The datasets developed during a project are provided to the community, and the information allows the community to determine whether the higher risk areas require more stringent building codes. Both regulatory and non-regulatory products are presented to the community in a series of Risk MAP meetings. The meetings also include information about Building Science Branch resources, such as the Building Science Toolkit CD, NFIP technical bulletins, disaster recovery advisories, building code assistance, web links, desk references, training resources, and technical publications, all of which can help the community meet FEMA's goal of fostering resilience through hazard-resistant structure design that leads to reducing the loss of life and property in hazard events.

Emergency Medical Services (EMS) agencies regardless of service delivery model have sought guidance on how to better integrate their emergency preparedness and response activities into similar processes occurring at the local, regional, State, tribal and Federal levels. The primary purpose of this project is to begin the process of providing that guidance as it relates to mass care incident deployment. The World Bank reported in 2005 that on aggregate, the reported number of natural disasters worldwide has been rapidly increasing, from fewer than 100 in 1975 to more than 400 in 2005. Terrorism, pandemic surge, and natural disasters have had a major impact on the science of planning for and responding to mass care incidents and remain a significant threat to the homeland. From the attacks of September 11th, 2001, the subsequent use of anthrax as a biological weapon, to the more recent surge concerns following the outbreak of H1N1 influenza, EMS have a real and immediate need for integration with the emergency management process, and to coordinate efforts with partners across the spectrum of the response community. The barriers identified from the literature review and interviews with national EMS leadership include: lack of access to emergency preparedness grant funding; underrepresentation on local, regional, and State level planning committees; and lack of systematic mandatory inclusion of all EMS provider types in State, regional, and local emergency plans. In December 2004, New York University's Center for Catastrophe Preparedness and Response held a national roundtable that included experts from major organizations representing the EMS system as a whole. The report from that meeting concluded that: "EMS providers, such as fire departments and hospital-based, commercial, and air ambulance services, ensure that patients receive the medical care they need during a terrorist attack. While EMS personnel, including Emergency Medical Technicians and paramedics, represent roughly one-third of traditional first responders (which also include law enforcement and fire service personnel), the EMS system receives only four percent of first responder funding. If EMS personnel are not prepared for a terrorist attack, their ability to provide medical care and transport to victims of an attack will be compromised. There will be an inadequate medical first response." In 2007, the Institute of Medicine in its landmark report Emergency Medical Services at the Crossroads issued a recommendation that stated: "The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the Department of Homeland Security and the States should elevate emergency and trauma care to a position of parity with other public safety entities in disaster planning and operations." Since the time of these reports Federal progress to address these issues has included the creation of the Office of Health Affairs (OHA) within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the creation of the Emergency Care Coordination Center (ECCC) within HHS, and the creation of the Federal Interagency Committee on EMS (FICEMS) Preparedness Committee. In an effort to increase the level of preparedness among EMS agencies, the National Emergency Medical Services Management Association (NEMSMA) approached the DHS and OHA to engage them in a partnership that would provide a greater understanding of the shortfalls in EMS emergency preparedness and provide resources to fill those gaps. The primary objective of this project is to understand model policies and practices across a spectrum of disciplines and provider types that will lead to a better prepared EMS deployment to mass care incidents. This project should serve as a foundation for further development of EMS specific policies and templates that improve EMS readiness to manage the full spectrum of hazards that face their communities.

Homeland Security Presidential Directive - 7 (December 2003) established the requirement to protect national critical infrastructures against acts that would diminish the responsibility of federal, state, and local government to perform essential missions to ensure the health and safety of the general public. HSPD-7 identified the Emergency Services as a national critical infrastructure sector that must be protected from all hazards. The Emergency Management and Response-Information Sharing and Analysis Center (EMR-ISAC) activities support the critical infrastructure protection and resilience of Emergency Services Sector departments and agencies nationwide. The fire service, emergency medical services, law enforcement, emergency management, and 9-1-1 Call Centers are the major components of the Emergency Services Sector. These components include search and rescue, hazardous materials (HAZMAT) teams, special weapons and tactics teams (SWAT), bomb squads, and other emergency support functions. This Job Aid is a guide to assist leaders of the Emergency Services Sector (ESS) with the process of critical infrastructure protection (CIP). The document intends only to provide a model process or template for the systematic protection of critical infrastructures. It is not a CIP training manual or a complete road map of procedures to be strictly followed. The CIP process described in this document can be easily adapted to assist the infrastructure protection objectives of any community, service, department, agency, or organization.

