Hydrogeology of, and simulation of ground-water flow In, the Pohatcong Valley, Warren County, New Jersey

Glen B. Carleton; Alison D. Gordon

doi:10.3133/sir20065269

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20065269

Hydrogeology of, and simulation of ground-water flow In, the Pohatcong Valley, Warren County, New Jersey

Glen B. Carleton·Alison D. Gordon

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

A numerical ground-water-flow model was constructed to simulate ground-water flow in the Pohatcong Valley, including the area within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Pohatcong Valley Ground Water Contamination Site. The area is underlain by glacial till, alluvial sediments, and weathered and competent carbonate bedrock. The northwestern and southeastern valley boundaries are regional-scale thrust faults and ridges underlain by crystalline rocks. The unconsolidated sediments and weathered bedrock form a minor surficial aquifer and the carbonate rocks form a highly transmissive fractured-rock aquifer. Ground-water flow in the carbonate rocks is primarily downvalley towards the Delaware River, but the water discharges through the surficial aquifer to Pohatcong Creek under typical conditions. The hydraulic characteristics of the carbonate-rock aquifer are highly heterogeneous. Horizontal hydraulic conductivities span nearly five orders of magnitude, from 0.5 feet per day (ft/d) to 1,800 ft/d. The maximum transmissivity calculated is 37,000 feet squared per day. The horizontal hydraulic conductivities calculated from aquifer tests using public supply wells open to the Leithsville Formation and Allentown Dolomite are 34 ft/d (effective hydraulic conductivity) and 85 to 190 ft/d (minimum and maximum hydraulic conductivity, respectively, yielding a horizontal anisotropy ratio of 0.46). Stream base-flow data were used to estimate the net gain (or loss) for selected reaches on Brass Castle Creek, Shabbecong Creek, three smaller tributaries to Pohatcong Creek, and for five reaches on Pohatcong Creek. Estimated mean annual base flows for Brass Castle Creek, Pohatcong Creek at New Village, and Pohatcong Creek at Carpentersville (from correlations of partial- and continuous-record stations) are 2.4, 25, and 45 cubic feet per second (ft3/s) (10, 10, and 11 inches per year (in/yr)), respectively. Ground-water ages estimated using sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), chlorofluorocarbon (CFC), and tritium-helium age-dating techniques range from 0 to 27 years, with a median age of 6 years. Land-surface and ground-water water budgets were calculated, yielding an estimated rate of direct recharge tothe surficial aquifer of about 23 in/yr, and an estimated net recharge to the ground-water system within the area underlain by carbonate rock (11.4 mi2) of 29 in/yr (10 in/yr over the entire 33.3 mi2 basin). A finite-difference, numerical model was developed to simulate ground-water flow in the Pohatcong Valley. The four-layer model encompasses the entire carbonate-rock part of the valley. The carbonate-rock aquifer was modeled as horizontally anisotropic, with the direction of maximum transmissivity aligned with the longitudinal axis of the valley. All lateral boundaries are no-flow boundaries. Recharge was applied uniformly to the topmost active layer with additional recharge added near the lateral boundaries to represent infiltration of runoff from adjacent crystalline-rock areas. The model was calibrated to June 2001 water levels in wells completed in the carbonate-rock aquifer, August 2000 stream base-flow measurements, and the approximate ground-water age. The ground-water-flow model was constructed in part to test possible site contamination remediation alternatives. Four previously determined ground-water remediation alternatives (GW1, GW2, GW3, and GW4) were simulated. For GW1, the no-action alternative, simulated pathlines originating in the tetrachloroethene (PCE) and trichloroethene (TCE) source areas within the Ground-Water Contamination Site end at Pohatcong Creek near the confluence with Shabbecong Creek, although some particles went deeper in the aquifer system and ultimately discharge to Pohatcong Creek about 10 miles downvalley in Pohatcong Township. Remediation alternatives GW2, GW3, and GW4 include ground-water withdrawal, treatment, and reinjection. The design for GW2 includes wells in the TCE and PCE source areas that wit

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations Report Report

Source-reported bounding extent: 40.5° to 40.833333333333336° latitude; -75.2° to -74.9° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Glen B. Carleton, Alison D. Gordon. 2007. Hydrogeology of, and simulation of ground-water flow In, the Pohatcong Valley, Warren County, New Jersey. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20065269

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

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

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

New Jersey↗

USGS2026

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

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

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

USGS2026

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

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

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