Seismic Hazard Assessment for Guam and the 

Northern Mariana Islands

By Charles S. Mueller, Kathleen M. Haller, Nicholas Luco, Mark D. Petersen, and Arthur D. Frankel

Open-File Report 2012–1015

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Marcia K. McNutt, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2012

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural 

and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit 

http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications,

visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov

Suggested citation:

Mueller, C.S., Haller, K.M., Luco, Nicholas, Petersen, M.D., and Frankel, A.D., 2012, Seismic 

hazard assessment for Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 2012–1015, 52 p.

Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual 

copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report.
iii

Contents

Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction.................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Seismic and Tectonic Setting of Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands.................................................................... 4

Methodology and Hazard Model.................................................................................................................................... 9

Gridded Historical Seismicity ....................................................................................................................................10

Mariana Megathrust ..................................................................................................................................................15

Crustal Faults on Guam............................................................................................................................................16

Results and Discussion ................................................................................................................................................19

Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................................................30

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................................30

Appendix. Supplementary Data Supporting Mariana Islands Seismic Hazard Analysis ...............................................34

Figures

1. Map of the Mariana Islands region ........................................................................................................................... 2

2. Maps showing focal mechanism solutions: 1976–2011, Mw ≥ 6, depth 0–40 kilometers; 1976–2011, Mw 

≥ 6, depth 41–200 kilometers; 1990–2011, Mw 5.5–6, depth 0–40 kilometers.................................................. 5

3. Map showing declustered earthquake catalog with megathrust and outer-rise zone boundaries ............................. 8

4. Graphs of seismicity rates and exponential model fits: depth 0–40 kilometers inside megathrust zone; 

depth 0–40 kilometers outside megathrust zone; depth 41–200 kilometers ....................................................11

5. Map of Guam showing historical seismicity and modeled faults ..............................................................................17

6. Hazard maps: peak ground acceleration (all modeled sources) for 2 percent and 10 percent probability 

of exceedance in 50 years...............................................................................................................................21

7. Hazard maps: 0.2-second spectral acceleration (5% damping, all modeled sources) for 2 percent and 10 

percent probability of exceedance in 50 years.................................................................................................23

8. Hazard maps: 1.0-second spectral acceleration (5% damping, all modeled sources) for 2 percent and 10 

percent probability of exceedance in 50 years.................................................................................................25

9. Hazard curves (peak ground acceleration) for Guam and Saipan showing contributions by seismic 

source..............................................................................................................................................................27

10. Hazard curves (0.2-second spectral acceleration for 5% damping) for Guam and Saipan showing 

contributions by seismic source.......................................................................................................................28

11. Hazard curves (1.0-second spectral acceleration for 5% damping) for Guam and Saipan showing 

contributions by seismic source.......................................................................................................................29

Tables

1. Parameters of the historical (background) seismicity hazard model........................................................................14

2. Probabilistic ground motions at Guam and Saipan..................................................................................................20
iv

Abbreviations Used in This Report

0.2sSA 0.2-second response spectral acceleration for 5 percent critical damping 

1.0sSA 1.0-second response spectral acceleration for 5 percent critical damping

a, b earthquake rate parameters

cm/yr centimeter per year

E east

EVC Engdahl-Villaseñor Centennial 

g gravitational acceleration 

ISC International Seismological Centre

km kilometer 

km2 square kilometer

m meter

mm/yr millimeter per year

m/s meter per seoond

MW moment magnitude 

N north

NGA Next Generation Attenuation

PDE Preliminary Determination of Epicenters

PGA peak ground acceleration 

USGS U.S. Geological Survey 

Vs30 30-meter average shear-wave velocity
Seismic Hazard Assessment for Guam and the 

Northern Mariana Islands

By Charles S. Mueller, Kathleen M. Haller, Nicholas Luco, Mark D. Petersen, and Arthur D. Frankel

Abstract

We present the results of a new probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for Guam and 

the Northern Mariana Islands. The Mariana island arc has formed in response to northwestward 

subduction of the Pacific plate beneath the Philippine Sea plate, and this process controls 

seismic activity in the region. Historical seismicity, the Mariana megathrust, and two crustal 

faults on Guam were modeled as seismic sources, and ground motions were estimated by using 

published relations for a firm-rock site condition. Maps of peak ground acceleration, 0.2-second 

spectral acceleration for 5 percent critical damping, and 1.0-second spectral acceleration for 

5 percent critical damping were computed for exceedance probabilities of 2 percent and 

10 percent in 50 years. 

For 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years, probabilistic peak ground 

acceleration is 0.94 gravitational acceleration at Guam and 0.57 gravitational acceleration at 

Saipan, 0.2-second spectral acceleration is 2.86 gravitational acceleration at Guam and 

1.75 gravitational acceleration at Saipan, and 1.0-second spectral acceleration is 0.61 

gravitational acceleration at Guam and 0.37 gravitational acceleration at Saipan. 

For 10 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years, probabilistic peak ground 

acceleration is 0.49 gravitational acceleration at Guam and 0.29 gravitational acceleration at 

Saipan, 0.2-second spectral acceleration is 1.43 gravitational acceleration at Guam and 

0.83 gravitational acceleration at Saipan, and 1.0-second spectral acceleration is 0.30 

gravitational acceleration at Guam and 0.18 gravitational acceleration at Saipan. 

The dominant hazard source at the islands is upper Benioff-zone seismicity (depth 40–

160 kilometers). The large probabilistic ground motions reflect the strong concentrations of this 

activity below the arc, especially near Guam. 

Introduction

In this report we present new probabilistic seismic hazard maps for Guam and the 

Northern Mariana Islands (fig. 1). These two United States territories, together composing the 

Mariana Islands group, lie in the western North Pacific Ocean along the Mariana arc about three 

quarters of the distance from Hawaii to the Philippines and halfway between Japan and New 

Guinea. Guam (13.5°N, 144.8°E) is the largest island in the Mariana chain with an area of 

550 square kilometers (km2); its 2011 population was 180,000 (CIA World Factbook, 2011). 

The 14 Northern Mariana Islands extend 800 kilometers (km) north from Guam along the arc to 

Farallon de Pajaros island (20.5°N, 144.9°E). The northernmost islands are largely uninhabited 

owing to ongoing volcanic threats and only the three largest southern islands, Rota (14.2°N, 

145.2°E ), Tinian (15.0°N, 145.6°E), and Saipan (15.2°N, 145.8°E), support substantial 

populations. The total area of the Northern Mariana Islands is 460 km2 and the 2011 population 

was 50,000 (CIA World Factbook, 2011). 
2

Figure 1. Geographic and tectonic setting of the Mariana Islands region. The Pacific plate subducts 

west-northwestward beneath Guam at 6.3 cm/yr and the back-arc Mariana trough opens at 4.7 cm/yr full 

rate (Sella and others, 2002). Structural elements are generalized from Karig and others (1978). [m, 

meter; cm/yr, centimeters per year]
3

The east-convex Mariana trench-arc system has formed in response to northwestward 

subduction of the Pacific tectonic plate beneath the Philippine Sea plate (fig 1). Repetti (1939), 

Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (1995), and U.S. Geological Survey (2012a) 

reviewed the history of damaging earthquakes in the Mariana Islands during the past two 

centuries. Destructive earthquakes struck in 1825 (Modified Mercalli Intensity VIII), 1834 

(VIII), 1849 (IX), 1862 (VII), 1892 (VIII), 1902 (IX), 1903 (VII), 1909 (VIII), 1936 (VIII), 

1970 (V), 1975 (VII), 1978 (VII), and 1993 (IX), but only the most recent large events have 

been well recorded and studied. Aspects of historical seismicity in the region are summarized in 

figures 2 and 3 in the main report and in table A1 and figure A1 in the appendix. 

In modeling the seismic hazard of the region it is important to recognize that no great––

or even very large––thrust earthquake has ever been associated with the Mariana plate 

boundary. On the basis of its seismic history and tectonic expression, the Mariana megathrust is 

commonly categorized as the weakly coupled, “aseismic” end-member in global subductionzone classifications (Uyeda and Kanamori, 1979; Ruff and Kanamori, 1980; Zhang and Lay, 

1992). 

Little is known about large earthquakes of 1902 (moment magnitude (Mw) 7.5) and 1914 

(body-wave magnitude 7.9). 

On 05 April 1990, an Mw 7.4 earthquake occurred just east of the Mariana trench near 

15.2°N and 147.6°E. Although not destructive, it is noteworthy as the largest shallow 

earthquake ever recorded in the region. This event was studied by Yoshida and others (1992) 

and Zhang and Lay (1992). Yoshida and others (1992) interpreted a normal-faulting mechanism 

with slip on a west-dipping plane within the outer-rise region of the subducting Pacific plate in 

response to gravitational slab-pull forces. 

On 08 August 1993, an Mw 7.8 (surface-wave magnitude (Ms) 8.1) earthquake occurred 

about 60 km south-southeast of Agana, the capital city of Guam, near 13.0°N and 144.8°E at a 

depth of 60–70 km. The largest earthquake ever recorded in the region, it caused considerable 

damage on Guam, especially to long-period structures. Earthquake Engineering Research 

Institute (1995) described its effects and estimated peak ground accelerations (PGA) of 0.15 to 

0.25 gravitational acceleration (g) on Guam; there were no strong-motion recordings. This 

earthquake was clearly associated with the subducting Pacific plate, but initially neither 

aftershock patterns nor seismic or tsunami modeling could distinguish between alternative 

interface or inslab mechanisms (Tanioka and others, 1995). Campos and others (1996) 

interpreted it as an interface event, with important implications for then-current ideas about 

seismic coupling (see also Scholz and Campos, 1995). Harada and Ishibashi (2008), after

making a joint relocation of a large Mariana seismicity dataset, determined that the 1993 

earthquake ruptured along a subhorizontal fault plane deep within the subducting Pacific slab; 

this result contradicted the Campos and others (1996) interpretation. 

Large earthquakes on 28 March 2000 and 28 September 2007 (Mw 7.6 and Mw 7.5, 

respectively) occurred north of 22°N within the Benioff zone at depths greater than 100 km. 

In fact, the largest modern (1976–2011) Mariana earthquakes with likely shallow thrust 

mechanisms appear to be 06 June 1993 Mw 6.4 and 14 August 2002 Mw 6.5 events (Global 

CMT Project, 2011). Regardless, the recent great 2004 Sumatra-Andaman and 2011 TohokuOki earthquakes have called the traditional subduction-zone classifications into question, with 

the implication that any major subduction zone––even Mariana––may be capable of a great
4

megathrust earthquake (Stein and Okal, 2007). To accommodate this idea in the hazard model 

we supplement the limited Mariana seismic history with data from other Pacific-region 

subduction zones.

