Security checkdata:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b97cb/b97cb213b46faeaaa7c66396a6ae87aea1b9e409" alt=""
Please login to your personal account to use this feature.
Please login to your authorized staff account to use this feature.
Are you sure you want to empty the cart?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/bd058/bd05802794419999aad39acaac37ca55b8a61770" alt=""
FEMA P-2191: A Step Forward - Recommendations for Improving Seismic Code Development, Content, and Education, April 2022, 2022
- FEMA P-2191 [Go to Page]
- A Step Forward Recommendations for Improving Seismic Code Development, Content, and Education
- Foreword
- Preface
- Notice
- Executive Summary
- Table of Contents
- List of Figures
- List of Tables
- Chapter1:Introduction
- 1.1 Background
- 1.2 Purpose of the Report
- 1.3 Scope of the Report
- 1.4 Target Audience for the Report
- 1.5 What is Covered (and Not Covered)
- 1.6 Organization of the Report
- Chapter2:StudyMethodology
- 2.1 Information Gathering Options Considered
- 2.2 Selected Approach
- 2.3 Surveys
- 2.4 Interviews
- 2.5 Synthesis and Evaluation of Recommendations
- Chapter 3: Survey Approach and Findings
- 3.1 Overview
- 3.2 Survey Approach and Implementation
- 3.2.1 Targeted Audiences and Recruitment
- 3.2.2 Survey Question Topics
- 3.2.3 Open-Ended Questions
- 3.2.4 Data Analysis
- 3.3 Topics and Findings for User Survey
- 3.3.1 User Survey Questions
- 3.3.2 User Survey Findings: Code Use
- 3.3.3 User Survey Findings: Code Content
- 3.3.4 User Survey Findings: Code Development
- 3.3.5 User Survey Findings: Code Dissemination and Education
- 3.4 Topics and Findings for Stakeholder Survey
- 3.4.1 Stakeholder Survey Questions
- 3.4.2 Stakeholder Survey Findings: Code Use
- 3.4.3 Stakeholder Survey Findings: Code Content
- 3.4.4 Stakeholder Survey Findings: Code Development
- 3.4.5 Stakeholder Survey Findings: Code Dissemination and Education
- 3.5 Cross-Group Comparisons and Findings from Questions Included on Both Surveys
- 3.5.1 Code Information Source Use by Survey Group
- 3.5.2 Opinions about U.S. Seismic Code Content, Development, and Communication by Survey Group
- 3.6 Survey Conclusions and High Level Take-Aways
- Chapter4:InterviewApproachand Findings
- 4.1 Overview
- 4.2 Interview Process
- 4.3 Interview Questions
- 4.4 Interview Findings
- 4.4.1OtherPotentialRecommendationsProposedbyInterviewees
- 4.4.2ExampleFindings
- 4.4.2.1 POTENTIALRECOMMENDATION:INCREASEDIVERSITYINCODEDEVELOPMENT: SOLICITNEWPARTICIPANTS,INSTEADOFTHESAMESELECTFEWPEOPLE.
- 4.4.2.2 POTENTIALRECOMMENDATION/ASSOCIATEDQUESTION:REDUCETIMETO IMPLEMENTINNOVATIONORNEWPROVISIONS. DOWENEEDTOVETPROPOSAL ATFOURLEVELS(PUC,ASCE,IBC,STATECODES)?
- 4.5 Recent Provisions Update Committee Member Characteristics
- Chapter 5: Synthesis andEvaluation ofPotentialRecommendations
- 5.1 Process Used
- 5.2 Task Group Initial Recommendations
- 5.3 Conclusions
- Chapter 6: Recommendations
- 6.1 Summary of Recommendations
- 6.2 Recommendations for ImprovingCodeDevelopment
- 6.2.1 HighPriority
- 6.2.1.1 RECOMMENDATIOND1 -INCREASEDIVERSITYINCODEDEVELOPERS
- 6.2.1.2 RECOMMENDATIOND2 -CONDUCTPRE-CYCLEREGIONALWORKSHOPS
- 6.2.1.3 RECOMMENDATIOND3 -REQUIREPAID WORKED EXAMPLESFORPROPOSED CODECHANGES
- 6.2.2 Medium Priority
- 6.3 Recommendations for Improving Code Content and Ease of Use
- 6.3.1 HighPriority
- 6.3.1.1 RECOMMENDATIONC1 -ADDRESSFUNCTIONALRECOVERYAND ENHANCED RESILIENCEINMODELCODEFRAMEWORK
- 6.3.2.2 RECOMMENDATIONC2 -MAKELOWAND MODERATESEISMICPROVISIONSMORE USABLE
- 6.3.2 Medium Priority
- 6.3.2.1 RECOMMENDATIONC3 -DEVELOPMOREUSABLEPERFORMANCE-BASED PROCEDURESFORDESIGN
- 6.3.2.2 RECOMMENDATIONC4 -DEVELOPCONSTRUCTIONQUALITYASSURANCE NEHRP PROVISIONS PART3 RESOURCEPAPER
- 6.3.2.3 RECOMMENDATIONC5 -IMPROVESEISMICCODEPROVISIONSFORFOUNDATION DESIGN
- 6.4 Recommendations for ImprovingDissemination and Education on Code and CodeChanges
- 6.4.1 HighPriority
- 6.4.1.1 RECOMMENDATIONE1 -DEVELOPCOORDINATED STRATEGYFORIMPROVING UNDERSTANDINGOFSEISMICCODES
- 6.4.1.2 RECOMMENDATIONE2 -DEVELOPINTERACTIVEONLINEPLATFORMFORSEISMIC CODEPROVISIONS
- 6.4.2 Medium Priority
- 6.4.2.1 RECOMMENDATIONE3 -EXPAND COMMENTARIES
- 6.4.2.2 RECOMMENDATIONE4 -DEVELOPMOREDESIGNGUIDES
- 6.4.2.3 RECOMMENDATIONE5 -OUTREACHTOGEOTECHNICALENGINEERS
- 6.4.2.4 RECOMMENDATIONE6 -PUBLICIZEUPCOMINGCODECHANGESAND INPUT OPPORTUNITIES
- 6.4.2.5 RECOMMENDATIONE7 -DEVELOPMOREWEBINARS, ARCHIVED AND AVAILABLE ONDEMAND
- 6.5 Recommendation for Monitoring and Encouraging Progress
- 6.5.1 HighPriority
- 6.5.1.1 RECOMMENDATIONM1: TRACKPROGRESSOFIMPLEMENTING RECOMMENDATIONS
- 6.5.2 Medium Priority
- 6.6 Taking the Step Forward
- Appendix B: SurveyInstruments
- B.1 Overview
- B.2U.S. Seismic CodeImprovement Surveyfor Users
- This section asks what you think about how US seismic codes andstandards are DEVELOPED AND UPDATED over time.
- of US seismic codes and provisions.
- B.3 U.S. Seismic CodeImprovement Surveyfor Stakeholders
- This section asks about your GENERAL IMPRESSIONS about US seismic codes and standards, and their RELEVANCE to people in your professionand where you work.
- This section asks what you think about how US seismic codes andstandards are DEVELOPED AND UPDATED over time.
- seismic codes is handled and could be improved.
- B.4List ofStates Assigned to Regions
- References
- Project Participants
- FEMAOversight
- BuildingSeismic SafetyCouncilOversight
- Project TaskGroup
- Interview Participants
- SurveyParticipants [Go to Page]