WEBVTT
Kind: captions
Language: en-US

00:00:00.857 --> 00:00:03.880
[Applause]

00:00:04.380 --> 00:00:09.090
So, let’s get things started with the
30th anniversary of the Loma Prieta

00:00:09.090 --> 00:00:14.562
earthquake, and our moderator is
going to be Carol Prentice. Woo hoo!

00:00:14.586 --> 00:00:18.326
[Applause]

00:00:19.834 --> 00:00:23.043
- Well, we only have two speakers,
so I’m just going to go ahead

00:00:23.067 --> 00:00:25.930
and call them up. I am going to
keep you guys on time.

00:00:25.930 --> 00:00:30.810
So, Steve Hickman is going to be
talking about advances in earthquake

00:00:30.810 --> 00:00:35.960
science monitoring and hazard
assessments since Loma Prieta.

00:00:39.887 --> 00:00:42.160
- Thank you, Carol.
And, to help me stay on time,

00:00:42.160 --> 00:00:44.060
I brought my wristwatch up.

00:00:44.060 --> 00:00:47.402
So thank you all,
again, for being here.

00:00:47.402 --> 00:00:50.275
Bring up my talk.

00:00:52.460 --> 00:00:56.583
[Silence]

00:00:56.583 --> 00:00:58.002
Oh, there we go.
Okay.

00:00:58.002 --> 00:01:02.030
So I’ll be talking about advances in
earthquake science hazard assessments

00:01:02.030 --> 00:01:06.289
and monitoring since Loma Prieta.
If the microphone stays more or less

00:01:06.289 --> 00:01:10.336
in place. There we go.
Okay, so I hardly need to remind

00:01:10.336 --> 00:01:14.219
most of you that this earthquake
struck a little over 30 years ago.

00:01:14.219 --> 00:01:17.229
Sixty-three people died.
Thousands were injured.

00:01:17.229 --> 00:01:20.499
Between 6 to $10 billion
in property loss.

00:01:21.402 --> 00:01:24.819
It was the largest earthquake to hit
the Bay Area since the great

00:01:24.819 --> 00:01:28.289
San Francisco earthquake of 1906.
It was truly a wake-up call for

00:01:28.289 --> 00:01:32.733
the Bay Area. Made everyone
realize that the threat is real.

00:01:32.733 --> 00:01:35.728
Started doing ShakeAlert –
ShakeOut exercises.

00:01:35.728 --> 00:01:38.466
And it’s important to note that
most damage resulted from

00:01:38.466 --> 00:01:41.667
enhanced ground
shaking at distance.

00:01:42.176 --> 00:01:44.542
Liquefaction was important
but not a dominant factor.

00:01:44.542 --> 00:01:47.069
So I’ll talk about that
a little bit later.

00:01:47.069 --> 00:01:50.380
The earthquake also motivated new
research on source characteristics,

00:01:50.380 --> 00:01:54.529
recurrence behavior, and consequences
of earthquakes, leading to re-evaluation

00:01:54.529 --> 00:01:58.915
of hazard. Led to enhanced earthquake
monitoring, better hazard

00:01:58.915 --> 00:02:01.950
characterization, situational
awareness, and, as Sarah mentioned,

00:02:01.950 --> 00:02:04.509
earthquake early warning,
and spurred investments of

00:02:04.509 --> 00:02:10.210
73 to $80 billion to retrofit or
strengthen/replace vulnerable structures.

00:02:10.210 --> 00:02:14.910
So I will do a fast round through this
series of topics – earthquake geology,

00:02:14.910 --> 00:02:18.540
paleoseismology, seismic
monitoring, geodetic monitoring,

00:02:18.540 --> 00:02:22.966
fault segmentation, ground motion
forecasting, landslides and liquefaction,

00:02:22.966 --> 00:02:25.155
and, if the hook doesn’t
come in and pull me off,

00:02:25.155 --> 00:02:28.833
investments in mitigating
risks of future earthquakes.

00:02:28.833 --> 00:02:30.450
So, first talking about
earthquake geology.

00:02:30.450 --> 00:02:32.040
A lot has happened since
the earthquake.

00:02:32.040 --> 00:02:35.660
It was certainly a catalyst for
renewed studies of Bay Area faults,

00:02:35.660 --> 00:02:38.588
with trenching, as you see here,
at the Tyson’s Lagoon site along

00:02:38.588 --> 00:02:41.950
the Hayward Fault.
Led to significantly improved

00:02:41.950 --> 00:02:45.760
view of location, style,
and rate of rupture on faults.

00:02:45.760 --> 00:02:49.120
And it got us better dates and
magnitudes of past earthquakes,

00:02:49.120 --> 00:02:53.840
slip rates on major faults, and there
was little information on these factors

00:02:53.840 --> 00:02:57.570
prior to the Loma Prieta earthquake.
This was input to earthquake rupture

00:02:57.570 --> 00:03:01.567
probability and fault-specific scenarios
as well as the U.S. National Seismic

00:03:01.567 --> 00:03:04.400
Hazard Maps, and very importantly,
it made the public aware that

00:03:04.400 --> 00:03:08.230
earthquake hazard is real and
spread across the entire Bay Area.

00:03:08.230 --> 00:03:11.050
This is a photograph of the Tyson’s
Lagoon trench site from

00:03:11.050 --> 00:03:15.240
Jim Lienkaemper et al.’s work.
This is a classic site along the Hayward

00:03:15.240 --> 00:03:19.880
that allowed, as you see below, us to
get a record of recurrence repeat of

00:03:19.880 --> 00:03:24.980
12 earthquakes on the Hayward
Fault over the past 2,000 years.

00:03:25.618 --> 00:03:29.300
So, since Loma Prieta, one of the most
important advances in earthquake

00:03:29.300 --> 00:03:35.333
geology was Lidar topographic data.
And this is – the first Lidar was done

00:03:35.333 --> 00:03:38.883
in northern California in 2003,
mapping the locations of faults,

00:03:38.883 --> 00:03:42.650
selecting sites for studies,
revealing faults in previously

00:03:42.650 --> 00:03:46.917
hard-to-find places, and helped to
refine the Alquist‐Priolo Act zones

00:03:46.917 --> 00:03:51.245
and accelerate selection
of paleoseismic sites.

00:03:51.245 --> 00:03:54.772
Also advances in geochronology,
as mentioned here.

00:03:54.772 --> 00:03:59.600
Other advances that helped earthquake
geology – remote sensing, including

00:03:59.600 --> 00:04:04.164
satellite and Lidar repeat imagery.
Advances in photogrammetric

00:04:04.164 --> 00:04:09.270
software – the 3D reconstruction
using aerial and UAV photos

00:04:09.270 --> 00:04:13.228
for slip rate recurrence. And, as I
mentioned before, long paleoseismic

00:04:13.228 --> 00:04:18.467
records plus synthesis of multiple sites
along individual strands and segments.

00:04:19.311 --> 00:04:23.069
This is a photograph, or a map,
from Dave Schwartz’s paper in 2014

00:04:23.069 --> 00:04:25.639
simply showing how many sites
have been investigated in the

00:04:25.639 --> 00:04:29.180
Bay Area since Loma Prieta.
About 90% of these little green dots –

00:04:29.180 --> 00:04:34.633
each one is a paleoseismic trench site –
has been done since Loma Prieta.

00:04:35.915 --> 00:04:38.749
Seismic network also – coverage
has increased dramatically since

00:04:38.749 --> 00:04:41.990
the Loma Prieta earthquake.
On the left, you see what it

00:04:41.990 --> 00:04:44.990
looked like in 1989.
Each dot is a station.

00:04:44.990 --> 00:04:48.710
On the right is what it looks like today.
You can see a lot more dots.

00:04:48.710 --> 00:04:50.999
So there’s been an increase in
the density of seismic stations

00:04:50.999 --> 00:04:55.690
by about a factor of 4-1/2.
The data is now available in real time,

00:04:55.690 --> 00:04:59.330
whereas, in 1989, many stations
were not telemetered, and you

00:04:59.330 --> 00:05:02.313
had to download
the data manually.

00:05:02.341 --> 00:05:05.615
This increased coverage allows for
improved ground motion models,

00:05:05.615 --> 00:05:08.939
more accurate earthquake detection
location characterization, and more

00:05:08.939 --> 00:05:14.124
important – very importantly, more
data on soil/basin/rock shaking.

00:05:14.124 --> 00:05:17.590
This is an example just showing
how the data has improved.

00:05:17.590 --> 00:05:21.080
On the left, you see what
it looked like in 1994.

00:05:21.116 --> 00:05:23.110
Back then, most of
our stations were analog.

00:05:23.110 --> 00:05:25.560
There were very few
truly digital stations.

00:05:25.560 --> 00:05:30.550
Sometimes stations were digitized
in the office, but that was slow,

00:05:30.550 --> 00:05:32.860
and often the velocity centers
were clipped, as you can see

00:05:32.860 --> 00:05:36.889
a lot of clipped records
on the left back in 1994.

00:05:36.889 --> 00:05:41.360
2003 to 2018 –
more and more digital stations.

00:05:41.360 --> 00:05:44.190
Most of the network is not digital
with strong motion instruments added.

00:05:44.190 --> 00:05:47.891
You can see in the middle, and
especially on the right-hand side,

00:05:47.891 --> 00:05:52.120
the data is much more on scale.
Wide range in terms of amplitudes.

00:05:52.120 --> 00:05:56.059
Wide dynamic range.
And also wide frequency response.

00:05:56.059 --> 00:05:58.889
Broadband instruments are much
more prevalent than they used to be.

00:05:58.889 --> 00:06:02.099
And, of course, the telemetry
has improved as well.

00:06:02.099 --> 00:06:05.009
So, with time, more and more
digital stations, higher-quality data,

00:06:05.009 --> 00:06:07.949
and you see there’s less move-out
on the right-hand side.

00:06:07.949 --> 00:06:11.400
More stations close to the earthquakes.
That’s very important.

00:06:12.169 --> 00:06:15.539
I mentioned strong motion stations.
This is just a cartoon showing what

00:06:15.539 --> 00:06:20.069
the distribution of the Advanced
National Seismic System strong motion

00:06:20.069 --> 00:06:23.809
stations, and other strong motion
stations, operated by other agencies,

00:06:23.809 --> 00:06:28.250
such as the Corps of Engineers shown
in blue, how they cover the country.

00:06:28.250 --> 00:06:31.680
These data are critical and have
been – include both free-field

00:06:31.680 --> 00:06:34.759
and building instrumentation.
This is really important for capturing

00:06:34.759 --> 00:06:39.030
strong motions in the near-field and
also, as it would show on the right,

00:06:39.063 --> 00:06:44.050
building response. So this is wherewe in
the earthquake business interfere with –

00:06:44.050 --> 00:06:48.919
[chuckles] interfere – interact – sorry.
That was not Freudian.

00:06:48.919 --> 00:06:51.702
[laughter]
So we interact very closely

00:06:51.702 --> 00:06:53.430
with the earthquake
engineering community.

00:06:53.430 --> 00:06:56.139
In fact, we have earthquake engineers
on staff for that very purpose.

00:06:56.139 --> 00:06:59.280
And looking at how buildings
respond during strong earthquakes,

00:06:59.280 --> 00:07:03.639
such as the Atwood Building in the
7.0 Anchorage, is critical to us.

00:07:03.639 --> 00:07:06.810
Because you can see how the ground
moves and then see how the building

00:07:06.810 --> 00:07:10.979
responds, both translationally
in terms of torsion, and other kinds

00:07:10.979 --> 00:07:14.753
of modes that help engineers
design buildings for better resilience,

00:07:14.753 --> 00:07:18.030
better energy dissipation, and,
in some cases, base isolation.

00:07:18.030 --> 00:07:21.800
So our interaction with the engineering
community through the strong motion

00:07:21.800 --> 00:07:25.559
stations has been very important to us.
And there’s some spectacular videos

00:07:25.559 --> 00:07:28.470
on the web that Mehmet Celebi
has put together if you want to see

00:07:28.470 --> 00:07:31.180
how these buildings actually
moved during the earthquake.

00:07:31.180 --> 00:07:34.040
I’d encourage you
to look that up.

00:07:34.040 --> 00:07:36.515
Another advance since Loma Prieta –
we’ve gotten a lot better

00:07:36.515 --> 00:07:39.969
at locating earthquakes.
No surprise.

00:07:39.969 --> 00:07:43.039
The Waldhauser, Waldhauser,
and Ellsworth techniques for

00:07:43.039 --> 00:07:46.649
relocating and identifying repeating
earthquakes have led to

00:07:46.649 --> 00:07:51.283
much more detailed mapping of fault
geometries and slip style along faults,

00:07:51.283 --> 00:07:54.449
particularly for creeping faults,
which produce a lot of background

00:07:54.449 --> 00:07:58.759
microseismicity. You can see on
the left-hand side, northern California

00:07:58.759 --> 00:08:02.370
seismic system locations and
the networks. These two panels

00:08:02.370 --> 00:08:06.590
on the lower left are
traditional network locations.

00:08:06.590 --> 00:08:08.639
These ones over here
are from relocations.

00:08:08.639 --> 00:08:13.050
You can see in cross-section,
streaks, clusters, and also the details

00:08:13.050 --> 00:08:16.559
of the distribution of unstably
sliding versus creeping fault behavior

00:08:16.559 --> 00:08:19.960
that were previously
invisible to us.

00:08:19.960 --> 00:08:22.529
This other side here shows
what’s being done now.

00:08:22.529 --> 00:08:27.999
We are now routinely using double-
difference activities – relocation of

00:08:27.999 --> 00:08:31.678
earthquakes in northern California
to produce a much sharper image.

00:08:31.678 --> 00:08:34.810
Here is the traditional
HypoInverse earthquake location.

00:08:34.810 --> 00:08:39.200
Here are the relocations done as shown
in this paper by Waldhauser and Schaff

00:08:39.200 --> 00:08:42.590
along the same faults – the intersection
of the San Andreas and the Calaveras.

00:08:42.590 --> 00:08:46.010
So you can see a lot of details
sharpening up – seeing more faults,

00:08:46.010 --> 00:08:49.750
seeing more repeating behavior,
and getting a much sharper picture

00:08:49.750 --> 00:08:52.570
of what the fault looks like.
The next step with the system is

00:08:52.570 --> 00:08:56.410
to apply machine learning to
earthquake detection, location,

00:08:56.410 --> 00:08:59.390
and characterization.
This is active area of research

00:08:59.390 --> 00:09:03.024
for us, and we hope to
be implementing it soon.

00:09:03.024 --> 00:09:06.281
So, due to the advances in monitoring
and data processing, we have a lot

00:09:06.281 --> 00:09:09.630
more products – real-time products
than were available before.

00:09:09.630 --> 00:09:12.490
This is a timeline showing what
we’ve had available over time.

00:09:12.490 --> 00:09:16.153
Loma Prieta, we basically did
earthquake locations in magnitudes.

00:09:16.153 --> 00:09:19.340
Rather labor-intensive.
Took a long time.

00:09:19.340 --> 00:09:22.610
Now we get earthquake locations
out in a matter of minutes, or seconds,

00:09:22.610 --> 00:09:24.824
in the case of
earthquake early warning.

00:09:24.824 --> 00:09:29.630
We started to do Did You Feel It reports
and ShakeMaps around the 1998 era.

00:09:29.630 --> 00:09:34.210
Then we had finite fault solutions
and ShakeCast to look at damage.

00:09:34.210 --> 00:09:36.030
Moment tensor solutions
for the earthquakes.

00:09:36.030 --> 00:09:40.400
Then we had web services kicking
in around 2011 with scenarios –

00:09:40.400 --> 00:09:45.160
ground motion scenarios.
Loss and injury estimates in PAGER.

00:09:45.160 --> 00:09:47.090
And then internet services.

