FEMA 383 / March 2003 

Expanding and Using Knowledge to 

Reduce Earthquake Losses:

The National Earthquake Hazards 

Reduction Program 

Strategic Plan 

2001 - 2005

The development and use of this strategic plan will result in a new era of coordination and 

advancement for the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program. It will serve as a 

mechanism to improve coordination among the agencies, and provide the broad vision that 

NEHRP will use to move forward boldly into the 21st century. This NEHRP Strategic Plan, 

respectfully submitted, represents the consensus view of the Policy Coordination Council (PCC). 

Anthony S. Lowe (Chair) 

Director 

Mitigation Division 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

Department of Homeland Security 

Dr. John A. Brighton 

Assistant Director 

Directorate for Engineering 

National Science Foundation 

Dr. Arden Bement 

Director 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology 

Dr. Charles Groat 

Director 

United States Geological Survey 

i 
ii 
March 1, 2003 

Members of Congress: 

This Strategic Plan is submitted in response to PL 95-124 (as amended) and PL 101-614. It 

serves as an operational plan for the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) 

agencies and guides Federal earthquake research, loss reduction, and mitigation efforts in the 

U.S. The plan articulates the mission and goals of the NEHRP, provides a framework for 

priority-setting and coordinating activities, and defines priority areas for the future. 

The plan was developed jointly among the four NEHRP agencies, the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency (FEMA), the National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST), the 

National Science Foundation (NSF), and the United States Geological Survey (USGS), and the 

earthquake stakeholder community. Two workshops, involving over 60 stakeholders, were held 

in 1999 and 2000 to help identify priority implementation activities (Appendices A and B). The 

input offered during the workshops has had a significant impact on the overall direction of future 

earthquake hazard mitigation efforts as identified in the Plan. The stakeholder involvement has 

assured that Federal efforts are coordinated with state and local governments as well as the 

private sector. 

The plan is also responsive to the desire of Congress that NEHRP emphasize coordination of 

research activities, speedy transfer of new knowledge, and implementation of the results and 

technologies by the user community. This plan addresses demands for greater productivity, 

efficiency, and accountability from the Federal government. 

The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 requires agencies consult with Congress 

and stakeholders to clearly define their missions, establish long-term strategic goals, and set 

annual objectives linked to the goals. This Plan is consistent with these requirements. 

This is a living document. Factors affecting earthquake risk reduction may change and evolve 

differently than expected, and therefore goals and objectives, priorities, strategies, and planning 

contexts may change over the life of this plan. Consequently, the plan will be reviewed 

biennially by the participating agencies to assess the status of implementation and refine or 

revise approaches based on experience. The biennial review will coincide with the requirement 

for a NEHRP report to Congress. A more formal and comprehensive review, to be performed 

every five years, will involve internal and external stakeholders and may result in more 

substantive changes. 

The NEHRP Agencies 

iii 
iv 
Table Of Contents 

Foreword ................................................................................................................i 

Letter to Congress ............................................................................................... iii 

Table of Contents ..................................................................................................v 

List of Figures........................................................................................................v 

List of Tables .........................................................................................................v 

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations .................................................................... vii 

Executive Summary ..............................................................................................1 

Introduction ...........................................................................................................5 

Background ...........................................................................................................7 

Future Challenges, Opportunities, and Priorities .................................................11 

Goals And Objectives..........................................................................................17 

Goal A. Develop effective practices and policies for earthquake 

loss-reduction and accelerate their implementation..................................21 

Goal B. Improve techniques to reduce seismic vulnerability of 

facilities and systems................................................................................27 

Goal C. Improve seismic hazard identification and risk assessment methods ...33 

Goal D. Improve the understanding of earthquakes and their effects ................39 

Implementation Summary ...................................................................................49 

Program Management / Agency Coordination ....................................................55 

Measuring Performance ......................................................................................59 

Appendix A. Development of Implementation Plan ............................................61 

Appendix B. List of Workshop Participants.........................................................63 

List Of Figures 

Figure 1. NEHRP Schematic................................................................................8 

Figure 2. NEHRP Agencies’ Relative Funding Levels ........................................12 

List Of Tables 

Table 1. Summary of Planned Implementation Activities ...................................50 

v 
vi 
List Of Acronyms And Abbreviations 

Acronym

ANSS 

ASCE 

ATC 

BSSC 

COSMOS 

CREW 

CUREE 

CUSEC 

EERC 

EERI 

EMPG 

EQNET 

FEMA 

GPS 

HAZUS 

IBC 

ICC 

ICSSC 

InSAR 

IRC 

IRIS 

MAE 

MCEER 

NASA 

NEES 

NEHRP 

NEIC 

NESEC 

NETAP 

NFPA 

NISEE 

NIST 

NSF 

NSMP 

PCC 

PEER 

SAFOD 

SCEC 

USGS 

WSSPC 

Definition 

Advanced National Seismic System 

American Society of Civil Engineers 

Applied Technology Council 

Building Seismic Safety Council 

Consortium of Organizations for Strong Motion Observation Systems 

Cascadia Region Earthquake Workgroup 

Consortium of Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering 

Central U.S. Earthquake Consortium 

Earthquake Engineering Research Centers 

Earthquake Engineering Research Institute 

Emergency Management Performance Grant 

Earthquake Information Network 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

Global Positioning System 

Hazards U.S. 

International Building Code 

Interagency Coordination Council 

Interagency Committee on Seismic Safety in Construction 

Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar 

International Residential Code 

Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology 

Mid-America Earthquake Center 

Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation 

National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program 

National Earthquake Information Center 

Northeast States Emergency Consortium 

National Earthquake Technical Assistance Program 

National Fire Protection Association 

National Information Service for Earthquake Engineering 

National Institute of Standards and Technology 

National Science Foundation 

National Strong Motion Program 

Policy Coordination Council 

Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center 

San Andreas Fault Observatory at Depth 

Southern California Earthquake Center 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Western States Seismic Policy Council 

vii 
viii 
Executive Summary 

Earthquakes represent an enormous threat to the Nation. Although damaging earthquakes occur 

infrequently, their consequences can be staggering. As recent earthquakes around the world 

have demonstrated, high population densities and development pressures, particularly in urban 

areas, are increasingly vulnerable. Unacceptably high loss of life and enormous economic 

consequences are associated with recent global earthquakes, and it is only a matter of time before 

the United States faces a similar experience. 

Earthquakes cannot be prevented, but their impacts can be managed to a large degree so that loss 

to life and property can be reduced. To this end, the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction 

Program (NEHRP) seeks to mitigate earthquake losses in the U.S. through both basic and 

directed research and implementation activities in the fields of earthquake science and 

engineering. This program is authorized and funded by Congress and is managed as a 

collaborative effort among the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the National 

Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the 

United States Geological Survey (USGS). These four Federal organizations work in close 

coordination to improve the Nation’s understanding of earthquake hazards and to mitigate their 

effects. The missions of the four agencies are complementary: FEMA, a component of the 

Department of Homeland Security, works with states, local governments, and the public to 

develop tools and improve policies and practices that reduce earthquake losses; NIST enables 

technology innovation in earthquake engineering by working with industry to remove technical 

barriers, evaluate advanced technologies, and develop the measurement and prediction tools 

underpinning performance standards for buildings and lifelines; NSF strives to advance 

fundamental knowledge in earthquake engineering, earth science processes, and societal 

preparedness and response to earthquakes; and USGS monitors earthquakes, assesses seismic 

hazard for the Nation, and researches the basic earth science processes controlling earthquake 

occurrence and effects. 

Mindful of the increasing threat posed by earthquakes, NEHRP initiated a review of the 

scientific goals and strategies of the Program and a discussion of the opportunities and priorities 

for the five-year interval 2001-2005. This review and discussion culminated in the new strategic 

plan presented here. Shaping the plan are four goals that represent the continuum of activities in 

the Program, ranging from research and development to application and implementation. These 

four goals are as follows: 

A. Develop effective practices and policies for earthquake loss-reduction and accelerate 

their implementation. 

B. Improve techniques to reduce seismic vulnerability of facilities and systems. 

C. Improve seismic hazard identification and risk assessment methods and their use. 

D. Improve the understanding of earthquakes and their effects. 

For each of these goals and their underlying objectives, specific implementation activities are 

identified. Taken together, these activities do not represent a dramatic redirection of the 

Executive Summary 1 
program, but instead serve to emphasize the importance of continued investment in several wellestablished focus areas complemented by directed growth into a few new strategic areas of 

opportunity. The latter represent areas where compelling, fundamental issues in earthquake 

hazard reduction overlap with emerging technological opportunities, resulting in unprecedented 

potential to make rapid advances in our knowledge and our implementation of such knowledge, 

leading to the reduction of vulnerability. Six especially promising opportunities stand out: 

• Upgrading seismic networks to allow for real-time notification of earthquake activity 

and intensity of ground shaking, 

• On-scale recording of strong motion to facilitate prediction of ground motion and its 

effects, 

• Simulation and testing of earthquake engineering design parameters, 

• Development of performance-based seismic design methods, 

• Monitoring of active fault zones to constrain the conditions that prevail prior to, 

during, and after an earthquake, and 

• Improving the effectiveness of earthquake risk mitigation efforts through utilization 

of both existing and new research in the social, behavioral, and economic sciences 

In addition to these challenges, NEHRP must also invest in the development of enhanced lossreduction policies and practices; increased use of research findings by the building science, earth 

science, and social science communities; improved technology transfer; expanded education on 

earthquake issues; and increased incentives for earthquake mitigation. These product-oriented 

activities are essential if the research and development efforts of NEHRP are to be translated in 

to real progress in earthquake loss reduction. 

Management of this Plan is shared by the NEHRP agencies. Each agency brings its strengths 

and organization to bear in support of the NEHRP mission, and is committed to developing the 

coordinated and cooperative actions identified in this strategic plan. Joint action of the agencies 

and interagency coordination at all levels will be important including: 

• Post-earthquake coordination 

• Information dissemination 

• Interagency Internet resources 

• Coordinated project activities across agencies 

• Coordination with external stakeholders 

Executive Summary 2 
• Coordination of transfer of research into practice and technology 

Strategic planning is a continuous process that flows from conception to planning, 

implementation, assessment, improvement, and reporting. A biennial review will be carried out 

by the participating agencies to assess the status of implementation and to refine NEHRP’s focus 

based on experience. In addition, a comprehensive review of the NEHRP Strategic Plan will be 

performed every five years, which may result in substantive changes in NEHRP’s activities. 

Executive Summary 3 
Executive Summary 4 
Introduction 

Earthquakes represent the largest single potential source for casualties and damage from a 

natural hazard facing this country. Although the location varies, the pattern is the same: an 

earthquake strikes without warning, leaving cities in rubble and killing tens to hundreds of 

thousands of people. Worldwide during the 20th century, there were ten earthquakes that each 

killed in excess of 50,000 people, and over 100 earthquakes that killed in excess of 1000 people. 

The U.S. has been fortunate in recent years in that its urban centers have largely avoided a direct 

hit from a “major” (M7.0 or greater) earthquake. Since the great Alaska earthquake of 1964, 

there have been twenty-six major earthquakes in the U.S. and none has claimed more than 65 

lives. One reason for this low impact is that most of these events occurred in remote areas such 

as the Aleutian Islands or the Mojave Desert. Even the two most noteworthy events—the M7.1 

Loma Prieta earthquake of 1989 and the M6.7 Northridge earthquake of 1994 (both with 

significant damage costs—occurred along the fringes of major metropolitan areas and struck 

during off-hours when impact was reduced. 

It is only a matter of time before one or more large earthquakes strike the U.S. in a densely 

populated region. All but seven states in the U.S. are exposed to significant earthquake risk, 

including many large metropolitan areas. FEMA, a component of the Department of Homeland 

Security, estimates that the current annualized earthquake loss for the U.S. is $4.4 billion per 

year (HAZUS 99 Estimated Annualized Earthquake Losses for the United States, FEMA #366, 

Sept. 2000). This estimate, however, represents the expected loss averaged over many years. If 

a large-magnitude earthquake strikes a major metropolitan area, the actual loss will be 

significantly larger. 

One only needs to look to Japan’s experience during the 1995 Kobe earthquake to appreciate the 

catastrophic potential of even a moderate urban earthquake. The M6.7 Kobe earthquake— 

similar in size and duration to the Northridge earthquake—caused $100-200B in damage and 

approximately 5500 fatalities. The earthquake’s impact was significantly larger than that of the 

Northridge earthquake ($40B and 57 lives lost), which ranks as the costliest natural disaster to 

strike in the U.S. The high price tag of the Kobe earthquake is due principally to its location— 

the event was centered beneath a highly urbanized region whereas Northridge was positioned 

beneath the northern edge of the Los Angeles metropolitan area. The U.S. was lucky. 

Vulnerability to earthquakes in the U.S. is growing at an alarming rate. Population growth, 

urbanization, and infrastructure expansion are all contributing to this trend. In addition, a large 

inventory of existing structures lack earthquake-resistant design and have not been retrofitted to 

meet current design codes. A large-magnitude earthquake near one of several urban regions 

could cause thousands of deaths and financial losses approaching $100-200 billion. Bold action 

must be taken today to counter this trend and to develop effective, long-term, sustainable 

strategies for building earthquake-safe communities. An action plan to achieve this goal is the 

focus of this document. 

Introduction 5 
Introduction 6 
Background 

Responsibility for reducing earthquake risks is shared by Federal, state, and local governments 

and the private sector. The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) is the 

Federal government’s coordinated approach to addressing earthquake risks. NEHRP was 

established by Congress in 1977 as a long-term, nation-wide program to reduce the risks to life 

and property in the U.S. resulting from earthquakes. NEHRP comprises the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency (FEMA), the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the 

National Science Foundation (NSF), and the United States Geological Survey (USGS). The 

premise of the Program is that while earthquakes may be inevitable, earthquake disasters are not. 

The NEHRP agencies work jointly and in cooperation with other Federal and state agencies; 

local governments; private companies; academic institutions; and regional, voluntary, and 

professional organizations to improve the Nation’s understanding of earthquake hazards and to 

develop methods to reduce their effects. Underpinning earthquake risk reduction is research that 

develops new knowledge about, and understanding of, 1) the earthquake hazard, 2) the response 

of the natural and built environment to that hazard, and 3) techniques to mitigate the hazard. The 

foremost challenge facing NEHRP is encouraging the use of knowledge to foster risk reduction 

among local and state agencies and private entities. 

