SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “The Seismic Record”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 1,693 records · Page 94Linked to original sources

USGS1979

Seismicity map of the State of Georgia

The earthquake data shown on this map and listed in table 1 are a list of earthquakes that were originally used in preparing the Seismic Risk Studies in the United States (Algermissen, 1969) which have been recompiled and updated through 1977. The data have been reexamined and intensities assigned where none had been assigned before, on the basis of available data. Other intensity values were updated from new and additional data sources that were not available at the time of original compilation. Some epicenters were relocated on the basis of new information. The data shown in table 1 are estimates of the most accurate hypocenter, magnitude, and intensity of each earthquake, on the basis of historical and current information. Known or suspected explosions are listed in table 1 but are not plotted on the seismicity map. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map. The latitude and longitude were rounded to the nearest tenth of a degree and sorted so that all identical locations were grouped together and counted. A triangle represents the epicenter plotted to a tenth of a degree. The number of earthquakes at each location is shown on the map by the number to the right of the triangle. A Roman numeral to the left of a triangle is the maximum Modified Mercalli intensity (Wood and Neumann, 1931) of all earthquakes located at that geographic position. The absence of an intensity value indicates that no intensities have been assigned to earthquakes at that location. A year shown below a triangle is the latest year for which the maximum intensity was recorded.

Georgia↗

USGS2019

Sampling the volatile-rich transition zone beneath Bermuda

Intraplate magmatic provinces found away from active plate boundaries, provide direct sampling of the Earth’s mantle composition and heterogeneity. Observed chemical heterogeneities in the mantle are commonly attributed to recycling during subduction1-3, which allows for the addition of volatiles and incompatible elements into the mantle. Although many intraplate volcanoes sample deep mantle reservoirs, possibly at the core-mantle boundary4,5, not all intraplate volcanoes are deep rooted6 and reservoirs in other shallower boundary layers likely participate in magma generation. Here we present new evidence that suggests that Bermuda sampled a previously unknown mantle domain, characterized by silica under-saturated melts that have significant enrichments in incompatible elements and volatiles, and a unique, extreme isotopic signature. Bermuda records the most radiogenic 206Pb/204Pb isotopes ever documented in an ocean basin (19.9-21.7), coupled with low 207Pb/204Pb (15.5-15.6) and relatively invariant Sr, Nd, and Hf isotopes, suggesting that this source must be <650 Ma. We interpret the Bermuda source as a new, transient mantle reservoir that resulted from recycling and storage of incompatible elements and volatiles7-10 in the transition zone, aided by the fractionation of Pb by minerals that are only stable in this boundary layer such as K-Hollandite11-12. Recent recycling and storage of material into the transition zone suggests that this reservoir can only be found in the Atlantic Ocean. Our geodynamic models suggest that this layer was sampled by disturbances related to mantle flow. Seismic studies have shown that recycled materials can be stored in the transition zone13. For the first time we show geochemical evidence that this storage is key in the generation of extreme isotopic domains previously thought to be related only to deep recycling.

Nature↗

USGS2009

V P Structure of Mount St. Helens, Washington, USA, imaged with local earthquake tomography

We present a new P-wave velocity model for Mount St. Helens using local earthquake data recorded by the Pacific Northwest Seismograph Stations and Cascades Volcano Observatory since the 18 May 1980 eruption. These data were augmented with records from a dense array of 19 temporary stations deployed during the second half of 2005. Because the distribution of earthquakes in the study area is concentrated beneath the volcano and within two nearly linear trends, we used a graded inversion scheme to compute a coarse-grid model that focused on the regional structure, followed by a fine-grid inversion to improve spatial resolution directly beneath the volcanic edifice. The coarse-grid model results are largely consistent with earlier geophysical studies of the area; we find high-velocity anomalies NW and NE of the edifice that correspond with igneous intrusions and a prominent low-velocity zone NNW of the edifice that corresponds with the linear zone of high seismicity known as the St. Helens Seismic Zone. This low-velocity zone may continue past Mount St. Helens to the south at depths below 5??km. Directly beneath the edifice, the fine-grid model images a low-velocity zone between about 2 and 3.5??km below sea level that may correspond to a shallow magma storage zone. And although the model resolution is poor below about 6??km, we found low velocities that correspond with the aseismic zone between about 5.5 and 8??km that has previously been modeled as the location of a large magma storage volume. ?? 2009 Elsevier B.V.

Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research↗

USGS1997

Source and path effects in the wave fields of tremor and explosions at Stromboli Volcano, Italy

The wave fields generated by Strombolian activity are investigated using data from small-aperture seismic arrays deployed on the north flank of Stromboli and data from seismic and pressure transducers set up near the summit crater. Measurements of slowness and azimuth as a function of time clearly indicate that the sources of tremor and explosions are located beneath the summit crater at depths shallower than 200 m with occasional bursts of energy originating from sources extending to a depth of 3 km. Slowness, azimuth, and particle motion measurements reveal a complex composition of body and surface waves associated with topography, structure, and source properties. Body waves originating at depths shallower than 200 m dominate the wave field at frequencies of 0.5–2.5 Hz, and surface waves generated by the surficial part of the source and by scattering sources distributed around the island dominate at frequencies above 2.5 Hz. The records of tremor and explosions are both dominated by SH motion. Far-field records from explosions start with radial motion, and near-field records from those events show dominantly horizontal motion and often start with a low-frequency (1–2 Hz) precursor characterized by elliptical particle motion, followed within a few seconds by a high-frequency radial phase (1–10 Hz) accompanying the eruption of pyroclastics. The dominant component of the near- and far-field particle motions from explosions, and the timing of air and body wave phases observed in the near field, are consistent with a gas-piston mechanism operating on a shallow (<200 m deep), vertical crack-like conduit. Models of a degassing fluid column suggest that noise emissions originating in the collective oscillations of bubbles ascending in the magma conduit may provide an adequate self-excitation mechanism for sustained tremor generation at Stromboli.

Journal of Geophysical Research B: Solid Earth↗

USGS1977

In-situ measurements of seismic velocities in the San Francisco Bay Region; part III

Seismic wave velocities (compressional and shear) are important parameters for estimating the seismic response characteristics of various geologic units when subjected to strong earthquake ground shaking. Seismic velocities of various units often show a strong correlation with the amounts of damage following large earthquakes and have been used as a basis for certain types of seismic zonation studies. In the current program seismic velocities have been measured at 59 locations 1n the San Francisco Bay Region. This report is the third in a series of Open-File Reports and describes the in-situ velocity measurements at locations 35-59. At each location seismic travel times are measured in drill holes, normally at 2.5-m intervals to a depth of 30 m. Geologic logs are determined from drill cuttings, undisturbed (cored) samples, and penetrometer samples. The data provide a detailed comparison of geologic and seismic characteristics and provide parameters for estimating strong earthquake ground motions quantitatively at each of the sites. A major emphasis of this program is to obtain a detailed comparison of geologic and seismic data on a regional scale for use in seismic zonation. There is a variety of geologic and seismic data available in the San Francisco Bay Region for use 1n developing the general zoning techniques which can then be applied to other areas. Shear wave velocities 1n near-surface geologic materials are of especial interest for engineering seismology and seismic zonation studies, yet in general, they are difficult to measure because of contamination by compressional waves. A comparison of various in-situ techniques by Warrick (1974) establishes the reliability of the method utilizing a "horizontal traction" source for sites underlain by bay mud and alluvium. Gibbs, and others (1975a) present data from 12 holes and establishes the reliability of the method for sites underlain by a variety of different rock units and suggest extending the measurements to a large number of sites. Data collected from the first 12 holes also provide an opportunity for developing a routine and efficient procedure for collection and reduction of the data. Gibbs and others (1975b) report preliminary comparisons of the data with the amplification data recorded from nuclear explosions, and the intensity data for the 1906 earthquake. These comparisons show that correlations exist between the three data sets. Average shear wave velocity in each geologic unit form the basis for the preliminary correlations, however, some of the geologic units (that is, granite and Franciscan Formation) exhibit a wide range of shear wave velocity. It is apparent that other factors must be considered in these units, perhaps near surface weathering or fracture spacing. Work is continuing in this area.

California↗

USGS2014

Advantages of active love wave techniques in geophysical characterizations of seismographic station - Case studies in California and the central and eastern United States

