Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Open-File Report”

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.

756 records · Page 8Linked to original sources
USGS2024

Identifying transportation data and system needs for a Federal lands transportation data platform

Executive Summary Modern transportation and land-use planning efforts include information from many sources to address topics such as safety, efficiency, commercial, and social needs. This wide breadth of topics provides opportunities for collaboration and development of common tools for diverse users. In many cases, different information systems provide the spatial data and geographic content necessary for transportation and land-use planners to consider multiple lines of evidence. The Federal Highway Administration Office of Federal Lands Highway (FLH) and Federal Land Management Agency partners use detailed spatial and quantitative data to inform transportation decisions. However, logistic challenges to data sharing exist because data are often managed by separate agencies; data-exchange frameworks and interagency data agreements are insufficient; and consistency from aggregated data requires maintenance, coordination, and supporting infrastructure. The FLH and U.S. Geological Survey collaboratively examined (1) use and availability of spatial data for transportation planning and (2) a possible mechanism to use more shared and consistent data in a common planning environment. The goals of this collaborative effort were to describe data needs from the perspective of planners and to identify opportunities for shared data resources. Results presented here focus on two workshops and a subsequent investigation of data and tools available from partner agencies. The objectives of this report are to (1) describe information used in transportation planning with geographic data; (2) identify spatially explicit data that inform transportation plans and could be shared among all partners; and (3) describe current platforms, planning and administrative opportunities, and potential barriers to developing an integrated planning tool. Key information and data needs were identified in three major classes: system, user, and influential factors. System data are parts of the transportation network and information about the condition of individual segments and the network. User data provide details about the function of the system and insights into potential needs; for example, user trips between source and destinations inform road and network demands that can lead to congestion and safety issues (in the future, user data might also include scenarios and projections based on land-use plans). Influential data represent social and environmental factors that influence transit demands and network conditions. These factors could be popular locations or seasonal events that influence demand and congestion; wildlife habitat or migration intersections that affect safety and management priorities; or geologic features that influence hazards, maintenance, and safety. Responses described here provide specific information for web-tool design and give a framework for interagency communication and cooperation to address specific information needs for integrated planning. Existing web-mapping and web-services, and the data that inform them, are also described. Commonly, these data are created and published by one agency, and the core users are outside of that agency; for example, threatened species distributions are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for consideration by planners in advance of National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) evaluation. This report is provided to inform FLH leaders and Federal Land Management Agency partners by articulating user needs and requirements for integrated planning tool(s). Programmers creating a secure web-based data-sharing platform (with data-viewing, -analysis and -download functions) can use the information presented here to organize data and user interfaces. This integrated perspective can help FLH and Federal Land Management Agency partners develop transportation networks that better serve the needs of people in local communities and across States and the Nation.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2024

Hydrologic investigations and a preliminary conceptual model of the groundwater system at North Penn Area 1 Superfund Site, Souderton, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted hydrogeologic investigations, reviewed existing data, and developed a preliminary conceptual model of the groundwater system as part of technical support of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at the North Penn Area 1 Superfund Site (hereafter, the NP1 Site) located within the Borough of Souderton in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. Field work and monitoring took place during 2012–18. The area is underlain by sedimentary formations that form a fractured-rock aquifer used for drinking water and industrial supply. The EPA placed the Site on the National Priorities List in 1989, identifying tetrachloroethylene (PCE) and trichloroethylene (TCE) as contaminants of concern. During 2012–18, the USGS conducted field activities that included drilling an 82-foot (ft)-deep monitoring well (MG 2220) in 2016, reconstructing a 208-ft-deep former industrial production well (MG 668 [Granite Knitting Mill]), and collecting borehole geophysical and video logs and water levels from those and five additional wells, which ranged in depth from about 50 to 200 ft below land surface. Continuous water levels were collected during 2014–17, and a synoptic set of water levels were measured in April 2018 in the seven wells. The borehole geophysical logs (caliper, acoustic televiewer, natural gamma, single-point resistance, vertical flow, and fluid temperature and resistivity) and borehole video logs in the seven wells were evaluated to assess potential for lithologic correlation and to identify and describe water-bearing features, which included both low- and high-angle fractures and other openings oriented along dipping bedding planes, joints, or possible faults. Borehole geophysical logs collected by USGS in 1992 in a 300-ft-deep former production well near the Site were also evaluated. Few to no distinctive features were identified on geophysical logs (natural gamma and single-point resistance) that could be used for correlation, thus limiting this approach to determining local geologic structure. Extensive fracturing in the upper 62 ft of monitoring well MG 2220 indicates that the well was likely drilled through a zone of faulting, and other evidence of faulting is present in the area near the Site. Assessment of continuous water levels showed hydraulic connections among some wells as indicated by rising or falling water levels in response to changes in pumping rates at nearby wells. A map of water levels measured in April 2018 indicates potential for groundwater flow generally toward the stream to the south and southwest of the Site, but the limited water-level data are insufficient to describe vertical groundwater gradients or lateral gradients in any detail. Review of 1999–2022 volatile organic compound (VOC) monitoring data collected by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection for five monitoring wells indicates that the highest groundwater concentrations of PCE and TCE were found in samples from extraction well MG 2201 (S-1) downgradient from, and nearest to, the previously identified Site contaminant source area, and these concentrations fluctuated through time. PCE concentrations were higher than TCE concentrations in samples from all five monitoring wells and were much higher than TCE concentrations in samples from extraction well MG 2201 (S-1). Temporally variable recharge is a possible factor affecting observed fluctuations in PCE concentrations in groundwater samples from well extraction MG 2201 (S-1), as indicated by a general inverse relation between PCE concentrations and water levels in a nearby long-term observation well. The PCE concentration of 1,830 micrograms per liter (μg/L) in a May 2018 water sample from monitoring well MG 2220 was more than four times the PCE concentration of 444 μg/L in a December 2017 sample from the nearby extraction well MG 2201 (S-1), which is open to fewer fractures. Low concentrations of VOCs were measured in surface water at two stream sites downgradient from wells with the highest groundwater VOC concentrations at the Site, indicating that discharge of contaminated groundwater to the stream is likely. Development of a conceptual model of the groundwater system was constrained by limited data. In areas with no pumping, groundwater-flow directions generally are thought to be controlled by topography and geologic structure (bedding orientation) and likely to the south and southwest of the Site, with local flow directions affected by orientations of fractures, joints, and local faults. Additional investigations that could help improve the conceptual model of the groundwater system and help delineate the extent of groundwater contamination and its transport are discussed.

