Illinois State Geological Survey Indiana Geological Survey .
Illinois State Geological SurveyIndiana Geological SurveyKentucky Geological SurveyCcpIdi-Vj---------KY.
Illinois State Geological SurveyNatural Resources Building615 East Peabody DriveChampaign, IL 61820-6964(217) 333-4747Indiana Geological SurveyICentucky Geological SurveyPlease use the following citation when referencing this publication:Tri-State Committee on Correlation of the Pennsylvanian System in the Illinois Basin, 2001, Toward a More UniformStratigraphic Nomenclature for Rock Units (Formations and Groups) of the Pennsylvanian System in the Illinois Basin:Illinois Basin Consortium Study 5, Joint publication of the Illinois State Geological Survey, Indiana Geological Survey,and Kentucky Geological Survey, 26 p., 1 plate.
Illinois Basin Consortium Study 5A Joint Project of thetate GeologicalIndiana GeologicalKentucky Geologic
Abstract . 1Introduction . 1New Nomenclature for Formations and Groups of the Pennsylvanian System . 1Raccoon Creek Group . 3Definition and Justification . 3Historical Perspective . 3Caseyville Formation . 4Definition and Justification .4Historical Perspective . .4Formation Boundaries . 4Thickness and Extent . 5Lithological Characteristics .- 6Future Considerations . 6Tradewater Formation .6Definition and Justification . 6Historical Perspective . 7Formation Boundaries . 7Thickness and Extent .7Lithological Characteristics . 8Future Considerations .8. Mansfield Formation (Indiana) .8Brazil Formation (Indiana) .9Staunton Formation (Indiana) . 9Carbondale Group/Fomation . 9Definition and Justification . 9Historical Perspective . 10Boundaries .11Thickness and Extent .1212Lithological Characteristics .Future Considerations .13Linton Formation (Indiana) .13tersburg Formation (Indiana) .13ugger Formation (Indiana) .13. 13cleansboro Group .Definition and Justification . 13Historical Perspective . 14helburn Formation .15Definition and Justification . 15Historical Perspective . 15Formation Boundaries . 16Thickness and Extent .1Lithological Characteristics .16Future Considerations . 17Patoka Formation .17Definition and Justification . 17Historical Perspective .17Formation Boundaries . 17Thickness and Extent . 17Lithological Characteristics . 18Future Considerations .18
Bond Formation . 18Definition and Justification . 18Historical Perspective .18Formation Boundaries . 19Thickness and Extent . 19Lithological Characteristics . 19Future Considerations . 19Mattoon Formation . 20Definition and Justification . 20Historical Perspective . 20oundaries . 20Thickness and Extent . 20Lithological Characteristics . 20Future Considerations . 21Summary .2 1References . 22Figure 1. Previous and newly adopted Pennsylvanian nomenclature . 2ap of the sub-Pennsylvanian surface . 5Figure 3. Outcrop limit of the Caseyville Formation in Illinois and Kentucky,and the lower part of the Mansfield Formation in Indiana . 6Figure 4 . Outcrop limit of the Tradewater Formation in Illinois and Kentucky,and the upper part of the Mansfield Formation and the Brazil and Staunton Formations in Indiana . 8Figure 5 . Outcrop limit of the Carbondale Group/Fomation . 12Figure 6. Outcrop limit of the Shelburn Formation . 16Figure 7. Outcrop limit of the Patoka Fonnation .18Figure 8. Outcrop limit of the Bond Formation .19Figure 9. Outcrop limit of the Mattoon Formation .21Plate 1. Chart showing the development of the stratigraphic classification of the Pennsylvanian System in theIllinois Basin .
The Tri-State Committee on Correlation of the Pennsylvanian System in the Illinois Basin (Tri-StateCommittee) was formed in 1979 to resolve correlation problems in the Pennsylvanian System across thebasin and to try to standardize stratigraphic terminology for the Pennsylvanian System. Originally thegroup consisted of members from the state geological surveys of Illinois, Indiana, and Kentucky. In 1989the committee was expanded to include geologsts from universities and coal companies involved inresearch on the Pennsylvanian System. The concept of cooperative basinwide geologic research begunby the Tri-State Correlation Committee has been continued and expanded by the current day IllinoisBasin Consortium (IBC). The IBC is composed of the Illinois State Geological Survey, the IndianaGeological Survey, and the Kentucky Geological Survey.The Tri-State Committee's initial efforts were focused on correlating key beds in the middle and upperparts of the Pennsylvanian System and on establishing a common nomenclature for these beds (Jacobsonand others, 1985). This report presents the results of the committee's efforts to unify nomenclature forformations and groups based in part on these key beds, as well as on vertical lithological changes in thelower part of the Pennsylvanian (namely, the Raccoon Creek Group).The members of the Tri-State Committee who contributed to this study include: R. J. Jacobson, W. J.Nelson, H. H. Damberger, C. P. Weibel, and R. A. Peppers of the Illinois State Geological Survey; W. A.Hasenmueller, N. R. Hasenmueller, D. L. Eggert, and C. H. Ault of the Indiana Geological Survey;S. E Greb and D. A. Williams of the Kentucky Geological Survey; M. E. Hopkins; H. Lamkin, Jr.; andR. L. Langenheim of the University of Illinois. S. F. Greb, N. R. Hasenmueller, W. A. Hasenmueller, R.J. Jacobson, C. P. Weibel, and B. A. Williams compiled and modified the draft of the manuscript.
