The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction
Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief
Peter Folger
Specialist in Energy and Natural Resources Policy
August 27, 2014
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R43141
The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief
Summary
Under the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP), four federal agencies have
responsibility for long-term earthquake risk reduction: the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the
National Science Foundation (NSF), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and
the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). These agencies assess U.S.
earthquake hazards, deliver notifications of seismic events, develop measures to reduce
earthquake hazards, and conduct research to help reduce overall U.S. vulnerability to earthquakes.
Congressional oversight of the NEHRP program encompasses how well the four agencies
coordinate their activities to address the earthquake hazard. Better coordination was a concern
that led to changes to the program in legislation enacted in 2004 (P.L. 108-360).
P.L. 108-360 authorized appropriations for NEHRP through FY2009. Total funding enacted from
reauthorization through FY2009 was $613.2 million, approximately 68% of the total amount of
$902.4 million authorized by P.L. 108-360. Although authorization for appropriations expired in
2009, Congress has continued to appropriate funds for NEHRP activities. NEHRP agencies spent
$119.5 million for program activities in FY2013, less than FY2012 spending of $124.1 million
and less than the FY2014 enacted amount of $121.4. Also, the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act (ARRA; P.L. 111-5) provided some additional funding for earthquake activities
under NEHRP.
What effect funding at the levels enacted through FY2014 under NEHRP has had on the U.S.
capability to detect earthquakes and minimize losses after an earthquake occurs is difficult to
assess. The effectiveness of the NEHRP program is a perennial issue for Congress: it is inherently
difficult to capture precisely, in terms of dollars saved or fatalities prevented, the effectiveness of
mitigation measures taken before an earthquake occurs. A major earthquake in a populated urban
area within the United States would cause damage, and in question is how much damage would
be prevented by mitigation strategies underpinned by the NEHRP program.
Legislation introduced during the 113th Congress, Title 1 of H.R. 2132, would make changes to
the program and would authorize appropriations totaling $906 million over five years through
FY2017 for NEHRP. Ninety percent of the funding would be designated for the USGS and NSF,
and the remainder for FEMA and NIST. H.R. 2132 awaits further action in the House.
Congressional Research Service
The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief
Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Changes to NEHRP Since Its Inception ........................................................................................... 1
A Shift in Program Emphasis to Hazard Reduction .................................................................. 1
NEHRP Legislation in the 113th Congress................................................................................. 4
Authorization of Appropriations in H.R. 2132 .................................................................... 5
NEHRP and Induced Seismicity ...................................................................................................... 5
Outlook and Issues for Congress ..................................................................................................... 6
Figures
Figure 1. NEHRP Agency Responsibilities and End Users of NEHRP Outcomes .......................... 3
Tables
Table 1. Enacted Funding for NEHRP Since Enactment of P.L. 108-360 Through FY2012 .......... 4
Table 2. NEHRP Authorization for Appropriations Under H.R. 2132 (113th Congress) ................. 5
Contacts
Author Contact Information............................................................................................................. 7
Congressional Research Service
The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief
Introduction
Portions of all 50 states and the District of Columbia are vulnerable to earthquake hazards,
although risks vary greatly across the country and within individual states. Seismic hazards are
greatest in the western United States, particularly in California, Washington, Oregon, and Alaska
and Hawaii. Alaska is the most earthquake-prone state, experiencing a magnitude 7 earthquake
almost every year and a magnitude 8 earthquake every 14 years on average. Because of its low
population and infrastructure density, Alaska has a relatively low risk for large economic losses
from an earthquake. In contrast, California has more citizens and infrastructure at risk than any
other state because of the state’s frequent seismic activity, large population, and extensive
infrastructure.
The federal government has supported efforts to assess and monitor earthquake hazards and risk
in the United States under the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) since
1977. Four federal agencies responsible for long-term earthquake risk reduction coordinate their
activities under NEHRP:
• U.S. Geological Survey (USGS);
• National Science Foundation (NSF);
• Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA); and
• National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
Congress last made changes to NEHRP in 2004 (P.L. 108-360), and authorized appropriations
through FY2009 for a total of $902.4 million over five years. Legislation introduced in the 113th
Congress (Title I of H.R. 2132) would make further changes to the program and would authorize
total appropriations of $906 million through FY2017.
Changes to NEHRP Since Its Inception
In 1977 Congress passed the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act (P.L. 95-124) establishing
NEHRP as a long-term earthquake risk reduction program for the United States. The program
initially focused on research, led by USGS and NSF, toward understanding and ultimately
predicting earthquakes. Earthquake prediction has proved intractable thus far, and the NEHRP
program shifted its focus to minimizing losses from earthquakes after they occur. FEMA was
created in 1979 and President Carter designated it as the lead agency for NEHRP. In 1980,
Congress passed amendments to the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act (P.L. 96-472), defining
FEMA as the lead agency and authorizing additional funding for earthquake hazard preparedness
and mitigation for FEMA and the National Bureau of Standards (now NIST).
