Mid-America Regional Advisory Committee
for the
Advanced National Seismic System
Meeting Summary
November 28-29, 2000, Memphis, TN
Brief Summary
The Mid-America Regional advisory committee for the Advanced National Seismic System met on November 28-29, 2000 at the Fogelman Executive Conference Center in Memphis, TN. Significant discussions revolved around the development of a management and implemenation plan particularly with respect to mechanisms for ANSS data flow, management, technical support, and products. Primary conclusions were selection of Bob Herrmann, Saint Louis University as the Committee Chair and Mitch Withers, University of Memphis, CERI as the Regional Coordinator. A siting strawman for FY2001 strong motion seismographs was also developed.
Participants
| Jim Beavers | Mid-America Earthquake Center |
| Larry Braile | Purdue University |
| Mehmet Celebi | USGS, Menlo Park |
| Martin Chapman | Virginia Tech |
| Joan Gomberg | USGS, Memphis |
| Bob Herrmann | St Louis University |
| John Kiefer | Kentucky Geological Survey |
| Tom Owens | University of South Carolina |
| Gary Patterson | University of Memphis, CERI |
| Gary Pavlis | Indiana University |
| Ron Porcella | USGS, NSMP |
| Glen Rix | Georgia Tech |
| Tom Roeseler | Bank of America |
| Jim Wilkinson | CUSEC |
| Steve Williamson | Army Corps of Engineers |
| Mitch Withers | University of Memphis, CERI |
Extended Summary
Withers provided an update on ANSS activities including summary of National Steering Committee meeting minutes from July, TIC and subcommittees, and enactment HR1550 authorizing full ANSS funding. He also provided a review of current seismic network activity including regional network connectivity and operational status.
Communications will be a significan concern for ANSS. We need to be aware of the activities of the Network of Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES) and Internet 2. Alternate redundant communications paths will be necessary. The bandwidth used by ANSS is in the noise however public internet may still become significantly slowed and unreliable during periods of peak usage. In many places, the limiting factor is still the local hardware.
Considerable discussion took place on the Education and Outreach Program. Gary Patterson is taking the lead on developing the ANSS-MA E&O program. The importance of E&O was unquestioned but it remains to be seen what ANSS resources will be available for the program. Extant strong education efforts already in place by organizations such as the MAE Center, IRIS, and PEPP should be leveraged to avoid duplication of effort. There was a consensus that the primary purpose of ANSS is monitoring but there still needs to be some E&O commitment. Education should be targeted toward several groups including K-6,12, and 20, public awareness, science literacy, developers, local officials, and legistlators. It is important to take advantage of teachable moments such as a nationally and locally newsworthy earthquakes.
From a business perspective, several issues are important. Need to get EMA awareness and invovlement at federal, state and local levels. Insurance industry is an important stakeholder. Business needs to make informed choices for deployment of resources which ideally would be estimate of risk at zip code resolution. Need to know what the probabilities are in non-scientific terms. Need to know potential impact on vital services such as power, water, etc and likely recovery times.
Potential broadband sites for outyears to monitor the central U.S. include St. Joseph, MO, Fayetteville, AR, Chicago, Ames, IA, Lexington, KY, Ohio, and upgrades. Need broad regional coverage; not just urban strong motion.
Instrumented structures within the region include Sedgewick ctr, Memphis, One Bell ctr, St Louis, Old VA Hospital, Memphis, New VA Hospital, Memphis (planned), Autozone, Memphis, Cape Girardeau Bridge (3/2003), I-40 bridge (2002). NSMP has 12 modern digital sm stations within the NMSZ. The Kentucky Geological Survey and Lamont also operate strong motion networks in the region. Most sites need at least communications upgrades and many need complete replacement. As NSMP performs upgrades, a prioritized list of sites from the regional committee would be useful input.
Because of the difficulty in establishing criteri and selection of structures for instrumentation before the end of FY2000 (Sept. 30, 2000), it was suggested not to instrument structures using FY2000 allocation. However, in order to be prepared and instrument structure(s) during FY2001 and beyond, a subcommittee including M. Celebi, J. Beavers and others (Jim Beavers: Please identify the other two_..... ) will meet and develop criteria and recommend structures before FY2001 starts. They may meet in Monterey, Ca. during the EERI Annual Meeting in February 2001.
Many response groups throughout the region cooperate and beginning in 2001, CUSEC is planning to have its annual meeting be a forum for these groups to interact. FEMA is pushing to get HAZUS used more widely. Many CUSEC states are rural in nature; how do we apply lessons learned from urban networks to rural communities?
Broadband and strongmotion sensors are not required for small events. Small events are of greater interest in the MA region but denser coverage will be required. This implies supporting short-period networks. It is possible to provide reduced thresholds using phase arrays.
According to the minutes of the July meeting of the Interim National Steering Committee, the regional coordinator and chair of the regional advisory committee should be independent. As Withers was previously filling both roles, a motion was made to nominate Bob Herrmann as the committee chair. The motion was seconded, and passed unanimously.
The ANSS organizational diagram was discussed. Given that most stakeholders are represented on the advisory committee, it was determined that the end users advisory group is redundant. Feedback mechanisms from end users to both the advisory committee and the E&O program will remain.
The 3-tier diagram was originally intended to represent multiple parameters including, rapid products, review products, archive products, technical support, and management. While these may indeed be represented in similar fashions, a single diagram does not faithfully illustrate the ideas. Instead, four diagrams should be employed: near-real-time data flow, maintenance (tech support), expertise, and data processing.
Products were discussed. Existing capabilities will be expanded for the entire region. Incorporation of shake maps will best be done with a phased approach. Initially, model attenuation and site response to produce a map based on magnitude and location. Add regional/local specific parameters as they become available. Adjust with data points as more stations become available. All data points need not necessarily be strong motion.
A siting plan for 18 strongmotion sensors in FY2001 was discussed. Several scenarios were desirable and distilled into one. Goals include refining attenuation, site reponse, and embayment resonance implying a linear array. There was a consensus that Memphis is the first urban network target. Reference sites for upcoming instrumented bridges are also needed. A broad grid for potential shake map development is also desirable. To increase the probability of near field recording of a large event, wide spatial coverage is required. Deployment to enhance outreach and education is also desirable. The best compromise is as follows:
The siting working group will have a workshop to discuss priorities for out years. This workshop will likely be held at the next EERI meeting. The committee will need to meet again in late summer. The purpose of this meeting will be to discuss the national implemenation plan (expected to be completed by July, 2001) and how it is folded into the ANSS-MA implementation plan.
Withers will make the appropriate adjustments to the draft plan with a goal of submission for public comment in early 2001.