U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

21–972 2018

S. HRG. 114–498 

OVERSIGHT OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE 

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

APRIL 7, 2016 

( 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairman 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

MIKE LEE, Utah 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

STEVE DAINES, Montana 

BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana 

CORY GARDNER, Colorado 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia 

MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico 

MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii 

ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine 

ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts 

COLIN HAYES, Staff Director 

PATRICK J. MCCORMICK III, Chief Counsel 

CHUCK KLEESCHULTE, Senior Professional Staff Member 

ANNIE HOEFLER, Legislative Aide 

ANGELA BECKER-DIPPMAN, Democratic Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Democratic Chief Counsel 

MELANIE STANSBURY, Democratic Professional Staff Member 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Page 

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, Chairman and a U.S. Senator from Alaska ................... 1 

Cantwell, Hon. Maria, Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator from Washington .................................................................................................................... 3 

WITNESSES 

Kimball, Hon. Suzette, Director, U.S. Geological Survey ..................................... 5 

Fogels, Edmund, Deputy Commissioner, Alaska Department of Natural Resources ................................................................................................................... 38 

Leahy, Dr. P. Patrick, Executive Director, American Geosciences Institute ...... 57 

McCoy, Dr. Robert, Director, Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska Fairbanks ..................................................................................................................... 79 

Vidale, Dr. John, Washington State Seismologist, and Director, Pacific Northwest Seismic Network, University of Washington ............................................ 84 

ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED 

Cantwell, Hon. Maria: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 3 

Article from The New Yorker dated July 20, 2015 entitled ‘‘The Really 

Big One’’ ......................................................................................................... 13 

Fogels, Ed: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 38 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 41 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 139 

Kimball, Hon. Suzette: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 5 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 7 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 104 

Leahy, Dr. P. Patrick: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 57 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 59 

McCoy, Dr. Robert: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 79 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 81 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 161 

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 1 

Map of GPS Sites in Alaska ............................................................................ 97 

Vidale, Dr. John: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 84 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 86 

(1) 

OVERSIGHT OF THE 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

THURSDAY, APRIL 7, 2016 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:06 a.m. in Room 

SD–366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Lisa Murkowski, 

Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA 

The CHAIRMAN. Good morning. The Committee will come to 

order. 

We are here this morning to conduct oversight of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). It has been a long time since our Committee has conducted direct oversight of this agency outside of the 

nominations process. I think that there is clearly a level of interest. 

There are a number of important and relevant issues for us to explore today. 

Director Kimball, I appreciate you being here. I understand you 

are a little bit under the weather, but you are clearly a trooper, 

ready to rally. We appreciate it, and hopefully this hearing will be 

quick and you can get some rest. 

I am among those who appreciate both the work of the USGS 

and the spirit in which it is typically undertaken. The agency is 

known for being non-partisan and for seeking out concrete, scientific evidence. I, for one, appreciate that. 

I think it is good. I think it is refreshing in an agency that comes 

before our Committee that perhaps does not have a significant regulatory agenda that is plowing straight ahead. It has been really 

greatly appreciated, the cooperative working relationship that we 

have, and I appreciate your leadership on that. 

It is also comforting to know that the Survey is collecting and 

monitoring data that is vital to the safety and the well-being of the 

American people. Alaskans, in particular, are grateful for the work 

that USGS does to help us cope with the daily threat of volcanic 

eruptions, earthquakes and other natural hazards. People might 

say, ‘‘Daily threat, Lisa, relax a little bit.’’ But during my week 

back home, I was grounded by a volcano because the airplanes 

could not fly. And it was just a few days after that that we had 

a magnitude 6.2 earthquake. No damage, but 6.2 gets your attention, although not quite as much as the 7.1 that we had a couple 
2 

months prior to that. But yes, we have a lot of stuff going on there, 

and we appreciate the vigilance of USGS. 

I do recognize, again, that we have parts of our country here that 

are active in different ways and the need for real time volcano 

monitoring, the recognition that we have very tectonically active 

areas, certainly in Alaska, as I mentioned. So knowing what you 

do there at the Agency is important. 

Another success story can be found with the Alaska Mapping Executive Committee. The AMEC, composed of representatives from 

15 federal and state agencies was formed in 2012 to prioritize the 

collection of high resolution elevation data. This initiative has expanded to collect other map layers, providing vital data to ensure 

the safety of our pilots and those wanting to explore the Alaska 

wilderness. 

Director, you were up in Alaska last year when we were celebrating the 50 percent mark where we had mapped over 50 percent 

of the state. Actually, in fairness, I think we were up to 57 percent. 

But it says something when we have a celebration when we hit 50 

percent. I noted that at the time we have got a ways to go, but hey, 

we are halfway there and we appreciate that. We look forward to 

working it further. 

While I support many efforts and activities within USGS, I also 

believe that some of its core areas lack attention and resources. 

That is another reason why we are here today, to review the agency’s priorities. 

Our mineral security is one of them. This will come as no surprise to anyone who has followed our Committee, but I remain seriously concerned about our growing foreign mineral dependence. 

Last year we imported more than 50 percent of our supply of 47 

minerals, including 100 percent of 19 of them. 

Even though minerals are more important to our modern society 

than ever before, we are paying less and less attention to them. 

That shows, I think, in the USGS budget where not even 10 percent goes to the energy and minerals program. 

It shows elsewhere as well. After the USGS reports our foreign 

dependence, it is very difficult to find anyone anywhere in the Federal Government who is responsible for doing anything to meaningfully reduce it. 

Now going back to mapping, the USGS has used hyperspectral 

imagery to map more than 96 percent of the country of Afghanistan. While hyperspectral imagery is used for mineral exploration, 

very little of the U.S. has been mapped with this same technology. 

There is some frustration to hear that USGS has conducted surveys on the other side of the world while the assessments are still 

much needed here in this country. I do recognize the importance 

of the Survey’s other mission areas, but those cannot come at the 

expense of the Congressionally-authorized and Congressionallymandated responsibilities that USGS holds. 

So I am glad we are having this hearing. We will have an opportunity to highlight areas of success for the Survey, but also identify 

the gaps within the agency that prevent it from meeting its original and primary directives. 

Again, Director Kimball, I appreciate you being with us before 

the Committee today and for your leadership there at USGS. 
3 

Let’s turn to Senator Cantwell for your opening remarks. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for 

scheduling this important hearing. Like Alaska, Washington has a 

lot of related issues, so this is a hearing of great importance to our 

state as well. 

I would like to extend a warm welcome to all the witnesses today 

and thank you for being here, Ms. Kimball. 

I also want to say hello to Dr. John Vidale, who is here from 

Washington State. He is the Washington State Seismologist, Director of the Pacific Northwest Seismic Network, and Professor at the 

University of Washington. These are people we count on all of the 

time, and we so appreciate them being here. 

It is a great opportunity this morning to talk about the importance of the USGS—the premier Earth Science agency—and its 

most respected roles that are so important to us: producing the nation’s maps, monitoring our rivers, guiding our energy and mineral 

development, supporting the management of public lands, and 

helping us respond to natural disasters such as floods, earthquakes, volcanoes and landslides. As the primary science agency 

for the Department of the Interior, they play an incredible role in 

informing decision-making for the Department in many of its areas. 

They also provide technical assistance to states, tribes and communities across the country. 

So these partnerships are particularly important in informing 

our decisions at the local level. In many states, the USGS is a critical partner, as it is in our state, and I would like to take a few 

minutes just to highlight what that partnership means. 

The first area of partnership is to protect the public from natural 

disasters. The USGS is the federal agency responsible for monitoring these natural hazards such as volcanoes, earthquakes and 

landslides. Washington, like Alaska, has its share of these, and we 

are so glad that they are an absolutely critical partner in monitoring and responding to these hazards. 

As many people know, Mount St. Helens erupted in 1980 and 

was the largest volcanic eruption in U.S. history. In fact, Washington State has six high risk volcanoes, including Mount Rainier, 

which is considered one of the nation’s most dangerous. Since the 

1990s the U.S. has partnered with Pierce County to operate a lahar 

warning system to protect the lives and property that could be affected in that eruption—and there are probably 80,000 people in 

the path of that potential eruption and lahar—so not that Mount 

St. Helens wasn’t significant, but the population density around 

Mount Rainier is a total other story. However, new monitoring, 

science and warning systems are needed throughout the West 

Coast. That is why Chairman Murkowski and I are co-sponsoring 

the National Volcano Early Warning and Monitoring System Act to 

protect communities that are in these high risk areas. 

Another significant hazard in Washington State is earthquakes, 

just like the Chair said. And Dr. Vidale, who is here, is the State 

Seismologist, who has been working with USGS and other states 

along the West Coast to develop an earthquake early warning sys-
4 

tem. USGS studies show that a major earthquake could occur in 

the next 50 years. It has been estimated that this earthquake could 

approach the intensity of the quake and tsunami that struck Japan 

in 2011 and particularly could affect major cities like Seattle. In 

fact, we are having a large-scale tsunami drill two months from 

now, in the next 60 days, in the Northwest. There are going to be 

thousands of people participating and learning how to respond to 

that type of event. 

That is why we continue to advocate for the Earthquake Early 

Warning System—because it would save lives and billions of dollars. That is also why we introduced the Tsunami Warning, Education, and Research Act which passed the Senate last year and 

would require USGS to work with NOAA on a tsunami program. 

Madam Chair—because I know you care so much about this— 

from our work on the Commerce Committee in looking at this, it 

is clear there is so much that needs to be done with the mapping 

and then working with the local community that needs to be knitted together. People need to see the maps, what could potentially 

happen, and then the community has to knit together a response. 

And all the agencies that are responsible for that need to work together. 

Finally, I want to mention the terrible tragedy of Oso that occurred in March 2014, which caused 43 deaths. That mudslide was 

such a devastation, and we still feel the loss of life and thank so 

many of our first responders who responded to that. The USGS 

provided critical assistance in the search and rescue operation, including real-time monitoring to keep our first responders safe. A 

horrible tragedy and yet we couldn’t even, without USGS, send the 

first responders into the area without their information and data 

about whether it was safe to go into the area. So we were counting 

on them. 

Landslides cause over two dozen fatalities and $1–$2 billion a 

year in damages across the country, so this is a significant issue. 

So, I think better understanding these hazards and their impact 

and potential for helping save life and property is very important. 

I am pleased to hear that USGS is proposing to increase its work 

in this area. We need a national landslide mitigation strategy, 

more science, more monitoring, to prevent these tragedies from occurring. 

Another area I just want to highlight is partnerships with the 

USGS to protect and restore watersheds. Washington is home to 

some of the greatest rivers and estuaries—the Puget Sound and 

Columbia River are the economic and cultural lifeblood of our region, so their work there is very important. 

The USGS has faced a number of institutional challenges in carrying out its mission. With a budget of only $1.06 billion, the organization leverages its resources many times over; however, many 

areas, such as hazard and water monitoring, are severely underfunded. This is where, I think, good science really can help all of 

us move forward. 

