E a r r t t h q u a k e R e s p o n s e C o o p e r r a t t i i o n P r r o g r r a m f f o r r E n e r r g y S u p p l l y S y s t t e m s
E x p e r t t G r r o u p W o r r k s h o p
I NTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 2
Attendees of the Expert Group Workshop .......................................................................................................... 2
Welcome Address – Mr. Shih-Ming Chuang ....................................................................................................... 2
P RESENTATIONS .......................................................................................................................... 3
Australian design standards ............................................................................................................................... 3
Japanese design standards ............................................................................................................................... 3
New Zealand design standards .......................................................................................................................... 3
Development of Earthquake Resistance Evaluation Method for Buried Pipeline Networks ................................. 3
C OOPERATION MECHANISM PRESENTATIONS .................................................................................. 4
Cooperation Mechanism Australian Comments .................................................................................................. 4
Cooperation Mechanism Chinese Comments..................................................................................................... 4
Cooperation Mechanism New Zealand Comments ............................................................................................. 5
D ISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................... 6
On Task Groups ................................................................................................................................................. 7
F INAL COMMENTS ......................................................................................................................... 8
1

E a r r t t h q u a k e R e s p o n s e C o o p e r r a t t i i o n P r r o g r r a m f f o r r E n e r r g y S u p p l l y S y s t t e m s
E x p e r t t G r r o u p W o r r k s h o p
The Earthquake Response Cooperation Program for Energy Supply Systems Expert Group
Workshop was held on September 6, 2002, in Chinese Taipei. The workshop was sponsored by the Energy Commission, Ministry of Economic Affairs, Chinese Taipei.
Attendees of the Expert Group Workshop
Chair: Mr. Shih-Ming Chuang, Division Director, Energy Commission, Ministry of Economic Affairs, Chinese Taipei
Australia:
China:
Canada
Japan
New Zealand:
Singapore
United States
Chinese Taipei:
Mr.Allan Gillespie
Mr. David Morton
Dr. Xing Jin
Prof. Chunguang Liu
Mr. Yi Tang
Mr. Yong-sheng Xu
Mr. Doug McLeod
Mr. Junichi Nagahara
Mr. Hiroaki Nishigami
Dr. Yoshihisa Shimizu
Mr. Tan Pham
Dr. Hugh Cowan
Mr. Philip Hoby
Dr. Tso-Chien Pan
Dr. William Savage
Dr. Yi-Ben Tsai
Dr. Chin-Hsiung Loh
Mr. Jei-Yuan Chen
Mr. Kai-Wen Kuo
Mr. Juen-Shen Wei
Mr. Jyuung-Shiauu Chern
Welcome Address – Mr. Shih-Ming Chuang
The meeting opened with a welcome address from Chairman Mr. Shih-Ming Chuang, Division
Director of the Energy Commission, Ministry of Economic Affairs, Chinese Taipei. Mr. Chuang.
2

E a r r t t h q u a k e R e s p o n s e C o o p e r r a t t i i o n P r r o g r r a m f f o r r E n e r r g y S u p p l l y S y s t t e m s
E x p e r t t G r r o u p W o r r k s h o p
Australian design standards
Mr Morton (Australia) gave a presentation on Australian Standard AS1170.4 Minimum
Design Loads on Structures, Part 4: Earthquake Loads . This standard is intended to apply to structures – building and non-buildings – though not critical structures such as dams and nuclear reactors. The standard is performance-based and non-prescriptive, allowing greater flexibility and innovation. The standard does not permit retrofitting. It is continually being revised on the basis of experiences overseas and can be viewed at http://standards.com.au
Japanese design standards
Mr. Nishigami (Japan) stressed the importance of sharing information and experience of earthquakes. In Japan, seismic design standards for electric utilities are provided by private enterprise. The standards submitted by Kansai Electric Power Co (first edition in 1980, revised after the Kobe earthquake) have been widely applied in Japan. The main changes since 1998 include designs for bushing on transformers, the anchor bolts of transformers, and aluminum pipes.
It is important to have access to correct data when drawing up design criteria. In Japan, companies share information and data relevant to design criteria. This data can be provided across APEC.
New Zealand design standards
Mr. Pham (New Zealand) explained that in New Zealand design is part of the risk manage ment of energy suppliers’ assets. Once risks are identified, the “4R” risk management conventions are followed:
 Reduction (look at the source of risk, consider the likelihood of earthquake at a specific site, then carry out mitigation measures)
 Readiness (practices, training, awareness)
 Response (emergency response planning)
 Recovery (involving other utilities, levels of government).
To be effective, this requires a comprehensive, integrated approach.
Development of Earthquake Resistance Evaluation Method for Buried Pipeline
Networks
Mr. Shimizu (Japan) delivered a paper outlining a new method for evaluation of the earthquake resistance of buried pipelines. Not only the strength of pipeline materials but also
3

