Building the Performance

You Need
A Guide to State-of-the-Art Tools for Seismic Design and
Assessment

FEMA P-58-7 / December 2018

CONTENTS

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

1. Building Codes Might Not Give You What You Need ............................................. 2
2. Introduction to Performance-Based Methods ....................................................... 4
3. Options for a Performance-Based Project..............................................................9
4. How to Determine Your Earthquake Performance Goals ....................................12
5. Selecting and Working with a Qualified Design Team ..........................................15
6. Cost Considerations ..............................................................................................17
7. Example Uses........................................................................................................19
8. Conclusion ............................................................................................................22
Resources .................................................................................................................23
Definitions and Acronyms ........................................................................................24

Acknowledgements
This document was prepared by the Applied Technology Council (ATC) for the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) under the ATC-58 series of projects. It is one in a series of products
representing the combined work of more than 200 consultants and individuals. ATC gratefully
acknowledges the work of the ATC-58-2 Stakeholder Products Team, including Laura Samant (Team
Leader), David Mar, Lori Peek, Maryann Phipps, Sharyl Rabinovici, and Tom Tobin for the conception and
development of the information contained herein.

Notice
Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Applied Technology Council (ATC), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS),
or the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Additionally, neither ATC, DHS, FEMA, nor any of
their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, nor assumes any legal liability or
responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, product, or process
included in this publication. Users of information from this publication assume all liability arising from
such use.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
After an earthquake, buildings designed to minimum building code criteria might be
unusable and result in heavy financial losses. Is that acceptable for your building?
For some buildings, safety is the critical concern when it comes to large earthquakes. But for other
buildings—such as those that house time-critical business activities, need to be reoccupied quickly, or
represent a significant financial investment—building owners and occupants want more.
Building codes in the United States provide minimum standards to ensure that new buildings are very
unlikely to have deadly collapses in large earthquakes. However, a new building constructed in accordance
with the code could still experience heavy damage, be unusable for an extended period, and require
demolition. Past earthquakes show that the costs associated with the loss of use of a building during repair
can exceed the value of the building itself. Owners and tenants may face major disruption and loss of
revenue, potentially including the need to abandon the building and find replacement space.

New performance-based seismic engineering tools empower you to make decisions

about earthquake risk that are right for you and your building.
Performance-based design and assessment methods enable detailed analyses of the wide-ranging
consequences of earthquakes for new and existing buildings. This information can be used to weigh trade-
offs when designing a new building, renovating an existing building, purchasing or leasing space, or making
decisions to manage the risk of currently owned buildings. Decision-makers can evaluate options and make
personalized risk decisions that reflect their needs, values, budget, and timeline. In consultation with
knowledgeable architects, engineers, and other design professionals, performance-based analyses can help
reduce the chance of injuries, minimize uncertainty and downtime, and reduce future financial losses.

This Guide presents information project managers and decision-makers need to know to
use a performance-based approach for seismic design and assessment.

A building project that uses performance-based seismic design and assessment methods is essentially the
same as a typical project, but with a few key differences. This Guide provides an overview of decisions,
steps, and implications associated with using a performance-based approach. It covers:
• When and why to use a performance-based approach
• How a performance-based approach varies from a conventional approach
• The types of projects a performance-based approach can be used for, and varying ways it can be used
• How to assemble a knowledgeable and effective team
• How to determine earthquake performance goals for a particular project
• Cost implications of using a performance-based approach

This Guide focuses solely on performance-based methods for managing the earthquake risk of buildings, but
similar approaches can be used for other threats, such as severe storms, flooding, or fire.

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 1

1. BUILDING CODES MIGHT NOT GIVE YOU
WHAT YOU NEED

Building codes mostly aim to protect lives, “After the 1994 Northridge earthquake,
not your business or investments.
people were shocked at how long it
New buildings that meet all seismic requirements of took before buildings could be repaired
the building code in the United States can experience and used again. More than one client
widely different levels of earthquake damage when
said that while it was great that their
exposed to the same earthquake shaking. Some new
buildings could have very light damage and be usable building didn’t fall down, the amount of
quickly. Others could be unusable for an extended downtime after the earthquake was an
time after a large but expected earthquake, and might unexpected financial disaster. They
even need to be demolished.
assumed the code would produce
The International Building Code (IBC) for new better buildings.”
construction, enforced in most parts of the United Mason Walters
States, is a set of minimum rules for designing Structural Engineer
buildings. Procedures in the IBC are meant to: (1) Forell/Elsesser Engineering
protect lives in the largest earthquakes likely to affect
a building, and (2) reduce property damage and
economic loss in more frequent, moderate
earthquakes. Key Limitations of
Building Codes
Building codes are updated regularly, meaning that
buildings constructed decades ago may be vulnerable
1. Even modern buildings designed to the
in ways that more recent buildings are not. With
current building code have some
limited exceptions, most cities do not require older
chance of collapse in earthquakes or
buildings to be evaluated or retrofitted, even for
might need to be demolished.
building types known to be unsafe in earthquakes.
Retrofitting can make damage less likely or less 2. The building code does not address
severe, but by how much depends on the design. many aspects of a building that affect
financial loss and whether a building is
Building codes in New Zealand have similar aims as functional after an earthquake.
codes in the United States. When two major
3. Code-compliant buildings are designed
earthquakes hit Christchurch, New Zealand in 2011, to resist forces from an earthquake of a
buildings built to modern codes performed as particular intensity even though larger
expected—only two collapsed. However, 70% of earthquakes are possible.
buildings in the Christchurch downtown area were
eventually demolished due to extensive damage. The 4. Most communities do not require older
Central Business District lay vacant for over two years. buildings to be evaluated or retrofitted,
The economic and social consequences to building even for known earthquake
owners, occupants, and the community were massive. vulnerabilities.

