Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

Alice B. Pennaz

Publications and source records attributed to Alice B. Pennaz.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

2026–2031 U.S. Geological Survey strategy for a hazard ready Nation—Actionable science for risk reduction

Executive Summary The USGS Strategy for a Hazard Ready Nation provides an approach that U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) researchers and staff can use to deliver actionable, user-focused science that supports risk-informed decision making aimed at reducing risk and losses across the Nation. The Strategy builds upon successful efforts within the USGS and seeks to promote and prioritize similar work in the future under an organized framework. Rooted in four priorities—(1) center end-user needs, (2) enhance research relevance, (3) support product and service development and implementation, and (4) improve communication—the USGS Strategy for a Hazard Ready Nation is designed to focus and guide, not prescribe, activities. Strategic actions are proposed to achieve these four priorities in a timely fashion. The USGS plans to continually build upon the Strategy for a Hazard Ready Nation to deliver actionable information for risk-informed decision making.

Circular↗

Earthquake-hazard exposure of residents with potential access and functional needs in the United States

Earthquake response plans and earthquake early warning (EEW) systems designed for general populations may not consider potential access and functional needs (AFN) of individuals with physical, sensory, cognitive, or social limitations. Previous efforts to map the distribution of these populations have focused on social-vulnerability indices that ignore or oversimply these limitations. The descriptive and exploratory analysis summarized in this United States (U.S.) case study addresses this gap by identifying and integrating spatially explicit data for AFN-related residential populations, earthquake hazards, and county and county equivalents for the conterminous U.S., Alaska, Puerto Rico, and Hawaii. We focus on 13 AFN-related attributes that relate to an individual's ability to access information contained in an EEW alert, to understand and process earthquake information or observed ground shaking, and to take self-protective actions based on this information and physical cues of an earthquake. Depending on the demographic attribute, there are millions to tens of millions of U.S. residents with AFN-related attributes in areas considered to have varying likelihoods (2%, 10%, and 50%) of exceedance of a damaging earthquake in the next 50 years. Although these amounts represent low percentages at the national level, the percentage of individuals with AFN-related attributes in many counties and county equivalents substantially exceeds national percentages. No one county, county equivalent, U.S. state, or U.S. territory has the highest percentage of individuals in all AFN-related attributes; therefore, future efforts to increase individual resilience to earthquakes may benefit from understanding the local context of individuals with potential access and functional needs.

