S u m m a r y


Puget Sound Tsunami/Landslide Workshop

January 23 and 24, 2001


George Crawford
Washington State Military Department
Emergency Management Division

Hal Mofjeld
National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration

Craig Weaver
United States Geological Survey


Sponsored by


Washington State Military Department
Building 20
Camp Murray, WA 98340-0149
NOAA/Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory
7600 Sand Point Way NE, Bldg. 3
Seattle, WA 98115-6349



Executive Summary 3
Workshop Structure 4
Day 1: Programmatic Sessions 5
Mitigation 5
Tutorials 14
Day 2: Technical Sessions 18
Earthquakes/Faults 18
Landslides 19
Tsunamis 20
Merged Bathy/Topo Digital Elevation Model 21
HAZUS/GIS Systems 22
List of Acronyms 24
Attendee List 25

Executive Summary

The Washington State Military Department Emergency Management Division (EMD) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsored a two-day Puget Sound Tsunami/Landslide Workshop held at the NOAA/Western Regional Center in Seattle on January 23 through 24, 2001. The workshop is part of ongoing work by the emergency management and scientific communities to forge a partnership to address tsunami and landslide hazards in the Puget Sound region. More than 120 emergency management professionals, scientists, engineers and interested public attended the workshop. The workshop was funded through a Tsunami Mitigation grant to EMD to provide emergency preparedness planning support to Washington state. NOAA provided the facility and technical support, funded in part by the National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program.

The organizers’ primary goal for the workshop was to provide a forum for discussing the current level of understanding of tsunami and landslide hazards in Puget Sound. Because this understanding has scientific, geotechnical, public policy and emergency response components, the workshop presented these issues in an interdisciplinary forum. The workshop goals were:


Workshop Conclusions

  • Tsunamis and landslides in the greater Puget Sound region pose significant hazards that must be included in local and regional emergency response and development plans.

  • Today there is little cross-discipline discussion of the issues, needs or capabilities of various groups concerned with tsunamis and landslides in Puget Sound.

  • Emergency managers need more guidance on where and how to apply existing data and maps.

  • We need a strategy for integrated tsunami research, community planning, and emergency response. Specifically, we need to:


-Integrate tsunami research in Puget Sound.

-Move research results to communities.

-Educate public and local officials in how to respond.

-Make products developed by any part of tsunami community widely available


Workshop Structure

The workshop was structured into programmatic sessions (Day 1) and technical sessions (Day 2). Each session served a separate purpose. The programmatic sessions were divided into a morning series of presentations on mitigation planning, including the following:

An afternoon tutorial focused on reducing hazards in Northwest hot spots. It included basics on Puget Sound:

The Technical Sessions (Day 2) offered panel discussions delivered by technical experts in several active areas of mitigation product development. The topics covered current research on the following:



Day 1: Programmatic Sessions

Introduction - "Preparedness Requires Cooperation"

George Crawford, Washington State Emergency Management division (EMD) Earthquake Program
Eddie Bernard, Director NOAA and Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory and Chair of National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program
Trudy Winterfield, Director of Cowlitz County Emergency Management and Vice Chair Washington State Emergency Management Council

The purpose of the workshop was to bring together the scientific and planning communities to find ways to better defend against tsunami and landslide hazards. We face hazards on a daily basis. Among the lessons we’ve learned¾ including that of the Aldercrest landslide near Kelso, Washington¾ is the importance of the inter-relationships among programs. Puget Sound tsunamis will have no warning, making outreach and warning guidance critical. Much work has been done. Tools for emergency managers now include databases on more than a 100 coastal communities, inundation maps, evacuation routes and surveys.

Understanding ongoing research is another tool that emergency managers can use to build disaster-resistant communities.



Moderator: Chuck Hagerhjelm EMD


State Hazard Mitigation
Marty Best (EMD)

All local communities must identify and assess mitigation. Typically, communities do so as part of their normal Capital Improvement Planning (CIP) or Growth Management Planning processes. They don’t, however, recognize CIP or GMA as the mitigation planning tool it is. Every community in the state is required by the GMA to update their comprehensive plans and critical areas ordinances (CAOs). Comprehensive plans and CAOs now require the use of Best Available Science (BAS), a ruling adopted in July 2000.

The state’s mitigation strategy focuses mitigation actions primarily among state agencies and establishes overall mitigation strategy for the state. The need for mitigation planning is critical. Since the eruption of Mount St. Helens, disasters have caused direct damage of $1 billion, monies that could have been spent elsewhere. While state agencies identify hazards and assess risk and vulnerability, mitigation planning is local and will be a requirement to access federal disaster mitigation funds in the future.


