We provide a methodology that seamlessly integrates national seismic hazard models across the Canada-U.S. border to provide earthquake risk managers with updated and consistent seismic hazard science and technology in the two countries. Consistent with our U.S. hazard model, we developed a new Canadian model that incorporates (1) spatially varying seismicity for the major metropolitan areas of southeastern and southwestern Canada and the United States, (2) a comprehensive probabilistic model for the Cascadia subduction zone that includes M 8.0–9.2 interface earthquakes, (3) a consistent set of ground motion prediction equations across eastern and western North America, and (4) a soil-based attenuation (SBA) methodology that mitigates uncertainty in the conversion of earthquake motions from rock to soil, on which the majority of exposure is located. NEHRP site conditions are mapped for all of Canada from existing geological data, and NEHRP site factors are used to account for local site conditions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsJ., 2011. Seismic hazard maps for the national building code of Canada, Paper No. 1, in Proceedings, Canadian Society of Civil Engineers 2011 General Conference, Jagmohan Jumar Symposium, 14–17 June 2011, Ottawa, Canada.
2.
AdamsJ., and HalchukS., 2003. Fourth generation seismic hazard maps of Canada: Values for over 650 Canadian localities intended for the 2005 national building code of Canada, Geological Survey of Canada Open-File 4459, Geological Survey of Canada, Ottawa, Canada, 155 pp.
3.
AdamsJ., WeichertD. H., and HalchukS., 1999. Trial seismic hazard maps of Canada—1999: 2%/50 year values for selected Canadian cities, Geological Survey of Canada Open File 3724, Geological Survey of Canada, 100 pp.
4.
AdamsJ., WeichertD. H., HalchukS., and BashamP. W., 1995. Towards fourth generation seismic hazard maps of Canada, in Proceedings 7th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, June, Montreal, 1009–1016.
5.
AnchetaT. D., DarraghR. B., StewartJ. P., SeyhanE., SilvaW. J., ChiouB. S.-J., WooddellK. E., GravesR. W., KottkeA. R., BooreD. M., KishidaT., and DonahueJ. L., 2014. NGA-West2 database, Earthquake Spectra30, 989–1005.
6.
AtwaterB. F., and Hemphill-HaleyE., 1997. Recurrence intervals for great earthquakes of the past 3500 years at northeastern Willapa Bay, Washington, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1576, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA, 108 pp.
7.
AtwaterB. F., SatokoM.-R., SatakeK., YoshinobuT., KazueU., and YamaguchiD. K., 2005. The Orphan Tsunami of 1700, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA, in association with University of Washington Press, Seattle and London, 133 pp.
8.
BashamP. W., WeichertD. H., AnglinF. M., and BerryM. J., 1985. New probabilistic strong seismic ground motion maps of Canada, Bulletin of the Seismolological Society of America75, 563–595.
9.
BozorgniaY., AbrahamsonN. A., Al AtikL., AnchetaT. D., AtkinsonG. M., BakerJ. W., BaltayA., BooreD. M., CampbellK. W., ChiouB. S.-J., DarraghR., DayS., DonahueJ., GravesR. W., GregorN., HanksT., IdrissI. M., KamaiR., KishidaT., KottkeA., MahinS. A., RezaeianS., RowshandelB., SeyhanE., ShahiS., ShantzT., SilvaW., SpudichP., StewartJ. P., Watson-LampreyJ., WooddellK., and YoungsR., 2014. NGA-West2 Research Project, Earthquake Spectra, 30, 973–987.
10.
Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC), 2009. NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures (FEMA P-750), National Institute of Building Sciences, Washington, D.C.
11.
ChiouB., DarraghR., GregorN., and SilvaW., 2008. NGA project strong-motion database, Earthquake Spectra24, 23–44.
12.
FieldE. H., DawsonT. E., FelzerK. R., FrankelA. D., GuptaV., JordanT. H., ParsonsT., PetersenM. D., SteinR. S., WeldonR.J.II, and WillsC. J., 2009. The uniform California earthquake rupture forecast, version 2 (UCERF2), Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America99, 2053–2107.
13.
FieldE. H., JordanT. H., and CornellC. A., 2003. OpenSHA: A developing community-modeling environment for seismic hazard analysis, Seismological Research Letters74, 406–419.
14.
FrankelA., 1995. Mapping seismic hazard in the central and eastern United States, Seismolo-logical Research Letters78, 7–16.
15.
FrankelA., MuellerC., BarnhardT., PerkinsD., LeyendeckerE., DickmanN., HansonS., and HopperM., 1996. National seismic hazard maps: Documentation June 1996, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 96-532, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA, 70 pp.
16.
FultonR. J., 1995. Surficial materials of Canada, Scale 1:5,000,000, Geological Survey of Canada Map 1880A, Geological Survey of Canada, Ottawa.
