.. . . ~ .

Golder Associates Inc.

4104 -148th Avenue. N.E. Redmond. WA 98052 Telephone (425) 883-0777 Fax (425) 882-5498

May 15, 1998

Cripple Creek & Victor Gold Mining Company P.O Box 191 2755 State Highway 67 Victor, Colorado 80860

ATTENTION: Ron Roberts

Our ref: 983-2348.135

RECEIVED

AUG 6 1998

DIV. OF MINERALS & GEOLOGY

RE: REPORT ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF 'PROBABILISTIC EARTHQUAKE GROUND MOTIONS FOR THE CC&V PROJECT, VICTOR, COLORADO

Dear Ron:

This letter provides a brief documentation of the approach, methodology, results, conclusions and recommendations of an evaluation of earthquake hazards for the CC&V Project near Victor, Colorado. The evaluation of earthquake hazards was focused on the development of probabilistic earthquake strong ground motions for use in site seismic stability analyses and site seismic design for the CC&V Project near Victor, Colorado.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the evaluation of seismic hazards for the CC&V Project was to develop probabilistically-based peak ground accelerations (pGA) for use in site seismic stability analyses for the valley leach facility in particular, and for site seismic design, in general. The development of the PGAs was a systematic and comprehensive office-based investigation thatutilized the existing literature, data, reports and maps regarding the geology, structure, tectonics, seismicity and seismic hazards for the site and the region of the site.

Previous investigations of earthquake ground motions for the CC& V Project have included work by Woodward-Clyde Consultants (1990) and Vector Engineering (1993). Woodward-Clyde Consultants (1990) appear to have employed a modified probabilistic assessment, whereby they conservatively estimated that a magnitude M 5.0 earthquake (their sOO-year earthquake event for this fault) could occur on the nearest identified seismic source (Le., the Oil Creek fault at a distance of 8 km [5 miD, and arrived at a PGA of 0.1 g for the site. Vector Engineering (1993), using the same Oil Creek fault source parameters from Woodward-Clyde Consultants (1990) (Le., magnitude M 5.0 and 8 km [5 miD, and incorporating a suite of eight earthquake attenuation relationships, arrived

, . . May 15, 1998 2

at a range of PGAs from 0.1 to 0.2 g, and an average PGA of 0.14 g that was recommended for use in site seismic design.

983-2348.135

The work to develop probabilistic PGAs for this investigation was designed to build on the previous investigations, but utilize a current, systematic and comprehensive approach and methodology, as well as an updated attenuation relationship, so that the results would be technically reasonable, defensible and appropriate to the seismic hazard of the region. The basic approach included the following steps:

• Identification, mapping and characterization of potential seismoge~c sources (faults) within 100 km (62 mi) of the site; the source characterization included fault type, orientation and geometry, closest source-to-site distance, total fault length, rupture length, fault rupture width, rupture area, slip rate and maximum credible earthquake (MCE); in addition, the maximum background earthquake (NfBE) and its MCE were identified, and .

• Development of probabilistic PGAs at the site for return periods ranging from 100 years to 2,500 years; the development of the PGAs addressed the exposure to the site, in terms of ground motion, from all the potential seismogenic sources within a 100 km (62 mil radius, utilizing the seismogenic source parameters from the source characterization in the previous step, and a probabilistic seismic hazard assessment approach.

TECTONIC/SEISMIC SETTING

The CC&V project is located in the Rocky Mountains, near Victor, Colorado, at elevations of about 9,000 to 10,500 feet, about 10 miles southwest of Pikes Peak. The area within about 10 miles of the project is generally underlain by Precambrian metamorphic rock (gneiss) and intrusive rock (granite), that are in turn overlain by Tertiary volcanics (lava flows and pyroclastic flows) (Tweto, 1976). The primary geolOgic structure of the area includes northwest-, north- and northeast-striking high angle faults, that are. primarily normal-slip, but locally also reverse-slip (Tweto, 1976; Witkind, 1976; Kirkham and Rogers, 1981).

The project valley leach facility site is underlain by two primary bedrock units (CC&V, 1998 and 1993). The predominant unit is undifferentiated Precambrian pinkish gray, medium to coarse-grained biotite granodiorite. The granodiorite is also considered to be the basement bedrock. Locally, this basement rock may also be composed of biotite schist, augen gneiss, or quartz monzonite. The granodiorite is also often intruded by feldspar pegmatite or aplite dikes. The secondary unit underlying the heap leach facility site is Tertiary aphanitic phonolite that occurs solely as narrow, often discontinuous dikes that intrude the granodiOrite. The aphanitic phonolite dikes are generally gray to white, with local potassium feldspar phenocrysts, and are fissile. For purposes of site design, the valley leach facility is considered to be underlain by granodiorite bedrock (CC&V,1993).

· May 15, 1998 3 983-2348.135

Witkind (1976) and Kirkham and Rogers (1981) have identified a number of late Cenozoic (Le., displacement sometime in the past 23 million years) faults in the region of the site. These late Cenozoic faults include several with documented historic and/or Holocene age displacement (Le., displacement in the past 10,000 years), that would be classified as active, and a number with documented, or interpreted late Pleistocene age displacement (Le., displacement in the past 50,000 to 100,000 years), that would be termed potentially active. The closest fault with historical or Holocene activity is the north- to northwest-striking Oil Creek fault that is located about 8 km (5 mi) northeast of the site at its closest approach (Figure 1). Although Kirkham and Rogers (1981) considered the age of most recent displacement on the Oil Creek fault to be about middle to late Pleistocene (about 80,000 to 200,000 years ago), the 1979 magnitude Ml2.9 Divide earthquake was assigned to the Oil Creek fault (Butler and Nicholl, 1986) thus classifying it as an active fault. The next closest active (Le., Holocene-age) fault appears to be the Ute Pass fault zone located about 25 km (15 mi) northeast, near Colorado Springs, Colorado (Figure 1).

Although there are a number of mapped active and potentially active faults in the region of the project (e.g., within about 100 km [62 mil of the site), this region is generally characterized by a "relatively low level of . orical seismicity. This is reflected in the fact >i~ that only 12 historical earthquakes ha ee recorded in the region (100 kIn [62 mil radius of the 'site) for the period fro 1568 0 1998 that was searched for this investigation (U.S. Geological Surve 8). These 12 earthquakes ranged from magnitude M 2.5 to 4.0, and had focal depths ranging from 1 km to 10kIn (0.6-6 mi), with an average depth of about 5 kIn (3 mi).

The earliest recorded of the 12 earthquakes was the January 6,1979 magnitude Ml2.9 Divide earthquake, that occurred on the Oil Creek fault, about 28 km (17 mi) north of the site (U.S. Geological Survey, 1998; Butler and Nicholl, 1986). The largest earthquake was magnitude M 4.0, and it occurred on December 25, 1994 near Castle Rock, Colorado. The closest earthquakes to the site were two events that occurred in December of 1995, and were located about 15 km to the east, between the southern extent of the Oil Creek fault and the southern extent of the Ute Pass fault zone. The December 23, 1995 earthquake was magnitude M 3.6, while the December 31, 1995 event was magnitude M 2.8. Both had focal depths of 5 km (3 mi).

Because of the few number of earthquakes, there are no clear patterns or spatial associations with mapped active or potentially active faults. However, 6 of 12 historical events are near (within 1 to 8 km [0.6-5 mil) either the Oil Creek fault or the Ute Pass fault zone.

The previous investigations of the earthquake ground motions at the site by Woodward­Clyde Consultants (1990) and Vector Engineering (1993) have resulted il) PGAs for the site which were 0.10 g and 0.14 g, respectively. Examination of regional probabilistic mapping of PGA by the u.s. Geological Survey (1996) and Algermissen et al (1990) has resulted in the following tabulation of approximate PGAs for the site area, for various return periods: .

,---------------------------------------------------

. May 15, 1998 4 983-2348.135

Source 100-Year 475-Year 1,000-Year 2,500-Year Return Period Return Period Return Period Return Period

----+-~----~~~------~~~~~~~~~~

U.s. Geological 0.015 g 0.04g 0.06 g 0.10 g Survey (1996)

Algermissen et al (1990)

0.02g 0.06 g

The different PGAs for the site area indicated by the mapping of the U.S. Geological It Survey (1996), as compared to that of Algermissen et al (1990), may be the result of the 1\ use of a more complete historical seismicity data base, the use of active fault sources in . the probabilistic analysis, and the use of different and more current attenuation relationships. Both the hazard mapping by the U.S. Geological Survey (1996) and Algermissen et al (1990) support the fact that the seismic hazard of the project site area, in terms of PGA, is generally low. For further comparison, the 1994 United States Uniform Building Code (UBq places the CC&V site within Seismic Zone 1. The UBC Seismic Zone 1 has an equivalent PGA of 0.075 g.

DEVELOPMENT OF EARTHQUAKE STRONG GROUND MOTIONS

The development of earthquake ground motions for the CC&V Project valley leach facility was based on a probabilistic approach that ineIuded an initial step involving the identification and characterization of potential seismogenic sources, within a 100 km (62 mi) radius, that could affect the seismic design at the site. Seismogenic source data and parameters developed from this initial step were used in the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment to develop peak ground accelerations (pGA) for use in site seismic stability analyses and site seis~c design.

Identification and Characterization of Potential Earthquake Sources

Based on the review of the available literature, data and maps, at least 16 potential seismogenic sources were identified within about 100 km (62 mi) of the CC&V Project that may affect the development of probabilistic earthquake ground motions. These include 15 mapped faults that have been identified as being active or potentially active, and one source, termed the maximum background earthquake (MBE), that was identified to represent the historical earthquakes that have occurred, but that have yet to be spatially or kinematically associated with mapped faults. Historically, in seismic hazard evaluations, the MBE has been termed the "random" earthquake source. The locations of the 15 faults, with respect to tpe CC&V site are shown on Figure 1. The geologic and geometric characteristics of each of the potential seismogenic sources, that

Golder Associates

,

. May 15, 1998 5 983-2348.135

were taken from the available data, or estimated based on the information in the available data, are listed in Table 1.

The fault geologic and geometric characteristics listed in Table 1 were used to calculate the maximum credible earthquake (MCE) for each potential seismogenic source, using the fault rupture versus earthquake magnitude relationships of Anderson et al (1996), Wells and Coppersmith (1994), and Slemmons (1982). The MCEs for each source listed in Table 1 were selected from the suite of calculated possible MCEs for each source (derived from the various fault rupture versus magnitude relationships) based primarily on the reliability, accuracy and completeness of the available fault rupture geometric and

. geologic data. In addition, selected source characteristics (Le., total length, rupture length, rupture width, slip rate), along with the MCE for each source were used as input data in the development of the probabilistic assessment of ground motions. The MCE calculation sheets for each of the faults are included in Attachment 1

The total lengths for the various potential seismogenic sources were taken directly from the available maps and tabulations ofWitkind (1976) arid Kirkham and Rogers (1981). Rupture lengths were estitItated from the available data based on mapped segment lengths, and the mapped orientations of the faults, as well as from comparisons to analogs in similar tectonic environments. Rupture widths were developed based on the type and estimated geometry of the fault, in conjunction with estimates of the crustal and seismogenic thickness. Slip rates for the Oil Creek, Ute Pass, Rampart Range and Kennedy faults were calculated using the fault source activity and magnitude parameters of Butler and Nicholl (1986), and the earthquake magnitude versus fault displacement relationships of Wells and Coppersmith (1994). Slip rates for the remaiiting sources were estimated based on comparisons of their geologic and age characteristics with respect to those of the Oil Creek, Ute Pass, Rampart Range and Kennedy faults. .

