USGS Science⌕ Search

Geology topics

Scott A. Hoffman

Publications and source records attributed to Scott A. Hoffman.

13 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2017

Water quality and quantity and simulated surface-water and groundwater flow in the Laurel Hill Creek Basin, southwestern Pennsylvania, 1991–2007

Laurel Hill Creek is considered one of the most pristine waterways in southwestern Pennsylvania and has high recreational value as a high-quality cold-water fishery; however, the upper parts of the basin have documented water-quality impairments. Groundwater and surface water are withdrawn for public water supply and the basin has been identified as a Critical Water Planning Area (CWPA) under the State Water Plan. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Somerset County Conservation District, collected data and developed modeling tools to support the assessment of water-quality and water-quantity issues for a basin designated as a CWPA. Streams, springs, and groundwater wells were sampled for water quality in 2007. Streamflows were measured concurrent with water-quality sampling at main-stem sites on Laurel Hill Creek and tributaries in 2007. Stream temperatures were monitored continuously at five main-stem sites from 2007 to 2010. Water usage in the basin was summarized for 2003 and 2009 and a Water-Analysis Screening Tool (WAST) developed for the Pennsylvania State Water Plan was implemented to determine whether the water use in the basin exceeded the “safe yield” or “ the amount of water that can be withdrawn from a water resource over a period of time without impairing the long-term utility of a water resource .” A groundwater and surface-water flow (GSFLOW) model was developed for Laurel Hill Creek and calibrated to the measured daily streamflow from 1991 to 2007 for the streamflow-gaging station near the outlet of the basin at Ursina, Pa. The CWPA designation requires an assessment of current and future water use. The calibrated GSFLOW model can be used to assess the hydrologic effects of future changes in water use and land use in the basin. Analyses of samples collected for surface-water quality during base-flow conditions indicate that the highest nutrient concentrations in the main stem of Laurel Hill Creek were at sites in the northeastern part of the basin where agricultural activity is prominent. All of the total nitrogen (N) and a majority of the total phosphorus (P) concentrations in the main stem exceeded regional nutrient criteria levels of 0.31 and 0.01 milligrams per liter (mg/L), respectively. The highest total N and total P concentrations in the main stem were 1.42 and 0.06 mg/L, respectively. Tributary sites with the highest nutrient concentrations are in subbasins where treated wastewater is discharged, such as Kooser Run and Lost Creek. The highest total N and total P concentrations in subbasins were 3.45 and 0.11 mg/L, respectively. Dissolved chloride and sodium concentrations were highest in the upper part of the basin downstream from Interstate 76 because of road deicing salts. The mean base-flow concentrations of dissolved chloride and sodium were 117 and 77 mg/L, respectively, in samples from the main stem just below Interstate 76, and the mean concentrations in Clear Run were 210 and 118 mg/L, compared to concentrations less than 15 mg/L in tributaries that were not affected by highway runoff. Water quality in forested tributary subbasins underlain by the Allegheny and Pottsville Formations was influenced by acidic precipitation and, to a lesser extent, the underlying geology as indicated by pH values less than 5.0 and corresponding specific conductance ranging from 26 to 288 microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius for some samples; in contrast, pH values for main stem sites ranged from 6.6 to 8.5. Manganese (Mn) was the only dissolved constituent in the surface-water samples that exceeded the secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL). More than one-half the samples from the main stem had Mn concentrations exceeding the SMCL level of 50 micrograms per liter (μg/L), whereas only 19 percent of samples from