Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Ground-water Series”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
USGS2009

Ground-Water Quality Data in the Coachella Valley Study Unit, 2007: Results from the California GAMA Program

Ground-water quality in the approximately 820 square-mile Coachella Valley Study Unit (COA) was investigated during February and March 2007 as part of the Priority Basin Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The GAMA Priority Basin Project was developed in response to the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Act of 2001, and is being conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of raw ground water used for public-water supplies within the Coachella Valley, and to facilitate statistically consistent comparisons of ground-water quality throughout California. Samples were collected from 35 wells in Riverside County. Nineteen of the wells were selected using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the study unit (grid wells). Sixteen additional wells were sampled to evaluate changes in water chemistry along selected ground-water flow paths, examine land use effects on ground-water quality, and to collect water-quality data in areas where little exists. These wells were referred to as 'understanding wells'. The ground-water samples were analyzed for a large number of organic constituents (volatile organic compounds [VOC], pesticides and pesticide degradates, pharmaceutical compounds, and potential wastewater-indicator compounds), constituents of special interest (perchlorate and 1,2,3-trichloropropane [1,2,3-TCP]), naturally occurring inorganic constituents (nutrients, major and minor ions, and trace elements), radioactive constituents, and microbial indicators. Naturally occurring isotopes (uranium, tritium, carbon-14, and stable isotopes of hydrogen, oxygen, and boron), and dissolved noble gases (the last in collaboration with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory) also were measured to help identify the source and age of the sampled ground water. A quality-control sample (blank, replicate, or matrix spike) was collected at approximately one quarter of the wells, and the results for these samples were used to evaluate the quality of the data for the ground-water samples. Assessment of the quality-control information resulted in V-coding less than 0.1 percent of the data collected. This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of water delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from the ground, water typically is treated, disinfected, and (or) blended with other waters to maintain acceptable water quality. Regulatory thresholds apply to treated water that is supplied to the consumer, not to raw ground water. However, to provide some context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured in the raw ground water were compared with health-based thresholds established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) and thresholds established for aesthetic purposes (secondary maximum contaminant levels, SMCL-CA) by CDPH. Most constituents detected in ground-water samples were at concentrations below drinking-water thresholds. Volatile organic compounds, pesticides, and pesticide degradates were detected in less than one-third of the grid well samples collected. All VOC and pesticide concentrations measured were below health-based thresholds. Potential waste-water indicators were detected in less than half of the wells sampled, and no detections were above health-based thresholds. Perchlorate was detected in seven grid wells; concentrations from two wells were above the CDPH maximum contaminant level (MCL-CA). Most detections of trace elements in samples collected from COA Study Unit wells were below water-quality thresholds. Exceptions include five samples of arsenic that were above the USEPA maximum contaminant level (MCL-US), two detections of boron above the CDPH notification level (NL-CA), and two detections of mol

Data Series↗
USGS2008

Ground-water quality data in the middle Sacramento Valley study unit, 2006— Results from the California GAMA program

Ground-water quality in the approximately 3,340 mi 2 Middle Sacramento Valley study unit (MSACV) was investigated from June through September, 2006, as part of the California Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) program. The GAMA Priority Basin Assessment project was developed in response to the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Act of 2001 and is being conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The Middle Sacramento Valley study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of raw ground-water quality within MSACV, as well as a statistically consistent basis for comparing water quality throughout California. Samples were collected from 108 wells in Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Sutter, Tehama, Yolo, and Yuba Counties. Seventy-one wells were selected using a randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the study unit (grid wells), 15 wells were selected to evaluate changes in water chemistry along ground-water flow paths (flow-path wells), and 22 were shallow monitoring wells selected to assess the effects of rice agriculture, a major land use in the study unit, on ground-water chemistry (RICE wells). The ground-water samples were analyzed for a large number of synthetic organic constituents (volatile organic compounds [VOCs], gasoline oxygenates and degradates, pesticides and pesticide degradates, and pharmaceutical compounds), constituents of special interest (perchlorate, N-nitrosodimethylamine [NDMA], and 1,2,3-trichloropropane [1,2,3-TCP]), inorganic constituents (nutrients, major and minor ions, and trace elements), radioactive constituents, and microbial indicators. Naturally occurring isotopes (tritium, and carbon-14, and stable isotopes of hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon), and dissolved noble gases also were measured to help identify the sources and ages of the sampled ground water. Quality-control samples (blanks, replicates, laboratory matrix spikes) were collected at approximately 10 percent of the wells, and the results for these samples were used to evaluate the quality of the data for the ground-water samples. Field blanks rarely contained detectable concentrations of any constituent, suggesting that contamination was not a noticeable source of bias in the data for the ground-water samples. Differences between replicate samples were within acceptable ranges, indicating acceptably low variability. Matrix spike recoveries were within acceptable ranges for most constituents. This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of water delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from the ground, water typically is treated, disinfected, or blended with other waters to maintain acceptable water quality. Regulatory thresholds apply to treated water that is served to the consumer, not to raw ground water. However, to provide some context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured in the raw ground water were compared with health-based thresholds established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and California Department of Public Health (CDPH) and thresholds established for aesthetic concerns (secondary maximum contaminant levels, SMCL-CA) by CDPH. Comparisons between data collected for this study and drinking-water thresholds are for illustrative purposes only and are not indicative of compliance or noncompliance with regulatory thresholds. Most constituents that were detected in ground-water samples were found at concentrations below drinking-water thresholds. VOCs were detected in less than one-third and pesticides and pesticide degradates in just over one-half of the grid wells, and all detections of these constituents in samples from all wells of the MSACV study unit were below health-based thresholds. All detections of trace elements in samples from MSACV grid wells were below health-based thresholds, with the exceptions of arsenic and boron. Arsenic concentrations were above the USEPA maximum contaminant level (MCL-US) threshold in eight grid wells, and boron concentrations were above the CDPH notification level (NL-CA) in two grid wells. Arsenic was detected above the MCL-US in two flow-path wells. Arsenic, barium, boron, molybdenum, strontium, and vanadium were detected above health-based thresholds in a few of the RICE wells; these wells are not used to supply drinking water. All detections of radioactive constituents were below health-based thresholds, although six samples had activities of radon-222 above the lower proposed MCL-US threshold. Most of the samples from the MSACV wells had concentrations of major elements, total dissolved solids, and trace elements below the non-enforceable thresholds set for aesthetic concerns. Chloride and sulfate concentrations exceeded SMCL-CA thresholds in two and one grid well, respectively. Iron, manganese, and total dissolved solids concentrations were above the SMCL-CA thresholds in 1, 12, and 6 grid wells, respectively. Nitrate (nitrite plus nitrate, as dissolved nitrogen) concentrations from two grid wells were above the MCL-US threshold. There were no detections of microbial indicators in MSACV.

