Pilot Implementation of Seismic Hazard Assessment at Regional and Local Scales Deliverable No.: D.03.01, Vol. 1 GA3. Earthquake, Landslide and Flood Hazard Assessment: Implementation at Regional and Local scales, Activities A.3.3 & A.3.6 OVERALL RESPONSIBLE for GA.3: Democritus University of Thrace (P.1) RESPONSIBLE for A.3.3 & A.3.6: P2 (EPPO –ITSAK) INVOLVED PARTNERS: ALL Project Details Programme Black Sea JOP Priority and Measure Priority 2 (Sharing resources and competencies for environmental protection and conservation), Measure 2.1. (Strengthening the joint knowledge and information base needed to address common challenges in the environmental protection of river and maritime systems) Objective Development of a Scientific Network A Scientific Network for Earthquake, Project Title Landslide and Flood Hazard Prevention Project Acronym SCInet NatHaz Contract No MIS-ETC 2614 Lead Partner TEI OF KENTRIKI MAKEDONIA, GREECE Total Budget 700.000,00 Euro (€) Time Frame Start Date – End Date 01/05/2013 – 30/11/2015 Book Captain: K. PAPATHEODOROU (TEI KENTRIKI MAKEDONIA) Contributing Authors: Deliverable-No. D.03.01 – Vol 1 Final version Issue: I.01 Date: 04 February 2016 Page: 2 of 222 Document Release Sheet Book captain: K. PAPATHEODOROU (TEI KENTRIKIS Sign Date MAKEDONIAS) 04.02.2016 Approval K. PAPATHEODOROU (TEI KENTRIKIS Sign Date MAKEDONIAS) 04.02.2016 Approval ATTILA ANSAL (KOERI/BOGAZICI Sign Date UNIVERSI) UNIVERSITY) 04.02.2016 Approval N. KLIMIS (DEMOCRITUS UNIVERSITY Sign Date of THRAKI) 04.02.2016 Approval B. MARGARIS (EPPO/ITSAK) Sign Date 04.02.2016 Approval V. NENOV (“ASSEN ZLATAROV” Sign Date UNIVERSITY) 04.02.2016 Approval L. TOFAN (“OVIDIUS” UNIVERSITY) Sign Date 04.02.2016 Approval A. SIDORENKO (“Dr. GHITU” Sign Date INSTITUTE ACAD. of SCIENCES 04.02.2016 Approval K. STEPANOVA (BSB UEAS) Sign Date 04.02.2016 Deliverable-No. D.03.01 – Vol 1 Final version Issue: I.01 Date: 04 February 2016 Page: 3 of 217 RECORD of REVISIONS Issue/Rev Date Page(s) Description of Change Release Deliverable-No. D.03.01 – Vol 1 Final version Issue: I.01 Date: 04 February 2016 Page: 4 of 222 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 BACKGROUND OF THE DOCUMENT 13 1.1 GENERAL NOTE 13 1.2 SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES 13 1.3 RELATED DOCUMENTS 13 1.3.1 INPUT 13 1.3.2 OUTPUT 13 2 INTRODUCTION 14 3 SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT 15 3.1 METHODOLOGY 15 3.1.1 PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT 18 3.1.2 DETERMINISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT 21 4 REGIONAL AND LOCAL SCALE SEISMIC HAZARD APPLICATIONS 22 4.1 GREECE 22 4.1.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON SEISMIC HAZARD MAPS IN GREECE 22 4.1.2 SEISMICITY & SEISMOTECTONICS OF THE AREA. 29 4.1.3 EMPIRICAL PREDICTIVE RELATIONS OF MACROSEISMIC INTENSITIES 34 4.1.4 DISTRIBUTION OF MAXIMUM MACROSEISMIC INTENSITIES IN THE STUDY AREA 41 4.1.5 INFORMATION OF EMPIRICAL PREDICTIVE RELATIONS OF HORIZONTAL PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION 42 4.1.6 REGIONAL SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT 49 4.1.7 DISTRIBUTION OF MAXIMUM VALUES OF GROUND PARAMETERS 57 4.1.8 COMPARISON FOR SITE SPECIFIC ON STATISTICAL TREATMENT OF OBSERVED INTENSITIES 61 4.1.9 LOCAL SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT 63 REFERENCES 71 APPENDIX 1 77 4.2 TURKEY 