USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Working Group Report”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
USGS2014

Performance of several low-cost accelerometers

Several groups are implementing low‐cost host‐operated systems of strong‐motion accelerographs to support the somewhat divergent needs of seismologists and earthquake engineers. The Advanced National Seismic System Technical Implementation Committee (ANSS TIC, 2002), managed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with other network operators, is exploring the efficacy of such systems if used in ANSS networks. To this end, ANSS convened a working group to explore available Class C strong‐motion accelerometers (defined later), and to consider operational and quality control issues, and the means of annotating, storing, and using such data in ANSS networks. The working group members are largely coincident with our author list, and this report informs instrument‐performance matters in the working group’s report to ANSS. Present examples of operational networks of such devices are the Community Seismic Network (CSN; csn.caltech.edu), operated by the California Institute of Technology, and Quake‐Catcher Network (QCN; Cochran et al., 2009; qcn.stanford.edu; November 2013), jointly operated by Stanford University and the USGS. Several similar efforts are in development at other institutions. The overarching goals of such efforts are to add spatial density to existing Class‐A and Class‐B (see next paragraph) networks at low cost, and to include many additional people so they become invested in the issues of earthquakes, their measurement, and the damage they cause.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS1995

Development of a National Digital Geospatial Data Framework

This proposal of a data framework to organize and enhance the activities of the geospatial data community to meet needs for basic themes of data was developed in response to a request in Executive Order 12906, Coordinating Geographic Data Acquisition and Access: The National Spatial Data Infrastructure (U.S. Executive Office of the President, 1994). The request stated: in consultation with State, local, and tribal governments and within 9 months of the date of this order, the FGDC shall submit a plan and schedule to OMB [U.S. Office of Management and Budget] for completing the initial implementation of a national digital geospatial data framework ("framework") by January 2000 and for establishing a process of ongoing data maintenance. The framework shall include geospatial data that are significant, in the determination of the FGDC, to a broad variety of users within any geographic area or nationwide. At a minimum, the plan shall address how the initial transportation, hydrology, and boundary elements of the framework might be completed by January 1998 in order to support the decennial census of 2000. The proposal was developed by representatives of local, regional, State, and Federal agencies under the auspices of the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). The individuals are listed in the appendix of this report. This Framework Working Group identified the purpose and goals for the framework; identified incentives for participation; defined the information content; developed preliminary technical, operational, and business contexts; specified the institutional roles needed; and developed a strategy for a phased implementation of the framework.Members of the working group presented the concepts of the framework for discussion at several national and regional public meetings. The draft of the report also was provided for public, written review. These discussions and reviews were the source of many improvements to the report.The FGDC approved the report for submission to the Office of Management and Budget on March 31, 1995.

Report↗
USGS2010

Proceedings of the U.S. Geological Survey Interdisciplinary Microbiology Workshop, Estes Park, Colorado, October 15-17, 2008

Preface A U.S. Geological Survey Interdisciplinary Microbiology Workshop was held in Estes Park, Colorado, on October 15-17, 2008. Participants came from all USGS regions and disciplines. This report contains abstracts from 36 presentations and 35 poster sessions and notes from 5 breakout sessions. The seven presentation topics follow: Ecology of wildlife and fish disease Mechanisms of fish and wildlife disease Microbial ecology Geographic patterns/visualization Public health and water quality Geomicrobiology Ecosystem function The six poster session topics follow: Wildlife disease Disease detection methods Water quality Microbial ecology Metabolic processes Tools and techniques Five working groups met in breakout sessions on October 16, 2008. The highlights for each working group are summarized in this report, and their goals are listed below: Working Group I: to plan a Fact Sheet on interdisciplinary microbiology in the USGS Working Group II: to plan a USGS interdisciplinary microbiology Web site Working Group III: to suggest ways to broadcast and publicize the types of microbiology conducted at the USGS Working Group IV: to identify emerging issues in USGS interdisciplinary microbiology research Working Group V: to identify potential opportunities for interdisciplinary microbiology work at the USGS After the workshop, the USGS interdisciplinary microbiology Web site was activated in June 2009 at http://microbiology.usgs.gov/.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2008

California fault parameters for the National Seismic Hazard Maps and Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities 2007