tributaries exceeded the SMCL for Mn. Stream temperatures along the main stem of Laurel Hill Creek became higher moving downstream. During the summer months of June through August, the daily mean temperatures at the five sites exceeded the limit of 18.9 degrees Celsius (°C) for a cold-water fishery. The maximum instantaneous values for each site ranged from 27.2 to 32.8 °C. Water-quality samples collected at groundwater sites (wells and springs) indicate that wells developed within the Mauch Chunk Formation had the best water quality, whereas wells developed within the Allegheny and Pottsville Formations yielded the poorest water quality. Waters from the Mauch Chunk Formation had the highest median pH (7.6) and alkalinity (80 mg/L calcium carbonate) values. The lowest pH and alkalinity median values were in waters from the Allegheny and Pottsville Formations. Groundwater samples collected from wells in the Allegheny and Pottsville Formations also had the highest concentrations of dissolved iron (Fe) and dissolved Mn. Seventy-eight percent of the groundwater samples collected from the Allegheny Formation exceeded the SMCL of 300 μg/L for Fe and 50 μg/L for Mn. Forty-three and 62 percent of the groundwater samples collected from the Pottsville Formation exceeded the SMCL for iron and Mn, respectively. The highest Fe and Mn concentrations for surface waters were measured for tributaries draining the Pottsville Formation. The highest median Fe concentration for tributaries was in samples from streams draining the Allegheny Formation. During base-flow conditions, the streamflow per unit area along the main stem of Laurel Hill Creek was lowest in the upper parts of the basin [farthest upstream site 0.07 cubic foot per second per square mile (ft 3 /s/mi 2 )] and highest (two sites averaging about 0.20 (ft 3 /s/mi 2 ) immediately downstream from Laurel Hill Lake in the center of the basin. Tributaries with the highest streamflow per unit area were those subbasins that drain the western ridge of the Laurel Hill Creek Basin. The mean streamflow per unit area for tributaries draining areas that extend into the western ridge and draining eastern or central sections was 0.24 and 0.05 ft 3 /s/mi 2 , respectively. In general, as the drainage area increased for tributary basins, the streamflow per unit area increased. Criteria established by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection indicate that the safe yield of water withdrawals from the Laurel Hill Creek Basin is 1.43 million gallons per day (Mgal/d). Water-use data for 2009 indicate that net (water withdrawals subtracted by water discharges) water withdrawals from groundwater and surface-water sources in the basin were approximately 1.93 Mgal/d. Water withdrawals were concentrated in the upper part of the basin with approximately 80 percent of the withdrawals occurring in the upper 36 mi 2 of the basin. Three subbasins—Allen Creek, Kooser Run, and Shafer Run— in the upper part were affected the most by water withdrawals such that safe yields were exceeded by more than 1,000 percent in the first two and more than 500 percent in the other. In the subbasin of Shafer Run, intermittent streamflow characterizes sections that historically have been perennial. The GSFLOW model of the Laurel Hill Creek Basin is a simple one-layer representation of the groundwater flow system. The GSFLOW model was primarily calibrated to reduce the error term associated with base-flow periods. The total amount of observed streamflow at the Laurel Hill Creek at Ursina, Pa. streamflow-gaging station and the simulated streamflow were within 0.1 percent over the entire modeled period; however, annual differences between simulated and observed streamflow showed a range of -27 to 24 percent from 1992 to 2007 with nine of the years having less than a 10-percent difference. The primary source of simulated streamflow in the GSFLOW model was the subsurface (interflow; 62 percent), followed by groundwater (25 percent) and surface runoff (13 percent). Most of the simulated subsurface flow that reached the stream was in the form of slow flow as opposed to preferential (fast) interflow.

