water resources research laboratory official file copy€¦ · • water quality from agriculture...

PAP-755

DRAFT

Groundwater Resource Management Research Needs

by

James A. Higgs

July 1995

WATER RESOURCES

RESEARCH LABORATORY

OFFICIAL FILE COPY

I .

.

I

I .

I .

' �

D

D .

.

I .

I .

I

1M Ii

I

I

IWl 11

• . I]

lfil ti

I . .

Draft

MEMORANDUM REPORT

Groundwater Resource Management Research Needs

July 1995

.

n

n

_ _)

'7

./

r7

'.'

r l ·-- )

,... "'

I.....J

'I �

7 LJ

�7

LJ

L�

LJ

Draft

Groundwater Resource

Management Research

Needs

By James A. Higgs

Water Resources Research Laboratory

Technical Service Center

Denver, Colorado

July 1995

United States Department of the Interior • Bureau of Reclamation

ri L J

n

ri

ri

V

'7 ... )

'l

,, I

�J

r,

L..J

r-7 L.J

'l LJ

') 1

LJ

r-7 1

,�l u

�,

u

L_,

LJ

Draft

Special thanks to Roger Burnett, Lisa Bryant, Larry Cast, Richard Everaert, John Fields, Jeff Farrar, Mark Gemperline, Judy Hamilton, Doug Hurcomb, Charley Johnson, Lynn Johnson, Cliff Pugh, Brad Prudhom, Christopher Reeves, Glen Sanders, Robert Talbot, Shirley Shadix, Robert Turner, and Joe Zander for their participation in this study.

The research covered by this report was funded by Water Technology and Environmental Research (WATER) project WSR08, Ground Water Resource Management.

The information contained in this report regarding commercial products or firms may not be used for advertising or promotional purposes and it is not to be construed as an endorsement of any product or firm by the Bureau of Reclamation.

�

z

w

1-2

0

(.)

�

1······ ·· ··J.� @

·.·. · .. · .... . ·. ··· . ·· .· ···· ·· ·· ·. ·.·. ·.·.:.} �

1

+;:f:":/-; -; -;: :.:i-: )\·i ''

( H i-,

n i

I.._ J

ri

n

J

7

r7

.... J

r1 ·- j

r1 I

,.__J

r7

l_)

i

J

J ,-, I

LJ

r7

u

�'I I

LJ

�l

J

,....,., !

LJ

LJ

,-.,

LJ

I

u

PURPOSE

The groundwater research team was assembled to assess and prioritize groundwater research studies which would most effectively support the overall groundwater-related efforts in Reclamation. The team was funded partially by participants and partially from the Water Technology and Environmental Research (WATER) project WSR0S, Groundwater Management Research.

The team was also assembled to assist other ongoing groundwater research and projects efforts as needed.

It addresses the physical laboratory facilities, numerical modeling abilities, and field testing expertise in Reclamation.

INTRODUCTION AND GOALS

Groundwater constitutes as much as 87 percent of the total water stored within the United States. However, groundwater annual replacement rate is only 3 percent of the overall water circulation' . This demonstrates both the immensity of this storage resource and the susceptibility to enhance or degrade from long-tenn uses and misuses. It also demonstrates the potential for use as a water management tool.

For many years Reclamation has used groundwater to supplement agricultural and municipal water supplies in the arid Western United States. Various Reclamation groups have also been involved and develop expertise in:

• Embankment and concrete dam seepage studies

• Groundwater well designs, construction, and rehabilitation

• Aquifer Storage and Recovery projects

• Chemistry of groundwater around embankment and concrete dams

• Regional groundwater studies

Draft

• Water quality from agriculture drains

• Real-time data collection of groundwater quality and quantity*

• Subsurface permeability testing and geophysical investigations

• Chemistry of groundwater around agricultural areas

• Numerical modeling of hydraulic and contaminant transport

• Dewatering systems

• Well sterilization

This list is by no means complete. In Reclamation there is a close relationship between these groundwater activities and disciplines such as Chemistry, Geology, Civil engineering, and Infrastructure management.

Despite the recent reorganization of Reclamation's Technical Service Center (TSC), ground water expertise remains scattered throughout several different groups. While this places the experts close to the work, like that in the Civil Engineering Services (D-8100), and Geotechnical Services (D-8300), it creates difficulties in communication of capabilities, techniques, and technologies.

Several regional and area offices are also active in groundwater work. Their resources and routes of communication to the TSC are often obstructed by organizational constraints.

The purpose of this project was to bring together this diverse group of experts to share capabilities, techniques, and technologies, and to improve the understanding of needed research. Often during group discussions a specialist in one area would express the need for research in a particular area. Another specialist would know of research underway or completed and share that information. These occurrences emphasize the need for more communications and team-type activities between these specialists.

ri \... ,I

r1

n

... J

ri

ri

r)

� J

r, I

� .J

-1 ._J

7 LJ

7 I

u

,.J

�-7

l_J

LJ

LJ

u

L_;

u

J

Other specific goals include:

• Assess and prioritize groundwater research studies

• Identify the level of effort required for the high priority groundwater research

• Assist other ongoing groundwater research efforts as needed

• Identify how the various resources can support groundwater in Reclamation

• Focus, direct, and coordinate groundwater work

• Identification of institutional problems blocking the research and how to overcome them

CONCLUSIONS

Regional and TSC team members rated 115 topics that were grouped into 15 different ground water areas (Appendix A). Each topic was rated by importance and difficulty. A research prospectus was written for the top rated topics (Appendix 8).

Four topics rated close to the top in importance and easiness were closely related. They were grouped together because they all need a team effort and improved communications. They were:

Rating Topic (ordered in importance and ease)

1 Improve technical transfer between all offices.

2 Sell Reclamation's capabilities to do groundwater research.

9 Emphasize technical transfer between agencies.

15 Technical transfer of reliable methods of measuring water levels in observation wells with electronic equipment in long-term installations.

Draft

Based on these closely-related topics, the research prospectus titled "Reclamation Research and Innovative Technology Transfer Approach into the Private and Public Sector," was written. This prospectus proposes that a team similar to the Groundwater Team of TSC and Regional personnel assembled for this study be reassembled. The team would continue group discussions of current work, needed research, new technologies, and to promote high priority research and to promote team efforts between different TSC groups and regional and area offices. The team would:

• Continue identifying groundwater research needs of customers

• Determine the future of Reclamation's groundwater technology needs for water resource management

• Establish a replicable procedure in groundwater technology transfer within the public and private sectors

• Identify the process by which Reclamation employees can take advantage of groundwater resources

• Identify customers and their needs for each research project

• Closer management of groundwater research efforts

• Improve groundwater technology transfer with other public agencies and private sector.

While several other topics were rated almost as important, reassembling a Groundwater Research Team to achieve these goals was unanimously the most important topic discussed.

PROCEDURES

The team was comprised of two parts: the TSC team and the regional and area office team. The difference being that the TSC met, while communications with the regional and area office team was almost entirely by E-mail.

n

� ,

r·7

',__J

fl

r1 .... ,;

n

· ...... )

r1

LJ

n u

i u

J

'l LJ

�-1

I 1..,_J

�., LJ

L}

,- '"II

LJ

LJ

� 7

u

J

Organizing and coordinating the TSC team meetings and regional and area office team mailings proved the most challenging.

A memorandum was sent to various TSC branch and division chiefs requesting participants. This helped in getting specialists in various areas of groundwater. The TSC Groundwater team was comprised of:

Person Mail Code

Roger Burnett D-8550

Jeff Farrar D-8340

Mark Gemperline D-8340

Judy Hamilton 0-8550

Jim Higgs 0-8560

Doug Hurcomb 0-8340

Lynn Johnson 0-8550

Cliff Pugh 0-8560

Glen Sanders D-8550

Robert Talbot 0-8550

About 30 regional and area office personnel known to have activities in groundwater was requested via E-mail to participate or recommend a colleague from the same office. The Regional and Area Office Groundwater team comprised of:

Person Mail Code

Lisa Bryant MP-434

Larry Cast G-250

Richard Everaert GP-100

John Fields MP-470

Charley Johnson AFD-430

Brad Prudhom APO-2522

Draft

Christopher Reeves MP-221

Shirley Shadix OK-245

Robert Turner MP-221

Joe Zander MP-430

The process created and rating included:

• TSC team would brainstorm/list problems that may need research under 3 of the 15 major groundwater topics.

• A mailing with three major topics and brainstorm results would be E-mailed to the Regional and Area office team. They would be requested to include. more topics they saw fit.

• The TSC team would then rate the importance and difficulty of each of the sub-topics.

• The Regional and Area office team would rate the importance and difficulty of each of the sub-topics.

Importance was rated from 1 to 10. Where 1 is not very important, few people will benefit and benefits are small, and where 1 O is very important, many people will benefit and the benefits are large.

Difficulty was also rated from 1 to 10. Where 1 is easy to obtain results, low cost, short tum-around time, implementation will be easy; to 10: difficult-to-obtain results, high cost, long tum-around time, hard-toimplement results.

Results of the rating are in appendix ? .

Once all the topics were rated, the results were then averaged. For plotting purposes, it was decided that it would be easier to interpret the results if the difficulty was changed to easiness where 1 O was easiest, and 1 most difficult. While choosing which topics to write prospectus on, it was also decided to slightly favor easiness over importance due to the nature of the funding that is available and the results the funding sources would most like to see. Figure 1

n

n

r1

ri

r1

r·,

r.,

·._ J

rl

'I

L.)

1 u

'7

..._J

,7

d

r1

LJ

u

Lj

L�

u

I

LJ

displays the results with the line drawn at a 4 to 5 slope. Most of the items that fell above and to the right of the line had a prospectus written for them. If a team member wanted to write a prospectus on a topic the fell below and left of the line. they were encouraged to do so.

Each topic was also given an overall score. This was done to sort topics in order of relative success of funding which aided in the discussion of how many prospectus should be written. how many topics could be combined. and who should write which prospectus. The overall score was calculated by:

importance + 1.25 X easiness

The prospectus includes details pertaining to research project planning and is in a format that can be rewritten to a proposal in a minimal amount of time. The prospectus format and completed prospectus are in appendix ....

RESULTS

As mentioned before, the Regional and TSC team members rated 115 topics that were grouped into 15 different groundwater areas {Appendix A). Each topic was rated by importance and difficulty. A research prospectus was written for the top rated topics (Appendix C).

Four topics rated close to the top in importance and easiness were closely related. They were grouped together because they all need a team effort and improved communications. They were:

Draft

+ Improve Confidence of Numerical Modeling

- Minimum Data Requirements

- Standardize calibration and verification procedures

- Which codes are best. when are they best?

Draft standards are available from ASTM committee D1821

Compilation of Modeling Experiences -Goals

- Identify which agencies. departments, and groups that are using models.

- Identify modeling systems. pre- and post-processors, and GIS packages that they are using.

- Identify known advantages. disadvantages, and problems.

- Identify agency-specific needs, requirements, and goals for modeling.

•

Contains name of author if

clarification or guidance is

needed

SPECIFIC

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR

STUDIES

i Todd, David Keith. Ground Water Hydrology, Second Editio� John Wiley & Sons, 1980.