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 2

 The building code does not cover everything • Mechanical systems such as elevators or heating
that affects the downtime and financial and cooling (HVAC)
losses of your building. • Plumbing
• Communications infrastructure such as phone
Earthquakes can damage all parts of a building, but lines and internet cables
the code’s seismic standards do not cover all parts of
• Interior walls or partitions
a building.
• Ceiling panels
The focus of the building code is preventing collapse
• Floor coverings (e.g., tiles)
of the overall structural system that supports a
building’s weight and withstands the forces of wind Contents are movable and often valuable things inside
and earthquakes. There are no guarantees that a building, such as furniture, computer equipment,
elements connected to or inside the structure will be machinery, scientific apparatus, data and files,
protected. chemical and biological research samples, and
product inventory. In many cases, bracing of contents
Everything else that is fixed in place and vital to a
is not required by the code.
building’s use are called nonstructural features or
elements, and these building elements can be very These distinctions are important because earthquakes
vulnerable to damage, which can lead to costly and worldwide show that nonstructural and content
disruptive repairs. Some nonstructural elements are damage are the most likely and often largest
addressed by the code. contributor to total losses. Businesses in the United
States, New Zealand, Japan, Mexico, Italy, Chile, and
Nonstructural elements that can be damaged include:
elsewhere have lost valuable assets and experienced
• Outside façades, balconies, windows, doors, and major delays in operations due to repairs of these
awnings elements that took months to years.
• Electrical systems and lighting

Interior damage in this Christchurch, New Zealand office building after the 2011 earthquake
demonstrates the safety concerns and length of time it might take to restore nonstructural elements
of a building to usable condition.
FEMA P-58-7: An Owner’s Guide to Using Performance-Based Seismic Design and Analysis pg 3
Photo credit: Russell Berkowitz, 2011.
2. INTRODUCTION TO PERFORMANCE-BASED
METHODS
A performance-based approach enables you to consider a range of future earthquake
consequences in decisions about new and existing buildings.
A performance-based approach to seismic design and assessment provides detailed information about what is likely
to happen to a building in earthquakes and the resulting consequences. This information allows building owners and
occupants to understand and proactively make decisions about how much damage is acceptable to them.

When designing a new building or retrofitting an existing building, a performance-based approach is both
complementary to and fundamentally different from a code-based approach. A code-based approach entails
following a series of rules that, based on decades of experience, are deemed by regulators to meet society’s needs.
A performance-based approach makes design decisions specifically to control a building’s earthquake risk, reflecting
the needs of the building owner or decision-maker. A building can both comply with code standards and be
designed to meet performance needs defined by the owner.

As the table below shows, the code does not require engineers to consider many potentially important earthquake
performance factors such as repair time or likelihood of receiving an unsafe placard. A performance-based approach
enables consideration of these and other outcomes across a range of potential shaking levels that could affect the
structure.

Performance-based approaches make sense for some but not all building projects.
A performance-based approach is most relevant in circumstances where it is important to have confidence in a
building’s expected earthquake performance. It can be appropriate for projects in which:

• The building represents a significant financial investment.

• The intent is to maintain an interest in the building for a significant length of time.
• It is important to be able to reoccupy the building quickly after an earthquake.
• The building has high-value assets inside that may be difficult or impossible to replace or move.
• The building is located in a location with particularly high earthquake hazard.
• The building has symbolic, historic, cultural, or brand importance.
• The building could command higher resale or lease values if it can be shown to be earthquake resilient.
• Demonstrating equivalence to code goals allows flexibility in design that could lower costs or enable architectural
features not typically allowed by the code.
• The building owner or users want more precise information about exposure and uncertainty, for example to
compare investment options or manage risk in a portfolio of properties.

The table on the next page shows four different contexts where performance-based approaches can benefit new
and existing building projects.

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 4

Four Contexts for Performance-Based Projects

New Construction Existing Buildings

1. DESIGNING FOR HIGH-PERFORMANCE 3. RISK EVALUATION

A performance-based approach can be used to A performance-based analysis can be used by
design a new building that will perform better in owners, investors, buyers, and tenants that want to
earthquakes than a basic code-conforming building. learn about an existing building’s earthquake risk.
Owners work with their design team to define what Risk assessment can be conducted at various levels
levels of damage in earthquakes are acceptable to of detail and accuracy.
them and produce a design that meets their needs
with a high level of certainty.

