sign in sign up
<<
Home , Carmel Formation, Dakota Formation, Entrada Sandstone

Prepared in cooperation with the BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS Lithology and Thickness of the as Related to Leakage Between the D and N , ,

Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5187

U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Lithology and Thickness of the Carmel Formation as Related to Leakage Between the D and N Aquifers, Black Mesa, Arizona

By Margot Truini and J.P. Macy

Prepared in cooperation with the BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS

Scientific Investigations Report 2005–5187

U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2006

Prepared in the Arizona Water Science Center

For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS--the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

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

Suggested citation: Truini, Margot, and Macy, J.P., 2006, Lithology and thickness of the Carmel Formation as related to leakage between the D and N aquifers, Black Mesa, Arizona: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2005–5187, 7 p., 1 pl. iii

Contents

Abstract...... 1 Introduction...... 1 Purpose and Scope ...... 1 Hydrogeologic Setting...... 3 Acknowledgements...... 3 Study Methods...... 3 Geophysical Logs...... 3 Drilling Logs...... 3 Lithology and Thickness of the Carmel Formation as Related to Ground-Water Leakage...... 3 Selected References...... 6

Plate

[In pocket at back of report] 1. Hydrogeologic sections showing correlations of units of the D and N aquifers from borehole-geophysical data and lithologic descriptions, Black Mesa, Arizona

Figures

1. Locations of study area, traces of hydrogeologic sections, and area where ground-water leakage between the D and N aquifers was detected in the southern part of Black Mesa, Arizona, by Lopes and Hoffmann (1997)...... 2 2. Rock formations and hydrogeologic units of the D and N aquifers, Black Mesa, Arizona...... 4 3. Thickness of the Carmel Formation, ranges of natural gamma and electrical conductivity from borehole-geophysical logs, and relative 87Sr/86Sr signatures, Black Mesa, Arizona...... 5

Conversion Factors and Datums

Multiply By To obtain inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm) inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter (mm) foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m) mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km) square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2)

Concentrations of chemical constituents in water are given in milligrams per liter (mg/L). Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD 29). Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD 27). Lithology and Thickness of the Carmel Formation as Related to Leakage Between the D and N Aquifers, Black Mesa, Arizona

By Margot Truini and J.P. Macy

Abstract for the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe, has concentrations of dissolved solids less than 500 mg/L. The Carmel Formation is considered the confining Initial studies addressing leakage from the D to unit between the D aquifer and the underlying N aquifer on the N aquifer by Lopes and Hoffmann (1997) and GeoTrans Black Mesa, Arizona. Leakage of ground water from the D Inc. (1993) suggest that leakage is most predominant in aquifer into the N aquifer, however, has been detected in the areas where, according to Harshbarger and others (1957), the southern part of Black Mesa in recent geochemical studies. In this investigation, borehole-geophysical data and lithologic Carmel Formation consists primarily of layers rather descriptions from drilling logs were used to relate the than siltstone layers. Lopes and Hoffmann (1997) delineated a thickness and lithology of the Carmel Formation to ground- leakage boundary that extends from northeast of Rough Rock water leakage in the southern part of Black Mesa. This area of in a roughly southwesterly direction to Second Mesa in the leakage corresponds to the area where the Carmel generally is confined part of the N aquifer (fig. 1). Truini and Longsworth 120 feet thick or less. The formation is likely a sandy siltstone where leakage has been detected and a clayey siltstone in areas (2003) completed a hydrogeologic characterization of the D where leakage has not been detected. aquifer to determine ground-water movement and geochemical signatures in relation to leakage. On the basis of strontium- isotope ratios, they determined that leakage occurs in zones Introduction north and south of the leakage boundary. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) recognized the The Carmel Formation, as described by various hydrogeologic significance of the Carmel Formation in investigators, consists of a series of sandstone beds separated water-supply issues for Black Mesa, and in 2001 the U.S. by siltstone beds and is the confining unit between the D Geological Survey, in cooperation with the BIA, began a aquifer and the underlying N aquifer on Black Mesa in northeastern Arizona. Ground-water leakage from the D program to evaluate the lithology and thickness of the Carmel aquifer through the Carmel Formation to the N aquifer has in relation to leakage. The study area covers about 3,300 mi2 been occurring naturally for thousands of years (Lopes on Black Mesa, including parts of the Navajo and Hopi Indian and Hoffmann, 1997; Truini and Longsworth, 2003; fig. Reservations. 1). The Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe are concerned about induced ground-water leakage from the D aquifer resulting from industrial and municipal pumping of water Purpose and Scope from the N aquifer (Truini and Longsworth, 2003). Leakage is a concern because D aquifer water, which is used The purpose of this report is to describe the lithology primarily for agricultural and livestock purposes, typically and thickness of the Carmel Formation in relation to known has concentrations of dissolved solids between 500 and areas of ground-water leakage in the confined area of the N 1,000 mg/L, exceeding the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Secondary Drinking Water Regulation of 500 mg/L aquifer underlying Black Mesa, Arizona. The report describes (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005). Ground water the Carmel Formation on the basis of available borehole- in the N aquifer, which is the main source of municipal water geophysical logs and lithologic descriptions from drilling logs.  Lithology and thickness of the Carmel Formation, Black Mesa, Arizona