This report contains research on behaviors and other factors contributing to the rural fire problem; identifies mitigation programs, technologies, and strategies to address those problems; and proposes actions that USFA can take to better implement programs in rural communities. In the Spring of 2004, the U S Fire Administration (USFA) partnered with the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) in a cooperative agreement project entitled Mitigating the Rural Fire Problem. The purpose of the project was to examine what can be done to reduce the high death rate from fires in rural U S communities. Rural communities, defined by the U S Census Bureau as communities with less than 2,500 population, have a fire death rate twice the national average. The objectives of the project were to a) conduct research on behaviors and other factors contributing to the rural fire problem, b) identify mitigation programs, technologies, and strategies to address those problems, and c) propose actions that USFA Public Education Division can take to better implement programs in rural communities. Research sources included a review of the published literature, some original statistical analysis, and information from national technical experts who have worked with NFPA.

Each year, approximately 1,100 Americans 65 and older die in home fires and another 3,000 are injured. These statistics, combined with the fact that adults ages 50 or more care for and will soon enter this high-risk group, inspired USFA to develop a new public education campaign targeting people ages 50-plus, their families and caregivers. People between 65 and 74 are nearly twice as likely to die in a home fire as the rest of the population. People between 75 and 84 are nearly four times as likely to die in a fire. People ages 85 and older are more than five times as likely to die in a fire. A Fire Safety Campaign for People 50-Plus encourages people ages 50 and older - including the high risk 65-plus group - to practice fire-safe behaviors to reduce fire deaths and injuries. The strategy is to inform and motivate adults as they enter their fifties so that stronger fire safety and prevention practices are integrated into their lives prior to entering the higher fire-risk decades. In addition, many Baby Boomers are currently caring for family members ages 65-plus and can encourage fire safe habits.

The United States Fire Administration (USFA) is committed to using all means possible for reducing the incidence of injuries and deaths to firefighters. One of these means is to partner with other people and organizations who share this same admirable goal. One such organization is the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF). The IAFF has been deeply committed to improving the safety of its members and all firefighters as a whole. This is why the USFA was pleased to work with the IAFF through a cooperative agreement to develop this revised edition of Emergency Incident Rehabilitation.

Earthquakes are potentially the most destructive of all natural disasters in both loss of life and property damage. Casualties and structural damage result from intense ground shaking and such secondary effects as fires, landslides, ground subsidence, and flooding from dam collapse or tsunamis. While earthquakes in the United States are commonly associated with the West Coast, particularly California, 39 states altogether face some degree of seismic risk. Seventy million people and at least nine metropolitan areas are susceptible to severe earthquakes. Nevertheless, California has been the focal point of most earthquake studies due to its high frequency of events (two thirds of all earthquakes have occurred in California), large population and extensive property development. But the high frequency of earthquakes alone does not warrant the amount of official and scientific attention these events have received. It is the rare and devastating earthquake such as the 1906 San Francisco quake and the 1964 Alaska event, both of which measured more than 8 on the Richter Scale. Earthquakes of this magnitude could be expected in the United States, and most likely in California, every 60 to 100 years and less severe but major earthquakes every 15 to 20 years (Anderson, et al., 1981). The area currently believed to be at greatest risk of a massive earthquake is the Los Angeles-San Bernardino region. An event which could exceed 8 on the Richter Scale has an estimated annual probability of occurrence of 2 to 5 percent and its likelihood of occurrence in the next 20 to 30 years is regarded as -high." This earthquake could kill and injure between 15,000 and 69,000 persons (depending upon time of occurrence) and cause up to $17 billion in property damage (NSC/FEMA, 1980). Some studies have placed the property damage estimates as high as $50 billion (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1969). This report grew out of the City of Los Angeles Planning Partnership for which the Southern California Earthquake Preparedness Project (SCEPP) was asked to research and report on several issues pertaining to earthquake insurance. In the course of this research, it became obvious to both SCEPP and SCEPP's Policy Advisory Board that earthquake insurance and its role in the recovery process was a major policy issue. Thus, the research effort was expanded to incorporate broader issues and circulation of the report beyond the Los Angeles Planning Partnership. The report has five goals which correspond to its organization: (1) to outline the provisions (coverages, rates, deductibles, etc.) of earthquake insurance policies currently available to the major classes of insurance consumers-homeowners, businesses, local governments and special districts; (2) to determine the extent to which earthquake insurance is purchased by these parties and explore the circumstances surrounding purchase or non-purchase; (3) to review the salient issues in earthquake insurance from the standpoints of purchasers and providers; (4) to explore potential Federal roles in resolving these issues and in providing or promoting earthquake insurance; and finally, (5) to make reasonable policy recommendations involving both the Federal Government and other stakeholders in earthquake insurance toward a more adequate system of coverage.

