Join the SESI committee in revisiting their accomplishments of 2016 and looking forward to goals and strategies in 2017.
Join the public policy committee in discussing upcoming policy issues with a focus on NEHRP (National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program) bill reauthorization.
The EERI Student Leadership Council (SLC) is coordinating and implementing the 14th Annual Undergraduate Seismic Design Competition (SDC) at the 2017 Annual Meeting in Portland, Oregon.
The objectives of the competition are to:
Thirty-three teams from universities across the US and around the world will be competing in the SDC in Portland, Oregon. Each team has designed and constructed a complex tall building model made from balsa wood (weighing no more than 7 pounds). The teams will present to a judging panel on Wednesday, March 8, and have their structures tested on a shake table on Thursday, March 9. The teams are scored on their design presentation, their summary poster, their architectural design, their ability to fulfill the design challenges, the accuracy of their predicted model performance, and the response of their model during shaking table testing.
EERI and the SLC would like to thank the sponsors of the 2017 Seismic Design Competition for their generous support: FEMA, Computers and Structures, Inc., California Earthquake Authority, Degenkolb Engineers, Kinemetrics, Oregon State University, MTS, and Cascadia Region Earthquake Workgroup (CREW).
To learn more about the SDC, or view the rules, scoring details, and other criteria, visit the Student Leadership Council's 2017 SDC web page. You can also follow SLC activities on Twitter (@EERI_tweets) and Facebook.
Finally, if you are a professional attending the Annual Meeting and you would like to be a judge for one aspect of the SDC, please send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org for more information or to sign up.
Visit the 2017 Seismic Design Competition webpage!
March 7. 2017
March 8, 2017
Judging Debrief with Team Captains
Captains must be present
March 9, 2017
March 10, 2017
View Full Map
The 2017 EERI Annual Meeting officially kicks off with food, drink, and a chance to catch up with colleagues and visit exhibitors. Join us!
Sponsored by the California Earthquake Authority
Failure of nonstructural components—which includes all those components that are not part of the structural system, such as architectural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, as well as furniture, fixtures, equipment, and contents—have accounted for the majority of earthquake damage in several recent U.S. earthquakes. In many cases, businesses, schools, hospitals, and other organizations had to spend excessive time and dollars for clean-up and repair due to nonstructural failures; therefore impeding continued operations and rapid recovery. Nonstructural component failures can impede safe evacuation, delay rescue, and cause additional hazards, such as fire following an earthquake. Training on FEMA E-74, Reducing the Risks of Nonstructural Earthquake Damage, covers the sources and types of nonstructural earthquake damage, as well as effective methods and guidance for reducing the potential risks of injury and property loss from future earthquakes. Questions about this training can be directed to Veronica Cedillos at email@example.com
Instructor: Mike Griffin
Cost: $35 (covers A/V and venue fees)
This workshop will provide an overview of conducting post-earthquake reconnaissance and a demonstration of EERI field data collection tools. The workshop will include a field exercise that will give participants the opportunity to practice making reconnaissance observations for structural or geotechnical damage scenarios. EERI members who complete this training will have a practical introduction to post-earthquake reconnaissance and information about opportunities to participate in future reconnaissance efforts.
Organizers: EERI's Student Leadership Council and the EERI Learning from Earthquakes Program
Sponsored by MTS, EERI Student Leadership Council and Learning from Earthquakes Program
At this year's EERI Annual Meeting, the EERI Younger Members Committee is hosting a breakfast event for Young Professionals and Academics! During this session, younger members will identify a leader they wish to meet, and join the leader at their numbered table for a 30 minute discussion about their experiences within the earthquake engineering industry and EERI community. We encourage younger members to ask leaders beneficial ways to get involved within the EERI.
Speakers: David A. Friedman, EERI Board President; Carmen Merlo and Jeff Rubin, Organizing Committee Chairs
Why the Pacific Northwest is Different, and Why it Matters Earthquake Lexicon 101: are we on the same wavelength?
