ROY J. SHLEMONR. J. Shlemon & Assoc., Inc., P.O. Box 3066, Newport Beach, CA 92659-0620Key Terms: Hazardous Fault, Alquist-Priolo Act,Surface-Fault Rupture, Geologic Hazards, StructuralMitigation, CaliforniaABSTRACTA California Technical Advisory Committee is nowreviewing the relative hazard of potential surface-faultrupture for single-family structures. Passage of theAlquist-Priolo (AP) Act in 1972 initially defined anactive fault as one with surface or near-surface rupturewithin approximately the past 10 ka. This deterministicnumber evolved to ,11 ka (Pleistocene-Holoceneboundary) and now, locally, to ,13 ka when expressedin calibrated radiocarbon years. Based on lessonslearned since 1972 and on the recurrence consideredacceptable for mitigation of other geologic processes, thepotential for surface-fault rupture should stem fromscience and the professional judgment of qualifiedgeological practitioners. Ideally, no specific determinis-tic number should define a hazardous fault, which may bepractically mitigated based on professional judgment,cost, available technology, and societal constraints. Butthis concept is generally not presently acceptable tomany California geological consultants and regulators.More pragmatic, therefore, is changing the existingactive fault definition from ,11 ka to a mid-Holocene(,4-ka to 6-ka) range. This range is non-rigid andshould be periodically revised based on technologicaladvances in the geologic and engineering sciences. Theproposed ‘‘mid-Holocene’’ age recognizes uncertaintyand closes the gap between the present 11-ka active-faultcriterion and the ,100–500-year recurrence of othernatural hazards typically mitigated by engineeringdesign. Change in regulation does not come easily andmay be detrimental to the economic livelihood of somegeologists. Nevertheless, to sensibly ensure public health,safety, and welfare, we must learn from new science andexperience and then adjust accordingly.INTRODUCTIONThe California State Mining and Geology Board(SMGB) established a Geological Hazards Commit-tee and an associated Technical Advisory Committee(TAC) to review and recommend improvements formitigation of surface-fault rupture potentially affect-ing habitable structures. The TAC discussions havebeen extensive and sometimes volatile. They have,however, produced many ideas for improving inter-pretation and application of regulations stemmingfrom ‘‘lessons learned’’ since passage of the Alquist-Priolo (AP) Act in 1972, a legislative response to the1971 Sylmar (San Fernando) earthquake in LosAngeles (Reitherman and Leeds, 1991). Currentagency policies and interpretations for the AP includedefining an active fault as being Holocene in age,mitigation of surface-fault rupture solely by avoid-ance, and presumption of fault activity within 50 ft(,15 m) unless demonstrably proven otherwise(Bryant and Hart, 2007). In light of new technicaldata, the TAC will now likely recommend that theterm ‘‘active fault’’ be replaced by the terms‘‘hazardous’’ and ‘‘non-hazardous’’ faults, respective-ly. Although not yet definitive, this change recognizesthat geotechnical and structural design can realisti-cally mitigate non-hazardous faults (Bray, 2001),namely those with cumulative ground displacementsof less than ,10 cm vertically and ,30 cm horizon-tally over an ,300-cm distance. In contrast, ahazardous fault cannot be technically or economicallymitigated except by avoidance. In this sense, mitiga-tion implies adequate engineering design to precludecatastrophic failure and loss of life, rather thanprevention of any structural damage, a concept thatis likely not well understood by many homeowners.Ostensibly, the hazardous-fault setback width (bufferzone) will vary and is mainly dependent on site-specific and regional fault characteristics (style andrecurrence) and on inherent uncertainties in exposure,mapping, and surface projection.Still problematic is the age (time of last displace-ment) of a hazardous fault. Based on new technicaldata and on lessons learned since 1972, the presentHolocene (,11 ka) definition for hazardous surface-rupture is an artifact that needs updating, especiallywhen compared with the much greater risks to lifesafety stemming from catastrophic failures outsidefault rupture zones. These failures typically resultfrom high seismic accelerations and ground shaking