Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Surveys in Geophysics”

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 307 records · Page 17Linked to original sources
USGS2010

Late Carboniferous through early Jurassic metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia, Chapter 7 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2010

Middle Jurassic through Quaternary metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia, Chapter 8 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2010

Tectonic and metallogenic model for northeast Asia, Chapter 9 in Metallogenesis and tectonics of northeast Asia

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2010

Appendix A: Description of the Northeast Asia Project and Associated Products

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2009

Appendix B: Description of Map Units for Northeast Asia Summary Geodynamics Map

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2010

Appendix C: Summary of Major Metallogenic Belts in Northeast Asia (the Russian Far East, Yakutia, Siberia, Transbaikalia, Northern China, Mongolia, South Korea, and Japan)

The major purposes of this chapter are to provide (1) an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia for readers who are unfamiliar with the region, (2) a general scientific introduction to the succeeding chapters of this volume, and (3) an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis used in this study. We also describe how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including construction of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit other mineral resource studies, including synthesis of mineral-deposit models; improve prediction of undiscovered mineral deposit as part of a quantitative mineral-resource-assessment studies; assist land-use and mineral-exploration planning; improve interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts, and suggest new research. Research on the metallogenesis and tectonics of such major regions as Northeast Asia (eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology including (1) definitions of key terms, (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions, (3) compilation of a mineral-deposit database that enables a determination of mineral-deposit models and clarification of the relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins, (4) synthesis of a series of mineral-deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits in the region, (5) compilation of a series of metallogenic-belt belts constructed on the regional geologic base map, and (6) construction of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis presented here is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that have been led by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These studies have produced two broad types of publications (1) a series of regional geologic, mineral-deposit, and metallogenic-belt maps, with companion descriptions of the region, and (2) a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of the same region. The study area consists of eastern Russia (most of eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East), Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. The major cooperative agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences; the Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia); VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation; the Mongolian Academy of Sciences; the Mongolian University of Science and Technology; the Mongolian National University; Jilin University, Changchun, People?s Republic of China, the China Geological Survey; the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources; the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST; the University of Texas, Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This study builds on and extends the data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys, and the Geological Survey of Canada. The major products of this project were summarized by Naumova and others (2006) and are described in appendix A.

Professional Paper↗
USGS2002

Preliminary geophysical characterization of two oil production sites, Osage County, Oklahoma - Osage Skiatook Petroleum Environmental Research Project

Ground electromagnetic and dc resistivity geophysical surveys were used to interpret the subsurface distribution of salinized soil, water, and bedrock at two sites (A and B) and to characterize the larger scale hydrologic setting. Measurements were made on grids of about 1000 square meters using a very shallow penetrating (less than 10 m) electromagnetic (EM) geophysical system (EM31). At site A, high subsurface conductivities (more than 100 millisiemens per meter) found below disposal ponds extended down the local hydrologic gradient to below the normal level of near by Lake Skiatook. At site B, areas of highest subsurface electrical conductivity were offset about 10 m from the center of salt scars. The area of high subsurface electrical conductivity extends in the subsurface below the normal level of Skiatook Lake. DC resistivity soundings were made in and around the two sites in order to characterize deeper (30-60 m) electrical properties of the subsurface lithology and ground water. These soundings indicate that the tight shale that dominates the local lithology is moderately electrically conductive (5 milliseimems per meter). DC soundings done in several areas at the Skiatook Lake shoreline indicate an electrically conductive (less than 10 millisiemens per meter) zone exists below the shore even away from the oil production sites. This conductive zone may indicate a mixing between fresh lake water and local ground water that has high dissolved solids. Borehole geophysical logs at site B and laboratory rock property measurements are currently being used to refine interpretation of ground geophysical measurements.

