Judson W. Harvey 2000 tables http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/ofr/00-168/ At present there are few reliable estimates of hydrologic fluxes between groundwater and surface water in the Everglades. This gap in hydrological investigations not only leaves the water budget of the Everglades uncertain, it also hampers progress in understanding the processes that determine mobility and transformation of contaminants, such as mercury, sulfate and nutrients. The objective of this project is to quantify hydrologic exchange fluxes between groundwater and surface water and its effects on transport of contaminants in the Everglades. The research furthermore relates surface water and ground water interactions to past, present, and proposed management of surface-water levels and flows in the Everglades. The principal research sites are the Everglades Nutrient Removal Project (ENR), Water Conservation Area 2A (WCA-2A), and the freshwater wetlands of Everglades National Park. Results are being used to quantify ground-water exchange with surface flow, and to quantify the enhancement of chemical transformations of contaminants during transport across the interface between surface water and ground water. The datasets available in the appendixes of the OFR provide information on site locations and measurements in the Everglades Nutrient Removal (ENR) area and Water Conservation Area (WCA) 2A. For restoration of the Everglades to succeed there must be comprehensive knowledge about physical, chemical, and biological processes throughout the system. A key measure of success in the Everglades is the improvement or protection of water quality under changing hydrologic conditions. Although there is a basic understanding of how interactions between groundwater and surface water will affect water budgets under restoration, there is only a rudimentary understanding of how interactions between groundwater and surface water will affect water quality. Only field-oriented research and modeling can determine whether interactions between groundwater and surface water are currently storing pollutants in groundwater, how long those pollutants are likely to be stored in the aquifer, and under what changing management conditions associated with restoration will those pollutants be returned into the surface water system. 19950601 19981221 ground condition Complete None planned -80.45 -80.37 26.7 26.59 none aquifer tests chemistry discharge flow groundwater groundwater-surface water exchanges hydrogeology hydrology nutrients seepage water quality conductivity peat ISO 19115 Topic Category environment inlandWaters 007 012 geoscientificInformation 008 Department of Commerce, 1995, Countries, Dependencies, Areas of Special Sovereignty, and Their Principal Administrative Divisions, Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 10-4, Washington, DC, National Institute of Standards and Technology United States USA U.S. Department of Commerce, 1987, Codes for the identification of the States, the District of Columbia and the outlying areas of the United States, and associated areas (Federal Information Processing Standard 5-2): Washington, DC, NIST Florida FL Department of Commerce, 1990, Counties and Equivalent Entities of the United States, Its Possessions, and Associated Areas, FIPS 6-3, Washington, DC, National Institute of Standards and Technology Broward County Miami-Dade County Palm Beach County none Central Everglades Greater Lake Okeechobee Water Conservation Area 2 WCA2A Everglades Nutrient Removal area Water Conservation Area 3 WCA3A none surface water wetland peat groundwater surficial aquifer system none seasonal none none Judson W. Harvey U.S. Geological Survey Project Chief mailing address