California↗
USGS2008

Ground-water quality data in the coastal Los Angeles Basin study unit, 2006: Results from the California GAMA Program

Ground-water quality in the approximately 860 square-mile Coastal Los Angeles Basin study unit (CLAB) was investigated from June to November of 2006 as part of the Statewide Basin Assessment Project of the Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The GAMA Statewide Basin Assessment was developed in response to the Ground-Water Quality Monitoring Act of 2001, and is being conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The Coastal Los Angeles Basin study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of raw ground-water quality within CLAB, as well as a statistically consistent basis for comparing water quality throughout California. Samples were collected from 69 wells in Los Angeles and Orange Counties. Fifty-five of the wells were selected using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the study area (?grid wells?). Fourteen additional wells were selected to evaluate changes in ground-water chemistry or to gain a greater understanding of the ground-water quality within a specific portion of the Coastal Los Angeles Basin study unit ('understanding wells'). Ground-water samples were analyzed for: a large number of synthetic organic constituents [volatile organic compounds (VOCs), gasoline oxygenates and their degradates, pesticides, polar pesticides, and pesticide degradates, pharmaceutical compounds, and potential wastewater-indicators]; constituents of special interest [perchlorate, N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), 1,4-dioxane, and 1,2,3-trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP)]; inorganic constituents that can occur naturally [nutrients, major and minor ions, and trace elements]; radioactive constituents [gross-alpha and gross-beta radiation, radium isotopes, and radon-222]; and microbial indicators. Naturally occurring isotopes [stable isotopic ratios of hydrogen and oxygen, and activities of tritium and carbon-14] and dissolved noble gases also were measured to help identify the sources and ages of the sampled ground water. Quality-control samples (blanks, replicates, and samples for matrix spikes) were collected at approximately one-fourth of the wells, and the results for these samples were used to evaluate the quality of the data for the ground-water samples. Field blanks rarely contained detectable concentrations of any constituent, suggesting that contamination was not a significant source of bias. Differences between replicate samples were within acceptable ranges, indicating acceptably low variability. Matrix spike recoveries were within acceptable ranges for most compounds. Assessment of the quality-control information resulted in applying ?V? codes to approximately 0.1 percent of the data collected for ground-water samples (meaning a constituent was detected in blanks as well as the corresponding environmental data). This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of drinking water delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from the ground, water typically is treated, disinfected, and (or) blended with other waters to maintain acceptable drinking-water quality. Regulatory thresholds are applied to the treated drinking water that is served to the consumer, not to raw ground water. However, to provide some context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured in the raw ground water were compared with regulatory and non-regulatory health-based thresholds established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), California Department of Public Health (CDPH, formerly California Department of Health Services [CADHS]) and thresholds established for aesthetic concerns (secondary maximum contaminant levels, SMCL-CA) by CDPH. Comparisons between data collected for this study and drinking-water thresholds are for illustrative purposes only, and are not indicative of compliance or non-compliance with those thresholds. VOCs were detected in alm

California↗
USGS2009

Ground-water quality data in the San Francisco Bay study unit, 2007: Results from the California GAMA Program

