Search USGSSearch

USGS · pp1404B

Hydrogeologic framework of the New Jersey Coastal Plain

Abstract

This report presents the results of a water-resources, oriented subsurface mapping program within the Coastal Plain of New Jersey. The occurrence and configuration of 15 regional hydrogeologic units have been defined, primarily on the basis of an interpretation of borehole geophysical data. The nine aquifers and six confining beds are composed of unconsolidated clay, silt, sand, and gravel and range in age from Cretaceous to Quaternary. Electric and gamma-ray logs from more than 1,000 Coastal Plain wells were examined. Of these, interpretive data for 302 sites were selected, on the basis of logged depth, quality of data, and data distribution, to prepare structure contour and thickness maps for each aquifer and a thickness map for each confining bed. These maps, together with 14 hydrogeologic sections, show the geometry, lateral extent, and vertical and horizontal relationships among the 15 hydrogeologic units. The hydrogeologic maps and sections show that distinct lower, middle, and upper aquifers are present within the Potomac, Raritan-Magothy aquifer system near the Delaware River from Burlington County to Salem County. Although the lower aquifer is recognized only in this area, the middle aquifer extends into the northeastern Coastal Plain of New Jersey, where it is stratigraphically equivalent to the Farrington aquifer. The upper aquifer extends throughout most of the New Jersey Coastal Plain and is stratigraphically equivalent to the Old Bridge aquifer in the northeastern Coastal Plain. The overlying Merchantville-Woodbury confining bed is the most regionally extensive confining bed within the New Jersey Coastal Plain. Its thickness ranges from less than 100 feet near the outcrop to more than 450 feet along the coast. The Englishtown aquifer system acts as a single aquifer throughout most of its subsurface extent, but it contains two water-bearing sands in pars of Monmouth and Ocean Counties. The overlying Marshalltown-Wenonah confining bed is a thin, leaky unit ranging in thickness from approximately 20 to 80 feet. The Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer is identified in the subsurface throughout the New Jersey Coastal Plain southeast of its outcrop area. Sediments that overlie the Wenonah-Mount Lauren aquifer and that are subjacent to the major aquifers within the Kirkwood Formation and the Cohansey Sand are described hydrologically as a composite confining bed. These include the Navesink Formation, Red Bank Sand, Tinton Sand, Hornerstown Sand, Vincentown Formation, Manasquan Formation, Shark River Formation, and Piney Point Formation and the basal clay of the Kirkwood Formation.. The Vincentown Formation functions as n aquifer within 3 to 10 miles downdip of its outcrop area. In areas farther downdip the Vincentown Formation functions as a confining bed. The Piney Point aquifer is laterally persistent from the southern New Jersey Coastal Plain northward into parts of Burlington and Ocean Counties. The Atlantic City 800-foot sand of the Kirkwood Formation can be recognized in the subsurface along coastal areas of Cape May, Atlantic, and southern Ocean Counties, but inland only as far west as the extent of the overlying confining bed. In areas west of the extent of the overlying confining bed, the Kirkwood Formation is in hydraulic connection with the overlying Cohansey Sand and younger surficial deposits and functions as an unconfined aquifer.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 38.8869° to 40.5678° latitude; -75.6167° to -74° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Otto S. Zapecza. 1989. Hydrogeologic framework of the New Jersey Coastal Plain. https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1404b

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Resurvey of the Marble Canyon and Bridge Canyon dam sites in Grand Canyon National Park—Changes in sediment storage and evidence supporting the occurrence of bedrock incision through the mid-20th century

The Bureau of Reclamation developed an extensive plan for a network of dams, water tunnels, and hydropower plants in and around Grand Canyon, Arizona, in the 1940s through 1960s. The two largest of these planned dams were the Marble Canyon and Bridge Canyon Dams on the Colorado River. Though these dams were ultimately never built, Reclamation conducted extensive topographic, bathymetric, and subsurface exploration work at the sites proposed for these dams in the 1940s and 1950s. Resurveys of these dam sites were conducted between 1998 and 2021 to determine the changes in sediment storage at these dam sites caused by the upstream construction and operation of Glen Canyon Dam and by the recession of Lake Mead, the reservoir impounded by Hoover Dam. The resurveys of the Marble Canyon dam sites indicate that the post-1950s changes in sediment storage at these dam sites are broadly consistent with flux-based estimates of voluminous sand erosion from Marble Canyon since the 1963 closure of Glen Canyon Dam. These resurveys also suggest that the pre-dam longitudinal variation in sediment thickness over bedrock played a key role in determining the locations of the sand erosion induced by Glen Canyon Dam; more sand eroded from locations where more sand was present in the 1950s. The resurvey of the Bridge Canyon dam sites indicates that the Colorado River’s incision of the Lake Mead delta is regulated both by bed-sediment grain size and downstream hydraulic controls. Finally, analyses of bed-sediment thickness and sedimentological data at the dam sites, and observations of bed scour and gravel transport, suggest that sufficient bedrock was exposed to allow bedrock incision during commonly recurring pre-dam snowmelt floods that entrained small boulders into transport.

Arizona

The eruptive behavior of distributed volcanism forming low shield edifices—A case study of Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field, U.S.A.

Distributed volcanic fields are present in various tectonic settings worldwide, and their characteristics reflect differing influences from magmatic and tectonic processes. In the southwestern United States alone, there are 37 Quaternary distributed volcanic fields. After the primary period of extensional tectonics in the southern Basin and Range 15–5 million years ago, the Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field developed in southwestern Arizona between 4 and 1 million years ago. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field consists primarily of low relief shield volcanoes, a type of distributed volcanism with poorly understood temporal evolution. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field is less than 200 kilometers (km) from the Colorado Plateau, Gulf of California, and southern San Andreas Fault system. This work identifies and examines controls on the emplacement of the Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field by documenting shallow and surficial structures as well as eruption characteristics and style through time. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field consists of 21 volcanoes with a total of 33 vents over an area of about 770 square kilometers (km 2 ). The prominence of low relief shield volcanoes may be explained by ascent of basaltic magmas through thin Basin and Range crust, without much crustal contamination, and low viscosities common to mafic compositions. Typical eruption characteristics involve the construction of low relief shield volcanoes followed by Strombolian fissure eruptions at the summits or near-summit medial areas that produce scoria lapilli, which may weld to form agglomerate. The total lifetime erupted volume of about 4.3 cubic kilometers (km 3 ) represents an average eruptive flux of approximately 2x10 -3 km 3 per thousand years (k.y.). This erupted volume is low relative to Neogene basaltic intraplate distributed volcanic fields worldwide, which typically range from 10 -3 to 1 km 3 k.y. -1 . Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field eruptions were likely triggered by intermittent rejuvenation of transient magmatic zones that exist in thinned crust. Instantaneous flux from point sources feeding the lava flows is estimated to be on the order of 10 -1 to 10 cubic meters per second.

Arizona

Capitalization of positional (Lower/Middle/Upper) and temporal (Early/Middle/Late) adjectives in the names of formal chronostratigraphic and geochronologic units of the Phanerozoic

Many authors are understandably confused about the capitalization of the words “lower,” “middle,” “upper,” “early,” and “late.” Where these words are used simply as descriptive adjectives, they should be in lowercase; where they form the first word of a formal chronostratigraphic or geochronologic unit name, they should be in uppercase.

Professional Paper