SEISMIC HAZARD ASSESSMENT, ONONDAGA COUNTY, NEW YORK
Donald H. Cadwell
Gary N. Nottis
Seismic shear-wave data collection is expanding the database for the projection statewide of seismic hazards and is obtaining detailed information about the varied surficial materials across New York State. Onondaga County was selected for study because of the types of surficial materials deposited within the County during retreat of the Wisconsinan Ice Sheet, 13,000-10,000 years ago, and because of the large urban population in the greater Syracuse region. Lacustrine sands, silts, and clays were deposited in Glacial Lake Oneida, a 400 square-mile lake that developed at the edge of the glacier front, during the waning stages of Woodfordian deglaciation. For example, the glacier retreated from the southern part of Onondaga County, near Tully and the Otisco Uplands, and continued past Syracuse and the Green Lakes State Park into the Mohawk Lowlands to the north. Glacial Lake Oneida included most of the lowland and swamp regions within 10-20 miles of the present 250 square mile Oneida Lake. Specific site locations for interpretation of seismic data were chosen based on the type of surficial material and the projected susceptibility to liquefaction, landslide, and seismic shear-wave attenuation.
In May 1990, the New York State Disaster Preparedness Commission (DPC) initiated a multi-year earthquake preparedness project for critical services and infrastructure (lifelines). This project is being funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), with New York State providing an in-kind services match to federal dollars. The New York State Emergency Management Office (SEMO) is serving as the grant administrator. The main emphasis of the New York State Emergency Management Lifelines Program is to develop the ability to conduct earthquake loss estimates for scenario events. Specifically, we need to determine expected damages, casualties, shelter needs, and secondary effects, such as, fire and toxic releases, and then utilize this information for mitigation and response planning.
A major task of this project is the design, development and implementation of a Geographic Information System (GIS) capable of facilitating vulnerability analysis, mitigation strategy, and response planning efforts. An integral part of this system is the development of GIS data sets that characterize the seismic ground response of the State's soils, bedrocks, and stratigraphy. The New York State Museum/Geological Survey (NYSGS) is responsible for this project.
The NYSGS has begun a systematic Seismic Hazard Assessment Program, with analyses for Columbia and Dutchess counties (1994, 1995), and portions of Rensselaer, Greene and St. Lawrence counties (1996), and has provided SEMO with earthquake hazard maps based on the data sets. Major earthquake damage occurs from attenuation of S-waves (shear-waves) as they travel from bedrock into the surficial glacial sediments. As the shear-wave velocity decreases in the unconsolidated sediments (together with a shortened wavelength), there is a corresponding increase in wave amplitude. The increased amplitude produces greater ground shaking and, consequently, increased damage.
The collection of seismic data was accomplished with a crew of 6, using a Geometrics Smartseis 24 channel seismograph, with 14Hz horizontal and vertical geophones. The phones were arranged with the vertical phones at the odd numbered positions and the horizontal phones at the even numbered positions. The spacing between geophones, in feet, was arranged from forward shot, 3ft, 6ft, 6ft, 10ft, 10ft, 10ft, 10ft, 10ft, 6ft, 6ft, 3ft, midpoint, 3ft, 6ft, 6ft, 10ft, 10ft, 10ft, 10ft, 10ft, 6ft, 6ft, 3ft, reverse shot. This spacing was used to examine the detailed stratigraphic layers near the surface. An auger was used to drill the holes for the shot points, where the Betsy Seisgun was used to detonate the 400 grain black powder charge 1.5 to 3 feet below the surface. A steel plate and cocoa mat were used to minimize blowback. The energy that passes through the ground simulates the energy released from a natural earthquake. The vertical geophones record the arrival of the Primary or P-wave, that oscillates in a vertical plane. These waves travel the fastest, and are the first to arrive. The second wave to arrive is recorded by the horizontal geophones, Shear or S-waves that oscillate in a horizontal plane.