00:09:47.090 --> 00:09:50.720
Now we are doing landslide
and liquefaction forecasts

00:09:50.720 --> 00:09:54.190
as real-time products, which are
very important for us and have

00:09:54.190 --> 00:09:57.461
been used and then calibrated,
actually, in studies – post-earthquake

00:09:57.461 --> 00:10:01.420
studies in Anchorage.
We also do a 2-PAGER product now,

00:10:01.420 --> 00:10:04.490
which incorporates FEMA’s
Hazus estimates into the traditional

00:10:04.490 --> 00:10:08.410
PAGER loss estimates.
And we have aftershock forecasting.

00:10:08.410 --> 00:10:11.630
I wanted to mention the aftershock
forecasting is a new thing for us.

00:10:11.630 --> 00:10:16.240
It’s a real-time product.
It went live in September of last year.

00:10:16.240 --> 00:10:20.330
And it’s been a very high-impact
product for the – for the 2018

00:10:20.330 --> 00:10:24.350
Anchorage earthquake, where it was
done essentially manually by our team.

00:10:24.350 --> 00:10:28.090
Same for the 6.4 and
7.1 Ridgecrest earthquakes.

00:10:28.090 --> 00:10:30.750
The Navy was extremely interested
in this. We worked very closely

00:10:30.750 --> 00:10:33.778
with them on producing timely
aftershock forecasting.

00:10:33.778 --> 00:10:36.883
And, most recently, the Puerto Rico
earthquake sequence that started

00:10:36.927 --> 00:10:42.470
in December 2019. Doing aftershock
forecasts for that continuing series

00:10:42.470 --> 00:10:46.683
of earthquakes has been very helpful
to the people of Puerto Rico.

00:10:46.683 --> 00:10:48.750
I want to point out there’s an
earthquake early warning session.

00:10:48.750 --> 00:10:51.380
That’s a big thing.
I’m not going to talk about that at all

00:10:51.380 --> 00:10:56.010
because of time, but there is
a session on that this afternoon.

00:10:56.010 --> 00:10:59.750
Talk a little bit about
ground deformation here.

00:10:59.750 --> 00:11:01.430
There are reasons to measure
ground motion deformation.

00:11:01.430 --> 00:11:05.010
I think you all know, if we’re looking
at strain accumulation, aseismic slip,

00:11:05.010 --> 00:11:06.580
and possibly for early warning.

00:11:06.580 --> 00:11:09.150
That’s something we’re
investigating very actively.

00:11:09.150 --> 00:11:13.460
Prior to 1989, we used two-color
lasers and actually flew airplanes

00:11:13.460 --> 00:11:16.620
to get line-length changes
in these trilateration surveys

00:11:16.620 --> 00:11:19.550
as shown here in
the Loma Prieta area.

00:11:19.550 --> 00:11:23.115
That was very time-consuming,
and the surveys were infrequent as a –

00:11:23.115 --> 00:11:24.940
as a result of that.

00:11:24.940 --> 00:11:28.700
Now, of course, we use GNSS,
or GPS, for continuous and

00:11:28.700 --> 00:11:31.540
campaign monitoring.
This just shows a vector displacement

00:11:31.540 --> 00:11:35.180
field across northern California.
Gradients going from, of course,

00:11:35.180 --> 00:11:38.860
the North American Plate
here to the Pacific Plate here.

00:11:38.860 --> 00:11:41.190
And those, of course, give us
information on loading rates

00:11:41.190 --> 00:11:45.070
along faults that are useful
in hazard assessments.

00:11:45.070 --> 00:11:47.420
You can see down here is an
example from southern California.

00:11:47.420 --> 00:11:51.448
The continuous GNSS data provides
very important data here on

00:11:51.448 --> 00:11:55.567
displacements during earthquakes,
then the post-earthquake relaxation

00:11:55.567 --> 00:11:59.567
process, strain accumulation,
earthquake, post-relaxation.

00:11:59.567 --> 00:12:02.667
Again, this tells us a lot about the
physics of the earthquake loading

00:12:02.667 --> 00:12:07.384
system, both from adjacent
faults and from below.

00:12:07.384 --> 00:12:09.970
Some of the technological
advances since Loma Prieta.

00:12:09.970 --> 00:12:13.748
They really were well-illustrated
by the Napa earthquake.

00:12:13.748 --> 00:12:15.580
We use InSAR now,
as shown here.

00:12:15.580 --> 00:12:19.890
The south Napa earthquake
broke along this fault here.

00:12:19.890 --> 00:12:22.170
The colors give you a change
in range to the satellites.

00:12:22.170 --> 00:12:26.060
So this helps us map out deformation,
and the arrows are from GPS receivers

00:12:26.060 --> 00:12:29.715
on the ground showing
relative displacement.

00:12:29.715 --> 00:12:32.475
One of the things we learned
from Napa was that the fault

00:12:32.475 --> 00:12:35.360
doesn’t slip all at once.
There was a large component of slip

00:12:35.360 --> 00:12:40.121
in the northern area that was coseismic.
That would be up here – sorry, up here.

00:12:40.121 --> 00:12:44.620
But, in the south, the coseismic slip
at the surface was relatively small.

00:12:44.620 --> 00:12:48.751
But, over time, the slip started to
accumulate, going up here to more

00:12:48.751 --> 00:12:53.410
and more displacement over a period
of about a year after the earthquake.

00:12:53.410 --> 00:12:58.010
So this postseismic slip, it turns out,
is an important hazard, especially

00:12:58.010 --> 00:13:01.830
if you’re trying to mitigate and
reconstruct lifelines, gas pipelines,

00:13:01.830 --> 00:13:04.920
water lines, roadways, etc.
Because the Earth keeps moving

00:13:04.920 --> 00:13:07.450
after the earthquake.
So this is an important thing for us

00:13:07.450 --> 00:13:11.235
to understand and is now including
in the HayWired scenario.

00:13:11.235 --> 00:13:14.970
Postseismic afterslip is also
shown here by this GNSS campaign

00:13:14.970 --> 00:13:19.437
station down here, which keeps
moving after the earthquake.

00:13:19.437 --> 00:13:22.610
We also use Lidar to map
offsets across faults.

00:13:22.610 --> 00:13:24.990
This is shown by work
here by Ben Brooks.

00:13:24.990 --> 00:13:28.462
You can see displacements
across the fault going here.

00:13:28.462 --> 00:13:33.307
And we also use borehole strainmeters,
which, in many cases, were installed

00:13:33.307 --> 00:13:37.305
by the USGS for the Plate
Boundary Observatory.

00:13:37.305 --> 00:13:40.180
Last but not least, I want to
mention one of the important uses

00:13:40.180 --> 00:13:44.400
for high-rate GNSS.
Certainly did not – is a recent thing –

00:13:44.400 --> 00:13:46.875
was constraining the source
mechanisms of big earthquakes.

00:13:46.908 --> 00:13:49.620
So I’m just showing this as an
example from Sarah Minson’s work.

00:13:49.620 --> 00:13:56.270
This is the Tohoku earthquake –
Tohoku-Oki earthquake in 2011 – 9.1 –

00:13:56.270 --> 00:14:00.440
showing how these displacement
vectors from GNSS receivers in Japan

00:14:00.440 --> 00:14:04.190
were used to constrain the slip
distribution during that earthquake.

00:14:04.190 --> 00:14:08.300
This is the coverage of GNSS
stations in western U.S. today.

00:14:08.300 --> 00:14:12.230
We have a lot of stations in California
and in the Pacific Northwest.

00:14:12.230 --> 00:14:15.050
So we’ll be able to use those to
help constrain subduction zone

00:14:15.050 --> 00:14:18.360
events in the Pacific Northwest
impacting northern California

00:14:18.360 --> 00:14:22.689
as well as potentially along
the San Andreas system.

00:14:22.689 --> 00:14:25.620
Seafloor geodesy – I wanted to
throw in a pitch for that – is something

00:14:25.620 --> 00:14:30.230
that’s an important new avenue.
This shows seafloor acoustically

00:14:30.230 --> 00:14:34.102
coupled geodetic transducers
offshore in Japan.

00:14:34.102 --> 00:14:37.348
Displacement vectors that were huge
compared to what was on land allowed

00:14:37.348 --> 00:14:41.350
them to map out the distribution of
slip as you approach the trench axis.

00:14:41.350 --> 00:14:44.452
And, as you know, there was a
huge tsunami after this earthquake.

00:14:44.452 --> 00:14:49.030
This gives us new insights into the
distribution of slip and why the slip

00:14:49.030 --> 00:14:52.220
was able to propagate and, in fact,
increases displacement toward

00:14:52.220 --> 00:14:56.140
the surface, which resulted
in the devastating tsunami.

00:14:56.140 --> 00:14:58.800
Fault complexity in multi-segment
ruptures become more evident

00:14:58.800 --> 00:15:01.670
since Loma Prieta.
Show here the example from

00:15:01.670 --> 00:15:04.730
Denali with multiple sub-events
comprising the main earthquake.

00:15:04.730 --> 00:15:08.780
We’ve also see this with Landers,
Izmit, Tohoku, and Kaikoura.

00:15:08.780 --> 00:15:12.200
There’s another session on that this
morning talking about Ridgecrest

00:15:12.200 --> 00:15:17.320
lessons learned. Uniform California
Earthquake Rupture Forecasts.

00:15:17.320 --> 00:15:22.332
This brings all this together – geology,
geodesy, seismology, paleoseismology.

00:15:22.332 --> 00:15:26.200
We’ve been forecasting the probability
of earthquakes along the San Andreas

00:15:26.200 --> 00:15:30.320
system since 1988. There was a forecast
that showed the Loma Prieta segment

00:15:30.320 --> 00:15:34.150
to be relatively high hazard, but we’ve
gotten a lot better at this using all these

00:15:34.150 --> 00:15:37.430
data forms brought together.
And there’s a session tomorrow

00:15:37.430 --> 00:15:39.862
afternoon about seismic
sources in California.

00:15:39.862 --> 00:15:43.090
So UCERF3 has been
a very important product for us.

00:15:43.090 --> 00:15:46.870
High-performance computing has
enabled that and similar studies.

00:15:46.870 --> 00:15:49.480
This is a close-up of what’s shown
for the San Andreas Fault system

00:15:49.480 --> 00:15:52.370
in the Bay Area. And you can see –
you’ve seen this all before –

00:15:52.370 --> 00:15:58.202
high potential for earthquakes from
the UCERF3 model for the Bay Area.

00:15:58.202 --> 00:16:02.310
There’s been a stress shadow here,
as seen after the 1906 earthquake,

00:16:02.310 --> 00:16:05.624
a relative paucity of
earthquakes after that event.

00:16:05.624 --> 00:16:08.510
And here we are
with Loma Prieta.

00:16:08.510 --> 00:16:11.779
The Ridgecrest – I mean, sorry –
the Loma Prieta earthquake was

00:16:11.779 --> 00:16:15.220
a take-off for a lot of stress shadow
studies that started soon after that.

00:16:15.220 --> 00:16:18.570
I’m showing an example here from
Reasenberg and Simpson’s paper

00:16:18.570 --> 00:16:23.040
in 1992 and a lot of other work
since then on static stress changes,

00:16:23.040 --> 00:16:27.340
dynamic stress changes – both nearby,
as it might affect dynamic rupture

00:16:27.340 --> 00:16:31.040
between segments, and distance,
such as triggering remote activities

00:16:31.040 --> 00:16:35.518
from Landers, and longer-term
viscoelastic effects.

00:16:35.549 --> 00:16:37.710
I want to talk a little
bit about scenarios.

00:16:37.710 --> 00:16:41.280
Scenarios have been a – have really
been critical for a number of

00:16:41.280 --> 00:16:45.338
earthquakes, not just scenarios of
ground shaking in the west in the U.S.,

00:16:45.338 --> 00:16:48.467
but also Salt Lake City, Flagstaff –
other parts of the country –

00:16:48.467 --> 00:16:51.980
New Madrid and Virginia.
And they’ve been very helpful

00:16:51.980 --> 00:16:57.200
in informing emergency response
exercises and planning to do ShakeOut,

00:16:57.200 --> 00:17:01.380
which I show here, and the HayWired
earthquake scenario in California.

00:17:01.380 --> 00:17:04.030
One thing we learned about
Loma Prieta was damage is

00:17:04.030 --> 00:17:06.579
amplified at distance.
So you can see here – of course,

00:17:06.579 --> 00:17:10.480
a lot of damage in Santa Cruz
and in the Santa Cruz Mountains

00:17:10.480 --> 00:17:13.220
during the earthquake, but also
a lot of damage done at the

00:17:13.220 --> 00:17:15.790
Cypress Viaduct and
in the Marina District.

00:17:15.790 --> 00:17:19.650
Most of the casualties – most of
the loss of life was in the viaduct.

00:17:20.486 --> 00:17:24.100
This is shown here as a consequence
of the viaduct being located on

00:17:24.100 --> 00:17:27.640
soft mud, which amplified ground
motions relative to bedrock.

00:17:27.640 --> 00:17:30.190
Also some reflections
off the lower crust.

00:17:30.190 --> 00:17:33.250
This is also the first implementation
for earthquake early warning for

00:17:33.250 --> 00:17:36.570
Loma Prieta, which gave –
we put sensors near the epicenter

00:17:36.570 --> 00:17:40.460
and gave people working at Caltrans
on the viaduct structure up to

00:17:40.460 --> 00:17:44.290
20 seconds’ lead time for impending
shaking from aftershocks.

00:17:45.102 --> 00:17:48.190
So we’ve learned a lot about Loma –
since Loma Prieta about how

00:17:48.190 --> 00:17:50.400
earthquake rupture processes
affect ground motion.

00:17:50.400 --> 00:17:51.953
We’ve learned
about directivity.

00:17:51.953 --> 00:17:55.310
We’ve learned about 3D structure
effects, especially sedimentary basins.

00:17:55.310 --> 00:17:59.340
We’ve learned about complex
ruptures involving multiple faults.

00:17:59.340 --> 00:18:02.876
And now we do the scenarios
for major earthquakes.

00:18:02.876 --> 00:18:05.900
This is just showing what we’ve
done for the Hayward Fault

00:18:05.900 --> 00:18:08.880
using this 3D model.
It was created over a period of time,

00:18:08.880 --> 00:18:11.590
and it’s still being worked on
very actively in this center

00:18:11.590 --> 00:18:15.280
and other USGS centers
and with collaborators.

00:18:15.280 --> 00:18:19.080
This model here shows ground shaking
as a function of Modified Mercalli

00:18:19.080 --> 00:18:22.680
Intensity along the Hayward Fault
for an anticipated 7.0 earthquake

00:18:22.680 --> 00:18:25.150
starting here and
propagating bilaterally.

00:18:25.150 --> 00:18:29.090
And it takes into account variations
in creep along the fault.

00:18:29.090 --> 00:18:32.500
This HayWired scenario was a very
important product where we used

00:18:32.500 --> 00:18:36.830
ground shaking science, liquefaction,
landsliding, ground shaking,

00:18:36.830 --> 00:18:41.900
and main shock/aftershock fault slip
and afterslip to talk about fire following

00:18:41.900 --> 00:18:45.410
earthquake, impact on lifelines,
structures and codes,

00:18:45.410 --> 00:18:48.824
and interdependencies,
and now recovery and social

00:18:48.824 --> 00:18:54.089
consequences of an earthquake and the
society’s rebounding from that event.

00:18:55.192 --> 00:18:58.080
Fire following earthquake is
an important factor and is considered

00:18:58.080 --> 00:19:03.680
in this scenario and could result
in significant aggravation of losses

00:19:03.680 --> 00:19:07.370
in houses and could have up to
$30 billion in additional damage

00:19:07.370 --> 00:19:11.170
due to fires, depending upon
ignition and winds and other things.

00:19:11.170 --> 00:19:13.730
U.S. National Seismic Hazard Maps
have come a long way since

00:19:13.730 --> 00:19:17.980
Loma Prieta. This is what
we had to work with in 1996.

