Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Model Hidrogeologi
Model Hidrogeologi
by
Joanne M. Jackson
Bachelor of Science (Honours)
SUPERVISOR
Assoc. Professor Malcolm Cox
Queensland University of Technology
The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted for a degree or
diploma at any other higher education institution. To the best of my knowledge and
belief, the thesis contains no material previously published or written by another
person except where due reference is made.
Signed:
..
Joanne Jackson
Date: ..
ABSTRACT
Bribie Island is a large, heterogeneous, sand barrier island that contains
groundwater aquifers of commercial and environmental significance. Population
growth has resulted in expanding residential developments and consequently
increased demand for water. Caboolture Shire Council (CSC) has proposed to
increase groundwater extraction by a new borefield.
Two aquifers exist within the Quaternary sandmass which are separated by an
indurated sand layer that is ubiquitous in the area. A shallow aquifer occurs in the
surficial, clean sands and is perched on the indurated sands. Water levels in the
shallow water table aquifer follow the topography and groundwater occurs under
unconfined conditions in this system. A basal aquifer occurs beneath the indurated
sands, which act as a semi-confining layer in the island system. The potentiometric
surface of the basal aquifer occurs as a gentle groundwater mound.
The shallow groundwater system supports water-dependent ecosystems including
wetlands, native woodlands and commercial pine plantations.
Excessive
groundwater extraction could lower the water table in the shallow aquifer to below
the root depth of vegetation on the island.
Groundwater discharge along the coastline is essential to maintain the position of
the saline water - fresh groundwater boundary in this island aquifer system. Any
activity that changes the volume of fresh water discharge or lowers the water table
or potentiometric surface below sea level will result in a consequent change in the
saline water freshwater interface and could lead to saline water intrusion.
Groundwater level data was compared with the residual rainfall mass curve (RRMC)
on hydrographs, which revealed that the major trends in groundwater levels are
related to rainfall. Bribie Island has a sub-tropical climate, with a mean annual
rainfall of around 1358mm/year (Bongaree station). Mean annual pan evaporation
is around 1679mm/year and estimates of the potential evapotranspiration rates
range from 1003 to 1293mm/year.
Flows from creeks, the central swale and groundwater discharged from the area
have the potential to affect water quality within the tidal estuary, Pumicestone
Passage.
conductivity ranging from 61 to 1018S/cm while water near the coast, canals or
tidal creeks is brackish to saline (1596 to 34800S/cm). Measurements of pH show
that all groundwater is acidic to slightly acidic (3.3-6.6), the lower values are
attributed to the breakdown of plant material into organic acids.
Groundwater is dominated by Na-Cl type water, which is expected in a coastal
island environment with Na-Cl rainfall. Some groundwater samples possess higher
concentrations of calcium and bicarbonate ions, which could be due to chemical
interactions with buried shell beds while water is infiltrating to depth and due to the
longer residence times of groundwater in the basal aquifer.
A steady-state, sub-regional groundwater flow model was developed using the
Visual MODFLOW computer package.
ii
ACKNOWLEGDEMENTS
I would like to thank everyone who helped in the completion of this research project.
The successful completion of this study has been made possible through the
practical and professional support and advice of many people, institutions and
departments, in particular:
I appreciate the support, guidance and expertise of Associate Professor
Malcolm Cox (principal supervisor), School of Natural Resource Sciences,
Queensland University of Technology.
Queensland University of Technology Staff
Dr. Micaela Preda, Dr. Deliana Gabeva, Wathsala Kumar, Bill Kwiecien and Dr.
Les Dawes.
Other Students: John Harbison, Tim Armstrong, Ken Spring, Lucy Paul and
Genevieve Larsen.
Funding for this study was provided by:
Caboolture Shire Council, QM Properties and Pacific Silica.
I appreciate the assistance and data provided by:
Bureau of Meteorology
Caboolture Shire Council
Caloundra City Council
Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Energy
Forestry Plantations Queensland (previously DPI Forestry)
HLA Envirosciences Pty. Ltd
Matrix Plus Consulting Pty Limited
QM Properties
Queensland Parks and Wildlife
iii
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
1.2
Scope of Work
1.2.1
Data Review
1.2.2
Field Work
1.2.3
Interpretation of Results
1.3
Significance of Project
2.
BACKGROUND
2.1
Location
2.2
2.3
Climate
2.4
Land Use
2.5
Geomorphology
10
2.6
Regional Geology
12
2.6.1
14
2.6.2
Quaternary Sand
17
2.6.3
Indurated Sandstone
18
2.7
2.8
Regional Hydrogeology
19
2.7.1
Aquifer Recharge
20
2.7.2
Drainage
21
2.7.3
Hydraulic Parameters
22
22
2.8.1
Groundwater Studies
22
2.8.2
Groundwater Modelling
25
3.
METHODOLOGY
27
3.1
27
3.2
3.1.1
Climate
27
3.1.2
27
3.1.3
Groundwater Quality
28
Modelling
29
3.2.1
Conceptual Model
29
3.2.2
Mathematical Modelling
30
4.
RESULTS
44
4.1
44
4.1.1
Climate
44
4.1.2
46
4.1.3
Groundwater Quality
51
4.2
Modelling
55
4.2.1
Conceptual Model
55
4.2.2
Mathematical Modelling
56
5.
67
5.1
Hydraulic Monitoring
67
5.1.1
Climate
67
5.1.2
67
5.1.3
Groundwater Quality
68
5.2
Modelling
70
5.2.1
Analytical Solution
70
5.2.2
Numerical Modelling
70
6.
75
6.1
75
6.2
Groundwater Quality
76
6.3
Numerical Model
77
7.
REFERENCES
80
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Location map of Bribie Island
11
13
15
16
17
20
30
33
Figure 11. Cross section of model showing the four model layers.
35
36
38
Figure 14. Location of 25 shallow monitoring bores used in the model (Layer 1)
39
Figure 15. Location of 20 deep monitoring bores used in the model (Layer 4)
40
41
42
43
Figure 19. Mean daily temperatures for Caloundra, Cape Moreton and Redcliffe
44
45
Figure 21. Mean monthly rainfall compared to mean monthly pan evaporation
45
Figure 22. Location of monitoring bores used to build the geological framework
46
48
49
Figure 25. Cross section through central Bribie Island showing grounwater
50
52
53
vii
Figure 28. Stiff patterns overlain on the cross section through central Bribie Island
54
59
60
62
62
66
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.
Stratigraphical succession
14
Table 2.
22
Table 3.
28
Table 4.
29
Table 5.
35
Table 6.
51
Table 7.
56
Table 8.
64
APPENDICES
Appendix A Climate Records
Appendix B Mean Pan Evaporation
Appendix C Summary of Monitoring Bore Details
Appendix D Standing Water Levels and Physico-chemical Parameters
Appendix E
Appendix F
viii
1.
INTRODUCTION
Groundwater
is
pervasive
and
vulnerable
resource.
Hydrogeological
groundwater aquifers:
Aveiro Aquifer, Portugal - a Cretaceous coastal aquifer was modelled to give a
better understanding of the groundwater flow conditions and the existing
geochemical processes.
naturally occurring hydraulic gradient and limited aquifer recharge from natural
sources (Condesso de Melo et al, 1998).
Big Pine Key, Florida, USA a small oceanic island with several canal
developments. The study examined the types of canals that are most detrimental to
the fresh groundwater supplies. It was found that the effect of the canals depended
on the relative penetration and position of the development. Canals bisecting long,
rectilinear islands reduced the groundwater lens volume more than canal
developments at the ends of the islands (Langevin et al, 1998).
North Stradbroke Island, Queensland, Australia - a large sand island that extracts
surface and ground water for town supply and for mining operations. A whole-ofisland groundwater flow model was developed with MODFLOW and PEST-ASP to
assist with managing the long-term sustainability of these resources (Chen, 2002).
groundwater flows through the aquifer system in the central catchment of the
island.
1.2
SCOPE OF WORK
1.2.1
Data Review
and
reviewing
available
geological
and
hydrogeological
and
Water
(DNRMW)
database
of
registered
bores,
HLA
evaporation data.
reviewing reports of previous studies undertaken in the Bribie Island region.