'-' J

ri

J

17

r1

r)

L.J

r7

�J

'l w

r, I

LJ

-7 '- J

\_j

�-7

LJ

-7

r--_,

lJ

L;

.. 1

u

J

Draft

Appendix A Rating Results

Groundwater Area ratings

Normalized

Groundwater contaminant transport 10

Agriculture return flows 8.7

Wetlands hydraulics 8.7

Model usage and verification 8.4

Aquifer storage and recovery 7.8

Groundwater overdraft, land subsidence, and recharge 7.5

Well design and rehabilitation 7.4

Dam safety - geochemical seepage 7.4

Monitor/measurement of hydraulic conditions and quality 7.25

Drain filter and envelope design 4.2

Legal ismes 3.9

Acid mine drainage 3.6

Salinity-density flows 3.3

Turbulence in groundwater flows 1.0

Prospectus averaged ratings listed in order of groundwater areas.

Topic #1: Agricultural Return Flows

Average Importance Average Easiness

Interaction between 8.1 3.8

contaminants and wildlife/wetlands (possible cooperation with FWS)

Operational management of 5.3 4.9

return flows (automation)

Best management practices 5.9 3.7

effects on agricultural contaminant runoff

Determination of effects of 5.3 3.4

residual agricultural contaminants in soil on runoff concentration.

n

n

n

\...._J

ri

'/ ,'

n

·� )

n .... j

r- l �J

r-, i

..._J

r-i

n !

'7 � J

r-7 d

�7 LJ

�l J

LJ

L_ _,

Draft

Topic #2: Wetland Hydraulics


Remote/automatic operation 5.1 5

and control of wetland hydraulics (groundwater and surface water).

Wetland/groundwater 7.1 3

interaction.

Impacts of wetlands on 7.5 3.5

groundwater quality.

Model verification (improved 5.7 3.1

groundwater/wetland models).

Chemical changes in water 7.5 3.9

flowing through wetlands related to agricultural and urban quality requirements.

Relationship between water 7.3 4.3

conservation and wetlands generation.

Wetlands maintenance. 6.5 5

Water treatment in wetlands. 6.3 4.3

Quality aspects of wetland 6.2 4.6

return flows of groundwater to surface water.

Impacts of Reclamation water 8 4.3

projects on wetlands -primarily contributions to shallow groundwater

n

n

n

'l J

'l

r1 '- j

rl

,_ J

r7

\....J

'l

L.J

I L,

r7

r-7 I

LJ

�7

u

r

L

" l

u

u

LJ

u

Draft

Topic #3: Ground Water Contaminant Transport


Specific applications of 6.2 4.3

existing ground water contaminant transport models.

Field verification of 7.5 2.2

groundwater contaminant transport model results.

Fractured flow - groundwater 5.5 2.6

contaminant transport model development.

Methods for filling-in missing 4.7 4.7 data for groundwater contaminant transport models.

Effect of preferential flow 7.6 3.9

paths on contaminant transport.

Models for non-point sources 6.2 5.1

of contaminants (e.g. leaky canals).

Investigate stratification of 6.5 3.0

contaminants.

Use of reclaimed water 7.7 4.3

(municipal wastewater) on agriculture.

Aquifer contamination by 4.6 4.7 methanogenesis and remedial measures for methanogenesis.

Faterrransport Study of 4.2 5.1

Atrazine in groundwater recharge - York Groundwater Recharge Project.

Use of a mixing zone for 5.2 4.2

contaminant dispersion - York Project.

Use of recovery wells for 5.9 4.6

contaminant dilution in a recharge reservoir - York Project.

n

n

17

J 17

n c._ J

r·7

r7

·�-'"'

ri

LJ

7 ;__J

LJ

r7

L_J

r l

1.,_)

r .. 1

I

u

LJ

LJ

�l LJ

Draft

Topic #4: Dam Safety & Geochemical Seepage


Research relationships 4.9 5.0

between stiff diagrams and quantify the analysis.

Write a manual to document 4.9 4.1 procedures for stiff diagrams and quantify the analysis.

More definite and useful 5.0 3.0

methods of determining possibilities of solutioning of caliche under dams.

Topic #5: Drain Filter and Envelope Design


Compare crushed gravel 5.5 5.2

envelopes with river run gravel envelopes.

Reconcile well design, 6 5.7 guidelines, and economics.

Break point of natural versus 6 5.1

gravel pack wells (economics and efficiency).

Effects on performance of 5.9 4.8

drain filters while varying Cu and Cc and hydraulic conductivity.

Topic #6: Acid Mine Drainage


Testing of Ozonization on 4.8 3.8

cyanide.

n

f7 i,__ J

J

ri i

r1

r1

.__ j

r7

r,

LJ

7 u

7 J

n I

�7

�, LJ

J �--7

Li

u

,. 7

J

Draft

Topic #7: Numerical Model Usage and Verification


Marketing values and 6.3 3.6

successes of numerical modeling.

Confidence in numerical 8.1 3.6

modeling results.

Standardize calibration and 7 verification procedures of numerical models.

Evaluation of risk factors of 6.3 3.1

numerical models.

GIS interface, develop and 6.6 3.4

improve for numerical models.

Minimum data requirements of 7.7 4.2 numerical models.

More economical/improved 6.3 2.1 methods of data collection of numerical models.

Model usage on watershed 6.5 3

basis.

Compile past numerical model 6.4 5.3

experiences: A- Agency B-Most popular

- J

'!

n

�-J

ri

r 1

1l

r l

,-, ..__J

r,

I

! u

r- l

�J

r l

LJ

,.- l I

L-_j

- 1

LJ

L J

L _J

� 7

7

LJ

Draft

Topic #8: Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR)


Health impacts from ASR. 7.5 3.1

Legal/water quality concerns 7.3 3.8

with ASR.

Withdrawal distances versus 6.8 3.6

water quality with respect to ASR.

Document history of ASR 4.8 5.4

ASR for supplementary 6.8 4

surface storage.

Economic feasibility of ASR 7.2 4

versus surface storage.

Use of evacuated water for 6.7 4.4

recharge.

Use GIS to identify good ASR 6.1 3.6

sites.

Survey of tertiary water for 6.9 5.2

availability in ASR.

Outline favorable geology for 7.2 5.1

ASR.

Topic #9: Well Design and Rehabilitation


Optimum gravel pack 6.2 4.6

thickness.

Gravel pack size versus 6.3 4.8

screen size and base soil.

Use of horizontal wells for 5.2 2.6

river diversions.

Sampling screen deposits 5.4 4.1

from problem wells.

Well efficiency studies. 5.8 3.6

Topic #1 0: Salinity-Density Flows

'l

n

� J

7

J n

r1

r ·1

- J

r1

L •

L..J

r-7 I

:7 J

n

d

,.-- 7

�l tJ

--,

LJ

L--1

� 7

\

Soil water/salt balance interactions.

Trace element/water balance.

Effects on mining water on saline migration.

Prevention measures of salt water intrusion.

Mixing in the ground of fresh and salt water.

Applying Saline Water on crops and return flows.

Leaching Efficiencies of rain water with various conditions {soil type, temperature . . . ).

Effects of salinity on permeability and viscosity for use in numerical models for the:

a. Short term.

b. Long term.

Organic effects on the salinity of water.

Use of conductivity penetrometers to map salt water intrusion in subsurface.

Use of florescence penetrometers to map salt water intrusion.

Draft


6 4.2

6.1 2.7

5.7 2.9

8.1 2.7

7.1 3.8

6.3 4.4

7.5 4.1

��=r��-.i,:.:4 '11[.[· 5.5 4

6.2 3.4

5.7 2.8

6 4.5

6.1 3.9

r1

ri � j

J n

r 1 '--- J

r 1

L .... 1

t l

·- j

,- l

LJ

'l

r7

L.i

L J

� l

L j

r

I....

- l

u

LJ

L

LJ

, _ _j

Draft

Topic #1 1 : Turbulence in Groundwater Flows


Determine what effect 4.8 3.9

turbulence has near wells and drains.

Radial (converging} flows 5.5 4.3

versus parallel flows.

Vibrations from pumping 4 3.7

effects on turbulence outside of well bore.

How and if turbulence effects 5.7 4.1

flow efficiencies.

Screen slot size effects on 5.8 4.8

turbulence.

n

f7

r,

n l

�

'I

r1

, ·,

, -, '..._ _)

il

L.,I

"I

,_j

,._ j

� 1

LJ

� �

LJ

- ,

Lj

- 1

LJ

u

,-i

u

L.J

Draft

Topic #1 2: Groundwater Overdraft & Land Subsidence, and Recharge

Prediction of subsidence due to overdraft by:

a. Geologic features.

b. Amount of overdraft.

c. Time and cyclic effects.

Average Importance

7.5

7.9

6.5

Induced liquefaction to expand I 4.3 aquifers.

Best management practices to I 6.9 balance mining and recharging of groundwater.

Use of grey water (treated I 7 .4 wastewater) for groundwater recharge and quality issues with respect to time and distance.

Groundwater recharge I 8.2 alternatives.

Identify optimum recharge I 7 .8 methods for different field conditions.

Vegetation effects on .I 7 .5 infiltration rates.

Prediction of subsidence using I 7 .2 gee-technical approaches (i.e. consolidation, effective stresses).

Average Easiness

3.1

3.5

3

2

4.

3.6

4.2

3.8

4.1

3.9

n ·-.... .J-

rJ

r1 i.. •• .J

I ,_J

n

.... )

r : � J

r 'I

L J

r 1

..__ J

'1

u

1 L)

I ·� )

r :

L. j

, �

u

,._ ..,

r.._J

L J

- l

LJ

LJ

7 i LJ -,

LJ

Draft

Topic #1 3: Monitor/Measurement of Hydraulic Conditions and Quality

Borehole permeability tests, determine when density sand should and should not be used.

Groundwater Monitoring Programs (needed on some Reclamation projects):

A) Improve statistical methods for determining monitoring sites and post-analysis.

B) Build a comprehensive data base and report findings.

Technical transfer of reliable methods of measuring water levels in observation wells with electronic equipment in long term installations.

Improve or design self-boring permeability testing devices.

Improve or design field test kits for water quality. Field screening of nitrates, arsenic, metals, selenium . . .


6.3 5.4

-� 7 4.3

7 4.8

6.6 5.1

5.4 2.9

7 3.7

:;:.:;::��!� on "'-' ········· · @--��····· ···· �··�--······· -� .•.•• : •••••.• ,: .. � • •.• ,�··--····· :�:•:�

A) How to model.

B) How existing programs and models compare.

Effects of hydraulic pressure on solubility of various elements.

6.4 3.1

6.3 3.8

5.6 4.3

n

n

n

_J

ri

,- !

l __ ;

' l

L j

r 7

'•- J

,.-, 1,_J

n ; ;

i I

,. .�..,,

1,_ J

L.. J

r 1

LJ

u

u

L.J

--.. J

LJ

Topic #14: Legal Issues

Legal ramifications of modeling (i.e. AWDI trial).

A) Model versus model.

B) Pre-modeling versus postconstruction.

Document guidelines for limiting liabilities from decisions based on models.

Legal responsibilities on water rights.

Train lawyers.

Change the legal definition of recharge.

Draft


-=--5.8 2.9

6.2 3.8

5.9 4.3

6.7 4.1

7 1 .8

5.3 3.33

Topic #1 5: Miscellaneous Issues


Sell Reclamation's capabilities 8.9 5.2

to do research.

Improve technical transfer 8.1 6.2

between all offices.

Define possible repercussions 7.1 4.8

of the U.S. Geological Survey downsizing/elimination on Groundwater issues.

