Ronald S. Reese 2008 report http://sofia.usgs.gov/projects/index.php?project_url=synth_framework To accomplish this regional synthesis, a number of maps and cross sections were constructed to illustrate regional features and delineate aquifer and permeable zone boundaries and characteristics. An approximately correlative or approximate time-stratigraphic framework was developed and is shown by four regional stratigraphic sections and two structure maps. Eight regional hydrogeologic sections are presented showing the distribution of hydrogeologic units across the study area. The boundaries of aquifers or subaquifers within the Floridan aquifer system are delineated, and maps of the upper and lower surfaces and thickness of three of these major hydrogeologic units are presented. Utilization and exploitation of the Floridan aquifer system of central and southern Florida has increased greatly since the early 1990s. Prior to the development of new treatment and storage technologies, use for public supply was limited to specific areas of potable water quality. Major uses now include withdrawal for reverse-osmosis treatment and blending operations, aquifer storage and recovery (ASR), and disposal of treated wastewater. A comprehensive understanding of the hydrogeology of the system necessary for its effective management has remained elusive owing to a need to integrate new information acquired during the last 20 years and geologic, hydrogeologic, and hydraulic uncertainties. The purposes of this report are to: (1) document the resolution of regional differences in hydrogeologic nomenclature and framework interpretation of the Floridan aquifer system between central and southern Florida and between west and east coastal areas; (2) establish a consistent hydrogeologic framework interpretation thoroughout central and southern Florida; and (3) develop hydrogeologic surface and thickness maps of units within the upper part of the Floridan aquifer system, thereby allowing for better comparisons of existing ASR sites and their performance and improved selection of future ASR sites. The results of this project are published in the USGS Scientific Investigations Report (SIR) 2007-5207 1925 2005 ground condition Complete None planned -82.84 -80.06 28.86 24.5 none synthesis hydrogeology hydrology ASR Aquifer Storage and Recovery ISO 19115 Topic Category environment geoscientificInformation inlandWaters 007 008 012 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 US 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 Brevard County Broward County Charlotte County Citrus County Collier County De Soto County Glades County Hardee County Hendry County Highlands County Hillsborough County Indian River County Lake County Lee County Manatee County Martin County Miami-Dade County Monroe County Okeechobee County Orange County Osceola County Palm Beach County Pasco County Pinellas County Polk County Sarasota County Seminole County St. Lucie County Sumter County Volusia County Hernando County USGS Geographic Names Information System Everglades National Park Lake Okeechobee Big Cypress National Preserve none Kissimmee Valley Greater Lake Okeechobee Central Everglades South Coast Florida SW Big Cypress Florida Keys none Floridan aquifer none none Ronald Reese U.S. Geological Survey mailing and physical address

3110 SW 9th Avenue

Ft. Lauderdale FL 33315 USA 954 377-5921 rsreese@usgs.gov http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2007/5207/pdf/v13figA1.pdf Location of all wells used in the study and South Florida Water Management District name pdf Emily Richardson of the South Florida Water Management District worked on this project populating (storing) the data generated by the project and the well data used in the project and report in SFWMD's database DBHYDRO and is also the second author of the report. Ronald S. Reese Steven J Memberg 2000 report USGS Water Resources Investigations Report 99-4061 Tallahassee, FL U.S. Geological Survey Prepared in cooperation with the South Florida Water Management District accessed as of 10/4/2010 http://fl.water.usgs.gov/Abstracts/wri99_4061_reese.html Ronald S. Reese 2000 report USGS Water Resources Investigations Report 98-4253 Tallahassee, FL U.S. Geological Survey Prepared in cooperation with the South Florida Water Management District accessed as of 10/4/2010 http://fl.water.usgs.gov/Abstracts/wri98_4253_reese.html Ronald S. Reese 1994 report USGS Water Resources Investigations Report 94-4010 Tallahassee, FL U.S. Geological Survey accessed as of 12/30/2009 http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/wri/94-4010/ Reese, Ronald S. 2002 report USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 02-4036 Tallahassee, FL U.S. Geological Survey accessed as of 12/30/2009 http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/wri/02-4036/ Reese, R. S. Alvarez-Zarikian, C. A. 2007 report USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5239 Reston, VA U.S. Geological Survey accessed as of 10/4/2010 http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2006/5239/ Reese, Ronald S. Richardson, Emily 2008 report USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5207 Reston, VA U.S. Geological Survey accessed as of 8/10/2010 Prepared in cooperation with the South Florida Water Management District http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2007/5207/ Reese, R. S. 2004 report USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 2003-4242 Tallahassee, FL U.S. Geological Survey Prepared in cooperation with South Florida Water Management District accessed as of 10/4/2010 http://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wri034242/ Duncan, J. G. Evans, W. L., III; Taylor, K. L. 1994 report Bulletin 64 Tallahassee, FL Florida Geological Survey report may be accessed on the website below by choosing B_64 Accessed as of 10/4/2010 http://www.dep.state.fl.us/geology/publications/lop-08-12-10.pdf Evaluation methods used in the study include: (1) review of previous studies, (2) identification of differences in hydrogeologic nomenclature and interpretation, (3) collection and assimilation of available data, (4) development of a correlative or time-stratigraphic framework, and (5) development of a preliminary hydrogeologic framework with consistent nomenclature based on the stratigraphic framework A total of 706 wells were inventoried and used in this study; they were drilled and constructed for various purposes and are irregularly distributed in the study area. Both location and type of available data are related to the original purpose for the well. Inventory of well data The 706 wells inventoried and used in this study were drilled and constructed for various purposes and are irregularly distributed in the study area. The review of previous studies in the study area, both regional and subregional in scope, found significant differences in the naming and definition of hydrogeologic units within the Floridan aquifer system. To make use of the data from these studies, it was necessary to identify these conflicts; and to guide this effort and develop a unified conceptual hydrogeologic framework, it was necessary to: (1) construct eight regional hydrogeologic sections through key wells, delineating major aquifers, subaquifers, and confining units across the study area north to south and west to east; and (2) develop an approximately correlative or approximate time-stratigraphic framework including construction of four stratigraphic sections. The differences in hydrogeologic nomenclature and interpretation across the study area from previous studies were identified and resolved within the unified conceptual hydrogeologic framework. Based on that conceptualization, data from previous studies of the Floridan aquifer system were extracted, archived, and utilized in conjunction with boundary depth determinations made for this study to map the boundaries and thicknesses of hydrogeologic units. Development of an approximately correlative stratigraphic framework included delineation of a marker unit and marker horizons. The horizons are correlative points in the stratigraphic section rather than a unit with upper and lower boundaries. This approximate time-stratigraphic framework differed from the formation-based stratigraphy and provides a basis for better understanding the vertical and lateral extent of formations. Two correlative stratigraphic marker horizons within the Floridan aquifer system and a marker unit near the top of the aquifer system were delineated or mapped to provide stratigraphic guidance in the identification and determination of aquifers and confining units and in the delineation of their lateral continuity. The two marker horizons originated from two previous studies of east coast Lower Floridan aquifer injection wells, where they are based on lithology and correlation of geophysical log (natural gamma-ray and sonic) signatures observed in boreholes. The depths of these same two marker horizons were extended throughout the study area by correlation of natural gamma-ray logs between wells. Development of an approzimate time-stratigraphic framework An approximate time-stratigraphic framework was developed in this study primarily using geophysical log correlation between wells, beginning with stratigraphic marker units or lithologic changes established in certain wells or areas. A stratigraphic marker unit near the top of the Floridan aquifer system and two stratigraphic marker horizons within the middle and lower parts of the Floridan aquifer system were delineated and mapped to provide stratigraphic guidance in the identification and delineation of aquifers, subaquifers, and confining units. The two marker horizons originated from work by Duncan and others (1994a, b) in studies of east coast Lower Floridan aquifer injection wells located in Brevard, St. Lucie, Martin, and Palm Beach Counties. The marker unit has a finite thickness, whereas the marker horizons are points of correlation on natural gamma-ray logs. The two marker horizons originated from work by Duncan and others (1994a, b) in studies of east coast Lower Floridan