Leland R. Spangler 20241001 raster and vector digital data Denver, Colorado U.S. Geological Survey Spangler, L. R., 2024, Digital data for a 3D Geological Model of the Powder River Basin and Williston Basin Regions, USA: U.S. Geological Survey data release, doi:10.5066/P13RSCBV https://doi.org/10.5066/P13RSCBV Leland R. Spangler 2026 publication n/a US Geological Survey https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20265127 This digital GIS dataset and accompanying nonspatial files synthesize model outputs from a regional-scale volumetric 3-D geologic model that portrays the generalized subsurface geology of the Powder River Basin and Williston Basin regions from a wide variety of input data sources. The study area includes the Hartville Uplift, Laramie Range, Bighorn Mountains, Powder River Basin, and Williston Basin. The model data released here consist of the stratigraphic contact elevation of major Phanerozoic sedimentary units that broadly define the geometry of the subsurface, the elevation of Tertiary intrusive and Precambrian basement rocks, and point data that illustrate an estimation of the three-dimensional geometry of fault surfaces. The presence of folds and unconformities are implied by the 3D geometry of the stratigraphic units, but these are not included as discrete features in this data release. The 3D geologic model was constructed from a wide variety of publicly available surface and subsurface geologic data; none of these input data are part of this Data Release, but data sources are thoroughly documented such that a user could obtain these data from other sources if desired. The PowderRiverWilliston3D geodatabase contains 40 subsurface horizons in raster format that represent the tops of modeled subsurface units, and a feature dataset “GeologicModel”. The GeologicModel feature dataset contains a feature class of 30 estimated faults served in elevation grid format (FaultPoints), a feature class illustrating the spatial extent of 22 fault blocks (FaultBlockFootprints), and a feature class containing a polygon delineating the study areas (ModelBoundary). Nonspatial tables define the data sources used (DataSources), define terms used in the dataset (Glossary), and provide a description of the modeled surfaces (DescriptionOfModelUnits). Separate file folders contain the vector data in shapefile format, the raster data in ASCII format, and the tables as comma-separated values. In addition, a tabular data dictionary describes the entity and attribute information for all attributes of the geospatial data and the accompanying nonspatial tables (EntityAndAttributes). An included READ_ME file documents the process of manipulating and interpreting publicly available surface and subsurface geologic data to create the model. It additionally contains critical information about model units, and uncertainty regarding their ability to predict true ground conditions. Accompanying this data release is the “PowderRiverWillistonInputSummaryTable.csv”, which tabulates the global settings for each fault block, the stratigraphic horizons modeled in each fault block, the types and quantity of data inputs for each stratigraphic horizon, and then the settings associated with each data input. This model was created as part of the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program (NCGMP). The objective of the NCGMP is to compile, synthesize, and disseminate 2-D and 3-D geologic information at detailed local, national, and continental scales to the public (Brock et al., 2021). This investigation is a component of the NGS’s ongoing effort to meet this broad directive and serve a geologically viable subsurface model to a wide variety of stakeholders. Intended end-uses of this product include (but are not limited to) natural resource assessments, engineering or environmental studies, geologic framework for future scientific investigation, support for land management decisions, and visualization for general public interest. 202207 202303 publication date Complete As needed -109.0685 -99.7622 49.3485 41.6885 ISO 19115 Topic Category geoscientificInformation USGS Thesaurus subsurface maps geologic structure stratigraphy USGS Geolex (https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Geolex/search) Bearpaw Shale Parkman Member Faults Lance Formation Glacial sediments Red Bird Member Hell Creek Formation Fox Hills Formation Pierre Shale Niobrara Formation Carlile Shale Belle Fourche Shale Mowry Shale Inyan Kara Group Morrison Formation Sundance Formation Spearfish Formation Minnekahta Formation Minnelusa Formation Madison Group Three Forks Shale Deadwood Formation Precambrian Winnipeg Group Red River Formation Interlake Dolomite Winnipegosis Formation Duperow Formation Bakken Formation Lodgepole Limestone Mission Canyon Limestone Charles Formation Big Snowy Group Opeche Shale Chugwater Group Thermopolis Shale Skull Creek Shale Tensleep Formation Greenhorn Formation Turner Member Sage Breaks Shale Wasatch Formation Wall Creek Member Tullock Member Ft. Union Formation Tongue River Member Tekla Member Teapot Member Swift Formation Lewis Shale Lebo Member None Geosciences and Environmental Change Science Center NCGMP (National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program) National Geologic Synthesis Project