Interviewer: Could you tell us how you’re connected
to the USGS’ ShakeOut earthquake scenario?
Larry Collins: Well, it has been a 20-year partnership
starting with the earthquakes in 1987, the Whittier
earthquake, and on through our planning and readiness
for the San Andreas fault scenario which began right
around 1988 for us. And really, in the last two years
with this ShakeOut study, we’ve concentrated at that
and taken it to a new level with the new science coming
out of this study and the integration of bridging that
we’ve done. So it has been about two years of intense
partnership now on this ShakeOut scenario.
How is your department using the science from the ShakeOut scenario?
The Los Angeles County Fire Department and the other
fire departments across Southern California have
recognized that this is a tool to allow us to plan
for catastrophic level disaster that we’ve never had before.
We have a tool now that is vetted by the science element
of our USGS partnership. It is a realistic study,
it is the most likely scenario, it is giving our
decision-makers the ability to plan based on what is
likely to happen. It’s almost surely going to happen
at some point in our future, so it’s a great planning
tool, and that’s the way we’re using it.
What does it mean to you that this is based on real science, real research?
Well, the one thing that has come about is the
realization you can’t ignore this study.
The ShakeOut study when you read it and you realize
that it’s not a worst case scenario. It’s the most
likely scenario when this fault ruptures. It may not
happen exactly like we’ve postulated in the ShakeOut
but it’s going to be something like that. And we
know that there’s going to be something far worse
than that which would be that event happening on a
Santa Ana wind day. We have 16- and 17-mile an hour
Santa Ana wind and the wind’s blowing and the temperature is 105
degrees and humidity is down to four or five percent.
That’s going to be a worst case scenario.
Another worst case scenario would be if it happened
during the middle of a wildfire disaster that is already
happening in Southern California like we saw in 2007
where the resources are already stretched thin,
and then you have an earthquake disaster. So the ShakeOut study is not the worst case
scenario,
and what that tells the planners and the decision-makers is that they’ve got to be ready for this
and keep in
mind some out of the box solutions for these possibly worse-case scenarios.
So when you get this kind of information coming across
your desk collectively, it’s very compelling for you.
The one thing about the ShakeOut study is when you sit
down and read it and absorb it, you can’t ignore the message.
That the message simply can’t be ignored that we are in line,
in the direct path of a major event coming our way that we
know is going to occur. And that’s going to have implications
Southern California-wide, nation-wide, and actually world-wide
in terms of the economic and other impacts that would happen.
But you can’t ignore reading about potentially equivalent
of 133,000 structures burning to the ground on a day when
there’s no Santa Ana winds blowing. Or thousands of
structures collapsing, including possibly a number of
high-rise buildings. You can’t ignore those things and
it’s telling us that we have to be ready for something
on a magnitude that we have never experienced before in
our lifetimes. And that’s what it’s doing.
Speaking of that integrated approach, could you talk a
little bit your involvement with Southern California
Mutli-Hazards Demonstration Project?
Yes, you know, the L.A. County Fire Department and the
other fire service agencies in Southern California,
they are truly all-risk response agencies. We get
pretty much every kind of disaster you can have with
the exception of probably hurricanes here. And even
those we respond to in other parts of the country.
Our departments are involved with the FEMA Urban Search
Rescue System and internationally with U.S. Agency
for International Development.
Some of our fire departments are on contract to respond
internationally. So we truly are all-risk.
And we’ve recognized early on, you know, for years
we’ve known that the bridging between science and
response in all these different realms; whether it’s
landslides, flooding, winter storms, the earthquakes,
and other natural hazards, that yields positive results
in our planning, in our readiness to respond.
So the multi-hazards project to me is the next generation
of where we need to go with our disaster planning.
It’s preparing not just the response agencies but also
the public to be ready for pretty much the whole range
of risks that we have. And other thing that happens
here is that, you know, one of the kind of unspoken
things that has occurred is that we started in
1987 getting ready for earthquakes.
That evolved the system called Urban Search and Rescue
which is now a worldwide system. And the concept was to
be ready for earthquakes and also hurricanes. That was the original priority.
Then when the Oklahoma City bombing happened, we saw
those same exact teams that were established for
earthquake response basically and hurricane response,
brought in to conduct search and rescue operations
in the aftermath of a huge terrorist attack.
And then the 9/11 attacks in the Pentagon and the
World Trade Center, that same teams that were originally
set up for earthquake and hurricane response, went to
work and performed beautifully in terms of, you know,
in a tragic situation they were able to recover all
the rescue, everyone who could be rescued alive,
recovered those who couldn’t be rescued alive successfully
without further loss of life.
And sometimes, operations that lasted weeks afterwards,
round the clock; very dangerous conditions.
And the fact that we have brought in these teams that
consisted of structural engineers, doctors, search and
rescue specialists from the fire service, K9 teams and
brought in as a collaborative team, that could either
to respond to an earthquake or a manmade disaster like
a terrorist attack, what it’s showing us is
there is a big circle here of learning.
And the things we learned in those terrorist attacks,
responding to the 9/11 attacks and the Oklahoma City
bombing and the other ones, that is also being applied to the next earthquake disaster.
The tools that have come out of our experiences in those
events, the lessons learned, the strategic planning and
the changes that we’ve done in terms of our strategy and
tactics, that’s to be applied to the next big earthquake
where we have building collapses and so forth.
On even a larger scale than any terrorist attack we’ve ever
seen in world history. So this is a big circle that’s
coming back right around to the beginning again.
So for you, what is the most inspiring or the thing that gets
you most excited or that you’re most proud of about the ShakeOut.
Well, I think the think that I’m most proud of is the fact
that we have been able to take scientists, engineers,
and fire firefighters and other emergency responders who
often don’t talk to each other on a daily basis,
and now they’re talking.
So we’ve got a bridging system now. We have great lines of
communication that are allowing us to really discuss the
issues in ways we haven’t had before, and look at solutions
from a holistic viewpoint. Not just from each different
perspective by themselves but altogether what are the best
solutions for this big problem which is the San Andreas Fault
sitting out there like the, sort of, Damocles hanging over
our heads here, which we know is going to drop at some point.
And how are we going to deal with that?