Reducing the Risks of 

Nonstructural Earthquake 

Damage – A Practical Guide 

FEMA E-74 / December 2012 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 Preface Page i

PREFACE

Under its ongoing “Seismic and Multi-Hazard Technical Guidance Development and Support” 

contract (HSFEHQ-04-D-0621) with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the 

Applied Technology Council (ATC) was awarded a task to update the third edition of the FEMA 

74 report, Reducing the Risks of Nonstructural Earthquake Damage – A Practical Guide, issued 

by FEMA in 1994. This project was designated the ATC-69 project and completed in 2012.

This fourth edition of the FEMA 74 document (renamed FEMA E-74) explains the sources of 

earthquake damage that can occur in nonstructural components and provides information on 

effective methods for reducing risk associated with nonstructural earthquake damage. It is 

intended for use by a nontechnical audience that includes building owners, facility managers, 

maintenance personnel, store or office managers, corporate or agency department heads, and 

homeowners. FEMA E-74 updates both the content and the format of the report. A 

considerable amount of new information now exists as a result of ongoing National Earthquake 

Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) activities, local and state government programs, private 

sector initiatives, and academic work focused on reducing the potential for nonstructural 

earthquake damage. In addition, the document has been redesigned for use on the internet. 

The new format makes it simple to browse, review focused information, print selected details

and download spreadsheets, checklists and other useful tools.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage 

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 Table of Contents Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface ............................................................................................................................................... i 

Chapter 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1-1 

1.1 Purpose .............................................................................................................................1-1

1.2 Intended Audience.............................................................................................................1-1

1.3 Regional Applicability ........................................................................................................1-5

1.4 Limitations ........................................................................................................................1-6

1.5 Acknowledgements............................................................................................................1-7

Chapter 2. Behavior of Nonstructural Components ........................................................................... 2-1 

2.1 Definitions.........................................................................................................................2-2

2.1.1 Structural Components ..........................................................................................2-2

2.1.2 Nonstructural Components ....................................................................................2-2

2.1.3 Relative Costs ........................................................................................................2-5

2.2 Causes of Nonstructural Damage.......................................................................................2-6

2.2.1 Inertial Forces........................................................................................................2-6

2.2.2 Building Deformations ...........................................................................................2-7

2.2.3 Building Separations ..............................................................................................2-8

2.2.4 Nonstructural Interaction .....................................................................................2-10

2.3 Extent of Nonstructural Damage ......................................................................................2-10

2.4 Importance of Nonstructural Damage ..............................................................................2-12

2.4.1 Life Safety (LS) .....................................................................................................2-13

2.4.2 Property Loss (PL) ................................................................................................2-18

2.4.3 Functional Loss (FL) .............................................................................................2-19

2.5 Common Types of Nonstructural Earthquake Damage......................................................2-22

2.5.1 Life Safety............................................................................................................2-22

2.5.2 Property Loss.......................................................................................................2-26

2.5.3 Functional Loss....................................................................................................2-28

Chapter 3. Survey and Assessment Procedures for Existing Buildings ................................................ 3-1 

3.1 Survey of Nonstructural Components.................................................................................3-1

3.1.1 Survey Forms .........................................................................................................3-3

3.2 Estimating Seismic Risk .....................................................................................................3-6

3.2.1 Estimating Seismic Shaking Intensity......................................................................3-6

3.2.2 Estimating Seismic Risk Ratings .............................................................................3-9

3.2.3 Assigning Priority Ratings ....................................................................................3-10

3.2.4 Application of Nonstructural Guidelines ...............................................................3-10

Chapter 4. Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings ......................................................... 4-1 

4.1 Program Objectives and Scope...........................................................................................4-1

4.1.1 Voluntary vs. Mandatory Risk Reduction ................................................................4-2

4.1.2 Performance-Based Design Concepts.....................................................................4-3

4.1.3 Legal Considerations ...........................................................................................4-10

4.2 Design Considerations.....................................................................................................4-11

4.3 Project Planning and Implementation Strategies...............................................................4-13

4.3.1 Integration with Maintenance Programs ...............................................................4-15

4.3.2 Integration with Remodeling................................................................................4-15

4.3.3 Phased or Incremental Upgrading ........................................................................4-16

4.3.4 Integration with Purchasing .................................................................................4-16

4.4 Responsibility and Program Management.........................................................................4-16

4.4.1 Responsibility ......................................................................................................4-16
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage 

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 Table of Contents Page iii

4.4.2 Sustaining Protection...........................................................................................4-20

4.4.3 Program Evaluation..............................................................................................4-20

4.5 Cost Benchmarks—Examples ...........................................................................................4-21

4.5.1 Example 1 – Manufacturing Facility ......................................................................4-21

4.5.2 Example 2 – School District..................................................................................4-22

4.5.3 Example 3 – California Hospital ...........................................................................4-23

Chapter 5. Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings ............................................................... 5-1 

5.1 Program Objectives and Scope...........................................................................................5-1

5.1.1 Voluntary vs. Mandatory Risk Reduction ................................................................5-3

5.1.2 Performance-Based Design Concepts.....................................................................5-4

5.2 Design Considerations.......................................................................................................5-6

5.3 Building Code Requirements ..............................................................................................5-7

5.3.1 2012 Edition of the International Building Code (IBC 2012) ....................................5-7

5.3.2 Enforcement of Code Requirements .....................................................................5-11

5.3.3 Requirements for Contents ..................................................................................5-13

5.3.4 Other Standards and Protocols.............................................................................5-13

5.3.5 Validation and Refinement of Code Requirements................................................5-14

5.4 Responsibility and Project Management ...........................................................................5-14

5.4.1 Example: Responsibility Matrix ...........................................................................5-16

5.4.2 Example: Seismic Code Block, Saint Louis County, Missouri ................................5-17

Chapter 6. Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components ............................................................. 6-1 

6.1 Protective Measures ...........................................................................................................6-1

6.1.1 Common Sense Measures ......................................................................................6-1

6.1.2 Nonstructural Component Protection Measures .....................................................6-2

6.1.3 Building Protection Measures .................................................................................6-4

6.2 Nonstructural Component Examples..................................................................................6-5

6.2.1 Typical Mitigation Details.......................................................................................6-6

6.3 Architectural Components ...............................................................................................6-11

6.3.1 Exterior Wall Components....................................................................................6-11

6.3.2 Interior Partitions.................................................................................................6-58

6.3.3 Interior Veneers ...................................................................................................6-89

6.3.4 Ceilings ...............................................................................................................6-94

6.3.5 Parapets and Appendages..................................................................................6-130

6.3.6 Canopies, Marquees, and Signs..........................................................................6-136

6.3.7 Chimneys and Stacks .........................................................................................6-139

6.3.8 Stairways ...........................................................................................................6-144

6.3.9 Freestanding Walls or Fences .............................................................................6-154

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing (MEP) Components................................................6-162

6.4.1 Mechanical Equipment .......................................................................................6-163

6.4.2 Storage Tanks and Water Heaters.......................................................................6-203

6.4.3 Pressure Piping..................................................................................................6-237

6.4.4 Fire Protection Piping.........................................................................................6-314

6.4.5 Fluid Piping, Not Fire Protection.........................................................................6-325

6.4.6 Ductwork...........................................................................................................6-346

6.4.7 Electrical and Communications Equipment.........................................................6-360

6.4.8 Electrical and Communications Distribution Equipment .....................................6-406

6.4.9 Light Fixtures ....................................................................................................6-416

6.4.10 Elevators and Escalators.....................................................................................6-448

6.4.11 Conveyors..........................................................................................................6-476

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment (FF&E) and Contents ................................................6-482

6.5.1 Storage Racks ....................................................................................................6-482

6.5.2 Bookcases, Shelving...........................................................................................6-501
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage 

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 Table of Contents Page iv

6.5.3 Computer and Communication Equipment.........................................................6-518

6.5.4 Hazardous Materials Storage..............................................................................6-544

6.5.5 Miscellaneous Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment .............................................6-550

6.5.6 Miscellaneous Contents .....................................................................................6-566

6.6 Installation Notes, Safety Warnings, and Additional Guidelines.......................................6-587

6.6.1 Positive Connections..........................................................................................6-587

6.6.2 Typical Wall Attachment Details .........................................................................6-588

6.6.3 Typical Floor and Ceiling Attachment Details .....................................................6-592

6.6.4 Typical Shelf or Countertop Attachment Details .................................................6-594

6.6.5 Purchasing.........................................................................................................6-595

6.6.6 Patching, Painting, and Corrosion Protection......................................................6-595

6.6.7 Safety Precautions..............................................................................................6-596

6.6.8 Electrical Danger Warnings and Guidelines.........................................................6-596

Chapter 7. Post-Earthquake Data Collection ..................................................................................... 7-1 

Appendix A. Specification................................................................................................................ A-1 

Appendix B. Responsibility Matrix .................................................................................................... B-1 

Appendix C. Nonstructural Inventory Form ....................................................................................... C-1 

Appendix D. Checklist of Nonstructural Seismic Hazards ................................................................. D-1 

Appendix E. Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings ............................................................................... E-1 

Appendix F. Post-Earthquake Data Collection Forms......................................................................... F-1 

 

Appendix G. List of Resources Related to Nonstructural Components ............................................... G-1 

 

Appendix H. Glossary..................................................................................................................... H-1 

 

Appendix I. References .................................................................................................................... I-1 

 

Appendix J. Project Participants ........................................................................................................ J-1 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 1: Introduction Page 1-1

1. INTRODUCTION

This chapter of the document describes the purposes of this e-document and describes the 

intended audience for the e-document. 

1.1 Purpose 

Nonstructural failures have accounted for the majority of earthquake damage in several recent 

U.S. earthquakes. Thus, it is critical to raise awareness of potential nonstructural risks, the 

costly consequences of nonstructural failures, and the opportunities that exist to limit future 

losses. Nonstructural components of a building include all of those components that are not 

part of the structural system; that is, all of the architectural, mechanical, electrical, and 

plumbing systems, as well as furniture, fixtures, equipment, and contents. Windows, partitions, 

granite veneer, piping, ceilings, air conditioning ducts and equipment, elevators, computer and 

hospital equipment, file cabinets, and retail merchandise are all examples of nonstructural 

components that are vulnerable to earthquake damage. The primary purpose of this guide is to 

explain the sources of nonstructural earthquake damage and to describe methods for reducing 

the potential risks in simple terms.

1.2 Intended Audience 

This guide is intended for use by a non-engineer audience located within the United States; this 

audience includes building owners, facility managers, maintenance personnel, store or office 

managers, corporate or agency department heads, business proprietors, risk managers, and 

safety personnel. The guide is also designed to be useful for design professionals, especially 

those who are not experienced with seismic protection of nonstructural components. It 

addresses nonstructural issues typically found in schools, office buildings, retail stores, hotels, 

data centers, hospitals, museums, and light manufacturing facilities. It is not intended as a 

guide for homeowners. How to make homes safer from earthquakes is covered in FEMA 232 

Homebuilders’ Guide to Earthquake-Resistant Design and Construction (2006). This document 

is also not intended to address nonstructural issues relevant to heavy manufacturing, 

specialized industrial manufacturing, or power generation facilities.

The guide is aimed at a wide audience with varying needs. Some readers may be small business 

owners with a limited number of potential problems, which could be addressed in a few days by 

hiring someone to install some of the non-engineered or prescriptive details that are presented 

in Chapter 6 of this guide. Other readers may be responsible for hundreds of facilities and may 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 1: Introduction Page 1-2

need a survey methodology like the one described in Chapter 3, to help them understand the 

magnitude of their potential risk. For those who need to implement nonstructural details, the 

specification and responsibility matrices in Appendices A and B can be used to clarify the scope 

of work and assign parties responsible for implementation. The prospective audience can be 

subdivided into the following four general categories:

 General Interest—the non-engineer reader 

who wants an illustrated overview of the 

subject of nonstructural earthquake damage.

 Small Business Owner—the reader who wants 

a general overview of the subject, along with 

help in identifying potential risks and specific 

guidance on suggested protective measures 

that the reader can implement on his or her 

own. This may be all that is required for a 

small business or simple facility, if the items can be addressed using the nonengineered or prescriptive details shown in Chapter 6. 

 Facilities and Planning Personnel—the reader who needs an overview of the subject, 

as well as a survey methodology that is applicable to an organizational setting. This 

guide contains forms and checklists that can be used to survey a facility, in order to 

identify potential risks and to estimate seismic vulnerability and potential 

earthquake losses. The guide includes suggestions for both existing and new 

construction and differentiates between methods that can be readily implemented by 

a handy worker following the non-engineered and prescriptive details in Chapter 6 

and methods that require professional design 

assistance and additional engineered details.

 Architect or Engineer—the architect or 

engineer who has limited knowledge of 

nonstructural earthquake damage and who 

needs an introduction to the subject, along 

with a list of resources that will provide more 

detailed technical information. For this 

audience, the examples provided in Chapter 

6 may serve as a starting point or conceptual design for common conditions; 

calculations may be required to size members and connection hardware for each 

particular situation. Each example contains brief summaries of the nonstructural 

bracing requirements in the codes that govern the design of new buildings and the 

General Interest Sidebar 

This style of sidebar is used 

in this guide to provide 

additional clarification or 

examples for the general 

interest reader.

Technical Sidebar 

This style of sidebar is used in this 

guide to provide additional 

technical details for architects and 

engineers.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 1: Introduction Page 1-3

seismic strengthening of existing buildings. The specification and responsibility 

matrices in Appendices A and B are also targeted for this audience; these are tools 

intended to help clarify the scope of work and assign responsibility for the various 

tasks involved.

Table 1.2-1 below is intended to help readers identify those portions of the guide that may 

apply to their particular situation and interests. The chapters and their respective audiences are 

intended to be helpful, not restrictive. Readers are encouraged to use this guide and to adapt 

the forms and checklists herein in any way that is helpful to their particular circumstances. The 

flowchart on the following page provides some additional guidance on how to use this 

document. While earlier editions of FEMA 74 were aimed at a more general audience, the 4th

edition has been greatly expanded to assist owners, facility managers, and design professionals 

implement nonstructural mitigation programs. A flowchart is also provided in Figure 1.2-1 to 

help readers identify portions of the guide that may apply to their situation.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 1: Introduction Page 1-4

Table 1.2-1 How to use this guide 

Chapter Title 

General 

Interest 

Small 

Business 

Owner 

Facilities 

and 

Planning 

Personnel 

Architect or 

Engineer 

Chapter 1. Introduction X X X X

Chapter 2. Behavior of Nonstructural 

Components

X X X X

Chapter 3. Survey and Assessment 

Procedures for Existing Buildings X X X

Chapter 4. Nonstructural Risk 

Reduction for Existing Buildings X X

Chapter 5. Nonstructural Risk 

Reduction for New Buildings X X

Chapter 6. Seismic Protection of 

Nonstructural Components

X X X X

Chapter 7. Post-Earthquake Data 

Collection

X X X

Appendix A. Specification X

Appendix B. Responsibility Matrices X

Appendix C. Survey Form X X X

Appendix D. Checklist X X X

Appendix E. Risk Ratings X X X

Appendix F. Post-Earthquake Data 

Collection Forms

X X X

Appendix G. Resources

Appendix H. Glossary
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 1: Introduction Page 1-5

 

Figure 1.2-1 Flowchart describing the relationship of document chapters and appendices. 

The forms discussed in Chapter 7 and provided in Appendix F can be used 

1.3 Regional Applicability

Different geographic areas of the U.S. are likely to experience 

different levels of seismic shaking in future earthquakes. In 

conjunction with the Probable Shaking Intensity Map shown in

Figure 3.2.1-1, the following considerations will help to 

determine if these guidelines are applicable to your facility:

 If the Shaking Intensity Map indicates that the building 

site is located in an area with minimal level of shaking, 

then the seismic hazard risk is extremely low and thus

seismic anchorage and bracing of nonstructural 

components is not considered necessary. 

 If the Shaking Intensity Map indicates that the building site 

Ch. 1&2 – Overview of 

Nonstructural Earthquake 

Damage

Ch. 3 – Survey Techniques 

for Existing Buildings

Ch. 4 – Program for Existing

Buildings

Ch.5 – Program for New 

Buildings

Ch. 6 – Illustrated Examples 

of Nonstructural

Components

(photos and details)

Appendix C– Survey Form

Appendix D – Checklist

Appendix E – Risk Ratings

Need to protect

nonstructural 

components?

Yes,

new building

No

Yes,

existing building

Yes

Implementation

Appendix A – Specification

Appendix B –

Responsibility Matrix

Complex 

facility?

Essential Facilities 

Hospitals, fire, rescue, and 

police stations, emergency 

vehicle garages, and 

designated emergency 

shelters are examples of 

essential facilities that 

require special design 

considerations.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 1: Introduction Page 1-6

is located in an area with low level of shaking and if the facility is not an essential type 

facility, then only parapets and exterior unreinforced masonry walls should be considered 

for seismic retrofit. 

 If the Shaking Intensity Map indicates that the building site is located in an area denoted 

with moderate level of shaking, and if the facility is 

not an essential type facility, then only architectural 

components should be considered for seismic retrofit; 

anchorage and bracing for other nonstructural 

components may not be necessary.

 If the Shaking Intensity Map indicates that the building 

site is located in an area denoted with high level of 

shaking, then adequate retrofitting of all nonstructural 

component items should be considered.

If in doubt about the applicability of these guidelines to a 

particular case, then it may be useful to check the 

requirements in ASCE/SEI 7-10 Minimum Design Loads 

for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 2009) for new 

construction. If the nonstructural component does not 

require bracing for new construction at the site, then it 

may not be necessary to brace this component in existing 

construction, pending consideration of the specific risks 

posed by potential damage. 

1.4 Limitations 

This guide advises users on how to identify nonstructural 

hazards and how to implement earthquake protection 

measures. Earthquake engineering expertise is often 

desirable when identifying and reducing earthquake risks, 

and in some situations, it is required. This guide 

attempts to provide advice regarding earthquake 

protection measures and presumes that the advice will be 

applied wisely, and that expert assistance will be obtained 

whenever necessary. 

When in doubt about the seismic vulnerability of a facility, 

one should consult a civil or structural engineer or an 

Limitations of the 

Non-engineered Approach 

If this guide explained how a 

person could administer his or 

her own health exam, diagnose 

any health problems, and 

prescribe and administer 

appropriate treatment, then an 

obvious question would arise: 

How far can an untrained 

person proceed before 

requiring the services of a 

physician? While doctors 

commonly recommend many 

self-help measures, such as 

taking one’s own temperature 

and treating minor colds with 

home remedies, it is important 

to recognize when one has 

exceeded the limits of 

commonsense measures and 

needs to seek the advice of a 

medical professional. 

When in doubt about a health 

problem, consult a medical 

professional. 

When in doubt about the 

“seismic health” of a facility, 

consult a civil or structural 

engineer or architect. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 1: Introduction Page 1-7

architect with specific training and expertise related to the evaluation and mitigation of 

nonstructural earthquake hazards.

1.5 Acknowledgements

This document was originally completed in 2011 under the ATC-69-1 project. ATC gratefully 

acknowledges the ATC-69-1 Project Management Committee, including Maryann Phipps, 

Cynthia Perry, Robert Bachman, James Carlson, Eduardo Fierro, and Richard Kirchner for their 

efforts in researching and developing the material contained in this report. The Project Review 

Panel, consisting of Tim Brown, Mary Comerio, David Conover, Doug Fitts, Michael Griffin, John 

Henry, Robert Reitherman, and Jeffrey Soulages, provided technical review, advice and 

consultation at key stages of the work. In addition, Dawn Anderson, Jon Gregg, and Eric 

Peabody provided review comments for Appendices A and B. 

While the ATC-69-1 Project aimed to include as many photographs of damage to nonstructural 

components during earthquakes that occurred in 2010 (Chile, New Zealand) and 2011 (New 

Zealand and Japan), the development timeframe did not allow for a thorough study of all 

lessons learned and data collected from these earthquakes to be incorporated in the FEMA E-74 

document. Thus, the ATC-69-2 project developed an update to FEMA E-74 in 2012. ATC 

gratefully acknowledges the ATC-69-2 Project Management Committee, including Maryann 

Phipps, Robert Bachman, John Gillengerten, William Holmes, and Eduardo Miranda. In addition, 

Philip Caldwell provided technical review comments. Ayse Hortacsu and Thomas McLane served 

as ATC project managers for this work. The affiliations of these individuals are provided in the 

list of project participants.

ATC also gratefully acknowledges Mike Mahoney and Cathleen Carlisle (FEMA Project Monitors)

and Barry Welliver (Subject Matter Expert) for their input and guidance in the preparation of this 

report, Peter N. Mork for ATC report production services, Scott Hiner for the expert graphics, 

and Steven Kuan as ATC Board Contact on this project.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-1

2. Behavior of Nonstructural Components

Effective seismic risk reduction strategies for 

nonstructural component damage begins by clearly 

understanding the scope and nature of nonstructural 

components in buildings, their behavior in 

earthquakes, and the consequences of damage. The 

next section will address the following key questions:

 What are nonstructural components?

 What are the primary causes of damage to 

nonstructural components during earthquakes?

 What is the significance of nonstructural 

component damage?

 Which nonstructural components are most 

vulnerable in an earthquake? 

 What are the consequences of damage to 

nonstructural components? 

A picture is worth a thousand words. 

The Hyogo Earthquake Engineering 

Research Center in Japan has posted 

video footage of shake table testing 

of nonstructural components during 

a simulated earthquake. Two of 

these video clips speak volumes 

about the hazards of nonstructural 

components during an earthquake. 

The video clips focus on the behavior 

of furniture, contents, and some 

architectural components.

Figure 2-1 Result of shaking table test on 

room contents (from 01, 2008 

test)

Click on the link below and select 

one of the following video clips:

-Shaking table tests on room safety 

issue of a high-rise building (01, 

2008)

-Shaking table tests on nonstructure furniture in a high-rise 

building (03, 2007)

http://www.bosai.go.jp/hyogo/movie.htm

l - click on English and then click on 

Movies. Scroll down to Office Space in 

High Rise Jan 2008 - Click on Video
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-2

2.1 Definitions

Buildings consist of both “structural” and “nonstructural” components. The distinction between 

the two types of building components is described below.

2.1.1 Structural Components

The structural components of a building resist gravity, earthquake, wind, and other types of 

loads and typically include the following elements:

 vertical supports such as columns, posts, pillars, and pilasters

 horizontal supports such as trusses, girders, beams, joists, and purlins

 load-bearing walls that provide vertical support or lateral resistance

 diagonal elements such as braces

 floor and roof slabs, sheathing or decking

 foundation systems such as slabs on grade, mats, spread footings, or piles

The structural system of buildings is typically analyzed and designed by a civil or structural 

engineer and is presented on construction drawings or plans, except in the case of houses. The 

structural components of a typical building can be seen on Figure 2.1.2-1 by clicking on the 

“structural components only” button.

2.1.2 Nonstructural Components

The nonstructural components of a building include all building parts and contents except for

those previously described as structural. These components are generally specified by 

architects, mechanical engineers, electrical engineers, and interior designers. However, they 

may also be purchased and installed directly by owners or tenants after construction of a 

building has been completed. In commercial real estate, the architectural and mechanical, 

electrical, and plumbing systems may be considered a permanent part of the building and 

belong to the building owner; the furniture, fixtures, equipment and contents, by contrast,

typically belong to the building occupants.

In this guide, nonstructural components are divided into three broad categories:

Architectural COMPONENTS such as partitions, ceilings, storefronts, glazing, 

cladding, veneers, chimney, fences, and architectural ornamentation.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-3

Mechanical, electrical, AND PLUMBING (MEP) COMPONENTS such as pumps, 

chillers, fans, air handling units, motor control centers, distribution panels, 

transformers, and distribution systems including piping, ductwork and conduit. 

Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment (FF&E), And contents such as shelving and

book cases, industrial storage racks, retail merchandise, books, medical records,

computers and desktop equipment, wall and ceiling mounted TVs and monitors, file 

cabinets, kitchen, machine shop or other specialty equipment, industrial chemicals or 

hazardous materials, museum artifacts, and collectibles. 

The list of nonstructural components is nearly endless and constantly evolving, as new 

technologies alter our built environment. Figure 2.1.2-1 displays a typical building with 

nonstructural components discussed in this document, along with typical structural 

components. Clicking the “structural components only” button strips away the layer of 

nonstructural components to emphasize the ubiquity of architectural, MEP, and FF&E 

components in the built environment.

Note that most structural components are typically concealed from view by nonstructural 

materials, such as architectural finishes. For example, in steel construction, fireproofing is 

typically applied directly to steel members and then covered with finish materials such as 

gypsum board. In wood construction, there is usually no way to visually distinguish between a 

non-load-bearing partition and a structural or shear wall. Steel diagonal braces are often 

hidden inside walls. Similarly, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing components are also 

typically concealed by architectural components.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-4

Figure 2.1.2-1 A three-dimensional view of a portion of a building. This figure shows both 

structural and nonstructural components. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-5

Figure 2.1.2-2 A three-dimensional view of a portion of a building showing structural 

components only.

2.1.3 Relative Costs

In general, the structural components of a commercial building account for approximately 15-

25% of the original construction cost, while the nonstructural (mechanical, electrical, plumbing, 

and architectural) components account for the remaining 75-85% of the cost. Contents 

belonging to the building occupants, such as movable partitions, furniture, and office or 

medical equipment, represent a significant additional value at risk. When these costs are 

compared, it becomes clear that the largest capital investment in most commercial buildings is 

in the nonstructural systems and contents. This is illustrated in Figure 2.1.3-1 below for three 

common types of commercial construction (Whittaker and Soong, 2003).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-6

Figure 2.1.3-1 Typical investments in building construction.

2.2 Causes of Nonstructural Damage

Earthquake ground shaking causes damage to nonstructural components in four principal ways:

 Inertial or shaking effects cause sliding, rocking or overturning (Section 2.2.1).

 Building deformations damage interconnected nonstructural components (Section 

2.2.2).

 Separation or pounding between separate structures damage nonstructural components 

crossing between them (Section 2.2.3).

 Interaction between adjacent nonstructural components (Section 2.2.4) cause damage.

2.2.1 Inertial Forces 

When a building shakes during an earthquake, the base of the building typically moves in 

unison with the ground. The entire building and its contents above the base experience inertial 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-7

forces that push them back and forth in a direction opposite to the base excitation. In general, 

the earthquake inertial forces are greater if the mass of the building is greater, if the 

acceleration or severity of the shaking is greater, or if the location is higher than the base,

where excitations are amplified. Thus, the earthquake 

forces experienced above the base of a building can be 

many times larger than those experienced at the base. 

When unrestrained or marginally restrained items are shaken 

during an earthquake, inertial forces may cause them to 

slide, swing, rock, strike other objects, or overturn (see 

Figure 2.2.1-1). File cabinets, emergency generators, 

suspended items, free-standing bookshelves, office 

equipment, and items stored on shelves or racks can all be 

damaged as they move and contact other items, fall, 

overturn or become disconnected from attached 

components. The shaking can also cause damage to 

internal components of equipment without any visible 

damage or movement from its original location. 

Figure 2.2.1-1 Sliding and overturning due to inertial forces.

2.2.2 Building Deformations

During an earthquake, structural members of buildings can deform, bend or stretch and 

compress in response to earthquake forces. For example, the top of a tall office tower may lean 

over a few feet in each direction during an earthquake. The horizontal deformation over the 

Analogy: Passenger in a 

Moving Vehicle 

As a passenger in a moving 

vehicle, you experience inertial 

forces whenever the vehicle is 

rapidly accelerating or 

decelerating. If the vehicle is 

accelerating, you may feel 

yourself pushed backward 

against the seat, since the 

inertial force on your body acts 

in the direction opposite to 

that of the acceleration. If the 

vehicle is decelerating or 

braking, the inertia forces may 

cause you to be thrown 

forward in your seat. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-8

height of each story, known as the story drift, might range 

from a quarter of an inch to several inches between 

adjacent floors, depending on the size of the earthquake 

and the characteristics of the particular building structure 

and type of structural system. The concept of story drift 

is shown in Figure 2.2.2-1.

Figure 2.2.2-1 Nonstructural damage due to building 

deformation.

When the building deforms, the columns or walls deform

and become slightly out of square and thus, any windows 

or partitions rigidly attached to the structure must also 

deform or displace the same amount. Brittle materials like 

glass, plaster partitions, and masonry infill or veneer 

cannot tolerate any significant deformation and will crack 

when the space between stops or molding closes and the 

building structure pushes directly on the brittle elements. Once cracked, the inertial forces in 

the out-of-plane direction can cause portions of these architectural components to become 

dislodged and to fall far from their original location, possibly injuring passers-by underneath

them.

2.2.3 Building Separations 

Another source of nonstructural damage involves pounding or movement across separation or 

expansion joints between adjacent structures or structurally independent portions of a building. 

Structural - Nonstructural Interaction: 

Problem with Short Columns 

There have been many notable 

examples in past earthquakes where 

rigid nonstructural components have 

been the cause of structural damage 

or collapse. These cases have 

generally involved rigid, strong 

architectural components, such as 

masonry infill or concrete spandrels 

that inhibit the movement or 

deformation of the structural framing 

and cause premature failure of column 

or beam elements. When a structural 

column is restrained by nonstructural 

components, it is often referred to as a 

“short column” or “captive column.” 

This is a serious concern for the 

design of structural systems. 

Designers of nonstructural 

components must be mindful to 

isolate their systems from the 

deformations of the adjacent structural 

components or to make sure that the 

structural components have been 

designed to accommodate the 

interaction. 

Structural - Nonstructural Interaction: 

Problem with Short Columns 

There have been many notable 

examples in past earthquakes where 

rigid nonstructural components have 

been the cause of structural damage 

or collapse. These cases have 

generally involved rigid, strong 

architectural components, such as 

masonry infill or concrete spandrels 

that inhibit the movement or 

deformation of the structural framing 

and cause premature failure of column 

or beam elements. When a structural 

column is restrained by nonstructural 

components, it is often referred to as a 

“short column” or “captive column.” 

This is a serious concern for the 

design of structural systems. 

Designers of nonstructural 

components must be mindful to 

isolate their systems from the 

deformations of the adjacent structural 

components or to make sure that the 

structural components have been 

designed to accommodate the 

interaction. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-9

A seismic joint is the separation or gap between two different building structures, often two 

wings of the same facility, which allows the structures to move independently of one another as 

shown in Figure 2.2.3-1.

In order to provide functional continuity between adjacent structures or between structurally 

independent portions of a building, utilities must often extend across these building joints, and 

architectural finishes must be detailed to terminate on 

either side. The separation joint may be only an inch or 

two wide in older construction or a foot or more in some 

newer buildings, depending on the expected horizontal 

movement, or seismic drift between buildings. Flashing, 

piping, conduit, fire sprinkler lines, heating, ventilation, 

and air-conditioning (HVAC) ducts, partitions, and 

flooring all have to be detailed to accommodate the 

seismic movement expected at these locations when the 

two structures move closer together or further apart. 

Damage to items crossing seismic separation or 

expansion joints is a common type of earthquake 

damage. If the size of the gap is insufficient, pounding 

between adjacent structures may result, which can 

damage structural components but more often causes 

damage to nonstructural components, such as parapets, 

veneer, or cornices on the façades of older buildings. 

Figure 2.2.3-1 Nonstructural damage due to separation and pounding.

Base-Isolated Buildings 

A special type of seismic joint 

occurs at the ground level of baseisolated buildings, which are 

separated from the ground by 

seismic shock absorbers or 

isolators, in order to reduce the 

transfer of earthquake accelerations 

to the building. The seismic joint 

typically occurs between the 

foundation below the isolator and 

the building above. These joints 

may be as much as several feet 

wide; special detailing is required 

for all the architectural finishes and 

building utilities that cross the joint.

Base-Isolated Buildings 

A special type of seismic joint 

occurs at the ground level of baseisolated buildings, which are 

separated from the ground by 

seismic shock absorbers or 

isolators, in order to reduce the 

transfer of earthquake accelerations 

to the building. The seismic joint 

typically occurs between the 

foundation below the isolator and 

the building above. These joints 

may be as much as several feet 

wide; special detailing is required 

for all the architectural finishes and 

building utilities that cross the joint.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-10

2.2.4 Nonstructural Interaction

An additional source of nonstructural damage is the interaction between adjacent nonstructural 

systems which move differently from one another. Many nonstructural components may share 

the same space in a ceiling plenum or pipe chase; these items may have different shapes, sizes,

and dynamic characteristics, as well as different bracing requirements.

Some examples of damaging nonstructural interactions include:

 Sprinkler distribution lines interact with the ceiling causing the sprinkler heads to break

and leak water into the room below.

 Adjacent pipes of differing shapes or sizes are unbraced and collide with one another or 

adjacent objects.

 Suspended mechanical equipment swings and impacts a window, louver, or partition.

 Ceiling components or equipment can fall, slide, or overturn blocking emergency exits.

2.3 Extent of Nonstructural Damage

There are many factors affecting the performance of nonstructural components during an 

earthquake and the extent to which they will sustain damage. The degree of damage caused by 

the four principal effects previously described depends upon considerations such as the 

components’ dynamic characteristics, their location in the building, and their proximity to other 

structural or nonstructural components. Other factors include the type of ground motion, the 

structural system of the building, the location and placement of the loads, the type of 

anchorage or bracing, if any, the strength of the structural supports used for anchorage, 

potential interaction with other nonstructural components, and the potential for secondary 

damage. 

A survey of 25 damaged commercial buildings following the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake 

revealed the following breakdown of property losses: structural damage, 3%; electrical and 

mechanical, 7%; exterior finishes, 34%; and interior finishes, 56%. A similar survey of 50 

damaged high-rise buildings, which were far enough away from the earthquake fault rupture to 

experience only mild shaking, showed that whereas none had major structural damage, 43 of 

the buildings suffered damage to drywall or plaster partitions, 18 suffered damaged elevators, 

15 had broken windows, and 8 incurred damage to their air-conditioning systems (Steinbrugge 

and Schader, 1973). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-11

ATC-69 Reducing the Risks of 

Nonstructural Earthquake 

Damage, State-of-the-Art and 

Practice Report (ATC, 2008) 

summarizes the current state of 

knowledge and practice regarding 

the seismic performance of 

nonstructural components of 

buildings. This study confirmed 

the lack of systematic and 

comprehensive post-earthquake 

documentation of nonstructural 

performance and recommended 

development of a standardized 

framework for the collection of 

future nonstructural earthquake 

damage data.

Engineering Considerations: Extent of Damage 

 Unique characteristics of the ground shaking at the site 

(e.g., high or low frequency motion, proximity to fault)

 Characteristics of the structural system supporting the 

nonstructural elements (e.g., the structure may be tall 

and flexible, short and stiff, or short and flexible)

 Location of the nonstructural item within the building 

(e.g., items may be at the basement, at mid-height or 

roof level; items may cross seismic joints or may be 

located in close proximity to deforming structural 

elements)

 Distribution and placement of loads (e.g., heavy loads 

situated near the bottom of shelving units and lighter 

items above, or the reverse; countertop lab equipment 

close or far from the edges of counters) 

 Anchorage or restraint conditions (e.g., items may be 

unanchored, marginally anchored, or well anchored)

 Condition of structural elements used for anchorage 

(e.g., location and strength of studs in a wall used to 

anchor tall cabinets or shelving, location of reinforcing 

bars in concrete used to anchor heavy items, condition 

of mortar in old masonry walls)

 Potential interaction with structural elements or other 

nonstructural elements (e.g., rigid granite veneer 

covering a flexible steel column or a well-anchored 

ceiling grid with unbraced sprinkler lines).

 Potential for secondary damage caused by release of 

fluids, gases, toxins, asbestos, and other hazardous 

substances (e.g., damage to asbestos insulation 

requires evacuation, a gas leak results in a fire)
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-12

2.4 Importance of Nonstructural damage

Historically, earthquake engineers have focused on the performance of structural systems and 

ways to mitigate structural damage. As the earthquake engineering community moves toward 

more comprehensive earthquake standards and expectations of improved seismic performance, 

and as the public demands a higher level of earthquake protection, it is important to 

understand the significance of nonstructural damage.

The failures of nonstructural components during an earthquake may result in injuries or 

fatalities, cause costly property damage to buildings and their contents; and force the closure 

of residential, medical and manufacturing facilities, businesses, and government offices until 

appropriate repairs are completed. As stated previously, the largest investment in most 

buildings is in the nonstructural components and contents; the failures of these elements may 

be both dangerous and costly. The potential consequences of earthquake damage to 

nonstructural components are typically divided into three types of risk:

 Life Safety (LS) Could anyone be hurt by this component in an earthquake? 

 Property Loss (PL) Could a large property loss result? 

 Functional Loss (FL) Could the loss of this component cause an outage or interruption? 

Damage to a particular nonstructural item may present differing degrees of risk in each of these 

three categories. In addition, damage to the item may result in direct injury or loss, or the 

injury or loss may be a secondary effect or a consequence of the failure of the item. 

The focus of this guide is on nonstructural hazards; 

nevertheless, existing structures may also have structural 

hazards that pose risks to life safety, property, and 

functionality. While it may make sense to implement simple 

and inexpensive nonstructural protection measures even in 

a building with structural hazards, the relative structural and 

nonstructural risks should be considered, so that limited 

resources can be used in the most effective manner. It 

would give little comfort to know that the pipes and ceilings 

were all well anchored in an unreinforced masonry structure 

that could collapse during an earthquake.

The three risk categories 

are also sometimes referred 

to as:

the 3Ds: Deaths, Dollars, 

and Downtime; 

the 3Cs: Casualties, Cost, 

and Continuity; 

or merely Safety, Property, 

and Function. 

The three risk categories 

are also sometimes referred 

to as:

the 3Ds: Deaths, Dollars, 

and Downtime; 

the 3Cs: Casualties, Cost, 

and Continuity; 

or merely Safety, Property, 

and Function. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-13

2.4.1 Life Safety (LS)

The first type of risk is that people could be injured or killed by damaged or falling 

nonstructural components. Heavy exterior cladding dislodged during earthquakes has killed 

passersby (Tally, 1988; Adham and Brent, 1985). Even seemingly harmless items can cause 

death if they fall on a victim. If a 25-pound light fixture not properly fastened to the ceiling 

breaks loose during an earthquake and falls on someone's head, the potential for injury is 

great. Life safety can also be compromised if the damaged nonstructural components block 

safe exits in a building. Damage to life safety systems such as fire protection piping can also 

pose a safety concern should a fire start following an earthquake. Examples of potentially 

hazardous nonstructural damage that have occurred during past earthquakes include broken 

glass, overturned tall, heavy cabinets and shelves, falling ceilings and overhead light fixtures, 

ruptured gas lines and other piping containing hazardous materials, damaged friable asbestos 

materials, falling pieces of decorative brickwork and precast concrete panels, dislodged 

contents stored overhead, and collapsed masonry parapets, infill walls, chimneys, and fences. 

The following anecdotes from past earthquakes will help to illustrate the point. Damage photos 

are shown in Figures 2.4.1-1 thru 2.4.1-5. Additional damage photos are provided in Chapter 

6.

 More than 170 campuses in the Los Angeles Unified School District suffered 

nonstructural damage during the 1994 Northridge, California earthquake. At Reseda 

High School, the ceiling in a classroom collapsed and covered the desks with debris. The 

acoustic ceiling panels fell in relatively large pieces, 3 feet or 4 feet square, 

accompanied by pieces of the metal ceiling runners and full-length sections of 

fluorescent light fixtures. Because the earthquake occurred during hours when the 

building was unoccupied, none of the students were injured (Los Angeles Times, 1994).

 A survey of elevator damage following the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake revealed 98 

instances in which counterweights came out of the guide rails and six instances where 

the counterweight impacted the elevator cab, including one case in which the 

counterweight came through the roof of the cab. No injuries were reported (Ding, 

1990). An elevator survey following the Northridge Earthquake indicated 688 instances 

in which counterweights came out of the guide rails, in addition to reports of other 

types of elevator damage. An occurrence of a counterweight becoming dislodged and 

impacting the elevator cab was captured on film during the 2010 Chile Earthquake.

 One hospital patient on a life-support system died during the 1994 Northridge 

Earthquake because of failure of the hospital's electrical supply (Reitherman, 1994).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-14

 During the 1993 Guam Earthquake, the fire-rated nonstructural masonry partitions in 

the exit corridors of one resort hotel were extensively cracked, causing many of the 

metal fire doors in the corridors to jam. Hotel guests had to break through the gypsum 

wallboard partitions between rooms in order to get out of the building, a process that 

took as long as several hours. It was fortunate that the earthquake did not cause a fire 

in the building and no serious injuries were reported. 

 Damage to industrial storage racks commonly used in “big box” stores has been 

reported in most recent earthquakes. Damage has ranged from dislodged contents to 

partial collapse of racking systems. Collapsed racking systems have been documented 

in both the 1994 Northridge Earthquake and the 2010 Christchurch New Zealand 

Earthquake. To date, related deaths and casualties have been avoided due to limited 

occupancy at the time of earthquake shaking.

 

Figure 2.4.1-1 Failure of office partitions, ceilings, and light fixtures in the 1994 Northridge 

Earthquake (FEMA 74, 1994).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-15

Figure 2.4.1-2 Shards of broken untempered glass that fell several stories from a multistory 

building in the 1994 Northridge Earthquake. Failures of this type can be very 

hazardous, especially if glazing is located above exit ways (FEMA 74, 1994).

Figure 2.4.1-3 Failure of suspended ceilings and light fixtures in a furniture store (FEMA 74, 

1994).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-16

Figure 2.4.1-4 Failure of heavy stucco soffit at building entrance in the 1994 Northridge 

Earthquake (FEMA 74, 1994).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-17

Figure 2.4.1-5 Damage to overloaded racks during the 1994 magnitude-6.7 Northridge 

Earthquake (FEMA 460, 2005).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-18

2.4.2 Property Loss (PL)

As discussed previously, nonstructural components, such as mechanical and electrical

equipment and distribution systems and architectural components, account for 75-85% of the 

original construction costs of a typical commercial building. Contents belonging to the building 

occupants, such as movable partitions, furniture, and office or medical equipment, represent a 

significant additional value at risk. For example, a high tech fabricating facility may have 

contents that are worth many times the value of the building and built-in components of the 

building. Immediate property losses attributable to contents alone are often estimated to be 

one third of the total earthquake losses (FEMA, 1981). 

Property losses may be the result of direct damage to a nonstructural item or of the 

consequences produced by its damage. If water pipes or fire sprinkler lines break, then the 

overall property losses will include the cost to repair the piping (a primary or direct loss), plus 

the cost to repair water damage to the facility (a secondary or indirect loss). If the gas supply 

line for a water heater ruptures and causes a fire, then clearly the property loss will be much 

greater than the cost of a new pipe fitting. Many offices and small businesses suffer losses as a 

result of nonstructural earthquake damage but may not keep track of these losses unless they 

have earthquake insurance that will help to cover the cleanup and repair costs. 

 

Figure 2.4.2-1 Complete loss of suspended ceilings and light fixtures in the 1994 Northridge 

Earthquake (FEMA 74, 1994).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-19

Figure 2.4.2-2 Damage to inventory on industrial storage racks in the 1994 Northridge 

Earthquake (FEMA 74, 1994).

The nonstructural property losses can be much larger if they occur at library and museum 

facilities whose function is to store and maintain valuable contents. For example, as a result of 

the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake, two libraries in San Francisco each suffered over a million 

dollars in damage to building contents; the money was spent primarily on reconstructing the 

library stacks, rebinding damaged books, and sorting and reshelving books. At one of these 

facilities, $100,000 was spent rebinding a relatively small number of rare books alone (Wong, 

1993; Dobb, 1993).

2.4.3 Functional Loss (FL)

In addition to life safety and property loss considerations, there is the additional possibility that 

nonstructural damage will make it difficult or impossible to carry out the functions that were 

normally accomplished in a facility. After life safety threats have been addressed, the potential 

for postearthquake downtime or reduced productivity is often the most important risk. For 

example, if a business loses the use of its computers, filing system, or other instruments of 

service as a result of earthquake damage, then the dollar loss of replacing the damaged items 

may be relatively small, but the loss in revenue associated with downtime during recovery can 

be tremendous. In light of the global economy, loss of function can also translate to longer 

term loss of market share for some businesses as consumers find alternate suppliers for 

needed goods or services.

Many external factors may affect postearthquake operations, including power and water 

outages, damage to transportation systems, availability of materials and contractors to repair 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-20

damage, civil disorder, police lines, and curfews. These effects are generally outside the 

control of building owners and tenants and beyond the scope of this discussion. 

The following are examples of nonstructural damage that resulted in interruptions to 

postearthquake emergency operations or to businesses:

 During the 1994 Northridge Earthquake, nonstructural damage caused temporary 

closure, evacuation, or patient transfer at ten essential hospital facilities. These 

hospitals generally had little or no structural damage but were rendered temporarily 

inoperable, primarily because of water damage. At the majority of these facilities, water 

leaks occurred when fire sprinkler, chilled-water, or other pipelines broke. In some 

cases, personnel were unavailable or unable to shut off the water, and water was flowing 

for many hours. At one facility, water up to 2 feet deep was reported at some locations 

in the building as a result of damage to the domestic water supply tank on the roof. At 

another facility, the emergency generator was disabled when its cooling water line broke 

where it crossed a separation joint. Other damage at these facilities included broken 

glass, dangling light fixtures, elevator counterweight damage, and lack of emergency 

power due to failures in the distribution or control systems. Two of these facilities, 

shown in the following figures, Los Angeles County Olive View Medical Center and Holy 

Cross Medical Center, both in Sylmar, California, that had suffered severe structural 

damage or collapse during the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake had been demolished and

entirely rebuilt by the time of the 1994 Northridge Earthquake (Reitherman, 1994). 

Figure 2.4.3-1 Broken sprinkler pipe at Olive View Hospital in Sylmar, California as a result of 

the 1994 Northridge, Earthquake. Pipe ruptured at the elbow joint due to 

differential motion of the pipe and ceiling (FEMA 74, 1994).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-21

Figure 2.4.3-2 HVAC damage at Holy Cross Medical Center in Sylmar in the 1994 Northridge 

Earthquake. Damage to signage and louvers was caused when suspended fans 

in the mechanical penthouse swung and impacted the louver panels. HVAC 

service outage caused the temporary evacuation of patients (FEMA 74, 1994).

 Of 32 commercial data processing facilities surveyed following the 1989 Loma Prieta 

Earthquake, at least 13 were temporarily out of operation for periods ranging from 4 to 

56 hours. The primary cause of outage was loss of outside power. Reported damage 

included overturning of equipment at two facilities, damage to access floors at four 

facilities, movement of large pieces of computer equipment over distances ranging from 

a few inches to 4 feet at 26 facilities, and dislodged ceiling panels at 13 facilities. 

Twenty of these facilities reported having an earthquake preparedness program in place 

at the time of the earthquake, three reported having no program, and information was 

unavailable for nine facilities (Ding, 1990). 

 The 1971 San Fernando Earthquake caused extensive damage to elevators in the Los 

Angeles area, even in some structures where no other damage was reported. An 

elevator survey indicated 674 instances in which counterweights came out of the guide 

rails, in addition to reports of other types of elevator damage. These elevators were 

inoperable until they could be inspected and repaired. Many thousands of businesses 

were temporarily affected by these elevator outages. The State of California instituted 

seismic elevator code provisions in 1975 with the intent of allowing for safe elevator 

shutdown during and after an earthquake (not to make the elevators so earthquakeresistant that they can be relied upon for exiting buildings immediately after an 

earthquake). While these provisions appear to have helped reduce elevator damage, 

there were still many instances of counterweight damage in the San Francisco area 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-22

following the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake, and 688 cases in the Northridge Earthquake 

in 1994 (Ding, 1990; Reitherman, 1994). . Since the State of California seismic elevator

code provisions have not been adopted nationally, elevator damage – including the 

potential for life-threatening conditions – remains a concern.

In some cases, cleanup costs or the value of lost employee labor are not the key measures of 

the postearthquake impact of an earthquake. For example, data processing facilities or 

financial institutions must remain operational on a minute-by-minute basis in order to 

maintain essential services and to monitor transactions at distant locations. In such cases, 

spilled files or damage to communications and computer equipment may represent less 

tangible but more significant outage costs. Hospitals and fire and police stations are facilities 

with essential functions that must remain operational 

after an earthquake.

2.5 Common Types of Nonstructural 

Earthquake Damage

Many types of nonstructural components can be 

damaged in earthquakes, but the items that are most 

vulnerable and most likely to result in injuries, significant 

property losses, and interruption will be described here 

in terms of the risk posed to life safety, property, and 

functionality.

2.5.1 Life Safety

Heavy exterior cladding

Cladding is an architectural element used to provide the 

exterior skin for buildings. Often constructed of heavy 

precast concrete panels, these panels typically have four 

support points, two at the top of the panel connecting it 

to the beam above, and two at its base connected to the 

level below. Unless specifically designed to 

accommodate the anticipated inter-story drift and outof-plane seismic forces, these supports can fail. A 

female student was killed in the 1987 Whittier Narrows 

Threshold for Damage to Unreinforced 

Masonry: 

Masonry damage has long been used 

to estimate earthquake ground motion 

intensity in the absence of 

instrumental recordings. The Modified 

Mercalli Intensity (MMI) scale identifies 

levels I to XII to characterize the 

seismic intensity. MMI Intensity VI and 

VII both include descriptions of 

cracked masonry that can be used to 

estimate the level of ground shaking 

(Richter, 1957).

Recent efforts to correlate the MMI 

scale with recorded peak ground 

accelerations (PGAs) suggest that the 

threshold for masonry damage, MMI 

Intensity VI, is associated with low 

levels of seismic excitation with PGAs 

in the range 0.10g to 0.15g (CISN, 

2009). 

Threshold for Damage to Unreinforced 

Masonry: 

Masonry damage has long been used 

to estimate earthquake ground motion 

intensity in the absence of 

instrumental recordings. The Modified 

Mercalli Intensity (MMI) scale identifies 

levels I to XII to characterize the 

seismic intensity. MMI Intensity VI and 

VII both include descriptions of 

cracked masonry that can be used to 

estimate the level of ground shaking 

(Richter, 1957).

Recent efforts to correlate the MMI 

scale with recorded peak ground 

accelerations (PGAs) suggest that the 

threshold for masonry damage, MMI 

Intensity VI, is associated with low 

levels of seismic excitation with PGAs 

in the range 0.10g to 0.15g (CISN, 

2009). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-23

Earthquake when a 5,000-pound precast panel fell 25 feet off of the exterior of a parking 

garage at California State University, Los Angeles. The student was attempting to exit from the 

ground floor parking level when she was struck by the falling panel (Taly, 1988).

Heavy interior walls

Nonstructural walls in older buildings are often built of heavy, unreinforced masonry materials 

such as brick, concrete block, or hollow clay tile. These materials are advantageous for fire and 

sound proofing and thermal insulation, but are brittle since they do not have a grid of 

horizontal and vertical steel reinforcing bars embedded in them. Falling masonry in hallways 

and stairwells is a particular hazard for occupants attempting to exit buildings during an 

earthquake.

Unbraced masonry parapets or other heavy building appendages

Unreinforced masonry parapets are a common feature of vintage commercial construction in 

many parts of the country. Parapets are the short walls around the perimeter of a roof, 

constructed to help prevent fire from jumping from one roof to the next, to provide guardrail 

protection for people on the roof, to hide roof-mounted equipment, or to provide an 

architectural effect of greater height. While some communities have enforced ordinances that 

require unreinforced masonry parapets to be braced or anchored, many jurisdictions have no 

such mandatory provisions. As these parapets often fail at the roofline and fall outwards onto 

the sidewalk, they represent a particular hazard for pedestrians and occupants attempting to 

exit damaged buildings. Two children were killed on their way to school due to falling 

unreinforced stone masonry in Challis, Idaho during the 1983 Borah Peak, Idaho earthquake 

(Adham and Brent, 1985). Unreinforced masonry parapets have also fallen inward and 

penetrated through the roof of buildings.

Unreinforced masonry chimneys

Residential chimneys are typically built of brittle unreinforced brick masonry that may be 

damaged even in relatively small earthquakes. This is also true of many commercial chimneys. 

Broken chimneys can fall through the roof and pose a safety risk to building occupants. The 

1992 Landers Earthquake caused one related fatality where a child was sleeping next to a 

fireplace. A similar fatality occurred in the 2000 Napa earthquake where a child sleeping next 

to a fireplace was killed during a slumber party. Chimneys can also fall against the side of the 

building, onto an adjacent building or onto a public sidewalk, posing a hazard to neighbors or

passersby. Use of a cracked flue chimney can cause an indirect hazard when carbon monoxide 

enters a home or leads to ignition of a fire.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-24

Suspended lighting

Suspended overhead lighting is prone to damage in earthquakes, especially if the lights are 

supported solely by unbraced suspended ceilings, or if they interact with unbraced piping or 

other suspended components. There were several instances where suspended lighting fixtures 

in Los Angeles school district classrooms fell during the 1994 Northridge Earthquake. No 

casualties occurred since school was not in session at the time of the earthquake. 

Large, heavy ceilings

Heavy suspended ceilings and soffits can be damaged during earthquakes, sometimes causing 

heavy and dangerous material to fall and injure people below. Figure 2.4.1-2 shows a failed 

stucco soffit above a building entrance damaged in the 1994 Northridge Earthquake. During 

the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake, the proscenium arch ceiling at the Geary Theatre in San 

Francisco fell and covered the first six rows of seats in the auditorium; the theater was not in 

use at the time and no one was injured (Ding, 1990). 

Tall, slender, and heavy furniture such as bookcases and file cabinets

Tall slender shelving, bookcases, or file cabinets frequently overturn during earthquakes if they 

are unanchored or poorly anchored. These items are particularly hazardous if they are located 

adjacent to a desk or bed or located where they can jam doors or block corridors and exits. 

Recent shaking table tests conducted in Japan predict injuries to occupants represented by 

mannequins crushed by tall unanchored pieces of furniture. 

Heavy unanchored or poorly anchored contents, such as televisions, 

computer monitors, countertop laboratory equipment, and 

microwaves

Heavy contents situated above the floor level include a wide range of items that could become 

falling hazards in an earthquake. Many rooms have overhead wall- or ceiling-mounted 

televisions and monitors, offices have desktop computer monitors, or microwaves may be 

perched high on counters or shelves. Any of these items could cause injury if they fell and hit 

someone; damage to fallen items can add to property loss and downtime. During the 1989 

Loma Prieta Earthquake, an overhead monitor fell at the San Francisco International Airport,

hitting a passenger on the shoulder. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-25

Glazing

Damage to storefront windows in older commercial buildings is common during earthquakes, 

often causing hazardous conditions on sidewalks in commercial areas. Glazing failures were 

relatively common in high-rise buildings in Mexico City in the 1985 Earthquake. U.S. 

earthquakes have not yet caused numerous high-rise glazing failures, though it remains a 

possibility.

Fire protection piping

Damage to suspended fire protection piping and other system components can render the 

system inoperable following an earthquake. The resultant loss of fire life safety protection can 

pose a serious risk to the life safety of building occupants. 

Hazardous materials release

There have been a number of examples of hazardous materials release resulting from 

earthquake damage to piping, stored chemicals, commercial, medical, or educational laboratory 

facilities. Breakage of containers of chemicals can cause them to mix and lead to hazardous 

reactions. Exposure of asbestos materials due to earthquake activity has also resulted in the 

postearthquake evacuation of facilities that otherwise had little structural damage. 

Gas water heaters 

Residential and small commercial water heaters have ignited fires following earthquakes, in

instances where the gas supply line was damaged. As water heaters are typically tall and 

slender, the gas supply line can break if the water heater tips over. 

Other components

The following components pose a high risk of direct injury requiring hospitalization, or possibly 

causing death, if installed without seismic bracing, seismic anchorage, seismic restraint or 

allowance for differential movement in zones of high seismicity. Other components posing 

indirect risks to life safety are also identified. 

 Exterior walls (including veneer, prefabricated panels, glazing, glass block, curtain wall 

and storefront window systems)

 Partitions (hollow clay tile, unreinforced masonry or similar)

 Ceilings (plaster or other heavy material, particularly if suspended)

 Parapets and appendages (unreinforced masonry)

 Canopies, marquees and signs
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-26

 Chimneys and stacks (unreinforced masonry)

 Stairways

 Suspended equipment weighing over 20 pounds

 Fuel tanks

 Fuel or hazardous material piping

 Suspended light fixtures (recessed, surface-mounted or pendant) weighing over 20

pounds

 Elevators

 Tall and slender shelves, bookcases, file cabinets, vending machines, lockers or similar

 Industrial storage racks and contents

The following components pose life safety concern when located in path of egress:

 Glazed partitions

 Demountable partitions

 Metal stud partitions with heavy veneer such as tile or stone

 Suspended acoustic tile ceiling including light or other components supported by the 

ceiling grid only and weighing 20 pounds or more

 Clay or concrete roof tiles

The following components pose indirect life safety risk:

 Emergency generation system (in hospitals, emergency communication centers or 

similar)

 Fire protection systems

For a more detailed list of components and risk ratings, refer to Appendix E.

2.5.2 Property Loss

Suspended piping for water or waste

Failures of suspended piping have led to costly property loss in past earthquakes. While such 

failures are not often associated with life threatening injuries, they often result in costly 

property loss: both the cost to replace the damaged system and the cost to repair damage 

caused by the release of both clean and contaminated or hazardous fluids. Secondary damage 

due to fluid release is often a large component of nonstructural property losses. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-27

Suspended fire protection piping

Failures of suspended fire protection piping have resulted in both direct and indirect property 

loss following earthquakes. Some of these systems have failed or fallen and had to be replaced. 

More costly are the failures of sprinkler piping, connections, or sprinkler heads. These have 

resulted in the release of great volumes of water in plenum or occupied spaces. Flooded 

plenums have resulted in collapsed ceilings which cause the consequent loss of property and 

disruption of operations. In extreme cases, entire floors or buildings were abandoned as a 

result of the water damage. Flooding in occupied spaces has resulted in water damage to 

furniture, files, computer equipment, and interior finishes. As fire sprinkler lines are 

widespread in occupied spaces, this type of failure has been one of the most costly types of 

nonstructural damage. 

Unanchored and poorly anchored equipment, particularly roof-mounted 

equipment and unrestrained vibration-isolated equipment

Roof-mounted HVAC equipment is often vulnerable to earthquake damage, in part because the 

seismic accelerations are typically larger at the roof level than they are at the lower levels of the 

building. Such equipment is often mounted on vibration-isolation springs to prevent the 

transmission of the equipment vibrations to the building and building occupants. While these 

springs allow the equipment to move vertically a small amount in order to isolate its rapid 

vibratory motion from the building, this equipment is especially vulnerable to the much larger 

motions caused by an earthquake, unless it is also designed with seismic restraints. Damage to 

roof-mounted equipment, as well as other suspended or floor-mounted equipment, can disable 

the infrastructure of a building. 

Partitions

Non-load-bearing gypsum board partitions can be detailed to reduce the impact of seismic 

distortions of structural systems, with a connection detail at the top of the partition that allows

the interface with the floor or roof above to accommodate sliding. However, this often is not 

detailed properly, resulting in extensive cracking and tearing at joints and points of attachment. 

Heavy partitions constructed of concrete masonry units, brick, or hollow clay tile are also often 

damaged in earthquakes and are costly to repair. Even when partition damage is minor to 

moderate, it may still necessitate complete interior patching and painting and may cause

business interruptions in the affected interior spaces. Pacific Gas & Electric Company, which 

operates throughout much of Northern California, reported close to $50 million in area-wide 

property damage following the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake, much of which was from damage 

to gypsum board partitions, glazing, and air conditioning units. While this nonstructural 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-28

damage represented relatively minor losses for each building, it added up to large aggregate 

losses for the firm (Ding, 1990). 

Ceilings

Suspended ceiling systems have failed in many earthquakes resulting in major repair or 

replacement costs for the ceilings and interconnected lighting or fire sprinkler lines as well as 

interruption in the use of the occupied spaces. 

Hazardous Materials Release

Release of some hazardous materials can create a point of ignition for a fire. An entire three 

story university chemistry building burned down to the steel frame as a result of a hazardous 

materials release in the 2010 Chile Earthquake (see Section 6.5.4.1). 

2.5.3 Functional Loss

Emergency generators for critical facilities and related components 

such as day tanks, batteries, and mufflers

Continued operations of critical facilities following an earthquake depend on the integrity not 

only of the emergency generator itself but also of many related subcomponents such as

batteries, battery racks, day tanks, exhaust and sometimes water-cooling connections, 

electrical connections to control panels, and mufflers. All of these items must be adequately 

restrained or anchored in order for the emergency systems to remain operational. 

Suspended piping for water or waste

As noted above, damage to these systems results not only in primary damage to the piping and 

connected systems but also can result in costly outages resulting from the release of fluids into 

occupied spaces. Also, many facilities cannot operate without water and sanitary sewage 

service. As an additional concern, process piping may require extensive inspection prior to 

equipment restart, whether it appears damaged or not, resulting in additional time for 

functional loss. 

Suspended fire protection piping

Failures of suspended fire protection piping have resulted in costly business interruption as well 

as disabling hospitals in past earthquakes. The small bore lines and sprinkler heads often are 

built in a grid with ceiling and lighting systems; incompatible motions of these systems have 

sometimes resulted in damage to the sprinkler heads and subsequent overhead water release. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 2: Behavior of Nonstructural Components Page 2-29

Hazardous materials release

Breakage of containers of chemicals can cause them to mix and lead to hazardous reactions. 

Also, due to disruption of building materials, asbestos release has occurred during 

earthquakes. Any of these types of releases can cause building closures, evacuation, and costly 

delays until specially trained HAZMAT crews can be brought in to identify and clean the spills. 

Failure of equipment needed for functionality, such as computer data 

centers, controls, servers, hubs, routers, switches, and 

communication systems

Computer networks form the backbone of many operations. Earthquake damage can result in 

extended downtime. 

Equipment needed for functionality, including HVAC systems

Many facilities cannot maintain operations without HVAC equipment because temperature 

control and air filtration systems are required in many hospitals, laboratories, and high tech 

manufacturing facilities. 

Equipment needed for functionality, such as elevators and conveyors

Many facilities cannot resume normal operations without the use of passenger and freight 

elevators or material conveyors. Hospitals need elevators to move gurneys and portable 

equipment from floor to floor. Occupants of multistory buildings depend upon the use of 

elevators to move work materials, supplies, and equipment.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 3: Survey and Assessment Procedures for Existing Buildings Page 3-1

3. SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES FOR 

EXISTING BUILDINGS

The first step toward reducing the nonstructural hazards in an existing building is to perform a 

survey to assess the extent and magnitude of the potential risks. This chapter includes survey 

guidelines for nonstructural components and describes the inventory form, the checklist, and

the risk ratings that are included in the appendices. In order to make informed decisions 

regarding nonstructural seismic risks, owners and managers will need to address the following 

questions:

 What types of nonstructural components are present in a particular facility? 

 Are these items adequately braced or anchored?

 How will a specific nonstructural item perform in an earthquake, and what are the 

consequences of failure of that item in terms of life safety, property loss, and functional 

loss?

 If the decision is made to upgrade a facility, which problems should be addressed first? 

The focus of this guide is on reducing nonstructural seismic hazards, particularly in those areas 

where the seismic shaking intensity is expected to be moderate or high and where significant 

structural hazards do not exist or will be addressed independently. A simplified map of 

probable shaking intensities is presented in Figure 3.2.1-1. If the expected shaking for the 

facility in question is minimal, then the survey procedures and seismic protection measures 

described in this guide might be undertaken on a voluntary basis but may not be necessary,

and in most cases they would not be required for new construction.

3.1 Survey of Nonstructural Components

The nonstructural components listed in the tables and checklists provided in the appendices are

at least initially within the scope of the construction of a building and its building permit. After 

occupancy of the building, these are items that are most commonly found in commercial, 

multiple-unit residential, or public buildings. A complex facility such as a hospital, research 

laboratory, or industrial plant will contain many additional types of specialized equipment that 

are not explicitly addressed in this guide.

The goal of a facility survey is to identify nonstructural components that may be vulnerable to 

earthquake damage. As noted earlier, it may be advisable to seek the help of a professional 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 3: Survey and Assessment Procedures for Existing Buildings Page 3-2

with expertise in this area. During the survey, the following three basic questions should be 

kept in mind as each nonstructural item is considered: 

 Could anyone get hurt by this item in an earthquake? (Life Safety)

 Could a large property loss result? (Property Loss)

 Would interruptions and outages be a serious problem? (Functional Loss)

For some components, the answers to these three questions may not be immediately obvious, 

since failure of an item may result in both direct damage and indirect damage. It is important 

not only to view each item as a discrete object that could tip or fall and hurt someone directly, 

but also to consider the consequences of failure. Several examples will serve to illustrate the 

point:

 If a fire sprinkler line breaks, this may cause minor damage to the sprinkler itself but 

result in major damage to architectural finishes and contents of the building. Even if the 

building does not sustain any other damage, the occupants may not be able to use the 

facility until the fire safety system is repaired. The potential for direct and indirect 

property losses in this case are much greater than the repair cost for the sprinkler

system. 

 The battery rack used to start an emergency generator is generally located in a locked 

mechanical room and is unlikely to hurt anyone, even if the rack and batteries fall on the 

floor. In this case, even though the direct life safety threat is probably low, if the fallen 

batteries cannot start the emergency generator, building occupants may be injured 

attempting to evacuate the building in the dark, or the lives of hospital patients on lifesupport systems may be jeopardized. Thus the indirect losses are larger than the direct 

losses.

 Gas-fired residential water heaters have rarely injured anyone as they fall, but they have 

frequently caused postearthquake fires due to ruptured gas lines.

A word of caution is in order regarding the field survey. While it may be relatively 

straightforward to assess whether or not an item is positively restrained to resist earthquake 

forces, the effectiveness of the restraint must also be judged. In the case of bookshelves in an 

office area, there may be hardware anchoring the shelving to the wall, but unless the hardware 

is secured to a solid wall or directly to a stud in a partition wall that is also braced, the 

anchorage may be ineffective in a strong earthquake. The illustrated examples in Chapter 6 

show many photos of unanchored, poorly anchored, and well anchored nonstructural 

components and provide seismic mitigation details for many common situations. As shown in 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 3: Survey and Assessment Procedures for Existing Buildings Page 3-3

the flowchart in Chapter 1, the reader is advised to complete Chapters 4 and 5 (as applicable)

and to review the illustrations and details in Chapter 6 before performing a facility survey and 

reviewing the questions in the checklist. If the checklist asks whether or not something is 

securely anchored, then the existing situation should be compared to the seismic mitigation 

details shown in Chapter 6 for that or a similar item. Also, the installation notes in Section 6.6 

provide general guidance on recommended hardware and procedures.

3.1.1 Survey Forms 

The field survey may be performed by using the forms and checklists in Appendices C, D, and E. 

Appendix C, the Nonstructural Inventory Form, shown in Figure 3.1.1-1 contains a blank 

nonstructural inventory form that can be used to record field observations. At the start of the 

survey, this form should be filled in, in order to identify the facility. This inventory form 

provides a place to record field observations made 

while walking through the facility and reviewing the 

questions in the checklist in Appendix D. When an 

item in the checklist is noncompliant, it should be 

entered as a line item in the inventory form. The 

form also contains space to add risk ratings from 

Appendix E according to the facility’s seismic shaking 

intensity; this could be done during the field survey 

or could be added to the form later. The space 

provided for notes may be used to identify the type 

of problem observed, such as "unanchored" or "bolts 

undersized.”

During the initial survey, it may be helpful to create a 

list containing a large number of items which may be 

shortened later, perhaps by dropping low-priority 

items. At the initial stage, it is better to be 

conservative and to overestimate vulnerabilities than 

to be too optimistic. In this version, Appendix C is 

provided as a sample of the inventory form prepared 

by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. The electronic file 

containing the sorting algorithm can be downloaded from the Bureau’s website at 

http://www.usbr.gov/ssle/seismicsafety/onlineorders.html.

Nonstructural Survey Methods for 

Engineers 

The survey method provided here was 

developed for use by non-engineers. 

Nonstructural survey methods for use 

by engineers are available both in 

ASCE 31/SEI 31-03 Seismic Evaluation 

of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2003) and 

in Chapter 11 of ASCE/SEI 41-06 

Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing 

Buildings (ASCE, 2006). 

The evaluation methods described in 

these ASCE documents are more 

quantitative than those presented here 

and often require that engineering 

calculations be performed to 

determine the adequacy of the existing 

conditions.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 3: Survey and Assessment Procedures for Existing Buildings Page 3-4

Figure 3.1.1-1 Sample nonstructural inventory form (from Appendix C).

Appendix D, Checklist of Nonstructural Earthquake Hazards, shown in Figure 3.1.1-2 is a 

checklist with questions designed to help identify vulnerable nonstructural items and potential

hazards associated with each item. The checklist should be carried during the field survey to 

help identify vulnerable items. The questions on the checklist are all stated in such a way that a 

"Noncompliantce (NC)" answer is indicative of a potential problem. Each nonstructural 

component with a potential problem should be listed as a line item on the nonstructural 

inventory form of Appendix C showing the location and quantity of the item with any relevant 

comments. If an example is available for this item in Chapter 6, it may be helpful to note the 

detail type and example number for future reference. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 3: Survey and Assessment Procedures for Existing Buildings Page 3-5

6.3 Architectural Components

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

6.3.1 Exterior Wall Components [Exterior falling hazards are a primary concern, 

especially items situated above 10 feet and 

items that may fall over exits, walkways, or 

sidewalks.]

Adhered 

veneer 

Falling 

hazard

6.3.1.1 Is the adhered veneer adequately attached to 

the structure? [This includes relatively thin 

sections of tile, masonry, stone, terra cotta, 

ceramic tile, glass mosaic units, stucco, or 

similar materials attached to a structural wall or 

framework by means of an adhesive].

Based on visual observations and/or tapping, is 

the veneer free of cracked or loose sections 

that may fall during an earthquake?

Anchored 

veneer 

Falling 

hazard

6.3.1.2 Is the anchored veneer adequately attached to 

the structure? [This includes thicker masonry, 

stone, or stone slab units that are attached to 

the structure by mechanical anchors].

Is the masonry or other veneer supported by 

shelf angles or other elements at each floor?

Is the masonry or other veneer connected to a 

structural back-up wall at adequate spacing?

Has the veneer been adequately maintained? 

Are the anchors in good condition, free of 

significant corrosion, and inspected regularly?

Figure 3.1.1-2 Sample checklist questions from Appendix D.

Appendix E, Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings, summarizes estimated seismic risk ratings 

stated as Low, Medium, and High for many common components based on their exposure to 

Low, Moderate or High levels of shaking intensity map in Figure 3.2.1-1. The risk ratings are 

based on the risk to Life Safety, Property Loss and Functional Loss for unanchored or unbraced 

items located at or near the base of a low-rise building of ordinary occupancy. The risk ratings 

are further explained in Section 3.2.2 and in the introduction to Appendix E. A sample of the 

risk ratings in Appendix E is shown below.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 3: Survey and Assessment Procedures for Existing Buildings Page 3-6

6.3 Architectural Components 

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

6.3.1 Exterior Wall Components1 

6.3.1.1 Adhered veneer Low M M L

Mod H H L ER

High H H L

6.3.1.2 Anchored veneer Low M M L

Mod H H L ER

High H H L

6.3.1.3 Prefabricated panels Low M M L

Mod H H L ER

High H H M

Figure 3.1.1-3 Sample risk ratings from Appendix E.

3.2 Estimating Seismic Risk

There are two aspects of the estimated seismic risk for a given item:

 What is the seismic shaking intensity that can be expected at the site?

 For a given level of shaking, what is the seismic risk rating of a given nonstructural item in 

terms of life safety, property loss, and functional loss? 

3.2.1 Estimating Seismic Shaking Intensity

Estimating site specific seismic hazards can be a difficult technical problem, requiring many 

factors to be taken into account. For the purposes of this nonstructural survey, the shaking 

intensity is based solely on regional seismicity. For a particular geographic location in the 

United States, the shaking intensity may be estimated by using the map in Figure 3.2.1-1 that 

shows the areas that are likely to experience minimal, low, moderate, or high levels of ground 

shaking during future probable maximum considered earthquake events. The ground shaking 

has been estimated for a stiff soil site. The information in Figure 3.2.1-1 may be summarized 

as follows:
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 3: Survey and Assessment Procedures for Existing Buildings Page 3-7

Figure 3.2.1-1 Map of probable shaking intensity in the United States.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 3: Survey and Assessment Procedures for Existing Buildings Page 3-8

 High level of shaking: Most of California and 

Nevada; significant portions of Alaska, 

Washington, Oregon, Montana, Wyoming, 

Idaho, and Utah; the areas near New Madrid, 

Missouri and Charleston, South Carolina; 

small pocket areas in Arizona, New Mexico,

upper New York, and upper Maine; the islands 

of Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Guam (not shown).

 Moderate level of shaking: Areas adjacent to 

the areas of high shaking plus pocket areas in 

New England, New Mexico, Arizona, West 

Texas, Colorado, and Oklahoma. 

 Low level of shaking: A portion of the western 

States, a significant portion of the central 

region of the continental United States east of 

the Rockies and most of New England.

 Minimal level of shaking: Remaining portions 

of mid-western, southern continental United 

States.

Shaking intensity estimates based on the probable 

shaking intensity map in Figure 3.2.1-1 should be 

adequate for evaluating components situated at or 

near the ground in simple, nonessential facilities. For 

other situations, it may be advisable to choose the 

next higher shaking intensity or to seek the advice of 

professional consultants. Note that in areas with 

minimal shaking, upgrade of nonstructural 

components generally would not be warranted unless 

an owner is particularly risk averse or special 

circumstances exist; the current code would not 

require many of the protective measures 

recommended herein, even for new construction. 

Engineering Design Forces 

Estimating the earthquake forces acting on 

a particular item in a particular building 

can be a difficult technical problem. In 

order to perform engineering calculations, 

an engineer may have to consider the 

following factors: 

 the proximity of the building site to an 

active fault

 soil conditions at the site (other than 

stiff soil)

 the flexibility of the building structure

 the location of the item in the building

 the flexibility of the floor framing or 

walls in the immediate vicinity of the 

item

 the flexibility and strength of the item 

and its attachments

 the weight and configuration of the 

item

 the characteristics of any connection 

details between the item and the 

structure

 the expected relative displacement 

between two connection points in 

adjacent stories or across a seismic 

gap

 the function of the item

 the function of the facility 

Refer to the current International Building 

Code (IBC) and ASCE/SEI 7 for seismic 

design requirements for nonstructural 

components and ASCE/SEI 41 for existing 

construction. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 3: Survey and Assessment Procedures for Existing Buildings Page 3-9

One reason why the use of professional consultants is recommended for complex facilities is 

that the generalized shaking intensity map does not take many engineering factors into 

consideration (see sidebar). Clearly, the complexity and detail of engineering calculations 

should commensurate with the complexity and importance of the facility and the item in 

question. It should be noted that current design codes and standards such as the International 

Building Code, ASCE/SEI 7Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, and 

ASCE/SEI 41Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, reference detailed digitized seismic 

maps of the United States prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These maps consider 

locations and seismic activity of all known seismic sources and faults which may affect a given 

site, and the standards provide procedures for adjusting the mapped ground motions for site 

soil conditions. For designs requiring compliance with building code or national standard 

requirements, the maps referenced by the code or standard in effect at the time must be used 

to establish minimum criteria.

In addition, it may be appropriate to consider more than one earthquake scenario for a 

particular facility, since earthquakes of different magnitudes may occur at different average 

time intervals. For some facilities, it may be useful to evaluate more probable frequent events,

such as those that are likely to occur every 100 years. While new construction projects have to 

anticipate the most severe shaking, others who are doing voluntary retrofits may find it more 

economical to plan for a smaller, more frequent event.

3.2.2 Estimating Seismic Risk Ratings

The risk ratings provided in Appendix E are based on a review of damage to nonstructural 

components in past earthquakes and on the judgment of the authors and their advisory panel. 

Estimates of future earthquake damage to either the structural or nonstructural components of 

a building are only that—estimates—and should be used with discretion. The approximations 

provided in this guide are adequate for the purpose of making an initial determination of the 

seismic risk of the nonstructural components of a simple facility. For a facility that is more 

complex, or for one where the potential risk is high, more detailed analyses should be 

performed by an in-house engineer or a professional consultant. In this document, the seismic 

risks for life safety, property loss, and functional loss have been rated simply as high, medium, 

or low for different levels of shaking intensity. Note that these ratings refer to primary losses 

caused by damage to the item in question; potential consequences or secondary losses are not 

considered. Appendix E contains more detailed notes concerning the definitions and 

assumptions used in assigning risk ratings. Stated briefly: 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 3: Survey and Assessment Procedures for Existing Buildings Page 3-10

 Life Safety risk is the risk of direct injury by the item.

 Property Loss risk is the risk of incurring a cost to repair or replace the item as a result 

of damage incurred.

 Functional Loss risk is the risk that the item will not function as a result of the damage 

incurred. 

The estimated risk ratings shown in Appendix E assume that the item is unbraced and 

unanchored and are intended for buildings with ordinary occupancies, not for essential 

facilities. The primary purpose of this information is to assist in assigning priority ratings, 

described below, and to help in identifying the most critical hazards. 

3.2.3 Assigning Priority Ratings 

Prioritization may be based on budget constraints, risk considerations (i.e., those elements that 

pose the greatest risks to safety, property or function are retrofitted first), availability of 

unoccupied space, or to achieve the highest cost to benefit ratio. 

A simplified priority rating system might be used to indicate which items are more vulnerable to 

earthquake damage and to indicate those items whose failure is most likely to have serious 

consequences. All components could be assigned a high, medium, or low priority, or each item 

or type of item could be ranked in order from highest to lowest. The highest priority might be 

assigned to those components for which all three risk ratings are high. If loss of function is not 

a serious concern, then the highest priority might be assigned to items for which the life safety 

risk is high and the upgrade cost is lowest, since these hazards could be reduced most costeffectively. The assignment of priorities may vary widely for different types of facilities, and 

this document merely provides some guidelines that can be used to establish a ranking system. 

In assigning the rating priorities, the requirements for new construction should be considered. 

If it is not required for new construction, then it does not make much sense to do a seismic 

retrofit of that item in an existing facility. 

3.2.4 Application of Nonstructural Guidelines

When estimating seismic risk and assigning priority ratings, it should be noted that current 

building codes and seismic design standards for new construction do not require seismic 

design of anchorage and bracing for nonstructural components in every part of the United 

States. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 3: Survey and Assessment Procedures for Existing Buildings Page 3-11

 In areas denoted as experiencing minimal levels of seismic shaking intensity in Figure 

3.2.1-1, no seismic anchorage or bracing of nonstructural components is required.

 For most buildings in areas denoted as experiencing low levels of seismic shaking 

intensity, only parapets are required to be braced. For essential facilities, all 

architectural components are required to be anchored and braced.

 In areas denoted as experiencing moderate levels of seismic shaking, all architectural 

components are required to anchored and braced. However, in most buildings, 

electrical and mechanical components and systems do not require anchorage and 

bracing. For essential facilities, mechanical and electrical components are required to 

be braced.

 In general, in areas denoted as experiencing high levels of seismic shaking intensity, all 

architectural, mechanical, and electrical components are required to be anchored and 

braced in all buildings. 

In addition, current seismic codes and standards also exempt mechanical and electrical 

components from bracing or anchoring, regardless of seismic area, in nonessential facilities, if 

they weigh less than 400 pounds and are mounted at a height 4 feet or less above the floor or, 

if elevated, weigh less than 20 pounds. Distributed systems in nonessential facilities, such as 

piping or HVAC ducting, are also exempt from bracing or anchoring if they weigh less than 5 

pounds per lineal foot and are provided with flexible connections.

Current seismic codes and standards do not provide much guidance on when seismic 

anchorage and bracing are required for contents except for cabinets and computer access 

floors which are treated as architectural components. The reason why they are typically not 

treated in standards for new construction is that furniture, fixture, equipment and contents are 

usually installed after the building has been approved for occupancy by the building official;

thus, the building official no longer has any control over the installation after occupancy 

approval has been given. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-1

4. NONSTRUCTURAL RISK REDUCTION FOR EXISTING 

BUILDINGS

Nonstructural risk reduction programs may vary depending on whether the nonstructural 

components in question are in an existing building, a historic facility, an essential facility, a 

facility containing hazardous materials, or are planned for a new building. The current chapter 

addresses issues related to existing buildings; Chapter 5 addresses issues related to new 

construction. Portions of these chapters are written in parallel, yet they are unique to each 

chapter. If portions apply to either situation, they appear only once. For instance, the material 

on implementation strategies appears only in Chapter 4; the material on current code 

requirements and code enforcement appears only in Chapter 5.

There is considerable overlap between the new and existing building categories. For instance, 

if an existing building undergoes a major alteration and changes to a higher use category, then

it would be required to comply with current codes in many jurisdictions and thus, the project 

requirements would closely resemble those for new construction. Conversely, a new building 

becomes an existing building as soon as the occupancy permit is issued. Thus, tenant 

improvements and the installation of furniture, fixtures, equipment, and contents for the first 

occupants of a leased portion of a new building often take place after the original design team 

is finished and the major architectural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing components are 

installed; for this reason, many of the problems involved in coordinating the anchorage of the 

tenants’ components with preexisting components are the same as for a project in an older

existing building. 

Historic buildings, essential buildings such as police and fire stations, or facilities that handle 

hazardous materials have special requirements, which are typically more complex than those 

for ordinary occupancies. While some issues related to these types of facilities are mentioned 

here, the treatment of nonstructural components in these facilities is beyond the scope of this 

guide. The list of references and additional sources of information may help to address these 

issues for specialized facilities.

4.1 Program Objectives and Scope

Several recent earthquakes in the United States have provided evidence suggesting that 

nonstructural damage may account for more than 50% of total damage in future domestic 

earthquakes. As advances are made in the structural design of buildings, and we experience 

fewer structural failures and fewer collapses as a result, the significance of nonstructural 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-2

damage becomes more apparent. In addition, postearthquake operations are of increasing 

concern not only to essential facilities such as police and fire stations and hospitals, but also to

manufacturing facilities, banks, mobile phone providers, and many other businesses concerned 

with loss of revenue or loss of market share that would result from a lengthy outage following 

an earthquake. Organizations and owners who want to reduce their seismic exposure will need 

to address the nonstructural hazards in their facilities.

Seismic improvements to existing buildings might be mandated by a governmental body or 

might be motivated by a desire to provide for postearthquake operations, to reduce future 

losses or liability, to reduce insurance premiums, or to increase the resale value of the property. 

In most cases, seismic improvements to existing facilities are undertaken on a voluntary basis 

and, as a result, organizations and owners have latitude in setting the objectives and defining 

the scope of a nonstructural risk reduction program for existing buildings. 

4.1.1 Voluntary vs. Mandatory Risk Reduction

In general, a nonstructural risk reduction program for existing buildings would be considered a 

voluntary upgrade; that is, a program that is voluntarily undertaken by an owner to reduce the 

potential liability and losses in the event of an earthquake. Although current codes have 

requirements for bracing and anchorage of nonstructural items, most jurisdictions do not 

currently require nonstructural hazards to be addressed retroactively in existing facilities. 

There are some notable exceptions, in cases where a jurisdiction may require mandatory 

retrofitting of existing nonstructural components. A few of these are listed below:

 Many jurisdictions in California have ordinances requiring that unreinforced masonry 

parapets, particularly those adjacent to a public right-of-way, be braced or anchored to 

prevent collapse in an earthquake.

 Some major cities including Chicago, New York, Boston, and Detroit have façade 

ordinances that mandate periodic inspection of building façades; while this is not 

intended as a seismic requirement, it has the benefit that the architectural cladding, 

veneer, ornamentation, and anchors are inspected and maintained on a regular basis.

 Seismic safety legislation (SB 1953) was passed in California in 1994, following the 

Northridge Earthquake. That earthquake resulted in the suspension of some or all 

services at 23 hospitals and in $3 billion in hospital-related damages. This legislation 

requires California hospitals to comply with specific nonstructural hazard mitigation 

deadlines, including: (1) major nonstructural items including emergency power supply, 

bulk medical gas systems, communication systems, fire alarm systems and exit lighting 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-3

are to be braced by 2002; (2) most nonstructural items within “critical care areas” are to 

be braced by 2008; and (3) most nonstructural components within the hospital are to be 

braced by 2030. This is an unfunded mandate; the burden of financing these 

improvements rests with the health care providers. 

 Major alterations, additions, or changes of use may trigger code requirements to bring 

existing construction, including the nonstructural items, into compliance with the 

current code. For instance, conversion of a warehouse to a school building would 

trigger requirements for current code compliance in many jurisdictions; check for local 

requirements and exemptions.

The rules that apply for voluntary upgrades to existing facilities are typically different than 

those that apply to new construction or to mandatory upgrades. While it may be desirable to 

design the nonstructural anchorage details for existing equipment in existing buildings using 

the current code, it is not typically required for voluntary upgrades. In order to describe the 

spectrum of risk reduction objectives, it is useful to introduce some performance-based design 

concepts.

4.1.2 Performance-Based Design Concepts

The use of performance-based design concepts requires a discussion between building design 

professionals and their clients about performance expectations and seismic risk tolerance. 

Performance-based design provides terminology to characterize seismic risk and seismic 

performance and provides a framework for making comparisons between varying levels of 

seismic hazard, structural and nonstructural performance, postearthquake functionality, 

acceptable and unacceptable damage, and total earthquake losses over the expected life of the 

facility. Design professionals, organizational risk managers, building owners, business owners, 

and tenants all need to have an understanding of the tradeoffs between risk and reward; an 

understanding that seismic design and investment choices have a relationship to expected 

future performance and potential future losses. The parties all need to understand that they 

make choices, both passive and active, based on their understanding of the issues and their 

seismic risk tolerance. One may choose to live with known seismic risks or choose to initiate 

programs to reduce some or all of the known hazards; either way, a choice must be made.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-4

Performance-based design concepts have been in 

development for several decades; this process is 

ongoing. These concepts are gradually finding their 

way into the building codes used for new construction, 

such as the International Building Code and ASCE/SEI 7

Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other 

Structures, and into the building standards used for the 

evaluation and retrofitting of existing structures, 

ASCE/SEI 31Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings and 

ASCE/SEI 41 Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, 

respectively. Previous editions of U.S. building codes 

were based on the philosophy that structures should 

not collapse in a major earthquake but might suffer 

severe structural and nonstructural damage; this was a 

minimum life safety standard and is roughly 

comparable to the Basic Safety Objective that is now 

described in ASCE/SEI 41-06 (ASCE, 2006). Although 

engineers were aware that a “code design” was only 

meeting minimum standards, it is not clear that 

building owners and occupants had a similar 

understanding. What is significant about performancebased design concepts is that they are used to describe 

a range of objectives and that they make the choice of 

performance objectives an explicit part of the design 

process; the design professional and the client need to discuss and agree on those performance 

objectives. 

For existing buildings, ASCE/SEI 41-06 Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007)

provides a flexible approach for evaluation and improvement of nonstructural components. 

Nonstructural performance levels are:

 Hazards Reduced – a postearthquake damage state in which nonstructural components 

are damaged and could potentially create falling hazards, but high hazard nonstructural 

components are secured to prevent falling into public assembly areas. Other life-safety 

issues, such as preservation of egress and protections of fire suppression systems are 

not addressed.

Analogy: Financial Risk 

Tolerance 

One of the first things most 

financial advisors do with new 

clients is to present them with 

an investment questionnaire to 

gauge how they feel about 

risking their money; that is, to 

assess what is referred to as 

their “investment risk 

tolerance." The investment 

advisor cannot make 

reasonable recommendations 

on how to allocate the client’s 

assets without knowing 

something about their 

tolerance for financial risk. Is 

the investor conservative, 

moderate, or aggressive? 

Given the tradeoffs between 

risk and reward, do they have 

a low, medium, or high 

tolerance for financial risk?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-5

 Life Safety – a postearthquake damage state in which nonstructural components are 

damaged but the damage is not life threatening. However, significant and costly 

damage is expected to occur. 

 Immediate Occupancy - a postearthquake damage state in which nonstructural 

components are damaged but building access and life-safety systems generally remain 

available and operable.

 Operational – a postearthquake state in which nonstructural components are able to 

support the pre-earthquake functions of the building.

While it is not relevant to describe the engineering design process of ASCE/SEI 41-06 in detail 

here, it is relevant to describe the decision making process used to determine the scope and 

desired performance objectives for a voluntary upgrade. Note that in addition to the Basic 

Safety Objective, the standard provides guidance on choosing objectives for voluntary upgrades 

that are both more ambitious, “Enhanced,” and less ambitious, “Limited,” than the Basic Safety 

Objective. The choice of objective will determine which hazards are addressed, what 

performance is likely following a major earthquake, and how much structural and nonstructural 

damage the facility is likely to sustain. 

Several key questions as posed in ASCE/SEI 41-06 are listed below. The array of performance

options described in ASCE/SEI 41-06 is shown in Table 4.1.2-1:

 What are the retrofitting objectives?

 What earthquake scenario(s) are most relevant for this facility?

 What kind of postearthquake functionality is required for this facility?

 What target structural performance level is required for this facility? 

 What target nonstructural performance level is required for the facility? 

 What target building performance level is required for the facility, and how does that 

relate to the target levels of structural and nonstructural performance and to the 

expected postearthquake damage state for the facility?

 What combination of choices meet the ASCE/SEI 41-06 Basic Safety Objectives? 

Enhanced Objectives? Limited Objectives?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-6

Table 4.1.2-1 Target Building Performance Levels (after ASCE/SEI 41-06) 

Target Building 

Performance 

Level 

Expected Postearthquake 

Damage State 

Target Structural 

Performance 

Level 

Target 

Nonstructural 

Performance Level 

Operational Level Backup utility services maintain 

function; very little structural or 

nonstructural damage

Immediate 

Occupancy

Operational

Immediate 

Occupancy 

 

The building remains safe to 

occupy; any structural or 

nonstructural repairs are minor 

Immediate 

Occupancy

Immediate 

Occupancy

Intermediate 

Level 

Damage Control 

Life Safety 

 

Structure remains stable and has 

significant reserve capacity; 

hazardous nonstructural damage 

is controlled

Life Safety Life Safety

Intermediate 

Level 

Limited Safety Hazards Reduced 

Collapse 

Prevention 

 

The building remains standing, 

but only barely; the building may 

have severe structural and 

nonstructural damage

Collapse 

Prevention

Not Considered 

As shown in Table 4.1.2-1, buildings are assigned a target performance level, which considers 

both structural and nonstructural performance objectives. 

In contrast to the approach used in ASCE/SEI 7-10 for new buildings where the nonstructural 

performance level is tied to a single ground shaking hazard, the nonstructural performance 

levels in ASCE/SEI 41-06 are defined in a manner independent of the ground motion. To 

establish criteria for a seismic retrofit, a ground shaking hazard level and corresponding 

structural and nonstructural performance levels are selected. Often, several sets of ground 

shaking hazards and nonstructural performance levels are established. For example, a building 

might have target building performance levels of Immediate Occupancy for the design 

earthquake ground motion and Life Safety for the maximum considered earthquake. 

Combinations of ground shaking hazard and performance level can be created to suit the needs 

and resources of the building owner. The engineering approach to nonstructural design 

ASCE/SEI 41-06 is discussed in Chapter 6 for different types of components.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-7

According to ASCE/SEI 41-06, the 

Basic Safety Objective is achieved by 

the following combination:

 Design for Life Safety Building 

Performance for Basic Safety 

Earthquake 1 (earthquake that 

occurs every 500 years), AND

 Design for Collapse Prevention 

Building Performance for Basic 

Safety Earthquake 2 (earthquake 

that occurs every 2500 years). 

All other combinations of 

performance levels and seismic 

hazard levels are characterized as 

either Limited or Enhanced objectives 

(for more on this, see sidebar at 

right). 

As seen in Table 4.1.2-1, an effort to 

preserve postearthquake operations 

at either the Immediate Occupancy

level or the Operational levels require 

that both structural and 

nonstructural hazards be addressed. 

Indeed, the higher Operational

standard for nonstructural 

components is what differentiates 

these two enhanced levels of 

building performance. Per ASCE/SEI 

41-06, the differences in design 

between the different target levels of 

building performance are higher or 

lower seismic design forces and 

explicit design for more or fewer 

nonstructural components. 

Engineering analysis methods, such 

Limited and Enhanced Rehabilitation Objectives 

per ASCE/SEI 41-06 

Besides the stated requirements for the Basic 

Safety Objective, all other combinations of 

performance levels and seismic hazard levels are 

characterized as either Enhanced or Limited 

objectives. In comparison with the Basic Safety 

Objective, a higher performance level correlates 

with less damage, lower losses, and increased 

functionality, whereas a lower performance level 

correlates with more damage, higher losses, and 

reduced functionality. The following are 

examples of Limited Rehabilitation Objectives:

 Address only serious nonstructural falling 

hazards considering a small, frequent 

seismic event, i.e., according to ASCE/SEI 

41-06 terminology, target for a Hazards 

Reduced nonstructural performance level, 

considering the 50%/50 year event.

 Address all nonstructural life safety 

hazards without consideration of 

structural hazards, i.e., according to

ASCE/SEI 41-06 terminology, target for a 

Life Safety nonstructural performance 

level for any chosen earthquake scenario.

In contrast, the following is an example for an 

Enhanced Rehabilitation Objective:

 Provide reduced damage and increased 

functionality, i.e., according to ASCE/SEI 

41-06 terminology, design for Immediate 

Occupancy Building Performance for any 

earthquake hazard level. Note that to 

achieve this performance level, both 

structural and nonstructural upgrades 

may be required.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-8

as nonlinear static and dynamic procedures, are available and can be used to check whether or 

not the design meets the target performance objectives. There are many other questions that 

may help refine the project objectives and scope of work, such as:

 What kind of losses can the business or organization tolerate after an earthquake?

 How much downtime can the organization tolerate before employees, clients, or 

customers go elsewhere?

 Does the organization have earthquake insurance? If so, how much of the losses are

covered? What are the deductibles? What is the cost-benefit ratio of doing upgrades 

versus providing coverage and suffering a loss?

 Is this a historic building, essential facility, or facility with specialized or unique 

considerations? 

 What nonstructural components are under your direct control? Architectural? 

Mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP)? Furniture, fixtures, equipment (FF&E)? 

Contents? Or all of these?

 Will the project include upgrades to only MEP and architectural components, or will 

FF&E and contents be included as well?

 What are the most hazardous nonstructural components?

 For leased facilities, which elements are responsibilities of the owner and which are 

responsibilities of the occupants? 

 If the owner has undertaken any seismic upgrades, is there a report available describing 

the project objectives or design level? Were nonstructural items addressed?

 Are there any incentives a lessee can offer a building owner to improve the safety of 

leased space? 

 Do you need to consider relocation to another space that provides an increased level of 

seismic safety?

ASCE/SEI 41-06 is in the last stages of an extensive revision. The new document, ASCE/SEI 41-

13, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings (ASCE/SEI 41-13) merges ASCE/SEI 41-

06 and ASCE/SEI 31-03, Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings. The nonstructural provisions 

of ASCE/SEI 41-13 will be significantly different than those found in ASCE/SEI 41-06. Major 

changes include:

 In most cases, the design ground motions for the performance objectives have been 

reduced. For example, in ASCE/SEI 41-06, the Basic Safety Objective was achieved by 

meeting Life Safety structural performance criteria when subject to ground shaking 

having a 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years. In ASCE/SEI 41-13, Life Safety 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-9

performance must be met for an earthquake having a 20% probability of exceedance in 

50 years, a less severe event.

 The nonstructural performance objectives have been redefined. 

o In ASCE/SEI 41-06, nonstructural performance objectives, from lowest to 

highest are: Hazards Reduced, Life Safety, Immediate Occupancy, and 

Operational. While the Operational performance objective is defined, the 

specific procedures and acceptance criteria were not provided. 

o In ASCE/SEI 41-13, nonstructural performance objectives, from lowest to highest 

are: Life Safety, Position Retention, and Operational. 

o There is no direct correlation between the old and new nonstructural 

performance objectives. Table 4.1.2-2 below illustrates the approximate 

relationship, but only in a general sense. There have been substantive changes 

to the nonstructural provisions throughout ASCE/SEI 41-13. Note the table is 

limited to performance objectives for which procedures and acceptance criteria 

are actually defined:

Table 4.1.2-2 Approximate Relationship of Nonstructural Performance Objectives

ASCE/SEI 41-06 ASCE/SEI 41-13 

Hazards Reduced Life Safety

Life Safety Position Retention

Immediate 

Occupancy

-

- Operational

o To achieve the Basic Performance Objective in ASCE/SEI 41-13, nonstructural 

components in essential buildings (Seismic Risk Category IV), such as hospitals, 

emergency operations centers, and fire stations must meet the “Position 

Retention” objective - for roughly equivalent to “Life Safety” in ASCE/SEI 41-06. 

This represents a considerable reduction in requirements compared to the earlier 

edition. 

When FEMA E-74 is used in conjunction with ASCE/SEI 41-13, care must taken to properly 

determine the appropriate retrofit objective, design procedures, and acceptance criteria. This is 

of great importance since the term “Life Safety,” used throughout this document, has been 

redefined in ASCE/SEI-41-13 to mean a lower retrofit objective.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-10

The point of including this discussion is not to discourage the reader by presenting the design 

process as a complex system, tempting the reader to conclude that it would be much easier to 

do nothing. The point of the discussion is to emphasize that choices need to be made in 

deciding how to manage seismic risk. Resources are always limited, and seismic risks must be 

balanced against many other types of risk. Whatever seismic hazard reduction objectives are 

selected, they should be chosen with an understanding of the risks and rewards. A decision to 

mitigate known seismic hazards, particularly dangerous life safety hazards, would generally be 

considered both reasonable and prudent, even if it were not mandated by law. A decision to 

upgrade a complex facility to Immediate Occupancy or Operational performance level is a major 

and complex undertaking, since facility operations may depend on the continued function of 

hundreds or thousands of individual nonstructural components. Such an upgrade should not 

be undertaken without an understanding of the costs and benefits of such a program. 

4.1.3 Legal Considerations

A common concern voiced by building owners who are considering seismic improvement 

projects for their building or its nonstructural contents and components is the question of legal 

liability. A persistent belief is that one should not do anything, because if a life safety issue is 

uncovered and is made known to the owner, then the owner may be liable for any injuries or 

deaths that arise due to a severe earthquake damaging their building. This “ignorance is bliss” 

approach is not supported by legal precedents. 

The legal issues involved are not black and white and may depend on the type of the facility, 

the sophistication of the owner, and the number of occupants at risk. There are two ways of 

looking at these issues:

 One view is that the standard of care of any owner is to act reasonably and to exercise

ordinary care in managing the property. This care includes inspecting and maintaining 

owned buildings in a safe condition. Safety is usually measured against the building 

standard in effect at the time when the building was constructed, not the current code 

or any current evaluation standard for existing buildings. Therefore, if owners choose 

to evaluate their building using a more modern standard and uncover issues in doing 

so, it is then at their discretion on how, when, and if to act on these data in a voluntary 

manner.

 Another view is that if an owner is aware of a dangerous condition on their property, 

they have an affirmative duty to warn those affected or to mitigate the hazard. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-11

If an owner does undertake a project or program to study and possibly to improve the seismic 

performance of a building or a building’s nonstructural components, then the following is 

recommended to provide transparency:

 Ensure that any inspection is conducted by competent, qualified, and experienced 

parties

 Use widely accepted inspection, design, and construction standards such as those from 

FEMA, ASCE or other national or internationally recognized standard organizations

 Develop clear and complete documentation of decisions and actions

 Establish processes to ensure that all work is performed properly

 Implement any remedial actions through experienced contractors

 Proceed without creating any dangerous conditions and without making the building 

performance worse than it was before

 Proceed in a reasonable and responsible manner

The position of the authors is that an owner is much better off being proactive and doing 

something to investigate or improve the performance of a building and its nonstructural 

components and contents than doing nothing. Ultimately, however, an owner’s decision to 

undertake such a remediation project is his or hers alone, and many considerations, such as 

public relations, risk tolerance, affordability, and market conditions will undoubtedly be 

factored into the decision. 

It is recommended that an owner concerned with these issues seek appropriate legal counsel 

with expertise in construction law and seismic mitigation issues, to assist in their decision 

making process. 

4.2 Design considerations

The selection of design solutions must be consistent with the scope and objectives selected for 

the project. Some design solutions can be implemented without consideration of the building 

code and without engineering expertise. Other design solutions rely on building codes and 

standards, such as ASCE/SEI 7-10, ASCE/SEI 31-03, and ASCE/SEI 41-06, that all contain 

elements of the performance-based design methods discussed above. If engineering 

consultants are engaged to provide design solutions, the selection of seismic force levels, 

design coefficients, and design methods depends upon the performance objectives selected. 

Specific design solutions for nonstructural items fall into three broad categories:

NON-ENGINEERED (NE): These are typically simple, generic details or common sense 

measures that can be implemented by a handy worker or maintenance personnel using 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-12

standard items from any hardware store. Many of these solutions apply to contents that 

are not directly covered by building code provisions. As an example, Chapter 6 contains 

a detail showing the general configuration for anchoring a bookcase to a stud wall (see 

Figure 6.5.2.1-4) and identifies the parts needed but does not explicitly indicate the 

size of the angle bracket or screws needed; this is left to the handy worker based on the 

size and weight of the particular bookcase and the type and spacing of studs. Some of 

these types of solutions have failed in past earthquakes, usually due to undersized bolts 

and hardware or because bolts have failed to engage a structural member. As a result, 

non-engineered solutions are generally not appropriate for hospitals or other facilities 

that have chosen operational functionality as a performance level objective. 

PRESCRIPTIVE (PR): Prescriptive design details are available in the public domain that 

have been engineered to meet or exceed code requirements for a set of common 

conditions and can be used directly in many situations. One prescriptive detail included 

in Chapter 6 is the anchorage detail for a residential or small commercial water heater 

(see Figure 6.4.2.4-6). This detail is applicable for the anchorage of a water heater, up 

to 100 gallons, attached to a wood stud wall. The detail calls out the required hardware 

and the size and spacing of fasteners.

While there are only a limited number of these details currently available, we anticipate 

that more such details will be developed as engineers, architects, and specialty 

contractors become more familiar with the new code requirements for nonstructural 

components. Some of the prescriptive details have been developed by or for the Office 

of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD), the entity in California 

responsible for overseeing hospital design.

ENGINEERING REQUIRED (ER): These are nonstructural anchorage details specifically 

developed by a design professional on a case-by-case basis for a specific set of 

conditions. First, the owner and design professional need to agree on the desired level 

of protection for the anticipated level of shaking, only then can the design professional 

develop details consistent with the objectives. Design methods and design coefficients 

are selected based on the performance objectives as discussed above. An anchorage 

detail designed for a lateral force of 1.0 g will generally be more robust and more costly 

than one designed for a lateral force of 0.1g. Higher design forces and more complex 

engineering methods may be required to meet higher performance objectives. 

As part of the design process, it may be important to consider a number of issues:
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-13

 Interaction of nonstructural components. Many nonstructural systems are 

interconnected or interdependent; items in close proximity can impact one another and 

tall or overhead items can fall and damage items below. Lights, ceilings, diffusers, 

ducts, piping, sprinkler heads, and variable air volume boxes may all share the plenum 

space above the ceiling and it may be challenging to find ways to keep them separated 

and to provide independent support for all of them. 

 Interaction of nonstructural and structural components. Nonstructural components may 

be damaged by the deformations of structural components. Items that cross seismic 

separations between buildings, connect at adjacent floor levels, or are located in base 

isolated structures have special design considerations based on the expected 

deformations of the structural system. 

 Strength of structural components. Since nonstructural components typically anchor to 

structural slabs, walls, and framing, it is important that the capacity of these 

components be checked for adequacy when tall and heavy items are being anchored to 

them.

 Location. Design forces are typically higher for items located in mid- and high-rise 

buildings and on roofs. The location of the item in the building may influence the 

design.

 Primary vs. secondary effects of failure. If failure of an item may result in the release of 

water or hazardous materials such as toxins, chemicals, or asbestos, it may warrant 

additional attention to address these damaging secondary effects. 

 System performance. Fire protection systems, emergency power generation systems, 

and computer and communication networks are systems that depend on the 

functionality of multiple components; the failure of any part might compromise the 

functionality of the system. All related components must be checked if the system is 

required for functionality. 

 Emergency egress. Items located over exits, in stairways, and along exit corridors may 

warrant special attention in order to ensure the safe exit of building occupants. 

