Annex I - Description of Work

(1)

Project acronym: Na.R.As Proposal number: 511264

SIXTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

PRIORITY [1.1.6.3]

[Global Change and Ecosystems]

Contract for:

SPECIFIC SUPPORT ACTION

Annex I - “Description of Work”

Project acronym:

Na.R.As.

Project full title:

Natural Risks Assessment: Harmonisation of Procedures,

Quantification and Information

Proposal/Contract no.:

511264

Related to other Contract no.:

(to be completed by Commission)

Date of preparation of Annex I:

15/04/2004

(2)

Table of Contents

p.7 p.6 p.4 p.3 1. Project summary

2. Project objective(s) and state of the art 3. List of participants

4. Relevance to the objectives of the specific programme and/or thematic priority

p.8 5. Potential Impact p.8 p.8 p.8 p.8 6. Project management and exploitation/dissemination plans

6.1 Project management

6.2 Plan for using and disseminating knowledge 6.3 Raising public participation and awareness

p.9 p.9 p.10 p.10 p.11 p.12 p.14 7. Workplan– for whole duration of the project

7.1 Introduction - general description and milestones

7.2 Work planning and timetable

7.3 Graphical presentation of work packages 7.4 Work package list

7.5 Deliverables list

7.6 Work package descriptions

8. Project resources and budget overview p.21

p.21 p.23 p.25 8.1 Efforts for the project (Specific Support Action Effort Form in Appendix 1)

8.2 Overall budget for the project (Forms A3.1 & A3.2 from CPFs) 8.3 Management level description of resources and budget.

Appendix A - Consortium description p.30

p.30 p.32 p.33 A.1 Participants and consortium

A.2 Sub-contracting A.3 Third parties

(3)

1. Project summary

Mediterranean countries are subject to frequent and different natural catastrophes which pay a high toll in terms of economic loss and human life. Since some tens of years EU countries are trying to mitigate the effects of these events mainly by means of prevention. Scientific progress in natural risk assessment and mitigation has increased the capacity of public administration to cope with high risk deriving from volcanic and hydro-geological events, to use satellites for short term prediction of meteorological events and floods, to work out, refine and enforce seismic EUROCODE 8. Several research project have been supported by EU Framework Programs. In all these cases risk assessment and managing have been approached individually for each risk typology and, often, differently even for a same typology in different countries. The consequence has been that the deliverables produced for different types of hazard are often not comparable and different deliverables for the same hazard types are produced in different countries. The need of harmonisation of terms and procedures has been stressed out in different EU MEDIN and UN Workshops. The aim of this project is to contribute to harmonise the risk assessment procedures and indicate ways to quantitative evaluation of hazard and risk levels through a two years long programmed series of Workshops, seminars, meetings, formation and educational activities which involve scientists, administrators and insurance experts who have been actively working in risk assessment problems in the latest years. Regions of South Italy, Greece and France will be used as test cases. The project is divided into 4 WP, dealing with: (1) Dissemination, comparisons of results and harmonisation, (2) Risk evaluation for land, urban planning and emergency management, (3) Formation and education (4) Publication of results.

(4)

2. Project objective(s) and state of the art

A number of EU project has been supported in the last decades which were relevant for risk assessment. In the following table the number of funded projects concerning natural hazards in the FP4 and FP5 is resumed: it is clear that the great majority of projects is related to a single type of natural hazard.

years/FP hydrogeological seismic volcanic Multirisk

1994-1998 (IV) 21 21 12 -

1998-2002 (V) 12 13 5 5

A lot of excellent data and deliverables were produced but they were not widely disseminated. Furthermore, each project produced relevant individual results but they were not merged in a global view of the risk assessment problem.

Mediterranean countries - like Italy, Greece and southern France – are subject to several natural hazards. Scientists are generally convinced that the main mitigation action against earthquakes, volcanoes and hydrogeological risks is prevention. There is a growing conscience of this also among administrators and risk managers. In order to make a cost-benefit analysis of prevention actions, they are increasingly asking the scientific world of providing them with comparable and, possibly, quantitative estimates of scenarios for the different types of risks. This project aims at contributing to this need by:

1. Disseminating and discussing the results obtained by EU funded projects, in order to make specialists of each area aware about the results attained by other areas’ specialists.

2. Promoting harmonisation of scenarios and procedures of risk evaluation among different countries and among different types of natural risks and by a critical analysis of existing normative codes, such as EC8.

3. Stimulating the development of quantitative probabilistic methodologies of evaluation of risks and different emergency scenarios using improved stochastic methods.

4. Promoting information and education actions in the schools aimed at increasing consciousness of natural risks among young people.

The EU-MEDIN project acknowledged and addressed some of these problems, pointing out the need of harmonisation of risk procedures in several countries. We want to complement the EU-MEDIN activities by disseminating and promoting harmonisation of the available data in three Mediterranean countries subject to high risk from different natural sources: Greece (earthquakes, landslides, floods, volcanoes), Italy (earthquake, volcanoes, landslides, floods) and southern France (earthquakes, landslides).

