crawford global te chnical service s superstorm …€¦ · and the legislative, regulatory, and...

C r aw f o r d G lo b a l T e C h n i C a l S e r v i C e S ®

SuperStorm Sandy a year Later:a record-setting Storm and a record-setting response (pg. 3)

Crawford Global Technical Services

Volume 4, Issue 3, 2013A publication of Crawford & Company’s Global Technical Services®

InsIde thIs Issue

Welcome to Tech Talk ................... 2

Superstorm Sandy a Year Later: A Record-setting Storm and a Record-setting Response .... 3

HIgh-speed Rail in Europe and China .................................. 4

New & Noteworthy ...................... 8

Articles can be found online at www.crawfordgts.com/TechTalk

Although care has been taken in the preparation of this newsletter, it should be used for general guidance only. Crawford & Company is not offering legal advice and does not accept responsibility for any factual errors or for any loss, direct or indirect, that reliance on the information in this newsletter might cause.

Comments or suggestions for Tech Talk? E-mail: [email protected]

Editor: John L’Abate, Public Relations Manager

Designer: Helena C. Bretherton Hay, Graphic Design Specialist

GTS Tech Talk is published by Crawford & Company. © 2013

Crawford & Company 1001 Summit Blvd Atlanta, GA 30319

Crawford & Company is an equal opportunity employer.

Welcome to the last issue of Tech Talk for 2013. In this issue

I’d like to highlight two in-depth, very different articles that

are both compelling reads.

In Superstorm Sandy a Year Later: A Record-setting Storm and a

Record-setting Response, we look at the genesis of the unique

storm, how Crawford & Company handled the claims process,

and the legislative, regulatory, and industry changes brought

about by the superstorm. In Mark Vos’ (head of Global

Technical Services CEMEA and regional managing director,

Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia) piece High-Speed Rail In Europe and China, he

takes an exacting look at the differences in rail infrastructure for Europe and China,

future developments, and considerations for claims adjusting.

I am excited to announce a new technological capability to benefit both our clients

and our adjusters—GTS® Strategic Loss Management (SLM), a Web-based tool that

will significantly improve accuracy of data and streamline claims capture, analysis

and monitoring. SLM is designed to be easy to use, flexible, thorough, and save

time, effort and money. Briefly, SLM is a password secured website-based claim

management tool that allows adjusters and clients to:

� Access all information provided to date in one place—information that

is searchable, sortable and secure

� Upload large files for information sharing

� Real-time availability to claim analysis

� Have transparency to all involved in the adjustment process

A key feature of SLM is the Document Request List for managing claim

documentation that:

� Combines all requests from the adjusting team into a single place

eliminating request letters from experts

� Prevents confusion over what materials have been provided

� Tracks provided items that have been received and the items that are

outstanding

� Inserts comments directly on the request list to communicate to the

adjusting team or insured

SLM also has fully-featured claims analysis tools that provide:

� All claimed amounts contained in one workbook with links connecting

users to all supporting documents

� Review of line-by-line analysis of claim

� Commentary on differences between claimed and recommended

amounts

� Hyperlinks to connect users directly to a .PDF of the relevant estimate,

invoices, photographs, and other documentation types

� Summary schedules give customized view by coverage code, vendor,

and other classification criteria, etc.

� One consolidated location for all claim components

I’m very proud of SLM; its current capabilities are robust and it will continue to

evolve as a very effective tool for GTS. If you or any of your colleagues would like to

know more about SLM or see it in action, please contact me.

2

| Continued on page 23

Tech Talk

3Volume 4, Issue 3

SupErStorm SanDy— a Storm unlikE any othEr

Late in October 2012—one month away from the end of the six-month hurricane

season—the unique, enormous tropical storm Sandy hit the United States

East Coast at a right angle, and, before it dissipated, the storm that came to be

nicknamed “Superstorm Sandy’ caused billions of dollars of damage across dozens

of states and affected millions of American’s lives.

What would become Superstorm Sandy developed normally in the Atlantic

Basin. On October 22, 2012, in the western Caribbean Sea, a tropical depression

intensified in less than a day to Tropical Storm Sandy, which made landfall in Cuba

on October 25 and the Bahamas the following day. By October 27, Sandy turned

toward the northwest and then tracked northeast along the U.S. East Coast. On

October 28, Sandy came back toward the U.S., and by October 29, Sandy became the

largest Atlantic hurricane on record as it moved toward the New Jersey coast1.

thE Storm StrikES

Sandy was the 18th named storm of the busy 2012 Atlantic hurricane season2 and

it was a unique storm in several ways, beginning with how it approached New

Jersey and New York from the east. Storms typically approach from the south3,

and a recent statistical analysis estimates that the track of the | Continued on page 11

Superstorm Sandy a Year Later:A Record-setting Storm and a Record-setting Response

Satellite image of Hurricane Sandy from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) on NASA’s Aqua satellite taken at 2:20 p.m. EDT (18:20 UTC) on October 29, 2012. At 2:00 p.m. EDT, the National Hurricane Center reported that the storm was located at 38.3°N, 73.1°W, about 110 mi (180 km) southeast of Atlantic City, MJ, and 175 mi (285 km) south-southeast of New York City. Maximum sustained winds were 90 mph (150 km/h), and the central minimum pressure was 940 mbar(27.76 inHg).

Source: NASA

4 Tech Talk

Over the years we have seen the development of public

transportation moving from regional to national and

from national to international transport. Aviation is one

high profile primary transport form, which is unique

and had been glamorized in its early days due to its risk,

novelty and expense, but the majority of mass public

transportation is still based on land vehicles such as

buses, electric trams, subways and railways.

The ever increasing number of people who travel or

commute by air requires the governmental vision

to manage the growing passenger volume while

attempting to stay within the often mandated

boundaries of environmental pollution mitigation

and financial investment. These critical operational

goals are challenged by the contravening effects of

ever expanding airports in highly populated regions,

expansions that can be limited by geographic or

financial factors, or by challenges from local residents

opposed to continued infrastructure development.

When looking into more detail to the demand and

comfort of the traveller and the present limitations

on air travel, it has become evident that rail

transportation is positioned to become a strong

alternative to air travel, especially in countries with

mature rail systems. Current high-speed trains are

fast, convenient, and can readily compete on price

and logistics with short distance flights.

Because of their specialized capabilities these trains

have created a new transportation category of high-

speed rail.

In the future high-speed rail may replace aviation

transport within a radius of <500 km around a large

airport and or even greater distances, as continuing

technological advances result in increasing speeds

that may allow rail to compete with aviation as

distances up to 900 km.

When looking at this new category of transportation

is should be noted that there are a number of different

definitions for high-speed rail in use worldwide, and

there is no single standard for determining what

constitutes “high-speed” rail service.

In order to establish a definition there are certain

parameters that are unique to high-speed rail that

must be considered. UIC (International Union of

Railways) and European Union regulation define

high-speed rail as systems of rolling stock and

infrastructure which regularly operate at or above

250 km/h (155 mph) on new tracks, or 200 km/h (124

mph) on existing tracks. However, in the United

States, the U.S. Department of Transportation

considers sustained speeds of more than 125 mph

(201 km/h) to constitute high-speed service, although

the U.S. Federal Railroad Administration uses a

definition of above 110 mph (177 km/h).

High-Speed Rail In Europe and ChinaAn ICE 3 high speed train on the Frankfurt-Cologne high-speed rail line, near the Oberhaider Wald Tunnel.

Source: Sebastian Terfloth, courtesy Wikimedia Commons.

5Volume 4, Issue 3

These definitions tend

to lag behind the pace

of advances in speed,

as trains with operating

speeds of more than

300km/hr (186 mph) are

already common. Even

400 km /hr has been

achieved, while the

world speed record for a

magnetic levitation train

is held by the Japanese

experimental MLX01: 581

km/h (361 mph).