4.3 Project planning and implementation strategies

There are a number of options to consider in implementing a program to reduce the 

vulnerability of nonstructural components. As described above, one of the critical first steps is 

to define the project objectives with a clear understanding of what these basic, enhanced, or 

limited objectives will mean in terms of the expected performance of the facility and amount of 

structural and nonstructural damage that is expected to occur for a given level of shaking. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-14

It is important to understand at the outset the 

level of commitment that is required from the 

organization in order to achieve the desired 

objectives. In order to achieve the Hazards 

Reduced nonstructural performance level, the 

bracing or anchoring of several obvious 

nonstructural falling hazards at a small 

commercial location may be accomplished by a 

skilled laborer over several weekends without 

any employee involvement. On the other hand, 

achieving the enhanced objectives which would 

allow for Immediate Occupancy or Operational

performance levels requires a major 

commitment from the top down in an 

organization. Achieving a level of readiness 

that will allow a facility to remain fully 

operational will likely require both structural 

and nonstructural upgrades and a commitment 

of capital, both initial and ongoing; time for 

employee training; downtime for 

implementation; incorporation with purchasing, 

operations, maintenance, facilities, and clear 

assignment of responsibilities for implementation and ongoing program maintenance.

It is also important that someone at the planning stage takes a broad view of what is proposed. 

A facility survey will identify the items and areas of the facility that will be affected. As the 

objective is to improve seismic safety, it is important to also take note of existing seismic 

protections and see that these components are not compromised. It may be necessary to 

evaluate the strength of existing partition walls and floor or roof framing to see that these 

components have sufficient capacity to support the nonstructural items to be anchored. In 

some cases, structural components may need strengthening in order to support the loads from 

the nonstructural components.

Once the project objectives are defined, there are a range of different strategies that can be 

used for implementation. Installation of protective measures can be done immediately, in 

phases, as part of routine maintenance or scheduled remodeling. A comparison of preliminary 

Additional References for Architects and 

Engineers 

FEMA has published a series of guides 

addressing the incremental seismic 

rehabilitation of various types of 

facilities, including the related 

nonstructural components, as follows:

FEMA 395 Schools (FEMA, 2003)

FEMA 396 Hospitals (FEMA, 2003)

FEMA 397 Offices (FEMA, 2003)

FEMA 398 Multifamily Apartment 

Buildings (FEMA, 2004)

FEMA 399 Retail Buildings (FEMA, 

2004)

FEMA 400 Hotel and Motel 

Buildings (FEMA, 2004)
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-15

cost estimates and schedules for several different implementation strategies consistent with the 

project objectives may help in deciding which implementation strategy will work best. 

4.3.1 Integration with Maintenance Programs 

One of the easier means of gradually implementing earthquake protection in an existing 

building is to train maintenance personnel to identify and to properly mitigate nonstructural 

hazards that they may discover as they survey the building for other purposes or to mitigate

problems identified by an outside consultant engineer. The disadvantages of this approach are 

that protection is increased only gradually and the potential cost savings from doing several 

related projects at the same time may be lost. 

Once nonstructural bracing and anchorage are installed, maintenance personnel should be 

trained to inspect and monitor the installations and be responsible for the upkeep of the 

protective measures where appropriate. For facilities with specialized equipment, this 

maintenance function must be performed by someone familiar with the equipment to ensure 

that the protective measures are installed and maintained without compromising the equipment 

functionality.

4.3.2 Integration with Remodeling 

If there are other reasons for remodeling, there may be an opportunity to increase the 

protection of several nonstructural components at the same time, especially ceilings, partitions, 

windows, piping, and other built-in features. If an architect, interior designer, or contractor is 

handling the remodeling, the possibility of incorporating additional earthquake protection into 

the space should be discussed, and a structural engineer's expertise should be employed where 

indicated. Newly installed components will need to comply with current code requirements. 

Depending on the scope, the remodel may also trigger requirements to bring some existing 

components of the facility into compliance with current code; check the requirements for 

additions and alterations with the local jurisdiction.

A word of caution: In some cases, remodeling efforts have reduced rather than increased the 

level of earthquake protection through the accidental modification of components that 

originally received some seismic protection as a result of the input of a structural engineer or 

architect. It is important not to compromise existing seismic protections; it is also important 

not to overload partition walls, floor or roof framing, or an existing ceiling grid by using them 

to brace or anchor items that are too heavy. In some instances, the remodeling scope may 

need to be extended to include ceilings, partitions, or structural components so that the 

strength of these components can be upgraded to support additional loading.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-16

4.3.3 Phased or Incremental Upgrading 

In some cases, it may be possible to upgrade different areas within a building at different times 

or to select one or more types of nonstructural components throughout a building and upgrade 

them at the same time. Some projects can be completed in a weekend, making it possible to 

upgrade equipment or other items without interrupting the normal work flow. Companies with 

annual shutdown periods may find it wise to upgrade the highest-priority items during each 

annual shutdown. Work that interrupts the use of a space, such as setting up ladders or 

scaffolding to work on the ceiling or ceiling-located items, could be restricted to limited areas 

in a facility at a given time, minimizing the overall disruption. 

An all-at-once implementation process, similar to that used in new construction, can be used in 

existing facilities either when the extent of the work required is small or when the work is 

extensive but the resulting disruption is tolerable. A favorable time for this approach is when a 

building is temporarily vacant, such as during planned renovations. 

4.3.4 Integration with Purchasing 

A guideline with a list of nonstructural items could be created to indicate special purchasing 

considerations. For example, file cabinets should have strong latches and wall or floor 

attachments, bookcases should have bracing and floor or wall attachments, and server racks 

should come with seismic detailing. Increasingly, vendors are marketing items with "seismicresistant" details such as predrilled holes for anchorage. There are also many vendors that 

supply hardware and kits for seismic anchorage of equipment and furniture; these items should 

be stockpiled or ordered routinely along with each new equipment purchase. The effective use 

of these guidelines requires coordination between the purchasing and facilities or operations 

functions.

Integration with purchasing may be used in conjunction with any of the other strategies. If 

used alone, it will improve the safety of newly purchased items, but will not enhance the safety 

of existing items or address architectural items such as parapets, partitions, or ceilings. Over 

time, the safety of the facility will gradually improve as new items are purchased and existing 

items are replaced. 

4.4 Responsibility and Program Management

4.4.1 Responsibility

Successful implementation of a nonstructural risk reduction program may involve many steps, 

including integration of the risk reduction program with the overall mission or business plan 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-17

and balancing the seismic risks with other risks that businesses and organizations face. 

Program tasks may include planning, budgeting, scheduling, allocation of in-house resources 

and personnel, selection of outside consultants and contractors, contract negotiation and 

administration, coordination of numerous trades, managing outages or disruption, facility 

surveys, installation, inspection, oversight, purchasing, evaluation, and ongoing maintenance of 

the seismic protection measures. Assigning clear responsibility for each task is important to 

the success of any risk reduction program. Figure 4.4.1-1 shows an example of a responsibility 

matrix that could be readily adapted by listing the nonstructural components for a particular 

project. This example format can be used to track who is responsible for design, design 

review, installation, and observation. If special inspection is required, this could also be added 

to the table. Appendix B contains templates for use in assigning responsibility for design, 

construction and inspection of nonstructural installations governed by ASCE/SEI 7-10. The 

responsibility matrices are intended to be used in conjunction with the construction 

specification in Appendix A.

One of the initial tasks is to assess the capabilities of in-house resources and the need for 

outside consultants. The answer depends on the nature of the physical conditions in the facility 

and the characteristics of the organization. 

 In-house implementation can be adequate where the potential hazard is small or the inhouse familiarity with engineering and construction is greater than average.

 Specialized consultants with experience in the evaluation and reduction of nonstructural 

risks may be required for essential facilities or larger and more complex facilities where 

the potential hazards or potential losses are high. 

 Facilities with moderate risk may fall in between these two examples and use a 

combination of expert advice and in-house implementation. For example, after an 

initial survey is conducted and a report is prepared by an expert, the remainder of the 

implementation might be handled in-house without further assistance.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-18

Job Aid:

Nonstructural Component Seismic Resistance Responsibility Matrix 

Who is Responsible for:

Type of Nonstructural 

Component or System Design Design Review Installation Observation

Access Floor (raised)

Ceilings

Suspended T-bar

Gypsum Board (hung)

Electrical Equipment

Busduct / Cable Trays

Power Generator

Light fixtures

Main Service Panel

Transformers

Elevator

Cable guides

Escalator

Exterior Cladding:

EIFS

GFRC

Metal Panels

Precast Concrete

Exterior Window Walls

Fire Sprinkler System

Fluid Tanks

Mechanical Equipment

Air Handlers

Boilers

Chillers

Cooling Tower

Condensers

Ductwork / VAV box

Fans

Furnaces

Piping Systems

Pumps

Interior Partitions

Other Equipment

Stairs 

Storage Racks

Veneer

Brick

Stone

Water Heater

Figure 4.4.1-1 Example responsibility matrix.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-19

One of the larger nonstructural earthquake hazard evaluation and upgrade programs is that of 

the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for its hospitals. The typical procedure followed by

the VA is to hire consultant experts to assess the seismic risk at the site, to review the facility 

and list specific nonstructural items that are vulnerable to future earthquakes, and to provide 

estimated upgrade costs and group the items by priority. Once the consultants have 

established the program outline, the VA maintenance staff at each hospital is given many of the 

implementation tasks. As mentioned in the introduction, there are limits to the self-help 

diagnosis and prescription approach; especially if larger buildings or more serious safety 

hazards, property risks, or critical functional requirements are involved, the use of consultants 

may be advisable. 

Consultants and design professionals could be used to assist with any or all of the tasks from 

program planning through implementation. Outside consultants that could facilitate planning, 

design, and implementation may include the following:

 Risk managers

 Earthquake engineers

 Structural engineers

 Civil engineers

 Architects

 Mechanical engineers

 Electrical engineers

 Interior designers

 Specialty contractors

 Special inspectors

 Vendors of specialty hardware and seismic protection devices

Many architects and engineers are qualified to design bracing or anchorage for simple 

nonstructural items. However, the design of anchorage and bracing for specialized equipment 

or for the systems needed to maintain operations in a hospital or manufacturing facility 

requires specialized experience with seismic design for nonstructural components. While there 

currently is not a recognized professional designation for someone with this type of experience, 

there may be one in the future. The job requires familiarity with MEP equipment and piping, 

architectural components, issues such as fire protection, and requirements of the Americans 

with Disabilities Act, computer networks, industrial storage racks, and all the other categories 

of nonstructural components and contents. When selecting outside consultants, check that 

they have experience with nonstructural seismic design, preferably specific experience with the 

type of equipment or facility in question.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-20

4.4.2 Sustaining Protection 

On an organizational level, sustaining protection generally requires a serious commitment from 

management and may include development of seismic planning guidelines for the organization, 

development of purchasing guidelines, ongoing personnel training, periodic facility audits, and 

incorporation into annual staff reviews. It is sometimes more problematic to maintain the 

human aspects than hardware aspects of nonstructural protection. Over time, interior 

fastenings and restraints may be removed as people move equipment or other items and fail to 

reinstall the protective devices. Chains used to restrain gas cylinders or elastic shock cords on 

bookshelves are effective only when they are in use. This is also true of tethers on office 

copiers, countertop lab equipment, or vending machines. Some nonstructural protection 

devices, such as anchorage hardware for exterior objects, may deteriorate with time if not 

protected from rust. New items may be purchased and installed without seismic protection in 

the absence of purchasing guidelines. As noted above, remodeling projects can sometimes 

result in the elimination of protective features if there are no seismic guidelines.

Training is required to ensure that gas cylinders, storage rack contents, lab and office 

equipment, and chemicals are properly stored. Maintenance personnel may periodically survey 

the building to find out whether or not earthquake protection measures are still effectively 

protecting mechanical equipment such as emergency generators, water heaters, and specialized 

equipment. Additionally, supervisors can be made responsible for an annual review of their 

work spaces. If there is a separate facility or physical plant office in an organization, it may be 

a logical place for the responsibility for sustaining protection to reside. Organizations with 

safety departments have successfully assigned the role of overseeing nonstructural earthquake 

protection to this functional area. 

An earthquake risk reduction program should conform to the nature of the organization. In the 

case of the University of California, Santa Barbara, the implementation and maintenance of a 

campus wide program to address nonstructural earthquake hazards was initiated by a one page 

policy memo from the chancellor. Each department head was made responsible for 

implementation of the policy, and the campus Office of Environmental Health and Safety was 

given the job of advising departments on implementation, making surveys, and evaluating the 

program's overall effectiveness (Huttenbach, 1980; Steinmetz, 1979). 

4.4.3 Program Evaluation

To assess whether the nonstructural risk reduction program was worth the cost, the strong 

points and deficiencies of the program need to be established. There are two program 

evaluation techniques to employ in accomplishing this task. The first is to ask:
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-21

 How well has the program met its stated objectives?

 Have the costs been within the budget? 

 Have the tasks been completed on schedule?

 Is the scope of the effort as broad as was originally intended, or have some items 

been neglected that were targeted for upgrades? 

 Have employee training exercises or other features of the plan all been 

implemented? 

 How well have the measures been implemented?

 Have the upgrade details been correctly installed? 

 Is the training taken seriously? 

 Do we need to modify (either enhance or reduce) our objectives going forward? 

The second evaluation technique is to ask:

 If the earthquake happened today, how much would the losses be reduced by due to 

the nonstructural protection program?

 Have the costs been worth the benefits?

4.5 Cost benchmarks – Examples

4.5.1 Example 1 – Manufacturing Facility 

The nonstructural components throughout a 500,000 square foot manufacturing facility located 

in the heart of the New Madrid Seismic Zone were upgraded for improved seismic performance. 

The facility was originally built in the late 1970’s with several periodic expansions constructed 

into the early 1990’s. The project included anchorage and bracing of existing nonstructural 

components in both manufacturing and office space.

Following a structural evaluation confirming life safety structural performance, a facility-wide 

nonstructural earthquake risk assessment was conducted and concluded that many of the 

nonstructural components failed to satisfy the life safety performance objective defined in 

ASCE/SEI 41-06. A subsequent engineering design phase was performed to design bracing and 

anchorage for nonstructural components not meeting the performance objective. The 

strengthening measures included bracing for all natural gas piping and equipment, fire 

protection piping systems, and emergency power systems as well as items whose damage could 

pose a threat to the life safety or the egress of building occupants. This included restraints for 

overhead office lights, bracing of tall unreinforced masonry walls and equipment suspended 

overhead, and anchorage of floor mounted equipment whose overturning or sliding could block 

the emergency exit routes for the facility.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-22

The design began in 2006 with an 8 month construction schedule completed in mid-2008. The 

facility was fully operational throughout construction. Regular communication between the 

owner, design team, and contractor were cited as key to the project success. Scheduling 

requirements such as night shifts and work sequencing were incorporated into the design 

documents and the construction schedule to give the entire construction team a clear 

understanding of the challenges of working in a 24/7 manufacturing facility.

The approximate cost breakdown for the project in 2007 dollars is summarized in Table 4.5.1-

1.

Table 4.5.1-1 Approximate Cost Breakdown for Manufacturing Facility Upgrade Project 

 Project Cost 

Consultant Fees (Design & Construction) $200,000

Construction Costs $700,000

Inspection and Testing $25,000

Total $925,000

Average Cost $2/square foot

4.5.2 Example 2 – School District 

A pilot project was undertaken to determine the magnitude of costs associated with 

implementation of nonstructural damage mitigation measures in a California school district. 

The pilot project addressed contents and equipment, overhead components and hazardous 

materials. Nonstructural hazards were surveyed and prioritized in three groups. The highest 

priority category included those items judged to pose the greatest safety risk. Among the 

components included were tall bookshelves and filing cabinets, suspended lighting, heavy 

ceiling systems, and hazardous materials. Roughly half of the items at risk were judged to be in 

the highest priority category.

A total of seventeen schools were included in the pilot program. The current cost to address the 

highest priority items ranged from roughly $20,000 per school (primarily to address tall 

cabinets and files) to $400,000 per school in 2008 dollars (requiring work on suspended 

components as well as floor- and wall-mounted items).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-23

4.5.3 Example 3 – California Hospital 

Seismic upgrading of nonstructural components was undertaken as a stand-alone project in 

response to SB 1953 regulations, which require California Hospitals to comply with specified 

nonstructural hazard reduction milestones by December 31, 2008 (see discussion in Section 

4.1.1).

The subject hospital is a 228-bed acute care hospital of roughly 230,000 gross square feet, 

built in the 1970s. The project included anchoring and bracing nonstructural components in 

designated areas throughout the hospital including central and sterile supply, clinical laboratory 

service spaces, pharmacy, radiology, intensive care units, coronary care units, angiography 

laboratories, cardiac catheterization laboratories, delivery rooms, emergency rooms, operating 

rooms, and recovery rooms. Also included in the scope was the anchorage and bracing of 

mechanical and electrical equipment serving the designated areas.

Floor-mounted equipment, wall-mounted items weighing over 20 pounds, suspended 

equipment, piping, and ceilings were included among the items addressed in the project. 

Seismic anchorage was designed for compliance with 2001 California Building Code 

requirements.

The primary project challenge was to maintain uninterrupted hospital services 24/7 while 

accomplishing the mandated work. This required planning efforts by hospital administrators, 

doctors, nurses, the design team consisting of architects, structural, mechanical, and electrical 

engineers, contractors and subcontractors. Planning commenced in mid-2003; construction 

was completed at the end of 2007. The work was successfully completed by working in small 

areas at a time, often at nights for short durations. In order to complete the work in the 

intensive care unit, an available wing of the hospital was completely remodeled as “swing 

space” to enable patients to be relocated from the intensive care unit to the remodeled wing, 

thereby providing the contractor unrestricted access to complete nonstructural upgrading in the 

intensive care unit. Work throughout the hospital was complicated by the presence of asbestos 

in the fireproofing at the underside of the floors. Hazardous material abatement preceded all 

work.

The cost breakdown for the project in 2007 dollars is summarized in Table 4.5.3-1.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 4: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for Existing Buildings Page 4-24

Table 4.5.3-1 Cost Breakdown for California Hospital Upgrade Project 

Base Project Swing Space Total 

Consultant fees $2,600,000 $795,000 $3,395,000

Construction $8,844,000 $5,190,000 $14,034,000

HAZMAT abatement $986,000 $140,000 $1,126,000

User equipment $0 $760,000 $760,000

Permits, inspection, testing $2,014,000 $810,000 $2,824,000

Total $14,444,000 $7,695,000 $22,139,000 

Most of the project cost was attributable to the logistics of making improvements while 

maintaining uninterrupted hospital operations. The total construction cost of roughly $100 per 

square foot demonstrates that the most cost effective nonstructural mitigation is undertaken 

when space is unoccupied such as during planned renovations.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-1

5. Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings

Nonstructural risk reduction programs may vary depending on whether the nonstructural 

components in question are in an existing building, an historic facility, an essential facility, a 

facility containing hazardous materials, or are planned for a new building. The current chapter 

addresses issues related to new buildings; Chapter 4 addresses issues related to existing

construction. Portions of these chapters are written in parallel, yet they are unique to each 

chapter. If portions apply to either situation, they appear only once. For instance, the material 

on implementation strategies appears only in Chapter 4; the material on current code 

requirements and code enforcement appears only in Chapter 5.

There is considerable overlap between the new and existing building categories. For instance, if 

an existing building undergoes a major alteration and changes to a higher use category, then it 

would be required to comply with current codes in many jurisdictions and thus, the project 

requirements would closely resemble those for new construction. Conversely, a new building 

becomes an existing building as soon as the occupancy permit is issued. Thus, tenant 

improvements and the installation of furniture, fixtures, equipment and contents for the first 

occupants of a leased portion of a new building often take place after the original design team 

is finished and the major architectural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing components are 

installed; for this reason, many of the problems involved in coordinating the anchorage of the 

tenants’ components with preexisting components are the same as for a project in an older 

existing building. 

Historic buildings, essential buildings such as police and fire stations, or facilities that handle 

hazardous materials have special requirements, which are typically more complex than those 

for ordinary occupancies. While some issues related to these types of facilities are mentioned 

here, the treatment of nonstructural components in these facilities is beyond the scope of this 

guide. The list of references and additional sources of information may help address these 

issues for specialized facilities.

5.1 Program Objectives and Scope 

For new construction, it is possible to anchor, brace, or restrain all of the critical nonstructural 

items at the same time according to a chosen set of performance objectives and in 

conformance with current building code requirements. It is generally more efficient and less 

costly to install anchorage details during construction and at the time of initial occupancy than 

to upgrade them after the fact. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-2

The planning stage for new construction is the 

ideal time to consider the desired seismic 

performance of a facility. It is an opportunity to 

coordinate the structural and nonstructural 

aspects of the design, for instance by selecting a 

structural system that provides a greater level of 

seismic safety and that will provide for a higher 

level of both structural and nonstructural 

performance. It is also critical to communicate 

concepts of seismic performance, risk, and 

related options to a building owner, in order to 

establish project specific design and construction 

strategies.

The following questions might help define the 

project objectives, including the nonstructural 

risk reduction objectives:

 What type of organization or business will 

occupy the facility?

 What type of functionality is needed during 

and after a minor, major, or severe 

earthquake? 

 How much structural and nonstructural 

damage can be tolerated after a minor, major, 

or severe earthquake?

 Do the design professionals have experience 

with bracing and anchorage of the types of 

nonstructural components proposed for the 

facility, particularly if the facility will need to 

be operational following an earthquake? 

 For an important project, is there a third party 

peer reviewer for the seismic design, including 

the design for the nonstructural components?

 What is the value of proposed architectural 

finishes? MEP systems? Furniture, fixtures & 

equipment (FF&E) and contents? What would 

Additional Questions for an Architect 

or Engineer to Consider 

 What is the design life of the 

facility?

 What are the magnitudes and 

frequency of earthquakes the 

building is likely to experience 

during its life?

 Has a structural system been 

chosen that will provide the level 

of structural and nonstructural 

protection required? Is the 

structural system very stiff? Very 

flexible? Are the inter-story drifts 

large? Does the structural design 

include base isolation or energy 

dissipation devices such as 

structural dampers?

 What types of nonstructural 

components are proposed? Would 

damage to or failure of the 

proposed components be a life 

safety hazard or result in heavy 

property loss, or compromise 

building function? What is the cost 

of upgrading to more seismically 

resistant components and 

detailing?

 Does the design team have any 

control over future FF&E and 

contents? If not, who will have 

control? Can the design team 

coordinate the design and 

installation of these components 

with design representatives for the 

initial building occupants?

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-3

be the financial impact of damage to or failure of each of these items?

 How much of the potential earthquake losses will be covered by insurance?

It is worth repeating that the nonstructural components and contents typically represent the 

major portion of the capital investment for new construction; per Figure 2.1.3-1, this is 82% for 

office buildings, 87% for hotels, and 92% for hospitals (Whittaker and Soong, 2003). 

Incorporating seismic damage control measures into the design for new construction makes 

good business sense, particularly for buildings that have a high probability of experiencing 

damaging earthquakes several times during their life span. For new construction of essential 

buildings in high seismic areas, damage control measures are now required, in order to 

increase the likelihood that these facilities will remain functional following a major earthquake. 

5.1.1 Voluntary vs Mandatory Risk Reduction

Although code provisions historically have been written with the primary intent to provide a 

minimum level of life safety and to avoid legislating property damage control measures, code 

provisions now mandate an increasing level of damage control for certain types of essential and 

high occupancy facilities. In ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other 

Structures, (ASCE, 2010) structures are assigned to a Risk Category. The Risk Category is 

related to the consequences of failure, from the lowest risk to human life (Risk Category I) to 

the highest (Risk Category IV). Most structures are placed in Risk Category II. Facilities where 

higher standards are currently mandated include hospitals, aviation control towers, designated 

emergency shelters, police and fire stations, power generating stations, water storage or 

pumping facilities, facilities that handle hazardous materials, and a number of others identified 

as (Risk Category IV in ASCE/SEI 7-10. Except in areas with the lowest seismicity, the structural 

and nonstructural design of these facilities must meet more stringent design requirements than 

for standard construction. 

For standard construction, a “code design” is intended to provide a minimum level of life safety, 

now considering both structural and nonstructural components, but it does not provide for 

significant damage control. 

The seismic performance goals for ASCE/SEI 7-10 for typical structures (Risk Category II),

designed to the minimum requirements are:

• To avoid serious injury or loss of life

• To minimize repair costs to the extent practical.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-4

In order to achieve enhanced performance (e.g., 

Operational, Immediate Occupancy, or a higher 

level of structural and nonstructural damage 

control), the design objectives must be targeted 

higher than the life safety level implicit in the 

minimum code provisions. Essential structures 

(Risk Category IV) are designed for higher forces, 

and more of the nonstructural components must 

be designed for seismic loads. 

Although new construction must meet the 

minimum life safety standards, owners concerned 

with building functionality or future earthquake 

losses may choose to implement a higher standard 

and to incorporate damage control measures into 

the design for new construction on a voluntary 

basis. 

5.1.2 Performance-Based Design 

concepts

The use of performance-based design concepts 

requires a discussion between building design 

professionals and their clients about performance 

expectations and seismic risk tolerance. 

Performance-based design provides terminology to 

characterize seismic risk and seismic performance 

and provides a framework for making comparisons 

between varying levels of seismic hazard, 

structural and nonstructural performance, 

postearthquake functionality, acceptable and

unacceptable damage, and total earthquake losses 

over the expected life of the facility. Design 

professionals, organizational risk managers, 

building owners, business owners, and tenants all 

need to develop an understanding of the tradeoffs 

between risk and reward; that is, an understanding that seismic design and investment choices 

have a relationship to expected future performance and potential future losses. The parties all 

Voluntary Adoption of Enhanced 

Performance Criteria 

At their discretion, owners may adopt 

more stringent seismic design 

standards than those in the prevailing 

code. 

 Beginning in the late 1970s, some 

owners of high tech research and 

manufacturing facilities in 

California started to use higher 

standards for the seismic design 

of critical buildings and 

nonstructural components on a 

voluntary basis. 

 In the mid-2000s, several 

thermoelectric power plants in 

Chile were designed using a 

special seismic performance 

criteria stipulated by the owners 

that require that any damage to 

the plants from a major 

earthquake be limited to that 

which could be inspected and 

repaired within 14 days time; 

further, the criteria require that 

these plants remain operational 

during moderate seismic events.

In these examples, the owners 

developed special seismic design 

criteria to meet the needs of their 

organizations, primarily motivated by 

a desire to limit costly postearthquake 

outages.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-5

need to understand that they make choices, both passive and active, based on their 

understanding of the issues and their seismic risk tolerance. One may choose to live with 

known seismic risks or choose to initiate programs to reduce some or all of the known hazards; 

either way, a choice must be made.

Performance-based design concepts have been in development for several decades; this 

development is ongoing. These concepts are gradually finding their way into the building 

codes used for new construction, such as IBC 2012 International Building Code (ICC, 2012) and 

ASCE/SEI 7-10). These codes now specify higher seismic design forces and more 

comprehensive requirements for nonstructural components while at the same time imposing 

more stringent drift limits on the building structural systems in certain types of facilities in an 

effort to reduce the earthquake damage and improve the performance of these facilities. 

Nevertheless, the code generally does not address damage control or postearthquake

operations for standard occupancies. If an owner wants to specify higher performance 

standards than those embodied in the code, it is important that those performance 

expectations be identified early in the planning process. For example, some owners interested 

in enhancing the structural and nonstructural performance of their facility will choose a 

structural system incorporating seismic isolation and/or supplemental damping. Seismic 

isolation provides the most significant benefit by greatly reducing both drift and acceleration 

demands imposed on nonstructural systems as well as demand on the structural system itself.

Seismic isolation is discussed in more detail in Section 6.1.

Borrowing some terminology used in ASCE/SEI 41-06 Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing 

Buildings (ASCE, 2006) for the rehabilitation of existing construction and previously described 

in Chapter 4, target building performance levels may be described as basic or enhanced. 

Limited performance objectives, those that provide less than the minimum life safety standard, 

while permissible for existing construction, are not allowed for new construction.

 A basic level of safety is achieved by following the code requirements for standard 

occupancies. This type of design should not be expected to provide significant damage 

control for structural or nonstructural components or to provide for continued 

operations or immediate occupancy after an earthquake.

 An enhanced performance level is achieved by following both structural and 

nonstructural code requirements for essential facilities. Enhanced performance could be 

achieved for nonessential facilities by using some or all of these additional 

requirements.

 Enhanced performance might also be provided by developing project-specific seismic 

design criteria to meet the needs of a particular organization (see sidebar on previous 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-6

page). These criteria should be developed and implemented by design professionals 

with specific experience with performance-based design. Engineering analysis 

methods, such as those using nonlinear or push-over techniques, are available that can 

be used to check whether or not the design meets the target performance objectives.

It is important that the performance objectives be clear from the outset, so that the owner and 

design professionals are in agreement on what they are trying to achieve. Design and 

construction contracts must all include language describing the responsibilities of the 

designers, contractors, subcontractors, specialty subcontractors, vendors, and inspectors to 

provide systems and details that will meet the project objectives; this is particularly important if 

these are enhanced performance objectives that are higher than for a “code design.” Budgets 

and schedules will all have to take into account the resources and time required to achieve the 

project goals.

5.2 Design Considerations

The selection of design solutions must be consistent with the scope and objectives selected for 

the project. For all items covered by the code provisions, design solutions must meet or exceed

the applicable building codes and standards, such as ASCE/SEI 7-10. For the engineering 

consultants engaged to provide design solutions, the selection of seismic force levels, design 

coefficients, and design methods depends upon the Seismic Design Category. The design team 

and owner need to be clear about the performance objectives and the level of seismic 

protection that will be targeted. There may be items that are not explicitly covered by the code, 

for which some design solutions can be implemented by the owner or the initial tenants without 

consideration of the building code and without engineering expertise.

Specific design solutions for nonstructural items fall into three broad categories. These were 

described in Chapter 4 and are repeated here because the application is somewhat different for 

new construction.

NON-ENGINEERED (NE): These are typically simple, generic details or common sense 

measures that can be implemented by a skilled laborer or by maintenance personnel 

using standard items from a hardware store. Although these solutions are not 

appropriate for essential facilities, they may be useful for the restraint of items not 

directly covered by code provisions, such as furniture and contents that lie below the 

code threshold but that may still fall and injure occupants. Some of these solutions 

might be implemented by the owner and the original design team; others by the initial 

tenants.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-7

PRESCRIPTIVE (PR): Prescriptive details are available in the public domain and have been 

engineered to meet or exceed code requirements for a set of common conditions; they

can be used directly in many situations. While there are only a limited number of these 

details currently available, we anticipate that more such details will be developed as 

engineers, architects, and specialty contractors become more familiar with the new 

ASCE/SEI 7-10 requirements for nonstructural components. Some of the prescriptive 

details have been developed for hospitals, schools and residences in California, and 

have been successfully implemented for many years. Examples are provided in Chapter 

6.

ENGINEERING REQUIRED (ER): These are nonstructural anchorage details specifically 

developed by a design professional on a case-by-case basis for a specific set of 

conditions. Design methods and design coefficients are selected based on the 

Importance Factor and Seismic Design Category, per IBC 2012 and ASCE/SEI 7-10, as 

discussed in Section 5.3.1 below. Higher design forces and more complex engineering 

methods may be required to meet performance objectives higher than those embodied 

in the building code provisions. 

5.3 Building code requirements 

5.3.1 2012 Edition of the International building code (IBC 2012)

Structures designed to the provisions of IBC 2012 are expected to have a low likelihood of 

collapse in the very rare seismic event defined as the Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered 

Earthquake (MCER) ground motion. Nonstructural components and systems are designed to 

protect occupants from life threatening damage or failures of nonstructural elements in an 

unusual but less rare earthquake ground motion, which is referred to as the Design Earthquake 

ground motion (defined as two-thirds of the MCER). There is no implicit performance goal 

associated with the MCER for nonstructural components in IBC 2012.

The current code requirements for nonstructural components are contained in ASCE/SEI 7-10 

Section 13 which is adopted by reference in IBC 2012 International Building Code (ICC, 2012). 

In recent years, engineers, researchers, and code committees have paid increasing attention to 

the issues of nonstructural performance. As a result, ASCE/SEI 7-10 now includes a 15-page 

chapter devoted to nonstructural components and contains design requirements for both forceand displacement-controlled nonstructural components. In contrast, the 1994 UBC Uniform 

Building Code (ICBO, 1994) covered the nonstructural requirements in less than two pages,

where the focus of the requirements was primarily on position retention of the components. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-8

The requirements are now more detailed and 

include explicit provisions for more items that 

apply to facilities that require postearthquake

functionality.

The performance expectations for noncritical 

nonstructural components (those with an 

importance factor, Ip =1.0) complying with 

ASCE/SEI 7-10 are:

• Minor earthquake ground motions –

minimal damage; not likely to affect 

functionality

• Moderate earthquake ground motions –

some damage that may affect 

functionality

• Design Earthquake ground motions –

major damage but significant falling 

hazards are avoided; likely loss of 

functionality.

Note that only the Design Earthquake ground 

motion is defined. Minor and moderate ground 

motions are qualitative descriptions. 

For architectural components, the component 

itself and the attachment of the component to 

the structure are considered in the seismic design. For mechanical and electrical systems and 

components, the design is limited to bracing and attachment to the structure, but the structural 

capacity of the component or system itself is not evaluated.

It is important to note that for some building owners or occupants, loss of functionality in the 

Design Earthquake (which is a likely performance result of a code minimum design) may not 

meet their needs. A higher level of performance can be achieved, by using the design 

requirements intended for essential structures.

The most stringent design provisions are driven by the Component Importance Factor, Ip. Any 

component with an Ip of 1.5 is considered a “Designated Seismic System” for which special 

provisions apply. This includes systems required to function for life safety purposes after an 

Alternative Methods 

The code formulas used to compute the 

design forces on nonstructural components 

in buildings contain a number of simplifying 

assumptions regarding damping, response 

amplification, possible resonance between 

the equipment and the structure, and the 

distribution of forces over the height of the 

structure. For some facilities, more 

sophisticated analyses may be warranted. 

The Tri-Service Manual “Seismic Design 

Guidelines for Essential Buildings” (TM 5-

810-10-1) describes an approximate floor 

response spectrum method that considers 

two earthquake levels and takes the multimode response of the building into 

account. Beyond that, an analytical model 

of the building can be used to generate 

floor response spectra at critical equipment 

locations, and these spectra can be used to 

determine the design forces for the 

nonstructural components and equipment.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-9

earthquake, including sprinkler systems and egress stairways and components used to convey, 

support or contain toxic, highly toxic, or explosive substances or hazardous materials. Risk 

Category IV structures are intended to be functional following a Design Earthquake; critical 

nonstructural components and equipment in such structures that are needed for continued 

operation following an earthquake are designed with Ip = 1.5. 

Components designed with Ip = 1.5, have a more robust attachment to the structure and are 

expected to remain in place sustaining little or no damage. When necessary, they are expected 

to function following an earthquake. The structural capacity of the component itself (stresses 

in a piping system, for example) are also evaluated. Active mechanical or electrical components 

that must remain operable following an earthquake are required to be seismically qualified, 

usually by shake table testing.

While the building code requires the higher importance factor in essential buildings only for 

components that must function following an earthquake, the higher importance factor will 

apply to most of the other components and equipment in the structure as well. Damage to 

vulnerable unbraced systems or equipment may disrupt operations following an earthquake 

even if they are not directly classified as essential to continued function. For nonessential and 

nonhazardous components, which cannot disrupt operations in the event of failure, the

requirements focus solely on supports and attachments. Additional distinctions in the design 

provisions are based on the Seismic Design Category, which ranges from A through F and 

depends on the Risk Category (I, II, III, or IV) and the ground motion parameters (SDS and SD1) 

generally as follows:

 Seismic Design Category A: All Risk Categories in areas with minimal seismicity; these 

facilities are exempt from the nonstructural requirements.

 Seismic Design Category B: Risk Categories I, II, and III in areas with low seismicity

 Seismic Design Category C: Risk Categories IV in areas with low seismicity and 

Occupancy Categories I, II and III in areas with moderate seismicity

 Seismic Design Category D: Risk Categories IV in areas with moderate seismicity and All 

Occupancy Categories in areas with high seismicity

 Seismic Design Category E: Risk Category I, II or III in areas of very high seismicity and 

near an active fault

 Seismic Design Category F: Risk Category IV in areas of very high seismicity and near an 

active fault

The seismic design forces are based on a variety of factors including the weight of the item, the 

ground acceleration and soil type, the flexibility of the component and its attachments, the 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-10

location in the building, and an importance factor. In general, design forces are higher for 

flexible components and flexible attachments; higher for items anchored in the upper levels of

the building; higher for items that contain hazardous materials, that are needed for life safety 

functions, or that are needed for continued operations of an essential facility; and lower for 

items with high deformability or high ductility.

Minimum and maximum limits on design forces are specified in the code. For a given 

acceleration and importance factor, the range from minimum design forces (0.3SDSIpWp) to 

maximum design forces (1.6SDSIpWp) is a factor slightly greater than 5. Thus, a flexible item 

anchored at the roof of a building might be designed for up to 5 times more force than a rigid 

item anchored at the base of the same building.

For items affected by differential movement and building story drift, the code requires that the 

design consider the relative lateral displacements both within and between structures. This will

affect the design of such components as pipe risers and precast panels, which are connected to 

adjacent floors, and piping, cable trays, ductwork, or architectural finishes crossing seismic 

joints. 

The code includes provisions for architectural, mechanical, and electrical components, 

supports, and attachments. Tables of design coefficients ap and Rp are provided for dozens of 

architectural, mechanical, and electrical components. Where design of nonstructural 

components or their supports and attachments is required by code, such design must be shown 

in construction documents prepared by a registered design professional. It is not sufficient to 

provide a note saying “All ceilings to be braced”; the bracing details must be included on the 

plans and covered in the project specifications.

Earlier provisions related to nonstructural components in the 2000 and 2003 IBC were 

concerned primarily with position retention, i.e., preventing components from becoming 

dislodged or overturned during an earthquake. ASCE/SEI 7-10 contains additional provisions 

related to postearthquake functionality that are applicable to components with hazardous 

contents and to equipment that is required to remain operational following an earthquake. For 

such designated seismic systems, where Ip is 1.5, certification based on approved shake table 

testing or experience data must be submitted to the authority having jurisdiction.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-11

The code contains a number of significant exemptions 

(see sidebar). Exemptions are granted for:

• Structures that are subject to low-level 

earthquake demands (accelerations and relative 

displacements). 

• Components that possess inherent strength 

and stability

• Items that are not part of the building 

architecture. This includes items such as 

temporary or movable items, equipment that is 

not permanently attached to the structure such 

as desktop items (computers, copiers, lamps, 

etc.), and most furniture, except permanent 

floor-supported storage cabinets, shelving or 

book stacks over 6 feet tall.

• Lighter nonstructural components that meet 

certain prescriptive requirements provided they 

are positively attached to the structure. 

Although the building code does not contain 

requirements for many components, such as furniture, 

and movable fixtures, equipment and contents that are 

supplied by tenants and building occupants, these may

still pose a significant risk in a strong earthquake, and 

consideration should be given to tethering or 

anchoring these items to reduce damage and 

disruption. For areas with moderate or high seismicity, 

the risks associated with many of these components 

can be reduced by following the suggestions contained 

in Chapter 6. 

5.3.2 Enforcement of Code 

Requirements

The effectiveness of model code requirements 

governing seismic design of nonstructural components 

depends on technically sound code provisions, proper 

Exemptions for Nonstructural 

Components 

The following items are specifically 

exempt from the ASCE/SEI 7-10 

seismic design requirements for 

nonstructural components: 

1. Most furniture and temporary 

or movable equipment.

2. Most components in Seismic 

Design Categories B and C 

(i.e., normal occupancies in 

areas of moderate seismicity). 

3. Mechanical and electrical 

components in Seismic Design 

Categories D, E and F, where 

all of the following apply:

a. Ip is equal to 1;

b. The component is 

positively attached to the 

structure;

c. Flexible connections are 

provided between the 

components and 

associated ductwork, 

piping and conduit are 

provided, and either

i. The component weighs 

400 lb or less and has a 

center of mass located 4 

feet or less above the 

adjacent floor level; or 

ii. The component weighs

20 pounds or less or, in 

the case of a distributed 

systems, weigh 5 

pounds per foot or less.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-12

application by designers, and code enforcement. Proper enforcement requires both 

comprehensive plan review and thorough construction inspection.

Plan Review

A comprehensive plan review includes determination of which items require seismic design; and 

an examination of the details for compliance with code requirements. Determining which items 

require seismic bracing involves a review of the construction drawings and specifications for 

each discipline (e.g., architectural, electrical, mechanical, plumbing, and other specialties). Few 

jurisdictions, if any, have resources devoted to such a comprehensive review of construction 

documents, and few jurisdictions have reviewers qualified to comprehensively evaluate 

compliance with all nonstructural code requirements.

An additional challenge in plan review arises from the many items that are commonly excluded 

from construction drawings, but are identified in the project specifications to be procured from 

the contractor on a “design-build” basis, or may be “owner furnished and installed.” Unless 

these items are carefully tracked and submitted for review, building department plan review can 

be nonexistent. Few jurisdictions have mechanisms in place to track and support ongoing 

review of nonstructural seismic bracing designs developed during construction. The 

responsibility matrices included in Appendix B are intended to aid project managers in the 

assignment and tracking of responsibility for nonstructural seismic protection. Used in 

conjunction with the specification section provided in Appendix A, the responsibility matrices 

can be used to facilitate compliance with nonstructural performance objectives. 

Construction Inspection

Enforcement of nonstructural seismic requirements is often lacking in the construction 

inspection process. Since details associated with seismic restraint of nonstructural components 

are not often fully shown on approved drawings, inspectors are left without the tools necessary 

to evaluate the adequacy of as-built installations. Historically, building inspectors have not 

been systematically trained to inspect the seismic restraint of nonstructural components, and 

few inspectors have sufficient experience to field review seismic restraints of nonstructural 

components that are not covered by a well known standard.

Many design professionals have the necessary training and experience to evaluate the adequacy 

of nonstructural seismic restraints; however, field observation of nonstructural component 

installations is often not included in their scope of work. As a result, it is not uncommon for 

nonstructural components to be installed without inspection.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-13

IBC 2012 contains requirements for special inspection of designated seismic systems. For most 

buildings, a written statement of special inspection must be prepared by a registered design 

professional. In buildings assigned to Seismic Design Categories C, D, E or F, the statement of 

special inspection must include seismic requirements for selected HVAC components, piping 

systems and electrical equipment. These code requirements are expected to increase the 

construction oversight of nonstructural installations and ultimately, to improve the seismic 

performance of nonstructural components.

5.3.3 Requirements for Contents

Building contents, such as furniture, kitchen and laundry equipment, movable partitions, and 

storage shelving are typically considered separate from the building and are usually the 

responsibility of the building occupant, not the owner or the original design team. Many such 

items are specifically exempted from seismic provisions in model building codes (e.g., 

furniture, floor-mounted equipment weighing less than 400 pounds, and suspended items 

weighing less than 20 pounds). Regulated by the code or not, contents can pose an additional 

risk to safety and continuity of operations after an earthquake. The seismic protection of 

contents is dependent upon an understanding of potential seismic risk, followed by action to 

mitigate that risk on the part of business owners, homeowners, and tenants. The content 

examples included in Chapter 6 provide guidance for the bracing and anchorage of many 

common furniture and content items and can be adapted for other similar items. Building code 

provisions, guidance documents, or other resources listed in the references can be effectively 

applied to the design and installation of seismic protection measures for building contents.

5.3.4 Other Standards and Protocols

Many of the challenges related to design, plan review, and construction inspection are resolved 

when installation in accordance with nationally accepted standards becomes a construction 

standard of practice. For example, 2012 IBC accepts seismic restraint of fire protection systems 

designed in accordance with the National Fire Protection Association’s NFPA 13 Standard for the 

Installation of Sprinkler Systems (2010). As a result, verification of NPFA 13 compliance is a 

common occurrence in the field. Similar examples exist for other major nonstructural 

components: Installation of suspended ceilings in accordance with ASTM C635, ASTM C636,

and the Standard Practice for Installation of Ceiling Suspension Systems for Acoustical Tile and 

Lay-in Panels in Areas Subject to Earthquake Ground Motions (ASTM E580/E 580M-09a) is 

included in the IBC by reference.; Selected additional industry standards are listed in Appendix 

B of the ATC-69 State-of-the-Art and Practice Report (ATC, 2008).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-14

Qualification testing is an acceptable alternative to the analytical requirements of the code. IBC 

2012 accepts seismic qualification based on nationally recognized testing procedures, such as 

the, ICC-ES AC 156 Acceptance Criteria for Seismic Qualification by Shake-Table Testing of 

Nonstructural Components and Systems by the International Code Council Evaluation Service. 

Standard 171-2008 Method of Test of Seismic Restraint Devices for HVAC&R Equipment

(ANSI/ASHRAE, 2008) provides additional test methods used in the HVAC industry. Selected 

additional testing protocols, such as FEMA 461 report, Interim Testing Protocols for 

Determining the Seismic Performance Characteristics of Structural and Nonstructural 

Components, are listed in Appendix B of the ATC-69 State-of-the-Art and Practice Report and 

repeated here in Appendix F.

5.3.5 Validation and Refinement of Code Requirements

Seismic design requirements for structural systems have evolved over time as a result of 

documented earthquake performance and laboratory testing. Seismic design requirements for 

nonstructural components have also evolved over time; however, comprehensive evaluation of 

these requirements, either by testing or through postearthquake observations, has been 

limited. Future earthquakes might be able to provide the information necessary to validate or 

refine current design requirements, but comprehensive and systematic postearthquake

documentation of nonstructural performance is needed. Obstacles to gathering such 

perishable data will need to be overcome before a quantitative review of nonstructural seismic 

design requirements can become possible.

5.4 Responsibility and Project Management

Who is responsible for ensuring that nonstructural components are protected from earthquake 

damage and that design solutions are consistent with the chosen performance objectives? Who 

is responsible for the design of which types of components? Who provides oversight for the 

design of the many, potentially interconnected nonstructural items? Who resolves conflicts in 

cases where different design solutions in different disciplines are incompatible? Who provides 

oversight for the installation, and inspection for all of the nonstructural items? 

Architects, mechanical, electrical and civil or structural engineers, interior designers, landscape 

architects, construction managers, contractors, specialty subcontractors, equipment

manufacturers, vendors, inspectors, testing agencies, plan reviewers, developers, owners, 

tenants – all these parties may be involved. Coordination of this effort is not a trivial task; the 

issue of nonstructural seismic risk reduction must be part of the initial planning, so that 

decisions regarding the structural system, the architectural finishes, the MEP systems, the 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-15

landscaping immediately adjacent to the 

building, and the equipment purchases are all 

made in accordance with a unified plan that is 

consistent with the performance goals and the 

project objectives. It may be advisable to assign 

a dedicated design professional to the oversight 

of the design and installation of the 

nonstructural items. 

Questions such as the following must be 

addressed from the beginning:

 Would a seismically isolated building provide 

the best and most reliable option for 

protecting the costly equipment in this

facility and allow for continued operations?

 Would a stiff structural system or a flexible 

structural system be more compatible with 

the performance objectives for the 

nonstructural items? Can this structural 

system be adapted for the architectural 

design? Can the architectural design be 

adapted to a more appropriate structural 

design?

 If the structural system is flexible, will the 

architect specify flexible finishes and avoid 

the use of adhered veneers, marble panels, 

stucco soffits or other items likely to be 

damaged by inter-story drift?

 If the architect specifies exterior adhered 

veneer, can the landscape architect provide 

a wide planting strip around the building 

perimeter to protect against falling hazards? 

Will the architect be willing to specify 

something other than the adhered veneer 

above exits?

Potential Issues for Specialized Facilities

The following are additional considerations 

for highly specialized or essential facilities:

 For facilities that depend on unique or 

specialized equipment that would take 

a long lead time to replace, is there a 

way to incorporate a secondary or 

backup system into the design that 

would reduce potential outages if the 

equipment were damaged? Would 

higher design forces or base-isolation 

reduce the equipment damage? Is there 

a need to provide budget and space to 

stock spare parts or spare equipment?

 For facilities that must remain 

operational following an earthquake, 

does the design incorporate elements 

that would be needed in the event of a 

catastrophe with lengthy infrastructure 

outages? The hospital that fared the 

best following Hurricane Katrina in New 

Orleans had the following elements in 

place prior to the hurricane: reserve 

tanks with water to flush toilets, diesel 

fuel to run the emergency generators, 

and gasoline for company vehicles. 

 The following questions should also be 

considered: Would space be needed to 

provide temporary accommodations for 

employees? Would a forklift, a 

backhoe, or other construction supplies 

and equipment for emergency repairs, 

backup communications equipment 

such as ham radios, emergency food 

supplies, and a designated place for 

sanitary and waste disposal be needed? 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-16

 For facilities that need to provide certification for specified MEP equipment, is certified 

equipment already available that is appropriate for the facility, or will money need to be 

budgeted for detailed analysis or shake table testing?

 At what point in the design process will information be available from the structural 

engineer regarding the behavior of the structural frame, such as inter-story drifts and other 

information required for the nonstructural design?

 Since lateral forces are higher on the roof, what MEP items are required to be located at the 

roof level and what items can be relocated lower in the building? 

 Are there architectural finishes available that would facilitate the inspection of earthquake 

damage? Can hatches, openings, or removable panels be provided that would make it 

easier to inspect structural framing, precast panel connections, piping, or ducts after an 

earthquake and thus, get occupants back into the building sooner? 

5.4.1 Example: Responsibility Matrix

New construction projects typically involve the coordination of numerous parties with 

overlapping responsibilities and competing or conflicting interests; adding a comprehensive 

program to brace and anchor nonstructural components and contents makes a new 

construction project even more complex. Assigning clear responsibility for each nonstructural 

component and tracking the design, peer review, plan review, installation, observation, and 

special inspection is very important. 

Figure 4.4.1-1 shows an example of a responsibility matrix that could be readily adapted by 

listing the nonstructural components for a particular project. This sample format can be used 

to track who is responsible for design, design review, installation, and observation. If peer 

review or special inspection is required, these could be added to the table. More 

comprehensive responsibility matrices, developed for each Seismic Design Category and 

compliance with ASCE/SEI 7-10, are provided in Appendix B. These matrices are intended to

serve as templates for use by project managers in assigning and tracking design, construction 

and inspection responsibilities. They can be used in conjunction with the specification provided 

in Appendix A and are intended to serve as a roadmap for implementation. Successful use of 

these tools starts with development of a comprehensive project-specific list of nonstructural 

components to be addressed.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-17

5.4.2 Example: Seismic Code Block, Saint Louis county, Missouri

When the 2003 International Building Code (ICC, 2003) was adopted in Saint Louis County, 

Missouri, enforcement of the seismic requirements for nonstructural components was 

complicated by varying interpretations by design professionals, code compliance plan 

reviewers, contractors and building inspectors. In response, the County established rules and 

regulations intended to provide a common set of standards for compliance with the Building 

Code. A cornerstone of the rules and regulations that were adopted is the requirement for a 

“Seismic Code Block” on the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing drawings (Figures 5.4.2-1 and

5.4.2-2). The seismic code block requires that the engineer(s) responsible for the design of the 

mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems identify the location of the details for anchorage 

and sway bracing of equipment and system components on the plans, or indicate that they will 

be furnished by subsequent submission, which will be reviewed by the engineer responsible for 

the design. Saint Louis County requires accountability for the design and documentation of 

nonstructural bracing requirements. Installation and building inspection is facilitated by the 

availability of project-specific bracing details. Use of the Seismic Code Block on all projects 

could significantly enhance the enforcement of code requirements for seismic bracing of 

nonstructural components and systems. The Saint Louis County model is expected to serve as 

a model for other jurisdictions throughout the country.

Figure 5.4.2-1 Seismic Code Block worksheet.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 5: Nonstructural Risk Reduction for New Buildings Page 5-18

Figure 5.4.2-2 Seismic Code Block worksheet.

The code block above, adopted in 2006, only addresses MEP components that are explicitly 

covered on the construction documents. Nevertheless, it provides a model for keeping track of 

these items. The project architect or design professional responsible for the general oversight 

of the nonstructural protective measures could expand this table to cover the various 

architectural, FF&E, and content items that are within the control of the original design team 

and use this as a tool for tracking the design and plan review for these items. Revised May 

2010, the St. Louis County Rules and Regulations include requirements for architectural and 

MEP components and provide a standardized form to be used to track construction inspections 

(see http://www.co.stlouis.mo.us/YourGovernment/CountyDepartments/PublicWorks/Documents/PublicNotices/#Sei

smic Notices). This document includes examples of forms filled out as intended, with each 

equipment item provided a separate line item in the code block. As with any tool, the seismic 

code block is only effective if the design team provides a complete list of the relevant items 

covered by the code provisions.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-1

6. SEISMIC PROTECTION OF NONSTRUCTURAL 

COMPONENTS

6.1 Protective Measures

Reducing nonstructural hazards requires a combination of common sense measures and 

additional protective measures that involve the installation of seismic anchorage and bracing. 

These measures are typically applied on a component basis, or on a systems basis when 

continuity of service is desired. The protective measures recommended in this Chapter will go 

a long way toward reducing the earthquake hazards from nonstructural components. There are 

additional technologies available to reduce seismic forces and deformations that cause

earthquake damage at the building level. Seismic isolation (commonly also referred to as base 

isolation) is one such technology that can be used to protect both structural systems and 

nonstructural components and contents from damage by altering the building response to 

earthquakes. While this chapter focuses on individual components, the performance of system 

depends on the collective behavior of the components comprising the system. 

6.1.1 Common Sense Measures

A facility survey may identify components that represent a high or moderate risk in their 

present location but that could readily be relocated or rearranged, in order to reduce the 

potential risk. The answers to the following questions may help identify common sense

measures available to reduce many of these risks:

 Which areas of the building have a higher occupant load and hence a potentially higher 

life safety risk?

 Are there heavy, unstable items currently located near a desk or bed, which could be 

moved?

 Are the exits and exit pathways clear, or are there items that could block doors, 

corridors, or stairways if they were to fall?

 What is the probability that someone will be injured by falling objects?

 Can items no longer serving a useful function be removed?

 Are all hazardous materials stored properly?

 Which items can be relocated to prevent possible injury and do not need to be anchored, 

in order to prevent damage or loss?

 If something slides or falls, in what direction is it likely to move?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-2

 Is a suspended item currently hanging where it may impact a window, wall, or another 

item?

While the answer to these questions may not always be obvious, some simple steps may go a 

long way toward reducing the related nonstructural risks. The primary investment here is the 

time required to relocate furniture, reshelf items, or rearrange hazardous chemicals. For 

instance:

 Tall or heavy objects can be relocated, so that they cannot block an exit or fall onto a 

desk or bed.

 Shelved items might be rearranged so that heavier items are near the bottom and 

lighter ones are near the top.

 Falling hazards, such as curios, potted plants, and flower vases can be relocated, so

that they will not fall on a bed or desk.

 Hanging objects can be relocated to a place where they will not impact one another or a 

window.

 Incompatible chemicals can be separated, in order to prevent mixing if the containers 

should break. 

 Excess supplies or inventory can be stored in their original shipping containers until 

ready for use, in order to reduce the possibility of breakage. 

 Rarely used files or materials can be moved to an offsite storage facility or be disposed 

of.

 Important electronic files should all be backed up to an offsite facility in a different 

geographic area, which would not be affected by the same earthquake.

6.1.2 Nonstructural Component Protection Measures

There are many techniques available to reduce potential nonstructural earthquake damage. 

Possible upgrade schemes might include one or more of the following seismic protection

measures: 

 Using anchor bolts to provide rigid anchorage to a structural floor or wall

 Bracing the item to a structural floor or wall

 Providing a tether or safety cable to limit the range of movement if the item falls or 

swings

 Installing bracing or anchors for architectural appendages such as chimneys, parapets, 

canopies, marquees, or signs; anchoring masonry veneer and cornices
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-3

 Providing stops, bumpers or snubbers to 

limit the range of movement if the item 

is on vibration isolators or can slide or 

swing

 Providing flexible connections for piping 

and conduit where they cross seismic 

joints or connect to rigidly mounted 

equipment

 Attaching contents to a shelf, desktop, 

or countertop

 Providing base isolation or seismic 

shock absorbers for individual pieces of 

vital equipment 

Some of these methods are designed to protect 

the functional integrity of a particular item;

some are designed merely to reduce the 

consequences of failure. It is important to 

understand the applicability and limitations of 

the various upgrade schemes and to select an 

appropriate scheme for a particular item in a 

specific context. It is also important to select 

upgrade details that are consistent with the 

program objectives: measures required for 

immediate occupancy or continued operations

are typically more complex than those required 

solely to reduce falling hazards. Measures used 

to restrain new items may differ from those 

used to restrain existing items, particularly if

the restraint for the existing items is intended 

to meet only limited objectives and to reduce 

falling hazards. Critical and expensive items, 

library and museum collections, hospitals, 

essential facilities, laboratories, and industrial 

clean rooms may all require special attention.

Requirements for Postearthquake 

Operations 

Facilities to be upgraded to Immediate 

Occupancy or Operational

performance level followinga major 

earthquake may require extensive 

modifications and implementation of 

an ongoing risk reduction program. In 

order to achieve these enhanced 

objectives, any or all of the following 

elements may be needed in order to 

provide an appropriate level of 

nonstructural protection: 

 Specialized engineering expertise 

from design professionals 

experienced with nonstructural 

seismic protection

 Higher design forces than those 

required by code for the basic 

safety objective

 Experienced specialty contractors

 Special construction inspection

 Load-rated hardware and specialty 

seismic restraint items

 Active equipment that is certified 

by the vendor to remain 

operational either by, shake table 

testing, or experience data

 Components with hazardous 

contents that are certified to 

maintain containment either by 

analysis, shake table testing, or 

experience data

 Equipment or piping with special 

design details such as dampers or 

base isolation

 

 

 

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-4

Some structural upgrades may also be required in order to meet the operational objectives such 

as larger seismic gaps to prevent pounding between adjacent structures, or stiffer structural 

systems such as shear walls to avoid excessive distortion of the structural framing. Structural 

measures to reduce seismic hazards are addressed in ASCE 31-03 and ASCE 41-06 but are 

beyond the scope this document.

6.1.3 building Protection Measures

It is possible to greatly reduce nonstructural damage and improve the probability of operability 

following an earthquake by reducing the earthquake demands that nonstructural components 

are subjected to. Conventional seismic design of building structures is based on the concept of 

increasing resistance against earthquake forces through the use of shear walls, braced frames,

or moment resisting frames. Stiffer building systems often result in higher floor accelerations

that are potentially damaging to many nonstructural components. More flexible buildings tend 

to have increased interstory drift that is potentially damaging to other nonstructural 

components. One building design concept that has been successfully used to resist 

earthquakes and greatly reduce both acceleration and drift demands (by factors of 4 or more)

and therefore corresponding reducing or eliminating damage to nonstructural components is 

seismic isolation. Both floor accelerations and interstory drift are reduced in seismically 

isolated buildings through the use of specially designed interfaces that are typically located at 

the structure base. These interfaces take advantage of the properties of known earthquake 

ground motion and trade off significant displacement demands at the base of the structure with 

reduced acceleration and structure deformation above the base by significantly increasing the 

fundamental period of the building system. Seismic isolation essentially decouples the building

response from the earthquake ground motions in a controlled manner.

The benefits of seismic isolation have been demonstrated in recent large earthquakes including 

the 1994 Northridge, 2010 Chile and 2011 Japan Earthquakes. The benefits have been most 

recently observed in full-scale testing of a 5-story building conducted on the large outdoor 

shake table at University of California San Diego in 2012. In this project (in part sponsored by 

the National Science Foundation and FEMA), a full-scale reinforced concrete building was 

constructed and outfitted with an array of nonstructural components included cladding, interior 

partitions, mechanical and electrical equipment, stairs and elevator and floors dedicated to 

hospital facilities, servers facilities, laboratories and residential areas. The building was tested 

with identical strong earthquake motions with and without seismically isolators. The building 

response with isolators was dramatically reduced with seismic isolators as compared to building 

response without isolators. More data, papers, reports, and videos from the testing project are 

expected to be made available in 2013 and 2014.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-5

6.2 Nonstructural Component examples

The tables in this chapter and the checklists and risk ratings in the appendices all have similar 

numbering; illustrated examples are provided for many, but not all, of the components listed. 

The components addressed herein have been grouped under three major headings:

 Architectural Components

 Mechanical, Electrical & Plumbing (MEP) Components

 Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment (FF&E) and Contents

Each of these three major categories includes a number of subcategories. The checklists and 

risk ratings in Appendices D and E address all of the subcategories; examples are also provided 

here for each of the components listed. This document has been prepared as a web-based 

document with the idea that additional examples may be added in the future.

The nonstructural component examples typically consist of the following elements:

 Typical Causes of Damage: A brief description relevant to the particular item.

o Damage Examples: The photographs presented here cover a variety of situations 

and have been taken over a 39-year period. Photographs from the 1971 San 

Fernando Earthquake generally show damage to components that were not 

restrained, while some of the more recent photographs depict damage to 

components that appeared to be braced or anchored but whose bracing and 

anchoring details were apparently inadequate to resist the severity of the 

shaking. Photos from the 2010 Haiti, Chile, Eureka, California, Baja California, 

and Christchurch, New Zealand Earthquakes have been included, illustrating the 

ongoing problems with nonstructural performance.

 Seismic Mitigation Considerations: A description of issues relevant to the mitigation of 

the particular item. 

o Mitigation Examples: The photographs presented here show braced and 

anchored components. Most are examples of properly anchored components; 

some show improper installations with an explanation of the problem(s). 

o Mitigation Details: Usually one or more suggested details that can be used to 

reduce the seismic vulnerability of the item. These details are not engineering 

drawings; in general, they have been drawn with shading to represent the 

appearance of the properly anchored item. The protection measures or seismic 

anchorage details are classified as Non-Engineered (NE), Prescriptive (PR), or 

Engineering Required (ER); these terms are described below. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-6

6.2.1 Typical Mitigation Details

Non-Engineered (NE) Details

These are simple, generic seismic protection details that do not require engineering design to 

determine the requirements. Some examples of types of nonstructural protection that can be 

designed and implemented without an engineer include:

 Restraints for tenant-supplied movable equipment and furniture

 Restraints for cabinet doors and drawers

 Restraints for shelved items

For these types of elements, generic restraint details are usually sufficient to provide adequate 

protection. The earthquake forces on these elements are generally small compared to the 

strength of the restraint methods that are usually recommended. Together with the installation 

guidelines at the end of this chapter, enough information is provided to enable someone 

without specialized expertise in the field to install the restraint shown using common tools and 

readily available materials. Many vendors now sell off-the-shelf seismic restraints that can be 

used for these Non-Engineered details; check the internet for available hardware.

There are limitations to the use of non-engineered seismic protection measures: this method 

should only be used for elements that are relatively lightweight. Non-engineered restraints 

should not be used for elements that are considered critical, such as emergency power systems,

large inventories of hazardous materials, or in hospitals, where immediate postearthquake

operations are desired. 

Prescriptive (PR) Details

These mitigation solutions rely on standard restraint details that have been previously 

developed and can be implemented without the need for an engineer. Together with the 

installation guidelines at the end of the chapter, enough information is provided to enable a 

contractor or skilled individual to install the restraints shown.

Examples of elements that can be mitigated by prescriptive methods include:

 Water heaters, up to 100 gallons capacity

 Suspended acoustic ceilings, up to 4 pounds per square foot in weight

While the underlying design of the prescriptive details has been reviewed by experienced

engineers, some judgment is required on the part of the user to ensure that their use is 

appropriate for the situation. For instance, the ceiling bracing detail shown may not be 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-7

appropriate for ceilings weighing more than 4 pounds per square foot; the user will need to 

verify the weight of the ceiling in question.

Engineering Required (ER) Details

Bracing, anchorage, or restraint details for these components require design by an engineer or

design professional experienced in the seismic design of nonstructural elements. The details 

provided in this document are schematic details showing common solutions for the 

components in question. These figures do not contain sufficient information for installation; 

they are provided primarily as an illustration of the required scope of work and the necessary 

elements for proper seismic restraint. Information regarding the size and spacing of bolts, type 

and size of steel shapes, appropriate configuration, required restraint capacity, and capacity of 

the structural elements to which they are attached needs to be determined by an engineer, or in 

some cases, by a specialty contractor. 

The designation Engineering Required has been used for components for which the nonengineered approach is most likely to be ineffective. The recommendation of this guide is that 

design professionals be retained to evaluate the vulnerability of these components and to 

design appropriate anchorage or restraint details, particularly when safety is an issue. As 

stated earlier, this recommendation may apply to all components of specialized facilities such 

as hospitals and emergency operations or communications centers, where interruption or loss 

of function is unacceptable. Recent experience has shown many instances in which fire 

sprinkler and other water lines, HVAC equipment, emergency generators, water tanks, ceilings, 

parapets, glazing, and such were damaged when subjected to severe shaking and failed to 

perform as expected. The lesson learned from this experience is that the protection of many 

items, particularly MEP equipment and architectural components in facilities that are expected 

to be functional after an earthquake, or could be immediately restored to operation by routine 

means, is a complex undertaking that should be addressed by engineers and architects with 

specific expertise in this area. As a result, most MEP systems and architectural components 

have been given the designation Engineering Required. Several of the items listed under FF&E

and contents have also been given this designation. 

The following table lists the subcategories and the component examples included in the 

following sections:
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-8

Table 6.2.1-1 List of Nonstructural Components 

Subcategory Example Component Type Type of 

Detail 

SECTION 6.3 ARCHITECTURAL COMPONENTS 

6.3.1 Exterior Wall Components 

6.3.1.1 Adhered veneer ER

6.3.1.2 Anchored veneer ER

6.3.1.3 Prefabricated panels ER

6.3.1.4 Glazed exterior wall system ER

6.3.1.5 Glass Blocks ER

6.3.2 Interior Partitions 

6.3.2.1 Heavy ER

6.3.2.2 Light ER

6.3.2.3 Glazed ER

6.3.3 Interior Veneers 

6.3.3.1 Stone and Tile ER

6.3.4 Ceilings 

6.3.4.1 Suspended lay-in tile ceiling systems PR

6.3.4.2 Ceilings applied directly to structure NE

6.3.4.3 Suspended heavy ceilings PR

6.3.5 Parapets and Appendages 

6.3.5.1 Unreinforced masonry parapets ER

6.3.6 Canopies, Marquees, and Signs 

6.3.6.1 Canopies, marquees, and signs ER

6.3.7 Chimneys and Stacks 

6.3.7.1 Unreinforced masonry chimney ER

6.3.8 Stairways 

6.3.8.1 Stairways ER

6.3.9 Freestanding Walls and Fences 

6.3.9.1 Freestanding masonry wall or fence PR

SECTION 6.4 MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, & PLUMBING (MEP) 

COMPONENTS 

 

6.4.1 Mechanical Equipment 

6.4.1.1 Boilers, furnaces, pumps, and chillers (HVAC wet ER

6.4.1.2 General manufacturing and process machinery ER

6.4.1.3 HVAC equipment with vibration isolation ER
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-9

Subcategory Example Component Type Type of 

Detail 

6.4.1.4 HVAC equipment without external vibration 

isolation 

ER

6.4.1.5 HVAC equipment suspended in-line with ductwork ER

6.4.1.6 Suspended equipment ER

6.4.2 Storage Tanks and Water Heaters 

6.4.2.1 Structurally supported tanks and vessels ER

6.4.2.2 Flat bottom tanks and vessels ER

6.4.2.3 Compressed gas cylinders NE

6.4.2.4 Water heaters PR

6.4.3 Pressure Piping 

6.4.3.1 Suspended pressure piping ER

6.4.3.2 In-line valves and pumps ER

6.4.3.3 Flexible connections, expansion joints, and seismic ER

6.4.3.4 Pipe risers ER

6.4.3.5 Floor-mounted supports ER

6.4.3.6 Roof-mounted supports ER

6.4.3.7 Wall-mounted supports ER

6.4.3.8 Penetrations ER

6.4.4 Fire Protection Piping 

6.4.4.1 Suspended fire protection piping ER

6.4.5 Fluid Piping, not Fire Protection 

6.4.5.1 Hazardous materials piping ER

6.4.5.2 Nonhazardous materials piping ER

6.4.6 Ductwork 

6.4.6.1 Suspended ductwork ER

6.4.6.2 Air diffusers NE, ER

6.4.7 Electrical and Communications Equipment 

6.4.7.1 Control panels, motor control centers, and ER

6.4.7.2 Emergency generator ER

6.4.7.3 Transformers ER

6.4.7.4 Batteries and battery rack ER

6.4.7.5 Photovoltaic (PV) power systems ER

6.4.7.6 Communications Antennae ER

6.4.8 Electrical and Communications Distribution 

6.4.8.1 Electrical raceways, conduit, and cable trays ER

6.4.8.2 Electrical distribution panels ER

6.4.9 Light Fixtures 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-10

Subcategory Example Component Type Type of 

Detail 

6.4.9.1 Recessed lighting PR

6.4.9.2 Surface-mounted lighting PR

6.4.9.3 Pendant light fixtures NE

6.4.9.4 Heavy light fixtures NE

6.4.10 Elevators and Escalators 

6.4.10.1 Hydraulic elevator ER

6.4.10.2 Traction elevator ER

6.4.10.3 Escalators ER

6.4.11 Conveyors 

6.4.11.1 Conveyors ER

SECTION 6.5 FURNITURE, FIXTURES, & EQUIPMENT (FF&E) 

COMPONENTS 

 

6.5.1 Storage racks 

6.5.1.1 Light duty shelving NE, ER

6.5.1.2 Industrial storage racks ER

6.5.2 Bookcases, Shelving 

6.5.2.1 Bookshelves NE

6.5.2.2 Library and other shelving ER

6.5.3 Computer and Communication Equipment 

6.5.3.1 Computer access floors and equipment ER

6.5.3.2 Computer and communication racks NE

6.5.3.3 Desktop computers and accessories NE

6.5.3.4 Televisions and video monitors, wall-mounted NE

6.5.4 Hazardous materials storage 

6.5.4.1 Hazardous materials storage NE

6.5.5 Miscellaneous FF&E 

6.5.5.1 File cabinets NE

6.5.5.2 Demountable partitions NE

6.5.5.3 Miscellaneous furniture and fixtures NE

6.5.6 Miscellaneous Contents 

6.5.6.1 Shelf-mounted items NE

6.5.6.2 Desktop, countertop items NE

6.5.6.3 Fragile artwork NE

6.5.6.4 Fire extinguisher and cabinet NE
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-11

6.3 Architectural Components

6.3.1 Exterior Wall Components

6.3.1.1 Adhered Veneer

Adhered veneers are typically thin materials such as tile, masonry, stone, terra cotta, ceramic 

tile or stucco that are attached to a backing substrate using an adhesive. These may pose a 

significant falling hazard. The risk to life safety rises significantly for thicker, heavier veneers.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Building code provisions for adhered veneers are prescriptive, and have not changed 

substantially since the late 1960’s. The current provisions are found in TMS402-

11/ACI530/ASCE 5-11, Building Code Requirements for Masonry Structures (ACI, 2011). The 

code limits the thickness, size, and weight of adhered veneers.

 The code specifies minimum shear strength between the adhered veneer unit and the 

backing substrate. Performance of adhered veneers depends on the adhesion of the 

veneer to the backing substrate.

 Out-of-plane deflections of walls with brittle finishes (including adhered veneers) under 

wind or seismic loads are limited to the span length, L, divided by 240 (L/240). It 

should be noted that this deflection limit is not sufficient to prevent cracking of the 

veneer, and many industry groups recommend more conservative limits. For example, 

the Tile Council of America recommends a limit of L/360, and Brick Industry Association 

recommends limiting out-of-plane deflections to a range between L/600 and L/720. 

The less conservative deflection criteria in the building code reflect the assumption that 

even if the veneer cracks under lateral load, safety performance should be adequate if 

there is a good bond between the veneer and the substrate.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007) classifies adhered 

veneers as primarily deformation sensitive. Adhered veneer is subject to the requirements of 

ASCE/SEI 41-06 when:

 The performance level is Immediate Occupancy or Life Safety.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-12

 The performance level is Hazards Reduced and heavy veneer is located over areas of 

public access or egress.

Acceptance criteria focus on limiting the in-plane and out-of-plane deflections of the anchored 

veneer.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Adhered veneers are generally deformation sensitive in-plane and out-of-plane and 

may crack or become dislodged due to deformation of the backing substrate. Adhered 

veneers placed directly over shear walls or structural elements that are designed to 

undergo large deformations may be particularly vulnerable.

 Poorly adhered veneer may come loose due to direct acceleration out-of-plane. This 

may be a particular problem where the adhesive bond has deteriorated due to water 

intrusion or degradation of the backing substrate.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-13

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.1.1-1 Failure of adhered masonry veneer at the Atascadero City Hall in the 2003 

magnitude-6.5 San Simeon Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Mike Mahoney, 

FEMA).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-14

Figure 6.3.1.1-2 Close-up of failed adhered veneer. (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP 

Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-15

Figure 6.3.1.1-3 Cracked and spalled adhered veneer reveals incipient structural damage to 

concrete piers in Viña del Mar following the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile 

Earthquake. In this case, the areas of structural and nonstructural damage 

coincide; the adhered veneer remained intact over portions of the shear wall 

that did not deform significantly (Photo courtesy of Santiago Pujol, Purdue 

University).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-16

Figure 6.3.1.1-4 Failed adhered veneer fallen from parapet in Santiago following the 2010 

magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake. (Photos courtesy of Antonio Iruretagoyena, 

Rubén Boroscheck & Associates)

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Repair any cracked or loose veneer; repair any damage or deterioration of the backing 

substrate.

 Remove adhered veneer above exits or pedestrian walkways, especially larger units if 

they are mounted above 10 feet.

 Design a structural canopy to resist the weight and impact of falling veneer; particularly 

above exits or walkways.

 Restrict pedestrian access below the veneer by providing a barrier or wide landscaping 

strip.

 Provide positive connections to attach the veneer to the structure; see Figure 6.3.1.2-5,

in the Anchored Veneer example or Figure 6.3.3.1-3 in the Interior Veneer example.

 If the expected seismic building drifts are substantial and replacement of the veneer is 

an option, consider substituting anchored veneer for adhered veneer. Anchored veneer 

can be designed accommodate larger story drifts.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-17

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.1.1-5 Landscaping strip restricts pedestrian access adjacent to adhered veneer façade.

Larger units used within lower 6 feet; smaller units used above (Photo courtesy 

of Cynthia Perry, BFP Engineers).

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-18

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.3.1.1-6 Adhered veneer (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-19

6.3 Architectural Components

6.3.1 Exterior Wall Components

6.3.1.2 Anchored Veneer 

Anchored veneers are typically masonry, stone or stone slab units that are attached to the 

structure by mechanical means. These units and their connections must be designed to 

accommodate the anticipated seismic drift; otherwise they may pose a significant falling 

hazard.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

2012 IBC, International Building Code, (ICC, 2012) and TMS 402-11/ACI 530/ASCE 5-11, 

Building Code Requirements for Masonry Structures (ACI, 2011) contain a number of 

prescriptive requirements and limitations on the use of anchored veneer. These include height 

limits, drift limits, deflection limits, limits on the use of combustible structural supports such as 

wood, limits on basic wind speed, cavity size limits, mortar bed minimum thickness limits, and 

minimum tie spacing limits. 

 Seismic loads for anchored veneer are calculated using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design 

Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13.

 The seismic provisions for masonry veneer in TMS 402-11/ACI 530/ASCE 5-11 are 

organized based on the severity of potential ground shaking at the site. The 

requirements are cumulative, adding requirements in areas of higher risk. The 

provisions require the veneer to be isolated from the structure to prevent accidental 

loading and accommodate building deformation. Veneer anchors (sometimes referred 

to as ties) are designed to allow movement in the plane of the wall but resist out-ofplane forces. Spacing of the anchors is dependent on the weight of the veneer and the 

seismic load.

 Seismic provisions for stone veneer are found in Chapter 14 of the 2012 IBC.

 The structural element or backing supporting anchored veneer (usually a wall) must 

have sufficient strength and stiffness to support the vertical and lateral loads imposed

by the veneer. Many of the prescriptive limits for anchored veneer are triggered by the 

nature of the support backing. Veneer anchored directly to concrete or masonry walls 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-20

has the fewest limitations. Anchored veneer supported by wood or light frame steel 

walls has more restrictions. 

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007) classifies anchored

veneers as both acceleration and deformation sensitive. 

 Anchored veneer is subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06 when it is over 48 

inches above the ground or adjacent exterior area. and

o The performance level is Immediate Occupancy or Life Safety.

o The performance level is Hazards Reduced and heavy veneer is located over 

areas of public access or egress.

 Acceptance criteria focus on checking the anchorage of the veneer under seismic 

loading and limiting in-plane deflections.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Anchored veneers and their connections may be damaged by inertial forces and by 

building distortion; units located at corners and around openings are particularly 

vulnerable. 

 Rigid connections may distort or fracture if they do not have sufficient flexibility to 

accommodate the seismic drift; veneer units may crack, spall, or become completely 

dislodged and fall.

 Deterioration or corrosion of the mechanical connections is a significant concern; 

corroded connections may fail prematurely. Maintaining watertightness at joints is 

important for the longevity of the anchors. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-21

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.1.2-1 Fallen sandstone veneer as a result of a magnitude-4.4 earthquake in northern 

California. Post-earthquake investigation revealed missing dovetail anchors, 

missing pencil rods, and weak stone-to-mortar bond (Photo courtesy of Simpson 

Gumpertz and Heger).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-22

Figure 6.3.1.2-2 Fallen sandstone veneer as a result of a magnitude-4.4 earthquake (Photo 

courtesy of Simpson Gumpertz and Heger).

Figure 6.3.1.2-3 Rubble from failed anchored veneer as a result of the 1994 Northridge

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Robert Reitherman).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-23

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Check the applicable code requirements when considering seismic mitigation options.

 Existing veneer anchors should be checked periodically and corroded anchors should be 

replaced. Tie spacing should be compared with current code requirements to evaluate 

whether the anchorage is sufficient. Additional anchors may reduce the falling hazards.

 There are many vendors who supply veneer anchors; these are typically metal wires or 

clips with a positive attachment to the structural backing that are embedded in the 

veneer mortar bed. The seismic version of these anchors requires an additional 

horizontal wire placed in the mortar bed and attached to the anchor. Some examples of 

these seismic veneer anchors are shown, others can be found online.

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.1.2-4 Installation of stone veneer showing anchorage to steel dovetail clips which are 

fastened to steel studs bolted to the grouted reinforced masonry wall behind 

(Photo courtesy of Simpson Gumpertz and Heger).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-24

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.3.1.2-5 Anchored veneer (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-25

6.3 Architectural Components

6.3.1 Exterior Wall Components

6.3.1.3 Prefabricated Panels 

This category covers any type of prefabricated exterior panel that is attached to the perimeter

structural framing. These may be lightweight metal panels, glass fiber reinforced concrete 

panels (GFRC) supported by cold-formed steel framework, stone or tile supported by steel 

frames, or precast concrete panels that may have adhered or anchored veneer. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010)

focuses on providing adequate strength in the connections and providing a mechanism to 

accommodate building deformations. 

 Fasteners in the connections (bolts, welds, and items embedded in concrete or masonry) 

are designed for amplified forces to prevent premature failures in potentially brittle 

connection elements. 

 Prefabricated panels must be designed to accommodate the expected deformations of 

the structure. Story drift can be resisted by rocking or sway mechanisms. In a rocking 

mechanism, the corners of the panels are permitted to move vertically when the building 

deforms horizontally. In a sway mechanism, the panel is attached rigidly to one level, 

while attachment points on other levels of the structure allow lateral movement by 

sliding or bending of ductile steel elements. 

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies

prefabricated exterior panels as both acceleration and deformation sensitive. 

 Prefabricated exterior panels are subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06 when:

o The performance level is Immediate Occupancy or Life Safety in high, moderate, 

and low seismicity areas.

o The performance level is Hazards Reduced in high, moderate, and low seismicity 

areas and prefabricated panels are located over areas of public access or egress.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-26

 Acceptance criteria focus on performing a drift analysis to determine if the panels can 

accommodate the expected story drifts, and the anchorage of the panels under seismic 

loading.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Both lightweight and heavier panels may be damaged by deformations of the building 

frame. GFRC systems and other cladding units that have a cold-formed steel support 

frame are more tolerant of building deformations, due to the inherent flexibility of the 

steel support frame.

 Heavier cladding panels may be damaged by direct acceleration. 

 Unless the panel connections are specially detailed to allow the panel to move 

independently of the building, both the connections and the panel may be damaged as 

they attempt to restrain the lateral movement of the building. Panels may be racked, 

damage adjacent panels, connections may fracture, and panels may become dislodged 

or displaced. 

 Separations (joints) between adjacent panels are intended to limit contact and resulting 

panel misalignment and/or damage under all but extreme building response, In strong 

shaking, some contact between adjacent cladding units is expected.

 Deterioration or corrosion of the mechanical connections is a significant concern; 

corroded connections may fail prematurely. Maintaining watertight joints is important 

for the longevity of the anchors. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-27

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.1.3-1 Failure of precast panel at parking garage that resulted in fatality in the 1987

magnitude-5.9 Whittier, California earthquake (Photo courtesy of Degenkolb 

Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-28

Figure 6.3.1.3-2 Precast panel failure at the top floor of a hospital in the1994 magnitude-6.7 

Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of OSHPD).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-29

Figure 6.3.1.3-3 Precast panel damage at a building corner in the 1994 Northridge Earthquake

(Photo courtesy of OSHPD).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-30

Figure 6.3.1.3-4 Interior view of precast panel showing response of three sets of push-pull 

connections in the 1994 Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of OSHPD).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-31

Figure 6.3.1.3-5 Close-up photo of two fractured connection bolts in a prefabricated panel in the

1994 Northridge Earthquake; corrosion of the rods may have contributed to the 

failure. (Photo courtesy of OSHPD).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-32

Figure 6.3.1.3-6 Residential building with precast concrete corridor and balcony railing panels. 

Some panels were damaged and subsequently many were removed to prevent 

falling. Location in Rancaqua, Chile 154 miles northeast of the epicenter; 

estimated PGA of 0.3g during the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake (Photo 

courtesy of Antonio Iruretagoyena, Rubén Boroschek & Associates).

Figure 6.3.1.3-7 Numerous precast panels removed to prevent falling; detail from residential 

building in Rancagua, Chile above. These panels had a bearing seat at the 

center and supported on steel dowels at either end (Photo courtesy of Eduardo 

Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-33

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Precast panel connections and panel joints require specialized design based on the 

expected inter-story drift of the structural system supporting them or 0.5 inch, 

whichever is greater. The connections must be detailed with sufficient ductility and 

rotation capacity to prevent failure. Typically, the panels are seated on two bearing 

connections at either the top or bottom floor and then have “push-pull” connections at 

the adjacent floor which resist out-of-plane loading but move laterally in the plane of 

the panel. In this way, the panels move with the floor where the bearing connections are 

located and the drift is accommodated by the rod at the “push-pull” connection. In order 

to work effectively, the “push-pull” connection must be able to accommodate the 

expected drift without extensive inelastic action. For sliding-type connections, this has 

traditionally been accomplished by using an oversize hole or slot large enough to 

accommodate the design drift in each direction, but recent testing has shown that this 

configuration can bind and restrict movement and not work as well as anticipated. For 

connections utilizing threaded rods, the length of the rod should be sufficient to prevent 

extensive yielding of the rod in bending, since this may result in premature fracture of 

the rod due to low-cycle fatigue.

 Prefabricated panels can be installed in a manner that forces the building deformations 

to occur over a distance substantially less than the story height. For example, “banded” 

precast concrete wall systems often feature spandrels at each floor level and with 

glazing and precast column covers spanning from the top of one spandrel to the bottom 

of the spandrel on the floor above. When the building displaces laterally, the spandrels 

move with the floors, acting as rigid bodies. The story drift has to be accommodated by 

the glazing and column covers.

 While both the rocking and sway mechanisms, as illustrated in Figures 6.3.1.3-8a 

through c, are effective methods of accommodating story drift, mixing mechanisms in 

adjacent panels may potentially close the joints between units, resulting in a collision 

between adjacent panels. To avoid this, the joints between panels have to be sized to 

allow for panel rotation and translation.Architectural Design for Earthquake, A Guide to 

Nonstructural Elements, (Charleson, 2007) has a detailed discussion of issues related to 

exterior cladding. Sliding connections with slotted or oversized holes are commonly 

used in New Zealand as an alternative to push-pull connections.

 DN-21, Behavior of Architectural Precast Panels in Response to Drift (PCI, 2011) contains 

an extensive discussion of the different mechanisms used to accommodate story drift. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-34

Figure 6.3.1.3-8a Modes of panel response to displacement.

Figure 6.3.1.3-8b Tall and narrow panels designed to accommodate seismic drift. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-35

Figure 6.3.1.3-8c Low aspect ratio panels designed to accommodate seismic drift.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-36

Mitigation Details

 

Figure 6.3.1.3-9 Precast spandrel panel in San Francisco parking garage supported by bearing 

connections near top of panel (left) and slotted connections at bottom of panel 

(right); panels have four connections each. The remnants of a previous 

nonductile connection detail are visible in the photo at left (Photo courtesy of 

Cynthia Perry, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-37

Figure 6.3.1.3-10 Prefabricated panels (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-38

6.3 Architectural Components

6.3.1 Exterior Wall Components

6.3.1.4 Glazing 

Glazing includes glass curtain walls on multistory buildings, large storefront windows, as well 

as small, operable wood framed windows. Glass may be annealed, heat-strengthened, 

tempered, laminated or in sealed, insulating glass units. Glazing can be installed using either 

wet or dry glazing methods. Any of these may pose a significant falling hazard if not designed 

to accommodate seismic forces and displacements.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 2010) focuses

on providing a mechanism to accommodate building deformations, or sufficient ductility to 

accommodate drift without a failure of the glazing system. 

 The building code has specific requirements on the type of glazing that may be used in 

different areas. Tempered glass is required within 10’ above a walking surface under 

some circumstances; check applicable code requirements. Wired glass with a grid of 

steel wire embedded in the pane is an option for some situations where fire and impact 

rating are not also required. ANSI A97.1 Safety Glazing Materials Used in Buildings 

(ANSI, 2004) is the standard that defines different kinds of safety glass. 

 The design of glazing assemblies depends on the calculated inter-story drift for the 

building, and the type of glass. 

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007) classifies glazed 

exterior wall systems as both acceleration and deformation sensitive.

 Glazed exterior wall systems are subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06 when:

o The performance level is Immediate Occupancy or Life Safety in high, moderate, 

and low seismicity areas, or

o The performance level is Hazards Reduced in high, moderate, and low seismicity 

areas and the glazing is located over areas of public access or egress.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-39

 Acceptance criteria focus on performing a drift analysis to determine if the glazing can 

accommodate the expected story drifts, and the anchorage of the panels under seismic 

loading. The evaluation approach is similar to that used in ASCE/SEI 7-10.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Glazing assemblies are sensitive to both accelerations and deformations and are subject 

to both in-plane and out-of-plane failures. Glazing is particularly vulnerable in flexible 

structures with large inter-story drifts; large storefront windows are also vulnerable. 

 The performance of glazing in earthquakes generally falls into one of four categories:

o The glass remains unbroken in its frame or anchorage

o The glass cracks but remains in its frame or anchorage while continuing to be a 

weather barrier

o The glass shatters but remains in its frame or anchorage in a precarious 

position, liable to fall out at any time

o The glass falls out of its frame or anchorage. Glass can fall in shards, shatter 

into small pieces, or broken panes may be held in place by film. Many of the 

glazing performance issues in earthquakes are a result of poor installation 

techniques. These include failure to provide clearances, use of improper shims, 

and failure to hold dimensional tolerances.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-40

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.1.4-1 Shard of broken untempered glass that fell several stories from a multistory 

building in the 1994 Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Wiss, Jenney, 

Elstner Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-41

Figure 6.3.1.4-2 Scenes in Ferndale, California following the 2010 magnitude-6.5 Eureka 

Earthquake. 50% of the glazing on Main Street was cracked (Photos courtesy of 

Bret Lizundia, Rutherford & Chekene).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-42

Figure 6.3.1.4-3 Glazing damage was observed in many residential and commercial buildings 

and hospitals throughout central Chile following the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile 

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Miranda, Stanford University).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-43

Figure 6.3.1.4-4 Glazing damage, due in part to pounding with the structure at right during the 

2010 Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Antonio Iruretagoyena, Rubén 

Boroscheck & Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-44

Figure 6.3.1.4-5 Overhead glazing damage from the 2010 Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of 

Eduardo Miranda, Stanford University).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-45

Figure 6.3.1.4-6 Broken glass and bent window mullions in flexible building which experienced 

large inter-story drift in the 1994 Northridge Earthquake (FEMA 310, 1998).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-46

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 The current glazing design provisions are the result of extensive testing. A full 

description of the test program can be found in FEMA 450-2, NEHRP Recommended 

Provisions and Commentary for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other 

Structures, Commentary. 2003 Edition (BSSC, 2004).

 Glazing that remains in place and acts as a weather barrier (even if cracked) satisfies 

both immediate occupancy and life-safety performance objectives. If the glass 

shatters or falls, the level of hazard depends on the post-breakage characteristics of 

the glass and the height from which it falls.

 The term safety glass refers to tempered or laminated glazing and is required by 

code in a number of applications such as glazing in or adjacent to exits, within 10’ 

of a walking surface, etc. Use of tempered glass will greatly reduce the seismic 

hazard because tempered glass breaks into small dull fragments instead of large 

hazardous shards. However, since the tempered glass fragments tend to fall from 

the frame or anchorage in clusters, they are potentially harmful to humans if they

fall from greater heights. Laminated glass will typically remain in place when broken 

and will prevent people or objects from falling through the opening. Storefront 

windows are often vulnerable as the windows occupy a large structurally 

unsupported area at the ground floor, often resulting in soft story or torsion 

problems. Use of laminated glass for storefront windows reduces the seismic risk 

and also increases protection from burglary and vandalism.

 Plastic films that help hold glass fragments together even if the pane breaks are 

available. These films may reduce seismic risk associated with dislodged fragments, 

which pose a safety risk, particularly if they fall from great heights. Strategic 

application of plastic films where glazing is directly over an exit way, within 10’ of 

an exit way, or along interior corridors may provide sufficient risk reduction if other 

areas surrounding the building have limited public access. Plastic films may be a

cost effective way to retrofit an existing pane of glass and are often installed for 

other reasons, such as security or reducing solar heat gain. Extending the film over 

the edge of the surrounding frame is advisable not only to hold broken fragments in 

place but also to prevent the entire pane from falling out. Avoid placing beds, 

desks, chairs or couches that are typically occupied many hours a day near large 

plate glass windows.

 Liberal use of landscaping strips or areas with restricted pedestrian access may help 

to reduce the seismic risk beneath large glass panes or tall curtain walls.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-47

Mitigation Details

Figure 6.3.1.4-7 Glazed exterior wall system (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-48

6.3 Architectural Components

6.3.1 Exterior Wall Components

6.3.1.5 Glass block

Glass block, or glass unit masonry, is used to construct a variety of nonbearing walls or used as 

nonbearing infill in window openings. If not properly detailed to accommodate movement,

glass block units may break and pose a falling hazard.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

The design provisions for the design and construction of glass unit masonry are empirical and 

prescriptive, with limits on panel size, the spacing between structural supports, deflections of 

supports, and prescriptive joint reinforcing requirements. There are additional code limitations 

on material properties of the glass unit masonry, sealant, and mortar; and properties, spacing, 

and details of anchorage hardware; and spacing and details of expansion joints.

 Design requirements are found in TMS 402-11/ACI 530-11/ASCE 5-11, Building Code 

Requirements and Specification for Masonry Structures and Related Commentaries

(MSJC, 2011), Chapter 7. There are also limitations on the use of glass block in Section 

2110 of the 2012 IBC, International Building Code, (ICC, 2012).. 

 Seismic design forces on the nonbearing wall assembly are determined from ASCE/SEI 

7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 

13, Nonstructural Components.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007) classifies glass block 

as primarily deformation sensitive in the in-plane-, and acceleration sensitive in the out-ofplane direction. Glass block is subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06 when:

 The performance level is Immediate Occupancy or Life Safety.

 The performance level is Hazards Reduced and glass block is located over areas of 

public access or egress.

Acceptance criteria requires conformance with in-plane drift limits and out-of-plane forces.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-49

The rehabilitation approach depends on the size of the individual walls. Walls less than 144 SF 

or 15 feet in any dimension may be retrofitted using prescriptive procedures. Larger walls must 

be analyzed,

Typical Causes of Damage

 Glass block panel assemblies are subject to both in-plane and out-of-plane failures. If 

the glass block panels are not reinforced and isolated from the movement of the 

structural surround or structural supports, the panel consisting of brittle glass blocks 

may be damaged. Older glass block panels may be installed with rigid mortar along all 

four sides and in the mortar joints. Damage to these rigid installations, or installations 

without the capacity to accommodate seismic deformations, may result in glass block 

breakage, falling glass block units, or possibly failure of the whole panel.

 If glass block panels are rigidly attached at the sill with mortar, but allowed to slip along 

the top and sides, and installed with panel reinforcing in alternate mortar joints, there 

may be damage to the panel anchors, angles, or channels surrounding the panel. The

fire-rating or weatherproofing may also be compromised and should be inspected if 

there are signs of movement. 

 A survey of glass block installations after the 1994 Northridge Earthquake found that 

glass block panels installed per the UBC provisions since the late 1970’s had performed 

well (Hart, 1994).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-50

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.1.5-1 Damage to glass block in building with reinforced concrete frame and concrete 

masonry infill in the magnitude-7 2010 Haiti Earthquake (Photo courtesy of 

Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers). Note some blocks failed at rigid mortar joints

and stayed in the frame, others fell out of the frame, and others broke in place. 

This building also suffered structural damage.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-51

Figure 6.3.1.5-2 Damage to glass block with rigid mortar on all sides and in all joints in the 2010 

Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers). About 

25% of the glass block units are cracked or broken but entire panel will need to 

be removed and replaced.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-52

Figure 6.3.1.5-3 Damaged glass block panel from the Los Angeles Hospital in the 2010 Chile

Earthquake; relatively new hospital building that had to be evacuated for repairs

(Photo courtesy of Bill Holmes, Rutherford & Chekene). Blocks were installed 

with steel reinforcing bars in the top and bottom horizontal joints.

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 The design of glass block panels must meet the applicable code requirements for glass 

masonry construction. The glass block panel should be isolated for seismic, wind and 

thermal movement from the nonstructural surround, and the nonstructural surrounding 

wall should be isolated from the seismic inter-story drift of the structure.

 For seismic resistance, the panels must be supported for both in-plane- and out-ofplane loads but should be isolated from the movement of the surrounding structure. 

Glass block units are inherently brittle and must be supported in a manner that does not 

allow structural loads from the building to be transmitted to the glass blocks. This 

typically involves providing a rigid mortar attachment to the sill at the bottom of the 

panel and providing slip joints along the top and sides. In addition, horizontal 

reinforcing is placed in alternate mortar joints. Typical glass block panel details are 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-53

shown in Figure 6.3.1.5-6. Slip joints at the top and sides may be accomplished with 

steel angles, steel channels, or panel anchors (see three alternate head details in Figure 

6.3.1.5-7). Jamb details are similar.

 Note that the fire-rated head detail A in Figure 6.3.1.5-7 is very similar to Figure 

6.3.2.1-9 used for full-height heavy partitions. This type of detail with steel angles 

provides the most robust seismic restraint where large displacements are expected.

 Special care must be taken to detail glass block panels on intersecting planes such as 

corners or reentrant corners. Simultaneous motion in two directions makes these joints 

particularly vulnerable to damage.

 Glass block vendors often have proprietary hardware, standard specifications, and

standard downloadable details available to assist designers. Manufacturer’s standard 

slip joint details are typically designed to accommodate thermal expansion and wind 

forces and may not have not been explicitly designed for seismic deformations. Thus, 

these details should be used with caution if large inter-story drifts are expected. 

 It may be prudent to avoid using glass block near exits and to restrict pedestrian access 

below or adjacent to a large expanse of glass block by providing a barrier or wide 

landscaping strip.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-54

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.1.5-4 Use of glass block panels for select exterior and interior walls at the North 

Hollywood Police Station in California, utilizing standard details provided by 

Pittsburgh Corning Glass (Photo courtesy of Pittsburgh Corning Corporation). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-55

Figure 6.3.1.5-5 Glass block panels divided into numerous subpanels at the Chula Vista Police 

Headquarters, California (Photo courtesy of Pittsburgh Corning Corporation). In 

addition, the nonbearing glass block panel partition wall is isolated from seismic 

movement of the building structure. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-56

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.3.1.5-6 Typical glass block panel details (shown here with steel angles or channels to 

provide lateral restraint (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-57

Figure 6.3.1.5-7 Alternate head details for glass block panels (jamb details similar) (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-58

6.3 Architectural Components

6.3.2 Interior Partitions

6.3.2.1 Interior Partition Walls, Heavy 

Heavy partitions may be full or partial height and may be constructed of reinforced or 

unreinforced masonry. Older office buildings were often built with hollow clay tile partitions 

throughout much of the interior. These elements are found as infill along column lines or 

located away from the structural framing or walls. In modern construction, these types of 

partitions may be found where an area separation for fire safety is required. Although 

"nonstructural" in their intended function, masonry partitions often become "structural" in the 

sense that they affect the overall response of the building to earthquakes and thus require the 

expertise of a structural engineer to properly assess. Unless rigid partitions are located in a 

stiff building with very small inter-story drifts, they should be isolated from the structural 

system or be explicitly included in the lateral force design of the building.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010)

focuses on providing adequate strength for out-of-plane forces and providing details that 

isolate the partition from building deformations.

 All heavy partitions greater than 6 feet in height must be laterally braced to the 

structure, independent of any ceiling lateral bracing.

 Partitions must be designed for wind and seismic forces acting out-of-plane on the wall. 

 The partition must be detailed so that it does not interact with the structural system or 

other nonstructural elements when the building displaces laterally under wind or seismic 

loading.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies heavy 

interior partitions as both acceleration and deformation sensitive. 

 Heavy interior partitions are subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06 when:

o The performance level is Immediate Occupancy or Life Safety in high or moderate 

seismicity areas.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-59

o The performance level is Hazards Reduced in high or moderate seismicity areas 

and heavy interior partitions are located over areas of public access or egress.

 Acceptance criteria focus on verifying that the partitions have sufficient strength to 

resist out-of-plane forces, and verifying that the partitions can accommodate in-plane 

story drift. If the building drift exceeds certain limits, the connection conditions at the 

edges of the partition require retrofit to accommodate the building movements. 

Typical Causes of Damage

 Heavy partitions are both acceleration and deformation sensitive and may fail either inplane or out-of-plane if not properly detailed. Partial height partitions may fail unless 

they are laterally braced to the structure above or engineered to cantilever from below. 

Full height partitions may fail unless they are isolated from the building deformations 

and provided with out-of-plane restraint.

 Masonry may crack and spall, walls may collapse creating falling hazards and blocking 

corridors and exits with debris. Masonry debris may be particularly hazardous in 

stairwells and elevator shafts.

 Where partitions are used as lateral support for piping, electrical cabinets, storage 

shelves, or other nonstructural items, the failure of the partition wall may result in 

damage to these other components.

Where partitions are built tight against structural columns, there is a potential for the masonry 

wall to unintentionally create a “captive column” thereby changing the intended earthquake 

response of the building. A structural engineer is needed to evaluate the implications of such 

conditions.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-60

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.2.1-1 Damage along the top of a reinforced concrete masonry unit partition built flush 

with soffit of metal deck at an industrial facility in the 2001 magnitude-8.4 Peru 

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).

Figure 6.3.2.1-2 Damage to reinforced concrete masonry partition used to support fire 

protection cabinet and piping in the 2001 Peru Earthquake; loose stucco and 

masonry were removed prior to photo (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP 

Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-61

Figure 6.3.2.1-3 Damage to structural column (“captive column”) due to restraint caused by 

partial height masonry wall in the 2001 Peru Earthquake (Photo courtesy of 

Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-62

Figure 6.3.2.1-4 View of stairway in the Banco Central Building, Managua, Nicaragua after the 

1972 magnitude 6.2 Managua Earthquake. Most of the stairs were covered with 

debris that resulted from the failure of the hollow tile partitions surrounding the 

stairs (Photo courtesy of PEER Godden Collection, No. J94).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-63

Figure 6.3.2.1-5 Damage to unreinforced brick partitions in patient rooms, and other mostly 

nonstructural damage, resulted in the evacuation of the Felix Bulnes Hospital in 

Santiago in the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of 

Gilberto Mosqueda, University of Buffalo, SUNY).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-64

Figure 6.3.2.1-6 An infill masonry wall collapsed onto the distilled water equipment spilling two 

150 gallon containers; water leaked past the perimeter edge of the floor slab 

into the operating room suite below resulting in the closure of 3 of 6 the 

operating rooms. Replacement gypsum board partition seen in photo. Hospital 

built in 2005 in Los Angeles, Chile. Damage from the 2010 Chile Earthquake 

(Photo courtesy of Bill Holmes, Rutherford & Chekene).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Heavy full height partitions need out-of-plane restraint with an in-plane slip joint. This 

can be provided with steel angles on either side attached to the structural slab above as 

shown. Steel angles may be continuous or intermittent; check code requirements. Note 

that special details may be required to meet fireproofing, sound proofing, 

weatherproofing or insulation requirements.

 Care must be used in detailing slip joints for a series of interconnected perpendicular 

walls since the out-of-plane restraints for one wall will prevent in-plane slip along the 

perpendicular wall; vertical isolation joints may be required. Similarly, special details are 

required where the soffit of the structure above has an irregular profile that would 

prevent slip such as the metal deck in Figure 6.3.2.1-1, or a sloping profile such as a 

ramp.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-65

 If the partition will be used to provide lateral restraint for other nonstructural items, 

check that the wall and the lateral restraints at the top are adequate to resist the 

additional loading. 

 Heavy partial height partitions are often used in exterior walls with glazing above or 

used as guardrails along exterior corridors. In buildings with structural frames, these 

walls should be self supporting and isolated from the structural framing at both ends. 

Failure to provide appropriate seismic isolation for these partial height walls has 

resulted in thousands of structural “captive column” failures in past earthquakes. 

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.2.1-7 Detail of isolation joint to prevent creation of “captive column” condition 

(Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-66

Figure 6.3.2.1-8 Full-height concrete masonry unit walls detailed with steel clip angles (3 angles 

visible in photo). Configuration shown includes perpendicular walls, sloping 

ramp above, and column with column capital. Although wall detailed with 

sealant joints along edges of column and column capital, it is not clear that the 

concrete frame can move independently of these CMU walls (Photo courtesy of 

Cynthia Perry, BFP Engineers). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-67

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.3.2.1-9 Full height heavy partition (ER). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-68

Figure 6.3.2.1-10 Partial height heavy partition (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-69

6.3 Architectural Components

6.3.2 Interior Partitions

6.3.2.2 Interior Partition Walls, Light

Light partitions are those that are built using wood or metal studs with gypsum board or lath 

and plaster finish. The studs may be full height (extending from floor-to-floor) or partial 

height, extending to the ceiling but not to the structural framing above. Partitions with partial 

height studs may be braced by the ceiling, but more commonly are braced with diagonal braces 

or wires independent of the ceiling, particularly at ceilings of lay-in acoustical tiles. The finish 

material may also run full height or stop at the ceiling, depending on fire or acoustical 

separation requirements.

In recent testing of a full scale 5-story building performed at the UC San Diego shake table (see 

Section 6.1.3), all floors included full height gypsum wall board partition wallboard partitions 

on metal studs that were subjected to severe earthquake motions and inter-story drifts. The 

partition walls were installed in accordance with normal installation practices. Severe gypsum 

wallboard damage and metal stud distress were observed following the strongest shaking but 

none of the walls collapsed. Additional tests were conducted to examine the potential 

consequences of fire initiated by earthquakes. Following the shake table testing, one of the 

floors was subjected to controlled burn and pressure tests to gauge how much the fire 

resistance of the fire-rated walls had been impaired by earthquake damage. The tests 

demonstrated that gypsum wallboard partitions may have reduced fire resistance following the

earthquake, as compared to the fire resistance before the earthquake. This subject is the focus 

of ongoing study.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Building code provisions for light interior partition walls limit deflections under out-of-plane 

loading, specify minimum out-of-plane loads, and have prescriptive bracing requirements 

when the height or weight of the partition exceed certain limits:

 The minimum out-of plane lateral load for partition walls is the larger of 5 psf or that 

computed in ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures,

(ASCE, 2010) Chapter 13. When computing the lateral load, the weight of casework, 

shelving, and wall-mounted items should be considered. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-70

 Deflection limits in International Building Code (IBC, 2012) for interior partitions are 

based on the type of the partition finish. They range from the partition height, L,

divided by 120, L/120, for flexible finishes to L/360 for brittle finishes. These 

deflection limits are checked using the 5 psf minimum load noted above.