Active-source Love waves, recorded by the multi-channel analysis of surface wave (MASLW) technique, were recently analyzed in two site characterization projects. Between 2010 and 2012, the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funded GEOVision to conduct geophysical investigations at 191 seismographic stations in California and the Central Eastern U.S. (CEUS). The original project plan was to utilize active and passive Rayleigh wave-based techniques to obtain shear-wave velocity (VS) profiles to a minimum depth of 30 m and the time-averaged VS of the upper 30 meters (VS30). Early in this investigation it became clear that Rayleigh wave techniques, such as multi-channel analysis of surface waves (MASRW), were not suited for characterizing all sites. Shear-wave seismic refraction and MASLW techniques were therefore applied. In 2012, the Electric Power Research Institute funded characterization of 33 CEUS station sites. Based on experience from the ARRA investigation, both MASRW and MASLW data were acquired by GEOVision at 24 CEUS sites. At shallow rock sites, sites with steep velocity gradients, and, sites with a thin, low velocity, surficial soil layer overlying stiffer sediments, Love wave techniques generally were found to be easier to interpret, i.e., Love wave data typically yielded unambiguous fundamental mode dispersion curves and thus, reduce uncertainty in the resultant VS model. These types of velocity structure often excite dominant higher modes in Rayleigh wave data, but not in the Love wave data. It is possible to model Rayleigh wave data using multi- or effective-mode techniques; however, extraction of Rayleigh wave dispersion data was found to be difficult in many cases. These results imply that field procedures should include careful scrutiny of Rayleigh wave-based dispersion data in order to also collect Love wave data when warranted.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2012

Evaluation of modal pushover-based scaling of one component of ground motion: Tall buildings

Nonlinear response history analysis (RHA) is now increasingly used for performance-based seismic design of tall buildings. Required for nonlinear RHAs is a set of ground motions selected and scaled appropriately so that analysis results would be accurate (unbiased) and efficient (having relatively small dispersion). This paper evaluates accuracy and efficiency of recently developed modal pushover–based scaling (MPS) method to scale ground motions for tall buildings. The procedure presented explicitly considers structural strength and is based on the standard intensity measure (IM) of spectral acceleration in a form convenient for evaluating existing structures or proposed designs for new structures. Based on results presented for two actual buildings (19 and 52 stories, respectively), it is demonstrated that the MPS procedure provided a highly accurate estimate of the engineering demand parameters (EDPs), accompanied by significantly reduced record-to-record variability of the responses. In addition, the MPS procedure is shown to be superior to the scaling procedure specified in the ASCE/SEI 7-05 document.

Earthquake Spectra↗

USGS1991

Seismicity map of the state of Georgia

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U.S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This maps shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of Georgia, even though earthquakes in nearby states or countries may have been felt or may have cause damage in Georgia. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map; these data are a corrected, expanded, and updated (through 1987) version of the data used by Algermissen (1969) for a study of seismic risk in the United States. The locations and intensities of some earthquakes were revised and intensities were assigned where none had been before. Many earthquakes were added to the original list from new data sources as well as from some old data sources that has not been previously used. The data in table 1 represent best estimates of the location of the epicenter, magnitude, and intensity of each earthquake on the basis of historical and current information. Some of the aftershocks from large earthquakes are listed, but not all, especially for earthquakes that occurred before seismic instruments were universally used. The latitude and longitude coordinates of each epicenter were rounded to the nearest tenth of a degree and sorted so that all identical locations were grouped and counted. These locations are represented on the map by a triangle. The number of earthquakes at each location is shown on the map by the Arabic number to the right of the triangle. A Roman numeral to the left of a triangle is the maximum Modified Mercoili intensity (Wood and Neumann, 1931) of all earthquakes at that geographic location, The absence of an intensity value indicates that no intensities have been assigned to earthquakes at that location. The year shown below each triangle is the latest year for which the maximum intensity was recorded.

Georgia↗

USGS1979

Seismicity map of the State of Louisiana

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U. S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This map shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of Louisiana, even though earthquakes in nearby states or countries may have been felt or may have caused damage in Louisiana. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map; these data are a corrected, expanded, and updated (through 1983) version of the data used by Algermissen (1969) for a study of seismic risk in the United States. The locations and intensities of some earthquakes were revised and intensities were assigned where none had been before. Many earthquakes were added to the original list from new data sources as well as from some old data sources that had not been previously used. The data in table 1 represent best estimates of the location of the epicenter, magnitude, and intensity of each earthquake on the basis of historical and current information. Some of the aftershocks from large earthquakes are listed, but not all, especially for earthquakes that occurred before seismic instruments were universally used. The latitude and longitude coordinates of each epicenter were rounded to the nearest tenth of a degree and sorted so that all identical locations were grouped and counted. These locations are represented on the map by a triangle. The number of earthquakes at each location is shown on the map by the arabic number to the right of the triangle. A Roman numeral to the 1eft of a triangle is the maximum Modified Mercalli intensity (Wood and Neumann, 1931) of all earthquakes at that geographic location. The absence of an intensity value indicates that no intensities have been assigned to earthquakes at that location. The year shown below each triangle is the latest year for which the maximum intensity was recorded.