E a r r t t h q u a k e R e s p o n s e C o o p e r r a t t i i o n P r r o g r r a m f f o r r E n e r r g y S u p p l l y S y s t t e m s
E x p e r t t G r r o u p W o r r k s h o p the shape of pipeline networks, the seismic response of the ground, and the effect of liquefaction are taken into consideration to evaluate actual earthquake resistance of existing buried pipeline networks. Using this evaluation method, weak points of pipeline networks can be picked up and rational measures against earthquakes can be achieved for existing pipelines.
Cooperation Mechanism Australian Comments
Mr. Gillespie urged closer cooperation between APEC member economies and discussed and provided several suggestions. These included:
 Information sharing (e.g. via seminars, the internet, use of common language)
 Formulation of shared polices and engineering and building design standards
 Technology transfer
 Sharing of emergency response resources (including setting up a database of key contacts and resources; establishing protocol for sharing & borrowing of resources and for informing others of events)
 Rehabilitation (establish database on rehabilitation programs and protocols on sharing of knowledge & resources to facilitate rehabilitation
 Establish web based chat forum to facilitate easy communication of issues and problem resolution across APEC economies
 Technical visits & staff exchange for each functional area of earthquake response
Cooperation Mechanism Chinese Comments
Dr. Jin urged further cooperation between members, particularly the sharing of information by those with direct experience of dealing with major earthquakes. China strongly supports cooperation projects as means to exchange ideas, information and research results. In coming years, the CSB in China will set up a model project on energy supply systems, focusing particularly on earthquake emergency response. China welcomes any experts interested in this or other projects to come to China to view what is happening.
4

E a r r t t h q u a k e R e s p o n s e C o o p e r r a t t i i o n P r r o g r r a m f f o r r E n e r r g y S u p p l l y S y s t t e m s
E x p e r t t G r r o u p W o r r k s h o p
Cooperation Mechanism New Zealand Comments
Mr. Pham emphasized that a workable and beneficial co-operation mechanism can be set up for APEC members but will take commitment from the key participants. He introduced a number of questions that should be considered with regard to cooperation, potential barriers to achieving cooperation and potential solutions, including:
 Set co-operation mechanism at a high policy level to be endorsed by the APEC members governments.
 Provide positive incentives or strong regulations to encourage energy suppliers to participate.
 Leave details to key participants to form bilateral or multilateral agreements.
 Tie this co-operation mechanism to other co-operation agreements.
 Carry out regular reviews.
Mr. Pham suggested the following roles the Workgroup could play in cooperation:
 As a conduit for information exchange.
 Can help produce templates for emergency response plans etc.
 Carry out regular reviews of current status and adoption of cooperation mechanisms
5

E a r r t t h q u a k e R e s p o n s e C o o p e r r a t t i i o n P r r o g r r a m f f o r r E n e r r g y S u p p l l y S y s t t e m s
E x p e r t t G r r o u p W o r r k s h o p
 There is a lack of information sharing on response and recovery arrangements and procedures. It would be useful for this Group to bring together best practices on these aspects and provide such information through the seminar website.
 Data on damage sustained in past earthquakes would be very useful but currently data are not widely accessible. While a GIS database is highly desirable, many databases are not yet publicly accessible, including those on soil condition, type and location of damage, etc. For reasons of physical security and/or commercial confidentiality, utilities are probably not willing to disclose specific network data. However there is often considerable useful information made available in the public domain.
It is therefore recommended that publicly available information be made accessible through the APEC earthquake response cooperation program website. Consideration should be given to pooling case studies on this website without releasing GIS data.
Workshop participants recommended that each economy work on and share case studies relating to its own earthquake experience (e.g. Tangshan, Kobe and Chi-chi).
The Workshop recommends the establishment of a protocol for informing member economies of response activities to a event.
 It is recognized that utilities face pressure to reduce costs and therefore may neglect earthquake preparedness, relying on central governments to assume responsibility for post-earthquake response and recovery.
The Workshop therefore recommends the application of incentives and/or regulations to encourage the participation of utilities in the cooperation mechanism.
 Cooperation between the utilities of member economies can reduce costs and generate substantial benefits. The working group could facilitate this cooperation but high political visibility may be required to encourage utilities to act.
The Workshop recommends the cooperation mechanism includes provision for informing member economies of energy supply impacts, response and recovery activities to a significant earthquake event (e.g. damage assessment).
 The Workshop agrees that a cooperation mechanism is highly desirable and would be beneficial to member economies.
6

E a r r t t h q u a k e R e s p o n s e C o o p e r r a t t i i o n P r r o g r r a m f f o r r E n e r r g y S u p p l l y S y s t t e m s
E x p e r t t G r r o u p W o r r k s h o p
The Workshop recommends that leaders / energy ministers endorse the adoption of the cooperation mechanism for energy supply systems.

The Workshop recognizes that response and restoration involves not only utilities but also the wider community.
On Task Groups
The Workshop accepts a proposal from the United States, Chinese Taipei, Australia and
New Zealand to establish a Task Group on Monitoring, Warning and Rapid Information for Energy Supply Systems.
The purpose of the Task Group is to advance the uses of rapid earthquake information for response purposes by energy suppliers. The Task Group is an international group. Each member team would set its own activities and exchange information on successes. It is envisaged that each team would consist of a national group of earthquake specialists and local energy suppliers.
The Task group will compile practical case histories on the use of earthquake data by energy system personnel and thereby learn how others can do it. Results will form the basis for a report delivered to the program seminar in 2003.
Dr. Tsai expressed willingness to coordinate formation and expressions of interest.
The Workshop identified the following topics to be explored by task groups:
 Information sharing
 Case studies of recent significant earthquakes
 Design standards and construction
 Mitigation policies
 Detection and monitoring systems
 Emergency response and recovery
 Policy and planning frameworks
 Mutual aid agreements
 Training
 Communications
Subject to endorsement from member economies, each task group will review relevant practices and emerging technologies and provide a summary to the seminar in 2003.
This review process may include a survey of energy suppliers via a questionnaire.
7

E a r r t t h q u a k e R e s p o n s e C o o p e r r a t t i i o n P r r o g r r a m f f o r r E n e r r g y S u p p l l y S y s t t e m s
E x p e r t t G r r o u p W o r r k s h o p
Chairman Shih-Ming Chuang then brought the workshop to a close. He thanked the delegates and speakers for their support and participation. The workshop ended at 16:15.
8