Pennsylvania↗
USGS1976

Helium detection as a guide for uranium exploration

Helium, a byproduct of radioactive decay, may prove to be a valuable indicator of the presence and distribution of uranium deposits. Recent technological advances permit the development of instrumentation not previously adapted for this purpose. Commercially available equipment can provide high sensitivity at low cost and allow reasonable mobility for field use. A truck-mounted mass-spectrometer, tuned for helium-4, permits immediate adjustment or modification of sampling patterns in response to accumulating data. The inlet system of the spectrometer has been designed to allow flexibility in gas analyses from various sample types--soil gas, atmosphere, or gases in water. Sensitivity of the instrument is better than 50 parts of helium per 10 9 parts of gas. Replicate samples and standards can be analyzed in only 3 minutes. Helium in soil gas is being used for the initial evaluation of the technique. A hollow probe, as much as 2 m long, is driven into the ground; and a 10-cc syringe is used to purge the probe and extract the gas. This sample is then injected into the inlet system and introduced into the spectrometer at constant pressure. The output signal is displayed on a chart recorder. Investigations can be performed on a qualitative, relative basis, or on a quantitative basis by comparison to calibrated helium standards. Preliminary field testing includes studies of the responses to variations in wind speed, temperature, barometric pressure, moisture, and sampling depth over extended time periods, as well as studies of geologic controls on the helium content in soil gas. Surveys over known uranium occurrences reveal some anomalous helium distributions. This report describes an updated technological approach to an old idea: that of using helium, a byproduct of uranium radioactive decay, as an exploration tool for uranium. Helium is the sixth most abundant gas found in the earth's atmosphere (Table 1). It is an inert gas and very mobile, mixing rapidly. When the alpha particles from the radioactive decay of uranium and thorium pick up two electrons, atoms of the isotope helium-4 are formed. Several helium-4 atoms are produced from each decay series of U-238, U-235, and Th-232 (fig. 1). The half-lives of the parent isotopes are5also shown in figure 1. One gram of uranium will produce ~10 5 atoms of helium-4 per second, and one gram of thorium produces ~2.5 x 10 4 atoms of helium-4 per second (fig. 2). Calculations of the helium produced from the crust and mantle reveal that 1,125 x 10 30 atoms per year are produced, but only 7 x 10 30 atoms per year escape from the earth (Damon and Kulp, 1958). More is being produced than is being lost; in fact, the total atmospheric content of helium could be produced in only 2 million years (MacDonald, 1963)! However, all the crustal and mantle helium-4 does not degas into the atmosphere as it is formed. It is trapped in crystal lattices and in pore spaces within the earth. What this means is that there is excess helium-4 in the earth--excess, that is, compared to the atmospheric concentration in equilibrium with the helium-4 escape rate into space and the helium-4 flux from the crust and mantle (Nicolet, 1957). Near-surface pockets of high helium-4 concentrations are known, and some natural gas fields are so enriched that they are the source for commercial production of helium. Work by Roberts and others (1975) has shown high helium concentration in the soil gas associated with geothermal areas; and work by Clark and Kugler (1973), Dyck (1975), and Goldak (1974), for example, has noted high helium concentrations in soils and waters in the vicinity of uranium deposits. These latter studies certainly indicate the potential of helium detection for use as an exploration tool for uranium.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1977

Leachate plumes in ground water from Babylon and Islip landfills, Long Island, New York

Landfills operated by the Towns of Babylon and Islip in southwest and central Suffolk County contain urban refuse, incinerated garbage, and scavenger (cesspool) waste; some industrial refuse is deposited at the Babylon site. The Islip landfill was started in 1933, the Babylon landfill in 1947. The landfills are in contact with and discharge leachate into the highly permeable upper glacial aquifer (hydraulic conducitvity 190 to 500 ft/d [feet per day]). The aquifer is 74 feet thick at the Babylon landfill and 170 feet thick at the Islip landfill. The leachate-enriched water occupies the entire thickness of the aquifer beneath both landfills, but hydrologic boundaries retard downward migration of the plumes to deeper aquifers. The Babylon plume is 1,900 feet wide at the landfill and narrows to about 700 feet near its terminus 10,000 feet from the landfill. The Islip plume is 1,400 feet wide at the landfill and narrows to 500 feet near its terminus 5,000 feet from the landfill. Hydrochemical maps and sections show the distribution of the major chemical constituents of the plumes. The most highly leachate-enriched ground water obtained was from the Babylon site; it contained 860 mg/L (milligrams per liter) sodium, 110 mg/L potassium, 565 mg/L calcium, 100 mg/L magnesium, 2,700 mg/L bicarbonate, and 1,300 mg/L chloride. Sulfate was notably absent or in low concentration in most parts of both plumes. Nitrogen in plume water was mostly in the form NH4+, and concentrations as high as 90 mg/L were found; concentrations of nitrogen as N in the plume were less than 10 mg/L. As much as 440 mg/L iron and 190 mg/L manganese were found in the leachate-enriched water. Samples were also tested for arsenic, boron, cadmium, cobalt, chromium, copper, mercury, nickel, lead, selenium, strontium, and zinc. Boron was more or less ubiquitous and was found in concentrations as high as 2 mg/L. Organic carbon was found in concentrations as high as 2,250 mg/L in the most highly leachate-enriched water but attenuated rapidly to less than 20 mg/L. Dissolved-solids concentrations near the landfills were between 400 and 3,000 mg/L at Babylon and between 500 and 1,500 mg/L at Islip. Ground-water temperatures near the landfills exceed those in ambient water by as much as 7°C at Babylon and 16°C at Islip. Heat contributed by the landfills was mostly dissipated within 0.4 mi of the landfill, butat Islip, the warm leachate-enriched water extended 0.5 mi downgradient. The entrance of leachate into the less dense ground water as pulsations after rainfall may explain the presence of high leachate enrichment near the bottom of the aquifer. A comparison of the physical characteristics of leachate-enriched ground water with those of ambient water suggests that the downward movement of leachate results from its greater density. Simulation of the movement and dispersion of the Babylon plume with a mathematical dispersion model indicated the coefficient of longitudinal dispersion to be about 60 ft 2 /d (feet squared per day) and the ground-water velocity to be 1 ft/d. However, the velocity determined from the hydraulic gradient and public-supply wells in the area was 4 ft/d, which would cause a plume four times as long as that predicted by the mathmatical dispersion model. At the Islip site, the plume was one-third the length calculated on the basis of the age of the landfill. The shortness of the plumes has not been explained; it may be a result of the leachate's having been too dilute to form a plume during the early years of the landfills.