Statement of the program’s mission provides strategic guidance: 

The mission of the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program is to develop 

and promote knowledge and mitigation practices and policies that reduce fatalities, 

injuries, and economic and other expected losses from earthquakes. 

The four NEHRP agencies each contribute their own unique set of skills and capabilities to the 

combined NEHRP mission: 

FEMA has primary responsibility for overall planning and coordination of the NEHRP program. 

FEMA works to translate the results of research and technology development into effective 

earthquake loss reduction measures at state and local levels of government. It supports publicprivate partnerships to develop disaster-resistant communities, helps state and local government 

decision-makers by providing estimates of potential losses due to earthquake hazards, develops 

earthquake risk-reduction tools and measures, prepares technical guidance aimed at improving 

the seismic safety of new and existing buildings and lifelines, and prepares and disseminates 

information about building codes and practices. FEMA also develops and supports public 

education to increase awareness of earthquake loss reduction measures. 

NIST is responsible for problem-focused research and development in earthquake engineering 

aimed at improving building codes and standards for both new and existing construction and 

advancing seismic practices for structures and lifelines. This work is focused on removing 

technical barriers, evaluating advanced technologies, and developing measurement and 

prediction tools underpinning performance standards needed by the U.S. design and construction 

industry. 

Background 7 
NSF supports a broad range of basic research covering the geoscience, engineering, economic, 

and social aspects and impacts of earthquakes. NSF supports basic research into the causes and 

dynamics of earthquakes, plate tectonics, and crustal deformation. It funds research on 

geotechnical, structural, architectural, and lifeline systems and expands the Nation’s earthquake 

engineering research capabilities. NSF supports research on the social, behavioral, and 

economic aspects of earthquake hazard mitigation. It also supports the education of new 

scientists and engineers, the integration of research and education, and outreach to professionals 

and the general public. 

The USGS conducts and supports basic and applied earth science investigations that increase 

knowledge about the origins and effects of earthquakes, produces national and regional 

assessments of seismic hazards, and carries out engineering seismology studies of ground 

shaking. USGS also has primary responsibility for monitoring earthquake activity in the U.S. 

and for coordinating post-earthquake reconnaissance investigations. USGS supports an external 

research program and works with a number of partners and stakeholders to transfer its 

earthquake-related products into practice. 

USGS 

NIST 

NSF 

FEMA 

Figure 1. Interconnection of the four NEHRP agencies 

The activities of the NEHRP agencies form a complementary program that has the ultimate aim 

of reducing earthquake losses across the Nation. At its foundation is research, which underpins 

nearly all of NEHRP’s activities. The basic research supported and conducted by NSF and 

USGS extends across a number of earthquake-related disciplines including earthquake 

engineering, seismology, geology, and the social sciences. The knowledge gained from this 

basic research is utilized by NIST to help industry adopt and use innovative technologies 

through problem-focused research and development aimed at removing technical barriers, 

evaluating advanced technologies, and developing measurement and prediction tools 

underpinning performance standards for buildings and lifelines. 

Background 8 
Similarly, an improved understanding of earthquake processes is utilized by the USGS to 

develop long-range earthquake probability forecasts, hazard assessments, and ground motion 

maps. FEMA then synthesizes the NIST and USGS applied research results into useable lossreduction tools and methods. It also uses the research results to guide policy and practice in 

seismic risk reduction. Feedback loops at every step in the process stitch these separate program 

pieces—and the stakeholder community—together, so that results are shared, product needs are 

communicated back to the researchers, and program priorities are revised as needed. 

An example of how this coordinated process has been effective in the past is presented here as 

insight into the way in which NEHRP expects to operate in the future. This example describes 

the research-to-practice pipeline that has been the lifeblood of NEHRP. 

Example of NEHRP Coordination: State-of-the-Art Building Codes 

Building codes have been recognized as 

NEHRP 

Recommended Provisions

incorporating the results of scientific advances of both NSF and USGS. 

Provisions, and NSF research results are used 

In addition, during the periodic revisions of the Provisions

This 

design guidance. 

building codes. 

In addition, the NEHRP Recommended Provisions

NEHRP partnership. 

An excellent example of the success of the NEHRP process is the incorporation of seismic provisions into 

the International Building Code (IBC), International Residential Code (IRC), and the codes being 

developed by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). 

one of the most effective tools for mitigating earthquake losses, and NEHRP activities have had a direct 

effect on the building code process in the United States, even though NEHRP has no regulatory authority. 

This process shows the success of both long term and short-term efforts on the part of NEHRP. 

Over the past 20 years, a significant body of basic research work has been accomplished by NSF and the 

USGS in the areas of earthquake engineering, geoscience, and seismology. This fundamental research 

work, and the use of the earthquake monitoring networks by USGS, has allowed the development of 

detailed seismic hazard maps by USGS, and the development of significant earthquake engineering 

knowledge by NSF. 

In parallel, FEMA, with the assistance of NIST, has developed and continued to refine the 

, a guidance document for the seismic design of structures; directly 

The seismic hazard maps 

developed by USGS are directly referenced in the 

throughout the document. , numerous 

unresolved issues have been forwarded back to USGS and NSF for their attention in future research. 

guidance document within the engineering profession is regarded as the state-of-the-art in earthquake 

National implementation of new design standards is done through the adoption and enforcement of 

FEMA and USGS work with state and local governments and multi-state consortia to 

improve hazard identification and to promote the adoption of the building codes in seismically at-risk 

communities and states. was selected by model code 

organizations to be the basis for the seismic design provisions of the IBC and IRC, and will also be the 

basis of the codes being developed by NFPA. 

This example clearly shows the significant and direct impact that NEHRP activities and coordination have 

had on the seismic safety of citizens, and the critical need to continue to invest in, and strengthen, the 

Background 9 
Background 10 
Future Challenges, Opportunities, and Priorities 

As we begin the twenty-first century, the estimated impact of a major urban earthquake is 

increasing dramatically as urban growth and capital investment in earthquake-prone areas 

continue. 

In particular, NIST currently occupies a critical niche in the Program: mining the basic 

earthquake engineering research of NSF and developing applied products and engineering 

guidelines that can be implemented by FEMA to reduce earthquake risk. Historically, the 

relative breakdown in funding among the agencies has been as follows: 

FEMA NIST 

48% 

20% 2% 

USGS 

NSF 

30% 

Figure 2. Relative Funding Levels of NEHRP Agencies 

NEHRP has made substantial progress in hazards reduction since its inception in 1978. NEHRP 

has succeeded in establishing regional and national seismic networks that provide reliable, rapid 

information on recent earthquake activity for decision makers and the public. NEHRP has 

integrated 20 years of seismological, geophysical, and geological research into national seismic 

hazard maps that portray seismic hazards in a probabilistic sense and which quantify expected 

ground motions. These hazard assessments and their underlying databases are now being used in 

conjunction with NEHRP-developed loss-estimation tools to assess earthquake risk and to design 

strategies to mitigate it. From an engineering perspective, NEHRP has succeeded in providing 

improved design guidance for new and existing buildings, and in working with local 

governments, advocacy groups, and professional engineering associations to see that these 

guidelines are adopted and incorporated into building codes. NEHRP researchers continue to 

advance earthquake-engineering technology while working closely with industry to translate this 

new technology into practice. NEHRP has also excelled at translating the technical research 

results from the earth and engineering sciences into tools, guidelines, and informational products 

that are distributed to state and local governments, emergency managers, professional societies 

and other stakeholders to elevate the state of knowledge on earthquake issues across the country. 

The overall success of NEHRP is reflected in the resilience of communities that have been tested 

by significant earthquakes during the past decade. But these same communities also demonstrate 

that there is still progress to be made. 

Future Challenges, Opportunities, and Priorities 11 
Looking forward, a number of compelling issues confront NEHRP. These issues occur on 

multiple time lines: some are more immediately addressable (10-15 years), while others may not 

deliver a payoff for many years. The most noteworthy challenges are as follows: 

• Providing real-time reports of seismic activity and associated shaking intensity, 

• Predicting ground motions in at-risk urban areas and determining how these ground 

motions interact with structures, 

• Understanding performance of structural systems, 

• Designing structures to explicitly reduce financial losses, 

• Predicting earthquakes and their magnitude, and 

• Improving the effectiveness of earthquake risk mitigation efforts through utilization of 

both existing and new research in the social, behavioral, and economic sciences. 

In this report we propose several new or expanded research and development activities 

specifically designed to address these future challenges. Each of these proposed activities is a 

high priority for NEHRP and each is designed to complement ongoing NEHRP activities. 

Because of the scope and magnitude of these proposed activities, however, the ability of the 

NEHRP agencies to implement them is limited under existing funding. We summarize these 

proposed activities as follows: 

Real-Time Seismic Monitoring and Reports of Ground Motion Intensities 

Recent and unprecedented advances in information technology, telecommunications, and digital 

electronics now allow for real-time, high fidelity monitoring of seismicity across the Nation. An 

upgraded seismic monitoring system in the U.S. would enable rapid assessments of the 

distribution and intensity of earthquake shaking, thereby allowing emergency response officials 

to assess, within minutes of an event, where damage is likely to be concentrated and how 

emergency resources should be allocated. Someday, the new technology may even allow for a 

few seconds of warning of impending strong seismic shaking from distal earthquakes already in 

progress. The USGS funds the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS) an effort to update 

current instrumentation and provide this real-time monitoring capability. 

Prediction of Strong Ground Motion and Its Effect on Structures 

The first step to predicting ground motion is to expand the observational database of strong 

motion recordings. Few if any complete recordings of strong motion near an earthquake’s 

source have ever been recorded. Typical seismic networks are composed of sensors designed to 

record earthquakes at great distances from an earthquake; these sensors go off scale when strong 

shaking occurs at distances near the instrument. With improved recordings and more detailed 

information on geologic structures and near-surface physical properties, it will soon be possible 

to compute synthetic time series that contain all of the critical information on the expected 

ground shaking, in addition to its duration. These synthetic time histories are needed by 

engineers if they are to determine how ground motion interacts with structures and consequently, 

how to improve engineering design standards. The ANSS, described above, calls for 

instrumentation that would permit on-scale recording of seismic shaking at over 7000 groundbased sites and structures. ANSS expands the observational database of ground motion 

recordings, thereby providing data that are critical to improving design standards and building 

practices. 

Future Challenges, Opportunities, and Priorities 12 
Earthquake Engineering Simulation and Testing 

Improved engineering design standards have traditionally followed from observational testing, 

where the observation was made from testing on-scale models and structural components in an 

experimental facility or observed during post-earthquake reconnaissance. However, dynamic 

testing of full-scale structures subjected to strong shaking is both logistically difficult and 

prohibitively costly. Fortunately, increased computational capabilities now allow for a new 

means of engineering design testing through computer simulation. The latter can be directed at 

both individual structural components and at integrated systems. Testing of complex structures 

and processes can be performed with real-time coordination at several facilities with enhanced 

capabilities and information stored and shared on-line, using Internet technology to integrate and 

interconnect nationally distributed facilities. The resulting information would then be integrated 

into improved guidelines for practice and activities that include NIST and FEMA. The NSF has 

secured funding to develop such a facility, referred to as the Network for Earthquake 

Engineering Simulation (NEES), which is expected to be on-line in 2004. The facility will 

include linkages to observational data acquired by USGS through ANSS, thereby allowing 

calibration of simulation results with observed strong motion recordings from structures and 

lifelines. 

Performance-Based Seismic Design 

Building codes have traditionally been designed to limit loss of life, not to guarantee a specific 

level of structural performance. In principle, however, it is possible to design for a range of 

performance objectives (i.e., “damage states”) for a given seismic event. This concept, known as 

performance-based design, represents the next generation of code development and is a high 

priority for NEHRP. In addition to the need for performance-based designs for buildings, there 

also is a need to develop performance-based standards for lifelines. Lifelines include 

transportation systems (bridges, highways, railroads, airports), water and sewerage, electric 

power, communication systems, and gas and liquid fuel pipelines. With the exception of bridges 

and large buildings, most lifelines are constructed without any special codes or guidelines for 

seismic resistance. The production of performance-based design codes for buildings and 

lifelines would allow the owner and builder to design a structure to an acceptable damage state, 

i.e., they could explicitly design for reduced financial losses. The end result would be a better 

understanding of the economic implications of the seismic risk and the ability to manage that 

risk. A NEHRP effort to develop performance-based codes is proposed herein and would be 

lead by FEMA and NIST, with support from NSF and USGS. 

Monitoring of Strain and Physical Properties Within and Across Active Fault Zones 

The ultimate goal for earthquake seismologists is the prediction of earthquakes. Currently it is 

not clear that earthquake prediction is realizable; earthquake nucleation may be an inherently 

unstable process that does not lend itself to prediction. However, it is possible to monitor active 

fault zones to diagnose their strain state and to capture the conditions that prevail when an 

earthquake initiates. New technologies utilizing advanced drilling techniques and satellite-based 

geographic positioning systems (GPS) now afford unprecedented opportunities to measure strain 

accumulation and the physical conditions under which earthquakes occur. 

Future Challenges, Opportunities, and Priorities 13 
As part of a new initiative known as EarthScope, NSF is proposing to develop four new earth 

science facilities that will contribute to NEHRP goals: USArray, the San Andreas Fault 

Observatory at Depth (SAFOD), the Plate Boundary Observatory (PBO) and the Interferometric 

Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) satellite. Multi-agency partnerships will be necessary to 

accomplish the construction of EarthScope including USGS and NASA. USArray will 

determine the detailed 3-dimensional structure of the earth’s crust, which will be necessary to 

develop estimates of earthquake ground motion. SAFOD is designed to monitor physical 

properties within the earthquake zone of the San Andreas Fault. This observatory will 

revolutionize the understanding of earthquake processes by enabling, for the first time, direct 

measurement of the physical conditions under which earthquakes occur and will allow for direct 

observation of the processes of earthquake ruptures. Both PBO and InSAR permit measurement 

of the rate and distribution of strain buildup and release before, during, and after earthquakes. 

PBO will consist of high precision, continuously recording GPS receivers and strain meters that 

will permit measurement of the rate and distribution of strain buildup. InSAR also measures 

crustal distortion but with revolutionary spatial resolution. All elements of EarthScope are 

designed to complement each other to provide an integrated picture of the structure and 

dynamics of the earth's crust. Collectively these facilities are essential if NEHRP is to advance 

the physical understanding of the mechanics of earthquakes and determine whether earthquake 

prediction will ever be possible. 

