HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK OF THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL PLAIN AVAILABILITY OF BOOKS AND MAPS OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Instructions on ordering publications of the U.S. Geological Survey, along with prices of the last offerings, are given in the current- year issues of the monthly catalog "New Publications of the U.S. Geological Survey." Prices of available U.S. Geological Survey publica­ tions released prior to the current year arc listed in the most recent annual "Price and Availability List." Publications that may be listed in various U.S. Geological Survey catalogs (see back inside cover) but not listed in the most recent annual "Price and Availability List" may be no longer available. Order U.S. Geological Survey publications by mail or over the counter from the offices given below.

BY MAIL OVER THE COUNTER

Books Books and Maps Professional Papers, Bulletins, Water-Supply Papers, Tech­ Books and maps of the U.S. Geological Survey are available niques of Water-Resources Investigations, Circulars, publications over the counter at the following U.S. Geological Survey Earth of general interest (such as leaflets, pamphlets, booklets), single Science Information Centers (ESIC), all of which are authorized copies of Earthquakes & Volcanoes, Preliminary Determination of agents of the Superintendent of Documents: Epicenters, and some miscellaneous reports, including some of the foregoing scries that have gone out of print at the Superintendent ANCHORAGE, Alaska Rm. 101, 4230 University Dr. of Documents, are obtainable by mail from LAKEWOOD, Colorado Federal Center, Bldg. 810 U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services MENLO PARK, California Bldg. 3, Rm. 3128, 345 Box 25286, Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225 Middlefield Rd. RESTON, Virginia USGS National Center. Rm. 1C402. Subscriptions to periodicals (Earthquakes & Volcanoes and 12201 Sunrise Valley Dr. Preliminary Determination of Epicenters) can be obtained ONLY SALT LAKE CITY, Utah Federal Bldg., Rm. 8105, 125 from the South State St. Superintendent of Documents SPOKANE, Washington U.S. Post Office Bldg., Rm. 135, Government Printing Office West 904 Riverside Ave. Washington, DC 20402 WASHINGTON, D.C. Main Interior Bldg., Rm. 2650, 18th (Check or money order must be payable to Superintendent of and C Sts., NW. Documents.) Maps Only Maps Maps may be purchased over the counter at the following U.S. Geological Survey offices: For maps, address mail orders to U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services ROLLA, Missouri 1400 Independence Rd. Box 25286, Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225 STENNIS SPACE CENTER, Mississippi Bldg. 3101 Hydrogeologic Framework of the North Carolina Coastal Plain

By M.D. WINNER, JR., and R.W. COBLE

REGIONAL AQU I FE R-S YSTE M ANALYSIS NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1404-1

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1996 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Gordon P. Eaton, Director

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Winner, M.D. Hydrogeologic framework of the North Carolina Coastal Plain / by M.D. Winner, Jr., and R.W. Coble. p. cm. (U.S. Geological Survey professional paper; 1404-1) (Regional aquifer-system analysis) Includes bibliographical references. Supt. of Docs, no.: I 19-16:1404-1 1. Water, Underground North Carolina. I. Coble, Ronald W. (Ronald Wimmer) II. Title. III. Series. IV. Series: Regional aquifer-system analysis. GB1025.N8W56 1996 551.49'09756-dc20 89-600385 CIP

For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services Box 25286, Federal Center, Denver, CO 80225 FOREWORD

THE REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS PROGRAM

The Regional Aquifer-System Analysis (RASA) Program represents a systematic effort to study a number of the Nation's most important aquifer systems, which, in aggregate, underlie much of the country and which repre­ sent an important component of the Nation's total water supply In general, the boundaries of these studies are identified by the hydrologic extent of each system and, accordingly, transcend the political subdivisions to which investi­ gations have often arbitrarily been limited in the past. The broad objective for each study is to assemble geologic, hydrologic, and geochemical information; to analyze and develop an understanding of the system; and to develop predic­ tive capabilities that will contribute to the effective management of the system. The use of computer simulation is an important element of the RASA studies to develop an understanding of the natural, undisturbed hydrologic system and the changes brought about in it by human activities and to pro­ vide a means of predicting the regional effects of future pumping or other stresses. The final interpretive results of the RASA Program are presented in a series of U.S. Geological Survey Professional Papers that describe the geology, hydrology, and geochemistry of each regional aquifer system. Each study within the RASA Program is assigned a single Professional Paper number beginning with Professional Paper 1400.

Gordon P. Eaton Director

CONTENTS

Foreword...... Ill Hydrogeologic Framework Continued Abstract...... II Beaufort Aquifer...... 127 Introduction...... 1 Distribution of Permeable Material...... 27 Purpose and Scope...... 1 Occurrence of Saltwater...... 29 Acknowledgments...... 3 Beaufort Confining Unit...... 29 Previous Studies...... 3 Relation with Other Aquifers...... 29 Hydrogeology...... 3 Peedee Aquifer ...... 29 Physiographic Setting...... 3 Distribution of Permeable Material...... 32 Geologic Setting...... 6 Occurrence of Saltwater...... 32 Hydrologic Setting...... 7 Peedee Confining Unit...... 32 Delineation of Hydrogeologic Units...... 12 Relation with Other Aquifers...... 33 Geophysical Logs...... 13 Black Creek Aquifer ...... 33 Ground-Water Levels...... 14 Distribution of Permeable Material...... 35 Chloride Distribution...... 16 Occurrence of Saltwater...... 35 Hydrogeologic Framework...... 17 Black Creek Confining Unit...... 35 Surficial Aquifer...... 17 Relation with Other Aquifers...... 36 Recharge Rates...... 18 Upper Cape Fear Aquifer...... 36 Distribution of Permeable Material...... 19 Distribution of Permeable Material...... 38 Occurrence of Saltwater...... 20 Occurrence of Saltwater...... 38 Yorktown Aquifer...... 20 Upper Cape Fear Confining Unit...... 38 Distribution of Permeable Material...... 20 Relation with Other Aquifers...... 40 Occurrence of Saltwater...... 21 Lower Cape Fear Aquifer...... 40 Yorktown Confining Unit...... 21 Distribution of Permeable Material...... 40 Relation with Other Aquifers...... 21 Occurrence of Saltwater...... 41 Pungo River Aquifer...... 21 Lower Cape Fear Confining Unit...... 42 Distribution of Permeable Material...... 23 Relation with Other Aquifers...... 42 Occurrence of Saltwater...... 23 Lower Cretaceous Aquifer ...... 43 Pungo River Confining Unit...... 23 Distribution of Permeable Material...... 45 Relation with Other Aquifers...... 23 Occurrence of Saltwater...... 45 Castle Hayne Aquifer...... 23 Lower Cretaceous Confining Unit...... 45 Distribution of Permeable Material...... 25 Relation with Other Aquifers...... 45 Occurrence of Saltwater...... 25 Summary...... 46 Castle Hayne Confining Unit...... 25 Selected References...... 46 Relation with Other Aquifers...... 26 Supplemental Data...... 51

ILLUSTRATIONS

[Plates are in separate case]

PLATE 1. Location of wells and hydrogeologic sections in the North Carolina Coastal Plain. 2-14. Hydrogeologic sections: 2. A-A' from Rockingham, Richmond County, to Calabash, Brunswick County, N.C. 3. B-B' from West End, Moore County, to Bladenboro, Bladen County, and C-C" from Lobelia, Moore County, to Garland, Sampson County, N.C. 4. D-D' from Lillington, Harnett County, to Wilmington, New Hanover County, N.C. 5. E-E' from Kipling, Harnett County, to Deppe, Onslow County, N.C. 6. F-F' from Bentonville, Johnston County, to Pamlico, Pamlico County, N.C. VI CONTENTS

7. G-G' from Wilson, Wilson County, to Manns Harbor, Dare County, N.C. 8. H-H' from Boykins, Southampton County, Va., to Aydlett, Currituck County, N.C. 9. /-/' from Clarendon, Columbus County, to Goldsboro, Wayne County, N.C. 10. J'-J" from Goldsboro, Wayne County, N.C., to Sands, Southampton County, Va. 11. K-K from Nakina, Columbus County, to Maple Hill, Fender County, N.C. 12. L~L' from Calabash, Brunswick County, to Sneads Ferry, Onslow County, N.C. 13. L'-L" from Sneads Ferry, Onslow County, to Valhalla, Chowan County, N.C. 14. M-M' from Edenton, Chowan County, N.C., to Well 160, Suffolk County, Va., and N-N', N'-N", P-P', and R-R' in Robeson, Bladen, and Columbus Counties, N.C. 15-24. Maps showing: 15. Percentage of sand in the surficial aquifer of the North Carolina Coastal Plain. 16. Altitude of top, percentage of sand, and chloride concentration of the Yorktown aquifer and thickness of the York- town confining unit in the North Carolina Coastal Plain. 17. Altitude of top, percentage of sand, and chloride concentration of the Pungo River aquifer and thickness of the Pungo River confining unit in the North Carolina Coastal Plain. 18. Altitude of top, percentage of sand and carbonate rock, and chloride concentration of the Castle Hayne aquifer and thickness of the Castle Hayne confining unit in the North Carolina Coastal Plain. 19. Altitude of top, percentage of sand, and chloride concentration of the Beaufort aquifer and thickness of the Beaufort confining unit in the North Carolina Coastal Plain. 20. Altitude of top, percentage of sand, and chloride concentration of the Peedee aquifer and thickness of the Peedee con­ fining unit in the North Carolina Coastal Plain. 21. Altitude of top, percentage of sand, and chloride concentration of the Black Creek aquifer and thickness of the Black Creek confining unit in the North Carolina Coastal Plain. 22. Altitude of top, percentage of sand, and chloride concentration of the upper Cape Fear aquifer and thickness of the upper Cape Fear confining unit in the North Carolina Coastal Plain. 23. Altitude of top, percentage of sand, and chloride concentration of the lower Cape Fear aquifer and thickness of the lower Cape Fear confining unit in the North Carolina Coastal Plain. 24. Altitude of top, percentage of sand, and chloride concentration of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer and thickness of the Lower Cretaceous confining unit in the North Carolina Coastal Plain.

Page FIGURES 1-3. Maps showing: 1. North Carolina Coastal Plain study area...... 12 2. County and areal ground-water investigations, North Carolina Coastal Plain...... 4 3. Physiographic subdivisions of the North Carolina Coastal Plain...... 5 4. Generalized cross section from Wilson, N.C., to Cape Hatteras, N.C...... 7 5, 6. Maps showing: 5. Structural features of the Coastal Plain of North Carolina and southern Virginia...... 9 6. Major cones of depression in the North Carolina Coastal Plain...... 11 7-10. Diagrams of: 7. Logs of exploratory hole and construction features of observation wells at a typical NRCD research station ...... 14 8. Resistance logs showing correlations of beds and groups of beds ...... 15 9. Test zones and distribution of head throughout the section in an NRCD test hole ...... 15 10. Chloride distribution at the NRCD Clarendon Research Station...... 16 11-23. Maps of North Carolina Coastal Plain showing: 11. Infiltration capacities of soils ...... 19 12. Confining units or basement rocks that directly underlie the Yorktown aquifer...... 22 13. Aquifers that directly overlie the Pungo River confining unit and aquifer ...... 24 14. Aquifers that directly overlie the Castle Hayne confining unit and aquifer...... 26 15. Confining units that directly underlie the Castle Hayne aquifer...... 28 16. Aquifers that directly overlie the Beaufort confining unit and aquifer...... 30 17. Confining units that directly underlie the Beaufort aquifer...... 31 18. Aquifers that directly overlie the Peedee confining unit and aquifer...... 34 19. Aquifers that directly overlie the Black Creek confining unit and aquifer...... 37 20. Aquifers that directly overlie the upper Cape Fear confining unit and aquifer ...... 39 21. Areas where the lower Cape Fear confining unit or basement rocks directly underlie the upper Cape Fear aquifer...... 41 22. Aquifers that directly overlie the lower Cape Fear confining unit and aquifer...... 43 23. Areas where the Lower Cretaceous confining unit or basement rocks directly underlie the lower Cape Fear aquifer...... 44 CONTENTS VII

TABLES

TABLE 1. Generalized stratigraphic units of the North Carolina Coastal Plain ...... 18 2. Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina Coastal Plain hydrogeologic units. 13 3. North Carolina Coastal Plain geologic and hydrogeologic units ...... 14 4. Summary of aquifer and confining-unit hydrogeologic data...... 17

CONVERSION FACTORS AND VERTICAL DATUM

This paper uses the inch-pound system of units as the primary system of measure­ ments and the metric system of units for water chemistry measurements. For readers who wish to convert measurements from the inch-pound system to the metric system, the conversion factors are listed below:

Multiply inch-pound units By To obtain metric units inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter foot (ft) 0.3048 meter mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer square mile (mi2) 2.59 square kilometer inch per hour (in/h) 25.4 millimeter per hour inch per year (in/yr) 25.4 millimeter per year foot per day (ft/d) 0.3048 meter per day foot per mile (ft/mi) 0.1894 meter per kilometer foot squared per day (ft2/d) 0.0929 meter squared per day gallon per day (gal/d) 3.785 liter per day million gallons per day (Mgal/d) 3.785 million liters per day gallon per day per square mile [(gal/d)/mi2] 1.461 liter per day per square kilometer milligram per liter per foot [(mg/L)/ft] 3.2808 milligram per liter per meter

Sea level: In this report, "sea level" refers to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD of 1929) a geodetic datum derived from a general adjustment of the first-order level nets of both the United States and Canada, formerly called Sea Level Datum of 1929.

REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK OF THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL PLAIN

By M.D. WINNER, JR., and R.W. COBLE

ABSTRACT To facilitate study of this regional aquifer system, which spans parts of six States, five subregional inves­ The hydrogeologic framework of the North Carolina Coastal Plain aquifer system consists of 10 aquifers separated by 9 confining units. tigations were conducted one each for areas in New From top to bottom, the aquifers are the surficial aquifer, Yorktown York, New Jersey, Maryland-Delaware, Virginia, and aquifer, Pungo River aquifer, Castle Hayne aquifer, Beaufort aquifer, North Carolina. These detailed studies furnished data to Peedee aquifer, Black Creek aquifer, upper Cape Fear aquifer, lower the team that coordinated the efforts of the five subre­ Cape Fear aquifer, and Lower Cretaceous aquifer. The uppermost aquifer (the surficial aquifer in most places) is a water-table aquifer, gional investigations and prepared reports on the and the bottom of the system is underlain by crystalline bedrock. regional aquifer system as a whole. The basic plan of The sedimentary deposits forming the aquifers are of Holocene to study had two elements: (1) development of a hydrogeo­ Cretaceous age and are composed mostly of sand, with lesser amounts logic framework that describes the geology, hydrology, of gravel and limestone. The confining units between the aquifers are composed primarily of clay and silt. The thickness of the aquifers and geochemistry of a multilayered aquifer system and ranges from zero along the Fall Line to more than 10,000 feet at Cape (2) development of digital flow models that simulate Hatteras. Prominent structural features are the increasing easterly ground-water flow within the hydrogeologic framework. homoclinal dip of the sediments and the Cape Fear arch, the axis of This report is a product of the first element of the which trends in a southeast direction. Stratigraphic continuity was determined from correlations of 161 investigation for the North Carolina area. It delineates a geophysical logs along with data from drillers' and geologists' logs. hydrogeologic framework for the North Carolina Coastal Aquifers were defined by means of these logs as well as water-level and Plain, which covers a 25,000-square-mile (mi2) area of water-quality data and evidence of the continuity of pumping effects. eastern North Carolina, or about 47 percent of the State, Eighteen hydrogeologic sections depict the correlation of these aquifers throughout the North Carolina Coastal Plain. and which includes all of 35 counties and parts of 11 others (fig. 1). INTRODUCTION PURPOSE AND SCOPE The Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain regional aquifer system, which is one of the areas studied in the U.S. To understand ground-water flow in a regional aquifer Geological Survey Regional Aquifer-System Analysis system and to evaluate the effects of hydrologic stresses program, borders the east coast of the United States on the aquifer system, the aquifers and confining units between Long Island, N.Y., and the North Carolina- that constitute the framework of the aquifer system must South Carolina State line. This regional aquifer system is be delineated and described. This report presents a an eastward-dipping and eastward-thickening wedge of hydrogeologic framework for the North Carolina Coastal sedimentary rocks ranging in age from Early Cretaceous Plain aquifer system. It is based mainly on analysis and to Holocene that were deposited mostly on metamorphic interpretation of lithologic data, geophysical logs, and igneous crystalline basement rocks; locally, the ground-water levels, and water-quality data. The frame­ sedimentary wedge lies on low-permeability red beds of work is presented by means of hydrogeologic sections, early Mesozoic age. The wedge is a featheredge at the contour maps, and tables that can be used (1) to under­ western limit of the Coastal Plain and is more than 10,000 stand the hydrogeology of the Coastal Plain aquifer feet (ft) thick at Cape Hatteras, N.C. system in North Carolina and (2) to prepare computer-

II 84° 83°

VIRGINIA Qi i O I 36° L I WASH- .-< MARTIN 1 '/ INGTON r>

CO Kj CO

COI

EXPLANATION 34° U COASTAL PLAIN STUDY AREA

PIEDMONT AND MOUNTAINS AREA

O

CO H

50 100 MILES \ i i r 0 50 100 KILOMETERS

FIGURE 1. North Carolina Coastal Plain study area. HYDROGEOLOGY 13 based flow models for understanding and evaluating the Plain has evolved from results of several studies con­ aquifer system. ducted by geologists beginning in the mid-19th century. The first comprehensive description of the geology was published by Clark and others in 1912. Their basic ACKNOWLEDGMENTS interpretations generally have withstood the test of This study, almost in its entirety, represents the time. The geologic character of the various formations that compilation and analysis of existing data. The data were make up the Coastal Plain is extensively described in the collected by many investigators over the past tens of literature, particularly in reports by Stephenson and years, and the authors are grateful for their careful data Rathbun (1923), Kimrey (1965), Swift and Heron (1969), collection and record keeping. Maher and Applin (1971), Brown and others (1972), Much of the data used in this study was furnished by Dennison and Wheeler (1975), Mixon and Pilkey (1976), the Groundwater Section, Division of Environmental and Ward and Blackwelder (1980). Management, of the North Carolina Department of Nat­ The first comprehensive survey of the ground-water ural Resources and Community Development (NRCD). resources of the North Carolina Coastal Plain was by The section has been engaged in a program of test Stephenson and Johnson (1912). Their description of drilling and monitor-well construction at ground-water topographic features, geology, water resources, and research station sites since about 1966. At each research prospects for wells in 42 counties is the principal source station site in the Coastal Plain, the NRCD drilled an of data on water levels before the effects of pumping exploratory hole to the basement rock or to a depth of became widespread in the Coastal Plain. Subsequent about 1,500 ft, whichever is less, and collected cuttings, ground-water investigations have been multicounty made borehole geophysical logs, and performed drill- reconnaissance studies, county appraisals, and other stem tests and aquifer tests of various zones. One or studies dealing with local situations. The areas covered more permanent observation wells were constructed at by these types of studies are shown in figure 2, and the each research station to monitor water-level changes and reports cited in the figure are included in the references water quality in the most important aquifers at the site. at the end of this report. Data from more than 90 of these NRCD ground-water LeGrand (1964) presented a broad review of the hydro- research stations were used during this study. Perry F. geology of the Gulf and Atlantic Coastal Plain and related Nelson, chief of the Groundwater Section, NRCD, and hydrologic concepts to the functioning of the ground- hydrologists William Jeter, Richard Shiver, Edward water flow throughout this large region. He outlined a Berry, William Bright, and L.A. Register deserve spe­ hydrogeologic classification of the Coastal Plain, based cial thanks for their advice and help in furnishing data. on concepts of ground-water recharge and discharge Many borehole geophysical logs of deep oil-test wells conditions that contains elements basic to this study. were furnished by the Geological Survey Section, Divi­ Brown and others (1972) divided the Coastal Plain sion of Land Resources, NRCD. These logs not only sediments from New York to North Carolina into 17 were invaluable in correlating geologic formations in the chronostratigraphic units. For each unit, they mapped deep zones near the coast, but also contributed to the lithofacies and distribution of intrinsic permeability delineation of salty ground water in the entire North based on interpretations of geophysical logs, drillers' Atlantic Coastal Plain region (Meisler, 1980). logs, and well cuttings. Considerable water-level data and other valuable well records came from the files of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). These data were furnished by numerous inves­ tigators who contributed to the 15 areal and county HYDROGEOLOGY ground-water studies mentioned in the next section of this report and listed in figure 2. Gerald L. Giese, Douglas A. Harned, Nancy Bonar PHYSIOGRAPHIC SETTING Sharpless, and Patricia Showalter, our USGS colleagues, The Coastal Plain of North Carolina is part of the made significant contributions to data collection, compi­ Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain physiographic province of lation, and analysis. the United States, which extends from Cape Cod in Massachusetts southward and westward into Texas PREVIOUS STUDIES (Fenneman, 1938, p. 8). The North Carolina Coastal Plain is roughly 90 to 150 miles (mi) wide from the An understanding of the stratigraphic and age rela­ Atlantic Ocean westward to its boundary with the Pied­ tions of the geologic units of the North Carolina Coastal mont province (fig. 1). This boundary, generally known 14 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

80 79 78 76 75 37

36

35

EXPLANATION AREAL INVESTIGATION BOUNDARY 34 AREAL INVESTIGATIONS Halifax area (Mundorff, 1946) Greenville area (Brown, 1959) Hertford-Elizabeth City area (Harris and Wilder, 1966) COUNTY INVESTIGATIONS Swanquarter area (Nelson, 1964) Martin County (Wyrick, 1966) Fayetteville area (Schipf, 1961) Chowan County (Lloyd, 1968a) Goldsboro area (Pusey, 1960) Craven County (Floyd, 1969) Wilmington area (LeGrand, 1960) New Hanover County (Bain, 1970) Southport-Elizabethtown area Pitt County (Sumsion, 1970) (Blankenship, 1965) Wilson County (Winner, 1976) Belhaven area (Uoyd and Floyd, 1968) 33

50 100 MILES

0 50 100 KILOMETERS FIGURE 2. County and areal ground-water investigations, North Carolina Coastal Plain. as the Fall Line, is recognized as zones of rapids in many of the larger streams flow on crystalline rocks for streams that indicate a change of stream gradient as the many miles after entering the Coastal Plain province. streams pass from crystalline basement rocks onto For this reason the Fall Line is represented in this report Coastal Plain sediments. Fenneman (1938, pi. Ill) as a sinuous boundary separating the continuous body of showed the Fall Line as a relatively smooth line separat­ Coastal Plain deposits and the residual Piedmont soils ing the Piedmont and Coastal Plain provinces. In North derived from the weathering of the crystalline rock. This Carolina, however, this definition does not hold up as Fall Line is the western boundary of the Coastal Plain as well as it does in other States, because in North Carolina shown on all maps in this report. HYDROGEOLOGY 15

80 79 78 77 76 75 37

VIRG1NJA______.

36

_ MARTIN V ', TON I

TIDEWATER i LENOIR .-<' GRAVEN ,> ! >x ; I REGION 35

^V ROBESON / BLADEN \ /

34

EXPLANATION SUBDIVISION BOUNDARY OF COASTAL PLAIN- Adapted from Stuckey, 1965, and Heath, 1980 NW S£ LINE OF SECTION-Section shown in figure 4

33°

50 100 MILES I I 50 100 KILOMETERS

FIGURE 3. Physiographic subdivisions of the North Carolina Coastal Plain.

The North Carolina Coastal Plain consists of two about 20 ft. Altitudes exceed 50 ft only on dunes at Kill natural subdivisions, as described by Stuckey (1965, p. Devil Hills on the Outer Banks in Dare County and along 9): the Tidewater region, sometimes called the Outer a 25-mi-long ridge extending from southern Onslow Coastal Plain, and the Inner Coastal Plain (fig. 3). The County into northern New Hanover County. The Tide­ Tidewater region consists of the coastal area, where water region is generally of low relief and is swampy. large streams and many of their tributaries are affected The Inner Coastal Plain lies between the Tidewater by oceanic tides. Land-surface altitudes range from sea region and the Fall Line. It has a gently rolling land level to 50 ft throughout most of the area and average surface in contrast to the low relief of the Tidewater 16 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN region. Land-surface altitudes range from about 50 ft at common. Rainfall readily infiltrates the surficial sands the Tidewater boundary to more than 700 ft at the Fall and percolates downward to the deep water table. Line in southeastern Montgomery County. Altitudes Ground water is the major source of streamflow in the along the Fall Line are lowest in the north about 100 to local streams. Accordingly, flow in these streams is the 150 ft in Northampton County near the Virginia border, most consistent of any area of the State. The streams about 150 to 200 ft in Wilson and Edgecombe Counties, seldom flood or go dry, because of the large infiltration about 200 to 300 ft in Harnett and Cumberland Counties, capacity of the sandy soil and the great ground-water more than 700 ft in Montgomery County, and about 400 storage capability of the thick sand aquifer. to 500 ft near the South Carolina border. Three subdivisions of the Inner Coastal Plain were recognized by Stuckey (1965). One is the area north of GEOLOGIC SETTING Craven, Lenoir, and Wayne Counties. Here the land The Coastal Plain sediments are characterized by (1) surface is generally flat to gently rolling, except near mostly clastic rocks ranging from clay to gravel, with major streams and the western border, where it is lesser amounts of marine limestone, all resting on a dissected in many places. foundation of crystalline basement rocks, (2) a generally The second subdivision is the eastern part of the Inner eastward dip, (3) a general thickening of beds toward the Coastal Plain south of the northern area. Here the broad, east, and (4) an increase in the number of individual beds flat uplands between major streams commonly are swampy and are very similar to those in the Tidewater in the seaward (eastward) direction. Figure 4 shows the area. Several large lakes are found in Columbus and ages of Coastal Plain sediments and the general eastward Bladen Counties and throughout much of Cape Fear thickening of these units. The rock stratigraphic units River valley; especially in Bladen County, circular to equivalent to the chronostratigraphic units in figure 4 are elliptical depressions called Carolina bays are a promi­ listed in table 1. nent part of the landscape. Some of these bays are filled Table 1 also shows the general age relationship of the with lakes, and all except those drained for agricultural Coastal Plain sediments. Geologic names are applied to purposes are swampy. The land near the major rivers, the hydrogeologic units in this report, and table 1 serves such as the Cape Fear, is quite dissected. These streams as a stratigraphic reference. Because many authors have may be incised 50 ft or more into the flat, swampy begun using stage names from Europe and the Gulf uplands. The uplands near the dissected valleys are Coast of the United States to define stratigraphic units swampy, and this attests to the lack of extensive drain­ and to relate them to time-equivalent rocks in those age of the swamps through the shallow aquifers. places, these stages are included in table 1 for convenient The third subdivision is the western part of the reference. southern Inner Coastal Plain, known as the Sand Hills The major regional structure of the Coastal Plain that (Fenneman, 1938, p. 39). Figure 3 shows the Sand Hills influences the geology and the hydrology is a homocline area relative to the rest of the Coastal Plain. It covers that dips seaward. During initial stages of continental about 2,500 mi2 in all or parts of Lee, Harnett, Cumber­ separation, Coastal Plain sediments were laid down land, Hoke, Moore, Montgomery, and Richmond Coun­ mostly under nonmarine and marginal-marine condi­ ties in North Carolina and extends into South Carolina. tions. Subsequently, the sediments became more marine The eastern limit of the Sand Hills is imprecisely in character. According to Rona (1973), as the Atlantic defined. The area is generally coincident with the upper Ocean widened, major alternating marine transgressive Coastal Plain physiographic region of Daniels and others and regressive phases of sedimentation on each side of (1972), which includes the area between the Piedmont the ocean were controlled largely by oceanwide eustatic and the toe of the Coats Scarp in North Carolina and the sea-level changes caused by variable rates of sea-floor Orangeburg Scarp in South Carolina at an altitude of spreading and variable volume of the mid-oceanic ridge. about 275 ft. Warping or faulting along continental margins also con­ As the name implies, the dominant feature of the Sand tributed to local sea-level fluctuations which, in turn, Hills is a deep layer of unconsolidated to poorly consoli­ controlled the transgressive or regressive depositional dated surficial sand that underlies the upland areas. The character of the sedimentation. Cyclic glaciation and area is characterized by rolling hills having rather flat deglaciation, particularly in Pleistocene time, was also an crests and altitudes generally ranging from 450 to 550 ft. important process with regard to the rise and fall of sea The larger streams of the area originate in the Piedmont level and to consequent regressive or transgressive and flow eastward or southeastward across the Coastal Coastal Plain sedimentation (Vail and others, 1977). Plain, where their valleys have steep sides and well- The depression of the Earth's crust under the Coastal developed flood plains. Local relief up to 200 ft is Plain, beginning about 150 million years ago, apparently HYDROGEOLOGY 17

NW SE

POST-MIOCENE CAPE HATTERAS

10 20 30 40 50 MILES

0 10 20 30 40 50 KILOMETERS

VERTICAL EXAGGERATION x 23

FIGURE 4. Generalized cross section from Wilson, N.C., to Cape Hatteras, N.C. has not been a simple process (Watts, 1981). Transverse North Carolina, and Behrendt and others (1981) in South structural features such as arches and troughs are super­ Carolina. The maximum known vertical displacement of imposed on the general homoclinal dip of the sediments. the contact between the basement and Cretaceous sedi­ The axes of these structures, the most widely known of ments is nearly 200 ft (Mixon and Newell, 1977) along a which is the Cape Fear arch, trend in an easterly or fault in northern Virginia. In North Carolina, vertical southeasterly direction. Other less well known struc­ displacement within Coastal Plain sediments is as much tures are the Norfolk arch in the southern Virginia as 30 ft, shown in a cross section by Harris and others Coastal Plain, the Albemarle embayment on the north­ (1979, fig. 3). The effects of geologic structure on the ern side of Albemarle Sound, and an unnamed positive movement of ground water within Coastal Plain aquifers structure roughly parallel to the lower Neuse River. are discussed in the next section. These structures are shown in figure 5. Similar struc­ tures are present elsewhere in the Atlantic Coastal Plain HYDROLOGIC SETTING and Continental Shelf areas (Maher and Applin, 1971). The arches and troughs are blocklike structures bounded The Coastal Plain ground-water flow system consists by zones of weakness (probably faults) in the crystalline of aquifers made up of permeable sand, gravel, and basement rocks; the blocks moved up or down relative to limestone layers separated by confining units composed each other in response to basement-rock tectonics or to a of less permeable sediments. These permeable layers combination of nommiform loading resulting from sedi­ and confining units constitute the sediments described in mentation and erosion. the previous section. Along with the movement of these structures, move­ As described by Heath (1980, p. 14), 'Water enters ment along possibly associated smaller faults is reflected ground-water systems in recharge areas and moves in the sediments accumulated since Late Jurassic time. through them, as dictated by hydraulic gradients and LeGrand (1955) postulated faulting in the area of the hydraulic conductivities, to discharge areas....In a humid Cape Fear arch. Wrench-fault zones were proposed by area, such as North Carolina, recharge occurs in all Brown and others (1972) to explain intricate patterns of interstream areas that is, in all areas except along thinning and thickening in chronostratigraphic units of streams and their adjoining flood plains. The streams and the Coastal Plain. More recent investigations have flood plains are, under most conditions, discharge areas." shown evidence of faulting in Coastal Plain sedi­ Because clay beds, which restrict vertical movement ments Mixon and Newell (1977) in Virginia, Prowell of ground water, are scattered throughout the aquifer and O'Connor (1978) in Georgia, Zoback and others system, recharge to shallow-lying unconfined aquifers is (1978) in South Carolina, Harris and others (1979) in considerably greater than recharge that moves down- 18 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

TABLE 1. Generalized stratigraphic units of the North Carolina Coastal Plain

GLOBAL STAGES GULF COAST STAGES SERIES USED IN NORTH USED IN NORTH STRATIGRAPHIC UNITS CAROLINA1 CAROLINA1

Holocene Informal names, alluvium, dunes, etc. Quaternary ifferentlated deposits -Mioceneost Informal names used as: terrace deposits. Pleis­ tocene deposits, or Pleistocene and Pliocene depos­ Pleistocene its. Some formal names: Planner Beach Formation2, James City Formation3, and Waccamaw Formation4 .

Pliocene a Yorfctown Formation5

Upper Miocene Eastover Formation5

Middle Miocene Pungo River Formation*

Lower Miocene Belgrade Formation7

Oligocene limestone (informal) Oligocene River Bend Formation7

Upper Eocene Jaclcsonian Not recognized in North Carolina

Middle Eocene Claibornian Castle Hayne Limestone8

Lower Eocene Sabinian Unnamed unit recognized in subsurface9

Pal eocene Midwayan Beaufort Formation8

Maestrichtian Navarroan Peedee Formation8

Campanian Tayloran Black Creek Formation8 Upper Santonian Middendorf Formation10' u Cretaceous Austinian Coniacian Cape Fear Formation12' 13

Turonian Eaglefordian Unnamed units 9 Cenomanian Woodbinian

Lower Washitan Albian and Unnamed units 9 Cretaceous Frederi cfc sbur gi an

Jurassic (?) Unnamed unit tentatively identified in subsurface9

1Jordan and Smith, 1983. "Brown, 1959. 'Mixon and Pilfcey, 1976. 9Brown and others, 1972. 3Blacfcwelder, 1981. °0wens, 1983. *Swain, 1968. ''Christopher and others, 1979. *Ward and Blackwelder, 1980. 2Sohl, 1976. 'Kimrey, 1964. 3Renken, 1984. 7Ward and others, 1978. ward to confined aquifers. For example, Heath (1980) Most of this water provides base flow for streams, is estimated that under natural steady-state conditions, transpired by plants, and is evaporated through the soil. rainfall recharge to North Carolina Coastal Plain soils Less than 2 inches reaches confined aquifers; the amount (and hence to the unconfined parts of the aquifers) varies that reaches the deepest aquifers of the system has been between 5 and 21 inches per year, depending on soil type. estimated to be less than 0.5 inch (Heath, 1980). HYDROGEOLOGY 19

80 79 .78 77 76 75 37

NORTH- I> / GATES 'C«^ O,V%>Nc S AMPTON .HEKJI^ ' ^%fe^

36

35°

34

EXPLANATION ARCH Shows trace of crestal plane

EMBAYMENT Shows trace of trough plane

NORFOLK ARCH ALBEMARLE EMBAYMENT 33° UNNAMED POSITIVE STRUCTURE CAPE FEAR ARCH

50 100 MILES I _J 0 50 100 KILOMETERS

FIGURE 5. Structural features of the Coastal Plain of North Carolina and southern Virginia. (Adapted from Gibson, 1967.)

A few studies support these estimates of natural Quaternary, Yorktown, and Castle Hayne aquifers recharge. Through analysis of water-level maps, Wyrick combined annual ground-water discharge is about 0.5 (1966) calculated that confined aquifers underlying Mar­ inch. Thus, assuming that ground-water recharge is tin County at depths of 100 to 300 ft receive recharge equal to discharge, the combined recharge to these at a rate of 22,000,000 gallons per day (gal/d). This aquifers is also about 0.5 inch per year. In 1976, Winner is equivalent to 0.96 inch of rainfall over the 482-mi2 calculated that the confined Cretaceous aquifers of county. Heath (1975) determined that for the uppermost Wilson County received about 67,000 gallons per day hydrologic units in the Albemarle-Pamlico region the per square mile ((gal/d)/mi2), or about 1.4 inches of 110 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN annual recharge. A water-budget analysis of a small as much as 3,000 ft (Meisler, 1980, p. 6), depending on watershed in Pitt, Beaufort, and Craven Counties the hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer materials and showed the average annual ground-water outflow the availability of freshwater. through the confined Castle Hayne Limestone to be The occurrence and origin of saltwater in clastic about 0.80 inch (Winner and Simmons, 1977). Coastal Plain aquifers from Long Island, N.Y., through Ground water discharges from the Coastal Plain aqui­ North Carolina have been described by Meisler (1980). fer system as seepage into streams, lakes, and drainage He attributed ground water fresher than seawater in ditches; by evapotranspiration from soil zones; by deep aquifers offshore to sea-level declines of a few upward leakage through confining beds to stream val­ hundred feet that have occurred several times during leys; and by upward leakage to the bottoms of estuaries. past glacial advances and retreats. Although the flushing The amount of discharge from the system equals the of seawater from deep aquifers is a slow process, Upson recharge to it, and the amount discharged from shallow (1966) concluded that, for the northern Atlantic Coastal and deep aquifers is in proportion to their recharge, as Plain, current positions of the freshwater-saltwater described above. The bulk of ground-water discharge, boundaries suggest that the hydrodynamic adjustments other than that lost to evapotranspiration, provides the of these boundaries have been rapid enough to keep pace base flow of perennial streams. Discharge from deeper with sea-level changes since the Late Cretaceous. How­ confined aquifers is primarily by leakage across confining ever, Meisler and others (1984, p. 14, 15) used a mathe­ beds; it is controlled by the difference in heads across matical model to simulate the position of the freshwater- these confining beds (or groups of confining beds called saltwater boundary during Tertiary and Quaternary confining units) and by the hydraulic properties of the time, and they concluded that, because of frequent confining beds. sea-level fluctuations, it is unlikely the boundary has Although the bulk of ground-water discharge to been in equilibrium during the past 900,000 years. They streams is from unconfined aquifers, the areas along also stated that simulation results suggest that the streams also are discharge areas for confined aquifers. position of the boundary off the New Jersey coast is not According to LeGrand and Pettyjohn (1981), for homo- in equilibrium with present sea-level conditions but clinal aquifer systems such as the North Carolina Coastal reflects lower sea levels. Plain aquifers, places where streams cross confining-bed Inasmuch as the sea has alternately inundated the outcrops are the last downdip chance for ground water to present onshore areas of North Carolina and receded discharge easily from confined aquifers. Such places are offshore, a complex pattern has developed in the position depicted on potentiometric-surface maps as natural of the freshwater-saltwater transition zone in the several cones of depression, or as V-shaped contours with the aquifers. Each aquifer has its own seaward limit of apex pointed downstream (see Siple, 1960, fig. 1). The freshwater as dictated by (1) its rates and location of term "artesian water-gap" was used by LeGrand and recharge, (2) its hydraulic properties, (3) its hydraulic Pettyjohn (1981) to describe this type of feature, which gradients, and (4) the thickness and properties of the occurs in most aquifers along the major streams flowing overlying confining units, which affect the amount of over the Coastal Plain of North Carolina. freshwater circulation in the aquifer. All sediments deposited under marine conditions ini­ The most prominent geologic structure that influences tially contained seawater having a chloride concentration regional ground-water movement is the seaward-dipping of about 19,000 milligrams per liter (mg/L) (Hem, 1985, Coastal Plain homocline. The hydrologic effects of the p. 7). As sea level declined and land surface was exposed, other structural elements in the Coastal Plain are neither rainfall on that land surface recharged the ground-water well known nor extensively documented. For the North system with freshwater. This initiated a flushing and Carolina Coastal Plain, one can only speculate on how dilution action that began to remove seawater from the faults may affect the ground-water system. Movement aquifer system. The rate of flushing is directly related to along a fault could partially (and locally) disrupt confining the amount of freshwater flowing in the aquifers. For an units and allow greater interaquifer leakage. unconfined aquifer in a barrier-beach setting, rainfall Superimposed on the natural recharge- and discharge- over a year or two may be sufficient to recreate a flow regime of the Coastal Plain aquifers are the effects freshwater lens following an ocean overwash (Winner, of pumping from some of the aquifers. Because virtually 1978); in contrast, for a deep confined aquifer, significant all withdrawals are from the confined parts of the flushing of seawater requires thousands of years or system, the effects of pumping extend over thousands of more. The freshwater-saltwater boundary between square miles. Three large cones of depression have ground water containing chloride concentrations of less developed in the North Carolina Coastal Plain that affect than 250 mg/L up to about 19,000 mg/L is gradational. In more than 20 percent of its area (fig. 6) and are important the vertical dimension, this transitional distance can be to the future management of ground-water supplies in HYDROGEOLOGY 111

80 79 78 77 76 75 37

o Frank Sin VIRGINIA

36

35 _ / I CUMBER- « RICH- .X HOKE \ !

