USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Groundwater”

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 163 records · Page 9Linked to original sources
USGS2026

Computation of regional groundwater budgets for the Virginia Coastal Plain aquifer system

Computation of detailed groundwater flow budgets for subdivisions of Virginia’s Coastal Plain aquifer system has enabled quantification and more thorough understanding of groundwater flow within this important water resource. A zone budget analysis conducted on previously published groundwater models of the Virginia Coastal Plain and Virginia Eastern Shore shows that groundwater conditions vary substantially throughout the Coastal Plain aquifer system due to local variations in hydrogeology and historical and ongoing variations in groundwater use and management. Decades of substantial groundwater withdrawal from the Coastal Plain aquifer system have fundamentally altered groundwater flow from pre-development conditions. Rates of sustainable withdrawal are limited because the downward groundwater flow rate into confined aquifers supplying groundwater is a relatively small portion of the total groundwater water budget for the aquifer system. Analyses of groundwater budgets from the Virginia Coastal Plain model show that groundwater flow is generally outward from the surficial aquifer to rivers and coastal water bodies and downward through a series of underlying aquifers and confining units to the Potomac aquifer, which is the deepest aquifer and the source of most groundwater withdrawals. Downward flow into the Potomac aquifer currently is estimated to be only 7 percent of total net precipitation-derived net recharge at the land surface but makes up about 66 percent of inflow to the aquifer in Virginia, with much of the remaining inflow occurring laterally from areas outside of defined groundwater budget regions in Virginia. For several decades prior to 2010, high rates of withdrawal from the Potomac aquifer resulted in substantial decline in groundwater storage in the aquifer and in most overlying aquifers and confining units. From 2010 to 2025, rates of withdrawal substantially lower than the historical maximum have resulted in small net increases in groundwater storage in the confined aquifer system for most regions of the Virginia Coastal Plain. Nevertheless, for the same period, groundwater storage for the entire model domain continues to incrementally decline, indicating that storage recovery in Virginia is offset by a continued decrease in storage in areas beneath the Chesapeake Bay or in adjacent areas of Maryland and North Carolina. Withdrawals from the Potomac aquifer have induced substantial downward flow which is a large part of groundwater budgets for confined aquifers such as the Potomac. Downward groundwater flow continues under current conditions, but because vertical flow rates are a function of the difference between water pressure in the upper surficial systems and lower confined units, those rates are lower than those in earlier decades as the confined water levels partially recover from larger groundwater withdrawals in the past. Geographically, groundwater flow is generally inward from perimeter regions of the Virginia Coastal Plain toward central regions with the largest withdrawal rates. Estimated groundwater inflow from coastal regions could be contributing to saltwater intrusion, though that was not measured directly in this study. Analyses of groundwater budgets from the Virginia Eastern Shore peninsula, a geographic region of the Virginia Coastal Plain, show that groundwater flow for that isolated aquifer system is generally outward from the surficial aquifer to coastal water bodies and downward into the confined Yorktown-Eastover aquifer system, which is the source of most withdrawals. Downward groundwater flow into the confined Yorktown-Eastover aquifer system is estimated to be less than 2 percent of total recharge and less than 9 percent of net recharge at the water table but makes up over 93 percent of all inflow to the confined aquifer system. Decades of substantial but relatively consistent groundwater withdrawals have induced greater downward flow rates into the confined aquifer system but also have resulted in loss of groundwater from storage. Currently, estimated storage loss accounts for slightly under 7 percent of withdrawals from the confined aquifer system. The current withdrawal rate from the confined Yorktown-Eastover system is near the highest reported rate for the Eastern Shore, which means that the storage depletion is expected to continue, even though groundwater levels appear to be relatively stable. Estimated groundwater flow rates upward from the confining unit underlying the Yorktown-Eastover system and small rates of inflow from coastal water bodies underscore ongoing concerns about up-coning and lateral intrusion of salty groundwater.

EarthArXiv↗
USGS2010

Pesticides in groundwater in the Anacostia River and Rock Creek watersheds in Washington, D.C., 2005 and 2008

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the District Department of the Environment, conducted a groundwater-quality investigation to (a) determine the presence, concentrations, and distribution of selected pesticides in groundwater, and (b) assess the presence of pesticides in groundwater in relation to selected landscape, hydrogeologic, and groundwater-quality characteristics in the shallow groundwater underlying the Anacostia River and Rock Creek watersheds in Washington, D.C. With one exception, well depths were 100 feet or less below land surface. The USGS obtained or compiled ancillary data and information on land use (2001), subsurface sediments, and groundwater samples from 17 wells in the lower Anacostia River watershed from September through December 2005, and from 14 wells in the lower Anacostia River and lower Rock Creek watersheds from August through September 2008. Twenty-seven pesticide compounds, reflecting at least 19 different types of pesticides, were detected in the groundwater samples obtained in 2005 and 2008. No fungicides were detected. In relation to the pesticides detected, degradate compounds were as or more likely to be detected than applied (parent) compounds. The detected pesticides chiefly reflected herbicides commonly used in urban settings for non-specific weed control or insecticides used for nonspecific haustellate insects (insects with specialized mouthparts for sucking liquid) or termite-specific control. Detected pesticides included a combination of pesticides currently (2008) in use, banned or under highly restricted use, and some that had replaced the banned or restricted-use pesticides. The presence of banned and restricted-use pesticides illustrates their continued persistence and resistance to complete degradation in the environment. The presence of the replacement pesticides indicates the susceptibility of the surficial aquifer to contamination irrespective of the changes in the pesticides used. A preliminary review of the data collected in 2005 and 2008 indicated that differences in the surficial geology, land use (as a surrogate for pesticide use), and above-average precipitation for most of 2004 through 2008, as well as differences in the number and performance of USGS laboratory methods used, could have led to more pesticides detected in groundwater samples collected in 2008 than in groundwater samples collected in 2005. Thus, although data from both years of collection were used for interpretive analysis, emphasis was placed on the analysis of the data obtained in 2008. The presence of pesticides in shallow groundwater (less than approximately 100 ft (feet), or 30 m (meters), below land surface) indicated at least the upper surficial aquifer in Washington, D.C. was susceptible to contamination. One or more herbicides or insecticides were detected in groundwater samples collected from 50 percent of the shallow wells sampled in 2005, and from 62 percent of the shallow wells sampled in 2008. Differences among types of pesticides in shallow groundwater were apparent. The most frequently detected class of herbicides was the s-triazine compounds—atrazine, simazine, or prometon, or the atrazine-degradate compounds—2-chloro-4-ethylamino-6-amino-s-triazine (desethylatrazine or CIAT) and 2-chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine (hydroxyatrazine or OIET). The next most frequently detected classes of herbicides were the chloroacetanilides, including metolachlor and acetochlor, and the ureic herbicides, including diuron (and degradate, 3,4-dichloroaniline), fluometuron, metsulfuron methyl, sulfameturon, bromacil, and tebuthiuron. Insecticides also were detected, but less frequently than herbicides, with one or more insecticides present in groundwater samples from 38 percent of shallow wells sampled in 2008. Detected insecticides included parent or degradate compounds commonly used for either nonspecific or haustellate (sucking) insects, including chlorpyrifos and dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane (p,p’-DDD; a degradate of dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, DDT), and for termite control, including dieldrin, chlordane, heptachlor epoxide, (a degradate of heptachlor), fipronil, and the sulfone and sulfide degradates of fipronil. The concentrations of individual pesticides in shallow groundwater in both years were low. Maximum concentrations were no greater than a few tenths of a microgram per liter (μg/L); typical concentrations often were less than 0.1 μg/L. Multiple pesticides, however, commonly were present in groundwater. For example, in 2008, approximately 88 percent (7 of 8) of the wells that yielded a sample with at least one detectable pesticide contained five or more pesticides. The highest number of detections occurred in a groundwater sample from well WE Ca 32, which is located in a highly developed urban area; this sample contained 15 different pesticide residues. In relation to human and aquatic health, no pesticide concentration in either 2005 or 2008 exceeded Federal drinking-water standards. Groundwater samples from a few sites, however, contained levels of chiefly banned or restricted-use pesticides that exceeded other human-health and (or) aquatic-health guidelines. For example, concentrations of dieldrin in 2008 groundwater samples from three wells—WE Ca 32 (0.028 μg/L), WE Ba 11 (0.016 μg/L), and WW Ac 8 (0.014 μg/L)—fell within the range of concern for 2004 Federally approved non-regulatory USGS Health-Based Assessment benchmarks (0.002 to 0.2 μg/L), and exceeded earlier (1999) Federal criteria for drinking water (0.000052 μg/L). Other individual compounds whose concentrations exceeded 1999 Federal guidelines for samples from one or more of these three sites, or another site, included p,p’-DDD, dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene (p,p’-DDE; another degradate of DDT), chlordane, and heptachlor epoxide. Pesticide concentrations in groundwater also were compared to three aquatic-health guidelines for freshwater (United States, Great Lakes, or Canada). One or more of these guidelines were exceeded in groundwater samples obtained in 2005 or 2008 for one or more of the compounds chlordane, dieldrin, heptachlor epoxide, p,p’-DDE, p,p’-DDD, and chlorpyrifos. The spatial distribution of pesticides in the shallow groundwater appeared to be related, in part, to land use, a surrogate for pesticide use. Although most of the wells sampled in this study are in parklands or other relatively open and accessible space, multiple pesticides most often were detected in 2008 groundwater samples collected from wells where a considerable percentage (in excess of 60 percent) of the land within a 500-m radius is developed space (residential, commercial, or other urban infrastructure). Insecticides were detected in wells surrounded by at least 50 percent, and most commonly by more than 80 percent, development. Well WE Ca 32, the site associated with the highest number of pesticide residues in groundwater (8 herbicides and 7 insecticides), is in a small residential park, where 99 percent of the surrounding land is well-maintained residential and commercial development. The vertical distribution of detected pesticides in shallow groundwater appeared to be related, in part, to depth below land surface, surficial-bedrock type, and differences in the chemistry of shallow groundwater. Pesticides were detected at relatively shallow depths in wells that may not have fully penetrated the shallow aquifer. For wells in which at least one pesticide was detected, the median depth below land surface to the top of the well screen was 5.8 m, and the maximum depth was 8.5 m. Among the types of surficial materials in which wells were completed—alluvium, terrace deposits, or Potomac Formation sub- or outcrops in the Coastal Plain Province, and saprolite or fractured bedrock (Laurel and Sykesville Formations) underlying saprolite in the Piedmont Province—no pesticides were detected in groundwater associated with wells completed in the alluvium or fractured bedrock. Detections occurred in some but not all wells completed in the other surficial materials. Overall, the pattern in occurrence appeared related to the local permeability of these sediments and groundwater chemistry. Groundwater with multiple pesticide detections tended to occur in permeable sediments (absent any appreciable overlying clay, silt, or clay-silt layers), in conjunction with other common urban contaminants (elevated chloride in excess of tens to hundreds of milligrams per liter (mg/L), and oxic, rather than reduced, groundwater as evidenced by elevated (in excess of 5 mg/L) concentrations of nitrate). The results of this investigation were compared to results from two other similar and recent studies on pesticide occurrence in the shallow aquifer. These included a study in the nearby Maryland and Delaware Coastal Plain Physiographic Province and one in the Maryland and Virginia Piedmont Physiographic Province. Results from these studies were similar to the current study in relation to (a) the types, frequencies, concentrations, and mixtures of pesticides detected; (b) compounds that exceeded human-and aquatic-health criteria; and (c) the occurrence and distribution of pesticides within the surficial aquifer in relation to depths, sediment types, and groundwater chemistries.