Strategic investments are needed to advance new science and 

tools. A number of programs and business practices need to be 

modernized and streamlined, and it is important that we have and 

strengthen these programs. 
5 

Again, I know other of our Committees are talking a lot about 

drones and drone systems. These can provide some very critical 

tools and information. We want to see that move forward so that 

these agencies can use these effectively. 

I am so glad that we are having both panels today, and again, 

thank you for being here. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Cantwell. 

Senator Cantwell just mentioned we do have two panels today. 

We are pleased to have the Director of USGS, Director Suzette 

Kimball. Welcome to the Committee. After you have presented your 

oral comments this morning, we will have a series of questions and 

then we will move to our second panel and look forward to their 

input this morning as well. 

So, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF HON. SUZETTE KIMBALL, DIRECTOR, 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Dr. KIMBALL. Well, thank you very much, Senator Murkowski 

and Senator Cantwell and members of the Committee. I very much 

appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today. I’m very excited to share the views of the USGS on the state of our organization and its mission. 

And I’d very much like to start the conversation at the point in 

which Senator Murkowski, you started the discussion that Congress established the USGS in 1879. And our mission then was not 

only to map the West and locate resources, but also to push the 

boundaries of science. Our scientists have pursued that mission 

with uncommon dedication, and I’m very honored to be their 16th 

Director. 

Since we were established, technology and Earth science have 

evolved and we have evolved as well. As you noted, two years ago, 

Madam Chairman, on the anniversary of the 1964 Good Friday 

Earthquake in Alaska, USGS Science in response to that event 

helped confirm the theory of plate tectonics, fundamentally changing how we approach earthquake science. 

In 1995 Congress merged the National Biological Survey with 

the USGS making us an integrated Earth science agency, one of 

the only agencies of this type worldwide. Since then the value of 

bringing Earth science disciplines together has become more apparent. 

I want to stress that we rely on partnerships to pursue our mission. State geological surveys, universities, municipal governments, 

other federal agencies and foreign governments are all critical partners for the USGS. Our budget is leveraged resulting in approximately an additional half billion dollars contributed by our partners. These partnerships, for example, have made it possible to 

publish such reports that offer industry and regulators guidance on 

how to site, develop and close mines with resource and environmental implications taken into account. 

The USGS also works closely with other Interior bureaus and 

other federal agencies such as the EPA, NASA, NOAA and the 

Army Corps of Engineers. Rather than duplicate these agencies’ 

missions, we complement their research and contribute sound 

science to their decisions. 
6 

While I’m proud of the Bureau’s integrated approach to problem 

solving, innovation is a characteristic that I hope to nurture during 

my tenure in this office. For example, we continue to pursue 21st 

century mapping. In Alaska we’re harnessing our partnerships 

with the state and university and using IFSAR to produce modern 

geospatial information for the state, and we closed last year, by the 

way, at 63 percent completion for Alaska. 

Meanwhile, in the lower 48, LiDAR collected by a coalition of federal, state and private industry partners, can enable mapping and 

even forecasting of landslides. The tragedy at Oso, Washington in 

2014, like the Good Friday Earthquake, pushes us to complete scientific achievements worthy of the investment and trust placed in 

us by the American people. 

Speaking of hazards, the USGS has long led federal research into 

geologic hazards and we’re pushing innovative approaches in this 

area too. Along the West Coast, we’re establishing an earthquake 

early warning system that could readily be expanded to Alaska and 

other high risk regions of the country. We’re also applying advanced telemetry and remote sensing tools to make volcano early 

warning a reality. 

The unknown unknowns of Earth science motivate us to advance 

our understanding of the world. Looking to the future I see challenges where we are positioned to lead, water security and availability, the tools for addressing natural hazards, the assessment of 

critical minerals, the forecasting and preventing of biological 

threats and, of course, developing the next generation of mapping 

technology. 

The mission of the USGS in the 21st century will be to locate 

natural resources for the benefit of the nation and to find ways to 

sustainably exploit those resources so that our prosperity endures. 

Indeed, research suggests that we may someday even harness the 

energy of coal using microbes that will avoid many of the associated environmental costs. It’s the job of the USGS, working with 

our partners, to help bring that future to fruition. 

So on behalf of the more than 8,000 employees of the USGS, 

thank you again for inviting me here today and for the opportunity 

to testify. I will be very happy to answer any questions you may 

have. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Kimball follows:] 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Director Kimball. 

Let’s begin. We have got good participation by the Committee 

this morning and hopefully more will drop by as well. 

I appreciate you acknowledging not only the core mission of the 

USGS but also some of the challenges that we have going forward. 

I have noted, particularly, your comment about water security. I do 

not think that we spend near enough time understanding our 

water resources. We all know that, at least from the West, water 

is the thing that we fight over all the time. So understanding that 

as a resource is key. 

I want to ask you about the importance of minerals within the 

USGS mission. In my December 18 letter to you regarding the concerns that I had outlined about the budget priorities, I indicated 

that USGS has reduced its traditional core function of assessing 

this country’s mineral resources. You responded by noting that the 

Minerals and Energy Resources Program has not been demoted but 

rather has been elevated. What I am wondering this morning is 

how it has been elevated from a budget perspective because that 

is really where we are placing priorities, and we need to know to 

what extent then, as we have done an assessment for our mineral 

commodity’s summaries, how we are working to expand our knowledge and understanding within this database here? If you can just 

speak to the priorities within the agency focused on our minerals 

and understanding our inventories? 

Dr. KIMBALL. Well thank you very much for that question. And 

I want to assure you that the USGS has taken very seriously the 

comments that we’ve received from this Committee in previous 

hearings, as well as the questions for the record that we’ve received. 

As you point out, we have taken concrete steps to address new 

strategic directions for our minerals work to enhance our ability to 

do life cycle analysis which we think is going to be essential as we 

move into new technologies that will require different types of minerals being applied to activities. 

As you pointed out, we have identified and submitted a reprogramming request last fall to Congress to have created, which 

we’ve done, an Associate Director specifically for our Energy and 

Mineral Resources. That individual’s responsibility will be to pursue those kinds of activities that will help enhance the budget 

through our various partnerships. And those partnerships are very 

important. We have strong partnerships with industry. We have 

strong partnerships with other federal agencies. And that’s going 

to be essential to having an understanding of the global scale and 

scope of mineral resources. 

The CHAIRMAN. Can I interrupt and ask a question on that? 

You have noted that, for instance, with Alaska mapping now we 

are at 63 percent which is making some progress. 

Do we know to what extent we have surveyed our lands to determine the extent of our own domestic mineral base? Can you say we 

have surveyed and analyzed 50 percent, that we are halfway there? 

To what extent do we know our own mineral base here in this 

country in terms of an inventory? 
12 

Dr. KIMBALL. I don’t have the answer for that today but our scientists and our program coordinators know that number and we’ll 

be happy to provide that for the record. 

The CHAIRMAN. I would be interested. 

Along those same lines, the geologic mapping in terms of the extent to which we have surveyed and understand and have accurate 

mapping of our geologic resources. Is that information that you can 

also make available to us? 

Dr. KIMBALL. Yes, we can. 

The CHAIRMAN. Great. 

Dr. KIMBALL. We have that information. 

The CHAIRMAN. Great, I appreciate that. 

And then my last question, the White House, you mentioned the 

Earthquake Resilience Summit that they held on February 2nd. 

Was USGS consulted by the White House on that summit? We 

were very surprised that Alaska did not have any role or participation. Our state seismologist was not brought into the loop. Now we 

had the Secretary of the Interior here not too long ago and she indicated the same thing, that this might be readily expandable to 

Alaska. It is all a function of money. But we did find that it was 

somewhat unusual that the most seismically active state was not 

brought into this process. Do you know what happened there? 

Dr. KIMBALL. I do not know all of the details. This, of course, was 

an event that was coordinated through the White House. 

I know that—— 

The CHAIRMAN. Were you all involved at USGS? 

Dr. KIMBALL. We were involved and for that matter, we did have 

conversations with the state seismologist about participation but it 

was late in the game and my understanding was at that point they 

were not able to travel. 

However, that being said, I need to assure you that the USGS 

agrees that Alaska is very much in our minds in terms of the next 

place where we need to begin working on earthquake early warning. We have opportunities within Anchorage, but we also recognize 

that Alaska has priorities in being able to establish a statewide 

seismic network and that that is one of the higher priorities within 

the state. We have been having discussions with your Commissioner of Natural Resources and the State Geologist about how to 

accomplish that and move forward with that. 

The CHAIRMAN. We will have further conversation on that but 

recognizing that it is the most seismically active state and then 

also that it is not part of the contiguous United States and that if 

we did have a major earthquake along the lines that we had in 

1964, you are cut off effectively from the rest of the country and, 

really, from an asset. So it is part of a bigger plan, but I look forward to talking with you about that as well. 

Senator Cantwell. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Dr. Kimball, the New Yorker article that came out about the 

Cascadia subduction zone, I think it was a year ago. ‘‘The Really 

Big One,’’ I think was the title of the article, about an earthquake 

that will destroy a sizable portion of the Pacific Northwest Coast. 

The question is when? 

[The information referred to follows:] 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 

Senator CANTWELL. I think, probably, that is the most I have 

heard from my constituents, from people across the country, people 

I grew up with, people in Europe, everybody saying, ‘‘Have you 

read this?’’ 

So the question is, I don’t even know if people here in our nation’s capital have their mind wrapped around this. It was very 

frustrating. I think the FEMA Region 10 Director was quoted in 

the article as saying, ‘‘Everything West of I–5 will be toast.’’ 

This is something we need to prepare for. I guess my question 

is, do we have all the tools necessary now to accurately depict the 

understanding of the Cascadia subduction zone? And what leadership role do you think that we need to push forward with other 

agencies so that we have the information and resources to move 

forward on a concrete plan? 

Dr. KIMBALL. Well thank you for the question. And yes, I think 

we’ve all read the New Yorker article. 

Within USGS we do have a priority activity to begin looking at 

the Cascadia subduction zone. It is the kind of system that could 

generate the same sorts of magnitude activities that we saw with 

the Tohoku earthquake in Japan and the Fukushima issues there. 

So we agree that it is important to look at that. 

There is more to be done to understand the mechanics. I think, 

perhaps, a more important aspect now, and you’re taking the first 

steps with the tsunami activity that’s coming up later this year, is 

to make sure that individuals understand the potential, understand the true probability of an event and what to do should that 

kind of event occur. 

That’s one of the premises behind the various activities like the 

Earthquake ShakeOut events and the ARkStorm events to have 

those kinds of events take place in cities up and down the West 

Coast and especially in the Pacific Northwest. So I think that will 

be an important activity. 

Senator CANTWELL. I just want to make sure that we are knitting this together. I guess that is the best word. 