In the picture below the

European rail system is

shown with rail speeds

color coded. The diversity

of track speeds is

evident and determined

by factors such as

geographical issues, the

legacy of first, second

and new generation

high-speed track and

equipment, and by the

range of rail budgets.

high-SpEED rail ConStruCtion

During a period of industry transition segments of

normal track are being superseded by high-speed

rail, but standard track must sometimes still be

used, consequently lower speeds can be required by

areas in some countries. This lower speed causes

competition for the short distances with planes or

automobiles. Continued investment in completing the

tracks is inevitably required to meet the objectives

of various governments wanting to bring improved,

faster service to passengers, but governments are also

focused on reducing the carbon dioxide footprint of

airports, cargo trucking and highways.

Specialized engineering modifications and public

safety considerations are significantly involved in

achieving the straight, level alignments needed

for sustained high-speed trains. One definitive

aspect of high-speed rail is the need for a track

with a continuous welded rail, which reduces track

vibrations and discrepancies between rail segments

enough to allow trains to pass at speeds in excess of

200 km/h (124 mph). Where vibrations especially need

to be managed is at rail junctions, which resulted in

additional engineering attention focused on design

specifications for level crossings.

Electrically-driven trains also raise a variety

of concerns with the various voltages which

international trains use, and there is an equal level of

issues around the various in-cab signaling and safety

systems of the different national railway authorities

which govern their respective sections of track. The

overhead electrical lines in Europe have different

voltages, which means that tracks in different

countries are unique to one another.

The construction tolerances and safety and health

regulations for high-speed rail resulted in the

construction of new bridges to accommodate the

need for new sloping bridgeheads, as well as tunnels

to protect national parks and the urban environment

from noise; as high-speed rails were built out there

was also major superstructure construction work

required to avoid crossings.

Bridges crossing the rivers needed to be replaced to

meet the high-speed trains’ specifications and their

strict tolerances for level track.

All the above factors lead to major infrastructure work

requiring Contractor’s All Risks (CAR) policy coverage.

Major infrastructure works introduce new construction

challenges, which need to be covered. Examples include

the Paris-London stretch under the English Channel and

Barcelona-Madrid, which consists of

Figure 1. Comparison of Speeds in European Rail Lines


6 Tech Talk

a 621-kilometer (386 mile) railway line that is designed

for speeds of 300 km/h (186 mph) and compatibility

with neighboring countries’ rail systems.

Another example of construction issues is the high-

speed track from Brussels to Amsterdam. Just over

the Dutch border towards Amsterdam the peat and

sand mix soil structure was insufficient to manage

the required load specifications for current and future

rail needs. Moreover, the vibrations generated by

the high speed was already a major technical issue

as peat-and-sand mixed soil behaves differently

when exposed to high vibrations. For this reason

the track was built on concrete slabs of 35 meters,

which were fully under pinned into the bearing sand

layer. Commentators on the slabs have jocularly

noted that they represent the longest building of the

Netherlands, with its origination point in Amsterdam.

In other countries there are tunnels and similar quality-

controlled viaducts that were needed specifically to

accomodate high-speed rail. This new rail infrastructure

required high-quality engineering, which often resulted

in higher costs and longer construction times.

Another environmental factor affecting trains

travelling at high speed is noise. High-frequency

sounds from the trains can affect people and animals

living in the vicinity of the high-speed tracks.

magnEtiC lEvitation

The previous rail discussion is based on rolling

vehicles, since you need rolling contact with the

track as energy is transferred into movement; this

movement which is hampered by the physical friction

between the wheel and the rail. A much more recent

concept in train kinetics eliminates this friction

through the use of magnetic levitation, where a

magnetic field separates the vehicle and the rail so

there is no physical contact between them. In China

the first step was made to introduce passenger trains

running on magnetic levitation.

Perhaps the most famous example of a magnetic

levitation train in regular operation is the Maglev train

between Shanghai and its airport at an commercial

speed of 431 km/hr. The writer of this article had the

opportunity to enjoy this 30-km-long trip.

Magnetic levitation trains fall under the category of

high-speed rail due to their association with track-

oriented vehicles; however the inability to operate on

conventional rails often leads to their classification as

a separate category of transportation.

The magnetic levitation is based on the repelling-

attracting principle of magnets, which to create train

motion intermittently change their polarization rapidly,

generating high-power magnetic fields that alternately

pull and push the train forward, allowing it to accelerate

quickly and smoothly. A “smart”, variable magnetic

field management allows the train to levitate at high

speeds, while at very low speeds and at railways station

wheels carry the train.Magnetic levitation trains require

even more sophisticated (and expensive) techology

and engineering to operate than typical high-speed rail

systems, but some countries (such as China) are making

the investment to further develop magnetic rail systems.

With regard to normal high speed, there are two

grades of high-speed lines in China: First there are

“slower” lines running at speeds of between 200 and

250 km/h (124 and 155 mph) which may comprise

either freight or passenger trains. Secondly, there are

passenger dedicated high-speed rail lines operating at

top speeds of up to 350 km/h (217 mph).

The historic strategy for the length of high-speed

lines (which is driving the investment for high-speed

trains) is to cover distances ranging from 0- 500 km,

but in China the new high-speed train some tracks

are longer than 900 km. The newest stretch of high-

speed rail there is covering 1,318 kilometers, and is

the track of the Beijing-Shanghai high-speed railway,

which reduces the travel time between the two cities

to less than five hours and it is designed to handle a

maximum speed of 350 km per hour.

High-Speed RailCoNTINuED fRoM PAGE 5

Figure 2. Comparison of European Rail Track Voltages


Volume 4, Issue 3 7

8 Tech Talk

terry hunt to lead Business Development for global markets in the americas and richard lafayette to lead global technical Services for the united States

Crawford & Company

has appointed

Terry Hunt to a new

position where he

will lead business

development for

Crawford Global

Markets in the

Americas. Hunt’s

expanded role for the Americas will include

both continuing to drive the growth of

Crawford Global Technical Services (GTS®)

and developing Crawford Specialty Markets,

an expansion of large and complex loss

adjusting services which was announced in

July. He will report jointly to Mike Reeves,

executive vice president for Global Markets

and to John Sharoun, CEO for Specialty

Markets for the Americas.

Hunt has been serving as chief executive

officer of GTS for the United States since

2012 and he brings to his new role a strong

record of developing and maintaining

key business relationships. Hunt came to

Crawford in 1990 as a general adjuster and

advanced to supervisory and management

positions before joining GTS in 2000.

The new leader of

GTS for the United

States is Richard

Lafayette, who is

currently its chief

technical officer and

managing director in

the southeast region.

Lafayette, already a

member of the U.S.

Miami but will devote a significant amount

of time visiting GTS offices in Latin America.

Prior to his work at Crawford, Salerno held

senior adjusting positions for 13 years in both

Latin America and the UK with Factory Mutual

Insurance Company and its international

subsidiaries. He has been working as an

adjuster since 1993 and has achieved

extensive experience handling complex, large

losses worldwide in industry sectors such

as building and construction, engineering,

power and energy, and technology. For the

past 15 years, he has covered all aspects of

loss adjustment in complex and multi-million

dollar insurance claims.

Salerno holds a Bachelor of Science degree in

Mechanical Engineering from the University

Simón Bolívar in Caracas, Venezuela, and a

Master of Business Administration degree

from the University of Arizona.

Eduardo kimsi named CEo of Crawford operations in latin america

Crawford &

Company has

appointed Eduardo

Kimsi as its CEO for

operations in Latin

America, effective

immediately. Since

2010 he has served

as Crawford’s

country manager for Mexico and Panama,

and he will be relocating to Miami from

Mexico City in his new role.

Kimsi has served in a variety of management

and executive roles in Mexico and London.