2. IMPROVED DESIGN FLEXIBILITY 4. EFFECTIVE SEISMIC RETROFIT

Performance-based methods can be used to show During the seismic retrofit of an existing building, the
that a building that deviates from some code design team and building owner make choices about
requirements or uses innovative systems or materials how—and how much—to improve the building’s
will perform equivalent to or better than what would seismic resistance. Performance-based methods can
be expected if the building was conventionally provide owners detailed information about the
designed to meet the code. This use is subject to the earthquake risk of various design options, which can
discretion of local Building Officials. be weighed with costs and other constraints.
It can result in a building with better defined seismic
resistance, lower up front construction cost, or
approval for new techniques that might not
otherwise be permitted.

The FEMA P-58 methodology is the state-of-the-art performance-based design and assessment
method.
The FEMA P-58 methodology, prepared by the Applied Technology Council for the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA), was originally released in 2012 after years of development, and can be used to calculate many
aspects of earthquake performance more rigorously than previously possible. It allows decision-makers to compare
options for their buildings based on feasibility and value by quantifying different types of outcomes in earthquakes.
A variety of modeling packages implement the FEMA P-58 methodology, including a downloadable program
distributed free by FEMA and some commercial services (see the Resources section of this document).
The diagram on the next two pages illustrates the range of earthquake consequences that can be calculated by the
FEMA P-58 methodology and how they might vary for different types of buildings.

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 5

 OPTIONS FOR EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT DESIGN
Design Decisions Have Measurable Consequences

Moderate EQ f
♦--Major
■ - ■EQ- ■ .1.1 Extreme EQ
t--. - . - . - . -
2O%chance I 10%chance - 2%chance Casualty Risks
in SO years
I
in SO years II in SO years

II
II
V')
Protective
0)
C
System I
'.g
·s
ca
3:
(!)
z

Enhanced
Code*

LI □
Basic Code f] [J

II
Basic Retrofit**
I
I

V')
0)
I
I

+-
C
'.g
·sca I
....(!) I
~ I
0 II • C
Unretrofitted
I
♦--- ■-■--· ♦---------- ■
Earthquake damage varies depending on the level of shaking experienced and charac­ New code-compliant build­
teristics of the building's structure and other systems. Design choices affect the amount and ings have very low risks of
types of likely damage. casualties in the US. Some
• Includes Risk Category IV and other buildings with enhanced seismic resistance features. older buildings have high
** Some retrofitted buildings can experience much less damage. safety risks.
 Consequences Under Major Earthquake

-----------------------------------------♦
Chance of Expected Building Initial Building Repair Cost Carbon Impacts
Post-EQ Placard Downtime Cost of Repairs

days

days to weeks
'

j\
weeks to months
- ~--
'

lA
'
(9
months to a year

Q)
-
a year or more -~• •

··-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·--·
Design choices affect the Design choices affect the More resilient buildings typically cost Building materials require
odds of a green tag (no amount of time required be­ slightly more upfront, but result in energy to produce. The
restrictions), yellow tag (re­ fore a building can be occu­ lower post-earthquake repair costs amount and types of repairs
stricted entry), or red tag pied after an earthquake. and consequences. required affect carbon re­
(unsafe, no entry). leases and energy usage.
 Comparison of Code-Based and Performance-Based Approaches

Type of Loss Code-Based Approach Performance-Based Approach*

Damage at or below a level expected to
Evaluates and controls the likely extent of
Structural Damage keep occupants safe in large
damage to the building structure.
earthquakes.
Some components are designed to Evaluates and controls the likely extent of
Nonstructural Damage remain in position. Other components damage to a building’s nonstructural
and contents are not regulated. elements and some contents.
In newer buildings, occupants are
Evaluates and controls the likelihood of
Casualties, including expected to be safe. Retrofits of
deaths or injuries due to building
Deaths and Injuries existing buildings are intended to
damage.
improve but not guarantee safety.
Financial Losses from
Evaluates controls the likely expected
Structural and Not evaluated.
direct dollar losses from damage.
Nonstructural Damage
Evaluates and controls the likelihood of
Likelihood of Unsafe receiving a post-earthquake unsafe
Not evaluated.
Placard placard (red tag) that restricts entry and
use.
Evaluates and controls the likely duration
of repairs, a key factor in how long a
Repair Time Not evaluated. building will be unusable after an
earthquake, and the chance a building
will need to be demolished.

Evaluates and controls the likely carbon

Environmental Impacts Not evaluated. and energy impacts due to building
repairs or demolition.

* Note: Only the FEMA P-58 methodology can estimate all the listed aspects of earthquake performance.

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 8

3. OPTIONS FOR A PERFORMANCE-BASED
PROJECT
You can use performance-based approaches in a variety of project stages with different degrees
of effort and benefit.

A performance-based design or retrofit project is largely the same as a conventional project. The key difference is
that the project team adds the step of explicitly deciding the earthquake consequences that are acceptable to them
and takes actions to meet those goals.
A performance-based approach can be used in the early stages of a project to guide conceptual design decisions, or
it can be used throughout a project to inform every aspect of the design and construction, including the selection
and installation of finishes and equipment. The appropriate effort and degree of implementing a performance-
based approach can be different for each project and decision-maker.

