Search USGSSearch

Geology topics

Michael J. Focazio

Publications and source records attributed to Michael J. Focazio.

44 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

Residence times and nitrate transport in ground water discharging to streams in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed

One of the major water-quality problems in the Chesapeake Bay is an overabundance of nutrients from the streams and rivers that discharge to the Bay. Some of these nutrients are from nonpoint sources such as atmospheric deposition, agricultural manure and fertilizer, and septic systems. The effects of efforts to control nonpoint sources, however, can be difficult to quantify because of the lag time between changes at the land surface and the response in the base-flow (ground water) component of streams. To help resource managers understand the lag time between implementation of management practices and subsequent response in the nutrient concentrations in the base-flow component of streamflow, a study of ground-water discharge, residence time, and nitrate transport in springs throughout the Chesapeake Bay Watershed and in four smaller watersheds in selected hydrogeomorphic regions (HGMRs) was conducted. The four watersheds were in the Coastal Plain Uplands, Piedmont crystalline, Valley and Ridge carbonate, and Valley and Ridge siliciclastic HGMRs. A study of springs to estimate an apparent age of the ground water was based on analyses for concentrations of chlorofluorocarbons in water samples collected from 48 springs in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. Results of the analysis indicate that median age for all the samples was 10 years, with the 25th percentile having an age of 7 years and the 75th percentile having an age of 13 years. Although the number of samples collected in each HGMR was limited, there did not appear to be distinct differences in the ages between the HGMRs. The ranges were similar between the major HGMRs above the Fall Line (modern to about 50 years), with only two HGMRs of small geographic extent (Piedmont carbonate and Mesozoic Lowland) having ranges of modern to about 10 years. The median values of all the HGMRs ranged from 7 to 11 years. Not enough samples were collected in the Coastal Plain for comparison. Spring samples showed slightly younger water under wet conditions than under dry conditions. The apparent age of water from wells, springs, and other ground-water discharge points in the four targeted watersheds was modern to 60 years, which was similar to the apparent ages from the spring study. In the Pocomoke River Watershed in the Coastal Plain Uplands HGMR, the apparent age of ground-water samples ranged from 0 to 60 years; the ages in the vicinity of the streams ranged from 0 to 23 years. The apparent ages of ground water in the Polecat Creek Watershed in the Piedmont crystalline HGMR ranged from 2 to 30 years. The apparent ages of water from wells in the Muddy Creek Watershed in the Valley and Ridge carbonate HGMR ranged from 10 to 20 years (except for a single sample that was 45 years). The ages in the East Mahantango Creek Watershed in the Valley and Ridge siliciclastic HGMR ranged from 0 to 50 years. The distribution in apparent age of water from wells in the targeted watersheds, however, generally is older than that for water from the springs. The median age of water from wells in the Muddy Creek Watershed, for example, was 15 years, compared to 11 years for the water from the springs in that watershed, and less than 10 years for water from all springs in the spring study. The similarity in the ranges in apparent age of water from the wells and from the springs shows that the samples from the targeted watersheds and springs have bracketed the range of apparent ages that would be expected in the shallow ground-water-flow systems throughout the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. The apparent age of water from individual wells does not necessarily represent the entire distribution of ages of the discharging ground water, and it is this distribution of ages that affects the response of nutrient concentrations in stream base flow. Nutrient-reduction scenarios were modeled for two watersheds for which the distribution of apparent ground-water ages was available, the East Mahantango Creek Watershed in the Valley and Ridge siliciclastic HGMR and the Locust Grove Watershed in the Coastal Plain Uplands HGMR. A nutrient-reduction scenario was created for East Mahantango Creek, where the average residence time was determined to be approximately 10 years on the basis of the output of particle tracking from a ground-water-flow model. This scenario showed decreases of nearly 50 percent in base-flow concentrations of nitrate in streams within the first year after the reduction in nitrogen input; smaller reductions in nitrate concentration occurred in each subsequent year. A second scenario for that same watershed, in which the same 10-year average residence time was assumed and an exponential model was used for analysis, showed that a 50-percent reduction in base-flow concentrations of nitrate could take up to 5 years. For the Locust Grove Watershed, in which an average residence time of 32 years was assumed, simulation with the exponential model showed that it may take more than 20 years to achieve a 50-percent reduction in base-flow concentra-tions of nitrate. Although it was not possible to construct such scenarios for all watersheds, these examples show the range of possible responses to changes in nutrient inputs in two very different types of watersheds. Findings from this study include information on factors that affect ground-water age, spatial distribution of ages, and nitrogen transport. In the East Mahantango Creek Watershed and the Polecat Creek Watershed, the residence time varied spatially depending on the position of the flow path, and temporally depending on the recharge conditions. Generally, ground water in areas near the stream had short residence times and the water in upland areas had longer residence times. Water traveling through deep layers had longer residence times than water traveling through shallow layers, and residence times were faster under high recharge conditions than low recharge conditions. Ground water in the Pocomoke Watershed exhibits a similar pattern: younger water discharges to small order streams in headwater basins and older water discharges to larger streams near the basin outlet. Factors affecting nitrogen transport in ground water include spatial and temporal variation in input sources, ground-water age, and aquifer processes that lead to denitrification. Spatial and temporal variations in nitrogen sources affect all the watersheds. Tributaries with higher inputs of nitrogen have higher concentrations in stream base flow. Areas where nitrogen application rates have increased over time show an age-nitrate relation in ground-water samples. The age-nitrate relation can be affected by denitrification, which occurs in Pocomoke and East Mahantango Creeks but is not evident in Polecat and Muddy Creeks. In East Mahantango Creek, the level of denitrification is significant in water with residence times greater than 20 years, but because this is a small component of overall ground-water discharge to a stream, it may not remove a significant quantity of nitrogen from the system. Denitrification in Pocomoke Creek is significant and appears to affect mostly older water discharging to streams. Therefore, if most of the nitrogen entering these two streams is associated with the discharge of younger ground water, denitrification may not greatly affect the overall nitrogen delivery to these streams. Other findings of this study show that nitrate in ground water discharging along preferential flow paths may not be affected by natural processes, such as denitrification or uptake by riparian vegetation. Seeps to swales and ditches beneath the north uplands at Polecat Creek indicate a shallow water table and discharge of young ground water whereas the absence of such seeps on the south side indicates a deep water table and a lack of young ground water. Similarly, discharge at the base of the slope and to the valley wetland south of the creek but not north of the creek indicates a different role for the riparian forest on the two sides of the creek. In many of the systems where water discharges at the base of slopes to wetlands, ditches have been dug to drain the valley. Such drainage circumvents possible removal of nitrate by riparian vegetation. Because ground-water residence times do not appear directly related to the HGMRs, the targeting of management practices will achieve the most rapid response in water quality if directed at 1) watersheds with large agricultural sources of nitrate, 2) areas with the shortest ground-water-flow paths and 3) areas not affected by significant denitrification. The fastest response in stream base-flow concentrations of nitrogen to implementation of management practices would be to implement practices in those areas with the highest loads rather than attempt to target practices on the basis of HGMR stratification. Overall findings of the study indicate that 1) ground-water contributions to nitrogen in streamflow are significant, 2) some response to management practices should be evident in base-flow concentrations of nitrogen and loads within 1 to 5 years in watersheds with the shortest average residence times, but response time may be closer to 20 years in watersheds with longer average ground-water residence times, 3) the majority of the response in ground-water discharge to any changes in management practices will be distributed over a 10-year time period even in the watersheds with the fastest response times, and 4) given that half the streamflow is from ground-water discharge and the other half is runoff or soil water, about 90 percent of total water being discharged to a stream will be less than about a decade old; therefore, full implementation of nutrient reductions may result in improved streamwater quality in about a decade. In the more-likely scenario of gradual source reduction, the reduction in concentrations of nitrate in streams and aquifers would take longer than the examples shown here.