This report describes development of fault parameters for the 2007 update of the National Seismic Hazard Maps and the Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP, 2007). These reference parameters are contained within a database intended to be a source of values for use by scientists interested in producing either seismic hazard or deformation models to better understand the current seismic hazards in California. These parameters include descriptions of the geometry and rates of movements of faults throughout the state. These values are intended to provide a starting point for development of more sophisticated deformation models which include known rates of movement on faults as well as geodetic measurements of crustal movement and the rates of movements of the tectonic plates. The values will be used in developing the next generation of the time-independent National Seismic Hazard Maps, and the time-dependant seismic hazard calculations being developed for the WGCEP. Due to the multiple uses of this information, development of these parameters has been coordinated between USGS, CGS and SCEC. SCEC provided the database development and editing tools, in consultation with USGS, Golden. This database has been implemented in Oracle and supports electronic access (e.g., for on-the-fly access). A GUI-based application has also been developed to aid in populating the database. Both the continually updated 'living' version of this database, as well as any locked-down official releases (e.g., used in a published model for calculating earthquake probabilities or seismic shaking hazards) are part of the USGS Quaternary Fault and Fold Database http://earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/qfaults/ . CGS has been primarily responsible for updating and editing of the fault parameters, with extensive input from USGS and SCEC scientists.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2018

Revised recommended methods for analyzing crater size-frequency distributions

Impact crater populations crucially help us to understand solar system dynamics, planetary surface histories, and surface modification processes. A single previous effort to standardize how crater data are displayed in graphs, tables, and archives, was in a 1978 NASA report by the Crater Analysis Techniques Working Group, published in 1979 in Icarus . The report had a significant lasting effect, but later decades brought major advances in statistical and computer sciences while the crater field has remained fairly stagnant. In this new work, we revisit the fundamental techniques for displaying and analyzing crater population data and demonstrate better statistical methods that can be used. Specifically, we address (1) how crater size-frequency distributions (SFDs) are constructed, (2) how error bars are assigned to SFDs, and (3) how SFDs are fit to power laws and other models. We show how the new methods yield results similar to those of previous techniques in that the SFDs have familiar shapes but better account for multiple sources of uncertainty. We also recommend graphic, display, and archiving methods that reflect computers' capabilities and fulfill NASA's current requirements for Data Management Plans.

Meteoritics and Planetary Science↗
USGS2015

The U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Collections Management System (GCMS)—A master catalog and collections management plan for U.S. Geological Survey geologic samples and sample collections

**Updated guidance is available in USGS Instructional Memorandum CSS 2019-01 .** Abstract The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is widely recognized in the earth science community as possessing extensive collections of earth materials collected by research personnel over the course of its history. In 2006, a Geologic Collections Inventory was conducted within the USGS Geology Discipline to determine the extent and nature of its sample collections, and in 2008, a working group was convened by the USGS National Geologic and Geophysical Data Preservation Program to examine ways in which these collections could be coordinated, cataloged, and made available to researchers both inside and outside the USGS. The charge to this working group was to evaluate the proposition of creating a Geologic Collections Management System (GCMS), a centralized database that would (1) identify all existing USGS geologic collections, regardless of size, (2) create a virtual link among the collections, and (3) provide a way for scientists and other researchers to obtain access to the samples and data in which they are interested. Additionally, the group was instructed to develop criteria for evaluating current collections and to establish an operating plan and set of standard practices for handling, identifying, and managing future sample collections. Policies and procedures promoted by the GCMS would be based on extant best practices established by the National Science Foundation and the Smithsonian Institution. The resulting report—USGS Circular 1410, “The U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Collections Management System (GCMS): A Master Catalog and Collections Management Plan for U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Samples and Sample Collections”—has been developed for sample repositories to be a guide to establishing common practices in the collection, retention, and disposal of geologic research materials throughout the USGS. While constructing this report, the GCMS’s potential customers and their needs were considered. Two critical definitions have been clarified: a repository is a facility for the long-term management of geologic collections, and a collection is a set of specimens that have been brought together on the basis of some common characteristic. Required sample metadata for newly collected samples, as well as for older collections, were also stipulated and are listed and explained in this report. Several basic policies are also recommended by the GCMS in order to standardize operations among the physical repositories where collections are currently housed. The GCMS Collection Management Plan provides a set of protocols and templates for the management of scientific collections, including access, storage, transfer, and disposal of physical geologic samples and data. This plan is flexible to allow each repository to adapt the practices best suited to its collections. The general consideration for implementation of the GCMS is that all active USGS geologic sample repositories will form the core of GCMS and that participating science centers will develop procedures based on proposed GCMS methodologies. The GCMS is a collective resource for the entire USGS community and the users who discover the geologic materials kept in these repositories and seek to access them.