Washington D.C.↗
USGS2026

Computation of regional groundwater budgets for the Virginia Coastal Plain aquifer system

Computation of detailed groundwater flow budgets for subdivisions of the Virginia Coastal Plain aquifer system has enabled quantification and more thorough understanding of groundwater flow within this important water resource. A zone budget analysis based on previously published groundwater models of the Virginia Coastal Plain and Virginia Eastern Shore indicates that groundwater conditions vary substantially throughout the Coastal Plain aquifer system because of local variations in hydrogeology and historical and ongoing variations in groundwater use and management. Decades of substantial groundwater withdrawal from the Coastal Plain aquifer system have altered groundwater flow from predevelopment conditions. Rates of sustainable withdrawal are limited because the downward groundwater flow rate into confined aquifers is a relatively small part of the total groundwater budget for the aquifer system compared to the rate of recharge at the land surface. Analyses of groundwater budgets from the Virginia Coastal Plain model indicate that groundwater flow is generally outward from the surficial aquifer to rivers and coastal waterbodies and downward through a series of underlying aquifers and confining units to the Potomac aquifer, which is the deepest aquifer and the source of most groundwater withdrawals. Downward flow into the Potomac aquifer is estimated to be only 7 percent of total net precipitation-derived net recharge at the land surface but makes up about 66 percent of inflow to the aquifer in Virginia, with much of the remaining inflow occurring laterally from outside of defined groundwater budget regions in Virginia. For several decades prior to 2010, high rates of withdrawal from the Potomac aquifer resulted in substantial decline in groundwater storage in the aquifer and in most overlying aquifers and confining units. From 2010 to 2023, rates of withdrawal substantially lower than the historical maximum resulted in small net increases in groundwater storage in the confined aquifer system for most regions of the Virginia Coastal Plain. Nevertheless, for the same period, groundwater storage for the entire model domain continues to incrementally decline, indicating that storage recovery in Virginia is offset by a continued decrease in storage in areas beneath the Chesapeake Bay or adjacent areas of Maryland and North Carolina. Withdrawals from the Potomac aquifer have induced substantial downward flow which is a large part of groundwater budgets for confined aquifers such as the Potomac. For the most recent simulated conditions (2023) downward groundwater flow continues, but because vertical flow rates are a function of the difference between water pressure in the upper surficial systems and lower confined units, rates of downward flow are lower than those in earlier decades as the confined water levels partially recover from larger groundwater withdrawals in the past. Geographically, groundwater flow is generally inward from perimeter regions of the Virginia Coastal Plain toward central regions with the largest withdrawal rates. Groundwater inflow from coastal regions could be contributing to saltwater intrusion, even though that was not measured in this study. Analyses of groundwater budgets from the Virginia Eastern Shore peninsula, a geographic region of the Virginia Coastal Plain, indicate that groundwater flow for that isolated aquifer system is generally outward from the surficial aquifer to coastal water bodies and downward into the confined Yorktown-Eastover aquifer system, which is the source of most withdrawals. Downward groundwater flow into the confined Yorktown-Eastover aquifer system is estimated to be less than 2 percent of total recharge and less than 9 percent of net recharge at the water table but makes up more than 93 percent of all inflow to the confined aquifer system. Decades of substantial but relatively consistent groundwater withdrawals have induced greater downward flow rates into the confined aquifer system but also have resulted in loss of groundwater from storage. For the most recent simulated period (2023), estimated storage loss accounts for slightly under 7 percent of withdrawals from the confined aquifer system. The reported withdrawal rate for this period from the confined Yorktown-Eastover system is near the highest reported rate for the Virginia Eastern Shore, which means that the storage depletion is expected to continue, even though groundwater levels appear to be relatively stable. Estimated groundwater flow rates upward from the confining unit underlying the Yorktown-Eastover system and low rates of inflow from coastal water bodies underscore ongoing concerns about up-coning and lateral intrusion of salty groundwater.

Virginia↗
USGS2016

The source of groundwater and solutes to Many Devils Wash at a former uranium mill site in Shiprock, New Mexico

The Shiprock Disposal Site is the location of the former Navajo Mill (Mill), a uranium ore-processing facility, located on a terrace overlooking the San Juan River in the town of Shiprock, New Mexico. Following the closure of the Mill, all tailings and associated materials were encapsulated in a disposal cell built on top of the former Mill and tailings piles. The milling operations, conducted at the site from 1954 to 1968, created radioactive tailings and process-related wastes that are now found in the groundwater. Elevated concentrations of constituents of concern—ammonium, manganese, nitrate, selenium, strontium, sulfate, and uranium—have also been measured in groundwater seeps in the nearby Many Devils Wash arroyo, leading to the inference that these constituents originated from the Mill. These constituents have also been reported in groundwater that is associated with Mancos Shale, the bedrock that underlies the site. The objective of this report is to increase understanding of the source of water and solutes to the groundwater beneath Many Devils Wash and to establish the background concentrations for groundwater that is in contact with the Mancos Shale at the site. This report presents evidence on three working hypotheses: (1) the water and solutes in Many Devils Wash originated from the operations at the former Mill, (2) groundwater in deep aquifers is upwelling under artesian pressure to recharge the shallow groundwater beneath Many Devils Wash, and (3) the groundwater beneath Many Devils Wash originates as precipitation that infiltrates into the shallow aquifer system and discharges to Many Devils Wash in a series of springs on the east side of the wash. The solute concentrations in the shallow groundwater of Many Devils Wash would result from the interaction of the water and the Mancos Shale if the source of water was upwelling from deep aquifers or precipitation. In order to compare the groundwater from various wells to groundwater that has been affected by Mill activities, a classification system was developed to determine which wells were most likely to have been affected. Affects to groundwater by the Mill were determined by using the reported uranium alpha activity ratios measured in groundwater samples, along with the concentration of the uranium and the location of the wells relative to the Mill. Activity ratios of 1.2 or less were determined to be the most reliable indicator of Mill-affected groundwater. Wells with samples that had a reported activity ratio of 1.2 or less were classified as Mill affected. To compare groundwater with background water-quality, data from groundwater seeps and springs in the Upper Eagle Nest Arroyo and Salt Creek Wash, located north of the San Juan River, are also presented and analyzed. Based on groundwater elevations and tritium concentrations measured in wells located between the disposal cell and Many Devils Wash, Mill water is not likely to reach Many Devils Wash. The tritium concentrations also indicate that groundwater from the Mill has not substantially affected Many Devils Wash in the past. Upwelling from deep aquifers was also determined to be an unlikely source, primarily by comparing the composition of the stable isotopes of water in the shallow groundwater with those reported in groundwater samples from the deeper aquifers. The stable-isotope compositions of the shallow groundwater around the site are enriched relative to the San Juan River and local meteoric lines, which suggests that most of the shallow groundwater has been influenced by evaporation and therefore was recharged at the surface. Several observations indicate that focused recharge is the likely source of groundwater in the area of Many Devils Wash. The visible erosional features in Many Devils Wash provide evidence of piping and groundwater sapping, and the distribution and type of vegetation in Many Devils Wash suggest that the focused recharge of precipitation is occurring. The estimated recharge from precipitation was calculated to be 0.0008 inches per year (in/yr) by using the mass-balance approach from reported seep discharge and 0.0011 in/yr using the chloride mass-balance approach. A conceptual model of groundwater quality beneath Many Devils Wash is presented to explain the source of solutes in the groundwater beneath Many Devils Wash. The major-ion concentrations and geochemical evolution in the groundwater beneath Many Devils Wash and across the study area support the conceptual model that the underlying Mancos Shale is the source of solutes. Differences in the major-ion composition between groundwater samples collected around the site, result from the degree of weathering to the Mancos Shale. The cation distribution appears to be an indicator of effects from the Mill, with samples from the Mill-affected wells largely having a calcium/magnesium-sulfate composition that resembles the reported compositions of more weathered shale; however, that composition could change if the Mill-processed water flowed into areas where the Mancos Shale was less weathered. On the basis of the widespread presence of uranium in the Mancos Shale and the distribution of aqueous uranium in the analog sites and other sites in the region, it appears likely that uranium in the groundwater of Many Devils Wash is naturally sourced from the Mancos Shale.

New Mexico↗
USGS2018

Simulation of groundwater flow and analysis of projected water use for the Rush Springs aquifer, western Oklahoma