The primary data source was the direct measurement of seismic waves with a Geometrics Seismograph. A seismic crew was used to obtain data from 40 shot locations, with a total of 146 shot detonations (Figure 1). The summary of seismic data (Table 1) relates the types of surficial materials with the number of shot sites, number of shot lines and the S- and P-wave velocities. A complete listing of seismic data is in Appendix A.
Table 1. Summary of Onondaga County seismic data.
Surficial material No. of shot sitesNo. of shot lines S-wave velocity P-wave velocity
*meters per second
A comparison of the S-wave velocities of Onondaga County with data obtained in earlier studies in Columbia, Dutchess, and Rensselaer counties illustrate changes in the shear-wave values for different areas (Table 2). The Betsy Seisgun with a 400 grain charge of black powder was used in Onondaga, Rensselaer and Dutchess counties, whereas a 16 lb sledgehammer and steel plate were used in Columbia County. Table 3 summarizes the range of shear-wave velocity values for the surficial materials in the counties.
Table 2. Comparison of average S-wave velocities in Onondaga County, compared with Rensselaer, Columbia, and Dutchess counties.
Surficial material Onondaga County Rensselaer County Columbia County Dutchess County
S-wave velocity S-wave velocity S-wave velocity S-wave velocity
*meters per second
The mean shear-wave velocities for surficial materials in Columbia County are higher than the values in other counties. The mean shear- wave velocity for each surficial material in Onondaga, Rensselaer, and Dutchess counties are different from each other, however each class of surficial materials fall within similar ranges (Table 3).
Table 3. Range of shear-wave velocities (meters per second) in Onondaga, Rensselaer, Columbia and Dutchess counties. The numbers in parentheses following the range of shear- wave values represents the number of seismic lines included for the distribution.
Surficial Material Onondaga County Rensselaer County Columbia County Dutchess County
*meters per second
Winkley M.S. Thesis/P
The thesis by Steven J. Winkley, 1989, The Hydrogeology of Onondaga County, New York, Syracuse University, M.S. Thesis, 118p, was used in the compilation of the Surficial Geologic Map of Onondaga County. This thesis was distributed by Nicholas J. Pirro, County Executive, Onondaga County. Subsurface water well data from 734 locations was used in the compilation of watertable and bedrock depths.
U.S.G.S.-W.R.D. Subsurface Data
The United States Geological Survey-Water Resources Division provided subsurface water well data from 421 locations in Onondaga County. Added to these data were subsurface water well data from 734 locations from the Winkley thesis. There were 895 usable depth to water table and 545 depth to bedrock determinations within Onondaga County.
N.Y.S.D.O.T. Subsurface Data
Subsurface data was also obtained from the New York State Department of Transportation, Syracuse Regional Office. Boring logs and blowcount on casing were obtained from 19 highway projects within the county. The blowcount data are used to assist in determining probability of liquefaction at depth. The individual highway projects are listed below.
Rte 31 Baldwinsville PIN 3037.35, borehole data and blows on casing
Jordon Bridge # E80 over NYS Barge Canal, borehole data and blows on casing
Rte 370 Lysander, borehole data and blows on casing
Rte 31 over Chittenango Creek PIN 3037.54, borehole data
Rte 298 Taylor Commission Ditch PIN 3104.10, borehole data and blows on casing
Rte 481, Rte 57 relocation, 4 sites, borehole data and blows on casing
Rte 290 Butternut Creek PIN 3082.09, borehole data and blows on casing
Rte 154 Skaneateles, East Lake Road, borehole data and blows on casing
Rte 41 Skaneateles PIN 3102.11, borehole data and blows on casing
Marietta - Marcellus Bridge #1, Marcellus, borehole data and blows on casing
Rte 158 Lawless Road Marcellus PIN 0091.10, borehole data and blows on casing
Rte 38A Bridge, Skaneateles PIN 3140.05, borehole data and blows on casing
Rte 11, Reference 11-3303-1065, borehole data and blows on casing
Rte 80, Reference Marker 80-3301-2056, borehole data and blows on casing
Rte 80 Fabius, west of Swift Road, borehole data
Rte 160, DeRutyter Reservoir PIN 3940.52, borehole data and blows on casing
Rte 175, Onondaga Lake outlet PIN 3751.79, borehole data and blows on casing
John Glenn Blvd over Barge Canal, borehole data and blows on casing
Rte 3 over railroad, Apulia Station PIN 3751.43, borehole data and blows on casing
Surficial Geologic Map of Onondaga County
The digital Surficial Geologic Map of Onondaga County, Figure 2, was created from both, the 1989, M.S. Thesis, completed by Steven Winkley at Syracuse University, and site specific surficial mapping data from D. Cadwell 1997, and D. Pair, 1995-97. The completed digital map was digitized at a 15-minute scale, one-inch equals one mile.
