A substantive update, v3 increases the authorized funding for the National Landslide Hazards Reduction Program from $25M to $35M and extends the 3D Elevation Program's reauthorization until 2034. It also removes the National Aeronautics and Space Administration from the Interagency Coordinating Committee, broadens advisory committee expertise, and adds specific deficit reduction provisions for program funding.
National Landslide Preparedness Act Reauthorization Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Sen. Murkowski, Lisa [R-AK]
- Committees
- Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jan 7, 2026
Bottom line
The bill significantly strengthens federal programs for landslide hazard mitigation and water resource management, emphasizing climate resilience and expanded engagement with diverse communities.
What it actually does
This bill reauthorizes the National Landslide Preparedness Act through fiscal year 2030, increasing its funding and expanding its scope to explicitly address risks from atmospheric rivers and extreme precipitation events. It also establishes a new 'Next Generation Water Observing System' within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to provide real-time water data and advanced modeling for flood and drought forecasts. Furthermore, the bill enhances existing water data and national groundwater resources monitoring programs, extending their authorization and increasing funding, with a focus on regions experiencing drought, flooding, or reliance on specific hydrologic storage.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the bill is crucial for enhancing national resilience against natural hazards, particularly in the face of increasing extreme weather events. They contend that modernizing water observing systems and improving landslide preparedness will save lives, protect property, and provide essential data for effective water management, thereby safeguarding communities and critical infrastructure. Expanding engagement with Tribal and Native Hawaiian organizations is also cited as a key benefit.
Opponents contend
While direct opposition to natural disaster preparedness and scientific data collection is uncommon, potential critics might raise concerns about the increased federal spending authorized by the bill, particularly in a period of high national debt. Some may also question the efficiency of expanding federal programs versus relying on state and local initiatives, or the potential for bureaucratic inefficiencies in implementing new systems and partnerships.
The bill is moderately complex due to its amendments to multiple existing acts and the introduction of new programs, requiring a careful read to understand its full scope. The estimated reading time is appropriate for an informed reader to grasp the details.
Section 2
New Definitions for Flood Level Observation, Operations, and Decision Support Act
This section amends the Flood Level Observation, Operations, and Decision Support Act to define key meteorological terms. It introduces 'atmospheric river' as a transient corridor of strong water vapor, 'atmospheric river flooding event' as an atmospheric river causing hazards, and 'extreme precipitation event' as precipitation exceeding a 5-year annual recurrence interval. These definitions are then cross-referenced and used throughout the bill to expand the scope of landslide and water-related hazard preparedness.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that clear, standardized definitions for these critical weather phenomena are essential for accurate forecasting, risk assessment, and effective communication of hazards to the public and decision-makers, especially as these events become more frequent or intense.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against defining scientific terms for federal programs, as it is considered a technical necessity for effective governance and scientific consistency.
Tradeoffs
The primary tension is ensuring these definitions are scientifically robust and adaptable to evolving meteorological understanding without becoming overly prescriptive or limiting future scientific advancements.
Section 3(a)
Expanded Definitions for National Landslide Preparedness Act
This section updates the definitions within the National Landslide Preparedness Act. It incorporates the new definitions for 'atmospheric river,' 'atmospheric river flooding event,' and 'extreme precipitation event' from Section 2. Additionally, it defines 'institution of higher education,' 'Native Hawaiian organization,' and 'Tribal organization,' explicitly broadening the scope of entities eligible for engagement and support under the Act.
Section 3(b)(2) and (3)
National Landslide Hazards Reduction Program Enhancements
This provision amends the National Landslide Hazards Reduction Program by requiring the national strategy to include an assessment of risks posed by atmospheric river flooding events and extreme precipitation events. It also expands the National Landslide Hazards Database to identify areas needing additional risk assessment, specifically including those at risk due to hydrology changes (erosion, drought), atmospheric rivers, geologic activity (volcanoes, earthquakes, tsunamis), and data-poor areas or hazards with poor monitoring.
Section 3(b)(4), (5), and (6)
Enhanced Community Preparedness, Early Warning, and Emergency Response
These sections bolster community preparedness, debris flow early warning systems, and emergency response activities. They explicitly include Native Hawaiian organizations and Tribal organizations in community engagement efforts. The early warning system is expanded to allow consultation with institutions of higher education and other stakeholders. Emergency response activities are broadened to improve real-time risk management for landslides caused by a wider array of factors, including hydrology changes, atmospheric rivers, geologic activity, data-poor areas, and thawing permafrost/glacial retreat, with consultation extended to the private sector.