US Geoframework Initiative USGI USGS Metadata Identifier USGS:661fda97d34e7eb9eb7ec5cf Common Geographic Areas Williston Basin Great Plains Powder River Basin Black Hills Missouri River Casper Arch Bighorn Uplift Hartville Uplift Miles City Arch Wyoming Montana North Dakota Laramie Range None. There are no restrictions on use of these data, except for reasonable and proper acknowledgment of information sources. Users are advised to thoroughly read the READ_ME document and metadata prior to use. Unless otherwise stated, all data, metadata and related materials are considered to satisfy the quality standards relative to the purpose for which the data were collected. Although these data and associated metadata have been reviewed for accuracy and completeness and approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data on any other system or for general or scientific purposes, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty. Acknowledgement of the U.S. Geological Survey would be appreciated in products derived from these data. Leland R Spangler U.S. Geological Survey, ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGION Geologist mailing address

Mail Stop 980, W 6th Ave Kipling St

Lakewood CO 80225 US 1-888-275-8747 lspangler@usgs.gov Project supported by funding from the USGS National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program. Author credits: Spangler gathered and prepared data, completed the geologic interpretation and synthesis, prepared the output data in a geodatabase, and wrote metadata. Melick provided critical input data used in the Powder River Basin portion of this work. Gelman (of USGS Energy) contributed significantly by providing models of key stratal surfaces, and thoughtful review comments for this release. Content and rigor of this dataset was improved by data quality, geologic names, GIS and metadata reviews by Donald Sweetkind, Paco VanSistine, and Joseph Colgan, all of the USGS. This dataset was developed on Windows 10 Enterprise using ArcGIS Pro, Leapfrog Geo 2023.1, Adobe Illustrator 2023, and Microsoft Excel. No formal attribute accuracy tests were conducted, however broad regions of high uncertainty for individual model units were marked as polygons. Verification was done by interactive on-screen review. Map elements and Topology were checked if needed. Data set is considered complete for the information presented, as described in the abstract. Users are advised to read the rest of the metadata record and associated READ_ME file carefully for additional details. Conclusions drawn from this information are the responsibility of the user. A formal accuracy assessment of the horizontal positional information in the dataset has not been conducted. A formal accuracy assessment of the vertical positional information in the dataset has not been conducted. Bader, J.W. 2017 publication Bader, J.W., 2017, Mapping Sandstones of the Inyan Kara Formation for Saltwater Disposal In North Dakota, Geo News, North Dakota Geological Survey Investigations, 9p. Digital and/or Hardcopy 2017 publication date Bader Inyan Kara Formation for Saltwater Disposal Information about the Inyan Kara group Fryberger, S.G. Jones, N. Johnson, M.B. 2014 publication Fryberger, S.G., Jones, N., and Johnson, M.B., 2014, “Field Guide to the Minnelusa Formation, Ranch A and Newcastle Area, Wyoming and South Dakota”, EOR Institute Field Guide, University of Wyoming, p. 1-67. Digital and/or Hardcopy 2014 publication date Field Guide to the Minnelusa Formation Information about the Minnelusa Formation Anderson, F.J., 2009 publication North Dakota Geological Survey 85 Anderson, F.J., 2009, Depth to Precambrian Basement Rock in North Dakota, North Dakota Geological Survey, Geologic Investigations No. 85, 1:750,000. Available online: https://www.dmr.nd.gov/ndgs/documents/Publication_List/pdf/geoinv/GI_85_web.pdf https://www.dmr.nd.gov/ndgs/documents/Publication_List/pdf/geoinv/GI_85_web.pdf Digital and/or Hardcopy 2009 publication date Depth to Precambrian Basement Rock in North Dakota Depth to Precambrian Basement Rock in North Dakota Lisenbee, A.L. 1988 publication Lisenbee, A.L., 1988, Tectonic History of the Black Hills Uplift. Thirty-Ninth Field Conference Guidebook, Eastern Powder River Basin—Black Hills. Casper, Wyoming: Wyoming Geological Association, Available online: http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1302/ML13023A327.pd (accessed on 29 March 2018). http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1302/ML13023A327.pd Digital and/or Hardcopy 1988 publication date Lisenbee Tectonic History of the Black Hills Uplift Information about the tectonic history of the Black Hills region Lichtner, D.T. Toner, R.N. Wrage, J.M, Lynds, R.M. 2020 publication U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 2173-A Lichtner, D.T., Toner, R.N., Wrage, J.M., and Lynds, R.M., 2020, Upper Cretaceous strata in the Powder River Basin—Formation tops database, structure and thickness contour maps, and associated well data: Wyoming State Geological Survey Open File Report 2020-9, 50 p. Available online: https://sales.wsgs.wyo.gov/upper-cretaceous-strata-in-the-powder-river-basin-formation-tops-database-structure-and-thickness-contour-maps-and-associated-well-data-2020/ Digital and/or Hardcopy 2020 