Order Code RL32739
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Tsunamis: Monitoring, Detection,
and Early Warning Systems
Updated June 1, 2005
Wayne A. Morrissey
Science and Technology Information Analyst
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

Tsunamis: Monitoring, Detection,
and Early Warning Systems
Summary
Some in Congress are concerned about the possible vulnerability of U.S. coastal
areas to tsunamis, and about the adequacy of early warning for coastal areas of the
western Atlantic Ocean. This stems from the December 26, 2004, tsunami that
devastated many coastal areas around the northern Indian Ocean, where few tsunami
early warning systems currently operate. The tsunami was caused by a strong
underwater earthquake off the coast of Sumatra, Indonesia. The earthquake and
tsunami together are estimated to have claimed as many as 300,000 lives. Affected
nations, assisted by others, are pursuing multilateral efforts through the UNESCO
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) to develop a regional tsunami
detection and warning network that would guard coastal populations around the
Indian Ocean. Those efforts would coincide with the United States’ goal of
upgrading and expanding its tsunami detection and early warning network.
Some developed countries bounding the Indian Ocean region already have
operating tsunami warnings systems. However, in other areas of these countries and
in neighboring countries, an emergency management infrastructure to receive
tsunami warnings is lacking. This leaves local officials incapable of rapidly alerting
the public to evacuate or to take other safety precautions. Disaster management
experts assert that an emergency management infrastructure includes not just issuing
tsunami warnings, but also educating indigenous people and visitors about the
potential dangers in the area; clearly communicating evacuation options; adapting to
potential risks by constructing public shelters; conducting periodic evacuation drills;
and producing tsunami inundation maps for guiding future land-use planning.
The Bush Administration’s plan for upgrading the U.S. tsunami early warning
network proposed $37.5 million through 2007 to expand from six existing deepwater
tsunami detection buoys to a total of 32 for the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, Gulf of
Mexico, and Caribbean Sea by 2008. The National Weather Service, which operates
the program, estimated initial procurement costs to be around $24 million, excluding
out-year funding for operations and maintenance. P.L. 109-13, the Emergency
Supplemental Appropriations Act of FY2005, has provided for procuring, deploying,
and maintaining a comprehensive U.S. tsunami early warning network. In the 109th
Congress, other legislation would support long-term operations and maintenance and
add public education and adaptation. Administration officials and some in Congress
consider an upgraded U.S. system the first step toward building a global capability.
Although the United States’ costs alone could run into millions of dollars for
instrumentation and maintenance, some suggest the benefits would far outweigh the
costs. Others have questioned whether the risks of tsunamis outside the Pacific Basin
justify the investment. To share costs, international science agencies have suggested
that global or regional warning networks could be built upon ocean data collection
systems, marine data buoys, tide gauge networks, regional coastal and ocean
observation networks, and global telecommunications systems. A global warning
network would be most useful in countries that also have expansive national
emergency management capability. This report is updated as warranted.

---

Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Proposals for International Tsunami Early Warning Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Bush Administration Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
P.L. 109-13, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for FY2005 . . . 5
Local Warnings and Emergency Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
A Global Tsunami Warning Network? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Congressional Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
U.S. Tsunami Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Tsunami Warnings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
U.S. Operations and Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Funding for the U.S. Tsunami Warning Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Related U.S. Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
List of Figures
Figure 1. U.S. Proposal for Tsunami Detection/Warning System . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Figure 2. NOAA DART Platform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

---

Tsunamis: Monitoring, Detection,
and Early Warning Systems
Introduction
Recently, numerous congressional inquiries have posed questions about the
possibility of tsunamis occurring in U.S. coastal areas; the extent to which these areas
are currently monitored; how tsunamis can be detected; and whether there is a
national capacity to issue evacuation warnings for tsunamis.1 These concerns stem
from the December 26, 2004, tsunami triggered by an underwater earthquake off the
west coast of northern Sumatra in Indonesia. That earthquake was measured at Mw
9.0.2 The ensuing tsunami devastated many coastal areas around the northern Indian
Ocean, and caused and economic upheaval in other areas. International disaster
agencies estimate that as many as 300,000 people may have lost their lives.
On January 5, 2005, the House Science Committee, House Coastal Caucus, and
House Oceans Caucus co-sponsored a briefing organized by the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) of the Department of the Interior. The purpose of the briefing was
to consider the possible implications of the Indian Ocean tsunami for the United
States. Experts from USGS and NOAA delivered presentations on the circumstances
surrounding that tsunami disaster, and discussed current capabilities for monitoring,
detection, and early warning around the globe.3
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the U.S.
Department of Commerce and various international science agencies have indicated
that there were few, if any, tsunami early warning systems monitoring the Indian
Ocean on December 26, 2004. However, nations bounded also by the Pacific Ocean,
including Australia and Indonesia, had tsunami early warning systems monitoring the
Pacific shores where they perceived the greatest threat.4 Because of the geographic
1 A tsunami is a seismic sea wave (or a series of waves) usually generated by an underwater
earthquake or landslide, but occasionally is caused by volcanic eruption or major landslide
into the ocean. Tsunami is translated from Japanese as “harbor wave”.
2 M , the moment of magnitude, is a way to measure the force of an earthquake’s total
w
seismic energy released as a function of rock rigidity in the fault, the total area of contact
where friction occurs, and the amount of slippage (or displacement). It is used for
earthquakes greater than M8.2 on the Richter scale.
3 Presenters at that briefing included, David Applegate, Science Advisor for Earthquake and
Geological Hazards at the USGS; General David Johnson, Assistant Director of NOAA’s
National Weather Service; Gregg Withee, Assistant Director for NOAA Satellite and
Information Services; and, Eddie Bernard, Associate Director of NOAA’s Pacific Marine
Environmental Laboratory (teleconferencing from Seattle, WA).
4 General David L. Johnson, “NOAA Tsunami and Natural Disaster Information,” Jan. 5,
(continued...)