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction↗

National strategy for landslide loss reduction

Executive Summary Landslide hazards are present in all 50 States and most U.S. territories, and they affect lives, property, infrastructure, and the environment. Landslides are the downslope move­ment of earth materials under the force of gravity. They can occur without any obvious trigger. Widespread or severe land­slide events are often driven by such hazards as hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, heavy rain events, flooding, and wildfires. Landslides can also cause their own cascading consequences, such as the spread of hazardous materials or the creation of devastating local tsunamis. This strategy document describes goals and strategic actions of a comprehensive strategy to meet key challenges to reducing the Nation’s risk from landslide hazards equitably and effectively. The document follows the direction of the National Landslide Preparedness Act (Public Law 116–323) by presenting a strategy for addressing landslide hazards, including risk reduction and response. The act directs the Department of the Interior to establish a program that will work with State, Tribal, and local governments as well as with academia, the private sector, community-based groups, and nonprofit organizations to identify landslide hazards and risk and improve communication, coordination, and emergency preparedness, with the objective of reducing landslide losses. As the only Federal program dedicated to landslide hazard science, the U.S. Geological Survey’s Landslide Hazards Program will lead and coordinate many of the efforts described in this strategy document. Landslide hazard risk reduction must be undertaken collectively and collaboratively across the Federal Government. This strategy document will provide a framework for the creation of an interagency management plan that describes the programs, projects, workforce, and budgets required to carry out the national strategy. The strategy outlined in this document presents a vision of how to equitably produce, communicate, and apply landslide data and science to support a broad range of land management, infrastructure, planning, and emergency response decisions. These decisions are made by a variety of actors, including private and nonprofit landholders; State, Tribal, territorial, city, and county planners; emergency managers; engineers; infrastructure managers; Federal agencies and their partners; and community leaders and individuals. Supporting those decisions and reducing the Nation’s vulnerability to landslides requires overcoming three main challenges: (1) gaps in basic information needed to describe and understand landslide occurrence and societal risk, (2) difficulty in accurately mapping and forecasting landslide hazards, and (3) communication and coordination among the many jurisdictions and sectors that have responsi­bility for and interest in reducing landslide losses. To address those challenges, this strategy document puts forward a series of strategic actions to achieve four goals: Assess: Decision makers have access to detailed, nationwide, and contextually relevant information on land­slide hazard and risk. Coordinate: Landslide hazard mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery efforts are coordinated across Federal, State, Tribal, territorial, and local levels. Plan: Communities and land managers are prepared and able to plan for landslide hazards. Respond: Landslide surveillance, warnings, and responses to events are effective, efficient, equitable, coopera­tive, and data-driven to protect lives, property, infrastructure, and the environment. These strategic actions focus on expanding the knowl­edge of societal risk posed by landslides as well as better understanding of where, when, and why they occur. They focus on applying that knowledge to support landslide risk reduction efforts and decisions, including the establishment of new advisory, coordination, and working groups focused on landslide hazard and risk. They take into account that supporting landslide loss reduction decisions also requires new guidance, tools, and training codeveloped with the entities, organizations, and individuals faced with making those decisions. Finally, they address actions needed to support and expand landslide warning information and improve the technical response to landslide emergencies.

Open-File Report↗

Multi-hazard risk analysis for the U.S. Department of the Interior: An integration of expert elicitation, planning priorities, and geospatial analysis

An integral part of disaster risk management is identifying and prioritizing hazards and their potential impacts in a meaningful way to support risk-reduction planning. There has been considerable use and subsequent criticism of threat prioritization efforts that simply compare likelihoods and consequences of plausible threats. This article summarizes a new mixed-methods and scalable approach for prioritizing risks in a multi-hazard, multi-objective, and multi-criteria organizational context. This approach integrates (1) hazard characterizations using subject-matter-expert (SME) elicitation, (2) expressed preferences in planning priorities provided by emergency managers, and (3) quantitative estimates of asset exposure to hazards using geospatial data and geographic-information-systems (GIS) software. We demonstrate this approach with a case study designed to support multi-hazard mitigation and response planning done by the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) Office of Emergency Management, which required a national understanding of the risks posed by 75 natural, technological, and adversarial hazards to DOI managed and administered lands, facilities, people, revenues, and resources. Results demonstrate that hazard priorities vary depending on the asset, scale, and risk-management context, thereby making the case that “one-size-fits-all” hazard rankings have limited utility or relevance to real-world, risk mitigation and response planning. Our results suggest that recognizing the risk-management context provides greater transparency, flexibility, and relevance in comparing threats than traditional likelihood-threat matrices or the use of hazard SMEs to decide for planners which hazard scenarios are emphasized in risk planning.

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction↗

Assessing hazards and risks at the Department of the Interior—A workshop report

On February 27–28, 2018, the U.S. Geological Survey and Department of the Interior (DOI) Office of Emergency Management (OEM) hosted a workshop to gather input from DOI subject matter experts (SMEs), resource managers, facility managers, emergency managers, and law enforcement personnel. Workshop goals were to (1) determine how DOI Bureaus and Offices use risk information for strategic planning and decision-making; (2) understand what types of information are most useful to DOI Bureaus and Offices; (3) establish what data, information, and products are desired; (4) identify the most effective methods for delivery and visualization; and (5) collect ideas for future project directions. The workshop findings presented in this report will influence the development of risk-information products created by the Strategic Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment of Department of the Interior Resources (SHIRA) Project team.