publication date Upper Cretaceous strata in the Powder River Basin—Formation tops database, structure and thickness contour maps, and associated well data Upper Cretaceous Structure Contours Love, J.D. Christiansen, A.C. 1985 publication Love, J.D., and Christiansen, A.C., comps., 1985, Geologic map of Wyoming: U.S. Geological Survey, 3 sheets, scale 1:500,000. (Re-released 2014, Wyoming State Geological Survey. Available online: https://sales.wsgs.wyo.gov/geologic-map-of-wyoming-2014/ https://sales.wsgs.wyo.gov/geologic-map-of-wyoming-2014/ Digital and/or Hardcopy 1985 publication date Geologic map of Wyoming Geologic map of Wyoming Singleton, J.S. Mavor, S.P. Seymour, N.M. Williams, S.A. Patton, A.I. Ruthven, R.C. Johnson, E.P. Prior, M.G. 2019 publication Singleton, J.S., Mavor, S.P., Seymour, N.M., Williams, S.A., Patton, A.I., Ruthven, R.C., Johnson, E.P., Prior, M.G., 2019, Laramide shortening and the influence of Precambrian basement on uplift of the Black Hills, South Dakota and Wyoming, U.S.A.. Rocky Mountain Geology, 54 (1): 1–17. doi: https://doi.org/10.24872/rmgjournal.54.1.1 https://doi.org/10.24872/rmgjournal.54.1.1 Digital and/or Hardcopy 2019 publication date Singleton Precambrian basement on uplift of the Black Hills Information about Laramide tectonism in the Black Hills Naylor, S. Wickert, A.D. Edmonds, D.A. Yanites, B.J. 2021 publication Naylor, S., Wickert, A.D., Edmonds, D.A., Yanites, B.J., 2021, Landscape evolution under the southern Laurentide Ice Sheet, Science Advances, v. 7, no. 48, DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abj2938. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abj2938. Digital and/or Hardcopy 2021 publication date Landscape evolution under the southern Laurentide Ice Sheet Landscape evolution under the southern Laurentide Ice Sheet United States Geological Survey 2021 raster digital data United States Geological Survey, 2021, United States Geological Survey 3D Elevation Program 1 arc-second Digital Elevation Model. Distributed by OpenTopography. https://doi.org/10.5069/G98K778D. Accessed: 2023-03-22 https://doi.org/10.5069/G98K778D Digital and/or Hardcopy 2021 publication date USGS 3DEP Used as the digital elevation model in this study Whitmeyer, S.J. Karlstrom, K.E. 2007 publication Whitmeyer, S.J., Karlstrom, K.E., 2007, Tectonic model for the Proterozoic growth of North America, Geosphere, 2007;; 3 (4): 220–259. doi: https://doi.org/10.1130/GES00055.1 https://doi.org/10.1130/GES00055.1 Digital and/or Hardcopy 2007 publication date Whitmeyer Proterozoic growth of North America information about the Precambrian assemblage of North America Gelman, S.E., Johnson, B.J., 2023 raster digital data USGS Science Base U.S. Geological Survey Gelman, S.E., and Johnson, B.G., 2023, Data release for the 3D petroleum systems model of the Williston Basin, USA: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/P9N7O1OT. https://doi.org/10.5066/P9N7O1OT. Digital and/or Hardcopy 2023 publication date Gelman and Johnson Williston Basin Data Release Detailed model of select formation tops for the Williston Basin portion of South Dakota Gelman, S.E., 2023 tabular digital data Marine and Petroleum Geology Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 155 Gelman, S.E., 2023, Modeling the maturation history of the stacked petroleum systems of the Williston Basin, USA, Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 155, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2023.106390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2023.106390. Digital and/or Hardcopy 2023 publication date Gelman Williston Basin Detailed outline of the methodology and inputs for the Williston Basin model Spangler, L.R. Melick, J. Sweetkind, D.S. 2023 tabular digital data Spangler, L.R., Melick, J., and Sweetkind, D.S., 2023, Digital subsurface database of elevation point data and structure contour maps of multiple subsurface units, Powder River Basin, Wyoming and Montana, USA: U.S. Geological Survey, data release, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5066/P953MC5C. https://doi.org/10.5066/P953MC5C. Digital and/or Hardcopy 2023 publication date Digital subsurface database of elevation point data and structure contour maps of multiple subsurface units, Powder River Basin, Wyoming and Montana, USA Digital subsurface database of elevation point data and structure contour maps of multiple subsurface units, Powder River Basin, Wyoming and Montana, USA Thamke, J.N. LeCain, G.D. Ryter, D.W. Long, A.J. 2014 tabular digital data Thamke, J.N., LeCain, G.D., Ryter, D.W., Sando, Roy, and Long, A.J., 2014, Hydrogeologic framework of the uppermost principal aquifer systems in the Williston and Powder River structural basins, United States and Canada (ver. 1.1, December 2014): U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2014–5047, 38 p., DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20145047. http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20145047. Digital and/or Hardcopy 2014 publication date Hydrogeologic framework of the uppermost principal aquifer systems in the Williston and Powder River structural basins, United States and Canada Hydrogeologic framework of the uppermost principal aquifer systems in the Williston and Powder River structural basins, United