Circular↗
USGS2002

Mars Geodesy/Cartography Working Group recommendations on Mars cartographic constants and coordinate systems

NASA's Mars Geodesy/Cartography Working Group (MGCWG), established in 1998 and chaired since 2000 by one of us (TCD), consists of leading researchers in planetary geodesy and cartography at such diverse institutions as JPL, NASA Ames and Goddard Centers, Purdue and Ohio State Universities, Malin Space Science Systems, the German Center for Aerospace Research DLR, and the US Geological Survey, as well as representatives of the current and future Mars mission teams that are the customers for Mars maps. The purpose of the group is the coordinate the activities of the many agencies active in Mars geodesy and cartography in order to minimize redundant effort and ensure that the products needed by mission customers are generated. A specific objectives has been to avoid repeating the experience of the 1970s-80s, when competing researchers produced geodetic control solutions and maps of Mars that were mutually inconsistent. To this end, the MGCWG has recently assembled a set of preferred values for Mars cartographic constants, based on the best available data. These values have been transmitted to the International Astronomical Union and appear in the report of the IAU/IAG Working Group on Cartographic Coordinates and Rotational Elements of the Planets and Satellites as the officially recommended constants for Mars (Seidelmann et al., 2002). The MGCWG has also recommended to NASA that the USGS adopt the IAU-approved coordinate system of planetocentric latitude and east longitude for future maps of Mars, in the place of the (also IAU-approved) planetographic system with west longitude positive. This recommendation has recently been approved by NASA. In this paper we present the preferred values for Mars cartographic constants with discussion of the process by which they were derived, then discuss the rationale and implications of the use of east/planetocentric coordinates in future Mars maps.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2006

Restoration of lowland streams: an introduction

This paper introduces the Lowland Streams Restoration Workshop that was held in Lund, Sweden in August 1991. Attenders at the Workshop participated in working groups which discussed and reported on the state of knowledge of stream restoration and identified critical areas of information need. Currently, most restoration efforts are emission‐orientated (i.e. waste‐water management), while the imitation of the geomorphology or of the riparian vegetation of a quasi‐natural or natural reference channel receives less attention. Successful stream restoration requires a multidisciplinary approach within a holistic system framework. Monitoring the outcome of past, existing and future steam‐restoration projects is required for information on the feasibility of alternative techniques and approaches. It was recommended that systems in pristine condition serve as a point of reference and not as a goal for most stream restoration projects. Restoration goals must be carefully defined so that everyone at every level understands the aim of the project. At the very least, all restoration programmes should consider geomorphic, hydrological, biological, aesthetic, and water quality aspects of the system. Restoration programmes should aim to create a system with a stable channel, or a channel in dynamic equilibrium that supports a self‐sustaining and functionally diverse community assemblage; it should not concentrate on one species or group, except at the local level. Preserving the terrestrial ‐aquatic interface by setting aside riparian land corridors is critical to all stages of restoration. Additional information on the temporal and regional variability in important system processes and functions is needed.

Freshwater Biology↗
USGS2002

Satellite imagery for volcanic hazards mitigation

The Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS) seeks to foster cooperation to increase the usefulness and accessibility of satellite imagery. In 1997, CEOS initiated the Disaster Management Support Project to assess the present and potential use of satellite-derived information for volcanic hazards mitigation. The final report of the CEOS Volcanic Hazards Working Group reviews current use of satellite data for mitigation of volcanic hazards. The report specifies the minimum spectral channels needed for effective remote sensing of volcanic hazards, together with recommendations for threshold and optimum spatial and temporal resolutions.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2022

Finalization of the Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy (CLSM) working group

A working group in Commission II to investigate applications of confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) for organic petrology investigations has finalized with publication of the manuscript “Characterization of bituminite in Kimmeridge Clay by confocal laser scanning and atomic force microscopy” in the International Journal of Coal Geology. The manuscript is available via Open Access from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coal.2022.103927 and also from the Commission II working group (WG) webpage https://www.iccop.org/workinggroup/confocal-laser-scanning-microscopy-clsm/. A report detailing the full history and results from the WG also is available from the Commission II WG webpage. The working group investigated the application of CLSM to an organic-rich (44 wt.% TOC), thermally immature sample (VRo 0.42%) of the Kimmeridge Clay Formation. CLSM imaging and spectroscopy and atomic force microscopy (AFM) were used to characterize bituminite.