EXPLANATION 34 AREAS AFFECTED BY WATER-LEVEL DECLINES DUE TO GROUND-WATER PUMPAGE FROM: Lower Cape Fear and Lower Cretaceous aquifers in southern Virginia (adapted from Peek, 1977, figure 9) Castle Hayne aquifer in Beaufort County. North Carolina (adapted from Peek and Nelson, 1975, figure 7) Black Creek and upper Cape Fear aquifers in the central Coastal Plain of North Carolina (adapted from Narkunas, 1980, figure 37) 33°

100 MILES _J 0 50 100 KILOMETERS FIGURE 6. Major cones of depression in the North Carolina Coastal Plain. the areas affected. One cone of depression is centered Since 1965, pumpage from the Castle Hayne Lime­ around Franklin, Va., about 10 mi north of the State line, stone, ranging from about 50 to 65 Mgal/d in Beaufort where about 38 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) was County, has caused an extensive cone of depression (fig. pumped from Cretaceous aquifers in 1986 (Hamilton and 6, no. 2). It covers more than 1,000 mi2, with a water- Larson, 1988). The effects of this continued pumping level decline at the center of more than 125 ft (Peek and have spread over about 2,500 mi2 of the northern North Nelson, 1975). Carolina Coastal Plain and over an even larger area in The third area of water-level decline (fig. 6) is in the southeastern Virginia. central Coastal Plain. Seven major water-supply sys- 112 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN terns and about 15 smaller ones pump from Cretaceous The northern Atlantic Coastal Plain regional study aquifers. Combined withdrawal during the period identifies 21 hydrogeologic units in the Coastal Plain 1980-82 was about 22 Mgal/d, affecting an area of more from New York to North Carolina: 12 aquifers and 9 than 1,800 mi2. It is clear, then, not only that geologic interlying confining units (Henry Trapp, Jr., U.S. Geo­ units extend over large areas of the Coastal Plain, but logical Survey, written commun., 1986). Ten of these that hydraulic continuity is equally extensive, as seen in aquifers and the nine confining units are found at one the development of these cones of depression. place or another in the North Carolina Coastal Plain. The North Carolina hydrogeologic units are listed in table 2 along with equivalent units in Virginia and South Caro­ DELINEATION OF HYDROGEOLOGIC UNITS lina. Neither the Virginia nor the South Carolina units are all present at the respective borders with North Criteria generally used to map geologic formations are Carolina; nor are they necessarily contiguous with equiv­ the lithologic properties and paleontologic characteristics alent North Carolina hydrogeologic units. of the rocks. Aquifer definition depends on the mapping The names of the North Carolina aquifers generally of hydraulically connected permeable units. Although are taken from the predominant geologic unit with which aquifer boundaries locally may coincide with, or may the aquifer is associated. Two exceptions are as follows: parallel, boundaries of stratigraphic units, they rarely (1) the surficial aquifer, which is the uppermost hydro- correspond everywhere to stratigraphic unit boundaries. geologic unit, and (2) the Lower Cretaceous hydrogeo­ This is especially true in deltaic to shallow marine logic units. The names of the confining units are taken deposits such as the Coastal Plain sediments, where from the aquifers they overlie. Table 3 shows the North facies changes are rapid. Carolina Coastal Plain geologic units and their associated For the purpose of developing a hydrogeologic frame­ hydrogeologic units. work to define the movement of ground water through­ The approach taken in this investigation to define the out the Coastal Plain in North Carolina, we have adopted framework in terms of both geologic and hydrologic a concept of hydrogeologic units similar to the term continuity has been outlined above. The remainder of "hydrostratigraphic unit" proposed by Maxey (1964, p. this section describes the methodology used to define the 126) to describe "bodies of rock with considerable lateral system of aquifers and confining units. This involves extent that compose a geologic framework for a reason­ interpretation of three sets of data: (1) borehole geophys­ ably distinct hydrologic system." In this report, the ical logs, (2) water-level measurements in wells, and (3) North Carolina Coastal Plain sediments are organized chemical analyses of water samples from wells. into a system that meets both geologic and hydrologic The primary method used to compile and compare criteria. these data and to correlate the aquifers and confining With the exception of the extensive Castle Hayne units throughout the Coastal Plain in North Carolina was Limestone, the Coastal Plain aquifer system is made up to construct hydrogeologic sections using wells for which primarily of a number of imperfectly connected sand the best combinations of the three types of data were bodies, any one of which may have only local extent and, available. Because Coastal Plain geology was the domi­ for short periods of time, may act under stress as a nant factor in defining the hydrologic framework, the distinct hydraulic unit. On a regional scale, however, selection of section lines was based on the availability of these sand bodies can be grouped into major aquifers on geophysical logs that reached basement rock or that the basis of three hydrologic factors: (1) significant penetrated a substantial portion of the sediment section. differences in hydraulic head across the confining units These hydrogeologic sections and a location map are that separate the aquifers, (2) evidence of widespread shown on plates 1-14. More than 450 geophysical logs lateral transmission of drawdown effects, thus indicating were examined for their potential use in constructing the the lateral hydraulic connection of permeable beds, and sections. The geophysical logs generated from the (3) water-quality similarities within an aquifer and dif­ NRCD ground-water research-station program were ferences across confining units. selected as the principal logs for each section because The confining units separating the major aquifers most of these test holes were drilled to basement and, consist of beds, or groups of beds, of clay and silt that equally important, because they also provided critical contain varying amounts of sand, either as separate thin water-level and water-quality data throughout the geo­ beds or mixed throughout the unit. Some confining units logic column. A diagram of a typical NRCD research can be correlated over long distances; although any given station is shown in figure 7. confining unit may not be stratigraphically equivalent Geophysical logs from other wells located along or near everywhere, the important consideration is the demon­ each line of section were used to supplement the cover­ strated confinement of the major aquifers. age between research stations. The average distance DELINEATION OF HYDROGEOLOGIC UNITS 113

TABLE 2. Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina Coastal Plain hydrogeologic units

VIRGINIA HYDROGEOLOGIC NORTH CAROLINA HYDROGEOLOGIC SOUTH CAROLINA HYDROGEOLOGIC UNITS1 UNITS UNITS2 Columbia aquifer Surficial aquifer Surficial aquifer Yorktown confining bed Yorktown confining unit

Yorktown-Eastover aquifer Yorktown aquifer St. Marys confining bed Pungo River confining unit North Carolina St. Marys-Choptank aquifer Pungo River aquifer

Calvert confining bed Castle Hayne confining unit

Chickahominy-Piney Point aquifer Castle Hayne aquifer units

Nanjemoy-Marlboro Clay Beaufort confining bed confining unit Aquia aquifer not present

Bright seat confining bed3 Beaufort aquifer Bright seat aquifer3 in South Carolina Peedee confining unit

North Carolina Peedee aquifer

units Black Creek confining unit not present Black Creek aquifer

in Virginia Black Creek aquifer Unnamed confining unit Midden do rf aquifer

Upper Potomac confining bed Upper Cape Fear confining unit Unnamed confining unit

Upper Potomac aquifer Upper Cape Fear aquifer Cape Middle Potomac confining bed Lower Cape Fear confining unit

Middle Potomac aquifer Lower Cape Fear aquifer Fear

Lower Cretaceous confining Lower Potomac confining bed unit4 aquifer

Lower Potomac aquifer Lower Cretaceous aquifer4

*Meng and Harsh (1984). Southeastern Coastal Plain aquifer system (W.R. Aucott, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 1987). 3Restricted to northern Virginia; not present along North Carolina-Virginia boundary. 4Restrioted to northern North Carolina; not present along North Carolina-South Carolina boundary.

between geophysical logs along sections is about 9 mi; the GEOPHYSICAL LOGS maximum is 24 mi. Dip sections were connected with strike sections (pi. 1) so as to correlate beds from south The delineation of the hydrogeologic units, as shown in to north. the hydrogeologic sections, was accomplished by means 114 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

TABLE 3. North Carolina Coastal Plain geologic and hydrogeologic FEET units 100 r

GEOLOGIC UNITS AQUIFERS AND CONFINING UNITS SEA M ^ - EVEL Total depth 30 feet Water level 9.54 -100 _ ( I feet (9/2/81) Quaternary deposits Surficial aquifer

Yorktown confining unit Ox2-inch casing -200 _ \ r-2-inch screen Yorktown Formation f Total depth 269 feet Yorktown aquifer I Water level 14.95 feet -300 o' (9/2/81) Eastover Formation Pungo River confining unit -400 o"> - Pungo River Formation c ° 4-inch- Pungo River aquifer casing -500 ipontaneouspol r~wv*/V4/wResistivityloc ~ Belgrade Formation Castle Hayne confining unit p River Bend Formation Total depth 570 feet Castle Hayne aquifer -600 Wate r level 20.46 feet (9/2/81) - Castle Hayne Limestone O -700 - ( - Beaufort confining unit 1 Beaufort Formation -Lead packer Beaufort aquifer -800 "? 2.5-inch casing i 2.5-inch screen Peedee confining unit Peedee Formation -900 \ Total depth 905 feet iepth\ Water level -85.70 feet (9/2/81 ) Peedee aquifer Tota Ic 946 feet Adapted from Peek (1977, figure 3) 1 nnn Black Creek Formation Black Creek confining unit FIGURE 7. Logs of exploratory hole and construction features of Middendorf Formation Black Creek aquifer observation wells at a typical NRCD research station. Upper Cape Fear confining unit

Upper Cape Fear aquifer Cape Fear Formation istics can be traced long distances. These are marker Lower Cape Fear confining unit beds used as guides in correlation. Lower Cape Fear aquifer Not all log-to-log correlations are as apparent as those shown in figure 8. Difficulties of interpretation may arise Lower Cretaceous confining unit Unnamed units when determining the continuity of a unit between two Lower Cretaceous aquifer wells where only an electric log is available from one well and only a gamma-ray log is available from the other, or between wells having electric logs with widely varying curve scales. of well-to-well correlation of lithologic units through use of geophysical logs, mainly standard single-point electric GROUND-WATER LEVELS logs (spontaneous-potential and resistance curves) and natural gamma-ray logs. In a number of instances, As geophysical log correlations were developed, interpretation of these logs was aided by use of multi- water-level data were added to the well traces on the electrode resistivity logs, where available, and by drill­ hydrogeologic sections to determine the head distribu­ ers' logs and descriptions of well cuttings. tion throughout the geologic column at a given well site. The method of correlation was to compare geophysical These data were taken primarily from NRCD observa­ logs from adjacent wells on section lines to determine the tion wells at research stations, such as those illustrated continuity of sediments between them. Inasmuch as in figure 7, although a significant number of measure­ abrupt changes in lithofacies of units can occur over ments were obtained from drill-stem tests in the initial distances of less than a mile, emphasis in correlation was test holes. Water-level data from wells other than NRCD placed on continuity of groups of similar beds rather than research-station wells were also used. on continuity of an individual bed. For example, figure 8 The distribution of head in the test hole and observa­ shows the continuity of groups of sand and clay beds over tion wells at a research station was compared with the a distance of more than 20 mi. Most individual beds geophysical log of the test hole, and confining units were within a group cannot be traced from log to log with selected on the basis of this head distribution (fig. 9). reliability, although some with distinctive log character- Log-to-log correlations of beds, together with analysis of DELINEATION OF HYDROGEOLOGIC UNITS 115

Well 123 WELL 18, NRCD CALABASH RESEARCH STATION, Well 122 BRUNSWICK COUNTY

WATER LEVEL, IN 1100 FEET ABOVE Electric-log traces SEA LEVEL

+39 SEA LEVEL

Confining unit

-100

Aquifer - -200

+24 -300

-400

-500 LU m cc Complete logs shown in hydrogeologic O section P - P. plate 14 LU Vertical scale: 3/5 inch = 100 feet +33 -600 m

FIGURE 8. Resistance logs showing correlations of beds and groups of beds. -700 ~. _i heads in adjacent test holes and other wells along the LU U- sections, led to the definition of aquifers and confining +66 O units shown on plates 2-14. -800 E In the case of the NRCD Calabash Research Station shown in figure 9, head differences between aquifers are quite obvious; from top to bottom these differences are -900 15, 9, 33, and 41 ft. The data also show a relative uniformity of water levels within two thick aquifers, even though there are numerous clay beds within each +107 -1,000 aquifer. From these water-level data, some clay layers are known to be more effective than others as confining units over large areas. A particular regional confining unit +109 -1,100 may not be the same stratigraphic unit everywhere because of lithofacies changes and erosional unconformi­ ties. Also, the degree of confinement afforded by a given +104 -1,200 clay bed is not necessarily the same everywhere. Some test data show relatively small head differences between aquifer zones that might indicate poor confinement. SPONTANEOUS RESISTANCE -I -1,300 Thus, in interpreting confining-unit and aquifer continu­ POTENTIAL LOG LOG ity, the primary factors considered were the persistence FIGURE 9. Test zones and distribution of head throughout of similar head values throughout aquifer zones and head the section in an NRCD test hole. differences across confining units. With these factors established, the log-to-log correlations were used to make the hydrogeologic correlations. 116 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

Ground-water heads shown on the hydrogeologic sec­ WELL 27, NRCD CLARENDON RESEARCH STATION, tions (pis. 2-14) present a picture of the regional flow COLUMBUS COUNTY GEOPHYSICAL pattern in the North Carolina Coastal Plain aquifers. LOG TRACES Water moves from areas of high head, usually where 100 i- recharge occurs, toward areas of lower head, which may represent points of natural discharge, such as along streams or to wells in response to pumping. Clay beds in the aquifer system impede but do not stop the circulation Confining unit

of ground water into and from deeper aquifers. SEA LEVEL Aquifer CHLORIDE DISTRIBUTION Chloride _ In conjunction with the analysis of water-level data, 1 concentration, in milli­ water-quality data were also used to help delineate the -100 grams per liter, from hydrogeologic units. The chloride ion was selected as the water in test zone constituent for this purpose because it is conservative and is common in Coastal Plain aquifers, and because ^Test zone water samples frequently are analyzed for chloride. Chloride distribution in seaward-dipping Coastal Plain -200 aquifers is gradational in nature; chloride concentrations generally increase with depth and in the downdip (sea­ ward) direction. Available chloride concentration data are given on the hydrogeologic sections (pis. 2-14). O Chloride data from the NRCD research station at UJ m -300 Clarendon are used in figure 10 to illustrate the vertical tr O 88 distribution of chloride concentration in Coastal Plain UJ aquifers and to show the use of these data in delineating O aquifers and confining units and in understanding the ground-water flow system. The chloride concentration in the water in the Clarendon well (fig. 10) increases from ? -400 top to bottom of the aquifer system. At this site, the average chloride gradient is just over 4 milligrams per liter per foot of depth ((mg/L)/ft). However, this gradient is not evenly distributed throughout the section. Instead, below a depth of about 400 ft, chloride gradients are as -500 much as 23 (mg/L)/ft. Conversely, low gradients, 2 to 4 (mg/L)/ft, occur within adjacent aquifers. Chloride in ground water at Clarendon is unevenly distributed and is directly related to relatively rapid lateral ground-water flow through aquifers and rela­ -600 tively slow vertical flow across confining units. Lateral movement of freshwater in the upper 400 ft of sediments at Clarendon has been effective in flushing saltwater from this part of the system as evidenced by low chloride concentrations. The rate of flushing is lower in the deeper aquifers because the fresher water from the -700 - recharge area above has not been able to move readily across the confining units. These data show that the confining units are continuous over wide areas and play a significant role in the regional flow system. SPONTANEOUS RESISTANCE The uneven distribution of chloride within the Coastal -800 L POTENTIAL LOG LOG Plain aquifer system is interpreted as evidence not only FIGURE 10. Chloride distribution at the NRCD Clarendon of restricted flow across confining units, but also of Research Station. continuity of flow within aquifers. Data show that salt- HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK 117

TABLE 4. Summary of aquifer and confining-unit hydrogeologic data [min., minimum; max., maximum; avg., average]

Average estimated Approximate areal North Carolina Coastal Altitude of top Thickness 1 Average percent hydraulic extent of Plain aquifers and (in feet) (in feet) of permeable conductivity aquifer confining units min. max. max, min. avg. material____(feet per day)_____(square miles) Surficial aquifer +2 4-605 180 3 35 79 29 25,000 Yorktown confining unit -173 4-107 73 2 22 15 Yorktown aquifer -580 4-100 343 4 76 71 22 11,800 Pungo River confining unit -615 -5 160 4 55 14 -- Pungo River aquifer -759 -8 225 4 53 80 32 8,000 Castle Hayne confining unit -810 4-85 43 4 14 14 -- Castle Hayne aquifer -820 4-74 952 7 178 81 65 11,500 Beaufort confining unit -1,127 4-19 80 5 24 19 Beaufort aquifer -1,207 0 171 4 70 73 35 10,700 Peedee confining unit -1,324 4-100 60 3 24 17 -- -- Peedee aquifer -1,355 4-86 351 6 146 68 34 13,900 Black Creek confining unit -1,511 4-597 168 4 45 16 -- Black Creek aquifer -1,612 +593 409 22 165 59 28 21,200 Upper Cape Fear confining unit -1,709 +455 180 6 48 18 Upper Cape Fear aquifer -1,852 +295 481 12 113 62 30 22,200 Lower Cape Fear confining unit -1,763 -18 147 12 52 17 Lower Cape Fear aquifer -1,910 -64 475 20 173 58 34 17,000 Lower Cretaceous confining unit -2,203 -347 69 7 44 10 Lower Cretaceous aquifer -2,267 -354 2,249 15 773 53 25 7,300

1Maximum and minimum observed thickness where unit is present. water occupies different positions in different aquifers control wells used for the study are given in the "Sup­ and that chloride gradients vary throughout the sedi­ plemental Data" at the end of the report. These data mentary section. were used to construct the maps showing the altitudes of the tops of the aquifers, the percentages of sand in the aquifers, and the thicknesses of the confining units cited HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK in this section (pis. 15-24). The occurrence of saltwater in each aquifer is included This section contains a description of each aquifer unit, in the discussion because it affects the development of its areal extent, the distribution of permeable material these aquifers. Two chloride concentrations in water within the unit, the occurrence of saltwater, the proper­ were mapped-250 and 10,000 mg/L. The 250 mg/L ties of the overlying confining unit, and the relation chloride concentration value was chosen because it is the among aquifers. Discussions center on the movement of recommended upper limit in drinking-water standards ground water between aquifers, the locations where (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1978). Water aquifers and confining units overlie or underlie each containing 250 mg/L chloride, or more, is considered other, and aspects of ground-water movement related to saltwater in this report. The 10,000 mg/L chloride con­ natural conditions or to pumping conditions. Although centration value was used by Meisler and others (1984, p. not specifically stated in each instance, the discussion of 14) in their simulation models to represent the no flow an aquifer is also meant to include its overlying confining boundary, because they assumed that ground water unit. A number of figures are presented to show the areal having such high chloride concentration moves very extent of contact between aquifers. Any exchange of little. Discussions of the hydrogeologic units follow. water between adjacent aquifers is inferred to pass through intervening confining units, unless otherwise noted. SURFICIAL AQUIFER Summary data for each aquifer and confining unit are listed in table 4. Included are minimum and maximum The surficial aquifer defined in this report consists observed altitude of unit top, maximum and minimum primarily of post-Yorktown deposits of Quaternary age observed thickness of unit, estimated average percent of near land surface. This unit is very important to the permeable material making up the unit, average esti­ hydrology of the area because it extends over a large mated hydraulic conductivity (for aquifers), and areal part of the Coastal Plain and because infiltration from extent of the aquifer. Hydrologic data for each of the 161 rainfall is the bulk of the recharge to the Coastal Plain 118 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN aquifer system. The aquifer transmits water laterally to Moore County. This material, called the Pinehurst For­ streams and serves as a source bed holding the water mation by Conley (1962), was mapped by Daniels and that moves downgradient to deeper aquifers. others (1972) eastward into Harnett County, where it The surficial aquifer is not restricted to a single overlies fine sand, sandy clay, and clay of marine origin geologic unit in terms of either age or lithology. Because called the Macks Formation. The Macks was extended the origin and age of the surficial aquifer are not the eastward into Johnston County by Daniels and others same everywhere, it is necessary to describe in broad (1972), but the full extent of this unit is not known. These terms the various rock units of the aquifer as they occur surficial materials of the Inner Coastal Plain and Sand in several parts of the Coastal Plain and to discuss some Hills overlie Cretaceous sediments. They are undifferen­ of the names applied to them. Surficial aquifer sediments tiated and in this report are included in the surficial in the Tidewater region (where land surface altitude is aquifer. less than 40 to 50 ft) were deposited under shallow marine or estuarine conditions. These consist of fine RECHARGE RATES sand, silt, clay, shell, and peat beds, plus scattered deposits of coarser grained material in the form of relict Recharge to the surficial aquifer depends on how beach ridges and flood-plain alluvium. rapidly rainfall can infiltrate into the aquifer. As noted in Geologic or morphostratigraphic names have been the preceding discussion, the rocks of the aquifer are not applied to some of these surficial deposits by several uniform in either composition or thickness. Recharge investigators. For most of Carteret County and part of rates depend on the capacity of the soils formed from the Pamlico County, Mixon and Pilkey (1976) used the name various rock materials to allow water to move downward "Flanner Beach Formation" to describe surficial deposits through the unsaturated zone. consisting of well-sorted sands and silty sands interbed- One way of evaluating relative recharge rates is to look ded with silt and clay. The Flanner Beach Formation is at the infiltration capacities of the various soil associa­ topped in places by the Minnesott sand, a relict beach tions delineated by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service. ridge. Blackwelder (1981) used the names "James City Soil associations having similar characteristics of drain­ Formation" and 'Windsor Formation" (Coch, 1968) for age, sand-clay content, and permeability were identified various post-Pliocene beds along and east of a line on the General Soil Map of North Carolina (Tant and between central Gates County and central Craven others, 1974) and arranged as groups having good, County. Elsewhere in the Tidewater region (fig. 3), the moderate, or poor infiltration capacity (fig. 11). sediments of the surficial aquifer are generally referred Soils deemed to have good infiltration capacity were to as undifferentiated Pleistocene or Pliocene and Pleis­ well-drained to very well-drained sandy soil and sandy tocene rocks generally occupying the upper 30 to 40 ft of loam having vertical saturated permeabilities of 2 to 20 section but thickening eastward to about 200 ft near the inches per hour. A few sandy soils containing significant Outer Banks. amounts of clay were included if their permeabilities West of the Tidewater region, the sediments compos­ were within this range. Heath (1980) estimated that ing the surficial aquifer change character; they become annual recharge to thick, sandy soils in the surficial coarser and more poorly sorted. With the exception of aquifer may be as much as 20 inches of equivalent one area described below, no attempt has been made to rainfall. assign formal names to these sediments. They are gen­ Fine sand, silty loam, and sandy clay loam having erally described as Pleistocene terraces or simply terrace vertical saturated permeabilities of 0.2 to 6 inches per deposits; where present, they lie unconformably on rocks hour were considered to have moderate infiltration of Cretaceous to Miocene age and range in thickness from capacity. Poorly drained clay, clay loam, and sandy-clay a few feet to as much as 30 ft. loam having vertical saturated permeabilities of 0.06 to 2 In Columbus and Brunswick Counties, Swain (1968) inches per hour were considered to have poor infiltration assigned surficial gray and white calcareous sands, silty capacity. Recharge to the surficial aquifer through these sands, and shelly sands to the Waccamaw Formation of soils having poor infiltration capacity may be as little as Pliocene age on the basis of ostracods. He suggested that 5 inches per year, according to Heath (1980). these beds, up to 20 ft thick, may extend northward to The general groupings of soil infiltration capacities in Hyde County. Hazel (1977) thought the Waccamaw figure 11 show a relation to the rocks making up the Formation of southeastern North Carolina and north­ surficial aquifer. For the most part, soils derived from eastern South Carolina to be of Pliocene and Pleistocene fine sand, silt, and clay of marine origin in the Tidewater age. The Waccamaw is included in the surficial aquifer. region have poor to moderate infiltration capacities, Grayish-brown coarse sand and gravel containing silt whereas soils derived from the coarser fluvial sediments and kaolinitic clay balls constitute the surficial deposits in in the Inner Coastal Plain tend to have higher infiltration HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK 119

80 79 78 77 76 75 37

VIRGINIA

36

35°

34

EXPLANATION COASTAL PLAIN SOILS GOOD INFILTRATION CAPACITY- MODERATE INFILTRATION CAPACITY- POOR INFILTRATION CAPACITY- Mostly well-drained to very well Moderately to well-drained soil: soil" gen­ Poorly drained clay, clay loam, and drained sandy soil and sandy loam, erally contains fine sand, silty loam, and sandy clay: soil permeability 0.06 to but including some soils containing sandy clay loam, and contains significant 2 inches per hour significant amounts of clay: soil percentage of clay; soil permeability 0.2 permeability 2 to 20 inches per hour to 6 inches per hour and may exceed 20 inches per hour PIEDMONT SOILS in some areas 33° UNDIFFERENTIATED

50 100 MILES i 50 100 KILOMETERS

FIGURE 11. Infiltration capacities of soils in the North Carolina Coastal Plain. capacities. Soils in the Sand Hills area in the southwest­ aquifer; however, it neither reflects the hydraulic con­ ern Coastal Plain have especially high infiltration capac­ ductivity of the aquifer nor indicates the size of the sand ities. particles. A sand-percentage map for the surficial aquifer is given on plate 15. This map was constructed with data mostly from gamma-ray geophysical logs and from drill­ DISTRIBUTION OF PERMEABLE MATERIAL ers' logs. Electric logs rarely include the upper several A sand-percentage map is an effective way to depict tens of feet of a well because most wells are lined with the areal distribution of permeable material within an steel casing. 120 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

The percentage of sand in the surficial aquifer gener­ Miocene Eastover Formation of Ward and Blackwelder ally exceeds 70 percent. However, there are significant (1980). It extends throughout the northern half of the areas where it is less than 70 percent sand, and in a few North Carolina Coastal Plain (pi. 16) from the Fall Line, places it is less than 50 percent sand. where it overlaps crystalline rocks of the Piedmont, The surficial aquifer generally contains less than 70 eastward to and beyond the coast. West of the Tidewater percent sand northeast of a line extending from the region (fig. 3), the aquifer is thin (less than 20 ft thick in Hertford-Gates County line through central Washington many places) and has been cut into or eroded away by the County and into Hyde County. This relatively low sand larger streams flowing across the area. The aquifer content can be attributed to the marine character of the thickens eastward, the slope of the top is up to 7 feet per Quaternary sediments of the surficial aquifer and the mile (ft/mi), and, in Dare County, the Yorktown attains resulting presence of more clay beds. Southwestward, a thickness of more than 300 ft (well 48, pi. 7). the aquifer also contains less than 70 percent sand in The Yorktown aquifer is not present in most of the parts of Edgecombe, Wilson, Wayne, Duplin, and Samp­ southern half of the Coastal Plain. Brown and others son Counties and in scattered areas of the Sand Hills (fig. (1972, pi. 21) showed a number of isolated outliers of 3). The aquifer here consists of poorly sorted fluvial material, which explains the lower sand content. rocks largely equivalent to the Yorktown aquifer. These outliers suggest that extensive erosion and removal of these rocks has occurred in the southern Coastal Plain OCCURRENCE OF SALTWATER and is responsible for the discontinuity of the aquifer The limit of 10,000 mg/L chloride concentration in there. The largest of the outliers, in Robeson County at water in the surficial aquifer is the shoreline of the the South Carolina line, is the only one considered of Atlantic Ocean and, for Carteret County northward, the sufficient significance to be mapped as a separate body of shorelines of the several sounds behind the Outer Banks, the aquifer (pi. 16). including the wider parts of major estuaries. The limit of 250 mg/L chloride concentration extends farther inland The Yorktown aquifer is composed largely of fine sand, along tidal streams and can be generally defined as being silty and clayey sand, and clay and is characterized by near the upstream limit of saltwater in each stream. shells and shell beds throughout. This attests to its Giese and others (1979) have described the occurrence of marine and near-marine origin of deposition. Coarser salinity in the sounds and estuaries of North Carolina and sand fractions and shell beds have been identified on the upstream limit of saltwater in the major streams. geophysical logs in some downdip areas, but over most of In Hyde, Dare, and Tyrrell Counties, which make up the Inner Coastal Plain, fine sand is the dominant aquifer the bulk of the region known as the Albemarle-Pamlico material. Brown and others (1972, p. 52) reported the Peninsula, a special case of saltwater intrusion into the occurrence of limestone in upper Miocene rocks along the surficial aquifer was reported by Heath (1975). Where easternmost Coastal Plain, and, for parts of northeastern the bottoms of drainage ditches and canals are lower than North Carolina, Ward and Blackwelder (1980, p. D29) sea level, saltwater from the sounds can move inland described the Yorktown Formation as containing, in through these canals and laterally into the surficial part, lag deposits of coarse sand and pebbles. aquifer. Insufficient data are available to show the extent of this problem. DISTRIBUTION OF PERMEABLE MATERIAL On the barrier islands constituting North Carolina's Outer Banks, freshwater occurs in small, isolated, lens- The average estimated hydraulic conductivity of the shaped masses above denser saltwater in the surficial Yorktown aquifer is about 22 feet per day (ft/d), based on aquifer. Winner (1975, 1978) has described and mapped lithologic- and geophysical-log data from 52 wells and freshwater in the parts of the Outer Banks belonging to test holes (table 4). Hydraulic conductivity values from the National Park Service. For purposes of modeling the aquifer tests in the Yorktown range from 19 ft/d in larger ground-water system, however, the freshwater in Chowan County (Lloyd, 1968a, p. 46) to 33 ft/d in the Outer Banks is considered unrelated to the larger Beaufort County (DeWiest and others, 1967, p. 89). flow system and, in any case, is too small an area to have Along the Inner Coastal Plain, sand beds of the an effect at the scale of the Coastal Plain ground-water Yorktown aquifer are commonly less than 10 ft thick and flow system. are somewhat irregularly distributed, as depicted on hydrogeologic section J'-J" through this area (pi. 10). These characteristics are also reflected on the sand YORKTOWN AQUIFER percentage map (pi. 16), which shows that the aquifer is The Yorktown aquifer is generally equated with the composed of less than 60 percent sand from Wilson redefined Pliocene Yorktown Formation and the upper County to Northampton County. Eastward and down- HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK 121 dip, sand beds are thicker and consist of coarser material above the southern part of the main body of the York- (well 140, pi. 7). town aquifer from Wilson to Pamlico Counties. In the Trending in an easterly direction from Gates County is northeast from about Gates County eastward, the con­ an area of decreasing sand percentage (pi. 16). Although fining unit averages about 50 ft in thickness and is more beds thicken in this direction, the aquifer contains than 70 ft thick in northern Pasquotank County. Above smaller percentages of permeable material. This sug­ the Yorktown aquifer outlier in Robeson County, the gests a major lithofacies change, and the aquifer contains Yorktown confining unit is less than 25 ft thick. extensive clay beds. RELATION WITH OTHER AQUIFERS OCCURRENCE OF SALTWATER The Yorktown aquifer and its confining unit are almost Water containing chloride concentrations of more than entirely overlain by the surficial aquifer and receive 250 mg/L has been collected from several wells open to recharge from it. The Yorktown is in direct contact with sands of the Yorktown aquifer. The 250 mg/L chloride streams that have channeled into it (pi. 16) or with their concentration lines (isochlors) as mapped on plate 16 alluvial deposits; outcrops along stream valleys of the depict the intersection of the equal-concentration surface Yorktown Formation, of which the aquifer and its con­ with both the bottom and the top of the aquifer (transi­ fining unit are composed, have been extensively tion zone). The isochlors bear no direct relation to the described by many investigators. On the whole, the altitude contours of the aquifer materials but do conform stream valleys are discharge areas for the Yorktown generally to the strike of the Yorktown Formation. aquifer. That the 250 mg/L transition zone is nearly horizontal, At least some part of all of the underlying aquifers and as shown in cross section on plates 7 and 8, suggests that their overlying confining units, except the Lower Creta­ water movement within the aquifer is virtually horizon­ ceous aquifer, subcrop beneath the Yorktown aquifer tal, with only a slight upward component. The distance (fig. 12). In the areas of these subcrops, the opportunity between the 250 mg/L isochlors that intersect the top exists for exchange of water between the Yorktown and bottom of the Yorktown aquifer ranges from 10 to 25 aquifer and the underlying aquifers. Excluding stream mi. valleys, the potential for downward leakage from the Chloride concentrations approaching 10,000 mg/L Yorktown aquifer to subcropping aquifers exists over have not been observed in water from the Yorktown about the western two-thirds of the area and in the aquifer. Ground water containing this concentration in southern outlier. In these areas, heads in the Yorktown the aquifer occurs an unknown distance offshore, and the aquifer are higher than heads in underlying aquifers. For position of the 10,000 mg/L isochlors must be estimated. the remainder of the Tidewater region, the Yorktown aquifer accepts upward leakage from the underlying YORKTOWN CONFINING UNIT Pungo River aquifer. The Yorktown confining unit overlies the Yorktown aquifer and serves as the hydrologic boundary between PUNGO RIVER AQUIFER the Yorktown aquifer and the overlying surficial aquifer. In this report, the Yorktown confining unit is considered The sediments constituting the Pungo River aquifer to extend only as far as the aquifer. Any stratigraphically are defined as the permeable parts of the Pungo River equivalent low-permeability beds beyond the limit of Formation of upper and middle Miocene age, named by Yorktown aquifer are included in other confining units. Kimrey (1964) for a type locality in Beaufort County. The confining unit is composed largely of clay and Ward and Blackwelder (1980, p. D4) equated this forma­ sandy clay that locally includes beds of fine sand or shell. tion with the Calvert Formation of Virginia and Mary­ It comprises the youngest beds of the Yorktown Forma­ land and indicated it to be partly of early Miocene age. tion and may include, in some places, clay beds of The aquifer is composed of fine- to medium-grained Pleistocene or Holocene age. marine sand with considerable phosphate content. The The average thickness of the Yorktown confining unit lithology and fossil content of the aquifer show that it is about 22 ft (table 4). As shown on plate 16, the 25-ft was largely deposited in an offshore environment. A few thickness line and several places where the confining unit beds of coarse sand may have been deposited in an is between 25 and 50 ft thick extend through or occupy estuarine or nearshore environment. the middle of the northern Coastal Plain. Westward The Pungo River aquifer is limited to the eastern part toward the Fall Line, the confining unit averages about of the northern North Carolina Coastal Plain (pi. 17). Its 13 ft in thickness, and eastward near the coast about 40 western limit is a line extending north from western ft. It is thinnest (less than 10 ft thick in many places) Carteret County to central Gates County. Its northern 122 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

80 79 78 77 76 75 37

36

t of Yorktown aquifer confininTjfynit. Limit cjdes with FaUJJne 35 the nqrth

34 EXPLANATION SUBCROP AREA OF CONFINING UNITS OR BASEMENT ROCKS UNDERLYING YORKTOWN AQUIFER 8 Pungo River 4 Black Creek 7 Castle Hayne 3 Upper Cape Fear 6 Beaufort 2 Lower Cape Fear 5 Peedee B Basement rocks LIMIT OF CONTACT WITH UNDERLYING CONFINING UNITS OR BASEMENT 33 ROCKS

50 100 MILES I __I 0 50 - 100 KILOMETERS

FIGURE 12. Confining units or basement rocks that directly underlie the Yorktown aquifer. limit is a line from there to the coast in Currituck top is more than 580 ft below sea level (well 71, Hyde County. The Pungo River Formation does not contain Co.). sufficient permeable material in southeastern Virginia to Except for manmade exposures, the Pungo River be considered an aquifer. aquifer is entirely covered by younger sediments, The Pungo River aquifer averages only about 15 ft in although the Neuse River may come close to penetrating thickness near its western and northern limits. As the it at the aquifer's western margin near New Bern. The aquifer dips eastward (10 to 12 ft/mi), it thickens to more Pungo River Formation is artificially exposed in pits in than 200 ft in the vicinity of the Outer Banks, where the Beaufort County, where it is mined for phosphatic-sand HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK 123 ore. The phosphatic sand is believed to constitute much River aquifer. For most of the area, this confining unit is of the Pungo River aquifer there. In order to conduct composed of clay containing less than 10 percent sand. dry-pit mining operations, heads in the underlying Castle Geophysical logs consistently show a nearly uniform clay Hayne aquifer are lowered by pumping so that water between the Yorktown and Pungo River aquifers. A few from this aquifer does not seep upward through clay beds logs show a gradation from sand to clay below the underlying the ore bed. The influence of this pumping is Yorktown, and some indicate an increasing silt content shown as area 2 in figure 6. near the top of the Pungo River aquifer; however, the main body of clay is a distinct feature. DISTRIBUTION OF PERMEABLE MATERIAL Along the western margin of the Pungo River aquifer, its confining unit is less than 10 ft thick. Eastward and The Pungo River aquifer consists of more than 90 percent sand throughout much of its western area (pi. downdip it thickens to about 150 ft beneath Currituck 17). Where the aquifer thickens eastward and is buried at County (pi. 17). An average value of thickness for the Pungo River confining unit is nearly 55 ft (table 4). depths greater than 200 to 300 ft, additional sand beds appear in the section (well 144, pi. 7), but the amount of permeable material decreases to about 50 or 60 percent. RELATION WITH OTHER AQUIFERS Near its northern limit in Gates County, the aquifer is The Pungo River aquifer and its confining unit are more than 50 ft thick and is composed of several sand overlain in most places by the Yorktown aquifer (fig. 13). bodies (pi. 8). Northward, the aquifer thins and becomes The lack of water-level data for the Pungo River aquifer a single sand bed to its pinch out, where the Pungo River makes it difficult to determine the recharge-discharge Formation no longer contains permeable material and relationship between the two aquifers. Generally, we can becomes part of the Castle Hayne confining unit (well 58, expect that the Pungo River aquifer is recharged from pi. 14). the Yorktown aquifer in the areas beneath the surface- Most of the permeable material composing the Pungo water divides common to both aquifers and that upward River aquifer is fine to medium sand, as reflected by an discharge from the Pungo River aquifer occurs along the average estimated hydraulic conductivity of 32 ft/d (table stream valleys. 4). No trends or patterns in the distribution of hydraulic Locally, in Craven and Carteret Counties, the York- conductivity in the aquifer were detected. town aquifer is not present and the Pungo River is directly overlain by the surficial aquifer (fig. 13). The opportunity for recharge to the Pungo River aquifer is OCCURRENCE OF SALTWATER greater in these areas than in areas where the interven­ The 250 mg/L isochlors for the top and bottom of the ing Yorktown aquifer is present. Pungo River aquifer are shown on plate 17. This transi­ Underlying the Pungo River aquifer everywhere is the tion zone narrows to about 1 mi north of Washington Castle Hayne aquifer and its confining unit, which County because the aquifer is thin and its permeability is extend west and north beyond the limits of the Pungo low there. To the south the transition zone is at least 10 River aquifer. The Castle Hayne confining unit, which mi wide; no data are available to determine its width in separates the Pungo River and Castle Hayne aquifers, is the extreme southern onshore area. The relatively wide relatively thin (14-ft average, table 4) and in some places transition zone in the south is due to the aquifer being is missing (pis. 13, 14), so that the Pungo River and thicker and in closer proximity to recharge sources. Castle Hayne aquifers are in contact. This suggests a As is the case for the Yorktown aquifer, the position of direct hydraulic connection between the two aquifers. the 10,000 mg/L isochlors for the Pungo River aquifer is unknown; very few analyses of water from it are avail­ able, and none with which to determine the position of CASTLE HAYNE AQUIFER the 10,000 mg/L isochlors. The highest concentration of The Castle Hayne aquifer includes the Eocene Castle chloride known is a little more than 1,700 mg/L from one Hayne Limestone, rocks of Oligocene age overlying the water sample from a test hole (well 71, pi. 17) open to the Castle Hayne (Brown and others, 1972), which are Pungo River aquifer at Ocracoke on the Outer Banks. lithologically similar to the Castle Hayne and in direct hydraulic contact with it, and rocks correlated with PUNGO RIVER CONFINING UNIT middle Eocene to upper Oligocene and lower Miocene The upper clay beds of the Pungo River Formation, as deposits in southeastern Virginia (Meng and Harsh, described by Kimrey (1964), plus contiguous clays of the 1984). In Jones and Onslow Counties, the Oligocene lowermost Yorktown or Eastover Formation constitute River Bend Formation (Ward and others, 1978) forms the Pungo River confining unit, which overlies the Pungo part of the Castle Hayne aquifer. The basal part of the 124 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