Growth Management
Chris Parsons (Washington State Office of Community Development)

State emergency managers can now use the Best Available Science (BAS) rule to help identify and plan for geohazards. The BAS rule is required under the Growth Management Act framework for designating and protecting critical areas, such as geologically unstable areas. The new rule provides cities and counties with information about how to recognize valid science and demonstrate how they have included good science when protecting critical areas within their jurisdiction. Local governments are required to update their critical areas to include the best available science ordinances by September 1, 2002.

The BAS rule (WAC 365-195-900 through —925) requires consistency among development regulations for critical areas ordinances (CAOs). Critical areas include wetlands, aquifer recharge zones and areas that are frequently flooded, geologically unstable, or used for fish and wildlife conservation. Under the GMA, you are required to conduct the following 4-step CAO process:

  1. Classify: based on CA function or vulnerability to damage from development.
  2. Inventory: identify existing conditions and locations in landscape.
  3. Designate: apply classification to CA distribution and maps.
  4. Protect: Include the BAS in development of regulations and performance standards and in granting exemptions or variances.

The BAS rule provides criteria for determining what is credible, applicable scientific information for making management decisions.



Shoreline Management Act
Randy Davis (Washington State Department of Ecology)

The Shoreline Management Act (SMA) and resultant shoreline plans are another mechanism available for implementing tsunami-related policy. These plans strive to protect state shorelines by regulating development. State shorelines include all marine waters, rivers and certain streams and lakes and their adjacent lands.

The Department of Ecology in concert with local governments develops shoreline plans for managing state shorelines. NOAA also approves shoreline plans for coastal jurisdictions as an element of the state’s Coastal Zone Management Program.

The Department of Ecology has technical assistance available. Please contact:

Randy Davis, AICP, WA Dept. of Ecology
PO Box 47775
Olympia, WA 98504


National Flood Insurance Program "V" Zone Requirement
Dan Sokol (Washington State Department of Ecology)

Another mitigation option is the NFIP Velocity or "V" zone designation, a piece of the regulatory framework that covers tsunami risks. FEMA identifies flood areas and local governments that must have flood zone ordinances. These local flood rules are encouraged to be stricter than minimum standards.

Most of these local regulations are more stringent than the 100-year floodplain. Construction standards for velocity, however, are limited to certain areas. Tsunamis could reach "A" zones, which don’t have these standards. Further compounding the issue is the lack of licensing for geotechnical engineers. Emergency managers should coordinate tsunami hazard mapping with existing and ongoing flood hazard mapping. State and federal agencies will assist
as requested. The new FEMA Coastal Construction manual is now available. Call 1-800-480-2520.


FEMA Coastal Construction manual. Three volumes in CD 1-800-480-2520.

Tsunami Mitigation
Chris Jonientz-Trisler (FEMA)

The National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program (NTHMP) was formed to help coastal communities reduce their tsunami risk. The tools the NTHMP has developed are also useful to inland coastal communities at risk to tsunamis generated by local faults and landslides.

Tools include inundation maps, an improved warning system, and a variety of other products. Education materials target a variety of audiences including planners, public officials, tourists, schools and the general public. Tools for emergency managers consist of inundation maps, evacuation routes and warning guidance, and community needs assessment surveys. Future work will include more projects dealing with guides for construction and land-use, infrastructure, vegetation, and vertical evacuation. The TsuInfo Alert newsletter facilitates information exchange and is one resource for information about meetings and mitigation

communities assisting them to become more tsunami resistant. Future work will address more long-term mitigation products and recovery planning.

Little tsunami legislation exists. Some is in place in Oregon to address tsunami education and drills for school children and future location of critical facilities on the coast¾ most of which currently are at risk to severe ground shaking and/or tsunami inundation during a local event based on a 1995 study of 47 communities. A 1994 survey of 11 West Coast U.S. communities showed the level of tsunami disaster resistance there could be improved. Since that finding, the NTHMP has worked to accomplish the following:



Shoreside Landslide Mitigation
Bill Laprade (Shannon & Wilson)

Three basic types of landslides occur in Puget Sound: 1) rapid shallow, 2) block fall, and 3) deep-seated. While large, deep-seated landslides don’t occur often, they make for very large disasters. For example, the 1997 deep-seated Woodway landslide dropped the shoreface of the bluff back 50 to 60 feet. The slide plane extended down through hard Lawton Clay, breaking into huge blocks, some as big as automobiles. The force of the event sent rail cars into Puget Sound.