Oklahoma↗
USGS2007

Introduction to Regional Geology, Tectonics, and Metallogenesis of Northeast Asia

Purpose This introduction presents an overview of the regional geology, tectonics, and metallogenesis of Northeast Asia. The major purposes are to provide a relatively short summary of these features for readers who are unfamiliar with Northeast Asia; a general scientific introduction for the succeeding chapters of this volume; and an overview of the methodology of metallogenic and tectonic analysis employed for Northeast Asia. The introduction also describes how a high-quality metallogenic and tectonic analysis, including synthesis of an associated metallogenic-tectonic model will greatly benefit refinement of mineral deposit models and deposit genesis; improvement of assessments of undiscovered mineral resources as part of quantitative mineral resource assessment studies; land-use and mineral exploration planning; improvement of interpretations of the origins of host rocks, mineral deposits, and metallogenic belts; and suggestions for new research. The compilation, synthesis, description, and interpretation of metallogenesis and tectonics of major regions, such as Northeast Asia (Eastern Russia, Mongolia, northern China, South Korea, and Japan) and the Circum-North Pacific (Russian Far East, Alaska, and Canadian Cordillera) requires a complex methodology. The methodology includes: (1) definitions of key terms; (2) compilation of a regional geologic base map that can be interpreted according to modern tectonic concepts and definitions; (3) compilation of a mineral deposit database that enables the determination of mineral deposit models, and relations of deposits to host rocks and tectonic origins; (4) synthesis of a series of mineral deposit models that characterize the known mineral deposits and inferred undiscovered deposits of the region; (5) compilation of a series of maps of metallogenic belts constructed on the regional geologic base map; and (6) formulation of a unified metallogenic and tectonic model. The summary of regional geology and metallogenesis in this introduction is based on publications of the major international collaborative studies of the metallogenesis and tectonics of Northeast Asia that were led by the U.S. Geological Survey. These studies have produced two broad types of publications. One type is a series of regional geologic, mineral deposit, and metallogenic belt maps and companion descriptions for the regions. Examples of major publications of this type are Obolenskiy and others (2003a, b, 2004), Parfenov and others (2003, 2004a, b), Nokleberg and others (2004), Rodionov and others (2004), and Naumova and others (2006). The other type is a suite of metallogenic and tectonic analyses of these same regions. Examples of major publications of this type are Rodionov and others (2004), Nokleberg and others (2000, 2004, 2005), and Naumova and others (2006). The Northeast Asia project area consists of eastern Russia (most of Siberia and most of the Russian Far East), Mongolia, Northern China, South Korea, Japan, and adjacent offshore areas. This area is approximately bounded by 30 to 82? N. latitude and 75 to 144? E. longitude. The major participating agencies are the Russian Academy of Sciences, Academy of Sciences of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia), VNIIOkeangeologia and Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation, Mongolian Academy of Sciences, Mongolian University of Science and Technology, Mongolian National University, Jilin University, Changchun, China, the China Geological Survey, the Korea Institute of Geosciences and Mineral Resources, the Geological Survey of Japan/AIST, University of Texas Arlington, and the U.S. Geological Survey. The Northeast Asia project extends and build on data and interpretations from a previous project on the Major Mineral Deposits, Metallogenesis, and Tectonics of the Russian Far East, Alaska, and the Canadian Cordillera that was conducted by the USGS, the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys,

Open-File Report↗
USGS2021

Conceptual and numerical groundwater flow model of the Cedar River alluvial aquifer system with simulation of drought stress on groundwater availability near Cedar Rapids, Iowa, for 2011 through 2013