Flowchart of the Performance-Based Seismic Design Process

• Consider risk to occupants, contents, activities, and

Discuss Performance investments
Goals Based on • Assess realistic and worst case scenarios for shaking
What is at Stake and damage
• Determine recovery needs after an earthquake

• Assemble a qualified design team

• Educate and involve key stakeholders in setting
Bring People on Board performance goals
• Develop business case for the desired level of
performance

• Use conceptual design tools like FEMA P-58 to

make ballpark estimates about earthquake
Create Initial Design performance of design options
• Comply with the legal requirements of the building
code or demonstrate equivalent performance

• Refine project plans so expected damage and

outcomes align with performance goals
Check Results
• If desired, use FEMA P-58 methodology to help
and Adjust
identify which parts of a building are driving losses
and fine tune the design

• Ensure that finishes and nonstructural components

Finalize Details and of the building also meet performance goals
Complete Work • Monitor compliance with earthquake-related
aspects of the design during construction

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 9

In the conceptual design stage, a A performance-based analysis helps you
performance-based approach helps you select earthquake-resilient building
select the most suitable structural system. components, anchoring systems, and
Decisions made early in a building design process, equipment.
during the conceptual design phase, can have a big In the later stages of either new construction or a
impact on a building’s earthquake performance. retrofit project, performance-based approaches can
Important early decisions for new building designs be used to drive decisions about earthquake-resilient
include the shape of the building and the selection of components and finishes.
its structural system. Simple analyses using
performance-based methods can provide information The FEMA P-58 methodology, for instance, provides
to guide these choices. breakdowns of the total loss by how much each
building element contributes, as shown on the figures
Early in a project, a structural engineer can broadly on the next page. Once the main drivers of
explore earthquake performance implications of unacceptable loss are identified, the design team can
different structural systems and design options explicitly compare the performance of alternative
through the use of the publication Guidelines for design choices, finishes, anchoring systems, and
Performance-Based Seismic Design of Buildings (FEMA materials to aid in selection and specification.
P-58-6), and companion computer tool (see the
Resources section). With a few assumptions, an
engineer can provide ballpark estimates about
When you have a lot at stake, a
important aspects of earthquake performance and
narrow in on the alternatives most likely to achieve performance-based assessment provides
the client’s earthquake performance goals while reliable estimates of risk for financial
meeting other practical constraints. transactions.
Commercial lenders and investors may be familiar
with earthquake risk measures such as Scenario
During detailed structural design, a
Expected Loss (SEL), Scenario Upper Loss (SUL), and
performance-based approach provides Probable Maximum Loss (PML).
information to help you understand trade-
These traditional approaches provide information
offs. about the expected dollar losses of damage to a
During the detailed structural design stage, an building in earthquakes. However, the accuracy and
engineer can use performance-based methods to quality of these analyses can vary significantly.
estimate project-specific dollar losses, required repair Performance-based analyses can be used to calculate
time, post-earthquake safety tagging, carbon reliable, high-quality SEL, SUL, and PML values for
emissions impacts, and potential casualties for situations in which it is important to have an accurate
earthquakes of various intensities. They can also understanding of risks and potential consequences.
identify which aspects of a building design is driving
unacceptable losses, and adjust plans accordingly.
This information can guide detailed decision-making
and can be used to verify that the established
performance goals are being met.

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 10

 Three examples of ways to consider information about how building components
contribute to earthquake performance for an example building.

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 11

4. HOW TO DETERMINE YOUR EARTHQUAKE
PERFORMANCE GOALS

Earthquake performance goals should Quick Guide to Determining

reflect what really matters to you. Performance Goals
1. Identify important aspects of the
It is generally not practical to make a building
building that could be affected by
“earthquake proof.” The key task in performance-
earthquakes.
based design is to choose target levels of damage and
loss that are acceptable when a building is exposed to 2. Consider what is acceptable
different levels of shaking. The desired performance performance for the building in
could be the same or better than would be achieved earthquakes of different sizes and
by following the rules of the code, depending on the likelihoods.
goals and constraints for a particular project. 3. Work with your design team to
translate performance goals into
It may seem awkward to think about any kind of risk metrics that can be used for design and
as “acceptable,” particularly when it comes to grave analysis, including the level of certainty
consequences such as building collapse. However, the with which goals need to be achieved.
code already reflects a level of acceptable risk—one
that may or may not be right for a particular building.
Without proactive analysis and discussion, choices
that affect earthquake outcomes are made by default.
Many factors play into setting performance goals,
such as the importance of the activities that take
place in the building, how quickly activities need to
“We started taking the seismic resume after an earthquake, and the costs of
performance of our buildings seriously achieving the desired performance. The following
questions can help guide performance goal-setting
when we realized that a large
discussions:
earthquake impacting one of our
manufacturing facilities could cause us 1. ACTIVITIES IN THE BUILDING
to miss a product cycle. That’s • What is the building used for?

unacceptable.” • Which activities are mission critical or affect

relationships with competitors or partners, the
Jeffrey Soulages
organization’s reputation, or the ability for
Senior Structural Engineer
important activities to take place elsewhere?
Intel, Portland, Oregon
• How could the activities in the building be affected
by loss of utility or lifelines systems, such as
electricity, gas, water, or internet?
• How difficult or costly would it be to relocate the
activities if the building is unusable for an extended
period?