The objective will be achieved through the following activities:

Workshops: they are meant to join together experts of different types of risks, who have been coordinators or main participant of EU projects in the last 5 years, to discuss the obtained results and, to harmonise them.

We plan to have one workshop per year joining experts on different geological risks, preferentially chosen among the participants of EU funded projects relative to Greece, Italy and southern France; for example:

• LEWIS – Landslide Early-Warning Integrated System

• OASYS- Integrated Optimization of Landslide Alert Systems

• RETINA – Realistic Evaluation of Temporal Interactions of Natural Hazards

• CORSEIS – An Integrated Study of seismic Hazard Assessment in the Area of Aigion, Gulf of Corinth, Greece

(5)

• RISK-UE – An advanced approach to earthquake risk scenarios with applications to different European towns

• SESAME – Site Effects Assessment Using Ambient Excitations

• EUROSEIS-RISK – Seismic Hazard assessment, Site Effects and Soil Structure Interaction Studies in an Instrumented Basin

• RELIEF –Large Earthquake Faulting and Implications for the Seismic Hazard assessment in Europe: The Izmit-Duzce earthquake sequence of August-November 1999

• MULTIMO – Multi-disciplinary Monitoring, Modelling and Forecasting of Volcanic Hazard

• e-RUPTION – A Satellite Telecommunication and Internet-Based Seismic Monitoring System for Volcanic Eruption Forecasting and Risk Management

• EXPLORIS – Explosive Eruption Risk and Decision Support for EU Populations Threatened by Volcanoes

• ERUPT – Processes and Timescales of Magma Evolution in Volcanic Systems Meetings: they are meant as a chance for scientists to discuss with stake-holders (local

administrators, civil defence, insurance and industries) in order to identify priorities and objectives and prepare pilot actions for future RTD activities.

We plan to have one meeting per year with Greek and Italian stakeholders, in order to identify priorities and objectives and prepare possible pilot actions for future RTD activities;

Formation courses on the enforcement of risk mitigation procedures and early warning to be attended by Administration and Civil Defence officers and private companies. We plan to have two formation courses.

Moreover the project will aim at development of education on natural risks in schools starting from the improvement of the already existing projects on seismic risks in Nice and Napoli (EDUSEIS project); publication of a volume (and/or CD-Rom) containing the results of joint evaluations of natural risks in the selected areas, guidelines and procedures for joint evaluation, and implementation of early warning systems.

The detail of the workshops, meetings and formation courses will be the following:

1. Workshop on “Discussion and dissemination and of the results obtained by EU funded projects, in order to make specialists of each area aware about the results attained by other areas’ specialists. (Sant’Angelo dei Lombardi – Italy)

2. Workshop on “Development and implementation of quantitative probabilistic methodologies of evaluation of risks and different emergency scenarios using improved stochastic methods”. (Thessaloniki, Greece)

3. Meeting on “Implementation of early warning methods to mitigate seismic and volcanic risks in densely inhabited volcanic areas (Sant’Angelo dei Lombardi – Italy)”

4. Meeting on “Formation courses on training teachers of schools for awareness of natural hazards and risks and for educating young generations to environmental problems.” (Nice- France)

5. 2 Formation courses on natural hazards for Civil protection officers, Local Administrations and industries.

(6)

3. List of Participants

List of Participants

Partic.

Role* Partic. No. Participant name short name Participant Country Date enter project** Date exit project**

CO 1 Università di Napoli

“Federico II” – Centro Regionale di Competenza Analisi e Monitoraggio del Rischio Ambientale

(AMRA) Italy Month 1 Month 24

RC 2 Aristotle University of

Tessaloniki – Department of Civil Engineering

AUTh Greece Month 1 Month 24

RC 3 Universitè de Nice Sophia Antipolis – UMR 6526 Geosciences Azur

UNSA France Month 1 Month 24

SCIENTIFIC STAFF

PARTNER NAME POSITION SPECIALIZATION

Università di Napoli “Federico II” – Centro Regionale di Competenza Analisi e Monitoraggio del Rischio Ambientale

Paolo Gasparini Coordinator Volcanic Risk

Antonio D’Alessio Co-worker Anthropogenic Risk

Umberto Arena Co-worker Anthropogenic Risk

Edoardo Cosenza, Co-worker Seismic Risk

Gaetano Manfredi Co-worker Seismic Risk

Giovanni Macedonio Co-worker Volcanic Risk

Aldo Zollo Co- worker Seismic Risk

Leonardo Cascini Co-worker Hydrogeological Risk Maurizio Ribera Co-worker Coastal system

Giuseppe Fornaro Co-worker Remote Sensing

Paolo De Natale Co-worker Sensors Development Lucilla de Arcangelis Co-worker Computer Models

