Nicolsky, D.J.
Suleimani, E.N.
Haeussler, P.J.
Ryan, H.F.
Koehler, R.D.
Combellick, R.A.
Hansen, R.A.
2013
Tsunami inundation maps of Port Valdez, Alaska
digital data, report, map sheet
Report of Investigation
RI 2013-1
Fairbanks, Alaska, United States
Alaska Division of Geological Geophysical Surveys
77 p., 1 sheet, scale 1:12,500.
http://dx.doi.org/10.14509/25055
We evaluate potential tsunami hazards for the city of Valdez and numerically model the extent of inundation from tsunamis generated by earthquake and landslide sources. Tsunami scenarios include a repeat of the tsunami triggered by the 1964 Great Alaska Earthquake, as well as hypothetical tsunamis generated by an extended 1964 rupture, a Cascadia megathrust earthquake, and earthquakes from the Prince William Sound and Kodiak asperities of the 1964 rupture. Local underwater landslide events in Port Valdez are also considered as credible tsunamigenic scenarios. Results of numerical modeling are verified by simulating the tectonic and landslide-generated tsunamis in Port Valdez observed during the 1964 earthquake. The results of these tsunami scenarios are intended to provide guidance to local emergency management agencies in tsunami hazard assessment, evacuation planning, and public education for reducing future casualties and damage from tsunamis.
Large seismic events occurring in the vicinity of the Alaska Peninsula, Aleutian Islands, and Gulf of Alaska have a very high potential for generating both local and Pacific-wide tsunamis. Saving lives and property depends on how well a community is prepared, which makes it essential to estimate the potential flooding of the coastal zone in the case of a local or distant tsunami. The Alaska Tsunami Mapping Team (ATMT) participates in the National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program (NTHMP) by evaluating and mapping potential inundation of selected parts of the Alaska coastline using numerical modeling of tsunami wave dynamics. The communities are selected for inundation modeling in coordination with the Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (DHSEM) with consideration for location, infrastructure, availability and quality of bathymetric and topographic data, and community involvement. The Port Valdez tsunami inundation maps described in the associated manuscript represent the results of the continuous effort of state and federal agencies to produce inundation maps for many Alaska coastal communities.
The DGGS metadata standard extends the FGDC standard to include elements that are required to facilitate our internal data management. These elements, referred to as "layers," group and describe files that have intrinsic logical or topological relationships. Attribute information for each layer is included in this metadata file under the "Entity_and_Attribute_Information" section. The metadata "layer" provides the metadata, codesets, or other documentation files applicable to all layers. The data layer(s) are titled: >mhhw-shoreline: The present day shoreline (mean higher high water - MHHW) of the Port Valdez study area; see Grid Development and Data Sources section of the associated manuscript to learn more about how this file was created.
>hypothetical-composite-line: Estimated, "maximum credible scenario" inundation line that encompasses the maximum extent of flooding based on model simulation of all credible source scenarios and historical observations. The "maximum credible scenario" inundation line becomes a basis for local tsunami hazard planning and development of evacuation maps.
>hypothetical-composite-flow-depth: Raster image depicting maximum composite flow depths over dry land.