Just having been in Pacific County a week or so ago and having 

people from the University of Washington there and the local community which is, basically, a very rural part of our state. So you 

have a scientist on one hand saying this is the devastation and I 

will help you plan, and you have a local community that is a very 

small, rural community, and county commissioners, Madam Chair, 

and mayors, who are trying to do their best job. They are trying 

to get a plan for their community. I don’t know that I would call 

that knitting it together. I think the exercise we are going to do 

will probably be a better knitting together, but I guess what I am 

saying is I feel like we have to keep doing work to make this plan 

a reality at the federal level because I think it is going to—this size 

that people are talking about, the map that they show is all the 

way from—I am sure it will have an impact on Alaska, but everything from Washington all the way through California. Basically 

one of the largest economies in the world, the West Coast economy, 

will be greatly impacted by this, so I think we want to keep knitting it together. 

And on that point, you have signed an MOU, I think, with Pierce 

County, as it relates to a warning system. What can we do to make 
30 

sure that that funding is there? And how do we make sure that we 

get the amount of funding that we need for the LiDAR data since 

this also, from just a mudslide perspective, is critical? 

Dr. KIMBALL. Right. 

Well having the LiDAR database is absolutely foundational to 

being able to understand the potential risk associated with these 

efforts. 

At the moment—— 

Senator CANTWELL. You are saying not just on landslides, but for 

the Cascadia subduction zone, having the LiDAR mapping system 

is going to be—— 

Dr. KIMBALL. Is not just for landslides, but for understanding 

flood potential, for instance. Having the information about the 

topographic expression is going to be very, very important. 

Of course, working with the state geologist’s office and developing the geologic maps is also going to be essential if you want 

to best understand the Cascadia subduction zone as well. 

So all of these need to come together in a coordinated fashion. 

As you point out that the knitting together is important, I’d like 

to point out that we have an office that is called Science Applications for Risk Reduction that is specifically dedicated to doing that. 

We’ve worked very closely with the seismic community and with 

SAFRR, the acronym, to help knit together both information, technology and infrastructure needs and public awareness. I think 

using the kinds of tools and technologies for communication and for 

pulling communities together will help with an understanding both 

of landslide potential and of the potentials associated with tsunami 

in the Northwest. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Senator Franken. 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Dr. 

Kimball. 

We talked a little at the beginning about the Asian Carp, and it 

sounds like you have done some trials and are about to go in the 

field with the experiment on, sort of, this magic bullet that will target the carp’s ability to reproduce. Is that right? 

Dr. KIMBALL. Yes, sir. 

The bio bullet has gone through the laboratory trials. We are finished with that. We’ll be doing field trials this spring and summer, 

and at that point we have information to put it into the system 

that actually registers the drugs for application. And so, we are 

well on our way to demonstrating the utility and viability of that 

particular method for carp control. 

Senator FRANKEN. That is very good news and thank you for that 

work. 

Dr. Kimball, according to your mission statement, the USGS 

serves the nation by providing reliable scientific information to describe and understand the Earth, minimize loss of life and property 

from natural disasters, manage water, biological energy and mineral resources and enhance and protect our quality of life. You have 

a big job. 
31 

Climate change is one of the biggest threats that we face. Climate change has and will continue to impact critical areas within 

the USGS mission. 

Dr. Kimball, I am struck by the overlap between the core mission 

of the USGS and the potential impacts of climate change, and I am 

pleased that you have made climate change a priority at USGS including strong funding for climate-related activities in the Administration’s FY2017 budget request. 

I am interested in the USGS’ work in satellite imagery and the 

monitoring of the Earth’s system. Can you describe the importance 

of this work in understanding climate change and its impact on our 

society? 

Dr. KIMBALL. Well satellite imagery is a tool of the future in any 

number of ways. 

Within USGS we operate the Landsat satellite system which provides eight-day repeat imagery of the globe at 30-meter resolution. 

This is the perfect mid-range resolution for understanding aspects 

associated with water supply, with agriculture, with forestry, with 

changes in land use. And in the 44 history, or 44-year history, of 

Landsat we’ve been able to do that. 

It has amazing commercial applications. We’ve been part of an 

analysis that has indicated that the provision of the Landsat data 

set and free and open access has resulted in over $2 billion return 

for commercial applications in terms of things like better management of irrigation systems. 

Senator FRANKEN. Sure. 

Dr. KIMBALL. Better management of forestry. 

So having the ability to use satellite-based global observations 

gives us that global perspective that allows us to identify change 

and change through time. Coupled with geologic change, the understanding of the long-term cycles within the Earth is we are able 

then to put together a very good picture of how change might occur 

affecting various aspects of Earth resources. 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you. Thank you. 

I want to talk about One Health. Over three quarters of the 

emerging diseases we faced in the last century have come from an 

animal source. Our ability to stop outbreaks relies on fast detection 

and response, and this means that wildlife experts and public 

health officials must work together in a One Health approach. 

My One Health bill will direct the Administration to create a 

framework that will strengthen coordination between the agencies 

and support initiatives that foster more disease surveillance in animal populations at the state and local levels. The USGS plays an 

important role in this framework. 

Dr. Kimball, in your testimony you describe USGS as the CDC 

of wildlife. Can you tell us more about how the work done by USGS 

helps prevent the spread of zoonotic diseases and what ways does 

the USGS coordinate with other public health agencies to prevent 

and respond to disease outbreaks? 

Dr. KIMBALL. Well thank you very much for that question, Senator Franken. 

The National Wildlife Health Center is a unique facility that has 

responsibilities for not only responding to particular disease events, 

die offs, for instance, but also for providing worldwide monitoring 
32 

that’s associated with the vectors that disease spread for things 

like, for instance, Avian influenza, West Nile virus. 

We are privileged to be part of the White House Fast Track Action Committees for diseases that are typically considered human 

health diseases such as Ebola and Zika, but those diseases actually 

have a genetic connection to wildlife disease. And so being able to 

connect our understanding of the spread of wildlife disease, the 

spread of vectors such as mosquitoes and changes in mosquito reservoirs based on understanding of say, climate change variables, is 

an important connection to the public health arena. 

I’d also like to point out that our minerals work is also very 

closely connected to the public health sector. Understanding things 

like the risk associated with asbestos-formed minerals and the risk 

associated with various air quality conditions and water quality 

conditions is another aspect of environmental health that is important and a key mission priority for us. 

Senator FRANKEN. Well thank you for the great work that you 

guys do. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Franken. 

Senator Hirono is next, but I understand that she is going to 

defer to Senator Manchin. Thank you. 

Senator MANCHIN. First of all let me thank Senator Hirono, my 

friend, and I appreciate it. 

But very quickly the USGS has the Leetown Science Center 

headquarters in Leetown, West Virginia, and it does a tremendous 

amount of ecological work. I think it has six other states that are 

involved with this one center. 

The only thing I am asking is would you come and visit the center with me, if I can extend that invitation to you? 

Dr. KIMBALL. Thank you, I would be delighted to have the opportunity. 

Senator MANCHIN. Would you, if we could go? Okay. 

Dr. KIMBALL. To visit the center. 

Senator MANCHIN. We will arrange it then with your office. 

Dr. KIMBALL. Absolutely, thank you. 

Senator MANCHIN. Okay. 

The other thing I want to talk to you about is seismic operations 

and deep well injections. I know you have come out with a report. 

I have been speaking to the NETL, National Energy Technology 

Labs. We are all concerned because I know that the Marcellus 

shale in West Virginia was not mentioned in that. But I would assume that any type of injections, if it is not done and done properly, can be contributed toward the seismic activity that we are 

seeing. 

Dr. KIMBALL. Our work on induced seismicity leads us to believe 

that it is most often associated with deep waste water injection 

wells. And again, depending on how those wells are constructed 

and how the operations take place can affect it. 

Senator MANCHIN. So you know there is a proper way and an improper way. I am just asking if we have come to the conclusion that 

we can do it and do it safely, and I will give you a perfect example. 

I know that we are concerned about well water impregnation as far 

as our drinking water aquifers and all that. In West Virginia we 
33 

require basically double wall casing with cement in between all the 

way to formation which prevents that from happening, if it is done 

and done properly. 

Also with the deep well injection we know if it is done properly 

with NETL’s research that they are doing. I think working maybe 

with you all too, we are looking for that, that we can minimize, almost minimize, any risk that we have for seismic operations from 

deep well. 

My concern is this. The energy this country needs and energy 

this country is using in so many different areas, whether you like 

it or not, there is a proper way to do things rather than just saying 

we are going stop it all together. That is what I am concerned 

about, because people will just shut it down for the sake of shutting something down. We need this energy, and we are looking for 

the proper ways. 

Have you all seen, basically, with the proper injections, the proper deep well type of formations? And have you come out with recommendations, rules and recommendations of how this should be 

injected? 

Dr. KIMBALL. No, we do—have not come out with—— 

Senator MANCHIN. That’s not your—— 

Dr. KIMBALL. The rules and recommendations. That’s not within 

our mission purview. 

However, I can commit to you that our scientists would be happy 

to have discussions about the observations of what actually may 

trigger these kinds of events. 

Senator MANCHIN. I would just say if I can work with your scientists and work with basically NETLs, our National Energy Technology Labs, making sure that we are all concurring on how we can 

do it and do it right and start forming the rules and regulations, 

working with EPA to make sure before they start overreaching and 

shutting things down, making sure they can comply and do it safely and do it properly. Because I think every state is a little bit different here on this, and before you know it it is going to have a 

snowball effect and we are going to have an energy shortage and 

be back to where we were before. 

Dr. KIMBALL. Well, we’d be very happy to enter into that discussion with you. 

Senator MANCHIN. Okay. 

That is all I needed to say. We will contact you on that too, if 

you can get your people. 

Dr. KIMBALL. Absolutely. 

Senator MANCHIN. Get your people with our people, how about 

that? 

Dr. KIMBALL. That sounds good. Yes, sir. 

Senator MANCHIN. Thank you. 

Dr. KIMBALL. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Hirono. 

Senator HIRONO. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Dr. Kimball, the Ohia tree is a native species that is an anchor 

to Hawaii’s rain forests and is currently being threatened by rapid 

Ohia death, or ROD. 

As of early 2016 ROD, which has a 100 percent mortality rate 

for infected trees, has impacted 34,000 acres of native forest on Ha-
34 

waii island. Of course, that impacts our watershed, et cetera. So as 

you can imagine this crisis situation requires a coordinated effort 

on the part of the county, state, federal agencies including, of 

course, yours. 

Can you provide an update on the models that USGS scientists 

have been constructing to predict the spread of the fungus that 

causes ROD and when will these models be ready to be implemented? And how has the recent prediction by scientists that burrowing beetles are spreading ROD impacted model development? 

Dr. KIMBALL. Well thank you for that question. 

Our Center Director at the Pacific Islands Ecological Research 

Center has, in fact, informed me about the importance of this issue 

and the potential devastating impacts that this could have to the 

ecosystems in Hawaii. 

I do not have the answer with me and to specifically answer your 

question about the model development, but I will be happy to provide that for the record. 