Pennsylvania↗
USGS2017

Evaluation of the streamgage network for estimating streamflow statistics at ungaged sites in Pennsylvania and the Susquehanna River Basin in Pennsylvania and New York

The current (2015) streamgage network in Pennsylvania and the Susquehanna River Basin in Pennsylvania and New York was evaluated in order to design a network that would meet the hydrologic needs of many partners and serve a variety of purposes and interests, including estimation of streamflow statistics at ungaged sites. This study was done by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and the Susquehanna River Basin Commission. The study area includes the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the Susquehanna River Basin in Pennsylvania and New York. For this study, 229 streamgages were identified as reference streamgages that could be used to represent ungaged watersheds. Criteria for a reference streamgage are a minimum of 10 years of continuous record, minimally altered streamflow, and a drainage area less than 1,500 square miles. Some of the reference streamgages have been discontinued but provide historical hydrologic information valuable in the determination of streamflow characteristics of ungaged watersheds. Watersheds in the study area not adequately represented by a reference streamgage were identified by examining a range of basin characteristics, the extent of geographic coverage, and the strength of estimated streamflow correlations between gaged and ungaged sites. Basin characteristics were determined for the reference streamgage watersheds and the 1,662 12-digit hydrologic unit code (HUC12) subwatersheds in Pennsylvania and the Susquehanna River Basin using a geographic information system (GIS) spatial analysis and nationally available GIS datasets. Basin characteristics selected for this study include drainage area, mean basin elevation, mean basin slope, percentage of urbanized area, percentage of forested area, percentage of carbonate bedrock, mean annual precipitation, and soil thickness. A GIS spatial analysis was used to identify HUC12 subwatersheds outside the range of basin characteristics of the reference streamgages. There were 320 HUC12 subwatersheds, or 19 percent of the study area, with basin characteristics outside the range represented by the reference streamgage watersheds. A GIS spatial analysis was used to identify geographic gaps in the streamgage network. For each streamgage, a watershed area, called the gage statistical area (GSA), was delineated. The GSA shows the drainage area within a specific drainage-area ratio of the streamgage for transfer of streamflow statistics from that streamgage to ungaged sites on the valid statistical reach of the GSA for a streamgage. In Pennsylvania, a drainage-area ratio of 0.33–3 times the drainage area of the ungaged site was found to perform as well as, if not better than, more traditional ratios such as 0.5–1.5 (or 2) for transfer of selected streamflow statistics. A total of 1,102 HUC12 subwatersheds, or 66 percent of the study area, are outside the GSA for a reference streamgage. The USGS Baseline Streamflow Estimator (BaSE) program was used to determine how well HUC12 subwatersheds outside the streamgage GSAs are represented by the reference streamgage network in Pennsylvania, based on estimated streamflow correlation. The centroid of each HUC12 subwatershed was run through the BaSE program to determine the reference streamgage with the highest estimated streamflow correlation. There were 929 HUC12 subwatersheds in Pennsylvania, or 56 percent of the State, with an estimated correlation coefficient less than 0.96. The results from the basin characteristic, geographic, and streamflow correlation analyses were combined to identify 1,405 HUC12 subwatersheds in Pennsylvania and the Susquehanna River Basin in Pennsylvania and New York that lack a representative reference, based on at least one identified gap. Of the 1,405 HUC12 subwatersheds, 139 exhibited all three gaps, indicating a 8-percent gap in the reference streamgage network. Streamgages in areas with similar hydrologic characteristics and in close proximity to one another can potentially provide similar information (termed streamgages with high substitution potential). Streamgages were considered to have a high substitution potential with a nearby streamgage(s) if (1) the streamflow correlation coefficient was equal to or greater than 0.96, (2) the streamgages had 10 years of concurrent record, and (3) the streamgages are in the same watershed within the GSA of the streamgage. Seventy-four current (2015) streamgages with high substitution potential with at least one other streamgage were identified in the study area. Although these identified streamgages have a high substitution potential, they provide valuable streamflow information to a stakeholder. Selected primary uses of these streamgages were identified to determine the overall need for an individual streamgage.

New York, Pennsylvania↗
USGS2015

Summary of hydrologic modeling for the Delaware River Basin using the Water Availability Tool for Environmental Resources (WATER)

The Water Availability Tool for Environmental Resources (WATER) is a decision support system for the nontidal part of the Delaware River Basin that provides a consistent and objective method of simulating streamflow under historical, forecasted, and managed conditions. In order to quantify the uncertainty associated with these simulations, however, streamflow and the associated hydroclimatic variables of potential evapotranspiration, actual evapotranspiration, and snow accumulation and snowmelt must be simulated and compared to long-term, daily observations from sites. This report details model development and optimization, statistical evaluation of simulations for 57 basins ranging from 2 to 930 km 2 and 11.0 to 99.5 percent forested cover, and how this statistical evaluation of daily streamflow relates to simulating environmental changes and management decisions that are best examined at monthly time steps normalized over multiple decades. The decision support system provides a database of historical spatial and climatic data for simulating streamflow for 2001–11, in addition to land-cover and general circulation model forecasts that focus on 2030 and 2060. WATER integrates geospatial sampling of landscape characteristics, including topographic and soil properties, with a regionally calibrated hillslope-hydrology model, an impervious-surface model, and hydroclimatic models that were parameterized by using three hydrologic response units: forested, agricultural, and developed land cover. This integration enables the regional hydrologic modeling approach used in WATER without requiring site-specific optimization or those stationary conditions inferred when using a statistical model.

Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylv↗
USGS2015

Water-budgets and recharge-area simulations for the Spring Creek and Nittany Creek Basins and parts of the Spruce Creek Basin, Centre and Huntingdon Counties, Pennsylvania, Water Years 2000–06

This report describes the results of a study by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with ClearWater Conservancy and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection to develop a hydrologic model to simulate a water budget and identify areas of greater than average recharge for the Spring Creek Basin in central Pennsylvania. The model was developed to help policy makers, natural resource managers, and the public better understand and manage the water resources in the region. The Groundwater and Surface-water FLOW model (GSFLOW), which is an integration of the Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System (PRMS) and the Modular Groundwater Flow Model (MODFLOW-NWT), was used to simulate surface water and groundwater in the Spring Creek Basin for water years 2000–06. Because the groundwater and surface-water divides for the Spring Creek Basin do not coincide, the study area includes the Nittany Creek Basin and headwaters of the Spruce Creek Basin. The hydrologic model was developed by the use of a stepwise process: (1) develop and calibrate a PRMS model and steady-state MODFLOW-NWT model; (2) re-calibrate the steady-state MODFLOW-NWT model using potential recharge estimates simulated from the PRMS model, and (3) integrate the PRMS and MODFLOW-NWT models into GSFLOW. The individually calibrated PRMS and MODFLOW-NWT models were used as a starting point for the calibration of the fully coupled GSFLOW model. The GSFLOW model calibration was done by comparing observations and corresponding simulated values of streamflow from 11 streamgages and groundwater levels from 16 wells. The cumulative water budget and individual water budgets for water years 2000–06 were simulated by using GSFLOW. The largest source and sink terms are represented by precipitation and evapotranspiration, respectively. For the period simulated, a net surplus in the water budget was computed where inflows exceeded outflows by about 1.7 billion cubic feet (0.47 inches per year over the basin area); storage increased by about the same amount to balance the budget. The rate and distribution of recharge throughout the Spring Creek, Nittany Creek, and Spruce Creek Basins is variable as a result of the high degree of hydrogeologic heterogeneity and karst features. The greatest amount of recharge was simulated in the carbonate-bedrock valley, near the toe slopes of Nittany and Tussey Mountains, in the Scotia Barrens, and along the area coinciding with the Gatesburg Formation. Runoff extremes were observed for water years 2001 (dry year) and 2004 (wet year). Simulated average recharge rates (water reaching the saturated zone as defined in GSFLOW) for 2001 and 2004 were 5.4 in/yr and 22.0 in/yr, respectively. Areas where simulations show large variations in annual recharge between wet and dry years are the same areas where simulated recharge was large. Those areas where rates of groundwater recharge are much higher than average, and are capable of accepting substantially greater quantities of recharge during wet years, might be considered critical for maintaining the flow of springs, stream base flow, or the source of water to supply wells. The slopes of the Bald Eagle, Tussey, and Nittany Mountains are relatively insensitive to variations in recharge, primarily because of reduced infiltration rates and steep slopes.