430 National Center

Reston VA 20192 703 648-5876 703 648 5484 jwharvey@usgs.gov http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/fs/169-96/fig1.gif study sites GIF Project personnel include Jim Krest, Jessica Thomas Newlin, and Eric Lerch. Past project personnel include Eric Nemeth, Katherine Randle, Jungyill Choi, Bob Mooney, Jonah Jackson, and Cynthia Gefvert. Data are available in tables in PDF files Bates, A. L. Orem, W. H.; Harvey, J.. W.; Spiker, E. C. 2001 report USGS Open-File Report OFR 01-007 Tallahassee, FL U.S. Geological Survey http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/ofr/01-007/ Bates, Anne L Orem, William H.; Harvey. Judson W.; Spiker, Elliot C. 2002 report Journal of Environmental Quality v. 31 no. 1 Madison, WI American Society of Agronomy The journal is published jointly by the American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/reports/trace_sulfur/ Harvey, Judson W. Krupa, Steven L.; Gefvert, Cynthia; Mooney, Robert H.; Choi, Jungyill; King, Susan A.; Giddings, Jefferson B. 2002 report USGS Water Resources Investigations Report 02-4050 Reston, VA U.S. Geological Survey http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/wri/02-4050/ Choi, J. Harvey, J. W. 2000 report Wetlands v. 20, n. 3 McLean, VA Society of Wetland Scientists http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/reports/quant_gwater/Wetlands_2000_v20(3)_p500.pdf Krest, James M. Harvey, Judson W. 2003 report Limnology and Oceanography v. 48, n. 1 Washington, DC American Society of Limnology and Oceanography http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/papers/radium_gw/ Harvey, Judson, W Jackson, Jonah M.; Mooney, Robert H.; Choi, Jungyill 2000 report USGS Open-File Report 00-483 Reston, VA U.S. Geological Survey Prepared in cooperation with Everglades National Park http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/ofr/00-483/ Harvey, J.W. Newlin, J. T.; Krest, J. M.; Choi, J.; Nemeth, E. A.; Krupa, S. L. 2004 report USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2004-5069 Reston, VA U.S. Geological Survey http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/sir/2004-5069 Harvey, J. W. Krupa, S. L.; Krest, J. M. 2004 report Journal of Ground Water, Oceans Issue 2004 v. 42, n. 7 Westerville, OH National Ground Water Association reprinted with permission from Judson W. Harvey et al. http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/papers/gw_discharge/ not applicable All project data that were quality assured at the time of preparation of this report are included in the appedixes. All wells and horizontal measuring points were surveyed by global positioning (GPS). The location of measuring points are reported with reference to the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD 27). Using the Army Corps of Engineers program Corpscon, horizontal coordinates were transformed to Northings and Eastings in the Universal Transverse Metcator (UTM) coordinate system. Horizontal positions were gathered using either a Trimble PRO XR GPS unit, a Rockwell PLGR unit, or a Garmin unit. In all cases the accuracy is expected to be better than +/- 100 feet, which is suffiecient for this project. The vertical elevations determined by leveling were determined on the basis of second-order Class I benchmarks in ENR and at site S10C in WCA-2A. Vertical elevations at interior sites in WCA-2A were revised in 1999 by Florida Department of Environmental Protection using GPS methods. The elevations for vertical control points near wells were transferred to well top control points. Elevations in the NGVD29 datum were derived from the observed NAD 83 ellipsoid heights and the NGS GEOID96 model. The estimated accuracy of derived elevations is +/- 0.07 meters. Location surveys All wells and horizontal measuring points were surveyed by global positioning (GPS). Vertical measuring points on land surface, staf gauges, and well tops were determined by leveling. Thirty-five monitoring wells were emplaced in the Surficial qauifer at depths reanging from 15 feet to 180 feet below the wetland sediment surface. Of those wells, eleven were drilled on levees surrounding ENR or WCA-2A to more efficiently utilize full size drilling rigs to obtain core material from the entire depth of the aquifer and to emplace the deep wells that were needed for hydrologic monitoring. Twenty-four monitoring wells were drilled at interior sites in the wetlands requiring the use of a portable tripod-drilling rig in WCA-2A and a specialized floating barge in ENR. To prevent cross contamination from soil/debris between drilling sites, all equipment was steam cleaned at a staging area located at least 2000 feet from the well drilling locations. The contractor ws required to bring in city water via the drill rig or support truck for all operations. The city water was tested for trace levels of mercury prior to any driloling activity/ No surface water was used for any cleaning or drilling. Boreholes were drilled and monitoring wells emplaced on levees by contractors. All borehole wells were derilled using the mud-rotary drilling method.The eight deep wells (greater than 95 feet below land surface) were drilled first to allow geophysical logging to be completed. The geophysical logging allowed onsite evaluation of lighological data and aided int eh placement of screen intervals if the monitoring wells. The boreholes at these sites were geologicall sampled using either standard penetratin testing and standard coring or wirleline coring. Only the seven deepest boreholes were selected for geophysical logging. The 2-inch diameter wells at ENR and and S10-C levee-based sites consissted of a two-foor section on 0.010-inch PVC screen and ten and five-foot sections pf 2-inch PVS riser pipe. Care was taken to prevent contamination during the drilling process. Wells and piezometers at the six interior ENR sites wre installed by a contractor using a floating drilling barge. All samples were collected by the wireline coring method. Wells at the six interior WCA-2A sites were installed by USGS staff utilizing their portable tripod drilling rig with rotary coring capabilities. Surface water was used as the drilling fluid for this operation and was pumped down the annular space via hydraulic pumps. No drillling muds were used at the WCA-2A sites. As soona as possible after well emplacem,ent, wells were develoed by pumping at high flow rates for one hour or until all turbidity had cleared, whichever took longer. Unconsolidated sediment samples were obtains from Split-spoon samples or Wireline samples at five sites in the ENR and at one site located at the S-10C site in WCA-2A. A small amount of unconsolidated sand material was extracted from the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) liner and continuous cores at two-foot intervals for sieve analysis to identify different depositional environments within the aquifer. Allssamples of limestone obtained from teh coring and drillling operations were reviewed and checked for competence. Only samples collected fromthe six deep boreholes that were geophysically logged were considered for further analysis. Samples were analyzed to determine the porosity and hydraulic conductivity of the slected limestones, percent (by weight), of potassium, concentration of uranium and thorium, and total gamma count. Dried and sieved sand fractions were returned to teh SFWMD in Ziploc freezer bags, marked with the boring number, sample nuumber, sived fraction and site location. Each soil boring was boxed. Each fraction f dr-sieved sand was sorted through to identify complete shells or shell fragments. Each soil boring ws assigned a Munsell color chart number. Once the shells were separated out for each two-foor interval, a hydrogeologist identified them. SFWMD staff used a software program to estimate the hydraulic conductivity of each sieve sample. The program used ten eaquations and the grain-size statistics to calculate hydraulic conductivity. The ten resulting values were the aithmetically averaged to improve the reliability of the estimate of hydraulic conductivity. Hydraulic conductivity was also determined by field drawdown tests. The drawdown tests were scheduled only after the wells had been fully developed and after at least one round of water quality sampling. The same test method was used at each site. 1999 Judson W. Harvey U.S. Geological Survey Project Chief mailing address