Improved Use of Social Sciences to More Effectively Mitigate Earthquake Risks 

One of the historic problems in successful implementation of earthquake risk reduction efforts 

has been the lack of understanding of factors that motivate action. A considerable body of 

knowledge in the areas of social, behavioral, and economic science exists that can provide great 

insight into the nature of decision making, risk communication, and the human dynamics 

involved in hazard mitigation. In addition, there is a need for both continued focused research 

and transfer of research results into practice in this area. FEMA and NSF will work together to 

identify and transform existing research into practice, and to identify topics where further 

research is needed. 

Each of the topics discussed above represent scientific and technologic growth areas that have 

the potential to deliver dramatic advances in our understanding of earthquake processes and our 

ability to mitigate their effects. As such, these new growth areas symbolize new lifeblood for 

NEHRP’s research-to-application pipeline, which is the foundation of the Program’s success. 

Support for research in science and technology alone, however, is not sufficient. Success cannot 

be achieved without the effective and timely transfer of information to the myriad of potential 

users, ranging from the general public to engineers, planners, government officials, business 

leaders, and many others. 

In the pages that follow, the NEHRP agencies outline a bold action plan for developing effective, 

long-term, sustainable strategies for building earthquake-safe communities. This plan provides 

the necessary balance among the research, development, and implementation activities of 

NEHRP and is structured around four main goals. These goals do not stand alone, but instead 

are strongly linked such that knowledge gained under one goal feeds research, development, and 

implementation efforts in the other goals. For this reason, overall success in earthquake 

mitigation requires that efforts in the four programmatic areas be appropriately coordinated. 

Future Challenges, Opportunities, and Priorities 14 
Specific implementation activities are discussed separately for each of the four goals. In 

addition, a philosophy is also presented that will guide how the NEHRP agencies implement 

Program management and coordination, and how they will measure program performance. 

Future Challenges, Opportunities, and Priorities 15 
Future Challenges, Opportunities, and Priorities 16 
Goals and Objectives 

Goals 

The goals and objectives of NEHRP lay a foundation on which the program builds its mission to 

reduce earthquake losses. The goals are of equal priority and are mutually dependent: 

A. 

accelerate their implementation. Promote earthquake loss-reduction activities and 

support those who adopt, implement, and enforce such policies and practices. 

B. Improve techniques to reduce seismic vulnerability of facilities and systems. 

Develop, improve, and disseminate products that guide design and construction 

practices and land-use planning, and improve professional practice. 

C. 

use. Develop, improve, and disseminate products that portray earthquake-related 

hazards accurately and quantify seismic risk. 

D. Improve the understanding of earthquakes and their effects. Support research 

to understand the processes that lead to earthquakes and associated hazards and to 

advance engineering, social, behavioral, and economic knowledge. 

Develop effective practices and policies for earthquake loss-reduction and 

Improve seismic hazards identification and risk-assessment methods, and their 

Objectives 

The following objectives indicate how the NEHRP agencies will achieve each goal: 

Goal A. Develop effective practices and policies for earthquake loss-reduction and 

accelerate their implementation. 

1. Develop and provide information on earthquake hazards and loss-reduction measures to 

decision-makers and the public. NEHRP will develop information to increase knowledge 

about earthquake hazards, to understand the risks, and to assist decision-makers in evaluating 

loss reduction alternatives. NEHRP will also foster development and dissemination of 

knowledge and tools that are formulated to meet user needs. 

2. Promote incentives for public and private sector loss-reduction actions. NEHRP will 

support community-based efforts to develop and implement economic and other incentives that 

promote loss-reducing actions, and create disaster-resistant and sustainable communities. 

Goals and Objectives 17 
3. Advocate state and local government practices and policies that reduce losses in the 

public and private sectors. NEHRP will collaborate with state and local government officials, 

associated advisory bodies, and regional earthquake consortia to provide technical and other 

assistance for developing, adopting, and evaluating earthquake loss-reduction measures in at-risk 

states and communities. 

4. Implement policies and practices that reduce vulnerability of Federal facilities. NEHRP 

will support the Interagency Committee on Seismic Safety in Construction (ICSSC) and its 

member agencies in developing and implementing practices and policies for earthquake risk 

reduction for buildings and lifelines that are owned, leased, assisted, and regulated by the 

Federal government. 

5. Develop the Nation’s human resource base in the earthquake field. NEHRP will support 

education and training for engineers, practicing design and construction professionals, planners, 

facility managers, and emergency managers through continuing education programs. NEHRP 

will also support educational activities for university students, K-12 school children, and the 

general public to facilitate a broader, informed understanding of earthquake hazard, risk, and 

mitigation. 

Goal B. Improve techniques to reduce seismic vulnerability of facilities and systems. 

1. Facilitate technology transfer among standards organizations, state and local 

governments, and private-sector professionals. NEHRP will support development and 

publication of design, construction, evaluation, and upgrade guidelines and pre-standards for 

consideration by national organizations that develop codes and standards for buildings and 

lifelines. NEHRP will also develop tools to assist in the use of those guidelines. NEHRP will 

work with professional and trade associations to promote the use of new technology. 

2. Improve earthquake loss-reduction knowledge and the quality of practice. NEHRP will 

support problem-focused and fundamental research by academia and the private sector to fill 

knowledge gaps and provide the technical basis for design, construction, evaluation, and upgrade 

guidelines and pre-standards. NEHRP will also support the exchange of information to maintain 

awareness of national and international developments in earthquake mitigation technology. 

3. Support efforts to improve seismic standards and codes and improve design and 

construction practices for buildings and lifelines. NEHRP will support periodic revision of 

the NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other 

Structures, application of the NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, and 

development of design and construction criteria for lifelines, including utility and transportation 

systems. NEHRP also will support post-earthquake investigations to identify knowledge gaps 

and will conduct studies to address special problems identified after major earthquakes. 

Goals and Objectives 18 
Goal C. Improve seismic hazards identification and risk assessment methods, and their 

use. 

1. Provide rapid, reliable information about earthquakes and earthquake-induced 

damage. NEHRP will continue to support the operation of regional data centers, the National 

Earthquake Information Center (NEIC), the Global Seismic Network (GSN), the International 

Seismic Centre (ISC), and the IRIS Data Management Center (DMC). In addition, NEHRP will 

deliver rapid, accurate reports on the intensity and distribution of strong ground shaking in urban 

areas following damaging earthquakes. NEHRP will also propose to implement the ANSS. 

2. Improve seismic hazard characterization and mapping. NEHRP will improve hazard 

assessment methods and produce updated national-scale ground-shaking maps and related 

products on a regular basis. NEHRP will also work with cooperators to develop a standard 

methodology for production of large-scale seismic hazard maps for urban regions. 

3. Support development and use of risk and loss assessment tools. NEHRP will support 

improvement of loss estimation and risk assessment tools and the development of next 

generation databases. Testing and dissemination of the nationally applicable loss-estimation 

model will continue. States and communities will be encouraged to provide detailed data on 

local geology, building inventories, and utility and transportation systems to enable more 

accurate planning and establishing of priorities. 

Goal D. Improve the understanding of earthquakes and their effects. 

1. Improve monitoring of earthquakes and earthquake-generating processes. NEHRP will 

continue to develop improved seismic monitoring capabilities geared toward full-waveform 

recording, real-time reporting, and improved network integration. NEHRP also will continue to 

support and expand other monitoring systems and the use of satellite-based observational 

systems for monitoring the deformation of the earth’s crust due to earthquakes and earthquakegenerating processes. 

2. Improve understanding of earthquake occurrence and potential. NEHRP will support 

research into the processes by which earthquakes occur, including studies of how large 

earthquakes initiate and grow, the role of fault zone geometry and mechanical properties, and the 

effect of changes in earth stresses. 

3. Improve earthquake hazards assessments and develop earthquake-potential estimates 

as planning scenarios. NEHRP will support a broad-based research program on earthquakes 

and ground failure by improving quantification and understanding of the extent of hazards and 

by encouraging use of that knowledge for planning purposes. 

4. Improve fundamental knowledge of earthquake effects. NEHRP will support research on 

the nature of strong ground shaking from earthquakes, how it is affected by seismological and 

geological factors, and how its characteristics are related to permanent ground deformation and 

Goals and Objectives 19 
damage. These efforts will include investigations of damage from domestic and foreign 

earthquakes and collaboration with non-U.S. research programs. 

5. Advance earthquake engineering knowledge of the built environment. NEHRP will 

implement the Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES) to improve the seismic 

design and performance of U.S. civil and mechanical infrastructure systems through 

collaborative and integrated experimentation, computation, theory, databases, and model-based 

simulation. 

6. Advance understanding of the social and economic implications of earthquakes. NEHRP 

will support earthquake-related social science and policy research to advance understanding of 

the social and economic impacts of earthquakes, determine levels of risk deemed acceptable by 

various groups in society, and reduce the social, economic, and political barriers to effective 

earthquake risk reduction. 

Implementation 

The following sections describe, by goal and objective, specific NEHRP priorities and activities 

that the agencies intend to pursue in the near term. Because the amount of available resources 

has a distinct bearing on the scope and breadth of activities, the discussion has been framed to 

reflect what can be accomplished at current funding levels. 

Goals and Objectives 20 
Goal A. Develop Effective Practices and Policies

for Earthquake Loss-Reduction and Accelerate

Their Implementation 

Through Goal A, NEHRP seeks to reduce the seismic vulnerability of the built and social 

environments by disseminating earthquake hazard and risk information and advocating risk 

reduction techniques. Activities identified under Goal A are designed to accelerate earthquake 

loss reduction in the public and private sector by engaging and supporting partners at the local, 

state, and national levels. FEMA is the primary agency carrying out Goal A efforts, with NIST, 

NSF, and USGS playing important supporting roles. 

NEHRP will continue to use existing resources to develop partnerships as described in the 

sections below to provide risk assessment and risk reduction tools to local business and 

government leaders, to provide training to design and construction professionals, and to advocate 

the adoption and enforcement of state-of-the-art codes and land-use practices for buildings and 

lifelines. 

The following sections address current and future NEHRP activities under each of the five 

objectives of Goal A. 

1. Develop and provide information on earthquake hazards and loss-reduction measures to 

decision makers and the public. 

NEHRP will develop information to increase knowledge about earthquake hazards, to 

understand the risk, and to assist decision-makers in evaluating loss reduction alternatives. 

NEHRP will also foster development and dissemination of knowledge and tools that are 

formulated to meet user needs. 

Under Objective 1, NEHRP’s priorities are to: 

• Promote the use of NEHRP resource materials to evaluate seismic risk and mitigation 

alternatives. 

• Work with professional organizations, universities, and local and national partners to 

distribute NEHRP products and promote adoption of risk reduction measures. 

NEHRP and its partners generate a large range of products that address earthquake hazards, 

document the associated seismic risk, and provide loss-reduction alternatives. These products 

are largely the outgrowth of activities in Goals B, C, and D of the program. Successful 

mitigation requires that these products be effectively understood, distributed, accepted, and used, 

and that a broad base of earthquake-aware individuals be developed and nurtured at all levels. 

To accomplish these goals, NEHRP pursues a variety of different means to distribute its tools 

and products so that they can be utilized effectively. Publications, press releases, web sites, and 

symposia are some of the traditional means of information dissemination. FEMA-supported 

multi-state consortia (CREW, CUSEC, NESEC, and WSSPC) are utilized as coordinators and 

Goal A 21 
policy centers for states and communities with similar seismic risk characteristics. Additionally, 

NEHRP works with its grantees in the regions, such as the three NSF-supported earthquake 

engineering research centers (MCEER, MAE, PEER) and the NSF/USGS supported 

multidisciplinary Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC), to provide local outreach 

programs designed to educate the public, promote earthquake awareness, and develop strategies 

to transfer research findings into implementation. 

NEHRP and its partners also work with professional organizations and multi-state consortia to 

develop the most effective means to communicate seismic hazard and risk issues and to better 

determine the needs of NEHRP audiences. This approach enables NEHRP to reach potential 

mitigation advocates effectively while also establishing a feedback loop to assure that projects 

are optimized to meet user needs. NEHRP provides the seismic expertise, while the professional 

organizations and regional consortia provide translation of the needs of their constituencies, such 

as the insurance industry, utility operators, facilities managers, design and construction 

professionals, and land-use planners. Funding for these collaborative efforts is often shared, 

thereby leveraging the ability of NEHRP to provide crucial knowledge transfer activities. In 

order to increase the promotion of risk reduction measures, NEHRP will increase its efforts to 

work with professional organizations to promote the use of risk-reduction tools by their 

members. 

One professional group that receives special focus from NEHRP is the structural engineering 

community. NEHRP utilizes university-based earthquake engineering centers (MAE, MCEER, 

PEER) and related Internet distribution channels (e.g., EQNET, CUREE, and NISEE) as a means 

of disseminating earthquake information to the professional community and the general public. 

NEHRP also works directly with engineering-based professional organizations (EERI, BSSC, 

ASCE, ATC, COSMOS) to promote guidelines development, to coordinate post-earthquake 

activities, and to translate and disseminate research results to practicing engineers. In the future, 

the NSF-funded Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES) project will be an 

increasingly important nexus for information flow from the experimental research community to 

practicing professionals, with translation of the research results to local decision makers and the 

public. 

As the need for reducing risks becomes more urgent in increasingly developed, at-risk 

communities, NEHRP must reach beyond traditional end-users. State-of-the-art resources must 

be provided to a larger group of design professionals and those in the construction trades, as well 

as land-use planners, emergency managers, and public administrators. Products must be 

specially crafted to meet the needs and backgrounds of individual audiences. NEHRP will work 

with researchers in the behavioral, policy, and social sciences to determine the most effective 

means to communicate seismic hazard and risk-reduction messages to these target audiences. 

NEHRP will also expand its use of the Internet as a medium for product distribution and hazard 

awareness. 

Goal A 22 
2. Promote incentives for public and private sector loss-reduction actions. 

NEHRP will support community-based efforts to develop and implement economic and other 

incentives that promote loss-reducing actions, and create disaster-resistant and sustainable 

communities. 

Under Objective 2, NEHRP’s priority is to: 

• Promote seismic risk reduction through partnerships with local communities and 

businesses. Advocate the use of incentives as a means of improving disaster resistance. 

