NASA Others Research using Landsat and other earth-science data at archive Earth Observing Systems data archive and management Aircraft Sensor data archive and management at EDC (Contributing data and research at EDC, and making Interior Department bureaus Agriculture Department agencies Agency for International Development Defense Mapping Agency Central Intelligence Agency Defense Intelligence Agency Question: Is demand for the data generated by satellites increasing? Answer: The overall demand for civil satellite data (Landsat, SPOT, and others) has increased. Each satellite system collects data with slightly different characteristics; thus the total demand for satellite data has increased as users find new applications for these data. Information about total data purchases is not available because SPOT and other satellite operators do not release sales figures. Question: this demand? Does your applications work (p. GS-56-57) help to increase Answer: Our research and cooperative applications projects have resulted in the development of many operational uses of satellite data. Several Interior bureaus now use satellite data for land management and resource assessment purposes based largely on successful cooperative programs with USGS. We also produce enhanced satellite image products for Federal agencies as a result of test projects that developed prototype products for these agencies. These successful programs have resulted in a greater demand for satellite data on a continuing basis to support these uses. Question: If so, why are you proposing to decrease this work by $500,000 (p. GS-57)? Answer: The USGS will be pursuing only the most important research and applications development projects with the remaining funds within the Applications and Research program. The other projects within this activity not funded in FY 1989 can be accomplished within other agencies or outside the government community. Question: Why does this 118 decrease reduce papers published and development projects by 50%? Answer: In response to this decrease, we have proposed to reduce the number of individual applications development and research projects to be conducted. Because these projects result in the most published papers, there would be an associated reduction in the number of papers to be published. We would continue to conduct research in such general areas as software development, image processing, and spatial data handling. This research results in fewer publications than applications development projects. Question: How much of this work is done at the EROS facility? Answer: More than half of the Applications and Research program activities are conducted at the EROS Data Center. This includes most of the applications Development Projects, the Cooperative Demonstration Projects, the Training Courses and Workshops, and the published Technical Papers and Reports. Other Applications and Research program activities are performed at other USGS offices, primarily in Flagstaff, AZ and Reston, VA. SIDE-LOOKING AIRBORNE RADAR (SLAR) Question: Who are the major users of SLAR data? Answer: An increasing number of States, especially New York, Maine, Ohio, California, Oklahoma, Connecticut, Alabama, Louisiana, and Washington are using SLAR data. Many USGS Geologic Division projects, an increasing number of Water Resources Division projects, as well as other Federal agencies, including DOE, NRC, and the Corps of Engineers, many universities and private sector users are taking advantage of the availability of the SLAR data as acquired. Question: Does the USGS expect to continue to use the SLAR data? Answer: Yes, the use of the data is increasing as more areas of coverage become available and its utility becomes better known. Question: In your opinion, is it necessary to cover the whole United States with SLAR data? Answer: The utility of SLAR data has been demonstrated to the earthscience community. Additional SLAR data can be readily acquired by industry within the private sector without expenditure of government funds. Question: Are there reasonable areas yet to be covered? Answer: There are numerous requests for additional SLAR data by State geological surveys and other users. Question: What are the principal uses for this data? Answer: SLAR data are being used by State agencies, the USGS, and the Federal, private, and educational institutions, to help locate potential minerals, fuels, and construction materials. Other important uses include the assistance of SLAR imagery in selecting sites to better handle hazard waste material disposal, studying seismic activity and other natural earth hazards, investigate surface water and ground water resources, assisting in making environmental decisions, glacial monitoring, and general geologic mapping and structural studies. The available airborne side-looking radar 84-150 0-88-30 data will permit better utilization of satellite radar data when it is acquired in the 1990's. GEOLOGIC AND MINERAL RESOURCES AND MAPPING EARTHQUAKES Question: What is the status of the research well at Cajon Pass in California? Answer: The well was drilled with funds provided by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under the management of the university consortium DOSECC (Deep Observation and Sampling of the Earth's Continental Crust). The U.S. Geological Survey supported some of the scientific experiments in the drillhole and duration of the cores taken from the hole. Drilling has stopped because funding is no longer available from NSF and the scientific experiments are being brought to completion. Question: How deep has it been drilled? Answer: The drillhole reached a depth of 11,515 feet. Question: What results have been gotten so far and what is their significance? Answer: Cores, fluids, geophysical logs, geochemical samples, and temperature and stress measurements were obtained at numerous places in the drillhole. The most surprising and significant result is that the stress direction is perpendicular to the San Andreas fault, which indicates that the