We present probabilistic seismic hazard maps for the Mariana Islands region for PGA, 

0.2-second spectral acceleration for 5 percent critical damping (0.2sSA), and 1.0-second 

spectral acceleration for 5 percent critical damping (0.1sSA) for exceedance probabilities of 

2 percent and 10 percent in 50 years (corresponding to ground-motion return times of 

approximately 2,500 and 500 years, respectively). Shallow seismicity, Benioff-zone seismicity, 

the Mariana megathrust fault, and two crustal faults on Guam are modeled as seismic sources. 

Appropriate published ground-motion relations for a firm-rock site condition are used for each 

source. The probabilistic seismic-hazard methodology developed by the U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS) for the United States national seismic hazard maps (Frankel and others, 1996; Frankel 

and others, 2000; Frankel and others, 2002; Petersen and others, 2008) is adapted for the 

Mariana case. As with other USGS seismic hazard maps, these are intended to inform building 

codes and other structural-design guidelines as well as earthquake mitigation and response plans 

(Leyendecker and others, 2000).

Seismic and Tectonic Setting of Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands

Seismicity in the region is primarily controlled by active convergence between two 

purely oceanic tectonic plates: the Pacific plate subducts northwestward beneath the Philippine 

Sea plate at the Mariana trench (Karig, 1971; Karig and others, 1978; Hussong and Uyeda, 

1981; Ranken and others, 1984). The Mariana volcanic arc lies west of the trench, and the backarc Mariana trough lies west of the arc (fig. 1). The east-convex plate boundary changes strike 

orientation from north-northwest at the latitude of the northernmost Mariana Islands (about 

20°N) to east-northeast southwest of Guam. In a global analysis of space geodesy data 

(primarily global positioning system data), Sella and others (2002) found a velocity for the 

Pacific plate relative to Guam (relative subduction velocity) of 6.3 centimeters per year (cm/yr) 

at an azimuth of 285 degrees. They also derived an extension rate across the Mariana trough of 

4.7 cm/yr (full rate, at the latitude of Guam), in rough agreement with geologic rates (Hussong 

and Uyeda, 1981). An older analysis of earthquake slip-vector data constrained by global platemotion models (Seno and others, 1993) gave a relative Pacific plate–Philippine plate velocity 

near 20°N of about 4 cm/yr, which diminished southwestward along the plate boundary to about 

2 cm/yr southwest of Guam. South of 13°N the volcanic arc is truncated by a series of eastwest-trending fractures (Karig and others, 1978; Ranken and others, 1984). Hengesh (1994) 

argued that the oblique component of convergence implied by the changing plate-boundary 

geometry south of Guam should be partitioned onto such transcurrent structures in a manner 

similar to strain partitioning near Sumatra, Puerto Rico, and the western Aleutians. 

The configuration of the subducting plate changes markedly along the boundary 

(Ranken and others, 1984; Tanioka and others, 1995). North of 15°N the Benioff zone dips 

steeply (it is essentially vertical below 200–250 km) and deep earthquakes occur down to 

700 km, whereas west of 143°E, southwest of Guam, no earthquakes deeper than 200 km have 

been recorded. Selected focal mechanisms from 1976 to 2011 (Global CMT Project, 2011) are 

plotted in figure 2. The declustered earthquake catalog developed for this project (described 

below in the Gridded Historical Seismicity section) is mapped in figure 3. (Seismicity is plotted 

in several cross-section views in appendix figure A1.)
5

Figure 2. Focal-mechanisms (Global CMT Project, 2011): A) earthquakes 1976–2011 with Mw ≥ 6 and 

depth 0–40 km; B) earthquakes 1976–2011 with Mw ≥ 6 and depth 41–200 km; C) earthquakes 1990–

2011 with 5.5 ≤ Mw < 6 and depth 0–40 km. Earthquakes are denoted by month, day, year 

(MMDDYY). (See fig. 1 for explanation of geographic and tectonic features.) [CMT, Centroid Moment 

Tensor; <, Less than; ≤, less than or equal to; Mw, moment magnitude; d, depth; ≥, greater than or 

equal to; km, kilometer]—Continued
6

Figure 2. Focal-mechanisms (Global CMT Project, 2011): A) earthquakes 1976–2011 with Mw ≥ 6 and 

depth 0–40 km; B) earthquakes 1976–2011 with Mw ≥ 6 and depth 41–200 km; C) earthquakes 1990–

2011 with 5.5 ≤ Mw < 6 and depth 0–40 km. Earthquakes are denoted by month, day, year 

(MMDDYY). (See fig. 1 for explanation of geographic and tectonic features.) [CMT, Centroid Moment 

Tensor; <, Less than; ≤, less than or equal to; Mw, moment magnitude; d, depth; ≥, greater than or 

equal to; km, kilometer]—Continued
7

Figure 2. Focal-mechanisms (Global CMT Project, 2011): A) earthquakes 1976–2011 with Mw ≥ 6 and 

depth 0–40 km; B) earthquakes 1976–2011 with Mw ≥ 6 and depth 41–200 km; C) earthquakes 1990–

2011 with 5.5 ≤ Mw < 6 and depth 0–40 km. Earthquakes are denoted by month, day, year 

(MMDDYY). (See fig. 1 for explanation of geographic and tectonic features.) [CMT, Centroid Moment 

Tensor; <, Less than; ≤, less than or equal to; Mw, moment magnitude; d, depth; ≥, greater than or 

equal to; km, kilometer]—Continued
8

Figure 3. Declustered seismicity catalog: earthquakes1964–2011 with MW ≥ 4.5 (stars, color-coded by 

depth). Megathrust zone and outer-rise zone boundaries are plotted as dashed and dotted lines, 

respectively. (The three source catalogs are mapped in fig. A2.) [Mw, moment magnitude; ≥, greater 

than or equal to; m, meter; d, depth]
9

The Mariana islands are formed of volcanic rocks and calcareous sedimentary rocks of 

Tertiary and Quaternary age. Guam consists of volcanic mountains in the south and low-lying 

coralline-limestone marine terraces in the north. There is evidence of crustal faulting all along 

the arc, both in sea-floor images (for example, Hussong and Uyeda, 1981) and from onshore 

reconnaissance (Tracey and others, 1964). Hengesh (1994) reported long-term tilting and 

displacement of a prominent late Holocene bench that is preserved across Guam and faulting of 

other young features (see also Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, 1995). He speculated 

that the shape of the island itself might be controlled by one or more young faults. 

As noted above, no great earthquake has ever been associated with the Mariana 

megathrust interface. In the taxonomy of global subduction systems proposed by Uyeda and 

Kanamori (1979), weak plate coupling and low seismic activity on the interface correlate with 

extension in the overriding plate, active back-arc spreading, old subducting lithosphere, and a 

steep Benioff zone. The Mariana system shows a predominance of extensional structural 

features (for example, high-angle normal faults) in the shallow fore-arc and little evidence of 

sediment accretion at the inner trench wall; both observations are consistent with weak coupling 

in the subduction zone (Hussong and Uyeda, 1981).

Methodology and Hazard Model

The U.S. Geological Survey probabilistic seismic hazard methodology is based on 

specific fault sources with geologically or geophysically derived slip-rate or recurrence 

information and on gridded and smoothed historical (background) seismicity. Earthquake rates 

are generalized using truncated exponential (Gutenberg-Richter) frequency-magnitude 

distributions with regionally determined b values and maximum magnitudes (that is, truncated 

Nm=10a-bm, where parameters a and b specify Nm, the rate of earthquakes of magnitude m). 

Magnitude ranges are adjusted in the model to avoid double counting hazard from different 

types of sources. Uncertainties in sources and ground-motion attenuation relations are 

accommodated by using logic trees. Modeled earthquakes are assumed to occur randomly in 

time; the probabilistic ground motions presented here represent mean, time-independent seismic 

hazard.

Specific sources in the Mariana seismic hazard model include faulting on the subduction 

megathrust west of the Mariana trench, normal faulting on two crustal faults on Guam that we 

judge to be active, and gridded and smoothed historical seismicity using earthquakes from 1964 

to 2011, larger than Mw 4.5, that are divided into eight depth ranges down to 700 km. Lacking 

magnitude or recurrence information, we do not model the Mariana trough boundary faults, the 

east-west-trending fractures that truncate the southern arc, or other crustal faults as specific 

sources; their hazard is accounted for by background seismicity. Alternative ground-motion 

predictions for a uniform firm-rock site condition (30-meter (m) average shear-wave velocity 

(Vs30) = 760 meters per second (m/s)) are used. M.D. Petersen and others (written commun., 

2012) made a seismic-hazard assessment for American Samoa incorporating new groundmotion estimates for oceanic paths, and we adopt some of their results. With a site grid spacing 

of 0.1 degree in latitude and longitude, we compute hazard curves for approximately 17,000 

sites within the area mapped in figure 1. 
10

Gridded Historical Seismicity

A uniform moment-magnitude-based seismicity catalog is constructed for the Mariana 

region from three global source catalogs. The Engdahl-Villaseñor Centennial (EVC) catalog is a 

compilation of large 20th-century earthquakes, many relocated, with completeness levels of 

about Mw 5.5 since 1964 and Mw 6.5 since 1900 (Engdahl and Villaseñor, 2002). The U.S. 

Geological Survey Preliminary Determination of Epicenters catalog (PDE) lists earthquakes 

since 1973 with variable completeness levels (U.S. Geological Survey, 2012b). The 

International Seismological Centre global catalog (ISC) lists earthquakes since 1900 with 

variable completeness levels (International Seismological Centre, 2011). We use catalog search 

parameters: 1900 ≤ year ≤ 2011, 8 ≤ lat°N ≤ 24, 138 ≤ lon°E ≤ 152, depth = all, and magnitude 

≥ 3.8. Listed magnitudes of various types are converted to Mw following Utsu (2002) and Sipkin 

(2003), and a preferred Mw is determined for each entry. The three source catalogs (appendix 

fig. A2) are concatenated and sorted chronologically. Duplicates and dependent events are 

identified and removed following Mueller and others (1997): duplicates are deleted using the 

source-catalog preference order EVC > PDE > ISC, and aftershocks and foreshocks are deleted 

(to insure the statistical independence of the final catalog) by using the algorithm of Gardner 

and Knopoff (1974). The final declustered catalog (fig. 3) includes 4,164 main shocks with Mw

≥ 4 (144 EVC, 2,859 PDE, 1,161 ISC), and we judge it to be complete to Mw 4.5–5.0 since 

1964. Most earthquakes deeper than about 40 km are associated with the Benioff zone of the 

subducting Pacific plate (appendix fig. A1). Appendix A1 lists earthquakes in the declustered 

catalog with Mw ≥ 6. 

