Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
help you achieve them. As you consider mitigation
options, keep in mind that attacks and accidents are
functions of human activity, and the risk of such
events is a characteristic of the target itself rather
than of its geographic location. Clearly, there are
areas in most communities where the chances of an
attack or accident are considerably different from
other parts of the jurisdiction—higher at indus-
trial parks and critical facilities than in suburban
residential neighborhoods, for example—but there
is no such thing as a definable “terrorism zone”
or “accident district” in the same sense as there
are identifiable floodplains and seismic fault lines.
Thus, it is not effective to protect people, buildings,
and systems from manmade hazards by simply
relocating them as one could for some natural
disasters.
Rather than removing potential victims from the
hazard, then, mitigation strategies for manmade
hazards focus primarily on creating a built envi-
ronment that is difficult to attack, resilient to
the consequences of an attack or accident, and
protective of its occupants should an incident
occur. This can be accomplished through target
hardening and other actions. Additional actions
such as public awareness and education initia-
tives are not discussed in this guide but should
be considered when formulating your mitigation
strategy.
Target hardening actions range from small-scale
projects, such as installing security fencing around
an HVAC system's air intake, to community-wide
initiatives, such as altering land use patterns to
require buffer zones around campuses of high-
risk buildings. Also, while some actions are highly
specific in nature and function, others can meet
multiple goals. For example, designing a building
to resist the force of a bomb blast will also
offer protection from windstorms, and requiring
buffer zones around critical facilities can help meet
open space requirements and protect wetlands.
The planning team is encouraged to take advan-
tage of these complementary approaches whenever
possible.
Taking Advantage of Existing Processes,
Strategies, and Tools
Some actions and techniques used for miti-
gating natural hazards may also provide protec-
tion against manmade hazards, such as:
Earthquake mitigation techniques
that
provide structural strengthening of buildings
may help resist impact/explosion effects of
bombs. Examples of such techniques include
adding steel moment frames, shear walls, cross
bracing, stronger floor systems, walls rein-
forced with shotcrete/fiber materials, columns
reinforced with fiber wraps/steel jackets,
tension/shear anchors, vibration dampers, and
strengthening or providing additional detailing
of the building's connections.
Fire mitigation techniques
may help protect
facilities against the effects of bombs and
incendiary attacks. Examples of such tech-
niques include improved sprinkler systems,
increased use of fireproofing and/or fire-
resistant materials, redundant water supplies for
fire protection (day-to-day and alternative), and
site set-backs.
High wind mitigation techniques
that provide
building envelope protection and structural
strengthening may also help mitigate against
impact/explosion effects of bombs. Exam-
ples of such techniques include openings
using windows with impact-resistant laminated
glazing, improving connections and the load
path of the building, and adding/reinforcing
shear walls.
Terrorism mitigation is becoming an inte-
gral part of multi-hazard mitigation, in process
and often in practice. Additionally, an action
that addresses the fullest possible spectrum of
natural and manmade hazards will likely show
the most cost-effectiveness.
Target hardening actions draw from a wide
variety of disciplines, all of which, as discussed in
Phase 1, should be represented on (or at least acces-
sible to) the mitigation planning team. Potential
hardening techniques and strategies are numerous,
