Geology topics

Stacey A. Archfield

Publications and source records attributed to Stacey A. Archfield.

41 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

USGS2009

Hydrologic conditions and a firm-yield assessment for J.B. Converse Lake, Mobile County, Alabama, 1991-2006

J.B. Converse (Converse) Lake is the primary source of drinking water for the city of Mobile, Alabama. Concerns regarding the ability of the reservoir to meet current and future water demands during drought conditions have prompted this study. The 1991 through 2006 water years included a drought that occurred during 2000, and drought conditions currently (2007) are affecting the area. To assist officials of the Mobile Area Water and Sewer System in planning for future demands for drinking water in the Mobile metropolitan area, the firm yield for Converse Lake was estimated by the U.S. Geological Survey. The firm yield of Converse Lake was estimated using the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection’s firm-yield-estimator (FYE) model, which recently was refined by the U.S. Geological Survey. The model uses a mass-balance approach to determine the maximum average daily withdrawal rate that can be sustained during a period of record that includes a drought of record. If the reservoir is in contact with an aquifer, the FYE also includes routines that estimate the volume of ground-water and surface-water exchange between the aquifer and the reservoir. The average daily firm yield for Converse Lake was estimated to be 79 million gallons per day using the FYE routine that does not include ground-water exchange between the reservoir and the adjacent aquifer. Observed lake levels and withdrawals during the drought of 2000 indicate that more than 74 million gallons per day of water were withdrawn without complete depletion of reservoir storage. Therefore, it is likely that ground-water exchange with the reservoir may supplement available reservoir storage. If water exchange occurs between the aquifer and the reservoir, an increase in the volume of water available to the reservoir may occur during a drought. To quantify the potential ground-water contribution to reservoir storage, an analytical solution was applied to the FYE simulation of Converse Lake to estimate ground-water exchange between the reservoir and the aquifer. Aquifer properties required by the FYE were estimated by model calibration to observed water levels that occurred during the drought of 2000. When ground-water exchange between the reservoir and adjacent aquifer is included, the average daily firm yield increased to 83 million gallons per day. The estimate of 83 million gallons per day incorporates both total surface-water flow and ground-water exchange components. This analysis indicated that direct ground-water interaction contributes about 5 percent of the firm yield of Converse Lake. However, the average daily firm yield of 83 million gallons per day, based in part on calibrated values for aquifer transmissivity and storage, can be used only as a guideline until these aquifer properties can be defined better by field investigation in the Converse Lake watershed.

Alabama↗

USGS2006

Factors Affecting Firm Yield and the Estimation of Firm Yield for Selected Streamflow-Dominated Drinking-Water-Supply Reservoirs in Massachusetts

Factors affecting reservoir firm yield, as determined by application of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection's Firm Yield Estimator (FYE) model, were evaluated, modified, and tested on 46 streamflow-dominated reservoirs representing 15 Massachusetts drinking-water supplies. The model uses a mass-balance approach to determine the maximum average daily withdrawal rate that can be sustained during a period of record that includes the 1960s drought-of-record. The FYE methodology to estimate streamflow to the reservoir at an ungaged site was tested by simulating streamflow at two streamflow-gaging stations in Massachusetts and comparing the simulated streamflow to the observed streamflow. In general, the FYE-simulated flows agreed well with observed flows. There were substantial deviations from the measured values for extreme high and low flows. A sensitivity analysis determined that the model's streamflow estimates are most sensitive to input values for average annual precipitation, reservoir drainage area, and the soil-retention number-a term that describes the amount of precipitation retained by the soil in the basin. The FYE model currently provides the option of using a 1,000-year synthetic record constructed by randomly sampling 2-year blocks of concurrent streamflow and precipitation records 500 times; however, the synthetic record has the potential to generate records of precipitation and streamflow that do not reflect the worst historical drought in Massachusetts. For reservoirs that do not have periods of drawdown greater than 2 years, the bootstrap does not offer any additional information about the firm yield of a reservoir than the historical record does. For some reservoirs, the use of a synthetic record to determine firm yield resulted in as much as a 30-percent difference between firm-yield values from one simulation to the next. Furthermore, the assumption that the synthetic traces of streamflow are statistically equivalent to the historical record is not valid. For multiple-reservoir systems, the firm-yield estimate was dependent on the reservoir system's configuration. The firm yield of a system is sensitive to how the water is transferred from one reservoir to another, the capacity of the connection between the reservoirs, and how seasonal variations in demand are represented in the FYE model. Firm yields for 25 (14 single-reservoir systems and 11 multiple-reservoir systems) reservoir systems were determined by using the historical records of streamflow and precipitation. Current water-use data indicate that, on average, 20 of the 25 reservoir systems in the study were operating below their estimated firm yield; during months with peak demands, withdrawals exceeded the firm yield for 8 reservoir systems.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2006

Ground-Water Contributions to Reservoir Storage and the Effect on Estimates of Firm Yield for Reservoirs in Massachusetts