83 4.2.1 INTRODUCTION 84 4.2.2 SEISMICITY 85 4.2.3 TECTONICS OF THE REGION 86 4.2.4 TECTONIC SETTING OF THE MARMARA REGION 88 4.2.5 TECTONIC SETTING OF BLACK SEA REGION 90 4.2.6 SEISMIC SOURCE ZONATION 94 4.2.7 SEISMIC SOURCE ZONATION FOR ISTANBUL AND TEKIRDAG (MARMARA REGION) 94 4.2.8 SEISMIC SOURCE ZONATION FOR SAMSUN PROVINCE (TURKEY) 95 Deliverable-No. D.03.01 – Vol 1 Final version Issue: I.01 Date: 04 February 2016 Page: 5 of 222 4.2.9 METHODOLOGY OF PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT 96 4.2.10 TIME-DEPENDENT APPROACH USED FOR MARMARA REGION 97 4.2.11 THE TIME-INDEPENDENT (POISSON) APPROACH USED FOR SAMSUN PROVINCE (TURKEY) 99 4.2.12 EARTHQUAKE RECURRENCE MODELS FOR MARMARA REGION 100 4.2.13 EARTHQUAKE RECURRENCE MODEL FOR TURKEY 101 4.2.14 GROUND MOTION PREDICTION EQUATIONS 102 4.2.15 HAZARD MAPS FOR MARMARA REGION 104 4.2.16 HAZARD MAPS FOR THE SAMSUN PROVINCE (TURKEY) 108 REFERENCES 110 4.3 BULGARIA 115 4.3.1 COUNTRY, PROJECT AREA IN THE COUNTRY 115 4.3.2 SEISMIC ACTIVITY, STRONG EARTHQUAKES NOW AND HISTORIC ONES 115 4.3.3 SEISMIC MONITORING NETWORK 122 4.3.4 PROBABİLİSTİC SEİSMİC HAZARD ASSESSMENT (PSHA) 124 4.3.5 TREATMENT OF UNCERTAINTIES (RANDOM & EPISTEMIC) 127 4.3.6 DE-AGGREGATION OF PSHA 128 4.3.7 PSHA RESULTS FOR ELIGIBLE AREA 129 4.3.8 DE-AGGREGATION OF PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT FOR BULGARIAN ELIGIBLE AREA (MAIN DISTRICT TOWNS) 132 4.3.9 DETERMINISTIC HAZARD 136 REFERENCES 140 4.4 UKRAINE 143 4.4.1 SEISMIC HAZARD 143 4.4.2 SEISMIC EVENTS IN ODESSA REGION 146 4.4.3 SEISMIC MICROZONING 149 4.4.4 MAPS OF GENERAL SEISMIC ZONING 157 4.4.5 POTENTIAL LOSSES 164 REFERENCES 168 4.5 ROMANIA 170 4.5.1 SEISMIC ZONATION 170 4.5.2 THE ASSESSMENT OF SEISMIC HAZARD USING THE PROBABILISTIC APPROACH 184 REFERENCES 199 4.6 MOLDOVA 201 4.6.1 PAST EVENTS AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES 201 4.6.2 EXISTING LEGISLATION FRAMEWORK 202 REFERENCES 209 5 CONCLUDING REMARKS 216 Deliverable-No. D.03.01 – Vol 1 Final version Issue: I.01 Date: 04 February 2016 Page: 6 of 222 LIST OF FIGURES FIG.1. SEISMIC RISK IS THE OUTPUT OF CONVOLUTION OF SEISMIC HAZARD AND VULNERABILITY. TYPICAL GRAPHS DEPICTING EACH QUANTITY ARE SHOWN. (COBURN AND SPENCE, 2002). ...................................................... 17 FIG.2. FLOW CHART FOR SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT STUDY BASED ON PROBABILISTIC (LEFT) OR DETERMINISTIC (RIGHT) APPROACH. (REITER,1990). ....................................................................................... 18 FIG.3. THE FIRST SEISMIC HAZARD MAP OF GREECE. ................................................................................................ 23 FIG 4. SEISMIC HAZARD MAP OF GREECE IN THE SEISMIC CODE OF 1992 (PAPAZACHOS ET AL., 1992). ............... 25 FIG 5. HYBRID MODEL OF FAULT AND AREA SOURCES IN THE AEGEAN AND SURROUNDING AREA (PAPAIOANNOU, 2001). ................................................................................................................................................................ 26 FIG 6. THE MAIN FAULTS OF SHALLOW STRONG (M≥6.0) EARTHQUAKES IN THE AGEGEAN AREAS (PAPAZACHOS ET AL., 2001). ......................................................................................................................................................... 