The closest potential seismogenic source to the site is the Oil Creek fault. It is considered to be a normal-slip fault, has a total length of about 58 km (36 mi), and is located about 8 km (5 mi) to the northeast at its closest approach to the site. Its MCE was calculated to be a moment magnitude Mw 6.8. Based on the annual seismicity rate of O.22E-4 for the maximum earthquake on the Oil Creek fault from Butler and Nicholl (1986), which equates to a recurrence interval of about 45,454 years, and the calculated displacement for the maximum earthquake event on the fault of about 1.2 m (4 ft), based on the relationships of Wells and Coppersmith (1994), the slip rate was calculated to be 0.027 mm/yr.

Development of Probabilistic Peak Ground Accelerations

The site-specific probabilistic seismic design output for the CC&V Project was established in terms of the peak ground acceleration (PGA) and the return period for the PGA. The return periods that were considered ranged from 100 years to 2,500 years, including a return period of 475 years, which is equivalent to a risk level, and design life

· May IS, 1998 6 983-2348.135

of 10 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years. This is the risk level and implied design life that is expressed in the 1994 UBC for non-critical structures.

To assess the seismic risk at the site and to determine various levels of PGA versus return period, a probabilistic seismic hazard assessment (pSHA) was performed using the basic approach outlined by Cornell (1968), and the seismogenic source (fault) activity data presented in Table 1. In addition, the attenuation relationships developed by Sadigh et al (1993) for rock or stiff sites were used to model the dependency of the PGA on the earthquake magnitude and distance. The Sadigh et al (1993) attenuation relationships were selected for use in the analysis because they are current and incorporate recent and more comprehensive strong motion data than previous relationships (including near­field data), they address the source type (e.g., they distinguish between dip-slip and strike-slip faults), and they address site foundation conditions (Le., they distinguish between rock and soil sites).

The activity of potential seismic sources was modeled as a truncated form of the Gutenberg-Richter (1954) magnitude-frequency relation given by:

10gN = a-bM

where N is the cumulative number of earthquakes with magnitude greater or equal to M. The relation is truncated at the maximum credible earthquake (MCE) magnitude. The a- and b-values are coefficients that are dependent on the fault activity (Table 1) and regional seismicity data, respectively.

The probability of exceedance, P e (Z), at a given level of ground motion (i.e:, PGA) at the site, Z, within a specified time frame, t, is given as:

Pe (Z) = 1- exp( -V(Z)t)

where V(Z) is the mean annual rate of exceedance of ground motion level Z. Different probabilities of exceedance may be calculated, depending on the required level of structural performance.

To evaluate the seismic exposure at the site, the PSHA was implemented. This resulted in the curve of PGA versus return period that is plotted on Figure 2. For comparison purposes, Figure 2 also shows the plots of PGA versus return period for the results of PSHA mapping in the site area taken from the U.S. Geological Survey (1996) and Algermissen et al (1990). .

Figure 2 shows that for a return period of 475 years, which is equivalent to the . risk/design level of 10 percent probability of exceedance in a 50-year period from the 1994 UBC, the PGA at the site is 0.08 g. Although this PGA is generated from the influence of all the sources within 100 km (62 mi) of the site, it is dominated by the contribution of the Oil Creek and Fourmile Creek faults that are 8 km (5 mi) and 9 km (5.5 mi) from the site, respectively. The Oil Creek fault appears to contribute almost two­thirds of the 0.08 g PGA, while the Fourmile Creek fault contributes almost one-third.

,-------------------------------------------------------

May 15, 1998 7 983-2348.135

For the contribution from the Oil Creek fault, the ground motion is influenced by earthquakes in the entire magnitude range from moment magnitude Mw 5.0 to Mw 6.8 (the MCE), although about 50 percent of the PGA appears to be from the magnitude range of Mw 5.0-5.5 and the remaining 50 percent from Mw 5.5-6.8.

For comparison, the U.S. Geological Survey (1996) would predict a PGA of 0.04 g for the same 475-year return period, and Algermissen et al (1990) would predict a PGA of 0.02 g (Figure 2). The higher PGAs for given return periods derived from this investigation, as compared to the U.S. Geological Survey (1996) and Algermissen et al (1990), are believed to be the result of the implementation of a systematic and comprehensive PSHA that incorporates historical seismicity data as well paleoseismic data for identified seismogenic faults in the development of the ground motions. Both the U.S. Geological Survey (1996) and Algermissen et al (1990) appear to have primarily addressed the use of historical seismicity data for the region of the site, with limited or no use of paleoseismic

. data for active faults, in the development of their probabilistic PGA maps for this region. Because the area is of low historical seismicity, and the earthquake record is short, and thus incomplete (compared to the geologic or paleoseismic record), the overall seismic hazard, in terms of ground motion may be underestimated if only the historical seismicity is considered. The use of paleoseismic data, in conjunction with historical seismicity data, more completely characterizes the seismic hazard and.thus accounts for the higher PGAs. .

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The CC&V Project is located in a region of Colorado that generally has a low rate of historical seismicity. In addition, although there are 16 active and potentially active seismogenic sources within 100 km (62 mi) of the project, their rates of tectonic activity appear to also be low, and are consistent with the apparently overall low rate of seismic activity of the region. Together, these suggest that, compared to other more active regions of Colorado, and the western United States, the seismic hazard and expected ground motions (pGAs) from future seismic activity in the vicinity and region of the site should be low.

The closest potential seismogenic source to the project is the Oil Creek fault that is located about 8 km (5 mi) to the northeast. It is estimated to be capable of generating an MCE of moment magnitude Mw 6.8, and it is estimated to have a slip rate of 0.027 mm/yr. The Oil Creek fault tends to dominate the probabilistic earthquake ground motions at the site because of its close proximity, relatively high MCE, and higher slip rate compared to the other, nearby potential seismogenic sources.

The results of the systematic and comprehensive PSHA of this investigation indicate that the PGAs at the CC&V site for a suite of retUrn periods ranging from 100 years to 2,500 years are:

May 15, 1998 8 983-2348.135

Return Period (yrs) Peak Ground Acceleration (g) 100 0.02 475 0.08

1,000 0.13 2,500 0.18

The 0.08 g corresponding to the 475-year return period is equivalent to the risk level for non-critical structures employed in the 1994 UBC. This risk level, and the PGA of 0.08 g, appear to be appropriate and reasonable for site seismic stability analyses and site seismic design. The PGA of 0.08 g reflects the overall low rate of tectonic and seismic activity in the region, and the consequently relatively low exposure to earthquake ground motions that would be associated with a 475-year return period. Therefore, it is recommended that the 0.08 g PGA associated with the 475-year return period be used in site seismic design.

Sincerely,

GOLDER ASSOCIATES INC.

Donald O. West Associate - Engineering Geologist

~S~ Associate - Geotechnical Engineer

References Table 1 Figures 1 and 2 Attachment 1

cc: T. Mandziak - Golder J. Hardaway - CC&V

ccv~.ooc

May 15,1998 9 983-2348.135

REFERENCES

Algermissen, S.T., Perkins, D.M., Thenhaus, P.c., Hanson, S.L., and Be·nder, B.L., 1990. Probabilistic Earthquake Acceleration and Velocity Maps for the United States and Puerto Rico: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2120.

Anderson, J.G., vVesnousky, S.G., and Stirling, M.W., 1996. Earthquake size as a function of fault slip rate: Bu~etin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 86, n. 3, p. 683-690 .

. Butler, D.B. and Nich.oll, J.J./ Jr., 1986. The Divide Earthquake of January 6, 1979: in Contributions to Colorado SeiSmicity and Tectonics, Colorado Geological Survey Special Publication 28, p. 145-157.

Butler, D.~. and Nicholl, n., Jr., 1985. Report M, Seismic Design Considerations, Two Forks, Estabrook, Ferndale, New Cheesman, Williams Fork and Gross Dam and Reservoir Sites, Third Interim Report: MicroGeophysics Corporation, November, 1985.

Cornell, c.A., 1968. Engineering Seismic Risk Analysis: Bulletin of the SeismC?logical Society of America, v. 58, n. 5, p. 1583-1606.

Cripple Creek & Victor Gold Mining Company (CC&V), 1998. Phase III Expansion Geology Map: based on compilation of 1:1,200 and 1:2,400 geologic mapping.

Cripple Creek & Victor Gold Mining Company (CC&V), 1993. Amendment No.6 to Office of Mined Land and Reclamation Pennit M-80-244.

Gutenberg, B. and Richter, C.F., 1954. Seismicity of the Earth and Associated Phenomena, 2nd Edition: Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.

Kirkham, R.M., and Rogers, W.P., 1981. Earthquake Potential in Colorado, A Preliminary Evaluation: Colorado Geological Survey Bulletin 43, 171 p.

Sadigh, K, chang, c.-y., Abrahamson, N.A., and Powers,-M.S., 1993. Specification of Long Period Ground Motion: Updated Attenuation Relationships for Rock Site Conditions and Adjustment Factors for Near Source Effects: Applied Technology Council Report ATC 17-1.

Slemmons, D.B., 1982. Determination of design earthquake magnitudes for microzonation: Proceedings of the Third International Earthquake Microzonation Conference, v. 1, U.S. National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C., p. 119-130.

Tweto, 0., 1976. Preliminary Geologic Map of Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map ill-788.

, ,

May IS, 1998 10 983-2343.135

U. S. Geological Survey, 1998. Earthquake Search Results, 1568-1998, 100 km Radius, Latitude 38.71N and Longitude 105.09W: National Earthquake Information Center, March 16, 1998.

u.s. Geological Survey, 1996. National Hazard Mapping Project, Peak Acceleration with 10% Probability of Exceedance in 50 Years, Peak Acceleration with 5% Probability of Exceedance in 50 Years, Peak Acceleration with 2% Probability of Exceedance in 50 Years: November, 1996. .

Vector Engineerin~ Inc., 1993. Stability Evaluation for the Cresson Project Amendment No.5 to MLRD Permit M-80-244 Adequacy Response, December 23, 1992: prepared fro Cripple Creek and Victor Gold Company, Victor, Colorado, January IS, 1993.

Wells, D.L. and Coppersmith, KJ., 1994. New empirical relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface fault displacement: Bulletin of the Seismological Society· of America, v. 84, n. 4, p. 974-1002.

Witkind, LI., 1976. Preliminary Map Showing Known and Suspected Active Faults in Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 76-154.

Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1990. Geotechnical and Hydrological Investigations~ Carlton Mill Tailings Dams, Victor, Colorado: prepared for Pikes Peak Mining Company, Victor, Colorado: October, 1990.