1.2.2
Field Work
The field program was designed to obtain site-specific information in the central
catchment of Bribie Island, near the Pacific Harbour residential golf course
development. The field program included:
monitoring of groundwater levels within existing monitoring bores to
determine static water levels; and
sampling and laboratory analysis of groundwater from selected monitoring
bores within each aquifer to acquire water chemistry information.
The data gathered aimed to assist with understanding groundwater quality,
groundwater occurrence and flow processes within the system and to support the
development of the conceptual and numerical models.
1.2.3
Interpretation of Results
SIGNIFICANCE OF PROJECT
Bribie Island is a large, sand barrier island that contains groundwater supplies of
commercial and environmental significance. There are competing demands on this
groundwater system that have lead to an increased stress on the local groundwater
resources. These groundwater resources are finite and must be carefully managed.
Groundwater discharge from this island aquifer system is essential to
maintain the position of the saline water - fresh groundwater boundary and
thus protect the aquifer system. The quantity and quality of environmental
flows from creeks and groundwater discharged from the area has the
potential to affect water quality within the tidal estuary, Pumicestone
Passage.
Tidal wetlands and waters around Bribie Island are protected as part of
Moreton Bay Marine Park. The passage provides a breeding area for fish,
crabs and prawns and it contains a population of dugong that feed on its
seagrass beds. The region provides an essential habitat for many species
of migratory and non-migratory birds. Due to its extensive system of tidal
flats, mangroves, salt marsh and claypan, the passage has been listed
under the Ramsar Convention as an important site for roosting and feeding
for migratory species. The Ramsar Convention is an international treaty that
aims to preserve intertidal feeding banks in both hemispheres and along the
flight paths of migratory bird species (South East Queensland Regional
Strategy Group, 2000).
In late
discharge or lowers the water table or potentiometric surface below sea level
will result in a consequent change in the saline water freshwater interface
(Driscoll, 1986; Fetter, 2001).
2.
BACKGROUND
2.1
LOCATION
Caloundra
Kilometres
0
10
20
Bribie
Isla nd
PUMICESTONE
PASSAGE
2700
Moreton
Isla nd
Ningi
Caboolture
River
DECEPTION
BAY
Redcliffe
MORETON
BAY
Pine River
Shorncliffe
Brisbane
River
2730
15300
North
Stra dbroke
Isla nd
15330
2.2
Bribie Island is a low lying, vegetated, sand barrier island. The topographic highs
occur on the beach ridge systems, with a maximum elevation of around 14m above
Australian Height Datum (AHD).
vegetation occur on the island including Acacia scrub, Banksia woodland, softwood
scrub, Melaleuca forest, eucalypt woodland and heath communities. Dense stands
dominated by Melaleuca quinquenervia (broad-leaved paperbark) occur mainly in
the low, poorly drained areas, such as the central swale, along the western side of
the island (James and Bulley, 2004). This species of vegetation usually grows best
in swampy sites surrounded by open forest (Boland et al, 1992).
2.3
CLIMATE
The island has a sub-tropical climate and experiences a wet summer and a dry
winter. Mean annual rainfall from the Bongaree station is 1358mm/year (Bureau of
Meteorology).
Pan evaporation values fluctuate with the seasons with maximum values occurring
from October to January. The mean annual pan evaporation values recorded at the
University of Queensland, Bribie Island weather station were 1679mm/year (DNR,
1996).
models
and
range
from
60%
(~1003mm/year,
Williams,
1998)
to
77%
LAND USE
Figure 2 displays the main land uses on Bribie Island which include native
vegetation, exotic pine plantations, residential and recreational areas (golf clubs,
parks and sports fields). Caboolture Shire Council administers the southern two
thirds of the island. Urban development is restricted to southern part of Bribie,
which is experiencing rapid population growth. Caloundra City Council manages
the northern one third of the island, which does not contain residential areas.
There are two conservation reserves on the island, the Bribie National Park
(4770ha) and the Buckleys Hole Conservation Park (87.7ha). All tidal areas and
waters around the island are gazetted as the Moreton Bay Marine Park (EPA).
Bribie Island currently uses two sources to supply urban water demands. Local
groundwater treated at the Bribie Water Treatment Plant supplies the southern and
eastern areas, while the mainland North Pine Dam Water Treatment Plant supplies
water to northern areas and meets demand above the capacity of the Bribie Water
Treatment Plant (CSC).
Treated
sewage is discharged into infiltration ponds south of the sewage treatment plant
(Isaacs and Walker, 1983; Marszalek and Isaacs, 1988).
Currently (October December 2006) Caboolture Shire Council is undertaking test
drilling and construction of production bores on the island. Pumping tests are being
conducted within the new bore field to determine yield capacities.
2.5
GEOMORPHOLOGY
Moreton Bay is formed by large sand islands on its eastern side. Sea level change
has dominated the geological history of Moreton Bay. Eustatic oscillations have
resulted in the emergence and submergence of the coastal lowlands within an
altitudinal range of approximately 150m since the beginning of the Pleistocene.
Figure 3 illustrates the amplitude of the sea level rise at the conclusion of the last
Ice Age, reaching a maximum height (+1.5m) around 6500 years ago. Sea levels
dropped to present levels around 3000 years ago (DEH, 1993; Jones, 1992a; Lang
et al., 1998).
These sea level oscillations created a series of differing environments that
controlled the deposition of sediment. During periods of low sea level, the floor of
Moreton Bay was exposed and rivers could incise channels and flow across the bay
surface. As sea levels rose, the sediments were submerged, but while the water
was still relatively shallow, waves were able to wash some sediments towards the
shore to accumulate on beaches and foredunes (DEH, 1993; Jones, 1992a; Lang et
al., 1998).
10
Bribie Island is best considered as a low lying, sand barrier island. The island
developed when a strandplain of prograded beach ridges bordering the coast was
separated from the mainland by the formation of Pumicestone Passage tidal
estuary. The sequence of sand dunes evolution extends from the Holocene period
(less than 10,000 BP) to before the last Pleistocene interglacial period (120,000140,000 BP) (DEH, 1993; Cox et al., 2000b).
The evolutionary classification of depositional coastal environments is based on the
relative roles of three main hydrodynamic processes: waves, tides and river outflow.
In this framework, coastal barriers can be considered the basic depositional element
on wave-dominated coasts.
11
2.6
REGIONAL GEOLOGY
Bribie Island is located at the edge of the Late Triassic to Early Jurassic age
Nambour Basin in coastal southeastern Queensland as seen in Figure 4.
The
Nambour Basin is a small, intracratonic basin with rock assemblages of less than
600m thick.
basement rocks of the DAguilar Block to the northwest and the Beenleigh Block to
the southeast (McKellar, 1993; Cox et al., 2000b; Geoscience Australia, 2003).
Sediment for the Nambour Basin was derived from the erosion of mountains to the
south and west of the coastline. Sandy sediments with minor gravel and mud were
deposited on broad plains by braided rivers in the eastern part of the region. These
areas gradually subsided allowing a greater thickness of sediments to accumulate.
These sediments consolidated to form the Landsborough Sandstone in the southern
Nambour Basin, which forms the bedrock for the Pumicestone catchment (Willmott
and Stevens, 1988; Cox et al., 2000b).
The regional basin experienced a Late Triassic Norian orogeny and the resulting
uplift exposed the newly stabilised continent to erosion. Ongoing erosion carved
the present landscape, depositing material in floodplains, as well as carrying
sediment out to sea (Cox et al., 2000b; Geoscience Australia, 2003).
Fluvial sediments of the Early Jurassic Landsborough Sandstone Formation form
the bedrock below Bribie Island, although no outcrop of this formation occurs on the
island.
sedimentary rock unit. Table 1 lists the stratigraphical succession for Bribie Island
and Figure 5 shows the Quaternary sedimentary deposits on the island. Through
the interpretation of geological logs and downhole gamma-ray logs of monitoring
bores, a lithological cross section of central Bribie Island was developed and is
shown in Figure 6 (Armstrong, 2006).