The Pacific Northwest (PNW) hosts a range of seismic regimes and hazards, including large urban areas and populated coastlines at risk for a great subduction-zone earthquake. The region's scarcity of damaging earthquakes, and infrequent disasters of any kind, generate challenges in awareness, preparedness, and meaningful investment in resilience across sectors. In dealing with these challenges, it is imperative that we have a common understanding of the terminology that we use in earthquake matters. This session will combine a contextual orientation and a panel interacting with the audience with the objective of more effective communication.
Moderator: Jeff Rubin. Emergency Manager, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue
Speakers: Jeff Rubin. Emergency Manager, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue; Carmen Merlo, Portland Bureau of Emergency Management; Kenji Yamasaki; Art Frankel, USGS; Mike Hagerty; Sandra Hyde, International Code Council
Sponsored by the Portland Bureau of Emergency Management
2017 marks the 40th anniversary of the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) established by Congress with its passage of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act in 1977. NEHRP authorized federal government involvement and funding for a long-term nationwide program to reduce risks to life and property from earthquakes. With the most recent reauthorization in 2004, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was designated as the lead federal agency for the program. Other NEHRP agencies are the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), National Science Foundation (NSF), and the United States Geological Survey (USGS). A federal Advisory Committee for Earthquake Hazard Reduction (ACEHR) was also authorized in 2004 to be widely representative of the stakeholder community and to regularly assess the effectiveness of NEHRP and its management, coordination, implementation, and activities.
While changes have occurred in program details over time, the four basic NEHRP goals remain unchanged:
During the past 40 years, the federal government has been a key organizer and funder of a wide array of programs related to understanding seismic hazards, developing guidelines, codes and standards for structures and lifelines, enhancing federal, state and local earthquake preparedness and mitigation, and conducting fundamental research in the earth sciences, engineering, and social sciences. This session will celebrate the key accomplishments of NEHRP, recognize the refined focus federal programs are now developing, and underscore the programs and needs requiring a uniform national perspective and sustained federal involvement in order to progress nationwide seismic resilience.
Moderator: Laurie Johnson, Chair, ACEHR and Chris Poland, Past Chair, ACEHR
Speakers: Chris Rojhan, ATC; Jack Moehle, UC Berkelely; Jane Bullock, Bullock and Haddow; Kathleen Tierney, University of Colorado; John Anderson, University of Nevada, Reno
The Resilience by Design program adopted by Los Angeles to address earthquake vulnerabilities brought together the earth science, earthquake engineering and public policy professions and worked with hundreds of community organizations to get approval for sweeping seismic resilience legislation. The process elucidated the disconnect between what well-informed members of the community and local governments understand about the earthquake risk and the goals and objectives of mitigation measures like building codes, and what has been implemented in most communities. Since their inception, building codes have been based on a principle that safety is the only valid concern of government. If an owner chooses to build a building that is a total financial loss, that is his prerogative but he cannot kill someone in the process. A key factor is that building codes consider buildings in isolation with impacts only on their owners and tenants. But the reality of a major earthquake is that the failure of a building impacts the whole community through economic disruption, population decreases, and cascading failures of engineered and social systems. This talk will explore a conceptual framework for creating a building code that reflects the realities of earthquake losses and the social dynamics of shared economic decisions.
Presenter: Lucy Jones, USGS RetiredTitle: "Life Safety in the City: There is more to life than not being crushed"
In regions struggling to upgrade buildings to a level of life safety sufficient to prevent collapse during a large earthquake or maintain function, what choices are made when designing SFRSs and non-structural components to code or to a higher performance? Three case studies will consider choices made by engineers based on local conditions for ground motion, potential for long duration shaking and consideration of whether life safety design is sufficient for economic and community needs. Then the cost of building to a higher performance will be discussed. The following questions are considered: what goals are required, how is immediate use defined for design goals, and will back-up utilities be available when the building performs as expected?
Moderator: Sandra Hyde, International Code Council
Speakers: Mark Tobin, KPFF; Jay Love, Degenkolb Engineers; Bob Glasgow, and Keith Porter, SPA Risk and the University of Colorado
"Resilience" is a ubiquitous term, but most applications are broad, conceptual, or both. This session offers specific examples of how local jurisdictions have assessed and/or addressed their seismic vulnerabilities with respect to their critical functions. Panel will describe challenges, opportunities, and actions, offering specific examples of how agencies/jurisdictions have responded to seismic hazards.