Mitigation is accomplished locally, and thus a successful earthquake mitigation program requires 

the involvement and commitment of local communities and businesses. Recognizing this, 

FEMA has established a nation-wide initiative to build disaster-resistant communities through 

local partnerships. This initiative is based on three principles: 1) preventive actions must be 

decided at the local level, 2) private sector participation is vital, and 3) long-term efforts and 

investments in prevention measures are essential. FEMA provides incentives for risk reduction 

activities within these communities, including small start-up funding as well as technical 

assistance through its National Earthquake Technical Assistance Program. FEMA, together with 

other NEHRP agencies, also works with communities to identify risks, prioritize needs, and 

develop long-term plans to protect each disaster-prone community. Increasingly, communities 

are using means such as the transfer of development rights into less hazard-prone areas to 

mitigate their risk. An essential element in the crafting of these mitigation strategies is the use of 

NEHRP tools and products (such as seismic hazard maps and HAZUS loss estimation software) 

to identify areas of a community that are most vulnerable to seismic hazards. FEMA also 

engages local and national businesses to promote disaster prevention efforts. One example is the 

promotion of low-interest loans—established in partnerships with banks doing business in the 

community—for mitigation of existing buildings. These activities are not only a good source of 

public relations for companies, they also result in more resilient communities, which improve the 

economic viability of the business over time. Finally, FEMA works with its NEHRP partners to 

promote the adoption of state-of-the-art building codes in communities and to insure access to, 

and use of, the latest seismic engineering design and retrofit techniques. 

3. Advocate state and local government practices and policies that reduce losses in the 

public and private sectors. 

NEHRP will collaborate with state and local government officials, associated advisory 

bodies, and regional earthquake consortia to provide technical and other assistance for 

developing, adopting, and evaluating earthquake loss-reduction measures in at-risk states 

and communities. 

Under Objective 3, NEHRP’s priorities are to: 

• Promote seismic risk reduction at the state and local government level through 

partnerships with seismic advisory boards and multi-state earthquake consortia. 

Goal A 23 
• Promote adoption of updated building codes by states and local governments to enhance 

seismic risk reduction. 

• Encourage mitigation during disaster recover efforts. 

The primary step that NEHRP advocates for at-risk states to achieve earthquake mitigation is to 

establish a seismic safety advisory board to serve as the statewide authority for seismic hazard 

identification and risk reduction. Currently 13 states and territories have established seismic 

safety advisory bodies. These boards provide advice to elected officials, develop seismic risk 

mitigation programs, and sponsor legislation directed at improving seismic safety. A goal of 

NEHRP is to expand this to all of the 45 states and territories that have been identified as having 

moderate to very high earthquake risk. 

NEHRP also places a high priority on working with states and local governments to promote 

seismic risk reduction through the adoption of building codes with up-to-date seismic provisions. 

The first International Building Code (IBC) and International Residential Code (IRC), which 

include state-of-the-art seismic components, were released in 2000. NEHRP will increase its 

efforts to actively promote the adoption of this code by at-risk states and communities, as well as 

other seismic-resistant codes such as those recommended by the National Fire Protection 

Association (NFPA). (For a discussion of the NEHRP’s building code role, see Goal B.) The 

enforcement of codes with seismic components that states and communities have adopted will be 

promoted through existing public and private-sector partnerships. 

Through FEMA, NEHRP also provides financial and technical support on an annual basis to 

states and territories at moderate and high seismic risk as an incentive for these states and 

territories to work with their most vulnerable jurisdictions. Multi-state consortia (e.g., CREW, 

CUSEC, NESEC, and WSSPC) are also funded to serve as coordinators and policy centers for 

states with similar seismic risk characteristics. Lastly, FEMA uses the Emergency Management 

Performance Grant (EMPG) program to urge at-risk states to assess the vulnerability of their 

facilities, and to develop plans to reduce the identified risks. 

A final area where NEHRP can work to reduce earthquake vulnerability is to encourage 

mitigation practices after natural disasters occur. After a disaster, affected citizens as well as 

local decision makers are frequently more receptive to mitigation, and this represents a 

tremendous opportunity to introduce earthquake mitigation measures. FEMA will therefore 

increase efforts to develop and provide earthquake mitigation tools and practices designed to be 

introduced into local disaster recovery efforts. 

4. Implement policies and practices that reduce vulnerability of Federal facilities. 

NEHRP will support the Interagency Committee on Seismic Safety in Construction (ICSSC) 

and its member agencies in developing and implementing practices and policies for 

earthquake risk reduction for buildings and lifelines that are owned, leased, assisted, and 

regulated by the Federal government. 

Under Objective 4, NEHRP’s priorities are to: 

Goal A 24 
• Reduce the risk to existing and future Federal facilities through partnerships with Federal 

agencies. 

• Provide state-of-the-art risk-reduction standards to all affected Federal agencies. 

The Federal government must set an example for both the public and private sectors, including 

the implementation of effective hazard mitigation measures for more than 500,000 buildings that 

it owns, leases, assists, and/or regulates throughout the country. The ICSSC was established as 

part of NEHRP by the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 to assist Federal departments 

and agencies in developing and incorporating earthquake hazard reduction measures into each 

organization’s ongoing facilities management program. The chair of the ICSSC is the Director 

of NIST or his designee, who reports to FEMA leadership. FEMA, NIST, NSF, and USGS are 

ICSSC member agencies. Twenty-eight other Federal departments and agencies are also 

members of the ICSSC, which recommends uniform practices and policies to reduce earthquake 

risk at both new and existing Federal facilities, including buildings and lifelines. These ICSSC 

recommendations are primarily embodied in two Executive Orders: EO 12699, Seismic Safety of 

Federally Assisted or Regulated New Building Construction, and EO 12941, Seismic Safety of 

Existing Federally Owned or Leased Buildings. FEMA has overall responsibility for carrying 

out Executive Orders, and provides progress reports to Congress; FEMA and NIST share 

responsibility in providing technical assistance to ICSSC member agencies in implementing the 

Executive Orders. To assure compliance with the requirements of the Executive Order, the 

ICSSC conducts periodic studies to compare the equivalence between the model building codes 

and standards issued by the private sector and the NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic 

Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures. 

In the future, as NEHRP develops performance-based standards for buildings and lifelines under 

Goal B, the ICSSC will disseminate these next-generation materials to all Federal agencies and 

support implementation. 

5. Develop the Nation’s human resource base in the earthquake field. 

NEHRP will support education and training for engineers, practicing design and 

construction professionals, planners, facility managers, and emergency managers through 

continuing education programs. NEHRP will also support educational activities for 

university students, K-12 school children, and the general public to facilitate a broader, 

informed understanding of earthquake hazard, risk, and mitigation. 

Under Objective 5, NEHRP’s priorities are to: 

• Develop and use partnerships to provide training in the use of NEHRP technical resource 

materials developed under Goals B, C, and D. 

• Advocate the inclusion of seismic hazard and risk reduction information into curricula at 

K-12 schools and higher education institutions. 

Goal A 25 
Because seismic risk-reduction activities are best carried out by local professional and 

construction trade organizations and by state personnel who are familiar with local issues and 

needs, NEHRP will increase its ongoing efforts to develop audience-specific risk-reduction 

tools, publications, and programs to meet the needs of these users. NEHRP will pursue this in 

cooperation with professional and trade membership organizations so that these organizations 

take a leadership role in training and educating their members. Similarly, as states and 

communities adopt seismic codes, NEHRP will work with code groups to support training and 

enforcement activities. 

The education of the next generation of seismic risk reduction advocates and professionals is 

important to the continued success of NEHRP. This education must begin at an early age, so that 

a basic understanding of earthquakes and their consequences is broadly established. For this 

reason, FEMA, NSF, and USGS have participated in partnerships with other Federal agencies 

and non-governmental organizations to develop and advocate curricula for K-12 school children 

and university students on earthquakes and their effects. Universities also are supported by NSF 

to educate researchers and other earthquake professionals in all aspects of seismic issues (i.e., 

engineering, seismology, geology, social sciences, and public policy). These efforts will 

continue and will focus on promoting the use of these curricula and related educational activities 

in areas of very high to moderate seismic risk. 

Goal A 26 
Goal B. Improve Techniques to Reduce Seismic

Vulnerability of Facilities and Systems 

The Goal B activities assure the availability of improved techniques to reduce the seismic 

vulnerability of facilities and systems. These improvements are achieved through several means, 

including: publication of design, construction, and evaluation guidelines for buildings and 

lifelines; development of tools to assist in the use of those guidelines; problem-focused research 

and development to fill knowledge gaps; execution of coordinated post-earthquake 

investigations; publication of associated longer-term studies to address special problems 

identified after major earthquakes; cooperation with professional and trade associations to 

improve the use of technology; advocacy to include research results in curricula and continuing 

education for practicing professionals; and international exchange of information on earthquake 

mitigation technology. 

The following is a discussion of NEHRP activities supported under Goal B. 

1. Facilitate technology transfer among standards organizations, state and local 

governments, and private-sector professionals. 

NEHRP will support development and publication of design, construction, evaluation, and 

upgrade guidelines and pre-standards for consideration by national organizations that 

develop codes and standards for buildings and lifelines. NEHRP will also develop tools to 

assist in the use of those guidelines. NEHRP will work with professional and trade 

associations to promote the use of new technology. 

Under Objective 1, the NEHRP’s priorities are to: 

• Support strong model building codes; and 

• Encourage technology transfer through professional organizations. 

NEHRP supports the development and periodic revision of model building codes. The current 

trend is toward unified national codes for both new and existing buildings, such as those 

developed by the International Code Council and those being developed by the National Fire 

Protection Association (NFPA). These codes are replacing the three regionally based model 

codes and are expected to be implemented throughout the Nation. The NEHRP Recommended 

Provisions serve as the resource documents for these model building codes for new buildings, 

while the NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings serve as the resource 

documents for code development for existing buildings. FEMA is the lead agency supporting 

the model building code efforts. The USGS’ probabilistic seismic hazard maps define the level 

of seismic hazard as a function of geography, and are thus the basis for applying the seismic 

design criteria contained in the model codes. The USGS also produces interactive tools that 

enable determination of location-specific seismic design parameters that can be used with the 

model building codes and standards. The basic and applied research performed by NSF and 

NIST, respectively, directly supports the development of the technical provisions of NEHRP 

Goal B 27 
guidelines. In addition, the ICSSC conducts periodic studies to compare the equivalence 

between the model codes and the NEHRP Recommended Provisions and issues consensus 

recommendations based on its findings for adoption by Federal agencies. In the future, this level 

of effort will be sustained using existing program funds. 

A second activity under Objective 1 is the dissemination of information and transfer of 

earthquake-resistant design and construction technology to users. These users include design 

and construction professionals, trade schools, and developers, among others. FEMA will be the 

lead agency in this effort, but will work in coordination with USGS and NSF efforts in science 

education. A baseline of activity directed at these audiences will proceed using existing funds. 

2. Improve earthquake loss-reduction knowledge and the quality of practice. 

NEHRP will support problem-focused and fundamental research by academia and the 

private sector to fill knowledge gaps and provide the technical basis for design, construction, 

evaluation, and upgrade guidelines and pre-standards. NEHRP will also support the 

exchange of information to maintain awareness of national and international developments 

in earthquake mitigation technology. 

Under Objective 2, NEHRP’s priorities are to: 

• Expand the use of problem-focused research and development to support codes and 

standards improvement. 

• Carry out international exchange of information to keep abreast of state-of-the-art 

technology in earthquake mitigation. 

NEHRP currently supports a modest program of problem-focused research and development to 

fill knowledge gaps and provide the technical basis for improved design, construction, evaluation 

and upgrade guidelines and pre-standards for buildings and lifelines. NIST is assigned lead 

responsibility for this activity, with supporting efforts from FEMA and NSF. NIST’s research 

program, focused on the structural performance of buildings within a multi-hazard context, 

includes studies of: new performance-based seismic design approaches, evaluation of advanced 

structural control technologies, structural performance of housing systems, and strengthening 

and rehabilitation of structures. FEMA also contributes to studies of design and rehabilitation of 

welded steel-frame buildings and supports problem-focused research at university-based 

research centers and at the National Research Council. 

This strategic plan includes a provision for increased emphasis of problem-focused research that 

will alleviate the “technology transfer gap” that is noted to exist for research outcomes. The 

current level of support in NEHRP for problem-focused research is insufficient to leverage the 

wealth of information emerging from basic research activities. As a result, a technology transfer 

gap has emerged which limits the adaptation of basic research knowledge into practice. This gap 

is expected to widen as NEHRP embarks on a new generation of performance-based provisions 

and guidelines for buildings and lifelines. A much-expanded problem-focused research and 

guideline development effort is critically needed for future design, construction, evaluation, and 

Goal B 28 
upgrade guidelines and pre-standards, and to facilitate the development of new mitigation 

technologies. NIST, in partnership with FEMA and the other NEHRP agencies, will develop a 

coordinated NEHRP plan to support an expanded level of problem-focused R&D. 

Recognizing that the U.S. is not the only developed country with an active earthquake 

engineering community, NEHRP must maintain awareness of international developments in 

earthquake mitigation technology and enhance learning through participation in international 

post-earthquake investigations and international information exchanges. Post-earthquake 

investigations in other countries provide rare opportunities to obtain important information on 

the performance and vulnerability of buildings and lifelines in major earthquakes. Similarly, 

formal and informal exchange mechanisms with the international community allow for enhanced 

sharing of research results and more rapid advancement of the science. These efforts, albeit 

modest, will continue as an integral part of NEHRP’s strategy to reduce seismic vulnerability of 

facilities and lifelines. 

3. Support efforts to improve seismic standards and codes and improve design and 

construction practices for buildings and lifelines. 

NEHRP will support periodic revision of the NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic 

Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures, application of the NEHRP Guidelines 

for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, and development of design and construction 

criteria for lifelines, including utility and transportation systems. NEHRP also will support 

post-earthquake investigations to identify knowledge gaps and will conduct studies to 

address special problems identified after major earthquakes. 

Under Objective 3 NEHRP’s priorities are to: 

• Maintain the NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New 

Buildings and Other Structures.

• Support NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings and other tools 

related to existing buildings. 

• Support development of guidelines and pre-standards for lifeline systems. 

• Start development of next generation performance-based codes. 

• Improve coordination of post-earthquake investigations. 