12
13
Age
Lithology
Holocene
Holocene to Pleistocene
Pleistocene
Early Jurassic
2.6.1
14
15
2.6.2
Quaternary Sand
During the
Pleistocene (around 120,000 years ago), before the last Ice Age, the sea level was
1 to 5m higher than present day. The Pleistocene coastline which is shown in
Figure 7 lay further to the west, inland of the present coastline. This resulted in
seawater covering most of the low-lying coastal areas. Between the headlands and
islands of this time, sediment deposition produced low barrier sand spits. Shallow
tidal sand banks (tidal deltas) accumulated behind the spits from marine sediments
swept around into the calmer waters. Inland of the tidal deltas lay extensive bays of
open water, which were backed by mangrove estuaries and mud flats. The bays
gradually filled in with sediments of mud and sand (Willmott and Stevens, 1988).
17
When sea levels fell during the last Ice Age, these bays and sandy tidal deltas were
exposed to become dry land.
consequently cut this area. Sea levels have not returned to this previous highstand
and consequently, the sediments are preserved and form the present coastline.
When the sea rose again to its present level, sands of the outer barrier spits were
redistributed, except in the southern area were remnant sand ridges of this age form
the core of Bribie Island (Willmott and Stevens, 1988).
Thompson (1992) delineated two types of sand deposit that typically occur along
the east coast of Australia:
a) Low sand ridges and swales that occur parallel to the coast. These formations
were widely distributed along the east coast.
b) Multiple systems of transgressive, parabolic dunes with the trailing arms of the
dunes open to the onshore winds from the southeast. These dunes can also be
influenced by local conditions such as bedrock morphology and smaller scale
local wind patterns.
2.6.3
Indurated Sandstone
18
vertically variable. Because of this process, the sediments would develop variable
porosity and reduced permeability. These indurated sands were found to have
hydrogeological significance as they can act as a semi-confining layer that
influences groundwater flows, separate groundwater bodies, and reduce storage
within the aquifer (Harbison, 1998; Cox et al., 2000a; Cox et al., 2002, Armstrong,
2006).
2.7
REGIONAL HYDROGEOLOGY
a shallow,
19
2.7.1
Aquifer Recharge
The
interconnected. Localised aquifer recharge may occur within low-lying areas and
along the central swale where surface water can readily permeate into sediments
during and following rainfall events (Harbison, 1998; Armstrong, 2006).
20
Passage depends on the quantity and quality of the water discharged into it; this
would include groundwater seepage as well as surface water flows.
Using the sodium accretion method (equivalent to the Cl accretion method in this
area), Harbison (1998) calculated an aquifer recharge of 7% of the average annual
rainfall for the whole island.
Holocene beach ridges this method gave a recharge estimated at around 13% of
the average annual rainfall.
2.7.2
Drainage
The primary mechanisms of groundwater discharge from Bribie Island are via
evapotranspiration, groundwater discharge to sea, evaporation and stream run-off
(Harbison, 1998; Harbison and Cox, 2000).
Streams are not well developed on Bribie Island and tend to be short and drain the
large areas of wetland. On the western side of the island, direct drainage occurs
through two mangrove swamps and a number of small tidal creeks.
Two tidal
creeks occur on the west coast, near the Pacific Harbour developments; Dux Creek,
which has been altered by canal development; and Wright's Creek, which drains the
southern portion of the central swale. In the east, Freshwater Creek in the south
and two freshwater lagoons in the north provide direct drainage.
The lagoons
(Figure 2) are usually closed to the sea by sand deposits (Lumsden, 1964;
Harbison, 1998).
Surface drainage on the island is poorly developed due to the islands low
topography and the permeable nature of the sand. Surface flow occurs only after
periods of heavy rainfall when the sand becomes saturated. However, because of
these features, water can remain lying at the surface in the interior until it either
evaporates or percolates into the sand profile (Lumsden, 1964; Harbison, 1998;
Armstrong, 2006).
21
2.7.3
Hydraulic Parameters
Lithology
K (m/day)
Reference
10-2 103
1.2 - 11
0.33 18.5
10-3 1
0.09 0.25
0.07 2.5
1 - 25
0.13 4.7
2.8
Earlier groundwater studies of Bribie Island have investigated water supply and
wastewater disposal issues and focused on the developed, southern portion of the
island. Later studies have considered the whole island.
Previous investigations on Bribie Island are summarised below.
2.8.1
Groundwater Studies
In 1962, 6 production bores and a 2.2ML/day water treatment plant (WTP) were
installed to southwest of Woorim (Harbison, 1998).
22
average
hydraulic
conductivities
of
4m/day
and
13m/day
from
Lumsden (1964)
recommended that an area of 2.6km2 be set aside as a water reserve. This area
was gazetted in 1970, in the southeast of the island, south of the Bongaree-Woorim
road (Harbison, 1998).
An additional 21 extraction bores were drilled within the water reserve in 1966
1967.
screens, groundwater extraction in the water reserve was changed to pumping from
a trench (approximately 3km long and 5m deep) (Isaacs and Walker, 1983;
Harbison, 1998).
John Wilson and Partners (1979) reviewed the performance and capacity of the
water reserve to supply an increased water treatment capacity of 6.6ML/day.
Recommendations from the investigation included extending the trench system
within the reserve and extending sewage disposal south of the water reserve to limit
groundwater flow out of the reserve. Water balance analysis estimated 42% of
rainfall recharged the aquifer and hydraulic conductivities within the water reserve
ranged from 13 to 30m/day.
In 1979 1980, the Geological Survey of Queensland conducted a second
hydrogeological investigation (Ishaq, 1980) in southern Bribie Island. As part of the
investigation, 26 holes were drilled and completed as observation bores. Ishaq
(1980) determined an average hydraulic conductivity of 17m/day from grain size
distribution. Analysis of pumping test data from two bores (from John Wilson and
Partners, 1966) determined hydraulic conductivity results of 15 and 75m/day.
Water balance analysis suggested of the total rainfall, 13% recharged the aquifer,
82% was removed through evapotranspiration and 5% was lost through surface
runoff. Ishaq (1980) assumed that potential evapotranspiration was equal to 63% of
pan evaporation.
23
storage
volume
of
2.1x106ML,
and
sustainable
yield
of
He developed a hydrogeological
conceptual model that recognised the significance of the indurated sands. The
indurated sand layer was found to control infiltration, the degree of aquifer
confinement and aquifer storage within the island aquifer system.
Chemical
analysis of rainwater and groundwater recorded Na-Cl type water, with calcium and
bicarbonate enrichment in recent sand deposits (Harbison, 1998; Harbison and
Cox, 1998).
Paul (2003) as part of a research project with QUT studied the environmental
quality of ground and surface waters in the central catchment of Bribie Island. Paul
found that shallow groundwater and surface water were closely related and that
water chemistry of the different water bodies was linked through groundwater flow
processes.
Armstrong (2006) installed 21 single and nested, monitoring bores across an east
west transect in central Bribie Island as part of a QUT research project.
He
24
occurrence and migration. Hydraulic testing of the aquifer system confirmed that
the indurated sand layer had a lower hydraulic conductivity than the upper,
unconfined and the basal, semi-confined aquifers.
Water quality
analysis recorded a relationship between surface water and the shallow, unconfined
groundwater that is important to the wetland areas of the island (Armstrong and
Cox, 2002; Armstrong, 2006).
2.8.2
Groundwater Modelling
Isaacs and Walker (1983) built a finite-difference, numerical model for southern
Bribie Island. They assumed a constant hydraulic conductivity of 25m/day and a
recharge rate of 300mm/year (approximately 22%). Marsalek and Isaacs (1988)
conducted a field investigation to assess the effects of the treated effluent recharge
on groundwater quality and found that effluent tends to sink to the bottom of the
aquifer.
DNR (1996) constructed a whole of island, steady-state groundwater flow model
using the MODFLOW package (USGS) with the PMWIN graphical interface. The
aquifer was modelled as a single layered, unconfined aquifer. Calibration of the
model involved using the PEST package (inverse problem solver) to determine the
recharge and hydraulic conductivity values, to achieve the best match between
observed and calibrated water levels.