Pennsylvania↗
USGS2014

Flood-inundation maps for the West Branch Susquehanna River near the Boroughs of Lewisburg and Milton, Pennsylvania

Digital flood-inundation maps for an approximate 8-mile reach of the West Branch Susquehanna River from approximately 2 miles downstream from the Borough of Lewisburg, extending upstream to approximately 1 mile upstream from the Borough of Milton, Pennsylvania, were created by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC). The inundation maps, which can be accessed through the USGS Flood Inundation Mapping Science Web site at http://water.usgs.gov/osw/flood_inundation/ , depict the estimated areal extent and depth of flooding corresponding to selected water levels (stages) at the USGS streamgage 01553500, West Branch Susquehanna River at Lewisburg, Pa. In addition, the information has been provided to the Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC) for incorporation into their Susquehanna Inundation Map Viewer (SIMV) flood warning system ( http://maps.srbc.net/simv/ ). The National Weather Service (NWS) forecasted peak-stage information ( http://water.weather.gov/ahps ) for USGS streamgage 01553500, West Branch Susquehanna River at Lewisburg, Pa., may be used in conjunction with the maps developed in this study to show predicted areas of flood inundation. In this study, flood profiles were computed for the stream reach by means of a one-dimensional step-backwater model. Calibration of the model was achieved using the most current stage-discharge relations (rating number 11.1) at USGS streamgage 01553500, West Branch Susquehanna River at Lewisburg, Pa., a documented water-surface profile from the December 2, 2010, flood, and recorded peak stage data. The hydraulic model was then used to determine 26 water-surface profiles for flood stages at 1-foot intervals referenced to the streamgage datum ranging from 14 feet (ft) to 39 ft. Modeled flood stages, as defined by NWS, include Action Stage, 14 ft; Flood Stage, 18 ft; Moderate Flood Stage, 23 ft; and Major Flood Stage, 28 ft. Geographic information system (GIS) technology was then used to combine the simulated water-surface profiles with a digital elevation model (DEM) derived from light detection and ranging (lidar) data to delineate the area flooded at each water level. The availability of these maps, along with World Wide Web information regarding current stage from USGS streamgages and forecasted stream stages from the NWS, provide emergency management personnel and residents with information that is critical for flood response activities, such as evacuations and road closures, as well as for post-flood recovery efforts.

Pennsylvania↗
USGS2013

Velocity, water-quality, and bathymetric surveys of the Grays Landing and Maxwell Navigation Pools, and Selected Tributaries to the Monongahela River, Pennsylvania, 2010–11

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted velocity, water-quality, and bathymetric surveys from spring 2010 to summer 2011 in the Grays Landing and Maxwell navigation pools of the Monongahela River, Pennsylvania, and selected tributaries in response to elevated levels of total dissolved solids (TDS) recorded in early September 2009. Velocity data were collected using an Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler. Water-quality surveys included the in-situ collection of specific-conductance, water-temperature, and turbidity data using a water-quality sonde. Additionally, discrete water samples were collected and analyzed for TDS, chloride, and sulfate. Bathymetric data were collected using an echo sounder, and the shoreline was delineated using a laser range finder and electronic compass. The data were geo-referenced using a differential global positioning system and navigational software. Horizontal (x, y) coordinates were referenced to the North American Datum of 1983. Depth (z) elevations were referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988. The data are provided in electronic format (appendix 1) and may be downloaded and can be used in a geographic information system for cartographic display and data analysis.

Pennsylvania↗
USGS2011

Development of flood-inundation maps for the West Branch Susquehanna River near the Borough of Jersey Shore, Lycoming County, Pennsylvania

Streamflow data, water-surface-elevation profiles derived from a Hydrologic Engineering Center River Analysis System hydraulic model, and geographical information system digital elevation models were used to develop a set of 18 flood-inundation maps for an approximately 5-mile reach of the West Branch Susquehanna River near the Borough of Jersey Shore, Pa. The inundation maps were created by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Susquehanna River Basin Commission and Lycoming County as part of an ongoing effort by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Weather Service to focus on continued improvements to the flood forecasting and warning abilities in the Susquehanna River Basin and to modernize flood-forecasting methodologies. The maps, ranging from 23.0 to 40.0 feet in 1-foot increments, correspond to river stage at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage 01549760 at Jersey Shore. The electronic files used to develop the maps were provided to the National Weather Service for incorporation into their Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service website. The maps are displayed on this website, which serves as a web-based floodwarning system, and can be used to identify areas of predicted flood inundation associated with forecasted flood-peak stages. During times of flooding or predicted flooding, these maps can be used by emergency managers and the public to take proactive steps to protect life and reduce property damage caused by floods.