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Bureau of Reclamation and the Oklahoma Water Resources Board, (1) quantified the groundwater resources of the Rush Springs aquifer in western Oklahoma by developing a numerical groundwater-flow model, (2) evaluated the effects of estimated equal-proportionate-share (EPS) pumping rates on aquifer storage and streamflow for time periods of 20, 40, and 50 years into the future, (3) assessed the uncertainty in the EPS scenario results, and (4) evaluated the effects of (a) projected groundwater-use rates extended 50 years into the future and (b) sustained hypothetical drought conditions over a 10-year period on stream base flow and groundwater in storage. The Rush Springs aquifer is an important source of water for municipal and irrigation use by many communities and agricultural users in the study area. The study area is composed of about 4,970 square miles (3,181,003 acres) of Rush Springs aquifer bedrock deposits located in 14 counties. The study area also includes the alluvium and terrace deposits of the Canadian and Washita Rivers, as well as alluvium along the Little Washita River, Deer Creek, and a number of smaller tributaries of the Washita River that overlie the bedrock. A numerical groundwater-flow model of the Rush Springs aquifer was constructed by using MODFLOW with the Newton solver. Groundwater flow was simulated for January 1979–December 2015 by using monthly stress periods, and an initial steady-state stress period was configured to represent mean annual inflows and outflows. The model was calibrated to groundwater-level observations at selected wells, monthly base flow at nine streamgages, stream seepage as estimated for the conceptual water budget, and Fort Cobb Reservoir stage. The EPS scenarios for the Rush Springs aquifer were run for periods of 20, 40, and 50 years. The 20-, 40-, and 50-year EPS pumping rates under normal recharge conditions were 0.82, 0.49, and 0.43 acre-foot per acre per year, respectively. Given the 2,954,545-acre aquifer area used for the EPS scenarios, the 20-year rate corresponds to an annual yield of about 2,422,727 acre-feet per year. Groundwater storage at the end of the 20-year EPS scenario was about 13,321,000 acre-feet, or about 31,516,437 acre-feet (70 percent) less than the starting EPS scenario storage. This decrease in storage was equivalent to a mean groundwater-level decline of about 152 feet. Water availability under the EPS pumping rate was primarily from the western area of the model. Saturation was sustained though the entire EPS scenario where the aquifer was sufficiently thick or a shallow hydraulic gradient was present. Fort Cobb Reservoir stage was below the dead-pool stage after about 5 years of 20-year EPS pumping. An uncertainty analysis was conducted to assess the uncertainty in the EPS scenario results. An ensemble of 400 random sets of possible parameter values was performed for the uncertainty analysis by using a multivariate normal distribution centered on the calibrated parameter values. The parameter bounds for the uncertainty analysis were determined by using the posterior covariance matrix, which allows for the incorporation of knowledge gained during the calibration process as well as observation uncertainty and the correlation between estimated parameters. The uncertainty results indicate a 95-percent confidence interval for the 20-year EPS pumping rate between 0.73 and 0.95 acre-foot per acre per year. Projected 50-year pumping scenarios were used to simulate the effects of selected well withdrawal rates on groundwater storage of the Rush Springs aquifer. The effects of well withdrawals were evaluated by comparing changes in groundwater storage between four 50-year scenarios using (1) no groundwater use, (2) mean groundwater use for the study period (1979–2015), (3) increasing groundwater use, and (4) groundwater use at the 2015 rate. The increasing-use scenario assumed a 38-percent increase in pumping over 50 years on the basis of 2010–60 demand projections for western Oklahoma. Simulated groundwater storage changes ranged between an increase of 6.3 percent for the scenario with no groundwater use, and 0.9 percent for the scenario with 2015 groundwater-use rates. For the Fort Cobb Reservoir surface watershed, simulated groundwater storage changes ranged between an increase of 23.6 percent for the scenario with no groundwater use and a decrease of 4.0 percent for the increasing groundwater-use scenario. Groundwater-level changes were generally greater in areas with a large concentration of groundwater wells and groundwater use such as the Fort Cobb Reservoir surface watershed. A hypothetical 10-year drought scenario was used to simulate the effects of a prolonged period of reduced recharge on the Rush Springs aquifer groundwater storage and Fort Cobb Reservoir stage and storage. Drought effects were quantified by comparing the results of the drought scenario to those of the calibrated numerical model. To simulate the hypothetical drought, recharge in the calibrated numerical model was reduced by 50 percent during the simulated drought period (1983–1992), and upstream inflows to the Canadian and Washita Rivers and associated tributaries were reduced by 37 percent. Groundwater storage at the end of the hypothetical drought period in December 1992 was about 42,983,000 acre-feet, or about 3,525,000 acre-feet (7.6 percent) less than the groundwater storage of the calibrated numerical model. This change in groundwater storage is equivalent to a mean groundwater-level decline of 15.8 feet. Simulated mean base-flow declines at the Canadian and Washita River streamgages were between 39 and 59 percent during the drought period. The minimum stage in Fort Cobb Reservoir at the end of the hypothetical drought period was 1,311 feet, indicating a storage capacity of only 10 percent of active conservation pool storage. The Fort Cobb Reservoir storage declines mostly resulted from reduced base flows in Cobb, Lake, and Willow Creeks upstream from the reservoir.

Oklahoma↗
USGS2021

Hydrogeologic framework, geochemistry, groundwater-flow system, and aquifer hydraulic properties used in the development of a conceptual model of the Ogallala, Edwards-Trinity (High Plains), and Dockum aquifers in and near Gaines, Terry, and Yoakum Counties, Texas

In 2014, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Llano Estacado Underground Water Conservation District, Sandy Land Underground Water Conservation District, and South Plains Underground Water Conservation District (hereinafter referred to collectively as the “UWCDs”), began a multiphase study in and near Gaines, Terry, and Yoakum Counties, Texas, to develop a regional conceptual model of the hydrogeologic framework, geochemistry, groundwater-flow system, and hydraulic properties, primarily for the High Plains and Edwards-Trinity aquifer system and to a lesser degree for the Dockum aquifer. The High Plains aquifer system (hereinafter referred to as the “Ogallala aquifer”), contained within the Ogallala Formation in Texas, is the shallowest aquifer in the study area and is the primary source of water for agriculture and municipal supply in the areas managed by the UWCDs. Groundwater withdrawals from deeper aquifers (primarily the Edwards-Trinity [High Plains] aquifer system that is hereinafter referred to as the “Edwards-Trinity [High Plains] aquifer”) augmented by lesser amounts from the Dockum aquifer provide additional water sources in the study area. The Edwards-Trinity (High Plains) aquifer is contained within the Trinity and Fredericksburg Groups. The Dockum aquifer, a relatively minor source of water in the study area, is contained in the Dockum Group, which was evaluated as a single unit. The potential for continual declines of the groundwater in the Ogallala aquifer in the study area and the potential changes in water quality resulting from dewatering and increased vertical groundwater movement between adjacent water-bearing units have raised concerns about the amount and quality of available groundwater. The developed conceptual model helped in the understanding of the quantity and quality of the groundwater within the Ogallala, the Edwards-Trinity (High Plains), and to a lesser extent, the Dockum aquifers within the study area. The hydrogeologic framework was used to assess the vertical and lateral extents of hydrogeologic units, bed orientations, unit thicknesses, and location and orientation of paleochannels. In general, the Trinity and Fredericksburg Groups and Ogallala Formation exhibit a slight regional dip (dip angle of about 0.14 degrees) to the southeast with dip directions becoming more to the south with each successively overlying unit (105, 110, and 125 degrees for the bases of the Trinity and Fredericksburg Groups and Ogallala Formation, respectively). In general, the Trinity and Fredericksburg Groups thin to the south and are not present in the southern part of Gaines County, whereas the Ogallala Formation becomes thinner from west to east. The combined thickness of the Trinity and Fredericksburg Groups and Ogallala Formation is generally greatest in the north-central part of the study area and thinnest in the southeastern part of the study area. Paleochannel orientation varied over geologic time as formations were deposited and eroded. Water-quality samples were collected from 51 wells throughout the study area to better understand general water quality and to provide insight into groundwater-flow paths and recharge areas. Groundwater samples were spatially grouped on the basis of similarities found in the physicochemical properties, major ions, trace elements, nutrients, organic compounds, and selected stable isotopes and age tracers. Three groundwater groups were identified in the study area. The first groundwater group (Group 1), represented mostly by groundwater from the Ogallala and Edwards-Trinity (High Plains) aquifers in the northern half of the study area, is considered to be recent recharge, affected by land-use activities, as explained by the younger age, higher concentrations of nitrate plus nitrite, and more frequent detections of organic compounds. Groundwater wells in the second groundwater group (Group 2) are typically in the southwestern and northwestern parts of the study area, and the groundwater in this group is considered to be groundwater recharged during the Pleistocene period, as explained by the relatively old age of the groundwater, high strontium stable isotope ratios, and hydrogen and oxygen stable isotope ratios. The last groundwater group (Group 3) is likely a mixture of groundwater from the first or second groups (or both) with a third, highly mineralized groundwater as explained by having the highest dissolved-solids concentrations in the study area and having some similarities to geochemical characteristics of samples from the first and second groups. A groundwater-flow system analysis was done to understand the flow of groundwater throughout the aquifer system. Groundwater-level altitudes for the Ogallala, Edwards-Trinity (High Plains), and Dockum aquifers are generally higher in the northwestern part of the study area and lower in the southeastern part of the study area. Groundwater generally flows in a northwest to southeast direction across the study area in each of the aquifers. The groundwater-flow paths closely resemble the mapped paleochannels, indicating that within the study area, the groundwater flows preferentially along the paleochannels, especially within the Ogallala aquifer where dewatering of the aquifer results in a greater effect of the base structure on the flow of groundwater. The Ogallala aquifer is unsaturated in localized areas in the study area; unsaturated areas are generally near the southern extent of the Edwards-Trinity (High Plains) aquifer, with the largest unsaturated area west of Seminole, Tex. The saturated thickness of the Ogallala aquifer is thickest (more than 125 feet) southeast of Seminole and west of Brownfield, Tex., near the border between Terry and Yoakum Counties. The saturated thickness of the combined Ogallala and Edwards-Trinity (High Plains) aquifers ranges from less than 10 feet along the far southern edge of the study area to more than 350 feet north and east of Brownfield, Tex., and along the border between Terry and Yoakum Counties. The aquifer hydraulic properties, including hydraulic conductivity and specific yield, were estimated to better understand the ability of groundwater to move through the aquifer system and quantify the volume of available water in storage. The hydraulic-conductivity values varied greatly within the study area (ranging from about 0.03 to about 350 feet per day), and often large variations were found in the same area. Terry County contained the highest and lowest hydraulic conductivity values for the Ogallala aquifer, whereas Yoakum County contained the highest and lowest hydraulic conductivity values for the Edwards-Trinity (High Plains) aquifer. The highest hydraulic-conductivity values for the Dockum aquifer were in Gaines County, whereas the lowest hydraulic-conductivity values were in Terry County. The estimated specific yield values within the study area range from 0.01 to 0.36. Higher specific yield values generally occurred in the western part of the study area except in the Ogallala aquifer where higher specific yield values were in the east. The Ogallala aquifer had the lowest specific yield range and the least specific yield variability among the three aquifers, whereas the Dockum aquifer had the highest specific yield range and the greatest specific yield variability. Using the estimated saturated thickness and estimated specific yield grids, the water volumes of the Ogallala and Edwards-Trinity (High Plains) aquifers and the combined Ogallala and Edwards-Trinity (High Plains) aquifers were estimated. The available water in the Edwards-Trinity (High Plains) aquifer (16.6 million acre-feet) is almost double the available water in the Ogallala aquifer (8.8 million acre-feet). Although the Edwards-Trinity (High Plains) aquifer contains more available groundwater, pumping is more difficult because of the relatively low hydraulic conductivity and specific yield values compared to the Ogallala aquifer. Overall, the available water within the combined Ogallala and Edwards-Trinity (High Plains) aquifers is about 6.6, 10.2, and 8.6 million acre-feet for Gaines, Terry, and Yoakum Counties, respectively.

