The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction
November 17, 2021
Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief
Linda R. Rowan
The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) aims to understand earthquake
Analyst in Natural
hazards and reduce earthquake risks in the United States. Portions of all 50 states, as well as U.S.
Resources Policy
territories and the District of Columbia, are vulnerable to earthquake hazards and their associated

risks, to varying degrees. Each region’s risk is shaped by the frequency and scale of the hazard as
well as by the population, infrastructure, and economic activity vulnerable to the hazard. Alaska

is the most earthquake-prone state; it has experienced a magnitude 7.0 earthquake almost every
year and a magnitude 8.0 earthquake every 13 years, on average, since 1900. Alaskan earthquakes can trigger damaging
tsunamis, which can be particularly threatening for Alaska, Washington, Oregon, California, and Hawaii. California has the
greatest earthquake risk, because the state has frequent earthquakes that affect a dense built environment and a large
population. The 1994 magnitude 6.7 Northridge earthquake in Los Angeles, Ventura, Orange, and San Bernardino counties is
the third-costliest disaster in the United States.
Congress created NEHRP as a coordinated program through the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (P.L. 95-124)
and most recently reauthorized the program in 2018 (P.L. 115-307). Four federal agencies have responsibilities related to
earthquake hazards and 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). Congress
assigned NIST as the lead agency for NEHRP in 1990. These agencies perform the four major NEHRP activities:
1. Develop effective measures for earthquake hazards reduction
2. Promote the adoption of earthquake hazards reduction measures
3. Improve understanding of earthquakes and their effects
4. Continue the development of the Advanced National Seismic System, a nationwide network of seismic stations
operated by the USGS
The 2018 NEHRP reauthorization did not change the program’s overall structure but did establish new priorities. For
example, the legislation emphasized advancing earthquake early warning systems and promoting community resilience to
earthquakes. An earthquake early warning system is to detect the start of an earthquake and immediately send an alert that
intense and potentially damaging ground shaking will reach a nearby location within seconds to minutes of the alert’s receipt.
Various actions can enhance community resilience, such as building earthquake-resistant structures based on a location’s
seismic hazard and designing structures for functional recovery, meaning the structures can be reoccupied and can function
after an earthquake.
Since the 2018 reauthorization, NEHRP has made progress on warning, resilience, and research, among other activities. An
earthquake early warning system called ShakeAlert operates in California, Oregon, and Washington, providing actionable
alerts to protect people and property from earthquake damage. NIST and FEMA have supplied information and tools to build
and retrofit structures for greater earthquake resistance and for functional recovery. NSF and the USGS have continued to
support research and have initiated new research opportunities that are coordinated across NSF directorates or across
agencies.
Issues for Congress regarding NEHRP include the program’s effectiveness (i.e., how much and how well NEHRP reduces
risks), the effectiveness of federal and nonfederal partnerships (i.e., how well the four agencies work together and with other
partners), and the effectiveness of program management (i.e., how well the agencies plan, manage, and implement program
objectives). Two reports underway in December 2021 may inform congressional deliberations related to NEHRP and
consideration of extending the program’s authorization of appropriations beyond FY2023. The first report is by the
Government Accountability Office (GAO); P.L. 115-307 required GAO to review and report to Congress on NEHRP’s costs
and benefits to assess the program’s effectiveness. The second report, also required by the 2018 act, is a strategic plan for
NEHRP crafted by the program’s Interagency Coordinating Committee.
Congressional Research Service

link to page 5 The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief

he United States is vulnerable to earthquake hazards and their associated risks,1 although
hazards and risks vary greatly across the nation and its territories. Earthquake hazards are
T greatest in the western United States, particularly in California, Washington, Oregon,
Alaska, and Hawaii. Alaska is the most earthquake-prone state; it has experienced a magnitude
(M) 7.0 earthquake almost every year and a M8.0 earthquake every 13 years, on average, since
1900.2 Despite being the most earthquake-prone state, because of Alaska’s small population and
low infrastructure density, most of the state has a relatively low risk for large economic losses
from an earthquake. In contrast, a larger portion of California has greater earthquake risk than
Alaska, because of California’s frequent seismic activity, large population, and extensive
infrastructure.3 The most damaging earthquake and the third-costliest natural hazard event in the
United States was the 1994 M6.7 Northridge earthquake in the Los Angeles metropolitan region,
which caused 60 fatalities, more than 7,000 injuries, 20,000 displaced people, more than 40,000
damaged buildings, and an estimated economic loss of $20 billion.4
Since 1977, the federal government has supported efforts to assess and monitor earthquake
hazards and to reduce related risks in the United States through the National Earthquake Hazards
Reduction Program (NEHRP). The four major NEHRP activities are (1) develop effective
measures for earthquake hazards reduction; (2) promote the adoption of earthquake hazards
reduction measures; (3) improve understanding of earthquakes and their effects; and (4) continue
the development of the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS), a nationwide network of
seismic stations. Today, four federal agencies responsible for earthquake risk reduction coordinate
their activities under NEHRP: the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), National Science Foundation
(NSF), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and National Institute of Standards
and Technology (NIST). For an overview of each agency’s responsibilities, see Table 1.