80 79 78 77 76 75 37

VIRGINIA

36

Limit of Purigo ,'' \ \ aquiferjafid confining ^7^ unit r X N\ - i ' '

35

34 EXPLANATION SUBCROP AREA OF AQUIFERS OVERLYING PUNGO RIVER CONFINING UNIT 10 Surficial 9 Yorktown

LIMIT OF CONTACT WITH OVERLYING AQUIFERS

33

100 MILES

0 50 100 KILOMETERS

FIGURE 13. Aquifers that directly overlie the Pungo River confining unit and aquifer. aquifer locally may include older contiguous permeable these outliers (Richards, 1950; Schipf, 1961; Brown and units. All of these rocks are mapped as the Castle Hayne others, 1972; Baum and others, 1978). In this report, aquifer. The aquifer's extent and the altitude of its top these outliers are not considered part of the Castle are shown on plate 18. Hayne aquifer. Clark and others (1912) recognized isolated outcrops of The Castle Hayne aquifer is composed predominantly calcareous sediments of Eocene age extending as far of limestone and sand, with minor amounts of clay, and west as Wake and Harnett Counties and called them was deposited under marine conditions. The limestone erosional remnants. Later workers have also recognized includes shell limestone, dolomitic limestone, and sandy HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK 125 limestone ranging from loosely consolidated to hard and based on the amount of each rock type as determined recrystallized. The sand beds have varying carbonate from geophysical logs. The hydraulic conductivity value content and range from fine to coarse but typically are for limestone was averaged from aquifer-test data composed of fine to medium sand. Clay occurs as marl reported by Floyd (1969) and by DeWiest and others beds less than 10 ft thick or as matrix in both sand and (1967, p. 94); values for sand were taken from Morris and limestone beds. The most distinguishing features of the Johnson (1967, table 5). The average of all values of Castle Hayne aquifer are its carbonate content and its estimated hydraulic conductivity for the aquifer is 65 ft/d great thickness of freshwater-bearing permeable mate­ (table 4); the range is from 15 ft/d where the aquifer is a rial (more than 300 ft in well 101, pi. 13) combined with thin bed of fine sand to 200 ft/d where the bulk of the the absence of extensive or continuous clay layers. thick aquifer is porous limestone. A typical section of the Castle Hayne aquifer consists of alternating beds of limestone, sandy limestone, and OCCURRENCE OF SALTWATER sand, with limestone the dominant sediment throughout The positions of the 250 mg/L isochlors at the top and the upper one-third to one-half of its thickness. In the bottom of the Castle Hayne aquifer are shown on plate lower part of the aquifer, sand is the major permeable 18. The narrow width of the transition zone north of material; a number of geophysical logs show increasing Beaufort County results from the aquifer thinning in that silt and clay content near the bottom of the aquifer. direction. Also, the factors that control deep circulation Along its western margin, from New Hanover County of freshwater in the Pungo River aquifer in this area to Craven County, the Castle Hayne aquifer occurs near apply as well to the Castle Hayne aquifer. The widening land surface and is exposed in many streams. North of of the transition zone from Beaufort County southward this area, it is covered by the Pungo River and Yorktown coincides with the absence of the Yorktown aquifer and aquifers. As it dips eastward, the aquifer thickens con­ its associated clay beds, which overlie the Castle Hayne siderably. It is more than 950 ft thick at Camp Glenn, aquifer to the north. Thus, closer access to recharge plus Carteret County (well 22, Supplemental Data), and the higher hydraulic conductivity of the limestone parts approaches 1,200 ft thick beneath Cape Hatteras (Brown, 1958b, fig. 4). The dip of its buried top ranges of the aquifer allow better circulation of ground water, between 13 and 15 ft/mi. resulting in the flushing of saltwater from the upper part In the area roughly north of Albemarle Sound, the of the Castle Hayne aquifer over a wide area. Castle Hayne aquifer generally is thinner, has a reduced A chloride concentration of as high as 10,000 mg/L has carbonate content, and contains more clay than else­ not been detected in water from the Castle Hayne where. Limestone beds are thin or nonexistent, and on aquifer in North Carolina. As is the case for the overly­ geophysical logs, sand beds appear to contain more clay. ing Yorktown and Pungo River aquifers, water with this The average thickness of the aquifer north of the sound chloride concentration is expected to occur offshore. is about 50 ft between Bertie and Currituck Counties, with a maximum observed thickness of 164 ft in Curri­ CASTLE HAYNE CONFINING UNIT tuck County (well 46, pi. 8). The beds of clay, sandy clay, and clay with sandy streaks that overlie the Castle Hayne aquifer are desig­ DISTRIBUTION OF PERMEABLE MATERIAL nated the Castle Hayne confining unit. These beds The Castle Hayne aquifer is the most productive belong mostly to the Belgrade Formation, the Pungo aquifer in North Carolina, as exemplified by the 60 River Formation, or the Yorktown Formation, or to Mgal/d pumpage from the aquifer in Beaufort County younger clays where the surficial aquifer alone overlies since the mid-1960's (Peek and Nelson, 1975; Coble and the Castle Hayne confining unit. The Belgrade Forma­ others, 1984). Not only do the carbonate rocks composing tion occurs in limited areas in Jones and Onslow Counties the aquifer have higher hydraulic conductivity than the and is generally less than 10 ft thick (Ward and others, clastic aquifers in the North Carolina Coastal Plain, but 1978). also this thick aquifer has an average of 80 to 90 percent This confining unit has an average thickness of about permeable material (pi. 18). Even where the aquifer 14 ft (table 4); it exceeds 25 ft thick only in Gates County thins near its northern and western limits, the permeable along the Virginia border, in eastern Pamlico and Cart­ material is generally more than 60 percent of the total eret Counties, and in two small areas along the western aquifer thickness. limit of the Castle Hayne aquifer (pi. 18). In major Because the Castle Hayne aquifer is composed of rocks stream valleys south of Craven County, the confining of widely different hydraulic conductivities limestone unit is missing and the Castle Hayne aquifer crops out. A and sand the estimates of hydraulic conductivity were few geophysical logs indicate no confining unit between 126 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

80° 79° 78 77 76 75 37

VIRGINIA

36

Limit flf Castlfe Hayn aquifer and confining

35°

34 EXPLANATION SUBCROP AREA OF AQUIFERS OVERLYING CASTLE HAYNE CONFINING UNIT 10 Surficial 9 Yorktown 8 Pungo River

LIMIT OF CONTACT WITH OVERLYING AQUIFERS

33

50 100 MILES

0 50 100 KILOMETERS

FIGURE 14. Aquifers that directly overlie the Castle Hayne confining unit and aquifer. the Pungo River and Castle Hayne aquifers in parts of RELATION WITH OTHER AQUIFERS Bertie and Chowan Counties. Throughout much of its area, the Castle Hayne confin­ Throughout most of the northern and eastern areas of ing unit is thin and contains enough sand to allow the Castle Hayne aquifer, the aquifer and its confining significant leakage between the Castle Hayne and the unit are overlain by the Pungo River aquifer (fig. 14). In overlying aquifers. However, the effectiveness of the most of the southern third of the aquifer area, the Castle confining unit is sufficient to support a 10-ft head differ­ Hayne aquifer and its overlying confining unit are cov­ ence across it in places (well 104, pi. 6). ered by the surficial aquifer. The Yorktown aquifer HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK 127 overlies the Castle Hayne aquifer in a small area of Pitt small stream northeast of Kinston in Lenoir County. As and Beaufort Counties. Where the Pungo River aquifer with the other hydrogeologic units, the definition of the pinches out near the Virginia State line, the Yorktown Beaufort aquifer is not restricted to a single geologic aquifer also overlies the Castle Hayne. formation; the aquifer may include permeable rock units The most significant recharge area for the Castle of older Cretaceous formations that directly underlie the Hayne aquifer is where it is overlain by only the surficial Beaufort Formation. aquifer and rainwater need not percolate far to enter the The Beaufort aquifer is composed of fine to medium Castle Hayne. Evidence of this recharge is found at well glauconitic sand, clayey sand, and clay beds of marine 99 (pi. 5) and at well 34 (pi. 6), where water levels in the origin, with occasional shell and limestone beds up to 5 or surficial aquifer are only a few feet higher than those in 6 ft thick. Except along the western margin of the unit the Castle Hayne aquifer immediately underlying it. (shown on pi. 19) and along the Virginia border, lime­ In the northern half of the Coastal Plain, the Castle stone and shell beds are distinctive in geophysical logs of Hayne aquifer is more deeply buried than in the southern wells and test holes in the central two-thirds of the area half and is overlain by the upper two aquifers the from Onslow County to Pasquotank County. They pro­ Pungo River and Yorktown aquifers. Typically, the head vide some of the marker beds for the correlation of this decreases downward into the Castle Hayne aquifer from overlying beds (well 144, pi. 7; well 56, pi. 8), indicating aquifer unit. recharge. The altitude of the highest occurrence of the Beaufort Natural discharge from the Castle. Hayne aquifer aquifer is at sea level along its western margin just east occurs in stream channels where the streams have cut of Kinston, Lenoir County (well 82, pi. 6). The top of the into the aquifer or as upward leakage through overlying aquifer dips eastward at 14 to 33 ft/mi and is more than sediments beneath streams and estuaries where the 1,300 ft deep from eastern Currituck County to eastern aquifer is covered (Winner and Simmons, 1977). The Carteret County (pi. 19). potential for upward leakage is present in downdip areas, The thickness of the Beaufort aquifer ranges from zero even where other overlying confining units are more along its western limit to more than 150 ft east of a line than 80 to 100 ft thick, as at wells 108 and 109 (pi. 8). between Swanquarter, Hyde County, and Hertford, The Castle Hayne aquifer is underlain by the Beaufort Perquimans County. The maximum observed thickness aquifer and its confining unit northeast of Jones and is 171 ft in well 21 in Camden County (table 4). Where the Onslow Counties and by the Peedee aquifer south of aquifer is less than 100 ft thick, its average thickness is there (fig. 15). Differences in head between the Beaufort about 60 ft; where it is more than 100 ft thick, its average and Castle Hayne aquifers indicate that water moves thickness is about 120 ft. upward into the Castle Hayne nearly everywhere that In the northern part of the area in Camden and the Beaufort aquifer underlies it, except in a narrow zone Currituck Counties, the aquifer thins toward the east, as about 10 mi wide paralleling the western limit of the shown between wells 21 and 46 in hydrogeologic section Castle Hayne aquifer, where water moves downward to H-H' (pi. 8). A general increase in clay content in the the Beaufort. In contrast, where the Peedee aquifer and upper part of the aquifer and a corresponding thickening confining unit directly underlie the Castle Hayne, differ­ of the overlying confining unit suggest a nearby offshore ences in head between these aquifers indicate a general limit to the aquifer. downward movement of water into the Peedee aquifer. DISTRIBUTION OF PERMEABLE MATERIAL

BEAUFORT AQUIFER For most of the area along and within 10 to 15 mi of its western margin, the Beaufort aquifer consists of a single The Beaufort aquifer is composed primarily of rocks of sand bed ranging in thickness from a few feet to about 40 the Beaufort Formation that were described by Brown ft; along a strip extending from Pitt County to Pamlico (1959) as dark green and gray sand and clay of Paleocene County, this single layer thickens to 80 ft (well 103, pi. age, and later by Brown and others (1972) as green or 6). Elsewhere, the aquifer is composed of two or more greenish-gray shale and fine to medium shaly, glauconitic sand layers. The areal extent of the single-sand-layer sand of Midwayan age. The Beaufort Formation lies part of the Beaufort aquifer roughly corresponds to those unconformably on rocks of Cretaceous age and is uncon- areas where the unit consists of 80 to 90 percent perme­ formably overlain by younger rocks (Lloyd, 1968a; Sum- able material, as shown on plate 19. sion, 1970). The Beaufort Formation is covered by Over a large area of the northeastern Coastal Plain in younger rocks except for some exposures in streambeds and north of Beaufort and Hyde Counties, the aquifer near its western limit. Brown and others (1977) describe contains less than 70 percent permeable material. To the such an exposure of the Beaufort Formation along a east, in Dare County, it contains less than 50 percent 128 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

80 79 78 77 76 75 37

VIRGINIA

36

35°

34 EXPLANATION SUBCROP AREA OF CONFINING UNITS UNDERLYING CASTLE HAYNE AQUIFER 6 Beaufort 5 Peedee LIMIT OF CONTACT WITH UNDERLYING CONFINING UNITS

33°

50 100 MILES I 50 100 KILOMETERS FIGURE 15. Confining units that directly underlie the Castle Hayne aquifer. sand. This eastward or northeastward trend of decreas­ western margin, especially from Bertie County north­ ing percentage of permeable material in the Beaufort ward, where the aquifer consists of thin beds of fine aquifer parallels similar trends in the other aquifers sand, the estimated hydraulic conductivity is 15 to 25 composed of Tertiary sediments in this area of the ft/d. Lower than average hydraulic conductivity values Coastal Plain the Castle Hayne, Pungo River, and also are estimated for the easternmost parts of the Yorktown aquifers. aquifer in Hyde, Dare, and Currituck Counties where, The average estimated hydraulic conductivity for the along with an increasing clay content, the aquifer con­ Beaufort aquifer is about 35 ft/d (table 4). Along its tains greater proportions of finer sand. Lloyd (1968a, p. HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK 129

46) reported a hydraulic conductivity of 29 ft/d for the thickens and is more than 50 ft thick in the vicinity of the Beaufort in Chowan County. coastline.

OCCURRENCE OF SALTWATER RELATION WITH OTHER AQUIFERS Saltwater occurs in the Beaufort aquifer between 12 More than 90 percent of the Beaufort aquifer and its and 25 mi east of its western limit, as depicted by the 250 confining unit are overlain by the Castle Hayne aquifer. mg/L isochlors on plate 19. The transition zone is about 1 They are overlain by the Yorktown aquifer along the mi wide in Craven and Beaufort Counties and lies to the northwestern margin in and north of Pitt County (fig. west of the transition zone in the highly transmissive 16). The Beaufort aquifer is recharged from both the Castle Hayne aquifer except in Gates County, where it Yorktown and Castle Hayne aquifers in upland areas lies to the east. In Gates County, the Beaufort extends along a 15- to 20-mi-wide band paralleling the western up to 15 mi beyond the western limit of the Castle margin of the aquifer. Hayne, affording a better opportunity for freshwater to The Beaufort aquifer discharges beneath stream val­ recharge and circulate in the Beaufort aquifer than in any leys and throughout the area east of the recharge area other part of the aquifer in the North Carolina Coastal described above. The Chowan River channel incises the Plain. Beaufort confining unit along the Gates-Hertford County The interpretation of the location of the 10,000 mg/L border (pi. 8), as does the Neuse River just east of isochlors in the Beaufort aquifer (pi. 19) is based on a Kinston, Lenoir County (pi. 6). These two places are water sample containing a chloride concentration of likely the last downdip points of relatively easy ground- 13,000 mg/L taken from the top of this aquifer at the water discharge from the Beaufort aquifer, although the New Lake Research Station (well 72) in Hyde County aquifer may not be in direct contact with the stream and on data from Meisler (1980, fig. 4). The 10,000 mg/L channels. isochlor is also shown in cross section as projected to Underlying the Beaufort aquifer are the upper Cape hydrogeologic section G-G' (pi. 7). Fear, Black Creek, and Peedee aquifers and their con­ Water in the Beaufort aquifer having a chloride con­ fining units (fig. 17). The Peedee aquifer underlies most centration of 10,000 mg/L or greater is in an offshore of the areal extent of the Beaufort aquifer (about 80 area east of Currituck County and south of Carteret percent) and, thus, has the greatest potential for exchanging ground water with the Beaufort. The confin­ County and encompassing nearly all of Dare and Hyde ing units overlying these lower aquifers appear to be Counties and parts of adjacent counties. Areas where the both thicker and less permeable, on the whole, than the Beaufort aquifer contains saltwater onshore are inter­ confining units above the Beaufort. preted to be parts of the aquifer from which residual seawater is not yet flushed. The seaward turn of the 10,000 mg/L isochlors in the PEEDEE AQUIFER north may be due to better recharge conditions in Gates and Hertford Counties, as discussed above. In the south, The Peedee aquifer is composed largely of the Peedee Sand of Late Cretaceous age, as traced by Clark and better hydraulic connection with the Castle Hayne aqui­ others (1912, p. 145) from the type locality in South fer and its recharge source may be responsible for the Carolina. The Peedee Sand later was redefined as the Beaufort containing more extensive freshwater. Peedee Formation by Stephenson and Rathbun (1923, p. 11). The Peedee aquifer may also contain sand units of BEAUFORT CONFINING UNIT older or younger age in some places. In North Carolina, The Beaufort confining unit consists of the uppermost the aquifer is present east and southeast of a line that sediments of the Beaufort Formation and possibly some extends from near the Robeson-Columbus County line at younger clay, silt, and sandy clay. Over most of the area, the South Carolina border northeastward through cen­ geophysical logs typically show a gradation from sandy tral Greene, Pitt, and Martin Counties and then east to clay to clay in this confining unit. In a few places the the coast in southern Currituck County (pi. 20). The confining unit is composed of a distinct clay with inter- Peedee Formation is exposed at many points along the layered beds of fine sand or silt. Cape Fear and Northeast Cape Fear Rivers and also The thickness of the confining unit, shown on plate 19, along the Neuse River and streams as far north as Pitt ranges from zero to 80 ft and averages about 24 ft (table County (Sumsion, 1970). The Peedee Formation discon- 4). From northern Onslow County to southern Beaufort formably overlies the Black Creek Formation (Sohl and County the confining unit averages only about 15 ft in Christopher, 1983, p. 30) and is mantled by a relatively thickness. In and northeast of Washington County, it thin veneer of Quaternary surficial deposits of fluvial and 130 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

80° 79 78 77 76 75 37

36

35

34 EXPLANATION SUBCROP AREA OF AQUIFERS OVERLYING BEAUFORT CONFINING UNIT 9 Yorktown 7 Castle Hayne

LIMIT OF CONTACT WITH OVERLYING AQUIFERS

33

50 100 MILES

0 50 100 KILOMETERS FIGURE 16. Aquifers that directly overlie the Beaufort confining unit and aquifer.

littoral origin in the southern part of the area and by a larly in the southeastern North Carolina Coastal Plain. thicker section of Tertiary sediments to the north. Shells are common throughout the formation. The Peedee Formation is composed of fine- to medium- The Peedee Formation is not recognized in northeast­ grained sand interbedded with gray to black marine clay ern North Carolina north of Albemarle Sound (pi. 20) or and silt. Sand beds are commonly gray or greenish-gray in Virginia. It is correlated with sediments of Navarro and contain varying amounts of glauconite. Thin beds of age in Maryland (Maher and Applin, 1971, p. 29) now consolidated calcareous sandstone and impure limestone included in the Severn Formation (Minard and others, are interlayered with the sands in some places, particu­ 1977). HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK 131

80 79 78 77 76 75 37

VIRGINIA

36

35°

34 EXPLANATION SUBCROP AREA OF CONFINING UNITS UNDERLYING BEAUFORT AQUIFER 5 Peedee 4 Black Creek 3 Upper Cape Fear

LIMIT OF CONTACT WITH UNDERLYING CONFINING UNITS

33

50 100 MILES

0 50 100 KILOMETERS

FIGURE 17. Confining units that directly underlie the Beaufort aquifer.

The Late Cretaceous age of the Peedee Formation has p. 45) used microfauna and geophysical-log patterns to been determined on the basis of fauna collected in define their Unit A (Navarroan Stage) time- outcrop areas. Downdip from the band of outcrop, the stratigraphic unit, and they mentioned the Peedee For­ Cretaceous section thickens and beds that have no updip mation in connection with that unit. Swift and Heron equivalents appear. The subsurface Peedee Formation (1969, p. 238) defined the subsurface Peedee Formation has been defined differently by various authors. Span- on the basis of lithostratigraphic evidence of a deposi- gler (1950, p. 116) restricted the Peedee Formation to tional regime that was largely open marine and could be Navarro-equivalent sediments. Brown and others (1972, interpreted from geophysical logs. 132 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

Correlations of lithologic units composing the Peedee The 10,000 mg/L isochlors also are shown on plate 20. aquifer are shown in cross section on plates 2-7, 9, and Chloride concentrations in excess of this amount have 11-14; contours of the top of the aquifer are shown on been measured in water from NRCD research station plate 20. The top of the Peedee aquifer dips eastward at test wells in Pamlico and Tyrrell Counties (wells 103 and an average rate of about 24 ft/mi, with a range of from 104, pi. 6; well 140, pi. 7). The estimated positions of the about 10 ft/mi along its inner margin, especially in the 10,000 mg/L isochlors are also shown on these hydroge- vicinity of the Cape Fear River, to more than 33 ft/mi ologic sections. along the coast, where the aquifer is deeply buried. The aquifer thickens from zero along its western limit to more PEEDEE CONFINING UNIT than 300 ft along the coast from southern Onslow County The Peedee confining unit, which overlies the Peedee to the South Carolina border. Northeast of Onslow aquifer, is composed of clay, silty clay, and sandy clay. County aquifer thickness is less than 200 ft. With the available data, this confining unit cannot be correlated with a particular geologic unit. However, it is DISTRIBUTION OF PERMEABLE MATERIAL known to represent the sediment at the Cenozoic- The Peedee aquifer consists of nearly 70 percent sand, Mesozoic boundary, especially where the Beaufort aqui­ on the average, throughout the Coastal Plain. The areas fer overlies the Peedee aquifer; elsewhere, it may rep­ where sand exceeds this percentage are generally along resent material spanning a longer period of geologic the aquifer's western margin from Bertie County to time. Duplin County and from Bladen County to the South The delineation of this confining unit is based largely Carolina line. The aquifer also contains a high percentage on geophysical-log correlations and on scattered head of sand from Duplin County southeast to Onslow County, and chloride data. In the deeper subsurface, a measured as well as in several smaller scattered areas (pi. 20). head difference across the Peedee confining unit was 13 The Peedee aquifer contains a substantial fraction of ft in Jones County (well 77, pi. 5), and chloride values clay in three areas, as indicated by the sand percentage differed by several thousand milligrams per liter in well being less than 60 percent. These areas are east of 90 in New Hanover County (pi. 4). Some confining layers Chowan County along the northern margin of the aqui­ locally within the aquifer may also cause significant fer in Columbus, Brunswick, and New Hanover Coun­ vertical changes in head or chloride concentration in a ties, and in Onslow, Jones, and Carteret Counties. few isolated areas. The aquifer's typical fine to medium sand size suggests The average thickness of the Peedee confining unit is a hydraulic conductivity of about 25 ft/d; average esti­ nearly 25 ft; this is represented on plate 20 by the 25-ft mated hydraulic conductivity is 34 ft/d (table 4). Gener­ thickness contour which extends from Bertie County ally, higher values of conductivity occur from southern southwestward to Brunswick County. East of this line, Craven County southwestward to the South Carolina the confining unit is as much as 60 ft thick but does not border, and lower values are found north and northeast exceed 35 ft thick in most places. West of the 25-ft contour, the confining unit averages about 15 ft in of this area. Hydraulic conductivity values derived from thickness, and in several areas it is very thin or missing. aquifer-test data in New Hanover County (Bain, 1970, p. The Peedee confining unit is missing in a few areas 35) and Pitt County (Sumsion, 1970, p. 34) are consistent where streams have cut directly into the Peedee aquifer, with estimated values. such as along the Cape Fear and South Rivers in Bladen County, along the Neuse River in Wayne and Lenoir OCCURRENCE OF SALTWATER Counties, and along Contentnea Creek in Greene County The area delineating the freshwater-saltwater transi­ (pi. 20). The confining unit probably is very thin or tion zone in the Peedee aquifer extends in a southerly missing in a broad, low area between the Cape Fear and direction from the aquifer limit in Bertie County to South Rivers (pi. 9). Accordingly, the updip limit of the Onslow County, where it takes a more southwesterly Peedee confining unit as shown on plate 20 does not course through Pender and Brunswick Counties (pi. 20). everywhere conform to the updip limit of the underlying The transition zone widens along this trend from about 1 Peedee aquifer, which extends farther west than the mi at the aquifer limit in Bertie County to almost 20 mi confining unit in several places. at the Cape Fear River. The transition zone is shown in The clays of the Peedee confining unit have very low cross section on plates 2, 4, 6, 7, and 11-13. Of particular permeability throughout most of its areal extent, but in note is a lens of freshwater in the Peedee aquifer beneath two areas the confining unit appears to have a higher a wedge of saltwater in the overlying Beaufort aquifer in than usual vertical hydraulic conductivity because of a eastern Jones and Onslow Counties (pi. 13). significant sand content. In these areas, water can move HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK 133 into or out of the Peedee aquifer more easily than in Tayloran Stage and the upper part of the Austinian other areas. One area is in Bladen, Columbus, and Stage, Maher and Applin (1971, p. 29) equated the Fender Counties where, in addition to its higher hydrau­ formation with all of both Tayloran and Austinian lic conductivity, the confining unit is also less than 25 ft Stages, and Dennison and Wheeler (1975, p. 186) thick (pi. 20). The surficial aquifer overlies the Peedee extended older Black Creek sediments into the upper aquifer here, and the confining unit between them is part of the Eaglefordian Stage. The Black Creek is typically a clayey sand layer. The other area is where the composed of all or parts of chronostratigraphic units B, Castle Hayne aquifer overlies the Peedee in southern C, and D of Brown and others (1972, pi. 2), which Duplin and eastern Pender Counties. Geophysical logs correspond to the Tayloran, Austinian, and Eaglefordian indicate that the Peedee confining unit there is clayey Stages, respectively. sand or sandy clay. The Black Creek Formation is lagoonal to marine, consisting of thinly laminated gray to black clay interlay- RELATION WITH OTHER AQUIFERS ered with gray to tan sands. In some outcrops, the formation is characterized by sand-dominated or clay- East and northeast of Onslow, Jones, Lenoir, and Pitt dominated lenses. Other outcrops show well-defined Counties, the Peedee aquifer and its confining unit are beds of clean sand and gray to black clay. A primary overlain by the Beaufort aquifer. They are also in contact characteristic of Black Creek sediments in the subsurface with the Yorktown aquifer in a small area of Pitt and is their high content of organic material, particularly Greene Counties, with the Castle Hayne aquifer in a lignitized wood. Shell material and glauconite are also strip from southern Lenoir to eastern Brunswick common. County, and with the surficial aquifer over the remainder The Middendorf Formation was originally named by of the area where the Peedee aquifer is present (fig. 18). Sloan (1904), who thought the unit was of Early Creta­ In general, the Peedee aquifer is recharged by all ceous age. Subsequently, Berry (1914) recognized that overlying aquifers west of a line from central Onslow these rocks were of Late Cretaceous age and treated the County to central Pitt County; east of this line, higher Middendorf as a member of the Black Creek Formation. heads in the Peedee create the potential for upward Swift and Heron (1969, p. 213) raised the Middendorf to leakage into the overlying aquifers. Discharge from the formational status as part of their differentiation of the Peedee aquifer occurs along streams in the general "Tuscaloosa Formation" into the Middendorf and Cape recharge area in a similar way that streams are lines of Fear Formations. The name "Middendorf Formation" is discharge for other aquifers. The Cape Fear River and herein applied to a fluvial sequence of sediments crop­ its larger tributaries in the Bladen County-Pender ping out to the west of the Black Creek Formation in the County area probably are major lines of discharge for the Sand Hills area of the Coastal Plain. Although the Peedee aquifer and deeper aquifers. Discharge in the Middendorf is recognized as underlying the Black Creek Cape Fear valley is demonstrated by the increasing in South Carolina (Hazel and others, 1977), Swift and heads with depth observed in well 134 (pi. 4) and wells 12 Heron (1969, p. 217) suggested an intertonguing relation and 116 (pi. 11). between these formations in their outcrop areas in North The Black Creek aquifer underlies the Peedee Carolina. throughout its extent. Head differences between the two The Middendorf Formation ranges in age from early aquifers allow for vertical exchange of ground water in Austinian to Woodbinian, according to Swift and Heron both directions. (1969, p. 211) and Dennison and Wheeler (1975, p. 186). Harris (1978, p. 210), however, thought the Middendorf BLACK CREEK AQUIFER ranged from early Tayloran through Austinian. Hazel and others (1977, p. 73) assigned an age range from The Black Creek aquifer consists mainly of sediments middle Eaglefordian to early Austinian. Christopher and of both the Black Creek and Middendorf Formations. others (1979) and Owens (1983) described the Midden­ Clark and others (1912, p. Ill) extensively described the dorf as Austinian age only. Black Creek Formation outcrops from the Cape Fear The Middendorf is composed of a heterogeneous mix of River region to the Greenville area along the Tar River fine to medium sand and silty clay beds, coarse channel (Pitt County). It is well established that the Black Creek sand, and thin laminated beds of sand and clay, all of Formation is of Late Cretaceous age, and a number of nonmarine origin. Crossbedding, lenses, pinch cuts, and investigators have further assigned Gulf Coast stage facies changes are common in the Middendorf and are designations to the Black Creek. For example, Swift and typical of sediments deposited in a deltaic environment. Heron (1969, p. 211) correlated it with most of the Other characteristic features of the Middendorf are its 134 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

80 79 78 77 76 75 37

36

35

34 EXPLANATION SUBCROP AREA OF AQUIFERS OVERLYING PEEDEE CONFINING UNIT 10 Surficial 9 Yorktown 7 Castle Hayne 6 Beaufort LIMIT OF CONTACT WITH OVERLYING AQUIFERS 33°

50 100 MILES I 50 100 KILOMETERS FIGURE 18. Aquifers that directly overlie the Peedee confining unit and aquifer. light color tones of white, tan, and red and kaolinitic clay Creek Formation; the Middendorf Formation is not balls or clay fragments scattered throughout the sand known to be in contact with the Peedee. beds in outcrops. The type localities of the Black Creek and Middendorf Both the Middendorf and Black Creek Formations are Formations are in South Carolina, and the formations reported to unconformably overlie older Cretaceous beds have been correlated into North Carolina. In Virginia, (Heron and Wheeler, 1964, p. 49). The surficial aquifer neither the Black Creek nor the Middendorf are recog­ overlies these formations from outcrop eastward to the nized depositional units; however, Brown and others point where the Peedee Formation overlies the Black (1972, pis. 11-13) showed equivalent chronostratigraphic HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK 135 units B, C, and D in the extreme southeastern part of Martin County, an average test value is 23 ft/d (Wyrick, Virginia. 1966, p. 39). Sumsion (1970, p. 33) listed tests in Pitt The Black Creek aquifer in this report is defined to County showing a range of values from 16 to 33 ft/d. A include the sediments of both the Black Creek and value of 30 ft/d was derived from two aquifer tests at Middendorf Formations and their downdip equivalents Kinston, Lenoir County (Nelson and Barksdale, 1965, p. as interpreted from geophysical logs and lithologic 22); for the Middendorf sediments (locally called the descriptions. The correlation of the Black Creek aquifer Sandhills aquifer) at Pinehurst, Moore County, test data throughout the Coastal Plain is shown on the hydrogeo- indicated a hydraulic conductivity of 19 ft/d (NRCD, logic sections on plates 2-14. Office of Water Resources, 1980). In addition to these The updip limit of the Black Creek aquifer extends data, preliminary tests at several NRCD research sta­ eastward from the Fall Line at the South Carolina State tions showed the hydraulic conductivity of the Black line to Johnston County, and thence northeastward to Creek aquifer to be approximately 15 to 50 ft/d. Gates County, where it swings eastward, nearly paral­ leling the Virginia border (pi. 21). The top of the Black OCCURRENCE OF SALTWATER Creek aquifer is about 1,600 ft below sea level in western The transition zone in the Black Creek aquifer closely Dare County (well 48, pi. 7). Although data are not parallels the transition zone in the Peedee aquifer in the available to define the aquifer farther east with confi­ northern half of the Coastal Plain, but in the south it is dence, sediments equivalent to those of the Black Creek slightly west of the one in the Peedee aquifer. The aquifer are as'deep as 3,000 ft at Cape Hatteras (Brown greatest width of the transition zone in the Black Creek and others, 1972, pi. 50). In general, the aquifer is more aquifer ranges between 6 and 10 mi, and is similar to that steeply dipping in the northern Coastal Plain than to the in the Peedee aquifer in the southern Coastal Plain. south. It dips east-southeast at a rate of about 17 ft/mi, The position of the 250 mg/L isochlor, along with increasing coastward to about 38 ft/mi in the north; in the chloride concentration values for points within the aqui­ south, the maximum southeastward dip of the aquifer is fer, are shown on several hydrogeologic sections (pis. 2, about 12 ft/mi. The aquifer is thickest along the Pender 4-8, 11, 13). In a small area of central Craven County, County coast northward to central Craven County, where it is as much as 400 ft thick. freshwater in the Black Creek aquifer occurs beneath saltwater in the Peedee aquifer (pis. 6, 13). The areal extent of this anomaly can be seen by comparing the 250 DISTRIBUTION OF PERMEABLE MATERIAL mg/L isochlors on plates 20 and 21. On the average, the Black Creek aquifer contains The 10,000 mg/L isochlors in the Black Creek aquifer nearly 60 percent sand (pi. 21). The distribution of sand also are shown on plate 21 and in three hydrogeologic is fairly uniform throughout the aquifer. There are no sections (pis. 6-8). No analyses of water from the Black large areas where the aquifer is composed of less than 50 Creek aquifer are available that show chloride concen­ percent or more than 70 percent sand, nor are there any trations of 10,000 mg/L or more; the positions of these regional trends. The largest variations of sand percent­ isochlors have been inferred from the chloride values of age are in the Sand Hills area. These are attributed to water samples from overlying and underlying aquifers the heterogeneous, fluvial nature of the Middendorf and from Meisler (1980, fig. 4). sediments. Sand in the Black Creek aquifer is predominantly very fine to fine. Lithologic descriptions commonly refer to BLACK CREEK CONFINING UNIT some Black Creek beds as fine "salt and pepper" sands, The Black Creek confining unit, which overlies the a reference to their content of dark glauconite grains. Black Creek aquifer, is composed of clay, silty clay, and The hydraulic conductivity of the Black Creek aquifer is sandy clay, primarily of the uppermost beds of the Black estimated to range from about 15 to 50 ft/d, the average Creek Formation. Along the western limit of the Black value being about 28 ft/d (table 4). Creek aquifer in the northern Coastal Plain, where As interpreted from lithology, the aquifer has lower Tertiary rocks overlie it, the confining unit may include hydraulic conductivity values in the northeast from Cur- clay beds of the lower parts of the Beaufort or Yorktown rituck to Tyrrell and Dare Counties, along its northwest Formations. In the deeper subsurface, where the conti­ limit, and in the Sand Hills area. It has higher hydraulic nuity of confining units is interpreted from head relation­ conductivity values along the southeast coast from east­ ships and water-quality data, the confining unit may be ern Brunswick County to Onslow County. composed of clay beds of either the Black Creek or More definitive values of hydraulic conductivity for the Peedee Formation. Where the Black Creek aquifer is Black Creek aquifer are derived from aquifer tests. In composed of the Middendorf Formation in the Sand Hills, 136 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN the Black Creek confining unit is the uppermost Midden- Discharge by upward leakage generally occurs southeast dorf clay. of a line from central Gates County to central Columbus The correlation and interpretation of the extent of the County. However, in some areas of heavy pumping from Black Creek confining unit are shown on plates 2-14. In the Black Creek aquifer, such as in the central Coastal the highly dissected Sand Hills, the Middendorf clays Plain around Lenoir and Craven Counties (fig. 6), natural that constitute this confining unit are cut through in discharge has been completely captured by pumping. many places by streams, as illustrated on plate 2. Thus, The upper Cape Fear aquifer and confining unit under­ the aquifer here is confined only beneath hilltops. Far­ lie the Black Creek aquifer everywhere except in a ther east, the channels of larger streams, such as the narrow area along the Fall Line from Richmond to Cape Fear and Neuse Rivers, also have cut through the Johnston Counties. Where the upper Cape Fear aquifer confining unit to allow direct hydraulic connection is absent near the Fall Line, the Black Creek aquifer between the streams and the Black Creek aquifer. directly overlies basement rocks, as shown on plates 2, 4, The Black Creek aquifer pinches out before reaching and 5. the Fall Line along the northern half of the Coastal Plain. Beyond the pinch out, clay beds equivalent to the Black UPPER CAPE FEAR AQUIFER Creek confining unit are included in the upper Cape Fear confining unit overlying the upper Cape Fear aquifer, The upper Cape Fear aquifer comprises permeable which extends farther west than the Black Creek aqui­ zones in the upper part of the Cape Fear Formation. fer. These sediments compose a distinct hydrologic unit apart The extent and thickness of the Black Creek confining from the lower part of the Cape Fear Formation. The unit are shown on plate 21. The average thickness of the Cape Fear Formation has been described by various workers from its outcrops exposed along the Cape Fear, confining unit is about 45 ft, but it ranges up to at least Neuse, and Tar Rivers and is the oldest exposed Creta­ 168 ft (table 4). The confining unit thickens over the ceous unit of the North Carolina Coastal Plain. First eastern part of the Coastal Plain. This thickening reflects named by Stephenson (1907), these rocks were called the the regional coastward thickening of Coastal Plain sedi­ Patuxent Formation by Clark and others (1912) and the ments. The pinching out of aquifer units and the merging Tuscaloosa Formation by Cooke (1936). The name "Cape of clay beds add considerable thickness to the confining Fear Formation" was reinstated by Sohl (1976). The unit in a number of places along the Inner Coastal Plain. Cretaceous age of the Cape Fear has been long estab­ The Black Creek confining unit is thinnest in the Sand lished, but the specific placement of the formation within Hills area, averaging about 10 ft, owing to the discontin­ the system has not been firmly fixed. For example, the uous nature of Middendorf fluvial sand and clay beds. age of the Cape Fear as given by recent workers ranges Here, the confining unit is defined as the first clay bed from late Santonian (Christopher and others, 1979) for an occurring near the top of the Middendorf Formation. upper limit, to Early Cretaceous (Jordan and Smith, 1983) for a lower limit. However, the U.S. Geological RELATION WITH OTHER AQUIFERS Survey considers the Cape Fear Formation Austinian in The Black Creek aquifer and its confining unit are age (Renken, 1984). overlain by the Peedee, Beaufort, Yorktown, and surfi- The Cape Fear Formation is not recognized from cial aquifers (fig. 19). The Peedee aquifer covers the Virginia northward, and its extension north of the Cape eastern two-thirds of the Black Creek aquifer, and the Fear River is by virtue of similar exposures along the surficial aquifer (where present) is in contact with the Neuse, Tar, and Roanoke Rivers. Swift and Heron (1969, Black Creek aquifer from the Fall Line to the western p. 209) also correlated the Cape Fear Formation in the limit of the Peedee aquifer in much of the southern northeast Coastal Plain with the Washitan and Freder- Coastal Plain, except for a small area of intervening icksburgian sediments in Halifax County described by Yorktown aquifer in Robeson County. The Yorktown Brown (1963, p. 4). and Beaufort aquifers overlie the Black Creek along its The lithologic characteristics of the Cape Fear Forma­ western limit in the northern Coastal Plain. tion in outcrop were thought by Heron and Wheeler Recharge to the Black Creek aquifer occurs mainly by (1964, p. 16) to indicate deposition in a nearshore marine downward percolation from the overlying aquifers. This environment. The outcropping Cape Fear consists of recharge process generally is limited to interstream alternating beds of sand and clay that are commonly 3 to areas along the western half of the area. 5 ft thick but range from a fraction of a foot to 15 ft thick. The Black Creek aquifer in the western part of the Some beds show vertical gradation from sand to clay, aquifer area discharges into streams where their chan­ while others carry thin conglomerates of quartz pebbles nels cut into it or into its overlying confining unit. or mudstone fragments. Where the Cape Fear is deeply HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK 137

