Following the widespread wildfires in the U.S. in 2000, the secretaries of the Departments of Interior and Agriculture asked the Interagency Wildland Fire Policy Review Working Group to review the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy and Program Review and its implementation. The document provides the philosophical and policy foundation for federal activities regarding wildfires. Recently, the National Interagency Fire Center posted the results of the working group's effort, the Review and Update of the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy, on its web site.
The report (2001, 94 pp., free) describes the five tasks assigned to the working group:
The working group found that the policy is "generally sound and continues to provide a solid foundation for wildland fire management activities and for natural resources management activities of the federal government." However, they also concluded that implementation of the 1995 policy remains incomplete in many areas, especially those that involve collaboration, coordination, and integration across agency jurisdictions and across different disciplines. The group further agreed that federal activities and programs should provide for both firefighter and public safety, protect and enhance land management objectives and human welfare, integrate programs and disciplines, require interagency collaboration, emphasize the natural ecological role of fire, and contribute to ecosystem sustainability.
The report can be obtained from the External Affairs Office, Bureau of Land Management, Office of Fire and Aviation, National Interagency Fire Center, 3833 South Development Avenue, Boise, ID 83705-5354; (208) 387-5457. It is also available on the web at: www.nifc.gov/fire_policy.
The U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century was established by Congress in 1998 to examine U.S. national security policies and processes and make recommendations to maintain and improve national security. Its members include prominent delegates of both major political parties. The commission concluded that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) should be at the center of a major federal agency reorganization to reduce the threat of a "catastrophic attack" within U.S. borders.
In its recently released report, Road Map for National Security: Imperative for Change (2001, 149 pp., free), the commission concluded that the U.S. faces new and different dangers, particularly within our own borders and to our scientific and educational institutions, and current methods for dealing with these dangers, based on old Cold War strategies, will not work. Consequently, the commission recommends the creation of a new independent National Homeland Security Agency (NHSA) with responsibility for planning, coordinating, and integrating various U.S. government activities involved in homeland security. NHSA would be built upon the Federal Emergency Management Agency, with the three organizations currently on the front line of border security--the Coast Guard, the Customs Service, and the Border Patrol--transferred to it. NHSA would not only protect American lives, but also assume responsibility for overseeing the protection of the nation's critical infrastructure, including information technology.
Other recommendations by the commission include:
The complete report is posted on the commission's web site: www.nssg.gov/peace.nsf/Introduction.htm. The authors welcome comments and suggestions and have provided a place on their site where interested individuals can do just that.
With the passage of the Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994, Congress directed the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to establish an advisory body to develop recommendations for improving FEMA's floodplain mapping program--largely in response to constituents' complaints about the absence or poor quality of Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) for their communities. The Technical Mapping Advisory Council was formed in November 1995, and during its five years of operation, the group submitted annual reports to and worked closely with FEMA to develop its Map Modernization Plan. The council completed its work in November 2000 with submission of its final report. Listed below are some of their conclusions and recommendations.
The council further states that, in order to implement these recommendations, FEMA needs adequate funding. Maps are the foundation of effective land use, regulation, insurance, and other forms of flood mitigation. Only accurate, usable, and accessible flood hazard maps will reduce flood losses.
The final report is available on-line at www.fema.gov/mit/tsd/tmc_main.htm. Printed copies can be requested from FEMA by e-mailing sally.magee@fema.gov.
Over a five-month period in 2000, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and its Institute for Water Resources (IWR) conducted "listening sessions throughout the U.S. to obtain information and feedback from a variety of stakeholders and concerned citizens regarding U.S. water resources. The resultant report, America's Water Resources Challenges for the 21st Century: Summary Report on Identified Water Resources Challenges and Water Challenge Areas (124 pp., 2001, free), was recently made available.
Prior to conducting the sessions, the Corps identified six general water resources challenges that require immediate attention: aging infrastructure that has not kept pace with economic and social expansion, the need for environmental and ecosystem restoration, mitigation and reduction of the impacts of natural disasters, stewardship over the marine transportation system, flood control, and utilization of smart growth processes to ensure reliable sources of clean water. The listening sessions were conducted with two main objectives: to open a dialogue about assessing water resource needs and priorities and to identify the federal role in addressing them.
The report describes in detail the challenges identified by participants, the rank of importance given to each, and the importance given according to region of the country. Participants were also asked to provide suggestions regarding the roles of federal, state, and local governments in addressing the challenges.
Copies of the report, along with additional information about the sessions, can be found on-line: www.wrsc.usace.army.mil/iwr/waterchallenges.