TABLE 1 GEOLOGIC/GEOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS OF POTENTIAL SEISMOGENIC SOURCES WITHIN 100 KM OF THE CC&V

SITE

Potential Seismo' enH::'So4rb~' .. : ,T- .. ;~ ~~p.rta'pc·· i: ';J~~Tllt~f.;:;:·;~ '.)~'rT.~wrti l~R'tlh""'r'~':? :iI~Et'~' '··t~~~ ~q1i'J"iR;:Yr.~ ·.:;:··,·,MC"S,'.:·: . '. P" .. ':";';':" .J; . ;.\ ''1 r.B,~.; ,1 ~:;:"~';'~'I'j'7~!" : 1:,,~,{.:,);!~,~Hlk~( t,.,,/ ~.~Rl!'W'j~j )l"',v~'~:~"I!,th\ '~l~~I"H~~~;!'~" Yi~~~~,~l'cr,'~ 'I "." ,-' . :: .. . .... .. ; ',:-' '. '.,.:i,.; ;'~.';' 1. '/1 .;~I·:/Il::·A~: ,,:.t;:;: Ian "'i~;': .! ~Ti''e W~1.'~1 .~!; (AnO'f-finj" !l!il,'I;,(~Tl f-W"(J:';'. .i{S ~,~ ': _:I~ , ur.)',.; .' ~;,: (Mw :"j

" ;1,. ~':~."~_' ••.• ·\l\l ".t"\'L'f,J' iij.4 ... ~~lI> ..... ).r.~ ..• t\ 1 ... 1 .. ~~t'b~ ...... If:!. ~t I~ ,0' 1 So,· ~ .)\: " r. '.1~~·'1'··'~· . . ..j ~ " :: ', ... :": -;;';',,' \ :~ ... :·:.f;.i!'j :\'~LJi~') .. :),::',\' I ;'i:':('irS)'~f,:'I~'~ ~i}!fI1:~'l£~~~i:I)' ~}(l~J,~~·ltaf).J~' :~jt!,il·~\t·{Jat(.;, ~i;I~ml'1~ ~&': ··.;i:;" .. ~ ;.: ';

• ' ", ',' :: .. t'" .. : :'t •. :.:!.~I'~tJo&.~~t/;~~. 'i.l.g·.,-1.~~lf; :l::,;,\t:,:,:;,rL~·:.l<!:1 ;:~l\' l\Jl1 ,t~'1-J' ~':;~flKJl~J~1l'71i';\>~ ·:Jt 'L'ill\Jl! :'' .. :'It ~rht~,:;Nf~)-~l,It . .t l'C~~;it:!r.ht,;(~:~~: ;:::,1' :': . ; .':;

Oil Creek Fault" N? 8 58 35 16 560 0.027 6.8 fourmile Creek Fault N 9 20 20 16 320 0.008 6.6 MEE N? 10 0.0001 5.0 Ute Pass Fault Zone" N? 25 70 45 16 720 0.0002 6.9 Rampart Range Fault .. R 27.5 47 47 21 987 0.025 7.0 Eleven Mile Fault .. N 28 12 12 16 192 0.01 6.5 Chase Gulch Fault .. N 30 33 33 16 528 0.01 6.8 Wet Mountain Fault .. N? 37 75 38 16 608 0.01 6.8 Alvarado Fault N? 65 83 30 16 480 0.008 6.8 Rosita Fault N 69 11 11 16 176 0.008 6.4 Kennedy Gulch Fault N? 70 34 34 16 544 0.008 6.8 11127 Fault N 75 6 6 16 96 0.008 6.3 Sangre de Cristo Fault Zone" N 79 130 50 16 800 0.10 6.9 11158 Fault .. N 84 4 4 16 64 0.01 6.1 Sawatch Fault" N 88 45 45 16 720 0.01 6.9 II 184 Fault .. N 89 71 71 16 1136 0.01 7.0

Notes: 1) Potential seismogenic sources from Witkind (1976), Kirkham and Rogers (1981) and Butler and Nicholl (1986); the MBE (maximum background earthquake) developed and estimated based on the historical seismicity; asterisk ( .. ) indicates documented or interpreted historic and/or Holocene activity. 2) Type is N = normal-slip fault; R = reverse-slip fault. 3) Distance is closest mapped distance of source to site (for the MBE, it is based on estimated focal depth).

Golder Associates

4) Total length from Witkind (1976) or Kirkham and Rogers (1981). ?) Rupture length estimated from pattern of mapped traces of seismogenic sources. 6) Rupture width based on estimated crustal thickness (20 km), dip of fault, and focal depths of historical seismicity. 7) Rupture area is the product of rupture width and rupture length. 8) Slip rate based on, and calculated from the fault activity data in Butler and Nicholl (1985), the age of displacement data in Kirkham and Rogers (1981), and the rupture versus magnitude relationships of Wells and Coppersmith (1994). 9) The MCE (maximum credible earthquake)is a moment magnitude (Mw) that was calculated using the fault rupture versus earthquake magnitude relationships of Wells and Coppersmith (1994), an.d the individual geologic/geometric data for each potential seismogenic source.

Golder Associates

JO "-\.

tic ~ ~ \. ~J.

100-J!I'+

• Duena Visla

"'s -r-9 • Salida

106'"

~'~:~'·;:9~;~t:~II~:~~tlr>Nln (,;1 Nl wu ... llot lJAAWIhG,tO Inw OAII ~ OhAWIU., lEA

0, .... "'Q

(,f>~

" ~,,~

t%~x {"""<. v?-t~

~ "., 'lJ.

~f> '1..-

""~

.CanonClly

~'" ,.~ o'?

-90• ~. ~ 4-

~q,t>: "..-" :"" ~<1vq .. ~~ 38"+

IDS"

• Colorado Springs

• Pueblo

~ o H 50

I

KILOMETERS

I

.. 1

fiGURE 1 POTENTIAL SEISMOGENIC SOURCES

WITHIN 100 KM OF THE CC&V SITE cC~V/seISMICIT1ICO

Golder Associates

0.18.-----------------------------------------------------------~

0.16 ...... - .. . - . - .... - - - . - - - - .. - - - - - . - .. - . - - - . - . - . - . - .. - - - - - . - - - -

o 14 . __ -. ~ This Study . ---B- USGS (1996)

-0- Aigermissen et al (1990) 0.12

-en -C') 0.1 -~ G Q. 0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

o ~.------------------~--------------------~------------------~ 100 475 1000 2500

Return Period T (years)

. FIGURE 2 PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION (PGA) VERSUS

RETURN PERIOD FOR THE CC&V PROJECT SITE CC&V/SEISMIC1"7"/C:J .

PRQ..;ECT NO. 98:1 2:148.1J5 DRAWING NO. m91 DArE JiJOJ98 CRAWN 9Y E., Golder Associates

,"

.~ ,

ATTACHMENT 1

MAXIMUM MAGNITUDE CALCULA nON SHEETS

.. ..- .. ,-.

MAG97 - M:uimwn E.uthqu:l!ce Mal;l1itude

An Excel (vers 5.0) spradshect to compute m:uimum crthqu:l!ce magnirJde from U!ler«fined fault p=eters.

Modified by R. Zepeda (Iune, 1997), from progr.un developed by K. Moser (February, 1988), and modified by J. Scot! (November, 1991).

Discl:limer. Determination of m!lXimum crthqu:l!ce magnitude requiC"..!l 3 det:lilcd undersunding of the geology and seismology of an are:1.

I Fault N:une I Fault Number I Fault T)1lC I Strike I ASSUMPTIONS:

I Oil Creek I I N I NNW ClUSt - 20 \em Dip - 70 degrees

Downc!ip -16 \em

E.uthquake/Fault Ch:u-actcristics E3rthquake/Fault Sconario

5-1 S-2 5-3 Tou! Fault Length (L. Icm): 5& 5& 0 Surface Rupture Length (L. Ian): 50 35 0 Subsurf3ce Rupture Width (W,lcm): 16 16 0 Rupture Are3 (A. sq.km): 928 560 0 M3ximum Surface

Displacement (Dmax, 01): 0 0 0 Avenge Surface

Displacement (Dave, 01): 0 ° 0 Slip R.1.te (S, mm/yr): 0.027 0.027 0

FAULT PARA."iETER I Fault I LimiulStd. Dev. Equation I Computed Magnitude (Reference) Type I 5-1 I 5-2 I FAULT LENGTH (SlemmollS, 1982) SS Ms:>O.O ~.618~.0012(L)

Std. Dev. - 0.12. SURF ACE RUPTURE LENGTH (Wells a.nd Coppersmith, 1994) All MW,5.2-8.1 Mw-5.0S+1.16LogL 7.1 6.9

Std. Dev. - 0.28 SUBSURFACE RUPTURE WIDlH (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw,4.S-8.1 Mw-4.06+2.2SLogW 6.S 6.S

Std. Dev. - 0.41

RUPTIIRE AREA (Wellsand Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw,4.8-7.9 Mw-4.07~.98LogA 7.0 6.&

Std. Dev, - 0.24 SURFACE DISPLACEMENT (Wells a.nd Coppersmith, 1994) All MW,5.2-8.1 Mw-6.6~.74LogDma:t IINUM! #NUM!

Dmax, 0.01-14.601

Sid. Dev. - 0.40 All MW,5.6-8.1 Mw-6.93~.S2LogDave #NUM! #NUM!

Dave, 0.05-8.0m

Std. Dev. - 0.39 RUPTIIRE LENGTIi AND SUP RATE (And=n ct ai, 1996) AIl Mw>5.1 Mw-S.12+1.16IogL-logS 7.4 7.2

Std. Dev. - 0.04 to 0.12

MEAN 7.1 I 6.9

MAXIMUM 7.4 I 7.2

MINlMUM 6.S I 6.S

Notes:. I) Fault type choices include: SS, strilce slip; N, aorm:l!; and R., reverse.

2) FAULT LENGTH equation will function only if SS is idontificd adjac:nt to Fault Type. 3) Mw, momont magnitude; Ms, surfacc·w:lve magnitude.

References: Andcr::on, I.G., WesnolUky, S.G~ and Stirling, M.W ~ 1996, Earthqu:l!cc siz: as a functio of fault slip ~e: Bulletin of the Seismologie:l!

Society of Amcria, v. 86, ao. 3, p. 68J~90. Slemmon.s, D.B., 1982, Determination of daiga crthquake magnitudes for microzanatioa, Proceedings of the Third Inte:TIarion:l!

E.uthquake Microzanation Confcro:nce, v. I, U.S. Nation:l! Scionc: Foundation. W:uhington, D.C~ p. 119-130. Wells, D.L,and Coppernnith, KJ., 1994, New cmpirie:l! rel:uiooships among magnitude, rupture len!;!h, rupture "";dth, rupture ate:I,

and surface displacement, Bulletin of the Scismologie:l! Society of Amcria, v. 34, no. 4, p. 974-1002.

5-3

IINUM!

~!

#NUM!

#NUM!

#NUM!

~!

flD£VIO! 0.0

0.0

c------------------------------------------- -

MAG97 • Ma~imum E.:uthqu:1lcc Ma~itudc

An Excd (vers S.O) sp=dsheetto compute m:IXimum eriqu.tke m~gnitude from user-<lefined Cault p=eters.

Modified by R. Zepeda (Iune, 1997), from progr= developed by K. Moser (February, 1983). and modified by I. Scott (November, 1991).

Disc1~mer: Determination of ma~imum ewqu:1lcc magnitude requires a det~led understanding of the geology and seismology of an Me:1.