How to emphasize technical 7.6 4.6

transfer between agencies.

Soil treatment of waste water. 6.8 3.2

Identify best management 6.7 3.6

practice on aquifer input, output, and storage.

Identify surface and 5.8 3.9

groundwater interaction at waste water treatment facilities.

Bio-remediation of acid mine 5.8 2.9

drainage.

n

n

n

ri .J

'7 - )

r , I

- ,

' l

\.- .J

r· l L j

,--"I

1.. • .J

" J

'7 LJ

,__ J

� t

LJ

� ,

L__j

LJ

LJ

LJ ---,

Draft

Appendix 8 Normalized Results

Topic Average Category Importance

1 Improve technical transfer between all offices. 1 5 8.1 2 Sell Reclamation•s capabilities to do research. 1 5 8.9 3 What can be done with return water. 1 7.5 4 What type of Instrumentation and measurement 1 6.2

devices (Including remote sensing) are needed? 5 Outline Favorable Geology for ASR. 8 7.2 6 Groundwater recharge alternatives. 1 2 8.2 7 Survey of tertiary water for availability In ASR. 8 6.9 8 Impacts of Reclamation water projects on 2 8.0

wetlands - primarily contributions to shallow aroundwater.

9 How to emphasize technical transfer between 1 5 7.6 agencies.

1 0 Reconcile well design, guidelines, and 5 6.0 economics.

1 1 Define possible repercussions of the U.S. 1 5 7. 1 Geological Survey downsizing/elimination on groundwater issues.

1 2 Use of reclaimed water (municipal wastewater) 3 7.7 on agriculture.

1 3 Compile past numerical model experiences: 7 6.4 A- Agency 8- Most popular

14 Groundwater Monitoring Programs (needed 1 3 7.0 on some Reclamation projects). B) Build a comprehensive data base and re1>0rt findings.

16 Technical transfer of reliable methods of 1 3 6.6 measuring water levels In observation wells with electronic equipment in long-term installations.

1 6 Minimum data requirements of numerical 7 7.7 models.

1 7 Interaction between contaminants from agriculture 1 8.1 return flows and wildlife/wetlands {possible cooperation with FWS).

1 8 Wetlands maintenance. 2 6.5 19 Relationship between water conservation and 2 7.3

wetlands generation. 20 Best management practices to balance mining 1 2 6.9

and recharging of groundwater. 21 Leaching efficiencies of rain water with various 1 0 7.5

conditions (soil type, temperature ... ). 22 Vegetation effects on Infiltration rates. 1 2 7.5 23 Confidence In numerical modeling results. 7 8.1 24 Identify optimum recharge methods for different 1 2 7.8

field conditions. 25 Models for non-point sources of contaminants {e.g. 3 6.2

leaky canals). 26 Effect of preferential flow paths on contaminant 3 7.6

transport.

Average weighted easiness points

6.2 1 5.9 5.2 1 5.4 5.4 1 4.3 6.2 1 4.0

5.1 1 3.6 4.2 1 3.5 5.2 1 3.4 4.3 1 3.4

4.6 1 3.4

5.7 1 3.1

4.8 1 3.1

4.3 1 3. 1

5.3 1 3.1

4.8 1 3

5.1 1 3

4.2 1 3

3.8 12.9

5.0 1 2.8 4.3 12.7

4.6 12.7

4.1 1 2.6

4. 1 12.6 3.6 12.6 3.8 12.6

5.1 1 2.5

3.9 1 2.5

n

L '

f7

fl

ri , _J

r1

r 1

n .__J

,- l

'�-J

r7

·-J

'l �

7

LJ

r- 7

-- J

I I.. J

r �

u

u

,- 7

LJ

u

�..,

J

L.J

Draft

27 Break point of natural versus gravel pack wells ( economics and efficiency).

28 Groundwater Monitoring Programs (needed on some Reclamation projects). A) Improve statistical methods for determining monitoring sites and post-analysis.

29 Chemical changes in water flowing through wetlands related to agricultural and urban quality requirements.

30 Gravel pack size versus screen size and base soil.

31 Contaminant levels resulting from increased water conservation measures.

32 Prediction of subsidence due to overdraft by B) amount of overdraft

33 Use of evacuated water for recharge.

34 Economic feasibility of ASR versus surface storage.

35 Prediction of subsidence using gee-technical a00roaches (i.e. consolidation, effective stresses).

36 Legal/water quality concerns with ASR. 37 Compare crushed gravel envelopes with river run

gravel envelopes 38 Standardize calibration and verification procedures

of numerical models. 39 Quality aspects of wetland return flows of

groundwater to surface water. 40 Optimum gravel pack thickness.

41 Use of grey water (treated wastewater) for groundwater recharge and quality issues with respect to time and distance.

42 Impacts of wetlands on groundwater quality.

43 Effects on performance of drain filters while varying Cu and Cc and hydraulic conductivity.

44 Mixing in the ground of fresh and salt water.

45 Legal responsibilities on water rights.

46 Screen slot size effects on turbulence.

4 7 Applying saline water on crops and return flows. 48 ASR for supplementary surface storage.

49 Data collection - how much is needed for verification and model data input requirements? (Compare USBR with TVA which has a lot of data and covers a smaller area than USSR. )

50 Water treatment in wetlands.

51 Specific applications of existing groundwater Contaminant Transport models.

52 Use of conductivity penetrometers to map salt water intrusion in subsurface.

53 Improve or design field test kits for water quality. Field Screening of nitrates, arsenic, metals, selenium . . .

54 Document history of ASR.

55 Prevention measures of salt water intrusion. 56 Management of agriculture return flows

(automation).

5 6 5.1 12.4

1 3 7.0 4.3 1 2.4

2 7.5 3.9 12.4

9 6.3 4.8 1 2.3

1 7.4 3.9 1 2.3

1 2 7.9 3.5 1 2.3

8 6.8 4.4 1 2.2

8 7.2 4 12.2

1 2 7.2 3.9 1 2.1

8 7.3 3.8 1 2.1 5 5.5 5.2 1 2

7 7.0 4 12

2 6.2 4.6 12

9 6.2 4.6 12

12 7.4 3.6 1 1 .9

2 7.5 3.5 1 1 .9 5 5.9 4.8 1 1 .9

1 0 7.1 3.8 1 1 .9

1 4 6.7 4.1 1 1 .8

1 1 5.8 4.8 1 1 .8

1 0 6.3 4.4 1 1 .8

8 6.8 4 1 1 .8

1 6.6 4.1 1 1 .7

2 6.3 4.3 1 1 .7

3 6.2 4.3 1 1 .6

1 0 6.0 4.5 1 1 .6

1 3 7.0 3.7 1 1 .6

8 4.8 5.4 1 1 .6

1 0 8.1 2.7 1 1 .5

1 5.3 4.9 1 1 .4

n L- _.

n

n

J ,1

' l l. J

r -,

..__ J

r 1

\... J

r7

·-- .)

J

7 u

,� -,

LJ

,-- '\

1...J

r-- 7

LJ

u

r7

LJ

LJ

,--i

LJ

-'\

LJ

Draft

57 Health impacts from ASR.

58 Prediction of subsidence due to overdraft by A) aeologic features.

59 Remote/automatic operation and control of wetland hydraulics (aroundwater and surface water).

60 Withdrawal distances versus water quality with respect to ASR.

61 Soll water/salt balance Interactions. 62 Document guidelines for limiting liabilities from

decisions based on models. 63 Identify best management practice on aquifer input.

output, and storage. 64 Research relationships between stiff diagrams and

quantify the analysis. 65 Improve methods used to determine boundary

effects on transmissivity. B} How existing programs and models compare.

66 Effects of hydraulic pressure on solubility of various elements.

67 Use of florescence penetrometers to map salt water intrusion.

68 Legal ramifications of modeling (i.e. AWDI trial) . B) Pre-modeling verses post construction.

69 Radial (converging) flows versus parallel flows.

70 GIS interface, develop, and improve for numerical models.

71 Wetland/groundwater interaction.

72 Marketing values and successes of numerical modeling.

73 How and if turbulence effects flow efficiencies.

7 4 Soil treatment of waste water.

75 Modeling return flow quality and quantity.

76 Identify surface and groundwater interaction at waste water treatment facilities.

77 Use GIS to identify good ASR sites.

78 Soil to water trace element mobility (ties in with what Jeff Farrar did in Nevada).

79 Methods for filling-in missing data for groundwater contaminant transport models.

80 Fate/Transport Study of Atrazine in Groundwater Recharge - York Groundwater Recharge Project.

81 Sampling screen deposits from problem wells.

82 Effects of Salinity on permeability and viscosity for use in numerical models for the A) short term.

83 Best management practices effects on agriculture contaminant runoff.

84 Aquifer contamination by methanogenesis and remedial measures for methanogenesis.

85 Effects of Salinity on permeability and viscosity for use in numerical models for the B) long term.

86 Effect of using subsurface drain system to promote sub-irrigation (potential salt buildup due to sub-irrigation}.

8 7.5 3. 1 1 1 .4

1 2 7.5 3. 1 1 1 .4

2 5.1 5.0 1 1 .4

8 6.8 3.6 1 1 .3

1 0 6 4.2 1 1 .3

1 4 5.9 4 .3 1 1 .3

1 5 6.7 3.6 1 1 .2

4 4.9 5 1 1 .1

1 3 6.3 3.8 1 1 . 1

1 3 5 .6 4.3 1 1

1 0 6.1 3.9 1 1

14 6.2 3.8 1 1

1 1 5.5 4.3 1 0.9

7 6.6 3.4 1 0.9

2 7.1 3 1 0.9

7 6.3 3.6 1 0.8

1 1 5.7 4.1 1 0.8

1 5 6.8 3.2 1 0.8

1 7.2 2.8 1 0.7

1 5 5.8 3.9 1 0.7

8 6.1 3.6 1 0.6

1 6.6 3.2 1 0.6

3 4.7 4.7 10.6

3 4.2 5.1 10.5

9 5.4 4.1 10.5

1 0 5.5 4 10.5

1 5.9 3.7 10.5

3 4.6 4.7 10.5

1 0 6.2 3.4 10.5

1 4.8 4.5 1 0.4

n

n

r7

ri _j

i\

r1 - j

,---, -- J

r 1

�- J

,..., l.. �'

17 u

'--- J

.,.- -.,

L..J

� 7

L J

- �

� J

L J

LJ

J

' I \._)

Draft

87 Use of a mixing zone for contaminant dispersion -York Proiect.

88 Well-efficiency studies.

89 Improve methods used to determine boundary effects on transmissivity. A) How to model.

90 Investigate stratification of contaminants.

91 Model usage on watershed basis.

92 Prediction of subsidence due to overdraft by C) time and cyclic effects.

93 Field verification of groundwater contaminant transport model results.

94 Evaluation of risk factors of numerical models.

95 Write a manual to document procedures for stiff diagrams and Quantify the analysis.

96 Determine what effect turbulence has near wells and drains.

97 Model verification (improved ground water/wetland models).

98 Testing of ozonization on cyanide.

99 Determination of effects of residual agricultural contaminants in soil on runoff concentration.

1 00 Change the legal definition of recharge.

1 01 Concentrations of contaminants based on land use practices (crops), using a. Remote sensing input b. Chemlatry (possibly could Involve a coop aareement with ARS).

1 02 Trace element/water balance.