111°30' 111° 30' U T A H 110° 109°30' 37° A R I Z O N A 160 163 Na va jo Cre ek ek Cre Kayenta Laguna NAVAJO NAVAJO

N A V A J O C O .

COCONINO CO.

sh 98 a W e in M PWCC2 N A V A J O C O . 30' B’ A P A C H E C O . l

oa C

C h

COAL-LEASE Rough Rock i

n

l

AREA Rough e PWCC9 C’ Rock PM5

Kits’iili Kits’iili Wash sh NTUA 2 a HOPI INDIAN INDIAN W INDIAN 160 RESERVATION Moenkopi ash W Piñon Hard Piñon PM6 Rocks Turquoise well 36° 264 BM5 Penzoil United Skelly Oil Aremeda Hotevilla Oil Low Mountain A Low Mountain PM2 Hotevilla A’ Second 191 Li PD&C Polacca Keams tt Mesa Canyon PM2 le Keams Canyon Co RESERVATION 89 sh a Second B Hopi C lo RESERVATION W Mesa PM2 High ra ash School 264 bi NAVAJO

do W ai IND. RES. Or

Ri

ver ca 77 ac bito ne Pol 87 Din 35°30' Base from U.S. Geological Survey Modified from Brown and Eychaner, 1988 digital data, 1:100,000, 1980 Lambert Conformal Conic projection Standard parallels 29°30' and 45°30', 0 25 MILES central meridian −111°30' STUDY AREA 0 25 KILOMETERS er v do Ri Co ra lo Li APPROXIMATE CONFINED AREA 77 HIGHWAY tt OF THE N AQUIFER—From le Co Brown and Eychaner (1998) Flagstaff lo RIVER OR WASH ra do Ri ver A A’ TRACE OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TOWN ARIZONA SECTION Polacca WELLS FOR WHICH Phoenix LEAKAGE BOUNDARY—Leakage Skelly Oil GEOPHYSICAL-BOREHOLE occurs southeast of the DATA AND DRILLING LOGS boundary. From Lopes and WERE USED TO CREATE Hoffman (1997) HYDROGEOLOGIC SECTIONS

Figure 1. Locations of study area, traces of hydrogeologic sections, and area where ground-water leakage between the D and N aquifers was detected in the southern part of Black Mesa, Arizona, by Lopes and Hoffmann (1997). Lithology and Thickness of the Carmel Formation as Related to Ground-Water Leakage 