Ugo Leone Co-worker Territorial Planning

Mauro Basili Co-worker Technology transfer

Aristotle University of Tessaloniki – Department of Civil Engineering

Aris Avdelas Coordinator

Theodoros Hatzigogos Co-worker Institute of Soil Mechanics and

Foundation Engineering

Andreas Kappos Co-worker Institute of Reinforced Concrete

Universitè de Nice Sophia Antipolis – UMR 6526 Geosciences Azur

Jean Virieux Coordinator

Jean-Luc Berenguer Co-worker Geoazur/Unsa

Nicole Bèthoux Co-worker Geoazur/Unsa

*CO = Coordinator CR = Contractor

** Normally insert “month 1 (start of project)” and “month n (end of project)”

(7)

4. Relevance to the objectives of the specific programme and/or thematic priority

The proposed project fits the objectives of Global Changes and Ecosystem, Sub-priority 1.1.6.3, 4.2 Mechanism of Desertification and Natural disaster, c. Natural Disaster, where it is suggested that

this topic should address aspects of multi-risk assessment focussing on the harmonisation of data and methodologies related to earthquakes, volcanoes, floods, ... , landslides, and avalanches. Furthermore, it is indicated that research will focus on risk assessment and mitigation with the aim of evaluating strategies for disaster reduction. In fact our project aims at:

• disseminating and discussing the results obtained by European funded projects, in order to make specialists of each area aware about the results attained by other areas’ specialists;

• promoting harmonisation of scenarios and procedures of risk evaluation among different countries and among different types of natural risks;

• stimulating the development of quantitative probabilistic methodologies of evaluation of risks and different emergency scenarios using improved stochastic methods;

• promoting information and education actions in the schools aimed at increasing consciousness of natural risks among young people.

The deliverables of the project, although referring to Greece, Italy and Southern France as case histories and specific of Mediterranean zones, have a general usefulness as practical guidelines to implement comparable procedures for volcanic, seismic, flood and landslides risk assessment, to evaluate the probability of proposed scenarios and early warning actions. They can be used by land use planners, urban planners and administrators for a cost/benefit based politics of risk mitigation in a given area. They are also useful to emergency managers for a decision based on the conditional probability of different scenarios once that a catastrophic event is started.

(8)

5. Potential Impact

The added value of this project is to put together experts of different fields of natural hazards to compare the deliverables produced by different European projects and to produce guidelines for their utilisation by land planners, urban planners, administrators and emergency managers.

Other major issues are the education of young people to seismic risk, the information and dissemination of results, the formation of stakeholders and small industry people to management of risk, to early warning problems, to enforcement of existing laws of risk mitigation.

The results of the project will be exploited and/or disseminated through several actions addressed both to the scientific and social communities and to stake holders:

• conferences, workshops opened to the scientific community;

• implementation of procedures, data base;

• project information web site;

• publication of a book (and/or a CD-Rom) on multi-risk and early warning,

• publication of a book (and/or a CD-Rom) on the education protocol for seismic risk consciousness in schools and of the teaching material of formation courses;

• meetings on risk management with local administrators, experts and technicians involved in the emergency decision-making chain and with school teachers.

6. Project management and exploitation/dissemination strategy 6. 1 Project management

The proposed project is sufficiently small to warrant an efficient management through a small and simple structure.

A management board will be formed by the coordinator of the project and by the scientific leaders of the other two partners. The board will take care of the coordination and organisation of meetings and workshops and of the organisation of formation courses. Most of the coordination activity will be carried out by e-mail and using the interactive part of the web-site. The management board will meet approximately every six months, during the programmed workshops and meetings.

They will also act as editors of the book and other publications, which will be the products of the project.

6.2 Plan for using and disseminating knowledge

An important aim of the project is the dissemination of knowledge it will be pursue through 2 workshops, 2 meetings and 2 formation courses as described in WP 1, 2, 3

6.3 Raising public participation and awareness

National Civil Defence experts and administrators will be invited to join actively the this aims: Two meetings of a panel of experts, including experts of probabilistic approach to risk problems, insurance people and officers from Civil Defence and Administrations from Campania region and Thessaloniki region.

Two formation courses of 15 days each to be attended by Administration and Civil Defence officers, about the enforcement of risk mitigation procedures, early warning problems and quantification of risk parameters. These courses will be held the CRdC AMRA School of Sant’Angelo dei Lombardi (AV), close to Naples.

(9)

7. Workplan– for whole duration of the project

7.1 Introduction – general description and milestones The project can be split into four work packages:

1. Dissemination, comparisons of results and harmonisation.

2. Risk evaluation for land, urban planning and emergency management 3. Formation and education.

4. Publication of results.

The instruments to achieve the objectives of each work package will be the following:

WP1 (Dissemination, comparisons of results and harmonisation)

• Two three days long workshops, which are meant as a joint work activity on the preparation of comparable deliverables, starting from selected EU funded project products concerning Greece, Italy and southern France.