ICCP News↗
USGS2014

The effects of atmospheric nitrogen deposition on terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity

This chapter reports the findings of a Working Group on how atmospheric nitrogen (N) deposition affects both terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity. Regional and global scale impacts on biodiversity are addressed, together with potential indicators. Key conclusions are that: the rates of loss in biodiversity are greatest at the lowest and initial stages of N deposition increase; changes in species compositions are related to the relative amounts of N, carbon (C) and phosphorus (P) in the plant soil system; enhanced N inputs have implications for C cycling; N deposition is known to be having adverse effects on European and North American vegetation composition; very little is known about tropical ecosystem responses, while tropical ecosystems are major biodiversity hotspots and are increasingly recipients of very high N deposition rates; N deposition alters forest fungi and mycorrhyzal relations with plants; the rapid response of forest fungi and arthropods makes them good indicators of change; predictive tools (models) that address ecosystem scale processes are necessary to address complex drivers and responses, including the integration of N deposition, climate change and land use effects; criteria can be identified for projecting sensitivity of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems to N deposition. Future research and policy-relevant recommendations are identified.

Book chapter↗
USGS2010

The global flow of aluminum from 2006 through 2025

This report presents results of an investigation of the global flow of materials related to the production and use of aluminum in 2006 and makes projections to 2025. The report was prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Environmental Policy Committee's Working Group on Waste Prevention and Recycling. The report addresses the major resource flows and effects of those flows and provides insights on the life cycle of aluminum; it does not address policy issues related to the production and use of aluminum.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2012

Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force---Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Science Assessment and Needs

The Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Task Force (GCERTF) was established by Executive Order 13554 as a result of recommendations from “America’s Gulf Coast: A Long-term Recovery Plan after the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill” by Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus (Mabus Report). The GCERTF consists of members from 11 Federal agencies and representatives from each State bordering the Gulf of Mexico. The GCERTF was charged to develop a holistic, long-term, science-based Regional Ecosystem Restoration Strategy for the Gulf of Mexico. Federal and State agencies staffed the GCERTF with experts in fields such as policy, budgeting, and science to help develop the Strategy. The Strategy was built on existing authorities and resources and represents enhanced collaboration and a recognition of the shared responsibility among Federal and State governments to restore the Gulf Coast ecosystem. In this time of severe fiscal constraints, Task Force member agencies and States are committed to establishing shared priorities and working together to achieve them. As part of this effort, three staffers, one National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) scientist and two U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists, created and led a Science Coordination Team (SCT) to guide scientific input into the development of the Gulf of Mexico Regional Ecosystem Restoration Strategy. The SCT leads from the GCERTF coordinated more than 70 scientists from the Federal and State Task Force member agencies to participate in development of a restoration-oriented science document focused on the entire Gulf of Mexico, from inland watersheds to the deep blue waters. The SCT leads and scientists were organized into six different working groups based on expanded goals from the Mabus Report: Coastal habitats are healthy and resilient. Living coastal and marine resources are healthy, diverse, and sustainable. Coastal communities are adaptive and resilient. Storm buffers are sustainable. Inland habitats and watersheds are managed to help support healthy and sustainable Gulf of Mexico ecosystems. Offshore environments are healthy and well managed Each working group was charged with defining their specific goal, describing the current conditions related to that goal (for example, the status of coastal habitats in the Gulf of Mexico), providing highlevel activities needed to further define and achieve the goal, with associated outcome-based performance indicators, and identifying the scientific gaps in understanding to accomplish the goal and implement the recommended activities. The overall scientific assessment reveals that the Gulf of Mexico ecosystem continues to suffer from extensive degradation, and action is necessary to develop a healthy, resilient, and sustainable Gulf of Mexico ecosystem. The six groups also were tasked with outlining the necessary monitoring, modeling, and research needs to aid in achieving the goals. Recognizing that (1) the scientific needs (monitoring, modeling, and research) overlap among many of the goals, and (2) an overarching scientific framework could be developed to implement the necessary science in support of the Strategy, a seventh group was created with several members from each of the original six working groups. This seventh group compiled all of the cross-cutting monitoring, modeling, and research needs previously identified by the individual groups. These scientific requirements are found in Chapter 5 of this document. The seventh group also has developed a Science Plan, outlined in Chapter 6. The Science Plan provides the basic science infrastructure to support the overall Gulf restoration program and Strategy. The Science Plan allows for the development of an iterative and flexible approach to adaptive management and decision-making related to restoration projects based on sound science that includes monitoring, modeling, and research. Taken in its entirety, this document helps to articulate the current state of the system and the critical science needs to support effective restoration of the Gulf of Mexico resources that have been trending towards decline for decades.