HalchukS., and AdamsJ., 1999. Crossing the border: Assessing the differences between new Canadian and American seismic hazard maps, in Proceedings, 8th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 13–16 June 1999, Vancouver, Canada, 77–82.
19.
HalchukS., and AdamsJ., 2008. Fourth generation seismic hazard maps of Canada: Maps and grid values to be used with the 2005 national building code of Canada, Geological Survey of Canada Open File 5813, Geological Survey of Canada, Ottawa, 32 pp.
20.
HuangY. N., WhittakerA. S., and LucoN., 2010. NEHRP site amplification factors and the NGA relationships, Earthquake Spectra26, 583–593.
21.
HwangH. H. M., HuijieL., and HuoJ. R., 1997. Site coefficients for design of buildings in eastern North America, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering16, 29–40.
22.
KafkaA. L., and LevinS. Z., 2000. Does the spatial distribution of smaller earthquakes delineate areas where larger earthquakes are likely to occur?Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America90, 724–738.
23.
KhaheshiB. K., KolajM., MotazedianD., SivathayalanS., HunterJ. A., CrowH. L., PugenA. J.-M., BrooksG. R., and PyneM., 2012. Seismic site response analysis for Ottawa, Canada: A comprehensive study using measurements and numerical simulations, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America102, 1976–1993.
24.
LamontagneM., HalchukS., CassidyJ. F., and RogersG. C., 2008. Significant Canadian earthquakes of the period 1600–2006, Seismological Research Letters79, 211–223.
25.
MatthewsM. V., EllsworthW. L., and ReasenbergP. A., 2002. A Brownian model for recurrent earthquakes, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America92, 2233–2250.
26.
PetersenM. D., CramerC. H., and FrankelA. D., 2002. Simulations of seismic hazard for the Pacific Northwest of the United States from earthquakes associated with the Cascadia subduction zone, Pure and Applied Geophysics159, 2147–2168.
27.
PetersenM., FrankelA., HarmsenS., MuellerC., HallerK., WheelerR., WessonR., ZengY., BoydO., PerkinsD., LucoN., FieldE., WillsC., and RukstalesK., 2008. Documentation for the 2008 Update of the United States National Seismic Hazard Maps, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008-1128, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA, http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1128 (last accessed 23 December 2014).
28.
PowerM. B., AbrahamsonN., BozorgniaY., ShantzT., and RobleeC., 2008. An overview of the NGA project, Earthquake Spectra24, 3–21.
29.
RohrK. M. M., SchneidhauerM., and TrehuA. M., 2000. Transpression between two warm mafic plates: The Queen Charlotte fault revisited, Journal of Geophyiscal Research105, 8147–8172.
30.
SatakeK., ShimazakiK., TsujiY., and UedaK., 1996. Time and size of a giant earthquake in Cascadia inferred from Japanese tsunami records of January 1700, Nature379, 246–249.
31.
SatakeK., WangK., and AtwaterB. F., 2003. Fault slip and seismic moment of the 1700 Cascadia earthquake inferred from Japanese tsunami descriptions, Journal of Geophyiscal Research108, 2535.
32.
SchrubenP. G., ArndtR. E., and BawiecW. J., 1998. Geology of the conterminous United States at 1:2,500,000 scale: A digital representation of the 1974 P. B. King and H. M. Beikman Map, U.S. Geological Survey Digital Data Series 11, Release 2, available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds11/ (last accessed 9 January 2009).
33.
StewartJ. P., and SeyhanE., 2013. Semi-Empirical Nonlinear Site Amplification and its Application in NEHRP Site Factors, PEER Report 2013/13, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, 60 pp.
34.
SzeligaW., 2013. 2012 Haida Gwaii earthquake: Insights into Cascadia's subduction extent, EOS, Transactions, American Geophysical Union, 94, 85–86.
35.
WetmillerR. J., HornerR. B., HasegawaH. S., NorthR. G., LamontagneM., WeichertD. H., and EvansS. G., 1988. An analysis of the 1985 Nahanni earthquakes, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America78, 590–616.
36.
WillsC. J., and ClahanK. B., 2006. Developing a map of geologically defined site-condition categories for California, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America96, 1483–1501.
37.
WillsC., and GutierrezC., 2011. Investigation of Geographic Rules for Improving Site-Conditions Mapping, California Geological Survey Final Technical Report No. 07HQGR0061, Sacramento, California, 20 pp.
38.
WillsC. J., PetersenM., BryantW. A., ReichleG. J., SaucedoS., TanS., TaylorG., and TreimanJ., 2000. A site-conditions map for California based on geology and shear-wave velocity, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America90, S187–S208.
39.
WheelerR. L., and FrankelA., 2000. Geology in the 1996 USGS seismic-hazard maps, central and eastern United States, Seismological Research Letters71, 273–282.
40.
YamaguchiD. F., AtwaterB. F., BunkerD. E., BensonB. E., and ReidM. S., 1997. Tree-ring dating the 1700 Cascadia earthquake, Nature389, 922–923.