 Partitions greater than 6 feet in height must be laterally braced to the structure, 

independent of any ceiling lateral bracing

Although crucial for controlling damage due to story drift, there are no code requirements 

governing the detailing at the head of the wall. 

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies light 

interior partitions as both acceleration and deformation sensitive. 

 Light interior partitions are subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06 when the 

performance level is Immediate Occupancy.

 Acceptance criteria focus on verifying that the partitions have sufficient strength to 

resist out-of-plane forces, and verifying building drift limits.

Typical Causes of Damage

 In-plane (parallel with the wall) damage can occur to light partitions as a result of

deformations of the structure (drift). Full-height partitions in flexible structures may be 

damaged in this way unless they are isolated from the building deformations. Typical

damage consists of cracked or spalled finishes, deformed partition framing, and failed 

connections. Damage to ceilings may occur at partial height partitions, due to the inplane stiffness of the partition and the flexibility of the ceiling suspension and bracing. 

 Metal studs are often installed with a deflection track at the top that provides lateral 

support but also accommodates potential movement of the floor above due to changing 

gravity loading. See Figures 6.3.2.2-3A through C. In order for the deflection track to 

be effective in allowing vertical movement, neither the stud nor the finish material 

should be attached to the track. This lack of connection is often in conflict with fire or 

acoustical approvals of partitions systems. In addition, ASTM C754-11, Standard 

Specification for Installation of Steel Framing Members to Receive Screw-Attached 

Gypsum Panel Products, covering installation of steel studs requires studs to be 

attached at jambs and partition intersections. To satisfy this condition, some installers 

attach such studs with angles with slotted holes to allow for vertical movement and 

prevent stud buckling. Deflection track details, if not compromised by occasional stud 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-71

attachment or finish attachment, will also allow in-plane lateral movement, minimizing 

damage to the finishes due to structural drift. However, even with no direct attachment 

to the floor above, sliding along the top track is incompatible with the rigid out-ofplane support of perpendicular partitions at corners. The local corner damage from this 

incompatible movement is difficult to avoid.

 Out-of-plane (perpendicular to the wall) damage is due to inertial loading on the wall 

from the floor accelerations (shaking). This loading is proportional to partition weight, 

so partitions with heavy finishes or hung book or storage shelves are more susceptible. 

Typically, damage from this loading occurs at the top connection of the partition to the 

structure or ceiling and may include local connection damage or complete failure 

leading to overturning of the partition. Such partition failures may create falling 

hazards, block corridors, and endanger occupants attempting to exit from damaged 

buildings.

 Partitions are also used to provide lateral support for floor supported storage shelves, 

equipment or other nonstructural items. This additional loading was often not 

anticipated in the design of the partition and damage could occur at the equipment 

connection, in the studs themselves, or at the wall-to-structure connections. The 

supported item could also be damaged due to unanticipated sliding or overturning. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-72

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.2.2-1 Out-of-plane failure of inadequately braced partial height metal stud partitions 

in the 1994 Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Wiss, Janney, Elstner 

Associates). 

Figure 6.3.2.2-2 In-plane damage to wood stud wall spanning floor-to-floor caused by 

differential movement between the two floors in the 1994 Northridge

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-73

Figure 6.3.2.2-3a Top connection for metal studs with deflection channel. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-74

Figure 6.3.2.2-3b Top connection for metal studs with deflection channel with double track. 

Studs can be attached to insider channel without compromising vertical or 

lateral movement.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-75

Figure 6.3.2.2-3c Example proprietary top track metal stud connection system. Studs are 

connected to the track through vertically slotted holes to allow for vertical 

movement. The connection of the track to the overhead structure through 

longitudinally slotted holes can accommodate in-plane slip to minimize damage 

from drift. The longitudinal slip capability can be inadvertently compromised 

by installing screw connections through the solid web, by overtightening screws 

through the slots, or by interruptions of the vertical alignment of the track at 

beams or changes in elevation of the overhead structure. This system does not 

solve the local damage at partition corners.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-76

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Both laboratory testing and earthquake experience have shown that light interior 

partitions are vulnerable to damage due to story drift, even in low levels of shaking. The 

detailing at the head of the partition (the “top track”) plays a critical role in determining 

the nature and severity of earthquake damage.

 For multistory and other engineered buildings, damage to non-load bearing full-height 

steel stud partitions can be minimized by avoiding connection of stud and finish to the 

top track. This can be accomplished by using a double track system or slotted tracks. . 

Note that special details need to be coordinated with requirements to meet fireproofing, 

sound proofing, weatherproofing, or insulation requirements. More elaborate details 

would be needed to minimize or eliminate damage at interconnected perpendicular 

walls since the out-of-plane restraints along one wall may prevent slip on the 

perpendicular wall. If fire or acoustical requirements allow, partial height partitions are 

less susceptible to in-plane damage, but should be braced to the overhead structure 

and not the ceiling.

 In wood framed buildings, partitions on wood studs are often installed with fixed 

connections top and bottom, although slip connections can also be developed in such 

cases. In small wood framed buildings gypsum or plaster non bearing partitions often 

provide additional lateral support against seismic shaking.If partition walls will be used 

to provide lateral restraint for other nonstructural items, the walls and the lateral 

connections at the top should be checked for adequacy.

 New or improved restraint systems for steel stud partitions are under development; one 

such scheme was tested at Stanford University in July 2010 that allows for over 1.5” of 

displacement in any horizontal direction, which would provide protection against 

damage at intersection of perpendicular walls. Check the internet for additional 

restraint options.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-77

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.2.2-4 Bracing of partial height stud partition (Photo courtesy of Degenkolb Engineers).

Figure 6.3.2.2-5 Two-story nonstructural component simulator at the University of Buffalo, SUNY 

shown at left. Preparation for dynamic testing of stud partitions for the NEES 

Nonstructural Project shown at right. Tests such as these improve understanding 

of the seismic behavior of nonstructural components (Photos courtesy of 

University of Buffalo, SUNY).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-78

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.3.2.2-6 Full height nonbearing stud wall (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-79

Figure 6.3.2.2-7 Partial height nonbearing stud wall (ER). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-80

6.3 Architectural Components

6.3.2 Interior Partitions

6.3.2.3 Glazed Partitions

Glazed partitions are often used in office corridors or around conference rooms to provide 

enhanced interior lighting. Glazing may be found in light, heavy, or demountable partitions; 

glazed partitions may be either full height or partial height. Glazing assemblies may be 

vulnerable to earthquake damage; glazed partitions must have lateral support but should be 

isolated from the movement of the surrounding structure.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Glazed partitions are subject to the provisions of Chapter 24 of the 2012 IBC, International 

Building Code, (ICC 2012), and are subject to the same requirements as exterior glazing. 

Seismic design is governed by ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other 

Structures (ASCE, 2010). ASCE/SEI 7-10 focuses on providing a mechanism to accommodate 

building deformations, or sufficient ductility to accommodate drift without a failure of the 

glazed partition:

 The building code has specific requirements on the type of glazing that may be used in 

different areas. Tempered glass is required within 10’ above a walking surface under 

some circumstances; check applicable code requirements. Wired glass with a grid of 

steel wire embedded in the pane is an option for some situations where fire and impact 

rating are not also required. ANSI A97.1 Safety Glazing Materials Used in Buildings 

(ANSI, 2004) is the standard that defines different kinds of safety glass. 

 The design of glazing assemblies depends on the calculated inter-story drift for the 

building, and the type of glass. Like exterior glazing assemblies, they are sensitive to 

both accelerations and deformations and are subject to both in-plane and out-of-plane 

failures. 

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007) classifies glazed 

partition systems as both acceleration and deformation sensitive.

 Glazed partition systems are subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06 when
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-81

o The performance level is Immediate Occupancy or Life Safety in high, moderate, 

and low seismicity areas, or

o The performance level is Hazards Reduced in high, moderate, and low seismicity 

areas and the glazing is located over areas of public access or egress.

 ASCE/SEI 41-06 does not contain detailed acceptance criteria for glazed partitions. 

However, the behavior of these systems is very similar to glazed curtain wall systems. A 

drift analysis should be performed to determine if the glazing can accommodate the 

expected story drifts, and the anchorage of the glazed partition under seismic loading.

The evaluation approach is similar to that used in ASCE/SEI 7-10.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Glazing assemblies may be damaged as a result of either in-plane or out-of-plane 

loading unless properly detailed. Failure of glazed partitions may create falling hazards, 

block corridors, and endanger occupants attempting to exit from damaged buildings.

Glazing is particularly vulnerable in assemblies where there is insufficient clearance in 

the glazing pockets or insufficient isolation from the structure to accommodate interstory drifts.

 Full height glazed partitions in flexible structures may fail unless they are isolated from 

the building deformations. In addition to broken glass, the mullions, gaskets, or setting 

block may be damaged. Damage may also include cracked or spalled finishes 

surrounding the glazing, deformed partition framing, and failed connections. Partial 

height glazed partitions may damage ceiling framing to which they are attached or can 

fall out-of-plane unless they are laterally braced to the structure above. Particularly 

hazardous is glazing used at the top portion of partial height partitions where it can fall 

from increased height; such glazing is often used to allow light transmission but reduce 

sound transmission.

 Glazed partitions may be damaged by impact from unanchored furniture or contents or 

suspended items without appropriate sway bracing.

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-82

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.2.3-1 Glass shards fallen from the top of partial height office partitions in the 

reception area during the magnitude-8.8 2010 Chile Earthquake (Photo 

courtesy of Rodrigo Retamales, Rubén Boroschek & Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-83

Figure 6.3.2.3-2 Damage to glazed doors at the Concepción airport in the 2010 Chile 

Earthquake. In the top photo the glazing in the sliding glass door shattered; in 

the lower photo the glass is intact but the door frames are misaligned (Photos

courtesy of Rodrigo Retamales, Rubén Boroschek & Associates). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-84

Figure 6.3.2.3-3 Failed wood framed glazing assembly in the 2010 Chile earthquake (Photo

courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers). The wood framing was held in 

place by metal or rebar brackets embedded in the masonry wall. The adobe 

wall on the left of the door collapsed and the brackets on the right side pulled 

out of the brick masonry wall (lower right). The glazing assembly at the rear 

entrance of the chapel was anchored overhead to the wood balcony framing 

and was undamaged. 

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Architectural Design for Earthquake (Charleson, 2007) provides discussion and graphics 

pertaining to seismic detailing for glazing and glazed partitions. In addition, the 

American Architectural Manufacturer’s Association (AAMA) has published guidelines for 

testing glazing assemblies and determining Δfallout. These guidelines may be obtained 

at www.aamanet.org.

 Glazing may be found in heavy, light, or demountable partitions; glazed partitions may 

be either full height or partial height. Anchorage details for heavy partitions are shown 

in Section 6.3.2.1, light partition details are shown in Section 6.3.2.2, and demountable 

partition details are shown in Section 6.5.5.2. The nonstructural surround must be selfsupporting and not deliver loads to the glazing assembly from above or either side; 

thus, wall elements above the glazed portion may need to be suspended from above or 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-85

have an adequate lintel so the weight does not bear on the glazing or mullions. A deep 

leg slip track could be installed either at the top of the mullion or at the structure above, 

depending on the structural framing configuration. Note that because glazed partitions 

must meet the seismic drift limits for glass components, glazed partitions may require 

additional or different bracing than a similar partition without glazing. Also note that 

where the partition is properly detailed to be isolated from the seismic inter-story drift 

of the surrounding structure, the glass-to-frame clearance required around each pane 

of glazing is reduced. Special care should be given when detailing glass on intersecting 

planes such as corners and reentrant corners as these locations are particularly 

vulnerable to damage.

 Safety glazing, such as laminated or tempered glass, may be required in areas adjacent 

to stairways or subject to human impact; check the applicable code for specific 

requirements. Use of safety glass will reduce the hazard in the event that some of the 

glazing breaks in an earthquake. 

 All glass assemblies have become common for enclosing lobby areas or atria in large 

commercial buildings. These typically are suspended from specially designed steel 

framing and may include details such as glass fins and steel connecting hardware.

These assemblies are typically left free to slip at the bottom and must be specially 

detailed at edges and corners to avoid impact with adjacent panes.

 Glazed partitions should not be used to provide lateral support to other nonstructural 

components such as book shelves, electrical panels, file cabinets, unless adequate 

lateral resistance can be shown. In addition, such items should not be located where 

they can tip, fall, or swing and break the partition glazing.

 The use of glazed partitions should be avoided in emergency exit corridors or stairways; 

limiting the height and area of partition glazing or using multiple smaller panes of glass 

may be less hazardous than larger and taller panes.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-86

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.2.3-4 Glazed partition supported at base with slip track at top; partition above glazing 

suspended and braced from above. Glazing subdivided into relatively small 

panels with ample clearance at mullions (Photo courtesy of Cynthia Perry, BFP 

Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-87

Figure 6.3.2.3-5 Specialized glazing details for glass dome using specialty hardware, such as large 

sealant joints required to accommodate thermal movement and seismic 

deformations at the California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, California 

(Photos courtesy of Cynthia Perry, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-88

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.3.2.3-6 Details for full-height glazed partition (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-89

6.3 ARCHITECTURAL COMPONENTS

6.3.3 Interior Veneers

6.3.3.1 Stone, Tile and Masonry Veneer

Interior veneer may be either adhered or anchored; both types are addressed here. Veneer

made of thin materials such as ceramic tile, masonry, corian or similar solid surface, and stone 

can be attached to a backing substrate with adhesive. Heavy veneers such as masonry, stone,

or stone slab units weighing more than 20 psf must be anchored to the structure by mechanical 

means. To avoid becoming a falling hazard, veneers and their connections must be designed to 

accommodate the anticipated seismic drift. Alternatively, they must be attached to interior 

partitions which are isolated from the anticipated seismic drift of the structure.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Building code provisions for adhered and anchored veneers are prescriptive, and contain a 

number of prescriptive requirements and limitations. Design provisions are found in both 2012 

IBC, International Building Code, (ICC, 2012) and TMS402-11/ACI530/ASCE 5-11, Building 

Code Requirements for Masonry Structures (ACI, 2011). There are limits on the thickness, size, 

and weight of veneers. In general, the provisions for interior veneer are identical to those for 

exterior veneers (see Section 6.3.1.1 and 6.3.1.2), with some additional limits on unit size and 

weight

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007) classifies interior

veneers as primarily deformation sensitive, but it may also become detached due to out-ofplane acceleration. 

 Interior veneer is subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06 when:

o The performance level is Immediate Occupancy,

o The performance level is Life Safety, except that ceramic tile need not be 

evaluated, or

o The performance level is Hazards Reduced and heavy interior veneer is located 

over areas of public access or egress.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-90

 Acceptance criteria focus on limiting the in-plane deflections of the veneer, and 

verifying that the anchorage is adequate for seismic loading.

Typical causes of damage 

 Adhered veneers are deformation sensitive and may crack or become dislodged due to 

deformation of the backing substrate. Veneer adhered directly to structural elements 

may be particularly vulnerable, for example, veneer adhered to a concrete or masonry 

shear wall may be damaged when the wall deforms. Poorly adhered veneer may come 

loose due to direct acceleration. Where veneer, such as tile, is used to provide a water 

barrier, such as in kitchens, restrooms, or showers, the adhesive and backing substrate 

may be damaged due to water intrusion if the mortar joints are cracked or deteriorated.

In this case, whole sections of tile might come loose.

 Anchored veneers and their connections may be damaged by inertial forces and by 

building distortion, especially when located at corners and openings. Rigid connections 

may distort or fracture if they do not have sufficient flexibility to accommodate the 

seismic drift. In addition, veneer units may crack, spall, or become completely 

dislodged and fall.

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

 

Figure 6.3.3.1-1 Damage to adhered tile veneer in residential bathroom and kitchen in the 2010

magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Antonio Iruretagoyena, 

Ruben Boroschek & Associates). Tile is adhered to CMU infill partitions. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-91

Figure 6.3.3.1-2 Damage to adhered tile veneer in locker room and kitchen at industrial facility

in the 2001 Peru Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers). 

Tile was adhered to CMU partitions which were built integral with the concrete 

frame. While only a limited number of tiles were broken, equipment had to be 

disconnected and many tiles removed to repair cracks in the wall and facilitate 

the repair of the veneer. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-92

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Where interior veneer is attached to nonstructural walls or partitions, these partitions 

must be designed with adequate in-plane and out-of-plane support but detailed to 

accommodate the anticipated inter-story drift of the structural frame. Sections 6.3.1.1 

and 6.3.1.2 provide additional information about adhered and anchored exterior 

veneers; the details used for interior veneers are similar, although interior and exterior 

finishes are typically installed by different trades.

 2012 IBC contains a number of prescriptive requirements and limitations on the use of 

veneer. These include height limits, drift limits, deflection limits, limits on the use of 

combustible structural supports such as wood, mortar bed minimum thickness limits, 

and minimum tie spacing limits. Check the applicable code requirements when 

considering seismic mitigation options. 

 Care must be taken in detailing corners, openings, edges and joints between structural 

elements and nonstructural substrates, such as a corner where a concrete masonry infill 

wall with veneer abuts a concrete column. While joints between individual tiles or 

stones may be grouted, movement joints may require a flexible sealant and bond 

breaker. Check manufacturer’s recommendations for detailing under these special 

conditions.

 Adhered veneer placed directly on concrete or masonry shear walls is likely to be 

damaged during a design level earthquake since the shear wall is designed to deform to 

resist seismic loading. Cracking or spalling of adhered veneer on a shear wall is a sign 

that the shear wall has been damaged and may also be in need of repair. 

 There are many vendors who supply veneer adhesion or anchoring systems. Some

seismic veneer anchor examples for exterior veneers are shown in Section 6.3.1.2, and 

others can be found online. Figure 6.3.3.1-3 shows two examples of anchoring 

schemes for thin stone slabs as typically installed by specialty contractors. Both the 

supporting structure and the anchorage assembly must be designed to accommodate 

the anticipated inter-story drift.

 Existing veneer anchors should be checked periodically and corroded anchors should be 

replaced. Tie spacing should be compared with current code requirements to evaluate 

whether the anchorage is sufficient. Additional anchors may be installed to reduce the 

falling hazards. Adhered veneer used to provide a water barrier must also be 

periodically inspected and maintained; if not repaired, water intrusion may cause 

corrosion or deterioration of the backing substrate or structural supports.

 It may be prudent to remove interior veneer in exit corridors or above exits, especially if 

larger units are mounted above 10 feet.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-93

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.3.3.1-3 Detail for anchored interior veneer (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-94

6.3 Architectural Components

6.3.4 Ceilings

6.3.4.1 Suspended Lay-in Tile Ceiling Systems 

Suspended modular ceiling systems are used widely in many types of buildings. These ceilings 

consist of light gauge metal inverted T-sections in a grid pattern, usually 2’ x 2’ but sometimes 

2’ x 4’, hung from the structure with wires. The ceiling panels are most commonly designed for 

acoustics and are lightweight, typically weighing 1 psf or less. However, the same suspension 

system is often used for metal or other custom designed panels, sometimes resulting in a total 

system weight of up to 4 psf. Suspended lay-in tile ceiling systems typically support lighting 

and air diffusers, and have penetrations for sprinkler heads. Diagonal bracing wires, when 

present, extend from the hanger wire locations to the structure above to reduce swaying of the 

ceiling. Modern ceilings also have a “compression post” at each bracing location to prevent 

uplift of the ceiling.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Suspended acoustic ceiling systems are subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10, 

Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010) Chapter 13, 

Nonstructural Components. Two options for establishing compliance are available:

• Suspended acoustic ceiling systems may be designed as an integral system, considering 

the mass and flexibility of elements including the ceiling, lights, HVAC air diffusers, and 

sprinklers. 

• Suspended acoustic ceiling systems may be installed in accordance with the prescriptive 

requirements of ASTME E580, Standard Practice for Installation of Ceiling Suspension 

Systems for Acoustical Tile and Lay-in Panels in Areas Subject to Earthquake Ground 

Motions (ASTM, 2010), as modified by ASCE/SEI 7-10, Chapter 13.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SOU 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies ceilings 

into one of four types. Suspended acoustic ceiling systems are classified as “Category d”, an 

integrated ceiling that includes lighting fixtures and mechanical items (air diffusers). 

Compliance with the requirements of the standard is necessary when:
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-95

 The performance level is Immediate Occupancy.

 The performance level is Life Safety in high, moderate, or low seismicity areas and the 

weight of the ceiling panels exceeds 2 psf.

Note that even if the ceiling system is exempt, light fixtures and air diffusers in the ceiling 

system may still be subject to support and bracing requirements. 

Suspended acoustic ceiling systems are classified as both force and deformation controlled. 

Evaluation and rehabilitation of these ceilings is performed using prescriptive requirements 

such as ASTM E580, as modified by ASCE/SEI 7-10, Chapter 13.

Typical Causes of Damage

 The panels are supported by the metal Tee grid, but the metal Tee grid is stabilized by 

the panels. If one or the other system is damaged, the entire ceiling could become 

unstable and collapse as shown in Figure 6.3.4.1-1 through 6.3.4.1-3. Such general 

instability often starts at the perimeter of the ceiling, particularly where there is no wire 

hanger on the first span of Tees next to the wall. If the Tees fall off the wall angles 

without additional wire support, tiles will fall, the perimeter Tees become unstable, and

the ceiling system will have uncontrolled sway, usually leading to collapse. Bracing will 

somewhat control the sway in this case but if the perimeter of the ceiling starts to fall 

apart, braces are only partly effective. 

 Any differential movement of the ceiling relative to structural elements, such as 

structural columns or walls, partitions, sprinklers heads, or fixed lighting may locally 

damage the ceiling. Similarly, movement of unrestrained piping, mechanical ducts, or 

lighting in a tightly braced ceiling can also damage the ceiling.

 Recent laboratory tests (University of Buffalo, NEES Nonstructural Grand Challenge) have 

shown that in ceilings with a 50 foot dimension, the tees in between braced lines (12 

feet spacing) were not sufficiently restrained by the braces and pulled away from the 

perimeter walls. Added braces, or staggering braces on different tee lines, may avoid 

this failure mode.

 Where lights, diffusers and other services within the ceiling do not have independent 

safety wires, these items can fall and create a hazard for occupants. 

 Conflicts between ceilings and sprinkler heads are a common occurrence causing 

damage to both the ceiling and sprinkler heads, potentially setting off the sprinkler 

system or causing local leaks..

 Ceiling failures may result in building evacuations and loss of functionality until the 

ceiling and utilities are repaired. In a hospital setting or clean lab, the failure of the 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-96

ceiling system may introduce dust and debris, including asbestos, into the room below 

compromising its functionality. In the case of asbestos contamination, this may involve 

costly removal before functionality can be restored.

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.4.1-1 Failure of suspended ceiling system including lights, air diffusers, and insulation 

in control room of an industrial plant in the 2001 magnitude-8.4 Peru 

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-97

Figure 6.3.4.1-2 Failure of suspended ceiling system including lights and air diffusers in the 1994 

Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates).

Figure 6.3.4.1-3 Generalized failure of ceiling grid, tiles, lights, and diffusers at the Los Angeles 

Hospital in the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Bill 

Holmes, Rutherford & Chekene). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-98

Figure 6.3.4.1-4 Fallen ceiling tiles at Talca Hospital in the 2010 Chile Earthquake, in spite of the 

use of clips as shown in detail at right. Most ceilings observed in Chile did not 

have seismic detailing (Photos courtesy of Bill Holmes, Rutherford & Chekene).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-99

Figure 6.3.4.1-5 Damage to suspended metal panel ceiling system and fire sprinklers at 

Concepción airport, primarily at far end and around column obstructions in the 

2010 Chile Earthquake (Photos courtesy of Rodrigo Retamales, Rubén 

Boroschek & Associates). The metal panel was strong enough to fail the 

sprinkler head shown at lower left. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-100

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Standard practice for the seismic design of suspended acoustic lay-in tile ceilings is 

described in ASTM E580, Standard Practice for Installation of Ceiling Suspension 

Systems for Acoustical Tile and Lay-in Panels in Areas Subject to Earthquake Ground 

Motions (ASCE, 2010), which is referenced in ASCE 7-10 Section 13.5.6. This standard 

supersedes several previous Ceilings and Interior Systems Construction Association 

(CISCA) standards. 

 For ceilings in Seismic Design Category C, the objective of these standards is to provide 

an unrestrained ceiling that will accommodate the movement of the structure during a 

seismic event. This is achieved by specifying the strength of grid connectors, frequency 

of hangers, perimeter closure angles, edge clearances, etc. 

 For ceilings in Seismic Design Category D, E, and F, the objective of these standards is 

to provide a restrained ceiling with connection to the perimeter wall and with rigid or 

non-rigid bracing assemblies. This is achieved by specifying the strength of grid 

elements, grid connections, frequency of hangers and lateral bracing assemblies, 2” 

minimum perimeter closure angles, minimum edge clearances, etc. For Seismic Design 

Category D, E & F, lateral bracing assemblies are required for all ceiling areas greater 

than 1000 sq. ft. There are several exemptions as follows:

o Seismic detailing is not required for suspended ceilings less than or equal to 144 

sq. feet that are surrounded by walls or soffits that are laterally braced to the 

structure (this exemption applies to heavy or light suspended ceiling systems). 

o For ceilings in Seismic Design Category C weighing less than 2.5 psf, special 

seismic perimeter closure details are required to provide an unrestrained ceiling; 

bracing assemblies are not required. 

o Ceilings weighing above 2.5 psf in Seismic Design Category C and ceilings in 

Seismic Design Categories D, E, and F are detailed to provide a restrained ceiling; 

nevertheless, ASTM E580 does not require bracing assemblies unless the ceiling 

area is larger than 1000 sq. ft. However, recent shake table testing indicates 

that long lengths of unbraced Tees cannot deliver the tributary seismic load to 

the fixed walls. Based on previous testing, it is estimated unbraced tees of 

greater than 30 feet should be avoided.

 For Seismic Design Category D, E, and F, these details typically include requirements for 

perimeter closure that provides fixity along two adjacent sides and allows 3⁄4” of slip on 

the opposite sides as well as periodic bracing assemblies in ceilings larger than 1000 

sq. ft. ASTM E580 includes requirements for the strength of connections between grid 

elements, minimum size (2”) for the closure angle, requirements for seismic separation 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-101

joints for ceilings larger than 2500 sq. ft., requirements for the support of lighting and 

mechanical services, and other requirements. See also Figures 6.3.4.1-8, 9, and 10.

 Where lights and diffusers and supported by the ceiling grid, either an intermediate duty 

or heavy duty grid must be used and supplementary framing and hanger wires may be 

required to provide direct support for such items. For instance, ASTM E580 requires 

heavy duty main runners with a load carrying capacity of 16 lb/ft for Seismic Design 

Category D, E and F. If cross runners with a load carrying capacity less than 16 lbs/ft are 

specified, and the corner of any light fixture is supported on two adjacent sides by these 

intermediate duty cross runners, then a supplementary hanger wire must be attached to 

the grid within 3” of each such corner. ASTM E580 includes several figures showing 

examples where these supplementary wires are required. These supplementary hanger 

wires are not required where heavy duty cross runners are specified. See Examples 

6.4.6.2 and 6.4.9 for additional requirements for ail diffusers and lights, respectively.

 Seismic bracing assemblies for suspended ceilings typically include a vertical 

compression strut and diagonally splayed wire braces as shown in Figure 6.3.4.1-9. 

Rigid bracing assemblies, such as those shown to brace overhead piping in Section 6.4.3 

may also be used. 

 ASTM E580 includes other requirements for clear openings for sprinkler heads, seismic 

separation joints, ceiling penetrations, and consideration of consequential damage and 

seismic interaction effects.

 The Division of the State Architect sets forth special ceiling standards for California 

schools in DSA IR 25-5 (California Department of General Services, 2009c),. This 

reference is a useful tool for designing in areas of potentially severe seismic shaking. In 

California, schools require ceiling bracing assemblies at a spacing of not more than 12 

feet in each direction; essential services buildings require bracing assemblies at a 

spacing of not more than 8 ft. by 12 ft. on center. DSA requirements differ slightly from 

those in ASTM E580; check the applicable jurisdiction for specific requirements.

 Ceiling details in Figures 6.3.4.1-7, 8, 9 and 10 are for Seismic Design Category D, E 

and F where the total ceiling weight does not exceed 4 psf or Seismic Design Category C 

where the total ceiling weight is between 2.5-4 psf. These details and diagrams are 

adapted from CA DSA IR 25-5 and ASTM E580. These figures are shown with heavy 

duty main runners and cross runners as required by DSA IR 25-5. Check the applicable 

jurisdiction; in some cases, ceilings heavier than 4 psf, or those with a plenum larger 

than a certain threshold, may require engineering. See references for additional 

information, updates, or for connection details and special conditions not shown.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-102

 There are shake table tests of ceilings which show that systems perform better when the 

tile almost nearly fills the available space and has ample overlap on the runners. These 

systems also have fewer tiles drop in tests than systems with smaller tiles. 

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 Section 13.5.6.3 includes a discussion of “integral construction” where 

the grid, panels, lights, piping, and other overhead services are shop assembled in 

modules and bracing is provided for the whole assembly. These are included as an 

alternative to the details shown here. Check the internet for proprietary systems or 

systems pre-approved for use in your jurisdiction.

 Safety wires are required for lights and mechanical services in suspended acoustic tile 

ceilings to prevent them from falling. Refer to Sections 6.4.9 and 6.4.6.2 for additional 

information. As noted above, supplementary hanger wires for the ceiling grid may also 

be required. The weight of supported items should never exceed the carrying capacity 

of the ceiling grid. Special details are required for heavy lighting or heavy mechanical 

items; these should be supported directly from the structure above and not depend on 

the ceiling grid for vertical or lateral support. For such fixed items, perimeter closure 

details may be required for the ceiling to prevent impact with the ceiling system. 

 Although not required by code, some manufacturers offer slide-on metal fabrications to 

clip the panels to the runnersfor enhanced stability. The main problem with such clips 

is that they defeat the purpose of an accessible ceiling space. In the case shown in 

Figure 6.3.4.1-4, the clips were installed but extreme shaking and ceiling movement at 

the walls still caused panels to fall.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-103

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.4.1-6 Compression struts and diagonal splayed wires are used to limit the movement 

of suspended acoustic tile ceilings. Per ASTM E580, this type of bracing 

assembly is required for ceiling areas larger than 1000 sq. ft. in Seismic Design 

Category D,E, and F (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).

Figure 6.3.4.1-7 Shake table testing of a proprietary suspended acoustic lay-in tile ceiling at 

MCEER (Photo courtesy of University of Buffalo, SUNY). Additional testing of 

these systems will help improve our understanding of their failure modes and 

help inform the design of more resilient systems.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-104

MITIGATION DETAILS

Ceiling details in Figures 6.3.4.1-8, 9, 10 and 11 are for Seismic Design Category D, E and F 

where the total ceiling weight does not exceed 4 psf or Seismic Design Category C where the 

total ceiling weight is between 2.5-4 psf. These are adapted from DSA IR 25-5 and ASTM E580. 

These figures are shown with heavy duty main runners and heavy duty cross runners as 

required by DSA IR 25-5; see discussion in text regarding the requirement in ASTM E580 for 

supplementary hanger wires at light fixtures supported by intermediate duty cross runners. 

Check the applicable jurisdiction; in some cases, ceilings heavier than 4psf, or those with a 

plenum larger than a certain threshold, may require engineering. See sources for additional 

information, updates, or for connection details and special conditions not shown.

Figure 6.3.4.1-8 Suspension system for acoustic lay-in panel ceilings – edge conditions (PR).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-105

Per DSA IR 25-5, ceiling areas less than 144 sq. ft, or fire rated ceilings less than 96 sq. ft., surrounded by walls braced 

to the structure above do not require lateral bracing assemblies when they are attached to two adjacent walls. (ASTM 

E580 does not require lateral bracing assemblies for ceilings less than 1000 sq. ft.; see text.) 

Figure 6.3.4.1-9 Suspension system for acoustic lay-in panel ceilings – lateral bracing assembly 

(PR).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-106

Figure 6.3.4.1-10 Suspension system for acoustic lay-in panel ceiling – general layout. Although 

installation standards suggest alignment of brace locations, intermediate tees 

(particularly with a 12 foot brace spacing), may not be sufficiently restrained in 

large ceilings (greater than 30 foot dimension). In order to follow the current 

standard and alleviate this problem, braces must be added in between the 12 

foot spacing. Another solution, not in complete compliance with the standard, 

would include staggering brace locations so more tee lines are braced (PR).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-107

Figure 6.3.4.1-11 Suspension system for lay acoustic lay-in panel ceiling – overhead attachment 

details (PR).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-108

6.3 Architectural Components

6.3.4 Ceilings

6.3.4.2 Ceilings applied Directly to Structure

Ceiling finishes such as gypsum board, interior lath and plaster, or exterior stucco soffits may 

be applied directly to structural elements such as wood ceiling joists, beam soffits, or the 

underside of structural slabs. These overhead finish materials may pose a falling hazard if the

finish materials and any backing substrate are not anchored to the structure with sufficiently 

strong positive attachments.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Ceilings applied directly to the structure are considered force controlled, and the principal 

objective of the code provisions is to prevent ceilings from falling. 

 Ceiling assemblies of gypsum board and plaster are covered by Chapter 25 of the 2012 

IBC, International Building Code (ICC, 2012). These are prescriptive requirements, 

including requirements for horizontal gypsum board diaphragm ceilings.

 Seismic loads for ceilings are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads 

for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

 ASCE 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007) contains specific 

requirements for ceilings that are surface applied or furred with materials that are 

applied directly to wood joists, concrete slabs, or steel decking. Compliance with the 

anchorage provisions of the standard is required when:

o The performance level is Immediate Occupancy.

o The performance level is Life Safety and the plaster ceiling is over 10 sq. ft. in 

area and attached to metal or wood lath.

o The performance level is Hazards Reduced and the ceiling is located in areas of 

public occupancy or egress. Such ceilings shall meet the Life Safety 

Nonstructural Performance Level.

 There are no prescriptive rehabilitation approaches for surface applied ceilings. Lateral 

forces are computed using ASCE 41-06 Section 11.7.4. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-109

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Vintage lath and plaster ceilings may fall if the wood or metal lath is not adequately 

secured to the structure above or if the plaster has separated from the lath. Even well 

secured ceilings may exhibit x-cracking in buildings with flexible diaphragms or 

cracking around the edges where the ceiling and walls meet or at locations with seismic 

joints that have not been properly detailed. These ceilings may be particularly 

vulnerable if they have deteriorated due to roof or plumbing leaks. 

 Stucco soffits on exterior surfaces, such as the underside of balconies or canopies, may 

fall if the wood or metal lath or finish materials are not adequately secured to the 

structure above or if the attachments have corroded or the components have 

deteriorated due to long term exposure or leakage from the roofing or decking above. 

Stucco soffits on cantilevered balconies or canopies may be particularly vulnerable as 

they often experience higher vertical accelerations than other structures.

 Large expanses of ceiling attached directly beneath flexible diaphragms may be 

damaged unless the ceiling is properly detailed with two adjacent sides attached and the 

opposite sides free and is subdivided into smaller areas (<2500 sq ft) with seismic 

expansion strips. Damage may occur around the perimeter, at changes in elevation, or 

at corners, columns, or other obstructions.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-110

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.4.2-1 Damage to metal lath and plaster ceiling applied to the underside of the 

concrete slab in 10-story residential building in the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile 

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers). The damage 

occurred due to pounding at the interface between two wings of the structure.

Figure 6.3.4.2-2 Damage to stucco soffit of historic church in the 2010 Chile Earthquake (Photo 

courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers). Stucco applied directly to the 

underside of the slab above without furring; portion at left has fallen, portion at 

right delaminated.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-111

Figure 6.3.4.2-3 Damage to soffit paneling and wood framing at hotel in the 2010 Chile 

Earthquake; panels and wood framing show signs of prior water damage and 

deterioration. Note also damage to storefront glazing and glass doors (Photos

courtesy of Rodrigo Retamales, Rubén Boroschek & Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-112

Figure 6.3.4.2-4 Damage to theater ceiling where foam panels and grid came down over 

orchestra seating and in upper balcony at the Municipal Theater Valparaiso in 

the 2010 Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).

A circular section of metal lath and plaster collapsed completely. It appears the 

metal lath may have only been attached around the perimeter to wood furring 

added in the plane of the steel framing; circular area of wired glass is in a plane 

above the level of the wood furring. Black panels are lightweight foam 

supported by a grid attached directly to the wood furring.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-113

Figure 6.3.4.2-5 Extensive failure of ceiling in the main terminal of the Santiago airport in the 

2010 Chile Earthquake. Metal panels with lights and diffusers hung from furring 

on short metal tabs; these remained in place but detail at lower left shows they 

also sustained some damage. Furring channels still in place throughout ceiling 

but majority of lightweight ceiling panels and much of the cross furring came 

down as shown at lower right photo of exterior soffit with same system (Photos 

courtesy of Antonio Iruretagoyena, Rubén Boroschek & Associates). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-114

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Provide positive connections from the gypsum board, plaster or stucco finish materials

to the furring and from the furring to the structure above. Protect these connections 

from water damage or corrosion. Check local codes for specific requirements or 

exemptions; in many cases these ceilings do not require special seismic detailing as 

long as the installation meets current industry standards. 

 It may be prudent to reduce the standard connector spacing on stucco soffits or finishes 

mounted beneath cantilevered balconies or canopies which may experience large 

vertical accelerations during an earthquake. Note that finishes with exterior exposure 

such as soffits also need to be designed for wind.

 Gypsum board ceilings are frequently used to meet requirements for fire-rating or 

sound proofing or both. Rated systems may include combinations of metal decking, 

wood subflooring, wood or metal joists, insulation, resilient furring strips, and one or 

several layers of gypsum board. While rated systems are typically proprietary, care must 

be taken to insure that appropriate fasteners are used for each successive layer and that 

they are installed with adequate penetration into the joists or furring strips. These 

multi-layer systems get increasingly heavy and also have increased in-plane stiffness. 

In some instances, care must be taken with the perimeter details to provide seismic 

expansion joints and to allow relative movement with the walls but maintain the firerating. Availability of certified systems with seismic detailing wherever sound or fire 

proofing is required should be checked and these systems must be installed exactly as 

specified and as tested otherwise the certification is not valid.

 Vintage lath and plaster ceilings still exist in many older structures. These ceilings 

should be in good condition with the lath securely fastened to the structure and the 

plaster secured to the lath. The most reliable way to upgrade these ceilings would be to 

remove and replace with a code compliant ceiling system. Where it is important to 

match other vintage finishes, screw attached metal lath with a new plaster finish can be 

used. As an alternative to replacement, screwing 1x2 wood strips at 16 in centers into 

the joists from below may serve as a safety net (See Figure 6.3.4.2-9). Some ornate 

theatre ceilings have been encapsulated from below with netting to reduce the falling 

hazard; such netting and all its attachments must be designed to contain any falling 

debris.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-115

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.4.2-6 Mitigation examples with 1-1/2” hat channels at 16” on centers screwed in 

place with #12 self drilling screws and furring strips ready to receive gypsum 

board (Photo courtesy of Excalibur Steel). No special seismic details are 

required for this type of ceiling where the gypsum board is well secured directly 

to furring strips.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-116

Figure 6.3.4.2-7 View of typical wood lath and plaster ceiling from the 1920’s from above (Photo 

courtesy of Cynthia Perry, BFP Engineers). The wood lath is well nailed to the 

underside of the ceiling joists. This type of ceiling typically remains intact

during an earthquake but may require crack repair and painting. Where the 

plaster has delaminated from the lath due to age or water leakage, wood strips 

could be installed from below as in Figure 6.3.4.2-8.

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-117

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.3.4.2-8 Gypsum board ceiling applied directly to structure (NE).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-118

Figure 6.3.4.2-9 Retrofit detail for existing lath and plaster (NE).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-119

6.3 Architectural Components

6.3.4 Ceilings

6.3.4.3 Suspended Heavy Ceilings

This category covers several different types of overhead ceilings suspended from above 

including dropped furred gypsum board ceilings and suspended lath and plaster ceilings. 

Suspended ceilings with wood or metal panels would also fit into this category. These systems 

typically have finish material attached to a two-way furring grid which is suspended from 

above. In order to reduce damage and prevent falling hazards the finish material must be well 

secured to the furring grid. Damage can be reduced if the ceiling is attached to the walls along 

two adjacent sides but separated from the walls along the opposite two sides and the furring 

grid is laterally braced to the structure above.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Suspended heavy ceiling systems are subject to the force requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10, 

Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13, 

Nonstructural Components. Ceiling assemblies of gypsum board and plaster are also subject to 

the requirements of the 2012 IBC, International Building Code, (ICC, 2012). 

 Section 13.5.6 of ASCE/SEI 7-10 contains requirements for special seismic perimeter 

details and lateral bracing assemblies for suspended ceilings but includes several 

significant exemptions from these requirements as follows. 

o Seismic detailing is not required for suspended ceilings less than or equal to 144 

square feet that are surrounded by walls or soffits that are laterally braced to the 

structure (this exemption applies to heavy or light suspended ceiling systems). 

o Seismic detailing is not required for suspended ceilings constructed of screw- or 

nail-attached gypsum board on one level (constructed in a single plane) that are 

surrounded by and connected to walls or soffits that are laterally braced to the 

structure above. Note that this exemption does not apply to plaster ceilings or 

to gypsum board ceilings on multiple levels (constructed in more than one 

ceiling plane elevation).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-120

 Chapter 25 of the 2012 IBC contains general provisions for horizontal assemblies of 

gypsum board and plaster, including prescriptive requirements for installation. There 

are, however, no provisions for lateral design of suspended ceilings.

 The Division of the State Architect sets forth ceiling standards for California schools in 

DSA-IR 25-3 Drywall Ceiling Suspension, Conventional Construction – One Layer

(California Department of General Services, 2005b). This document provides general 

guidance for design and detailing of heavy suspended ceilings.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007) classifies ceilings into 

one of four types. Suspended ceiling systems are classified into one of two categories:

 Category b, short-dropped gypsum board sections (less than 2-ft drop) attached to 

wood or metal furring supported by carrier members.

 Category c, dropped gypsum board sections greater than 2 and suspended metal lath 

and plaster. 

These ceiling systems are considered force and deformation sensitive. Compliance with the 

requirements of the standard is necessary when:

 The performance level is Immediate Occupancy.

 The performance level is Life Safety or Hazards Reduced in high or moderate seismicity 

areas.

If the performance level is Hazards Reduced and the ceiling is located in areas of public 

occupancy or egress, the ceiling must meet the Life Safety performance level.

Note that even if the ceiling system is exempt, light fixtures and air diffusers in the ceiling 

system may still be subject to support and bracing requirements. 

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Suspended heavy ceilings may be damaged both by direct acceleration and by 

deformation. Direct acceleration may cause connectors to become loose or deform, and 

differential movement of the ceiling relative to structural elements such as columns or 

walls or nonstructural elements such as partitions, lights, diffusers, or sprinklers may 

also damage the ceiling.

 As these systems are heavier than acoustic tile ceilings, the consequences of failure may 

be more hazardous for occupants since both the finish material and the furring grid may 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-121

fall. Ceiling failures are often costly because the space underneath may be unusable 

while the ceiling is repaired or replaced.

 Ceiling finishes may crack unless adequately isolated from the motion of the 

surrounding structural and nonstructural elements. Crack repair in gypsum board and 

plaster ceilings is a common expense following earthquakes.

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.4.3-1 Damage to ornate wire lath and plaster ceiling in the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile 

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers). Wire lath is 

attached to arches or to wood furring suspended from the roof framing.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-122

Figure 6.3.4.3-2a Complete collapse of a large suspended gypsum board ceiling over a swimming facility in Japan (Photo courtesy of Shojiro Motoyui, Tokyo Institute of 

Technology). This type of failure has been replicated on the E-defense shake 

table and occurs when the U-shaped clip holding the cross furring (M-bar) to 

the main runners (channel) opens into a V-shape and drops the furring grid. This 

type of failure is not common in the U.S.

Figure 6.3.4.3-2b Schematic view of Japanese drywall ceiling grid. These ceilings are also typically installed with lateral bracing and 200mm edge clearance. Clip shown at lower 

right opens when the M-bar slides back and forth relative to the main runner, particularly those located near a diagonal brace. This type of clip is not 

common in the U.S (Source: “Dynamic characteristics of Japanese style of 

ceiling,” Motoyui, S., Satoh, Y., and Kawanishi, T. Proceedings 7CUEE & 5ICEE, March 2010). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-123

Figure 6.3.4.3-3 Collapse of exterior soffit at Jefferson Elementary School in Calexico in the 2010 

Baja California Earthquake; approximately 1200 sq ft of soffit collapsed at this 

school built in the 1960’s (Photo courtesy of Baja Earthquake Reconnaissance 

Team, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI), published in the EERI 

July 2010 Newsletter).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Special seismic detailing may be required for heavy ceilings such as plaster, wood or 

metal panels, or for gypsum board ceilings at multiple levels. For these cases, details 

are typically configured similar to those used for acoustic ceilings with more frequent 

bracing and robust members and connections to account for the increased weight. 

Seismic bracing for suspended heavy ceilings typically includes a vertical compression 

strut and diagonally splayed wire braces as shown in Figure 6.3.4.3-7. Rigid bracing 

(strut or cold-formed steel) is sometimes used in lieu of splayed wire bracing and 

compression posts. Special perimeter details typically include 2” wide perimeter closure 

angles, fixed attachments on two adjacent walls and clearance of at least 3⁄4” from the 

two opposite walls as shown in Figure 6.3.4.3-5. 

 Details shown in Figures 6.3.4.3-5, 6.3.4.3-6, and 6.3.4.3-7 are based on requirements 

for schools in California. The Division of the State Architect sets forth ceiling standards 

for California schools in DSA-IR 25-3 Drywall Ceiling Suspension, Conventional 

Construction – One Layer (California Department of General Services, 2005b). This 

standard refers to DSA-IR 25-5 Metal Suspension Systems for Lay-in Panel Ceilings

(California Department of General Services, 2009c) for specific details regarding the 

bracing assembly. These references are useful tools for designing in areas of potentially 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-124

severe seismic shaking or in jurisdictions where bracing is required. In California, 

ceiling bracing assemblies at a spacing of not more than 12 feet in each direction are 

required in schools and bracing assemblies at a spacing of not more than 8 ft by 12 ft 

on center, as shown in Figure 6.3.4.3-5, are required in essential services buildings.

 This section provides prescriptive details for suspended gypsum board ceilings where 

the grid is composed of channel sections for the main runners with hat channels wired 

below as the cross furring. Check with manufacturers for alternative proprietary 

systems that use T-bars for both the main and cross runners.

 Vintage lath and plaster ceilings are typically hung with wood hangers and runners 

without consideration of seismic design forces. Diagonal 45 degree splay bracing wires 

can be added at select wood hanger locations (for instance, 4 ft by 6 ft) to brace these 

ceilings. Some jurisdictions, such as the Salt Lake City School District, require that 

vintage lath and plaster ceilings be removed and replaced with compliant ceiling 

systems. Where historic preservation considerations require and the local codes permit, 

replacement plaster ceilings may be constructed with screw-attached metal lath and 

dedicated bracing. As a lower cost alternative to replacement in wood framed 

construction, the seismic risk posed by a plaster ceiling can be reduced by screwing 1x2 

wood strips at 16” centers into wood joists from below (oriented perpendicular to the 

joists) to serve as a safety net. Some ornate theatre ceilings have been effectively 

encapsulated from below with netting to reduce the falling hazard; such netting and all 

its attachments must be designed to contain any falling debris.

 Ceiling anchorage needs to be coordinated with the anchorage for lighting, air diffusers, 

and sprinkler lines. All recessed or drop-in light fixtures and diffusers must be 

supported directly by main runners or by supplemental framing with positive attachment 

to main runners. In order to minimize their potential falling hazard, lights, diffusers and 

similar items are required to be independently supported by the structure, typically with 

a minimum of two wires, as discussed in Sections 6.4.6.2 and 6.4.9.3. In some 

locations and occupancies, penetrations for sprinkler heads in ceilings braced with 

splayed wire bracing are required to have a 2 inch oversized opening to allow for free 

movement of 1 inch in all horizontal directions. Check local code requirements.

 Mechanical connectors between the component parts of the ceiling assembly must be 

chosen carefully to avoid failures. Catastrophic failures of ceiling systems in Japan have 

been replicated during shake table testing because the U-shaped mechanical clip used 

to hang the cross furring from the main runner can open during an earthquake, 

dropping the cross furring and drywall as shown in Figures 6.3.4.3-2. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-125

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.4.3-4 Details of suspended and braced plaster ceiling,. Rigid bracing and 

compression posts (highlighted) are provided at 6 ft by 8 ft on center. Note 

cross furring saddle tied to black channel (main runner) from below; 

supplementary framing for lights runs parallel to cross furring and saddle tied to 

main runner from above (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-126

MITIGATION DETAILS

Per ASCE 7-10, suspended ceilings constructed of screw- or nail-attached gypsum board on one level that 

are surrounded by and connected to walls or soffits that are laterally braced to the structure above are 

exempt from any special seismic design requirements. 

The exemption above does not apply to suspended plaster ceilings, other heavy ceilings or to gypsum 

board ceilings at more than one level or that are not adequately supported by surrounding walls; these 

may require bracing assemblies and special edge details such as those shown here. Check applicable 

code requirements. Details in Figures 6.3.4.3-6, 7, and 8 are adapted from California DSA IR 25-3 (revised 

7-21-05) that provides prescriptive details for a single layer of suspended gypsum board; check with DSA 

for additional details and the latest requirements (http://www.dsa.dgs.ca.gov/Pubs/IRManual.htm). These 

details are shown with standard steel shapes; proprietary T-bar systems are also available.

Figure 6.3.4.3-5 Diagrammatic view of suspended heavy ceiling grid and lateral bracing (PR).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-127

Figure 6.3.4.3-6 Perimeter details for suspended gypsum board ceiling (PR).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-128

Figure 6.3.4.3-7 Details for lateral bracing assembly for suspended gypsum board ceiling (PR).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-130

6.3 Architectural Components

6.3.5 Parapets and Appendages

6.3.5.1 Unreinforced Masonry Parapets 

Unreinforced masonry (URM) parapets, cornices and appendages pose a significant falling 

hazard and have caused numerous injuries and required costly repairs in past earthquakes.

While the function of parapets is “nonstructural,” i.e., to prevent fire spread, create a safety 

railing or conceal roof-mounted equipment, they are a structural concern that requires 

engineering expertise to address. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Parapets are subject to the force requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for 

Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010) Chapter 13, Nonstructural Components. In 

general, unreinforced masonry construction is not permitted in areas of moderate and high 

seismicity (Seismic Design Categories B and higher).

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies 

unreinforced masonry parapets as force-controlled. Compliance with the requirements of the 

standard is required for all performance levels in areas of high, moderate and low seismicity. If 

the performance level is Hazards Reduced and the unreinforced masonry parapet is located in 

areas of public occupancy or egress, it must meet the Life Safety performance level. If the 

unreinforced masonry parapet is not over 4 feet in height, it may be retrofitted using 

prescriptive design concepts.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Heavy unbraced parapets typically fail out-of-plane at the roofline and may take part of 

the building wall with it as they fall. Even small pieces of masonry falling several stories 

may cause serious bodily injury.

 Appendages may crack or spall; connections may be damaged. Pounding between 

adjacent buildings often results in damage to brittle masonry parapets, cornices, and 

appendages.

 Failed parapets may fall either inwards or outward. When parapets collapse inward they 

can damage the roof and have the potential to fall through light roof construction 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-131

posing a safety hazard to occupants below. If they collapse outward they can fall to the 

street or onto the roof of an adjacent property. 

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.5.1-1 URM parapet fell and smashed two cars in the 1992 magnitude-7.2 Petrolia 

Earthquake. A parapet at same location in Ferndale, California failed in 1906 

and killed two cows (NGDC, 2009).

Figure 6.3.5.1-2 Unreinforced masonry parapet failures along Beach Street, Watsonville in the 

1989 magnitude-6.9 Loma Prieta Earthquake (NGDC, 2009).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-132

Figure 6.3.5.1-3 Damage to roof framing caused by failure of overhanging brick masonry during 

the 1962 magnitude-5.8 Cache Valley, Utah earthquake (Photo courtesy of 

PEER Steinbrugge Collection, No. S828).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-133

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Some jurisdictions have parapet ordinances requiring seismic bracing for URM parapets 

along a public right of way; check the local jurisdiction for requirements. 

 Parapet and roof conditions may vary widely. An engineered design accounting for 

specific as-built construction details is needed to provide reliable earthquake 

performance. Flashing and weatherproofing must be provided for any roof-mounted 

connections.

 The reliability of bolts in unreinforced masonry is heavily dependent on the quality of 

masonry and the amount of overburden (weight above the anchor). With poor quality 

masonry or little overburden, oversized plate washers or a continuous plate may be 

needed on the outside face of the wall to enhance the effectiveness of the anchorage.

 Connection details for terra cotta cornices and appendages are similar to those for 

anchored veneer. See Section 6.3.1.2 and check the internet for various types of 

masonry, stone and veneer anchors.

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.5.1-4 Bracing of URM parapet (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-134

Figure 6.3.5.1-5 Bracing of unreinforced masonry parapet (Photo courtesy of Degenkolb 

Engineers).

Figure 6.3.5.1-6 Close-up of parapet bracing (Photo courtesy of Degenkolb Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-135

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.3.5.1-7 Unreinforced masonry parapet (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-136

6.3 Architectural Components

6.3.6 Canopies, Marquees, and Signs

6.3.6.1 Canopies, Marquees, and Signs 

Cantilevered appendages of any type may pose a significant falling hazard when located above 

an entrance or along a sidewalk or street. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 2010)

classifies canopies, marquees, and signs as “Appendages and Ornamentations.” Both the 

anchorage of the component and the structure of the component itself must be designed for 

gravity, wind, and seismic loads. Special consideration of the vertical response of components 

that cantilever from the structure is necessary. ASCE/SEI 7-10 specifies a vertical force 

component that is applied concurrently with the lateral design force for design. 

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007) classifies canopies, 

marquees, and signs as force-controlled. Compliance with the requirements of the standard is 

required for all performance levels in areas of high, moderate, and low seismicity. Freestanding marquees are subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06. Canvas or fabric 

covered projections are not subject to the rehabilitation requirements. If the performance level 

is Hazards Reduced and the component is located in areas of public occupancy or egress, it

must meet the Life Safety performance level. 

Typical Causes of Damage

 Unbraced cantilevered items may bounce or swing; connection hardware may be 

undersized or corroded; items may collapse and fall.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-137

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.6.1-1 Failure of commercial sign in the 1979 Imperial Valley, California earthquake 

(Photo courtesy of Robert Reitherman). 

Figure 6.3.6.1-2 Reinforced concrete appendage dangling from connection on one side; impact 

damaged the curtain wall and created a serious hazard above the entrance of 

the Corte de Apelaciones de Talca in the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake 

(Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-138

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Anchorage detail shown is for a cantilevered canopy, sign, or marquee that is oriented 

horizontally; the vertical braces protect the item from vertical accelerations and prevent 

bouncing. 

 Seismic protection of building appendages requires a reliable connection from the 

appendage to structural framing members. Heavy canopies, marquees, or signs may 

require installation of supplemental framing to deliver seismic demands to primary 

structural framing elements.

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.3.6.1-3 Canopy, marquee, or sign support (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-139

6.3 Architectural Components

6.3.7 Chimneys and Stacks

6.3.7.1 Unreinforced Masonry Chimney 

Unreinforced masonry (URM) chimneys are extremely vulnerable to earthquake damage; their 

behavior has long been used as an indicator of seismic intensity as in the Modified Mercalli 

Intensity (MMI) scale. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Masonry chimneys are subject to the force requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design 

Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13, Nonstructural Components. 

In addition, masonry fireplaces are subject to the prescriptive requirements of 2012 IBC, 

International Building Code, (ICC 2012), Chapter 21. The 2012 IBC provisions focus on seismic 

reinforcing and anchorage of masonry fireplaces. In general, unreinforced masonry chimney 

construction is not permitted in areas of moderate and high seismicity (Seismic Design 

Categories C and higher).

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007) classifies 

unreinforced masonry chimneys as force-controlled. Compliance with the requirements of the 

standard is required for all performance levels in areas of high and moderate seismicity. If the 

performance level is Hazards Reduced and the unreinforced masonry chimney is located in 

areas of public occupancy or egress, it must meet the Life Safety performance level. Residential 

unreinforced masonry chimneys may be retrofitted using prescriptive design concepts.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Unreinforced masonry chimneys may crack, spall, separate from the structure, or 

collapse. They may fall through the roof structure and injure occupants or fall to the 

ground. 

 Chimneys may suffer damage even at relatively low levels of ground shaking.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-140

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.7.1-1 Chimney collapsed and fell through the roof; approximately 2,600 chimneys 

were destroyed in the 1992 Big Bear City, California earthquake (NGDC, 2009). 

Figure 6.3.7.1-2 Residential metal flue in wood frame chimney that failed in the 2003 

magnitude-6.5 San Simeon earthquake. The house fell off its cripple wall, 

pushing over the chimney (Photo courtesy of Michael Mahoney).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-141

Figure 6.3.7.1-3 Chimney collapse (Photo courtesy of Earthquake Engineering Research 

Institute).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-142

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 The most reliable mitigation measure is to remove a URM chimney and replace it with a 

metal flue inside a framed enclosure or to remove the chimney and firebox entirely.

 If the chimney is not being used, reducing its height to not more than 1 to 2 feet above 

the roofline will limit the potential for damage.

 Chimney and roof configurations vary widely. If a URM chimney is to be braced in place, 

an engineered design is needed to account for specific as-built construction details.

 To protect against a chimney falling in toward the roof and posing a safety hazard 

below, the roof can be locally strengthened with plywood.

 Large historically important chimneys need special consideration; these could be 

reinforced using a “center core” technology to improve their performance; this method 

involves core drilling the masonry and filling the cores with reinforcing and grout.

 Fire code requirements and local ordinances must be considered when considering 

strategies for reducing the risk of unreinforced masonry chimneys.

 The City of Seattle developed guidelines for Alteration and Repair of Unreinforced 

Masonry Chimneys following the 2001 Nisqually Earthquake; these can be found at 

http://www.seattle.gov/dclu/codes/dr/DR2004-5.pdf and include details for straps at 

the roof and floor lines, bracing above the roofline, and partial replacement above the 

roofline. Similarly, the Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety developed 

prescriptive measures for Reconstruction and Replacement of Earthquake Damaged 

Masonry Chimneys, available at 

http://ladbs.org/LADBSWeb/LADBS_Forms/InformationBulletins/IB-P-BC2008-

070EQDamagedChimney.pdf.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-143

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.7.1-4 Braced chimney (FEMA, 2004).

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.3.7.1-5 Unreinforced masonry chimney bracing (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-144

6.3 Architectural Components

6.3.8 Stairways

6.3.8.1 Stairways

This includes stairs between floors, which may be independent of the structure, or integral with 

it. Stairs are needed for exiting following an earthquake and hence protecting them from 

damage and keeping them clear should be a high priority. Protecting a stair from damage is a 

structural concern that requires engineering expertise to address. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings (ASCE, 2010), Section 13.1.3.1 specifies 

that systems required for life-safety purposes after an earthquake, including exit stairways, be 

classified as designated seismic systems and designed using a component importance factor, Ip, 

of 1.5. Designated seismic systems may require engineering calculations, special inspection, 

etc. Stairways must be designed to accommodate story drift, while having sufficient strength to 

resist inertial loads.

 The minimum lateral loads and seismic relative displacements on stairways are

determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Chapter 13. 

 Where the actual design drifts of the structure for displacement analysis are not known, 

the allowable story drifts of ASCE/SEI 7-10, Chapter 12 may be used.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007) classifies stairs and 

stair enclosures as either acceleration or deformation sensitive, depending on the predominant 

behavior. Components of stairs that are attached to adjacent floors or the floor framing are 

considered deformation sensitive. All other stair components are considered acceleration 

sensitive.

 Stairs are subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06 when the performance level is 

Immediate Occupancy, or in regions of high and moderate seismicity when the 

performance level is Life Safety.

 The evaluation must consider the stairs and their connection to the supports, 

supporting and adjacent walls, windows, and other elements of the stair shaft system.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-145

 Acceptance criteria focus on verifying that the stairs have sufficient strength to resist 

out-of-plane forces, and the ability to accommodate the expected relative 

displacements.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Stairs are primarily damaged by interstory drift, i.e., differential movement of the 

adjacent floors, because the stairs must accommodate the differential movement. Stair 

damage is more likely to occur in flexible buildings with larger interstory drift and less 

likely to occur in stiffer buildings.

o When stairs are rigidly attached to both floor levels, the stair structure will try to 

act like a diagonal brace and could be damaged as shown in Figure 6.3.8.1-3.

o When one end or both ends of the stair have slip or sliding connections, the 

design differential movement could be exceeded causing failure of the 

connection and perhaps collapse of the stair as shown in Figures 6.3.8.1-4 and 

6.3.8.1-5.

o Steel and concrete stairs are vulnerable to inter-story drifts if not specially

detailed for seismic resistance. Recent shake table testing of a full scale 5-story 

building at University of California, San Diego (project website is located at 

http://bncs.ucsd.edu/) revealed that standard prefabricated steel stairs can be 

badly damaged or even collapse at inter-drift levels less than expected in a 

Design Earthquake in flexible buildings. 

 Damage to stairs will also vary depending on the material of construction, as follows:

o Damage has been observed most often in stairs with concrete stringer 

assemblies, which, if not specifically detailed for movement, will naturally have 

very rigid connections. Concrete stairs are typically not detailed for ductility, so 

large tension or compression demands can lead to severe damage.

o Single run stairs with steel stringers as shown in Figure 6.3.8.1-1, not detailed 

with slip connections, will provide stiff resistance to drift which could cause 

buckling of the stringers or failure of the connections.

o Typical commercial steel exit stairways, often purchased on a “design-build” 

basis, are generally not provided with drift allowance on the basis that, with 

normal landing configurations, sufficient flexibility is provided. However, recent 

testing at the University of California, San Diego), has shown that these stairs can 

suffer dangerous damage if not specifically detailed for slip, or provided with 

ductile connection details.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-146

o Wooden stairs are generally in smaller, stiff buildings and have inherent 

flexibility in connections. Damage to wooden stairs has not been common, 

although configurations which provide direct bracing between floors (e.g., a 

straight run from ground to first floor)should be provided with a slip connection.

 The walls surrounding a stairway may be damaged during an earthquake causing debris 

to fall into the stairwell and rendering the stairs unusable. Brittle materials such as 

brick, hollow clay tile, or glass are particularly vulnerable and may create falling and 

debris hazards in stair enclosures as shown in Figure 6.3.8.1-2.

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.8.1-1 Stairway damaged by drift in the 1994 magnitude-6.7 Northridge, California 

earthquake (Photo courtesy of Wiss, Jenney, Elstner Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-147

Figure 6.3.8.1-2 View of stairway in the Banco Central Building, Managua, Nicaragua after the 

1972 magnitude-6.2 Managua Earthquake. Most of the stairs were covered with 

debris that resulted from the failure of the hollow tile partitions surrounding the 

stairs. This photograph highlights the need to not only prevent direct damage to 

stairway framing and connections, but also to protect against damage to 

surrounding walls (Photo courtesy of PEER Godden Collection, No. J94).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-148

Figure 6.3.8.1-3 Stairs damaged up the full height of this apartment building in Viña del Mar in 

the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Santiago Pujol, 

Purdue University). The stairs were rigidly attached at adjacent floors and 

behaved like diagonal braces although they were neither designed nor detailed 

to function as structural braces.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-149

Figure 6.3.8.1-4 Stair support condition at Forsyth-Barr Building in Christchurch, New Zealand. 

Precast stair runs have completely pulled off supports and collapsed into 

stairwell (Photo courtesy of Des Bull, Holmes Consulting Group).

Figure 6.3.8.1-5 One story precast stair units stacked up at base of stairwell after falling off the 

sliding end supports and collapsing into stairwell (Photo courtesy of Des Bull, 

Holmes Consulting Group).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-150

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Precast connection details in Christchurch, New Zealand often featured sliding joints in 

“pockets” that allowed only limited movement that tended to put the stair in 

compression. After stairs were compressed and shortened in one direction, the bearing 

length was reduced for sliding in the other direction. See Figure 6.3.8.1-6. Sliding 

joints on stairs can also cause collapse if the bearing length is simply too small. 

Guidelines in New Zealand recommend providing safe movement for 1.5 x the maximum 

expected drift.

 In order to prevent stairs from behaving like diagonal struts between adjacent floors, 

the stairs should be detailed with a fixed connection at one floor and a sliding 

connection at the other that allows movement parallel to the direction of the stair. 

Movement allowance must be adequate for the maximum possible drift, or connections 

provided with a fail-safe mechanism to prevent gravity failure. See Figures 

6.3.8.1-7 (steel) and 6.3.8.1-8 (wood).

 Sliding “gang plank” connections or connections with slotted holes can also be used to 

isolate the stair from one of the attached floors and prevent damage due to interstory 

drift. The connection must be designed to accommodate the anticipated drift. 

 If stair enclosures are built using brittle materials such as unreinforced masonry, hollow 

clay tile, glass block, or skylights, it is recommended that they be encapsulated or 

replaced to prevent falling hazards and debris in the stairwell. Provide bracing and 

anchorage for pipes, lighting, emergency lighting or ducts to prevent falling hazards 

and debris in the stairwell. Maintaining safe exits is a critical element of earthquake 

safety.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-151

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.3.8.1-6 Figure showing how inadequate sliding surface can compress and then drop 

precast stair sections.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-152

Figure 6.3.8.1-7 Example slip connection for steel stair stringer (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-153

Figure 6.3.8.1-8 Example slip connection for wood stair with single run between floors (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-154

6.3 Architectural Components

6.3.9 Freestanding Walls or Fences

6.3.9.1 Freestanding Masonry Wall or Fence

This category covers freestanding (cantilevered) walls and fences built of either reinforced or 

unreinforced masonry. Freestanding fences of 6 feet or less are often not covered by code 

provisions; nevertheless, unreinforced or poorly reinforced masonry walls or fences or those 

with inadequate foundations are vulnerable to earthquake damage.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Unreinforced masonry elements perform poorly in earthquakes; unreinforced or underreinforced masonry walls and fences frequently fail out-of-plane and may collapse 

completely. Walls with inadequate foundations may also fail out-of-plane and tip over.

 Falling masonry walls and fences may injure people and property and block pedestrian 

walkways, driveways, loading docks, streets and access for emergency vehicles during 

an emergency.

 When these fences serve as a security perimeter, their failure may result in a security 

breach following an earthquake resulting in additional property damage due to 

trespassing or looting.

 The 1994 Northridge Earthquake damaged many miles of poorly constructed concrete 

masonry unit (CMU) fences and caused collapse of walls with inadequate or absent 

reinforcing and foundations in Northridge and Sylmar, California, covering sidewalks

with debris, as shown in Figure 6.3.9.1-1. After the 2010 Haiti Earthquake, the debris

were apparent from aerial photos of the affected areas.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-155

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.3.9.1-1 Collapse of freestanding CMU walls covering much of the sidewalk in the 1994 

magnitude-6.7 Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Robert Reitherman).

The rubble reveals that the wall was unreinforced. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-156

Figure 6.3.9.1-2 Freestanding masonry fences with inadequate reinforcement collapsed covering

both sides of this street in Port-au-Prince in the 2010 magnitude-7 Haiti 

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Yves Montoban). Many miles of such fencing 

collapsed in the 2010 Haiti Earthquake.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-157

Figure 6.3.9.1-3 Damage to reinforced masonry boundary fence at industrial facility in Southern 

Peru; out-of-plane movement at construction joint in wall without sufficient 

reinforcing for the level of shaking experienced at this location in the 

2001magnitude-8.4 Peru Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP 

Engineers). Additional boundary steel or reinforced concrete boundary columns 

located either side of construction joints would improve the performance of this 

type of fence.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-158

Figure 6.3.9.1-4 Photo at top shows complete collapse of poorly detailed confined masonry 

fence in foreground; partial collapse of poorly detailed confined masonry fence 

in distance at left; no damage to well detailed confined masonry fence in 

distance at right in the 2010 Haiti Earthquake. Close-up view of well-detailed 

confined masonry fence in bottom photo with concrete columns and bond 

beam at top (Photos courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers). Fences in 

foreground and at right formed the security perimeter at an electric power plant 

in Port-au-Prince. 

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Freestanding walls or fences built of concrete masonry units (CMU), brick or stone need 

to be engineered and constructed to cantilever from the base with appropriate 

foundations, adequate reinforcing, good quality mortar, and good workmanship. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-159

Seismic loading at the base of tall cantilever walls can be substantial in a major 

earthquake. Such walls could be constructed using standard seismic detailing for 

reinforced masonry such as the details shown in Figure 6.3.9.1-6 and 7. Engineered 

reinforced concrete walls would clearly be another, although more costly, alternative.

 The State of California has published several guidelines that relate to the construction of 

such fences; see DSA IR 21-1 Masonry Wall – Non Structural, DSA IR 21-2 Concrete 

Masonry High Lift Grouting Method, DSA IR 21-3 Clay Brick Masonry High Lift Grouting 

Method, and DSA IR 21-4 Masonry: Concrete Masonry Unit Standards (California 

Department of General Services, 2007a, 2009b, 1999, and 2007b). DSA IR 21-1 

describes minimum requirements for a garden wall or screen wall to be used at

California schools or essential facilities. Other jurisdictions may have standard details 

for highway sound walls or short retaining walls that could be adapted for use. Some 

jurisdictions or homeowner associations may also have zoning restrictions or similar 

that limit the height, setbacks, or materials used for fencing; check the local jurisdiction. 

The details shown in Figure 6.3.9.1-5 were adapted from details provided online by the 

City of San Diego, California for reinforced CMU fences up to 6 feet in height. 

 While design and construction of unreinforced masonry walls or fences typically do not

come under the purview of the building code, there are many hazardous masonry walls 

or fences in existence. These could be demolished and replaced with a reinforced 

masonry fence, wood fence, or cyclone fence. As an alternative, the performance of 

unreinforced masonry walls with adequate foundations could be substantially improved 

by using retrofit details for confined masonry. Even though the use of confined 

masonry is rare in the U.S., it is common in other parts of the world. This system 

utilizes reinforced concrete boundary members on all four sides of each unreinforced 

masonry wall panel with a panel size limited to roughly 3 meters in length. The 

Confined Masonry Network (http://www.confinedmasonry.org/) provides information 

and details on this subject.

 The International Building Code exempts fences from a building permit if the fence is 

not over 6 feet in height. The code also states that work must still comply with building 

code requirements even when a permit is not required.

 Fence heights may also be regulated by the zoning laws of the city. For specific 

information about the zoning regulations for your fence on your lot, contact the 

development services and zoning departments for requirements.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-160

MITIGATION DETAILS

1. ALL MATERIAL AND WORKMANSHIP SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE AUTHORITY HAVING 

JURISDICTION.

2. CONCRETE SHALL ATTAIN A COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 2,500PSI MINIMUM AT 28 DAYS.

3. CONCRETE BLOCK UNITS SHALL BE MEDIUM OR NORMAL WEIGHT UNITS CONFORMING TO ASTM C90 

(LATEST REVISION).

4. MORTAR SHALL BE TYPE S CONFORMING TO ASTM C270 WITH A COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 1,800PSI 

MINIMUM AT 28 DAYS.

5. GROUT SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM C476 AND BE COMPOSED OF THE FOLLOWING RATIO BY VOLUME: 1 PART 

PORTLAND CEMENT, 3-PARTS SAND, 2-PARTS PEA GRAVEL, AND SUFFICIENT WATER FOR POURING WITHOUT 

SEGREGATION OF GROUT CONSTITUENTS (MIN. COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 2,000PSI AT 28 DAYS).

6. ALL REINFORCING STEEL SHALL COMPLY WITH ASTM A615, GRADE 60. VERTICAL STEEL SHALL BE CENTERED 

IN THE CONCRETE BLOCK CELL IN WHICH IT IS LOCATED, U.O.N.

7. WALL JOINT REINFORCING STEEL SHALL BE DUR-O-WAL WIRE CONFORMING TO ASTM A82 AND ASTM A641 

– STANDARD, MILL GALVANIZED MINIMUM LAP SPLICE OF JOINT REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE 12 INCHES.

8. CELLS CONTAINING REINFORCING STEEL SHALL BE SOLID GROUTED.

9. ALL HORIZONTAL WALL REINFORCING BARS SHALL BE PLACED IN BOND BEAM UNITS. ALL JOINT 

REINFORCING SHALL BE PLACED IN THE MORTARED BED JOINT.

10. ALL GROUT SHALL BE CONSOLIDATED BY VIBRATING IMMEDIATELY. RECONSOLIDATE GROUT AFTER INITIAL 

WATER LOSS BUT BEFORE PLASTICITY IS LOST TO INSURE ADEQUATE CONSOLIDATION.

11. CONCRETE BLOCK UNITS ARE TO BE STAGGERED (COMMON BOND) AND ARE TO HAVE THE VERTICAL 

CONTINUITY OF THE CELLS UNOBSTRUCTED.

12. ALL FOOTINGS MUST EXTEND INTO FIRM UNDISTURBED NATURAL SOIL OR SOIL WHICH HAS BEEN 

COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 90 PERCENT MAXIMUM DENSITY.

13. THESE WALLS SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUCTED ON EXPANSIVE SOIL (EXPANSION INDEX GREATER THAN 20), 

LIQUEFIABLE SOILS OR OTHER QUESTIONABLE SOILS, UNLESS THE SOIL HAS BEEN SPECIALLY PREPARED IN 

ACCORDANCE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS OF A CIVIL OR GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER.

14. PROVIDE VERTICAL CONTROL JOINTS AT 25’-0” ON CENTER MAXIMUM.

15. FENCE WALL DESIGN INCLUDES 1⁄2” OF PLASTER (OR VENEER) ON EACH SID OF THE WALL. NO FINISHES 

WITH A TOTAL WEIGHT GREATER THAN 13PSF (SUMMATION OF BOTH SIDES OF WALL) ARE ALLOWED.

Figure 6.3.9.1-5 6ft maximum height concrete masonry unit (CMU) wall (PR) [1 of 2].
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-161

Figure 6.3.9.1-5 6ft maximum height concrete masonry unit (CMU) wall (PR) [2 of 2].
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-162

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

In the following sections, the seismic performance of individual mechanical components will be 

discussed. However, it is critical to remember that mechanical components act and interact 

together as systems. While each component is examined individually, the performance of that 

component and the system as a whole depends on the performance of many individual 

components. Depending on the performance objectives of the structure, these interactions may 

be inconsequential, or should be studied in greater depth. For example, the following would be 

considered for a rooftop fire water tank, mounted close the edge of the building overlooking a 

busy sidewalk:

• If the performance objective is limited to protect the occupants of the sidewalk from 

the tank falling on them, the seismic evaluation may focus on the adequacy of the tank 

legs, bracing, and anchorage to the roof structure.

• If the performance objective is to prevent the contents of the tank from flooding the 

floor below, then the evaluation must not only consider the anchorage of the tank but 

the connections and bracing of the rooftop piping associated with the tank. 

• If the performance objective is to provide a reliable fire suppression system that may 

function after an earthquake, the tank must be considered as part of a complete 

system that includes fire sprinkler risers, mains, branches and sprinkler drops. The 

possibility of interactions between the fire protection piping and adjacent structural or 

nonstructural elements, such as sprinkler heads and hard ceilings, should also be 

considered.

Having a clear view of the performance objectives will guide the selection of the proper degree

of investigation and the mitigation measures needed.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-163

6.4.1 Mechanical Equipment

6.4.1.1 Boilers, Furnaces, Pumps, and Chillers

This category includes equipment such as boilers, furnaces, humidifiers, pumps, chillers and 

similar that are anchored to a concrete floor or housekeeping pad. These items are either 

rigidly anchored or have vibration isolation. 

In recent shake table testing of a full scale 5story building performed at UC San Diego (see 

Section 6.1.3), a vibration isolated cooling tower and a self-contained air handling unit, were 

subjected to severe earthquake motions. The cooling tower and air handling unit were both 

anchored to the roof of the building per code requirements. Both units were energized and the 

time of the testing and both were undamaged after all the testing was concluded. There was, 

however, one issue. As the shaking level increased, water in the cooling tower sloshed and 

spilled resulting in loss of water. After each test, the cooling tower was refilled with water. At 

the largest shaking level, the cooling tower lost half of its water capacity because of spillage. 

This loss of water would affect the cooling tower’s ability to maintain its full cooling capability 

until the water capacity was restored.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for boilers, furnaces, pumps, and chillers are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, 

Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010) Chapter 13. The 

principal objective of the code provisions is to prevent the component from sliding or 

overturning.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires anchorage design for all equipment in Seismic Design 

Categories D, E, and F if the equipment weighs over 400 pounds, or if the item weighs

over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 feet above the floor. Lighter items may be 

exempt if the component Importance Factor, Ip, is 1.0. 

 Items that are exempt from the anchorage design requirements noted above are still 

required to be positively anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be 

designed or detailed on the construction documents. They must also be provided with 

flexible connections between the equipment and associated pipes, ducts, or conduits

unless alternate measures are used to protect the connection.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-164

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies boilers, 

furnaces, pumps, and chillers as force controlled. These components are subject to the 

provisions of the standard when the performance level is Immediate Occupancy, or Life Safety 

in high, moderate and low seismicity areas, if:

 The item weighs more than 400 pounds,

 The item is unanchored, weighs over 100 pounds and is subject to overturning. These 

items may be exempt if they have a factor of safety greater than 1.5 when design loads are 

applied.

 The item weighs over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 feet above the floor.

 The equipment is a boiler or furnace. 

Acceptance criteria for boilers, furnaces, pumps, and chillers focuses on providing adequate 

anchorage. 

Typical Causes of Damage

 The primary concern is that equipment may slide, tilt or overturn. Anchorage should be 

made to a structural element with sufficient capacity to resist the anchorage forces, such 

as a concrete slab or housekeeping pad. Heavy equipment may be anchored to an 

unanchored or poorly reinforced housekeeping pad and the pad may shift or break.

 Movement of equipment may cause loss of connections to fuel and exhaust lines, relief 

valves, electrical lines, piping, or ductwork. Fluids such as fuel or refrigerant may leak.

 Even when the equipment is adequately anchored, distribution systems (pipe, conduit, 

or ducts) connected to the equipment may fail if they experience large movements 

relative to the equipment. For example, 3⁄4- and 1-inch diameter copper piping (exempt 

from seismic bracing requirements due their small diameter) has failed where they 

connect to braced equipment. Providing flexible connections between the equipment 

and distribution systems will help protect against such failures.

 Function and operability of equipment may be compromised; this is especially critical for 

hospitals and other essential facilities that must maintain post-earthquake operations.

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-165

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.1.1-1 Failed chiller mounts due to insufficient uplift resistance in the 1994 magnitude6.7 Northridge Earthquake ((Photo courtesy of Wiss, Jenney, Elstner Associates).

Figure 6.4.1.1-2 Pumps with rigid anchorage to housekeeping pad in the 2010 magnitude-8.8 

Chile Earthquake; housekeeping pad not anchored to base slab and slid 

horizontally several inches (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-166

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 The details shown depict rigid anchorage of mechanical equipment to a concrete slab or 

housekeeping pad. Verify that the slab and/or housekeeping pad are adequate to resist 

the imposed loads. Rigidly mounted equipment should have flexible connections for the

distribution systems, such as fuel lines and piping where relative motion or 

displacements due to story drift are likely to occur between the component and the 

distribution systems. Where flexible connections are used for larger diameter piping, it 

may be necessary to evaluate the forces imposed on the equipment nozzles when the 

flexible connections displace. For pressurized systems, “flexible” connections such as 

braided pipe or hose have significant lateral stiffness, and may overload the nozzle on 

the equipment, causing it to fail. Piping loops are also an acceptable way of providing a 

flexible connection, provided that nozzles are not overloading by the piping reactions.

 For equipment with vibration isolation, restraints ("snubbers") or seismic isolators are 

required; see Section 6.4.1.3 for equipment with vibration isolation. Snubbers should

not be rigidly connected to the equipment, but instead allow for a small amount of 

ordinary vibration movement while preventing large seismic movements. However, the 

“air gap”, or distance between the snubber and the component should be limited to less 

than 0.25 inches, to avoid significant dynamic amplification when the component 

contacts the snubber. The snubbers should have an elastomeric or resilient surface to 

lessen the impact effects during strong shaking. Where isolators with integral seismic 

restraint are used, the isolator should be selected and sized to resist the anticipated 

seismic shear and uplift and connections to the equipment and supporting structure 

should be specifically designed to resist these forces.

 HVAC equipment or other items required for use in a hospital or essential facility would 

be classified as designated seismic systems and may require engineering calculations, 

equipment certification and special inspections. Check with the jurisdiction for specific 

requirements.

 To see additional examples for specific equipment and different anchorage conditions, 

refer to FEMA 412 Installing Seismic Restraints for Mechanical Equipment (2002) and 

FEMA 414 Incremental Seismic Restraints for Duct and Pipe (2004).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-167

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.1.1-3 Added lateral capacity provided for skid-mounted equipment added following 

the 2001 Peru Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).

Figure 6.4.1.1-4 Bolted connection to steel skid with added shear lugs (Photo courtesy of

Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-168

Figure 6.4.1.1-5 Alternate detail for skid mounted equipment (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, 

BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-169

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.1.1-6 Floor-mounted equipment – anchored through integral base (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-170

Figure 6.4.1.1-7 Floor-mounted equipment – restrained with snubbers.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-171

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.1 Mechanical Equipment

6.4.1.2 General Manufacturing and Process Machinery

This category covers a wide range of equipment of various shapes and sizes. It includes 

isolated pieces of equipment as well as manufacturing lines that consist of numerous 

components requiring precise alignment. Mechanical components may be constructed of 

deformable materials and attachments or rigid components and attachments; they may be 

floor-, wall-, or roof-mounted. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

General manufacturing and process machinery may be subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 

7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13, 

Nonstructural Components, or Chapter 15, Nonbuilding Structures. Components housed in or 

supported by a building are typically assumed to be nonstructural components and are covered 

by Chapter 13. Larger or significant components not enclosed or supported by a building are 

considered Nonbuilding Structures and are covered by Chapter 15. For example, the 

components in Figures 6.4.1.2-1 and 6.4.1.2-2 would be classified as Nonbuilding Structures.

The distinction between the nonstructural components and Nonbuilding Structures is 

sometimes difficult to determine. When uncertainty exists, one approach is to use the larger of 

the seismic demands determined by either method.

The principal objective of the requirements in ASCE/SEI 7-10 is to prevent the component from 

sliding or overturning. However, depending on the nature of the machinery, it may also be 

sensitive to building displacements if the system is connected to multiple levels of the same 

structure, or is connected to adjacent structures.

Requirements for general manufacturing and process machinery classified as Nonbuilding 

Structures:

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 Chapter 15 classifies Nonbuilding Structures into two broad groups, 

those that are similar to buildings and those that are not similar to buildings.

 Nonbuilding Structures similar to buildings may be designed or strengthened using the 

same general approach as those used for buildings. The most significant difference is 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-172

that in areas of high seismicity, a broader range of structural systems are permitted for 

Nonbuilding Structures, although higher design forces are required.

 ASCE 7-10 Chapter 15 provides extensive provisions for Nonbuilding Structures not 

similar to buildings, including tanks, vessels, silos, and cooling towers.

Requirements for general manufacturing and process machinery classified as nonstructural 

components:

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires anchorage for all equipment in Seismic Design Categories D, E, 

and F for all equipment weighing over 400 pounds, and items weighing over 20 pounds 

that are mounted over 4 feet above the floor. Lighter items may be exempt if the 

component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0.

 Items that are exempt from the anchorage requirements noted above are still required 

to be positively anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be designed or 

detailed on the construction documents. They must also be provided with flexible 

connections between the equipment and associated pipes, ducts, or conduits or 

alternate means for protecting the connections.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007) classifies general 

manufacturing and process machinery as force controlled. For general manufacturing and 

process machinery that can be classified as a nonstructural component, ASCE/SEI 41-06

requires compliance with the anchorage provisions of the standard when:

 The performance level is Immediate Occupancy

 The performance level is Life Safety in high seismicity areas, if

o The item is gas-fired.

o The item is part of an emergency power system,

o The items weighs more than 400 pounds and is 6 feet or more in height,

o The item is unanchored, weighs over 100 pounds, is 6 feet or more in height, 

and is subject to overturning. These items may be exempt if they have a factor 

of safety greater than 1.5 against overturning when design loads are applied.

o The item weighs over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 feet above the floor.

For general manufacturing and process machinery classified as a nonbuilding structure, the 

provisions of ASCE/SEI 41-06 are not directly applicable. However, the procedures of the 

document may be extrapolated to apply to many Nonbuilding Structures similar to structures 

such as pipe racks and structural towers that support tanks, vessels and bins. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-173

Typical Causes of Damage

 Unanchored or poorly restrained equipment can slide, tilt, overturn, or fall. Poorly 

reinforced housekeeping pads may slide or fail.

 Components may be damaged by shaking or pounding, or may be crushed by other 

fallen components. Failure of large nonstructural components may result in damage to 

structural elements due to impact or falling.

 Items crossing seismic joints, attached to adjacent floors, penetrating structural 

elements, or connections between flexible and rigid components may be particularly 

vulnerable. 

 Machinery may cease to function due to misalignment or internal damage.

 Contents, fluids, or hazardous materials may slosh, mix, or spill. 

 Connections of fuel lines, electrical lines, optical cable, piping, or ductwork may be 

damaged; runs of piping, ducts, or cable may be damaged.

 Loss of function of manufacturing equipment can cause significant business interruption 

losses.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-174

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.1.2-1 Damage to conveyors and equipment at a cement plant in the 2010 magnitude7 Haiti Earthquake (Photos courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-175

Figure 6.4.1.2-2 Damage to silos, conveyors and equipment at a grain operation in the 2010 

magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake (Photos courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP 

Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-176

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 In addition to requirements in ASCE/SEI 7-10 Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and 

Other Structures (ASCE, 2010), anchorage design for equipment may be governed by 

specialty codes and standards such as ASME, ASHRAE, IEEE, API.

 See Sections 6.4.1.1 and 6.4.1.3 for sample details for floor-mounted equipment and

see FEMA 412 Installing Seismic Restraints for Mechanical Equipment (2002), FEMA 413

Installing Seismic Restraints for Electrical Equipment (2004) and FEMA 414 Installing 

Seismic Restraints for Duct and Pipe (2004) for example details for MEP equipment, 

piping and ductwork. Many of the attachment details in these documents could be 

adapted for use with other types of equipment.

 Some equipment has been shake table tested and is rated for seismic loading by their 

vendors; inquire about seismic load ratings and seismic anchorage details when any new 

equipment is purchased.

 For vulnerable items that require a long lead time to replace, it may be prudent to stock 

replacement parts or equipment in order to reduce an outage following an earthquake. 

 Special attention is required for control rooms and emergency generators to ensure that 

a facility may be shut down safely after an earthquake.

 Flexible connections should be provided for fuel lines and piping where they connect to 

rigidly mounted equipment. 

 Design of seismic bracing and anchorage for complex manufacturing systems is a 

significant engineering challenge and should be handled by design professionals with 

specific expertise in this area. Nonstructural bracing should be checked regularly to 

ensure that the anchorage has not been compromised. It may be prudent to have a 

standing agreement with a design professional familiar with the facility to perform 

postearthquake inspections in order to facilitate speedy repairs and reduce the outage 

time. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-177

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.1 Mechanical Equipment

6.4.1.3 HVAC Equipment with Vibration Isolation

This includes HVAC equipment, typically of sheet metal construction, that is floor- mounted 

with vibration isolators to prevent the transmission of mechanical vibrations into the building. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for HVAC equipment with vibration isolation are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, 

Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13. The 

principal objective is to prevent the component from sliding or overturning.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires anchorage for all equipment in Seismic Design Categories D, E, 

and F for all equipment weighing over 400 pounds, and items weighing over 20 pounds 

that are mounted over 4 feet above the floor. Lighter items may be exempt if the 

component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0.

 Items that are exempt from the anchorage requirements noted above are still required 

to be positively anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be designed or 

detailed on the construction documents. Exempt components must be provided with 

flexible connections between the equipment and associated pipes, ducts, or conduits.

 The seismic design force for vibration isolated equipment is doubled if the “air gap” (the 

distance between the equipment support frame and the restraint) is greater than 0.25 

inches.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

In ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007), HVAC equipment 

with vibration isolation is classified as force controlled. ASCE/SEI 41-06 requires compliance 

with the anchorage provisions of the standard when:

 The performance level is Immediate Occupancy

 The performance level is Life Safety in high seismicity areas, if

o The item is gas-fired.

o The item is part of an emergency power system,

o The items weighs more than 400 pounds and is 6 feet or more in height,
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-178

o The item is unanchored, weighs over 100 pounds, is 6 feet or more in height, 

and is subject to overturning. These items may be exempt if they have a factor 

of safety greater than 1.5 against overturning when design loads are applied.

o The item weighs over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 feet above the floor.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Vibration isolated equipment is particularly vulnerable to earthquake damage unless 

some type of snubbers, bumpers, or vendor-supplied restraints are used. Open and 

housed springs do not have adequate capacity to resist shear and uplift.

 Vibration isolators tend to amplify seismic response of the equipment This requires the 

supporting frames or slabs to have adequate capacity to resist higher forces (Figure 

6.4.1.3-3).

 Items can slide, tilt, overturn, or fall.

 Internal components may be damaged by shaking. 

 Connections of fuel lines, electrical lines or ductwork may be damaged; machinery may 

cease to function due to misalignment, failure of the isolators, or internal damage.

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-179

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.1.3-1 Failure of compressor mounted on vibration isolators in the 1994 Northridge

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Wiss, Jenney, Elstner Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-180

Figure 6.4.1.3-2 Failure of pump mounted on three vibration isolators and damage at wall 

penetration (Photo courtesy of Mason Industries).

Figure 6.4.1.3-3 Failure of an entire support assembly including vibration isolators (Photo 

courtesy of Mason Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-181

Figure 6.4.1.3-4 Rooftop equipment on isolators collapsed onto skid (Photo courtesy of Mason 

Industries).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Although the code exempts small components on vibration isolators from design 

requirements, they should be carefully evaluated, since vibration isolators tend to 

amplify the seismic response.

 Two methods are used for anchoring floor-mounted equipment on vibration isolators:

1. Open springs used in conjunction with snubbers or bumpers. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-182

2. Restrained springs with rated capacity to resist the anticipated seismic shear and 

uplift.

 Rated housed springs with vertical travel limits should be used for seismic restraint 

applications.

 The “air gap”, or distance between the snubber and the component should be limited to 

less than 0.25 inches, to avoid significant dynamic amplification when the component 

contacts the snubber. 

 Metal-to-metal contact between snubbers and the supporting frame or between the 

isolator housing and the mounting bolt to the unit should be avoided. The snubbers 

should have an elastomeric or resilient surface to lessen the impact effects during 

strong shaking. For housed springs, an elastomeric grommet will prevent hard surface 

impact.

 Flexible connections must be provided for fuel lines and piping.

 Refer to FEMA 412 Installing Seismic Restraints for Mechanical Equipment (2002) and 

FEMA 414 Installing Seismic Restraints for Duct and Pipe (2004) for additional 

information and details.

 HVAC equipment or other items required for use in a hospital or essential facility would 

be classified as designated seismic systems and may require engineering calculations, 

equipment certification and special inspections. Check with the jurisdiction for specific 

requirements.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-183

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.1.3-5 Restrained springs used to support heavy equipment (Photo courtesy of Mason 

Industries).

Figure 6.4.1.3-6 Open springs and snubbers used to support equipment (Photo courtesy of 

Mason Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-184

Figure 6.4.1.3-7 Seismic shake table testing of an air-handler unit and vibration isolation restraint 

system as part of the MCEER-ASHRAE project (Photos courtesy of André

Filiatrault, MCEER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-185

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.1.3-8 HVAC equipment with vibration isolation (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-186

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.1 Mechanical Equipment

6.4.1.4 HVAC Equipment without External Vibration Isolation

This includes dry-side HVAC equipment, typically of sheet metal construction, that is rigidly 

mounted to the floor, wall or roof, and components that are internally isolated. While internally 

isolated equipment is rigidly attached to the structure, internal components are installed on 

vibration isolators. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for HVAC equipment without external vibration isolation are determined using 

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 2010), 

Chapter 13. The principal objective is to prevent the component from sliding or overturning.

 Seismic loads for HVAC equipment without external vibration isolation are determined 

using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 

2010), Chapter 13. The design forces for internally isolated components are 

substantially higher than those for non-isolated components.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires anchorage for all equipment in Seismic Design Categories D, E, 

and F for all equipment weighing over 400 pounds, and items weighing over 20 pounds 

that are mounted over 4 feet above the floor. Lighter items may be exempt if the 

component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0.

 Items that are exempt from the anchorage requirements noted above are still required 

to be positively anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be designed or 

detailed on the construction documents. They must also be provided with flexible 

connections between the equipment and associated pipes, ducts, or conduits or 

provided with other means to protect the connections from damage.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

In ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007), HVAC equipment 

without external vibration isolation is classified as force controlled. ASCE/SEI 41-06 requires

compliance with the anchorage provisions of the standard when:

 The performance level is Immediate Occupancy
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-187

 The performance level is Life Safety in high seismicity areas, if

o The item is gas-fired.

o The item is part of an emergency power system,

o The items weighs more than 400 pounds and is 6 feet or more in height,

o The item is unanchored, weighs over 100 pounds, is 6 feet or more in height, 

and is subject to overturning. These items may be exempt if they have a factor 

of safety greater than 1.5 against overturning when design loads are applied.

o The item weighs over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 feet above the floor.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Unanchored or inadequately anchored items can slide, tilt, overturn, or fall. 

 Connections of fuel lines, electrical lines or ductwork may be damaged; machinery may 

cease to function due to misalignment. 

 Internally isolated components may experience substantially larger seismic forces than 

those without internal isolation. This results in higher demands on the component 

anchorage, and increases the vulnerability of the component to internal shaking 

damage.

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.1.4-1 Poorly anchored compressor jumped off the undersized anchor bolts in the 

2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP 

Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-188

Figure 6.4.1.4-2 Unanchored rooftop units thrown off their supports during an earthquake 

(Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-189

Figure 6.4.1.4-3 Numerous poorly anchored rooftop units toppled in the 2010 Chile Earthquake 

(Photos courtesy of Rodrigo Retamales, Rubén Boroschek & Associates). 

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 See Section 6.4.1.1 for rigid floor mount details and Section 6.4.1.3 for vibration 

isolation floor mount details. 

 Special consideration is needed for rooftop units. Such units are typically mounted on 

curbs or platforms to facilitate waterproofing and flashing. Curbs may be custom-built 

on site or premanufactured. Detailing for seismic restraints must include a connection 

between the equipment and the curb and the curb and the roof framing. In addition, the 

curb itself must be sufficiently strong to deliver earthquake forces from the unit to the 

roof. If the equipment is internally isolated, the design forces for the anchorage should 

be increased appropriately.

 See FEMA 412 Installing Seismic Restraints for Mechanical Equipment (2002) and FEMA 

414 Installing Seismic Restraints for Duct and Pipe (2004) for details for wall-mounts, 

roof-mount with flashing details, ducts and piping, and additional information 

regarding hardware and installation. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-190

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.1.4-4 Rooftop HVAC equipment (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-191

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.1 Mechanical Equipment

6.4.1.5 HVAC Equipment Suspended In-Line with Ductwork

This in-line HVAC equipment typically includes suspended items of sheet metal construction 

such as fans, coils, VAV boxes, and blowers. The connection details for suspended equipment 

may also include vibration isolators. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for suspended HVAC equipment in-line with ductwork are determined using 

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 2010), 

Chapter 13. Depending on the nature of the equipment, the supports may include vibration 

isolators. The principal objective is to prevent the component from falling.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires anchorage for all suspended equipment in Seismic Design 

Categories D, E, and F weighing over 20 pounds. Lighter items may be exempt if the 

component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0.

 Suspended HVAC equipment on vibration isolators should be designed using the 

appropriate design coefficients for isolated components, which will result in higher 

design forces. See Section 6.4.1.3.

 Equipment that is installed in-line with a duct system that has an operating weight 

greater than 75 pounds must be supported and laterally braced independent of the duct 

system. Equipment 75 pounds or less may be supported and braced integrally with the 

duct system, provided that the equipment is positively attached to the duct with 

mechanical fasteners.

 Unbraced piping attached to in-line equipment must be provided with flexibility 

adequate to accommodate seismic relative displacements.

 Items that are exempt from the anchorage requirements noted above are still required 

to be positively anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be designed or 

detailed on the construction documents. Flexible connections must be provided 

between the equipment and associated pipes, ducts, or conduits, or alternate measures 

should be employed to protect the connections from damage.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-192

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

Suspended HVAC equipment in-line with ductwork is classified as force-controlled by, ASCE 

41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007). ASCE 41-06 requires

compliance with the anchorage provisions of the standard when:

 The performance level is Immediate Occupancy

 The performance level is Life Safety in high seismicity areas, if

o The item is gas-fired,

o The item is part of an emergency power system, or

o The item weighs over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 feet above the floor.

 The recommended evaluation procedure is to use a prescriptive approach, such as 

provisions in ASCE 7-10 Section 13.6.7.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Poorly supported items can fall.

 Items can swing and impact structural, architectural or other mechanical items. Internal 

components may be damaged by shaking or impact. 

 Connections of fuel lines, water piping, electrical conduit or ductwork may be damaged. 

Equipment may cease to function due to misalignment or internal damage. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-193

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.1.5-1 Damage to suspended HVAC, signs, and louvers was caused when suspended 

fans in the mechanical penthouse swung and impacted the louver panels. Holy 

Cross Medical Center in Sylmar, as a result of the 1994 magnitude-6.7 

Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Robert Reitherman).

Figure 6.4.1.5-2 Sheet metal duct separated from suspended fan unit (Photo courtesy of Wiss, 

Jenney, Elstner Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-194

 

Figure 6.4.1.5-3 Suspended HVAC equipment came down at the Santiago airport terminal in the 

2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Gokhan Pekcan).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-195

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Items should be braced to structural elements with sufficient capacity to resist the 

imposed loads. Do not brace to other equipment, ducts, or piping, unless specifically 

permitted by the reference standards. If installed on pipes, ducts, or conduit that are 

exempt from seismic bracing, in-line equipment must be supported and laterally braced 

independently, regardless of weight.

 Flexible connections should be provided for fuel lines and piping. 

 Equipment may be suspended either with or without vibration isolation. The vibration 

isolators may allow more vertical motion in the hangers than in a non-isolated 

condition, resulting in larger lateral displacements. This should be considered when 

examining potential interaction with adjacent components and systems. Where 

vibration isolators are present, a bracing scheme that utilizes aircraft cable for lateral 

bracing rather than rigid element will prevent accidental transmission of vibration to the 

structure.

 Refer to FEMA 412 Installing Seismic Restraints for Mechanical Equipment (2002) and 

FEMA 414 Installing Seismic Restraints for Duct and Pipe (2004) for additional 

information and details.

 Several engineered seismic bracing systems are available for suspended equipment and 

can be customized for most applications. Other options may be found on the internet.

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.1.5-4 Suspended equipment with cable braces (Photo courtesy of Mason Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-196

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.1.5-5 HVAC equipment suspended in-line with ductwork (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-197

Figure 6.4.1.5-6 Cable and rigid brace attachments to structure (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-198

Figure 6.4.1.5-7 Hanger attachment details (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-199

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.1 Mechanical Equipment

6.4.1.6 Suspended Equipment

This category covers any type of suspended equipment items other than HVAC equipment 

suspended in-line with ductwork, such as unit gas heaters. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for suspended equipment are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design 

Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13. The principal objective is to 

prevent the component from falling.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires anchorage for all suspended equipment in Seismic Design 

Categories D, E, and F weighing over 20 pounds. Lighter items may be exempt if the 

component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0.

 Unbraced piping attached to in-line equipment must be provided with flexibility 

adequate to accommodate seismic relative displacements.

 Items that are exempt from the anchorage requirements noted above are still required 

to be positively anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be designed or 

detailed on the construction documents. Flexible connections must be provided 

between the equipment and associated pipes, ducts, or conduits.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

For suspended equipment, ASCE 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE,

2007) requires compliance with the anchorage provisions of the standard when the 

performance level is Immediate Occupancy, or the performance level is Life Safety and the 

component is gas-fired and located in areas of high seismicity. These components are

classified as force controlled.

 Anchorage should be provided if the item weighs over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 

feet above the floor.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Poorly supported suspended items may lose support and fall.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-200

 Suspended items can swing and impact building elements or other equipment.

 Internal components may be damaged by shaking or impact.

 Connections of fuel lines or other connected piping may be damaged.

 Equipment may cease to function due to misalignment or internal damage. 

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.1.6-1 Gas space heater fell from ceiling above in the 1971 magnitude-6.6 San 

Fernando Earthquake (Photo courtesy of C. Wilton, Scientific Service, Inc.).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-201

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Detail shown provides rigid attachment for small suspended equipment weighing less 

than 150 pounds. Two or more double angle assemblies could be used for larger items. 

If the equipment is suspended with rigid, unbraced hangers, the details shown may be 

adapted to provide diagonal bracing.

 Provide flexible connections for fuel lines.

 Refer to Section 6.4.1.5 for details for suspended HVAC items; these details can be 

adapted for multiple suspended items. See also FEMA 412 Installing Seismic Restraints 

for Mechanical Equipment (2002) and FEMA 414 Installing Seismic Restraints for Duct 

and Pipe (2004) for additional information and details.

 Several engineered seismic bracing systems are available for suspended equipment and 

can be customized for most applications, more options may be found on the internet.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-202

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.1.6-2 Suspended equipment (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-203

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.2 Storage Tanks and Water Heaters

6.4.2.1 Structurally Supported Tanks and Vessels

This category covers any type of tank or vessel supported on legs or a structural frame and may 

be either vertical or horizontal. Tanks may be made of steel, stainless steel, polyethylene, 

polypropylene, fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP), or concrete. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for structurally supported tanks and vessels are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, 

Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13, or 

Chapter 15 (Nonbuilding Structures) for large tanks that are not within buildings. 

For tanks considered nonstructural components, ASCE/SEI 7-10 Chapter 13 requires anchorage 

for tanks in Seismic Design Categories D, E, and F weighing over 400 pounds. Lighter tanks 

may be exempt if the component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0.

 Tanks or vessels that are exempt from the anchorage requirements noted above are still 

required to be positively anchored to the structure or ground. The anchorage need not 

be designed or detailed on the construction documents. The components must be 

provided with flexible connections between the equipment and associated pipes or 

conduits or alternate means of protecting the connection should be implemented.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires design of component supports and component anchorage

where:

o Component supports for the tank or vessel include the legs and attachment of 

the legs to the base plate and the tank or vessel wall, and

o Component anchorage includes the attachment or anchors of the tank or vessel 

to the structure (e.g., anchor bolts to a concrete slab or bolts to a steel 

platform).

Requirements for structurally supported tanks and vessels classified as nonbuilding structures:

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 Section 15.7 contains extensive design requirements for elevated tanks 

on legs, saddles and skirts. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-204

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007) classifies structurally 

supported tanks and vessels as force controlled, meaning that the principal objective is to 

prevent the component from sliding or overturning. These components are subject to the 

provisions of the standard when:

 The performance level is Immediate Occupancy.

 The performance level is Life Safety in high seismicity areas, if

o The item is part of an emergency power system.

o The item weighs more than 400 pounds and is 6 feet or more in height.

o The item is unanchored, weighs over 100 pounds, is 6 feet or more in height, and is 

subject to overturning. These items may be exempt if they have a factor of safety 

greater than 1.5 against overturning when design loads are applied.

o The item weighs over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 feet above the floor.

Typical Causes of Damage

 If the tank is not anchored to the structural supports or the structural supports are not 

properly braced and anchored, the tanks may slide or fall. Poorly anchored tanks may 

damage the supports or damage the tank wall.