This Orientation Manual provides practical information: both rescue techniques, and preparedness information for the first responder who will encounter people with visible and non-visible disabilities through their work. This publication can assist first responders in advance or make critical emergency decisions. This publication will help first responders to confidently work with the disability community toward the goal of protecting and saving lives and minimizing trauma.

Emergency Medical Services (EMS) agencies regardless of service delivery model have sought guidance on how to better integrate their emergency preparedness and response activities into similar processes occurring at the local, regional, State, tribal, and Federal levels. This primary purpose of this project is to begin the process of providing that guidance as it relates to mass care incident deployment.

The original Earthquakes -A Teacher's Package for K-6 (FEMA 159) was developed as a joint effort of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) under contract with FEMA. NSTA's project team produced an excellent product. Since its publication in 1988, over 50,000 teachers have requested copies. This revised version brought members of the original project team together with a group of teachers who had used the materials extensively in their classroom and served as teacher-educators at FEMA's Tremor Troop workshops. About 75% of the original material remains unchanged: a few activities were removed and a few added. A major change was the addition of assessments throughout the units. The examples we provide relate to life outside the classroom and/or activities similar to those of scientists. We also added matrices linking activities to the National Science Education Standards. The Teacher's Package has five units. Each of the first four units is divided into three levels: Level 1, for grades K-2; Level 2, for grades 3-4; and Level 3, for grades 5-6. Since classes and individuals vary widely you may often find the procedures in the other levels helpful for your students. The last unit has four parts with activities for students in all grades, K-6. Unit L, Defining an Earthquake, builds on what students already know about earthquakes to establish a working definition of the phenomenon. Legends from near and far encourage children to create their own fanciful explanations, paving the way for the scientific explanations they will begin to learn in this unit. Unit I, Why and Where Earthquakes Occur, presents the modern scientific understanding of the Earth's structure and composition, and relates this to the cause of earthquakes. Unit II, Physical Results of Earthquakes, provides greater understanding of the processes that shape our active Earth. Earthquakes are put in the context of the large- and small-scale changes that are constantly at work on the continents as well as the ocean floor. Unit IV, Measuring Earthquakes, explains earthquakes in terms of wave movement and introduces students to the far-ranging effects of earthquakes. Unit V, Earthquake Safety and Survival, focuses on what to expect during an earthquake; how to cope safely; how to identify earthquake hazards; and how to reduce, eliminate, or avoid them.

Following the two damaging California earthquakes in 1989 (Loma Prieta) and 1994 (Northridge), many concrete wall and masonry wall buildings were repaired using federal disaster assistance funding. The repairs were based on inconsistent criteria, giving rise to controversy regarding criteria for the repair of cracked concrete and masonry wall buildings. To help resolve this controversy, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) initiated a project on evaluation and repair of earthquake damaged concrete and masonry wall buildings in 1996. The ATC-43 project addresses the investigation and evaluation of earthquake damage and discusses policy issues related to the repair and upgrade of earthquake damaged buildings. The project deals with buildings whose primary lateral-force-resisting systems consist of concrete or masonry bearing walls with flexible or rigid diaphragms, or whose vertical-load-bearing systems consist of concrete or steel frames with concrete or masonry infill panels. The intended audience is design engineers, building owners, building regulatory officials, and government agencies. The project results are reported in three documents. The FEMA 306 report, Evaluation of Earthquake Damaged Concrete and Masonry Wall Buildings, Basic Procedures Manual, provides guidance on evaluating damage and analyzing future performance. Included in the document are component damage classification guides, and test and inspection guides. FEMA 307, Evaluation of Earthquake Damaged Concrete and Masonry Wall Buildings, Technical Resources, contains supplemental information including results from a theoretical analysis of the effects of prior damage on single-degree-of-freedom mathematical models, additional background information on the component guides, and an example of the application of the basic procedures. FEMA 308, The Repair of Earthquake Damaged Concrete and Masonry Wall Buildings, discusses the policy issues pertaining to the repair of earthquake damaged buildings and illustrates how the procedures developed for the project can be used to provide a technically sound basis for policy decisions. It also provides guidance for the repair of damaged components.