Kimsi began his loss adjusting career in 1995,

gaining significant expertise in property,

business interruption, liability, marine

surveying and transportation claims, among

others. He also has considerable experience

Property & Casualty leadership team, will

report to David Repinski, its chief executive

officer. Lafayette joined Crawford in 1974 as

a trainee and advanced to the position of

property general adjuster. He was promoted

to branch manager in New York in 1986 and

later became the first executive general

adjuster for Crawford in 1990. In 2012, he

was named to the newly created position of

chief technical officer for GTS.

Domingo Salerno named managing Director global technical Services – latin america & Caribbean

Domingo Salerno has

been appointed as

its Global Technical

Services (GTS®)

managing director

for Latin America

and the Caribbean.

In his new position,

Salerno will

have the responsibility for developing

and maintaining local, regional, and

international client relationships and

managing and supervising adjusting services

for large losses. His new role is part of

a regional investment plan by Crawford

to improve client liaisons and further

strengthen the team of GTS adjusters to

assure the delivery of high quality services

per GTS global standards. In 2011 Crawford

established GTS-services hubs in six Latin

America countries—Argentina, Brazil, Chile,

Mexico, Panama, and Peru—to serve the fast-

growing regional market.

Salerno joined Crawford in 2009 as an

executive general adjuster for GTS, a

position he has held until being promoted

to his current role. He will be based in

Crawford’s Latin American regional office in

9Volume 4, Issue 3

aBout CrawforD & Company

Based in Atlanta, Ga., Crawford & Company (www.crawfordandcompany.com) is the world’s largest independent provider of claims management solutions to the risk management and insurance industry as well as self-insured entities, with an expansive global network serving clients in more than 70 countries. The Crawford System of Claims Solutions® offers comprehensive, integrated claims services, business process outsourcing and consulting services for major product lines including property and casualty claims management, workers compensation claims and medical management, and legal settlement administration. The Company’s shares are traded on the NYSE under the symbols CRDA and CRDB..

with major losses and catastrophic

events, adjusting claims after a number of

hurricanes and other catastrophes.

Kimsi graduated from ISEC University in

Mexico City with a bachelor’s degree in

business administration.

gtS and Crawford represented at Zurich’s new pErC program workshop

GTS’ Dr. Andries Willemse and Benedict

Burke, senior vice president, global markets

at Crawford & Company, represented

the company at the “Post Event Review

Capability” (PERC) Workshop held early in

August 2013 in Washington, D.C., and hosted

by Zurich Insurance Group and the Global

Disaster Preparedness Center.

PERC is the Post Event Review Capability of

Zurich that investigates and determines the

causes of significant floods and extent of

related losses after an event. It is designed

to understand flood events and related

catastrophes or losses. The program is a new

initiative of Zurich and considered to be

unique in the insurance market. PERC is part

of the Zurich Flood Resilience Program that

seeks to build a solid foundation on flood

resilience and aims at positioning Zurich as

an emerging leader on flood resilience and

the go-to global insurer.

PERC’s post-event reviews can be offered to

public authorities and private companies

upon request to offer decision makers

an independent opinion. The program as

planned will not cover the entire world but

will be operative in selected areas around

the globe. It is designed to not compete with

tasks owned by authorities; flood claims

adjusters or river engineering companies.

Its activities are limited to gathering and

disseminating insight and knowledge related

to the flood hazard.

Crawford launches Specialty markets

Earlier this year, Crawford & Company

announced that it has created a new global

offering to better serve the unique needs

of clients requiring highly technical and

specialized claims handling.

Crawford Specialty Markets is comprised

of the following specialty services focused

on serving Lloyd’s of London and the

International Adjusting market: Energy,

Marine, Aviation, Forensic Accounting, and

Mining. Its establishment will bolster the large

and complex claim capabilities of Crawford

Global Technical Services® (GTS®), and offers

the market a single solution to meet the

claims needs of clients in these niche areas

and their insured irrespective of location.

“Specialty Markets was created for several

strategic reasons and most importantly to

better serve the needs of clients who require

highly technical claim handling including,

Lloyd’s, the London Market and other global

entities around the world,” said Crawford

President and CEO Jeffrey T. Bowman.

Specialty Markets is managed by Specialty

Markets CEO John Jenner in Europe, Middle

East, Africa and Asia Pacific (EMEA/AP), and in

the Americas by John Sharoun, CEO Specialty

Markets, Americas. Both will work closely

with Crawford Global Markets represented

by Clive Nicholls, SVP, Global Markets &

Client Services, EMEA. Specialty Markets will

operate within Crawford’s existing geographic

structure and leverages the strength of

Crawford’s expansive global footprint.

“We are seeing an increased need for

specialist opinions on large, complex

losses,” noted Dr. Andries Willemse, senior

vice president, Crawford Global Technical

Services®. “Specialty Markets will serve to

provide our clients assurance of GTS’ ability

to provide focused attention from highly

qualified specialist adjusters in specific

industry sectors.”

Supported by Crawford’s solid operational

infrastructure, high-caliber specialist

adjusters are able to deploy quickly

anywhere in the world when an event or

incident occurs to ensure the needs of our

clients and their insured are aligned.

Crawford has and will continue to recruit

many highly technical and experienced

loss professionals globally to bolster this

new offering, and in March, acquired the

majority share of UK-based Lloyd Warwick

International (LWI) to boost its onshore/

offshore energy loss adjusting capabilities.

“Crawford intends to aggressively grow its

market share in all of the specialty sectors,”

noted Bowman. “We are excited about

the future opportunities in this area and

are confident Crawford Specialty Markets

provides the market and our clients the

unique capabilities of highly qualified

and experienced loss professionals and

the confidence of trusting the work to be

handled by an established independent

global provider of claims solutions.” n

10 Tech Talk

high-SpEED rail – ConStruCtion anD rEpair ConSiDErationS

The ability to drive at this speed and the engineering

required to enable it resulted in trains now being built

from aluminium with a new design incorporating

a skeleton—the concept features two long girders

known as sole bars that form the structural

backbone of cars. The high-speed rail vehicles have

strict engineering and construction tolerances,

which require that the skeleton backbone and the

surrounding aluminium bodywork are secured in

their final position by molds and structure supports.

The aluminium structure also includes sandwich

techniques—layered construction—and ultimately

results in a lower car weight.

Compared to earlier power car and passenger car

designs the weight distribution has pushed designers

and engineers to spread out all equipment from the

power cars to the passenger cars. This means that

all four cars are now equipped with driving bogies

(a bogie is a structure underneath a railway vehicle

body to which axles and wheels are attached through

bearings). Over the years the conventional train

design consisted of power cars and passenger cars

in between, so that every train was considered to be

comprised of four units, i.e., two power cars on either

side and two passenger sections in between. Now a

high-speed train is considered to be a four-car unit, as

driving, energy and operational controls, etc., systems

are all spread over the different types of cars.

The original policy concept that partial damage

to a train could be considered separate from the

complete train set of power cars and carriages as a

whole is generally seen as no longer relevant in the

modern era. Because of the more complex assembly

and interdependability of components, train car

repairs have therefore turned into more elaborate

reconstruction projects, which require considerable

stripping and re-assembly for repairs.

This brings us to the restriction of repair facilities

and capacities. Owing to the specifications and the

licenses to operate these high-speed trains, the

repairs need to be finalized with vehicle test runs to

meet certification standards before the repaired car(s)

are allowed to be handed over to public transport

operations. Where a country has the ability to make

all repairs, but then does not have the license to

make test runs up to the required speed, the facility is

limited in support options. This limited repair capacity

is an issue when operators are licensed to operate on

tracks with strict service conditions for the public and

strict service obligations to the local government to

provide service capacity.

As high-speed rail continues to proliferate, especially

in Asia, opportunities for mishaps with trains,

infrastructure and facilities will also increase (such

as the collision in Wenzhou, China, in 2011) and

these situations require specialists to evaluate

their consequences. Dedicated rail adjusters keep

track of new technology, construction and repair

developments, and have the professional training

and experience to discuss cause, origin, and scope

of damage with the technical engineers and the

management of repair facilities and operations.