00:19:17.980 --> 00:19:22.530
Hazard map for U.S. based
on seismicity, basically,

00:19:22.530 --> 00:19:26.246
and fault geometry.
These were replaced in 1996

00:19:26.279 --> 00:19:30.710
by the National Seismic Hazard Maps,
which included geologic slip rates,

00:19:30.710 --> 00:19:34.480
paleoearthquake data, multiple
models for earthquake recurrence,

00:19:34.480 --> 00:19:39.280
ground motion prediction equations,
used spatially smoothed seismicity,

00:19:39.280 --> 00:19:44.440
and various different source zones,
depending upon the geologic province

00:19:44.440 --> 00:19:49.291
and also using more ground
deformation measurements,

00:19:49.291 --> 00:19:53.040
especially in California,
to constrain hazards.

00:19:53.040 --> 00:19:56.084
So this is what the
map looks like today.

00:19:56.122 --> 00:19:58.290
Earthquake probabilities,
as I mentioned, go into this.

00:19:58.290 --> 00:20:01.243
Ground motions,
site amplification.

00:20:01.243 --> 00:20:04.165
Importantly, these maps are used to
set provisions for building codes

00:20:04.165 --> 00:20:08.919
and design earthquake-resistant
structures and insurance rates as well.

00:20:08.919 --> 00:20:12.300
The new release – 2018 –
also includes the effect of sedimentary

00:20:12.300 --> 00:20:14.730
basins for the first time.
And, as you can see, in the

00:20:14.730 --> 00:20:18.891
San Francisco Bay Area, this is looking
at the 5-second spectral acceleration.

00:20:18.928 --> 00:20:22.610
We see an increase in the
East Bay around Walnut Creek.

00:20:22.610 --> 00:20:27.740
Ground motions up to about 10 to 25%.
In the San Jose area, ground motion

00:20:27.740 --> 00:20:32.430
increases up to about 5 to 10%,
depending on frequency, of course.

00:20:32.430 --> 00:20:34.230
And, as I said,
this is for 5 seconds.

00:20:34.230 --> 00:20:38.390
We see most amplification in basins
at long periods in this model.

00:20:38.390 --> 00:20:41.440
Again, there’s an afternoon session
on Wednesday talking about shaking.

00:20:41.440 --> 00:20:43.602
So encourage you to
stay tuned for that.

00:20:43.602 --> 00:20:46.480
Liquefaction susceptibility.
We’ve learned a lot about liquefaction

00:20:46.480 --> 00:20:52.650
since – I’m sorry, since 1989.
We know that liquefaction was

00:20:52.650 --> 00:20:57.300
a big factor in the 1906 earthquake.
This shows some buildings that have

00:20:57.300 --> 00:20:59.573
tilted into their foundations
due to liquefaction.

00:20:59.573 --> 00:21:04.130
We now have liquefaction susceptibility
maps and a map of liquefaction

00:21:04.130 --> 00:21:07.660
potential for San Jose and East Bay
alluvial plains based upon

00:21:07.660 --> 00:21:11.500
cone penetrometer data. And this
shows liquefaction susceptibility.

00:21:11.500 --> 00:21:13.550
Red is very high,
gold is high,

00:21:13.550 --> 00:21:17.869
going down to very low in white,
for the Bay Area.

00:21:17.905 --> 00:21:20.672
An important consequence of the
Loma Prieta earthquake was the

00:21:20.672 --> 00:21:23.770
passing of the Seismic Hazard
Mapping Act of 1990.

00:21:23.770 --> 00:21:27.540
This was passed by
California state legislature.

00:21:27.540 --> 00:21:31.380
It directs the California Geological
Survey to identify map zones that

00:21:31.380 --> 00:21:34.720
are earthquake-prone for
liquefaction and landslides.

00:21:34.720 --> 00:21:38.370
It’s raised the standard of practice
in the geotech engineering

00:21:38.370 --> 00:21:42.429
community throughout the state.
And it also shows the Alquist-Priolo

00:21:42.429 --> 00:21:46.530
Act fault study zones that have to
be avoided and treated specially

00:21:46.530 --> 00:21:50.010
when they
impact developments.

00:21:50.010 --> 00:21:54.280
This is a map of the California
Earthquake Hazard Zone Application,

00:21:54.280 --> 00:21:57.521
which you can basically zoom in on
and look at your parcel, and it’ll tell

00:21:57.521 --> 00:22:00.910
you if you’re close to a fault zone
through Alquist-Priolo Act,

00:22:00.910 --> 00:22:05.090
liquefaction zone, landsliding zone.
If you’re in one of these zones,

00:22:05.090 --> 00:22:07.870
you will have to do site-specific
investigations before you develop

00:22:07.870 --> 00:22:12.669
or subdivide that. And also, you have
to disclose that fact through real estate –

00:22:12.669 --> 00:22:16.780
during real estate transactions.
And last thing I want to mention,

00:22:16.780 --> 00:22:20.370
that a lot of money has
been invested in resiliency

00:22:20.370 --> 00:22:23.310
since Loma Prieta –
73 to $80 billion.

00:22:23.310 --> 00:22:27.040
And a lot of it’s on water,
schools, unreinforced masonry –

00:22:27.040 --> 00:22:29.570
in different counties.
And this has been huge.

00:22:29.570 --> 00:22:33.623
And I encourage you to read Tom
Brocher’s Open-File for more detail.

00:22:33.623 --> 00:22:37.060
So, in closing, it was
a wake-up call for all of us.

00:22:37.060 --> 00:22:40.330
Motivated new research – Loma Prieta
earthquake – and certainly led to

00:22:40.330 --> 00:22:43.153
enhanced monitoring for
better hazard characterization.

00:22:43.153 --> 00:22:45.920
And, for those of us who are scientists,
really brought home the importance

00:22:45.920 --> 00:22:49.680
of our science in reducing the risks,
both by future earthquakes, the need

00:22:49.680 --> 00:22:53.130
to work with engineers, emergency
managers, and others to make sure that

00:22:53.130 --> 00:22:56.767
our science has impact on
saving lives, reducing injuries,

00:22:56.767 --> 00:23:00.203
and increasing societal
resilience. Thank you.

00:23:00.203 --> 00:23:03.799
[Applause]

00:23:07.218 --> 00:23:10.820
- All right. Thanks, Steve.
We’re going to have a discussion

00:23:10.820 --> 00:23:13.000
session at the end,
so we’re just going to move on

00:23:13.000 --> 00:23:16.634
to the next speaker now,
who is Chris Poland.

00:23:16.666 --> 00:23:19.360
Where is Chris?
Oh, there you are.

00:23:19.360 --> 00:23:23.967
Technical advances and remaining
challenges since Loma Prieta.

00:23:29.064 --> 00:23:30.772
- Nice to be here with you.

00:23:30.772 --> 00:23:34.815
I have a hunch I may be the only
structural engineer in the group.

00:23:35.856 --> 00:23:39.750
Excuse me. Mehmet’s here.
Good to see you again.

00:23:39.750 --> 00:23:42.284
I got to get back to my talk.

00:23:45.961 --> 00:23:49.665
I’m not a Mac guy. Can somebody
help me with this, please?

00:23:50.836 --> 00:23:52.967
- [inaudible]

00:23:55.787 --> 00:24:00.880
I’m not a Mac person, either,
but I stumble through this.

00:24:00.880 --> 00:24:04.100
We have a Mac at home.
There you go.

00:24:10.024 --> 00:24:14.246
- Okay. I am a structural engineer,
now retired CEO of Degenkolb

00:24:14.246 --> 00:24:16.454
Engineers out
of San Francisco.

00:24:16.454 --> 00:24:21.080
I’ve spent my entire career in
earthquake engineering as it

00:24:21.080 --> 00:24:24.910
relates to the practice of
building design and evaluation

00:24:24.910 --> 00:24:27.503
and the development of
community resilience.

00:24:27.540 --> 00:24:30.886
So it’s a bit of a different perspective
than what we just heard about,

00:24:30.886 --> 00:24:33.643
though this is all
extraordinarily important to us.

00:24:33.643 --> 00:24:36.640
But I want to – I want to bring to
you the perspective of a practicing

00:24:36.640 --> 00:24:40.880
engineer that has been dedicated
to community resilience but also

00:24:40.880 --> 00:24:44.170
to trying to use the best
earthquake science that you folks

00:24:44.170 --> 00:24:47.980
bring to us in order to
improve what we’re doing.

00:24:47.980 --> 00:24:53.100
I had the good fortune, when I started
with Degenkolb Engineers in 1974,

00:24:53.100 --> 00:24:57.754
to have spent a little bit of time
here just in an exchange program

00:24:57.780 --> 00:25:00.130
with Chris Rojan. Now we’re talking
about – [inaudible] you people hear

00:25:00.130 --> 00:25:04.540
will know these names, I’m sure.
But Henry Degenkolb, my boss and the

00:25:04.540 --> 00:25:08.700
leader of our firm, and Fritz Matthiesen
decided that it would be good for

00:25:08.700 --> 00:25:11.980
Chris Rojan to spend a little bit of time
in the design office and for me to

00:25:11.980 --> 00:25:17.480
spend a little bit of time here just to
try to get some connection going on.

00:25:17.480 --> 00:25:22.179
And that has turned into a lifelong
desire on both of our parts, I think,

00:25:22.179 --> 00:25:25.920
to see the interconnection of earthquake
science and engineering, especially

00:25:25.920 --> 00:25:30.367
as it relates to – especially as it relates
to strong motion and the use of strong

00:25:30.367 --> 00:25:33.170
motion, which we still have,
I must say, as engineers,

00:25:33.170 --> 00:25:38.133
a long ways to go to appreciate
the benefits that we have from that.

00:25:42.110 --> 00:25:46.030
Steve has given you the introduction
about the Loma Prieta earthquake –

00:25:46.030 --> 00:25:50.520
1989. This was a great opportunity
to look back at 30 years and see

00:25:50.520 --> 00:25:54.367
what we’ve accomplished,
and it really is pretty amazing.

00:25:55.990 --> 00:25:58.940
I was 15 years into my
career at the time that this

00:25:58.940 --> 00:26:01.280
Loma Prieta
earthquake occurred.

00:26:01.280 --> 00:26:07.240
I was in a principal-level position.
It was – it was devastating to hit –

00:26:07.240 --> 00:26:10.640
it was the most devastating
earthquake to hit San Francisco.

00:26:10.640 --> 00:26:16.240
The thing that was interesting is that
27,000 buildings were damaged,

00:26:16.240 --> 00:26:20.760
and only 63 people lost their lives.
And I got to tell you that the

00:26:20.760 --> 00:26:24.360
engineering community was feeling
pretty good about what they were doing

00:26:24.360 --> 00:26:26.940
at the time of the earthquake
because of the lack of damage.

00:26:26.940 --> 00:26:31.270
Of course, we really didn’t understand –
and I’m remembering clearly sitting

00:26:31.270 --> 00:26:34.030
in my office when the earthquake
occurred, getting the calls,

00:26:34.030 --> 00:26:38.030
and spending the next year of my
life investigating damaged buildings

00:26:38.030 --> 00:26:39.980
and working on
repairing those.

00:26:39.980 --> 00:26:44.520
And we were continuing to repair
those things through my entire career.

00:26:44.520 --> 00:26:47.750
But it became really important to us,
and we came to understand,

00:26:47.750 --> 00:26:51.059
that what this earthquake showed us
was the vulnerability of our existing

00:26:51.059 --> 00:26:54.420
built environment and the impact
that that has on communities.

00:26:54.420 --> 00:26:58.809
And it’s this whole notion about,
what do you do with the existing

00:26:58.809 --> 00:27:02.420
built environment
that we have.

00:27:02.420 --> 00:27:05.515
I went back to the National
Research Council – that’s a member

00:27:05.515 --> 00:27:09.440
of the National Academy of Science,
Engineering, and Medicine –

00:27:09.440 --> 00:27:13.832
to a group that they brought
together – a symposium in 1993.

00:27:13.832 --> 00:27:17.280
There may be a couple of you here
that participated in that. I don’t know.

00:27:17.280 --> 00:27:23.240
It was a great collection of earthquake
scientists, engineers, and responders.

00:27:23.240 --> 00:27:25.679
In this symposium, they went
through and they said, well,

00:27:25.679 --> 00:27:28.846
what have we learned after three years?
What can we do, and where should

00:27:28.846 --> 00:27:31.483
we head? And I thought
this would be a good anchor.

00:27:31.483 --> 00:27:36.820
I picked out a few things to talk about
that they – that they recommended.

00:27:36.820 --> 00:27:40.580
But they recognized that this
was a very short-duration earthquake

00:27:40.580 --> 00:27:44.207
that lacked in surface
faulting for a magnitude 7.1.

00:27:44.207 --> 00:27:46.154
Kind of sounds like
Ridgecrest, doesn’t it?

00:27:46.154 --> 00:27:48.702
Everybody says a 7.1
is not what’s expected. Okay.

00:27:48.702 --> 00:27:52.830
There’s something there.
Local geology had – we had site factors.

00:27:52.830 --> 00:27:56.450
We understood about site factors.
And we were building that into our

00:27:56.450 --> 00:27:59.650
design, but we weren’t – we weren’t
building it in in a way that was

00:27:59.650 --> 00:28:02.809
the most significant, nor did
we recognize how that changed

00:28:02.809 --> 00:28:08.140
the risk to a particular site, when you
have to consider the site factors.

00:28:08.140 --> 00:28:11.880
We recognized and concluded that the
mandatory state legislation that was

00:28:11.880 --> 00:28:15.930
out there that had to do with schools –
that came from 1933, the unreinforced

00:28:15.930 --> 00:28:18.490
masonry schools, and they had
been completely taken out

00:28:18.490 --> 00:28:24.660
of the inventory by then.
And hospitals – in a – it was 519.

00:28:24.660 --> 00:28:28.270
Came after the San Fernando
earthquake requiring California’s

00:28:28.270 --> 00:28:32.960
hospitals to be constructed to higher
standards and to remain functional.

00:28:32.960 --> 00:28:38.451
That all happened before Loma Prieta.
And the work that that had

00:28:38.451 --> 00:28:42.070
accomplished was demonstrated.
And we took good credit, I believe,

00:28:42.070 --> 00:28:46.290
and assurance that we
were in the right direction.

00:28:46.290 --> 00:28:48.984
We recognized that that there was
an urgent need to pay attention to

00:28:48.984 --> 00:28:52.809
our unreinforced masonry buildings,
and that led into a number of programs

00:28:52.809 --> 00:28:56.620
into the nonductile
concrete buildings and bridges.

00:28:56.620 --> 00:28:59.510
The other thing that was recognized,
I think, for one of the first times,

00:28:59.510 --> 00:29:03.560
is the economic and social
impact this had on our communities.

00:29:03.560 --> 00:29:06.630
And there was quite a bit of research
that was done – continues to be done –

00:29:06.630 --> 00:29:09.820
try to understand that.
And so much is going on now

00:29:09.820 --> 00:29:13.730
to try to take that – what we were
learning there and what we recognized

00:29:13.730 --> 00:29:17.100
there and how that affects community
recovery and build that into the

00:29:17.100 --> 00:29:21.067
community resilience planning
programs that are going on today.

00:29:21.626 --> 00:29:23.910
Symposium came up with
40 recommendations.

00:29:23.910 --> 00:29:27.049
You can see them here,
and I want to just grab a few

00:29:27.049 --> 00:29:30.150
of these recommendations.
The general recommendations

00:29:30.150 --> 00:29:32.540
really were a stern warning to
the engineering profession,

00:29:32.540 --> 00:29:36.990
I believe, that we’re not okay.
We have not got this under control.

00:29:36.990 --> 00:29:39.820
And, boy, 1994 Northridge
told us that again.

00:29:39.820 --> 00:29:45.260
It’s not enough to just save lives
when our communities can’t recover.

00:29:45.260 --> 00:29:47.309
Community recovery
is very, very localized.

00:29:47.309 --> 00:29:50.799
It has to do with a small area.
And that has to be taken care of.

00:29:50.799 --> 00:29:54.690
It has to recognize the impact
we’re having – that our existing

00:29:54.690 --> 00:29:57.830
built environment has on it.
There were things to be learned

00:29:57.830 --> 00:30:02.016
about engineering and – geotechnical
engineering and structural engineering.

00:30:02.016 --> 00:30:04.290
And we’ll talk a
little bit about that.

