In recent hours, the Petro government attempted to issue a controversial decree that weakened the earthquake resistance of buildings

In the last 15 days of his administration, the Gustavo Petro government intended to issue a decree that, according to structural engineering experts, would have increased the vulnerability of Colombian buildings to earthquakes like the one recorded on August 10.

Paradoxically, the government proposal became known just one week before the worst earthquake in the last 27 years occurred in the country, an event that strongly reopened the debate about construction parameters in the national territory.

The initiative was under public consultation on the Dapre website from July 21 to August 4, and reached the Presidency on August 6. However, it was not issued firmly due to the change of government.

The controversy revolves around the adoption of the ‘National Seismic Hazard Model’, a scheme that would reduce design requirements. Had it been implemented, the regulation would have forced new constructions to be calculated with lower resistance margins.

Currently, building construction in Colombia is regulated by the Seismic Resistant Standard issued in 2010 (NSR-10), which sets the mandatory minimum standards to guarantee the stability of civil works.

However, the proposal promoted by the Petro Government in its last days sought to adopt the model developed by the Colombian Geological Service (SGC) in partnership with the Italian foundation Global Earthquake Model (GEM).

From this proposal derives a series of design coefficients, which represent the minimum parameters with which engineers must calculate the seismic forces of a structure.

According to experts, adopting this proposal would entail a reduction in these parameters, decreasing the structural resistance requirements for future constructions.

Gabriel Bernal, professor at the National University of Colombia, explains the risks of this measure: “By reducing these coefficients, buildings would have to be designed for lower forces and, therefore, would have less resistance to future earthquakes.”

Adding to this warning is Daniel Mauricio Ruiz, professor in the Engineering Department at the Pontifical Javeriana University, who considers it not only a mistake but a danger to the public to design new buildings with lower requirements than those currently applied.

“If with a seismic-resistant regulation what happened on August 10 happened, imagine what it would mean to design buildings for conditions where the seismic forces are lower,” he states.

Ruiz points out that calculating a structure with less horizontal force leads to reducing the dimensions of beams and columns or using less reinforcing steel. In the long run, this decreases a building’s capacity to withstand an earthquake and increases the risk of severe damage or collapse.

In response, the Javeriana University academic emphasizes that a seismic hazard study is not a sufficient input by itself to guarantee safety.

In his view, it is essential to evaluate the real impact these parameters have on the structural calculation and require the SGC to demonstrate in writing that the new rules will guarantee equal or higher levels of protection than the current ones.

When asked about the reasons for insisting on a technically questioned standard, the National University professor attributes the measure to a “more ideological” approach of the Gustavo Petro administration.

He states that, despite having presented risk simulations and technical evidence to the SGC and the Permanent Advisory Commission for the Seismic Resistant Construction Regime, the outgoing government preferred to support the state proposal over other alternatives developed by the Colombian Association of Seismic Engineering (AIS).

Likewise, Bernal exposes serious legal irregularities in the structuring of the decree. First, he criticizes the attempt to validate a single official model through regulation, ignoring contributions from universities and private consultants, when the SGC products — as a science and technology entity — have the nature of a technical concept and are not binding.

Secondly, he warns of a substantial procedural defect: the draft intended to be regulated invoking Law 1523 of 2012 (National Disaster Risk Management Policy) instead of Law 400 of 1997 (framework law for seismic-resistant constructions).

Additionally, the published project would bear the signature of the former Minister of Mines and Energy, Edwin Palma, and the former director of Dapre, Nhora Mondragón, omitting the direct competence of the Ministry of Housing.

However, with the arrival of the Abelardo De La Espriella government, it is unlikely that the decree will be firmly issued due to the risks it entails, especially after the magnitude 7.4 earthquake on August 10. Insisting on this measure “would be absurd,” said Professor Bernal.