1

Board of Directors Meeting

Status Report on
Catastrophic Earthquake Response Planning
for the New Madrid Seismic Zone Region
Amr S. Elnashai
Bill and Elaine Hall Endowed Professor of Engineering
Director, MAE Center

Project Team
Amr Elnashai, Principle Investigator
Theresa Jefferson, Co-PI
Jack Harrald, Co-PI
Tim Gress, Project Manager
Lisa Cleveland, Technical Project Manager

Mid-America Earthquake Center

Benefits of Earthquake Impact Assessment

Mitigation

Identify vulnerable infrastructure

Set priorities for mitigation

Define quantities for response

Define staging areas, evacuation
routes and temporary housing

Emergency Response
Public Awareness

Increase awareness of required

funding and legislation
Create public support for actions
and plans

Public Policy

Help law-makers to understand

potential impact
Create support for mitigation,
response and recovery plans and
exercises

Mid-America Earthquake Center

Catastrophic Earthquake Planning Initiative

Scenario-Driven Catastrophic Planning

Bottom-up format
Combines planning and exercise
Includes Operations and Planning personnel
Incorporates a number of site-specific scenarios
Suitable for rapid exercise application
Utilizes FEMA HAZUS-MH for modeling
Selected advanced models using MAEviz

Integrated Response
Identifies needs of all stakeholders
Elaborates the interdependence between private,

public and government bodies

Details the consequences for counties, states,
FEMA regional and national impact and capacity

Mid-America Earthquake Center

Objectives and Features of the Project

Provide scientifically-defensible estimates of

earthquake damage, loss and social impacts

as the basis for various levels of emergency
response planning
Helped with some of the State workshops
Phase II scenario is providing impact
estimates for regional-level (FEMA) emergency
planning
Develop new technologies, models, and data
to further advance the field of earthquake
impact assessment and its utilization in
emergency response
Promote public awareness of earthquake risk
Identify and prioritize critical facilities for
mitigation

Mid-America Earthquake Center

Components Needed for Scenario

Location of earthquake and length of

fault

Attenuation - how does shaking

change with distance?

Site response - what is the soil type?

Liquefaction how likely it is that the
soil fails and the structure sinks?

Inventory what are the assets we

have?

Fragility how is each asset type

affected by the shaking?

Mid-America Earthquake Center

1.0

Components of Earthquake Impact Assessment

Site
Response

Attenuation
Mid-America Earthquake Center

Fragility of the Built Environment

Fragility

1.0

Mid-America Earthquake Center

Fragility of the Built Environment

For Each Scenario Earthquake (magnitude, distance, mechanism, soil condition)

Four fragility plots for each type of 36 buildings

The Four are for No Seismic Design, Low, Medium and High Design
If the scenario changes, the relationships should be re-derived

Mid-America Earthquake Center

Causes and Effects of Liquefaction

Liquefaction

Mid-America Earthquake Center

10

Causes and Effects of Liquefaction

Mid-America Earthquake Center

11

Phase I (States) Improvement of Hazard

Northeast Segment

Ten different earthquake shaking maps

Central Segment

used to generate plausible hazards

Included NMSZ Magnitude 7.7, Wabash
Valley 7.1 and East Tennessee 5.8
Soil maps better than previous but still
cover only part of the region

Southwest Segment

Indiana
Missouri

Illinois

Kentucky
Tennessee
Legend

Arkansas

No ne
Very Lo w

Mississippi

Al abama

Low
Mod era te
Hi gh
Very Hi gh

Mid-America Earthquake Center

12

Phase I (States) - Improvements to Inventory

MR2 Default
Inventory

Updated
Inventory

Essential Facilities
Hospitals
Schools
Fire Stations
Police Stations
Emergency Operation Centers

1,074
18,455
5,032
3,982
353

1,262
19,785
10,212
4,378
308

Transportation Facilities
Highway Bridges
Highway Tunnels
Railway Bridges
Railway Facilities
Railway Tunnel
Bus Facilities
Port Facilities
Ferry Facilities
Airports
Light Rail Facilities
Light Rail Bridges