Louisiana↗

USGS1987

Seismicity map of the state of Pennsylvania

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U. S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This map shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of Pennsylvania, even though earthquakes in nearby states may have been felt or may have caused damage in Pennsylvania. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map; these data are a corrected, expanded, and updated (through 1983) version of the data used by Algermissen (1969) for a study of seismic risk in the United States. The locations and intensities of some earthquakes were revised and intensities were assigned where none had been before. Many earthquakes were added to the original list from new data sources as well as from some old data sources that had not been previously used. The data in table 1 represent best estimates of the location of the epicenter, magnitude, and intensity of each earthquake on the basis of historical and current information. Some of the aftershocks from large earthquakes are listed, but not all, especially for earthquakes that occurred before seismic instruments were universally used. The latitude and longitude coordinates of each epicenter were rounded to the nearest tenth of a degree and sorted so that all identical locations were grouped and counted. These locations are represented on the map by a triangle. The number of earthquakes at each location is shown on the map by the arabic number to the right of the triangle. A Roman numeral to the left of a triangle is the maximum Modified Mercalli intensity (Wood and Neumann, 1931) of a11 earthquakes at that geographic location. The absence of an intensity value indicates that no intensities have been assigned to earthquakes at that location. The year shown below each triangle is the latest year for which the maximum intensity was recorded.

Pennsylvania↗

USGS1991

Seismicity map of the state of Idaho

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U.S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This map shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of Idaho, even though earthquakes in nearby states or countries may have been felt or may have caused damage in Idaho. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map; these data are a corrected, expanded, and updated (through 1987) version of the data used by Algermissen (1969) for a study of seismic risk in the United States. The locations and intensities of some earthquakes were revised and intensities were assigned where none had been before. Many earthquakes were added to the original list from new data sources as well as from some old data sources that had not been previously used. The data in table 1 represent earthquake on the basis of historical and current information. Some of the aftershocks from large earthquake are listed, but not all, especially for earthquakes that occurred before seismic instruments were universally used. The latitude and longitude coordinates of each epicenter were rounded to the nearest tenth of a degree and sorted so that all identical locations were grouped and counted. These locations are represented on the map by a triangle. The number of earthquakes at each location is shown on the map by the Arabic number to the right of the triangle. A Roman numeral to the left of a triangle is the maximum Modified Mercalli intensity (Wood and Neumann, 1931) of all earthquakes at that geographic location. The absence of an intensity value indicates that no intensities have been assigned to earthquakes at that location. The year shown below each triangle is the latest year for which the maximum intensity was recorded.

Idaho↗

USGS1987

Seismicity map of the state of Indiana

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U. S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This map shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of Indiana, even though earthquakes in nearby states may have been felt or may have caused damage in Indiana. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map; these data are a corrected, expanded, and updated (through 1983) version of the data used by Algermissen (1969) for a study of seismic risk in the United States. The locations and intensities of some earthquakes were revised and intensities were assigned where none had been before. Many earthquakes were added to the original list from new data sources as well as from some old data sources that had not been previously used. The data in table 1 represent best estimates of the location of the epicenter, magnitude, and intensity of each earthquake on the basis of historical and current information. Some of the aftershocks from large earthquakes are listed, but not all, especially for earthquakes that occurred before seismic instruments were universally used. The latitude and longitude coordinates of each epicenter were rounded to the nearest tenth of a degree and sorted so that all identical locations were grouped and counted. These locations are represented on the map by a triangle. The number of earthquakes at each location is shown on the map by the arabic number to the right of the triangle. A Roman numeral to the left of a triangle is the maximum Modified Mercalli intensity (Wood and Neumann, 1931) of all earthquakes at that geographic location. The absence of an intensity value indicates that no intensities have been assigned to earthquakes at that location. The year shown below each triangle is the latest year for which the maximum intensity was recorded.

