructure, as building codes have only recently addressed the seismic hazard in the area. The highest seismicity in the U.S. is east of the Rocky Mountains, with an average of 150–200 events a year. The NMSZ has significant fault systems and high catastrophic exposure, with 44 million people living in the eight states included in the region.

• Received a presentation on FEMA Phase I and Phase II projects from Dr. Teresa Jefferson (Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University). The objective of the projects is to enhance the readiness for response to a catastrophic event by providing the most realistic estimates possible of losses and impacts, and guidance on response and recovery planning. The presentation included the impact of a catastrophic earthquake in the NMSZ, an overview of the scenarios used, and the results found during the projects. Specific findings of the impact of a sequential earthquake rupture similar to the 1811-1812 series of earthquake events to the eight-state region included:
• 80,000 injuries and 35,000 deaths.
• 4.5 million chronic illness cases in the total “at risk” population.
• Over 7 million people will require some level of support, with 2 million seeking shelter, by day three.
• 1 million people will be without water on day one, 2.7 million people will be without water on day two.
• Almost 3 million people will be without water.
• The impacted area has a high concentration of people living in poverty.
• The impacted area speaks a low to moderate level of English.
• Received a presentation titled “Seismic Hazards in the Central and Eastern U.S.: 2009,” by Gary Patterson (University of Memphis—Center for Earthquake Research & Information). The presentation provided an historical and current overview on the science of earthquakes in the Midwest. It also covered how earthquake characteristics differ between mid-continental and tectonic plate boundary geographic areas. Earthquake risk factors in the central U.S. include:
• Area is subject to infrequent, large earthquake sequences that could have a national impact.
• Low attenuation equates to a larger damage area compared to similar magnitude quakes in California.
• Building codes are the most effective way to prevent loss; however, most infrastructural elements were not designed for earthquakes.
• 11 million people live in the NMSZ, many socially vulnerable.
• Ground motions at soft soil sites can be amplified significantly.
• Public awareness is low.