Between July 2011 and February 2013, the City of Cedar Rapids observed water level declines in their horizontal collector wells approaching 11 meters. As a result, pumping from these production wells had to be halted, and questions were raised about the reliability of the alluvial aquifer under future drought conditions. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the City of Cedar Rapids, completed a study to better understand the effects of drought stress on the Cedar River alluvial aquifer using a numerical groundwater flow model. Previously published groundwater flow models were combined with newly collected airborne, waterborne, down-hole, and land-based geophysical survey data and provided a detailed three-dimensional lithologic model of the Cedar River alluvial aquifer and surrounding area. An improved conceptual model for the groundwater flow system and a lithologic model were used to build and inform a numerical groundwater flow model capable of simulating water levels observed in the City of Cedar Rapids horizontal collector wells during the 2012 drought. Model performance was assessed primarily on the ability of the model to simulate water table elevation at six monitoring wells. Statistical tests were used to assess the numerical model during the calibration period, and results varied from satisfactory to unsatisfactory, likely because of stage changes in the Cedar River and production well withdrawal rates near monitoring wells. Simulated water levels during the 2012 drought indicated a depression near the horizontal collector wells, although simulated elevations at these locations and at monitoring wells were generally overestimated compared to measured values. The numerical groundwater flow model was modified to account for a decrease in seepage rate caused by low flow in the Cedar River and increased production. With seepage rate modification, model results improved; the simulated water table elevations were like those observed in horizontal collector and monitoring wells. Results demonstrated the ability of the model to simulate water levels observed in the horizontal collector wells during the 2012 drought when accounting for a decrease in infiltration from the Cedar River.

Iowa↗
USGS2009

Magnetotelluric and audiomagnetotelluric groundwater survey along the Humu'ula portion of Saddle Road near and around the Pohakuloa Training Area, Hawaii

The Pohakuloa Training Area (PTA), operated by the U.S. Army on the Big Island of Hawaii, is in need of a reliable potable water supply to sustain ongoing operations by staff and trainees. In an effort to acquire baseline hydrologic data with which to develop a plan for providing that water, a series of magnetotelluric (MT) geophysical surveys was performed that spanned the Mauna Loa/Mauna Kea Saddle region of Hawaii Island. These surveys provided electrical resistivity profiles and resistivity maps at several elevations along the axis of the field measurements that can be interpreted to yield information on the depth to the water table. In 2004 a preliminary sequence of 23 audiomagnetotelluric (AMT) soundings was collected along Saddle Road extending from the Waikii Ranch area, west of the PTA, to Department of Hawaiian Home Lands Humu'ula properties east of the Mauna Kea access road. The results of those soundings showed that highly resistive rocks, consistent with dry basalts, were present to depths of at least one kilometer, the maximum depth to which the AMT technique can reliably reach in Hawaii's rocks. A second survey was conducted in 2008 using MT instruments capable of recovering resistivity data to depths of several kilometers below sea level where saturated formations are known to exist. A total of 30 MT soundings was performed along a roughly east to west transect that extended from the (recently acquired) Keamuku PTA lands on the west to as far as the County of Hawaii's upper Kaumana water supply well to the east. Inversion and processing of the field data yielded an electrical cross-section following the Saddle that roughly parallels the geologic contact between the Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa lavas. Several additional electrical sections were constructed normal to the main transect to investigate the three-dimensional nature of the contact. These resistivity data and models suggest that the elevation of saturated rock in places are 400 to 600 meters above mean sea level beneath the surveyed region. Highest elevations for water-saturated zones based upon preferred electrical models are located between training area 3 and training area 6 southwest of training area 4.

Hawai'i↗
USGS1982

Atlantic continental margin of the United States

The objective of this Decade of North American Geology (D-NAG) volume will be to focus on the Mesozoic and Cenozoic evolution of the U.S. Atlantic continental margin, including the onshore coastal plain, related onshore Triassic-Jurassic rift grabens, and the offshore basins and platforms. Following multiple compressional tectonic episodes between Africa and North America during the Paleozoic Era that formed the Appalachian Mountains, the Mesozoic and Cenozoic Eras were dominated by tensional tectonic processes that separated Africa and North America. Extensional rifting during Triassic and Early Jurassic times resulted in numerous tensional grabens both onshore and offshore, which filled with nonmarine continental red beds, lacustrine deposits, and volcanic flows and debris. The final stage of this breakup between Africa and North America occurred beneath the present outer continental shelf and continental slope during Early or Middle Jurassic time when sea-floor spreading began to form new oceanic crust and lithosophere between the two continents as they drifted apart. Postrift subsidence of the marginal basins continued in response to cooling of the lithosphere and sedimentary loading. Geophysical surveys and oil-exploration drilling along the U.S. Atlantic continental margin during the past 5 years are beginning to answer many questions concerning its deep structure and stratigraphy and how it evolved during the rifting and early sea-floor-spreading stages of the separation of this region from Africa. Earlier geophysical studies of the U.S. continental margin used marine refraction and submarine gravity measurements. Single-channel seismic-reflection, marine magnetic, aeromagnetic, and continuous gravity measurements became available during the 1960s.