1 03 Legal ramifications of modeling (i.e. AWDI trial). A) Model verses model.

1 04 Bio-remediation of acid mine drainage.

1 05 Effects on mining water on saline migration.

1 06 Train lawyers.

1 07 Organic effects on the salinity of water.

1 08 Improve or design self boring permeability testing devices.

1 09 More economical/improved methods of data collection of numerical models.

1 1 O Choose crops to immobilize trace elements.

1 1 1 Fractured flow ground water contaminant transport model development.

1 12 More definite and useful methods of determining possibilities of solutioning of caliche under dams.

1 1 3 Vibrations from pumping effects on turbulence outside of well bore.

1 1 4 Use of horizontal wells for river diversions.

1 1 5 Induced l iquefaction to expand aquifers.

3 5.2 4.2 1 0.4

9 5.8 3.6 1 0.3

1 3 6.4 3.1 1 0.3

3 6.5 3.0 1 0.3

7 6.5 3.0 1 0.3

1 2 6.5 3.0 1 0.3

3 7.5 2.2 1 0.2

7 6.3 3.1 1 0.2

4 4.9 4.1 10

1 1 4.8 3.9 9.7

2 5.7 3 .1 9.6

6 4.8 3.8 9.6

1 5.3 3.4 9.6

14 5.3 3.3 9.5

1 6.7 2.2 9.5

1 0 6.1 2.7 9.4

1 4 5.8 2.9 9.4

1 5 5.8 2.9 9.4

1 0 5.7 2.9 9.3

1 4 7 1 .8 9.3

1 0 5.7 2.8 9.2

1 3 5.4 2.9 9

7 6.3 2.1 8.9

1 5.4 2.7 8.8

3 5.5 2.6 8.8

4 5 3 8.8

1 1 4 3.7 8.6

9 5.2 2.6 8.5

1 2 4.3 2 6.8

I .

.

II ii 181

fl IJ

I .

.

� 111

frl 13

� lj

Ml IJ

11 11

I .

D

I

I

II .

II .

C

I

Draft

Appendix C Submitted Prospectus

Reclamation Research and Innovative Technology Transfer Approach into the Private and Public Sector

· I

fl . __ ..,

n

fl �- -'

_J

n

r·1 l j

.,.... 1

.__ J

r 1

\.. . .J

r- "I !

�

ri

7 L.J

r- , I

L J

,---"'

Lj

r ,

u

LJ

LJ

u

J

L Title

Draft

1 Improve technical transfer between all offices.

2 Selling Reclamation's capabilities to do research.

9 How to emphasize technical transfer between agencies.

15 Technical transfer of reliable methods of measuring water levels in observation wells with electronic equipment in long term installations

Research Prospectus

Ground-Water Research Team

Leo

Leo

Leo

Leo

The following research prospectuses should be combined since they are all directly related:

#96 Technical transfer of reliable methods of measuring water levels in observation wells with electronic equipment in long-term installations.

#108 Selling Reclamation's capabilities to do research.

#109

#111

Improve technical transfer between all offices.

How to emphasize technical transfer between agencies.

Recommended New Title:

IL

Reclamation Research and Innovative Technology Transfer Approach into the Private and Public Sector

Problem Description

With limited public resources now available, Reclamation needs to be especially aware of "getting more done with less." This means identifying research needs of customers, determining the future of Reclamation's technology needs for water resource management, and establishing a replicable procedure in technology transfer within the public and private sectors. Recent examples of Reclamation enhanced technology for water resource management now needing transfer are: that in Prospectus #96; low cost adaptive canal automation for conserving water and maximizing delivery system flexibility (USU)l 1 ; various recent water resource planning and hydraulic models (USU)2 ; new low cost geosysnthetics canal lining methods; wetland treatment of sewage effluent; improved ground-water recharge methodologies; etc. There exists within Reclamation a general lack of known formal procedures for capturing employees innovative research ideas and successfully promoting technology transfer to others.

1 Utah State University, Cooperative Agreement No . 142 5-2-FC-81-18990 , ( Final Report October 1 9 9 4 )

2 Contract No . 1425-2-CS-81-17000

n

'7

i __ J

ri ... ,)

r1 I

L ,·

r ,

� .,J

,_ . . l

,._ ;

.--, '-_,!

J

LJ

r ,

I

u

,.. 1

L J

,- t

LJ

... J

- 1

u

u

�

LJ

Draft

m. Recommended Action

This Combined Prospectus should address Reclamation's professional competency for innovative thinking with given goals:

A. Overall Goals:

1. Identify the process by which Reclamation employees can take advantage of creative water resource management research opportunities, including the encouragement of risk taking.

2. Document procedure for identifying customer(s) and their need(s) on each research project including customer input during the research.

3. Management would be responsible for establishing accountability and tracking of research efforts. Process would include inputs by customer, researchers' motivation in meeting schedules and budgets, and termination procedures on research when established goals are not met.

4. Reclamation management would develop, identify, and initiate formal plan for technology transfer as an integral element of their interagency daily activities, with other public agencies, and within private sector. This would be in accordance with Reclamation's Mission, "To manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally- and economicallysound manner in the interest of the American public."

B. Method of Approach

1. Survey Reclamation employees on their ability to provide input on water resource research and contributions they may provide to identifiable customers with research opportunities, (normally within their area of expertise).

2. Each Prospectus for research must identify customer as a partner, sharing costs and commitment in the project.

3. Each Prospectus should include set objectives, goals with intermediate milestones for accomplishment with budgets set in accordance.

4. Survey of Reclamation management on present perceptions on how research priorities are established, how are their employees motivated and involved, how can it be improved, who are their perceived research customers, and means by which technology transfer occurs and how it can be improved.

5. Survey identified Reclamation customers as to how they perceive research and improvements in possible partnership and technology transfer.

6. Option is to use Prospectus #96 and/or other technology needing transference to identified customers as a prototype in establishing Reclamation procedures.

7. Formalize and distribute to all Reclamation employees.

C. Program Components or Subdivisions

Milestone #1- Months 0-3, survey Reclamation's employees and managers.

n

n

I .___.;

r1 ·- )

r 1 '- J

r '/

·- J

' 1 I.. J

,, I...,�

� �

n ..._J

r- 1

� )

u

LJ

LJ

LJ

LJ

Optional

Milestone #2-

Milestone #3-

Milestone #4-

Milestone #5-

Milestone #6-

Draft

Months 3-6, survey identified Reclamation research customers and identify research needs, and possible partnership and technology transfer opportunities.

Months 6-9, provide draft of proposed procedures for Reclamation employees innovative input to research efforts, managers commitment to the process, customer involvement, and procedure of technology transfer.

Months 9-12, summarize comments and decide whether to provide pilot program of chosen research technology for transfer.

Months 12-18, promote transfer of selected research technology.

Months 18-24, formalize technology transfer procedures and issues.

IV. Expected Benefits

To fully utilize Reclamation's limited research resources in providing the public and private sector with needed results.

V. Time Schedule, Funds, Qualification for Investigators

Time: 1 ½- to 2-year program within Milestones of item J.C.

Funds: $150,000 - $200,000

Qualifications:

• • •

Team Leader, Public Involvement and Social Analysis Assistant, Public involvement and Social Analysis Input of others within Research and Technical Groups

VL Deliverable

Milestone #1-

Milestone #2-

End month 3, survey summary of Reclamation's employees and managers input.

End month 6, survey summary of identified Reclamation research customers and identify research needs, and possible partnership and technology transfer opportunities.

Milestone #3- End month 9, provide draft of proposed procedures for Reclamation employees innovative input to research efforts, managers commitment to the process, customer involvement, and proposed procedure of technology transfer.

Milestone #4-

Optional

End month 12, summarized comments of chosen research technology for transfer.

'7

I I

_ .J

7

r 1

r )

� J

r 1

L J

,. l

L �

r-1

,., LJ

L )

L j

LJ

.J

- l

L j

u

u

LJ

Milestone #5-

Milestone #6-

VIL References

Draft

End month 18, provide results report of pilot program of selected research technology transfer.

End month 18 or 24, provide formalized technology transfer procedures and issues.

Ayers, Robert. Technological Forecasting and Long Range Planning. (McGraw-Hill, New York. 1969)

Armstrong, J. Scott. Long-Range Forecading: From Crystall Ball to Computers. (Wiley &Sons. New York, 1978)

Bell, DanieL The Coming of Post-Industrial Society: A Venture in Social Forecasting. (Basic Books. New York. 1973)

Cetron, Marvin. Encounters with the Future: A Forecast of Life into the 21st Century. (McGraw-Hill. New York. 1982)

Henderson, Hazel. Creating Alternative Futures: The End of Economics. (Berkeley Windhover. New York. 1978)

Meadows, Donella H. and Dennis L, et.al. Limits to Growth. (Potomac Associates. Washington, D.C. 1972)

Meadows, Donella, et. al. Groping in the Dark: The First Decade of Global Modeling. (John Wiley & Sons. New York. 1982)

Naisbitt, John. Megatrends: New Directions Transforming Our Lives

Toffler, Alvin. The Third Wave. (Bantam Books. New York. 1980)

vm.Prepared by: Leo A. Busch

IX. Date of Preparation: March 13, 1995

n

n

ri

I _,J

'l .. J

r i

.r )

; 7

r .,

,.___ .J

,,. 1'

7 �

�., LJ

, .., LJ

- l

- l

I LJ

' 1

� J

L ;

� "·

� !

Draft

41What type of Instrumentation and measurement devices (Including remote sensing) are needed. IChff

n

ri, , I

n '- .i

I __ j

n

-- )

r- 1

L J

' )

.__.,

r 7

� J

� L_j

rl

' ' Lj

r-7

u

,.- 1

LJ

� , u

- l

�

r 1

LJ

L""

; l

tJ

-7 !

Draft

&IOutllne Favorable Geology for ASR !Doug Hurcomb Draft 1 April 18, 1995 GEOL-ASRPRO

Research Prospectus

Groundwater Research Team

1 . Tide: Favorable Geologic Settings for Aquifer Storage and Recovery Applications

2. Problem Description: Only aquifers with beneficial hydraulic characteristics will favor ASR applications. These aquifers are generally associated with unique geologic occurrences. We propose to identify and screen favorable geologic settings conducive to potential application of ASR technology.

Recommended Action:

A. Overall Goals

1 . Identify favorable geologic settings where ASR is technically feasible.

2. Perform a search of geologic and hydrologic literature including state geologic and water resource maps.

B.

3. Produce a regional map of the U.S. highlighting areas where ASR is technically feasible and operational.

Method of Approach:

1. Develop a set of criteria for ASR applicability including the hydraulic characteristics of alluvial aquifers, sedimentary aquifers, glacial aquifers, igneous aquifers, and metamorphic aquifers.

2. Target geologic settings conducive to ASR using the criteria from B. l as a screening process.

3 . Map out geologic settings on a GIS compatible base map of the U.S.

C. Program Components or Subdivisions:

1 . Define geologic and hydrogeologic characteristics favorable to ASR development. Screen unfavorable geologic settings.

2. Locate maps showing the major geologic and hydrogeologic provinces in the U. S. and map out areas conducive to ASR.

3. Justify the characteristics of each favorable geologic setting and rank most desirable regions for ASR applications.

4. Expected Benefits: Identifies regions where ASR could become an alternative to surface water storage.

n

ri � -'

J n

r7

� j

r :

r 7

,-, .___)

7 Li

1-J

r7

L J

:-- 1

1--J

r-7

LJ

u

�- 7

L :

u

'7 I I

'7

5.