States and Canada Vuke, S.M. Porter, K.W. Lonn, J.D. Lopez. D.A. 2009 tabular digital data Vuke, S.M., Porter, K.W., Lonn, J.D., and Lopez. D.A., 2009, Geologic Map of Montana: Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology Geologic Map 62-E, 59 p., scale 1:500,000. Available online: Digital and/or Hardcopy 2009 publication date Geologic Map of Montana Geologic map of Montana Wyoming State Geological Survey 2022 tabular digital data Wyoming State Geological Survey, 2022, Precambrian basement map of Wyoming—Structural configuration: Wyoming State Geological Survey Open File Report 2022-5, 8 p., 1 pl., scale 1:500,000, DOI: https://doi.org/10.15786/21183787. (Revised 2023.) https://doi.org/10.15786/21183787 500000 Digital and/or Hardcopy 2022 publication date Precambrian basement map of Wyoming—Structural configuration Precambrian basement map of Wyoming—Structural configuration Digital elevation data (DEM) for this study was extracted from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) 1 arc-second Digital Elevation Model (United States Geological Survey, 2021) into an ASCII elevation grid from online repository OpenTopography (https://doi.org/10.5069/G98K778D). This ASCII elevation grid was resampled from 1 arc-second (30m) to 200m resolution due to the large scale of this model and data handling constraints at the time of processing (over 9 million vertices). The ASCII file was then reprojected into NAD 1983 Contiguous USA Albers (EPSG 5070) using Environmental Science Research Institute (ESRI) ArcGIS ProTM software, gridded using a standard triangular mesh routine in LeapfrogTM Geo 2021.2 3D modeling software, and the resultant mesh was cleaned to combine identical vertices, consistently orient faces and concentric parts, remove non-vertex points, and eliminate degenerate faces. DEM data were used to define land surface elevation, and to add elevation values to 2D surficial data used as model inputs. 2023 Surficial geologic contacts and structural surface exposures were compiled across the study area from a combination of digital vector data and scanned images. A generalized digital geologic map was compiled in a GIS by merging four data sets: (1) digital vectors of the South Dakota Geological Survey’s 1:500,000 scale General Map 10 (Martin et al., 2004), (2) digital vectors of the 1:500,000 scale map of Wyoming (Love and Christiansen, 1985), (3) digital vectors of the 1:500,000 scale geologic map of Montana (Vuke et al., 2007), and (4) digital vectors of the 1:670,000 scale geologic and topographic bedrock map of North Dakota (Bluemle, 2009). Vector-format data were compiled in GIS software and edited for use in modeling. Polylines delineating stratigraphic contacts of interest were isolated, and data other than the surface of interest was eliminated (i.e, all data other than the stratigraphic “upper” contact). These data were stored in a geodatabase, uploaded into the 3D modeling software, and then draped on the topographic surface. In some cases, minor mapped details or intricate contact polylines were manually simplified to eliminate conflicts between the true ground surface and simplified topographic surface used in this model. This is a known source of error that may deviate from true ground conditions. Scanned geologic maps were manually georeferenced in the 3D modeling software and draped on the topographic surface. These maps serve as general guides and additional non-digital datapoints (i.e., average regional strike and dip values) not explicitly incorporated as model data. 1:100,000-scale maps include work from the Black Hills (Redden and DeWitt, 2008; Sutherland, 2007; 2008; McLaughlin and Ver Ploeg, 2006) eastern Montana (Vuke et al., 2001; 2003; 2009), Bighorn Mountains (Vuke et al., 2000; Lopez, 2000; Ver Ploeg et al., 2002; 2003; 2004; Wittke, 2007) and southern Powder River Basin (Hunter et al., 2005; McLaughlin and Harris, 2005; McLaughlin and Ver Ploeg, 2008; McLaughlin et al., 2011) among others. 2023 Surface locations of 146,904 hydrocarbon well collars were imported from the Wyoming Oil and Gas Commission (WYOGCC) (http://pipeline.wyo.gov/), North Dakota Department of Mineral Resources (https://www.dmr.nd.gov/dmr/), and Montana Board of Oil and Gas Conservation (MBOGC) (https://bogapps.dnrc.mt.gov/dataminer/Default.aspx). Collar location points were reprojected into the NAD 1983 Contiguous USA Albers projection and saved with corresponding easting and northing values. All depths and elevations were converted to meters. A considerable number of well locations did not contain collar or kelly bushing elevation data, therefore corresponding ground elevation data was extracted from the USGS 3DEP 1m dataset to all wells. This elevation data deviated from provided collar values by a mean of 2.7m, which was deemed acceptable for this application by the authors. This is a known source of error. Boreholes lacking deviation surveys or telemetry data were incorporated into this study. Due to a lack of available data, wells without survey information were assumed to be vertical with a dip and dip direction of 90°/180°. This was deemed acceptable for this application by the authors, as true vertical depth (TVD) was used to calculate the elevation of stratigraphic horizons. This is a known source of error. Stratigraphic tops data were sourced from previously referenced state databases, and 289,916 stratigraphic tops of interest were converted to meters and imported into the 3D modeling software. Data were displayed along proper borehole traces by correlating unit API number (American Petroleum Institute). 