DNAG Special Publication↗
USGS1999

Hydrogeology and analysis of aquifer characteristics in west-central Pinellas County, Florida

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Pinellas County, Florida, conducted an investigation to describe the hydrogeology and analyze the aquifer characteristics in west-central Pinellas County. A production test well and four monitor wells were constructed in Pinellas County at Walsingham Park during 1996-97. Water-quality sampling, static and dynamic borehole geophysical surveys, and hydraulic tests were conducted at the wells to delineate the hydrogeology at Walsingham Park. A 9-day aquifer test was conducted to determine the hydraulic characteristics of the aquifer system and observe the changes in water quality due to pumping. A numerical model was constructed to simulate the aquifer test and calculate values for hydraulic conductivity and storage coefficient for permeable zones and confining units at Walsingham Park. Final calibrated values for hydraulic conductivity for the different permeable zones and confining units at the test site were 18 feet per day for Upper Zone A, 750 feet per day for Lower Zone A, 1 foot per day for Zone B, 1x10-4 feet per day for the intermediate confining unit, and 10 feet per day for the semiconfining unit separating Upper Zone A and Lower Zone A. Final calibrated values for storage coefficient were 3.1x10-4 for Upper Zone A, 8.6x10-5 for Lower Zone A, 2.6x10-5 for Zone B, 3.1x10-4 for the intermediate confining unit, and 4.3x10-5 for the semiconfining unit separating Upper Zone A and Lower Zone A. Estimates of transmissivity for Upper Zone A and Lower Zone A were about 2,500 and 37,500 feet squared per day, respectively.

Florida↗
USGS1996

Assessment of the hydrogeology and water quality in a near-shore well field, Sarasota, Florida

The city of Sarasota, Florida, operates a downtown well field that pumps mineralized water from ground water sources to supply a reverse osmosis plant. Because of the close proximity of the well field to Sarasota Bay and the high sulfate and chloride concentrations of ground-water supplies, a growing concern exists about the possibility of lateral movement of saltwater in a landward direction (intrusion) and vertical movement of relict sea water (upconing). In 1992, the U.S. Geological Survey began a 3-year study to evaluate the hydraulic characteristics and water quality of ground-water resources within the downtown well field and the surrounding 235-square-mile study area. Delineation of the hydrogeology of the study area was based on water- quality data, aquifer test data, and extensive borehole geophysical surveys (including gamma, caliper, temperature, electrical resistivity, and flow meter logs) from the six existing production wells and from a corehole drilled as part of the study, as well as from published and unpublished reports on file at the U.S. Geological Survey, the Southwest Florida Water Management District, and consultant's reports. Water-quality data were examined for spatial and temporal trends that might relate to the mechanism for observed water-quality changes. Water quality in the study area appears to be dependent upon several mechanisms, including upconing of higher salinity water from deeper zones within the aquifer system, interbore-hole flow between zones of varying water quality through improperly cased and corroded wells, migration of highly mineralized waters through structural deformities, and the presence of unflushed relict seawater. A numerical ground-water flow model was developed as an interpretative tool where field-derived hydrologic characteristics could be tested. The conceptual model consisted of seven layers to represent the multilayered aquifer systems underlying the study area. Particle tracking was utilized to delineate the travel path of water as it enters the model area under a set of given conditions. Within the model area, simulated flow in the intermediate aquifer system originates primarily from the northwestern boundary. Simulated flow in the Upper Floridan aquifer originates in lower model layers (deeper flow zones) and ultimately can be traced to the southeastern and northwestern boundaries. Volumetric budgets calculated from numerical simulation of a hypothetical well field indicate that the area of contribution to the well field changes seasonally. Although ground-water flow patterns change with wet and dry seasons, most water enters the well-field flow system through lower parts of the Upper Floridan aquifer from a southeastern direction. Moreover, particle tracking indicated that ground-water flow paths with strictly lateral pathlines in model layers correspond to the intermediate aquifer system, whereas particles traced through model layers corresponding to the Upper Floridan aquifer had components of vertical and lateral flow.