A Surficial Geologic Map is used to illustrate surface glacial materials; each deposit has a different response to earthquakes as the shear-wave passes through the material. Surficial materials are deposits left by a glacier, usually during glacial retreat. Most of the surficial materials in Onondaga County were deposited during retreat of the Late Wisconsinan Ice Sheet, the last episode of glaciation in New York. This glacier retreat was gradual, first the ice retreated northward from Long Island, about 21,750 years ago, reaching the Mohawk Valley about 15,000 ago. Then, the Ice Sheet readvanced southward to the Valley Heads Moraine, which is in the southern part of Onondaga County near Tully. Northward glacier retreat resumed from the Valley Heads Moraine about 13,000 ago, and New York State was completely deglaciated about 10,000 ago. This means that most of the glacial deposits in Onondaga County were deposited between 13,000 to 10,000 years ago. The map, therefore, illustrates the surficial geological material deposited by all glacier, stream and lake processes associated with retreat of the Late Wisconsinan Glacier.
The colors on the map each represent different surficial materials, deposited in association with the retreating Wisconsinan Ice Sheet. The glacial deposits are classified according to the type of material (i.e., sand, gravel, clay) deposited, the location where deposition occurred with respect to the glacier (i.e., adjacent, in front of, or beneath) and the mechanism of deposition (i.e., fluvial, lacustrine, or aeolian).
Depth to Water Table Map of Onondaga County
Depth to Bedrock Map of Onondaga County
Subsurface water well data was derived from 735 records from Winkley=s 1989 thesis, and 421 records from USGS-WRD (Figure 3). Both the Depth to Water Table Map (Figure 4) and the Depth to Bedrock Map (Figure 5) were created from this data. The water table information was derived from 895 points, whereas the depth to bedrock information was derived from 545 points. Both maps represent a surface interpolated from points: the water table map makes no attempt to account for seasonal changes in water table depth values. The depths to water table and bedrock were input to an algorithm, that assumes that there are no great variations among the points. These algorithms created surfaces representing the depth to the water table and the depth to bedrock across the county. These data sets were reclassified to group the depth values into the ranges presented on the individual maps.
Slope Map of Onondaga County
The Slope Map of Onondaga County (Figure 6) was created by using 7.5 minute Digital Elevation Models (DEMs), a three dimensional model of topography,with the HAZUS Earthquake Loss Estimation Methodology to create slope polygons. The DEMs for each 7.5 minute topographic quadrangle were brought together as a single image for the entire county. The HAZUS Methodology divided the slope values into the following ranges:
0 - 10 degrees
10.01 - 15 degrees
15.01 - 20 degrees
20.01 - 30 degrees
30.01 - 40 degrees
Landslide Susceptibility Maps
The landslide hazard evaluation from HAZUS requires the characterization of the landslide susceptibility of the soil/geologic conditions of a region. Susceptibility is characterized by the geologic group, slope angle and critical acceleration. The acceleration required to initiate slope movement is a complex function of slope geology, steepness, groundwater conditions, type of landsliding and history of previous slope performance. Landslide susceptibility is measured on a scale of 1 - 10, with 10 being the most susceptible. The site condition is defined using three geologic groups and groundwater level. The description for each geologic group and its associated susceptibility is given in Table 4. The groundwater condition is divided into either dry condition (groundwater below level of the sliding) or wet conditions (groundwater level at the surface). The critical acceleration is then estimated for the respective geologic and groundwater conditions and the slope angle. These bounds are shown in Table 5. In Table 6, landslide susceptibility categories are defined as a function of critical acceleration.