Ground-water quality in the approximately 620-square-mile San Francisco Bay study unit (SFBAY) was investigated from April through June 2007 as part of the Priority Basin project of the Ground-Water Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The GAMA Priority Basin project was developed in response to the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Act of 2001, and is being conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of raw ground-water quality, as well as a statistically consistent basis for comparing water quality throughout California. Samples in SFBAY were collected from 79 wells in San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Alameda, and Contra Costa Counties. Forty-three of the wells sampled were selected using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the study unit (grid wells). Thirty-six wells were sampled to aid in evaluation of specific water-quality issues (understanding wells). The ground-water samples were analyzed for a large number of synthetic organic constituents (volatile organic compounds [VOC], pesticides and pesticide degradates, pharmaceutical compounds, and potential wastewater-indicator compounds), constituents of special interest (perchlorate and N-nitrosodimethylamine [NDMA]), naturally occurring inorganic constituents (nutrients, major and minor ions, trace elements, chloride and bromide isotopes, and uranium and strontium isotopes), radioactive constituents, and microbial indicators. Naturally occurring isotopes (tritium, carbon-14 isotopes, and stable isotopes of hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, boron, and carbon), and dissolved noble gases (noble gases were analyzed in collaboration with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory) also were measured to help identify the source and age of the sampled ground water. Quality-control samples (blank samples, replicate samples, matrix spike samples) were collected for approximately one-third of the wells, and the results for these samples were used to evaluate the quality of the data for the ground-water samples. Assessment of the quality-control information from the field blanks resulted in applying “V” codes to approximately 0.1 percent of the data collected for ground-water samples (meaning a constituent was detected in blanks as well as the corresponding environmental data). See the Appendix section “Quality-Control-Sample Results.” This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of water delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from the ground, water typically is treated, disinfected, and (or) blended with other waters to maintain acceptable water quality. Regulatory thresholds apply to treated water that is delivered to the consumer, not to raw ground water. However, to provide some context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured in the raw ground water were compared with regulatory and non-regulatory health-based thresholds established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and California Department of Public Health (CDPH) and thresholds established for aesthetic concerns (secondary maximum contaminant levels, SMCL-CA) by CDPH. VOCs were detected in about one-half of the grid wells, while pesticides were detected in about one-fifth of the grid wells. Concentrations of all VOCs and pesticides detected in samples from all SFBAY wells were below health-based thresholds. No pharmaceutical compounds were detected in any SFBAY well. One potential wastewater-indicator compound, caffeine, was detected in one grid well in SFBAY. Concentrations of most trace elements and nutrients detected in samples from all SFBAY wells were below health-based thresholds. Exceptions include nitrate, detected above the USEPA maximum contaminant level (MCL-US) in 3samples; arsenic, above the USEPA maximum contaminant level (MCL-US) in 3 samples; cadmium, above the MCL-US in 1 sample; boron, above the CDPH notification level (NL-CA) in 2 samples; and strontium, above the USEPA lifetime health advisory level (HAL-US) in 2 samples. The radioactive constituent radon-222 was detected above the proposed MCL-US in two grid wells, but no wells had detections above the proposed alternative MCL-US. Most of the samples from all SFBAY wells had concentrations of major ions, total dissolved solids, and trace elements below the non-enforceable thresholds set for aesthetic concerns. Six or fewer samples contained chloride, sulfate, or iron at concentrations above the SMCL-CA thresholds. No microbial indicators were detected in SFBAY grid wells.

California↗
USGS2010

A Compilation of Spatial Datasets and Surface-Water and Ground-Water Data from the U.S. Geological Survey and Other Federal and Oklahoma State Agencies for the Kickapoo Tribe of Oklahoma

This report contains spatial datasets of natural and anthropogenic features and spatial datasets detailing surface-water, ground-water, and other types of environmental information collected in and surrounding Kickapoo Tribal Lands. Spatial datasets were compiled from Federal and Oklahoma State agencies. Surface-water, ground-water, and other types of environmental information of natural and anthropogenic features were compiled from USGS National Water Information System database, Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality online Geographic Information System data viewer, Oklahoma Water Resources Board online Water Information Mapping System, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency online Modernized STORET database. These spatial datasets were compiled from many different sources with varying quality. Because of the different sources, features common to multiple layers may not overlay exactly. Users should check the metadata to determine proper use of these data. These data were not checked for accuracy or completeness. Should a question of accuracy or completeness arise, the user should contact the originator cited in the metadata.

Data Series↗
USGS2009

Ground-Water Quality Data in the Upper Santa Ana Watershed Study Unit, November 2006-March 2007: Results from the California GAMA Program

Ground-water quality in the approximately 1,000-square-mile Upper Santa Ana Watershed study unit (USAW) was investigated from November 2006 through March 2007 as part of the Priority Basin Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The GAMA Priority Basin project was developed in response to the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Act of 2001, and is being conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The Upper Santa Ana Watershed study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of raw ground-water quality within USAW, as well as a statistically consistent basis for comparing water quality throughout California. Samples were collected from 99 wells in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. Ninety of the wells were selected using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the study unit (grid wells). Nine wells were selected to provide additional understanding of specific water-quality issues identified within the basin (understanding wells). The ground-water samples were analyzed for a large number of organic constituents (volatile organic compounds [VOCs], pesticides and pesticide degradates, pharmaceutical compounds, and potential wastewater-indicator compounds), constituents of special interest (perchlorate, N-nitrosodimethylamine [NDMA], 1,4-dioxane, and 1,2,3-trichloropropane [1,2,3-TCP]), naturally occurring inorganic constituents (nutrients, major and minor ions, and trace elements), radioactive constituents, and microbial indicators. Naturally occurring isotopes (tritium, carbon-14, and stable isotopes of hydrogen and oxygen in water) and dissolved noble gases also were measured to help identify sources and ages of the sampled ground water. Dissolved gases, and isotopes of nitrogen gas and of dissolved nitrate also were measured in order to investigate the sources and occurrence of nitrate in the study unit. In total, nearly 400 constituents and water-quality indicators were investigated for this study. This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of water delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from the ground, water typically is treated, disinfected, and (or) blended with other waters to maintain acceptable water quality. Regulatory thresholds apply to treated water that is served to the consumer, not to raw ground water. However, to provide some context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured in the raw ground water were compared with regulatory and non-regulatory health-based thresholds established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) and thresholds established for aesthetic concerns (secondary maximum contaminant levels, SMCL-CA) by CDPH. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were detected in more than 80 percent of USAW grid wells. Most VOCs detected were at concentrations far less than thresholds established for drinking water to protect human health; however, six wells had VOC concentrations above health-based thresholds. Twenty-four of the 85 VOCs investigated were detected in the study unit;11 were detected in more than 10 percent of the wells. The VOCs detected above health-based thresholds in at least one well were dibromochloropropane (DBCP), tetrachloroethene (PCE), trichloroethene (TCE), carbon tetrachloride, and 1,1-dichoroethene. Pesticide compounds were detected in more than 75 percent of the grid wells. However, of the 134 different pesticide compounds investigated, 13 were detected at concentrations greater than their respective long-term method detection limits, and only 7 compounds (all herbicides or herbicide degradates) were detected in more than 10 percent of the wells. No pesticide compound was detected above its health-based threshold, although thresholds exist for fewer than half of the pesticide compounds investigat