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗
USGS2007

Integrating hydrologic and geophysical data to constrain coastal surficial aquifer processes at multiple spatial and temporal scales

Since 1997, repeated, coincident geophysical surveys and extensive hydrologic studies in shallow monitoring wells have been used to study static and dynamic processes associated with surface water-groundwater interaction at a range of spatial scales at the estuarine and ocean boundaries of an undeveloped, permeable barrier island in the Georgia part of the U.S. South Atlantic Bight. Because geophysical and hydrologic data measure different parameters, at different resolution and precision, and over vastly different spatial scales, reconciling the coincident data or even combining complementary inversion, hydrogeochemcial analyses and well-based groundwater monitoring, and, in some cases, limited vegetation mapping to demonstrate the utility of an integrative, multidisciplinary approach for elucidating groundwater processes at spatial scales (tens to thousands of meters) that are often difficult to capture with traditional hydrologic approaches. The case studies highlight regional aquifer characteristics, varying degrees of lateral saltwater intrusion at estuarine boundaries, complex subsurface salinity gradients at the ocean boundary, and imaging of submarsh groundwater discharge and possible free convection in the pore waters of a clastic marsh. This study also documents the use of geophysical techniques for detecting temporal changes in groundwater salinity regimes under natural (not forced) gradients at intratidal to interannual (1998-200 Southeastern U.S.A. drought) time scales.

Book chapter↗
USGS2011

Development of characterization technology for fault zone hydrology

Several deep trenches were cut, and a number of geophysical surveys were conducted across the Wildcat Fault in the hills east of Berkeley, California. The Wildcat Fault is believed to be a strike-slip fault and a member of the Hayward Fault System, with over 10 km of displacement. So far, three boreholes of ∼ 150m deep have been core-drilled and borehole geophysical logs were conducted. The rocks are extensively sheared and fractured; gouges were observed at several depths and a thick cataclasitic zone was also observed. While confirming some earlier, published conclusions from shallow observations about Wildcat, some unexpected findings were encountered. Preliminary analysis indicates that Wildcat near the field site consists of multiple faults. The hydraulic test data suggest the dual properties of the hydrologic structure of the fault zone. A fourth borehole is planned to penetrate the main fault believed to lie in-between the holes. The main philosophy behind our approach for the hydrologic characterization of such a complex fractured system is to let the system take its own average and monitor a long term behavior instead of collecting a multitude of data at small length and time scales, or at a discrete fracture scale and to “up-scale,” which is extremely tenuous.

California↗
USGS2013

Hydrogeologic framework, arsenic distribution, and groundwater geochemistry of the glacial-sediment aquifer at the Auburn Road landfill superfund site, Londonderry, New Hampshire