Hydrogeologic Setting leakage in the Black Mesa study area. Natural-gamma and electromagnetic-induction logs were used to determine the Black Mesa is a large moderately dissected highland in general lithology, thickness, and depth below land surface of northeastern Arizona. The Black Mesa Basin, a geologic basin geologic units; driller and geologic descriptions of drilling named after this highland area, contains several thousand feet logs were used as a record of the geologic units and the of sediments accumulated from to Tertiary time. relative water levels within the D and N aquifers, and to Deposition attendant to marine advances and retreats produced support the borehole-geophysical data. complex intertonguing lithologic units that contain abrupt changes. The Black Mesa Basin was deformed during the Late uplift, but less so in comparison to the Geophysical Logs rest of the Plateau. The resultant deformation of Natural-gamma logs are records of the amount of pre-Cretaceous flat-lying , siltstones, and claystones natural-gamma radiation emitted by the rocks surrounding induced folds and faults that helped to form sedimentary facies the borehole. The American Petroleum Institute (API) variations that established some of the principal controls on gamma-ray unit is used in this report. The natural-gamma the occurrence and movement of ground water in the study and electromagnetic logs were collected by several different area (Cooley and others, 1969). geophysical logging companies between 1964 and 1993 and Two aquifers have been delineated among the are reported as calibrated values; however, no calibration sedimentary sequence of to Cretaceous age (Cooley documentation was available to verify their accuracy. and others, 1969). The D aquifer is named for the primary and units commonly emit higher natural-gamma radiation water-bearing unit, the Dakota Sandstone, and also includes than do sandstone units (Keys and MacCarthy, 1990), but the , the , and in the subsurface lithology can not be determined solely on the basis southeastern part of the study area, the Carmel Formation of natural-gamma radiation. (fig. 2). The N aquifer is named for the principal water-bearing Electromagnetic-induction logs record the electrical unit, the , and includes other formations conductivity of the rocks and water surrounding the from the Glen Canyon : the , the borehole. Electrical conductivity is affected by the porosity, permeability, and clay content of rocks, and by the dissolved- Moenave Formation, and the (Cooley and solids concentration of the water within the rocks. others, 1969; Dubiel, 1989; Blakey, 1989; fig. 2). The Carmel Formation, which unconformably overlies the Navajo Sandstone, was described by Harshbarger and Drilling Logs others (1957) as a series of red and white sandy-siltstone beds and sandstone beds. The Carmel Formation has five members: Descriptions of drill cuttings by drillers and geologists the Upper Member, the Winsor Member, the Paria River were used to determine lithologic and stratigraphic Member, the Crystal Creek Member, and the Judd Hollow information about the subsurface units, the altitudes of the Member (Jenney and Reynolds, 1989). The Judd Hollow units, and the relative water levels within the D and N aquifers. Member is the only member that likely is present in the study Drilling logs included both lithologic and stratigraphic area and was deposited in a low energy subtidal coastal-plain descriptions. Lithologic and stratigraphic descriptions of the environment in northwestern Arizona and southern subsurface units were used to support borehole-geophysical (Vorrheese, 1978; Geeseman, 1979). data, determine depths to the tops of the Carmel Formation and Navajo Sandstone, provide data for sites where geophysical data were unavailable, and develop a thickness Acknowledgements map of the Carmel Formation. The authors thank the staff of the BIA, the Navajo Department of Water Resources, and the Navajo Tribal Utility Authority who provided assistance on the Navajo Indian Lithology and Thickness of the Carmel Reservation where necessary. Staff of Peabody Western Company provided access to lithologic information for Formation as Related to Ground-Water company wells. Leakage

Borehole-geophysical data and geologic descriptions Study Methods of drilling logs examined during this study indicate that the Carmel Formation consists of siltstones in the southern part of Borehole-geophysical logs and descriptions from well the confined area of the N aquifer where leakage was detected cuttings were used to determine the presence, thickness, and in previous studies. The formation is thinner in the southern lithology of the Carmel Formation. Information derived from areas where leakage has been detected than in the northern the geophysical and drilling logs were related to ground-water areas where leakage has not been detected (fig. 3).  Lithology and thickness of the Carmel Formation, Black Mesa, Arizona

Unconsolidated surficial deposits AND TERTIARY Bidahochi Formation Volcanic rocks TERTIARY