Moderator: Carmen Merlo, Director, Portland Bureau of Emergency Management
Speakers: Tom Peterson, Chief Engineer, Port of Portland; Siobhan Kirk, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue; Teresa Elliott, Chief Engineer, Portland Water Bureau; and Mike Howard, Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience
One of two breakout sessions on liquefaction and ground deformations. These multiple sessions invite speakers ranging from academics to practitioners to discuss new developments on the subject of seismically-induced soil liquefaction.
Session 1 covers updates on the recent National Research Council (NRC) study on liquefaction, including the committee recommendations on data collection, the simplified method, and performance-based design.
Moderator: Armin Stuedlein, Oregon State University
Title:Updates on National Research Council (NRC) project on the State of the Art and Practice in Earthquake Induced Soil Liquefaction Assessment
Speakers: Sammantha Magsino, National Academies; Ed Kavazanjian, Arizona State University; Ellen Rathje, University of Texas, Austin; Russell Green, Virginia Tech; Steve Kramer, University of Washington
This session focuses on how to advance seismic safety of schools. Topics include: new developments and advances on seismic safety of schools, including FEMA P-1000; issues and solutions relating to schools in tsunami evacuation zones; and new community roles of schools. EERI members are invited to engage in EERI's School Earthquake Safety Initiative (SESI), including exploring activities in the SESI tsunami committee. Speakers range from school administrators, academics, practitioners to subject matter experts. A panel session will explore gaps, needs and next steps to advance seismic and tsunami safety of schools.
Moderator: Barry Welliver, BHW Engineers
Speakers: Veronica Cedillos, Applied Technology Council; Cale Ash, Degenkolb Engineers; Richard Steinbrugge, Beaverton School District; Edward Wolf, Parents for Preparedness
"Resilience" is a ubiquitous term, but most applications are broad, conceptual, or both. This session offers specific examples of how Oregon has approached the challenge of seismic hazards on a statewide level, with distinctly finite resources. The 2013 release of the Oregon Resilience Plan (ORP) charted a course for public and private organizations, as well as state action. The relatively recent awareness of Oregon's range of seismic hazards, brought forth by a group of technical policy champions, offered a path toward (greater) resilience. This session includes a panel, and focuses on statewide impacts, and includes information on some of the most pressing issues: earthquake hazard and risk assessments, development of the Pacific Northwest's earthquake early warning system, and state continuity of government. Specific case studies from local agencies, state agencies, planners and researchers will be presented. The panel sessions will explore gaps, goals and next steps to advance earthquake resilience.
Moderator: Yumei Wang, Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI)
Speakers: Mike Harryman, Oregon State Resilience Officer, Oregon Governor's Office; Brad Avy, Director, State Geologist, DOGAMI; Doug Toomey, University of Oregon; Andrew Phelps, Director, Oregon Emergency Management
The second of two breakout sessions on liquefaction and ground deformations. These multiple sessions invite speakers ranging from academics to practitioners to discuss new developments on the subject of seismically-induced soil liquefaction.
This session will include updates on the Next-Generation Liquefaction (NGL) project by the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER); new research findings on liquefaction/cyclic-softening of low-plasticity silts; and case studies for local projects on liquefaction and cyclic softening of Willamette Silts
Moderator: Arash Khosravifar, Portland State University
Title:Liquefaction/Cyclic-Softening of Low-Plasticity Silts and Case Studies
Speakers: Mike Beaty, Beaty Engineering; Jon Stewart, UCLA; Ken Stokoe, University of Texas, Austin
The mission of the Learning from Earthquakes (LFE) Program is to accelerate and increase learning from earthquake-induced disasters that affect the natural, built, social and political environments worldwide. This session will discuss recent earthquakes that EERI participated in reconnaissance work after the 2016 M6.2 Central Italy, 2016 M7.8 Ecuador and 2016 M7.8 Kaikoura earthquakes. This session will also report on the survey findings investigating the resilience and recovery of businesses impacted by the South Napa and Cushing, Oklahoma earthquakes. Session presenters will provide a summary of the reconnaissance work performed, lessons from the earthquakes, and results from a new business resilience survey data collected from the Napa and Cushing earthquakes.
