EQECAT Model Submission - Florida State Board of Administration

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Florida Commission on Hurricane Loss Projection MethodologyGeneral StandardsDr. James R. (Bob) Bailey provides support in the area of mitigationmeasures within vulnerability.3. Independent Peer ReviewA. Provide dates of external independent peer reviews that have been performed onthe following components as currently functioning in the model:1. Meteorology2. Vulnerability3. Actuarial Science4. Statistics5. Computer Science1. MeteorologyProfessor Robert Tuleya performed a review of the hurricane windfieldmodel in February 2011. His comments included the following: “I reviewedthe EQECAT revised wind field model. The review was composed ofseveral presentations by EQECAT, review of several scientific referencesas well as fruitful discussion between EQECAT and myself. This model isa parametric model, which estimates the evolution of the inland surfacewind field given the values of several parameters describing the low-levelwind field just off shore. The model uses as observed input the stormintensity, radial extent of winds and the storm track. It also assumes astandard filling rate as the storm progresses inland. The EQECAT modeluses a sophisticated high resolution land use field to diagnose the effect ofupwind roughness effects accurately. The terrain roughness was shown tohave a dual role of reducing the damaging wind field due to frictionalretardation but also to a lesser extent increasing the possible wind effectsby contributing to a larger gust factor with increasing roughness. Thepresentation indicated realistic wind behavior for an incoming stormmaking landfall. The time evolution of the EQECAT model was quitesimilar to more sophisticated 3-D NWP operational and research models,lending credibility to their model product. EQECAT also showedcomparisons and verification to observed surface wind field as well. Themodel has a deviational component to account for statistical variation inresults. This estimate appears to be handled well, with the model for themost part, verifying well compared to observations. Overall, I believe theEQECAT revised model should model observed landfall wind evolutionquite well for both individual storms as well as for estimating aclimatological group of storms.”2. VulnerabilityDr. Kishor Mehta, Dr. James McDonald, and Dr. C. Allin Cornell performedindependent reviews of the vulnerability model in 1995. Professor S.38
The Florida Commission on Hurricane Loss Projection MethodologyGeneral StandardsNarasimhan performed an independent review of the vulnerability model in2013.3. Actuarial ScienceDiscussed in conjunction with Statistics below.4. StatisticsDr. C. Allin Cornell and Dr. Richard Mensing reviewed the overallmethodology and technical approach in 1995. Their comments were asfollows: Cornell - suggested we make the procedure more transparent inorder to facilitate communication and learning by the users - “simple, bruteforce Monte Carlo simulation is about as straight-forward as you can be...but you are doing something smarter and hence more difficult to grasp.”Further suggestions were for a thorough sensitivity study and ideas for thetreatment of uncertainty. Mensing - “Overall, I believe the methodologyrepresents a very good approach to a probabilistic analysis of thedamages and losses associated with hurricanes.” His suggestions were toreview the treatment of uncertainty and verify the adequacy of the portfolioinput data. Additional studies were done to address these issues prior tothe release of USWIND.Mr. Peter Kelly and Dr. Lixin Zeng of Arkwright Mutual InsuranceCompany reviewed all aspects of the USWIND model in their paper ‘TheEngineering, Statistical, and Scientific Validity of EQECAT USWINDModeling Software’ in 1996. They stated the following in their review:“The validity of EQECAT USWIND modeling software is reviewedfrom several perspectives. Using several external sources forhurricane data, it is found that the storm data set represents thehistorical and expected long term storm patterns well and generallywithout bias. By reviewing storm damage estimates against atheoretical understanding of the wind effects on structures as well asactual experience, it was found that the model’s damage estimatesreasonably reflect the physical properties of force and damage andthat the system has no systematic bias in its damage estimationlogic.”A copy of their review is provided in Appendix #7.39
Page 1: FLORIDA COMMISSION ONHURRICANE LOSS
Page 4 and 5: The Florida Commission on Hurricane
Page 11: The Florida Commission on Hurricane
Page 89 and 90:
The Florida Commission on Hurricane
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Frequency (%)The Florida Commission
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Modeling Organization: EQECAT, incM
Page 211 and 212:
Form A-4 Output RangesLOSS COSTS PE
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273:
show all

EQECAT Model Submission - Florida State Board of Administration

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?