Section 3(e) (new)
Establishment of Regional Partnerships
This new subsection mandates the Secretary to establish regional partnerships in areas with high landslide hazards. These partnerships will involve eligible organizations or institutions of higher education with expertise in landslide mapping, research, and monitoring. Their purpose is to leverage regional expertise, coordinate long-term landslide research specific to the region, and align interagency landslide monitoring efforts.
Section 3(i) (redesignated)
Reauthorization of National Landslide Preparedness Act Funding
This section reauthorizes appropriations for the National Landslide Preparedness Act at $35,000,000 annually for fiscal years 2026 through 2030. Notably, it specifies that not less than $10,000,000 of this amount shall be made available for the purchase, deployment, and repair of landslide early warning systems in high-risk areas. This represents a significant increase from previous authorizations.
Section 4
Establishment of Next Generation Water Observing System (NGWOS)
This section establishes the 'Next Generation Water Observing System' (NGWOS) within the USGS. The system's purpose is to provide more affordable, rapid, and widely available real-time data on water quantity and quality. It aims to support advanced modeling for flood and drought forecasts, inform emergency and water management decisions, and evaluate risks related to floods, droughts, snowpacks, evapotranspiration, water quality, and glacial changes. The system prioritizes regions with high drought, reliance on reservoirs/hydrologic storage, and flooding/extreme rainfall. It authorizes $30,000,000 for FY2026 for 10 initial basins, to remain available until expended.
Section 5
Water Data Enhancement and National Groundwater Resources Monitoring
This section amends the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 to enhance water data and groundwater monitoring. It adds groundwater quality assessments related to permafrost thaw and precipitation changes. It extends the authorization for the Federal Priority Streamgage program by one year (to 11 years) and increases its annual authorization to $30,000,000 for FY2026-2033 (up from $10,000,000 previously). Both streamgage and groundwater monitoring programs are directed to prioritize regions with high drought, reliance on reservoirs/hydrologic storage, and flooding/extreme rainfall. It also expands engagement for groundwater monitoring to include Tribal organizations and Native Hawaiian organizations.
Amends the National Landslide Hazards Reduction Program activity from requiring the Secretary to 'implement' new technologies to 'disseminate' them.
Section 3(b)(1)(C)(ii)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for refining agency roles and responsibilities, often reflecting a shift in how federal agencies interact with state/local partners regarding technology adoption.
Case for: Proponents would argue that the USGS's role is primarily scientific research and data dissemination, not direct implementation of technologies at the local level. This change clarifies the agency's function and empowers local entities to adopt technologies best suited for their specific needs.
Case against: Critics might argue that by shifting from 'implement' to 'disseminate,' the federal government is reducing its direct responsibility for ensuring that effective landslide mitigation technologies are actually put into practice, potentially leaving a gap in adoption for under-resourced communities.
Estimated impact: Potentially shifts the burden of technology adoption and associated costs more directly onto state, local, and tribal entities, while clarifying the federal role as a knowledge provider.
This new subsection specifies that funds used by an agency to carry out the National Landslide Preparedness Act may only come from amounts authorized to be appropriated to that agency. It also mandates that any appropriated funds cancelled pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1552(a) (related to expired appropriations) shall be transferred to the general fund of the Treasury and applied to deficit reduction.
Section 3(j) (new)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for ensuring fiscal accountability and adhering to budget rules, often included in reauthorization bills to address potential concerns about spending and unspent funds.
Case for: Proponents would argue that this provision ensures fiscal responsibility by clarifying funding sources and directing any unspent, expired funds towards deficit reduction, thereby preventing waste and improving government efficiency.
Case against: No specific opposition is typically raised against such fiscal accountability measures, as they are generally seen as good governance. However, some might argue that the deficit reduction mechanism is a minor gesture compared to the overall spending increases.
Estimated impact: Ensures that funding for the Act is clearly tied to agency appropriations and provides a mechanism for returning unspent funds to the Treasury, potentially reducing the national deficit by a small, indeterminate amount.
Adds a clause stating that the priority given to certain regions for streamgage installation (drought, reservoirs, hydrologic storage, flooding) shall have no impact on existing streamgage sites operating as of the date of enactment, provided their data continues to meet stakeholder priority needs.
Section 5(a)(4)(D)
Why it matters:This is a technical clarification designed to reassure stakeholders that existing, valuable streamgage operations will not be disrupted by the new prioritization scheme, addressing potential concerns about continuity.
Case for: Proponents would argue that this ensures continuity of vital long-term data collection at existing sites while allowing for strategic expansion into new priority areas. It balances new needs with established infrastructure.
Case against: No specific opposition is typically raised against grandfathering clauses for existing infrastructure, as it prevents unnecessary disruption and loss of valuable historical data.
Estimated impact: Maintains the operational status and data collection from existing streamgages, ensuring that the new prioritization for future installations does not inadvertently lead to the decommissioning of currently valuable sites.