---

CRS-2
proximity of many settlements to where the tsunami was generated, and an inability
to receive tsunami warnings rapidly, some have concluded that for people on
Indonesia’s Indian Ocean shores, emergency communications were useless in many
cases. In other cases, it was found that indigenous people and tourists were not
educated about the possible dangers of tsunamis; they were not aware of the physical
warning signs of an onset of a tsunami; and local officials did not have alternative
procedures for issuing evacuation alerts, if “lifelines” were disrupted, included in
regional emergency plans.5
On January 29, 2005, the House Committee on Science, and on February 2,
2005, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, held
hearings about providing expanded tsunami early warning protection for the United
States and its possessions. Legislation recently introduced by Senator Lieberman of
Connecticut (S. 34) and Senator Inouye of Hawaii (S. 50), among others, would
provide for a rapid U.S. response to upgrade existing capacity for warning in the
Pacific, and expand this capacity to the Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean Sea.
Senator Inouye’s bill is closely aligned with the Administration’s proposal, released
on January 14, 2005, but also addresses social issues such as disaster education and
local emergency preparedness. (See “Congressional Action,” below.)
Although most deadly tsunamis have occurred historically in the western Pacific
Ocean, there are examples of recorded events in the North Atlantic. In 1692, a
tsunami generated by massive landslides in the Atlantic Puerto Rican Trench reached
Jamaica’s coast, causing an estimated 2,000 deaths. In 1775, a tsunami struck in the
eastern Atlantic Ocean on the coast of Portugal, killing an estimated 60,000 people.
More recently, in 1929, a tsunami generated in the Grand Banks region of Canada hit
Newfoundland, killing 51. It was the third lethal tsunami for Canada’s Atlantic
Coast within 150 years.6
Proposals for International Tsunami
Early Warning Systems
Currently, most experts agree that considerable challenges must be overcome
to establish an extensive tsunami early warning network in the Indian Ocean and
elsewhere. In some respects, developed nations that currently have the resources and
capability to establish their own regional emergency management networks have
been able to avoid some of these challenges.
4 (...continued)
2005 House briefing.
5 Lifelines are emergency response services, hospitals, other care facilities, energy and water
delivery systems, telecommunications, and electronic commerce. See U.S. Congress,
Senate, Committee on Commerce Science and Transportation, report on S. 910, the
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act, S.Rept. 105-59, July 30, 1997, p. 3.
6 Statistics on deaths resulting from tsunamis were compiled by CRS from online sources,
and include data from the Tsunami Laboratory of Novosibirsk, NOAA’s National
Geophysical Data Center, the University of Southern California, Tsunami Research Group,
and others. See [http://geology.about.com/library/bl/bltsunamideathtable.htm], visited Jan.
11, 2005.

---

CRS-3
Challenges. Few nations would question that development of an international
system with a capability for regional and local tsunami warnings will require
involving many nations with widely varying technological capabilities and financial
resources. Reports indicate that political leaders expect that most of the responsibility
for paying for such a system will likely fall on the wealthiest nations. The costs of
procuring, operating, and maintaining instruments and platforms, and the challenge
of obtaining international cost sharing, are likely to be the most critical factors for
sustaining a long-term international effort for global tsunami detection and warning.
International science agencies have called for an inventory of existing global
capacity for tsunami monitoring, detection, and warning systems to use as a baseline
from which to determine what may still be needed for an international warning
network. U.S. policy experts also have suggested that technological challenges and
possible national security issues could arise with a global system, including
multinational sharing of international telecommunication networks and international
standardization for tsunami warning instrumentation on data platforms. In addition,
some intelligence experts suggest that some data collected could be considered
sensitive and perhaps compromising to U.S. or other nations’ intelligence-gathering
operations. Also, the Assistant Director of NOAA Satellite and Information Services
has noted that some nations, including India, maintain proprietary rights to all of their
real-time satellite data. Some of these data, he asserted, could be important for
tsunami detection in the Indian Ocean, and also for post-disaster damage assessment.7
Proposals. On January 6, 2005, the United Nations proposed an international
effort to develop a tsunami early warning capacity for nations bounding the Indian
Ocean. That effort would be led by the UNESCO Intergovernmental Oceanographic
Commission (IOC). Also, Australian, Japan, Thailand, and India have announced
initiatives to monitor their own Indian Ocean coastlines, in addition to providing
humanitarian aid for the region.8 (For information on other types of foreign
assistance proposed for the areas affected by the tsunami, see CRS Report RL32715,
Indian Ocean Earthquake and Tsunami: Humanitarian Assistance and Relief
Operations, by Rhoda Margesson.)
International science ministers finalized plans for a global observing system in
Brussels, Belgium February 15, 2004. That system would be the backbone on which
a regional tsunami early warning system for the Indian Ocean would be built. The
United States is not expected to provide details of its commitment to the
internationally sponsored global tsunami early warning network prior to the
convening of the G-8 summit in July 2005. Experts from Indian Ocean countries
affected by the December 26, 2004 tsunami and other countries met at the UN
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of UNESCO, in Paris, France,
March 3-8, 2005, to plan a coordinated tsunami early warning system for the Indian
Ocean and to review countries’ financial commitments. The Assistant Director
General of UNESCO, Executive Secretary of the IOC, chaired the meeting.9
7 Gregg Withee, Jan. 5, 2005 House briefing, by USGS and NOAA.
8 Idem.
9 For a review of that meeting, a schedule of subsequent meetings, and ongoing activities,
(continued...)

