USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · sir20095113

Hydrogeologic and Hydraulic Characterization of the Surficial Aquifer System, and Origin of High Salinity Groundwater, Palm Beach County, Florida

Abstract

Previous studies of the hydrogeology of the surficial aquifer system in Palm Beach County, Florida, have focused mostly on the eastern one-half to one-third of the county in the more densely populated coastal areas. These studies have not placed the hydrogeology in a framework in which stratigraphic units in this complex aquifer system are defined and correlated between wells. Interest in the surficial aquifer system has increased because of population growth, westward expansion of urbanized areas, and increased utilization of surface-water resources in the central and western areas of the county. In 2004, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the South Florida Water Management District, initiated an investigation to delineate the hydrogeologic framework of the surficial aquifer system in Palm Beach County, based on a lithostratigraphic framework, and to evaluate hydraulic properties and characteristics of units and permeable zones within this framework. A lithostratigraphic framework was delineated by correlating markers between all wells with data available based primarily on borehole natural gamma-ray geophysical log signatures and secondarily, lithologic characteristics. These correlation markers approximately correspond to important lithostratigraphic unit boundaries. Using the markers as guides to their boundaries, the surficial aquifer system was divided into three main permeable zones or subaquifers, which are designated, from shallowest to deepest, zones 1, 2, and 3. Zone 1 is above the Tamiami Formation in the Anastasia and Fort Thompson Formations. Zone 2 primarily is in the upper part or Pinecrest Sand Member of the Tamiami Formation, and zone 3 is in the Ochopee Limestone Member of the Tamiami Formation or its correlative equivalent. Differences in the lithologic character exist between these three zones, and these differences commonly include differences in the nature of the pore space. Zone 1 attains its greatest thickness (50 feet or more) and highest transmissivity in coastal areas. Zone 2, the most transmissive and extensive zone, is thickest (80 feet or more) and most transmissive in the inland eastern areas near Florida's Turnpike. In this area, zone 1 is absent, and the semiconfining unit above zone 2 extends to the land surface with a thickness commonly ranging from 50 to 100 feet. The thickness of zone 2 decreases to zero in most wells near the coast. Zone 3 attains its greatest thickness (100 feet or more) in the southwestern and south-central areas; zone 3 is equivalent to the gray limestone aquifer. The distribution of transmissivity was mapped by zone; however, zones 2 and 3 were commonly combined in aquifer tests. Maximum transmissivities for zone 1, zones 2 and 3, and zone 3 were 90,000, 180,000, and 70,000 ft2/d (feet-squared per day), respectively. The northern extent of the area with transmissivity greater than 50,000 ft2/d for zones 2 and 3 in the inland northeastern area along Florida's Turnpike has not been defined based on available data and could extend 5 to 10 miles farther north than mapped. Based on the thickness of zone 2 and a limited number of aquifer tests, a large area of zone 2 with transmissivity greater than 10,000 ft2/d, and possibly as much as 30,000 ft2/d, extends to the west across Water Conservation Area 1 from the inland southeastern area into the south-central area and some of the southwestern area. In contrast to the Biscayne aquifer present to the south of Palm Beach County, zones 2 and 3 are interpreted to be present principally in the Tamiami Formation and are commonly overlain by a thick semiconfining unit of moderate permeability. These zones have been referred to as the 'Turnpike' aquifer in the inland eastern areas of Palm Beach County, and the extent of greatest thickness and transmissivity follows, or is adjacent to, Florida's Turnpike. Where it is thick and transmissive, zone 1 may be considered equivalent to the Biscayne aquifer. Areas

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 26.25° to 27° latitude; -81° to -80° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ronald S. Reese, Michael A. Wacker. 2009. Hydrogeologic and Hydraulic Characterization of the Surficial Aquifer System, and Origin of High Salinity Groundwater, Palm Beach County, Florida. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20095113

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

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

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

New Jersey↗

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

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

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

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

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

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