DNR developed steady-state and transient groundwater flow models to investigate
the removal of commercial pine plantations and for resource management
associated with current and proposed groundwater developments (Werner, 1998a;
Werner and Williams, 1999). The whole-of-island model was conceptualised as a
single unconfined aquifer layer. Werner (1998a) acknowledged that peaty layers
and clay lenses caused some semi-confined regions and isolated groundwater
perching. A block centred, finite difference, MODFLOW model was constructed.
Recharge, hydraulic conductivity and specific yield were mathematically calibrated
to historical groundwater levels using the PEST package.
Zones of spatially
invariant hydraulic conductivity were assigned, calibrated and produced values that
ranged from 5 to 150m/day. Aquifer recharge was calibrated at 22% of annual
rainfall and potential evapotranspiration rates were estimated from a bucket model
25
This rate did not conflict with current forestry operations and
Hydraulic conductivity,
26
3.
METHODOLOGY
These
parameters were used to assist with developing a conceptual model for central
Bribie Island and are summarised below.
3.1
3.1.1
Climate
Climate averages were collected from the Bureau of Meteorology for three stations
in the area: Caloundra, Cape Moreton and Redcliffe.
obtained from the Bureau of Meteorology for two weather stations on Bribie,
Bongaree Bowls Club and Bribie Island University of Queensland, both of which
have been decommissioned (Appendix A). Rainfall data was also acquired from the
Department of Natural Resources, Mines and Water (DNRMW) from an automatic
tipping bucket rainfall gauge located in east central Bribie at Bore 14100090.
Mean daily pan evaporation values were recorded from 1970 to 1993 at the
University of Queensland Bribie Island weather station (Appendix B).
3.1.2
lithological information, bore construction details, elevations, water levels and water
chemistry.
27
Fieldwork was conducted on Bribie Island in May, July, September and November
2003.
Groundwater Quality
To ensure a representative
sample of the aquifer was collected, all monitoring bores were purged of three water
bore volumes using a submersible pump or a bailer (in low flowing bores) prior to
collecting a sample. Polyethylene sample bottles (500mL) had been prepared in
the laboratory with a wash of 1:3 diluted HNO3. Two sample bottles were used per
bore, one for anion analysis and the other for cation analysis. The cation sample
bottle was acidified with 1mL HNO3 to slow chemical reactions. Physico-chemical
parameters of the groundwater were measured in the field with a TPS meter and
parameters recorded are listed in Table 3.
Parameters
Analysis
Physico-chemical
EC = Electrical Conductivity
Eh = Oxidation Reduction Potential (Redox Potential)
DO = Dissolved Oxygen
Table 3. Field parameters measured with a TPS meter
All samples were preserved at below 4oC by storing them with ice during the day
and in a refrigerator at night. Water quality analysis of samples for major ions and
metals was conducted in the School of Natural Resource Sciences (NRS) chemical
laboratory. Alkalinity was determined by acid titration. Cations were analysed with
the Varian Liberty 200 Inductively Coupled Plasma Optical Emission
Spectrometer (ICP-OES) and anions were analysed with the DX300 Dionex Ion
Chromatograph. Ions and metals tested for are listed in Table 4.
28
Method
Analysis
ICP OES
Acid titration
HCO3
Ion Chromatography
3.2
MODELLING
3.2.1
Conceptual Model
29
the central area of Bribie Island as flow in this area is predominantly along an eastwest axis.
Results from hydraulic tests and well as monitoring of groundwater levels and
groundwater quality were taken into account when developing the conceptual
model. These factors assisted with understanding groundwater occurrence and
flow processes in the area. This helped to clarify the relationship between the upper
and lower aquifers and the impact of the indurated, sand layer, which lay between
the two aquifer systems.
3.2.2
Mathematical Modelling
aquifer system and they depend on the solution of basic mathematical equations as
shown in Figure 9. Analytical models provide the simplest approach to modelling
while numerical modelling can represent more complex systems.
30
Analytical Solution
The simplest mathematical model of groundwater flow is Darcys Law (equation 1)
which is an equation that describes the flow of groundwater. Groundwater flow
through a vertical section of an aquifer can be calculated using Darcys Law
(Driscoll, 1986):
Q=
KA(h1 h2 )
L
Equation 1
where:
Q = flow (m3/day)
K = hydraulic conductivity averaged over the height of the aquifer (m/day)
A = area (m2)
h1-h2 = difference in hydraulic head (m)
L = distance along the flowpath between the points where h1 and h2 are measured
(m)
An analytical solution of the aquifer system in the central catchment of Bribie Island
was used to assist with understanding the groundwater flow processes at a
rudimentary level. The results obtained by using Darcys Law were later compared
to the model results to verify the findings from numerical model.
Numerical Modelling
Numerical models are used to represent complex processes (Hill, 1998). Numerical
models are used when complex boundary conditions exist or where the value of
parameters varies within the model (Zheng and Bennett, 1995).
Due to the complicated subsurface environment, conditions can rarely be replicated
completely by mathematical expressions.
made to solve flow equations for appropriate boundary and initial hydrologic
conditions. Assumptions include; the aquifer being homogeneous; isotropic; and
infinite in areal extent. Simplification reduces the accuracy of the model (Driscoll,
1986).
The Visual MODFLOW (version 3.1.0) computer package was available for use to
build a groundwater flow model over the central catchment of Bribie Island. Visual
MODFLOW is a three-dimensional, finite-difference, Layer Property Flow (LPF)
31
The
available version of Visual MODFLOW did not support all of the features and
analysis capabilities of MODFLOW-2000 including the Observation Process, the
Sensitivity Process and the Parameter Estimation Process.
Visual MODFLOW
does support the PEST package (Doherty, 1994) which is a powerful and robust
parameter estimation program.
PEST is an acronym for Parameter ESTimation. PEST optimises a set of userdefined model parameters to minimize the calibration residuals from a set of userdefined observations. PEST guides the model calibration process towards the most
reasonable set of parameter values in order to achieve a better calibration result.
Visual MODFLOW supports the optimisation of the model flow properties
conductivity, storage, and recharge (Waterloo Hydrogeologic, 1995).
When
seasonal variability and does not attempt to model the fresh water-salt water
interface.
assessment.
Spatial Discretisation and Boundary Conditions
Defining the physical configuration of the model involves delineating the areal extent
and thickness of the aquifers and defining the number of layers and the boundary
conditions within the aquifer systems (Fetter, 2001).
The model extends approximately 7.5km in a north-south direction and 8.5km in the
east-west direction. The co-ordinate system is MGA Zone 56 (GDA 94). The model
grid is aligned 16.9 degrees west of north to align the model grid with the dominant
direction of groundwater flow. Layers consisted of 75 rows and 85 columns of
32
model cells the size of 100m x 100m. The model configuration for the Bribie model
is shown in Figure 10.
It is simply
33
cell. Visual MODFLOW uses this information to calculate the interlayer leakage
(VCONT) values. As a result, a VCONT value could not be entered into the model
to simulate the leakance through the semi-confining layer between the two aquifers,
as Spring (2006) did in his regional model of the island.
A second approach is to discretise the semi-confining bed as a separate layer. This
considers the storage within the semi-confining layer but generally does not provide
a good approximation of the gradient within the confining bed (Anderson, 1993).
When this method was utilised for the Central Bribie Island area, the numerical
model would not converge.
The third method is to discretise several layers within the confining bed to
approximate the gradient.
gridding in an area where there is limited data and interest in hydraulic heads
(Anderson, 1993). The benefits for the central Bribie Island model of discretising
separate layers were convergence and stability of the model.
The model defines four layers: 1) the surficial sand; 2) and 3) the indurated sand
layer; and 4) the basal sand layer. Figure 11 shows a sample cross section through
the model of the island. The bedrock Landsborough Sandstone was not included in
the model because there was no hydrogeological information from this unit as none
of the piezometers penetrated to this depth. The bedrock contact was treated as a
no flow boundary as it is believed that no groundwater flows upward from this
stratigraphy.
