ABSTRACT The late Eocene Chesapeake Bay impact structure was formed in a multilayered target of seawater underlain sequentially by a sediment layer and a rock layer in a continental-shelf environment. Impact effects in the “brim” (annular trough) surrounding and adjacent to the transient crater, between the transient crater rim and the outer margin, primarily were limited to the target-sediment layer. Analysis of published and new lithostratigraphic, biostratigraphic, sedimentologic, petrologic, and mineralogic studies of three core holes, and published studies of a fourth core hole, provided information for the interpretation of the impact processes, their interactions and relative timing, their resulting products, and sedimentation in the brim. Most studies of marine impact-crater materials have focused on those found in the central crater. There are relatively few large, complex marine craters, of which most display a wide brim around the central crater. However, most have been studied using minimal data sets. The large number of core holes and seismic profiles available for study of the Chesapeake Bay impact structure presents a special opportunity for research. The physical and chronologic records supplied by study of the sediment and rock cores of the Chesapeake Bay impact indicate that the effects of the initial, short-lived contact and compression and excavation stages of the impact event primarily were limited to the transient crater. Only secondary effects of these processes are evident in the brim. The preserved record of the brim was created primarily in the subsequent modification stage. In the brim, the records of early impact processes (e.g., outgoing tsunamis, overturned flap collapse) were modified or removed by later processes. Transported and rotated, large and small clasts of target sediments, and intervals of fluidized sands indicate that seismic shaking fractured and partially fluidized the Cretaceous and Paleogene target sediments, which led to their inward transport by collapse and lateral spreading toward the transient crater. The succeeding inward seawater-resurge flow quickly overtook and interacted with the lateral spreading, further facilitating sediment transport across the brim and into the transient crater. Variations in the cohesion and relative depth of the target sediments controlled their degree of disaggregation and redistribution during these events. Melt clasts and shocked and unshocked rock clasts in the resurge sediments indicate fallout from the ejecta curtain and plume. Basal parautochthonous remnant sections of target Cretaceous sediments in the brim thin toward the collapsed transient crater. Overlying seawater-resurge deposits consist primarily of diamictons that vary laterally in thickness, and vertically and laterally in maximum grain size. After cessation of resurge flow and re-establishment of pre-impact sea level, sandy sediment gravity flows moved from the margin to the center of the partially filled impact structure (shelf basin). The uppermost unit consists of stratified sediments deposited from suspension. Postimpact clayey silts cap the crater fill and record the return to shelf sedimentation at atypically large paleodepths within the shelf basin. An unresolved question involves a section of gravel and sand that overlies Neoproterozoic granite in the inner part of the brim in one core hole. This section may represent previously unrecognized, now parautochthonous Cretaceous sediments lying nonconformably above basement granite, or it may represent target sediments that were moved significant distances by lateral spreading above basement rocks or above a granite megaclast from the overturned flap. The Chesapeake Bay impact structure is perhaps the best documented example of the small group of multilayer, marine-target impacts formed in continental shelves or beneath epeiric seas. The restriction of most impact effects to the target-sediment layer in the area outside the transient cavity, herein called the brim, and the presence of seawater-resurge sediments are characteristic features of this group. Other examples include the Montagnais (offshore Nova Scotia, Canada) and Mjølnir (offshore Norway) impact structures.

