USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “earthquake hazards”

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 1,189 records · Page 66Linked to original sources
USGS2023

A conceptual framework for estimation of initial emergency food and water resource requirements in disasters

Many households lack the necessary food and water supplies to sustain themselves for more than three days during a disaster. Community vulnerability assessments can be used to identify households with more pressing needs for emergency food and water resources. It is critical that these assessments include the interaction between physical impacts to lifeline infrastructure and the social vulnerabilities of food and water insecurity to prioritize, allocate, and distribute emergency resources. In this paper, we review and synthesize relevant literature to propose a new multidisciplinary conceptual framework of community vulnerability assessment for estimating initial emergency food and water resource requirements in a developed country. Using the framework as a guide, we illustrate its practical application through a simplified, deterministic model of initial resource requirements in disaster response, and offer a quantitative, comprehensive description of its application within the geophysical hazard context of the “ShakeOut” scenario—a major M w 7.8 earthquake on California's San Andreas fault , occurring within the Los Angeles Basin, CA (USA) region. Model results estimate that 999,027 households (2,947,130 residents) will require initial emergency food and water resource requirements. Estimates include about 6 million meals and 9 million liters of water, concentrated in Lancaster-Palmdale, El Monte-Baldwin Park, East Los Angeles-Downey in Los Angeles County, the Coachella Valley (Riverside County), and in populated areas of San Bernardino County. A sensitivity analysis of social vulnerability interactions with utility service outages investigates the influence of food insecurity on the amplification of resource needs. This study establishes fundamental knowledge at the nexus of natural hazards, critical infrastructure disruptions, and social vulnerability by providing initial estimates of emergency resource demand while advancing the understanding of social inequity in emergency resource access.

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction↗
USGS2017

Probabilistic tsunami hazard analysis: Multiple sources and global applications

Applying probabilistic methods to infrequent but devastating natural events is intrinsically challenging. For tsunami analyses, a suite of geophysical assessments should be in principle evaluated because of the different causes generating tsunamis (earthquakes, landslides, volcanic activity, meteorological events, and asteroid impacts) with varying mean recurrence rates. Probabilistic Tsunami Hazard Analyses (PTHAs) are conducted in different areas of the world at global, regional, and local scales with the aim of understanding tsunami hazard to inform tsunami risk reduction activities. PTHAs enhance knowledge of the potential tsunamigenic threat by estimating the probability of exceeding specific levels of tsunami intensity metrics (e.g., run-up or maximum inundation heights) within a certain period of time (exposure time) at given locations (target sites); these estimates can be summarized in hazard maps or hazard curves. This discussion presents a broad overview of PTHA, including (i) sources and mechanisms of tsunami generation, emphasizing the variety and complexity of the tsunami sources and their generation mechanisms, (ii) developments in modeling the propagation and impact of tsunami waves, and (iii) statistical procedures for tsunami hazard estimates that include the associated epistemic and aleatoric uncertainties. Key elements in understanding the potential tsunami hazard are discussed, in light of the rapid development of PTHA methods during the last decade and the globally distributed applications, including the importance of considering multiple sources, their relative intensities, probabilities of occurrence, and uncertainties in an integrated and consistent probabilistic framework.

Reviews of Geophysics↗
USGS2003

Paleoseismicity of two historically quiescent faults in Australia: Implications for fault behavior in stable continental regions

Paleoseismic studies of two historically aseismic Quaternary faults in Australia confirm that cratonic faults in stable continental regions (SCR) typically have a long-term behavior characterized by episodes of activity separated by quiescent intervals of at least 10,000 and commonly 100,000 years or more. Studies of the approximately 30-km-long Roopena fault in South Australia and the approximately 30-km-long Hyden fault in Western Australia document multiple Quaternary surface-faulting events that are unevenly spaced in time. The episodic clustering of events on cratonic SCR faults may be related to temporal fluctuations of fault-zone fluid pore pressures in a volume of strained crust. The long-term slip rate on cratonic SCR faults is extremely low, so the geomorphic expression of many cratonic SCR faults is subtle, and scarps may be difficult to detect because they are poorly preserved. Both the Roopena and Hyden faults are in areas of limited or no significant seismicity; these and other faults that we have studied indicate that many potentially hazardous SCR faults cannot be recognized solely on the basis of instrumental data or historical earthquakes. Although cratonic SCR faults may appear to be nonhazardous because they have been historically aseismic, those that are favorably oriented for movement in the current stress field can and have produced unexpected damaging earthquakes. Paleoseismic studies of modern and prehistoric SCR faulting events provide the basis for understanding of the long-term behavior of these faults and ultimately contribute to better seismic-hazard assessments.