Mark Vos, head of Global

Technical Services CEMEA and

regional managing director, CEE

and Eurasia, is responsible for

Crawford’s GTS loss adjusting in

continental Europe, the Middle

East and Africa. He has more

than 35 years of experience as an

adjuster, operations manager and

executive and focuses on losses in

the agriculture, engineering, power and energy and technology

industries. Contact him at [email protected]. n

Shanghai Maglev Train

High-Speed RailCoNTINuED fRoM PAGE 6

11Volume 4, Issue 3

storm—which took a very rare left-hand turn in the

Atlantic before hitting the East Coast perpendicularly

(and spectacularly)—has an average probability of

happening only once every 714 years4.

The storm also progressively downgraded from

hurricane to tropical storm to post-tropical status, an

unusual degradation pattern5, but because it was so

unusually large tropical storm force winds covered an

area approximately 1,000 miles in diameter, including

most of the Eastern Seaboard6.

Sandy made landfall along the southern New

Jersey shore on Monday, October 29 at 8:00 p.m.

ET, approximately five miles southwest of Atlantic

City, New Jersey with sustained winds of 90 mph. A

number of factors contributed to the storm’s intense

destructive power. Sandy’s vast size, in combination

with its slow offshore movement, low pressure, and

its timing of landfall during a full moon7—one of

the highest tides of the month—that made tides 20

percent higher than normal8.

Superstorm Sandy was one of the largest, most

destructive natural events in recent U.S. history,

with a large part of damage due to flooding from its

catastrophic surge, which accounted for fully 65% of Sandy’s

total insured loss. Sandy caused water levels to rise along the

entire East Coast of the United States from Florida northward

to Maine9. Another key factor that contributed to the

storm’s massive damage was that the storm struck

directly at one of the most densely populated areas

of the country. By the time the storm dissipated over

western Pennsylvania on October 3110, there were at

least 147 direct deaths recorded across the Atlantic

basin due to Sandy, with 72 of these fatalities occurring

in eight mid-Atlantic and northeastern United States11.

At least 75 indirect deaths occurred either before,

during, or after the storm12.

While the most severe damage occurred in New York,

New Jersey, and Connecticut, overall Sandy affected

24 states, including the entire Eastern Seaboard from

Florida to Maine, and west across the Appalachian

Mountains into the Midwestern states of Michigan

and Wisconsin13. The storm generated heavy snows

across the central Appalachians,

Superstorm SandyCoNTINuED fRoM PAGE 3


12 Tech Talk

especially in West Virginia and the mountains of

western North Carolina. Due to the large amount

moisture brought by the storm and the timing of late

October, cumulative snowfall totals of up to 36 inches

along with strong winds produced blizzard conditions.

Closer to the East coast, parts of the Mid-Atlantic

region experienced more than a foot of rainfall,

resulting in river, stream, and creek flooding14.

Power outages (in many cases lasting multiple days)

were reported in 15 states, affecting more than 8.5

million customers15 and causing severe business

interruption and contingent business interruption

insurance losses16; some coastal areas of New Jersey

were without power for months after the storm17.

Hurricane Sandy is certain to rank as one of the

costliest natural catastrophes in U.S. history, with

current projected economic losses reaching $82 billion

in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut alone18. It will

take months to years for all insurance claims to be

settled, and a final, definitive financial loss amount

determined19.

CrawforD’S CapaBilitiES anD initial rESponSE

Sandy was a storm that would fully flex Crawford’s

extensive catastrophe services experience and

technology.

Crawford Catastrophe Services (CAT) has more

than 40 years of experience of handling major

catastrophic events such

as Superstorm Sandy.

Crawford’s current CAT

management team had

personally handled all of

the top ten insured loss-

producing U.S. hurricanes,

from Hurricane Gilbert in

2005 to Irene in 2011, but

Sandy was not like any

storm they had previously

encountered. Because

of its scope, Sandy also

required the services of

Crawford Global Technical

Services® (GTS®), which

focuses on large, complex

claims, and has the

largest, most experienced team of strategic loss

managers and technical adjusters in the world.

Crawford’s Marine and Transportation team of experts

was on call to assist with Sandy’s anticipated effects

on ports, marinas, intermodal facilities, and associated

vehicles and infrastructure. These team members are

highly qualified and experienced professionals from

all areas of the marine, transportation, and insurance

industries (including ex-seagoing senior officers with

Master Mariners or engineering qualifications and

general cargo experience, naval architects, industrial

“What do you think about Sandy?

Any worries?”Email from Kevin Frawley, chief executive officer,

Crawford Property & Casualty – Americas, as the storm was forming

“I haven’t been terribly impressed with

this one from the beginning. My sense

is that it’ll be minimal. If it moves

noticeably back to the west, it could

become something larger. Will know

more in 24 to 48.”Email response from Bud Trice, vice president,

Crawford Catastrophe Services

Crawford Command Center


13Volume 4, Issue 3

engineers and maritime insurance specialists in

ocean and inland transit cargoes, and specialists in

subrogation and recovery), who can quickly deploy to

the site of the incident.

In addition to commercial and residential property,

marine and transportation concerns, Crawford

also had to be prepared for another usual victim of

hurricanes—automobiles. From flooding to impacts

from downed trees and tree limbs to road craters,

storms can wreak enormous damage on cars,

trucks, buses and other motor vehicles. Crawford

offers a comprehensive suite of services which can

accommodate motor vehicle claims management

needs ranging from private automobiles to tanker

trucks or other specialty equipment. Where applicable,

heavy equipment appraisal—as well as automobile

and heavy equipment managed repair programs— is

also offered. Its network of trained and credentialed

adjusters utilizes the latest technology to deliver

comprehensive, accurate appraisals promptly.

Crawford also had a unique capability ready to

address the results of the storm for commercial

and residential property, Contractor ConnectionSM,

the largest, fully independent network of managed

contractor repair for insurance companies and

consumers. Contractor Connection is the only national

network of managed contractors vetted and overseen

by a robust quality control tracking system measuring

time, costs, and customer satisfaction. Its approved

contractors specialize in emergency response, general

repairs, disaster restoration, and all manner of

general residential and commercial restoration work.

Claim representatives screen assignments and refer

homeowners who are interested in using an approved

network contractor who will provide high quality

service backed by a two-year workmanship warranty.

Contractor Connection’s

contractor credentialing

requirements are the

strictest in the industry,

as all network members

must undergo rigorous

credentialing process

prior to acceptance

into the network and

are recertified on an

annual basis. As Sandy

developed, management at Contractor Connection

also began following the storm.

Formal tracking of Sandy began on Monday, October

22. As the storm originated and began evolving,

Crawford’s Catastrophe (CAT) management team began

monitoring real-time feeds of all relevant news and

weather data and maintained constant contact with

the field force via the Command Center. Located in

Crawford’s world headquarters, the Command Center

houses an experienced team of business analysts who

constantly monitor key performance indicators of all

open U.S. claims using proprietary software and the

latest technology for recording, analyzing, and securely

transmitting data. During Sandy the Command

Center’s capabilities were expanded to include

performance dashboards, providing consolidated

visualization of claims data. Dashboard data displayed

included claims volume broken down by delivering

unit, e.g., GTS® or CAT, staffing, call center volume,

daily received claims, daily closed claims, performance

metrics, unit workloads, resource allocation, mapping,

and other key performance information. The Command

Center also was able to provide special data requests

such client-specific reports and

historical comparisons.