Chesapeake Bay watershed

Pharmaceuticals, hormones, personal-care products, and other organic wastewater contaminants in water resources: Recent research activities of the U.S. Geological Survey's toxic substances hydrology program

Recent decades have brought increasing concerns for potential contamination of water resources that could inadvertently result during production, use, and disposal of the numerous chemicals offering improvements in industry, agriculture, medical treatment, and even common household products. Increasing knowledge of the environmental occurrence or toxicological behavior of these contaminants from various studies in Europe, United States, and elsewhere has resulted in increased concern for potential adverse environmental and human health effects (Daughton and Ternes, 1999). Ecologists and public health experts often have incomplete understandings of the toxicological significance of many of these contaminants, particularly long-term, low-level exposure and when they occur in mixtures with other contaminants (Daughton and Ternes, 1999; Kümmerer, 2001). In addition, these ‘emerging contaminants’ are not typically monitored or assessed in ambient water resources. The need to understand the processes controlling the transport and fate of these contaminants in the environment, and the lack of knowledge of the significance of long-term exposures have increased the need to study environmental occurrence down to trace (nanogram per liter) levels. Furthermore, the possibility that mixtures of environmental contaminants may interact synergistically or antagonistically has increased the need to characterize the types of mixtures that are found in our waters. The U.S. Geological Survey’s Toxic Substances Hydrology Program (Toxics Program) is developing information and tools on emerging water-quality issues that will be used to design and improve water-quality monitoring and assessment programs of the USGS and others, and for proactive decision-making by industry, regulators, the research community, and the public (http://toxics.usgs.gov/regional/emc.html). This research on emerging water-quality issues includes a combination of laboratory work to develop new analytical capabilities as well as field work on the occurrence, fate, and effects of these contaminants.