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 12

 2. OCCUPANTS AND CONTENTS 3. POST-EARTHQUAKE RECOVERY NEEDS
• How many people use the building and how much • What is at stake for the organization if this building
time do they spend there? is unusable for weeks to months or years during
• Are any users of the building particularly repair?
vulnerable, such as children, the elderly, or • Is this building required for emergency response or
disabled? other activities immediately after an earthquake?
• How challenging or time consuming would it be to • Are there systems that are particularly critical to
replace or repair the contents of this building (for have functional after an earthquake, such as
instance, machinery, inventory, information security or refrigeration?
technology, or archives)? • Will people need to shelter at the site if they
• Are there contents in the building that are cannot safely travel home?
irreplaceable, such as research samples, precious
artwork, or religious or historic artifacts? 4. FINANCIAL INVESTMENT
• Does the building contain hazardous materials, or • How severe are the financial consequences if the
substances that could harm health or the activities in the building are disrupted after an
environment if released? earthquake?
• What are the consequences if employees cannot • How severe are the financial consequences if the
get into the building to get materials or accomplish building is so damaged it needs to be demolished?
tasks?
• After an earthquake, will there be sufficient
liquidity to pay for repairs as quickly as they are
needed?
• Could reputation, public relations, or brand be
affected by what happens to the building?

Performance goals should consider issues that could threaten assets, damage
inventory,
FEMA P-58-7: or interrupt
Building mission-critical
the Performance You Need processes. page 13
Your performance goals should be different for earthquakes of different sizes and frequency.

In general, smaller earthquakes occur more frequently than larger and more damaging earthquakes. After a major
earthquake, it is typically reasonable to accept some building damage, financial loss, and building closure. However,
after an earthquake of a more moderate size and higher likelihood of occurrence, decision-makers might desire the
same building to be functional shortly after the event. Acceptable earthquake performance goals for a building will
vary for earthquake shaking of different strengths and likelihoods.

With the help of qualified design professionals, careful review of project circumstances should lead to a clearer
picture of the most important building performance issues. A performance goal‐setting worksheet, as shown below,
can be set up to track discussions. It is not necessary to write something in every box. Rather, the purpose of the
worksheet is to think and communicate about how acceptable performance changes with the likelihood and size of
an event. This process will also help uncover whether a code-level design provides the desired performance with
adequate assurance. If not, an iterative design process can then help explore options and whether their costs are
worth the expected outcomes.

Performance Goal-Setting Worksheet

After a Moderate,
More Likely After a Large, Rare After a Major, Very
Performance Category Earthquake Earthquake Rare Earthquake

(e.g., <1% chance of

Level of safety (e.g., no injuries)
injuries)

Maximum acceptable building

(e.g., one day) (e.g., one month)
repair time

Maximum acceptable cost for

(e.g., 1% of building (e.g., 20% of building
structural and non-structural
replacement cost) replacement cost)
repairs

(e.g., 90% chance of (e.g., 50% chance of

Level of protection for contents industrial machinery industrial machinery
intact) intact)

Acceptable chances of collapse (e.g., <1%) (e.g., <5%)

Acceptable chances of red

(e.g., <10%) (e.g., <25%)
tag/unsafe placard

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 14

5. SELECTING AND WORKING WITH A
QUALIFIED DESIGN TEAM
Assembling a skilled and efficient team is Encourage regular communication and
key to project success. collaboration of all team members to help
Everyone involved in a performance-based project, achieve your project goals.
from project leaders to architects, engineers, other
Successful design teams generally communicate early
design professionals, vendors, and contractors and
and often during the design process amongst each
subcontractors, needs to understand earthquake
other and with representatives of the building owner
performance goals and be able to work together to
or decision-maker. Frequent communication allows
achieve them. Investing in the services of
professionals well-versed in or open to performance- design team members to understand each other’s
based approaches at the outset of a project can save constraints and the earthquake risk implication of
money in the long-term. various design choices.