Date # of Flight Cancellations

October 28 1,501

October 29 7,977

October 30 7,074

October 31 2,989

November 1 873

November 2 78

Total 20,492

Flight cancellations (Source: FlightAware)


14 Tech Talk

Crawford GTS® has redesigned

its website (http://www.

crawfordgts.com/), enhancing its

accessibility and usability on

mobile devices. Now you can

access the completely revised

GTS website from all common

browsers and on most modern

mobile devices including iPads®

and iPhones®. The Crawford

GTS mobile website won a 2013

MobileWebAward from the Web

Marketing Association.

The enhanced user experience

provides more visuals,

easier navigation, and

robust search and mapping

tools. Through the use of

responsive design, this site

automatically optimizes

the layout and design to fit

any screen from desktop to

tablet to mobile phone. This

new mobile-friendly website

replaces the previous GTS

mobile application, providing

greater functionally without

the need to download an

application. The new mobile

website provides all the same

great search functions of the

previous mobile application,

plus it is:

� Instantly available

from your browser -

no download

required

� Compatible on most

mobile devices

� Can be upgraded

instantly

� Is easier to find and

share with other

users

The Crawford GTS Website Offers Enhanced Usability and Access for Office and Mobile Users

Find a technical adjuster for any region of the world

See what’s news with GTS® and its professionals

Research our regional capabilities

Review Tech Talk, our magazine on global technical adjusting

Learn about specialized GTS industry services

15Volume 4, Issue 3

Pro-ActSM, the company’s proprietary response task

force of multidisciplinary professionals empowered

to leverage all of Crawford’s corporate resources,

began meeting to evaluate and plan a detailed

response on October 25. Crawford’s ClaimsAlert®, a

centralized claim intake call center that receives and

processes claims, 24 hours a day, seven days a week,

began preparing for a significant increase in claim

assignments, while ClaimsAlert® in Canada prepared

to handle overflow calls from the U.S.

CAT Connection also came into play during this key

preparation phase. CAT Connection is Crawford’s

proprietary event resource management system

available to all of the company’s adjusters. The

self-service system links Crawford U.S. employees

into a real-time virtual workforce that integrates

directly to the Crawford Management System and

helps expedite claims set-up. CAT Connection also

connects to the company’s Human Resource system,

allowing for faster activation and deployment of

adjusters. Additionally, the system allows adjusters

to accept specific event-related requests for standby

and deployment. CAT Connection allows Catastrophe

adjusters all over the country to maintain contact

even in difficult circumstances.

ClaimsAlert was just one part of an end-to-end

claims reporting process that Crawford would use

for Sandy. An important part of that process for at

least one insurer was integrated claims intake. Using

Crawford’s systems in conjunction with IVANS (the

largest insurance data exchange in the U.S.), integrated

claims intake provides a fast, seamless, and accurate

method of processing claims from events such as

Sandy in a direct route from adjuster to Crawford to

IVANS to insurers. For one major insurer, three months

before Sandy hit, Crawford had built a process where

all the insured’s policy-level detail was contained

within a database accessible by Crawford’s call center

operators in Atlanta and Waterloo, Ontario. For Sandy

the operators were be able to respond to insured’s

calls quickly, and since the system was connected to

Crawford’s claim system it allowed field adjusters to

rapidly respond. With the system, Crawford was able

to intake a large number of claims automatically for

the insurer, resulting in reduced costs, streamlined

operations, and increased responsiveness.

Staging anD DEploymEnt

The Crawford Induction Team that would assist in

bringing adjusters on board, prepping them, and

assigning them to the field, deployed to Richmond,

Virginia, as the storm was moving in to the East

Coast. Richmond was a modestly sized, relatively

central location for coordination and personnel

disbursement that lacked the density of a larger

city such as New York, which could become a

severe logistical problem if its infrastructure was

affected by the storm. Once it was set up, the

Induction Team began in-processing of employees,

including temporary license processing for 16 states,

immigration paperwork for Canadian adjusters,

cost database updates, client-specific briefings, and

field deployment to the work zone. The broad effort

involved many more people than just Catastrophe

Services, as Crawford’s Information Communications

Technology, Human Resources, Compliance, Finance,

Regional and headquarters support people all began

putting in extra time and effort to

Crawford Command Center Dashboard



16 Tech Talk

meet the huge service

demands created by

Sandy.

CrawforD’S Effort anD aDjuStEr ChallEngES

Superstorm Sandy was

an unprecedented event

in terms of scope and

Crawford’s efforts; the

response to Sandy was the

largest in the company’s

more than 70-year history.

Initially the biggest

challenge for adjusters

was travel delays due to

cancelled flights, major

gasoline shortage and

massive infrastructure

damage such as downed power lines, washed out roads

and bridges, nonfunctioning traffic lights and entire

blocks of neighborhoods reduced to rubble. Nearly

20,000 flights were cancelled, with Newark, JFK, and La

Guardia airports all closed for at least three days.

Once on the ground, adjusters dealt with the lack of

gasoline and lodging, and restrictions on access—for

some neighborhoods only residents were allowed

access due to fears of looting and vandalism.

As the storm came in towards the United States and

prepared to make landfall on October 29, Crawford

increased field staff deployments in affected areas

ranging from Virginia to Massachusetts and the inland

states of Ohio and West Virginia. It began using the

Allentown, Pennsylvania office as a control point for

redeployment of adjusters to the high volume claims

areas of heavily populated New York and New Jersey.

While adjusters were fanning out, Sandy-

related claims began coming in, and the types of

claims included cars and other vehicles, marine,

transportation such as rail lines, property damage to

schools, businesses, amusement arcades, boardwalks,

retail stores, healthcare facilities, standalone homes

and high-value brownstone homes.

Crawford’s clients were able to monitor the

adjusting progress and access claim reports from

ClaimsAlert® on demand via XactAnalysis®, a

claims analysis and reporting tool for the property

insurance industry. As claims flow through

Crawford’s network, the software constantly

monitors the data to help adjusters, insurers, and

repair contractors catch errors, report on progress,

and benchmark performance.

As adjusters were deployed and claims began to come

in at ever accelerating rates it was clear that Sandy

would be a long-term event with record levels of claim

activity. Claims Crawford saw ranged from a damaged

door on a house to flooding of the Statue of Liberty

near New York City, and in dollar amounts from a few

hundred dollars to millions of dollars.

Claiming a rECorD

Crawford’s connected technology systems and

processes—including ClaimsAlert®, CAT Connection,

and integrated claims intake —helped speed claims

intake, evaluation and settlement, but some claims

would not be settled until well into 2013 or possibly

Number of U.S. states where claims were handled

16

Number of countries for claims 3 (United States, Jamaica, Bahamas)

Number of adjusters deployed 562

Number of calls received 44,085

Crawford Claims Numbers

Area/Type of Claims Number of Claims

Caribbean 626

GTS® 1,473

Vehicles 5,657

Contractor ConnectionSM Direct Repair

10,927

Catastrophe Field Operations 30,061

Total: 48,744

11,050 estimates returned in first 20 days

Crawford Claims volume


even much later. Just as Crawford had a record

number of adjusters deployed, it also handled a record

number of claims resulting from a single event, as the

claims table shows.

Additionally, other important Sandy claims-related

adjusting points were:

� Crawford handled approximately 4% of the

more than 1.5 million claims from the

storm.

� According to industry estimates, total

amount of insured losses overall for the

storm were $18.75 billion.

� Leading states for number of claims and

amount of losses were New York, New

Jersey, Pennsylvania, and then the rest of the

states directly affected by the storm.

While settling some complex claims may take years,

many claims were settled in six months or less.