The NEHRP Recommended Provisions and the related Commentary present criteria for designing 

and constructing buildings subject to earthquakes throughout the U.S. They are resource 

documents widely used by practicing professionals and building officials. Periodic updates of 

these documents are critical in order to incorporate results from NEHRP-funded research for 

immediate use by practicing engineers. FEMA will provide lead support for these periodic 

revisions, while USGS will support the revision of the underlying probabilistic seismic hazard 

maps and NIST and NSF will continue to support research and development efforts leading to 

new cutting-edge methodologies and technologies. NEHRP experts from all four agencies will 

Goal B 29 
participate in technical committees responsible for updating the NEHRP Recommended 

Provisions and will work in close coordination with the ICSSC. 

The NEHRP Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings and related Commentary are 

first-of-their-kind, performance-based, nationally applicable design and engineering documents. 

They contain new approaches, new analytical techniques, choices as to seismic safety levels, and 

acceptability criteria for upgrading all major types of existing buildings and construction 

materials. FEMA led the development of this document and will continue to ensure these 

documents are kept current. This work, and the updates to the NEHRP Recommended 

Provisions discussed above, will be accomplished with existing funding. 

Lifelines are another high priority area for NEHRP. FEMA, in partnership with nongovernmental organizations and the private sector, has initiated the processes of developing 

consensus guidelines for lifelines. The goal of this effort is to achieve an acceptable level of 

seismic performance for these structures, building upon current seismic provisions, as 

appropriate. To date, efforts to develop the technical basis for performance-based standards, 

codes, and practices for infrastructure lifeline systems pale in comparison to similar efforts 

directed at guideline development for new and existing buildings. NEHRP therefore recognizes 

the need to significantly expand efforts in this area. FEMA will lead this effort and will be 

assisted by NIST. 

Looking to the future, NEHRP supports the need to develop a new generation of performancebased provisions for new buildings and lifelines. Performance-based provisions will 

encourage/permit competition through value-added products and services, adoption and use of 

innovative technologies, selection of design or rehabilitation performance level based on 

owner/user needs, and setting of risk-adjusted insurance premiums commensurate with the 

chosen performance level. FEMA will lead this effort, and NIST will assist FEMA with 

problem-focused R&D in developing the technical basis for performance-based standards, codes, 

and practices for buildings. NIST work will include application of probabilistic and reliability 

analysis methods underpinning performance-based provisions in coordination with the risk 

analysis and loss estimation work under Goal C. NSF will continue to support basic research in 

performance-based earthquake engineering and probabilistic methods through its existing 

programs. 

Major earthquakes provide a unique source of information on the performance of the built 

environment and failure mechanisms at full scale. Post-earthquake investigations are thus 

critical for documenting structural performance, examining the adequacy of current standards 

and practices, and identifying research needs to mitigate the impacts of future earthquakes. 

NEHRP has long supported post-earthquake investigations, both in the engineering and earth 

science disciplines. However, improved coordination is necessary if these investigations are to 

maximize learning through the sharing of information. Therefore, NEHRP, under the leadership 

of the USGS, will spearhead an examination of the roles and responsibilities of the various 

groups involved in post-earthquake investigations and will develop a NEHRP protocol action 

plan for investigations following major national and international earthquakes. This protocol 

action plan will detail the degree of coordinated learning desired and how it will be achieved and 

how findings can be most effectively disseminated to all stakeholders (e.g., in a comprehensive, 

Goal B 30 
multidisciplinary NEHRP report). The plan will improve coordination during post-earthquake 

investigation efforts, minimize duplication, and provide safety training for participants. 

Goal B 31
Goal B 32 
Goal C. Improve Seismic Hazard Identification and

Risk Assessment Methods, and Their Use 

Seismic hazard identification and risk assessment are critical components of NEHRP’s 

earthquake mitigation strategy. Under this goal, NEHRP agencies identify and quantify seismic 

hazards through improved seismic monitoring and through detailed geological and geophysical 

characterization of regions of active faulting. The seismic hazard information then becomes the 

foundation upon which subsequent risk assessment models are based. NEHRP will continue to 

emphasize geological, geophysical, and seismological research activities that improve the state 

of knowledge of seismic hazard identification. NEHRP will also continue to develop and 

improve the HAZUS loss estimation tool and work with state and local governments to ensure 

that this tool is used effectively to guide pre-earthquake mitigation efforts. 

1. Provide rapid, reliable information about earthquakes and earthquake-induced 

damage. 

NEHRP will continue to support the operation of regional data centers, the National 

Earthquake Information Center (NEIC), the Global Seismic Network (GSN), the 

International Seismic Centre (ISC), and the IRIS Data Management Center (DMC). In 

addition, NEHRP will deliver rapid, accurate reports on the intensity and distribution of 

strong ground shaking in urban areas following damaging earthquakes. NEHRP will also 

propose to implement the ANSS. 

Under Objective 1 NEHRP’s priorities are to: 

• Continue support for global, national, and regional seismic monitoring networks and 

associated data centers. 

• Propose implementation of the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS). 

• Develop improved algorithms for rapidly determine earthquake source parameters (e.g., 

location, size, type of faulting, direction of fault rupture) and estimating earthquake 

damage patterns through the production of shaking intensity maps (ShakeMaps). 

Seismic monitoring serves as a primary source of information necessary for seismic hazard 

assessments. USGS has the assigned Federal responsibility to monitor seismic activity in the 

U.S. The USGS fulfills this role by operating the U.S. National Seismograph Network 

(USNSN), the National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC), the National Strong Motion 

Program (NSMP), and by supporting sixteen regional networks in areas of moderate to high 

seismic activity. Additionally, NSF and USGS operate the Global Seismic Network, which 

provides the main source of worldwide earthquake information, and NSF also operates archival 

and distribution centers: the International Seismic Center and the IRIS Data Management Center. 

NEHRP will continue to maintain and operate these networks and data centers and will improve 

their integration and real-time reporting capabilities. 

Goal C 33 
Traditionally earthquake monitoring in the U.S. has focused on the identification of areas of 

active faulting. Recent technological advances, however, are contributing to a broadening in 

emphasis to include strong motion recording of ground shaking and building response in 

seismically active urban areas. The data resulting from these efforts are critical to engineering 

research directed at improving design standards so that structures and systems are better able to 

withstand the effects of earthquakes. To provide useful, high quality data that meet the needs of 

engineers, a significant upgrade of the current networks as well as a major expansion of new 

instrumentation in urban areas is required. The specifications of such a system, referred to as the 

Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS), have been developed through discussions with the 

engineering community and summarized in USGS Circular 1188 at the request of Congress. The 

report calls for over 6000 new instruments in at-risk urban areas, including 3000 strong motion 

instruments on the ground and an additional 3000 instruments in structures. In addition, the 

report calls for 1000 broadband stations in regional networks across the Nation. ANSS has 

received widespread endorsement in the earthquake community and is a high priority for 

NEHRP. 

An important new earthquake-reporting tool that builds on ANSS is ShakeMap. ShakeMap 

utilizes network recordings of seismic energy to portray the intensity of ground shaking in the 

region surrounding a significant earthquake. It can thus provide an estimate of earthquake 

damage patterns and impact within minutes of an event. This information, in turn, can be used 

by emergency managers to speed earthquake disaster relief. ShakeMap is now being 

implemented in networks across the country, but for it to be truly effective, it must be supported 

by a modern seismic network with real-time, high fidelity recordings of the type envisioned in 

ANSS. Currently the only regional network in the U.S. that offers this capability is in southern 

California. 

Another, longer-range research effort that builds on the technological capabilities of ANSS is the 

development of an early warning capability for earthquakes already in progress. Specifically, 

USGS scientists are now exploring the possibility of developing faster means of detecting and 

characterizing large earthquakes. If large earthquakes can be discriminated from small 

earthquakes at the onset of rupture, it might be possible—in the special case where the 

earthquake source is distant to an urban center—to provide an alert of imminent strong ground 

shaking. Although such a system would offer only a few seconds to tens of seconds of early 

warning, this brief period may be sufficient to secure critical facilities and prepare for the arrival 

of strong ground shaking. 

2. Improve seismic hazard characterization and mapping. 

NEHRP will improve hazard assessment methods and produce updated national-scale 

ground-shaking maps and related products on a regular basis. NEHRP will also work with 

cooperators to develop a standard methodology for production of large-scale seismic hazard 

maps for urban regions. 

Goal C 34 
Under Objective 2, NEHRP’s priorities are to: 

• Maintain and update national hazard maps through the collection and integration of 

geologic, geophysical, and seismological data, including prehistoric earthquake 

chronologies, location of active faults, determination of 3-D velocities and geologic 

structure, and wave propagation and attenuation parameters. 

• Improve probabilistic methods for quantifying seismic hazards, including formally 

incorporating uncertainty into hazard estimates, especially for areas of relatively low 

seismicity, such as the East and Intermountain West. 

• Produce prototype urban seismic hazard maps for select major metropolitan areas. 

The USGS, with support from NSF, has lead NEHRP responsibility for the production of 

probabilistic seismic hazards maps in the U.S. The first generation of these maps, released in 

1996, has been incorporated into updates of the International Building Code, and the information 

is used by numerous consulting companies to estimate earthquake losses for insurance 

companies, pension funds, and other clients. Going forward, the USGS will produce an updated 

set of these maps and associated databases for the contiguous U.S. and will develop new maps 

for U.S. Trust territories, including American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and 

Puerto Rico/Virgin Islands. The revised national maps will incorporate an updated earthquake 

catalog with consistent magnitudes, improved ground-motion attenuation relations for the 

Central and Eastern U.S., and improved knowledge of earthquake source zones and recurrence 

rates. This work will be completed with existing funds. 

Concurrent with the updating of the hazards maps, USGS- and NSF-supported scientists will 

conduct research on ways to improve probabilistic and scenario methods for quantifying seismic 

hazards, including identifying and testing alternative methodologies for earthquake-potential 

estimates. Research efforts will also be directed at formally incorporating uncertainty into 

hazard estimates. Using existing funding, efforts in this area will focus on areas of relatively low 

seismicity, such as the East and Intermountain West. 

Another key focus area of NEHRP is urban seismic hazard mapping. The increasing valuation 

of building stock and infrastructure assets, combined with demographic shifts toward 

earthquake-prone cities, are combining to increase loss potential dramatically for the next urban 

earthquake. To aid metropolitan areas in evaluating and mitigating this risk, USGS will work 

with local communities in three test areas (Oakland, Seattle, and Memphis) to develop a standard 

methodology for urban hazard mapping in three contrasting tectonic environments (strike-slip, 

subduction, and intraplate faulting, respectively). In these regions, the USGS will collaborate 

with state geologists, state agencies, and local committees to compile digital surficial geology 

maps, ground shaking amplification maps, and liquefaction, lateral spreading, and landslide 

susceptibility maps. The USGS will also determine priorities for subsequent studies in other 

seismically active urban areas. 

3. Support development and use of risk and loss assessment tools. 

Goal C 35 
NEHRP will support improvement of loss estimation and risk assessment tools and the 

development of next generation databases. Testing and dissemination of the nationally 

applicable loss-estimation model will continue. States and communities will be encouraged 

to provide detailed data on local geology, building inventories, and utility and transportation 

systems to enable more accurate planning and establishing of priorities. 

Under Objective 3, NEHRP’s priorities are to: 

• Provide HAZUS training and support for users. 

• Devise standards and protocols that can be implemented to aid in data base enhancements 

and data collection efforts. 

• Continue to improve the usability, functionality, and accuracy of HAZUS. Calibrate and 

refine HAZUS loss-estimation models following actual damaging earthquakes. 

• Integrate ShakeMap with HAZUS to allow for rapid loss estimations. 

The main NEHRP focus under Objective 3 is the continued development and promotion of 

Hazards U.S. (HAZUS), a FEMA GIS-based loss estimation tool designed to aid in mitigation 

planning and disaster response activities. HAZUS provides a standardized approach to 

estimating losses from earthquakes and other hazards and utilizes the national seismic hazard 

maps developed by the USGS as well as complementary information on the built environment to 

assess risk. Although HAZUS has been used by FEMA to estimate annualized earthquake losses 

nationally across the U.S. (FEMA #366, Sept. 2000), it also offers the capability of computing 

more detailed loss estimates for major urban centers. Communities across the country are 

anxious for this capability; however, additional developmental components must be completed 

before use will be widespread. 

First, there is a universal need for additional training and guidance in the use of HAZUS. This is 

a high priority for NEHRP and FEMA will lead in this effort. Second, there is a need for 

development of data collection standards, tools, and storage formats to enable consistent, 

accurate, and effective augmentation of the national data-bases with more detailed local 

information such as building inventories, lifeline inventories, and local site response estimates. 

The USGS and FEMA will cooperate with local users to establish these standards and protocols. 

It is important to note, however, that NEHRP is not capable of performing detailed data 

acquisition efforts at a local scale. This will be the responsibility of states and local 

communities. Third, there is a general need to improve the usability, functionality, and 

reliability of HAZUS and to calibrate with post-earthquake assessments following major 

damaging earthquakes. Finally, if HAZUS is to be used in a rapid response mode, it must be 

modified to incorporate the near real-time intensity ground shaking information portrayed in the 

USGS’s ShakeMap routine. The USGS and FEMA are working on adding this capability, 

thereby permitting rapid, automatic calculations of loss estimation to aid in both the response 

and recovery processes. Widespread use of such features, however, will ultimately require 

modern seismic monitoring instrumentation of the type envisioned by ANSS. Use of these 

Goal C 36 
features, in coordination with local and federal GIS capability, has the potential to significantly 

move the state of the practice forward. 

Goal C 37
Goal C 38 
Goal D. Improve The Understanding of Earthquakes

and Their Effects 

Activities under Goal D comprise the basic research component of NEHRP and cover a range of 

disciplines from geology and seismology, to earthquake engineering and structural engineering, 

to the behavioral and economic sciences. USGS and NSF are the two primary NEHRP agencies 

supporting Goal D efforts, with USGS emphasizing the geologic and seismologic disciplines and 

NSF also supporting these areas in addition to studies of the built environment and the 

behavioral and economic impact of earthquakes. Activities in Goal D are inherently 

intermediate- to long-term research efforts that may not yield immediate payoffs. Past 

experience suggests, however, that these efforts will contribute significantly to future risk 

mitigation efforts. 

The following sections address current and future NEHRP activities under each of the six 

objectives of Goal D. 

1. Improve monitoring of earthquakes and earthquake-generating processes. 

NEHRP will continue to develop improved seismic monitoring capabilities geared toward 

full-waveform recording, real-time reporting, and improved network integration. NEHRP 

also will continue to support and expand other monitoring systems and the use of satellitebased observational systems for monitoring the deformation of the earth’s crust due to 

earthquakes and earthquake-generating processes. 