In response to the Holiday storm of 1996/97, Shannon & Wilson recently completed a database of landslides in Seattle, one of the largest in the country. The cataloging, done for Seattle Public Utilities (SPU), goes all the way back to 1890 to record data from 1,326 landslides. Drawn from the Department of Design, Construction and Land Use (DCLU), the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), and Shannon & Wilson’s files, the database is a valuable tool for CIP and maintenance planning. It can be used to define landslide zones, set landslide policy, and educate the public.

A major finding of the work is that landslides in Puget Sound need a large storm and antecedent rainfall to create the conditions for widespread slope instability. The researchers looked first at steep slope (40%) areas. To their surprise, they found "holes" in areas where they thought landslides should occur. Some areas had many landslides where slide-prone zones had not been recognized. By studying concentrations of landslides, researchers were able to judge which ground should be in and which out of a potential landslide zone. These areas of risk are now incorporated in landslide maps. Certain other spots, such as the north end of Queen Anne, were removed as a

landslide potential area, because they did not have landslide concentrations and other geologic factors indicative of landsliding.

The City of Seattle is now putting this information to use in several ways. SPU is using it to map engineering improvement and define the right kind of mitigation for a particular area. And because the database includes cost information, it can be used to come up with ballpark estimates for mitigation. DCLU is using the information during screening of building and construction permits.


Submarine Landslide Mitigation
Steve Palmer (Washington State Department of Natural Resources)

Puget Sound submarine earthquakes are a significant hazard that requires further study. Historically, these landslides have happened on the deltas of rivers and large streams in the Pacific Northwest. Damage from submarine landslides results from both the movement of the landslide, which can destroy onshore and near-shore structures, and large water waves generated by the moving slide mass. The height of these water waves depends on the volume, geometry, and duration of the slide and the rheologic behavior (how matter deforms when it flows) of the slide mass. Submarine landslides cannot be prevented, and in many instances areas at risk to this hazard must be utilized for port and industrial areas. Consequently, mitigation efforts should be directed at minimizing damage and protecting lives.

Submarine landslides occur when the weight of the landslide mass along a slip surface exceeds the strength of the soil on that surface. They can occur at any time, as submarine slopes are typically at a point of near-instability. The primary triggering mechanisms for static (not caused by earthquake ground shaking) submarine landslides are:

  1. Oversteepening: Rapid sedimentation results in a too steep and unstable slope.
  2. Tidal Drawdown: Rapid drop in water level at high to low-tide transition results in loss of soil strength due to static liquefaction.
  3. Undercutting: Changes in current pattern can erode material from the base of the delta slope.
  4. Overloading: Addition of material at the top of the delta slope (e.g. artificial fill) increases downslope weight of soil mass.

The following table lists wave heights and descriptions of damage from static submarine landslides over the last 100 years in the Pacific Northwest.

Static Submarine Landslides — Pacific Northwest Coast (1894 — 1994)
Location Year Possible Cause Wave Effect
Skagway, AK 1994
  • High sedimentation
  • Low tide
  • Human activity?
25-30 ft
  • 1 dead
  • Major harbor damage
Fraser Delta, BC 1985
  • High sedimentation
  • Low tide
none Nearly undermined lighthouse
Seattle, WA 1980s Previous construction? none Undermined sewer outfall
Kitimat, BC 1975
  • High sedimentation
  • Low tide
25-30 ft Minor damage docks & mill
Howe Sound, BC 1955
  • High sedimentation
  • Low tide
none Major damage docks & mill
Tacoma, WA 1943
  • High sedimentation
  • Low tide
  • Toe of slope undercut
none 700 feet of training wall destroyed
Tacoma, WA 1894
  • High sedimentation
  • Low tide
  • Toe of slope undercut
  • Human activities?
10-15 ft
  • 2 dead
  • Northern Pacific RR docks destroyed

Strong shaking during an earthquake can trigger submarine landslides by accelerating the landslide mass downslope, consequently increasing its weight, and also by causing liquefaction of soils within the failure. Earthquakes have caused the largest Pacific Northwest submarine landslides. Most of the deaths caused by the 1964 Alaska earthquake were a direct result of submarine landslides. The table below summarizes damage and casualties from earthquake-related submarine landslides in the Pacific Northwest.