South Australia↗
USGS1996

Review of Seismic Hazard Issues Associated with Auburn Dam Project, Sierra Nevada Foothills, California

Summary -- The U.S. Geological Survey was requested by the U.S. Department of the Interior to review the design values and the issue of reservoir-induced seismicity for a concrete gravity dam near the site of the previously-proposed Auburn Dam in the western foothills of the Sierra Nevada, central California. The dam is being planned as a flood-control-only dam with the possibility of conversion to a permanent water-storage facility. As a basis for planning studies the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is using the same design values approved by the Secretary of the Interior in 1979 for the original Auburn Dam. These values were a maximum displacement of 9 inches on a fault intersecting the dam foundation, a maximum earthquake at the site of magnitude 6.5, a peak horizontal acceleration of 0.64 g, and a peak vertical acceleration of 0.39 g. In light of geological and seismological investigations conducted in the western Sierran foothills since 1979 and advances in the understanding of how earthquakes are caused and how faults behave, we have developed the following conclusions and recommendations: Maximum Displacement. Neither the pre-1979 nor the recent observations of faults in the Sierran foothills precisely define the maximum displacement per event on a fault intersecting the dam foundation. Available field data and our current understanding of surface faulting indicate a range of values for the maximum displacement. This may require the consideration of a design value larger than 9 inches. We recommend reevaluation of the design displacement using current seismic hazard methods that incorporate uncertainty into the estimate of this design value. Maximum Earthquake Magnitude. There are no data to indicate that a significant change is necessary in the use of an M 6.5 maximum earthquake to estimate design ground motions at the dam site. However, there is a basis for estimating a range of maximum magnitudes using recent field information and new statistical fault relations. We recommend reevaluating the maximum earthquake magnitude using current seismic hazard methodology. Design Ground Motions. A large number of strong-motion records have been acquired and significant advances in understanding of ground motion have been achieved since the original evaluations. The design value for peak horizontal acceleration (0.64 g) is larger than the median of one recent study and smaller than the median value of another. The value for peak vertical acceleration (0.39 g) is somewhat smaller than median values of two recent studies. We recommend a reevaluation of the design ground motions that takes into account new ground motion data with particular attention to rock sites at small source distances. Reservoir-Induced Seismicity. The potential for reservoir-induced seismicity must be considered for the Auburn Darn project. A reservoir-induced earthquake is not expected to be larger than the maximum naturally occurring earthquake. However, the probability of an earthquake may be enhanced by reservoir impoundment. A flood-control-only project may involve a lower probability of significant induced seismicity than a multipurpose water-storage dam. There is a need to better understand and quantify the likelihood of this hazard. A methodology should be developed to quantify the potential for reservoir induced seismicity using seismicity data from the Sierran foothills, new worldwide observations of induced and triggered seismicity, and current understanding of the earthquake process. Reevaluation of Design Parameters. The reevaluation of the maximum displacement, maximum magnitude earthquake, and design ground motions can be made using available field observations from the Sierran foothills, updated statistical relations for faulting and ground motions, and current computational seismic hazard methodologies that incorporate uncertainty into the analysis. The reevaluation does not require significant new geological field studies.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2001

