Mapping and Modeling Subcommittee Update Roger Hansen and

Mapping and Modeling Subcommittee Update Roger Hansen and Susan Mc. Lean M&M Co-chairs

Overview of Terms of Reference 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(c 1).

Overview of Terms of Reference 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 Mc. Lean, 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.

Action Item Status – Coordinating Committee Actions 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 a. Available grids used for modeling; relevant information about grids used in modeling (whether forecast or inundation/evacuation mapping and Underway modeling); b. Model computer codes for use by partners in the NTHMP that have responsibility for modeling and Underway mapping; c. Input resolution of bathymetry and topography used to Underway develop grids Reference Boulder_Benchmarki ng_Actions_rev 1. doc

Action Item Status – Coordinating Committee Actions 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 Sub-action Status a. Inventory available mapping and modeling information & products, giving consideration to available grids and associated information about these grids [see Underway CC Action 1], relevant model computer code [see CC Action 1] and standards for use Reference b. Develop recommendations for the broader NTHMP for inundation maps Focus 2009 Subcommittee Underway NTHMP DEM Web Map beta release

Action Item Status – Coordinating Committee Actions 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 Determine the applicability of PMELs forecast effort to Underway NTHMP inundation mapping and mitigation Determine a method of prioritizing NTHMP DEM development nationwide Underway Reference Report_to_CC_11 Sept_ Final. doc

Action Item Status – M&M Actions Action Description 1 2 3 Finalize Terms of Reference for the M&M Subcommittee Identify common practices and requirements for benchmarking models Agree on a methodology to develop procedures for NTHMP model benchmarking & validation. Lead Participants Due Date Status Date Comp Comments Co. M&M Chairs 11 -Sep. Complete 08 11 -Sep- M-MTerms of 08 Reference-rev 3. doc Co. M&M Chairs 11 -Sep. Complete 08 11 -Sep- Boulder_Benchmarki 08 ng_Actions_rev 1. doc

Action Item Status – M&M Actions Action 4 5 6 7 Description NGDC send an e-mail clarifying requirements for sharing through the DEM portal Establish a web site containing all benchmarking events and data (provided by PMEL) to enable M&M Modelers to benchmark models. Identify what relief data PMEL used for Sitka 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. Lead Participants Barry M&M Eakins Vasily Titov M&M Modelers Chris Vasily Titov Moore M&M Due Date Status 18 -Sep. Complete 08 Date Comp 19 -Sep- e-mail sent 19 08 September 1 -Oct. Complete 08 15 -Oct. Barry Eakins Underway 08 Comments Modelers tasked to check web site 17 Sep 08 Information sent to Elena PMEL sent DEMs to NGDC 10/10/08; OR, CA, WA, HI responded

Action Item Status – M&M Actions Action Description 8 9 10 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 Lead Participants Due Date Status M&M 15 -Oct. Susan Mc. Lean Underway Modelers 08 States develop current priority list for community inundation M&M mapping needs; send to co-chairs States develop current list of available inundation mapping and modeling M&M information & products, send to co-chairs Co-chairs 15 -Oct. Underway 08 Date Comp Comments Initial responses received from OR, WA, HI, CA; NGDC collating Initial responses received from OR, HI, CA; WA working with new EM; NGDC collating

Action Item Status – M&M Actions Action Description Lead Participants 11 Investigate development of a common, updatable database of Rick scientifically valid sources and what Wilson constitutes “scientifically valid” for a source 12 Investigate development of a mechanism to continue scientific Rick discussions and updates to source Wilson database, potentially establishing CA forum 13 M&M develop a proposal for a multi-State pilot project Proposal due by for National Meeting 14 NGDC determine resources needed to support archive and versioning, Susan M&M including State partnerships, and Mc. Lean provide an estimate of cost. M&M Due Date Status 1 -Nov-08 Complete Rob Whitter, Roger Megan Craw, 10 -Nov. Hansen Rick Wilson and 08 others? 10 -Nov 08 Date Comp Comments 3 -Nov-08 CA-sourcedb document California Geological Survey (CGS) has the ability to construct and maintain a 3 -Nov-08 website to house the database along with establishing a format for discussing the scenarios Final day to submit is 30 Nov 08. Proposals must demonstrate how requested funding supports NTHMP performance metrics and milestones

M&M FY 08 Funding Report 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

Selected Outcomes - Modeling 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).

Selected Outcomes – DEM Priorities 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

Focus: NTHMP DEM Viewer 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

Focus: Tsunami Data Archive 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 Li. DAR data ◦ NOAA Archive growth from 12 GB (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, postprocessed inundation line and flow depth grid, GIS projects, technical reports, final inundation products Estimated volume & cost TBD

Questions or Comments?

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: ◦ ◦ ◦ CA ◦ ◦ Model source code (or compiled executable file) Volume: 1 Mb 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: ◦ ◦ ◦ Bathymetry/Topography grids (with appropriate metadata) Volume: 350 – 550 Mb (See Table 2 in Action 7) 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 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,