shear strength of the segment of fault near the well is very weak. Such a stress direction explains the existence of compressional folds and faults oriented parallel to the fault, the cause of which had hitherto been a puzzle. Knowledge about the strength of the fault will be important in planning earthquake prediction experiments. Question: How deep will proposed funding allow the hole to be drilled? Answer: There is no current commitment to drill to the originally planned 16,000 foot depth. Question: Is this sufficient to get the data previously expected? Answer: The original plan for the Cajon Pass drillhole called for a total depth of 16,000 feet. This depth was chosen in order to measure stresses at a depth where earthquakes commonly occur. By not reaching the planned depth, the stress measurements obtained at shallower depths can only be extrapolated to the depth of the earthquakes. Question: What kinds of data will not be gotten? Answer: Rock and fluid samples, temperature, and stress at greater depths will not be measured. Question: Is drilling already being shut down? Answer: Yes. The drill rig was released on April 8, 1988; however, it is still on the site because it is not yet scheduled for another project. Question: If not, when will it be? Answer: Drilling was stopped on April 8, 1988. Question: Will you carry out ongoing experiments there? Answer: The drill hole will be turned over to the USGS for long-term monitoring for earthquake prediction. We plan eventually to install instruments in the drillhole and in the region around the hole. Question: This well was a strong candidate for a "Parkfield" type experiment according to last year's testimony. Is it still a strong candidate at 12,000 feet, instead of 16,000? Answer: Yes. Although the greater depth would have been preferable, the hole is still the deepest one that we have access to near the San Andreas fault in southern California. Question: How much would it cost to drill the well to 16,000 feet? Answer: According to DOSECC, it would cost about $5-6 million to complete the hole. Question: How long would it take? Answer: The drilling could be completed in 6 to 12 months. Question: What would be the benefits? Answer: The main benefit would be to extend the measurements and sample collection to depths where earthquakes occur. Information from 16,000 feet would be important for evaluating the state of stress on the San Andreas fault near the hole, which in turn would make possible a better estimate of the likelihood of a large earthquake in southern California. Answer: The USGS could work with the National Science Foundation and DOSECC to complete the hole. It would be essential that the scientists and engineers who were involved in the hole so far continue to be involved. Question: What are the sizes and emphasis of earthquake programs funded by other Federal agencies? Answer: The four principal agencies, their budgets under the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP), and their primary programmatic emphasis are described below. They are: a) 1. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has an annual budget of $34 million (fiscal year 1988). The USGS conducts geophysical and geological studies and related operational activities for the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) through its program which emphasizes: regional monitoring and earthquake potential studies, b) earthquake prediction research, c) regional earthquake hazards assessments, d) earthquake data and information services, e) engineering seismology, and f) implementation. 2. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has an annual budget of $5 million. FEMA, the lead agency, emphasizes: a) design practices and manuals for new buildings, b) guidelines on the abatement of seismic risk posed by existing buildings, c) seismic safety planning for lifeline systems, d) support for a study of a national earthquake engineering experimental facility, e) earthquake hazard mitigation strategies, f) Federal response planning, g) state and local preparedness planning, h) earthquake education and information transfer, and i) post-disaster mitigation. The 3. The National Science Foundation (NSF) has programs in the Earth Sciences Division ($10 million) and the Division for Fundamental Research in Critical Engineering Systems ($18 million). The NSF objectives in the first program are: a) basic understanding of earthquake processes, b) international activities, and c) workshops, symposia, and conferences. objectives in the second program are to conduct research on: a) fundamental engineering issues related to earthquake ground shaking, b) earthquake responses of soil and geologic structures, c) tsunami mitigation, d) seismic zonation, e) steel, masonry, reinforced concrete, and wood structures, f) lifeline systems and offshore structures, and g) post-earthquake investigations. 4. The National Bureau of Standards (NBS) has an annual budget of $0.5 million. The NBS emphasizes: a) improved seismic design and construction practices, b) prediction of the behavior of masonry walls and bridge columns, c) the feasibility and need for a national earthquake engineering experimental facility, and d) the U.S./Japan Panel on Wind and Seismic Effects. Question: How are these programs coordinated with each other and the USGS program? Answer: The programs of the four agencies are coordinated through: a) an integrated 5-year plan for the NEHRP, which is presently being updated and revised for 1989-1994 and b) an Interagency Coordinating Committee which meets at least once each quarter. The USGS program is reviewed at least twice each year by the National Academy of Sciences Subcommittee on Earthquake Research. Other Federal agencies have liaison representatives who attend these meetings just as USGS also attends their program review meetings. The USGS's external grants program is also open to liaison representatives who attend during the peer review process. Question: With what foreign countries does the USGS have scientific |