1 Hazard is not the same as risk. Hazard is a source of danger, whereas risk is the possibility of loss or injury.
Earthquake hazard is related to an earthquake causing intense ground shaking and other damaging effects. The degree
of earthquake hazard is related to the probability of certain damaging effects caused by an earthquake occurring within
a certain period. The degree of earthquake risk is the combination of the degree of earthquake hazard and the extent of
the affected population (which includes the infrastructure supporting that population). Large population centers would
therefore be at a higher risk than small population centers for the same degree of earthquake hazard, in general. In U.S.
Congress, House Committee on Science and Technology, Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977, report to
accompany H.R. 6683, 95th Cong., 1st sess.95-286, part 1, May 11, 1977, p. 3, Congress defined earthquake hazard
reduction as “reducing by any available methods the harm done by earthquakes,” so the intent of Congress is to reduce
risks of earthquake hazards.
2 State of Alaska, Alaska Seismic Hazards Safety Commission, “Earthquake Risk in Alaska,” at
http://seismic.alaska.gov/earthquake_risk.html.
3 For estimates of earthquake hazards and risks displayed on maps divided into states—and the significant hazards and
risks in California, in particular—see the 2018 update of the USGS’s National Seismic Hazard Map. The USGS,
Earthquake Hazards, “Seismic Hazard Maps and Site-Specific Data,” at “ https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/
earthquake-hazards/seismic-hazard-maps-and-site-specific-data; and Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), Hazus Estimated Annualized Earthquake Losses for the United States, FEMA P-366, April 2017, Figure E-1.
4 The USGS, “Impact Summary,” at https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/ci3144585/impact.
Congressional Research Service

1

link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 5 The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief

Table 1. National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) Agencies:
Roles and Activities
Agency
Roles and Activities
NIST

Is the lead agency for NEHRP and coordinates NEHRP activities

Conducts applied earthquake engineering research to provide the technical basis for building
codes, standards, and building practices

Is responsible for research and development to close the gap between research and
implementation of earthquake risk mitigation technologies
FEMA

Assists other agencies and private-sector groups to prepare and disseminate building codes and
practices for structures and lifeline infrastructure

Aids development of performance-based codes for buildings and other structures

Supports communication of earthquake early warning alerts via the Integrated Public Alert and
Warning System and Wireless Emergency Alertsa
USGS

Provides earthquake monitoring and notification, earthquake hazards assessments, earthquake
hazards maps, and earthquake research

Operates the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS), regional geodetic networks, and the
National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC) to provide earthquake understanding,
information, warning, and responseb
NSF

Supports basic research in the earth sciences, engineering, and social sciences to understand
earthquakes, their hazards, and their risk reduction

Supports additional engineering research through the Natural Hazards Engineering Research
Infrastructure (NHERI),c additional earth science research through the Seismological Facilities
for the Advancement of Geoscience (SAGE) and the Geodetic Facilities for the Advancement
of Geoscience (GAGE),d and additional social science research through the Natural Hazards
Center (NHC)e
USGS and

Together, support the Global Seismographic Network (GSN),f regional networks, the
NSF
Southern California Earthquake Center,g earthquake research, earthquake early warningh, post-
earthquake assessments, and education and outreach
Source: Activities summarized from NEHRP’s website under, “About Us,” at https://www.nehrp.gov/about/
agencies.htm.
Notes: FEMA = Federal Emergency Management Agency; NIST = National Institute of Standards and
Technology; NSF = National Science Foundation; USGS = U.S. Geological Survey.
a. See FEMA, “Integrated Public Alert & Warning System,” at https://www.fema.gov/emergency-managers/
practitioners/integrated-public-alert-warning-system; and FEMA, “Wireless Emergency Alerts,” at
https://www.fema.gov/emergency-managers/practitioners/integrated-public-alert-warning-system/public/
wireless-emergency-alerts.
b. For more information about ANSS, NEIC, GSN, and other USGS earthquake monitoring efforts see the
USGS, Earthquake Hazards, “Monitoring,” at https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/earthquake-hazards/
monitoring.
c. See NSF’s NEHRI description at NSF, “Natural Hazards Engineering Research Infrastructure (NHERI),” at
https://beta.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/natural-hazards-engineering-research-infrastructure-nheri.
d. See NSF’s SAGE description at NSF, Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology, “NSF Makes 5-Year
$93M Award to IRIS to Manage the SAGE Facility,” press release, at https://www.iris.edu/hq/news/story/
nsf_makes_5_year_93m_award_to_iris_to_manage_the_sage_facility; and NSF’s GAGE description at
UNAVCO’s “GAGE Facility,” at https://www.unavco.org/what-we-do/gage-facility/.
e. See NSF’s NHC description at Natural Hazards Center at https://hazards.colorado.edu/.
f.
See the USGS’s GSN description at the USGS, “GSN—Global Seismographic Network”
https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/earthquake-hazards/gsn-global-seismographic-network.
g. For more information about the Southern California Earthquake Center, see https://www.scec.org.
h. For more information about the earthquake early warning system operating in Washington, Oregon, and
California, see the ShakeAlert website at https://www.shakealert.org.
Congressional Research Service