00:30:04.290 --> 00:30:07.833
And then, of course, planning
and emergency response.

00:30:09.110 --> 00:30:12.889
Steve showed you the picture of
Algermissen and Perkins map.

00:30:12.889 --> 00:30:16.354
What I’ve got next to it there is
what we were using in 1985

00:30:16.354 --> 00:30:20.270
in the Uniform Building Code
for our design values map.

00:30:20.270 --> 00:30:24.230
Maybe you’ve seen this thing.
Maybe you haven’t. It has four zones.

00:30:24.230 --> 00:30:27.590
The engineers drew this thing all
by themselves because they really

00:30:27.590 --> 00:30:31.797
didn’t have a good connection to
the earthquake science community,

00:30:31.797 --> 00:30:36.900
even though Ted Algermissen said, hey,
come along in ’76, and gave us a map.

00:30:36.900 --> 00:30:41.580
His map said that the ground shaking
was upwards of 60% g acceleration.

00:30:41.580 --> 00:30:46.940
And the engineers were using
10% g to design their buildings.

00:30:46.940 --> 00:30:51.860
And the differences between 10% g
and 60% g was unfathomable.

00:30:51.860 --> 00:30:55.390
And the engineers didn’t understand
why he could ever suggest such a thing.

00:30:55.390 --> 00:30:59.092
And the reality is, they were completely
talking about different things.

00:30:59.092 --> 00:31:02.760
Engineers were talking about what
they had calculated to be the strength

00:31:02.760 --> 00:31:05.910
of buildings that had behaved well
in earthquakes, thinking they

00:31:05.910 --> 00:31:08.996
were the largest earthquakes.
And the 1906 earthquake was one of

00:31:08.996 --> 00:31:12.320
the key benchmarks that they had used.
And buildings that had a strength in

00:31:12.320 --> 00:31:16.135
the 3 to 4% range, that means
their lateral strength – the way that

00:31:16.135 --> 00:31:23.165
they calculated that, that strength
was equal to 3 or 4% of its weight.

00:31:23.165 --> 00:31:25.190
And that’s what they
termed as acceleration.

00:31:25.190 --> 00:31:30.070
And when the scientifically generated
acceleration maps came along and

00:31:30.070 --> 00:31:34.850
said 60% g, we couldn’t get there, and it
was rejected, honestly. It was rejected.

00:31:34.850 --> 00:31:38.190
After Loma Prieta, one of the
things that I testified and –

00:31:38.190 --> 00:31:40.510
invited to a field hearing.
one of the things that I testified

00:31:40.510 --> 00:31:42.730
is that we really
had this discrepancy,

00:31:42.730 --> 00:31:44.179
and we needed to do
something about that.

00:31:44.179 --> 00:31:47.730
We needed to get the engineers and
the scientists in the same room.

00:31:47.730 --> 00:31:50.860
The engineers needed to understand
how important it was to have

00:31:50.860 --> 00:31:55.070
a scientifically defendable map.
And the scientists needed to understand

00:31:55.070 --> 00:31:59.030
that we had to think about how we were
thinking about our building designs and

00:31:59.030 --> 00:32:02.590
how those two things came together.
There’s a whole story there that

00:32:02.590 --> 00:32:05.960
could be told, but I won’t tell it.
We now have maps.

00:32:05.960 --> 00:32:09.903
The wonderful thing is, is you can
go to the website, as Steve mentioned,

00:32:09.903 --> 00:32:13.300
and you can put in your lat/long,
or your address for that matter,

00:32:13.300 --> 00:32:15.756
and it’ll tell you
your spectral acceleration.

00:32:15.756 --> 00:32:18.083
It’ll tell you your
peak ground acceleration.

00:32:18.083 --> 00:32:22.549
And that’s all terrific. And that’s all
built into the building codes now.

00:32:22.549 --> 00:32:25.450
We’re doing a much better job.
We figured out how to interlace

00:32:25.450 --> 00:32:28.429
these two things so that
the designs make sense.

00:32:28.429 --> 00:32:31.848
Though you may know, or you may
not know, that it drives engineers crazy

00:32:31.848 --> 00:32:35.151
every time you change those values.
And when you – when you’re reporting

00:32:35.151 --> 00:32:39.419
them on a lot-by-lot basis, every time
you change those values, you might say,

00:32:39.419 --> 00:32:44.689
oh, it’s only 10 or 20%, you tell me I
got to make my building 20% stronger.

00:32:44.689 --> 00:32:48.800
That’s a big deal. And if it no longer
meets the code, that’s a big deal.

00:32:48.800 --> 00:32:53.169
And the issue is is that the buildings
you’re building to resist the earthquake

00:32:53.169 --> 00:32:57.240
doesn’t necessarily relate directly to
that change in ground motion shaking,

00:32:57.240 --> 00:33:01.370
as I hope you’ll pick up as I go along.
There’s plenty for us to learn there

00:33:01.370 --> 00:33:05.040
as we really fully understand the
characteristics of the earthquake as

00:33:05.040 --> 00:33:11.510
they relate to the – as they relate
to the building performance.

00:33:11.510 --> 00:33:15.970
The presence now that we have of
liquefaction, landslide, and faulting

00:33:15.970 --> 00:33:19.780
maps is extraordinarily important.
We are moving into an era –

00:33:19.780 --> 00:33:22.280
and you’ll hear me talk about this –
we’re moving into an era where

00:33:22.280 --> 00:33:25.530
we’re talking about community
resilience and communities’ ability

00:33:25.530 --> 00:33:29.020
to recover. The communities’ ability
to understand where their

00:33:29.020 --> 00:33:33.429
most vulnerable buildings are.
Their most vulnerable buildings

00:33:33.429 --> 00:33:37.130
and the ones that can be damaged
can dramatically affect their ability

00:33:37.130 --> 00:33:40.110
to recover are sitting
on the bad soil sites.

00:33:40.110 --> 00:33:45.521
Or they’re sitting alongside the fault.
Or they’re sitting in landslide zones.

00:33:45.521 --> 00:33:49.356
Property owners generally cannot
afford or don’t want to spend the

00:33:49.356 --> 00:33:52.481
money to have detailed studies
done about whether their site

00:33:52.481 --> 00:33:56.309
has liquefaction potential,
landslide potential, or if they –

00:33:56.309 --> 00:33:59.030
they want to trench their
site to see if they have a fault.

00:33:59.030 --> 00:34:01.299
So it’s extremely important
that we have these maps.

00:34:01.299 --> 00:34:03.990
We’re developing techniques.
The maps are getting better.

00:34:03.990 --> 00:34:07.020
They’re becoming more street
level, that we can see them.

00:34:07.020 --> 00:34:10.550
That’s extremely important.
The thing is, we need these maps.

00:34:10.550 --> 00:34:15.179
Every community needs these maps
in a general sense in order to do

00:34:15.179 --> 00:34:19.960
their community resilience planning.
This is not the – this is not the great

00:34:19.960 --> 00:34:23.940
work of earthquake science, I’m sure.
Though earthquake science will lead us

00:34:23.940 --> 00:34:26.623
to the techniques that are necessary
so we can have the computers

00:34:26.670 --> 00:34:29.109
draw the maps for us,
and we can get the information

00:34:29.109 --> 00:34:33.970
at the ground level that
is so desperately needed.

00:34:33.970 --> 00:34:36.459
The National Research Council
recommendations said that we

00:34:36.484 --> 00:34:40.969
needed to develop on-time, real-time
monitoring systems capable of

00:34:40.969 --> 00:34:44.730
producing intensity maps for use
in emergency response planning

00:34:44.730 --> 00:34:48.470
and execution.
And this has been just dramatic.

00:34:48.470 --> 00:34:52.746
Loma Prieta – that map that sits over
on the – on the left-hand side there,

00:34:52.746 --> 00:34:55.550
I just remember – I remember
seeing that within a little while

00:34:55.550 --> 00:34:57.848
after the earthquake occurred,
and we knew where the fault was.

00:34:57.873 --> 00:35:00.354
We knew where the epicenter was.
We knew that it ruptured in

00:35:00.354 --> 00:35:03.762
both directions. And we knew
that there was building damage,

00:35:03.802 --> 00:35:07.640
as Steve had explained,
but it didn’t make a lot of sense.

00:35:07.640 --> 00:35:10.130
My experience was in San Jose
the night of the earthquake.

00:35:10.130 --> 00:35:13.580
I went down there to investigate
at Kaiser Hospital that we had

00:35:13.580 --> 00:35:15.660
been studying. We were
doing a lot of work for Kaiser.

00:35:15.660 --> 00:35:19.349
And my partners and I spread out across
the Bay Area to look at these hospitals

00:35:19.349 --> 00:35:22.490
to make sure that they were safe
to continue providing service.

00:35:22.490 --> 00:35:26.299
And I had no idea – I thought I was
driving into the epicentral area.

00:35:26.299 --> 00:35:30.240
I had no idea what I was driving into.
The reality is – and, of course,

00:35:30.240 --> 00:35:34.630
today I would know that that
particular site only experienced 10% g.

00:35:34.630 --> 00:35:38.930
Recorded acceleration.
And all the reasons why that occurred.

00:35:38.930 --> 00:35:43.250
But the reality is is the fact that we
now have ShakeMaps, that we can

00:35:43.250 --> 00:35:47.894
tell how strong the shaking is in
a moment has a huge impact on

00:35:47.894 --> 00:35:51.980
engineers’ ability to respond and look
for damage and determine whether

00:35:51.980 --> 00:35:55.970
a building has been damaged because
it’s poorly constructed and it shouldn’t

00:35:55.970 --> 00:35:59.690
have been damaged, or it has really
received extremely strong shaking.

00:35:59.690 --> 00:36:02.450
That makes a big difference
to understand that.

00:36:02.450 --> 00:36:07.520
Having the ShakeMaps available to
us now is huge to be able to do that.

00:36:07.520 --> 00:36:10.950
The other thing that the program
has brought us with the monitoring

00:36:10.950 --> 00:36:15.020
for strong motion instrumentation
is we now have strong motion records

00:36:15.020 --> 00:36:17.411
by the hundreds of thousands.
And that’s wonderful.

00:36:17.411 --> 00:36:20.580
Back in the days when all
we had was 1940 El Centro,

00:36:20.580 --> 00:36:23.110
everybody acted like that’s
what earthquakes looked like.

00:36:23.110 --> 00:36:26.299
And that’s the not the case.
And, in fact, the duration,

00:36:26.299 --> 00:36:30.619
the waveform, the frequency content,
the intensity, the number of repeated

00:36:30.619 --> 00:36:35.260
cycles of strong shaking all bear
directly on how a building performs,

00:36:35.260 --> 00:36:40.612
and that information is now coming
to us, and it’s extremely important.

00:36:40.612 --> 00:36:43.500
Over to Ridgecrest.
This is – this is really [chuckles]

00:36:43.500 --> 00:36:47.700
delightful for me.
I visited the sites of damaging

00:36:47.700 --> 00:36:51.090
earthquakes over my entire career –
dozens and dozens of them.

00:36:51.090 --> 00:36:54.640
And now that we have this kind of
information, it’s spectacular.

00:36:54.640 --> 00:36:57.310
I don’t run after earthquakes anymore.
I get on my computer and look

00:36:57.310 --> 00:37:00.599
at the information that
you folks provide to us.

00:37:00.599 --> 00:37:03.840
But, you know, it’s still not being
used by the engineers, and that’s

00:37:03.840 --> 00:37:06.750
what bothers me so much. We had –
we had the Ridgecrest earthquake.

00:37:06.750 --> 00:37:10.479
We had a ShakeMap that told us
that we had two significant hotspots

00:37:10.479 --> 00:37:13.480
at both ends of the fault.
When you look about building damage,

00:37:13.480 --> 00:37:16.740
you can’t – you can’t talk about
the whole area. You’ve got to talk

00:37:16.740 --> 00:37:19.937
about what’s going on in particular
sites and how that [inaudible].

00:37:19.937 --> 00:37:23.730
And when you look at the waveforms
at the – just over this short area,

00:37:23.730 --> 00:37:25.858
look at the waveforms
that we were able to record.

00:37:25.858 --> 00:37:29.321
They have a – there’s a significant
difference in those waveforms

00:37:29.321 --> 00:37:31.502
and how – the impact that
they’ll have on buildings.

00:37:31.502 --> 00:37:34.640
And so, when we were talking about
community resilience and predicting

00:37:34.640 --> 00:37:37.760
damage, we need to understand
what’s causing the damage

00:37:37.760 --> 00:37:40.450
and be able to predict it.
We’ve got to understand how

00:37:40.450 --> 00:37:44.160
the waveforms are really
affecting particular structures.

00:37:44.160 --> 00:37:48.555
And every structure type –
there’s, like, 13, 15, 20 types,

00:37:48.555 --> 00:37:51.790
depending on how you like to count –
responds differently to these

00:37:51.790 --> 00:37:54.690
waveforms. And that’s what’s
so important about understanding

00:37:54.690 --> 00:37:56.940
where those come from.
And I understand that there’s

00:37:56.940 --> 00:37:59.900
a huge amount of uncertainty
in predicting that.

00:37:59.900 --> 00:38:04.340
The National Research Council
said that practicing professionals

00:38:04.340 --> 00:38:06.890
need to know more about bridge
and building performance

00:38:06.890 --> 00:38:10.445
during earthquakes with
the use of instrumentation.

00:38:10.445 --> 00:38:13.080
As Steve showed, that the
instrumentation programs are there.

00:38:13.080 --> 00:38:15.550
We’re instrumenting buildings.
The California state program

00:38:15.550 --> 00:38:18.200
is instrumenting buildings.
We’re instrumenting buildings

00:38:18.200 --> 00:38:21.099
under ANSS nationwide.
This is all terrific.

00:38:21.099 --> 00:38:25.780
This particular building in Watsonville
recorded the Loma Prieta earthquake.

00:38:25.780 --> 00:38:29.040
It had been instrumented, as you can
see there, with a few instruments

00:38:29.040 --> 00:38:33.480
that would help show us what the mode
shapes were and how much torsion

00:38:33.480 --> 00:38:37.042
there was and how much uplift it was.
It’s a four-story reinforced concrete

00:38:37.042 --> 00:38:41.790
shear wall building.
Extraordinarily strong, solid building.

00:38:41.790 --> 00:38:47.160
It was designed, actually, by the
people at Degenkolb before I got there

00:38:47.160 --> 00:38:50.320
as a telephone exchange building.
And they knew that if they made it

00:38:50.320 --> 00:38:55.141
solid and strong that it would be
able to withstand all the

00:38:55.141 --> 00:38:59.050
earthquakes that it needed to.
We’ve been through a lot of that.

00:38:59.050 --> 00:39:04.512
The records that came through
clearly showed the kind of

00:39:04.512 --> 00:39:08.010
performance that we expected.
The thing that was so surprising

00:39:08.010 --> 00:39:11.288
about this, which really changed the
course of a little piece of earthquake

00:39:11.288 --> 00:39:16.590
engineering, was the amount of strong
shaking that the building experienced

00:39:16.590 --> 00:39:20.270
over time and how that related to
some rapid seismic analysis

00:39:20.270 --> 00:39:24.720
procedures that were being –
that we were all using to decide

00:39:24.720 --> 00:39:27.950
when a building was going to
be unacceptably damaged.

00:39:27.950 --> 00:39:31.359
And that procedure said, this building,
given this ground shaking, should have

00:39:31.359 --> 00:39:34.950
been unacceptably damaged,
and it wasn’t. It wasn’t even close.

00:39:34.950 --> 00:39:37.119
And that caused a dramatic
change in that procedure.

00:39:37.119 --> 00:39:40.290
And it’s really – this kind of
an experience has really moved us

00:39:40.290 --> 00:39:43.810
away from considering just the
response spectrum, peak ground

00:39:43.810 --> 00:39:46.560
acceleration first, then we start
[inaudible] spectral [inaudible].

00:39:46.560 --> 00:39:50.369
Now we’re looking at the time
history records as a way of

00:39:50.369 --> 00:39:53.667
better understanding how our
buildings are going to perform.