Leachate continues to be generated from landfills at the Auburn Road Landfill Superfund Site in Londonderry, New Hampshire. Impermeable caps on the three landfills at the site inhibit direct infiltration of precipitation; however, high water-table conditions allow groundwater to interact with landfill materials from below, creating leachate and ultimately reducing conditions in downgradient groundwater. Reducing conditions can facilitate arsenic transport by allowing it to stay in solution or by liberating arsenic adsorbed to surfaces and from geologic sources, such as glacial sediments and bedrock. The site occupies a 180-acre parcel of land containing streams, ponds, wetlands, and former gravel pits located in glacial sediment. Four areas, totaling 14 acres, including three landfills and one septage lagoon, were used for waste disposal. The site was closed in 1980 after volatile organic compounds associated with industrial waste dumping were detected. The site was added to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Priority List in 1982, and the landfills were capped in 1996. Although volatile organic compound concentrations in groundwater have declined substantially, some measurable concentrations remain. Temporally variable and persistent elevated arsenic concentrations have been measured in groundwater affected by the landfill leachate. Microbial consumption of carbon found in leachate is a driver of reducing conditions that liberate arsenic at the site. In addition to sources of carbon in landfill leachate, wetland areas throughout the site also could contribute carbon to groundwater, but it is currently unknown if any of the wetland areas have downward or reversing gradients that could allow the infiltration of surface water to groundwater. Red-stained sediments and water indicate iron-rich groundwater discharge to surface water and are also associated with elevated concentrations of arsenic in sediment and groundwater. Ironrich groundwater seeps have been observed in the wetland, streams, and pond downgradient of the landfills. Piezometers were installed in some of these locations to confirm groundwater discharge, measure vertical-flow gradients, and to provide a way to sample the discharging groundwater. Understanding the movement of leachate in groundwater is complicated by the presence of preferential flow paths through aquifer materials with differing hydraulic properties; these preferential flow paths can affect rates of recharge, geochemical conditions, and contaminant fluxes. In areas adjacent to the three capped landfills, infiltration of precipitation containing oxygenated water through permeable deltaic sediments in the former gravel pit area causes increases in dissolved oxygen concentrations and decreases in arsenic concentrations. Layered deltaic sediments produce anisotropic hydraulic characteristics and zones of high hydraulic conductivity. The glacial-sediment aquifer also includes glaciolacustrine sediments that have low permeability and limit infiltration at the surface Discharge of leachate-affected groundwater may be limited in areas of organic muck on the bottom of Whispering Pines Pond because the muck may act as a semiconfining layer. Geophysical survey results were used to identify several areas with continuous beds of muck and an underlying highresistivity layer on top of a layer of low resistivity that may represent leachate-affected groundwater. The high-resistivity layer is likely groundwater associated with oxygenated recharge, which would cause arsenic to adsorb onto aquifer sediments and reduce concentrations of dissolved arsenic in groundwater. Surface and borehole geophysical data collected in 2011 were used to identify potentially high-permeability or contaminated zones in the aquifer (preferential flowpaths) as well as low-permeability zones that may promote contamination through back diffusion. Some groundwater in parts of the glacial-sediment aquifer where the leachate plumes were present had low electrical resistivity, low dissolved oxygen, and high concentrations of arsenic. Low-resistivity zones in the underlying bedrock were associated with fractures that also may contain leachate. Although surveying the fractured bedrock was not a specific objective of this study, the results suggest that such a survey would help to determine if leachate and associated concentrations of arsenic are migrating downward into the fractured-bedrock-aquifer system. An uncalibrated, one-dimensional, reactive-transport model was used to assess several conditions that affect arsenic mobility. The results indicate that reductive dissolution and desorption from glacial sediments control dissolved arsenic concentrations. Parameter sensitivity analysis was used to identify key data that are needed in order to accurately assess the time required for arsenic concentrations to fall to levels below the maximum contaminant level at the site. Quantifying this time will require accurate characterization of carbon, sediment-surface sorption sites, and groundwater fluxes at the site.

New Hampshire↗
USGS2012

Archive of single beam and swath bathymetry data collected nearshore of the Gulf Islands National Seashore, Mississippi, from West Ship Island, Mississippi, to Dauphin Island, Alabama: Methods and data report for USGS Cruises 08CCT01 and 08CCT02, July 2008, and 09CCT03 and 09CCT04, June 2009