>tectonic-scenario-01: Scenario 1. Repeat of the 1964 event: Source function based on coseismic deformation model by Johnson and others (1996);
>tectonic-scenario-02: Scenario 2. Repeat of the 1964 event: Source function based on coseismic deformation model by Suito and Freymueller (2009) (SDM);
>tectonic-scenario-03: Scenario 3. Multi-Segment JDM event: Source function based on extension of the JDM;
>tectonic-scenario-04: Scenario 4. Multi-Segment SDM event: Source function based on extension of the SDM;
>tectonic-scenario-05: Scenario 5. Rupture of the Yakutat-Yakataga segment;
>tectonic-scenario-06: Scenario 6. Rupture of the Cascadia zone, including portions of the margin along the British Columbia and northern California shores;
>tectonic-scenario-07: Scenario 7. Modified 1964 event: Prince William Sound asperity of the JDM;
>tectonic-scenario-08: Scenario 8. Modified 1964 event: Kodiak asperity of the JDM;
>tectonic-scenario-09: Scenario 9. Modified 1964 event: Prince William Sound asperity of the SDM;
>tectonic-scenario-10: Scenario 10. Modified 1964 event: Kodiak asperity of the SDM;
>tectonic-scenario-11: Scenario 11. Modified multi-segment JDM event: Rupture of the PWS and YY segments; >tectonic-scenario-12: Scenario 12. Modified multi-segment SDM event: Rupture of the PWS and YY segments;
>tectonic-scenario-13: Scenario 13. Mw8.8 earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska region: 17-30 km (10.5-18.6 mi), uniform slip along strike;
>tectonic-scenario-14: Scenario 14. Mw8.8 earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska region: 13-28 km (8.1-17.4 mi), variable slip along strike;
>tectonic-scenario-15: Scenario 15. Mw 8.8 earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska region: 12-29 km (7.5-18 mi), variable slip along strike;
>landslide-scenario-16: Scenario 16. Repeat of the 1964-type event: An underwater slide at the head of Port Valdez (HPV slide);
>landslide-scenario-17: Scenario 17. Repeat of the 1964-type event: An underwater slide at the Shoup Bay moraine (SBM slide);
>landslide-scenario-18: Scenario 18. Hypothetical event: An underwater slide offshore of Mineral Creek (MC slide);
>landslide-scenario-19: Scenario 19. Hypothetical event: An underwater slide offshore of Gold Creek (GC slide);
>landslide-scenario-20: Scenario 20. Hypothetical event: An underwater slide offshore of Lowe River (LR slide);
>landslide-scenario-21: Scenario 21. Hypothetical event: An underwater slide at Shoup Bay moraine (SBM residual slide);
>landslide-scenario-22: Scenario 22. Hypothetical event: Simultaneous failure of underwater slide complexes described by scenarios 13-16 (Combined slide);
2009
2013
ground condition
none planned
-146.690132
-146.166672
61.148882
61.065704
ISO 19115 Topic Category
geoscientificInformation
Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys
Landslide
Earthquake Related Slope Failure
Active Fault
Alaska Earthquake 1964
Bathymetry
Coastal
Coastal and River
Earthquake
Emergency Preparedness
Engineering
Engineering Geology
Faulting
Faults
Flood
Geologic Hazards
Geology
Hazards
Inundation
Modeling
Seismic Hazards
Tides
Tsunami
Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys
Valdez Quadrangle
This report, map, and/or dataset is available directly from the State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys (see contact information below).
This dataset includes results of numerical modeling of earthquake-generated tsunami waves for a specific community. Modeling was completed using the best information and tsunami modeling software available at the time of analysis. They are numerical solutions and, while they are believed to be accurate, their ultimate accuracy during an actual tsunami will depend on the specifics of earth deformations, on-land construction, tide level, and other parameters at the time of the tsunami. Actual areas of inundation may differ from areas shown in this dataset. Landslide tsunami sources may not be included in the modeling due to unknown potential impact of such events on a given community; please refer to accompanying report for more information on tsunami sources used for this study. The limits of inundation shown should only be used as a general guideline for emergency planning and response action in the event of a major tsunamigenic earthquake. These results are not intended for any other use, including land-use regulation or actuarial purposes. Any hard copies or published datasets utilizing these datasets shall clearly indicate their source. If the user has modified the data in any way, the user is obligated to describe the types of modifications the user has made. The user specifically agrees not to misrepresent these datasets, nor to imply that changes made by the user were approved by the State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys. The State of Alaska makes no express or implied warranties (including warranties for merchantability and fitness) with respect to the character, functions, or capabilities of the electronic data or products or their appropriateness for any user's purposes. In no event will the State of Alaska be liable for any incidental, indirect, special, consequential, or other damages suffered by the user or any other person or entity whether from the use of the electronic services or products or any failure thereof or otherwise. In no event will the State of Alaska's liability to the Requestor or anyone else exceed the fee paid for the electronic service or product.
Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys
GIS Manager
mailing and physical
3354 College Road
Fairbanks
AK
99709-3707
USA
(907)451-5020
dggsgis@alaska.gov
8 am to 4:30 pm, Monday through Friday, except State holidays
This project was supported by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) under Reimbursable Service Agreement ADN 0931000 with State of Alaska's Division of Homeland Security & Emergency Management. Some of the research in this publication is sponsored by the University of Alaska Fairbanks Cooperative Institute for Alaska Research with funds from NOAA under cooperative agreement NA08OAR4320751 with the University of Alaska. Numerical calculations for this work were supported by a grant of High Performance Computing (HPC) resources from the Arctic Region Supercomputing Center (ARSC) at the University of Alaska Fairbanks. Reviews by Rob Witter and one anonymous reviewer improved the report and maps. We would like to thank K. Labay and D. West for the development of the high-resolution DEM of Port Valdez; and N. Ruppert, D. Christensen, and J. Freymueller for their help in developing the hypothetical scenarios.
Suleimani, E.N.
Nicolsky, D.J.
Koehler, R.D.
2013
Tsunami inundation maps of Sitka, Alaska
digital data, report, map sheet
Report of Investigation
RI 2013-3
Fairbanks, Alaska, United States
Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys
76 p., 1 sheet, scale 1:250,000.
http://dx.doi.org/10.14509/26671
Nicolsky, D.J.
Suleimani, E.N.
Combellick, R.A.
Hansen, R.A.
2011
Tsunami inundation maps of Whittier and western Passage Canal, Alaska
Report of Investigation
RI 2011-7
Fairbanks, Alaska, United States
Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys
65 p
http://dx.doi.org/10.14509/23244
Suleimani, E.N.
Combellick, R.A.
Marriott, D.
Hansen, R.A.
Venturato, A.J.
Newman, J.C.
2005
Tsunami hazard maps of the Homer and Seldovia areas, Alaska
Report of Investigation
RI 2005-2
Fairbanks, Alaska, United States
Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys
28 p., 2 sheets, scale 1:12,500
http://dx.doi.org/10.14509/14474
Suleimani, E.N.
Hansen, R.A.
Combellick, R.A.
Carver, G.A.
2002
Tsunami hazard maps of the Kodiak area, Alaska
Report of Investigation
RI 2002-1
Fairbanks, Alaska, United States
Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys
16 p., 4 sheets, scale 1:12,500
http://dx.doi.org/10.14509/2860
Suleimani, E.N.
Nicolsky, D.J.
West, D.A.
Combellick, R.A.
Hansen, R.A.
2010
Tsunami inundation maps of Seward and northern Resurrection Bay, Alaska
Report of Investigation
RI 2010-1
Fairbanks, Alaska, United States
Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys
47 p., 3 sheets, scale 1:12,500
http://dx.doi.org/10.14509/21001
The maps showing the results of our modeling have been completed using the best information available, and are believed to be accurate; however, their preparation required many assumptions. We considered several tectonic and landslide scenarios and provide an estimate of maximum credible tsunami inundation. Actual conditions during a tsunami event may vary from those considered, so the accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The limits of inundation shown should be used only as a guideline for emergency planning and response action. Actual areas inundated will depend on specifics of the earth deformations, on-land construction, and tide level, and they may differ from areas shown by this data. The information is intended to permit state and local agencies to plan emergency evacuation and tsunami response actions in the event of a major tsunamigenic earthquake. These results are not intended for land-use regulation or building-code development. Users should review the accompanying report, particularly the Sources of Errors and Uncertainties section, for a detailed discussion of limitations of the methods used to generate the various inundation models.
