ML20151H176
| ML20151H176 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png |
| Issue date: | 04/12/1988 |
| From: | Martens C, Noson L WASHINGTON, UNIV. OF, SEATTLE, WA |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20151H012 | List:
|
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8808010174 | |
| Download: ML20151H176 (15) | |
Text
,
! i
( WASHINGTON STATE _
, SCHOOL EARTHQUAKE EMERGENCY PLANNING !
! t
. r a
4 f
i !
't t
I i 4
I :
- i i !
l I I i :
l t. !
i.
i !
i i
a i
i n l
l 1'
i I
1 Linda Lawrance Ncnon 4 [
1 Carole Martens I 4 I I
School Earthquake Safety and Education Project Geophysics Program AIG50 f
, University of Wuhington l Seattle, Wa. 96195 (200 543 7640) f April 7,1967 I
{
890801017MGGO615 PDR ADOCA 05000344 l
P PDC >
L____ % _ _ - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - - - - . - - _ - - - - - - - -- - - - - . - - - - - - - _ _ - - - . - - _ - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - _ _ - _ - _ - -
2
, TABLE OF CONTENTS FARTHQUAKES IN WASHINGTON 3 s
EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS :4 -
NEED FOR SCHOOL EARTHQUAKE DfERGENCY PLANNING 5 t ELEhfENTS OF A SC1100L EARTilQUAKE SAFETY PROGRAh!-7
, PROGRAh! SUPPORT : 0 !
?
i ILLUSTRATIONS 1
Figure 1: hisjor Washington State Earthquakes - 11 s J
l Figure 2: Proposed United States Seismic Risk Zones - 12 Figure 3: Proposed Washington State Seistnie Risk Zones -13 I i
l Figure 4: hiodified hierealli Intensity Scale 14 i 4
?
I !
E 4
i
[
)
l 1
I 1
1 i
l l i l i 1 1
4 v i ,
l 1
I (
r l'
3 l
EARTHQUAKES IN WASHINGTON k Washington is well known for beautiful mountains, lakes and thick forests. Some of the
- huards of such an environment avalanches, drowning,6tes are obvious sad the precautions neceuary to deal with them well understood. The hasard from earthquakes in Wuhington is less well recognised, yet the potential for damage during a large earthquake is enormous. This section brie 8y diseumes where, how big and how often Washington earthquakes occur.
WHERE do Wuhington earthquakes occurf Historically the tnost active part of tbe state 1 has been the 1Puget Sound lowland from Olympia to the Canadian border (figure 1). The most damaging recent Wuhington earthquakes were located in southern Puget Sound. On April 13, 1949, a magnitude 7.1 earthquake near Olympia caused wide spread damage in Western Wuhing-ton. Eight deaths were suociated with that earthquake. Two of those were school children: Cu-tle Rock High School, Cutte Rock (1) and Lowell Elementary, Tacoma (1). Fortunately, many schools were elooed for spring vacation, undoubtedly preventing a number of injuries and possible ,
fatalities. On April 29, 1965, a magnitude 6.5 earthquake between Seattle and Tacom's resulted in seven deaths and wide-spread damage.
l Although less active than Puget Sound, damaging earthquakes have occurred in other parts '
of the state Southwest Washington, the North Cucades, and southeast Wuhington have all had 4 at lent one past earthquake that wu widely felt and produced significant damage and concern.
Future large earthquakes willlikely recur in the same areas that have already had earthquakes in ,
1 the past. The active areas in Wuhington are broad rather than narrow, well. de6ned nones. L
, HOW BIG will future earthquakes be? The site of an earthquake can be considered in two f w ays: 1) by how much damage it causes to buildings and property, called the Intensity, and 2) 1 d
by how much energy is releued, called the rnagnitude, Our biggest future earthquake will at I leut equal the largest earthquake that we have already experienced.