The Stafford fault system, located in the mid-Atlantic coastal plain of the eastern United States, provides the most complete record of fault movement during the past ~120 m.y. across the Virginia, Washington, District of Columbia (D.C.), and Maryland region, including displacement of Pleistocene terrace gravels. The Stafford fault system is close to and aligned with the Piedmont Spotsylvania and Long Branch fault zones. The dominant southwest-northeast trend of strong shaking from the 23 August 2011, moment magnitude M w 5.8 Mineral, Virginia, earthquake is consistent with the connectivity of these faults, as seismic energy appears to have traveled along the documented and proposed extensions of the Stafford fault system into the Washington, D.C., area. Some other faults documented in the nearby coastal plain are clearly rooted in crystalline basement faults, especially along terrane boundaries. These coastal plain faults are commonly assumed to have undergone relatively uniform movement through time, with average slip rates from 0.3 to 1.5 m/m.y. However, there were higher rates during the Paleocene–early Eocene and the Pliocene (4.4–27.4 m/m.y), suggesting that slip occurred primarily during large earthquakes. Further investigation of the Stafford fault system is needed to understand potential earthquake hazards for the Virginia, Maryland, and Washington, D.C., area. The combined Stafford fault system and aligned Piedmont faults are ~180 km long, so if the combined fault system ruptured in a single event, it would result in a significantly larger magnitude earthquake than the Mineral earthquake. Many structures most strongly affected during the Mineral earthquake are along or near the Stafford fault system and its proposed northeastward extension.

Abstract The Salisbury embayment is a broad tectonic downwarp that is filled by generally seaward-thickening, wedge-shaped deposits of the central Atlantic Coastal Plain. Our two-day field trip will take us to the western side of this embayment from the Fall Zone in Washington, D.C., to some of the bluffs along Aquia Creek and the Potomac River in Virginia, and then to the Calvert Cliffs on the western shore of the Chesapeake Bay. We will see fluvial-deltaic Cretaceous deposits of the Potomac Formation. We will then focus on Cenozoic marine deposits. Transgressive and highstand deposits are stacked upon each other with unconformities separating them; rarely are regressive or lowstand deposits preserved. The Paleocene and Eocene shallow shelf deposits consist of glauconitic, silty sands that contain varying amounts of marine shells. The Miocene shallow shelf deposits consist of diatomaceous silts and silty and shelly sands. The lithology, thickness, dip, preservation, and distribution of the succession of coastal plain sediments that were deposited in our field-trip area are, to a great extent, structurally controlled. Surficial and subsurface mapping using numerous continuous cores, auger holes, water-well data, and seismic surveys has documented some folds and numerous high-angle reverse and normal faults that offset Cretaceous and Cenozoic deposits. Many of these structures are rooted in early Mesozoic and/or Paleozoic NE-trending regional tectonic fault systems that underlie the Atlantic Coastal Plain. On Day 1, we will focus on two fault systems (stops 1-2; Stafford fault system and the Skinkers Neck-Brandywine fault system and their constituent fault zones and faults). We will then see (stops 3-5) a few of the remaining exposures of largely unlithified marine Paleocene and Eocene strata along the Virginia side of the Potomac River including the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum boundary clay. These exposures are capped by fluvial-estuarine Pleistocene terrace deposits. On Day 2, we will see (stops 6-9) the classic Miocene section along the ~25 miles (~40 km) of Calvert Cliffs in Maryland, including a possible fault and structural warping. Cores from nearby test holes will also be shown to supplement outcrops.

Abstract Miocene strata exposed in the Calvert Cliffs, along the western shore of the Chesapeake Bay, Maryland, have a long history of study owing to their rich fossil record, including a series of spectacular shell and bone beds. Owing to increasingly refined biostratigraphic age control, these outcrops continue to serve as important references for geological and paleontological analyses. The canonical Calvert, Choptank, and St. Marys Formations, first described by Shattuck (1904), are generally interpreted as shallowing-up, from a fully marine open shelf to a variety of marginal marine, coastal environments. More detailed paleoenvironmental interpretation is challenging, however, owing to pervasive bioturbation, which largely obliterates diagnostic physical sedimentary structures and mixes grain populations; most lithologic contacts, including regional unconformities, are burrowed firmgrounds at the scale of a single outcrop. This field trip will visit a series of classic localities in the Calvert Cliffs to discuss the use of sedimentologic, ichnologic, taphonomic, and faunal evidence to infer environments under these challenging conditions, which are common to Cretaceous and Cenozoic strata throughout the U.S. Gulf and Atlantic Coastal Plains. We will examine all of Shattuck‚s (1904) original lithologic “zones” within the Plum Point Member of the Calvert Formation, the Choptank Formation, and the Little Cove Point Member of the St. Marys Formation, as well as view the channelized “upland gravel” that are probably the estuarine and fluvial equivalents of the marine upper Miocene Eastover Formation in Virginia. The physical stratigraphic discussion will focus on the most controversial intervals within the succession, namely the unconformities that define the bases of the Choptank and St. Marys Formations, where misunderstanding would mislead historical analysis.