During the summers of 2008 and 2009 the USGS conducted bathymetric surveys from West Ship Island, Miss., to Dauphin Island, Ala., as part of the Northern Gulf of Mexico (NGOM) Ecosystem Change and Hazard Susceptibility project. The survey area extended from the shoreline out to approximately 2 kilometers and included the adjacent passes (fig. 1). The bathymetry was primarily used to create a topo-bathymetric map and provide a base-level assessment of the seafloor following the 2005 hurricane season. Additionally, these data will be used in conjunction with other geophysical data (chirp and side scan sonar) to construct a comprehensive geological framework of the Mississippi Barrier Island Complex. The culmination of the geophysical surveys will provide baseline bathymetry necessary for scientists to define and interpret seafloor habitat for this area and for scientists to predict future geomorpholocial changes of the islands with respect to climate change, storm impact, and sea-level rise. Furthermore, these data provide information for feasibility of barrier island restoration, particularly in Camille Cut, and for the preservation of historical Fort Massachusetts. For more information refer to http://ngom.usgs.gov/gomsc/mscip/index.html. Since bathymetric surveys have often been conducted for navigational purposes, soundings have traditionally been referenced to a water level datum using tide gages and tide models. Bathymetric measurements referenced to a Global Positioning System (GPS) is a more accurate way of representing water depth and has been implemented in the acquisition and processing procedures for these datasets. Previous single-beam bathymetric studies performed at the USGS Center for Coastal and Marine Science have successfully referenced bathymetric measurements to GPS (DeWitt and others, 2007; Hansen 2008 and 2009). The 2008-2009 bathymetry surveys were conducted as a test to (1) develop acquisition and processing technology utilizing both single beam and swath bathymetry survey methods together, (2) reference both types of measurements to GPS rather than water level, and (3) compare the differences between methods in acquisition and processing. Results of the survey are explained in greater detail within this report. To acquire suitable coverage of the study area in a limited time frame, the seafloor-elevation survey was conducted using three techniques: single-beam bathymetry, interferometric swath bathymetry, and a walking kinematic survey of the island shorelines. All three techniques utilized GPS measurements. Implementation of these techniques was executed concurrently yet independently aboard two research vessels: the RV Survey Cat , a 26-foot (ft) shallow-draft Glacier Bay Coastal Runner, and the 50-ft RV G.K. Gilbert . A portable push buggy with a rigid antenna mount served as the platform for the kinematic shoreline survey. Data from each survey technique was post-processed and edited independently with proper inclusion of the differentially processed external navigation files. The x,y,z components from each method were then combined and the two survey years (2008 and 2009) were merged into one dataset. The 2008 bathymetry data were processed at the USGS Center for Coastal and Marine Science in St. Petersburg, Fla., and the 2009 bathymetry data were processed at the USGS Coastal and Marine Science Center located in Woods Hole, Mass. This report serves as an archive of the processed single beam and interferometric swath bathymetry, outlines the methodology, and reports the results. Data products herein include gridded and interpolated digital depth surfaces, and x,y,z data products for both single beam and interferometric swath bathymetry. Additional files include trackline maps, navigation files, geographic information system (GIS) files, Field Activity Collection System (FACS) logs, and formal Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) metadata. Scanned images of the handwritten FACS logs and digital FACS logs are also provided as PDF files. Refer to the Acronyms page for description of acronyms and abbreviations used in this report or hold the cursor over an acronym for a pop-up explanation. The USGS St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center assigns a unique identifier to each cruise or field activity. For example, 08CCT01 indicates that the data were collected in 2008 for the Coastal Change and Transport (CCT) study and the data were collected during the first (01) field activity for that project in that calendar year. Refer to http://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/infobank/programs/html/definition/activity.html for a detailed description of the method used to assign the field activity ID. See the digital FACS equipment log for details about the acquisition equipment used. Raw datasets are stored digitally at the USGS St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center and processed systematically using Novatel's GrafNav version 7.6, SANDS version 3.7, SEA SWATH plus version 3.06.04.03, CARIS HIPS AND SIPS version 3.6, and ESRI ArcGIS version 9.3.1. For more information on processing refer to the Equipment and Processing page. Chirp seismic data were also collected during these surveys and are archived separately.

Mississippi;Alabama↗
USGS2011

U.S. Geological Survey 2011 assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources of the Cook Inlet region, south-central Alaska

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has completed an assessment of the volumes of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil and gas resources in conventional and continuous accumulations in Cook Inlet. The assessment used a geology-based methodology and results from new scientific research by the USGS and the State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and Division of Oil and Gas (DOG). In the Cook Inlet region, the USGS estimates mean undiscovered volumes of nearly 600 million barrels of oil, about 19 trillion cubic feet of gas, and about 46 million barrels of natural gas liquids.

Open-File Report↗