WP2 (Risk evaluation for land, urban planning and emergency management)

• One meeting of a panel of experts, including experts of probabilistic approach to risk problems, insurance people and officers from Civil Defence and Administrations from Campania region, Thessaloniki region and Provence region.

• Production of a document containing a critical evaluation of existing codes (such as EC8 for the seismic risk) and guidelines for quantitative joint risk evaluation and improvement of codes. In fact rules might require scientific investigations for understanding what are well confirmed parts and more speculative parts of specified guidelines. Efforts will be performed for understanding limitations coming from propagation in heterogeneous media: topographic effects, non-linear behaviour, basinal oscillations and so on.

WP3 (Formation and education)

• One formation course of 15 days to be attended by Administration and Civil Defence officers, about the enforcement of risk mitigation procedures, early warning problems and quantification of risk parameters. These courses will be held the CRdC AMRA School of Sant’Angelo dei Lombardi (AV), close to Naples.

• One formation course on the enforcement of existing rules in Greece, Italy and France, using the distant teaching facilities at Aristotle University of Thessaloniki.

• One formation course for teachers about awareness of environmental risks for pupils

WP4 (Publication of results)

• Publication of a book and/or CD-Rom.

• Publication of a bool and/or CD-Rom on tools, data, softwares for training pupils at the environmental problems.

(10)

7.2 Work planning and timetable

Timing (in months after the kick off) of the different WPs and their components:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 WP 1 W W WP 2 M M G WP 3 C C WP 4 B

(W = Workshop, M = Meeting, G = Guidelines, C = Course, B = Book/CD-Rom)

7.3 Graphical presentation of work packages

AMRA AUTh UNSA

WP1

WP2

WP3 WP4

(11)

7.4 Template: Work Package List

Work package list (full duration of project)

Work package

No1

Work package title Lead contractor

No2

Person-months3 _monthStart 4 _monthEnd 5 _erable

Deliv-No6

1

Dissemination, comparisons of

results and harmonisation

2

25

1

24 1,2,

_4,6

2

Risk evaluation for land, urban

planning and emergency management

1 25

1 24

5,7

3

Formation and Education

_{3 28}

_{1 20}

_2,3,8,

10,11

4

Publication of results

_{1 18}

_{6 24}

_6,7,9

TOTAL

96

1_{Workpackage number: WP 1 – WP n.}

2_{Number of the contractor leading the work in this workpackage.} 3_{The total number of person-months allocated to each workpackage.}

4_{Relative start date for the work in the specific workpackages, month 0 marking the start of the project, and all other}

start dates being relative to this start date.

5_{Relative end date, month 0 marking the start of the project, and all ends dates being relative to this start date.} 6_{Deliverable number: Number for the deliverable(s)/result(s) mentioned in the workpackage: D1 - Dn.}

(12)

7.5 Template: Deliverables List

Deliverables list (full duration of SSA)

Del.

no. 1 Deliverable name WP no. Lead particip-ant Estimated person-months Nature2 Dissemina tion level 3 Delivery date4 (proj. month)

1 Insertion of our data into

the EU-MEDIN website WP 1 2 10 O PU 24

2 Teaching material of the

courses WP 1 3 8 P PU 24

3 Formation courses about the enforcement of risk mitigation procedures, early warning problems and qualification of risk parameters.

WP 3 1 3 R RE 24

4 Workshops, which are

meant as a joint work activity on the preparation of comparable deliverables. WP 1 1, 2 3 R RE 12 5 Meetings on implementation of early warning methods WP 3 1, 3 4 R RE 24

6 Guidelines for procedure of harmonised risk estimates WP 1, 4 1 12 + 4 D PU 18 7 Guidelines for probabilistic quantification of natural risk WP 2,4 1 21 +4 D PU 12 8 Meeting on Education at seismology in schools WP 3 3 4 R PU 24

1_{Deliverable numbers in order of delivery dates: D1 – Dn}

2_{Please indicate the nature of the deliverable using one of the following codes:}

R = Report

P = Prototype

D = Demonstrator

O = Other

3_{Please indicate the dissemination level using one of the following codes:}

PU = Public

PP = Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission Services).

RE = Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission Services).

CO = Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services).

4_{Month in which the deliverables will be available. Month 1 marking the start of the project, and all delivery dates}

(13)

9 Final book and/or

CD-Rom WP 4 1 10 P PU 24

10 Bloc-notes of

educational training for pupils in order to raise their conscientiousness about natural hazard and risks (CD-Rom)

WP 3 3 10 P PU 24

11 Web sites for school seismic databases and dedicated educational tools.

WP 3 3 3 O PU 6

(14)

7.6 Template: Work package description

Work package description

Work package number 1 Start date or starting event: 1

Activity Type1 Dissemination, comparison of results and harmonisation

Participant id 1 2 3

Person-months per participant: 8 13 4

Objectives

The objective of this WP is to compare the procedures and deliverables obtained by selected FP4 and FP5 EU projects concerning natural risks in Greece, Italy and France, to extract the most relevant deliverables trying to uniform them and to make them available for public use.