6.

Draft

Time Schedule, Funds, Qualification for Investigators:

Time: 60 SD

Funds: $30,000 (level 2 billing rate); $40,000 (level 3 billing rate)

Qualifications: Geologist, Hydrogeologist, and / or Physical Scientist (Remote Sensing)

Deliverables:

1. List of geologic setting criteria.

2. Sumnwy of desirable geologic and hydraulic characteristics

3 . Maps highlighting areas of potential technical applications of ASR technology and actual operational projects.

7.

8.

References:

CH2M Hill, Northern Monterey County ASR Project, Phase 1 Feasibility Study, January 1993� pages 4-1 to 4-9, Hydro geology

Prepared by and Date: D. Hurcomb 4/18/95

n

L ,

ri

n

ri , _ _j

r 1

� j

r 1

�. J

r l L J

'l

L.)

'1

:7

l,._)

r -i

.._ j

-1

1-.J

I L .l

r-·1

LJ

LJ

' 1

Draft

sforoundwater recharge alternatives Jeob Talbot

71Survey of tertiary water for availability In ASR I Doug Hurcomb Draft 1 April 26, 1995 TW-ASRPRO

Research Prospectus Groundwater Research Team

1. Title: Survey of tertiary treated water for availability in Aquifer Storage and Recovery

2. Problem Description - ASR is an available and proven water supply technology for public use. Tertiary treated wastewater is a potential source of water for storage and eventual recovery if it is an acceptable alternative to the public. The available supplies of tertiary treated water is crucial to favorable economics for use with ASR technology. We propose to analyze the economics and technical feasibility of using tertiary treated water for ASR.

A. Overall Goals:

1. Determine availability of tertiary treated water for ASR applications. Find existing models to emulate successes.

2. Determine economics of using tertiary treated water; is it feasible to use treated water for ASR?

3 . Consider the effects of injection of tertiary treated water on aquifer water quality and aquifer hydraulics; will aquifer water quality be degraded.

4. Effects of injection of tertiary treated water on public health. Can we produce high quality reclaimed water with minimal health hazards?

B. Method of Approach:

1. Identify available resources including government agencies and consulting firms with tertiary treatment experience. Learn of existing projects that use tertiary treated water and study successes and failures of each.

2. Determine typical costs of tertiary treated water and ASR facilities from existing project track records.

3. Perform conceptual modeling of ASR of tertiary treated water in typical ASR wells to determine the effects of injection and recovery on water quality. Again, existing project experiences will be useful.

4. Perform conceptual modeling of ASR of tertiary treated water in typical ASR wells to determine the effects of injection and recovery on aquifer hydraulics.

n

n

J 17

� j

r 1

r ,

� �

r 1

L J

,- .,

L.._j

'7

u

'7

LJ

u

- 7

1...J

L . J

- 7

LJ

- l

L ]

L J

,--,

Draft

C. Program Components or Subdivisions:

1 . Perform literature searches.

2. Study project case histories.

3. Consult industry and public agency experts.

4. Compile details and report.

4. Expected Benefits: Optimize use of reclaimed water and provide a new water source to local water users. Stabilize local agricultural economies. Reduce wastewater discharges to rivers and the sea.

5. Time Schedule, Funds, Qualification for Investigators:

6.

Time: 60 SD


Qualifications: Civil Engineer and/or Hydrologist

Deliverables:

1. Provide accounts of industry and public agency experience with bibliography.

2. Provide a summary of the economics based on case histories.

3. Provide modeling results for a typical ASR operation using tertiary treated wastewater.

4. Provide descriptions of technical problems likely to be encountered.

7. References:

8.

Bouwer, H., Pyne, R D., Goodrich, J. A., Recharging Groundwater, Civil Engineering, June 1990

CH2M Hill, Northern Monterey County ASR Project, Phase 1 Feasibility Study, January 1993, pages 2-2 to 2-6, Reclaimed wastewater injection and ASR projects; pages 4-1 to 4-9, Hydrogeology; pages 5-1 to 5-8, Water Quality

Crook, J., Ammerman, D.K., Okun, D.A., Matthews, RL., Guidelines for Water Reuse, Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc., originally published for the EPA, Cambridge MA, 1992

Pyne, D. R, Aquifer Storage Recoveiy: A new water supply alternative, Artifical Recharge of Ground Water Symposium/IR. Div/ASCE, Anaheim, CA, August 1988

Prepared by and Date:

D. Hurcomb 4/26/95

n � j

n

ri

ri j

ri '· j

r7

L J

r 1

r ,

r ,

L- J

7 �

ri L1

LJ

r- -,

LJ

u

d

i l

L .J

L:

�-,

Draft

8 Impacts of Reclamation water projects on Cliff wetlands - primarily contributions to shallow 1groundwater

'l

n

17

- J

�..J

r,

_ )

• 1

- j

r i

I.. J

r 7

� J

,-- , u

r-1 �

7 L.J

,,.. .,

L J

� , l_J

,-- 7

L.J

r 7

LJ

- i

°L_ j

L J

Draft

1 O Reconcile well design, guidelines, and economics

5 6.0 5.7 13.1

1 .

2 .

3 .

Titl.e :

D RA F T

Research Prospectus


Reconcile well design, guidelines , and economics

Problem Description : Present well design is based primarily on experience and custom, and on asswnptions of a homogeneous , isotropic aquifer . However, many Reclamatin wells are i n areas with considerable vertical variation in lithology, e . g . interlayered gravel , sand, silt and clay. Design of screen and filter pack is difficult in such situations , and involves a compromise which may not actually be the most suitable choice of screen slot opening and filter pack gradation . Also, chemical quality of the water may cause corrosion or incrustation of well screens which could affect the choice of slot size, but there has been little work on estimating long-term effect of the water chemistry on well design . The economics of increased expenditure for better screen and filter material to provide higher yields or prolong original yield and/or reduce maintenance costs has not been explored in detail .

Reconmended Action:

A. OVerall Goals :

1 . Determine relationship between well screen slot-size and filter material size and well production from different materials in layered soils or rock .

2 . Determine long-term effects of various common chemical categories of water on corrosion and incrustation on range of screen slot sizes .

3 . Determine long-term installation and maintenance costs and effects on long-term production for varying screen and filter pack designs .

B . Method of Approach :

c .

1 . Develop model to test various combinations o f screen slot size, filter pack size, and aquifer materials .

2 . Develop field sites to check results of laboratory tests

3 . Analyze results to determine i f general guidelines can be developed, or if site specific conditiosn govern

Program Ccmponents or Subdivisions :

'7

ri

r1

ri _j

�. )

r 1

r 1

,. l

,_ J

r· �

1-.. )

'7

u

'7

LJ

r .,,

Lj

r l

LJ

� "I

u

Lj

LJ

L. )

LJ

w

4 .

s .

Draft

1 . Laboratory studies

2 . Field studies

3 . Evaluation and analysis

Expected Benefib : Cost savings in well construction and operation, more efficient well operation

Time Schedule , Funds , Qaal.ification for Investigators :

Time : 5 years part time ( investigations will need to be spread out over time to determine long-term effects )

Flmds : 1 . Laboratory costs -???

2 . Field costs dependent upon availability of well field construction site which could be used for testing purposes , eliminating or considerably reducing drilling and construction costs for test program 3 . Evaluation and analysis $25 , 000?

Qual.ifications : Experience in hydraulics laboratory, field experience in well construction

6 . Deliverables :

7 .

8 .

1 . Annual reports summarizing activities and preliminary results of tests .

2 . Final report summarizing activities and results of tests and giving recommendations for well design and construction under difference conditions

3 .

References : 1 . U . S . Bureau of Reclamation, 1 985 . Ground Water Manual

2 . Driscoll t. Ground WAter and Wells

Prepared by: Judy Hamilton, D-8550

9 . Date of Preparation :

I � J

ri - )

r1 \... �

J

� � )

r 1

'- ;

r- 7

\.. )

r 1

.._ j

f'l

,___J

r 7

7 LJ

r 7

L J

,...- 7

u

r- �

LJ

- 1

c- l

LJ

u

---.

Draft

1 1 Define possible repercussions of the U.S. 15 7.1 4.8 1 3.1

1 .

2 .

3

Geological Survey down sizing/elimination on Ground Water Issues.

Beaearcb Prospectus

Groundwater Besearcb Team

Tit1e : Define possible repercussions of the U . S . Geological Survey downsizing/elimination on Ground Water Issues .

Problem Description : Reduction or elimination of USGS projects will result in loss of basic data which is used in many Reclamation projects

A.

B .

c.

OVerall Goals :

1 . Determine specific Reclamation considerable use of USGS basic data .

groups which make

2 . Determine geographical areas where Reclamation has projects and where USGS data acquisition is critical or important to project planning and/or operation .

3 . Estimate economic effects to Reclamation of loss of USGS data .

Method of Approach :

1 . Determine what data or information USGS is presently acquiring or providing

2 . Determine what questions need to be asked to define present use of USGS information by Reclamation and/or water user groups

3 . Determine value of data and information provided by USGS

Program Ccmponents or Subdivisions :

1 . Develop survey form and distribute to appropriate Reclamation groups in TSC, Regions , and area offices .

2 . Compile data and meet with economists to determine methods of determining costs and economic losses .

3 . Prepare report and maps showing geographical a reas and projects where USGS data is needed, prepare maps and tables

n

, __ j

r7

� J

ri J

fl ·- j

r-1

' 1

r· 1

,._ )

,- ;

,_ J

r-1

LJ

'7

�

- l

L J

r 1

L J

� i

LJ

L j

.-- ""' I

u

l J

LJ

�

4 .

Draft

showing 1 ) costs to Reclamation to have consultants or Reclamation personnel provide necessary information and 2 ) economic losses i f this information cannot be provided by sources other than USGS .

Bxpected Benefits : Better understanding of value of USGS operations and costs which will result to Reclamation if their data no longer available .

5 . Time Schedule , l'wlds , Qual.ification for Investigators :

6 .

7 .

8 .

9 .

Time : 6 months to 1 year

Func:ls : $40 , 000 -$50 , 000

Qualifications : Basic understanding of general uses of USGS data, ability to compose useful questionnaire, general understanding of basic economic determinations , ability to abstract necessary information from questionnaire replies .

Deliverables :

1 . Questionnaire

2 . Report , including appropriate maps and tables ( see 3 . C . 3 . above )

3 .

References :

Prepared by: Judy Hamilton, D-8550

Date of Preparation : March 24 , 1995

n

r7

r1

L. .J

ri �

'l .__J

r1 '- J

r ,

' :

,---,

L j

J

1 L.l

,.- ')

L.J

' ,

L J

Lj

J

� ,

u

L J

r'-l

LJ

Draft

1 1 Define possible repercussions of the U.S. 15 7.1 4.8 13.1

1 .

2 .

Geological Survey down sizing/elimination on Ground Water Issues .

Beaearch Prospectus

Groundwater Beaearch 'l'eam

Tiile : Define possible repercussions of the U . S . Geological Survey downsizing/elimination on Ground Water Issues .

Problem Description : Reduction or elimination of USGS projects will result in loss of basic data which is used in many Reclamation projects

3 . Beecmcnerded Action:

A.

B.

c.