Moderator: Carmen Merlo, Portland Bureau of Emergency Management
Speakers: Silvia Mazzoni, University of California, Berkeley; Erica Fisher, Degenkolb Engineers; Forrest Lanning, Miyamoto International; Dave Brunsdon, Kestrel Group New Zealand; Yu Xiao, Texas A&M University, Michael Mieler, Arup
Sponsored by CREW
The Strong Motion Forum has been a part of the EERI Annual Meetings for several decades. This year the Forum will have its own technical session. The focus will be on new strong motion data and new developments in strong motion monitoring. Four presentations will cover strong motion monitoring in the Pacific Northwest, geotechnical arrays, new and significant strong motion data at CESMD, and discussion of a new UC/PG&E collaboration on ultra-dense monitoring and modeling of strong earthquake shaking. There will be time at the end for the usual open discussion of strong motion issues.
Moderator: Robert Nigbor and Jamie Steidl, University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB)
Speakers: Paul Bodin, University of Washington; Jamie Steidl, UCSB; Norm Abrahamson, PG&E; and Hamid Haddadi, CSMIP, CGS
This session explores recent developments and applications in seismic safety and planning that cover the spectrum from pre-event through recovery, including policy development, early warning, estimating fire following earthquakes, and scarce resource allocation after an earthquake. Specific assessments, methods and tools will be presented.
Moderator: Ian Madin, Chief Scientist, Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI)
Speakers: Bill Leith, USGS; Charles Scawthorn, SPA Risk; Janiele Maffei, California Earthquake Authority, Tom Horning, Seaside Oregon City Council
Investment in resilience takes time and commitment from a wide range of participants. This session examines the relationship between public will and political will for implementing seismic policies. How does valuing the goals of resilience translate into daily decision-making? What is the role of local champions in galvanizing support and leadership for achieving resilience? What is the relationship between the public and private sectors, along with NGOs, CBOs, and FBOs? For resilience community development, is the minimum standard of “Life Safety? adequate for the majority of our built environment?
Moderator: Jay Wilson, Clackamas County, Oregon
Speakers: Arrietta Chakos, Urban Resilience Strategies; Ines Pearce, Pearce Global Partners Inc.; Susan Graves, Lincoln County School District, Oregon; Steve Moddemeyer, Collins Woerman
Many of the guidelines and recommendations for the design of earthquake resistant structures were developed based on knowledge and experience gained from earthquakes occurring in Southern California. These events tend to be short in duration and contribute mainly to the response of short period structures. Recent subduction earthquakes have subjected structures to ground shaking with much longer duration. Earthquake generated hazards in the Pacific Northwest have the potential to cause long duration shaking and have a significant contribution to the response of long period structures. Geotechnical and structural design implications will be discussed as they pertain to long duration shaking for both short and long period structures.
Moderator: Nicholas Rillstone, KPFF Consulting Engineers
Speakers: Peter Dusicka, Portland State University; Jeffrey Berman, University of Washington
This session focuses on social, financial, policy and planning issues, including Cascadia earthquake-induced social vulnerabilities and mass care needs in Oregon. The panel sessions will explore gaps, goals and next steps.
Moderator: Eric Gebbie, Oregon Health Authority
Speakers: Jay Wilson, Clackamas County, Oregon; Stan Thomas, Oregon Department of Human Services; Monica Gowan, Western Washington University; Judith Mitrani-Reiser, National Institute of Standards and Technology
Coastal communities with tsunami hazards face a great deal of uncertainty and conflict about development in the inundation zone such as loss of valuable tax base lands vs. low probability/high consequence impacts. How do we define coastal resilience for future development? Is resilience defined the same way for every community? What demonstrates resilience: life safety or return to service?
Moderator: Lianne Thompson, Clatsop County Board of Commissioners
Speakers: Nate Wood, USGS; Stephanie Chang, University of British Columbia; Chris Goldfinger, Oregon State University; Tom Horning, Seaside Oregon City Council, Kent Yu, SEFT Consulting
The Pacific Northwest region is unique in the United States as it requires consideration of multiple seismic sources with large variations in earthquake magnitude. Many large infrastructure projects with multi-modal transportation links require considering multiple design codes with varying hazard levels when permitting and designing a project. This session will include a panel of speakers that will discuss the challenges of designing in accordance with the intent of the various design codes and effectively communicating the risks to the owners, agencies, and the public.