---

CRS-4
Some Members of Congress proposed development of a “global” tsunami
detection and warning system in the aftermath of the Indian Ocean disaster.
Representative Pallone was the first to call for establishing a tsunami detection and
warning network for the U.S. Atlantic coast, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Caribbean
Sea.10 However, others question whether the risk for a tsunami on the U.S. Atlantic
coast would justify such expenditures. In response, NOAA scientists have asserted
that the Puerto Rican Trench, which is the deepest point in the western Atlantic
Ocean, should be of great concern.11 As noted above, massive landslides and
sloughing have occurred on the North American continental shelf, generating deadly
tsunamis. One U.S. Atlantic coast state, New Hampshire, already has an emergency
contingency plan for tsunamis, and a clearinghouse for information about historical
tsunami disasters.12 Some states on the Pacific coast have had plans in effect for at
least 50 years.
Bush Administration Plan. On January 14, 2005, the White House Office
of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) announced the Bush Administration’s
plan for an improved tsunami warning and detection system for the United States.13
That plan initially includes procuring and deploying a total of 32 dedicated tsunami
warning and detection buoys by mid-2007, to provide better coverage for tsunami
detection in the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean Sea.
(See Figure 1, below.) The President would commit $37.5 million over the next two
years to implement the plan. The Director of OSTP noted the system would
“ultimately include the Indian Ocean.”14 Partial funding for the President’s proposal
was approved in the emergency supplemental appropriations for FY2005.15 Plans are
for the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) to release to release a
detailed implementation plan later this year.16
9 (...continued)
see the IOC website at [http://ioc.unesco.org/indotsunami], visited June 1, 2005.
10 Congressional Record, Jan. 4, 2005: H40.
11 Jan. 5, 2005 House briefing,.
12 State of New Hampshire, “Disaster Plan 409,” Sect. II, Geological Hazards, Seismic
Hazards, at [http://www.nhoem.state.nh.us/mitigation/state_of_new_hampshire.asp], visited
Jan. 11, 2005. See also “Is your Community Ready for the Next Tsunami,” National
Weather Service Tsunami Ready program, at [http://tsunami.gov], visited Jan. 11, 2005.
13 U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy, “U.S. Announces Plan for Improved
Tsunami Detection and Warning System,” press release, OSTP News, Jan. 14, 2005. See
also Eli Kintisch, “South Asia Tsunami: U.S. Clamor Grows for Global Network of
Sensors,” Science, vol. 307, Jan. 14, 2005: 191.
14 John H. Marburger, Director of Office of Science and Technology Policy, “Testimony,”
Tsunami Preparedness, hearing before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation (Feb. 2, 2005). Hereafter, “Senate Commerce, Tsunami Preparedness
hearing,” available at [http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/witnesslist.cfm?id=136].
15 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, “Communication for the President
of the United States Transmitting a Request for Supplemental Appropriations ... Including
Tsunami Relief and Reconstruction,” H.Doc. 109-9, Feb. 15, 2005 (GPO, Washington:
2005).
16 Personal communication with an OSTP official on the NSTC on June 1, 2005.

---

CRS-5
Figure 1. U.S. Proposal for
Tsunami Detection/Warning System
Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, from “U.S. Announces Plans
for an Improved Tsunami Warning and Detection System” (modified by CRS for
contrast), at [http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2005/s2369.htm], visited Jan. 18,
2005.
P.L. 109-13, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for FY2005.
The conference report on H.R. 1268 (H.Rept. 109-72, Div. A of the Emergency
Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and
Tsunami Relief, 2005) stated that NOAA’s National Tsunami Warning Program,
managed by the National Weather Service (NWS), would receive a total of $25.4
million. Conferees agreed to $7.1 million for NOAA’s Operations, Research, and
Facilities (ORF) account for NWS to proceed with developing coastal inundation
maps and provide community outreach and preparedness programs (tsunami
education and training). A portion of the funding would be used to upgrade the

---

CRS-6
Alaska tsunami warning center and to establish an international regional warning
center in Hawaii. NWS would hire additional personnel at U.S. tsunami warning
centers to monitor USGS earthquake alerts and issue tsunami warnings around the
clock.
Conferees also reported another $10.2 million for NOAA’s Procurement,
Acquisition, and Construction (PAC) account. PAC funding would be used to
acquire 35 new DART buoys for the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, the Gulf of
Mexico, and the Caribbean Sea, which would provide several new data points for
observing ocean conditions at depth. In reference to the Global Environmental
Observation Systems of Systems (GEOSS) initiative, conferees encouraged NOAA
“to develop buoys with capabilities beyond the single purpose of tsunami reporting.”
Finally, $8.1 million was reported for USGS’s National Earthquake Information
Center (NEIC) in Golden, CO. The NEIC would upgrade the existing Global
Seismic Network (GSN), so more of its instruments could relay real-time earthquake
data; currently 80% of the 127 instruments have that capability. GSN data are used
at the NWS warning centers to determine the potential for tsunami generation after
an underwater earthquake or other geological disturbance. The Alaska warning
center models the intensity and possible tracking of the large waves and, in turn,
issues warnings to regional emergency managers. The President signed H.R. 1268
into law as P.L. 109-13 on May 11, 2005.

Local Warnings and Emergency Communication. NOAA’s Director
of the National Weather Service, Brig. Gen. David L. Johnson, USAF (Ret.), and
others, have emphasized that in addition to the capacity to monitor and detect
possible tsunamis, a telecommunications infrastructure for issuing tsunami warnings
(such as that presently in place in the Pacific Ocean) is critical for the Indian,
Atlantic, and far Pacific Ocean populations. He noted that NOAA’s responsibility
for tsunami warnings terminate when those emergency communications are delivered
to international emergency management officials. He added that in the United
States, forecasts and warnings of severe weather are also picked up and distributed
by local emergency managers and the media, after they are issued by local and
regional NWS weather forecast offices.17 In some nations, there are varying
capabilities for relaying public emergency warnings, especially locally. In some
regions these capabilities are inadequate or non-existent.
A Global Tsunami Warning Network? Addressing international tsunami
detection and warning capabilities, NOAA’s Administrator, Admiral Lautenbacher,
has promoted development of an international Global Earth Observing System of
Systems (GEOSS), an initiative that is supported by President Bush. Billed as “an
excellent example of science serving society,” GEOSS would be built from existing
data collection platforms, and would use the telecommunications capabilities of other
observation systems and communication networks currently operating around the
world. One of these networks would be the International Global Ocean Observing
System (IGOOS), another, Argo (climate monitoring) floats. (See “U.S. Operations
17 Brig. Gen. Jack Kelly, Jr., former NWS Director, and present Deputy Administrator for
NOAA, “Testimony,” Senate Commerce, Tsunami Preparedness hearing.

