Roger Hansen and Susan McLean M&M Co-chairs

Authority◦ The M&M Subcommittee is the primary mechanism

for NTHMP partner input to the mapping, modeling, and hazard components of the NTHMP.

◦ The subcommittee’s actions and recommendations will be achieved by consensus, and considered to represent the collective will of those partners.

◦ This authority is established within the context of PL 109-424 and subject to the provisions of Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Act, most particularly Section 5(c1).

Chairpersons◦ Approved by a majority of the NTHMP Coordinating Committee ◦ Include a representative from NOAA and a from one of the member

States◦ Serve 2 years with rotation staggered to maintain leadership continuity

subcommittee members can recommend a 1-year extension Roger Hansen, Alaska (November 2006) Susan McLean, NOAA/NGDC (November 2007)

Communications◦ Take place primarily by email and conference calls although specific

subcommittee meetings are encouraged. ◦ Notes and Action Items will be maintained by the Chairpersons and

posted to the NTHMP web site. ◦ Completion of actions will be coordinated by the Chairpersons. ◦ Recommendations will be forwarded to the appropriate organizations

by the Chairpersons.

Sub-action Status Referencea. Available grids used for modeling; relevant information about grids used in modeling (whether forecast or inundation/evacuation mapping and modeling); Underway

Boulder_Benchmarking_Actions_rev1.docb. Model computer codes for use by partners in the

NTHMP that have responsibility for modeling and mapping; Underwayc. Input resolution of bathymetry and topography used to develop grids Underway

Action: Propose recommendations to the NTHMP CC on how a process could be established for sharing and archiving Mapping and Modeling information across all NTHMP.

Sub-action Status Referencea.       Inventory available mapping and modeling information & products, giving consideration to available grids and associated information about these grids [see CC Action 1], relevant model computer code [see CC Action 1] and standards for use

UnderwayNTHMP DEM Web Map beta release

b.      Develop recommendations for the broader NTHMP for inundation maps

Underway Focus 2009 Subcommittee

Action: Assess the issues, requirements, and mechanisms related to production of inundation maps. Clarify what is being requested and outcomes expected. Identify risks or issues associated with sharing the identified information. Develop recommendations for the broader NTHMP committee to consider on how a process could be established for sharing this information to advance research and manage operations

Action Status Reference

Determine the applicability of PMELs forecast effort to NTHMP inundation mapping and mitigation Underway Report_to_CC_11Sept_

Final.doc

Determine a method of prioritizing NTHMP DEM development nationwide Underway Report_to_CC_11Sept_

Final.doc

Action: Assess the issues, requirements, and mechanisms related to production of inundation maps. Clarify what is being requested and outcomes expected. Identify risks or issues associated with sharing the identified information. Develop recommendations for the broader NTHMP committee to consider on how a process could be established for sharing this information to advance research and manage operations

Action Description Lead Participants Due Date Status Date Comp Comments

1Finalize Terms of Reference for the M&M Subcommittee

Co-Chairs

M&M11-Sep-

08Complete 11-Sep-08

M-MTerms of Reference-rev3.doc

2

Identify common practices and requirements for benchmarking models

Co-Chairs

M&M11-Sep-

08Complete 11-Sep-08

Boulder_Benchmarking_Actions_rev1.doc

3

Agree on a methodology to develop procedures for NTHMP model benchmarking & validation.

Co-Chairs

M&M11-Sep-

08Complete 11-Sep-08

Boulder_Benchmarking_Actions_rev1.doc

Action Description Lead Participants Due Date Status Date

Comp Comments

4

NGDC send an e-mail clarifying requirements for sharing through the DEM portal

Barry Eakins

M&M18-Sep-

08Complete

19-Sep-08

e-mail sent 19 September

5

Establish a web site containing all benchmarking events and data (provided by PMEL) to enable M&M Modelers to benchmark models.

Vasily Titov

M&M Modelers

1-Oct-08

CompleteModelers tasked to check web site

6Identify what relief data PMEL used for Sitka

Chris Moore

Vasily Titov1-Oct-

08Complete

17 Sep 08

Information sent to Elena

7

States / PMEL send footprints of existing and desired DEMs to NGDC. Existing DEMs require additional input as defined in 19 Sep e-mail to make them accessible through NGDC DEM portal.

M&MBarry Eakins

15-Oct-08

UnderwayPMEL sent DEMs to NGDC 10/10/08; OR, CA, WA, HI responded

Action Description Lead Participants Due Date StatusDate Comp

Comments

8

State Representatives identify the necessary minimum inputs, model outputs, products and metadata to ensure reproducible results, including volume and most likely update schedules for archive

M&M Modelers

Susan McLean

15-Oct-08Underway

Initial responses received from OR, WA, HI, CA; NGDC collating

9

States develop current priority list for community inundation mapping needs; send to co-chairs

M&M Co-chairs 15-Oct-08Underway

Initial responses received from OR, HI, CA; WA working with new EM; NGDC collating

10

States develop current list of available inundation mapping and modeling information & products, send to co-chairs

M&M Co-chairs 15-Oct-08Underway

Action Description Lead ParticipantsDue Date

Status Date Comp Comments

11

Investigate development of a common, updatable database of scientifically valid sources and what constitutes “scientifically valid” for a source

Rick Wilson M&M 1-Nov-08 Complete 3-Nov-08 CA-sourcedb document

12

Investigate development of a mechanism to continue scientific discussions and updates to source database, potentially establishing CA forum

Rick Wilson M&M 1-Nov-08 Complete 3-Nov-08

California Geological Survey (CGS) has the ability to construct and maintain a website to house the database along with establishing a format for discussing the scenarios

13M&M develop a proposal for a multi-State pilot project Proposal due by for National Meeting

Roger Hansen

Rob Whitter, Megan Craw, Rick Wilson and others?