26 FIG 7. SEISMIC SOURCES MODELS OF SHALLOW (BLACK) AND INTERMEDIATED DEPTH (RED) EARTHQUAKES (PAPAZACHOS, 1990) ........................................................................................................................................ 27 FIG 8. SEISMIC SOURCES MODELS OF SHALLOW (BLACK) AND INTERMEDIATED DEPTH (RED) EARTHQUAKES (PAPAZACHOS AND PAPAIOANNOU, 1993 REVISED)......................................................................................... 27 FIG 9. COMPARISON OF THE VARIOUS EMPIRICAL PREDICTIVE RELATIONS FOR THE PGA, USED IN THE PRESENT STUDY FOR M=6.5 AND SOIL CONDITIONS “ROCK” ............................................................................................ 28 FIG 10. GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF THE MEAN VALUES OF THE PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION (CM/SEC2) IN GREECE AND SURROUNDING AREA ................................................................................................................... 28 FIG 11. GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF THE STANDARD DEVIATION OF THE PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION VALUES (CM/SEC2) IN GREECE AND SURROUNDING AREA ................................................................................ 28 FIG 12. THE OFFICIAL CURRENT SEISMIC HAZARD MAP OF GREECE .......................................................................... 29 FIG 13. THE MAIN FEATURES OF TECTONIC ORIGIN IN THE BROADER AEGEAN AREA. THE RECTANGULAR SHOWS THE INVESTIGATED AREA. .................................................................................................................................. 30 FIG 14. GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF STRONG EARTHQUAKES WITHIN THE INVESTIGATED AREA. THE FAULTS ARE AFTER PAPAZACHOS ET AL. (2001). .......................................................................................................... 31 FIG 15. GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF MODERATE-TO-SMALL EARTHQUAKES WITHIN THE INVESTIGATED AREA SHOWN BY A RECTANGULAR. INFORMATION OF THE TIME PERIOD AND SIZE OF THE EVENTS ARE SHOWN IN THE LEGEND. ...................................................................................................................................................... 32 FIG 16. GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION THE EPICENTERS OF THE KNOWN EARTHQUAKES AT THE BROADER AREA OF THE INVESTIGATED AREA (SHOWN BY PINK-HACHURED RECTANGULAR). THE BLUE POLYGONS SHOW THE SEISMIC SOURCES PROPOSED BY PAPAIOANNOU AND PAPAZACHOS (2000). ................................................. 33 FIG 17. A HYBRID MODEL OF AREA-TYPE AND LINE-TYPE (FAULTS) IN THE AREA PAPAIO-ANNOU (2002). THE FAULTS ARE AFTER PAPAZACHOS ET AL. (2001). THE RED LINES REPRESENT NORMAL FAULTS WHILE THE GREY LINEAR SYMBOLS STAND FOR THE STRIKE SLIP FAULTS. ......................................................................... 34 FIG 18. COMPARISON BETWEEN VARIOUS ATTENUATION RELATIONS HOLDING FOR DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE WORLD. THE CONTINUOUS BLACK LINE STANDS FOR THE AEGEAN AREA (PAPAZACHOS AND PAPAIOANNOU, 1997). ................................................................................................................................................................ 36 FIG 19. ISOSEISMAL MAP OF THE EARTHQUAKE OF 1752 IN THRACE (PAPAZACHOS