This paper concerns the explicit consideration of near-fault directivity in conventional ground motion prediction models, and its implication for probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) in New Zealand. The proposed approach utilises recently developed models by Shahi & Baker (2011), which account for both the 'narrowband' nature of the directivity pulse on spectral ordinates, and the probability of pulse occurrence at the site of interest. Furthermore, in order to correctly consider directivity, distributed seismicity sources are considered as finite-faults, as opposed to their (incorrect) conventional treatment as point-sources. The significance of directivity on hazard analysis results is illustrated for various vibration periods at generic sites located in Christchurch and Otira, two locations whose seismic hazard is comprised of notably different seismic sources. When compared to the PSHA results considering directivity and distributed seismicity as finite faults, it is shown that the NZS1170.5:2004 directivity factor is notably unconservative for all vibration periods in Otira (i.e. high seismic hazard region); and unconservative for Christchurch at short-to-moderate vibration periods ( < 3s); but conservative at long periods ( > 4s).
The Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 have shone the spotlight on a number of tax issues. These issues, and in particular lessons learned from them, will be relevant for revenue authorities, policymakers and taxpayers alike in the broader context of natural disasters. Issues considered by this paper include the tax treatment of insurance monies. For example, building owners will receive pay-outs for destroyed assets and buildings which have been depreciated. Where the insurance payment is more than the adjusted tax value, there will be a taxable "gain on sale" (or depreciation recovery income). If the building owner uses those insurance proceeds to purchase a replacement asset, legislative amendments specifically enacted following the earthquakes provide that rollover relief of the depreciation recovery income is available. The tax treatment of expenditure to seismically strengthen a building is another significant issue faced by building owners. Case law has determined that this expenditure will usually be capital expenditure. In the past such costs could be capitalised to the building and depreciated accordingly. However, since the 2011-2012 income year owners have been prohibited from claiming depreciation on buildings and therefore currently no deduction is available for such strengthening expenditure (whether immediate or deferred). This has significant potential implications for landlords throughout New Zealand facing significant seismic retrofit costs. Incentives, or some form of financial support, whether delivered through the tax system or some other mechanism may be required. International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) require insurance proceeds, including reimbursement for expenditure of a capital nature, be reported as income while expenditure itself is not recorded as a current period expense. This has the effect of overstating current income and creating a larger variation between reported income for accounting and taxation purposes. Businesses have obligations to maintain certain business records for tax purposes. Reconstructing records destroyed by a natural disaster depends on how the information was originally stored. The earthquakes have demonstrated the benefits of ‘off-site’ (outside Canterbury) storage, in particular electronic storage. This paper considers these issues and the Inland Revenue Department (Inland Revenue) Standard Practice Statement which deals with inter alia retention of business records in electronic format and offshore record storage. Employer provided accommodation is treated as income to the benefitting employee. A recent amendment to the Income Tax Act 2007 retrospectively provides that certain employer provided accommodation is exempt from tax. The time aspect of these rules is extended where the employee is involved in the Canterbury rebuild and comes from outside the region.
This presentation discusses recent empirical ground motion modelling efforts in New Zealand. Firstly, the active shallow crustal and subduction interface and slab ground motion prediction equations (GMPEs) which are employed in the 2010 update of the national seismic hazard model (NSHM) are discussed. Other NZ-specific GMPEs developed, but not incorporated in the 2010 update are then discussed, in particular, the active shallow crustal model of Bradley (2010). A brief comparison of the NZ-specific GMPEs with the near-source ground motions recorded in the Canterbury earthquakes is then presented, given that these recordings collectively provide a significant increase in observed strong motions in the NZ catalogue. The ground motion prediction expert elicitation process that was undertaken following the Canterbury earthquakes for active shallow crustal earthquakes is then discussed. Finally, ongoing GMPE-related activities are discussed including: ground motion and metadata database refinement, improved site characterization of strong motion station, and predictions for subduction zone earthquakes.
Generalized conditional intensity measure (GCIM) method is extended to ground motion selection for scenario ruptures. Using different rupture scenarios and site conditions, various aspects of the GCIM methodology are scrutinized, including: (i) implementation of different weight vectors and the composition of the IM vector; (ii) quantifying the importance of replicate selections for different number of desired ground motions; and (iii) the effect of considering bounds on the implicit causal parameters of the prospective ground motions. Using the extended methodology, representative ground motion ensembles for several major earthquake scenarios in New Zealand are developed. Cases considered include representative ground motions for the occurrence of Alpine, Hope, and Porters Pass earthquakes in Christchurch city, and the occurrence of Wellington, Wairarapa, and Ohariu fault ruptures in Wellington city. Challenges in the development of ground motion ensembles for subduction zone earthquakes are also highlighted. The selected scenario-based ground motion sets can be used to complement ground motions which are often selected in conjunction with probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, in order to understand the performance of structures for the question “what if this fault ruptures?”
Generalized conditional intensity measure (GCIM) method is extended to ground motion selection for scenario ruptures. Using different rupture scenarios and site conditions, various aspects of the GCIM methodology are scrutinized, including: (i) implementation of different weight vectors and the composition of the IM vector; (ii) quantifying the importance of replicate selections for different number of desired ground motions; and (iii) the effect of considering bounds on the implicit causal parameters of the prospective ground motions. Using the extended methodology, representative ground motion ensembles for several major earthquake scenarios in New Zealand are developed. Cases considered include representative ground motions for the occurrence of Alpine, Hope, and Porters Pass earthquakes in Christchurch city, and the occurrence of Wellington, Wairarapa, and Ohariu fault ruptures in Wellington city. Challenges in the development of ground motion ensembles for subduction zone earthquakes are also highlighted. The selected scenario-based ground motion sets can be used to complement ground motions which are often selected in conjunction with probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, in order to understand the performance of structures for the question “what if this fault ruptures?”
