[an error occurred while processing this directive]
To: Participants, ANSS Intermountain West (IMW) Region
(and other interested persons)
From: Walter Arabasz, Regional Coordinator
Subj: ANSS-IMW Information Update & FY2003 Planning
Date: 23 July 2002
ANSS-IMW homepage is at http://www.seis.utah.edu/anss/index.shtml
- ANSS Funding Picture for FY2003
- Highlights from July 17-18 Mtg of National Implementation Committee
- COSMOS Recommendations for Strong-Motion Instrumentation of Bldgs
- Guidance for FY2003 Regional Planning
- Steps for FY2003 Plan for IMW Region
- ANSS FUNDING PICTURE FOR FY2003
Despite many lobbying efforts, neither the House nor Senate markups
of the USGS FY2003 budget include any increase for ANSS. The most
likely outcome is a level appropriation of $3.9 million. An excellent
source of info on Congressional earth-science-related news is
Accounting for agency overhead and O&M commitments for instruments
already installed, dollars available for new instruments will necessarily
be less than for FY2002, and pressures are mounting from the earthquake
engineering community for instrumenting structures in high-hazard areas
(see Item 3, below).
- HIGHLIGHTS FROM JULY 17-18 MTG OF NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE
- Meeting attended by USGS-ANSS managers, regional coordinators, and
the chair (or a representative) from the Regional Advisory Committee
(RAC) of each ANSS region. Bob Guenzler, State of Idaho INEEL Oversight,
represented the IMW-RAC, and Steve Bartlett, chair of the Utah Strong-
Motion Advisory Committee also attended.
- Discussions were deliberately limited to general issues and guidelines
for FY2003 planning--as opposed to specific planning for any ANSS
region. Funding picture (Item 1, above) poses major challenges).
- ANSS challenges include: (1) raising funding, (2) engaging
engineering community, (3) addressing technical issues, (4) balance
between new hardware and techical support (human resources)--for system
operation & maintenance and development of new data/information products,
(5) keeping interest and morale high, and (6) keeping promises and
commitments (internal and external credibility).
- ANSS strong-motion stations installed: 80 in FY2000, 122 in FY2001,
and 137 in FY2002, for a total of 339. Emphasis generally will continue
on strong-motion instrumentation in urban regions and "national backbone"
- Observations and recommendations from the ANSS National Steering
Committee were reported (see http://earthquake.usgs.gov/anss/index.php/scmin2001.html)
- Need for enhanced ANSS data and information products; special working
group created to define performance standards; check out and bookmark
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/ for examples of new products; USGS
reorganization of NEIC focusing on improved earthquake response and
delivery of real-time EQ information via the Internet.
- California Integrated Seismic Network (CISN) advancing, thanks to
$3.9 million from the California state legislature and California
Office of Emergency Services (see http://www.cisn.org); but state
funding is "metastable."
- ShakeMap working group being formed under CISN will be enlarged
into a national ShakeMap working group.
Steve Malone reported Idaho's decision--after some deliberation--to
indeed be a core member of the IMW Region and an affiliate member
of the Pacific NW Region. (See "A Vision for ANSS in Idaho" by
Steve Weiser, Idaho Bureau of Disaster Services at
- Outcome of COSMOS workshop (Item 3, below) points out need for
more emphasis on strong-motion instrumentation of buildings, but
no-growth funding means trade-offs; regions outside of California
want flexibility in instrumenting buildings vs other strong-motion
needs. Policy-making still evolving.
- Guidance was developed for FY2003 planning by ANSS regions
(see Item 4, below).
- COSMOS RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STRONG-MOTION INSTRUMENTATION OF BLDGS
In November 2001, COSMOS (Consortium of Organizations for Strong-Motion
Observation Systems) held a workshop on "Strong-Motion Instrumentation of
Buildings." A full workshop report is supposed to be released soon.
The "Summary and Recommendations" from the report were distributed at
the July 17-18 ANSS-NIC meeting and can be viewed at
- GUIDANCE FOR FY2003 REGIONAL PLANNING
One of the outcomes of the July 17-18 ANSS-NIC meeting was a general
guidance document for preparing FY2003 implementation plans in each ANSS
region. The guidance document, circulated by John Filson of the USGS,
can be viewed at http://www.seis.utah.edu/anss/fy03_guidance.shtml.
Some explanation of parts of the guidance document may be helpful:
(a) The requirements for candidate structures for strong-motion
instrumentation (see Item 3 above) are elaborate; it will take great
effort to make a persuasive case for instrumenting any structures
in the IMW Region in FY2003. (b) "System level expenditures" refer
to investments in aspects of the ANSS nationwide system that benefit
the entire system (e.g., software support, archiving, system engineering
studies, national backbone stations); such investments reduce the total
dollars available to individual regions but enhance the effectiveness of
the whole system. (c) "Regional cooperative opportunities" refer to
special cost-sharing opportunities.
- STEPS FOR FY2OO3 PLAN FOR IMW REGION
The deadline for each ANSS region to submit an implementation plan
for FY2003 has been set for the end of October (2002), and
early submissions are encouraged.
I expect to be out of the country during all of September and want
to begin the process of shaping an FY2003 IMW plan. The good news
is that the plan can be short! The challenge will be deciding what
to propose--given the no-growth funding--and reaching a regional
Some states are already working on prioritizing their needs for
FY2003, following up on the general needs they outlined in the FY2002
Step 1. Members of the IMW Regional Working Group (network operators)
should begin evaluating their state's needs ASAP--accounting for
ANSS funding constraints and guidelines (Item 4 above).
Step 2. Where applicable, plan to convene your state advisory
committee soon to engage them in the planning.
Step 3. I plan to arrange one or more conference calls with the
IMW Regional Advisory Committee (RAC) during mid- to late-August
and hope to have at least preliminary input from individual states
so that the RAC can begin evaluating a regional plan.
Thank you all for your help.
IMW Regional Coordinator