Texas↗
USGS2022

Groundwater budgets for the Big Lost River Basin, south-central Idaho, 2000–19

The Big Lost River Basin, located in parts of Butte and Custer Counties in south-central Idaho, supports the communities surrounding the cities of Arco, Leslie, Mackay, and Moore and provides for agricultural resources that depend on a sustainable supply of surface water from the Big Lost River and its tributaries and groundwater from an unconfined aquifer. The aquifer, situated in a structurally controlled intermontane valley, is composed of unconsolidated alluvium, consolidated sedimentary and volcanic rocks, and younger interbedded volcanic rocks. This report presents two separate groundwater budgets for the aquifer, one above and one below Mackay Dam, as well as a combined groundwater budget for the aquifer within the entire Big Lost River Basin. The budgets span a 20-year period (2000–19), characterizing average conditions, a dry year (2014), and a wet year (2017). The groundwater budgets will help address questions regarding the availability of groundwater supply in the Big Lost River Basin and inform future groundwater modeling. The Idaho Geological Survey has prepared the groundwater budgets as part of a larger hydrogeologic investigation completed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Idaho Geological Survey in cooperation with the Idaho Department of Water Resources during 2018–21. Other reports describe the hydrogeologic framework and several streamflow-measurement events to evaluate gains and losses on the Big Lost River. Collectively, these reports provide an updated characterization of groundwater resources in the Big Lost River Basin which will help address water resources challenges. A groundwater budget is a conceptual and numerical accounting of inflow (recharge) to groundwater and outflow (discharge) from groundwater. The predominant sources of recharge to the aquifer include losing river reaches (33 percent), areal recharge (as precipitation less evapotranspiration and surface runoff, comprising about 23 percent of the total inflow), tributary canyon underflow from higher altitudes (20 percent), canal seepage (13 percent), recharge through applied irrigation on fields below the root zone and other minor sources (11 percent), and Mackay Reservoir seepage (less than 1 percent). The primary sources of discharge from the aquifer are groundwater pumpage to meet irrigation demand, domestic supply, and municipal supply (76 percent) and gaining river reaches (24 percent). The positive or negative difference between the sum of all inflows and outflows is regarded as the residual, representing the change in groundwater storage, groundwater outflow from the basin or subbasins, and uncertainty and errors in the budget. In the Big Lost River Basin, groundwater outflow is at the mouth of the basin below Arco into the eastern Snake River Plain aquifer. The total mean annual estimated recharge to the Big Lost River Basin was 439,100 acre-feet per year (acre-ft/yr; 607 cubic feet per second [ft 3 /s]) for 2000–19, 373,900 acre-ft/yr (516 ft 3 /s) in 2014, and 762,100 acre-ft/yr (1,053 ft 3 /s) in 2017. The mean annual estimated groundwater discharge from the aquifer was about 112,300 acre-ft/yr (155 ft 3 /s) for 2000–19, 153,500 acre-ft/yr (212 ft 3 /s) in 2014, and 53,400 acre-ft/yr (74 ft 3 /s) in 2017. The estimated mean annual groundwater residual was 326,800 acre-ft/yr (451 ft 3 /s) for 2000–19, 220,400 acre-ft/yr (304 ft 3 /s) in 2014, and 708,700 acre-ft/yr (979 ft 3 /s) in 2017. The mean annual residual above Mackay Dam was 100,400 acre-ft/yr (2000-19), 96,700 acre-ft (2014), and 248,300 acre-ft (2017). The mean annual residual contribution below Mackay Dam, minus any groundwater-flow above Mackay Dam, was 226,400 acre-ft/yr (2000-19), 123,700 acre-ft (2014), and 460,400 acre-ft (2017). These results are highly sensitive to assumptions about certain budget inflow parameters. In particular, the magnitude of the budget residuals during especially dry and wet periods is amplified by the groundwater-budget terms tributary streamflow and tributary underflow that contribute appreciable recharge but also have high uncertainty. The results of the groundwater-budget evaluation describe an interconnected and complex hydrologic response throughout the basin to various climatic and water-use trends. The part of the basin above Mackay Dam typically has a positive groundwater residual derived from snowmelt recharge to tributary canyons and areal recharge in excess of groundwater pumpage for irrigation demand. This supply is used to meet irrigation demand above Mackay Dam and to provide for water supply below Mackay Dam. On average, groundwater inflow from above Mackay Dam to below Mackay Dam, assuming negligible reservoir storage effects, accounts for about 25 percent of the total groundwater recharge below Mackay Dam. Considerable recharge to groundwater below Mackay Dam occurs through seepage from the Big Lost River and canals and ditches. Most groundwater discharge from the aquifer is through irrigation pumping. The water supply below Mackay Dam is highly dependent on available upstream surface-water flows, the magnitude of the groundwater residual from above Mackay Dam, and annual variability in local groundwater conditions.

Idaho↗
USGS2022

Groundwater resources of the Harney Basin, southeastern Oregon

Groundwater development has increased substantially in southeastern Oregon’s Harney Basin since 2010, mainly for the purpose of large-scale irrigation. Concurrently, some areas of the basin experienced groundwater-level declines of more than 100 feet, and some shallow wells have gone dry. The Oregon Water Resources Department has limited new groundwater development in the basin until an improved understanding of the groundwater-flow system is available. This report describes the results of a hydrologic investigation undertaken to provide that understanding. The investigation encompasses the groundwater hydrology of the entire 5,240-square-mile Harney Basin. Most of the precipitation in the Harney Basin falls in the higher-elevation areas of the Blue Mountains and Steens Mountain. Although considerable groundwater recharge occurs in these upland areas, most (83 percent) re-emerges as streams and springs in the uplands. Groundwater recharge in the lowlands is provided through infiltration of surface water flowing onto the lowlands from rivers and streams leaving the uplands and as groundwater flow from the surrounding upland rocks. Water-balance calculations indicate that the rate of groundwater recharge to the Harney Basin lowlands (where most groundwater is withdrawn) averages 173,000 acre-feet per year (acre-ft/yr). Groundwater in the Harney Basin lowlands mainly discharges through evapotranspiration from groundwater-irrigated (supplied from wells) crops or from natural vegetation drawing groundwater from the shallow water table and capillary fringe. Groundwater discharge in the lowlands is estimated to be about 283,000 acre-ft/yr, which exceeds the estimated groundwater recharge to the lowlands by about 110,000 acre-ft/yr. This imbalance results in removal of groundwater from storage in the aquifer system and is evidenced by the large declines observed in groundwater levels in the areas of greatest groundwater pumpage. To a large degree, the location and depth of pumpage dictate the timing and distribution of the effects of groundwater use in the Harney Basin. Pumpage is commonly greatest in the areas where higher-permeability geologic units allow for higher well yields. However, many of these higher-permeability units are bounded by lower-permeability units that cannot supply groundwater at a sufficient rate to replenish the areas of greatest pumpage, resulting in groundwater-level declines. Three Harney Basin areas with a combined area exceeding 140 square miles have experienced groundwater-level declines exceeding 40 feet compared to pre-development conditions: near the Weaver Spring/Dog Mountain area, in the northeastern floodplains along Highway 20, and near Crane. Areas of more modest groundwater-level decline (about 10 feet) were identified in the Virginia Valley area and the Silver Creek floodplain north of Riley. Smaller localized areas of groundwater-level depression have also formed around individual wells or groups of wells throughout the Harney Basin lowlands. Most groundwater being pumped from the Harney Basin lowlands, including all three areas experiencing large groundwater-level declines, was recharged more than 12,000 years ago, near the end of the last glacial period when the climate in the basin was cooler and wetter than today. Geochemical evidence indicates that modern recharge generally circulates to a depth no greater than 100 feet below the floodplains of major rivers and streams in the lowlands. Away from the major river and stream corridors, pre-modern water commonly is found at the water table. Recharge to groundwater and recovery of groundwater levels in the most heavily pumped areas in the Harney Basin lowlands are restricted by the limited spatial extent and depth of modern recharge in the Harney Basin lowlands and the relatively fine-grained deposits underlying most of the lowland areas.

Oregon↗
USGS2022

Estimated effects of pumping on groundwater storage and Walker River stream efficiencies in Smith and Mason Valleys, west-central Nevada

The Walker River originates in the Sierra Nevada Mountains and flows nearly 160 miles to its terminus at Walker Lake in west-central Nevada. The river provides a source of irrigation water for tens of thousands of acres of agricultural lands in California and Nevada and is the principal source of inflow to Walker Lake. Extraction of groundwater for agricultural use became prevalent in the late 1950s and early 1960s to supplement irrigation demands not met by surface-water diversions during times of drought. There is growing concern that continued groundwater withdrawals within the Walker River Basin are likely contributing to depleted streamflow of the Walker River and the long-term depletion of groundwater storage in the basin. This report documents changes in groundwater storage-volume and trends in Walker River stream efficiency, a measure of change in flow due to gaining or losing conditions, in the two largest agricultural valleys in the Walker River Basin, Smith and Mason Valleys, for a multi-decade period. Groundwater-level maps from previous studies were used for the beginning (1970) and middle (2006) points of this study. Groundwater levels measured from 1991–95 and 2016–20 were used to construct median groundwater-level maps that represented conditions in 1995 and 2020. Valley wide groundwater-level change was calculated by comparing groundwater-level maps for the periods 1970–95, 1996–2006, and 2007–20 and by observing the overall change from 1970 to 2020. Groundwater storage-volume change was calculated using groundwater-level change and previously defined specific yield values. Between 1970 and 2020, groundwater storage-volume declined 287,600 acre-feet in Smith Valley and 269,000 acre-feet in Mason Valley. Using groundwater storage-volume decline and annual groundwater pumpage rates, a maximum groundwater pumpage rate can be computed to support management of water resources. In Smith Valley, groundwater pumping in excess of 22,300 acre-feet per year would likely result in groundwater storage decline. In Mason Valley, groundwater pumping in excess of 75,200 acre-feet per year would likely result in groundwater storage decline. Stream efficiency was calculated using continuous streamflow data and monthly diversion volumes on two reaches: (1) the West Walker River in Smith Valley, from 1948 to 2020 and (2) the Walker River in Mason Valley, from 1958 to 2020. Stream efficiency during non-irrigation season in Smith and Mason Valleys declined at a statistically significant rate of 1.1 and 0.6 percent per year, respectively. Trends in stream efficiency corresponded to occurrence of prolonged drought, deviation from average annual streamflows, and total groundwater pumpage. Long-term declines in groundwater storage-volume and stream efficiency demonstrate that the alluvial aquifer system is becoming increasingly depleted, such that the river can no longer replenish groundwater storage while simultaneously balancing groundwater and surface-water withdrawals. The introduction of supplemental groundwater pumpage was intended to offset surface-water deficits during dry years; however, pumpage occurs even in years when average or above average streamflows meet surface-water demands. Reliance on supplemental groundwater pumpage has resulted in widespread groundwater storage-volume decline and decreased stream efficiency. With each successive drought cycle, the ability of Walker River to sustain streamflows and convey water downstream has diminished. Above average wet periods have a marginal and short-lived effect on rebounding the groundwater levels outside of the river corridor. Moreover, if the trend continues, each future drought cycle may further reduce groundwater supplies and that may further decrease streamflow reliability.