The topography of the island (ground surface) was generated from topographic data
supplied by the Caboolture Shire and Caloundra City Councils combined with bore
hole elevations from DNRMW, HLA and QUT bores and is shown in Figure 12. The
surfaces representing the base of layers 1, 3 and 4 were gridded from data points
delineated by interpretation of drill log data and downhole gamma-ray logs.
Surfaces were contoured using the Surfer contouring software and imported into
Visual MODFLOW. Layer 3 was created by splitting the distance between the base
of Layer 1 and top of Layer 4 into two individual layers (Layer 2 and 3). The base of
the model represents the contact between Quaternary sediments and the
underlying Jurassic Landsborough Sandstone, which represents bedrock in the
area.
34
Figure 11. Cross section of model showing the four model layers.
The base of the model is the sandstone bedrock.
Geological
unit
Model
layer
Aquifer type
Surficial sand
Layer 1
Unconfined
Indurated
sand
Layers 2
and 3
Semi-confining
layer
Basal sand
Layer 4
Semi-confined
Model layer
type
Model layer
thickness
4 10 m
Confined /
unconfined,
variable S,T
1.5 7 m
5 35 m
Bodies of water, for example lakes and the ocean, are commonly
35
(AHD)
4
3
2
1
0
36
Cells representing Pumicestone Passage and the Coral Sea were assigned as
inactive. Coastline cells, the Pacific Harbour canal system and tidal creeks were
assigned as fixed-head cells with a hydraulic head value of 0.3m (AHD), a typical
groundwater level along low-energy coasts (Harbison and Cox, 2002). Lagoons
were assigned as fixed-head cells with a hydraulic head value of 0.7m (AHD)
(Harbison, 1998).
The fixed head cells along the coast were assigned to give an approximation of the
interface between salt water and the less dense freshwater. This numerical model
was developed to simulate groundwater flow in central Bribie Island and does not
attempt to specifically map the fresh water - saltwater boundary along the coastline.
Artificial boundaries were created at the northern and southern boundaries of the
model, as there were no natural groundwater divides in the central catchment of
Bribie Island. They were assigned as general head boundaries as they were in full
hydraulic contact with the aquifer. The hydraulic head at the boundary was set at
0.3m and conductance values ranged from 0.012 to 0.5m2/day. Initial conductance
values were determined using equation 2; however, these values were too high
resulting in lowered groundwater levels. The conductance values were reduced
manually until a better calibration was achieved.
C=
(L *W ) * K
D
Equation 2
where:
C = conductance (m2/day)
(L*W) = is the surface area of the grid cell face exchanging flow with the external
source/sink (m2)
K = average hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer material separating the external
source/sink from the model grid (m/day)
D = is the distance from the external source/sink to the model grid (m)
Drain cells were assigned along the central swale within Layer 1. Drainage was set
at 750m2/day, with a drainage depth of 1m below ground level. This was designed
to mimic loss of water from the model domain via evapotranspiration by vegetation
and evaporative processes along the swale.
37
The loss of groundwater from the model domain via direct seepage from the canals
was simulated by assigning drain cells in the canal estates within Layer 1. Drainage
of 1000m2/day was initially set, with a drainage depth of 1m below the land surface.
Initial attempts to assign these cells as fixed head cells failed due to the proposed
fixed head elevation (0.3m) lying below the bottom elevations of some cells in this
area, which the computer program would not accept.
38
Monitoring Bores
DNRMW, HLA and QUT monitoring bores are represented in the model as
observation points. The locations of the monitoring bores in the upper, perched
aquifer are shown in Figure 14 and the bores in the basal aquifer are shown in
Figure 15. Within the model, Layer 1 (the shallow, unconfined aquifer) contained 25
monitoring bores and Layer 4 (the basal, semi-confined aquifer) contained 20
monitoring bores. The bores were used as model calibration points to achieve
calibration in steady-state.
Initial Hydraulic Heads
Initial hydraulic heads for the model were subset from the whole island steady-state
model completed by Spring (2005).
Figure 14. Location of 25 shallow monitoring bores used in the model (Layer 1)
39
Figure 15. Location of 20 deep monitoring bores used in the model (Layer 4)
Hydraulic Conductivities
Initial steady-state hydraulic conductivities were spatially invariant and based on
field test results conducted by Armstrong (2006) and HLA (2002). This method
resulted in a poor calibration between the field and the simulated water levels.
Zones were established as shown in Figure 16 and the parameter optimisation
software WinPEST was used to estimate the distribution of hydraulic conductivities.
Observed groundwater levels were matched to hydrologic inputs through the
process of inverse parameter estimation.
determination of parameter values that produce the best possible fit to the available
observations (Hill, 1998). This was a valuable time-saving tool which enhanced the
model calibration.
problem solving otherwise the program can generate unrealistic values for aquifer
40
surface water runoff and interception by vegetation are expected to account for the
remainder of the rainfall (around 93%). Recharge of the aquifer was increased to
218mm/year (16% of the average annual rainfall) when potential evapotranspiration
was included into the model.
Evapotranspiration (ET) is expected to make up a large portion of the total
groundwater discharge for Bribie Island.
41
The ET parameters were split into 3 zones which are displayed in Figure 17.
Divisions were based on the dominant vegetation types on the island: pine
plantation, swale and National Park.
depending on the vegetation type.
unsaturated soil profiles could range from 3 to 5 metres (K. Bubb, pers comm.,
2005), so the extinction depth in the pine plantation areas was set at 3m. Extinction
depth in the swale and National Park areas was set at 2.5m.
42
assessment
was
conducted
on
the
following
model
inputs:
43
4.
RESULTS
4.1
4.1.1
Climate
Bribie Island has a sub-tropical climate and experiences a wet summer and a dry
winter. Figure 19 reveals that the maximum temperatures in the Moreton Bay area
range from 19C in winter and 28C in summer.
30
Caloundra
25
Temp C
20
15
10
5
0
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
30
Cape Moreton
25
Temp C
20
15
10
5
0
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
30
Redcliffe
25
Temp C
20
15
10
5
0
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Figure 19. Mean daily temperatures for Caloundra, Cape Moreton and Redcliffe
Rainfall records shown in Figure 20 reveal a seasonal trend in the data with a peak
period for rainfall occurring over summer and early autumn (December through
March). The mean annual rainfall from the Bongaree station, which operated for
44
nearly 59 years, is 1358mm/year. The mean monthly pan evaporation values from
the University of Queensland Bribie Island weather station (1970 1995) were
compared to mean monthly rainfall from the nearby Bongaree station in Figure 21.
Pan evaporation values exhibit seasonal fluctuations and usually exceed rainfall
from July through January. The mean annual pan evaporation was measured as
1679mm/year.
250
Bore 14100090
Bongaree Station
University of Qld
200
150
100
50
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Figure 21. Mean monthly rainfall compared to mean monthly pan evaporation
45
4.1.2
Data from all monitoring bores was used to develop a geological framework for the
central catchment of Bribie Island. The monitoring bores located within the central
area of Bribie Island are summarised in Appendix C and locations of all bores are
illustrated in Figure 22.
Figure 22. Location of monitoring bores used to build the geological framework
46
Lithological data from different sources (DNRMW, HLA and QUT) was collated and
interpreted to unify the data. Different naming conventions were used for lithology
in the various drilling programs conducted over many years. For example, material
in the upper profile that was described variably as sandstone, indurated sand or
Coffee Rock in previous drill hole logs were grouped into an indurated sand
assemblage.
Data was plotted in 3-dimensional space and interpolations of lithological data
between monitoring bores were made using the HydroGeo Analyst computer
package. Figure 23 shows the results of the process and graphically displays the
heterogeneous nature of the Bribie Island sandmass.
Standing water levels were recorded between May and November 2003 to obtain
site specific information to assist with understanding the groundwater flow
processes in the central catchment of Bribie Island (Appendix D).
Hydrograph analysis is an important method of presenting periodic measurements
(time series) of groundwater levels as the graphs display baseline trends in the
data.
hydrographs show that water level data can vary significantly from year to year, but
will remain relatively stable over the long term.
compensate for discharges from the aquifer, such as during droughts or due to
excessive pumping, the water level will fall over time.
