This program is funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation, under grant #CMMI-0758529

• Guidelines for the Submission of Reconnaissance Reports

 The Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, a nonprofit professional association of earthquake engineers and others interested in earthquake risk reduction, has, since its inception in 1949, conducted post-earthquake investigations with the purpose of improving the science and practive of earthquake engineering.

The ability to make observations rapidly and precisely following a disaster has long been recognized as critical to managing emergency response activities in the short term and improving the understanding of natural hazards in the long term. Participating in earthquake reconnaissance is a vivid reminder of why we are actively engaged in earthquake engineering and risk management.

In 1973, EERI formally initiated the Learning from Earthquakes (LFE) Program. This program, funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation, sends out multi-disciplinary teams of researchers (e.g., earth scientists, engineers, social scientists) into the field to investigate and to learn from the damaging effects of earthquakes ([1], [2], [3], [4]). The reconnaissance team makes a rapid, general damage survey of the affected area, documents initial important observations from the particular earthquake, and assesses the need for follow-up areas of research ([5], [6]).

EERI investigates all damaging earthquakes in the United States as well as international earthquakes where lessons might be learned that have application to the U.S. (See [7], [8] for recent examples.) In addition to EERI, many other organizations (e.g., universities, private firms, state and international governments) send reconnaissance teams. EERI andthe United States Geological Survey (USGS) share responsibility under a recently completed federal post-earthquake investigation plan to manage reconnaissance efforts in the United States; EERI has primary responsibility in international earthquakes [9]. Typically, management includes coordinating all field investigators.

On average, a reconnaissance team is deployed within three days of a disaster and the reconnaissance efforts lasts one to two weeks. On a daily basis, trips are made into the damaged region and nightly debriefings are planned for the team members to discuss their findings. EERI has found that it is crucial to set up a clearinghouse, a common place where the various investigators can report and get status updates of the overall field investigation and the whereabouts of team members. In its simplest form, the clearinghouse is a physical location where the team members will meet at predetermined times and exchange information they have gathered in the field. At the end of the reconnaissance process, the EERI team members lead the effort to identify further research needs [10] and document the impacts of the earthquake, beginning with preliminary reports through additional investigations (e.g., Beyond Reconnaissance Grants) and ending with the final consolidated report, as shown below (adapted from [9]).

In addition, studies to capture earthquake lessons that may not be apparent until some years after an event are also funded (e.g., Lessons Learned Over Time grants, such as [11], [12], [13]). The data collected are put in the form of voluminous reports, which become an essential source of information for researchers for many years to come. Recent examples include: the Southern Peru Earthquake of 23 June 2001 Reconnaissance Report [4], the Bhuj, India Earthquake of January 26, 2001 Reconnaissance Report [14], and the Kocaeli, Turkey, Earthquake of August 17, 1999 Reconnaissance Report [15].

[1] Hanson, Robert D. and Henry J. Degenkolb, 1969. The Venezuela Earthquake of July 29, 1967, American Iron and Steel Institute, 176 pp.
[2] Penzien, Joseph, and Robert D. Hanson, 1971. The Gediz Turkey Earthquake of 1970, National Research Council, NAS/NAE, 81 pp.
[3] Meehan, J.F. et al. 1973. Managua, Nicaragua, Earthquake of December 23, 1972. Oakland, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.
[4] Rodriguez-Marek, A., Edwards, C. 2003a. Southern Peru Earthquake of 23 June 2001 Reconnaissance Report. Supplement A to Volume 19, Earthquake Spectra, January 2003.
[5] EERI, 1996. Post-Earthquake Investigation Field Guide: Learning from Earthquakes, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Publication No. 96-1, 144 pp.
[6] EERI, 1986. Reducing Earthquake Hazards: Lessons Learned from Earthquakes. Oakland, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, November, 1986.
[7] EERI Special Earthquake Report, January 2003. Preliminary Observations on the October 31-November 1, 2002 Molise, Italy, Earthquake Sequence. Supplement to EERI Newsletter, 12 pp.
[8] EERI Special Earthquake Report, February 2003. Preliminary Observations on the Denali Fault, Alaska Earthquake of November 2nd, 2002. Supplement to EERI Newsletter, 8 pp.
[9] Holzer, T. et al., 2002. A Plan to Coordinate NEHRP Post-Earthquake Investigations, prepared by Applied Technology Council under contract to USGS, July 6, 2002, 27 pp.
[10] EERI, 1999b. Research Needs Emerging from Recent Earthquakes. Recommendations from a Workshop organized by the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute for the National Science Foundation, October 25 and 26, 1999. Oakland, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, December 1999.
[11] EERI, 2000. Lessons Learned over Time, Volume III: Bridge Repairs after the 1995 Kobe (Hyogo-ken Nanbu) Earthquake; The 1995 Kobe Earthquake as a Trigger for Implementing New Seismic Design Technologies in Japan. Oakland, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, January 2000.
[12] Nikolic-Brzev, S., Greene, M., Krimgold, F., Seeber, L. 1999. Lessons Learned over Time, Volume II: Innovative Earthquake Recovery in India. Oakland, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, October 1999, 95 pp.
[13] EERI, 1999a. Lessons Learned over Time, Volume I: Earthquake as Opportunity: the Reconstruction of Pacific Garden Mall, Santa Cruz after the Loma Prieta Earthquake of 1989; Empowering Local Governments in Disaster Recovery Management: Lessons from Watsonville and Oakland in Recovering from the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake and other Recent Disasters; Re-examining the Performance of Roll-up Garage Doors in Fire Stations in Recent California Earthquakes, Oakland, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, May 1999, 110 pp.
[14] Jain, S.K. Lettis, W.R, Murty, C.V. R., Bardet, Jean-Pierre (technical editors). Bhuj, India Earthquake of January 26, 2001 Reconnaissance Report, Earthquake Spectra, Supplement A to Volume 18, July 2002.
[15] Youd, T. L. Bardet, J.P, Bray, J.D., 2000. Kocaeli, Turkey, Earthquake of August 17, 1999 Reconnaissance Report, Supplement A to Volume 16, Earthquake Spectra, December 2000.