---

CRS-7
and Research,” below.) Through GEOSS, IGOOS would help to build a global
tsunami detection and warning capacity.18
U.S. and international science ministers composing the “Group on Earth
Observation” met February 16, 2005, in Brussels, Belgium, and adopted a 10-year
implementation plan for GEOSS. The European Union hosted the event, with 60
other countries. Details about international funding commitments, and a United
States role in the global tsunami warning network, are not likely expected until the
G-8 Summit convenes in July 2005.19 However, experts from Indian Ocean countries
affected by the December 26, 2004 tsunami, and other countries, met in early March
to plan development of a coordinated tsunami early warning system for the Indian
Ocean and to reaffirm benefactor countries’ financial commitments.

A number of international science agencies and nongovernmental organizations
generally support the Bush Administration proposal for a U.S. tsunami warning
system, and have called it “a good start.” Some social scientists argue for
“institutionalizing” a strong public education component, in whatever legislation
would implement the Administration’s plan or otherwise be introduced in Congress
for similar purposes.20 The public education initiative envisioned includes local
authorities as the developer and deliverer of disaster education activities; encourages
(federal) interagency partnerships and an established presence in the community;
supports adaptation as an alternative approach to disaster management; and promotes
low-tech, high-impact solutions for local emergency management.21
Congressional Action
Some Members of Congress have introduced bills to expand existing tsunami
early warnings networks globally. A majority of this legislation emphasizes
expediting expanded coverage for the United States and its trust territories. Similar
to the Bush Administration proposal, most legislation calls for domestic needs to be
met before international commitments are made. Also, negotiations are
recommended through established international diplomatic channels to deliberate
national roles and responsibilities for a global warning network.
S. 34 (Lieberman)/H.R. 499 (Shays). S. 34, the Global Tsunami Detection
and Warning System Act, was introduced on January 24, 2005, and referred to the
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.22 This bill addresses
18 Gen. David Johnson, Jan. 5, 2005, House briefing. For more information on ocean
observing systems, see U.S. Congress, House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries,
Conservation, and Wildlife, Status of Ocean Observing Systems in the United States,
oversight hearing, serial no. 108-102, July 13, 2004 (Washington: GPO, 2005).
19 John Marburger, Senate Commerce Tsunami Preparedness hearing, Feb. 2, 2005.
20 Eileen Shea, Project Coordinator, East West Center, Honolulu, HI), “Testimony,” Senate
Commerce Tsunami Preparedness hearing, Feb. 2, 2005, available at [http://commerce.
senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=1361&wit_id=3955], visited Feb. 3, 2005.
21 Ibid.
22 Associated Press, “Hill Eyes Tsunami Warning System — Lieberman calls for Global
(continued...)

---

CRS-8
U.S. tsunami early warning capabilities and deficiencies. It also recommends
cooperative efforts with established international agencies to develop regional
tsunami warning and emergency management capabilities for coastal communities
around the globe. In addition, S. 34 encourages an inventory of existing international
capabilities, but it is primarily focused on the institutional needs of developing a
global warning network, and what might be an appropriate U.S. contribution. S. 34
authorizes $30 million for NOAA in FY2005 to expand the existing Pacific network
and add coverage for the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico/Caribbean Sea. Also, $7.5
million is authorized for each of FY2006 through FY2012 to operate and maintain
the (U.S.) system. It directs the Secretary of Commerce to work with the Secretary
of State and the Department of the Interior (through USGS) to convene an
international conference to seek agreement on a U.S. contribution to a global tsunami
warning network, including funding. H.R. 499, a related bill, was introduced on
February 1, 2005, and referred to the House Committees on International Relations
and Resources. This bill also provides for the development of global tsunami
detection and warning systems to improve communication of tsunami warnings to
all nations potentially affected. On February 9, 2005, H.R. 499 was referred to the
Subcommittees on Fisheries and Oceans and Energy and Minerals.
S. 50 (Inouye). The Tsunami Preparedness Act of 2005 was introduced on
January 24, 2005, and referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation. The bill directly supports the Bush Administration’s proposals for
an expanded U.S. tsunami early warning system, and similarly proposes to eventually
assist other nations in an international endeavor to build a global capacity. However,
S. 50 goes further, requiring dissemination of U.S. tsunami information and research
findings, and facilitating technology transfer for tsunami hazard mitigation efforts.
To that end, S. 50 establishes a U.S. multi-agency task force that includes NOAA, the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), USGS, and the National Science
Foundation (NSF). NOAA would be directed to provide assistance for global
tsunami warning efforts through involvement with establishing an international earth
observation system (GEOSS). Section 8 of the bill authorizes $35 million for “each
of fiscal years 2006 though 2012, to carry out the Act.”23
On February 2, 2005, the Senate Subcommittee on Disaster Preparedness held
hearings on S. 50. The bill’s author noted that S. 50 could be “effective in educating
populations at risk” for tsunami disasters. He also noted that S. 50 considered
sociological need as well as tsunami detection and warning, which he stated would
require NSF’s contribution. NOAA would be authorized to receive reimbursement
of cash or services in kind from international agencies it might assist in developing
a global warning network. On March 10, 2005, the full committee marked up S. 50,
adopting Senator Inouye’s amendment in the nature of a substitute bill. Senator Ted
Stevens, committee chair, stated that S. 50 would require Congress to be notified if
a (DART) buoy stops functioning, so that a replacement could be deployed. Also,
the measure would authorize $5 million annually for an “integrated coastal
vulnerability and adaption program.” An international Tsunami Warning Center to
22 (...continued)
Net,” Washington Times, Jan. 7, 2005, p. A10.
23 Congressional Record, Jan. 24, 2005, p. S328.