A further objective will be to insert data assembled and/or produced by the project into the EU-MEDIN website.

Description of work

The objective will be pursued by joining together experts in different fields – preferably, but not necessarily, those who have worked in the selected projects. The workshops is meant as a joint work activity on the selection of the EU funded projects, on the examination, comparison and harmonisation of procedures and deliverables concerning Greece, Southern Italy and Southern France.

• Disseminating and discussing the results obtained by EU funded projects, in order to make specialists of each area aware about the results attained by other areas’ specialists.

• Stimulating the development of quantitative probabilistic methodologies of evaluation of risks and different emergency scenarios using improved stochastic methods.

1 operative 3 days workshop.

The workshop will be organised in cooperation between CRdC-AMRA and AUTh, in the Castle of Sant’ Angelo dei Lombardi at about 100 km distance from the city of Napoli- Italy, one of the Southern Appennines localities with high seismic risk.

1_{For Specific Support Actions each work package must relate to one (and only one) of the following two possible}

(15)

Deliverables

Guidelines for the harmonisation of procedures and deliverables for different natural risks (deliverable 6)

Revised hazard and risk scenario maps for different geological risks in the chosen test sites (deliverable 6 and 9)

Milestones1_{and expected result}

Selection of test sites: 1 month Possibility of harmonisation: 6 month

Final results: A feasibility study of harmonisation (what can be harmonised?) and an indication of the methods to pursue for harmonisation.

Dissemination of the deliverables for the test sites.

1_{Milestones are points where major results have successfully been achieved as the basis for the next phase of work, or}

which serve as control points at which decisions are needed; for example concerning which of several technologies will be adopted as the basis for the next phase of the project.

(16)

Work package description

Work package number 2 Start date or starting event: 1

Activity Type1 Risk evaluation for land, urban planning and emergency management

Objectives

To provide land use planners, urban planners and emergency managers with tools for probabilistic assessment of different possible scenarios of geological hazards and risk. To work out a report based on a critical evaluation of existing codes for risk mitigation (e.g. EC8 for seismic risk) with suggestions for their revision.

The objective will be pursued by joining together in 1 Workshop experts of probabilistic approach to risk problems, insurance people, officers from Civil Defence and Administrations and specialistic of geological risks, to settle the problem from different view point and discuss the way to a quantitative approach. A panel will be identified to procedure a document containing a critical evaluation of existing codes (such as EC8 for the seismic risk) and guidelines for quantitative joint risk evaluation and improvement of codes. In fact rules might require scientific investigations for understanding what are well confirmed parts and more speculative parts of specified guidelines. Efforts will be performed for understanding limitations coming from propagation in heterogeneous media: topographic effects, non-linear behaviour, basinal oscillantions and so on.

1 operative 3 days Workshop

The Workshop will be organized in cooperation between CRdC-AMRA, AUTh and UNSA. Contributors: officers from Civil Defence and Administrators.

The document will be implemented on the WEB site of the project. Deliverables

Report giving guidelines for a quantitative probabilistic approach to risk evaluation.

Report containing a critical evaluation of the existing codes for risk mitigation (Deliverable 6).

Milestones1 and expected result

(17)

The milestones are practically the results coming out of the Workshop after 1 and 12 months.

The main expected results is to indicate a methodology for addressing the need of planners to have a quantitative probabilistic estimate of natural hazards and risks in any particular area to be used or cost/benefit analysis of mitigation actions and land use plans. Similar indications can be given for emergency scenarios to be used to plan actions during emergency.

(18)

Work package description

Work package number 3 Start date or starting event: 1 Activity Type1 Formation and education

Objectives

To form people able to address in a modern way the problems of both individual and joint natural risk evaluation and to apply properly the mitigation actions contained in the existing codes and to implement early warning methods.. To improve school education in natural hazards and risks using as a prototype the EduSeis project of education on seismic risk.

Description of work Objectives

1 Meeting on the implementation of early warning methods to mitigate seismic and volcanic risks in densely inhabited areas.

1 Meeting with school teachers on environmental risk teaching will be organized by UNSA probably at the Vienna Assembly of the European Union of Geosciences in 2005.

Two formation courses of 15 days each to be attended by Administration and Civil Defence officers. These courses will be held by CRdC-AMRA School of Sant’Angelo dei Lombardi (AV), close to Naples.

One formation course on the enforcement of existing rules in Greece, Italy and France, using the distant teaching facilities at Aristotle University of Tessaloniki.

Deliverables

Teaching materials of the courses, (deliverable 2)

Publication in the EU MEDIN WEB site of exercises and activity developed in schools by the EduSeis project (deliverable 8) as a blueprint on activity on the other types of natural risks.

A teacher special session at the EUG meeting in April 2005 (30/60 teachers will be invited from different European countries depending on the available funding).