104,048
11
1,663
990
2
310
1,738
6
2,435
0
38

112,311
11
1,868
1,000
67
394
1,931
50
3,556
456
38

Utility Facilities
Communication Facilities
Electric Power Facilities
Natural Gas Facilities
Oil Facilities
Potable Water Facilities
Waste Water Facilities

3,160
554
464
138
918
4,518

135,053
8,720
3,116
1,000
9,330
26,074

High Potential Loss Facilities

Dams
Hazardous Materials Facilities
Levees
Nuclear Power Facilities

15,098
20,153
0
15

17,238
27,485
0
15

Infrastructure Category

Total inventory for 8 states

Default: 185,155 facilities
Updated: 385,658 facilities

Specific improvements

Communication: +133,000
Waste Water: +21,500
Potable Water: +8,400
Highway Bridges: +8,300
Hazmat: +7,300
Fire Stations: +5,200

Mid-America Earthquake Center

13

Scenario Improvements Phase I (States)

Social impact models

Improved existing displaced

population model inside

HAZUS
New impact parameters
addressed
Required shelter space,
sleeping space
Feeding requirements
Ice storage requirements
Drinking water
requirements
Medical Needs
Common medical
conditions of shelter
population identified

Mid-America Earthquake Center

14

Summary of Results Phase I (different scenarios)

State

No. Damaged No. Damaged

Buildings
Bridges

Displaced Casualties
Population

Total Direct
Economic Loss

Alabama *

6,000

1,600

200

$1 billion

Arkansas

110,000

1,000

125,000

14,000

$20 billion

Illinois

30,000

500

50,000

6,000

$35 billion

Indiana **

16,000

27,000

3,000

$7 billion

Alabama

Arkansas

Maximum impacts of NMSZ and ETSZ scenarios

** Maximum impacts of NMSZ and WVSZ scenarios

Mid-America Earthquake Center

Illinois

Indiana

15

Summary of Results Phase I (different scenarios)

State

No. Damaged
Buildings

No. Damaged
Bridges

Kentucky

80,000

200

78,000

10,000

$45 billion

Mississippi

45,000

75

20,000

4,000

$10 billion

Missouri

85,000

1,300

122,000

15,000

$40 billion

Tennessee

175,000

1000

260,000

60,000

$60 billion

Kentucky

Mississippi

Mid-America Earthquake Center

Displaced Casualties
Population

Missouri

Total Direct
Economic Loss

Tennessee

16

The Scenario Event Phase II (FEMA Regions)

All regional-level workshops will utilize same

scenario event
Magnitude remains M7.7
Rupture of three New Madrid Fault segments

simultaneously
Designed to reflect historic series of earthquakes within the
constraints of HAZUS modeling

New soil amplification and liquefaction susceptibility

maps throughout entire region
Outcome of MAE Center-funded State Geological Surveys

workshop in Chicago
Work completed by CUSEC State Geologists and lead by
CUSEC Geologist Bob Bauer (ISGS)

Mid-America Earthquake Center

17

Phase II (FEMA Regions) Hazard Improvements

Use of new hazard map

from ex-USGS
researcher Chris
Cramer (now at UM)
Utilize new soil
characterization maps
Utilizes new
liquefaction
susceptibility maps

Mid-America Earthquake Center

18

Phase II (FEMA Regions) Inventory Improvements

HSIP 2008 to update
HSIP 2007 inventory

Essential facilities
Transportation lifelines
Utility lifelines
High potential-loss facilities

National Bridge

Inventory 2008
National elevation data
from USGS and FEMA
New inventory
categories

Major river crossings

Dams
Levees
Hazardous material facilities

Mid-America Earthquake Center

19

Phase II (FEMA Regions) Fragility Improvements

New Building
Fragilities

HAZUS-Compatible
Timber Structures
Masonry Structures
Parameterized Fragilities

New Bridge
Fragilities
Bridge types common to

CEUS
Component fragilities
used to build system
fragility using advanced
analysis
Mid-America Earthquake Center

20

Phase II Fragility Improvements - continued

Pass-Fail Values for

New Inventory
In place of typical

fragility relationship
Classify infrastructure
as likely or unlikely to
incur damage
Values based on review
of literature and basic
analytical simulation
Long-span bridges,
dams, levees and
hazmat facilities