430 National Center

Reston VA 20192 703 648-5876 703 648 5484 jwharvey@usgs.gov Everglades Nutrient Removal area, WCA-2A, and WCA-3A 0.001 0.001 Degrees, minutes, and decimal seconds North American Datum of 1927 Clarke 1866 6378206 294.9786982 National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 0.01 feet Explicit elevation coordinate included with horizontal coordinates Data contained in the appendixes includes research site locations, research site information, lithology and hydrogeology of the surficial aquifer, water levels and hydraulic gradients, surface water and ground water chemistry, vertical fluxes of water through wetland peat, budget for water, chlorine and dissolved mercury, and site instrumentation maps USGS personnel Heather S.Henkel U.S. Geological Survey mailing address

600 Fourth St. South

St. Petersburg FL 33701 USA 727 803-8747 ext 3028 727 803-2030 hhenkel@usgs.gov OFR 00-168 The data have no implied or explicit guarantees Adobe PDF unknown Data on hydrologic measurements and water quality are found in the appendixes 8.6 http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/ofr/00-168/ Report can be downloaded from the SOFIA website none 20070813 Heather Henkel U.S. Geological Survey mailing and physical address

600 Fourth Street South

St. Petersburg FL 33701 USA 727 803-8747 ext 3028 727 803-2030 sofia-metadata@usgs.gov Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata FGDC-STD-001-1998