Geohealth News

Assessing ground-water vulnerability to contamination: Providing scientifically defensible information for decision makers

Throughout the United States increasing demands for safe drinking water and requirements to maintain healthy ecosystems are leading policy makers to ask complex social and scientific questions about how to assess and manage our water resources. This challenge becomes particularly difficult as policy and management objectives require scientific assessments of the potential for ground-water resources to become contaminated from anthropogenic, as well as natural sources of contamination. Assessments of the vulnerability of ground water to contamination range in scope and complexity from simple, qualitative, and relatively inexpensive approaches to rigorous, quantitative, and costly assessments. Tradeoffs must be carefully considered among the competing influences of the cost of an assessment, the scientific defensibility, and the amount of acceptable uncertainty in meeting the objectives of the water-resource decision maker.

Circular

Occurrence of selected radionuclides in ground water used for drinking water in the United States: A reconnaissance survey, 1998

The U.S. Geological Survey, in collaboration with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the American Water Works Association, and the American Water Works Service Company, completed a targeted national reconnaissance survey of selected radionuclides in public ground-water supplies. Radionuclides analyzed included radium-224 (Ra-224), radium-226 (Ra-226), radium-228 (Ra-228), polonium-210 (Po-210) and lead-210 (Pb-210).This U.S. Geological Survey reconnaissance survey focused intentionally on areas with known or suspected elevated concentrations of radium in ground water to determine if Ra-224 was also present in the areas where other isotopes of radium had previously been detected and to determine the co-occurrence characteristics of the three radium isotopes (Ra-224, Ra-226, and Ra-228) in those areas. Ninety-nine raw-water samples (before water treatment) were collected once over a 6-month period in 1998 and 1999 from wells (94 of which are used for public drinking water) in 27 States and 8 physiographic provinces. Twenty-one of the 99 samples exceeded the current U.S. Environmental Protection Agency drinking-water maximum contaminant level of 5 picocuries per liter (pCi/L) for combined radium (Ra-226 + Ra-228). Concentrations of Ra-224 were reported to exceed 1 pCi/L in 30 percent of the samples collected, with a maximum concentration of 73.6 pCi/L measured in water from a nontransient, noncommunity, public-supply well in Maryland. Radium-224 concentrations generally were higher than those of the other isotopes of radium. About 5 percent of the samples contained concentrations of Ra-224 greater than 10 pCi/L, whereas only 2 percent exceeded 10 pCi/L for either Ra-226 or Ra-228. Concentrations of Ra-226 greater than 1 pCi/L were reported in 33 percent of the samples, with a maximum concentration of 16.9 pCi/L measured in water from a public-supply well in Iowa. Concentrations of Ra-228 greater than 1 pCi/L were reported in 22 samples, with a maximum concentration of 72.3 pCi/L measured in water from a non-transient, noncommunity, public-supply well in Maryland.Radium-224, which is a decay product of Ra-228 in the Th-232 decay series, was significantly correlated with Ra-228 (Spearman?s rank correlation coefficient ?r? equals 0.82) and to a lesser degree with Ra-226 (r equals 0.69), which is an isotope in the U-238 decay series. The rank correlation coefficient between Ra-226 and Ra-228 was 0.63. The high correlation between Ra-224 and Ra-228 concentrations and the corresponding isotopic ratios of the two (about 1:1 in 90 percent of the samples) indicates that the two radionuclides occur in approximately equal concentrations in most ground water sampled. Thus, Ra-228 can be considered as a reasonable proxy indicator for the occurrence of Ra-224 in ground water.The maximum concentration of Po-210 was 4.85 pCi/L and exceeded 1 pCi/L in only two samples. The maximum concentration of Pb-210 was 4.14 pCi/L, and about 10 percent of the samples exceeded 1 pCi/L. Areas with known, or suspected, elevated concentrations of polonium and lead were not targeted in this survey.Three major implications are drawn for future radionuclide monitoring on the basis of this information: (1) grossalpha particle analyses of ground water should be done within about 48-72 hours after collection to determine the presence of the short-lived, alpha-particle emitting isotopes, such as Ra-224, which was detected in elevated concentrations in many of the samples collected for this survey; (2) the isotope ratios of Ra-224 to Ra-228 in ground water are variable on a national scale, but the two radioisotopes generally occur in ratios near 1:1, therefore, the more commonly measured Ra-228 can be used as an indicator of Ra-224 occurrence for some general purposes other than compliance; and (3) the isotopic ratios of Ra-226 to Ra-228 were less than 3:2 in many samples. These ratios corroborate results of previous studies that have shown the presence of Ra-228.