2023 Structure contours are lines of constant elevation of a geologic surface and are generally interpretive products aimed at interpolating between known points such as stratigraphic formation tops in a well. This study incorporates 10,781 individual structure contour lines from several maps of both local and regional extent. Vector format structure contours of the Wyoming Precambrian basement (WGS, 2022), top of the Inyan Kara Group (Lisenbee, 1985), top of the Mowry Shale, Belle Fourche Formation. Greenhorn Formation, Turner-Wall Creek System, Sage Breaks Member of the Carlile Shale, Niobrara Formation, Red-Bird and Parkman Members, Teapot Member, Tekla Member, Fox Hills Formation (Lichtner et al., 2020), and top of the Ft. Union Formation (Jones et al., 2003) were employed to supplement well data in the Powder River Basin. Other published contours in the Powder River Basin were consulted, but not explicitly incorporated in grid calculation such as Goldberg and Sweetkind (2022), and Fox and Higley (1996). In the Williston Basin, contours were used to model the top of the Precambrian basement (Anderson, 2009), the top of the consolidated pre-Laurentide bedrock surface (Naylor et al., 2021), the top of the Hell Creek/Lance Formation, and Tullock, Lebo, and Tongue River Members of the Ft. Union Formation (Thamke et al., 2014). Contours from the USGS water study by Thamke (2014) were additionally used in the Powder River Basin. Contours were imported into GIS software, reprojected, and converted to meters. Contour datasets were manually pre-processed by removing data where redundant, where contours conflicted new data, or where contours ignored fault offset. Datasets were then uploaded to 3D modeling software for use in constraining the geometry of surfaces defining the upper boundary of stratigraphic model units. Contours of the upper bedrock surface from Soller and Garrity (2018) were used to construct an upper bedrock surface in glaciated portion of North Dakota, Montana, and South Dakota. 2023 Multiple published cross sections were used to aid in the interpretation of this model. Published cross sections served as interpretive guides rather than as true subsurface datapoints. For example, the geometry of the Piney Creek thrust system was inferred from published depth-migrated seismic data by Stone (2003). Regional stratigraphic cross sections picked from geophysical well logs by Gregory (1997) and De Bruin (1998) were employed to constrain understanding of regional stratigraphic architecture as they provided evidence of key stratigraphic pinch-outs and unconformities from a regional perspective not immediately evident in our input data. The geometry of select stratigraphic tops in the northwestern portion of the model were derived from a USGS petroleum systems model of the Williston Basin (Gelman and Johnson, 2023). Descriptions of modeled stratigraphic horizons, associated formation top picks, and notes on horizon creation are tabulated in the accompanying Marine and Petroleum Geology publication (Gelman, 2023). For the purposes of this model, the Gelman and Johnson (2023) data is assumed to be the most accurate due to the quality and density of data available for their study, and are treated as the most important data where it exists within the model boundaries. The “top Red River” and “top Mowry” surfaces, which were used as anchor surfaces within the Gelman and Johnson (2023) model. Model grids in the Powder River Basin were sourced from Melick (2013), who modeled the top of the Precambrian Basement, Madison Formation, Tensleep Formation, Lakota Formation, Frontier Sandstone, and Mesaverde Group from wireline logs as part of a study on carbon sequestration in subsurface reservoirs. These grids were adapted for use in this study and published as a USGS data release (Spangler et al., 2023). Stratigraphic horizon grids for the 3D petroleum systems model were imported into a GIS software and reprojected to NAD 1983 Contiguous USA Albers. Grids were then converted to point feature classes and incorporated into the 3D modeling software using a geodatabase. These point feature classes were then applied to their respective stratigraphic horizons, and conflicting data such as older structure contour data or picked formation tops were omitted using professional judgement. 2023 3-D modeling was accomplished through a series of steps using ArcGIS ProTM software and Leapfrog GeoTM 2021.2. Following compilation and initial preparation for use in a GIS, input data were imported into a 3-D modeling software for synthesis. The modeling approach begins with aggregation of input data into stratal and fault surfaces, editing and refining of stratal and fault surfaces using geologic and mathematical rules, and final concatenation of fault and stratal surfaces to generate a faulted 3D volume. Initial synthesis of geologic data involved generating dynamic meshes of stratal surfaces using Leapfrog Geo’sTM Fast Radial Basis Function gridding routine. Input data included stratigraphic formation tops, structure contours, and surface contact polylines. All grids were generated at a 250-meter resolution, using single-pass isosurfacing. 