DOCSLIB.ORG

Hydrogeologic Characterization of Aquifers and Injection Capacity Estimation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hydrogeologic Characterization of Aquifers and Injection Capacity Estimation Hydrogeologic characterization of aquifers and injection capacity estimation Main authors: Peter K. Kang (UMN ESCI), Anthony Runkel (MGS), Seonkyoo Yoon (UMN ESCI), Raghwendra N. Shandilya (KIST), Etienne Bresciani (KIST), and Seunghak Lee (KIST) Contents Introduction 2 Overview of four ASR study areas 4 Buffalo aquifer, Clay County 4 Jordan aquifer, City of Woodbury 6 Jordan aquifer, Olmsted County 10 Straight River Groundwater Management Area: Pineland Sands Aquifer 12 Methodology for InJection Capacity Estimation 19 Methodology Overview 19 Parameters estimation 21 Transmissivity 22 Allowable head change 23 Injection duration 25 Storativity 25 Well radius 25 Data sources 25 Application to aquifers in Minnesota 26 Transmissivity characterization 26 Buffalo aquifer, Clay County 26 Transmissivity of Jordan aquifer, Woodbury, Washington County 28 1 Transmissivity of the Jordan aquifer, Olmsted County 31 Allowable head change estimation 33 Buffalo aquifer, Clay County 34 Jordan aquifer, Woodbury, Washington County 37 Jordan aquifer, Olmsted County 40 Injection Duration, Storativity and Well Radius 44 Injection capacity 45 Buffalo aquifer, Clay County 45 Jordan aquifer, Woodbury, Washington County 48 Jordan aquifer, Olmsted County 50 Comparison of InJection Capacity 52 Identified Data Gaps 53 Groundwater Level Data 53 Aquifer Pumping Test Data 54 Future Directions 54 Incorporate Leakage factor in the Injection Capacity Estimation Framework 54 Recovery Efficiency of InJected Water 54 Conclusions 54 References 62 2 1 Introduction About 99% of global unfrozen freshwater is stored in groundwater systems, and groundwater is an essential freshwater resource both in the United States and across the globe. The availability of groundwater is particularly important where surface water options are scarce or inaccessible. In the United States, groundwater is the source of drinking water for about half the total population and nearly all of the rural population. However, due to the significant increase in water demand and climate change, many areas of the United States, including parts of Minnesota, are experiencing groundwater depletion or unsustainable extraction. Increasing groundwater storage through aquifer storage and recovery (ASR), a water resources management technique that injects water underground using wells for future recovery, may be a promising option that can alleviate problems associated with declining groundwater levels. There is currently only one reported ASR site from the state of Minnesota (See Section 7; Case studies) but its success shows ASR could be an attractive solution in Minnesota to meet the increased water demand. To consider ASR, it is important to quantify the injection capacity (how much water can be safely injected with a well) of target aquifers. In this study, we derived an analytical solution for estimating injection capacity and developed a new GIS-based mapping tool that produces injection capacity maps (maps showing how much water can be injected with a well). Combining the GIS- based mapping tool with Minnesota's extensive hydrogeologic databases, we have successfully produced injection capacity maps for three aquifers in Minnesota: the Buffalo aquifer in Clay County, the Jordan aquifer in the city of Woodbury (southern Washington County), and the Jordan aquifer in Olmsted County. These aquifers are expected to be under stress in the coming years due to a projected increase in withdrawals. The Buffalo aquifer is the most heavily utilized aquifer in Clay County. In addition to rural domestic withdrawals, it is extensively used by the largest city, Moorhead, for municipal water supply. It has historically also provided significant groundwater for irrigation purposes. This has raised concerns over the long-term sustainability of the aquifer. In Woodbury, the Jordan aquifer is the principal source of the municipal water supply. The city projects a significant increase in population and water demands over the next 20 years, which will require greatly increased withdrawals of groundwater. In addition to potential water quantity issues, the Jordan and other aquifers in southern Washington County are contaminated by PFAS compounds, and ASR could be a solution for mitigating