Nevada↗
USGS2011

Hydrogeologic setting and simulation of groundwater flow near the Canterbury and Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnels, Leadville, Colorado

The Leadville mining district is historically one of the most heavily mined regions in the world producing large quantities of gold, silver, lead, zinc, copper, and manganese since the 1860s. A multidisciplinary investigation was conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, to characterize large-scale groundwater flow in a 13 square-kilometer region encompassing the Canterbury Tunnel and the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel near Leadville, Colorado. The primary objective of the investigation was to evaluate whether a substantial hydraulic connection is present between the Canterbury Tunnel and Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel for current (2008) hydrologic conditions. Altitude in the Leadville area ranges from about 3,018 m (9,900 ft) along the Arkansas River valley to about 4,270 m (14,000 ft) along the Continental Divide east of Leadville, and the high altitude of the area results in a moderate subpolar climate. Winter precipitation as snow was about three times greater than summer precipitation as rain, and in general, both winter and summer precipitation were greatest at higher altitudes. Winter and summer precipitation have increased since 2002 coinciding with the observed water-level rise near the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel that began in 2003. The weather patterns and hydrology exhibit strong seasonality with an annual cycle of cold winters with large snowfall, followed by spring snowmelt, runoff, and recharge (high-flow) conditions, and then base-flow (low-flow) conditions in the fall prior to the next winter. Groundwater occurs in the Paleozoic and Precambrian fractured-rock aquifers and in a Quaternary alluvial aquifer along the East Fork Arkansas River, and groundwater levels also exhibit seasonal, although delayed, patterns in response to the annual hydrologic cycle. A three-dimensional digital representation of the extensively faulted bedrock was developed and a geophysical direct-current resistivity field survey was performed to evaluate the geologic structure of the study area. The results show that the Canterbury Tunnel is located in a downthrown structural block that is not in direct physical connection with the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel. The presence of this structural discontinuity implies there is no direct groundwater pathway between the tunnels along a laterally continuous bedrock unit. Water-quality results for pH and major-ion concentrations near the Canterbury Tunnel showed that acid mine drainage has not affected groundwater quality. Stable-isotope ratios of hydrogen and oxygen in water indicate that snowmelt is the primary source of groundwater recharge. On the basis of chlorofluorocarbon and tritium concentrations and mixing ratios for groundwater samples, young groundwater (groundwater recharged after 1953) was indicated at well locations upgradient from and in a fault block separate from the Canterbury Tunnel. Samples from sites downgradient from the Canterbury Tunnel were mixtures of young and old (pre-1953) groundwater and likely represent snowmelt recharge mixed with older regional groundwater that discharges from the bedrock units to the Arkansas River valley. Discharge from the Canterbury Tunnel contained the greatest percentage of old (pre-1953) groundwater with a mixture of about 25 percent young water and about 75 percent old water. A calibrated three-dimensional groundwater model representing high-flow conditions was used to evaluate large-scale flow characteristics of the groundwater and to assess whether a substantial hydraulic connection was present between the Canterbury Tunnel and Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel. As simulated, the faults restrict local flow in many areas, but the fracture-damage zones adjacent to the faults allow groundwater to move along faults. Water-budget results indicate that groundwater flow across the lateral edges of the model controlled the majority of flow in and out of the aquifer (79 percent and 63 percent of the total water budget, respectively). The largest contributions to the water budget were groundwater entering from the upper reaches of the watershed and the hydrologic interaction of the groundwater with the East Fork Arkansas River. Potentiometric surface maps of the simulated model results were generated for depths of 50, 100, and 250 m. The surfaces revealed a positive trend in hydraulic head with land-surface altitude and evidence of increased control on fluid movement by the fault network structure at progressively greater depths in the aquifer. Results of advective particle-tracking simulations indicate that the sets of simulated flow paths for the Canterbury Tunnel and the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel were mutually exclusive of one another, which also suggested that no major hydraulic connection was present between the tunnels. Particle-tracking simulations also revealed that although the fault network generally restricted groundwater movement locally, hydrologic conditions were such that groundwater did cross the fault network at many locations. This cross-fault movement indicates that the fault network controls regional groundwater flow to some degree but is not a complete barrier to flow. The cumulative distributions of adjusted age results for the watershed indicate that approximately 30 percent of the flow pathways transmit groundwater that was younger than 68 years old (post-1941) and that about 70 percent of the flow pathways transmit old groundwater. The particle-tracking results are consistent with the apparent ages and mixing ratios developed from the chlorofluorocarbon and tritium results. The model simulations also indicate that approximately 50 percent of the groundwater flowing through the study area was less than 200 years old and about 50 percent of the groundwater flowing through the study area is old water stored in low-permeability geologic units and fault blocks. As a final examination of model response, the conductance parameters of the Canterbury Tunnel and Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel were manually adjusted from the calibrated values to determine if altering the flow discharge in one tunnel affects the hydraulic behavior in the other tunnel. The examination showed no substantial hydraulic connection. The multidisciplinary investigation yielded an improved understanding of groundwater characteristics near the Canterbury Tunnel and the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel. Movement of groundwater between the Canterbury Tunnel and Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel that was central to this investigation could not be evaluated with strong certainty owing to the structural complexity of the region, study simplifications, and the absence of observation data within the upper sections of the Canterbury Tunnel and between the Canterbury Tunnel and the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel. There was, however, collaborative agreement between all of the analyses performed during this investigation that a substantial hydraulic connection did not exist between the Canterbury Tunnel and the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel under natural flow conditions near the time of this investigation.

Colorado↗
USGS2016

Budgets and chemical characterization of groundwater for the Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada, 2011–12

The Diamond Valley flow system consists of six hydraulically connected hydrographic areas in central Nevada. The general down-gradient order of the areas are southern and northern Monitor Valleys, Antelope Valley, Kobeh Valley, Stevens Basin, and Diamond Valley. Groundwater flow in the Diamond Valley flow system terminates at a large playa in the northern part of Diamond Valley. Concerns relating to continued water-resources development of the flow system resulted in a phased hydrologic investigation that began in 2005 by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with Eureka County. This report presents the culmination of the phased investigation to increase understanding of the groundwater resources of the basin-fill aquifers in the Diamond Valley flow system through evaluations of groundwater chemistry and budgets. Groundwater chemistry was characterized using major ions and stable isotopes from groundwater and precipitation samples. Groundwater budgets accounted for all inflows, outflows, and changes in storage, and were developed for pre-development (pre-1950) and recent (average annual 2011–12) conditions. Major budget components include groundwater discharge by evapotranspiration and groundwater withdrawals; groundwater recharge by precipitation, and interbasin flow; and storage change. Groundwater in the basin-fill aquifer of the Diamond Valley flow system was mostly a calcium or sodium bicarbonate water type and generally within acceptable drinking-water standards. The general water type was similar among the individual hydrographic areas. Stable isotopes of oxygen-18 and deuterium from precipitation varied seasonally, such that enrichment from evaporation was greater during warmer months than cooler months. The isotopic signature of shallow groundwater was similar to cool season precipitation, indicating recharge was relatively recent (similar to recent climatic conditions) and was derived from cool season precipitation. Site-scale groundwater evapotranspiration was estimated from eddy-covariance and micrometeorological measurements collected at four sites and ranged from 0.15 feet per year in sparse, undisturbed shrubland to 1.13 feet per year in a grassland meadow. Vegetation indices calculated from satellite imagery and field mapping were used to define three evapotranspiration units (shrubland, grassland, and playa) and to extrapolate site-scale groundwater evapotranspiration rates to basin-scale estimates. Annual pre-development groundwater evapotranspiration for individual hydrographic areas ranged from 2,900 acre-feet per year (acre-ft/yr) in northern Monitor Valley to 35,000 acre-ft/yr in Diamond Valley. Total groundwater evapotranspiration from the Diamond Valley flow system under pre-development conditions was about 70,000 acre-ft/yr. Areas of irrigated land in the Diamond Valley flow system increased from less than 5,000 acres in the early 1960s to more than 25,000 acres in 2012 and are mostly for growing alfalfa in southern Diamond Valley. Annual (2011–12) net groundwater withdrawals for irrigation, assumed to be the volume of groundwater consumed by crops and pastureland, ranged from about 420 acre-ft/yr in Antelope Valley to 67,000 acre-ft/yr in Diamond Valley. Total net groundwater withdrawals for irrigation in the Diamond Valley flow system were about 69,000 acre-ft/yr (2011–12). Groundwater recharge, the largest inflow component to the Diamond Valley flow system, was determined as the sum of groundwater evapotranspiration and net subsurface outflow (subsurface outflow minus subsurface inflow). Annual groundwater recharge estimates ranged from 200 acre-ft/yr in Stevens Basin to 35,000 acre-ft/yr in Diamond Valley. Subsurface flow between hydrographic basins was evaluated using estimated transmissivity, groundwater-flow sections derived from remotely sensed imagery, and hydraulic gradients determined from 2012 water-level data. Subsurface outflow ranged from 0 acre-ft/yr for Diamond Valley to 3,400 acre-ft/yr for northern Monitor Valley into western Kobeh Valley. Subsurface inflow ranged from 0 acre-ft/yr for southern Monitor Valley to 4,200 acre-ft/yr for Kobeh Valley from northern Monitor and Antelope Valleys. The pre-development, steady state, groundwater budget for the Diamond Valley flow system was estimated at about 70,000 acre-ft/yr of inflow and outflow. During years 2011–12, inflow components of groundwater recharge from precipitation and subsurface inflow from adjacent basins totaled 70,000 acre-ft/yr for the DVFS, whereas outflow components included 64,000 acre-ft/yr of groundwater evapotranspiration and 69,000 acre-ft/yr of net groundwater withdrawals, or net pumpage. Spring discharge in northern Diamond Valley declined about 6,000 acre-ft/yr between pre-development time and years 2011–12. Assuming net groundwater withdrawals minus spring flow decline is equivalent to the storage change, the 2011–12 summation of inflow and storage change was balanced with outflow at about 133,000 acre-ft/yr.