Senator HIRONO. Thank you so much. 

Then turning to Albizia. USGS, in collaboration with the University of Hawaii Hilo, worked to collect satellite imagery of the forest 

canopy in Puna on Hawaii Island following Tropical Storm Iselle in 

the fall of 2014. This imagery was gathered to assess the most 

heavily impacted areas and develop a model of tree canopy conditions that were impacted during the storm. 

Frankly, a lot of the damage that arose out of the Tropical Storm 

Iselle was the fact that these Albizia trees would just fall over and 

create a lot of the property damage was due to that. 

Can this model be used to identify the highly invasive Albizia 

trees which grow like weeds, practically, in areas with canopy conditions similar to those impacted in order to locate and remove 

Albizia trees to mitigate impact from future storms? And what 

other steps can be taken to identify Albizia trees in potential hazard locations for the future? This may be another one where you 

need to check and get back to me. 

Dr. KIMBALL. I will have to check for the specifics. 

I can tell you that there are a number of techniques that allow 

us to identify through global Earth observations, either from space 

or from airborne technologies, that allow us to identify particular 

species, canopy species, and their distribution from their reflectance in the—as the imagery is collected. So there are a number 

of different ways. The ways that could be most effective for modeling those tree distributions within Hawaii is beyond my knowledge base right this instant, but we will be more than happy to 

provide that information for you. 

Senator HIRONO. Thank you so much. 

Your organization’s Hawaii Volcanoes Observatory plays a crucial role in monitoring Hawaii’s active volcanoes, and as you know, 

Kilauea has been active for decades. 

Scientists communicated closely with the state Civil Defense and 

the county during the lava flows at Kilauea last year. Given the 

increased seismic activity at Mauna Loa on the Big Island, can you 

discuss any ways that Congress can continue to provide support to 

this critical work to ensure public safety due to active volcanoes? 
35 

I realize we have over 100 active volcanoes in our country, so do 

we provide enough support for what you are doing? 

Dr. KIMBALL. Well—— 

Senator HIRONO. —volcanoes? 

Dr. KIMBALL. This particular Committee, in providing bipartisan 

proposed legislation to establish volcano early warning and volcano 

monitoring systems, is going a long way toward elevating the need 

and the kinds of activities that need to take place in order to maintain that monitoring system. 

As always, new technologies evolve that are very helpful. And as 

those technologies evolve for looking at things such as gas emissions, that help us understand when volcanoes are getting ready to 

erupt and the ability to pursue those new innovations, is going to 

be essential for maintaining those long-term monitoring systems. 

We are absolutely committed to that effort. We’re absolutely committed to enhancing and providing additional assistance for volcano 

monitoring. 

The President’s proposed budget for 2017 actually puts into our 

proposed base funding those funding levels that Congress has put 

in as one-time increases over the past two years. So we are working to increase our base funding to address volcano monitoring 

issues. 

Senator HIRONO. Thank you. 

Just very briefly, I know that you are focusing on the next generation of young people to scientific inquiry, and I commend you for 

those efforts and especially the focus on Native American young 

people. 

Dr. KIMBALL. Thank you. 

Senator HIRONO. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Stabenow. 

Senator STABENOW. Well thank you very much, Madam Chair. 

Dr. Kimball, thank you so much for your work and the work of 

your agency. We appreciate it very much. With my Great Lakes hat 

on, and we have a number of members of our Committee that surround the Great Lakes, we thank you for your ongoing efforts. That 

is really what I want to talk about and that is the whole effort 

around trying to stop the Asian Carp from getting into the Great 

Lakes which has been of such concern to all of us on a bipartisan 

basis, who represent the area. I appreciate the role that U.S. Geological Survey is playing as part of the Asian Carp Regional Coordinating Committee. 

I first wanted to just ask you your thoughts. As you know, we 

have seven federal agencies, departments, natural resource officials 

from all of the Great Lakes states as well as regional bodies that 

came together through the President’s initiative just set up, the 

Asian Carp Regional Coordinating Committee. I have been thinking it might be good to actually authorize that officially in law. I 

wonder if you have any thoughts about that? 

Dr. KIMBALL. Thank you, Senator. 

As I’ve had the opportunity to talk to colleagues in the Great 

Lake states, they feel that that particular committee has been very, 

very effective. It’s been a keystone in the way we’re able to coordinate science needs, science priorities with the actual operational 

activities that need to take place. So I can tell you that our sci-
36 

entists feel that that Committee is very effective and should remain in operation, however we do that. 

Senator STABENOW. Great. Well thanks very much. 

I appreciate your working with the Great Lakes Fisheries Commission, the Council of Lake Committees. I mean, all the effort and 

research that is going on. 

This is what I wanted to zero in on in terms of research right 

now as we look how we stop these fish that grow up to 100 pounds 

and have no functioning stomach and basically will destroy the 

other fish habitat and fish in the Great Lakes as well as the boating industry and so on and so on. This is actually a very serious 

economic and ecological issue for us, trying to stop these fish. 

When we look at the best strategy right now, as you know, about 

40 miles south of Chicago is the Brandon Road Lock and Dam 

which is a place where the rivers come together and where we have 

been focused. The Army Corps of Engineers is looking at the best 

technologies to deploy there in addition to the electric fences that 

are there down in the water and so on. 

I wonder if you could talk about the technologies and deterrents 

you are reviewing for deployment at this particular spot and 

whether carbon dioxide barriers are at a point soon to be deployed? 

We have heard a lot about that as a possible deterrent for the fish 

and wondered if you might speak about the technologies, but also 

about the carbon dioxide barriers that they are testing? 

Dr. KIMBALL. Well we’ve been working very closely with the 

Corps of Engineers on these particular technologies. 

One of the challenges that we face is how do you maintain the 

consistent pressure through the water column that will have the 

desired effect on the Asian Carp and not impact other species? And 

so, that is a challenge now. And it’s one that the Corps of Engineers from a technology development perspective and the USGS 

from an understanding of fish physiology are working closely together to try and address. 

I don’t have an answer for you in terms of how far we are from 

an actual implementation of that kind of technology, but I’d be 

happy to go back and ask our scientists to provide that answer for 

you. 

[The information requested has not been provided as of the date 

of printing.] 

Senator STABENOW. We are very concerned. We have a bipartisan 

Great Lakes Task Force, as you know, in the Senate as well as the 

House, which not long ago held a meeting where we were urging 

the Army Corps, USGS and everyone, to not wait until everything 

has been analyzed, that if there is one technology that looks like 

it will work to begin to deploy that. So we are interested in the carbon dioxide research that has been done. And the other one is, I 

am wondering if you know how far along the approval process, 

under FIFRA, that the micro particles that everyone talked about 

that would put toxins into micro particles to target the carp? Are 

you are aware at all where that technology stands? 

Dr. KIMBALL. We’ve completed the laboratory trials for that technology, and we’ll be going to field trials this spring. And I do not 

know how long it will take in the drug registration process to move 

it through, but I do know that we are going to field trials now. 
37 

Senator STABENOW. Well if you feel that this is something that 

is credible and will work, we certainly want to know and work with 

you and do everything we can to be able to make sure that this is 

expedited in the right way to be able to get it out the door because 

the fish are not waiting for us, as you know. We debate and hold 

hearings and discuss things and they keep finding a way to get 

closer and closer to the Great Lakes. 

So I am anxious to continue to work with you, and I appreciate 

your agency’s work. 

Thank you. 

Dr. KIMBALL. Well thank you. And we’re happy to work with you, 

and we’ll continue to provide you updates as we move forward with 

this. 

Senator STABENOW. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Director Kimball, thank you. 

I have a whole series of questions, many related to unconventional oil and gas, some questions about land patenting issues and 

then the work that USGS is doing in better understanding the migration and winter habitat of the black brant, but I will be submitting those to you for followup. Senator Cantwell. 

Senator CANTWELL. I have a couple to submit too. 

The CHAIRMAN. Other members of the Committee may have 

some followup as well. But because we do have a second panel and 

I know we have votes that are coming up, I think we will excuse 

you. Again, thank you for appearing before the Committee today. 

Dr. KIMBALL. Again, thank you very much for the opportunity, 

and I’ll look forward to the questions for the record. 

Thanks. 

The CHAIRMAN. Great. Thank you very much. 

Let’s call up the second panel at this time. 

We are joined this morning by some very esteemed scientists and 

folks with an understanding of so many of these issues in good and 

deep detail. 

We have Mr. Ed Fogels. Ed is the Deputy Commissioner for the 

Alaska Department of Natural Resources. He has had an opportunity to appear before the Committee in other areas. Not only do 

we appreciate your insight, Ed, but we also appreciate the fact that 

you have traveled a long way to be here with us this morning and 

we greatly appreciate that. 

Next we have Dr. P. Patrick Leahy, not to be confused with a 

Patrick Leahy that—— 

Senator CANTWELL. We all know. 

The CHAIRMAN. We all know and work with on a daily basis. Dr. 

Leahy is the Executive Director for the American Geosciences Institute. 

We also have another Alaskan and fellow Fairbanksan, Dr. Robert McCoy, who is the Director of the Geophysical Institute at the 

University of Alaska Fairbanks. He is another individual we rely 

on a great deal for his expertise, so welcome and thank you for 

traveling all this way. 

And as Senator Cantwell mentioned earlier, Dr. John Vidale, 

who is the Washington State Seismologist and Director at the Pacific Northwest Seismic Network at the University of Washington. 
38 

Again, a very esteemed panel and a panel that has come from 

long distances to be with us. 

We will go ahead and begin with your opening comments. We 

would ask you to keep your comments to about five minutes. Your 

full statements will be incorporated as part of the record, and then 

we will have an opportunity for questioning. 

I will also offer my apologies. I am trying to be in two places at 

once. I have an Appropriations hearing that is going on downstairs, 

so I will be bouncing in and out. That does not mean that I am not 

interested, it means that I need to be in two places at once. 

Let’s start with you, Mr. Fogels. Again, welcome back to the 

Committee. 

STATEMENT OF EDMUND FOGELS, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, 

ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 

Mr. FOGELS. Thank you, Chairwoman Murkowski, Ranking 

Member Cantwell and honorable members of the Committee. My 

name is Ed Fogels. I’m the Deputy Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Natural Resources. And on behalf of Governor Bill 

Walker, thank you for this opportunity to testify in strong support 

of Alaska’s mapping and the critical role that the U.S. Geological 

Survey plays in this effort. 

Alaska is a huge place. It is one-fifth the size of the entire 

United States, and it is the least geographically and geologically 

understood of all states. It has twice the land area of Texas and 

covers 32 ecoregions. In many respects, the planet Mars has been 

mapped better than Alaska. 

The USGS is Alaska’s primary partner in improving our knowledge base of our vast state, whether it be mapping our topography, 

our geology, our geologic hazards or our energy and mineral resources. The good news is that we, largely because of our strong 

partnership with the USGS, have made a great deal of progress 

mapping Alaska. 