the contamination (by extracting contaminated groundwater and injecting purified water). In Olmsted County, all of the water supply is from groundwater, with the Jordan aquifer as the major source. Olmsted County, especially the Rochester area, projects significant population growth and water consumption increase in the years ahead. This makes it important to ensure the sustainability of the Jordan aquifer for long term use. This section of the report focuses on the hydrogeological characterization of the Buffalo aquifer in Clay County and Jordan aquifer in Washington and Olmsted counties and investigates the injection capacity of ASR at these sites. We collect necessary data from publications and unpublished government and consulting reports and databases and use this information to evaluate the injection capacity of these heavily utilized aquifers. For each of the three study sites, we present: (1) the long-term, average groundwater level and depth-to-groundwater; (2) aquifer 3 characteristics data obtained from aquifer tests and specific capacity tests; (3) available headspace in the aquifer where water can be safely injected for storage, and (4) injection capacity of the aquifers. We show that the three studied aquifers have sufficient capacity for safe water storage. We also describe the hydrogeologic characteristics of a fourth site, a surficial aquifer in Benton County that spans the Straight River watershed and is part of the Straight River Groundwater Management area . This site was not evaluated for injection capacity due to the unavailability of sufficient water volume for injection. 2 Overview of four ASR study areas In this section of the report, we describe the physical setting and the hydrogeologic properties of the target aquifers. The physical setting includes characteristics such as aquifer extent, material properties such as composition and grain size, recharge and discharge areas, conditions of confinement, and hydraulic conductivity. 2.1 Buffalo aquifer, Moorhead area, Clay County Clay County, in northwestern Minnesota, is largely an agriculture-dominated area with small towns. The City of Moorhead, located along the western border of Clay County, has the largest area of developed land and is the principal consumer of water in the County (Berg, 2018). The County lies within the watersheds of the Red River, Wild Rice River, Buffalo River, and Otter Tail River. The topographic elevation of the County decreases from east to west. The Buffalo aquifer is an elongate, narrow, north-south trending aquifer that extends along much of the western part of Clay County, and south into neighboring Wilkin County. Our study focused on the aquifer within Clay County between the Red River to the west and a branch of the Buffalo River to the east. The total area of the aquifer in Clay County is nearly 100 km2 (Figure 1). It ranges in thickness from a few meters at the outer edges to about 60 meters locally along the north- south centerline. We used the maps and related GIS coverages in Bauer (2014) to provide the geologic context of the Buffalo aquifer necessary for our injection capacity estimate. The Buffalo aquifer was formed mostly by deposition of sand and gravel in water confined in a subglacial tunnel at the base of retreating ice (Harris et al., 1998; Hobbs and Gowan, 2014). As the ice retreated, the tunnel valley deposits were overlain by finer-grained glacial Lake Agassiz sediments that confine the aquifer across most of its extent. The aquifer is unconfined locally where those overlying lake sediments are absent (Figure 2). Most of the aquifer is underlain by till confining units, with the exception of relatively small, older sand and gravel bodies that locally may be in contact with the base of the Buffalo aquifer. At depths of about 60-75 meters, the Quaternary tills and associated sand and gravel bodies are underlain by Precambrian crystalline bedrock (Reppe, 2005; Schoenberg, 1998; Wolf, 1981). Overall, the aquifer is a heterogeneous mixture of material ranging in size from clay to gravel (Wolf, 1981; Schoenberg, 1998). In the northern portion, the aquifer contains three distinct vertical horizons from top to bottom. The uppermost horizon consists of interlayered deposits of fine- grained silt to coarse-grained sand (Schoenberg, 1998). The middle horizon, wherever present, 4 consists of sand with clay (Schoenberg, 1998). In the lower horizon, coarser particles ranging in size from cobbly gravel to medium-grained sand are present (Schoenberg, 1998). Figure 1. Areal extent of the confined and unconfined portion of Buffalo aquifer and Moorhead in Clay County. 