Frequently but not always, use of performance-based All design team members make decisions that
seismic engineering requires structural engineer team contribute to earthquake performance, not just
members with in-depth knowledge of ground shaking structural engineers. Even seasoned design
hazards, structural materials behavior, and in-depth professionals may not be aware of all the ways other
structural analysis. The Resources section at the end peoples’ work can affect what happens to a building in
of this Guide is a good starting point for team an earthquake. For example:
members who want to learn more about the technical
aspects of performance-based methods for design • Architects plan the building configuration
and assessment. (footprint, shape, number of stories), select
materials such as exterior cladding, ceilings,
interior walls, escape routes, and other
Questions for Prospective architectural features. Each of these decisions can
Team Members affect the seismic performance of the building.
Ask potential design team members the Architects also play a critical role in coordinating
following questions to launch a discussion interaction among other design consultants.
about earthquake performance:
• Mechanical engineers help plan and oversee proper
• What is your experience with installation of equipment, piping, and essential
performance-based seismic design systems such as ventilation, heating and air
and analysis? conditioning (HVAC). These systems can be very
• Does a performance-based vulnerable to earthquake shaking, depending on
approach make sense for conceptual design.
or detailed structural design phases
of this project? • Plumbing specialists design a building’s water
• What earthquake performance systems. Design and installation decisions impact
objectives seem right for this leaks or breaks in earthquakes that can lead to
project? flooding and loss of use of the entire building after
an earthquake.
• What do you think are the most
seismically vulnerable nonstructural • Electrical specialists plan and implement power
components in our building and supply to mission-critical IT infrastructure, security,
what can be done to protect them? HVAC, and lighting systems as well as back-up
power and fire alarms.
FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 15
 • Fire protection engineers design sprinkler systems “Our entire design team meets
that might be needed to fight post-earthquake fires
and could flood the building if damaged by the together, beginning in the conceptual
shaking. design phase. All of our subcontractors
• Interior architects or interior designers often select
discuss the performance needs of the
elements like suspended ceilings, decorative wall aspects of the project they work on—
hangings, and large furniture, which can be not just seismic performance, but every
hazardous if not properly anchored.
aspect of performance. We need our
• Structural engineers select and design the structures and systems to work under a
structural system, critical both to minimizing wide range of scenarios. This allows us
structural damage and also building movement
that can damage architectural, mechanical, and
to identify issues and solve them before
electrical components. Structural engineers they become problems.”
typically lead the performance-based seismic Geoff Neumayr
design process. Chief Development Officer
San Francisco International Airport

San Francisco Airport recently underwent millions of dollars in upgrades,

including new buildings that took advantage of performance-based
seismic design.
Photo credit: John Swain Photography

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 16

 6. COST CONSIDERATIONS

A performance-based project is not “Our client needed their new Public

necessarily more expensive than a Safety Building to be operational after
conventional project, but can be more
the maximum credible earthquake.
complex.
Using performance-based methods, our
Every building project is unique, and it is not possible design team found that strategically
to make a generic statement comparing the costs of a positioning sensitive equipment within
performance-based project with a project that does
not employ performance-based methods. In some the building in areas that are expected
cases, early investments in seismic performance- to shake less in earthquakes allowed us
based engineering lead to cost savings in the to meet the client’s goals without
construction phase. In other cases, decisions to invest
in greater seismic resilience result in a more expensive adding significant costs to the project.”
building project. Kevin Miller, AIA
GSBS Architects, Salt Lake City, Utah

Salt Lake City used a cost-effective performance-based approach to enable its Public
Safety
FEMABuilding to the
P-58-7: Building operate after
Performance a disaster.
You Need page 1
Following are some important cost and logistical • Better Components. For nonstructural elements and
considerations: contents with better than minimum code
• Time for Setting Goals. All design team members performance, such as finishes, utilities, and fire
will need to put thought and time into determining, protection systems, ensuring that each of these
analyzing, and meeting desired building systems meets articulated performance goals can
performance goals, ideally in a collaborative fashion. require analysis and iteration by design team
This can require more time for consultants than members. Possibly, the team would need to include
projects that do not include these tasks. additional consultants to conduct this analysis. This
can also result in the selection of higher cost
• Analysis Time. More time and input information
components than might otherwise have been used.
may be required to conduct performance-based
assessments than required for prescriptive code- • Interior Arrangement. In order to achiever superior
based approaches. performance, it may be necessary to locate some
critical business or building functions in lower levels,
• Structural Elements. If higher earthquake
so as to minimize earthquake effects on these
performance than provided by minimum code
functions. This can result in less than optimal
standards is desired, the structural system itself may
arrangement for other perspectives, or require
cost more than a minimally code-compliant
other accommodation in building layout.
structure. However, this is not always the case.
Sometimes, extra time spent on design can result in • Permitting. If performance procedures are used to
a better performing structure that does not require avoid one or more code requirements, the building
larger or more expensive structural elements. authority may take additional time to review the
project and issue building permits. The building
official may also require independent reviews by
other design professionals.

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 18

7. EXAMPLE USES

Earthquake Performance Planning at the Campus Scale

The University of California San Francisco (UCSF) operates a world-class hospital, research institution, and
medical school. As part of its billion-dollar facility expansion and improvement program, institutional
leaders put significant thought into how much earthquake damage it can tolerate in its buildings.

UCSF created three tiers of seismic performance and requires integrated design-build teams to present
options for each of these tiers so that they can be compared in terms of costs and benefits. Each tier
addresses objectives for structural and nonstructural systems, including explicit limits on downtime and
damage that could affect UCSF’s core mission, people, and assets.

UCSF’s desired performance for each tier varies based on the size of the earthquake as shown in the
diagram below. Detailed policies define what “minor,” “moderate,” or “major” disruption mean in terms
that are meaningful to UCSF, such as destruction of laboratory samples, loss of student housing, or
hazardous chemical releases.

Major
M8.0 Scenario disruption
Moderate
Level of Shaking

disruption
Code Design
Earthquake
Minor
disruption
M6.0 Scenario

Desired Level of Earthquake Performance

Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Well-Designed Important Building Mission Critical
Building Usable for critical Building
Safe for re-entry functions Continuous
operation

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 19

 TIER 2: Neuroscience
Research (Clinics
and Laboratory –
in construction)

TIER 1: Mission Hall Global

Health and Clinical
Sciences Building
TIER 3: Benioff Children’s (Offices)
Hospital (Urgent Care)

UCSF’s Mission Bay campus features mixed uses including administrative offices,
patient care, research facilities, housing, public transit, and parking. Buildings have
been categorized into tiers based on UCSF’s performance policy.

