{"id":395684,"date":"2024-10-20T04:20:50","date_gmt":"2024-10-20T04:20:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/product\/uncategorized\/fema-p-2191-2022\/"},"modified":"2024-10-26T08:07:05","modified_gmt":"2024-10-26T08:07:05","slug":"fema-p-2191-2022","status":"publish","type":"product","link":"https:\/\/pdfstandards.shop\/product\/publishers\/fema\/fema-p-2191-2022\/","title":{"rendered":"FEMA P 2191 2022"},"content":{"rendered":"
None<\/p>\n
PDF Pages<\/th>\n | PDF Title<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1<\/td>\n | A Step Forward Recommendations for Improving Seismic Code Development, Content, and Education <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
5<\/td>\n | Foreword <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
7<\/td>\n | Preface <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
9<\/td>\n | Notice <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
11<\/td>\n | Executive Summary <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
13<\/td>\n | Table of Contents <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
17<\/td>\n | List of Figures <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
19<\/td>\n | List of Tables <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
21<\/td>\n | Chapter1:Introduction 1.1 Background <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
22<\/td>\n | 1.2 Purpose of the Report 1.3 Scope of the Report <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
23<\/td>\n | 1.4 Target Audience for the Report 1.5 What is Covered (and Not Covered) <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
25<\/td>\n | 1.6 Organization of the Report <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
27<\/td>\n | Chapter2:StudyMethodology 2.1 Information Gathering Options Considered <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
28<\/td>\n | 2.2 Selected Approach <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
30<\/td>\n | 2.3 Surveys 2.4 Interviews 2.5 Synthesis and Evaluation of Recommendations <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
33<\/td>\n | Chapter 3: Survey Approach and Findings 3.1 Overview <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
34<\/td>\n | 3.2 Survey Approach and Implementation 3.2.1 Targeted Audiences and Recruitment <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
35<\/td>\n | 3.2.2 Survey Question Topics 3.2.3 Open-Ended Questions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
37<\/td>\n | 3.2.4 Data Analysis <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
38<\/td>\n | 3.3 Topics and Findings for User Survey 3.3.1 User Survey Questions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
39<\/td>\n | 3.3.2 User Survey Findings: Code Use <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
40<\/td>\n | 3.3.3 User Survey Findings: Code Content <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
42<\/td>\n | 3.3.4 User Survey Findings: Code Development <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
43<\/td>\n | 3.3.5 User Survey Findings: Code Dissemination and Education <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
45<\/td>\n | 3.4 Topics and Findings for Stakeholder Survey 3.4.1 Stakeholder Survey Questions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
46<\/td>\n | 3.4.2 Stakeholder Survey Findings: Code Use 3.4.3 Stakeholder Survey Findings: Code Content <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
48<\/td>\n | 3.4.4 Stakeholder Survey Findings: Code Development <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
49<\/td>\n | 3.4.5 Stakeholder Survey Findings: Code Dissemination and Education 3.5 Cross-Group Comparisons and Findings from Questions Included on Both Surveys <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
50<\/td>\n | 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 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
53<\/td>\n | Chapter4:InterviewApproachand Findings 4.1 Overview 4.2 Interview Process <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
55<\/td>\n | 4.3 Interview Questions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
59<\/td>\n | 4.4 Interview Findings 4.4.1OtherPotentialRecommendationsProposedbyInterviewees <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
61<\/td>\n | 4.4.2ExampleFindings 4.4.2.1 POTENTIALRECOMMENDATION:INCREASEDIVERSITYINCODEDEVELOPMENT: SOLICITNEWPARTICIPANTS,INSTEADOFTHESAMESELECTFEWPEOPLE. <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
63<\/td>\n | 4.4.2.2 POTENTIALRECOMMENDATION\/ASSOCIATEDQUESTION:REDUCETIMETO IMPLEMENTINNOVATIONORNEWPROVISIONS. DOWENEEDTOVETPROPOSAL ATFOURLEVELS(PUC,ASCE,IBC,STATECODES)? <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
65<\/td>\n | 4.5 Recent Provisions Update Committee Member Characteristics <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