80 79 78 77 76 75 37

Limit of Black Creek aquifer and confining unit. Limit coincides with Fall Line in the VIRGINIA south-

36

35

34 EXPLANATION SUBCROP AREA OF AQUIFERS OVERLYING BLACK CREEK CONFINING UNIT 10 Surficial 9 Yorktown 6 Beaufort 5 Peedee LIMIT OF CONTACT WITH OVERLYING AQUIFERS 33°

50 100 MILES

50 100 KILOMETERS

FIGURE 19. Aquifers that directly overlie the Black Creek confining unit and aquifer. buried in South Carolina, it is reported to have sand and further defined as consisting of the rocks of the Cape clay beds of marginal-marine origin interbedded with Fear Formation as recognized in outcrop areas and as coarse feldspathic sands and silty clays of continental traced laterally by geophysical- and lithologic-log corre­ origin (Gohn and others, 1977, p. 66). lations. Where hydrologic continuity dictates, the upper Within the eastward-thickening wedge of Cape Fear Cape Fear aquifer may also include some lowermost sediments, at least two hydrologic units can be differen­ Middendorf beds in downdip areas. The correlation of the tiated on the basis of hydraulic head. The uppermost unit upper Cape Fear aquifer throughout the Coastal Plain is is termed the "upper Cape Fear aquifer," which is presented in the hydrogeologic sections on plates 2-14. 138 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

In a small area in Columbus County, at least two 50 ft/d. Hydraulic conductivity as estimated in this study interpretations for subdividing the formation are possi­ ranges from 10 to 70 ft/d and averages 30 ft/d (table 4). ble. Data are not available that indicate how these Generally, the upper Cape Fear aquifer has lower continental-type deposits can be correlated in the dip hydraulic conductivity in the Sand Hills region and direction and to the south along strike into South Caro­ higher hydraulic conductivity along the coast from Bruns­ lina. Hydrogeologic sections through this area are wick to Onslow Counties. The sands of the Cape Fear labeled "aquifer correlation uncertain" (pis. 2, 9, 14). Formation are poorly sorted and have a clay matrix in The top of the upper Cape Fear aquifer, shown on most areas of the Inner Coastal Plain, including the Sand plate 22, has a general northeast strike and a dip of up to Hills (Heron and Wheeler, 1964, p. 13); the sand beds are 50 ft/mi toward the southeast; however, the dip is only more uniform (as determined from geophysical logs) in about 10 ft/mi along the axis of the Cape Fear arch in downdip areas. Bladen, Columbus, and Brunswick Counties. The aquifer does not extend to the Fall Line except in a few places. OCCURRENCE OF SALTWATER Generally, sand units of the upper Cape Fear aquifer along its western edge are thin and pinch out, as shown Except for an area near the Virginia border from on plates 2-5. Also, along the western edge of the aquifer Gates to Pasquotank Counties, the freshwater-saltwater from near Goldsboro, Wayne County, to Halifax County, transition zone in the upper Cape Fear aquifer (pi. 22) a thick section of clay containing very little permeable lies just west of the transition zone in the Black Creek material is present between basement rocks and the aquifer (pi. 21). Where the upper Cape Fear aquifer is upper Cape Fear aquifer (pi. 10). thin (well 119, pi. 7), the transition zone is 1 to 2 mi wide. The aquifer thickens eastward from about 10 ft along In parts of the Cape Fear valley, the aquifer is thicker its western edge to nearly 500 ft in central Tyrrell (pi. 4) and the transition zone is as much as 8 mi wide, as County. Its average thickness is just over 100 ft (table 4), shown in the hydrogeologic sections on plates 2, 4-9, and and its greatest thickness occurs beneath the Albemarle- 14. There are no known places where freshwater occurs Pamlico Peninsula east of Beaufort and Washington or is likely to occur beneath the upper Cape Fear aquifer Counties. It is generally less than 100 ft thick over and where this aquifer contains saltwater. along the northern flank of the Cape Fear arch. The position of the 10,000 mg/L isochlors shown on plate 22 is based on analyses of water samples collected at several NRCD research stations. These isochlors DISTRIBUTION OF PERMEABLE MATERIAL parallel and lie slightly west of those in the Black Creek The upper Cape Fear aquifer, on the average, is aquifer in the northern half of the Coastal Plain. The composed of about 60 percent sand, with the amount of distance between the 10,000 mg/L isochlors intersecting sand ranging between about 30 and 90 percent. The areal the top and bottom of the upper Cape Fear aquifer distribution of sand in the aquifer is shown on plate 22. ranges from 5 to 10 mi. Southeast of Craven County the The region east of Wilson and Edgecombe Counties to 10,000 mg/L isochlors are near the coast, and east of Beaufort and Washington Counties, and possibly Brunswick County they lie offshore. beyond, is the largest area where the percentage of sand The landward reentrant of the 10,000 mg/L isochlors in in the aquifer is lower than average. The aquifer contains New Hanover and Pender Counties along the Cape Fear a slightly greater proportion of sand in the southeast River is based on data from a test hole (well 115, pi. 4) at Coastal Plain in the vicinity of the Cape Fear River. Moores Creek National Park near Currie in Pender Relatively small areas of the aquifer along the Inner County. This reentrant of saltwater appears to be Coastal Plain contain more than 80 percent sand; in these related to the ground-water circulation pattern in the areas the aquifer is thin and consists of a single sand bed aquifer. Primarily, the Cape Fear River valley is a (pis. 3, 10). discharge area of the upper Cape Fear aquifer. The sands that compose the upper Cape Fear aquifer are poorly sorted, with grain size ranging from very fine UPPER CAPE FEAR CONFINING UNIT to gravel; the most common sand size, as determined from lithologic logs, is medium or fine to medium. The upper Cape Fear confining unit, which overlies Aquifer-test data for the upper Cape Fear aquifer are the upper Cape Fear aquifer, consists of nearly continu­ scarce. Hydraulic conductivity values from two tests in ous clay, silty clay, and sandy clay beds. Most of these Wilson County (Winner, 1976, p. 54), from tests in Pitt beds belong either to the lower Middendorf Formation in County (Sumsion, 1970, p. 32), and from an unpublished the Sand Hills area (and possibly extend downdip) or to test by NRCD in Greene County range from about 25 to the Black Creek Formation. The confining unit may also HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK 139

80° 79 78 77 76 75 37

VIRGINIA

36

35

34 EXPLANATION SUBCROP AREA OF AQUIFERS OVERLYING UPPER CAPE FEAR CONFINING UNIT 10 Surficial 9 Yorktown 6 Beaufort 4 Black Creek LIMIT OF CONTACT WITH OVERLYING AQUIFERS

33"

50 100 MILES i _J 0 50 100 KILOMETERS FIGURE 20. Aquifers that directly overlie the upper Cape Fear confining unit and aquifer.

include clay beds in the uppermost Cape Fear Formation The hydrogeologic sections (pis. 2-14) show the corre­ in the eastern third of the Coastal Plain, where the lation of the upper Cape Fear confining unit throughout sedimentary wedge thickens greatly. Along the north­ the Coastal Plain and its relation to the aquifers it western part of the Coastal Plain in and north of Wayne separates. Along the Inner Coastal Plain, the Cape Fear County, where the Cape Fear Formation is overlain by and Neuse Rivers are in close hydraulic connection with the Yorktown Formation (fig. 20), clays in the lower part the upper Cape Fear aquifer where their channels cut of the Yorktown are also included in this confining unit. through or into the confining unit (pis. 3, 6). On the basis 140 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN of geologic descriptions of outcropping materials, the Tar west of the lower Cape Fear aquifer, the upper Cape and Roanoke Rivers are also inferred to cut into the Fear aquifer is in direct contact with basement rocks or upper Cape Fear aquifer along short reaches near the with undifferentiated clay units on top of the basement western limit of the aquifer. rocks. A general coastward thickening of the confining unit is indicated on plate 22. The average thickness of the unit calculated from measurements in wells penetrating it is LOWER CAPE FEAR AQUIFER 48 ft (table 4); however, there are areas where the The lower Cape Fear aquifer is composed of older sand confining unit is thicker than 100 ft. One of these is from beds of the Cape Fear Formation, as discussed in the Scotland and Hoke Counties southeastward into Bladen section on the upper Cape Fear aquifer. These older County, and possibly into Columbus County; another sediments are distinguished as a hydrogeologic unit area is centered around the common point of Onslow, separate from the overlying younger sand units of the Duplin, and Fender Counties, and a third is in Dare Cape Fear Formation. The lower Cape Fear sediments County. do not extend as far west as do the sands that compose the upper Cape Fear aquifer; rather, they pinch out RELATION WITH OTHER AQUIFERS against the eastward-sloping bedrock surface (pis. 2, 3). Over about 90 percent of the aquifer area from the The lower Cape Fear aquifer is traced northward to a Sand Hills, where the Black Creek overlaps the upper point where it extends farther west and is close to the Cape Fear northeast to Currituck County at the Virginia Fall Line near the Virginia border (fig. 21). border the upper Cape Fear aquifer and its confining The extent of the lower Cape Fear aquifer is also unit are overlain by the Black Creek aquifer (fig. 20). The shown on plate 23. The top of this aquifer has a north­ Yorktown aquifer overlies the upper Cape Fear along its eastward strike similar to that of the upper Cape Fear northwestern limit, and the Beaufort aquifer overlies the aquifer and shows a slightly greater southeast dip (15 to upper Cape Fear in Gates, Hertford, and Camden Coun­ 55 ft/mi). The thickness of the lower Cape Fear aquifer ties near the Virginia border. A small patch of undiffer- ranges from a few feet along its western margin to at entiated post-Miocene deposits (surficial aquifer) over­ least 400 ft downdip, with an average of nearly 175 ft lies the upper Cape Fear in Wayne, Wilson, and (table 4). Its greatest thickness in the northeastern Johnston Counties. Coastal Plain is attributed to the influence of the Albe- Recharge to the upper Cape Fear aquifer is from marle embayment on deposition of the Cape Fear For­ downward percolation of water through the overlying mation (fig. 5). aquifers and confining units, primarily in interstream areas along the western limit of the aquifer. Before the DISTRIBUTION OF PERMEABLE MATERIAL advent of large-scale pumping from the upper Cape Fear, its natural recharge area was a zone estimated to The sand composition of the lower Cape Fear aquifer be about 25 mi wide paralleling the western limit of the averages about 58 percent and ranges from about 40 to 90 aquifer. Pumping has altered this natural recharge pat­ percent, according to data from 48 wells that penetrate tern in some areas, and widespread cones of depression the aquifer (table 4). Sand percentage distribution in the cause water to move into the aquifer from both overlying aquifer is shown on plate 23. Sand beds compose more and underlying aquifers. than 60 percent of the aquifer in several scattered areas; Natural discharge from the upper Cape Fear aquifer the largest of these is an arc-shaped area extending from occurs along and directly into streams whose channels southern Duplin County, through Sampson and Bladen incise the unit. Plate 22 shows where the upper Cape Counties, to Columbus County, where the aquifer has an Fear confining unit is missing in valleys of some of the average sand content of more than 70 percent. larger streams. Discharge to many smaller streams Clay predominates in the aquifer in two areas. One is undoubtedly occurs as upward leakage through overly­ along its western margin in southern Pitt, western ing sediments. Discharge from the upper Cape Fear Craven, Jones, and eastern Lenoir Counties; the other is aquifer in predevelopment times probably occurred in Pender and Brunswick Counties. The aquifer averages everywhere east of the zone of recharge; the natural only about 48 percent sand in these places. discharge pattern has also been altered by ground-water The sand beds of the lower Cape Fear aquifer have a withdrawals. range in grain size from fine to coarse, but the most The lower Cape Fear aquifer underlies the upper Cape common descriptions in lithologic logs are of medium to Fear aquifer throughout the eastern three-fourths of its fine and medium sands. Gravel has been noted in a few area in the Coastal Plain (fig. 21). Everywhere to the wells along the inner margin of the aquifer, and along the HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK 141

76° 80 79 78 77 75 37

Limit of upper Cape Fear aquifer and confining unit. Limit coincides with Fall Line in places VIRGINIA

36

35

34 EXPLANATION SUBCROP AREA OF CONFINING UNIT OR BASEMENT ROCKS UNDERLYING UPPER CAPE FEAR AQUIFER 2 Lower Cape Fear B Basement rocks LIMIT OF CONTACT WITH UNDERLYING CONFINING UNIT OR BASEMENT ROCKS

33

50 100 MILES I 1 I 0 50 100 KILOMETERS FIGURE 21. Areas where the lower Cape Fear confining unit or basement rocks directly underlie the upper Cape Fear aquifer. coastline the aquifer contains some thin beds of lime­ conductivity of about 60 ft/d (Brown and Silvey, 1977, stone. p. ID- Estimated hydraulic conductivity for the aquifer ranges between 20 and 75 ft/d and averages 34 ft/d (table OCCURRENCE OF SALTWATER 4). No aquifer tests have been conducted on the lower Cape Fear aquifer in North Carolina. However, some In North Carolina, the lower Cape Fear aquifer con­ tests at Norfolk, Va., in a sand bed approximately tains freshwater only along its western margin in equivalent to part of this aquifer, indicate a hydraulic Northampton, eastern Halifax, southern Pitt, eastern 142 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

Lenoir, and central Duplin and Sampson Counties. The RELATION WITH OTHER AQUIFERS freshwater-saltwater transition zone lies east and south­ The lower Cape Fear aquifer and its confining unit are east of these counties; within them only the uppermost overlain everywhere by the upper Cape Fear aquifer, sands of the aquifer contain freshwater. The width of the except in a small area near the Fall Line in Northampton transition zone, as shown on plate 23, is about 32 mi along County, where it is covered by the Yorktown aquifer the Virginia border, where the aquifer is thickest. The (fig. 22). Before the effects of pumping from the Creta­ width narrows to about 5 mi in the central part of the ceous aquifers became widespread, natural recharge to Coastal Plain in Craven County. The position of the 250 the lower Cape Fear aquifer probably occurred from the mg/L isochlors is also shown in hydrogeologic sections upper Cape Fear and Yorktown aquifers in the inter- (pis. 2-6, 8, 9, 14). stream areas along its western margin from about Samp­ Analyses of water samples from NRCD research sta­ son County northward. Because all the known water- tion wells tapping the lower Cape Fear aquifer provide level measurements in this aquifer have been made data for locating the 10,000 mg/L isochlors shown on during the postdevelopment period, it is difficult to plate 23. Data from overlying and underlying aquifers reconstruct predevelopment areas of natural recharge; were also used in the analysis. These isochlors parallel however, the recharge areas during both predevelop­ and lie west of those in the overlying upper Cape Fear ment and postdevelopment times probably are less than aquifer. The distance between the 10,000 mg/L isochlors 10 mi wide along the western limit of the aquifer. intersecting the top and bottom of the aquifer is between Predevelopment discharge from the aquifer probably 2 and 15 mi. Profiles of the 10,000 mg/L isochlors are consisted almost exclusively of upward leakage into the shown in the hydrogeologic sections (pis. 4-8, 11-13). upper Cape Fear aquifer. An exception may have been A landward reentrant of the 10,000 mg/L isochlors in along a short reach of the Roanoke River between the vicinity of the Cape Fear River is similar to that in Northampton and Halifax Counties where the lower the overlying upper Cape Fear aquifer; in the lower Cape Cape Fear confining unit is incised by the river (pi. 23), Fear, however, the isochlors extend slightly farther up and where the lower Cape Fear aquifer may be discharg­ the river. This reentrant of saltwater probably is due to ing directly into the stream. the Cape Fear River Valley acting as a discharge area for Along the South Carolina border in Columbus and the aquifer. Brunswick Counties, the lower Cape Fear aquifer is not being used for water supply because it contains water LOWER CAPE FEAR CONFINING UNIT that is too salty for most purposes. Hence, recent The lower Cape Fear confining unit, which overlies the water-level measurements probably reflect heads not lower Cape Fear aquifer, is composed of clay and sandy very different from those in predevelopment times. It is clay beds that belong largely to the Cape Fear Forma­ likely, also, that the north and northwest direction of tion. In the northwestern Coastal Plain where the aqui­ ground-water flow, as indicated by the heads, reflects a fer is overlain by Tertiary sediments, part of the confin­ predevelopment flow pattern. Further analysis of this pattern indicates that ground water is moving through ing unit may be of Tertiary age. the lower Cape Fear aquifer from South Carolina into The continuity of the confining unit is shown in the North Carolina, and that some of it discharges upward hydrogeologic sections on plates 2-14. In places along the into the upper Cape Fear aquifer in the vicinity of the western edge of the aquifer, the confining unit pinches Cape Fear River. Evidence of this includes (1) progres­ out so that the lower Cape Fear and upper Cape Fear sive upward loss of head at several test sites in the Cape aquifers merge; elsewhere, the confining unit either Fear River-Northeast Cape Fear River valleys and (2) terminates against bedrock or is combined with younger the presence of saltwater seeps in the Cape Fear River clay beds to form a thick clay section overlying bedrock. valley observed by LeGrand (1955, p. 2023). The north­ Downdip, the lower Cape Fear confining unit becomes west flow direction may have developed because of the thicker, as would be expected in the eastward-thickening presence of the reentrant of dense saltwater (chloride Coastal Plain sedimentary wedge (pi. 23). The confining concentration more than 10,000 mg/L) in the aquifer (pi. unit is more than 75 ft thick throughout the eastern 23), so that less dense saltwater, moving generally quarter of the Coastal Plain and in Bertie and Halifax northeast, is forced to move updip and around the Counties. It is more than 100 ft thick in parts or all of saltwater reentrant. Pasquotank, Camden, and Currituck Counties, and in The Lower Cretaceous confining unit and aquifer Columbus and Brunswick Counties in the southeast. The underlie the lower Cape Fear aquifer in the eastern half average thickness of this confining unit is about 52 ft of the Coastal Plain east of a line from Carteret County (table 4). north and northwest to Hertford County (fig. 23). Every- HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK 143

80° 79 78 77 76 75 37

36

Cfrrjit of lower Cape Fear aquife and.confining utfit

35

34 EXPLANATION SUBCROP AREA OF AQUIFERS OVERLYING LOWER CAPE FEAR CONFINING UNIT 9 Yorktown 3 Upper Cape Fear

LIMIT OF CONTACT WITH OVERLYING AQUIFERS

33°

50 100 MILES I 50 100 KILOMETERS

FIGURE 22. Aquifers that directly overlie the lower Cape Fear confining unit and aquifer.

where west of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer subcrop, possibly include older rocks. These rocks do not crop out the lower Cape Fear aquifer lies directly on basement in North Carolina and are known only from geophysical rock or on thick clay beds. logs and well cuttings. Their depth has precluded gath­ ering much geologic and hydrologic data. The Lower LOWER CRETACEOUS AQUIFER Cretaceous aquifer includes the principal water-bearing Sediments beneath the Cape Fear Formation are zones in the Lower Cretaceous section of the North generally regarded as Early Cretaceous in age and Carolina Coastal Plain. 144 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

80 79 78 77 76 75 37

VIRGINIA

36

Limit of lower Ca aquifer ahd confin*ng\-

35

34 EXPLANATION SUBCROP AREA OF CONFINING UNIT OR BASEMENT ROCKS UNDERLYING LOWER CAPE FEAR AQUIFER 1 Lower Cretaceous B Basement rocks LIMIT OF CONTACT WITH UNDERLYING CONFINING UNIT OR BASEMENT ROCKS

33

50 100 MILES 1 100 KILOMETERS FIGURE 23. -Areas where the Lower Cretaceous confining unit or basement rocks directly underlie the lower Cape Fear aquifer.

Although the western limit of the Lower Cretaceous Maher and Applin (1971, p. 38) reported that Lower sediments extends only about halfway into the northern Cretaceous sediments nearest the surface are lithologi- Coastal Plain (fig. 23), the beds thicken greatly eastward cally similar to overlying Upper Cretaceous nonmarine so that they form about one-third to one-half the total beds, and that downdip the occurrence of marine beds thickness of the Coastal Plain sediments along the north­ increases. The nonmarine beds are varicolored shale, ern coastline. Spangler (1950, p. 123) described these arkosic, micaceous, or lignitic sand, and gravelly sand. sediments as largely marine deposits, but interbedded Marine beds are chiefly limestones that may be sandy or nonmarine sediments are seen throughout the sections. dolomitic; anhydrite is a minor constituent. HYDROGEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK 145

Lower Cretaceous sediments were correlated into conductivity for the aquifer in that area ranges between Virginia by Brown and others (1972) as sediments 10 and 40 ft/d. belonging to Trinitian, Fredericksburgian, and Washitan Stages. Brown and Cosner (1974) also described Lower OCCURRENCE OF SALTWATER Cretaceous strata in southern Virginia along the North The Lower Cretaceous aquifer in North Carolina con­ Carolina border, and equated these with sediments of the tains little freshwater. Freshwater is restricted to a Potomac Formation. Lower Cretaceous sediments are small area along the Virginia border in Hertford and not known in the subsurface along the North Carolina- Northampton Counties (pi. 24) where the freshwater- South Carolina border. saltwater transition zone trends almost east-west. The The Lower Cretaceous aquifer is the lowermost aqui­ transition zone is 1 to 2 mi wide. Just at the southern fer defined in this report. The mapped extent in North edge of the transition zone, a water sample from near the Carolina is limited to the northern tier of counties, as bottom of the aquifer contained 1,100 mg/L chloride (well shown on plate 24; south of this area, hydrogeologic data 67, pi. 8). are lacking to separate the lower Cape Fear and Lower The 10,000 mg/L isochlors extend southward from the Cretaceous aquifers. The southward projection of the Virginia border in the vicinity of the Camden County- limit of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer was estimated Currituck County line to northern Pasquotank County, from the limit of Lower Cretaceous sediments shown by and thence westward to the aquifer limit in southern Maher and Applin (1971, pi. 17). The section on plate 8 Hertford County (pi. 24). The distance between the shows the aquifer from its western limit in Virginia 10,000 mg/L isochlors intersecting the top and bottom of downdip to Currituck County, N.C. The aquifer also has the aquifer is large, primarily because of the great been identified in a test hole (well 160, pi. 14) in Virginia thickness of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer. Two water that penetrates all the Coastal Plain sediments. samples, one from the upper part of the aquifer in The upper surface of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer Pasquotank County (well 108, pi. 8) and another from the dips east, steepening from 15 ft/mi near its western limit lower part of the aquifer in well 160 (pi. 14) in Virginia, to about 25 ft/mi near the coast. The altitude of the were the control data for the interpretation of the 10,000 aquifer top in northeastern North Carolina ranges from mg/L isochlors. less than 600 ft to as much as 2,267 ft below sea level (pi. 24). The thickness of the aquifer also increases to the LOWER CRETACEOUS CONFINING UNIT east, as shown on plate 8, from about 25 ft near its western limit (well 161) to 812 ft in well 57. The average The Lower Cretaceous confining unit, which overlies thickness of the aquifer west of the 10,000 mg/L isochlor the Lower Cretaceous aquifer, consists of clay and sandy boundary is about 500 ft. clay beds that belong to sediments of either Early Cretaceous or Late Cretaceous age. The degree of continuity of this confining unit along the western margin DISTRIBUTION OF PERMEABLE MATERIAL of the aquifer is not well understood. For example, there The Lower Cretaceous aquifer averages 53 percent are no data to indicate whether the aquifer or the sand in five wells that penetrate it (table 4). The distri­ confining unit first pinches out updip. bution of these wells is shown on plate 24. The proportion Downdip, the confining unit is correlated between a of sand to clay varies little from west to east in the few wells (pi. 8) and shows a general trend of thickening aquifer, although the aquifer thickens greatly in this toward the coast (pi. 24). The thickness of the unit ranges direction. to nearly 70 ft in Camden and Currituck Counties. The Grain sizes interpreted from geophysical logs appear average thickness is about 44 ft, based on data from eight to be mostly fine to medium, with a few scattered beds of wells that penetrate the confining unit (table 4). coarse sand. Some sand layers apparently either contain a significant proportion of clay or are somewhat glauco- RELATION WITH OTHER AQUIFERS nitic. The deeper parts of the aquifer include limestone The Lower Cretaceous aquifer and its confining unit beds. Estimates of hydraulic conductivity range between are overlain everywhere by the lower Cape Fear aquifer, 20 and 30 ft/d. Brown and Cosner (1974) report trans- as shown in figure 23, and are underlain everywhere by missivity values for the Lower Cretaceous aquifer at crystalline basement rocks. Aside from the negligible Franklin, Va., about 10 mi due north of the Gates ground-water flow in fractured or weathered bedrock, all County-Hertford County line at the Virginia border, to water flowing into or out of the Lower Cretaceous be between 6,000 and 24,000 feet squared per day (ft2/d). aquifer must pass through the lower Cape Fear aquifer. Given an average thickness of about 600 ft, the hydraulic Patterns of natural recharge and discharge in the Lower 146 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

Cretaceous aquifer have been masked, at least in the water levels in different sedimentary layers, and differ­ northern Coastal Plain, by the effects of large ground- ences in water quality. water withdrawals from the Lower Cretaceous and Ten aquifers and nine confining units constitute the lower Cape Fear aquifers in Virginia. hydrogeologic framework of the North Carolina Coastal Comparative water-level measurements in these aqui­ Plain. The names of the aquifers (except the lowermost fers in North Carolina do not extend far enough back in aquifer) were derived from the geologic formation most time to provide information about the predevelopment closely associated with each aquifer. Uppermost to low­ condition of the aquifer. However, the direction of ermost, these are the surficial aquifer, Yorktown aqui­ ground-water movement in the Lower Cretaceous aqui­ fer, Pungo River aquifer, Castle Hayne aquifer, Beau­ fer may be inferred from the orientation of saltwater in fort aquifer, Peedee aquifer, Black Creek aquifer, upper the aquifer. The transition zone in the Lower Cretaceous Cape Fear aquifer, lower Cape Fear aquifer, and Lower aquifer (pi. 24), which is oriented nearly east-west, is Cretaceous aquifer. presumed to represent a front of saltwater that has been Along with the hydrogeologic sections, maps showing created by action of freshwater flowing in a direction the altitude of the top of each aquifer, the thickness of more or less perpendicular to the front. Therefore, it appears that predevelopment ground-water movement each confining unit, and the percentage of permeable in the aquifer was in a southerly direction, flowing from material in each aquifer provide areal descriptions of recharge areas in Virginia to discharge areas in Virginia these aquifers. Hydrogeologic data for each of 161 well and North Carolina. All of this discharge in North sites include the altitude of the top of each unit, the Carolina was by upward leakage through the Lower thickness of each unit, the percentage of permeable Cretaceous confining unit to the lower Cape Fear material in each unit, and an estimate of hydraulic aquifer. conductivity for each aquifer; these data are given in the "Supplemental Data" section at the end of the report.

SUMMARY SELECTED REFERENCES The North Carolina Coastal Plain is underlain by a Bain, G.L., 1970, Geology and ground-water resources of New generally eastward dipping and eastward thickening Hanover County, North Carolina: North Carolina Department of wedge of sedimentary rocks ranging in age from Holo- Water and Air Resources Ground-Water Bulletin 17, 79 p. cene to Cretaceous and composed of unconsolidated Baum, G.R., Harris, W.B., and Zullo, V.A., 1978, Stratigraphic revision of the exposed middle Eocene to lower Miocene forma­ gravel, sand, silt, and clay with scattered beds of shells, tions of North Carolina: Southeastern Geology, v. 20, no. 1, indurated to loosely consolidated beds of limestone, p. 1-19. sandy limestone, and shell limestone. These sediments Behrendt, J.C., Hamilton, R.M., Ackermann, H.D., and Henry, V.J., lie on crystalline basement rocks and attain a thickness of 1981, Cenozoic faulting in the vicinity of the Charleston, South more than 10,000 ft east of Cape Hatteras. Most of these Carolina, 1886 earthquake: Geology, v. 9, no. 3, p. 117-122. rocks are nonmarine and deltaic in origin. They consist Berry, E.W., 1914, The Upper Cretaceous and Eocene floras of South Carolina and Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper largely of sand and clay sequences that are discontinuous 84, 200 p. and heterogeneous and locally show evidence of exposure Billingsley, G.A., Fish, R.E., and Schipf, R.G., 1957, Water resources to the atmosphere. This is especially true of the lower­ of the Neuse River basin, North Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey most one-third to one-half of the sedimentary section Water-Supply Paper 1414, 89 p. making up the oldest rock layers. The upper sequences Blackwelder, B.W., 1981, Stratigraphy of upper Pliocene and lower Pleistocene marine and estuarine deposits of northeastern North are largely marine in origin and include nearshore and Carolina and southeastern Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Bul­ estuarine deposits, lagoonal sediments, and beds depos­ letin 1502-B, 19 p. ited in deep waters. The entire Coastal Plain sedimen­ Blankenship, R.R., 1965, Reconnaissance of ground-water resources of tary sequence has a complex erosional and depositional the Southport-Elizabethtown area, North Carolina: North Caro­ history as a result of continental rifting, the presence of lina Department of Water Resources Ground-Water Bulletin 6, 47 p. structural highs and lows in the underlying basement Brown, D.L., and Silvey, W.D., 1977, Artificial recharge to a rocks, and fluctuations in the level of the sea. freshwater-sensitive brackish-water sand aquifer, Norfolk, Vir­ The stratigraphic continuity of these sediments was ginia: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 939, 53 p. delineated primarily by using geophysical logs in con­ Brown, G.A., and Cosner, O.J., 1974, Ground-water conditions in the junction with lithologic data to construct 18 intercon­ Franklin area, southeastern Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-538, 3 sheets. nected hydrogeologic sections throughout the Coastal Brown, P.M., 1958a, The relation of phosphorites to ground water in Plain. Aquifers and confining units also were delineated Beaufort County, North Carolina: Economic Geology, v. 53, no. 1, on the basis of lithologic similarities, information on p. 85-101. SELECTED REFERENCES 147

1958b, Well logs from the Coastal Plain of North Carolina: of the Coastal Plain between New Bern and Coats, North Carolina: North Carolina Department of Conservation and Development Carolina Geological Society and Atlantic Coastal Plain Geological Bulletin 72, 68 p. Association Field Trip Guidebook, Oct. 7-8, 1972, 44 p. 1959, Geology and ground-water resources in the Greenville 1977, The Arapahoe Ridge, a Pleistocene storm beach: South­ area, North Carolina: North Carolina Department of Conservation eastern Geology, v. 18, no. 4, p. 231-247. and Development Bulletin 73, 87 p. Dennison, J.M., and Wheeler, W.H., 1975, Stratigraphy of Precam- 1960, Ground-water supply of Cape Hatteras National Seashore brian through Cretaceous strata of probable fluvial origin in recreational area: North Carolina Department of Water Resources Southeastern United States and their potential as uranium host Report of Investigations 1, 14 p. rocks: Southeastern Geology Special Publication 5, 210 p. 1963, The geology of northeastern North Carolina (Guidebook DeWiest, R.J.M., Sayre, A.N., and Jacob, C.E., 1967, Evaluation of for the fourth annual field conference of the Atlantic Coastal Plain potential impact of phosphate mining on ground-water resources of Geological Association in northeastern North Carolina): Raleigh, eastern North Carolina: North Carolina Department of Water North Carolina Department of Conservation and Development, Resources, 167 p. Division of Mineral Resources Special Publication, 44 p. Fallaw, Wallace, and Wheeler, W.H., 1969, Marine fossiliferous Pleis­ Brown, P.M., Brown, D.L., Shufflebarger, T.E., and Sampair, J.L., tocene deposits in southeastern North Carolina: Southeastern 1977, Wrench-style deformation in rocks of Cretaceous and Pale- Geology, v. 10, no. 1, p. 35-54. ocene age, North Carolina Coastal Plain: North Carolina Depart­ Faye, R.E., and Prowell, D.C., 1982, Effects of Late Cretaceous and ment of Natural and Economic Resources, Division of Earth Cenozoic faulting on the geology and hydrology of the Coastal Resources Special Publication 5, 44 p. Plain near the Savannah River, Georgia and South Carolina: U.S. Brown, P.M., Miller, J.A., and Swain, F.M., 1972, Structural and Geological Survey Open-File Report 82-156, 73 p. stratigraphic framework, and spatial distribution of permeability Fenneman, N.M., 1938, Physiography of Eastern United States: New of the Atlantic Coastal Plain, North Carolina to New York: U.S. York, McGraw-Hill, 714 p. Geological Survey Professional Paper 796, 79 p. Fish, R.E., LeGrand, H.E., and Billingsley, G.A., 1957, Water resour­ Carter, J.G., comp., 1983, Summary of lithostratigraphy and biostra- ces of the Yadkm-Pee Dee River basin, North Carolina: U.S. tigraphy for the Coastal Plain of the Southeastern United States: Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1415, 115 p. Chapel Hill, N.C., Biostratigraphy Newsletter, no. 2, Oct. 15, Floyd, E.G., 1969, Ground-water resources of Craven County, North 1983. Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Investigations Atlas Cederstrom, D.J., Boswell, E.H., and Tarver, G.R., 1979, Summary HA-343. appraisals of the Nation's ground-water resources South Floyd, E.G., and Long, A.T., 1970, Well records and other basic Atlantic- Gulf Region: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper ground-water data, Craven County, North Carolina: North Caro­ 813-0, 35 p. lina Department of Water and Air Resources Ground-Water Christopher, R.A., Owens, J.P., and Sohl, N.F., 1979, Late Creta­ Circular 14, 111 p. ceous palynomorphs from the Cape Fear Formation of North Floyd, E.O., and Peace, R.R., 1974, An appraisal of the ground-water Carolina: Southeastern Geology, v. 20, no. 3, p. 145-159. resources of the upper Cape Fear River basin, North Carolina: Clark, W.B., Miller, B.L., Stephenson, L.W., Johnson, B.L., and North Carolina Department of Water and Air Resources Ground- Parker, H.N., 1912, The Coastal Plain of North Carolina: North Water Bulletin 20, 17 p. Carolina Geological and Economic Survey, v. 3, pt. 1, p. 1-330. Gibson, T.G., 1967, Stratigraphy and paleoenvironment of the phos- Coble, R.W., Giese, G.L., and Eimers, J.L., 1984, North Carolina phatic Miocene strata of North Carolina: Geological Society of ground-water resources, in National water summary 1984, Hydro- America Bulletin, v. 78, no. 5, p. 631-650. logic events, selected water-quality trends, and ground-water Giese, G.L., Wilder, H.B., and Parker, G.G., Jr., 1979, Hydrology of resources: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2275, major estuaries and sounds of North Carolina: U.S. Geological p. 329-534. Survey Water-Resources Investigations 79-46, 175 p. Coch, N.K., 1968, Geology of the Binns Church, Smithfield, Windsor, Gohn, G.S., Higgins, B.B., Smith, C.C., and Owens, J.P. 1977, and Chuckatuck quadrangles, Virginia: Virginia Division of Min­ Lithostratigraphy of the deep corehole (Clubhouse Crossroads eral Resources Report of Investigations 17, 39 p. corehole 1) near Charleston, South Carolina: U.S. Geological Conley, J.F., 1962, Geology and mineral resources of Moore County, Survey Professional Paper 1028-E, p. 59-70. North Carolina: North Carolina Department of Conservation and Hamilton, P.A., and Larson, J.D., 1988, Hydrogeology and analysis of Development, Division of Mineral Resources Bulletin 76, 40 p. the ground-water flow system in the Coastal Plain of southeastern Cooke, C.W., 1936, Geology of the Coastal Plain of South Carolina: Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 867, 196 p. Report 87-4240, 175 p. Cosner, O.J., 1976, Measured and simulated ground-water levels in the Harris, W.B., 1978, Stratigraphic and structural framework of the Franklin area, southeastern Virginia, 1973-74: U.S. Geological Rocky Point member of the Cretaceous Peedee Formation, North Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 76--S3, 5 sheets. Carolina: Southeastern Geology, v. 19, no. 4, p. 207-229. Daniel, C.C., III, 1978, Land use, land cover, and drainage on the Harris, W.B., Zullo, V.A., and Baum, G.R., 1979, Tectonic effects on Albemarle-Pamlico Peninsula, eastern North Carolina, 1974: U.S. Cretaceous, Paleogene, and early Neogene sedimentation, North Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigation 78-134, 2 Carolina, in Baum, G.R., and others, eds., Structural and strati- sheets. graphic framework for the Coastal Plain of North Carolina: 1981, Hydrology, geology and soils of pocosins: A comparison of Wrightsville Beach, N.C., Carolina Geological Society and Atlan­ natural and altered systems, in Richardson, C.J., ed., Pocosin tic Coastal Plain Geological Association Field Trip Guidebook, Oct. wetlands, An integrated analysis of Coastal Plain freshwater bogs 19-21, 1979, p. 17-30. in North Carolina: Stroudsburg, Pa., Hutchison and Ross, Inc., Harris, W.H., and Wilder, H.B., 1964, Ground-water supply of Cape p. 69-108. Hatteras National Seashore recreational area, North Carolina Daniels, R.B., Gamble, E.E., Wheeler, W.H., and Holzhey, C.S., Part 3: North Carolina Department of Water Resources Report of 1972, Some details of the surficial stratigraphy and geomorphology Investigations 4, 22 p. 148 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