Yale Point Sandstone

Wepo Formation Group

Mesa Verde Toreva Formation

Mancos Shale CRETACEOUS

upper sandstone member Dakota Sandstone middle carbonaceous member lower sandstone member

Westwater Canyon Member Morrison D Aquifer Recapture Member Formation Water bearing in sandstone units Salt Wash Member

Tidwell Member

Entrada Sandstone Upper Member

JURASSIC Winsor Member Water bearing Carmel in places Group Formation Paria River Member San Raphael Crystal Creek Member

Judd Hollow Member

Navajo Sandstone Water bearing Kayenta Formation Springdale sandstone Member Water bearing Moenave in places N Aquifer Formation Canyon Member Glen Canyon Group Wingate Water bearing Sandstone

Note: Members and units of formations underlying Geology from Harshbarger and others, 1957; Cooley rocks of the N aquifer are not shown. and others, 1969; Irwin and others, 1971; O'Sullivan and others, 1972; Peterson and Pipiringos, 1979; Peterson, 1988; and Dubiel, 1989

Figure 2. Rock formations and hydrogeologic units of the D and N aquifers, Black Mesa, Arizona. Lithology and Thickness of the Carmel Formation as Related to Ground-Water Leakage 

111°30' 111° 30' U T A H 110° 109°30' 37° A R I Z O N A

80

N A V A J O C O .

COCONINO CO. 120 100

120 B’ PWCC2 30' 25-130 240 20-275 COAL- LEASE 200 Rough Rock PM5 AREA 48-128 PWCC9 160 60-120 C’ Kits’iili NUA 2 60-120

120 120-140 100

120 140 120

180 Piñon PM6 Turquoise well 77-275 N A V A J O C O . BM5 40-280 A P A C H E C O . 50-120 36° Penzoil United 40-275 Skelly Oil 32-64 Aremeda 30-60 Oil 60-96 Low Mountain PM2 80 A 40-160 Hotevilla PD&C A’ 50-150 Keams Canyon

180 PM2 24-120 120 80 140 B C 100 Hopi 80 Second 80

120 100 High School Mesa PM2 12-48 37-70 100-325

35°30' Base from U.S. Geological Survey 25 MILES Modified from Brown and Eychaner, 1988 digital data, 1:100,000, 1980 0 Lambert Conformal Conic projection Standard parallels 29°30' and 45°30', 0 25 KILOMETERS central meridian −111°30'

APPROXIMATE CONFINED AREA N AQUIFER WELL WITH N WELLS FOR WHICH GEOPHYSICAL- OF THE N AQUIFER—From AQUIFER 87Sr/86Sr Skelly Oil BOREHOLE DATA AND DRILLING Brown and Eychaner (1998) SIGNATURE—From Truini LOGS WERE USED TO CREATE and Longsworth (2003) HYDROGEOLOGIC SECTIONS APPROXIMATE AREA WHERE Range of electrical conductivity, N AQUIFER WELL WITH D 100-325 GROUND-WATER LEAKAGE in millimhos per meter LIKELY OCCURS BETWEEN THE AQUIFER 87Sr/86Sr D AND N AQUIFERS IN THE SIGNATURE—From Truini Range of natural gamma, in SOUTHERN PART OF BLACK and Longsworth (2003) 37-70 American Petroleum Institute MESA ON THE BASIS OF (API) gamma-ray units LITHOLOGIC AND NATURAL- D AQUIFER WELL WITH D GAMMA DATA FROM WELLS AQUIFER 87Sr/86Sr SIGNATURE—From Truini A A’ TRACE OF HYDROGEOLOGIC and Longsworth (2003) SECTION LOCATION OF WELLS WITH 80 LINE OF EQUAL THICKNESS OF GEOLOGIC DATA USED TO CARMEL FORMATION- DETERMINE THE THICKNESS Dashed where approximately OF THE CARMEL FORMATION located. Interval 20 feet