2023 The availability and quality of data for any particular surface is highly variable This variability can result in geologically unreasonable relationships between meshes. To better synthesize the input data, datapoints that were deemed an extreme outlier or detrimental to the overall model quality were excluded. This involves removing individual formation tops, and simplifying surface contacts where they distort an individual mesh past the point geologic reasonability. This process was improved by the selective use of a boundary filter for individual data inputs, and a global maximum snap distance for meshes to honor and particular datapoint was set at 125 m. Following data quality control, over 3143 spatially oriented synthetic control points were used to modify stratal surface meshes to better reflect a geologically reasonable interpretation, especially where important details were indicated by surfaces above or below. These control points were especially useful for restoring stratal surfaces to their pre-erosional geometry above the present-day land surface so that the intersection of the stratal surface and the DEM better reflected mapped contacts. This process was iterated numerous times until surfaces approximated published maps and cross sections. Fault data was synthesized by creating sets of structural control points along a digital fault trace in the 3-D modeling software. 250 meter-resolution meshes were then generated from this data to populate the volume with simple fault models. As stratal surface meshes evolved, fault shape, dip, and offset were modified to reflect signals from the input data. Stratal surface meshes and fault meshes were then combined in the 3-D modeling software to construct a 3-D volumetric model composed of individual volumes for each model unit. The upper boundary surface of each volume was exported as a raster with a 500-meter resolution, and as structure contours generated in the 3-D software. Fault were exported as a 500-meter resolution elevation grid, with x, y, and z coordinates assigned to each grid point with z representing the elevation relative to mean sea level. All outputs were then imported into a GIS, and attributed in the GeMS format. 2023 Vector G-polygon 1 Albers Conical Equal Area 29.5 45.5 -96.0 23.0 0.0 0.0 coordinate pair 0.6096 0.6096 meters North_American_Datum_1983 GRS_1980 6378137.0 298.257222101 PowderRiverWilliston3D.gdb FEATURE DATASET: GeologicModel ***All features classes in projected coordinates of NAD 1983 Contiguous USA Albers (WKID 5070)*** ***Note that feature classes have certain attribute fields such as OBJECTID, SHAPE, SHAPE_Length, SHAPE_Area that are assigned by the geographic information system. These fields are not editable and are not described below. FEATURE CLASS: ModelBoundary [Polygon feature class] DESCRIPTION OF FIELDS: Shape: Describes the type of attribute in the feature class Shape_Length: Describes the length of the outline in meters Shape_Area: Describes the area of the polygon in meters MapUnit: Short identifier for the map unit(s) represented by this polygon. IdentityConfidence: Qualitative value representing certainty in identification of feature Label: If used, describes text label to accompany this point symbol Symbol: If used, numeric code that references "REF NO" column in USGS FGDC Digital Cartographic Standard for Geologic Map Symbolization (https://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/2006/11A02/) DataSourceID: Foreign key to nonspatial DataSources table, to track provenance of each data element. Notes: Free text for additional information specific to this feature. MapUnitPolys_ID: Primary key. Unique feature identifier (MUP*) FEATURE CLASS: Fault_Points_ [Point feature class] DESCRIPTION OF FIELDS: Shape: Describes the type of attribute in the feature class Type: Specifies kind of line feature represented by this database row. Values must be defined in Glossary table. Null values not permitted LocationConfidenceMeters: Half-width (in meters) of positional-uncertainty envelope around this line feature. Data type = float. Null values not permitted; recommend setting value = ?9 if value is not known Label: Describes text label for this point feature. Can be used to store easily understood name for point feature. Allows for special fonts to show geologic age symbols. Null values are typical Symbol: References a point symbol in USGS FGDC Digital Cartographic Standard for Geologic Map Symbolization (https://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/2006/11A02/) DataSourceID: Identifies source of each data element. Foreign key to DataSources table. Null values not permitted Notes: Free text for additional information specific to this entry. FaultPoints_ID: Primary key. Values must be unique in database. Null values not permitted. Unique key identifier (FUP*) FaultType: Text field specifying the relative motion specific to a given fault at this point (Normal, Thrust, Unknown) x: Specifies measured position of fault plane that pertains to this point feature. Date type = float. Null values not permitted y: Specifies measured position of fault plane that pertains to this point feature. Date type = float. Null values not permitted z: Specifies measured vertical value of fault plane in meters that pertains to this point feature. Date type = float. Null values not permitted FaultModelName: Specifies an informal name for faults exclusively for differentiation within this dataset. See "Read_Me" documentation for more information FEATURE CLASS: FaultBlockFootprints [Polygon feature class] DESCRIPTION OF FIELDS: Shape: Describes the type of attribute in the feature class Shape_Length: Describes the length of the outline in meters Shape_Area: Describes the area of the polygon in meters Label: Text label identifying the specific polygon Symbol: If used, numeric code that references "REF NO" column in USGS FGDC Digital Cartographic Standard for Geologic Map Symbolization (https://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/2006/11A02/) DataSourceID: Foreign key to nonspatial DataSources table, to track provenance of each data element. Notes: Free text for additional information specific to this feature. FaultBlockPolys_ID: Primary key. Unique feature identifier (FBP*) RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopLaurentideDeposits Elevation values in meters for top of unconsolidated sediments derived from the Laurentide Ice Sheet RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopSurficialUndifferentiated Elevation values in meters for top of unknown and undifferentiated sediments RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopPrePliocene Elevation values in meters for top of Pre-Pliocene deposits RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopIntrusive Elevation values in meters for top of Tertiary intrusives RASTER DATASET: PRW_ TopWasatchFormation Elevation values in meters for top of the Wasatch Formations RASTER DATASET: PRW_ TopTongueRiverMember Elevation values in meters for top of the Tongue River RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopLeboMember Elevation values in meters for the top of the Lebo Member RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopTullockMember Elevation values in meters for the top of the Tullock Member RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopLanceHellCreekFormation Elevation values in meters for top of the Lance and Hell Creek Formations RASTER DATASET: PRW_ TopFoxHillsFormation Elevation values in meters for top of the Fox Hills Formation RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopPierreBearpawLewisShale Elevation values in meters for top of the Pierre, Bearpaw, and Lewis Shales RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopTeklaMember Elevation values in meters for top of the Tekla Member RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopTeapotMember Elevation values in meters for top of the Teapot Member RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopParkmanRedBirdMember Elevation values in meters for top of the Parkman and Red Bird Members RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopNiobraraFormation Elevation values in meters for top of the Niobrara Formation RASTER DATASET: PRW_ TopCarlileShale Elevation values in meters for top of the Carlile Shale RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopTurnerWallCreekMember Elevation values in meters for top of the Turner and Wall Creek Members RASTER DATASET: PRW_ TopGreenhornLimestone Elevation values in meters for top of the Greenhorn Limestone RASTER DATASET: PRW_ TopBelleFourcheShale Elevation values in meters for top of the Belle Fourche Shale RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopMowryShale Elevation values in meters for top of the Mowry Shale RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopSkullCreekThermopolisShale Elevation values in meters for top of the Skull Creek and Thermopolish Shales RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopInyanKaraGroup Elevation values in meters for top of the Inyan Kara Group RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopMorrisonFormation Elevation values in meters for top of Morrison Formation RASTER DATASET: PRW_ TopSwiftSundanceFormation Elevation values in meters for top of the Sundance and Swift Formations RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopSpearfishChugwaterFormation Elevation values in meters for top of the Spearfish and Chugwater Formations RASTER DATASET: PRW_ TopMinnekahtaFormation Elevation values in meters for top of the Minnekahta Formation RASTER DATASET: PRW_ TopMinnelusaTensleepFormation Elevation values in meters for top of the Minnelusa and Tensleep Formations RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopBigSnowyGroup Elevation values in meters for top of the Big Snowy Group RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopMadisonGroup Elevation values in meters for top of the Madison Group RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopMissionCanyonFormation Elevation values in meters for top of the Mission Canyon Formation RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopLodgepoleLimestone Elevation values in meters for top of the Lodgepole Limestone RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopBakkenFormation Elevation values in meters for top of the