An Assessment of the Consequences and Preparations for a Catastrophic California Earthquake: Findin | Page 7

the prediction is correct and appropriate actions are taken, thousands of lives can be saved and significant economic losses can be avoided. The costs of responding to a prediction may be substantial, however, and the commitment of resources undoubtedly will have to be made in the face of considerable uncertainty and even reluctance. Indeed, the possibility of an inaccurate prediction must be faced squarely.
=Actions=: FEMA, in conjunction with other appropriate Federal agencies, State and local governments, and volunteer and private-sector organizations, will increase its actions to develop procedures for responding to a credible, scientific earthquake prediction, including:
? Identification of constructive and prudent actions to be taken
? Analysis of the costs and benefits of various alternative actions
? Identification of roles and responsibilities in deciding which actions should be implemented and by whom
? Criteria for evaluating circumstances when the provision of Federal assistance would be appropriate
The U.S. Geological Survey of the Department of the Interior will:
? Maintain a sound and well-balanced program of research in earthquake prediction and hazard assessment based upon a carefully considered strategic plan
? Work with State and local officials and FEMA to develop improved mechanisms for the transmission of earthquake predictions and related information, and to plan for the utilization of the capability for earthquake prediction
3. Resources
=Finding=: While leadership and management are essential ingredients to achieve an adequate earthquake preparedness posture, the availability of adequate staffing and resources at all levels of government determines the efficacy of agency programs and initiatives. In many agencies, earthquake preparedness has been accorded a low priority in their programs. This is a manifestation of a more general problem of minimal agency resource allocation to emergency preparedness. The results of the actions that have been indicated will be limited unless additional resources are made available.
=Issue=: Additional resources should be provided as necessary to accelerate the earthquake hazard mitigation and preparedness activities under the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program.
=Action=: FEMA has reassessed its priorities and is allocating resources to increase the staffing, funding, and management attention and direction for earthquake hazards mitigation, including preparations for a catastrophic earthquake in California. This includes an increase of staff resources in FEMA Region IX for Federal, State, and local coordination of planning, preparedness, and mitigation. Resource needs that cannot be fully met by the reassessment and reallocation for Fiscal Year 1981 should be identified and justified along with needs for Fiscal Year 1982 in the course of the budget submissions for Fiscal Year 1982. To facilitate an adequate and balanced response by other Federal agencies, FEMA will provide timely guidance to other agencies on specific priorities for this effort in relation to other major preparedness goals. The Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Science and Technology Policy will work together to develop a cross-agency ranking of budgetary resources for earthquake preparedness for Fiscal Year 1982.
CHAPTER II
GEOLOGIC EARTHQUAKE SCENARIOS
A. MAJOR EVENTS
For purposes of assessing the consequences of a major California earthquake, scenarios for seven large earthquakes were developed. The scenarios depict expectable earthquakes that could severely impact on the major population centers of California. In each case they are representative of only one possible magnitude of earthquake that could occur on the indicated fault system. On each fault system there is a greater probability of one or more damaging earthquakes of somewhat smaller magnitude than the postulated event. The postulated earthquakes are listed in the following table.
TABLE 1
MAJOR CALIFORNIA EARTHQUAKES
------------------------------------------------------------------------- Current Annual Likelihood Probability of of Occurrence Richter Occurrence in Next Region Fault System Magnitude[1] (Percent) 20-30 Years -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Los Angeles- Southern San Bernardino San Andreas 8.3 2-5 High
San Francisco Northern Bay Area San Andreas 8.3 1 Moderate
San Francisco Bay Area Hayward 7.4 1 Moderate
Los Angeles Newport- Moderate Inglewood 7.5 0.1 -Low
San Diego Rose Canyon 7.0 0.01 Low
Riverside Moderate- San Bernardino Cucamonga 6.8 0.1 Low
Los Angeles Santa Monica 6.7 0.01 Low ------------------------------------------------------------------------- [1] This is the estimated largest magnitude earthquake expected at a reasonable level of probability. The main shock can be expected to be followed by large aftershocks over a period of weeks or longer. Each large aftershock would be capable of producing additional significant damage and hampering disaster assistance operations. -------------------------------------------------------------------------
These earthquake scenarios represent the largest magnitude events estimated on the basis of a variety of geologic assumptions. The appropriateness of these assumptions depends on the intent of the analysis and the state of geologic knowledge. Therefore, the resulting estimates may not be appropriate for other purposes, such as the development of seismic design criteria for a specific site. The development of such criteria commonly requires detailed analyses of the site and its immediate geologic environment beyond the scope of this report. Consequently, detailed site analyses may require modification of the conclusions reached in this report, particularly fault systems other than the San Andreas and Hayward faults.
B. GEOLOGIC EVIDENCE
Some of the possible earthquakes listed