Figure 24 shows a hydrograph of water levels recorded from a selection of
representative monitoring bores with long-term data.
plotted with a residual rainfall mass curve (RRMC) calculated for the site 14100090
(automatic tipping bucket rainfall gauge).
difference between the rainfall recorded for a month and the average rainfall for
each month. This curve is used to illustrate trends in rainfall to assist with the
detection of seasonal and longer-term climatic variations. An increase in the RRMC
indicates periods of above average rainfall and decreases indicate periods of below
average rainfall.
shallow and basal monitoring bores, mimic the trends of the RRMC.
In Figure 25 groundwater levels recorded across the central Bribie Island transect
are overlain on the hydrogeological cross section. This figure displays the lithology
47
of the area and the two aquifers present: the shallow water table of the perched
aquifer and the deeper potentiometric surface of the basal, semi-confined aquifer.
48
Figure 25. Cross section through central Bribie Island showing grounwater
levels and piezometer locations (modified from Armstrong, 2006)
4.1.3
Groundwater Quality
Table 6 (Appendix D). Groundwater monitoring bores near coastal areas, canal
developments or tidal creeks were found to have an increased electrical
conductivity (EC) compared to the fresh groundwater within the aquifers.
The
average pH values of groundwater within the upper aquifer and indurated sand
layer were slightly more acidic than the lower semi-confined aquifer.
Monitoring Bores
EC
EC
S/cm
S/cm
range
pH
pH
average
range
average
61 - 590
229
3.4 - 6.6
4.1
90.2 - 294
169
3.5 - 3.9
3.7
76.4 - 1018
317
3.7 - 5.8
4.9
1596 - 34800
14748
3.3 - 6.5
5.1
Groundwater samples were collected from selected monitoring bores across the
project area and analysed in the QUT laboratory (Appendix E). An ion balance was
calculated for each sample. An ion balance represents a summation of negative
and positive ions; expressed as equivalents [(sum of cations - sum of anions) / sum
of cations and anions]. An analysis returning an ion balance exceeding 5% was
regarded as poor (inaccurate). Water chemistry results completed in this study
were compared and combined with existing water chemistry records. One analysis
per bore was selected as a representative sample of that monitoring bore for
presentation in the following graphs.
The major ions of groundwater from monitoring bores within the central Bribie Island
area are plotted on a Trilinear diagram shown in Figure 26. Trilinear plots display
data based on the percentage of major cations and anions of a water sample. This
plot can reveal useful properties and relationships of different groundwater groups.
51
Trilinear diagrams can indicate samples with similar chemical compositions, via the
clustering of data points.
The Trilinear plot of groundwater samples within the central catchment of Bribie
Island shows that the dominant water type in this area is Na-Cl type water. A
number of groundwater samples, predominantly from the basal aquifer, display an
increase in calcium and bicarbonate ions.
52
53
Figure 28. Stiff patterns overlain on the cross section through central Bribie Island
(modified from Armstrong, 2006)
4.2
MODELLING
4.2.1
Conceptual Model
Models are used to represent a simplified form of reality to assist with developing an
understanding of the groundwater resource. Mathematical models are based on a
conceptual understanding of the physical system to be modelled. A conceptual
model involves the conceptualisation of the geology and hydrology of a groundwater
system.
As discussed in Chapter 2, Bribie Island is composed of Quaternary sand deposits
that overlie bedrock of the Early Jurassic Landsborough Sandstone Formation.
Groundwater on Bribie Island occurs as a freshwater 'lens' within the intergranular
spaces of the heterogeneous, sand deposits.
occur on the island: a shallow, perched, unconfined aquifer and a deeper, semiconfined, basal aquifer. A hydrogeologically significant layer of indurated sand,
locally known as Coffee Rock, separates these aquifers (Harbison, 1998; Harbison
and Cox, 1998; Spring, 2005; Armstrong, 2006). Hydraulic conductivity results from
field testing on Bribie Island range from 0.3 to 18.5m/day for the shallow, perched
aquifer and 1 to 25m/day for the basal, semi-confined aquifer.
Bribie Islands groundwater aquifers are recharged via direct infiltration of rainwater
into the porous sands.
calculated an aquifer recharge of 7% of the average annual rainfall for this part of
the island.
Evapotranspiration and groundwater discharge to the sea dominate groundwater
discharge processes on Bribie. Other drainage mechanisms include evaporation,
surface run-off and some direct drainage from tidal creeks along west coast
(Harbison, 1998; Harbison and Cox, 2000).
55
4.2.2
Mathematical Modelling
Analytical Solution
An analytical solution is the simplest approach to modelling. A preliminary estimate
of groundwater discharge at the coast was calculated using Darcys Law. The area
assessed covered the same area as the groundwater flow model. The input values
and results from this analysis are listed in Table 7. The estimate of groundwater
discharge from the central catchment of Bribie Island totalled approximately
8000m3/day.
layers on the island and representative hydraulic conductivities gained from field
testing. Discharge results were not directly verified with field data and are therefore
are unlikely to be very accurate.
Q=
KA(h1 h2 )
L
Units
Shallow
Sands
Indurated
Sand
Basal
Sands
K mean
m/day
6.4#
0.4#
13*
A mean
m3
193500
279500
860000
(h1-h2) mean
4.5
2.5
1.5
L mean
2875
2875
2875
m3/day
2000
100
6000
Q = discharge
#
56
Numerical Modelling
A rudimentary steady-state groundwater flow model was developed for the central
area of Bribie Island. The model was designed to investigate recharge, hydraulic
properties, boundary conditions, discharge, flow budget and the sensitivity of model
parameters on model results.
Model Calibration
Model calibration is the process of refining selected model input parameters to
achieve an acceptable degree of correspondence between the model simulation
and observations of the groundwater flow system (ASTM, 1994). Calibrations were
based on achieving the best fit between simulated groundwater levels and water
levels recorded from field observation.
using inverse problem solving with the WinPEST package, which is included with
the Visual MODFLOW program.
The study included qualitative and quantitative measures of calibration. Qualitative
measures include the comparison of expected water level contours, hydraulic
gradients and flow directions with those simulated by the model.
Quantitative
57
Figure 29
presented in Figure 30 and Appendix G contains the simulated and observed water
levels. A scattergram of observed heads verses modelled heads for the steadystate calibration is included in Figure 31.
The normalised root mean square value from the optimised steady-state model was
4.5%, a value that represents the collective error in the model outputs. This value
was based on measured (actual) verses predicted water levels and should be less
than 5 percent (L. Luba, pers comm., 2005). The correlation coefficient is 0.99; this
value tends to 1 for perfect calibrations (Middlemis, 2000). The absolute residual
mean for the steady-state model is 0.21m. The maximum residual in the model
between assumed and simulated water levels is +0.94m at monitoring bore
14100135.
58
59
a)
b)
60
Water Budget
In addition to the calculated hydraulic heads, MODFLOW uses computed heads to
develop a mass balance (volumetric balance).
accuracy of the numerical solution. A good mass balance may not guarantee an
accurate solution, however a poor mass balance usually indicates problems within
the model.
consequences (Voss, 1998), data in the mass balance contains useful information
used to identify the relative importance of flows into and out of the system
(Anderson, 1993).
The mass balance graph shown in Figure 32 plots the volume of water entering and
leaving the system through the flow boundary conditions. The final steady-state
model produced a mass balance error of 0 %. The percent discrepancy of a model
should be less than 1 percent (Anderson, 1993).
As anticipated, the mass balance data shows that rainfall is the primary model input
with 25163m3/day. There is a relatively insignificant input from the constant head
boundaries of 5m3/day.
Minor losses occur via drains (397m3/day) and flow across the
boundaries was 9512m3/day, around 16% more than the preliminary estimate of
8000m3/day, determined from Darcys Law flow equation.
61
62
The flow zone budget data in Table 8 outlines the flow rates of water entering and
leaving user-defined zones through flow boundary conditions and through other
user-defined zones. This provides information related to groundwater movement in
areas outlined by the modeller. Five zones of interest were delineated: zones 1 3
in the upper aquifer (representing three different vegetation groups - National Park,
swale and pine plantation, respectively); zone 4 in the indurated, sand layer; and
zone 5 in the basal aquifer.