In April 2013 the Insurance Information Institute

stated that insurance regulators in New Jersey and

New York—the two Northeast states with the most

damage by Sandy—reported that insurers had

settled 93 percent of the Superstorm Sandy claims

they received. The Institute went on to say that

the estimates of claims payments do not include

claims for flood damage insured under the federal

government’s National Flood Insurance Program

(NFIP) 20. One issue with a number of claims was the

problem of flood insurance.

thE proBlEm with flooD ClaimS

Most residential flood insurance is provided through

the U.S. government managed National Flood Insurance

Program. The NFIP was created in 1968 due to a

widespread belief that flood hazard was uninsurable

just through private insurance companies. The NFIP

is based in the Federal Emergency Management

Agency (FEMA), and makes flood insurance available

to voluntarily participating communities. When

communities join the program they agree to adopt

baseline floodplain management regulations, and with

this adoption the community residents become eligible

to purchase a flood insurance policy21.

According to a study conducted shortly after the

storm “This analysis shows that many homes and

business owners who sustained flood damage from

Sandy did not have a flood insurance policy22.” While

claims were settled, the lack of flood insurance

did mean that some losses were not completely

covered by policies in force at the time of the storm.

This situation pointed out the need for additional

communities and individuals to consider obtaining

flood coverage.

rEgulatory, lEgiSlativE anD inDuStry ChangES aftEr SanDy

A momentous event such as Superstorm Sandy

creates wide-ranging repercussions for both state

governments and private industries, including the

insurance industry. In the wake of Sandy both states

and the federal government took steps to manage the

storm’s effects, while the insurance industry began

taking stock of how it might change its approach to

catastrophic claims.

rEgulatory ChangES

Due to its size and destructive impact in the Northeast,

Sandy generated innovative regulatory responses from

several states in that region, responses that had a

significant effect on the insurance industry post-storm.

On November 29, 2012, New York Governor Andrew

Cuomo instituted emergency regulations on insurers

to accelerate claims processing from hundreds

of thousands of New York state residents whose

residential or commercial properties were damaged

or destroyed by Superstorm Sandy. One regulation

Cuomo announced was a requirement reducing the

time limit for insurance company claims adjusters to

respond to a claim to six days from 15 days. Governor

Cuomo also said that New York’s insurance regulator

would post to the agency’s website report cards on

insurers’ performance to make the companies more

accountable for their response to customers needing

storm-related assistance23.

Governor Cuomo also announced soon after Sandy

struck that New York homeowners would not have to

pay hurricane deductibles on insurance claims from

damage caused by the superstorm since the storm was

not a hurricane, and the New York State Department

of Financial Services informed the insurance industry

that hurricane deductibles should not be triggered for

Sandy24. Later, in early 2013, New Jersey Governor Chris

Christie and Governor Cuomo announced plans to offer

a mediation program option to Sandy victims who are

in claims disputes with their insurers25.

For the federal government, a major reaction was

an attempt to increase the borrowing rate—to

allow for funding to pay claims—from the National

Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The funding was

requested by the Obama administration and could

only be approved by Congressional legislation, but

so far Congress has waited to see the outcome of

legislation passed earlier in 201226. The funding

increase was necessary as the NFIP incurred $18

billion of debt after Hurricane Katrina, and had

remained in debt since that storm27. Only months

before the storm, in summer 2012,

Volume 4, Issue 3 17


Congress passed and the President signed the Biggert-

Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012; the most

important provisions of the legislation were designed

to put the NFIP on a more solid fiscal foundation

and build a catastrophic reserve fund to provide for

unusually high claims28.

inSuranCE inDuStry ChangES

Sandy also resulted in the insurance industry

considering what changes it might make in

anticipation of future storms in order to more

carefully manage exposure. While insurers’ policies

and procedures have evolved over decades to manage

assumptions covering almost every conceivable

disaster; Sandy’s unique aspects—its unprecedented

size, striking directly at the densely populated

Northeast, and the massive storm surge—meant that

they needed to re-evaluate their operations.

According to the analysis State of the Market NAPCO

Property Catastrophe Insurance Insights Spring 201329;

“While Sandy’s impact on insurance pricing has been

limited; the storm has forced insurers to reconsider

their catastrophe exposures in the Northeast as they

try to determine the new norm…Insurers are now

considering how to manage exposures in the Northeast.

Accounts located in the mid-Atlantic and Northeast

may see more restrictive policy terms and conditions in

coming months. Insureds with no adverse loss history

are likely to see a stable market that may become

increasingly competitive on price. Businesses that have

experienced significant losses may see some additional

price increases and may have increased difficulty in

obtaining coverage for flood or windstorms.”

Sandy’s scope affected insurers across a very wide

range of industries. Trade Only Today, a website for

marine industry professionals, stressed that

“Hurricane Sandy will change the way marinas are

insured… It won’t just be marina owners who see

rising rates. The huge marine loss inflicted by Sandy

will be felt by marine businesses and boat owners

across the nation30.”

During panel discussions at a major insurance

industry event—the 2013 Property/Casualty Joint

Industry Forum in New York in January 2013—CEOs

from major insurers and other insurance experts

summarized what could the eventual results of the

storm for the industry. According to the panelists,

the industry consequences of Sandy could include

“Adjustments to pricing, policy limits and deductibles

for damage caused by named storms are likely to

occur… Additionally, greater attention should be

paid to the concentration and interconnectivity

of catastrophe risk in densely populated areas,

risk management and insurance education for

policyholders and the implementation of risk

mitigation measures in order to stem the rising tide of

catastrophe losses in the U.S. and worldwide.31”


Looking north toward Jacob Riis Houses from FDR Drive, in Manhattan’s Lower East Side, showing flood damage from Superstorm Sandy.

Source: Beth Carey, via Wikimedia Commons.

Tech Talk18

19Volume 4, Issue 3

thE prESEnt anD futurE of StormS – thE 2013 hurriCanE SEaSon

As mentioned earlier, in a recent study by Timothy

Hall of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies

and Adam Sobel of the Department of Applied

Physics and Applied Mathematics at Columbia

University, they predicted that a hurricane of Sandy’s

intensity or greater making New Jersey landfall at a

angle similar to Sandy’s would not occur again for

more than 700 years32.

Given the prediction by Hall and Sobel it is important to

consider that the statistical projections of time intervals

between storms of Sandy’s magnitude should be viewed

with some additional context. The misconception

among the general public is often that hundreds of

years must pass before a similar storm is generated. In

fact, these researchers are saying that there is a one in

seven hundred chance of recurrence, and the reality is

that a storm such as Sandy can occur at any time—it

could develop this year, next year, or any year. Sandy

was an anomaly, and the nature of an anomaly is that it

is not subject to a precise schedule or prediction.

However, given anticipated climate changes that

would include overall global warming, the frequency

and severity of storms may be altering significantly,

both currently and in the future. The 2013 Atlantic

Hurricane season started June 1 (and concludes at the

end of November), and it’s of special interest given

the widespread damage in caused by Sandy. Several

predictions for this year’s hurricane season have been

issued by various weather forecasters both within

and outside of the United States. Two well-known

predictors of hurricanes, Philip J. Klotzbach and

William M. Gray of the Department of Atmospheric

Science at Colorado State University in Fort Collins,

CO, issued their initial predictions in April 2013, with

planned updates as the season progressed.

According to Klotzbach and Gray, “We anticipate

that the 2013 Atlantic basin hurricane season will

have enhanced activity compared with the 1981-

2010 climatology…We anticipate an above-average

probability for major hurricanes making landfall along

the United States coastline and in the Caribbean33.”