Overall Goals :

1 . Determine specific Reclamation considerable use of USGS basic data .

groups which make

2 . Determine geographical areas where Reclamation has projects and where USGS data acquisition is critical or important to project planning and/or operation .

3 . Estimate economic effects to Reclamation of loss of USGS data .

Method of Approach:

1 . Determine what data or information USGS is presently acquiring or providing

2 . Determine what questions need to be asked to define present use of USGS information by Reclamation and/or water user groups

3 . Determine value of data and information provided by USGS

Program Conponents or Subdivisions :

1 . Develop survey form and distribute to appropriate Reclamation groups in TSC, Regions , and area offices .

2 . Compile data and meet with economists to determine methods of determining costs and economic losses .

n I

'- j

ri

ri '-- j

1 �J

'1 \..- J

r1 L. )

r 1

'--- J

r l

.._ _;

r ,

LJ

ri J

L j

r 1 I

LJ

� 1 u

- , Lj

- , I

LJ

LJ

·----i

LJ

4 .

5 .

Draft

3 . Prepare report and maps showing geographical areas and projects where USGS data is needed, prepare maps and tables showing 1 ) costs to Reclamation to have consultants or Reclamation personnel provide necessary information and 2 ) economic losses i f this information cannot be provided by sources other than USGS .

Expected. Benefits : Better understanding of value of USGS operations and costs which will result to Reclamation if their data no longer available .

'l'ime Sahedule , Funds , Qwu.ific:ation for Investigators :

'l'ime: 6 months to l year

Funds : $ 4 0 , 000 -$50 , 000

Quµifications : Basic understanding of general uses of USGS data, ability to compose useful questionnaire, general understanding of basic economic determinations , ability to abstract necessary information from questionnaire replies .

6 . Deliverables :

7 .

8 .

9 .

1 . Questionnaire

2 . Report, including appropriate maps and tables ( see 3 . C . 3 . above )

3 .

References :

Prepared by: Judy Hamilton, D-8 550

Date of Preparation: March 24 , 1 995

n

r 1 _ J

'7 �

1....-J

' l

r- 1

...__ _)

r 7

c.. .J

,- , L _J

7 L.J

J -- 1

L.J

- , LJ

r l

LJ

� 1

LJ

- 7 LJ

LJ

,7

7

u

Draft

1 21Uae of reclaimed water (municipal wastewater) IDoug on aariculture.

April 28, 199S MW-AG.PRO

Research Prospectus


1 . Title: Use of municipal wastewater on agriculture

2. Problem Description: Recycled wastewater is usable for irrigation of crops and agricultural water after suitable treatment In areas where there is competition for water resources, treated wastewater can be a valuable water resource. Fresh, potable water can be provided to municipal users and the wastewater provided to agricultural users if this is acceptable to both users.

A. Overall Goals

1. Detennine treatment technology factors to be considered when using wastewater in agriculture.

2. Detennine water quality standard factors to be considered when using wastewater in agriculture.

3. Identify public health regulatoiy problems associated with use of wastewater in agriculture.

4. Consider seasonal storage factors to be considered when using wastewater in agriculture.

5. Consider water reuse facilities.

6. Consider environmental impacts.

B. Method of Approach:

1. Survey the treatment technologies available including soil. treatment and soil aquifer treatment. Find existing models to emulate successes.

C.

2. Survey water quality standards required for various crop types.

3. Survey public health regulatoiy literature.

4. Identify pilot studies for various treatment and storage applications.

S. Estimate agricultural irrigation demands.

Program Components or Subdivisions:

1. Perform literature searches.

2. Study project case histories.

fl '- j

n

n ·- J

.... J

n !

1..- J

n

L- j

r7

LJ

r 1 LJ

n J

,--, l j

r 7 I

' 7

u

�

,.. 1 LJ

LJ

7

LJ

J

Draft

3. Consult industJy and public agency experts.

4. Compile details and report

4. Expected Benefits: Multiple use of resources; fresh, potable water can be used initially by municipalities and the wastewater can be used for agricultural applications.

s.

6.

7.

8.

Time Sche<Jule, Funds, Qualification for Investigators:

Time: 30 SD


Qualifications: Civil or Chemical Engineer

Deliverables:

1. Provide accounts of indusuy and public agency experience with bibliography.

2. Provide a summary of the public health regulatory problems based on case histories.

3. Provide descriptions of technical problems likely to be encountered.

4. Propose pilot studies for further research.

References:

Bouwer, H., Agricultural and Municipal Use of Wastewater, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Setvice, U. S. Water Conseivation Laboratory, 433 1 E Broadway, Phoenix AZ 85040

Crook, J., Ammerman, D.K. , Okun, D.A., Matthews, R.L., Guidelines for Water Reuse, Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. , originally published for the EPA, Cambridge MA, 1992

Prepared by and Date:

D. Hurcomb, April 28, 1995

n

']

�J

�-J

r 1

�- J

r- 1

r· �

r- 1

1_J

7 .J

7 _j

-- 1

LJ

�- .,

LJ

- 7

1...J

LJ

-· ')

u

L J

�l LJ

r-- !

LJ

Draft

1 31Complle Paat Model Experiences A- Agency B- IBob Most Popular

1 .

2 .

Research Prospectus

Groundwater Research �eam

�itle : Compile Past Model Experiences : A - Agency Popular {topic #7 , order #51 )

B - Most

Probl- Description: Identify model usage by agency and by model type { flow models, transport models, test analysis models , storage models, GIS applications, etc ) .

3 . Recommended Action:

A.

B .

overall Goals :

1 . Identify which agencies, and departments/groups/teams/ etc within the agency, are using groundwater models or modeling systems .

2 . Identify which models or modeling systems, including preand post-processors and GIS packages , are being used {propietary or public domain) .

3 . Identify amount of use of each model {# of projects, size of projects, etc) .

4 . Identify known advantages, disadvantages , and problems from the modeler ' s viewpoint of each model .

5 . Identify agency specific needs, requirements , and goals for modeling.

Method of Approach:

1 . Assemble a small core team of four or five modelers from three or more agencies in the local area; design a questionaire to solicit answers to specific questions . Identify a set of selected modelers to test and critique the guestionaire . Identify a full distribution mailing list .

2 . Distribute the questionaire to the selected modelers to test and critique the questionaire .

3 . Collate and evaluate responses from selected modelers and refine auestionaire based on critique comments .

4 . Send out revised guestionaire to full distribution (request each recipient to complete and return; also request each

n

r7

n '-- .J

'l ,J

r7

� -

r l

' l

C- �

r 1

'--- _J

ri u

ri

LJ

,.. 1

L-- J

r- 7

L J

r- 7

LJ

LJ

-7

LJ

L �

c- 7

J

7 LJ

, .

s .

6 .

7 . a .

Draft

recipient to distribute copies of questionaire to peers and colleagues not on the original distribution list)

5 . collate and evaluate responses from full distribution mailing.

6 . Publish results, c. Program Components or Subdivisions :

1 . No specific subdivision is necessary, although each of the six items under 3 . B could be identified as subtasks 1 through §

Expected Benefits : A multi-agency report available to all agencies and the public, The report would provide users with a reference source for identifying which agencies are using which models and modeling systems , what the specific needs , requirements , and goals are for each agency in terms of groundwater modeling, the types of projects within each agency that the models are being used for, the amount of usage of each type of model or modeling system (the popularity) . and known advantages , disadvantages , and problems with each type of model or modeling system from the user ' s perspective .

Time Schedule, Funds , Qualification for Investigators :

Time: Estimated 12 months required for completion : item 3 . B . 1 at 3 months, 3 . 8 . 2 at 1 month. 3 . 8 . 3 at 1 month, 3 . B . 4 at 3 months , 3 . B . 5 at 2 months, and 3 . 8 . 6 at 1 month .

Funds : Estimated at 2 FTE ( four multi-agency core team members at • 5 FTE each) ; additional funds required for mailing of questionaire, and publication of the report C including editing, review, etc) .

Qualifications : No specific qualifications required of core team members . however experience with modeling and modeling systems as well as a wide range of contacts within other agencies would be beneficial .

Deliverables :

1 . A multi-agency report identifying the types of groundwater models and modeling systems currently being used, which agency is using them, what the specific needs, requirements, and goals are for each agency in terms of groundwater modeling, the types of projects that the models are being used for, the amount of usage of each type of model or modeling system (the popularity) , and known advantages, disadvantages, and problems with each type of model or modeling system from the user ' s perspective.

References : NIA Prepared by: w. Robert Talbot , D8550 1 ( 303 )236-8066x233

� tu

[]

�

� �

I

�

[]

fl IU

fl lbJ

Ii �

[pl @I

fl �

fl l&d

fl �

�

�

[]

I "'

[TI ll

Draft

9 . Date of Preparation: March 10, 1995

ri c._ J

n

C. j

'7 L ;

1 _J

ri � J

r 1

.__ J

r 7

._ _l

r 1

c. I

r 7

- ..,

'7 L.J

'l �

L j

' 7

L J

, 7

L j

u

L J

I

u -,

!

LJ

Draft

141B) Build a comprehensive data base and report IBob flndlnas.

1 .

2 .

Reaearch Proapectus Groundwater Research Team

Title: Groundwater Monitoring Programs (needed on some Reclamation projects) . B) Build a comprehensive data base and report findings (topic #13 1 order #95 )

Problem Description: Identify Reclamation projects which have used groundwater monitoring programs as part of the project; provide a synopsis of why the program was needed or required, what type of program was used, what problems were encountered and how they were overcome, usefulness or success of the program, recommendations for further use or modifications •

3 . Recommended Actions

A . overall Goals :

B .

1 . Identify which Reclamation projects incorporated a groundwater monitoring program as part of the project . 2 . Summarize the goals or objectives of the groundwater monitoring program, by project .

3 . Summarize the type of monitoring program used by each project and how that type of monitoring program met the stated goals or objectives for the project .

4 . Summarize ·the effectiveness of each monitoring program, by project; including any problems encountered and what was done to overcome the problems, how effective was the program at meeting the goals or objectives for the project , results of the program, etc .

5 . Summarize any lessons learned or recommendations for future applications of specific monitoring systems .

Method of Approachs

1 . conduct a literature search of Reclamation reports, publications, etc . to identify published information regarding projects that utilized or incorporated groundwater monitoring programs .

2 . Distribute a Reclamation-wide questionnaire soliciting input from existina Reclamation employees for information about former or existing projects where groundwater monitoring was or is an issue .

3 . Attempt to contact former Reclamation employees, through newsletters, Retired Employee associations, etc . . to solicit

n

n

r1

7 _j

n .._.J

r 1

- ,J

r 1

L ..

r7

L J

r7

I L. .J

ri I

u

' l

L j

Ll

' l

tJ

u

- 7

Lj

L J

I

LJ

·7 Ll

4 .

c.

Draft

information regarding projects that incorporated groundwater monitoring programs .

4 . Summarize and provide a synopsis of each project { including results and inputs from conversations with existing and former employees , as well as from the publications) identifying: a ) the goals or objectives of the project specific monitoring program, b) the type of monitoring program that was used, c) any problems encountered during installation or operation of the monitoring program, and what actions were taken to overcome the problems, d) the effectiveness of the monitoring program in meeting the goals or objectives of the project, e) any lessons learned from the project, and f ) any recommendations for future applications of the specific type of monitoring program that was used .

s . Publish a compilation of the summaries and synopses C from step #4) of the projects .