5 Figure 2. Three-dimensional view of the Buffalo aquifer (yellow portion in eastern part) in Clay County. The aquifer has variable thickness and spatial extent (Minnesota DNR, 2013). Standard aquifer pumping tests from four wells screened in the Buffalo aquifer in Clay County yielded horizontal hydraulic conductivity values that ranged from about 15 to 97 meters per day (m/d) (Schoenberg, 1998; Wolf, 1981). The results are based on aquifer tests conducted by a number of agencies at various times and employ a number of test procedures and methods of analysis. Although based on small sample size, it appears that lower hydraulic conductivity values correspond to
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Biscayne Aquifer, Florida Groundwater Provides Nearly 50 Percent of the Nation’S Drinking Water
    National Water Quality Program National Water-Quality Assessment Project Groundwater Quality in the Biscayne Aquifer, Florida Groundwater provides nearly 50 percent of the Nation’s drinking water. To help protect this vital resource, the U.S. Geological Survey - (USGS) National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Project assesses groundwater quality in aquifers that are important sources of drinking water (Burow and Belitz, 2014). The Biscayne aquifer constitutes one of the important aquifers being evaluated. Background Overview of Water Quality The Biscayne aquifer underlies an area of about 4,000 square miles in southeastern Florida. About 4 million people live in this area, and the Biscayne aquifer is the primary source of drinking water with about 700 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) withdrawn for public supply in 2000 Inorganic Organic (Maupin and Barber, 2005; Arnold and others, 2020a). The study area for the Biscayne aquifer constituents constituents underlies much of Broward and Miami-Dade Counties in southeastern Florida and includes 3 the cities of Miami and Fort Lauderdale. Most of the area overlying the aquifer is developed 5 and consists of about 63 percent urban and 9 percent agricultural land use. The remaining area 17 (28 percent) is undeveloped (Homer and others, 2015). The Biscayne aquifer is an unconfined, surficial aquifer made up of shallow, highly 80 95 permeable limestone as well as some sandstone units (Miller, 1990). Because of the shallow depth of the units that make up this aquifer, the connection to surface water is an important aspect of the hydrogeology of the Biscayne aquifer (Miller, 1990). A system of canals and levees are used to manage the freshwater resources of southern Florida.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquifer Test CONDUCTED on MAY 24, 2017 CONFINED QUATERNARY GLACIAL-FLUVIAL SAND AQUIFER
    Analysis of the Cromwell, Minnesota Well 4 (593593) Aquifer Test CONDUCTED ON MAY 24, 2017 CONFINED QUATERNARY GLACIAL-FLUVIAL SAND AQUIFER TEST 2612, CROMWELL 4 (593593) MAY 24, 2017 Analysis of the Cromwell, Minnesota Well 4 (593593) Aquifer Test Conducted on May 24, 2017 Minnesota Department of Health, Source Water Protection Program PO Box 64975 St. Paul, MN 55164-0975 651-201-4700 [email protected] www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp To obtain this information in a different format, call: 651-201-4700. Upon request, this material will be made available in an alternative format such as large print, Braille or audio recording. Printed on recycled paper. 2 TEST 2612, CROMWELL 4 (593593) MAY 24, 2017 Contents Analysis of the Cromwell, Minnesota–Well 4 (593593) Aquifer Test............................................. 1 ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Data Collection and Analysis ....................................................................................................... 7 Description .................................................................................................................................. 7 Purpose of Test ....................................................................................................................... 7 Well Inventory ......................................................................................................................... 7
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Baseline Sampling Plan for the Ross Isr Uranium Recovery Project, Crook County, Wyoming