---

CRS-9
monitor warnings in the Pacific would be established to disseminate information. S.
50 (amended) was ordered to be reported favorably to the full Senate on March 10,
2005. A written report on S. 50 was issued in April 19, 2005 (S.Rept. 109-59).
S. 361 (Snowe)/H.R. 1584 (Curt Weldon). S. 361, the Ocean and Coastal
Observation Systems Act of 2005, was introduced on February 10, 2005, and referred
to the Senate Committee on Science, Commerce, and Transportation. This bill
develops a U.S. capacity “to monitor a range of ocean conditions and quickly assess
ocean-based threats, including tsunamis....”24 Through NOAA, S. 361 proposes
broader public access and facilitation of timely public warnings of hazardous ocean
conditions. It authorizes “such sums as may be necessary” for each of fiscal years
2006 through 2010, of which least half of the amount is to be used to implement
regional ocean and coastal observing systems. Funding would be available until
expended. The measure was marked up on March 10, 2005, and reported favorably
to the full Senate without objection. On April 19, 2005, the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation reported S. 361 without amendment (S.Rept.
109-60). Introduced on April 12, 2005, H.R. 1584, a related bill, would develop and
maintain an integrated system of coastal and ocean observations for the nation’s
coasts, oceans, and Great Lakes, to improve warnings of tsunamis and other natural
hazards, to enhance homeland security, to support maritime operations, and for other
purposes. The bill was referred to the House Committees on Resources and Science.
On May 6, 2005, executive comment was requested from the Department of
Commerce.
H.R. 396 (Menendez). The Early Warning and Rapid Notification Act of
2005 was introduced on January 26, 2005, and referred to the House Committee on
International Relations. This bill focuses on the sociological and institutional needs
for developing tsunami warning systems in foreign countries. The legislation
emphasizes four components of a proposed program to be established through the
U.S. Agency for International Development (AID) consisting of: (1) expansion upon
prior knowledge of risks faced by communities; (2) technological monitoring of
hazards; (3) delivery of understandable warnings to those at risk, and (4) knowledge
and preparedness of how to act when threatened by disasters. This bill addresses all
disasters; however, the Indian Ocean tsunami is cited as one of the primary reasons
for its introduction. H.R. 396 would improve lines of international communications
for delivery of disaster warnings, by identifying impediments in U.S. and foreign
government policies. It identifies the U.N. International Early Warning Program as
the appropriate institution to undertake that task. It would authorize $10 million
annually for FY2006 through FY2010 to develop an effective global public warning
capability; establish the necessary communications infrastructure; provide technical
expertise and training; and launch public education campaigns to minimize the loss
of life and property. Further, it calls for employing emerging technologies, such as
wireless communications, for emergency warning systems in United States territories
and in international locations.
H.R. 465 (Faleomavaega)/H.R. 882 (Boehlert). On February 1, 2005,
H.R. 465 was introduced “To Provide for the Establishment of a Tsunami Mitigation
24 Statement introducing S. 361, Congressional Record, Feb. 14, 2005: S1293-S1294.

---

CRS-10
Program for all United States Insular Areas,” and was referred to the House
Committee on Resources. The bill establishes a tsunami hazard mitigation program
within NOAA for all U.S. insular areas. Also, it requires NOAA to perform tsunami
hazard assessment, monitoring, warning, and public education functions for the
benefit of all insular areas of the United States, including American Samoa, Guam,
the U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Commonwealth of the Mariana Islands.
No funding authority was proposed in the legislation. On February 10, 2005, H.R.
465 was referred to the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans.
H.R. 882, a related bill, was introduced February 17, 2005, and referred to the House
Committee on Science. It was referred to the Subcommittees on Environmental
Technology and Standards on March 3, 2005.
H.R. 890 (Pallone)/S. 452 (Corzine). H.R. 890, the Tsunami Warning and
Relief Act of 2005, was introduced February 17, 2005, and referred to the House
Science Committee. Title I, Tsunami Warning Systems, establishes a global tsunami
disaster reduction program in NOAA to upgrade U.S. and other international regions’
protection from tsunamis by encouraging cooperation through the building of global
observations systems (GEOSS). The bill would expand the U.S. TsunamiReady
program, and directs NOAA and USGS to integrate seismic monitoring using the
Global Seismic Network (GSN). It would also require annual progress reports. It
authorizes $38 million for FY2006, and $32 million for FY2007. On March 3, 2005,
H.R. 890 was referred to the Subcommittee on Environmental Technology and
Standards. Introduced on February 17, 2005, S. 452, a related bill, would provide for
the establishment of national and global tsunami warning systems and would provide
assistance for the relief and rehabilitation of victims of the Indian Ocean tsunami and
for the reconstruction of tsunami-affected countries. It was referred to the Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
H.R. 1674 (Boehlert). The United States Tsunami Warning Education Act.
This bill would strengthen tsunami detection, forecast, warning, and mitigation, and
would be carried out by the National Weather Service. It would upgrade and expand
the U.S. (warning) network for the Pacific, including U.S. territories, the Atlantic
Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean Sea. It also encourages cooperation
between NOAA and the U.S. Geological Survey and the National Science
Foundation. It would establish an international (tsunami) research program. It would
improve federal, state, and international coordination for tsunami and other coastal
hazards warnings and preparedness, and aid in establishing a regional tsunami
warning network in the Indian Ocean. Another major theme of the legislation is
providing educational and outreach activities for U.S. populations-at-risk. It also
encourages mutual sharing of related data among participating countries of a “Global
Tsunami and Warning Mitigation Network.” H.R. 1674 authorizes $30 million for
each of fiscal years 2006-2008, allocating 70% of that for operations and upgrade of
the U.S. network, 20% for mitigation programs, and 10% for an international tsunami
research program. In many respects, H.R. 1674 is similar to S. 50 (Inouye).
Introduced on April 18, 2004, it was referred to the House Committee on Science,
and marked up by the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards on
April, 20, 2005. Full committee markup was held on May 4, 2005, and the measure
was ordered to be reported.