Data Series↗
USGS2010

Selected water-quality data from the Cedar River and Cedar Rapids well fields, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, 1999–2005

The Cedar River alluvial aquifer is the primary source of municipal water in the Cedar Rapids, Iowa area. Municipal wells are completed in the alluvial aquifer at approximately 40 to 80 feet deep. The City of Cedar Rapids and the U.S. Geological Survey have been conducting a cooperative study of the groundwater-flow system and water quality near the well fields since 1992. Previous cooperative studies between the City of Cedar Rapids and the U.S. Geological Survey have documented hydrologic and water-quality data, geochemistry, and groundwater models. Water-quality samples were collected for studies involving well field monitoring, trends, source-water protection, groundwater geochemistry, evaluation of surface and ground-water interaction, assessment of pesticides in groundwater and surface water, and to evaluate water quality near a wetland area in the Seminole well field. Typical water-quality analyses included major ions (boron, bromide, calcium, chloride, fluoride, iron, magnesium, manganese, potassium, silica, sodium, and sulfate), nutrients (ammonia as nitrogen, nitrite as nitrogen, nitrite plus nitrate as nitrogen, and orthophosphate as phosphorus), dissolved organic carbon, and selected pesticides including two degradates of the herbicide atrazine. In addition, two synoptic samplings included analyses of additional pesticide degradates in water samples. Physical field parameters (alkalinity, dissolved oxygen, pH, specific conductance and water temperature) were recorded with each water sample collected. This report presents the results of water quality data-collection activities from January 1999 through December 2005. Methods of data collection, quality-assurance samples, water-quality analyses, and statistical summaries are presented. Data include the results of water-quality analyses from quarterly and synoptic sampling from monitoring wells, municipal wells, and the Cedar River.

iowa↗
USGS1988

General hydrogeology of the aquifers of Mesozoic age, Upper Colorado River Basin - excluding the San Juan Basin - Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, and Arizona

The objective of the Upper Colorado Regional Aquifer Systems Analyses (RASA) project is to assess quantitatively the occurrence, movement, and availability of water stored in rock formations underlying the basin. This is one of a series of preliminary reports that describe what is currently known (1984) about the geometry and hydrologic properties of the aquifer systems, and the chemistry of the water in known or potential aquifers. This report provides the foundation needed for the assessment of the ground-water resources of the region. The report describes only part of the hydrologic system; that is, formations of Mesozoic age. Younger and older formations significant to the hydrologic system are described in other reports.

Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming↗
USGS2008

Potentiometric Surface of the Upper Floridan Aquifer, West-Central Florida, May 2007

The Floridan aquifer system consists of the Upper and Lower Floridan aquifers separated by the middle confining unit. The middle confining unit and the Lower Floridan aquifer in west-central Florida generally contain highly mineralized water. The water-bearing units containing fresh water are herein referred to as the Upper Floridan aquifer. The Upper Floridan aquifer is the principal source of water in the Southwest Florida Water Management District and is used for major public supply, domestic use, irrigation, and brackish water desalination in coastal communities (Southwest Florida Water Management District, 2000). This map report shows the potentiometric surface of the Upper Floridan aquifer measured in May 2007. The potentiometric surface is an imaginary surface connecting points of equal altitude to which water will rise in tightly-cased wells that tap a confined aquifer system (Lohman, 1979). This map represents water-level conditions near the end of the dry season, when ground-water levels usually are at an annual low and withdrawals for agricultural use typically are high. The cumulative average rainfall of 41.21 inches for west-central Florida (from June 2006 through May 2007) was 11.63 inches below the historical cumulative average of 52.84 inches (Southwest Florida Water Management District, 2007). Historical cumulative averages are calculated from regional rainfall summary reports (1915 to most recent complete calendar year) and are updated monthly by the Southwest Florida Water Management District. This report, prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Southwest Florida Water Management District, is part of a semi-annual series of Upper Floridan aquifer potentiometric-surface map reports for west-central Florida. Potentiometric-surface maps have been prepared for January 1964, May 1969, May 1971, May 1973, May 1974, and for each May and September since 1975. Water-level data are collected in May and September each year to show the approximate annual low and high water-level conditions, respectively. Most of the water-level data for this map were collected by the U.S. Geological Survey during the period May 21-25, 2007. Supplemental water-level data were collected by other agencies and companies. A corresponding potentiometric-surface map was prepared for areas east and north of the Southwest Florida Water Management District boundary by the U.S. Geological Survey office in Orlando, Florida (Kinnaman and Dixon, 2007). Most water-level measurements were made during a 5-day period; therefore, measurements do not represent a 'snapshot' of conditions at a specific time, nor do they necessarily coincide with the seasonal low water-level condition.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2008

Potentiometric Surface of the Upper Floridan Aquifer, West-Central Florida, September 2007