10-Nov-08

Final day to submit is 30 Nov 08. Proposals must demonstrate how requested funding supports NTHMP performance metrics and milestones

14

NGDC determine resources needed to support archive and versioning, including State partnerships, and provide an estimate of cost.

Susan McLean M&M 10-Nov-

08

Proposal to host an M&M Subcommittee Meeting between the National Meetings

Focus of Meeting: Establishing Subcommittee Terms of Reference and develop methodology to address M&M issues related to DEM priorities, Benchmarking Models, Code sharing, Best practices, and Archive

Meeting Dates: 9-11 Sep 2008 Boulder, CO◦ Amount Received: $26,260.00

◦ Date Received: 22 May 2008

◦ Amount Spent: $14,432.55

◦ Remainder to be applied to 2009 Subcommittee or DEM Workshop

M&M considers the PMEL forecast effort has limited applicability in its current form for mitigation. The applicability could be substantially increased, in those cases where the States work directly and collaboratively with PMEL to identify a community driven process that includes:◦ priorities, ◦ source scenarios (local and distant), ◦ model parameters◦ high-resolution SIFT DEMs, and ◦ results in State products and coverage for the communities

To evaluate further the applicability, M&M requires a: ◦ A “definition of mitigation” from the Mitigation and Education Subcommittee

(action assigned to M&ESC at the June 18, 2008 CC meeting) and ◦ A better understanding of the PMEL forecast modeling process and how this

process could support State inundation mapping for mitigation (see action items 2 and 3).

The existing list of priority forecast areas is a good starting point for developing a National DEM priority list

To expand the existing list, M&M will undertake the following actions.◦ Identify existing areas with public DEMs (NTHMP DEM Portal & listing)◦ States develop priority list for community inundation mapping needs◦ Compare requirements and develop list of unmet needs ◦ M&M develop process of prioritization

Begin at November National NTHMP meeting and finalize at M&M meeting Based on criteria to be determined, but possibly including: hazard level,

data quality and availability, forecast requirement, partnerships◦ NGDC and State partners communicate needs and priorities to data

collection agencies

Beta viewer (under review)◦ NGDC Hosting ◦ Contains all NOAA

completed & planned tsunami DEMs

◦ Currently populating with State completed, planned, required DEMs

◦ Identify and link to / download DEM and project information

NGDC (funded by NOAA) currently archives◦ DART & Tide gauge high-resolution data & metadata (non-real time)◦ Historical tsunami event and runup data◦ Historical impacts photos◦ Coastal tsunami DEMs (and associated data)◦ Coastal LiDAR data

◦ NOAA Archive growth from 12GB (2006) to 3,800 GB (2008) NTHMP data NOT addressed in archive

◦ Inputs: deformation files, configuration files for grids, model input parameters, model source code or description, additional bathymetry / topography, flow depth grids, inundation grids

◦ Outputs: Gridded water fluxes and total depth, inundation zones for scenarios, flow depths on dry land, time series at given points, post-processed inundation line and flow depth grid, GIS projects, technical reports, final inundation products

Estimated volume & cost TBD

AK◦ Minimum Inputs: deformation files, configuration files for grids, model parameters, e.g. Coriolis parameter, friction coefficient,

minimal total depth for inundation modeling, and time steps.  

◦ Total size of all grids needed for one run: about 500 Mb.

◦ Model source code including PETSc library: 100 Mb 

◦ Outputs: Gridded water fluxes and total depth, inundation zones for every tsunami scenario, flow depths on dry land, time series at given points (about 500 Mb).

HI Minimum Input:

◦ Bathymetry/Topography grids (with appropriate metadata) Volume: 350 – 550 Mb (See Table 2 in Action 7)

◦ Model source code (or compiled executable file) Volume: 1Mb total (code is not open source)

◦ Model input parameters such as friction, timesteps, grid sizes/resolution, output specifications, etc.

◦ Input source deformation parameters (initial tsunami generation mechanism)

◦ Description of source code, equations and computer used (publication or technical report)

◦ Total Input Data Volume: 350 – 550 Mb  Minimum Output for reproducible results:

◦ Initial tsunami wave elevation grid Volume: 60 – 75 Mb

◦ Summary of nearshore wave conditions (flow depth, runup/inundation grids) Volume: 10 – 20 Mb

◦ Summary of nearshore wave elevation time series grid (could skip because of space considerations) Volume: 200 – 650 Mb

◦ Post-processed inundation line and flow depth grid generated from model output Volume: 5 – 10 Mb

◦ Technical report describing post-processing methodology Total Output Data Volume: 80 – 750 Mb

CA◦ Minimum Inputs: Bathymetric grids, flow depth grids, inundation grids, source input data

◦ Outputs: Max flow depth grids, max inundation grids, max wave elevation grids, expanded wave elevation, pre-field max inundation line, various DEM grids, final inundation line

OR: all plus- GIS database w/ metadata; Wave height & velocity time series, 2-D and 3-D animations, technical reports

ALL – tsunami inundation products (i.e. tsunami hazard and inundation maps,