Report↗
USGS2013

Modeling for the SAFRR Tsunami Scenario-generation, propagation, inundation, and currents in ports and harbors: Chapter D in The SAFRR (Science Application for Risk Reduction) Tsunami Scenario

This U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Open-File report presents a compilation of tsunami modeling studies for the Science Application for Risk Reduction (SAFRR) tsunami scenario. These modeling studies are based on an earthquake source specified by the SAFRR tsunami source working group (Kirby and others, 2013). The modeling studies in this report are organized into three groups. The first group relates to tsunami generation. The effects that source discretization and horizontal displacement have on tsunami initial conditions are examined in section 1 (Whitmore and others). In section 2 (Ryan and others), dynamic earthquake rupture models are explored in modeling tsunami generation. These models calculate slip distribution and vertical displacement of the seafloor as a result of realistic fault friction, physical properties of rocks surrounding the fault, and dynamic stresses resolved on the fault. The second group of papers relates to tsunami propagation and inundation modeling. Section 3 (Thio) presents a modeling study for the entire California coast that includes runup and inundation modeling where there is significant exposure and estimates of maximum velocity and momentum flux at the shoreline. In section 4 (Borrero and others), modeling of tsunami propagation and high-resolution inundation of critical locations in southern California is performed using the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Method of Splitting Tsunami (MOST) model and NOAA’s Community Model Interface for Tsunamis (ComMIT) modeling tool. Adjustments to the inundation line owing to fine-scale structures such as levees are described in section 5 (Wilson). The third group of papers relates to modeling of hydrodynamics in ports and harbors. Section 6 (Nicolsky and Suleimani) presents results of the model used at the Alaska Earthquake Information Center for the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, as well as synthetic time series of the modeled tsunami for other selected locales in southern California. Importantly, section 6 provides a comparison of the effect of including horizontal displacements at the source described in section 1 and differences in bottom friction on wave heights and inundation in the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Modeling described in section 7 (Lynett and Son) uses a higher order physical model to determine variations of currents during the tsunami and complex flow structures such as jets and eddies. Section 7 also uses sediment transport models to estimate scour and deposition of sediment in ports and harbors—a significant effect that was observed in southern California following the 2011 Tohoku tsunami. Together, all of the sections in this report form the basis for damage, impact, and emergency preparedness aspects of the SAFRR tsunami scenario. Three sections of this report independently calculate wave height and inundation results using the source specified by Kirby and others (2013). Refer to figure 29 in section 3, figure 52 in section 4, and figure 62 in section 6. All of these results are relative to a mean high water (MHW) vertical datum. Slight differences in the results are observed in East Basin of the Port of Los Angeles, Alamitos Bay, and the Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge. However, given that these three modeling efforts involved different implementations of the source, different numerical wave propagation and runup models, and slight differences in the digital elevation models (DEMs), the similarity among the results is remarkable.

California↗
USGS2020

Coordination of planetary coordinate system recommendations by the IAU Working Group on Cartographic Coordinates and Rotational Elements–2020 status and future

Our goal is to request input from the lunar and planetary community regarding issues of planetary coordinate systems and cartography standards. We begin with an overview of the work of the International Astronomical Union Working Group on Cartographic Coordinates and Rotational Elements. We briefly describe the operations and membership of the Working Group, some of the various uses of the recommendations it makes, our most recent (2018) published report and the recommendations therein, and the outlook for our next such report. We then consider several issues and questions regarding the future of the Working Group and regarding planetary cartography and planetary data spatial infrastructure in general. This includes possible near-term projects, how we and others might collect and consider community input and includes some ideas regarding possible outcomes or future work that will need to be addressed by the Working Group or other organizations.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2019

Community for Data Integration 2018 annual report

The Community for Data Integration (CDI) is a community of practice whose purpose is to build the U.S. Geological Survey knowledge base in data integration. This annual report describes the various presentations, activities, and outcomes of the CDI monthly forums, working groups, trainings, and other CDI-sponsored events in fiscal year 2018. The report also describes the objectives of the 10 CDI-funded projects for the year. The CDI had a topical theme for fiscal year 2018—Risk assessment and hazards vulnerability in support of integrated predictive science capacity. This report describes how the community coordinated its activities around this theme.

Open-File Report↗