I F~ultN=e I Fault Number I Fault Type I Strike I ASSUMPTIONS:

I Fourmile Creek I I N I NNW Crust-20 km Dip - 70 degrees

Downdip - 16 km

E.:uthqu:1lcelFault Characteristics Embqu:1lceIFauJt Scenario

S·I 5-2 S-l

Tobl Fault Ungth (L. km): 20 0 0

Swfacc Rupture Length (L. km): 20 0 0

Subsurface Rupture Width (W, km): 16 0 0

Rupture Area (A, sq. km): 320 0 0

Maximum Swface

Displacement (Dmu, m): 0 0 0

Avenge Swfacc

Displacement (Dave, m): 0 0 0

Slip R..ate (5, mm/yT): 0 0 0

FAULT PAR.AME1ER I Fault I Limits/Std. Dev. Equation T Computed Magnitude

(Reference) Type

FAULT LENGTH

(Slemmons., 1932) 55 Ms>O.O Ms-O.618~.OOI2(L)

Std. Dev, - 0.22

SURFACE RUP'IURE LENGTH (Wells and Coppersmith. 1994) All Mw,S.2-8.1 M.,.,..S.08+1.16LogL

Std. Dev. - 013

SUBSURFACE RUPTURE WIDrn

(Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw,4.8-8.1 Mw-4.06+2.2SLogW

Std. Dev. - 0.41

RUP'IURE AREA (Wells and Coppersmith., 1994) All Mw,4.S-7.9 Mw-4.07+O.98LogA

Std. Dev. - 0.24

SURFACED~PLACfu~

(Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw, S.2-8.1 Mw-6.69+0.74Lo&Dmax

Dmax.0.01.14.6m

Sid. Dev. - 0.40

All Mw. S.6·8.1 Mw-6.93+O.S2LogDave

Dave.0.OS-8.0m

Std. Dev. - OJ9

RUPTURE LENGrn AND SUP RATE

(Anderson et aI. 1996) All Mw>S.I M.,.,..S.I 2+1.16IogL·logS

Std. Dev. - 0.04 to 0.12

MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM

Notes:

I) Fault tYpe choices include: SS. strike slip; N. normal; and It, reverse.

2) FAULTl..ENGTH equation will function only ifSS is identified adjacent to Fault Type.

l) Mw. moment magnitude; Ms, surface·wave magnitude.

ReCerenees:

I 5-1 I

6.6

6.S

6.S

IINUM!

1tNUM!

IINUM! . ' .

6.6

6.8

6.S

Anderson, I.G .• Wesnousky, S.G .• 3/ld Stirling, M. W .• 1996. EWqu.tke size as a funcrlo of f~ult slip ~te: Bulletin of t.~e Seismological

Society of America. v. 86. no. 3, p. 683-690. Slemmons, O.B .• 1982, Oelermin:uion of design e:ut.~qu:1lce m~gnirudes for mierczon~rion. Proceedings oCthe Third lnlern,tion31

Ewqu:1lce Micrczon~tion Conference. v. I, U.S. N~tion31 Science Foun~rion. Washin~on. D.C .• p. 119·130.

Wells, D.L,:II1d Coppcr.:mit.~. KJ .• 1994, New empiric31 rel~tionships ameng m~gnitude, rupture length, rupture width, ruprure Me~,

and surf~ce displ~ement, Bullenn oCme Seismologic31 Society of America. v. U, no. 4, p. 974·1002.

5-2 I

1tNUM!

IlNUM!

I4NUM!

1tNUM!

1tNUM!

ItNUMI

IIDNIO!

0.0

0.0

5-3

WUM!

IINUM!

14Nmvl!

IINUM!

14Nmv!!

.

I4Nmv!!

#DNIO!

0.0

0.0

MAG97 - Muimwn E.1rthqu:llce Mal!l\itude

An Excel (vcrs S .0) spreadsheet 10 compule maximum e:Ilthqu:llce magnirude from uscr~efined fault p=meters. Modified by R. Zepeda (lune, 1997), from progr:un developed by K. Moser (Feb\'U.3r)', 1983), and modified by 1. Scott (November, 1991).

Disclaimer: Detemination ofma:timwn e:ut1tqu:llce magnirude requires a detailed undcrsunding oflbe geology and seismology ofan area.

I Fault Name I Fault NUr:lbcr I FaultTypc , Stnlce I ASSUMPTIONS: , UleP= I , N I NW -, Crust-20!em Dip - 70 degrees Downdip -16!em

E.1rthqu:llccJFauit Ch=:crilties E.1rthqu:llccJFault Scenario 5-1 5-2 S-3

Tow Fault Length (L, !em): 70 70 0 Surface Ruprurc Length (L, ian): 45 2j 0 Subsurface Rupture Width rvv,lan): 16 16 0 Ruprurc Arc (A. sq.lan): 720 400 0 Maximum Surface

Displacement (Dm3X, m): 0 0 0

Average Surface Displacement (Dave, m): 0 0 0

Slip Rate (S, mm/yl'): 0.0002 0.0002 0

FAULT PARAME'IER I Fault I Limits/Std. Dev. Equation I Computed M3.,utude (R.cferClce) Type I 5-1 T 5-2 FAULT LENGTH (Slemmons, 1982) SS ~.O Ms-6.61S~.OOI2(L)

Sid. Dcv. - 0.22 SURFACE RUPTURE LENGTH (Wells md Copp=ith, 1994) All MW,5.2-8.1 Mw-5.0S"1.1 61.ogL 7.0 6.7

Std. Dcv. - 0.28 SUBSURFACE RUPTURE WIDlR (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All MW,4.8-8.1 Mw-4.06 .. 2.25LogW 6.S 6.S

Std. Dev. - 0.41 RUPTURE AREA (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw,4.1!-7.9 Mw-4.07~.9SLogA 6.9 6.6

Std. Dcv. - 0.24 SURFACE DISPLACEMENT (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw, S .2-8.1 Mw-6.69~.7 4LogDm:L,( IINUM! IINUM!

Dma.'t, O.01-14.6m Std. Dov. - 0.40

All MW,5.6-8.1 Mw-6.93~.82LogDave #NUM! #NUM! Dave, 0.OS-8.0m Std. Dcv. - 0.39

RUPTURE lENGllI A...'ID SUP RATE (Anderson et ai, 1996) All Mw>S.1 Mw-S.12+l.161ogIAogS 1.S 7.5

Sid. Dcv. - 0.04 to 0.12 MEAN I 7.1 6.9

MAXIMUM I 7.S 7.5

MINIMUM I 6.S 6.6

Notes: I) Fault type choices include: SS, stn1ce slip: N, nonn:tl: and R, reverse. 2) FAULT lENGTH equation will function only if SS is identified adjacent to F:wIt Type.

t:-f<\w" CD .~:. -

3) Mw, moment magnitude: Ms, surface-wave magnitude.

Referenc .. : Anderson,I.G., Wesnouslcy, S.G., and Stirling, M.W., 1996, Emhqualce size as a functio of fault slip rate: Bulletin oflbe Seismolol:ic::!l Society of America, v. 86, no. 3, p. 683~90. Slemmons, D.B., 1982, Determination of design earthqu:llce magnirudes for mie:rozao:ltion, ~edings of the Third lntern:ltion:tl E:uthqu:llce Mie:rozon:1tion Conference, v. I, U.s. Nation:tl Science Found:ltioa, Washington, D.C., p. 119-130. Wells, D.L,and Coppersmith, KJ., 1994, New empirical ~l;llionships arnong lItagnirude, ruprurc Ic::lgth, ruptu:"e width, ruprurc 3Z'C:I.

and surf~ce displ~cement, Bulletin of tile Scismologid Society or Americ:a, v. &4, no. 4, p. 974-1002.

, S-3

fINUM!

fINUM!

#NUM!

fINUM!

#NUM!

fINUM!

#DIV/O! 0.0 0.0

MAG91 - Ma:<Lmum E.uthqu:llce Mat;nitude

An Excel (vers 5.0) sp=dshect to compute maximum e:uthqu:llce magnitude from user«fined fault p=meters. Modified by R. Zeped.l (June, 1997), from progr:un developed by K. Moser (Febru:try, 1988), and modified by 1. Scott (Noverobcr,1991).

Disclaimer. Determination of m3.'timum e:trthqu:llce magnitude ~te$ a detailed und=ding of the geology and seismology of an :lrC3.

Fault Name 1 Fault Number I FaultTypc I Saike I ASSUMPTIONS: I Rampart Rmge I R I N-S Crust - 20 Ic:l

Dip - 45 de;;rees Downdip - 21b

Earthqu:llceIFault Chancteristic: EanllquaJcelFault Scerurio 5-1 5-2 S-3

Tow Fault Length (1.., Ian): 41 0 0 Surfacc Rupture Length (1.., Ian): 41 0 0 Subsurface Rupture Width CVI, Ian): 21 0 0 Rupture AlCl (A., sq. Ian): 987 0 0 Maximum Surf;u:e

Displacement (Dm:L'C. m): 0 0 0 Average Surface

Displacement (Dave. m): 0 0 0 Slip Rate (S, mm/yT): 0.025 0 0

FAULT PARAME1ER. I Fault I Limi~Std. Dev. £quatioa I Computed Magnitude (Reference) Type I S-I I FAULT LENGIH (Slcmmoas, 1982) SS Ms>6.0 Ms-6.6 18+0.00 12(L}

Std. Dev. - 0.22 SURfACE RUP'ITJRE LENGTIi (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All MW,S.2-8.1 Mw-S.OS+1.l6LogL 7.0

Std. Dev. - O.2S SUBSURfACE RUP'ITJRE WlDTIi (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw,4.S-8.1 Mw-4.06+2.2SLogW 7.0

SId. Dev. - 0.41 RUP'IURE AREA (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All MW,4.8-7!J Mw-4.07+O.98LogA 7.0

SId. Dev. - 0.24 SURfACED~PLACEMENT

(Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All MW,5.2-8.1 Mw-6.69+0.74LogDmax #NUM! Dm:L'C. 0.01-14.6m Std. Dev. - 0.40

All MW,5.6-8.1 Mw-6.93+O.S2LogDave #NUM! Dave, O.OS-8.Om . SId. Dev. - OJ9

RUP'IURE LENGIH AND SUP RATE (Andersoa et aI. 1996) All Mw>S.1 Mw-S.12+1.16IogL-logS 7.4.

Std. Dev. - 0.04 to 0.12 MEAN 7.1 MAXIMUM 1.4 MINIMUM 7.0

Notes: I) Fault type choic= iaclude: SS, strilce slip; N, aorm31; and R. m=. 2) FAULT LENGtH equatioa will function oaly ieSS is idc:ntified adjacentto Fault Type. 3) Mw, moment magnitude; Ml, surface-W3ve magnitude.

References: Anderson, J.G., Wesnousky, S.G~ and Stirling, M. W ~ 1996, Earthqu:llce size as a functio of fault slip nte: Bullena oftllc: Sdsmologic:l Society of Americ:l, v. 86. no. 3, p. 6S3~90. Slemmons. D.S., 1982. Determination of design earthqu:llce magnitudes for mi=nation. Proccodings of the Third lntematioll:ll Earthqu:llce Microzenation Conference, v. I, U.S. Natioll:ll Science Foundation, Washington, D.C., p. 119-\30. . Wells., D.L..and Coppersmith, KJ., 1994, New empiric31 rel:1tionships among m:lgnitude, rupture leugt.'!. rup= width, rup= area. and surf:1ce displ:u:cment, Bulletin of the Seismologic31 Society of Americ:l, v. &4, no. 4, p. 974-1002.