Nevada↗
USGS2017

Hydrogeology and simulation of groundwater flow and analysis of projected water use for the Canadian River alluvial aquifer, western and central Oklahoma

This report describes a study of the hydrogeology and simulation of groundwater flow for the Canadian River alluvial aquifer in western and central Oklahoma conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Oklahoma Water Resources Board. The report (1) quantifies the groundwater resources of the Canadian River alluvial aquifer by developing a conceptual model, (2) summarizes the general water quality of the Canadian River alluvial aquifer groundwater by using data collected during August and September 2013, (3) evaluates the effects of estimated equal proportionate share (EPS) on aquifer storage and streamflow for time periods of 20, 40, and 50 years into the future by using numerical groundwater-flow models, and (4) evaluates the effects of present-day groundwater pumping over a 50-year period and sustained hypothetical drought conditions over a 10-year period on stream base flow and groundwater in storage by using numerical flow models. The Canadian River alluvial aquifer is a Quaternary-age alluvial and terrace unit consisting of beds of clay, silt, sand, and fine gravel sediments unconformably overlying Tertiary-, Permian-, and Pennsylvanian-age sedimentary rocks. For groundwater-flow modeling purposes, the Canadian River was divided into Reach I, extending from the Texas border to the Canadian River at the Bridgeport, Okla., streamgage (07228500), and Reach II, extending downstream from the Canadian River at the Bridgeport, Okla., streamgage (07228500), to the confluence of the river with Eufaula Lake. The Canadian River alluvial aquifer spans multiple climate divisions, ranging from semiarid in the west to humid subtropical in the east. The average annual precipitation in the study area from 1896 to 2014 was 34.4 inches per year (in/yr). A hydrogeologic framework of the Canadian River alluvial aquifer was developed that includes the areal and vertical extent of the aquifer and the distribution, texture variability, and hydraulic properties of aquifer materials. The aquifer areal extent ranged from less than 0.2 to 8.5 miles wide. The maximum aquifer thickness was 120 feet (ft), and the average aquifer thickness was 50 ft. Average horizontal hydraulic conductivity for the Canadian River alluvial aquifer was calculated to be 39 feet per day, and the maximum horizontal hydraulic conductivity was calculated to be 100 feet per day. Recharge rates to the Canadian River alluvial aquifer were estimated by using a soil-water-balance code to estimate the spatial distribution of groundwater recharge and a water-table fluctuation method to estimate localized recharge rates. By using daily precipitation and temperature data from 39 climate stations, recharge was estimated to average 3.4 in/yr, which corresponds to 8.7 percent of precipitation as recharge for the Canadian River alluvial aquifer from 1981 to 2013. The water-table fluctuation method was used at one site where continuous water-level observation data were available to estimate the percentage of precipitation that becomes groundwater recharge. Estimated annual recharge at that site was 9.7 in/yr during 2014. Groundwater flow in the Canadian River alluvial aquifer was identified and quantified by a conceptual flow model for the period 1981–2013. Inflows to the Canadian River alluvial aquifer include recharge to the water table from precipitation, lateral flow from the surrounding bedrock, and flow from the Canadian River, whereas outflows include flow to the Canadian River (base-flow gain), evapotranspiration, and groundwater use. Total annual recharge inflows estimated by the soil-water-balance code were multiplied by the area of each reach and then averaged over the simulated period to produce an annual average of 28,919 acre-feet per year (acre-ft/yr) for Reach I and 82,006 acre-ft/yr for Reach II. Stream base flow to the Canadian River was estimated to be the largest outflow of groundwater from the aquifer, measured at four streamgages, along with evapotranspiration and groundwater use, which were relatively minor discharge components. Objectives for the numerical groundwater-flow models included simulating groundwater flow in the Canadian River alluvial aquifer from 1981 to 2013 to address groundwater use and drought scenarios, including calculation of the EPS pumping rates. The EPS for the alluvial and terrace aquifers is defined by the Oklahoma Water Resources Board as the amount of fresh water that each landowner is allowed per year per acre of owned land to maintain a saturated thickness of at least 5 ft in at least 50 percent of the overlying land of the groundwater basin for a minimum of 20 years. The groundwater-flow models were calibrated to water-table altitude observations, streamgage base flows, and base-flow gain to the Canadian River. The Reach I water-table altitude observation root-mean-square error was 6.1 ft, and 75 percent of residuals were within ±6.7 ft of observed measurements. The average simulated stream base-flow residual at the Bridgeport streamgage (07228500) was 8.8 cubic feet per second (ft 3 /s), and 75 percent of residuals were within ±30 ft 3 /s of observed measurements. Simulated base-flow gain in Reach I was 8.8 ft 3 /s lower than estimated base-flow gain. The Reach II water-table altitude observation root-mean-square error was 4 ft, and 75 percent of residuals were within ±4.3 ft of the observations. The average simulated stream base-flow residual in Reach II was between 35 and 132 ft 3 /s. The average simulated base-flow gain residual in Reach II was between 11.3 and 61.1 ft 3 /s. Several future predictive scenarios were run, including estimating the EPS pumping rate for 20-, 40-, and 50-year life of basin scenarios, determining the effects of current groundwater use over a 50-year period into the future, and evaluating the effects of a sustained drought on water availability for both reaches. The EPS pumping rate was determined to be 1.35 acre-feet per acre per year ([acre-ft/acre]/yr) in Reach I and 3.08 (acre-ft/acre)/yr in Reach II for a 20-year period. For the 40- and 50-year periods, the EPS rate was determined to be 1.34 (acre-ft/acre)/yr in Reach I and 3.08 (acre-ft/acre)/yr in Reach II. Storage changes decreased in tandem with simulated groundwater pumping and were minimal after the first 15 simulated years for Reach I and the first 8 simulated years for Reach II. Groundwater pumping at year 2013 rates for a period of 50 years resulted in a 0.2-percent decrease in groundwater-storage volumes in Reach I and a 0.6-percent decrease in the groundwater-storage volumes in Reach II. The small changes in storage are due to groundwater use by pumping, which composes a small percentage of the total groundwater-flow model budgets for Reaches I and II. A sustained drought scenario was used to evaluate the effects of a hypothetical 10-year drought on water availability. A 10-year period was chosen where the effects of drought conditions would be simulated by decreasing recharge by 75 percent. In Reach I, average simulated stream base flow at the Bridgeport streamgage (07228500) decreased by 58 percent during the hypothetical 10-year drought compared to average simulated stream base flow during the nondrought period. In Reach II, average simulated stream base flows at the Purcell streamgage (07229200) and Calvin streamgage (07231500) decreased by 64 percent and 54 percent, respectively. In Reach I, the groundwater-storage drought scenario resulted in a storage decline of 30 thousand acre-feet, or an average decline in the water table of 1.2 ft. In Reach II, the groundwater-storage drought scenario resulted in a storage decline of 71 thousand acre-feet, or an average decline in the water table of 2.0 ft.

Oklahoma↗
USGS2013

Shallow groundwater in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley, Alaska—Conceptualization and simulation of flow

The Matanuska-Susitna Valley is in the Upper Cook Inlet Basin and is currently undergoing rapid population growth outside of municipal water and sewer service areas. In response to concerns about the effects of increasing water use on future groundwater availability, a study was initiated between the Alaska Department of Natural Resources and the U.S. Geological Survey. The goals of the study were (1) to compile existing data and collect new data to support hydrogeologic conceptualization of the study area, and (2) to develop a groundwater flow model to simulate flow dynamics important at the regional scale. The purpose of the groundwater flow model is to provide a scientific framework for analysis of regional-scale groundwater availability. To address the first study goal, subsurface lithologic data were compiled into a database and were used to construct a regional hydrogeologic framework model describing the extent and thickness of hydrogeologic units in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley. The hydrogeologic framework model synthesizes existing maps of surficial geology and conceptual geochronologies developed in the study area with the distribution of lithologies encountered in hundreds of boreholes. The geologic modeling package Geological Surveying and Investigation in Three Dimensions (GSI3D) was used to construct the hydrogeologic framework model. In addition to characterizing the hydrogeologic framework, major groundwater-budget components were quantified using several different techniques. A land-surface model known as the Deep Percolation Model was used to estimate in-place groundwater recharge across the study area. This model incorporates data on topography, soils, vegetation, and climate. Model-simulated surface runoff was consistent with observed streamflow at U.S. Geological Survey streamgages. Groundwater withdrawals were estimated on the basis of records from major water suppliers during 2004-2010. Fluxes between groundwater and surface water were estimated during field investigations on several small streams. Regional groundwater flow patterns were characterized by synthesizing previous water-table maps with a synoptic water-level measurement conducted during 2009. Time-series water-level data were collected at groundwater and lake monitoring stations over the study period (2009–present). Comparison of historical groundwater-level records with time-series groundwater-level data collected during this study showed similar patterns in groundwater-level fluctuation in response to precipitation. Groundwater-age data collected during previous studies show that water moves quickly through the groundwater system, suggesting that the system responds quickly to changes in climate forcing. Similarly, the groundwater system quickly returns to long-term average conditions following variability due to seasonal or interannual changes in precipitation. These analyses indicate that the groundwater system is in a state of dynamic equilibrium, characterized by water-level fluctuation about a constant average state, with no long-term trends in aquifer-system storage. To address the second study goal, a steady-state groundwater flow model was developed to simulate regional groundwater flow patterns. The groundwater flow model was bounded by physically meaningful hydrologic features, and appropriate internal model boundaries were specified on the basis of conceptualization of the groundwater system resulting in a three-layer model. Calibration data included 173 water‑level measurements and 18 measurements of streamflow gains and losses along small streams. Comparison of simulated and observed heads and flows showed that the model accurately simulates important regional characteristics of the groundwater flow system. This model is therefore appropriate for studying regional-scale groundwater availability. Mismatch between model-simulated and observed hydrologic quantities is likely because of the coarse grid size of the model and seasonal transient effects. Next steps towards model refinement include the development of a transient groundwater flow model that is suitable for analysis of seasonal variability in hydraulic heads and flows. In addition, several important groundwater budget components remain poorly quantified—including groundwater outflow to the Matanuska River, Little Susitna River, and Knik Arm.

Alaska↗
USGS2014

Assessment of ethylene dibromide, dibromochloropropane, other volatile organic compounds, radium isotopes, radon, and inorganic compounds in groundwater and spring water from the Crouch Branch and McQueen Branch aquifers near McBee, South Carolina, 2010-2012