---

CRS-11
Thus far, it appears that S. 50 and H.R. 1674 are the most likely legislative
vehicles Congress would act on for authorizing a long-term commitment to
developing and maintaining U.S. and global tsunami warning networks.
U.S. Tsunami Programs
Currently, NOAA has a national program managed by the National Weather
Service (NWS) to warn Pacific coastal areas of tsunamis, consisting of two regional
U.S. tsunami warning centers in the Pacific Ocean; a cooperative program to reduce
false tsunami alarm rates in the Pacific Ocean; monitoring and detection operations;
tsunami research activities; and public outreach and education programs.
Tsunami Warnings. The NWS operates the West Coast/Alaska Tsunami
Warning Center (WC/AKTWC) at Palmer, AK, and the Pacific Tsunami Warning
Center (PTWC), at Ewa Beach, HI.
The PTWC monitors for tsunamis and issues warnings for the Hawaiian
Islands, the U.S. Pacific territories, and other U.S. and international interests in the
Pacific Basin. It was established in 1949, after a strong earthquake and massive
landslides off the coast of southwest Alaska caused a tsunami disaster in the
Hawaiian Islands hours later. The WC/AKTWC was established in 1967, after a
devastating earthquake in Anchorage, AK, in 1964 caused localized tsunami
damages. This center is responsible for issuing warnings to emergency managers in
Alaska, British Columbia, Washington, Oregon, and California.
In 1992, NOAA launched a National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program
(NTHMP) to address credibility of Pacific tsunami warnings, which, at that time,
were being issued with a 75% false alarm rate. Local officials became concerned
about the significant social upheaval and economic disruption caused by them, and
whether the public would heed tsunami warnings in the future. Additionally, the
NTHMP focuses on the potential that a sizable earthquake in the Pacific Northwest
Cascadia Region could generate devastating tsunamis that would damage U.S.
Pacific coastal regions. Additionally, it assists five Pacific states, including Alaska,
California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington, in developing local tsunami
preparedness planning through its TsunamiReady program. NTHMP has developed
disaster models and tsunami inundation maps for many coastal communities of its
current member states.25
NOAA is also the leader of the UNESCO International Coordinating Group for
the International Tsunami Warning System in the Pacific (ICG/ITSU). Since 1965,
NOAA’s National Weather Service has hosted the UNESCO/IGO International
Tsunami Information Center (ITIC) which supports ITSU and its member states.
ITSU was first convened in 1968 and the PTWC acts as the international operational
tsunami warning center for the Pacific, and currently comprises 27 member nations,
most bounded by the Pacific Ocean, except for Thailand, Malaysia, and parts of
Indonesia, bounded by the Indian Ocean.26
25 Eddie Bernard of NOAA, Jan. 5, 2005, House briefing.
26 See “International Tsunami Information Center: ITSU Master Plan,” the International
(continued...)

---

CRS-12
Figure 2. NOAA DART Platform
Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, from “U.S. Announces Plans
for an Improved Tsunami Warning and Detection System.” See [http://www.noaanews.
noaa.gov/stories2005/s2369.htm], visited Jan. 18, 2005.
U.S. Operations and Research. NOAA currently operates a network of six
dedicated tsunami detection and relay stations as part of its Deep-Ocean Assessment
and Reporting of Tsunamis (DART) program.27 (See Figure 1 for proposed
locations, and Figure 2, above, for the components.) These are equipped to provide
26 (...continued)
Coordination Group for the Tsunami Warming System in the Pacific (IGC/ITSU),
UNESCO/IG, at [http://www.prh.noaa.gov/itic/more_about/itsu/itsu.html], visited June 1,
2005.
27 Hugh B. Milburn et al., “Real-Time Tsunami Reporting from the Deep Ocean,” NOAA
Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (1996), at [http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/Dart/
milburn_1996.shtml], visited Jan. 4, 2005. A seventh DART buoy owned and operated by
the Chilean government is deployed off Chile’s coast in South America.

---

CRS-13
an early warning capability, but NOAA officials caution these are only effective if
there are emergency managers to receive their communications and, in turn, alert the
public to take the necessary precautions or evacuate. The Bush Administration’s
proposal includes a total of 7 DART buoys for the Atlantic and 25 for the Pacific, for
the first time monitoring the southwest Pacific Ocean. Also, hundreds of NWS
weather buoys operating off the coasts of the United States record various
meteorological data, while marine data buoys measure speed of ocean currents,
temperature, salinity, and pressure change. Sea surface height (or sea level) also is
measured by satellite-GPS (global positioning system) by NOAA’s National Ocean
Service tidal monitoring network, which is responsible for issuing warnings. All
these buoys are equipped to relay data and emergency communications for
navigational purposes.28
A proposed array of 3,000 data buoys, known as Argo floats, will be deployed
in the equatorial waters of the Pacific Ocean. About a thousand of these are in place
to detect conditions for El Niños and La Niñas, which are three- to seven-year
climate variations that affect global weather. Argo floats might also be considered
as possible platforms for situating tsunami detection instrumentation.29 These floats
have been advocated by NOAA as “the next step in global observations.”30 In the
Atlantic Ocean, other possible platforms for tsunami monitoring and detection
include a growing number of regional and local coastal and ocean monitoring
networks in development along the coasts of Canada and the United States.
Legislation to use these systems as part of a tsunami detection and warning network
was introduced in the 108th Congress.31 In the 109th Congress, Senator Snowe’s bill,
S. 361, would promote similar goals. (See “Congressional Action,” above.)
Funding for the U.S. Tsunami Warning Program. NOAA officials
estimate that the cost of adding tsunami detection instruments on Atlantic Ocean
platforms, such as weather buoys, or building dedicated DART platforms, could vary
depending upon the scale of the project — for example, the number of instruments
to be included and the out-year costs of operation and maintenance.32 Other
28 Eddie Bernard, House Science Committee briefing, Jan. 5, 2005.
29 NOAA/Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, Observing the Ocean in Real-Time: Argo,
a Global Array of Profiling Floats to Understand and Forecast Climate, ed. Stan Wilson
(1996). Funded in part by private academic institutions.
30 Ibid.
31 On January 5, 2005, Representative Curt Weldon circulated a “Dear Colleague” letter
advocating the reintroduction of H.R. 5001 (108th Congress), the Ocean and Coastal
Observation System Act, in the 109th Congress. This legislation promoted development of
an “Integrated Ocean Observation System,” to protect U.S. citizens in coastal communities
from tsunamis. For further information on U.S. ocean observation systems, see U.S. House
Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries, Conservation, and Oceans, Status of Ocean
Observing Systems in the United States, Oversight Hearing, serial no. 108-102, July 13,
2004 (Washington, DC: GPO 2005).
32 NOAA officials estimated the cost to produce the existing six experimental DART
platforms, instrument them, provide a telecommunications capability, and maintain them at
(continued...)