A Shift in Program Emphasis to Hazard Reduction
Congress changed NEHRP’s original focus on research to predict earthquakes in 1990 in P.L.
101-614. The law decreased the program’s emphasis on earthquake prediction, clarified the role
of FEMA, clarified and expanded the program objectives, and required federal agencies to adopt
seismic safety standards for new and existing federal buildings. In 2004, Congress enacted P.L.
108-360 and adjusted the program again by shifting primary responsibility for planning and
Congressional Research Service
1
The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief
coordinating NEHRP from FEMA to NIST. P.L. 108-360 also established a new interagency
coordinating committee and a new advisory committee, both focused on earthquake hazards
reduction.
The current program activities are focused on four broad areas:
1. developing effective measures to reduce earthquake hazards;
2. promoting the adoption of earthquake hazard reduction activities by federal,
state, and local governments, national building standards and model building
code organizations, engineers, architects, building owners, and others who play a
role in planning and constructing buildings, bridges, structures, and critical
infrastructure or “lifelines”;1
3. improving the basic understanding of earthquakes and their effects on people and
infrastructure through interdisciplinary research involving engineering, natural
sciences, and social, economic, and decision sciences; and
4. developing and maintaining the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS), the
George E. Brown Jr. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES),
and the Global Seismic Network (GSN).2
The House Science Committee report in the 108th Congress on H.R. 2608 (P.L. 108-360) noted
that NEHRP has produced a wealth of useful information since 1977, but it also stated that the
program’s potential has been limited by the inability of the NEHRP agencies to coordinate their
efforts.3 The committee asserted that restructuring the program with NIST as the lead agency,
directing funding towards appropriate priorities, and implementing it as a true interagency
program would lead to improvement.
The 2004 law made the director of NIST chair of the Interagency Coordinating Committee. Other
members of the committee include the directors of FEMA, USGS, NSF, the Office of Science and
Technology Policy, and the Office of Management and Budget. The Interagency Coordinating
Committee is charged with overseeing the planning, management, and coordination of the
program. Primary responsibilities for the NEHRP agencies break down as follows (see also
Figure 1):
• NIST is the lead NEHRP agency and has primary responsibility for NEHRP
planning and coordination. NIST supports the development of performance-based
seismic engineering tools and works with FEMA and other groups to promote the
commercial application of the tools through building codes, standards, and
construction practices.
1 Lifelines are essential utility and transportation systems.
2 ANSS is a nationwide network of seismographic stations operated by the USGS. GSN is a global network of stations
coordinated by the Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS, a nonprofit organization). NEES is an
NSF-funded project that consists of 15 experimental facilities and an information technology infrastructure with a goal
of mitigating earthquake damage by the use of improved materials, designs, construction techniques, and monitoring
tools.
3 U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Science, National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program
Reauthorization Act of 2003, H.Rept. 108-246 (Aug. 14, 2003), p. 13.
Congressional Research Service
2
The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief
• FEMA assists other agencies and private-sector groups to prepare and
disseminate building codes and practices for structures and “lifelines,” and aids
development of performance-based codes for buildings and other structures.
• USGS conducts research and other activities to characterize and assess
earthquake risks, and (1) operates a forum, using the National Earthquake
Information Center (NEIC), for the international exchange of earthquake
information; (2) works with other NEHRP agencies to coordinate activities with
earthquake reduction efforts in other countries; and (3) maintains seismic hazard
maps in support of building codes for structures and lifelines, and other maps
needed for performance-based design approaches.
• NSF supports research to improve safety and performance of buildings,
structures, and lifelines using the large-scale experimental and computational
facilities of NEES and other institutions engaged in research and implementation
of NEHRP.
Figure 1. NEHRP Agency Responsibilities and End Users of NEHRP Outcomes
Source: NEHRP program office at http://www.nehrp.gov/pdf/ppt_sdr.pdf (modified by CRS).
Table 1 shows the enacted budgets for NEHRP agencies from FY2005 through FY2014. The total
enacted amount for FY2005-FY2009 was $613.2 million, or 68% of the $902.4 million total
amount authorized in P.L. 108-360 over the five-year span (see Table 2). Authorization of
appropriations for the program under P.L. 108-360 expired at the end of FY2009. Congress has
continued to appropriate funds for NEHRP program activities.