Seismicity and crustal deformation monitoring provides a wealth of critical information for 

research into fault identification, slip rate estimates, and hazard assessments. Earthquake 

monitoring also contributes to engineering investigations of building and infrastructure response 

and soil-structure interactions for earthquake design purposes. NEHRP is continually seeking 

ways to improve monitoring and reporting technologies and thereby enhance real-time reporting 

efforts while delivering ever-improving information for downstream research efforts into hazard 

assessments and earthquake engineering. (Note that seismic monitoring activities are presented 

in detail under Goal C.1. We thus incorporate that section by reference and limit this discussion 

to crustal deformation monitoring.) 

Under Objective 1, NEHRP’s priorities are to: 

• Maintain crustal deformation monitoring in active seismic areas of California, the Pacific 

Northwest, the Central U.S., Nevada, Utah, and Alaska for understanding the strain fields 

associated with earthquakes. 

• Establish a Plate Boundary Observatory consisting of a network of GPS, and deformation 

sensors (GPS, strain meters) across the Western U.S. 

Goal D 39 
• Investigate Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) techniques for providing 

map images of fault slip, areal crustal deformation associated with earthquakes, and rapid 

post-earthquake damage assessment. 

Even in the most seismically active parts of the U.S., aseismic movements account for the 

majority of crustal deformation. For this reason, USGS and NSF-supported researchers monitor 

crustal deformation across seismically active regions using a range of instrumentation (e.g., 

leveling and laser-ranging surveys, strain meters, and Global Positioning System (GPS) sensors). 

The measurement of aseismic deformation includes determination of the plate motion rates that 

drive earthquakes in California, Oregon, Washington, and Alaska, of strain rates in interplate 

areas of the U.S., as well as the recording of small transient strain signals associated with fault 

motion that may be related to earthquake generation. 

Recent advances in technology and large decreases in the cost of instrumentation have enabled 

continuous determinations of positions at fixed GPS sites, providing a practical way to 

continuously track crustal deformation. A number of continuous GPS monitoring stations 

currently exist in concentrated areas of study across the western U.S., and NSF is now proposing 

to expand and integrate these networks into a single strain observatory that extends across the 

entire North American–Pacific plate boundary (i.e., from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific 

Ocean). This Plate Boundary Observatory (PBO) will permit NEHRP scientists to measure the 

rate and distribution of strain buildup and release before, during, and after earthquakes, and 

determine how deformation is accommodated three-dimensionally within the plate boundary 

zone. 

In addition to GPS-based deformation monitoring, NEHRP is supporting research into new 

technologies for satellite-based monitoring of crustal deformation. In particular, both NSF and 

USGS are working cooperatively with NASA to explore the capabilities of satellite-based InSAR 

techniques in mapping small changes in ground deformation. Large areal maps of the ground 

deformation will give clear images of deformation accompanying and following large 

earthquakes. The technology may also elucidate regional strain accumulation around faults 

between earthquakes. 

Funding for PBO and InSAR are being proposed under NSF’s EarthScope initiative, which was 

advanced in FY 2002 as a Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction Project 

(MREFC). 

2. Improve understanding of earthquake occurrence and potential. 

NEHRP will support research into the processes by which earthquakes occur, including 

studies of how large earthquakes initiate and grow, the role of fault zone geometry and 

mechanical properties, and the effect of changes in earth stresses. 

Seismic hazard assessments rely upon estimates of the locations, sizes, and probabilities of 

future earthquakes. These estimates, in turn, require identifying the physical variables that 

govern where and how often earthquakes occur and how large they will be. NEHRP supports a 

Goal D 40 
range of studies directed at understanding these variables through investigations into earthquake 

rupture, recurrence, stress transfer, aftershock activity, and remote triggering. 

Under Objective 2, NEHRP’s priorities are to: 

• Investigate the rupture process of large earthquakes, including the initiation, propagation, 

and arrest of seismic rupture and test the resulting hypotheses by geologic, geodetic, 

seismological, and other relevant field observations, laboratory experiments, and numerical 

simulation. 

• Use geodetic and geologic techniques to determine crustal strain rates, compare these strain 

rates with long-term seismic moment release, fault slip rates, and modeled plate rates, and 

investigate how all of these quantities are related to future earthquake potential. Evaluate 

the validity of the “characteristic earthquake” model. 

• Acquire laboratory measurements of physical properties, rock/fluid compositions, 

temperature, stress, and pore pressure in active fault zones under in situ conditions. 

• Establish the San Andreas Fault Observatory at Depth (SAFOD) and use it as an in situ

laboratory for measuring and monitoring fault zone properties at depth across the San 

Andreas Fault. 

Research into the fundamental physics of large earthquakes is being supported by NSF and 

USGS through an array of laboratory, field, and theoretical investigations of seismicity, fault 

zone properties, and crustal strain. These studies are directed at understanding earthquake 

nucleation, propagation, arrest, and recurrence and include research into fault zone geologic or 

geometric heterogeneity, frictional properties, deformation rates, rupture histories, wave 

propagation, fault segmentation, measured strain rates, stress concentrations, and mechanical and 

chemical effects of pore fluids. These studies will continue to be supported at current levels. 

A future priority for NEHRP is the creation of the San Andreas Fault Observatory at Depth 

(SAFOD), an in situ laboratory for measuring and monitoring the San Andreas Fault. SAFOD is 

designed to facilitate direct measurements of fault zone properties where aseismic creep and 

small earthquakes occur. By monitoring the fault zone prior to, during, and after an earthquake, 

SAFOD will provide answers to a number of fundamental questions about the physical and 

chemical processes responsible for earthquake generation. Funding for SAFOD is being 

proposed under NSF’s EarthScope initiative, which was advanced in FY 2002 as a Major 

Research Equipment and Facility Construction Project. 

3. Improve earthquake hazards assessments and develop earthquake-potential estimates 

as planning scenarios. 

NEHRP will support a broad-based research program on earthquakes and ground failure by 

improving quantification and understanding of the extent of hazards and by encouraging use 

of that knowledge for planning purposes. 

Goal D 41 
National and regional hazard assessments require integration of information from nearly all 

aspects of earthquake hazards research as well as the information collected by the seismic and 

crustal strain monitoring networks. These activities are described under Goal C. Future 

improvements in the quality of hazard assessments depend on new insights derived from these 

seismological and geological research efforts. 

Under Objective 3, NEHRP’s priorities are to: 

• Enhance modeling of large earthquakes to incorporate realistic physical constraints and 

fault behavior. 

• Model the likely impact of anticipated great earthquakes on large urban regions, using 

realistic scenarios. Validate results from earthquake studies with results from structural 

and engineering investigations. 

While peak accelerations in great earthquakes are not expected to be significantly larger than 

they are in the near-source region of moderate-to-major earthquakes, great earthquakes cause 

very long duration shaking (several minutes) and very large long-period ground motions. 

Neither long shaking durations nor large long-period ground motions have been experienced by 

modern U.S. cities, and their effects are poorly understood. Although the likelihood of a great 

earthquake in an urban center is certainly much smaller than a moderate earthquake, there is 

precedent for such events (e.g., 1906 San Francisco and 1923 Tokyo earthquakes) and scenario 

models are needed to assess their potential impact. 

New research results from these fundamental earthquake studies can have enormous benefits in 

better understanding the response of structures and lifelines to the large ground motions of big 

earthquakes. It is therefore essential that results of these fundamental earthquake studies be 

shared with the geotechnical and engineering communities. The information provided by large 

earthquakes elsewhere in the world in various tectonic settings provides results that are valuable 

for validation and improvement of design and planning standards in the U.S. 

4. Improve fundamental knowledge of earthquake effects. 

NEHRP will support research on the nature of strong ground shaking from earthquakes, how 

it is affected by seismological and geological factors, and how its characteristics are related 

to permanent ground deformation and damage. These efforts will include investigations of 

damage from domestic and foreign earthquakes and collaboration with non-U.S. research 

programs. 

Among the most important contributions of NEHRP to reducing earthquake losses in the U.S. 

are improving the understanding and modeling of damaging earthquake effects. These effects 

include strong ground shaking, failure and deformation of unstable ground, and the impact of 

these geologic effects on the built environment. NEHRP research into earthquake effects is thus 

directed at both the geophysical parameters controlling ground shaking and ground deformation 

and their relationship to structural damage through studies of soil-structure interaction. 

Under Objective 4, NEHRP’s priorities are to: 

Goal D 42 
• Develop improved methods to generate synthetic seismograms for expected future 

earthquakes, incorporating improved understanding of the rupture process and 

information about the fault and the properties of the surrounding earth’s crust. Test 3-D 

numerical simulations of basin response to strong shaking. 

• Record strong seismic shaking for large earthquakes and develop synthetic models that 

match the observed. Acquire recordings by implementing a national strong motion 

instrumentation program for structures and ground-based sites, and by conducting postearthquake investigations. 

• Identify the parameters of ground motion that cause liquefaction and slope instability and 

damage to structures (such as acceleration, velocity, shaking duration, and spectral 

content). Develop techniques to estimate the permanent ground deformation and 

displacement resulting from earthquake-induced landslides and liquefaction. Improve 

understanding of soil-structure interaction and examine the response of structures and 

lifelines. 

Studies of strong ground shaking and earthquake effects require knowledge of the earthquake 

source, the propagation of seismic energy from the source to the site, and the local geologic 

conditions that characterize the site. For this reason, USGS and NSF support a broad spectrum 

of research ranging from studies of earthquake source properties to near-field effects, wavepropagation effects, local site effects controlling ground failure, and correlation of ground 

motion parameters to structural and lifeline response. NSF also supports research on engineering 

methods to mitigate the effects of the ground motion on new and existing structures and lifelines. 

Collectively these research activities address the primary factors controlling the magnitude of 

earthquake losses and casualties through their effects on structures and lifelines. 

Synthetic seismograms are an outgrowth of these studies and are used to model building and 

lifeline response and guide their design. A priority for NEHRP is the development and 

refinement of synthetic seismogram modeling techniques to produce more accurate ground 

motion time histories. The seismograms must accurately simulate a number of parameters used 

by structural and geotechnical engineers, including peak acceleration, ground velocity and 

displacement, response spectra, and shaking duration. 

Large and destructive earthquakes provide the best opportunities to substantially advance the 

understanding of earth science and engineering issues associated with earthquake effects. But to 

capitalize on this learning opportunity, instruments capable of capturing the complete seismic 

signal must be in place. This is one of the reasons NEHRP is proposing to implement an 

Advanced National Seismic System, which would include approximately 3000 strong motion 

instruments capable of full-waveform recording in critical structures, facilities, and buildings 

across the Nation. These instruments will provide heretofore unavailable data on structural 

response to strong shaking that is absolutely essential for advancing earthquake-engineering 

practices. 

The other means of obtaining strong motion recordings is through post-earthquake 

investigations. NEHRP will thus continue to respond to damaging domestic earthquakes with 

Goal D 43 
portable seismic instrumentation, geodetic measurements, geologic field investigations, and 

damage evaluations. USGS will take the lead in coordinating these post earthquake response 

efforts, following the guidelines outlined in the post earthquake response action plan called for 

under Goal B. In the case of foreign earthquakes, NEHRP will cooperate with U.S. and foreign 

institutions in focused investigations directed at filling critical knowledge gaps in fault behavior, 

site effects, and soil-structural interaction. 

Landsliding, liquefaction, and lateral spreading are major contributors to earthquake destruction. 

An improved understanding of subsurface conditions and ground failure mechanisms is 

necessary if losses in this area are to be reduced. Advances in this area require improved 

measurements and instrumentation. Monitoring of physical properties, pore pressure, 

acceleration, and other transient parameters are all necessary to characterize the ambient physical 

properties of the soils in which failure occurs. Such measurements will enable NSF-supported 

researchers and USGS scientists to develop techniques designed to estimate earthquake-induced 

permanent ground deformation and displacement. 

Studies of nonlinear soil response are critical for assessing site-specific shaking hazards. The 

NSF earthquake engineering research centers actively support research in this area, and there are 

ongoing projects by other NSF-funded investigators that are focused on the prediction of site 

response under large earthquakes for which soil behavior may not be elastic. The NEES 

equipment portfolio will include experimentation equipment that will extend our knowledge in 

this area. 

5. Advance earthquake engineering knowledge of the built environment. 

NEHRP will implement the Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES) to 

improve the seismic design and performance of U.S. civil and mechanical infrastructure 

systems through collaborative and integrated experimentation, computation, theory, 

databases, and model-based simulation. 

NEHRP supports research in earthquake engineering through NIST and NSF. The problemfocused research and development conducted by NIST to improve codes, standards, and 

practices for buildings and lifelines is discussed under Goal B. The NSF-supported research is 

directed at developing new knowledge derived from fundamental research on buildings, lifelines, 

geologic materials, and geotechnical construction. NSF research activities also address the 

impacts of seismic events on the physical infrastructure systems that serve the public and societal 

institutions. 

Under Objective 5, NEHRP priorities are: 

• Improve the understanding of existing materials and develop new materials and 

technologies for earthquake resistant structures. Develop and validate new structural 

systems and new methods of structural control. 

• Improve the understanding of collapse mechanisms of various classes of structures. 

Enhance the understanding of fragility curves for various classes of buildings and utility 

Goal D 44 
and transportation lifelines to improve performance-based earthquake engineering 

methodologies. 

• Focus research efforts on theoretical simulations of building and lifeline “systems” 

through the implementation of NEES. Research how structure and component 

integration change the performance of the overall structure. Conduct post-earthquake 

investigations to validate and calibrate research results. 

A new facet of earthquake engineering research now being launched by NSF is theoretical 

studies of the structural response of the built environment to earthquakes based on computer 

simulations. This effort, known as the Networked Earthquake Engineering Systems (NEES), 

will transform earthquake engineering research from its current reliance on physical experiments 

to investigations based on integrated experimentation, computation, theory, databases, and 

model-based simulation. Research areas to be supported under NEES include: structural control, 

composite and hybrid seismic structural systems, smart materials and structures to develop new 

building systems, advanced technologies for seismic response reduction and control, and health 

monitoring. NSF also supports experimental and model-based research projects in these areas. 