The highest intenalty reported during put Washington earthquakes was E on the Modified I
- Mercalli Intensity Scale (Figure 4), for an earthquake on December 14, 1872 in the North Ca3- i
- cades. This intensity level indientes damage occured to well built structures and the possible del-
- truction of masonry buildings. A U.S. Geological Survey study on earthquake losses in Puget shows intensity N as the highest expected Modified Merealli Intensity anticipated within Puget '
2 Sound.
- l j The largest rnagnitude earthquake reported in Wuhington wu a magnitude 7.5 for the (
j 1872 North Cucades earthquake. A number of magnitude 6 and 7 earthquakes have occurred in j i Wuhington. Earthquakes of that sine can be expected to recur in the future.
1 Recent studies suggest that a greater than magnitude S earthquake may be possible along l the cout of Wuhington, Oregon or Northern California. Wuhington earthquakes of that site !
- have not been reported over the lut 150 years, but do occur periodically in other areu with gen.
l logic settings similar to those in the Pacifie Northwest. Therefore, a greater than magnitude 6 earthquake may be the biggest future earthquake expected in Washington. Such an earthquake would probably produce high intensities over a greater area than put earthquakes.
HOW OFTEN do Wuhington earthquakes occur? Large earthquakes usually occur much i less frequently than small ones. Over 1000 earthquakes large enough to feel have been reported I by Wuhington residents since 1840. Of those,19 have been felt widely and caused significant damage. Sensitive instruments installed beginning in 1970 record Wuhington earthquakes every
, day that are too small to be felt. These instruments allow us to determine how often earthquakes of different sizes occur. Since no large, damaging Wuhington earthquakes have occurred since 1
( the instruments were installed, we rely more on the small number of historic reports to determine l I
1
4 their rate of occurrence. Earthquakes in Puget Sound as large as the 1965 Seattle-Tacoma earth.
( quake (magnitude 6.5) and as large as the 1949 Olympia earthquake (magnitude 7.1) have occurred every 35 years and every 110 years respectively. The intervals for larger earthquakes, i
however, are less well known than for the more numerous smaller earthquakes.
EARTHQUAKE HA7ARDS are those sources of primary and secondary danger usoci.
ated with the direct and indirect effects of earthquakes.
Primary earthquake hasards are sources of danger directly produced by an earthquake and include surface faulting and ground shaking.
- 1) Major metive surface faulting has not been identlfled in Washington and thus, t has not been conaldered one of our primary earthquake hasards. '
- 2) Ground obaking causes more damage than surface faulting even in areu with numerous acti<e surface faults. Expected ground shaking can be estimated by looking at the sine and distribution of past Wuhington earthquakes. The rate of shaking (frequency) .
and the duration are important factors in the amount and kind of damage produced. Short, stiffer buildings are more strongly effected by the rapid, high frequency, shaking that occurs {
i near the earthquame's source. Taller buildings and bridges respond more strongly to the '
slow, low frequency, shaking that is mere dominant farther away from the source. The
' longer the duration of shaking the inereced pessibility of total building collapse. The Uni.
form Building Code seismie risk map (Figure 2 and 3) includes Puget Sound in Seismic Zone '
3 (major espected earthquake damage) and the rest ef Wuhington u Seismie Zone 2 (moderate expected earthquake damage). This elusification relies on estimates of future ground shaking bued upon the ground shaking experienced in put earthquakes.
( Secondary earthquake hasards are sources of daniter resulting from the effects of surface 1 faulting and ground shaking on the natural and built environn.ent.
- 1) Natural secondary hasards in Wuhtnston include:
- a. ground failures (landslides, ground subsidence and liquefaction which occurs when soft, water saturated soil Bows like a liquid dunng shaking) and
- b. destructive water waves (e g. Tsunamis).
I l
- 2) Secondary hasards to the built environrnent include
- a. damage to the structure supporting a buildirg that may lead to partial or total i building collapse,
' b. damage and displacement of non structural building elements (glus, ceiling panels, light fixtures, heavy unanchored equipment),
i c. failure of dams that may inundate downstream populations i
i
- d. chemical spills and major fires.
