USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · sir20195026

Water-quality and geochemical variability in the Little Arkansas River and Equus aquifer, south-central Kansas, 2001–16

Abstract

The city of Wichita’s water supply currently (2019) comes from two primary sources: Cheney Reservoir and the Equus Beds aquifer. The Equus Beds aquifer storage and recovery project was developed to help the city of Wichita meet increasing future water demands. Source water for artificial recharge comes from the Little Arkansas River during above-base-flow conditions, is treated using National Primary Drinking Water Regulations as a guideline, and is injected into the Equus Beds aquifer through recharge wells or surface spreading basins for later use. The Equus Beds aquifer storage and recovery project currently (2019) consists of two coexisting phases. Phase I began in 2007 and captures Little Arkansas River water and indirect streambank diversion well water for aquifer recharge using 4 wells and 2 recharge basins. Phase II began in 2013 and currently (2019) includes a surface-water treatment facility, a river intake facility, eight recharge injection wells, and a third recharge basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the City of Wichita, completed this study to summarize water-quality and geochemical variability of the Equus Beds aquifer. Data in this report can be used to establish baseline conditions before implementing artificial aquifer recharge further, document groundwater quality, evaluate changing conditions, identify environmental factors affecting groundwater, provide science-based information for decision making, and help meet regulatory monitoring requirements. Physicochemical properties were measured and water-quality data were collected from 2 Little Arkansas River surface-water sites and 63 Equus Beds aquifer groundwater sites, including 38 areal assessment index wells (IWs) during 2001 through 2016. Data collection included discrete samples and additional continuous measurements at selected sites. Discretely collected samples were analyzed for physicochemical properties, dissolved solids, primary ions, nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus species), organic carbon, indicator bacteria, trace elements, arsenic species, organic compounds, and radioactivity. This report focuses discussion on aquifer water quality. Federal drinking-water criteria were used to evaluate aquifer water quality. Primary drinking-water criteria are those that are enforceable for public drinking water. Secondary criteria are those that can cause aesthetics or tastes that are unpleasant. Continuously collected data at a subset of sites included streamflow, groundwater levels, water temperature, specific conductance, pH, oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), dissolved oxygen, turbidity, nitrate plus nitrite, and fluorescent dissolved organic matter. Continuous measurement of physicochemical properties in near-real time allowed characterization of Little Arkansas River surface water and Equus Beds aquifer groundwater during conditions and time scales that would not have been possible otherwise and served as a complement to discrete water-quality sampling. During 2001 through 2016, less than 1 percent of chloride and nitrate plus nitrite, 7 percent of dissolved iron, 48 percent of dissolved manganese, 12 percent of dissolved arsenic, and 39 percent of atrazine detections in surface-water samples exceeded their respective Federal primary or secondary drinking-water criteria. None of the surface-water samples collected exceeded the Federal sulfate criterion, and every sample had detections of total coliform bacteria during the study. Constituents of concern in the Equus Beds aquifer exceeded their respective Federal criteria throughout the study period and included chloride, sulfate, nitrate plus nitrite, Escherichia coli ( E. coli ), total coliforms, and dissolved iron and arsenic species. About 5 percent of shallow (less than 80 feet) and 7 percent of deep (greater than 80 feet) IW chloride sample concentrations exceeded the secondary Federal criterion of 250 milligrams per liter (mg/L). Chloride tended to exceed its criterion in shallow and deep wells along the Arkansas River and near Burrton, Kansas, an area with past oil and gas activities. Chloride concentrations near Burrton were larger in the deep parts of the aquifer. About 18 percent of shallow and 13 percent of deep IW sulfate sample concentrations exceeded the secondary Federal criterion of 250 mg/L. Mean sulfate concentrations tended to exceed the criterion in the central part of the study area. Shallow IW mean nitrate plus nitrite (hereafter referred to as “nitrate”) was substantially larger than mean deep IW nitrate. Geochemical conditions in the deeper aquifer reduced forms of nitrogen to species such as ammonia. About 15 percent of shallow and less than 1 percent of deep IW nitrate sample concentrations exceeded the Federal criterion of 10 mg/L. Mean shallow IW nitrate concentrations exceeded the criterion in the northeastern and southeastern parts of the study area; on average, deep IW nitrate concentrations did not exceed the criterion. E. coli and fecal coliform bacteria detections were usually at or near the detection limit. E. coli was detected in 3 percent of shallow