CONTENT OF SITE-SPECIFIC HAZARD REPORT

A. Purpose and scope of the investigation, including a brief description of the

proposed site use, size of the proposed building or other structure, occupancy,
and current seismic zonation.

seismic zone of the site: zone 4


B. Regional geologic and tectonic setting, including a complete list of all
seismogenic faults that could impact the site and a description of the crustal,
intraplate, and subduction-zone earthquake hazards.

Active Faults Within 200 km Radius Of The PEZA Site
(from PHIVOLCS website)
1. Marikina Valley Fault System (East and West)
2. Iba Fault
3. East Zambales Fault
4. Tubao Fault (PFZ)
5. Digdig Fault (PFZ)
6. Infanta Fault (PFZ)
7. Guinyangan Fault (PFZ)
8. Central Marinduque Fault
9. Lubang Fault

C. Site conditions, including elevation, subsurface conditions, landforms, site
grading, vegetation, existing structures, and other features that may influence the
investigation

D. Description of the investigation

1. Regional seismic history and tectonic setting

a. Significant historic earthquakes and tsunamis in the region and
locations and magnitudes of seismic events in the vicinity of the site.
Crustal earthquakes, intraplate, and interface subduction zone
events should be included.

Historic Earthquake Within 200 km Radius Of The PEZA Site
1658 West Valley Fault Earthquake
Date of Event : August 18, 1658
Epicenter :
Ms : 5.7
Focal Mechanism :

1771 East Valley Fault Earthquake
Date of Event : February 01, 1771
Epicenter : 1
Ms : 7.0
Focal Mechanism :

1973 Ragay Gulf Earthquake
Date of Event : March 17, 1973
Epicenter : 13 8' N and 122 52' E
Ms : 7.0
Focal Mechanism : Strike Slip

1990 Luzon Earthquake
Date of Event : July 16, 1990
Epicenter : 15 42' N and 121 7' E
Ms : 7.8
Focal Mechanism : Strike Slip

1994 Mindoro Earthquake
Date of Event : November 15, 1994
Epicenter : 13 32 N and 121 5 E
Ms : 7.1
Focal Mechanism : Strike Slip

Recent Seismic Activities Within 200 km Radius Of The PEZA Site
(from PHIVOLCS website)

Date - Time Latitude Longitude Depth Magnitude Location
(Philippine Time) (N) (E) (km)


04 Apr 2013 - 10:27 AM 15.82 121.65 016 5.4 011 km N 53 E of
Baler (Aurora)

14 Jan 2013 - 07:16 PM 15.01 119.64 021 5.0 050 km N 82 W of
San Antonio (Zambales)

14 Jan 2013 - 07:03 PM 14.99 119.68 014 5.2 045 km N 84 W of
San Antonio (Zambales)

23 Nov 2012 - 12:52 PM 14.10 120.64 183 5.0 003 km N 35 E of
Nasugbu (Batangas)

04 Oct 2012 - 09:55 AM 13.11 120.24 015 5.3 041 km S 72 W of
Mamburao (Occidental Mindoro)

29 Sept 2012 - 10:12 PM 13.83 120.50 123 5.2 014 km N 89 W of
Calatagan (Batangas)

27 Sept 2012 - 11:47 AM 15.25 122.81 006 5.2 074 km N 37 E
of Jomalig (Quezon)

07 Aug 2012 - 01:03 PM 13.83 119.89 029 5.3 025 km S 83 W of
Lubang (Occidental Mindoro)

15 Jul 2012 - 04:12 AM 14.86 119.36 033 5.3 085km S 53 W of
Iba (Zambales)

17 Jun 2012 - 06:18 AM 15.58 119.38 004 6.0 080 km S 90 W of
Candelaria (Zambales)

09 Mar 2012 - 04:03 AM 13.57 120.22 012 5.3 017 km S
11 W of Looc (Occidental Mindoro)

08 Mar 2012 - 11:30 PM 13.58 120.29 022 5.1 015 km S 15 E of
Looc (Occidental Mindoro)

23 Dec 2011 - 12:27 PM 13.10 120.30 024 5.4 35 km S 67 W of
Mamburao (Occidental Mindoro)

30 Nov 2011 - 08:27 AM 15.45 119.00 021 6.0 100 km N 89 W of
Palauig (Zambales)

12 Aug 2011 - 10:29 AM 13.40 120.68 159 5.0 008 km S 47 W of
Abra de Ilog (Occ Mindoro)

26 July 2011 - 01:15 AM 15.06 119.83 030 5.9 035 km S 29 W of
Iba (Zambales)

23 May 2011 - 12:42 AM 13.60 120.68 117 5.8 042 km N 13 E of
Mamburao (Occ. Mindoro)

09 Apr 2011 - 02:29 AM 13.82 119.83 028 5.4 033 km S 83 W
of Lubang (Occidental Mindoro)


b. Evidence of prehistoric earthquakes and tsunamis that may have
affected the site.

c. Map showing the location of seismic features relative to the
proposed project and an estimate of the amount of disturbance
relative to bedrock and surficial materials.


d. Selection for appropriate strong-motion attenuation relationships for
the site.

e. Published probabilistic estimate of earthquake occurrence.

f. Geodetic and strain measurement, microseismicity monitoring, or
other monitoring.