aquifer injection wells located in Brevard, St. Lucie, Martin, and Palm Beach Counties; they were mapped by Duncan and others (1994a,b) using changes in lithology and natural gamma-ray logs for the purpose of establishing correlative relations. Starting with wells where they were determined by Duncan and others (1994a,b), the depths of these same two marker horizons were extended throughout the study area primarily using correlation of natural gamma-ray curves between wells. Correlation of gamma-ray logs of wells in this investigation was carried out at a vertical scale of 1 in. = 125 ft using working copies plotted through Viewlog (tm) software. The entire section from surface to total depth was correlated between wells in order to best establish the depths of stratigraphic marker horizons. Correlation within the carbonate rocks of the Floridan aquifer system, which tend to have low natural radioactivity, was aided by plotting curves using an expanded scale, such as 0 to 100 API (American Petroleum Institute) standard units, instead of a more standard scale of 0 to 200 API units, to enhance gamma-ray curve variations. The reliability of correlation of the marker horizons by gamma-ray logs in this study was improved by correlating all the deep wells with gamma-ray logs, not just wells on cross sections. Additionally, wells were correlated in loops, first regionally then locally, to check for correlation error of closure in returning to the original well. If an error greater than 20 to 30 ft was found, the correlations for the wells in a loop were reviewed and corrections were made. Once a regional loop was satisfactorily correlated, thereby establishing the correlations in a new region, then smaller loops were conducted in the new region. Determination of hydrogeologic unit boundaries Hydrogeologic unit boundaries were determined in this study primarily using geophysical logs and lithologic descriptions. Where available, the results of hydraulic tests such as aquifer and packer tests were also reviewed. Additionally, in one area a formation boundary was used for the top of a confining unit because of the nature of the formation in the area and the unavailability of adequate other data. Assistance in the identification of units and determination of their boundaries between the major divisions of the study area was provided by the construction of hydrogeologic sections and the approximate time-stratigraphic framework, including the marker horizons and the marker unit previously described. Hydrogeologic unit boundaries determined in previous studies were reviewed for consistency in their methods of determination with those used in this study, and utilized wherever possible. For the purpose of determining hydrogeologic boundaries in each well, geophysical logs and, when available, lithologic data were plotted together at a uniform scale (1 in. = 125 ft) using Viewlog (tm) software. Borehole geophysical logs were grouped by type into four columns that include: (1) natural formation gamma ray, spontaneous potential (SP), and caliper curves, (2) formation resistivity curves, (3) formation porosity curves, and (4) borehole flow and fluid properties logs including fluid resistivity, temperature, and flowmeter. Lithologic data were plotted in a fifth column using graphic symbols. The vertical distribution of hydraulic head in a test well was used to assist in determining boundaries in some water-management district well construction reports, and after review, these boundaries were usually accepted in this study. Generally, however, determination of the hydrogeologic boundaries through hydraulic head and hydrogeochemical data could not be done in this study, because these data were not available in most wells. Most of the hydrogeologic data used to determine hydrogeologic unit boundaries in this study were archived in the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) DBHYDRO database; the data include geophysical logs, packer and aquifer performance tests, lithologic descriptions, and formation contact depths. The most complete coverage of these data is in the SFWMD area, but data on many of the wells used in the other water-management district areas were also archived in this database. Most of the lithologic descriptions in DBHYDRO were done by the Florida Geological Survey (FGS) and came from their database. Other data and lithologic descriptions used that are not in DBHYDRO were available from well construction reports done by consulting firms and government agencies other than FGS, including the USGS and the State water-management districts. Hydrogeologic unit boundary depths determined during this study or obtained from other investigations were also archived in DBHYDRO. Hydrogoelogic sections The regional synthesis and development of a new hydrogeologic conceptualization of the Floridan aquifer system in the study area was in large part based on eight hydrogeologic sections created for this study. The primary purpose of these sections was to assist in delineating aquifers, subaquifers, and confining