1966, Geology and ground-water resources of the Hertford- 1968b, Ground-water resources of Chowan County, North Elizabeth City area, North Carolina: North Carolina Department Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Investigations Atlas of Water Resources Ground-Water Bulletin 10, 89 p. HA-292, 1 sheet. Hazel, J.E., 1977, Distribution of some biostratigraphically diagnostic Lloyd, O.B., Jr., and Floyd, E.O., 1968, Ground-water resources of the ostracodes in the Pliocene and lower Pleistocene of Virginia and Belhaven area, North Carolina: North Carolina Department of northern North Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Journal of Water and Air Resources Report of Investigations 8, 38 p. Research, v. 5, no. 3, p. 373-388. Lohman, S.W., 1936, Geology and ground-water resources of the Hazel, J.E., Bybell, L.M., Christopher, R.A., Frederickson, N.O., Elizabeth City area, North Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey May, F.E., McLean, D.M., Poore, R.Z., Smith, C.C., Sohl, N.F., Water-Supply Paper 773-A, 57 p. Valentine, P.C., and Witmer, R.J., 1977, Biostratigraphy of the Maher, J.C., and Applin, E.R., 1971, Geologic framework and petro­ deep corehole (Clubhouse Crossroads corehole 1) near Charleston, leum potential of the Atlantic Coastal Plain and Continental Shelf: South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 659, 98 p. 1028-F, p. 71-89. Manheim, E.T., and Horn, M.K., 1968, Composition of deeper subsur­ face water along the Atlantic continental margin: Southeastern Heath, R.C., 1975, Hydrology of the Albemarle-Pamlico region, North Geology, v. 9, no. 4, p. 215-236. Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigation Maxey, G.B., 1964, Hydrostratigraphic units: Journal of Hydrology, 9-75, 98 p. v. 2, no. 2, p. 124-129. 1980, Basic elements of ground-water hydrology with reference Meisler, Harold, 1980, Preliminary delineation of salty ground water in to conditions in North Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Water- the Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain: U.S. Geological Survey Resources Investigations Open-File Report 80-44, 86 p. Open-File Report 81-71, 12 p. Hem, J.D., 1985, Study and interpretation of the chemical character­ Meisler, Harold, Leahy, P.P., and Knobel, LeRoy, 1984, Effect of istics of natural water: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply eustatic sea-level changes on saltwater-freshwater relations in the Paper 2254, 263 p. Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain: U.S. Geological Survey Water- Heron, S.D., and Wheeler, W.H., 1964, The Cretaceous formations Supply Paper 2255, 28 p. along the Cape Fear River, North Carolina: Atlantic Coastal Plain Meng, A.A., III, and Harsh, J.F., 1984, Hydrogeologic framework of Geological Association annual field excursion, 5th, Guidebook, the Virginia Coastal Plain: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 55 p. Report 84-728, 78 p. Hopkins, H.T., Bower, R.F., Abe, J.M., and Harsh, J.F., 1981, Minard, J.P., Sohl, N.F., and Owens, J.P., 1977, Reintroduction of the Potentiometric surface map for the Cretaceous aquifer, Virginia Severn Formation (Upper Cretaceous) to replace the Monmouth Coastal Plain, 1978: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Formation in Maryland, in Sohl, N.F., and Wright, W.B., Investigations Open-File Report 80-965, 1 sheet. Changes in stratigraphic nomenclature by the U.S. Geological Jordan, R.R., and Smith, R.V., coords., 1983, Correlation of strati- Survey, 1976: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1435-A, graphic units of North America (COSUNA) project, Atlantic p. A132-A133. Coastal Plain region: American Association of Petroleum Geolo­ Mixon, R.B., and Newell, W.L., 1977, Stafford fault system: Struc­ gists Correlation Chart Series, 1 sheet. tures documenting Cretaceous and Tertiary deformation along the Kimrey, J.O., 1964, The Pungo River Formation, a new name for Fall Line in northeastern Virginia: Geology, v. 5, no. 7, p. 437-440. middle Miocene phosphorites in Beaufort County, North Carolina: Mixon, R.B., and Pilkey, O.K., 1976, Reconnaissance geology of the Southeastern Geology, v. 5, no. 4, p. 195-205. submerged and emerged Coastal Plain province, Cape Lookout 1965, Description of the Pungo River Formation in Beaufort area, North Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper County, North Carolina: North Carolina Department of Conser­ 859, 45 p. vation and Development, Division of Mineral Resources Bulletin Morris, D.A., and Johnson, A.I., 1967, Summary of hydrologic and 79, 131 p. physical properties of rock and soil materials, as analyzed by the Larson, J.D., 1981, Distribution of saltwater in the Coastal Plain Hydrologic Laboratory of the U.S. Geological Survey, 1948-60: aquifers of Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1839-D, 42 p. 81-1013, 25 p. Mundorff, M.J., 1946, Ground water in the Halifax area, North Laymon, L.L., and Barksdale, R.G., 1964, Ground-water conditions in Carolina: North Carolina Department of Conservation and Devel­ the Clinton area, North Carolina: North Carolina Department of opment Bulletin 51, 76 p. Water Resources Ground-Water Circular 3, 24 p. Narkunas, James, 1980, Groundwater evaluation in the central Coastal LeGrand, H.E., 1955, Brackish water and its structural implications in Plain of North Carolina: Raleigh, North Carolina Department of the Great Carolina Ridge, North Carolina: American Association Natural Resources and Community Development, 119 p. of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 39, no. 10, p. 2020-2037. Nelson, P.F., 1964, Geology and ground-water resources of the Swan- 1960, Geology and ground-water resources of the Wilmington- quarter area: North Carolina Department of Water Resources New Bern area: North Carolina Department of Water Resources Ground-Water Bulletin 4, 79 p. Ground-Water Bulletin 1, 80 p. 1976, Interim report on ground-water conditions in capacity use -1964, Hydrogeologic framework of the Gulf and Atlantic area no. 1, central Coastal Plain, North Carolina, 1974-75: North Coastal Plain: Southeastern Geology, v. 5, no. 4, p. 177-194. Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Resources Report LeGrand, H.E., and Pettyjohn, W.A., 1981, Regional hydrogeologic of Investigations 13, 55 p. concepts of homoclinal flanks: Ground Water, v. 19, no. 3, Nelson, P.F., and Barksdale, R.G., 1965, Interim report on the p. 303-^310. ground-water resources of the Kinston area, North Carolina: Lindskov, K.L., 1973, Water resources of northeast North Carolina North Carolina Department of Water Resources Ground-Water above Cape Lookout Interim report: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 10, 31 p. Open-File Report, 71 p. Nelson, P.F., and Peek, H.M., 1964, Preliminary report on ground Lloyd, O.B., Jr., 1968a, Ground-water resources of Chowan County, water in Beaufort County with special reference to potential North Carolina: North Carolina Department of Water and Air effects of phosphate mining: North Carolina Department of Water Resources Ground-Water Bulletin 14, 133 p. Resources Ground-Water Circular 2, 25 p. SELECTED REFERENCES 149

North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Resources, 1977, Schipf, R.G., 1961, Geology and ground-water resources of the Fay- Exploratory oil wells of North Carolina, 1925-1976: Division of etteville area: North Carolina Department of Water Resources Earth Resources, Geology and Mineral Resources Section Infor­ Ground-Water Bulletin 3, 99 p. mation Circular 22, 52 p. Siple, G.A., 1960, Piezometric levels in the Cretaceous sand aquifer of North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Community the Savannah River basin: Georgia Mineral Newsletter, v. 8, no. 4, Development, Office of Water Resources, 1980, Ground-water p. 163-166. resources of the Southern Pines area A supplement to the Sloan, Earle, 1904, A preliminary report on the clays of South Carolina: Sandhills capacity use study: Raleigh, 41 p. South Carolina Geological Survey Bulletin, ser. 4, no. 1, 175 p. Owens, J.P., 1983, The northwestern Atlantic Ocean margin, in Sohl, N.F., 1976, Reinstatement of the name Cape Fear Formation in Moullade, M., and Nairn, A.E.M., eds., The Phanerozoic geology North and South Carolina, in Cohee, G.V., and Wright, W.B., of the world, II., The Mesozoic B: Amsterdam and New York, 1976, Changes in stratigraphic nomenclature by the U.S. Geolog­ Elsevier Science Publishers, chap. 2, p. 33-60. ical Survey, 1975: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1422-A, p. A68. Peek, H.M., 1977, Interim report on ground-water conditions in Sohl, N.F., and Christopher, R.A., 1983, The Black Creek-Peedee northeastern North Carolina: North Carolina Department of Nat­ formational contact (Upper Cretaceous) in the Cape Fear region of ural Resources and Community Development Report of Investi­ North Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1285, gations 15, 29 p. 37 p. Peek, H.M., and Laymon, L.L., 1975, Ground-water quality manage­ Spangler, W.B., 1950, Subsurface geology of Atlantic Coastal Plain of ment and monitoring program for North Carolina: North Carolina North Carolina: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Department of Natural and Economic Resources Ground-Water Bulletin, v. 34, no. 1, p. 100-132. Circular 16, 34 p. Stephenson, L.W., 1907, Some facts relating to the Mesozoic deposits Peek, H.M., and Nelson, P.F., 1967, Ground-water problems in the of the Coastal Plain of North Carolina: Johns Hopkins University Coastal Plain related to heavy withdrawals, in Symposium on Circular n.s. no. 7 (whole number 199), p. 93-99. hydrology of the coastal waters of North Carolina, May 12, 1967: Stephenson, L.W., and Johnson, B.L., 1912, The water resources of Water Resources Research Institute Report 5, p. 62-80. the Coastal Plain of North Carolina, in Clark, W.B., Miller, B.L., 1975, Potential effects of withdrawals from the Castle Hayne Stephenson, L.W., Johnson, B.L., and Parker, H.N., The Coastal aquifer for expanded phosphate mining in Beaufort County, North Plain of North Carolina: North Carolina Geological and Economic Carolina: North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Survey, v. 3, pt. 2, p. 333-509. Resources Report of Investigations 11, 33 p. Stephenson, L.W., and Rathbun, M.J., 1923, The Cretaceous forma­ Peek, H.M., Nelson, P.F., Laymon, L.L., Register, L.A., and Jeter, tions of North Carolina: North Carolina Geological and Economic W.J., 1974, Status report on ground-water conditions in capacity Survey, v. 5, pt. 1, 604 p. use area no. 1, central Coastal Plain, North Carolina: North Stuckey, J.L., 1965, North Carolina: Its geology and mineral Carolina Department of Natural and Economic Resources Ground- resources: Raleigh, North Carolina Department of Conservation Water Bulletin 21, 146 p. and Development, 550 p. Peek, H.M., and Register, L.A., 1975, A preliminary report on Stuckey, J.L, and Conrad, S.G., 1958, Explanatory text for geologic anomalous pressure in deep artesian aquifer in southeastern North map of North Carolina: North Carolina Department of Conserva­ Carolina: North Carolina Department of Natural and Economic tion and Development, Division of Mineral Resources Bulletin 71, Resources Report of Investigations 10, 20 p. 51 p. Peek, H.M., Register, L.A., and Nelson, P.F., 1972, Potential ground- Sumsion, C.T., 1968, Summary of the geology and ground-water water supplies for Roanoke Island and the Dare County beaches, resources of Pitt County, North Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey North Carolina: North Carolina Department of Natural and Eco­ Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-291, 1 sheet. nomic Resources Report of Investigations 9, 26 p. 1970, Geology and ground-water resources of Pitt County, Prowell, D.C., and O'Connor, B.J., 1978, Belair fault zone: Evidence of North Carolina: North Carolina Department of Water and Air Tertiary fault displacement in eastern Georgia: Geology, v. 6, no. Resources Ground-Water Bulletin 18, 75 p. 11, p. 681-384. Swain, F.M., 1968, Ostracoda from the upper Tertiary Waccamaw Pusey, R.D., 1960, Geology and ground water in the Goldsboro area, Formation of North Carolina and South Carolina: U.S. Geological North Carolina: North Carolina Department of Water Resources Survey Professional Paper 573-D, p. D1-D37. Ground-Water Bulletin 2, 77 p. Swift, D.J.P., and Heron, S.D., Jr., 1969, Stratigraphy of the Carolina Renken, R.A., 1984, The hydrogeologic framework for the sand aquifer Cretaceous: Southeastern Geology, v. 10, no. 4, p. 201-245. of the southeastern United States Coastal Plain: U.S. Geological Tant, P.L., Byrd, H.J., and Horton, R.E., 1974, General soil map of Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 84-4243, 26 p. North Carolina: U.S. Soil Conservation Service 1:1,000,000 scale Richards, H.G., 1950, Geology of the Coastal Plain of North Carolina: map. American Philosophical Society Transactions, new ser., v. 40, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1978, Quality criteria for pt. 1, 83 p. water, 1976: Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, Robison, T.M., 1977, Public water supplies of North Carolina Part 4, 256 p. Northern Coastal Plain: North Carolina Department of Natural Upson, J.E., 1966, Relationships of fresh and salty ground water in the and Economic Resources, 224 p. Robison, T.M., and Mann, L.T., Jr., 1977, Public water supplies of Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain of the United States: U.S. Geo­ North Carolina Part 5, Southern Coastal Plain: North Carolina logical Survey Professional Paper 550-C, p. C235-C243. Department of Natural and Economic Resources, 341 p. Vail, P.R., Mitchum, R.M., Jr., and Thompson, S., Ill, 1977, Seismic Rona, P. A., 1973, Relations between rates of sediment accumulation on stratigraphy and global changes of sea level, Part 4: Global cycles continental shelves, sea-floor spreading, and eustacy inferred from of relative changes of sea level, in Payton, C.E., ed., Seismic the central North Atlantic: Geological Society of America Bulletin, stratigraphy Applications to hydrocarbon exploration: American v. 84, no. 9, p. 2851-2872. Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 26, p. 83-97. 150 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

Ward, L.W., and Blackwelder, B.W., 1980, Stratigraphic revision of 1981a, An observation-well network concept as applied to upper Miocene and lower Pliocene beds of the Chesapeake Group, North Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Inves­ Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain of North Carolina: U.S. Geological tigation 81-13, 59 p. Survey Bulletin 1482-D, 71 p. -1981b, Proposed observation-well networks and ground-water Ward, L.W., Lawrence, D.R., and Blackwelder, B.W., 1978, Strati- level program for North Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Open- graphic revision of the middle Eocene, Oligocene, and lower File Report 81-544, 68 p. Miocene Atlantic Coastal Plain of North Carolina: U.S. Geologi­ cal Survey Bulletin 1457-F, 23 p. Winner, M.D., Jr., and Simmons, C.E., 1977, Hydrology of the Watts, A.B., 1981, The U.S. Atlantic continental margin: Subsidence Creeping Swamp watershed, North Carolina, with reference to history, crustal structure and thermal evolution, in Geology of potential effects of stream channelization: U.S. Geological Survey passive continental margins: History, structure, and sedimento- Water-Resources Investigation 77-26, 54 p. logic record (with special emphasis on the Atlantic margin): Wyrick, G.G., 1966, Ground-water resources of Martin County, North American Association of Petroleum Geologists and Atlantic Mar­ Carolina: North Carolina Department of Water Resources Ground- gin Energy Conference, Education Course Note Series 19, 75 p. Water Bulletin 9, 85 p. Welby, C.W., and Leith, C.J., 1968, Bedrock surface beneath Pamlico 1967, Water-bearing characteristics and occurrence of aquifers River channel, Beaufort County, North Carolina: North Carolina in Martin County, North Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Hydro- State University Department of Engineering research study, 28 p. logic Investigations Atlas HA-264, 1 sheet. Wilder, H.B., Robison, T.M., and Lindskov, K.L., 1978, Water Zack, A.L., 1977, The occurrence, availability, and chemical quality of resources of northeast North Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey ground water, Grand Strand area and surrounding parts of Horry Water-Resources Investigation 77-81, 113 p. and Georgetown Counties, South Carolina: South Carolina Water Winner, M.D., Jr., 1975, Ground-water resources of the Cape Hatteras Resources Commission Report 8, 100 p. National Seashore, North Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-540, 2 sheets. 1980, Geochemistry of fluoride in the Black Creek aquifer 1976, Ground-water resources of Wilson County, North Caro­ system of Horry and Georgetown Counties, South Carolina And lina: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigation its physiological implications: U.S. Geological Survey Water- 76-60, 85 p. Supply Paper 2067, 40 p. 1978, Ground-water resources of the Cape Lookout National Zoback, M.D., Healy, J.H., Roller, J.C., Gohn, G.S., and Higgins, Seashore, North Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Water- B.B., 1978, Normal faulting and in situ stress in the South Carolina Resources Investigation 78-52, 49 p. Coastal Plain near Charleston: Geology, v. 6, no. 3, p. 147-152. SUPPLEMENTAL DATA [Properties of Aquifers and Confining Units]

SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 153

* «H .u" § -o c u S3 .-s a ~ .w " < u a SH ^ 3 c° -2 '§ i i i If fill .. o iB o -5 ,S 4J r ft. C ^ rr> *Q c b Ei C b Ei g 3 8 jjj | | IS HI Z M i o z g 3 0) 05 s* 0) 0)i 0 D 0> 0> M aj S- § " ^ id id 2 1 i 8* £|j CO m b O b O * rt S *j ^ C-) i^ ^ &;§ .2 J eS £> "" «*H § § H r- t-i vo 5 ^ S ^ ^ 0 b E-i VO CM CM O b E* en vo f-i S S ^ S ^- ^fl Z M VO I Z M m i 1 10) *£& PQ ^ te ^ Js ^ "Od) O Z "O O Z S fc * O *H »rt "^ ""^ U D 0 D fYj ^^ *o3 ^ ^ c 'o 3 3 &J r^ |_J Q PH -U f] 4J ^ S - j* *T e S! -4J H r- en r- o -H o r- r- o "?* fe ^ ^ii ^ ^ ^j co r - ^* co j i t-i co vo ^> i-l J^ <£ CJ O S ^Js * 4-> u a m CM i-i u a m ** S? ^^oDnWgb CQ r- m jj 0> O & 2 ^D ^ 0 m CM en CM co r- m g *^3 t. C^H S £^ 5i S m b E-i co m t-i t-i pyi f_4 CO CM V cS ^ c ^ h, ^ 0 Z M co i o IS Hi co t-i i i? u^'^S^-S^ ^4 r- P>» O Z i i r- o z i i t3? fc ^^ "tn Frl r^ F~H ^ U D U D H ^ ^oSoE-tP^^ g 0) en VD CM o to CM t-i VD m C3 ^"^ 1 C ^^ w c -+J T3 co en vo ^* r0 o co m CM ;^i >H * fl .. fll D 3 Q a CM 3 Q g co O Q} »H tH Q^ W JQ 4J 01 £S U C C $z 0 r- CM ^ O VD VD O t-l CM f-l ,4 b E-i VD CO f-l ££ CM 1 Z M CM V 1 1 IS'SlafS H 0 Z 1 1 o z 1 1 (^ S^^^tnS CM 0 D O U D 1 3 " -S a) ^ T^ PH P^ m CM | £ .« grj O 3 CM CO O CM ^* co r-- o co t-i m co o m (35 O en CM co co m (35 0 t-i m r- m h co b b Ei r- co t-i EH 'llSg'cUfe m -H Z M t-l V 1 * -H Z M f-l V 1 " ^^ ^ flT m w n M 4J o z 1 1 J< 4J o z i i r-r"! S *^ ^ Q ^ !* ** f-i id 0 D ^3 id 0 D ^ 3 C *O . . 'S o ^ CM i-3 CM i-3 ^ fl-*§Q>a5S'^W cu W 'O > "^n *^ .J 0 ^H 3 S? O CO VO O 0 10 «r vo o J ^ *gjj yg S ^ " .. 00 1-4 < t-i r- oo vo o 3 *4* T m oo vo 0^ °^ s_, S~X *-C o o 5^ O f-l u I t-i o r- 0 I f i Z en Z r- b E-i S sll^iif i-i Z M co co o i i-i r- co o t CQ .^ 3 o ti *s rt sr -I O Z t-l CM t-l 1 i-l o z CM t-l .H 1 0) 43 0 D V 0) 43 0 D 1 V O, a. Il*l2i| 0) 05 O a> (35 0 tf 1. 1 -s 1 -S g a U < Q u < CU cu ^S^ sui aT cd *^01 oe£ STdi S C ft b> T3 -w to 0 b E-i O b E-i Z M Z M 0 Z O Z U D U D -Hr *g islii§ - a> oT + > 1c >s ^1, ^»d tin Jjj ."^ *5 4 Z O a *r co o m CO 'Tl OJ ^ ^ t["1 jj rf f-i f-i en CM bjD fe *^ *" ^ r « w *H §*H C .S b/i '§ > 8 f-l M C CQ ^ ^ g "jj-fl CM E~* b E-i 9% ^^ oj ' ' ^ c EH IS HI Z W en m o i *S ^Q co £Zj ^ ^ KM fj O Z i f-i i S ^^ S H OJ i^< 4 « U D V 2 . *. (H ? bi) J«< } ^ « 0 I i ^ ^ t*H -S? ^H z jjjj *m fe fl > ^ OS Q| f 05 O m ^ CM m 2 a V CM VO CM -H CX CM CO CO CM ^ -g 1 H..S ^ § «a w J3 it in § -2 JJ Q ,-B § ^ H'" *S i-3 »** S i-3 H CU (35 < Q H "H CU P5 < Q H o «§ "S ^"~! M '| H ^ CU 05 33 D H &c! DJ PC 33 D a 1 o g>lti u u Q fl> *r< hy T ^7 Ql ^-H O HMHE-IE-IZ.P HMHE-IE-IZ ^ OJD ^H 1 1 f-^ rZ« ^ pg ^ a: u < w o -H J a: u < M o g < H CU S W U U < H CU S W U SUPPLEMENTAL DATA. Properties of aquifers and confining units Continued

Coastal Plains Oil Company. Well No: M181- API No. 32-013-5 (H.M. Jackson No. 1) Map No: 3 Log Depth 1,526 Latitude: 353815 Longitude: 765115 Altitude of Land Surface: 40 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

-63 -73 -90 -222 -245 -348 H ALT TOP 40 -367 -453 -570 -647 -692 -1,173 -1,243 O O THICK >18 10 17 132 23 103 19 86 117 77 45 481 70

PCT PERM __ __ <5 90 <10 85 <15 77 <10 62 <10 75 <10 49 <20 > MATERIAL i i EST HYD -______15 __ 75 _. 45 _ 35 40 40 M CONDUCT CQ CO NRCD Cox' s Crossroad Research Sta. Well No: P19m4 M Map No: 4 Log Depth 800 Latitude : 352223 Longitude: 765704 Altitude of Land Surface: 27 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ .LYSIS-

ALT TOP 27 1 -9 -17 -35 -45 -333 -351 -371 -405 -467 -521 -757

THICK 26 10 8 18 10 288 18 20 34 62 54 236 O w PCT PERM 10 90 <10 90 <10 73 <20 80 24 74 37 53 M MATERIAL § EST HYD 25 25 80 80 30 35 r CONDUCT

NRCD Chocowinity Test. Well No: N21v5 0 Map No: 5 Log Depth 458 Latitude : 353038 Longitude: 770601 Altitude of Land Surface: 33 Basement: COAST SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ r ALT TOP 33 21 13 3 -2 -185 -214 -235 -250 -359 -389 r * THICK 12 8 10 5 183 29 21 15 109 30

PCT PERM 90 <10 90 <5 66 17 90 20 64 <10 MATERIAL

EST HYD 50 25 80 50 . 30 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 155

rn rn U 0 ^ 2 o U O * rJ < ! 1 ,; " *j i-l r-l CM m c b EH C b EH c b EH at

.. .. M m oo oo 4) b EH Q) b EH Q) PM E-* VO 00 r-l U 35 n U U 2 H rn 1 (0 o z (0 § Z (0 o z 1 1 VM U 0 VM O 3 U 0 Li Li Ll p 3 P c/} CO CO IO 00 CM O o b O o b O b O «T r-l VO m U < o U < i-l CM C 3 C 3 c 1 ,3 (0

-H -r-l at -r-l CM CM P- O ±1 Jj

Oo* ^ ^ 0 m vo m CM «T 00 P- p- b EH r^ b EH 00 VO r-l VD b EH m Z fH ^* Z M VD I m Z M 1 1 vo O Z VO O Z 1 1 VD O Z 1 p- rj o p- O 3 P- rj o .. .. X .. "O4) 4) m oo vo m 4) o O\ 00 P* CM -3 «=C O r-l o CM CM O m r-l m O at 0 z m I z at 1 Z r-l b EH b EH b EH rH 2 n oo at in I r-< p- oo o I r 1 r-l Z M r-l 0 Z CM r-l CM 1 rH § Z m r-i I r-l 0 Z 4) 43 O 3 CM V 4) 03 rj o H V Q) J= U 0 S xJ i 3: -u 1 0. Ou O. 4) OS O rn m o m a> PS O CD O\ f*l ^D Q) PS O at vo o o Q o < at CM oo rn o o < OD *Q* tO f7) Q U) 17 S 5 b EH O 0 b EH 0 b EH O i-5 Z M m oo o i -H iJ Z M VO CM O 1 Z M m T m i H O Z «T «T CM 1 41 O Z VO CM i-l 1 O Z rn CM i 4* O 3 r-l V 4 0 0 1 V U O 1 V 4 1 4J Og 4» CO H CO Z O r-l m 5 «* 3 < VO CM VO r-t c/J A S S

0 04 2 < D EH « 04 S < Q EH M O4 PS < Q EH m o u M >4 u ,3 o w M * u U O « M JM U EH S<: 04 PS IE 3 EH « 04 PS X 3 EH i£ O4 OS X O Q O PL! O Q O PL! Q Q u w a D EH M EH EH EH a D EHMEHEHEHZ U EH M EH EH EH Z Oj rH* X U £! M O K in* X U A! M O aj j x u <5 w o 55 r3! EH £4 2»; pQ O $5 r3! EH £L| £ pQ (J g < EH 04 3 « U 156 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

-] < 1 rH <

Z 4-> £ c CM EH C CM EH C CM H Z M Z M 8 0 Z i 0 Z i § z 0) U 3 tt) U 3 tt) U 3 to to to Ijj id Ijj CQ CQ ao TH m o CQ mom o CM O CM O o m «* CM CM O vo vo co m O <^ O <^ "3* CJ i^ m m rH1 vo J i m ,j I vo CM 3 .. e> P- rH CM co P- m tt) CM EH 0) CM EH VO T r-l tt) CM EH rH «P V 0 Z M o Z W m I 0 Z M m i id o z id O Z i i id O Z i i tj U 3 U 3 tj U 3 3 3 3 CO VO rH O O (/] m m m m CM O CM O o^ r^ vo ^* QI O rH VO CM 73 73 U < rH rH 73 & rtj CM rH £J C 1 C ^3 1 -O <0 id « 1 * ti_i rH in CO <4H co m co ts ° Cu H o CM EH m "v I-H o CM EH vo m CM Z M Z w rH 1 rH 1 O Z 0 Z 1 1 tt) O Z a 4 0 3 -8 U 3 73 U 3 1 ' 1 3 3 3 05 !-> 4-> 4-> t«w -H CO H m co m o -H at at o o s£ ±J vo 4-> m rH m m <-> T rH VD CM S r| mil I u a 1 rH rH u a 1 rH CQ < ill I CQ < CQ <

1 o CU CO o O^ o* *o m «* «* m H m m K lO OC O m m r- ^ OC O "3* oc a &H **) CM S *o ij| 73^ 73 t"H ^ ot vo m 3 3 CM H £^ 1 **H Z W rH 1 CM -r-l Z M VO -rl Z M ^ D> *J O Z 3 4J O Z Q 4-* 0 Z HH vo id U 3 rH Id U 3 co id U 3 J <5 T m co co o r- J < H o m u rH U O O\ 0 g Z «* | Z m Z T CM EH CM EH CM EH Z M Z M _, Z W hH1 f-l O Z ,^1 O Z rH O Z PH tt) J3 U 3 0) X U 3 fl) «C U 3 PL, s t; s o. ^C 4J t * Q. o, OC O rH CO O O 0) OC 0 tt) OC 0 § s 0 < m rH O\ O c Q U < Q U < CU CU CU D> 1 0 & 4 D^ O CM EH * 0 CM EH 4J O CM EH i 3 Z M rH 0 in 1 ij J M J Z M O Z co m v i J § Z O Z O 3 1 U 0 . U 3 M Z O m vo rH o Z O CM m r- m 8 g 2 * i * * I?** So §H CM H H CM EH H CM H W Z W CM m o I Z M H Z M Ou O Z rH rH rH 1 A 0 Z M O Z & U 3 1 V 0 3 01 « U 3 0 0 * 0 O o z S 25 Z OC O m r- «* o OC 0 vo co m o >! OC 0 m i i i 3 < CM m co m O P< 3 «e 3 O a o w M >-. o 5 o w M >-. o H X CU OC SC 3 EH^CUOCXO EH X CU « Z 0 U W Q o u w a a o M Q ^ EH W EH EH EH Z U EH M EH H EH Z U EH M EH H EH 2 i-i ac u

NRCD Kelley Research Station. Well No: AA35nl Map No: 12 Log Depth 670 Latitude: 342718 Longitude: 781831 Altitude of Land Surface: 28 Basement: -642

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 28 -6 -14 -150 -233 -366 -407 -517 -577

THICK 34 8 136 83 137 41 110 60 65

PCT PERM 85 <10 66 16 55 22 53 <10 46 MATERIAL

EST HYD 50 45 20 40 25 CONDUCT

Town of White Oak. Well No: X40c4 Map No: 13 Log Depth 386 Latitude: 344430 Longitude: 784230 Altitude of Land Surface: 75 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC SUPPLEMENTAL AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 75 37 32 -131 -205 -281

THICK 38 5 163 74 76

PCT PERM 90 <10 50 20 68 a MATERIAL > EST HYD 30 25 30 CONDUCT

DuFont Corporation. Well No: V41y- Map No: 14 Log Depth 384 Latitude: 345037 Longitude: 785018 Altitude of Land Surface: 147 Basement: -237

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 147 125 113 -86 -119

THICK 22 12 199 33 118

PCT PERM 90 <25 56 <10 59 MATERIAL

EST HYD 50 30 25 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA. Properties of aquifers and confining units Continued

Heat Point Pepperell Company. Well No: Y39g6 Map No: 15 Log Depth 518 Latitude: 343757 Longitude: 783715 Altitude of Land Surface: 130 Basement: -384

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 130 100 86 14 1 -135 -177 -131 -330 M 0 THICK 30 14 72 13 136 42 134 19 54 0

PCT PERM 65 <10 71 15 44 19 62 16 56 f MATERIAL ,O

EST HYD 25 30 25 35 35 M CONDUCT W 1SYSTEM B R 0 N SWICK C 0 U N T Y

NRCD Bear Pen Research Station. Well No: EE36k2 ^ Map No: 16 Log Depth 1,118 Latitude: 340743 Longitude : 782017 Altitude of Land Surface: 64 Basement:-!, 054 ALYSIS-NORTHERl SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 64 -300 -373 -592 -618 -754 -834

THICK >306 73 219 26 136 80 220 ^ PCT PERM ~ 66 14 75 <20 71 <10 54 H MATERIAL f _ __ EST HYD 35 35 50 55 | CONDUCT 0 O O Colonial Oil and Gas Company. Well No: DD31h- API No. 32-019-2 (Trask No. 1) rn Map No: 17 Log Depth 1,235 Latitude: 340820 Longitude : 775745 Altitude of Land Surface: 15 Basement: -1,220 1TALPLAIN SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 15 -25 -35 -140 -190 -435 -507 -765 -820 -975 -1,041

THICK 40 10 105 50 245 72 258 55 155 66 179

PCT PERM 90 <10 67 <25 41 <10 59 <10 74 <10 46 MATERIAL

EST HYD 25 85 65 50 35 50 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA. Properties of aquifers and confining units Continued

NRCD Calabavh R«««arch Station. Well No: HH39J2 Map No: 18 Log Depth 1,335 Latitude: 335336 Longitude: 783522 Altitude of Land Surface: 50 Basement:-1,282

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 50 -12 -50 -349 -416 -638 -694 -802 -868

THICK 62 38 299 67 219 56 108 66 414

PCT PERM 80 <5 50 <10 73 <10 51 <10 45 MATERIAL

EST HYD 25 45 30 -- 45 45 CONDUCT

NRCD Gri »et town Research Station. Well No: GG38k3 Map No: 19 Log Depth 500 Latitude: 335733 Longitude: 782958 Altitude of Land Surface: 42 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC SUPPLEMEN AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 42 -18 -32 -360 -405

THICK 60 14 328 45 f O PCT PERM 87 <10 47 <10 MATERIAL J5

EST HYD 20 50 CONDUCT

Albert Glenn. Well No: DD33yl Map No: 20 Log Depth 400 Latitude: 341018 Longitude: 780954 Altitude of Land Surface: 25 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 25 8 0 -329

THICK 17 8 329

PCT PERM 90 <10 61 MATERIAL

EST HYD 50 30 CONDUCT Or SUPPLEMENTAL DATA. Properties of aquifers and confining units Continued

CAMDEN COUNT Y

Edwin Blair Company. Hell No: DlOa- API No. 32-029-2 (Heyerhaeuser No. 1) Map No: 21 Log Depth 3,471 Latitude: 362440 Longitude : 761030 Altitude of Land Surface: 8 Basement: -2, 814

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC W AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ H AQ UNIT AQ Oi i 0 ALT TOP 8 -510 -534 -541 -624 -647 -818 -862 -995 -1,045 -1,212 -1,332 -1,612 -1,670 25 tr>1 THICK . >138 24 7 83 23 171 44 133 50 167 120 280 58 1,144 £ «©d PCT PERM __ __ , _ <5 90 <10 82 <10 56 34 60 18 53 17 61 <5 ^i i MATERIAL H » EST HYD ~ 15 85 40 30 25 45 2'S CONDUCT GO H H £ CART ERET COUN T Y >Z > NRCD Camp Gl*nn R*c«arch Station. Hell No: X17i6 Map No: 22 Log Depth 1, 120 Latitude: 344323 Longitude : 764513 Altitude of Land Surface: 8 Basement: s"-^ CO1 1 CO SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC 1 25 AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ O 2 ALT TOP 8 -18 -36 -48 -58 -102 -130 -1,082 -1 ,096 H W H THICK 26 18 12 10 44 28 952 14 W25 PCT PERM 90 <25 90 <25 80 <15 93 <15 H£ f MATERIAL > EST HYD 50 40 35 60 __ . _ i i CONDUCT O 0o C H OMAN COUNTY 1!>£ r US6S Glidten T«*t. Hell No: E15bl n Map No: 23 Log Depth 940 Latitude: 361902 Longitude : 763634 Altitude of Land Surface: 36 Basement: f i> i 23 SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 36 -28 -81 -161 -194 -206 -213 -231 -258 -321 -343 -490 -518 -666 -697

THICK 64 53 80 33 12 7 18 27 63 22 147 28 148 31

PCT PERM 66 <25 52 <25 90 <10 67 <25 71 23 58 <10 59 <10 MATERIAL

EST HYD 20 15 25 65 50 40 30 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 161

tH o 0 0 O O U 0 1 *-4 rt3 i *J rtj 1 1 i

-U ^ 4J CM VD O c PM EH c PM EH c CM EH *r in «r en Z M 4) 4) Z tH P- «H i 0 Z e % Z g O Z 4) U 3 4) u a 4) u a m m m <0 r0 r0 CQ CQ CQ r- in o PM O PM O PM O 3* J ** VD V 1 00 o\ O en VD o VD ^ w en en CM CM 0 m i i i PM O CM 0 en P- CM 1 T3 U < VD I | | T3 u < T3 c J^ 1 C J5 C J^ 1 *"O nj r0 r0

i m o\ m VH M-l o en CM m PM EH iP3 ° m CM o PM EH O PM EH T tr CM Z M m v i Z M CM «H o z 1 1 4) 0 Z 4) O Z 1 O .2 o a T3 u a T3 o a 1 3 D D CO 4J -U ~S "H en o\ en o -H p* -H CM 00 CM Si *J ^* VD VD en 1 1 00 1 1 P- «H CM u o m tH en i i i rH o o CM 1 s < CQ < BS ill i CQ < 1 1

'H 00 ^. CM c^> oo in o CM m CM o\ m o CM a\ o ^* CM EH oo in «H a\ PM EH tH P- r-« o\ PM EH CM m m ^i C*) Z M *r vi en en 1 >* en Z M 1 CM t ^o O Z 1 1 VD O Z 1 1 00 O Z *§ *** u a P- o a H p- u a § .. a .. fl) r- tH CM in 4) fl) m m o e $ CM VD in «H T3 D T3 1 «H «H ^ D Q O ^ 3 a o D Q O V 1 cu < 1 -U CU ft, O CU ft, i § -H -H -H U S C C g <+_, O 00 O^ C3 O O O i_3 CM EH <»> CM CM t-5 Cu EH CM EH co Z M en 1 m Z M O Z 1 1 O Z O Z '-C O u a VD o a D en u a 51- ^3 en en o *""! 00 n p- a 4 C3 o\ o\ o o o r- oo VD o o 5- VD DC O oo o VD in VD oi o m m VD m a DC O OH rn CM < CM «H m £ * CM en Cu < m I pa 1 D CQ 1 mm J Q) 4) j 4) r* "^3 T3 T3 c"^ 3 en VD o 3 oo o\ in O D ^ jj PM EH VD CM CM 4J PM EH tH en tH CM 4J PM EH Q «H -H Z M CM V 1 1 -H Z tH CM 1 U O -H Z tH ou *j O Z 1 1 M-l *J o z i i O Z J ^ <0 u a in >0 u a en <0 u a ^ *""t »-3 *H «^ U *H H sc U u t-» S 0 o en o in re o O PM EH 0 PM EH 0 PM EH «^ Z M CO T O 1 J Z M T VD O 1 ^ Z M o z ^ en «H 1 O Z en «H «H I 0 o z o a tH V u a «H V O U D 1 1 H "{j a Z 0 oo o oo o 2 0 r- r- oo in Z 0 ^" o in en CM O in CM P *"* 1 H U > O W M >H U % O W M >H U t^ £C CU P^ 1C *3 & < ^ PJ fY* 33 O EH x cu DC x a m u w a 01 u w Q Q U U Q C9 EH M EH EH EH 2 O EH M EH EH EH 2 U EH M EH EH EH Z i-] s o < c/> o ca <-i s u <: c/> o PS .J a o rt w o S < EH CU S3 W U D < EH CU IS W U 55 idj EH Oi S W O 162 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

rH I CO r- U O CO U O U O 1 -J < I -J < i -J <

4J 4J ^ C b EH C pti E-* c pti E-* 2 M S5 l_l S5 H O 2 O 2 g O 2 01 U 3 01 U 3 0 U 3 W W W -o b O CO rH VO CO b O r- CM co co b O U < ^* rH *O U < ^ rH *O U < c 3 1 C 3 1 C 1 * Jj Jj '43§ *£ co o\ o VM co co m vti b EH CO O\ rH O b EH *r CM v o b EH o 2 M CO V 1 2 HH *r I 2 M O 0 O 2 I I 0 O 2 I I 0 0 2 U 3 -o U 3 TJ U 3 1 3 3 3 § £ 4J 4J ^ O\ VO O tH VO CM O O tH vo ?" jJ O CM VO CO 4J VO CO \O CM 4J vo <. c C c o* m co o CO CM 0 O r- m o b EH rH CM CM i-5 b EH 1 CM rH J b EH CO CM rH 05 2 M 1 2 M V 1 2 M V 1 S O 2 1 0 2 1 0 Z 1 p* U 3 0 U 3 VO U 3 CO CO ^* CM CM CO t rH PS O PS a PS O i: S CO & "* CO b < \ m OQ 0 H EHu oM 04o 2w M< Q>H EHu «Ho 04o PSw M< Q>H EHu EH « 04 PS 33 3 EH « eu PS 33 3 EH « 04 PS 33 3 Q U H a a U W Q C U W Q U EH M EH EH EH 2 U EH w EH EH EH 2 S EH M EH EH EH 2 K i-3 33 U «£ c/) O C£ rJCCU^MOO r-3 33 U rt! c/) O g < EH a. S W U g < EH 0. S W U H < EH 0. S W U SUPPLEMENTAL DATA. Properties of aquifers and confining units Continued

Town of Chadbourne. Well No: CC41e- Map No: 30 Log Depth 436 Latitude: 341945 Longitude: 784953 Altitude of Land Surface: 110 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 110 63 60 -74 -98 -222

THICK 47 3 134 24 124

PCT PERM 66 <50 66 <10 60 MATERIAL

EST HYD 25 25 25 CONDUCT

CRAVE N COUNT Y CO USGS Simoons Farm Test. Well No: T22al cl Map No: 31 Log Depth 1,000 Latitude: 350458 Longitude: 771049 Altitude of Land Surface: 34 Basement: tr1

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 34 -222 -252 -317 -341 -475 -587 -871 -907 r ^>G THICK >215 30 65 24 134 112 284 36 ^>

PCT PERM 74 26 55 29 67 <15 50 <10 MATERIAL

EST HYD 60 ~ 35 30 30 CONDUCT

USGS New Bern Properties Test. Well No: S21i- Map No: 32 Log Depth 960 Latitude: 350815 Longitude: 770620 Altitude of Land Surface: 27 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 27 17 1 -266 -289 -333 -347 -501 -553 -893 -911

THICK 10 16 267 23 44 14 154 52 340 18

PCT PERM 90 19 81 <20 80 <10 51 <20 50 <10 MATERIAL

h < O5 EST HYD 25 50 30 25 30 CO CONDUCT DATA. Properties of aquifers and confining units Continued gj

USGS N.W. Fields Property Test. Well No: S21y- Map No: 33 Log Depth 605 Latitude: 350544 Longitude: 770908 Altitude of Land Surface: 21 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 21 -2 -217 -229 -325 -341 -464 -553 2 THICK >5 215 12 96 16 123 89 o f PCT PERM <10 72 <10 57 12 63 <20 MATERIAL «o

EST HYD 70 __ 20 30 __ i CONDUCT 02 NRCD Claries Research Station. Well No: S22J6 % Map No: 34 Log Depth 1, 286 Latitude : 350816 Longitude: 771018 Altitude of Land Surface: 28 Basement:-!, 254

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC ?t. AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ LLYSIS-

ALT TOP 28 10 2 -221 -228 -292 -300 -432 -520 -830 -860 -1,079 -1,144

THICK 18 8 223 7 64 8 132 88 310 30 219 65 110 o» PCT PERM 90 <20 86 <10 76 <10 49 <25 54 23 65 34 42 K MATERIAL § EST HYD 25 ~ 55 30 25 35 45 75 CONDUCT f i i Peter Havfich. Well No: R24n5 O Map No: 35 Log Depth 1, 195 Latitude : 351018 Longitude: 772332 Altitude of Land Surface: 60 Basement: -998 o0 SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC 02 AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ f ALT TOP 60 52 46 -43 -50 -117 -147 -221 -264 -611 -629 -788 -810 f