5-2 ,

IINUM!

#NUM!

#NUM!

#NUM!

IINUM!

IINUM!

#DIY/O! 0.0 0.0

S-3

tINUMJ

#NUM!

#NUM!

#NIJM!

#NUM!

#NUM!

#DIY/O! 0.0 0.0

MAG97 - Maximum E:utlIquake M.l~itude

An E.'tcel (vers S.O) spre:1dsheet to compute m~imum emhquake m.lgnitude from user,.jefined faut! pmme!crs.

Modified by R. Zeped.:1 (Iune. 1997), from prognm developed by K. Moser (Febru:uy, (983), :lnd modified by I. Scott (November, (991).

Disclaimer. Determin:1tion of m:Lximwn ewquake magnitude requires a deuiled under::unding of tile ~eology :lnd sei:mology of:ln :ue:1.

FlUI! N;une I Flult Number I FlUlt Type I Strike ASSUMPTIONS; Elevenmile I I N I NW Crust -20 \an

Dip - 70 degrees Downdip - 16 \an

E:utlIqu:tkc!Fault Ch=eteristies E.lrthquakClFault Scmmo

Sol So2 S-3 Toul Fault Length (L,1an): 12 0 0 Surface Rupture Length (L,1cm): 12 0 0 Subsurface Rupture Width (W, Ian): 16 0 0

Rupture Ala (A, sq. km): 192 0 0

Maximum Surf.lce

Displ:1cement (Dmax, m): 0 0 0 Avenge Surface

Displacemen! (Dave, m): 0 0 0

Slip Rate (S, mmlyr): 0 0 0

FAULT PA.RA.'v1EIER I Fault I Limits/Std. Dev. Equation I Computed Magnitude

(Reference) Type

FAULT LENGTIi

(Slcmmons, 1982) SS MP<i.0 Ms-6.61S+O.00 12(L)

Std. Dev. - 0.22 SURFACE RUP1UR.E LENGTIi

(Wells and Copper:mirh, 1994) . All Mw,S.2-S.1 M_S.OS"I.16LogL

Std. Dev. - 0.28 SUBSURFACE RlTPl1JR.E WIDTII

(WellS and Coppmmith, 1994) All Mw,4.S-3.1 Mw-4.06"USLogW

Std. Dev. - 0.41

RlTPl1JR.E AREA

(Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw,4.8-7.9 Mw-4.07+O.9SLogA

Std. Dev. - 0.24 SURFACED~PLACEMENT

(Wells and Coppenmirh, 1994) All MW,S.2-8.1 Mw-6.69+O.74LogDm:L't

Dmax,O.01-14.6m

Std. Dev. - 0.40 All Mw,S.6-8.1 Mw-6.93+o.S2LogDaY e

Dlve, 0.OS-8.0m

Std. Dev. - 039

RUPTt.JflE LENGTIi AND SLIP RATE

(Anderson eol, 1996) All Mw>S.1 M_S.12"1.16Io~-logS

Std. Dev. - 0.04 to 0.12

MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM

Notes:

I) Fwlt type choices include: SS, strike slip; N, norm:tl; and R. ~vme. 2) FAULT LENGTH equ:1tion will function only ifSS is identified adjacent to FlultType.

J) Mw, moment mlgnirude; Ms, surflce-w:1Ve m:1gnitude.

References:

I S-I I

63

6.8

6.3

#NUM!

#NUM!

/iNm;1! .. , 6.5' 6.8

63

Anderson, J.G., We::nousky, S.G., and Stirling, M.W., 1996, Earthquake size as:1 functio off.ult slip <lte: Bulletin of the SeismologiC:11

Society of Americl. v. S6, no. J, p. 683-690.

Slemmons, D.B., 1982. Determinltion of design ewquake magnitud=~ for microzon.ltion. Proceedinss oCtile Third lntem:1tion~

E:utlIquake Microzon.ltion Conference. Y. I. U.S. N~tion:tl Science Foundltion. Washington. D.C .• p. 119-130.

Wells. D.L .• :lnd Coppersmith. KJ .• 1994, New empiric:tl rel:1tionships ameng magnitude •. rupture length. rupture width. ruprure :ue.l,

and surflce displ:1cement, Bulletin of tile Seismologic:tl Society of Americl. v. 84. no. 4, p. 9i4-1002.

S-2 I

f#NUM!

muM!

#NUM!

#NUM!

IINUM!

#NIIM!

110 lV/O !

0.0

0.0

.

S-3

#NUM!

#NUM!

#NUM!

#NUM!

#NUM!

~'M!

#DlV/O!

0.0

0.0

MAG97 - Maximum ~~quake Ma:;nirude

An Excel (ve~ S.O) spreadsheet to compute.m:l."timum e:uthquake magnirude from u.ser-defined f .. ult p:u-:unetm. Modified by R. Zepeda (June. 1997). from prognm developed by K. Mo.er (Febru:uy, 1983). and modified by 1. Scott (November, 1991).

Disclaimer: Determination ofm:l."timum e:uthquake magnirude requires a derailed unde.~unding of the getllogy and seismology ofan :lrea.

I Fault N3rRe I Fault Number Fault Type I Strike I ASSUMPTIONS:

I Ch:1Se Gulch I N I NW I Crus! - 20 \an Dip - 10 de!;fees Downdip -16 \an

E:uthquakeIFault Ch:=cteristics E:uthquakeIFault Scenario S-I S-2 5-3

Toul Fault Length (L. Ian): 33 0 0 Surface Rupture Length (L. Ian): 33 0 0 Subsurface Rupture Width CH, \an): 16 0 0 Rupture Area (A. sq, Ian): S23 0 0 Maximum Surface

Displacement (Dmax. m): 0 0 0 Average Surface

Displacement (Dave, m): 0 0 0 Slip Rate (S, mmlyr): 0 0 0

FAULT PARAMEla I Fault I LimiWStd. Oev. Equatioll I Computed Mag:tirude (Refereace) Type I 5-1 I 5-2 I FAULT LENGIH (SlemmolU,1982) SS Ms>6.0 Ms-6.6 I 8+{).00 I 2(L)

Std. Dev. - 0.22 SURFACE RUP11JRE LENGTH CHells and Copp=mith, 1994) All MW,5.2-8.1 Mw-S.08+1.16LogL 6.8 f#NUM!

Std. Dev. - 0.28 SUBSURFACE RUP1iJRE WIDTIi CHells and Coppe=ith. 1994) All Mw,4.8-8.1 Mw-4.06+2.2SLoSW 6.8 #NUM!

Std. Dev. -0.41

RUPTIJRE AREA CHells and Coppe~mith, 1994) All Mw,4.S-1.9 Mw-4.07+{).9SLogA 6.7 1INtTh1!

Std. Dev. - 0.24 SURFACED~PLAC~~NT

CHells and Coppersmith, 1994) All MW,S.2·8.1 Mw-6.69+{).14LogDm:l."t #NUM! #NUM! Dmu,O.01·14.6m

Std. Dev. - 0.40 All Mw,S.6-8.1 Mw-6.93+{).S2LogD:t~ ~! #NUM!

Dave,O.OS-8.Om

Std. Dev. - 0.39 RUPTIJRE LENGIH AND SLIP RATE (Anderson el aI. 1996) All Mw>S.l Mw-S.12+1.16IogI...togS #NUM! #NUM!

SId. Dev. - 0.04 to 0.12

MEAN 6.8 #D(vIO! I MAXIMUM 6.8 0.0 I MINIMUM 6.7 0.0 I

Notes: I) F:tull type choices include: SS. strike slip; N, nonnal; and R. reverse. 2) FAULT LENGIH equation will function only ifSS is identified :uijacent to Faull Type. 3) Mw, moment magnirude; Ms. surface·wave magnirude.

References: Ande~on,I.0., Wesnousky. S.O., and Stirling, M.W., 1996, E:uthquake size;tS a funcrio offault slip rate: Bulletin of the Seismological

Society of America, v. 36, no. 3, p. 68J~90. Slemmons, D.B., 1982, Determination of design e:uthquake magnirudes for microzonarion, Proceedinss of the Third International E:uthquake Microzonation Conference, v. I, U.S. National Science Foundation, W;tShinSlon. D.C •• p. 119-\30. Wells, D.L.,and Coppe~mith, KJ .. 1994, New empiric:u relationships 3lI1ong magnirude, ruprure length, ruprure width. ruprure :Ire:!, and surface displacement, Bulletin oftht Seismological Society of America. v. 3~, no.~, p. 974-1002.

S-3

fINUM!

liNUM!

/#NUM!

#NUM!

#NUM!

IINUM!

NON/O!

0.0 0.0

,.

MAG97 - M.uimum EJrthqu:1lce M3!p1itude

An Excel (vers 5.0) spre3dsheet to compute m:IXimum eriqu:1lce magnitude from uscr-defined fault p:u:uneter::. Modified by R. Zepecb {June, 1997}, from prngr:1lll developed by K. Moser (February, 1983), and modified by J. Scott (November, 1991).

Disclaimer. Determination of m.uimum eriqu:1lce m3gnitude requires a detailed undersunding of the geology and seismology of an :u-e:l.

I Fault Name I Fault Number I Fault Type I Strike I ASSUMPTIONS: Wet Mou ntain I I N I NW Crust-20kIn

Dip - 70 desrees Downdip - 16 kIn

EJrthqu:1lce/Fault Cb3r:lcteristics EmbquakeJfault Scenmo 5-1 S-2 Sol

ToU! Fault Length (1... Ian): 7S 0 0 Surface Rupture I..cIgth (1... Ian): 38 0 0 Subsurface Rupture Width (W,Ian): 16 0 0 Rupture Area (A, sq. Ian): 608 0 0 Maximum Surface

Displacement (Dm.u, m): 0 0 0 Avenge Surface

Displacement (Dave, m): 0 0 a Slip Rate (S, mm/yt): 0 0 0

FAULT PARAME"IER. I Fault I LimiUlStd. Dcv. Equation I Computed M:lgnitude (Reference) Type I Sol I FAULT LENGTH (Slemmons, 1982) SS ~.O Ms-6.618+{).0012{L)

Std. Dcv. - 0.22 SURFACE RUPTURE LENGTH (WeUs and Coppersmith. 1994) All MW,S.2-8.1 Mw-S.08+1.1 6LogL 6.9

Std. Dev. - 0.28 SUBSURFACE RUPTURE WIDTII (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw,4.8-8.1 Mw-4.06+2.23LogW 6.8

Std. Dev. - 0.41 RUPTURE AREA (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw,4.8-7.9 Mw-4.07 +0.9SLogA 6.8

Std. Dcv. - 0.24 SURFACE DISPLACEMENT (Wells and Coppersmith. 1994) All MW,S.2-8.1 Mw-6.69+{).74LogDma..,; /INUM!

Dmaic, 0.01-14.6m Std. Dev. - 0.40

All MW,S.6-8.1 Mw-6.93+{)J!2L.ogD3ve IlNUM! Da.ve,O.OS-8.Om Std. Dcv. - OJ9

RUPTURE LENGTH AND SLIP RATE (Anderson et ai, 1996) All Mw>S.1 Mw-S.12+1.1610gL-logS /INUM!

