Search USGS⌕ Search

USGS · 70201669

Microseismic events associated with the Oroville Dam spillway

Abstract

On 14 February 2017, two small (equivalent M D 0.8 and 1.0) seismic events occurred in proximity to the Oroville Dam in the Sierra Nevada foothills, California. To examine possible causal relationships between these events and reservoir operations, including the spillway failure starting prior to these events, we applied a new optimized template matching approach to seismic data between May 1993 - April 2018. We identified more than 19,000 smaller-magnitude events that were similar in character to the February 14 events. These events are located in proximity to the Oroville spillway and occurred in tight temporal clusters that strongly correlate with periods of spillway discharge. Seismic source inversion is inconclusive, but we suggest that these events might be induced by rapid changes in pore pressure along a fracture (or fractures) near the spillway. Cavitation cannot be ruled out, but it is unlikely to be the primary cause of the signals observed because these events are intermittent, impulsive and of short duration. The inferred repetitive opening and closing of the fracture(s) occurred long before any damage to the spillway and is thus probably not directly associated with spillway failure in February 2017. These events were not related to the 1975 M L 5.7 earthquake sequence that may have been induced by the filling of the Oroville reservoir.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 39.2° to 39.7° latitude; -121.9° to -121.4° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Robert J. Skoumal, Phillip B. Dawson, Stephen H. Hickman, J. Ole Kaven. 2018-12-18. Microseismic events associated with the Oroville Dam spillway. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120180255

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