exchange programs relating to earthquake prediction, and what is their scope?

Answer: The USGS is actively engaged in earthquake prediction research with several other nations throughout the world. The USGS has a cooperative scientific exchange program on earthquake prediction with the Soviet Union. Earthquake prediction is a part of the protocol with the Peoples Republic of China. The USGS and Japan collaborate on earthquake prediction through the U.S./Japan Cooperative Program in Natural Resources (UJNR). The scope of each program is broad, including field, laboratory, and theoretical investigations of earthquake mechanisms and fault zones with the objectives of establishing the procedures, knowledge, and technology needed for the reliable prediction of the time, place, and magnitude of damaging earthquakes. Such cooperation accelerates the growth of knowledge for each country involved.

Question: What specific activities in earthquake prediction research will be deleted based on the fiscal year 1989 budget reduction? (p. GS-77)

Answer: Geodetic monitoring in California, Alaska, and Washington will be eliminated. Non-seismic prediction monitoring of Parkfield will be discontinued. There will be no effort to design the instruments for installation at the Cajon Pass drill site. (Funds for casing of this well were provided from the earthquake program in fiscal year 1988.) In-house laboratory experiments requiring new set-ups or equipment will be eliminated.

Question: Will work with the Global Positioning System (GPS), started in fiscal year 1988, continue?

Answer: No field work will be conducted with the GPS. Previously collected data will be analyzed and theoretical studies on error reduction techniques will continue.

Question: What is the significance of this work?

Answer: For the past 10 years geodetic surveys have been conducted in seismically active parts of the western United States to determine the level and direction of tectonic strain in these regions. In the past these surveys have been conducted using conventional, high-precision surveying techniques that involved such things as flying an airplane between the two points being surveyed to measure the properties of the atmosphere so that proper corrections could be made. The GPS approach involves specially designed receivers that use radio signals from military navigation satellites to accurately determine the position of a point on the ground or the distance between two points. The conduct of geodetic surveys to measure deformation of the Earth's crust can be greatly simplified and made more versatile using the GPS approach. The requirements for line-of-sight between two points is eliminated, as are the need for airplane measurements of the atmospheric properties and reasonable weather conditions.

Question: Does this kind of technology have the potential for reducing costs of measuring crustal deformation and fault movement?

Answer: Yes. The direct costs the Survey will pay for field operations can be significantly reduced using GPS techniques. Crew size can be cut approximately in half and other costs, such as measurements of atmospheric properties from airplanes, can be eliminated.

Question: Is it also applicable to the monitoring of volcanic

activity?

Answer: Yes. Ground inflation or deflation associated with volcanic activity can be easily measured by GPS techniques. GPS antennae can be placed near the summits of active volcanoes and provide frequent measurements of ground deformation. Frequent line-of-sight measurements will no longer be required, thus significantly reducing hazardous exposure of the personnel monitoring volcanoes.

Answer: In the early 1960's the Department of Defense provided equipment for the Worldwide Standard Seismographic Network (WWSSN). This network consists of 90 stations operated by agencies in about 40 countries. The SGS assumed responsibility for this network when the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program was established. The USGS provides supplies and maintenance for these stations, the stations send us the data, we copy the data and distribute the data to the scientific community. In the 1970's the Defense Department, working through the USGS, began to equip on an ad hoc basis some of these stations, about 40, with digital recorders. The USGS maintains this equipment, collects this data, and distributes it on compact discs (CD-ROM). The digital data proved so useful in research on earthquakes and earth structure that the National Science Foundation in 1986 began a program to provide standard, state-of-the-art seismometers and digital recorders at 100 sites worldwide, many of them WWSSN locations. is working through the Incorporated Research Institutions of Seismology (IRIS, a university consortium) and with the USGS to develop this equipment. A prototype system has been constructed and is under test at the USGS Albuquerque Seismological Laboratory.

Question: To what extent will the USGS support this network?

NSF

Answer: The new Global Digital Network will eventually replace the 40 digital WWSSN stations and the 90 analog WWSSN stations. The USGS has agreed, pending the availability of funds, to redirect maintenance from the old stations to the new stations as the transition is made. The USGS has made it clear to NSF that the new digital stations will be more in number, more sophisticated, and more difficult to maintain than the existing stations and that our current support for maintenance will not be adequate. We are requesting that NSF provide to the USGS the additional required funds.

Question: How many systems are envisioned for it?

Answer: 100 stations are planned for the new Global Seismograph

Network.

Question: How much funding is the Nuclear Regulatory Commission providing for the National Seismic Network in the eastern United States in fiscal year 1988 and 1989? (p. GS-75)

Answer: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will provide $900,000 during fiscal years 1988 and 1989 ($1.8 million total) to the USGS to replace regional seismographic networks that NRC currently supports in the east.

Question: Are any USGS funds identified in the fiscal year 1989 budget for the National Seismographic Network?

Answer: The USGS agreement with the NRC states that NRC funds will be used only for the purchase and installation of equipment. The USGS recognizes that the equipment and concepts developed for the national network in the eastern U.S. may be applicable to earthquake monitoring elsewhere in the country. For this reason the USGS provides salary support for about three personnel to work on the NRC project.

Question: What specific regional monitoring will be discontinued based on the fiscal year 1989 budget reduction? (p. GS-77)

Answer: Networks in Alaska will be closed. Work at networks in other western regions (southern and central California, Washington, Utah, and Nevada) and in the central U.S. will be reduced. This means that maintenance will be deferred and data analysis will be restricted to determining the location and magnitude of earthquakes.