    SEI020A ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ PRELIMINARYȱBASELINEȱSAMPLINGȱ PLANȱFORȱTHEȱ ROSSȱISRȱURANIUMȱRECOVERYȱPROJECT,ȱ CROOKȱCOUNTY,ȱWYOMINGȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Official Hearing Exhibit STRATA ENERGY, INC. In the Matter of: ȱ (Ross In Situ Recovery Uranium Project) ASLBP #: 12-915-01-MLA-BD01 Docket #: 04009091 ȱ Exhibit #: SEI020A-00-BD01 Identified: 9/30/2014 Admitted: 9/30/2014 Withdrawn: ȱ Rejected: Stricken: Other: ȱ ȱ ȱ Preparedȱfor:ȱ ȱ StrataȱEnergy,ȱInc.ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Novemberȱ2009ȱ RevisedȱAugustȱ2010ȱ ȱ ServingȱtheȱRockyȱMountainȱregionȱsinceȱ1980. ȱ ȱ www.wwcengineering.comȱ - 1 - PRELIMINARY BASELINE SAMPLING PLAN FOR THE ROSS ISR URANIUM RECOVERY PROJECT, CROOK COUNTY, WYOMING Prepared for: Strata Energy, Inc. (Business Office) 406 W. 4th Ave. Gillette, Wyoming 82716 Strata Energy, Inc. (Field Office) 2869 New Haven Road Oshoto, Wyoming 82721 Prepared by: WWC Engineering 1849 Terra Avenue Sheridan, Wyoming 82801 (307) 672‐0761 Fax: (307) 674‐4265 Principal Authors: Benjamin J. Schiffer, P.G. John D. Berry, Biologist Reviewed by: Kenneth R. Collier, P.G. Michael J. Evers, P.G. Serving the Rocky Mountain region since 1980. Z:\Sheridan\CD_Archives\040212\Peninsula_Minerals\09142\Strata\010 Pre‐Op Sampling Plan\Pre‐Op Plan Cover 081910.doc www.wwcengineering.com - 2 - TABLE OF CONTENTS K:\Peninsula_Minerals\09142\Strata\010 Pre-Op Sampling Plan\Pre-Op Plan Final 081910.doc 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 2.0 HISTORY AND BRIEF
    [Show full text]
  • Transmissivity, Hydraulic Conductivity, and Storativity of the Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer in Texas
    Technical Report Transmissivity, Hydraulic Conductivity, and Storativity of the Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer in Texas by Robert E. Mace Rebecca C. Smyth Liying Xu Jinhuo Liang Robert E. Mace Principal Investigator prepared for Texas Water Development Board under TWDB Contract No. 99-483-279, Part 1 Bureau of Economic Geology Scott W. Tinker, Director The University of Texas at Austin Austin, Texas 78713-8924 March 2000 Contents Abstract ................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 2 Study Area ......................................................................................................................... 5 HYDROGEOLOGY....................................................................................................................... 5 Methods .............................................................................................................................. 13 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................... 14 DATA COMPILATION ...................................................................................................... 14 EVALUATION OF HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES FROM THE TEST DATA ................. 19 Estimating Transmissivity from Specific Capacity Data.......................................... 19 STATISTICAL DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Method 9100: Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity, Saturated Leachate
    METHOD 9100 SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY, SATURATED LEACHATE CONDUCTIVITY, AND INTRINSIC PERMEABILITY 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Scope and Application: This section presents methods available to hydrogeologists and and geotechnical engineers for determining the saturated hydraulic conductivity of earth materials and conductivity of soil liners to leachate, as outlined by the Part 264 permitting rules for hazardous-waste disposal facilities. In addition, a general technique to determine intrinsic permeability is provided. A cross reference between the applicable part of the RCRA Guidance Documents and associated Part 264 Standards and these test methods is provided by Table A. 1.1.1 Part 264 Subpart F establishes standards for ground water quality monitoring and environmental performance. To demonstrate compliance with these standards, a permit applicant must have knowledge of certain aspects of the hydrogeology at the disposal facility, such as hydraulic conductivity, in order to determine the compliance point and monitoring well locations and in order to develop remedial action plans when necessary. 