Search USGS⌕ Search

USGS · sir20115218

Status and understanding of groundwater quality in the two southern San Joaquin Valley study units, 2005-2006 - California GAMA Priority Basin Project

Abstract

Groundwater quality in the southern San Joaquin Valley was investigated from October 2005 through March 2006 as part of the Priority Basin Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The GAMA Priority Basin Project is conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in collaboration with the California State Water Resources Control Board and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. There are two study units located in the southern San Joaquin Valley: the Southeast San Joaquin Valley (SESJ) study unit and the Kern County Subbasin (KERN) study unit. The GAMA Priority Basin Project in the SESJ and KERN study units was designed to provide a statistically unbiased, spatially distributed assessment of untreated groundwater quality within the primary aquifers. The status assessment is based on water-quality and ancillary data collected in 2005 and 2006 by the USGS from 130 wells on a spatially distributed grid, and water-quality data from the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) database. Data was collected from an additional 19 wells for the understanding assessment. The aquifer systems (hereinafter referred to as primary aquifers) were defined as that part of the aquifer corresponding to the perforation interval of wells listed in the CDPH database for the SESJ and KERN study units. The status assessment of groundwater quality used data from samples analyzed for anthropogenic constituents such as volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and pesticides, as well as naturally occurring inorganic constituents such as major ions and trace elements. The status assessment is intended to characterize the quality of untreated groundwater resources within the primary aquifers in the SESJ and KERN study units, not the quality of drinking water delivered to consumers. Although the status assessment applies to untreated groundwater, Federal and California regulatory and non-regulatory water-quality benchmarks that apply to drinking water are used to provide context for the results. Relative-concentrations (sample concentration divided by benchmark concentration) were used for evaluating groundwater. A relative-concentration greater than 1.0 indicates a concentration greater than the benchmark and is classified as high. The relative-concentration threshold for classifying inorganic constituents as moderate or low was 0.5; for organic constituents the threshold between moderate and low was 0.1. Aquifer-scale proportion was used as the primary metric for assessing the quality of untreated groundwater for the study units. High aquifer-scale proportion is defined as the areal percentage of the primary aquifers with a high relative-concentration for a particular constituent or class of constituents. Moderate and low aquifer-scale proportions were defined as the areal percentage of the primary aquifers with moderate and low relative-concentrations, respectively. Two statistical approaches—grid-based and spatially weighted—were used to evaluate aquifer-scale proportions for individual constituents and classes of constituents. Grid-based and spatially weighted estimates were comparable for the two study units in the southern San Joaquin Valley (within 90 percent confidence intervals). The status assessment showed that inorganic constituents were more prevalent than organic constituents and that relative-concentrations were higher for inorganic constituents than for organic constituents. For inorganic constituents with human-health benchmarks, the relative-concentration of at least one constituent in the SESJ study unit was high in 30 percent of the primary aquifers. In the KERN study unit, the relative-concentration of at least one constituent was high in 23 percent of the primary aquifers. In the SESJ and KERN study units, the inorganic constituents with human-health benchmarks detected at high relative-concentrations in more than 2 percent of the primary aquifers were arsenic, boron, vanadium, nitrate, uranium, and gross alpha radioactivity. Additional constituents with human-health benchmarks—antimony, radium, and fluoride—were detected at high relative-concentrations in the KERN study unit. For inorganic constituents with aesthetic benchmarks (secondary maximum contaminant levels, SMCLs), the relative-concentration of at least one constituent in the SESJ study unit was high in 6.6 percent of the primary aquifers. In the KERN study unit, the relative-concentration of at least one constituent was high in 22 percent of the primary aquifers. Inorganic constituents with aesthetic benchmarks detected at high relative-concentrations in the primary aquifers in the SESJ and KERN study units were iron and manganese. Additional constituents with aesthetic benchmarks—total dissolved solids (TDS), sulfate, and chloride—were detected at high relative-concentrations in the KERN study unit. In contrast, the status assessment for organic constituents with human-health benchmarks showed that relative-concentrations were high in 4.8 percent and 2.1 percent of the primary aquifers in the SESJ and KERN study units, respectively. The special-interest constituent, perchlorate, was detected at high relative-concentrations in 1.2 percent of the primary aquifers in the SESJ study unit. Twenty-eight of the 78 VOCs (not including fumigants) analyzed were detected. Of these 28 VOCs, benzene had high relative-concentrations in the SESJ study unit, and relative-concentrations for the other 27 VOCs were moderate and low. Five of the 10 fumigants were detected; 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP) was the only fumigant with high relative-concentrations in the SESJ and KERN study units. Of the 136 pesticides and pesticide degradates analyzed, 33 were detected. Human-health benchmarks were established for eighteen of the detected pesticides. Dieldrin was detected at moderate relative-concentrations in the SESJ and KERN study units. All other pesticides detected with human-health benchmarks were present at low relative-concentrations. The detection frequencies for two of these pesticides—simazine and atrazine—were greater than or equal to 10 percent in the SESJ and KERN study units. The understanding assessment of groundwater quality included an analysis of correlations of selected water-quality constituents or classes of constituents with potential explanatory factors. The understanding assessment indicated that the concentrations of many trace elements and major ions were correlated to well depth, groundwater age, and/or geochemical conditions. Many trace elements were positively correlated with depth. Arsenic, boron, vanadium, fluoride, manganese, and iron concentrations increased with well depth or depth to top-of-perforations. The concentrations for these trace elements also were higher in older (pre-modern) groundwater. In contrast, uranium concentrations decreased with increasing depth and groundwater age. Most trace elements were correlated to geochemical conditions. Arsenic, antimony, boron, fluoride, manganese, and iron concentrations generally were higher wherever the pH of the groundwater was greater than 7.6. Concentrations for these constituents generally were higher at low concentrations of dissolved oxygen (DO). Uranium was the exception; uranium concentrations generally were lower at high pH and at high concentrations of DO. Nitrate concentrations generally were lower in deeper wells. Nitrate concentrations also were higher in groundwater with higher DO. Total dissolved solids, sulfate, and chloride concentrations were higher in the KERN study unit than in the SESJ study unit. Total dissolved solids were negatively correlated with pH in the KERN study unit. Total dissolved solids and sulfate were higher in areas with more agricultural land use. Chloride concentrations increased with depth to top-of-perforations in the KERN study unit. Organic constituents and constituents of special interest, like many inorganic constituents, were correlated with well depth, groundwater age, and DO. Unlike most trace elements, however, solvent and pesticide detections, and total trihalomethanes (THM), DBCP, and perchlorate concentrations decreased with increasing well depth. Volatile organic compound, solvent, and pesticide detections, and THM concentrations also were lower in older (pre-modern) groundwater than in modern-age groundwater. Solvent detections and total THM, DBCP, and perchlorate concentrations increased with increasing DO concentrations.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 34.833333333333336° to 37° latitude; -121° to -118° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Carmen A. Burton, Jennifer L. Shelton, Kenneth Belitz. 2012. Status and understanding of groundwater quality in the two southern San Joaquin Valley study units, 2005-2006 - California GAMA Priority Basin Project. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20115218

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