Table 4. Landslide Susceptibility# of Geologic Groups
# measured on a scale of 1-10, with 10 the most susceptible
* surficial geologic map units
Table 5.Lower Bounds for Slope Angles and Critical Accelerations for Landsliding Susceptibility.
Table 6. Landslide Susceptibility Categories Are Defined as a Function of Critical
For the calculations of the landslide maps, the following values were used: magnitude 4.1 moment magnitude, with a critical site accelleration of 0.1g, and magnitude 5.8 moment magnitude, with a critical site accelleration of .36g. Landslide susceptibility in Onondaga County is summarized in Figures 7 and 8. Figure 7 illustrates susceptibility with wet conditions, where the groundwater level is at the ground surface, and represents categories 8 (low), 9 (medium), and 10 (high) on Table 4, part( b). Figure 8 illustrates susceptibility with dry conditions, where the groundwater level is below the level of sliding, and represents categories 8 (low), 9 (medium), and 10 (high) on Table 4, part (a).
The initial step of the liquefaction hazard evaluation is to characterize the relative liquefaction susceptibility of the soil/geologic conditions of the region. Susceptibility is characterized utilizing geologic map information and the classification outlined in Youd and Perkins (1978) with modifications to characterize glacial deposits (Table 7). Based on these characteristics, a relative susceptibility is assigned.
Table 7. Liquefaction Susceptibility of Sedimentary Deposits (modified from Youd and Perkins, 1978, modified to reflect the age and types of deposits).
i This category (<11,000 years BP) is used for the liquefaction calculations because that is an average age for the glacial deposits in New York.
It is recognized that in reality, natural geologic deposits as well as man-placed fills encompass a range of liquefaction susceptibilities due to variations of soil type, relative density, etc. Therefore portions of a geologic map unit may not be susceptible to liquefaction, and this is considered in assessing the probability of liquefaction at any given location within a unit. Non-susceptible portions are generally smaller for higher susceptibilities. Default values for the susceptibility categories are listed in Table 8.
Table 8. Proportion of Map Unit Susceptible to Liquefaction
The likelihood of liquefaction is significantly influenced by ground shaking amplitude (i.e., peak horizontal acceleration, PGA), ground shaking duration as reflected by earthquake magnitude, Mw, and groundwater depth. The probability of liquefaction for a given susceptibility category can be determined by the following relationship.
P[LiquefactionSC] = P[LiquefactionSC|PGA = a] .Pml
P[LiquefactionSC|PGA = a] is the conditional liquefaction probability for a given susceptibility category at a specified level of peak ground acceleration
KM Is the moment magnitude (Mw) correction factor (from equation 4-23, HAZUS)
Kw is the ground water correction factor (from equation 4-24, HAZUS)
Pml proportion of map unit susceptible to liquefaction (from Table 9)
Table 9. Proportion of Map Unit Susceptible to Liquefaction
Two scenario events, Magnitude 5.8 (Table 10) and Magnitude 4.1 (Table 11), have been chosen to illustrate the probability of liquefaction. If the susceptibility and depth to water table is known, the probability is easily determined. For example, in Figure 9 and Table 7, a unit designated with a High Risk and a depth to water table of 20 feet, would have a probability of 74 percent (Table 9). Note that the Magnitude 4.1 scenario (Table 11) would have an extremely low probability.
Table 10. Susceptibility to Liquefaction with Magnitude 5.8 Earthquake
Table 11. Susceptibility to Liquefaction with Magnitude 4.1 Earthquake
Ground Shaking Amplification
Site soil classifications are used in the methodology to standardize site geology classifications for determination of amplification of site-dependent ground motion demand. This classification is based on the average shear-wave velocity of the upper 30 meters of the local site geology. Users with geotechnical expertise are required to relate the soil classification scheme of soil maps to the classification scheme shown in Table 12 The ground shaking amplification in Onondaga County is summarized in Figure 10, using the general descriptions in Table 12.