Known and suggested quaternary faulting in the midcontinent United States

The midcontinent United States between the Appalachian and Rocky Mountains contains 40 known faults or other potentially tectonic features for which published geologic information shows or suggests Quaternary tectonic faulting. We report results of a systematic evaluation of published and other publicly available geologic evidence of Quaternary faulting. These results benefit seismic-hazard assessments by (1) providing some constraints on the recurrence intervals and magnitudes of large, prehistoric earthquakes, and (2) identifying features that warrant additional study. For some features, suggested Quaternary tectonic faulting has been disproved, whereas, for others, the suggested faulting remains questionable. Of the 40 features, nine have clear geologic evidence of Quaternary tectonic faulting associated with prehistoric earthquakes, and another six features have evidence of nontectonic origins. An additional 12 faults, uplifts, or historical seismic zones lack reported paleoseismological evidence of large. Quaternary earthquakes. The remaining 13 features require further paleoseismological study to determine if they have had Quaternary earthquakes that were larger than any known from local historical records; seven of these 13 features are in or near urbanized areas where their study could affect urban hazard estimates. These seven are: (1) the belt of normal faults that rings the Gulf of Mexico from Florida to Texas. (2) the Northeast Ohio seismic zone, (3) the Valmont and (4) Goodpasture faults of Colorado. (5) the Champlain lowlands normal faults of New York State and Vermont, and (6) the Lexington and (7) Kentucky River fault systems of eastern Kentucky. Published by Elsevier Science B.V.

Engineering Geology↗
USGS2023

The 2023 US 50-State National Seismic Hazard Model: Overview and implications

The US National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) was updated in 2023 for all 50 states using new science on seismicity, fault ruptures, ground motions, and probabilistic techniques to produce a standard of practice for public policy and other engineering applications (defined for return periods greater than ∼475 or less than ∼10,000 years). Changes in 2023 time-independent seismic hazard (both increases and decreases compared to previous NSHMs) are substantial because the new model considers more data and updated earthquake rupture forecasts and ground-motion components. In developing the 2023 model, we tried to apply best available or applicable science based on advice of co-authors, more than 50 reviewers, and hundreds of hazard scientists and end-users, who attended public workshops and provided technical inputs. The hazard assessment incorporates new catalogs, declustering algorithms, gridded seismicity models, magnitude-scaling equations, fault-based structural and deformation models, multi-fault earthquake rupture forecast models, semi-empirical and simulation-based ground-motion models, and site amplification models conditioned on shear-wave velocities of the upper 30 m of soil and deeper sedimentary basin structures. Seismic hazard calculations yield hazard curves at hundreds of thousands of sites, ground-motion maps, uniform-hazard response spectra, and disaggregations developed for pseudo-spectral accelerations at 21 oscillator periods and two peak parameters, Modified Mercalli Intensity, and 8 site classes required by building codes and other public policy applications. Tests show the new model is consistent with past ShakeMap intensity observations. Sensitivity and uncertainty assessments ensure resulting ground motions are compatible with known hazard information and highlight the range and causes of variability in ground motions. We produce several impact products including building seismic design criteria, intensity maps, planning scenarios, and engineering risk assessments showing the potential physical and social impacts. These applications provide a basis for assessing, planning, and mitigating the effects of future earthquakes.

Earthquake Spectra↗
USGS2023

Sediment thickness map of United States Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain Strata, and their influence on earthquake ground motions

With the recent successful accounting of basin depth ground-motion adjustments in seismic hazard analyses for select areas of the western United States, we move toward implementing similar adjustments in the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains by constructing a sediment thickness model and evaluating multiple relevant site amplification models for central and eastern United States seismic hazard analyses. We digitize and combine existing sediment thickness data sets into a composite surface that delineates the base of Cretaceous sediments under the Atlantic Coastal Plain and the base of Mesozoic sediments under the Gulf Coastal Plain. Amplification models dependent on sediment thickness, site natural period, and source-to-site path length are compared with data sets of observed ground motions to evaluate the ability of the new models to improve ground motion estimates. We find that the amplification models can account for observed trends in sediment-thickness and period-dependent residuals, but some tuning is required. For example, the model of Chapman and Guo requires a reference V S 30 , the time-averaged shear-wave velocity within 30 m of the Earth’s surface, for non-Coastal Plain sites, which we estimate to be between about 1 and 2 km/s. Along with our sediment thickness model, we estimate a velocity profile for application to the Harmon et al. site-natural-period-based model in order to best match the Chapman and Guo period dependence for a broad range of sediment thicknesses. The Next Generation of Attenuation models for the eastern United States Gulf Coast path-based adjustment models can also account for seismic attenuation in the Coastal Plain sediments and reduce the standard deviation of total residuals. If enacted in the U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Model, these amplification models will reduce predicted short-period (<1 s) and increase predicted long-period (>1 s) ground motions in the Coastal Plains appreciably.