Public-supply wells near the rural town of McBee, in southwestern Chesterfield County, South Carolina, have provided potable water to more than 35,000 residents throughout Chesterfield County since the early 1990s. Groundwater samples collected between 2002 and 2008 in the McBee area by South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC) officials indicated that groundwater from two public-supply wells was characterized by the anthropogenic compounds ethylene dibromide (EDB) and dibromochloropropane (DBCP) at concentrations that exceeded their respective maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR). Groundwater samples from all public-supply wells in the McBee area were characterized by the naturally occurring isotopes of radium-226 and radium-228 at concentrations that approached, and in one well exceeded, the MCL for the combined isotopes. The local water utility installed granulated activated carbon filtration units at the two EDB- and DBCP-contaminated wells and has, since 2011, shut down these two wells. Groundwater pumped by the remaining public-supply wells is currently (2014) centrally treated at a water-filtration plant. To assess the occurrence, distribution, and potential sources of the anthropogenic and naturally occurring compounds detected in groundwater in the McBee area, samples of groundwater and spring water were collected from public-supply, domestic-supply, agricultural-supply, and monitoring wells and springs, respectively, between 2010 and 2012 by the U.S. Geological Survey. The water samples were analyzed for concentrations of EDB, DBCP, other volatile organic compounds (VOCs), radium-226 and radium-228, radon, and inorganic compounds. All wells sampled were screened in the shallow Crouch Branch aquifer, the deeper McQueen Branch aquifer, or, for most public-supply wells, both aquifers. In areas where no wells existed or wells could not be installed, passive samplers that adsorb EDB, DBCP, and various VOCs, were installed in the shallow subsurface. A representative groundwater flow pathway to each public supply well and selected other wells was determined by using a calibrated three-dimensional groundwater-flow model of the Atlantic Coastal Plain in Chesterfield County and particle-tracking analysis. The aerial extent of the groundwater flow pathway to public-supply wells was mapped by using chlorofluorocarbon-concentration based, apparent-age dates of the groundwater. The water-quality data collected between 2010 and 2012, in conjunction with groundwater flow pathways and historical aerial photographs of land uses near McBee, indicate an area where EDB-, DBCP-, 1,2-dichloropropane-, 1,3-dichloropropane-, and carbon disulfide-contaminated groundwater exists in the Crouch Branch aquifer in the Cedar Creek Basin and north of McBee and is most likely related to the past use of these compounds between the early 1900s and the 1980s as soil fumigants in predominately agricultural areas north of McBee. The highest EDB concentration detected (18.6 micrograms per liter) during the 3-year study was in a groundwater sample from an agricultural-supply well located north of McBee. Other VOCs, such as dichloromethane and 1,1,2-trichloroethane, also were detected in groundwater samples from this EDB-contaminated agricultural-supply well but are from unknown source(s). The fact that the agricultural area north of McBee is located in a recharge area for the Crouch Branch aquifer most likely facilitated the groundwater contamination in this area. DBCP-contaminated groundwater detected in three public-supply wells south of McBee in the deeper McQueen Branch aquifer appears to be related to past soil fumigation practices that used DBCP in agricultural areas located south of McBee. One of the three DBCP-contaminated public-supply wells also contained EDB, most likely present in groundwater due to the release of leaded gasolines that contained EDB as a fuel additive between the 1940s and 1970s. A gasoline-source of EDB, rather than a soil-fumigation source, is supported by the co-detection in groundwater from the well of 1,2-dichloroethane, a lead scavenger compound also added to leaded gasoline. Groundwater pumped from two public-supply wells located within and to the east of the McBee town limits and one domestic-supply well east of McBee was characterized by the detection of 1,1-dichloroethane, trichloroethylene, 1,1-dichloroethylene, and perchloroethylene. Groundwater flow pathways determined for these wells indicate that the potential source(s) of these compounds detected in one public-supply well and the domestic-supply well may be located within the McBee town limits, and that the potential source(s) of these compounds detected in the public-supply well to the east of McBee may be located in an area north of McBee formerly used for agriculture, but used for industry since at least the 1970s. Radium isotopes (defined in this study as the sum of radium-226 and radium-228 concentrations) and radon were detected in all wells sampled in the McBee area between 2010 and 2012. Wells characterized by radium isotope concentrations in groundwater that exceeded the MCL of 5.0 picocuries per liter were also characterized by specific conductance values greater than 30 microsiemens per centimeter and clustered north of McBee in a predominately agricultural area, and in agricultural and urban areas located within and east of McBee. The elevated specific conductance values measured in groundwater from these wells most likely are due to recharge by water mineralized by fertilizer application in agricultural areas, or due to the recharge by water mineralized by septic-tank drain-field effluent near urban areas. Radon was detected in groundwater from all wells sampled, and radon concentrations in groundwater from three monitoring wells exceeded the proposed MCL of 300 picocuries per liter. Concentrations of uranium in groundwater in the McBee area increased with increased groundwater-sample depth, most likely due to the proximity of the sample-collection location to basement rock that contains uranium-bearing minerals.

South Carolina↗
USGS2017

Hydrogeologic framework and selected components of the groundwater budget for the upper Umatilla River Basin, Oregon

Executive Summary This report presents a summary of the hydrogeology of the upper Umatilla River Basin, Oregon, based on characterization of the hydrogeologic framework, horizontal and vertical directions of groundwater flow, trends in groundwater levels, and components of the groundwater budget. The conceptual model of the groundwater flow system integrates available data and information on the groundwater resources of the upper Umatilla River Basin and provides insights regarding key hydrologic processes, such as the interaction between the groundwater and surface water systems and the hydrologic budget. The conceptual groundwater model developed for the study area divides the groundwater flow system into five hydrogeologic units: a sedimentary unit, three Columbia River basalt units, and a basement rock unit. The sedimentary unit, which is not widely used as a source of groundwater in the upper basin, is present primarily in the lowlands and consists of conglomerate, loess, silt and sand deposits, and recent alluvium. The Columbia River Basalt Group is a series of Miocene flood basalts that are present throughout the study area. The basalt is uplifted in the southeastern half of the study area, and either underlies the sedimentary unit, or is exposed at the surface. The interflow zones of the flood basalts are the primary aquifers in the study area. Beneath the flood basalts are basement rocks composed of Paleogene to Pre-Tertiary sedimentary, volcanic, igneous, and metamorphic rocks that are not used as a source of groundwater in the upper Umatilla River Basin. The major components of the groundwater budget in the upper Umatilla River Basin are (1) groundwater recharge, (2) groundwater discharge to surface water and wells, (3) subsurface flow into and out of the basin, and (4) changes in groundwater storage. Recharge from precipitation occurs primarily in the upland areas of the Blue Mountains. Mean annual recharge from infiltration of precipitation for the upper Umatilla River Basin during 1951–2010 is about 9.6 inches per year (in/yr). Annual recharge from precipitation for water year 2010 ranged from 3 in. in the lowland area to about 30 in. in the Blue Mountains. Using Kahle and others (2011) data and methods from the Columbia Plateau regional model, average annual recharge from irrigation is estimated to be about 2.2 in/yr for the 13 square miles of irrigated land in the upper Umatilla River Basin. Groundwater discharges to streams throughout the year and is a large component of annual streamflow in the upper Umatilla River Basin. Upward vertical hydraulic gradients near the Umatilla River indicate the potential for groundwater discharge. Groundwater discharge to the Umatilla River generally occurs in the upper part of the basin, upstream from the main stem. Groundwater development in the upper Umatilla River Basin began sometime after 1950 (Davies-Smith and others, 1988; Gonthier and Bolke, 1991). By water year 2010, groundwater use in the upper Umatilla River Basin was approximately 11,214 acre-feet (acre-ft). Total groundwater withdrawals for the study area were estimated at 7,575 acre-ft for irrigation, 3,173 acre-ft for municipal use, and 466 acre-ft for domestic use. Total groundwater flow into or from the study area depends locally on geology and hydraulic head distribution. Estimates of subsurface flow were calculated using the U.S. Geological Survey Columbia Plateau regional groundwater flow model. Net flux values range from 25,000 to 27,700 acre-ft per year and indicate that groundwater is moving out of the upper Umatilla River Basin into the lower Umatilla River Basin. Water level changes depend on storage changes within an aquifer, and storage changes depend on the storage properties of the aquifer, as well as recharge to or discharge from the aquifer. Groundwater level data in the upper Umatilla River Basin are mostly available from wells in Columbia River basalt units, which indicate areas of long-term water level declines in the Grande Ronde basalt unit near Pendleton and Athena, Oregon. Groundwater levels in the Wanapum basalt unit do not show long-term declines in the upper Umatilla River Basin. Because of pumping, some areas in the upper Umatilla River Basin have shown a decrease, or reversal, in the upward vertical head gradient. Key data needs are improvement of the spatial and temporal distribution of water-level data collection and continued monitoring of streamflow gaging sites. Additionally, refinement of recharge estimates would enhance understanding of the processes that provide the groundwater resources in the upper Umatilla River Basin.

Oregon↗
USGS2022

Groundwater hydrology in the area of Savannah and Gunstocker Creeks in northeastern Hamilton, southern Meigs, and northwestern Bradley Counties, Tennessee, 2007–09

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Savannah Valley Utility District, evaluated the groundwater hydrology of the Valley and Ridge carbonate rock aquifer in northeastern Hamilton, southern Meigs, and northwestern Bradley Counties, Tennessee, from 2007 through 2009. The evaluation included, and built on, the results of test drilling conducted in the area in 1974 to determine the potential for groundwater as a source of public supply for the utility and the results of an investigation conducted to define recharge areas for wells used by groundwater-source public-supply water systems throughout Hamilton County in the early 1990s. Groundwater-level data collected from wells open to the aquifer in the study area were used to prepare potentiometric-surface maps for fall 1992, spring and fall 1993, summer 2008, and spring 2009 conditions. Two primary groundwater basins were delineated from the maps—the larger of which coincides with the watershed of Savannah Creek in the southern part of the study area and the smaller of which coincides with the watershed of Gunstocker Creek in the northern part of the study area. Both basins are characterized by potentiometric surfaces that contain a central area of low-altitude groundwater levels and low gradients relative to the basin margins that reflect the orientation of enhanced permeability along dissolution-enlarged features that have developed parallel to strike in the aquifer. The recharge area of the Savannah Creek groundwater basin is estimated to be about 31 square miles, and the recharge area of the Gunstocker Creek groundwater basin is estimated to be about 17 square miles. Recharge to the aquifer in the Savannah Creek and Gunstocker Creek groundwater basins primarily occurs in the uplands area along White Oak Mountain in the eastern part of the study area and along the western boundaries of the basins. Groundwater flows toward the potentiometric lows in each basin, discharging as base flow to the streams and to springs locally. Groundwater withdrawals for public supply by the utility influence the potentiometric low in the north-central part of the Savannah Creek groundwater basin and disrupt flow in the creek and nearby Anderson Spring, particularly during the summer and fall seasons. No large groundwater withdrawals currently occur in the Gunstocker Creek basin, but there is potential for groundwater supply development in the basin. A conceptual model of the groundwater hydrology of the area developed from the evaluation indicates that Chickamauga Lake is the base-level control on groundwater discharge from the Savannah Creek and Gunstocker Creek basins and that lake stage affects the potentiometric surfaces and groundwater discharge in the most downgradient parts of the basins as a result of inferred hydraulic connection between the aquifer and the lake. The model also infers that captured surface water from sections of Savannah Creek and the Hiwassee River that are embayed by the lake could recharge the aquifer and serve as a source of water withdrawn by wells in each basin if the potentiometric surfaces were lowered to altitudes less than the stage of the lake, particularly under potential future groundwater-development scenarios in the Gunstocker Creek basin. Geochemical analysis of samples collected from six wells for the study indicate that groundwater in the Valley and Ridge aquifer in the area generally is a calcium-magnesium-bicarbonate type, and although the water generally is hard, it is suitable for most uses. Trace-element concentrations were less than primary drinking-water criteria in all the samples. Results of the investigation indicate that options are available for additional groundwater withdrawal in the study area. Water-level data collected since 1975 at the Savannah Valley Utility District Smith Road well site indicate that some additional amount of groundwater is available for withdrawal from the aquifer in the Savannah Creek groundwater basin. The potentiometric low within the Gunstocker Creek groundwater basin indicates that an area with enhanced permeability is present as a northeastern counterpart to the potentiometric low within the Savannah Creek basin. Because the Gunstocker Creek basin is about one-half the total area of the Savannah Creek basin, a commensurate decrease in available groundwater storage is likely. Furthermore, groundwater withdrawal locations in the Gunstocker Creek basin would be closer to—and possibly connected hydraulically to—the Hiwassee River, thus increasing the potential for induced surface-water recharge in the basin if sustained drawdown from pumping lowered groundwater levels to altitudes less than the stage of the river.