Std. Dcv. - 0.04 to 0.12 MEAN 6.8 :; MAXIMUM 6.9 MINIMUM 6.8

Notes: I) Fault type choiees inelude: SS, strike slip: N, normal: and R. reverse. 2) FAULT LENGTH equation will function only if SS is identified adjacent to Fault Type. 3) Mw, moment magnitude: Ms, surface-wa.ve m3gnitude.

References: And=on, J.G., Wcsnousky, S.G., and Stirlin!r, r.lW., 1996, Emhqu:1lce size as a. functio offa.ult slip r:Ile: Bulletin oftlte Seismological Society of AmeriQ, v. 86, no. 3, p. 683-690. Slemmons, D.B., 1982, Determination of design eriqu:1lce magnitudes formicrozonation, Proccedings of the Third International Eanhquake Microzonation Conference, v. I, U.S. National Science Founciuicn, Washinl:!on, D.C., p. 119-130. Wells, D.L.,and Coppersmith, K.J., 1994, New empirical rela.tionships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, ruprure area, and surface displa.cement, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.. v. 84, no. 4, p. 974-1002.

S-2 I S-3

I;!NUM! IINUM!

1INmv!! .IINUM!

IINID.I! #NUM!

1INt1M! IINUM!

1INt1M! /lNUM!

1INt1M! fINm;!!

liD £V/O ! IID£V/O! 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

MAG97 - M ... <imum ~qu:!lce M~l;!Iirude

An Excel (ve," 5.0) spr~heet to compute m ... <imum e:uthqu:!lce m~snirude from user-defined fault par:uneters. Modified by R. Zepe~ (June, 1997), (rom progr:un developed·by K. Moser (Fcbruory, 1988), and modified by J. Scott (November. 1991).

Disclaimer: Determination of m:uimum e:uthqu:!lcc masnirude requires 3 detailed undent:l1lding of the geology and seismology of:l1l Jre:!.

I F3ultN=e I Fault Number I Fault Type I Strike J ASSUMPTIONS: I Alv=do I N N\V Crust - 20 Ian

Dip - 70 degrees Downdip - 16 Ian

~qu:!lce/Fault Ch=cteristics Earthqu3lce/Fault Scenario S-I S-2 Sol

Tow Fault Length (L,1cm): 83 83 0 Surface Rupture Length (L, Ian): 30 5S 0 Subsurf;).ce Rupture Width (W, 1cm): 16 16 0 Rupture Are;). (A. sq. Ian): 480 880 0 M<lximum Surface

Displacement (Dmax, m): 0 0 0 Average Surface

Displacement (Dave. m): 0 0 0 Slip Rate (S, mm/yr): 0 0 0

FAULT PARAME!ER I Fault I Limits/Std. Dev. Eqlution I Computed MJ.gn.irude (Reference) Type L S-I I S-2 I FAULT LENGTIi (Slemmons, 1982) SS Ms>Q.O Ms-6.618+0.0012(L)

Std. Dev. - 0.22 SURFACE RUPTURE L&"lGTIi (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All MW,5.2-3.1 Mw-S.08+1.16LogL 6.8 7.1

Std. Dev. - 0.28 SUBSURFACE RUPTURE WIDTIi (WellS and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw,4.8-3.1 M ........ t06 ... 2.2SLogW 6.8 6.8

SId. Dev. -0.41 RUPTURE AREA (Wells and Coppemnith, 1994) All Mw,4.S-7.9 Mw-4.07+O.98LogA 6.7 7.0

Std. Dev. - 0.24 SURFACE DISPLACE,\1ENT (Wells:llld Coppersmith, 1994) All MW,5.2-3.1 Mw-6.69+O.74LogDm ..... #NUM! /iNm.!!

Dm:u, 0.01-14.6m SId. Dev. - 0.40

All MW,S.6-3.1 Mw-6.93+O.S2LoGl):lve #NUM! #Nml! Dave, 0.OS-8.0m Std. Dev. - 0.39

RUPTURE LENGTIi AND SLIP RATE (Anderson et 31; 1996) All Mw>S.1 Mw-S.IZ"'I.1610gL-logS #NUM! #Nml!

SId. Dev. - 0.04 to 0.12 .. MEAN 6.S 6.9 MAXIMUM 6.S 1.1 MINIMUM 6.7 6.S

Notes: I) F3ult type choices include: SS, strike slip; N, normal; and R. reverse. 2) FAULT LENGTIi equ:uion will function only if SS is identified adjacent to Fault Type. 3) Mw. moment magnirude; Ms. surface-wave masnirude.

References: Anderson. J.G .• Wesnousky, S.G .• and Slirlin!;. M.W .• 1996. ~qu:!lce size as a functio of fault slip rate: Bullelin of Inc Seismological Society of Arneric;)" v. 86, no. 3. p. 683~90. Slemmon •• D.B .• 1982, Delenninalion of desiG" e:uthqu:!lce magnirudes for microzon:lIion. Proceedings oftne Third Inlernational E:uthqu:!lce Microzonation Conference. v. I, U.S. N3tional Science Foundation, Washington. D.C .• p. 119-130. Wells. D.L .. :I1Id Coppersmith. K.J .• 1994, New empirical relationships Jrnong magnirude, rupture length, ruprure width, ruprure Jrea. and surface displ3cemenl. Bulletin Oflne Seismologic:1l Society of AmeriC;!. v. S~. no. 4, p. 97~-1002.

S-3

#NUM!

#NUM!

fINm.!!

1lNUr>l!

IINmI!

#NUM!

#DlV/O! 0.0 0.0

MAG97 - MJ.~lmum E:uthqu:llce Ma.;nitude

An Excel (vcr.: S.O) sprC:1dsheet to compute m:1Ximum e:1rthqu:llce magnitude from user-defined fault p=et:r>. Modified by R. Zcped:1 (June. 1997). from progr:1lll developed by K. Moser (Febnury. 1933), and modified by 1. Scott (November. 1991).

Discl:1imer. Determination ofm:1Ximum e:1rthqu:llce magnitude ~quires a det:1iled unde=ding of the geology and seismology ofan =.

I Fault Name I Fault !'lumber , Fault Type , Strike I ASSUMPTIONS: I Rosita I I N I NW I Crust-20b

Dip - 70 degre~ Downdip - 16 km

E:uthqu:llcclFault Char:lcteristics Earthqu:llcclFault Scenario 501 S-2 S-3

Tow Fault Length (L. Ian): II 0 0 Surfac:: Rupture Length (L.1an): II 0 0 Subsurface Rupture Width (W, Ian): 16 0 0 Rupture Area (A. sq.lanl: 176 0 0 Ma.lWnum Surface

Displacement (Dmu, ml: 0 0 0 Av=ge Surf;u:e

Displaceme.'lt (Dave. ml: 0 0 0 Slip Rate (S. mmlyr): 0 0 0

FAULT PARAMETER I Fault I Limits/Std. Dev. Equation I C<lmputed Magnitude (Ref=nce) Type I 501 , FAULTLENGTI! (Slemmons. 1982) SS Ms>U.O Ms-6.618+{).OOI2(L)

Std. Dcv. - 0.22 SURFACE RUPTURE LENGTI! (Wclls and Coppernnith. 1994) All Mw.S.2-3.1 Mw-S.08+1.16LogL 6.3

Std. Dcv. -0.28 SUBSURFACE RUPTURE WIDTI! (Wells and Coppersmith. 1994) All Mw, U-3.1 Mw-4.06+ 2.2SLogW 6.8

Std. Dev. - 0.41 RUPTURE AREA (Wells and Coppernnith. 1994) All Mw,4.8-7.9 Mw-4.07+O.98LogA 6.3

Std. Dev. - 0.24 SURFACED~PLA~ffiNT

(Wells and Coppemnith. 1994) All Mw,S.2-S.1 Mw-6.69+O.74Lo~max IINUM! Dm:1X. 0.Oi-14.6m Std. Dev. - 0.40

All Mw,S.6-8.1 Mw-6.93+O.82LogDave f#NUM! Dave. 0.OS-8.0m Std. Dcv. - 0.39 .

RUPTURE LENGTI! AND SUP RA"ffi (Anderson et ai, 1996) All Mw>S.I Mw-S.12+1.16IogL-logS IINUM!

Std. Dcv. - 0.04 to 0.12 MEAN 6.4 MAXIMUM 6.8 MINIMUM 6.3

Notes: I) Fault type choices include: SS. strike slip; N, normal; and R. ~ver>e. 2) FAULT LENGTI! equ:ltion will function only if SS is identified adjac::u to Fault Type. 3) Mw, moment magnitude; Ms. surface-wave magnitude.

References: Anderson, 10 .• Wesnousky, S.O .• and Stirling, M.W .• 1996, E.uUtquake size as a functio of fault slip rate: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Amerie::!, v. 86, no. 3, p. 683-690. Slemmans. D.B., 1982. Determination of design earthqu:llce magnitudes for microzonation. Proceedings of the Third International Earthquake Microzonation Conference. v.I. U.S. National Science Founciltion. Washington. D.C .• p. 119-\30. Wells. D.L .• and Copper>mith, KJ .• 1994. New empirical relationships amcng magnitudc. rupture length, rupture width, rupture area. and surface displacement. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.. v. 84, no. 4, p. 974-1002 ..

S-2 ,

IINUM!

IINUM!

IINUM!

1lNU"1v!!

IINUM!

IINUM!

florY/a! I 0.0 I 0.0 I

S-3

IlNUM!

#NUM!

/lNUM!

#NUM!

#NUM!

IINUM!

IION/O! 0.0 0.0

MAG97 - M.3ximum Eanhqu.aJce M~gnilUde

An Excel (ven 5.0) sp=dshect to compute maximum ~qu.aJce m~gnilUde from user-defined fault pu.uneters. Modified by R. Zcpecb (June, 1997), from progr.utl developed by K. Moser (Febru.ary, 1988), and modified by 1. Scott (November, 1991).

Discl:limCT: Detennin~on of m:l.'timum c::uthquake magnilUde requires ~ deuiled undersunding of tlte geology and seismology of an =~.

I FaultN:une I F~ult Number I Fault Type I Sllik: I ASSUMPTIONS:

I Kennedy Gulch I I N I NW Crust - 20 Ian Dip - 70 debfees Downdip -16 km

Eanhquak:/Fault Ch=tcristic:: E.3zthqualc:/F~t Scenario 5-1 5-2 5-3

Tou! Fault Length (l... laD): 34 0 0 Surface Rupture Length (l...1an): 34 0 0 Subsurf:lce Rupture Widtlt (W, laD): 16 0 0 Rupture A= (A, sq. Ian): 544 0 0 Maximum Surface

Displ~cement (Dm:lX, m): 0 0 0 A vcr:Ige Su:tacc

Displacement (Dave, m): 0 0 0 Slip Rate (S, mmlyr): 0.008 0 0

FAULT PARAMElER. I Fault I limits/Sid. Ocv. Equation I Computed MagnilUde (Re(=c:) Type I S-I I FAULT LENGTIi (Slemmoas, 1982) SS ~.O Ms-6.618+O.0012(L)

SId. Dev. - 0.22 SURFACE RUl'TURE LENGTIi (Wells and Copp=ith, 1994) All MW,5.2-8.1 Mw-S.08+1.16LagL 6.9

SId. Dcv. ·0.28 SUB SURF ACE RUl'TURE WIDTII (Wells and Coppersmitlt, 1994) All Mw,4.8-8.1 Mw-4.06+2.2SLogW 6.8

Sid. Ocv.· 0.41 RUl'TURE AREA (Wells and Coppersmith, (994) All Mw,4.8-7.9 Mw-4.07+O.98LogA 6.8

Std. Dcv .• 0.24 SURFACE DISPLACE.'-1ENT (Wells and Copp=ith, 1994) All MW,5.2-8.1 Mw-6.69+0.74LogDin:l.'t IINUM!