The Floridan aquifer system consists of the Upper and Lower Floridan aquifers separated by the middle confining unit. The middle confining unit and the Lower Floridan aquifer in west-central Florida generally contain highly mineralized water. The water-bearing units containing fresh water are herein referred to as the Upper Floridan aquifer. The Upper Floridan aquifer is the principal source of water in the Southwest Florida Water Management District and is used for major public supply, domestic use, irrigation, and brackish water desalination in coastal communities (Southwest Florida Water Management District, 2000). This map report shows the potentiometric surface of the Upper Floridan aquifer measured in September 2007. The potentiometric surface is an imaginary surface connecting points of equal altitude to which water will rise in tightly-cased wells that tap a confined aquifer system (Lohman, 1979). This map represents water-level conditions near the end of the wet season, when ground-water levels usually are at an annual high and withdrawals for agricultural use typically are low. The cumulative average rainfall of 39.50 inches for west-central Florida (from October 2006 through September 2007) was 13.42 inches below the historical cumulative average of 52.92 inches (Southwest Florida Water Management District, 2007). Historical cumulative averages are calculated from regional rainfall summary reports (1915 to most recent complete calendar year) and are updated monthly by the Southwest Florida Water Management District. This report, prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Southwest Florida Water Management District, is part of a semi-annual series of Upper Floridan aquifer potentiometric-surface map reports for west-central Florida. Potentiometric-surface maps have been prepared for January 1964, May 1969, May 1971, May 1973, May 1974, and for each May and September since 1975. Water-level data are collected in May and September each year to show the approximate annual low and high water-level conditions, respectively. Most of the water-level data for this map were collected by the U.S. Geological Survey during the period September 17-21, 2007. Supplemental water-level data were collected by other agencies and companies. A corresponding potentiometric-surface map was prepared for areas east and north of the Southwest Florida Water Management District boundary by the U.S. Geological Survey office in Orlando, Florida (Kinnaman and Dixon, 2008). Most water-level measurements were made during a 5-day period; therefore, measurements do not represent a 'snapshot' of conditions at a specific time, nor do they necessarily coincide with the seasonal high water-level condition.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2009

Summary of West Virginia Water-Resource Data through September 2008

The West Virginia Water Science Center of the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with State and Federal agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the water resources of West Virginia each water year. A water year is the 12-month period beginning October 1 and ending September 30. These data, accumulated during many years, constitute a valuable database for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the State. These data are maintained in the National Water Information System (NWIS) and are available through its World-Wide Web interface, NWISWeb, at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/wv/nwis. Data can be retrieved in a variety of common formats, and a tutorial is available at http://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov/tutorial. Location information for all continuous-record gaging stations operated in West Virginia through September 2008 is provided in this report, as well as statistical summaries of the available daily records. This report can serve as an index to the daily records data available on the World-Wide Web. Hydrologic data for nearly all of the gaging stations identified in this report are also available in the annual publication series titled Water-Resources Data - West Virginia. This series of annual reports for West Virginia began with the 1961 water year with a report that contained only data relating to quantities of surface water. For the 1964 water year, a similar report was introduced that contained only data relating to water quality. Beginning with the 1975 water year, the report format was changed to include data on quantities of surface water, quality of surface water and groundwater, and groundwater levels. Prior to the introduction of the Water-Resources Data - West Virginia series and for several water years concurrent with it, water-resources data for West Virginia were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers. Data on stream discharge and stage and on lake or reservoir contents and stage through September 1960 were published annually under the title Surface-Water Supply of the United States, Parts 6A and 6B. For the 1961 through 1970 water years, the data were published in two 5-year reports. Data on chemical quality, temperature, and suspended sediment for the 1941 through 1970 water years were published annually under the title Quality of Surface Water of the United States, and water levels for the 1935 through 1974 water years were published under the title Ground-Water Levels in the United States. Many of the above mentioned Water-Supply Papers are available at the USGS Publications Warehouse (http://pubs.er.usgs.gov), and most of the others may be found in the collections of large libraries or may be purchased from the U.S. Geological Survey, Books and Open-File Reports, Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, Colorado 80225. Annual reports on hydrologic data are published by the Geological Survey for all states, and each has an identification number consisting of the two-letter state abbreviation, the last two digits of the water year, and the volume number. For example, the 2005 water year report for West Virginia is identified as U.S. Geological Survey Water-Data Report WV-05-01. Water-Data Reports for West Virginia for 2001-2005 are available online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/wdr/#WV. Water-Data Reports for water years prior to 2006 are for sale in paper copy or microfiche by the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, Virginia 22161. Since the 2006 water year, the report is published online only and is available at http://wdr.water.usgs.gov/. When substantial errors in published records are discovered, the records are revised. Such revisions are routine and are made to records regardless of the age of the original records. Revisions have been made for many stations for which data are published in this report. The USGS National Water Information System always contains the most recent data revisions. For critical a

Open-File Report↗
USGS2008

Potentiometric Surface of the Upper Floridan Aquifer, West-Central Florida, May 2008

The Floridan aquifer system consists of the Upper and Lower Floridan aquifers separated by the middle confining unit. The middle confining unit and the Lower Floridan aquifer in west-central Florida generally contain highly mineralized water. The water-bearing units containing fresh water are herein referred to as the Upper Floridan aquifer. The Upper Floridan aquifer is the principal source of water in the Southwest Florida Water Management District and is used for major public supply, domestic use, irrigation, and brackish water desalination in coastal communities (Southwest Florida Water Management District, 2000). This map report shows the potentiometric surface of the Upper Floridan aquifer measured in May 2008. The potentiometric surface is an imaginary surface connecting points of equal altitude to which water will rise in tightly-cased wells that tap a confined aquifer system (Lohman, 1979). This map represents water-level conditions near the end of the dry season, when ground-water levels usually are at an annual low and withdrawals for agricultural use typically are high. The cumulative average rainfall of 46.95 inches for west-central Florida (from June 2007 through May 2008) was 5.83 inches below the historical cumulative average of 52.78 inches (Southwest Florida Water Management District, 2008). Historical cumulative averages are calculated from regional rainfall summary reports (1915 to most recent complete calendar year) and are updated monthly by the Southwest Florida Water Management District. This report, prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Southwest Florida Water Management District, is part of a semi-annual series of Upper Floridan aquifer potentiometric-surface map reports for west-central Florida. Potentiometric-surface maps have been prepared for January 1964, May 1969, May 1971, May 1973, May 1974, and for each May and September since 1975. Water-level data are collected in May and September each year to show the approximate annual low and high water-level conditions, respectively. Most of the water-level data for this map were collected by the U.S. Geological Survey during the period May 19-23, 2008. Supplemental water-level data were collected by other agencies and companies. A corresponding potentiometric-surface map was prepared for areas east and north of the Southwest Florida Water Management District boundary by the U.S. Geological Survey office in Orlando, Florida (Kinnaman and Dixon, 2008). Most water-level measurements were made during a 5-day period; therefore, measurements do not represent a 'snapshot' of conditions at a specific time, nor do they necessarily coincide with the seasonal low water-level condition.