For the hazard calculation the declustered catalog is divided into eight subcatalogs by 

depth: 0–40 km, 41–80, 81–120, 121–160, 161–200, 201–300, 301–500, and 501–700. To 

accommodate regional differences in b values or maximum magnitudes the 0–40-km (shallow) 

subcatalog is further divided into three tectonic zones: megathrust, outer-rise, and shallowother. The megathrust zone boundary (dashed line in fig. 3) corresponds with the surface used 

to model the Mariana megathrust fault (described below). The outer-rise zone boundary (dotted 

line in fig. 3) extends about 100 km oceanward from the Mariana trench axis. The shallow-other 

zone includes the remaining shallow seismicity (not megathrust or outer-rise). Completeness 

levels and b values are derived from statistical analysis of each subcatalog. Figure 4A shows the 

result for shallow megathrust seismicity (all shallow earthquakes within the megathrust zone, 

regardless of mechanism). Binned incremental annual earthquake rates (dots, plotted in the 

center of each 0.5-magnitude-unit bin) are determined for the listed completeness levels. A b 

value of 1.06 (solid line) is derived from a maximum-likelihood fit (Weichert, 1980) to the rates 

of earthquakes with Mw ≥ 5.0. Figure 4B shows the result for shallow seismicity outside the 

megathrust zone (combined outer-rise and shallow-other). A b value of 1.07 (dashed line) is 

derived from the rates of earthquakes with Mw ≥ 4.5; b = 1.06 (solid line) is used in the hazard 

model for simplicity and consistency with the megathrust-zone result. Figure 4C shows the 

result for seismicity in the 40–200-km depth range. A b value of 1.124 (dashed line) is derived 

from the rates of earthquakes with Mw ≥ 5.0, but the fit underestimates the historical rates of 

large earthquakes. For simplicity b = 1.06 (solid line) is again used in the hazard model; in our 

judgment it fits the rates of large earthquakes better without seriously violating the other rates. 

For seismicity in the 200–700-km depth range, b = 0.80 provides a good fit to the rates of 

earthquakes with Mw ≥ 5.0 (not shown).
11

Figure 4. Seismicity rates and exponential-model fits for variable completeness (Weichert, 1980). Data (dots) are incremental annual earthquake 

rates in 0.5-magnitude-unit bins. A) Depth 0–40 km, inside megathrust zone: fit gives b = 1.06 (solid line). B) Depth 0–40 km, outside megathrust 

zone: fit gives b = 1.07 (dashed line), but b = 1.06 (solid line) is used in the hazard calculation. C) Depth 40–200 km: fit gives b = 1.124, but b = 

1.06 (solid line) is used in the hazard calculation. Completeness levels are listed on each graph. The megathrust zone boundary is mapped in 

figure 3. [Eqks/yr, earthquakes per year; MW, moment magnitude; b, earthquake rate parameter; km, kilometer; s, since; <, less than; d, depth; 

≤, less than or equal to]—Continued
12

Figure 4. Seismicity rates and exponential-model fits for variable completeness (Weichert, 1980). Data (dots) are incremental annual earthquake 

rates in 0.5-magnitude-unit bins. A) Depth 0–40 km, inside megathrust zone: fit gives b = 1.06 (solid line). B) Depth 0–40 km, outside megathrust 

zone: fit gives b = 1.07 (dashed line), but b = 1.06 (solid line) is used in the hazard calculation. C) Depth 40–200 km: fit gives b = 1.124, but b = 

1.06 (solid line) is used in the hazard calculation. Completeness levels are listed on each graph. The megathrust zone boundary is mapped in 

figure 3. [Eqks/yr, earthquakes per year; MW, moment magnitude; b, earthquake rate parameter; km, kilometer; s, since; <, less than; d, depth; ≤, 

less than or equal to]—Continued
13

Figure 4. Seismicity rates and exponential-model fits for variable completeness (Weichert, 1980). Data (dots) are incremental annual earthquake 

rates in 0.5-magnitude-unit bins. A) Depth 0–40 km, inside megathrust zone: fit gives b = 1.06 (solid line). B) Depth 0–40 km, outside megathrust 

zone: fit gives b = 1.07 (dashed line), but b = 1.06 (solid line) is used in the hazard calculation. C) Depth 40–200 km: fit gives b = 1.124, but b = 

1.06 (solid line) is used in the hazard calculation. Completeness levels are listed on each graph. The megathrust zone boundary is mapped in 

figure 3. [Eqks/yr, earthquakes per year; MW, moment magnitude; b, earthquake rate parameter; km, kilometer; s, since; <, less than; d, depth; ≤, 

less than or equal to]
14

A 0.1°-latitude × 0.1°-longitude grid was superimposed on the study region and a 

seismic activity rate, incremental 10a (for a bin size of 0.1 magnitude unit), was computed for 

each grid cell considering catalog completeness (Weichert, 1980; Frankel and others, 2000). 

Separate 10a grids were made for the shallow megathrust, shallow outer-rise, shallow-other, and 

the seven 41–700-km subcatalogs. Following Frankel and others (1996, 2000) gridded 10a

values were spatially smoothed using a two-dimensional Gaussian function with a 50-km 

correlation distance for the three shallow grids and a 30-km correlation distance for the seven 

deeper grids. The 10a grids were used to compute the hazard contribution from seismicity for 

the epicentral distance range 0–200 km. The historical seismicity source models are 

summarized in table 1. 

Table 1. Historical earthquakes and seismicity hazard models.

[km, kilometer; b, parameter in earthquake rate model; Mmin, minimum magnitude; Mmax, maximum magnitude; 

Mw, moment magnitude, %, percent]

Depth range (km)

Largest observed (Mw) Model parameters

1900–2011 1964–2011 b Mmin

(Mw) Mmax (Mw) Fix depth (km)

0–40 megathrust 7.3 (1940) 6.5 (2002 ) 1.06 5.0 7.0 20

0–40 outer-rise 7.4 (1990) 1.06 5.0 7.5 (80%)

8.2 (20%) *

20

0–40 other 7.5 (1902) 6.9 (2007,2010) 1.06 5.0 7.5 20

41–80 7.8 (1993) 1.06

5.0 8.2

60

81–120 8.2 (1914) 7.6 (2000) 1.06 100

121–160 6.8 (1912,1957) 6.6 (2005) 1.06 140

161–200 7.0 (1931) 6.9 (1953) 1.06 180

201–300 7.5 (2007) 0.80

5.0 8.0

250

301–500 7.1 (1905) 6.5 (2001) 0.80 400

501–700 7.1 (1995) 0.80 600

* Mmax from American Samoa hazard study (M.D. Petersen and others, written commun., 2012)

For shallow seismicity we use three ground-motion prediction equations from the Next 

Generation Attenuation (NGA) project (Power and others, 2008) and one equation from Zhao 

and others (2006). The Next Generation Attenuation relations are essentially empirical, based 

largely on strong-motion data from crustal earthquakes in California, Taiwan, and Turkey. They 

are intended to predict ground motions “for shallow crustal earthquakes in the western United 

States and similar active tectonic regions” (Power and others, 2008). We use them with half 

weight overall, equally partitioned (weight 0.167 each) between the relations of Boore and 

Atkinson (2008), Campbell and Bozorgnia (2008), and Chiou and Youngs (2008). Each is 

applied with weights 0.5 for strike-slip faulting and 0.5 for normal faulting in recognition of the 

evidence for extensional crustal deformation in the region. Zhao and others (2006) developed 

ground-motion relations from a large Japanese dataset supplemented by data from the western 
15

United States for crustal earthquakes. M.D. Petersen and others (written commun., 2012) 

collected and processed a set of ground-motion data from the Pacific Basin, and they made a 

performance evaluation of three published ground-motion relations. They preferred the Zhao 

and others (2006) predictions, and used them exclusively in their seismic-hazard model for 

American Samoa. They noted that all earthquakes between 10 and 200 km depth had similar 

ground-motion characteristics. We use the Zhao and others (2006) interface ground-motion 

relation with half weight overall. No extra epistemic uncertainty is added for the shallowseismicity ground motions. All equations account explicitly for the firm-rock site condition 

(Vs30 = 760 m/s) applied here. 

For deeper seismicity (depth 41–700 km, primarily Benioff-zone seismicity) we use 

Zhao and others (2006) inslab ground-motion relations exclusively. We partition these relations 

into the as-published equation with 70 percent weight and into an equation adjusted for regional 

differences (Pacific compared with global) with 30 percent weight (M.D. Petersen and others, 

written commun., 2012). In this case we include 25 percent additional epistemic uncertainty to 

account for ground-motion modeling variability (M.D. Petersen and others, written commun., 

2012). 

Mariana Megathrust

It is not known whether very large earthquakes can occur on the Mariana subduction 

megathrust or, if they do, what their rates and sizes are. The evidence for weak seismic coupling 

precludes estimating seismic activity rates directly from plate-motion data. Instead we assume 

an exponential frequency-magnitude distribution, extrapolate the rates of historical earthquakes 

associated with the megathrust, and judge that the implied rates for large earthquakes seem 

reasonable given the incomplete Mariana seismic history. The limited history also complicates 

direct estimates of maximum magnitudes. We consider two maximum magnitudes for the

megathrust, one based on the local history and one from consideration of other subduction 

zones.

The megathrust is modeled as a west-dipping surface extending from latitude 23°N to 

about 11.5°N. The up-dip (eastern) edge is defined as the trace of the Mariana Trench and the 

down-dip (western) edge is defined as a 40-km depth contour estimated from spatial patterns of 

west-dipping seismicity; seismicity and the megathrust zone boundary are shown in figure 3. 