I 2 ,
[
l 1 ,
- I i
i l i i
5 NEED FOR SCHOOL EARTHQUAKE EMERGENCY PLANNING
( c The Puget Sound region of Wuhington state is classi6ed as a zone of major expected earthquake damage. That cleasineation was determined from interpretations of existing geologic and seismo-logie data. We will continue to have earthquakes comparable to the magnitude 7.1 Olympia earthquake of April 13,1949. Scientists suggest that an even larger earthquake than any that we have no far observed is a pouibility. Wuhington state is in earthquake country.
This uction outlines the need for school earthquake emergency planning.
- 1. Isolation of Schoole
. Communication interrupted (telephone systems become overlouded or damaged)
. Transportation routes blocked
. Other prioritics for emergency responders:
. Get themselves safe
. Assess injuries to personnel and damsge to equipment l
. Evaluate external reports
. Check high priority sites within their jurisdiction
. Expect to be isolated for 24 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> l l
- 2. Vulnerability of School Population
. Children and senior citizens are subject to signi6eantly higher rates of fatalities and,
{ . Greater proportions of emotional and physleal trauma
. Schools have a small number of adults to care for a large number of children
. Some schools have a signi6eant disabled population
- 3. Schools are Public Faellities Where Attendance le Mandated
. A higher standard of care may be required for dependent populations.
. Children spend 12"e of their time at school, providing signineant exposure to the likelibcod of incurring an earthquake emergency during school hours
. During winter when weather worsens post disuter problems, that percentage inereues to about 2We l 4. Disaster Psychology Research Findings l
l . Uncertainty about what to do increases anxiety and levens abihty to respond appropriately l . Focus of attention narrown during disater
. .Need short, brief instructions (put and practice)
(
l 6 t
- 8. Inadequate School Staustures
! . Many school buildings were built before earthquake resistance features were required by the Uniform Building Code (UBC)in 1961. The UDC wu not required e the state wide standard until 1975.
. Some school buildings were darnaged by the 1949 and 1965 Wuhington earthquakes.
The weakenins of these buildinse increues thelt susceptibility to future earthquake damage.
- 6. State Law (RCW 28/. 04.130 (10)), (WAC 180 41): Pupil Safety Requiru School Einersency Preparedness
. Schools shall be prepared to take steps u the particular emergency demands, without confusion or panie.
(
7 ELEMENTS OF A SCHOOL EARTHQUAKE SAFETY PROGRAM
(
The goal of a school earthquake safety pivgram is to reduce the vulnerability of students and stan to the life threatening eKeets of earthquakes. Unlike most school emergencies which may be resolved within a period of one or two hours, parents and emergency responders may be unable to reach a schmt following a major earthquake for more than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
The following elements of a school safety program are discussed throughly in the Coi/cleek for Deneloping a SchooI Earingsake Safety Preram (FEMA publication 88,1955, whleh is available from: Marilyn MacCabe, Federal Etaergency Managment Agency, FEMA SL.NT, Room 502,500 C St. S.W., Washington D.C., 20472). Brief information on each element listed below reflecta experience with schools that participated in the School Earthquake Safety and Education Project.
- 1. Forrn a Safety Committee The purpose of the safety committee is to organise and direct the school earthquake safety program. A small group of 3 to 4 members can gather information from key indivi.
duals (such u the principal, nurse and custodian), review the FEMA guidebook, select immediate and long term program goals, and outline the steps necessary to achieve those goals. Pilot schools needed about 5 meetings <<.er a period of six weeks to generate begin.
ning school plans.
g Further
Reference:
Guidebook, p. 711;
- 2. Identify School Earthquake Hasards The purpose of identifying earthquake hasards is twofold: 1) where possible identified huards will be reduced or eliminated and 2) response actions during and immediately after an earthquake need to take the presence of hasards into consideration.
Ilarard checks may be carried out in several ways 1) As student clusroora activities (Guidebook p D9 il); 2) safety committee survey; 3) custodian survey 4) jointly with school district facilitier personnel. Forms are included in the Guidebook (p.15 20).
- 3. Establish and E valuate Drill Procedures The purpose of carrying out earthquake drills is to assure prompt, safe response by students and stan during an earthquake emergeney.