Earthquake Spectra↗
USGS2022

Portable optically stimulated luminescence age map of a paleoseismic exposure

The quality and quantity of geochronologic data used to constrain the history of major earthquakes in a region exerts a first-order control on the accuracy of seismic hazard assessments that affect millions of people. However, evaluations of geochronological data are limited by uncertainties related to inherently complex depositional processes that may vary spatially and temporally. To improve confidence in models of earthquake timing, we use a high-density suite of radiocarbon and optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) ages with a grid of 342 portable OSL samples to explore spatiotemporal trends in geochronological data across an exemplary normal fault colluvial wedge exposure. The data reveal a two-dimensional age map of the paleoseismic exposure and demonstrate how vertical and horizontal trends in age relate to dominant sedimentary facies and soil characteristics at the site. Portable OSL data provide critical context for the interpretation of 14 C and OSL ages, show that geochronologic age boundaries between pre- and post-earthquake deposits do not match stratigraphic contacts, and provide the basis for selecting alternate Bayesian models of earthquake timing. Our results demonstrate the potential to use emergent, portable OSL methods to dramatically improve paleoseismic constraints on earthquake timing.

Utah↗
USGS2004

Sensitivity analysis of seismic hazard for the northwestern portion of the state of Gujarat, India

We test the sensitivity of seismic hazard to three fault source models for the northwestern portion of Gujarat, India. The models incorporate different characteristic earthquake magnitudes on three faults with individual recurrence intervals of either 800 or 1600 years. These recurrence intervals imply that large earthquakes occur on one of these faults every 266-533 years, similar to the rate of historic large earthquakes in this region during the past two centuries and for earthquakes in intraplate environments like the New Madrid region in the central United States. If one assumes a recurrence interval of 800 years for large earthquakes on each of three local faults, the peak ground accelerations (PGA; horizontal) and 1-Hz spectral acceleration ground motions (5% damping) are greater than 1 g over a broad region for a 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years' hazard level. These probabilistic PGAs at this hazard level are similar to median deterministic ground motions. The PGAs for 10% in 50 years' hazard level are considerably lower, generally ranging between 0.2 g and 0.7 g across northwestern Gujarat. Ground motions calculated from our models that consider fault interevent times of 800 years are considerably higher than other published models even though they imply similar recurrence intervals. These higher ground motions are mainly caused by the application of intraplate attenuation relations, which account for less severe attenuation of seismic waves when compared to the crustal interplate relations used in these previous studies. For sites in Bhuj and Ahmedabad, magnitude (M) 7 3/4 earthquakes contribute most to the PGA and the 0.2- and 1-s spectral acceleration ground motion maps at the two considered hazard levels. ?? 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Tectonophysics↗
USGS1990

Volcano hazard mitigation program in Indonesia

Volcanological investigations in Indonesia were started in the 18th century, when Valentijn in 1726 prepared a chronological report of the eruption of Banda Api volcno, Maluku. Modern and intensive volcanological studies did not begin until the catastrophic eruption of Kelut volcano, East Java, in 1919. The eruption took 5,011 lives and destroyed thousands of acres of coffee plantation. An eruption lahar generated by the crater lake water mixed with volcanic eruptions products was the cause of death for a high number of victims. An effort to mitigate the danger from volcanic eruption was first initiated in 1921 by constructing a tunnel to drain the crater lake water of Kelut volcano. At the same time a Volcanological Survey was established by the government with the responsibility of seeking every means for minimizing the hazard caused by volcanic eruption.

Earthquakes & Volcanoes (USGS)↗
USGS2000

Active, capable, and potentially active faults - a paleoseismic perspective

Maps of faults (geologically defined source zones) may portray seismic hazards in a wide range of completeness depending on which types of faults are shown. Three fault terms - active, capable, and potential - are used in a variety of ways for different reasons or applications. Nevertheless, to be useful for seismic-hazards analysis, fault maps should encompass a time interval that includes several earthquake cycles. For example, if the common recurrence in an area is 20,000-50,000 years, then maps should include faults that are 50,000-100,000 years old (two to five typical earthquake cycles), thus allowing for temporal variability in slip rate and recurrence intervals. Conversely, in more active areas such as plate boundaries, maps showing faults that are <10,000 years old should include those with at least 2 to as many as 20 paleoearthquakes. For the International Lithosphere Programs' Task Group II-2 Project on Major Active Faults of the World our maps and database will show five age categories and four slip rate categories that allow one to select differing time spans and activity rates for seismic-hazard analysis depending on tectonic regime. The maps are accompanied by a database that describes evidence for Quaternary faulting, geomorphic expression, and paleoseismic parameters (slip rate, recurrence interval and time of most recent surface faulting). These maps and databases provide an inventory of faults that would be defined as active, capable, and potentially active for seismic-hazard assessments.