and deep IWs, and fecal coliform bacteria were detected in 8 percent of shallow and 6 percent of deep IWs. Total coliforms were detected in 24 percent of shallow and 12 percent of deep IWs. E. coli coliphage was detected in two shallow IW samples (1 percent of samples) at the detection limit and was not detected in deep IW samples. Dissolved iron was detected in 51 percent of shallow and 62 percent of deep IW samples. Dissolved iron concentrations exceeded the secondary Federal criterion of 0.3 mg/L in 38 percent of shallow and 46 percent of deep IW samples. Mean dissolved iron concentrations were largest mostly in the central and northwest part of the study area corresponding to an area of the aquifer where aquifer material is more clay-rich. The distribution of large dissolved iron concentrations was similar to that of large sulfate concentrations. About 55 percent of shallow and 92 percent of deep IW dissolved manganese samples exceeded the secondary Federal criterion of 0.05 mg/L. Almost all samples from the central and northern parts of the study area had mean dissolved manganese concentrations that exceeded the Federal criterion in the shallow part of the aquifer. Mean dissolved manganese concentrations in the shallow part of the aquifer were substantially large (greater than 1,000 micrograms per liter [μg/L]) in wells near the Little Arkansas River and in the central part of the study area because of chemically reducing conditions in the aquifer that likely related to larger percentages of clay in the aquifer material. Concentrations of dissolved arsenic species generally were larger in the deep parts of the aquifer. Arsenite was the dominant form of arsenic on average in shallow (52 percent) and deep (55 percent) IWs. About 12 percent of shallow and 34 percent of deep IW dissolved arsenic sample concentrations exceeded the Federal primary drinking criterion of 10 μg/L. Shallow IW dissolved arsenic concentrations were larger near the Little Arkansas River and the center of the study area; large shallow IW dissolved arsenic concentrations (10–50 μg/L) in the center of the study area correspond to areas that have had the most water-level recovery since the historical low in 1993. Mean ORP in shallow IWs generally decreased with increasing water-level depths and were inversely related to mean dissolved arsenic concentrations because of more reducing conditions (smaller ORP) at larger depths below the land surface. Larger dissolved arsenic concentrations in the shallow parts of the aquifer were associated with decreases in water levels and a subsequent decrease in ORP and thus more reducing conditions. Atrazine was detected in about 58 percent of shallow and 28 percent of deep IWs and did not exceed the primary Federal criterion of 3 μg/L in any groundwater samples. Atrazine concentrations in shallow IWs generally were largest in the northwest part of the study area near the North Branch Kisiwa Creek, and atrazine concentrations in deep IWs generally were largest most often in the southern part of the study area. Gross α radioactivity concentrations exceeded the primary Federal criterion of 15 picocuries per liter in 4 percent of shallow IW samples. Gross α and gross β radioactivity concentrations generally were larger in the southern third of the aquifer. Most groundwater-sample-simulated minerals saturation indices (SIs) were consistently negative (undersaturated). Minerals that had SI values that were consistently or typically positive (oversaturated) included iron oxide, hydroxide, and quartz-group minerals. Several SI values for arsenic- and manganese-bearing minerals were consistently negative. Some manganese-bearing mineral SI values ranged from undersaturated to oversaturated in shallow and deep IWs during the study. Several carbonate minerals in shallow and deep IWs varied across their equilibrium state. Calcite SI values were larger more often in the deep parts of the aquifer and did not show a clear distributional pattern. Mean and median calcite SI values for shallow and deep IWs were negative (undersaturated) indicating the potential for calcite dissolution if calcite is present for a substantial part of the study period. However, some individual calcite SI values in this study indicated saturation and subsequent calcite precipitation may occur in the study area, potentially resulting in formation of calcite mineral deposits that may reduce efficiency of injection wells. SI values with respect to iron hydroxide varied across their equilibrium states. Mean and median SI values with respect to iron hydroxide were undersaturated in shallow and deep IWs; however, some samples had positive SI values indicating there is potential for iron hydroxide precipitation, possibly caused by leaching and oxidation of iron-containing minerals, like pyrite, in the aquifer material.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 37.66805980224121° to 38.17829073458205° latitude; -97.89985656738281° to -97.33062744140625° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Mandy L. Stone, Brian J. Klager, Andrew C. Ziegler. 2019-08-19. Water-quality and geochemical variability in the Little Arkansas River and Equus aquifer, south-central Kansas, 2001–16. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20195026

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↗