New York↗
USGS2026

Computation of regional groundwater budgets for the Virginia Coastal Plain aquifer system

Computation of detailed groundwater flow budgets for subdivisions of the Virginia Coastal Plain aquifer system has enabled quantification and more thorough understanding of groundwater flow within this important water resource. A zone budget analysis based on previously published groundwater models of the Virginia Coastal Plain and Virginia Eastern Shore indicates that groundwater conditions vary substantially throughout the Coastal Plain aquifer system because of local variations in hydrogeology and historical and ongoing variations in groundwater use and management. Decades of substantial groundwater withdrawal from the Coastal Plain aquifer system have altered groundwater flow from predevelopment conditions. Rates of sustainable withdrawal are limited because the downward groundwater flow rate into confined aquifers is a relatively small part of the total groundwater budget for the aquifer system compared to the rate of recharge at the land surface. Analyses of groundwater budgets from the Virginia Coastal Plain model indicate that groundwater flow is generally outward from the surficial aquifer to rivers and coastal waterbodies and downward through a series of underlying aquifers and confining units to the Potomac aquifer, which is the deepest aquifer and the source of most groundwater withdrawals. Downward flow into the Potomac aquifer is estimated to be only 7 percent of total net precipitation-derived net recharge at the land surface but makes up about 66 percent of inflow to the aquifer in Virginia, with much of the remaining inflow occurring laterally from outside of defined groundwater budget regions in Virginia. For several decades prior to 2010, high rates of withdrawal from the Potomac aquifer resulted in substantial decline in groundwater storage in the aquifer and in most overlying aquifers and confining units. From 2010 to 2023, rates of withdrawal substantially lower than the historical maximum resulted in small net increases in groundwater storage in the confined aquifer system for most regions of the Virginia Coastal Plain. Nevertheless, for the same period, groundwater storage for the entire model domain continues to incrementally decline, indicating that storage recovery in Virginia is offset by a continued decrease in storage in areas beneath the Chesapeake Bay or adjacent areas of Maryland and North Carolina. Withdrawals from the Potomac aquifer have induced substantial downward flow which is a large part of groundwater budgets for confined aquifers such as the Potomac. For the most recent simulated conditions (2023) downward groundwater flow continues, but because vertical flow rates are a function of the difference between water pressure in the upper surficial systems and lower confined units, rates of downward flow are lower than those in earlier decades as the confined water levels partially recover from larger groundwater withdrawals in the past. Geographically, groundwater flow is generally inward from perimeter regions of the Virginia Coastal Plain toward central regions with the largest withdrawal rates. Groundwater inflow from coastal regions could be contributing to saltwater intrusion, even though that was not measured in this study. Analyses of groundwater budgets from the Virginia Eastern Shore peninsula, a geographic region of the Virginia Coastal Plain, indicate that groundwater flow for that isolated aquifer system is generally outward from the surficial aquifer to coastal water bodies and downward into the confined Yorktown-Eastover aquifer system, which is the source of most withdrawals. Downward groundwater flow into the confined Yorktown-Eastover aquifer system is estimated to be less than 2 percent of total recharge and less than 9 percent of net recharge at the water table but makes up more than 93 percent of all inflow to the confined aquifer system. Decades of substantial but relatively consistent groundwater withdrawals have induced greater downward flow rates into the confined aquifer system but also have resulted in loss of groundwater from storage. For the most recent simulated period (2023), estimated storage loss accounts for slightly under 7 percent of withdrawals from the confined aquifer system. The reported withdrawal rate for this period from the confined Yorktown-Eastover system is near the highest reported rate for the Virginia Eastern Shore, which means that the storage depletion is expected to continue, even though groundwater levels appear to be relatively stable. Estimated groundwater flow rates upward from the confining unit underlying the Yorktown-Eastover system and low rates of inflow from coastal water bodies underscore ongoing concerns about up-coning and lateral intrusion of salty groundwater.

Virginia↗
USGS2024

Groundwater, surface-water, and water-chemistry data, Black Mesa area, northeastern Arizona—2019–2021

The Navajo (N) aquifer is an extensive aquifer and the primary source of groundwater in the 5,400-square-mile Black Mesa area in northeastern Arizona. Water availability is an important issue in the Black Mesa area because of the arid climate, past industrial water use, and continued water requirements for municipal use by a growing population. Precipitation in the area typically ranges from less than 6 to more than 16 inches per year, depending on location. The U.S. Geological Survey water-monitoring program in the Black Mesa area began in 1971 and provides information about the long-term effects of groundwater withdrawals from the N aquifer for industrial and municipal uses. This report presents the results of data collected as part of the monitoring program in the Black Mesa area from calendar years 2020–2021 and, additionally, uses streamflow statistics from November and December 2019. The monitoring program includes measurements of (1) groundwater withdrawals (pumping), (2) groundwater levels, (3) spring discharge, (4) surface-water discharge, and (5) groundwater chemistry. In calendar year 2020, total groundwater withdrawals were estimated to be 2,680 acre-feet (acre-ft), and, in 2021, total withdrawals were estimated to be 2,570 acre-ft. Total withdrawals during 2021 were about 65 percent less than total withdrawals in 2005 because the Peabody Western Coal Company discontinued its use of water to transport coal in a coal slurry pipeline after 2005 and ceased mining operations in 2019. Owing to Navajo Nation and Hopi Reservation access restrictions during the Coronavirus pandemic, water levels were not collected from municipal wells in 2020 or 2021. Water levels measured in 2021 from wells completed in the unconfined areas of the N aquifer within the Black Mesa area showed a decline in 7 of 13 wells when compared with water levels from the prestress period (prior to 1965). The changes in water levels across all 13 wells ranged from +8.4 feet (ft) to −42.4 ft, and the median change was −0.4 ft. Water levels also showed decline in 11 of 12 wells measured in the confined area of the aquifer when compared to the prestress period. The median change for the confined area of the aquifer was −25.9 ft, with changes across all 12 wells ranging from +17.3 ft to −133.7 ft. Spring flow was measured at four springs between 2020 and 2021. Flow fluctuated during the period of record for Burro Spring and Pasture Canyon Spring, but a decreasing trend was statistically significant (p<0.05) at Moenkopi School Spring and Unnamed Spring near Dennehotso, Arizona. Discharge at Burro Spring has remained relatively constant since it was first measured in the 1980s, and discharge at Pasture Canyon Spring has fluctuated for the period of record. Continuous records of surface-water discharge in the Black Mesa area were collected from streamflow-gaging stations at the following sites: Moenkopi Wash at Moenkopi 09401260 (1976–2021), Dinnebito Wash near Sand Springs 09401110 (1993–2020), Polacca Wash near Second Mesa 09400568 (1994–2020), and Pasture Canyon Springs 09401265 (2004–2021). Median winter flows (November through February) of each winter were used as an estimate of the amount of groundwater discharge at the above-named sites. For the period of record, the median winter flows have generally remained constant at Polacca Wash and Pasture Canyon Springs, whereas a decreasing trend was observed at Moenkopi Wash and Dinnebito Wash. In 2020 and 2021, water samples were collected from a total of four springs in the Black Mesa area and analyzed for selected chemical constituents. Results from the four springs were compared with previous analyses from the same springs. Dissolved solids, chloride, and sulfate concentrations increased at Moenkopi School Spring during the more than 30 years of record at that site. Concentrations of dissolved solids and sulfate at Pasture Canyon Spring have not varied significantly (p>0.05) since the early 1980s, and there is no increasing or decreasing trend in those data. However, concentrations of chloride from Pasture Canyon Spring show a diminishing trend. Concentrations of dissolved solids, chloride, and sulfate at Unnamed Spring near Dennehotso have varied for the period of record, but there is no statistical trend in the data. Concentrations of dissolved solids at Burro Spring have varied for the period of record, but there is no statistical trend in the data. However, concentrations of chloride and sulfate from Burro Spring show a trend towards lower concentrations.