Two cores at the outer margin of the Chesapeake Bay impact structure show significant structural and depositional variations that illuminate its history. Detailed stratigraphy of the Watkins School core reveals that this site is outside the disruption boundary of the crater with respect to its lower part (nonmarine Cretaceous Potomac Formation), but just inside the boundary with respect to its upper part (Exmore Formation and a succession of upper Eocene to Pleistocene postimpact deposits). The site of the U.S. Geological Survey–National Aeronautics and Space Administration Langley core, 6.4 km to the east, lies wholly within the annular trough of the crater. The Potomac Formation in the Watkins School core is not noticeably impact disrupted. The lower part of crater unit A in the Langley core represents stratigraphically lower, but similarly undeformed material. The Exmore Formation is only 7.8 m thick in the Watkins School core, but it is over 200 m thick in the Langley core, where it contains blocks up to 24 m in intersected diameter. The upper part of the Exmore Formation in the two cores is a polymict diamicton with a stratified zone at the top. The postimpact sedimentary units in the two cores have similar late Eocene and late Miocene depositional histories and contrasting Oligocene, early Miocene, and middle Miocene histories. A paleochannel of the James River removed Pliocene deposits at the Watkins School site, to be filled later with thick Pleistocene deposits. At the Langley site, a thick Pliocene and thinner Pleistocene record is preserved.

During 2005–2006, the International Continental Scientific Drilling Program and the U.S. Geological Survey drilled three continuous core holes into the Chesapeake Bay impact structure to a total depth of 1766.3 m. A collection of supplemental materials that presents a record of the core recovery and measurement data for the Eyreville cores is available on CD-ROM at the end of this volume and in the GSA Data Repository. The supplemental materials on the CD-ROM include digital photographs of each core box from the three core holes, tables of the three coring-run logs, as recorded on site, and a set of depth-conversion programs. In this chapter, the contents, purposes, and basic applications of the supplemental materials are briefly described. With this information, users can quickly decide if the materials will apply to their specific research needs.

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) acquired two 1.4-km-long, high-resolution (~5 m vertical resolution) seismic-reflection lines in 2006 that cross near the International Continental Scientific Drilling Program (ICDP)–USGS Eyreville deep drilling site located above the late Eocene Chesapeake Bay impact structure in Virginia, USA. Five-meter spacing of seismic sources and geophones produced high-resolution images of the subsurface adjacent to the 1766-m-depth Eyreville core holes. Analysis of these lines, in the context of the core hole stratigraphy, shows that moderate-amplitude, discontinuous, dipping reflections below ~527 m correlate with a variety of Chesapeake Bay impact structure sediment and rock breccias recovered in the cores. High-amplitude, continuous, subhorizontal reflections above ~527 m depth correlate with the uppermost part of the Chesapeake Bay impact structure crater-fill sediments and postimpact Eocene to Pleistocene sediments. Reflections with ~20–30 m of relief in the uppermost part of the crater-fill and lowermost part of the postimpact section suggest differential compaction of the crater-fill materials during early postimpact time. The top of the crater-fill section also shows ~20 m of relief that appears to represent an original synimpact surface. Truncation surfaces, locally dipping reflections, and depth variations in reflection amplitudes generally correlate with the lithostrati-graphic and sequence-stratigraphic units and contacts in the core. Seismic images show apparent postimpact paleochannels that include the first possible Miocene paleochannels in the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain. Broad downwarping in the postim-pact section unrelated to structures in the crater fill indicates postimpact sediment compaction.