Scientific Investigations Map↗
USGS2009

Potentiometric Surface of the Upper Floridan Aquifer, West-Central Florida, September 2008

The Floridan aquifer system consists of the Upper and Lower Floridan aquifers separated by the middle confining unit. The middle confining unit and the Lower Floridan aquifer in west-central Florida generally contain highly mineralized water. The water-bearing units containing fresh water are herein referred to as the Upper Floridan aquifer. The Upper Floridan aquifer is the principal source of water in the Southwest Florida Water Management District and is used for major public supply, domestic use, irrigation, and brackish water desalination in coastal communities (Southwest Florida Water Management District, 2000). This map report shows the potentiometric surface of the Upper Floridan aquifer measured in September 2008. The potentiometric surface is an imaginary surface connecting points of equal altitude to which water will rise in tightly-cased wells that tap a confined aquifer system (Lohman, 1979). This map represents water-level conditions near the end of the wet season, when ground-water levels usually are at an annual high and withdrawals for agricultural use typically are low. The cumulative average rainfall of 50.63 inches for west-central Florida (from October 2007 through September 2008) was 2.26 inches below the historical cumulative average of 52.89 inches (Southwest Florida Water Management District, 2008). Historical cumulative averages are calculated from regional rainfall summary reports (1915 to most recent complete calendar year) and are updated monthly by the Southwest Florida Water Management District. This report, prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Southwest Florida Water Management District, is part of a semi-annual series of Upper Floridan aquifer potentiometric-surface map reports for west-central Florida. Potentiometric-surface maps have been prepared for January 1964, May 1969, May 1971, May 1973, May 1974, and for each May and September since 1975. Water-level data are collected in May and September each year to show the approximate annual low and high water-level conditions, respectively. Most of the water-level data for this map were collected by the U.S. Geological Survey during the period September 15-19, 2008. Supplemental water-level data were collected by other agencies and companies. A corresponding potentiometric-surface map was prepared for areas east and north of the Southwest Florida Water Management District boundary by the U.S. Geological Survey office in Orlando, Florida (Kinnaman and Dixon, 2009). Most water-level measurements were made during a 5-day period; therefore, measurements do not represent a 'snapshot' of conditions at a specific time, nor do they necessarily coincide with the seasonal high water-level condition.

Scientific Investigations Map↗
USGS2009

Potentiometric Surface of the Upper Floridan Aquifer, West-Central Florida, May 2009

The Floridan aquifer system consists of the Upper and Lower Floridan aquifers separated by the middle confining unit. The middle confining unit and the Lower Floridan aquifer in west-central Florida generally contain highly mineralized water. The water-bearing units containing fresh water are herein referred to as the Upper Floridan aquifer. The Upper Floridan aquifer is the principal source of water in the Southwest Florida Water Management District and is used for major public supply, domestic use, irrigation, and brackish water desalination in coastal communities (Southwest Florida Water Management District, 2000). This map report shows the potentiometric surface of the Upper Floridan aquifer measured in May 2009. The potentiometric surface is an imaginary surface connecting points of equal altitude to which water will rise in tightly-cased wells that tap a confined aquifer system (Lohman, 1979). This map represents water-level conditions near the end of the dry season, when ground-water levels usually are at an annual low and withdrawals for agricultural use typically are high. The cumulative average rainfall of 48.53 inches for west-central Florida (from June 2008 through May 2009) was 4.12 inches below the historical cumulative average of 52.65 inches (Southwest Florida Water Management District, 2009). Historical cumulative averages are calculated from regional rainfall summary reports (1915 to most recent complete calendar year) and are updated monthly by the Southwest Florida Water Management District. This report, prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Southwest Florida Water Management District, is part of a semi-annual series of Upper Floridan aquifer potentiometric-surface map reports for west-central Florida. Potentiometric-surface maps have been prepared for January 1964, May 1969, May 1971, May 1973, May 1974, and for each May and September since 1975. Water-level data are collected in May and September each year to show the approximate annual low and high water-level conditions, respectively. Most of the water-level data for this map were collected by the U.S. Geological Survey during the period May 18-22, 2009. Supplemental water-level data were collected by other agencies and companies. A corresponding potentiometric-surface map was prepared for areas east and north of the Southwest Florida Water Management District boundary by the U.S. Geological Survey office in Orlando, Florida (Kinnaman and Dixon, 2009). Most water-level measurements were made during a 5-day period; therefore, measurements do not represent a 'snapshot' of conditions at a specific time, nor do they necessarily coincide with the seasonal low water-level condition. The potentiometric contours are generalized to synoptically portray the head in a dynamic hydrologic system, taking due account of the variations in hydrogeologic conditions, such as differing depths of wells, nonsimultaneous measurements of water levels, variable effects of pumping, and changing climatic influence. The potentiometric contours may not conform exactly with the individual measurements of water levels.