Indiana↗

USGS1987

Seismicity map of the state of Ohio

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U. S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This map shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of Ohio, even though earthquakes in nearby states or countries may have been felt or may have caused damage in Ohio. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map; these data are a corrected, expanded, and updated (through 1983) version of the data used by Algermissen (1969) for a study of seismic risk in the United States. The locations and intensities of some earthquakes were revised and intensities were assigned where none had been before. Many earthquakes were added to the original list from new data sources as well as from some old data sources that had not been previously used. The data in table 1 represent best estimates of the location of the epicenter, magnitude, and intensity of each earthquake on the basis of historical and current information. Some of the aftershocks from large earthquakes are listed, but not all, especially for earthquakes that occurred before seismic instruments were universally used. The latitude and longitude coordinates of each epicenter were rounded to the nearest tenth of a degree and sorted so that all identical locations were grouped and counted . These locations are represented on the map by a triangle. The number of earthquakes at each location is shown on the map by the arabic number to the right of the triangle. A Roman numeral to the left of a triangle is the maximum Modified Mercalli intensity (Wood and Neumann, 1931) of all earthquakes at that geographic location. The absence of an intensity value indicates that no intensities have been assigned to earthquakes at that location. The year shown below each triangle is the latest year for which the maximum intensity was recorded.

Ohio↗

USGS1987

Seismicity map of the state of Vermont

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U. S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This map shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of Vermont, even though earthquakes in nearby states or countries may have been felt or may have caused damage in Vermont. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map; these data are a corrected, expanded, and updated (through 1983) version of the data used by Algermissen (1969) for a study of seismic risk in the United States. The locations and intensities of some earthquakes were revised and intensities were assigned where none had been before. Many earthquakes were added to the original list from new data sources as well as from some old data sources that had not been previously used. The data in table 1 represent best estimates of the location of the epicenter, magnitude, and intensity of each earthquake on the basis of historical and current information. Some of the aftershocks from large earthquakes are listed, but not all, especially for earthquakes that occurred before seismic instruments were universally used. The latitude and longitude coordinates of each epicenter were rounded to the nearest tenth of a degree and sorted so that all identical locations were grouped and counted. These locations are represented on the map by a triangle. The number of earthquakes at each location is shown on the map by the arabic number to the right of the triangle. A Roman numeral to the 1eft of a triangle is the maximum Modified Mercalli intensity (Wood and Neumann, 1931) of all earthquakes at that geographic location. The absence of an intensity value indicates that no intensities have been assigned to earthquakes at that location. The year shown below each triangle is the latest year for which the maximum intensity was recorded.

Vermont↗

USGS1987

Seismicity map of the state of North Carolina

This map is one of a series of seismicity maps produced by the U. S. Geological Survey that show earthquake data of individual states or groups of states at the scale of 1:1,000,000. This map shows only those earthquakes with epicenters located within the boundaries of North Carolina, even though earthquakes in nearby states may have been felt or may have caused damage in North Carolina. The data in table 1 were used to compile the seismicity map; these data are a corrected, expanded, and updated (through 1983) version of the data used by Algermissen (1969) for a study of seismic risk in the United States. The locations and intensities of some earthquakes were revised and intensities were assigned where none had been before. Many earthquakes were added to the original list from new data sources as well as from some old data sources that had not been previously used. The data in table 1 represent best estimates of the location of the epicenter, magnitude, and intensity of each earthquake on the basis of historical and current information. Some of the aftershocks from large earthquakes are listed, but not all, especially for earthquakes that occurred before seismic instruments were universally used. The latitude and longitude coordinates of each epicenter were rounded to the nearest tenth of a degree and sorted so that all identical locations were grouped and counted. These locations are represented on the map by a triangle. The number of earthquakes at each location is shown on the map by the arabic number to the right of the triangle. A Roman numeral to the left of a triangle is the maximum Modified Mercalli intensity (Wood and Neumann, 1931) of a11 earthquakes at that geographic location. The absence of an intensity value indicates that no intensities have been assigned to earthquakes at that location. The year shown below each triangle is the latest year for which the maximum intensity was recorded.

North Carolina↗

USGS2010

Tectonic controls on nearshore sediment accumulation and submarine canyon morphology offshore La Jolla, Southern California

CHIRP seismic and swath bathymetry data acquired offshore La Jolla, California provide an unprecedented three-dimensional view of the La Jolla and Scripps submarine canyons. Shore-parallel patterns of tectonic deformation appear to control nearshore sediment thickness and distribution around the canyons. These shore-parallel patterns allow the impact of local tectonic deformation to be separated from the influence of eustatic sea-level fluctuations. Based on stratal geometry and acoustic character, we identify a prominent angular unconformity inferred to be the transgressive surface and three sedimentary sequences: an acoustically laminated estuarine unit deposited during early transgression, an infilling or “healing-phase” unit formed during the transgression, and an upper transparent unit. Beneath the transgressive surface, steeply dipping reflectors with several dip reversals record faulting and folding along the La Jolla margin. Scripps Canyon is located at the crest of an antiform, where the rocks are fractured and more susceptible to erosion. La Jolla Canyon is located along the northern strand of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone, which separates Cretaceous lithified rocks to the south from poorly cemented Eocene sands and gravels to the north. Isopach and structure contour maps of the three sedimentary units reveal how their thicknesses and spatial distributions relate to regional tectonic deformation. For example, the estuarine unit is predominantly deposited along the edges of the canyons in paleotopographic lows that may have been inlets along barrier beaches during the Holocene sea-level rise. The distribution of the infilling unit is controlled by pre-existing relief that records tectonic deformation and erosional processes. The thickness and distribution of the upper transparent unit are controlled by long-wavelength, tectonically induced relief on the transgressive surface and hydrodynamics.