---

CRS-14
expenditures supporting the program include funding for NOAA’s U.S. tsunami-
related research activities, tsunami mitigation programs, public outreach and
education, the TsunamiReady program, and telecommunications upgrades for
supporting technologies such as the USGS Global Seismic Network (GSN). (See
“Related U.S. Programs,” below.)
Annual funding requested for U.S. tsunami monitoring, early warning, and
research is usually found in the NOAA National Weather Service (NWS) budget
under Operations and Research. Additional funding may be provided for NWS in
NOAA’s Procurement, Acquisition, and Construction (PAC) account. Because of
the December 26, 2004, tsunami in the Indian Ocean, funding was provided in the
FY2005 emergency supplemental appropriations act (P.L. 109-13). Regular
appropriations for these activities are provided by Title II, Department of Commerce,
“National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,” in the Science, State, Justice,
and Commerce appropriations act. Prior to 2004, tsunami-related activities were
funded by the NOAA Research ORF budget. (See Table 1, below.)
Table 1. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) Funding for U.S. Tsunami Programs
($ million)
U.S. TSUNAMI
NTHMPb
TWEAKc
DART
Strengthen
Annual
WARNING
Buoy
Tsunami
Total
PROGRAMa
Acq.d
Warning
Networke
FY’06
Request
2.3
0.0
6.0
3.5
$11.8
FY’05 Suppl.f
P.L 109-13
7.1
0.0
10.2
—
$17.3
FY’05
Approp.
4.3
2.0
0.0
—
$6.3
Req.
0.0
0.0
0.0
—
$0.0
FY’04
Approp.
4.3
2.0
0.6
—
$6.9
Req.
0.0
0.0
0.0
—
$0.0
FY’03
Approp.
4.3
—
—
—
$4.3
Req.
0.0
—
—
—
$0.0
FY’02
Approp.
3.3
—
—
—
$3.3
Req.
2.3
—
—
—
$2.3
FY’01
Approp.
3.3
—
—
—
$3.3
Req.
0.0
—
—
—
$0.0
Source: Compiled by CRS from annual Commerce, Justice, State, Judiciary and Related Agency
annual appropriations reports, and NOAA FY2006 Budget Summary.
Notes:
a. Funding for NOAA tsunami programs is not currently authorized by legislation. The last official
NOAA authorization to fund NWS/NOAA Research programs occurred on October 29, 1992
in the 102nd Congress (P.L. 102-567).
32 (...continued)
approximately $125,000 each, but suggested there would be an economy of scale if the
President’s proposed total of 32 platforms for the United States in the Pacific and Atlantic
Oceans were produced.

---

CRS-15
b. The Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program has been operated out of the Pacific Tsunami Warning
Center, HI, and funded since FY2004 by the National Weather Service (NWS). A major portion
of the funding is divided among each of five Pacific states (AK, HI, WA, OR, and CA). The
NTHMP also operates the NOAA’s Tsunami Ready program, which provides assistance for
developing local warning capacity, emergency planning, and tsunami inundation mapping.
c. Prior to FY2004, the Tsunami Warning and Environmental (Observation Center) AK conducted
experimental tsunami warning system programs. In FY2004, that program was transferred to
NWS along with all other tsunami-related programs.
d. Funding proposed for deployment of DART buoys in P.L. 109-13 and FY2006 regular
appropriations.
e. NWS systems acquisition, in NOAA’s Procurement Account. This funding would upgrade NOAA
tsunami warning communications network capabilities, and global telecommunications
infrastructure. It does not include $8.1 million requested for USGS’s Global Seismic Network
(GSN) telecommunication upgrades. (See USGS.)
f. Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2005 (P.L. 109-13).
Related U.S. Programs. To reduce costs of a U.S. Atlantic coast tsunami
early warning system, engineers at NOAA say that it is technologically possible to
modify weather and marine data buoys, such as those currently situated off the
United States, to serve as platforms for mounting some tsunami monitoring and
detection instrumentation. These platforms do not measure at great depths like the
DART buoys, but would monitor other ocean conditions at the near-surface. The
USGS and others have suggested taking greater advantage of existing international
seismic monitoring stations, improving real-time data communications, and using
global telecommunications networks to issue tsunami warnings to local emergency
managers.33
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). USGS indirectly contributes to
tsunami early warning notification. It is networked with 128 global seismic
monitoring stations, including some that operate in the Indian Ocean, known as the
Global Seismic Network (GSN). The GSN is managed by the Incorporated Research
Institutions for Seismology (IRIS), which is a consortium of academic institutions
involved with earthquake monitoring, detection, and modeling. Although the USGS
does not specifically monitor for tsunami genesis, the GSN measures earthquake
activity around the globe in real time. Based on where they occur, and their
magnitude, the USGS makes determinations to warn NOAA of the possible onset of
a tsunami. USGS officials report that currently only about 80% of the network has
capability for real-time data communication. The President proposed, and Congress
appropriated, $8.1 million in emergency supplemental funding for FY2005 to
upgrade the real-time telecommunications capabilities of the GSN, as well as to
expand the number of seismic monitoring stations around the globe.34
In addition, USGS geological researchers collect and analyze data on crustal
deformation and ocean floor displacement, which could be precursors to earthquakes
that generate tsunamis. Also, USGS topographical mapping data is used in
33 Kenneth B. Allen, Director of the Partnership for Public Warning, “Letter to President
Bush,”Jan. 3, 2005, at [http://www.partnershipforpublicwarning.org/ppw/], visited Jan. 21,
2005. See also, Joab Jackson, “Cisco, IBM Propose Internet-Based Disaster Alert System,”
Government Computer News, Feb. 11, 2005, at [http://www.gcn.com, visited Feb. 15, 2005.
34 Dr. Charles Groat, Director of the USGS, Feb. 7, 2006, presentation on USGS FY2006
budget held at the Dept. of the Interior. Congress appropriated $8.1 million in P.L. 109-13.