By The Tri-State Committee on Correlationof the Pennsylvanian System in the Illinois BasinThe Tri-State Committee on Correlation of the Pennsylvanian System in the Illinois Basin proposesrevisions in Pennsylvanian nomenclature. Formation and group boundaries are moved to horizonsmarked by either distinct lithologic changes or by key beds.In the proposed classification, the basal Raccoon Creek Group is underlain by an unconformity onrocks ranging in age from Ordovician to Mississippian. The group extends upward to the base of theSeelyville Coal Member or Davis Coal Member/bed1of the Carbondale GroupIFormation.In Illinois andKentucky, the Raccoon Creek Group comprises the Caseyville and Tradewater Formations. In Indiana,where the boundary between the Caseyville and Tradewater Formations is not recognized, the RaccoonCreek Group is divided, in ascending order, into the Mansfield, Brazil, and Staunton Formations. TheCarbondale Group/Formation and overlying McLeansboro Group are accepted basinwide. The boundary between the Carbondale and the McLeansboro is placed at the base of the Providence (Brereton)Limestone Member of the Shelburn Formation in Kentucky and Illinois and the top of the Danville CoalMember of the Carbondale Group in Indiana. The McLeansboro Group comprises the Shelburn, Patoka,Bond, and Mattoon Formations and the boundaries of all but the base of the Shelburn are placed atcommon horizons in all three states.Although many of the Pennsylvanian formation and group boundaries and unit names have beenunified as a result of the Tri-StateCommittee's work, sigmficant differences in geology and in the mappedcontinuity of key beds have made it impossible at this time to unify formation and group names throughout the basin. However, the standardization achieved thus far represents progress. This standardizednomenclature will improve communication among geologists and the coal mining industry working in thePennsylvanian System; many geologists and companies operate in two or three states of the IllinoisBasin.Stratigraphic nomenclature of Pennsylvanian formations andgroups in the Illinois Basin has differed significantly for Illinois, Indiana, and Kentucky (fig. 1). For example, of 17 formation names used in the basin, only four (Caseyville,attoon) were used in more than onestate. Although the name "Carbondale" was used in all threestates, it was ranked as a formation in Kentucky and Illinoisand as a group in Indiana, and the boundaries were differentin all three states (fig. 1). In addition, only one of the fivegroup names was used in more than one of the states (fig. 1).Conelation problems still exist and prevent basinwide adoption of some units and formation boundaries where defininglithologies or key beds are not recognized as being continuous; such correlation and mapping problems are discussedand are considered topics of future research. In the meantime,adoption of the new nomenclature will improve communication and foster future cooperative studies among the threestate geological surveys, industry, and academia.The TPi-State Cornnnittee's principal objective in this reportis to identify basinwide formations and groups of the Pennsylvanian System and establish common names and boundaries insofar as possible. No new stratigraphic names areintroduced; the proposed classification builds on previouslydefined rock-units. The definitions of some rock-units havebeen amended to place boundaries at horizons of moredistinct vertical lithologic change or at key beds consideredby this committee to be regionally extensive.'The Seelyville is ranked as a member in both Illinois and Indiana; the Davis is considered a member in Illinois but a bed without formal statusin Kentucky, thus Davis Goal Member in Illinois, Davis coal bed in Kentucky. 'I'he "slash" symbol (0is used to indicate change in rank betweenstates, and parentheses are used to indicate stratigraphic equivalence.