Figure 3. Thickness of the Carmel Formation, ranges of natural gamma and electrical conductivity from borehole- geophysical logs, and relative 87Sr/86Sr signatures, Black Mesa, Arizona.  Lithology and thickness of the Carmel Formation, Black Mesa, Arizona

Borehole-geophysical logs were useful in differentiating Brown, J.G., and Eychaner, J.H., 1988, Simulation of five sediment types and delineating the contact between the Carmel ground-water withdrawal projections for the Black Mesa Formation and the underlying Navajo Sandstone. Natural- area, Navajo and Hopi Indian Reservations, Arizona: U.S. gamma intensities for fine-grained sediments of the Carmel Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report Formation generally exceeded 50 API gamma-ray units, and 88–4000, 51 p. intensities for the coarser grained Navajo Sandstone generally were less than 25 API gamma-ray units (pl. 1). Intensities Cooley, M.E., Harshbarger, J.W., Akers, J.P., and Hardt, W.F., generally were lower for sediments in the southern part of 1969, Regional hydrogeology of the Navajo and Hopi the study area and increased to the north and northwest (pl. 1 Indian Reservations, Arizona, , and Utah: U.S. and fig. 3). The logs show that the Carmel could grade from Geological Survey Professional Paper 521–A, 61 p. a sandy siltstone in the southern part of the area to a clayey Dubiel, R.F., 1989, Sedimentology and revised nomenclature siltstone in the northern part. for the upper part of the upper Electrical conductivity from the electromagnetic- and the lower Jurassic Wingate Sandstone, northwestern induction logs was more than 200 millimohs per meter for New Mexico and northeastern Arizona, in Anderson, the Carmel Formation and less than 50 millimohs per meter O.J., Lucas, S.G., Love, D.W., and Cather, S.M., eds., for the Navajo Sandstone (pl. 1). The logs were useful in distinguishing between the sediments of the Carmel Formation Southeastern : New Mexico Geological and those of the Navajo Sandstone, and in determining the Society Fortieth Annual Field Conference, September thickness of the Carmel (fig. 3 and pl. 1). 28–October 1, 1989, p. 213–223. Areas where the Carmel Formation is 120 ft or less Eychaner, J.H., 1983, Geohydrology and effects of water coincide with areas where 87Sr/86Sr values and major-ion data use in the Black Mesa area, Navajo and Hopi Indian for ground water indicate that D aquifer water has mixed with Reservations, Arizona: U.S. Geological Survey Water- N aquifer water as a result of leakage (Truini and Longsworth, Supply Paper 2201, 26 p. 2003; fig. 3). In the southern part of the area where the N aquifer is under confined conditions, the thickness of the Geeseman, R.C., 1979, Sedimentary facies of the Carmel Carmel Formation is about 50 ft near BM5 well, 100 ft near Formation, southeastern Utah: Flagstaff, Northern Arizona the Hopi High School and Keams Canyon PM 2 wells, 50 ft University, unpublished master’s thesis, 135 p. near Second Mesa PM2 well, and 150 ft near Hotevilla P D & C well (fig. 3). In the northern part of Black Mesa, the Carmel GeoTrans Inc., 1993, Investigation of the N- and D- aquifer is 150 ft thick near the Peabody Western Coal Company wells geochemistry and flow characteristics using major ion and 160 to more than 250 ft thick northeast of Kits’iili. and isotopic chemistry, petrography, rock stress analysis, Information derived from geophysical-borehole logs and dendrochronology in the Black Mesa area, Arizona: and geologic descriptions of drilling logs indicate that the Prepared for Peabody Coal Company, project No. 8369.400. thickness and lithology of the Carmel Formation are factors in ground-water leakage between the D and N aquifers. Harshbarger, J.W., Repenning, C.A., and Irwin, J.H., 1957, Additional geophysical-borehole data from existing and of the uppermost Triassic and the Jurassic new wells and cuttings analysis from new wells could be rocks of the Navajo country: U.S. Geological Survey used to better delineate leakage on the basis of an improved Professional Paper 291, 74 p. knowledge of the thickness and lithology of the Carmel. Irwin, J.H., Stevens, P.R., and Cooley, M.E., 1971, Geology of the Paleozoic rocks, Navajo and Hopi Indian Reservations, Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah: U.S. Geological Survey Selected References Professional Paper 521–C, 32 p.