1.1.2 In this report, the laboratory and field methods that are considered the most appropriate to meeting the requirements of Part 264 are given in sufficient detail to provide an experienced hydrogeologist or geotechnical engineer with the methodology required to conduct the tests. Additional laboratory and field methods that may be applicable under certain conditions are included by providing references to standard texts and scientific journals. 1.1.3 Included in this report are descriptions of field methods considered appropriate for estimating saturated hydraulic conductivity by single well or borehole tests. The determination of hydraulic conductivity by pumping or injection tests is not included because the latter are considered appropriate for well field design purposes but may not be appropriate for economically evaluating hydraulic conductivity for the purposes set forth in Part 264 Subpart F.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquifer System in Southern Florida
    HYDRGGEOLOGY, GRQUOT*WATER MOVEMENT, AND SUBSURFACE STORAGE IN THE FLORIDAN AQUIFER SYSTEM IN SOUTHERN FLORIDA REGIONAL AQUIFER-SYSTEM ANALYSIS \ SOUTH CAROLINA L.-S.. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1403-G 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 cur­ rent-year issues of the monthly catalog "New Publications of the U.S. Geological Survey." Prices of available U.S. Geological Sur­ vey publications released prior to the current year are listed in the most recent annual "Price and Availability List" Publications that are listed in various U.S. Geological Survey catalogs (see back inside cover) but not listed in the most recent annual "Price and Availability List" are no longer available. Prices of reports released to the open files are given in the listing "U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Reports," updated month­ ly, which is for sale in microfiche from the U.S. Geological Survey, Books and Open-File Reports Section, Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225. Reports released through the NTIS may be obtained by writing to the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, VA 22161; please include NTIS report number with inquiry. Order U.S. Geological Survey publications by mail or over the counter from the offices given below. BY MAIL OVER THE COUNTER Books Books Professional Papers, Bulletins, Water-Supply Papers, Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations,
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Analysis of Two Slug Test Methods in Puget Lowland Glacio-Fluvial Sediments Near Coupeville, WA
    A Comparative Analysis of Two Slug Test Methods in Puget Lowland Glacio-Fluvial Sediments near Coupeville, WA Matthew Lewis A report prepared in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Science Masters of Earth and Space Science: Applied Geosciences University of Washington November, 2013 Project Mentor: Mark Varljen Project Coordinator Kathy Troost Reading Committee: Dr. Michael Brown and Dr. Drew Gorman-Lewis MESSAGe Technical Report Number: 004 ©Copyright 2013 Matthew Lewis i Table of Contents Abstract ……………………………………… iii Introduction ……………………………………… 1 Geological Setting ……………………………………… 2 Methods ……………………………………… 4 Results ……………………………………… 10 Discussion ……………………………………… 11 Summary and ……………………………………… 12 Conclusion Acknowledgements ……………………………………… 13 Bibliography ……………………………………… 14 Figures begin on page 20 Tables begin on page 30 Appendices begins on page 33 ii A Comparative Analysis of Two Slug Test Methods in Puget Lowland Glacio-Fluvial Sediments. Abstract Two different slug test field methods are conducted in wells completed in a Puget Lowland aquifer and are examined for systematic error resulting from water column displacement techniques. Slug tests using the standard slug rod and the pneumatic method were repeated on the same wells and hydraulic conductivity estimates were calculated according to Bouwer & Rice and Hvorslev before using a non-parametric statistical test for analysis. Practical considerations of performing the tests in real life settings are also considered in the method comparison. Statistical analysis indicates that the slug rod method results in up to 90% larger hydraulic conductivity values than the pneumatic method, with at least a 95% certainty that the error is method related. This confirms the existence of a slug-rod bias in a real world scenario which has previously been demonstrated by others in synthetic aquifers.