The megathrust boundary in figure 3 closely matches the updip and 40-km depth contours on 

the megathrust surface derived by Hayes and others (2012). Some support for fixing the 

downdip edge of the megathrust at 40 km comes from the recent great megathrust earthquakes 

in Chile (2010 Maule, Mw 8.8) and Japan (2011 Tohoku-oki, Mw 9.0): seismic and geodetic 

datasets show that primary coseismic slip in both cases occurred at depths shallower than about 

35–40 km (for example, Hayes, 2011; Lorito and others, 2011; Ozawa and others, 2011; Pollitz 

and others, 2011; Wei and others, 2011). These earthquakes may or may not be very good 

Mariana analogs; the rationale for the comparison is simply that they are among the bestrecorded and best-studied of all Pacific megathrust earthquakes, with among the bestdetermined slip distributions. Perhaps better support for the 40-km choice comes from 

considering the depths of historical earthquakes located along the northward-adjacent Izu-Bonin 

megathrust (local Mariana data are insufficient): populations of thrust-mechanism events 

(Hayes and others, 2012) show clear maxima in the 15–35-km depth range and a sharp decline 

at greater depths.
16

From the shallow seismicity within the megathrust boundary (all earthquakes, regardless 

of mechanism) we determine a b value of 1.06 (fig. 4A) and a rate that gives a Mw 8 or greater 

earthquake about every 450 years. The megathrust is modeled with spatially floating 

earthquakes following a truncated exponential frequency-magnitude distribution, extending 

from Mw 7 (the maximum magnitude for the shallow megathrust background seismicity; see 

table 1) to a maximum magnitude. Two values of maximum magnitude are applied in a logic 

tree: Mw 8 (weight 0.8) is based on the local Mariana seismic history, and Mw 9 (weight 0.2) 

acknowledges the possibility of a great earthquake on the megathrust.

Following M.D. Petersen and others (written commun., 2012) we use the subduction 

interface ground-motion relations of Zhao and others (2006) for the distance range 0–1,000 km. 

Twenty-five percent additional epistemic uncertainty is again added to account for groundmotion modeling uncertainty.

Crustal Faults on Guam

Tracey and others (1964), Hengesh (1994), and Earthquake Engineering Research 

Institute (1995) present evidence that some young geomorphic relationships on Guam are 

controlled by crustal faults. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (1995; their fig. 2-5)

shows several on-island faults and emphasizes that even a moderate earthquake on one of them 

could pose a substantial seismic threat. We have reviewed the work of Tracey and others 

(1964), and in our judgment two onshore faults merit inclusion in the seismic hazard model 

(fig. 5).
17

Figure 5. Guam with historical seismicity (used in the hazard calculation) and generalized traces of 

Adelup and Tamuning-Yigo faults (black lines). Filled circle, Agana, the capital city of Guam. [km, 

kilometer; ≈, approximately; mm/yr, millimeters per year; d, depth; <, less than; >, greater than]
18

The Cocos fault is shown on figure 25 of Tracey’s report, but not on their 1:50,000-scale 

geologic map. In our judgment faulting is not required to produce the geologic relationships at 

the south end of the volcanic terrain of southern Guam, and, lacking clear geologic evidence to 

support the existence of this fault, we do not consider it as a potential source. The Cabras and 

Talofofo faults lie entirely within the Tertiary volcanic section. Although that is insufficient 

evidence on its own to preclude them from being potentially active, the absence of throughgoing topographic expression along the Cabras fault, and the observation that younger Tertiary 

and Quaternary-Tertiary deposits are unfaulted along the Talofofo fault zone suggest little postTertiary activity. Even though Tracey and others (1964) suggest that faulting on the Talofofo 

fault zone is synchronous with faulting on the Adelup fault to the north (see below), we see little 

evidence to support young movement on either the Cabras or Talofofo faults. 

The Adelup (or Adelup-Pago) fault is an important structure. According to Tracey and 

others (1964) this fault extends across the narrow waist of the island and forms the structural 

boundary between the northern and southern parts of the island. As shown on their geologic 

map, the Adelup fault juxtaposes Quaternary-Tertiary limestones of the northern part of the 

island against volcanic terrain to the south; clearly it has had an extended history of movement. 

Two lines of evidence suggest young displacement. First, the broad limestone platform that 

forms the northern part of the island has a regional dip to the southwest of about 5 meters per 

kilometer. There does not seem to be any substantial east-west tilting, and the limestone 

deposits south of the Adelup fault do not share this regional dip. Thus, differential movement is 

probably accommodated along the Adelup fault. Second, the fault coincides with a topographic 

escarpment across the Quaternary-Tertiary Agana argillaceous facies and reef facies of the 

Mariana Limestone south of Pago Bay, on the east side of the island. The scarp is about 80 m 

high on the Agana argillaceous facies, whereas the scarp on the reef facies is more subdued and 

may be only 40–60 m high. The Adelup fault is likely characterized by low slip rates on the 

basis of a late-Holocene bench that is offset several feet (Earthquake Engineering Research 

Institute, 1995) and on the amount of offset suggested by the topographic expression of the fault 

in the older limestone. We believe from the evidence of surface rupture, however, that it is 

capable of generating earthquakes of at least Mw 6.5. Geologic relations suggest that it is 

probably a high-angle normal fault dipping to the northeast. 

The Tamuning-Yigo fault zone (and the Santa Rosa horst at its north end), characterized 

by a topographic scarp indicating Quaternary displacement, should also be considered as a 

potential source. The fault is at least 25 km long, although Tracey and others (1964) note that 

the northeastern part is not well expressed. In our judgment the topographic and geologic 

evidence is consistent with a maximum earthquake of at least Mw 6.5. Tracey and others (1964) 

report that the Tamuning-Yigo fault zone is a high-angle, down-to-the-northwest fault with 

maximum relief of about 60 m.

A lack of ages for offset landforms or deposits considerably limits our ability to 

determine slip rates. For both the Adelup and Tamuning-Yigo faults, the age of the Mariana 

Limestone is critical. Tracy and others (1964) assign it a Quaternary-Tertiary age. If we assume 

an age of 1.6 mega-annum (the Quaternary-Tertiary boundary) the resulting slip rates are very 

small, less than about 0.05 millimeters per year (mm/yr). Preserving a topographic scarp is 

difficult at these rates in a tropical environment. If we assume an age of 0.5 mega-annum for the 

reef deposits (middle Quaternary) as reported by Earthquake Engineering Research Institute 

(1995), we get slip rates of 0.2 and 0.1 mm/yr for the Adelup and Tamuning-Yigo faults, 

respectively. This rate for the Adelup fault is supported by the several-foot offset of the late-
19

Holocene beach (Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, 1995). We believe that the 

Tamuning-Yigo fault zone is less active than the Adelup fault, so the relative difference in slip 

rates seems appropriate. 

Figure 5 shows the island of Guam with the modeled (generalized) fault traces and

background seismicity. The Adelup fault is modeled as a 10-km-long, northeast-dipping normal 

fault producing characteristic Mw 6.5 earthquakes. The slip rate of 0.2 mm/yr and an average 

displacement of 0.44 m (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994), imply a recurrence time of about 

2,200 years. The Tamuning-Yigo fault is modeled as a 25-km-long, northwest-dipping normal 

fault producing characteristic Mw 6.5 earthquakes. The slip rate of 0.1 mm/yr and an average 

displacement of 0.44 m (Wells and Coppersmith, 1994), imply a recurrence time of about 

4,400 years.

For the crustal faults we use Next Generation Attenuation ground-motion relations for 

normal faulting with full weight, equally partitioned (weight 0.333 each) between the relations 

of Boore and Atkinson (2008), Campbell and Bozorgnia (2008), and Chiou and Youngs (2008), 

for the distance range 0–200 km. 

Results and Discussion

Hazard maps of probabilistic peak ground acceleration (PGA), 0.2-second spectral 

acceleration for 5 percent critical damping (0.2sSA), and 1.0-second spectral acceleration for 5 

percent critical damping (1.0sSA) for all modeled sources are presented in figures 6, 7, and 8,

respectively. The “A” and “B” panels in each figure show maps for 2 percent and 10 percent 

probability of exceedance in 50 years (approximately 2,500- and 500-year return times, 

respectively). Probabilistic ground motions at Guam (Agana) and Saipan are summarized in 

table 2. Figures 9, 10, and 11 show hazard curves for Guam and Saipan with contributions from 

individual sources for PGA, 0.2sSA, and 1.0sSA, respectively. At both locations the dominant 

hazard source for all structural periods and all probability levels considered is the upper 

Benioff-zone seismicity. As the Pacific plate subducts westward, concentrations of Benioffzone earthquakes trade off with depth and distance from the islands, with the result that 

seismicity at different depths can dominate the hazard at different locations. Figures 9–11 show 

that 41–80-km seismicity controls the hazard at Guam, whereas 81–120-km seismicity

dominates at Saipan. These results can be further understood by considering appendix figure 

A3, which compares PGA hazard maps (2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years) for 

individual seismic sources. Overall, the probabilistic ground motions are large, reflecting the 

high rates of activity and relative proximity of the Benioff-zone sources (especially at Guam),

as well as their large maximum magnitudes (table 1). The shallow (0–40 km) seismicity is more 

diffuse and its hazard contribution is smaller. Owing to its distance from the islands and 

relatively small modeled activity rate, the Mariana megathrust is a minor contributor, even at 

1.0-second period. (Note that the two megathrust hazard curves in figures 9–11 are not scaled 

by the 0.8 and 0.2 weights used in the final model.) Owing to their small slip rates, the two 

crustal faults are not major contributors, even at Agana. Both faults may be capable of larger 

earthquakes, however, and more complex hazard models might be warranted in other 

applications.
20

Table 2. Probabilistic ground motions (g) at Guam and Saipan.