 The most common forms of damage are the following: 

o Failure of anchor bolts to the concrete deck or slab

o Failure of the welds between the tank or vessel leg and the base plate

o Buckling of the tank legs

o Failure of the welds or connections between the supporting legs and the body of 

the tank or vessel

o Buckling or local failure of the tank wall where the legs are attached

o For saddle mounted tanks, failure of the straps or connectors that hold the tank 

in the saddle

 If the tank slides or rocks, the connections of supply lines or fuel lines may be damaged; 

contents may slosh or spill.

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-205

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.2.1-1 Tank shifted off support curb, Granada Hills Hospital in the 1994 magnitude6.7 Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of OSHPD).

Figure 6.4.2.1-2 A vertical tank at hospital overturned due to inadequate anchorage in the 1994 

Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of OSHPD).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-206

Figure 6.4.2.1-3 Horizontal tank strapped to structural support frame on hospital roof; one strap

failed and tank slid six inches in the 1994 Northridge Earthquake (Photo 

courtesy of OSHPD).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-207

Figure 6.4.2.1-4 Wineries suffered extensive damage in the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile 

Earthquake with many barrels of wine spilled. This winery had damage to 

anchored tanks; tank anchorage failed, legs buckled, welds tore, anchor bolts 

pulled up, etc. The tank legs all have leveling bolts at the bottom, creating a 

weak zone between the bottom of the leg and the anchor plate. Similar 

unanchored tanks in this facility shifted position but were undamaged (Photos 

courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-208

Figure 6.4.2.1-5 Damage to tanks at the Pioneer Memorial Hospital at the 2012 Brawley 

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Chris Tokas, OSHPD)

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Tanks must have adequate vertical and horizontal support. Provide anchorage and 

bracing for tank legs or support structure; provide positive attachment from tank to 

support structure. Provide concrete pad large enough to prevent tank from overturning.

 Provide flexible connections for fuel lines and piping.

 The details shown are for rigid connections; see also FEMA 412 Installing Seismic 

Restraints for Mechanical Equipment (2002) for attachment details.

 For some installations where tanks have a low aspect ratio (i.e., the tank is relatively 

wide compared to the height) and are unlikely to overturn, it may be preferable to allow 

the tank to slide rather than providing rigid anchorage. As shown in the photos in 

Figure 6.4.2.1-4 taken at a winery, many stainless steel tanks on legs with base 

anchorage were damaged while nearby unanchored tanks shifted slightly but were 

undamaged. Flexible connections designed to accommodate sliding would be required 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-209

for tanks left free at the base. Tanks classified as nonstructural components that are 

specifically designed and detailed to accommodate seismic demands by sliding would 

be considered an Alternative Means of Compliance subject to the approval of the 

Building Official, since ASCE/SEi 7-10 explicitly requires that tanks and vessels be 

anchored. Tanks classified as nonbuilding structures that accommodate seismic 

demands by sliding may be designed using the provisions of ASCE/SEI 7-10 Section 

15.7.5.

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.2.1-6 Braces added to four sides of tank support structure (Photo courtesy of Eduardo 

Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-210

Figure 6.4.2.1-7 Gusset plates and cross bracing added at base of vertical tank on four legs 

following the 2001 magnitude-8.4 Peru Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo 

Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-211

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.2.1-8 Vertical tank on legs (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-212

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.2 Storage Tanks and Water Heaters

6.4.2.2 Flat Bottom Tanks and Vessels

This category covers any type of flat bottom tank or vessel resting on a concrete pad at the 

base. These tanks may be made of steel, stainless steel, polyethylene, polypropylene,

fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP), or concrete. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for flat bottom tanks and vessels are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum 

Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010) Chapter 13, or Chapter 15 for 

large tanks that are not within buildings. 

For tanks considered nonstructural components, ASCE/SEI 7-10 Chapter 13 requires anchorage 

for tanks in Seismic Design Categories D, E, and F weighing over 400 pounds. Lighter tanks 

may be exempt if the component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0.

 ASCE 7-10 requires consideration of component supports and component anchorage, as 

follows:

o The component supports for the tank or vessel include the clips or brackets and 

attachment of the brackets to the tank or vessel wall, 

o The component anchorage includes the attachment or anchors of the tank or 

vessel to the structure (e.g., anchor bolts to a concrete slab or bolts to a steel 

deck or platform).

 Flat bottom tanks and vessels that are exempt from the anchorage requirements noted 

above are still required to be positively anchored to the structure or ground. The 

anchorage need not be designed or detailed on the construction documents. Flexible 

connections between the equipment and associated pipes or conduits must be provided

or alternate means for protecting the connection shall be implemented. 

Requirements for flat bottom tanks and vessels classified as nonbuilding structures:

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 Section 15.7 contains extensive design requirements for flat bottom 

tanks and vessels. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-213

 Tanks and vessels at grade may be permitted to be designed without anchorage. See 

ASCE/SEI 7-10 Section 15.7.5 for additional information.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies flat bottom 

tanks and vessels as force controlled, meaning that the principal objective is to prevent the 

component from sliding or overturning. Piping associated with the tank or vessel must meet 

the force and deformation requirements of the standard.

Tanks and vessels at grade are subject to the provisions of the standard when:

 The performance level is Immediate Occupancy

 The performance level is Life Safety in high seismicity areas, if

o The item is part of an emergency power system,

o The item weighs more than 400 pounds and is 6 feet or more in height,

o The item is unanchored, weighs over 100 pounds, is 6 feet or more in height, and is 

subject to overturning. These items may be exempt if they have a factor of safety 

greater than 1.5 against overturning when design loads are applied.

o The item weighs over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 feet above the floor.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Unanchored tanks may slide or overturn; poorly anchored tanks may damage the hold 

down, damage the tank wall, and potentially slide or overturn. However, these tanks 

and vessels may be designed to resist seismic forces solely by friction between the tank 

bottom and the subgrade, if the tank meets certain restrictions. See the section on 

Seismic Mitigation Considerations, below.

 The shell of the tank or vessel may be damaged by fluid-structure interaction.

 Connections of supply lines or fuel lines may be damaged; contents may slosh or spill.

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-214

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.2.2-1 Damage to ductile connection at base of a 5000 cubic meter diesel fuel tank in 

the 2001 magnitude-8.4 Peru Earthquake. All eight connections were 

damaged; damage included bolt elongation, deformation of tank wall, and 

cracked concrete pad (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-215

Figure 6.4.2.2-2 Tank with “elephant’s foot” buckle at the base in the 1964 magnitude-9.2 

Anchorage, Alaska earthquake (Photo courtesy of PEER, Steinbrugge Collection, 

No. S2508)

Figure 6.4.2.2-3 Tank with “elephant’s foot” and “elephant knee” in Port-au-Prince in the 2010

magnitude-7 Haiti Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP 

Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-216

Figure 6.4.2.2-4 Anchored tank damaged at base when anchorage failed; tank slid and ruptured 

attached piping in 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of 

Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-217

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 The structural response of these tanks, especially large tanks, is influenced strongly by 

the fluid-structure interaction (sloshing). The magnitude of these forces depends on the 

geometry (height, H, to diameter, D, ratio) of the tank. See ASCE/SEI 7-10 Chapter 15, 

Section 15.7.6 for additional information.

 Small-diameter tanks and vessels are more susceptible to overturning and vertical 

buckling. As a general rule, a greater ratio of height to diameter (H/D) produces lower 

resistance to vertical buckling. Where H/D is greater than 2, the liquid tends to behave 

as a “rigid mass” and the loads due to sloshing are small.

 There are several alternatives for designing flat bottom tanks and vessels for seismic 

resistance

o Provide adequate connections around the base of the tank. Do not weld to tanks 

with flammable contents.

o For steel tanks, the lateral force may be resisted by friction between the tank 

bottom and the subgrade. See ASCE/SEI 7-10 Sections 15.7.5.5 and 15.7.6 for a 

description of the design approach and limitations.

 Provide flexible connections for fuel lines and piping or implement alternate measures 

to protect the pipe-to-tank connection.

 The detail shown is for a rigid connection; larger tanks require ductile details such as 

those shown in Figure 6.4.2.2-1.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-218

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.2.2-5 Flexible connections prevented piping damage in 2001 Peru Earthquake (Photo 

courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-219

Figure 6.4.2.2-6 Anchors at base of fiberglass reinforced plastic tank (Photo courtesy of Jeffrey 

Soulages, Intel). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-220

 

Figure 6.4.2.2-7 Examples of rigid base anchorage for small circular tanks (Photos courtesy of 

Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-221

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.2.2-8 Flat bottom tank (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-222

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.2 Storage Tanks and Water Heaters

6.4.2.3 Compressed Gas Cylinders

This category includes single or multiple gas cylinders. These may be attached to piping, 

anchored to carts for mobility, or stored for future use. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Since compressed gas cylinders are generally not permanently attached to the building utilities, 

they are considered “temporary or moveable equipment” and are exempt from the requirements 

of ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010). 

When gas cylinders are connected to building utilities, ASCE/SEI 7-10 Chapter 13 requires

anchorage for cylinders in Seismic Design Categories D, E, and F weighing over 400 pounds. 

Lighter cylinders may be exempt if the component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0. Cylinders that 

are exempt from the anchorage requirement are still required to be restrained to prevent 

damage between the gas cylinder and associated pipes.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies 

compressed gas cylinders as hazardous materials storage. Anchorage of compressed gas 

cylinders requires compliance with the anchorage provisions of the standard when the 

performance level is Life Safety or higher. Prescriptive (non-engineered) anchorage approaches 

may be used.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Unanchored tanks may slide, overturn, and roll; connected piping may be damaged. 

 Contents may be flammable or hazardous; leaking cylinders may be dangerous.

 Tank installations equipped with chains or straps are still susceptible to damage unless 

the chains or straps are properly secured around the tanks.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-223

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.2.3-1 Unanchored tanks inside fenced enclosure in the 1994 magnitude-6.7 

Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of OSHPD).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Wall restraint detail shown at top of Figure 6.4.2.3-8 is a non-engineered detail for tank 

storage; this detail does not provide sufficient restraint for tanks attached to piping. 

 Engineered details with additional restraints are required for tanks attached to piping; 

see corral detail at bottom of Figure 6.4.2.3-7 or scheme shown in Figures 6.4.2.3-2 

and 6.4.2.3-3.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-224

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.2.3-2 Gas cylinder anchorage with attached gas lines undamaged in the 2001

magnitude-8.4 Peru Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP 

Engineers).

Figure 6.4.2.3-3 Detail of undamaged gas cylinder installation (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, 

BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-225

Figure 6.4.2.3-4 Wall-mounted cylinder restraints upgraded with stiffener plates following the 

2001 Peru Earthquake(Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).

Figure 6.4.2.3-5 Steel tube supports for mobile gas cylinder carts (Photo courtesy of Eduardo 

Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-226

Figure 6.4.2.3-6 Detail of steel tube supports and chains (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP 

Engineers).

Figure 6.4.2.3-7 Detail of enclosures for airgas tanks in a hospital; chains attached with quick 

release hooks (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-227

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.2.3-8 Compressed gas cylinders (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-228

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.2 Storage Tanks and Water Heaters

6.4.2.4 Water Heaters

This category includes residential or small commercial water heaters. Most water heaters rest 

on the floor although smaller units may be wall- or shelf-mounted. Tankless water heaters are 

often wall-mounted.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for water heaters are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads 

for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13. The principal objective is to 

prevent the water heater from sliding or overturning. They may be floor mounted, wall 

mounted, or suspended from the level above.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires anchorage design for all equipment in Seismic Design 

Categories D, E, and F if the equipment weighs over 400 pounds. Lighter components 

may be exempt if the component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0. 

 Items that are exempt from the anchorage design requirements must still be positively 

anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be designed or detailed on the 

construction documents. Exempt items must also be provided with flexible connections 

between the equipment and associated pipes or conduits.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) contains specific 

requirements retrofit of water heaters. Compliance with the anchorage provisions of the 

standard is required when: 

 The performance level is Immediate Occupancy.

 The performance level is Life Safety in High Seismicity areas and the water heater is 

more than 6 feet in height, or the unit is gas-fired.

Water heaters with a capacity less than 100 gallons may be retrofitted using prescriptive 

approaches. Larger water heaters must meet the force provisions of the standard.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-229

Typical Causes of Damage

 Unanchored or poorly anchored tanks may slide or overturn.

 Even if the restraint is strong enough to prevent complete overturning, if it is not rigid 

enough, the connections to gas and water lines may be damaged by tank movement and 

lead to fire or to water leakage

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.2.4-1 Unanchored water heaters overturned (Photo courtesy of Mason Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-230

Figure 6.4.2.4-2 Water damage at the Talca Hospital in the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile 

Earthquake; water leaking from tank at right. This building was closed due to 

nonstructural damage, dominated by water damage (Photos courtesy of Bill 

Holmes, Rutherford & Chekene).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-231

Figure 6.4.2.4-3 Damaged water heater in the 2010 magnitude-6.5 Eureka Earthquake. The 

water heater strap pulled out from the supporting concrete wall as a result of 

inadequate anchorage. The tank moved sufficiently to break interconnected 

water lines which were rigidly connected to the tank.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-232

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Details shown are for tanks resting on the floor adjacent to a structural wall. Where the 

water heater is not located adjacent to a wall, it may be necessary to construct a frame 

around the tank or adjacent to the tank to provide anchorage.

 Flexible connections should be provided for the gas and water lines.

 Provide noncombustible spacers between the tank and wall for older units; newer units 

often have insulation inside the housing as part of the assembly and do not require the 

additional spacers.

 Larger tanks may be floor-mounted as shown for flat bottom tanks in Section 6.4.2.2 or 

as pictured in Figure 6.4.2.4-5.

 See also Guidelines for Earthquake Bracing of Residential Water Heaters (California 

Department of General Services, 2005c) online at 

www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/dsa/pubs/waterheaterbracing_11_30_05.pdf for additional 

information.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-233

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.2.4-4 Corner installation using a commercially available strap; note flex copper tubing 

for water hook up (Photo courtesy of Cynthia Perry, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-234

Figure 6.4.2.4-5 Base-mounted water heater located in a school; equipment supplied with metal 

base for mounting (Photo courtesy of EQE for the Salt Lake City School District).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-235

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.2.4-6 Water heater (PR).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-236

Figure 6.4.2.4-7 Water heater - corner installation (PR).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-237

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.3 Pressure piping

6.4.3.1 Suspended Pressure Piping

There are many types of piping systems which convey a wide variety of fluids and gases in and 

around buildings. In this section, pressure piping refers to “all piping (except fire suppression 

piping) that carries fluids which, in their vapor stage, exhibit a pressure of 15 psi, gauge, or 

higher.” See Sections 6.4.4 and 6.4.5 for other piping categories. This example addresses 

seismic restraint details for suspended piping; see Sections 6.4.3.2 through 6.4.3.8 for other 

types of piping system restraints as shown in Figure 6.4.3.1-10.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for suspended pressure piping are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum 

Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13. The principal 

objective is to prevent the system from falling. Depending on the configuration of the piping, it 

may also be sensitive to building displacements if it is connected to multiple levels in the same 

structure, or is supported by adjacent structures.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 exempts suspended pressure piping from seismic bracing requirements 

in Seismic Design Category C if Ip =1.0.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires seismic design for all distribution systems in Seismic Design 

Categories D, E, and F that weighs more than 5 pounds per linear foot.

 Unbraced piping attached to in-line equipment must be provided with flexibility 

adequate to accommodate seismic relative displacements.

 Pressure piping systems, including their supports, may be designed either using the 

provisions of ASME B31 Process Piping (ASME, 2008) or ASCE/SEI 7-10. If ASME B31 is 

used, the forces and displacements of ASCE/SEI 7-10 must be used for design. See 

Section 6.4.4 for issues related to fire protection piping systems.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 contains a number of bracing exemptions for suspended piping:

o Trapeze assemblies are used to support piping whereby no single pipe exceeds

certain size limits and the total weight of the piping supported by the trapeze 

assemblies is less than 10 lb/ft 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-238

o Suspended piping where the hangers are less than 12 inches long. Rod hangers 

must be detailed to prevent bending of the rod.

o High-deformability or limited deformability piping (such as steel and copper 

pipe) where the pipe diameter is small (anywhere from 1- to 3-inch diameter 

depending on the Seismic Design Category and occupancy). Provisions must be 

made to accommodate anticipated movement (such as by providing flexible 

connections, as shown in Section 6.4.3.3) and to avoid impact with other 

structural or nonstructural components or to protect the piping in the event of 

such impact

 Allowable stresses are provided in ASCE/SEI 7-10 for suspended pressure piping that is 

not design to ASME B31 or other approved material standards or design bases.

RETROFIT STANDARDS PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies suspended 

pressure piping as force controlled, meaning that the principal objective is to prevent the piping 

from falling. Where piping runs between floors or crosses seismic joints it as also deformation 

controlled. Suspended pressure piping must meet the force and deformation requirements of 

the standard.

 For suspended pressure piping, ASCE/SEI 41-06 requires compliance with the 

anchorage provisions of the standard when the performance level is Life Safety or 

higher. 

 Rehabilitation may utilize prescriptive standard. 

Typical Causes of Damage

 Improperly supported pipes can become dislodged and fall. 

 Pipes are particularly vulnerable to damage at joints, bends, penetrations through walls 

or structural members, and connections to equipment. 

 Unbraced piping can sway and impact adjacent items. 

 Piping may be damaged as a result of differential movement between points of 

attachment.

 Fluids may leak from damaged joints or broken pipe; property losses and business 

outages are often attributed to fluid leaks from piping. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-239

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.3.1-1 Pipe joint failure in the 1971 magnitude-6.6 San Fernando Earthquake (Photo 

courtesy of John F. Meehan).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-240

Figure 6.4.3.1-2 Leakage caused by pipe damage at joint in the 1994 magnitude-6.7 Northridge

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Degenkolb Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-241

Figure 6.4.3.1-3 Pipe brace failed at connection in 1994 Northridge Earthquake; insulation 

removed prior to photo (Photo courtesy of Mason Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-242

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Details shown are for overhead attachments for suspended piping. Seismic detailing for 

pipes requires both transverse and longitudinal braces; while these are shown here as 

separate details, both types of bracing are required. The spacing of pipe bracing is 

dependent on the level of seismicity, location in a building, size of the pipe, type of 

pipe, and strength of connections to the structure.

 Many vendors supply specialized hardware used for the seismic anchorage or sway 

bracing of piping systems. These vendors offer a wide variety of products and services 

including design, installation and inspection manuals, load tables, load rated hardware, 

spring loaded hangers, couplers and fittings, pipe dampers, preassembled seismic 

bracing kits, AUTOCAD details, calculation packages, and technical support.

 Longitudinal pipe bracing requires the use of a pipe clamp, riser clamp, welded lug or 

device that provides positive attachment to the pipe and will not slip along the length of 

the pipe. Longitudinal pipe supports should not rely on friction connections such as Ubolts as these do not provide reliable longitudinal restraint during an earthquake and 

are likely to slip. Some vendors have items with names such as “seismic pipe clamp” or 

“longitudinal restraint device” that are intended for use with longitudinal restraints.

 Virtual Design and Construction (VDC) and Building Information Models (BIM) involve the 

development of 3D computer models depicting all the structural and many nonstructural 

components of buildings. Increasing use of these 3D models that incorporate all the 

MEP systems will facilitate the design and coordination of these components with the 

structural system and other nonstructural components. An example of a BIM model with 

piping and pipe supports is shown in Figure 6.4.3.1-9.

 Piping systems are typically combinations of horizontal and vertical runs of pipe; vertical 

runs are often called risers. Pipes may be suspended overhead as shown in this 

example or floor-mounted, roof-mounted, or wall-mounted. Flexible connections are 

often required at fixed equipment or where piping crosses an expansion joint or seismic 

separation. Pipe runs also typically include penetrations through floor slabs, roof slabs, 

and walls or structural framing. Details for many restraint conditions can be found in 

FEMA 414 Installing Seismic Restraints for Duct and Pipe (2004). Some of these 

conditions are shown in Sections 6.4.3.2 through 6.4.3.8 (See Figure 6.4.3.1-11).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-243

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.3.1-4 Single clevis hanger support with transverse cable bracing at the restraining bolt 

(Photo courtesy of Mason Industries).

Figure 6.4.3.1-5 Pipe clamp supports with transverse and longitudinal angle braces; note pipe 

clamp for longitudinal brace in direct contact with pipe (Photo courtesy of 

Mason Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-244

Figure 6.4.3.1-6 All-directional cable bracing of suspended piping (Photo courtesy of ISAT).

Figure 6.4.3.1-7 Transverse bracing with J-hanger and strut at the restraining bolt. Note that 

longitudinal brace shown is ineffective because the J-hanger can slip along the 

length of the pipe; a pipe clamp or equivalent is required for a longitudinal 

brace (Photo courtesy of Cynthia Perry, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-245

Figure 6.4.3.1-8 Viscous damper used as restraint on large insulated pipe (Photo courtesy of 

Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).

 

Figure 6.4.3.1-9 Example of BIM Model (left) compared to installed piping (right) (Photo and 

image courtesy of ISAT).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-246

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.3.1-10 Schematic of seismic restraint conditions for piping (ER)
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-247

 

Figure 6.4.3.1-11 Rigid bracing - single pipe transverse (ER). Note that insulated pipes need 

special rigid insulation sleeves at hangers and braces to prevent compression of 

the insulation.

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-248

 

Figure 6.4.3.1-12 Cable bracing - single pipe transverse (ER). Note that insulated pipes need 

special rigid insulation sleeves at hangers and braces to prevent compression of 

the insulation.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-249

 

Figure 6.4.3.1-13 Rigid bracing - single pipe alternate transverse (ER).

 

Figure 6.4.3.1-14 Rigid bracing - single pipe longitudinal (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-250

 

Figure 6.4.3.1-15 Rigid bracing - Trapeze supported piping (ER).

 

Figure 6.4.3.1-16 Cable bracing - Trapeze supported piping (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-251

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.3 Pressure Piping

6.4.3.2 In-Line Valves and Pumps

This category covers equipment that is in-line with pressure piping. These items may be valves

or pumps and may be suspended, floor-mounted, roof-mounted, or wall-mounted. They may 

be mounted with or without vibration isolation.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for equipment that is in-line with pressure piping are determined using ASCE/SEI 

7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13.

The principal objective of the code provisions is to prevent the component from falling, sliding 

or overturning. The design approach is dependent on the mounting configuration of the in-line 

equipment.

 Seismic loads for suspended in-line pumps are determined using the ASCE/SEI 7-10, 

design coefficients for pumps, not piping. Pumps must be independently supported for 

gravity loads. Pumps in Seismic Design Categories D, E, and F weighing 20 pounds or 

less do not require lateral bracing if the component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0.

 Seismic loads for suspended in-line valves are determined using the ASCE/SEI 7-10, 

design coefficients for piping. Design coefficients may be reduced based on the 

construction of the valve. For example, in a steel piping system the in-line valves may 

be cast iron, increasing the design seismic load by at least 50 percent. Valves should be 

independently supported for gravity load if they weigh more than 20 pounds. Valves 

weighing 20 pounds or less do not require lateral bracing if the component Importance 

Factor Ip = 1.0 for the piping system.

 In-line valves and pumps in Seismic Design Categories D, E, and F that are mounted at 4 

ft (1.22 m) or less above a floor level and weigh less than 400 pounds or less do not 

require lateral bracing if the component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0 for the piping 

system.

 Items that are exempt from the anchorage requirements noted above are still required 

to be positively anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be designed or 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-252

detailed on the construction documents. Flexible connections between the equipment 

and associated pipes, or conduits must be provided.

 Unbraced piping attached to in-line equipment must be provided with flexibility 

adequate to accommodate seismic relative displacements.

 The seismic design force for vibration isolated pumps is doubled if the “air gap” (the 

distance between the equipment support frame and the restraint) is greater than 0.25 

inches.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

In ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) equipment that is 

in-line with pressure piping classified as force controlled, meaning that the principal objective 

is to prevent the component from falling if suspended, or sliding or overturning if floormounted. ASCE/SEI 41-06 requires compliance with the anchorage provisions of the standard 

when:

 The performance level is Immediate Occupancy.

 The performance level is Life Safety in high seismicity areas, if

o The item is part of an emergency power system.

o The items weighs more than 400 pounds and is 6 feet or more in height,].

o The item is unanchored, weighs over 100 pounds, is 6 feet or more in height, 

and is subject to overturning. These items may be exempt if they have a factor 

of safety greater than 1.5 against overturning when design loads are applied.

o The item weighs over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 feet above the floor.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Poorly restrained in-line valves or equipment may fall. Pumps may be damaged if not 

properly restrained; these items may slide or fall. Movement of the in-line equipment 

may result in damage to the attached piping at the connection or at adjacent pipe joints. 

Equipment or piping damage may result in leaks.

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Details shown are for overhead restraints for items in-line with suspended piping. 

Generally, seismic restraint in the form of typical pipe bracing is provided on each side 

of the connected item.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-253

 Details for other conditions such as equipment in-line with floor- or wall-mounted 

piping can be found in FEMA 414 Installing Seismic Restraints for Duct and Pipe (2004). 

Section 6.4.1.5 also includes general details for suspended equipment. 

 Many vendors supply specialized hardware for seismic anchorage of piping including 

load rated anchorage assemblies, spring loaded hangers, and pipe dampers.

 In-line pumps on vibration isolators require special consideration.

o Although the code exempts smaller pumps on vibration isolators from bracing 

requirements, even small pumps should be carefully evaluated, since vibration 

isolators tend to amplify the seismic response of the component.

o The “air gap”, or distance between the snubber and the pump should be limited 

to less than 0.25 inches, to avoid significant dynamic amplification when the 

pump contacts the snubber.

o Metal-to-metal contact between snubbers and the supporting frame, or the 

isolator housing and the mounting bolt to the pump, should be avoided. The 

snubbers should have an elastomeric or resilient surface to lessen the impact 

effects during strong shaking. For housed springs, an elastomeric grommet will 

prevent hard surface impact.

o Flexible connections should be provided for conduit and piping.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-254

MITIGATION EXAMPLES 

Figure 6.4.3.2-1 Inline pump mounted on independent concrete inertia pad with vibration 

isolation and seismic snubbers (Photo courtesy of Mason Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-255

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.3.2-2 In-line valves and pumps (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-256

Figure 6.4.3.2-3 In-line valves and pumps (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-257

Figure 6.4.3.2-4 In-line valves and pumps (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-258

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.3 Pressure piping

6.4.3.3 Flexible Connections, Expansion Joints, and Seismic 

Separations

This category covers the flexible piping connections required to accommodate differential 

movement at seismic separations between buildings or between floors, at the interface between 

piping and equipment, or to accommodate thermal expansion. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Displacement demands for flexible connections are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum 

Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13. The objective is to 

provide sufficient capacity to accommodate the design building drifts without failure.

 Flexible connections are required between unbraced distribution systems (pipes, ducts, 

raceways, conduit, etc.) and braced equipment, braced distribution systems and 

unbraced equipment, and equipment that is supplied by distribution systems supported 

by the level above the component (drops). 

 When equipment is supplied by drops, the length of the pipe, duct, conduit, or raceway

that must accommodate the drift may be substantially less than the story height. For 

example, a floor mounted boiler, (which can be idealized as a rigid body) is supplied by 

pipes dropping from the floor level above. When the building displaces laterally, all the 

story drift must be accommodated by the pipe drops over the distance between the top 

of the boiler and the piping suspended from the floor above.

 At expansion and seismic separation joints, the distribution system must be able to 

accommodate the displacements between structures. Since the structures can move 

independently in any direction (towards each other, away from each other, etc.), the 

minimum and maximum displacements must be determined. Distribution systems 

crossing at expansion and seismic separations joints must accommodate movements 

that compress, extend, and shear the system crossing the joint.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

Flexible connections are considered deformation and acceleration sensitive in ASCE/SEI 41-06, 

Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007). Flexible connections must be capable 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-259

of accommodating the required relative displacements. Detailed requirements depend upon 

the nature of the piping (or other distribution) system. Refer to the discussions of different 

distribution systems for more specific information. 

Typical Causes of Damage

 Differential movement between adjacent buildings or adjacent wings of buildings can 

cause damage to interconnected piping if relative movement has not been specifically 

accounted for. Differential movement between the fixed and base isolated portions of 

buildings can damage piping crossing the isolation plane. Failure to accommodate 

seismic displacements can rupture piping.

 Differential movement between anchored or restrained equipment and attached piping 

can cause damage to the equipment, the piping, or both.

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.3.3-1 Failure at rigid connection to equipment on isolators without lateral restraint in 

the 1994 magnitude-6.7 Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Mason 

Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-260

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Flexible couplings are needed to accommodate relative displacement in a pipeline. 

Locations that may require flexible couplings include connections between piping and 

anchored equipment, wall or slab penetrations, seismic joints between buildings, and 

seismic joints in base isolated buildings. Selection of a specific coupling detail will 

depend on the magnitude of the anticipated relative displacements, the diameter of the 

pipe, and the type of pipe and its location.

 It is usually preferable for piping to be detailed to accommodate seismic relative 

displacements between the first seismic support upstream or downstream from 

connections to other seismically supported components or headers. This is preferably 

achieved by means of pipe flexibility or, where this is not possible, flexible supports. 

Piping not otherwise detailed to accommodate such seismic relative displacements must 

be provided with connections having sufficient flexibility in the connecting element or in 

the component or header to avoid failure of the piping. The option to use a flexible 

connecting element may be less desirable due to the need for greater maintenance 

efforts to ensure continued proper function of the flexible element.Several different 

types of flexible connections are shown; details for other conditions including floor and 

roof penetrations can be found in FEMA 414 Installing Seismic Restraints for Duct and 

Pipe (2004). Many vendors supply specialized hardware to create articulated joints or 

flexible tubing for these applications. 

 Connections must provide sufficient flexibility to accommodate the expected differential 

movement in all directions.

 It is generally good seismic resistant design practice to provide a flexible connection 

between piping and equipment.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-261

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.3.3-2 Examples of flexible couplings that performed well in the 2010 magnitude-7 

Haiti Earthquake; the building suffered relatively minor damage (Photo 

courtesy of Tom Sawyer, Engineering News Record).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-262

Figure 6.4.3.3-3 Flexible connection at pipe attachment to rigidly mounted tank (Photo courtesy 

of Wiss, Janney, Elstner, Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-263

Figure 6.4.3.3-4 Flexible pipe connections at rooftop expansion joint (Photo courtesy of 

Maryann Phipps, Estructure).

Figure 6.4.3.3-5 Flexible pipe connections at building separation (Photo courtesy of Mason 

Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-264

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.3.3-6 Flexible connections and expansion joints (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-265

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.3 Pressure Piping

6.4.3.4 Pipe Risers

This category covers pipe risers for pressure piping, that is, vertical runs of pressurized piping 

such as those used in multistory buildings. Risers are typically supported by a combination of 

wall-mounted supports and additional floor-mounted or roof-mounted supports at the 

locations of penetrations. Due to their length, thermal movement may be an important 

consideration and seismic restraints must be designed to accommodate the anticipated interstory drift and the thermal movement.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Displacement demands for pipe risers are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design 

Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13. The objective is to provide 

sufficient capacity to accommodate the design building drifts without failure. The effects of 

story drifts must be considered in combination with displacements caused by other loads such 

as those due to thermal expansion. The required displacement capacity can be accomplished 

through pipe flexibility or connections with sufficient flexibility to avoid failure of the pipe.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

Pipe risers are considered deformation and acceleration sensitive in ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic 

Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007). Pipe risers running between floors must be 

capable of accommodating the required relative displacements. Detailed requirements depend 

upon the nature of the piping system. Refer to the discussions of different piping systems for 

more specific information. 

Typical Causes of Damage 

Pipe risers must be designed to accommodate inter-story drift between adjacent floors, that is, 

differential movement between the points of support located on different floors of the building. 

If the pipe supports are not designed to accommodate this movement during an earthquake, 

the supports may fail or the pipes or pipe joints may fail and leak. Improperly supported pipes 

can become dislodged and fall; unbraced risers can sway and impact adjacent items. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-266

 Pipes are vulnerable at penetrations, thus floor and roof penetrations must be 

sufficiently oversized to prevent impact. Unrestrained movement of pipes at 

penetrations may damage the piping and pipe restraints but may also damage flooring, 

ceilings, partitions, insulation, fire-proofing or other architectural finishes. For 

insulated risers, the piping insulation may also be damaged if the pipe chafes at the 

restraint. If risers are mounted to lightweight partitions, the partitions may be damaged 

unless they have been designed and braced to resist the piping loads.

 Because risers often involve very long pipe runs, the thermal movement may be 

significant. Unless seismic restraints are designed to accommodate thermal movement, 

the piping, pipe joints or rigid seismic restraints could be damaged under operating 

conditions and fail to perform properly in an earthquake.

 Pipe risers in multistory buildings are typically located in utility shafts or pipe chases; 

thus, they usually do not pose a significant falling hazard to occupants but riser damage 

could cause significant leakage resulting in property losses and business outage.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-267

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.3.4-1 Movement of unbraced risers damaged ceiling finishes and insulation in the 

1994 magnitude-6.7 Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Mason 

Industries).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 See the general discussion of pipe bracing in Section 6.4.3.1. 

 It is usually preferable for pipe risers to be detailed to accommodate seismic relative 

displacements by means of pipe flexibility, or flexible supports where this is not 

possible. When the riser cannot accommodate seismic relative displacements by such 

means, connections having sufficient flexibility are needed. Flexible connections may be 

less desirable due to the need for greater maintenance.

 Standard steel pipe expands or contracts at a rate of 0.8 inch per 100 feet per 100 

degrees Fahrenheit; supports and bracing for tall risers or piping subject to large 

temperature variations must be explicitly designed to accommodate thermal movement. 

Riser details for chilled water piping may need to accommodate additional insulation. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-268

Riser calculations should be performed assuming the full weight of water is at the 

bottom of the pipe riser.

 Pipe risers require vertical support (longitudinal restraints) as well as lateral bracing.

Risers are typically supported and braced by a combination of wall-mounted restraints 

and floor- or roof-mounted supports or guides at the locations of penetrations. They 

may also be supported by hangers located on horizontal branch lines within 24 inches 

of the centerline of the riser. Suspended support details are sometimes used at the top 

of the riser. The pipes may be rigidly mounted, for instance at the base of the riser, or 

mounted with elastomeric pads, sliding guides or vibration isolation. Specially designed 

riser clamps are often used to provide vertical support for pipe risers. Isolated piping 

should be supported independently from rigidly braced piping; rigid pipe attachments to 

lightweight walls may cause vibration problems under operating conditions.

 All vertical risers should have lateral restraints at the top and bottom of the riser and at 

each intermediate floor at a maximum spacing of 30 foot intervals. When installed as a 

riser, nonductile piping, such as no-hub cast iron piping, should include joint stabilizers 

where the joints are unsupported between floors.

 Pipe penetrations through structural elements such as beams, walls, and slabs must be 

coordinated with a structural engineer. Pipe penetrations through nonstructural walls, 

architectural finishes or roof membranes must be coordinated with an architect. Riser 

penetrations may require thermal insulation, fire proofing, sound proofing or weather 

proofing and unless properly detailed, these architectural and safety features may be 

compromised during an earthquake. See Section 6.4.3.8 for additional information 

about detailing pipe penetrations.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-269

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.3.4-2 Riser supports provide lateral restraint with vertical sliding guides that allow 

thermal movement; restraint hardware consisting of tube sections is welded to 

either side of pipe (Photo courtesy of Mason Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-270

 

Figure 6.4.3.4-3 Different schemes for riser supports at floor penetrations with vibration 

isolation: first one with restraint hardware welded to pipe, second with two sets 

of riser clamps, and third with riser clamp inside the insulation (Photos courtesy 

of Mason Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-271

Figure 6.4.3.4-4 Insulated boiler pipe risers with welded lugs (small pipe sections) which travel 

vertically in guides providing lateral seismic restraint (Photo courtesy of Eduardo 

Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-272

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.3.4-5 Wall-mounted pipe riser restraint/support (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-273

Figure 6.4.3.4-6 Riser restraint/support at floor penetrations – variations with pipe clamp, 

vibration isolation, and sliding guides (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-274

Figure 6.4.3.4-7 Riser restraint/support at roof penetration – variations with U-bolt or pipe clamp

(ER). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-275

Figure 6.4.3.4-8 Roof penetration with vibration isolation (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-276

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.3 Pressure Piping

6.4.3.5 Floor-mounted supports

This category covers floor-mounted supports for pressure piping. Floor-mounted supports 

may be used to support either horizontal or vertical pipe runs with or without vibration 

isolation, either indoors or outdoors. Floor-mounted supports typically involve steel shapes 

anchored to structural framing or a structural concrete slab. These supports may have one 

cantilevered support member, one propped cantilever member, or be built up of multiple 

elements to form a trapeze or braced frame.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), 

Chapter 13 classifies floor-mounted supports as “Component Supports”. The design for 

component supports may be based on reference standards, proprietary systems, or calculated 

forces. When calculating seismic forces, the design coefficients for the supports are typically 

the same as those used for the piping. However, in no case should the value of Rp used for 

support design be greater than 6.0. 

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 exempts piping from seismic bracing requirements in Seismic Design 

Category C if Ip =1.0.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires seismic design for all distribution systems including piping in 

Seismic Design Categories D, E, and F that weighs more than 5 pounds per linear foot.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 exempts high-deformability or limited deformability piping (such as 

steel and copper pipe) where the pipe diameter is small (anywhere from 1- to 3-inch 

diameter depending on the Seismic Design Category and occupancy). Provisions must 

be made to accommodate anticipated movement (such as by providing flexible 

connections, as shown in Section 6.4.3.3) and to avoid impact with other structural or 

nonstructural components or to protect the piping in the event of such impact.

The stiffness of the support should be designed to be compatible with its’ intended function. 

For example, a relatively slender, flexible cantilever pipe support may not provide effective 

restraint for a stiff, large diameter steel pipe. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-277

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

The requirements for component supports in ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing 

Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) depend on the type of piping system. Refer to the discussions of 

different distribution systems for more specific application information. Floor-mounted 

supports are acceleration sensitive, and when retrofit is required, they must meet the force 

requirements of the standard.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Failure of pipe supports may result in damage to the support in question, damage to 

adjacent supports which are overloaded due to the initial failure, damage to the piping 

or pipe joints, damage to insulation, leakage of the contents, and outage of the system 

that the pipes support. Joints may fail if the layout of the seismic restraints is poor or 

where the restraints are inadequate for the anticipated forces and displacements. Piping 

damage may occur at building separations, seismic joints, or penetrations if the piping 

has not been detailed to account for the differential movement. 

 Several failure mechanisms exist for floor-mounted supports: failure at base if 

anchorage is undersized, yielding of cantilever elements causing excessive deflection, 

and buckling of braced elements if braces are undersized.

 Unrestrained piping supported directly on the floor is vulnerable to damage due to 

excessive movement. Section 6.4.3.8 provides more information about potential 

damage at pipe penetrations.

 Low lying piping, regardless of the mounting details, is vulnerable to damage due to 

items falling from above. Pipes may be knocked loose or crushed if heavy items fall on 

them.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-278

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.3.5-1 Pipe and support assembly seem intact but photo shows evidence of 

longitudinal movement of the pipe in the U-bolts (Photo courtesy of BFP 

Engineers). A rubber pad was installed between the U-bolt and pipe in order to 

increase the friction coefficient, but was not sufficient to provide longitudinal 

restraint. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-279

Figure 6.4.3.5-2 Damage to piping, stud wall and finishes due to movement of poorly restrained 

floor-mounted piping in the 1994 magnitude-6.7 Northridge Earthquake (Photo 

courtesy of Mason Industries).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Horizontal and vertical pipe runs need vertical, lateral, and longitudinal restraints.

Floor-mounted supports can be used to provide restraint for any combination of these 

loads, can be designed for many different configurations, may be used with or without 

vibration isolation, and may be used either indoors or outdoors.

 If the pipe supports are vibration isolated, analysis is required to determine the 

appropriate seismic design force.

 Longitudinal restraints require positive support to the pipe with a pipe clamp or welded 

lug; U-bolts do not provide sufficient longitudinal restraint, as observed in Figure 

6.4.3.5-1. For insulated piping, longitudinal restraint hardware may need to be located 

beneath the insulation in order to prevent longitudinal slip.

 In an existing concrete slab, care must be taken to locate rebar or post-tensioned 

tendons prior to drilling holes for anchor bolts. If the base plate for the pipe support is 

near the edge of a concrete curb or slab, care must be taken to provide sufficient edge 

distance and embedment for the anchor bolts. Some types of anchors are not 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-280

recommended for use with vibratory loads. FEMA 414, Installing Seismic Restraints for 

Duct and Pipe (2004) provides additional precautions regarding the installation of 

anchor bolts and general guidance on pipe restraints.

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.3.5-3 Floor-mounted supports for insulated pipe with vibration isolation (Photo 

courtesy of Mason Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-281

Figure 6.4.3.5-4 Floor/ground-mounted supports for industrial piping in Chile; piping 

undamaged in the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake. Pipe supports 

include concrete pedestal, base plate, and built-up welded support stand. 

(Photos courtesy of Antonio Iruretagoyena, Rubén Boroschek & Associates).

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-282

Figure 6.4.3.5-5 Floor-mounted supports for industrial piping in Chile; piping undamaged in the 

2010 Chile Earthquake. The Chilean Industrial Code (Norma Chilena 2369) 

requires that shear forces be resisted by shear keys as shown; lower photo is 

detail of piping at upper right (Photos courtesy of Antonio Iruretagoyena, Rubén 

Boroschek & Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-283

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.3.5-6 Floor-mounted single vertical pipe support (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-284

Figure 6.4.3.5-7 Floor-mounted pipe stand (strut frame) (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-285

Figure 6.4.3.5-8 Floor-mounted pipe stand (steel shapes) (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-286

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.3 Pressure Piping

6.4.3.6 Roof-Mounted Supports

This category covers roof-mounted supports for pressure piping. Roof-mounted supports may 

be used to support either horizontal or vertical pipe runs. Roof-mounted supports consist of

wood blocking or steel shapes anchored to structural framing or a structural concrete slab and 

may be mounted with or without vibration isolation. These supports may be flush with the roof 

surface, have one cantilevered support member, one propped cantilever member, or be built up 

of multiple elements to form a trapeze or braced frame.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010)

Chapter 13 classifies roof-mounted supports as “Component Supports.” The design for 

component supports may be based on reference standards, proprietary systems, or calculated 

forces. When calculating seismic forces, the design coefficients for the supports are typically 

the same as those used for the piping. However, in no case should the value of Rp used for 

support design be greater than 6.0. 

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 exempts piping from seismic bracing requirements in Seismic Design 

Category C if Ip =1.0.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires seismic design for all distribution systems including piping in 

Seismic Design Categories D, E, and F that weighs more than 5 pounds per linear foot.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 exempts high-deformability or limited deformability piping (such as 

steel and copper pipe) where the pipe diameter is small (anywhere from 1 to 3 inch 

diameter depending on the Seismic Design Category and occupancy). Provisions must 

be made to accommodate anticipated movement (such as by providing flexible 

connections, as shown in Section 6.4.3.3) and to avoid impact with other structural or 

nonstructural components or to protect the piping in the event of such impact

The stiffness of the support should be designed to be compatible with its’ intended function. 

For example, a relatively slender, flexible cantilever pipe support may not provide effective 

restraint for a stiff, large diameter steel pipe. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-287

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

The requirements for component supports in ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing 

Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) depend on the type of piping system. Refer to the discussions of 

different distribution systems for more specific application information. Roof-mounted 

supports are acceleration sensitive, and when retrofit is required, they must meet the force 

requirements of the standard.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Failure of pipe supports may result in damage to the support in question, damage to 

adjacent supports which are overloaded due to the initial failure, damage to the piping, 

damage to insulation or roofing, leakage of the contents, and outage of the system that 

the pipes support. Joints may fail if the layout of the seismic restraints is poor or where 

the restraints are inadequate for the anticipated forces and displacements. Piping 

damage may occur at locations where piping runs across roof separations or seismic 

joints if the piping has not been detailed to account for the differential movement.

 Seismic accelerations are often highest at the roof level and thus roof-mounted items 

are particularly vulnerable to failure unless properly designed. Several failure 

mechanisms exist for roof-mounted supports: failure at base if anchorage is 

undersized, yielding of cantilever elements causing excessive deflection, and buckling of 

braced elements if braces are undersized. 

 Unrestrained piping supported directly on the roof is vulnerable to damage due to 

excessive movement. Unanchored wood sleepers may overturn or slide.

 Damage to roof-mounted items may also result in damage to the roofing membrane 

causing subsequent water damage.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-288

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.3.6-1 Damaged supports and piping on roof-mounted HVAC unit in the 1994 

magnitude-6.7 Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Mason Industries). 

Both the roof-mounted wood sleepers and strut supports failed.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-289

Figure 6.4.3.6-2 Unrestrained wood sleepers on roof-mounted piping slid a foot in either 

direction in 2010 magnitude-6.5 Eureka Earthquake (Photos courtesy of 

Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-290

Figure 6.4.3.6-3 Unrestrained roof-mounted piping broke at the connection to the equipment in 

the 2010 Eureka Earthquake. Piping mounted on wood sleepers should typically 

be restrained to the roof, not free to slide (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, 

Estructure).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Pipe runs need vertical, lateral and longitudinal restraints. Roof-mounted supports can 

be used to provide restraint for any combination of these loads, can be designed for 

many different configurations, and may be used with or without vibration isolation.

Longitudinal restraints require positive support to the pipe with a pipe clamp or welded 

lug; U-bolts do not provide effective longitudinal restraint. 

 Seismic accelerations are often highest at the roof level; roof-mounted supports may 

need to be more robust than those located elsewhere in a building. They additionally 

need to be protected from corrosion and deterioration or they will be ineffective during 

an earthquake. 

 If the pipe supports are vibration isolated, analysis is required to determine the 

appropriate seismic design force.In an existing concrete roof slab, care must be taken to 

locate rebar or post-tensioned tendons prior to drilling holes for anchor bolts. If the 

base plate for the pipe support is near the edge of a concrete curb or slab, care must be 

taken to provide sufficient edge distance and embedment for the anchor bolts. Some 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-291

types of anchors are not recommended for use with vibratory loads. FEMA 414, 

Installing Seismic Restraints for Duct and Pipe (2004) provides additional precautions 

regarding the installation of anchor bolts. 

 Weatherproofing is an important consideration for roof-mounted supports; any 

penetration of the roof membrane must be adequately sealed to prevent roof leakage. 

Refer to Section 6.4.3.8 for additional discussion of pipe penetrations.

 Seismic restraint hardware for any exterior exposure should be specified using materials

or coatings to reduce corrosion and may require periodic painting or replacement to 

maintain the effectiveness of the restraint. Items exposed to salt air, or deicing

compounds such as in a parking structure, may be especially at risk.

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.3.6-4 Roof-mounted supports with vibration isolation (Photo courtesy of Mason 

Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-292

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.3.6-5 Roof-mounted single vertical pipe support (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-293

Figure 6.4.3.6-6 Roof-mounted pipe stand and sleeper anchored to slab (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-294

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.3 Pressure Piping

6.4.3.7 Wall-Mounted Supports

This category covers wall-mounted supports for pressure piping. Wall-mounted supports may 

be used to support either horizontal or vertical pipe runs, may be used with or without vibration 

isolation, and may be used either indoors or outdoors. Wall-mounted supports may be 

mounted flush or be built up out of assemblies of steel shapes anchored to structural framing 

or a structural wall. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), 

Chapter 13 classifies wall-mounted supports as “Component Supports”. The design for 

component supports may be based on reference standards, proprietary systems, or calculated 

forces. When calculating seismic forces, the design coefficients for the supports are typically 

the same as those used for the piping. However, in no case should the value of Rp used for 

support design be greater than 6.0. 

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 exempts piping from seismic bracing requirements in Seismic Design 

Category C if Ip =1.0.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires seismic design for all distribution systems including piping in 

Seismic Design Categories D, E, and F that weighs more than 5 pounds per linear foot.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 exempts high-deformability or limited deformability piping (such as 

steel and copper pipe) where the pipe diameter is small (anywhere from 1- to 3-inch 

diameter depending on the Seismic Design Category and occupancy). Provisions must 

be made to accommodate anticipated movement (such as by providing flexible 

connections, as shown in Section 6.4.3.3) and to avoid impact with other structural or 

nonstructural components or to protect the piping in the event of such impact.

The stiffness of the support should be designed to be compatible with its’ intended function. 

For example, a relatively slender, flexible cantilever pipe support may not provide effective 

restraint for a stiff, large diameter steel pipe. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-295

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

The requirements for component supports in ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing 

Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) depend on the type of piping system. Refer to the discussions of 

different distribution systems for more specific application information. Wall-mounted 

supports are acceleration sensitive, and when retrofit is required, they must meet the force 

requirements of the standard.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Failure of pipe supports may result in damage to the support in question, damage to 

adjacent supports which are overloaded due to the initial failure, damage to the piping 

or pipe joints, damage to insulation, leakage of the contents, and outage of the system 

that the pipes support.

 Joints may fail if the layout of the seismic restraints is poor or where the restraints are 

inadequate for the anticipated forces and displacements. Piping damage may occur at 

building separations or seismic joints if the piping has not been detailed to account for 

the differential movement. Wall-mounted piping often passes thru penetrations; piping 

may be vulnerable unless the penetrations are properly detailed.

 Several failure mechanisms exist for wall-mounted supports: failure at wall plate if 

anchorage is undersized, yielding of cantilever elements causing excessive deflection, 

and buckling of braced elements if braces are undersized. Piping attached to 

nonstructural walls or walls of insufficient strength may also result in damage to the 

wall or partition and the architectural finishes or fire-proofing.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-296

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.3.7-1 Wall-mounted supports for horizontal and vertical pipe runs with exterior 

exposure. Photo shows minor damage at wall penetration of green pipe and 

minor movement at some U-bolts, but restraints generally performed well

(Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers). Note that lateral restraint 

near an elbow can be used to provide longitudinal restraint for a perpendicular 

pipe run. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-297

Figure 6.4.3.7-2 Pipe supports attached to wall of damaged silo (Photo courtesy of Eduardo 

Fierro, BFP Engineers). In spite of structural damage to silo, cast-in-place pipe 

supports were still intact and the piping did not fall. 

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Horizontal and vertical pipe runs need vertical, lateral and longitudinal restraints. Wallmounted supports can be used to provide restraint for any combination of these loads, 

can be designed for many different configurations, may be used with or without 

vibration isolation, and may be used either indoors or outdoors. Pipes may be mounted 

flush to the wall or offset; make sure to check that the wall or partition is capable of 

carrying the piping loads and will not develop vibration problems.

 If the pipe supports are vibration isolated, analysis is required to determine the 

appropriate seismic design force.

 Longitudinal restraints require positive support to the pipe with a pipe clamp or welded 

lug; U-bolts do not provide sufficient longitudinal restraint. For insulated piping, 

longitudinal restraint hardware may need to be located beneath the insulation in order 

to prevent longitudinal slip.

 In an existing concrete or masonry wall, care must be taken to locate rebar prior to 

drilling holes for anchor bolts so the rebar is not cut. Anchorage for isolated piping 

should be independent of anchorage for rigidly mounted pipe. In addition, some types 

of anchors are not recommended for use with vibratory loads. FEMA 414, Installing 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-298

Seismic Restraints for Duct and Pipe (2004), provides additional precautions regarding 

the installation of anchor bolts and general guidance on pipe restraints.

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.3.7-3 Wall-mounted pipe restraint examples using standard strut shapes and 

connectors (Photo courtesy of Cynthia Perry, BFP Engineers). Bottom view still 

under construction; pipes temporarily attached with plastic ties. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-299

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.3.7-4 Surface-mount to structural wall (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-300

Figure 6.4.3.7-5 Wall-mount with steel shape or struts welded to concrete wall (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-301

Figure 6.4.3.7-6 Wall-mount using strut channels to metal stud wall (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-302

Figure 6.4.3.7-7 Wall-mount to stud wall with pre-manufactured brackets (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-303

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.3 Pressure Piping

6.4.3.8 Penetrations

This section addresses locations where pressure piping passes through floor, roof, or wall 

penetrations in either architectural or structural components. Penetrations usually fall into one 

of three categories: 1) the penetration is sufficiently oversized to prevent impact between the 

pipe and surrounding wall or slab; 2) a seismic restraint is located at or near the penetration so 

the pipe and surrounding wall or slab are constrained to move together; or 3) the penetration is 

not properly detailed and becomes an unintended restraint in the piping run which may result 

in damage to the piping, wall, slab, or finishes. Structural and nonstructural elements may 

require strengthening around penetrations or may need special detailing to provide fireproofing, sound-proofing, and weather-proofing or improve the appearance of architectural 

finishes.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), 

Chapter 13, Nonstructural Components states that when seismic design is required, interaction 

between the components and the supporting structures, including other mechanical and 

electrical components, shall also be considered. Pressure piping with an Importance Factor Ip

greater than 1.0 must be designed to eliminate seismic impact for:

 Components vulnerable to impact, 

 Components constructed of nonductile materials, and 

 Cases where material ductility will be reduced due to service conditions (e.g., low 

temperature applications).

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies pressure 

piping systems as force and deformation sensitive. Compliance with the requirements of the 

standard is necessary when the performance level is Immediate Occupancy or Life Safety in 

areas of High and Moderate seismicity. There are no specific requirements for pipe 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-304

penetrations in ASCE/SEI 41-06. Retrofit in accordance with prescriptive standards is 

permitted. 

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Pipe movement at penetrations often results in damage to architectural finishes, fireproofing, and insulation. Failure of joints at or near penetrations may result in leakage 

causing further damage to these components. 

 Where pipes pass through unreinforced masonry walls, the opening may create a point 

of weakness resulting in crack propagation from the opening. Lightweight partitions or 

ceilings are also frequently damaged by movement of unrestrained piping. Pipe 

movement at penetrations may also result in damage to electrical lines in the wall or 

ceiling space.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-305

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.3.8-1 Damage to ceilings, gypsum board partitions, fire-proofing, and insulation in the 

1994 magnitude-6.7 Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Mason 

Industries). Note that the blue piping has joints located in the wall space which 

leaked, resulting in additional damage. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-306

Figure 6.4.3.8-2 Exterior stucco damage at wall penetration for fire protection piping in the 2001

magnitude-8.4 Peru Earthquake (Photos courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, : BFP 

Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-307

Figure 6.4.3.8-3 Wall penetrations for piping and ducts contributed to damage to unreinforced 

masonry walls at an industrial facility in the 2010 magnitude-7 Haiti Earthquake 

(Photos courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers). The piping and ducts were

not damaged but the walls cracked and will need to be repaired. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-308

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 As described above, there are two different approaches for avoiding damage at pipe 

penetrations. Either the penetration should be designed to be oversized to avoid 

contact between the pipe and the wall or slab, or the pipe should be restrained at or 

near the penetration so the pipe and wall or slab are constrained to move together.

 Penetrations should be oversized wherever possible to allow for differential movement 

of pipe supports and the structural elements they are attached to on either side of the 

wall, floor, or roof slab. Alternatively, lateral restraints for the piping should be 

provided close to the penetration to prevent impact between the pipe and the opening. 

Where piping crosses from one building to another, flexible connections may also be 

required near the penetration. 

 Pipes often fail or leak at joints; pipe joints should be not be located within penetrations 

where they will leak into a wall cavity or are inaccessible for inspection and repair. 

 Penetrations through structural walls, slabs, or framing must be coordinated with a 

structural engineer; structural walls, slabs, or framing elements may require 

strengthening around penetrations. For large openings such as a pipe chase, this may 

involve extra trim steel around the opening or additional framing members beneath a 

slab. Penetrations in a structural steel girder may require welded reinforcement plates 

around the opening. For locating penetrations in existing concrete or masonry walls or 

concrete slabs, care must be taken to locate rebar or post-tensioned tendons prior to 

drilling holes for pipe penetrations so these elements are not cut.

 Penetrations through nonstructural walls should be coordinated with an architect to 

ensure that fire-proofing, sound-proofing, weather-proofing, insulation requirements 

and finishes on either side of the opening are not compromised. Roof penetrations have 

particular issues related to weather-proofing and corrosion protection; care must be 

taken to avoid leakage at roof penetrations. Where penetrations pass through weak 

materials such as unreinforced masonry or lightweight partitions, these elements may 

require strengthening. 

 Detailing at penetrations often involves several layers of material and finishes each of 

which require attention; penetrations through structural elements may involve both the 

engineer and the architect. For instance, a penetration through a masonry wall with 

interior plaster and exterior stucco will require detailing for all three of these materials. 

The damage shown in Figure 6.4.3.8-2 occurred because although the masonry 

penetration was oversized and filled with packing, the exterior stucco was placed flush 

with the pipe resulting in stucco damage during the earthquake. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-309

 Pipe risers that pass through floor and roof penetrations must be detailed so the seismic 

restraints can also accommodate longitudinal thermal movement of the pipe. If 

allowance for thermal movement is not included in the design, the seismic restraints 

may be damaged under operating conditions and fail to perform properly in an 

earthquake.

 Penetrations in exit corridors needed for emergency egress may warrant special care; 

similarly, penetrations in boiler rooms or locations with fuel lines or hazardous 

materials may also warrant special detailing to maintain the fire-proofing of the space in 

the event of a post-earthquake fire.

 FEMA 414, Installing Seismic Restraints for Duct and Pipe (2004), provides additional 

precautions regarding the installation of anchor bolts and general guidance on pipe 

restraints.

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.3.8-4 Wall penetrations with lateral restraints at trapeze in foreground, flexible 

couplings with independent vertical supports, and sealant at each wall 

penetration (Photo courtesy of Mason Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-310

Figure 6.4.3.8-5 Floor penetration with oversized opening and vertical and lateral restraints 

immediately above floor (Photo courtesy of Mason Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-311

Figure 6.4.3.8-6 Series of pipe penetrations through a full-height CMU partition wall. Note pipe 

suspended from floor above; partition anchored to floor below and detailed 

with steel clip angles intended to provide lateral restraint for the wall but allow 

relative slip between the wall and slab above. The hangers will move with the 

floor above and the pipe at penetration will move with the wall. Lateral 

restraints are located immediately above floor (Photo courtesy Cynthia Perry, 

BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-312

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.3.8-7 Wall penetration (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-313

Figure 6.4.3.8-8 Floor or roof penetration (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-314

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.4 Fire Protection piping

6.4.4.1 Suspended Fire Protection Piping

This category covers fire protection sprinkler systems and piping. These systems and piping 

are subject to the requirements in NFPA 13, Standard Installation of Sprinkler Systems (NFPA, 

20010a). Fire sprinkler systems may include a number of components besides piping, 

including pumps, tanks, and control panels. Recommendations for these components are 

found in the appropriate sections in Chapter 6.

Bracing provisions for fire protection piping were introduced in 1947, making it one of the 

earliest nonstructural standards to consider lateral bracing. NFPA 13 bracing provisions have 

developed continuously over time, in response to changes in construction practice and lessons 

learned from earthquakes. As a result, some fire protection piping systems may appear to be 

braced, even if installed 50 years ago. Unfortunately, older bracing installations may include 

features that have been shown to be vulnerable in strong ground shaking. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings, (ASCE, 2010), Section 13.1.3.1 specifies 

that systems required for life-safety purposes after an earthquake, such as fire protection 

systems, be classified as designated seismic systems and designed using a component 

importance factor, Ip, of 1.5. Designated seismic systems may require engineering calculations, 

equipment certification, special inspection, etc. ASCE/SEI 7-10 specifies that fire protection 

piping conform to NFPA 13, as follows:

 NFPA 13 provides specific requirements for fire suppression systems and piping. Fire 

protection piping installations conforming to the 2007 or later editions of NFPA 13 may 

be considered to comply with the requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10. 

 The 2010 edition of NFPA 13 contains prescriptive details and requirements for many 

aspects of the piping installation, such as hanger size and spacing, clearances between 

the system and other structural or nonstructural components, and standard bracing 

installation details. It also contains a simplified method for doing seismic design, based 

on the concept of “zone of influence,” a method of proportioning forces to bracing 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-315

elements that has been in use for decades. Most bracing assemblies for fire protection 

piping must be listed for a maximum load rating.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies suspended 

fire protection piping as both force controlled and displacement controlled. ASCE/SEI 41-06 

requires compliance with the anchorage provisions of the standard when the performance level 

is Life Safety or higher. Rehabilitation, if required, is accomplished by prescriptive approaches 

to support and bracing, in accordance with NFPA 13. 

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Fire protection piping systems are sensitive to both acceleration and deformation. 

Vulnerable locations include joints, bends, connections to rigidly mounted equipment 

and risers subjected to significant relative movement between floors.

 Older bracing installations may include details that have performed poorly in past 

earthquakes, including the use of non-seismically rated power actuated fasteners (shot 

pins) or drop-in type concrete expansion anchors in bracing applications, which have 

proven unreliable under seismic loads. Many sprinkler system failures in the 1994 

Northridge Earthquake were due to failure of poorly designed braces and brace 

connections. 

 Sprinkler heads are often damaged due to interactions with ceiling systems, especially 

those with “hard” finishes such as plaster and metal panels. These interactions may also 

result in impact damage to the ceiling, failure of the sprinkler head, or failure to joints 

in the piping, with subsequent water damage. Sprinkler heads and sprinkler drops are 

also damaged by interactions with structural members and other structural braces where 

inadequate clearance is provided to avoid impact.

 Older systems may lack lateral restraints on the branch lines, which will make the 

sprinkler heads more vulnerable to interaction with the ceiling system and adjacent 

structural members.

 Fluids may leak from damaged joints or broken pipe; property losses and business 

outages are often attributed to fluid leaks from fire suppression piping. Facilities may 

need to be evacuated if the fire suppression system is compromised.

 Damage to any part of the fire protection system may compromise its functionality. In

addition to the piping, pumps, holding tanks, control panels, control sensors, smoke 

detection equipment, and fire doors must all be operational for the life-safety systems 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-316

to function correctly. If a fire breaks out following an earthquake and the fire 

suppression system is not functional, significant property losses may result.

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-317

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.4.1-1 Sprinkler pipe ruptured at the elbow joint due to differential motion within the 

ceiling plenum. Water leakage from broken fire sprinklers and water lines 

contributed to the decision to close this hospital for several days following the 

1994 magnitude-6.7 Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Robert 

Reitherman).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-318

Figure 6.4.4.1-2 Wall-mounted pipe restraint failed due to inadequate connection to structural 

framing in the 2001 magnitude-8.4 Peru Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo 

Fierro, BFP Engineers).

Figure 6.4.4.1-3 Damage to suspended fire protection piping from the 1994 Northridge 

Earthquake. Failed vibration isolators at left; failed C-clamps without beam 

clamp restraining straps shown at right (Photos courtesy of Mason Industries). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-319

Figure 6.4.4.1-4 Collapse of water tank at left and broken piping disabled the fire protection 

system at this power plant in Port-au-Prince and led to the temporary plant 

closure in the 2010 magnitude-7 Haiti Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo 

Fierro, BFP Engineers).

Figure 6.4.4.1-5 Unanchored holding tank slid on concrete pad, breaking fire protection piping 

and disabling the fire protection system in the 2010 Haiti Earthquake. In this 

case, the piping was well anchored but the tank was unrestrained (Photo 

courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-320

Figure 6.4.4.1-6 Damage to industrial fire protection piping located on jetty in 2001 Peru 

Earthquake. Longitudinal slip at U-bolt shown at left; this U-bolt still intact but 

other U-bolts broke and fell off the jetty. Failure of joint coupling and crushing 

of pipe shown at right (Photo courtesy Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).

Figure 6.4.4.1-7 Conflicts between the sprinkler heads and several types of ceiling finishes 

resulted in damage to the ceilings, sprinkler heads and subsequent water damage at the Concepción 

airport in the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake (Photos courtesy of Rodrigo Retamales, Rubén 

Boroschek & Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-321

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Fire suppression systems include many components, all of which must be properly 

restrained or anchored for the system to function as intended. Pumps, holding tanks, 

control panels, control sensors, piping and sprinkler heads must all be protected from 

earthquake damage. In addition to seismic restraints for each component, it is 

important to check for potential conflicts with other structural and nonstructural 

elements and for falling hazards.

 Performance of fire protection piping systems that already have some bracing can be 

improved by addressing the vulnerabilities identified in past earthquakes. Many of 

these issues have been addressed in the 2010 edition of the NFPA 13 seismic 

provisions. These include:

o Limits on the lateral brace spacing on mains and cross-mains to limit bending 

stresses in the piping, which will reduce the likelihood of leaks.

o Lateral restraint requirements for branch lines. Laterally restraining the branch 

lines should reduce the potential for adverse interactions between the sprinkler 

heads and the ceiling system. 

o The prescriptive allowable fastener load tables have been revised to provide 

design values consistent with current materials standards. The values in 

previous editions may be unconservative.

o The prescriptive values for brace assemblies have been revised. The values in 

previous editions may be unconservative.

 NFPA 13 Chapter 9 contains many prescriptive bracing details for new installations 

which may be utilized to retrofit existing systems. As an alternative, seismic restraint 

details for pressure piping shown in Sections 6.4.3.1 through 6.4.3.8 can be adapted for 

use with fire protection piping. One significant difference is that components, supports, 

and seismic restraint hardware for fire protection systems must all be certified (UL 

listed, FM approved, etc.). This requirement also applies to seismic restraint 

components for fire protection control panels, pumps, and holding tanks.

 Some proprietary systems are available that reduce the vulnerability of sprinkler heads 

in suspended ceiling grids. One such system provides flexible sprinkler drops so the 

sprinkler head can move freely with the ceiling grid (see Figure 6.4.4.1-11); this 

proprietary system has been shake table tested. Another system is an “integrated” 

ceiling system where the ceiling grid, acoustical panels, lighting, ducts and air diffusers, 

and sprinkler piping are all shop assembled in modules; this system alleviates the 

problem of differential movement of the component parts. These types of solutions 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-322

may greatly reduce the seismic vulnerability of sprinkler heads. Check the internet for 

these and other proprietary systems.

 Two details are included here that are unique to fire protection systems. Figure 6.4.4.1-

11 provides one type of detail for a sprinkler drop and Figure 6.4.4.1-12 provides a 

detail for an end of line restraint required for feeds or cross mains.

 Several engineered seismic bracing systems are commercially available and can be 

customized for most applications. Check the internet for these proprietary systems and 

whether they are UL listed, OSHPD approved, FM approved, etc. as required.

 For California schools and essential facilities, DSA Policy 10-01, Plan Submittal 

Requirements: Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems (AFSS) (California Department of 

General Services, 2010b), states that as of July 2010, deferred submittals (similar to 

“design-build” as discussed in Section 5.3.2) for fire protection systems will no longer 

be accepted. These systems must be submitted as a complete package as part of the 

initial project submittal. 

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.4.1-8 There was no damage to the fire suppression equipment in this control room in 

the 2001 Peru Earthquake because the pump and the control panel were well 

anchored and the piping had flexible connections with adequate sized wall 

penetration and no overhead falling hazards (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, 

BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-323

Figure 6.4.4.1-9 Transverse and longitudinal restraints on fire protection distribution line (Photo 

courtesy of Cynthia Perry, BFP Engineers).

Figure 6.4.4.1-10 Flexible hose between sprinkler line and ceiling allowing the sprinkler head to 

move with the suspended ceiling without causing damage to the sprinkler 

system (Photo courtesy of Flexhead).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-324

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.4.1-11 Flexible sprinkler drop (ER).

Figure 6.4.4.1-12 End of line restraint (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-325

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.5 Fluid Piping, not Fire Protection

6.4.5.1 Hazardous Materials Piping

This category covers fluid piping, other than pressure piping or fire protection piping, that 

transfers fluids under pressure, by gravity, or that are open to the atmosphere. Specifically, the 

fluids in this category are hazardous and flammable liquids that would pose an immediate life 

safety danger due to their inherent properties. Hazardous materials and flammable liquids that 

would pose an immediate life safety danger if exposed are described in NFPA Standards such 

as NFPA 49, Hazardous Chemicals Data, and NFPA 491, Hazardous Chemical Reactions, as 

listed in the NFPA Fire Protection Guide to Hazardous Materials (NFPA, 2010). 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), 

requires the use of a component importance factor, Ip, of 1.5 if the component conveys, 

supports or contains toxic, highly toxic or explosive substances. The quantities of materials 

that trigger the requirements are established by the authority having jurisdiction and are based 

on a determination of the threat to the public if the material is released.

 The piping and supports may be designed using the provisions of ASME B31 Process 

Piping (ASME, 2008) or ASCE/SEI 7-10. If ASME B31 is used, the forces and 

displacements of ASCE/SEI 7-10 must be used for design. 

 In addition to force and displacement design, special certification is required 

demonstrating that any component containing hazardous materials with an Ip of 1.5 will 

maintain containment under seismic loading. Thus any component covered by the 

above descriptions is a “designated seismic system” and, unless it falls under the 

exemption for mechanical and electrical components in Seismic Design Category B, 

requires engineering, special certification, or special inspection.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies hazardous 

material piping systems as both acceleration and deformation sensitive.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-326

 Hazardous material piping systems are subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06 

when

o The performance level is Immediate Occupancy or Life Safety in high, moderate, 

and low seismicity areas.

o The performance level is Hazards Reduced in high, moderate, and low seismicity 

areas and the system is close proximity to occupancy such that leakage could 

cause an immediate life safety threat.

 Acceptance criteria focus on performing drift analysis to determine if the glazing can 

accommodate the expected story drifts, and the anchorage of the panels under seismic 

loading. The evaluation approach is similar to that used in ASCE/SEI 7-10.

o ASCE/SEI 41-06 requires compliance with the anchorage provisions of the 

standard when the performance level is Life Safety or higher. 

o Rehabilitation may utilize prescriptive standard. 

Typical Causes of Damage 

 . Vulnerable locations in hazardous fluid piping include joints, bends, connections to 

rigidly mounted equipment and risers subjected to significant relative movement 

between floors. These piping systems have failure modes common to all piping 

systems, but the consequences of failure are more severe.

 Fluids may leak from damaged joints or broken pipe. Hazardous and flammable fluid 

spills may result in fire, explosion, or evacuation to avoid personal exposure. The risk 

for injury, property losses and business outages is high.

 Damage to any part of the hazardous piping system may compromise its functionality 

and connected equipment or systems may be disabled due to piping leaks or failures. 

For example, many hazardous piping systems are designed with safety systems to 

reduce the likelihood of leakage such as secondary containment with double walled 

pipes, automatic shut-off or excess flow valves, leak detection systems, use of nonjointed piping and highly ductile pipe materials, etc. If not properly designed, installed 

and maintained, any of these secondary or backup systems could also be damaged 

resulting in hazardous material leaks or loss of functionality.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-327

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.5.1-1 Earthquake, liquefaction, and tsunami damage to oil supply lines at the port in 

Talcahuano in the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake. The pier in upper 

photo collapsed over much of its length dragging the pipes down into the water; 

this caused tension failures in some pipe joints and also resulted in structural 

damage to the buildings (Photos courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-328

Figure 6.4.5.1-2 Basement level at power plant in Port-au-Prince flooded with oil and water in 

the 2010 magnitude-7 Haiti Earthquake creating hazardous conditions for 

inspection and clean-up (Photos courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-329

Figure 6.4.5.1-3 Elephant foot damage to inadequately anchored fuel tank in the 2010 Chile 

Earthquake also resulted in damage to fuel lines. Close-up photo shows failed 

pipe at welded joint (left) and pipe segment with attached valve (foreground)

tore out of the tank wall (Photos courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-330

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

Fuel and natural gas lines are found in many common settings, but this category also covers 

more hazardous types of piping found in industrial facilities, power plants or hospitals. The 

national standard for pressure piping, ASME B31.3, Process Piping (ASME, 2008), defines 

hazardous fluid service as “a fluid service in which the potential for personnel exposure is 

judged to be significant and in which a single exposure to a very small quantity of a toxic fluid, 

caused by leakage, can produce serious irreversible harm to person on breathing or bodily 

contact, even when prompt restorative measures are taken.”

The International Fire Code (IFC) contains provisions that deal with each type of hazardous 

material such as corrosives, cryogenics, flammable and combustible liquids, highly toxic 

materials, organic peroxides, oxidizers, pyrophorics, reactive materials, and water reactive 

solids and liquids. Independent of any seismic concerns, there are many provisions that apply 

to piping systems that convey these materials. There may be requirements, such as secondary 

containment, backup safety systems, emergency shut-off, monitoring or leak detection. NFPA 

704, Standard System for the Identification of Hazards of Materials for Emergency Response

(NFPA, 2007b) provides a classification and labeling system for hazardous materials as shown 

in Figure 6.4.5.1-4. The four-part diamond symbol is coded by color and position for type of 

hazard; the hazards associated with health, flammability and reactivity are further coded by 

degree of hazard. Use of appropriate hazard labeling for hazardous piping and associated 

containers or tanks of hazardous materials, as well as buildings housing such materials, is 

important so that fire fighters, emergency responders, and engineers performing

postearthquake inspections will be aware of the hazards present. 

 Requirements for seismic shut-off valves, excess flow switches, and excess flow valves 

for natural gas lines may vary by jurisdiction. While some jurisdictions now require 

seismic shut-off valves on some types or sizes of gas lines, many utilities do not 

encourage their use for residential service due to the difficulty in resetting them all 

following an earthquake. Some jurisdictions have tried to avoid this by requiring excess 

flow valves instead; check the applicable jurisdiction for specific requirements in your 

area.

 Seismic restraint details for pressure piping shown in Sections 6.4.3.1 through 6.4.3.8 

can be adapted for use with hazardous fluid piping. Nevertheless, additional care is 

required in the design, installation, inspection, and maintenance of hazardous fluid 

piping systems. They may require specialized piping analysis, more frequent supports, 

ductile materials, continuous piping without joints, special welding procedures, special 

inspections, special purpose pipe clamps to avoid scratching the pipe or to prevent 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-331

corrosion, special insulation and consideration of large thermal differentials. Hazardous 

piping systems often require secondary containment such as double-walled piping. In 

addition, they may require monitoring, leak detection systems, excess flow switches, 

excess flow valves or seismic shut-off valves, use of protective sleeved connections, or 

cushion clamps. There are thousands of possible hazardous chemical streams and 

dozens of different pipe materials. Design of seismic restraints for these systems is a 

highly specialized field and may require coordination between the mechanical engineer, 

hazardous piping expert, and a seismic piping expert. There are currently few 

references available that deal specifically with the seismic issues related to these 

hazardous systems.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-332

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.5.1-4 Example of NFPA 704 Fire Diamond used to label hazardous substances. The 

four divisions in the diamond are typically color-coded, with blue indicating 

level of health hazard, red indicating flammability, yellow (chemical) reactivity, 

and white containing special codes for unique hazards. Each of health, 

flammability and reactivity is rated on a scale from 0 (no hazard; normal 

substance) to 4 (severe risk). This labeling scheme is used in the U.S. but 

Canada, the European Union, Japan, etc. have different labeling schemes that 

should be followed for facilities outside the U.S.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-333

Figure 6.4.5.1-5 Two examples of double walled piping used for secondary containment of 

hazardous fluids. Preassembled double walled pipe with centering devices or 

spacers separating the inner and outer pipe is available commercially, but as 

shown here, the outer pipe was installed and leak tested prior to pulling the 

inner pipe through. Note the yellow color coded labels indicate reactive 

materials; flow direction also marked prominently (Photos courtesy of Jeffrey 

Soulages, Intel Corporation).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-334

Figure 6.4.5.1-6 Clockwise from top: a) Sleeved pipe connections where seismic anchorage 

consists of cushioned pipe clamp attached around outer sleeve and inner pipe 

not restrained longitudinally. b) Airgas canisters chained and strapped to 

supports, fitted with flexible hose, stainless steel piping (note blue label), and a 

row of valves. c) Label on tank shows example of European ADR danger 

labeling scheme. d) Excess flow valve for large gas tank (Photos courtesy of 

Jeffrey Soulages, Intel Corporation).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-335

Figure 6.4.5.1-7 Process nitrogen piping outside engineering building on the UC Berkeley 

campus; strut clamp has rubber fittings to protect the stainless steel piping 

(Photos courtesy of Cynthia Perry, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-336

Figure 6.4.5.1-8 Two examples of seismic shut-off valves in San Francisco Bay Area. Top photo 

at Marine Mammal Center; lower photo at six unit apartment building in 

Oakland (Photos courtesy of Cynthia Perry, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-337

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.5.1-9 Hazardous piping examples (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-338

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.5 Fluid Piping, not Fire Protection

6.4.5.2 Nonhazardous Materials Piping

This category covers fluid piping, other than pressure piping or fire protection piping, that 

transfers fluids under pressure, by gravity, or that are open to the atmosphere. Pressure piping 

covers piping where the internal pressure is in excess of 15 psf; this category covers piping 

with pressures lower than 15 psf. The fluids in this category include drainage and ventilation 

piping, hot, cold, and chilled water piping; and piping carrying other nonhazardous liquids.

These fluids, in case of line rupture, would cause property damage, but pose no immediate life 

safety danger. Like any other piping, failure of the pipes or pipe supports could results in 

falling hazards. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Piping systems, including their supports, are designed using the provisions of ASCE/SEI 7-10, 

Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13. The 

principal objective is to prevent the system from falling. Depending on the configuration of the 

piping, it may also be sensitive to building displacements if it is connected to multiple levels in 

the same structure, or is supported by adjacent structures.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 exempts piping from seismic bracing requirements in Seismic Design 

Category C if Ip =1.0.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires seismic design of piping in Seismic Design Categories D, E, and 

F that weighs more than 5 pounds per linear foot.

 Unbraced piping attached to in-line equipment must be provided with flexibility 

adequate to accommodate seismic relative displacements.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 contains a number of bracing exemptions for suspended piping based 

on the pipe size and support conditions:

o Trapeze assemblies are used to support piping whereby no single pipe exceeds 

the certain size limits and the total weight of the piping supported by the 

trapeze assemblies is less than 10 lb/ft.

o Suspended piping where the hangers are less than 12 inches long. Rod hangers 

must be detailed to prevent bending of the rod.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-339

o High-deformability or limited deformability piping (such as steel and copper 

pipe) where the pipe diameter is small (anywhere from 1- to 3-inch diameter 

depending on the building location and occupancy). Provisions must be made to 

accommodate anticipated movement (such as by providing flexible connections, 

as shown in Section 6.4.3.3) and to avoid impact with other structural or 

nonstructural components or to protect the piping in the event of such impact. 

Allowable stresses are provided in ASCE/SEI 7-10 for suspended pressure piping.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies suspended 

pressure piping as force controlled, meaning that the principal objective is to prevent piping 

from falling. Where piping runs between floors or crosses seismic joints it as also deformation 

controlled. Piping must meet the force and deformation requirements of the standard when the 

performance level is Immediate Occupancy, and the pipes are 2 inches or more in diameter and 

suspended more than 12 inches from the structure.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Nonhazardous fluid piping is sensitive to both acceleration and deformation. Vulnerable 

locations include joints, bends, connections to rigidly mounted equipment and risers 

subjected to significant relative movement between floors. These piping systems have 

failure modes common to all piping systems.

 Fluids may leak from damaged joints or broken pipe; water leakage has been a major

source of damage in past earthquakes.

 Damage to any part of the piping system may compromise its functionality and 

connected equipment or systems may be disabled due to piping leaks or failures.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-340

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.5.2-1 Broken copper hot water piping for at the San Carlos Hospital in the 2010 Chile 

Earthquake. Piping failure caused by movement of inadequately braced boiler 

shown at left (Photos courtesy of Gilberto Mosqueda, SUNY Buffalo).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-341

Figure 6.4.5.2-2 Broken copper piping for hot water supply in residential building in the 2010 

Chile Earthquake. Trapeze shown not laterally braced but hangers appear to be 

less than 12” in length and may not have required lateral restraints per ASCE 7-

10 (Photo courtesy of Gokhan Pekcan).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-342

Figure 6.4.5.2-3 Photos displaying resilience of piping systems; this building suffered a partial 

structural collapse along one side in the 2010 Chile Earthquake. The only 

broken pipe (shown at lower right) was along the collapsed side; the other 

piping had broken pipe supports in some locations but the joints remained 

largely intact, even with these very large deformations (Photos courtesy of 

Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-343

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Seismic restraint details for pressure piping shown in Sections 6.4.3.1 through 6.4.3.8 

can be adapted for use with fluid piping. The same types of suspended, wall-, floor-, or 

roof-mounted details also apply to these types of piping.

 Insulation must be coordinated with pipe supports; the presence of insulation or a 

protective sleeve between the pipe and the pipe strap or clamp may allow the pipe to 

slip longitudinally.

 Note that where a pipe carries water in a facility that uses magnesium, it should be 

treated the same as hazardous material piping due to the potentially violent reaction 

between some forms of magnesium and water. 

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.5.2-4 Cable bracing used to restrain overhead copper piping (Photo courtesy of 

Mason Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-344

Figure 6.4.5.2-5 Poor example of sanitary sewer pipe support installed in San Francisco Bay Area 

in 2010; strut clamp has inadequate edge distance to end of strut and could slip 

off the end (Photo courtesy of Cynthia Perry, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-345

Figure 6.4.5.2-6 Piping installation in garage of mixed commercial/residential building San 

Francisco Bay Area completed in 2010. Note piping and trapeze supports do 

not have lateral restraints as all hangers were kept under 12” in length; only the 

sprinkler lines were laterally restrained. (Photo courtesy of Cynthia Perry, BFP 

Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-346

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.6 Ductwork

6.4.6.1 Suspended Ductwork

This category covers suspended HVAC ducts; see Section 6.4.1.5 for suspended HVAC 

equipment.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Ductwork, including its supports, is designed using the provisions of ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum 

Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13. The principal 

objective is to prevent the duct system from falling. Depending on the configuration of the 

ductwork, it may also be sensitive to building displacements if it is connected to multiple levels 

in the same structure, or is supported by adjacent structures.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 exempts ductwork from seismic bracing requirements in Seismic Design 

Category C if Ip =1.0.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires seismic design for all ductwork in Seismic Design Categories D, 

E, and F that weighs more than 5 pounds per linear foot.

 Unbraced piping attached to equipment in-line with the ductwork must be provided with 

flexibility adequate to accommodate seismic relative displacements.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 contains a number of bracing exemptions for ductwork that does not 

carry toxic or flammable gases or is used for smoke control. Ductwork is exempt if:

o Trapeze assemblies are used to support ductwork and the total weight of the 

ductwork supported by trapeze assemblies is less than 10 lb/ft.

o The ductwork is supported by hangers and each hanger in the duct run is 12 

inches or less in length from the duct support point to the supporting structure. 

Rod hangers must be detailed to prevent bending of the rod.

o Design for the seismic forces and relative displacements are not be required 

where provisions are made to avoid impact with larger ducts or mechanical 

components or to protect the ducts in the event of such impact, and HVAC ducts 

have a cross sectional area of less than 6 square feet, or weigh less than 17 lb/ft.

 HVAC duct systems fabricated and installed in accordance with approved bracing 

standards meet the lateral bracing requirements ASCE/SEI 7-10.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-347

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies ductwork 

as force controlled, meaning that the principal objective is to prevent the ductwork from falling. 

Where ductwork runs between floors or crosses seismic joints it as also deformation controlled. 

Ductwork must meet the force and deformation requirements of the standard when:

 The performance level is Immediate Occupancy, 

 The performance level is Life Safety in regions of high or moderate seismicity, and:

o The ductwork conveys hazardous materials, or

o The ducts are 6 square feet or more in area, or

o The ducts are suspended more than 12 inches from the structure.

Prescriptive standards for seismic bracing may be used for ductwork meeting the life safety and 

immediate occupancy performance objectives. 

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Unbraced ducts may swing and impact other items. They may become damaged at 

restraints or “hard spots” along the duct path such as at connections of braced in-line 

equipment, at connections to floor-mounted equipment, or at wall or slab penetrations. 

Inadequately supported ducts may come loose from the HVAC equipment or diffusers to 

which they are connected and fall.

 Ducts may be damaged by differential movement such as at building separations.

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-348

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.6.1-1 Unbraced ducts separated at bend in the 1994 magnitude-6.7 Northridge 

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Mason Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-349

Figure 6.4.6.1-2 Unbraced duct damaged by impact with piping in 1994 Northridge Earthquake

(Photo courtesy of Mason Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-350

Figure 6.4.6.1-3 Collapsed unbraced ducts and hangers dangling from floor above in the 1994

Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Mason Industries).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Details shown here are for suspended ducts. Ducts may also be floor-, wall- or roofmounted, may cross building separations, or may be located in vertical chases. Refer to 

FEMA 414 Installing Seismic Restraints for Duct and Pipe (2004) for attachment details, 

for other conditions and general information about installation.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-351

 Ductwork required for HVAC systems in hospitals or other essential facilities may be 

classified as designated seismic systems with a component importance factor of 1.5. 

Such designated seismic systems may require engineering calculations, equipment 

certification, and additional inspections. Check ASCE 7-10 and the jurisdiction for 

specific requirements. 

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.6.1-4 Rectangular duct supported by steel shapes with cable braces (Photo courtesy of

Mason Industries).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-352

Figure 6.4.6.1-5 Floor-mounted rectangular duct supported on braced support stand built up 

from steel angles (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-353

Figure 6.4.6.1-6 Roof-mounted rectangular duct supported on braced support stand built up 

from steel channels (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-354

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.6.1-7 Overview of ductwork restraints (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-355

Figure 6.4.6.1-8 Suspended ductwork (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-356

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.6 Ductwork

6.4.6.2 Air Diffusers

This category covers suspended air diffusers or mechanical registers, typically part of a 

suspended ceiling system. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), 

Chapter 13 requires that appurtenances to ductwork such as dampers, louvers, and diffusers be 

positively attached with mechanical fasteners. For air diffusers mounted in suspended acoustic 

lay-in tile ceiling systems, ASTME E580, Standard Practice for Installation of Ceiling Suspension 

Systems for Acoustical Tile and Lay-in Panels in Areas Subject to Earthquake Ground Motions 

(ASTM, 2010) requires that ceiling mounted air terminals or other services weighing less than 

20 lb (9 kg) be positively attached to the ceiling suspension main runners or cross runners that 

have the same carrying capacity as the main runners.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

Suspended HVAC equipment in-line with ductwork, including air diffusers, are classified as 

force-controlled by ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007).

ASCE 41-06 requires compliance with the anchorage provisions of the standard when:

 The performance level is Immediate Occupancy.

 The performance level is Life Safety in high seismicity areas, if

o The item weighs over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 feet above the floor.

 The recommended evaluation procedure is to use a prescriptive approach, such as 

provisions in ASCE/SEI 7-10 Section 13.6.7.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Air diffusers may pose a falling hazard if they are not supported independent of the 

ceiling. The diffuser may separate from the attached duct and fail to operate as 

intended.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-357

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.6.2-1 Air diffusers fell to the floor; ducts hanging through ceiling grid as a result of the 

1994 Northridge Earthquake (FEMA 74, 1994).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-358

Figure 6.4.6.2-2 HVAC diffuser attached to the structure with four vertical hangers; ceiling 

system was damaged beyond repair in the 2001 Peru Earthquake but none of 

the diffusers or lights fell. Ceiling was demolished prior to photo (Photo 

courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Requirements for ceiling mounted services in suspended acoustic ceilings are covered in 

ASTM E580, Standard Practice for Installation of Ceiling Suspension Systems for 

Acoustical Tile and Lay-in Panels in Areas Subject to Earthquake Ground Motions (ASTM, 

2010). Air diffusers and other ceiling-mounted services weighing less than 20 lb must 

have positive attachment to the ceiling grid. In addition to positive attachment to the 

grid, services weighing between 20 lb and 56 lb must have two 12 gauge safety wires

connected to the structure above or to the ceiling hanger wires to prevent them from 

falling. Two diagonally opposite vertical safety wires can keep them from posing a risk 

to occupants below. Services weighing above 56 lb must be supported directly from the 

structure above by approved hangers; in some cases this can be accomplished with 4 

taut 12 gauge wires, one located at each corner of the service. While ASTM E580 does 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-359

not require safety wires for items weighing less than 20 lb, use of at least one wire may 

be good practice considering the number of diffusers that have come down in recent 

earthquakes. 

 Only intermediate duty or heavy duty grid may be used to support suspended acoustic 

ceilings with lights and mechanical services attached. For Seismic Design Category D, E 

& F, only heavy duty grid may be used. See Section 6.3.4.1 for additional ceiling 

requirements. For an existing unbraced ceiling, the addition of four diagonal wire 

braces at each corner of diffusers will limit horizontal movement of the diffuser and 

prevent impact with other suspended items. Diffuser restraints should be coordinated 

with the lateral restraints for the ceiling grid and may require engineering expertise. 

 Do not brace diffusers to ducts, piping, or other nonstructural items.

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.6.2-3 Ceiling-mounted diffuser (NE, ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-360

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.7 Electrical and Communications Equipment

6.4.7.1 Control Panels, Motor Control Centers, and Switchgear 

This category includes tall, narrow floor-mounted electrical items in sheet metal cabinets such 

as electrical control panels, motor control centers, switchgear, and substations.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Electrical control panels, motor control centers, switchgear, and substations are designed using 

the provisions of ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures,

(ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13. The principal objective is to prevent the components from sliding or 

toppling. These components may also be sensitive to building displacements if they are both 

anchored to the floor and braced to the floor above. 

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires anchorage design for all equipment in Seismic Design 

Categories D, E, and F if the equipment weighs over 400 pounds. Lighter components 

may be exempt if the component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0. 

 Items that are exempt from the anchorage design requirements must still be positively 

anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be designed or detailed on the 

construction documents. Exempt items must also be provided with flexible connections 

between the equipment and associated raceways, bus ducts, or conduits if there is a 

potential for damaging differential movement between the equipment and connected 

components.

 Electrical component supports and their attachment to the component must be designed 

for the appropriate forces and displacements. Supports include braces, frames, skirts, 

legs, pedestals, and snubbers, as well as elements forged or cast as a part of the 

mechanical or electrical component. There are prescriptive requirements for reinforcing 

the cabinets around anchor points.

 The seismic design must consider the loads imposed on the components by attached 

utility or service lines that are attached to separate structures.

 Control panels, motor control centers, switchgear, and substations with slideout 

components must have a latching mechanism to hold the components in place.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-361

 The design of the component cabinet must comply with the applicable National 

Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) standards. 

 If cutouts are made in the lower panels of the cabinet that were not made by the 

manufacturer, the effects of the cutouts on the strength of the cabinet should be 

specifically evaluated.

 Attachments for additional external items not provided by the manufacturer that weigh 

more than 100 lb should be evaluated.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies electrical 

equipment, including panel boards, motor control centers, and switch gear as force controlled. 

These components are subject to the provisions of the standard when the performance level is 

Immediate Occupancy. The requirements also apply when the performance level is Life Safety 

in high and moderate seismicity areas, and the equipment is over 6 feet in height and weighs 

more than 20 pounds. When applicable, electrical equipment meeting any of the following 

criteria must comply with the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06:

 The item weighs more than 400 pounds.

 The item is unanchored, weighs over 100 pounds and is subject to overturning. These 

items may be exempt if they have a factor of safety greater than 1.5 when design loads 

are applied.

 The item weighs over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 feet above the floor.

 Building operation equipment. 

Acceptance criteria for electrical equipment focus on providing adequate anchorage for seismic 

forces. Prescriptive anchorage and bracing provisions may be used for smaller equipment.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Overturning or sliding due to lack of anchorage or inadequate anchorage.

 Loss of function due to failure of internal components caused by inertial forces.

 Damaged electrical equipment may cause electrical hazards and fire hazards.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-362

DAMAGE EXAMPLE

Figure 6.4.7.1-1 Overturned equipment in the 1985 magnitude-8 Mexico Earthquake, note 

absence of anchorage of equipment base to floor (Photo courtesy of Degenkolb 

Engineers).

Figure 6.4.7.1-2 Unanchored electrical cabinets overturned in a paper products plant during the 

1999 magnitude-7.4 Izmit, Turkey earthquake (Photo courtesy of NISEE Izmit 

Collection, No. IZT-682, photograph by Halil Sezen).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-363

Figure 6.4.7.1-3 Damage to unanchored electrical cabinets at power plant in Port-au-Prince in 

the 2010 magnitude-7 Haiti Earthquake (Photos courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, 

BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-364

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Working around electrical equipment can be extremely hazardous. Read the Electrical 

Danger Warning and Guidelines in Section 6.6.8 of this document before proceeding 

with any work.

 Many of these components can be supplied with shop welded brackets or predrilled 

holes for base or wall anchorage. For any new equipment, request items that can be 

supplied with seismic anchorage provisions by the manufacturer.

 When tall units are anchored to the floor, flexible connections between the equipment 

and raceways, bus ducts, or conduits that are braced to the level above will limit damage 

due to story drift. 

 See Section 6.4.1.1 for additional base anchorage details. Refer to FEMA 413 Installing 

Seismic Restraints for Electrical Equipment (2004) for general information on seismic 

anchorage of electrical equipment.

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.7.1-9 Anchorage for electrical cabinets. Anchorage to wall at top of cabinets is also 

present but not visible (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-365

p

Figure 6.4.7.1-10 Detail of cabinet base anchorage (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, 

Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-366

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.7.1-11 Electrical control panels, motor controls centers, or switchgear, (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-367

Figure 6.4.7.1-12 Free-standing and wall-mounted electrical control panels, motor controls 

centers, or switchgear (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-368

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.7 Electrical and Communications Equipment

6.4.7.2 Emergency Generators

Emergency generators are essential for postearthquake operations for many types of facilities. 

These range from small residential size generators to large systems required to maintain 

hospital or other essential operations. Emergency generators are often mounted on vibration 

isolators.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for emergency generators are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design 

Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13. The principal objective is 

to prevent the component from sliding or overturning.

 If the emergency generator is required to function for life safety purposes, ASCE/SEI 7-

10 classifies them as Designated Seismic Systems, with an Importance Factor Ip = 1.5. It 

may also require seismic qualification (shake table testing) to verify that the generator 

will function following and earthquake.

 Generators are often mounted on vibration isolators. The seismic design force for 

vibration isolated equipment is doubled if the “air gap” (the distance between the 

equipment support frame and the restraint) is greater than 0.25 inches.

 When checking the adequacy of an emergency generator for seismic forces, the load 

path from the generator, through any supporting framing to the ground or structural 

slab must be evaluated. For example, some emergency generators are “packaged: 

units,” where all of the necessary components (prime mover, generator, radiator, fuel 

tank, etc.) are mounted on a skid or frame. Another common approach is to mount the 

generator on top of the fuel tank. In either case, a load path of adequate strength and 

stiffness must be confirmed. Supporting elements, especially fuel tanks used as 

supports, may require reinforcement to withstand the seismic loads.

REHABILITATION CODE PROVISIONS

In ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) emergency 

generators are not covered in Section 11, Architectural, Mechanical, and Electrical Components
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-369

as a separate item. The closest requirements are those for electrical and communications 

equipment, Section 11.10.7. Electrical and communications equipment are subject to the 

provisions of the standard when the performance level is Immediate Occupancy. The 

requirements also apply when the performance level is Life Safety in high and moderate 

seismicity areas, and the equipment is over 6 feet in height and weighs more than 20 pounds. 

Regardless of these provisions, it is prudent to apply the nonstructural evaluation and retrofit 

requirements for all occupancies and performance levels due to the essential nature of 

emergency generators.

Acceptance criteria for electrical equipment focus on providing adequate anchorage for seismic 

forces.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Emergency generators may slide, tilt, or overturn. Internal elements may be damaged 

by inertial forces.

 Unanchored or poorly reinforced housekeeping pads may fail, resulting in excessive 

movement of the supported equipment.

 Vibration isolators can fail causing excessive generator movement.

 Failure of the emergency power generating system may be caused by the failure of any 

of the component parts including generator, fuel tank, fuel line, batteries and battery 

racks.

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Working around electrical equipment can be extremely hazardous. Read the Electrical 

Danger Warning and Guidelines in Section 6.6.8 of this document before proceeding 

with any work.

 Many equipment items can be supplied with a structural steel base, shop welded 

brackets, or predrilled holes for base anchorage. For any new equipment, request items 

that can be supplied with seismic anchorageprovisions.

 For equipment mounted on a free-standing concrete pad, make sure pad is large 

enough to resist seismic overturning of generator.

 Check the anchorage for all the component parts of the emergency power generation 

system; failure of any one of them could compromise the postearthquake performance 

of the system. Provide flexible connections for the fuel line, exhaust ducting and any 

other connected utility.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-370

 See Section 6.4.1.1 for additional base anchorage details. Refer to FEMA 413 Installing 

Seismic Restraints for Electrical Equipment (2004) for general information on seismic 

anchorage of electrical equipment.

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.7.2-1 Emergency generator is anchored to a concrete inertia base. The inertia base is 

mounted on spring isolators and restrained by steel angle snubbers on all sides

(Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-371

Figure 6.4.7.2-2 Emergency generator with skid mount on housekeeping pad; shear lugs added 

following the 2001 Peru Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP 

Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-372

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.7.2-3 Emergency generator (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-373

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.7 Electrical and Communications Equipment

6.4.7.3 Transformers

Transformers may be dry-type or liquid filled; mounted on a floor, wall or roof; and installed 

with or without vibration isolation.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for transformers are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for 

Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13. The principal objective is to prevent 

the component from sliding or overturning. They may be floor mounted, wall mounted, or 

suspended from the level above.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires anchorage design for all equipment in Seismic Design 

Categories D, E, and F if the equipment weighs over 400 pounds. Lighter components 

may be exempt if the component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0. 

 Items that are exempt from the anchorage design requirements must still be positively 

anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be designed or detailed on the 

construction documents. Exempt items must also be provided with flexible connections 

between the equipment and associated raceways, bus ducts, or conduits if there is a 

potential for damaging differential movement between the equipment and connected 

components.

 Internal coils of dry type transformers should be positively attached to their supporting 

substructure within the transformer enclosure.

 Electrical component supports and their attachment to the component must be designed 

for the appropriate forces and displacements. Supports include braces, frames, skirts, 

legs, pedestals, and snubbers, as well as elements forged or cast as a part of the 

mechanical or electrical component.

 The seismic design must consider the loads imposed on the components by attached 

utility or service lines that are attached to separate structures.

 Attachments for additional external items not provided by the manufacturer that weigh 

more than 100 lb should be evaluated.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-374

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies electrical 

equipment, including transformers, as force controlled. These components are subject to the 

provisions of the standard when the performance level is Immediate Occupancy. The 

requirements also apply when the performance level is Life Safety in high and moderate 

seismicity areas, and the equipment is over 6 feet in height and weighs more than 20 pounds. 

When applicable, electrical equipment meeting any of the following criteria must comply with 

the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06:

 The item weighs more than 400 pounds,

 The item is unanchored, weighs over 100 pounds and is subject to overturning. These 

items may be exempt if they have a factor of safety greater than 1.5 when design loads are 

applied.

 The item weighs over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 feet above the floor.

 Building operation equipment. 

Acceptance criteria for electrical equipment focus on providing adequate anchorage for seismic 

forces. 

Typical Causes of Damage

 Transformers may slide, tilt, overturn, or fall. Vibration isolation hardware may be 

damaged.

 Internal elements may be damaged by inertial forces. 

 Damaged electrical equipment may be cause electrical hazards and fire hazards. 

Transformer damage may result in power outages and business interruption.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-375

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.7.3-1 Rail mounted transformer slipped off rails at power plant in Port-au-Prince in 

the 2010 magnitude-7 Haiti Earthquake; only one of six identical transformers 

was damaged (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-376

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Working around electrical equipment can be extremely hazardous. Read the Electrical 

Danger Warning and Guidelines in Section 6.6.8 of this document before proceeding 

with any work.

 This type of equipment can be supplied with a structural steel base, shop welded 

brackets, or predrilled holes for base anchorage. For any new equipment, request items 

that can be supplied with seismic anchorage provisions. 

 See Section 6.4.1.1 for additional base anchorage details. Refer to FEMA 413 Installing 

Seismic Restraints for Electrical Equipment (2004) for additional mounting 

configurations such as wall- and roof-mounting, or vibration isolation as well as general 

information on the seismic anchorage of electrical equipment.

Figure 6.4.7.3-2 Typical electrical distribution dry type transformer. Note the use of 

manufacturer supplied anchor locations on base channels. Post earthquake 

photo from the 2010 Haiti M 7.0 Earthquake (photos courtesy of Philip J. 

Caldwell). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-377

Figure 6.4.7.3-3 High ampacity power busway routing power from generator paralleling 

switchgear to facility. Note use of lateral restraints in addition to gravity hanger. 

Supplied uninterrupted power to critical facility during the 2010 M 7.0 Haiti 

earthquake. (photos courtesy of Philip J. Caldwell)

Figure 6.4.7.3-4 Outdoor low voltage switchgear supplying incoming utility power to critical 

facility. Note equipment frame seismic anchorage load path is bolted at both 

equipment frame and pad with a continuous rigid load path. Post earthquake 

photo from the 2010 M 7.0 Haiti earthquake. (photos courtesy of Philip J. 

Caldwell)
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-378

Figure 6.4.7.3-5 Outdoor liquid type electrical power transformer which converts incoming 

medium voltage to 480 volt utilization voltage for critical facility. Note use of 

manufacturer supplied diagonal elements on cooling fin assembly to minimize 

dynamic loading on liquid filled fin assembly which contains numerous welded 

connections. Post earthquake photo from the 2010 M 7.0 Haiti Earthquake

(photos courtesy of Philip J. Caldwell).

Figure 6.4.7.3-6 Battery room for central network cell phone carrier after 2010 M 7.0 Haiti 

Earthquake. Three-story building which contained the UPS (uninterruptable 

power supply) and battery room was newly constructed and suffered near 

collapse structural damage which required structural demolition and 

replacement. Note that high mass batteries with integral structural system was 

rigidly anchored and sustained no damage or loss of operation despite building 

structural system displacing enough to shear support columns. Cellular carrier 

representative advised that the central network support functionality was 

maintained during Earthquake (photos courtesy of Philip J. Caldwell).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-379

Figure 6.4.7.3-7 Heat rejection mechanical units which provide cooling for servers in cellular 

carrier central network facility (left photo). Collapsing security wall during the 

2010 M 7.0 Haiti Earthquake crushed these units and resulted cyclical total 

failure of the cellular network as the servers hit temperature limits, shut down, 

rebooted and heated up again. System stability was restored by replacing the 

damaged units with temporary ones (right photo). Example of how the 

reliability of a critical facility essential system is both dependent upon adequate 

seismic restraints and a location which is free of structural and nonstructural 

falling hazards (photos courtesy of Philip J. Caldwell).

Figure 6.4.7.3-8 Example of rugged equipment. Post earthquake photos of two different 

essential facilities which sustained significant structural damage during the 2010 

M 7.0 Haiti Earthquake. Wall mounted electrical power distribution panels 

were undamaged and remained functional even though the walls they were 

mounted to were severely damaged during the earthquake (photos courtesy of 

Philip J. Caldwell).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-380

Figure 6.4.7.3-9 Incoming power switchgear for critical facility anchored through base 

undamaged by the 2010 Haiti M 7.0 Earthquake. Visual inspection of 

equipment base channels did not reveal any structural damage or equipment 

displacement on concrete equipment pad. Similar equipment located nearby 

which did not have a rigid seismic restraint with a continuous load path shifted 

on its pad (photos courtesy of Philip J. Caldwell).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-381

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.7.3-10 Transformer, note that external bracket must bolt directly to the internal frame 

to which the transformer core and coil assembly is attached (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-382

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.7 Electrical and Communications Equipment

6.4.7.4 Batteries and Battery Racks

This category covers batteries and battery racks, often used as part of the emergency 

generation system. These may be mounted on a concrete floor, raised floor, wall or roof.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for batteries and battery racks are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum 

Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13. The principal 

objective is to prevent the component from sliding or overturning. 

 If the batteries are required to function for life safety purposes, ASCE/SEI 7-10 classifies 

them as Designated Seismic Systems, with an Importance Factor Ip = 1.5. This may 

require additional analysis, testing, and special inspections.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires anchorage design for all equipment in Seismic Design 

Categories D, E, and F if the equipment weighs over 400 pounds. Lighter components 

may be exempt if the component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0. 

 Items that are exempt from the anchorage design requirements must still be positively 

anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be designed or detailed on the 

construction documents. Exempt items must also be provided with flexible connections 

between the equipment and associated raceways, bus ducts, or conduits if there is a 

potential for damaging differential movement between the equipment and connected 

components.

 Batteries on racks must have wraparound restraints to ensure that the batteries will not 

fall from the rack. Spacers should be used between restraints and cells to prevent 

damage to cases. 

 All elements of battery racks must be evaluated for sufficient lateral load capacity, 

including braces, frames, legs, pedestals, restraints, and snubbers.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies electrical 

equipment, including batteries and battery racks, as force controlled. These components are 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-383

subject to the provisions of the standard when the performance level is Immediate Occupancy. 