Earthquake-Induced Submarine Landslides — Pacific Northwest Coast (1866 — 1964)
Earthquake/yr Location Wave Casualties Damage
1964 Alaska Valdez 30-40 ft 31 dead total destruction shore area
1964 Alaska Seward 30 ft 13 dead; 5 injured total destruction shore area
1964 Alaska Whittier 30-50 ft 13 dead total destruction shore area
1949 Olympia Seattle none None none. small slide
1949 Olympia Olympia (Cooper Spit) none None none. small slide
1946 Vancouver Is Comox Lake yes 1 dead Minor damage to cannery
1866 Olympia Olympia (Cooper Spit) 10-15 ft 10-15 ft None. Small slide


Coulter, H. W.; Migliaccio, R. R., 1966, Effects of the earthquake of March 27 1964 at Valdez, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 542-C, 36 p., 3 plates.

Johns, M. W.; Prior, D. B.; Bornhold, B. D.; Coleman, J. M.; Bryant, W. R., 1986, Geotechnical aspects of a submarine slope failure, Kitimat Fjord, British Columbia: Marine Geotechnology, v. 6, n. 3, p. 243-279.

Kachadoorian, R., 1965, Effects of the earthquake of March 27 1964 at Whittier, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 542-B, 21 p., 3 plates.

Kayan, R. E.; Barnhardt, W. A.; Palmer, S. P., in press, Geomorphological and geotechnical issues affecting the seismic slope stability of the Duwamish River delta, Port of Seattle, Washington: pre-print of paper to be presented at the American Society of Civil Engineers 5th Technical Conference on Lifeline Engineering, August 12-15, 1999, Seattle, Washington.

McKenna, G. T.; Luternauer, J. L.; Kostaschuk, R. A., 1992, Large-scale mass-wasting events on the Fraser River delta front near Sand Heads, British Columbia: Canadian Geotechnical Journal, v. 29, n. 1, p. 151-156.

Morrison, K. I., 1984, Case history of very large submarine landslide, Kitimat, British Columbia: in IV International Symposium on Landslides, Volume 2, p. 337-342.

Shannon, W. L.; Hilts, D. E., 1973, Submarine landslide at Seward: The Great Alaska earthquake of 1964, Committee on the Alaska Earthquake of the Division of Earth Sciences, National Research Council, published by the National Academy of Sciences, p. 144-156.

Terzaghi, K., 1956, Varieties of submarine slope failures: in Proceedings of the Eighth Texas Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, published by the University of Texas, Bureau of Engineering Research, Austin, Texas, 41 p.


General Policy Change in the Flood Program
Norman Skjelbreia (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)

The Corps is the public works arm of the federal government. It can play either a post-disaster or proactive role in studying landslide problems. After a flood disaster is official, the Corps does a damage assessment. Flood "authority" is the key. Once granted that authority, the Corps can act quickly. In ten days the Corps built a million-dollar structure in Snohomish following the 1996 flood. When the 1997 snow melt flooding occurred, the Corps, at the request of the governor, offered technical assistance for a landslide inventory and assessment. As a public works agency, the Corps has geotechnical capabilities and offers structural assessment teams. A CD is available from the Corps.

Reducing Earthquake/Tsunami Hazards in Pacific Northwest Ports and Harbors
Robert F. Goodwin (Washington Sea Grant Program)
Nate Wood (Oregon State University College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences)

A three-year collaboration between researchers, university outreach specialists and community planners is studying how to build Pacific Northwest port and harbor communities that are more resistant to earthquake and tsunami hazards. Work includes the development of a GIS-based hazard and vulnerability model, a community-based planning process, and a regional needs assessment survey.

Sponsored by Washington and Oregon Sea Grant Programs and NOAA’s Coastal Services Center, the project is developing information technology tools coastal communities can use when creating realistic response-recovery options and seeking new mitigation funding.

A primary goal of the project is to determine how well coastal communities are prepared for and understand the effects of tsunami and earthquake risk and to pinpoint harbor-specific data gaps. Data from the project includes natural hazards/vulnerability analyses for subsidence, liquefaction and landslide potential and maximum tsunami elevation. The group’s Web site is a growing forum for public input and a regional educational and training tool for other Pacific Northwest communities.

To date, the study embraces 20 coastal counties and 47 coast towns. Year 1 (1999) was spent designing a model process and testing it in the port and harbor community of Yaquina Bay, Oregon, including the towns of Newport and Toledo. Year 2, now underway, is focused on improving the model and conducting a demonstration project in Washington. Year 3 will concentrate primarily on outreach, training and technical assistance for other Pacific Northwest communities.

Preliminary results from a regional survey suggest that most people believe earthquakes are a greater and more imminent risk to human life and property than tsunamis. Stakeholder input will be merged with technical and scientific input at a "Hazards and Vulnerability Workshop" in Newport, Oregon to be held February 28, 2001. Additional community workshops held in the spring and summer of 2001 will focus on developing mitigation and implementation strategies.