Among the FEMA documents covering the topic of making existing buildings more resistant to the effects of earthquakes, this volume occupies a unique position: it is the only one that fulfills a historical need. When the decision was made to convert the performance-based Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, FEMA 273, into a prestandard containing mandatory language (FEMA 356), there was considerable concern among design professionals that some of the major characteristics and salient features of the original document (or indeed its very fabric) would be adversely affected in the conversion process. This Global Topics Report is the third in a series of reports chronicling the development of the FEMA 273 NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings into the FEMA 356 Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings. The purpose of this report is to provide a narrative discussion and permanent record of the technical changes made to Guidelines as the document evolved into the Prestandard. It is the vehicle by which new technical information was introduced into the Prestandard, as issues were identified and, when possible, resolved by the Prestandard Project Team. For completeness, this report also includes a brief discussion of new concepts introduced to the engineering profession in the publication of the original FEMA 273 Guidelines and FEMA 274 Commentary documents. As the Guidelines were used by the industry, questions arose regarding application of certain procedures, interpretation of some provisions, and results stemming from portions of the methodology. These questions have been formulated into statements, termed global issues, and recorded in this report for reference during the prestandard project and future revisions of the document. At the time the Guidelines were published, it was known that additional research was needed to refine the accuracy and applicability of certain procedures, and analytical studies were required to test and substantiate certain new concepts and philosophical themes. Unresolved issues, reported by BSSC to be present at the time of publication, are incorporated into this report and identified with the designation 'previously unresolved' in the classification of the issue. The purpose of Global Topics Report 1, Identification of Global Issues, dated April 12, 1999, was to formulate a statement and classify global issues that had been identified as of the date of the report. The issues identified in that report were presented and discussed at the ASCE Standards Committee Meeting on March 3, 1999, in San Francisco. The discussions resulted in clarifications to some of the issues, as well as a consensus on the recommended classification of each issue. Comments from Standards Committee members were incorporated into the report, and were used by the Project Team in moving issues toward resolution. Global Topics Report 2 was published on March 22, 2000. The purpose of the second report was to formulate statements for new global issues identified since Global Topics Report 1, and to document resolution of issues that were incorporated into the Second Draft of the Prestandard. This third and final Global Topics Report contains new global issues identified since the publication of the previous two reports, and final resolutions of previously identified issues. The appendices to this report contain the results of special focused studies, which serve as back-up data to the resolution of selected issues. These studies are referenced in the body of this report, where applicable, and included in the appendices for future reference. Upon completion of the Case Studies Project, the final report FEMA 343 Case Studies: An Assessment of the NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings was made available to the Prestandard Project Team.

Recent earthquakes around the world show a pattern of steadily increasing damages and losses that are due primarily to two factors: (1) significant growth in earthquake-prone urban areas and (2) vulnerability of the older building stock, including buildings constructed within the past 20 years. In the United States, earthquake risk has grown substantially with development while the earthquake hazard has remained relatively constant. Understanding the hazard requires studying earthquake characteristics and locales in which they occur while understanding the risk requires an assessment of the potential damage to the built environment and to the welfare of people - especially in high risk areas. Estimating the varying degree of earthquake risk throughout the United States is useful for informed decision-making on mitigation policies, priorities, strategies, and funding levels in the public and private sectors. For example, potential losses to new buildings may be reduced by applying seismic design codes and using specialized construction techniques. However, decisions to spend money on either of those solutions require evidence of risk. In the absence of a nationally accepted criterion and methodology for comparing seismic risk across regions, a consensus on optimal mitigation approaches has been difficult to reach. While there is a good understanding of high risk areas such as Los Angeles, there is also growing recognition that other regions such as New York City and Boston have a low earthquake hazard but are still at high risk of significant damage and loss. This high risk level reflects the dense concentrations of buildings and infrastructure in these areas constructed without the benefit of modern seismic design provisions. In addition, mitigation policies and practices may not have been adopted because the earthquake risk was not clearly demonstrated and the value of using mitigation measures in reducing that risk may not have been understood. This study highlights the impacts of both high risk and high exposure on losses caused by earthquakes. It is based on loss estimates generated by HAZUS(r)-MH, a geographic information system (GIS)-based earthquake loss estimation tool developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in cooperation with the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS). The HAZUS tool provides a method for quantifying future earthquake losses. It is national in scope, uniform in application, and comprehensive in its coverage of the built environmen

This incident highlights the need for the recognition of the dangers of oxygen-limiting silos regardless of their use and setting. Other issues identified are the need for a hazard and risk assessment process in decisionmaking on the fireground, the importance of site control and accountability, the need for group training in technical rescue operations, the coordination of non-fire department resources and the role of emergency management personnel fulfilling an active role in a unified command structure.