Bloc-notes of educational training for pupils in order to raise their coscientiousness about natural hazards and risks (CD-Rom) (deliverable 10).

Web sites for school seismic databases and dedicated educational tools (deliverable 11). The software for the teaching is realized by Anthony Lomax Scientific Software Company.

Milestones1 and expected result

(19)

Evaluation of each formation course (after 6,13 and 23 months). The main expected results are:

Formation of natural risks specialists able to cope with problems of assessment of joint natural risks;

To apply properly existing codes, to know codes existing in France, Greece and Italy, to cope with the probabilistic aspects of early warning scenarios;

To increase perception and understanding of natural risks in young generation, with a consequent improvement of social resiliency and coping capacity.

(20)

Work package description

Work package number 4 Start date or starting event: 6 Activity Type1 Publication of results

Objectives

To disseminate all the produced documents (revised scenarios, results of harmonisation, guidelines for quantitative individual and joint evaluation of natural risks, suggestions to revise and uniform existing codes, procedures for early warning).

Publication of a book and/or CD-Rom to pursue the objectives. Publication of teaching material.

All the material will be printed by Doppiavoce Studio Editoriale/Napoli.

Deliverables

Book and/or CD-Rom

Implementation of teaching material on the EU MEDIN WEB site

Milestones2_{and expected result}

Outline of the book (after 12 months)

Selection of the teaching material to disseminate (18 months) Expected results:

Availability for administrators of revised and harmonised hazard and risk documents relative to selected areas of Greece, Italy and Southern France.

Availability of guidelines for joint quantitative evaluation of natural risks. Expert suggestions for revision and application of existing codes.

Activity Types: Activities specific for the Support Action , Management activities.

(21)

8.1 Template: Specific Support Action Effort Form - Full duration of project Specific Support Action Effort Form1 - Full duration of project

Project number (acronym): 511264 (Na.R.As)

Participant 1

short name Participant 2 short name Participant 3 short name ACTIVITIES TOTAL Activities specific for the

Support Action 2 AMRA AUTh UNSA

WP 1 8 13 4 25

Insert data into EU-MEDIN

website; 1 2

Teaching material of the courses;

1 3 1

Worshop 2 3 1

Meetings 2 3 1

Guidelines for procedure of

harmonised risk estimates 2 2 1

WP 2 13 7 5 25

Workshops 5 3 2

Guidelines for probabilistic

quantification of natural risk 8 4 3

WP 3 7 8 13 28

Formation courses 1 2 5

Meetings on early warning and on Education at seismology in schools;

1 2 3 Bloc-notes of educational

training for pupils

2 2 3 Websites for school seismic

databases and dedicated educational tools.

3 2 2

WP4 10 5 3 18

Guidelines for procedure of harmonised risk estimates

3 1 1 Guidelines for probabilistic

quantification of natural risk 3 2 1

Final book and/or CD-Rom. 4 2 1

Total 'specific activities' 40 31 25 96

1_{Specify efforts in 'person months'}

2_{For Specific Support Actions these are 'other specific activities' according to Article II.25 of Annex 2 to the contract,}

(22)

Consortium management activities

AMRA AUTh UNSA

WP 1 6 0 0

WP 2 6 0 0

WP 3 6 0 0

WP 4 6 0 0

Total consort. management 24 0 0 24

TOTAL per PARTICIPANT

(23)

8.2Overall budget for the project (Forms A3.1 & A3.2 from CPFs)

Costs and EC contribution per type of activities Participant n Organisation

short name

Cost model used Estimated eligible costs and requested EC contribution (whole duration of

the project)

Specific activities (1)

Consortium Management activities (")

Total (3)=(1)+(2) Total receipts

3 UNSA Full cost model Eligible cost Direct Cost (a) 152.000,00 0,00 152.000,00 0 of wich subcontracting 20.000,00 0,00 20.000,00

Indirect cost (b) 0,00 0,00 0,00

Total eligible costs (a)+ (b) 152.000,00 0,00 152.000,00

Requested EC

Contribution

70.000,00 0,00 70.000,00

2 AUTh Addition cost model Eligible cost Direct Cost (a) 58.333,00 0,00 58.333,00 0

of wich subcontracting 0,00 0,00 0

Indirect cost (b) 11.667,00 0,00 11.667,00

Requested EC

Contribution

70.000,00 0,00 70.000,00

1 AMRA Addition cost model Eligible cost Direct Cost (a) 74.000,00 16.000,00 90.000,00 0

of wich subcontracting 0,00 0,00 0

Indirect cost (b) 10.000,00 0,00 10.000,00

Requested EC

Contribution

84.000,00 16.000,00 100.000,00

TOTAL Eligible costs 306.000,00 16.000,00 322.000,00 0 Requested

EC

Contribution

(24)

Estimated breakdown of the EC contribution per reporting period.