The NEES project will exploit Internet technology to integrate and interconnect nationally 

distributed facilities. NEES will also provide a curated data repository for easily accessible 

information, and the managing NEES consortium will develop outreach, educational, and 

experimental opportunities for the professional community. 

As the network of NEES facilities comes on line in FY 2004, university-based research is 

important to provide maintenance and operation support for the NEES facilities and to support 

the expanded research opportunities made possible by the NEES project. 

6. Advance understanding of the social and economic implications of earthquakes. 

NEHRP will support earthquake-related social science and policy research to advance 

understanding of the social and economic impacts of earthquakes, determine levels of risk 

deemed acceptable by various groups in society, and reduce the social, economic, and 

political barriers to effective earthquake risk reduction. 

The social science community has the potential to make vital contributions to NEHRP as it 

moves forward. Social scientists can, for example, research effective ways to involve 

communities in risk identification, prevention, and mitigation; communicate earthquake risks to 

targeted audiences; evaluate the effectiveness of existing and proposed programs and policies; 

and assess and improve the design and operations of organizations and institutions whose job it 

is to prepare for, respond to, mitigate, and aid in recovery from earthquakes. This work can 

serve to increase the pace and overall success of NEHRP risk-reduction measures. Currently 

NSF provides funding for interdisciplinary university-based research conducted in the social, 

economic, policy, and decision sciences, in addition to research contributions from engineering 

and natural sciences. In addition, the NSF-funded earthquake engineering research centers 

develop strategic research agendas that include interdisciplinary research framed to integrate 

contributions from social and natural sciences and engineering, with applications to 

performance-based earthquake engineering, seismic risk mitigation, pre-earthquake 

Goal D 45 
preparedness, and post-earthquake response and recovery. This work will continue and will be 

more directly integrated into the NEHRP activities outlined in other portions of the plan. 

Under Objective 6, NEHRP priorities are to: 

Analyze how incentives influence risk-reduction behavior under the conditions of uncertainty 

inherent with earthquake predictions. Research ways to expand and improve incentives to 

promote earthquake mitigation. 

• Analyze risk perceptions and their effects on decision making in order to develop a 

common framework for discussing risk with engineers, building owners, occupants, and 

public officials. Improve techniques for explaining risk under conditions that have varied 

degrees of uncertainty. 

• Research effective means to communicate real-time warnings to various intended 

recipients so that appropriate responses are elicited. Incorporate research results into the 

development of earthquake early notification systems. 

Improving earthquake risk communication requires continued investment in both fundamental 

research and translation of that research into risk communication and management policies and 

practices. While we now understand a good deal more about risk perceptions than we did 

several decades ago, research on the relationship between risk perceptions and mitigation 

decisions, and on risk communication and management, may enable risk reductions as large as or 

larger than equal investments in physical and engineering sciences. 

NSF supports research by social and behavioral scientists that will improve our understanding of 

how different incentives influence behavior under conditions of uncertainty. Research should be 

supported on the direct and indirect effects of a range of incentives for hazard mitigation, 

including taxes and other financial incentives, social and legal sanctions, and land-use based 

incentives. NSF also supports research on risk analysis and management as well as on the design 

of effective institutions, which can help to identify potentially effective policies and 

organizational strategies for achieving risk reduction. The policy implications of the results of 

this research should be identified and evaluated. If, for example, specific kinds of financial 

incentives are identified by researchers as potentially effective at encouraging large and small 

businesses, organizations, government agencies, and individuals to implement mitigation 

programs, FEMA could support Federal and state tax consultants to identify the specific changes 

in existing Federal and state tax policies that would accomplish this. 

We are not currently able to measure and quantify risks and discuss them within a common 

framework used by engineers, building owners, occupants, and public officials. Early work was 

conducted in the field of risk perception and communication, however, further research in the 

decision sciences field is needed to enable policy makers to communicate relative risks under 

conditions that have varied degrees of uncertainty in terms of time, place, magnitude, and 

frequency, while taking into consideration the limitations of engineering knowledge. 

Goal D 46 
Technological developments have made real-time warning systems a potential tool to 

communicate warnings to affected groups: the general public, large and small businesses, 

emergency responders, hospitals, and schools systems. However, we do not have an adequate 

understanding of how best to communicate these warnings in a way that is fast, reliable, and 

generates the appropriate response from each recipient. NSF supports research by social 

scientists to understand how warning information is processed and acted upon and how 

transmission modes and messages are linked to behavioral response. USGS will such research 

results into the development of earthquake early notification systems. 

Goal D 47 
Goal D 48 
Implementation Summary 

The table below summarizes the range of implementation activities proposed under this strategic 

plan. NEHRP program managers will work with agency policy officials through the NEHRP 

Policy Coordination Council, and with the Office of Management and Budget and Congress to 

develop detailed plans and budget justifications for these projects. 

Implementation Summary 49 
Table 1. Summary of planned implementation activities. 

Goal A. Develop effective practices and policies for earthquake loss reduction and accelerate 

their implementation. 

1. 

decision-makers and the public. 

2. Promote incentives for public and private sector loss-reduction actions. 

3. Advocate state and local government practices and policies that reduce losses in the 

public and private sectors. 

4. Implement policies and practices that reduce vulnerability of Federal facilities. 

5. Develop the Nation’s human resource base in the earthquake field. 

Goal and 

Objective NEHRP Activity Lead Agency Support Agencies 

A.1 

FEMA 

NIST 

NSF 

USGS 

A.2 

and businesses. 

FEMA NSF 

USGS 

A.3 

support of, state-based advisory bodies. 

FEMA USGS 

NSF 

A.3 

and local levels. FEMA USGS 

NSF 

A.4 Reduce the risk to existing and future Federal 

facilities, in cooperation with the ICSSC, through 

for Federal agencies. 

FEMA 

NIST USGS 

NSF 

A.5 

and university students. 

FEMA 

NSF 

USGS 

NIST 

A.5 Provide training and continuing education through 

partnerships for the use of NERHP technical 

resources developed under Goals B, C, and D. 

FEMA 

USGS 

Develop and provide information on earthquake hazards and loss-reduction measures to 

Distribute NEHRP resource materials and provide 

technical advice to promote adoption of risk reduction 

measures to decision makers and the public. 

Promote loss reduction actions through development 

of partnerships and incentives with local communities 

Advance seismic risk reduction at the state and local 

government level through interaction with, and 

Promote the adoption of building codes at the state 

development and adoption of risk-reduction standards 

Support curricula and education programs for K-12 

Implementation Summary 50 
Goal B. Improve techniques to reduce seismic vulnerability of facilities and systems. 

1. Facilitate technology transfer among standards organizations, state and local 

governments, and private-sector professionals. 

2. Improve earthquake loss-reduction knowledge and the quality of practice 

3. Support efforts to improve seismic standards and codes and improve design and 

construction practices for buildings and lifelines. 

Goal and 

Objective NEHRP Activity Lead Agency Support Agencies 

B.1 Support development of improved building codes and 

encourage technology transfer through consortia and 

professional trade associations. 

FEMA NIST 

B.2 Expand the use of problem-focused research to 

support a new generation of codes and standards for 

buildings and lifelines. 

NIST FEMA 

NSF 

B.3 Maintain NEHRP guidance documents for new and 

existing buildings. FEMA USGS 

B.3 Develop performance-based codes for buildings and 

lifelines. 

FEMA 

NIST 

NSF 

USGS 

B.3 Improve coordination of post-earthquake 

investigations. USGS 

FEMA 

NIST 

NSF 

B.3 Develop integrated, comprehensive NEHRP postearthquake reports and databases. USGS FEMA 

NIST 

NSF 

Implementation Summary 51 
Goal C. Improve seismic hazards identification and risk assessment methods, and their use. 

1. Provide rapid, reliable information about earthquakes and earthquake-induced damage. 

2. Improve seismic hazard characterization and mapping. 

3. Support development and use of risk and loss assessment tools. 

Goal and 

Objective NEHRP Activity Lead Agency Support Agencies 

C.1 Operate national, regional, and global seismic 

networks and associated network information centers. 

USGS 

NSF 

C.1 Upgrade seismic monitoring networks through the 

implementation of the ANSS. USGS 

C.2 Update and expand national seismic hazard maps, 

including U.S. trust territories. Incorporate new earth 

science data and improve probabilistic methods. 

USGS NSF 

C.2 Develop prototype urban seismic hazard maps for 

select major metropolitan areas. USGS 

C.3 Expand access to HAZUS and provide necessary 

training. FEMA 

C.3 Support development of standards for database 

management and data collection efforts. FEMA NSF 

USGS 

C.3 Refine HAZUS earthquake model to incorporated 

new research findings and database developments and 

calibrate with post-earthquake studies. 

FEMA USGS 

Implementation Summary 52 
Goal D. Improve the understanding of earthquakes and their effects. 

1. Improve monitoring of earthquakes and earthquake-generating processes. 

2. Improve understanding of earthquake occurrence and potential 

3. 

as planning scenarios. 

4. . 

5. 

6. 

Goal and 

Objective NEHRP Activity Lead Agency Support Agencies 

D.1 

Synthetic Aperture Radar techniques. 

NSF USGS 

NASA 

D.1 Establish and support Plate Boundary Observatory in 

western U.S. NSF USGS 

D.2 Continue earth science studies and research related to 

earthquake potential and earthquake occurrence. 

USGS 

NSF 

D.2 Establish and support the San Andreas Fault 

Observatory at Depth (SAFOD). NSF USGS 

D.3 

earthquakes on urban regions and refine results using 

structural and engineering investigations. NSF USGS 

D.4 

Evaluate effect of nonlinear 

soil response on urban areas. Calibrate results 

through post-earthquake investigations. 

USGS 

NSF 

D.4 NSF 

USGS 

D.5 NSF NIST 

D.5 Advance earthquake engineering knowledge of the NSF 

D.6 Support interdisciplinary research that involves 

and decision sciences. 

NSF 

FEMA 

USGS 

NIST 

Improve earthquake hazards assessments and develop earthquake-potential estimates 

Improve fundamental knowledge of earthquake effects

Advance earthquake engineering knowledge of the built environment. 

Advance understanding of the social and economic implications of earthquakes. 

Expand and advance crustal deformation monitoring, 

including investigation of GPS and Interferometric 

Model the likely impact of anticipated large 

Develop improved methods to predict ground shaking 

and structural damage. 

Develop techniques to estimate ground deformation 

from landslide and liquefaction. 

Improve knowledge of structural characteristics and 

system performance of constructed facilities. 

built environment through implementation of NEES. 

engineering, natural science, and social, economic, 

Implementation Summary 53 
Implementation Summary 54 
Program Management / Agency Coordination 

Program management requires a programmatic agenda, or implementation plan, that identifies 

the projects, schedules, responsible agencies, and resource commitments and that describes the 

involvement of each agency. Management of this Plan is shared by the NEHRP agencies on a 

collegial basis. Each agency represents its own interests and remains responsible for its own 

programs, but recognizes the value of cooperative actions. As the lead agency, FEMA is 

ultimately responsible for program and policy matters but solicits advice from the Interagency 

Coordination Council (ICC). The ICC is responsible for writing, adopting, and implementing 

this Strategic Plan, and for integrating agency programs to accomplish the Plan’s goals and 

objectives. Periodic meetings provide a forum for discussing common activities, exploring 

crosscutting issues, collaborating on joint projects, identifying and resolving conflicts, and 

seeking support and cooperation. The ICC also provides a mechanism for revising the Strategic 

Plan. 

The ICC will conduct an annual program review at which the project managers will present 

achievements and reports on their projects. This meeting will have two purposes. The first is to 

permit the ICC to assess progress and to redirect efforts to take advantage of new results. The 

second purpose is to allow the agency representatives to gain insight into the work of the other 

agencies and to facilitate collaboration among them. 

The NEHRP agencies have identified several explicit areas where resources and funding will be 

specifically coordinated: 

• Meetings of Policy Coordination Council (PCC) 

• Meetings of Interagency Coordination Council (ICC) 

• Developing an explicit research implementation process 

• Post-earthquake coordination 

• Coordinated audience identification/information dissemination/Internet presence 

• Coordination of EERCs and multi-state consortia activities and funding 

• Guidelines for external partnering 

The following discussions outline in more detail the specific areas of coordination listed above. 

The PCC, consisting of the head of FEMA’s Mitigation Division, and the directors of NIST, 

NSF, and USGS, will meet on at least a bi-annual basis. The focus of their meetings will be 

high-level policy issues that concern strategic NEHRP direction and liaison with the Office of 

Management and Budget and Congress. 

The ICC, chaired by the Director of FEMA’s Engineering and Technology Unit, and populated 

with a representative from NIST, NSF, and USGS, will meet on at least a quarterly basis 

throughout the year. The key focus of the ICC will be interagency coordination of projects, 

programs, plans, budgets, and operational NEHRP issues. Some of the key purposes of these 

regularly held meetings are for each of the program agencies to present their NEHRP-related 

budget and expense figures and to have a better understanding of what activities each agency is 

Program Management / Agency Coordination 55 
emphasizing. These meetings also will act as a catalyst for spurring interagency cooperative 

projects. 

An extremely high priority in the short term for NEHRP is the improvement of the “research to 

practice to implementation” cycle, especially in the building sciences area. There currently 

exists a fundamental disconnect in that there is not a clear link for research results to be 

incorporated into codes and standards development and implementation activities. The result is 

that relevant research activities take longer to get translated into practice. Similarly, research 

needs identified by guideline development and implementation activities are not being 

communicated to research organizations; hence, these items are not being investigated in a 

timely manner. An exception has been the incorporation of USGS and NSF data on the national 

hazard maps into the model building codes. This is an example where the cycle appears 

functional and has worked well. The NEHRP agencies need to develop and agree on a 

conceptual flowchart and process to close this loop. This will be accomplished by a NEHRP 

research issues ad hoc working group that will have the responsibility of designing mechanisms 

and processes that assure proper information transfer and coordination. 

Another area that requires attention is post-earthquake investigations. Following an earthquake, 

there is a tremendous opportunity to both learn and to transmit findings. Following the 1964 

Alaska and 1971 San Fernando earthquakes, significant government efforts produced 

comprehensive reports on the respective earthquakes. Since that time, the scientific landscape 

has changed. A large number of groups now embark on post-earthquake reconnaissance and 

data collection efforts and produce reports. However, there is insufficient coordination or 

synergy to these efforts. By creating a pre-earthquake action plan for post-earthquake 

coordination, NEHRP’s goal is to produce a framework, with stakeholder input, that maximizes 

the efficiency and minimizes the overlap of these efforts. 