. Learn what to expect (Guidebook p. 25, DS)
Know what action, to take during the shaking (Guidebook p.00, DS-8) and after the shaking stops (Guidebook p. 20 30)
Post a short, simple, clear instruction set (Guidebook p. 26)
Practice and Evaluate Drills (Guidebmk p 3132, D10}
(
=. _ . _ . - -
- .s.
- 4. Plan for immediate Care Needs The purpose of an stamediate care plan la to s.asure that expected life threatening dangers to students and staff following a major earthquake can be responded to quickly and profleiently.
3 . Learn what must be taken care of immediately after the shaking stops (Guide-book, p. 35, p.43)
. Inventory existing staff training and skills to meet those expectations (Guide.
book, p. 35 40, 45)
. Prepare staff response procedures (Guidebook, p. 40,46) i l . Complete additional training as necessary :
Practice and update plan regularly (Guidebook, p. 41) i t i
- 5. Consider Long Term Shelter Needs i
The purpce, of developing a school shelter plan is to provide for student and stati !
i heeds should an exter. 2. : etay (3 4 days) at the school site be neceuary. Many school dis- !
i tricta have agreements with the American Red Cross to use schools as community disaster i cente rs.
1 i
j Further
References:
Guidebmk. p. 40 53; Red Croes Shelter Manarenent Programs !
j . !
l 6. Obtain Necessary Supplies and Equipment 1
- ,. q j The purpose of maintaining emergency supplies and equipment at the schoolis to have ;
euentialitems available to meet life safety needs. See the following br more information: !
)l Classroom Earthquake litt (Guidebook p. B 17) !
I
- 7. Inform and involve Students and Parenta in Earthquake Preparednese Activi.
l ties, i ,
] The purpose of involving students and parents in earshquake preparedness activities is t I to improve their ability to respond safely during a major earthquake. It is important {
j that students and parents undentand the need for schml emergency planning, how to l l respond safely during : earthquake emergency and how to be a resource, not a prob. t j lem, after the shaking stops. Consider putting information into the school newsletter, J 1
holding .tudent assemblies on earthquake safety, classroom activities, PTA meetings l l and other communication channels. ;
i l J !
2 l i i i
- i l
1 5I\
4 l
i l
l 1 l i
i i
I 1
1 9
)
l PROGRAM SUPPORT !
Earthquaku do not respect political, geographleal, jurisdictional, or occupational boun- i 1 .
daties. The vut number of afected groups and individuals increases the complexity of the i
i disaster, but also provides an increased number of potential helpers. The FEMA "Guide.
book for the Development of A School Earthquake Safety Program" focuns on how an indi.
vidual school can develop a school earthquake emergency program. This section outlines a i
few of the many partners within the community that can assist your school in program
]
i development.
- 1. Dietelet involvement 1
1 4 ' Planning for earthquakes depends on policy decisions. Most polieles, or planning guide-lines, are best resolved by the office of the district superintendent. Schools can bue their
! response procedures and preparedneu programs on district wide policies." (*Cuidelines for School Earthquake Safety Planning
- by the Southern California Earthquake Preratedneu
- Project, SCEPP).
1 The following are suggested key policy luues:
Earthquake Responu Policy (institute district wide response procedures. to include both initial response actions . such a drop and cover p well u staff response pro-cedures to cover immediate care needs,like medical and utilities inspection) i 4
. Evacuation Policy (Establish a uniform district-wide evacuation procedure) 4 ,
4 -
Retention Policy (Whether to retain or disperse students following evacuation)
Supernion Policy (Whether teacher = will be required to stay with students) 9 Shelter Policy (Will the school become a community mus care shelter)
Inspection Policy (Whether to establish uniform d; strict inspections for earthquake hasards in school buildings and on site) i
. Earthquake Education Policy (Establish district guidelines for on going student edu-cation on earthquake causes. effects and response actions) ll
- 2. American Red Cross J
t Basic aid training for grades 4 0 1
Home preparedness program for staff and parenti
. Coordinate communication network i
. Shelter management training j First aid and CPR training for staff and parents i
i
(
i 4
4
10
- 3. Fire Departament
. Search and rucue training
. Use of Ste extinguishers
. Include earthquake safety information within school Are safety programs -
. Participate in communleation network
. Inform schools of increased response time during major earthquaku
- 4. Emergency Manasement
. Assist in developing school emergency plans
. Distribute earthquake safety handouts
. Provide speakers for student, staff, and parent groups I
I
)
i
(
WASHINGTON STATE EARTHQUAKES 1840 -
1986 Intensity Vil or greater.or felt area greater than 50,000 km2 125.00 123.00 117.0 0
, 121.0 0 119.0 0 49.00- 1 49.00
),(4909 8 tib a t h t*, [
'8 i 48.00-kr '
,,gg, P t.e e;' 48.03 1904 e j h gefe,' _.