[g, gravitational acceleration; %, percent; yr, year; PGA, peak ground acceleration; 0.2sSA, 

0.2-second spectral acceleration for 5 percent damping; 1.0sSA, 1.0-second spectral acceleration for 5 percent 

damping] 

Parameter Guam (Agana) Saipan

2% in 50 yr 10% in 50 yr 2% in 50 yr 10% in 50 yr

PGA 0.94 0.49 0.57 0.29

0.2sSA 2.86 1.43 1.75 0.83

1.0sSA 0.61 0.30 0.37 0.18
21

Figure 6. Probabilistic peak ground acceleration for all modeled sources for exceedance probabilities of 

A) 2 percent in 50 years and B) 10 percent in 50 years. [PGA, peak ground acceleration; %g, percent 

of gravitational acceleration; %, percent; y, year]—Continued
22

Figure 6. Probabilistic peak ground acceleration for all modeled sources for exceedance probabilities of 

A) 2 percent in 50 years and B) 10 percent in 50 years. [PGA, peak ground acceleration; %g, percent 

of gravitational acceleration; %, percent; y, year]
23

Figure 7. Probabilistic 0.2-second spectral acceleration (5 percent damping) for all modeled sources for 

exceedance probabilities of A) 2 percent in 50 years and B) 10 percent in 50 years. [0.2sSA, 0.2-

second spectral acceleration; %g, percent of gravitational acceleration; %, percent; y, year]—Continued
24

Figure 7. Probabilistic 0.2-second spectral acceleration (5 percent damping) for all modeled sources for 

exceedance probabilities of A) 2 percent in 50 years and B) 10 percent in 50 years. [0.2sSA, 0.2-second 

spectral acceleration; %g, percent of gravitational acceleration; %, percent; y, year]
25

Figure 8. Probabilistic 1.0-second spectral acceleration (5 percent damping) for all modeled sources for 

exceedance probabilities of A) 2 percent in 50 years and B) 10 percent in 50 years. [0.1sSA, 0.1-second 

spectral acceleration; %g, percent of gravitational acceleration; %, percent; y, year]—Continued
26

Figure 8. Probabilistic 1.0-second spectral acceleration (5 percent damping) for all modeled sources for 

exceedance probabilities of A) 2 percent in 50 years and B) 10 percent in 50 years. [0.1sSA, 0.1-second 

spectral acceleration; %g, percent of gravitational acceleration; %, percent; y, year]
27

Figure 9. Peak ground acceleration hazard curves showing contributions by sources for Guam (top) and 

Saipan (bottom). [PGA, peak ground acceleration; Exceedance/yr, exceedance per year; g, 

gravitational acceleration; km, kilometer; Mw, moment magnitude; N, North; E, east]
28

Figure 10. Hazard curves (0.2-second spectral acceleration) showing contributions by sources for Guam 

(top) and Saipan (bottom). [0.2sSA, 0.2-second spectral acceleration; Exceedance/yr, exceedance per 

year; g, gravitational acceleration; km, kilometer; Mw, moment magnitude; N, North; E, east]
29

Figure 11. Hazard curves (1.0-second spectral acceleration) showing contributions by sources for Guam 

(top) and Saipan (bottom). [0.1sSA, 0.1-second spectral acceleration; Exceedance/yr, exceedance per 

year; g, gravitational acceleration; km, kilometer; Mw, moment magnitude; N, North; E, east]
30

Acknowledgments 

Steve Harmsen provided the latest versions of the hazard codes and advice on 

implementiation. Gavin Hayes provided a prepublication version of the Slab 1.0 results and 

advice on the megathrust model. Roland LaForge brought the Repetti reference to our attention. 

Bathymetry data were downloaded from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration’s National Geophysical Data Center website (National Oceanic andAtmospheric 

Administration, 2005). The figures in this report were created with the Generic Mapping Tools 

(GMT) software (Wessel and Smith, 1991). Reviews by Morgan Moschetti, Gavin Hayes, and 

Roland LaForge are gratefully acknowledged. 

References Cited

Boore, D.M., and Atkinson, G.M., 2008, Ground-motion prediction equations for the average 

horizontal component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-damped PSA at spectral periods between

0.01 s and 10.0 s: Earthquake Spectra, v. 24, no. 1, p. 99–138. 

Campbell, K.W., and Bozorgnia, Y., 2008, NGA ground motion model for the geometric mean 

horizontal component of PGA, PGV, PGD and 5% damped linear elastic response spectra for 

periods ranging from 0.01 to 10 s: Earthquake Spectra, v. 24, no. 1, p. 139–171. 

Campos, Jaime, Madariaga, R., and Scholz, C., 1996, Faulting process of the August 8, 1993, 

Guam earthquake—A thrust event in an otherwise weakly coupled subduction zone: Journal 

of Geophysical Research, v. 101, p. 17,581–17,596. 

Chiou, B.S.-J., and Youngs, R.R., 2008, An NGA model for the average horizontal component 

of peak ground motion and response spectra: Earthquake Spectra, v. 24, no. 1, p. 173–215. 

CIA World Factbook, 2011, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook, 

accessed 30 October 2011.

Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, 1995, Guam earthquake of August 8, 1993, 

reconnaissance report: Earthquake Spectra, v. 11 (Supplement B), p. 1–24. 

Engdahl, E.R., and Villaseñor, A., 2002, Global seismicity: 1900–1999, in International 

handbook of earthquake and engineering seismology: IASPEI, v. 81A, p. 665–690. (Also U.S. 

Geological Survey, 2011, earthquake.usgs.gov/research/data/centennial.php, accessed 27 

October 2011).

Frankel, A.D., Mueller, C., Barnhard, T., Perkins, D., Leyendecker, E., Dickman, N., Hanson, 

S., and Hopper, M., 1996, National Seismic Hazard maps—Documentation, June 1996: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 96–532, 70 p. 

Frankel, A.D., Mueller, C.S., Barnhard, T.P., Leyendecker, E.V., Wesson, R.L., Harmsen, S.C., 

Klein, F.W., Perkins, D.M., Dickman, N.C., Hanson, S.L., and Hopper, M.G., 2000, U.S. 

Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard maps: Earthquake Spectra, v. 16, p. 1–19. 

Frankel, A.D., Petersen, M.D., Mueller, C.S., Haller, K.M., Wheeler, R.L., Leyendecker, E.V., 

Wesson, R.L., Harmsen, S.C., Cramer, C.H., Perkins, D.M., and Rukstales, K.S., 2002, 

Documentation for the 2002 update of the National Seismic Hazard maps: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 02–420, 33 p.

Gardner, J.K., and Knopoff, L., 1974, Is the sequence of earthquakes in southern California, 

with aftershocks removed, Poissonian?: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America,

v. 64, p. 1363–1367. 

Global CMT Project, 2011, CMT catalog search, www.globalcmt.org, accessed 28 October 

2011. 
31

Harada, Tomoya, and Ishibashi, K., 2008, Interpretation of the 1993, 2001, and 2002 Guam 

earthquakes as intraslab events by a simultaneous relocation of mainshocks, aftershocks, and 

background earthquakes: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 98, no. 3, p. 

1581–1587. 

Hayes, G.P., 2011, Rapid source characterization of the 2011 Mw 9.0 off the Pacific coast of 

Tohoku earthquake: Earth, Planets and Space, v. 63, p. 529–534. 

Hayes, G.P., Wald, D.J., and Johnson, R.L., 2012, Slab1.0—A three dimensional model of 

global subduction zone geometries: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 117, B01302, 

doi:10.1029/2011JB008524, 15 p. 

Hengesh, J.V., 1994, Geologic effects of the August 8, 1993, Ms 8.1 earthquake and 

observations of Quaternary deformation on Guam [abs.]: Geological Society of America, 

Abstracts with Program, v. 26, no. 2, p. 58. 

Hussong, D.M., and Uyeda, S., 1981, Tectonic processes and the history of the Mariana arc—A 

synthesis of the results of Deep Sea Drilling Project Leg 60, in Initial reports of the Deep Sea 

Drilling Project: Washington (U.S. Government Printing Office), v. 60, p. 909–929. 

International Seismological Centre, 2011, ISC catalog on-line search, 

www.isc.ac.uk/iscbulletin/search/bulletin, accessed 27 October 2011. 

Karig, D.E., 1971, Structural history of the Mariana island arc system: Geological Society of 

America Bulletin, v. 82, p. 323–344. 

Karig, D.E., Anderson, R.N., and Bibee, L.D., 1978, Characteristics of back arc spreading in the 

Mariana Trough: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 83, no. B3, p. 1213–1226. 

Leyendecker, E.V., Hunt, R.J., Frankel, A.D., and Rukstales, K.S., 2000, Development of 

maximum considered earthquake ground motion maps: Earthquake Spectra, v. 16, p. 21–40. 

Lorito, S., Romano, F., Atzori, S., Tong, X., Avellone, A., McCloskey, J., Cocco, M., Boschi, 

E., and Piatanesi, A., 2011, Limited overlap between the seismic gap and coseismic slip of the 

great 2010 Chile earthquake: Nature Geoscience, p. 173–177 (doi:10.1038/ngeo1073, 

www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v4/n3/abs/ngeo1073.html, accessed 18 October 2011). 

Mueller, C.S., Hopper, M., and Frankel, A., 1997, Preparation of earthquake catalogs for the 

national seismic hazard maps—Contiguous 48 states: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 97–464, 36 p. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2005, ETOPO2—2-minute global relief,

www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/gdas/gd_designagrid.html, accessed 20 September 2005. 

Ozawa, Shinzaburo, Nishimura, T., Suito, H., Kobayashi, T., Tobita, M., and Imakiire, T.,

2011, Coseismic and postseismic slip of the 2011 magnitude-9 Tohoku-Oki earthquake: 

Nature, v. 475, no. 7356, p. 373–376 (doi:10.1038/nature10227, 

(www.nature.com/nature/journal/v475/n7356/full/nature10227.html, accessed 18 October 

2011). 

Petersen, M.D., Frankel, A.D., Harmsen, S.C., Mueller, C.S., Haller, K.M., Wheeler, R.L., 

Wesson, R.L., Zeng, Y., Boyd, O.S., Perkins, D.M., Luco, N., Field, E.H., Wills, C.J., and 

Rukstales, K.S., 2008, Documentation for the 2008 update of the United States national 

seismic hazard maps: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008–1128, 60 p. plus 

appendixes. 

Pollitz, F.F., Brooks, B., Tong, X., Bevis, M., Foster, J., Bürgmann, R., Smalley, R., Vigny, C., 

Socquet, A., Ruegg, J.-C., Campos, J., Barrientos, S., Parra, H., Soto, J., Cimbaro, S., and 

Blanco, M., 2011, Coseismic slip distribution of the February 27, 2010, Mw 8.8 Maule, Chile 
32

earthquake: Geophysical Research Letters, v. 38, L09309, 5 p. (doi:10.1029/2011GL047065, 

www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2011/2011GL047065.shtml, accessed 18 October 2011). 

Power, Maurice, Chiou, B., Abrahamson, N., Bozorgnia, Y., Shantz, T., and Roblee, C., 2008, 

An overview of the NGA project: Earthquake Spectra, v. 24, no. 1, p. 3–21. 

Ranken, B., Cardwell, R.K., and Karig, D.E., 1984, Kinematics of the Philippine Sea plate: 

Tectonics, v. 3, no. 5, p. 555–575. 

Repetti, W.C., 1939, Catalog of earthquakes felt in Guam 1825–1938: Manila Observatory 

Seismological Bulletin, Philippines. (We have not seen Repetti’s original report. It is 

excerpted at reference: U.S. Geological Survey, 2012a.) 

Ruff, Larry, and Kanamori, H., 1983, Seismicity and the subduction process: Physics of the 

Earth and Planetary Interiors, v. 23, p. 240252. 