Moderator: Scott Schlechter, Geotechnical Resources, Inc. (GRI)Speakers: Nason McCollough, CH2M; Lee Marsh, BergerABAM; Robert Braddock, Jordan Cove LNG
Lifeline systems provide fundamental services for society, including water and waste-water, power, fuel, transportation, and communication. Lifeline systems are often designed independently at the system level, yet, they rely on other lifeline systems to operate. When one system fails, it can trigger failures in other systems.
This session will explore lifeline system vulnerabilities, interdependencies, and potential impacts from different types of earthquake hazards, including liquefaction and landslides. Discussion will include how interdependencies of lifelines have impacted service delivery, response, and recovery in earthquakes. A case study of lifeline interdependencies in the San Francisco region will be presented. A holistic research framework to improve earthquake-resilient lifelines developed by NIST will be discussed. A panel discussion will focus on how engineers, lifeline owners and operators address dependencies on lifelines; how to better understand lifeline interdependencies; and identify needs to improve the reliability of critical lifeline service after major earthquakes. The program will include:
Moderator: Yumei Wang, Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI)
Speakers: Joseph Wartman, University of Washington; Kent Yu, SEFT Consulting; Michael Germeraad, Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG); Tom O'Rourke, Cornell University
The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) was launched forty years ago with the goal of coordinating and supporting the work of key federal agencies to reduce the nation's earthquake risk. In the decades since, the program has led to dramatic reductions in risk and advancements in knowledge, but much work remains to be done. However, today the program needs revitalization. Its Congressional authorization expired in 2009. While funding for the program continues, unfortunately, it has not kept up with inflation and the Presidential requests and appropriations granted by Congress have failed to meet program needs.
A variety of roadblocks stand in the way of NEHRP reauthorization now, including lack of a legislative champion, disagreement among professional organizations on priorities and funding needs, conflicting perspectives from NEHRP agencies, and lack of a coordinated and consistent effort to advocate for NEHRP's reauthorization. The decades worth of NEHRP Advisory Committee reports clearly state the issues at hand.
EERI strongly believes that Congress needs to reauthorize a revitalized NEHRP program and raise the agency appropriation levels to meet the program needs. Similarly, the Presidential budget needs to request appropriate funding to support this critical work. But given today's realities, NEHRP may need to evolve to be effective. The session will probe how the program can be reenergized and whether and how it should change.
Panelists will present brief “lightning talks? with a range of perspectives from around the US, followed by audience discussion and interaction. The goal of this session is to plot a path forward to advocate for effective federal leadership of the nation's earthquake programs. Following this session, EERI's Public Policy and Advocacy Committee will shape the ideas heard in the session into clear talking points and a strategy that can be used by EERI members and partners to shape and support the next generation of NEHRP legislation.
Organizers/Moderators: EERI Public Policy and Advocacy Committee, Laura Dwelley Samant, Chair
Panelists: Craig Davis, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power; Robert Pekelnicky, Degenkolb Engineers; Glenn Rix, GeoSyntec Consultants; Barry Welliver, BHW Engineers; Jay Wilson, Clackamas County Disaster Management.
Beyzaei: “Liquefaction Resistance of Silty Soils: An Investigation in Christchurch, New Zealand,? State-of-practice liquefaction triggering procedures have been shown generally to work well across much of Christchurch when compared with post-earthquake observations from the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence. However, there are important cases where liquefaction assessment methods indicate significant liquefaction-induced ground failure should have occurred, yet none was observed. Post-earthquake reconnaissance investigators noted that these discrepancies were concentrated in areas of the city known to have silty soil conditions.
This presentation explores discrepancies between surface manifestations of liquefaction and estimates using state-of-practice liquefaction assessment procedures at silty soil sites in Christchurch, New Zealand. Research topics to be presented include: (i) field sampling and laboratory testing to evaluate cyclic response of the silty soils, (ii) depositional geologic effects, and (iii) site characterization to capture thin-layer stratigraphy and groundwater table effects. These topics are discussed in terms of how they may affect liquefaction manifestation at a site. Limitations of current simplified liquefaction triggering procedures at stratified, silty soil sites are delineated.
