1 / 22

Simulation of groundwater response to development: CENTRAL PASSAIC RIVER BASIN, NJ

Simulation of groundwater response to development: CENTRAL PASSAIC RIVER BASIN, NJ. Fatoumata Barry 1,2 , Duke Ophori 1 , Jeffrey L. Hoffman 2 and Robert Canace 2 1 Department of Earth & Environment Studies, Montclair State University, Upper Montclair, NJ 07043

stephen-navarro
Download Presentation

Simulation of groundwater response to development: CENTRAL PASSAIC RIVER BASIN, NJ

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Simulation of groundwater response to development:CENTRAL PASSAIC RIVER BASIN, NJ Fatoumata Barry1,2, Duke Ophori1, Jeffrey L. Hoffman2 and Robert Canace2 1Department of Earth & Environment Studies, Montclair State University, Upper Montclair, NJ 07043 2New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection P.O. Box 427, Trenton, NJ 08625

  2. Issues • Increased demand of water • Due to population growth • Decline of water levels • Due to increase withdrawals • Decreased recharge • Due to urban development • Contamination • Have limited withdrawal in some areas

  3. Objectives • Develop a regional GW flow model to simulate: • flow paths • contaminants paths • contaminants source • protection areas around wells • Delineate regional discharge and recharge areas

  4. Study Area Hackensack – Passaic River Basin

  5. Model Design Conceptualization SURFACIAL Sand and Gravel LAYER 1 Silt, Clay (Semi-confining Unit) Sand and Gravel (LAYER 2) BEDROCK (LAYER 3) Sandstone, Siltstone Basalt

  6. Model Design - Boundaries • Lateral: • Western edge: Ramapo Fault (Granite on West side of fault) • Northern, Southern and Eastern edge: Crest of the 2nd Watchung Mountain • Vertical: • Top: Surface water Rivers, lakes, wetlands • Bottom: Bedrock

  7. Data Input

  8. Input Data Sets • Aquifer Parameters: specified for each grid cell within each layer • Hydraulic Conductivity • Transmissivity • Storage coefficients • Initial water levels • Botton and Top elevations • Vertical leakance to account for the hydraulic connection between adjacent layers. • Pumping Wells • Observation Wells • Recharge values • River Data

  9. Flow Simulation • Modeling was done using the MODFLOW and MODPATH codes in the GMS package

  10. Simulation Results

  11. Steady State Calibration Surface and Heads of Unconfined Sand and Gravel comparison Surface Elevation Layer 1

  12. 1990 Computed and Observed Water Level Original Calibrated

  13. Interpretation

  14. Prepumpage (1898) versus Recent (1995) Wetlands in unconfined sand and gravel 1898 1995

  15. Unconfined Sand and Gravel Discharge Areas 1898 1995

  16. Semi-confined Sand and Gravel Discharge Areas 1898 1995

  17. Decline of Water Levels between 1898 and 1995

  18. Hanover Twp - Heads and Flow vectors 1929 -1974

  19. Hanover Twp - Heads and Flow vectors 1979 -1995

  20. East Hanover, Parsippany Twps - Capture Zones Analysis

  21. Conclusion • Benefit from the model • Wetlands reduced from prepumping to pumping conditions • Discharge areas reduced after pumping started • Temporal flow patterns easily visualized • Decline of groundwater levels can be visualized • Analytical and Numerical Capture zones compared • Analytical capture zones found to be conservative

  22. Questions and CommentsThank you

More Related