The requirements also apply when the performance level is Life Safety in high and moderate 

seismicity areas, and the equipment is over 6 feet in height and weighs more than 20 pounds. 

When applicable, batteries and battery racks meeting any of the following criteria must comply 

with the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06:

 The item weighs more than 400 pounds.

 The item is unanchored, weighs over 100 pounds and is subject to overturning. These 

items may be exempt if they have a factor of safety greater than 1.5 when design loads are 

applied.

 The item weighs over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 feet above the floor.

Acceptance criteria for batteries and battery racks focus on providing adequate anchorage for 

seismic forces. 

Typical Causes of Damage

 The racks may slide or overturn and batteries may slip or fall from the rack. Failure of 

the batteries may compromise the emergency power generation system or other

functions that rely on backup battery power.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-384

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.7.4-1 Earthquake Damage in the 1971 magnitude-6.6 San Fernando Earthquake

(Photo courtesy of John F. Meehan).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Seismic resistant battery racks are available from a number of vendors; these may be 

directly bolted to the floor or wall. Check the internet for available products.

 For existing battery racks, check that the batteries are secured to the rack and that the 

rack is properly braced and anchored.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-385

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.7.4-2 Anchored battery racks (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-386

Figure 6.4.7.4-3 Batteries anchored with equipment skid (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP 

Engineers).

Figure 6.4.7.4-4 Battery rack that performed well in the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake 

(Photo courtesy of Rodrigo Retamales, Rubén Boroschek & Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-387

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.7.4-5 Batteries and rack (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-388

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.7 Electrical And Communications Equipment

6.4.7.5 Photovoltaic (PV) Power Systems 

This category covers photovoltaic (PV) power systems and solar car charging stations, 

commonly mounted on roofs or on separate freestanding racks. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

While not explicitly covered in ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other 

Structures, (ASCE, 2010), PV power systems are subject to the seismic requirements for 

nonstructural components. If mounted on a building, the provisions of Chapter 13 for 

nonstructural components apply. PV power systems mounted on racks at grade are subject to

the provisions of Chapter 15, Nonbuilding Structures. The principal objective is to prevent the 

component from sliding or overturning. 

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires anchorage design for all equipment in Seismic Design 

Categories D, E, and F if the equipment weighs over 400 pounds. Lighter components 

may be exempt if the component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0. 

 Items that are exempt from the anchorage design requirements must still be positively 

anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be designed or detailed on the 

construction documents. Exempt items must also be provided with flexible connections 

between the equipment and associated raceways, bus ducts, or conduits.

 Ballasted PV systems use friction due to the weight of the system to resist lateral loads. 

These systems must use an alternative analysis approach, since ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires 

that component attachments be bolted, welded, or otherwise positively fastened without 

consideration of frictional resistance produced by the effects of gravity. The alternative 

analysis should account for the coefficient of friction between the PV system and the 

supporting structure, the slope of the supporting structure, and the tendency of the PV 

panels to slide in the direction of the roof slope during shaking. Seismic performance 

depends on providing adequate distance between the PV system and the edge of the 

supports, so that the panels do not slide off, and in providing flexible connections to 

electrical system to accommodate the expected displacements.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-389

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2006) does not expressly 

cover PV systems, but they may be classified as electrical equipment, that is both force and 

displacement controlled. PV systems are subject to the provisions of the standard when the 

performance level is Immediate Occupancy. They requirements also apply when the 

performance level is Life Safety in high and moderate seismicity areas, and the equipment is 

over 6 feet in height and weighs more than 20 pounds. When applicable, PV systems meeting 

any of the following criteria must comply with the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06:

 The items weighs more than 400 pounds,

 The item is unanchored, weighs over 100 pounds and is subject to overturning. These 

items may be exempt if they have a factor of safety greater than 1.5 when design loads 

are applied.

 The item weighs over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 feet above the floor or roof.

Refer to the notes on Building Code Provisions (above) for acceptance criteria. 

Typical Causes of Damage 

As the installation of these fixtures on U.S. rooftops is relatively new, there are few documented

examples of earthquake damage to date. This is in part due to the fact that since panels tend 

to be very light, the most severe design loading for roof-mounted photovoltaic panels is 

typically wind. Nevertheless, if these have not been properly designed to meet seismic loading, 

the panels may become dislodged and fall from the racks or fall off of pitched roofs or piping 

may be damaged, resulting in leakage. Wiring may also become dislodged and disable the 

systems. 

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Solar power is a rapidly changing field; these products and systems are evolving. Where 

existing photovoltaic systems may weigh between 2.5 to 3.0 pounds per square foot 

and consist of glass covered modules that are roof mounted on aluminum or galvanized 

steel track, newer products include lighter panels without glass, solar roof tiles that 

interlock with standard S-shaped clay or concrete roofing tiles, or peel and stick panels

which weigh under 2 pounds per square foot that may be applied directly to the roof 

surface. Several of these newer systems are integrated with the roofing materials and 

may not require special seismic consideration as long as the additional weight is 

accounted for. Ballasted photovoltaic systems are also available that do not require 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-390

anchorage or penetration of the roofing membrane. Check the internet for proprietary 

systems.

 Photovoltaic panels supported on framing systems are typically flush mounted or tilt 

mounted. These systems typically have anodized aluminum or galvanized steel track 

channels mounted to brackets or standoffs which are mounted to roof framing or 

structural supports. The panels or modules are then screwed directly to the track, 

typically four per panel. For installation on a wood framed roof, the system layout 

works best when the track is mounted perpendicular to the rafters; blocking may be 

required between the rafters where the track is mounted parallel to the rafters. Care 

must be taken to see that the roof penetrations are well sealed so the photovoltaic 

power system does not cause roof leaks. Friction fittings should not be used to resist 

seismic loading; positive connections should be provided between all the component 

parts.

 Photovoltaic power systems may be installed on top of carports for charging electric 

cars. Before mounting an expensive solar system on top, it must be ensured that the 

carport or patio structures have been designed for seismic loading.

 The State of California has published DSA IR 16-8 Solar Photovoltaic and Thermal 

Systems Acceptance Requirements (California Department of General Services, 2010a) to

address requirements for California schools. This document describes solar systems 

supported on framing systems and foundations, ballast panel systems, and adhered 

panel systems. 

 Installation guidelines are available on the internet for proprietary flush mount kits and 

tilt up kits. For example, UniRac, Inc. has installation manuals for two proprietary 

systems called SolarMount and Clicksys (see http://unirac.com/mounting-solutions). 

These installation manuals have wind and snow load tables with wind loading from 

90 mph to 170 mph. Although there is no explicit mention of seismic provisions, the 

detailing will be adequate if designed sufficiently for wind. A review of the tabulated 

wind design loads shows these systems are engineered for 10 psf to over 100 psf uplift; 

thus a well engineered wind design for a photovoltaic system typically weighing less 

than 3 psf should not require additional seismic detailing. Another company, 

Professional Solar Products (http://www.prosolar.com/prosolar-new/pages/installationguides-subpage2.htm) has hardware with installation guides for tilt up kits designed for 

30 psf or 100 mph winds.

 Like any components exposed to the weather, components and connectors for 

photovoltaic systems should be corrosion resistant materials such as stainless steel or 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-391

anodized aluminum. Where roof penetrations are required, these should have 

appropriate flashing and caulking to prevent leakage.

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.7.5-1 60,000 photovoltaic cells are incorporated into the glass canopy surrounding 

the Academy of Science, San Francisco, California (Photos courtesy of Cynthia 

Perry, BFP Engineers). The photovoltaic system provides 10% of the electricity 

needed for the facility. Panels must be securely attached to resist wind loads 

but also because these cantilevered members may be subject to vertical as well 

as horizontal seismic forces.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-392

 

Figure 6.4.7.5-2 Ground mounted photovoltaic system that also provides shade to injured 

animals at the Marine Mammal Center in Sausalito, California (Photo courtesy 

of Cynthia Perry, BFP Engineers). Each solar panel is screwed to the strut at four 

locations; two rows of struts are bolted to 6 steel tubes which are anchored at 

the base with four bolts apiece. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-393

 

Figure 6.4.7.5-3 Residential photovoltaic system in Berkeley, California mounted over the

transition between two different roof slopes (Photos courtesy of Heber Santos). 

Short standoff used on tar and gravel flat portion (upper left); aluminum flashing 

and mounting bracket used on sloped portion with composition tile roofing 

(upper right). The profile of one type of proprietary mounting track is seen at 

lower left. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-394

Figure 6.4.7.5-4 Flush mount photovoltaic system on barrel shaped roof of gymnasium at HeadRoyce School, Oakland, California (Photo courtesy of Cynthia Perry, BFP 

Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-395

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.7.5-5 Typical details for flush-mounted photovoltaic power modules (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-396

Figure 6.4.7.5-6 Typical tilt up details for anchored photovoltaic power modules (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-397

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.7 Electrical and Communications Equipment

6.4.7.6 Communications Antennae

This category covers communications antennae, often referred to as satellite dishes, which may 

be mounted in a variety of ways. Circular antennae used for residential or small commercial 

applications are typically supported by a single mast that may be mounted on a wall, roof, 

chimney, eaves, balcony, or freestanding at the ground. Non-penetrating roof mounts that 

typically rely on ballast are also available.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Communications antennae are designed using the provisions of ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum 

Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13 when supported by 

a structure, and Chapter 15, Nonbuilding Structures, if the antennae is supported at grade. The 

principal objective is to prevent the component from sliding or toppling. 

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires anchorage design for all equipment in Seismic Design 

Categories D, E, and F if the equipment weighs over 400 pounds. Lighter components 

may be exempt if the component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0. 

 Items that are exempt from the anchorage design requirements must still be positively 

anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be designed or detailed on the 

construction documents. Exempt items must also be provided with flexible connections 

between the equipment and associated raceways, bus ducts, or conduits.

 Electrical component supports and their attachment to the component must be designed 

for the appropriate forces and displacements. Design of dish antennae should consider 

the effects of both wind and seismic loading.

 The design of the antenna depends on whether it is braced above or below its’ center of 

gravity.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies 

communications equipment as force-controlled. There are no specific provisions for antennas. 

Communications equipment is subject to the provisions of the standard when the performance 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-398

level is Immediate Occupancy. The requirements also apply when the performance level is Life 

Safety in high and moderate seismicity areas, and the equipment is over 6 feet in height and 

weighs more than 20 pounds. When applicable, electrical equipment meeting any of the 

following criteria must comply with the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06:

 The item weighs more than 400 pounds,

 The item is unanchored, weighs over 100 pounds and is subject to overturning. These 

items may be exempt if they have a factor of safety greater than 1.5 when design loads 

are applied.

 The item weighs over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 feet above the floor.

 Building operation equipment. 

Acceptance criteria for communication equipment focus on providing adequate anchorage for 

seismic forces. Prescriptive anchorage and bracing provisions may be used for smaller 

components.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 While TV antennae have been mounted on roofs for many decades, the appearance of 

circular antennae on U.S. rooftops is relatively new, and to date, earthquake damage has 

not been documented. This is in part due to the fact that since antennae tend to be very 

light, the most severe design loading for circular antennae is typically wind.

Nevertheless, if antennae have not been mounted to meet seismic loading, they could 

become dislodged and either the dish or the mast or both could fall. 

 Damage to the antennae could disable critical communications systems or television 

access that may be needed following an earthquake.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-399

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.7.6-1 Most antenna are designed for wind and able to resist seismic loading. In spite 

of the collapse of the first story of this residential building complex, the roofmounted antennae appear intact in the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake 

(Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).

Figure 6.4.7.6-2 Antennae retrieved from roof of adjacent collapsed wing of the Hôpital SaintFrançois de Sales in the 2010 magnitude-7 Haiti Earthquake (not known if 

antenna suffered earthquake damage; photo courtesy of Ayhan Irfanoglu, 

Purdue University). Hospital communications depend on the functionality of 

antennae such as this.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-400

Figure 6.4.7.6-3 Damage or movement of ballasted antennae was not observed on this rooftop 

in the 2010 magnitude-6.5 Eureka Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Maryann 

Phipps, Estructure).

Figure 6.4.7.6-4 The antenna with guy wires remained upright atop a collapsed building in the 

2010 Haiti Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers). Even 

though some of the guy wires went slack, the antenna did not fall into the 

street.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-401

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issues regulations for Over-the-Air 

Reception Devices to preempt restrictions on the size, mast height, or location of directto-home satellite dishes. For instance, Title 47 (Section 1.200) of Code of Federal 

Regulations which codifies the FCC regulations covers dishes less than 1 meter in 

diameter with a mast height less than 12 feet above the roofline. In addition, tenant or 

homeowner association agreements may have restrictions on the size or placement of 

antennae; check for local code or association requirements.

 The antenna mast may be mounted in a variety of ways, for example to wood or metal 

stud walls, concrete or solid masonry walls (cells filled with concrete), hollow masonry 

block walls, freestanding poles, or to roof rafters or a concrete roof slab. Schematic 

details for installing the mast mounting bracket to a stud or concrete walls are shown in 

Figure 6.4.7.6-5. 

 Some mounting kits available on the internet provide hardware for strapping the 

antenna to a residential chimney. As unreinforced masonry chimneys are highly prone 

to earthquake damage as described in Section 6.3.7.1, antenna should not be mounted 

to unreinforced masonry chimneys. If the chimney is adequately reinforced, chimney 

mount details may be used for lightweight antennae. 

 Hardware and kits for non-penetrating ballasted mounts are also available for purchase.

These kits often use standard sized concrete blocks for ballast. Use of multiple 

concrete blocks for ballast may be heavy enough to trigger the requirement for the

equipment to have engineered anchorage. While these ballasted systems can reasonably 

be used in areas of low seismicity, they could potentially slide and damage roofing or 

wiring in areas of high seismicity.

 Large or tall antennae need to be properly engineered for both wind and seismic 

loading. Tower antennae may be anchored with guy wires, or mounted to a specially 

designed frame. Positive attachments from the antenna to the supporting structure 

should be provided and one should check with the manufacturer to see if the antenna 

itself has been designed or tested for seismic loading since seismic forces at the roof 

elevation are typically much higher than at ground level.

 Communications equipment used for essential facilities may need to be shake table 

tested and certified. Shake tables operated by the Pacific Earthquake Engineering 

Research Center (PEER) at UC Berkeley, MCEER at SUNY Buffalo, and others both perform 

testing of telecommunications network equipment in accordance with NEBS 

Requirements: Physical Protection (NEBS, 2006), protocol to certify that the internal parts 

and electronic components can withstand seismic shaking.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-402

 As with any items mounted with exterior exposure, components and connectors should 

be corrosion resistant and roof or wall penetrations should receive flashing and sealant 

as appropriate. 

 Extreme caution must be exercised when working in the proximity of any satellite dish 

antenna used to uplink internet, broadcast or other communications services. Because 

the dish is used to greatly focus the beam of microwave radio frequency energy a 

serious radio frequency (RF) exposure hazard may be present. Never position yourself 

in front of an uplink dish unless the transmitter has all sources of power removed and 

the appropriate lock out procedures are in practice. 

 Always consult a qualified communications expert knowledgeable about the RF 

exposure hazard present in the vicinity of all antennas used for all form of radio

transmission and obtain a detailed description of what the RF exposure guidelines are 

for each. For more information refer to FCC OET Bulletin 65 (FCC, 1997). 

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.7.6-5 Antenna mast mounted to concrete wall surface at top floor of building (Photo 

courtesy of (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure). Note that two wall 

brackets are used to resist moments produced by wind or seismic forces. This 

antenna is larger than most standard residential versions. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-403

Figure 6.4.7.6-6 Antenna mast mounted to wood stud wall using blocking to clear eves (Photo 

courtesy of Cynthia Perry, BFP Engineers). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-404

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.7.6-7 Details for wall-mounted communications antenna (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-405

Figure 6.4.7.6-8 Details for roof/slab mounted communications antenna (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-406

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.8 Electrical and Communications Distribution Equipment

6.4.8.1 Electrical Raceways, Conduit, and Cable Trays

This category covers electrical raceways, conduit, cable trays, and bus ducts. These items may 

be suspended from above or be floor-, chase-, wall- or roof-mounted.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for electrical raceways, conduit, cable trays, and bus ducts are determined using 

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), 

Chapter 13. The principal objective for suspended and wall-mounted systems is to prevent 

them from falling. Depending on the configuration of the system, it may also be sensitive to 

building displacements if it is connected to multiple levels in the same structure, or is 

supported by adjacent structures.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 exempts electrical raceways, conduit, cable trays, and bus ducts from 

seismic bracing requirements in Seismic Design Category C if Ip =1.0.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires seismic design for all distribution systems in Seismic Design 

Categories D, E, and F that weighs more than 5 pounds per linear foot, except as noted 

below.

 Unbraced electrical raceways, conduit, cable trays, and bus ducts attached to in-line 

equipment must be provided with flexibility adequate to accommodate seismic relative 

displacements.

 Conduit greater than 2.5 inches (64 mm) trade size and attached to panels, cabinets or 

other equipment subject to seismic relative displacement, must be provided with 

flexible connections or designed for seismic forces and seismic relative displacements.

 Design for the seismic forces is not required for raceways where trapeze assemblies are 

used to support raceways and the total weight of the raceway supported by trapeze 

assemblies is less than 10 lb/ft.

 The raceways that are supported by hangers where each hanger in the raceway run is 12 

inches or less in length from the raceway support point to the supporting structure are 

also exempt from bracing requirements. The rod hangers used must be equipped with 

swivels to prevent inelastic bending in the rod.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-407

 Design for seismic forces is not required for conduit, regardless of the value of Ip, where 

the conduit is less than 2.5 inches trade size.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies electrical 

and communication distribution components as force controlled, meaning that the principal 

objective is to prevent the systems from falling. Where the system runs between floors or 

crosses seismic joints it as also deformation controlled. Electrical and communication 

distribution components are subject to the provisions of the standard when:

 The performance level is Immediate Occupancy. 

 The requirements also apply when the performance level is Life Safety in high and 

moderate seismicity areas, the systems form part of an emergency lighting, power, 

and/or communications system. 

When applicable, electrical and communication distribution components must meet the force 

and deformation requirements of the standard. Rehabilitation may utilize prescriptive 

standards, such as Seismic Restraint Manual: Guidelines for Mechanical Systems (SMACNA, 

2009) or A Practical Guide to Seismic Restraint (ASHRAE, 2012).

Typical Causes of Damage

 Items may swing and impact structural or other nonstructural elements; they may fall 

and create electrical hazards.

 Vulnerable locations include seismic separations; wall, floor, or roof penetrations; and

attachments to rigidly mounted equipment.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-408

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.8.1-1 Unbraced suspended piping and conduit (Photo courtesy of Wiss, Janney, 

Elstner Associates).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Working around electrical equipment can be extremely hazardous. Read the Electrical 

Danger Warning and Guidelines in Section 6.6.8 of this document before proceeding 

with any work.

 Individual conduit is usually braced using the same design approach and details as 

piping. The weight of the conduit plus the conductors is approximately the same as 

water-filled pipe of similar diameter.

 Two trapeze anchorage details are shown. See Section 6.4.3.1 for additional pipe 

anchorage details; the same type of bracing is typically used for electrical distribution 

lines. Refer to FEMA 413 Installing Seismic Restraints for Electrical Equipment (2004) for 

general information on seismic anchorage of electrical equipment and to FEMA 414

Installing Seismic Restraints for Duct and Pipe (2004) for many different anchorage 

configurations for raceways, conduit and cable trays.

 Several engineered seismic bracing systems are available and can be customized for 

most applications. This is particularly useful for large scale projects or essential 

applications.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-409

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.8.1-2 Rigid strut bracing provides restraint against earthquake forces perpendicular to 

the piping. Similar bracing is required in the direction parallel to the conduit

(Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).

Figure 6.4.8.1-3 Rigid strut bracing for trapeze supporting electrical conduit; conduit attached to 

trapeze with conduit clamp that provides lateral and longitudinal restraint 

(Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-410

Figure 6.4.8.1-4 Lateral and longitudinal rigid strut bracing for trapeze supporting electrical 

raceways (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.8.1-5 Cable tray on braced trapeze (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-411

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.8 Electrical and Communications Distribution Equipment

6.4.8.2 Electrical Distribution Panels

This category includes electrical distribution panels, either recessed or surface-mounted. Wallmounted electrical panels have generally performed well in past earthquakes, in part due to 

their weight (typically less than 200 pounds), the ductility of the sheet metal cabinets, and the 

strength of the interconnected conduit which can serve as unintended bracing.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for electrical distribution panels are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum 

Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010) Chapter 13. The principal 

objective is to prevent the component from falling.

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires anchorage for all equipment in Seismic Design Categories D, E, 

and F for all equipment weighing over 400 pounds, and items weighing over 20 pounds 

that are mounted over 4 feet above the floor. Lighter items may be exempt if the 

component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0.

 Items that are exempt from the anchorage requirements noted above are still required 

to be positively anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be designed or 

detailed on the construction documents. They must also be provided with flexible 

connections between the equipment and associated conduit, if relative motion between 

the panel and the conduit is possible.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies electrical 

equipment, including panel boards, as force controlled. These components are subject to the 

provisions of the standard when the performance level is Immediate Occupancy. The 

requirements also apply when the performance level is Life Safety in high and moderate 

seismicity areas, and the equipment is over 6 feet in height and weighs more than 20 pounds. 

When applicable, electrical equipment meeting any of the following criteria must comply with 

the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06:

 The item weighs more than 400 pounds,
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-412

 The item weighs over 20 pounds and is mounted over 4 feet above the floor.

 Building operation equipment. 

Acceptance criteria for electrical equipment focus on providing adequate anchorage for seismic 

forces. 

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Panels may become dislodged and fall. 

 Damage to distribution panels and the attached lines may create electrical hazards and 

fire hazards.

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-413

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.8.2-1 Dislodged panel board due to failure of hollow concrete block partition wall in 

the 1964 magnitude-9.2 Anchorage, Alaska earthquake (Photo courtesy of PEER 

Steinbrugge Collection, No. S2144).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Working around electrical equipment can be extremely hazardous. Read the Electrical 

Danger Warning and Guidelines in Section 6.6.8 of this document before proceeding 

with any work.

 This type of equipment can be supplied with shop welded brackets or predrilled holes 

for wall anchorage. For any new equipment, request items that can be supplied with 

seismic anchorage details.

 See Section 6.4.7.1 for additional details. The wall mount detail shown is for a concrete 

wall; refer to FEMA 413 Installing Seismic Restraints for Electrical Equipment (2004) for 

additional information about anchoring to masonry or drywall and for general 

information on seismic anchorage of electrical equipment.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-414

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

 

Figure 6.4.8.2-2 Wall anchorage for electrical panel; standard strut anchored to wall studs and 

panel anchored to strut (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-415

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.8.2-3 Free-standing electrical distribution panel (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-416

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.9 Light Fixtures

6.4.9.1 Recessed Light Fixtures

This category covers recessed light fixtures that are part of a suspended ceiling grid. These 

may be lay-in fixtures in a suspended acoustic tile ceiling or recessed fixtures in other types of 

suspended ceilings such as gypsum board, plaster, or metal panels. Overhead light fixtures in 

a finished ceiling have often been damaged in past earthquakes; the fixtures may become 

dislodged from the ceiling or ceiling grid and fall unless they are tied to the grid and have 

independent support to the structure above.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Recessed light fixtures are an integral part of suspend ceiling systems, and their support is 

covered by the standards for suspended acoustical tile ceilings. Requirements for recessed 

fixtures in suspended acoustic tile ceilings in ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for 

Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), are by reference to ASTM E580, Standard Practice 

for Installation of Ceiling Suspension Systems for Acoustical Tile and Lay-in Panels in Areas 

Subject to Earthquake Ground Motions (ASTM, 2010). 

ASCE/SEI 7-10 specifies that systems required for life safety purposes after an earthquake be 

classified as designated seismic systems and designed using a component importance factor, Ip, 

of 1.5. Ceiling systems and light fixtures classified a designated seismic systems may require 

engineering calculations or special inspection.

The requirements depend on the Seismic Design Category of the structure. 

 In Seismic Design Category C:

o Lighting fixtures that weigh less than 56 pounds must be positively attached to 

the ceiling grid as specified in the electrical code, with a minimum of two

attachment devices. The attachment devices must be capable of resisting 100% 

of the fixture weight in any direction. 

o Lighting fixtures weighing less than 10 pounds that are supported by the ceiling 

grid must have a safety wire attached to the fixture and the structure above.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-417

o Lighting fixtures weighing between 10 and 56 pounds that are supported by the 

ceiling grid must have two safety wires attached to the fixture and the structure 

above.

o Lighting fixtures that weigh more than 56 pounds must be supported directly 

from the structure.

 In Seismic Design Categories D, E, and F:

o Light fixture attachments and safety wires must conform to the requirements for 

Seismic Design Category C.

o An intermediate duty or heavy duty ceiling grid is required for ceilings carrying 

light fixtures.

o Where the load carrying capacity of the cross runners is less than 16 lb/ft, 

supplementary hanger wires may be required for the ceiling grid. 

o The requirements for safety wires on fixtures are identical to Seismic Design 

Category C.

o Lighting fixtures weighing more than 56 pounds must be supported directly 

from the structure above by approved hangers. If the ceiling bracing can provide 

lateral restraint for such fixtures, they should be positively attached to the 

ceiling grid but must still be but supported with not less than four taut #12 

wires. 

 ASTM E580 Section 5.3 contains prescriptive requirements for attachment of light 

fixtures: Fixtures must be positively attached to the suspended ceiling system by 

mechanical means. The attachment device shall have the capacity of supporting 100 % 

of the lighting fixture weight acting in any direction. A minimum of two attachment 

devices are required for each fixture.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies light 

fixtures into one of four types. Recessed light fixtures are classified as “Category 1” or 

“Category 3,” depending on the type of ceiling they are installed in. ASCE/SEI 41-06 provides 

prescriptive acceptance criteria for the life safety and immediate occupancy nonstructural 

performance levels. Fixtures not meeting the criteria must be seismically retrofit.

Evaluation for the presence of adequate attachment is required for all performance levels and in 

high, moderate, and low seismicity areas.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-418

Typical Causes of Damage

 Recessed fixtures supported by a suspended ceiling without independent safety wires to 

the structure above can become dislodged and fall. Fixtures with proper safety wires 

may fall from the grid and dangle from the safety wire but will not threaten occupants.

 Unless secured to a properly braced ceiling grid, relative movement between the light 

fixture and the ceiling may damage the ceiling finishes, ceiling grid, wiring, or the light 

fixture. Heavy fixtures that are hung independently but not laterally braced may swing 

independent of the ceiling and damage the ceiling system.

 Unsecured lenses and bulbs may fall independent of the fixture and cause damage 

below.

 Most observed damage to recessed light fixtures in the U.S. has involved fixtures in 

suspended acoustic tile ceilings which do not have much inherent in-plane stiffness; 

damage to fixtures in gypsum board ceilings has been less common.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-419

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.9.1-1 Numerous fluorescent fixtures dangling from electrical conduit; installed without 

safety wires in unbraced suspended acoustical ceiling and damaged in the 2010 

magnitude-7 Haiti Earthquake. Loose bulbs, lenses, ceiling panels, diffusers and 

ducts also on the floor (Photo courtesy of Ayhan Irfanoglu, Purdue University).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-420

Figure 6.4.9.1-2 Overhead lights with four vertical hangers to the structure. Unbraced acoustic 

ceiling system was damaged beyond repair in the 2001 magnitude-8.4 Peru 

Earthquake but none of the diffusers or lights fell because they had independent 

supports. Ceiling was demolished prior to photo (Photo courtesy of Eduardo 

Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-421

Figure 6.4.9.1-3 Light fixture without adequate independent support dangling along one edge 

from ceiling grid, damaged in the 1994 magnitude-6.7 Northridge Earthquake 

(Photo courtesy of Degenkolb Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-422

Figure 6.4.9.1-4 Light fixture without independent support dangling from conduit as a result of 

the 1994 Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Degenkolb Engineers). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-423

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Requirements for recessed lighting fixtures may vary depending on requirements for the 

type of ceiling in which they are located. Recessed light fixtures may be found in any 

type of ceiling system. Requirements for suspended acoustic ceilings and suspended 

gypsum board ceilings are discussed below.

 For acoustic tile ceilings, California schools require safety wires or independent vertical 

support for each light fixture, positive attachment from the light fixtures to the ceiling 

grid, and bracing for the ceiling grid that is adequate to resist the lateral loading from 

the ceiling, lights, and diffusers. DSA IR 25-5 Metal Suspension Systems for Lay-in 

Panel Ceilings (California Department of General Services, 2009c) provides details for 

lights in suspended acoustic ceiling grids. The requirements in DSA IR 25-5 differ 

slightly from ASTM E580: California schools require two safety wires on all fixtures 

under 56 pounds; require all 4 ft x 4 ft fixtures have a slack #12 safety wire at each 

corner, even if the fixture weight is less than 56 lb; and for fixtures weighing more than 

56 lb, require they be independently supported by not less than four taut #12 wires, and 

that these wires be capable of supporting four times the weight of the fixture. 

 Per ASCE 7-10, certain types of suspended ceilings with screw-attached gypsum board 

built at one level do not require special seismic details; these ceilings also do not 

require safety wires for light fixtures (see Section 6.3.4.3 for a discussion of exempt 

ceilings). The weight of recessed light fixtures in suspended gypsum board ceilings 

must be supported by main runners, supplementary framing supported by the main 

runners, or directly by the structure above. Neither the ceiling finish material nor the 

cross furring should be used to support light fixtures. The fixture should be positively 

attached with screws or other approved connectors to the ceiling grid. Requirements for 

California schools are in DSA IR 25-3 Drywall Ceiling Suspension Conventional 

Construction-One Layer (California Department of General Services, 2005b). For 

suspended gypsum ceilings built at multiple levels, or other types of heavy ceilings, 

seismic detailing and safety wires for lighting may be required; check applicable code 

provisions. 

 International Code Council Evaluation Service has published AC184, Acceptance Criteria

for Attachment Devices for Recessed Lighting Fixtures (Luminaries) in Suspended Ceiling 

Systems (ICC-ES, 2006), with information on attachments of light fixtures to suspended 

ceiling grids. The website located at http://www.agi-seismic.com/code/ac184.html#

provides footage of lighting fixture failures where the lights are attached only with tie 

wires. A discussion of issues related to the code design provisions and the requirement 

for positive attachments is also provided. In some instances, where approved seismic 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-424

fixture clamps (SFC) are used to anchor the lighting to a properly braced ceiling grid, the 

independent tie wires are not required. 

 For existing construction where the ceiling grid is not adequately braced or not strong 

enough to provide lateral restraint for the lighting, splay wire bracing at each corner of 

the fixture can be used to provide horizontal restraint. Such bracing would also help 

prevent swinging lights from damaging the surrounding ceiling. At a minimum, such 

fixtures should be retrofit with independent safety wires to prevent them from falling. 

 Lenses and bulbs may require independent restraints to keep them from falling from the 

fixture. 

 For fire rated ceiling assemblies, only fixtures and attachments with an approved fire 

rating may be used. Check with the manufacturer for approved systems. Some fixtures 

may require lead shielding or a fire-rated enclosure; check local code provisions.

 Do not attach lights to ducts, piping, or other nonstructural items in the ceiling plenum. 

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.9.1-5 Example of light fixture with only one safety wire attached; the Salt Lake City 

schools require four wires for a fixture of this size and weight and also require 

tighter turns on the wire (Photo courtesy of Salt Lake City School District). 

Investigations in ceiling plenums often reveal missing wires.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-425

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.9.1-6 Schematic plan of recessed lights in suspended acoustic ceiling (PR).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-426

Figure 6.4.9.1-7 Recessed light fixture in suspended ceiling (fixture weight < 10 pounds) (PR).

Figure 6.4.9.1-8 Recessed light fixture in suspended ceiling (fixture weight 10 to 56 pounds) 

(PR).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-427

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.9 Light Fixtures

6.4.9.2 Surface-Mounted lighting

This category covers surface-mounted light fixtures that are overhead in a finished ceiling. The 

term surface-mounted refers to a range of conditions; in some cases the fixture and housing 

are entirely below the ceiling surface, in other cases part of the housing is recessed above the 

bottom of the ceiling. Overhead fixtures may also be surface-mounted on a wall. Damage to 

overhead lighting has occurred frequently in past earthquakes; the fixtures become dislodged 

from the ceiling or ceiling grid and fall unless they are tied to the grid or have independent 

support to the structure above. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010) does 

not have specific seismic requirements for surface mounted light fixtures. For the purposes of 

design, the same design procedures used for suspended ceilings may be used. 

ASCE/SEI 7-10 specifies that systems required for life-safety purposes after an earthquake be 

classified as designated seismic systems and designed using a component importance factor, Ip, 

of 1.5. Ceiling systems and light fixtures classified a designated seismic systems may require 

engineering calculations, or special inspection.

When supported by ceiling systems other than suspended lay-in types, surface-mounted light 

fixtures must conform to the anchorage requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10. The anchorage of 

surface mounted light fixtures weighing less than 20 pounds need not be designed, provided 

that the importance factor for the fixtures is equal to 1.0 (not part of an essential system), the 

fixture is positively attached to the structure, and that flexible connections are provided 

between the fixture and conduit if there is a potential for damaging differential movement.

When surface-mounted fixtures are supported by suspended lay-in ceilings, the provisions of

ASTM E580, Standard Practice for Installation of Ceiling Suspension Systems for Acoustical Tile 

and Lay-in Panels in Areas Subject to Earthquake Ground Motions (ASTM, 2010) apply. The 

requirements for support of the fixtures depend on the Seismic Design Category of the 

structure. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-428

 In Seismic Design Category C:

o Lighting fixtures that weigh less than 56 pounds must be positively attached to 

the ceiling grid as specified in the electrical code, with a minimum of two

attachment devices. The attachment devices must be capable of resisting 100% 

of the fixture weight in any direction. 

o Lighting fixtures weighing less than 10 pounds that are supported by the ceiling 

grid must have a safety wire attached to the fixture and the structure above.

o Lighting fixtures weighing between10 and 56 pounds that are supported by the 

ceiling grid must have two safety wires attached to the fixture and the structure 

above.

o Lighting fixtures that weigh more than 56 pounds must be supported directly 

from the structure.

 In Seismic Design Categories D, E, and F:

o Light fixture attachments and safety wires must conform to the requirements for 

Seismic Design Category C.

o An intermediate duty or heavy duty ceiling grid is required for ceilings carrying 

light fixtures.

o Where the load carrying capacity of the cross runners is less than 16 lb/ft, 

supplementary hanger wires may be required for the ceiling grid. 

o Lighting fixtures weighing less than 10 pounds require one safety wire 

connected from the fixture housing to the structure above. The wire may be 

slack.

o Lighting fixtures weighing 10 to 56 pounds require two safety wires at 

diagonally opposite corners connected from the fixture housing (not the 

detachable end plates) to the structure above. The wires may be slack.

o Fixtures weighing more than 56 pounds must be supported directly from the 

structure above by approved hangers. If the ceiling bracing can provide lateral 

restraint for such fixtures, they should be positively attached to the ceiling grid 

but must still be supported with not less than four taut #12 wires. 

 ASTM E580 Section 5.3 contains prescriptive requirements for attachment of surfacemounted light fixtures:

o Surface-mounted lighting fixtures must be attached to the ceiling system with a 

positive clamping device that completely surrounds the supporting members. 

Safety wires have to be attached between the clamping device and the adjacent 

ceiling hanger or to the structure above. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-429

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies light 

fixtures into one of four types. Surface-mounted light fixtures are classified as “Category 2” or 

“Category 3,” depending on the type of ceiling they are installed in. ASCE/SEI 41-06 provides 

prescriptive acceptance criteria for the life safety and immediate occupancy nonstructural 

performance levels. Fixtures not meeting the criteria must be retrofitted.

Evaluation for the presence of adequate attachment is required for all performance levels and in 

high, moderate, and low seismicity areas.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Surface lighting that is not equipped with independent safety wires may fall to the floor. 

Lighting with proper safety wires may fall from the ceiling and dangle from the safety 

wires but will not pose a safety risk to occupants.

 Unless secured to a properly braced ceiling grid, relative movement between the light 

fixture and the ceiling may damage the ceiling finishes, ceiling grid, wiring, or the light 

fixture.

 Unsecured lenses and bulbs may become dislodged and fall to the floor even where the 

fixture is restrained. This may occur with both ceiling and wall mounted surface 

lighting.

 Most observed damage to light fixtures in the U.S. has involved fixtures in suspended 

acoustic tile ceilings which do not have much inherent in-plane stiffness; damage to 

fixtures mounted in or on gypsum board ceilings has been less common.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-430

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.9.2-1 Numerous failures of ceilings and lights were observed at the Concepción 

airport in the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake. Photo shows surfacemounted fixture on wall that remained in place but the lens fell and the bulbs 

were dislodged (Photo courtesy of Rodrigo Retamales, Rubén Boroschek & 

Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-431

Figure 6.4.9.2-2 Overhead surface-mounted fixture anchored to underside of concrete slab 

damaged in the 2010 Chile Earthquake. Back of fixture housing remained 

anchored to the concrete slab above and the bulbs remained in place but the 

lens and sides of housing fell indicating that internal connections in the fixture 

were inadequate (Photos courtesy of Rodrigo Retamales, Rubén Boroschek & 

Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-432

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Retrofit of surface-mounted light fixtures is generally performed by following the 

prescriptive requirements for new construction. The key considerations include 

attachment to the ceiling suspension system with positive clamping devices that 

completely surround the supporting members. Safety wires are required between the 

clamping device and the adjacent ceiling hanger or to the structure above. The weight 

of the fixture shall not exceed the design carrying capacity of the supporting members. 

One, two, or four safety wires are required from the fixture housing to the structure 

above. 

 For suspended acoustic ceilings, ASTM E580 has other requirements related to the grid 

itself. Intermediate or heavy duty ceiling grid is required where lights will be supported 

and supplementary ceiling framing and supplementary hanger wires may be required 

adjacent to fixtures. Lateral restraint for lighting is assumed to be provided by the 

ceiling grid so the design of the grid must account for the overall weight of all the 

attached lighting and mechanical registers. See Section 6.3.4 for additional information 

regarding ceilings.

 Per ASCE 7-10, certain types of suspended ceilings with screw-attached gypsum board 

built at one level do not require special seismic details; these ceilings also do not 

require safety wires for light fixtures (see Section 6.3.4.3). The weight of surfacemounted fixtures must be supported by main runners, supplementary framing 

supported by the main runners, or directly by the structure above. Neither the ceiling 

finish material nor the cross furring should be used to support light fixtures. The 

fixture should be positively attached with screws or other approved connectors to the 

ceiling grid. Requirements for California schools are in DSA IR 25-3 Drywall Ceiling 

Suspension Conventional Construction-One Layer (California Department of General 

Services, 2005b) and read “Surface-mounted fixtures shall be attached to a main runner 

with a positive clamping device made of material with a minimum of 14 gage. Rotational 

spring clamps do not comply.” For suspended gypsum ceilings built at multiple levels, 

or other types of heavy ceilings, seismic detailing and safety wires may be required; 

check applicable code provisions. 

 International Code Council Evaluation Service has published Acceptance Criteria AC184 

(ICC-ES, 2006) with information on attachments of light fixtures to suspended ceiling 

grids. The website located at http://www.agi-seismic.com/code/ac184.html provides 

footage of lighting fixture failures where the lights are attached only with tie wires. A 

discussion of issues related to the code design provisions and the requirement for 

positive attachments is also provided. In some instances, where approved seismic 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-433

fixture clamps are used to anchor the lighting to a properly braced ceiling grid,

independent tie wires are not required. Check for pre-approved details for such devices 

in the applicable jurisdiction.

 For surface-mounted fixtures in existing buildings where the ceiling grid is unbraced, 

such fixtures should be retrofit with safety wires at a minimum to prevent them from 

falling. Providing independent lateral bracing for the fixture may reduce the potential 

for the light to damage an existing unbraced ceiling.

 For fire rated ceiling assemblies, only fixtures and attachments with an approved fire 

rating may be used. Check with the manufacturer for approved systems. Some fixtures 

may require lead shielding or a fire-rated enclosure; check local code provisions.

 Do not attach lights to ducts, piping, or other nonstructural items in the ceiling plenum. 

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.9.2-3 Independent vertical support for surface-mounted light fixture in suspended 

gypsum board ceiling located in California hospital. Eye hook and slack wire 

from fixture is tied to concrete slab above. The rigid bracing in the photos is 

attached to the ceiling grid, not the light fixture (Photos courtesy of Maryann 

Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-434

MITIGATION DETAILS

Note: Surface-mounted fixtures shall be attached to ceiling suspension systems with screws or positive 

clamping devices. Safety wires (1, 2 or 4) are required in suspended acoustic lay-in tile ceilings depending 

on the size and weight of the fixture; safety wires may be required in other ceiling types as well. Weight of 

fixture shall not exceed design carrying capacity of the supporting members; supplementary framing and 

additional hanger wires may be required. Gypsum board ceiling shown in details; although some gypsum 

ceilings may be exempt from the seismic detailing requirements and may not require the safety wires 

shown. 

Figure 6.4.9.2-4 Surface-mounted fixture below suspended ceiling grid (PR).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-435

6.4 Mechanical, ElectricaL, and Plumbing Components

6.4.9 Light Fixtures

6.4.9.3 Pendant Light Fixtures

This section covers pendant light fixtures, chandeliers, ceiling fans, and other similar 

suspended items. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and other Structures, (ASCE, 2010) 

contains provisions for components supported by chains or suspended from the structure. The 

anchorage of pendant light fixtures weighing less than 20 pounds need not be designed, 

provided that the importance factor Ip = 1.0 (not part of an essential system) and the fixture is 

positively attached to the structure. Flexible connections must be provided between the fixture 

and conduit.

Larger suspended items need not meet the seismic force requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10 

provided prescriptive conditions are met. The connection to the structure must be designed for 

vertical and horizontal loads equal to 1.4 times the operating weight, acting simultaneously. 

The connection to the structure must permit a 360 degree range of motion in the horizontal 

plane; care must be taken to avoid seismic interactions with adjacent objects when the 

suspended component swings.

When pendant fixtures are installed with suspended lay-in ceilings, the provisions of ASTM 

E580, Standard Practice for Installation of Ceiling Suspension Systems for Acoustical Tile and 

Lay-in Panels in Areas Subject to Earthquake Ground Motions (ASTM, 2010) apply. Pendanthung lighting fixtures must be supported directly from the structure above using no less than 

number 9-gauge (3.80 mm) wire or an approved alternate support. The ceiling suspension 

system may not provide any direct support.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies light 

fixtures into one of four types. Pendant light fixtures are classified as “Category 4”. ASCE/SEI 

41-06 provides prescriptive acceptance criteria for Life Safety and Immediate Occupancy 

nonstructural performance levels. Fixtures not meeting the criteria must be seismically retrofit.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-436

Evaluation for the presence of adequate attachment is required for all performance levels and in 

high, moderate, and low seismicity areas.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Suspended items can swing and impact building elements or adjacent equipment, 

resulting in damage to the fixture or damage to the surrounding items. Lenses, bulbs, 

or decorations may come loose and fall and endanger occupants. 

 If the item is not sufficiently well supported, or if the item is connected only to ceiling 

framing which is damaged in an earthquake, the entire fixture may become dislodged 

and fall. Where a string of fixtures are attached end to end, the failure of one fixture 

can overload the supports for the adjacent fixtures leading to progressive collapse. 

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.9.3-1 Failure of a strip of pendant light fixtures at Dawson Elementary School library 

as a result of the 1983 magnitude-6.4 Coalinga Earthquake. Note that in this 

case the support stems failed at the ceiling connection and the stem came down 

with the lights (Gary McGavin, NGDC, 2009). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-437

Figure 6.4.9.3-2 Failure of pendant light fixtures at Northridge Junior High School as a result of 

the 1994 Northridge Earthquake. In this example, the support stem failed at the 

fixture connection and the stem is still attached at the ceiling (Photo courtesy of 

Gary L. McGavin).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-438

Figure 6.4.9.3-3 Failure of pendant light fixture in the 2010 magnitude-7 Haiti Earthquake; stem 

of fixture broke and conduit pulled loose (Photos courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, 

BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-439

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 All light fixtures should have positive attachments to the structure to prevent falling 

hazards. Per ASTM E580, Standard Practice for Installation of Ceiling Suspension 

Systems for Acoustical Tile and Lay-in Panels in Areas Subject to Earthquake Ground 

Motions (ASTM, 2010), pendant fixtures in suspended ceilings must be supported 

directly from the structure above by no less than #9 gauge wire or an approved alternate 

support. The ceiling suspension system shall not provide any direct support and rigid 

conduit is not permitted for the attachment of fixtures.

 For California schools, DSA IR 25-5, Metal Suspension System for Lay-in Panel Ceilings

(California Department of General Services, 2009c), requires the following: “Support 

pendant mounted light fixtures directly from the structure above with hanger wires or 

cables passing through each pendant hanger and capable of supporting two (2) times 

the weight of the fixture. A bracing assembly, (see Section 6.3.4.1), is required where 

the pendant hanger penetrates the ceiling. Special details are required to attach the 

pendant hanger to the bracing assembly to transmit horizontal force. If the pendant 

mounted light fixture is directly and independently braced below the ceiling, i.e. aircraft 

cables to walls, then brace assembly is not required above the ceiling.” See DSA IR 16-9, 

Pendant Mounted Light Fixtures (California Department of General Services, 2009a), for 

additional requirements for pendant mounted fixtures.

 For older installations, provide a safety chain or cable for the fixture and provide 

restraints for lenses and bulbs that can readily fall from the fixture.

 If the fixture can impact other items and cause failure of an essential component, or if 

impact can create a falling hazard, then seismic restraints that limit the range of motion 

of the fixture should be installed.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-440

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.9.3-4 Pendant light fixture (NE).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-441

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.9 Light Fixtures

6.4.9.4 Heavy Light Fixtures

This category covers heavy or special purpose overhead light fixtures that require engineered 

support details. This includes fixtures such as hospital operating room lights which also have 

movable arms. Damage to overhead lighting has occurred frequently in past earthquakes; 

special purpose lighting has additional issues in that the fixture may have internal joints and 

movable parts which may not have not been designed for seismic loading.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for heavy light fixtures are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design 

Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010) Chapter 13. The principal objective is to 

prevent the component from falling. Light fixtures are classified as an electrical component. 

Unless they are anchored directly to the structure (slab or framing), they require component 

supports (structural members, frames, braces, anchor plates, etc) that carry gravity and lateral 

loads to the structure. The design of heavy light fixtures must include the component supports 

as well as the design of the anchorage of the fixture itself. 

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires anchorage for items weighing over 20 pounds that are mounted 

over 4 feet above the floor. 

 Heavy light fixtures in essential buildings such as hospitals may be classified as 

designated seismic systems. Designated seismic systems are designed using a 

component importance factor, Ip, of 1.5 and may require engineering calculations, 

equipment certification, and special inspection.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies light 

fixtures into one of four types. Heavy suspended light fixtures do not fit any of the four types. 

“Category 4” fixtures are described as “lighting suspended from ceiling or structure by a 

pendant or chain.” Heavy light fixtures are generally supported by a rigid or braced frame 

component supports, and so do not fit this category. They rarely rely on the ceiling for vertical 

or lateral support, and so do not fit the other categories. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-442

Analysis of the fixture anchorage and component supports is required, since the prescriptive 

acceptance criteria for the life safety and immediate occupancy nonstructural performance 

levels are not generally applicable. 

Given the level of risk posed by these components, evaluation for the presence of adequate 

attachment and support should be performed for all performance levels in high, moderate, and 

low seismicity areas.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Heavy or special purpose lighting can fail at the attachment to the structure above if not 

adequately designed and the fixture could fall and injure occupants. Overhead braces 

may buckle and the fixture will be misaligned or fail to function as intended.

 Fixtures with multiple parts or movable arms may fail at the connections or arm joints; 

bulbs or lenses may fall. 

 Bracing for the light fixture and surrounding ceiling should be coordinated to allow for 

relative movement. If the ceiling surround has not been designed with appropriate 

clearance around the fixture, the ceiling may be damaged at the interface with the light.

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.9.4-1 Operating room lights undamaged although hospital evacuated due to collapse 

of adjacent wing in the 2010 magnitude-7 Haiti Earthquake. Fixture anchored 

to underside of concrete slab (Photo courtesy of Ayhan Irfanoglu, Purdue 

University).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-443

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Per ASTM E580, Standard Practice for Installation of Ceiling Suspension Systems for 

Acoustical Tile and Lay-in Panels in Areas Subject to Earthquake Ground Motions (ASTM, 

2010), where the weight of a fixture in a suspended acoustic ceiling is greater than 56 

pounds, the fixture must be supported directly from the structure above by approved 

hangers. Where the fixture is over 56 pounds but light enough so that the lateral 

restraint for the fixture can be provided by the lateral bracing for the ceiling grid, these 

fixtures must also be positively attached to the ceiling grid with a minimum of two 

attachment devices capable of resisting 100% of the fixture weight in any direction. This 

condition is covered in Sections 6.4.9.1 and 6.4.9.2. 

 Lights covered here are those heavier than can be safely supported by the suspended 

ceiling grid and require independent engineered supports for both vertical and lateral 

loads. In addition, special purpose lighting with movable parts may require more fixity 

than provided by the ceiling grid and require independent support and bracing to 

maintain position and satisfy operational tolerances. 

 Note that fixed lighting provides an obstruction for a suspended ceiling system. For 

suspended acoustic ceilings in Seismic Design Category D, E & F, ASTM E580 requires 

that the ceiling surrounding such a fixture must be detailed as if it were a perimeter 

closure that must allow the required clearances by use of suitable closure details; this 

typically would require a minimum 3⁄4” clearance around the fixture.

 When purchasing heavy light fixtures that have multiple part or movable arms, check 

with the manufacturer for seismically qualified fixtures. Certified fixtures are required 

for hospitals or essential facilities that must remain functional following an earthquake 

per Section 13.2.2.1 of ASCE 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other 

Structures (ASCE, 2010).

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-444

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.9.4-2 Engineered support and bracing are required for heavy operating room lights. 

The arms, joints, lenses and bulbs must be capable of resisting seismic forces. 

Hospital fixtures require certification. Photo also shows surface mounted 

fluorescent fixtures in a suspended gypsum board ceiling; each of these requires 

independent safety wires to the structure above; see Section 6.4.9.2 (Photo 

courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-445

Figure 6.4.9.4-3 Engineered support and bracing for operating room lights located in California 

hospital. Steel plate has predrilled holes to receive fixture attachments (Photo 

courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-446

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.9.4-4 Details for supporting heavy light fixture directly from structure (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-447

Figure 6.4.9.4-5 Details for supporting heavy light fixture directly from structure (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-448

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.10 Elevators and Escalators

Elevators are the most common type of transportation system to move people or cargo from 

one floor to another in buildings. Since the first passenger elevator was installed in New York 

in 1857 by Elisha Otis, elevators have become a ubiquitous mode of vertical transportation in 

buildings and they are found in practically all modern buildings around the world. An elevator 

is a machine that either pulls or pushes a car (or cab) located in a shaft (also referred to as 

hoistway). There are two main types of elevators which vary depending on the mechanical 

means in which the car is lifted or lowered. In hydraulic elevators a pressurized fluid in a piston 

is used to lift and lower the car whereas in traction (sometimes referred to as roped) elevators 

the car is pulled by steel ropes moved by a pulley system. 

6.4.10.1 Hydraulic Elevators

The primary components of the hydraulic elevator system are the elevator cab, cab guides, 

doors and door mechanism, piston, cylinder, fluid reservoir, hydraulic fluid, rotary pump, valve, 

solenoid switch, and electrical control panel. Figure 6.4.101-1 shows a schematic view of a 

typical hydraulic elevator. Hydraulic elevators consist of relatively simple mechanical systems 

but failure of any of the component parts could disable the functionality of the entire system. 

The system may be tied to a seismic switch or a smoke detector which would facilitate safe 

shutdown in the event of an earthquake or fire. 

These elevators are typically less expensive but are limited in height since they require a 

cylinder beneath the elevator equal to the height of the elevator cab’s vertical travel. Typical 

heights are two to six stories.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for elevators are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for 

Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13. Elevators are classified as 

mechanical components, and are sensitive to both story drift and acceleration. Elevators 

designed in accordance with the seismic requirements of ASME A17.1 Safety Code for Elevators 

and Escalators (ASME, 2007a) are deemed to meet the requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10, provided 

the forces and displacements used in the design meet the provisions of ASCE/SEI 7-10.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-449

 Elevators, hoistway structural systems, elevator equipment supports and attachments, 

and controller supports and attachments must be designed to meet the force and 

displacement requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10.

 Bracing exemptions for small diameter piping and piping supported on hangers less 

than 12 inches long do not apply to elevator piping.

 Elevators that operate at speeds greater than 150 feet per minute must be provided with 

seismic switches that are triggered by earthquake shaking. The seismic switch will 

prevent a potentially damaged elevator from being used.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies 

components of elevators as acceleration sensitive. Shafts and hoistway rails that rise through

several floors are both acceleration and deformation sensitive. 

 Elevators are subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06 when the performance level 

is Immediate Occupancy, or in regions of high and moderate seismicity when the 

performance level is Life Safety. 

 The evaluation must consider the anchorage of the equipment and controllers, as well as 

the construction of the elevator shafts. 

 Acceptance criteria may be based on prescriptive procedures, or the elevator 

components may be analyzed for the force and displacement demands. 

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Common modes of elevator damage includedeformed door frames impeding the

adequate operation of doors, failure of door rails, damaged to pump, oil leakage in

hydraulic lines, and damage to hoistway switches. 

 According to survey responses collected by the Division of Occupational Safety and 

Health Elevator, Tramway, and Ride unit, following the 1994 Northridge Earthquake 897 

hydraulic elevators suffered damage such as leaks in underground feed lines, separated 

pipes, and failed gaskets and fittings. In addition, numerous guide rails were bent and 

several cars came out of rails. Tie downs on several oil tanks failed and hold-down 

bolts sheared and pulled out.

 In addition to property damage, passengers may become trapped in the cab following an 

earthquake and may need to await extraction by qualified elevator technicians.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-450

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 All components of the hydraulic system need to be restrained, anchored or detailed to 

accommodate movement to prevent damage in an earthquake. The system must be 

designed to accommodate the anticipated inter-story drift over the height of the 

elevator travel and the depth of the cylinder below. Components such as cab guides, 

door frames, and cylinder supports must all be detailed to accommodate lateral 

deformations. All mechanical and electrical equipment, sensors, piping, tanks, valves, 

and guides need to be properly anchored or restrained. 

 All elevators should be inspected by qualified elevator technicians following an 

earthquake. Elevators should have a seismic switch or safety features that allow for safe 

shutdown in an earthquake. 

 Elevator safety is governed by the prescriptive requirements in ASME A17.1/CSA B44,

Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators (ASME, 2007a) a document that is continually 

evolving to reflect new elevator technologies. In addition, ASME A17.7/B44.7,

Performance Based Code for Elevator Safety (ASME, 2007b), is the next step in the 

evolution of elevator safety codes in the United States and Canada. Local or state 

jurisdictions may have other elevator requirements.

 The internet provides information regarding hydraulic elevators. A few websites are 

linked below:

o The website http:science.howstuffworks.com/elevator1.htm describes the 

workings of hydraulic elevators and provides links to other resources 

o Jobsite safety in the elevator industry is discussed on http://safety.elevatorworld.com/disaster.htm

o The websites of the Elevator and Escalator Safety Foundation, http://eesf.org/,

and major elevator suppliers such as The Otis Elevator Company and Schindler

Elevators provide additional resources.

o The National Elevator Industry, Inc. has other resources including a discussion of 

the performance based code for elevator safety (http://www.pbcelevators.com/).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-451

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.10.1-1 Schematic view of hydraulic elevator (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-452

 

 

Figure 6.4.10.1-2 Hydraulic elevator that performed well during the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile 

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Miranda, Stanford University).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-453

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.10 Elevators and Escalators

6.4.10.2 Traction Elevators

Traction elevators have made high rise construction possible. These systems are continually 

evolving to achieve faster speeds, smoother and quieter operations. Currently there are geared 

traction elevators, gearless traction elevators, and “machine-roomless” elevators that use flat 

belts instead of steel cable. Traction elevators are complex mechanical systems that have many 

moving parts and electronic components and failure of any of the components could disable the 

functionality of the entire system. Maintaining limited functionality of some elevators following 

an earthquake is critical for continued operations of essential facilities or the evacuation of 

hospital patients.

The primary components of the traction elevator system are the elevator cab (car), 

counterweight, cab guide rails, counterweight guide rails, guide rail support brackets, electric 

motor, electrical control panel, ropes, sheaves, safety braking mechanisms, door mechanisms, 

and a shock absorber at the bottom of the shaft. The system may be tied to a seismic switch or 

a smoke detector which would facilitate safe shutdown in the event of an earthquake or fire. 

Any of these components could be damaged if not properly restrained. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for elevators are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for 

Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13. Elevators are classified as 

mechanical components, and are sensitive to both story drift and acceleration. Elevators 

designed in accordance with the seismic requirements of ASME A17.1 Safety Code for Elevators 

and Escalators (ASME, 2007a) are deemed to meet the requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10, provided 

the forces and displacements used in the design meet the provisions of ASCE/SEI 7-10.

 Elevators, hoistway structural systems, elevator equipment supports and attachments, 

and controller supports and attachments must be designed to meet the force and 

displacement requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10.

 Bracing exemptions for small diameter piping and piping supported on hangers less 

than 12 inches long do not apply to elevator piping.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-454

 Elevators that operate at speeds greater than 150 feet per minute must be provided with 

seismic switches that are triggered by earthquake shaking. The seismic switch will 

prevent a potentially damaged elevator from being used. 

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEi 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2006) classifies 

components of elevators as acceleration sensitive. Shafts and hoistway rails that rise through 

several floors are both acceleration and deformation sensitive. 

 Elevators are subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06 when the performance level 

is Immediate Occupancy, or in regions of high and moderate seismicity when the 

performance level is Life Safety. 

 The evaluation must consider the anchorage of the equipment and controllers, as well as 

the construction of the elevator shafts. The possibility of derailment or displacement of 

the elevator counterweights must also be considered.

 Acceptance criteria may be based on prescriptive procedures, or the elevator 

components may be analyzed for the force and displacement demands. 

Typical Causes of Damage 

 The most common cause of damage in elevators is counterweight derailment. 

Counterweights are the heaviest component in an elevator and typically weigh the same 

as the cab filled at 50% capacity. Elevators are often programmed to spend more time in 

the ground floor and therefore when earthquakes occur the counterweight is likely to be 

located in the upper part of the building where the largest acceleration demands occur. 

This means that often counterweights are subjected to forces that are larger than those 

experienced by the cab (car). Counterweight derailment is a very serious type of 

damage because once it is out of the guide rails the heavy counterweight may violently 

swing in the hoistway and collide against other components causing the damage to 

guide rails and rail brackets. In some cases collisions with the cab occur if the elevator 

is operated with its counterweight derailed. In other cases, severe pounding of a 

derailed counterweight against the guide rails or the hoistway can cause damage to the 

frame of the counterweight and individual block which are typically made of cast iron or 

steel plates may become loose and fall into the shaft or onto the roof of the cab. 

 Counterweight and car guide rails often are bent as a result of large inertia forces acting 

on the counterweight and car that push the guiderails during the earthquake. Damage 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-455

typically occurs when the counterweight or car are between floors where the rails are not 

attached to the structure and therefore are subjected to large bending deformations. 

Guide rails also get damaged as a result of pounding against the counterweight or the 

car. Bent rails often need to be replaced, which may require several days. 

 Guide rails are attached to the structure by steel brackets. As shown in Figure 6.4.10.2-

1 the rails are attached to the brackets by clamps that hold the flanges of the rail to the 

bracket. Both brackets and clamps are damaged as a result of the forces acting on the 

counterweight or car. The most common type of damage consists of bending of the 

brackets.

 Lateral motion of counterweight and of the car relative to the guide rails is constrained 

by a guide rolling system typically consisting of three guide wheels (or guide shoes). 

Guiding systems are comprised of several parts. Details vary from manufacturer to 

manufacturer, on the load capacity of the elevator, the travelling speed and on whether 

the guide is for the car or the counterweight. An example of a spring adjustable guide 

rolling system is shown in Figure 6.4.10.2-15. The axle bolts, pins, and supports of 

these rolling systems are particularly vulnerable during earthquakes where very large 

forces are produced in these small mechanical components as a result of inertia forces 

acting on the counterweight and car.

 Landing switches and limit switches are sensing elements that allow an adequate 

positioning of the car at each floor level. These switches consist of brackets extending 

into the hoistway. Damage to these elements consists of being bent by lateral motion of 

the car or the counterweight. They can also be damaged from steel ropes swinging in 

the shaft and colliding with the switches or by falling counterweight block. 

 At the top of the elevator is a room that houses the elevator machines. The main 

components housed in the elevator machine room are the electrical motors which are

usually directly attached to the shaft. The elevator machines must be properly anchored 

to the base otherwise a sliding may occur during earthquakes.

Damage in Prior Earthquakes

Earthquake Date Magnitude Number of Derailed 

Counterweights 

Nisqually February 28, 2001 6.8 224

Van, Turkey October 23, 2011 7.2 218

Darfield, New Zealand September 3, 2011 7.1 30

Whittier Narrows October 1, 1987 5.9 91

Loma Prieta October 17, 1989 6.9 249

Northridge January 17, 1994 6.7 690
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-456

 According to survey responses collected by the Division of Occupational Safety and 

Health Elevator, Tramway, and Ride unit, following the 1994 Northridge earthquake, the 

following issues were observed:

o Water damage-sprinkler pipes pulled apart flooding machine rooms and pits 

causing water on top of cars, damage to door operators and door detectors, and 

soaking car processors and car station. Several oil buffers had to be rebuilt.

o Falling debris in hoistways, falling plaster, loose concrete blocks, broken glass 

resulted in damaged door interlocks and misalignment of hatch switches and 

bent fascias.

o Building settlements bent elevator guide rails; structural damage, loose and bent 

divider beams shifted guide rails and bending support brackets.

o 3,528 cabled elevators were removed from service by a seismic protective device. 

710 devices did not operate as intended. Some devices were located in the 

elevator pits which were flooded.

o 968 electric cabled elevators sustained earthquake damage.

o 2 minor injuries were reported, one of which was sustained by a fireman trying 

to open hoistway doors.

o 39 elevators required rescue.

o 57 instances were reported where "unauthorized persons" reset earthquake 

devices. Fortunately, only 5 elevators sustained additional damages.

o 688 counterweights came out of guide rails. 8-1b rails were inadequate even 

with additional intermediate guide rail bracket retrofit. Several counterweight 

frames were twisted and bent with a few dislodged subweights. Some 

counterweight roller guide shoe mountings disintegrated.

 Following the 2010 Chile Earthquake, it was reported that 50%-80% of hospital elevators 

were damaged. In a number of locations, patients had to be carried down many flights 

of stairs, often cluttered with fallen debris, in order to evacuate them to safety. The 

most common damage was due to unrestrained movement of the counterweights, 

resulting in damage to the guide rails. Movement of unrestrained mechanical 

equipment was another problem. One security camera at a military hospital in Santiago, 

Chile captured a sequence through the open door of an empty elevator cab where the 

counterweights derailed and then the subweights came crashing down on top of the 

cab. (Source: Bill Holmes, March 2010).

 In addition to property damage, passengers may become trapped in the cab following an 

earthquake and may need to await extraction by qualified elevator technicians. Failure 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-457

of elevators are particularly critical to high-rise buildings that may become inoperable 

without elevators.

In recent shake table testing of a full scale 5 story building performed at UC San Diego (see 

Section 6.1.3), a fully operational machine-roomless traction elevator was subjected to severe 

earthquake motions. The elevator remained operational for all but the largest tested 

earthquake motion although in a normal installation, the elevator would have tripped off line by 

seismic sensors. For the largest motion (inter-story drifts exceeding 3%) the gypsum wall board 

partition distortions caused the elevator shaft doors to jam thus making the elevator inoperable. Elevators have interlocking controls that when the shaft doors are not operational, 

the elevator is not operational. 

Figure 6.4.10.2-1 Examples of an elevator counterweight (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Miranda, 

Stanford University). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-458

 

Figure 6.4.10.2-2 Examples of brackets and clips attaching the elevator guide rails to the structure 

(Photo courtesy of Eduardo Miranda, Stanford University). 

 

Figure 6.4.10.2-3 Examples of rolling guides at the bottom of a car (Photos courtesy of Eduardo 

Miranda, Stanford University). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-459

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

 

Figure 6.4.10.2-4 Examples of damage to elevator machines produced by inadequate anchorage 

to the structure (Photos courtesy of Eduardo Miranda, Stanford University). 

 

Figure 6.4.10.2-5 Details of bent bracket (left) and large displacement at the base of elevator 

machines (Photos courtesy of Eduardo Miranda, Stanford University). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-460

 

Figure 6.4.10.2-6 Overturned control panels in the 2010 Chile earthquake (Photos courtesy of 

Eduardo Miranda, Stanford University). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-461

 

Figure 6.4.10.2-7 Damage to guide rails caused by derailment of the counterweight in a hospital 

in Chillan during the 2010 Chile earthquake (Photos courtesy of Eduardo 

Miranda, Stanford University). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-462

Figure 6.4.10.2-8 Damage to guide rail support brackets in the 2010 Chile Earthquake (Photo 

courtesy of Gilberto Mosqueda, SUNY Buffalo).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-463

Figure 6.4.10.2-9 Derailed car roller assembly of the guide rail at the Santiago airport in the 2010 

Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Gilberto Mosqueda, SUNY Buffalo). The 

three rollers are supposed to travel along three sides of the stem of the T-shaped 

steel guide rail.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-464

Figure 6.4.10.2-10 Glazing failures caused additional hazards at Santiago airport elevator in the 

2010 Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Antonio Iruretagoyena, Rubén 

Borsochek & Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-465

Figure 6.4.10.2-11 Unrestrained movement of the counterweights damaged the counterweight 

assembly and bent the counterweight guide rails; over half the subweights 

dropped onto the top of the cab and damaged the cab framing in the 2010 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-466

Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Rodrigo Retamales, Rubén Borsochek & 

Associates).

Figure 6.4.10.2-12 Anchor bolt failure of the elevator generator set due to inadequate edge 

distance for the bolts at the Los Angeles Regional Public Hospital in the 2010 

Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Bill Holmes, Rutherford & Chekene).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 All of the components of the traction system need to be restrained, anchored, or 

detailed to resist lateral forces in all directions and accommodate seismic movement.

The system must be designed to accommodate the anticipated inter-story drift over the 

height of the elevator travel. Guide rails and door frames must all be detailed to 

accommodate lateral deformations. All of the mechanical and electrical equipment, 

sensors, and guides need to be properly anchored or restrained. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-467

 All elevators should be inspected by qualified elevator technicians following an 

earthquake. Elevators should have a seismic switch or safety features that allow for safe 

shutdown in an earthquake. 

 Elevator safety is governed by the prescriptive requirements in ASME A17.1/CSA B44 

Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators (2007a), a document that is continually evolving 

reflect new elevator technologies. In addition, ASME A17.7/CSA B44.7, Performance 

Based Code for Elevator Safety (ASME, 2007b), is the next step in the evolution of 

elevator safety codes in the United States and Canada. Local or state jurisdictions may 

have other elevator requirements.

 As an example of state jurisdictions, the California Office of Statewide Health Planning 

and Development (OSHPD) provides special requirements for elevators in California 

hospitals, such as Title 24, Section 3007. These include requirements for a seismic 

switch connected to the essential electrical system, a visible or audible alarm, the ability 

to function at a “go slow” speed of not more than 150 feet per minute until the elevator 

can be inspected, and an additional sensor that will disable the elevator if the governor 

tail sheave is dislodged. For these systems, the seismic anchorage, guards and switches 

all need to be inspected annually.

 The internet provides a resource of information regarding elevators. A few websites are 

linked below:

o The website http:science.howstuffworks.com/elevator1.htm describes the 

workings of a traction elevator and provides links to other resources 

o Jobsite safety in the elevator industry is discussed on http://safety.elevatorworld.com/disaster.htm

o The websites of the Elevator and Escalator Safety Foundation, http://eesf.org/, 

and major elevator suppliers such as The Otis Elevator Company and Schindler 

Elevators provide additional resources. 

o The National Elevator Industry, Inc. has other resources including a discussion of 

the performance based code for elevator safety (http://www.pbcelevators.com/).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-468

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.10.2-13 Small “machine-roomless” traction elevator with flat belts at the Academy of 

Sciences, San Francisco, California (Photos courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP 

Engineers). Clockwise: Overview of elevator at roof; view of guide rails and 

sheaves; top of cab showing belts; view down shaft at belts, counterweight, 

guide rails and guide rail brackets. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-469

Mitigation Details

Figure 6.4.10.2-14 Schematic view of geared traction elevator system (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-470

Figure 6.4.10.2-15 Spring loaded elevator guide with polyurethane rollers. Details of elevator 

guides vary from manufacturer to manufacturer, elevator load capacity, elevator 

speed, and whether used for guiding the car or counterweight.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-471

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.10 Elevators and Escalators

6.4.10.3 Escalators

Escalators typically span between two floors, and although most escalators run in a straight 

line, spiral escalators are found in some locations. The failure of any of the component parts of 

the escalator or escalator equipment could disable the functionality of the system. Relative 

horizontal displacements between supporting floors that are greater than the displacement 

capacity of the connection can result in the escalator coming of its supports and falling to the 

floor below resulting in severe damage to the escalator and a serious life safety threat. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for Escalators are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for 

Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13. Escalators are classified as 

mechanical components, and are sensitive to both story drift and acceleration. Escalators 

designed in accordance with the seismic requirements of ASME A17.1 Safety Code for Elevators 

and Escalators (ASME, 2007a) are deemed to meet the requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10, provided 

the forces and displacements used in the design meet the provisions of ASCE/SEI 7-10.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007) does not provide seismic 

retrofit criteria for escalators. In lieu of specific guidance, retrofit criteria may be inferred from 

the requirements for stairways, as follows 

 Stairs are subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 41-06 when the performance level is 

Immediate Occupancy, or in regions of high and moderate seismicity when the 

performance level is Life Safety. Similar criteria may be used for escalators.

 The evaluation must consider the escalator and the connection of the escalator to the 

supports, and adjacent supporting beams or slabs.

 Acceptance criteria should focus on verifying that the escalator has sufficient strength to 

resist out-of-plane forces, and the ability to accommodate the expected relative 

displacements.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-472

Typical Causes of Damage 

 The primary components of an escalator system are the steps, chain, inner rail, chain 

guide, drive gear, handrail, handrail drive, electric motor, and electrical control panel. 

These components are often supported by a truss that spans between the floors. Any of 

these components could be damaged if not properly detailed or restrained; failure of 

any of the component parts could disable the system.

 Escalators, like stairs, may form a strut or brace between adjacent floors unless they are 

detailed so the system will accommodate inter-story drift. Damage could occur to the 

skirt, landing plate or other components not detailed to accommodate either an 

extension or shortening of the distance between the two landings. An example of the 

results of a failure and collapse of an escalator that occurred during the 2011 Great 

Tokohu Japan Earthquake is provided in Figure 6.4.10.3-1. A total of 4 escalators fell in 

this earthquake at 3 separate locations in the Sendai and Fukushima areas.

 According to survey responses collected by the Division of Occupational Safety and 

Health Elevator, Tramway, and Ride unit, 65 escalators were damaged in the 1994 

Northridge earthquake. It was reported that escalators came off upper supports, and 

several truss support angles had their bolts sheared off where one truss actually 

dropped. Glass came out of its supports and shattered, handrails collapsed. In 

addition, numerous deckboards, skirts and newels were damaged. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-473

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.10.3-1 Photo of escalator, located in the Sendai area of Japan, which fell from the floor 

above onto the escalator on the floor below during the magnitude-9.0 Great 

Tohoku Earthquake of March 11, 2011. The probable cause of this collapse 

was that the relative displacements between floors exceeded the connection 

bearing width capacity of the escalator. This type of failure creates a serious life 

safety hazard (Photo source: Nekkei Architecture).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-474

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Each of the components of an escalator system need to be detailed to accommodate 

movement, or restrained and anchored to prevent damage in an earthquake. The 

system must be designed to accommodate the anticipated inter-story drift between the 

two connected floors. Where a truss is used to span between the two floors, the bearing 

seats should allow movement at one or both ends. Components such as the rail 

supports, handrails, landing plates, and skirts must be detailed to accommodate lateral 

deformations. All of the mechanical and electrical equipment needs to be properly 

anchored or restrained. 

 Escalators have traditionally been designed to run continuously, whether they are in use 

or not. Some more energy efficient escalators operate on an intermittent basis and are 

triggered by the presence of passengers but otherwise are in a standby idle mode.

 All escalators should be inspected by qualified personnel following an earthquake. 

Unlike elevators, escalators typically function as a usable stair when they are not 

operating and could be used to facilitate evacuation following an earthquake.

 Elevator and escalator safety is governed by the prescriptive requirements in ASME 

A17.1, Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators (ASME, 2007a), a document that is 

continually evolving to reflect new elevator and escalator technologies. Seismic 

requirements for escalators were first introduced into A17.1 in the 2000 edition include 

the design of connections for relative displacements effects between floors. Escalators 

installed prior to the adoption of A17.1-2000 may be particularly vulnerable. Local or 

state jurisdictions may have other elevator and escalator requirements. In California, 

Escalator Seismic Requirements are provided in Title 8 in the California Code of 

Regulations.

 The internet provides information regarding escalators. Websites such as 

http://science.howstuffworks.com/transport/engines-equipment/escalator.htm

describe the workings of escalators and provide links to other resources 

 Some escalator models are offered with a seismic option; check for appropriate 

equipment before purchasing a new escalator. The escalators should comply with the 

seismic requirements of Section 8.5 of ASTM A17.1 especially the drift requirements 

between floors.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-475

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.10.3-2 Schematic view of escalator (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-476

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Components

6.4.11 Conveyors

6.4.11.1 Conveyors

Material handling conveyors come in all shapes and sizes from the conveyor belt at the grocery 

store checkout line, the clothing conveyor at the dry cleaner’s, assembly line conveyors in clean 

rooms, airport baggage handling conveyors, to large industrial conveyors. They are used for 

many purposes, such as shipping, packaging, assembling, and manufacturing. The conveyors

may be horizontal, inclined, hinged, straight, curved, spiral, screw, fixed or on wheels. Tall,

inclined, or overhead systems may be a falling hazard; systems critical to facility operations 

may be important for post-earthquake functionality.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Conveyors are subject to the requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for 

Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13, Nonstructural Components

 Conveyors in Seismic Design Categories D, E, and F that weigh 5 pounds or less per 

linear foot do not required seismic bracing if the component Importance Factor is 

Ip = 1.0.

 Conveyors that are exempt from the anchorage requirements noted above are still 

required to be positively anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be 

designed or detailed on the construction documents. Flexible connections must be 

provided between the conveyor and associated pipes or conduits or alternate means for 

protecting the connection must be implemented.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings (ASCE, 2007) requires compliance 

with the anchorage provisions of the standard when the performance level is Immediate 

Occupancy. Conveyors are classified as both force and displacement controlled. The principal 

objectives are to prevent the component from sliding or overturning. In addition, depending on 

the configuration, the conveyor must accommodate building displacements if it is connected to 

multiple levels in the same structure, or is supported by adjacent structures.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-477

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Unanchored conveyors may slide and impact other items, tall or inclined conveyors may 

overturn, overhead conveyors or components may become dislodged and fall. 

Conveyors not designed for seismic forces may have damage to the component parts 

and connectors. Unrestrained conveyor motors and related equipment may be damaged

and fall.

 Properly anchored conveyors may remain in place but the contents may fall. For tall or 

overhead conveyors, this could be a falling hazard resulting in injury and damage to 

materials or merchandise.

 The conveyor may shift and exceed the alignment tolerances and not be functional until 

repaired or realigned.

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.4.11.1-1 Misalignment between rice storage hopper and conveyor following the 2010 

magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Rodrigo Retamales, Rubén 

Boroschek & Associates). Where various system components interface with a 

conveyor, the seismic restraints for the various parts should be coordinated to 

maintain alignment following an earthquake. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-478

Figure 6.4.11.1-2 Damage to industrial conveyor used to feed grain silos in the 2010 Chile 

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-479

Figure 6.4.11.1-3 Damage to industrial coal conveyor on jetty in southern Peru in the 2001 

magnitude-8.4 Peru Earthquake (Photos courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP 

Engineers). Conveyor was well anchored along entire length but detailing at the 

seismic joint between the jetty and platform did not allow sufficient movement, 

resulting in misalignment at end of conveyor and damage to the supports as

shown at lower left. Approximately 10% of the rollers fell; these were held in 

place with friction fittings and did not have positive connections.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-480

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Conveyor systems and the associated motors, control systems, and control panels 

should be restrained or anchored to prevent earthquake damage. If life safety is the 

primary concern, tall or overhead components should be restrained to reduce falling 

hazards. If the conveyor is critical to continued operations, or the conveyed materials 

hazardous or particularly valuable, the system should be engineered to assure continued 

operations and the safety of the materials. In this case, the anchorage or restraints for 

interconnecting parts should be coordinated to maintain alignment tolerances following 

an earthquake.

 There are various conveyor mechanisms including belt driven, chain driven, gravity 

rollers, chain driven rollers, and flex link conveyors. Conveyors may be supplied with 

leveling feet which may not be sufficiently robust unless they have been designed for 

seismic loading. Floor to floor conveyors must be detailed the same as for stairs or 

escalators and be able to accommodate the anticipated inter-story drift. Where long 

conveyors are variously suspended, wall-mounted, or floor-mounted, the layout of the 

supports and restraints should consider the relative motion of the various attachment 

points. Special detailing is required where conveyors cross building separations or 

seismic joints.

 Some conveyors come supplied with predrilled base plates at each leg; these should be 

anchored to the floor slab. Existing conveyor platforms could be strengthened with 

transverse or longitudinal bracing if they have not been designed for seismic loading; 

clip angles could be used to anchor the legs to the floor. Check with the manufacturer 

prior to modifying existing equipment as equipment warranties may be affected.

 Where conveyed materials are hazardous or valuable, it may be prudent to devise 

guiderails or side restraints of some type to prevent the materials from falling off the 

conveyor in the event of an earthquake. Such restraints would have to be designed so 

that they do not to interfere with normal operations. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-481

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.4.11.1-4 Anchorage details for small material handling conveyor (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-482

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment and Contents 

6.5.1 Storage Racks

6.5.1.1 Light Duty SHelving

This category includes light duty shelving units and sheet metal storage cabinets. These items 

are typically tall and narrow and may be heavily loaded. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

The seismic design requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and 

Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010) Chapter 13 are intended to apply only to permanently attached 

components, not to furnishings, temporary items, or mobile units. Storage cabinets and 

shelving units of significant mass are not considered to be exempt and should be anchored or 

braced, 

Permanent floor-supported shelving or storage cabinets over 6 feet tall must be designed as 

architectural components per ASCE/SEI 7-10. Bracing and anchorage for these units should be 

designed considering the weight of the unit and weight of shelved contents.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies light-duty 

shelving as force controlled, and the principal objective of the code provisions is to prevent the 

component from sliding or overturning. ASCE/SEI 41-06 requires compliance with the 

anchorage provisions of the standard for storage racks over 4 feet in height when the 

performance level is Life Safety or higher. Storage racks in unoccupied spaces are exempt.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Shelving units may slide or overturn and the contents may become dislodged or fall. 

Where there are rows of freestanding or poorly anchored shelves, the failure of a few 

may result in progressive collapse of many. Broken bottles, spilled chemicals, mixed or 

damaged inventory are often the result of the failure of storage or display units.

 Mobile storage carts may roll, overturn, or impact other items. Stored contents may 

become dislodged or fall.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-483

 Damage to contents or inventory that has fallen from shelving can be costly to repair or 

replace and may result in substantial business interruption. 

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.1.1-1 Collapse of row of unanchored freestanding shelving units containing spare 

parts at an electric power plant in Port-au-Prince in the 2010 magnitude-7 Haiti 

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-484

Figure 6.5.1.1-2 Unanchored storage shelving slid nine inches without falling but contents 

scattered in the 2001 magnitude-8.4 Peru earthquake; unit lifted to original 

position prior to photo (Photo courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 For sheet metal cabinets or shelving, anchor units to floor, tie back-to-back units 

together, strap rows of units together across the top, or anchor units to an adjacent 

wall. Light duty steel storage racks may additionally require cross bracing. 

 See Section 6.5.6.1 for recommendations regarding edge restraints and arrangement of 

shelf-mounted items. Do not locate cabinets or racks adjacent to doors or exits if their 

failure would block the exit.

 Any connections to stud walls must engage the structural studs. Stud walls and 

partitions may not have adequate lateral capacity to support many shelving units; 

engineering may be required. Where items are anchored to heavy partitions, the bracing 

or anchorage of these partitions to the structure above must also be checked for 

adequacy considering the seismic loads imposed by all anchored items.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-485

 The details shown are intended for light duty units; heavy duty units with large loads 

may require engineering. See FEMA 460, Seismic Considerations for Steel Storage Racks 

Located in Areas Accessible to the Public (2005), for additional information on the 

performance of industrial storage racks. Some racks are available with enhanced 

seismic performance; check other resources, such as the internet for additional options.

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.1.1-3 Mobile carts restrained at base with clip angles anchored to the floor and 

removable eyebolts attached from each cart to the angles (Photo courtesy of 

Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-486

Figure 6.5.1.1-4 Alternate restraint at base of mobile shelving unit (Photo courtesy of Maryann 

Phipps, Estructure). 

Figure 6.5.1.1-5 Fixed base shelving units anchored with optional seismic base plate offered by 

manufacturer (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-487

Figure 6.5.1.1-6 Mobile cart restrained at base with removable angles and eyebolts. Back-toback units are interconnected (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-488

Figure 6.5.1.1-7 Fixed base shelving units anchored directly to concrete slab through base plate 

(Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-489

Figure 6.5.1.1-8 Mobile shelving unit restrained by connection to strut fastened to full height 

metal studs (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-490

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.5.1.1-9 Light duty shelving (NE, ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-491

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment and Contents 

6.5.1 Storage Racks

6.5.1.2 Industrial Storage Racks

This subcategory includes heavy duty steel pallet storage racks such as those found in public 

warehouse stores. These racks are typically 42 to 44 inches deep, 8 feet wide and up to 14 to 

18 feet tall, often configured with two rows back-to-back. They are composed of specially 

designed steel elements that permit easy installation and reconfiguration consistent with 

merchandising needs.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Industrial storage racks are considered nonbuilding structures. The seismic design provisions 

for industrial storage racks in ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other 

Structures, (ASCE, 2010) Chapter 15 include two approaches to the design of steel storage 

racks that are intended to produce comparable results. Racks can be designed in accordance 

with ANSI/RMI MH 16.1, Specification for the Design, Testing, and Utilization of Industrial Steel 

Storage Racks, (ANSI/RMI, 2008), as amended by ASCE/SEI 7-10. As an alternative, racks may 

be designed to comply with the requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10 Section 15.5.3.4.

• Industrial storage racks in areas open to the public are designed with an importance 

factor of Ip = 1.5.

• While beyond the scope ASCE/SEI 7-10, contents on the storage racks may pose a 

potentially serious threat to life should they fall during an earthquake. It is 

recommended that restraints be provided.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) may require

compliance with the anchorage provisions of the standard when the performance level is 

Hazards Reduced, Life Safety, or Immediate Occupancy. Storage racks over 4 feet in height 

should be evaluated. Storage racks in unoccupied spaces where the performance level is Life 

Safety are exempt. When the performance level is Hazards Reduced, storage racks in areas of 

public assembly must comply with the provisions of the standard.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-492

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Industrial storage racks may slide or overturn, or failure of individual components can 

cause collapse or partial collapse. 

 Stored contents may become dislodged and fall. Items falling from the upper shelves 

can cause serious bodily harm. Damage to merchandise or inventory may be costly to 

replace and reshelf and may result in significant business interruption.

 In cases with heavy stored products and light structural framing, collapsed racks and 

falling goods have caused damage to structural framing members and/or architectural 

cladding.

 Industrial storage racks can be weakened if damaged from collisions with forklifts. Bent 

or damaged legs or anchor bolts reduce the lateral capacity of the rack system.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-493

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.1.2-1 Damage to overloaded racks during the 1994 magnitude-6.7 Northridge 

Earthquake (FEMA 460, 2005).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-494

Figure 6.5.1.2-2 Spilled contents during the 1994 Northridge Earthquake (FEMA 460, 2005).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-495

Figure 6.5.1.2-3 Rack collapse during the 1994 Northridge Earthquake. Note the minimal 

damage to shrink wrapped merchandise (FEMA 460, 2005).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-496

Figure 6.5.1.2-4 Failure of anchored racks in the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake. The 

racks are leaning precariously due to inadequate bracing in the longitudinal 

direction and weak connections between the components. The welded fitting 

at the end of the beam failed at the weld in many places. Note that most items 

were shrink wrapped so merchandise did not scatter (Photos courtesy of 

Rodrigo Retamales, Rubén Boroschek & Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-497

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Storage racks in warehouse-type retail stores may pose a greater seismic risk to the 

general public than exists in low-occupancy warehouses or more conventional retail 

environments, due to their higher occupant load. The use of an Importance Factor of 

1.5 provides an appropriate level of additional safety in areas open to the public.

 Project specific design of industrial storage racks is required. Each design must account 

for proprietary members and connectors that are used. Anchorage of the rack to the 

floor must be engineered and verification of the adequacy of the slab to accommodate 

forces generated by the rack is required. Storage racks are classified as nonbuilding 

structures.

 Industrial storage rack systems may experience high lateral displacements during strong 

shaking. For the purposes of providing adequate clearances between the rack and 

adjacent structural and nonstructural elements, ASCE/SEI 7-10 specifies relative 

displacements of not less than 5 percent of the height of the rack. 

 Pallet racks should be installed by trained and experienced personnel working from 

installation drawings provided by the rack designer. Reconfiguration from the asdesigned condition should be evaluated by the designer.

 To prevent or minimize the falling hazard posed by stored overhead merchandise, a 

dual approach is recommended: prevent merchandise from falling down from one shelf 

to the next; and prevent pallets and individual merchandise from falling from the 

shelves into the aisles. The use of wire decking or spaced framing on each shelf will 

reduce the potential for fall-through of merchandise. Stretch-wrapping, shrinkwrapping, banding or use of integral pallet box units can reduce the potential falling 

hazard posed by pallets. Restraining bars, chains or cables, netting and/or slip-resistant 

containers can reduce the potential for loss of individual merchandise.

 FEMA 460 Seismic Considerations for Steel Storage Racks Located in Areas Accessible to 

the Public (2005) provides a comprehensive treatment of seismic resistant design 

considerations for steel storage racks.

 The Rack Manufacturers Institute (RMI) publishes industry-wide standards for 

engineering design of steel storage racks.

 Purchase storage racks designed for seismic resistance. Some industrial storage racks 

are now available with proprietary schemes for improved seismic performance such as 

base isolation, added damping, or shelves sloped toward the back of the rack. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-498

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

 

Figure 6.5.1.2-5 Typical pallet storage rack configuration and details (Photos courtesy of 

Maryann Phipps, Estructure). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-499

Figure 6.5.1.2-6 Photo showing netting used to keep storage on upper portions of steel storage 

racks in a big box hardware store (Photo courtesy of Mike Mahoney, FEMA). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-500

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.5.1.2-7 Industrial storage rack (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-501

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment and Contents 

6.5.2 Bookcases, Shelving

6.5.2.1 Bookshelves

Tall wood or metal shelving units frequently tip or overturn in earthquakes unless they are 

properly anchored.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

The seismic design requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and 

Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010) Chapter 13 apply to permanent floor-supported library shelving, 

book stacks, and bookshelves over 6 feet tall in Seismic Design Categories C, D, E, and F. The 

weight of the contents must be included when determining the seismic loads.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies 

bookshelves as force controlled, and the principal objective of the code provisions is to prevent 

the component from sliding or overturning. ASCE/SEI 41-06 requires bookshelves 4 feet in 

height comply with the anchorage provisions of the standard when the performance level is Life 

Safety or higher.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Tall, narrow shelving may tip, slide, overturn or collapse and the contents may spill. 

Overturned shelving may injure occupants and block doors or exits. 

 Books, files, medical records may fall and get scrambled or damaged. Clean-up and 

reorganization of spilled items may take many hours or days and result in costly 

business interruption.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-502

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.2.1-1 Failure of poorly anchored wood and metal book shelves at the Lawrence 

Livermore Laboratory, Livermore, California (NGDC, 2009).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-503

Figure 6.5.2.1-2 Failure of poorly anchored shelving; toggle bolt pulled out of gypsum board wall 

in the 1994 magnitude-6.7 Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Wiss, 

Janney, Elstner Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-504

Figure 6.5.2.1-3 Bookcase overturned onto desk in the 1971 magnitude-6.6 San Fernando

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Degenkolb Engineers).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Permanent floor-supported shelving or storage cabinets over 6 ft tall must be designed 

as architectural components per ASCE 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and 

Other Structures (ASCE, 2010). Bracing and anchorage for these units should be 

designed considering the weight of the unit and weight of shelved contents. The details 

shown in Figure 6.5.2.1-4 and 6.5.2.1-5 are for shelving units up to 6 feet tall.

 Bookcases and shelving should be anchored to an adjacent stud wall or concrete or 

masonry wall. For freestanding units, see Section 6.5.1.1 for recommended details for 

bracing units and tying back-to-back units together. 

 See Section 6.5.6.1 for recommendations regarding edge restraints and arrangement for 

shelf-mounted items. Do not locate shelving adjacent to doors or exits if their failure 

would block the exit.

 Any connections to stud walls must engage the structural studs; do not rely on gypsum 

or plaster to support shelving. Stud walls and partitions and unreinforced or lightly 

reinforced heavy partitions may not have adequate lateral capacity to support multiple
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-505

shelving units; engineering may be required. The bracing or anchorage of walls and

partitions to the structure above must also be checked for adequacy considering the 

seismic loads imposed by all anchored items.

 Bookcase or cabinet anchorage can be located either outside or inside the unit as long 

as the attachment properly engages the “structural” studs. Where aesthetics are a 

concern, it may be preferable to locate the screws or clip angles on the inside of the 

unit. In a commercial setting where maintenance personnel or movers may need to 

verify the anchorage or relocate the unit periodically, it may be preferable to provide 

exterior anchorage that is readily visible.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-506

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.5.2.1-4 Bookshelves against wall (NE, ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-507

Figure 6.5.2.1-5 Anchorage of freestanding book cases arranged back to back (NE, ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-508

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment and Contents

6.5.2 Bookcases, shelving

6.5.2.2 Library and Other Shelving

Library shelving typically consists of many rows of tall back-to-back shelving units that are 

heavily loaded. There have been many costly failures of library shelving in earthquakes; this 

includes failures of both unrestrained and poorly restrained shelving units. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Bookshelves are considered force controlled, and the principal objective of the code provisions 

is to prevent them from sliding or overturning. 

 The seismic design requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for 

Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010), Chapter 13 apply to permanent floorsupported library shelving, book stacks, and bookshelves over 6 feet tall in Seismic 

Design Categories C, D, E, and F. The weight of the contents must be included.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

 ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) requires

bookshelves 4 feet in height comply with the anchorage provisions of the standard when 

the performance level is Life Safety or higher.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Unrestrained or poorly restrained library shelving can slide or overturn resulting in 

damage to the contents, damage to the shelving units, and damage to partition walls or 

other contents. Shelving failures may result in personal injuries. It may be costly and 

time consuming to repair the shelving units and reshelf all of the books. 

 Unrestrained or poorly restrained library shelving has failed in a variety of ways. If the 

base anchorage is inadequate, the bolts can fail and the units may slide or tip. If 

overhead transverse ties are provided between many shelving units, but no longitudinal 

bracing or ties are provided, the units may collapse in their longitudinal direction. If 

undersized transverse ties are provided, or they are attached at the extremes to walls or 

partitions with insufficient capacity or with inadequate connectors, the units may all 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-509

topple in their transverse direction like dominos. If individual or back-to–back shelving 

units are braced to the structure above, these restraints may fail or buckle if they are 

undersized.

 Damage to rare books or irreplaceable museum collections can be devastating. These 

materials may need to be rebound or restored at great expense to the institution. 

Where water leakage from failed sprinkler piping is also an issue, these items may be 

beyond restoration.

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.2.2-1 Photo showing collapsed library shelving in the 2010 magnitude-7.1 Canterbury 

New Zealand Earthquake (Photo courtesy of University of Canterbury).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-510

Figure 6.5.2.2-4 Shelving units with longitudinal ties did not fall over but all of the contents 

spilled to the floor in the 2010 Canterbury Earthquake. The use of lips or wires 

would have prevented the damage.(Photo courtesy of University of Canterbury). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-511

Figure 6.5.2.2-3 Longitudinal failure of library shelving units (Photo courtesy of NISEE-PEER, U.C. 

Berkeley). Transverse ties used to tie units together but this was not enough to 

prevent longitudinal failure. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-512

Figure 6.5.2.2-2 Failure of overhead transverse bracing for bookshelves were anchored to 

gypsum board partition in the 1984 magnitude-6.2 Morgan Hill Earthquake 

(Photo courtesy of Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Services). The 

anchors were not attached to wall studs, only to gypsum board. 

Figure 6.5.2.2-5 These shelving units remained in place but all of the contents spilled in the 

2010 magnitude-6.5 Eureka, California Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Steve 

Mahin, PEER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-513

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Following damage to library collections in the 1994 Loma Prieta Earthquake, the 

California Library Association developed a library shelving standard, ANSI/NISO Z39.73, 

Single-Tier Steel Bracket Library Shelving (ANSI/NISO, 1994) for single-tier steel bracket 

library shelving. 

 Large library collections may contain rare or valuable items that need to be preserved; 

such library shelving should be engineered to prevent costly downtime and damage to 

the collection. 

 For new library installations, it is important to procure heavy duty shelving that has 

cross bracing or solid sides and backing that will prevent longitudinal collapse. In 

addition, for units that will receive additional overhead bracing, the unit should be 

strong enough to receive the attached ties and bracing. Light duty steel shelving or 

weak wood shelving units may require strengthening. Steel shelving may require 

additional cross bracing. Wood shelving units could be strengthened with the addition 

of corner brackets or hardware to tie the top, back and sides more securely together. 

 Anchor the shelving units to the floor. Where shelving units are located against a 

structural wall, anchor the top of the units to the structure. Tie freestanding back-toback units together to create a larger base. A one-way transverse grid or two-way grid 

may be installed, either at the top of the units or above the ceiling surface, to tie many 

units together. This grid in turn should be anchored to structural walls at the perimeter 

of the grid or to the structural slab or framing above. However, if the shelving units are 

anchored to the floor and braced to the framing above, the shelving and brace assembly 

must accommodate story drift through distortion of the shelving. While bracing to the 

structure above will prevent the units from toppling, it may result in damage to the 

shelving itself, if the story drifts are significant.

 Any connections to stud walls must engage the structural studs. Stud walls and 

partitions typically do not have adequate lateral capacity to support many shelving units 

unless they have been engineered with heavy gauge studs and braced to resist the 

imposed lateral loading from the shelving. Anchorage to structural concrete or masonry 

walls is preferred.

 The location of the library shelving will influence the design loading. Floor accelerations 

typically increase as you go higher in a building and may also be higher at locations 

such as poorly braced mezzanine floors. 

 See Section 6.5.6.1 for recommendations regarding edge restraints and the arrangement 

of shelf-mounted items. Especially rare or valuable items may need to be stored in 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-514

well-anchored temperature controlled and water tight cabinets to protect them from 

deterioration, dust, sprinkler damage, or from falling. 

 Do not locate shelving adjacent to doors or exits if their failure would block the exit. 

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

 

Figure 6.5.2.2-6 Examples of struts and hardware used to retrofit library shelving at the University 

of California, Berkeley (Photos courtesy of Mary Comerio, Dept. of 

Environmental Design, University of California Berkeley).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-515

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.5.2.2-7 Concealed overhead restraints for library and other shelving (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-516

Figure 6.5.2.2-8 Overhead restraints for library and other shelving (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-517

Figure 6.5.2.2-9 Freestanding library and other shelving units (ER). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-518

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment and Contents

6.5.3 Computer and Communication Equipment

6.5.3.1 Computer Access Floors and Equipment 

Computer access floors are raised floor systems used in many facilities with heavy use of 

computer equipment; these provide space to run the equipment cables under the flooring. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for computer access floors are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum 

Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010) Chapter 13. The principal 

objective is to prevent the floor from displacing or buckling under seismic loads. ASCE/SEI 7-

10 requires that 100 percent of the weight of all equipment fastened to the floor, and 25 

percent of the weight of all equipment supported by, but not fastened to the floor, be used 

when calculating the design seismic force. The effects of overturning of equipment attached to 

the floor must be considered, and a complete load path for vertical and lateral forces is 

required, 

Improved performance may be obtained by specifying Special Access Floors. To be considered 

“special,” access floors must meet specific design and detailing requirements. 

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies access 

floors as both acceleration and deformation sensitive. ASCE/SEI 41-06 requires compliance 

with the anchorage provisions of the standard when the performance level is Immediate 

Occupancy. Retrofit of access floors may utilize prescriptive procedures or project specific 

analysis. The analysis should consider buckling and racking of the floor supports, connections, 

and the effects of mounted equipment.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Access floors may collapse if not adequately braced and anchored. 

 Equipment located on access floors that are not anchored or tethered may slide and hit 

a wall or other equipment and may suffer internal damage. Equipment castors can get 

lodged in floor openings.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-519

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.3.1-1 Temporary bracing for access floor collapsed in the1994 magnitude-6.7 

Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-520

Figure 6.5.3.1-2 Damage to access floor with short anchored pedestals in the 2010 magnitude-6.7 

Chile Earthquake; floor did not have lateral bracing. Note many tiles misaligned (Photos courtesy of 

Antonio Iruretagoyena, Rubén Boroschek & Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-521

Figure 6.5.3.1-3 Undamaged access floor with braced pedestals in the 2010 Chile Earthquake 

(Photo courtesy of Rodrigo Retamales, Rubén Boroschek & Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-522

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Access floor base pedestals should be anchored to the floor slab; taller pedestals may 

also need diagonal bracing. In zones of low or moderate seismicity, or where the floor 

height is less than 12 inches high, it may be feasible to adhere the pedestals to the floor 

slab rather than anchoring them. Check the internet for vendors who supply access 

floors with a seismic capacity rating.

 Equipment placed on access floors should be tethered; heavy equipment should be 

anchored to structural slab below. Anchorage may be accomplished through installation 

of an independent frame beneath the equipment. Alternatively, the equipment may be 

anchored to properly designed access floor framing, or supplemental bracing 

components. 

 If unrestrained equipment on castors is present, cable openings through access floor 

should have lips to prevent the wheels from getting stuck.

 Proprietary base isolation systems are also available. The equipment is anchored to the 

isolation base and the isolation base is anchored to the structural slab.

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.3.1-4 Raised floor braced with strut (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-523

Figure 6.5.3.1-5 Data rack bolted through access floor to supplemental strut bracing below

(Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-524

Figure 6.5.3.1-6 Base of data cabinet with supplemental angles bolted to strut bracing below 

floor (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).

Figure 6.5.3.1-7 Close-up of supplemental angles connecting data cabinet to strut bracing below 

floor (Photo courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-525

Figure 6.5.3.1-8 Strut framing added to brace data cabinet located on access floor. Bolts from 

angles above are connected to strut framing below (Photo courtesy of Maryann 

Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-526

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.5.3.1-9 Equipment mounted on access floor (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-527

Figure 6.5.3.1-10 Equipment mounted on access floor - independent base (ER).

Figure 6.5.3.1-11 Equipment mounted on access floor – cable braced (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-528

Figure 6.5.3.1-12 Equipment mounted on access floor – tiedown rods (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-529

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment and Contents 

6.5.3 Computer and Communication Equipment

6.5.3.2 Computer and Communication Racks 

Steel racks for servers or communications equipment may be open or closed, wall or floor 

mounted or portable. To prevent damage and loss of communication links, racks should be 

braced, anchored, or tethered with equipment firmly secured to the rack and cables arranged 

with adequate slack.

In recent shake table testing of a full scale 5-story building performed at UC San Diego (see 

Section 6.1.3), 3 servers that were operating and connected on line at the time of the shaking 

were subjected to severe earthquake motions. The servers were anchored per code 

requirements. With the exception of the largest test motion, the servers continued functioning 

during and following the earthquake motion without a problem. For the largest test motion, 

the servers momentarily went off line, reset themselves, automatically reconnected themselves 

and then continued functioning.

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for computer and communication racks are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-10, 

Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010) Chapter 13. The 

principal objective is to prevent the racks from toppling or buckling under seismic loads, 

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires anchorage for all equipment in Seismic Design Categories D, E, 

and F weighing over 400 pounds, and items weighing over 20 pounds that are mounted 

over 4 feet above the floor. Lighter items may be exempt if the component Importance 

Factor Ip = 1.0.

 Items that are exempt from the anchorage requirements noted above are still required 

to be positively anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be designed or 

detailed on the construction documents. Flexible connections must be provided 

between the equipment and associated conduit or raceways.

 The racks themselves should be checked for adequate strength and stiffness.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-530

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies computer 

and communication racks as force controlled. These components are subject to the provisions 

of the standard when the performance level is Immediate Occupancy. Acceptance criteria for 

electrical equipment focus on providing adequate anchorage for seismic forces. Buckling or 

racking failure of rack framing components must also be considered.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Unbraced, unanchored, or poorly anchored racks can slide, tip, overturn or collapse. 

Equipment may slide, bang, or fall and suffer internal damage; cable connections may 

pull loose and get scrambled.

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.3.2-1 Damage to communication and computer racks (Photo courtesy of Degenkolb 

Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-531

Figure 6.5.3.2-2 Damage to communication and computer racks (Photo courtesy of Degenkolb 

Engineers).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Check suppliers for seismic rated cabinet racks or server racks that come with predrilled 

holes and hardware for floor or wall anchorage. Where items are anchored to a partition 

wall, make sure that the wall and wall anchorage or bracing to the structure above are 

adequate to resist the imposed loads. Cables and wiring should be installed with 

sufficient slack to allow for some seismic deformations.

 See also Section 6.5.3.1 for equipment on access floors; see Section 6.4.7.1 for details 

for anchorage of electrical cabinets. Also refer to FEMA 413, Installing Seismic Restraints 

for Electrical Equipment (2005), for general guidelines for anchorage of electrical items.

 Develop a backup and recovery plan for all electronic data including offsite backup to a 

location not likely to be affected by the same earthquake.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-532

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.3.2-3 Base anchorage details for data cabinets; top photos shows internal 

anchorage, bottom photo shows external anchorage (Photos courtesy of 

Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-533

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.5.3.2-4 Data rack (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-534

Figure 6.5.3.2-5 Data cabinet (ER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-535

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment and Contents 

6.5.3 Computer and Communication Equipment

6.5.3.3 Desktop Computers and Accessories 

Computers, printers, monitors, projectors, scanners and other electronic equipment are found 

nearly everywhere, most of them resting on desks and tables without restraint. 

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Desktop items may slide, tip, collide with other items or fall. If one item falls, the cords 

and cables may pull other items down resulting in additional damage. 

 Equipment may suffer internal damage and be rendered inoperable. Business 

interruption losses may result.

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.3.3-1 Computer monitor slid off desktop onto floor in the 2010 magnitude-6.5

Eureka, California Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Steve Mahin, PEER).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-536

Figure 6.5.3.3-2 Damage to control tower at the SeaTac Airport in the 2001 Nisqually 

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of JCP Geologists).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Desktop equipment should be anchored or tethered to prevent earthquake damage, loss 

of equipment and loss of electronic files. The supporting desk, table or cart should also 

be anchored or tethered if movement could cause additional damage. Alternatively, 

cables and cords should be installed with sufficient slack to allow for some movement.

 Many proprietary safety fasteners are currently available to use to restrain desktop 

items. See also Section 6.5.6.2 for tether details.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-537

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.5.3.3-3 Desktop computers and accessories (NE).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-538

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment and Contents 

6.5.3 Computer and Communication Equipment

6.5.3.4 Televisions and Video Monitors, Wall-Mounted 

Wall and ceiling mounted televisions, monitors and projectors are found in many places 

including homes, classrooms, airports, and hospital rooms. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

Seismic loads for wall mounted television and video monitors are determined using ASCE/SEI 7-

10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010) Chapter 13. The 

principal objective is to prevent the components from falling. 

 ASCE/SEI 7-10 requires anchorage for all equipment in Seismic Design Categories D, E, 

and F weighing over 20 pounds that are mounted over 4 feet above the floor. Lighter 

items may be exempt if the component Importance Factor Ip = 1.0.