2

The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief

Major Changes to NEHRP Since 1977
In 1977, Congress passed the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act (P.L. 95-124), establishing
NEHRP as a coordinated earthquake hazards reduction program for the United States.5 The
legislation directed the President to establish a program to advance the following objectives:
 Development of earthquake-resistant construction
 Earthquake prediction and identification and assessment of seismic hazards
 Development and promotion of model codes for land use and building
 Development of earthquake preparedness, warning, response, and recovery
 Development of research to increase earthquake hazards and risks knowledge to
reduce risks, deal with prediction consequences, assure insurance availability,
and control seismic events
The law authorized appropriations for the USGS and NSF to carry out these objectives. Beyond
these specific authorizations, Congress did not identify a lead agency or specific activities for
other agencies. FEMA was created in 1979; in 1980, Congress amended the Earthquake Hazards
Reduction Act in P.L. 96-472 to make FEMA the lead agency. Since 1980, NEHRP has been a
coordinated program of four agencies: the USGS, NSF, FEMA and NIST (formerly National
Bureau of Standards). In 2004, Congress designated NIST the lead agency for NEHRP in the
National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-360).
The USGS and NSF roles in NEHRP initially focused on research to understand and predict
earthquakes. However, earthquake prediction proved insoluble,6 and NEHRP shifted its focus
beginning in 1990 to understanding, monitoring, assessing, issuing early warnings,7 and
responding to earthquakes. Congress removed language related to earthquake prediction in the
National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-307).
Congress reauthorized NEHRP in 1990, 1997, 2000, and 2004 and changed the program’s
emphasis and oversight in various ways, as detailed below.

5 Congress emphasized a coordinated program in the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act (P.L. 95-124). It also
requested management, budget, and implementation plans to explain how the program would carry out its objectives
and to define the roles and responsibilities of federal agencies involved in the program. P.L. 95-124 directed the
President to establish the program to include the USGS, NSF, Department of Defense, Department of Housing and
Urban Development, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, National Bureau of Standards, Energy Research and Development Administration, Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, and National Fire Prevention and Control Administration. Congress also called for coordination and
cooperation with state and local governments in P.L. 95-124; this directive remains part of the statute.
6 See, for example, the USGS, “Can You Predict Earthquakes?,” at https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/can-you-predict-
earthquakes?qt-news_science_products=0#qt-news_science_products.
7 The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) shifted its focus from predicting earthquakes to
issuing a warning after an earthquake is detected in the 1990s. Congress’s initial, prediction-focused definition of
earthquake warning in P.L. 95-124 arose because China had predicted and evacuated over a million people about five
hours before a damaging earthquake struck on February 4, 1975 (see the USGS, Earthquake Hazards Program,
“Repeating Earthquakes,” at https://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/parkfield/eq_predict.php) and because research
suggested prediction and imminent warning for earthquakes might be feasible. H. Rpt 95-268, Part 1, stated, “As
defined in the act, an earthquake prediction is a prediction, in definite or probabilistic terms, of the time, place, and
magnitude of an earthquake, whereas an earthquake warning means a recommendation that normal life routines should
be changed for a time because an earthquake is believed imminent.” However, to date, there is no feasible way to
provide an earthquake prediction or a warning that an earthquake is imminent. Today, the terms earthquake warning
and earthquake early warning typically are defined as a warning that damaging ground shaking may reach a warned
location within seconds to minutes after an earthquake has been detected as starting.
Congressional Research Service

3

link to page 6 The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief

 In 1990, the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization
Act (P.L. 101-614) directed the USGS to study faults and earthquakes to
determine earthquake frequency, provide a seismic hazards assessment, and
conduct research and development for earthquake-resistant structures. The
amendments directed the USGS to establish a Center for International Exchange
of Earthquake Information, operate a National Seismic Network, continue work
on earthquake prediction, and conduct post-earthquake investigations with NSF.
The law directed NIST to develop seismic standards for buildings and lifelines
(i.e., essential utility and transportation systems).8 It established a NEHRP
Advisory Committee until September 30, 1993, to report on NEHRP activities
and advise the program.9 The act directed the Office of Science and Technology
Policy (OSTP) to study and report on interagency collaboration.
 In 1997, P.L. 105-47 amended NEHRP to (1) direct the USGS to develop a
prototype real-time seismic warning system,10 (2) allow NSF to use competitive
grants to develop earth science education materials for kindergarten through 12th
grade, and (3) request FEMA to study and assess national earthquake emergency
training capabilities.
 In 2000, P.L. 106-503 amended NEHRP to (1) direct the USGS to establish an
Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring program and a Scientific
Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee and (2) direct NSF to establish the
George E. Brown Jr. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES)
program to research earthquakes’ effects on structures and to develop improved
designs for earthquake-resistant structures.11
 In 2004, Congress enacted P.L. 108-360 and established an Interagency
Coordinating Committee (ICC) and an Advisory Committee on Earthquake
Hazards Reduction (ACEHR).12 The ICC consisted of the USGS, NSF, FEMA,
NIST, OSTP, and the Office of Management and Budget.