Pennsylvania↗
USGS2010

Pennsylvania StreamStats: A web-based application for obtaining water-resource-related information

StreamStats is a national web-based Geographic Information System (GIS) application, developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc., to provide a variety of water-resource-related information. Users can easily obtain descriptive information, basin characteristics, and streamflow statistics for USGS streamgages and ungaged stream locations throughout Pennsylvania. StreamStats also allows users to search upstream and (or) downstream from user-selected points to identify locations of and obtain information for water-resource-related activities, such as dams and streamgages.

Pennsylvania↗
USGS2010

Simulation of Runoff and Reservoir Inflow for Use in a Flood-Analysis Model for the Delaware River, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, 2004-2006

A model was developed to simulate inflow to reservoirs and watershed runoff to streams during three high-flow events between September 2004 and June 2006 for the main-stem subbasin of the Delaware River draining to Trenton, N.J. The model software is a modified version of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System (PRMS), a modular, physically based, distributed-parameter modeling system developed to evaluate the impacts of various combinations of precipitation, climate, and land use on surface-water runoff and general basin hydrology. The PRMS model simulates time periods associated with main-stem flooding that occurred in September 2004, April 2005, and June 2006 and uses both daily and hourly time steps. Output from the PRMS model was formatted for use as inflows to a separately documented reservoir and riverrouting model, the HEC-ResSim model, developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center to evaluate flooding. The models were integrated through a graphical user interface. The study area is the 6,780 square-mile watershed of the Delaware River in the states of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York that drains to Trenton, N.J. A geospatial database was created for use with a geographic information system to assist model discretization, determine land-surface characterization, and estimate model parameters. The USGS National Elevation Dataset at 100-meter resolution, a Digital Elevation Model (DEM), was used for model discretization into streams and hydrologic response units. In addition, geospatial processing was used to estimate initial model parameters from the DEM and other data layers, including land use. The model discretization represents the study area using 869 hydrologic response units and 452 stream segments. The model climate data for point stations were obtained from multiple sources. These sources included daily data for 22 National Weather Service (NWS) Cooperative Climate Station network stations, hourly data for 15 stations from the National Climatic Data Center, hourly data for 1 station from the NWS Middle Atlantic River Forecast Center records, and daily and hourly data for 7 stations operated by the New York City Department of Environmental Protection. The NWS Multisensor Precipitation Estimate data set for 2001-2007 was used for computing daily precipitation for the model and for computing hourly precipitation for storm simulation periods. Calibration of the PRMS model included regression and optimization algorithms, as well as manual adjustments of model parameters. The general goal of the calibration procedure was to minimize the difference between discharge measured at USGS streamgages and the corresponding discharge simulated by the model. Daily streamflow data from 35 USGS streamgages were used in model calibration. The streamflow data represent areas draining from 20.2 to 6,780 square miles. The PRMS model simulates reservoir inflow and watershed runoff for use as input into HECResSim for the purpose of evaluating and comparing the effects of different watershed conditions on main-stem flooding in the Delaware River watershed draining to Trenton, N.J. The PRMS model is useful as a planning tool to simulate the effects of land-use changes and different antecedent conditions on local runoff and reservoir inflow and, as input to the HEC-ResSim model, on flood flows in the main stem of the Delaware River.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2006

Selected Streamflow Statistics and Regression Equations for Predicting Statistics at Stream Locations in Monroe County, Pennsylvania