THICK 8 6 89 7 67 30 74 43 347 18 159 22 188 *

PCT PERM 90 <10 90 <10 57 <5 81 <10 56 <5 69 <5 59 MATERIAL

EST HYD 50 50 __ 40 45 30 ~ 25 20 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 165

O O O O O O 1 J < rJ < 1 i \ 1-3 <

4J -U 4J C Du E-* c Pu EH c Eu EH ^ H 0) 2 |jj< Z M g o ^ g O Z g 0 Z 0) O 0 0) O 0 0) O 0 B) 10 10 id id id 0) 0) 0) Pu O DM O DM O y * O *flC T 1-1 CO 1-5 to r ^ CO eg to

0) DM EH 0 DM EH 0) Eu EH U 55 H U Z M U 55 tH id O Z id O Z id O Z o o *M O O

g

e 0 vo sr to o o> to vo ot o (0 rH 0 0 0 OQ T3 co vo p- sr T3 P* rH VO CO T3 CO VO Ot CO Q 0 eg 3 Q 0 CM rH 3 Q 0 »H V (Xi < 1 4J 1 -U (Xi < 1 *^ P- V tO PC o o co ot eg to PC O Og sr VO CO OH m En < rH CO eg co (8 < 1 0) 1 \ ; » j» j» "^3 *O H 3 to co o 3 p- ot o 3 ot oo o Eu EH O\ tO 4J Eu EH 1 rH rH 2 *- H Z M rH V 1 rH -H Z fH rH V 1 CO -H A IH V 1 H s .p O Z 1 1 0 4J O Z 1 1 i-H 4J 0 Z .j co id O 0 rH 4 O 0 m id U O Jd eg J eg t-J eg J H * PC PC X O sr eg o o X O CO V Ot to x g rH O O O £H T t-5 <; CM fO O\ P* ^* r-3 < 1 (Tt OO to O eg co ot p- [V] O OO 0 rH 0 tO 0 rH O 0 o S Z oo Z to Z -a- f=< Pu EH Eu EH Eu EH H -» Z HH r-t Z M VO Ot O 1 i-H Z M Ot OO P- 1 3 ^ O Z i-H O Z rH rH rH 1 i-H O Z CO rH rH 1 PH g* O 0 0) X O 0 V 0) J3 O 0 fe * ft ft ft 3 0 PC 0 0) PC O 0) PC O C/2 Q o H L> K O W M >-i L> O O W M >< L> EHXifXtpCXO E-i XI (Xi PS X D E-i XI &i PS X D >1 U W Q W U pq Q >i U W Q 4> EHMEHEHEH^O EHMEnEHEHZ4> E-( M E-( EH E-i Z H t-J X U < W O OJ t-J X U < W O -H t-J X L> < W O U . Properties of aquifers and confining units Continued ££ Oi

City of New Barn Test No. 13. Well No: S20ol Map No: 39 Log Depth 496 Latitude: 350730 Longitude: 770430 Altitude of Land Surface: 20 Basement: ~

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 20 ~ -22 -35 -320 -338 Q O THICK >14 13 285 18 t-1 PCT PERM 90 <25 82 22 MATERIAL 1£j EST HYD 25 ~ 60 CONDUCT s

CUMBERLAND COUNTY t> Town of Falcon. Well No: R39pl 2 h" Map No: 40 Log Depth 230 Latitude: 351130 Longitude: 783915 Altitude of Land Surface: 143 Basement: -60 f 03 i i SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC O3 AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ 1 O ALT TOP 143 95 86 29 9 ffi THICK 18 9 57 20 69 § PCT PERM 90 <10 64 17 42 > MATERIAL £ EST HYD 25 ~ 30 20 H CONDUCT 0 O O NRCD Seabrook Research Station. Well No: U41al Map No: 41 Log Depth 280 Latitude: 345915 Longitude: 784518 Altitude of Land Surface: 130 Basement: -103 § $f SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC JS AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ § ALT TOP 130 88 70 15 -20

THICK 42 18 55 35 83

PCT PERM 78 <10 55 17 48 MATERIAL

EST HYD 25 25 ~ 25 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 167

m CO r- (N i O O o o y 2 J < ^ < 1 «J <

4J £ _£ C PM Ei C PM H c En H ? n 0) Z M Q) i o z E O Z £ O Z 0) U 3 Q) O 3 0) U 3 0} 0} 0} tO (0 (0 CO m PM O PM O PM O 3 "* 3* 3* m o O CN «g* o 1-1 CN ro

0) PM H 0) PM H 0) PM H o Z M O S M o Z M tO O Z (0 O Z 10 O Z IM O 3 *M O 3 *M O 3 M M M 3 3 3 to ro CO CM O U) «« CM r- o w Pu O iH CO lO CM PM Ol r- o m iH PM O -o 0 < *o O rtl U < __ C ^ j3 3 C 3 1 3 (0 .3 »« tn vo CM M-I ro en o M-I m PM EH ^< ro CM O PM H iH CO iH O PM EH 1o Z M 1 g M H V 1 iH 1 1 1 O Z O Z 1 Q) 0 Z i i i " -8 O 3 8 O 3 -o O 3 1 3 p 3 § tJ 4J O iH O\ IT) -H O co m tH o oo o 5* i * O\ ^* ^* «-H 4J O VO ,H 4J m r- CM s ^ O O ,_f O O 1 rH t-l 0 O 1 A ffl rt! ** m iH «« PM EH CO CM E-* o ^* Z M v i m ill i in ill i 00 O Z 1 CO 0 Z III 1 00 0 Z ill i 1 O 3 ^ O 3 I U 3 e «« P « Q) Q) V A? -o T3 *4^ 3 a o 3 Q O 3 Q 9 04 rt! 4J 04 < jg -H ST °* IT IT ^ C c C *te> ° o o ° >J PM H PM H PM H 05 z n Z M S o z O Z 0 Z £> vo O 3 at O 3 p- O 3 ^ CM o m ft- ft r- en C?" O o o J- m PZ O m Oi O m Oi O WH ro PM < ro PM Q) a) P: *XJ 73 -o ^] ^ 3 3 PM H PM EH O 4J PM H Q * % Z H ro -H Z M I'H *rH , * 4J o z O 4J O Z T3 4J 0 Z H-J i-i .C O 3 0) ^C O 3 IT 04 IT 04 o PM EH 0 PM H o PM EH »-l 5 *""* »-l Z M »-l Z M o z O Z O Z U 3 O 3 O 3

Z O Z O Z O M O U M >H u M O U M >H U O O U M >H U O EH ^ CU Oi 33 O EH &(J CLi OS 03 O EH ^ CU Oi 33 O 43 u u a *j u u a c u u a EH M EH EH EH Z rH EH M EH EH EH Z > EH M EH EH EH Z 4 J 33 U < M O « J 33 U < M O O J 33 U < M O H

vo p~ o\ t-H vo -4-t u o >4-t O O t-H o o

3 p 3 C/) CO o\ T oo m o fa O fa O vo o\ vo CM fa O CJ rtl o u < <» CM o u < c O c o % C "-r^ id id t-H id 0) J _ _ n 1 * | t-H C «IH in >4-t «M r*. ro vo o ' S ° fa H O fa EH CM ^ rH O b £"* Z M rH 1 1 1 g 0 Z M ^J- V 1 z n O (U 0 Z 1 1 1 0 Z 1 o z O § CJ D O O t-H u o =1 3 O 3 1 i M JJ 4J ."* * **H o o\ m 0 -H o m «a« o H S ** O VO t-H >4-t 4J CM O in CM 4J O Ol 1 CM -H rH 0 0 CM CM rH o o ri! ffl < 1 A 3 <4i CO < % I^J CQ rtl S^ EH t-H 'c* ^^ 1 .g £; 0 OO t-l ro 000 m j5* n fa EH I m fa H VO VO rH m fa H o o Z M ro in Z M O rH V 1 ^* Z M o o\ O Z X m m 0 Z « 1 m o z 0 0 o r~ o o rH ^ 0 0 i 1 1 - CM ^4 ro 0) I * 55 o H 0)o Q Ol D Q O 3 Q O 04 rf! O 4J 04 < 55 04 < '§ -H O Z -H H ^H n* D e c U M C C t*"fci O O4 O O 0 O ij fa EH < J fa H fa EH oo Z M Z M U Z M » O Z M 0 Z 0 Z S 10 0 0 O O O m O O S CM U t-H t-i & OD 00 H ro O ^^ D t-H o o m m IO 5- IO jx; 01 VO OS 0 o vo r> CM X 10 e< a OH 4J 0 Z D 1 4J 0 Z 1 1 t-l JJ o z p 1 <» id O O n id O O i i id CJ 0 ^ ^* i-H1 U r^ ij 10 iJ ^H CO U ac a ac a ,3. ,3. ^. o re o ^ " f" I-H* (^ .. ro OD vo r*- r^ .. o J < H o 10 u o m fj r~ t-H o o o § Z CM z m I z 10 r-i fa H fa EH pti £4 ^5 rH Z M rH ^J1 Z M 0 «« 0 1 rH jj H4 « H 0 Z rH 0 Z P- rH rH 1 rH o z PLH 0) X O O 0) X O O r~ v o> ji CJ O PLH S 4J 1 ' ^ (X s o. s ft rf} * 0) OS Ol 0) 05 0 O\ t-H O O 0) 05 O O* Q u < o U «C m t-H o\ in o u «c f^ 5Q O4 O4 O4 O^ D^ 1 |g Q) bi o fa EH o fa H £ 5 fa EH C .-} Z M (_3 Z M m ^ m i Ol i-l Z M a\ i i i H O Z 0 Z rH V V 1 0 Z ro I I I *» 0 0 0 0 VO rH 13 U 3 & 1 H z cn 0 Z Ol i m i i S Z Ol m vo oo 10 to ^ < ^ rtl 1 ro 1 1 0 ro o r~ CM ^4 if ^4 A Jn CM CM 1 S3 fa EH "o J? fa H 5 5 fa H H Z M o j5 |^ III 1 Z M m o 10 i to 0 Z 0 Z III 1 M O Z r~ vo v I O O a o o O O t-H 4* 0 rt o A 0 « Z 2j M Z « a m i i i 05 Ol m i I i ofi a r~ o vo m pt 3 rt! Oil 1 C ft 0 rt! i t i D3 ft 0 rt! OD VO ro o id C/) *3" 4 id CO t-H to S . a « £ - M r ^ ^ 3 s ^ 3 s ij H O4 05 rfl Q EH 3 04 K < a S O u M >H u n o w M >H u S o pa M >H H &< 04 OH ac o H x 04 o: ac o H ^ 04 oe ac U U Q U W Q to H M H EH EH Z M jH acM Ho EH< EHco Zo j ac o rf w o KU iJH Mac Hcj EH< EHco D < H 04 2 W O tH

o\ ro «H fH u o III 1 r- U 01 t> O % t-^ <^ III 1 1 1 j ^ |rf 10 1

4J 4J 4J C [14 E-i C [14 E-i c [14 E-i Z M III 1 o Z M V Z M g O Z III 1 O Z O Z 0 U S 0) U S Q) U S n w n *d id rf ro t-3 m ^ 1 0 ,H ^ «* m .H fH M o o r- « 0) CM E-i 0) CM E-i CM E-i U Z M III 1 U Z M VO 1 U Z M o id O Z III 1 id O Z 1 I id O 2 Z *W U S M-4 U S M-4 U S M M M M 3 3 3 V M CM CM oo ro o u) m Q. Pu O mil i CM O oo oo ^* ro [14 01 00 1 1 1 id T3 O <^ 00 1 1 | c y-> U < m T3 ~fr ill i CU C % C J^ 1 C id fH id id c +1 1 c id O Z - i Q) O Z 1 1 9) O Z i U 0 fH o U S o U 0 CU 3 1 3 3 4J 4J 4J -rH CM r- o o -H r- ro m o -H «* ^* o m o* n vo CM > -H U O vo tH U Oi CM CM fH u o fH CQ < « fH r*- U S r- U S i 1 CM " >* .. .. ro d> m vo m o O ro vo vo o a> T3 m m ^* CM H T3 ro CM vo «s- T3 3 Q 0 ro tH 3 Q 0 CM 3 Q O O 4J CU < » SB 4J CU < 4J CU < Z -H rH H i D M C C C CU 0 ^ fH O O o r- «» o o *^ *-^ CM E-i CM ro m ^^ CM E-i ro fH «-] CM E-i Z M m v i U Z M V 1 Z M O Z » i O Z 1 O Z O U S f-^ CM U S m U S 10 i CM ^* iH SB O\ vo m r- r- r- m ^* o 10 OS 01 O .H «S- CM H "S1 OS O m OS O ro n * CM fH ro a-^ ro * a* fH vo I Pi aio Q> 3 r- o o D 3 ? 4J [14 E-i CM 00 fH 4J [14 E-i 4J [14 E-i H Z M iH V 1 a Z M 1 -H Z M 1 -U O Z » i "O -i-* O Z > .u O Z 4^ id U S fH o\ id U 0 ro id U S r- <-l 1 CM A ro in1 t"3 s ac o ro ^" m o ac o ac o r- ^ <: fH fH VO O\ .. CM t-3 i4i .. o ^ <: o «s- u oo ro O CM U O vo u Z .H I Z oo Z CM % [14 E-i CM E-i [14 E-i tH IO Z M r- vo m i fH Z M tH Z M tH O Z a\ fH ,H I tH o z tH O Z 0) JS U S r- v 0) JS U S fl> JS 3» 4^ I !S 4^ S -U o. pt o. OS 01 r- o ^* m OS 01 V Q o <: fH OO ^* CM A ° o <: Q US CU VO fH c cu CU c^ | o o* C^ o CM E-i H 0 [14 E-I o CM E-i 1^ Z M CM m o i Z M l_^ Z M O Z ro oo fH l If 0 Z 0 Z U S m v 4* U S U S i n 0 Z O o* ro m o 8 z o* Z O If 5*"* r-t CO M ^4 5*"* v4 0 l « Ot o O ^ [14 E-i 0 V [14 E-i 10 CM E-i O Z M ro vo o 1 '&.. Z M Z M O Z 0 Z O Z U S fH V U S U S 3 o o 1* a z z OS O ro vo i m OS Oi in oo o m C OS Oi o o o o «s- i CM "3- O\ fH O Q« m CM «s* m 3 id fH l| id fH . S M a * "3 s j S 5 ^ 5 ^ H CU 2 < Q E-i Ja cu £ < Q E-I U U O WM>4UO O WM>«C> E-I x o. os ac s E-I x a. os ac o E-- « cu os ac o U W Q Q 0 W Q G 0 W Q (H E-i M E-i E-i E-i Z j ac o < MO Oc< jE-iME-iE-iE-iz5 ac o < w o o E-iME-iE-iE-iZJ ac o < w o N <; H cu s w u SS < E-i CU S W O H < E-i CU S U U UI.I.L A JUI.U.LU..U.I.^ J.AJU un j. .n.. j. i

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 127 85 74 67 35 -43 -115 -292 -325 » O THICK 42 11 7 32 78 72 177 33 228 O

PCT PERM 69 <10 100 38 88 <25 60 18 43 f MATERIAL i 1 t 35 15 ~ 60 ~ 30 ~ 20 EST HYD H CONDUCT -SYSTEM

BDGBCOMBB COUNTY

Town of Pinetops. Well No: K27nl ^ Map No: 52 Log Depth 317 Latitude: 354724 Longitude: 773822 Altitude of Land Surface: 108 Basement: -196

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC CO AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ CO1 ALT TOP 108 75 68 41 6 ** O I THICK 33 7 27 35 67 H * PCT PERM 54 <5 67 <10 75 H MATERIAL f

EST HYD 25 20 25 H CONDUCT O

City of Tarboro. Well No: J26h- Map No: 53 Log Depth 349 Latitude: 355334 Longitude: 773218 Altitude of Land Surface: 50 Basement: -299 COASTALPLAIN

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 50 25 10 **

THICK 15 159

PCT PERM MATERIAL

EST HYD __ CONDUCT

** Thick clay beds occur between lowermost aquifer and bedrock SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 171

0 " < O O" 0 Of 1 1 J < J < \

c En H c Eu H C Eu H 2 M 2 M 2 M i O 2 i 0 2 i O 2 0) O 3 0) 0 » 0) 0 3 n n n id id id CQ CO (O O En O Eu O Eu O VO I | | " ** J ** 3* m i i i CM CM o i O m "*

.. ., .. 00 CM O 0) En H 0) Eu H 0) Eu H u 2 M u 2 M u 2 M m v i id O 2 id 0 2 id O 2 i i VM 0 3 VM O » VM O 3 H 14 M 3 3 3 (/} O (/) VO fH O O M fH r- r- o En O nil i Eu O CM cn m n Eu O T O VO T TJ O *4! III TJ 1 fH TJ 0 < ^* ,_( C £3 c 3 C 1 is id id id

13 M-4 *T *T CO VM VO O O VM CM O> T "e O En C-i vo ro fH o Eu H i CM m 0 Eu H fH CM f) 2 M I V 1 2 M »» 1 O 2 0 2 i O 2 1 1 a .s 0 » s O » s O 3 1 3 3 3 03 *J 4-i -U r^ * ! -H -H CM o m o S£ i > 1 1 1 1 m vo r- »» S " O O tH U O tH 0 O f} gl ** in <: ** CO < < 03 < t

'g CM CO V ^£L ^^ ^* fH VO VO 00 g» O En H VO En H VO Eu C* rO fH fH Q ^p 2 M CM 2 M l*j n I o r*" O 2 r- O 2 VO 0 2 I I 1 ^ 0 3 ^ O » r- O 3 * e « V V |2 *o -o E4 -o .s p O O 3 Q O 3 Q O CM < CU < S5 .u 04 < s ii -H -H &< tp IT D ?3 C C c % o O O 0 Q t_3 En H Eu H -) Cu H 03 2 M 2 M U 2 M -SB O 2 O 2 O 2 "S 2 O » r- O » VO O 3 55, m 00 CO VO o ^* m CM on r- r- o -? m PS O m PC O M VO PC 0 T O> VO CO OH m En < fT) Eu < m sHi *>£ CM 1 D3 to E4 I < £ ^ E-J T TJ^ jj -J js O » O J3 O » 0) £ O 3 CM V 1 & "0, o. D. So ® OS O 0) PS O 0) PS O on ,H vo o Q O < Q CD <^ Q o < m in oo ni 04 CM PL, f i tP IT O^ i 0 En H 0 tu H ' O Eu H ij 2 M ij 2 M C iJ 2 M m »» o i O 2 O 2 0 O 2 ^* fH fH 1 O » O » H O 3 fH V

2 O co T o in 2 0 m fH oo o jj 2 O CM m fH m 5^ *^ vo en fH J|f* |^ CM m m CM 01 00 VO 00 CM ^4 V J^| J^| 1 m rt 40 m Eu E-i m En H o m Eu tn 2 M O CM O 1 TOO 1 CM 0 CO 1 O 2 00 fH fH 1 O 2 »» fH m i O 2 m m CM i O » V O » V : .. U 3 1 o 0 o 2 2 PS O CM CM fH in PS O CM 00 O O ffi PS O o CM o m O. O CM T CM "dO« 3 <: m cn CM D. ,3. on vo CM id (/} S* fH X sid U) >i «d M O 0i rt M M ^5 H CM PS H O O O U M >H u 01 O U M >H U H « 04 PS X 3 g u w a G uuo Q UNO U H M tn tn tn 2 M j ac u

ao VD CM in m ao r~ rH m CM 0 O Oi CM ao H 9 O Oi « J

4J rH m O 4J 4J C b EH CM m tH C b EH c b EH Q) Z M CM V 1 O Z M o Z M £ O Z * 1 £ O Z £ O Z V U 0 tH a> O 0 0) o o m 1 W to id id id CQ vo in o\ in cQ CQ b O *r r- m CM b O b O O *4! r- ^« 0 < O ^ m i 3 1 CM r-l m I«J tH ** CM

.. rH m o .. v b EH tH ro CM a> b EH v b EH o Z M r- 1 0 Z M u Z M id O Z I I id O Z id O Z U 0 O 4J Cu Z M Z M Z M O Z 0 Z O Z '^ O U 0 r^. O 0 O 0 0 t f~H m ro ft ^O o ao C} ^^ *r CM vo o ro O CM vo a\ o o J>. VD o5 a vo vo vo ro vo 05 O VO 1 1 I VD 05 O m CM o\ CM WH m b < ro ro b < CM I I 1 ro b < tH I 1 CQ I '. m CQ V V S *^ *d d t^ 3 r>- r>- o 3 ro r- o 3 VD 0 0 ^J 4J b EH rH ^* CM 4J b EH CO CM r-l 4J b EH CO CM CM CD ' *^ Z M ro V 1 1 -H Z M CM V I I -H Z M rH I jj 4J 0 Z 1 I 3 4J O Z 1 1 T-» 4J O Z 1 1 r-J ^* ftf m id r>- id U 0 o o tH f4 0 0 2 f CQ U ^ ac a ro T 0 o so a CT» T o m EC O »< ao >J ^ o tH o\ m .. VD tH tH O> CM V ^ 05 a 0) o5 a m Q v ^« r- CM Q U) < Q U) 1 O b EH O r*. FH o b EH C H^ Z M tH O\ tH 1 tl Z M ^ Z M (0 0 Z tH CM CM 1 0 Z O Z Qi U 0 CM 0 0 0 0 1 rt U z a r- ^« m o Z 0 vo o *r o z a ro ro v m ao CM m rH }j; rtl oo o\ \o CM CD in VO rH 1 rH I i C r- 00 Ok H IO b EH 10 b EH 10 b EH rH Z M m CM o i Z w 00 OO O 1 Z M m ao o i H 0 Z m ro tH i O Z CO 'T CM 1 o z tH VO CM 1 H U 0 1 V O 0 1 V o o 1 V M 0 O o Q Z Z rH Z 05 O mom m 05 a CM o o\ m O 05 O moo m o. o

05 « o eg M >i o >H O eu 05 ac o eu o5 cq Q cq EH EH EH 2 EH EH U S» CO O U < en O u < eu 2 cq u eu 2 cq u eu 2 SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 173

o CM m Ok CO t-l u o CM 1 3? i 3S

4J 4J 4J C C b Ei C b Ei 0) Z M 0) Z M Z M O Z o z O Z 0) U 3 0) U 3 0) U 3 10 10 10 id id CO n r- m CM m PQ o m m o b O b O *o t-i m co b O m ot m co ^ * O i^ i t-i r-t CO »-l r- ,_q CO ,_q i r- CO Ok

.. mm Ok CO O Ok t-l O 0) b E-i 0) b fn T t-l t-l 0) 00 \O CM u u Z M 1 VI U US 1 V 1 10 0 Z 10 O Z 1 10 o z 1 r- o w t-l O O O b O O CO *3" CM b O i ^* oo in t-i o m CM o CM CM o o U < t-l C 3 1 C 3* ' < C 3 10 10 10 cu H M

'-C§ 0 CM 0 T CM O fT| £^ CM CM t-l O b E-* CM t-l t-l o Z M t-l 1 Z M V 1 Z M V 1 0)o O Z 1 1 0) O 25 1 0) O Z 1 O U 3 o U 3 o U 3 1 3 3 3 4J 4J 4J *2 t-l ^* \O t 1 C3 .^4 4J t-l ^" in ro 4J 4J 1 «-H U O i t-i U O U C5 gj < n < < n < < m < '§ m CM CM ^^* m O T CO t-l m CM E-* t-l eg ro \O b E-* ^* b Ei § CO Z M 1 CM Z M CM Z M O r- o z 1 r- O Z r- 0 Z ""^ r- U 3 r- U 3 r- U 3 ^* X ^g mt £| 0) < ^* m m £| d) 0) «^ o ro CM r- CM o o 5 < *? SB 3 Q O 3 Q O 3 Q O '§ 4J CU < 4J Oi < 4J 04 < D H §" o O C O C C o* 0 ro OH in 0 0 U t-l b Ei U> CM V u b E-* b E-i CQ Z M I Z M Z M ?s O Z I O Z O Z "t* 0 U 3 ^* U 3 \o U 3 ^> M X 0 ro ?5«l CO CO r- Q JQ CM 04 t-l 0 m PS O \o PS O \o PS O £ M CO h b < CO CQ CQ rn l_ M H ca *f* 0)o 0)o 0)o sg^-4 PS i^ 3 3 3 C9 4J b E-i ^ 4J b E-i 4J b Ei Q Z M t-l -rl Z M t-l -^ Z M -n 4j O Z n rl 4J O Z M 4J O Z hJ r- io U 3 m io U 3 m io U 3 ^3 CM fj CM *J CM *J O w O X O X O SC O .. CO *-3 i4« o * 5 rtj .. CO H O 10 ^ O CM f* O CO rj z m Z CM Z CO r5g b E-« b Ei t^4 b Ei .-H Z M c^ Z M ^H hJ rH O Z i-H O Z 0 Z* d> fi U 3 0) *C U 3 0) A U 3 PLH |S 4J 0. a CL W 0) PS O 0) PS 0 0) PS 0 Q U) < Q U) < Q 0 < CU Cu CM 0* G O^ 0^ O b Ei 5 ° b E-i o Z M Z M ^S O Z ^j O Z O Z U 3 4| U 3 U 3 Og ^J rl CQ Z O Z O Z O ro CM w> o A rt* "^,0 &+ **s* &+ ^3 m ro m CM n4< o ^4 ^4 B ^ b f 4 5 b f gs CM E"* 3 Z M ^| Z M Z M m CM o i O Z O Z W> t-l t-l 1 M » U 3 8§ s .. U 3 V a o (N O O o 0 Z « z 2 z PS 0 oo m o m PS O r r- o o 3 PS O ro co o m « a 3 < r- t-i o» CM 3 rt! co t-i o» m H a 3 < Ok CM Ok CM CO CO a io CO 1^ 8 s f S ^J W S ^ «| Cu PS < Q E-« * CU PS < Q Ei < U U O W M >i O O O W M >i O E-« * cu PS a 3 EI « CM PS z 3 EI « CM PS a: o O O W Q a o w Q g o w Q U E * H E-* £ * £ * p« pj J SC U rf W O K j a: u < M o o *J a: u < w o K rf: EI cu s w o g < E-i Cu S W O tl < E-i Cu 2 W U SUPPLEMENTAL DATA. Properties of aquifers and confining units Continued

Town of Hobgood. Well No: H25q- Map No: 63 Log Depth 396 Latitude: 360148 Longitude: 772350 Altitude of Land Surface: 90 Basement: -306

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 90 79 50 -5 -19 -158 -255 0 THICK 11 29 55 14 139 97 51 O f PCT PERM 90 14 54 28 59 <5 67 MATERIAL a EST HYD 25 -- 15 30 25 M CONDUCT 02 02 HARMBTT COUNTY

Harnttt Co . Board of Education. Well No: 04111 Map No: 64 Log Depth 457 Latitude: 352752 Longitude: 784643 Altitude of Land Surface: 290 Basement: 209 O2 SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC 02 AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ 1 O ALT TOP 290 278 264 ffi THICK 12 14 55 » PCT PERM 50 <20 44 MATERIAL 5f

EST HYD 20 20 CONDUCT o o0 Hugh W. D*an. Well No: R45fl 02 Map No: 65 Log Depth 316 Latitude: 351257 Longitude: 790846 Altitude of Land Surface: 325 Basement: 143 f SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC f AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 325 251 226

THICK >30 25 83

PCT PERM 90 90 20 41 MATERIAL

EST HYD 15 10 20 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 175

CM m r» tH m * 00 m CM CM m CM tH r- u o> VD tH as i ^ < I as

£ 4J V0 Ol O 4J C C O tH tH C § z VD V 1 Z M J; Iso z 1 1 0 Z 0 U 3 U 3 U 3 a 0ia 0ia m ffl oo oo in o CO fe O> fe O> r» CM m « » fo O> a-* tH V a-* Ol CM ro ^1 VD m CM CM .. n m o .. 0 1*4 EH O fn H VD fH fH 0 f*4 E^ U 2 M u tH V 1 u J2 n I I « > 0 t*4 EH CM r~ « > I I tH | 0d § z J 0 0 o z U 3 d U 3 o U 3 4J ^ 4J H o m * m .H f-l oo CM m m 4J CM CM in CM 4J 1 1 tH Ol VO CM tH U Ql CM ,_( U O> ,_! O Qi CM ** ffl «* < CO < * s <

CM Ol CM Ol Ol O tH tH tH m o Ol fn H CM tH O fn H m tH tH Z M CM V 1 o tH CM V 1 00 8§ 1 X Is8§ at u 5 H " " X d * d H d 3 Q O> D Q O> Q 0 4J a* < 04 < ss 4J Oi < fl 0 t-l H o» o» D O> c U c C 0 O o bj H 3 fo H fo H 2 *"H U Z M O Z Q § Z O Z £ VD u 5 VD u 5 tH U 3 u m fl£ CM <*) o CM O M 00 M CM 0 (*} m n VD o in d m OS O VD OS Ql tH ^* OO ^) K OS O> 5 CQ PQ O CQ H d d 0 ta 0 c Pi d d 4 3 V Ol O 4J fn H M 4J tu H fH CM CM 4J fe H M H Z *H VD fl V 1 1 -H Z M 0 4J H 3 -U 1 *M 4J a fn H fe H Z M H ^ s rH O Z H o i tH O Z M X u 5 o x U 3 0 X U 3 0 o. p o 0 OS Ql 0 PS 0> s0 OS Ql tH Q 0 It a 0 < Q U < Oi Oi Oi C O» o> O» 0 0 tu H 0 tu H 0 fe H 0 i_3 J > § 5 § Z o S u 5 li 0 C Q| 3 CM OO O O M § f£ ^j « » tH Ol CM X X X U «0 OB U «0 5is b H «0 O Z* M S S OO VD O | & s O Z ^Q O Z « > CM I 0 Z a U 3 O U 3 V U 3 d 0 M 0 O z 5 OS Oi at o o m ^ Q| CM ^ O O (^ OS O> n CM o m Ql 3 *4 n fH o\ CM V P| g f£ VO CM Ol CM 3 < m CM 01 CM ^j W CM w W CM 4 S 2 S |l tH o U B S «-3 £ tn" Oi S < Q EH Q O. 2 < Q H

.W. Camaran, Jr. Well No: T48kl Map No: 69 Log Depth 248 Latitude: 350200 Longitude: 792056 Altitude of Land Surface: 350 Basement: 102

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ » ALT TOP 350 198 144 O THICK >100 54 42 § f PCT PERM 90 54 28 52 MATERIAL §

EST HYD 25 25 ~ 20 & CONDUCT R-SYSTEMA

HYDE COUNTY

NRCD Hydeland Research Station. Well No: 010w2 g r^ Map No: 70 Log Depth 1,505 Latitude: 352527 Longitude: 761231 Altitude of Land Surface: 3 Basement: f 02i i SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC 02 AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ 1 0 -365 -501 -619 -629 -1,061 -1,095 -1,218 -1,230 -1,375 ALT TOP 3 -92 -104 a H THICK 95 12 261 136 118 10 432 34 123 12 145 53

PCT PERM 80 <20 77 29 76 <10 92 24 57 <10 72 § MATERIAL £

H- 1 EST HYD 30 25 60 55 -- 25 30 O CONDUCT O O US6S Ocracoke Test. Well No: S7q- 02 Map No: 71 Log Depth 895 Latitude: 350647 Longitude: 755839 Altitude of Land Surface: 3 Basement: f SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC f AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ * ALT TOP 3 -95 -132 -466 -585 -810 -820

THICK 98 37 334 119 225 10

PCT PERM 80 <20 85 <25 60 <10 MATERIAL

EST HYD 25 -- 30 30 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 177

r-t U O y 2 U O 1 «-l <4! i »J «S! «-l <4! 1 i

Jj £ Jj c EM H c EM E-i C EM E-i 0 2 M 0 2 M 2 M e O 2 ££ O 2 i 0 2 0 U O 0 U 0 0 U 0 n n n

0 EM H 0 EM E-t 0 EM E-i U 2 M u 2 M U 2 M 4 0 2 CO O "4-1 10 10 O s o £tj C-* o EM E-i P- fN r-t O EM E-i 00 »H »H o J5 H 2 M V 1 2 M V 1 O 0 O 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 2 1 U O o U 0 o U 9 1 g P p S 4J Jj H "Si *^ in en in o i-t oo ca co in § ** Jj *r u> u> co 4J o ca p- ca U O tH rH U O r-t CQ < I1 < ffl < CQ < co in <]§, °° in U> tH O CM p- en o EM H f^ Pn &4 u> csj t-i in EM E-i iH r-t 8 JN 2 M P- py H rH VI .H 2 HH r-t V 1 "H *° O 2 ^4 oo O 2 1 OO 0 2 1 U 9 P- U 0 p- U 0 S "" ft % 0 ^ 55 0 0 S "O ca *o o a o I I 1 D P a o p Q g '^ -*^ Oi < ill i Oi < Jj Oi < f-l H S* ITI O t. C U c C o* o r- o in o o OQ *^ EM E-< o\ m ca EM E-i EM E-i 2 M 00 V 1 2 n ' t-^ O 2 i i S5 0 2 O 2 ? ^3 U 9 co U 0 m U 0 0 °* O o co o* ^" o o £ ro r-t u> a\ m ^^ ca ca (Xi "^ PC O r~ ca in ca in PC O m PC O EM < r^ r-t 0) m EM < co i °° m 1 CQ 55 .. < a 0 0 H -O n o o ^c 3 in u> o P p Q ** EM H m m ca o EM E-t Jj EM E-t M co t-» 2 M P- V 1 ca f-i 2 M tH f-l 2 M . i ,_| 4J 0 2 i i i^ 0 2 P 4J O 2 3 oj id U 9 p-

CQS 2 O oo ro oo o 2 O 2 O 10 *r 10 co i-4 jij rtj ^-1 fd i ca ^4 ^^ ^4 ^3 fyf n O ^F M 1* EM E-i r- CM E-i f^ EM E-t ^ 2 M oo o o i 2 M § ^ O 2 in r-t r-t 1 O 2 0 § 2 M * O O 1 V U O 0 U 9 O o o 2 2 5 PC O r-t m oo o PC O co P- o o 9 PC O in oo o in 0 < r-t U> 10 C4 0 < o co P- in o fit CM en CM JS 8* § & W C4 O 4 U) r-t <3 £ 4J 32 CO Z

,§ S H^ M 35 t-3 Oi K < Q E-i O Oi 5 < Q H O Oi 5 < Q H 95 O W M >-i U H X Ou PC SC O H X Dj PC I O < E-t^OiPCXS Q U U Q U W Q O U W Q O H M H H H 2 tfl H M H H H 2 E-t M E-t E-t E-t 2 K ^ I U < W O ^ I U < W O p ^ I U < W O S < H Oi 2 U U Q < H CU 2 W U 6 < H Dj g W U SUrrLJii ivirii IN LAL, UAL A.. properties oj aqmjers ana conjimng umis uonunuea 53 Norwood Sorrell. Well No: P38n2 Map No: 75 Log Depth 160 Latitude : 352228 Longitude: 783403 Altitude of Land Surface: 210 Basement: 62

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 210 190 160 124 109 H O THICK 20 30 36 15 47 O ^> PCT PERM 85 <20 43 33 57 ^> MATERIAL O

EST HYD 25 25 ~ 70 CONDUCT IFER-SYSTEMANALYSIS-NORTH! J 0 NBS COUNTY

Town of Maysvilltt. Well No: V22dl Map No: 76 Log Depth 504 Latitude : 345435 Longitude: 771330 Altitude of Land Surface: 35 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 35 27 -2 -303 -321 -434

THICK 8 29 301 18 113 ra

PCT PERM 90 14 76 <20 73 > MATERIAL £ EST HYD 25 65 45 CONDUCT COASTALNTICPL

NRCD Comfort Research Station. Well No: U26J2 Map No: 77 Log Depth 877 Latitude : 345809 Longitude: 773014 Altitude of Land Surface: 70 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ § ALT TOP 70 60 46 -78 -92 -120 -156 -249 -392 -663 -702

THICK 10 14 124 14 28 36 93 143 271 39

PCT PERM 90 <10 68 <10 90 <5 59 24 46 <10 MATERIAL

EST HYD 25 85 75 55 20 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 179

CM 0 vo o a CO 0 O" O O 1

^ 4J 4J c Cu E-i c Cu E-i C r^. ^| Z M Z M Z M Q o z g O Z g O Z 0> 0 S Q) 0 S Q) u o n n n (0 (0 10 CQ CQ CQ Cu O Cu O Eu O ^" t_3 CM 1-5 CO i_3 V o 0\

0> Cu E-i Q) Cu E, Q) Cu M u Z M u SS n u Z M (0 o z (0 o z O Z M-t o s M-4 u o M-4 O O M M M 3 3 3 CO CO ^ 0\ O CO o\ m co m co 0 Eu O vo CM ^r CM Cu O

»M m co m 4-1 «-l CO 00 4-1 VO ^* OO 1 o Cu E-i sr «-i v o Cu M O\ CM «-l O r-|. ^| m CM co os Z M CO 1 Z M «-H 1 Z M CM 1 0) o z 1 1 Q) O Z 1 Id) O Z O *o *O *o 1 u a 0 S o s 3 ^ 3 § 4J 4J 4J ^ co r~ co o f-i O »-l O O f-l rH m. ^- 0 S 4J n o vo co 4J o\ m n 4J f OO VO CO 5 H 0 O" «-l CM «-l 0 O" «-H *-H 0 O" 1 vHI Is *< CQ *^ i < CQ *^ < CQ <

:§ vo o CM (S* 0 r- «HJ r- r-t 000 ,-1 vo m ^ Cu EH 0 Cu M to ao m CO CO »-l O rH m CO CO Z M 1 1 *T Z M V 1 ^< £5 1 1 f^ I r~ 1 r~ f~ o z t~ o z o z 1 g o s o s 0 S e ^ .. .. V* fl) CO O GO O Q) o o m o a) t-l f- ^* O 5*- *o E4 CM co m v *O VO CO CO ^* "O CO ^ VO CM 'S*^i 3 Q 0 3 Q 0 3 Q O" 8 cu < 4J CU fit 4J CU < 51 "0» f-l "o* D C C c 0s O 0 r~ *r o o r~ r~ o o m ^« o t-3 Cu E-i CO r-t CM 1-3 Cu M r- «H «H ^ Cu fn ^* «-H «-H S U 5 M V 1 Z M V 1 Z M V 1 c^> o z 1 O Z i 0 Z 1 T^ o\ 0 0 m 0 S vo O S Q5 0 t^ 0 A vo f~ r~ _, H m PS 0 m PS 0 m PS O CO Cu < CO CO ( O CQ CQ CQ a> Q) E~* o O o ^H M 3 3 3 4J Cu M 4J Cu M 4J Q H) m f-i Z M CO f-l Z M CM f-l Z M T M 4J 0 Z X 4J O Z X -U O Z Vj r- 10 0 p a\ 10 0 S CO 10 O S CM J CM J CM ^ H O" O" O" *^ n: o X O n: o ryj CO ^ *»: .. o .. 0 ij < £H O r- u O <-l U O a\ 0 ^H Z vo z ^ Z CO &3 ^ Cu M Cu M Cu M H Z M rH Z M rH Z M s rH o z H 0 Z H O Z n^ 0) JS o s 0 JS 0 S Q) JS O S p~it^H * a a. a M . Q) Q) PS 0 Q) PS O 4 a 82 a O rtl a o < 4> cu CU cu CD D* 0^ O^ 0 Cu M 0 Cu E-i 0 Z M Z M Z M a 0 Z O Z o z 0 S 0 S 2 !« I s I s I s Ok U1 o L^^ Cu E-i ^^ Cu E-i a Cu E-i Z M Z M M Z M H o z O Z O Z u o O S o s |o 4 0 M Z * Z PS O v r> o m 3 PS 0 CM m o m PS Ct ao co r- o a s *»: T a\ CM M a O rtl O CM VO CM X O. O rtl a\ m m co c H U O O W M >H U C O W M >H U a u w a a o w Q H o w a tfU ,-HEH mM E-iu JEH a:M EHu

