@book {338, title = {Western Massachusetts Mineral Localities}, year = {1992}, publisher = {Valley Geology}, organization = {Valley Geology}, address = {Greenfield, MA}, abstract = {A compilation of fossil and mineral collecting localities, with maps, in western Massachusetts by Alan R. Plante.}, keywords = {$\#$Collecting, $\#$EducationalResources, $\#$MassGeology, $\#$MineralResources, $\#$Minerals, collecting, fossils, localities, minerals}, issn = {0-9616520-2-0}, author = {Plante, Alan R} } @proceedings {303, title = {Improving seismic hazard assessment in New England through the use of surficial geologic maps and expert analysis}, volume = {45}, year = {2013}, note = {Accession Number: 2014-021037; Conference Name: Geological Society of America, Northeastern Section, 48th annual meeting; Bretton Woods, NH, United States; Conference Date: 20130318; Language: English; Coden: GAAPBC; Collation: 2; Collation: 50-51; Publication Types: Abstract Only; Serial; Conference document; Updated Code: 201414; Monograph Title: Geological Society of America, Northeastern Section, 48th annual meeting; Monograph Author(s): Anonymous; Reviewed Item: Analytic}, month = {2013/02/01/}, pages = {50 - 51}, publisher = {Geological Society of America (GSA) : Boulder, CO, United States}, address = {United States}, abstract = {In New England, earthquakes pose a risk to the built environment. New England state geological surveys partnered with the Northeast States Emergency Consortium to integrate geologic information and GIS analysis for risk communication. Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, and Vermont employed surficial geologic maps, deglaciation history, glacial stratigraphy, and professional judgment to reclassify surficial geologic materials into one of the five National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) site classifications (A, B, C, D, and E). These new classifications were used in the HAZards U.S. Multi-Hazard (HAZUS-MH) risk assessment application as a substitute for site class value of "D," used in HAZUS-MH throughout New England as a default value. Coding of surficial geologic materials for the five NEHRP site classifications was then compared with classifications using the Wald methodology, a method using slope analysis as a proxy for shear-wave velocity estimates. Comparisons show that coding to site classes using the Wald methodology underestimates categories A (high-velocity shear-wave materials, least relative hazard) and E (lowest-velocity shear-wave materials, greatest relative hazard) when evaluated side by side with coding done with the aid of surficial geologic maps. Geologic maps provide insights into the location of buried low shear wave velocity materials not afforded by the Wald methodology. North of the glacial limit, derangement of drainage resulted in extensive ponding of meltwaters and the subsequent deposition of thick sequences of lacustrine mud. Inundation by the sea immediately following deglaciation in New England resulted in the deposition of spatially extensive and locally thick sequences of glacial marine mud. Surficial geologic maps better capture these circumstances when compared with the Wald methodology. Without the use of surficial geologic maps, significant areas of New England will be incorrectly classified as being more stable than actual site conditions would allow. By employing surficial geologic information, HAZUS-MH earthquake loss estimates are improved, providing local and regional emergency managers with more accurate information for locating and prioritizing.

}, keywords = {$\#$StaffPubs, earthquakes, Environmental geology, geologic hazards, maps, natural hazards, New England, risk assessment, seismic risk, seismic zoning, surficial geology, surficial geology maps, technology, United States}, isbn = {00167592}, url = {https://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2013NE/webprogram/Paper214837.html}, author = {Becker, Laurence R. and Patriarco, Steven P. and Marvinney, Robert G. and Thomas, Margaret A. and Stephen B Mabee and Fratto, Edward S.} } @article {304, title = {Improving seismic hazard assessment in New England through the use of surficial geologic maps and expert analysis}, journal = {Special Paper - Geological Society of America}, volume = {493}, year = {2012}, note = {Accession Number: 2013-034008; Conference Name: Geological Society of America, 2010 annual meeting; Denver, CO, United States; Conference Date: 20101031; Language: English; Coden: GSAPAZ; Collation: 22; Collation: 221-242; Publication Types: Serial; Conference document; Updated Code: 201321; Illustration(s): illus. incl. 6 tables, geol. sketch maps; Number of References: 36; Monograph Title: Recent advances in North American paleoseismology and neotectonics east of the Rockies; Monograph Author(s): Cox, Randel Tom [editor]; Tuttle, Martitia P. [editor]; Boyd, Oliver S. [editor]; Locat, Jacques [editor]; Reviewed Item: Analytic}, month = {2012/01/01/}, pages = {221 - 242}, publisher = {Geological Society of America (GSA) : Boulder, CO, United States}, address = {United States}, abstract = {(GSA Special Paper) In New England, earthquakes pose a risk to the built environment. Emergency preparedness and mitigation planning are prudent in this region as older unreinforced masonry buildings and numerous critical facilities are common. New England state geological surveys cooperate with the Northeast States Emergency Consortium (NESEC) to improve risk communication with emergency managers. To that end, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, and Vermont employed surficial geologic maps, deglaciation history, knowledge of the glacial stratigraphy, and professional judgment to reclassify surficial geologic material units into one of the five