A-1. Plot of probability of surface rupture relative to magnitude A-2. Plot of depth to top of surface rupture relative to magnitude for earthquakes in Next Generation Attenuation database B-1. Plot of multisegment fault as defined in 1996 and 2002 maps B-2. Plot of multisegment fault as defined in 2008 maps D-1. Diagram of a virtual dipping fault D-2. Plots showing effect of including hanging-wall term on median ground motion D-3. Plot showing the increase in Rjb for vertical faults F-1. Ground motions for two sites in the Central and Eastern United States without cluster model F-2. Ground motions for two sites in the Central and Eastern United States with cluster model G-1. Map of fault sources in the Intermountain West G-2. Slip-rate changes for Intermountain West faults H-1. Map of fault sources in the Pacific Northwest J-1. Plot showing increase in characteristic rate due to magnitude rounding J-2. Plot showing uncertainty in assigned slip rate for selected faults in Utah Appendix Tables: A-1. Depth to top of rupture E-1. Sampling interval details for non-California faults, truncated Gutenberg-Richter distribution G-1. Updated Intermountain West fault parameters G-2. Updated fault names for Intermountain West faults G-3. Intermountain West fault parameters by State H-1. Pacific Northwest fault parameters by State I-1. Rupture-model data for California Type-A faults I-2. List of significant changes to California Type-B faults I-3. Parameters for California Type-B faults I-4. Parameters for California Connected-B faults

Introduction 1 Melding CEUS and WUS maps 2 Number of sites and spacing 3 Sample hazard curves 3 Central and Eastern United States 3 Basic procedure 3 CEUS catalogs and b-value calculation 5 Attenuation relations for CEUS 6 Special Zones

No abstract

No abstract

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) recently completed new probabilistic seismic hazard maps for the United States, including Alaska and Hawaii. These hazard maps form the basis of the probabilistic component of the design maps used in the 1997 edition of the NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures, prepared by the Building Seismic Safety Council and published by FEMA. The hazard maps depict peak horizontal ground acceleration and spectral response at 0.2, 0.3, and 1.0 sec periods, with 10%, 5%, and 2% probabilities of exceedance in 50 years, corresponding to return times of about 500, 1000, and 2500 years, respectively. In this paper we outline the methodology used to construct the hazard maps. There are three basic components to the maps. First, we use spatially smoothed historic seismicity as one portion of the hazard calculation. In this model, we apply the general observation that moderate and large earthquakes tend to occur near areas of previous small or moderate events, with some notable exceptions. Second, we consider large background source zones based on broad geologic criteria to quantify hazard in areas with little or no historic seismicity, but with the potential for generating large events. Third, we include the hazard from specific fault sources. We use about 450 faults in the western United States (WUS) and derive recurrence times from either geologic slip rates or the dating of pre-historic earthquakes from trenching of faults or other paleoseismic methods. Recurrence estimates for large earthquakes in New Madrid and Charleston, South Carolina, were taken from recent paleoliquefaction studies. We used logic trees to incorporate different seismicity models, fault recurrence models, Cascadia great earthquake scenarios, and ground-motion attenuation relations. We present disaggregation plots showing the contribution to hazard at four cities from potential earthquakes with various magnitudes and distances.