This report continues a series of annual studies by the USFA of on-duty firefighter fatalities in the United States. The USFA is the single public agency source of information for all on-duty firefighter fatalities in the United States each year. The unique and specific objective of this study is to identify all on-duty firefighter fatalities that occurred in the United States and its protectorates in 2001, and to present in summary form the circumstances surrounding each occurrence. The study is intended to help identify approaches that could reduce the number of firefighter deaths in future years. In addition to the 2001 overall findings, this study includes assessments of trends over the past 6 years, as well as special analysis on actions that can immediately impact cardiac health and firefighter safety during emergency operations.

This report continues a series of annual studies by the USFA of on-duty firefighter fatalities in the United States. The USFA is the single public agency source of information for all on-duty firefighter fatalities in the United States each year. The unique and specific objective of this study is to identify all on-duty firefighter fatalities that occurred in the United States and its protectorates in 1996, and to present in summary form the circumstances surrounding each occurrence. The study is intended to help identify approaches that could reduce the number of firefighter deaths in future years. In addition to the 1996 overall findings, this study includes special analyses on violent firefighter deaths, physical fitness and its relation to firefighter deaths, and vehicle accidents.

The specific objective of this study was to identify all of the on-duty firefighter fatalities that occurred in the United States in 1995, and to analyze the circumstances surrounding each occurrence. The study is intended to help identify approaches that could reduce the number of deaths in future years. In addition to the 1995 findings, this study includes a special analysis of the use of personal alert safety devices at fatal structure fires and a special report on several fatalities that occurred during technical rescue operations.

This guide outlines the essentials for establishing an arson strike force. It begins with a definition of the concept, presents a brief description of how such a unit might respond to an incident, proceeds through the planning steps for single and multi-jurisdictional strike forces, and outlines key elements in their organization and management.

One of the activities authorized by the Dam Safety and Security Act of 2002 is research to enhance the Nation's ability to assure that adequate dam safety programs and practices are in place throughout the United States. The Act of 2002 states that the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), in cooperation with the National Dam Safety Review Board (Review Board), shall carry out a program of technical and archival research to develop and support: improved techniques, historical experience, and equipment for rapid and effective dam construction, rehabilitation, and inspection; devices for continued monitoring of the safety of dams; development and maintenance of information resources systems needed to support managing the safety of dams; and initiatives to guide the formulation of effective policy and advance improvements in dam safety engineering, security, and management. With the funding authorized by the Congress, the goal of the Review Board and the Dam Safety Research Work Group (Work Group) is to encourage research in those areas expected to make significant contributions to improving the safety and security of dams throughout the United States. The Work Group (formerly the Research Subcommittee of the Interagency Committee on Dam Safety) met initially in February 1998. To identify and prioritize research needs, the Subcommittee sponsored a workshop on Research Needs in Dam Safety in Washington D.C. in April 1999. Representatives of state and federal agencies, academia, and private industry attended the workshop. Seventeen broad area topics related to the research needs of the dam safety community were identified. To more fully develop the research needs identified, the Research Subcommittee subsequently sponsored a series of nine workshops. Each workshop addressed a broad research topic (listed below) identified in the initial workshop. Experts attending the workshops included international representatives as well as representatives of state, federal, and private organizations within the United States. Impacts of Plants and Animals on Earthen Dams; Risk Assessment for Dams; Spillway Gates; Seepage through Embankment Dams; Embankment Dam Failure Analysis; Hydrologic Issues for Dams; Dam Spillways; Seismic Issues for Dams; Dam Outlet Works. Based on the research workshops, research topics have been proposed and pursued. Several topics have progressed to products of use to the dam safety community, such as technical manuals and guidelines. For future research, it is the goal of the Work Group to expand dam safety research to other institutions and professionals performing research in this field. The proceedings from the research workshops present a comprehensive and detailed discussion and analysis of the research topics addressed by the experts participating in the workshops. The participants at all of the research workshops are to be commended for their diligent and highly professional efforts on behalf of the National Dam Safety Program. The National Dam Safety Program research needs workshop on Hydrologic Issues for Dams was held on November 14-15, 2001, in Davis, California. The Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, would like to acknowledge the contributions of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center, which was responsible for the development of the technical program, coordination of the workshop, and development of these workshop proceedings. A complete list of workshop facilitators, presenters, and participants is included in the proceedings.