A suite of 28 streamflow statistics, ranging from extreme low to high flows, was computed for 17 continuous-record streamflow-gaging stations and predicted for 20 partial-record stations in Monroe County and contiguous counties in north-eastern Pennsylvania. The predicted statistics for the partial-record stations were based on regression analyses relating inter-mittent flow measurements made at the partial-record stations indexed to concurrent daily mean flows at continuous-record stations during base-flow conditions. The same statistics also were predicted for 134 ungaged stream locations in Monroe County on the basis of regression analyses relating the statistics to GIS-determined basin characteristics for the continuous-record station drainage areas. The prediction methodology for developing the regression equations used to estimate statistics was developed for estimating low-flow frequencies. This study and a companion study found that the methodology also has application potential for predicting intermediate- and high-flow statistics. The statistics included mean monthly flows, mean annual flow, 7-day low flows for three recurrence intervals, nine flow durations, mean annual base flow, and annual mean base flows for two recurrence intervals. Low standard errors of prediction and high coefficients of determination (R2) indicated good results in using the regression equations to predict the statistics. Regression equations for the larger flow statistics tended to have lower standard errors of prediction and higher coefficients of determination (R2) than equations for the smaller flow statistics. The report discusses the methodologies used in determining the statistics and the limitations of the statistics and the equations used to predict the statistics. Caution is indicated in using the predicted statistics for small drainage area situations. Study results constitute input needed by water-resource managers in Monroe County for planning purposes and evaluation of water-resources availability.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2005

Hydrogeologic setting and conceptual hydrologic model of the Spring Creek Basin, Centre County, Pennsylvania, June 2005

The Spring Creek Basin, Centre County, Pa., is experiencing some of the most rapid growth and development within the Commonwealth. This trend has resulted in land-use changes and increased water use, which will affect the quantity and quality of stormwater runoff, surface water, ground water, and aquatic resources within the basin. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the ClearWater Conservancy (CWC), Spring Creek Watershed Community (SCWC), and Spring Creek Watershed Commission (SCWCm), has developed a Watershed Plan (Plan) to assist decision makers in water-resources planning. One element of the Plan is to provide a summary of the basin characteristics and a conceptual model that incorporates the hydrogeologic characteristics of the basin. The report presents hydrogeologic data for the basin and presents a conceptual model that can be used as the basis for simulating surface-water and ground-water flow within the basin. Basin characteristics; sources of data referenced in this text; physical characteristics such as climate, physiography, topography, and land use; hydrogeologic characteristics; and water-quality characteristics are discussed. A conceptual model is a simplified description of the physical components and interaction of the surface- and ground-water systems. The purpose for constructing a conceptual model is to simplify the problem and to organize the available data so that the system can be analyzed accurately. Simplification is necessary, because a complete accounting of a system, such as Spring Creek, is not possible. The data and the conceptual model could be used in development of a fully coupled numerical model that dynamically links surface water, ground water, and land-use changes. The model could be used by decision makers to manage water resources within the basin and as a prototype that is transferable to other watersheds.

Pennsylvania↗
USGS1997

Sediment deposition in Lake Clarke, Lake Aldred, and Conowingo Reservoir, Pennsylvania and Maryland, 1910-93

The Susquehanna River carries a significant amount of the sediment and the nutrient load transported to the Chesapeake Bay. Three large hydroelectric dams are located near the mouth of the Susquehanna River. The three dams and associated reservoirs are Safe Harbor (Lake Clarke) and Holtwood (Lake Aldred) in southern Pennsylvania and Conowingo (Conowingo Reservoir) in northern Maryland. Two of these reservoirs, Lakes Clarke and Aldred, have reached a state of equilibrium with sediment transport in the river. The third, Conowingo Reservoir, continues to accumulate sediment as well as particulate organic nitrogen and particulate phosphorus. Bottom-elevation surveys of Conowingo Reservoir made in 1959, 1990, and 1993 indicate that the reservoir will reach equilibrium with sediment transport of the river during the next 10 to 20 years. Data collected from 1985-89 indicate that the Susquehanna River transports about 1,780 million pounds of sediment, 147 million pounds of nitrogen, and 5.1 million pounds of phosphorus to the Chesapeake Bay during a year of normal streamflow. Once equilibrium is reached in the Conowingo Reservoir, these loads may increase to levels currently transported by the river to the reservoirs, about 6,600 million pounds of sediment, 153 million pounds of nitrogen, and 9.1 million pounds of phosphorus per year. These higher loads may effect progress made on reducing nutrient loads and should be considered when planning future programs.

Maryland, Pennsylvania↗