National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) site classifications (A, B, C, D, and E). These new classifications were used as a substitute for the HAZards U.S. Multi-Hazard (HAZUS-MH) site class value of "D," which is used throughout New England as a default value. In addition, coding of surficial geologic materials for the five NEHRP site classifications was compared with classifications using the Wald methodology, a method that uses a slope analysis as a proxy for shear-wave velocity estimates. Comparisons show that coding to site classes using the Wald methodology underestimates categories A (high-velocity shear-wave materials, least relative hazard) and E (lowest-velocity shear-wave materials, greatest relative hazard) when evaluated side by side with coding done with the aid of surficial geologic maps. North of the glacial limit, derangement of drainage resulted in extensive ponding of meltwaters and the subsequent deposition of thick sequences of lacustrine mud. Inundation by the sea immediately following deglaciation in New England resulted in the deposition of spatially extensive and locally thick sequences of glacial marine mud. Surficial geologic maps better capture this circumstance when compared with the Wald topographic slope analysis. Without the use of surficial geologic maps, significant areas of New England will be incorrectly classified as being more stable than the site conditions that actually exist. By employing surficial geologic information, we project an improved accuracy for HAZUS-MH earthquake loss estimations, providing local and regional emergency managers with more accurate information for locating and prioritizing earthquake planning, preparedness, and mitigation projects to reduce future losses.}, keywords = {$\#$StaffPubs, civil engineering, earthquakes, Eastern U.S., Engineering geology 30, Environmental geology 22, geologic hazards, mitigation, natural hazards, New England, Northeastern U.S., risk assessment, risk management, safety, seismic risk, seismicity, United States}, isbn = {007210779780813724935}, url = {http://specialpapers.gsapubs.org/content/493/221.abstract}, author = {Becker, Laurence R. and Patriarco, Steven P. and Marvinney, Robert G. and Thomas, Margaret A. and Stephen B Mabee and Fratto, Edward S.} } @Map {252, title = {Digital conversion of Peck, J.H., 1975, Preliminary bedrock geologic map of the Clinton quadrangle, Worcester County, Mass., U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 75-658}, year = {2012}, publisher = {Massachusetts Geological Survey}, edition = {DC12-01}, abstract = {This map is an interim product and will be superseded by an updated bedrock map of the quadrangle in 2016. This map is a digital version of USGS OFR 75-658: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/ofr75658 There are some cartographic errors in creating a digital version: A Jurassic diabase dike along the western edge of the quadrangle is not shown in the digital version. These errors are being corrected.}, keywords = {$\#$BedrockMap, $\#$MGSPub, andalusite, ayer granite, Berlin, Bolton, Boylston, Clinton, Clinton-Newbury Fault, Devens, Harvard, Lancaster, Leominster, nashoba, Oakdale Quartzite, Peck, phyllite, quartzite, Reuben{\textquoteright}s Hill Formation, Sterling, tadmuck brook schist, Tower Hill quartzite, Wekepeke Fault, Worcester Formation}, author = {Peck, J.A.}, editor = {Joseph P Kopera} } @Map {235, title = {Preliminary fracture characterization map of the Ayer quadrangle, Massachusetts}, year = {2006}, publisher = {Massachusetts Geological Survey}, edition = {OFR-06-03}, abstract = {This preliminary version of the Fracture Characterization Map of the Ayer Quadrangle (Kopera, 2006) has been removed pending the release of an updated version of the underlying bedrock geologic map in the near future. The above version should be considered outdated. If you would like a copy of the outdated map, please contact Joseph Kopera at jkopera[at]geo[dot]geo[dot]umass[dot]edu }, keywords = {$\#$FractureMaps, $\#$MGSPub, Ayer, ayer granite, Boxborough, chelmsford granite, Devens, fault, Fort Devens, fracture, fracture trace, Groton, Harvard, hydrostructural domain, joint, lineament, LITTLETON, Shirley, water resources}, author = {Joseph P Kopera and Stephen B Mabee and Powers, D.C.} } @techreport {348, title = {Carbon Sequestration: Developing an assessment of potential CO2 storage resources in Massachusetts - Final Report: Estimate of CO2 Storage Resource Potential in Massachusetts Saline Aquifers and Unmineable Coal Seams}, year = {2011}, month = {5/2011}, pages = {62}, institution = {Massachusetts Geological Survey}, address = {Amherst, MA}, abstract = {Geologic carbon sequestration, defined as the permanent storage of CO2 in underground geologic reservoirs, is emerging as an important strategy towards mitigation of increasing accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere and associated greenhouse gas warming and climate change. These efforts have been organized nationally through programs such as the U.S. Department of Energy {\textendash} Office of Fossil Energy {\textendash} National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) {\textendash} Carbon Sequestration Program and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) {\textendash} Energy Resources Program {\textendash} Health and Environment Section {\textendash} Geologic CO2 Sequestration Research initiative. These organizations have partnered with a network of regional participants to evaluate CO2 storage resource potentials in geologic formations throughout the United States and Canada, through the Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships program. To date, however, CO2 storage resource potentials for geologic formations in Massachusetts