In 2006 the State of Alaska established the Statewide Digital 

Mapping Initiative to create an accurate base map of Alaska consisting of satellite imagery and elevation data. To date, the State 

of Alaska has appropriated $19.5 million in this effort and our federal partners have contributed $35.1 million, and we are well on 

our way to finishing our base map. 

These efforts gave rise to the Alaska Mapping Executive Committee, chaired by the Department of the Interior and having representatives from 19 federal agencies and the State of Alaska, and 

the USGS has been instrumental in this effort. Our mapping collaboration with the USGS involves creating a number of data layers that together form our digital base map. 

First, the elevation layer is the most foundational. This layer is 

a digital model of our terrain. In Alaska, many areas are only 

mapped at 60 meter resolution. This results in enormous errors 

and inaccuracies. We are now collecting improved elevation data at 

a five meter resolution using the IFSAR technology. We are approximately 63 percent complete and hope to be over 70 percent 

after this summer, a testament to the highly effective collaborative 

efforts through AMEC, the Alaska Mapping Executive Committee, 
39 

between the State of Alaska and federal agencies such as the 

USGS. 

The next layer is imagery. From imagery, additional information 

such as roads, railways, pipelines and trails can be derived. We 

now have a two and a half-meter resolution satellite image available for almost all of Alaska. 

Our third layer is hydrography. Hydrography is a map of all the 

water features in Alaska such as lakes, streams, ice fields and 

coastlines. We have completed 11 percent of Alaska, soon to be at 

28 percent, with the help of many partners including the USGS, 

and we are making great strides in improving this important data 

set. 

The other critical layer that I need to mention is geodetic control. 

Geodetic control provides the framework to accurately position all 

our mapping activities. Key to good geodetic control are what we 

call continuously operating reference stations which are fixed 

ground stations that help GPS devices give more accurate positioning. The more of these stations we have, the more accurate our 

GPS positioning is. 

Alaska already has one of the lowest densities of any state, and 

over half of our existing stations are in danger of decommissioning 

when the Earthscope project loses its funding in two years. We are 

also looking at ways to utilize existing infrastructure such as the 

Earthscope transportable array stations to collocate this equipment. 

I’d like to give the Committee an example of a real world product 

that is being produced using all of this new data, a product that 

is helping everyone from hikers enjoying Alaska’s great parks to 

geologists mapping our mineral resources, to agency land managers, new topographic maps. Alaska’s topographic maps are compiled from antiquated surveys dating from the ’40s and ’50s. Much 

to our delight the USGS National Geospatial Program is now creating the new U.S. topo map in Alaska providing far more accurate 

maps. 

Now let me move from our foundational mapping data to something much more specific, mapping Alaska’s geology. In Alaska, 

good geologic mapping has been completed for about 17 percent of 

our state. The remaining area to be mapped is roughly equal to the 

combined area of California, Oregon, Washington and Idaho, and 

at our current rate of mapping this would take about 400 years to 

complete. 

USGS’ National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program, 

STATEMAP, is an excellent example of the cooperative funding 

and leveraging of state and federal dollars to conduct the geologic 

mapping. 

We need help with mapping our geologic hazards. Alaska is an 

exciting place with 52 active volcanoes and lots of earthquakes and 

permafrost hazards. Some key areas in need of additional mapping 

are coastal erosion, flooding, tsunami inundation mapping and avalanche and landslides susceptibility mapping. 

Alaska’s earthquake monitoring system lags behind those in the 

rest of the nation. The National Science Foundation’s Earthscope 

project will deploy 261 seismic stations and those are not, at this 
40 

point, programmed to be kept after that time period and integrated 

into Alaska’s seismic array. 

As you can see, Alaska has a wonderful and necessary collaborative relationship with the USGS. It is critical for us and the rest 

of the nation that this relationship continue on and be strengthened. The USGS needs more resources to help finish mapping our 

great state. 

Thank you very much for the opportunity to provide my testimony today. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Fogels follows:] 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Fogels, thank you very much. It is always 

a little bit astonishing to learn how far we have to go; 400 years, 

I don’t know if we can wait. 

Let’s go to Dr. Leahy, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF DR. P. PATRICK LEAHY, EXECUTIVE 

DIRECTOR, AMERICAN GEOSCIENCES INSTITUTE 

Dr. LEAHY. Thank you very much, Chairman Murkowski and 

Ranking Member Cantwell. It really is a pleasure to be here and 

to have this opportunity to provide remarks on behalf of the American Geosciences Institute on the role and the importance of the 

U.S. Geological Survey to the geoscience community and to the nation. 

As you know, my name is Pat Leahy, and I’m the Executive Director of the American Geosciences Institute. 

Let me tell you a little bit about AGI, which is the acronym for 

the American Geosciences Institute. It’s sort of a unique organization in that we’re a non-profit federation of 51 geoscientific associations that represent approximately a quarter of a million U.S. 

Earth scientists. Our member societies represent the full breadth 

of the geosciences, everything from petroleum geologists to geophysicists, medical geologists, geographers, you name it. 

AGI provides information services to geoscientists, serves as the 

voice of shared interest in our profession, plays a major role in 

strengthening geoscience education and strives to increase public 

awareness of the vital role the geosciences play in society’s use of 

resources, resilience to natural hazards and health of the environment. 

This year we published a document that was distributed earlier 

called, ‘‘Geoscience for America’s Critical Needs: An Invitation to a 

National Policy Dialogue.’’ This is a collaborative document between AGI and its 51 member societies which outlines the major 

geoscience issues facing the nation. The document attempts to 

begin a national dialogue between decision-makers and 

geoscientists on topics ranging from ensuring sufficient supplies of 

clean water to developing energy to power the nation, and it provides a high level overview of all geoscience topics including water, 

energy, natural hazards, soils, mineral resources, oceans and 

coasts, climate change, waste disposal and workforce and education. 

In the mineral resources arena, the priorities that were identified 

include assessing the nature and distribution of domestic mineral 

resources; quantifying domestic and global supply of, demand for 

and the flow of minerals; supporting socially, economically and environmentally responsible domestic mineral production; fostering 

innovative solutions to lessen the environmental impact of production; and, use of minerals. 

In the natural hazards arena, geoscientists help communities 

identify, mitigate, prepare for, respond to and recover from natural 

disasters. Some of the priorities include encouraging basic and applied research to strengthen community resilience, prioritizing natural hazard monitoring, support communication of risk and 

vulnerabilities associated with hazards to the public and mitigate 

the hazard impacts on people, buildings and infrastructure. 
58 

Clearly, USGS science and research contributes to the advancement of all of these community-wide priorities. Now much has been 

said about the importance of the USGS. I don’t intend to go over 

that again. It’s a critical agency in terms of the Earth sciences. I 

do want to point out a couple things. 

First of all, assessing the nature and distribution of our domestic 

supplies of mineral resources is a critical component. Just this 

year, highlighting the importance of monitoring data collection, 

USGS released on April 1st, a report announced that it will be carrying out an airborne geophysical survey as part of mapping the 

upper peninsula in Michigan. This investment is providing publicly 

available information that can be used for decision-making by a 

wide array of individuals from industry to the public. 

The other thing I want to mention now is that the organization, 

as someone mentioned, was founded in 1879. During that period of 

time it has developed a repository of irreplaceable geoscientific information that does not go out of date and cannot be replicated. Its 

store of more than a century of geoscience records including field 

notes, maps, samples, drill cores, publications, data sets, satellite 

and topographic data is used constantly by other researchers and 

by businesses large and small. Clearly, the USGS is a very, very 

important organization. 

I’ll close by saying, on behalf of the geoscience community, I urge 

you to support the critical work of the USGS and to strengthen its 

capability to carry out its geoscience research, monitoring, data collection, analysis and to expand the distribution of its information. 

And those are topics we discussed earlier at the opening remarks. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I would be 

pleased to answer any questions you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Leahy follows:] 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 
79 

Senator CANTWELL [presiding]. Thank you, Dr. Leahy. Thank you 

for being here and for your advocacy. 

Dr. McCoy. 

STATEMENT OF DR. ROBERT McCOY, DIRECTOR, GEOPHYSICAL INSTITUTE, UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS 

Dr. MCCOY. Thank you, Senator, for inviting me today. 

I’m the Director of the Geophysical Institute at the University of 

Alaska Fairbanks. We were created by your organization, by Congress, back in 1946 at the end of World War II, to establish a permanent institute for the study of geophysics in the Arctic and 

maintenance of geophysical research for Arctic regions. It was focused on all the diverse geophysical hazards in Alaska but also primarily focused on space weather hazards and impacts to HF communications. 

You’ve already heard there are 52 active volcanoes in Alaska. 

There’s an eruption about every three months. And like Senator 

Murkowski and several others in the room, I was delayed here last 

week when Pavlof popped ash up to 37,000 feet. 

The Alaska Earthquake Center is part of my institute, and last 

year they counted 40,000 earthquakes in Alaska—about one every 

13 minutes. The magnitude 7.1 earthquake in the Cook Inlet back 

in January that Senator Murkowski mentioned shook Anchorage 

well but also caused breaks in gas lines and fires, and four homes 

were destroyed. So we live in a very exciting and hazardous region. 

Tsunamis—there have been a number of tsunamis. If you fly 

around Alaska, you can still see some of the high water marks from 

the ’64 earthquake, the Good Friday Earthquake, and the resulting 

tsunami. 

We haven’t mentioned much space weather, but space weather is 

also a major hazard. We see the aurora almost every day in the 

winter when it’s clear, and that there’s big implications for a major 

space weather event. 

My institute does research and educates students, but we also do 

a lot of operational things. In partnership with the USGS and the 

state DGGS, the Department of Geological and Geophysics Survey, 

we man the Alaska Volcano Observatory, the Alaska Earthquake 

Center and the College International Geophysical Observatory, to 

monitor volcanoes, earthquakes and geomagnetism from space 

weather events. 

We have other operational programs. We downlink satellite data, 

we map the state, we fly unmanned aircraft, we launch rockets into 

the aurora and we do active ionospheric experiments using an HF 

heater. 

We’ve been a—we’ve had a very strong partnership with the 

USGS and DGGS over the years. We’re especially enthused about 

the efforts by the USGS to establish the National Volcano Early 

Warning System and to reauthorize the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program and the Tsunami Warning Education and 

Research Act. 

You’ve heard mention of the Earthscope Program with the 

Boundary Observatory Subprogram and the U.S. Array Program. 

This is a major enhancement we’ll have. This will be a major aug-
80 

mentation to the seismic network in Alaska, and it’s already providing new insight into what’s going on in Alaska. 

A lot of us are working hard to figure out a way to keep some 

of those sites there when the NSF Program completes in a couple 

years and starts moving those out again. This could be a major opportunity. 

And just finally I want to mention space weather. The National 

Space Weather, the Administration of National Space Weather Program, the USGS and that program will be enhancing their geomagnetic, geomagnetism program that will provide increased monitoring for geomagnetic hazards from space weather events, and 

we’re pretty excited about that. 