Table 12 Site Classes for Site-Dependent Ground Shaking Amplification
(Modified From Borcherdt, 1994 and HAZUS 1997 User=s Manual)
*surficial geologic map units
Composite Seismic Hazard
The composite seismic hazard in Onondaga County represents an overlay of areas within the County that have Liquefaction values of Very High or High, Ground Shaking Amplification values of 4 or 5, and Landsliding values of 8, 9 or 10, when the surficial materials are either wet or dry. Figure 11 summarizes the hazard areas when the groundwater is below the level of sliding (dry). Figure 12 summarizes the hazard areas when the groundwater level is at the ground surface (wet).
Atkinson, G.M., and D.M. Boore, 1990, Recent trends in ground motion and spectral response relations for North America, Earthquake Spectra, v.6, pp.15-35.
Borcherdt, Roger D., 1994, Estimates of Site-Hedendent response spectra for design (Methodology and Justification), Earthquake Spectra, v. 10, No. 4, pp. 617-653.
Ebel, J.E., 1994, The mLg(F) magnitude scale: a proposal for its use for northeastern North America, Seismological Research Letters, v.65, pp.157-166.
Ebel, J.E. and A.L. Kafka, 1991, Earthquake activity in the northeastern United States, in Neotectonics of North America, The geology of North America, Volume I, D.B. Slemmons, E.R. Engdahl, M.D. Zoback, and D.D. Blackwell, Editors, Geological Society of America, Boulder, Colorado, pp. 277-290.
Fickies, R.F., and P.T.Regan, 1983, Engineering geology classification of the soils of the Albany, New York 15 minute quadrangle. New York State Museum Map and Chart Series No. 36, 8p, 2 maps.
Fischer, J.A., 1994, personal communication.
Jacob, K., J. Armbruster, N. Barstow, and S. Horton, 1994, Probabilistic ground-motion estimates for New York: Comparison with design ground-motions in national and local codes. Proceedings of 5th US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Earthquake Engineering Institute, Oakland, CA, v. 3, pp. 119-128.
Kijko, A., and M.A. Sellevoll, 1992, Estimation of earthquake hazard parameters from
incomplete data files. Part II. Incorporation of magnitude heterogeneity, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 82, pp.120-134.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1976, SIMQKE: A program for artificial motion generation - user's manual and documentation, Department of Civil Engineering, 87 p.
Seed, H.B., and I.M. Idriss, 1970, Soil moduli and damping factors for dynamic response analyses, Report No. UCB/EERC-70/10, University of California, Berkeley.
Sun, J.I., R. Golesorkhi, and H.B. Seed, 1988, Dynamic moduli and damping ratios for cohesive soils, Report No. UCB/EERC-88/15, University of California, Berkeley.
Technical manual, Development of a Standardized Earthquake Loss Estimation Methodology, Volume I, prepared for National Institute of Building Sciences, 1997, by Risk Management Solutions, Inc. Menlo Park, CA.
Tinti, S., and F. Mulargia, 1985, Effects of magnitude uncertainties on estimating the parameters in the Gutenberg-Richter frequency-magnitude law, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 75, pp.1681-1697.
Toro, G.R. and R.K. McGuire, 1987, An investigation into earthquake ground motion
characteristics in eastern North America, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America, v. 77, pp.468-489.
Youd, P. L., and Perkins, D. M., 1978, Mapping Liquefaction-induced ground failure potential, Journal of Geotechcnical Engineering, ASCE, v.104 No.GT4, pp.433-446.