An unusually thick section of sedimentary breccias dominated by target-sediment clasts is a distinctive feature of the late Eocene Chesapeake Bay impact structure. A cored 1766-m-deep section recovered from the central part of this marine-target structure by the International Continental Scientific Drilling Program (ICDP)–U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) drilling project contains 678 m of these breccias and associated sediments and an intervening 275-m-thick granite slab. Two sedimentary breccia units consist almost entirely of Cretaceous nonmarine sediments derived from the lower part of the target sediment layer. These sediments are present as coherent clasts and as autoclastic matrix between the clasts. Primary (Cretaceous) sedimentary structures are well preserved in some clasts, and liquefaction and fluidization structures produced at the site of deposition occur in the clasts and matrix. These sedimentary breccias are interpreted as one or more rock avalanches from the upper part of the transient-cavity wall. The little-deformed, unshocked granite slab probably was transported as part of an extremely large slide or avalanche. Water-saturated Cretaceous quartz sand below the slab was transported into the seafloor crater prior to, or concurrently with, the granite slab. Two sedimentary breccia units consist of polymict diamictons that contain cobbles, boulders, and blocks of Cretaceous nonmarine target sediments and less common shocked-rock and melt ejecta in an unsorted, unstratified, muddy, fossiliferous, glauconitic quartz matrix. Much of the matrix material was derived from Upper Cretaceous and Paleogene marine target sediments. These units are interpreted as the deposits of debris flows initiated by the resurge of ocean water into the seafloor crater. Interlayering of avalanche and debris-flow units indicates a partial temporal overlap of the earlier avalanche and later resurge processes. A thin unit of stratified turbidite deposits and overlying laminated fine-grained deposits at the top of the section represents the transition to normal shelf sedimentation.

Collapse and inward slumping of unconsolidated sedimentary strata expanded the Chesapeake Bay impact structure far beyond its central basement crater. During crater collapse, sediment-loaded water surged back to fill the crater. Here, we analyze clast frequency and granulometry of these resurge deposits in one core hole from the outermost part of the collapsed zone (i.e., Langley) as well as a core hole from the moat of the basement crater (i.e., Eyreville A). Comparisons of clast provenance and flow dynamics show that at both locations, there is a clear change in clast frequency and size between a lower unit, which we interpret to be dominated by slumped material, and an upper, water-transported unit, i.e., resurge deposit. The contribution of material to the resurge deposit was primarily controlled by stripping and erosion. This includes entrainment of fallback ejecta and sediments eroded from the surrounding seafloor, found to be dominant at Langley, and slumped material that covered the annular trough and basement crater, found to be dominant at Eyreville. Eyreville shows a higher content of crystalline clasts than Langley. There is equivocal evidence for an anti-resurge from a collapsing central water plume or, alternatively, a second resurge pulse, as well as a transition into oscillating resurge. The resurge material shows more of a debris-flow–like transport compared to resurge deposits at some other marine target craters, where the ratio of sediment to water has been relatively low. This result is likely a consequence of the combination of easily disaggregated host sediments and a relatively shallow target water depth.

The Eyreville core holes provide the first continuously cored record of postimpact sequences from within the deepest part of the central Chesapeake Bay impact crater. We analyzed the upper Eocene to Pliocene postimpact sediments from the Eyreville A and C core holes for lithology (semiquantitative measurements of grain size and composition), sequence stratigraphy, and chronostratigraphy. Age is based primarily on Sr isotope stratigraphy supplemented by biostratigraphy (dinocysts, nannofossils, and planktonic foraminifers); age resolution is approximately ±0.5 Ma for early Miocene sequences and approximately ±1.0 Ma for younger and older sequences. Eocene–lower Miocene sequences are subtle, upper middle to lower upper Miocene sequences are more clearly distinguished, and upper Miocene–Pliocene sequences display a distinct facies pattern within sequences. We recognize two upper Eocene, two Oligocene, nine Miocene, three Pliocene, and one Pleistocene sequence and correlate them with those in New Jersey and Delaware. The upper Eocene through Pleistocene strata at Eyreville record changes from: (1) rapidly deposited, extremely fine-grained Eocene strata that probably represent two sequences deposited in a deep (>200 m) basin; to (2) highly dissected Oligocene (two very thin sequences) to lower Miocene (three thin sequences) with a long hiatus; to (3) a thick, rapidly deposited (43–73 m/Ma), very fine-grained, biosiliceous middle Miocene (16.5–14 Ma) section divided into three sequences (V5–V3) deposited in middle neritic paleoenvironments; to (4) a 4.5-Ma-long hiatus (12.8–8.3 Ma); to (5) sandy, shelly upper Miocene to Pliocene strata (8.3–2.0 Ma) divided into six sequences deposited in shelf and shoreface environments; and, last, to (6) a sandy middle Pleistocene paralic sequence (~400 ka). The Eyreville cores thus record the filling of a deep impact-generated basin where the timing of sequence boundaries is heavily influenced by eustasy.