Coordinated audience identification is a key component of any effective effort by the NEHRP 

agencies to raise earthquake awareness and encourage mitigation activities. It is critical for 

NEHRP to coordinate internally so that it speaks to the community in a common voice. This is 

especially important during post-earthquake response efforts and requires improved coordination 

among the various field offices of FEMA, NSF, and USGS. 

The NEHRP agencies will form an ad hoc information dissemination working group that seeks 

to eliminate overlap in agency dissemination efforts and to better coordinate resources in 

existing efforts. One area of immediate focus will be the development of a NEHRP web site that 

serves as an information source about NEHRP agency activities and other program information. 

FEMA will assume the lead for this effort. 

The NEHRP agencies provide significant funding to the EERCs (MAE, MCEER, and PEER) 

through NSF. In addition, FEMA and USGS fund multi-state consortia such as the Central US 

Earthquake Consortium (CUSEC), the Western States Seismic Policy Council (WSSPC), the 

New England States Emergency Consortium (NESEC), and the Cascadia Region Earthquake 

Workgroup (CREW). Historically, each of the NEHRP agencies has funded these entities 

separately, presenting a challenge to coordinate the efforts of these groups to meet NEHRP 

objectives. The NEHRP agencies will promote the joint coordination of the activities of these 

Program Management / Agency Coordination 56 
groups and will develop coordination in annual reviews. This will help avoid duplicative efforts. 

It will also force better coordination between the centers and consortia in meeting NEHRP 

objectives. 

Finally, as an aid to Plan revisions, NEHRP will convene an ad hoc stakeholder group comprised 

of a balanced and representative sampling of NEHRP stakeholders. This group will have a 

revolving membership and will aid the ICC in revising the Strategic Plan by providing opinions 

and firsthand observations of what is needed on the ground to ensure more efficient earthquake 

loss reduction. 

Program Management / Agency Coordination 57 
Program Management / Agency Coordination 58 
Measuring Performance 

Measuring the progress of earthquake mitigation is inherently problematic. Those who seek to 

quantify the value of mitigation efforts face a frustrating dilemma⎯it’s the actions that aren’t 

taken that lead to measurable consequences, while the actions that are taken are subject to 

ambiguity. Did the structure survive because of retrofitting, or because the shaking intensity and 

duration of the earthquake were not sufficiently strong to cause damage? If the building codes 

had not been strengthened, what would have been the impact of an event? It is extremely 

difficult to measure events that have not yet occurred, but that is nevertheless the challenge. 

The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 and the NEHRP mission statement contain two 

complementary, fundamental goals: 1) to develop knowledge and, 2) to promote practices and 

policies to reduce fatalities, injuries, and economic and other losses. As they are distinctly 

different tasks, different methods of measuring performance need to be employed. 

Developing Knowledge 

Evaluating the outcomes of the research component of NEHRP requires a science-sensitive 

approach. Research under NEHRP is intended to fulfill program goals as well as to address a 

national goal of leadership in scientific knowledge. Basic research is intended to advance 

knowledge—it is not required that it produce tangible, immediately useful results, although this 

often happens. NEHRP activities are focused to expand fundamental understanding of 

earthquake processes, engineering, and social and economic impacts. This knowledge is further 

developed through applied research and development activities that enable effective transfer of 

the new applications, methods, and technologies to those who will use it in reducing earthquake 

losses. 

A performance assessment for research and development activities should include continuous 

self-assessment and periodic external independent review of the outcomes and quality of 

research. Of importance to the NEHRP mission, the review should: 1) evaluate the excellence of 

the research methods and products; 2) determine how rapidly research results are translated for 

use in reducing risk; 3) assess how effectively earthquake scientists, engineers, and practitioners 

learn from other areas of research and from other nations; 4) assess how investigators apply new 

knowledge and use it in advancing their own research and development efforts; and 5) analyze 

the effectiveness and appropriateness of allocation of research resources by discipline and 

NEHRP priorities. Recommendations from such evaluations can be used to improve the 

effectiveness of the research, development, and implementation programs in meeting the 

Nation’s science objectives and the NEHRP goals and objectives. Conclusions from such 

reviews should be included in NEHRP reports to Congress. 

Measuring Performance 59 
Reducing Losses 

The second component of measuring performance is measuring the effectiveness of the program 

in the reduction in earthquake losses. Damaging earthquakes occur only infrequently, which 

makes difficult the validation of the predicted or expected reductions in earthquake losses as a 

result of NEHRP activities. NEHRP could work to develop HAZUS loss estimates over 5-year 

time intervals to estimate the likely reductions in earthquake losses in selected areas of the 

country. However, the logistical difficulties required to assemble this data make this path 

impractical. An alternative approach is the development of risk indicators that can serve as 

proxy measures of the success of loss-reduction activities. Input will be required from the 

stakeholder communities to identify meaningful metrics, and to evaluate the usefulness of 

candidate metrics. Program metrics developed should be subjected to periodic review to ensure 

that the target indicator is being accurately represented, and should incorporate the results of 

continuing research in the field. 

Next Steps 

Development of metrics for a program as diverse and difficult to measure as the NEHRP 

program will require careful thought and effort. It is critical that metrics be designed that are 

meaningful, that will accurately reflect the performance measures of interest, and that will 

actually measure the two key program objectives, developing knowledge and reducing losses. 

To develop the desired metrics, the NERHP agencies will commit resources in FY03 to 

developing a series of metrics consistent with each NEHRP agencies’ GPRA reporting 

requirements for both the developing knowledge and reducing losses missions of NEHRP. 

Measuring Performance 60 
Appendix A. Development of Implementation Plan 

The development of the implementation sections of this strategic plan began with a stakeholder 

workshop in September of 1999. Workshop participants were identified by goal so that broad 

representation was assured. Discussion of implementation activities occurred in four concurrent 

discussion sessions corresponding to the four NEHRP Goals. Discussion leaders were 

appointed, and these same leaders were responsible for producing summary reports of 

recommended implementation activities following the meeting discussion. 

The next step in the process was for a working subgroup of the ICC to categorize the existing 

NEHRP activities by goal and objective. This list was then compared to the list of proposed 

implementation activities generated from the September 1999 workshop. Areas where suggested 

implementation activities were matched by ongoing activities within the agencies were left 

alone, while gaps (i.e., those areas where suggested activities represented new or expanded 

efforts not currently being addressed within NEHRP) were specifically identified. The agencies 

then prioritized these proposed activities on the basis of perceived value and need, and on the fit 

with stated NEHRP goals and objectives. High priority activities were then summarized by goal 

and objective into a draft document that was distributed to all the participants of the September 

1999 workshop. 

The distribution of the draft plan was followed by a second workshop in September 2000. At 

this meeting, a summary of the major changes to the document was presented. Breakout sessions 

corresponding to the four Strategic Plan goals were again assembled to discuss in detail the 

recommendations under each goal contained in the latest version of the plan. Also, topical 

discussions on stakeholder involvement and program metrics were undertaken in the breakout 

groups. Comments were collected in the breakout groups and presented in a general plenary 

session. A considerable question and answer period was also employed as a feedback 

mechanism. The ICC Working group then took the feedback from the second workshop and 

incorporated relevant comments into the plan. At this juncture, the document was reformatted to 

reflect the forward-looking nature of NEHRP and to sharpen the focus of the Plan’s message. 

The Working Group prepared final revisions, and the plan was submitted to the agencies for 

formal internal review in early November 2000. 

Appendix A 61 
Appendix A 62 
Appendix B. List of Workshop Participants 

September 1-2, 1999 

Daniel P. Abrams 

Jim Ament 

Jill Andrews 

Walter Arabasz 

Michael Armstrong 

James E. Beavers 

Richard Bernknopf 

Ann Bostrom 

Jawhar Bouabid 

James Buika 

Arrietta Chakos 

Harish Chander 

Karen Clark 

Craig Comartin 

James Davis 

Gregory Deierlein 

Claire Drury 

Charles D. Eadie 

Donald Eggleston 

Richard Eisner 

Steven P. French 

John Filson 

Arthur D. Frankel 

Edward S. Fratto 

Ian Friedland 

Marjorie R. Greene 

John Gross 

Robert Hanson 

Ronald Hamburger 

James R. Harris 

Jack Hayes 

Thomas Heaton 

Gregory L. Hempen 

Gil Jamieson 

Arch Johnston 

Rob Johnson 

Gerald H. Jones 

John D. Kiefer 

Anne S. Kiremidjian 

Elizabeth Lemersal 

H.S. Lew 

Theodore Litty 

Mid-America Earthquake Center 

State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. 

University of Southern California 

University of Utah 

FEMA 

Mid-America Earthquake Center 

USGS 

NSF 

Durham Technologies, Inc. 

FEMA 

City Managers Office, Berkeley, CA 

Department of Energy 

Applied Insurance Research 

Comartin-Reis 

California Division of Mines & Geology 

Stanford University 

FEMA 

University of California 

SERA Architects PC 

Office of Emergency Services, CA 

Georgia Institute of Technology 

USGS 

USGS 

NESEC 

MCEER 

EERI 

NIST 

FEMA, University of Michigan 

EQE International 

JR Harris & Company 

US Army Construction Engineering 

CALTECH 

USACE, St. Louis District 

FEMA 

CERI, University of Memphis 

Cascadia Region Earthquake Workgroup 

National Institute of Building Sciences 

Kentucky Geological Survey 

Stanford University 

FEMA 

NIST 

FEMA 

Appendix B 63 
Sue Luebbering-Evers 

Edgar V. Leyendecker 

Ronald Lynn 

George Mader 

Stan Mahin 

Mike Mahoney 

Bob McCluer 

Thomas R. McLane 

Mike Mehrain 

Ugo Morelli 

Sam Morton 

Priscilla Nelson 

Joanne Nigg 

Stuart Nishenko 

Robert A. Olson 

Ronald Padgett 

Joy Pauschke 

Milo Pearson 

Chris Poland 

Jonathan G. Price 

Joseph Rachel 

Robert Reitherman 

Michael Riley 

Christopher Rojahn 

Paul Senseny 

Daniel Shapiro 

Haresh Shah 

Tim Sheckler 

Paul G. Somerville 

Shyam Sunder 

Bruce Swiren 

Alex Tang 

Mary Taylor 

Thomas Tobin 

Susan K. Tubbesing 

Jerry Uhlmann 

Anita Vollmer 

Yumei Wang 

James Whitcomb 

Stephen Weiser 

Stuart Werner 

Soy Williams 

Craig Wingo 

Cecily Wolfe 

T. Leslie Youd 

Eugene Zeller 

FEMA 

USGS 

Clark Co. Nevada Bldg. Dept. 

Spangle Associates 

University of California, Berkeley 

FEMA 

BOCA International 

ASCE 

Dames & Moore 

FEMA 

The Morton Company 

NSF 

University of Delaware 

FEMA 

Robert Olson Associates, Inc. 

Kentucky Division of Emergency Management 

NSF 

California Earthquake Authority 

Degenkolb Engineers 

Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology 

FEMA 

CUREe 

NIST 

Applied Technology Council 

Factory Mutual Insurance 

SOHA Engineers 

Stanford University 

FEMA 

URS Greiner Woodward Clyde 

NIST 

FEMA 

Nortel 

FEMA 

Tobin and Associates 

EERI 

Missouri State Emergency management Agency 

FEMA 

Oregon Dept. of Geology and Mineral Industries 

NSF 

Idaho Bureau of Disaster Services 

Seismic Systems and Engineering Consultants 

International Code Council, Inc. 

FEMA 

NSF 

Bringham Young University 

Long Beach Department of Planning 

Appendix B 64 
Robert Zimmerman Boeing Company 

September 6-7, 2000 

Daniel P. Abrams Mid-America Earthquake Center 

Jim Ament State Farm Fire and Casulty Co. 

John G. Anderson University of Nevada 

Michael Armstrong FEMA 

James E. Beavers Mid-America Earthquake Center 

Jawhar Bouabid Durham Technologies, Inc. 

Ian Buckle University of Nevada, Reno 

Jim Buika FEMA 

Charles D. Eadie University of California 

Donald Eggleston SERA Architects PC 

John Filson USGS 

Edward S. Fratto NESEC 

Jayanta Guin Applied Insurance Research 

Marjorie R. Greene EERI 

Robert Hanson FEMA, University of Michigan 

James R. Harris JR Harris & Company 

Jack Hayes US Army Construction Engineering 

Thomas Heaton CALTECH 

Gregory L. Hempen USACE, St. Louis District 

Jon Janowitz FEMA 

Rob Johnson Cascadia Region Earthquake Workgroup 

Gerald H. Jones National Institute of Building Sciences 

John D. Kiefer Kentucky Geological Survey 

Anne S. Kiremidjian Stanford University 

Elizabeth Lemersal FEMA 

Mark Leonard California Earthquake Authority 

Theodore Litty FEMA 

Sue Luebbering-Evers FEMA 

Edgar V. Leyendecker USGS 

George Mader Spangle Associates 

Mike Mahoney FEMA 

Jill McCarthy USGS 

Thomas R. McLane ASCE 

Mike Mehrain Dames & Moore 

Jack Moehle PEER, University of California, Berkeley 

Ugo Morelli FEMA 

Priscilla Nelson NSF 

Stuart Nishenko FEMA 

Dennis Olmstead Oregon Dept. of Geology and Mineral Industries 

Robert A. Olson Robert Olson Associates, Inc. 

Chris Poland Degenkolb Engineers 

Jonathan G. Price Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology 

Appendix B 65 
Michael Riley 

Christopher Rojahn 

Richard Roths 

William U. Savage 

Paul Senseny 

Daniel Shapiro 

Tim Sheckler 

Howard Simpson 

Paul G. Somerville 

Shyam Sunder 

Craig Taylor 

Susan K. Tubbesing 

Jerry Uhlmann 

Anita Vollmer 

Soy Williams 

Craig Wingo 

T. Leslie Youd 

Robert Zimmerman 

NIST 

Applied Technology Council 

FEMA 

Pacific Gas & Electric Company 

Factory Mutual Insurance 

SOHA Engineers 

FEMA 

Simpson Gumpertz & Heger, Inc. 

URS Greiner Woodward Clyde 

NIST 

Natural Hazards Management, Inc. 

EERI 

Missouri State Emergency management Agency 

FEMA 

International Code Council, Inc. 

FEMA 

Bringham Young University 

Boeing 

Appendix B 66