 Items that are exempt from the anchorage requirements noted above are still required 

to be positively anchored to the structure. The anchorage need not be designed or 

detailed on the construction documents. 

 Many proprietary wall mounts will provide adequate protection, if they are rated for 

seismic loads.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) does not directly 

address wall mounted television and video monitors. Given the level of risk posed by these 

components, evaluation for the presence of adequate attachment and support should be 

performed for all performance levels in high and moderate seismicity areas. 

Typical Causes of Damage 

 These items may shake, bounce, impact adjacent items, or fall. Wall or ceiling-mounted 

items can become dislodged and fall from the supporting bracket, the bracket could pull 

out from the wall or ceiling, or the bracket can break and the television or monitor may 

be damaged or broken.

 These items are heavy and could cause serious bodily injury if they fall on someone.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-539

EXISTING CONDITION

Figure 6.5.3.4-1 Wall-mounted monitor fell from the bracket in a hospital in the 2010 

magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake; bracket still anchored to the wall (Photos 

courtesy of Rodrigo Retamales, Rubén Boroschek & Associates)
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-540

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Proprietary video mounting brackets are available to support overhead or wall-mounted 

televisions, monitors, and screen of all sizes. These come as rigid mount, tilt mount, or 

motorized mount. Check the internet; some of these products indicate they are seismic 

rated for safer installations. 

 Brackets will not provide seismic protection unless properly installed; follow the 

manufacturer’s installation instructions. It is critical that the lag bolts, screws, or 

expansion bolts used be installed directly into structural elements such as studs, 

concrete or masonry wall, or ceiling joists that have adequate capacity to support the 

additional loading. Do not anchor to gypsum board, plaster or a suspended ceiling grid. 

See the installation notes in Section 6.6 of this document for more information on 

anchorage details.

 If the bracket can be adjusted into different positions, make sure it cannot swing and hit 

a window or light; providing a safety cable or tether to restrict the range of motion may 

reduce the risk of impact with other objects and the risk of falling.

 Do not locate overhead items directly over a bed, couch, bench, or desk in a classroom 

where people are likely to be.

 For televisions or monitors resting on furniture or a home entertainment center, heavyduty safety fasteners or tethers should be used to prevent the television from falling and 

the furniture should be anchored to the floor or wall.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-541

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.3.4-2 Wall-mounted television bracket anchored with sheet metal screws to wall studs 

at four locations. Bracket must be rated for the weight of television or monitor 

and that the unit must be securely attached to the bracket (Photo courtesy of 

Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-542

Figure 6.5.3.4-3 Mounting plate above ceiling for overhead television bracket in a hospital room. 

Television or monitor must be securely attached to the bracket (Photos courtesy 

of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-543

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.5.3.4-4 Wall-mounted bracket for television or monitor weighing less than 50 lb (NE).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-544

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment and Contents 

6.5.4 Hazardous Materials Storage

6.5.4.1 Hazardous Materials Storage 

Unsecured or improperly stored hazardous materials resulting in a release may close 

businesses located in an otherwise undamaged building. Hazardous materials may include 

cleaning supplies, laboratory or production chemicals, medical sharps, and biohazard 

containers. These may be stored in fragile containers or may be in open vats in an industrial 

setting. 

Provisions

BUILDING CODE PROVISIONS

The seismic design requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and 

Other Structures, (ASCE, 2010) Chapter 13 are intended to apply only to permanently attached 

components, not to furnishings, temporary items, or mobile units. Storage cabinets and 

shelving units that contain hazardous materials are not considered to be exempt and should be 

anchored or braced. In addition, storage cabinets and shelving units that contain toxic, highly 

toxic, or explosive materials above a threshold quantity are considered designated seismic 

systems with a component importance factor, Ip, of 1.5 and may require engineering 

calculations, special certification, and additional inspections. 

Permanent floor-supported shelving or storage cabinets over 6 ft tall must be designed as 

architectural components per ASCE/SEI 7-10. Bracing and anchorage for these units should be 

designed considering the weight of the unit and weight of shelved contents.

RETROFIT STANDARD PROVISIONS

ASCE/SEI 41-06, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, (ASCE, 2007) classifies hazardous 

materials storage as force controlled, and the principal objective of the code provisions is to 

prevent the component from sliding or overturning. The emphasis of the hazardous materials 

storage provisions is on materials in containers. For materials stored in cabinets or shelves, the 

provisions for storage racks may be used. ASCE/SEI 41-06 requires compliance with the

provisions of the standard for hazardous materials storage when:

 The performance level is Immediate Occupancy or Life Safety in high and moderate 

seismicity areas.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-545

 The performance level is Life Safety in low seismicity areas or Hazards Reduced in high, 

moderate, and low seismicity areas and the system is in close proximity to occupancy 

such that leakage could cause an immediate life safety threat.

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Loose containers may slide, tip, overturn, or fall. Glassware may break; hazardous 

contents may slosh or spill and create noxious fumes and toxic mixtures. 

 Spilled flammable liquids may cause a fire and destroy a home or business that 

otherwise may have survived an earthquake without damage. 

 Unknown spills may cause building closure until a HAZMAT team can investigate.

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.4.1-1 Spilled chemicals in high school chemistry lab in the 1971 magnitude-6.6 San 

Fernando Earthquake (Photo courtesy of EERI).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-546

Figure 6.5.4.1-2 Spilled pharmaceutical and medical supplies in the 1994 magnitude-6.7 

Northridge Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Robert Reitherman).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-547

Figure 6.5.4.1-3 Spilled fluids in a hospital in the Costa Rica Earthquake (Photo courtesy of 

Degenkolb Engineers).

Figure 6.5.4.1-4 Fire destroyed the chemistry building containing the entire chemistry 

department at the University of Concepción in the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile 

Earthquake; fire exacerbated by the presence of hazardous chemicals (Photo 

courtesy of Bill Holmes, Rutherford & Chekene).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-548

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), the International Building Code, and the 

International Fire Code (IFC) contain many requirements pertaining to the classification, 

labeling, handling, monitoring, shipping, containment, and storage of hazardous 

materials. Check the applicable jurisdiction for requirements. See also the discussion 

of hazardous materials piping in Section 6.4.5.1. 

 Hazardous materials storage cabinets and lockers are available with secure door 

closures and internal containment in case materials spill inside the cabinet. Brace and 

anchor all shelving units or cabinets used for storage of hazardous materials. See 

Section 6.5.1.1 and 6.5.2.1 for restraint details. Where shelving or cabinets are 

anchored to a partition wall, check that the partition, bracing and attachments to the 

structure above are adequate for the imposed loads.

 See Section 6.5.6.1 for recommendations for edge restraints and arrangement of 

shelved items. Provide edge restraints for containers of flammable or hazardous 

substances even if they are in closed cabinets.

 Secure large containers of production chemicals or cleaning supplies; these may be 

secured using tether cables or chains. See Section 6.4.2.3 or Section 6.5.5.3 for similar 

restraint details.

 Store small or breakable items in original packaging or in “egg crate” type boxes; not 

loose on shelves or in drawers.

 Ensure that all toxic items are in the correct containers and properly labeled. 

• Ensure that employees know what to do in case of a spill. Make sure they know where to 

find the Material Data Safety Sheets (MSDS). The MSDS contains physical data for 

chemicals, chemical compounds and chemical mixtures and provides information for 

workers and emergency personnel regarding the safe use and potential hazards of each 

product. The MSDS includes information such as melting point, boiling point, flash 

point, reactivity, toxicity, health effects, protective equipment required, first aid 

procedures, storage and disposal procedures, spill-handling procedures, and labeling 

requirements. Facilities that use or store chemicals should have an MSDS for each 

product on site; employees should know where to locate the MSDS binder and know 

what steps to take in case of a spill.

 Store incompatible materials at a safe distance from each other to avoid mixing if the 

containers fall and break.

 Order hazardous lab chemicals in unbreakable plastic bottles or in glass bottles with an 

exterior plastic safety coating.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-549

 Keep all large containers or vats of toxic, hot, or hazardous items covered to prevent 

surging in an earthquake. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-550

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment and Contents 

6.5.5 Miscellaneous Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment

6.5.5.1 File Cabinets

Sheet metal file cabinets are often tall, narrow and heavily loaded. These cabinets frequently 

overturn in earthquakes; the time required to pick up and reorganize files may be significant 

business expense and result in lost productivity. 

Typical Causes of Damage

 Unanchored file cabinets can slide, tip, or overturn. Drawers may slide open increasing 

the chance that the cabinet will overturn; contents may fall and get scrambled. 

 Overturned cabinets may block doors and exit corridors.

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-551

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.5.1-1 Failure of file cabinets in the 1994 magnitude-6.7 Northridge Earthquake (Photo 

courtesy of Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-552

Figure 6.5.5.1-2 Tipped filing cabinets and other office equipment at the Lawrence Livermore 

Lab, California (NGDC, 2009).

Figure 6.5.5.1-3 Unanchored cabinets toppled in the 1994 Northridge Earhtquake (Photo 

courtesy of Wiss, Janney, Elstner)
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-553

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 ASCE 7-10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE, 2010), 

requires that permanent floor supported cabinets or shelving over 6 ft tall be treated as 

architectural components. This requirement does not apply to wall mounted items with 

both base and wall anchorage. 

 Do not locate cabinets where their failure would block a door or exit corridor; note some 

school districts do not allow file cabinets within 6 feet of a doorway. Do not locate 

where they could fall and break a window or glass partition.

 File cabinets should be anchored to the floor or wall. Where cabinets or shelving are 

anchored to a partition, check that the partition, bracing and attachment to the 

structure above are adequate for the imposed loading.

 Adjacent freestanding file cabinets should be anchored together and to the floor. Gang 

multiple units together to create a more stable arrangement.

 Provide strong drawer latches to prevent the drawers from sliding open. Fluids and files 

don’t mix; do not place flower vases or other breakable fluid containers on top of file 

cabinets. 

 There are many acceptable ways to reliably protect file cabinets from earthquake 

damage. The following details illustrate measures that can protect loaded cabinets up 

to 6 ft tall in severe ground shaking at the highest locations within a building; 

engineering may be required for floor-supported items taller than 6 feet. Alternate less 

robust details may be developed for less severe loading conditions.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-554

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.5.5.1-4 Wall-mounted file cabinets (NE).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-555

Figure 6.5.5.1-5 Base-anchored file cabinets (NE).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-556

Figure 6.5.5.1-6 Wall-mounted and base-anchored lateral file cabinets (NE).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-557

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment and Contents 

6.5.5 Miscellaneous Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment

6.5.5.2 Demountable Partitions 

These are freestanding half-height partition walls that are often used to delimit office work 

spaces. These partitions are typically installed by tenants or occupants and may be readily 

relocated. 

Typical Causes of Damage

 Long runs of unbraced panels are vulnerable to falling over if not specially detailed.

 Partitions that support overloaded shelving units are particularly vulnerable. 

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.5.2-1 Damage to demountable partitions at the Veterans Administration Medical 

Center in Sepulveda as a result of the 1994 magnitude-6.7 Northridge

Earthquake (Photo courtesy of James O. Malley).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-558

Figure 6.5.5.2-2 Damage to unbraced demountable partition in Silicon Valley office building in 

the 1989 magnitude-6.9 Loma Prieta Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Maryann 

Phipps, Estructure).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Check the internet for demountable partitions with seismic rated capacity; some of these 

have been shake table tested and have improved seismic detailing.

 Panel manufacturers typically have guidelines for acceptable panel configurations for 

use in earthquake prone areas. Shorter runs of panels with panels at 90 degrees to one 

another provide favorable conditions for earthquake resistance. Panel anchorage at the 

base and interconnectivity between panels is also needed for reliable 

performance.Where panels are not stabilized by return panels, or where panels are tall, 

bracing at the tops of the panels, up to the structural framing, may be required.

Anchorage to the floor slab is another alternative as shown in Figure 6.5.5.2-4.

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-559

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.5.5.2-3 Demountable partitions (NE).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-560

Figure 6.5.5.2-4 Demountable partition details (NE).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-561

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment and Contents 

6.5.5 Miscellaneous Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment

6.5.5.3 Miscellaneous Furniture and Fixtures 

Furniture and fixtures come in all shapes and sizes. Items on castors will roll; squat items are 

likely to slide; medium height items may slide, rock back and forth, or overturn; tall narrow 

furniture is likely to overturn. This category provides general recommendations for a wide 

range of items such as shop and kitchen equipment, vending machines, large office copiers, 

pianos, china hutches, and entertainment centers. 

Typical Causes of Damage

 Unrestrained items may slide, impact other items, tip, and/or overturn. Failure of one 

item may damage others or cause the collapse of other items. 

 Contents supported on furniture or fixtures may fall, break, or spill. 

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.5.3-1 Residential damage in the 1994 magnitude-6.7 Northridge Earthquake (Photo 

courtesy of Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-562

Figure 6.5.5.3-2 Existing condition: Unrestrained kitchen equipment (Photo courtesy of EQE for 

the Salt Lake City School District).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-563

Figure 6.5.5.3-3 Equipment on wheels did well during the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile 

Earthquake; there were no reported injuries or examples of overturning related 

to equipment mounted on wheels. Centrifuges on wheels shown in photo 

(Photo and information courtesy of Bill Holmes, Rutherford & Chekene).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Many proprietary items are available to restrain a wide variety of furniture and fixtures. 

Check the internet for seismic safety fasteners and security restraints. 

 Provide floor or wall anchorage for vulnerable items, especially items near doors, exits, 

beds or other locations where people spend many hours. Anchor freestanding items 

together and to the floor. Provide tethers for items like kitchen equipment, vending 

machines, or grand pianos. Provide edge restraints and drawer and cabinet latches. 

 Canvas or metal straps can be used to attach some items where it is not acceptable to 

penetrate the furniture or housing. Multiple tethers may be needed for strength and 

stability; for instance a tether to only one leg of a grand piano may pull the leg off.

 Where several items need to be tethered and the edges do not line up with studs in the 

adjacent wall, a continuous steel angle or wood 2x4 may be attached to the wall and 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-564

then the tether restraints in turn attached to the steel angle wood stud. Where items are 

attached to partitions, verify that the partition and attachment or bracing to the 

structure above are adequate for the imposed loading.

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.5.3-4 Anchored wood key cabinets in industrial plant control room; note top and 

bottom units anchored together and both anchored to wall (Photo courtesy of 

Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-565

 

Figure 6.5.5.3-5 Typical tethering details for kitchen equipment and vending machines. Tether 

provided on both sides of equipment and does not penetrate the equipment 

housing (Photos courtesy of Maryann Phipps, Estructure).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-566

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment and Contents 

6.5.6 Miscellaneous Contents

6.5.6.1 Shelf-Mounted Items 

Loose items stored on bookshelves, shelves of storage racks or cabinets, and store display 

racks are all vulnerable during earthquakes. This includes retail merchandise, pharmaceutical 

and medical supplies, laboratory supplies, stored inventory as well as shelved items found in 

every home, school or office.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Items may slide, break, or fall. Inventory may be damaged, library books and medical 

records may be scrambled or damaged; broken glass and spilled chemicals may be 

hazardous for occupants.

 Items falling from shelves can pose a safety hazard for occupants.

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.6.1-1 Merchandise fallen from drug store shelving in the 1979 magnitude-6.4 Imperial 

Valley Earthquake (NGDC, 2009).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-567

Figure 6.5.6.1-2 Items fallen from kitchen cabinets in townhouse near Northridge Fashion Center

in the 1994 magnitude-6.7 Northridge Earthquake. An occupant cut her foot 

on glass when she ran into the kitchen area in the dark when the power was out 

(NGDC, 2009).

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Unless each item is packed tightly or individually restrained, loose material will slide 

around during an earthquake. Thoughtful organization of shelved items can reduce the 

potential for damage. For instance, 

o Keep items in their original packaging

o Place larger and heavier items on lower shelves and lighter and smaller items on 

upper shelves

o Provide edge restraints with wood, clear plastic or wire as shown

o Provide individual restraints for especially toxic or costly items

o Purchase storage racks or shelving units with shelving that slopes 3-4 degrees 

towards the back; or attach a thin wedge to each shelf sloping towards the back 

as this prevents many items from falling to the floor

o Provide positive latches to prevent cabinet doors or drawers from opening; baby 

proof latches are one example. Don’t keep loose shelved items above a bed, 

desk or other location that is occupied for long periods of time.

o In industrial settings, shrink wrapping of goods on pallets may reduce the risk of 

falling hazards
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-568

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.6.1-3 High school lab supplies protected on shelving with edge restraints (Photo 

courtesy of EQE for the Salt Lake City School District).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-569

Figure 6.5.6.1-4 Shelf restraint example; shock cord made of wire and springs used to restrain 

liquor bottles (Photo courtesy of Robert Reitherman).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-570

Figure 6.5.6.1-5 Plexiglass lip provides restraint for pharmaceuticals (Photo courtesy of 

Degenkolb Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-571

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.5.6.1-6 Shelf-mounted items (NE).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-572

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment and Contents 

6.5.6 Miscellaneous Contents

6.5.6.2 DeskTop, CounterTop Items 

Many types of office and laboratory equipment items rest on desktops, workbenches or 

countertops. This may range from microwaves, microscopes, lab and medical equipment to

displayed items. 

Typical Causes of Damage

 Desktop and countertop items may be affected by movement of the surface on which 

they are supported; they may slide, bang, overturn, or fall. Equipment and glassware 

may be damaged or be broken.

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.6.2-1 Incubator in the microbiology lab at the University of Concepción was ruined in 

the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake (Photo courtesy of Bill Holmes, 

Rutherford & Chekene).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-573

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Provide bracing and anchorage for desks, work benches, and laboratory tables, if 

located near doors and exits, or if the supported items are required for post-earthquake 

operations.

 Provide bracing and anchorage for overhead items such as lights, air diffusers, ceilings, 

and piping that can fall and damage the desktop items.

 Provide tethers, anchors, bumpers, or other safety fasteners to keep desktop items from 

colliding with other items or falling. Many proprietary devices are available for this 

purpose; check the internet for seismic safety straps and devices. Many of these are the 

same as those used for computer equipment. Devices are also available that provide 

base isolation for individual pieces of delicate or valuable equipment.

 Ensure that any electrical cords or cables have sufficient slack to allow the item to travel 

to the end of any tether. Tangled cords and cables attached to one item that falls may 

pull other items down if the cords are tangled; use nylon ties to keep the cords and 

cables organized. 

 Items must be anchored to structural wall or studs; do not use plaster or gypsum board 

for anchorage. Provide a continuous steel shape or wood 2x4 along the wall at a 

convenient height anchored to each stud or at 2 foot spacing to facilitate anchorage for 

multiple items.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-574

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.6.2-2 Set-up for shake table testing at UC Irvine of typical laboratory bench and 

shelving with countertop equipment and shelved books and supplies. Testing 

was done in order to develop fragility curves for use in developing performance 

based design parameters (PEER Testbed Study on a Laboratory Building: 

Exercising Seismic Performance Assessment; Comerio, Editor. PEER 2005/12).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-575

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.5.6.2-3 Desktop/countertop equipment restraints (NE).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-576

Figure 6.5.6.2-4 Desktop/countertop equipment restraining brackets (NE).

Figure 6.5.6.2-5 Desktop/countertop equipment restraining straps (NE).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-577

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment and Contents 

6.5.6 Miscellaneous Contents

6.5.6.3 Fragile Artwork 

Paintings, vases, glassware, ceramics, sculptures, or museum collections are often stored or 

displayed without any seismic restraints. 

Typical Causes of Damage 

 Loose items on shelves or hanging items may slide, bang, overturn or fall. Paintings or 

other wall hangings may fall Sculptures may slide or fall due to shaking.

DAMAGE EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.6.3-1 Fallen sculpture that collapsed in the 2010 Chile Earthquake (Photo by Natach 

Pisarenko, AP Photo).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-578

Figure 6.5.6.3-2 Leaning fountain after the 2010 Chile Earthquake; corrosion was a factor 

(Photos courtesy of Eduardo Fierro, BFP Engineers).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-579

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Many proprietary safety straps, mats, small enclosures, base isolation platforms and 

other devices are available to protect fragile or expensive art, collectibles and other 

artifacts. Check the internet for available devices. 

 Items hanging on walls should be secured with a positive attachment such as an eyebolt 

with closed wire loops. Ceramics, glassware, and decorative items on shelves should be 

individually restrained or provide edge restraint for the shelves. Items hanging from the 

ceiling should be anchored to structural framing; heavy items should not be located 

where they can swing and impact a window, wall, or other object. Provide positive 

restraint for statuary and large vases.Items displayed outdoors must be protected from 

corrosion and weathering; mounting and connection hardware should be corrosion 

resistant.

 For protection of valuable items and museum artifacts, seek professional guidance. The 

J. Paul Getty Museum and Getty Conservation Institute in Los Angeles, California have 

published a number of references, such as Advances in the Protection of Museum 

Collections from Earthquake Damage, (Podany, 2006) and Building an Emergency Plan, a 

Guide for Museums and other Cultural Institutions (Dorge and Jones, 1999).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-580

MITIGATION EXAMPLES

Figure 6.5.6.3-3a Seven foot tall marble statue located in the Archaeological Museum of Olympia, 

Greece (Photo courtesy of University at Buffalo).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-581

Figure 6.5.6.3-3b Installation of base isolation devices to support reinforced concrete slab for 

statue (Photo courtesy of University at Buffalo).

Figure 6.5.6.3-3c Completed installation of statue on platform with base isolation (Photo courtesy 

of University at Buffalo, SUNY).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-582

Figure 6.5.6.3-4 Seismic restraint of an object with artistic and historical value with nylon 

filament (fishing line) in the Tokyo Museum in Ueno Park (Photo courtesy of 

Robert Reitherman, CUREE).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-583

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.5.6.3-5 Fragile artwork restraints (NE).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-584

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, Equipment and Contents 

6.5.6 Miscellaneous Contents

6.5.6.4 Fire Extinguisher and Cabinet 

Fire extinguishers are often hung from a wall-mounted hook or placed in cabinets which may

be wall-mounted.

Typical Causes of Damage

 Extinguishers can fall and roll; they may be damaged and not function properly. If 

located in a glazed enclosure, the enclosure may be damaged and the glass may break.

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-585

DAMAGE EXAMPLE

Figure 6.5.6.4-1 Fire extinguishers damaged during the 2010 magnitude-8.8 Chile Earthquake at 

an industrial facility (Photos courtesy of Antonio Iruretagoyena, Rubén 

Boroschek & Associates).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-586

Seismic Mitigation Considerations

 Provide safety fasteners with quick release straps for fire extinguishers.

 Anchor cabinets for extinguishers and hoses to structural wall or studs. 

MITIGATION DETAILS

Figure 6.5.6.4-2 Fire extinguisher and cabinet (NE).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-587

6.6 Installation Notes, Safety Warnings, and additional guidelines

For those details for which the non-engineered approach is acceptable, a few words of caution 

are in order. Many items shown in the upgrade details can be purchased at any hardware store, 

but it is important to select hardware that is appropriate for the task at hand. A toggle bolt 

mounted in gypsum board may hold a light picture frame on the wall, but it is not appropriate 

for any of the details shown in this guide. At the other extreme, a 1-inch diameter bolt is too 

large for a 2x4 wood stud, since the hole required to accommodate the bolt will unacceptably 

weaken the 1 1/2- inch wide stud and does not meet the required edge distance in NDS 2005 

National Design Standard Specifications for Wood Construction (AFPA/ANSI, 2005). The 

following discussion provides general guidelines on hardware selection and installation 

procedures for the details shown in this chapter. 

FEMA 412 Installing Seismic Restraints for Mechanical Equipment , FEMA 413 Installing Seismic 

Restraints for Electrical Equipment, and FEMA 414 Installing Seismic Restraints for Duct and 

Pipe contain additional details for mechanical, electrical, and plumbing components. These 

guides include lists and tables covering many specific types of MEP equipment with 

recommendations on the type of detail, housekeeping pads, and anchorage hardware to use. In 

addition, safety warnings that are important for anyone working on or around electrical 

equipment are included in these guides; these warnings are repeated here in Section 6.6.8.

6.6.1 Positive Connections 

The objective of nonstructural anchorage or restraint 

details is to provide what engineers refer to as a 

positive connection between the item and a hard 

attachment point, such as a structural wall, braced 

partition, concrete floor, or built-in countertop. 

Positive connections generally consist of some 

combination of screws, bolts, cables, chains, straps, 

steel angles, and other steel hardware that transfer 

seismic loads to structural framing. Positive 

connections do not rely solely on the frictional 

resistance produced by the effects of gravity. 

Frictional resistance between the base of an object and 

the floor or mechanical friction connections such as Cclamps or thumbscrew clamps are not considered

Earthquake Forces 

Keep in mind that although 

heavy objects are hard to move 

by hand, their weight (mass) 

interacts with the shaking 

(accelerations) of an 

earthquake to produce large 

inertial forces. Those forces 

mostly act sideways to make 

the object slide or tip, and 

there are also vertical motions 

in earthquakes that 

temporarily "lighten" an object 

and reduce frictional 

resistance.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-588

positive connections. The most common nonstructural connection details for wall attachments, 

floor or ceiling attachments, countertop attachments, and attachments between adjacent items 

are discussed below.

6.6.2 Typical Wall Attachment Details 

Many types of nonstructural items can be anchored, braced, or tethered to an adjacent wall to 

provide stability in an earthquake. Before installing any anchorage details, however, one should 

determine whether the wall has adequate structural capacity to support the nonstructural items. 

The wall element should consist of concrete, masonry, or structural framing members that are 

securely attached to the structural framing at both the top and bottom of the wall. 

Anchorage to Wood or Metal Stud Partition Walls

Any type of attachment hardware or brace should be attached directly to a structural stud, not 

to a gypsum board or to plaster wall covering. Gypsum board and most other interior wall 

coverings have little capacity to resist out-of-plane loading, that is, loads perpendicular to the 

wall. A nail or screw can simply pull out of this type of wall covering during an earthquake, 

leaving a hole in the wall. Even a toggle bolt can pull through the wall sheathing if the 

demands are sufficient.

Typical wood and metal stud walls are constructed with vertical studs located at either 16- or 

24-inch spacing. Many interior partition walls in non-residential construction extend only to 

the ceiling line and should not be used to anchor heavy nonstructural items, unless the top of 

the partition wall is braced to the structure above. Heavy items anchored to unbraced partitions 

may bring the partitions down with them, if they fall during an earthquake. Partition bracing 

should consist of diagonal elements of similar size and material as the vertical studs, spaced 

every few feet, connecting the top of the partition to the structure above. Engineering advice 

may be needed if the partitions appear questionable. 

The structural studs should be located at the start of a project, to confirm that they are within 

reach of the items to be anchored. In situations where many items must be anchored to a stud 

wall, it is sometimes advantageous to install a mounting strip first, in order to avoid having to 

relocate items to line them up with studs. Sometimes referred to as seismic molding, a 

mounting strip is a horizontal member mounted to the wall and anchored to each stud. The 

strip should be located at or near the top of the items to be anchored. Furniture or cabinets 

may then be anchored directly to the mounting strip without regard to stud locations. A 

mounting strip may be constructed of a structural-grade wood 2x4 or 2x6 or a continuous 

steel channel or angle. The strip can be finished to have an appropriate architectural 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-589

appearance. In fact, horizontal strips a few feet off the floor were often included in older 

architectural styles and were called chair rails; even today in many settings, such as hotel 

conference rooms, there are similar architectural features.

In new construction this is typically accommodated by installing “backing plates” directly on the 

studs, before sheathing is installed. Backing plates are commonly 16 gauge steel plates, runner 

tracks or studs.

HARDWARE – RECOMMENDED

 Attach steel angle directly to wood studs using a minimum 1/4-inch diameter by 3-inch 

lag bolt (maximum 3/8-inch lag bolt). Embed the bolt at least 2 inches into the wood 

stud.

 Attach steel angle to metal studs using #12 sheet-metal screws long enough to 

penetrate the flange material. Use two screws per connection, located 3 inches apart 

vertically.

 Attachments for anchoring sheet-metal shelving or cabinets may be made by using a 

minimum 1/4-inch diameter machine bolt. Where possible, attach the bolt through two 

layers of material, for example where the top and side or back and side pieces overlap. 

Otherwise, use an oversized 2-inch diameter by 3/32-inch thick fender washer with the 

nut on the inside of the cabinet to provide additional strength.

 For seismic molding, use #14 flat-head wood screws, with countersunk heads, with at 

least 2 inches embedded into the wood stud behind the wall covering. Locate screws 

along the centerline of the 2x4 or 2x6, and anchor the strip to each stud with maximum 

spacing of 24 inches. For attachments to the wood molding strip, do not screw or bolt 

anything within 1-inch of each edge of the wood member. 

 Small quick-release safety hooks (carabiners) and nylon cord or straps, are often 

available at sporting goods stores that carry mountain climbing equipment. Self-drilling 

screws may be useful, especially for a connection to metal studs. These items may be 

used for tethering small office equipment. 

HARDWARE - NOT RECOMMENDED

 Toggle bolts mounted in gypsum board or plaster are not recommended for any of the 

details presented here. They may be useful for items weighing only a few pounds.

 Nails have little capacity in tension or withdrawal, i.e., when pulled directly on the head 

of the nail. Thus, nails are not recommended for any of these details. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-590

Anchorage to Concrete or Masonry Walls

Connections to existing concrete or grouted masonry walls should be made with steel anchor 

bolts made to insert into walls after they are built. Many types of anchors are available from 

various vendors, including expansion anchors, sleeve anchors, and epoxy anchors. Since the 

installation procedures and capacities for these anchors vary widely, it is important to check the 

local building code or vendor literature for the allowable load capacity and to install the anchors 

in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. Holes into concrete or masonry walls 

should be drilled with care, in order to avoid cutting any reinforcing steel (rebar). A magnetic 

device can be used to locate the steel prior to drilling. If rebar is encountered while drilling, 

stop, and relocate the hole; do not cut through the reinforcing steel unless directed by a 

structural engineer who has examined the specific condition. In buildings with post-tensioned 

construction, post-tensioning cables must be positively located prior to anchor installation.

The capacity of an anchor bolt in concrete is governed by the strength of the concrete, the bolt 

diameter, the depth of embedment of the bolt into the concrete, the spacing between adjacent 

bolts, and the distance to the edge of the concrete. Improper installation can result in a bolt 

with virtually no capacity. The bolt will have a greatly reduced capacity if it is too near to an 

edge or too close to an adjacent bolt, or if it has insufficient embedment into the concrete. In 

order to develop the full capacity of a concrete anchor, as a rule of thumb, the spacing of the 

bolts should be at least 12 bolt diameters, with a minimum edge distance of 6 diameters. The 

minimum embedment length is typically 8 bolt diameters. Specific requirements for edge 

distance, spacing and embedment depth are determined by anchor manufacturers and code 

requirementsCaution should be used in selecting anchors to ensure that they have been 

prequalified for seismic applications and are capable of maintaining their strength under 

repeated cyclic loading including installations in cracked concrete. The most common postinstalled anchors are expansion anchors, where part of the shank expands to press against the 

sides of the hole as the nut is tightened. Recently, large screw anchors have been gaining 

popularity. Other types of anchors include sleeve anchors and adhesive anchors. Sleeve 

anchors consist of a threaded sleeve installed directly into the concrete, flush with the concrete 

surface, and a bolt that is screwed into the sleeve. Sleeve anchors may be advantageous in 

situations, in which items may be moved frequently. The bolt may be removed, leaving the 

sleeve flush with the wall (or floor) and without leaving a protruding bolt. Adhesive anchors are 

inserted into slightly oversized holes with epoxy or polyester resin so that the adhesive will 

hold the bolt in place. Extreme care is required to ensure that the epoxy components are 

mixed in the proper proportions within the hole and that dust is removed from it; otherwise the 

bolt will never reach the manufacturer's rated capacity. Quality control is critical for all post-
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-591

installed anchors. Installation by experienced personnel and inspection by professional 

inspectors is recommended.

HARDWARE AND PROCEDURES – RECOMMENDED

 Do not cut reinforcing steel, tendons, or electrical conduit embedded in concrete or 

masonry walls. Locate the steel or conduit prior to drilling. There are many types of 

devices available for locating steel in concrete or masonry. These devices require the 

user to be familiar with their limitations.

 Follow manufacturer's recommendations for installation. Remove dust from the hole 

prior to inserting the anchor bolt by using a hand-held vacuum cleaner; or blow the 

dust out with a bellows or a bulb.

 For anchorage to reinforced concrete walls, expansion anchors are commonly used. 

 To check if an anchor is properly installed, test a sample of installed bolts with a proof 

load or by torque as required by the manufacturers, test reports, or direction by the 

design professional of record.

 Use galvanized or preferably stainless steel bolts and other hardware in locations where 

they will be exposed to moisture or weathering.

 Corrosion resistant chains, eyebolts, and quick-release safety hooks can often be found 

at marine supply stores, hardware stores, or ordered from industrial catalogues. These 

fasteners may be needed to provide wall anchorage for gas cylinders or other items 

stored outside or in a damp location. 

 For anchors in walls constructed of concrete masonry units, the expansion anchors 

should be installed only in grouted cells, where the cavity in the masonry unit is filled 

with grout and reinforcing steel. In order to achieve adequate embedment into the 

grout, longer bolts may have to be used in concrete masonry unit walls. Through-bolts, 

where feasible, generally provide the highest capacity and reliability. These are machine 

bolts that go through the concrete slab and are fastened with nuts and steel plate 

washers on the underside of the slab. Unreinforced masonry walls, particularly 

cantilever partition walls, may not have adequate strength to anchor heavy nonstructural 

items. For light loads, up to 100 pounds, masonry toggle bolts can be used in 

ungrouted cells.

 For unreinforced masonry walls, engineering assistance is recommended. Published 

capacities for expansion anchors typically apply to concrete, not to brick. Anchorage to 

the floor may be a preferable solution in a brick building. 

 Anchorage hardware, installation procedures, and code requirements are continually 

evolving. Some types of bolts may not be appropriate for overhead applications, 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-592

vibratory loading, seismic loading, or cracked concrete applications; check with the 

manufacturer for recommended usage.

HARDWARE AND PROCEDURES - NOT RECOMMENDED

 Adhesive or epoxy anchors are not recommended, unless they are installed by 

experienced personnel with proper quality control. Unless specifically tested for high 

temperature applications, adhesive or epoxy anchors should not be used in 

unconditioned environments, since their strength can be reduced at elevated 

temperatures.

 Inserts made of lead or plastic placed in holes drilled in concrete or masonry and used 

with lag screws have very limited capacity and are not recommended. 

6.6.3 Typical Floor and Ceiling Attachment Details 

For heavy items, anchorage to a concrete floor slab is often preferable to wall anchorage 

because it avoids the additional seismic load to the wall. Ceiling attachment details are 

required for many types of piping, ducts, light fixtures, and overhead fans or heaters. The type 

of detail used in each situation will depend on the structural materials of the floor and ceiling 

framing. 

Anchorage to Wood Framing

Because wood flooring such as1/2-inch plywood or 1/4 to 3/8-inch strip oak flooring typically 

does not have adequate strength to resist large concentrated forces, floor or ceiling anchorage 

hardware should be attached directly to the floor or ceiling beams or joists. 

HARDWARE AND PROCEDURES - RECOMMENDED

 Locate the floor or ceiling joists prior to beginning work. If wood beams or joists are 

not situated within a convenient distance, then wood blocking may be used to provide 

additional anchor locations. Install blocking perpendicular to the joists, using, as a 

minimum, a member of the same size as the joists. Anchor the blocking with framing 

clips to the joists at each end. Do not toenail the blocking.

 Wood screws or lag bolts should be used for simple anchorage connections for lighter 

items. A 1/4-inch diameter by 3-inch lag bolt will be adequate for many types of 

connections.

 For anchorage of heavier items to the roof or floor, add blocking beneath the anchor 

location, run A307 bolts through the blocking, and tighten them on the underside with 

nuts and washers.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-593

HARDWARE AND PROCEDURES - NOT RECOMMENDED 

 Do not anchor heavy items directly to wood or plywood floor or roof sheathing, as these 

materials typically do not have adequate capacity to resist significant out-of-plane 

loads. 

 Nails are not recommended for nonstructural anchorage details. 

Anchorage to Steel Framing

Caution should be used in anchoring nonstructural items to structural steel framing. 

Engineering expertise may be needed to determine whether holes can be drilled through 

structural steel framing without compromising the integrity of the structural members. There 

are several types of connection details that do not require holes through the steel framing. In 

addition, where steel framing is fireproofed, special measures may be needed to restore the fire 

rating after connections are made.

HARDWARE - RECOMMENDED

 Vendor catalogues of hardware that can be used to provide both vertical and lateral 

support for piping often include fittings specifically designed for steel framing. While 

C-clamps are not recommended, there are a variety of other devices that clamp 

mechanically around the flange of a steel beam or are designed to fit between column 

flanges. These devices are typically load-rated by the vendors and come in a variety of 

sizes. Besides bracing piping and ducts, this type of hardware might also be used for 

bracing or anchoring items like lights or ceiling fans. 

Anchorage to Concrete Floor or Roof Slabs

Concrete expansion anchors are the most common type of hardware used to anchor items to a 

concrete slab on grade or to a structural floor slab. Most manufacturers require a minimum 

slab thickness on the order of 1.5 times the anchor embedment depth. For heavy loads or 

concrete slabs less than 4 inches thick, it may be preferable to use through-bolts.

HARDWARE AND PROCEDURES - RECOMMENDED

 Refer to discussion of expansion anchors under concrete wall anchorage details. 

 Do not cut reinforcing steel or tendons in concrete slabs or beams. Locate the 

reinforcing steel, post-tensioning tendons, any embedded water pipes, and electrical 

conduit prior to drilling holes in concrete slabs. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-594

 For anchorage to a concrete foundation pad, slab on grade, or suspended floor, check 

the drawings for the thickness of the concrete, or perform exploratory investigation to 

confirm the thickness. While short expansion bolts may be adequate to prevent sliding 

of squat equipment, longer bolts with greater embedment are generally needed to 

prevent the combination of sliding and overturning forces for items that are taller than 

they are wide. 

 If equipment is resting on leveling bolts or must be level to allow for proper operation, 

then vertically slotted connections may be needed to allow for adjustment. 

HARDWARE AND PROCEDURES - NOT RECOMMENDED

Anchors that have not been qualified for seismic applications should not be used unless they 

are specifically justified by a licensed professional and are permitted for use by the authority 

having jurisdiction. 

6.6.4 Typical Shelf or Countertop Attachment Details 

If important or essential contents are to be secured, then the shelf or mounting surface should 

be secured prior to anchoring nonstructural items. While standard desks and office tables are 

unlikely to overturn, they may slide during an earthquake. Desktop computers and printers can 

be anchored to the desk by means of hook-and-loop tape such as Velcro or by using various 

types of security devices designed to prevent theft. 

HARDWARE AND PROCEDURES - RECOMMENDED

 Unanchored desks or tables may slide and pull on the electrical cords of office 

equipment, if the items are anchored to the tabletop. Electrical cords should have 

adequate slack to allow for movement of unanchored desks or tables.

 Loose shelves should be secured to the wall or to shelf brackets. Wood shelves that rest 

on wall-mounted brackets may be secured to the brackets with 1/2-inch long wood 

screws.

 Many types of vendor-supplied anchorage and security devices are available for 

computer equipment. These may also be adapted for other types of countertop 

equipment, such as medical or laboratory equipment. Heavy-duty hook-and-loop tape 

with adhesive backing can be purchased at most hardware and fabric stores and can 

readily be cut into strips.

 Desktop computer equipment usually consists of several independent components. If 

items are stacked, then make sure that each component is anchored to the one beneath 

it and that the bottommost item is anchored to the desk. For tall configurations of 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-595

items that do not have to be moved frequently, it may be more advantageous to tie an 

assembly of components together using nylon strap and then to anchor the base to the 

desktop.

 For light and nonessential items on shelves or countertops, a 1- to 2-inch lip secured to 

the edge of the counter or shelf may be adequate to prevent miscellaneous items from 

falling. In this case, individual items need not be anchored. 

6.6.5 Purchasing

In some instances, it is easier to install nonstructural anchorage details for newly purchased 

equipment than for existing equipment. Many items are available off the shelf or can be 

special-ordered with seismic attachment provisions from the manufacturer. Some file cabinets 

come with predrilled holes for floor anchorage and strong latches on the drawers. Installing a 

strong shelf over the top of a bank of file cabinets that will line a wall or using other 

architectural ways to provide built-in restraint can be cost-effective and have a non-seismic 

benefit. Battery racks, industrial storage racks, and computer access floors that meet seismic 

requirements specified in the building code can be ordered. It is always useful to inquire about 

the availability of seismic attachment provisions when purchasing new equipment. 

6.6.6 Patching, Painting, and Corrosion Protection 

Most of the details shown here assume that the nonstructural component in question is situated 

in a dry, interior location. In these locations, some cosmetic patching and painting may be 

desirable, primarily for aesthetic reasons. 

For basements, roofs, or other exterior locations, it is important to provide adequate protection 

from weathering and corrosion. If attachment details perforate a roof membrane, then 

appropriate sealants or localized repair will be needed, in order to avoid roof leakage. If 

expansion anchors or other steel hardware will be exposed to moist conditions or weathering, 

then either stainless steel or galvanized hardware should be selected to avoid corrosion and 

deterioration. Many types of paints and coatings are available that will help retard corrosion. 

Exterior earthquake protection devices may need periodic maintenance to avoid deterioration. 

In cases where a chain, latch, or tether is installed and users must remove and replace some 

hardware whenever they need to use the item, it may be helpful to select a bright or distinctive 

paint color as a reminder that the seismic restraint, chain, or hook needs to be refastened. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-596

6.6.7 Safety Precautions

As with any type of construction work, there are safety precautions that must be followed while 

installing nonstructural attachment details. Employers and the skilled trades must comply with 

numerous local, state, and federal safety regulations and follow guidelines established for 

specific trades or industries. The following list is not comprehensive but is a brief list of safety 

precautions that merit emphasis in connection with the nonstructural attachment details shown 

here. 

PROCEDURES - RECOMMENDED

 The individuals installing seismic mitigation measures should have adequate training 

and supervision. Office workers or volunteers may not have the necessary background.

 Electrical hazards are present around any equipment supplied with electrical power. See

FEMA 413, Installing Seismic Restraints for Electrical Equipment (FEMA, 2004) 

www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1436.

 Mechanical and electrical hazards are present around machinery that is operating. See 

FEMA 412, Installing Seismic Restraints for Mechanical Equipment (FEMA, 2002), 

www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1557.

 For guidance on bracing ducts and piping, see FEMA 414, Installing Seismic Restraints 

for Duct and Pipe (FEMA, 2004) www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1437.

 All power to energized equipment must be turned off and verified as energized by a 

qualified electrician

 Drilling holes into metal cabinets containing electrical components or piping may void 

the equipment warranty, create an electrical safety hazard or damage the equipment. 

Care should be taken to protect the equipment when drilling holes and that no debris 

has fallen into energized portions of the equipment.

6.6.8 Electrical Danger Warnings and guidelines

 Only qualified personnel familiar with proper voltage equipment are to perform work 

described in this set of instructions. Workers must understand the hazards involved in 

working with or near electrical circuits.

 Perform work only after reading and understanding all of the installation instructions in 

this manual and the manufacturer’s literature.

 Turn off all power-supplying equipment before working on or inside equipment.

 Always use a properly rated voltage sensing device to confirm that the power is off.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 6: Seismic Protection of Nonstructural Components Page 6-597

 Beware of potential hazards. Wear Personal Protective Equipment as required by NFPA70E, Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace (2009), and take adequate safety 

precautions.

 Replace all devices, doors, and covers before turning on the power to the equipment.

 All activities must be performed by qualified personnel in accordance with local codes.

 Handle equipment carefully and install, operate, and maintain it correctly in order for it 

to function properly. Neglecting fundamental installation and maintenance 

requirements may lead to personal injury, as well as damage to electrical equipment or 

other property.

 Heavy equipment should be stabilized with straps and other tie-downs to reduce the 

possibility of tipping. 

 Spreader bars must be evaluated by the appropriate design professional prior to lifting. 

 When lifting, do not pass ropes or cables through lift holes. Use slings with safety 

hooks or shackles.

 Damaged vent housings can constrict proper air flow and expose the interior of 

electrical voltage compartments to weather.

 Do not make any modifications to the equipment or operate the system with interlocks 

and safety barriers removed. Contact the manufacturer’s representative for additional 

instructions if the equipment does not function as described in this manual.

 Complete seismic installation and proper inspection of work prior to enabling the circuit 

breakers. 

 Use out-of-service tags and padlocks when working on equipment. Leave tags in place 

until the work is completed and the equipment is ready to be put back into service.

 Restore all seismic restraints removed for maintenance to their original installation 

configuration and torque all bolts and anchors to their proper values.

 Carefully inspect the work area and remove any tools and objects left inside the 

equipment.

 Remove all tools, lifting assembly, and miscellaneous items left on the equipment prior 

to enabling the circuit breaker.

 All instructions provided in this manual and by the manufacturer are written with the 

assumption that the customer has taken the above measures before performing any 

maintenance or testing

These electrical danger warnings and guidelines were originally developed for FEMA 413; refer 

to FEMA 412, 413, and 414 for additional warnings regarding the installation of bracing or 

anchorage details for MEP equipment, ducts, and piping.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 7: Post-Earthquake Data Collection Page7-1

7. POST-EARTHQUAKE DATA COLLECTION

This chapter provides motivation for collection of post-earthquake nonstructural component 

data and resources for conducting systematic collection of data for two selected nonstructural 

components. 

There have been no publically available systematic, quantitative post-earthquake investigations 

of nonstructural damage. This is due to the following: 

 Focus has been on structural damage; 

 Nonstructural damage is perishable since it is cleaned up immediately, leaving little 

evidence of the original damage; 

 Access to the interiors of buildings is limited because the buildings may contain 

proprietary information or damage that owners do not want to publically share;

 There are many different types of nonstructural components and it is extremely time 

consuming and complicated to obtain information in sufficient quantity and detail to 

draw meaningful conclusions on which to change or validate design and/or construction 

practices; and

 No one has the time or resources to do this.

However, until comprehensive nonstructural damage information is available, the practice will 

continue to rely on an incomplete understanding of the performance of some nonstructural 

components and base the designs on standards of practice that may be lacking or even 

incorrect. 

Collection of these data is essential to advancing the protection of nonstructural components.

In an effort to provide an initial data collection tool, data collection forms for two of 

nonstructural components have been developed for use in immediate post-earthquake 

situations: one for suspended acoustic tile ceilings and one for metal stud partitions. The 

forms are provided in Appendix F along with instructions. These forms are intended to serve as 

a starting point for data collection subject to revision and refinement as they are used in the 

field. Other similar forms can be developed for other systems and components when resources 

become available. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-1

A. SPECIFICATION

This appendix contains Specification Section 130541, Seismic Restraint Requirements for 

Nonstructural Components. This Section is intended to aggregate requirements for seismic 

restraint of nonstructural components and should be cross referenced from each specification 

section that includes nonstructural components requiring seismic protection. This specification 

has been written to address nonstructural components for which the Contractor is assigned 

responsibility for both design and construction. Items that have been explicitly designed by the 

design team and included on the drawings may be removed from this section, or the relevant 

section may be modified to indicate that the Contractor is required to furnish and install 

restraints only.

The specification is intended to be used in conjunction with the responsibility matrices provided 

in Appendix B to facilitate compliance with nonstructural performance objectives.

The Section is provided as a Microsoft Word file (.doc) file for download here and should be 

customized for use in projects.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-2

 

Figure A-1 Screenshot showing Specification Section 130541, Seismic Restraint 

Requirements for Nonstructural Components. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 B: Responsibility Matrix Page B-1

B. RESPONSIBILITY MATRIX 

This appendix contains responsibility matrix templates for the seismic protection of 

nonstructural components. The templates are to be used for assigning responsibility for 

design, construction, and inspection of nonstructural installations governed by ASCE/SEI 7-10. 

Three separate templates are provided for Seismic Design Categories B, C, and D/E/F, 

respectively. In addition, a Basic Form is provided for general use. The matrices are intended 

to be used in conjunction with the construction specification provided in Appendix A.

The matrices are provided as a Microsoft Excel file (.xls) file for download here and should be 

customized for use in projects.

.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 B: Responsibility Matrix Page B-2

 

Figure B-1 Screenshot showing Responsibility Matrix for the Seismic Protection of nonstructural Components, Seismic Design 

Catergory B worksheet. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 C: Nonstructural Inventory Form Page C-1

C. NONSTRUCTURAL INVENTORY FORM

The intent is that Appendices C, D and E be used together as tools for the facility survey. The 

first step is to review the map in Figure 3.2.1-1 and discussion in Section 1.3 to see if 

nonstructural hazard mitigation is a concern for the facility in question. If so, then Appendices 

C and D can be used in tandem to perform the survey. Risk ratings from Appendix E could be 

added to the inventory form during the field survey or added later in order to help prioritize the 

items in the list.

The questions in Appendix D are stated in such a way that the answer "No" or “Unknown” 

indicates that the component may be noncompliant and likely to pose a nonstructural 

earthquake hazard. All of the noncompliant components should be entered as individual line 

items on the facility inventory form in this Appendix. As shown below, the form provides 

columns for the following information:

 Priority: This can be added at the end after the priorities have been established.

 Nonstructural Item: Name or description of nonstructural component.

 Location: Information such as building, floor, or room number.

 Quantity: Number of items, lineal feet, or square feet.

 Risk Rating for Life Safety (LS), Property Loss (PL) and Functional Loss (FL) from 

Appendix E.

 Notes: Space for comments regarding the current condition, presence or absence of 

anchorage details, proximity to other hazardous items, issues with secondary damage 

such as leaks or hazardous materials release, and whether the component in question is 

important for functionality of the facility. This might also include a photo number if 

photos of each item are taken to assist with the survey.

The inventory form provided here has been adapted from the spreadsheet provided by the U.S. 

Bureau of Reclamation on their website under the heading “Online Orders/Free Tools,” 

http://www.usbr.gov/ssle/seismicsafety/onlineorders.html. The website contains two types of 

downloadable survey forms: one in spreadsheet format (Microsoft Excel) and one in database 

format (Microsoft Access). Both of these forms have built-in sorting algorithms so that 

components with high risk in any category can be shifted to the top of the list. These sorting

criteria may be adjusted to suit individual needs. Survey forms can be customized to include 

cost data, which may be useful for prioritization and planning. Proprietary forms are also 

available for purchase from specialty vendors.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 C: Nonstructural Inventory Form Page C-2

 

Figure C-1 Sample inventory checklist for a facility located in an area with Moderate seismic risk. The sorting algorithm of the 

spreadsheet makes this a useful tool for prioritization. The electronic file is free to download from the U.S. 

Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation’s website, 

http://www.usbr.gov/ssle/seismicsafety/onlineorders.html. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-1

D. CHECKLIST OF NONSTRUCTURAL SEISMIC HAZARDS

This checklist is intended to be used in surveying buildings to assess whether the nonstructural 

elements (architectural, MEP, FF&E, or contents) pose a danger to the building occupants or are 

likely to cause financial loss or interruption following an earthquake. 

This checklist of nonstructural hazards is intended for use in areas where seismic hazards are a 

significant concern. Review the discussion in Section 1.3 for the applicability of these 

nonstructural guidelines and the sidebar in Section 5.3.1 for rules regarding exemptions from 

the nonstructural provisions in ASCE/SEI 7-10 Minimal Design Loads for Buildings and Other 

Structures (ASCE, 2010) that apply to new construction. 

The form includes eight columns marked as follows:

ITEM NO.: ID number to indicate the type of component (architectural, MEP, FF&E or contents) 

and the subgroup. These numbers are based on the section or subsection in this text and as 

shown in the tables in Chapter 6.

COMPONENT NAME(S): Name or description of item.

PRINCIPAL CONCERNS: List of problems often associated with this type of item such as falling 

hazard, water or fuel leakage, broken glass. These concerns should be taken into account 

when answering the checklist questions. For example, the primary concern for adhered veneer 

is that it may pose a falling hazard. If a facility has adhered veneer, but only at the base of the 

building below 6 ft, then this might be checked “Compliance,” if the purpose of the survey is to 

identify life safety hazards or might be rated “Noncompliance,” if the survey is also intended to 

help control property damage and limit losses.

EXAMPLE: Example number. All examples, which contain photos and detailed drawings when 

applicable, can be found in Chapter 6.

COMPLIANCE (C): The questions in this form have been stated in such a way that an 

affirmative answer indicates that the item is not likely to pose a nonstructural hazard.

NONCOMPLIANCE (NC): The questions in this checklist are stated in such a way that the 

answer "No" or “Unknown” indicates that the component may be noncompliant and likely to 

pose a nonstructural earthquake hazard. All of the noncompliant components should be 

entered as individual line items on the facility inventory form in Appendix A. Comments should 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-2

be entered in the survey form noting the location, condition, presence or absence of anchorage 

details, proximity to other hazardous items, issues with secondary damage such as leaks or 

hazardous materials release, and whether the component in question is important for 

functionality of the facility.

NOT APPLICABLE (N/A): This column should be checked if none of the listed items are present 

and has been included, so that it is clear that the item was not missed or overlooked when 

performing the survey. 

CHECKLIST QUESTIONS: Questions are all “Yes-No” questions, which are answered by 

checking the appropriate box from among the previous three columns.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-3

6.3 Architectural Components

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

6.3.1 Exterior Wall Components [Exterior falling hazards are a primary concern, 

especially items situated above 10 feet and 

items that may fall over exits, walkways, or 

sidewalks.]

Adhered veneer Falling hazard 6.3.1.1 Is the adhered veneer adequately attached to 

the structure? [This includes relatively thin 

sections of tile, masonry, stone, terra cotta, 

ceramic tile, glass mosaic units, stucco, or 

similar materials attached to a structural wall or 

framework by means of an adhesive].

Based on visual observations and/or tapping, is 

the veneer free of cracked or loose sections 

that may fall during an earthquake?

Anchored 

veneer 

Falling hazard 6.3.1.2 Is the anchored veneer adequately attached to 

the structure? [This includes thicker masonry, 

stone, or stone slab units that are attached to 

the structure by mechanical anchors].

Is the masonry or other veneer supported by 

shelf angles or other elements at each floor?

Is the masonry or other veneer connected to a 

structural back-up wall at adequate spacing?

Has the veneer been adequately maintained? 

Are the anchors in good condition, free of 

significant corrosion, and inspected regularly?

Prefabricated 

panels 

Falling 

hazard, 

damage to 

panels and 

connections, 

broken glass

6.3.1.3 Were the panels and connections designed by 

an architect or engineer to accommodate the 

expected seismic distortion of the surrounding 

structure?

Are prefabricated cladding panels detailed to 

allow relative movement between the panel and 

the structure?

Are prefabricated panels supported for vertical 

loads with at least two connections per panel?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-4

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Are prefabricated panels supported for out-ofplane loads with at least four connections per 

panel?

Have the panels been adequately maintained? 

Are the panel connections in good condition, 

free of significant corrosion, and inspected 

regularly?

Are there adequate separations between panels 

so they will not come into contact with each 

other during an earthquake?

Glazing 

exterior wall 

system

Falling 

hazard, 

broken glass

6.3.1.4 Is it known that the glazing was designed by an 

architect or engineer to accommodate the 

expected seismic distortion of the surrounding 

structure?

Do large window panes and storefront windows 

have safety glass? [All exterior glazing should 

be laminated, annealed or laminated heatstrengthened safety glass or other glazing 

system that will remain in the frame when the 

glass is cracked. This is particularly important 

for glazing located over 10 feet above an 

exterior walking surface].

Glass blocks Falling 

hazard, 

broken glass

6.3.1.5 Are partial-height glass block walls laterally 

braced to the structure?

Is the glass block reinforced with panel anchors 

and panel reinforcing wire?

Overhead 

glazing or 

skylights

Falling 

hazard, 

broken glass

6.3.1.6 Are transoms (glass panes over doors) made of 

safety glass?

Are skylights made of safety glass or covered 

with shatter-resistant film?

Are large panes made of safety glass or is it 

known whether the glazing assembly was 

designed by an architect or engineer to 

accommodate the expected seismic distortion 

of the surrounding structure?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-5

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

6.3.2 Partitions

Heavy Falling 

hazard; 

collapse or 

spalling with 

debris in 

exitways; 

large cracks 

often 

mistaken for 

structural 

damage

6.3.2.1 Are block wall partitions reinforced? [This 

would include concrete masonry unit (CMU), 

brick, and hollow clay tile partitions. Most

brick and hollow clay tile walls in pre-1933 

buildings in California are unreinforced; 

unreinforced masonry partitions may still be 

found in current construction in other parts of 

the country.]

Are unreinforced masonry walls braced at 

regular intervals? [In zones of low and 

moderate seismicity, are partitions braced at 10 

foot intervals or less? In zones of high 

seismicity, are partitions braced at 6 foot 

intervals or less?]

Are full-height CMU partitions detailed to allow 

sliding at the top?

Light Cracking of 

plaster or 

gypsum 

board; costly 

to patch and 

paint

6.3.2.2 Are partial-height stud wall partitions braced to 

the structure above the ceiling line?

Are full-height stud wall partitions detailed to 

allow sliding at the top?

If partitions function as lateral support for tall 

shelving or other nonstructural components, 

are these partitions adequately anchored or 

braced to the structure above the ceiling line?

Glazed Broken glass 6.3.2.3 Are interior glazed or glass block partitions 

laterally braced to the structure?

6.3.3 Interior Veneers

 Stone and tile Falling 

hazard, 

debris in 

exitways

6.3.3.1 Is the adhered veneer adequately attached to 

the structure?

 Is the anchored veneer adequately attached to 

the structure?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-6

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

6.3.4 Ceilings, Soffits

 Suspended 

acoustic lay-in 

tile ceiling 

Dropped 

acoustical 

tiles, 

perimeter 

damage, 

separation of 

runners and 

cross 

runners; 

falling hazard 

if grid and 

lights come 

down

6.3.4.1 Does the suspended ceiling have adequate 

diagonal bracing wires and compression struts 

to support seismic loads from the ceiling grid 

plus all lay-in items that do not have 

independent lateral supports?

If the ceiling supports lay-in lighting or 

diffusers, do the lay-in items all have 

independent vertical supports consisting of 

wires located at least at two diagonally opposite 

corners? 

Do lay-in fixtures weighing over 50 pounds 

additionally have independent lateral bracing 

wires at all four corners?

If located in a high seismic zone, is the 

suspended ceiling supported by a heavy duty 

ceiling grid with adequate capacity and does 

the grid include supplemental hanger wires at 

light fixtures or other mechanical items?

 Directly applied 

to structure 

Falling hazard 6.3.4.2 Are decorative ceiling panels and/or latticework 

securely attached, particularly beneath exterior 

eves over exits?

Are decorative finishes and/or latticework on 

beam soffits or beneath exterior eves securely 

attached, particularly over exits?

For plaster ceilings or stucco soffits, is the wire 

mesh or wood lath securely attached to the 

structural framing above? 

Is the plaster or stucco in good condition and 

not deteriorated by water damage or corrosion?

 Suspended 

heavy ceilings

Falling hazard 6.3.4.3 If the suspended gypsum board ceiling extends 

over more than one level, does the suspended 

ceiling system have adequate diagonal bracing?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-7

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Is the suspended wire mesh or wood lath 

securely attached to the structural framing 

above?

Is the plaster ceiling in good condition and not 

deteriorated by water damage?

6.3.5 Parapets, Appendages, Roof Tiles 

 Unreinforced 

masonry 

parapet 

Falling hazard 6.3.5.1 Are unreinforced masonry parapets adequately 

braced? [If there is a local parapet ordinance, is 

it known if the bracing complies with the local 

ordinance?]

Parapets, 

cornices, 

appendages

Falling hazard Are parapets and cornices reinforced and 

adequately braced?

Do other decorative elements and appendages 

have positive anchorage to the building?

Are hanging appendages braced or secured 

with a safety cable?

6.3.6 Canopies, Marquees, Signs 

 Canopy, 

Marquees, 

Signs 

Falling hazard 6.3.6.1 Are cantilevered elements braced to the 

structure with steel shapes, not chains, to 

provide restraint and prevent bouncing?

Are exterior signs or billboards adequately 

braced and anchored?

Are interior signs securely attached with 

positive connections?

 Flagpoles Falling hazard Are flagpoles securely attached to the 

structure?

6.3.7 Chimneys and Stacks 

 Unreinforced 

masonry 

chimney 

Falling hazard 6.3.7.1 Is the brick chimney restrained with braces to 

the roof near the top of the chimney?

Is the brick chimney anchored near the roof 

line?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-8

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Stacks Falling hazard Are stacks anchored to the supports or 

foundation by means of anchor bolts of 

adequate length and double nuts?

6.3.8 Stairways 

 Stairways 6.3.8.1 Do steel stairs in multistory buildings have 

sliding supports at one end that can 

accommodate the anticipated interstory 

displacements?

Have any unreinforced masonry partitions, 

piping, or lighting in stairwells been removed, 

strengthened, encapsulated or braced, 

especially if the stairway is used as a primary 

exit route?

6.3.9 Freestanding Walls or Fences

 Freestanding 

Walls or Fences 

Falling hazard 

if over 4’ tall 

6.3.9.1 Were freestanding walls or fences designed by 

an architect/engineer to resist lateral forces?

Are CMU walls adequately reinforced with 

vertical bars set in grout-filled cells and 

horizontal bars embedded in the mortar joints?

Were CMU walls or fences built with adequate 

foundations to prevent them from tipping over 

in an earthquake?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-9

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Components

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

6.4.1 Mechanical Equipment

Boilers, 

furnaces, 

pumps and 

chillers ( HVAC 

wet-side 

equipment)

Sliding, 

overturning, 

broken 

gas/fuel or 

exhaust lines, 

leaking fluids, 

loss of 

function

6.4.1.1 Are the boilers, pumps, chillers and similar 

wet-side HVAC equipment securely anchored to 

the floor or wall with adequately sized bolts?

Do HVAC wet-side equipment items that are 

mounted on vibration isolators have adequate 

lateral restraint provided by snubbers, 

bumpers, or restrained vibration isolators?

Are housekeeping pads under boilers and 

similar equipment anchored to the floor slab?

Does the gas line have a flexible connection to 

the water heater or boiler that is able to 

accommodate movement?

Are furnaces, and furnace or boiler bases, 

constructed without using unreinforced 

masonry?

General 

manufacturing 

and process 

machinery 

Falling 

hazards, 

hazardous 

material leaks 

or spills, loss 

of function

6.4.1.2 Is manufacturing and process machinery and 

related equipment, cranes, tanks, piping, 

chutes, and conveyors all adequately restrained 

and anchored, particularly items that may fall 

and injure workers, result in hazardous 

materials release, or create hazardous electrical 

conditions? 

Have all life safety hazards been addressed by 

bracing or anchoring clear falling hazards and 

other hazardous items?

If immediate occupancy or operations is a 

project objective, has a design professional 

familiar with nonstructural anchorage of 

manufacturing and process machinery been 

engaged to perform a detailed survey of the 

plant?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-10

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

HVAC 

equipment with 

vibration 

isolation

Fall off 

isolators, 

overturning, 

broken 

gas/fuel or 

exhaust lines, 

leaking fluids, 

loss of 

function

6.4.1.3 Do HVAC dry-side equipment items such as air 

compressors, fans, blowers and filters that are 

mounted on vibration isolators have adequate 

lateral restraint provided by snubbers, 

bumpers, or restrained vibration isolators?

If large equipment is mounted on a concrete 

housekeeping pad, is the pad adequately 

anchored into the structural slab?

Do roof-mounted HVAC units that are mounted 

on vibration isolators have adequate lateral 

restraint provided by snubbers, bumpers, or 

restrained vibration isolators?

For roof-mounted units, are the curbs 

supporting the vibration isolators securely 

attached to the structural roof framing?

HVAC 

equipment 

without 

vibration 

isolation 

Sliding, 

overturning, 

broken 

gas/fuel or 

exhaust lines, 

leaking fluids, 

loss of 

function

6.4.1.4 Is equipment (e.g. gas-fired boiler, commercial 

water heater, chiller, etc.) securely mounted to 

the floor, wall, or roof with adequately sized 

bolts?

If large equipment is mounted on a concrete 

housekeeping pad, is the pad adequately 

anchored into the structural slab?

Does the gas or fuel line have a flexible 

connection that is able to accommodate 

movement?

For roof-mounted units, are the curbs 

supporting the vibration isolators securely 

attached to the structural roof framing?

Are wall- or window-mounted window air 

conditioning units securely mounted to the wall 

or shelf?

HVAC 

equipment 

Falling or 

swinging 

6.4.1.5 Is suspended equipment braced or anchored 

independently from the ductwork?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-11

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

suspended inline with 

ductwork 

hazard, 

separate from 

ductwork, 

loss of 

function

Does the equipment have flexible connections 

to gas, fuel, or electrical lines?

Suspended 

equipment

Gas leak, 

falling hazard

6.4.1.6 Are the suspended room heaters, especially 

gas-fired ones, laterally supported?

Are gas-fired heaters fitted with flexible gas 

connections?

6.4.2 Storage Tanks and Water Heaters

Structurally 

supported 

tanks and 

vessels

Tank or 

vessel 

rupture, pipe 

break

6.4.2.1 Is the tank securely attached to the supports?

Are the tank supports braced in both 

directions?

Are the tank supports attached with anchor 

bolts to concrete walls or foundation pad?

Is the foundation large enough to keep the tank 

from sliding or tipping over?

Is the wall strong enough to support the tank?

Flat bottom 

tanks and 

vessels

Tank or 

vessel 

rupture, pipe 

break

6.4.2.2 Is the tank securely anchored to a concrete slab 

or foundation?

Is the foundation large enough to keep the tank 

from sliding or tipping over?

Compressed 

gas cylinders

Gas leak 6.4.2.3 Are all gas cylinders tightly secured with a 

chain near the top and bottom or otherwise 

restrained from movement in each direction?

Are the chains or restraints securely anchored 

to a wall or counter with screws or bolts rather 

than clamps?

If the gas cylinders are attached to piping, are 

the restraints adequate to prevent damage at 

the piping connections? 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-12

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Water heaters Gas leak, 

water leak, 

loss of 

function

6.4.2.4 Are the water heaters securely anchored to the 

floor or wall?

Do the gas lines or electrical conduit and water 

lines have flexible connections to the water 

heater that are able to accommodate 

movement?

Does the water heater meet the limitations for 

use of prescriptive restraints? Is the capacity 

less than 100 gallons and is there a structural 

wall within 12 inches?

Does the wall have adequate strength to 

restrain the water heater?

6.4.3 Pressure Piping 

Suspended 

pressure piping

Breaks, leaks, 

loss of 

function

6.4.3.1 Are the pipes laterally restrained at reasonable 

intervals in each direction? 

Are the restraints securely attached to the 

structure?

Are the pipes free of asbestos insulation that 

could be damaged by movement in an 

earthquake?

Are the pipes free of asbestos that would need 

to be abated before any retrofit work?

In-line valves 

and pumps

Loss of 

function, 

leaks

6.4.3.2 Are the distribution pumps anchored, or are 

they mounted on vibration isolation springs 

with additional seismic lateral restraints?

Are suspended valves and pumps adequately 

braced and anchored to structural elements?

Flexible 

connections, 

expansion 

joints, seismic 

separations

Breaks, leaks, 

loss of 

function

6.4.3.3 Are flexible connections provided where piping 

connects to rigidly mounted equipment?

Are flexible connections provided where pipes 

cross expansion joints or seismic separations 

between buildings?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-13

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Are pipe penetrations through structural walls 

or framing members large enough to allow for 

some seismic movement?

Pipe Risers Breaks, leaks, 

loss of 

function

6.4.3.4 Are risers (vertical runs of piping) laterally 

restrained at each floor level or roughly at 20 

foot intervals?

For risers subject to thermal expansion and 

contraction, have the seismic supports been 

designed to allow ample thermal movement?

Floor-mounted 

pipe supports

Breaks, leaks, 

loss of 

function

6.4.3.5 Are the pipes laterally restrained at reasonable 

intervals in each direction? 

Are the restraints securely attached to the 

structure?

Roof-mounted 

pipe supports

Breaks, leaks, 

loss of 

function

6.4.3.6 Are the pipes laterally restrained at reasonable 

intervals in each direction and do the restraints 

appear adequate for the roof level? 

[Accelerations at the roof level are typically 

higher than at lower levels of a building.]

Are the curbs and restraints securely attached 

to the structure and protected from weathering 

and corrosion?

Wall-mounted 

pipe supports

Breaks, leaks, 

loss of 

function

6.4.3.7 Are the pipes laterally restrained at reasonable 

intervals in each direction? 

Are the restraints securely attached to the 

structure?

Pipe 

penetrations

Breaks, leaks, 

loss of 

function

6.4.3.8 Are pipe penetrations through structural walls 

or framing members large enough to allow for 

some seismic movement or are the pipes 

restrained to prevent impact with the structural 

element?

6.4.4 Fire Protection Piping 

Suspended fire 

protection 

Damage to 

sprinkler 

6.4.4.1 Are the fire sprinkler piping components 

laterally restrained in each direction?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-14

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

piping heads, leaks, 

loss of 

function

Is the ceiling restrained so the ceilings won't 

break the sprinkler heads?

6.4.5 Fluid Piping, not Fire Protection

Hazardous 

materials

Breaks, leaks, 

hazardous 

materials 

release

6.4.5.1 Is the hazardous material piping laterally 

restrained at reasonable intervals in each 

direction?

Are the restraints securely attached to the 

structure?

Where required, does the hazardous material 

piping have double walls, secondary 

containment, leak detection systems or 

monitoring and are these systems designed for 

seismic loading?

Do the pipes have flexible connections that are 

able to accommodate relative movement at 

locations where they are attached to rigidly 

mounted equipment or where they cross 

seismic separations?

Does piping containing fuel or other hazardous 

materials have a seismic shut-off valve or 

excess flow valve?

If the shut-off for the line is manual, is a 

wrench stored within easy reach?

Nonhazardous 

materials

Breaks, leaks, 

loss of 

function

6.4.5.2 Is the piping laterally restrained at reasonable 

intervals in each direction?

Are the restraints securely attached to the 

structure?

Do the pipes have flexible connections that are 

able to accommodate relative movement at 

locations where they are attached to rigidly 

mounted equipment or where they cross 

seismic separations?

6.4.6 Ductwork 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-15

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Suspended 

ductwork

Collapse, 

separation, 

leaking, 

fumes

6.4.6.1 Are the rectangular distribution ducts larger 

than 6 sq ft in cross sectional area laterally 

supported in each direction?

Are circular ducts larger than 28 inches 

diameter laterally supported in each direction?

Are the supports and hangers securely attached 

to the structure?

Are the distribution ducts able to accommodate 

movement at locations where they cross 

separations between buildings?

Air diffusers Drop out of 

ceiling grid

6.4.6.2 Are the air distribution grills or diffusers 

anchored to adequately supported sheet-metal 

ducts or to the ceiling grid or wall?

Do the diffusers have positive restraint, 

independent of the ceiling grid, such as at least 

two vertical hanger wires per diffuser?

6.4.7 Electrical and Communications Equipment Caution: Only qualified personnel should open 

access panels on electrical equipment.

Control panels, 

motor control 

centers, 

switchgear, etc.

Sliding or 

overturning, 

broken or 

damaged 

conduit or 

electrical bus

6.4.7.1 Are the control panels, motor control centers, 

switchgear and similar items all properly 

anchored to the floor or laterally supported by 

a structural wall?

Do the walls used to support these electrical 

cabinets have adequate strength to restrain 

these items?

Emergency 

generator

Failed 

vibration 

isolation 

mounts; 

broken fuel, 

signal, power 

and exhaust 

lines; loss of 

function

6.4.7.2 Is the emergency generator adequately secured, 

especially if mounted on motor vibration 

isolation springs?

Is the concrete housekeeping pad adequately 

anchored to the structural slab?

Is the diesel fuel tank adequately braced and 

anchored? (Refer to additional questions for 

structurally supported tanks and vessels).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-16

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Are the fuel lines, cooling water lines, and 

exhaust flues for the emergency generator 

attached with flexible connections that are able 

to accommodate relative movement at 

junctions to spring-mounted equipment, at 

building entry and exit points, and at 

expansion joints within the building?

Have all the components of the emergency 

power generating system and the electrical 

distribution system been checked as part of 

this survey?

Transformers Sliding, oil 

leakage, 

bushing 

failure, loss 

of function

6.4.7.3 Are transformers properly anchored to the floor 

or wall?

Batteries and 

battery rack

Batteries fall, 

rack tips; loss

of emergency 

power

6.4.7.4 Are the batteries securely attached to the 

battery rack?

Is the battery rack cross-braced in both 

directions?

Does the battery rack have anchor bolts 

secured to a concrete foundation pad?

Is the foundation large enough to keep the 

battery rack from sliding or tipping?

Photovoltaic 

power systems

Falling hazard 

for roof 

mounted 

panels

6.4.7.5 Are the solar panels securely anchored to the 

roof?

Is the piping laterally restrained?

Communications 

equipment

Sliding, 

overturning, 

or toppling 

leading to 

loss of 

function

6.4.7.6 Is the microwave communications equipment 

(antennae, receiver, transmitter, etc.) securely 

supported and/or anchored?

Are the components of the public address 

system and phone system secured? 

6.4.8 Electrical and Communications Distribution Equipment 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-17

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Electrical 

raceways, 

conduit, cable 

trays

Electrical 

hazards, loss 

of function

6.4.8.1 Are the raceways, bus ducts, and cable trays all 

laterally braced, including both transverse and 

longitudinal braces at reasonable spacing?

Are electrical cables or conduit able to distort 

at the connections with the equipment or where 

they cross seismic joints between buildings?

Distribution 

panels

Electrical 

hazards, loss 

of function 

6.4.8.2 Are the electrical distribution panels securely 

anchored to the floor or wall?

6.4.9 Light Fixtures

Recessed Falling 

hazards

6.4.9.1 Are recessed lights securely attached to the 

ceiling grid to resist seismic shaking and is the 

ceiling grid adequately braced?

Do the lay-in fluorescent light fixtures have 

positive support, independent of the ceiling 

grid, such as at least two diagonally opposite 

hanger wires per light fixture?

Do lay-in fixtures weighing more than 50 

pounds have independent lateral support?

Are lens covers attached or supplied with safety 

devices?

Surfacemounted Falling 

hazards

6.4.9.2 Are spot lights or track lights securely attached 

to resist seismic shaking?

Are exterior light fixtures properly supported or 

securely attached to the structure?

Are emergency lights and exit lights mounted 

to protect them from falling off the wall or off 

shelf supports?

Pendant light 

fixtures

Falling 

hazard, light 

fixture or 

6.4.9.3 Do chandeliers or other hanging fixtures have 

safety cables to prevent them from impacting 

each other or a window?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-18

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

unrestrained 

bulbs

Are lens covers attached or supplied with safety 

devices?

Do pendant or stem light fixtures have safety 

cables so they will not fall if the fixture sways 

and breaks the stem connection, or are they 

braced to prevent swaying? 

Heavy lightfixturesFalling 

hazards

6.4.9.4 Are heavy light fixtures, such as operating 

room lights, adequately braced and anchored to 

the structure independent of the ceiling 

system?

6.4.10 Elevators and escalators Caution: The moving parts or components of 

these systems need to be evaluated by qualified 

personnel. Inappropriate seismic restraints may 

compromise the safe operation of these 

systems.

Hydraulic 

elevator

Loss of 

function

6.4.10.1 Are the components of the hydraulic system 

properly anchored?

Traction 

elevator

Loss of 

function, 

counterweights out 

of guide rails, 

cables out of 

sheaves, 

dislodged 

equipment

6.4.10.2 Are the cables installed in such a way that they 

are protected against misalignment during an 

earthquake?

Is the elevator cab properly attached to the 

guide rails?

Are the counterweights properly attached to the 

guide rails?

Are the guide rails securely attached to the 

building?

Are the motor and motor control cabinets 

properly anchored? 

Is the elevator equipped with a seismic switch?

Escalators Loss of 

function

6.4.10.3 Is the escalator control equipment securely 

anchored?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-19

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Is it known if the escalator was designed by an 

engineer to accommodate relative movement 

between floors during an earthquake?

Is the control equipment for the moving 

walkway properly anchored?

6.4.11 Conveyors, material handling 

Conveyors Loss of 

function, 

falling hazard 

if elevated, 

contents fall

6.4.11.1 Are supports for the conveyors properly 

anchored to the floor or wall?

Is the conveyor control equipment properly 

anchored?

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment and Contents

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

6.5.1 Storage racks 

Light duty 

shelving

Contents fall, 

shelves 

damaged

6.5.1.1 Are tall shelving units securely anchored to the 

floor or walls?

If walls are used for lateral support, has the 

capacity of the walls been checked for 

adequacy to restrain the shelving?

Are heavily loaded shelving units supported in 

both directions?

For shelving units significantly taller than wide, 

are large anchor bolts used to anchor each leg 

to a concrete slab?

Are breakable items secured to the shelves, or 

are they stored in stable units (e.g., are they 

shelved in the original packing boxes, or are 

small items shrink-wrapped together)?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-20

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Industrial 

storage racks

Contents fall, 

racks 

damaged

6.5.1.2 Are industrial storage racks braced and 

anchored to a concrete floor slab or concrete 

walls?

If walls are used for lateral support, has the 

capacity of the walls been checked for 

adequacy to restrain the shelving?

Has the capacity of the concrete floor slab been 

checked for adequacy to resist uplift of the 

storage racks?

Are the racks equipped with dampers, base 

isolation, or other specialized seismic restraint 

systems?

6.5.2 Bookcases, Shelving

 Bookshelves Contents fall, 

shelving 

damaged

6.5.2.1 Are bookshelves 5’ or taller properly anchored 

with brackets to a solid wall or studs, or 

anchored to the floor, particularly if they are 

located next to a bed or desk or where they 

could block an exit?

Does the wall or partition used to anchor the 

book shelves have adequate strength to 

support seismic loading from the shelving?

Are bookshelves fitted with edge restraints or 

elastic cords to keep books from falling?

Are large and heavy books located on the 

lowest shelves?

 Library and 

other shelving

Contents fall, 

shelving 

damaged

6.5.2.2 Is it known if the lateral supports for the library 

stacks and shelving have been designed by an 

architect or engineer?

Are library shelving and stacks properly braced 

and anchored to the floor and walls, including 

bracing to the floor above if shelving is tall and 

slender that tie the shelving units together?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-21

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

If all shelving units are not independently 

braced or anchored, are adjacent units fastened 

together with bolts or other mechanical 

fasteners?

Do walls or partitions used to anchor library 

stacks have adequate strength for the imposed 

lateral loads?

Are bookshelves fitted with edge restraints or

elastic cords to keep books from falling?

Are large and heavy books located on the 

lowest shelves?

Are rare or fragile books given extra protection 

to prevent falling and water damage?

6.5.3 Computer and Communications Equipment

 Computer 

access floors 

and equipment 

Collapse, 

separation 

between 

modules, loss 

of function

6.5.3.1 Are the support pedestals for computer access 

floors anchored to the floor and braced with 

diagonal steel members, or is it verified that 

the vertical pedestals are a seismically qualified 

model, installed in accordance with the 

manufacturer's recommendations?

Do cable openings in the access floor have 

edge guards to prevent equipment legs from 

sliding into the openings

Are computers, tape racks, and associated 

equipment that are about twice as tall as wide, 

anchored, tethered, and/or laterally supported?

Does heavy computer equipment have supports 

which are braced and anchored to the structural 

floor slab independently of the computer 

access floors?

Is computer cabling long enough to 

accommodate lateral movement within the 

building?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-22

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

 Computer and 

communication 

racks 

Lost data or 

damaged 

equipment 

may cause 

downtime

6.5.3.2 Is computer information vital to operations 

backed up and stored off-site?

Is critical computer and communications 

equipment securely anchored to the rack?

Are computer and communication racks 

securely anchored to the floor or wall?

Is sensitive computer or communications 

equipment located out of range of fire sprinkler 

heads or joints in the sprinkler pipes where 

they are less prone to water damage if the 

sprinkler lines break?

 Desktop 

computers and 

accessories

Falling 

hazard, lost 

data or 

damaged 

equipment 

may cause 

downtime

6.5.3.3 Are computers and monitors anchored to 

desktops?

Are desktop or countertop computers and 

printers mounted with positive restraint, resting 

on high-friction rubber pads, or located far 

enough from the edges of desks and tables to 

prevent them from sliding and falling in an 

earthquake?

 Televisions and 

video monitors, 

wall-mounted

Falling hazard 6.5.3.4 Are wall- or overhead-mounted television sets, 

video monitors, surveillance cameras or sound 

system speakers securely braced and anchored 

to the wall or ceiling or equipped with safety 

cables?

6.5.4 Hazardous materials storage

 Hazardous 

materials 

storage 

Hazardous 

material 

release, 

mixing of 

incompatible 

substances

6.5.4.1 Are chemical supplies secured with shelf lips 

several inches high, or are they stored in "egg 

crate" containers in drawers, so that the 

containers will not overturn or fall and spill?

Are chemicals stored in accordance with 

manufacturers' recommendations?

Are incompatible chemicals stored at an 

appropriate distance from one another so that 

they will not mix if the containers are broken?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-23

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Are the chemicals in each cabinet catalogued 

properly and marked clearly?

Are Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) stored 

in a location separate from the chemicals?

Are cabinets for hazardous materials securely 

attached to the floor or to a sturdy wall?

Has asbestos insulation been removed, or has it 

been encapsulated to reduce the possibility of 

damage in an earthquake?

Is the facility free of asbestos that would need 

to be abated before any retrofit work?

6.5.5 Miscellaneous FF&E 

 File cabinets Cabinets fall, 

may block 

exits, 

contents spill

6.5.5.1 Do the file cabinet drawers or doors latch 

securely?

Are tall file cabinets anchored with wall 

brackets to a solid wall or studs, anchored to 

the floor, or bolted to one or more adjacent 

cabinets to form a more stable configuration, 

i.e., a larger "footprint"?

Are unanchored cabinets located so that they 

will not fall or slide and block a door or exit?

 Demountable 

partitions

Collapse, 

block exit 

path

6.5.5.2 Are demountable partitions attached to each 

other and arranged in a stable layout with many 

perpendicular wall segments?

Are partial-height partitions anchored to the 

floor?

If tall shelving or cabinets are located next to 

the partitions, can these items be moved or 

independently anchored to the floor or 

structure?

 

 

Miscellaneous 

furniture and 

fixtures

Falling hazard 6.5.5.3 Are tall items located near beds or desks 

securely anchored to a wall with adequate 

capacity?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-24

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Are large kitchen and laundry equipment all 

securely anchored to the floor, wall, or 

countertop with adequate capacity?

Are vending machines tethered a column or 

wall to prevent tipping and sliding?

Are unanchored furnishings located where they 

cannot slide or overturn to block corridors or 

doors?

Are heavy wall pictures and other wall hangings 

well anchored to the studs or structural 

framing?

Are heavy hanging plants secured to prevent 

falling or impact with windows?

Are personal or storage lockers and vending 

machines anchored and laterally supported, or 

are they clear of exits?

6.5.6 Miscellaneous Contents

 Shelf-mounted 

items 

Contents fall, 

items broken 

or mixed 

6.5.6.1 Are valuable or fragile items protected against 

tipping or falling off shelving?

Are the drawers and cabinet doors latched 

securely, e.g., with special latches or babyproof hardware that will not fly open in an 

earthquake?

Are rare or valuable items (rare books, museum 

collections, medical records) given extra 

protection against falling and water damage?

Are heavy potted plants on file cabinets or tall 

shelves restrained to prevent falling?

 Desktop, 

countertop 

items

6.5.6.2 Is radio equipment restrained to keep it from 

sliding off shelving or tabletops?

Is important equipment restrained to keep it 

from sliding off shelving or tabletops?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-25

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Are fax machines restrained or placed far 

enough from the edge that they will not slide 

and fall off?

Is the public address system restrained to 

prevent the equipment from sliding and falling 

off the shelving?

 Fragile artwork Loss of rare 

or expensive 

art objects, 

falling 

hazards

6.5.6.3 Are heavy sculptures anchored to prevent 

overturning during an earthquake?

Are heavy wall-mounted paintings, mirrors, or 

other wall hangings well anchored to structural 

studs or framing?

Do hanging sculptures or mobiles have a safety 

cable to prevent them from swinging 

excessively, impacting windows or other 

artwork, or falling?

Are fragile items restrained by mono-filament 

lines, hook and loop material, Plexiglas display 

cases, or some other seismic safety device?

 Fire 

extinguisher 

and cabinet

6.5.6.4 Are the fire extinguisher cabinets and/or hose 

cabinets securely mounted?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-26

 Emergency Systems

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

 Emergency Egress Emergency system components were not 

covered in the body of the document but are 

an important consideration for providing 

earthquake safety.

Emergency 

Egress

Exit doors 

jammed, 

corridors 

blocked, no 

emergency 

lighting, 

falling 

hazards

6.6.1.1 If primary exit doors are heavy metal fire doors 

that might jam if the building racks during an 

earthquake, is there a crowbar or 

sledgehammer located near the exit to facilitate 

emergency exiting?

Do automatic doors with optical or floor 

sensors and mechanized roll-up doors have a 

manual override in case of a power outage after 

an earthquake?

Are the building utilities and architectural 

finishes along egress routes (piping, ducts, 

ceilings, lights, partitions, etc.) braced or 

anchored adequately to prevent falling 

obstructions and to keep the egress routes 

clear after an earthquake?

Are the furniture and contents along egress 

routes (desks, supply cabinets, shelving, etc.) 

braced or anchored adequately to prevent 

falling obstructions and keep the egress routes 

clear after an earthquake?

Are unanchored furniture and contents along 

egress routes kept far enough from the exits so 

they will not fall or slide and obstruct the 

doors?

Have any unreinforced masonry walls in 

stairwells, corridors, and elevator enclosures 

been removed, strengthened, or encapsulated 

to prevent collapse during an earthquake?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-27

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Are parapets, canopies, veneers, cornices and 

any other ornamentation above building exits 

braced and anchored to prevent collapse?

Are emergency lights and exit lights securely 

mounted to protect them from falling off walls 

or shelf supports during an earthquake?

Are transoms, skylights, corridor glazing or 

glazing above exits made of safety glass or 

covered with shatter-resistant film?

If the building has elevators, does the elevator 

have a seismic switch?

Emergency 

Power 

Generation and 

Distribution 

System

Loss of 

function

Is the emergency generator adequately secured, 

especially if mounted on motor vibration 

isolation springs?

Is the concrete housekeeping pad adequately 

anchored to the structural slab?

Is the diesel fuel tank adequately braced and 

anchored?

Are the batteries and battery racks adequately 

braced and anchored?

Are the fuel lines, cooling water lines, and 

exhaust flues for the emergency generator 

attached with flexible connections that are able 

to accommodate relative movement at 

junctions to spring-mounted equipment, at 

building entry and exit points, and at 

expansion joints within the building?

Have the transformer, MCC, switchgear and bus 

ducts been checked?

Have all the components of the emergency 

power generating system and the electrical 

distribution system been checked as part of 

this survey?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-28

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Fire Detection 

and Protection 

System

Loss of 

function

Are fire and smoke detectors properly 

mounted?

Is the control equipment for the fire alarm 

system and automatic fire doors securely 

anchored?

Are the fire extinguisher cabinets and/or hose 

cabinets securely mounted?

Are the fire extinguishers secured with quickrelease straps?

Are the fire sprinkler piping components 

laterally restrained in each direction?

Is the ceiling restrained so the ceilings won't 

break the sprinkler heads?

Are the distribution lines able to accommodate 

movement where they cross between buildings?

Is the fire water pump anchored, or is it 

mounted on vibration isolation springs with 

additional seismic restraints? 

Is the emergency water tank or reservoir 

securely attached to its supports?

Are the tank supports anchored to the floor and 

braced in both directions?

Are the supports or braces properly anchored 

to the foundation?

Are the smoke control fans properly supported 

and/or anchored?

Are the fan control centers securely anchored?

Emergency 

Supply Cabinet

Supplies 

inaccessible 

in emergency

Is the cabinet properly braced and anchored to 

the floor and/or walls?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-1

E. Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings

The risk ratings that appear in this Appendix are provided as an aid to establishing priorities.

Nonstructural components are organized by component type, and estimates of the potential 

risk posed by the component are given for different ground shaking intensities. Each 

component is rated for High (H), Moderate (M) or Low (L) potential risk to Life Safety, Property 

Loss, and Functional Loss. The seismic risk ratings are based on the following definitions and 

assumptions: 

SHAKING INTENSITY: For a particular geographic location in the United States, the shaking 

intensity may be estimated by using the seismic map in Figure 3.2.1-1 that shows the areas 

that are likely to experience minimal, low, moderate, or high ground shaking during future 

probable maximum considered earthquake events that may affect the areas. The shaking 

intensity estimates based on the map in Figure 3.2.1-1 should be adequate for items situated 

at or near the ground in simple, nonessential facilities. For other situations, it may be advisable 

to choose the next higher shaking intensity or to seek the advice of professional consultants. 

Note that for areas with light shaking, a full blown upgrade of nonstructural components may 

not be warranted, unless an owner is particularly risk averse; the current code would not 

require many of the protective measures recommended herein, even for new construction.

LIFE SAFETY (LS) RISK: Risk of death or direct injury requiring hospitalization.. This does not 

include the overall impact on life safety systems in a building, such as loss of emergency power 

in a hospital or loss of fire detection or suppression capability. These disruptions of service are 

covered under Functional Loss below. 

PROPERTY LOSS (PL) RISK: Risk of incurring a repair or replacement cost because of damage 

to the item. This property loss, as used here, includes the cost of fixing a broken pipe but not 

the indirect cost of water leakage damage, and includes the cost of repairing a computer but 

not the loss of business revenue computer downtime might cause. These indirect effects 

cannot be estimated here on a generic basis. 

FUNCTIONAL LOSS (FL) RISK: Risk that the item will not function because it has been 

damaged. This includes some consideration of the impact of this loss of function of the 

component on the operation of an ordinary occupancy building. Not included are off-site 

functional impacts, such as the loss of function of a piece of equipment because of a city-wide 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-2

power outage. Outages of power, water, and other utility company or agency services are real 

problems to consider but are outside the scope of the item-by-item ratings here. 

TYPE OF DETAIL: For components where an illustrated example is provided in Chapter 6, the 

detail type is indicated as Non-engineered (NE), Prescriptive (PR), or Engineering Required (ER). 

The example number (e.g. 6.3.1.1 for adhered veneer) is shown at the left.

ASSUMPTION 1: The risk ratings are based on the assumption that the item has been installed 

without seismic bracing, seismic anchorage, seismic restraint, or allowance for differential 

movements. In areas of the U.S. where seismic building code provisions have only recently 

been enforced, this assumption will be generally true. In areas of the western U.S. where 

seismic codes have been enforced for some time, this assumption may not always be true. 

Particularly in buildings constructed in the western states since the mid-1970s, some 

nonstructural items may be anchored or braced, but the assumption of unanchored and 

unbraced items will still be true for many items on these lists. 

ASSUMPTION 2: The item is assumed to be located at or near the ground level, or in a low-rise 

building. The most common case of a relatively stiff low-rise building with structural walls is 

presumed in the ratings here. Items such as full-height partitions and glazing are more likely to 

be damaged in flexible buildings that experience large lateral deformations. Damage to items 

sensitive to imposed deformation will be greater in buildings or portions of buildings that are 

more flexible, such as mid- and high-rise buildings; flexible frame buildings without significant 

structural walls; "soft stories" of buildings with structural walls in most stories but with a story, 

typically the ground story, that is much less laterally stiff because of the absence of walls; and 

the "soft wall" sides of bearing wall buildings where there is little or no solid wall area, such as 

the face of a typical commercial storefront building. 

ASSUMPTION 3: For building occupancy, an ordinary occupancy category is assumed. Thus, in 

the case of essential or specialized facilities, some nonstructural components would be rated 

differently. For example, in this appendix the risk ratings are given for shelving in an ordinary 

occupancy building, but the same shelving would be rated quite differently with regard to Life 

Safety risk in a lab, Property Loss risk in a museum, or risk of Functional Loss in a 

communications center.

For most of the nonstructural components listed below, the risk ratings for those components

would be reduced significantly if the components were installed or retrofitted in accordance 

with recommendations of Chapter 6 or were installed within a seismically isolated building.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-3

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

6.3 Architectural Components 

6.3.1 Exterior Wall Components1 

6.3.1.1 Adhered veneer Low M M L

Mod H H L ER

High H H L

6.3.1.2 Anchored veneer Low M M L

Mod H H L ER

High H H L

6.3.1.3 Prefabricated panels Low M M L

Mod H H L ER

High H H M

6.3.1.4 Glazed exterior wall system Low L L L

Mod M M L ER

High H M M

6.3.1.5 Glass blocks Low L L L

Mod M M L ER

High H H M

N/A Overhead glazing or skylights Low L L L

Mod H M L

High H M M

6.3.2 Partitions2 

6.3.2.1 Heavy (CMU, brick, hollow clay 

tile)

Low L L L

Mod H H H ER

High H H H

6.3.2.2 Light (partial- or full-height 

stud wall partitions)

Low L L L

Mod M M M ER

High M H H

6.3.2.3 Glazed Low L L L

Mod M M L ER

High M H M

6.3.3 Interior Veneers2 

6.3.3.1 Stone and tile Low L L L

Mod H H M ER

High H H M

6.3.4 Ceilings 

6.3.4.1 Suspended acoustic lay-in tile Low L L L PR
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-4

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

ceiling Mod L M M

High M H H

6.3.4.2 Directly applied to structure Low L L L

Mod M M M NE

High M H H

N/A Soffits (stucco, gypsum board, 

plaster)

Low L L L

Mod M M M

High H H H

6.3.4.3 Suspended heavy ceilings Low L L L

Mod M M M PR

High H H H

6.3.5 Parapets, Appendages, Roof 

Tiles 

6.3.5.1 Unreinforced masonry parapet Low M M L

Mod H H L ER

High H H L

N/A Parapets, cornices, decoration Low M M L

Mod H H L

High H H L

N/A Hanging appendages Low L L L

Mod H H L

High H H M

N/A Clay roof tiles1 Low L L L

Mod L M L

High M H M

6.3.6 Canopies, Marquees, Signs 6.3.6.1 Canopies, Marquees, Signs Low L L L

Mod H H L ER

High H H M

N/A Heavy signs or exterior 

billboards

Low L L L

Mod H H L

High H H L

N/A Flagpoles Low L L L

Mod L L L

High M L L

6.3.7 Chimneys and Stacks 

6.3.7.1 Unreinforced masonry chimney Low L L L

ER

Mod M M L
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-5

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

High H M M

N/A Stacks, small Low L L L

Mod M M L

High H M M

6.3.8 Stairways 

6.3.8.1 Stairways Low L L L

Mod H M M ER

High H M H

6.3.9 Freestanding Walls or Fences 

6.3.9.1 Freestanding Walls or Fences Low L L L

Mod L L L PR

High M H M

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, & Plumbing Components 

6.4.1 Mechanical Equipment

6.4.1.1 Boilers, furnaces, pumps and 

chillers (HVAC wet side) Low L L L

ER

Mod L L L

High M M H

N/A Boilers and furnaces (rigid 

mount) Low L L L

Mod L L L

High M M M

N/A Chillers Low L L L

Mod L L L

High L M H

N/A Heat pumps or heat exchangers Low L L L

Mod L L L

High L M M

6.4.1.2 General manufacturing and 

process machinery Low L L L

ER

Mod M M M

High M H H

6.4.1.3 HVAC equipment with vibration 

isolation Low L L L

ER

Mod L M L

High L M M

N/A Fans, blowers, filters Low L L L

Mod L M L
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-6

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

High L M M

N/A Air compressors Low L L L

Mod L M L

High L M M

N/A Roof mounted HVAC units Low L M L

Mod L M L

High M H M

N/A Roof mounted equipment, vents 

or flues Low L L L

Mod L M L

High M M M

6.4.1.4 HVAC equipment without 

vibration isolation (rigid mount) Low L L L

ER

Mod L L L

High L M M

N/A Wall-mounted room air 

conditioning units Low L L L

Mod M M L

High M M L

6.4.1.5 HVAC equipment suspended 

in-line with ductwork Low L L L

ER

Mod L M L

High L M M

6.4.1.6 Suspended equipment Low L L L

Mod H H L ER

High H H L

6.4.2 Storage Tanks and Water 

Heaters

6.4.2.1 Structurally supported tanks 

and vessels Low L L L

ER

Mod M H M

High M H M

N/A Diesel fuel tank Low L L L

Mod H H L

High H H M

N/A Propane tank Low L L L

Mod H H M

High H H M
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-7

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

6.4.2.2 Flat bottom tanks and vessels Low L L L

Mod M H M ER

High M H M

6.4.2.3 Compressed gas cylinders 

(oxygen, CO2, ammonia, etc.) Low L L L

NE

Mod M M L

High H M M

6.4.2.4 Gas water heaters Low L L L

Mod M H L PR

High H H L

6.4.3 Pressure Piping 

6.4.3.1 Suspended pressure piping Low L L L

Mod M M M ER

High M H M

6.4.3.2 In-line valves and pumps Low L L L

Mod M M M ER

High M M M

6.4.3.3 Flexible connections, expansion 

joints and seismic separations Low L L L

ER

Mod M M M

High M M M

6.4.3.4 Pipe Risers Low L L L

Mod L M M ER

High M M M

6.4.3.5 Floor-mounted supports Low L L L

Mod L M M ER

High M M M

6.4.3.6 Roof-mounted supports Low L L L

Mod L M M ER

High M M M

6.4.3.7 Wall-mounted supports Low L L L

Mod M M M ER

High M M M

ER

6.4.4 Fire Protection Piping 

6.4.4.1 Suspended fire protection Low L M M ER
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-8

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

piping 

Mod L H H

High M H H

6.4.5 Fluid Piping, not Fire Protection

6.4.5.1 Hazardous materials Low L L L

Mod H H H ER

High H H H

N/A Fuel line Low L L L

Mod H H L

High H H M

6.4.5.2 Nonhazardous materials Low L L L

Mod M M M ER

High M M M

6.4.6 Ductwork 

6.4.6.1 Suspended Ductwork Low L L L

Mod L L L ER

High M M L

6.4.6.2 Air diffuser Low L L L

Mod M M L NE, ER

High M HM L

6.4.7 Electrical and Communications 

Equipment 

6.4.7.1 Control panels, motor control 

centers and switchgear Low L L L

ER

Mod L L L

High M M M

6.4.7.2 Emergency generator Low L L M

Mod L M H ER

High L H H

6.4.7.3 Transformers Low L L L

Mod L L L ER

High M M M

6.4.7.4 Batteries and battery rack Low L L L

Mod L H M ER

High L H H

6.4.7.5 Photovoltaic power systems 

(Solar panels) Low L L L

ER

Mod L L L
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-9

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

High M M L

6.4.7.6 Communication antennae Low L L L

Mod L M L ER

High M H M

6.4.8 Electrical and Communications 

Distribution Equipment 

6.4.8.1 Electrical raceways, conduit, 

and cable trays Low L L L

ER

Mod L M M

High M M M

6.4.8.2 Distribution panels Low L L L

Mod L L L ER

High M M M

6.4.9 Light Fixtures

6.4.9.1 Recessed Low L L L

Mod H L L PR

High H M M

6.4.9.2 Surface-mounted lighting Low L L L

Mod H L L PR

High H M M

6.4.9.3 Pendant light fixtures Low L L L

Mod H L L NE

High H M M

6.4.9.4 Heavy light fixtures Low L L L

Mod H L L NE

High H M M

N/A Exterior lighting Low L L L

Mod M L L

High M M M

6.4.10 Elevators and Escalators

6.4.10.1 Hydraulic Elevator (cab and 

elevator equipment) Low L L L

ER

Mod L M M

High M M M

6.4.10.2 Traction Elevator (elevator cab

and shaft doors) Low L L L

ER

Mod L M M

High M M H
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-10

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

N/A Cables, counterweights and 

guide rails (for cable-traction 

system)

Low L L L

Mod H M M

High H M M

N/A Elevator motor and motor 

control cabinets Low L L L

Mod L M M

High L H M

6.4.10.3 Escalator Low L L L

Mod M M M ER

High H H H

6.4.11 Conveyors

6.4.11.1 Conveyors Low L L L

Mod L M M ER

High M M M

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, & Equipment

6.5.1 Storage racks 

6.5.1.1 Light duty shelving Low L L L

Mod H M M NE, ER

High H M M

6.5.1.2 Industrial storage racks Low L L L

Mod H M M ER

High H H M

6.5.2 Bookcases, Shelving

6.5.2.1 Bookshelves Low L L L

Mod H M M NE

High H M M

6.5.2.2 Library and other helving Low L L L

Mod H M M ER

High H M M

6.5.3 Computer & Communications 

Equipment

6.5.3.1 Computer access floors Low L L L

Mod L L M ER

High M H H

N/A Large computer equipment Low L L L

Mod L M M
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-11

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

High M H M

N/A Computer networks, data 

storage

Low L L L

Mod L M H

High L H H

N/A Computer cabling Low L L L

Mod L L L

High L L L

6.5.3.2 Computer and communication 

racks Low L L L

NE

Mod L H M

High M H M

6.5.3.3 Desktop computers and 

accessories

Low L L L

NE

Mod L H M

High L H M

6.5.3.4 Television and video monitors, 

cameras, wall-mounted Low L L L

NE

Mod H H L

High H H L

N/A Suspended speakers in 

conference room or auditorium Low L L L

Mod M M L

High H H L

6.5.4 Hazardous materials storage 

6.5.4.1 Hazardous materials storage, 

cabinet and contents Low L L L

NE

Mod H M H

High H M H

N/A Chemical, laboratory, medical 

supplies Low L L L

Mod H M L

High H M M

N/A Asbestos Low L M M

Mod L H H

High L H H

6.5.5 Miscellaneous FF&E 

6.5.5.1 File cabinets, tall vertical or Low L L L NE
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-12

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

lateral files 

Mod M M M

High H M M

6.5.5.2 Demountable partitions Low L L L

Mod L L L NE

High M M M

6.5.5.3 Miscellaneous furniture under 

4’ tall Low L L L

NE

Mod L L L

High L L L

N/A Large kitchen or laundry 

equipment

Low L L L

Mod M M L

High M H M

N/A Lockers, vending machines Low L L L

Mod H M L

High H M L

N/A Freestanding wood stove 

(wood, pellet, or gas-fired) Low L L L

Mod M M M

High H H H

6.5.6 Miscellaneous Contents

6.5.6.1 Shelf-mounted items Low L L L

Mod M M L NE

High H M M

N/A Especially valuable or fragile 

merchandise Low L M L

Mod L H L

High L H L

N/A Potted plants or indoor 

landscaping resting on shelves 

above the floor

Low L L L
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-13

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

Mod L L L

High M L L

6.5.6.2 Desktop, countertop items Low L L L

Mod L M L NE

High L H M

6.5.6.3 Fragile artwork Low L L L

Mod L H L NE

High L H L

N/A Tall sculptures (over 5 ft) Low L L L

Mod M M L

High H H L

6.5.6.4 Fire extinguisher and cabinet Low L L L

Mod M H L NE

High M H L

Footnotes:

1. Ratings for exterior components assume an entrance or walkway is located near the exterior 

wall. At locations where there is limited access, the life safety risk would be low.

2. Ratings assume component is located in a corridor or along the path of egress.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-1

A. SPECIFICATION

This appendix contains Specification Section 130541, Seismic Restraint Requirements for 

Nonstructural Components. This Section is intended to aggregate requirements for seismic 

restraint of nonstructural components and should be cross referenced from each specification 

section that includes nonstructural components requiring seismic protection. This specification 

has been written to address nonstructural components for which the Contractor is assigned 

responsibility for both design and construction. Items that have been explicitly designed by the 

design team and included on the drawings may be removed from this section, or the relevant 

section may be modified to indicate that the Contractor is required to furnish and install 

restraints only.

The specification is intended to be used in conjunction with the responsibility matrices provided 

in Appendix B to facilitate compliance with nonstructural performance objectives.

The specification is also provided as a Microsoft Word file (.doc) file for download on this 

CD-ROM and should be customized for use in projects.

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-2

SECTION 130541 

SEISMIC RESTRAINT REQUIREMENTS FOR NONSTRUCTURAL COMPONENTS

[NOTE TO SPECIFIER: This section is intended to aggregate

requirements for seismic restraint of nonstructural components. It should 

be cross referenced from each specification section that includes 

nonstructural components requiring seismic protection. This specification 

has been written to address nonstructural components for which the 

Contractor is assigned responsibility for both design and construction. 