8 Within the earthquake community, the term lifelines generally has given way to the term lifeline infrastructure. See
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, “Improve Reliability of Lifeline Infrastructure Systems,” white paper, April
5, 2016, at https://www.eeri.org/wp-content/uploads/eeri-policy-lifelines.pdf.
9 The NEHRP Advisory Committee was composed of experts outside of the NEHRP agencies. Congress intended the
committee to review NEHRP and present its findings to Congress, while advising NEHRP about its review. Congress
established a new Advisory Committee on Earthquake Hazards Reduction (ACEHR) in 2004. ACEHR is distinct from
the previous committee, but the two share some aspects of committee structure and some objectives.
10 This warning system refers to providing an automated alert to high-risk activities (e.g., stopping trains when an
earthquake is detected) about damaging ground shaking after an earthquake starts. See footnote 7 for an explanation of
the changing definition of warning over NEHRP’s legislative history.
11 From FY2004 through FY2014, George E. Brown Jr. Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES)
program activities consisted 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. The National Science Foundation (NSF) ended NEES in FY2014 and started the Natural Hazards Engineering
Research Infrastructure (NEHRI) program in FY2015. NEHRI is a distributed, multiuser, national facility that provides
research infrastructure for the natural hazards research community, including earthquake and wind engineering
experimental facilities, cyber infrastructure, computational modeling and simulation tools, and research data. A
description of NEHRI facilities and opportunities is available at NSF, “Natural Hazards Engineering Research
Infrastructure (NEHRI),” at https://beta.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/natural-hazards-engineering-research-
infrastructure-nheri.
12 ACEHR is composed of 11 outside experts on earthquake hazard risk reduction from science, engineering, and
industry standards organizations; financial organizations; and state and local governments. ACEHR is to provide the
following assessments in biennial reports to Congress: (1) trends and developments in the science and engineering of
Congressional Research Service

4

link to page 8 link to page 6

The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief

Figure 1. NEHRP Agency Responsibilities and End Users of NEHRP Products

Source: National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) program office at http://www.nehrp.gov/
pdf/ppt_sdr.pdf (modified by CRS).
Notes: FEMA = Federal Emergency Management Agency; NIST = National Institute of Standards and
Technology; NSF = National Science Foundation; USGS = U.S. Geological Survey.
NEHRP Reauthorization Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-307)
The 2018 NEHRP reauthorization act (P.L. 115-307) kept the four-agency program intact. The act
called for additional oversight, management planning, and strategic planning to enhance
coordination, cooperation, and efficient progress on objectives (See Figure 1 for agency
coordination and cooperation from research through implementation). The act expanded emphasis
on earthquake early warning systems and earthquake-resistant construction and requested support
for resilience, such as earthquake-resistant structures that continue to function after an event and
communities that are prepared to respond effectively to and recover efficiently from a seismic
event.
Changes to Findings, Purposes and Definitions (Section 2)
Starting in the 1990s, NEHRP activities shifted from earthquake prediction to earthquake warning
after an earthquake is detected. The 2018 NEHRP reauthorization act codified that shift by
removing references to earthquake prediction throughout the act. For example, Section 2 of the
2018 act modified the congressional findings section (42 U.S.C. 7701) by omitting the linkage
between seismological research and earthquake prediction, substituting the finding that “a well-
funded seismological research program could provide the scientific understanding needed to fully
implement an effective earthquake early warning system.”13

earthquake hazards reduction; (2) effectiveness of NEHRP; (3) the need to revise NEHRP; and (4) NEHRP’s
management, coordination, implementation, and activities. ACEHR is distinct from the congressionally established
1990 NEHRP Advisory Committee, which ended its service in 1993.
13 For a discussion of prediction and warning and the changes in the meaning of a warning system, see footnote 7.
Congressional Research Service

5

The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief

Section 2 of the 2018 act introduced the concept of resilience to earthquake hazards.14 For
example, Section 2 cited a National Research Council study with objectives for achieving
national earthquake resilience.15 Section 2 amended the congressional statement-of-purpose
section (42 U.S.C. 7702) to add the purpose of increasing communities’ resilience to future
earthquakes to the existing purpose of reducing risks to life and property. The definitions section
of the 2018 act defined community resilience as “the ability of a community to prepare and plan
for, absorb, recover from, and more successfully adapt to seismic events” (42 U.S.C. 7703).
Section 2 of P.L. 115-307 called for resilience to include building design and construction, so that
structures are built to potentially continue functioning or be reoccupied despite earthquake
damage. Section 2 introduced the language of “re-occupancy, recovery, reconstruction.”
In addition, P.L. 115-307 added the states of Oregon and Tennessee, together with the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, to the 15 states the law named as facing significant earthquake
risk. The 2018 law identified 39 states facing major or moderate seismic risk (42 U.S.C. 7701).16
Changes to Program Activities and Agency Responsibilities
(Section 3)
Section 3 of the 2018 NEHRP reauthorization act added new duties for the ICC. P.L. 115-307
required the committee to develop a strategic plan for NEHRP, a management plan to implement
the strategic plan, and a coordinated interagency budget on a biennial basis. The ICC is
developing a strategic plan for FY2022-FY2029 and intends to submit the plan to Congress likely
in fall 202117 the management plan and interagency budget await a finalized strategic plan.
In addition, P.L. 115-307 required the ICC to develop memoranda of understanding with any
relevant federal agencies (such as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) on data sharing and resource commitments in
the event of an earthquake disaster.
Further, the ICC shall coordinate with the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior on the use of
federal lands for monitoring, research, and data collection. The ICC is required to coordinate with
the Secretaries of Transportation and Housing and Urban Development on earthquakes’ effects on
transportation and building stocks (including the lifeline infrastructure). The 2018 act required the
NEHRP ICC to coordinate with its counterpart committee on the National Windstorm Impact
Reduction Program,18—as well as with other natural hazards coordination committees, as
determined appropriate—to share data and best practices.