Results of numerical modeling were verified by simulating the tectonic and landslide-generated tsunamis in Port Valdez observed during the 1964 earthquake. Inundation lines are visually inspected using GIS software for identification of anomalous elevations or data inconsistencies. See text report for detailed explanation of the tests used to determine the fidelity among the various data sources that were used to generate this dataset.
The dataset contains tsunami inundation limits for 15 tectonic and 7 landslide source scenarios. We conducted all model runs using bathymetric data that correspond to Mean Higher High Water so that the resulting maximum inundation line represents a maximum credible scenario of tsunami occurrence at high tide. Users of this dataset should note that the inundation figures presented in printed map and report focus on populated areas within the Port of Valdez project area; whereas the digital data extends throughout the entire project area.
The extent of tsunami inundation in Port Valdez was calculated through numerical modeling of water waves over bathymetry and topography. To compute a detailed map of potential tsunami inundation triggered by local and distant earthquakes, we employ a series of nested computational grids. A nested grid allows for higher resolution in areas where it is needed, without expending computer resources in areas where it is not. The computational grid was based on digital elevation models (DEMs) obtained from various U.S. federal and academic agencies. In select intertidal zones, values used to fill gaps between DEM datasets were derived from comparison of Landsat images and historic records. The highest level of horizontal resolution of the grid used for inundation modeling is about 15 m (49 ft). This scale is mostly limited by the computational resources necessary to compute the tsunami inundation at the higher resolution. The 15 m (49 ft) resolution is high enough to describe major relief features, but small topographic features, buildings, and other facilities cannot be accurately resolved by the existing model. For additional information please reference the Grid Development and Data Sources section of the associated manuscript.
The vertical accuracy of the inundation modeling is dependent on the accuracy and resolution of the digital elevation models (DEMs) and tidal datum values that were used to compile the computational grid. Prior to scenario modeling, bathymetric data were shifted to use Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) as the vertical datum. The depths of inundation shown should be used only as a guideline for emergency planning and response action. Actual inundation water depth will depend on specifics of the earth deformations, on-land construction, and tide level, and they may differ from areas shown by this data. The information is intended to permit state and local agencies to plan emergency evacuation and tsunami response actions in the event of a major tsunamigenic earthquake. These results are not intended for land-use regulation or building-code development. For additional information please reference the Grid Development and Data Sources section of the associated manuscript.
Caldwell, R.J.
Eakins, B.W.
Lim, E.
2011
Digital elevation models of Prince William Sound, Alaska-Procedures, Data Sources and Analysis
NOAA Technical Memorandum
NESDIS NGDC-40
Boulder, Colorado
National Geophysical Data Center, Marine Geology and Geophysics Division
digital data
2011
publication date
Caldwell, R.J. and others, 2011
Development of nested grids
Coulter, H.W.
Migliaccio, R.R.
1966
Effects of the earthquake of March 27, 1964 at Valdez, Alaska
Professional Paper
P 542-C
United States
U.S. Geological Survey
p. C1-C36, 3 sheets
http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/3879
paper
1966
publication date
Coulter, H.W. and Migliaccio, R.R., 1966
Model verification
Johnson, J.M.
Satake, Kenji
Holdahl, S.R.
Sauber, Jeanne
1996
The 1964 Prince William Sound earthquake-Joint inversion of tsunami waveforms and geodetic data
Journal of Geophysical Research
v. 101, no. B1
Washington, DC, United States
American Geophysical Union
paper
1996
publication date
Johnson, J.M. and others, 1996
Model verification
Nicolsky, D.J
Suleimani, E.N
Hansen, R.A
2011
Validation and verification of a numerical model for tsunami propagation and runup
Pure and Applied Geophysics
v. 168
Switzerland
Birkhauser Geoscience
paper
2011
publication date
Nicolsky, D.J and others, 2011
Model validation
Plafker, George
Kachadoorian, Reuben
Eckel, E.B.
Mayo, L.R.