Items that have been explicitly designed by the design team and 

included on the drawings may be removed from this section, or the 

relevant section may be modified to indicate that the Contractor is

required to furnish and install restraints only.]

PART 1 - GENERAL

1.1 DESCRIPTION

A. Provide seismic restraint of nonstructural components to withstand seismic forces and seismic 

deformations without displacing or overturning. For designated nonstructural components, 

provide installations capable of providing post-earthquake functionality.

B. Work in this section includes furnishing and installing complete seismic restraint systems. Work 

in this section may also include the seismic restraint design and/or equipment/product 

certifications to be submitted for review by the registered design professional. 

1.2 SCOPE

A. The architectural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing components and systems identified on 

the following Responsibility Matrix shall be designed and constructed for seismic demands.

[NOTE TO SPECIFIER: Insert the Responsibility Matrix appropriate for 

the project Seismic Design Category (see Section 1.3A). Explicitly list 

those components requiring seismic design, specify each component 

importance factor, Ip, identify the parties responsible for design, 

preparation of shop drawings and seismic calculations and indicate 

which components require Special Seismic Certification.]

[NOTE TO SPECIFIER: The items listed above are generally consistent 

with the scope of items regulated by building codes per ASCE 7. Items 

not governed by Building Codes may be added to the scope to create a 

complete project-specific list (for example, shelf- and counter-mounted 

contents may be excluded completely or may be excluded except for 

designated items). It is the responsibility of the design team to create the 

list and identify the party/parties responsible for verifying compliance with 

this specification section.]

1.3 DEFINITIONS

1. Professional Engineer - A professional engineer is one who is legally qualified to practice 

in the jurisdiction where the Project is located, who is experienced in providing 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-3

engineering services of the kind indicated, and is registered with the state where the 

Project is located.

2. Seismic Forces: Forces acting in any direction on a nonstructural component and related 

system due to the action of an earthquake as defined in the Building Codes currently in 

effect where the Project is located.

3. Seismic Deformations: Drifts, deflections and seismic relative displacements determined 

in accordance with the applicable seismic requirements of the Building Codes currently in 

effect where the Project is located.

4. Restraint/Bracing: Bracing or anchorage used to limit movement under seismic forces.

Cables or rigid elements (strut, pipe, angles, etc) used to resist forces by uniaxial tension 

or compression. The term “bracing” may also be used to describe design to resist lateral 

forces through the use of wall or frame elements.

5. Support: Elements used to support the weight (gravity load) of an item. Where the 

support is located at a seismic brace, the element may also resist tension/compression 

reactions from the restraint system.

6. Anchorage: Connection to structure typically through the use of welding, bolts, screws, 

post-installed anchors or other fasteners selected to meet the Building Codes currently in 

effect where the Project is located.

7. Designated Seismic System: Those architectural, electrical and mechanical systems and 

their components that require seismic design in accordance with ASCE 7 and for which 

the component importance factor, Ip, is 1.5 according to ASCE 7 or listed as 1.5 in 

Section 130541.1.2.

8. Inspection Body: Organization or individual accredited to ISO 17020 and regularly 

engaged in factory inspection services for seismic restraint of non-structural components 

and equipment.

9. Special Inspector: An IAS accredited IBC special inspection agency or qualified 

professional engineer who demonstrates competence, to the satisfaction of the building 

official (or Authority Having Jurisdiction [AHJ]), for inspection of the designated seismic 

systems. The owner or the registered design professional in responsible charge acting as 

the owner’s agent shall employ one or more special inspectors to provide periodic 

inspections during installation of designated seismic systems.

10. AHJ: Authority Having Jurisdiction – The governmental agency or subagency that 

regulates the construction process. This may be a local building department, state 

agency, federal entity or other body or bodies having statutory authority.

11. OSHPD: California Office of Statewide Health, Planning and Development

12. ICC-ES: International Code Council Evaluation Service
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-4

13. IAS: International Accreditation Service, Inc.

14. IBC: International Building Code

15. VISCMA: Vibration Isolation and Seismic Control Manufacturers Association

1.4 RELATED SECTIONS

[NOTE TO SPECIFIER: List all sections of the specifications that have

related requirements governing installation. The following sections follow 

the Construction Specifications Institute format for “[Sound], Vibration, 

and Seismic Control.” To avoid confusion and inconsistent design 

criteria, it is recommended that all seismic design criteria be aggregated 

in this section or that care is taken to ensure that seismic design criteria 

for all components are consistently addressed.]

A. Coordinate and comply with the requirements of the following:

1. Section XXX – Vibration and seismic controls for fire suppression piping and equipment

2. Section XXX – Vibration and seismic controls for plumbing piping and equipment

3. Section XXX – Vibration and seismic controls for HVAC duct, piping and equipment

4. Section XXX – Vibration and seismic controls for electrical systems and equipment

5. Section XXX –Vibration and seismic controls for communications systems and equipment

6. Section XXX – Vibration and seismic controls for electronic safety and security

7. Section XXX – Vibration and seismic controls for communications systems

8. Section XXX – Vibration and seismic controls for medical gas piping and equipment

1.5 APPLICABLE PUBLICATIONS

A. The most recent edition of publications listed below (including amendments, addenda revisions, 

supplements and errata) form a part of this specification to the extent referenced unless 

otherwise noted. The publications are referenced in text by basic designation only.

[NOTE TO SPECIFIER: Verify and edit applicable publications to 

indicate all referenced guidelines/standards. Where the most recent 

edition does not apply, provide specific instruction.]

B. American Concrete Institute (ACI):

1. 355.2 Qualification for Post-Installed Mechanical 

Anchors in Concrete and Commentary

2. 318 Appendix D Anchoring to Concrete

C. American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC): Load and Resistance Factor Design American 

Society of Civil Engineers Minimum Design Loads for Building and Other Structures 

D. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM):

1. A/36/A36M Standard Specification for Carbon Structural 

Steel

2. A/53/A53M Standard Specification for Pipe, Steel, Black and 

Hot-Dipped, Zinc-Coated, Welded and Seamless
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-5

3. A307 Standard Specification for Carbon Steel Bolts 

and Studs; 600,000 PSI Tensile Strength

4. A325 Standard Specification for Structural Bolts, 

Steel, Heat Treated, 120/105 ksi Minimum Tensile 

Strength

5. A325M Standard Specification for High-Strength Bolts 

for Structural Steel Joints (Metric)

6. A490 Standard Specification for Heat-Treated Steel 

Structural Bolts, 150 ksi Minimum Tensile Strength

7. A490M Standard Specification for High-Strength Steel 

Bolts, Classes 10.9 and 10.9.3, for Structural Steel 

Joints (Metric)

8. A500/A500m Standard Specification for Cold-Form Welded 

and Seamless Carbon Steel Structural Tubing in Rounds 

and Shapes

9. A501 Specification for Hot-Formed Welded and 

Seamless Carbon Steel Structural Tubing

10. A615/A615M Standard Specification for Deformed and Plain 

Billet-Steel Bars for Concrete Reinforcement

11. A992/A992M Standard Specification for Steel for Structural 

Shapes for Use in Building Framing

12. A996/A996M Standard Specification for Rail-Steel and AxelSteel Deformed Bars for Concrete Reinforcement.

13. E488-96 Standard Test Method for Strength of Anchors in 

Concrete and Masonry Elements

14. E580 Standard Practice for Installation of Ceiling 

Suspension Systems for Acoustical Tile and Lay-in 

Panels in Areas Subject to Earthquake Ground Motions

E. American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and Rack Manufacturers’ Institute (RMI): 

Specification For The Design, Testing and Utilization of Industrial Steel Storage Racks (ANSI 

MH16.1)

F. American Welding Society (AWS): 

1. AWS D1.1 Structural Welding Steel

2. AWS D1.3 Structural Welding Sheet Steel

G. International Code Council Evaluation Service (ICC-ES): Index of Reports can be found at 

http://www.icc-es.org/reports/index.cfm

H. National Fire Protection Association: Installation of Sprinkler Systems (NFPA-13)

I. OSHPD Code Application Notice 2-1708A.5 – Certification of Equipment and Nonstructural 

Components

J. Americal Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) 

1. Standard B31 Standards for Pressure Piping

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: Add additional local or 

statewide code references.]

1.6 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS

A. Comply with the International Building Code (IBC) latest adopted Edition by the jurisdiction 

where the Project is located and applicable local and/or statewide adopted amendments.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-6

B. Special Seismic Certification – Provide certification in accordance with IBC, Chapter 17 and 

ASCE 7 Chapter 13 requirements for designated seismic systems as indicated on the 

Responsibility Matrix.

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: It is the project design 

professional’s responsibility to identify components for which the 

Contractor is required to submit Special Seismic Certification. The 

“Responsibility Matrix” provided in Appendix B is provided as a tool to 

identify and track these items. (Note: Certification should be addressed 

by the design team prior to construction to ensure component has been 

certified or will be certified to suit the project schedule.)]

1.7 PROJECT SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA

A. Seismic Design Category – X

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: Seismic Design Category is 

defined in ASCE 7 Table 11.6-1. It is dependent on the site seismicity 

and building occupancy. The project designer is responsible for 

identifying the building specific seismic design category. ]

B. Seismic Design Force – Calculation of seismic design force shall be based on the requirements 

of Chapter 13 of ASCE 7 with the following seismic design parameters

1. SDS = X.XX

2. Ibuilding = X

3. Ip = X.X (1.0 or 1.5 as indicated in ASCE 7 Section 13.1.3)

4. aP, RP = in accordance with ASCE 7 Tables 13.5-1 and 13.6-1

5. z = XX (roof elevation)

6. h1 = XX (floor 1 elevation)

h2 = XX (floor 2 elevation)

h3 = XX (floor 3 elevation)

etc.

C. Seismic Relative Displacement – Design shall accommodate seismic relative displacement of 

0.02 times the story height in addition to thermal movement that may be present. 

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: Design for the maximum 

permitted code displacement as indicated in ASCE 7 Table 12.12-1. 

Alternatively, provide interstory drift for each story of the building based 

on project-specific structural analysis. For example, replace above 

requirement with: Use the following interstory drifts to compute the 

relative seismic displacement that the component must be designed to 

accommodate.

Δ1-2 = interstory drift between floors 1 and 2 = X.XX

Δ2-3 = interstory drift between floors 2 and 3 = X.XX

Δ3-Roof = interstory drift between floors 2 and 3 = X.XX]

D. Seismic Separation between Independent Structures – Components crossing seismic 

separations shall be designed to accommodate relative seismic movement between structures. 

Locations of seismic separations are shown on the drawings. Use the following to determine the 

range of movement required at each floor. Components shall be independently anchored to 

each structure.

1. DA1-B1 = XX” (i.e. +/- xx”/2)

2. DA2-B2 = XX” (i.e. +/- xx”/2)

3. DA3-B3 = XX” (i.e. +/- xx”/2)

4. DARoof-BRoof = XX” (i.e. +/- xx”/2)
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-7

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: Provide seismic separation for 

each floor for each seismic joint based on project-specific structural 

analysis and as required by ASCE 7 Section 12.12-3. Alternatively, 

specify seismic separation based on maximum interstory drift permitted 

by code.]

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: The following list contains a 

sample list of nonstructural components for which the contractor may be 

assigned responsibility for design and construction. Items that have been 

explicitly designed by the design team and included on the drawings 

should be identified as such on the Responsibility Matrix and may be 

removed from this section. Items for which seismic restraint is not 

required should be removed. Add additional items as required for projectspecific scope.]

1.8 QUALITY CONTROL

A. Shop-Drawing Preparation:

1. Seismic restraint shop drawings shall be prepared or their preparation shall be overseen 

by a professional engineer experienced in designing seismic restraints for nonstructural 

components as required by the authority having jurisdiction. The use of proprietary 

restraint systems with a certificate of compliance verified and listed by an IAS accredited 

inspection body is acceptable.

B. Seismic Calculations Preparation:

1. Seismic restraint calculations shall be prepared and stamped by a registered professional 

engineer experienced in the area of seismic restraint for nonstructural components.

Comply with the applicable code specified in Paragraph 1.6.

[NOTE TO SPECIFIER: If desired or required by the authority having 

jurisdiction, restrict design to professional engineers registered in the 

state where the project is located or to licensed Structural Engineers, or 

both.]

C. Special Seismic Certification of Mechanical and Electrical Equipment and Distribution Systems:

1. Each manufacturer of designated seismic system components shall provide a certificate 

of compliance indicating that the component and its mounting system or anchorage have 

been tested or analyzed to withstand required seismic loads and maintain operability. 

Qualification shall be by an actual test on a shake table with three-dimensional shock 

tests, an analytical method using dynamic characteristics and forces and/or experience 

data based upon nationally recognized procedures acceptable to the authority having 

jurisdiction. Certificate must be verified by an IAS accredited inspection body or other 

independent inspection entity acceptable to the Authority Having Jurisdiction. 

Components shall be labeled with an identification applied on a product by the 

manufacturer that contains the name of the manufacturer, the function and performance 

characteristics of the product or material, and the name and identification of an 

accredited agency that indicates that the representative sample of the product or material 

and its testing have been evaluated and listed by an accredited inspection body agency.

If a particular component has no manufacturer available that has been evaluated and 

listed by an accredited inspection body agency, then qualification must be by analysis 

performed be a professional engineer registered in the jurisdiction where the Project is 

located. Professional engineer must be approved by the authority having jurisdiction and 

experienced in providing engineering services of the kind indicated. Analysis must 

include an evaluation of stress and deflection developed through the entire load path 

from the center of applied seismic load to the equipment anchorage. Analysis must 

consider dynamic characteristics and the response spectrum required by code.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-8

Special Seismic Certification for distribution systems such as piping and ductwork shall

include a stress analysis of the pipe/duct, supports, bracing and anchors. The stress 

analysis shall include gravity and seismic demands and shall include an analytical 

assessment of connections and consideration of movement of points of attachment. The 

effects of in-line devices, where present, shall be considered in the analysis. 

Conformance with NFPA 13 2010 will satisfy Special Seismic Certification requirements 

for fire protection piping.

D. Coordination:

1. Do not install seismic restraints until seismic restraint submittals have been reviewed and 

accepted by the entity/entities identified on the Responsibility Matrix.

2. Verify that multiple systems installed in the same vicinity can be installed without conflict.

3. Verify tolerances between installed items to confirm that unbraced components will not 

come into contact with restrained equipment or structural members during an earthquake. 

When contact is possible, provide seismic restraint or provide justification to the 

satisfaction of the registered design professional in responsible charge of the project that 

contact will not cause unacceptable damage to the components in contact, their supports, 

finishes or other elements that are contacted.

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: (1) The requirement to 

regulate tolerances between installed unbraced items may not be 

necessary to protect components and systems that are inherently 

rugged, lightweight or where contact is unlikely to cause unacceptable 

damage. Consider project specific requirements and those imposed by 

the authority having jurisdiction. (2) Where contact between adjacent 

items is specified, consider explicitly specifying tolerance for unbraced 

equipment. (3) See 3.9.D.9.(4) Unless otherwise specified, the Structural 

Engineer of Record is responsible for confirming that the structure is 

capable of supporting the gravity and seismic demands imposed by 

nonstructural components.]

PART 2 - PRODUCTS

2.1 STEEL

A. Structural steel: ASTM A36, A36M, A992

B. Structural tubing: ASTM A500, Grade B

C. Steel pipe: ASTM A53/A53M, Grade B

D. Bolts and nuts: ASTM, A307, A325, A325M, A490, A490M, ASTM A563

E. Lag bolts and screws: ASME B18.2.1 (ASME B18.2.3.8M), ASTM A563

F. Powder driven anchors: NES NER-272

G. Nails: ASTM F1667

2.2 LIGHT GAGE NON-LOAD BEARING METAL FRAMING

A. Metal studs: A653 Grade 33, ASTM A1011 Grade 33, ASTM A446 Grade A or D, or ASTM 

A570
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-9

B. Tie wires: ASTM A641/A641M

C. Screws for fastening to cold-formed metal framing: ANSI B18.6.4

2.3 WELDING

A. Welding filler metal: AWS A5.1 

2.4 POST-INSTALLED ANCHORS

A. Expansion or sleeve anchors: Pre-qualified for use in seismic applications per ASTM E488

B. Adhesive anchors: Pre-qualified for use in seismic applications per ASTM E488

2.5 SEISMIC RESTRAINT CABLES

A. Prestretched galvanized carbon steel cable 7x19 strand core, ASCE-19, ASTM A-1023 1A, 

ASTM A-603 or stainless steel

2.6 CHANNEL STRUT AND FITTINGS

A. Strut: ASTM A 1011SS Gr 33 or ASTM A 653 Gr 33

B. Fittings: ASTM A 575, A 576, A36 or A 635

PART 3 - EXECUTION

3.1 CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL

A. For items identified in the Responsibility Matrix furnish and install supports, braces, 

connections, hardware and anchoring devices to withstand code-required seismic forces and 

seismic deformations without shifting or overturning. For components with Ip = 1.5, in addition 

to providing code-required seismic forces and deformations, provide installations capable of 

providing post-earthquake functionality.

B. Construct seismic restraints and anchorages that do not inhibit thermal expansion and 

contraction of distribution systems. Utilize ASME Standard B31 when utilizing common 

supports for both thermal and seismic loading.

C. Maintain fire ratings of assemblies as specified elsewhere or on the drawings in addition to 

compliance with the criteria set forth below.

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: It is the structural engineer of 

record’s responsibility to provide a structure capable of accommodating 

the design demands from nonstructural components. The submittal 

requirements of these specifications require the contractor to provide the 

numerical values of gravity and seismic forces imposed on the structure 

from components. The structural engineer of record must verify that the 

structure is capable of accommodating the demands. Any limitations of 

the structural system that would alter the manner or location in which 

components are supported or braced should be clearly shown on the 

drawings and/or described in the specifications below.]

3.2 NONSTRUCTURAL EXTERIOR WALL COMPONENTS
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-10

A. Nonstructural exterior wall framing

1. Design framing to resist out-of-plane seismic design force, movement due to temperature 

changes and relative vertical movement between floors.

2. Design framing to accommodate code-required interstory drift without damage that 

compromises the exterior wall water, moisture and thermal barriers.

3. Design framing with sufficient out-of-plane stiffness to prevent damage to cladding or 

veneer when subjected to code-required out-of-plane forces.

B. Veneer

1. Fasten veneer to substrate to accommodate out-of-plane seismic design force and 

deformation of supporting framing.

2. Anchored veneer shall be detailed to prevent moisture penetration from weather that 

could corrode anchors.

C. Nonstructural prefabricated panels

1. Design prefabricated panels and connections capable of resisting in-plane and out-ofplane forces and story drift deformations in accordance with ASCE-7.

D. Glazing

1. Design glazing to resist out-of-plane seismic design force

2. Design glazing to accommodate relative displacement to resist fallout as set forth in 

ASCE 7 Section 13.5.9.1 and not less than 0.5”.

3. Drift limit for glass components shall be determined in accordance with AAMA 501.6 or 

by engineering analysis.

4. In lieu of calculations, compliance with design criteria may be established by testing in 

accordance with AAMA 501.4.

3.3 INTERIOR PARTITIONS

A. Heavy partitions (masonry, glass block, etc.):

1. Design wall and connections to resist out-of-plane seismic design force.

2. Provide connection detail between the building structure and heavy partition to 

accommodate seismic relative displacement between partition and structure.

3. Maintain fire rating at connections in rated construction.

B. Light partitions (metal stud or wood stud):

1. Design partitions to resist out-of-plane seismic design force. Design force shall be based 

on the weight of the partition framing, finishes, soffits, connected casework or equipment, 

and ceilings for which it provides bracing. Out-of-plane design force shall not be less than 

5 psf.

2. Design partitions to accommodate interstory drift. 

3. Fasten veneer to partition framing to resist code required forces and deformation of 

studs.

4. Where partition does not extend to the structure, the partition height does not exceed 9 

feet, the linear weight of the partition does not exceed the product of 10 pounds times the 

height in feet of the partition and the partition horizontal load does not exceed 5 psf, 

lateral bracing to the building structural is not required. For all other conditions, provide 

supplemental bracing or framing to resist out-of-plane seismic design force. Such bracing 

or framing shall be independent of splayed wire ceiling bracing. Design wall bracing or 

framing for compatibility with ceiling deflection requirements, fire ratings and architectural 

treatments.

3.4 CEILINGS

A. Suspended acoustic tile ceilings:

1. Design and install ceiling in accordance with ASTM E580.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-11

2. For Seismic Design Categories D, E and F, provide bracing at regular intervals to resist 

code design forces and limit vertical and lateral movement. Suspended ceilings with 

areas less than or equal to 144 square feet and that are surrounded by walls or soffits 

that are laterally braced to the structure above are exempt from seismic design 

requirements.

3. Where ceilings are unbraced or splayed wire bracing is used to resist seismic forces and 

limit lateral deflections, provide 1 inch clearance around all penetrations through the 

ceiling sprinkler drops. If flexible sprinkler drops are used and have been certified to 

accommodate 1 inch of movement, the 1 inch clearance requirement may be waived. 

4. Provide independent support of lighting fixtures, diffusers, cable trays, electrical conduit

and other ceiling appurtenances.

5. Ceiling system design load Wp shall be taken as not less than 4 psf. 

B. Ceilings directly fastened to structural framing or furred with materials that are directly applied to 

structural framing

1. Fasten ceiling to framing to resist the vertical seismic design forces and the weight of the 

ceiling and all connected light fixtures, sprinklers, HVAC appurtenances.

3.5 PARAPETS, ROOF SCREEN WALLS, APPENDAGES, CANOPIES, MARQUEES, SIGNS, 

CHIMNEYS, AND STACKS

A. Exterior appendages

1. Design component and connections to resist out-of-plane seismic design force and code 

wind force.

2. Design and provide supplementary framing and/or backing as required to support and 

anchor to structural framing.

3. Provide details that do not compromise water, moisture and thermal barriers.

3.6 ACCESS FLOORS

1. Provide restraint to resist seismic design force in any direction. Use components that 

have been tested in accordance with CISCA “Recommended Test Procedures for Access 

Floors.”

2. The use of adhesive-only anchorage of pedestals is prohibited in Seismic Design 

Categories D through F. 

3.7 STAIRWAYS

A. Stairs (including treads, risers, landings and enclosures)

1. Design components and connections to resist seismic design force 

2. Design stairs to accommodate interstory drift. Acceptable means shall include isolating 

the stair from experiencing internal stresses due to interstory drift or provide 

substantiating evidence to demonstrate that stair can accommodate interstory drift.

3. Design and provide supplementary framing as required to support and anchor to 

structural framing.

4. Design components and connections to maintain fire rating when subjected to seismic 

design forces and deformations.

3.8 FREESTANDING WALLS OR FENCES

A. Freestanding walls and fences:

1. Design wall/fence and foundation capable of resisting out-of-plane seismic design force 

and code wind forces including out-of-plane forces.

3.9 MECHANICAL AND PLUMBING COMPONENTS
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-12

A. Floor and base-mounted mechanical equipment (boilers, furnaces, pumps, chillers, 

manufacturing, process machinery, etc.), vibration isolated equipment and associated system 

vibration and seismic controls for connections. 

1. Design equipment anchorage to resist seismic design force in any direction.

2. Design vibration and seismic controls for equipment to include base and isolator 

requirements.

3. Provide flexible connection between equipment and interconnected piping.

4. Where equipment is mounted on vibration isolators and restraints, use isolators and 

restraints designed for amplified code forces per ASCE 7 and with demonstrated ability to 

resist required forces including gravity, operational and seismic forces.

5. Provide supplemental steel or concrete base as required for mounting equipment on 

isolators. Where equipment is not designed to be point loaded, provide base capable of

transferring gravity and seismic demands from equipment to isolator base plate 

anchorage.

6. Where concrete floor thickness is less than required for expansion anchor installation per 

ICC-ESR, install through bolt in lieu of expansion anchor. Where timber/wood floor or 

other substrate is inadequate for installation of lag bolts, screws or other mechanical 

fasteners, furnish and install supplemental framing or blocking to transfer loads to 

structural elements. 

B. Suspended mechanical equipment

1. Design support and bracing to resist seismic design force in any direction.

2. Provide flexible connection between equipment and interconnected piping.

3. Brace equipment hung from spring mounts using cable or other bracing that will not 

transmit vibration to the structure.

4. As an alternate to project-specific design of seismic bracing, use of proprietary restraint 

systems with a certificate of compliance verified and listed by an accredited inspection 

body is acceptable. Use of a certified product does not preclude the requirement for shop 

drawings. 

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: The California Office of 

Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD) runs a 

“Preapproval” program in which it conducts an internal technical review 

of proprietary components or system seismic design submittals and 

approves them for use in California hospitals. OSHPD preapprovals are 

accepted by some jurisdictions.]

C. Wall-mounted mechanical equipment

1. Design support and bracing to resist seismic design force in any direction.

2. Install backing plates or blocking as required to deliver load to primary wall framing 

members. Do not anchor to gypsum wallboard, plaster or other wall finish that has not 

been engineered to resist imposed loads.

D. Piping

1. Provide seismic bracing for piping as required by Section 1.2.

2. Provide supports, braces and anchors to resist gravity and seismic design forces.

3. Design piping and piping risers to accommodate interstory drift. 

4. Provide flexible connections between floor-mounted equipment and suspended piping; 

between unbraced piping and restrained suspended items; as required for thermal 

movement; at building separations and seismic joints; and wherever relative differential 

movements could damage pipe in an earthquake. 

5. Brace resiliently-supported pipe with cable bracing or alternate means designed to 

prevent transmission of vibrations and noise to structure.

6. Brace every run (5’ or more in length) with two transverse and one longitudinal bracing 

locations. For pipes and connections constructed of ductile materials (copper, ductile 

iron, steel or aluminum and brazed, welded or screwed connections) provide transverse 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-13

bracing at not more than 40 feet on center and longitudinal bracing at spacing not more 

than 80 feet on center. For pipes and their connections constructed of nonductile 

materials (cast iron, no-hub pipe and plastic or non-UL listed grooved coupling pipe), 

provide transverse bracing at not more than 20 feet on center and longitudinal bracing at 

spacing not more than 40 feet on center. Alternatively, explicitly design piping and 

connections to resist gravity and seismic forces and seismic deformations.

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: Add additional pipe types or 

alternate requirements as required to cover project specific scope and 

performance requirements.]

7. Provide lateral restraint for risers at not more than 30 feet on center or as required for 

horizontal runs, whichever is less.

8. Where piping is explicitly exempt from seismic bracing requirements, provide flexible 

connections between piping and connected equipment, including in-line devices such as 

VAV boxes and reheat coils.

9. Where piping is explicitly exempt from seismic bracing requirements, install piping such 

that swinging of the pipes will not cause damaging impact with adjacent components, 

finishes or structural framing. This will be considered satisfied if there is horizontal clear 

distance of at least 2/3 the hanger length between subject components. If swinging of 

exempted piping can cause damaging contact with adjacent components, finishes or 

structural framing, add swing restraints as required to eliminate contact. 

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: The concern for damage 

caused by unbraced pipes should be considered on a project specific 

basis. ASCE 7 13.6.8 allows pipe bracing to be omitted if “high 

deformability piping is used; (and) provisions are made to protect the 

piping in the event of such impact.” The measures described above are 

one way to meet these requirements. In many jurisdictions, this is not a 

focus of concern.]

10. As an alternate to project-specific design of seismic bracing, use of proprietary restraint 

systems with a certificate of compliance verified and listed by an accredited inspection 

body is acceptable. Use of a certified product does not preclude the requirement for shop 

drawings. 

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: The California Office of 

Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD) runs a 

“Preapproval” program in which it conducts an internal technical review 

of proprietary components or system seismic design submittals and 

approves them for use in California hospitals. OSHPD preapprovals are 

accepted by some jurisdictions.]

11. Re-use of existing hangers: Where pipes are being installed in existing facilities, the reuse of existing hangers at locations of seismic bracing will be judged on a case-by-case 

basis by the registered project design professional. Unless otherwise shown on the 

drawings, it shall be assumed that all hangers supporting new piping and located at a 

seismic brace will be installed new.

E. Ductwork

1. Provide seismic bracing for ducts with cross sectional area greater than 6 square feet

(independent of the duct contents) and for ducts containing hazardous materials.

2. Provide supports, braces and anchors to resist gravity and seismic design forces.

3. Design ducts and duct risers to accommodate interstory drift. 

4. Provide independent support for in-line devices weighing more than 20 pounds. Provide 

independent support and bracing for all in-line devices weighing more than 75 pounds. 

Unbraced piping attached to braced in-line equipment shall be provided with adequate 

flexibility to accommodate differential displacements.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-14

5. Appurtenances such as dampers, louvers and diffusers shall be positively attached to the 

ductwork with mechanical fasteners.

6. Duct supports shall be designed to resist not less than 150% of the weight of the duct. 

For seismic design categories D, E and F, ducts weighing over 10 plf shall not be hung

using power driven fasteners.

7. As an alternate to project-specific design of seismic bracing, use of proprietary restraint 

systems with a certificate of compliance verified and listed by an IAS accredited 

inspection body or otherwise accepted by the Authority Having Jurisdiction is acceptable. 

Use of a certified product does not preclude the requirement for shop drawings. 

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: The California Office of 

Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD) runs a 

“Preapproval” program in which it conducts an internal technical review 

of proprietary components or system seismic design submittals and 

approves them for use in California hospitals. OSHPD preapprovals are 

accepted by some jurisdictions. “Preapproved by OSHPD” may be added 

to item 7 after “IAS accredited inspection body” if desired.]

F. Tanks

1. Design tank anchorage to resist seismic design force.

2. Design tank legs or supporting structure to resist seismic design force.

3. Provide flexible connections between tank and interconnected piping.

G. Fire suppression equipment and piping

1. See requirements for suspended piping.

2. See requirements for floor-mounted and wall-mounted equipment.

3. Satisfy requirements of NFPA 13 and the force and displacement requirements of ASCE 

7. All components shall be UL listed.

4. Provide end of line restraint as required by NFPA 13.

3.10 ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT

A. Electrical equipment

1. Design equipment to resist seismic design force in any direction

2. Batteries on racks shall be provided with acid resistant and corrosion resistant wraparound restraints or shall be otherwise prevented from movement within battery rack. 

Racks shall be designed to resist seismic design force.

3. Electrical cabinet design shall comply with the applicable National Electrical 

Manufacturers Association (NEMA) standards.

4. Supports shall be designed to accommodate the seismic relative displacement between 

points of support.

5. Where equipment is mounted on vibration isolators and restraints, use isolators and 

restraints designed for amplified code forces and with demonstrated ability to resist 

required forces including gravity, operational and seismic forces.

B. Conduit, cable tray, bus duct, raceways, bundled cabling

1. Provide supports and anchoring so that, upon application of seismic forces and 

deformations, conduit/cable tray/bus duct/raceway/bundled cabling will not displace 

sufficiently to cause damage to wires, connections, adjacent or connecting equipment, 

building members or finishes.

2. Provide seismic bracing of conduit/cable tray/bus duct/raceway/bundled cabling to resist 

gravity and seismic design forces.

3. Provide gravity support for conduit/cable tray/bus duct/raceway/bundled cabling that is 

independent of suspended ceiling framing.

4. Design conduit/cable tray/bus duct/raceway/bundled cabling to accommodate interstory 

drift. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-15

5. As an alternate to project-specific design of seismic bracing, use of proprietary restraint 

systems with a certificate of compliance verified and listed by an accredited inspection 

body is acceptable. Use of a certified product does not preclude the requirement for shop 

drawings. 

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: The California Office of 

Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD) runs a 

“Preapproval” program in which it conducts an internal technical review 

of proprietary component or system seismic design submittals and 

approves them for use in California hospitals. OSHPD preapprovals are 

accepted by some jurisdictions.]

6. Provide flexible connections wherever relative differential movement could damage 

conduit/cable tray/bus duct/raceway/bundled cabling in an earthquake. 

C. Light fixtures

1. Design fixture connections to resist seismic design force.

2. For lights in suspended ceilings:

a. For lights weighing 56 pounds or less, provide positive mechanical connection 

between fixtures and ceiling framing to resist seismic design force and gravity load.

Provide 2 independent wires at diagonally opposite corners connected to structural 

framing. For lights weighing more than 56 pounds, provide independent support 

and bracing.

3. For lights in light framed ceilings and walls:

a. For lights weighing 56 pounds or less, provide positive mechanical connection 

between the fixture and the ceiling/wall framing capable of resisting required 

gravity and seismic demands. Provide ceiling and wall framing capable of 

delivering demands from the light fixture to the structure.

4. For pendant mounted fixtures:

a. Verify that fixture will not displace in such a manner as to hit adjacent lighting 

and/or architectural elements or other suspended items. Connection to the 

structure shall allow a 360 degree range of motion. If pendant fixture could come in 

contact another item when swinging in a 45 degree arc from vertical in any 

direction, provide bracing to limit movement and avoid interaction. Design load 

shall be 1.4 times the operating weight acting down with a simultaneous horizontal 

load of 1.4 times the operating weight.

D. Communication systems including alarm systems

1. See requirements for electrical equipment and conduit, cable tray, bus duct, raceways, 

bundled cabling.

3.11 TRANSPORTATION COMPONENTS

A. Elevator and escalators

1. Design for conformance with seismic requirements of ASME A17.1.

2. Design to resist seismic design force specified herein. The more stringent design force 

shall govern.

3. Elevator/escalator equipment and controller supports and attachments shall be designed 

to resist seismic design force.

4. Elevators travelling with a speed of 150 ft/min or greater shall be provided with a seismic 

switch in accordance with ASCE 7.

5. Provide retainer plate at the top and bottom of the car and counterweight.

3.12 STORAGE RACKS AND SHELVING

A. Light duty storage racks and shelving 

1. Provide restraint to resist seismic design force in any direction.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-16

2. Where restraint is provided by anchorage to a wall, verify that wall has adequate strength 

to resist anchor demands. Install backing plates or blocking as required to deliver load to 

primary wall framing members. Do not anchor directly to gypsum wallboard, plaster or 

other wall finish that has not been engineered to resist imposed loads.

B. Industrial storage racks

1. Design for conformance with latest version of Rack Manufacturers Institute (RMI) 

Specification for the Design, Testing and Utilization of Industrial Steel Storage Racks and 

the seismic design requirements of ASCE 7. Where design criteria conflict, the more 

stringent shall apply.

3.13 TELEVISIONS, MONITORS

1. Design support and bracing for wall-mounted and suspended televisions/monitors to 

resist seismic design force in any direction.

2. Where restraint is provided by anchorage to a wall, verify that was has adequate strength 

to resist anchor demands. Install backing plates or blocking as required to deliver load to 

primary wall framing members. Do not anchor directly to gypsum wallboard, plaster or 

other wall finish that has not been engineered to resist imposed loads.

3. Use mounting brackets certified for resistance to seismic loads.

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: 1. These provisions address 

wall-mounted and suspended televisions/monitors. If large or critical 

monitors are counter-mounted, specific seismic restraint provisions could 

be added to restrain them. 2, The California Office of Statewide Health 

Planning and Development (OSHPD) runs a “Preapproval” program in 

which it conducts an internal technical review of proprietary component 

or system seismic design submittals and approves them for use in 

California hospitals. OSHPD preapprovals for television mounting 

brackets are accepted by some jurisdictions and may be a useful source 

for selecting and specifying mounting hardware.]

3.14 DESKTOP COMPUTERS

1. Provide straps, high friction pads, snubbers or other mechanisms as required to resist 

seismic design forces.

2. All connections shall be readily demountable and shall not damage computer housing.

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: Desktop computers are not 

regulated by the building code. The need for restraint should be 

considered on a project-by-project basis.]

3.15 COMPUTER AND COMMUNICATIONS RACKS, CABINETS AND BOARDS

1. Design equipment anchorage to resist seismic design force in any direction

2. Where cable tray is connected to the top of racks or cabinets, design seismic restraint to 

include the tributary weight of the cable tray and components.

3. Interconnect adjacent cabinets to cause them to respond together when resisting lateral 

forces.

4. Where equipment is supported on raised access flooring, provide bracing and anchorage 

to the supporting floor below.

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: There are many approaches to 

providing seismic restraint for computer and communications equipment. 

Where specific design requirements are desired, they should be clearly 

specified. For example, the use of isolation bases or independent 

support frames may be specified.] 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-17

3.16 KITCHEN EQUIPMENT

1. Design equipment anchorage to resist seismic design force in any direction.

2. Connections shall enable the equipment to be readily disengaged to enable the 

equipment to be relocated for cleaning.

3. Provide flexible connections between connected piping and kitchen equipment. If kitchen 

equipment is restrained with removable “tethers,” provide sufficient flexibility in 

connections to accommodate full range of movement associated with tether.

3.17 DEMOUNTABLE PARTITIONS

1. Use system engineered for use in regions of seismicity. Anchor to structure to resist 

seismic design force in any direction.

3.18 SHELF- AND COUNTER-MOUNTED CONTENTS

1. Provide straps, mechanical barriers, high friction pads, snubbers or other mechanisms as 

required to resist seismic design forces.

2. All connections shall be readily demountable and shall not damage or permanently alter 

contents.

3. Restraints shall not prevent items from being added to or removed from shelf or counter.

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: Shelf- and counter-mounted 

contents are not regulated by the building code. The need for restraint 

should be considered on a project-by-project basis.]

3.19 FIELD QUALITY CONTROL

Provide a quality assurance plan as required by ASCE 7, Appendix 11A for installation of the 

following per IBC Chapter 17. Reference 130541.1.3 for the definition of special inspector. A 

minimum of 3 special inspections shall be performed (pre-construction, mid-construction, and 

final inspection):

1. Seismic Design Category C

a. Heating, ventilating and air-conditioning (HVAC) ductwork containing hazardous 

materials or smoke control and anchorage of such ductwork.

b. Piping systems and mechanical units containing flammable, combustible or highly 

toxic materials.

c. Anchorage of electrical equipment used for emergency or standy power systems.

d. Vibration-isolated systems and associated seismic restraints where indicated on 

the construction documents or submittals. All restraints require a nominal 

clearance of 0.25” or less between the equipment support frame and restraint.

2. Seismic Design Category D

a. All systems required for Seismic Design Category C

b. Exterior wall panels and their anchorage

c. Suspended ceiling system and their anchorage

1) Verify member type and size, verify that bracing elements such as splayed 

wires and compression struts are installed as detailed; test anchorage to 

structure

d. Steel storage racks 8’ or higher
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 A: Specification Page A-18

1) Verify that connections of the racks to the structure are installed as detailed 

on the drawings. Spot check the connection of horizontal beams to uprights 

verifying fastener tightness

e. Access floors

1) Verify that anchorage matches detail on the drawings

2) Verify connection of access floor framing to support posts

3) Inspect installation of post-installed anchors

4) Test post installed anchors

3. Seismic Design Categories E and F

a. All systems required for Seismic Design Categories C and D

b. All electrical equipment

[NOTE TO DESIGNER AND SPECIFIER: This specification assumes 

that the requirements for testing and inspection of post-installed anchors 

are covered elsewhere in the specifications or drawings. If not, specific 

test requirements should be added here.]

B. Special Seismic Certifications

1. Verify that the label, anchorage or mounting conforms to the certificate of compliance for 

designated seismic systems defined in Section 130541.1.2 and 1.3.

END OF SECTION 130541
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 B: Responsibility Matrix Page B-1

B. RESPONSIBILITY MATRIX 

This appendix contains responsibility matrix templates for the seismic protection of 

nonstructural components. The templates are to be used for assigning responsibility for 

design, construction, and inspection of nonstructural installations governed by ASCE/SEI 7-10. 

Three separate templates are provided for Seismic Design Categories B, C, and D/E/F, 

respectively. In addition, a Basic Form is provided for general use. The matrices are intended 

to be used in conjunction with the construction specification provided in Appendix A.

The matrices are provided as a Microsoft Excel file (.xls) on the CD-ROM and should be 

customized for use in projects.

.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 B: Responsibility Matrix Page B-2

 

Figure B-1 Screenshot showing Responsibility Matrix for the Seismic Protection of nonstructural Components, Seismic Design 

Catergory B worksheet. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 C: Nonstructural Inventory Form Page C-1

C. NONSTRUCTURAL INVENTORY FORM

The intent is that Appendices C, D and E be used together as tools for the facility survey. The 

first step is to review the map in Figure 3.2.1-1 and discussion in Section 1.3 to see if 

nonstructural hazard mitigation is a concern for the facility in question. If so, then Appendices 

C and D can be used in tandem to perform the survey. Risk ratings from Appendix E could be 

added to the inventory form during the field survey or added later in order to help prioritize the 

items in the list.

The questions in Appendix D are stated in such a way that the answer "No" or “Unknown” 

indicates that the component may be noncompliant and likely to pose a nonstructural 

earthquake hazard. All of the noncompliant components should be entered as individual line 

items on the facility inventory form in this Appendix. As shown below, the form provides 

columns for the following information:

 Priority: This can be added at the end after the priorities have been established.

 Nonstructural Item: Name or description of nonstructural component.

 Location: Information such as building, floor, or room number.

 Quantity: Number of items, lineal feet, or square feet.

 Risk Rating for Life Safety (LS), Property Loss (PL) and Functional Loss (FL) from 

Appendix E.

 Notes: Space for comments regarding the current condition, presence or absence of 

anchorage details, proximity to other hazardous items, issues with secondary damage 

such as leaks or hazardous materials release, and whether the component in question is 

important for functionality of the facility. This might also include a photo number if 

photos of each item are taken to assist with the survey.

The inventory form provided here has been adapted from the spreadsheet provided by the U.S. 

Bureau of Reclamation on their website under the heading “Online Orders/Free Tools,” 

http://www.usbr.gov/ssle/seismicsafety/onlineorders.html. The website contains two types of 

downloadable survey forms: one in spreadsheet format (Microsoft Excel) and one in database 

format (Microsoft Access). Both of these forms have built-in sorting algorithms so that 

components with high risk in any category can be shifted to the top of the list. These sorting

criteria may be adjusted to suit individual needs. Survey forms can be customized to include 

cost data, which may be useful for prioritization and planning. Proprietary forms are also 

available for purchase from specialty vendors.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 C: Nonstructural Inventory Form Page C-2

 

Figure C-1 Sample inventory checklist for a facility located in an area with Moderate seismic risk. The sorting algorithm of the 

spreadsheet makes this a useful tool for prioritization. The electronic file is free to download from the U.S. 

Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation’s website, 

http://www.usbr.gov/ssle/seismicsafety/onlineorders.html. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-1

D. CHECKLIST OF NONSTRUCTURAL SEISMIC HAZARDS

This checklist is intended to be used in surveying buildings to assess whether the nonstructural 

elements (architectural, MEP, FF&E, or contents) pose a danger to the building occupants or are 

likely to cause financial loss or interruption following an earthquake. 

This checklist of nonstructural hazards is intended for use in areas where seismic hazards are a 

significant concern. Review the discussion in Section 1.3 for the applicability of these 

nonstructural guidelines and the sidebar in Section 5.3.1 for rules regarding exemptions from 

the nonstructural provisions in ASCE/SEI 7-10 Minimal Design Loads for Buildings and Other 

Structures (ASCE, 2010) that apply to new construction. 

The form includes eight columns marked as follows:

ITEM NO.: ID number to indicate the type of component (architectural, MEP, FF&E or contents) 

and the subgroup. These numbers are based on the section or subsection in this text and as 

shown in the tables in Chapter 6.

COMPONENT NAME(S): Name or description of item.

PRINCIPAL CONCERNS: List of problems often associated with this type of item such as falling 

hazard, water or fuel leakage, broken glass. These concerns should be taken into account 

when answering the checklist questions. For example, the primary concern for adhered veneer 

is that it may pose a falling hazard. If a facility has adhered veneer, but only at the base of the 

building below 6 ft, then this might be checked “Compliance,” if the purpose of the survey is to 

identify life safety hazards or might be rated “Noncompliance,” if the survey is also intended to 

help control property damage and limit losses.

EXAMPLE: Example number. All examples, which contain photos and detailed drawings when 

applicable, can be found in Chapter 6.

COMPLIANCE (C): The questions in this form have been stated in such a way that an 

affirmative answer indicates that the item is not likely to pose a nonstructural hazard.

NONCOMPLIANCE (NC): The questions in this checklist are stated in such a way that the 

answer "No" or “Unknown” indicates that the component may be noncompliant and likely to 

pose a nonstructural earthquake hazard. All of the noncompliant components should be 

entered as individual line items on the facility inventory form in Appendix A. Comments should 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-2

be entered in the survey form noting the location, condition, presence or absence of anchorage 

details, proximity to other hazardous items, issues with secondary damage such as leaks or 

hazardous materials release, and whether the component in question is important for 

functionality of the facility.

NOT APPLICABLE (N/A): This column should be checked if none of the listed items are present 

and has been included, so that it is clear that the item was not missed or overlooked when 

performing the survey. 

CHECKLIST QUESTIONS: Questions are all “Yes-No” questions, which are answered by 

checking the appropriate box from among the previous three columns.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-3

6.3 Architectural Components

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

6.3.1 Exterior Wall Components [Exterior falling hazards are a primary concern, 

especially items situated above 10 feet and 

items that may fall over exits, walkways, or 

sidewalks.]

Adhered veneer Falling hazard 6.3.1.1 Is the adhered veneer adequately attached to 

the structure? [This includes relatively thin 

sections of tile, masonry, stone, terra cotta, 

ceramic tile, glass mosaic units, stucco, or 

similar materials attached to a structural wall or 

framework by means of an adhesive].

Based on visual observations and/or tapping, is 

the veneer free of cracked or loose sections 

that may fall during an earthquake?

Anchored 

veneer 

Falling hazard 6.3.1.2 Is the anchored veneer adequately attached to 

the structure? [This includes thicker masonry, 

stone, or stone slab units that are attached to 

the structure by mechanical anchors].

Is the masonry or other veneer supported by 

shelf angles or other elements at each floor?

Is the masonry or other veneer connected to a 

structural back-up wall at adequate spacing?

Has the veneer been adequately maintained? 

Are the anchors in good condition, free of 

significant corrosion, and inspected regularly?

Prefabricated 

panels 

Falling 

hazard, 

damage to 

panels and 

connections, 

broken glass

6.3.1.3 Were the panels and connections designed by 

an architect or engineer to accommodate the 

expected seismic distortion of the surrounding 

structure?

Are prefabricated cladding panels detailed to 

allow relative movement between the panel and 

the structure?

Are prefabricated panels supported for vertical 

loads with at least two connections per panel?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-4

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Are prefabricated panels supported for out-ofplane loads with at least four connections per 

panel?

Have the panels been adequately maintained? 

Are the panel connections in good condition, 

free of significant corrosion, and inspected 

regularly?

Are there adequate separations between panels 

so they will not come into contact with each 

other during an earthquake?

Glazing 

exterior wall 

system

Falling 

hazard, 

broken glass

6.3.1.4 Is it known that the glazing was designed by an 

architect or engineer to accommodate the 

expected seismic distortion of the surrounding 

structure?

Do large window panes and storefront windows 

have safety glass? [All exterior glazing should 

be laminated, annealed or laminated heatstrengthened safety glass or other glazing 

system that will remain in the frame when the 

glass is cracked. This is particularly important 

for glazing located over 10 feet above an 

exterior walking surface].

Glass blocks Falling 

hazard, 

broken glass

6.3.1.5 Are partial-height glass block walls laterally 

braced to the structure?

Is the glass block reinforced with panel anchors 

and panel reinforcing wire?

Overhead 

glazing or 

skylights

Falling 

hazard, 

broken glass

6.3.1.6 Are transoms (glass panes over doors) made of 

safety glass?

Are skylights made of safety glass or covered 

with shatter-resistant film?

Are large panes made of safety glass or is it 

known whether the glazing assembly was 

designed by an architect or engineer to 

accommodate the expected seismic distortion 

of the surrounding structure?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-5

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

6.3.2 Partitions

Heavy Falling 

hazard; 

collapse or 

spalling with 

debris in 

exitways; 

large cracks 

often 

mistaken for 

structural 

damage

6.3.2.1 Are block wall partitions reinforced? [This 

would include concrete masonry unit (CMU), 

brick, and hollow clay tile partitions. Most

brick and hollow clay tile walls in pre-1933 

buildings in California are unreinforced; 

unreinforced masonry partitions may still be 

found in current construction in other parts of 

the country.]

Are unreinforced masonry walls braced at 

regular intervals? [In zones of low and 

moderate seismicity, are partitions braced at 10 

foot intervals or less? In zones of high 

seismicity, are partitions braced at 6 foot 

intervals or less?]

Are full-height CMU partitions detailed to allow 

sliding at the top?

Light Cracking of 

plaster or 

gypsum 

board; costly 

to patch and 

paint

6.3.2.2 Are partial-height stud wall partitions braced to 

the structure above the ceiling line?

Are full-height stud wall partitions detailed to 

allow sliding at the top?

If partitions function as lateral support for tall 

shelving or other nonstructural components, 

are these partitions adequately anchored or 

braced to the structure above the ceiling line?

Glazed Broken glass 6.3.2.3 Are interior glazed or glass block partitions 

laterally braced to the structure?

6.3.3 Interior Veneers

 Stone and tile Falling 

hazard, 

debris in 

exitways

6.3.3.1 Is the adhered veneer adequately attached to 

the structure?

 Is the anchored veneer adequately attached to 

the structure?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-6

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

6.3.4 Ceilings, Soffits

 Suspended 

acoustic lay-in 

tile ceiling 

Dropped 

acoustical 

tiles, 

perimeter 

damage, 

separation of 

runners and 

cross 

runners; 

falling hazard 

if grid and 

lights come 

down

6.3.4.1 Does the suspended ceiling have adequate 

diagonal bracing wires and compression struts 

to support seismic loads from the ceiling grid 

plus all lay-in items that do not have 

independent lateral supports?

If the ceiling supports lay-in lighting or 

diffusers, do the lay-in items all have 

independent vertical supports consisting of 

wires located at least at two diagonally opposite 

corners? 

Do lay-in fixtures weighing over 50 pounds 

additionally have independent lateral bracing 

wires at all four corners?

If located in a high seismic zone, is the 

suspended ceiling supported by a heavy duty 

ceiling grid with adequate capacity and does 

the grid include supplemental hanger wires at 

light fixtures or other mechanical items?

 Directly applied 

to structure 

Falling hazard 6.3.4.2 Are decorative ceiling panels and/or latticework 

securely attached, particularly beneath exterior 

eves over exits?

Are decorative finishes and/or latticework on 

beam soffits or beneath exterior eves securely 

attached, particularly over exits?

For plaster ceilings or stucco soffits, is the wire 

mesh or wood lath securely attached to the 

structural framing above? 

Is the plaster or stucco in good condition and 

not deteriorated by water damage or corrosion?

 Suspended 

heavy ceilings

Falling hazard 6.3.4.3 If the suspended gypsum board ceiling extends 

over more than one level, does the suspended 

ceiling system have adequate diagonal bracing?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-7

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Is the suspended wire mesh or wood lath 

securely attached to the structural framing 

above?

Is the plaster ceiling in good condition and not 

deteriorated by water damage?

6.3.5 Parapets, Appendages, Roof Tiles 

 Unreinforced 

masonry 

parapet 

Falling hazard 6.3.5.1 Are unreinforced masonry parapets adequately 

braced? [If there is a local parapet ordinance, is 

it known if the bracing complies with the local 

ordinance?]

Parapets, 

cornices, 

appendages

Falling hazard Are parapets and cornices reinforced and 

adequately braced?

Do other decorative elements and appendages 

have positive anchorage to the building?

Are hanging appendages braced or secured 

with a safety cable?

6.3.6 Canopies, Marquees, Signs 

 Canopy, 

Marquees, 

Signs 

Falling hazard 6.3.6.1 Are cantilevered elements braced to the 

structure with steel shapes, not chains, to 

provide restraint and prevent bouncing?

Are exterior signs or billboards adequately 

braced and anchored?

Are interior signs securely attached with 

positive connections?

 Flagpoles Falling hazard Are flagpoles securely attached to the 

structure?

6.3.7 Chimneys and Stacks 

 Unreinforced 

masonry 

chimney 

Falling hazard 6.3.7.1 Is the brick chimney restrained with braces to 

the roof near the top of the chimney?

Is the brick chimney anchored near the roof 

line?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-8

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Stacks Falling hazard Are stacks anchored to the supports or 

foundation by means of anchor bolts of 

adequate length and double nuts?

6.3.8 Stairways 

 Stairways 6.3.8.1 Do steel stairs in multistory buildings have 

sliding supports at one end that can 

accommodate the anticipated interstory 

displacements?

Have any unreinforced masonry partitions, 

piping, or lighting in stairwells been removed, 

strengthened, encapsulated or braced, 

especially if the stairway is used as a primary 

exit route?

6.3.9 Freestanding Walls or Fences

 Freestanding 

Walls or Fences 

Falling hazard 

if over 4’ tall 

6.3.9.1 Were freestanding walls or fences designed by 

an architect/engineer to resist lateral forces?

Are CMU walls adequately reinforced with 

vertical bars set in grout-filled cells and 

horizontal bars embedded in the mortar joints?

Were CMU walls or fences built with adequate 

foundations to prevent them from tipping over 

in an earthquake?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-9

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Components

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

6.4.1 Mechanical Equipment

Boilers, 

furnaces, 

pumps and 

chillers ( HVAC 

wet-side 

equipment)

Sliding, 

overturning, 

broken 

gas/fuel or 

exhaust lines, 

leaking fluids, 

loss of 

function

6.4.1.1 Are the boilers, pumps, chillers and similar 

wet-side HVAC equipment securely anchored to 

the floor or wall with adequately sized bolts?

Do HVAC wet-side equipment items that are 

mounted on vibration isolators have adequate 

lateral restraint provided by snubbers, 

bumpers, or restrained vibration isolators?

Are housekeeping pads under boilers and 

similar equipment anchored to the floor slab?

Does the gas line have a flexible connection to 

the water heater or boiler that is able to 

accommodate movement?

Are furnaces, and furnace or boiler bases, 

constructed without using unreinforced 

masonry?

General 

manufacturing 

and process 

machinery 

Falling 

hazards, 

hazardous 

material leaks 

or spills, loss 

of function

6.4.1.2 Is manufacturing and process machinery and 

related equipment, cranes, tanks, piping, 

chutes, and conveyors all adequately restrained 

and anchored, particularly items that may fall 

and injure workers, result in hazardous 

materials release, or create hazardous electrical 

conditions? 

Have all life safety hazards been addressed by 

bracing or anchoring clear falling hazards and 

other hazardous items?

If immediate occupancy or operations is a 

project objective, has a design professional 

familiar with nonstructural anchorage of 

manufacturing and process machinery been 

engaged to perform a detailed survey of the 

plant?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-10

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

HVAC 

equipment with 

vibration 

isolation

Fall off 

isolators, 

overturning, 

broken 

gas/fuel or 

exhaust lines, 

leaking fluids, 

loss of 

function

6.4.1.3 Do HVAC dry-side equipment items such as air 

compressors, fans, blowers and filters that are 

mounted on vibration isolators have adequate 

lateral restraint provided by snubbers, 

bumpers, or restrained vibration isolators?

If large equipment is mounted on a concrete 

housekeeping pad, is the pad adequately 

anchored into the structural slab?

Do roof-mounted HVAC units that are mounted 

on vibration isolators have adequate lateral 

restraint provided by snubbers, bumpers, or 

restrained vibration isolators?

For roof-mounted units, are the curbs 

supporting the vibration isolators securely 

attached to the structural roof framing?

HVAC 

equipment 

without 

vibration 

isolation 

Sliding, 

overturning, 

broken 

gas/fuel or 

exhaust lines, 

leaking fluids, 

loss of 

function

6.4.1.4 Is equipment (e.g. gas-fired boiler, commercial 

water heater, chiller, etc.) securely mounted to 

the floor, wall, or roof with adequately sized 

bolts?

If large equipment is mounted on a concrete 

housekeeping pad, is the pad adequately 

anchored into the structural slab?

Does the gas or fuel line have a flexible 

connection that is able to accommodate 

movement?

For roof-mounted units, are the curbs 

supporting the vibration isolators securely 

attached to the structural roof framing?

Are wall- or window-mounted window air 

conditioning units securely mounted to the wall 

or shelf?

HVAC 

equipment 

Falling or 

swinging 

6.4.1.5 Is suspended equipment braced or anchored 

independently from the ductwork?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-11

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

suspended inline with 

ductwork 

hazard, 

separate from 

ductwork, 

loss of 

function

Does the equipment have flexible connections 

to gas, fuel, or electrical lines?

Suspended 

equipment

Gas leak, 

falling hazard

6.4.1.6 Are the suspended room heaters, especially 

gas-fired ones, laterally supported?

Are gas-fired heaters fitted with flexible gas 

connections?

6.4.2 Storage Tanks and Water Heaters

Structurally 

supported 

tanks and 

vessels

Tank or 

vessel 

rupture, pipe 

break

6.4.2.1 Is the tank securely attached to the supports?

Are the tank supports braced in both 

directions?

Are the tank supports attached with anchor 

bolts to concrete walls or foundation pad?

Is the foundation large enough to keep the tank 

from sliding or tipping over?

Is the wall strong enough to support the tank?

Flat bottom 

tanks and 

vessels

Tank or 

vessel 

rupture, pipe 

break

6.4.2.2 Is the tank securely anchored to a concrete slab 

or foundation?

Is the foundation large enough to keep the tank 

from sliding or tipping over?

Compressed 

gas cylinders

Gas leak 6.4.2.3 Are all gas cylinders tightly secured with a 

chain near the top and bottom or otherwise 

restrained from movement in each direction?

Are the chains or restraints securely anchored 

to a wall or counter with screws or bolts rather 

than clamps?

If the gas cylinders are attached to piping, are 

the restraints adequate to prevent damage at 

the piping connections? 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-12

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Water heaters Gas leak, 

water leak, 

loss of 

function

6.4.2.4 Are the water heaters securely anchored to the 

floor or wall?

Do the gas lines or electrical conduit and water 

lines have flexible connections to the water 

heater that are able to accommodate 

movement?

Does the water heater meet the limitations for 

use of prescriptive restraints? Is the capacity 

less than 100 gallons and is there a structural 

wall within 12 inches?

Does the wall have adequate strength to 

restrain the water heater?

6.4.3 Pressure Piping 

Suspended 

pressure piping

Breaks, leaks, 

loss of 

function

6.4.3.1 Are the pipes laterally restrained at reasonable 

intervals in each direction? 

Are the restraints securely attached to the 

structure?

Are the pipes free of asbestos insulation that 

could be damaged by movement in an 

earthquake?

Are the pipes free of asbestos that would need 

to be abated before any retrofit work?

In-line valves 

and pumps

Loss of 

function, 

leaks

6.4.3.2 Are the distribution pumps anchored, or are 

they mounted on vibration isolation springs 

with additional seismic lateral restraints?

Are suspended valves and pumps adequately 

braced and anchored to structural elements?

Flexible 

connections, 

expansion 

joints, seismic 

separations

Breaks, leaks, 

loss of 

function

6.4.3.3 Are flexible connections provided where piping 

connects to rigidly mounted equipment?

Are flexible connections provided where pipes 

cross expansion joints or seismic separations 

between buildings?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-13

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Are pipe penetrations through structural walls 

or framing members large enough to allow for 

some seismic movement?

Pipe Risers Breaks, leaks, 

loss of 

function

6.4.3.4 Are risers (vertical runs of piping) laterally 

restrained at each floor level or roughly at 20 

foot intervals?

For risers subject to thermal expansion and 

contraction, have the seismic supports been 

designed to allow ample thermal movement?

Floor-mounted 

pipe supports

Breaks, leaks, 

loss of 

function

6.4.3.5 Are the pipes laterally restrained at reasonable 

intervals in each direction? 

Are the restraints securely attached to the 

structure?

Roof-mounted 

pipe supports

Breaks, leaks, 

loss of 

function

6.4.3.6 Are the pipes laterally restrained at reasonable 

intervals in each direction and do the restraints 

appear adequate for the roof level? 

[Accelerations at the roof level are typically 

higher than at lower levels of a building.]

Are the curbs and restraints securely attached 

to the structure and protected from weathering 

and corrosion?

Wall-mounted 

pipe supports

Breaks, leaks, 

loss of 

function

6.4.3.7 Are the pipes laterally restrained at reasonable 

intervals in each direction? 

Are the restraints securely attached to the 

structure?

Pipe 

penetrations

Breaks, leaks, 

loss of 

function

6.4.3.8 Are pipe penetrations through structural walls 

or framing members large enough to allow for 

some seismic movement or are the pipes 

restrained to prevent impact with the structural 

element?

6.4.4 Fire Protection Piping 

Suspended fire 

protection 

Damage to 

sprinkler 

6.4.4.1 Are the fire sprinkler piping components 

laterally restrained in each direction?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-14

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

piping heads, leaks, 

loss of 

function

Is the ceiling restrained so the ceilings won't 

break the sprinkler heads?

6.4.5 Fluid Piping, not Fire Protection

Hazardous 

materials

Breaks, leaks, 

hazardous 

materials 

release

6.4.5.1 Is the hazardous material piping laterally 

restrained at reasonable intervals in each 

direction?

Are the restraints securely attached to the 

structure?

Where required, does the hazardous material 

piping have double walls, secondary 

containment, leak detection systems or 

monitoring and are these systems designed for 

seismic loading?

Do the pipes have flexible connections that are 

able to accommodate relative movement at 

locations where they are attached to rigidly 

mounted equipment or where they cross 

seismic separations?

Does piping containing fuel or other hazardous 

materials have a seismic shut-off valve or 

excess flow valve?

If the shut-off for the line is manual, is a 

wrench stored within easy reach?

Nonhazardous 

materials

Breaks, leaks, 

loss of 

function

6.4.5.2 Is the piping laterally restrained at reasonable 

intervals in each direction?

Are the restraints securely attached to the 

structure?

Do the pipes have flexible connections that are 

able to accommodate relative movement at 

locations where they are attached to rigidly 

mounted equipment or where they cross 

seismic separations?

6.4.6 Ductwork 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-15

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Suspended 

ductwork

Collapse, 

separation, 

leaking, 

fumes

6.4.6.1 Are the rectangular distribution ducts larger 

than 6 sq ft in cross sectional area laterally 

supported in each direction?

Are circular ducts larger than 28 inches 

diameter laterally supported in each direction?

Are the supports and hangers securely attached 

to the structure?

Are the distribution ducts able to accommodate 

movement at locations where they cross 

separations between buildings?

Air diffusers Drop out of 

ceiling grid

6.4.6.2 Are the air distribution grills or diffusers 

anchored to adequately supported sheet-metal 

ducts or to the ceiling grid or wall?

Do the diffusers have positive restraint, 

independent of the ceiling grid, such as at least 

two vertical hanger wires per diffuser?

6.4.7 Electrical and Communications Equipment Caution: Only qualified personnel should open 

access panels on electrical equipment.

Control panels, 

motor control 

centers, 

switchgear, etc.

Sliding or 

overturning, 

broken or 

damaged 

conduit or 

electrical bus

6.4.7.1 Are the control panels, motor control centers, 

switchgear and similar items all properly 

anchored to the floor or laterally supported by 

a structural wall?

Do the walls used to support these electrical 

cabinets have adequate strength to restrain 

these items?

Emergency 

generator

Failed 

vibration 

isolation 

mounts; 

broken fuel, 

signal, power 

and exhaust 

lines; loss of 

function

6.4.7.2 Is the emergency generator adequately secured, 

especially if mounted on motor vibration 

isolation springs?

Is the concrete housekeeping pad adequately 

anchored to the structural slab?

Is the diesel fuel tank adequately braced and 

anchored? (Refer to additional questions for 

structurally supported tanks and vessels).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-16

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Are the fuel lines, cooling water lines, and 

exhaust flues for the emergency generator 

attached with flexible connections that are able 

to accommodate relative movement at 

junctions to spring-mounted equipment, at 

building entry and exit points, and at 

expansion joints within the building?

Have all the components of the emergency 

power generating system and the electrical 

distribution system been checked as part of 

this survey?

Transformers Sliding, oil 

leakage, 

bushing 

failure, loss 

of function

6.4.7.3 Are transformers properly anchored to the floor 

or wall?

Batteries and 

battery rack

Batteries fall, 

rack tips; loss

of emergency 

power

6.4.7.4 Are the batteries securely attached to the 

battery rack?

Is the battery rack cross-braced in both 

directions?

Does the battery rack have anchor bolts 

secured to a concrete foundation pad?

Is the foundation large enough to keep the 

battery rack from sliding or tipping?

Photovoltaic 

power systems

Falling hazard 

for roof 

mounted 

panels

6.4.7.5 Are the solar panels securely anchored to the 

roof?

Is the piping laterally restrained?

Communications 

equipment

Sliding, 

overturning, 

or toppling 

leading to 

loss of 

function

6.4.7.6 Is the microwave communications equipment 

(antennae, receiver, transmitter, etc.) securely 

supported and/or anchored?

Are the components of the public address 

system and phone system secured? 

6.4.8 Electrical and Communications Distribution Equipment 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-17

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Electrical 

raceways, 

conduit, cable 

trays

Electrical 

hazards, loss 

of function

6.4.8.1 Are the raceways, bus ducts, and cable trays all 

laterally braced, including both transverse and 

longitudinal braces at reasonable spacing?

Are electrical cables or conduit able to distort 

at the connections with the equipment or where 

they cross seismic joints between buildings?

Distribution 

panels

Electrical 

hazards, loss 

of function 

6.4.8.2 Are the electrical distribution panels securely 

anchored to the floor or wall?

6.4.9 Light Fixtures

Recessed Falling 

hazards

6.4.9.1 Are recessed lights securely attached to the 

ceiling grid to resist seismic shaking and is the 

ceiling grid adequately braced?

Do the lay-in fluorescent light fixtures have 

positive support, independent of the ceiling 

grid, such as at least two diagonally opposite 

hanger wires per light fixture?

Do lay-in fixtures weighing more than 50 

pounds have independent lateral support?

Are lens covers attached or supplied with safety 

devices?

Surfacemounted Falling 

hazards

6.4.9.2 Are spot lights or track lights securely attached 

to resist seismic shaking?

Are exterior light fixtures properly supported or 

securely attached to the structure?

Are emergency lights and exit lights mounted 

to protect them from falling off the wall or off 

shelf supports?

Pendant light 

fixtures

Falling 

hazard, light 

fixture or 

6.4.9.3 Do chandeliers or other hanging fixtures have 

safety cables to prevent them from impacting 

each other or a window?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-18

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

unrestrained 

bulbs

Are lens covers attached or supplied with safety 

devices?

Do pendant or stem light fixtures have safety 

cables so they will not fall if the fixture sways 

and breaks the stem connection, or are they 

braced to prevent swaying? 

Heavy lightfixturesFalling 

hazards

6.4.9.4 Are heavy light fixtures, such as operating 

room lights, adequately braced and anchored to 

the structure independent of the ceiling 

system?

6.4.10 Elevators and escalators Caution: The moving parts or components of 

these systems need to be evaluated by qualified 

personnel. Inappropriate seismic restraints may 

compromise the safe operation of these 

systems.

Hydraulic 

elevator

Loss of 

function

6.4.10.1 Are the components of the hydraulic system 

properly anchored?

Traction 

elevator

Loss of 

function, 

counterweights out 

of guide rails, 

cables out of 

sheaves, 

dislodged 

equipment

6.4.10.2 Are the cables installed in such a way that they 

are protected against misalignment during an 

earthquake?

Is the elevator cab properly attached to the 

guide rails?

Are the counterweights properly attached to the 

guide rails?

Are the guide rails securely attached to the 

building?

Are the motor and motor control cabinets 

properly anchored? 

Is the elevator equipped with a seismic switch?

Escalators Loss of 

function

6.4.10.3 Is the escalator control equipment securely 

anchored?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-19

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Is it known if the escalator was designed by an 

engineer to accommodate relative movement 

between floors during an earthquake?

Is the control equipment for the moving 

walkway properly anchored?

6.4.11 Conveyors, material handling 

Conveyors Loss of 

function, 

falling hazard 

if elevated, 

contents fall

6.4.11.1 Are supports for the conveyors properly 

anchored to the floor or wall?

Is the conveyor control equipment properly 

anchored?

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment and Contents

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

6.5.1 Storage racks 

Light duty 

shelving

Contents fall, 

shelves 

damaged

6.5.1.1 Are tall shelving units securely anchored to the 

floor or walls?

If walls are used for lateral support, has the 

capacity of the walls been checked for 

adequacy to restrain the shelving?

Are heavily loaded shelving units supported in 

both directions?

For shelving units significantly taller than wide, 

are large anchor bolts used to anchor each leg 

to a concrete slab?

Are breakable items secured to the shelves, or 

are they stored in stable units (e.g., are they 

shelved in the original packing boxes, or are 

small items shrink-wrapped together)?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-20

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Industrial 

storage racks

Contents fall, 

racks 

damaged

6.5.1.2 Are industrial storage racks braced and 

anchored to a concrete floor slab or concrete 

walls?

If walls are used for lateral support, has the 

capacity of the walls been checked for 

adequacy to restrain the shelving?

Has the capacity of the concrete floor slab been 

checked for adequacy to resist uplift of the 

storage racks?

Are the racks equipped with dampers, base 

isolation, or other specialized seismic restraint 

systems?

6.5.2 Bookcases, Shelving

 Bookshelves Contents fall, 

shelving 

damaged

6.5.2.1 Are bookshelves 5’ or taller properly anchored 

with brackets to a solid wall or studs, or 

anchored to the floor, particularly if they are 

located next to a bed or desk or where they 

could block an exit?

Does the wall or partition used to anchor the 

book shelves have adequate strength to 

support seismic loading from the shelving?

Are bookshelves fitted with edge restraints or 

elastic cords to keep books from falling?

Are large and heavy books located on the 

lowest shelves?

 Library and 

other shelving

Contents fall, 

shelving 

damaged

6.5.2.2 Is it known if the lateral supports for the library 

stacks and shelving have been designed by an 

architect or engineer?

Are library shelving and stacks properly braced 

and anchored to the floor and walls, including 

bracing to the floor above if shelving is tall and 

slender that tie the shelving units together?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-21

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

If all shelving units are not independently 

braced or anchored, are adjacent units fastened 

together with bolts or other mechanical 

fasteners?

Do walls or partitions used to anchor library 

stacks have adequate strength for the imposed 

lateral loads?

Are bookshelves fitted with edge restraints or

elastic cords to keep books from falling?

Are large and heavy books located on the 

lowest shelves?

Are rare or fragile books given extra protection 

to prevent falling and water damage?

6.5.3 Computer and Communications Equipment

 Computer 

access floors 

and equipment 

Collapse, 

separation 

between 

modules, loss 

of function

6.5.3.1 Are the support pedestals for computer access 

floors anchored to the floor and braced with 

diagonal steel members, or is it verified that 

the vertical pedestals are a seismically qualified 

model, installed in accordance with the 

manufacturer's recommendations?

Do cable openings in the access floor have 

edge guards to prevent equipment legs from 

sliding into the openings

Are computers, tape racks, and associated 

equipment that are about twice as tall as wide, 

anchored, tethered, and/or laterally supported?

Does heavy computer equipment have supports 

which are braced and anchored to the structural 

floor slab independently of the computer 

access floors?

Is computer cabling long enough to 

accommodate lateral movement within the 

building?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-22

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

 Computer and 

communication 

racks 

Lost data or 

damaged 

equipment 

may cause 

downtime

6.5.3.2 Is computer information vital to operations 

backed up and stored off-site?

Is critical computer and communications 

equipment securely anchored to the rack?

Are computer and communication racks 

securely anchored to the floor or wall?

Is sensitive computer or communications 

equipment located out of range of fire sprinkler 

heads or joints in the sprinkler pipes where 

they are less prone to water damage if the 

sprinkler lines break?

 Desktop 

computers and 

accessories

Falling 

hazard, lost 

data or 

damaged 

equipment 

may cause 

downtime

6.5.3.3 Are computers and monitors anchored to 

desktops?

Are desktop or countertop computers and 

printers mounted with positive restraint, resting 

on high-friction rubber pads, or located far 

enough from the edges of desks and tables to 

prevent them from sliding and falling in an 

earthquake?

 Televisions and 

video monitors, 

wall-mounted

Falling hazard 6.5.3.4 Are wall- or overhead-mounted television sets, 

video monitors, surveillance cameras or sound 

system speakers securely braced and anchored 

to the wall or ceiling or equipped with safety 

cables?

6.5.4 Hazardous materials storage

 Hazardous 

materials 

storage 

Hazardous 

material 

release, 

mixing of 

incompatible 

substances

6.5.4.1 Are chemical supplies secured with shelf lips 

several inches high, or are they stored in "egg 

crate" containers in drawers, so that the 

containers will not overturn or fall and spill?

Are chemicals stored in accordance with 

manufacturers' recommendations?

Are incompatible chemicals stored at an 

appropriate distance from one another so that 

they will not mix if the containers are broken?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-23

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Are the chemicals in each cabinet catalogued 

properly and marked clearly?

Are Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) stored 

in a location separate from the chemicals?

Are cabinets for hazardous materials securely 

attached to the floor or to a sturdy wall?

Has asbestos insulation been removed, or has it 

been encapsulated to reduce the possibility of 

damage in an earthquake?

Is the facility free of asbestos that would need 

to be abated before any retrofit work?

6.5.5 Miscellaneous FF&E 

 File cabinets Cabinets fall, 

may block 

exits, 

contents spill

6.5.5.1 Do the file cabinet drawers or doors latch 

securely?

Are tall file cabinets anchored with wall 

brackets to a solid wall or studs, anchored to 

the floor, or bolted to one or more adjacent 

cabinets to form a more stable configuration, 

i.e., a larger "footprint"?

Are unanchored cabinets located so that they 

will not fall or slide and block a door or exit?

 Demountable 

partitions

Collapse, 

block exit 

path

6.5.5.2 Are demountable partitions attached to each 

other and arranged in a stable layout with many 

perpendicular wall segments?

Are partial-height partitions anchored to the 

floor?

If tall shelving or cabinets are located next to 

the partitions, can these items be moved or 

independently anchored to the floor or 

structure?

 

 

Miscellaneous 

furniture and 

fixtures

Falling hazard 6.5.5.3 Are tall items located near beds or desks 

securely anchored to a wall with adequate 

capacity?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-24

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Are large kitchen and laundry equipment all 

securely anchored to the floor, wall, or 

countertop with adequate capacity?

Are vending machines tethered a column or 

wall to prevent tipping and sliding?

Are unanchored furnishings located where they 

cannot slide or overturn to block corridors or 

doors?

Are heavy wall pictures and other wall hangings 

well anchored to the studs or structural 

framing?

Are heavy hanging plants secured to prevent 

falling or impact with windows?

Are personal or storage lockers and vending 

machines anchored and laterally supported, or 

are they clear of exits?

6.5.6 Miscellaneous Contents

 Shelf-mounted 

items 

Contents fall, 

items broken 

or mixed 

6.5.6.1 Are valuable or fragile items protected against 

tipping or falling off shelving?

Are the drawers and cabinet doors latched 

securely, e.g., with special latches or babyproof hardware that will not fly open in an 

earthquake?

Are rare or valuable items (rare books, museum 

collections, medical records) given extra 

protection against falling and water damage?

Are heavy potted plants on file cabinets or tall 

shelves restrained to prevent falling?

 Desktop, 

countertop 

items

6.5.6.2 Is radio equipment restrained to keep it from 

sliding off shelving or tabletops?

Is important equipment restrained to keep it 

from sliding off shelving or tabletops?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-25

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Are fax machines restrained or placed far 

enough from the edge that they will not slide 

and fall off?

Is the public address system restrained to 

prevent the equipment from sliding and falling 

off the shelving?

 Fragile artwork Loss of rare 

or expensive 

art objects, 

falling 

hazards

6.5.6.3 Are heavy sculptures anchored to prevent 

overturning during an earthquake?

Are heavy wall-mounted paintings, mirrors, or 

other wall hangings well anchored to structural 

studs or framing?

Do hanging sculptures or mobiles have a safety 

cable to prevent them from swinging 

excessively, impacting windows or other 

artwork, or falling?

Are fragile items restrained by mono-filament 

lines, hook and loop material, Plexiglas display 

cases, or some other seismic safety device?

 Fire 

extinguisher 

and cabinet

6.5.6.4 Are the fire extinguisher cabinets and/or hose 

cabinets securely mounted?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-26

 Emergency Systems

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

 Emergency Egress Emergency system components were not 

covered in the body of the document but are 

an important consideration for providing 

earthquake safety.

Emergency 

Egress

Exit doors 

jammed, 

corridors 

blocked, no 

emergency 

lighting, 

falling 

hazards

6.6.1.1 If primary exit doors are heavy metal fire doors 

that might jam if the building racks during an 

earthquake, is there a crowbar or 

sledgehammer located near the exit to facilitate 

emergency exiting?

Do automatic doors with optical or floor 

sensors and mechanized roll-up doors have a 

manual override in case of a power outage after 

an earthquake?

Are the building utilities and architectural 

finishes along egress routes (piping, ducts, 

ceilings, lights, partitions, etc.) braced or 

anchored adequately to prevent falling 

obstructions and to keep the egress routes 

clear after an earthquake?

Are the furniture and contents along egress 

routes (desks, supply cabinets, shelving, etc.) 

braced or anchored adequately to prevent 

falling obstructions and keep the egress routes 

clear after an earthquake?

Are unanchored furniture and contents along 

egress routes kept far enough from the exits so 

they will not fall or slide and obstruct the 

doors?

Have any unreinforced masonry walls in 

stairwells, corridors, and elevator enclosures 

been removed, strengthened, or encapsulated 

to prevent collapse during an earthquake?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-27

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Are parapets, canopies, veneers, cornices and 

any other ornamentation above building exits 

braced and anchored to prevent collapse?

Are emergency lights and exit lights securely 

mounted to protect them from falling off walls 

or shelf supports during an earthquake?

Are transoms, skylights, corridor glazing or 

glazing above exits made of safety glass or 

covered with shatter-resistant film?

If the building has elevators, does the elevator 

have a seismic switch?

Emergency 

Power 

Generation and 

Distribution 

System

Loss of 

function

Is the emergency generator adequately secured, 

especially if mounted on motor vibration 

isolation springs?

Is the concrete housekeeping pad adequately 

anchored to the structural slab?

Is the diesel fuel tank adequately braced and 

anchored?

Are the batteries and battery racks adequately 

braced and anchored?

Are the fuel lines, cooling water lines, and 

exhaust flues for the emergency generator 

attached with flexible connections that are able 

to accommodate relative movement at 

junctions to spring-mounted equipment, at 

building entry and exit points, and at 

expansion joints within the building?

Have the transformer, MCC, switchgear and bus 

ducts been checked?

Have all the components of the emergency 

power generating system and the electrical 

distribution system been checked as part of 

this survey?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 D: Checklist of Nonstructural Hazards Page D-28

Item 

No.

Component 

Name 

Principal 

Concerns 

Example C NC NA Checklist Questions (Yes=Compliance; No or 

Unknown=Noncompliance; NA=Not Applicable) 

Fire Detection 

and Protection 

System

Loss of 

function

Are fire and smoke detectors properly 

mounted?

Is the control equipment for the fire alarm 

system and automatic fire doors securely 

anchored?

Are the fire extinguisher cabinets and/or hose 

cabinets securely mounted?

Are the fire extinguishers secured with quickrelease straps?

Are the fire sprinkler piping components 

laterally restrained in each direction?

Is the ceiling restrained so the ceilings won't 

break the sprinkler heads?

Are the distribution lines able to accommodate 

movement where they cross between buildings?

Is the fire water pump anchored, or is it 

mounted on vibration isolation springs with 

additional seismic restraints? 

Is the emergency water tank or reservoir 

securely attached to its supports?

Are the tank supports anchored to the floor and 

braced in both directions?

Are the supports or braces properly anchored 

to the foundation?

Are the smoke control fans properly supported 

and/or anchored?

Are the fan control centers securely anchored?

Emergency 

Supply Cabinet

Supplies 

inaccessible 

in emergency

Is the cabinet properly braced and anchored to 

the floor and/or walls?
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-1

E. Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings

The risk ratings that appear in this Appendix are provided as an aid to establishing priorities.

Nonstructural components are organized by component type, and estimates of the potential 

risk posed by the component are given for different ground shaking intensities. Each 

component is rated for High (H), Moderate (M) or Low (L) potential risk to Life Safety, Property 

Loss, and Functional Loss. The seismic risk ratings are based on the following definitions and 

assumptions: 

SHAKING INTENSITY: For a particular geographic location in the United States, the shaking 

intensity may be estimated by using the seismic map in Figure 3.2.1-1 that shows the areas 

that are likely to experience minimal, low, moderate, or high ground shaking during future 

probable maximum considered earthquake events that may affect the areas. The shaking 

intensity estimates based on the map in Figure 3.2.1-1 should be adequate for items situated 

at or near the ground in simple, nonessential facilities. For other situations, it may be advisable 

to choose the next higher shaking intensity or to seek the advice of professional consultants. 

Note that for areas with light shaking, a full blown upgrade of nonstructural components may 

not be warranted, unless an owner is particularly risk averse; the current code would not 

require many of the protective measures recommended herein, even for new construction.

LIFE SAFETY (LS) RISK: Risk of death or direct injury requiring hospitalization.. This does not 

include the overall impact on life safety systems in a building, such as loss of emergency power 

in a hospital or loss of fire detection or suppression capability. These disruptions of service are 

covered under Functional Loss below. 

PROPERTY LOSS (PL) RISK: Risk of incurring a repair or replacement cost because of damage 

to the item. This property loss, as used here, includes the cost of fixing a broken pipe but not 

the indirect cost of water leakage damage, and includes the cost of repairing a computer but 

not the loss of business revenue computer downtime might cause. These indirect effects 

cannot be estimated here on a generic basis. 

FUNCTIONAL LOSS (FL) RISK: Risk that the item will not function because it has been 

damaged. This includes some consideration of the impact of this loss of function of the 

component on the operation of an ordinary occupancy building. Not included are off-site 

functional impacts, such as the loss of function of a piece of equipment because of a city-wide 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-2

power outage. Outages of power, water, and other utility company or agency services are real 

problems to consider but are outside the scope of the item-by-item ratings here. 

TYPE OF DETAIL: For components where an illustrated example is provided in Chapter 6, the 

detail type is indicated as Non-engineered (NE), Prescriptive (PR), or Engineering Required (ER). 

The example number (e.g. 6.3.1.1 for adhered veneer) is shown at the left.

ASSUMPTION 1: The risk ratings are based on the assumption that the item has been installed 

without seismic bracing, seismic anchorage, seismic restraint, or allowance for differential 

movements. In areas of the U.S. where seismic building code provisions have only recently 

been enforced, this assumption will be generally true. In areas of the western U.S. where 

seismic codes have been enforced for some time, this assumption may not always be true. 

Particularly in buildings constructed in the western states since the mid-1970s, some 

nonstructural items may be anchored or braced, but the assumption of unanchored and 

unbraced items will still be true for many items on these lists. 

ASSUMPTION 2: The item is assumed to be located at or near the ground level, or in a low-rise 

building. The most common case of a relatively stiff low-rise building with structural walls is 

presumed in the ratings here. Items such as full-height partitions and glazing are more likely to 

be damaged in flexible buildings that experience large lateral deformations. Damage to items 

sensitive to imposed deformation will be greater in buildings or portions of buildings that are 

more flexible, such as mid- and high-rise buildings; flexible frame buildings without significant 

structural walls; "soft stories" of buildings with structural walls in most stories but with a story,

typically the ground story, that is much less laterally stiff because of the absence of walls; and 

the "soft wall" sides of bearing wall buildings where there is little or no solid wall area, such as 

the face of a typical commercial storefront building. 

ASSUMPTION 3: For building occupancy, an ordinary occupancy category is assumed. Thus, in 

the case of essential or specialized facilities, some nonstructural components would be rated 

differently. For example, in this appendix the risk ratings are given for shelving in an ordinary 

occupancy building, but the same shelving would be rated quite differently with regard to Life 

Safety risk in a lab, Property Loss risk in a museum, or risk of Functional Loss in a 

communications center.

For most of the nonstructural components listed below, the risk ratings for those components 

would be reduced significantly if the components were installed or retrofitted in accordance 

with recommendations of Chapter 6 or were installed within a seismically isolated building.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-3

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

6.3 Architectural Components 

6.3.1 Exterior Wall Components1  

6.3.1.1 Adhered veneer Low M M L

Mod H H L ER

High H H L

6.3.1.2 Anchored veneer Low M M L

Mod H H L ER

High H H L

6.3.1.3 Prefabricated panels Low M M L

Mod H H L ER

High H H M

6.3.1.4 Glazed exterior wall system Low L L L

Mod M M L ER

High H M M

6.3.1.5 Glass blocks Low L L L

Mod M M L ER

High H H M

N/A Overhead glazing or skylights Low L L L

Mod H M L

High H M M

6.3.2 Partitions2 

6.3.2.1 Heavy (CMU, brick, hollow clay 

tile)

Low L L L

Mod H H H ER

High H H H

6.3.2.2 Light (partial- or full-height 

stud wall partitions)

Low L L L

Mod M M M ER

High M H H

6.3.2.3 Glazed Low L L L

Mod M M L ER

High M H M

6.3.3 Interior Veneers2 

6.3.3.1 Stone and tile Low L L L

Mod H H M ER

High H H M

6.3.4 Ceilings 

6.3.4.1 Suspended acoustic lay-in tile 

ceiling 

Low L L L

Mod L M M PR

High M H H
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-4

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

6.3.4.2 Directly applied to structure Low L L L

Mod M M M NE

High M H H

N/A Soffits (stucco, gypsum board, 

plaster)

Low L L L

Mod M M M

High H H H

6.3.4.3 Suspended heavy ceilings Low L L L

Mod M M M PR

High H H H

6.3.5 Parapets, Appendages, Roof 

Tiles 

6.3.5.1 Unreinforced masonry parapet Low M M L

Mod H H L ER

High H H L

N/A Parapets, cornices, decoration Low M M L

Mod H H L

High H H L

N/A Hanging appendages Low L L L

Mod H H L

High H H M

N/A Clay roof tiles1 Low L L L

Mod L M L

High M H M

6.3.6 Canopies, Marquees, Signs 

 

6.3.6.1 Canopies, Marquees, Signs Low L L L

Mod H H L ER

High H H M

N/A Heavy signs or exterior 

billboards

Low L L L

Mod H H L

High H H L

N/A Flagpoles Low L L L

Mod L L L

High M L L

6.3.7 Chimneys and Stacks 

6.3.7.1 Unreinforced masonry chimney Low L L L

Mod M M L ER

High H M M
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-5

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

N/A Stacks, small Low L L L

Mod M M L

High H M M

6.3.8 Stairways 

6.3.8.1 Stairways Low L L L

Mod H M M ER

High H M H

6.3.9 Freestanding Walls or Fences 

6.3.9.1 Freestanding Walls or Fences Low L L L

Mod L L L PR

High M H M

6.4 Mechanical, Electrical, & Plumbing Components 

6.4.1 Mechanical Equipment

6.4.1.1 Boilers, furnaces, pumps and 

chillers (HVAC wet side) 

Low L L L

ER

Mod L L L

High M M H

N/A Boilers and furnaces (rigid 

mount)

Low L L L

Mod L L L

High M M M

N/A Chillers Low L L L

Mod L L L

High L M H

N/A Heat pumps or heat exchangers Low L L L

Mod L L L

High L M M

6.4.1.2 General manufacturing and 

process machinery 

Low L L L

ER

Mod M M M

High M H H

6.4.1.3 HVAC equipment with vibration 

isolation

Low L L L

ER

Mod L M L

High L M M

N/A Fans, blowers, filters Low L L L

Mod L M L

High L M M
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-6

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

N/A Air compressors Low L L L

Mod L M L

High L M M

N/A Roof mounted HVAC units Low L M L

Mod L M L

High M H M

N/A Roof mounted equipment, vents 

or flues Low L L L

Mod L M L

High M M M

6.4.1.4 HVAC equipment without 

vibration isolation (rigid mount)

Low L L L

ER

Mod L L L

High L M M

N/A Wall-mounted room air 

conditioning units

Low L L L

Mod M M L

High M M L

6.4.1.5 HVAC equipment suspended 

in-line with ductwork 

Low L L L

ER

Mod L M L

High L M M

6.4.1.6 Suspended equipment Low L L L

Mod H H L ER

High H H L

6.4.2 Storage Tanks and Water 

Heaters

6.4.2.1 Structurally supported tanks 

and vessels 

Low L L L

ER

Mod M H M

High M H M

N/A Diesel fuel tank Low L L L

Mod H H L

High H H M

N/A Propane tank Low L L L

Mod H H M

High H H M
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-7

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

6.4.2.2 Flat bottom tanks and vessels Low L L L

Mod M H M ER

High M H M

6.4.2.3 Compressed gas cylinders 

(oxygen, CO2, ammonia, etc.)

Low L L L

NE

Mod M M L

High H M M

6.4.2.4 Gas water heaters Low L L L

Mod M H L PR

High H H L

6.4.3 Pressure Piping 

6.4.3.1 Suspended pressure piping Low L L L

Mod M M M ER

High M H M

6.4.3.2 In-line valves and pumps Low L L L

Mod M M M ER

High M M M

6.4.3.3 Flexible connections, expansion 

joints and seismic separations

Low L L L

ER

Mod M M M

High M M M

6.4.3.4 Pipe Risers Low L L L

Mod L M M ER

High M M M

6.4.3.5 Floor-mounted supports Low L L L

Mod L M M ER

High M M M

6.4.3.6 Roof-mounted supports Low L L L

Mod L M M ER

High M M M

6.4.3.7 Wall-mounted supports Low L L L

Mod M M M ER

High M M M

6.4.4 Fire Protection Piping 

6.4.4.1 Suspended fire protection 

piping 

Low L M M

ER

Mod L H H

High M H H
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-8

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

6.4.5 Fluid Piping, not Fire Protection

6.4.5.1 Hazardous materials Low L L L

Mod H H H ER

High H H H

N/A Fuel line Low L L L

Mod H H L

High H H M

6.4.5.2 Nonhazardous materials Low L L L

Mod M M M ER

High M M M

6.4.6 Ductwork 

6.4.6.1 Suspended Ductwork Low L L L

Mod L L L ER

High M M L

6.4.6.2 Air diffuser Low L L L

Mod M M L NE, ER

High M HM L

6.4.7 Electrical and Communications 

Equipment 

6.4.7.1 Control panels, motor control 

centers and switchgear 

Low L L L

ER

Mod L L L

High M M M

6.4.7.2 Emergency generator Low L L M

Mod L M H ER

High L H H

6.4.7.3 Transformers Low L L L

Mod L L L ER

High M M M

6.4.7.4 Batteries and battery rack Low L L L

Mod L H M ER

High L H H

6.4.7.5 Photovoltaic power systems 

(Solar panels)

Low L L L

ER

Mod L L L

High M M L
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-9

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

6.4.7.6 Communication antennae Low L L L

Mod L M L ER

High M H M

6.4.8 Electrical and Communications 

Distribution Equipment 

6.4.8.1 Electrical raceways, conduit, 

and cable trays 

Low L L L

ER

Mod L M M

High M M M

6.4.8.2 Distribution panels Low L L L

Mod L L L ER

High M M M

6.4.9 Light Fixtures

6.4.9.1 Recessed Low L L L

Mod H L L PR

High H M M

6.4.9.2 Surface-mounted lighting Low L L L

Mod H L L PR

High H M M

6.4.9.3 Pendant light fixtures Low L L L

Mod H L L NE

High H M M

6.4.9.4 Heavy light fixtures Low L L L

Mod H L L NE

High H M M

N/A Exterior lighting Low L L L

Mod M L L

High M M M

6.4.10 Elevators and Escalators

6.4.10.1 Hydraulic Elevator (cab and 

elevator equipment) 

Low L L L

ER

Mod L M M

High M M M

6.4.10.2 Traction Elevator (elevator cab

and shaft doors)

Low L L L

ER

Mod L M M

High M M H
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-10

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

N/A Cables, counterweights and 

guide rails (for cable-traction 

system)

Low L L L

Mod H M M

High H M M

N/A Elevator motor and motor 

control cabinets

Low L L L

Mod L M M

High L H M

6.4.10.3 Escalator Low L L L

Mod M M M ER

High H H H

6.4.11 Conveyors

6.4.11.1 Conveyors Low L L L

Mod L M M ER

High M M M

6.5 Furniture, Fixtures, & Equipment

6.5.1 Storage racks 

6.5.1.1 Light duty shelving Low L L L

Mod H M M NE, ER

High H M M

6.5.1.2 Industrial storage racks Low L L L

Mod H M M ER

High H H M

6.5.2 Bookcases, Shelving

6.5.2.1 Bookshelves Low L L L

Mod H M M NE

High H M M

6.5.2.2 Library and other helving Low L L L

Mod H M M ER

High H M M

6.5.3 Computer & Communications 

Equipment

6.5.3.1 Computer access floors Low L L L

Mod L L M ER

High M H H
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-11

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

N/A Large computer equipment Low L L L

Mod L M M

High M H M

N/A Computer networks, data 

storage

Low L L L

Mod L M H

High L H H

N/A Computer cabling Low L L L

Mod L L L

High L L L

6.5.3.2 Computer and communication 

racks 

Low L L L

NE

Mod L H M

High M H M

6.5.3.3 Desktop computers and 

accessories

Low L L L

NE

Mod L H M

High L H M

6.5.3.4 Television and video monitors, 

cameras, wall-mounted

Low L L L

NE

Mod H H L

High H H L

N/A Suspended speakers in 

conference room or auditorium

Low L L L

Mod M M L

High H H L

6.5.4 Hazardous materials storage 

6.5.4.1 Hazardous materials storage, 

cabinet and contents 

Low L L L

NE

Mod H M H

High H M H

N/A Chemical, laboratory, medical 

supplies

Low L L L

Mod H M L

High H M M

N/A Asbestos Low L M M

Mod L H H

High L H H
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-12

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

6.5.5 Miscellaneous FF&E 

6.5.5.1 File cabinets, tall vertical or 

lateral files 

Low L L L

NE

Mod M M M

High H M M

6.5.5.2 Demountable partitions Low L L L

Mod L L L NE

High M M M

6.5.5.3 Miscellaneous furniture under 

4’ tall Low L L L

NE

Mod L L L

High L L L

N/A Large kitchen or laundry 

equipment

Low L L L

Mod M M L

High M H M

N/A Lockers, vending machines Low L L L

Mod H M L

High H M L

N/A Freestanding wood stove 

(wood, pellet, or gas-fired) Low L L L

Mod M M M

High H H H

6.5.6 Miscellaneous Contents

6.5.6.1 Shelf-mounted items Low L L L

Mod M M L NE

High H M M

N/A Especially valuable or fragile 

merchandise

Low L M L

Mod L H L

High L H L
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 E: Nonstructural Seismic Risk Ratings Page E-13

Example 

No. Example Name 

Shaking 

Intensity 

Life 

Safety (LS) 

Property 

Loss (PL) 

Functional 

Loss (FL) 

Type of 

Detail 

N/A Potted plants or indoor 

landscaping resting on shelves 

above the floor

Low L L L

Mod L L L

High M L L

6.5.6.2 Desktop, countertop items Low L L L

Mod L M L NE

High L H M

6.5.6.3 Fragile artwork Low L L L

Mod L H L NE

High L H L

N/A Tall sculptures (over 5 ft) Low L L L

Mod M M L

High H H L

6.5.6.4 Fire extinguisher and cabinet Low L L L

Mod M H L NE

High M H L

Footnotes:

1. Ratings for exterior components assume an entrance or walkway is located near the exterior 

wall. At locations where there is limited access, the life safety risk would be low.

2. Ratings assume component is located in a corridor or along the path of egress.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 F: Post-Earthquake Data Collection Forms Page F-1

F. POST-EARTHQUAKE DATA COLLECTION FORMS

Two post-earthquake data collection forms were developed for two nonstructural components: 

(1) suspended acoustical tile ceilings and (2) metal stud partitions. Collection of these data is 

essential to advancing the protection of nonstructural components. These forms are intended 

to serve as a starting point for data collection subject to revision and refinement as they are 

used in the field. Other similar forms can be developed for other systems and components 

when resources become available. 

The forms are provided as Microsoft word files on the CD-ROM and should be customized for 

use in projects.

 
FEMA E-74 – Detailed Post-Earthquake Condition Assessment: Suspended Acoustical Tile 

Ceiling

Page 1 of 7

INSTRUCTIONS TO USERS: 

The purpose of a detailed investigation is to collect data that can be used to quantitatively evaluate the 

performance of suspended acoustic tile ceilings in earthquakes.

The following procedure is recommended for a comprehensive ceiling investigation in one building:

Step 1: Observe building or review drawings to describe basic construction characteristics. Complete 

Section A.

Step 2: Walk through building. Assess overall building condition and general condition of ceilings. Assess 

whether ceilings in some floors are more heavily damaged than others. Complete Section B.

Step 3: Complete Sections C and D, as required, to describe ceiling construction and conditions in one 

building. The flowchart below is intended to provide guidance on determining how many ceilings to 

examine in detail. Consideration should be given to the scope and nature of damage, and any unique 

factors that may have caused damage.

For example:

 If the ceilings in one story appear to be more heavily damaged than in other floors, but construction is 

similar throughout the building, Section C should be completed to describe the typical construction 

and two Section D forms should be completed as follows: one for the typical ceiling in the heavily 

damaged floor and one for the typical floor.

 If construction or conditions vary throughout the building, complete Section C and D forms should be 

prepared to describe predominant ceiling types and typical damage. Additional Sections C and D 

forms should be completed to capture unique features.
FEMA E-74 – Detailed Post-Earthquake Condition Assessment: Suspended Acoustical Tile 

Ceiling

Page 2 of 7

SECTION A: Building Description

Inspection

Inspector ID:____________________________________

Affiliation: _____________________________________

Inspection Date and Time: ________________________

Building Description

Building name: __________________________________

Address: _______________________________________

______________________________________________

Building contact/phone: __________________________

No. of stories above ground: _________ below ground: _

Approx. footprint area (square feet): ________________

Typical Floor Construction

 Concrete slab

 Metal deck and concrete fill

 Plywood  with topping slab  without topping slab

 Other: ________________

Building Lateral Force Resisting System

 Concrete or Masonry Shear Wall

 Plywood Shear Wall

 Concrete Moment Frame  Steel Braced Frame

 Steel Moment Frame Base Isolated

 Other: __________________

Primary Occupancy

Retail Government Residential

Offices Historic Public Assembly

Industrial School Emergency Services

Other:_______________

SECTION B: Damage Descriptions

Building Posting, if known:  Inspected

 Restricted Use

 Unsafe

 Comments:

Structural Damage:  Minor/None: _____________________________________________

 Moderate: _______________________________________________

 Severe: __________________________________________________

Ground Movement:  None Observed

 Observed:________________________________________________

General Ceiling Damage:  None

 Minor (less than 1% of tiles dislodged, no damage to the grid)

 Moderate (upto 1/3 of tiles dislodged, minor repairable damage to grid)

 Severe (severe damage to tiles and grid requiring reconstruction of ceiling)

Floor by Floor:  Ceilings in all floors appear to be in about the same condition.

 Ceilings in some floors are more heavily damaged than in others.

List floors with most damage: ________________________________
FEMA E-74 – Detailed Post-Earthquake Condition Assessment: Suspended Acoustical Tile 

Ceiling

Page 3 of 7

SECTION C: Ceiling Definition (Use separate assessment form for each ceiling area investigated)

Floor: _________

Location in building (sketch plan – see page 7)

Ceiling Area (within full height walls, braced soffits or other terminations) L x W: ______’ x ______’ 

Tile: Type:  Acoustic Tile 2’x2’  Acoustic Tile 2’x4’  Other:__________

Grid: Type:  Heavy Duty  Medium Duty  Other:__________

Spacing of Main Tees:  4’  Other:_________

Spacing of Cross Tees:  2’  Other:_________

Splices:  Capable of Resisting 180# in Tension and Compression  Other:__________

Hangers:

Gauge:  12 Gauge  Other:_________

Spacing:  4’ each way  Other:_________

Connection to Structure:

 Powder Actuated Fastener  Expansion Anchor Wire Loop

Screw Nail Other: _______________

Connection Hardware:

Sheet Metal Angle Integral wire/fastener assembly  Other: _______________

No. of Turns each end: 

 3 turns in 3”  3 turns in 1 1⁄2”  Other: _______________

Plumbness: Plumb to within one in six  Other: ___________

Bracing (if present):

Type:  Rigid Diagonal Braces  Splayed Wires  None

If rigid: 

Type:  Strut  Stud  Other: ________

If wire:

Wire Size:  12 gauge  Other:_________

Spacing:  Every 144 sf  Every 96 sf  Other:_________

Spacing from Wall:

 6’ maximum  Other:_________

 Connection to Structure:

 Powder Actuated Fastener  Expansion Anchor Screw Nail Other: _______

 No. of Turns each end:  4 turns in 1 1⁄2”  Other: _______

Compression Post:  Yes  No

If yes:

Type of Compression Post:  Strut EMT  CRC  Other: _______

Independent ceiling wire at Compression Post:  Yes  No
FEMA E-74 – Detailed Post-Earthquake Condition Assessment: Suspended Acoustical Tile 

Ceiling

Page 4 of 7

Boundaries:

Perimeter Support Angles

2” horizontal leg, vertical leg screwed to studs

7/8” horizontal leg, vertical leg screwed to studs; proprietary clip connecting each tee

 7/8” horizontal leg, vertical leg screwed to stud

Other: ______________________________________________________________________

Perimeter Restraint:

 Ceiling installed with main runner and/or cross runner positively connected to two adjacent 

walls and with 3/4” gap between main runner/cross runner ends and walls at opposite walls

  “Fixed” sides have ceiling grid screwed to perimeter support angle

  “Fixed” sides have proprietary clip connecting tee to perimeter support angle

 Other: ______________________________________________________________________

Spreaders: 

 Stabilizer bars, cross tees or other means to prevent spreading are provided within 8” of each 

wall

 Stabilizer bars or similar are not provided

Other: ______________________________________________________________________

Perimeter Support:

 Terminal end of each cross runner and main runner are independently supported within 8” 

of wall

 Other: ______________________________________________________________________

Sprinkler Installation:

 2” Oversized hole at sprinkler head penetrations

 No oversized hole at sprinkler head penetration

 Flexible Sprinkler Hose, 1”diameter hole

 Sprinkler lines are braced

 Sprinkler lines are not braced

 Sprinklers have end of line restraint

 Sprinklers do not have end of line restraint

 Other: ______________________________________________________________________

Lights:

Type:  Rigid Diagonal Braces  Splayed Wires  None

If rigid: 

Recessed: 

Size:  1’x1’  2’x2’  2’x4’  can  Other:__________

Support:  2 independent wires at diagonally opposite corners 

 With positive connection to grid

Describe:_______________________________

 1 independent wire

 No independent wire

 Other:_________________________
FEMA E-74 – Detailed Post-Earthquake Condition Assessment: Suspended Acoustical Tile 

Ceiling

Page 5 of 7

Lights (continued):

If Surface Mounted: 

Size:  1’x1’  2’x2’  2’x4’  Other:____________

Support:  Bolted through to hardware connected to grid 

 Other:_________________________

If Pendant: 

Size:  ______________

Support:  #9 wire to structure

 Other_________________________

Other Items Supported by Ceiling:

 Diffusers 

 Speakers

 Projector

Other: ______________________________________________________________________

Partitions: 

 Partitions at boundaries of ceiling extend to the structure above or are independently 

braced to the structure above

 Partitions at boundaries of ceiling are not independently braced against out-of-plane forces

Other:

Any building seismic separations in ceiling area?  Yes  No

If yes, describe: _________________________________________________________

Perimeter Support Angles:

 No visible damage 

At Free Edge:

 Main/cross main tee dislodged from angle; approximate percentage___________

At Fixed Edge:

 Pullout of screw connection angle to stud

 Visible bending of angle

 Failure of rivet or screw connecting tee to angle

Lights:

 No visible damage 

 Light dislodged from grid, but still suspended from independent wires; approximate 

percentage___________

 Light fully dislodged and fallen to floor; approximate percentage___________
FEMA E-74 – Detailed Post-Earthquake Condition Assessment: Suspended Acoustical Tile 

Ceiling

Page 6 of 7

SECTION D: Condition Assessment 

General damage assessment for ceiling area under investigation:  None  Severe

 Insignificant  Moderate

Tile:  < 1% tiles dislodged

 2 – 10% tiles dislodged

 11-33% tiles dislodged

 > 34% tiles dislodged

Grid:  No visible damage requiring repair

 Perimeter tees dislodged at ceiling boundaries; approximate percentage:___________

 Damage to Grid Requiring Repair; describe: _______________________________

 Grid Dislodged; approximate percentage:___________

Hangers:

 No visible damage to hangers

 Hanger connection to structure failed or visibly damaged; approximate 

percentage:___________

 Wire ties untied or visibly loosened; approximate percentage:___________

Bracing:

 No visible damage to braces

 Connection of diagonal wires/braces to structure failed or visibly damaged; approximate 

percentage: ________

 Bracing wire ties untied or visibly loosened; approximate percentage:___________

Perimeter Support Angles:

 No visible damage 

At Free Edge:

 Main/cross main tee dislodged from angle; approximate percentage:___________

At Fixed Edge:

 Pullout of screw connection angle to stud

 Visible bending of angle

 Failure of rivet or screw connecting tee to angle

Lights:

 No visible damage 

 Light dislodged from grid, but still suspended from independent wires; approximate 

percentage:___________

 Light fully dislodged and fallen to floor; approximate percentage:___________
FEMA E-74 – Detailed Post-Earthquake Condition Assessment: Suspended Acoustical Tile 

Ceiling

Page 7 of 7

SECTION E: Sketches and Photographs

1. Building Footprint

2. Plan of Ceiling Area under Investigation (indicate wall locations, and show ceiling boundary conditions (fixed and 

free))

3. Photographs

The following photographs are provided as an attachment to this section

 Overall view  Above ceiling damage  Cross tee splices
FEMA E-74 – Detailed Post-Earthquake Condition Assessment: Metal Stud Partitions

Page 1 of 9

INSTRUCTIONS TO USERS: 

The purpose of a detailed investigation is to collect data that can be used to quantitatively evaluate the 

performance of partitions in earthquakes.