Scholz, C.H., and Campos, J., 1995, On the mechanism of seismic decoupling and back arc 

spreading at subduction zones: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 100, p. 22,103–22,115. 

Sella, G.F., Dixon, T.H., and Mao, A., 2002, REVEL—A model for Recent plate velocities from 

space geodesy: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 107, no. B4, p. ETG 11–1–ETG 11–30. 

Seno, Tetsuzo, Stein, S., and Gripp, A.E., 1993, A model for the motion of the Philippine Sea 

plate consistent with NUVEL–1 and geological data: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 98, 

p. 17,941–17,948. 

Sipkin, S.A., 2003, A correction to body-wave magnitude mb based on moment magnitude Mw: 

Seismological Research Letters, v. 74, no. 6, p. 739–742. 

Stein, Seth, and Okal, E.A., 2007, Ultralong period seismic study of the December 2004 Indian 

Ocean earthquake and implications for regional tectonics and the subduction process: Bulletin 

of the Seismological Society of America, v. 97, p. S279–S295. 

Tanioka, Yuichiro, Satake, K., and Ruff, L., 1995, Analysis of seismological and tsunami data 

from the 1993 Guam earthquake: Pure and Applied Geophysics, v. 144, no. 3/4, p. 823–837. 

Tracey, J.I., Jr., Schlanger, S.O., Stark, J.T., Doan, D.B., and May, H.G., 1964, General geology 

of Guam: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 403–A, 104 p., 3 pls., scale 1:50,000. 

U.S. Geological Survey, 2012a, Earthquake history of Guam /Northern Marianas, 

earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/world/guam/guam_history.php, accessed 10 January 2012.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2012b, PDE catalog online search, 

earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/epic/epic_rect.php, accessed 11 January 2012.

Utsu, Tokuji, 2002, Relationships between magnitude scales, in International Handbook of 

Earthquake and Engineering Seismology: IASPEI, v. 81A, p. 733–746.

Uyeda, Seiya, and Kanamori, H., 1979, Back-arc opening and the mode of subduction: Journal 

of Geophysical Research, v. 84, no. B3, p. 1049–1061. 

Wei, Shengji, Sladen, A., and the ARIA group, 2011, Updated result 3/11/2011 (Mw 9.0) 

Tohoku-oki Japan, www.tectonics.caltech.edu/slip_history/2011_taiheiyo-oki, accessed 18 

October 2011. 

Weichert, D.H., 1980, Estimation of earthquake recurrence parameters for unequal observation 

periods for different magnitudes: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 70, 

p. 1337–1356. 

Wells, D.L., and Coppersmith, K.J., 1994, New empirical relationships among magnitude, 

rupture length, rupture width, rupture area, and surface displacement: Bulletin of the 

Seismological Society of America, v. 84, p. 974–1002. 

Wessel, Paul, and Smith, W.H.F., 1991, Free software helps map and display data: EOS 

Transactions, American Geophysical Union, v. 72, p. 441 and 445–446. 
33

Yoshida, Yasuhiro, Satake, K., and Abe, K., 1992, The large normal-faulting earthquake of April 

5, 1990 in uncoupled subduction zone: Geophysical Research Letters, v. 19, p. 297–300. 

Zhang, Jiajun, and Lay, T., 1992, The April 5, 1990 Mariana Islands earthquake and subduction 

zone stresses: Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors, v. 72, p. 99–121. 

Zhao, J.X., Zhang, J., Asano, A., Ohno, Y., Oouchi, T., Takahashi, T., Ogawa, H., Irikura, K., 

Thio, H.K., Somerville, P.G., Fukushima, Y., and Fukushima, Y., 2006, Attenuation relations 

of strong ground motion in Japan using site classification based on predominant period: 

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 96, no. 3, p. 898–913. 
34

Appendix. Supplementary Data Supporting Mariana Islands Seismic 

Hazard Analysis

Earthquakes from the declustered catalog 1900–2011 with Mw ≥ 6.