Estimated grant to the Budget

Reporting Periods Start month End Month Total In wich first six months

Reporting Period 1 1 12 140.000,00 0,00 Reporting Period 2 13 24 100.000,00 50.000,00 Reporting Period 3 25 36 0,00 0,00 Reporting Period 4 37 48 0,00 0,00 Reporting Period 5 49 60 0,00 0,00 Reporting Period 6 61 72 0,00 0,00 Reporting Period 7 73 84 0,00 0,00

(25)

8.3 Management level description of resources and budget Partecipant n° 1

Organisation short name: AMRA Cost model used: Additional cost

Categories of Cost Amount for the period

Direct Costs

1. Personnel 20.000,00

2. Equipment

3. Third party assistance

3.1 Print of the book and e-book 6.000,00

4. Travel and subsistence 33.000,00

5. Consumable and computing 3.000,00

6. Other significant specific Project cost (organisation of one workshop, one meeting and two formation courses)

Management costs 12.000,0016.000,00

Subtotal of direct costs 90.000,00 Indirect Costs

7. Overheads 10.000,00

Adjustments

8. Adjustments to costs previously reported

Total 100.000,00

Request EC Contribution 100.000,00

Details of travel and subsistance Amount for the period Workshop

Travel (8 persons x € 500,00) 4.000,00

Subsistance (8 persons x 3 days) 6.000,00

Meetings

Travel (6 persons x € 500,00) 3.000,00

Formation courses

Travel (16 persons x € 500,00) 8.000,00

(26)

Details of management costs Amount for the period

Personnel 9.500,00

N° 3 audit certificates 4.500,00

Travel and subsistance (1 person x € 500,00 x 4 days) 2.000,00

(27)

Partecipant n° 2

Organisation short name: AUTh Cost model used: Additional cost

Direct Costs

9. Personnel 31.333,00

10. Equipment

14. Other significant specific Project cost (FAD organisation) 8.000,00 Subtotal of direct costs 58.333,00 Indirect Costs

15. Overheads 11.667,00

Adjustments

16. Adjustments to costs previously reported

Total 70.000,00

Contribution of Commission 70.000,00

Travel (4 persons x € 500,00) 2.000,00

Meetings

Travel (4 persons x € 500,00 x 2 meetings) 4.000,00

Subsistance (4 persons x 3 days x 2 meetings) 6.000,00

(28)

Partecipant n° 3

Organisation short name: UNSA Cost model used: Full cost

Direct Costs

17. Personnel 104.000,00

18. Equipment

19.1 Software for teaching 20.000,00

22. Other significant specific Project cost (organisation of education natural risks in

school) 5.000,00

Subtotal of direct costs 152.000,00 Indirect Costs

23. Overheads

Adjustments 24. Adjustments to costs previously reported

Total 152.000,00

Contribution of Commission 70.000,00

Travel (4 persons x € 500,00 x 2 workshoop) 4.000,00

Subsistance (4 persons x 3 days x 2 workshoop) 6.000,00

Meetings

Travel (6 persons x € 500,00) 3.000,00

Education natural risks in school

Travel (10 persons x € 200,00) 2.000,00

(29)

Eligible costs 322.000,00

(30)

Details by categories

Partecipant n° 3

Organisation short name: UNSA Cost model used: Full cost

Personnel and overheads

Name No. of Man _Hours _{Personnel Rate}Hourly Hourly Overhead _Rate Personnel _Amount Overheads _Amount

Virieux J. 800 55,5000 -- 44.400,00 Berenguer J.L. 800 42,3837 -- 33.907,00 Betoux N. 610 42,1200 -- 25.693,00 Subtotals 104.000,00 Total (personnel + overheads) 104.000,00

(31)

Appendix A - Consortium description A.1 Participants and consortium

The Consortium will consist of three participants with a consolidated experience in different sectors of the environmental risk. They are:

1. Centro Regionale di Competenza “Analisi e Monitoraggio del Rischio Ambientale” of the Università di Napoli Federico II (AMRA);

2. Department of Civil Engineering of the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (AUTh); 3. Unité Mixte de Recherche of the Université de Nice - Sophie Antipolis (UNSA).

The Regional Center of Environmental Risk Analysis and Monitoring is a consortium project financed by the Campania Region through EU – ESRD Funds for the regions of Objective 1. Its objective consists in the creation of a structure of research and development of innovative methods applied to environmental problems with a high potential of self-financing, its position being among research institutions and agencies, industrial sector and environment management institutions. It gathers the best competence existing in Campania in the field of environmental risk, and it can rely on a network of high technology laboratories.

One of its main objectives is to develop methods to approach the problem of risks in a comprehensive and quantitative way, giving public authorities comparative estimates of different typologies of risk in different areas as a basis for mitigation actions, land use or urban plans. Another objective is the protection of strategic edifices of the town of Napoli, including schools, from damages due to tectonic earthquakes using high tech seismic early warning systems.