    [Show full text]
  • Aquifer Test Procedures for Determining Hydrologic Properties
    AquiferAquifer TestTest ProceduresProcedures forfor DeterminingDetermining HydrologicHydrologic PropertiesProperties Dr. Michael Strobel Deputy State Director EXHIBIT G– WATER RESOURCES Meeting Date: 03-22-06 USGS Nevada Water Science Center Document consists of 28 slides. Entire Exhibit Provided Purposes of Aquifer Tests • Measure the change, with time, in water levels as a result of withdrawals through wells • Determine the transmissivity and storage coefficient of the aquifer • Determine characteristics of confining layers • Determine well efficiency and optimum pumping rates • Determine boundary conditions (natural) and potential well interference Types of Aquifer Tests •Slug • Single-well • Multiple-wells – Time-Drawdown Analysis – Distance-Drawdown Analysis From Alley, W.M., Reilly, T.E., and Franke, O.L., 1999, Sustainability of ground- water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1186, 79 p. From Alley, W.M., Reilly, T.E., and Franke, O.L., 1999, Sustainability of ground- water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1186, 79 p. From Alley, W.M., Reilly, T.E., and Franke, O.L., 1999, Sustainability of ground- water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1186, 79 p. From Alley, W.M., Reilly, T.E., and Franke, O.L., 1999, Sustainability of ground- water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1186, 79 p. Slug Test TIME • The rapid addition or removal of a known volume from a well stresses the aquifer. • The hydraulic conductivity (K) estimate is related to the rate of recovery with various corrections for well construction
    [Show full text]
  • Aquifer Test Procedures
    General Aquifer Test Procedures These guidelines accompany the Lower Platte South NRD’s Ground Water Rules and Regulations (Revised Effective Date: 1/1/2017) Section C: Water Well Permits. Typically, they will apply to Class 2 and 4 Permits but may apply to Class 1 Permits if required by the District, and Class 3 Permits if the proposed well is within 600 feet of a well with higher preference of use. For the purposes of LPSNRD’s Ground Water Rules and Regulations, an aquifer test may be required to estimate aquifer parameters in order to determine the effect of a permitted well on preexisting wells in the vicinity, and to demonstrate that an adequate ground water supply is present for the well to be permitted. Aquifer parameters such as transmissivity, hydraulic conductivity, storativity/specific yield, etc. can generally be adequately estimated using a single well drawdown/recovery test (i.e. using drawdown and recovery observations in the production well) by constant-rate pumping, slug testing, or step-drawdown tests; numerous software programs are available for these estimates. If further refinements of these parameters are necessary, installation of one or more dedicated observation well(s) or utilization of appropriate nearby existing wells can be considered. General A licensed geologist or professional engineer must oversee the aquifer test and stamp the aquifer test report. When selecting a professional, confirm that he or she has previous experience designing, performing and analyzing aquifer tests. If an additional observation well is used, it should be close enough to the pumping well so that drawdown is observed in the observation well, but not directly next to the pumping well.
    [Show full text]
  • Slug) Test with a Mechanical Slug and Submersible Pressure Transducer
    GWPD 17—Conducting an Instantaneous Change in Head (Slug) Test with a Mechanical Slug and Submersible Pressure Transducer VERSION: 2010.1 PURPOSE: To obtain data from which an estimate of hydraulic conductivity of an aquifer can be calculated. During a slug test the water level in a well is changed 5. Slug of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or other relatively inert rapidly, and the rate of water-level response to that change is material (fig. 1). A slug of solid PVC (fig. 1C) is ideal measured. From these data, an estimate of hydraulic conduc- because PVC caps (fig. 1A) can catch the well casing tivity can be calculated using appropriate analytical methods during insertion, and PVC plugs (fig. 1B) can come loose (for example, Ferris and Knowles, 1963). during the rapid removal of the slug. A slug test requires a rapid (“instantaneous”) water-level change and measurement of the water-level response at high Select the largest diameter and length of slug that will frequency. A rapid change in water level can be induced in fit in the well without disturbing the transducer. The many ways, including injecting or withdrawing water, increas- slug should have a displacement that will provide an ing or decreasing air pressure in the well casing, or adding adequate change in water level. The slug should displace a mechanical device like a plastic rod to displace water. The enough water to provide a measurable change in water water-level changes can be measured with many methods, level, but not so large as to significantly increase the including steel tape, electric tape, air line, wireline/float, and saturated thickness of the aquifer, disturb the transducer, submersible pressure transducers.