71<\/td>\n | Chapter 5: Synthesis andEvaluation ofPotentialRecommendations 5.1 Process Used 5.2 Task Group Initial Recommendations <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
72<\/td>\n | 5.3 Conclusions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
81<\/td>\n | Chapter 6: Recommendations 6.1 Summary of Recommendations <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
85<\/td>\n | 6.2 Recommendations for ImprovingCodeDevelopment 6.2.1 HighPriority 6.2.1.1 RECOMMENDATIOND1 -INCREASEDIVERSITYINCODEDEVELOPERS <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
88<\/td>\n | 6.2.1.2 RECOMMENDATIOND2 -CONDUCTPRE-CYCLEREGIONALWORKSHOPS <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
90<\/td>\n | 6.2.1.3 RECOMMENDATIOND3 -REQUIREPAID WORKED EXAMPLESFORPROPOSED CODECHANGES <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
92<\/td>\n | 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 <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
95<\/td>\n | 6.3.2.2 RECOMMENDATIONC2 -MAKELOWAND MODERATESEISMICPROVISIONSMORE USABLE <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
96<\/td>\n | 6.3.2 Medium Priority 6.3.2.1 RECOMMENDATIONC3 -DEVELOPMOREUSABLEPERFORMANCE-BASED PROCEDURESFORDESIGN <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
98<\/td>\n | 6.3.2.2 RECOMMENDATIONC4 -DEVELOPCONSTRUCTIONQUALITYASSURANCE NEHRP PROVISIONS PART3 RESOURCEPAPER <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
99<\/td>\n | 6.3.2.3 RECOMMENDATIONC5 -IMPROVESEISMICCODEPROVISIONSFORFOUNDATION DESIGN <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
100<\/td>\n | 6.4 Recommendations for ImprovingDissemination and Education on Code and CodeChanges 6.4.1 HighPriority 6.4.1.1 RECOMMENDATIONE1 -DEVELOPCOORDINATED STRATEGYFORIMPROVING UNDERSTANDINGOFSEISMICCODES <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
102<\/td>\n | 6.4.1.2 RECOMMENDATIONE2 -DEVELOPINTERACTIVEONLINEPLATFORMFORSEISMIC CODEPROVISIONS <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
104<\/td>\n | 6.4.2 Medium Priority 6.4.2.1 RECOMMENDATIONE3 -EXPAND COMMENTARIES <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
105<\/td>\n | 6.4.2.2 RECOMMENDATIONE4 -DEVELOPMOREDESIGNGUIDES <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
107<\/td>\n | 6.4.2.3 RECOMMENDATIONE5 -OUTREACHTOGEOTECHNICALENGINEERS <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
108<\/td>\n | 6.4.2.4 RECOMMENDATIONE6 -PUBLICIZEUPCOMINGCODECHANGESAND INPUT OPPORTUNITIES <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
109<\/td>\n | 6.4.2.5 RECOMMENDATIONE7 -DEVELOPMOREWEBINARS, ARCHIVED AND AVAILABLE ONDEMAND <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
110<\/td>\n | 6.5 Recommendation for Monitoring and Encouraging Progress 6.5.1 HighPriority 6.5.1.1 RECOMMENDATIONM1: TRACKPROGRESSOFIMPLEMENTING RECOMMENDATIONS <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
111<\/td>\n | 6.5.2 Medium Priority 6.6 Taking the Step Forward <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
115<\/td>\n | Appendix B: SurveyInstruments B.1 Overview B.2U.S. Seismic CodeImprovement Surveyfor Users <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
122<\/td>\n | This section asks what you think about how US seismic codes andstandards are DEVELOPED AND UPDATED over time. <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
124<\/td>\n | of US seismic codes and provisions. <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
128<\/td>\n | B.3 U.S. Seismic CodeImprovement Surveyfor Stakeholders <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
131<\/td>\n | This section asks about your GENERAL IMPRESSIONS about US seismic codes and standards, and their RELEVANCE to people in your professionand where you work. <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
133<\/td>\n | This section asks what you think about how US seismic codes andstandards are DEVELOPED AND UPDATED over time. <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
134<\/td>\n | seismic codes is handled and could be improved. <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
136<\/td>\n | B.4List ofStates Assigned to Regions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
137<\/td>\n | References <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
141<\/td>\n | Project Participants FEMAOversight BuildingSeismic SafetyCouncilOversight Project TaskGroup <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
142<\/td>\n | Interview Participants <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
143<\/td>\n | SurveyParticipants <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" FEMA P-2191: A Step Forward – Recommendations for Improving Seismic Code Development, Content, and Education, April 2022<\/b><\/p>\n |