NEHRP Clearinghouse
- Title
- Seismic Provisions of State and Local Building Codes and Their Enforcement.
- File
- PB92196062.pdf
- Source
- National Inst. of Standards and Technology (BFRL), Gaithersburg, MD. Structures Div.; Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC., May 1992, 368 p.
- Abstract
- The report provides technical and administrative information on the status of seismic design and construction provisions adopted by state and local jurisdictions and of their enforcement. Federal agencies must determine if state and local design and construction standards and practices provide adequate seismic safety when considering where to design and build Federal facilities in the United States. The document presents a compilation and summarization of building code adoption and enforcement data on the 50 states, the three U.S. territories, 186 of the largest local jurisdictions (all cities over 100,000 in population), and 1,164 other units of local government (county/city). The methodology for selecting the points of contact is explained in detail in Appendix A. In short, the contacts were selected on the basis of population and seismic risk. All states had a minimum of five contact points; each of the three U.S. territories constitute one contact; and the 186 largest cities were each contacted. Twelve states had only the minimum five contact points since they were located entirely in Seismic Map Areas 1 and 2 (low seismic risk). Five states with relatively low populations had areas located no higher than Map Area 3 and were, therefore, allocated an additional contact point for each 500,000 of total state population. Sixteen states with higher populations, but with no areas higher than Map Area 3, were allotted an additional contact for every county in Map Area 3 with a population over 25,000. Additional contacts were then made in the metropolitan areas surrounding the 186 major cities if located in Map Areas 2 and 3. The remaining contact points were made in the U.S. counties that are located in Map Areas 4 through 7 according to a formula based on the seismic risk of the county and its population.
- Keywords
- ; Seismic design; Earthquake resistant structures; Regulations; Enforcement; State government; Earthquake engineering; Surveys; Local government; Construction management; Building codes