Congressional Research Service
3
The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief
Table 1. Enacted Funding for NEHRP Since Enactment of P.L. 108-360 Through
FY2012
($ millions)
USGS
NSF
FEMA
NIST
Total
FY2005 Enacted
58.4
53.1
14.7
0.9
127.1
FY2006 Enacted
54.5
53.8
9.5
0.9
118.7
FY2007 Enacted
55.1
54.2
7.2
1.7
118.2
FY2008 Enacted
58.1
53.6
6.1
1.7
119.5
FY2009 Enacted
61.2
56.0
9.1
4.1
130.4
FY2010 Enacted
62.8
55.0
9.0
4.1
130.9
FY2011 Enacted
61.4
55.3
7.8
4.1
128.6
FY2012 Enacted
59.0
53.2
7.8
4.1
124.1
FY2013 Enacted
55.6
52.2
`7.8
3.9
119.5
FY2014
Enacted
58.7
51.0
7.8
3.9
121.4
Source: NEHRP program office, 2005-2014 NEHRP Agency Budgets, via personal communication with Jack
Hayes, Director, NEHRP, June 20, 2014.
Notes: According to the NEHRP program office, ARRA funds are not included. The USGS enacted funding
reflects amount appropriated for the USGS; FEMA, NIST, and NSF budgets reflect agency allocations for NEHRP
activities from the total agency appropriations.
NEHRP Legislation in the 113th Congress
Title I of H.R. 2132, the Natural Hazards Risk Reduction Act of 2013, would authorize
appropriations for NEHRP through FY2017, retain NIST as the lead NEHRP agency, and
authorize total appropriations of about $906 million over five years. Title II of the bill would
authorize appropriations for the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Act (first enacted in 2004
as Title II of P.L. 108-360 and modeled after NEHRP), and Title III would create an interagency
coordinating committee, chaired by the director of NIST, that would oversee the planning and
coordination of both the earthquake and wind hazards programs. The single interagency
coordinating committee would replace the two separate interagency committees overseeing the
current earthquake and wind hazards programs. The bill was introduced on May 23, 2013, by
Representative Frederica Wilson, and referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology, the Committee on Natural Resources, and the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure.
The bill would give the interagency coordinating committee authority to “make proposals for
planning and coordination of any other Federal research for natural hazard mitigation that the
Committee considers appropriate.” The potentially broader mandate for the interagency
coordinating committee—to embrace all natural hazards in its deliberations—could reflect an
emphasis on natural hazard mitigation presented in the bill’s “Findings” section. The bill finds
that research is needed to better understand institutional, social, behavioral, and economic factors
that influence how risk mitigation is implemented, and that a major goal of federally supported
natural hazards-related research should be to increase the adoption of hazard mitigation measures.
The House has not acted on H.R. 2132; however, on July 29, 2014, the House Science, Space,
and Technology Committee, Subcommittee on Research and Technology, held a hearing that
Congressional Research Service
4
The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief
reviewed the NEHRP program. According to the charter, the hearing intended to examine
strengths, weaknesses, challenges, and accomplishments of NEHRP.4
Authorization of Appropriations in H.R. 2132
H.R. 2132 would authorize total appropriations for NEHRP of approximately $906 million for a
five-year period ending in FY2017, with 90% of the funding authorized for the USGS and NSF,
and the remainder for FEMA and NIST. (See Table 2.) The total authorized amounts would be
slightly greater than what was authorized by P.L. 108-360 over five years from FY2005 through
FY2009.
Table 2. NEHRP Authorization for Appropriations Under H.R. 2132 (113th Congress)
($ millions)
Total
Total
FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2013-FY2017 FY2005-FY2009
USGS 90.0 92.1 94.3 96.5 98.8
471.7 423.6
NSF 64.1 66.1 68.0
70.1
72.2
340.5
306.3
FEMA 10.2 10.6 10.9
11.2
11.5
54.4
111.5
NIST 7.0 7.7 7.9
8.2
8.4
39.2
61.0
Total 171.3 176.5 181.1
186.0
190.9
905.8
902.4
Source: U.S. House of Representatives, H.R. 2132; and P.L. 108-360.
Note: Total authorization for appropriations for FY2005-FY2009 from P.L. 108-360. Totals may not sum due to
rounding.
The USGS would receive the largest share—about 52%—of total authorized appropriations under
H.R. 2132 as under the expired authorization of appropriations for NEHRP, and the total amount
authorized for the USGS would be approximately $48 million more than the amount authorized
for FY2005 through FY2009. As with the previous authorization, H.R. 2132 singles out the
Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS) to receive a subset of authorized appropriations
within the total USGS-authorized amount. Specifically, ANSS would be authorized to receive $36
million in FY2013, $37 million in FY2014, $38 million in FY2015, $39 million in FY2016, and
$40 million in FY2017. That would total $190 million over five years, compared to a total of
$174 million over five years in the previous authorization.