14The term resilience in discussions regarding reducing earthquake risk and resilience typically refers to better
preparations, better situational awareness, and more earthquake-resistant structures that lead to less damage and faster
recovery from an earthquake. Earthquake-resistant structures are structures that are capable of withstanding, with less
damage, an earthquake that could harm people and property and that are capable of reoccupation and function right
after an earthquake.
15National Research Council, National Earthquake Resilience, Research, Implementation, and Outreach, 2011, at
http://www.nehrp.gov/pdf/nrc2011.pdf.
16 The act identifies these particular states—Alaska, California, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana,
Nevada, Oregon, New Jersey, New York, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, and Washington―and the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico as facing significant earthquake risks.
17 NEHRP, ACEHR Report on NEHRP Effectiveness FY20-FY21: A Report from the Advisory Committee on
Earthquake Hazards Reduction, September 30, 2021, available at https://nehrp.gov/pdf/
ACEHR_2021_Report_Package_to_NIST.pdf (hereinafter cited as NEHRP, ACEHR Report, 2021), pp. i and 2.
18 See National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Engineering Laboratory/Materials and Structural
Congressional Research Service

6

link to page 11 link to page 6 link to page 7 The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief

Section 3 of P.L. 115-307 modified FEMA’s duties and required FEMA to enter cooperative
agreements or contracts to establish demonstration projects on earthquake hazards modification,
link research and mitigation efforts with emergency management programs, and prepare
educational materials for national distribution (substituting the word “shall” in the enacted
language for the word “may” in existing law).
Section 3 of P.L. 115-307 removed statutory language requiring the USGS to develop procedures
for making earthquake predictions and replaced it with language for developing procedures to
issue earthquake alerts and early warnings. The 2018 act inserted language to “continue the
development of the ... [ANSS], including earthquake early warning capabilities,” as part of 42
U.S.C. 7704(a)(2)(D).19 Further, P.L. 115-307 required the USGS, in the event of an earthquake,
to issue an alert and a warning, when necessary and feasible, to FEMA, NIST, and state and local
officials. The act required the USGS to publish maps of active faults and folds, plus maps of areas
that are susceptible to specific earthquake hazards (e.g., liquefaction or landslides).20
The 2018 NEHRP reauthorization act removed language in existing law that required NSF to
support earthquake-related research using NEES. Instead, P.L. 115-307 referred to using
“experimental and computational facilities.”21 Section 3 of P.L. 115-307 added a new subsection
to existing law requiring NSF to identify and track NEHRP grant funding.
Review of NEHRP (Section 4)
Section 4 of P.L. 115-307 required the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to complete a
review of federal earthquake hazards risk reduction efforts and report its findings within three
years of enactment.22 GAO interviewed the agencies and is preparing its findings for Congress.23
Seismic Standards (Section 5)
Section 5 of P.L. 115-307 replaced language in current law (42 U.S.C. 7705b) that called for the
adoption of seismic safety standards for buildings constructed or leased by the federal
government. The 2018 NEHRP reauthorization act required, instead, an assessment and
recommendations for improving the built environment and critical infrastructure, specifically “to

Systems Division, “National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program Office,” at https://www.nist.gov/el/materials-and-
structural-systems-division-73100/national-windstorm-impact-reduction-program-nwirp.
19 In Section 8 (Technical Corrections) of P.L. 115-307, the act deleted references in the U.S. Code to the Advanced
National Seismic System (ANSS) predecessor—the Advanced National Seismic Research and Monitoring System. For
more on ANSS, see the “Management of Advanced National Seismic System (Section 6)” section of this product. Also
note that earthquake early warning means providing an alert after the start of an earthquake is detected, which is the
modern definition and usage of the term (as opposed to the meaning of warning in the 1977 act, see footnote 7).
20 Earthquakes cause intense ground shaking, ground displacement and liquefaction. Liquefaction occurs when loose,
weak or water-saturated soils or rocky materials lose their strength because of earthquake-induced ground shaking.
When liquefaction happens around structural elements, such as buildings or bridges, these structures can be damaged or
collapse. For more information about liquefaction, see USGS, “What Is Liquefaction?,” at https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/
what-liquefaction. Earthquakes can trigger other natural hazards such as tsunamis, landslides, fires, floods, or volcanic
eruption.
21 See footnote 11.
22 P.L. 115-307 required GAO to submit the report to the Senate Committees on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation; Energy and Natural Resources; and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and to the House
Committees on Science, Space, and Technology; Natural Resources; and Homeland Security.
23 NEHRP, ACEHR Report, 2021, pp. 5-6.
Congressional Research Service