The Los Alamos National Laboratory suffered considerable damage last year during the Cerro Grande wildfire, which also burned over 200 homes when a prescribed burn got out of control. In December, the Department of Energy (DOE) created the Commission on Fire Safety and Preparedness to provide the Secretary of Energy and the Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health with information and recommendations on the readiness of the DOE to deal with wildland and facility fires.
The commission will be a forum to evaluate the risk of fire, the state of the DOE's fire protection programs, and its emergency response systems. The group will also provide recommendations on a comprehensive fire policy for the department. Members will represent the disciplines of fire safety engineering, fire science, firefighter safety, risk/benefit analysis, and emergency response. Further information about this commission can be obtained from Amina Khan, Office of Defense Programs, DP-1, 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20585; (202) 586-6982.
In December, FEMA and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) signed an agreement under which FEMA will use NASA science, technology, research, and remote-sensing to support the agency's emergency management and disaster prevention activities.
The memorandum of understanding was signed by FEMA Director James Lee Witt and NASA Administrator Daniel S. Goldin at NASA headquarters in Washington, D.C. The FEMA-NASA partnership is a cooperative arrangement established under FEMA's Project Impact: Building Disaster Resistant Communities program and NASA's Earth Science Enterprise, a coordinated research program that studies the earth's land, oceans, ice, atmosphere, and life as a total system.
The pact will result in updated and more accurate maps of floodplains, a better understanding of wildfires, and maps to improve disaster recovery and mitigation by state and local communities throughout the U.S. The first cooperative activity under the agreement involves using advanced technology to map floodplains in California's Los Angeles basin, as well as around Sacramento and San Francisco, California; Virginia Beach, Virginia; and the Red River along the North Dakota and Minnesota borders.
As the agreement is further implemented, FEMA and NASA will use a variety of public and private satellites and aircraft-mounted earth-observing instruments to improve understanding of, and preparedness for, flood, wildfire, and geologic hazards.
For more information about this new alliance, see the FEMA web site: www.fema.gov/impact/nasa1207.htm.
Shortly after the NASA/FEMA alliance was announced, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and FEMA also signed an agreement to promote mutual activities in support of FEMA's Project Impact. The partnership will enhance federal efforts to improve disaster recovery and mitigation in communities throughout the U.S. by applying science to better understand and prepare for the natural geologic processes that can cause or exacerbate disasters.
The agreement actually formalizes a strong working relationship that the USGS and FEMA have maintained for more than 20 years. The USGS will continue to provide FEMA with crucial earth science information on such natural hazards as earthquakes, floods, volcanoes, wildland fires, and landslides.
More information about this partnership is available from both the USGS and FEMA web pages: www.usgs.gov and www.fema.gov. Interested persons can also contact Kathleen K. Gohn, USGS, Office of Communications, 119 National Center, Reston, VA 20192; (703) 648-4242; fax: (703) 648-4466; e-mail: kgohn@usgs.gov.
"The time has come for a new national approach to natural hazards."
With this declaration, the Work Group of the Natural Hazards Caucus of the U.S. Congress recently introduced a call to refocus America's disaster policy. Intended as a transition document to guide the new administration, A National Priority: Building Resilience to Natural Hazards, notes that, "Today, we possess unprecedented means to anticipate hazards, protect citizens and property, and reduce accompanying disruption. There is a flip side, however: in the aftermath of disasters, today's public officials are rarely held blameless."
The resolution notes the increasing costs of disasters in the U.S. and the reasons for those increases--primarily population growth and increased occupancy of hazard-prone areas, combined with our increasing wealth--and outlines the kinds of issues the current and future administrations will face. It then lists nine steps to increase national resilience to extreme events:
The work group is composed of representatives from many of the nation's leading professional and scientific societies, relief organizations, higher education associations, institutions of higher learning, trade associations, and private companies involved in disaster reduction.
The complete text of A National Priority: Building Resilience to Natural Hazards is available on the World Wide Web at www.ucar.edu/communications/awareness/. For further information on the Natural Hazards Caucus Work Group and its activities, see www.agiweb.org/workgroup or contact the work group co-chairs: David Applegate, (703) 379-2480, ext. 228, e-mail: applegate@agiweb.org; and Peter Folger, (202) 777-7509; e-mail: pfolger@agu.org.
In January, president George W. Bush named Joe Allbaugh, a long-time adviser and manager of Bush's presidential campaign, to head the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). As the former Texas governor's chief of staff, Allbaugh helped shape the Bush administration's response to natural disasters such as tornadoes, floods, and hurricanes, and was directly involved in allocating resources in response to several Texas disasters.