Rainfall was the dominant recharge process for Layer 1 (perched aquifer, zones 1 3) of the model while for the lower sands (Layers 2, 3 and 4, zones 4 and 5)
recharge was via vertical leakage of water from the overlying sand layers.
Groundwater
discharge
from
Layer
of
the
model
is
dominated
by
63
Layer 1
National
Park &
remainder
Pine
Plantation
Layer 2 & 3
Layer 4
Swale
Zone 1
Zone 2
Zone 3
Zone 4
Zone 5
IN:
Constant Head
Head Dep Bounds
Recharge
Flow (m /day)
4.8
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
15511.0
2215.8
7435.9
--
--
Zone 2 to 1
= 31.4
Zone 1 to 2
= 51.5
Zone 1 to 3
= 182.2
Zone 1 to 4
= 3787.7
Zone 4 to 5
= 6953.0
Zone 3 to 1
= 182.4
Zone 3 to 2
= 136.2
Zone 2 to 3
= 5.6
Zone 2 to 4
= 968.0
Zone 4 to 1
= 54.2
Zone 4 to 2
= 0.0
Zone 4 to 3
= 0.0
Zone 3 to 4
= 2308.3
Zone 5 to 4
= 21.4
Total IN
15784
2403.5
7623.7
7085.4
6953.0
Flow (m3/day)
OUT:
Constant Head
2595.9
--
--
59.6
6856.4
Drains
397.1
--
--
--
--
ET
8728.7
1386.4
4954.6
--
--
40.6
12.0
42.2
18.3
75.6
Zone 1 to 2
= 51.5
Zone 2 to 1
= 31.4
Zone 3 to 1
= 182.4
Zone 4 to 1
= 54.2
Zone 5 to 4
= 21.4
Zone 1 to 3
= 182.2
Zone 2 to 3
= 5.6
Zone 3 to 2
= 136.2
Zone 4 to 2
= 0.0
Zone 1 to 4
= 3787.7
Zone 2 to 4
= 968.0
Zone 3 to 4
= 2308.3
Zone 4 to 3
= 0.0
Zone 4 to 5
= 6953.0
Total OUT
15784
2404
7624
7085
6953
IN - OUT
0.033
-0.004
0.017
0.2
-0.244
% discrepancy
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
64
Altering
65
66
5.
5.1
HYDRAULIC MONITORING
5.1.1
Climate
Data from various sources (DNRMW, HLA and QUT) was collated and interpreted
in order to conceptualise the hydrogeological system in the central catchment of
Bribie Island.
Lithological data was interpreted and the various stratigraphic descriptions from the
different sources were standardised to allow comparison of data. The resulting
interpretation was plotted in 3-dimensional space using the HydroGeo Analyst
computer package.
central Bribie Island was spatially heterogeneous in both lateral and vertical extent.
The sandmass aquifer system in central Bribie Island contains fine to coarse sands,
clayey sands, clay bands and the hydrogeologically significant indurated sands.
The indurated sands affect groundwater flow on the island by impeding the
infiltration of water into the sandmass.
67
Groundwater levels recorded in the field across central Bribie Island show a distinct
separation between the shallow, perched aquifer and the basal, semi-confined
aquifer.
groundwater in the surficial, clean sands is perched on the indurated,
Quaternary sands and occurs under unconfined conditions. The water table
mirrors the topography and water levels range from around 1 to 7.3mAHD.
the indurated sands act as a semi-confining layer causing the groundwater
in the basal sands to occur under semi-confined conditions.
The
In the
upper, perched aquifer, the sides of the beach ridges offer the steepest gradient in
central Bribie Island.
groundwater flow is along an east-west axis, towards the low-lying central swale or
the coastline. The lower basal aquifer forms a gentle groundwater mound, with
water flowing east and west to the coastline to discharge via groundwater seepage
off the coast. As flow can only occur parallel to streamlines, the north-south flow
along the length of the island would be nominal compared to flow along the eastwest axis.
5.1.3
Groundwater Quality
68
bores near the coast, canals or tidal creeks was found to have an increased
electrical conductivity. Electrical conductivity readings were brackish to saline and
ranged from 1596 to 34800S/cm. Predominantly the groundwater on Bribie is
fresh even though the island is surrounded by seawater. However the elevated
conductivity in some samples indicates the vulnerability of this type of groundwater
system to seawater encroachment.
Measurements indicate that the pH of groundwater is acidic to slightly acidic (3.36.6). This has been attributed to the breakdown of plant material into organic acids
(Harbison, 1998; Armstrong, 2006). The average pH values of groundwater within
the upper aquifer (4.1) and indurated sand layer (3.7) were slightly more acidic than
the lower semi-confined aquifer (4.9).
Groundwater chemistry analysis can indicate samples with similar chemical
compositions, via the clustering of data points, and show trends occurring within
groundwater groups. Groundwater samples from aquifers in central Bribie Island
show that groundwater from both aquifers is dominated by Na-Cl type water. This is
to be anticipated in a coastal island environment where the primary mechanism of
groundwater recharge is coastal rainfall containing cyclic salt.
Quartz, the dominant mineral on the island, belongs to the silicate group of minerals
which are slow to chemically react with water. Some minerals are more soluble and
react fast upon contact with water, for example carbonate minerals (Appelo and
Postma, 2005). A number of groundwater samples from the basal aquifer possess
higher concentrations of calcium and bicarbonate ions.
Enrichment of Ca and
HCO3 could be due to chemical interactions with shell material while water is
infiltrating to the lower levels. The longer residence times of groundwater in the
basal aquifer may also be a factor.
Groundwater recharge of the Bribie Island aquifers is via the infiltration of coastal
rainfall into the upper sand unit and vertical leakage of groundwater into the
underlying sand units. This common recharge source is reflected by the similarity of
the physico-chemical parameters and the water chemistry results. However, the
separation of the two aquifers by semi-confining, indurated sands enables chemical
interactions to alter the groundwater, resulting in subtle, localised differences in the
groundwater quality.
69
5.2
MODELLING
5.2.1
Analytical Solution
rudimentary assessment of the discharge from the central area of the island.
Groundwater discharge from the aquifer system in the central catchment of the
island is approximately 8000m3/day. Discharge from the upper, perched aquifer
was in the order of 2000m3/day and 6000m3/day discharged from the basal, semiconfined aquifer.
aquifer is attributed to the larger volume of this aquifer and its higher hydraulic
conductivity rates.
A minor volume of groundwater discharges from the indurated sands (approximately
100m3/day).
sandmass and has the lowest recorded hydraulic conductivity values. The process
of induration has resulted in the infilling of pore spaces between sand grains which
has reduced the hydraulic conductivity and available storage of the sand.
Darcys Law was used to calculate an initial estimate of discharge from the central
area of Bribie Island.
thickness and hydraulic conductivity of the aquifers were not taken into account.
The simplifications introduced uncertainty into the discharge calculations.
5.2.2
Numerical Modelling
70
the overall flow regime in the area but that it is unlikely to model the local flows
accurately.
Groundwater in the upper, perched aquifer mirrored the topography of the sand
ridges. Water levels range from zero at the coastline up to 8.5mAHD in the higher
beach ridges. The simulated potentiometric surface of the basal aquifer was a
gentle groundwater mound with the highest water level (3mAHD) centrally located in
the north of the study area. This correlates with the expected water level contours
determined from field investigations.
Groundwater levels in the model in the upper, perched aquifer and the basal, semiconfined aquifer were found to be lower along the coastal areas and in the vicinity of
the central swale. This matches patterns in water levels revealed in field studies
which are attributed to proximity to groundwater discharge locations and
mechanisms. Direct discharge along the coastline and groundwater seepage off
the coast are significant groundwater discharge mechanisms on Bribie. The central
swale acts as a local groundwater sink that supports wetlands which are reliant on
shallow groundwater. Any change that alters the shallow groundwater levels has
the potential to negatively impact on this native vegetation, which usually grows
best in swampy, freshwater sites (Boland et al, 1992).