Bakken Formation RASTER DATASET: PRW_ TopThreeForksFormation Elevation values in meters for top of the Three Forks Formation RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopDuperowFormation Elevation values in meters for top of the Duperow Formation RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopWinnipegosisFormation Elevation values in meters for top of the Winnipegosis Formation RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopInterlakeFormation Elevation values in meters for top of the Interlake Formation RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopRedRiverWhitewoodFormation Elevation values in meters for top of the Red River and Whitewood Formations RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopWinnipegGroup Elevation values in meters for top of The Winnipeg Group RASTER DATASET: PRW_TopDeadwoodFormation Elevation values in meters for top of the Deadwood Formation RASTER DATASET: PRW_ TopPrecambrianBasement Elevation values in meters for top of the Precambrian basement NON-SPATIAL TABLE: DataSources DESCRIPTION OF FIELDS: Source: Short description of source FullCitation: complete citation of publication URL: URL link to data (at time of publication), if available Notes: Free text for additional information specific to this entry. DataSource_ID: Primary key. Unique to each data entry (DAS*) NON-SPATIAL TABLE: DescriptionOfModelUnits DESCRIPTION OF FIELDS: MapUnit: Unit abbreviation Name: Short unit name FullName: Full unit name that may include member/formation/group associations Age: Period or Epoch of unit consistent with USGS time scale Description: Text description of map unit HierarchyKey: String of dash-delimited numeric values that illustrate the hierarchical relationship between units Label: Describes text label for map-unit polygons. Field from which map-unit label is generated Symbol: If used, references an area-fill symbol DescriptionSourceID: Identifies source of Description. Foreign key to DataSources table GeoMaterial: Term categorizing the dominant lithology in the map feature. Term derived from NGMDB standard term list (see APPENDIX A. TERMS FOR GEOMATERIAL AND GEOMATERIALCONFIDENCE in GeMS data model https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Info/standards/GeMS/) GeoMaterialConfidence: Qualitative term describing appropriateness of the GeoMaterial term used DescriptionOfMapUnits_ID: Primary key. Unique to each data entry (DMU*) NON-SPATIAL TABLE: Glossary DESCRIPTION OF FIELDS: Term: Geologic concept, feature, phenomenon, or other terminology being defined Definition: Definition of value in Term DefinitionSource_ID: Identifies source of Definition. Foreign key to DataSources table Glossary_ID: Primary key. Unique to each glossary entry (GLO*) NON-SPATIAL TABLE: GeoMaterialDict FIELD DESCRIPTION HierarchyKey Text string that indicates hierarchy of entries within list of GeoMaterial terms GeoMaterial Name of GeoMaterial unit IndentedName GeoMaterial name with indentation that corresponds to rank of entry within hierarchy Definition Definition of GeoMaterial name ***This nonspatial table is a standard part of any GeMS spatial database and is not modified by the authors. ***This table is described within the GeMS documentation; see https://doi.org/10.3133/tm11B10 and https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Info/standards/GeMS/ U.S. Geological Survey National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program, 2020, GeMS (Geologic Map Schema)—A standard format for the digital publication of geologic maps: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods, book 11, chap. B10, 74 p., GS ScienceBase U.S. Geological Survey mailing address

Denver Federal Center, Building 810, Mail Stop 302

Denver CO 80225 United States 1-888-275-8747 sciencebase@usgs.gov Any use of trade, product or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also contains copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items for other than personal use must be secured from the copyright owner. This database has been approved for release and publication by the Director of the USGS. Although this database has been subjected to rigorous review and is substantially complete, the USGS reserves the right to revise the data pursuant to further analysis and review. Furthermore, it is released on condition that neither the USGS nor the United States Government may be held liable for any damages resulting from its authorized or unauthorized use. Although these data have been processed successfully on a computer system at the U.S. Geological Survey, no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data on any other system, or for general or scientific purposes, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty. The U.S. Geological Survey shall not be held liable for improper or incorrect use of the data described and/or contained herein. Digital Data https://doi.org/10.5066/P13RSCBV None. No fees are applicable for obtaining the data set. 20260319 Leland R Spangler U.S. Geological Survey, ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGION Geologist mailing address

Mail Stop 980, W 6th Ave Kipling St

Lakewood CO 80225 US 1-888-275-8747 lspangler@usgs.gov FGDC Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata FGDC-STD-001-1998