00:39:53.667 --> 00:39:56.654
You remember I said that the
whole thing is about understanding

00:39:56.654 --> 00:40:00.110
how the existing built environment
is going to behave.

00:40:00.110 --> 00:40:05.990
And that understanding requires us
to get a real close look at what causes

00:40:05.990 --> 00:40:10.190
a building to be damaged or not.
We’re going to – one of the reasons

00:40:10.190 --> 00:40:13.580
I think we have so much trouble
advancing our earthquake mitigation

00:40:13.580 --> 00:40:18.110
programs – again, on the building
infrastructure side, is it costs too much.

00:40:18.110 --> 00:40:22.920
It’s just – communities look at this,
and it just – they see billions of dollars.

00:40:22.920 --> 00:40:26.609
And, as we can use better Earth
science, better engineering,

00:40:26.609 --> 00:40:30.349
better interconnection, better analysis
procedures, we’ve got better tools –

00:40:30.349 --> 00:40:34.450
as we can do that to get the price down,
to be able to pinpoint where we really

00:40:34.450 --> 00:40:38.220
need to work, that’s going
to make a huge difference.

00:40:38.220 --> 00:40:41.020
The National Research Council
recommended that practicing

00:40:41.020 --> 00:40:45.030
professionals need to develop refined
techniques consistent with historic

00:40:45.030 --> 00:40:48.680
behavior of structures for designing
new and retrofitting existing

00:40:48.680 --> 00:40:52.570
buildings and informing owners
of the expected performance.

00:40:52.570 --> 00:40:56.940
1989 we said that. We’re still
saying that today. [laughs]

00:40:56.940 --> 00:40:59.590
I wish I could say we
were getting it done.

00:40:59.590 --> 00:41:04.349
This whole notion of being able to
design and retrofit buildings

00:41:04.349 --> 00:41:07.770
for an expected performance
has been around for a long time.

00:41:07.770 --> 00:41:10.869
Some firms like ours
were doing this.

00:41:10.869 --> 00:41:13.420
Most firms were not doing it,
either because they didn’t know how

00:41:13.420 --> 00:41:16.540
or they were afraid to do it because
they didn’t want to talk about it.

00:41:16.540 --> 00:41:20.910
After the 1994 Northridge earthquake,
that kind of pushed us even farther

00:41:20.910 --> 00:41:25.109
as a profession and said, we’ve
got to get this under control.

00:41:25.109 --> 00:41:28.990
We had friends at the national level that
money came available to the structural

00:41:28.990 --> 00:41:32.730
engineers to write down what
we’ve been talking about for years.

00:41:32.730 --> 00:41:35.800
And that’s, what is performance-based
seismic engineering?

00:41:35.800 --> 00:41:39.020
We called it Vision 2000.
Because we’re engineers,

00:41:39.020 --> 00:41:41.560
and we understand what causes
buildings to be damaged.

00:41:41.560 --> 00:41:44.256
There’s really five
pieces to this puzzle.

00:41:44.291 --> 00:41:46.831
First, you’ve got to set out
what you expect to have happen.

00:41:46.831 --> 00:41:49.398
That’s the first part of
performance-based engineering.

00:41:49.398 --> 00:41:51.520
And that is, do you want the
building to just save people,

00:41:51.520 --> 00:41:54.760
or do you want it to remain
functional, or something in between.

00:41:54.760 --> 00:41:57.102
You’ve got to develop and
verify your conceptual design.

00:41:57.102 --> 00:42:00.500
You know, when you start from
scratch as a designer, you’ve got

00:42:00.500 --> 00:42:03.730
a blank piece of paper.
The way that building is going to

00:42:03.730 --> 00:42:08.931
behave has an awful lot to do with
how it’s built and how it’s configured

00:42:08.931 --> 00:42:11.360
and where’s it located,
what kind of foundation it has.

00:42:11.360 --> 00:42:14.050
And all that happens
at the conceptual stage.

00:42:14.050 --> 00:42:16.171
That has to be thought of
in the beginning.

00:42:16.171 --> 00:42:19.240
Then you’ve got to design the thing
and draw it and specify it and verify it,

00:42:19.240 --> 00:42:22.113
do the structural and non-structural,
the contents, the utilities.

00:42:22.113 --> 00:42:24.550
You’ve got to do that whole,
big package, where most of the

00:42:24.550 --> 00:42:27.850
interest is in people, when they want
to talk about building performance.

00:42:27.850 --> 00:42:30.604
But then, one of the most important
things is you’ve got to get the

00:42:30.604 --> 00:42:34.720
thing constructed properly.
It has to be designed properly,

00:42:34.720 --> 00:42:37.640
and it has to be inspected
while it’s being constructed.

00:42:37.640 --> 00:42:40.433
I can’t tell you how many times we’ve
gone to earthquakes and seen damage,

00:42:40.433 --> 00:42:43.367
and we said that there’s
a construction problem here.

00:42:43.367 --> 00:42:46.450
Or there’s a design problem here
that should have been taken care of.

00:42:46.450 --> 00:42:48.737
And then the building
has to be maintained.

00:42:48.737 --> 00:42:54.570
Vision 2000 introduced this idea –
or, I should say, cataloged the idea

00:42:54.570 --> 00:42:57.820
that there were performance
levels that we could strive for.

00:42:57.820 --> 00:43:00.933
The bottom was collapse.
Collapse means collapse,

00:43:00.933 --> 00:43:04.371
and it falls down, pancake,
everybody loses their lives.

00:43:04.371 --> 00:43:07.760
Near collapse is a building
that you’re trapped inside of

00:43:07.760 --> 00:43:11.594
that you can’t get out of.
If you’ve dropped, covered, and held,

00:43:11.594 --> 00:43:13.660
and you’re lucky that nothing
fell on you, you’re going to

00:43:13.660 --> 00:43:15.820
still be alive, but you’ve
got to be rescued.

00:43:15.820 --> 00:43:18.260
Life safe means that you’re safe
inside that building and able to

00:43:18.260 --> 00:43:21.650
get out on your own power.
Immediate occupancy means the

00:43:21.650 --> 00:43:25.960
building can – you can go back into it.
You may not be able to use it, but you

00:43:25.960 --> 00:43:28.530
can at least get in it and start
repairing it so you can get it

00:43:28.530 --> 00:43:31.720
back to some level of usability.
And then operational says it’s

00:43:31.720 --> 00:43:35.380
fully usable, just as if the
earthquake hadn’t happened.

00:43:35.380 --> 00:43:38.490
Those performance levels make
sense, and they’re a continuum.

00:43:38.490 --> 00:43:41.340
We’re can strive toward those.
We made those names up

00:43:41.340 --> 00:43:44.480
all by ourselves, and they didn’t –
they didn’t resonate very well

00:43:44.480 --> 00:43:46.099
with the communities.

00:43:46.135 --> 00:43:49.140
Because they didn’t really touch
what the community was interested in.

00:43:49.140 --> 00:43:52.588
Honestly, they never really understood
what all those terms meant.

00:43:52.588 --> 00:43:55.946
I must say that most of my fellow
structural engineers didn’t fully

00:43:55.946 --> 00:43:59.560
understand what all those terms meant.
But it started a process.

00:43:59.560 --> 00:44:04.869
And this is – this came out of
Loma Prieta and Northridge.

00:44:05.383 --> 00:44:10.940
That performance – taking that
process and bringing it to California,

00:44:10.940 --> 00:44:15.710
installing performance-based design,
those principles, into our building

00:44:15.710 --> 00:44:22.740
codes started after that happened.
In 1985, before Loma Prieta, our

00:44:22.740 --> 00:44:27.589
Uniform Building Code was based on,
like I said, 10% g with some variation.

00:44:27.589 --> 00:44:30.192
But it was based on
prescriptive requirements.

00:44:30.192 --> 00:44:33.190
You followed the requirements,
and the building would perform.

00:44:33.190 --> 00:44:36.550
There was no explicit
promise of performance.

00:44:36.550 --> 00:44:40.140
Though there was – the engineers
talked among ourselves, and we talked

00:44:40.140 --> 00:44:42.390
about how our buildings
were going to perform.

00:44:42.390 --> 00:44:45.849
The fact that they would be safe,
that they would be – most of them

00:44:45.849 --> 00:44:49.700
would be repairable and usable,
but that was just never talked about

00:44:49.700 --> 00:44:52.645
in the – in the
public sector.

00:44:52.645 --> 00:44:56.890
By 2019, we had gone from
a Uniform Building Code

00:44:56.890 --> 00:44:59.750
to the California Building Code
with many iterations.

00:44:59.750 --> 00:45:03.240
It’s now developed by the
State of California, and it’s adopted

00:45:03.240 --> 00:45:06.150
locally with amendments.
So each local community adopts

00:45:06.150 --> 00:45:09.308
the code with their own amendments
if they want to have amendments,

00:45:09.308 --> 00:45:13.510
but the code is written by the state.
It’s based on a national model code,

00:45:13.510 --> 00:45:18.089
and it’s written by engineers that come
together – a few – a few Earth scientists

00:45:18.089 --> 00:45:22.480
that are willing to weigh in with the
engineers, which is very important.

00:45:22.480 --> 00:45:26.450
But the International Code Council
puts this together with the

00:45:26.450 --> 00:45:29.609
building officials in the end.
And it’s based on standards

00:45:29.609 --> 00:45:32.870
that are written by engineers.
Now I want to emphasize that

00:45:32.870 --> 00:45:35.849
[chuckles], because, when you
get right down to who’s deciding

00:45:35.849 --> 00:45:38.913
how we’re going to build our buildings
or how we’re going to do our lifeline

00:45:38.913 --> 00:45:43.410
systems, and what’s the acceptable
level of risk, it falls to the earthquake

00:45:43.410 --> 00:45:47.740
science professionals to do that.
And that’s good.

00:45:47.740 --> 00:45:51.480
That’s a nice place to be, but we –
this process says that we have to

00:45:51.480 --> 00:45:54.589
agree on what we’re going to do.
And it’s a very lengthy process

00:45:54.589 --> 00:45:57.830
you go through to make
sure that we’re agreeing.

00:45:57.830 --> 00:46:01.310
But it means we have to speak
with one voice at the end of the day.

00:46:01.310 --> 00:46:05.400
And it really is a challenge to all of us –
and I’m not complaining about anybody

00:46:05.400 --> 00:46:08.780
[laughs] – it’s a challenge to all
of us to understand the big picture,

00:46:08.780 --> 00:46:11.900
understand what we’re all contributing,
and really work towards speaking

00:46:11.900 --> 00:46:15.589
with this common voice.
Where this really – where this

00:46:15.589 --> 00:46:20.160
really lands a lot is in the
hazard levels that we design to.

00:46:20.160 --> 00:46:24.533
Traditionally, we’ve designed to
a 475-year or 500-year earthquake.

00:46:24.533 --> 00:46:26.940
The code talks about
a 2,500-year earthquake.

00:46:26.940 --> 00:46:29.390
We like to talk about lots of
different kinds of things and

00:46:29.390 --> 00:46:32.339
how that’s going to change.
But to the – to the policymakers

00:46:32.339 --> 00:46:37.650
and the code writers, we need to agree
that there are times we want to use that

00:46:37.650 --> 00:46:41.148
2,500-year earthquake and times we
want to use that 500-year earthquake.

00:46:41.148 --> 00:46:42.747
That’s what the
community has agreed to.

00:46:42.747 --> 00:46:44.401
That’s what we
need to hang on to.

00:46:44.401 --> 00:46:48.000
The two standards that are used
in the building code are ASCE-7

00:46:48.000 --> 00:46:52.050
and ASCE-41.
7 is for new construction,

00:46:52.050 --> 00:46:55.690
and it defines performance today
in four risk categories and

00:46:55.690 --> 00:46:58.940
designated occupancies. So it still
doesn’t describe performance.

00:46:58.940 --> 00:47:03.120
It just says
Risk Category 1, 2, 3, and 4.

00:47:03.120 --> 00:47:08.050
That doesn’t help us too much.
ASCE-41 really has grown up and

00:47:08.050 --> 00:47:12.950
been based on the principles of
Vision 2000 and gives us the

00:47:12.950 --> 00:47:17.070
performance levels that we talked about.
All new buildings must conform

00:47:17.070 --> 00:47:21.859
to the California Building Code.
Existing buildings – and this is

00:47:21.859 --> 00:47:24.687
extremely important, and maybe
you understand this, but existing

00:47:24.687 --> 00:47:28.970
buildings do not need to conform.
They only need to conform to the

00:47:28.970 --> 00:47:31.861
code provisions under
which they were designed.

00:47:31.861 --> 00:47:36.520
And that means that, since I believe
that our codes are really getting to

00:47:36.520 --> 00:47:40.890
where we’re in a pretty decent place
with buildings in the late ’80s, early

00:47:40.890 --> 00:47:44.680
‘90s, anything that was built before that
doesn’t meet that standard, and is

00:47:44.680 --> 00:47:48.630
going to be the source of the problem.
And when we talk about damaging

00:47:48.630 --> 00:47:52.910
earthquakes, we’ve got to take a look
at when the building was built.

00:47:52.910 --> 00:47:55.960
Is it a non-conforming building that
we knew was a problem, or is it

00:47:55.960 --> 00:47:59.392
a new building that we are really
surprised at what’s happened?

00:47:59.392 --> 00:48:02.820
And what we’re finding is that it’s the
old buildings that are the problem, and

00:48:02.820 --> 00:48:07.000
we’ve got to continue to point to that
and not continue to act like there’s

00:48:07.000 --> 00:48:09.790
something wrong with how we’re
designing our new buildings.

00:48:12.421 --> 00:48:16.567
Hopefully, ASCE-7, the new building
design standard, is going to declare

00:48:16.567 --> 00:48:19.067
performance by 2030.
Now, remember, in 1989,

00:48:19.067 --> 00:48:22.773
the NRC got together and said,
you guys need to do this right away

00:48:22.773 --> 00:48:25.690
because you’re not telling the
owners what’s going to happen.

00:48:25.690 --> 00:48:29.810
And this is a particular pet peeve
of mine, as you can tell.

00:48:29.810 --> 00:48:32.440
The new building code’s not
going there, and it’s not going there

00:48:32.440 --> 00:48:35.690
for a long time.
ASCE-41 is already there.

00:48:35.690 --> 00:48:39.730
It grew up since 1984
going through different steps.

00:48:39.730 --> 00:48:44.890
The most important thing that I can
say is it provides three tiers of seismic

00:48:44.890 --> 00:48:48.670
evaluation and retrofits, so we can
talk about how existing buildings

00:48:48.670 --> 00:48:52.520
are going to perform. I’ve got a quick
example I wanted to show you.

00:48:52.520 --> 00:48:56.050
One of my projects down at Stanford
University that illustrates those three –

00:48:56.050 --> 00:48:59.530
those three tiers of –
those three levels of evaluation.

00:48:59.530 --> 00:49:01.599
Just a little structural
engineering for you.

00:49:01.599 --> 00:49:04.620
This is the Mitchell Earth Science
Building. You may recognize it.

00:49:04.620 --> 00:49:06.750
This was before it was
seismically retrofitted.

00:49:06.750 --> 00:49:09.020
Went through the
Loma Prieta earthquake.

00:49:09.020 --> 00:49:14.250
Experienced some cracking.
Went under evaluation.

00:49:14.250 --> 00:49:19.230
It’s a four-story building that has
this very tall third story, which is

00:49:19.230 --> 00:49:24.291
the library area of the building.
And its first-tier analysis is

00:49:24.291 --> 00:49:27.290
a deficiency-based analysis.
We look at the building, and we

00:49:27.290 --> 00:49:32.423
figure out what its deficiencies are
in terms of structural characteristics.

00:49:32.452 --> 00:49:34.327
This is a concrete
moment frame building.

00:49:34.358 --> 00:49:38.630
It has a list of potential deficiencies.
And, in Tier 1, you decide

00:49:38.630 --> 00:49:41.609
which ones matter.
In this case, it was a soft story,

00:49:41.609 --> 00:49:44.250
shear stress check –
that’s how strong the building is,

00:49:44.250 --> 00:49:48.080
and the nonductile concrete detailing,
which is how much reinforcing seal

00:49:48.080 --> 00:49:50.891
is in the beams and
columns and the joints.