US6S Pink Hill Test. Well No: T28f2 Map No: 81 Log Depth 392 Latitude: 350305 Longitude: 774450 Altitude of Land Surface: 100 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ * ALT TOP 100 66 46 16 -16 -140 -203 O THICK 36 20 30 32 124 63 o t-1 PCT PERM 81 <20 73 31 73 <20 MATERIAL ,© EST HYD 30 25 25 1 CONDUCT co City of Kinston. Well No: R26dl co Map No: 82 Log Depth 600 Latitude: 351412 Longitude: 773355 Altitude of Land Surface: 33 Basement: > SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ co ALT TOP 33 19 0 -20 -41 -139 -227 -447 -469 co 1 THICK 14 19 20 21 98 88 220 22 O td PCT PERM 90 <10 80 <10 82 23 66 23 a MATERIAL >-ji EST HYD 25 15 35 30 CONDUCT fATLANTICCOASTALPL

MARTIN COUNTY

Town of William* ton. Well No: J20q- Map No: 83 Log Depth 665 Latitude: 355111 Longitude: 770338 Altitude of Land Surface: 60 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ * ALT TOP 60 40 19 -5 -55 -67 -74 -88 -103 -157 -165 -171 -205 -403 -435

THICK 20 21 24 50 12 7 14 15 54 8 6 34 198 32

PCT PERM 90 <20 79 16 90 <25 90 <10 56 25 90 <10 62 25 MATERIAL

EST HYD 25 ~ 15 50 25 30 15 35 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 181

o o a o a co 0 O 1 i J < 1 i

4J £ £ C h EH c h EH C h EH 0) Z M Z M Z M e O Z g O Z g O Z 0) U 0 0) 0 0 0) O P M M m <0 *tf (0 CQ CQ CQ PM O h O Cu O m £3 m Jq O hJ VO * co CM m

0) h EH « En EH a! h EH u Z M u Z M u Z M <0 O Z O Z <0 O Z «H O O t-» 0 0 *M O P M M M P P P cn r* en m cn h O Oil 1 h O tH 1 1 1 Eci O -o CO 1 1 1 73 0 < VO | | | -o {J P 1 C i c P ^ <0 <0 1 * .S VM (O «T CT\ IM CM CO O >4-l e O CM EH r^ co CM O h H oo co co O CM H o Z M CM 1 Z M m i Z M n o .s O Z 1 1 0) O Z i | 4) O Z * O P -o 0 D -o 0 P §1 3P p p r* vo CM in -H tH tH O O H o. S 4J r^ o\ vo co 4J a\ a\ vo co 1 1 ov ?5 fH u a 1 fH fH o a CO tH fH o a 1 A 1 1 9» * CQ < < CQ < 1 < CQ < 1 1 1

s ^ a\ *ei m m CM P- o vo m co m S m h EH fH O\ ^* CO Ct* E-* T T tH o h EH O fH Z M i m 2 H co I co Z M III 1 0 r- O Z 1 VO o z t I a\ O Z III 1 *§ **" U P r* o o f* O P e .. X .. 0) 00 00 tH O 0) £ - *O -o tH CM r- CM £4 -o t?5 p a a p a o co p a o & 4* 04 < 04 < 1 yi 04 < "S> H CF tp D c c C ^ o 0 o\ o\ r- 0 o EM E-i H! h EH 00 CM tH H! h EH 03 Z M Z M CM 1 u Z M O Z O Z 1 1 0 Z O O eg 0 » o 0 P U I« co CO co O £i. o\ CM H CM M o ^* v in o o tH a ^- m PC 0 m PC a a\ a\ oo ^* p£ m PC a 0) "H ro h < CO fe * tH co mEn *t£. JQ 1 CQ CQ 1 o a <* 0) 0 0) c r. *Q % a (0 ^"j 2 p oo vo m JC p ^3 i > h EH fc EH 1- tH CM h EH M Q tH -H Z M 1 -H Z M tH V 1 CM -H Z M 0) , <0 4J O Z C 4J O Z 1 1 O Z (4-1 H CO <0 U O 00 « O » O 10 0 P -H J < VO tH 00 ^< .. o J < H O CM O r* 0 1 tH O CO 0 1 1 ^ z ^* Z ^^ Z CM M pj h EH Cu EH h EH O t^4 r«4 Z M fH Z M CM in o i fH Z M e I-J fH O Z fH O Z m tH tH i fH 0 Z M &H 0) JC O O a> JG O P 1 V 0) JC O P 0) p . gj 1 1 S 4-> S a I ) p, a 8 ttr Q) PC a 0) PC O CM o o m 0) PC a fH Q 0 < a o < ^ tH O\ CM a 0 < 04 1 O4 C cn tP \J\ 0) O h EH o h EH C O h EH 0) (J Z M i_5 Z M m r* *r i O i-5 Z M 3 O Z 0 Z CM tH CM 1 H 0 Z 0 0 U P 0 P 1 4> z a VO fH CM I/) Z O co CM r- m M z a M &s rti CM fH 00 tH tt < i CM r- CM P ^4 jrt ^H U « * IO O ^O U H CD h EH *» CD s" h EH O H Z M VO 0 0 1 *r r* o I Z M H O Z 'T CM tH 1 0 ISo z tH tH tH 1 O Z M 0 » V E-I " U P V O P a S 0 O S o 0) 0 Z « Z K Z JQ PC a in a\ o o H Q| m tH o m Q| o i o m is- VO ,H 0\ in tH O. g i4j CO CM O\ CM ^tf Pi § l4J CM 1 O\ CM ^ V *0 cn H <0 cn H <0 cn m <0 J^ 5E ^ £ H £ fH O M U « ^ g «H 04 2 < Q EH a 04 2 < Q EH H 04 PC < Q EH u O O W M >H U »3 O W M >H U Pi O W M >H U -H EH « 04 PC SC P EH « 04 PC SC P EH K 04 PC BC P JC C U W Q M U U Q Q U W Q EH EH M EH EH EH Z 19 EH M EH EH EH Z Q EH M E-i EH EH Z S ,-) ac u < M o M -) ac u rf w o K -) 3C U < W O * E4 < EH CU 2 W U D < EH CU 2 W U S < EH CU 2 W U * SUPPLEMENTAL DATA. Properties of aquifers and confining units Continued oo

NRCD Weymouth Wood* Research Sta. Hell No: S48hl Map No: 87 Log Depth 269 Latitude: 350841 Longitude: 792218 Altitude of Land Surface: 475 Basement: 206

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC. CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 475 ~ ~ 299 229 » O THICK >140 70 23 0

PCT PERM 57 -- 64 25 90 MATERIAL Id EST HYD 25 25 H CONDUCT g Longleaf, Incorporated. Hell No: Q51u3 ^ Map No: 88 Log Depth 191 Latitude: 351557 Longitude: 793523 Altitude of Land Surface: 605 Basement: 414 SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC 1 AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ &LYSIS-]

ALT TOP 605 ** z; THICK >130 o

PCT PERM 90 -- 58 M MATERIAL 1 EST HYD 25 25 t> CONDUCT £ Pinehurst , Incorporated. Hell No: R49m3 i i Map No: 89 Log Depth 224 Latitude: 351219 Longitude: 792751 Altitude of Land Surface: 505 Basement: 281 O o SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 505 349 295 3

THICK >130 54 14 5

PCT PERM 90 53 30 86 MATERIAL

EST HYD 45 25 15 CONDUCT

** Thick clay beds occur between lowermost aquifer and bedrock SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 183

U O u o U O 1 J < 1 J < f 1 ' 1

C EM EH C EM EH c EM EH Z M Z M Z M i 0 Z i 0 Z 0 Z Q) U 3 0) U 3 0)i U 3 n n n id id id CQ co CQ CQ O CM 0 Oil 1 EM 0 EM 0 CSl I 1 I a\ i i i rH 1 1 1 m ^ i m ^3 m ^3 1 CSl CSl ^

o\ o\ o -B 0% rH 0% Q) EM EH ^3* to m o) EM EH 0) CM EH O\ CSl CSl u Z M co v i u Z M u Z M 1 1 id O Z i i id O Z id O Z 1 *LJ U 3 U 3 U 3 3 3 3 CO *» m m o co CO in T co o EM O O T W> CSl EM O EM O «H oo p* ro *o U < r- t-n TJ U < *o U < 1 C 1 C c *"O id id id CD

.3g <4-l O T O <4-l <4-l ro csi o O EM EH ui m *r O EM EH O EM EH 1 rH rH 0 Z M «) V 1 Z M Z M V 1 0 Z 0 Z 0) 0 Z 1 O 8 U 3 § U 3 U £> 1 3 3 3 _-w00 jj 4J 4J -H oo csj in m iH CO H ji g O\ 10 to ro 4J m 4J s U O ro CM i-H i- 1 1 1 rH < CQ < 1 < CQ < III 1 £3 '§ ^ ,_, o O ^J^ m ro m o *r lO ro O Kf O £?* £4 CO EM EH ^9* lO rH rH EM EH rH T rH (^ EM EH o m Z M n vi m Z M *» V 1 £4 rH Z M 0 jj f^ O Z 1 1 P> O Z 1 1 f^ O Z r- f^ r- 'tS U 3 U S ^ U 3 2 D e O Q) CSl rH O lO 0) ^r csi m Q) ? > O *O O T to ro TJ rH tO rO O c^J U 3 0 0 rH CSl 3 0 0 1 ro 3 0 0 1 4J OH < 1 A u CM < If§* iH C* C C C «*-.0" 0 O CSl O O jg O H EM EH 0% rH CSl ,J EM EH EM EH 00 Z M 1 V 1 Z M o Z M ^ O Z 1 O Z O Z VS to U S O U 3 EH m U 3 ^ O m 0 ro $, CO CO en "" rH rH g T DC 0 PC 0 55 PC 0 Q,. j& ro fe < ro EM < ro fe < CQ CQ f£ CQ 1 n *£"^ ® « n ® T3 TJ TJ t^ 3 3 £4 3

^ 9B CM EH 1 4J EM EH 4J EM EH Q Z M rH -H Z M H r? I> 0 Z ^3 4J O Z 0 Z . T ro id U 3 ro id U 3 o ro id U 3 jg U .J U ^H CSl *1 < U U jg Hi Pj oc o 1 lO O lO oc o X O )x^ O n3 rtJ 1 O\ O\ CSl .. ^ »-3 rtj .. m t-1 < ^^ O to u A O CO u O ro U ^j Z 0 Z to Z ro S EM EH EM EH EM EH C^ rH rH Z M r l Z M H Z M .1 rH 0 Z rH O Z rH 0 Z OH 0) JC U 3 0) JC U 3 0) JC U 3 3 i> OH Q. Q. Q. h^ 0) PC O 0) PC 0 0) DC 0 CQ Q Q 0 < Q OH OH CM O EM EH O EM EH O EM EH »-l Z M Z M Z M 0 Z 0 Z O Z U 3 U 3 U 3

Z 0 Z O Z O m co to m m m to CM *"*M < &l < Si *** 8 2 H N o n EM EH 41 A EM H A EM EH H Z M 9 Z M moo i 0 Z 9 O Z (4 0 Z tO rH CM 1 1& U 3 E4 " U 3 4 U 3 V M 0 0 9 O a z & z PC 0 mil i o mil 1 moo m 9 < csi i i i 4* a CSl I 1 I Q. P" rH ON CM i: (A O id (A fa CO 4a «* ^ 3 ^ H OH PC < Q EH -H OH PC < Q EH «H CM 2 < Q EH «H O U M >H U » O W W >H U o o a M x u O EH tt OH PC X O EH tt OH OC X 3 EH M CM PC Z 3 O U Q M UNO C U U Q S EH M EH EH EH Z O EH M EH EH EH Z i EH M EH EH EH Z « ,4 x u < CA o M ,4 x u < co o O tn X U < CA O a < EH CU S U U D < EH OH £ H U EH < EH OH £ W U SUPPLEMENTAL DATA. Properties of aquifers and confining units Continued

6.B. Barne*. Well No: B22y- Map No: 93 Log Depth 310 Latitude: 363100 Longitude: 771426 Altitude of Land Surface: 120 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 120 59 33 7 -16 -43 -64 O THICK 61 26 26 23 27 21 O

PCT PERM 79 23 90 <10 70 <10 f MATERIAL «©

EST HYD 20 20 25 CONDUCT CO Hi CO Town of Conway. Well No: C22q2 H Map No: 94 Log Depth 520 Latitude: 362603 Longitude: 771339 Altitude of Land Surface: 105 Basement: -415

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ f Hi CO ALT TOP 105 66 50 -1 -15 -27 -82 OQ I THICK 39 16 51 14 12 55 333

PCT PERM 75 <10 82 <10 90 <20 57 W MATERIAL

EST HYD 25 20 30 25 CONDUCT

ONSLOW COUNTY O O O NRCD Folkcton* R*>*aroh Station. Well No: Y25q2 (x) Map No: 95 Log Depth 1,220 Latitude: 343642 Longitude: 772901 Altitude of Land Surface: 67 Basement: f SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC Tl AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 67 43 11 -245 -260 -279 -291 -642 -706 -1,080

THICK 24 32 256 15 19 12 351 64 374

PCT PERM 75 <10 76 <10 74 <10 75 <20 58 MATERIAL

EST HYD 25 75 40 ~ 35 30 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 185

o 00 o vo vo CN vo o o prj U O m U O J < J < J < fH fH rH 1 1

JJ 4J 4J C b EH C b EH c b EH 0) Z M Q) Z M Q) Z M J2 O Z g O Z E O Z o> U 3 0> U 3 a> U 3 w w w id id < ffl r** n n i/> cQ n m CN m ffl n r- r- m b O fH *3* VO *3* b O f** Cft *3" ^3" b O oo n in m «a- CN O < o CN CM CN 00 a* «. o « o fH «n fH «a« tH i I i .. r- o VD oo m oo n o o 0> b EH «a- r- CN fl) b EH rH U) fH fl) b E-i CN VD n U Z M n i o Z M 0 1 U Z S 01 1 id O Z i id 0 Z I id O Z ^ i VM U 0 0 3 U 3 fH M 1 ~~ M 1 M | 3 fH 3 .H 3 CO a\ oo o o co «3" «* CN O CO co m eft m b O CN rH r- in b O m vo o\ n b O o fH m m o 0 < CN fH O*O U < o\ o TJ O «C fH fH C z c i z c 3 * id fH id id f^ fH t-4 1 4J I-) 4J I-) i * o w w CN r» O fl) «M co vo m fl> O Z 1 I b 0> O Z « i g o> -o 0 3 ^1 73 U 3 o U 3 fH O ° 3 1 C 3 C 3 i 1 -H -U id 4J id 4J 1 JJ -H 0 CM VO 0 E -H vo 01 vo m E -H m m CN m 00 « 4J 00 00 VO crj «M 4J co o in n UH 4J ^* CN in ro sS 3 «H U O r- ro «M t-H U O m n o < CD < 1 0 < CD < 03 A! s * S JE S5 fH O m O <»i fH n CM oo fH «a« «a« fH in o n «a« en vo o S 1 CM b EH O\ 00 rH If*! b EH m n CM i vo b EH vo r- CM l£L trj CN Z M VD .| n CM *3* fH 1 t^J fH Z M VO 1 S? n r- O Z i i n r- O Z i i n r» 0 Z I I O fH r- U 3 fH 1 O 3 fH r** U 3 O 1 i I W CN CM CM " 8 trj fl) in r** o\ in t*i o> o fH CM m n fl) «* m m m s *o n in vo t*i T3 n CM r- «3" *O CN «3" r- VD Q O «a- CN 3 Q O n rH -3 Q 0 m rH g o 3 CM < 1 0 4J O4 < 1 O 4J O4 < I «, Z -H Z -H Z -H

'§. M C M C M C CN m VD Oj O n r** in Oj o m en CN 53 irf . ^ b EH o\ *a* fH t^ *J b EH eft n v i^ »-4 b EH vo m CN o" Z M n i Z M 01 1 Z M *3* 1 O Z i i O Z I I O Z 1 1 oo o O 3 0 U 3 o U 3 pS ^^ o o "b^ n *3* 0 to |TJ o\ n o o m «* o\ vo m m CN n r- m 5^ *3* ac o *3" ^3* O\ frj *? t£ O CM vo co n «? OH 0 CM ^« r- CN p n fi n CM n b < n fH OH ffl m i CD i

'. % S o «a- n o 3 rH n o 3 m r- o b EH o «r CM 4J b EH rH fH CN 4J b EH O fH CN ^ i iJ Z M n v i i -H Z M CN V 1 1 -H Z M n v i ^ 6 4J O Z 1 1 tP 4J 0 Z 1 1 > 4J O Z i i Q o- id U 3 m id U 3 n id U 3 -, CN i-3 CM t-4 CM J !rf< N ^ QI 1 CM VO 0 93 O S3 0 i m en m EH fH 3 |rf I vo oo r- .. n 1 VO CO CO O i m r- r- >7 O 00 U CM on U fH O r- U CN Z VD A Z T A z m A W « b EH b EH b EH § -» fH Z M H fH Z M *H fH Z M O Z ,_! O Z t-H O Z 0) «C U 3 fl> 43 U 3 fl) 43 U 3 jr3 * -U * -^ & xf £ a (X (X P-i 0> O* O fl> OS 0 4) !^ Q U < Q U < a 0 < O4 O4 p| M IP IP o* O b EH O b EH 0 b EH 1-4 Z M ij Z M *-4 Z M O Z O Z O Z U 3 U 3 U 3

Z O Z O Z O £ G *"* *"** < Mi < 5 40 ^ p. a> 0 Ok b EH S Ok b EH Ok b EH Q Z M & Z M ^| Z M O O Z O Z rt O Z U 3 10 " U 3 9 U 3 0 o o fr o 5 OS O 00 1 1 1 >| gf Q Oil 1 O OS O Oil 1 (X 3 rt ii i «* n, 3 *^ in | 1 1 U CU 3 < Til 1 CO CO (0 CO M al c as S x o

H O4 2 < Q EH O4 2 < Q EH fl CU 2 <* Q EH o o w M >« cj 4* o u M >4 t> a o w M >* u EH *: 04 a: 93 3 a EH & cu oc 33 3 EH *: cu oc 33 3 U W Q 3 U W Q O W Q U EH M EH EH EH Z >l E-i M E-i EH E-i Z H E-i M E-i EH E-i Z t-4 ac o

y 2 y 2 H 9 1 J < i -J <: | t-j < 1 i 1

£ 4J 4J c b EH C b EH C b EH Q) 2! M Q) g g Q) 2 M g 0 2! g O 2 6 0 Z 0> U O Q) O O 0> U O W V} W id TJ <0 (f) m (Q b O b O b O

m ,j m rJ 0 J « VO OJ

a> b EH o> b EH 0> b EH u 2! M u 2 M u 2! M id 0 Z 0 Z <0 O Z O Z 0> 0 2! u o o U 0 o U O 1 p p p

* -H OO -H 's 3 rH 4J P- 4J ^ rH u o P- 1 1 1 rH 0 O en 1 1 1 rH U O i§1 ** (Q s mm co a) oo en P* o Q> en rH o m a> «3" ? ncS m vo p* en *o « O P- P- TJ m vSj p Q O ^r rH 3 Q O rH rH P Q O a- I I i PU <: 1 4J Pu t, C C c o> o o oo oo o on ^* vo o OJ CN ^ b EH 01 en rH J b EH On ^* rH «4 b EH rH ^- OJ Z M ^* 1 2! M I I 2 M ^* 1 C§ 0 Z 1 1 O Z I O Z 1 1 "t^ \f) u o o 0 0 o U O Qi i-H en CN gn O on g m vo «j- o o m on o P- m en CN O CN in i£ ^* P5 2 O rH OD en ^* Ofi 0 vo m vo CN T OS O en oo vo m i ^ b < en rH m i en b o> H TJ o o 0 2 1 1 <0 4J 0 2! 1 fl> 4J 0 Z i i <*< en id U O U 0 en ac o o en o m 33 O rH en ^ m 3C O o CM vo m [V] « rH 1-5 rf* CN vo oo vo .. ^r *j ^ rH m vo vo .. o frj 0rf rH P- ^1 H o o u 1 tM O 00 O O 0 U en S 20 2! *r 2 m H % b EH b EH b EH J rH rH Z M tM tM 00 1 rH Z M P- VO O 1 rH Z M 000 1 PL, "m jrj O 2 tM rH 1 rH 0 2 OJ rH rH 1 rH 0 Z rH rH rH 1 U O fl> jC U O V 0> JS u o V & J5 -iJ * ^ * tf ^~ CL ex P. co a> OS 0 0> 05 O 0> OS 01 o 0 < Q O

$ § 2 «

U O O " o o tt U O » o O A *7 Z frl s * OS O m en o m *^ o£ O m oo an m o OS O 000 0 « 0, o <: ^* ^* on CN PI o <: 10 en P- en u Ot CN rH on m en M <0 M id 5*= . x « x « x 8. "S -H 5i St *-5 !S X i-5 M 2C 1 1 $ PLI 2 rfl Q £"< Pta 2 *4« Q £~* *4 PL* 2 rfl Q E-* Q O ^ KJ M >* O * O W M JM U X O W M t« U t^ »^4 Pu K SC S O t^ &G Oi PC« SC O t^ ^ Oi p£ 33 G Q UUQH O W Q O W Q U EH M H EH H Z EH M EH EH EH Z M EH M EH EH EH Z 0$ J 3C O < M O G HHXU

m VO ^ 2 0 O u o * t-1 < I 1 »J rtj en 1 | I

4J 4J 4J C CM EH C fa EH C fa EH 2 M 25 l-l Q) 25 M § 0 2 § 0 25 g O 25 0) U O 0) O O 0) U O

0 0 0 Jfa ^O z*fa O X*fa O v at CO en

0) 0) 0) faEH U u us U <0 0 25 O 25 0) § 25 0) O 25 ft TJ u a *o U S3 o U O 1 3 3 3 3 +2 4J 4J '§ -H CO -H r- -H ft -U 0 4J VO 4J at U ft en I i i I-H U O CM 1 1 1 i-H at i i i &> 25 ** 0 S II I < 0 «C II 1 < BS lit i g* « i ft *($ ^ * t 1 ? O ^* CO H^ ft 0 ft r* o CM at QO c^ c^ r- v m §£ i at fa EH a- vo fi at fa EH at vo ft o fa EH ^* ^* en O r- en fi ft v I en 25 M o fi v i m 25 M eo fi i ""^ en vo 0 S 1 VO O 25 1 VO 0 25 I I ^4 ft r- U O ft r- U O ft r- U O I i e £4 CM en a> CM a> t o a> *ljj ft oo m o a> ft vo m o 2 35 m oo oo CM T> CM P* r** CM "O r- r- vo *a- (^ at fi 3 VO ft *§* 3 a o a o at ,-» 3 a o D 0 4J O4 <, 1 4J i -P O4 < I "o» -r\ H CFH 0 o M C C C *^» U fl ft O O en oo m o fi o m ^ ^5 t-3 fa EH CM en ft >J fa EH ao en ft >J fa EH VO f| CM 33 2 M at v I 25 l-l CO V 1 25 M vo v i 0 25 O 25 I i O 25 i | 0 m U 0 m U 0 CO U S 1 en CM o U m m o vo m o o o ro o o m o at CM m m J-| H m Cfi O « r- at ro m o oo at CM m PS O o m co ro S PS O ro 1*4 itf co en fa *4 eo en VO 1 A 0 I 0 i 0 i

^ X 0) 0) 0) ~~|r^\ o o f^ 3 en en in 3 at ^* at 3 en vo ft 4J fa EH CM CM ft 4J fa EH P* CM CM i » fa EH eo CM en Q Ck 1 -r4 25 M CO V 1 CM -H r- i CM -H 25 M m i TJ 4J O 25 1 1 >, 4J 0 £ 1 1 3 4J 0 25 i i H^ in «o U 0 m PS O o CM o m C/J a C9 < 111 i a g i42 r- vo r- en Q O < vo en at CM P4 04 ft 04 i 0^ * t» 1 0^ 0 41 0 fa EH fl 0 25 M III 1 M tJ 25 l-l oo en I-H I O t-J 25 l-l m m o i 0 25 III 1 0 25 CM V CM 1 -H O 25 a1 i-t ft I U O J"Jj U O fl 41 U O 1 V ^f 1 4 |4] 41 25 O III 1 4 25 O r- fi o\ o M QI o m vo m jjj irf ||| | ^| 5^5 (^ en at v CM § f£ a- m CM X ^ >H i A ^4 CM °H fa EH 5S M 0 fa EH 25 l-l III 1 H en ^r m 1 4 H co co m i 0 25 III 1 § 25 1 en fi I 0 25 ft i 1- U O H U 0 v U O v 0 H 0 rl 25 51 P5 O PS O at CM o in PS O eo o r- m a, O rtj "* i i i f»4 0 < ft at CM Q. O i^J ro en vo ft A} flj (A C m (A O flJ (A as o as ^ as * jj g, fia oP. w%< M >-«0 EHu S° *o w(?- o (3 04o Hw M< >-0 uEH O U U Q Q L> U Q P L) U Q S EH M EH EH EH £5 U EH M EH EH EH 25 Q EH M EH EH EH 25 1-3 X U «£ (A O K t-3 X U rt! (A O K »-3 X D £! (A O «C EH Oi £ [z] l> B rij EH O4 as W U 55 *< EH O4 £ H l> SUPPLEMENTAL DATA. Properties of aquifers and confining units Continued

Bayboro Ch«vrol«t Company. Well No: S171- Map No: 105 Log Depth 210 Latitude: 350820 Longitude: 764640 Altitude of Land Surface: 15 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ 50 ALT TOP 15 -7 -19 -83 -93 -137 -145 M i i THICK 22 12 64 10 44 8 O

PCT PERM 90 <25 59 <10 90 <10 __ f MATERIAL «O i i

EST HYD 15 20 25 H CONDUCT *? CG E. Edward* Well No: Sl6w- 3 Map No : 106 Log Depth 234 Latitude: 350555 Longitude: 764245 Altitude of Land Surface: 10 Basement: H

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ ALYSIS- ALT TOP 10 -2 -15 -107 -134 -171 -186

i

THICK 12 13 92 27 37 15 O 50 PCT PERM 90 <25 48 <10 73 <10 a H MATERIAL 50 EST HYD 15 20 25 > CONDUCT f

KRCO Hobuokan Racaarch Station. Well No: Ql5u2 | Map No : 107 Log Depth 1, 003 Latitude: 351517 Longitude: 763547 Altitude of Land Surface: 6 Basement: ~ O 0o SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ 1f ALT TOP 6 -24 -46 -126 -140 -302 -326 -750 -764 -824 -851

THICK 30 22 80 14 162 24 424 14 60 27 1 PCT PERM 90 <20 78 <10 82 <25 85 <50 65 <20 MATERIAL

EST HYD 40 __ 15 __ 25 75 15 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 189

rH m 1 a < * 1 1 1 1 rnS 1 a < 1 rH 1 1

4J 0 rH CM *J 4J C Eu EH O in rH C Eu EH C Eu EH Z H ro 1 Q) Z H Z H O Z * I 6 O Z O Z 0)% U 3 rH 0) U S> 0)1 n i n n

.. CO 0 CM 0 Eu H CO in rH 0) O U CO 1 U Z M U Z M id O Z I I 4J »y ^j O Z III 1 H Pi CM «d 8t/ §*-> rH Id 8tj §*-> O <0 u » rH M rH i-l H u O U \^ X O CM CO O O X O P- 1 1 1 p* Q| P- in co o .. o\ p" CO O^ O^ ^3 3* »» 1 1 1 " rH *< CO P* ^* H O CM d^ CO O O ^* O CO u m «H 53 Z m I Z m 1 Z P- i Eu EH Eu EH Eu EH w rH rH Z M CO T O 1 i-H Z H VO 0 1 rH Z M co a\ o I H-J i-H 8 § VO rH 1 rH 0 Z rH 1 rH R ^ CO rH 1 PH & " \j *-> CO V 0) J3 U » V 9) .C \J £3 m v *PH ) * £ 1 % 4J * % i h J Q< O. o< CO » oe o co in o o a) PC O TOO V PC O m co vo o u < vo a\ m o u < o\ m o u < rH CM VO CM ij 04 CO 4 04 04 «» rH 41 & 1 41 IT tp 1 M O Eu EH CQ O Eu EH o Eu EH Z M VO p- 0 1 i-l Z H co o i 4 i-l Z H in o o i O Z CO p- rH 1 A O Z in rH 1 41 0 Z in VO rH 1 L> O CM V X) U O v en U O CM rH V f 1 « Z O in rH co in Z O co P- o CM co in o rH P- in CM vo co CM K g 2 o m T CM * rH rH * CM * rH rH K a 1 K A 1 X 0 1 o ptl ^1 0 Eu EH 9 H Eu EH CM CO 0\ I >, H in vo o I i H Z M «» P- rH 1 41 0 Z CO CM rH 1 H O Z P- CM rH 1 II 1 -H U 9 I v u u o 1 V 1 U 0 o o z z HH 2 o Pfi Q| o CM co in .fl Q| P- CM CO in 41 Pfi Q| o co in in o< O ri! H O M 0 W M X 0 « O W M >< U E-* &(i 04 PS 33 £^ J% C^ W O (5 u u op O W O £1 EH M EH EH EH Z O EH M EH EH EH Z O EH M EH EH EH Z i-l X Ori! MO ft i-l X O rf MO K i-l X U < MO i < EH 04 2 U U X < EH 04 2 WO g < EH 04 2 H U 190 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

CO 00 CO rH CO to CM U O CM o a CO CJ Oi J < >-) < J < rH rH 1 1

4J £ 4J C b EH C pH £-4 C b EH Z M o Z H Z M i 0 Z o z g O Z (U U O o 0 » 01 U » m n n id m r- to CM o 03 *r ^r ^r o CQ tO P- rH O b O co r- to co b O m ro m CM b O o m m v O i^ rH rH i-H CM rH *3* O rfl O rfl i_^ 0 -3 r- ^.^ ^ CO rH tO rH CO rH 1 1 .. tO TH 0 co to o in rH in 0) b EH r- 10 rH 0) b EH 00 to CM 01 b EH CO P- CM u Z M 0 V 1 U Z M 0 V 1 U Z M rH 1 Id 0 Z i id O Z - I id 0 Z * | *4H U O ^H IM O » rH MH U O rH 14 1 ^ 1 M | 3 D D (0 CT» P- CO O C/l o co *» o in in o r- m o ftj Q| tO O tO CM b O o co to «r b O CO C3 tO ^3* B 1* 00 CM 7) U < 0 TJ U < O rH PT^ c 1 C -~ c % CD Id rH rH Id rH H ^4 1 t-3 1

.Sg g *4H T m m MH CM 00 O O MH m o CM o b E^ rH in rH O b EH tO CO CM Z O b EH m oo CM 0 jmt 5S H CO V 1 Z rH 00 rH V 1 Z M at t O rH 0) O Z 1 1 4) O Z 1 ICO) 0 Z i | u » TJ o » id TJ U O 1 D j3 H D so i "'S O 4J iH 4J Z -H O V rH in -H m r~ o o -H -H tO at rH O 4J oo co m *>* 4J o m m co g -u v o to «r |^ Id .H V CO ^H in CO U rH in *r ffl < 1 < ffl < i id < 03 < I .g J^ s: O CM o !> to o O rH P- V p- co m m «H CO CO T b EH V V rH O b EH V in rH 1 P- b EH 00 in rH rH 5T Z M *r i sr V V 1 rH CO Z M 0 *9* p* Z M V 1 "§ O Z 1 1 r- O Z 1 1 *r p- O Z H rH r- U O p- U 0 rH P- U O e ^ CM " .. CM CO 0) CM r* on o u CM m m m co 01 in co CM m g 55 TJ *r a\ to «r 7) «r o to CM TJ at at p* co «^ '2 D 0 0 rH CM 3 Q O rH CO « 3 a o r-t CM D O 4J Pi 4! I jj Pi < 1 0 4J PI < i ?L Z -H -H * Ti H O o> M C C M C ^^» U Pi o V OO O O o CM m PI o CM CO O l^i hH* b EH rH CM cH J b EH rH CO CM rti t-3 b E-* P- CM rH 00 Z M rH V 1 Z rH rH V 1 5S H cH V 1 *2 c* 0 Z 1 1 O Z 1 1 1 1 rt m U O r- U 0 O 8 0 1 CO m H CM CO m CM CM CM Q V 0^ QI ci a Pi 0 CO b < CO b 4 CO b < S5 n ( 'o CO -3 03 j) H § 03 icg ^ 3 9 i oo m m Q| p- co m o Q| i at to o r- ^ .. CO j < 1 OO P- OO .. CO 3 |rf rH at tO in rH 3 irf I at p- oo o m u A o *r U 1 O CM u A S Z CM Z co Z *r ryi « b EH % b EH b EH ^ rH rH Z M *-H rH Z M CM at in 1 fH rH t^ i i 0 Z ,_! 0 Z rH CM 1 iH 0 Z PH V J3 U O 01 *C U » V 0) J3 U » p~iMH S £ 3* i * % xJ (X CL, D. CQ (U Pi CD 01 oi o 01 Pi 0 Q U < Q u < Q 0 < Pi PI Pi 0 b EH o b EH O b EH Z M a j Z M Z M 0 Z o O Z O Z U O H U O U » * £ Z 0 Z 0 £ Z 0 c fe£ i^i 01 ^J rtj rt J>i < 10 >H ^4 10 QI rHl fl c^l r"QI in B rHI b EH O rHl b EH b E^ O iH) Z M ^4 Z rH O i-l 5S H o 0 Z 8 O Z o o z U O 0 o » U 0 « o « O « o * Z 4 Z o Pi O *3" It 1 H pi 0 o co o o O Q| r- i i i _ D. 5 < en i i i ft to in oo *?* p. g I^J CO 1 1 1 "O id rHl * 'l_i £^» Br» £^»

H OH K < Q EH O Pi K < Q EH *4 OH K < Q EH O O N M IM t> i< O M H >4 u O O W M > U O W Q Q U W Q U W Q U EH M EH EH EH z u EH M EH EH EH z u EHMEHEHEHZ J ac u «< M o K J ac u «< w o J ac u «* W o Z < E-i OH S W U J5 < E-i OH S W U J5 < E-i OH 2? W U SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 191

m CM U O 0 O ^ ^ rt! , J^S 1 T | 1 1

U £ ^ C fo EH c b H C b EH g H g O S g O *3 g O 2 0> O D 0> O D V 0 D m n m 10 10 10 n t~- oo o m CQ n n o% o in &4 O^ vo r^ vo ^« b O b O o o m n O rtj CM T l O rt« O rtj 00 ,-1 0 ^ « O ** o\ f-H r-t ^

m9 CM m o CM i-l CM O 0> bi E^ O VO r-< 0> b H Of> o> pL4 E^ vo *r ,-1 u 55 W CM V 1 O 2 M m i i i u 2 HI r^ v i 10 O 2 «. 1 10 O 2 III 1 10 O 2 i i *W O D T~l *W O D 0 D M 1 M M P P P CO CM O iH in CO VD VD ort O CO vo m ^ o o b O o% T-4 r^ ^* b O 00 0 VD *T b O t^CM n r- n U «« 0 ^H TJ 0 < ^ T-l TJ S* ii-* C J3 c D 1 C i QJ <0 i-l «0 iO 3 -> 1 K^ S _ m VD VD CM <4-l r- o% o% <4-i in *H o C CM O (xi E^ O 00 rH O b EH i-l VO rH O &i E^ PO O\ rH O 2 M O 1 2 M ^* 1 2 M VO V 1 O 0) 1 0> O 2 1 1 O O 2 1 1 I 0 TJ O O ^1 TJ 0 D o O D 1 P p .-2 ^S S 01 -H r^ o% oo o -H oo o% oo in *H m o r- m 1 4J 4J o o% m ^* -U OO CM VD CM 4J ^ O\ ^f CM 55 4-> r-( o o VD n i-H 0 O CM i-l i-H O O n CM Gi *0 i4! n < i < n < 1 < CQ rtj § £ J o 0 O ^> ^- m ff} ^* o% PO m n in CM r^ oo CM Pu H n r- vo b EH i-i r^ i-i i-i CM E^ 0% ^- ,-1 « T-I m 2 M m i o 2 HI CM t m 2 HI CM 1 O 2 1 1 00 O 2 i i r^ O 2 1 1 1 V" O D ^ 0 D O D e w . .. cc m Q> u> r- n m o> in o n o o> r^ o oo o Q^ "O ^* oo r^ n *o 1 rH VO ^- -O v m m n S-*. 3 Q O CM CM P 0 O CM P 0 O 1 CM s o £ Pi < 1 *> Pi < Pi < H H 2 1 & * S_ M C c c O* Pi O i-i m o o CM r^ m o n ^ m <4i H^ Pu H CM CM T-t H] b EH i-l i-l CM *1 b EH CM CM i-l « 0 t1 (*) Sb "«* ro py rtj n 1 n n S -S SI JJ r^ ^3 o -o X O D V &H * 5 S a, Q. CQ §* OS O 0> ce o 0> ce o Q e> < Q 0 < Q PI PI PI tJ* 4) tJI Q> O b H « O b EH 0 b EH I-l 2 M 0 H^ 2 M 1-J ** O 2 0 Z 8g 0 D § O D H X Jj £ 2 O 2 O 2 O a ^^ g M M 1*3 j m ^9 b H "S rt b EH O rH o rt 2 ^ 2 HI u O 2 O 2 M O 2 O D ^i O D 4 » O D 0 S 5 0 4 & 4 2 2 0 g °; Oil 1 SB OS 01 o oo r- m g °« o\ T-I c*> ID i-l I 1 1 Q, D rt! prj ,-1 VO CM K D. *rt <0 CO JK (0 CO fll CO C S3 S3 » 33

H S KH- Us S3 KH- fig. S3 KH- H Pi PC i4! Q EH Pi OS "< Q EH p Pi OS rt. Q EH O O W M >H O O W M >H O fl O W M >i O ONOM O W Q Q O W Q U E-i M E-i EH E-i 2 O EH M EH H EH 2 U EH M H EH EH 2 H^ X O rf W O O H^ X U < C/l O K t-1 DC O rf t/1 O SB

N.C. Oil and Ga* Company. Well No: X28w- API No. 32-141-2 (Cowan No. 1) Map No: 117 Log Depth 1,000 Latitude: 344030 Longitude: 774230 Altitude of Land Surface: 33 Basement: -956

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 33 24 18 -27 -47 -355 -405 -679 -791 -872 -892

THICK 9 6 45 20 308 50 274 112 81 20 64

PCT PERM 90 <10 90 <10 75 12 48 19 56 <20 59 MATERIAL AQUIFER-SYSTEMREGIONAL[92ANALYSIS-NORTHERNCOASTALATLANTICPLAIN EST HYD 25 65 55 40 25 30 CONDUCT

P B R Q U I M A K S C O U N T Y

NRCD Parkvill* R«»«»rch Station. Well No: El3m2 Map No: 118 Log Depth 1,210 Latitude: 361744 Longitude : 762744 Altitude of Land Surface: 16 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 16 -71 -88 -248 -302 -319 -352 -382 -510 -558 -640 -674 -922 -989

THICK 87 17 160 54 17 33 30 60 48 82 34 248 67

PCT PERM 90 <20 48 <20 85 80 <20 65 <25 65 <20 60 <10 MATERIAL

EST HYD 25 ~ 15 15 30 30 30 25 CONDUCT

P I T T C 0 U N T Y

NRCD Bttthal R*B«aroh Station. Well No: L24b3 Map No: 119 Log Depth 690 Latitude: 354457 Longitude : 772155 Altitude of Land Surface: 65 Basement: -625

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 65 39 27 5 -16 -266 -290 -531 -561

THICK 26 12 22 21 250 24 241 30 64

PCT PERM 62 17 68 <10 62 33 54 <10 47 MATERIAL

EST HYD 25 25 25 20 20 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 193

r- m vo f i eg fH *"* 0 0 eg o a 3 S 1 ^ <

4J 4J C Cu EH C Cu EH c Cu EH 5 M 4) S S O 2 |S O 2 £ O 2 0) U 0 a> U 9 0) 0 0 n ca ca id id ca ca CO cu a Cu O Cu O' 3 1* 3" m o o *J eg ^* oo ro ro

4) Cu EH 0) Cu EH d> Cu EH u 2 M U 2 M u 2 M n> O 2 id O 2 id O 2 HH U O HH 0 0 HH U 9 M M M 3 3 3 CO W W en r- vo o "O Cu O Cu O cu a o o vo ro O i4( o 1 * o ro fH c £> 1 id id id 1 .1 m r- o o m ««H o en CM 0 Cu EH ^r ro fH o Cu EH 0 Cu EH CO CM CM 1 2 M fH V I 5 M tH fH 1 i a> §s 4) O 2 | 1 O 8§ o U 9 o U => J3 p P i 4J 4J JJ *r* -rH ro vo sr o -«H r- CM m o H ao eg *r o Si 4J oo ro sr ro 4J J_l ON ^* ro 4J eg m m ro rH 0 O CM fH rH 0 d ro H 0 O" fH ** "* ** I1 ca < ca «c ca < '§ O ao oo (P^ f_| ^""^ ro o m eg CM m o fH eg vo m v | Cu EH o eg fH r- Cu EH ro fH fH oo Cu EH fH fH CM ^* 2 M ro VI *r 2 M ro V 1 m 2 M i i ^l en O 2 I en O 2 1 oo i § r- r- >i r- O 35 0 0 U 9 a 0 1?