The Consortium is lead by the Università di Napoli Federico II and consists of five Universities (Napoli Federico II, Second University of Napoli, Salerno, Sannio, Napoli – Parthenope), six Research Organizations (National Research Council, ENEA, National Institute of Geophysics and Vulcanology, National Institute of Physics of Matter, National Institute of Applied Optics, Zoological Station Anton Dohrn) and two scientific-technological parks (Consortium Technapoli, Scientific and Technological Park of Salerno and the Campania Interior).

CRdC AMRA is organised in nine operative sections: anthropic risk, seismic risk, volcanic risk, hydrogeological risk, vulnerability of maritime coast system, remote sensing, sensors development, modelization, policies of the territory and technological transfer.

Each section has as a leader a recognised expert in that particular field. The expertise ranges from numerical modelling to geophysics, chemical engineering, seismic engineering, geology, to economics, architecture, social sciences. The scientist in charge and many of the section leaders have a long standing collaboration with Civil Defence and Admistrators. Some of them are presently collaboration with Regione Campania for land use planning of Regione Campania.

CRdC AMRA has implemented a specialisation and high level formation school system at Sant’Angelo dei Lombardi at about 100 km distance from the city of Napoli, one of the Southern Appenines localities with high seismic risk. The School is located in the Castle of Sant’Angelo dei Lombardi. It is equipped with all the modern teaching facilities. All the formation courses, workshops and meetings of the present project organised by this unit can be located in that suggestive site. The wide range of expertise of AMRA and its mission warrant the accomplishment of the objectives of WP2, 3 and 4. AMRA experts will also contribute to the specific parts of WP1 which are not covered by the other partners. AMRA will assume the major charge for the publication activity of Workshop 4.

(32)

The Department of Civil Engineering of the AUTh is divided into four divisions: Structural Engineering; Hydraulics and Environmental Engineering; Geotechnical Engineering; Transport, Infrastructure, Management and Regional Planning.

The members of the AUTh group have research and teaching experience in the fields of seismic engineering and landslides, particularly: structural seismology and soil dynamics, vulnerability assessment, computational mechanics for earthquake-resistant structures design, modelling and analysis of earthquake-resistant buildings, foundations, retaining walls and earth structures, seismic damage, repairs, strengthening, geotechnics, seismic risk assessment, slope instabilities and landslides (analysis, stabilisation technics). This unit will work mainly on the objectives of WP1 and will contribute to the comparison and revision of existing codes, as well as in the formation activity.

The Workshops and teaching activities can take advantage of the AUTh network of six fully equipped distance-learning classrooms. The lecturers can present simultaneously their educational material both to local and remote audience by using appropriate equipment for each case.

The University of Nice – Sophia Antipolis - Géosciences Azur UMR is involved in the educational point of view for training pupils, students and teachers of high schools on natural hazards and awareness of natural risks. The laboratory has 24 persons involved directly in the University teaching training and additional 20 persons as full-time researchers. The laboratory has been the starting point of the EDUSEIS project in France altogether with people in Italy (Naples), in Portugal (Lisbonne) and in Germany (Munich) in 1998. In that respect, this laboratory is the unique one involved at the national and European level in France. The expertise of the laboratory in earthquakes and landslides is based on data acquisition (seismic networks, deformation networks), data analysis (quality control, attributes extraction) and data interpretation (data labelling) and modelisation (wave propagation). Therefore, the laboratory may plug directly what it has learnt from research into the educational training of teachers bring new technologies and new ways of thinking into the education system (web site http://geoazur.unice.fr).

The educational program for schools is devoted to the education of young people to the natural risk culture by both an experimental/technological approach as well as a scientific one. In order to achieve this goal, training of high school teachers is critical and leads to an increasing impact to the new generation waiting for more information about the Earth and about natural hazards and risks. This training is performed by using networks having deep root in the French educational system with a strong coordination at the top level interacting with other groups in Europe. This training is based on experimental data training by recording natural events and by simple but highly technological laboratory experiments as well as direct simple interpretation using learning and e-experiments. The elaboration of common European training book for natural events analysis as earthquakes as well as for natural hazard evaluation is the output of this scientific willingness for the awareness of future generations (web site http://www.edusismo.org). Beyond its relevant contribution to WP3, this unit will participate to WP2 and 1 as well mostly in the critical evaluation of the existing codes for natural hazards and on evaluation of the documentation existing for seismic risk and landslides in Southern France.

A.2 Sub-contracting

1 Sub-contractor is required by the partner UNSA. The sub-contractor is: Anthony Lomax Scientific Software

Mouans-Sartoux, France

The subcontractor is an expert of software for seismological application and will be in charge of the implementation of material for school teachers.

(33)

A.3 Third parties

Third Party assistance is required by the partner AMRA for preparation of the book, reproduction of CD ROM and preparation of teaching material.

This activity will be performed by: Doppiavoce Studio Editoriale

Via Monte di Dio 5 80132 Napoli