Arizona↗
USGS2024

Assessment of water levels, nitrate, and arsenic in the Carson Valley Alluvial Aquifer and the development of a data visualization tool for the Carson River Basin, Nevada

Residents of Carson Valley, Douglas County, Nevada, rely on the basin-fill alluvial aquifer underlying the valley for drinking water. Since the 1980s, groundwater levels and water-quality data have been collected to monitor the status of the aquifer system and to assist in planning efforts to address current (2024) and future demand. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with Douglas County, Nevada, evaluated trends in water levels, nitrate, and arsenic concentrations from a network of monitoring and domestic wells in Carson Valley. This work also assessed the monitoring well network to determine the suitability of wells for characterizing the occurrence of arsenic in the groundwater. Monitoring of constituents, such as nitrate and arsenic concentrations, is needed to assess changes in contaminant distribution and to evaluate the effect that changing land use and groundwater pumping has on their occurrence and transport. Results of the trend analysis indicate water levels are declining ( p <0.05) in 17 of 26 selected monitoring wells (65 percent). Areas with the largest change in water levels, with more than 20 feet of declines, were within the community areas of Johnson Lane, Ruhenstroth, South Agricultural, East Valley, and Fish Springs. Variations in water levels measured in wells from the Central Agricultural, Minden, Foothill, Alpine County (one well), and Gardnerville Ranchos areas show periods of increase and decrease over time, but they also maintain long-term declining trends ( p <0.05). Increases in nitrate concentrations in groundwater samples collected from 9 out of 14 selected monitoring wells (64 percent) are statistically significant ( p <0.05) within the Ruhenstroth, Gardnerville Ranchos, East Valley, Genoa, and Johnson Lane community areas. Samples collected from a well in Indian Hills/Jacks Valley indicated a decreasing trend in nitrate concentration over time. Nitrate concentrations in samples collected from wells in East Valley, Genoa, Johnson Lane, and Indian Hills/Jack Valley were consistently low (less than 3 milligrams per liter [mg/L]) and stable. Nitrate concentrations from selected wells in Johnson Lane and Garnerville Ranchos exceeded the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 10 mg/L (as nitrogen) and have trends that are increasing over time. In 2022, a sample collected from Johnson Lane had a concentration (7.3 mg/L) below the MCL with an increasing trend over time. Temporal trend analyses for groundwater arsenic concentrations in Carson Valley could not be done because of a lack of temporal data. However, using available historical data, arsenic concentrations seem to be greater in groundwater from wells located on the eastern and northern areas of the valley than in wells located on the western or southern areas. Groundwater arsenic concentrations exceed 5 micrograms per liter (μg/L) in most samples collected from wells in Johnson Lane, Airport, Central Agricultural, and East Valley areas and in many cases exceed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) MCL of 10 μg/L. Data indicate that groundwater from domestic wells screened at deeper intervals are likely more vulnerable to elevated arsenic concentrations than shallower wells. A groundwater network evaluation for Carson Valley identified potential modifications in the sampling locations and frequency to better understand the effect of groundwater pumping in communities where municipal and domestic demand are greatest, potentially enhancing understanding of contaminant transport in these areas. Potential modifications to the active well network include reducing the frequency of sample collection from existing network wells (6 out of 11) that have consistently shown low and stable nitrate concentrations, adding wells in areas where data are sparse, and increasing the number of wells in areas with elevated groundwater nitrate concentrations. Including the analysis of arsenic in samples from the active groundwater monitoring well network will provide more detail on the temporal and spatial variability of arsenic concentrations. A visualization tool for the Carson River Basin was developed to provide access to discrete and near real-time hydrologic and water-quality data. The Carson River Basin Hydro Mapper (CBH; U.S. Geological Survey, 2023b) shows active and historical discrete water levels measured by the USGS and the State of Nevada Division of Water Resources, discrete groundwater nitrate and arsenic concentration data collected by the USGS, near real-time streamflow, and surface water levels for select waterbodies. The hydrologic data in the CBH provides resource managers, the public, and the scientific community with an easily accessible tool to present and communicate the most up-to-date information available about local and basin-wide water resources.