00:49:50.891 --> 00:49:54.910
The linear elastic analysis that you
use in Tier 2, which is basically

00:49:54.910 --> 00:49:59.060
what we’re doing with the code today –
the linear elastic analysis would

00:49:59.060 --> 00:50:02.556
recommend that we add all those
purple shear walls to the building.

00:50:02.556 --> 00:50:07.137
That’s to get the building to be strong
enough to match those techniques,

00:50:07.137 --> 00:50:10.590
to get the building to be strong enough.
It would have a huge impact on

00:50:10.590 --> 00:50:13.964
the use of the building.
Visually, it would be awful.

00:50:13.964 --> 00:50:16.450
And nobody would really want
to do it, and it costs a lot of money.

00:50:16.450 --> 00:50:20.960
That’s the simple story.
The thing we did after that –

00:50:20.960 --> 00:50:23.830
and we were early adopters in this.
This has now become very

00:50:23.830 --> 00:50:27.060
commonplace, is do the Tier 3
analysis where you go through

00:50:27.060 --> 00:50:30.130
and you do a nonlinear analysis.
And it’s really a displacement-based

00:50:30.130 --> 00:50:34.260
analysis. And, in the displacement-
based analysis, instead of deciding

00:50:34.260 --> 00:50:37.800
how strong the building is and
how much it would displace,

00:50:37.800 --> 00:50:41.954
you focus on how much it will
actually displace using a time history,

00:50:41.954 --> 00:50:46.200
response history, or a
pseudo-response history analysis.

00:50:46.200 --> 00:50:48.130
How far is it
going to deflect?

00:50:48.130 --> 00:50:52.230
And can I handle that level of deflection
with the kind of building that I have?

00:50:52.230 --> 00:50:56.460
And what we determined was is that
this particular building only needed

00:50:56.460 --> 00:51:01.599
to arrest its deflection a little bit.
And you can see in the corners –

00:51:01.599 --> 00:51:04.470
we were fortunate we had
corners with narrow columns.

00:51:04.470 --> 00:51:09.180
We could put concrete walls in there
that would act as backstays, if you will.

00:51:09.180 --> 00:51:12.534
It would arrest the displacement to the
point that we were satisfied that the

00:51:12.534 --> 00:51:16.200
building would not only be safe but
probably be usable after an event –

00:51:16.200 --> 00:51:18.890
much higher level of performance
than we could get by the

00:51:18.890 --> 00:51:24.220
old response spectrum analysis.
We could add those shear walls

00:51:24.220 --> 00:51:26.020
and limit the drift.
We could do that work while the

00:51:26.020 --> 00:51:29.764
building was being used, and it was.
It was done that way, though

00:51:29.764 --> 00:51:32.840
I understand from folks that were
in there, it was a little bit noisy.

00:51:32.840 --> 00:51:34.910
But you didn’t have to evacuate
the building, which is huge.

00:51:34.910 --> 00:51:37.570
That’s one of the biggest
costs of retrofit.

00:51:37.570 --> 00:51:43.339
And the university could make a
good investment in their response.

00:51:43.339 --> 00:51:45.650
You look at the building today,
you’ll see those skinny shear walls

00:51:45.650 --> 00:51:48.829
down in the corners, and the library
remains open and beautiful.

00:51:48.829 --> 00:51:52.180
And that’s the –
that’s a great story.

00:51:52.180 --> 00:51:56.280
But, you know, when you do an
analysis that’s displacement-based,

00:51:56.280 --> 00:52:00.520
you got to know how many peaks of
acceleration you’re going to have.

00:52:00.520 --> 00:52:03.140
You have to know what
the frequency content is.

00:52:03.140 --> 00:52:07.369
Because the way that building
behaves over time, and how much

00:52:07.369 --> 00:52:10.800
it’s going to displace, depends on
how much it’s going to break up.

00:52:10.800 --> 00:52:13.930
And how much – and,
in the process of it yielding,

00:52:13.930 --> 00:52:17.010
what the consequence of that is.
So that’s why it’s so important to

00:52:17.010 --> 00:52:20.740
think about these earthquakes more
in terms of what the – what the

00:52:20.740 --> 00:52:24.770
content of the time record is.
Frequency and content, number of

00:52:24.770 --> 00:52:29.290
repeated cycles, amplitude, duration –
all that is extremely important and

00:52:29.290 --> 00:52:33.300
will affect how these buildings behave.
We only analyzed this building for

00:52:33.300 --> 00:52:35.761
one response spectrum because
that was a long time ago.

00:52:35.761 --> 00:52:39.730
Today, we’re using multiple time
history analysis to do that to try to

00:52:39.730 --> 00:52:42.250
capture the uncertainty
in the variation.

00:52:42.250 --> 00:52:45.079
You could argue, there’s too much
uncertainty. We can’t get there.

00:52:45.079 --> 00:52:48.420
I would argue, we have to get there.
And we’ve got to – we’ve go to

00:52:48.420 --> 00:52:52.150
figure out how to put our bounds
around the uncertainties that we have.

00:52:52.150 --> 00:52:53.619
Because every day,
we’ve got to do our work.

00:52:53.619 --> 00:52:56.030
We’ve got to work on buildings.
We’ve got to design new ones.

00:52:56.030 --> 00:53:00.960
We have to retrofit buildings.
It’s all part of the hassle we go through.

00:53:00.960 --> 00:53:05.680
Okay. Another part of that thing
from the National Academy was to

00:53:05.680 --> 00:53:09.070
make sure you inform owners
of the expected performance.

00:53:09.070 --> 00:53:12.799
And there is, in just the last couple of
years, three programs that have come

00:53:12.799 --> 00:53:16.785
along that are predicting performance
in a way that the public can see.

00:53:16.785 --> 00:53:20.130
These are
LEED-style programs.

00:53:22.384 --> 00:53:25.250
Let me back up a second.
All three of the programs

00:53:25.250 --> 00:53:28.430
have the basic concepts.
They rate buildings.

00:53:28.430 --> 00:53:30.810
This is the USRC
Building Rating System.

00:53:30.810 --> 00:53:34.520
They rate buildings based on
safety, damage, and recovery.

00:53:34.520 --> 00:53:39.633
Safety has to do with whether you’re
likely to be killed as opposed to –

00:53:39.633 --> 00:53:42.160
unlikely that you can’t
get out of the building.

00:53:42.160 --> 00:53:45.255
Damage has to do with
how much it costs to replace.

00:53:45.255 --> 00:53:50.130
40% damage usually means that
a building is completely destroyed

00:53:50.130 --> 00:53:53.450
and needs to be replaced.
That’s what we’d like to not get to.

00:53:53.450 --> 00:53:55.858
And then recovery, now we
talk about in terms of days,

00:53:55.858 --> 00:54:00.630
weeks, months, and years.
And so, given those kind of metrics

00:54:00.630 --> 00:54:04.510
to work with, and they have stars that
they work with on that, they come back

00:54:04.510 --> 00:54:10.320
with a LEED-style platinum, gold,
silver, and certified rating that gives

00:54:10.320 --> 00:54:14.369
a building owner a sense and
an explanation about how his

00:54:14.369 --> 00:54:18.279
building is going to perform
and what he can expect.

00:54:18.279 --> 00:54:22.630
Because we have not talked about it –
because, Loma Prieta, they said

00:54:22.630 --> 00:54:27.310
everybody was surprised, everybody
is still surprised, this is supposed to

00:54:27.310 --> 00:54:31.320
be the tool that we can use to get the
community to start to understand.

00:54:31.320 --> 00:54:35.240
As I understand it, there’s a half a dozen
of these ratings on buildings right now.

00:54:35.240 --> 00:54:39.242
And, by the end of next year,
there should be 40 or 50 of them.

00:54:39.242 --> 00:54:41.101
And hopefully,
it’s going to begin to snowball.

00:54:41.101 --> 00:54:45.260
You’re going to begin to see this.
It’s based on a lot of assumptions,

00:54:45.260 --> 00:54:48.400
but it’s still a very important step
from not knowing at all and

00:54:48.400 --> 00:54:50.485
expecting everything’s
going to be fine,

00:54:50.485 --> 00:54:54.850
to having a good idea about how
your building’s going to perform.

00:54:55.806 --> 00:54:59.150
Okay, the last thing I wanted to talk
about is the National Research Council

00:54:59.150 --> 00:55:03.180
said we need to adequately inform
policymakers of the risks and costs

00:55:03.180 --> 00:55:08.110
and benefits of various strategies
and make strong recommendations

00:55:08.110 --> 00:55:10.334
for earthquake
risk mitigation.

00:55:10.334 --> 00:55:13.233
Well, we’ve been talking about
this kind of stuff for 60 years.

00:55:13.233 --> 00:55:14.964
Unfortunately, we’ve
been talking to ourselves.

00:55:14.964 --> 00:55:17.120
We haven’t been talking
to the policymakers.

00:55:17.120 --> 00:55:19.039
And we’ve been changing
our building codes.

00:55:19.039 --> 00:55:21.960
You can read there how the codes
have been changing over the decades

00:55:21.960 --> 00:55:26.020
to try to accomplish this.
What I’ll take you – I’ve kind of talked

00:55:26.020 --> 00:55:29.480
a little bit about each one of those eras,
including the performance levels

00:55:29.480 --> 00:55:33.894
that we introduced in the ’90s.
But, in the 2000s and going forward,

00:55:33.894 --> 00:55:36.423
we’re now talking about
building re-occupancy,

00:55:36.423 --> 00:55:40.240
functional recovery time,
community resilience.

00:55:41.202 --> 00:55:44.330
And those terms are
all under development.

00:55:44.330 --> 00:55:47.170
And it’s been included in the
recent NEHRP re-authorization –

00:55:47.170 --> 00:55:50.150
National Earthquake
Hazard Reduction Program.

00:55:50.150 --> 00:55:54.812
That program was re-authorized,
and it talks about that.

00:55:54.812 --> 00:55:56.970
Another thing that happened –
that was in the 2000s.

00:55:56.970 --> 00:56:01.712
I really think that this all kicked off
in my mind where we came together –

00:56:01.712 --> 00:56:08.099
Carol, Peggy, we’re on this activity list –
we came together, the Earth scientists,

00:56:08.099 --> 00:56:11.740
SSA, USGS, the Earthquake
Engineering Research Institute,

00:56:11.740 --> 00:56:15.839
and the Office of Emergency Services.
We put on a earthquake conference

00:56:15.839 --> 00:56:19.150
commemorating the 1906
earthquake – 100-year conference.

00:56:19.150 --> 00:56:22.655
Caught the attention of the world.
Made a huge splash.

00:56:22.655 --> 00:56:25.140
Wrote down – got together –
did not happen overnight,

00:56:25.140 --> 00:56:28.869
and wrote down these 10 top
action items that needed to be done

00:56:28.869 --> 00:56:32.830
to develop a culture of preparedness,
investing in reducing losses,

00:56:32.830 --> 00:56:35.830
and ensure resiliency and recovery.
You can read through those.

00:56:35.830 --> 00:56:41.390
Those are the essential features.
And, since 2006, if you – if I could

00:56:41.390 --> 00:56:45.220
take you through all that has happened
in that 14 years, you can see that

00:56:45.220 --> 00:56:49.690
this has become kind of the rallying
cry for a lot of what’s going on.

00:56:49.690 --> 00:56:52.569
And that’s important.
And it’s because we came together,

00:56:52.569 --> 00:56:54.010
and we worked together, and we put

00:56:54.010 --> 00:56:56.270
our heads together, and
we spoke with one voice.

00:56:56.270 --> 00:57:00.928
That’s the big thing that I want to say.
And don’t take me wrong.

00:57:00.928 --> 00:57:04.118
I don’t suggest that you’re the ones
that are not speaking with one voice

00:57:04.118 --> 00:57:07.359
[laughs] because my colleagues
have got exactly the same problem.

00:57:07.359 --> 00:57:09.920
We’ve got to – we’ve
got to do this, though.

00:57:09.920 --> 00:57:13.520
The NEHRP program was
finally re-authorized in 2018.

00:57:13.520 --> 00:57:21.270
And that re-authorization really
made a significant shift in the

00:57:21.270 --> 00:57:24.040
NEHRP program thinking about
individual buildings, systems,

00:57:24.040 --> 00:57:28.180
and people to thinking about
community resilience.

00:57:28.180 --> 00:57:32.060
Just to quickly say that, when you
look in the authorizing legislation,

00:57:32.060 --> 00:57:34.700
which is part of the public law –
this is in the law now.

00:57:34.700 --> 00:57:37.975
This is what they’re
supposed to do.

00:57:37.975 --> 00:57:41.190
Expanded the findings, making sure
that we have updated notion

00:57:41.190 --> 00:57:45.000
of all the areas that were affected.
Talked about a new conversation –

00:57:45.000 --> 00:57:48.940
new language we put in there,
declared that the built environment

00:57:48.940 --> 00:57:51.928
has been constructed for life safety,
not to remain operational or able to

00:57:51.928 --> 00:57:54.170
recover under any
specific schedule.

00:57:54.170 --> 00:57:57.349
It’s important that congressional
staffers read that, and they do.

00:57:57.349 --> 00:58:01.119
And they understand that.
It also reported the NRC findings

00:58:01.119 --> 00:58:03.707
that said that we needed
$300 million a year for 20 years

00:58:03.707 --> 00:58:05.829
if we’re going to start
to solve this problem.

00:58:05.829 --> 00:58:09.799
If you haven’t seen that NRC
report, it’s worth looking at.

00:58:09.799 --> 00:58:13.220
Expanded the purpose of the legislation.
And basically, what all these words

00:58:13.220 --> 00:58:18.572
talk about are really, we need to think
about community recovery now.

00:58:18.572 --> 00:58:21.470
We’ve got to get to where we’re
paying attention to what it takes

00:58:21.470 --> 00:58:25.723
for communities to recover.
This was all driven by what we –

00:58:25.723 --> 00:58:30.510
what we learned from Katrina and other
natural hazards that have happened.

00:58:30.510 --> 00:58:32.910
We defined community resilience
in that re-authorization.

00:58:32.910 --> 00:58:36.710
I say “we” because there were
groups of you and groups at EERI

00:58:36.710 --> 00:58:39.621
that worked together
to get this to happen.

00:58:39.621 --> 00:58:42.920
Expanded the program activities –
I think this is important.

00:58:42.920 --> 00:58:46.640
Published a systematic set of maps
for active faults, folds, liquefaction

00:58:46.640 --> 00:58:50.217
susceptibility, susceptibility for
earthquake-induced landslides and

00:58:50.217 --> 00:58:54.300
other seismically induced hazards.
Continue the development of ANSS,

00:58:54.300 --> 00:58:57.760
including earthquake early warning.
The reason this needed to get into

00:58:57.760 --> 00:59:00.609
the re-authorization is so
the funders would understand

00:59:00.609 --> 00:59:02.470
that Congress
wanted this done.

00:59:02.470 --> 00:59:05.089
Because the biggest barrier we
have to getting maps for

00:59:05.089 --> 00:59:08.970
all of our significant communities
is the funding that’s required.

00:59:08.970 --> 00:59:13.290
And then this expanded definition of
the Interagency Coordinating Council –

00:59:13.290 --> 00:59:16.069
because there’s four agencies that
are involved in this program –

00:59:16.069 --> 00:59:19.580
is really all about getting
a common budget, getting these guys

00:59:19.580 --> 00:59:22.810
to come together, talk together.
Congress wants the executive branch

00:59:22.810 --> 00:59:25.550
to bring them recommendations
that everybody stands behind

00:59:25.550 --> 00:59:29.417
to enforce this one-voice
notion that I was talking about.

00:59:29.417 --> 00:59:32.710
Also in that re-authorization
was a call for a special studies.