1969
Effects of the earthquake of March 27, 1964 on various communities
Professional Paper
P 542-G
United States
U.S. Geological Survey
p. G1-G50, 2 sheets, scale 1:250,000
http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/pubs/id/3883
250000
paper
1969
publication date
Plafker, George and others, 1969
Model verification
Ryan, H.F
Lee, H.J
Haeussler, P.J
Alexander, C.R
Kayen, R.E
2010
Historic and paleo-submarine landslide deposits imaged beneath Port Valdez, Alaska - Implications for tsunami generation in a glacial fiord, in Mosher, D.C. and others, eds., Submarine Mass Movements and their Consequences
Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research
Vol. 28
Dordrecht - Boston - London, International
Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
paper
2010
publication date
Ryan, H.F and others, 2010
Model verification
Suito, Hisashi
Freymueller, J.T
2010
A viscoelastic and afterslip postseismic deformation model for the 1964 Alaska earthquake
Journal of Geophysical Research
v. 114, no. B11
Washington, DC, United States
American Geophysical Union
paper
2010
publication date
Suito, Hisashi and Freymueller, J.T, 2010
Model verification
Wilson, B.W
Torum, Alf
1972
Effects of the tsunamis - An engineering study, in The Great Alaska Earthquake of 1964
Washington, DC, United States
National Academy of Sciences - Engineering
paper
1972
publication date
Wilson, B.W and Torum, Alf, 1972
Model verification
Development of nested grids - Development of nested grids - To support inundation modeling of coastal areas in Alaska, we use a series of nested telescoping grids, or digital elevation models (DEMs), as input layers for tsunami inundation modeling and mapping. The topographic datasets are augmented with the LiDAR data in Port Valdez and along near-shore areas in the city of Valdez. These grids of increasing resolution allow us to propagate waves generated by both distant and local sources to Port Valdez. In order to propagate a wave from its source to various coastal locations we use embedded grids, placing a large, coarse grid in deep water and coupling it with smaller, finer grids in shallow water areas. See Methodology and data section of the associated manuscript for more detail and additional data source information.
Caldwell, R.J. and others, 2011
2009
Model validation - The numerical model that is used for simulation of tsunami wave propagation and runup has been validated through a set of analytical benchmarks, and tested against laboratory data. The model solves nonlinear shallow water equations using a finite-difference method on a staggered grid. See Methodology and data section of the associated manuscript for more detail and additional model information.
Nicolsky, D.J and others, 2011
2010
Model verification - We perform the verification of the numerical model using observations of the 1964 tsunami. We compare results of inundation modeling in Port Valdez and Valdez with observations collected shortly after the event. First, we simulate tsunami waves generated by multiple submarine slope failures using a numerical model of a viscous slide coupled with a numerical model for water waves. Then, we simulate the tectonic tsunami in Port Valdez using an output of a coseismic deformation model of the 1964 earthquake as an initial condition for water waves. The composite inundation zone is compared with the observed extent of inundation at the Old City site in Valdez. See Methodology and data and Modeling results sections of the associated manuscript for more detail and additional model information.
Coulter, H.W. and Migliaccio, R.R., 1966
Johnson, J.M. and others, 1996
Plafker, George and others, 1969
Ryan, H.F and others, 2010
Suito, Hisashi and Freymueller, J.T, 2010
Wilson, B.W and Torum, Alf, 1972
2011
Numerical simulations of hypothetical tsunami scenarios - We assess hazard related to tectonic and landslide-generated tsunamis in Port Valdez by performing model simulations for each hypothetical earthquake and landslide source scenario. Numerical results for each scenario include extent of inundation, sea level and velocity time series, and tsunami flow depth. See Modeling results section of the associated manuscript for more detail and additional information.
2012
Compilation of maximum inundation zone and maximum flow depths - We calculated maximum composite extent of inundation by combining the maximum calculated inundation extents of all scenarios. The same method was used for calculation of maximum flow depths over dry land. See Modeling results section of the associated manuscript for more detail and additional information.