7.5 146.000 18.000 0 1902 09 22 01 46 0. EVCABE|7.5MwP&S

7.1 143.000 22.000 450 1905 07 11 15 37 30. EVCUTS|7.2mBABE1

6.8 144.500 12.000 50 1909 12 09 23 28 48. EVCG&R|6.8MsAN2

6.8 146.000 14.000 130 1912 10 26 09 00 36. EVCG&R|7.0mBABE1

7.0 145.500 14.500 0 1913 05 18 02 08 53. EVCISS|7.0MsAN1

8.2 143.000 22.000 110 1914 11 24 11 53 30. EVCG&R|7.9mBABE1

6.2 148.000 18.000 35 1921 02 10 23 53 45. ISC

6.6 143.000 22.000 35 1922 07 11 14 13 0. EVCUTS|6.6MjUTSU

6.2 144.000 13.000 35 1924 01 30 04 47 43. ISC

6.2 141.500 12.000 35 1925 07 17 03 13 53. ISC

6.0 142.000 14.000 35 1925 07 17 22 31 04. ISC

6.0 145.000 23.000 35 1926 04 22 23 47 52. ISC

6.0 141.000 13.000 35 1927 07 17 08 48 33. ISC

6.0 141.000 11.000 35 1928 02 13 05 33 37. ISC

6.0 143.500 21.500 200 1928 12 19 15 15 50. ISC

6.2 144.000 12.000 35 1929 01 17 22 28 42. ISC

6.8 145.686 18.761 35 1929 03 10 14 34 34.9 EVCEHB|6.8UKG&R

6.2 147.000 14.000 35 1929 05 01 07 38 41. ISC

6.2 141.000 11.000 35 1929 12 31 01 03 57. ISC

6.2 146.500 18.500 190 1930 01 26 12 20 30. ISC

7.0 146.570 18.351 35 1930 10 24 20 15 12.9 EVCEHB|7.0MsABE1

7.1 144.803 10.778 35 1931 01 28 21 24 10.9 EVCEHB|7.1MsABE1

7.0 145.489 19.152 172 1931 09 09 20 38 28.4 EVCEHB|7.1mBABE1

6.5 146.000 17.000 520 1931 10 29 08 39 18. ISC

6.2 147.000 17.000 100 1931 11 03 02 35 55. ISC

6.0 148.000 20.000 130 1932 01 05 11 22 25. ISC

6.0 146.000 13.500 90 1932 02 13 19 12 30. ISC

6.8 147.460 15.733 35 1932 03 19 10 59 43.4 EVCEHB|6.8UKG&R

6.5 142.500 23.000 140 1932 09 02 12 56 30. ISC

6.0 146.500 16.500 170 1932 11 03 19 42 53. ISC

6.5 143.500 22.000 280 1932 12 26 22 31 06. ISC

6.2 145.500 22.000 200 1933 05 21 21 54 05. ISC

6.0 139.000 11.000 35 1933 07 18 19 05 22. ISC

6.0 146.000 18.000 70 1933 11 07 06 39 58. ISC

6.5 145.000 18.500 570 1934 02 04 03 10 45. ISC

7.2 144.067 22.878 35 1934 02 24 06 23 46.8 EVCEHB|7.2MwP&S

6.5 146.000 18.000 210 1934 10 21 17 53 44. ISC
35

6.0 147.000 18.500 35 1934 12 25 06 27 20. ISC

6.0 146.000 19.000 200 1935 07 29 04 12 49. ISC

6.9 141.705 12.322 35 1935 10 18 11 05 27.1 EVCEHB|6.9MsABE1

6.5 143.500 21.500 270 1935 12 14 12 47 29. ISC

6.8 145.414 13.203 35 1936 10 29 18 38 50.3 EVCEHB|6.8UKPAS

6.2 147.000 17.500 170 1936 11 12 02 15 58. ISC

6.2 145.750 19.250 190 1937 05 05 21 15 39. ISC

6.5 145.500 19.000 120 1937 08 08 10 12 03. ISC

6.2 146.000 20.500 140 1937 09 12 11 54 53. ISC

6.2 143.500 12.000 90 1939 11 09 16 06 20. ISC

7.3 148.218 17.244 31 1940 01 17 01 14 58.7 EVCEHB|7.3mBABE1

6.0 146.000 18.000 150 1940 08 15 21 23 28. ISC

7.3 147.527 18.140 35 1940 12 28 16 37 46.6 EVCEHB|7.3mBABE1

6.2 146.000 15.500 35 1941 07 26 20 11 19. ISC

6.8 148.008 14.548 49 1942 06 14 03 09 58.0 EVCEHB|7.0mBABE1

7.0 140.101 9.123 35 1942 06 18 09 31 00.9 EVCEHB|7.0MsABE1

6.8 142.000 9.500 0 1943 03 15 04 47 56. EVCG&R|6.8UKG&R

6.7 146.000 19.000 170 1943 04 09 08 48 59. EVCG&R|6.9mBABE1

6.9 143.000 13.000 110 1944 08 15 11 47 40. EVCG&R|6.9UKG&R

6.8 146.500 14.500 60 1944 12 04 20 34 34. EVCG&R|6.8UKG&R

7.0 146.500 17.500 120 1945 07 15 05 35 13. EVCG&R|7.1mBABE1

6.9 145.500 21.500 0 1947 06 13 20 24 49. EVCG&R|6.9MsABE1

6.8 142.500 22.000 240 1948 12 15 19 11 28. EVCG&R|6.8UKG&R

6.6 148.000 16.000 50 1949 07 02 19 57 13. EVCG&R|6.6MsABE1

6.8 147.600 16.400 191 1949 07 25 03 50 41. EVCISS|6.8UKPAS

7.0 143.500 13.000 90 1950 05 25 18 35 07. EVCG&R|7.1mBABE1

6.7 146.000 18.500 64 1953 02 14 21 48 16. EVCISS|6.7MsROTHE

6.9 145.600 17.800 192 1953 07 26 16 53 20. EVCISS|6.9MsROTHE

6.8 145.006 18.819 380 1956 02 01 13 41 52.6 EVCEHB|7.0mBABE1

6.7 144.267 21.776 107 1957 05 21 01 12 04.8 EVCEHB|6.9mBABE3

6.8 143.910 13.090 151 1957 06 10 03 13 17. EVCISS|6.8UKPAS

6.8 146.090 13.430 0 1959 01 13 01 15 27. EVCISS|6.8UKPAS

6.9 145.066 19.134 693 1962 03 07 11 01 06.2 EVCEHB|6.9MwHRV

6.3 144.637 11.719 33 1964 07 04 10 49 30.5 EVCEHB|6.0mbISC

6.5 146.309 20.764 44 1966 02 10 14 21 12.6 EVCEHB|6.5UKPAS

6.4 146.347 13.832 18 1966 05 20 09 14 44.3 EVCEHB|6.4UKPAS

7.1 139.641 11.302 50 1966 06 07 13 59 37.8 EVCEHB|7.1UKB&D

6.3 145.949 22.141 12 1966 10 27 14 21 03.7 EVCEHB|6.0mbISC

6.5 140.840 12.189 71 1967 08 26 00 36 48.1 EVCEHB|6.1mbISC

6.2 143.107 21.594 306 1969 08 15 08 41 54.8 EVCEHB|6.2MwHRV

6.2 143.857 12.169 37 1970 03 04 03 30 37.7 EVCEHB|6.2MsUSCGS

6.1 145.370 18.583 621 1970 05 10 20 05 18.8 EVCEHB|6.1MwHRV

6.4 147.702 17.705 59 1970 09 01 05 11 19.9 EVCEHB|6.4MsUSCGS
36

6.3 142.549 11.857 16 1971 10 23 22 33 31. EVCEHB|6.3MsNEIS

6.4 142.442 11.900 33 1971 10 24 01 37 32.2 EVCEHB|6.4MsNEIS

6.0 144.274 12.616 71 1974 03 24 04 21 06.4 EVCEHB|5.8mbISC

7.0 144.813 13.851 108 1975 11 01 01 17 34.7 EVCEHB|7.1mBABE3

6.6 145.970 10.532 13 1975 11 30 13 32 33.7 EVCEHB|6.6UKPAS

6.4 145.448 18.814 216 1977 05 24 10 23 25.7 EVCEHB|6.4MwHRV

6.2 143.215 11.829 15 1977 09 17 05 23 28.9 EVCEHB|6.2MwHRV

6.7 145.437 19.015 241 1979 05 13 06 26 08.2 EVCEHB|6.7MwHRV

7.0 145.409 18.521 583 1979 10 17 05 43 02.8 EVCEHB|7.0MwHRV

6.0 145.522 16.578 316 1981 06 07 21 40 37.2 EVCEHB|6.0MwHRV

6.3 143.546 22.315 114 1982 02 27 16 16 54.3 EVCEHB|6.3MwHRV

6.1 144.974 13.867 109 1983 02 13 06 35 31.5 EVCEHB|6.1MwHRV

6.0 140.983 10.561 39 1983 02 14 00 23 21.2 EVCEHB|6.0MwHRV

6.3 145.854 18.120 159 1983 09 14 11 25 02.3 EVCEHB|6.3MwHRV

6.1 145.372 13.876 104 1984 09 22 18 10 37.4 EVCEHB|6.1MwHRV

6.0 143.334 22.609 121 1984 12 04 07 43 23.1 PDE

6.0 144.314 12.314 28 1985 05 31 07 24 34.9 EVCEHB|6.0MwHRV

6.0 140.277 11.157 27 1985 08 11 00 19 03.5 EVCEHB|6.0MwHRV

6.6 146.368 19.366 51 1986 09 16 18 20 19.6 EVCEHB|6.6MwHRV

6.1 147.003 18.796 26 1987 04 14 02 08 15.6 EVCEHB|6.1MwHRV

6.3 145.894 18.501 126 1988 05 04 23 47 04.2 EVCEHB|6.3MwHRV

6.3 145.767 17.466 164 1989 12 23 11 24 04.4 EVCEHB|6.3MwHRV

7.4 147.596 15.150 18 1990 04 05 21 12 38.3 EVCEHB|7.4MwHRV

6.0 144.807 14.068 155 1991 02 10 14 15 21.2 EVCEHB|6.0MwHRV

6.0 145.654 18.541 195 1991 10 26 02 27 33.3 EVCEHB|6.0MwHRV

6.2 145.786 18.368 154 1993 01 18 01 18 08.0 EVCEHB|6.2MwHRV

6.4 146.630 15.782 29 1993 06 06 13 23 24.9 EVCEHB|6.4MwHRV

7.8 144.838 12.983 62 1993 08 08 08 34 26.7 EVCEHB|7.8MwHRV

6.0 145.699 13.173 27 1993 08 11 14 17 40.2 EVCEHB|6.0MwHRV

6.3 145.421 18.506 222 1994 12 30 15 12 27.0 EVCEHB|6.3MwHRV

6.2 142.748 21.744 271 1995 04 08 17 45 14.5 EVCEHB|6.2MwHRV

7.1 145.279 18.814 598 1995 08 23 07 06 04.4 EVCEHB|7.1MwHRV

6.5 145.780 17.368 151 1996 06 09 01 12 18.8 EVCEHB|6.5MwHRV

6.5 144.992 13.991 101 1997 04 23 19 44 29.9 EVCEHB|6.5MwHRV

6.0 144.798 13.208 29 1997 05 09 09 06 39.0 EVCEHB|6.0MwHRV

6.3 148.202 17.099 19 1998 08 30 01 48 08.4 EVCEHB|6.3MwHRV

6.0 143.209 11.858 12 1998 09 22 01 16 57.5 EVCEHB|6.0MwHRV

6.0 144.720 12.867 48 1999 12 19 00 48 38.3 EVCEHB|6.0MwHRV

6.2 144.808 13.831 114 2000 02 26 08 11 47.9 EVCEHB|6.2MwHRV

7.6 143.711 22.232 105 2000 03 28 11 00 20.7 EVCEHB|7.6MwHRV

6.0 147.568 17.444 14 2000 05 02 15 03 33.0 EVCEHB|6.0MwHRV

6.0 139.240 11.375 19 2000 05 26 00 30 04.7 EVCEHB|6.0MwHRV

6.2 144.856 11.748 15 2000 12 19 13 11 46.0 EVCEHB|6.2MwHRV
37

6.0 147.073 18.799 34 2001 06 15 06 17 46.9 EVCEHB|6.0MwHRV

6.5 143.040 21.632 303 2001 07 03 13 10 45.3 EVCEHB|6.5MwHRV

7.0 145.051 12.724 43 2001 10 12 15 02 19.4 EVCEHB|7.0MwHRV

7.1 144.619 13.088 85 2002 04 26 16 06 07. PDE|7.10mwGS

6.1 140.690 10.985 33 2002 06 10 22 48 36.2 PDE|6.10mwGS

6.5 146.199 14.101 30 2002 08 14 13 57 52.1 PDE|6.50mwHRV

6.0 143.246 22.321 101 2003 11 11 18 48 23.7 PDE|6.00mwGS

6.0 146.993 14.546 7 2004 10 04 19 20 34.9 PDE|6.00mwHRV

6.60 140.842 10.934 24 2005 01 16 20 17 52.7 PDE|6.60mwGS

6.30 144.715 14.080 158 2005 02 02 02 30 25.9 PDE|6.30mwHRV

6.60 145.867 16.011 142 2005 02 05 03 34 25.7 PDE|6.60mwHRV

6.00 145.801 20.134 48 2005 08 13 07 36 52.7 PDE|6.00mwHRV

6.10 140.995 12.232 22 2005 12 20 05 51 12.5 PDE|6.10mwGS

6.30 146.180 20.821 40 2006 02 14 15 27 23.3 PDE|6.30mwHRV

6.60 144.705 20.980 20 2007 01 30 21 37 44.3 PDE|6.60mwGCMT

7.50 142.668 22.013 260 2007 09 28 13 38 57.8 PDE|7.50mwGCMT

6.90 145.718 10.454 14 2007 09 30 02 08 30.1 PDE|6.90mwGS

6.10 147.148 18.730 20 2007 10 06 12 38 49.1 PDE|6.10mwGCMT

7.20 145.388 18.900 207 2007 10 31 03 30 15.9 PDE|7.20mwGS

6.80 143.181 12.516 76 2008 05 09 21 51 29.7 PDE|6.80mwGCMT

6.10 144.703 19.335 457 2010 03 08 09 47 11.6 PDE-W|6.10mwGS

6.30 145.999 11.143 13 2010 07 10 11 43 32.7 PDE-W|6.30mwUCMT

6.90 141.476 12.484 10 2010 08 13 21 19 33.0 PDE-W|6.90mwUCMT
38

Figure A1. Four seismicity cross-sections across the Mariana plate boundary. In the north (A, B) the 

Benioff zone dips steeply and earthquakes occur down to about 700 kilometers. Southwestward (C, D) 

the Benioff zone dips more shallowly and very deep earthquakes have not been observed. (See fig. 1 

in text for explanation of geographic and tectonic features.—Continued
39

Figure A1. Four seismicity cross-sections across the Mariana plate boundary. In the north (A, B) the 

Benioff zone dips steeply and earthquakes occur down to about 700 kilometers. Southwestward (C, D) 

the Benioff zone dips more shallowly and very deep earthquakes have not been observed. (See fig. 1 

in text for explanation of geographic and tectonic.—Continued
40

Figure A1. Four seismicity cross-sections across the Mariana plate boundary. In the north (A, B) the 

Benioff zone dips steeply and earthquakes occur down to about 700 kilometers. Southwestward (C, D) 

the Benioff zone dips more shallowly and very deep earthquakes have not been observed. (See fig. 1 

in text for explanation of geographic and tectonic.—Continued
41

Figure A1. Four seismicity cross-sections across the Mariana plate boundary. In the north (A, B) the 

Benioff zone dips steeply and earthquakes occur down to about 700 kilometers. Southwestward (C, D) 

the Benioff zone dips more shallowly and very deep earthquakes have not been observed. (See fig. 1 

in text for explanation of geographic and tectonic.
42

Figure A2. Maps of earthquakes from three sources: A, Engdahl-Villaseñor Centennial catalog (Engdahl 

and Villaseñor, 2002); B, International Seismological Centre catalog (International Seismological 

Centre, 2011); and C, Preliminary Determination of Epicenters catalog (U.S. Geological Survey, 

2012b). (See fig. 1 for explanation of geographic and tectonic features; see fig. 3 for map of final 

declustered catalog used in the hazard analysis.)—Continued
43

Figure A2. Maps of earthquakes from three sources: A, Engdahl-Villaseñor Centennial catalog (Engdahl 

and Villaseñor, 2002); B, International Seismological Centre catalog (International Seismological 

Centre, 2011); and C, Preliminary Determination of Epicenters catalog (U.S. Geological Survey, 

2012b). (See fig. 1 for explanation of geographic and tectonic features; see fig. 3 for map of final 

declustered catalog used in the hazard analysis.)—Continued
44

Figure A2. Maps of earthquakes from three sources: A, Engdahl-Villaseñor Centennial catalog (Engdahl 

and Villaseñor, 2002); B, International Seismological Centre catalog (International Seismological 

Centre, 2011); and C, Preliminary Determination of Epicenters catalog (U.S. Geological Survey, 

2012b). (See fig. 1 for explanation of geographic and tectonic features; see fig. 3 for map of final 

declustered catalog used in the hazard analysis.)
45

Figure A3. Maps of probabilistic peak ground acceleration for 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 

years showing hazard from individual sources: A, all modeled sources (same as fig. 6A); B, 0–40-km-deep 

seismicity, 50 percent Next Generation Attenuation + 50 percent Zhao-crustal attenuation[0.5-nga+0.5-

zhaoC]; C, 41–80-km-deep seismicity, 70 percent Zhao-inslab as-published + 30 percent Zhao-inslab 

Pacific-adjusted attenuation plus epistemic [0.7-zhaoIS+0.3-zhaoIS′+epistemic]; D, 81–120-km-deep 

seismicity, same attenuation as C; E, 121–160-km-deep seismicity, same attenuation as C; F, 161–700-

km-deep seismicity, same attenuation as C; G, megathrust with 80 percent MWmax=8 + 20 percent 

MWmax=9, Zhao interface attenuation plus epistemic [0.8-Mmax8+0.2-Mmax9, zhaoIF+epistemic]; H, 

Guam crustal faults, Next Generation Attenuation plus epistemic [nga+epistemic] (note change in scale). 