Program Components or Subdivisions :

1 . There are no components or subdivisions necessary for this prospectus, although each step listed under 3 . B could be identified as a separate task.

Expected Benefits : A report or Reclamation publication that summarizes all , or at the very least , the major Reclamation projects that had or have a groundwater monitoring program. This report will summarize the goals or objectives of each program, as well as the type of monitoring program used, problems encountered and corrective action taken, an evaluation of the overall effectiveness of the monitoring program along with the lessons learned and recommendations provided by the project staff . References to project specific literature will be provided for persons seeking further information or greater detail about specific projects . The major benefit from this work will be a report that brings together in one publication a summary of the types of monitoring programs that have been used on Reclamation projects , problems that could be expected, some solutions to the problems that have been tried and found to work, how effective the different types of program were, and suggestions or recommendations for future applications of specific types of monitoring programs .

5 . Time Schedule, Funds , Qualification for Investigators :

Time: Scheduling could be broken down into two phases : Phase 1 would be the literature search phase, and Phase 2 would be the personnel interview phase . Initially, Phase 1 could be completed in 12 months . Subsequent updates to Phase 1 could be completed every five years or so, in about 1 to 2 months depending on the length of time between updates and the number of projects that have been completed or are underway since the initial completion of Phase 1 , or since the latest update to Phase 1 . Phase 2 could take longer, or could be completed

n

n

r1

L j

n _ J

n

'- _J

r ,

r i

1 -,

r -,

\...._ j

r7

J

u

'7

Lj

' l

Lj

;- 7

L j

C 7

LJ ,

Lj

L .J

LJ -: , I LJ

6 .

7 . a . 9 .

Draft

relatively quickly, depending upon the response to the questionnaires and how much response there is from former and retired Reclamation employees . Funds : Initial completion of Phase 1 is estimated at . 5 to . 75 FTE, Subsequent updates to Phase 1 are estimated at . 1 to . 2 FTE every fifth year, Initially. estimates of completion of Phase 2 vary between • 25 and • 5 FTE in the first year depending upon responses . Subsequent Phase 2 updates would be minimal or not required. Qualifications : No special qualifications are anticipated, however, a knowledge of monitoring systems and parameters would be beneficial in summarizing the literature and in interviewing former and retired employees . A project o f this type seems to be ideally suited for a part-time staff position, or even as a ' special project ' that might utilize retired employees on a volunteer or reduced stipend/consultant basis .

Deliverables :

1 . A Reclamation report or publication identifying Reclamation projects that incorporate groundwater monitoring programs; including summaries of goals or objectives , types of programs used, problems encountered and corrective actions taken, effectiveness of the program in meeting project goals , and suggestions or recommendations for future applications .

References : NIA Prepared by : W . Robert Talbot, D8550, ( 303 ) 236-8066x233 Date of Preparation: April 13 , 1995

n l j

<7

'7

ri I

_ j

r-, I

C. )

r7

r ,

r l

r 7

..._ _.,

J

r-,

L J

r-- l

L j

u

LJ

r 1

Lj

,-- , LJ

LJ

:7

'7

u

Draft

1 &J Minimum Data Requirements Jeob

1 . 2 .

3 .

, .

s .

6 .

Research Prospectus

Groumiwater Research Team

Titles Minimum Data Requirements ttopic #7 , order #48) Prabl- Deacription1 Identify and describe methods of establishing the minimum data requirements for a particular hydrologic study, study area, or modeling effort . Recommended Action:

A . Overall Goals :

a.

c .

1 . Identify techniques or methods o f data minimization or of determining minimum data requirements . 2 .- Describe and summarize the techniques and methods . 3 . Identify under what conditions or situations one technique or method is better than another. Method of Approach:

1 . Complete a literature search into published articles, research. or investigations that addressed the topic of minimum data requirements or data minimization techniques . 2 . Describe the different techniques or methods identified. Evaluate their usefulness , easy of use, accuracy, advantages, disadvantages , and acceptance . 3 . Publish a report or reference documentation of the results of step #2 . Program components or Subdivisions :

1 . There are no program components or subdivisions necessary. Expected Benefits : A report or reference publication that describes the basic theory behind the techniques or methods of establishing the minimum data requirements , or of data minimization techniques. including case studies that illustrate the applications of the various techniques or methods . An evaluation of the usefulness, easy of use, interpretation, and . reliability of each method along with a ·complete reference listing of the methods and case studies would provide modelers and reviewers with a valuable reference source for improving Reclamation project reports and reviews .

Time Schedule, Funds, Qualification for Investigators :

Time: Estimated completion time. is 12 months . Funds : Estimated funding i s . s to . 75 FTE . Qualifications : Qualifications required include �ackground or working knowledge of groundwater modeling. mathematics . and statistics .

Deliverables :

a firm sv,a.tem

ri

n

ri , ... J

-_j

c._ .l

r ,

11 � )

1 1

" J

r- 1

'- j

7

u

n

LJ

r ,

L J

,... '

L J

.... ..,

L J

� 7

LJ

u

J

, . a . 9 .

Draft

1 . A report or reference document describing the theory behind establishing minimum data requirements or data minimization methods for groundwater modeling projects . and including evaluations of the usefulness , easy of use. interpretation, and reliability of each method along with a complete reference listing of the techniques or methods and case studies illustrating each technique or method.

References I N /A Prepared bys w. Robert Talbot , D8550 1 l303 ) 236-8066x233 Date of Preparation: April 13 , 1995

�- J

ri

J ri

r7

r 1

l. -'

,.. 1

\,. J

r ,

L J

r1 I LJ

'1

u

r- 7

L j

,.. l

L J

r---- 1

LJ

L J

L j

L__)

{J

,-7 u

Draft

1 91Relatlonahlp between water conservation and wetlands generation.

Glen

L j

ri

ri ,_ J

J

ri ._ J

r 1

� )

r·l

L J

,. ,

.... J

r 7

.__J

ri �

ri J

'l

L J

r- 7 L J

r� ,

LJ

- 1

� 1 LJ

t.. J

-U

Draft

201 Practlcea to balance mining and recharging of IBob roundwater.

1 .

2 .

3 .

Research Prospectus


Title: Best Management Practices to Balance Mining and Recharging of Groundwater (topic #12, order #88 )

Probl- Description: Identify and describe current status of Best Management Practices to limit mining of groundwater resources and to enhance recharge of groundwater resources . Identify and describe new or untried management practices to limit mining and/or enhance recharge of groundwater resources .

Recommended Action:

A .

B .

overall Goals :

1 . Identify which Best Management Practices, either singly or in combination, have been or are being used to limit groundwater mining and/or enhance groundwater recharge .

2 . Compile a listing of the Best catagories of actions. such as

Management Practices by in_s_i:_i_t_ut iona_l..L.. _ s11rf ic ial

actions, subsurface acctions. etc .

3 . Summarize each Practice, identifying the criteria under which it is appropriate to use, under which conditions it would not be successful , and which other Practices it is compatible or incompatible with .

Method of Approach:

1 . Complete a literature search into published research, or investigations that addreEt_sed the groundwater mining and/or groundwater recharge, groundwater recharge projects, programs, or studies .

articles, topics of

in_e_lJI_ding

2 . Describe the different techniques , methods, practices, projects, or programs identified . Evaluate their advantages , disadvantages, problems encountered, successes or lack of success, usefulness, applicability, easy of implimentation, and acceptance .

3 . Describe the Best Management Practices, or combination of practices , used and how successful they were at meeting the goals and objectives of the project or study.

4 . Publish a report or reference documentation of the results of steps #1 through #3

'7

r1

r7

�j

ri

, -1

r 1

,.. 1

r 1

\.._ J

:7 '-- J

,. l

L J

,.. 1

d

r ,

u

LJ

� 1

L J

L_J

, , - U

LJ

, .

s .

6 .

c.

Draft

Program COmponenta or Subc:liviaiona s

1 . There are no components or subdivisions necessary for this prospectus, although each step listed under 3 . B could be identified as a separate task.

Expected Benefits s A report or reference publication that describes the Best Management Practices currently being used, under which conditions they are being applied, their successes, advantages, disadvantages , applicability, ease of implimentation, usefulness, and acceptability. This report or reference publication will provide planners , managers, and study teams with a valuable resource for improving Reclamation projects and meeting Reclamation ' s mission.

Time Schedule , Funds , Qualification for Investigators :

Times Estimated completion time is 12 months .

Funds : Estimated funding is . 5 to . 75 FTE .

Qualifications : No special qualifications are required for this study.

Deliverables :

1 . A report or reference publication that describes the Best Management Practices currently being used, under which conditions they are being applied, · their successes, advantages, disadvantages , applicability, ease of implimentation, usefulness , and acceptability.

7 • References : N /A

a . Prepared by : w . Robert Talbot, 08550, t 303 ) 236-8066x233

9 . Date of Preparation: May 11 , 1995

C. �

ri

J

- )

r 1

� _J

r1

r l

L J

r 1

'-. J

7 LJ

., I

Lj

,--- -,

L. J

,.,. ,

u

r 1

LJ

LJ ,. . ..,

I

LJ

LJ

-U

7

LJ

Draft

21 ILeachlng Efficiencies of rain water with various IGlen conditions (son type, temperature ...

n

n

r1

7 ,_J

'l '- J

r 1 � j

r- 1

,._ J

' l �- J

r l

�j

J r-, l.� J

r l

L j

- 1

L.J

r 1

LJ

- l

LJ

u

LJ

-U

7

L.J

Draft

221Vegetatlon effects on Infiltration rates !Olen


1. Tide: Vegetation Effects on Infiltration Rates

2. Problem Description: Infiltration of surface water for the potential recharge of groundwater is sometimes limited by the soil surface infiltration rate. The infiltration rates may be improved at site specific areas by mechanical modification to improve vertical penetration, or remove and replace surface soil with porous material such as gravels. Other means for improving the surface soil for the enhancement of water penetration may be possible through vegetation types that retard overland flow and other vegetation types that improve deep penetration with root development. Quantification of the process could improve estimates for infiltration under various vegetation scenarios. The area impacted by vegetation control could be as small as a wetland that is used to treat local field runoff to many square miles ( such as a national grassland ) that coµ]d be managed to enhance groundwater recharge from limited amounts of rainfall.

3. Recommended Actiob A. Overall Goals:

1. Provide literature search on existing and past experiments with vegetation used to enhance surface water infiltration and groundwater recharge 2. Identify types of vegetation that provides specific benefits to the infiltration/recharge process. This would establish types of vegetation that could be used for surface water clarification (treatment) vs. types of vegetation that could be used for soil improvement by vigorous rooting to provide penetration pathways for water flow. 3. Quantify the amount of water used by these specific plant communities to improve the estimate of the amount of water that is left for groundwater storage. This would help to improve the water balance of the process.

B. Method of Approach: 1. Literature search for past projects dealing with infiltration, vegetation enhanced infiltration, groundwater recharge, rooting penetration by selected vegetation types. 2. Literature search for past research on consumptive use of grasslands, designed wetlands, water treatment wetlands, etc. 3. Propose research project to investigate vegetation affects on infiltration rate, water retention for infiltration, water balance of recharge vs. plant consumptive use, impacts of large land area vegetation changes (national grasslands, CRP acreages of native grasses within a county, etc)

C. Program Components or Subdivisions: 1 . Literature search. 2. Vegetation assessment for runoff retention. 3. Vegetation assessment for infiltration improvements 4. Vegetation assessment for consumptive uses.