So thanks for the invitation, and I enjoyed talking about the diverse hazards and wonderful things going on in Alaska. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. McCoy follows:] 
81 
82 
83 
84 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Dr. McCoy. We are glad you 

were able to make it this week. 

Doctor, my staff tells me it is Vidale. Is that correct? 

Dr. VIDALE. Vidale. 

Senator CANTWELL. Vidale, okay, thank you. Thank you so much 

for being here and for your work at the University of Washington. 

STATEMENT OF DR. JOHN VIDALE, WASHINGTON STATE SEISMOLOGIST, AND DIRECTOR, PACIFIC NORTHWEST SEISMIC 

NETWORK, UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON 

Dr. VIDALE. They usually mispronounce, so that’s the norm. 

[Laughter.] 

Dr. VIDALE. Good morning, Chair Murkowski, Ranking Member 

Cantwell and members of the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify about the FY’17 budget and ongoing efforts of the 

USGS. I’m John Vidale, Director of the Pacific Northwest Seismic 

Network at the University of Washington. I’m privileged to have 

worked closely with USGS for the last decade to protect the public 

from earthquake hazards, so that’s what I’ll mainly talk about. 

In my oral remarks I’ll focus on new methods to reduce the risk 

from large earthquakes. USGS also has important initiatives to 

seismically monitor the Central and Eastern U.S. and to maintain 

the global seismic network, and I don’t mean to argue for 

prioritization among these projects. 

A recent article in the New Yorker captured public attention 

with the nightmare scenario of an impending magnitude nine 

earthquake on the Pacific Northwest Coast which has worried people across the entire nation. It last struck in the year 1700 in the 

Cascadia fault and is now locked and loaded again. When it comes, 

the strongly shaken region will extend from Northern California, 

up the coast to Canada including the entire coastlines of Oregon 

and Washington. Coastal Alaska faces a similar threat. 

We know what earthquakes of this size can do. In 2011 the M9 

Tohoku earthquake in Japan shook communities for four minutes 

and triggered a devastating tsunami. Through this example we’ve 

seen the level of destruction that could happen along the Pacific 

Northwest coast. Fortunately, we can act to protect lives and property now. 

I’ll highlight two opportunities at the USGS that can reduce devastation from quakes of all sizes, earthquake early warning and 

seafloor monitoring, and discuss why subduction zone earthquakes, 

the gravest type, need a special focus. 

The newest advance in USGS earthquake risk mitigation development of shake alert earthquake early warning, we use 

seismometers and GPS to recognize an earthquake within seconds 

of its occurrence and then broadcast a warning of seconds to minutes to vulnerable communities telling people how strong shaking 

will be and when it will come. 

Earthquake early warning reduces earthquake risks and public 

fears in several ways. In terms of life safety, simply giving people 

such as schoolchildren a few extra seconds to drop, cover and hold 

has great benefit. ShakeAlert can also stop trains, call off airplane 

takeoffs and landings, halt surgeries and much more. In the private sector companies can reduce losses by battening down fac-
85 

tories, racing computer operators and shutting off pipelines. Emergency responders can jump-start emergency operations while communications still work. 

The implementation plan for earthquake early warning for Washington, Oregon and California costs $16 million per year for 

equipment and operations. This state-of-the-art system is entering 

the public testing phase. We’re halfway there. The USGS funding 

level for earthquake early warning from Congress was $8 million 

for Fiscal Year ’16 and the Administration has requested the same 

in Fiscal Year ’17 budget thanks to strong public and private support for universities, coordination from the USGS, major commitments from the Moore Foundation and corporations, as well as 

strong support from Congress. We’re very grateful for leadership in 

supporting ShakeAlert from West Coast Congressional delegations. 

Extension to other states simply requires careful study followed by 

judicious expansion of ShakeAlert operations. 

The second opportunity I’ll discuss is the placement of earthquake-sensing instruments on the seafloor exactly as Japan has already done to protect their coastal communities. Seafloor sensors 

would yield more accurate and rapid warnings of shaking and 

tsunamis, providing more critical time for people to take life-protecting action. Even more critically, offshore instruments would 

watch for subtle tectonic unrest which preceded several recent 

subduction zone earthquakes and would accelerate scientific understanding of the associated risks. There’s a high level of interest in 

exploring subduction zone science, both within the academic community and the USGS which goes beyond offshore instrumentation. 

In summary, the great earthquakes in the last decade in Japan 

and Sumatra, which cost hundreds of thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars, are forerunners of the inevitable devastating earthquakes in the U.S. To prepare, we should complete 

both an Earthquake Early Warning System and emplace seafloor 

monitoring. The ShakeAlert Warning System is well on its way to 

help protect lives and property, and I urge that it be completed 

quickly and fully for Washington, Oregon and California and evaluated for other vulnerable regions. 

Thank you again for allowing me to testify, and I look forward 

to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Vidale follows:] 
86 
87 
88 
89 
90 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you to all the witnesses for your testimony. 

Thank you, Dr. Vidale. And as I said, thank you for your advocacy for the State of Washington’s perspective. I cannot tell you 

how vital we think this science is and how much it is going to help 

in saving lives and property. So thank you for what you do. 

Dr. Vidale, I would like to drill down on what you are saying 

about the early warning system, particularly as it relates to 

seafloor monitoring and the development of the system. Where are 

we exactly? And where are we as it relates to the budget and the 

shortfall that we need to cover these activities? 

Dr. VIDALE. Right. The early warning system we’ve designed, the 

implementation plan from the Survey covers the system on land, 

and it should perform quite well. 

We have half the funding in hand. With the $16 million a year, 

we could build it out over the next few years so it’s operational according to that implementation plan. With extra funds up front, 

and the figure $38 million has been mentioned, we could build it 

a few years faster. California is looking to raise $20 million this 

year to jump-start that capability. 

The offshore aspect is something that’s longer-term. We’re still 

studying the different ways it could be done with a cable or with 

gliders or with OBSs for things that aren’t so real time, but that’s 

a long-term goal. It’s not something we’ll build in the next year or 

two. 

Senator CANTWELL. But should we think about that seafloorbased monitoring as an extension of the land-based system in giving us more time? My understanding is that Tokyo residents had 

about 80 seconds of warning. We’re talking about something more 

than that, is that right? 

Dr. VIDALE. Well it’s complicated because it will depend on exactly where the earthquake starts. And you know, they can start 

right under the cities for earthquakes in the crust or they could 

start on the far edge of the zone that’s going to rupture. So in the 

Pacific Northwest the best case is if, for us, the earthquake starts 

in California and then we can see it coming for three or four minutes. If it starts right next to us, then we’d have less warning time. 

If we have instruments offshore we gain some warning time, but 

the more important monitoring would be to see the kind of anomalous activity that sometimes means the risk is elevated. For example, before that disastrous Japanese earthquake there were several 

days of slow slip, you know, a technical term, that could have alerted people that the risk was higher. It wouldn’t have said there was 

an earthquake coming, but they would have been watching more 

closely. So there are a number of things we don’t understand that 

we’re just blind to now without instruments on the seafloor reporting back in real time. 

Senator CANTWELL. My understanding is, just because we visited 

the NOAA center, that you could take a device like this today and 

the network information is available. I could download an app, and 

I could get this information. So this part of the delivery system is 

here. 

Dr. VIDALE. Oh yeah, the system—— 

Senator CANTWELL. So what is not—— 
91 

Dr. VIDALE. The system is complete. I mean I have an app on 

my phone too, which, when they update it next week, will give me 

the warning that we’re trying to produce but it will be slower than 

it should produce at the full system. It won’t be as reliable or as 

accurate. So, you know, we could take halfway measures now. 

Senator CANTWELL. Right. 

My point is what we are getting out of the next development is 

the fact that we are pushing out our systems to get the information 

sooner. 

You are indicating that the seafloor indications are—how much 

more time is that giving us, I guess, is the question? 

Dr. VIDALE. Yeah and that’s a great question. 

Now it only brings a few tens of seconds so it’s the waves that 

are generated offshore coming to the shore fairly quickly. So the 

gain in the early warning is fairly modest. I think that the bigger 

reason for the seafloor is to understand the risk better and to see 

the signs of unrest that indicate changing levels of danger. And so 

this is something, it’s a long-term goal and something we’ll need to 

study to figure out the best approach. 

Senator CANTWELL. Well I just want to bring up our two former 

colleagues, the Senator from Alaska and the Senator from Hawaii. 

The CHAIRMAN [presiding]. Stevens and Inouye? 

Senator CANTWELL. Yes, Senators Stevens and Inouye. 

They were very involved in the development of this system. I remember one incident in Hawaii when people got the warning and 

then it turned out the tsunami risk was not as great. 

My point is that what you are saying today is that what you 

would be getting from the seafloor monitoring is a better understanding of how big the risk might be. So to better prepare, is that 

what you are saying? 

Dr. VIDALE. That’s right. And also the early warning systems are 

just now emerging with the tsunami warning systems because they 

give a faster warning of the earthquakes than the tsunami warning 

system currently does. And if we were to put offshore instruments 

we’d be directly measuring the waves, not just the ground shift 

which is a much less accurate way to predict the waves. So there 

are a number of benefits we’d have from seafloor instruments for 

tsunami warnings as well as a warning of the shaking. 

Senator CANTWELL. So you are requesting an extra $1.7 million 

for warning capabilities on earthquakes on the West Coast. 

Dr. VIDALE. 1.7. We’re talking about, I guess, $16 million a year 

for the West Coast early warning system of which we currently 

have eight. So we’re, kind of, short $8 million a year to be building 

the system on the West Coast. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. 

Dr. VIDALE. Yeah. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Dr. Vidale. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Gentlemen, I apologize that I was not able to hear the testimony 

from the other three of you before I had to scoot out, but I am glad 

that we are back and able to ask some questions. I have read your 

testimonies. 
92 

I want to continue the discussion about the geologic hazards. It 

is one thing to have the early warning, but we are also better 

armed if we have done the mapping. 

Deputy Commissioner Fogels, you mentioned that we have 

mapped 17 percent of the geologic hazards in the State of Alaska. 

Senator Cantwell has mentioned the need to knit together all of 

this information so that within our communities we are better prepared, better able to respond. 

If we have not been able to do an adequate job in mapping, 

whether it is the hazards around our communities, our infrastructure corridors, how do we get to what Senator Cantwell is saying, 

that level of preparedness and what our communities can do? 

So the question, and I’ll direct this to you, to start, Mr. Fogels. 

We need to step it up in order to be able to be more prepared, but 

you have to start with some basic mapping that is accurate. Am 

I thinking that somehow or other we can jump over this step? 

Mr. FOGELS. Senator, you’re absolutely right. We do need to step 

it up as far as our mapping, and I touched on that in my testimony. I think it’s worth emphasizing that a couple times in my testimony I mentioned the Earthscope project. 

The CHAIRMAN. Right. 

