1

National Construction Safety Team (NCST)

Advisory Committee Meeting Summary

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

Gaithersburg, Maryland

November 27, 2018, at 10:00 am EST

(meeting conducted via web-conference)

Advisory Committee Members

James R. Harris J.R. Harris and Company

Ross Corotis University of Colorado, Boulder

Reggie DesRouches Rice University 

Gary Klein Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. 

William Holmes Rutherford + Chekene

Jeannette Sutton University of Kentucky

NIST Representatives

Howard Harary Director, Engineering Laboratory, Designated Federal Officer

Jason Averill Chief, Materials and Structural Systems Division

Judith Mitrani-Reiser Director, Disaster and Failure Studies Program

Benjamin Davis Management & Program Analyst, Disaster and Failure Studies Program

Carmen Martinez Information Technology Specialist, Engineering Laboratory 

Steve Potts Management & Program Analyst, National Windstorm Impact Reduction 

Program
2

Summary of Discussions

I. Welcome and Opening Remarks

Dr. Howard Harary welcomed the National Construction Safety Team Advisory Committee (NCSTAC)

members and thanked them for their participation. Dr. Harary reminded the Committee that at the last 

meeting, NIST presented our response to the NCSTAC 2017 report to Congress - “A Summary of the 

Accomplishments and Implementation of the Joplin Recommendations” and gave an overview of the 

goals associated with the Hurricane Maria NCST investigation. The goals of the Hurricane Maria NCST 

technical investigation are:

- characterizing the hazards and the technical conditions associated with deaths and injuries;

- evaluating the performance of representative critical buildings, including dependence on

lifelines, and

- evaluating the performance of emergency communication systems, and the public’s response to 

such communications. 

Dr. Harary stated that it was NIST’s intention to clearly state the project objectives, connect the projects 

to the overall investigative goals, provide preliminary observations and background information, and to 

propose next steps for those projects. 

He reminded the Committee that they are charged with providing advice to the NIST Director on 

carrying out the NCST Act for the Hurricane Maria NCST investigation. Specifically, he asked the 

Committee to:

- evaluate the function of the NIST team’s ability to establish the likely technical cause of 

engineered building failures in Puerto Rico (PR);

- evaluate the technical aspects of evacuation and emergency response procedures;

- make recommendations for improvements in standards, codes, and practices, as well as future 

research to improve the structural safety of buildings;

- provide advice on the composition of the NCST, which currently includes combined expertise in 

structural engineering, social science, complex dynamic systems, risk modeling, epidemiology, 

meteorology, climate science, and hazard modeling;

- provide advice regarding our NIST’s efforts to adhere to any other applicable authorities 

prescribed in the NCST Act.

Dr. Harary noted that the NIST investigations are not about finding fault, responsibility or negligence. 

The goal is to complete a thorough investigation that will result in recommendations that will improve 

the safety and structural integrity of buildings. 

Finally, Dr. Harary noted that he recently approved a preliminary reconnaissance team to go to Paradise, 

California to collect perishable data on damaged structures. The team included three members from 

NIST, one member from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and two members from

U.S. Forest Service. They were charged with working closely with CAL FIRE in the field. Dr. Harary

committed NIST to briefing the Committee on the team’s findings and subsequent actions at the next 

meeting. 
3

Dr. Harary turned the meeting over to Committee Chair, Dr. James Harris, who referenced previous 

reports to Congress noting they were formatted as letters addressed to the Chair of the Committee on 

Science in the House of Representatives and to the Chair of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation of the Senate. He asked meeting participants if the level of detail in a report to the NIST 

Director would be the same as in the report that is developed for the Congress. He suggested that it 

would be appropriate to include more detail in the report to NIST. Dr. Harary responded that in the 

past, the Committee Chair had produced a second document that is a letter to the Director of NIST, as 

opposed to the report to Congress, which has additional detail. Dr. Harris noted that might have some 

bearing on what the Committee would decide to include in the report. 

Dr. Harris led the Committee through a series of edits to their draft report. The first discussion centered 

on funding. Mr. Klein noted that disasters and building failures are inherently unpredictable, and 

suggested the Committee recommend that Congress provide funding to support long-term studies and 

also flexibility to enable the Teams to respond to new events. Dr. Harris confirmed there was nothing in 

the draft about that, but suggested the Committee commend NIST for their commitment to finding the 

funding for the investigation and studies when justified. Dr. Harris asked Committee members to 

respond to that statement. Dr. Corotis reiterated what was discussed at the last meeting – that NIST 

shouldn’t have to take money from other programs when they need to conduct an NCST investigation. 

All Committee members agreed to edit Mr. Klein’s paragraph and include this statement. 

The Committee next discussed the methodologies for mortality studies. Mr. Klein read his proposed 

paragraph, which indicated that death certificates are the primary source for mortality statistics, but 

typically do not provide the information needed to determine if a death results from a disaster. Mr. 

Holmes suggested strengthening the point by also including that the public was confused by the way 

mortality was reported, and that great care is needed to communicate such information clearly to the 

public. Dr. Sutton highlighted the need to create standards for how mortality is measured in the future 

and not just the Hurricane Maria event. Dr. Corotis agreed with developing standards, as that it is the 

role of NIST to make technical contributions to consensus standards. He also suggested that the 

Committee include a statement explaining the difference between immediate death, death because of 

logistical or infrastructural failures, such as lack of oxygen supply in hospitals, and long-term induced 

mortality that have resulted from a lack of available care. He suggested these should all be measured 

and explained against background statistics of what would be expected. Mr. Holmes suggested the 

statement include the idea that more consistent methods are needed to measure deaths and injuries 

attributable to the event. This is in distinction to those that are related, but which are indirect. The 

Committee agreed to add the paragraph about the importance of developing consistent standards for 

measuring mortality attributed to disasters. 