4. Expected Benefits: An improved understanding of the impacts of vegetation on the groundwater recharge of geographic areas as well as improvements to local recharge cells. Local recharge projects could be enhance by the use of designed vegetation wetland that also function as recharge basins.

5. Time Schedule, Funds, Qualification for Investigators:

n

11

ri

1

r- 1

r 1

'- J

r l \._ )

r 7

..._ _J

ri u

r1

L J

r '

L j

r ,

LJ

....---7

Lj

- - 1

�

- 1

L J

r-1

-U

u

Draft

A. Time. Variable, field testing should cover at least one growing season with mature plant varieties. Annual climate variations would be a factor that would suggest longer time of study. Lab testing could be limited due to the size of the project area, however, horticultural greenhouse areas at some universities may work with plant science and small field plot investigations. B. Funds: Variable needs depending on scope of research. C. Qualifications: Geologists, hydrologists, agronomists, engineers, or others involved in artificial wetland designs and groundwater reclup'ge.

Ci. Deliverables: A Bibliography of past and existing research efforts. B. Proposals for research of a selected aspect of the use of vegetation to enhance groundwater recharge. C. Quantification of plant types that enhance groundwater recharge by improving soil infiltration as well as improving the retention of runoff for infiltration and eventual recharge. D. Quantification of plant consumptive use in recharge areas. Improve estimates of water balance in recharge sites.

7. References: Ground Water Recharge As Affected by Surface Vegetation and Management; CSU Resources Research Institute Completion Report Number 41, December 1972,

Measuring and Computing Natural Ground Water Recharge At Sites in South Central Kansas; USGS Water Resources Investigations Report, 87-4097.

8. Prepared by: Roger Burnett

9. Date: April 20, 1995.

n

(7

n

n � .J

17

� J

f l

.... J

r 1

\..__ J

r 7

LJ

J

J 'l

.__ J

' l !

,- l

Lj

- 7

u

r l

LJ

LJ

i] 'l LJ

Draft

23Jconfldence In Modeling Results feob

1 . 2 .

3 .

4 .

Research Prospectus

Groundwater Research !ream

!ritlea Confidence in Modeling Results (topic #7 , order #44) Problem Description: Identify and describe means of quantifying confidence in groundwater modeling results . Confidence is defined as a measure of the accuracy or the degree to which a numerical model represents or simulates a real hydrologic system.

Recommended Action:

A .

B .

c.

overall Goals :

1 . Identify and describe statistical methods of quantifying confidence in groundwater modeling results . 2 . Identify and describe parameter estimation methods of quantifying confidence in groundwater modeling results .

3 . Identify and describe uncertainty analysis methods of quantifying confidence in groundwater modeling results .

Method of Approach:

1 . Complete a l iterature search into texts, articles, and published research dealing with statistical , parameter estimation, and uncertainty analysis methods of quantifying confidence in modeling results, in general , and in groundwater modeling results, in particular .

2 . Evaluate. compare and contrast. or otherwise describe the various techniques . their applications . their usefulness, their easy of use or ' user friendliness ' . their meaning or interpretation. and their reliability.

3 . summarize the results of step #2 , and publish a Reclamation report or compilation, including a complete reference list of sources, and a list of example case studies for each method.

Program Components or Subdivisions :

1 . There are no program components or subdivisions necessary in this research topic .

Expected Benefits : A report or reference publication that describes the basic theory behind statistical, parameter estimation, and uncertainty analysis methods of quantifying confidence (as a measure of model accuracy or the degree to which a numerical model represents or simulates a hydrologic system) , including case studies that illustrate the applications of the various methods . An

n '. J

17

n

ri �J

r 7

.� l

� j

r 1

',.__ .J

'l

7 LJ

r7

L J

r 7

u

,---,

LJ

u

- 1

L J

L J

__ LJ

7 LJ

5 .

6 .

7 . a . 9 .

Draft

evaluation of the usefulness, easy of use, interpretation, and reliability of each method along with a complete reference listing of the methods and case studies would provide modelers and reviewers with a valuable reference source for improving Reclamation project reports and reviews .

�iaa Schedule, Funds, Qualification for Investigamrs :

�ime: Schedule is estimated at 12 months for a matrix team consisting of 3 to 6 persons . �a: Funding is estimated at 1 . 5 to 3 FTE C . s FTE per person) depending upon the make-up and qualifications of the matrix team members . Qualifications : Team members should have a firm basis or background in modeling and mathematics . I n addition, the team membert s) dealing with the statistical methods should have a firm working knowledge of statistics ; the team memberls ) dealing with the parameter estimation methods should have a firm understanding of those methods; and the team member ( s) dealing with the uncertainty analysis methods should have a firm understanding of those methods .

Deliverables :

1 . A report or compilation reference document describing the theory behind statistical, parameter estimation, and uncertainty analysis methods of quantifying confidence in modeling results , particularly groundwater modeling results, and including evaluations of the usefulness , easy of use, interpretation, and reliability of each method along with a complete reference j listing of the methods and case studies illustrating each method.

References : N /A Prepared by: w. Robert Talbot, D8550, { 303 ) 236-8066x233 Date of Preparation: April 13 1 1995

n l J

n L ,

'7

I ,_ J

'l � J

r7

� J

r 1 L J

r 1

L J

,.- l

L___)

J -7

LJ

- l

Lj

: 7

L j

Lj

� 7

L .;

L J

_LJ

Draft

24lldentlfy optimum recharge methods for different I Glen field conditions


1. Tide: Identify Optimum Recharge Methods for Different Field Conditions.

2. Problem Description: Many groundwater recharge experiments and working projects have been constructed around the world Each recharge project carries some similarity to others, and also some peculiar differences. The site specific peculiarities are used to adapt the site conditions to the best method of recharge and the least amount of maintenance. The general similarities could be categorized and used as and initial screening as to the objectives, site plan, site geology, etc. to establish commonly used methods that would apply to any new proposals for a recharge site.

3. Recommended Action A. Overall Goals

1 . A literature search and cataloging of past recharge sites would provide a reference source for owners/operators and localities of existing information.

2. An information database could be constructed to provide useful information in a form that could be sorted or searched for peculiar properties or common properties of recharge facilities.

3. A selection of field conditions could be established to show the success or limitations of recharge capacity for a particular type of installation.

B. Method of Approach 1 . Literature search conducted and cataloged

2. Information collection may require many contacts with owners/operators to get field conditions and site specifics.

3. Field conditions may be sorted from the database if enough information is available for qualifiers to be used.

C. Program Components or Subdivisions 1 . Collect available information

2. Establish database format and define useful information parameters for all sites

3. Conduct information retrievals and solicit necessary information

4. Enter all recharge sites in database

5. Perform some sorting or analysis of existing field conditions

6. Analyze geology of existing sites for field conditions parameters.

4. Expected Benefits Past experiences and existing information would be available to others for analysis before they enter into a recharge program. Field condition parameters could be limiting factors to a site.

n u

ri L j

c__ _;

� J

1 L_J

n

' l

L j

i l

L j

r 7

L j

n i

LJ

,--

L

--- , LJ

- , u

Li

LJ

LJ

;-- ,

- U

Draft

May be able to establish field condition criteria for the selection of preferred alternatives of recharge methods for consideration.

5. Time Schedule, Funds, Qualification for Investigators Time: 6 months Funds: Variable needs depending on scope selected Qualifications: Geologists, hydrologists, engineers, physical scientists

6. Deliverables: Recharge Database listings and field conditions parameters for geologic screening selection of recharge methodology

7. References none

8. Prepared By Roger Burnett

9. Date of Preparation April 20, 1995

E ==;

.m

C

s...

0

... > ·c:

j u,

Q)

ai

> C

CD

ai

> ! C)

"'D

u,

!

Q)

en o

2

-u

�

ec

m G>

0.

-E

�

om

0

... ..... c-,

E ==;

u 0

"'D

C

a,

0 C)

C

�

"' > .!

:E

� Q)

u C

m

E .g G)

0.

C

0

en

t,

:! w

c-,

•

L

L

[ --, _j

l_

_J

- -,

j

L

- �

J n

;. J

n

J

ri - � j

'l � j

r 1 ._ J

'l I

i,_ j

r7

LJ

Lj

r l

L J

r

L

r- 1

u

r l

LJ

L J

LJ

- I

_u

Draft

61 Soil water/salt balance interactions. 10 6 4.2 11.3 Research Prospectus


1. Title: Provide salt balance program/routine to interface with existing crop water scheduling software.

2. Problem Description: Use of computer software for irrigation scheduling has become fairly common and user friendly. The National Resource Conservation Service (formerly Soil Conservation Service) has developed and published a computer program called SCS-Scheduler Version 3 .00 that is available to irrigators to help improve water use efficiency. Continual pressure is expected in the future for water use efficiency improvements. With the ability to real-time measure soil moisture, and easily compute crop needs and water (irrigation or rainfall) inputs, the use of water for crop growth has become more controlled. In an effort toward 100% efficiency, the implications of maintaining soil salt balance are being overlooked. Without consideration for the salt balance, the soil may become damaged and crop production will suffer. Computational programs for salt balance are available, but not widely used or readily available.

3. Recommended Action A. Overall Goals

1. Soil salt balance routines would be written, or existing ones made available, for the most popular water scheduling software. The goal would be to have the salt balance routine be an extension of the scheduling software and use the same inputs. Additional inputs would be required to carry on with a salt balance based on the salt content of the irrigation supply, salt content of the soil, or any other residual affect, such as prior year buildup or depletions.

2. Overall goals would include the improvement of water use efficiency without sacrificing the soil resources.

3 . Additional goals may include some type of computations of the expected salt loading to farm drains or adjacent surface streams. This would facilitate impact analysis on the existing streams based on changes in water use efficiency.

B. Method of Approach 1 . A literature search and cataloging of existing programs and computation routines for soil salt balance would be conducted.

2. Information would be gathered on the various crop water scheduling programs that are being used by irrigation companies, consultants, and individual growers. Information collection may require many contacts with owners/operators to get field conditions and site specifics.

C. Program Components or Subdivisions 1 . Collect available information

2. Establish and define useful information parameters for all sites

3 . Conduct information retrievals or specific software acquisitions and solicit necessmy information to allow addition of salt balance routine.

4. Perform some analysis of existing field conditions and the impacts on soil salt balance.

4. Expected Benefits

n

ri

r 1 L j

� J

ri . - j

r 1

L J

r· 7

r 1

r 1

� L.J

f7

LJ

'l L J

r- 7

LJ

:1 LJ

- l u

- , LJ

L J

1J

l u

Draft

Field condition parameters could be limiting factors to improvements in water use efficiency at a site. May be able to establish field condition criteria for the selection of preferred alternatives of water use efficiency. Overall goals of water use may become more realist and benefits of rainfall "flushing" of the soil root zone may be quantitatively analyzed.

5. Time Schedule, Funds, Qualification for Investigaton Time: 12 months Funds: Variable needs depending on scope selected Qualifications: Hydrologists, engineers, physical scientists, resource specialists.

6. Deliverables: Computer software for soil salt balance that is compatible to real time inputs of water and crops. Computations of soil salt balance would be easily accomplished by persons using water scheduling software.

7. References none

8. Prepared By Roger Burnett

9. Date of Preparation May I 0, 1995

water resources research laboratory official file copy€¦ · • water quality from agriculture...

Documents