---

CRS-16
developing tsunami inundation maps for emergency managers to develop evacuation
plans, as well as for government planning and private development. Although the
USGS primarily monitors for seismic activity on land, it has noted that land-based
operations can be as important for tsunami detection and warning, as ocean buoys.35
For example, in coastal areas of the United States, and especially along the Pacific
coast, earthquakes have generated landslides. Some of these have resulted in mass
wasting of land that has entered the ocean abruptly and displaced large volumes of
water. Landslides also can originate beneath the ocean and generate tsunamis.
Concerns for the Atlantic coast of the United States involves a potential that a
volcano in the eastern Atlantic could collapse.36
World Weather Watch. NOAA and other international weather agencies
issue warnings of meteorological conditions that primarily affect commercial air
traffic, but that also might put human lives in danger and cause significant economic
disruption for global nations. The U.N. World Weather Watch (WWW) is a
cooperative program organized and administered by the World Meteorological
Organization (WMO).37 NOAA plays a leadership role in the WWW, representing
the United States in scientific research, weather data collection and management, and
meteorological forecast and warning. The Department of State plays an important
role in achieving and maintaining international agreements to sustain WWW
operations globally. The WWW has an established international telecommunications
network for receiving and distributing weather data and warnings, including those for
the United States and its trust territories. NOAA Satellite Services manages one of
three global WWW data centers for weather data analysis and forecasting, which is
also an international telecommunications gateway.38
National All Hazards Weather Radio (NAHWR). As for local emergency
management capabilities for the United States, the Department of Homeland Security
and the National Weather Service are modifying the NOAA Weather Radio network
as the initial infrastructure for communicating public warnings for all disasters,
natural or otherwise. Over time, Congress has expanded the reach of the former
35 These include the USGS Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS), the Global Seismic
Network, and U.S. regional networks and cooperators. See [http://earthquake.usgs.gov/
eqinthenews/2004/usslav/neic_slav_faq.html], visited Jan. 4. 2004.
36 Rossella Lorenzi, “Top World Tsunami Hotspots Detailed,” Discovery News (online), Jan.
11, 2005, at [http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20050110/tsunamidanger.html], visited
Feb. 17, 2005. “According to Simon Day, Benfield Greig Hazard Research Center at
University College London, U.K., geological evidence suggests that during a future
eruption, Cumbre Vieja Volcano on the island of La Palma in the Canary Islands, off West
Africa, could experience a catastrophic failure of the western flank.”
37 U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA, Office of the Federal Coordinator for Meteorology,
“World Weather Program,” The Federal Plan for Meteorological Services and Supporting
Research: Fiscal Year 2004, Report FCM P1-2003, Appendix B: 223-228 (Washington,
DC: Oct. 2003). Other examples of international communications networks are included.
38 NOAA’s Satellite and Information Services, which operates the two U.S. WWW data
Centers, reviews weather satellite data, which has since provided valuable information about
the Indian Ocean tsunami. See “NOAA Scientists Able to Measure Tsunami Height from
Space,” at [http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2005/s2365.htm], visited Jan. 11, 2005.

---

CRS-17
NOAA Weather Radio so that this emergency telecommunications infrastructure is
able to provide adequate coverage of weather services and support local forecasting
and warning of extreme weather for more regions of the United States. NOAA has
improved technology of weather instrumentation to increase lead time of emergency
warnings; constructed transmission towers; added repeaters to expand ranges of
emergency notification; and distributed individual NOAA Weather Radio receivers
to the public, particularly in rural areas, so as many U.S. citizens as possible can
receive disaster warnings and emergency communications. Funding for NAHWR
has been about $5.5 million annually since FY2003.39
Conclusion
Decisions about whether and how to proceed with establishing an international
tsunami early warning system for the Indian Ocean (and elsewhere) will likely be
complicated for a number of reasons. One reason is because of the number of
different potential international parties that would be involved with the need to
coordinate data collection and warning dissemination, and a second is the funding
needed to establish a tsunami warning system in that region. A third is that nations,
including some in the Indian Ocean, might charge for access to critical satellite data
that may help in warning potential victims and assessing damages. Senator
Lieberman and others contend that the costs of acquiring those data may be well
worth it, in terms of lives saved. However, others assert that the costs of accessing
and using those proprietary data could be prohibitive. They are of the opinion that
access to global environmental data should be provided free of charge, especially
when the United States and other nations are providing disaster relief and plan on
funding tsunami detection and warning activities for the region.40
Still others foresee challenges to standardize tsunami detection instrumentation
and other related technology, and provide long-term maintenance for tsunami
warning systems. There are also concerns about national security and compromising
U.S. intelligence-gathering operations, if international telecommunications networks
are used. That notwithstanding, some U.S. lawmakers question the actual risk of a
tsunami hitting the U.S. Atlantic coast.41 They believe the probability is low, and
assert that risk should be considered when guiding development of and investment
in a cooperative early tsunami warning system for the U.S. eastern seaboard. It
appears that many international scientific and engineering experts view the
Administration’s plan for expanding the U.S. tsunami early warning network as
viable. Further, the plan is backed by some Members of Congress who have
introduced legislation to prepare the way for a more effective, expanded tsunami
detection and warning system for coastlines of the United States and trust territories.
39 See NOAA Weather Radio (NWR) at [http://www.nws.noaa.gov/nwr/], visited Jan. 10,
2005.
40 Washington Times, Jan. 7, 2005, p. A10.
41 USGS, Earthquake Hazards Program, “Off W Coast of Northern Sumatra, Can It Happen
in the United States?” at [http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqinthenews/2004/usslav/canit.html],
visited Feb. 17, 2005.

---

CRS-18
The President’s plan for U.S. tsunami early warning capabilities proposed
funding of nearly $30 million for FY2005 and FY2006, most of which was requested
through the FY2005 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act (H.R. 1268).
Congress approved $25.4 million for that purpose in P.L. 109-13. A Senate
amendment to H.R. 1268 modified the Administration’s proposal to include an
additional $2.7 million in funding for international “in country” sociological needs
for public education and adaptation strategies to complement technological needs.
Many U.S. lawmakers and statesmen have indicated that greater deliberation is
needed before the United States commits resources to an international effort to
develop a global tsunami warning network. Foremost, they say that the United States
must define its role and responsibilities.
A number of international science agencies are encouraged that U.S. domestic
efforts and international planning are proceeding along similar time frames, and look
forward to the development of the Global Earth Observation System of System
(GEOSS), which, fundamentally, will be the United States’ long-term contribution
to global tsunami early warning protection.

---