2012
Calculation of the potential inundation lines - For each grid cell in the high-resolution DEM of Port Valdez, we find whether this cell was inundated by waves or stayed dry throughout the entire simulation. Then, we define a function such that it is equal to one at the center of each wet cell and is negative one at the center of each dry cell. Using a linear interpolation algorithm in Matlab, we plot a zero-value contour that delineates dry and wet cells from each other. The resultant contour line (or a collection of lines if the contour is not a simply connected) is in WGS84 datum and is directly exported to the ArcGIS.
2012
vector
World Geodetic System of 1984
World Geodetic System of 1984
6378137
298.257223563
Mean Higher High Water
1
meters
Explicit depth coordinate included with horizontal coordinates
ri2013-1-mhhw-shoreline
The present day shoreline (mean higher high water - MHHW) of the Port Valdez study area; see Grid Development and Data Sources section of the associated manuscript to learn more about how this file was created. File format: shapefile
U.S. Geological Survey and University of Alaska Fairbanks
mhhw-shoreline
ri2013-1-hypothetical-composite-line
Estimated, "maximum credible scenario" inundation line that encompasses the maximum extent of flooding based on model simulation of all credible source scenarios and historical observations. The "maximum credible scenario" inundation line becomes a basis for local tsunami hazard planning and development of evacuation maps. File format: shapefile
This report
hypothetical-composite-line
ri2013-1-hypothetical-composite-flow-depth
Raster image depicting maximum composite flow depths over dry land. Pixel values provide the modeled depth (in meters) of maximum inundation. For each grid point, the pixel value provides the modeled depth of water (in meters) over previously dry land, representing the maximum depth value of all calculated tsunami scenarios. File format: GeoTIFF
This report
hypothetical-composite-flow-depth
ri2013-1-tectonic-scenario-01
Scenario 1. Repeat of the 1964 event: Source function based on coseismic deformation model by Johnson and others (1996); File format: shapefile
This report
tectonic-scenario-01
ri2013-1-tectonic-scenario-02
Scenario 2. Repeat of the 1964 event: Source function based on coseismic deformation model by Suito and Freymueller (2009) (SDM); File format: shapefile
This report
tectonic-scenario-02
ri2013-1-tectonic-scenario-03
Scenario 3. Multi-Segment JDM event: Source function based on extension of the JDM; File format: shapefile
This report
tectonic-scenario-03
ri2013-1-tectonic-scenario-04
Scenario 4. Multi-Segment SDM event: Source function based on extension of the SDM; File format: shapefile
This report
tectonic-scenario-04
ri2013-1-tectonic-scenario-05
Scenario 5. Rupture of the Yakutat-Yakataga segment; File format: shapefile
This report
tectonic-scenario-05
ri2013-1-tectonic-scenario-06
Scenario 6. Rupture of the Cascadia zone, including portions of the margin along the British Columbia and northern California shores; File format: shapefile
This report
tectonic-scenario-06
ri2013-1-tectonic-scenario-07
Scenario 7. Modified 1964 event: Prince William Sound asperity of the JDM; File format: shapefile
This report
tectonic-scenario-07
ri2013-1-tectonic-scenario-08
Scenario 8. Modified 1964 event: Kodiak asperity of the JDM; File format: shapefile
This report
tectonic-scenario-08
ri2013-1-tectonic-scenario-09
Scenario 9. Modified 1964 event: Prince William Sound asperity of the SDM; File format: shapefile
This report
tectonic-scenario-09
ri2013-1-tectonic-scenario-10
Scenario 10. Modified 1964 event: Kodiak asperity of the SDM; File format: shapefile
This report
tectonic-scenario-10
ri2013-1-tectonic-scenario-11
Scenario 11. Modified multi-segment JDM event: Rupture of the PWS and YY segments; File format: shapefile
This report
tectonic-scenario-11
ri2013-1-tectonic-scenario-12
Scenario 12. Modified multi-segment SDM event: Rupture of the PWS and YY segments; File format: shapefile
This report
tectonic-scenario-12
ri2013-1-tectonic-scenario-13
Scenario 13. Mw8.8 earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska region: 17-30 km (10.5-18.6 mi), uniform slip along strike; File format: shapefile
This report