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 20

 Roseville City Hall Annex: A Five Star Building
In 2016, the City of Roseville, California completed construction of its new City Hall Annex building. The
building was designed to meet code standards, without using a performance-based approach. However,
due to the critical operations and services that would take place in the building, the design team
incorporated a number of features to increase the building’s earthquake performance.

The design team and the City believed the building would have significantly better performance than an
average building complying with minimum code requirements. To confirm this was true and to
communicate the findings clearly, the City sought an earthquake performance rating of the building. Their
design team conducted a performance-based assessment that enabled the City to obtain the highest
possible ratings by the U.S. Resiliency Council: five stars for safety, repair cost, and recovery time.

The non-profit U.S. Resiliency Council (USRC) was founded in 2011 to implement an earthquake
performance rating system. The USRC certifies qualifying engineers to issue ratings (from 1 to 5 stars) for
three important considerations of building earthquake risk: (1) safety; (2) repair cost; and (3) time to
regain function. Under the USRC system, a 5-star rating means the chance of fatalities is next to zero,
damage will be under five percent of replacement cost, and the building will be re-occupiable within days
of a major seismic event. This is well beyond what could be expected by a typical building designed
according to minimum code requirements.

Performance-based analyses were used to earn the Roseville, California City Hall Annex
a five star seismic resilience rating for safety, repair cost, and recovery time.
Photo credit: John Swain

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 21

8. CONCLUSION
Detailed earthquake performance “Seismic performance-based methods
information empowers informed decisions are the future. New structural
about your buildings. engineers are learning how to use
Performance-based seismic design and assessments these methods to better understand
enable developers, owners, tenants, and investors to the difference between a structure that
clarify exactly what levels of earthquake damage and is safe and one that is both safe and
loss are acceptable, feasible, and affordable to them.
can be quickly reoccupied following a
Armed with the information that performance-based major earthquake.”
methods provide, stakeholders can:
Stephen Mahin, Ph.D.
• Achieve a more resilient building that has less Nishkian Distinguished Professor
damage and improved functionality after an of Structural Engineering
earthquake, as well as reduced environmental University of California, Berkeley, California
impacts.
• Better understand and control their risk exposure Performance-based seismic design and analysis is the
and reduce uncertainty. future. Newly available technical analysis tools, such
as the FEMA P-58 methodology, can more quickly and
• Increase the value of a property at time of sale.
reliably than ever before calculate how much damage
• Differentiate rental properties from competing and loss is expected, how long post-earthquake
properties, because tenants are in a more resilient repairs will take, and how many environmental
building and will be able to resume operations impacts will result. This empowers better decisions
more quickly after an event. about how much and what types of investment in
seismic resilience makes sense for each building
• Thoroughly evaluate choices when considering
project.
purchase or renovation alternatives.
• Enhance recruitment, retention, reputation, and
public relations by going beyond minimum
requirements to better protect the public as well as
employees and their livelihoods.
• Make a contribution to community resiliency and
getting the local and regional economy back on
track after an earthquake.
• Gain greater confidence and peace of mind from
having clearly defined seismic performance goals
and a plan for achieving them.

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need pg 22

RESOURCES
The FEMA P-58 Methodology
• FEMA P-58-1, Seismic Performance Assessment of Buildings, Volume 1 – Methodology, Second Edition, 2018:
This document provides a detailed, technical overview of the FEMA P-58 methodology.
• FEMA P-58-2, Seismic Performance Assessment of Buildings, Volume 2 – Implementation Guide, Second
Edition, 2018: This document provides guidance on implementing a seismic performance assessment using
the FEMA P-58 methodology.
• FEMA P-58-5, Seismic Performance Assessment of Buildings, Volume 5 – Expected Seismic Performance of
Code-Conforming Buildings, 2018: This document summarizes the assessed performance of code-conforming
buildings using FEMA P-58 performance metrics.
• FEMA P-58-6, Guidelines for Performance-Based Seismic Design of Buildings, 2018: This document provides
guidance to engineers for using insights from the FEMA P-58 methodology to select building characteristics
necessary to achieve the desired performance.
• Online Quiz: Could Your Project Benefit from New Earthquake Risk Analysis Techniques?: A brief online
interactive tool that provides insight on whether a building-related project is likely to benefit from the use of
performance-based methods, http://femap58.atcouncil.org/.
• FEMA website for Seismic Performance of Buildings: This site includes downloads of all the major FEMA P-58
reports and computer tools, https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/90380.
• Applied Technology Council website for FEMA P-58: This site includes downloads of all major FEMA P-58
reports and computer tools, as well as background research reports used to develop the methodology,
http://femap58.atcouncil.org/.