Nevada↗
USGS2025

Insights and strategic opportunities from the USGS 2024 Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Interagency Workshop

Introduction In 2021, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) published Circular 1490 titled, “Integrated Science for the Study of Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in the Environment: A Strategic Science Vision for the U.S. Geological Survey” (Tokranov and others, 2021). Circular 1490 was created to be a resource for USGS scientists prioritizing and planning research related to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and to be a guide for developing partnerships with other scientists, State and Federal agencies, and stakeholders engaged in PFAS research and management and mitigation of the environmental and human-health effects of PFAS. This USGS PFAS Strategic Science Vision document was intended to be the foundation for a “living strategic vision,” periodically providing updates on the state of USGS PFAS research, emerging PFAS data gaps and needs, and progress on interagency and stakeholder PFAS partnerships and priorities. To meet this objective, the USGS planned to host an Interagency and Stakeholder PFAS Workshop every 2–3 years. During September 10–12, 2024, the USGS hosted the first Interagency and Stakeholder PFAS Workshop in Reston, Virginia. The Workshop brought together experts from other Federal agencies (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Food and Drug Administration, Department of Defense [Air Force, Army]), State agencies (Washington Fish and Wildlife, Virginia Department of Transportation), and academia (Harvard University, University of Maryland) to address key challenges relating to the measurement and modeling of PFAS and the implications for environmental health. Participants engaged in in-depth discussions centered around six pivotal topics related to PFAS: (1) sampling protocols, methods and interpretation; (2) environmental sources, source apportionment, and occurrence; (3) environmental fate and transport; (4) human and wildlife exposure routes and risk; (5) bioconcentration, bioaccumulation, and biomagnification; and (6) ecotoxicology and effects. Each topic had three breakout sessions. A recurrent theme of workshop discussions was how data on a nationwide scale for PFAS occurrence in various environmental matrices, including air, water, food crops, biota, soil, and streambed sediment could help to advance scientific understanding. Participants noted significant geospatial data gaps, particularly in the midwestern and southern United States and the Pacific Northwest. PFAS data collection tends to be more robust along the eastern seaboard and in California. Participants stressed how enhancing the integration of large and small datasets across various agencies could help to support national scale understanding of PFAS. To address these gaps, attendees suggested leveraging datasets from Federal entities like the USGS and the U.S. Department of Defense, State agencies, and municipal utility services to develop predictive contaminant detection and transport models. Improved coordination between water quality programs and USGS research could help to facilitate access to valuable data, leading to comprehensive databases that inform PFAS point (wastewater treatment plants and landfills) and nonpoint (runoff from land, atmospheric deposition, food packaging) sources, environmental transport mechanisms, environmental detection and concentrations, potential exposure routes, and health effects on different biota, including humans. A specific request was made to develop a map demarking the depth of modern (1953 or later) groundwater, which is susceptible to surface-derived anthropogenic (that is, human-made) contamination, based on tritium-age dating. Emphasis was placed on incorporation of hydrology, groundwater flow paths, groundwater–surface water interactions, and landscape factors in predictive statistical models as a step to improve contaminant source identification and tracking. Molecular fingerprinting approaches garnered attention as techniques to link specific PFAS mixtures detected in a sample to environmental sources and levels in biota (Dávila-Santiago and others, 2022). Integrating data from abiotic (that is, water, soil, and air) and biotic (that is, living organisms) systems identified as a research opportunity. For example, understanding the composition of soils and sediments, which include a mixture of mineral, plant, and animal components, could advance understanding of exposure pathways. The discussions highlighted opportunities to explore and understand the potential redistribution and biotic exposures of PFAS from biosolid and wastewater treatment plant effluent land application practices, in addition to atmospheric releases and discharges from landfill and wastewater treatment plants. Participants identified research gaps surrounding how these sources may contribute to contamination and may affect surrounding ecosystems, including a better definition of anthropogenic background concentrations. Moving forward, the collection of co-occurrence data was noted as a means to improve understanding of complex mixtures and to leverage companion modeling efforts focused on areas with high and low contamination levels to identify areas of concern and unaffected resources. Participants emphasized how centralized USGS databases and the establishment of sample-metadata archives can help to ensure that samples are preserved and accessible for future research. In conclusion, the workshop participants identified opportunities to bridge data gaps and improve measurement techniques, modeling frameworks, databases, and communication, to enhance the understanding of PFAS and their effects on environmental and human health. Upon completion of the workshop, participants indicated an interest in developing strategic data collection, modeling, and analytical approaches to address these challenges.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2025

Reconnaissance of potential alternate water supply sources for the City of Gary, West Virginia

Seven potential sources of water, consisting of free-flowing discharge from abandoned coal mines at six locations and one abandoned flooded underground coal mine air shaft, were sampled for chemical analysis to assess the quality of the groundwater emanating from the seven mine sources. The six free-flowing mine discharge sources were also assessed for discharge by current-meter measurements on two separate occasions. The U.S. Geological Survey assessed these seven sources to provide information to the City of Gary, West Virginia (W. Va.), and the City of Gary’s consulting engineer with groundwater-quality and flow data to allow them to assess the seven sites as potential alternate sources of water for the City of Gary to augment its existing supply. For the six sites where discharge could be measured, discharge ranged from a minimum of 0.082 cubic feet per second (ft 3 /s) to a maximum of 3.685 ft 3 /s. Of the six sites measured, only two, Harmon Branch at Thorpe, W. Va. (USGS site 372201081303501) and the abandoned public-supply water wells near Havaco, W. Va. (USGS site 372358081344601), had discharge in excess of 1.00 ft 3 /s. Discharge from the abandoned public supply wells was 3.685 ft 3 /s on September 20, 2023, and 2.888 ft 3 /s on October 16, 2023, and discharge from Harmon Branch at Thorpe, W. Va., was 1.049 ft 3 /s on September 22, 2023, and 1.038 ft 3 /s on October 17, 2023. Discharge in the abandoned underground mine air shaft (USGS site 372224081340901) could not be assessed, but the air shaft drains an abandoned mine that likely contains water stored in approximately 1.7 square miles (mi 2 ) of abandoned underground coal mines in the Pocahontas No. 3 coal seam, and possibly an additional 0.9 mi 2 of leakage from the overlying Pocahontas No. 4 coal seam. Discharge for the six sites measured for the study was measured during a period between September 20 and October 18, 2023, and corresponded to the 12th to the 15th percentile of flow-duration statistics for the Tug Fork downstream of Elkhorn Creek at Welch, W. Va. streamgage (USGS site 03212750). Water-quality data for the seven sites sampled overall were acceptable with respect to drinking water standards. Of the 203 constituents analyzed, only a few failed to meet applicable U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) drinking water standards. Iron exceeded the 300 micrograms per liter (μg/L) secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL) at only 1 of the 7 sites (14.3 percent) sampled. Iron concentrations ranged from a minimum of less than (<) 5.00 μg/L to a maximum of 724 μg/L with a median concentration of 7.62 μg/L. Manganese exceeded the 50.0 μg/L SMCL at 2 of the 7 sites (28.6 percent) sampled. Manganese concentrations ranged from a minimum of 1.93 μg/L to a maximum of 271 μg/L with a median concentration of 4.03 μg/L. No sites sampled exceeded the arsenic maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 10 μg/L. Arsenic concentrations ranged from a minimum of <0.100 μg/L to a maximum of 2.35 μg/L with a median arsenic concentration of 0.200 μg/L. None of the seven sites sampled for selenium for this study exceeded the EPA MCL of 50.0 μg/L. Selenium concentrations ranged from a minimum of <0.050 μg/L to a maximum of 5.26 μg/L with a median concentration of 3.21 μg/L. All seven sites were sampled for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), but most had concentrations below the detection limit. Of the 10 PCB compounds analyzed for the seven sites sampled, none contained detectable concentrations of PCBs or Aroclor compounds. Of the 44 SVOCs analyzed at each of the seven sites sampled, only 1 SVOC, acenaphthene, was detected, at a concentration of 0.02 μg/L. Of the 96 VOCs analyzed, from each of the seven sites sampled, only two were found at detectable concentrations. Trichloromethane was detected only at 1 of the 7 (14.3 percent) sites sampled at a concentration of 0.027 μg/L, and benzene was detected at the same site and 3 additional sites (4 of the 7 sites or 57.1 percent of the sites sampled) at concentrations of 0.028, 0.029, 0.021, and 0.035 μg/L, but none exceeded the EPA MCL for benzene of 5.00 μg/L. Total coliform bacteria are ubiquitous in the environment, and their presence only suggests the potential for contamination by near-surface processes. Escherichia coli ( E. coli ) bacteria are derived from either human or animal fecal material and can be an indicator of potential contamination by pathogenic bacteria or viruses. Total coliform bacteria were detected at all 7 sites sampled at concentrations ranging from 17.5 to greater than (>) 2,420 most probable number per 100 mL (MPN/100 mL) of sample, with a median total coliform concentration of 1,553 MPN/100 mL. Escherichia coli bacteria were detected at 4 of the 7 sites sampled at concentrations ranging from <1 to 11.9 MPN/100 mL, with a median E. coli concentration of 5.1 MPN/100 mL.