Allbaugh was confirmed by the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs in February. As one political observer commented, his strong association with Bush could bode well for FEMA and disaster management generally, since it would continue the agency's close relationship with and access to the president. During his confirmation hearing, Allbaugh pledged to work closely with state and local governments in responding to disasters. He added, "Taking my lead from Congress' enactment of the 2000 Stafford Act amendments [see the Observer, Vol. XXV, No 3, p. 8], I plan to focus on implementing pre-disaster mitigation programs that encourage the building of disaster resistant communities. FEMA has made solid progress in this area, but more can be done to limit the human and financial toll of disasters."
The complete text of Allbaugh's statement before the committee can be found on-line at www.senate.gov/~gov_affairs/021301_allbaugh.htm. For more information about the new FEMA Director, contact the agency's Office of Emergency Information and Public Affairs; 500 C Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20472; (202) 646-4600; e-mail: eipa@fema.gov; WWW: www.fema.gov.
In Central America . . .
Hurricane Mitch, which struck Central America in the fall of 1998, hit Honduras and Nicaragua hardest. Honduran casualties numbered more than 5,500 dead and more than 8,000 missing, while more than 2,500 died in Nicaragua and nearly 900 were reported missing. In both cases, major economic and social lifelines were crippled, including health facilities and communications services. Within a year of this tragedy, the United States National Library of Medicine (NLM) and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO)/World Health Organization began to consider a special project to rebuild and improve the local and national health information infrastructure in Honduras and Nicaragua. Subsequently, last September, a contract was awarded by NLM to the nongovernmental foundation FundaCRID to support work in Honduras and Nicaragua to develop a system for collecting and making available health information related to disasters. The principal technical partner for NLM will be the Centro Regional de Información Sobre Desastres (CRID), the regional disaster information center located in Costa Rica. In addition to funding the initiative, NLM--principally through its Specialized Information Services Division--will be a partner in the process and, supported by the Center for Public Service Communications, will provide training and technical support. PAHO, already one of CRID's major partners, is also strongly committed to the project.
Mitch made apparent, again, the need for a multisectoral approach to disaster reduction. A coordinated approach to disaster reduction that includes all relevant sectors requires timely, reliable information from many sources. For example, information is needed in the areas of identification of hazards, the design of early warning and response systems, community education and disaster mitigation, health management in disasters, disaster management agency coordination, and damage assessment following hazard events. The ability to collect, manage, disseminate, and exchange such information is essential, and the capacity of human and technological infrastructure to deal with large quantities of information has to be ensured.
Not surprisingly, the demand for information is rising among the growing number of planners who are becoming more knowledgeable about how information can be used in disaster preparedness, and, again, this information is increasing in both volume and quality. This is particularly true of information about health issues in disasters in the Latin American and Caribbean region. At the same time, many of the "lessons learned" during disasters do not find their way into the health and medical literature, and the experiences of many health professionals engaged in disaster work go unpublished. This information includes needs assessments, conference presentations, and details about training courses and curricula.
In addition, because of inadequate access to information technology, lack of training in how to find and manage information, and lack of awareness of what information is available, communities and local authorities are frequently uninformed about fundamental health issues important to their well-being.
To ensure that these activities are sustained in the future, the NLM/PAHO project has designated four university libraries in Honduras and Nicaragua to gather and disseminate technical and scientific disaster and health information. In addition to the CRID center in Costa Rica, the four partner sites are:
These centers will be strengthened in three areas: Internet connectivity and basic computer resources; training (to be carried out at both the NLM and at the CRID in Costa Rica); and special disaster and health information services including the development of full-text documents, databases, training materials, etc.).
Because these information services will be provided through the Internet, there will be additional important benefits for the two target countries and others. Access to important NLM resources (for example, information on toxicology and environmental health) will be promoted and facilitated through the project's web site. Training material will be published in Spanish on information management and its use and adapted to the realities and needs of users in Central America. All documents and information sources selected under this project will be available on-line to anyone, free of charge.
John C. Scott, Center for Public Service Communications
Ricardo Perez, Pan American Health Organization
Stacey J. Arnesen, NLM, Division of Specialized Information Services
For additional information about this project, contact the Regional Disaster Information Center for Latin America and the Caribbean (CRID), e-mail: crid@crid.or.cr, WWW; www.crid.or.cr; or Stacey Arnesen, e-mail: arneses@mail.nlm.nih.gov.