Circular↗

Results from the Department of the Interior Strategic Sciences Group Technical Support for the 2018 Kīlauea Eruption

On May 3, 2018 Hawai'i’s Kīlauea volcano erupted, ultimately covering 35 square kilometers (13.5 square miles) of land in lava, destroying over 700 homes in multiple subdivisions, and displacing over 2500 residents in the Puna District on the southeast flank of the volcano. Simultaneously, Kīlauea’s summit experienced its largest collapse in 200 years, with a total of 500 meters (1,640 feet) subsidence and tens of earthquakes each day rattling surrounding communities. These simultaneous events impacted residential, agricultural, business, tourist, and scientific areas. Hawai'i Volcanoes National Park closed, slowing tourism and the local economy. The building housing the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Hawai'ian Volcano Observatory also closed, displacing scientists responsible for monitoring the erupting volcano. The eruption lasted 107 days, one of the longest eruptions in recent history in lower Puna. Throughout the eruption, uncertainty regarding the duration of the event, its extent, and total damage remained high. This uncertainty led to social tensions and fatigue across the affected community, responders, and local officials. At the direction of the USGS Director, serving as the Science Advisor to the Secretary of the of the Interior, the Department of the Interior (DOI, hereafter also referred to as “the Department”) Strategic Sciences Group (SSG) convened a multidisciplinary group of 13 experts in Hilo, Hawai'i, on July 17-19, 2018. The SSG was charged with considering the cascading short- and long-term social, economic, and environmental consequences of the 2018 Kīlauea eruption to DOI resources, employees, and facilities as well as to the surrounding communities. Established in 2012, the SSG is designed to complement ongoing response efforts by providing strategic science to identify potential social, environmental, and economic consequences and potential interventions during a crisis event affecting Departmental resources. This activation of the SSG was funded by the USGS. It was the first official activation of the SSG since it supported Hurricane Sandy recovery in 2013 and provided the unique opportunity to test new methods, including bolstering the social science expertise on the team and interacting directly with stakeholders before, during, and after deployment. The SSG Kīlauea Team developed three scenarios focused on 1) the impacts of continued seismicity and deformation at the summit; 2) vog (volcanic smog); and 3) the eruption in the lower East Rift Zone. Across all scenarios, areas of concern included human health (physical and mental); biosecurity (for example, protecting threatened and endangered species); infrastructure (impacts caused by seismic activity, vog, and lava); communications (internal and public-facing); long-term planning (related to tourism, access, housing); and ongoing needs for community engagement and empowerment. The SSG Kīlauea Team identified 59 potential actions for mitigation. Highlights of these actions were delivered to stakeholders during briefings in August and September 2018. Examples of potential actions included: ● Seize opportunities to develop new partnerships within and outside of DOI to address facilities issues caused by seismic damage and park closure. ● Educate community members and new workers to increase early detection of invasive species and establish new wash stations to address biosecurity threats to the park posed by more frequent commuting from new temporary Hilo locations. ● Create a "vog officer" position to ensure coordination and consistency in communication about vog hazards across federal, state, and county agencies. It is important to note that the potential actions are suggestions and are not intended to be prescriptive. The SSG uses “blue sky thinking” when developing these potential actions to encourage creative approaches to problem solving. In some cases, some of the suggested potential actions derived by the SSG are actions that were already underway, or already under consideration and helped to affirm 3 activities by different stakeholders. In other cases, the actions may be new ideas. Some were applicable to immediate response, while others are more relevant to long-term recovery. This report details the results from the July 2018 activation of the SSG. It includes background on Kīlauea and the 2018 eruption, an overview of SSG methodology, and a complete list of the potential actions to mitigate cascading consequences identified by the SSG. Importantly, Appendix 4 includes several rapidly assembled “issue papers” on a variety of topics for consideration for recovery and future preparedness and response activities. This report is designed to be used by both the Department and more broadly by partners, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Hawai'i County, Hawai'i Department of Health, and the Hawai'i Emergency Management Agency.

Hawaii↗