Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

Thomas L. Murray

Publications and source records attributed to Thomas L. Murray.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2024

The U.S. Geological Survey Volcano Science Center’s response plan for significant volcanic events

This publication describes the U.S. Geological Survey Volcano Science Center (VSC) Response Plan for Significant Volcanic Events (hereinafter referred to as “the plan”) that has been developed for U.S volcano observatories over the past several years in consultation with the lead scientist, or Scientist-in-Charge (SIC), of each of the five U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) volcano observatories. The goal of the plan is to define a standardized management system that ensures the VSC can achieve the following during a volcanic crisis: maintain situational awareness and issue timely warnings and hazard assessments, fulfill internal and external agency requests for information as well as requests from the public, sustain financial and technical support, and gather critical scientific data. The plan addresses situations in which the scale of a response at least temporarily eclipses the response capabilities of a single observatory. The plan features two integrated response structures for managing and carrying out operations within the VSC during a crisis: the Observatory Volcanic Event Response Team (OVERT) and the Center Volcanic Event Response Team (CVERT). The design of these structures reflects lessons learned from past volcanic responses and is influenced by the Incident Command System used by the U.S. Federal Government for managing emergency responses. The plan clarifies expectations regarding the flow of information during a response, summarizes required tasks of the responding observatory and VSC to ensure a successful response, defines response-team roles and responsibilities, and describes the internal communication practices critical for an effective and coordinated response.

Circular↗
USGS2010

Hazard information management, interagency coordination, and impacts of the 2005-2006 eruption of Augustine Volcano: Chapter 28 in The 2006 eruption of Augustine Volcano, Alaska

Dissemination of volcano-hazard information in coordination with other Federal, State, and local agencies is a primary responsibility of the Alaska Volcano Observatory (AVO). During the 2005-6 eruption of Augustine Volcano in Alaska, AVO used existing interagency relationships and written protocols to provide hazard guidance before, during, and after eruptive events. The 2005-6 eruption was notable because of the potential for volcanogenic tsunami, which required establishment of a new procedure for alerts of possible landslide-induced tsunami in Cook Inlet. Despite repeated ash-cloud generating explosions and far-traveled ash clouds, impacts from the event were relatively minor. Primary economic losses occurred when air carriers chose to avoid flights into potentially unsafe conditions. Post-eruption evaluations by agencies involved in the response indicated weaknesses in information centralization and availability of specific information regarding ash fall hazards in real time.

Alaska↗
USGS2005

An assessment of volcanic threat and monitoring capabilities in the United States: Framework for a National Volcano Early Warning System

Executive Summary NVEWS – a National Volcano Early Warning System – is being formulated by the Consortium of U.S. Volcano Observatories (CUSVO) to establish a proactive, fully integrated, national-scale monitoring effort that ensures the most threatening volcanoes in the United States are properly monitored in advance of the onset of unrest and at levels commensurate with the threats posed. Volcanic threat is the combination of hazards (the destructive natural phenomena produced by a volcano) and exposure (people and property at risk from the hazards). The United States has abundant volcanoes, and over the past 25 years the Nation has experienced a diverse range of the destructive phenomena that volcanoes can produce. Hazardous volcanic activity will continue to occur, and – because of increasing population, increasing development, and expanding national and international air traffic over volcanic regions – the exposure of human life and enterprise to volcano hazards is increasing. Fortunately, volcanoes exhibit precursory unrest that if detected and analyzed in time allows eruptions to be anticipated and communities at risk to be forewarned with reliable information in sufficient time to implement response plans and mitigation measures. In the 25 years since the cataclysmic eruption of Mount St. Helens, scientific and technological advances in volcanology have been used to develop and test models of volcanic behavior and to make reliable forecasts of expected activity a reality. Until now, these technologies and methods have been applied on an ad hoc basis to volcanoes showing signs of activity. However, waiting to deploy a robust, modern monitoring effort until a hazardous volcano awakens and an unrest crisis begins is socially and scientifically unsatisfactory because it forces scientists, civil authorities, citizens, and businesses into “playing catch up” with the volcano, trying to get instruments and civil-defense measures in place before the unrest escalates and the situation worsens. Inevitably, this manner of response results in our missing crucial early stages of the volcanic unrest and hampers our ability to accurately forecast events. Restless volcanoes do not always progress to eruption; nevertheless, monitoring is necessary in such cases to minimize either over-reacting, which costs money, or under-reacting, which may cost lives. Volcano monitoring in the U.S. is conducted by five volcano observatories, supported primarily by the USGS Volcano Hazards Program. Under the Stafford Act, the USGS is responsible for issuing timely warnings of potential volcanic disasters to the affected populace and civil authorities. To make maximum use of the Nation’s scientific resources, the USGS operates the observatories with the help of universities and other governmental agencies, through formal partnerships. At present, about half of the most threatening U.S. volcanoes are monitored at a basic level with real-time sensors (primarily seismic arrays), and a few are well monitored with a suite of modern instrument types and methods. However, monitoring capabilities at many hazardous volcanoes are known to be sparse or antiquated, and some hazardous volcanoes have no ground-based monitoring whatsoever.

Marianas Islands↗