The Eyreville and Exmore, Virginia, core holes were drilled in the inner basin and annular trough, respectively, of the Chesapeake Bay impact structure, and they allow us to evaluate sequence deposition in an impact crater. We provide new high-resolution geochronologic (<1 Ma) and sequence-stratigraphic interpretations of the Exmore core, identify 12 definite (and four possible) postimpact depositional sequences, and present comparisons with similar results from Eyreville and other mid-Atlantic core holes. The concurrence of increases in δ 18 O with Chesapeake Bay impact structure sequence boundaries indicates a primary glacioeustatic control on deposition. However, regional comparisons show the differential preservation of sequences across the mid-Atlantic margin. We explain this distribution by the compaction of impactites, regional sediment-supply changes, and the differential movement of basement structures. Upper Eocene strata are thin or missing updip and around the crater, but they thicken into the inner basin (and offshore to the southeast) due to rapid crater infilling and concurrent impactite compaction. Oligocene sequences are generally thin and highly dissected throughout the mid-Atlantic region due to sediment starvation and tectonism, except in southeastern New Jersey. Regional tectonic uplift of the Norfolk Arch coupled with a southward decrease in sediment supply resulted in: (1) largely absent Lower Miocene sections around the Chesapeake Bay impact structure compared to thick sections in New Jersey and Delaware; (2) thick Middle Miocene sequences across the Delmarva Peninsula that thin south of the Chesapeake Bay impact structure; and (3) upper Middle Miocene sections that pinch out just north of the Chesapeake Bay impact structure. Conversely, the Upper Miocene–Pliocene section is thick across Virginia, but it is poorly represented in New Jersey because of regional variations in relative subsidence.

We investigated the groundwater system of the Chesapeake Bay impact structure by analyzing the pore-water chemistry in cores taken from a 1766-m-deep drill hole 10 km north of Cape Charles, Virginia. Pore water was extracted using high-speed centrifuges from over 100 cores sampled from a 1300 m section of the drill hole. The pore-water samples were analyzed for major cations and anions, stable isotopes of water and sulfate, dissolved and total carbon, and bioavailable iron. The results reveal a broad transition between freshwater and saline water from 100 to 500 m depth in the postimpact sediment section, and an underlying synimpact section that is almost entirely filled with brine. The presence of brine in the lowermost postimpact section and the trend in dissolved chloride with depth suggest a transport process dominated by molecular diffusion and slow, compaction-driven, upward flow. Major ion results indicate residual effects of diagenesis from heating, and a pre-impact origin for the brine. High levels of dissolved organic carbon (6–95 mg/L) and the distribution of electron acceptors indicate an environment that may be favorable for microbial activity throughout the drilled section. The concentration and extent of the brine is much greater than had previously been observed, suggesting that its occurrence may be common in the inner crater. However, groundwater-flow conditions in the structure may reduce the saltwater-intrusion hazard associated with the brine.