Water-Resources Investigations Report

Arsenic in Ground-Water Resources of the United States

Arsenic is a naturally occurring element in rocks, soils, and the waters in contact with them. Recognized as a toxic element for centuries, arsenic today also is a human health concern because it can contribute to skin, bladder, and other cancers (National Research Council, 1999). Recently, the National Research Council (1999) recommended lowering the current maximum contaminant level (MCL) allowed for arsenic in drinking water of 50 ?g/L (micrograms per liter), citing risks for developing bladder and other cancers. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) will propose a new, and likely lower, arsenic MCL during 2000 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000). This fact sheet provides information on where and to what extent natural concentrations of arsenic in ground water exceed possible new standards. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has collected and analyzed arsenic in potable (drinkable) water from 18,850 wells in 595 counties across the United States during the past two decades. These wells are used for irrigation, industrial purposes, and research, as well as for public and private water supply. Arsenic concentrations in samples from these wells are similar to those found in nearby public supplies (see Focazio and others, 1999). The large number of samples, broad geographic coverage, and consistency of methods produce a more accurate and detailed picture of arsenic concentrations than provided by any previous studies.

Fact Sheet

A Retrospective Analysis on the Occurrence of Arsenic in Ground-Water Resources of the United States and Limitations in Drinking-Water-Supply Characterizations

The Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended in 1996, requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to review current drinking-water standards for arsenic, propose a maximum contaminant level for arsenic by January 1, 2000, and issue a final regulation by January, 2001. Quantification of the national occurrence of targeted ranges in arsenic concentration in ground water used for public drinking-water supplies is an important component of USEPA's regulatory process. Data from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Water Information System (NWIS) were used in a retrospective analysis of arsenic in the ground-water resources of the United States. The analysis augments other existing sources of data on the occurrence of arsenic collected in ground water at public water-supply systems.The USGS, through its District offices and national programs, has been compiling data for many years on arsenic concentrations collected from wells used for public water supply, research, agriculture, industry, and domestic water supply throughout the United States. These data have been collected for a variety of purposes ranging from simple descriptions of the occurrence of arsenic in local or regional ground-water resources to detailed studies on arsenic geochemistry associated with contamination sites. A total of 18,864 sample locations were selected from the USGS NWIS data base regardless of well type, of which 2,262 were taken from public water-supply sources. Samples with non-potable water (dissolved-solids concentration greater than 2,000 milligrams per liter and water temperature greater than 50o Celsius) were not selected for the retrospective analysis and other criteria for selection included the amount and type of ancillary data available for each sample. The 1,528 counties with sufficient data included 76 percent of all large public water-supply systems (serving more than 10,000 people) and 61 percent of all small public water-supply systems (serving more than 1,000 and less than 10,000 people) in the United States. The arsenic data were summarized for the selected counties by associating the arsenic concentrations measured in the ground-water resource with the numbers and sizes of public water-supply systems using ground water in those counties. Targeted arsenic concentrations of 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, and 50 ug/L were exceeded in the ground-water resource associated with 36, 25, 14, 8, 3, and 1 percent respectively of all public water-supply systems accounted for in the analysis.Contributions to uncertainty such as changes in sampling methods and changes in laboratory reporting appear to be less important to the national occurrence estimates than other factors such as temporal variability in arsenic concentrations at a given well, the types of wells sampled, and density and types of sampling locations. In addition, no attempt was made to quantify arsenic concentrations in relation to depth within aquifers. With these qualifications, the USGS data represent the ground-water resource in general and are not restricted to wells currently used for public drinking-water sources. In this way, the broad spatial extent, large number of water samples, and low detection limits used for the USGS data provide a unique source of information to determine where targeted concentrations of arsenic are likely to occur in the ground-water resources within much of the United States.These results indicate USGS data can be effectively used to augment national estimates of arsenic occurrence in the nation's ground-water resources if limitations are recognized. Existing estimates of the occurrence of arsenic in ground water that are used as a source of drinking water can be supplemented with the USGS arsenic concentration data when associated with the public water-supply data base. One such supplementary application is the additional insight gained by establishing relations between arsenic concentration data in the ground-water resource and small public wat

Water-Resources Investigations Report