Journal of Geodynamics↗
USGS2021

Preface to the Focus Section on the 2020 Intermountain West earthquakes

The Intermountain West region of the United States extends from the eastern margin of the Sierra Nevada and Cascade Mountains in the west to the Rocky Mountains in the east. The region is characterized by dextral shear along the eastern margin of the Sierra Nevada and nearly east-west extension in the Basin and Range. This region experienced four significant earthquake sequences in the first half of 2020. The most significant mainshocks were the 18 March 2020 Mw 5.7 earthquake north of Magna, Utah (a suburb of Salt Lake City), the 31 March 2020 Mw 6.5 earthquake northwest of Stanley, Idaho, the 15 May 2020 Mw 6.5 earthquake in the Monte Cristo Range, northwest of Tonopah, Nevada, and the 24 June 2020 Mw 5.8 earthquake near Lone Pine, California. The 15 articles appearing in this focus section explore timely and important topics associated with these sequences, including kinematic rupture models, near-field ground motions, aftershock statistics, geologic observations, seismic hazard implications, and seismotectonics. It is noteworthy that the efforts to record and characterize these earthquake sequences took place during travel and work restrictions necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2011

USGS remote sensing coordination for the 2010 Haiti earthquake

In response to the devastating 12 January 2010, earthquake in Haiti, the US Geological Survey (USGS) provided essential coordinating services for remote sensing activities. Communication was rapidly established between the widely distributed response teams and data providers to define imaging requirements and sensor tasking opportunities. Data acquired from a variety of sources were received and archived by the USGS, and these products were subsequently distributed using the Hazards Data Distribution System (HDDS) and other mechanisms. Within six weeks after the earthquake, over 600,000 files representing 54 terabytes of data were provided to the response community. The USGS directly supported a wide variety of groups in their use of these data to characterize post-earthquake conditions and to make comparisons with pre-event imagery. The rapid and continuing response achieved was enabled by existing imaging and ground systems, and skilled personnel adept in all aspects of satellite data acquisition, processing, distribution and analysis. The information derived from image interpretation assisted senior planners and on-site teams to direct assistance where it was most needed.

Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing↗
USGS2011

Ground motion attenuation during M 7.1 Darfield and M 6.2 Christchurch, New Zealand, earthquakes and performance of global predictive models