6 .. .. SB 4) 4) SB » ,_, ro r- o o "O "O ro »j «r r- ro £ D P Q a P Q 0 D Q Q| ^ 4J CU r4j 4J CU < 4J cu «C ^ O "&> -jH O li o U C C U C ^^ Q ao o o ^" r- m o ^ Cu EH Cu EH 1 1 Cu EH fH fH ao 2 M 2 M 2 rH V 1 o O 2 O 2 jj O 2 1 *?^ O U O ao U 9 o U O ? SB ro ro o eg Sr ro r- vo o* O m m M eg j^, PS O a* PS 0 « PS O ^H Jg ro Cu < ro Cu < M ro Cu < CO CO CO 1 a " n "^ 0) u o § 0 o t^ 3 3 P ^ H 4J Cu EH 4J Cu EH £ ro *» Cu EH Q 2 M fH -rH 2 M tr -H 2 M « H 4J O 2 O 2 ro 4J O 2 [J eg id U O m id 0 => 3 ** C X d X O x a r- ^* .. VO «-3 «c W o ao U 0 0 U o en 0 ^^ 2 CM 2 ro 2 *r ^5 Cu EH Cu EH Cu EH &3 rH 2 M rH 3 *~* rH 5 M hJ rH O 2 rH O 2 rH O 2 OH 0) X u a 0) X 0 0 o> fi U 9 3* 4J PH 0. P 0) PS O 0) PS a 0) a CQ Q o < Q o < Q S f£ cu cu PL, o Cu EH O Cu EH Cu EH (J (J 2 M 0 r3 5 M O 2 O 35 H O 2 0 0 U 9 U => c 2 a o 2 a M 2 O H * * o 01 Cu EH J (^ Cu EH |SI Cu EH H H r4 2 M H Q O 2 0 2 Q* U 9 U 9 0 tt O 2 2 2l PS O S PS a o oo o m PS O o eg oo o * O. S .5 eg CM P- eg M (X 9 < ^* en eg C Q. O «C oo ro r** ro (A ro Ei id (A ro CO 1 a as J «M CU 2 < Q EH 8* CU 2 < Q EH K < Q EH O O W M >-i U Q O U M JM U MM >H U f o $£ PL, PS 35 S C O W Q U U Q ]t EH M EH EH EH Z U EH 6 *g *| y H M EH EH EH 2 O tJ 3C O

m P- vo m vo 0 O fH CM o a T 1 32 1

c Cu EH C fe EH C fci EH Z M Z M Z M g O 25 O Z g o z CD o a CDg o a CD o a 10 10 10 d id id CQ CQ CQ tM O HM O u 2 *r ^J in >J vo rJ a\ 00 vo fH fH

CD &4 E-I CD fci EH CD &4 EH U u U Z M CD CD ^" "TJ *O o <£ 3 Q 0 3 a o a o 5** jj CM < 4J CM < §H "*"* H H D» , c C <£> 0 0 o 0 >J fci EH f-1 fci EH f-1 fci EH 03 Z M Z M Z M g O Z O Z O Z 5^ ^* o a in u a p- o o S CM cn m a, CM o tn O CM m rt ^* OS O OS O ^* OS 0 "H cn pL4 id! C^ CQ ** cn 1 CQ ffl * < £ i> CD f-t T o "O Z* 3 3 ^N CM il fci EH ^j &4 E-I fn EH CH £ ft Z M CS| ^1 Z M CM -H Z M -. in .u O Z o z O Z *-j ^T id o a m J3 o a 0 X! o a 0> JS o a PH 3» 4J £> Q< Q. Q. CQ « cc o OS O CD o < §° o < a o < CM CM ^ CT* g o fc EH &4 EH g o &4 EH Z M Z M Z M ^4 O Z *» O Z H O Z 41 o a n o a 41 o a 41 « 41 V 0 0 0 O z o 01 z o* 5 < p- ^ a\ fH u rt X o «n v I) lO M M fn EH M fn EH M M fn EH 4 H Z M VO CM 0 1 H « H Z M 0 Z P^ fH 1 £% O Z O Z o a V o a u a 21 til 21 OS O OS O in CM o in OS O vo CM o in « 0. a < o\ f i o\ f i (! pt a < OO fH Ot CM Oi a < VO «H O\ CM (A C 1) (A fH 41 id w fH ** &* | s ^ ^ M § ^ >S § ^ S r-3 * Cn K << a EH Cn Pi < a E-i M CM OS <4! a EH S O U M >i U K O W M JH O Pi O W M ^ O EH ;£ CM OS SB a EH i£ CM OS SB a EH ;£ CM OS SB a Q UCQQQ OCQQQ UCQQ U E-i M E-i E-i E-i 2 O E-i M E-i E-i E-i Z O E-i M E-i E-i E-i Z tf f4 2C O < W O pj f4 2C O < W O g f-1 Z O < W O SS i^iEHDiSCQUSB

p- p- at CN m o CO O O co 0 0" CM U O 1 ^ * i I ^ *

4J 4J 4J C CM EH C CM Ei C CM EH Z M Z H Z H O Z O Z O Z 0) U 3 0) U 3 0) U 3 10 10 10 -t rH i_3 m rH rH rH

0) Cu Ei 0) CM Ei 0) CM EH O Z H u Z M U Z H <0 O Z <0 O Z <0 O Z *w U 3 ^M 0 3 ^M U 3 14 ^4 M 3 3 3 to CM m o o co oo en oo m co P- CM CO O o CM 0 » oo P- co CM O oo vo m CM CM O CM 00 VO CM CN -O S* CN -O U < rH _. c 3 1 C I C 3 1 n * <0 <0 3 *-* ^ S IM m P- CM <«H o oo m ^ rH VD 0\ 'c o CM H OO in rH O CM H P- rH CN O b H m P- CM 0 Z H rH 1 Z H rH rH 1 Z H 1 1 O » O Z 1 1 0) o z 1 1 0) O Z 1 U 3 o U 3 o U 3 1 3 3 3 -8 £ 4J 4J 'S -H P- CN CN 0 -H CO CO rH O -H VD p- o» m 1 *> vo m m co 4J CO O in CO *J CM P- VD CM 5s i-H U O CN >-t U O CN >-t U 0" rH rH g> < n < < n < < n < e-i ,§ m p- m ^"" a ^* » P- P- ^ rH 00 O rH OO CM O 5* ^* CM E-i rH ^ rH P- CM Ei VO CM rH rH CM EH CO rH rH 8 "* Z H rH 1 rH Z H V 1 in Z H rH V 1 00 O Z 1 a\ O Z 1 00 O Z 1 si *"* U 3 P- U 3 P- U 3 e ...... «>§ "S0) 0)o 0)o H-5 3 Q O 3 Q a 3 Q O ^ *J CU < 4J 4J CU < H H §* DI O» %_- G C C O1 O o o i^ Cu E-i I-] CM Ei !_^ CM EH S Z M Z H Z H *c^ O Z O Z O Z "^ vo U 3 vo O 3 m U 3 0 CO m m Q 00 rH p- fc co CO ^* ci ^* Ofi Q| ^* 0£ Ol ^* K O CM H ^ eg S 55 z o ffi 0 S 2 M P- n3 rf .. ao .. CM tj < B o vo u o «r o O VO u S Z ^" Z m Z CO w CM E-i CM E-i CM EH J i-H Z H i-H Z H i-H Z H Q. r-H O Z i-H O Z i-H O Z f£ W J3 U 3 0) A O 3 0) £ U 3 P O. * 0. OU OQ . 0 K 0 K 0 OS O §° O < Q U> < CU cu ^4 tP o^ D» P 0 CM EH A 5 CM H O Cu EH Z H Z H jj Z H ^j O Z 0 O Z O Z en U 3 H O 3 U 3

Z O 2 z a o at CM o z a | ca 2 < o co vo CM **+ rtj ^ ^4 SH rH ^4 a SS CM H H CM CM Ei CM CM EH 0 r4 Z H H H Z H m m m i « H s a K O Z O Z 0 V 1 H O Z U 3 0 O 3 rH 3 " U 3 0 0 0 « 0 i-4 Z Ol Z Ofi Ql 0 VO 0 0 K K a m o oo m tf O rH CO P- O 3 a 3 < «T CM O\ m (X 3 < «r ^ m CN 4) Ou 3 < in rH P- in IH « u c5 o w M SH u o o w M >H u t-i « CU K Z O HMidttfSS H « CU K Z 3 Q O W Q Q U M O C O W Q U HMHE-iHZU HMHHE-izp H M H H H Z P( ^ Z O < W O 2 ^ Z U < W O O ^ SC U < W O g < H CU S W O g < H 0< S W O H < H CU S W O SUPPLEMENTAL DATA. Properties of aquifers and confining units Continued

Town of Falrmont. Well No: Z45v- Map No: 129 Log Depth 612 Latitude: 343004 Longitude: 790634 Altitude of Land Surface: 108 Basement: -504

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 108 88 64 40 -10 -258 -438 » 8 THICK 20 24 24 50 248 180 66 O

PCT PERM 77 <10 83 <10 56 25 64 f MATERIAL <©cj EST HYD 50 35 30 25 H CONDUCT » -SYSTEM. SAMPSON .COUNTY

Town of Rosvboro. Well No: U38t- J2 Map No: 130 Log Depth 353 Latitude: 345639 Longitude: 783028 Altitude of Land Surface: 134 Basement: -219 ALYSIS-NOR1 SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 134 95 59 -30 -86 -166 -176 a ^3 THICK 39 36 89 56 80 10 43 w PCT PERM 44 <10 50 <10 66 <5 75 > MATERIAL F EST HYD 50 15 25 50 | CONDUCT o

Town of Salomburg. Well No: T38t- COASTALPI Map No: 131 Log Depth 320 Latitude: 350122 Longitude: 783013 Altitude of Land Surface: 165 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ L

ALT TOP 165 101 81 0 -44 -113 -133

THICK 64 20 81 44 69 20

PCT PERM 70 <50 55 <40 67 40 MATERIAL

EST HYD 35 25 25 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 197

CA o *r r- CO ^* CM 0 O tH m 1 1 3S i 3?

JJ Jj jj C CM E^ c CM £ * c CM E-* O » M 0) Z M Z M £ o z 6 O Z 0 Z 0) 0 0 0) 0 0 o o n n in d id id OQ CA O O O CQ m m vo m CQ T o oo m EM O m CM vo m CM O « m ^- CM CM O r- r- ^« CM o *^ CM ^ * iH ^* m 1-3 1 O i-l i ^« 1-3 i CM r- n iH tH IH oo m o m o tH O O 0) ¥** E-* n CM CM a) CM H r-t n CM 0 fu g-4 in CM tH o s M CM V 1 O Z M tH V 1 O ^S H ^* 1 id I i id 0 Z I I id o z 1 1 «M 8§ O O 0 0 M M M 3 3 3 c/) o tH oo m CA m m vo m w « r- ^« o CM O m oo 'r CM CM O^ i o r- n CM O CA m m ro o O rt! tH TJ O rt« rH TJ 0 ** CM tH c ^5 1 C & c i 8 5 id id 1 !M CA rH O «M tH VO O «M m CA o "c O CM E-* tH n tH O CM H « ^- CM O CM H m n CM O ^S H tH V 1 Z M V t Z M CM V 1 o z 1 1 0) 0 Z I 0) O Z i i o ^ o a g 0 0 g 0 0 1 3 3 3 *§ ^ -U 4J r*- vo m m -H « n CM m -H n CM tH m '§ 3 tH n VO CM 4J r- to m CM *j CM n r"* n 3 ,H 0 O tH rH 0 O rH iH iH CQ < CQ < as

S| o\ n CM s^ ^ tH ^ tH CM CO CA O CO r- vo CM (S4 f-> n tH CM m CM E~* O CM CM ^< CM E~* O tH tH 8 Z M 1 CO $5 H tH V 1 tH ^S n tH 1 oo 1 CO 1 CO o z r- o z r- o z 1 1 1 r* 0 0 o o 0 0 w Q vo m vo o 0) 0) O r- rH O ^> *O m CM m to TJ o n r*» r- m ,QJ r-i Q O 3 Q a 3 Q 0 i ^ 3 Cu < jJ CM < "o>jJ CM < S* D» C 1? CM VO O O O rH rH CA ^ 5 CM E-* r- rH rH >1 CM H CM E-« C*> CM M § O 2 { § 2 § 55 | "t* O o o VO O O m 0 0 ^ rH tH CM o^ ^^ VO vo Q^ ^* O CO n ^» A O m os a ^* os a ^^ n CQ ** to CM «£ n fe ** i CQ ^ CQ JC O O P-i S JJ S «iJ S 4J f ^ OU 0. O4 M « QI 0) OS O 0) QI Q g 1^ a o < a g 1^ O4 CM CM O CM E-* 0 o Z M O 2 O Z ^ IIO Z O O 0 0 H o a z o z a z o 5 N n n CM t* n CM H o n CM E-i H S t! H Z M M H Z M O Z O Z O Z __ 0 0 O O 0 0 1* 0 o 0 OS O m n r*- o r4 OS O o r- m o K OS O ^* CO CA O 3 o. CM m r- n O CU o < r- vo ^- CM a, o < r4 id tH o id w tH id MS 8 s C9 n X iJ 4» CM C4» < Q E-i r> CM OS < Q E-« o g-io j(j wp| p£M jgJM jjo Ae g_io j(j p|w p£M 2c>< r^o H t^o »*t wfti Mofi >in o& C O W Q 8 UcqQQ O W Q o* i-3xu

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 145 99 71 -58 -93 -190 -208 & O THICK 46 28 129 35 97 18 102 O

PCT PERM 67 <15 54 <10 65 16 72 ^ MATERIAL i EST HYD 25 30 35 40 & CONDUCT z City of Clinton. Well No: U35gl ^ Map No: 136 Log Depth 455 Latitude: 345831 Longitude: 781822 Altitude of Land Surface: 155 Basement: -297 &

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ r GO ALT TOP 155 104 81 -67 -112 -191 -204 1 THICK 51 23 148 45 79 13 93 0 PCT PERM 69 <5 55 13 70 15 62 w MATERIAL & * EST HYD 35 __ 25 30 30 CONDUCT r Town of N«wton Grov*. Well No: R36b2 § Map No: 137 Log Depth 325 Latitude: 351503 Longitude: 782053 Altitude of Land Surface: 180 Basement: -119 0 o o SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC GO AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 180 130 108 14 -1

THICK 50 22 94 15 118 |

PCT PERM 64 <15 60 27 57 MATERIAL

EST HYD 35 25 30 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 199

m VO m J 4 i J < i J <

u £ £ c b E-i c b E-i c b E-i Z M Z M Z M 1 0 Z c% 0 Z g 0 Z 0 O 3 0 O 3 0 O 3 M M 0)

b E-i 0 b E-i V b E-i 8 Z M O Z M O Z M b O o m vo CM b O tH 1 1 1 o O < o 0 < tH o 0 < CM 1 1 1 C S 3 i C * 3

VO b E-i OO tH tH b E-i in CM tH vo b E-i m vo r* ro Z M fH VI CM Z M tH V 1 tH Z M at v i j ^4 at O Z 1 0 Z 1 VO 0 Z I I p- O 3 r- O 3 P- O 3 I E4 ^4 a 0 0 fr 0 «9* CM m m 0 *o o o «q* at vo CM s ^ 3 0 0 3 O O 95 3 Q 0 oo S> U Oi < Oi < 4J Oi < I S o H H & H r u C C O C 0 O O TOO ? b E-i b E-i U b E-i CM CM m 0 Z M Z M Z M CO 1 g Q 0 Z O Z 0 Z 1 1 .3 m O 3 at O D o O 3 95 m m t3 m m m 0 ^* *4* I frf i^ m P- P- «9* O *s* OS o *9* « 0 m os a p. »g- vo m H |^ m b < m b < H m b < VO tH (Q to to 1 E4 * H 0 « 0 H O o TJ * o H 3 3 3 CM m o U 4J b E-i b E-i ^4 b E-i »n CM CM 5 CM -H Z M tH -H Z M m -H Z M VO V 1 01 ^ 1 ' 0 Z M 4J 0 Z t* ^ 1 * 0 Z 1 1 3 .H -3 irf ^* *-3 rt at p. p. CO VO O vo *9* tH 3 o at o o O T o Z CM Z m Z ^ I 1 b E-i b E-i ^ b E-i f f 3 Z M tH Z M rH fH Z M CM m o i fH P- tH 1 3 fH O Z fH O Z 0 Z 0 fi O 3 0 ff, O 3 0 ff, u s "9* V s a ' H a a 3 0 05 0 0 « 0 v ftf 0 T co T m Q o 0 < o O < o o < m tH m CM Oi Oi Oi m tH t7* O^ tr* i 0 b E-i o b E-i c o b E^ Z M Z M 0 ^ Z M oo vo o i O Z 0 Z H 0 Z tH m tH I O 3 O 3 O 3 CM tH V ^ 1 J 4) Z O 1^ Z 0 01 Z O «* «* CM 0 0 K < Jj* (^ at CM oo CM * >* * 1 tH CO &CJ tn b E-i b E-i Is b E-i Z M rt ^1 Z M ftf ^1 Z M vo QO m i O Z O Z 0 O Z VO CM tH 1 * O 3 c O 3 W O 3 1 V o O 0 11 ^ Si g o£ 01 O T OO O M OS OI oo vo m o PC a oo "9* at m 2 & 3 < m vo r- m So. O *4J o m P" ro M CU s < p- m tH m t O C O W M * O 95 0 W M * U E-i tt O< ftf X 3 E-i tt Oi ftf X 3 E^ ^ PI p5 J5 ^ C O W Q M O W Q Q DUO £ E-i M E-i E-i E-i Z 3 E-i M E-i E-i E-i Z O E-i M E-i E-i E-i Z o *J x u g ui o tf *j ac o < c/> o p£ fJ X U < Ul O E4 < H Oi 2 W 0 |4 < E-i Oi 2 W 0 S < E-I QI is w o SUPPLEMENTAL DATA. Properties of aquifers and confining units Continued

Town of Columbia. Well No: I10y4 Map No: 141 Log Depth 208 Latitude: 355530 Longitude: 761430 Altitude of Land Surface; 5 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 5 -80 -93 H O THICK 85 13 O

PCT PERM 74 <10 f MATERIAL &d EST HYD 25 M CONDUCT w CO Exchange Oil and Ga> Company. Well No: J9f- API No. 32-177-1 (Westvaco No. 2) N Map No: 142 Log Depth 4,198 Latitude : 355333 Longitude: 760935 Altitude of Land Surface: 12 Basement: -3, 882 H S SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC ^ AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ r ALT TOP 12 ~ -761 _TQC _oi t _aoo _1 noA 1 iin _1 OQC _1 loc ._ . _ _ CO CO 1 127 16 156 26 176 40 o w wH MATERIAL M S)

jy £ U 4\J CONDUCT f

HH WASH INGZON COUNTY Q Q O NRCD Plymouth R«««arch Station. Well No: Kl7a3 CO Map No: 143 Log Depth 1,494 Latitude : 354925 Longitude: 764530 Altitude of Land Surface: 33 Basement: H f SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC Tl AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ f

ALT TOP 33 15 -7 -68 -105 -125 -131 -216 -238 -322 -335 -341 -395 -599 -632 -1,084 -1,148

THICK 18 22 61 37 20 6 85 22 84 13 6 54 204 33 452 64

PCT PERM 90 <10 77 <10 90 <10 82 <10 74 <10 90 <10 50 <10 54 26 MATERIAL

EST HYD 15 -- 20 25 90 20 25 25 30 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 1101

rH 00 0 O rH 0 O t J < J < 1, t

_£ JJ JJ c Cu EH c Cu EH C Cu EH 4) Z M 4) Z M £ 0 Z g O Z g 0 Z 4) o o 4) o o 4) O O 10 10 10 <0 <0 0 0 0 Cu O Cu O Cu O o *^ °, * °, < CO ^ m »J M rH £

4) Cu EH 4) h EH 4) Pn t^ U Z M U Z M U Z M CO O Z <0 O Z <0 O Z U 0 Jj u a U 0 tl tj 3 3 3 C/l O (/} C/1 vo en CM o Cu O rH 1 1 1 Cu O PM O CM O\ en en o

CO CM en *-! «w rH r* O ! ° Cu EH CO CM CM O Cu EH O PM EH CM rH Z M CO 1 Z M Z M V 1 3 *"O4) O Z 1 1 4) o z 4) O Z O O TJ o o 73 O O § 3 3 3 4J JJ S *H ^3* ^3* O% in *rH mfj vo m o m rH r^ vo en jJ JJ VO VO T CM * rH O O' r* rH rH 0 O rH O Ol 0 < 1 < 0 < 0 <

O ^ m en *j (_{ m a\ CM en o in * o 4) CM en en O 4) 4) ' TJ CO VO VO CM 73 £4 TJ » 3 a o m 3 Q O 3 Q 0 3* jj CU < i jJ CU < SB jJ CU < * -H H H ? CP CP D CP 3 c C C 5» ° VO VO O O o 0 Cu EH VO rH rH J Cu EH PLI EH Z M m v i Z M 0 Z M ^ O Z 1 1 O Z O Z "* O\ o o o U 0 CM o o j m m f^l ^ *3* CM M CO ^ m co co vo o m CM " m cc o 4 0

* 4) 4) ^ 4) H Tj -o TJ (J 3 co o vo 3 ^ 3 Cu EH «* m en jJ Cu EH JJ Cu EH 3 en -H Z M «* 1 en -H Z M CM -rl Z M -_ *||J ^ O Z 1 1 rH 4J 0 Z H 4J o z H en cO o o m co O O 0 (0 U 0 4 rH tJ rH t^ en »>3 1 *O r^ o a o VO CM T O sc o ac o 1-5 (^ CM CM r* O\ ..CM *J (^ .. VO 3 o N ^ en rH O en {J O rH ^ 3 z 3 1 Z CM Z CM j * Cu EH Cu EH Cu EH ^ rH rH Z M in rH 0 1 rH Z M rH Z M o z rH rH in 1 rH O Z rH O Z H £ X! o o en V 4) JG o o 4) X o o H S .u 1 2 -^ s o, 3 a a cc o o m m m a> cc o r* i i m 4) cc o 0 < 0 rH in CM Q u < co i i en Q u < 2 g° CU CU rH CU H IT i Cn 1 ht 4» 0 Cu EH 0 PLI EH Cu EH Z M O O O 1 J § t! m CM m i §5 Z M ^J o z «* VO rH 1 o z O% O% V 1 H O Z CO o o rH V 0 D 1 o o

zo m m rH o ZO en CM m m £ zo r* vo r- CM vo en r* CM >H i ^4 i ja ^4 10 ^* 10 "jJ ^O 1- Cu EH ^i PM EH H ^ CM EH 0 r4 Z M co r- o I H Z M rH CM 0 1 m H Z M p* o z CM O1 CM 1 0 Z in rH rH 1 0 Z o o 1 V O O 1 V O O 0 0 !?z z K Z o cc o co vo r* m CC O m vo m o CC O r* CM en o 3 < en vo CM U O, O rt! rH VO VO en C Q. 0 < o\ « i co en H *tf tn m co C/1 O « tn S. 52 81 s 8* s >j s »j H 6 CU S < Q H «H CU 2 < Q E-i 4 CU K < Q EH CO O W M >< O O O W M >H O m o w M >H o EH « CU OS » 0 O OWQC OWQ O O W Q U EH M EH EH EH Z 5 EHMEHEHEHZ CJ EH M EH EH EH Z £ J 3G U < M O O J 3G U < M O K J 3G U < M O Z < EH CU S5 B) O E< < E-i CU S W O g < EH CU 2 W 0 SUPPLEMENTAL DATA. Properties of aquifers and confining units Continued o to Georgia-Pacific Corporation. Well No: Q32wl Map No: 147 Log Depth 297 Latitude: 351542 Longitude: 780203 Altitude of Land Surface: 190 Basement: -107

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 190 162 156 10 -18 -72 » O THICK 28 6 146 28 54 35 O

PCT PERM 61 <10 62 <10 65 <10 f MATERIAL «O EST HYD 30 30 ~ 30 i CONDUCT W en H*ll* Realty Company. Well No: Q3211 en Map No: 148 Log Depth 214 Latitude: 351843 Longitude: 780157 Altitude of Land Surface: 135 Basement: -66 5 SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ ALYSIS- ALT TOP 135 100 92 37 12 i THICK 35 8 55 25 78 o PCT PERM 86 <10 62 <10 58 a MATERIAL » EST HYD 25 25 30 ^ CONDUCT f Town of Saulaton. Well No: 030ql 3 Map No: 149 Log Depth 224 Latitude: 352620 Longitude: 773355 Altitude of Land Surface: 128 Basement: -96 [CCOASTALPL^ SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 128 23 -13

r^ H-t THICK >35 36 83 1

PCT PERM 57 <10 45 MATERIAL

EST HYD 25 50 CONDUCT SUPPLEMENTAL DATA 1103

m rH 0 0 o o

4J b EH c b EH b EH Z M Z M Z M O Z 0 Z O Z O 3 801 U 3 U 3 in 4 m b O b 0 b O Q < 3* o £l CO rH

b EH oi b EH b EH Z M U Z M Z M O Z

O W CM CM O b EH rH O b EH rO rH rH b EH Z M V Z M 1 V 1 Z M O 01 O Z 1 01 0 Z 1 O Z T3 U 3 o U 3 U 3 3 3 4J 4J in 0 -H ro m >» m u> CM 4J CM m u> CM mU C O O I-l b EH i-l b EH Z M O Z 0 Z O Z U 3 O O O U 3 CM CM rH m a: o as o ro b < b rtl m .. m 01o 3 3 4J b EH 4J b EH b EH ro -H Z M 1 -H Z H Z M e 4J O Z O 4J O Z o z o

o m >i Z O Z O rH C

b EH i*u» b EH b EH o 1 0 H Z M Z M O Z rH 1 U O Z O Z U 3 V U 3 U 3 « o as o m a: o o o co m a: o 3 < u> CM O Q. 3 < co M- in CM 3 < rl <0 tn rH U)

O EH 2 < O EH £3" W w w b >H O On OS en a: on oS O O EH EH EH Z EH EH EH Z 0 3 W O 0 3 O < W O a* 2 U O on 2 on 2 U O 1104 REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS-NORTHERN ATLANTIC COASTAL PLAIN

r- m r- CM O OI I r* Q| r* Q| i rJ <4 rj rtj 1 rJ rt! 1

4J ^ £ C fa EH C fa EH C fa EH Q) Z M Q) Z M Q) Z M G 0 Z g O Z G O Z 0) U » 0) u r~* 0) u a to 10 10 « 0 CQ CQ CQ fa a fa O fa OI

m rJ m rJ CM rJ o vo CM rH rH rH

0) fa EH aj fa EH 0) fa EH U Z M u Z M O Z M o z 0 0 Z o z IM u s IM U O U 0 tj 3 3 3 CQ in «T> o CQ rH o PLJ O -H VO rH 00 in -H «H en m en 4J ro oo m CM 4J rH u o rH rH O OI rH r-l U OI CQ < ** CQ < < S < CQ «e if m CM m §? ~* sr vo CM en r- rH oo CM o «"> fa EH « CM rH in fa EH ^ rH rH fa EH o m Z M 1 rH Z M rH 1 *9* Z M O Z 1 00 O Z 1 r- 1 £ U S r- U O r- 8§ e X g a) r- en sr m CD t* "O0) cS^ *O vo CM r- CM TJ fe> 3 Q O 3 Q a J5 3 a 9 CM <42 4J CM < 4J CM «e -H D -H csI 1 -itj* D< W C C O c1 o r- o o o O GO 1-3 fa EH r- rH rH r-3 fa EH U rH fa EH i^ Z M V 1 Z M Z M "^ O Z 1 O Z O Z fe 2 U 0 en u o CM u o o CO SB m §"* *& m en $h. ( 4 rH O *9* QS m B* O m OS OI m OS OI en fa < M en fa <4 1 "* m CQ 0) H § O H u ^^ 3 3 3 O 4J fa EH 4J fa EH ^ 4J fa EH CN -H Z l~l rH -H Z M rH -H Z rH J TJ .U O Z 3 4J «M 4J O Z ^ OH OI & a a a o 3 9 [j^ vo rH < ^* o ** .. en i-3 < |g or- U O en O en U [T^ 2S c^ Z CM z **> W fa EH fa EH fa EH Sr1 -< Z M rH Z M rH Z M rH rH O Z & 0.C 8§ 8i 0) .C u a o« P, o, OS OI 0) OS OI Q u < Q SS Q u < CM CM CM O fa EH I? fa EH O fa EH i^) rH Z M rH Z HI O 2 0 Z O Z U » U 0 U O

M . 4 z a Q| 0 Z OI en *sr o o Pi * < § l4j 41 * < oo vo en >H >H ^ >H m ^i 41 m 41 m fa EH 10 fa EH 10 fa EH * H H M H Z rH vo en o i 41 O 2 § Z O Z 0 CM rH 1 0) .. U S U O u o rH V o O 0 £5 25 \l tt en a m oo o m OS OI m oo o m H Q| CM r- CM m 9 Q* O < O CM

CM 2 < a EH CM 2 < a EH (Q CM 2 < Q EH O H M >H U ll O (i) M >H U O W M >H U IM EH V* Q. fy; »T1 ^ £| r | ^ « fy« M j % i< EH « CM OS Z 0 «M U W O S, U W a U U Q H EH M EH EH EH Z O EH M EH EH EH 2 EH M EH EH EH Z H rH S U < CQ O O rHSCU

CM V CM CO tH U O ^ 2 u o 1 J < i i-3 < J < i

U 4J 4J C c fa H C fa H Z M 0 Z M Z M i O Z g o z g 0 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 9 W w w Ifl m CQ5 CQ fa O fa O fa O o ,J 0 j O J 00 tH tH tH

0 fa H 0 fa H flj fa H u Z M U Z M o z o z U Z M U 3 2 U 9 8§ Ll M M 3 3 3 IA r- 10 .H 10 w VO 10 tH O fa fn o e Z M | Z M Z M I I O 00 O Z 1 0 o z I 0 O Z 1 1 U 9 "O 0 D o U 0 a ^1 3 3 4J 4J - g r* -H H H S 4J 4J 4J U O rH U O U O i5 ° ** CQ < CQ < CQ < iS tH 10 V <5> *"^ CM CM 10 g I a\ fa H fa H fa fn § 10 *T Z M Z M m Z M / o\ r- O Z ? O Z r~ O Z s *"* r~ O 0 ^ 0 0 0 0

IT*CO P> *o0 0o 0g * -« , 3 Q O 3 Q O 3 Q O CU < 4J CU < 4J CU < S ° ** H H §" tJ1 O»

VO 00 S CO C*l ^* m P5 9 10 oc o 10 CC O t C*) fa < frj irf c*l fa rt» . CQ CQ CQ O Z £ 4J O Z tr AJ O Z U 9 U 9 o m U 9 <3 S) ,3 S5 c*^ 23 S . T |7j X O S 3 X O IV] .. OO J < .. 10 i-3 < (V) i-3 < S 0 tH u O IO U O IO U S Z (M Z tH Z T [V| fa H fa E* fa H hJ «H Z M fH Z M tH Z M o z ^H O Z O Z PH a 5 U 9 0 X U 9 *0 JC U 9 1-3 04 0. 0. CO 0 CC O 0 CC O 0 c< a Q O < O O < Q o < CU CU CU tr* o^ O» o fa M o fa E* O fa H ^3 Z M fj Z M o z O Z . U 9 U 9 II g Z 0 CM 00 O IO z en 00 CM 0 0 z o o\ 10 r- m QI Jj^ |^J f*«- < s^ gt s^ O ^0 t* U a U 10 fa H IO fa H fa H H Z M 0 00 0 1 H Z M vo oo vo I §,H Z M n T o i H O Z 00 tH 1 o z <»> tH tH 1 H O Z C* tH 1 U 9 V .. 0 0 U 9 V 3 0 o z a8 zo CC O 1 1 1 1 z o *r o o H CC O o r- on m 0. 0 < till 0. §s tH ,H CO 0, 0 < *H tH IO tH I* ta S** (Q (A tH 5^ s(0 w tH W 41 O S «J 0 S ,J O 52 *3 j CU CC < Q H O CU CC < Q E-i (a Oi ffi < Q E-i < o w M >H u ae o w M >H u o WM>

VIRGINIA

Mr. Parker. Well No: 54A3 (USGS) Map No : 159 Log Depth 348 Latitude: 363522 Longitude: 770634 Altitude of Land Surface: 100 Basement:

SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC REGIONAL AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ

ALT TOP 100 52 22 7 -22 -32 -46 -78 -115

THICK 48 30 15 29 10 14 32 37 d PCT PERM 90 <10 90 <40 90 <5 90 13 H MATERIAL do EST HYD 25 20 25 35 1 CONDUCT 1 Virginia. Dapt. Water Resource*. Well No. 58A2 (USGS) X Map No: 160 Log Depth 2,017 Latitude: 363410 Longitude: 763505 Altitude of Land Surface: 60 Basement:-!, 820 CQ 1 1 SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC 02 AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ -NORTH) ALT TOP 60 -60 -97 -182 -218 -251 -276 -362 -414 -480 -588 -1,087 -1,156 ra THICK 120 37 85 36 33 25 86 52 66 108 499 69 664 SO

PCT PERM 59 16 53 17 90 24 65 <10 82 7 52 <10 53 > MATERIAL £ EST HYD 25 25 ~ 40 35 25 30 ~ 25 i i CONDUCT O O 0 Town of Boykin*. Well No: 53A4 (USGS) 02 Map No : 161 Log Depth 465 Latitude: 363505 Longitude: 771200 Altitude of Land Surface: 39 Basement: -380 £ SUR CONF YKN CONF PGR CONF CLH CONF BFR CONF PD CONF BC CONF UCF CONF LCF CONF LC AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ UNIT AQ 1 1

ALT TOP 39 32 17 -9 -348 -355

THICK 7 15 26 339 7 25

PCT PERM __ <10 67 11 68 <10 53 MATERIAL

EST HYD __ 20 30 20 CONDUCT

SELECTED SERIES OF U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PUBLICATIONS

Periodicals Coal Investigations Maps are geologic maps on topographic or planimetric bases at various scales showing bedrock or surficial Earthquakes & Volcanoes (issued bimonthly). geology, stratigraphy, and structural relations in certain coal- Preliminary Determination of Epicenters (issued monthly). resource areas. Oil and Gas Investigations Charts show stratigraphic infor­ Technical Books and Reports mation for certain oil and gas fields and other areas having petro­ leum potential. Professional Papers are mainly comprehensive scientific Miscellaneous Field Studies Maps are multicolor or black- reports of wide and lasting interest and importance to professional and-white maps on topographic or planimetric bases for quadran­ scientists and engineers. Included are reports on the results of gle or irregular areas at various scales. Pre-1971 maps show bed­ resource studies and of topographic, hydrologic, and geologic rock geology in relation to specific mining or mineral-deposit investigations. They also include collections of related papers problems; post-1971 maps are primarily black-and-white maps on addressing different aspects of a single scientific topic. various subjects such as environmental studies or wilderness min­ Bulletins contain significant data and interpretations that are eral investigations. of lasting scientific interest but are generally more limited in scope Hydrologic Investigations Atlases are multicolored or or geographic coverage than Professional Papers. They include the black-and-white maps on topographic or planimetric bases pre­ results of resource studies and of geologic and topographic investi­ senting a wide range of geohydrologic data of both regular and gations, as well as collections of short papers related to a specific irregular areas; principal scale is 1:24,000, and regional studies are topic. at 1:250.000 scale or smaller. Water-Supply Papers are comprehensive reports that present significant interpretive results of hydrologic investigations of wide interest to professional geologists, hydrologists, and engineers. Catalogs The series covers investigations in all phases of hydrology, includ­ ing hydrogeology. availability of water, quality of w atcr. and use of Permanent catalogs, as well as some others, giving compre­ water. hensive listings of U.S. Geological Survey publications are avail­ Circulars present administrative information or important able under the conditions indicated below from the U.S. scientific information of wide popular interest in a format designed Geological Survey. Information Services, Box 25286. Federal for distribution at no cost to the public. Information is usually of Center, Denver, CO 80225. (See latest Price and Availability List.) short-term interest. "Publications of the Geological Survey, 1879-1961" may Water-Resources Investigations Reports are papers of an he purchased by mail and over the counter in paperback book form interpretive nature made available to the public outside the formal and as a set of microfiche. USGS publications series. Copies are reproduced on request unlike "Publications of the Geological Survey, 1962-1970" may formal USGS publications, and they are also available for public he purchased by mail and over the counter in paperback book form inspection at depositories indicated in USGS catalogs. and as a set of microfiche. Open-File Reports include unpublished manuscript reports, "Publications of the U.S. Geological Survey, 1971-1981" maps, and other material that are made available for public consul­ may be purchased by mail and over the counter in paperback book tation at depositories. They are a nonpermanent form of publica­ form (two volumes, publications listing and index.) and as a set of tion that may be cited in other publications as sources of microfiche. information. Supplements for 1982, 1983. 1984. 1985, 1986, and for sub­ sequent years since the last permanent catalog may be purchased Maps by mail and over the counter in paperback book form. State catalogs, "List of U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Geologic Quadrangle Maps are multicolor geologic maps and Water-Supply Reports and Maps For (State)," may be pur­ on topographic bases in 7.5- or 15-minute quadrangle formats chased by mail and over the counter in paperback booklet form (scales mainly 1:24,000 or 1:62,500) showing bedrock, surficial, only or engineering geology. Maps generally include brief texts: some "Price and Availability List of U.S. Geological Survey maps include structure and columnar sections only. Publications," issued annually, is available free of charge in Geophysical Investigations Maps are on topographic or paperback booklet form only. planimetric bases at various scales; they show results of surveys Selected copies of a monthly catalog "New Publications of using geophysical techniques, such as gravity, magnetic, seismic, the U.S. Geological Survey" arc available free of charge by mail or radioactivity, which reflect subsurface structures that are of eco­ or may be obtained over the counter in paperback booklet form nomic or geologic significance. Many maps include correlations only Those wishing a free subscription to the monthly catalog with the geology. "New Publications of the U.S. Geological Survey" should write to Miscellaneous Investigations Series Maps arc on planimet­ the U.S. Geological Survey. 582 National Center, Reston. VA ric or topographic bases of regular and irregular areas at various 22092. scales: they present a wide variety of format and subject matter. The scries also includes 7.5-minute quadrangle photogcologic Note Prices of Government publications listed in older cata­ maps on planimetric bases that show geology as interpreted from logs, announcements, and publications may be incorrect. There­ aenal photographs. Series also includes maps of Mars and tht fore, the prices charged may differ trom the prices in catalogs, Moon. announcements, and publications