Project investigators recently met with emergency managers and local officials from six mid-sized port and harbor communities in Washington State–Edmonds, Bainbridge Island, Bremerton, Port Orchard, Port Angeles and Port Townsend–in preparation for selecting the Washington demonstration project. You can contact the program through Robert Goodwin, Coastal Resources Specialist, Washington Sea Grant Program, School of Marine Affairs, 3707 Brooklyn Ave. NE, Seattle, WA 98105-6715. Or phone, fax or email at 206.685.2452: 206.543.1417 (Fax), goodrf@u.washington.edu.




Tsunami Tutorial – Nature of the Threat
Brian Atwater (USGS)

Earthquakes in Puget Sound come from three sources:  the lower plate (Juan de Fuca plate), the upper plate (North America plate), and the boundary between those plates. On average, large earthquakes arrive at intervals of decades in the lower plate, millenia for the best-known fault in the upper plate (Seattle fault), and centuries for events of magnitude 8 or larger on the plate boundary.

Any of these three kinds of earthquakes can produce tsunamis in Puget Sound. A landslide that set off a tsunami in Tacoma Narrows shortly followed the 1949 earthquake in the lower plate. The earthquake of ca. A.D. 900 caused uplift that triggered a tsunami in central Puget Sound and probably also caused landslide-generated waves in Lake Washington. Tsunamis from plate-boundary earthquakes probably account for sand sheets on Whidbey Island and the head of Discovery Bay.

Atwater, B.F., and Moore, A.L., 1992, A tsunami 1000 years ago in Puget Sound, Washington:  Science, v. 258, p. 1614-1617.

Noson, L.L., Qamar, A., and Thorsen, G.W., 1988, Washington State earthquake hazards:  Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources Information Circular 85, 77 pp.

Williams, H., and Hutchinson, I., 2000, Stratigraphic and microfossil evidence for late Holocene tsunamis at Swantown marsh, Whidbey Island, Washington:  Quaternary Research, v. 54, p. 218-227.


Tsunami Tutorial – Emergency Management Issues
Hal Mofjeld (NOAA)

The study of tsunami hazards naturally divides itself up into two parts: 1) the nature of the threat,

discussed by Brian Atwater, and 2) the response to it, addressed in this tutorial. Tsunamis in Puget Sound require understanding the hazard, planning and mitigating for it, and having the warning systems and communication, including education, in place to handle the disaster. Tools for tsunami mitigation currently include (e.g., the NOAA/PMEL/TIME Projects):

These tools require a basic understanding of tsunamis and where they can happen. Areas at risk are shorelines, ports and harbors, coastal rivers and lakes. Tides, weather, and time of day also determine the size of a tsunami in any of these areas. Tsunamis in Puget Sound come from three sources:

Types of Tsunamis in Puget Sound Region
Type Source Warning Time
Local Local quakes and landslides 1 minute
Regional Cascadia Subduction Zone 0.5 to 3 hours
Trans- Pacific Alaska and Asia 4 hours or more

Both NOAA (through its Tsunami Warning Centers and NWS/Seattle Forecast Office) and state, county and local EMDs issue tsunami warnings.

Further management information can be drawn from NOAA’s Puget Sound Tsunami Model, which uses a 7.6 earthquake on the Seattle Fault to simulate the results of an earthquake-induced tsunami. The model has shown that a 7.6 quake would unleash a dangerous tsunami that would strike the Seattle Waterfront only 2.5 minutes after the earthquake hit. To address the tsunami threat in Puget Sound, emergency managers need to answer the following questions:



Earthquake Tutorial
Craig Weaver (USGS)

The three earthquake source zones in Puget Sound can release enough force to cause landslides or underwater slumping. And these disasters may not happen immediately after a quake. Some landslides could produce locally damaging tsunamis. Only shallow crustal events, which are rare, have the potential to generate earth movement.

The UW/USGS Seismic Net is a resource to help emergency managers identify where earthquakes occur in all of western Washington. It may be especially useful to managers following deep quakes, which are unlikely to create a tsunami but could cause landslides in a wide area around the epicenter, as happened in a 1949 ground failure that reached from the Cowlitz river to Seattle.

After an earthquake, you can get the following timed sequence of data from the UW/USGS:

SHAKE MAPS are another tool that can be applied as overlay to a map of failure-prone areas. They may be used to identify a subset of slopes with the highest probability of generating a Tsunami. They could also be used as a response template that summarizes ground failure possibilities.

The UW/USGS is developing a real-time data products guide that can show where tsunamis and landslides are expected in Puget Sound.