The M 7.1 Darfield earthquake occurred 40 km west of Christchurch (New Zealand) on 4 September 2010. Six months after, the city was struck again with an M 6.2 event on 22 February local time (21 February UTC). These events resulted in significant damage to infrastructure in the city and its suburbs. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the performance of global predictive models (GMPEs) using the strong motion data obtained from these two events to improve future seismic hazard assessment and building code provisions for the Canterbury region. The Canterbury region is located on the boundary between the Pacific and Australian plates; its surface expression is the active right lateral Alpine fault (Berryman et al. 1993). Beneath the North Island and the north South Island, the Pacific plate subducts obliquely under the Australian plate, while at the southwestern part of the South Island, a reverse process takes place. Although New Zealand has experienced several major earthquakes in the past as a result of its complex seismotectonic environment ( e.g. , M 7.1 1888 North Canterbury, M 7.0 1929 Arthur's Pass, and M 6.2 1995 Cass), there was no evidence of prior seismic activity in Christchurch and its surroundings before the September event. The Darfield and Christchurch earthquakes occurred along the previously unmapped Greendale fault in the Canterbury basin, which is covered by Quaternary alluvial deposits (Forsyth et al. 2008). In Figure 1, site conditions of the Canterbury epicentral area are depicted on a V S 30 map. This map was determined on the basis of topographic slope calculated from a 1-km grid using the method of Allen and Wald (2007). Also shown are the locations of strong motion stations. The Darfield event was generated as a result of a complex rupture mechanism; the recordings and geodetic data reveal that earthquake consists of three sub-events (Barnhart et al. 201 1 , page 815 of this issue). The first event was due to rupturing of a blind reverse fault with M 6.2, followed by a second event (M 6.9), releasing the largest portion of the energy on the right-lateral Greendale fault. The third sub-event (M 5.7) is due to a reverse fault with a right-lateral component (Holden et al. 2011). The Christchurch earthquake occurred on an oblique thrust fault. The comparison of spectral acceleration values at stations near Christchurch reveals that the second event produced much larger amplitudes of shaking than the Darfield event due to its proximity to the epicenter. Both events resulted in noticeably large amplitudes of the vertical motion, often exceeding horizontal motion in the near-fault area. The vertical motions, showing asymmetric acceleration traces and pulses, reached 1.26 g during the Darfield earthquake and 2.2 g during the Christchurch event. These events were recorded by more than 100 strong motion stations operated by the Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences (http://www.geonet.org.nz/). Using the processed data from these stations, peak ground acceleration (PGA) and 5%-damped spectral acceleration values at 0.3, 1, and 3 s are used for performance evaluation of the global ground motion predictive equations (GMPEs). The selected GMPEs are the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA) models of Abrahamson and Silva (2008), Boore and Atkinson (2008), Campbell and Bozorgnia (2008), and Chiou and Youngs (2008). The Graizer and Kalkan (2007, 2009) model, which is based on the NGA project database, is also included. These GMPEs are abbreviated respectively as AS08, BA08, CB08, CY08, and GK07. Because they have been used widely for seismic hazard analysis for crustal earthquakes, their performance assessment becomes a critical issue especially for immediate response and recovery planning after major events. The occurrence of aftershocks similar to the Christchurch event will most probably control seismic hazard in the broader area, as confirmed by the recent M 6.0 event on June 13, 2011.

Christchurch, Darfield↗
USGS2012

Seismic hazard of American Samoa and neighboring South Pacific Islands--methods, data, parameters, and results

American Samoa and the neighboring islands of the South Pacific lie near active tectonic-plate boundaries that host many large earthquakes which can result in strong earthquake shaking and tsunamis. To mitigate earthquake risks from future ground shaking, the Federal Emergency Management Agency requested that the U.S. Geological Survey prepare seismic hazard maps that can be applied in building-design criteria. This Open-File Report describes the data, methods, and parameters used to calculate the seismic shaking hazard as well as the output hazard maps, curves, and deaggregation (disaggregation) information needed for building design. Spectral acceleration hazard for 1 Hertz having a 2-percent probability of exceedance on a firm rock site condition (Vs30=760 meters per second) is 0.12 acceleration of gravity (1 second, 1 Hertz) and 0.32 acceleration of gravity (0.2 seconds, 5 Hertz) on American Samoa, 0.72 acceleration of gravity (1 Hertz) and 2.54 acceleration of gravity (5 Hertz) on Tonga, 0.15 acceleration of gravity (1 Hertz) and 0.55 acceleration of gravity (5 Hertz) on Fiji, and 0.89 acceleration of gravity (1 Hertz) and 2.77 acceleration of gravity (5 Hertz) on the Vanuatu Islands.

South Pacific Islands↗
USGS2004

Delineation of tectonic provinces of New York state as a component of seismic-hazard evaluation

Seismic-hazard evaluations in the eastern United States must be based on interpretations of the composition and form of Proterozoic basement-rock terranes and overlying Paleozoic strata, and on factors that can cause relative movements among their units, rather than Phanerozoic orogenic structures, which may be independent of modern tectonics. The tectonic-province concept is a major part of both probabilistic and deterministic seismic-hazard evaluations, yet those that have been proposed to date have not attempted to geographically correlate modern earthquakes with regional basement structure. Comparison of basement terrane (megablock) boundaries with the spatial pattern of modern seismicity may lead to the mechanically sound definition of tectonic provinces, and thus, better seismic-hazard evaluation capability than is currently available. Delineation of megablock boundaries will require research on the many factors that affect their structure and movement. This paper discusses and groups these factors into two broad categories-megablock tectonics in relation to seismicity and regional horizontal-compressive stresses, with megablock tectonics divided into subcategories of basement, overlying strata, regional lineaments, basement tectonic terranes, earthquake epicenter distribution, and epeirogeny, and compressive stresses divided into pop-ups and the contemporary maximum horizontal-compressive stress field. A list presenting four to nine proposed research topics for each of these categories is given at the end.