Other Performance-Based Engineering Methods

• ASCE/SEI 41-13, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings, 2013, American Society of Civil Engineers
(ASCE), Structural Engineering Institute: This standard presents procedures that use performance-based
principles to evaluate and retrofit existing buildings.
• Guidelines for Performance-Based Seismic Design of Tall Buildings, 2017, Pacific Earthquake Engineering
Research Center (PEER): This guideline presents recommended procedures using a performance-based
approach for seismic design and review of tall buildings, http://peer.berkeley.edu/.
• An Alternative Procedure for Seismic Analysis and Design of Tall Buildings Located in The Los Angeles Region -
A Consensus Document (2014 Edition with 2015 Supplements), Los Angeles Tall Buildings Structural Design
Council: This document provides a performance-based approach for seismic design and analysis of tall
buildings, http://www.tallbuildings.org/.

Other
• U.S. Resiliency Council (USRC) Earthquake Rating System, http://usrc.org/.
• REDi Rating System, ARUP, https://www.arup.com/publications/research/section/redi-rating-system.
• SP3, Seismic Performance Prediction Program, based on FEMA P-58 methodology, https://www.hbrisk.com/.

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 23

DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS
Code This refers to the International Building Code (IBC) for new
buildings, which is the model building code adopted by most U.S.
states. The IBC presents standards for the design of new buildings,
including the design of seismic force resisting systems. Note: many
states and localities make modifications to the IBC when they adopt
it, creating variations in code requirements among communities.

Conceptual structural design Early structural design steps for a building, such as selecting the
structural system that will be used and determining general layout.

Contents The movable but often valuable things inside a building, including
furniture, computer equipment, machinery, scientific apparatus,
data and files, chemical and biological research samples, and
product inventory.

Design team A team of professionals involved in designing a building, typically

including an architect, structural engineer, and others such as
mechanical engineers, plumbing specialists, electrical specialists,
and fire protection engineers.

Earthquake performance Refers to the amount and types of damage and consequences that a
building experiences during earthquake shaking.

Existing building A building constructed sometime in the past, possibly prior some to
Building Code improvements that address seismic risk issues.

FEMA P-58 A state-of-the-art performance-based seismic engineering

methodology that enables users to estimate the amount of
expected dollar losses, repair time, casualties, chance of receiving
an unsafe placard, and carbon emissions for a building exposed to
earthquake shaking.

Finishes Refers to non-structural elements of a building that have a

decorative function, including, for example, the exterior cladding of
a building, interior floor surfaces, and paneling on interior walls.

Intensity A measure of the strength of shaking produced by an earthquake at

different locations, expressed in terms of the effects of the shaking
on people, the built environment, and nature.

Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) shaking The maximum intensity of earthquake shaking considered by the
Building Code for a specific site. This is intended to represent the
most severe shaking a building is ever likely to experience.
However, with very low probability, a building could experience
more severe shaking.

Nonstructural damage Earthquake damage to nonstructural elements of a building, which

are the parts of a building that are fixed in place but are not part of
the structural system. Nonstructural elements can include façades,
balconies, utility systems, partition walls, and ceiling panels.
FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 24
Partitions Refers to interior walls or other room dividers that are not
structural elements.

Performance-based seismic engineering (PBSE) Engineering techniques to determine the amount of damage a
building may experience in response to earthquake shaking, and the
consequences of that damage, so that information can be
considered for design and analysis.

Performance-based approach A process to design or analyze a building that uses or considers the
amount of damage a building may experience in response to
earthquake shaking, and the consequences of that damage.

Performance-based design A formal process for design of new buildings, or seismic upgrade of
existing buildings, which includes a specific intent to achieve
defined performance objectives in future earthquakes.

Performance goals / performance objectives A defined set of expectations regarding the amount of damage a
building may experience in response to earthquake shaking, and the
consequences of that damage.

Probable Maximum Loss (PML) A term used to express the amount of financial loss expected to a
building when it is exposed to earthquake shaking. Scenario
Expected Loss (SEL) and Scenario Upper Loss (SUL) are more specific
forms of probable maximum loss that are sometimes used in
financial transactions associated with buildings.

Resilience The ability of a community, system, or organization to prepare and

plan for, absorb, recover from, and more successfully adapt to
adverse events, such as earthquakes.

Replacement cost The cost to reconstruct a building today in essentially the same way
it exists now.

Scenario Expected Loss (SEL) A calculation of the mean expected repair costs for a building that
experiences earthquake shaking with a specified return period
(often 475 years), expressed as a percentage of the replacement
cost of the building. This calculation is sometimes used for financial
transactions associated with buildings.

Scenario Upper Loss (SUL) A calculation of the expected repair costs that have a 90% chance of
not being exceeded for a building that experiences earthquake
shaking with a specified return period (often 475 years), expressed
as a percentage of the replacement cost of the building. This value
is sometimes used for financial transactions associated with
buildings.

Seismic retrofit Upgrades to an existing structure to reduce the amount of damage

that will occur due to earthquake shaking.

Structural system The load resisting system of a building, such as columns, beams,
joints, and walls that are designed to support a building under
normal gravity loads and when it is exposed to earthquake shaking
and strong winds.

FEMA P-58-7: Building the Performance You Need page 25

 FEMA P-58-7
Catalog No. 1894-10