tg 5, t:e
, / SP:40'e 194 691965*1945 '
00- l9396 ii'*i' M
i
. . 1 46.00 d
. *19 81 s f ahcy ***"***"'
1 46.0: ,
3 l la tgeg t, O 8 ril4 3 m$ 9 Yl!
1877 o- ,p) S yni ir O Le: tion wxette n 45.00 l ***
- 4 5.0" 12500 ' '
12300 !21.00 ilU.OO M7.00 l
Figure 1 !
\
( Revised Seismic Zone Map Proposed by SEAOC The Seamologi Comminee of the Structurallegineers Associa, mod,hed based on the informahon prouded bs the Structural tes'.
t.on of Cabforn.a t5tAOCr has been acinets prepanns a te,4ed nee's A >ociahons of Arizona, Hawan. tdaho. m$hieston and p coosal for a code charge to Unaorm 8 wilding Code 5cchon Cahfornia. arid the Portlaad Cement Associanos 2312. Ai part of that chort, they haie been prepanng an wndated se.Smic soning map A tentata e proposed toning map is presented The eracha used for dehning the bowa danes w ere estabiahed b, herewith for informahon and to encowrage comment the 5eamology Committee of the Siewctwralleg,neeri Association of Caioornia. The cntena a'e as follow 6 The heti draft of the tentain e proposed se4mic tone rnap was prepared wohains data fro n the following sources: Zone IPA.f*V 4
lenlaine Prounicalio'the Des elopment of Se4mec Regu* ,
j fahomi for Bwild'est. ATC 3, Figs e C13, Figure Cl.4, Fig.
wre Cl 5 and Figwr eCl 6 y ,m
, ,,,,legg
, g gthey .)
1 Probab4the istimaies of Manimum Acce'eranon and Ve- 05 to lein than .1 locas in Rock in The Covgvous Unded Sta'es. USC5 open o legg tsan c3 (de Report 82103 3. Plate 2 and Plate 5. ISF8'Sh0" ' modificaten of the testahse tone mao sun be Ihe re'erenced faaps are based on risk probab1ty Co9tider. welcomed h by the Internanonal Cer'e ence oi Swa d.rg Othciat i and t e 5edmology Committee of t he $t*wctural(eg nee's Anocia+ abont nith the Stated les el ol 90 percent probabilit) that the valweg t on et California. Recommendabom6 thCv!d be twbmitled, acccm-Wdl not be etcteded in a 30 sear penod. panied by supporting geoles cal and seamoles cat data substamb. T he t utt drait 01 the propo$ed map w aldithb6ted to J nLmber of ahng the recommend 4 hon. to-eagietenPB albociabCnl a*d to otherl who have p'euovil, et. p'el6ed an inte'est en Se4m C sonieg The rnap presented here in Keneeth A Luttrell. Chairman, Se4mologs Committee Co't, ice, Sc hwtert & Anocia'es nbil tentaMe CTmdi*g add I onal technicalinDyt tro'n k*ow'ed[e- 1515 Raer Pa'k Orne. Swite 220 ab'e 6eercel. The to*e bowmca'iel Shown on the f all d'a'l were $acramento, C A 95813 m I s A F ACPCSED S E:$u:C ZCNE MAP *
'23 1
2 3 {E 1 0 2; E b b3 1 E j na (
/\
o3 5 1 0 E
),
l
' , Y
, I' /4' i i i; y, , i\
p 1; D ) , e , N. W ' , - j 4 , p.j 41, s
. i; 3.