Landslide Tutorial
Tim Walsh (Washington State Department of Natural Resources)

Two different methods of mapping landslides–inventory and analytical¾ are tools now available to local governments. Ideally, the two methods are used in tandem.

  1. USGS work by Rex Baum and Ed Harp can give you analytical data that can help predict the likelihood of landslides for Seattle. Look for this information at http://www.landslides.usgs.gov/index.shtml
  2. Bill Laprade’s (Shannon & Wilson) inventory database for the same area is available from the City of Seattle. Other observational data on landslides along coastal bluffs can be found at:

    http: //wa.gov/dnr/htdocs/ger/index.html

Several forces act on a hillslope to cause landslides. Primarily, gravity acts vertically on rocks, making a slope tend to move parallel to the slope or be pinned by forces acting perpendicular to the slope. The Factor of Safety (Fs) is a way scientists measure the resisting and driving forces in a landslide. Shear stress, a driving force, pushes soil parallel along a slope. Shear strength is a measure of the soil’s ability to resist this pushing. In thinking about landslide movement, Fs equals shear strength/shear force.

Sometimes the same materials can act differently because of circumstances, not just the properties of soil. That’s one of the reasons landslides are much more common during rainy spells. And it’s one of the reasons scientists analyze slope angle and put that kind of information in slope hazard maps to show susceptibility. A mix of heavy rain, rapid snowmelt and saturated soils trigger landslides as shown by both the historical record and recent events, such as the 1997 Perkins Lane and Magnolia Bluff slides.

More than 100 landslides happened in our region after that kind of weather in 1997. The Woodway slide on January 15, 1997 knocked a freight train into the Sound and on January 19, 1997 killed a family of four in the Rolling Bay area of Bainbridge Island. The Rolling Bay area had been mapped as "unstable" by the Coastal Zone Atlas of 1970, which gives a county-by-county readout of landslide hazard along Washington’s saltwater coastline areas.

Researchers mainly rely on winter-storm-related events to study landslides in Puget Sound. But the region also experienced landslides caused by earthquakes as in the 1949 slide at Salmon Beach in the Tacoma Narrows. The landslide, which occurred 3 days after the 1949 Puget Sound earthquake, generated a 6- to 8-foot tsunami that hit Gig Harbor. The photo on the right shows the effects of this massive slide.



Day 2: Technical Sessions


Emergency managers want the best available information delivered to them as soon as possible. The task ahead is very practical: to find out just how to deliver that information. Technical panels drawn from the earth science and information technology research fields summarized state-of-the-art practice for earthquakes, landslides, tsunamis, merged bathymetry and topography, and HAZUS/GIS products. Panelists were encouraged to explore how their science applies to tsunami and landslide mitigation practice. The following summarizes each panel’s major conclusions and the audience’s response to the technical discussions.



Moderator: Craig Weaver (USGS)
Panelists: Eric Geist (USGS), Tom Brocher (USGS) and Derek Booth (UW)



Audience Discussion:



Moderator: Tim Walsh (Washington Department of Natural Resources)
Panelists: Connie Manson (WA DNR), Bill Laprade (Shannon & Wilson), Hugh Shipman (Ecology), and Rex Baum (USGS)



Audience Discussion:


Other Resources Identified:



Moderator: Vasily Titov (NOAA)
Panelists: Brian Atwater (USGS), Shun-ichi Koshimura (JSPS), Ed Meyers (OGI), Sasha Rabinovich (TCM) and Harry Yeh (UW).



Audience Discussion:


Merged Bathy/Topo Digital Elevation Model (DEM)

Moderator: Ralph Hagerud (USGS)
Panelists: Dave Finlayson (UW), Mike Fisher (USGS) and Cinde Donoghue (NOAA)


Audience Discussion:



Moderator: Ron Langhelm (FEMA)
Panelists: George Graettinger (NOAA), Chris Wayne (ERSI) and Tiffany Vance (NOAA).


Audience Discussion:


List of Acronyms

BAS Best Available Science
BATHY Bathymetry
CAO Critical Area Ordinance
CIP Capital Improvement Project or Program
DCLU Department of Construction and Land Use
DEM Digital Electronic Mapping
EMD Emergency Management Division (Washington State Military Department)
Or Emergency Management Districts
ESRI Environmental Systems Research Institute
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
GIS Geographical Information System
GMA Growth Management Act
GPS Global Positioning System  
HAZUS Hazard U.S.
JSPS Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
NFPI National Flood Insurance Program
NOS National Oceanographic Service
NOAA National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration
NTHMP National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program
OGI Oregon Graduate Institute
PMEL Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (a division of NOAA)
PRISM Puget Sound Integrated System Model
RACE Rapid Alert of Cascadia Earthquakes
SMP Shoreline Management Plan
SPU Seattle Public Utility
TCM Tsunami Center, Moscow
TIME Center for Tsunami Inundation Modeling Efforts at PMEL
TOPO Topography
TsuInfo TsuInfo newsletter produced by FEMA
USGS United States Geological Survey
UW University of Washington
WSDOT Washington Department of Transportation