Potential ground-water contributions to reservoir storage were determined for nine reservoirs in Massachusetts that had shorelines in contact with sand and gravel aquifers. The effect of ground water on firm yield was not only substantial, but furthermore, the firm yield of a reservoir in contact with a sand and gravel aquifer was always greater when the ground-water contribution was included in the water balance. Increases in firm yield ranged from 2 to 113 percent, with a median increase in firm yield of 10 percent. Additionally, the increase in firm yield in two reservoirs was greater than 85 percent. This study identified a set of equations that are based on an analytical solution to the ground-water-flow equation for the case of one-dimensional flow in a finite-width aquifer bounded by a linear surface-water feature such as a stream. These equations, which require only five input variables, were incorporated into an existing firm-yield-estimator (FYE) model, and the potential effect of ground water on firm yield was evaluated. To apply the FYE model to a reservoir in Massachusetts, the model requires that the drainage area to the reservoir be clearly defined and that some surface water flows into the reservoir. For surface-water-body shapes having a more realistic representation of a reservoir shoreline than a stream, a comparison of ground-water-flow rates simulated by the ground-water equations with flow rates simulated by a two-dimensional, finite-difference ground-water-flow model indicate that the agreement between the simulated flow rates is within ?10 percent when the ratio of the distance from the reservoir shoreline to the aquifer boundary to the length of shoreline in contact with the aquifer is between values of 0.5 and 3.5. Idealized reservoir-aquifer systems were assumed to verify that the ground-water-flow equations were implemented correctly into the existing FYE model; however, the modified FYE model has not been validated through a comparison of simulated and observed data. A comparison of simulated and observed reservoir water levels would further define limitations to the applicability of the ground-water-flow equations to reservoirs in Massachusetts whose shorelines are in contact with a sand and gravel aquifer.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2005

Comparison of diffusion- and pumped-sampling methods to monitor volatile organic compounds in ground water, Massachusetts Military Reservation, Cape Cod, Massachusetts, July 1999–December 2002

To evaluate diffusion sampling as an alternative method to monitor volatile organic compound (VOC) concentrations in ground water, concentrations in samples collected by traditional pumped-sampling methods were compared to concentrations in samples collected by diffusion-sampling methods for 89 monitoring wells at or near the Massachusetts Military Reservation, Cape Cod. Samples were analyzed for 36 VOCs. There was no substantial difference between the utility of diffusion and pumped samples to detect the presence or absence of a VOC. In wells where VOCs were detected, diffusion-sample concentrations of tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) were significantly lower than pumped-sample concentrations. Because PCE and TCE concentrations detected in the wells dominated the calculation of many of the total VOC concentrations, when VOC concentrations were summed and compared by sampling method, visual inspection also showed a downward concentration bias in the diffusion-sample concentration. The degree to which pumped- and diffusion-sample concentrations agreed was not a result of variability inherent within the sampling methods or the diffusion process itself. A comparison of the degree of agreement in the results from the two methods to 13 quantifiable characteristics external to the sampling methods offered only well-screen length as being related to the degree of agreement between the methods; however, there is also evidence to indicate that the flushing rate of water through the well screen affected the agreement between the sampling methods. Despite poor agreement between the concentrations obtained by the two methods at some wells, the degree to which the concentrations agree at a given well is repeatable. A one-time, well-bywell comparison between diffusion- and pumped-sampling methods could determine which wells are good candidates for the use of diffusion samplers. For wells with good method agreement, the diffusion-sampling method is a time-saving and cost-effective alternative to pumped-sampling methods in a long-term monitoring program, such as at the Massachusetts Military Reservation.

Massachusetts↗

USGS2002

A logistic regression equation for estimating the probability of a stream flowing perennially in Massachusetts

A logistic regression equation was developed for estimating the probability of a stream flowing perennially at a specific site in Massachusetts. The equation provides city and town conservation commissions and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection with an additional method for assessing whether streams are perennial or intermittent at a specific site in Massachusetts. This information is needed to assist these environmental agencies, who administer the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Rivers Protection Act of 1996, which establishes a 200-foot-wide protected riverfront area extending along the length of each side of the stream from the mean annual high-water line along each side of perennial streams, with exceptions in some urban areas. The equation was developed by relating the verified perennial or intermittent status of a stream site to selected basin characteristics of naturally flowing streams (no regulation by dams, surface-water withdrawals, ground-water withdrawals, diversion, waste-water discharge, and so forth) in Massachusetts. Stream sites used in the analysis were identified as perennial or intermittent on the basis of review of measured streamflow at sites throughout Massachusetts and on visual observation at sites in the South Coastal Basin, southeastern Massachusetts. Measured or observed zero flow(s) during months of extended drought as defined by the 310 Code of Massachusetts Regulations (CMR) 10.58(2)(a) were not considered when designating the perennial or intermittent status of a stream site. The database used to develop the equation included a total of 305 stream sites (84 intermittent- and 89 perennial-stream sites in the State, and 50 intermittent- and 82 perennial-stream sites in the South Coastal Basin). Stream sites included in the database had drainage areas that ranged from 0.14 to 8.94 square miles in the State and from 0.02 to 7.00 square miles in the South Coastal Basin.Results of the logistic regression analysis indicate that the probability of a stream flowing perennially at a specific site in Massachusetts can be estimated as a function of (1) drainage area (cube root), (2) drainage density, (3) areal percentage of stratified-drift deposits (square root), (4) mean basin slope, and (5) location in the South Coastal Basin or the remainder of the State. Although the equation developed provides an objective means for estimating the probability of a stream flowing perennially at a specific site, the reliability of the equation is constrained by the data used to develop the equation. The equation may not be reliable for (1) drainage areas less than 0.14 square mile in the State or less than 0.02 square mile in the South Coastal Basin, (2) streams with losing reaches, or (3) streams draining the southern part of the South Coastal Basin and the eastern part of the Buzzards Bay Basin and the entire area of Cape Cod and the Islands Basins.

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