Nonstructural earthquake hazard mitigation is essential in protecting university lives and property. Hazardous nonstructural items range from some architectural elements to furnishings and equipment to hazardous materials. The University of Oregon recently completed a project demonstrating methods of nonstructural earthquake hazard reduction. The purpose of this project was two-fold: to test nonstructural anchoring devices and to inform users about hazard mitigation. The project focused on "do-it-yourself" mitigation methods for hazards created by building occupants themselves. The demonstration project thus established a "grassroots" approach that encouraged users to determine and take responsibility for the hazards they identified in their own buildings.
During the first phase of the project, background research revealed that efforts to seismically upgrade academic buildings have primarily been focused on structural components, although some west coast universities and school districts have developed nonstructural mitigation programs.
The University of California-Berkeley has recently developed the Q-Brace Non-structural Seismic Safety Program, as part of its Strategic Plan for Loss Reduction and Risk Management. The program includes a matching grant program with the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The Q-Brace guidelines provide instructions for anchoring and bracing various nonstructural components, such as light fixtures, suspended ceilings, bookcases, cabinets, computer and lab equipment, and shelf contents.
At the University of Southern California, the Safety and Risk Management Department received a grant from FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Program for the bracing of suspended ceilings and installation of gas shut-off valves.
In conjunction with the Office of State Superintendent of Public Instruction, the Seattle School District developed the School Facilities Manual: Nonstructural Protection Guide as part of their Classroom Mitigation Program. The district encourages schools to assess their buildings and improve the safety of their communities according to the guidelines established in the manual. Inventory lists for surveying nonstructural earthquake hazards and guidelines for installing anchoring devices are included in the guide.
The Los Angeles Unified School District's Emergency Preparedness and Hazard Mitigation Program has also developed classroom inventory lists to identify nonstructural earthquake hazards. The school district provides recommendations for anchoring and bracing devices to secure components, such as bookcases, file cabinets, equipment, and shelf contents. The school district has also begun work on bracing light fixtures and suspended ceilings at 400 out of 720 schools.
The University of Oregon demonstration project grew out of the school's Nonstructural Seismic Building Program as a collaborative effort among faculty and students in the Department of Architecture and the staff of the Office of Environmental Health and Safety (EH&S). Academic buildings were surveyed for nonstructural earthquake hazards, the most typical being unanchored furnishings, objects in danger of falling, and unsecured desktop computers. However, unbraced suspended ceilings were the most prevalent hazard (436,233 square feet in all), and a quarter of these were located in the main library. These findings revealed the need for a demonstration project on hazard mitigation.
The EH&S office was chosen for the demonstration site. This 1,344 square foot space is a typical university office setting, consisting of eight workstations, two enclosed offices, and a conference room--all tightly arranged.
The first phase of the project involved assessing the nonstructural earthquake hazards in the office. A visual screening was performed, and hazardous nonstructural components were identified. The hazards found were ones that could easily be reduced by "do-it-yourself" methods. The primary nonstructural earthquake hazards found in the office were tall storage cabinets, shelving and contents, large hanging artwork, and elevated office equipment, all of which could potentially fall, block egress routes, and cause injury and/or significant economic loss.
To mitigate these hazards, both off-the-shelf, traditional hardware and special earthquake fasteners were considered and used. In addition, some components were relocated. In some cases, different restraining methods were used for the same component so that different techniques could be compared and displayed. In part, products were also chosen based on their aesthetic quality. Due to budgetary constraints, not all equipment could be secured, but a variety of methods were tested.
In the end, with the help of donations and discounts, the earthquake-designed fasteners cost $431.16, and other hardware cost $54.73. With labor, the total cost of the project was $1,325.89.
Upon completion of the installation, the demonstration project became a means for informing university staff, faculty, and students of ways to prepare for earthquakes. By providing services and information, the project staff encouraged users to become aware of hazards and learn ways to reduce them. The resulting preparation of campus spaces will in turn increase life safety, reduce damage to property, and limit interruption of university activities in the event of an earthquake. In order to promote the information and services available from EH&S, an article about the project will be published in the university's newsletter and sent out to community members via e-mail. Campus members can tour the EH&S office to view the products installed, and EH&S staff will be available to answer questions regarding mitigation techniques and installation procedures. Nonstructural mitigation literature, vendor catalogs, and samples are also available at the office.
The demonstration project at the University of Oregon is a way to inform university building users of the hazards created by nonstructural components and to encourage people to take responsibility for the way they furnish and arrange their classrooms and workspaces. To assess the project's effectiveness, an evaluation will be undertaken by EH&S in conjunction with the Department of Architecture. Hopefully, this demonstration project will prompt other universities to follow suit and increase earthquake hazard awareness on their campuses.
Abigail Fowle and Christine Theodoropoulos, Department of Architecture, University of Oregon