Mr. FOGELS. In Alaska, through a National Science Foundation 

(NSF) grant, we’re in the process of installing about 261 sensors 

throughout the state. I mean, those are going to be fantastic for our 

state and for the rest of the nation to provide real time data. 

And so, our concern is to make sure that once those things are 

in, at some point, some select few of those get to be maintained and 

integrated with our own earthquake systems. I think that’s critical 

not only for the geologic hazards, but as I mentioned, those can 

provide a real boost to our geodetic control which lets us actually 

make sure that our data is positioned properly on the planet surface and that’s—— 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, let me ask further to that and I will ask 

you, Dr. McCoy, to weigh in as well because when we had the Secretary, I think it was when Secretary Ventura was in front of us 

and we were asking this question about, is there some discussion 

going on about how the State of Alaska can continue what 

Earthscope has put in place? 

I mean our state is not doing well financially right now. You certainly know it at the University level. But what happens if we get 

to that situation where we do not have the federal funding to pay 

for the operation and maintenance of the network, and we have not 

been able to work out an agreement? Does that just move us backward in terms of our ability to have any kind of an early warning 

system, to have the level of preparedness that we would hope for 

around the state? 

I do not want to talk about worst case scenario, but I need to understand what that does to us as a state if we are not able to continue the benefits that we have seen from this Earthscope project. 

Dr. McCoy? 

Dr. MCCOY. Yes, the Alaska Volcano Observatory and Alaska’s 

Earthquake Center have deployed sensors all along the Aleutians 

and over a big chunk of Alaska. Of the 52 active volcanoes I men-
93 

tioned, we can only monitor, directly, 26 of them. We monitor the 

others using satellite data or infrasound remotely. 

The seismicity has been changing in Alaska. We’ve had earthquakes near Kotzebue that weren’t there before, so we’ve had to deploy temporary sensors. 

The Earthscope Array, these 260 something sensors, is extraordinary. This is going to really improve—it’s a diverse set of instruments, seismic, GPS. It’s a $70 million effort that’s a fantastic enhancement to our capabilities. 

The State Seismologist who is in the Geophysical Institute, he’s 

already working to integrate that data as well as he already integrates Department of Defense (DoD) seismic data into this overall—— 

The CHAIRMAN. Does DoD maintain different instrumentation 

around the state separate from—— 

Dr. MCCOY. There’s a few seismic sites that are used for nuclear 

treaty verification. And we partner closely, so does USGS, and we 

work closely with those, with the DoD on that. 

So all of a sudden, for a short time, a couple years, two or three 

years, we’re going to have an extraordinary map of seismicity in 

Alaska. But the bad news is if we don’t do anything at the end of 

that two years, NSF will go back and take all this back out again. 

So we’re in active discussions as to how to keep, as Mr. Fogels 

said, just a subset, just a few of those at key locations that are 

hard to get to and we’re looking for funding to operate them and 

maintain them. Maintaining them is important. We spend most of 

our summer flying around Alaska with USGS help to maintain, replace batteries, and upgrade systems and maintain. 

So we’ll degrade back to where we were in the past, but for a 

short time it’ll be really amazing. If we can keep some of those 

then we’ve made a definite improvement for the State of Alaska. 

The CHAIRMAN. So after two years where do these go? Where is 

USGS going to take these geodetic stations? 

Dr. MCCOY. Well they’re required to go back. Dig them out of the 

ground and return them. 

The CHAIRMAN. Return them to where? 

Dr. MCCOY. Storage. 

The CHAIRMAN. Return them to storage. 

Dr. MCCOY. Or—— 

The CHAIRMAN. Are they going to be used elsewhere? 

Dr. MCCOY. I doubt it. 

The CHAIRMAN. What a horrible waste when you could be advancing the research, science and the data and allowing us to be 

so much smarter. We are required to take them out of the ground, 

and then I was thinking somebody else was going to be able to gain 

benefit. 

Dr. MCCOY. Well I’m sure somebody else might, someplace else 

but Alaska—— 

The CHAIRMAN. The person who has the storage unit that gets 

the rental from them. I don’t know. 

Dr. MCCOY. So I’m not sure exactly what they have planned, but 

we’re working hard with our partners and the state and with 

USGS to figure out a way to keep a select subset of those. 
94 

The CHAIRMAN. Okay, know that we want to be working with 

you. 

Dr. MCCOY. Terrific. 

The CHAIRMAN. It just seems to me that if NSF has made this 

investment, this is an investment in data and if the state can figure out a way to do the operation and maintenance end of it, NSF 

is going to continue to gain benefit. Obviously the state will as 

well. So this appears to me to be one of those no-brainers that we 

need to ensure we don’t allow a lapsing. 

Dr. MCCOY. Absolutely. In the lower 48 this program has already 

been completed. This is the final stage in Alaska. And in most 

states, especially in the states that are seismically active, there 

were some ways found to keep many of those sensors in place. So 

now we’re working on trying to find ways to keep a subset in place 

in Alaska. 

The CHAIRMAN. Okay. Well we are going to work with you. 

I will turn to Senator Cantwell for additional questions. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. 

I want to go back to you, Dr. Vidale. 

We were talking with Director Kimball about Mount Rainier and 

installing lahar equipment. I know the UDub is working with Tacoma and the USGS to help improve that system. What do you 

think the timeline is for updating it and what do we need to do to 

make sure that we have safe evacuation routes? 

Dr. VIDALE. Well, there is a plan to do the lahar monitoring on 

Rainier. My impression is it’s not, the funding is not there yet. I 

mean, they’re upgrading the Hood Stations and the Glacier Peak 

Stations because they have that in their existing budget. But there 

isn’t funding at the moment to do the lahar—— 

Senator CANTWELL. Well my understanding is that Glacier Peak 

has next to nothing today. 

Dr. VIDALE. Yes, it has almost nothing. That’s correct. 

Senator CANTWELL. But we have a volcano in our state that 

has—— 

Dr. VIDALE. Yeah, there are several volcanoes that are undercovered. There are hazardous volcanoes and two or three of them 

are well-covered and the rest are pretty sparse. 

Senator CANTWELL. Okay, so back to what do we need to do then 

to improve the system for Tacoma and Mount Rainier? 

Dr. VIDALE. Well I think for Rainier, my impression was it was 

on the order of a $1 million budget and they just don’t have the 

funding yet. And so if they have funding they can do the plan. 

Until then, they’ll be waiting. 

Senator CANTWELL. Okay. We will definitely think that is a high 

priority here. 

What about the early warning tsunami systems as it relates to 

areas of our state like Long Beach? We really need to be building 

vertical structures, is that correct? And what is the science telling 

us about these vertical structures and what we need to do? 

Dr. VIDALE. Well there’s continuing study of just, you know, how 

high we have to evacuate and how often. And next we have an M9 

project at the University of Washington trying to probabilistically 

estimate what people have to watch out for. But right now I think 

they’re building the first vertical evacuation tower on the coast of 
95 

Washington at a high school. It’s just a challenge to find the funding to build these evacuation structures. So we know it’s a problem. 

We know there are people who are going to be stuck, but these 

buildings cost a lot of money and the state is working on it. 

Senator CANTWELL. Right. 

And what do we do to make sure that we are actually getting an 

accurate, well, I think the community wants to have a plan. So just 

as you said, with the cost of the facility we are making them make 

certain choices. But in reality the impact is something that is going 

to be more than just one wave, correct? 

Dr. VIDALE. Right. 

Senator CANTWELL. And the devastation that could be left behind 

could leave them pretty isolated for a while. So you really need a 

vertical structure that is more than what the New Orleans Dome 

was, correct? It needs to be a better structure for housing and facilitating? 

Dr. VIDALE. Yes. 

Senator CANTWELL. Several days of a population, is that correct? 

Dr. VIDALE. It’s challenging to make the appropriate structures. 

And Japan, sort of, reset our expectations for the height of the 

wave that could come in. The wave in Japan was 30 or 40 meters 

in places, which was twice as much, well, three times as much as 

the Japanese had planned for. So suddenly these structures are 

more challenging to build. 

So we, sort of, know what we need to build to be safe, but again, 

it’s a matter of finding the resources and getting the community 

will to push it at all levels to make it happen. 

Senator CANTWELL. Again, I don’t know if it’s so much the community. I just feel like we are planning for Cascadia by Committee, 

almost, and I feel like we need a General. I feel like we need an 

overseer of this because, again, you are doing great work. Scientists 

at a university working with local mayors and county commissioners in a county that has very little resources to plan for it. And 

yet, that is the front line of our response to something we know is 

going to happen. It is just a matter of when it is going to happen. 

So I think, again, we were just down there for a community 

meeting. The community is doing great work, but again, these are 

big questions. 

Dr. VIDALE. Yes, they’re difficult. And you know, the state budget 

in Washington, as you’d know better than I do, is not that easy to 

find large sums of money to fix these problems. 

Senator CANTWELL. But this will be a federal disaster. If you are 

going to affect the economies of Washington, Oregon, California 

and Alaska, it is going to have a devastating impact on the national economy as well. 

I think this is a lot of information today, again, about making 

sure we get this, Madam Chair, right on the mapping and the early 

warning systems and the tsunami systems and then making sure 

that we continue to ask the questions about how we are going to 

move all of this together. 

I don’t know if you have more questions, so I will pass it back 

to you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Cantwell. 
96 

I am just reminded this was some years ago that I had been advocating for funding for the volcano monitoring system, and I was 

written up in one of the Hill publications as one of those, oh my 

gosh, can you believe that there is a Senator who wants to monitor 

volcanoes? I was really mocked. 

And then, I cannot pronounce the name of the volcano in Iceland 

that blew and literally shut down Europe, and all of sudden there 

was all this scrambling around. What are we doing to monitor volcanoes? And then I was apparently brilliant at that point in time. 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. But it reminds me that unfortunately so much 

of what we are talking about here you cannot get the appropriate 

attention that we need to it until there is that natural disaster, 

until you have that big earthquake, until you have the volcano that 

shuts down air traffic—that is not how we should be operating. 

These are ways to help us with a little bit of an insurance policy. 

I want to ask a couple more questions here and then we can 

wrap up, because I think there has been good discussion, certainly 

about some of the hazard mapping, and what more we can do when 

it comes to early warning. 

Mr. Fogels, I wanted to ask one quick question about land conveyance and the issue in the state about BLM wanting to move on 

the state land conveyances but using a different methodology that 

the state has not yet signed off on regarding the GPS calibration 

stations. The fact that, quite honestly, we just do not have enough 

of these, so called, continuously operating reference sites, and the 

fact that when you do not have them you cannot get the accurate 

GPS coordinates. 

[The information referred to follows:] 
97 
98 

The CHAIRMAN. I know that what we are trying to do in the state 

is to get an independent peer review of the accuracy of the GPSbased land conveyances that might be finished. Can you just, real 

quickly, speak to the state’s concern about the conveyance, this 

new proposal, that is coming out of BLM and the concern that we 

have with the impact to the state patents? 

