Preparedness is the shared responsibility of all levels of government, the private and nonprofit sectors, and individual citizens. Individuals and households are at the core of our Nation's preparedness. A community's ability to respond to or recover from a disaster depends on the level of preparedness of every member. However, a 2009 Citizen Corps National Survey found that 29 percent of Americans have not prepared because they think that emergency responders will help them and that over 60 percent expect to rely on emergency responders in the first 72 hours following a disaster. The reality is that in a complex disaster, first responders and emergency workers may not be able to reach everyone right away. In addition, providers may not be able to restore critical services, such as power, immediately. The purpose of this initiative is to promote personal and community preparedness through engaging activities for individuals, neighbors, or households. These activities are a set of building blocks. You can mix and match the activities based on the needs of your target audience or time available. Most activities can be completed during a 15-minute to 60-minute session. You should adapt the materials to include critical local information, such as information on local hazards, local alerts and warnings, and local community response resources and protocols. Remember, preparedness does not have to be complex or overly time consuming. Rather, it should motivate, empower, and engage the whole community.

Fire departments in the United States responded to nearly 1.6 million fire calls in 2007. The United States fire problem, on a per capita basis, is one of the worst in the industrial world. Thousands of Americans die each year, tens of thousands of people are injured, and property losses reach billions of dollars. There are huge indirect costs of fire as well-temporary lodging, lost business, medical expenses, psychological damage, and others. These indirect costs may be as much as 8- to 10-times higher than the direct costs of fire. To put this in context, the annual losses from floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, and other natural disasters combined in the United States average just a fraction of those from fires. The public, the media, and local governments generally are unaware of the magnitude and seriousness of the fire problem to individuals and their families, to communities, and to the Nation. The National Fire Data Center (NFDC) of the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) periodically publishes Fire in the United States, a statistical overview of the fires in the United States with the focus on the latest year in which data were available at the time of preparation. This report is designed to equip the fire service and others with information that motivates corrective action, sets priorities, targets specific fire programs, serves as a model for State and local analyses of fire data, and provides a baseline for evaluating programs. This Fifteenth Edition covers the 5-year period of 2003 to 2007 with a primary focus on 2007. Only native National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) 5.0 data are used for NFIRS-based analyses. In 2007, the native NFIRS 5.0 data account for 98 percent of the fire incident data. The report addresses the overall national fire problem.

Past storms such as Hurricanes Andrew, Hugo, Charley, Katrina, and Rita, and recent events such as Hurricane Ike continue to show the vulnerability of our built environment. While good design and construction cannot totally eliminate risk, every storm has shown that sound design and construction can significantly reduce the risk to life and damage to property. With that in mind, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has developed this manual to help the community of homebuilders, contractors, and local engineering professionals in rebuilding homes destroyed by hurricanes, and designing and building safer and less vulnerable new homes. The intent of the manual is to provide homebuilders, contractors, and engineering professionals with a series of recommended foundation designs that will help create safer and stronger buildings in coastal areas. The designs are intended to help support rebuilding efforts after coastal areas have been damaged by floods, high winds, or other natural hazards. The foundations may differ somewhat from traditional construction techniques; however, they represent what are considered to be some of the better approaches to constructing strong and safe foundations in hazardous coastal areas. The objectives used to guide the development of this manual are: To provide residential foundation designs that will require minimal engineering oversight; To provide foundation designs that are flexible enough to accommodate many of the homes identified in A Pattern Book for Gulf Coast Neighborhoods prepared for the Mississippi Governor's Rebuilding Commission on Recovery, Rebuilding, and Renewal; To utilize model layouts so that many homes can be constructed without significant additional engineering efforts. The focus of this document is on the foundations of residential buildings. The assumption is that those who are designing and building new homes will be responsible for ensuring that the building itself is designed according to the latest building code (International Building Code(r), International Residential Code(r), and FEMA guidance) and any local requirements. The user of this manual is directed to other publications that also address disaster-resistant construction. Although the foundation designs are geared to the coastal environment subject to storm surge, waves, floating debris, and high winds, several are suitable for supporting homes on sites protected by levees and floodwalls or in riverine areas subjected to high-velocity flows. Design professionals can be contacted to ensure the foundation designs provided in this manual are suitable for specific sites. This edition of FEMA 550 introduces the Case H foundation, which is an open/deep foundation developed for use in coastal high hazard areas (V zones). It is also appropriate to use the Case H foundation in Coastal A and non-coastal A zones. Case H foundations incorporate elevated reinforced concrete beams that provide three important benefits. One, the elevated beams work in conjunction with the reinforced concrete columns and grade beams to produce a structural frame that is more efficient at resisting lateral loads than the grade beams and cantilevered columns used in other FEMA 550 open foundations. The increased efficiency allows foundations to be constructed with smaller columns that are less exposed to flood forces. The second benefit is that the elevated reinforced concrete beams provide a continuous foundation that can support many homes constructed to prescriptive designs from codes and standards such as the IRC, the American Forest and Paper Association's Wood Frame Construction Manual for One- and Two-Family Dwellings (WFCM), and the International Code Council's Standard for Residential Construction in High Wind Regions (ICC-600). The third benefit that Case H foundations provide is the ability to support relatively narrow homes. It is anticipated that Case H foundations can be used for several styles of modular ho