[PGA, eak ground acceleration; %g, percent of gravitational acceleraton; 02px50, 2 percent probability of 

exceedance in 50 years; km, kilometer; MWmax, maximum moment magnitude]—Continued
46

Figure A3. Maps of probabilistic peak ground acceleration for 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 

years showing hazard from individual sources: A, all modeled sources (same as fig. 6A); B, 0–40-km-deep 

seismicity, 50 percent Next Generation Attenuation + 50 percent Zhao-crustal attenuation[0.5-nga+0.5-

zhaoC]; C, 41–80-km-deep seismicity, 70 percent Zhao-inslab as-published + 30 percent Zhao-inslab 

Pacific-adjusted attenuation plus epistemic [0.7-zhaoIS+0.3-zhaoIS′+epistemic]; D, 81–120-km-deep 

seismicity, same attenuation as C; E, 121–160-km-deep seismicity, same attenuation as C; F, 161–700-

km-deep seismicity, same attenuation as C; G, megathrust with 80 percent MWmax=8 + 20 percent 

MWmax=9, Zhao interface attenuation plus epistemic [0.8-Mmax8+0.2-Mmax9, zhaoIF+epistemic]; H, 

Guam crustal faults, Next Generation Attenuation plus epistemic [nga+epistemic] (note change in scale). 

[PGA, eak ground acceleration; %g, percent of gravitational acceleraton; 02px50, 2 percent probability of 

exceedance in 50 years; km, kilometer; MWmax, maximum moment magnitude]—Continued
47

Figure A3. Maps of probabilistic peak ground acceleration for 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 

years showing hazard from individual sources: A, all modeled sources (same as fig. 6A); B, 0–40-km-deep 

seismicity, 50 percent Next Generation Attenuation + 50 percent Zhao-crustal attenuation[0.5-nga+0.5-

zhaoC]; C, 41–80-km-deep seismicity, 70 percent Zhao-inslab as-published + 30 percent Zhao-inslab 

Pacific-adjusted attenuation plus epistemic [0.7-zhaoIS+0.3-zhaoIS′+epistemic]; D, 81–120-km-deep 

seismicity, same attenuation as C; E, 121–160-km-deep seismicity, same attenuation as C; F, 161–700-

km-deep seismicity, same attenuation as C; G, megathrust with 80 percent MWmax=8 + 20 percent 

MWmax=9, Zhao interface attenuation plus epistemic [0.8-Mmax8+0.2-Mmax9, zhaoIF+epistemic]; H, 

Guam crustal faults, Next Generation Attenuation plus epistemic [nga+epistemic] (note change in scale). 

[PGA, eak ground acceleration; %g, percent of gravitational acceleraton; 02px50, 2 percent probability of 

exceedance in 50 years; km, kilometer; MWmax, maximum moment magnitude]—Continued
48

Figure A3. Maps of probabilistic peak ground acceleration for 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 

years showing hazard from individual sources: A, all modeled sources (same as fig. 6A); B, 0–40-km-deep 

seismicity, 50 percent Next Generation Attenuation + 50 percent Zhao-crustal attenuation[0.5-nga+0.5-

zhaoC]; C, 41–80-km-deep seismicity, 70 percent Zhao-inslab as-published + 30 percent Zhao-inslab 

Pacific-adjusted attenuation plus epistemic [0.7-zhaoIS+0.3-zhaoIS′+epistemic]; D, 81–120-km-deep 

seismicity, same attenuation as C; E, 121–160-km-deep seismicity, same attenuation as C; F, 161–700-

km-deep seismicity, same attenuation as C; G, megathrust with 80 percent MWmax=8 + 20 percent 

MWmax=9, Zhao interface attenuation plus epistemic [0.8-Mmax8+0.2-Mmax9, zhaoIF+epistemic]; H, 

Guam crustal faults, Next Generation Attenuation plus epistemic [nga+epistemic] (note change in scale). 

[PGA, eak ground acceleration; %g, percent of gravitational acceleraton; 02px50, 2 percent probability of 

exceedance in 50 years; km, kilometer; MWmax, maximum moment magnitude]—Continued
49

Figure A3. Maps of probabilistic peak ground acceleration for 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 

years showing hazard from individual sources: A, all modeled sources (same as fig. 6A); B, 0–40-km-deep 

seismicity, 50 percent Next Generation Attenuation + 50 percent Zhao-crustal attenuation[0.5-nga+0.5-

zhaoC]; C, 41–80-km-deep seismicity, 70 percent Zhao-inslab as-published + 30 percent Zhao-inslab 

Pacific-adjusted attenuation plus epistemic [0.7-zhaoIS+0.3-zhaoIS′+epistemic]; D, 81–120-km-deep 

seismicity, same attenuation as C; E, 121–160-km-deep seismicity, same attenuation as C; F, 161–700-

km-deep seismicity, same attenuation as C; G, megathrust with 80 percent MWmax=8 + 20 percent 

MWmax=9, Zhao interface attenuation plus epistemic [0.8-Mmax8+0.2-Mmax9, zhaoIF+epistemic]; H, 

Guam crustal faults, Next Generation Attenuation plus epistemic [nga+epistemic] (note change in scale). 

[PGA, eak ground acceleration; %g, percent of gravitational acceleraton; 02px50, 2 percent probability of 

exceedance in 50 years; km, kilometer; MWmax, maximum moment magnitude]—Continued
50

Figure A3. Maps of probabilistic peak ground acceleration for 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 

years showing hazard from individual sources: A, all modeled sources (same as fig. 6A); B, 0–40-km-deep 

seismicity, 50 percent Next Generation Attenuation + 50 percent Zhao-crustal attenuation[0.5-nga+0.5-

zhaoC]; C, 41–80-km-deep seismicity, 70 percent Zhao-inslab as-published + 30 percent Zhao-inslab 

Pacific-adjusted attenuation plus epistemic [0.7-zhaoIS+0.3-zhaoIS′+epistemic]; D, 81–120-km-deep 

seismicity, same attenuation as C; E, 121–160-km-deep seismicity, same attenuation as C; F, 161–700-

km-deep seismicity, same attenuation as C; G, megathrust with 80 percent MWmax=8 + 20 percent 

MWmax=9, Zhao interface attenuation plus epistemic [0.8-Mmax8+0.2-Mmax9, zhaoIF+epistemic]; H, 

Guam crustal faults, Next Generation Attenuation plus epistemic [nga+epistemic] (note change in scale). 

[PGA, eak ground acceleration; %g, percent of gravitational acceleraton; 02px50, 2 percent probability of 

exceedance in 50 years; km, kilometer; MWmax, maximum moment magnitude]—Continued
51

Figure A3. Maps of probabilistic peak ground acceleration for 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 

years showing hazard from individual sources: A, all modeled sources (same as fig. 6A); B, 0–40-km-deep 

seismicity, 50 percent Next Generation Attenuation + 50 percent Zhao-crustal attenuation[0.5-nga+0.5-

zhaoC]; C, 41–80-km-deep seismicity, 70 percent Zhao-inslab as-published + 30 percent Zhao-inslab 

Pacific-adjusted attenuation plus epistemic [0.7-zhaoIS+0.3-zhaoIS′+epistemic]; D, 81–120-km-deep 

seismicity, same attenuation as C; E, 121–160-km-deep seismicity, same attenuation as C; F, 161–700-

km-deep seismicity, same attenuation as C; G, megathrust with 80 percent MWmax=8 + 20 percent 

MWmax=9, Zhao interface attenuation plus epistemic [0.8-Mmax8+0.2-Mmax9, zhaoIF+epistemic]; H, 

Guam crustal faults, Next Generation Attenuation plus epistemic [nga+epistemic] (note change in scale). 

[PGA, eak ground acceleration; %g, percent of gravitational acceleraton; 02px50, 2 percent probability of 

exceedance in 50 years; km, kilometer; MWmax, maximum moment magnitude]—Continued
52

Figure A3. Maps of probabilistic peak ground acceleration for 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 

years showing hazard from individual sources: A, all modeled sources (same as fig. 6A); B, 0–40-km-deep 

seismicity, 50 percent Next Generation Attenuation + 50 percent Zhao-crustal attenuation[0.5-nga+0.5-

zhaoC]; C, 41–80-km-deep seismicity, 70 percent Zhao-inslab as-published + 30 percent Zhao-inslab 

Pacific-adjusted attenuation plus epistemic [0.7-zhaoIS+0.3-zhaoIS′+epistemic]; D, 81–120-km-deep 

seismicity, same attenuation as C; E, 121–160-km-deep seismicity, same attenuation as C; F, 161–700-

km-deep seismicity, same attenuation as C; G, megathrust with 80 percent MWmax=8 + 20 percent 

MWmax=9, Zhao interface attenuation plus epistemic [0.8-Mmax8+0.2-Mmax9, zhaoIF+epistemic]; H, 

Guam crustal faults, Next Generation Attenuation plus epistemic [nga+epistemic] (note change in scale). 

[PGA, eak ground acceleration; %g, percent of gravitational acceleraton; 02px50, 2 percent probability of 

exceedance in 50 years; km, kilometer; MWmax, maximum moment magnitude]