tectonic-scenario-13
ri2013-1-tectonic-scenario-14
Scenario 14. Mw8.8 earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska region: 13-28 km (8.1-17.4 mi), variable slip along strike; File format: shapefile
This report
tectonic-scenario-14
ri2013-1-tectonic-scenario-15
Scenario 15. Mw 8.8 earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska region: 12-29 km (7.5-18 mi), variable slip along strike; File format: shapefile
This report
tectonic-scenario-15
ri2013-1-landslide-scenario-16
Scenario 16. Repeat of the 1964-type event: An underwater slide at the head of Port Valdez (HPV slide); File format: shapefile
This report
landslide-scenario-16
ri2013-1-landslide-scenario-17
Scenario 17. Repeat of the 1964-type event: An underwater slide at the Shoup Bay moraine (SBM slide); File format: shapefile
This report
landslide-scenario-17
ri2013-1-landslide-scenario-18
Scenario 18. Hypothetical event: An underwater slide offshore of Mineral Creek (MC slide); File format: shapefile
This report
landslide-scenario-18
ri2013-1-landslide-scenario-19
Scenario 19. Hypothetical event: An underwater slide offshore of Gold Creek (GC slide); File format: shapefile
This report
landslide-scenario-19
ri2013-1-landslide-scenario-20
Scenario 20. Hypothetical event: An underwater slide offshore of Lowe River (LR slide); File format: shapefile
This report
landslide-scenario-20
ri2013-1-landslide-scenario-21
Scenario 21. Hypothetical event: An underwater slide at Shoup Bay moraine (SBM residual slide); File format: shapefile
This report
landslide-scenario-21
ri2013-1-landslide-scenario-22
Scenario 22. Hypothetical event: Simultaneous failure of underwater slide complexes described by scenarios 13-16 (Combined slide); File format: shapefile
This report
landslide-scenario-22
Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys
mailing and physical
3354 College Road
Fairbanks
AK
99709-3707
USA
(907)451-5020
(907)451-5050
dggspubs@alaska.gov
8 am to 4:30 pm, Monday through Friday, except State holidays
Please view our website (http://www.dggs.alaska.gov) for the latest information on available data. Please contact us using the e-mail address provided above when possible.
RI 2013-1
The State of Alaska makes no expressed or implied warranties (including warranties for merchantability and fitness) with respect to the character, functions, or capabilities of the electronic data or products or their appropriateness for any user's purposes. In no event will the State of Alaska be liable for any incidental, indirect, special, consequential, or other damages suffered by the user or any other person or entity whether from the use of the electronic services or products or any failure thereof or otherwise. In no event will the State of Alaska's liability to the Requestor or anyone else exceed the fee paid for the electronic service or product.
DGGS publications are available as free online downloads or you may purchase paper hard-copies or digital files on CD/DVD or other digital storage media by mail, phone, fax, or email from the DGGS Fairbanks office. To purchase this or other printed reports and maps, contact DGGS by phone (907-451-5020), e-mail (dggspubs@alaska.gov), or fax (907-451-5050). Payment accepted: Cash, check, money order, VISA, or MasterCard. Turnaround time is 1-2 weeks unless special arrangements are made and an express fee is paid. Shipping charge will be the actual cost of postage and will be added to the total amount due. Contact us for the exact shipping amount.
Contact DGGS for current pricing
vector and raster digital data
http://dx.doi.org/10.14509/25055
Free download
20131204
Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys
Metadata Manager
mailing and physical
3354 College Road
Fairbanks
AK
99709-3707
USA
(907)451-5020
FGDC Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata
FGDC-STD-001-1998
If the user has modified the data in any way they are obligated to describe the types of modifications they have performed in the supporting metadata file. User specifically agrees not to imply that changes they made were approved by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources or Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys.
http://www.dggs.alaska.gov/metadata/dggs.ext
dggs metadata extensions