This guide was developed to fulfill several different objectives and address a wide audience with varying needs. The primary intent is to explain the sources of nonstructural earthquake damage in simple terms and to provide information on effective methods of reducing the potential risks. The recommendations contained in this guide are intended to reduce the potential hazards but cannot completely eliminate them. The primary focus of this guide is to help the reader understand which nonstructural items are most vulnerable in an earthquake and most likely to cause personal injury, costly property damage, or loss of function if they are damaged. In addition, this guide contains recommendations on how to implement cost effective measures that can help to reduce the potential hazards. This guide is intended primarily for use by a lay Audience building owners, facilities managers, maintenance personnel, store or office managers, corporate/agency department heads, business proprietors, homeowners, etc. Some readers may be small-business owners with a small number of potential problems that could be addressed in a few days' time by having at handyman install some of the generic details presented in this guide. Other readers may be responsible for hundreds of facilities and may need a survey methodology to help them understand the magnitude of their potential problems.

Early on the morning of 4th September 2010, a series of seismic events began to unfold in Christchurch, New Zealand. They would eventually take 185 lives and directly affect hundreds of thousands of men, women and children. This book is a compilation of stories from some of these people. Preschoolers, teenagers, families, and retirees tell of the impact of the ongoing earthquakes and aftershocks, the emotional and physical toll they exacted, and their hope for a new Christchurch. They reflect the incredible resilience the people of Canterbury have shown throughout this devastating time. Some of the stories are poignant, some humorous, some shocking and some sad. All of them are from the heart and deserve to be heard. Magnitude 7.1 & 6.3 was put together by Debbie Roome who is an award-winning novelist and freelance writer with 25 years experience.