California↗

USGS1996

Application of ground-penetrating radar to investigation of near-surface fault properties in the San Francisco Bay region

In many geologic environments, ground-penetrating radar (GPR) provides high-resolution images of near-surface Earth structure. GPR data collection is nondestructive and very economical. The scale of features detected by GPR lies between those imaged by high-resolution seismic reflection surveys and those exposed in trenches and is therefore potentially complementary to traditional techniques for fault location and mapping. Sixty-two GPR profiles were collected at 12 sites in the San Francisco Bay region. Results show that GPR data correlate with large-scale features in existing trench observations, can be used to locate faults where they are buried or where their positions are not well known, and can identify previously unknown fault segments. The best data acquired were on a profile across the San Andreas fault, traversing Pleistocene terrace deposits south of Olema in Marin County; this profile shows a complicated multi-branched fault system from the ground surface down to about 40 m, the maximum depth for which data were recorded.

California↗

USGS2005

Catalog of earthquake hypocenters at Alaskan volcanoes: January 1 through December 31, 2004

The Alaska Volcano Observatory (AVO), a cooperative program of the U.S. Geological Survey, the Geophysical Institute of the University of Alaska Fairbanks, and the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, has maintained seismic monitoring networks at historically active volcanoes in Alaska since 1988. The primary objectives of the seismic program are the real-time seismic monitoring of active, potentially hazardous, Alaskan volcanoes and the investigation of seismic processes associated with active volcanism. This catalog presents the calculated earthquake hypocenter and phase arrival data, and changes in the seismic monitoring program for the period January 1 through December 31, 2004. These include Mount Wrangell, Mount Spurr, Redoubt Volcano, Iliamna Volcano, Augustine Volcano, Katmai volcanic cluster (Snowy Mountain, Mount Griggs, Mount Katmai, Novarupta, Trident Volcano, Mount Mageik, Mount Martin), Mount Peulik, Aniakchak Crater, Mount Veniaminof, Pavlof Volcano, Mount Dutton, Isanotski Peaks, Shishaldin Volcano, Fisher Caldera, Westdahl Peak, Akutan Peak, Makushin Volcano, Okmok Caldera, Great Sitkin Volcano, Kanaga Volcano, Tanaga Volcano, and Mount Gareloi. Over the past year, formal monitoring of Okmok, Tanaga and Gareloi were announced following an extended period of monitoring to determine the background seismicity at each volcanic center. The seismicity at Mount Peulik was still being studied at the end of 2004 and has yet to be added to the list of monitored volcanoes in the AVO weekly update. AVO located 6928 earthquakes in 2004. Monitoring highlights in 2004 include: (1) an earthquake swarm at Westdahl Peak in January; (2) an increase in seismicity at Mount Spurr starting in February continuing through the end of the year into 2005; (4) low-level tremor, and low-frequency events related to intermittent ash and steam emissions at Mount Veniaminof between April and October; (4) low-level tremor at Shishaldin Volcano between April and October; (5) an earthquake swarm at Akutan in July; and (6) low-level tremor at Okmok Caldera throughout the year (Table 2). Instrumentation and data acquisition highlights in 2004 were the installation of subnetworks on Mount Peulik and Korovin Volcano and the installation of broadband stations to augment the Katmai and Spurr subnetworks. This catalog includes: (1) a description of instruments deployed in the field and their locations; (2) a description of earthquake detection, recording, analysis, and data archival systems; (3) a description of velocity models used for earthquake locations; (4) a summary of earthquakes located in 2004; and (5) an accompanying UNIX tar-file with a summary of earthquake origin times, hypocenters, magnitudes, phase arrival times, and location quality statistics; daily station usage statistics; and all HYPOELLIPSE files used to determine the earthquake locations in 2004.

Alaska↗