units between the major divisions of the study area. Working copies of the sections were constructed at a vertical scale of 1 in. = 125 ft with geophysical logs and lithologic columns plotted for each well using Viewlog (tm) software. Geophysical logs were grouped by function as previously described. Aquifer and formation boundaries and marker horizons were delineated. Key wells were used to constrain interpretations across each section. Selected wells on each section were sufficiently deep to intersect the primary zones of interest and have high quality geophysical logs and ancillary data (such as water-quality or water-level data). The ancillary data could be used to help identify an aquifer or determine whether a permeable zone was a unique aquifer or a flow zone within a larger aquifer. Priority was given to State water-management district test wells, but wastewater injection and oil test wells were also used. Five sections were extended west to east across the peninsula as tie lines, and three sections were extended north to south, one along each coast and one along the center of the peninsula. Stratigraphic and hydrogeologic maps Maps of the two stratigraphic marker horizon surfaces and the top surface and thickness of hydrogeologic units, including aquifers, subaquifers, and one confining unit, were constructed in this study. The mapping was completed in three steps: (1) determination of the stratigraphic marker horizon and hydrogeologic unit boundary depths in wells used in the study, (2) generation of surface maps by fitting the well data to a statistical model, and (3) review and revision of these surfaces and generation of thickness maps. Generation of surfaces by fitting data to a statistical model Stratigraphic marker horizon and hydrogeologic unit surface maps were produced using ordinary kriging techniques available with Viewlog (tm) software. A semivariogram model and associated parameters, which are range, sill, and nugget, were selected based on the best visual and statistical fit for each surface data set. Due to the regional southerly dip of strata and units comprising the Floridan aquifer system into the southern Florida basin, a linear trend had to be removed from all data prior to selecting the semivariogram model. Review and revision of surfaces and generation of thickness maps Generating the stratigraphic marker horizon and hydrogeologic unit surfaces was an iterative process. After the first round of kriging, the surfaces and control point values were plotted. Data points that were anomalous because of a value inconsistent with those in nearby wells were reviewed, and any that were determined or evaluated in this study were reevaluated to establish their reliability. One of the following steps then was taken: Anomalous points were reviewed for how well they met the criteria used in this project for boundary depth determination. Upon this additional review, points found not to meet project criteria or based on a weak data set (for example, a control point based solely on poor quality geophysical logs without supporting borehole fluid logs, lithologic descriptions, or hydraulic tests) were removed from the interpolation or retained with the uncertainty indicated manually by dashing contour lines. Anomalous points with strong supporting data were assumed to be reliable and were retained. In rare cases, data points met project criteria with relatively strong supporting data at the local well scale, but were removed from the interpolation because of the undue influence they exerted at a larger scale. After modifications were made to the input data set based on this review, the integrity of the kriging model was checked and the surface was regenerated. Once satisfactory upper and lower surfaces for a hydrogeologic unit were completed, they were used to generate the unit thickness map by subtraction. The final step in the generation of surface and unit thickness maps was manual modification, In addition to reviewing individual anomalous data points, the surfaces as a whole were reviewed for consistency. Contours lines on maps were moved to account for all data points, and the positions of zone pinchouts, if present, were interpreted and drawn in manually. Finally, contour lines were smoothed and, where necessary, dashed to indicate less confidence in their position because of large areal data gaps or values that were less certain. For a more complete discussion of the steps above, see SIR 2007-5207. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Government 2005 Ronald Reese U.S. Geological Survey mailing and physical address

3110 SW 9th Avenue