2 m* .;/'Y,' 4A A'
\ '
{..+,Sh>L__/,h
%p a
... ,. i,,.
FICURE 2 l
Il ( , I " wen 1; ,,
, . pi ,
i i 3 ( fi /g nS h wy P .q t i.n.on. i! 4 19 ~p~bJL3, typhq r i fs bi i 7# 1 me 33 .
. S, -
v lg , ,t
;11 id , t ib y4,.A,Pc/ur o,
sa p h- I, l,\u.jp i '
*,.1 ;.i'tj
$n s
! i,1f -
.1 v. f. ' s I e M D).Its
'e ju.
f;1;
\
\ lL/ 7,h Y .
;.T hY()rpg;..,.f,'\x;n e e 1
o f. /m, 9 I. { p\f+* (1 i . r)2 sis [y Lr, - m
.g.i i.
I,
,4 1 e .. f i
i; 3 1 { N J tj , Q
$ .,i(fr jl 0 i-t)j rN
' 11;;
4 '$., " \ h<g p p [L.,L,Q^r,p)W,f1m
.y
~
t's a ]n J 3._l~*I>/' 8 1 i, 7 i . m,
<pyht) rf i l; 3 w 7.a Q4).)
gf ,! ? p.
; a z Qw.T,'LyJhi.o-p7h' p. ,4 .s - . g c1 .
V@A ., t
;$h.,yfs.ij%p$c-l J
i, ' j vgg. ,,Qh, 4 l l
( , MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE
- 1. Not f elt except by a very few under especially f avorable circum- i stances.
II. Telt only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper floors of buildings. Delicately suspended objects may swing. III. yelt quite noticeably indoors, especially on upper floors of build-ings, but many people do not recognise it as an earthquake. Stand- ! ing motor cars may rock slightly. Vibration like passing of truck. Duration estimated. L IV. During the day felt indoors by many, outdoors by few. At night some awakened. Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; valls made creaking sound. Sensation like heavy truck striking building. Standing motor cars rocked noticeably. V. yett by nearly everyone; many awakened. Some dishes, vindows, 5 etc., broken a few instances of cracked plasterg unstable ob-
- jects overturned. Disturbance of trees, poles, and other tall ,
objects sometimes noticed. Pendulum clocks may stop. l VI. yelt by all: many frightened and run outdoors. Sese heavy furni-ture moved; a few instances of f allen plaster or damaged chimneys. Damage slight. l VII. Everybody runs outdoors. Dasage negligible in buildings of good design and constructient slight to moderate in well-built ordi-cary structures; considerable in poorly built or badly designed - structures; some chimneys brcreen. Noticed by persons driving j antor cars. VIII. Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable in : i ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse; great in ! Poorly built structures. Fanel walls thrown out of frase struc . tures. l Fall of chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, < walls. Heavy furniture o'erturned. Sand and mud ejected in ' es.sil amounts. Changes in well water. Disturbed persons driv-i ing motor cars. l ZX. Damage considerable in specially designed structurest well-designed ' f rame structures thrown out of plumbi great in substantial build-ings, with partial collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations. Ground cracked conspicuously. Underground pipes broken. . ( FIGURE 4
~
( 0 X. Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and f rame structures destroyed with foundations: ground badly cracked. Rails bent. Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes. Shif ted sand and mud. Water splashed (slopped) over banks. XI. Tow, if any, (masonry) structures remain standing. Bridges des-troyed. Broad fiesuras in ground. Underground pipe lines com-plately out of service. Earth slumps and land slips in soft ground. Rails bent greatly. XII. Damage total. Waves seen on ground surfaces. Lines of sight and level distorted. Objects thrown upward into the air.
- See (Wood and Neumann,1931) for complete details of this Intensity Scale, i
i .I 1 I 1 1 i I ~ l l ) ) l I I}}