Mid-America Earthquake Center

21

New Impact Models Phase II

Utility Network Modeling

St. Louis, MO, and Memphis, TN

Natural gas and water networks
connectivity and flow
Network interdependencies with
electric power grid
Provides number and location of
leaks and breaks, as well as loss of
service to customers

Transportation Network
Modeling

St. Louis, MO, and Memphis, TN

Static and dynamic traffic models
Provides causes and length of
delays, total network efficiency and
network-based prioritization of
repair and retrofitting of bridges

Mid-America Earthquake Center

(available to FEMA regions March-April 2009)

22

New Impact Models Phase II

Uncertainty
Characterization (now)
Quantify uncertainty in

hazard, inventory, fragility

and modeled system
Use of logic tree analysis and
total probability theorem

Optimization of
Temporary Housing
Minimize social disruption,

secondary risks and

environmental impact
Minimize public cost of
temporary housing
Transition to permanent
sustainable housing
Mid-America Earthquake Center

23

Phase II Social Impacts and Needs Assessments

Hazard
Event

Critical Counties

Assessment
of Impact

Social and Economic

Consequences
Long Term

Short Term

Building Stock

Emergency Shelter,
Temporary Housing

Housing

Relocation,
Displacement

At Risk Populations
Prison Populations
Shelter Gap Analysis
Pet Sheltering

Infrastructure
Systems

Social Vulnerability Index

Search and Rescue Needs

Mid-America Earthquake Center

Direct Damage, Price

Increases, Business
Interruption, Supply
Disruption

Transportation
Systems

Critical
Facilities

Social Vulnerability

Physical
Damage

Casualties, Fatalities,
Health Care Disruption

Emergency Supplies,
Family Separation

Economic
Loss

Health

Social
Disruption

Fiscal Impacts,
Business Failure,
Job Loss,
Reconstruction

Psychological
Distress,
Chronic Injury

Family Stress,
Neighborhood
Disruption

24

Summary Phase I (States)

All Phase I work complete

Worst case impacts to eight states by considering a total of

10 scenarios
Best available hazard at the time
Partial soil amplification map
Extensive improvements to inventory
Existing fragilities
Some new social impact models

Mid-America Earthquake Center

25

Summary Phase II (FEMA Regions)

Phase II work is underway
New ground shaking and deformation maps
Significant improvements to inventory
New fragilities for buildings and bridges
Pass-fail values for other new inventory types
New models for utility and transportation networks
Uncertainty characterization
Improved social impact models
Temporary housing model

Mid-America Earthquake Center

26

Phase III from July 2009 (National Scenario)

Further support tools for exercise and training of emergency

responders
Development of training material for FEMA impact assessment team
for rapid HAZUS analysis following earthquakes
New hazard maps with inelastic site response
New technology to account for multiple earthquake effects on soils,
buildings and bridges
Coupled fragilities for structures and soils
Analytical fragilities for major river crossings, dams, levees and
tanks
Fragilities for contents damage based on displacements
New fire-following earthquakes model
Much improved and verified inventory data for all facilities,
especially critical infrastructure
Coupling of HAZUS and sensors on structures and free field (ANSS)
for immediate assessment
Improvement of shelter model to include more than building
damage
Development of realistic speed-of-recovery factors for social and
economic effects
Development of outcome-based metrics for response goals

Mid-America Earthquake Center

27

Outreach and Publicity

Number of Downloads Since Launch is 3730

Mid-America Earthquake Center

28

Outreach and Publicity - continued

Report mailed to over 600 key individuals

Posted on the web sites of:

National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP)

Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI)
European School for Advanced Seismic Risk in Italy
Multi-disciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering (MCEER)

EERI Newsletter (~6000 earthquake risk readership)

MAE Center Newsletter
The St. Louis Post
The Birmingham News
NBC TV, AK
ABC TV, MO
Bloomberg TV News
Kansas City Infozone
Istock Analyst
Continuity Central, UK
Another 58 articles

Media Appearance in:

Mid-America Earthquake Center

29

Outreach and Publicity - continued

Radio Interviews
Congressional briefing in

summer 2007
Telephone conversations
with Secretary of Chairman
of the Science and
Technology Committee

Mid-America Earthquake Center