ILLINOIS BASIN CONSORTIUM STUDY 5KentuckyIndianaIllinois(Kehn, 1973)(Wier and Gray, 1961)(Kosanke and others,This R e o r tIllinois nLs. Mbr.Livingston(Millersville)Ls. Mbr.NORTH ionLivingston (Millersville)Limestone Member3ond FormationBond FormationBond FormationShoal CreekLs. MemberShoal CreekLs. MemberCarthage kaFormationModestoFormationHerrin coal bedWest FranklinLs. Mbr.West Franklin Ls. Mbr.ShelburnFormationShelburnFormationDanville Coal(VII) Mbr.Danville Coal Mbr.Dugger Fm.Coal VCarbondaleFormationPetersburgFormationCoal IVDavis coal hester CoalMbr.Coal IllStauntonFormationProvidence (Brt ?ton)Ls. Mbr.Danville CoalMbr.Herrin CoalMbr./bedDuggerSpringfieldCoal Mbr.CarbondaleFormationPetersburgFormationSurvant CoalMbr.Seelyville CoalMbr. or DavisCoal Mbr./bedSpoonFormationLinton Fm.SeelyvilleCoal Mbr.StauntonFormationPerth Ls. Mbr.TradewaterFormationBrazilFormationLower BlockCoal Mbr.Bernadotte(Murray Bluff)Sandstone Mbr.TradewaterFormationMinshall CoalMbr.Brazil Fm.Lower BlockCoal Mbr.AbbottFormationBell coal bedCaseyvilleFormationMansfieldFormationPounds Sandstone Mbr.Pounds Sandstone Mbr.CaseyvilleFormationCaseyvilleFormationZigure 1. Previous and newly adopted Pennsylvanian nomenclature for Kentucky, Indiana, and Illinois.MansfieldFormationSeriesSystem
TOWARD A MORE UNIFORM STRATIGRAPHIC NOMENCLATUREThe new nomenclature for the Pennsylvanian System is, inascending order: 1) the Raccoon Creek Group, made up ofthe Caseyville and Tradewater Formations in Kentucky andIllinois and the Mansfield, Brazil, and
Illinois State Geological Survey Natural Resources Building 615 East Peabody Drive Champaign, IL 61820-6964 (217) 333-4747 Indiana Geological Survey
Indiana State University 2 5.0% University of Southern Indiana 0 0.0% Indiana University-Bloomington 6 15.0% Indiana University-East 0 0.0% Indiana University-Kokomo 1 2.5% Indiana University-Northwest 0 0.0% Indiana University-Purdue University-Indianapolis 4 10.0% Indiana University-South Bend 0 0.0% Indiana University-Southeast 1 2.5%
AER/AGS Special Report 101 (October 2015) 1 Introduction K.E. Maccormack1, L.H.Thorleifson2, R.C. Berg3, and H.A.J. Russell4 1 Alberta Geological Survey 2 Minnesota Geological Survey 3 Illinois State Geological Survey 4 Geological Survey of Canada Abstract The objective of this year’s 3D workshop is to
Barnett Creek at Lower Suwannee National Wildlife Refuge, Fla. Width. Drainage Area . Physiographic Divisions of Indiana . Henry Gray, 2000 Indiana Geological Survey Special Report 61 . Northern Indiana Streams . Southern Indiana Streams . 82 Data-collec
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1988-89 (JULY 1, 1988-JUNE 30, 1989) by Larry D. Fellows State Geologist Arizona Geological Survey Open-File Report 89-11 Arizona Geological Survey 416 W. Congress, Suite #100, Tucson, Arizona 85701 This report is preliminary and has not been edited
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY SELECTED GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, U.S. BUREAU OF MINES, AND ALASKA DIVISION OF GEOLOGICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL SURVEYS REPORTS AND MAPS ON ALASKA RELEASED DURING 1978, INDEXED BY QUADRANGLE BY Edward H. Cobb Open-file Report 79-706 1979 This report is preliminary and has not been edited or reviewed for conformity with
U.S. Geological Survey U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. Geological Survey 10 Bearfoot Road Northborough, MA 01532 Water Resources Data Massachusetts and Rhode Island Water Year 2001 Prepared in cooperation with the States of Massachusetts and Rhode Island and with other agencies U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Data Water-Data Report .
veys reports and maps on Alaska released during 1974, indexed by quadrangle: U.S. Geological Survey Open-file Report 75-128, 46 p. Cobb, E. H., 1976, Geological Survey and selected U.S. Bureau of Mines and Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Sur veys reports and maps on Alaska released during 1975: U.S. Geological Survey Open-file .
Both the ISO 14001 and the Responsible Care requirements shall be included in order for an organization to receive certification of its RC14001 management system. ISO 14001 This Technical Specification document includes relevant provisions of the text of international standard ISO-14001:2004 – Environmental Management Systems. The text of ISO14001 is the first set of requirements in each .