Considering the massive amount of damage that Sandy

did last year that prediction is problematic. But was not

the only prediction that came out in the spring of 2013;

throughout May 2013 there was a consensus that 2013

was going to have a lot of hurricanes34

However, as the 2013 hurricane season developed

through the summer it was clear that it would have a

late start. In fact 2013 was almost—missing the record by

just a few hours—the latest start to a hurricane season

ever, with Hurricane Umberto achieving Category 1

hurricane ranking on September 11, 201335. The late start

to the 2013 hurricane caused a number of predictions to

be revised, with some analysts reconsidering the activity

level for the year and lowering expectations36. According

to Alex Sosnowski, expert senior meteorologist with

AccuWeather.com, “With only two hurricanes so far, the

2013 Atlantic hurricane season is well behind the curve

to reach the average number of hurricanes and is one of

the least intense since 195037.”

thE futurE of hurriCanES

A recent study published in the Proceedings of the

National Academy of Sciences highlights the potential

for a very significant increase in Atlantic hurricane

surges due to rising temperatures. The authors

analyzed a variety of predictors, including storm

surge statistics from tide gauges to changes in global

temperature patterns, concluding that:

“The most extreme events are especially sensitive to

temperature changes, and we estimate a doubling of

Katrina magnitude events associated with the warming

over the 20th century… Statistically downscaling

21st century warming patterns from six climate

models results in a twofold to sevenfold increase in the

frequency of Katrina magnitude events for a 1°C rise in

global temperature38.”

In 2005, Hurricane Katrina was one of our country’s

deadliest and most destructive Atlantic hurricanes,

responsible for more than 1,800 deaths and total insured

property damage estimated at $81 billion. Superstorm

Sandy was a larger storm but not as destructive.

how CitiES Can managE for futurE DiSaStErS

The economic stakes of readiness for future

catastrophes such as Superstorm Sandy continue

to get higher. According to The

Source: AccuWeather.com, October 3, 2013


20 Tech Talk

Coastline at Risk: 2013 Update to the Estimated Insured

Value of U.S. Coastal Properties, since 2008 the insured

value of properties in coastal areas of the United

States increased at a compound annual growth rate

of a bit less than 4%. The reports believes that as the

economy recovers, the rate of growth will pick up,

and at a historical rate of 7%, the total values insured

would double every 10 years. The report specified the

huge value of land along the coast, stating that the

insured value of U.S. residential and commercial

properties in coastal counties now exceeds $10

trillion, and while New York edges Florida as the state

with the highest coastal property values, at close to $3

trillion, Florida has the largest proportion of its value

in coastal counties at almost 80%39.

A panel of experts gathered at the New York Academy

of Sciences on January 24, 2013, to discuss how cities

and smaller population areas can better prepare

for these disasters. A www.livescience.com article

summarizes the experts’ list of 10 lessons from

Sandy that cities should note in preparing for future

disasters, particularly those cities along coastlines:

1. Know that sea level rise is the major

problem. The sea level in the New York

City area has risen approximately a foot

over the last century, and Sandy brought a

record storm surge to the southern tip of

Manhattan, and that surge received a boost

from the increase in sea levels.

2. Know that storm barriers cannot solve

everything. The devastation caused by

Sandy’s storm surge prompted discussion

of installing a barrier system in the waters

surrounding New York. But a barrier system,

which uses a gate to let ships, fish and

water in and out, wouldn’t address the

real problem—sea-level rise. A short-term

cost-benefit analysis does favor a storm

barrier system, because the city could avoid

improving its infrastructure. But a barrier

would not provide a long-term solution,

which would be costly.

3. Discuss retreat upfront and clearly. People

can adapt to the increasing threat of storms

in different ways, including moving when

risks become too high, a strategy called

managed retreat.

4. Consider ways to make retreat possible

if not desirable. Cities and communities

in the United States must implement new

ways manage populations that would

be naturally resistant to relocating. For

example, a legal tool called land re-

adjustment has shown success in the

Netherlands, where much of the country

is below sea level. When a community is

threatened rising water, its land is re-

allocated elsewhere and property lines

redrawn. Tools used by the non-profit

Nature Conservancy to protect land may

also be effective, for instance, conservation

easements limit how land can be used,

particularly by prohibiting development.

5. Re-envision the city’s development. With

planning, commitment, and effort, a New

York City better adapted to the threat of

hurricanes and storms could be created.

It would take enormous resources and

overcoming individual’s entrenched

preferences for where and how they want

to live. The new vision—and version—of

the city would have a smaller footprint

and probably be less dense. It could have

more parks on the waterfront as buffers

and other infrastructural changes such

as modifying the electrical grid, emptying

out the lower basements of skyscrapers

and using them for parking, and halting

vulnerable development such as housing

along the waterfront.

6. Think how nature can help. As a result of

development over the centuries, New York

City, New Jersey and surrounding areas

have lost wetlands and oyster reefs, natural

features that once protected the coast

from storms. Restoring these


Above: MTA employees using a pump train are working around the clock to pump seawater out of the L train’s tunnel under the East River. The tunnel was flooded during the unprecedented 13-foot storm surge of Hurricane Sandy.

Source: Metropolitan Transportation Authority/Patrick Cashin, via Wikimedia Commons.

Right: Pickup truck damaged when a tree fell on it during Hurricane Sandy in an auto-parts store parking lot along NY 208 in the town of Montgomery, NY, USA.

Source: Daniel Case, via Wikimedia Commons.


21Volume 4, Issue 3

22 Tech Talk

features could help make the coast more

resilient, by reducing wave velocity, storm

surge height and erosion. Wetlands and

oyster reefs also provide other benefits, such

as the removal of contaminants from the

water as they act as massive organic filters.

7. Reconsider costs and longer-term needs.

According to the panel, on average, every $1

spent to make infrastructure more resilient

against pounding storms saves $4 in costs

later on, but still many communities will

not commit the funds needed to protect

their future.

8. Don’t just focus on the most recent event.

After a disaster like Sandy, the natural

tendency is to discuss how to protect our

shoreline but other disasters have to be

planned for as well. Heat waves and disease

are also major threats associated with

climate change.

9. Expect surprises. By allowing greenhouse

gas emissions to accumulate in the

atmosphere, humans are conducting a giant

experiment with the planet, but there will

be surprises and situations that cities have

to adapt to that cannot be predicted.

10. Disasters may bring equity issues

among economic classes. Poor and rich

neighborhoods can be exposed to risks

associated with extreme events and climate

change because of their location. As a

result, it is important to avoid pitting these

interests against one another in battles for

resources needed to adapt, since poorer

neighborhoods have less political influence40.

In June 2013, New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg

outlined a storm protection plan for the city of New

York that incorporated a number of the actions similar

to those put forward by the New York Academy of

Sciences panel in January, including installing storm

barriers and fortifying the power grid41.

CrawforD iS rEaDy

Crawford is able to respond quickly to natural and

man-made disasters both in the U.S. and around the

world. We have deeply experienced professionals,

effective procedures and processes, proprietary and

seamless policyholder to service center to client

technology backed by the full resources and support

of the world’s largest independent provider of claims

management solutions—a billion-dollar company

with operations in more than 70 countries.

While Sandy was an exceedingly rare event that

tested Crawford & Company’s capabilities, Crawford

was able to fully meet the needs of both the insured

and insurers, scaling its considerable resources to

adapt to the significant claims volume coming out of

this major storm. n

EnDnotES1 Modeling Sandy: A High-Resolution Approach To Storm Surge, ©2013 Risk Management Solutions, Inc., February 2013 from https://support.rms.com/publications/rms-modeling-sandy-storm-sturge.pdf

2 “18th Tropical Storm of the Season Forms,” OurAmazingPlanet Staff, livescience.com, October 22, 2012, 05:26 p.m. ET from http://www.livescience.com/24185-tropical-storm-sandy-forms.html

3 Service Assessment, Hurricane/Post-Tropical Cyclone Sandy October 22–29, 2012, U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, May 2013, from http://www.nws.noaa.gov/os/assessments/pdfs/Sandy13.pdf

4 On the Impact Angle of Hurricane Sandy’s New Jersey Landfall, Timothy M. Hall and Adam H. Sobel, Columbia University, May 2013 from http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/~sobel/Papers/Hall_Sobel_GRL_resubmitted_revised.pdf



7 Modeling Sandy: A High-Resolution Approach To Storm Surge, ©2013 Risk Management Solutions, Inc., February 2013 from https://support.rms.com/publications/rms-modeling-sandy-storm-sturge.pdf