Question: Is the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program well thought of by those who can use its results?

Answer: Yes. The USGS has made a major outreach effort to increase the number of people who can use the results of its Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program. The USGS organizes and convenes an average of more than four workshops per year in earthquake-prone regions of the Nation, usually in cooperation with FEMA. During the first ten years of the NEHRP, 45 such meetings involving a total of approximately 4,000 people were held to communicate the knowledge base on earthquake hazards and risk and to foster the overall process of earthquake preparedness and mitigation with emphasis on implementation of loss reduction measures at the local level by local experts. Evaluations by participants in each meeting have indicated a very high level of respect for the USGS Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program and increasing utilization of the results.

Question: Has there been a recent review of its effectiveness?

Answer: Yes, three reviews were completed recently. The first review took place in June, September, and October of 1987 when the USGS organized and convened (with joint sponsorship by NSF, FEMA, and National Bureau of Standards (NBS) three workshops to evaluate the effectiveness throughout the Nation of the NEHRP in producing applications that reduce the potential losses from future earthquakes. One hundred knowledgeable experts of earthquake hazards participated in these meetings which focused on: a) California, b) the Western United States excluding California, and c) the Eastern United States. The conclusion was unequivocal: Many useful

applications of research sponsored by the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program have been made in the past decade and more applications are expected because of the maturing knowledge base and infrastructure of people and institutions. The second review was initiated in December 1987 when the USGS conducted a voluntary survey (with support from NSF, FEMA, and NBS) to evaluate the impact and effectiveness of the NEHRP in calendar year 1987. Among the many results the survey identified the following significant developments in 1987:

1. Development of a model ordinance by the City of Los Angeles, Department of Building and Safety, for earthquake hazard reduction in existing buildings in California.

2. A planning scenario for a magnitude 7.5 earthquake on the Hayward fault in California.

3.

Comprehensive planning with State and local governments for responding to a predicted magnitude 6.25 earthquake in Parkfield, California.

4. Assessment of earthquake risk in locations like Oklahoma where geologically young movement was recently found.

5. Scientific information and technical briefings on the October 1, 1987, Whittier Narrows earthquake.

6. Development of the criteria and outline for the drafting of a State-mandated building code in South Carolina.

7. Establishment of a State-funded county geologists program in Utah to implement the recommendations of the recent Wastach area hazards

assessment.

8. Subsurface study of the Late Cenozoic structural geology of the Los Angeles Basin.

9. A model for relating observations of building damage to earthquake parameters in such a way that information on either set of data is sufficient to estimate the other.

10. A significant advance in earthquake emergency response, especially in Southern California by the Office of Emergency Services in responding rapidly and efficiently to the Whittier-Narrows earthquake.

11. Development of NEHRP recommended provisions for new national building codes by the Building Seismic Safety Council (part of the National Institute of Building Sciences), with an updated ground-shaking map of the U.S. produced by USGS.

The survey also showed that many of the investigators in the NEHRP take the responsibility for moving research results into professional practice very seriously. They are not only producing approximately 3,000 publications and reports per year, they are also participating extensively in conferences, workshops, seminars, professional societies, and professional and standards

committees. This is important because professional and standards committees are the means by which professions assess knowledge and recommend practices that are consistent with the state-of-the-art and the state-of-practice. Finally, in 1987 a review of the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) was organized by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the lead agency. This review was part of the development of a fiveyear plan requested by Congress. The report reviews and commends the progress that has been made in understanding and mitigating earthquake hazards during the past 10 years.

Question: In your opinion can the program function effectively at the reduced funding levels suggested for fiscal year 1989?

Answer: Given the competing priorities within the limited budgetary resources of the USGS and given the commitment to reduce the federal deficit, the funding requested in the President's budget is sufficient.

Question: What deficiencies does this level produce, if any?

Answer: Facility and salary costs continue to rise. The USGS has a strong commitment to direct about 25 percent of program funds to research and operations at universities, State agencies, and private firms. Given that all these costs are fixed or rising, the operating funds for USGS inhouse activities for seismic and geodetic networks, field experiments, and earthquake hazard assessments are reduced.

VOLCANOES

Question: One of the objectives of the volcano hazards program is to identify potentially hazardous volcanic areas of the United States and delineate the nature and extent of the hazards (p. GS-78). Has this been accomplished?

Answer: Volcanoes hazards studies in recent years have been concentrated on the Cascade volcanoes of the Pacific Northwest and Hawaii where there are risks to the population and economy. Volcanic hazards maps and assessment reports, some of them preliminary, have been completed for several Cascade volcanoes, for the Long Valley-Mono Craters area, California, for the volcanoes of Hawaii, Oahu, and Maui, and for several volcanoes in Alaska. Preliminary results are being reviewed and finalized. Continued efforts are focused on areas of greatest need for an initial or revised assessment, based on the likelihood of eruption and the degree of societal impact, including Medicine Lake, Crater Lake and Three Sisters volcanic areas.

Question: How much do you understand how volcanoes work?

Answer: The current state of knowledge regarding volcanic processes does not permit prediction of the time, nature, and magnitude of volcanic eruptions except for certain types of eruptions at those volcanoes that have been closely monitored over a period of several years and for which some patterns of activity have been recognized. At the present time, volcanic activity is beginning to be understood only at Kilauea and Mauna Loa