Blakey, R.C., 1989, Triassic and Jurassic geology of the Jenney, J.P. and Reynolds, S.J., 1989, Geologic evolution southern Colorado Plateau, in Jenney, J.P., and Reynolds, of Arizona: Tucson, Arizona Geological Society Digest, S.J., eds., Geologic evolution of Arizona: Arizona p. 369–396. Geological Society Digest 17, p. 369–396. Keys, W. Scott, 1988, Borehole geophysics applied to ground- Blakey, R.C., Peterson, F., Caputo, M.V., Geesman, R.C., and water hydrology: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report Vorheeses, B.J., 1983, Paleogeography of 87–539, p. 130 and 155. continental shoreline, and shallow marine sedimentation, southern Utah, in Reynolds, M.W., and Dolly, E.D., eds., Keys and McCarthy, 1990, Application of borehole geophysics paleogeography of the west-central U.S.: , to water-resources investigations: Techniques of Water- Society of Economic Paleontologist and Mineralogist, Resources Investigations of the Geological Rocky Mountain Section, p. 77–100. Survey, book 2, chap. E1, 126 p. Selected References 

Lopes, T.J., and Hoffmann, J.P., 1997, Geochemical analyses of ground-water ages, recharge rates, and hydraulic conductivity of the N Aquifer, Black Mesa area, Arizona: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 96–4190, 42 p. Middleton, L.T. and Blakey, R.C., 1983, Sedimentologic processes and controls on the intertonguing of the fluvial Kayenta and eolian Navajo Sandstone, northern Arizona and southern Utah, in Brookfield, M.E., and Ahlbrant, T.S., eds., Eolian sediments and processes: Amsterdam, Elsevier, Developments in Sedimentology, no. 38, p. 613–634. O’Sullivan, R.B., Repenning, C.A., Beaumont, E.C., and Page, H.G., 1972, Stratigraphy of the Cretaceous rocks and the Tertiary Ojo Alamo Sandstone, Navajo and Hopi Indian Reservations, Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 521–B, 34 p.

Peterson, Fred, 1988, Stratigraphy and nomenclature of Middle and Upper Jurassic rocks, western Colorado Plateau, Utah and Arizona, in Revisions to stratigraphic nomenclature of Jurassic and Cretaceous rocks of the Colorado Plateau: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1633–B, p. 13–56. Peterson, Fred, and Pipiringos, G.N., 1979, Stratigraphic relations of the Navajo Sandstone to Middle Jurassic formations, southern Utah and northern Arizona: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1035–B, 43 p. Robinson, S. Edwin and Coruth, Cahit, 1988, Basic exploration of geophysics: John Wiley and Sons, New York, p. 309–444. Truini, Margot, and Longsworth, S.A., 2003, Hydrogeology of the D aquifer and movement and ages of ground water determined from geochemical and isotopic analyses, Black Mesa area, northeastern Arizona: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 03–4189, 38 p. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005, 2004 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories: U.S. Environmental Protection agency, accessed August 15, 2005 at http://epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/drinking/standards/ dwstandards.pdf. Vorrheese, B. J., 1978, Stratigraphy and facies of the lower Carmel Formation (Middle Jurassic), southwestern Utah: Flagstaff, Northern Arizona University, unpublished master’s thesis, 161 p. SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATIONS REPORT 2005–5187 Hydrogeologic sections showing correlations of units of the D and N aquifers from borehole-geophysical data and lithologic descriptions, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Black Mesa, Arizona—Plate 1 of 1 U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PREPARED IN COOPERATION WITH THE Margot Truini and J.P. Macy, 2006, Lithology and thickness of the Carmel Formation as related to BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS leakage between the D and N aquifers, Black Mesa, Arizona

Section A - A’