8 “‘Frankenstorm’ Full Moon: Hurricane Sandy’s Impact Amplified by Lunar Event,” Tariq Malik, SPACE.com, October 29, 2012 10:38 a.m. ET from http://www.livescience.com/24366-hurricane-sandy-full-moon-frankenstorm-surge.html



11 Tropical Cyclone Report Hurricane Sandy, National Hurricane Center, February 12, 2013 from http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/tcr/AL182012_Sandy.pdf




15 Hurricane Sandy-Nor’easter Situation Report #2, U.S. Department of Energy, November 8, 2012 (10:00 AM EST) from https://www.oe.netl.doe.gov/docs/SitRep2_Sandy-Nor’easter_11082012_1000AM.pdf

16 Modeling Sandy: A High-Resolution Approach To Storm Surge, ©2013 Risk Management Solutions, Inc., February 2013 from


23Volume 4, Issue 3

https://support.rms.com/publications/rms-modeling-sandy-storm-sturge.pdf


18 “HUD to Hold Competition to Help Sandy-Ravaged Communities,” Kia Gregory, The New York Times, June 20, 2013 from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/21/nyregion/hud-to-hold-competition-to-help-sandy-ravaged-communities.html


20 “Over 90 Percent of the New Jersey and New York Sandy Insurance Claims Have Been Settled; Likely to Be Third Largest Storm Ever for U.S. Insurers,” Insurance Information Institute, April 19, 2013 from http://www.iii.org/press_releases/over-90-percent-of-the-new-jersey-and-new-york-sandy-insurance-claims-have-been-settled-likely-to-be-third-largest-hurricane-ever-for-us-insurers.html

21 Hurricane Sandy, Storm Surge and the National Flood Insurance Program - A Primer on New York and New Jersey, Carolyn Kousky and Erwann Michel-Kerjan, Resources for the Future, November 2012 from http://www.rff.org/RFF/Documents/RFF-IB-12-08.pdf

22 Hurricane Sandy, Storm Surge and the National Flood Insurance Program - A Primer on New York and New Jersey, Carolyn Kousky and Erwann Michel-Kerjan, Resources for the Future, November 2012 from http://www.rff.org/RFF/Documents/RFF-IB-12-08.pdf

23 “New York governor orders insurers to speed up Sandy claims,” Ben Berkowitz and Hilary Russ, Reuters, Thursday, November 29, 2012 6:53 p.m. EST from http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/29/us-storm-sandy-ny-insurance-idUSBRE8AS15920121129

24 “Governor Cuomo Announces Homeowners Will Not Have To Pay Hurricane Deductibles,” New York State Department of Financial Services, press release, November 1, 2012 from http://www.dfs.ny.gov/about/press/pr1211011.htm

25 “N.J., N.Y. to Offer Mediation Program for Sandy Claims Disputes,” Insurance Journal, February 26, 2013 from http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/east/2013/02/26/282732.htm

26 “President to Ask for NFIP Borrowing Increase,” Arthur D. Postal, Propertcasualty360.com, November 16, 2012 from https://www.propertycasualty360.com/2012/11/16/president-to-ask-for-nfip-borrowing-increase

27 “Flood Insurance, Already Fragile, Faces New Stress,” Eric Lipton, Felicity Barringer and Mary Williams Walsh, The New York Times, November 12, 2012 from, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/13/nyregion/federal-flood-insurance-program-faces-new-stress.html?pagewanted=all

28 “Congress Moves NFIP Toward Fiscal Soundness,” DMS Disaster Consultants, July 31, 2013 from http://dmsrecovery.com/congress-moves-nfip-fiscal-soundness/

29 State of the Market NAPCO Property Catastrophe Insurance Insights Spring 2013, NAPCO, April 2013 from http://

www.napcollc.com/articles/NAPCOInsuranceInsights-TheStateOfTheMarket-2013-April.pdf

30 “Marine insurance rates expected to rise after Sandy,” Tradeonlytoday.com, December 5, 2012 from http://www.tradeonlytoday.com/home/523006-marine-insurance-rates-expected-to-rise-after-sandy

31 “Sandy proved that long-term changes are needed to survive future catastrophes,” Matt Dunning, Business Insurance, January 27, 2013 - 6:00 a.m. from https://www.businessinsurance.com/article/20130127/NEWS06/301279977

32 On the Impact Angle of Hurricane Sandy’s New Jersey Landfall, Timothy M. Hall and Adam H. Sobel, Columbia University, May 2013 from http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/~sobel/Papers/Hall_Sobel_GRL_resubmitted_revised.pdf

33 Extended Range Forecast of Atlantic Seasonal Hurricane Activity and Landfall Strike Probability for 2013, Philip J. Klotzbach and William M. Gray, Colorado State University, April 10, 2013 from https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://tropical.atmos.colostate.edu/forecasts/2013/apr2013/apr2013.pdf

34 “AccuWeather joins bad hurricane season bandwagon,” Caribbean 360.com , May 17, 2013 from http://www.caribbean360.com/index.php/news/barbados_news/712717.html#axzz2TZjtyfex

35 “Humberto Weakens after Becoming Atlantic’s First Hurricane,” Alex Sosnowski, AccuWeather.com, September 11, 2013; 5:55 a.m. from http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/humberto-may-defend-hurricane-record/17586208

36 “The 2013 Atlantic Hurricane Season: Act II,” Gene Lockard, Rigzone.com, August 27, 2013 from http://www.rigzone.com/news/oil_gas/a/128692/The_2013_Atlantic_Hurricane_Season_Act_II/?pgNum=1

37“2013 Hurricane Season Ranks as One of the Least Intense,” AccuWeather.com, Alex Sosnowski, October 3, 2013 from http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/2013-hurricane-season-ranks-nearly-least-intense/18392996

38 Projected Atlantic hurricane surge threat from rising temperatures, Aslak Grinsteda, John C. Moorea and Svetlana Jevrejevaa, Proceedings from the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, February 11, 2013 from http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/03/14/1209980110

39 The Coastline at Risk: 2013 Update to the Estimated Insured Value of U.S. Coastal Properties, firm AIR Worldwide Corporation, June 3, 2013 from https://www.air-worldwide.com/publications/white-papers/documents/the-coastline-at-risk-2013/

40 “Future Disasters: 10 Lessons from Superstorm Sandy,” Wynne Parry, Livescience.com, January 28, 2013, 12:53 p.m. ET from http://www.livescience.com/26640-future-disasters-lessons-superstorm-sandy.html

41 “Bloomberg Outlines $20 Billion Storm Protection Plan,” Kia Gregory and Marc Santora, The New York Times, June 11, 2013 from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/12/nyregion/bloomberg-outlines-20-billion-plan-to-protect-city-from-future-storms.html

Superstorm SandyCoNTINuED fRoM PREvIouS PAGE

I am also pleased to announce that the Crawford GTS mobile website has won a national 2013 MobileWebAward

from the Web Marketing Association. The Association’s annual Mobile WebAwards Competition honors excellence

in mobile Websites and apps, recognizes the individuals and organizations responsible, and showcases the best in

award-winning mobile development.

We hope you find this issue of Tech Talk informative and interesting, and I invite you to learn more about our

activities and capabilities at our updated website, www.crawfordgts.com.

Please feel free to contact me directly regarding any GTS-related issue at [email protected]. n

Welcome to the Latest Issue of Tech TalkCoNTINuED fRoM PAGE 2

Delivering worldwide expertise in the management of large and complex losses.

For major insurance claim events, the risk and insurance community needs a team of experts with the experience and industry focus to evaluate and assess damages under extreme conditions.

Crawford Global Technical Services® (GTS®) has the largest, most experienced team of strategic loss managers and technical adjusters in the world.

For more information on Global Technical Services please visit us at www.crawfordgts.com.

Innovation. Excellence. Expertise. Quality. Teamwork. Service.