2. Interpretation of aerial photography and other available remotely sensed
images relative to the geology and earthquake history of the site, including
vegetation patterns, soil contrasts, and lineaments of possible fault origin.

3. Site investigation

a. Detailed field mapping of soils, geologic units and structures, and
topographic features indicative of faulting, such as sag ponds,
spring alignments, disrupted drainage systems, offset topographic
and geologic features, faceted spurs, vegetation patterns, and
deformation of buildings or other structures.

b. Review of local groundwater conditions including water depth and
elevation.

c. Trenching and other excavating to permit the detailed and direct
observation and logging of continuously exposed geologic units,
including soils and features that are relevant to seismic hazards.
Trenching should cross known or suspected active faults in order to
determine the location, timing, and recurrence rate of past
movements, the area disturbed, the physical condition of fault zone
materials, and the geometry of faulting.

d. Exploratory drilling and/or test pits designed to permit the collection
of data needed to evaluate the depth, thickness, and types of earth
materials and groundwater conditions that may identify past
seismicity or could contribute to damage potential at the site. Drill
holes and/or pits should be located and spaced sufficiently to allow
valid interpretations of the resulting data. Subsurface testing could
include Standard Penetration Tests (SPT), Cone Penetrometer
Tests (CPT), undisturbed tube samples, and collection of bulk
samples for laboratory testing.

e. Surface and subsurface geophysical surveys as appropriate to
determine the dynamic properties of the subsurface materials,
including shear-wave velocity, shear modulus, and damping.

4. Subsurface investigation

a. Laboratory testing of samples for moisture content, grain size,
density, dynamic properties, and other pertinent parameters

b. Radiometric analysis of geologic units, study of fossils, mineralogy,
soil-profile development, paleomagnetism, or other age-
determinating techniques to characterize the age of geologic units.

c. Estimates of expected magnitude, acceleration, and duration of
strong motion for the design earthquakes for crustal and intraplate
and interface subduction-zone sources and for other defined
earthquakes if required by statute or regulation of the proposed
project. The rationale for earthquake-source selection for the
relevant types of events should be provided. The design basis
earthquakes and ground acceleration maps available from the
State of Oregon should be consulted and described.

d. Determination of appropriate UBC site-specific soil-profile
coefficients.

e. Analytic dynamic soil response analyses to evaluate potential
amplification or attenuation of subsurface soil deposits to the
underlying bedrock motions.

f. Evaluation of the liquefaction potential of the subsurface deposits at
the site and, if applicable, estimation of liquefaction-induced
settlement and liquefaction-induced lateral spreading.

g. Evaluation of other seismic hazards, including earthquake-induced
landslides, generation of tsunamis or seiches, regional subsidence,
and fault displacement.

E. Conclusions and recommendation

1. Summarize the results of the seismic study, including the review of
regional seismicity, site investigations, selection of the design earthquakes,
and office analysis, including the evaluation of ground response,
liquefaction, landsliding, and tsunamis on the proposed structure and use
of the site. The report should be stamped and signed by a certified
engineering geologist or by a registered professional engineer
experienced in seismic hazard design or by both, when the work of each
can be clearly identified.

2. Recommendations for site development to mitigate seismic hazards. The
recommendations could include: ground modification to reduce
amplification of ground shaking or liquefaction-induced settlement and
lateral spreading potential, remedial treatment options for slope stability,
and foundation alternatives to minimize seismic impact to structure.

F. References and appendices

1. Literature and records reviewed.

2. Aerial photographs or other images used, including the type, scale, source,
date, and index numbers.

3. Maps, photographs, plates, and compiled data utilized in the investigation.

4. Description of geophysical equipment and techniques used in the
investigation.

5. Personal communications or other data sources.

G. Illustrations

1. Location map to identify the site locality, significant faults, geographic
features, seismic epicenters, and other pertinent data.

2. Site development map at a scale appropriate to show the site boundaries,
existing and proposed structures, graded and filled areas, streets, and
proposed and completed exploratory trenches, geophysical traverses, drill
holes, pits, and other relevant data.

3. Geologic map and sections showing the distribution of soils, geologic units,
topographic features, faults and other geologic structures, landslides,
lineaments, and springs.

4. Logs of exploratory trenches, borings, and pits to show the details of
observed features and conditions. Groundwater data should be included.





West Valley Fault (Strike Slip Type)
Magnitude : 7.4
F
RV
: 0

F
NM
: 0
Dip (angle) : 90

Z
TOR
: 2 km
R
RUP
: approximately 7.7 to 8.5 km
R
JB
: approximately 7.7 to 8.5 km

R
x
: approximately 7.7 to 8.5 km

East Valley Fault (Strike Slip Type)
Magnitude : 6.3
F
RV
: 0

F
NM
: 0
Dip (angle) : 90

Z
TOR
: 2 km
R
RUP
: approximately 20 to 25 km
R
JB
: approximately 20 to 25 km
R
x
: approximately 7.7 to 9.25 km



(From: MMEIRS Report)