SCEC – PG&E-SCE 2013 Research Coordination Meeting Norm Abrahamson Sep 14, 2012

Objective Set up a more formal process for how SCEC, PG&E and SCE will collaborate on seismic research Set the research topics and budgets in time to meet the schedule for the SCEC RFP. – Is September the best month for this?

SWUS Schedule May – Sep 2012 – Set up validation exercises Jun - Nov 2012 – Additional modules added to broadband platform – Simulations from non-planar ruptures Sep 2012 – Mar 2013 – Validations (parts A and B) – Present plan for numerical simulations at SSHAC Workshop Apr 2013 – SCEC evaluation of simulation methods (combination of modules) that pass the validation May – Oct 2013 – SCEC Workshop (June?) comparison of Initial results from forward simulations from methods that passed validation – SCEC Workshop (September) to evaluate results and understand causes of differences – SSHAC Workshop (October) simulation results and empirical GMPs Nov Feb 2014 – Final results from second set of forward simulations

SWUS 2013 Topics Validation of broadband platform – Part A (compare simulations to recorded eqk) 23 validation earthquakes Reduce scope to 10 eqk if running out of time – Part B (compare forward simulations to NGA medians) 2-4 scenarios (M6.5, M7.0, R=15, R=40, rock site) – Complete Mar 2013 – Evaluation by SCEC panel in Apr 2013 – 2013 Budget $250K each from SCE and PG&E ($500k total) Plus 15% SCEC overhead

SWUS 2013 Topics Application of broadband platform (Forward modeling) – Cases to be set at the Mar 2013 workshop – Should be fairly limited volume of runs 3-4 rupture geometries for DCPP and SONGS 1-2 rupture geometries for PVNGS – Initial set of simulations by Sep 2013 Need workshop to review/compare results – Revised set of simulations by Feb 2014 – Budget in SWUS project plan is $100k

PG&E Topics – SSC Chances of Branch faulting – Use of quasi-static earthquake simulators – Use of dynamic rupture models to evaluate chances of branch faulting Verification of the dynamic rupture models for branch faulting Continuing support for dynamic rupture TAG Will this be ready for application by Nov 2013? – DCPP geometry: Strike-slip faults, degree difference in strike Magnitude pdf for faults – Evaluation of characteristic eqk model as used in the seismic hazard industry Location of 1927 Lompoc earthquake – Other catalog issue – Adequate documentation for the catalog? CFM extending north to San Luis Obispo?

PG&E topics - GM Broadband platform – long term items – Add NL site to the simulations – Add 3-D crustal models to validation Need 3-D models at our sites to be of use – Additional methods – Process needed Evaluation of method – Documentation should be complete Implement module in BB platform – Validation of the variability of source parameters in the rupture generator Needed for replacing empirical GMPEs with simulations Not to be used in SWUS (will use empirical sigma)

PG&E topics - GM Extending dynamic rupture models to high frequencies Need validation Will this go on the broadband platform? Simulations for creeping faults Source parameters for creeping faults from dynamic ruptures? – CVM extending north?