Mr. FOGELS. Yes, Senator, I can certainly do that. 

As the Bureau of Land Management is in the process of conveying to the State of Alaska its remaining land entitlement, you 

know, we have a 105-million-acre land entitlement. We have about 

100 million already in hand, but only about half of that has actually been patented to us. In order to patent that land, it has to be 

surveyed and then patented to us. 

We can use the rest of the land as if we owned it right now, so 

it’s really not that big of an issue in the immediate term. But at 

some point in the future this land has to be surveyed and patented. 

Right now the survey standards prescribe physical monumentation 

in the ground, you know, every so often throughout a memorandum 

agreement that we’ve had with the BLM and we believe is rooted 

in the Alaska Statehood Act. 

The Bureau of Land Management wants to reduce its surveying 

costs by reducing the spacing of the physical monumentation and 

relying more on GPS coordinates. And I think we all agree, at some 

point in the future, it’s probably silly to run around hammering in 

physical monumentation. At some point in the future, when we 

have the technology, we can replace that, but we do not believe 

we’re there yet. 

The ground controls I mentioned in my testimony in Alaska are 

poor, and that’s what determines how accurately you can pinpoint 

those survey monuments with your GPS. And as I mentioned, not 

only are we inadequate in our coverage of these continuously operating reference stations, but we’re in danger of losing almost half 

of them once the Earthscope stations disappear. So we’ll be backsliding; we’ll go even further back. 

Before we really are convinced of the new technology that BLM 

will use for patenting our land, we’d like to see it. We’re not convinced yet. We want to see better ground control in Alaska. 

The CHAIRMAN. Yet one more example of why this Earthscope 

project, or the instrumentation there, is so important. 

Back to mapping and then I want to direct a question to you, Dr. 

Leahy. 

In your testimony, Mr. Fogels, you talk about the mineral potential in Alaska and the fact that we have only got about 17 percent 

of the state that has been mapped, geologically, much less with 

other mapping techniques whether it is airborne, geophysical survey. Why is it so important that we get this accurate mapping 

when it comes to our minerals? 

Mr. FOGELS. Well Senator, there are a number of reasons. 

I think one, just the geologic mapping, is a foundational data set 

that describes the Earth. And so, all of the geologic hazards that 

we’ve been discussing here in this Committee, I mean, if you don’t 

have a good geologic map of your state, you’re just behind the curve 

when you’re trying to figure out where your hazards are or what 
99 

their potentials are. So the geologic mapping is important for hazards too and flooding and tsunami inundation mapping. 

But as far as resource development, I think Director Kimball 

said, part of the USGS’ mission is to provide for our mineral and 

energy security in the future. Alaska is vastly underexplored. 

We have much more mineral potential to offer the nation, we 

have much more oil and gas potential and energy potential to offer 

the nation, and this mapping is critical to find that. We don’t even 

know where a lot of this is yet. 

Some examples of where we’ve used state and USGS mapping, 

the new, the recent discovery by Repsol and Armstrong on the 

North Slope that could produce up to 200,000 barrels of additional 

oil for TAPS a day, potentially. I mean, that was assisted by mapping, through the STATEMAP program. 

The Pogo Gold project that’s now employing 300 people was assisted in its discovery with this mapping whether it’s airborne, geophysical or state mapping, the Livengood projects. 

So we have a lot of success stories in Alaska, and we believe we 

have a lot more success stories in the future with better mapping. 

The CHAIRMAN. I would agree. 

Let me wrap this panel up with a question to you, Dr. Leahy. In 

your written testimony that I reviewed you speak about four main 

goals for USGS in mineral resources led with the need to assess 

the nature and the distribution of domestic mineral resources. 

As you know I mentioned that to Director Kimball and we have 

a critical minerals bill that I have introduced. It is something I feel 

pretty strongly about. 

In your observation, can the USGS be doing better when it comes 

to its assessment of minerals? And what would you recommend in 

terms of steps that can be done at the federal level to really 

strengthen our nation’s mineral security? 

Dr. LEAHY. Well I think, you know, all minerals occur in deposits, different types of deposits. The way you determine where those 

deposits are is through geologic mapping. If there is no map at the 

appropriate scale, it’s very difficult to, kind of, guess that there 

might be a material that you’re interested in. So geologic mapping 

is absolutely critical. 

Now the U.S. has been playing catch up in terms of, kind of, filling in the geologic map of the country. It’s an enormous effort. Tremendous progress has been made in the last 20 years but there’s 

a great deal to be done. To me, that’s a very high priority for the 

USGS, and obviously a state partnership is a vehicle to get it done. 

Now can it happen immediately? That’s impossible. We don’t 

have the workforce to be able to do that. But certainly it could be 

accelerated and particularly in Alaska, but elsewhere as well. 

The other thing I want to say is when you talk about minerals 

I think you have to maintain a global view. And I think you’ve got 

to be somewhat strategic in that global view in terms of what 

you’re looking at. 

For example, I think there are special studies and USGS is starting to do some of these. One that comes to mind is the rare earths 

or the critical minerals that you mentioned. But also there are geographic areas that are important for us to know about because they 

could be potential supplies or producers of supplies we need in 
100 

order to run our manufacturing or whatever. There isn’t one that 

immediately jumps to mind. It’s kind of a question mark globally. 

It would be good to be able to fill in that question mark. 

I think we need to, you know, the USGS has a rather iconic 

graph they put out every year that shows the U.S. dependence on 

foreign production of minerals. The one thing I have not seen is 

how of those, what are the trends in those graphs that are produced on an annual basis? Which ones are increasing? Which ones 

are declining in terms of our dependence? 

If you look at it in that context, I think you can start doing some 

pretty educated forecasting in terms of where are there going to be 

challenges for domestic supplies in the future. 

In my mind, that’s an analysis that should be done, and we 

should have a handle on forecasting where we see mineral disruptions in the future. Not that the minerals won’t be there geologically, let me make that perfectly clear, but where the supply could 

be disrupted because of world events. 

I think that the USGS is ideally situated, which it isn’t in energy 

but it is in minerals, by having both the demand and the production supply or, the production side as well as the supply side. They 

do assessments of resources globally, so they know how much is 

available in terms of reserve or the resource base. But they also 

look at production statistics globally. Frankly, that’s a big advantage in terms of doing some very innovative science, kind of, looking at both of those sides of the equation. That, I don’t believe, is 

being done, or it’s only being done in a few cases in a pilot area. 

So those are some of the things I would do. 

The CHAIRMAN. Yes. 

Dr. LEAHY. The other thing, and I’ll just close with this comment, 

is there was some discussion of the mineral cycle. I think Director 

Kimball mentioned the mineral life cycle, she called it. I think 

there are some things that could be done in terms of greater collaboration if we want to look at minerals as a cycle, we really need 

to look at all the components, the discovery, the development, the 

production, the disposal, the reuse, the substitution and so forth. 

Other federal agencies have responsibilities. DOE comes to mind 

in terms of doing substitution and so forth. I don’t believe the collaboration and looking at the minerals cycle as an entity with various components within the Federal Government contributed to it 

is very strong, and I think that could be strengthened. 

The CHAIRMAN. Very good. 

Dr. LEAHY. Just a few thoughts. 

The CHAIRMAN. Very helpful, I appreciate that. 

Dr. LEAHY. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. I have to ask one last question. Hopefully this 

will be very quick. Dr. McCoy, in your comments you noted the 

need for a new space weather strategy and talk about the USGS 

geomagnetism program. Do you see a role for the Arctic of Alaska 

in this particular effort? It seems to me it is perfectly poised for 

it. But can you inform me just a little bit? 

Dr. MCCOY. Sure. 

The CHAIRMAN. Very briefly. 

Dr. MCCOY. Sure. 
101 

Just off campus, we maintain the College International Geophysical Observatory. 

The CHAIRMAN. Right. 

Dr. MCCOY. It was built by USGS, but we operate it and we 

monitor geomagnetic activity. Large solar activity, Chrono mass 

ejections, can create ground induced currents, geomagnetically induced currents, that can take down power grids. It’s a major concern. 

The Administration has had a space weather initiative the last 

couple years as a new strategy that involves enhancing USGS 

funding in this area. So we’re excited about that. 

And—but this is—this could be an extreme hazard. In fact, I 

think Lloyd’s of London has estimated a potential up to $5 trillion, 

globally, from a major space weather event. So USGS, it’s a, they’re 

a small part of the overall responsibility in the nation, but they’re 

monitoring ground currents and measuring ground currents. 

The CHAIRMAN. Can we predict that? Is that where you are going 

with this project, and this proposal, is the ability to predict when 

that might happen, or if? 

Dr. MCCOY. There are several aspects. Some of it is prediction, 

looking at the sun, but also understanding the ground and the way 

currents are produced and having enough warning to provide, to do 

mitigation so we don’t take out power grids. 

The CHAIRMAN. Right. 

Dr. MCCOY. Like what happened back in ’89 in Quebec. 

The CHAIRMAN. Right. 

Yet another hazard. Add it to our list. 

Thank you, gentlemen, for your testimony and for all that you 

are doing to help us be better prepared, particularly when Mother 

Nature does some crazy stuff. 

Senator Cantwell. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

I just wanted to add, you know, we were mentioning Senator Stevens in a way that my predecessors, Senators Magnus and then 

Jackson, actually through this Committee on Insular Affairs, extended our ability to conduct investigations on the Outer Continental Shelf and to the oceans that we need to be doing now. 

That was in 1961, and I am so glad that they did that. I think 

you and I are continuing to carry the torch for this, and I think 

today’s hearing is all about how we need to make sure we are carrying the torch in the appropriations process. 

The CHAIRMAN. Yes. 

Senator CANTWELL. And make sure that these gentlemen get the 

funding we need to protect the public and to continue to look at 

these issues. 

So I thank you for holding this important hearing that is very 

important to our region of the country. And thank you for your 

leadership, as you mentioned, on bringing up monitoring when people didn’t quite understand the significance of it. So thank you for 

that. 

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, we do have a Natural Hazards Caucus. Apparently I am a co-chair and was with Senator Landrieu when she 

was here in the Senate—and this was shortly after Katrina. The 

caucus hasn’t done much of late, and maybe it is time to revisit, 
102 

at least from an educational perspective, what we might need to be 

doing. Anyway, I am just putting that out there. 

But thank you, we appreciate it and you all. 

[Whereupon, at 11:55 a.m. the hearing was adjourned.] 
(103) 

APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED 
104 
105 
106 
107 
108 
109 
110 
111 
112 
113 
114 
115 
116 
117 
118 
119 
120 
121 
122 
123 
124 
125 
126 
127 
128 
129 
130 
131 
132 
133 
134 
135 
136 
137 
138 
139 
140 
141 
142 
143 
144 
145 
146 
147 
148 
149 
150 
151 
152 
153 
154 
155 
156 
157 
158 
159 
160 
161 
162 
163 
164