1

National Construction Safety Team 

Advisory Committee (NCSTAC) Meeting Summary

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 

Gaithersburg, Maryland 

(meeting conducted via web-conference)

December 2, 2019

Meeting Summary

Advisory Committee Members:

James Harris, Chair J. R. Harris & Company

Reginald DesRoches, Vice Chair Rice University 

Ross Corotis University of Colorado, Boulder

William Holmes Rutherford + Chekene

Gary Klein Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc.

Jeannette Sutton University of Kentucky

NIST Representatives

Jason Averill Chief, Materials & Structural Systems Division

Ben Davis Designated Federal Officer, NCSTAC

Maria Dillard Acting Director, Disaster and Failure Studies

Howard Harary Director, Engineering Lab

Judith Mitrani-Reiser Associate Chief, Materials & Structural Systems Division

Steve Potts Management and Program Analyst, NWIRP
2

Meeting Summary:

I. Welcome/Opening Remarks

Designated Federal Officer, Ben Davis, opened the meeting at 1:30 pm EDT. 

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

(NCSTAC) members and thanked them for their participation. Dr. Harary reminded the 

Committee of the key items covered in the last in-person Committee meeting including: the 

implementation activities related to the Joplin Tornado NCST investigation; a summary of 

methods used in the Hurricane Maria NCST investigation; the program management and 

communication efforts of the Hurricane Maria NCST investigation; the data security and 

management considerations for NCST investigations; a summary of the hazard characterization 

project; the readiness of NCST Teams; and relevant NWIRP research studies of Hurricane 

Maria. Dr. Harary reiterated that the Committee is charged with providing advice to the NIST 

Director on carrying out the NCST Act. Specifically, Dr. Harary asked the Committee to

evaluate the NIST efforts in Hurricane Maria NCST investigation and the 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; and

• recommend improvements in standards, codes, and practices, as well as future research to 

improve the structural safety of buildings 

Dr. Harary also requested the Committee to:

• provide advice on the composition of the investigation Team, which currently includes 

combined expertise in structural engineering, social science, complex dynamic systems, 

risk modeling, epidemiology, meteorology, climate science, and hazard modeling; and 

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

prescribed in the NCST Act. 

Dr. Harary noted that NIST NCST 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.

Dr. Harary made two announcements: 

• Dr. Judith Mitrani-Reiser has been appointed to a new position as the Associate Chief of 

the Materials and Structural Systems Division (MSSD), and

• Dr. Maria Dillard has been appointed as the Acting Director of the Disaster and Failures 

Studies (DFS) Program.

He described their roles in terms of leveraging the capabilities of the statutory programs to 

reinforce each other. 

II. Review of Meeting Goals and Agenda 

Dr. Harris stated the primary goal of the meeting is to finalize the Report to Congress with 

recommendations to the NIST Director. He announced that Lisa Berger from the International 
3

Code Council (ICC) has registered for the public comment period. Dr. Harris asked if anyone 

wanted to add any topics of discussion to the agenda. There were none.

III. Public Comment Period 

At 2:07 pm the meeting was opened for public comment. There were none.

IV. NIST Presentation on Event Scoring

Dr. Mitrani-Reiser referenced two slides, including information requested by the Committee at 

the last in-person meeting. One slide, presented at the September 9, 2020 Committee meeting, 

included all the events scored in FY 2018. The second slide listed all the events that were scored

since between September 2018 and December 2019. Dr. Mitrani-Reiser provided additional

information on events that NIST dispatched teams to conduct preliminary reconnaissance:

• A team deployed to North Carolina to collect baseline damage data of residential and 

commercial buildings after Hurricane Florence. The buildings assessed are included in 

the sample of structures that NIST has been studying over the last few years, as part of a 

longitudinal study of the impacts and recovery of a community that suffered a significant 

flood after Hurricane Matthew.

• A team deployed to Florida after Hurricane Michael made landfall in October. The 

team’s field efforts focused on schools and shelters in the panhandle of Florida. NIST

coordinated with other teams to optimize time in the field. NIST considered that a lot 

could be learned about Hurricane Michael’s impacts that could influence standards,

codes, and practice across the U.S.

• A team deployed to California within a few weeks of the Camp Fire. NIST is 

reconstructing a timeline of the Camp Fire, which is an ongoing effort in collaboration 

with CAL Fire (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). This effort is not 

part of NCST.

• A team deployed to Alaska following the earthquake in Anchorage, in collaboration with 

other teams from academia, practitioners, and federal agencies (e.g., FEMA). NIST staff

looked at schools, hospitals, and other buildings. NIST is not pursuing an NCST 

investigation based on the preliminary reconnaissance. 

These efforts provided training opportunities for newer staff, which were fruitful. They learned 

how to score events within 24 hours, make quick decisions documenting NIST’s intentions, and 

collaborate with others in the field. These efforts also led to new research studies within the 

Materials and Structural Systems Division and Engineering Laboratory, and will augment 

existing programs.

Dr. Harris asked if NIST coordinated with the U.S. Air Force (USAF) on Hurricane Michael's

impacts on Tyndall USAF Base. Dr. Mitrani-Reiser replied that the USAF was very helpful. 

Additionally, she indicated that in all of its deployments, NIST has had great engagement with 
4

federal partners, including Tyndall USAF Base. Dr. Harris requested more detail on why the 

Camp Fire did not result in an investigation. Dr. Mitrani-Reiser replied that NIST has multiple 

authorities that can be used to do in-depth studies. The firsthand observations collected during 

preliminary reconnaissance efforts updates NIST’s event scores, which support NIST decision 

making for follow on activities. For example, NIST decided to focus on a fire timeline 

reconstruction for the Camp Fire, based on available resources and other variables considered 

when recommending a NCST investigation. NIST has worked closely with collaborators to

recreate the fire’s timeline and its intensity. A comprehensive report is forthcoming. 