West East A A‘ 6,800

6,600

Hotevilla P D & C Well Bend in section 6,400

Amereda Oil Welll ALLUVIUM Low Mountain PM 2 Well 6,200 Skelly Oil Well Polacca Wash 6,000 ALLUVIUM Oraibi MESA VERDE GROUP 5,800 Wash Penzoil United 5,600 ? 5,400

5,200 DAKOTA SANDSTONE 5,000 0 200 400 ENTRADA SANDSTONE 4,800 400 200 0 4,600

ALTITUDE, IN FEET ABOVE NGVD OF 1929 CARMEL FORMATION 400 200 0 4,400 NAVAJO SANDSTONE 0 200 400 4,200 0 200 400 0 5 MILES 4,000 0 5 KILOMETERS 3,800

3,600

3,400

Section B - B’ PWCC #2 Well

South North B B‘ ALLUVIUM

PWCC #9 Well ALLUVIUM 6,600 Bend in section Second Mesa PM2 Well Moenkopi

Bend in section 6,400 BM5 Well Dinnebito Wash Wash

Bend in section 6,200 Skelly Oil Well MESA VERDE GROUP

Turquiose Well Bend in section 6,000

5,800 MESA VERDE GROUP 5,600

5,400 MANCOS SHALE 5,200

5,000 4,800 0 200 400 200 0 MORRISON FORMATION 4,600

4,400 ALTITUDE, IN FEET ABOVE NGVD OF 1929 ENTRADA FORMATION 4,200 0 200 400 0 200 400 200 0 CARMEL FORMATION 4,000 0 5 MILES 0 200 400 3,800 0 200 400 0 5 KILOMETERS NAVAJO SANDSTONE 3,600

3,400

3,200

3,000

2,800 0 200 400 200 0

2,600

Section C - C’

South North

Bend in section C ALLUVIUM Kits’iili NTUA 2 hWell C‘ 6,800

6,600 Piñon PM6 Well MESA VERDE GROUP 6,400 Rough Rock PM5 Well

Amereda Oil Well Bend in section 6,200 DAKOTA SANDSTONE

Hopi High School Well Polacca

6,000 Keams Canyon PM2 Well Wash 5,800 MANCOS SHALE

5,600

5,400 MORRISON FORMATION 5,200

5,000 ENTRADA SANDSTONE 0 200 400

4,800 0 200 400

4,600 400 200 0 CARMEL FORMATION ALTITUDE, IN FEET ABOVE NGVD OF 1929 4,400 0 200 400 NAVAJO SANDSTONE 4,200 0 200 400 200 0 0 5 MILES 400 200 0 4,000 0 5 KILOMETERS 3,800

111° 110°30’ 110° 109°30’ EXPLANATION

er v LOGS do Ri Co ra lo Li POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE—D aquifer (Dakota Sandstone, tt B’ SANDSTONE le 36°30’ COAL- Morrison Formation, Entrada Sandstone, and Carmel LEASE Co AREA SHALE Formation). Source: Truini and Longsworth (2003) Flagstaff lo C’ ra do Ri v NO DATA POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE—N aquifer (Navajo Sandstone, er Kayenta Formation, Wingate Formation). See figure 2. ARIZONA NATURAL GAMMA, IN AMERICAN PETROLEUM Source: Thomas (2002) INSTITUE (API) GAMMA-RAY UNITS Phoenix A A’ TRACE OF HYDROGEOLOGIC SECTION 36° A A’ ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, IN MILLIMHOS PER METER

Bottom of log dashed where log is deeper than depth shown. B C Geologic contacts and potentiometric surface lines are NOTE: Correlations based on geophysical data only, except at positioned relative to the vertical line representing the PWCC #2 and PWCC #9 where lithographic descriptions were well location. also used. 35°30’ Colored region represents the approximate confined area of the N aquifer—From Brown and Eychaner (1998)

Hydrogeologic sections showing correlations of units of the D and N aquifers from borehole-geophysical data and lithologic descriptions, Black Mesa, Arizona By Margot Truini and J.P. Macy 2005