00:59:32.710 --> 00:59:36.060
Two of them are really important.
One is by the general accounting –

00:59:36.060 --> 00:59:39.420
the comptroller general, which is
going to look at the NEHRP program

00:59:39.420 --> 00:59:43.470
over the last – through its entire life
and decide how well we’ve done.

00:59:43.470 --> 00:59:48.130
And talking to Keith and Steve –
they were just talking to the

00:59:48.130 --> 00:59:51.290
[inaudible] guys yesterday
about this. So this is good.

00:59:51.290 --> 00:59:55.060
Because what they’re going to
learn is that we’ve got a lot done,

00:59:55.060 --> 00:59:59.010
but we’ve got not nearly as much done
that we want to get done because of

00:59:59.010 --> 01:00:02.000
the problem we have with funding.
And the other things is, NIST and

01:00:02.000 --> 01:00:05.319
FEMA were commissioned to
develop options for improving

01:00:05.319 --> 01:00:10.310
the built environment in terms of
buildings and critical infrastructure

01:00:10.310 --> 01:00:15.660
and to reflect re-occupancy and
functional recovery time goals.

01:00:15.660 --> 01:00:19.430
So that’s this new place that we’re
going with community resilience.

01:00:19.430 --> 01:00:23.540
And just to say a few words about that.
As you know, communities today

01:00:23.540 --> 01:00:26.540
are unique, they’re diverse,
they’re historical.

01:00:26.540 --> 01:00:30.325
They have substantial built
environment that’s sub-standard.

01:00:30.325 --> 01:00:32.660
They’re challenged
by shocks and stresses.

01:00:32.660 --> 01:00:34.950
There’s all sorts of problems
that communities have that

01:00:34.950 --> 01:00:38.100
they need to spend money on.
Earthquake engineering is not one.

01:00:38.100 --> 01:00:40.550
They have limited resources.
They need to form –

01:00:40.550 --> 01:00:44.164
informed decision-making.
They need us as earthquake scientists

01:00:44.164 --> 01:00:47.829
and professionals to come
alongside and give them that idea.

01:00:47.829 --> 01:00:50.920
We have – we have now gone
to community resilience,

01:00:50.920 --> 01:00:55.160
and we’re looking very closely at the
interaction between social functions

01:00:55.160 --> 01:01:01.800
that are listed there on the left-hand
side, and the built environment –

01:01:01.800 --> 01:01:06.069
energy, transportation, buildings,
communication, water, and wastewater.

01:01:06.069 --> 01:01:09.400
With the recognition that everything
we do to the built environment

01:01:09.400 --> 01:01:12.010
is to serve the social functions.
That’s what it’s there for.

01:01:12.010 --> 01:01:14.353
And the social functions
cover everything.

01:01:14.353 --> 01:01:17.839
And, in fact, we need to look at that.
We need to pay attention to the social

01:01:17.839 --> 01:01:21.440
functions so that we can determine
what needs to be done to our existing

01:01:21.440 --> 01:01:25.770
environment in order to start to improve
the resilience of our communities.

01:01:25.770 --> 01:01:28.310
The NIST Community Resilience
Planning Guide was published

01:01:28.310 --> 01:01:31.560
back in 2015. I worked on
this project for five years.

01:01:31.560 --> 01:01:35.431
It’s kind of what I did at the last part
of my career. I’m still doing it now.

01:01:35.431 --> 01:01:39.670
I shouldn’t say the last part. [laughs]
This phase. That’s what we’re doing.

01:01:39.670 --> 01:01:44.010
It talks about bringing a community
together, putting together a planning

01:01:44.010 --> 01:01:48.570
team, understanding what your
vulnerabilities are, determining goals

01:01:48.570 --> 01:01:52.339
and objectives, figuring what
the anticipated performance is,

01:01:52.339 --> 01:01:55.470
understanding what the gaps are,
and then getting about –

01:01:55.470 --> 01:01:58.579
getting those things corrected.
Like I said, this problem is

01:01:58.579 --> 01:02:02.280
insurmountable, but it is
being brought under control.

01:02:02.280 --> 01:02:05.480
A community has a chance
to bring it under control.

01:02:05.480 --> 01:02:09.640
Over on the left-hand side over here,
we have what we call building clusters.

01:02:09.640 --> 01:02:13.930
And they are clustered around essential
facilities, critical facilities, emergency

01:02:13.930 --> 01:02:18.829
housing, housing in neighborhoods,
and community recovery.

01:02:18.829 --> 01:02:23.680
It recognizes that, for a community to
recover, it needs to have its critical

01:02:23.680 --> 01:02:27.950
facilities during the emergency response
period, but it needs to have its housing.

01:02:27.950 --> 01:02:30.880
Because it’s got to have –
because people have to be able to

01:02:30.880 --> 01:02:33.030
go back to work, have to be
able to have their housing.

01:02:33.030 --> 01:02:36.140
They’ve got to be able to get their kids
in school, have their small business

01:02:36.140 --> 01:02:38.500
districts available to them.
The hospitals and the MOBs

01:02:38.500 --> 01:02:42.030
have to be available. Or else they
won’t stay in their community.

01:02:42.030 --> 01:02:44.990
And this is extremely important.
That’s probably the most important

01:02:44.990 --> 01:02:46.650
thing that a community could do is

01:02:46.650 --> 01:02:53.910
to bring its building stock and lifeline
systems and support – the people

01:02:53.910 --> 01:02:57.280
together so that the workforce is
there to restore their economy.

01:02:57.280 --> 01:03:01.640
This is all – a whole big program,
another lecture, but the reality is

01:03:01.640 --> 01:03:05.900
is the green and yellow and orange
boxes are the goals in terms of days,

01:03:05.900 --> 01:03:10.210
weeks, and months and years.
The blue boxes are an illustration

01:03:10.210 --> 01:03:13.609
of where we are today.
And in communities, the intention is

01:03:13.609 --> 01:03:17.920
to look at where we are today, where
they need to be, and use that as a tool

01:03:17.920 --> 01:03:21.813
to understand how they’re going to
improve their community resilience.

01:03:21.813 --> 01:03:25.980
Understanding where they are today
and how to get to the better future

01:03:25.980 --> 01:03:29.801
is right at the heart of really good
earthquake science and engineering.

01:03:29.801 --> 01:03:31.730
That’s what we do.

01:03:31.730 --> 01:03:34.039
The better tools that we have,
the better we understand,

01:03:34.039 --> 01:03:37.320
the more localized it can become,
and it’s all done at the community level,

01:03:37.320 --> 01:03:41.559
the better off we’re going to be
able to serve our communities.

01:03:41.559 --> 01:03:45.130
So there’s a series of
performance categories now.

01:03:45.130 --> 01:03:47.569
These are new terms that
are just being introduced.

01:03:47.569 --> 01:03:54.533
They come out of that report from
the NEHRP re-authorization.

01:03:54.533 --> 01:03:58.950
FEMA and NIST have a project going
with ATC right now that define these

01:03:58.950 --> 01:04:03.366
opportunities we have to improve
the resilience of our communities.

01:04:03.366 --> 01:04:06.790
And I just wanted to tell you about
these terms because this is – this is

01:04:06.790 --> 01:04:09.696
the new version of that chart that
I showed you that went from

01:04:09.696 --> 01:04:12.970
collapse to operational.
Re-occupancy means you

01:04:12.970 --> 01:04:16.089
could get back in the building.
That’s a – that’s a performance level

01:04:16.089 --> 01:04:19.200
that we’re talking about.
Functional recovery includes safe

01:04:19.200 --> 01:04:24.013
occupancy, but it includes a building’s
ability to do its most significant things.

01:04:24.013 --> 01:04:26.690
Okay? It’s not full recovery.
A full recovery is back to

01:04:26.690 --> 01:04:29.119
pre-earthquake conditions.
That’s for buildings.

01:04:29.119 --> 01:04:32.440
For lifeline systems,
we need to talk about operability.

01:04:32.440 --> 01:04:36.990
These systems need to be back to
near-normal service and functionality

01:04:36.990 --> 01:04:38.661
where they’re
working normally.

01:04:38.661 --> 01:04:41.040
And, you know, the whole thing –
I haven’t said it yet, but I want to say,

01:04:41.040 --> 01:04:44.500
the whole thing with lifelines
get extremely complex because

01:04:44.500 --> 01:04:47.400
we have to look at the ground
shaking and vulnerability over

01:04:47.400 --> 01:04:50.007
a large area with
the lifeline [inaudible].

01:04:50.007 --> 01:04:53.950
And that’s a – that’s a whole
new area of us to deal with.

01:04:53.950 --> 01:04:58.119
So, to adequately inform policymakers
and make strong recommendations.

01:04:58.119 --> 01:05:00.760
I think that some – just a
couple of summaries here.

01:05:00.760 --> 01:05:04.160
We need to adapt our new and
existing building designs in a way

01:05:04.160 --> 01:05:08.099
that generates public understanding.
We need common hazard levels,

01:05:08.099 --> 01:05:10.752
which means that we all got to come
together and agree on what these

01:05:10.752 --> 01:05:14.589
common hazard levels are and then
provide the information to support that.

01:05:14.589 --> 01:05:17.070
We’re on our way there.
We’re working on that now.

01:05:17.070 --> 01:05:21.109
It’s just – it’s going to
become more complex.

01:05:21.109 --> 01:05:24.137
We need to define and declare
performance levels and include

01:05:24.137 --> 01:05:27.704
expected time needed for re-occupancy
and functional recovery.

01:05:27.704 --> 01:05:30.810
Time to restore.
That’s the important thing.

01:05:30.810 --> 01:05:34.760
We need to allow for community
adaptation and advocate for

01:05:34.760 --> 01:05:38.619
community resilience. And lastly,
I just want to say, my – since I –

01:05:38.619 --> 01:05:41.660
going to give you remaining challenges.
In my humble opinion, the biggest

01:05:41.660 --> 01:05:45.580
remaining challenge that we have since
Loma Prieta are adequate funding

01:05:45.580 --> 01:05:48.917
for research and tool development.
And that runs with Earth science

01:05:48.917 --> 01:05:51.540
and engineering.
Community-level seismic hazard

01:05:51.540 --> 01:05:54.460
maps nationwide related to faulting,
landslide, liquefaction,

01:05:54.460 --> 01:05:57.569
and strong shaking.
I have helped communities put these

01:05:57.569 --> 01:06:01.400
programs together, and this is huge.
To be able to understand this.

01:06:01.400 --> 01:06:04.230
Because they just can’t go out
and do this on their own.

01:06:04.230 --> 01:06:07.470
Calibrate structural analysis tools
suitable for design and usable

01:06:07.470 --> 01:06:12.550
to define functional recovery. And
incorporate those into ASCE-7 and 41.

01:06:12.550 --> 01:06:14.461
That’s our new building design
standard and existing building

01:06:14.461 --> 01:06:19.030
design standard. Get the building
performance rating system implemented

01:06:19.030 --> 01:06:22.750
and getting those seals all over the
place so everybody understands

01:06:22.750 --> 01:06:25.900
what we’re dealing with.
Participate in community resilience

01:06:25.900 --> 01:06:28.780
planning and implementation
through codes and standards.

01:06:28.780 --> 01:06:31.480
And then enact public policy that
supports community-based

01:06:31.480 --> 01:06:34.680
risk mitigation. The last thing
I’ll say there, it’s not like

01:06:34.680 --> 01:06:37.285
we haven’t been trying to do this.
We’ve been trying to do this

01:06:37.285 --> 01:06:40.467
for a long, long time. Probably
longer than I’ve been trying to do it.

01:06:40.467 --> 01:06:44.191
And I’ll count 40 years.
But what I’ll say is, we’ve got to

01:06:44.191 --> 01:06:46.490
recognize we need to
do something different.

01:06:46.490 --> 01:06:51.160
We need to talk about this differently.
We’ve got to figure out how to get to

01:06:51.160 --> 01:06:54.770
a point that we believe the money
should be spent, and our policymakers

01:06:54.770 --> 01:06:57.520
and our communities believe
the money needs to be spent,

01:06:57.520 --> 01:06:59.970
so that we can improve the
community resilience and

01:06:59.970 --> 01:07:03.067
the thing that we’re all striving for.
Thank you very much.

01:07:03.067 --> 01:07:07.267
[Applause]

01:07:11.696 --> 01:07:14.044
- All right. Thank you.

01:07:14.044 --> 01:07:17.070
Thank you to Steve and Chris.
[laughs]

01:07:17.070 --> 01:07:21.579
We’re going to have 15 minutes
of discussion now, and we have

01:07:21.579 --> 01:07:26.137
somebody running around with
a microphone, so questions.

01:07:26.162 --> 01:07:28.307
First question.
- [inaudible]

01:07:29.033 --> 01:07:32.980
So this is for Chris, and it has to
do with your point number two.

01:07:34.176 --> 01:07:38.780
USGS and CGS, for a long time,
have been producing hazard maps

01:07:38.780 --> 01:07:42.671
with landslide and liquefaction
at 1-to-24,000 scale.

01:07:43.961 --> 01:07:48.780
That works for us. There are
regional data layers available.

01:07:48.780 --> 01:07:53.800
And, philosophically, that’s about
where we leave off and expect the

01:07:53.800 --> 01:07:57.680
site-specific studies should take over.
But there are cities who would

01:07:57.680 --> 01:08:02.233
like more detailed maps.
That’s tremendously expensive

01:08:02.233 --> 01:08:05.533
to try to produce [inaudible]
maps with more detail.

01:08:05.533 --> 01:08:09.050
I’m wondering if you think the
breakdown – how we see this.

01:08:09.050 --> 01:08:11.580
Should we continue working at
1-to-24,000, or should we try to

01:08:11.580 --> 01:08:15.610
get much bigger pots of funding
and produce more detailed maps?

01:08:15.610 --> 01:08:19.709
- Yeah. In the – in the community
resilience planning thing that I showed,

01:08:19.709 --> 01:08:24.010
we have different building clusters
that we like to talk about and

01:08:24.010 --> 01:08:26.221
things that we’re going to
depend on in a short period of time

01:08:26.221 --> 01:08:29.120
and a long period of time.

01:08:29.120 --> 01:08:33.890
If you go out and – if a city goes out
and inventories its public schools –

01:08:33.890 --> 01:08:38.359
because they need schools, they need
to know if those schools are sitting on

01:08:38.359 --> 01:08:42.463
liquefaction sites or landslide sites,
or if they’re sitting next to faults.

01:08:42.463 --> 01:08:46.533
Now, 1-in-24,000,
you kind of get an idea.

01:08:46.533 --> 01:08:49.200
You can’t tell too much
around the periphery.

01:08:49.200 --> 01:08:53.049
And you can’t – you can’t expect
a city to have the money to go

01:08:53.049 --> 01:08:56.167
and do the detailed studies.
Now, there’s probably detailed studies

01:08:56.167 --> 01:08:58.867
that have been done, but there’s
no mechanism that I know of to

01:08:58.867 --> 01:09:03.074
gather that information of the process.
So then you say, well,

01:09:03.074 --> 01:09:07.120
whose responsibility is that?
And that gets down to [laughs]

01:09:07.120 --> 01:09:10.733
who’s got the money. The city is
never going to have the money.

01:09:10.733 --> 01:09:13.833
The building folks don’t want to
have to spend the money.

01:09:13.833 --> 01:09:17.079
And if you’re talking about landslide,
I mean, if you’re in a large area,

01:09:17.079 --> 01:09:21.023
obviously, and you own a piece of it,
you can’t study the whole area.

01:09:21.023 --> 01:09:24.653
You don’t want to study the whole area.
So it comes down to recognizing this is

01:09:24.653 --> 01:09:28.500
something that needs to be done.
And I recognize that there’s more

01:09:28.500 --> 01:09:33.770
research necessary to try to get
better benchmarks and metrics

01:09:33.770 --> 01:09:37.170
so we can do it at a finer scale.
And then somebody’s got to draw

01:09:37.170 --> 01:09:41.400
the map on a – on a GIS platform
so you can figure out what it is.