Description of Seismic Shot Locations, Onondaga County
20-01 Power line, Highland County Forest, Town of Fabius
20-02 East of DeRuyter Reservoir, Madison County, Town of DeRuyter
20-03 East side Waters Road, 1/4 mile north of town border, Town of Pompey
20-04 South side Island Road, just west of Cicero Swamp State Wildlife Management Area, Town of Cicero
20-05 East side Island Road, in Cicero Swamp State Wildlife Management Area, Town of Cicero
20-06 East of Oxbow Road, on floodplain to the rear of Gerber farm, Town of Cicero
20-07 East side of Route 298, in Cicero Swamp State Wildlife Management Area, Town of Cicero
20-08 West side of Route 11 at Michael Field, north of Cicero, Town of Cicero
20-09 West side of Riverside Drive, adjacent to Oswego River, Town of Clay
20-10 Oneida River floodplain, near Lock 23 Park, Oswego County
20-11 Model Plane Airport, east of Black Creek Road, Town of Clay
20-12 West of Black Creek Road, Town of Clay
20-13 Adjacent to Rt 481 exit ramp onto maple Road, Town of Clay
20-14 Near Seneca River, behind Seneca Mall, Route 57, Town of Clay
20-15 Three Rivers State Wildlife Area, South side of Kellogg Road, east of Hollow Road, Town of Lysander
20-16 North side Kibby Road, east of Plainville Rd, Town of Lysander
20-17 West of Perry Road, north of Loveless Road, Town of Van Buren
20-18 South of railroad tracks at Peru, Town of Elbridge
20-19 Parking lot, Beaver Lake County Park, Town of Lysander
20-20 North side of Route 370, near County line, Town of Lysander
20-21 Parking lot, Onondaga Lake County Park, Town of Salina
20-22 East side Sentinel Hill Road, north of Mondor Drive, Town of Lafayette
20-23 East side Apulia Road, just north of railroad tracks, Town of Fabius
20-24 East of Berry Road, in field north of Route 80, Town of Fabius
20-25 West of Berry Road, in field, Town of Fabius
20-26 East of Berry Road, in field, Town of Fabius
20-27 North side Cascade Road, near Apulia Road, Town of Lafayette
20-28 East side Tully Farms Road, near landslide south of Town border, Town of Tully
20-29 East side Slate Hill Road, at top of hill between Brewer and Schuyler Roads, Town of Marcellus
20-30 Old gravel pit, north side of Brewer Road, east of Otisco Valley Road, Town of Marcellus
20-31 North side Church Road, half way between Shamrock and Rosbill Roads, Town of Marcellus
20-32 East side of Gully Road, north of New Seneca Turnpike, where road is closest to Ninemile Creek, Town of Skaneateles
20-33 East side Stevens Road, north of Gardner Road, Town of Onondaga
20-34 North of Route 173, near White Lake, Town of Dewitt
20-35 Green Lakes State Park, in field south of Route 257, Town of Manlius
20-36 Syracuse Tank Farm, NYS Barge Canal property, Syracuse
20-37 Parking lot, Onondaga Community College, near entrance from Route 175, Town of Onondaga
20-38 East side Barker Road, midway between Cook and Kingsley Roads, Town of Otisco
20-39 East side Masters Road, north of Church Road, Town of Spafford
20-40West side Tully Farms Road, near Syracuse Tully Valley Road, Town of Lafayette
Interpretations of New York State Geological Survey's (Nysgs)