    [Show full text]
  • 34816 Dewatering Calcs Tables
    Table 1A: Dewatering Calculations for Installation of Underground Storage Tanks Facility Name: 7-Eleven Store No. 34816 Facility Address: 3701 Santa Barbara Blvd, Naples, Collier Co, FL 34104 FDEP ID: 11/9063983 aquifer thickness water table drop (b) in feet in feet H=total head of aquifer 50 13 H= 15.2 m h=total head of dewatered aquifer 37 h= 11.3 m K in ft/day K=hydraulic conductivity 6.97 Ro = Radius of Influence K= 2.46E-05 m/s Re = Equivalent Radius of Influence Ro in feet Ro + Re in Feet Ro=3000(H-h)sqrtK L in ft W in ft 193.4 217.8 Ro= 58.9 m 52 36 ab Re=radius of influence (equivalent) 15.8 11.0 Re= 7.4 m # well points q= 7.84335E-05 m^3 / sec 50 q= 1.2 gpm per well point Total pump rate 62 (gpm) 89,452 (gpd) NOTE: 1. Please see enclosed the Broward County Environmental Protection Department Exhibit III: Calculation Methods for Radius of Influence and Dewatering Flow Rate from Aquifer Test Data. 2. Aquifer values are from subject site assessment data. Table 1B: Dewatering Calculations for Installation of Fuel Dispenser Sumps, Product Piping, and Canopy Footers Facility Name: 7-Eleven Store No. 34816 Facility Address: 3701 Santa Barbara Blvd, Naples, Collier Co, FL 34104 FDEP ID: 11/9063983 aquifer thickness water table drop (b) in feet in feet H=total head of aquifer 50 3 H= 15.2 m h=total head of dewatered aquifer 47 h= 14.3 m K in ft/day K=hydraulic conductivity 6.97 Ro = Radius of Influence K= 2.46E-05 m/s Re = Equivalent Radius of Influence Ro in feet Ro + Re in Feet Ro=3000(H-h)sqrtK L in ft W in ft 44.6 81.3 Ro= 13.6 m 132 32 ab Re=radius of influence (equivalent) 40.2 9.8 Re= 11.2 m # well points q= 0.000212597 m^3 / sec 50 q= 3.4 gpm per well point Total pump rate 168 (gpm) 242,463 (gpd) NOTE: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Hydrogeologic Reports and Aquifer Testing
    Guidelines for Hydrogeologic Reports and Aquifer Testing Barton Springs/Edwards Aquifer Conservation District Hays, Caldwell, and Travis Counties, Texas Board Adopted - May 12, 2016 BSEACD Guidelines for Hydrogeologic Reports and Aquifer Testing 0 | P a g e Guidelines for Hydrogeologic Reports and Aquifer Testing Barton Springs/Edwards Aquifer Conservation District Hays, Caldwell, and Travis Counties, Texas Aquifer Science Staff Board Adopted - May 12, 2016 BSEACD General Manager John Dupnik, P.G. BSEACD Board of Directors Mary Stone Precinct 1 Blayne Stansberry, President Precinct 2 Blake Dorsett, Secretary Precinct 3 Dr. Robert D. Larsen Precinct 4 Craig Smith, Vice President Precinct 5 Acknowledgments This document is modified from original guidelines written by former District Hydrogeologist Nico Hauwert, P.G., and later revised by Aquifer Science staff in January 2007. This version of the guidelines were revised by the District’s Aquifer Science Team Brian, A. Smith, Ph.D., P.G. and Brian B. Hunt, P.G., with reviews also provided by the District’s Technical Team. Additional reviews were provided by Joe Vickers, P.G., Douglas A. Wierman, P.G., Alex S. Broun, P.G., and Rene Barker, P.G. Cover Photograph of pumping well in Kingsville City from the Goliad Sands pumping 700 gpm. Photo shows the orifice weir for measuring the flow rate, photo from Joe Vickers. Chart is an example of analytical solution used to estimate aquifer parameters for a Middle Trinity irrigation well (Onion Creek Golf Course well; August 2015). BSEACD Guidelines
    [Show full text]