Ft. Lauderdale FL 33315 USA 954 377-5921 rsreese@usgs.gov Floridan Aquifer system, central and south Florida Point Point 706 1 1 Degrees, minutes, and decimal seconds North American Datum of 1983 Geodetic Reference System 80 6378137 298.257 National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 0.01 feet Attribute values Local surface 1 feet Explicit depth coordinate included with horizontal coordinates inventory of all wells used in the study parameters used to describe the wells and the data collected South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Florida Geological Survey (FGS), Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD), and St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) BOG NUMBER permit number used by the Oil and Gas Section of the Florida Geological Survey FGS BOG number COUNTY abbreviation for the county name SFWMD BRE Brevard SFWMD BRO Broward SFWMD CHA Charlotte SFWMD COL Collier SFWMD DAD Miami-Dade SFWMD DES DeSoto SFWMD GLA Glades SFWMD HAR hardee SFWMD HEN Hendry SFWMD HER Hernando SFWMD HIG Highlands SFWMD HIL Hillsborough SFWMD IND Indian River SFWMD LAK Lake SFWMD LEE Lee SFWMD MAN Manatee SFWMD MAR Martin SFWMD MON Monroe SFWMD OKE Okeechobee SFWMD ORA Orange SFWMD OSC Osceola SFWMD PAL Palm Beach SFWMD PAS Pasco SFWMD PIN Pinellas SFWMD POL Polk SFWMD SAR Sarasota SFWMD SEM Seminole SFWMD STL St. Lucie SFWMD SUM Sumter SFWMD VOL Volusia SFWMD CIT Citrus SFWMD DEPTH_TOTAL total depth of well, in feet below measurement point USGS 20 18670 feet 1 FGS NUMBER Florida Geological Survey well number FGS FGS well number LANSMSL altitude of land surface in feet above National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD 29), normally the measurement point for all depths in a well; used in DBHYDRO USGS 0.16 204 feet 0.01 LATITUDE north horizontal coordinate of well referenced to North America Datum of 1983 (NAD 83) entity which drilled or constructed the well 24 34 08.523 28 51 26 degrees, minutes, decimal seconds 0.001 LONGITUDE west horizontal coordinate of well referenced to North America Datum of 1983 (NAD 83) entity which drilled or constructed the well 80 03 45.159 82 50 12 degrees, minutes, decimal seconds 0.001 OTHER NAME OR IDENTIFIER can include site name or owner USGS site name or owner SFWMD STATION NAME South Florida Water Management District station name, primary identifier used in the study and in DBHYDRO database SFWMD SFWMD station name SJRWMD NAME St. Johns River Water Management District well name SJRWMD SJRWMD well name SWFWMD NAME Southwest Florida Water Management District well name SWFWMD SWFWMD well name USGS LOCAL NAME U.S. Geological Survey local well name used in the Ground Water Site Inventory (GWSI) inventory USGS USGS local name USGS SITE ID U.S. Geological Survey 15-digit site identification number used in the National Water Information System (NWIS) database USGS USGS site identification number WELL TYPE abbreviation for the type of well USGS TST State water-management district or Federal hydrogeologic test well USGS ASR Aquifer Storage and Recovery system well USGS INJ deep wastewater injection system well USGS OIL oil industry well USGS NI purpose of well not identified USGS XCOORD State plane horizontal coordinate of well in feet, referenced to NAD 83 entity which drilled or constructed the well 62769 962729.502 feet 0.001 YCOORD State plane horizontal coordinate in feet, referenced to NAD 83 entity which drilled or constructed the well 86413.252 1644367.213 feet 0.001 hydrologic unit boundaries hydrologic unit boundaries and sources of determination SFWMD, USGS AQUIFER_CODE abbreviations in order of increasing depth USGS SU surficial aquifer system USGS IA intermediate aquifer system USGS IC intermediate confining unit USGS MH mid-Hawthorn aquifer USGS LH Lower Hawthorn aquifer USGS UF Upper Florida aquifer USGS MC middle confining unit of the Florida aquifer system USGS MS middle semi-confining unit of the Floridan aquifer system USGS APPZ Avon Park permeable zone USGS LF Lower Floridan aquifer, uppermost permeable zone or subaquifer USGS BZ Boulder Zone of the Lower Floridan aquifer USGS SF sub-Floridan aquifer system confining unit USGS COUNTY abbreviation for the county name SFWMD BRE Brevard SFWMD BRO Broward SFWMD CHA Charlotte SFWMD CIT Citrus SFWMD COL Collier SFWMD DAD Miami-Dade SFWMD DES DeSoto SFWMD GLA Glades SFWMD HAR Hardee SFWMD HEN Hendry SFWMD HER Hernando SFWMD HIG Highlands SFWMD HIL Hillsborough SFWMD IND Indian River SFWMD LAK Lake SFWMD LEE Lee SFWMD MAN Manatee SFWMD MAR Martin SFWMD MON Monroe SFWMD OKE Okeechobee SFWMD ORA Orange SFWMD OSC Osceola SFWMD PAL Palm Beach SFWMD PAS Pasco SFWMD PIN Pinellas SFWMD POL Polk SFWMD SAR Sarasota SFWMD SEM Seminole SFWMD STL St. Lucie SFWMD SUM Sumter SFWMD VOL Volusia SFWMD DEPTH_MAX subaquifer, aqifer, or aquifer system bottom depth, in feet below measurement point entity which drilled or constructed the well 10 3700 feet 1 DEPTH_MIN subaquifer, aquifer, or aquifer system top depth, in feet below measurement point USGS 0 3520 feet 1 SFWMD STATION NAME South Florida Water Management District station name, primary identifier used in the study and DBHYDRO database SFWMD South Florida Water Management District station name 20101005 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 none This metadata record may have been copied from the SOFIA website and may not be the most recent version. Please check http://sofia.usgs.gov/metadata to be sure you have the most recent version.