SLIDE 1
NCSEA Structural Engineer Emergency Response (SEER) Safety - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
NCSEA Structural Engineer Emergency Response (SEER) Safety - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
NCSEA Structural Engineer Emergency Response (SEER) Safety Assessment Program 2017 Deployments 2 nd Responders Why SEER? All too often affected communities are left without assistance determining whether buildings in the post-disaster
SLIDE 2
SLIDE 3
Why SEER?
▪ All too often affected communities are left without assistance determining whether buildings in the post-disaster environment are adequate for re-occupancy ▪ When evaluations are not performed quickly by properly qualified individuals, residents may reoccupy unsafe buildings ▪ The key is to ensure that qualified damage assessment professionals are available to perform post-disaster damage assessments
SLIDE 4
Hurricane Harvey
Rockport, Texas and Orange Co, Texas NCSEA SEER Team Responses Jeff Kobes and Mike Bratten Structural Engineers Association of TX (SEAoT) Co-chairs for Texas
SLIDE 5
Rockport, Texas September 9-13 2017
▪ Approximately 14,000 damaged structures ▪ Saw both severe wind damage and flood/storm surge damage ▪ 51 volunteer assessors over 12 days ▪ Local officials had limited initial response plan. Volunteers with BOAT did great job assisting with the planning and implementation process. ▪ Followed Cal-OES / ATC-45 tagging procedures, with all manual reporting
SLIDE 6
Rockport, Texas
SLIDE 7
Rockport, Texas
SLIDE 8
Rockport, Texas
SLIDE 9
Rockport, Texas
SLIDE 10
Rockport, Texas
SLIDE 11
Rockport, Texas
SLIDE 12
Rockport, Texas
SLIDE 13
Rockport, Texas
SLIDE 14
Orange County, Texas September 23-26 2017
▪ Approximately 7,500 damaged structures ▪ Predominantly flood damage. Saw very little wind damage ▪ 14 volunteer assessors over first 2 days ▪ Local officials (flood plane manager and GIS coordinator) and BOAT coordinators had very organized response plan. ▪ Assessments were limited to mapped flood plane area within Orange County (no work within the city of Orange) ▪ Used GIS mapped data and digital reporting forms via smartphones/tables/laptops ▪ Generally followed Cal-OES / ATC-45 for “windshield”
- nly reviews.
SLIDE 15
Orange County, Texas
SLIDE 16
Orange County, Texas
SLIDE 17
Hurricane Irma
Glades County, Florida and Monroe County (Florida Keys), Florida SEER Team Responses William Bracken, SEER Co-Chair and Ron Rogers, SEER SME
SLIDE 18
Overview
- On the 10th of September 2017, Hurricane Irma
made US landfall in the Florida Keys as a Category 4 hurricane with sustained winds of 130 MPH
- Within 48 hours, 84 NCSEA/SEER members from
across the country volunteered to provide 2nd Responder assistance
- Of those 84, 24 were actively deployed.
SLIDE 19
Overview, Cont.
- 3 Requests Responded To
- 4 Municipalities/AHJs
Supported
- 24 Responders Deployed
- 5,032 Structures Assessed
- 12 Days Deployed
SLIDE 20
Areas Assessed
Glades Monroe
SLIDE 21
Glades County
▪ Rural Florida County ▪ 54th lowest per capita income in the FL ▪ Agriculture is the primary industry ▪ 806 sq miles of land area ▪ Population (est.), 13,670 ▪ More than 60% of the structures are manufactured housing
SLIDE 22
Monroe County
▪ Mixed Urban/Rural Florida County ▪ 4th lowest per capita income in the FL ▪ Tourism and fishing/lobstering are the primary industries ▪ 983 sq miles of land area ▪ Population (est.), 77,482 ▪ Wide variety of housing units including modern construction, historical structures and manufactured homes
SLIDE 23
The Glades County Mission
▪ September 14 – 16, 2017 ▪ The ATC 45 process was used for evaluation ▪ A Unified Command was established with Glades County at 21:30, Thursday, September 14, 2017 (just over twelve hours after the request was received) ▪ Approximately 90% of the residential structures were assessed
SLIDE 24
Challenges, Glades
Day 1 Day 1 Day 2 Day 2 Day 2 Day 2 Day 2
SLIDE 25
Typical Damage, Glades
SLIDE 26
Typical Damage, Glades
SLIDE 27
Typical Damage, Glades
SLIDE 28
Typical Damage, Glades
SLIDE 29
Lessons Learned, Glades
▪ The use of detailed maps of the area with parcels delineated was extremely beneficial ▪ While tape is the preferred method for placard attachment, a stapler is needed for certain applications ▪ All deployed personnel should have some type
- f task related photo ID
SLIDE 30
The Monroe County Mission
▪ October 1 – 8, 2017 ▪ A local process loosely based on ATC 45 was used for evaluation ▪ A Unified Command was established with Monroe County at 17:23, Sunday, October 1, 2017 ▪ 100% of the structures were assessed
SLIDE 31
Challenges
SLIDE 32
Typical Damage, Monroe
SLIDE 33
Typical Damage, Monroe
SLIDE 34
Typical Damage, Monroe
SLIDE 35
Typical Damage, Monroe
SLIDE 36
Typical Damage, Monroe
SLIDE 37
Typical Damage, Monroe
SLIDE 38
Challenges
SLIDE 39
Challenges
SLIDE 40
Lessons Learned 2017
▪ A non-standard assessment mechanism is not recommended and will cause confusion ▪ Geographically dispersed work areas such as the Keys will impact work time
SLIDE 41
Recommendations
▪ Deploy a team of personnel to function as an
- verhead/liaison team
▪ Personnel assigned to the overhead team should have command/deployment experience and a minimum of ICS 300 certification ▪ Develop a rating process for evaluating deployed personnel in order to avoid potential conflict with the local representatives ▪ Use an Inspector number unique to the jurisdiction
SLIDE 42
Recommendations, Cont.
▪ Develop a tablet/phone based software product in which local ESRI data can be loaded which would allow for an electronic record keeping process in place of the paper forms
ESRI Collector for ArcGIS App
SLIDE 43