Earthquakes represent an enormous threat to the Nation. Although damaging earthquakes occur infrequently, their consequences can be staggering. As recent earthquakes around the world have demonstrated, high population densities and development pressures, particularly in urban areas, are increasingly vulnerable. Unacceptably high loss of life and enormous economic consequences are associated with recent global earthquakes, and it is only a matter of time before the United States faces a similar experience. Earthquakes cannot be prevented, but their impacts can be managed to a large degree so that loss to life and property can be reduced. To this end, the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) seeks to mitigate earthquake losses in the U.S. through both basic and directed research and implementation activities in the fields of earthquake science and engineering. This program is authorized and funded by Congress and is managed as a collaborative effort among the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the United States Geological Survey (USGS). These four Federal organizations work in close coordination to improve the Nation's understanding of earthquake hazards and to mitigate their effects. The missions of the four agencies are complementary: FEMA, a component of the Department of Homeland Security, works with states, local governments, and the public to develop tools and improve policies and practices that reduce earthquake losses; NIST enables technology innovation in earthquake engineering by working with industry to remove technical barriers, evaluate advanced technologies, and develop the measurement and prediction tools underpinning performance standards for buildings and lifelines; NSF strives to advance fundamental knowledge in earthquake engineering, earth science processes, and societal preparedness and response to earthquakes; and USGS monitors earthquakes, assesses seismic hazard for the Nation, and researches the basic earth science processes controlling earthquake occurrence and effects. Mindful of the increasing threat posed by earthquakes, NEHRP initiated a review of the scientific goals and strategies of the Program and a discussion of the opportunities and priorities for the five-year interval 2001-2005. This review and discussion culminated in the new strategic plan presented here. Shaping the plan are four goals that represent the continuum of activities in the Program, ranging from research and development to application and implementation. These four goals are as follows: A. Develop effective practices and policies for earthquake loss-reduction and accelerate their implementation. B. Improve techniques to reduce seismic vulnerability of facilities and systems. C. Improve seismic hazard identification and risk assessment methods and their use. D. Improve the understanding of earthquakes and their effects.

This FEMA 154 Report, Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings for Potential Seismic Hazards: A Handbook, is the first of a two-volume publication on a recommended methodology for rapid visual screening of buildings for potential seismic hazards. The technical basis for the methodology, including the scoring system and its development, are contained in the companion FEMA 155 report, Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings for Potential Seismic Hazards: Supporting Documentation. The rapid visual screening procedure (RVS) has been developed for a broad audience, including building officials and inspectors, and government agency and private-sector building owners, to identify, inventory, and rank buildings that are potentially seismically hazardous. Although RVS is applicable to all buildings, its principal purpose is to identify (1) older buildings designed and constructed before the adoption of adequate seismic design and detailing requirements, (2) buildings on soft or poor soils, or (3) buildings having performance characteristics that negatively influence their seismic response. Once identified as potentially hazardous, such buildings should be further evaluated by a design professional experienced in seismic design to determine if, in fact, they are seismically hazardous. The RVS uses a methodology based on a "sidewalk survey" of a building and a Data Collection Form, which the person conducting the survey (hereafter referred to as the screener) completes, based on visual observation of the building from the exterior, and if possible, the interior. The Data Collection Form includes space for documenting building identification information, including its use and size, a photograph of the building, sketches, and documentation of pertinent data related to seismic performance, including the development of a numeric seismic hazard score. Once the decision to conduct rapid visual screening for a community or group of buildings has been made by the RVS authority, the screening effort can be expedited by pre-planning, including the training of screeners, and careful overall management of the process. Completion of the Data Collection Form in the field begins with identifying the primary structural lateral-load-resisting system and structural materials of the building. Basic Structural Hazard Scores for various building types are provided on the form, and the screener circles the appropriate one. For many buildings, viewed only from the exterior, this important decision requires the screener to be trained and experienced in building construction. The procedure presented in this Handbook is meant to be the preliminary screening phase of a multi-phase procedure for identifying potentially hazardous buildings. Buildings identified by this procedure must be analyzed in more detail by an experienced seismic design professional. Because rapid visual screening is designed to be performed from the street, with interior inspection not always possible, hazardous details will not always be visible, and seismically hazardous buildings may not be identified as such. Conversely, buildings initially identified as potentially hazardous by RVS may prove to be adequate.