West Virginia↗
USGS2026

CRESCENT earthquake dynamic rupture, earthquake cycle, and tsunami code verification platform

Physics-based simulations are critical for understanding natural hazards. The increasing complexity of numerical codes requires benchmark exercises to verify that different computational methods yield consistent results when solving the same governing equations. Here, we present an open-access web platform designed for the verification of earthquake dynamic rupture, seismic cycle, and tsunami simulations. The platform architecture utilizes a modular, serverless backend on Amazon Web Services (AWS) to provide scalable file processing and visualization. A lightweight static web application provides a secure interface for uploading and managing results, while the browser-based data visualization enables interactive analysis of time series and surface grid data. By using structured JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) text files to define benchmark structures, the system remains fully extensible, allowing the addition of new scenarios without modifying the underlying software logic. The platform hosts the "The Tsunami Problem Versions" (TTPV) 1 & 2, two benchmarks for 3D fully coupled earthquake dynamic rupture and tsunami generation, and provides a framework for earthquake cycle models. This community resource aims to build trust in numerical simulations and facilitate long-term collaborative code verification as modeling software continues to evolve.

Seismica↗
USGS2025

Phase 1 technical implementation plan for the expansion of the ShakeAlert earthquake early warning system to Alaska

Executive Summary The conference report accompanying the fiscal year (FY) 2022 Consolidated Appropriations Act (Public Law 117–103) for the U.S. Department of the Interior and related agencies directed the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to “work with the State of Alaska to develop an implementation plan to be completed within two years in order to put ShakeAlert/Earthquake Early Warning in Alaska” (p. 29). Congress included $1 million in the FY 2022 appropriation to conduct this effort. The USGS Earthquake Hazards Program, along with partner organizations, has developed the ShakeAlert earthquake early warning (EEW) system for the West Coast, which currently operates in California, Oregon, and Washington. The purpose of the system and its alert delivery partners is to reduce the impact of earthquakes and save lives and property by delivering ShakeAlert-powered alerts that are transmitted to the public via mass notification technologies, and by providing more detailed data streams to institutional users and commercial service providers to trigger automated, user-specific, protective actions. ShakeAlert was designed in such a way that it could be expanded to other U.S. regions with high earthquake risk, after the build-out of seismic and geodetic networks to support ShakeAlert in a specified region is completed and the necessary funding is secured for long-term operation and maintenance. When an earthquake occurs, seismic waves radiate from the rupturing fault like waves on a pond. It is these waves that people feel as earthquake shaking and that can cause damage to structures. Using networks of ground-motion sensors and sophisticated computer algorithms, ShakeAlert can detect an earthquake seconds after it begins, calculate its location and magnitude, and estimate the resulting intensity of shaking. Early warnings of impending shaking are then sent to people and systems that may experience damaging shaking, allowing them to take appropriate protective actions. Depending on the user’s distance from the earthquake, alerts may be delivered before, during, or after the arrival of strong shaking. There will almost always be a region near the earthquake epicenter where alerts arrive after damaging shaking has begun. The ShakeAlert system updates its ground-motion estimates as an earthquake grows larger. In response to the FY 2022 congressional direction, the USGS worked with the State of Alaska to devise this implementation plan for ShakeAlert expansion to Alaska. The USGS engaged with the Alaska Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (DHS&EM) and the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys (DGGS). A cooperative agreement was awarded to the Alaska Earthquake Center (AEC) at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) for their contributions to the plan and their work coordinating with other networks in Alaska. The USGS engaged with the Alaska Seismic Hazards Safety Commission (ASHSC) throughout the process. The USGS also held a series of Alaska stakeholder engagements. The process of developing the implementation plan was facilitated by contracted staff from Corner Alliance, which is a government consulting firm. This implementation plan describes the details and estimates the costs for a Phase 1 expansion of the ShakeAlert system to Alaska. A geographically limited Phase 1 goal was chosen that covers the highest risk and most populated areas of Alaska. The areas proposed encompass the State’s main population centers and 90 percent of the State’s population. This Phase 1 design is considered very challenging and ambitious from the viewpoint of network operators. The lessons learned if this plan is implemented could be used to consider subsequent phases to expand EEW beyond Phase 1 in Alaska in the future. ShakeAlert is built on the foundation of the sensor networks and data processing infrastructure of the USGS-led Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS). This implementation plan calls for a total of 450 high-quality, real-time EEW-capable ANSS seismic stations in Alaska: 270 new stations, 160 upgraded stations, and 20 existing stations. These seismic station numbers are based on a station spacing of 10 kilometers (km) in urban areas, 20 km in seismic source areas that endanger population centers, and 40 km in other areas. The associated costs also include support for some EEW-capable global navigation satellite system (GNSS) stations, with a focus on improving warnings for large subduction zone earthquakes. For effective EEW, ShakeAlert requires low-latency, high-availability, robust telemetry links to deliver continuous, real-time data from field stations to the data centers. The Alaska data processing hardware infrastructure would follow the general design for fail-safe operation that is used for the ShakeAlert system on the West Coast. The ShakeAlert architecture uses two independent layers: the production layer for earthquake processing and the alert layer to make alerting decisions and serve alerts to users. This implementation plan includes two geographically separated data centers in Alaska, each with two fully independent production and alert layers using the same system design developed for the West Coast. As of March 2024, the