7

The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief

reflect performance goals stated in terms of post-earthquake reoccupancy and functional recovery
time.” This language highlighted one of the changes in NEHRP emphasis to enhance resilience.
The NIST Director and the FEMA Administrator appointed a committee of experts, representing
federal agencies, nongovernmental organizations, the private sector, disaster management
associations, engineering associations, and construction and homebuilding industry associations,
to prepare such a report for Congress.24 NIST and FEMA jointly published the committee’s report
in January 2021.25 The report recommended seven actions for communities to enhance resiliency:
1. Develop a framework for post-earthquake reoccupancy and functional recovery
objectives
2. Design new buildings to meet recovery-based objectives
3. Retrofit existing buildings to meet recovery-based objectives
4. Design, upgrade, and maintain lifeline infrastructure systems to meet recovery-
based objectives
5. Develop and implement pre-disaster recovery planning focused on recovery-
based objectives
6. Provide education and outreach to enhance awareness and understanding of
earthquake risk and recovery-based objectives
7. Facilitate access to financial resources needed to achieve recovery-based
objectives.
Management of Advanced National Seismic System (Section 6)
ANSS is a nationwide network of seismic stations operated by the USGS. It consists of a
“backbone” network of about 100 seismic stations throughout the United States, the National
Earthquake Information Center, the National Strong Motion Project, and 15 regional seismic
networks operated by the USGS and partner institutions.26 The 2018 NEHRP reauthorization act
required a new five-year management plan for ANSS. The USGS submitted a five-year
management plan for ANSS to Congress in November 2021.27 The plan prioritized core ANSS
activities including monitoring, 24/7 reporting, rapid assessment, and earthquake early warning.
Authorization of Appropriations (Section 7)
Section 7 of P.L. 115-307 authorized appropriations for NEHRP activities over a five-year period,
FY2019-FY2023. The act apportioned the same authorized amount per agency each year. The
total authorization broken down by agency was as follows:

24 P.L. 115-307 required the committee to submit a report to Congress with recommended options no later than June 30,
2020. The committee submitted the report to the Senate Committees on Commerce, Science, and Transportation;
Energy and Natural Resources; and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and to the House Committees on
Science, Space, and Technology; Natural Resources; and Homeland Security.
25 NIST and FEMA, Recommended Options for Improving the Built Environment for Post-Earthquake Reoccupancy
and Functional Recovery Time, NIST-FEMA Special Publication FEMA P-2090/NIST SP-1254, January 2021, at
https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1254.
26 For more information, see the USGS, Earthquake Hazards Program, “ANSS—Advanced National Seismic System,”
at https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/earthquake-hazards/anss-advanced-national-seismic-system.
27 The USGS, Earthquake Hazards Program, Advanced National Seismic System 5-Year Management Plan, November
2021.
Congressional Research Service

8

link to page 12 The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief

 USGS: $83.4 million per year, $417 million total28
 NSF: $54 million per year, $270 million total
 FEMA: $8.76 million per year, $43.8 million total
 NIST: $5.9 million per year, $29.5 million total
The total five-year NEHRP authorization of appropriations was $760.305 million for FY2019-
FY2023, or about $152 million annually. The findings section (Section 2) of P.L. 115-307 noted
that the National Research Council in 2011 recommended funding of approximately $300 million
annually for 20 years (in 2009 dollars);29 that amount is about twice the average annual amount
authorized for appropriations in P.L. 115-307. Table 2 shows the enacted funding for NEHRP
agencies from FY2005 through FY2021 and the budget request for FY2022.30
Table 2. Enacted Funding for NEHRP, FY2005-FY2021, and FY2022 Budget Request
(in millions of current dollars)
Fiscal Year
USGS
NSF
FEMA
NIST
Total
FY2005
58.3
53.1
14.7
0.9
127.0
FY2006
54.5
53.8
9.5
0.9
118.7
FY2007
55.4
54.8
9.1
1.7
121.0
FY2008
58.1
55.6
6.1
1.7
121.5
FY2009
61.2
55.3
9.1
4.1
129.7
FY2010
62.8
55.3
9.0
4.1
131.2
FY2011
61.4
53.3
7.8
4.1
126.6
FY2012
60.4
53.2
7.8
4.1
125.5
FY2013
55.6
52.2
7.8
3.9
119.5
FY2014
58.7
51.0
7.8
3.9
121.4
FY2015
64.4
52.2
7.4
3.9
127.9
FY2016
67.0
54.2
8.5
5.2
134.9
FY2017
71.0
54.2
8.5
5.2
138.9
FY2018
90.1
65.7
8.5
5.2
169.5
FY2019
90.1
60.5
8.7
5.2
164.5
FY2020
92.1
53.4
8.9
4.8
159.2
FY2021
92.6
53.4
8.9
4.8
159.7