have not been incorporated into any national or regional carbon sequestration initiative, nor have resources for local geologic carbon storage in Massachusetts been estimated or calculated. During a preliminary investigation into geologic carbon sequestration potential in Massachusetts, researchers at the University of Massachusetts identified five potential candidate geologic formations for further study. These include: sandstone aquifers in the Connecticut River Valley, unmineable coal seams in southeastern Massachusetts, organic-rich shales in the Connecticut River Valley, basalts in the Connecticut River Valley, and organic-rich metamorphic rocks in the western Berkshire Hills. Through sponsorship from the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center, a project was developed to gain more information about these candidate formations related to their hydrogeologic characteristics and potential carbon storage resource. This information has been used to assess if some or all of these candidates meet screening criteria for geologic carbon storage and to provide data for volumetric carbon storage models as outlined by methodologies developed by the USGS and NETL. This research also has identified gaps in knowledge and information regarding key hydrogeologic characteristics for the candidate formations in Massachusetts. These data are required to determine if formations meet screening criteria and to estimate total storage resources. Prepared for the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center under Task Order 09-1}, keywords = {$\#$MGSPub, $\#$MGSPubs, $\#$Report, $\#$Reports, Carbon, climate change, CO2, coal, coal seams, Hartford Basin, injection, Narragansett Basin, sequestration}, url = {http://www.geo.umass.edu/stategeologist/Products/reports/CarbonSequestrationReport.pdf}, author = {Stephen B Mabee and David F Boutt and Petsch, Steven T} } @techreport {347, title = {Experiments Summarizing the Potential of CO2 Sequestration in the Basalts of Massachusetts {\textendash} Final Report}, year = {2011}, month = {10/2011}, pages = {103}, institution = {Massachusetts Geological Survey}, address = {Amherst, MA}, abstract = {Basalts are gaining more attention as reservoirs for the geological sequestration of carbon dioxide (CO2). The purpose of this report is to present the results of experiments that were conducted on the basalts in western Massachusetts and Connecticut to determine their potential to sequester CO2. There were two primary objectives of these experiments:
  • To recreate and validate prior carbonate mineralization experiments conducted on the Holyoke basalt by Schaef et al. (2009) from Pacific Northwest National Laboratories (PNNL) and to test if their results are reproducible and geographically consistent within western Massachusetts and Connecticut, and,
  • 2. To explore the possibility of reacting CO2 with basalt at the earth{\textquoteright}s surface in an ex-situ mineral reactor and, in particular, to identify the optimum conditions necessary to precipitate large amounts of carbonate at the surface in a short time period by varying pressure, temperature, water volume, mass of sample and grain size in the experiments.
    • Prepared for the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center}, keywords = {$\#$MGSPub, $\#$MGSPubs, $\#$Reports, basalts, Carbon, carbonate, climate change, CO2, Holyoke Basalt, injection, mineralization, precipitation, sequestration}, url = {http://www.geo.umass.edu/stategeologist/Products/reports/BasaltSequestrationReport.pdf}, author = {Petrick, Carrie and Stephen B Mabee} } @techreport {346, title = {Field Investigation of the Geology and Possible Pisolitic Bauxite Occurrence at Menemsha Hills Reservation, Martha{\textquoteright}s Vineyard, Massachusetts}, year = {2008}, institution = {Office of the Massachusetts State Geologist}, type = {4/2008}, address = {Amherst, MA}, abstract = {The Office of the Massachusetts State Geologist was asked by The Trustees of Reservations to make an assessment of an unusual deposit of what appears to be pisolitic bauxite or iron hardpan exposed on the beach at Menemsha Hills Reservation in Chilmark, Massachusetts. The formation occurs as thin 10-20 cm wide lenses extending from 0.5 to 6 meters in length. They are found most commonly along a 200 to 250 meter section of the shore in the intertidal zone. The intact lenses trend northeast at about 25{\textdegree} to 35{\textdegree} and dip at 61{\textdegree} to 75{\textdegree}. The material occurs in a variety of forms. These include hematite and clay rich botyoidal (grape-like) surfaces, as iron hardpan cementing together gravel and pebble-sized stones, and as 1-2 cm wide pisolites (concentrically layered round structures). Prepared for the Trustees of Reservations}, keywords = {$\#$MGSPub, $\#$MGSPubs, $\#$Minerals, $\#$Reports, aluminum, bauxite, ferricrete, glacial, hematite, Holocene, Martha{\textquoteright}s Vineyard, Menemsha Hills, minerals, ore, oxides, pisolite, pisolitic, precipitation, reservation, thrust faults, Trustees, Vineyard}, url = {http://www.geo.umass.edu/stategeologist/Products/reports/FinalReport.pdf}, author = {Stephen B Mabee and Panish, P.} } @techreport {30, title = {Preliminary compilation of the bedrock geology of the land area of the Boston 2 degree sheet, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island and New Hampshire}, number = {77-285}, year = {1977}, keywords = {$\#$MassGeology, $\#$MassGeologyMap, bedrock geology, Connecticut, eastern MA, GEOLOGY, map, massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island}, issn = {USGS OFR 77-285}, url = {http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/ofr77285}, author = {Patrick J Barosh and Fahey, Richard J. and Pease, Maurice Henry, Jr.} }