ShakeAlert system is at version 3.0.1, with more advanced versions in the development and testing pipeline. ShakeAlert originally used two algorithms to determine the location and magnitude of earthquakes using seismic data. A third algorithm that can calculate very large magnitudes of very large earthquakes with geodetic data was added in March 2024. ShakeAlert publishes several data and alert products to meet the needs of different users. All messages include the location of the earthquake, either as a point or a line, and its magnitude. Ground-shaking estimates are published in two forms, as ground-motion contours and a map grid. Providing adequate warning time for strong shaking (the “target threshold”) requires sending alerts at a threshold lower than that strong shaking level (the “alert threshold”). The thresholds for public alerting in Alaska would be a joint USGS and State decision. To have the greatest benefit, ShakeAlert-powered alerts would be delivered to institutional users and individuals by all practical pathways. The USGS alert layer can support thousands of institutional users and alert redistributors, but the USGS does not have the mission nor the infrastructure and expertise to perform mass notifications to the public or implement automatic actions for end users of the alerts. To meet this need, ShakeAlert recruits private sector “technology enablers” that have the necessary expertise to develop end-user implementations using EEW alerts with the goal of stimulating an EEW industry. Earthquake early warning alerts are useless if people do not know how to respond to them. Although the alert messages include instructions about what to do (drop, cover, and hold on), alerts are more effective if people have been trained in advance. Messages about ShakeAlert’s capabilities, limitations, and benefits could be integrated with existing earthquake education programs, including State-run programs. Therefore, ShakeAlert would coordinate with both public and private partners and stakeholders through various partnerships and agreements to accomplish consistent and ongoing public earthquake hazard education. The estimated capital cost of completing the computing infrastructure and sensor networks for the Phase 1 ShakeAlert expansion to Alaska is approximately $66 million in 2024 dollars. The annual operation and maintenance cost of the completed system is estimated to be $12 million per year in 2024 dollars when fully built out.

Alaska↗
USGS2025

Bedrock geologic map of the Bellows Falls 7.5- x 15-minute quadrangle, Windham and Windsor Counties, Vermont, and Sullivan and Cheshire Counties, New Hampshire

Introduction The bedrock geology of the Bellows Falls 7.5- x 15-minute quadrangle, Vermont and New Hampshire, consists of polydeformed Ordovician to Devonian metasedimentary, metavolcanic, and metaplutonic rocks of the Connecticut Valley trough, Bronson Hill anticlinorium (or Bronson Hill terrane), and the Central Maine terrane. Previous work in this area includes a 1:62,500-scale published map and text (1946), State geologic maps of New Hampshire (1997) and Vermont (2011), and various maps and reports presented largely as parts of field trip guidebooks. A provisional open-file map of the geology of the Vermont part of the Bellows Falls 7.5- x 15-minute quadrangle, completed in 1997, is incorporated and revised on this map based on additional fieldwork. This study recognizes three major structural levels from west to east and from lowest to highest: (1) autochthonous rocks of the Connecticut Valley trough; (2) allochthonous rocks of the New Hampshire sequence and Bronson Hill arc in the Monroe thrust sheet (or nappe), including the Skitchewaug nappe; and (3) allochthonous rocks of the Fall Mountain thrust sheet or nappe.

New Hampshire, Vermont↗
USGS2025

Geologic map of the Greater Antilles and Virgin Islands

Introduction The geologic map of the Greater Antilles and Virgin Islands is a compilation of information from the literature, integrated to provide a seamless geologic map of the region. This map was prepared to serve as a base map for a mineral resource assessment of the region. Several small-scale regional geologic maps of the region have been prepared in the past. This report supersedes an earlier version of the geologic map of the Greater Antilles and the Virgin Islands that was released as U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Open-File Report 2019–1036. For this report, the regional geologic overview shown on sheet 1 covers Cuba; the island of Hispaniola, which includes Haiti and Dominican Republic; Jamaica; the Cayman Islands; Puerto Rico; and the U.S. and British Virgin Islands. Sheet 2 shows the geology of Cuba and Cayman Islands, sheet 3 the geology of Jamaica, sheet 4 the geology of Hispaniola, and sheet 5 the geology of Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands. Accompanying the maps are three tables: table 1 lists the map units (in alphabetical order by map-unit label), their ages, and the countries or territories in which they can be found. These are listed in alphabetical order for ease in locating unit names from the symbols on the maps. Table 2 is a list of sources for the geologic map compilation of Puerto Rico. Table 3 shows formations in the Devil’s Race Course Group of Jamaica.

Greater Antilles, Virgin Islands↗
USGS2024

Revision of ModelMuse to support the use of PEST software with MODFLOW and SUTRA models

Executive Summary ModelMuse is a graphical user interface for several groundwater modeling programs. ModelMuse was updated to generate the input files for the parameter estimation software suite PEST. The software is used with MODFLOW or SUTRA models to run PEST-based parameter estimation and display the updated model inputs after parameter estimation. The PEST input files can also be used with the PEST++ version 5 software suite. Parameter estimation typically requires defining the parameters being adjusted during calibration and observations for assessing calibration quality. After a parameter is defined in ModelMuse, it can be applied to all or part of a model dataset. Pilot points—a parameterization device that facilitates higher levels of parameterization—can be used to assign spatially variable distributions of model inputs. Parameters can be applied to temporally varying features, such as boundary conditions, by either applying them to all the values in a series in one step or by applying separate parameters to individual members of a series. ModelMuse allows the definition of many observation types from various model output files. For MODFLOW 6 and SUTRA models, new options were added to ModelMuse to allow it to display the changed input after parameter estimation is complete. For MODFLOW–2005 and MODFLOW–NWT models, ModelMuse can import an entire model for visualization. An example illustrates the use of PEST with a MODFLOW 6 model in ModelMuse.