28 P.L. 115-307 required $30 million of the annual authorized amount for the USGS be made available for completion
of ANSS.
29 National Research Council, National Earthquake Resilience, Research, Implementation, and Outreach, 2011, p. 4, at
http://www.nehrp.gov/pdf/nrc2011.pdf.
30 Enacted appropriations for FY2005-FY2009 totaled $617.9 million, or 68% of the total amount of $902.4 million
authorized in P.L. 108-360 over the five-year span. P.L. 115-307 authorized a total of $760.3 million for NEHRP
activities summed over the five-year span FY2019-FY2023, approximately $142 million less than the total amount
authorized by P.L. 108-360 (not adjusted for inflation). In constant 2018 dollars, the difference between total
authorized amounts over the five-year periods in P.L. 108-360 and P.L. 115-307 would be at least $330 million (using
the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, CPI Inflation Calculator, at https://www.bls.gov/data/
inflation_calculator.htm).
Congressional Research Service

9

The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief

Fiscal Year
USGS
NSF
FEMA
NIST
Total
FY2022
99.8
53.4
8.7
4.8
166.7
Requested
Sources: NEHRP Office, see “About Us”; Annual Reports, Budgets and Plans, Agency Budget Charts, 2005-2021
NEHRP Agency Budgets chart and 2022 Requested Funding for NEHRP Agencies, at https://www.nehrp.gov/
about/reports.htm.
Notes: According to the NEHRP office, the FEMA and NIST budgets are those agencies’ allocations for NEHRP
activities from the total agency appropriations through FY2021. The NSF budget is the foundation’s estimated
expenditure for NEHRP activities from total agency appropriations through FY2021. Beginning in FY2018, the
USGS budgets included congressional “one-time” funding additions for ShakeAlert but excluded the $8.0 mil ion
supplemental funding for seismic network restoration fol owing Hurricane Maria. Amounts are reported to the
nearest $0.1 mil ion.
NEHRP Progress Since Reauthorization in 2018
Since NEHRP’s reauthorization in 2018, the program has focused on earthquake early warning
systems, improved building codes and building standards, functional recovery methods for
structures, pathways to community resilience, and continued basic research to understand
earthquake hazards and risks. ACEHR reviews NEHRP progress and recommends actions to
make NEHRP more effective in biennial reports to Congress, as mandated by P.L. 108-360. 31 The
2021 ACEHR report identified the following three NEHRP activities as noteworthy and
continued priorities:
1. ShakeAlert, the earthquake early warning system operating on the West Coast
2. The joint NIST-FEMA report on reoccupancy and functional recovery, which
made seven recommendations and detailed four options for Congress to carry out
these recommendations
3. The significance and status of basic research on earthquakes and earthquake-
resistant structures through traditional grants and cooperative agreements, plus
the addition of three new coordinated research opportunities
Earthquake Early Warning: ShakeAlert
The first operational earthquake early warning system in the United States,32 called ShakeAlert,
provides alerts to users in California, Oregon, and Washington.33 Several studies show that

31 The ACEHR, established by Congress (P.L. 108-360), provides comprehensive biennial reports on NEHRP progress.
Two reports, covering FY2018-FY2019 and FY2020-FY2021, respectively, provide more details on recent NEHRP
activities: NEHRP, ACEHR Report on NEHPR Effectiveness FY18-FY19: A Report from the Advisory Committee on
Earthquake Hazards Reduction, September 27, 2019, at https://www.nehrp.gov/pdf/
September_2019_ReporttotheNISTDirector.pdf; and NEHRP, ACEHR Report, 2021.
32 Operational means the system sends warnings to technical users who have agreements with ShakeAlert (and, in
some cases, hardened communications that allow for the most rapid and secure alerting) and to individuals who signed
up for ShakeAlert messaging through their state emergency management agencies. In some areas and in some cases,
the system is not fully operational, because there are not enough sensors to monitor for earthquakes or because the
communications of alerts are not established to provide adequate warning before the shaking arrives.
33 Users include government and nongovernmental organizations that partner with ShakeAlert to receive warnings so
they can take specific actions to reduce risks. Some of these actions are automated, such as the Bay Area Rapid Transit
System (BART) automatically slowing or stopping trains because of an earthquake alert. Other users include
individuals who sign up to receive the alerts through the California, Oregon, or Washington emergency management
agencies. Alerts to individuals suggest protective actions based on the severity of the shaking. Action standards were
Congressional Research Service

10

link to page 13 The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief

earthquake early warning systems are cost-effective—that is, the cost savings in terms of risk
reduction is greater than the actual cost of the system.34 One study estimated that early warnings
reduce injuries from earthquakes by more than 50%.35 Today, after an earthquake starts,
ShakeAlert warns users in California, Oregon, and Washington that intense ground shaking will
reach their location in seconds to minutes. This warning allows users to take actions to protect
people and property before shaking occurs and thereby reduce the risk of damage to structures,
lifelines, transportation, construction, medical procedures, business operations, educational
services, and other activities. Several organizational users, such as train systems and large
buildings, have programmed their infrastructure to take certain automated actions upon receipt of
a warning.36 Nonautomated responses by individuals include executing the drop, cover, and hold
on maneuver and stopping school activities, vehicles, and hazardous activities.37
Reoccupancy Recommendations and Building Codes
NEHRP generates improved design guidance products, model building codes, national consensus
building standards, and construction guidelines to reduce earthquake risks. A 2019 study by the
National Institute of Building Sciences estimated that the development and adoption of seismic
provisions in building codes since the advent of modern seismic design provisions have produced
a national average benefit-cost ratio of 12 to 1 (i.e., $12 saved in avoided losses for every $1
invested in earthquake requirements for buildings).38 The study estimated that retrofitting older
buildings to earthquake-resistant standards provides a national average benefit-cost ratio of 13 to
1.
The 2021 ACEHR report encouraged NEHRP to follow through on the recommendations in the
2020 joint NIST-FEMA report on reoccupancy and functional recovery. The 2021 ACEHR report
suggested four options for Congress to help NEHRP follow through on the recommendations:
1. Support technical development of recovery-based regulations and retrofitting of
buildings and lifeline infrastructure systems
2. Incentivize action (e.g., through FEMA’s Building Resilient Infrastructure and
Communities grants)39 by encouraging state and local jurisdictions to adopt
recovery-based codes, standards, and practices