Marafi:?Impacts of an M9 Cascadia Subduction Zone Earthquake on Structures Located in Deep Sedimentary Basins,? The Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) is capable of producing long-duration, large-magnitude earthquakes (up to magnitude 9) that could severely affect buildings and infrastructure in the Pacific Northwest (PNW). In addition, deep sedimentary basins are expected to amplify ground-motion intensity which underlie several cities in the Puget Sound region. The effects of long-duration and basins are poorly understood for the CSZ, because no ground-motion recordings are available for large-magnitude earthquakes in this region. To compensate for the paucity of recorded subduction events in the PNW, suites of simulated M9, CSZ ground motions are used to study their effects on archetypical structures in the PNW region. The severity of these ground motions is quantified in terms of several intensity measures that quantify ground-motion duration and spectral shape, and are compared with recordings from Japan with similar site and source characteristics. Finally, the performance of these archetypes is evaluated in terms of collapse risk, and appropriate design recommendations which account for long-duration effects and basin amplifications are proposed.
Moderator: David Friedman; EERI President
Speakers: Christine Beyzaei, University of California, Berkeley and Nasser Marafi, University of Washington
The earthquake engineering community and regulatory agencies are moving, at varying rates, toward risk-informed engineering decisions and design. Risk-informed decision making, in turn, requires that probabilistic seismic hazard analyses explicitly and transparently incorporate uncertainty in hazard-significant seismic source and ground motion parameters. The Earth science community, following the scientific method, often leads to publication of a “proponent? interpretation or model with little or no expression of uncertainty beyond the limits of the immediate data that were considered in the research. This practice leaves it incumbent on the PSHA analyst (often a consultant) to capture the proper range of uncertainty for a parameter based on the body of published literature or, at times, based on the analyst's own interpretations of available data. This is an important, often critical, interface issue between the Earth science community and the engineering community. Over time, some published interpretations or models become incorporated into “common belief? and become accepted paradigms whose uncertainties are rarely challenged even when more recent data or studies no longer support (if not outright reject) the original interpretation or model.
Emerging best practice, originating in the nuclear industry, is to use a formal, structured process to capture the center, body and range of uncertainty for inputs to a hazard model. This process engages the Earth science community as resource (e.g., data) and proponent (e.g., interpretation or model) experts, and requires the PSHA analysts to consider whether full parameter uncertainties are captured within the available data or whether uncertainties ought to extend beyond the available data, expert interpretations, and current paradigms.
An overall goal of current PSHA practice ought to be the focus on capturing the full range of uncertainty, so that the next generation of PSHA, which will be constructed with more and better information, will have results that fall within today's uncertainty limits. This presentation will address some of the issues and questions that have evolved in the assessment of uncertainty and suggestions for a path forward in improved communication of uncertainty between the Earth scientist and the PSHA practitioner.
Presenter: William Lettis, Lettis Consultants International, IncTitle: "Seismic Hazard Analysis and Capturing Uncertainty-Just How Uncertain Should We Be?"
In the absence of major recent earthquakes in the Pacific Northwest, we take our lessons from other regional incidents, exercises, and major events elsewhere. Our final session will offer specific examples of what is already in progress to enhance resilience, as well as some resources available to public and private sectors. The session will incorporate live audience polling on paths forward.
Moderator: Jeff Rubin, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue
Speakers: Bruce Johnson, Oregon Department of Transportation; Mike Riley, Bonneville Power Administration; Mike Duyck, Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue, State Interoperability Executive Council; Scott Ashford, Oregon State University College of Engineering
Take a short walk to the Portland State University campus, visit a few buildings that have been retrofitted in recent years for seismic resistance, and tour the structures laboratory (iSTAR) where several projects in seismic strengthening are underway. At the end of the walking tour, you are invited to join the hosts for beer, wine, and conversation.
Organizers: EERI's Student Leadership Council and the EERI Learning from Earthquakes Program
Sponsored by MTS, EERI Student Leadership Council and Learning from Earthquakes Program