The Committee discussed updating a paragraph about NIST’s work on research to improve knowledge of 

tornado wind speeds and improve codes and standards. The existing description was a very short 

statment about studies that have been done following the Joplin tornado. The Committee considered 

adding a description of the vulnerability of housing to tornadoes, since housing is not thoroughly 

addressed in the ASCE standards, and it is almost entirely covered by the International Residential Codes

(IRC). In addition to the engineering impacts, there are tremendous societal and economic impacts 

which need to be considered. Dr. Corotis communicated that the Committee is not suggesting what 

changes should be made relevant to the standards, and NIST has a unique role in providing the kind of 

information that is useful in improving the standards. He suggested specific studies be conducted to 
4

enable improvements to the standard. He committed to emailing these sentences to Dr. Harris, to be 

incorporated in their letter to Congress, along with the point made about economic impacts. 

The next topic discussed by the Committee was raised by Dr. Sutton, who noted the importance of going 

into the field with local researchers. She asked NIST if their social science field efforts were in 

collaboration with local researchers in Puerto Rico. Dr. Mitrani-Reiser stated that DFS made extensive 

efforts to collaborate with local researchers in Puerto Rico. She stated that NIST hosted a research 

method meeting in Washington, DC. Four scientists from Puerto Rico participated in the meeting. She 

added that DFS has included language in all solicitations for contracts that specifies integrating local 

knowledge and local scientists. Many of the contracts issues to support the program specify that 

contractors are expected to have a physical presence in Puerto Rico. Some contracts have also required

that designers have experience with the cultures and communities in Puerto Rico. She intends for NIST’s

response teams to incorporate local knowledge into every investigation, as done previously. Dr. Sutton 

suggested the Committee add language to their report to Congress supporting the efforts that NIST has 

already begun. Dr. Corotis added that sensitivity to local culture adds a lot of value to guiding questions 

and calibrating responses. Dr. Sutton agreed, and the Committee agreed that Dr. Harris should add 

these points to the report. 

Dr. Harris reminded the Committee that the Lead Investigator of the Hurricane Maria NCST, Dr. Erica 

Kuligowski, had previously asked the Committee if they had input on how to better interface with social 

media. Dr. Sutton remembered that question and responded saying that the Committee did not have a 

good answer about how to help NIST get the data they seek. Dr. Sutton stated that it is difficult to get

organizations to share their data. She elaborated that it is possible to pay a private company to get data 

that is archived. The goal is to find a clean set of messages that have been shared on that social media 

platform, based on a set of criteria. It’s similar to building a survey; you have to know exactly what 

you’re trying to collect. Dr. Harris thought it was beyond the scope of the Committee to provide a 

formal response, but that individual members can certainly help Dr. Kuligowski and NIST. The 

Committee considered recommending that companies and organizations that own relevant data share it

with NIST but decided it’s better to stay away from trying to tell companies what to do with their data.

The Committee agreed to include the idea that social media is an important source of disaster 

information, and that work is needed to develop strategies and research methodologies to ethically 

access, collect, publish, and analyze such data. Dr. Sutton made the point that this moves the 

conversation beyond NIST, to all organizations who are accessing this information, including those 

companies that have sold information for private gain. This could help define how this type of work is 

done in the future. 

Mr. Holmes suggested adding a recommendation to the report that NIST coordinate with the National

Science Foundation’s (NSF) Natural Hazards Engineering Research Infrastructure (NHERI) 

(https://www.designsafe-ci.org/facilities/experimental/) during investigations. He added that there is a 

Natural Hazards Reconnaissance (RAPID) facility at the University of Washington with top-notch 

reconnaissance equipment which would be a great asset to NIST’s investigations. Dr. Mitrani-Reiser 

responded that NIST is actively coordinating with NHERI and that members of both the RAPID facility

and DesignSafe Center came out to NIST last year. Committee member Dr. DesRoches recommended 

that NIST also coordinate with the Computational Modeling and Simulation Center (SimCenter) 

(https://simcenter.designsafe-ci.org/). He explained that they are one of the hubs of NHERI and have 

access to all the data at the University of California, Berkeley. He elaborated that Dr. Sanjay Govindjee 
5

and Dr. Gregory Deierlein are developing a framework for conducting regional risk assessments under a 

variety of hazards. They are using wind loads, earthquake loads, and flooding data to develop 

simulation tools that can be used by the research community. Mr. Holmes added that there is a new 

program at NHERI called CONVERGE (https://www.designsafeci.org/community/news/2018/november/nsf-creates-3m-converge-center-augment-natural-hazardsresearch/ ). It is part of the National Science Foundation’s efforts to improve collaboration across the 

scientific disciplines. He suggested that the Committee include CONVERGE, along with RAPID and 

SimCenter as programs that NIST should coordinate with during investigations. The Committee agreed 

that Dr. Harris will edit the recommendation and will add it to the report.

No other suggestions were offered. The Committee agreed with the changes to the report to Congress 

made during the meeting. Dr. Harris proposed that he incorporate these changes into the report and 

send it back out for final review. Once finalized, he will send it to Congress. He also recommended the 

Committee craft a letter with more detail to the NIST Director. He emphasized that it does not need to 

be the same letter and encouraged the Committee to think about what might be included. 

II. Public Comment Period 

At 12:09 pm, Dr. Harris opened the meeting for public comment. There were no responses, and Dr. 

Harris stated that the Committee will interpret the silence to mean there are no public comments.

III. Closing

Dr. Harary thanked everyone for their work and adjourned the meeting at 12:11 pm.