developed by the Southern California Earthquake Center and other authorities.
34 NEHRP, ACEHR Report, 2021, p. 13; and J. A. Strauss and R. M. Allen, “Benefits and Costs of Earthquake Early
Warning,” Seismological Research Letters, vol. 87, no. 3 (May-June 2016), pp. 765 -772 (hereinafter cited as Strauss
and Allen, “Benefits and Costs”).
35 Strauss and Allen, “Benefits and Costs.”
36 See footnote 33 for an example of an automated alert.
37 For a list of actions to take before, during, and after an earthquake, including a description of drop, cover, and hold
on, see Ready.gov, “Earthquakes,” at https://www.ready.gov/earthquakes.
38 National Institute of Building Sciences, Natural Hazard Mitigation Saves, 2019, see https://nibs.org/projects/natural-
hazard-mitigation-saves-2019-report.
39 FEMA introduced a new program in FY2020, the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC). The
priorities for BRIC in FY2021 are to incentivize natural hazard risk reduction activities that mitigate risk to public
infrastructure and disadvantaged communities; projects that mitigate risk to one or more community lifelines; projects
that incorporate nature-based solutions; projects that enhance climate resilience; and adoption and enforcement of the
latest published editions of building codes. More information is available at the FEMA BRIC website,
https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation/building-resilient-infrastructure-communities.
Congressional Research Service

11

The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief

3. Encourage the executive branch to develop recovery-based seismic design and
retrofit requirements for federally owned and leased buildings
4. Lead the development and implementation of a federal education campaign
around earthquake risk and recovery-based objectives
Basic Research
The 2021 ACEHR report considered basic research the foundation for making progress on
earthquake early warning systems and improving earthquake-resistant building codes, standards,
and construction practices. Together, research, warning, and standards enhance resilience, and
resilience is a congressional objective emphasized in the NEHRP law. Much of the basic research
occurs through grants and cooperative agreements awarded in three of the NSF’s directorates:
Geosciences; Engineering; and Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences. The 2021 ACEHR
report highlighted three new research initiatives involving these NSF directorates and other
agencies. One of these initiatives, a new cross-directorate opportunity known as Coastlines and
People Competition, funds a research hub to examine Cascadia Subduction Zone hazards and
mitigation, among other projects.40 The other new initiatives, NSF-NIST Disaster Resilience
Research Grants and the NSF-Department of Homeland Security Civic Innovation Challenge, are
interagency competitions that aim to strengthen earthquake resilience by improving fundamental
knowledge of earthquakes and their effects.41
Issues for Congress
Congress established NEHRP in 1977 to understand earthquake hazards and reduce their risks.
NEHRP has made progress on congressional objectives for earthquake warning, risk reduction,
and resilience. Congress may consider several issues regarding NEHRP, including the following:
 Program Efficacy. How much and how well does NEHRP reduce risks?
 Federal and Nonfederal Partnerships: How well do the four agencies work
together and with other partners?
 Program Management: How well do the agencies plan, manage, and implement
program objectives?
In the coming months, Congress is expected to receive the ICC’s FY2022-FY2029 strategic plan
for NEHRP and GAO’s report on the effectiveness of earthquake hazards risk reduction.
Congress may consider the plans and recommendations in these reports as part of its deliberations
on and oversight of NEHRP. In addition, in its deliberations on NEHRP funding and the
authorization of appropriations timeframe (which currently expires at the end of FY2023),
Congress may use information in these and earlier reports, such as the 2011 National Research
Council report that recommended $300 million annually for NEHRP.

40 The Cascadia Subduction Zone is a major tectonic plate boundary that lies just offshore of southwestern British
Columbia, the Pacific Northwest and northern California. At the plate boundary, the Juan de Fuca oceanic plate
subducts beneath the North American crustal plate causing earthquakes and volcanic activity, among other hazards. See
NSF Award Description: Large-Scale CoPe: The Cascadia Coastlines and People Hazards Research Hub
https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=2103713&HistoricalAwards=false.
41 NEHRP, ACEHR Report, 2021, pp. 8-9 and 14-15.
Congressional Research Service

12

The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP): Issues in Brief

Author Information

Linda R. Rowan

Analyst in Natural Resources Policy

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
R43141 · VERSION 20 · UPDATED
13