Techniques and Methods↗
USGS2026

Open-source gravity reduction workflows for geothermal resource assessment

Potential-field geophysical data such as gravity can enhance understanding of geothermal resources at all stages of the resource life cycle, including assessment, exploration, development, and monitoring, and at multiple scales, from the reservoir scale to regional scale. However, to make gravity data useful for geothermal resource characterization, several processing steps are required to isolate the effects of density variations in the Earth’s crust to enable the identification of structural features associated with geothermal resources. Although this process is well-established, standard computational implementations for processing gravity data that are FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reproduceable) are still lacking. This paper details ongoing efforts at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to develop a standard set of open-source Python tools for gravity data reduction that align with the FAIR principles. This workflow makes use of existing open-source tools for geophysical data processing with the goal of maximizing opportunities for rapid improvements, interoperability, and adaptability to other types of geophysical data.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2025

Spatiotemporal variability of algal biomass and nitrate in Owasco and Seneca Lakes in the Finger Lakes Region, New York, in 2019

Cyanobacterial harmful algal blooms (CyanoHABs) have become increasingly common, threatening the security of water resources globally. The U.S. Geological Survey conducted high-resolution nearshore mapping surveys using boat-mounted multiparameter sondes and nitrate sensors during the summer and fall of 2019 on Owasco Lake and Seneca Lake, two lakes with documented CyanoHABs in the Finger Lakes region of New York State. Discrete sensor measurements and water-quality samples were collected at fixed points along survey routes and continuous data were generated at open-water monitoring platforms. This investigation examined whether water-quality information from nearshore surveys was representative of open-water conditions and if nearshore surveys could be used to identify areas with localized nearshore CyanoHABs and potential sources of nutrients not captured by tributary sampling. In addition to comparisons across methods, nearshore concentrations of nitrate and chlorophyll were evaluated relative to tributary outlets, cyanobacterial abundance and biovolume at discrete locations, and the locations of near-surface CyanoHABs that were designated as “confirmed with high toxins” by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Nitrate and chlorophyll concentrations were comparable across methods for each lake, although concentration ranges were typically higher for nearshore mapping datasets than for nearshore discrete datasets. Nearshore surveys indicated areas of nitrate enrichment that varied temporally in both lakes. Orthophosphate was not routinely detected. Across methods, median chlorophyll concentrations were higher for the summer survey than for the fall survey in Owasco Lake. Nearshore chlorophyll concentrations varied more temporally in Owasco Lake than in Seneca Lake. Phytoplankton and cyanobacterial abundance and biovolume were about five times higher in Owasco Lake than in Seneca Lake. Cyanobacteria dominated the phytoplankton community in most samples, and Microcystis comprised the bulk of the cyanobacterial biovolume. The most abundant potential cyanotoxin-producing (specifically microcystins) genera were Microcystis , Synechococcus , Aphanocapsa , and Pseudanabaena . The cyanobacterial community composition was comparable between open-water monitoring platforms and nearshore samples. Microcystins were detected in seven survey samples from Owasco Lake, in one survey sample from Seneca Lake, and in one sample each from the open-water monitoring platforms on Owasco and Seneca Lakes that were collected about 7 days before the fall surveys. Microcystin detections were not consistently associated with high cyanobacterial cell counts or cyanotoxin-producing genera. Results from nearshore surveys were comparable to open-water monitoring platforms and discrete nearshore observations in the absence of nearshore or open-water CyanoHABs in these systems during the study. Patterns of nearshore concentrations of nitrate and chlorophyll from nearshore surveys may aid in the identification of areas with localized nitrate loading and shifts in phytoplankton abundance and community composition.

New York↗
USGS2024

Evaluation of an open earthquake early warning system in Mexico, and laboratory tests of their sensors

Microelectromechanical system (MEMS) accelerometers are useful for seismological and engineering applications because of their ability to record unsaturated large seismic signals. Recent advances in MEMS technologies enable the design of instruments with improved capabilities that also allow the recording of small signals. As a result, MEMS can be useful across a broad dynamic range and for both major earthquakes and smaller magnitude events. Here, we analyze the performance of a MEMS‐based accelerometer with the capability of real‐time data transmission. We discuss the self‐noise level, dynamic range, and sensitivity, along with the timing precision and data transmission latency, and compare these parameters to other MEMS‐based instruments. We also summarize observations from a regional network deployed in southern Mexico over a period of 3+ yr for the purpose of earthquake early warning. In addition to the sensor evaluation, we present a large, openly available data set of strong motion data from the Mexican network that comprises continuous ground‐motion records from 24 accelerometers in the period between 2017 and 2022.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2025

Four-band image mosaic of the Colorado River Corridor downstream of Glen Canyon Dam in Arizona, derived from the May 2021 airborne image acquisition

In May 2021, the U.S. Geological Survey’s Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center acquired airborne multispectral high-resolution data for the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon, Arizona. The image data, which consist of four spectral bands (red, band 1; green, band 2; blue, band 3; and near infrared, band 4) with a ground resolution of 20 centimeters, are available as 16-bit unsigned-integer GeoTIFF files in Sankey and others (2024) (available online at https://doi.org/10.5066/P9BBGN6G ). The image files are projected in the State Plane Coordinate System, using the central Arizona zone (202) with the North American Datum of 1983 National Adjustment of 2011. The assessed spatial accuracy for these data is based on 47 ground-control points that were independent from the ground-control points used by the contractor for aerotriangulation and is reported at the 95-percent confidence level as 0.514 meter (m) and a root mean square error of 0.297 m. The intended uses of this dataset are primarily in support of scientific research and monitoring applications. Examples of these applications include high-resolution spatial and temporal change detection of the river channel, geomorphic landforms, riparian vegetation, and backwater and nearshore habitat, as well as other ecosystem-wide mapping. These imagery data also serve as reference material for field science mission planning, as base data for field data collection including community science activities, and as a highly detailed guide for technical boat operation during science activities such as reconnaissance for nighttime missions and navigating rapids during low flows.

Arizona, Nevada, Utah↗