Dr. Mitrani-Reiser described how the deployment after the Anchorage earthquake led to the 

initiation of a research project on the reliability of fiber-reinforced polymer composites in

seismic retrofits. 

Dr. Harris asked if column failures in Anchorage were due to adhesion failures. Dr. MitraniReiser responded there were no column failures reported based on the limited field data, but 

NIST would like to investigate the impact of potential degradation of fiber reinforced polymers

(FRP) used in retrofits. 

Mr. Holmes suggested the NCST scoring form should have an additional criterion added to 

indicate follow-up efforts. Dr. Mitrani-Reiser said NIST can show how these activities have been 

integrated into other studies, like the study of the 2018 flood following Hurricane Matthew in 

Lumberton, North Carolina.

V. Committee Editing of the 2019 Report to Congress

Dr. Harris displayed the draft letter report to Congress for the Committee to review. Some of the 

most significant comments included the following: 

• The working draft of the annual report to Congress was an abbreviated version of the 

2018 version of the report. Dr. Harary suggested that since the audience of the report 

consists mostly of staffers from Congressional offices, and the Committee mentions

modifying the NCST Act in the report, it may be best for the Committee to say exactly 

what modifications it wanted, as Congressional staff are extremely pressed for time.

• There is an important distinction between investigations and studies. According to the 

NCST Act, investigations allow for NIST to exercise powers (e.g., subpoena powers) it 

did not have before the Act was passed. Work other than investigations, as defined in the 

Act, would be considered by NIST to be studies. 

Dr. Harris led the Committee members through a series of edits to their draft report. He offered 

an additional opportunity for public comment at 2:41 pm, but there was no response. When the 

edits were completed, Dr. Harris went through a roll call to ensure all Committee members were 

in agreement. The vote was unanimously in favor of the report as edited during the meeting. Dr. 

Harris stated: “We have a consensus that the report is ready for final proofreading and then we’ll 

send it off to Congress. “

Dr. Mitrani-Reiser stated that NIST had two additional agenda items that could be discussed if 

time allowed:
5

• a brief update on trips to Puerto Rico (PR) that Dr. Dillard could provide

• a more in-depth discussion on the scoring process of the Hard Rock Hotel’s partial 

collapse in New Orleans.

Dr. Harris expressed appreciation for the offer and asked NIST to continue.

VI. Update on Puerto Rico NCST Investigation

Dr. Dillard described two deployments during the fall of 2019. One took place at the end of 

October when four NIST team members and one interpreter visited hospitals as well as several 

tower locations where NIST is considering having anemometers installed for wind 

measurements. The team went to the PR Planning Board Permitting Office and visited the 

University of Puerto Rico (UPR) campus to meet with colleagues.

The second deployment took place during the first week of November with a team of five 

investigators and two interpreters. They went to four emergency management zones and talked to 

multiple representatives from the Puerto Rican government. They also met with one of NIST's 

academic colleagues. These efforts furthered the projects examining hurricane impacts on

infrastructure and electricity, and also included visits to the Department of Health. NIST 

collaborated with FEMA’s Joint Recovery Office (JRO) on infrastructure projects, and shared 

data with local entities. Both visits added to the Team’s connections with key institutions and 

officials, and informed decisions about multiple projects. 

Dr. Mitrani-Reiser added that navigating the new space of security and privacy of data

necessitated new practices for the Team. NIST developed agreements with FEMA on how the 

agency will store and protect data that is shared. This should make future engagements and data 

sharing with federal agencies more straightforward. During the November trip, the team obtained 

data from FEMA consistent with the new agreement. 

Dr. Dillard said that the care NIST is showing with data seems to have been well communicated 

to the agencies in Puerto Rico. These agencies appeared to be very comfortable handing over 

data based on NIST’s written explanations of limitations of use. 

VII. NIST Assessment of Hard Rock Hotel Collapse

Dr. Mitrani-Reiser said this event was challenging to score because NIST was dependent on

publicly available information coming out of New Orleans. The score of 4.3 was driven by the 

number of people who perished, and those exposed at the construction site. Both of these 

numbers fluctuated over several days resulting in multiple updates to the score. Additionally, 

NIST reached out to the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), who were 

on the scene soon after the collapse. NIST described its authorities and technical capabilities to 

the OSHA Directorate of Construction. OSHA has started its investigation, and NIST offered

assistance. 

Dr. Harris suggested that if the building utilized an innovative construction system, it might be 

beyond OSHA’s capabilities to investigate, and might be a good reason for NIST to be involved. 

Dr. Mitrani-Reiser agreed and said the conversations with OSHA were ongoing. She described a 
6

meeting with the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), where authorities and scope of 

work were shared. NIST is planning to do the same thing with OSHA and set up a meeting 

where scope and authorities are shared. This investigation has reinvigorated the relationship

between NIST and OSHA, and we plan to continue that in the future.

Mr. Klein asked if OSHA has the same authority regarding implementing lessons learned about

failure or safety. Dr. Mitrani-Reiser responded that they are expanding what would normally be 

included in their investigations to include the design of the hotel. NIST will maintain contact 

with OSHA to ensure an understanding of the scope of that agency’s investigation. At this point, 

OSHA indicated that it is planning a comprehensive investigation. Mr. Klein expressed concern 

that OSHA can make findings but may not have sufficient charge to implement

recommendations. He suggested that it may be wise for NIST to take further action if

recommendations are warranted. 

Dr. Mitrani-Reiser indicated that she will explore options with OSHA and will report back at the 

next meeting. 

VIII. Closing

Mr. Ben Davis adjourned the meeting at 3:05 pm EDT.