Dm:IX, 0.01·14.6m Std. Ocv. ·0.40

All MW,S.6-8.1 Mw-6.93+O.82LogDavc IINUM! Dave, O.OS-8.Om SId. Dev.· 0.39

RUl'TURE LENGTIi AND SLIP RA1E (A.adcrson ct al, 1996) All Mw>5.1 Mw-S.l2+I.l610gL-logS 7.J

SId. Dcv.·· 0.04 to 0.12 MEAN 6.9 MAXIMUM 7.J

MINIMUM 6.8

Notes: I) F~u1t typc: choices include: SS, strike slip; N, normal; and R, reverse. 2) FAULT LENGTIi equ.ation w;U function only if SS is identified adjacent to Fault Type.

{ ;~~:S;8\ \ ..... \

3) Mw, moment m~gnilUde; Ms, surface-W:J.ve magnilUde.

References: Anderson, J.G., Wc:snausky, S.O., and Stirling, M.W., 1996, Earthquake si:.: as a f'unctia of fault slip r:lte: Bulletin oftlte Seismologic! Sociery of Amcric:l, v. 86, no. 3, p. 683-690. Slemmons, D.B., 1982, Determination of design ~quake magnilUdes for microzenation, Proceedings oftlte ihird !ntem~tional Earthquake Microzonation Conference, v. I, U.S. Natiotcl Science Foundation, Washington, D.C., p. 119·130. Wells, D.L.,and Coppersmitlt, KJ., 1994, New empiric! relationsllips amoog magnilUde, ruplUre lengtfl, ruplUre width, rupture =30

and surfa~ displ~cerncnt, Bulletin of the Seismo(ogic3l Society of America. v. 8.\, no. 4, p. 974-1002.

S-2 I

IlNUMI

IINUM!

IINUM!

IINUM!

IINUM!

IINUM!

IIDlYlO! 0.0 0.0

S-3

IINUM!

IINUM!

IINUM!

IINUM!

t4NIDtl!

IINUM!

/lDlY/O! 0.0 0.0

MAG97 - M:I."timum ~qu:!lce M~~itude

An Excel (ven 5.0) sp=dsheet to compute maximum e:uthqU3ke m~gnitude from user-<lefined fault par.uneters. Modified by R. Zepe~ (lune, 1997), from progr:un developed by K. Moser (Febru:uy, 1983), :IlId modified by 1. Scott (November, 1991).

Disclaimer. Determin~tion of maximwn e:uthqu:llc:e magnitude requires:! deuiled underst:lllding oC the geology and seismology oC an :lte:l.

I Fault Name I Fault Number I Faull T)1le I Strike I ASSUMPTIONS: I # 127 I I N I NW I Crusl - 20 Ian

Di P - 70 degrees Downdip - 16 Ian

EmhqU3keIFault O=eristies EouthqualcClFault Scenario S-I 5-2 S-3

Total Fault Length (L, Ian): 6 0 0 Surfuee Ru;lture Length (L, Ian): 6 0 0 Subsurface Rupture Width ('N, Ian): 16 0 0 Rupture Area (A. 5<1. Ian): 96 0 0 Maximum Surface

Displacement (Dm:1JC, m): 0 0 0 Av=~ Surface

DisplaeemClt (Dave, m): 0 0 0 Slip Rate (S, mmlYT): 0 0 0

FAULT PARAMETER I Fault I limits/Sid. Dev, ~on I Computed M:1gnitude (Reference) T)1le I 5-1 I FAULTLENGTII (Slemmons, 1982) SS Ms>6.0 Ms-6.618~.COI2(L)

SId. Dev. - 0.22 SURFACE RUPTURE LENGTIl ('Neils and Copp=ith. 1994) All Mw, S.2-8.1 Mw-S.08+\.I 6LogL 6.0

Sid. Dev. - 0.23 SUBSURFACE RUPTURE WIDTI! ('Neils and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw,4.!-8.1 Mw-4.06+2.2SLogW 6.!

Std. Dev. - 0.41 RUPTURE AREA ('Neils and Coppersmith. 1994) All Mw,4.S-7.9 Mw-4.07+O.9SLogA 6.0

SId. Dev. - 0.24 SURFACE DISPLACEMENT (Wells :IlId Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw, S.2·8.1 Mw-6.69~.74LogDm:l.'t IINUM!

Dmu. 0.01-14.6m SId. Dev. - 0.40

All MW,S.6-8.\ Mw-6.93+O.82LogDave IINUM! Dave,O.OS-8.0m SId. Dev. - 0.39

RUPTURE LENGTIl AND SUP RA IE (Andenon ct ai, 1996) All Mw>S.1 Mw-S.12+1.1610gL-logS /SNUM!

SId. Dev. - 0.04 10 0.12 MEAN 6.3 MAXIMUM 6.8 MINIMUM 6.0

Note:: I) Faull type choices include: SS, strike slip; N, normal; and R. revene. 2) FAULT LENGTII equ.ation will function only ifSS is identified adjacent to Faull T)1le. 3) Mw, moment magnitude; Ms, surface-wave magnitude.

References: Anderson,J.G., Wesnousky, S.G., and Stirling, M. W., 1996, ~qu:llc:e size u a functio of Cault slip rolle: Bulletin oCthe Seismological Society of Americ:s, v. 86, no. 3, p. 633-690. Slemmons, D.B., 1982, Determination of design ~qu:llc:e magnitudes Cor microzonation, l'T<lc~dings of the Third Intern:!tional E:lnhqu:llc:e Micro%onarion Conference, v. I, U.S. National Science Found:lrion, Wuhing-ron, D.C., p. 119-130. Wells, D.L.,:IlId Coppersmith. KJ., 1994, New empiric:u rel:!tionships :lmong ma&nitude, rup!U!elength, rupture width, rupture :ltea, :IlId surface displacement, Bulletin of the Seismologic:u Society of America.. v. 84, no. 4, p. 97-1-1002.

S-2 I

ISNUM!

#NUM!

/SNUM!

/SNUM!

/SNUM!

ISNID.!!

IIDlV/O! 0.0 0.0

S-3

IINUM!

IINUM!

IINUM!

ISNUM!

IINUM!

ISNUM!

#DlV/O! 0.0 0.0

MAG97 - M3l<imum E:uthqu~e Magnitude

An Excel (ve~ S.O) spre:1dsheet to compute m3l<imum C3tthqu~e magnitude from user-defined fault par:unete~.

Modified by R. Z':ped3 (lune, 1997), from pro~ developed by K. Moser (Febru.uy, 1988), and modified by I. SCOIt (November, 1991).

Discl:iliner: Determination of m3. .. imum C3tthqu~e magnitude requires a deuiled undcr:;~ding of the geology and seismology of an are:!.

I Fault Name I Fault Number I Fault Type I Strike I ASSUMPTIONS:

I S3ngre de Cristo I I N I NW I Crust - 20 Ian Dip - 70 degrees

Downdip - 16 Ian

E:uthq~e/F ault Char.lC!cristi~ Eanhqualce/Fault Scenario

5-1 S-2 S-J Tot:u Fault Length (l.. Ian): 130 IJO a Surf:1ce Rupture Length (l.. Ian): 3S SO a Subsurface Rupture Width (VI, Ian): 16 16 a Rupture Are:1 (A. sq. Ian): S60 800 a M:JXimum Surface

Displacement (Dm:IX. m): 0 0 0

Ave"'ge Surf:1Ce Displacement (Dave, m): a 0 0

Slip Rate (S, mm/yr): 0 0 a

FAULTPARAME1ER I Fault I Limits/Std. Dev. Equation I Computed Magnitude

(Reference) Type I 5-1 I S-2 I FAULT LENGTIi (Slcmmons, 1981) SS Ms>6.0 Ms-6.618+O.00 1 2(L)

Std. Dev. - 0.22

SURFACE RUPnJRE LENGTIi

(Wdll and Coppernnith. 1994) All Mw, S.2-8.1 Mw-S.08+1.16LogL 6.9 7.1

Std. Dev. - 0.28

SUBSURFACE RUPnJRE wtD1H (Wells and Coppe~mith, 1994) All Mw,4.S-8.1 Mw-4.06+2.2SLogW 6.! 6.!

Std. Dev. - 0.41

RUPnJRE AREA (Wells and Coppe=ith, 1994) All Mw,4.!-7.9 Mw-4.07+o.98LogA. 6.8 6.9

Std. Dev. - 0.24

SURFACE DlSPLACE."1ENT

(Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All MW,5.2-8.1 Mw-6.69+0.74LogDmax #NUM! #NUM!

DrulL",O.01-14.6m

Std. Dev. - 0.40 All Mw,5.6-8.1 Mw-6.9J+O.!2LogDave #NUM! #NUM!

Dave, a .OS-8.0m

Std. Dev. - 0.39

RUP1UR.E LENGTIi AND SLIP RATE (Anderson et ai, 1996) All Mw>S.l Mw-S.l2+I.l610gL-logS #NUM! #NUM!

Std. Dev. - 0.04 to 0.12

MEAN 6.S 6.9

MAXIMUM b 6.9 7.1

MINIMUM 6.8 6.8

Nates: I) Fault type choices include: 55, strike slip: N, nonno!; and R.. reverse.

2) FAULT LENGTIi eqU:1tion will function only ieSS is identified adjacent to Fault Type.

3) Mw, moment ma!:llitude; Ms, surface-wave ru3!;1litude.

References:

Anderson,I.G., Wesnousky, S.G., and Stirling, M.W., 1996, Eanhqu~e size as a functio oHault slip .",te: Bulletin oft.'1e Seismological

Society of America. v. 86, no. 3, p. 683-690.

Slemmons, D.B., 1982, Determination of design e:1r1hqu~e magnitudes for microzanation, Proceedin(l.S of the Third lntemationo!

E:uthqu~e Microzanation Conferellce, v. I, U.S. National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C., p. 119-IJO.

Wells, D.L.,3nd Coppersmith, KJ., 1994, New empiriQ! relationships among magnitude, rupture length, rupture width, rupture area,

and surface displacement. Bulletin of the SeismologiQ! Society of America. v. 8-', no. -', p. 9H-1002.

S-J

#NUM!

IINUM!

#NUM!

1INm1!

#NUM!

#NUM!

/lorY/a! ·0.0

0.0

\ ,

....

MAG97 • M:I.~imwn EJrthqU.1ke Mlllllicude

An Excel (ven S.O) spre:u!sheet to compute muimum e:uthqu:llce magniru~e fTem user-<lefined fault p=eters. Modified by R. UpedJ (Iune, 1997), from progr:un developed by K. Moser (February, 1988), Jnd modified by I. SCOII (November, 1991).

Disclaimer: Determination of m:L'Cimwn e:uthqU.1kc mJgnitude requires a detailed understlnding of the genlollY Jnd seismology of In area.

