USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · sir20195075

Potential interaction of groundwater and surface water including autonomous underwater vehicle reconnaissance at Nolin River Lake, Kentucky, 2016

Abstract

The U.S. Geological Survey collaborated with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Louisville District, on a synoptic study of water quality at Nolin River Lake during August 2016. The purpose of the study was to develop a better understanding of the potential for interaction between groundwater and surface water at Nolin River Lake, Kentucky. Groundwater can have properties that are measurably different from those in adjacent surface water, and inflows and outflows can be an important component of water quality and quantity. An improved understanding of potential interaction of groundwater and surface water at Nolin River Lake may be used to refine lake-management strategies. This study (1) compiled and interpreted existing information to characterize the hydrogeological setting and implications for potential interaction of groundwater and surface water in the Nolin River Lake watershed; (2) collected transects of onsite water-quality parameters using an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) in areas with potential for interaction of groundwater and surface water, including five sites on Nolin River Lake and one site on the Nolin River; and (3) collected discrete water-quality and phytoplankton community data at the same six sites. A review of existing hydrogeologic information did not indicate the presence of karst features adjacent to or beneath Nolin River Lake that would facilitate groundwater interaction with the reservoir. Observations leading to this conclusion include (1) limestone that is adjacent to the shoreline and perhaps beneath the lake, is overlain with siliciclastic rocks and fine-grained sediment that inhibits infiltration and development of karst features that encourage rapid groundwater flow; (2) the geologic deposits surrounding the reservoir are described as having limited or no potential for development of karst features, some exceptions may exist in tributary valleys; (3) very few karst features were mapped within 1 mile of the reservoir or in the area currently occupied by the reservoir; and (4) faults that intersect the reservoir but may not possess hydraulic properties that cause the faults to be conduits for groundwater flow. Groundwater interaction with reservoir tributaries is likely more common in areas of the watershed upstream from Nolin River Lake where karst hydrogeology is prevalent. Results of water-quality surveys using an AUV from August 15 to 19, 2016, did not identify areas of anomalous values that might indicate groundwater inflows through preferential flow zones. Spatial distributions of water-quality parameters were generally uniform within each constant-depth layer. The constant-depth layers were selected to be above, within, and below the thermocline and ranged from the water surface to 25 feet. Surveys near the bottom of the reservoir that might have been more sensitive to groundwater inflows were not done because presurvey data were not available to indicate locations of obstacles that could ensnare the AUV. Water-quality data collected with the AUV did identify water-quality anomalies where stream tributaries were discharging to the reservoir. The discrete water-quality samples indicated uniformity among the five reservoir sites. The riverine site that is immediately upstream from Nolin River Lake, however, had some unique water-quality characteristics relative to sites on the reservoir. The highest concentrations of nitrate plus nitrite as nitrogen (0.145 milligrams per liter [mg/L]), total phosphorous (0.07 mg/L), chlorophyll a (36.1 micrograms per liter), and pheophytin a (10.2 micrograms per liter) were measured at the Nolin River Lake riverine site (site 2NRR20034). The concentrations of nutrients and chlorophyll a at the riverine site did exceed the 25th percentile of median concentrations measured by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at other lakes and reservoirs in EPA level IV ecoregion 71a. Concentrations of most nutrients and chlorophyll a at the five reservoir sites also exceeded the 25th percentile of median concentrations in EPA level IV ecoregion 72h. The exception was the concentrations of total phosphorus as phosphorus at the reservoir sites that were at or below the 25th percentile of median concentrations measured by EPA (0.03 mg/L). Concentrations of orthophosphate as phosphorus were less than the method detection limit of 0.004 mg/L at all sites. The phytoplankton community in Nolin River Lake was almost exclusively (greater than 90 percent of total phytoplankton abundance) cyanobacteria, also known as blue-green algae. A species of Cylindrospermopsis dominated the cyanobacterial community at the five reservoir sites, while Chroococcus microscopicus was most abundant at the riverine site. Cyanobacterial cell densities ranged from 10,000 to 198,067,460 cells per liter in five areas in the reservoir and from 4,800 to 73,751,253 cells per liter at the riverine site. Multiple potential sources of water to Nolin River Lake include direct precipitation, overland flow, interflow, groundwater, and surface water. Understanding the exact contribution of each of these components to the water budget at Nolin River Lake may help the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers manage the water quality, water quantity, and biological communities in the reservoir. Additional hydrogeologic and water-quality data that builds on the results of this study may refine the inferences of this study; for example, deeper AUV surveys that target the largest fault zones might further the understanding of the potential for groundwater flow through those features. A complete understanding of the reservoir hydrology, however, may require the use of scientific methods intended for water bodies as large as Nolin River Lake, such as aerial infrared photography and imagery; water mass, chemical, and isotopic balance studies; geophysical measurements; and numerical simulations.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 37.25929865437848° to 37.40780092202727° latitude; -86.28387451171875° to -86.0504150390625° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Angela S. Crain, Justin A. Boldt, Randall E. Bayless, Aubrey R. Bunch, Jade L. Young, Jennifer C. Thomason, Zachary L. Wolf. 2019-10-02. Potential interaction of groundwater and surface water including autonomous underwater vehicle reconnaissance at Nolin River Lake, Kentucky, 2016. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20195075

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↗