Attendee List

Puget Sound Tsunami/Landslide Workshop January 23-24, 2001

First Last Name Title Organization
Allen Alston Emergency Planner King County Office of Emergency Management
Brian Anderson Teacher Education Supervisor Pacific Science Center
Brian Atwater Geologist USGS/Quaternary Geology and Earthquake Hazards
Eric Baer Professor Highline Community College
Steve Bailey Director Pierce County Dept. of Emergency Management
Cathleen Barry Cartographer NOAA/Pacific Hydrographic Branch
Rex Baum Geologist USGS/National Landslide Hazards Program
James Bela President Oregon Earthquake Awareness
Boyd Benson Geologist GeoEngineers
Eddie Bernard Director NOAA/Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory
Matthew Bernard CDR Planner US Coast Guard
Marty Best Mitigation Officer WA Emergency Management Division
Derek Booth Director UW/ Center for Urban Water Resources Management
Tom Brocher Geophysicist USGS/Western Earthquake Hazards Team
Eric Brose Intern Kitsap County Dept. of Emergency Management

Attendee List

First Last Name Title Organization
Steve Brown Recovery & Mitigation Coordinator City of Seattle Emergency Management
Ted Buehner Warning & Coordination Meteorologist NOAA/National Weather Service
Det. Steve Cain Detective City of Bainbridge Island Dept. of Public Safety
Sharon Christopherson Scientific Support Coordinator NOAA/ORR/Hazardous Materials Response Division
Joe Ciarlo Emergency Coordinator Clallam County Emergency Management Division
Mitch Cline Major Incidence & Response Coordinator Thirteenth Coast Guard District
George Crawford Earthquake Program Manager WA Emergency Management Division
Feruccio Crocetti Plans Section Supervisor WA Emergency Management Division
Randy Davis Shorelands Planner WA State Dept. of Ecology
Cinde Donoghue Bathymetry Expert NOAA/Coastal Services Center
John Ege Engineering Geologist City of Seattle Public Utilities
Claudia Ellsworth Project Consultant Project Impact
Richard Fife Emergency Management Coordinator WA St. Dept. of Transportation
Dave Findley Principal Golder Associates
Dave Finlayson Graduate Student UW/Geology/Puget Sound Regional Synthesis Model

Attendee List

First Last Name Title Organization
Mike Fisher Marine Geophysicist USGS/Coastal and Marine Geology
Bob Freitag Director UW/Institute for Hazard Maintenance & Research
Eric Geist Geophysicist/Earthquake &Tsunami Hazards USGS/Coastal and Marine Geology
Frank Gonzalez Supervisory Oceanographer NOAA/PMEL/Tsunami Research Program
Roberto Gonzalez Regional Director Emergency Preparedness Canada
Bob Goodwin Coastal Resource Specialist UW/Washington Sea Grant
George Graettinger GIS Coordinator NOAA/NOS/ORR/Coastal Protection and Restoration Division
Barb Graff Emergency Preparedness Manager City of Bellevue Fire Department
Lyn Gross Director Emergency Services Coordinating Agency
Chuck Hagerhjelm Recovery Section Supervisor WA Emergency Management Division
TJ Harmon Director Island County Emergency Management Division
Ralph Haugerud Geologist USGS/Puget Sound Landform Studies
Roger Hieb Training Section Supervisor WA Emergency Management Division
Eric Holdeman Manager King County Office of Emergency Management
Steve Hou Senior Civil Engineer City of Seattle Transportation

Attendee List

First Last Name Title Organization
Sheryl Jardine Program Assistant WA Emergency Management Division
Jeff Jensen Deputy Chief City Tacoma Fire Department
Jerry Jenson Exercise Training Officer WA Emergency Management Division
Bill Johnson Inspector Kent Dept. of Fire & Life Safety
Bob Johnson Chief City of Auburn Fire Department
Chris Jonientz-Trisler Earthquake Program Manager FEMA Region X
Rob Kayen Civil Engineer/
Earthquake & Landslide Hazards
USGS/Coastal and Marine Geology
Gordon Kelsey Civil Engineer Thurston County Roads & Transportation Services
Shun-ichi Koshimura Tsunami Scientist NOAA/Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory
Don Krupp Director Thurston County Development Services Division
Ron Langhelm GIS Coordinator FEMA Region X/Response & Recovery
Bill Laprade Engineering Geologist Shannon & Wilson, Inc.
Peter Leon Policy Analyst NOAA/Office of Response & Recovery
Michael Lienau Television Producer Global Net Productions
Jeff Loewen GIS Technician FEMA Region X/Response & Recovery