I FaultNarne I Flult NWIlber I Fault Type I Slnke ASSUMPTIONS:

I 1/ Isa I I N I WNW Crust-20km

Dip - 70 degrees Downdip -16 Ian

EarthquakeIFault Ch=cteristics EarthqU.1keIFault Scenario S-I So2 S-3

Tow Fault Length (L, Ian); 4 a a Surf.1cc Rupture Length (L, Ian): 4 a a Subsurf.1ce Rupture Width (W,Ian); 16 16 a Rupture Are:! (A. sq. Ian): 64 a a Maximum Surface

Displacement (Dmax, m); a a a Average Sumce

Displacement (Dave, m); 0 0 0 Slip Rate (S, mm/yr): 0 0 0

FAULT P AR.AME1ER. I Fault I limits/Sid. Dev. Equation I Computed Magnirude

(Reference) Type I S-I I FAULT LENGTH (Slemmons, 1982) SS ~.O Ms-6.618~.OO 12(L)

Std. Dev. - 0.22 SURFACE RUPTURE LENGTH (Wells JndCoppersmith, 1994) All Mw, S.2-8.1 Mw-S.08+1.l6LogL S.8

Std. Dev. - 0.28 SUBSURFACE RUPTIIRE WIDTH (Wells Jnd Coppernnith, 1994) All Mw,4.8-8.1 Mw-4.06+2.2SLogW 6.8

Std. Dev. - 0.41 RUPTIIRE AREA (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw,4.8-7.9 Mw-4.07 ~.98LogA S.S

Sed. Dev. - 0.24

SURFACE DISPLACE."IENT (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw, S.2-8.1 M-o.69+<l.74LogDm:IX #NUM!

Dm:lX, 0.01·14.6m

Std. Dev. - 0.40 All Mw,S.6-8.1 Mw-6.93~.82LogOave 1rntI?!!

Dave, 0.OS-8.0m Std. Dev. - 0039

RUPTIIRE LENGTH AND SLIP RATE

(Anderson et ai, 1996) All Mw>S.1 Mw-S.12+1.1610gL-IogS I#NUM! Std. Dev. - 0.04 to 0.12

MEAN 6.1

MAXIMUM b 6.8

MINIMUM 5.8

Notes;

I) Fault type choices include: SS, strike slip; N, normal; Jnd It. reverse.

2) FAULT LENGTH eq~tion will function only ifSS is identified adjacent to Fault Type. 3) Mw, moment magnitude; Ms, surface·wave magnitude.

References: Anderson, I.G., Wesnousky, S.G., Jnd Stirling, M.W., 1996, Em!lqtl:llcc size as a functio o{fault slip rate: Bulletin of me Seismologieal Society of Americ3. v. S6, no. 3, p. 683..090. Slemmons. D.B., 1982, Determination of design e:uthqu:llce magnirudes for microzonation, Proceedings of the Third International

E.uthqu:llce Microzonation Conference, v. I, U.S. National Science FoundJtion, Washington, D.C., p. 119-130.

Wells. D.L .. Jnd Coppersmith. KJ., 1994, New empirical relationships among magnirude, rupture lenSth, ruprure width, rupture area,

Jnd surface displacement, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. v. 84, no. 4, p. 974-1002 ..

S-2 I

I#NUM!

6.S

I#NUM!

I#NUM!

1rntI?!!

tmUM!

6.8

6.a 6.8

. So3

IINUM!

/IN'm.1!

tmUM!

1INmt!!

#NtJ?o,!!

IINUM!

IIDlV/O!

0.0 0.0

lI-lAG97 - M:lXimum ~qtuke lI-ugnitude

An E.'(ccl (ven s.a) spre~dshect to compute m:IXimum crthqtuke mJgnitude from uscr~efined fault p:u:uneters. Modified by R. L:pcdJ (June. 1997), from progr:un developed by K. Moser (Febru:uy, 198!). md modified by 1. SCOI! (November, 1991).

Discl:umer: Determination of maximum e:uthquake magnirude requires a deuiled understmding of the geology md seismology of m :Ite1.

I Fault I-bme I Fault Number I Fault Type Strike I ASSUMPTIONS:

I SJwatch I I N I NS I Crust - 20 Ian Dip - 70 degrees Downdip - 16 Ian

ElrthquakeIFault Ch:ll":lctcristies E.uthquakelFault Scenario 5-1 5-2 S-3

Tot:ll FJult Length (L, Ian): 4S 0 0 Surface Rupture Length (L,1cm): 45 ·0 0 Subsurface Rupture Width CW. Ian): 16 16 0 Rupture Are:! (A. sq. Ian): 720 0 0 Maximum SurfJce

Displacement (Dmu, m): 0 0 0 Average Surface

Displacement (Dave., m): 0 0 0 Slip Rate (S, mm/yt"): 0 0 0

FAULT PARAME1ER. I Fault I UmitslStd. Dev. Equation I Computed Magnirude (Reference) Type I 5-1 1 FAULTLENGTIi (Slcmmons.1982) SS Ms>6.0 Ms-6.6I 8+0.00 I 2(L)

Std. Dev. - O.n SURFACE RUP1'UR.E LENGTIi (Wells and Coppenmith, 1994) All Mw,5.2-3.1 Mw-5.08+-1.16LogL 7.0

Std. Dev. - 0.23 SUBSURFACE RtJPTIIRE WIDTII (Wells and Coppersmith. 1994) All Mw,4.3-8.1 Mw-4.06+-2.2SLogW 6.!

Std. Dev. - 0041 RUP1'UR.E AREA (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw,4.8-7.9 Mw-4.07+O.98LogA 6.9

Std. Dev. - 0.2~

SURFACE DISPLACEMENT (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw,5.2-8.1 Mw-6.69+O. 74LogDm:IX IlNUM!

Dmu, 0.01-14.6m Std. Dev. - 0.40

All Mw,5.6-8.1 Mw-6.93+O.S2LogDJve /lNUM! Dave.O.OS-8.Om Std. Dev. - 0.39

RUP1'UR.E LENGTIi AND SLIP RATE (Andenon et ai, 1996) All Mw>S.1 Mw-S.I2+-I.l610gL-logS #NUM!

Std. Dev. - 0.04 to 0.12 MEAN 6.9 MAXIMUM 7.0 MINIMUM 6.S

Notes: I) FJult type ehoices include: SS. strike slip; N, normal: md R. reverse. 2) FAULT LENGTIi equation will function only if SS is identified adjacent to Fault Type. 3) Mw, moment magnitude: Ms. surface-wJve mJgnitude.

References: Andenon, J.G., Wesnousky, S.G., md Stirling, M.W., 1996. E.ut!!quake size as a Cunctio offault slip ro1le: Bulletin of the Seismologieal Society of Amerie. v. 86. no. 3, p. 683-690. Slemmons. D.B., 1982. DeterminJtion of design e:utltquake magnirudes for mieromnJoon. Proeeedings of the Third international ~quake Microzon:1tion Conference. v. I, U.s. National Sciene: Foundltion, Washington, D.C., p. 119-130. Wells. D.L .. md Coppersmith. K.1., 1994. New empirical relationships among magnirude, ruprure length. rupture width. rupture :lI"e~ md surface displJcement. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Amenc:1, v. 84, no. 4. p. 974-1002.

. S-2 I S-3

fINUM! I#NUM!

6.3 . MNUM!

#NUM! /lNUM!

#NUM! #NUM!

llNU!\.!! IINUM!

IINUM! MNUM!

6.8 IID£V/O!

6.S 0.0 6.8 0.0

MAG97 - MJ.'Cimum E.lrtJIqu:lke ~bgnirude

An Excel (ven S.O) spre::dsheel to com pule m:uimum e:uthqualce magnirude from user-defined faull panmetrn. Modified by R. ZepecU (June, 1997), from progr::m developed by K. Moser (February, 1988), and modified by J. Scott (November, 1991).

Disclaimer: Detennin:lIion of m:uimum c::rthquake magnirude require: a det:1iled und=ding of the geology md seismology of mare:>.

I F::ullNarne I Fault Number I Fault Type I Strike I ASSUMPTIONS:

I /I 184 I I N I NW Crust -20 Ian Dip - 70 desrees Downdip - 16 \em

E:inhquakcIF::ull Clur:IC:cristics E:anhquakcIF:wl1 Scen:uio S-I 5-2 Sol

Toul Fault ~gth (L. km): 71 0 0 Surf:ICC Rupture ~gth (L. Ian): 71 0 0 Subsurface Rupture Width (W, km): 16 16 0 Rupture Alea (A. sq. Ian): 1116 0 0 Maximum Surface

Displacemenl (Dm:u:. m): 0 0 0 Avcr::gc Surface

Displacement (Dave, m): 0 0 0 Slip R.1te (S, mmlyr): 0 0 0

FAULT PARA..\1E1ER I Fault I Limits/SId. Dev. Equation. I Compuled Magnirude (Reference) Type I S-I I 5-2 t FAULT LENG1H (Slemmons, 1982) SS ~.O Ms-6.6 I 8+0.00 12(L)

Std. Dcv. - 0.22 SURfACE RUPTURE LENG1H (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw, S.2-8.1 Mw-S.OS+1.I6LogL 7.2 #NUM!

Std. Dev. - 0.28 SUBSURfACE RUPTURE WIDTH (Wells md Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw,4.8-8.1 Mw-4.06+ 2.2SLo!lW 6.8 6.3

SId. Dev .• 0.41 RUPTURE AREA (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994) All Mw,4.S-7.9 Mw-4.07+O.98LogA 7.1 #NUM!

Std. Dev. ·0.24 SURfACE DlSPLACE.\1ENT (Wells and Coppmmit!t, 1994) All Mw,S.2-3.1 Mw-6.69+O.74LogDmJ.'C /#NUM! #NUM!

Dm:u, 0.01-14.6m Sid. Dcv. - 0.40

All Mw,S.6-S.1 Mw-6.93+O.32LogDave #NUM! #NUM! Dave,O.OS-8.0m Std. Dev. - OJ9

RUPTURE LENG1H AND SLIP RATE (Ande~on el ai, (996) All Mw>S.1 Mw-S.12+1.1610gL-logS fINm,!! #NUM!

Std. Dcv. - 0.04 to 0.12 MEAN 7.0 I 6.8

MAXIMUM 7.2 I 6.3 MINIMUM 6.3 I 6.3

Notes: I) Fault type choices include: SS. strike slip: N. nonnal: and R. reverse. 2) FAULT LENG1H equation will function only ifSS is identified adjacent to Faull Type. 3) Mw, moment magnirude: Ms. surface·w::ve magnirude.

References: Anderson. I.G .• Wesnousky, S.G., md Stirling, M. W., 1996. Earthquake size as a functio of faul! slip r:1le: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ:1. v. 86, no. 3, p. 683-690. Slemmons, D.B .• 1982. Detennin::tion of design c::rthquake magnirudes for microzonation. Proceedings of the Third International E:uthquake Micrazonatian Ca~ference, v. I, U.S. Nation:iJ Science Foundation. Washington, D.C., p. 119-130. Wells. D.L.,md Coppersmith, KJ .• 1994, New empiric::1 relationships l/IIang m::gnirude, ruprure le::!;th, ruprure width. ruprure are::, and surf~ce displ~cement. Bulletin of the Seismalogic~1 Society of AmeriC:1. v. 34. no. 4, p. 914-1002.

S-3

IINUM!

fINID,!!

#NUM!

IINm.!!

frnID,!!

#Nm.1!

#D£V/O! 0.0 0.0