Scientific Investigations Map↗
USGS2008

Simulation of the Quantity, Variability, and Timing of Streamflow in the Dennys River Basin, Maine, by Use of a Precipitation-Runoff Watershed Model

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Maine Department of Marine Resources Bureau of Sea Run Fisheries and Habitat, began a study in 2004 to characterize the quantity, variability, and timing of streamflow in the Dennys River. The study included a synoptic summary of historical streamflow data at a long-term streamflow gage, collecting data from an additional four short-term streamflow gages, and the development and evaluation of a distributed-parameter watershed model for the Dennys River Basin. The watershed model used in this investigation was the USGS Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System (PRMS). The Geographic Information System (GIS) Weasel was used to delineate the Dennys River Basin and subbasins and derive parameters for their physical geographic features. Calibration of the models used in this investigation involved a four-step procedure in which model output was evaluated against four calibration data sets using computed objective functions for solar radiation, potential evapotranspiration, annual and seasonal water budgets, and daily streamflows. The calibration procedure involved thousands of model runs and was carried out using the USGS software application Luca (Let us calibrate). Luca uses the Shuffled Complex Evolution (SCE) global search algorithm to calibrate the model parameters. The SCE method reliably produces satisfactory solutions for large, complex optimization problems. The primary calibration effort went into the Dennys main stem watershed model. Calibrated parameter values obtained for the Dennys main stem model were transferred to the Cathance Stream model, and a similar four-step SCE calibration procedure was performed; this effort was undertaken to determine the potential to transfer modeling information to a nearby basin in the same region. The calibrated Dennys main stem watershed model performed with Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) statistic values for the calibration period and evaluation period of 0.79 and 0.76, respectively. The Cathance Stream model had an NSE value of 0.68. The Dennys River Basin models make use of limited streamflow-gaging station data and provide information to characterize subbasin hydrology. The calibrated PRMS watershed models of the Dennys River Basin provide simulated daily streamflow time series from October 1, 1985, through September 30, 2006, for nearly any location within the basin. These models enable natural-resources managers to characterize the timing and quantity of water moving through the basin to support many endeavors including geochemical calculations, water-use assessment, Atlantic salmon population dynamics and migration modeling, habitat modeling and assessment, and other resource-management scenario evaluations. Characterizing streamflow contributions from subbasins in the basin and the relative amounts of surface- and ground-water contributions to streamflow throughout the basin will lead to a better understanding of water quantity and quality in the basin. Improved water-resources information will support Atlantic salmon protection efforts.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2009

Watershed Models for Decision Support for Inflows to Potholes Reservoir, Washington

A set of watershed models for four basins (Crab Creek, Rocky Ford Creek, Rocky Coulee, and Lind Coulee), draining into Potholes Reservoir in east-central Washington, was developed as part of a decision support system to aid the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, in managing water resources in east-central Washington State. The project is part of the U.S. Geological Survey and Bureau of Reclamation collaborative Watershed and River Systems Management Program. A conceptual model of hydrology is outlined for the study area that highlights the significant processes that are important to accurately simulate discharge under a wide range of conditions. The conceptual model identified the following factors as significant for accurate discharge simulations: (1) influence of frozen ground on peak discharge, (2) evaporation and ground-water flow as major pathways in the system, (3) channel losses, and (4) influence of irrigation practices on reducing or increasing discharge. The Modular Modeling System was used to create a watershed model for the four study basins by combining standard Precipitation Runoff Modeling System modules with modified modules from a previous study and newly modified modules. The model proved unreliable in simulating peak-flow discharge because the index used to track frozen ground conditions was not reliable. Mean monthly and mean annual discharges were more reliable when simulated. Data from seven USGS streamflow-gaging stations were used to compare with simulated discharge for model calibration and evaluation. Mean annual differences between simulated and observed discharge varied from 1.2 to 13.8 percent for all stations used in the comparisons except one station on a regional ground-water discharge stream. Two thirds of the mean monthly percent differences between the simulated mean and the observed mean discharge for these six stations were between -20 and 240 percent, or in absolute terms, between -0.8 and 11 cubic feet per second. A graphical user interface was developed for the user to easily run the model, make runoff forecasts, and evaluate the results. The models; however, are not reliable for managing short-term operations because of their demonstrated inability to match individual storm peaks and individual monthly discharge values. Short-term forecasting may be improved with real-time monitoring of the extent of frozen ground and the snow-water equivalent in the basin. Despite the models unreliability for short-term runoff forecasts, they are useful in providing long-term, time-series discharge data where no observed data exist.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2011

Hydrogeology and simulation of groundwater flow in fractured rock in the Newark basin, Rockland County, New York