Nonstructural failures have accounted for the majority of earthquake damage in several recent U.S. earthquakes. Thus, it is critical to raise awareness of potential nonstructural risks, the costly consequences of nonstructural failures, and the opportunities that exist to limit future losses. Nonstructural components of a building include all of those components that are not part of the structural system; that is, all of the architectural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, as well as furniture, fixtures, equipment, and contents. Windows, partitions, granite veneer, piping, ceilings, air conditioning ducts and equipment, elevators, computer and hospital equipment, file cabinets, and retail merchandise are all examples of nonstructural components that are vulnerable to earthquake damage. The primary purpose of this guide is to explain the sources of nonstructural earthquake damage and to describe methods for reducing the potential risks in simple terms. This guide is intended for use by a non-engineer audience located within the United States; this audience includes building owners, facility managers, maintenance personnel, store or office managers, corporate or agency department heads, business proprietors, risk managers, and safety personnel. The guide is also designed to be useful for design professionals, especially those who are not experienced with seismic protection of nonstructural components. It addresses nonstructural issues typically found in schools, office buildings, retail stores, hotels, data centers, hospitals, museums, and light manufacturing facilities. FEMA 74 explains the sources of earthquake damage that can occur in nonstructural components and provides information on effective methods for reducing risk associated with nonstructural earthquake damage. It is intended for use by a non-engineer audience that includes building owners, facility managers, maintenance personnel, store or office managers, corporate or agency department heads, and homeowners. The reference material contained within the third edition of FEMA 74 is now approaching 20 years old. A considerable amount of new information now exists as a result of ongoing National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) activities, local and state government programs, private sector initiatives, and academic work focused on reducing the potential for nonstructural earthquake damage.

Although earthquakes are an inevitable hazard, they are not inevitable disasters. Experiences in recent years have shown consistently that lifelines properly designed to resist earthquakes perform well in spite of severe earthquakes; those not so designed are subject to failure. Assessments of earthquake hazards indicate that one or more severe earthquakes can be expected to strike U.S. metropolitan areas in the next decade. Until actions are taken to improve the design and construction of lifelines, failures can be expected to result in substantial losses--estimated at billions of dollars and many lives for a single severe earthquake. The plan described in this document defines a process that, if activated, will begin the development of seismic design guidelines and standards for both new and existing lifelines. Lifelines are the public works and utility systems that support most human activities: individual, family, economic, political, and cultural. The various lifelines can be classified under the following five systems: electric power, gas and liquid fuels, telecommunications, transportation, and water supply and sewers. This plan for developing and adopting seismic design and construction guidelines and standards for lifelines has been prepared in response to Public Law 101-614, the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) Reauthorization Act. The act requires the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), in consultation with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), to develop "a plan, including precise timetables and budget estimates, for developing and adopting, in consultation with appropriate private sector organizations, design and construction standards for lifelines" and "recommendations of ways Federal regulatory authority could be used to expedite the implementation of such standards." The Plan focuses on developing recommendations, encouraging and supporting the approval of these recommendations by the standards and professional organizations serving the lifeline community, and working with the lifeline community to achieve their effective implementation. Design guidelines lay out a set of principles, which for lifelines may include performance criteria, materials characteristics, and testing procedures for design, construction, maintenance, repair, and retrofitting of both existing and proposed systems. Guidelines provide a basis for making judgments or determining a course of action; they may evolve into recommendations for standards. A standard, according to the National Standards Policy Advisory Committee, is "a prescribed set of rules, conditions, or requirements concerning definitions of terms; classification of components; specification of materials, performance, or operation; delineation of procedures; or measurement of quantity and quality in describing materials, products, systems, services, or practices." Properly developed and effectively implemented lifeline seismic guidelines and standards will significantly reduce the vulnerability of both existing and proposed lifeline systems to future earthquakes. Guidelines and standards should (1) establish performance criteria for the construction, maintenance, and operation of existing and proposed lifeline systems, equipment, and materials for selected levels of seismic risk; (2) provide a basis for technical specifications for use by buyers and sellers of lifeline products and services to reduce the vulnerability of lifeline systems to earthquakes; and (3) provide a reliable basis for regulations to protect the public health, safety, and welfare.