1997 Seismic Refraction Program in Onondaga County, New York
Seismic Layer Thickness Velocities(ft/sec)
Line Site Description Number (ft) P-waveS-wave
LN20-01 Till over shale 1 4.0 882 240
2 --- 10,271 5,677
LN20-02 Thin till over shale (?) 1 3.0 1,435 433
2 6.0 3,215 969
3 --- 7,593 3,825
LN20-03 Till over shale 1 7.0 1,219 368
2 28.0 5,170 2,604
3 --- 12,899 7,130
LN20-05 Till 1 4.0 702 250
2 5.0 1,986 541
3 --- 8,382 4,222
LN20-11 Till over Lockport dolomite 1 5.0 1,240 374
2 35.0 5,342 1,454
3 --- 16,250 8,982
LN20-17 Drumlin till 1 5.0 1,132 341
2 --- 7,720 2,101
LN20-22 Till over shale 1 13.0 2,223 605
2 --- 6,070 3,058
LN20-29 Thin till over Marcellus shale 1 5.0 746 250
2 --- 6,414 3,231
LN20-31 Thin till over rock 1 7.0 1,475 445
2 --- 6,063 3,062
LN20-37 Till over rock (OCC) 1 7.0 1,962 592
2 25.0 5,936 2,990
3 --- 12,371 6,838
LN20-38 Till over Hamilton shale 1 7.0 970 293
2 --- 9,764 5,397
LACUSTRINE SILT AND CLAY
LN20-06 Lake silt and clay over sand 1 5.0 747 250
2 75.0 5,014 1,193
3 --- 11,144 6,160
LN20-08 Lake clays and fine sands 1 10.0 1,561 471
2 --- 12,538 6,931
LN20-12 Lake clay over Lockport 1 5.0 1,098 331
dolomite 2 35.0 5,324 1,267
3 --- 15,558 8,600
LN20-13 Wet clay 1 6.0 1,674 505
2 --- 6,900 1,642
LN20-14 Fill over lake clay or alluvium 1 6.0 1,029 310
2 --- 5,494 1,307
LN20-19 Fill over muck or clay 1 7.0 1,146 346
2 --- 6,029 1,434
LN20-28 Fill over lake clay 1 5.0 1,034 312
2 --- 5,283 1,257
LN20-04 Fill over lake clay 1 5.0 540 250
2 --- 6,422 1,528
LN20-07 Fill over muck 1 3.0 847 255
2 --- 5,254 1,245
LN20-18 Fill over rock or alluvium 1 6.0 976 250
2 17.0 7,221 3,637
3 --- 9,950 5,500
LN20-23 Fill over silt? 1 6.0 1,509 455
2 --- 5,143 1,224
LN20-32 Fill over shale? 1 5.0 1,208 364
2 8.0 1,878 447
3 --- 9,146 5,056
LN20-33 Fill over shale or limestone 1 5.0 934 282
2 --- 6,225 3,144
LN20-34 Fill over limestone (Jamesville 1 21.0 3,842 1,427
Quarry) 2 --- 11,025 6,094
LN20-36 Fill at Syracuse Tank Farm 1 10.0 1,979 597
2 --- 3,472 945
LN20-20 Supra-glacial melt-out 1 12.0 5,692 2,114
2 --- 6,891 2,560
LN20-35 Kame sand and gravel over 1 7.0 990 299
2 --- 4,103 1,971
LN20-24 Outwash over carbonate rock 1 8.0 1,082 326
or shale 2 --- 5,257 2,648
LN20-25 Outwash over carbonate rock 1 13.0 1,164 351
or shale 2 --- 9,310 5,146
LN20-26 Outwash over carbonate rock 1 5.0 842 254
or shale 2 13.0 8,588 4,326
3 --- 12,254 6,674
LN20-27 Floodplain/gravel 1 5.0 1,037 313
2 --- 5,634 1,340
LN20-30 Glacial delta 1 10.0 1,878 566
2 --- 3,483 1,673
LN20-10 Lake sand over dolomite?? 1 7.0 947 286
2 8.0 1,550 369
3 --- 2,737 651
LN20-15 Lake sand over Lockport 1 5.0 1,014 306
dolomite 2 30.0 5,729 1,363
3 --- 16,934 9,360
LN20-16 Lake sand over Lockport 1 5.0 1,266 382
dolomite 2 30.0 8,910 2,120
3 --- 16,250 8,982
LN20-21 Lake sand over flood plain 1 4.0 1,331 401
2 --- 5,153 1,220
ALLUVIUM & COLLUVIUM
LN20-09 Alluvium over rock 1 5.0 1,248 376
2 35.0 4,887 1,330
3 --- 13,736 7,593
LN20-39 Colluvium over shale 1 12.0 1,171 353
2 --- 5,345 2,700
LN20-40 Colluvium over lake sediments 1 22.0 1,773 319 2 --- 6,111 1,454