Groundwater in the Newark basin aquifer flows primarily through discrete water-bearing zones parallel to the strike and dip of bedding, whereas flow perpendicular to the strike is restricted, thereby imparting anisotropy to the groundwater flow field. The finite-element model SUTRA was used to represent bedrock structure in the aquifer by spatially varying the orientation of the hydraulic conductivity tensor to reflect variations in the strike and dip of the bedding. Directions of maximum and medium hydraulic conductivity were oriented parallel to the bedding, and the direction of minimum hydraulic conductivity was oriented perpendicular to the bedding. Groundwater flow models were prepared to simulate local flow in the vicinity of the Spring Valley well field and regional flow through the Newark basin aquifer. The Newark basin contains sedimentary rocks deposited as alluvium during the Late Triassic and is one of a series of basins that developed when Mesozoic rifting of the super continent Pangea created the Atlantic Ocean. The westward-dipping basin is filled with interbedded facies of coarse-grained to fine-grained rocks that were intruded by diabase associated with Jurassic volcanism. The Newark basin aquifer is bounded to the north and east by the Palisades sill and to the west by the Ramapo Fault. Although the general dip of bedding is toward the fault, mapping of conglomerate beds indicates the rocks are folded into broad anticlines and synclines. An alternative, more uniform pattern of regional structure, based on interpolated strike and dip measurements from a number of sources, has also been proposed. Two groundwater flow models (A for the former type of bedrock structure and B for the latter type) were developed to represent these alternative depictions of bedrock structure. Transient simulations were calibrated to reproduce measured water-level recoveries in a 9.3 mi&sup2 area surrounding the Spring Valley well field during a 5-day aquifer test in 1992. The models represented a 330-ft thick rock mass divided vertically into 10 equally spaced layers and were calibrated through nonlinear regression. Results of model B best matched the observed water-level recoveries with an estimated hydraulic conductivity of 9.5 ft/day, specific storage of 7.6 x 10 -6 ft -1, and K max : K min anisotropy ratio (hydraulic conductivity parallel to bedding: perpendicular to bedding) of 72:1. Model error was 50 percent greater in model A because the assumed structure did not match the actual strike of bedding in this area. Steady-state simulations of regional flow through the 85.4-mi2 modeled extent of the Newark basin aquifer represented both the alluvial aquifer beneath the Mawah River and the fractured bedrock. The rock mass was divided into two aquifer units: an upper 500-ft thick unit divided into 10 equally spaced layers through which most groundwater is assumed to flow and a lower unit divided into 7 layers with increasing thickness. Models were calibrated through nonlinear regression to average water levels measured in 140 wells from August 2005 through April 2007. Water levels simulated using the two models were similar and generally matched those observed, and the average recharge rate estimated using both models was 19 inches/year for the simulated period. Estimated transmissivity parallel to the strike of bedding (1,100 ft&sup2/d) was uniform in two transmissivity (T) zones in model A, but in model B the transmissivity of a high T zone (1,600 ft&sup2/d), delineated on the basis of aquifer test data, was slightly greater than in a low T zone (1,300 ft&sup2/d). The K max : K min anisotropy was estimated to be 58:1 in model A and 410:1 in model B, so the proportion of flow perpendicular to bedding is less in model B than in model A. Distributions of groundwater age simulated with models A and B are similar and indicate that most shallow ground-water (225 ft below the bedrock surface) is 5 t

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2018

Groundwater chemistry and water-level elevations in bedrock aquifers of the Piceance and Yellow Creek watersheds, Rio Blanco County, Colorado, 2013–16

The Piceance and Yellow Creek watersheds in Rio Blanco County, Colorado, are known to contain important energy resources (oil shale and natural gas) and mineral resources (nahcolite). The primary sources of fresh groundwater in the Piceance and Yellow Creek watersheds are bedrock aquifers in the Uinta and Green River Formations. The aquifers are divided into an upper and lower aquifer separated by a regionally extensive semiconfining layer. These aquifers provide water to streams and springs in the watersheds and are an important resource to people living and working in the area. Development of energy and mineral resources has the potential to affect the quality of groundwater in several ways. The Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Geological Survey began groundwater monitoring in 2010 to characterize the groundwater quality and water-level elevations of shallow bedrock aquifers in the Piceance and Yellow Creek watersheds. The purpose of this report is to present ground-water chemistry and water-level elevations collected during 2013–16. Comparisons are made to data that were collected from the bedrock aquifers from 2010 to 2012 to identify the potential for changes in water quality and water-level elevations. Appreciable changes in water-level elevations and hydraulic gradient were observed in early April 2015 in two wells completed in the upper and lower aquifers. The hydraulic gradient between the two wells was consistently downward from the upper aquifer to the lower aquifer during 2010–15; however, in early April 2015, the gradient changed from downward to upward between the two aquifers. Overall, water-level elevations declined by about 14 and 11 feet in the upper and lower aquifers, respectively, from 2013 to 2016. Previously published data estimated groundwater ages at 1,200 years old in the upper aquifer and 9,600 years old in the lower aquifer. These groundwater ages indicate that ground-water was recharged over thousands of years. With such long periods of time for aquifer recharge, declines in water-level elevation over short time steps (a few months) have important implications for sustainable management of this resource. Solution mining activities or drilling for oil and natural gas in the area could be related to the changes observed in water-level elevations in these wells; however, further investigation would be needed to evaluate causation. Changes in major-ion chemistry were evaluated in the bedrock aquifer using time series plots of select major-ion data from 2010 to 2016. Major-ion chemistry was variable for a single well from 2010 to 2016 where alkalinity and sulfate were the most variable constituents. One possible explanation for the observed changes in major-ion chemistry may be that the sample depth for that well no longer represents the most appreciable flow in the borehole. On a larger scale, potential changes in flow within the borehole may indicate changes in the regional flow system. Methane and volatile organic compound concentrations were evaluated using a similar approach to that of major ions and had similar findings. Methane concentrations in wells sampled from 2010 to 2016 were generally constant. The only exception was observed at a single well where the range of methane concentrations was from 57.4 (2010) to 4.02 milligrams per liter (2013). This is the same well where changes in water-level elevation, hydraulic gradient, and major-ion chemistry were observed, providing multiple lines of evidence to indicate change in the bedrock aquifers. Sampling of a well located in an area with little energy development but where faults or fractures could provide a path for the migration of fluids indicate mixing of groundwater between the upper and lower aquifers.

Colorado↗