Attendee List

First Last Name Title Organization
Erika Lund Recovery Coordinator City of Seattle Emergency Management
Phyllis Mann Director Kitsap County Dept. of Emergency Management
Connie Manson Senior Librarian WA Dept of Natural Resources
Steve Marten Operations and Training Coordinator City of Seattle Emergency Management
Peter May Professor UW/Political Science
Mike McCallister Coordinator Snohomish County Emergency Management
TJ McDonald Information Technology Coordinator City of Seattle Emergency Management
Bob Mead Hydrologist Thurston County Environmental Health
Max Messman Southest Regional Coordinator WA Emergency Management Division
Bob Minty Assistant Director / Coordinator Jefferson County Dept. of Emergency Management
Hal Mofjeld Tsunami Scientist NOAA/Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory
Jim Mullen Director City of Seattle Emergency Management
Ed Myers Tsunami Scientist Oregon Graduate Institute
Ken Olsen Student UW/Geophysics Program
Lester Olson Director Thurston County Emergency Management
Steve Palmer Geologist WA Dept of Natural Resources

Attendee List

First Last Name Title Organization
Steve Palmer Geologist WA Dept of Natural Resources
Chris Parsons Senior Planner Community Trade & Economic Development
Cheryl Paston Contract Administration Manager City of Seattle Public Utilities
Catherine Petroff Assistant Professor UW/Civil & Environmental Engineering
Jane Preuss Principal GeoEngineers
Sasha Rabinovich Tsunami Scientist Tsunami Center, Moscow, Russia
Frank Reynolds Inspector U.S. Dept. of Transportation
Stanley Roe Personal Secretary to the County Assessor King County Dept. of Assessment
Keith Ronnholm President Remote Measurement Systems, Inc.
Robert Schneider Emergency Preparedness Manager City of Redmond Fire Dept.
Dave Schneidler Manager, Emergency Planning Port of Seattle Seaport Planning Services
Richard Schroedel Coordinator Pierce County Dept. of Emergency Management
Roger Serra Director Snohomish County Dept. of Emergency Management
Hugh Shipman Coastal Geologist WA Department of Ecology
Kristi Silver Water Quality Planner King County Dept. of Natural Resources

Attendee List

First Last Name Title Organization
Terry Simmonds Emergency Response Coordinator Wash. St. Department of Transportation
Norman Skjelbreia Engineer U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Randy Sleight Chief Engineering Officer Snohomish County Planning & Development Services
Dan Sokol Environmental Planner WA Department of Ecology
Colleen Srull Private Citizen
Bill Steele Seismology Lab Coordinator UW/Geophysics Program
Ron Stephens Assistant Chief, Prevention & Education City of Tacoma Fire Department
Don Summers Section Supervisor Snohomish County Planning & Development Services
Genie Thompson Vice President Bank of America
Vasily Titov Co-Director Center for Tsunami Inundation Modeling Efforts
Joe Toland GIS Specialist FEMA Region X/Response & Recovery
Dee Totten Emergency Management Coordinator City of Mercer Island
Kathy Troost Research Scientist UW/Dept. of Geological Sciences
Maillian Uphaus Programs & Recovery Unit Manager WA Emergency Management Division
Teffany Vance GIS Specialist NOAA/Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory

Attendee List

First Last Name Title Organization
John Vollmer Individual Asst. Program Manager WA Emergency Management Division
Lee Walkling Librarian WA Dept of Natural Resources
Tim Walsh Chief Geologist WA Dept of Natural Resources
Chris Wayne GIS Expert Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc.
Craig Weaver Pacific Northwest Coordinator USGS Earthquake Hazard Program
Kate Wheatley Science Education Associate Pacific Science Center
Carla Whittington Instructor Highline Community College
John Willits Lieutenant Kent Dept. of Fire & Life Safety
David B. Winandy Facilities Engineer NOAA/Western Regional Center
Trudy Winterfeld Vice Chair WA St. Emergency Management Council
Nate Wood Graduate Student OSU/Oregon Sea Grant
Patrick Yamashita City Engineer City of Mercer Island
Harry Yeh Professor UW/Civil & Environmental Engineering
Jon Zerby Director San Juan County Emergency Management