Northeastern Geology and Environmental Sciences↗
USGS2020

Evaluation of seismic hazard models with fragile geologic features

We provide an overview of a 2019 workshop on the use of fragile geologic features (FGFs) to evaluate seismic hazard models. FGFs have been scarcely utilized in the evaluation of seismic hazard models, despite nearly 30 yr having passed since the first recognition of their potential value. Recently, several studies have begun to focus on the implementation of FGFs in seismic hazard modeling. The workshop was held to capture a “snapshot” of the state‐of‐the‐art in FGF work and to define key research areas that would increase confidence in FGF‐based evaluation of seismic hazard models. It was held at the annual meeting of the Southern California Earthquake Center on 8 September 2019, and the conveners were Mark Stirling (University of Otago, New Zealand) and Michael Oskin (University of California, Davis). The workshop attracted 44 participants from a wide range of disciplines. The main topics of discussion were FGF fragility age estimation (age at which an FGF achieved its current fragile geometry), fragility estimation, FGF‐based evaluation of seismic hazard models, and ethical considerations relating to documentation and preservation of FGFs. There are now many scientists working on, or motivated to work on, FGFs, and more types of FGFs are being worked on than just the precariously balanced rock (PBR) variety. One of the ideas presented at the workshop is that fragility ages for FGFs should be treated stochastically rather than assuming that all share a common age. In a similar vein, new studies propose more comprehensive methods of fragility assessment beyond peak ground acceleration and peak ground velocity‐based approaches. Two recent studies that apply PBRs to evaluate probabilistic seismic hazard models use significantly different methods of evaluation. Key research needs identified from the workshop will guide future, focused efforts that will ultimately facilitate the uptake of FGFs in seismic hazard analysis.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2001

Paleoliquefaction studies in continental setting; geologic and geotechnical factors in interpretations and back-analysis

Paleoliquefaction research in the last 15 years has greatly improved our ability to interpret the paleoseismic record throughout some large geographic areas, especially in regions of infrequent large earthquakes. Paleoliquefaction studies have been used extensively in the central and eastern U.S. to assess seismic hazards, and could be used elsewhere to good purpose because paleoliquefaction studies in some field settings can reveal more than other methods, such as fault studies, about the prehistoric strength of shaking and earthquake magnitude. We present guidelines for the conduct of a paleoliquefaction study in continental deposits, mainly in terms of the geologic/seismologic setting and geotechnical properties, because a successful interpretation requires factors from all these disciplines. No single discipline suffices alone. Their interactions must be appreciated in order to understand why seismically induced liquefaction features are found in some locales and not in others. The guidelines that we present also relate to three primary issues for which liquefaction features are especially useful for interpretations: Where was the tectonic source? What was the strength of shaking? And what was the magnitude? In discussing these issues we focus on the following aspects of level-ground liquefaction: (1) mechanisms that form seismic liquefaction features in the field; (2) field settings where liquefaction features should be present if strong seismic shaking has occurred; (3) field settings where an absence of liquefaction features indicates an absence of strong seismic shaking; (4) how liquefaction features should be used to interpret the tectonic source locale of a paleo-earthquake; and (5) how effects of liquefaction can be used to back-calculate the strength of shaking as well as earthquake magnitude. Several methods are available to back-calculate the strength of shaking and earthquake magnitude, and the most commonly used methods are presented and critiqued. Our critique of these methods points out the uncertainties attending each. Paleoliquefaction/paleoseismic case histories are presented to illustrate potential uncertainties in back-calculations and procedures to overcome these uncertainties. Reasonable confidence in paleoseismic interpretation generally requires using multiple methods of back-analysis, and achieving similar results from each method. An alternate approach can be used for paleo-earthquakes that were large enough to have caused liquefaction in a variety of geologic settings, in which there were differing factors affecting surface ground motions and liquefaction susceptibility. For this situation, a method such as the cyclic-stress method can be used to make back-calculations that can be cross-checked with results from other settings.

Open-File Report↗