NEHRP and Induced Seismicity
The Advisory Committee on Earthquake Hazards Reduction, created by P.L. 108-360, made
several recommendations to the NEHRP program in its March 15, 2013, report to the Director of
NIST and to the Interagency Coordinating Committee.5 One of the recommendations called for
increased seismic monitoring to respond to the increased oil and gas exploration and production
4 The hearing charter is available at http://science.house.gov/sites/republicans.science.house.gov/files/documents/
7%2029%2014%20NEHRP%20Hearing%20Charter.pdf.
5 Advisory Committee on Earthquake Hazards Reduction, National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, letter to
Patrick D. Gallagher, Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology, March 15, 2013,
http://www.nehrp.gov/pdf/2013ACEHRReportFinal.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
5
The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief
in the central and eastern United States. Accompanying the increased oil and gas activity has been
an increase in deep well injection and disposal of oilfield brines, produced water, and flowback
water from hydraulic fracturing activities. There are reports that in some instances the deep well
injection activities may have triggered earthquakes, some damaging, in regions that are not
identified as particularly seismically active on U.S. earthquake hazard maps.6 In Oklahoma, for
example, the rate of earthquakes has increased by about 50% since October 2013, and the USGS
has postulated that a likely contributing factor to the increased seismicity has been wastewater
injected into deep geologic formations.7
Outlook and Issues for Congress
At present earthquakes can be neither accurately predicted nor prevented, and in its 1990
reauthorization NEHRP shifted its program emphasis from prediction to hazard reduction. The
program’s focus has been on understanding the earthquake hazard and its risk to populations and
infrastructure in the United States, developing effective measures to reduce earthquake hazards,
and promoting the adoption of earthquake hazards reduction measures in vulnerable areas.
Legislation to modify NEHRP in the 108th Congress (P.L. 108-360) reflected congressional
concerns about how well the four NEHRP agencies coordinated their efforts to maximize the
program’s potential. As part of its oversight responsibilities, Congress may consider evaluating
how effectively the agencies have responded to Congress’s direction in P.L. 108-360 to improve
coordination since 2004.
In the 113th Congress, legislation introduced to make changes to NEHRP—Title 1 of H.R. 2132—
states that a major goal for the program should be “to reduce the loss of life and damage to
communities and infrastructure through increasing the adoption of hazard mitigation measures.”
The bill further emphasizes the social aspects of mitigating earthquake hazards, calling for
research to better understand institutional, social, behavioral, and economic factors that influence
how risk mitigation is implemented, in addition to the traditional research into understanding
how, why, and where earthquakes occur.
Both the House and the Senate introduced legislation to authorize NEHRP and make changes to
the program in the 112th Congress, and two bills were reported out of committee and placed on
the legislative calendar in both chambers (H.R. 3479 and S. 646). Among other changes, H.R.
3479 would have authorized appropriations for three years instead of five. The Senate bill, S. 646,
would have authorized appropriations for five years. Neither bill received further action in the
112th Congress.
The emphasis on mitigation proposed by H.R. 2132 reflects at least two fundamental challenges
to increasing the nation’s resiliency to earthquakes, and to most other major natural hazards such
as hurricanes and major floods. The first is to assess whether social, behavioral, and economic
factors can be understood in sufficient degree to devise strategies that influence behavior to
6 See, for example, National Research Council, “Induced Seismicity Potential in Energy Technologies,” Board on Earth
Sciences and Resources, 2012, http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13355.
7 U.S. Geological Survey-Oklahoma Geological Survey, Record Number of Oklahoma Tremors Raises Possibility of
Damaging Earthquakes, Joint Statement on Oklahoma Earthquakes, May 2, 2014, http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/
ceus/products/newsrelease_05022014.php.
Congressional Research Service
6
The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief
mitigate risk posed by the hazard. Put simply, what motivates people and communities to adopt
risk mitigation measures that address the potential hazard? A second challenge is how to measure
the effectiveness of NEHRP more quantitatively. It is inherently difficult to capture precisely, in
terms of dollars saved or fatalities prevented, the effectiveness of mitigation measures taken
before an earthquake occurs. A major earthquake in a populated urban area within the United
States would cause damage, and in question is how much damage would be prevented by
mitigation strategies underpinned by the NEHRP program.
The history of the NEHRP program has evolved with the recognition that it is unlikely to provide
information that would allow earthquake prediction. The program has shifted its emphasis
towards reducing losses during an earthquake. Establishing a precise relationship between
NEHRP activities and reduced losses from an actual earthquake may also be difficult. However,
as more accurate seismic hazard maps evolve, as understanding of the relationship between
ground motion and building safety improves, and as new tools for issuing warnings and alerts are
devised, trends denoting the effectiveness of NEHRP activities may emerge more clearly.
Author Contact Information
Peter Folger
Specialist in Energy and Natural Resources Policy
pfolger@crs.loc.gov, 7-1517
Congressional Research Service
7