Asteroid and comet impact events are known to cause profound disruption to surface ecosystems. The aseptic collection of samples throughout a 1.76-km-deep set of cores recovered from the deep subsurface of the Chesapeake Bay impact structure has allowed the study of the subsurface biosphere in a region disrupted by an impactor. Microbiological enumerations suggest the presence of three major microbiological zones. The upper zone (127–867 m) is characterized by a logarithmic decline in microbial abundance from the surface through the postimpact section of Miocene to Upper Eocene marine sediments and across the transition into the upper layers of the impact tsunami resurge sediments and sediment megablocks. In the middle zone (867–1397 m) microbial abundances are below detection. This zone is predominantly quartz sand, primarily composed of boulders and blocks, and it may have been mostly sterilized by the thermal pulse delivered during impact. No samples were collected from the large granite block (1096–1371 m). The lowest zone (below 1397 m) of increasing microbial abundance coincides with a region of heavily impact-fractured, hydraulically conductive suevite and fractured schist. These zones correspond to lithologies influenced by impact processes. Our results yield insights into the influence of impacts on the deep subsurface biosphere.

The late Eocene Chesapeake Bay impact structure, located on the Atlantic margin of Virginia, may be Earth's best-preserved large impact structure formed in a shallow marine, siliciclastic, continental-shelf environment. It has the form of an inverted sombrero in which a central crater ∼40 km in diameter is surrounded by a shallower brim, the annular trough, that extends the diameter to ∼85 km. The annular trough is interpreted to have formed largely by the collapse and mobilization of weak sediments. Crystalline-clast suevite, found only in the central crater, contains clasts and blocks of shocked gneiss that likely were derived from the fragmentation of the central-uplift basement. The suevite and entrained megablocks are interpreted to have formed from impact-melt particles and crystalline-rock debris that never left the central crater, rather than as a fallback deposit. Impact-modified sediments in the annular trough include megablocks of Cretaceous nonmarine sediment disrupted by faults, fluidized sands, fractured clays, and mixed-sediment intercalations. These impact-modified sediments could have formed by a combination of processes, including ejection into and mixing of sediments in the water column, rarefaction-induced fragmentation and clastic injection, liquefaction and fluidization of sand in response to acousticwave vibrations, gravitational collapse, and inward lateral spreading. The Exmore beds, which blanket the entire crater and nearby areas, consist of a lower diamicton member overlain by an upper stratified member. They are interpreted as unstratified ocean-resurge deposits, having depositional cycles that may represent stages of inward resurge or outward anti-resurge flow, overlain by stratified fallout of suspended sediment from the water column.

Four new coreholes in the western annular trough of the buried, late Eocene Chesapeake Bay impact structure provide samples of shocked minerals, cataclastic rocks, possible impact melt, mixed sediments, and damaged microfossils. Parautochthonous Cretaceous sediments show an upward increase in collapse, sand fluidization, and mixed sediment injections. These impact-modified sediments are scoured and covered by the upper Eocene Exmore beds, which consist of highly mixed Cretaceous to Eocene sediment clasts and minor crystalline-rock clasts in a muddy quartz-glauconite sand matrix. The Exmore beds are interpreted as seawater-resurge debris flows. Shocked quartz is found as sparse grains and in rock fragments at all four sites in the Exmore, where these fallback remnants are mixed into the resurge deposit. Crystalline-rock clasts that exhibit shocked quartz or cataclastic fabrics include felsites, granitoids, and other plutonic rocks. Felsite from a monomict cataclasite boulder has a sensitive high-resolution ion microprobe U-Pb zircon age of 613 ± 4 Ma. Leucogranite from a polymict cataclasite boulder has a similar Neoproterozoic age based on muscovite 40 Ar/ 39 Ar data. Potassium-feldspar 40 Ar/ 39 Ar ages from this leucogranite show cooling through closure (∼150 °C) at ca. 261 Ma without discernible impact heating. Spherulitic felsite is under investigation as a possible impact melt. Types of crystalline clasts, and exotic sediment clasts and grains, in the Exmore vary according to location, which suggests different provenances across the structure. Fractured calcareous nannofossils and fused, bubbled, and curled dinoflagellate cysts coexist with shocked quartz in the Exmore, and this damage may record conditions of heat, pressure, and abrasion due to impact in a shallow-marine environment.