The following procedure is recommended for a comprehensive partition investigation in one building:

Step 1: Observe building or review drawings to describe basic construction characteristics. Complete 

Section A. 

Step 2: Walk through building. Assess overall building condition and general condition of partitions. 

Assess whether walls in one direction are more heavily damaged than others. Assess whether walls in 

some floors are more heavily damaged than others. Complete Section B.

Step 3: Complete Sections C and D, as required, to describe partition construction and conditions in one 

building. The flowchart below is intended to provide guidance on determining how many partitions to 

examine in detail. Consideration should be given to the scope and nature of damage, and any unique 

factors that may have caused damage. 

For example:

 If the walls in one story appear to be more heavily damaged than in other floors, but construction is 

similar throughout the building, Section C should be completed to describe the typical construction and 

two Section D forms should be completed as follows: one for the typical partition in the heavily damaged 

floor and one for the typical floor. 

 If the walls in one direction are more heavily damaged than another on a given floor, one Section C and 

two Section D forms should be completed as follows: one for a typical wall in each direction. 

 If construction or conditions vary throughout the building appropriate number of Section C and D forms 

should be prepared to describe predominant partition types and typical damage. Additional Section C and 

D forms should be completed to capture unique features.
FEMA E-74 – Detailed Post-Earthquake Condition Assessment: Metal Stud Partitions

Page 2 of 9

SECTION A: Building Description

Inspection

Inspector ID/ Affiliation: __________________________

Inspection Date and Time: ________________________

Building Description 

Building name: __________________________________

Address: _______________________________________

________________________________________________

Building contact/phone: __________________________

Number of stories above ground: _____ below ground: _

Approx. footprint area (square feet): ________________

For typical floor:

Approx. total length of partition in direction 1 (feet):____

Approx. total length of partition in direction 2 (feet):____

Primary Occupancy

Retail Government Residential

Offices Historic Public assembly

Industrial School Emergency services

Other:_______________

Typical Floor Construction

 Concrete slab

 Metal deck and concrete fill

 Plywood  with topping slab  without topping slab

 Other: ________________

At grade construction (if different from typical)

 Concrete slab

 Metal deck and concrete fill

 Plywood  with topping slab  without topping slab

 Other: ________________

Roof Construction (if different from typical)

 Concrete slab

 Metal deck and concrete fill

 Untopped metal deck 

 Plywood  with topping slab  without topping slab

 Other: ________________
FEMA E-74 – Detailed Post-Earthquake Condition Assessment: Metal Stud Partitions

Page 3 of 9

SECTION B: Damage Descriptions

Building posting if known:  Inspected

 Restricted Use

 Unsafe

Comments: ________________________________________________

Structural Damage:  Minor/None: _____________________________________________

 Moderate: _______________________________________________

 Severe: __________________________________________________

Ground Movement:  None Observed

 Observed:________________________________________________

General Partition Damage:  None

 Minor (minor cracking of wall finishes that can be repaired by patching and 

painting)

 Moderate (moderate damage to finishes requiring removal and replacement of 

some gypsum wallboard or plaster)

 Severe (severe damage to finishes and wall framing requiring reconstruction of the 

wall

Directionality:  Walls in both directions appear to be in similar condition. 

 Walls in one direction appear to be more heavily damaged than walls in 

perpendicular direction. Direction of heaviest damage:

 N – S  E – W  Other_______

Floor by Floor:  Walls in all floors appear to be in about the same condition.

 Walls in some floors are more heavily damaged than in others.

List floors with most damage: ________________________________
FEMA E-74 – Detailed Post-Earthquake Condition Assessment: Metal Stud Partitions

Page 4 of 9

SECTION C: Component Definition

Partition Wall:

Wall Type:  Full height studs (studs are continuous from one floor to the next)

 Partial height studs (studs are continuous from floor to ceiling)

 Other ___________________________________________________

Stud Depth:  1 5/8” C stud  2 1/2” CH stud

 2 1/2” C stud  4” CH stud

 3 5/8” C stud

 4” C stud

 5 1/2” C stud

 6” C stud

 8” C stud

Stud Gage:  16 ga (0.057”) (very difficult to bend flange)

 18 ga (0.045”)

 20 ga (0.035”) (can bend flange slightly)

 22 ga (0.028”)

 25 ga (0.019”) (very easy to bend flange)

Stud Spacing:  16”

 24”

 Other ________________

Stud Flange Width:  1 1/4”

 1 3/8”

 1 5/8”

 2”

 2 1/2”

Sheathing:  5/8” gypsum wallboard both sides, floor to floor

 5/8” gypsum wallboard both sides, floor to ceiling

 5/8” gypsum wallboard both one side, floor to floor

 5/8” gypsum wallboard both one side, floor to ceiling

 7/8” plaster both sides, floor to floor

 7/8” plaster both sides, floor to ceiling

 Other ___________________________________________________

Bottom Track Fasteners (if visible):

Type:  Powder actuated fasteners (shot pin)

 Expansion anchors

 Nails

 Screws

 Other ___________________________________________________

Size: __________________________________________________________

Spacing:  16”

 24”

 Other ___________________________________________________
FEMA E-74 – Detailed Post-Earthquake Condition Assessment: Metal Stud Partitions

Page 5 of 9

Top Track Fasteners (if visible):

Type:  Powder actuated fasteners (shot pin)

 Expansion anchors

 Nails

 Screws

 Other ___________________________________________________

Size: __________________________________________________________

Spacing:  16”

 24”

 Other ___________________________________________________

Top Track Detailing:

 No slip track

 No slip track for horizontal movements, vertical slotted holes

 Studs free to slide in track

 Track connected to structure with fasteners in slotted holes

 Nested Track

 Other ___________________________________________________
FEMA E-74 – Detailed Post-Earthquake Condition Assessment: Metal Stud Partitions

Page 6 of 9

Bracing (for partial height walls):

 None

 Top of wall is braced by gypsum wallboard or plaster ceiling

 Wall is braced by perpendicular walls

Spacing _________

 Top of wall is braced by diagonal braces

Spacing _________________________

Brace type_______________________

Anchorage at structure_____________

 Wall is braced by full height studs at regular spacing 

Spacing _________________________

Stud type/size ____________________

Top connection ___________________

Items Mounted on or Braced by Wall:

Wall supported items (i.e. items that are supported solely by the wall)

 Shelving; describe contents __________________________________

 Upper Cabinets; describe contents ____________________________

 Television/monitor

 Other ___________________________________________________

Floor supported items that are braced by the wall (i.e. items that have a positive connection to 

the wall but bear on the floor)

 Base Cabinets; describe contents _____________________________

 Book Shelf; describe contents ________________________________

 Storage Shelving; describe contents ___________________________

 Equipment _______________________________________________

 Other ___________________________________________________

Does wall contain glazing?

 No

 Yes, describe: _____________________________________________

(glass type if known, size, number, etc.)

Does wall contain doors?

 No

 Yes, describe: _____________________________________________

(size, number, etc.)

 Does wall contain duct/pipe/conduit penetrations through wall finish?

 No

 Yes, describe: _____________________________________________
FEMA E-74 – Detailed Post-Earthquake Condition Assessment: Metal Stud Partitions

Page 7 of 9

SECTION D: Condition Assessment

Floor __________________

Location in building (sketch – see page 9) ___________

Story height (measure from top of finished floor to underside of floor above) _________________

Length of wall (estimate total straight length of wall, including doors and windows) ____________

Average length of wall between door openings__________________________________________

General Damage Assessment for Wall Under Investigation

 None

 Minor (minor cracking of wall finishes that can be repaired by patching and 

painting)

 Moderate (moderate damage to finishes requiring removal and replacement of 

some gypsum wallboard/plaster)

 Severe (severe damage to finishes and wall framing requiring reconstruction of 

the wall

Wall Finishes (check as many as apply)

 No visible damage

 Cracking distributed throughout wall

 Cracking concentrated at door and window openings

 Cracking concentrated at intersections with perpendicular walls

 Sheathing spalled or dislodged, describe: _______________________

If sheathing is cracked, 

Crack width: __________ average

__________ maximum

Total length of cracks in 10’ length x height of wall: _________ average

_________ maximum

 Other, Describe: ___________________________________________

Framing (check as many as apply)

 No visible damage to framing

 Studs are damaged, describe: ________________________________

 Bottom track is damaged, describe: ___________________________

 Top track is damaged, describe: ______________________________

 Bracing is damaged, describe: ________________________________

 Sheathing fasteners exposed, describe: ________________________

 Framing fasteners damaged, describe: _________________________

 Other, describe: ___________________________________________
FEMA E-74 – Detailed Post-Earthquake Condition Assessment: Metal Stud Partitions

Page 8 of 9

Wall Mounted Items:  No visible damage 

 Items damaged, describe: ___________________________________

 Items dislodged, describe: ___________________________________

Floor-Mounted Items Braced by Wall:

 No visible damage

 Damage at connection to wall, describe:________________________

 Other, describe: ___________________________________________

Glazing:  No visible damage

 Glass has visibly shifted in frame but not fallen out or cracked

 Glass is cracked, describe: ___________________________________

 Glass is cracked and has partially or completely fallen out of frame

 Other, describe: ___________________________________________

Doors:  No visible damage 

 Doors stick when opening

 Door inoperable

 Other, describe: ___________________________________________

Penetrations:  No visible damage

 Local crushing of wall finish at penetration

 Visible gap created between pipe/duct/conduit and finish

 Pipe/duct/conduit damaged at penetration 

 Other, describe: ___________________________________________
FEMA E-74 – Detailed Post-Earthquake Condition Assessment: Metal Stud Partitions

Page 9 of 9

SECTION E: Sketches and Photographs

Building Footprint

Plan of walls under investigation

Photographs

The following photographs are provided as an attachment to this section

 Overall view

 Connections at top track, bottom track, brace connection
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-1

G. LIST OF RESOURCES RELATED TO NONSTRUCTURAL 

COMPONENTS

This appendix is a list of available resources related to nonstructural components, including 

codes and standards, testing protocols, guidance documents, nonproprietary details, photos, 

sample specifications, proprietary details, products, and research efforts. This list originates 

from Appendix B of the ATC-69 Report, Reducing the Risks of Nonstructural Earthquake 

Damage, State-of-the-Art and Practice Report, prepared by the Applied Technology Council for 

FEMA (ATC, 2008).

The information in this appendix is organized into the following tables:

Table G-1 Codes and Standards Related to Nonstructural Components G-2

Table G-2 Guidance Documents Related to Nonstructural Components G-10

Table G-3 Nonproprietary Details and Other Resources for Nonstructural 

Components G-23

Table G-4 Proprietary Details and Products for the Protection of 

Nonstructural Components G-32

Table G-5 Recent and Ongoing Research Related to Nonstructural

Components G-37
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-2

Table G-1 Codes and Standards Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

ACI 318-08 Building Code Requirements 

for Reinforced Concrete and 

Commentary

2008 Appendix D Appendix on requirements for anchorage in concrete; published by 

the American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan.

ACI 355.2-07 Qualification of Post-Installed 

Mechanical Anchors in 

Concrete

2007 Published by the American Concrete Institute, Detroit, Michigan.

ASCE/SEI 7-05 Minimum Design Loads for 

Buildings and Other 

Structures

2005 Chapter 13 Chapter specifying seismic design requirements for nonstructural 

components; published by the American Society of Civil Engineers, 

Reston, Virginia.

SEI/ASCE 31-03 Seismic Evaluation of Existing 

Buildings 

2003 Sections 3.9, 

4.2.7, 4.8, 

and Table 4-9

Successor document to FEMA 310 Handbook for the Seismic 

Evaluation of Buildings – A Prestandard. Relevant sections describe 

evaluation procedures for existing nonstructural components. 

Includes comprehensive checklists of potential nonstructural 

hazards. Published by the American Society of Civil Engineers, 

Reston, Virginia.

ASCE/SEI 41-06 Seismic Rehabilitation of 

Existing Buildings

2007 Chapter 11 Successor document to FEMA 356 Prestandard and Commentary for 

the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings. Relevant chapter describes 

design procedures for the rehabilitation of existing nonstructural 

components, and a table identifying nonstructural component types 

and their applicability to different performance objectives. Published 

by the American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-3

Table G-1 Codes and Standards Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

ASCE/SEI 43-05 Seismic Design Criteria for 

Structures, Systems, and 

Components in Nuclear 

Facilities

2005 Provides design criteria for structures, systems, and components in 

nuclear facilities, with the goal of ensuring that these facilities can 

withstand the effects of earthquake ground shaking at the desired 

level of performance. Published by the American Society of Civil 

Engineers, Reston, Virginia. 

ASHRAE SPC 171P Method of Test of Seismic 

Restraint Devices for 

HVAC&R Equipment

2006 Establishes methods of testing and documenting the working shear 

and tensile strength of seismic restraint devices that are integral with 

vibration isolators or resilient devices. Published by the American 

Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, 

Inc., Atlanta, Georgia.

ASTM E580/ 

E580M-06

Standard Practice for 

Application of Ceiling 

Suspension Systems for 

Acoustical Tile and Lay-In 

Panels in Areas Requiring 

Seismic Restraint

2006 Standard for Zone 2; could also be used for Zones 3 and 4. 

Published by ASTM International, West Conshohocken, 

Pennsylvania.

Bulletin 

2004-014-BU

(Vancouver)

Seismic Restraint of 

Nonstructural Components 

2004 Addresses suspended ceilings and non-load bearing partitions. 

Published by the City of Vancouver, British Columbia. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-4

Table G-1 Codes and Standards Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

CSA S832-06

(Canada)

Seismic Risk Reduction of

Operational and Functional 

Components (OFCs) of 

Buildings

2006 Operational and functional components (OFCs) is a Canadian term 

for nonstructural components. The second edition of a document 

first published in 2001. Describes how to identify and evaluate 

hazards caused by nonstructural components, and provides 

strategies to mitigate damage. Intended to be applicable to most 

buildings types, either new or existing, and intended for building 

owners, inspectors, facility managers, engineers, architects and 

others whose focus is to provide safety, serviceability and durability 

of nonstructural components when subjected to earthquakes. 

Published by the Canadian Standard Association, Mississauga, 

Ontario.

E.030

(Peru)

National Construction Code, 

Technical Standard for 

Buildings, E.030 EarthquakeResistant Design

2003 Design requirements for buildings in Peru. Drift provisions changed 

in 1997, and are now among the most stringent in the world. Drift 

must be computed without an R factor, and allowable drift is limited 

to .007h for reinforced concrete, and .01h for steel structures. 

Standard school construction must be confined concrete, and 

masonry infill must be isolated from the concrete frame. Schools 

built since 1997 meeting these criteria have suffered virtually no 

damage in recent large earthquakes in Peru. Published by El Servicio 

Nacional de Normalización, Capacitación e Investigación para la 

Industria de la Construcción (SENCICO), Lima, Perú.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-5

Table G-1 Codes and Standards Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

EN 1998-1:2004(E)

(Europe)

Eurocode 8: Design of 

Structures For Earthquake 

Resistance (English version, 

Final Draft) 

2004 Part 1, 

Sections 

4.3.5, 4.3.6

Includes general rules, seismic actions, and rules for buildings. 

Relevant sections cover design of nonstructural elements and 

additional measures for masonry infilled frames. Non-structural 

elements mentioned include parapets, gables, antennae, mechanical

appendages and equipment, curtain walls, partitions, and railings. 

Nonstructural elements that might cause risks to persons, affect the 

main structure, or disrupt services of critical facilities must be verified 

to resist seismic design actions. Designs for nonstructural elements of 

great importance are based on realistic models of the structure and 

on appropriate response spectra derived from the response of the 

supporting structural elements. Lateral force calculations include 

consideration of period ratio, importance factor, and behavior 

factor. Published by the European Committee for Standardization 

(CEN).

IBC 2006 2006 International Building 

Code

2006 National model building code, latest edition; scheduled for adoption 

in most jurisdictions across the United States. Specifically references 

ASCE 7-05 for design of nonstructural components. Published by the 

International Code Council, Washington, D.C.

IBC 2003 2003 International Building 

Code

2003 National model building code; adopted in some areas of the United 

States. Published by the International Code Council, Washington, 

D.C.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-6

Table G-1 Codes and Standards Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

ICC-ES AC-156 Acceptance Criteria for 

Seismic Qualification by 

Shake-Table Testing of 

Nonstructural Components 

and Systems.

2004 Published by the International Code Council Evaluation Service, 

Whittier, California.

NFPA 13 Standard for the Installation 

of Sprinkler Systems, 2007 

Edition

2007 Published by the National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, 

Massachusetts.

NCh 433.Of96

(Chile)

Chilean Norm 

NCh 433.Of96, Earthquake 

Resistant Design of Buildings

1996 Chilean code for buildings. Includes the following drift criteria: (1) 

drift must be computed without an R factor; and (2) must be less 

than 0.002h for buildings with precast shear walls with dry joints; 

less than 0.003h for shear wall building with rigidly attached 

masonry infill; less than .0075h for unbraced frames with isolated 

infill; and less than .015h for other structures. Includes a scale factor 

Q/Qmin that allows a reduction of the computed drift for longer 

period structures where the design base shear Q is less than a 

minimum base shear Qmin. Stringent drift criteria (more stringent than 

U.S. codes) have resulted in an almost exclusive use of shear wall 

systems in buildings. As a result, drift-related nonstructural damage is 

significantly reduced. Published by the Instituto Nacional de 

Normalizacion (INN-Chile), Santiago, Chile.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-7

Table G-1 Codes and Standards Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

NCh 2369.Of2003

(Chile)

Chilean Norm NCh2369, 

Earthquake Resistant Design 

of Industrial Structures and 

Facilities

2003 Chilean code for industrial buildings. Includes recommendations and 

design rules for mechanical equipment that could be applicable to 

other types of buildings. Currently only available in Spanish. 

Published by the Instituto Nacional de Normalizacion (INN-Chile), 

Santiago, Chile.

UBC 1961 Uniform Building Code, 1961 

Edition

1961 First appearance of separate provisions for nonstructural components 

in the UBC; maximum lateral force of 0.2g in Zone 3.

UBC 1976 Uniform Building Code, 1976 

Edition

1976 Nonstructural provisions updated in response to 1971 San Fernando 

Earthquake; maximum force increased to 0.3g in Zone 4.

UBC 1988 Uniform Building Code, 1988 

Edition

1988 Update of nonstructural provisions to consider response of non-rigid 

items and items at grade; maximum force remained 0.3g in Zone 4 

for rigid items.

UBC 1997 Uniform Building Code, 1997 

Edition

1997 Nonstructural seismic requirements are a blend of requirements 

from the 1994 and 1997 NEHRP Recommended Provisions for 

Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures. 

USACE 

TI 809-04

Tri-Service Manual, Seismic 

Design for Buildings

1998 Chapter 10 Successor document to TM 5-809-10 and TM 5-809-10-1. 

Published by the US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, D.C.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-8

Table G-1 Codes and Standards Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

USACE

TM 5-809-10

Tri-Service Manual, Seismic 

Design for Buildings

1996 Chapter 8, 

Appendix L

Provides a dynamic analysis procedure for design of nonstructural 

components that must remain functional after a major earthquake. 

Requires generation of floor response spectra and consideration of 

inter-story drift at the location of essential equipment. Appendix 

includes four design examples. Published by the US Army Corps of 

Engineers, Washington, D.C.

USACE

TM 5-809-10-1

Tri-Service Manual, Seismic 

Design Guidelines for 

Essential Buildings

1986 Chapter 6 Provides methodology for design; defines essential nonstructural 

systems (Table 6-3); defines two levels of earthquake ground motion 

(EQ-I and EQ-II); requires equipment certification. Published by the 

US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, D.C.

USACE

TM-5-809-10-2

Tri-Service Manual, Seismic 

Design Guidelines for 

Upgrading Existing Buildings

1988 Chapter 9 Chapter focuses on improving performance of existing nonstructural 

installations. Includes a list of nonstructural systems with descriptions 

of potential damage and failure modes (Table 9-1). Published by the 

US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, D.C.

VISCMA 102-07 Static Qualification Standards 

for Obtaining a VISCMA 

Compliant Seismic 

Component Rating

2007 Testing protocol for mechanical, electrical and plumbing equipment. 

Published by the Vibration Isolation and Seismic Control 

Manufacturers Association, Wayne, Pennsylvania.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-9

Table G-2 Guidance Documents Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

ASHRAE RP-812 A Practical Guide to Seismic 

Restraint

1999 Published by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and AirConditioning Engineers, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia.

ASHRAE /SMACNA Seismic Restraint 

Applications CD-ROM

2002 Provides technical information for design and installation of seismic 

restraints for HVAC equipment, piping, and ducts. Includes 

representative bracing details, layout examples, and tables. Consists of 

portions of the following documents: SMACNA's Seismic Restraint 

Manual: Guidelines for Mechanical Systems; ASHRAE's Handbook -

HVAC Applications (2003); and ASHRAE's A Practical Guide to 

Seismic Restraint. Produced by the American Society of Heating, 

Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. and the Sheet 

Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors' National Association.

CISCA 1991 Recommendations for 

Direct-Hung Acoustical and 

Lay-in Panel Ceilings, Seismic 

Zones 0-2

1991 Industry standards for ceilings in low seismic zones. Published by 

Ceilings and Interior Systems Construction Association, Deerfield, 

Illinois.

CISCA 1990 Recommendations for 

Direct-Hung Acoustical and 

Lay-in Panel Ceilings, Seismic 

Zones 3-4 

1990 Industry standards for ceilings in high seismic zones. Published by 

Ceilings and Interior Systems Construction Association, Deerfield, 

Illinois.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-10

Table G-2 Guidance Documents Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

DGS, DSA

(California )

Guide and Checklist for 

Nonstructural Earthquake 

Hazards in California Schools

Identifies potential hazards associated with nonstructural components 

and provides recommendations to mitigate hazards. Includes typical 

details and a nonstructural earthquake hazards checklist. Published by 

the California State Department of General Services, Division of the 

State Architect, and the Governer’s Office of Emergency Services, 

Sacramento, California. 

DOISSP Nonstructural Hazards 

Rehabilitation Guidelines; 

Vol. I; Guidelines Usage, 

Architectural, Mechanical, 

Electrical, Plumbing

Contains guidance gathered from various sources, both public and 

private sources. Includes both proprietary and non-proprietary 

details. Published by the Department of the Interior Bureau of 

Reclamation, Seismic Safety Program (DOISSP), Washington, D.C. 

DOISSP Nonstructural Hazards 

Rehabilitation Guidelines; 

Vol. II; Furnishings, Interior 

Equipment, Miscellaneous 

Components, Mobile 

Homes, Manufactured 

Homes, FEMA 273, FEMA 

310, FEMA 178, & ASCE 31-

Contains guidance gathered from various sources, both public and 

private sources. Includes both proprietary and non-proprietary 

details. Published by the Department of the Interior Bureau of 

Reclamation, Seismic Safety Program (DOISSP), Washington, D.C. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-11

Table G-2 Guidance Documents Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

xx Excerpts

EERI 84-04 Nonstructural Issues of 

Seismic Design and 

Construction

1984 Results of workshop including invited papers on nonstructural issues. 

Published by the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, 

California.

FEMA Instructor's Guide for 

Nonstructural Earthquake 

Mitigation for Hospitals and 

other Health Care facilities. 

1988 Materials for course given by Emergency Management Institute, 

Emmitsburg, Maryland. 

FEMA Final Report, Nonstructural 

Earthquake Mitigation 

Guidance Manual. 

2004 Based on FEMA Region X Earthquake Hazard Mitigation Handbook 

for Public Facilities, 2002. Includes flowcharts, step-by-step 

procedures and some details. Divides nonstructural components into 

four groups: contents, exterior building elements, interior building 

elements, and building utilities. Prepared by URS Group, Inc. for 

FEMA. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-12

Table G-2 Guidance Documents Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

FEMA Region X Earthquake Hazard 

Mitigation Handbook for 

Public Facilities

2002 Available at http://www.conservationtech.com/FEMA-WEB/FEMAsubweb-EQ/index.htm

FEMA 74 Reducing the Risks of 

Nonstructural Earthquake 

Damage: A Practical Guide. 

Third Edition

1994 Successor document to previous editions of FEMA 74, first published 

in 1985.

FEMA 74-FM Earthquake Hazard 

Mitigation for Nonstructural 

Elements, Field Manual

2005 Includes three types of details: Non-Engineered, Prescriptive, and 

Engineered. Contains more details than FEMA 74, along with a field 

data sheet based on the FEMA 74 checklist.

FEMA 150 Seismic Considerations: 

Health Care Facilities 

1990 Published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, 

Washington, D.C.

FEMA 172 NEHRP Handbook of 

Techniques for the Seismic 

Rehabilitation of Existing 

Buildings 

1992 Chapters 

5, 6

Relevant chapters include details for electrical cabinets, chimneys, 

parapets, masonry partitions, raised access floors, and mechanical 

equipment.

FEMA 178 NEHRP Handbook for the 

Seismic Evaluation of Existing 

1992 Section 10.5 Predecessor document to FEMA 310.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-13

Table G-2 Guidance Documents Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

Buildings 

FEMA 232 Homebuilders' Guide to 

Earthquake-Resistant Design 

and Construction

2006 Includes details based on the 1994 edition of FEMA 74.

FEMA 273 NEHRP Guidelines for the 

Seismic Rehabilitation of 

Buildings

1997 Predecessor document to FEMA 356.

FEMA 310 Handbook for the Seismic 

Evaluation of Buildings - A 

Prestandard

1998 Sections 3.9, 

4.2.7, 4.8, 

and Table 4-

9

Predecessor document to SEI/ASCE 31-03. Relevant sections describe 

evaluation procedures for existing nonstructural components. 

Includes comprehensive checklists of potential nonstructural hazards.

FEMA 356 Prestandard and 

Commentary for the Seismic 

Rehabilitation of Buildings

2000 Chapter 11 Successor document to FEMA 273/274, and predecessor to ASCE/SEI 

31-03. Relevant chapter describes design procedures for the 

rehabilitation of existing nonstructural components, and a table 

identifying nonstructural component types and their applicability to 

different performance objectives.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-14

Table G-2 Guidance Documents Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

FEMA 389 Communicating with Owners 

and Managers of New 

Buildings on Earthquake 

Risk: A Primer for Design 

Professionals

2004

FEMA 395 Incremental Seismic 

Rehabilitation of School 

Buildings (K-12): Providing 

Protection to People and 

Buildings

2003 Includes a table of "Nonstructural Seismic Performance 

Improvements" (page C-21) that lists possible seismic performance 

improvements that could be undertaken on nonstructural 

components common to school occupancies. 

FEMA 396 Incremental Seismic 

Rehabilitation of Hospital 

Buildings: Providing 

Protection to People and 

Buildings

2003 Includes a table of "Nonstructural Seismic Performance 

Improvements" (page C-23) that lists possible seismic performance 

improvements that could be undertaken on nonstructural 

components common to hospital occupancies. 

FEMA 397 Incremental Seismic 

Rehabilitation of Office 

Buildings: Providing 

Protection to People and 

Buildings

2003 Includes a table of "Nonstructural Seismic Performance 

Improvements" (page C-24) that lists possible seismic performance 

improvements that could be undertaken on nonstructural 

components common to office occupancies. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-15

Table G-2 Guidance Documents Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

FEMA 398 Incremental Seismic 

Rehabilitation of Multifamily 

Apartment Buildings: 

Providing Protection to 

People and Buildings

2004 Includes a table of "Nonstructural Seismic Performance 

Improvements" (page C-22) that lists possible seismic performance 

improvements that could be undertaken on nonstructural 

components common to multifamily apartment occupancies.

FEMA 399 Incremental Seismic 

Rehabilitation of Retail 

Buildings: Providing 

Protection to People and 

Buildings

2004 Includes a table of "Nonstructural Seismic Performance 

Improvements" (page C-22) that lists possible seismic performance 

improvements that could be undertaken on nonstructural 

components common to retail occupancies.

FEMA 400 Incremental Seismic 

Rehabilitation of Hotel and 

Motel Buildings

2005 Includes a table of "Nonstructural Seismic Performance 

Improvements" (page C-23) that lists possible seismic performance 

improvements that could be undertaken on nonstructural 

components common to hotel and motel occupancies.

FEMA 412 Installing Seismic Restraints 

for Mechanical Equipment

2002 Includes numerous elaborate details and many recommendations for 

seismic restraint of mechanical equipment.

FEMA 413 Installing Seismic Restraints 

for Electrical Equipment

2004 Includes numerous elaborate details and many recommendations for 

seismic restraint of electrical equipment.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-16

Table G-2 Guidance Documents Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

FEMA 414 Installing Seismic Restraints 

for Duct and Pipe

2004 Includes numerous elaborate details and many recommendations for 

seismic restraint of duct and piping components.

FEMA 424 Design Guide for Improving 

School Safety in Earthquakes, 

Floods, and High Winds

2004 Includes pictures of nonstructural damage (pages 4-17 through 4-19, 

4-23, 4-24, 4-30, 4-31); a list of types of nonstructural components 

(page 4-59); graphics for ceilings, shelves, and walls (pages 4-60 and 

4-61).

FEMA 433 Using HAZUS-MH for Risk 

Assessment: How-To Guide

2004

FEMA 445 Next-Generation 

Performance-Based Seismic 

Design Guidelines: Program 

Plan for New and Existing 

Buildings 

2006 Section 4.2 Describes how performance-based seismic design guidelines will be 

developed under the ATC-58 Project. Section 4.2 refers specifically to 

the development of nonstructural performance products.

FEMA 450 NEHRP Recommended 

Provisions for Seismic 

Regulations for New 

Buildings and Other 

Structures, Part 1 and 2: 

Provisions and Commentary 

2004 Chapters 6, 

6A, and 

Commentary

Provides criteria for the design and construction of structures to resist 

earthquake ground motions. Relevant chapters include prescriptive 

requirements for the design of architectural, mechanical, electrical 

and piping components. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-17

Table G-2 Guidance Documents Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

FEMA 452 A How-To Guide to Mitigate 

Potential Terrorist Attacks 

Against Buildings

2005

FEMA 454 Designing for Earthquakes: A 

Manual for Architects

2006 Section 6.6, 

Chapter 9

Discussion of code issues including nonstructural issues. Contains a 

collection of photos and generic details borrowed from various 

sources including: FEMA 74; details developed for the Lawrence 

Livermore National Lab; and the SMACNA Guidelines. Includes a

discussion on the need for systems engineering, considering all parts 

of the building as a whole. Provides a checklist (Table 9-3) showing 

allocation of design responsibilities for nonstructural systems and 

components. 

FEMA 460 Seismic Considerations for 

Steel Storage Racks Located 

in Areas Accessible to the 

Public

2005 Includes: a review of the performance of storage racks in past 

earthquakes; a history of the development of codes and standards 

used for storage rack design; current storage rack design practices; 

guidance on recommended performance goals and design 

requirements for storage racks; guidelines for 

implementation/responsibilities associated with the specification, 

procurement, and installation of pallet storage racks; suggested 

guidance for securing contents; recommendations for operations and 

use; suggested guidance for quality assurance programs; a discussion 

of current and past storage rack research and testing; suggestions for 

post-earthquake inspections; and proposed modifications to seismic 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-18

Table G-2 Guidance Documents Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

design provisions and standards for racks. 

FEMA 461 Interim Protocols for 

Determining Seismic 

Performance Characteristics 

of Structural and 

Nonstructural Components 

2007 Provides an interim protocol for testing of building components to 

establish their performance capability in the form of fragility functions. 

Fragility functions are used to assess the seismic performance of 

individual components, systems incorporating these components, and 

buildings containing these systems and components that are subjected 

to earthquake shaking. Protocols are not intended for seismic 

performance qualification testing of nonstructural components 

required by the building code, although the loading protocols could 

be used for that purpose. 

FEMA 577 Design Guide for Improving 

Hospital Safety in 

Earthquakes, Floods, and 

High Winds: Providing 

Protection to People and 

2007
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-19

Table G-2 Guidance Documents Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

Buildings

FEMA 582 Design Guide for Improving 

Commercial Buildings Safety 

in Earthquakes, Floods, and 

High Winds

Future

John Wiley & Sons, 

Inc.

Earthquakes, an Architect's 

Guide to Nonstructural 

Seismic Hazards

1990 Target audience is architects. Written by H.J. Lagorio. Published by 

John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, New York.

OCIPEP

(Canada)

Seismic Hazard Assessment 

and Mitigation for Buildings’ 

Functional and Operational 

Components: A Canadian 

Perspective

2002 Contains figures and photos from various sources, including FEMA 74. 

Includes damage photos from 1999 Chi Chi, Taiwan Earthquake: 

damage to rooftop equipment (page 19); collapse of free-standing 

non-structural wall (page 20); and damage to sprinkler systems. 

Prepared by the Department of Civil Engineering, University of 

Ottowa, for the Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection and 

Emergency Preparedness (OCIPEP), Ontario, Canada.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-20

Table G-2 Guidance Documents Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

Oregon Emergency 

Management

Earthquake Preparedness 

and Mitigation Guidance for 

Oregon State Agency Offices 

and Warehouses

2004 Focuses on office and warehouse occupancies, with special attention 

to storage racks. Includes photos and guidance including shrink-wrap 

and netting to mitigate potential falling hazards. Provides some 

specific information on performance of furniture by specific vendors 

(Hayworth, Steelcase, and Artmet).

Pan American 

Health 

Organization

Principles of Disaster 

Mitigation in Health Facilities

2000 Chapter 3 Includes guidance on assessing and mitigating seismic vulnerabilities 

of nonstructural components. Published by the Pan American Health 

Organization, Regional Office of the World Health Organization, 

Washington, D.C.

Salt Lake City 

School District

Seismic Design Criteria of

Nonstructural Systems For 

New School Facilities And 

Existing School Facilities

2001 Developed under a FEMA “Project Impact” Grant. Intended for use 

on new school design projects and seismic retrofit projects in the Salt 

Lake City School District. Establishes minimum design procedures, 

general detailing requirements, design approval procedures, and 

construction inspection procedures for nonstructural items. The 

design engineer or architect is responsible for development of project 

specific nonstructural details. Some requirements exceed the 

minimum standards given in the Uniform Building Code (UBC). 

Seattle Public 

Schools

School Facilities Manual: 

Nonstructural Protection 

Guide. Safer Schools, 

Earthquake Hazards, 

Nonstructural. Second 

2000 Includes detailed inventory form and details not included in FEMA 

74. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-21

Table G-2 Guidance Documents Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

Edition

University of 

California, Berkeley

UC Berkeley: Q-Brace 

Quake Bracing Guidelines

2005 Guidelines developed for University of California, Berkeley campus 

facilities. Includes detailed solutions for contents identifying vendor 

supplied products or size of hardware to use. 

USACERL 

TR-98/34

Seismic Mitigation for 

Equipment at Army Medical 

Centers

1998 Presents simple methods for reducing the seismic vulnerability of 

equipment at Army medical centers. Illustrations, observations, and 

recommendations are based on examples from Madigan Army 

Medical Center (MAMC). Concerns about particular well-anchored 

critical medical equipment are presented. Published by the U.S. 

Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratories.

USACE, Engineering 

and Support

Center 

Seismic Protection for 

Mechanical Equipment

Presentation on procedures to design seismic supports of equipment, 

piping, and ducts; includes force coefficients and methods to 

calculate forces. Also includes a list of references useful as guidelines 

for the design. Available from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers at

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2005triservice/track16/stut.pdf. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-22

Table G-2 Guidance Documents Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title

Publication 

Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

VISCMA Understanding the 2000 IBC 

Code (Architectural 

Components and Equipment 

Restraint)

2005 Available on the Vibration Isolation and Seismic Control 

Manufacturers Association website at 

http://www.viscma.com/articles.htm

VISCMA The Pitfalls of Combining 

Internal & External 

Equipment Isolation

2003 Explains problems associated with utilizing both internal and external 

isolation in equipment. Shows that performance is better if only 

external isolation is used. Available on the Vibration Isolation and 

Seismic Control Manufacturers Association website at 

http://www.viscma.com/articles.htm
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-23

Table G-3 Nonproprietary Details and Other Resources for Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Resource Type Title Publication Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

ASHRAE /SMACNA Non-proprietary 

Details

Seismic Restraint 

Applications CD-ROM

2002 Provides technical information for design and installation 

of seismic restraints for HVAC equipment, piping, and 

ducts. Includes representative bracing details, layout 

examples, and tables. Consists of portions of the 

following documents: SMACNA's Seismic Restraint 

Manual: Guidelines for Mechanical Systems; ASHRAE's 

Handbook - HVAC Applications (2003); and ASHRAE's A 

Practical Guide to Seismic Restraint. Produced by the 

American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and AirConditioning Engineers, Inc. and the Sheet Metal and Air 

Conditioning Contractors' National Association.

ATC-38 Damage 

Inventory Form

ATC-38 

Postearthquake 

Building Performance 

Assessment Form and 

Surveyor Instructions

2001 10-page form and instructions that provides standardized 

damage percentages and standardized codes for ceilings 

and partitions. Available with the ATC-38 Project report, 

or on the EERI website at http://www.eeri.org/

Dartmouth College Sample 

Specification

Dartmouth College 

Design & Construction 

Guidelines, 

Section 15240 

Seismic Restraint and 

Vibration Control

2004 Specification for the installation of equipment at 

Dartmouth College. Available at 

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~opdc/pdfs/15240.pdf
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-24

Table G-3 Nonproprietary Details and Other Resources for Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Resource Type Title Publication Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

DGS, DSA

(California )

Guide and 

Checklist

Guide and Checklist 

for Nonstructural 

Earthquake Hazards in 

California Schools

2003 Identifies potential hazards associated with nonstructural 

components and provides recommendations to mitigate 

hazards. Includes typical details and a nonstructural 

earthquake hazards checklist. Published by the California 

State Department of General Services, Division of the 

State Architect, and the Governer’s Office of Emergency 

Services, Sacramento, California. 

DOISSP Non-proprietary 

Details

Nonstructural Hazards 

Rehabilitation 

Guidelines; Vol. I; 

Guidelines Usage, 

Architectural, 

Mechanical, Electrical, 

Plumbing

2003 Contains guidance gathered from various sources, both 

public and private sources. Includes both proprietary 

and non-proprietary details. Published by the 

Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation, 

Seismic Safety Program (DOISSP), Washington, D.C. 

DOISSP Non-proprietary 

Details

Nonstructural Hazards 

Rehabilitation 

Guidelines; Vol. II; 

Furnishings, Interior 

Equipment, 

Miscellaneous 

Components, Mobile 

Homes, Manufactured 

Homes, FEMA 273, 

2003 Contains guidance gathered from various sources, both 

public and private sources. Includes both proprietary 

and non-proprietary details. Published by the 

Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation, 

Seismic Safety Program (DOISSP), Washington, D.C. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-25

Table G-3 Nonproprietary Details and Other Resources for Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Resource Type Title Publication Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

FEMA 310, FEMA 178, 

& ASCE 31-xx Excerpts

EERI Damage 

Inventory Form

EERI Reconnaissance/

Clearinghouse Report 

Form - Architectural 

and Nonstructural 

Elements

2000 2-page form consisting of broad categories, several 

subcategories, and blank lines to report damage and gather 

damage statistics. 

FEMA Non-proprietary 

Details

Final Report, 

Nonstructural 

Earthquake Mitigation 

Guidance Manual 

2004 Based on FEMA Region X Earthquake Hazard Mitigation 

Handbook for Public Facilities, 2002. Includes 

flowcharts, step-by-step procedures and some details. 

Divides nonstructural components into four groups: 

contents, exterior building elements, interior building 

elements, and building utilities. Prepared by URS Group, 

Inc. for FEMA. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-26

Table G-3 Nonproprietary Details and Other Resources for Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Resource Type Title Publication Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

FEMA Region X Non-proprietary 

Details

Earthquake Hazard 

Mitigation Handbook 

for Public Facilities

2002 Available at http://www.conservationtech.com/FEMAWEB/FEMA-subweb-EQ/index.htm

FEMA 74 Non-proprietary 

Details

Reducing the Risks of 

Nonstructural 

Earthquake Damage: A 

Practical Guide. Third 

Edition

1994 Successor document to previous editions of FEMA 74, 

first published in 1985.

FEMA 74 FM Non-proprietary 

Details

FEMA 74 Field Manual 2005 Includes three types of details: Non-Engineered, 

Prescriptive, and Engineered. Contains more details than 

FEMA 74, along with a field data sheet based on the 

FEMA 74 checklist.

FEMA 172 Non-proprietary 

Details

NEHRP Handbook of 

Techniques for the 

Seismic Rehabilitation 

of Existing Buildings 

1992 Chapters 

5, 6

Relevant chapters include details for electrical cabinets, 

chimneys, parapets, masonry partitions, raised access 

floors, and mechanical equipment.

FEMA 412 Non-proprietary 

Details

Installing Seismic 

Restraints for 

Mechanical Equipment

2002 Includes numerous elaborate details and many 

recommendations for seismic restraint of mechanical 

equipment.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-27

Table G-3 Nonproprietary Details and Other Resources for Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Resource Type Title Publication Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

FEMA 413 Non-proprietary 

Details

Installing Seismic 

Restraints for Electrical 

Equipment

2004 Includes numerous elaborate details and many 

recommendations for seismic restraint of electrical 

equipment.

FEMA 414 Non-proprietary 

Details

Installing Seismic 

Restraints for Duct and 

Pipe

2004 Includes numerous elaborate details and many 

recommendations for seismic restraint of duct and piping 

components.

FEMA 424 Photos, Damage Design Guide for 

Improving School 

Safety in Earthquakes, 

Floods, and High 

Winds

2004 Includes pictures of nonstructural damage (pages 4-17 

through 4-19, 4-23, 4-24, 4-30, 4-31); a list of types of 

nonstructural components (page 4-59); graphics for 

ceilings, shelves, and walls (pages 4-60 and 4-61).

FEMA 454 Non-proprietary 

Details

Designing for 

Earthquakes: A 

Manual for Architects

2006 Section 6.6, 

Chapter 9

Discussion of code issues including nonstructural issues. 

Contains a collection of photos and generic details 

borrowed from various sources including: FEMA 74; 

details developed for the Lawrence Livermore National 

Lab; and the SMACNA Guidelines. Includes a discussion 

on the need for systems engineering, considering all parts 

of the building as a whole. Provides a checklist (Table 9-

3) showing allocation of design responsibilities for 

nonstructural systems and components. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-28

Table G-3 Nonproprietary Details and Other Resources for Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Resource Type Title Publication Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

Los Alamos 

National Laboratory

Sample 

Specification

Section 22 0548

Vibration and Seismic 

Controls for Plumbing, 

Piping, and Equipment

2006 Specification for the anchorage of equipment at Los 

Alamos National Lab. Available at 

http://engstandards.lanl.gov/conspec/pdf/22_0548R0.pdf

OCIPEP 

(Canada)

Photos, Damage Seismic Hazard 

Assessment and 

Mitigation for 

Buildings' Functional 

and Operational 

Components: A 

Canadian Perspective

2002 Contains figures and photos from various sources, 

including FEMA 74. Includes damage photos from 1999 

Chi Chi, Taiwan Earthquake: damage to rooftop 

equipment (page 19); collapse of free-standing nonstructural wall (page 20); and damage to sprinkler 

systems. Prepared by the Department of Civil 

Engineering, University of Ottowa, for the Office of 

Critical Infrastructure Protection and Emergency 

Preparedness (OCIPEP), Ontario, Canada.

Oregon Emergency 

Management

Non-proprietary 

Details

Earthquake 

Preparedness and 

Mitigation Guidance 

for Oregon State 

Agency Offices and 

Warehouses

2004 Focuses on office and warehouse occupancies, with 

special attention to storage racks. Includes photos and 

guidance including shrink-wrap and netting to mitigate 

potential falling hazards. Provides some specific 

information on performance of furniture by specific 

vendors (Hayworth, Steelcase, and Artmet).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-29

Table G-3 Nonproprietary Details and Other Resources for Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Resource Type Title Publication Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

PEER 2003/05 Taxonomy and 

Nonstructural 

Damage 

Inventory Form

Response Assessment 

of Nonstructural 

Building Elements 

2003 Proposes a taxonomy (classification) of nonstructural 

elements by functionality, modes of failure, accelerationsensitive or drift-sensitive response parameter, and 

repercussions of damage. Provides damageability, cost, and 

loss data for 200 elements. Includes a Nonstructural

Damage Inventory Form used following the Nisqually 

Earthquake.

PEER 2003/12 Non-proprietary 

Details

Implementation 

Manual for the Seismic 

Protection of 

Laboratory Contents: 

Format and Case 

Studies 

2003 Presents case studies for University of California Berkeley 

campus labs. Suggests format for User's Manual that could 

be used to help occupants install do-it-yourself details for a 

particular facility. 

PEER 2005/03 Taxonomy A Taxonomy of 

Building Components 

for Performance-Based 

Earthquake 

Engineering

2005 Provides a detailed taxonomy (classification) of nonstructural 

components. Each component is assigned a unique 

identification number. The list differentiates between 

anchored and unanchored versions of the same item. 

Sandia Sample 

Specification

Special Specification 

Section 13085S -

Seismic Protection

Sample specification for the anchorage of equipment at 

Sandia (16 pages). Includes lists of equipment, detailed 

requirements, specific instructions for some items, load 

limits, and member sizes.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-30

Table G-3 Nonproprietary Details and Other Resources for Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Resource Type Title Publication Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

Seattle Public 

Schools

Non-proprietary 

Details

School Facilities 

Manual: Nonstructural 

Protection Guide. 

Safer Schools, 

Earthquake Hazards, 

Nonstructural. Second 

Edition

2000 Includes detailed inventory form and details not included 

in FEMA 74. 

Southern California 

Earthquake Center

Photos, Damage Nonstructural Issues in 

Public Schools - "Stairs 

to Nowhere"

2000 Photos of damage in school facilities in Southern California. 

Available at 

http://www.scec.org/instanet/00news/images/mcgavin/sld00

1.htm 

University of 

California, Berkeley

Non-proprietary 

Details

UC Berkeley: Q-Brace 

Quake Bracing 

Guidelines

2005 Guidelines developed for University of California, 

Berkeley campus facilities. Includes detailed solutions for 

contents identifying vendor supplied products or size of 

hardware to use. 

USACERL 

TR-98/34

Photos, 

Mitigation

Seismic Mitigation for 

Equipment at Army 

Medical Centers

1998 Presents simple methods for reducing the seismic 

vulnerability of equipment at Army medical centers. 

Illustrations, observations, and recommendations are 

based on examples from Madigan Army Medical Center 

(MAMC). Concerns about particular well-anchored 

critical medical equipment are presented. Published by 

the U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-31

Table G-3 Nonproprietary Details and Other Resources for Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Resource Type Title Publication Date

Relevant 

Sections Comments

Laboratories.

VISCMA 101-07 Sample 

Specification

Seismic Restraint 

Specification 

Guidelines 

for Mechanical, 

Electrical And 

Plumbing Systems

2007 Sample specification for seismic restraint of mechanical, 

electrical and plumbing equipment. Published by the 

Vibration Isolation and Seismic Control Manufacturer’s 

Association, Wayne, Pennsylvania.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-32

Table G-4 Proprietary Details and Products for the Protection of Nonstructural Components (continued)

Product 

Source/Vendor Product or Service Description Comments

Chatsworth Seismic 

Protection Products

Chatsworth Seismic Protection 

Products

Variety of seismic protection products. Available at 

http://www.twacomm.com/catalog/dept_id_644.htm

 

Flexhead Flexible fire protection Proprietary flexible connection for sprinklers heads. Available at http://www.flexhead.com/

Hilti Concrete anchors and hardware Information on product selection, different installation systems, and load data. Available at 

www.hilti.com 

International 

Seismic Application 

Technology

International Seismic Application 

Technology (ISAT) Applications and 

Design Manual 

Focuses exclusively on mechanical, electrical, plumbing equipment and piping. Includes load 

tables and details showing use of products. Available at www.isatsb.com

International 

Seismic Application 

Technology

2003 IBC Specification - Seismic 

Restraint of Suspended Utilities

Sample specification available at www.isatsb.com

Kinetics Noise 

Control

Kinetics noise control seismic 

restraint capabilities

Brochure presents restraint systems that serve to limit the movement of equipment during a 

seismic event. Available at 

http://www.kineticsnoise.com/hvac/pdf/seismic%20restraint%20capabilities.pdf

Loos & Co Proprietary details approved by Includes collections of details, such as: Section 7, Sway Brace Components, Installation 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-33

Table G-4 Proprietary Details and Products for the Protection of Nonstructural Components (continued)

Product 

Source/Vendor Product or Service Description Comments

OSHPD for use in California hospitals Instructions and Details. Available at www.earthquakebrace.com

Mason Industries Details, Handbook, and online 

resources

Available at http://www.mason-ind.com/html/about.htm or 

http://209.200.80.33/html/seismic_engineering_index.htm

Metraflex Thermal and seismic expansion joints 

for pipe

Available at http://www.metraflex.com/seismic_met.php

Pacific Seismic 

Products

ASCE 25-97 listed seismic actuated 

valves for residential, commercial 

and industrial applications

Gas shut off valves and other seismic actuated devices. Available at 

http://www.psp4gasoff.com/aboutpsp.htm

Ridg-U-Rak Isolation system for storage racks Isolation test of storage racks, both with and without transverse isolation. Movie of test 

available on website. Available at http://www.ridgurak.com

Technotes Issue 

No. 21

RWDI Consulting 

Engineers and 

Scientists

Base isolation system for museum 

pieces or equipment

“Seismic Protection of Museum Artifacts using Base Isolation,” Bujar Myslimaj, Ph.D., P.Eng., 

Senior Specialist, Scott Gamble B.Sc., P.Eng., Principal, Ray Sinclair, Ph.D., Principal. Available 

at http://go.rwdi.com/technotes/t21.pdf

Safety Central Earthquake safety fasteners, furniture 

straps, and emergency preparedness 

Available at www.safetycentral.com
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-34

Table G-4 Proprietary Details and Products for the Protection of Nonstructural Components (continued)

Product 

Source/Vendor Product or Service Description Comments

supplies

Secure Quick Secure Quick Seismic Fastening 

System 

Consists of steel cable, wall bracket, and cable fasteners for attaching furniture to wood stud 

walls. Also provided on website, "Why You Should Not Use Plastic Tabs Devices, Velcro, 

Hook and Loop, Nylon Straps or Metal Braces." Available at www.quakesecure.com

Secure-It PC Security Hardware Provides products to secure computer equipment. Intended as protection against theft, but 

security cables and hardware could also be adapted as seismic restraint for other desktop 

items. Available at http://www.secure-it.com/shop/index.php/cPath/21

Seismic Restraints 

NZ

Hardware and systems for contents: 

collectables, home, office, school, 

hospital, lab, and technology.

Available at www.seismicrestraints.co.nz

Seismic Solutions Seismic restraint for ducts, pipes, 

cable trays, and equipment using 

cables

Services include structural design, labor and materials for installation. Available at 

http://www.seismicsolutionsinc.com/details.html

Simpson Strong-Tie Provides load rated straps and ties Includes link for DIY (Do-it-Yourself) projects that illustrate the use of various connectors and 

adhesives, which could help with some nonstructural installations. Available at 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-35

Table G-4 Proprietary Details and Products for the Protection of Nonstructural Components (continued)

Product 

Source/Vendor Product or Service Description Comments

http://www.strongtie.com/products/categories/diy.html

Strand Earthquake 

Consultants

Engineering and products for 

nonstructural seismic mitigation

Distributors for GeoSIG, Pacific Seismic Products, Metraflex, and WorkSafe Technologies.

Taylor Devices, Inc. Viscous dampers for equipment 

protection

Available at http://www.taylordevices.com/SeismicDampers.htm

The Preparedness 

Center

Earthquake safety fasteners, furniture 

straps, and emergency preparedness 

supplies

Available at www.preparedness.com

USG "Seismic Ceiling Resource Center" Includes a series of technical notes and guidelines related to ceilings, ceiling tracks, and 

shadow moldings. Available at www.usg.com and www.seismicceilings.com

Viking Flexible connections for sprinkler 

heads

Available at http://www.vikingcorp.com/databook/sprinklers/spk_accessories/070605.pdf
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-36

Table G-4 Proprietary Details and Products for the Protection of Nonstructural Components (continued)

Product 

Source/Vendor Product or Service Description Comments

WorkSafe

Technologies

System for base-isolation of 

equipment

IsoBaseTM Seismic Isolation Platform, available at http://www.worksafetech.com/

WorkSafe

Technologies

Large variety of products for seismic 

protection of nonstructural 

components in offices, data centers, 

hospitals, laboratories, and 

warehouses.

Available at http://www.worksafetech.com/
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-37

Table G-5 Recent and Ongoing Research Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title Author(s)

Publication 

Date Comments

8NCEE-002034 Enhancing the Resilience 

of Acute Care Facilities: 

An Overview of MCEER 

Research

Filiatrault, A., 

et al.

2006 Paper at 8th National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, San 

Francisco, California.

13WCEE-00295 Overturning Criteria for 

Non-Anchored NonSymmetric Rigid Bodies

Boroschek, 

R.L., and 

Romo, D.

2004 Theoretical discussion of the effect of non-symmetric bodies subjected to 

overturning. Paper at 13th World Conference on Earthquake 

Engineering, Vancouver, B.C., Canada.

ATC-29 Proceedings of a Seminar 

on Seismic Design and 

Performance of 

Equipment and 

Nonstructural Elements 

in Buildings and 

Industrial Structures

1992 Includes information on seismic design, performance, and research 

pertaining to nonstructural components. Funded by the National Center 

for Earthquake Engineering Research and the National Science 

Foundation.

ATC-29-1 Proceedings of a Seminar 

on Seismic Design, 

Retrofit, and 

Performance of 

Nonstructural 

Components

1998 Includes information on seismic design, performance, and research 

pertaining to nonstructural components. Funded by the National Center 

for Earthquake Engineering Research and the National Science 

Foundation.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-38

Table G-5 Recent and Ongoing Research Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title Author(s)

Publication 

Date Comments

ATC-29-2 Proceedings of Seminar 

on Seismic Design, 

Performance, and 

Retrofit of Nonstructural 

Components in Critical 

Facilities

2003 Focused principally on nonstructural components and systems in facilities 

with critical functions. Includes information on the state of the art, state 

of the practice, and efforts needed to improve both. Prepared in 

cooperation with the Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering 

Research, and funded by the National Science Foundation.

ATC-38 Database on the 

Performance of 

Structures Near StrongMotion Recordings: 

1994 Northridge, 

California, Earthquake

2001 Effort to correlate structural and nonstructural damage with ground 

motion parameters recorded during the 1994 Northridge Earthquake. 

Report includes a CD-ROM with Access database, Excel files, text files, 

and collection of over 500 photos. Database includes some 

nonstructural damage data in the following categories: "cladding 

separation or damage," “partitions damage," "windows damage," "lights 

and ceilings damage," and "Building Contents Damage." Most photos do 

not show damage, but provide an overview of the building from street. 

Report also includes the ATC-38 Postearthquake Building Performance 

Assessment Form and Surveyor Instructions. Nonstructural categories 

include Exterior Cladding/Glazing; Partitions; Ceilings; Plumbing, 

Electrical, Lighting, HVAC; Fire Protection; Major Fixed Equipment, 

Elevators, Chimneys, and Unusual Contents. 

ATC-58 Proceedings: MiniWorkshop/Invited 

Meeting on the 

Identification of 

2005 ATC-58 Project workshop focusing on the selection of a nonstructural 

component taxonomy, and identifying nonstructural components that are 

significant to the estimation of casualty, direct economic, and downtime 

losses from earthquake damage. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-39

Table G-5 Recent and Ongoing Research Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title Author(s)

Publication 

Date Comments

Nonstructural 

Components of 

Significance

ATC-58 Guidelines for Seismic 

Performance Assessment 

of Buildings, ATC-58 

35% Complete Draft

2007 Interim report on methodology for seismic performance assessment of 

new and existing buildings. Methodology will be applicable to most 

common building types designed and constructed in the United States 

within the past 50 years, and will estimate losses in terms of causalities, 

direct economic losses, and downtime as a result of earthquake damage. 

Loss estimation is based on fragility curves, which will be provided for 

both structural and nonstructural components.

FEMA 349 Action Plan for 

Performance Based 

Seismic Design

2000 Predecessor document to FEMA 445. Prepared by the Earthquake 

Engineering Research Institute for FEMA.

FEMA 445 Next-Generation 

Performance-Based 

Seismic Design 

Guidelines: Program 

Plan for New and 

Existing Buildings 

2006 Section 4.2 Describes how performance-based seismic design guidelines will be 

developed under the ATC-58 Project. Section 4.2 refers specifically to 

the development of nonstructural performance products.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-40

Table G-5 Recent and Ongoing Research Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title Author(s)

Publication 

Date Comments

EERI Learning from 

Earthquakes: a Survey of 

Surveys. 

Porter, K. 2002 Taken from an EERI Invitational Workshop: An Action Plan to Develop 

Earthquake Damage and Loss Data Protocols, September 19-20, 2002, 

Doubletree Hotel, Pasadena, California.

MCEER ASHRAE Consortium 

Investigates Performance 

of Roof-Top Air 

Handling Unit 

Future MCEER’s ASHRAE Consortium is beginning Phase II studies involving 

shake table testing of a rigidly anchored and vibration isolated roof-top 

air handling unit. Testing will begin in March 2008 in the Structural 

Engineering and Earthquake Simulation Laboratory (SEESL) at the 

University at Buffalo. Studies will focus on developing a specialized 

numerical model capable of analyzing the seismic response of various 

types of HVAC equipment mounted on ASHRAE-type isolation/restraint 

systems. 

MCEER Seismic Vulnerability and 

Protection of 

Nonstructural 

Components

T.T. Soong 

and D. Lopez 

Garcia

2003 Addresses seismic vulnerability and protection strategies. Divides 

nonstructural items into 3 categories: Unrestrained Nonstructural 

Components; Restrained Nonstructural components; and Nonstructural 

Systems, which consist of systems of nonstructural components. Cites 

examples of fragility curves developed for each category. Contains 

discussion of both damping systems and isolation systems as protection 

strategies. Ends with recommendations for 6 tasks: (1) Develop a Catalog 

of Nonstructural Components, Systems and Contents; (2) Identify 

Nonstructural Performance Measures; (3) Identify Engineering Demand 

Parameters; (4) Develop Damage Database; (5) Establish Comprehensive 

Testing and Certification Protocols; and (6) Performance Evaluation Case 

Studies/Test bed Checks.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-41

Table G-5 Recent and Ongoing Research Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title Author(s)

Publication 

Date Comments

MCEER-99-0014 MCEER Nonstructural 

Damage Database

Kao, A., and 

Soong, T.T.

1999 Database of earthquake damage to nonstructural elements.

MCEER-05-0005 “Simulation of Strong 

Ground Motions for 

Seismic Fragility 

Evaluation of 

Nonstructural 

Components in 

Hospitals” 

Wanitkorkul, 

A. and 

Filiatrault, A. 

2005 Published by the Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering 

Research, University at Buffalo, State University of New York. 

MCEER-06-0001 Seismic Fragility of 

Suspended Ceiling 

Systems

BadilloAlmaraz, 

Whittaker, 

Reinhorn, 

Cimellaro

2006 Report on testing of Armstrong ceiling systems. Concludes that 

compression bars and retention clips help in the behavior of ceilings, and 

that undersized tiles are a detriment. 

PEER 1998/05 Rocking Response and 

Overturning of 

Equipment Under 

Horizontal Pulse-Type 

Motions 

N. Makris, Y. 

Roussos

1998 Published by the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, 

Berkeley, California.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-42

Table G-5 Recent and Ongoing Research Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title Author(s)

Publication 

Date Comments

PEER 1999/06 Rocking Response and 

Overturning of Anchored 

Equipment under 

Seismic Excitations 

N. Makris, J. 

Zhang

1999 Results of shake table testing.

PEER 2001/14 Rocking Response of 

Equipment Anchored to 

a Base Foundation

N. Makris, C. 

Black

2001 Example of PEER research related to Lifelines. PEER has done series of 

tests funded by PG&E on electrical substation equipment including rigid 

bus connectors, flexible bus connectors, transformer bushings, and heavy 

substation equipment.

PEER 2002/01 Nonstructural Loss 

Estimation: The UC 

Berkeley Case Study 

M. Comerio, 

J. Stallmeyer

2002 Case studies of loss estimation for five University of California Berkeley 

campus buildings. Includes a table (Table 10) showing costs assumed for 

many types of equipment, and photos of lab equipment.

PEER 2002/05 Guidelines, 

Specifications, and 

Seismic Performance 

Characterization of 

Nonstructural Building 

Components and 

Equipment

Filiatrault, A., 

Christopoulus, 

C, and 

Stearns, C.

2001 Contents include chapters on nonstructural earthquake damage. 

Nonstructural items are divided into 5 groups: contents; building service 

equipment; building utilization equipment; interior architectural 

elements; and exterior architectural elements. Overview of various design 

guidelines and inventory of previous analytical and experimental studies. 

Includes recommendations, and comprehensive list of references. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-43

Table G-5 Recent and Ongoing Research Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title Author(s)

Publication 

Date Comments

PEER 2003/05 Response Assessment of 

Nonstructural Building 

Elements 

S. Taghavi, E. 

Miranda

2003 Proposes a taxonomy (classification) of nonstructural elements by 

functionality, modes of failure, acceleration-sensitive or drift-sensitive 

response parameter, and repercussions of damage. Provides damageability, 

cost, and loss data for 200 elements. Includes a Nonstructural Damage 

Inventory Form used following the Nisqually Earthquake.

PEER 2003/12 Implementation Manual 

for the Seismic 

Protection of Laboratory 

Contents: Format and 

Case Studies 

W. Holmes, 

M. Comerio 

2003 Presents case studies for University of California Berkeley campus labs. 

Suggests format for User's Manual that could be used to help occupants 

install do-it-yourself details for a particular facility. 

PEER 2005/03 A Taxonomy of Building 

Components for 

Performance-Based 

Earthquake Engineering

Porter, Keith 2005 Provides a detailed taxonomy (classification) of nonstructural components. 

Each component is assigned a unique identification number. The list 

differentiates between anchored and unanchored versions of the same item. 

PEER 2005/05 Performance 

Characterization of 

Bench- and ShelfMounted Equipment

S. Chaudhuri 

and T. 

Hutchinson|

2005
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-44

Table G-5 Recent and Ongoing Research Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title Author(s)

Publication 

Date Comments

PEER 2005/07 Experimental and 

Analytical Studies on the

Seismic Response of 

Freestanding and 

Anchored

Laboratory Equipment

D. 

Konstantinidis, 

N. Makris

2005 Shake table testing of equipment.

PEER 2005/12 PEER Test bed Study on 

a Laboratory Building: 

Exercising Seismic 

Performance Assessment

M. Comerio 2005 Test bed performance assessment of the UC Science Building linking 

performance of contents to operational failure. Shows the 

interdependence of building structure, systems, and contents in 

performance assessment, and highlights where further research is 

needed.

SUNY Buffalo Nonstructural 

Components Simulator 

(NCS). 

Future Specialized equipment for testing nonstructural components. University 

at Buffalo's NEES (UB-NEES) facility is commissioning a dedicated 

Nonstructural Component Simulator (NCS). The NCS is a modular and 

versatile two-level platform for experimental performance evaluation of 

nonstructural components and equipment under realistic full scale floor 

motions. NCS can provide the dynamic stroke necessary to replicate fullscale displacements, velocities and accelerations at the upper levels of 

multi-story buildings during earthquake shaking. Both displacement 

sensitive and acceleration sensitive nonstructural components and 

equipment can be experimentally evaluated under full-scale floor 

motions to understand, quantify and control their seismic response. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-45

Table G-5 Recent and Ongoing Research Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title Author(s)

Publication 

Date Comments

SUNY Buffalo, 

CSEE-SEESL-2004-

02

“Shake Table Testing of 

Frazier Industrial Storage 

Pallet Racks” 

Filiatrault, A. 

and 

Wanitkorkul, 

A. 

2004 Published by the University at Buffalo, State University of New York, 

Buffalo, New York. 

SUNY Buffalo, 

CSEE-SEESL-2005-

01

“Seismic Qualification By 

Shake Table Testing of a 

Centrifugal Liquid Chiller 

according to AC-156 

Testing Protocol” 

Filiatrault, A. 

and 

Wanitkorkul, 

A. 

2005 Published by the University at Buffalo, State University of New York, 

Buffalo, New York. 

SUNY Buffalo, 

CSEE-SEESL-2005-

03

“Shake Table Testing of 

Ridg-U-Rak Rigid Based 

and Ridg-U-Rak Patent 

Pending Base Isolated 

Industrial Storage Racks”

Filiatrault, A., 

Wanitkorkul, 

A. and Seo, JM. 

2005 Published by the University at Buffalo, State University of New York, 

Buffalo, New York. 

SUNY Buffalo, 

CSEE-SEESL-2005-

05

“Seismic Qualification of 

a Centrifugal Liquid 

Chiller by Shake Table 

Testing" 

Filiatrault, A. 

and 

Wanitkorkul, 

A. 

2005 Published by the University at Buffalo, State University of New York, 

Buffalo, New York. 

SUNY Buffalo, 

CSEE-SEESL-2006-

“Experimental Seismic 

Performance Evaluation 

of ASRAE-Type 

Fathali, S. and 

Filiatrault, A. 

2006 Published by the University at Buffalo, State University of New York, 

Buffalo, New York. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 G: List or Resources Page G-46

Table G-5 Recent and Ongoing Research Related to Nonstructural Components (continued)

Document 

Number/Source Title Author(s)

Publication 

Date Comments

05 Isolation/Restraint 

Systems” 

SUNY Buffalo, 

CSEE-SEESL-2006-

07

“Shake Table Testing of 

Ridg-U-Rak Rigid Based 

and Ridg-U-Rak Patent 

Pending Base Isolated 

Industrial Storage Racks: 

Production Unit Testing” 

Filiatrault, A., 

and 

Wanitkorkul, 

A.

2006 Published by the University at Buffalo, State University of New York, 

Buffalo, New York. 

SUNY Buffalo, 

CSEE-SEESL-2006-

19

“Shake Table Testing of 

Ridg-U-Rak Rigid Based 

and Ridg-U-Rak Patent 

Pending Base Isolated 

Industrial Storage Racks: 

Final Production Unit 

Testing”

Filiatrault, A., 

and 

Wanitkorkul, 

A.

2006 Published by the University at Buffalo, State University of New York, 

Buffalo, New York. 

University of Chile Controlled Overturning 

of Unanchored Rigid 

Bodies

Boroschek, 

R.L., and 

Iruretagoyena, 

A.

Review of test results for equipment on an inclined surface. Results show 

that an incline can force overturning to occur in a preferred direction. 

For example, a 3-degree angle will result in an 89% probability that 

blocks will overturn in that direction. Could be useful information for 

keeping contents on shelves. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 H: Glossary Page H-1

H. Glossary

Air gap: For vibration isolated equipment, the air gap is the nominal clearance between the 

equipment support frame and the bumper restraint or snubber. Where the air gap exceeds 

0.25”, the seismic design force must be doubled (2Fp) per ASCE/SEI 7-10. The optimal size of 

this air gap is a subject of continuing study and laboratory testing.

Anchorage: Connection or attachment of a nonstructural component to the structure typically 

through the use of welding, bolts, screws, post-installed anchors or other mechanical fasteners 

that provide a positive connection. Based on the configuration and the deformability of the 

components used, the anchorage may behave as a rigid attachment or a flexible attachment.

Anchors in Concrete and Masonry: Anchors into concrete or masonry are required for the 

attachments of many nonstructural components. See ACI 318 Appendix D for requirements for 

anchors embedded in concrete. See TMS 402/ACI 503/ASCE 5 for anchors embedded in 

masonry. See also post-installed anchors and power actuated fasteners.

Appendage: An architectural component such as a canopy, marquee, ornamental balcony or 

statuary.

Base: The portion of a building embedded in or resting on the ground surface. Seismic forces 

are delivered to the base of a building. This term is also used to describe the interface of a 

freestanding nonstructural component with the floor or roof of a building where it is supported. 

Seismic forces from the floor or roof level of the building are delivered to the base of the 

nonstructural component.

Base Isolation: A method whereby a building superstructure is separated from its foundation 

using flexible bearings in order to reduce the earthquake forces. Special detailing is required to 

provide flexible connections for architectural components, building utilities, piping, etc. that 

cross the isolation plane into the building. This method can also be used to protect individual 

pieces of critical, sensitive, or expensive equipment, museum artifacts, etc. 

Base Shear: The total design lateral force or shear at the base of a building structure or 

nonbuilding structure.

Bending: The curvature of structural or nonstructural components in response to certain types 

of applied loading. (For example, a beam bends or flexes in response to the weight it supports 

or to seismic loading). 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 H: Glossary Page H-2

Cantilever Elements: Elements supported only at the base such as parapets, chimneys, 

freestanding partitions, or freestanding exterior walls. 

Component Importance Factor, Ip: A factor equal to 1.0 for standard installations or 1.5 used 

for the design of Designated Seismic Systems that are required for post-earthquake life safety 

or for the continued operations of essential facilities; defined in ASCE/SEI 7-10 Section 13.1.3. 

Note that this is not the same as the Importance Factor, Ic, assigned for the building structure 

as a whole.

Consequential Damage: Essential components, such as designated seismic systems, must be 

protected from damage which might result from the failure of adjacent or connected elements. 

Thus both the functional and physical interrelationships of essential or nonessential 

components with essential components must be considered in order to properly safeguard the 

essential components.

Construction Documents: The written, graphic, electronic, or pictorial documents describing the 

design, locations, physical characteristics of a project. These documents are typically required 

to communicate the design intent to contractors and installers and may also be required to 

demonstrate compliance with applicable building codes or meet specific requirements of the 

jurisdiction where a project is located.

Construction Observation: The visual observation by a licensed design professional to 

determine that the elements of the project are constructed in general conformance with the 

construction documents. The architect, mechanical engineer, structural engineer, etc. may each 

have an independent duty to perform construction observation. This type of observation is 

distinct from special inspection.

Damper: Mechanical devices used to dissipate energy and reduce seismic displacements. 

Dampers come in many shapes and sizes and may be viscous, viscoelastic, lead extrusion, 

friction, plate yielding, shape memory, or unbonded braces. 

Deformability: The ease with which a component deforms under seismic loading. Per ASCE/SEI 

7-10, different design parameters are used for high-, limited-, and low-deformability elements 

and attachments. For example, a high-deformability element is one whose ultimate 

deformation is not less than 3.5 times the limit deformation (see ASCE/SEI 7-10 for clarification 

of these terms).

Design Force: The earthquake forces used for design typically expressed as a percentage of the 

acceleration of gravity such as 0.3g or 1.0g. Minimum code specified design forces for 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 H: Glossary Page H-3

nonstructural components are found in ASCE/SEI 7-10 Chapter 13 or in the appropriate 

Building Code in effect where the Project is located.

Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters: SDS and SD1 are two parameters used in 

ASCE/SEI 7-10 to characterize the intensity of the ground motion and determine the Seismic 

Design Category. SDS refers to the 5% damped spectral response acceleration at short periods;

SD1 refers to the spectral response acceleration at a period of 1 second. 

Designated Seismic Systems: This term is applied to those architectural, electrical and 

mechanical systems or their components that require design in accordance with ASCE/SEI 7-10 

Chapter 13 and for which the component importance factor, Ip, is greater than one. This 

includes systems required to function for life safety purposes after an earthquake including 

sprinkler systems and egress stairways; components used to convey, support or contain toxic, 

highly toxic, or explosive substances or hazardous materials; or components needed for 

continued operation of essential facilities. 

Distortion: The change in the configuration of an object or building as it bends or twists out of 

shape in response to earthquake loading. 

Drift: The horizontal displacement of a building resulting from the application of lateral forces, 

usually forces from earthquake or wind. See also interstory drift.

Earthquake Shaking: The vibratory movement of the earth's crust caused by seismic activity. 

Egress, Emergency Egress: Path provided for safe exit from a building in case of emergency. 

Extra care may be warranted in designing restraints or anchorage for nonstructural components 

along emergency egress routes and may be required for essential facilities in some 

jurisdictions. Exit doors, partitions, ceilings, glazing, lighting and piping along the egress route 

may need special details; furniture and cabinets should be removed or anchored.

Egress Stairways: Stairways required for life-safety purposes in an emergency may be 

considered designated seismic systems and require special design treatment per ASCE/SEI 7-10 

Chapter 13. This requirement may apply to partitions, infill, lighting, piping, etc. in the stairway 

as well as to the structural supports for stairs that are not part of the building structure.

Essential Facility: Occupancy Category IV facility such as hospital, emergency call center, fire 

station, emergency shelter as defined in ASCE/SEI 7-10.

Expansion Joint: A separation joint provided to allow for thermal expansion and contraction. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 H: Glossary Page H-4

Flexible Connection: The anchorage of an object to a structural member or braced 

nonstructural component, usually using hardware such as springs, cables, or corrugated tubing, 

which is designed to allow the object to move relative to the structural member or braced 

nonstructural component without degradation of performance. Also used to describe 

connections of pipe or duct to fixed equipment that allows for relative movement; for example, 

flexible hose connections are advisable for all gas-fired equipment. 

Flexible Nonstructural Component: Per ASCE/SEI 7-10, these are nonstructural components 

with a fundamental period greater than 0.6 seconds. The fundamental period of the 

nonstructural component (including its supports and attachment to the structure) may be 

computed per Section 13.6.2 of ASCE 7-10. The design parameters for nonstructural 

components may depend on whether an item is rigid or flexible.

FM Approved: Third-party certified by FM Approvals.

Foundation: That part of a structure which serves to transmit vertical and lateral forces from the 

superstructure of a building to the ground. 

Frame: A type of structural system in which the loads are carried by a grid or framework of 

beams and columns, rather than by load-bearing walls. Special purpose frames built up from 

struts or steel shapes are used to support many types of nonstructural components such as 

piping, ducts, etc.

Friction Clip: A mechanical device that relies on friction to resist applied loads in one or more 

directions to anchor a nonstructural component. Friction is applied mechanically and is not due 

to the frictional resistance produced by the effects of gravity. For Seismic Design Categories D, 

E and F, friction clips may not be used to support sustained loads in addition to resisting 

seismic forces.

Hazardous Contents: A material that is highly toxic or potentially explosive and in sufficient 

quantity to pose a significant life-safety threat to the general public if an uncontrolled release 

were to occur. (See also IBC 2009 Chapter 4).

Importance Factor, Ic : Per ASCE/SEI 7-10 Section 11.5-1 and Table 1.5-2, the factor applies to 

the building structure. This factor is distinct from the Component Importance Factor, Ip.

Inertial Forces: Forces necessary to overcome the tendency for a body at rest to stay at rest or 

for a body in motion to stay in motion. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 H: Glossary Page H-5

Inspection Body: Organization or individual accredited to ISO 17020 and regularly engaged in 

factory inspection services for seismic restraint of nonstructural components and equipment.

Intensity: See Shaking intensity. 

Interstory Drift: The horizontal displacement that occurs over the height of one story of a 

building resulting from the application of lateral forces, usually forces from earthquake or wind. 

This is often expressed as an interstory ratio; the ratio of the displacement to the height of the 

story. Interstory drifts from the structural design of a building are often needed in design 

calculations for nonstructural components such as glazing, pipe risers or precast panels that 

are attached to more than one floor.

Lateral Force Resisting System: The elements of a structure that resist horizontal forces. These 

structural elements are typically frames, braces or shear walls. 

Magnitude: A measure of earthquake size which describes the amount of energy released. 

Mitigation: An action taken to reduce the consequences of a future earthquake. Other terms 

such as retrofit, rehabilitation or upgrade are also used to describe these actions.

Moment: The moment of a force about a given point, typically referred to as "the moment”, is 

the turning effect, measured by the product of the force and its perpendicular distance from the 

point. 

Nonbuilding Structures: These are self-supporting structures and other structures governed by 

the design provisions in ASCE/SEI 7-10 Chapter 15. There is some overlap between the 

definitions for large nonstructural components and nonbuilding structures; it is recommended 

to check both provisions to see which apply for large or industrial items. Storage racks, tanks, 

signs, and chimneys are examples of items that may be covered in either Chapter 13 or 15 

depending upon the size and support conditions.

Nonstructural Component: Any architectural element; mechanical, electrical, plumbing (MEP) 

equipment or systems or part thereof; any furniture, fixtures, equipment (FF&E) or building 

contents. This term is used to describe any and all components within or without a building or 

nonbuilding structure which are not an explicit part of the structural system. The seismic 

design of nonstructural components is governed by provisions in ASCE/SEI 7-10 Chapter 13. 

Some large nonstructural components may qualify as nonbuilding structures (see ASCE/SEI 7-

10 Chapter 15).
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 H: Glossary Page H-6

OSHPD Approved: Approved by the State of California, Office of Statewide Health Planning and 

Development.

Risk Category: A category used to determine structural and nonstructural design requirements 

in ASCE/SEI 7-10 Table 1.5-1 based on a building’s occupancy. Occupancy Category I is used 

for the buildings and other structures with the lowest risk to human life such as agricultural 

facilities; Occupancy Category IV is used for essential facilities such as hospitals which may 

pose a substantial hazard to humans and to the community. 

Partition: A nonstructural interior wall used to subdivide interior spaces. Partitions may span 

horizontally or vertically from support to support; support may be provided by the building 

structure or secondary framing members. Partitions may be full-height or partial-height, often 

stopping just above the ceiling level and are typically constructed of steel or wood studs and 

gypsum board, wood studs and plaster, brick, or concrete masonry unit infill. Glass block and 

glazed partitions are also in use.

Positive Connection: A means of anchorage between a nonstructural item and a structural 

member or braced nonstructural component that does not rely on friction to resist the 

anticipated earthquake forces. Positive connections are typically made using hardware such as 

bolts, steel angles, or cables rather than C-clamps or thumb screws. Nails, adhesives and 

toggle bolts typically do not have enough capacity to provide positive connections for the 

seismic anchorage of nonstructural items. 

Post-installed Anchors: Post-installed anchors in concrete or masonry are those which are 

drilled and placed into existing construction. Post-installed anchors must be prequalified for 

seismic applications; for instance, post-installed anchors in concrete must be prequalified in 

accordance with ACI 355.2 or other approved qualification procedure.

Pounding: The impact of two structures during an earthquake. Pounding frequently occurs 

when the seismic gap between two adjacent wings of a building, or the gap between two 

neighboring buildings, is insufficient to accommodate the relative lateral movement of both 

buildings. 

Power Actuated Fasteners: Use of power actuated fasteners to resist seismic loading may be 

restricted depending on the substrate (concrete, steel, masonry, etc.) and the Seismic Design 

Category. See ASCE/SEI 7-10 Section 13.4.5 for restrictions and exemptions.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 H: Glossary Page H-7

Professional Engineer: A professional engineer is one who is legally qualified to practice in the 

jurisdiction where the Project is located, who is experienced in providing engineering services 

of the kind indicated, and is registered with the state where the project is located.

Restraint/Bracing: Bracing or anchorage used to limit movement under seismic forces. Cables or 

rigid elements (struts, pipes, angles, etc) used to resist forces by uniaxial tension or 

compression. The term “bracing” may also be used to describe design to resist lateral forces 

through the use of wall or frame elements.

Rigid Connection: The anchorage of an object to a structural member or braced nonstructural 

component, usually using hardware such as bolts or brackets, which is designed to prohibit the 

object to move relative to the structural member or braced nonstructural component. 

Rigid Nonstructural Component: Per ASCE/SEI 7-10, these are nonstructural components with a 

fundamental period less than or equal to 0.6 seconds. The fundamental period of the 

nonstructural component (including its supports and attachment to the structure) may be 

computed per Section 13.6.2 of ASCE 7-10. The design parameters for nonstructural 

components may depend on whether an item is rigid or flexible.

Schematic Upgrade Detail: A drawing outlining the basic elements of an upgrade scheme, but 

lacking dimensions, element sizes, and other specific information necessary for construction. 

The terms upgrade, retrofit, rehabilitation, and mitigation are often used interchangeably. 

Seismic: Of, relating to, or caused by an earthquake.

Seismic Deformations: Drifts, deflections and seismic relative displacements determined in 

accordance with the applicable seismic requirements of ASCE/SEI 7-10 or the Building Codes 

currently in effect where the Project is located.

Seismic Design Category: A classification assigned to a building structure based on its risk 

category or occupancy and the severity of the design earthquake ground motion. See ASCE/SEI 

7-10 Table 1.5-1 for the Risk Category; see Section 11.4 for ground motion; see Section 11.6 

for Seismic Design Category. Requirements for nonstructural components depend on the 

Seismic Design Category which ranges from A to F, from A for the lowest seismicity to F for the 

highest seismicity. Structures rated Seismic Design Category A are exempt from the 

nonstructural requirements in Chapter 13; structures rated Seismic Design Categories D, E and 

F have the most stringent requirements for nonstructural components. 

Seismic Drift: The horizontal displacement of a building resulting from the application of lateral 

earthquake forces. See also interstory drift.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 H: Glossary Page H-8

Seismic Force: The force that will act on a nonstructural component during an earthquake is the 

product of its mass and the seismic acceleration.

Seismic Gap or Seismic Joint: The distance between adjacent buildings, or two portions of the 

same building, which is designed to accommodate relative lateral displacements during an 

earthquake. 

Seismic Risk: The chance of injury, damage, or loss resulting from earthquake activity. 

Seismic Stop: A rigidly mounted bumper or snubber used to limit the range of lateral motion of 

spring-mounted mechanical equipment. See also air gap, snubber, and vibration isolation.

Seismic Upgrade: Improvement of the resistance of a structural or nonstructural component to 

provide a higher level of safety or resistance to earthquake forces. For nonstructural 

components, seismic upgrade schemes typically involve the addition of anchorage hardware or 

braces to attach the nonstructural item to the surrounding structure. In some instances, the 

nonstructural item may also require internal strengthening. 

Separation Joint: The distance between adjacent buildings, or two portions of the same 

building, which is designed to accommodate relative displacements between the two structures. 

Seismic gaps and expansion joints are two types of separation joint. 

Shaking Intensity: The amount of energy released by an earthquake as measured or 

experienced at a particular location. Intensity is subjectively measured by the effects of the 

earthquake on people and structures.

Shear Wall: A wall designed to resist lateral forces parallel to the wall. 

Snubber: A device, such as a mechanical or hydraulic shock absorber, used to absorb the 

energy of sudden impulses or shocks in machinery or structures. Snubbers are often used to

brace pipe runs where thermal expansion and contraction is an important consideration. 

Snubbers are also required for many equipment items mounted on vibration isolators in order 

to limit the seismic movement. See also vibration isolation and air gap.

Special Inspection: The observation of work by a Special Inspector or Inspection Body to 

determine compliance with the approved construction documents and the standards of the 

authority having jurisdiction over the project. Continuous special inspection requires full-time 

observation by a special inspector who is present in the area where work in being performed. 

Periodic special inspection may be part-time or intermittent observation by a special inspector 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 H: Glossary Page H-9

who is present in the area where the work has been or is being performed. Requirements for 

continuous or periodic special inspection are typically specified by the jurisdiction.

Special Inspector: An International Accreditation Service (IAS) accredited International Building 

Code (IBC) special inspection agency or qualified professional engineer who demonstrates 

competence, to the satisfaction of the building official, for inspection of the designated seismic 

systems. The owner or the registered design professional in responsible charge acting as the 

owner’s agent shall employ one or more special inspectors to provide periodic inspections 

during installation of designated seismic systems.

Supports: Those members, assemblies of members or manufactured elements including braces, 

frames, legs, shear lugs, snubbers, hangers, saddles, struts, and associated fasteners that 

transmit loads between nonstructural components and their attachments to the structure. Some 

supports may carry only gravity loads (the weight of the item), such as vertical hangers. Some 

supports may resist both gravity loads and seismic loads; some may resist only seismic loads.

UL Listed: Approved by the Underwriters Laboratories.

Upgrade Detail: A drawing presenting the necessary elements of an upgrade scheme, including 

dimensions, element sizes, and other specific information in sufficient detail so that the 

drawing can be used for construction. 

Veneer: An architectural facing or ornamentation of brick, tile, concrete, stone or similar 

materials attached to a backing substrate. Veneer may be adhered to the substrate or anchored 

using mechanical anchors.

Vertical Force Resisting System: The elements of a structure that resist the gravity loads or selfweight. 

Vibration Isolation: Mechanical equipment is often placed on specially designed springs to 

prevent the transmission of mechanical vibrations into the building. Components mounted on 

vibration isolators also require bumper restraints or snubbers in each horizontal direction to 

resist seismic loading. The nominal clearance between the snubbers and equipment may affect 

the seismic design forces; see also snubbers and air gap.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 I: References Page I-1

I. References

ACI, 2008, Building Code Requirements and Specification for Masonry Structures and Related 

Commentary, TMS 402-08/ACI 530-08/ASCE 5-08, reported by the Masonry Standards 

Joint Committee (MSJC), consisting of TMS Committees 402 and 602, ACI Committees 

530 and 530.1, and ASCE Committees 5 and 6, published by the American Concrete 

Institute.

ACI, 2011, Building Code Requirements and Specification for Masonry Structures and Related 

Commentaries, TMS 402-11/ACI 530-11/ASCE 5-11, reported by the Masonry 

Standards Joint Committee (MSJC), consisting of TMS Committees 402 and 602, ACI 

Committees 530 and 530.1, and ASCE Committees 5 and 6, published by the American 

Concrete Institute.

Adham, S. A., Brent B., 1985, “The Borah Peak, Idaho Earthquake of October 28, 1983 –

Buildings and Schools,” Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 2, No.1.

AFPA/ANSI, 2005, National Design Specifications for Wood Construction, NDS 2005, American 

Forest and Paper Association, Washington, D.C. 

ANSI, 2004, Safety Glazing Materials Used in Buildings – Safety Performance Specifications and 

Methods of Test, ANSI Z97.1-2004, American National Standards Institute, New York, 

New York.

ANSI/ASHRAE, 2008, Method of Test of Seismic Restraint Devices for HVAC&R Equipment, 

Standard 171-2008, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning 

Engineers Atlanta, Georgia. 

ANSI/NISO, 1994, Single-Tier Steel Bracket Library Shelving, Z39.73 – 1994, National 

Information Standards Organization, Baltimore, Maryland.

ANSI/RMI, 2008, Specification for the Design, Testing, and Utilization of Industrial Steel Storage 

Racks, ANSI/RMI MH 16.1, Rack Manufacturers Institute, Material Handling Institute of 

America, Charlotte, North Carolina.

ASCE, 2002, Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings, ASCE/SEI 31-03, American Society of Civil 

Engineers, Reston, Virginia.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 I: References Page I-2

ASCE, 2006, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE/SEI 7-05, 

American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia.

ASCE, 2007, Seismic Rehabilitation of Existing Buildings, ASCE/SEI 41-06, American Society of 

Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia.

ASCE, 2010, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE/SEI 7-10, 

American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia.

ASHRAE, 2012, A Practical Guide to Seismic Restraint, 2nd Edition, the American Society of 

Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, Georgia.

ASHRAE/SMACNA, 2002, ASHRAE/SMACNA Seismic Restraint Applications CD-ROM, prepared 

by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers and 

Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors’ National Association, Atlanta, Georgia.

ASME, 2007a,Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators, A17.1/CSO B44, American Society of 

Mechanical Engineers, New York, New York.

ASME, 2007b, Performance-Based Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators, A17.7/B44.7, 

American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, New York.

ASME, 2008, Process Piping, B31.3, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, New 

York.

ASTM C635/C635M-07, Standard Specification for the Manufacture, Performance, and Testing 

of Metal Suspension Systems for Acoustical Tile and Lay-in Panel Ceilings, ASTM 

International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.

ASTM C636/C636M-06, Standard Practice for Installation of Metal Ceiling Suspension Systems 

for Acoustical Tile and Lay-In Panels, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, 

Pennsylvania.

ASTM C754-11, Standard Specification for Installation of Steel Framing Members to Receive 

Screw-Attached Gypsum Panel Products, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, 

Pennsylvania.

ASTM E580, 2010, Standard Practice for Installation of Ceiling Suspension Systems for 

Acoustical Tile and Lay-in Panels in Areas Subject to Earthquake Ground Motions, ASTM 

International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 I: References Page I-3

ATC, 2008, Reducing the Risks of Nonstructural Earthquake Damage, State-of-the-Art and 

Practice Report, ATC-69 Report, prepared by the Applied Technology Council for the 

Federal Emergency Management Agency in cooperation with the National Earthquake 

Hazard Reduction Program, Redwood City, California.

BSSC, 2004, NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and 

Other Structures – 2003 Edition, FEMA 450 Report, prepared by the Building Seismic 

Safety Council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.

California Department of General Services, Division of the State Architect, 1999, Clay Brick 

Masonry High Lift Grouting Method, Interpretation of Regulations Document, IR 21-3,

Sacramento, California.

California Department of General Services, Division of the State Architect, 2005a, Metal 

Suspension Systems for Lay-in Panel Ceilings, revised 07-21-05, Interpretation of 

Regulations Document, IR 25-2, Sacramento, California.

California Department of General Services, Division of the State Architect, 2005b, Drywall 

Ceiling Suspension Conventional Construction – One Layer, revised 07-21-05, 

Interpretation of Regulations Document, IR 25-3, Sacramento, California.

California Department of General Services, Division of the State Architect, 2005c, Guidelines for 

Earthquake Bracing of Residential Water Heaters, prepared by the Division of the State 

Architect, Sacramento, California.

California Department of General Services, Division of the State Architect, 2007a, Masonry Walls 

- Non Structural, Interpretation of Regulations Document, IR 21-1, Sacramento, 

California.

California Department of General Services, Division of the State Architect, 2007b, Masonry: 

Concrete Masonry Unit Standards, revised 11-01-07, Interpretation of Regulations 

Document, IR 21-4, Sacramento, California.

California Department of General Services, Division of the State Architect, 2009a, Pendant 

Mounted Light Fixtures, Interpretation of Regulations Document, IR 16-9, Sacramento, 

California.

California Department of General Services, Division of the State Architect, 2009b, Concrete 

Masonry High Light Grouting Method, revised 12-17-09, Interpretation of Regulations 

Document, IR 21-2, Sacramento, California.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 I: References Page I-4

California Department of General Services, Division of the State Architect, 2009c, Metal 

Suspension System for Lay-in Panel Ceilings, Interpretation of Regulations Document, IR 

25-5, Sacramento, California.

California Department of General Services, Division of the State Architect, 2010a, Solar 

Photovoltaic and Thermal Systems and Acceptance Requirements, revised 06-25-10,

Interpretation of Regulations Document, IR 16-8, Sacramento, California.

California Department of General Services, Division of the State Architect, 2010b, Plan Submittal 

Requirements: Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems (AFSS), Policy Document, Policy 10-01,

Sacramento, California.

Charleson, A., 2007, Architectural Design for Earthquake, Second Edition, New Zealand Society 

for Earthquake Engineering. 

CISCA, 2004, Guidelines for Seismic Restraint for Direct-hung Suspended Ceiling Assemblies 

(zones 3-4), Ceilings and Interior Systems Construction Association, St. Charles, Illinois.

CISN, 2009, Shakemaps, California Integrated Seismic Network.

City of Seattle, 2004, Alteration and Repair of Unreinforced Masonry Chimneys, prepared by the 

Department of Planning and Development, Seattle, Washington.

Ding, D. and Arnold, C., coordinators, 1990, "Architecture, building contents, and building 

Systems," Chapter 9 in Earthquake Spectra, Supplement to Volume 6, pp. 339-377. 

Dobb, Linda, librarian, San Francisco State University, personal communication, San Francisco, 

California. 

Dorge, V., Jones, S., 1999, Building an Emergency Plan, A Guide for Museums and Other 

Cultural Institutions, Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles, California.

FCC, 1997, Evaluating Compliance with FCC Guidelines for Human Exposure to Radiofrequency 

Electromagnetic Fields, OET Bulleting 65 Edition 97-01, authored by the Standards 

Development Branch, Allocations and Standards Division, Office of Engineering 

Technology, Federal Communications Commission, Washington D.C. 

FEMA, 1981, An Assessment of the Consequences and Preparations for a Catastrophic 

California Earthquake: Findings and Actions Taken, Federal Emergency Management 

Agency, Washington, D.C. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 I: References Page I-5

FEMA 74, 1994, Reducing the Risks of Nonstructural Earthquake Damage: A Practical Guide,

Third Edition, prepared by Wiss, Janey, Elstner Associates, Inc. for the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, Washington, D.C. 

FEMA 232, 2006, Homebuilders’ Guide to Earthquake-Resistant Design and Construction,

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C. 

FEMA 395, 2003, Incremental Seismic Rehabilitation of School Buildings (K-12): Providing 

Protection to People and Buildings, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 

Washington, D.C. 

FEMA 396, 2003, Incremental Seismic Rehabilitation of Hospital Buildings: Providing Protection 

to People and Buildings, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C. 

FEMA 397, 2003, Incremental Seismic Rehabilitation of Office Buildings: Providing Protection to 

People and Buildings, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C. 

FEMA 398, 2004, Incremental Seismic Rehabilitation of Multifamily Apartment Buildings: 

Providing Protection to People and Buildings, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 

Washington, D.C. 

FEMA 399, 2004, Incremental Seismic Rehabilitation of Retail Buildings: Providing Protection to 

People and Buildings, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C. 

FEMA 400, 2004, Incremental Seismic Rehabilitation of Hotel and Motel Buildings: Providing 

Protection to People and Buildings, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 

Washington, D.C. 

FEMA 412, 2002, Installing Seismic Restraints for Mechanical Equipment, prepared by the 

Vibration Isolation and Seismic Control Manufacturers Association for the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C. 

FEMA 413, 2004, Installing Seismic Restraints for Electrical Equipment, prepared by the 

Vibration Isolation and Seismic Control Manufacturers Association for the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C. 

FEMA 414, 2004, Installing Seismic Restraints for Duct and Pipe, prepared by the Vibration 

Isolation and Seismic Control Manufacturers Association for the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, Washington, D.C. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 I: References Page I-6

FEMA 460, 2005, Seismic Considerations for Steel Storage Racks Located in Areas Accessible to 

the Public, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.

FEMA 461, 2007, Interim Testing Protocols for Determining the Seismic Performance 

Characteristics of Structural and Nonstructural Components, prepared by the Applied 

Technology Council for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.

Gatscher, J.A., McGavin, G.L., Caldwell, P.J., 2012, Earthquake Protection of Building Equipment

and Systems, Bridging the Implementation Gap, ASCE, Reston, Virginia

Goodno, B.J., Gould, N.C., Caldwell, P.J. and Gould, P.L.,2011, “Effects of the January 2010 

Hatian Earthquake on Selected Electrical Equipment,” Earthquake Spectra, Volume 27, 

No. S1, pp. 1-26

Hart, G.C, 1994, Performance of Glass Block during the Northridge Earthquake, prepared for 

Pittsburgh Corning Corporation, Technical/General Information Letter No: TD-249, 

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Huttenbach, R.A., 1980, Policy on Seismic Hazard Reduction. Santa Barbara, California, Office of 

the Chancellor, University of California, Santa Barbara. 

ICBO, 1994, Uniform Building Code, International Conference of Building Officials, Whittier, 

California.

ICC, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2009, 2012, International Building Code, International Code Council,

Washington, D.C.

ICC-ES, 2004, Acceptance Criteria for Seismic Qualification by Shake-Table Testing of 

Nonstructural Components and Systems, AC 156, International Code Council Evaluation 

Service, Whittier, California.

ICC-ES, 2006, Acceptance Criteria for Attachment Devices for Recessed Lighting Fixtures 

(Luminaries) in Suspended Ceiling Systems, AC 184, International Code Council 

Evaluation Service, Whittier, California.

Staff of the Los Angeles Times. 1994,” 4:31, Images of the 1994 Los Angeles Earthquake. Los 

Angeles, California,” Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles, California. 

NEBS, 2006, NEBS Requirements: Physical Protection, GR-63, Network Equipment Building 

Systems.
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 I: References Page I-7

NFPA, 2006, Building Construction and Safety Code, NFPA 5000, National Fire Protection 

Association, Quincy, Massachusetts.

NFPA, 2007a, Standard for Installation of Sprinkler Systems, 2007 Edition, NFPA 13, National 

Fire Protection Association, Quincy, Massachusetts.

NFPA, 2007b, Standard System for the Identification of Hazards of Materials for Emergency 

Response, NFPA 704, National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, Massachusetts.

NFPA, 2009, Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace, NFPA 70E, National Fire Protection 

Association, Quincy, Massachusetts.

NFPA, 2010, Standard for Installation of Sprinkler Systems, 2010 Edition, NFPA 13, National Fire 

Protection Association, Quincy, Massachusetts.

NGDC, 2009, Natural Hazards Slide Sets, National Geophysical Data Center, National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.

PCI, 2011, Behavior of Architectural Precast Panels in Response to Drift, DN-21, 

Podany, J., 2006, “Advances in the protection of museum collections from earthquake damage,” 

Papers from a Symposium Held at the J. Paul Getty Museum at the Villa on May 3-4, 

2006, J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles, California.

Reitherman, R. And Sabol, T., coordinators, 1995, “Nonstructural damage,” Chapter 11 in 

Earthquake Spectra, Supplement C to Volume 11, Northridge Earthquake 

Reconnaissance Report. 

Richter, C.F., 1957, Elementary Seismology, W.H. Freeman Co, San Francisco, California.

Salt Lake City School District, 2001, Seismic Design Criteria of Nonstructural Systems for New 

School Facilities and Existing School Facilities.

SMACNA, 2009, Seismic Restraint Manual: Guidelines for Mechanical Systems, 3rd Edition, Sheet 

Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors’ National Association, Washington, D.C.

Steinbrugge, K.V. and Schader, E.E., 1973, "Earthquake damage and related statistics In San 

Fernando, California, Earthquake of February 9, 1971,” edited by Leonard Murphy. 

Volume 1A, pp. 709-710 and 713. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 

Washington D.C. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 I: References Page I-8

Steinmetz, W.H., 1979, "How a campus handles an earthquake disaster," presented at the 26th 

National Conference on Campus Safety, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 

Taly, N., 1988, “The Whittier Narrows, California Earthquake of October 1, 1987-Performance of 

buildings at California State University, Los Angeles,” Earthquake Spectra, Volume 4, No. 

2.

Whittaker, A.S. and Soong, T.T., 2003, “A overview of nonstructural component research at 

three U.S. earthquake engineering research centers,” in Proceedings of Seminar on 

Seismic Design, Performance, and Retrofit of Nonstructural Components in Critical 

Facilities, Applied Technology Council, ATC-29-2, pp. 271-280, Redwood City, 

California.

Wong, K.M., 1993, High Seismic Economic Risk Buildings: Research Report to the National 

Science Foundation, Vickerman, Zachary, Miller, Oakland, California. 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 J: Project Participants Page J-1

J. PROJECT PARTICIPANTS

APPLIED TECHNOLOGY COUNCIL – TASK ORDER MANAGEMENT

Christopher Rojahn (Project Executive 

Director)

Applied Technology Council

201 Redwood Shores Parkway, Suite 240

Redwood City, CA 94065

Jon A. Heintz (Project Quality Control Monitor)

Applied Technology Council

201 Redwood Shores Parkway, Suite 240

Redwood City, CA 94065

William T. Holmes (Project Technical Monitor)

Rutherford & Chekene

55 Second Street, Suite 600

San Francisco, CA 94105

FEMA PROJECT OFFICERS 

Cathleen M. Carlisle

Dept. of Homeland Security – FEMA

500 C Street SW

Washington, DC 20008

 

Michael Mahoney

Dept. of Homeland Security – FEMA

500 C Street SW

Washington, DC 20008

PROJECT MANAGERS 

Thomas R. McLane

Applied Technology Council

2111 Wilson Blvd., Suite 700

Arlington, VA 22201

 

Ayse Hortacsu

Applied Technology Council

201 Redwood Shores Parkway, Suite 240

Redwood City, CA 94065

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 J: Project Participants Page J-2

PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 

Maryann Phipps, Lead Technical Consultant

Estructure

8331 Kent Court

El Cerrito, CA 94530

Robert Bachman

Consulting Structural Engineer

25152 La Estrada Drive

Laguna Niguel, CA 92677

James Carlson

Omaha Public Power District

Fort Calhoun Station

13801 Buffalo Road

Springfield, NE 68059

Eduardo A. Fierro

BFP Engineers, Inc.

1803 Oxford Street, Suite 2

Berkeley, CA 94709

John G. Gillengerten

5155 Holly Drive

Shingle Springs, CA 95862

William T. Holmes

Rutherford & Chekene

55 Second Street, Suite 600

San Francisco, CA 94105

Richard Kirchner

Hawley Peterson & Snyder Architects

444 Castro Street, Suite 1000 

Mountain View, CA 94041

Eduardo Miranda

Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Stanford University

Yang and Yamazaki Building, Rm. 281

Stanford, CA 94305

Cynthia L. Perry

BFP Engineers, Inc.

1803 Oxford Street, Suite 2

Berkeley, CA 94709

Jon A. Heintz (ex-officio)

 

 
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 J: Project Participants Page J-3

PROJECT REVIEW PANEL 

Tim P. Brown 

Bureau of Reclamation

Denver Federal Center

6th and Kipling, Building #67

Denver, CO 80225

Mary C. Comerio

University of California, Berkeley

Department of Architecture

382D Wurster Hall

Berkeley, CA 94720-1800

David Conover

International Code Council (ICC)

500 New Jersey Ave. NW, Suite 600

Washington, DC 20001

Doug Fitts

Fitts HVAC Consulting, LLC

P. O. Box 16847

St. Louis, MO 63105

Michael J. Griffin

CCS Group, Inc. 

1415 Elbridge Payne Road, Suite 265

Chesterfield, MO 63017

*ATC Board Contact

John R. Henry

International Code Council, Inc.

P.O. Box 968

Knights Landing, CA 95645 

Steven Kuan*

Office of Housing and Construction Standards

P.O. Box 9844 

Stn Prov Govt, 5th Floor, 609 Broughton 

Street

Victoria, BC V8W 9T2 Canada

Robert K. Reitherman

Consortium of Universities for Research in 

Earthquake Engineering (CUREE)

1301 South 46th St., Building 420

Richmond, CA 94804

Jeffrey R. Soulages

Strategic Facilities Technology Design (SFTD)

Intel Corporation

2501 NW 229th Street MS: RA1-220

Hillsboro, OR 97124

William T. Holmes (ex-officio)

Christopher Rojahn (ex-officio)
Available at: http://www.fema.gov/earthquake-publications/fema-e-74-reducing-risks-nonstructural-earthquake-damage

Last Modified: December 2012

FEMA E-74 J: Project Participants Page J-4

ADDITIONAL REVIEWERS 

Dawn Anderson

As It Stands

2059 Camden Ave. Suite 229

San Jose, CA 95124

Jon Gregg

ISAT Seismic Bracing

42550 Albrae St.

Fremont, CA 94538

ADDITIONAL CONTRIBUTOR

Scott Hiner

Creative Marketing Resources

447 Sheridan Circle

Livermore, CA 94551-1775

Eric Peabody

The Design Partnership

1412 Van Ness Avenue

San Francisco, CA 94109

Philip J. Caldwell

Schneider Electric

1990 Sandifer Blvd.

Seneca, SC 29682