01:09:41.400 --> 01:09:44.830
And so who can do that?
In the NEHRP re-authorization,

01:09:44.830 --> 01:09:48.017
the reason we wrote that in there,
a way to get it, we’re trying to

01:09:48.017 --> 01:09:52.074
say to the agencies, the national – the
federal government is going to do this.

01:09:52.074 --> 01:09:54.333
That they want their
communities to do this.

01:09:54.333 --> 01:09:56.780
Is it going to – do you do it with
the money that you get today?

01:09:56.780 --> 01:09:59.690
No. Not even close.
Do you need a whole new special

01:09:59.690 --> 01:10:02.193
fund to do this sort of thing?
Yeah. You need recognition

01:10:02.193 --> 01:10:06.487
that that’s important.
So that’s how [inaudible].

01:10:08.570 --> 01:10:13.047
[Silence]

01:10:13.047 --> 01:10:17.333
- Chris, I’d like to follow up
on that if I may.

01:10:18.570 --> 01:10:22.436
I have a hearing deficiency.
I didn’t hear everything that Keith said.

01:10:22.436 --> 01:10:27.212
But your response kind of
left things hanging.

01:10:27.212 --> 01:10:32.631
If 24,000 isn’t
good enough, what is?

01:10:32.631 --> 01:10:38.712
Do we go to a scale of
100 foot to the inch?

01:10:38.712 --> 01:10:40.875
That’s not something that
the U.S. government …

01:10:40.875 --> 01:10:45.920
- Well, you know, again, if you’re …
- So, what’s sufficient?

01:10:45.920 --> 01:10:52.490
- It has to be on a – it has to be
information on a lot-by-lot basis.

01:10:52.490 --> 01:10:55.500
- [inaudible]
- Well, it’s out of reach.

01:10:55.500 --> 01:10:56.980
Maybe it’s out reach.
Maybe it’s not.

01:10:56.980 --> 01:11:01.400
We have – we have information
on strong shaking, whether we are

01:11:01.400 --> 01:11:04.050
all comfortable with the uncertainty
that’s built into it or not,

01:11:04.050 --> 01:11:07.737
we have information on strong
shaking lot by lot right now.

01:11:07.737 --> 01:11:09.710
Give me the address.
I’ll tell you what the strong shaking

01:11:09.710 --> 01:11:13.845
is going to be for the engineers.
We’ve got that.

01:11:13.845 --> 01:11:19.001
Yeah, we do. Just …
- [inaudible]

01:11:19.001 --> 01:11:22.690
- It’s …
- We have estimates lot by lot,

01:11:22.690 --> 01:11:29.194
but it’s not measured lot by lot.
- No. If I want to design a building

01:11:29.194 --> 01:11:33.690
on a particular site, whether you
like how the information was

01:11:33.690 --> 01:11:37.630
put in there or how it was done,
I can get an answer about what my

01:11:37.630 --> 01:11:42.600
seismic design parameters are lot by lot.
Now, what does that mean if I want

01:11:42.600 --> 01:11:45.885
information for liquefaction
and for landslides?

01:11:45.885 --> 01:11:50.461
Well, I need a new set
of metrics, right? Somehow.

01:11:50.461 --> 01:11:55.090
And I need a new way to characterize
the risk and what’s going to happen.

01:11:55.090 --> 01:11:59.020
And then I’ve got to have tools that are
able to do the same thing they did for

01:11:59.020 --> 01:12:01.512
strong shaking to get it down to
some kind of a statement

01:12:01.512 --> 01:12:04.444
about what’s going on lot by lot.
It may take 100 years.

01:12:04.444 --> 01:12:07.130
I don’t know.
It doesn’t bother me.

01:12:07.130 --> 01:12:10.130
I’m just saying that, if we want to –
if we want to get the community

01:12:10.130 --> 01:12:12.533
resilience and be able to give
communities the tools that are

01:12:12.533 --> 01:12:17.500
necessary so they can figure out
where they are, they’ve got to

01:12:17.500 --> 01:12:20.340
be able to have that
kind of information.

01:12:20.340 --> 01:12:25.260
Or, they’ll greatly benefit from that
kind of information. How’s that?

01:12:29.797 --> 01:12:35.167
- My name is Jim Baker, and I’m the
county geologist in Santa Clara County.

01:12:35.167 --> 01:12:40.160
Been doing that for 25 years. Jim
Berkland did it for 21 years before me.

01:12:40.160 --> 01:12:45.600
We have detailed
hazard zone maps.

01:12:45.600 --> 01:12:49.475
Some of them were developed by the
state and then adopted by the county,

01:12:49.475 --> 01:12:54.367
and then USGS developed more maps.
The state developed more maps.

01:12:54.367 --> 01:12:56.150
Those have been
incorporated into our maps.

01:12:56.150 --> 01:12:59.148
It’s all available on the GIS.

01:12:59.148 --> 01:13:03.290
I use that on a daily basis when
I’m evaluating applications for

01:13:03.290 --> 01:13:08.280
development, applications for
building permits, new buildings,

01:13:08.280 --> 01:13:13.070
additions to existing buildings.
That information is the basis for

01:13:13.070 --> 01:13:17.850
making a decision as to whether or not
that applicant has to hire a private

01:13:17.850 --> 01:13:21.699
consulting engineering geologist
or geotechnical engineer to

01:13:21.699 --> 01:13:25.980
perform a site investigation.
That’s the key.

01:13:25.980 --> 01:13:30.300
And then, having a certified engineering
geologist or a registered geotechnical

01:13:30.300 --> 01:13:36.269
engineer on staff at the jurisdiction to
evaluate the adequacy of the report of

01:13:36.269 --> 01:13:41.502
that investigation is the second key.
And finally, implementation in the

01:13:41.502 --> 01:13:47.800
design where that information is
conveyed to the design engineers

01:13:47.800 --> 01:13:52.410
in such a way that they can incorporate
it into what they want to build.

01:13:52.410 --> 01:13:56.640
And finally, verifying that it
actually gets constructed that way.

01:13:56.640 --> 01:14:00.400
So I think our system is working.

01:14:00.400 --> 01:14:05.320
And I think having information
developed at 24,000 scale and

01:14:05.320 --> 01:14:10.719
incorporated into what local
jurisdictions do is working.

01:14:10.719 --> 01:14:17.900
I am a little wary when we present
a fault map and zoom in on

01:14:17.900 --> 01:14:22.100
an individual parcel, and the
owner says, well, the fault’s mapped

01:14:22.100 --> 01:14:27.260
in my backyard, not under my house.
And we have to say, well, it is plus

01:14:27.260 --> 01:14:31.070
or minus a few hundred feet.
The reason for the zones is

01:14:31.070 --> 01:14:34.820
just like you having a
smoke alarm in a building.

01:14:34.820 --> 01:14:38.570
It goes off. That doesn’t mean the
building is necessarily on fire.

01:14:38.570 --> 01:14:42.489
It means there’s smoke. Now you
got to find out why there’s smoke.

01:14:42.489 --> 01:14:46.800
So our zones are the
early warning system.

01:14:46.800 --> 01:14:49.900
We have a question as to what those
conditions really are at that site,

01:14:49.900 --> 01:14:53.420
and it has to be investigated.
And then it’s the process for

01:14:53.420 --> 01:14:56.335
incorporating it into what
actually gets constructed.

01:14:56.362 --> 01:14:57.600
I think it’s working.

01:14:57.600 --> 01:15:03.560
I think 24,000 scale is a viable way
for information to be developed.

01:15:03.560 --> 01:15:07.500
As long as it’s qualified when
you present that information.

01:15:07.500 --> 01:15:10.470
That those lines –
that’s the problem with GIS.

01:15:10.470 --> 01:15:12.453
[laughter]

01:15:12.453 --> 01:15:16.860
Well, a good example would be
Hitchcock and Kelson’s photolineations

01:15:16.860 --> 01:15:20.750
map that they developed right
after the Loma Prieta earthquake.

01:15:20.750 --> 01:15:26.160
I utilized that. And when I digitized
those, I digitized them as polygons

01:15:26.160 --> 01:15:32.780
rather than lines. So, when you zoom
in on a GIS, what is presented as an ink

01:15:32.780 --> 01:15:37.640
line on a published map gets bigger and
bigger and bigger as you zoom in on it.

01:15:37.640 --> 01:15:44.270
And it makes it more realistic at the
parcel scale as to the fuzzy boundaries.

01:15:44.270 --> 01:15:48.560
The problem with GIS is a lot of
things are – especially zones are drawn

01:15:48.560 --> 01:15:52.489
with a line, like the Alquist-Priolo
earthquake zones is a line.

01:15:52.489 --> 01:15:56.770
And I have guys – parcels that come
in that are half in and half out.

01:15:56.770 --> 01:16:00.350
- Well, what I’ll say is, I’m going to take
everything you said in support of what

01:16:00.350 --> 01:16:06.500
I said, except maybe the 1-in-24,000.
I will say that we have thousands of

01:16:06.500 --> 01:16:11.070
jurisdictions in California,
tens of thousands across the country,

01:16:11.070 --> 01:16:14.528
the don’t have the benefit
of what you have. I believe.

01:16:14.528 --> 01:16:18.420
- [inaudible]
- No, no. No, no.

01:16:18.420 --> 01:16:20.013
You’re great, Jim.
- [laughs]

01:16:20.013 --> 01:16:22.734
- Hey. You got it under control.
We’ve got all these other folks

01:16:22.734 --> 01:16:26.480
that need the same thing.
And that’s – I take what you’re telling

01:16:26.480 --> 01:16:30.550
me, other than the nuts and bolts
of the details of how specific it is,

01:16:30.550 --> 01:16:36.844
as supportive of what I’m trying to say.
And from a – if you go to a city –

01:16:36.844 --> 01:16:41.210
some city – I don’t know, Antioch.
And they’re trying to do community

01:16:41.210 --> 01:16:43.220
resilience. And maybe
they’ve got maps. I don’t know.

01:16:43.220 --> 01:16:46.111
I’m – maybe I got the wrong –
I’m trying to get to a small city

01:16:46.111 --> 01:16:48.879
that’s trying to do something.
I know the little place I live in southern

01:16:48.879 --> 01:16:52.090
California now, they know
nothing about this stuff. [laughs]

01:16:52.090 --> 01:16:55.933
And it’s – and that’s part of what
this recommendation is about.

01:16:57.969 --> 01:17:00.612
- [inaudible]

01:17:00.612 --> 01:17:02.670
- Well, I moved out of
Walnut Creek five years ago.

01:17:02.670 --> 01:17:08.533
And I loved that place, and I don’t know
where they are [inaudible]. [laughs]

01:17:11.152 --> 01:17:14.133
- [inaudible] Walnut Creek,
and I have a question.

01:17:14.133 --> 01:17:16.167
[laughter]

01:17:16.167 --> 01:17:18.623
I also work with
the California State Guard,

01:17:18.623 --> 01:17:23.133
and I move a lot of data about these
earthquakes to them and try to connect

01:17:23.133 --> 01:17:25.628
them with the right people so
they use the information right.

01:17:25.628 --> 01:17:29.800
But I have a specific question about
what cities can do for creating –

01:17:29.800 --> 01:17:33.955
what kind of value they can get
from doing building inventories.

01:17:33.955 --> 01:17:38.567
Structural analysis to some point so that
they understand a lot more about the

01:17:38.567 --> 01:17:44.080
pre-1980 buildings that you want – that
I took that you wanted us to focus on.

01:17:44.080 --> 01:17:47.552
- Yeah. At the – at the heart of the
NIST Community Resilience Planning

01:17:47.552 --> 01:17:50.460
Guide is the answer to that.
And there’s a whole – a whole

01:17:50.460 --> 01:17:54.440
conversation that goes on there.
But basically, when a community like

01:17:54.440 --> 01:17:58.940
Walnut Creek sits down and says,
okay, the earthquake has occurred.

01:17:58.940 --> 01:18:03.620
The response is successful.
Now we’ve got to recover.

01:18:03.620 --> 01:18:07.199
What buildings do you need in
Walnut Creek in the first few days,

01:18:07.199 --> 01:18:11.210
in the first weeks, in the first few
months – what buildings and lifeline

01:18:11.210 --> 01:18:15.520
systems do you have to have in order
for your city to recover so people will

01:18:15.520 --> 01:18:19.700
stay and be a part of the recovery?
Okay, so, as soon as you’ve identified

01:18:19.700 --> 01:18:23.217
those buildings, then you’ve got to
go about the process of figuring out

01:18:23.217 --> 01:18:27.180
whether you have them or not or
what you’re going to – what you’re

01:18:27.180 --> 01:18:29.594
going to do in order to
get that to occur.

01:18:29.594 --> 01:18:34.440
That’s – to me, it’s a question of not,
how do I get everything fixed.

01:18:34.440 --> 01:18:37.130
It’s a question of, how do
I identify what I’ve got to have

01:18:37.130 --> 01:18:40.882
in the first few weeks?
And I happen to think it’s housing.

01:18:40.882 --> 01:18:43.060
What do I have to have
in the first few weeks?

01:18:43.060 --> 01:18:48.800
What part of the – of the lifeline
system do I have to re-engage

01:18:48.800 --> 01:18:52.840
and make useful in the first few
weeks so my city can recover?

01:18:52.840 --> 01:18:56.850
And that’s – to me,
that’s the secret to this.

01:18:56.850 --> 01:18:59.030
Because, in a lot of cities,
it’s a small thing.

01:18:59.030 --> 01:19:01.813
You’ve got a brand-new city hall –
almost brand-new.

01:19:01.813 --> 01:19:04.530
Ought to be okay, right?
Should be good.

01:19:04.530 --> 01:19:07.300
You’re sitting on good land.
You’ve got freeways.

01:19:07.300 --> 01:19:10.150
You’ve got that gigantic overpass.
Ought to be okay.

01:19:10.150 --> 01:19:13.300
So anyway, that’s the point is you
want to – you want to look in closely

01:19:13.300 --> 01:19:16.860
and find out what needs to be done.
Safety we always have to do.

01:19:16.860 --> 01:19:19.926
I mean, we just have to worry
about where the – where the massive

01:19:19.926 --> 01:19:22.530
unsafe conditions are and
get those taken care of.

01:19:22.530 --> 01:19:26.258
But this – what I’m talking about here
is, what do we need for recovery?

01:19:26.258 --> 01:19:29.275
How do – how do we –
how do orchestrate recovery?

01:19:29.275 --> 01:19:33.133
I talked to our city manager in my little
town of Canyon Lake, 12,000 people,

01:19:33.133 --> 01:19:37.433
down by Lake Elsinore.
And he said, oh, we know. We know.

01:19:37.433 --> 01:19:40.567
We’ll just – we’ll get it done.
[laughs]

01:19:40.567 --> 01:19:43.302
Okay. You’re going to get it done.
How you – how’s your building?

01:19:43.302 --> 01:19:47.233
I don’t know.
But we’ll figure it out. [laughs]

01:19:48.127 --> 01:19:51.767
- Well, if there’s one more
short, quick question?

01:19:51.792 --> 01:19:55.333
If not, we’ll [inaudible].

01:19:57.851 --> 01:20:01.869
[Applause]

01:20:03.035 --> 01:20:05.739
- Okay. Thank you, everyone.
As Carol just said, we are

01:20:05.739 --> 01:20:09.540
breaking until 10:45.
There is coffee outside.

01:20:09.540 --> 01:20:14.379
Please pay for snacks if you haven’t yet
because we don’t have funding for that.

01:20:14.379 --> 01:20:16.898
We are fronting the month for that.
Please pay.

01:20:16.898 --> 01:20:21.201
But most importantly, if you
are a speaker, do not go.

01:20:21.201 --> 01:20:24.640
Come, if you have not already given us
your slides and make sure that we have

01:20:24.640 --> 01:20:27.767
your slides if you would like
to have slides for your talk.

01:20:27.767 --> 01:20:34.250
And also, lastly, there is exciting
fire-related equipment outside.

01:20:34.250 --> 01:20:36.548
If you want to stretch your legs,
go on down to the parking lot

01:20:36.548 --> 01:20:40.167
and enjoy the
Menlo Fire Department.

01:20:41.365 --> 01:20:45.706
[inaudible background conversations]