Tennessee↗
USGS2019

Numerical model simulations of potential changes in water levels and capture of natural discharge from groundwater withdrawals in Snake Valley and adjacent areas, Utah and Nevada

The National Park Service (NPS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) are concerned about cumulative effects of groundwater development on groundwater-dependent resources managed by, and other groundwater resources of interest to, these agencies in Snake Valley and adjacent areas, Utah and Nevada. Of particular concern to the NPS and BLM are withdrawals from all existing approved, perfected, certified, permitted, and vested groundwater rights in Snake Valley totaling about 55,272 acre-feet per year (acre-ft/yr), and from several senior water-right applications filed by the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) totaling 50,680 acre-ft/yr. An existing groundwater-flow model of the eastern Great Basin was used to investigate where potential drawdown and capture of natural discharge is likely to result from potential groundwater withdrawals from existing groundwater rights in Snake Valley, and from groundwater withdrawals proposed in several applications filed by the SNWA. To evaluate the potential effects of the existing and proposed SNWA groundwater withdrawals, 11 withdrawal scenarios were simulated. All scenarios were run as steady state to estimate the ultimate long-term effects of the simulated withdrawals. This assessment provides a general understanding of the relative susceptibility of the groundwater resources of interest to the NPS and BLM, and the groundwater system in general, to existing and future groundwater development in the study area. At the NPS and BLM groundwater resource sites of interest, simulated drawdown resulting from withdrawals based on existing approved, perfected, certified, permitted, and vested groundwater rights within Snake Valley ranged between 0 and 159 feet (ft) without accounting for irrigation return flow, and between 0 and 123 ft with accounting for irrigation return flow. With the addition of proposed SNWA withdrawals of 35,000 acre-ft/yr (equal to the Unallocated Groundwater portion allotted to Nevada in a draft interstate agreement), simulated drawdowns at the NPS and BLM sites of interest increased to range between 0 and 2,074 ft without irrigation return flow, and between 0 and 2,002 ft with irrigation return flow. With the addition of the proposed SNWA withdrawals of an amount equal to the full application amounts (50,680 acre-ft/yr), simulated drawdowns at the NPS and BLM sites of interest increased to range between 1 and 3,119 ft without irrigation return flow, and between 1 and 3,044 ft with irrigation return flow. At the NPS and BLM groundwater resource sites of interest, simulated capture of natural discharge resulting from withdrawals based on existing groundwater rights in Snake Valley, both with and without irrigation return flow, ranged between 0 and 100 percent; simulated capture of 100 percent occurred at four sites. With the addition of proposed SNWA withdrawals of an amount equal to the Unallocated Groundwater portion allotted to Nevada in the draft interstate agreement, simulated capture of 100 percent occurred at nine additional sites without irrigation return flow, and at eight additional sites with irrigation return flow. With the addition of the proposed SNWA withdrawals of an amount equal to the full application amounts, simulated capture of 100 percent occurred at 11 additional sites without irrigation return flow, and at 9 additional sites with irrigation return flow. The large simulated drawdowns produced in the scenarios that include large portions or all of the proposed SNWA withdrawals indicate that the groundwater system may not be able to support the amount of withdrawals from the proposed points of diversion (PODs) in the current SNWA water-right applications. Therefore, four additional scenarios were simulated where the withdrawal rates at the SNWA PODs were constrained by not allowing drawdowns to be deeper than the assumed depth of the PODs (about 2,000 ft). In the constrained scenarios, total withdrawals at the SNWA PODs were reduced to about 48 percent of the Unallocated Groundwater portion allotted to Nevada (35,000 acre-ft/yr reduced to 16,817 acre-ft/yr or 16,914 acre-ft/yr, without or with irrigation return flow, respectively), and about 44 percent of the full application amounts (50,680 acre-ft/yr reduced to 22,048 acre-ft/yr or 22,165 acre-ft/yr, without or with irrigation return flow, respectively). This indicates that the SNWA may need to add more PODs, or PODs in different locations, in order to withdraw large portions or all of the groundwater that has been applied for. At the NPS and BLM groundwater resource sites of interest, simulated drawdown resulting from the addition of the constrained SNWA withdrawals applied to the Unallocated Groundwater amount ranged between 0 and 290 ft without irrigation return flow, and between 0 and 252 ft with irrigation return flow. With the addition of the constrained SNWA withdrawals applied to the full application amounts, simulated drawdowns at the NPS and BLM sites of interest ranged between 0 and 358 ft without irrigation return flow, and between 0 and 313 ft with irrigation return flow. At the NPS and BLM groundwater resource sites of interest, with the addition of the constrained SNWA withdrawals applied to the Unallocated Groundwater amount, simulated capture of 100 percent of the natural discharge occurred at five additional sites without irrigation return flow, and at two additional sites with irrigation return flow (in addition to the four captured from existing water rights both with and without irrigation return flow). With the addition of the constrained SNWA withdrawals applied to the full application amounts, simulated capture of 100 percent occurred at six additional sites both with and without irrigation return flow.

Nevada, Utah↗
USGS2023

Hydrogeology, land-surface subsidence, and documentation of the Gulf Coast Land Subsidence and Groundwater-Flow (GULF) model, southeast Texas, 1897–2018

Executive Summary As a part of the Texas Water Development Board groundwater availability modeling program, the U.S. Geological Survey developed the Gulf Coast Land Subsidence and Groundwater-Flow model (hereinafter, the “GULF model”) and ensemble to simulate groundwater flow and land-surface subsidence in the northern part of the Gulf Coast aquifer system (the study area) in Texas from predevelopment (1897) through 2018. Since the publication of a previous groundwater model for the greater Houston area in 2012, there have been changes to the distribution of groundwater withdrawals and advances in modeling tools. To reflect these changes and to simulate more recent conditions, the GULF model was developed in cooperation with the Harris-Galveston and Fort Bend Subsidence Districts to provide an updated Groundwater Availability Model. Since the early 1900s, most of the groundwater withdrawals in the study area have been from three of the hydrogeologic units that compose the Gulf Coast aquifer system—the Chicot, Evangeline, and Jasper aquifers and, more recently, from the Catahoula confining unit. Withdrawals from these hydrogeologic units are used for municipal supply, commercial and industrial use, and irrigation purposes. Withdrawals of large quantities of groundwater in the greater Houston area have caused widespread groundwater-level declines in the Chicot, Evangeline, and Jasper aquifers of more than 300 feet (ft). Early development of the aquifer system, which began before 1900, resulted in nearly 50 percent of the eventual historical groundwater-level minimums having been reached as early as 1946 in some areas. These groundwater-level declines led to more than 9 ft of land-surface subsidence—historically in central and southeastern Harris County and Galveston County, but more recently in northern, northwestern, and western Harris County, Montgomery County, and northern Fort Bend County—from depressurization and compaction of clay and silt layers interbedded in the aquifer sediments. In a generalized conceptual model of the Gulf Coast aquifer system, water enters the groundwater system in topographically high outcrops of the hydrogeologic units in the northwestern part of the aquifer system. Groundwater that does not discharge to streams flows to intermediate and deep zones of the aquifer system southeastward of the outcrop areas where it is discharged by wells and by upward leakage in topographically low areas near the coast. The uppermost parts of the aquifer system, which include outcrop areas, are under water-table (unconfined) conditions where the groundwater is not confined under pressure. As depth increases in the aquifer system and interbedded clay and silt layers accumulate, water-table conditions evolve into confined conditions where the groundwater is under pressure. Groundwater flow and land-surface subsidence in the GULF model and ensemble were simulated by using MODFLOW 6 with the Skeletal Storage, Compaction, and Subsidence package. The model consists of six layers, one for each of the five hydrogeologic units in the northern part of the Gulf Coast aquifer system and a surficial top layer that includes part of each hydrogeologic unit. Transient groundwater flow was simulated during 1897–2018 by using a combination of multiyear, annual, and monthly stress periods. An initial steady-state stress period was configured to represent predevelopment mean annual inflows and outflows. The subsidence package used in the GULF model and ensemble uses a head-based subsidence formulation that simulates the delayed drainage response from clay and silt sediment to changes in groundwater levels. The GULF model and ensemble were history matched to groundwater-level observations at selected wells, land-surface subsidence at benchmarks, aquifer compaction at borehole extensometers, and vertical displacement from Global Positioning System stations. A Bayesian framework was used to represent uncertainty in modeled parameters and simulated outputs of interest. History matching and uncertainty quantification were performed by using a Monte Carlo approach enabled through iterative ensemble smoother software to produce an ensemble of models fit to historical data. The iterative ensemble smoother substantially reduced the computational demand of parameter estimation by approximating the first-order relation between model inputs and outputs, thereby allowing 183,207 adjustable parameters to be used for history matching at a relatively low computational and time cost. The history-matched parameter values are within the ranges of previously published values and agree with the current understanding of the spatial and temporal patterns of parameter uncertainty for the Gulf Coast aquifer system. A good agreement between the observed (or estimated) and simulated groundwater levels, land-surface subsidence, compaction, and vertical displacement was obtained across the modeled area based on qualitative and quantitative comparisons. Ensemble mean annual groundwater-flow rates to the Chicot, Evangeline, Jasper aquifers and Catahoula confining unit were 0.0–0.49 inch (in.), 0.09–0.33 in., 0.01–0.07 in., and 0.01–0.05 in., respectively. GULF model mean annual groundwater-flow rates to the Chicot, Evangeline, and Jasper aquifers and Catahoula confining unit were 0.31 in., 0.19 in., 0.03 in., and 0.03 in., respectively. The GULF-model-simulated recharge to the outcrop area was the largest inflow (75 percent), and recharge to other areas was 25 percent of the model inflow. The simulated outflows included (1) net surface-water/groundwater exchange with study area streams (50 percent), (2) groundwater use (49 percent), and (3) net surface-water/groundwater exchange with the Gulf of Mexico (1 percent). The sum of the simulated values of the outflows (1,041,973 acre-feet per year [acre-ft/yr]) and the elastic expansion of the fine-grained sediment and numerical solver error (339 acre-ft/yr) minus the inflows (654,172 acre-ft/yr) represents the reduction of storage from the Gulf Coast aquifer system (388,140 acre-ft/yr). Most of the storage depletion is caused by the long-term groundwater-level declines that have resulted primarily in inelastic compaction. The GULF model was used to estimate Jasper aquifer compaction at selected benchmarks in Montgomery County and northern Harris County, which are the primary locations of Jasper aquifer groundwater use. Simulated Jasper aquifer compaction in northern Harris County was between 0.2 and 0.5 ft, or between about 5 and 16 percent of simulated subsidence at the benchmark locations. Simulated Jasper aquifer compaction in Montgomery County was between 0.8 and 1.2 ft, or between about 33 and 57 percent of simulated subsidence at the benchmark locations.

Texas↗