Water Budget
The calibrated groundwater model produced an estimated groundwater budget for
the model domain. The primary source of groundwater recharge is infiltration of
rainfall for the upper, perched aquifer (Layer 1) and percolation of groundwater into
the lower indurated sands (Layers 2 and 3) and the semi-confined, basal aquifer
(Layer 4). An insignificant amount of water enters the Bribie aquifers from constant
head boundaries (5m3/day). However the Visual MODFLOW modelling package is
not able to model the freshwater-seawater interface so this value is unlikely to
adequately represent the water interface at the coast.
While Bribie Island aquifers form groundwater mounds above sea level, they restrict
saline water intrusion into the aquifer system but this balance needs to be
constantly monitored to protect the existing balance. Any change that lowers the
water table or potentiometric surface of the aquifers has the potential to alter the
seawater-fresh groundwater boundary.
71
could lower the groundwater levels within the aquifer system. The potential for
induced seawater intrusion into the island was not investigated in this study but
would be a good topic for future research.
The flow budget describes how much water leaves the groundwater system under
steady-state conditions. The dominant drainage processes on Bribie Island are
evapotranspiration (Layer 1 only - 15070m3/day) and groundwater seepage along
the coast, from canals and tidal creeks (all layers - 9512m3/day). Groundwater
enters the sea through offshore sediments in the Pumicestone Passage and the
Coral Sea.
groundwater discharged from central Bribie Island, approximately 16% less than the
model. The drain cells in Layer 1 and flow across the general head boundaries in
Layers 2, 3 and 4 remove minor amounts of water from the system. Any natural or
anthropogenic change that significantly reduces groundwater seepage from the
coastline has the potential to alter the seawater - fresh groundwater boundary. This
could result in the degradation of the freshwater aquifer system due to saline water
intrusion. Changes to the quantity and quality of environmental flows discharging
into Pumicestone Passage have the potential to impact ecosystems within the area.
Uncertainty and Sensitivity Assessment
Sources of uncertainty in numerical models can include geological, parameter (e.g.
hydraulic
conductivity
and
recharge)
and
boundary
condition uncertainty.
monitoring network in the Pacific Harbour area give good information about the
stratigraphy in the northern area. The northern portion of the model has 22 of the
25 piezometers in the upper aquifer and 17 of the 20 piezometers in the basal
aquifer. It was neither possible nor necessary to complete further monitoring bores
72
in the southern half of the study area due to budgetary constraints. Further drilling
would have confirmed the heterogeneity of the sand package but this information
was unlikely to add significantly to the current model as data would have to have
been simplified to mathematically model the system. The delineation of the different
sand units does not significantly affect the overall water budget in terms of the
amount of water that is discharged to the sea or Pumicestone Passage. However,
the lack of data may influence the representation of local conditions such as flow
directions or water levels in the south of the model.
The recharge rate has a large affect on the total volume of water that enters the
model. The groundwater model reveals a non-unique relationship; an increase in
the recharge rate causes a proportional increase in the evapotranspiration and
groundwater discharge along the coastal zone. As there were good records for this
parameter the data was not altered significantly.
There is uncertainty associated with the hydraulic conductivity parameters within the
model, especially for the indurated sand layer as there are few monitoring
piezometers targeting this interval. The hydraulic conductivities determined from
parameter estimation methods were limited between 1 and 110m/day (horizontal)
and between 0.0001 and 1.1m/day (vertical) to keep the values within limits of field
test data and published values for similar sedimentary units.
The uncertainties
associated with the hydraulic conductivity combined with the heterogeneity and
anisotropy of the sandmass cause uncertainties in direction and magnitude of flows
at a local scale. However, it is unlikely that the hydraulic conductivity values within
specific sand units will differ by more than an order of magnitude from the actual
field value.
The most important source of uncertainty in the model arises from the salt water
boundary not being integrated in the model.
uncertainty arises from treating the coastline as a constant head boundary. The
proportion of groundwater that discharges to these boundaries is dependent upon
the assigned head value and/or the hydraulic conductivities values for the
sediments near the coast. Sea water does extend into the Bribie Island aquifer and
interacts with the fresh aquifer. This is revealed by water quality samples collected
along the coastal areas and near tidal streams which have elevated electrical
conductivities.
groundwater flow and discharge in the central catchment of Bribie Island but does
73
not incorporate the interaction between the freshwater sea water along the coast
due to limitations of the software package. Groundwater levels along the coast are
influenced by sea water levels and tidal surges, which the model does not take into
account.
After modification of select parameter values during sensitivity analysis, the model
still shows the same basic behaviour. This includes the presence of groundwater
divides along the higher beach ridges, flow gradients from the higher beach ridges
down to the coast or swale areas and a dominant groundwater flow direction along
an east-west axis.
74
6.
6.1
There is a scarcity of data in the southern portion of the project area, near the
central swale and within the hydrogeologically significant indurated sand layer.
There are few existing monitoring bores in the southern portion of the model and the
bores present are not nested. There is limited information on the nature of the
indurated sands in the southern area.
aquifers cannot be observed and compared, and the paucity of data reduces the
accuracy of the model in the south. The model assumes the same stratigraphy in
the south as that in the north, which cannot be verified with the current reach of
piezometers in the south.
The central swale acts as a groundwater sink in the area and is of environmental
significance as it supports paperbark wetlands.
significance of this feature and its role as a drainage feature on the island, there are
insufficient monitoring bores along the length of this feature to monitor water levels
and water quality discharging into Pumicestone Passage.
The indurated sand layer is not considered a primary water producing unit within the
Bribie sandmass and as a result limited data exists for the layer. However, this
horizon is hydrogeologically significant to groundwater flow within the aquifer
system and the induration process reduces available storage within the Bribie
sandmass. Further information on the extent, specifically in the south, and the
hydraulic parameters of this unit are required in order to improve understanding of
the role and impact of the indurated sands within the aquifer system.
Monitoring bores are more useful where nested bore sites exist i.e. bores that are
screened at various depths in the aquifer system at the same location. This setup
assists with defining the different water quality parameters, groundwater levels and
hydraulic gradients in the separate aquifers. As shown in this project and others
preceding it, Bribie Island possesses separate but interconnected aquifers. It is
recommended that any future monitoring bores be installed as nested bore sites.
Bores should be screened in the shallow aquifer, the basal aquifer, and in the
indurated sands.
75
Hydraulic testing is recommended at other locations within the different sand units
on Bribie Island. This will provide improved constraints on parameter estimation
methods used in the mathematical model.
The existing monitoring bore network should be maintained and monitoring
continued on a regular basis.
6.2
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Groundwater recharge is via the infiltration of coastal rainfall into the surfical sands
and percolation of groundwater into the lower sand units across the island.
Analyses of groundwater from the two aquifers revealed an overlap of physicochemical parameters and water chemistry results which reflects the interconnection
of the aquifer systems. Groundwater from the island was dominated by fresh and
acidic to slightly acidic quality water.
Groundwater samples reflect the coastal environment setting with groundwater
dominated by Na-Cl type water.
required to protect this water resource against deterioration from saltwater intrusion.
Environmental flows from tidal creeks and canals and groundwater discharge from
the coastal areas has the potential to affect water quality within the tidal estuary,
Pumicestone Passage. Monitoring of groundwater quality should continue on a
regular basis in areas of groundwater discharge, including the central swale area
and at locations along the coast.
76
6.3
NUMERICAL MODEL
77
evaluate the effects of seasonal changes to the shallow groundwater and its
consequent interaction with the phreatophytic vegetation.
Refining hydraulic conductivity based on different sand units, both vertically
within the sand column and horizontally across the central area, specifically
in the southern portion. The model by necessity assumes averages across
large areas with limited data to validate against. While this may not affect
the average water budget, it may affect the local flow directions and flow
rates.
Developing a model with a computer package that allows for the modelling
of the freshwater-saltwater interface. The potential for seawater intrusion
into the fresh aquifer system was not investigated in this study but it would
be a topic for future research.
78
In a number of aquifers around the world, natural groundwater resources have been
impacted by the extraction of groundwater for human supply.
Groundwater
extraction can lower water levels and cause saltwater intrusion into productive
aquifers in coastal settings. Changes to the quantity and quality of environmental
flows discharging into Pumicestone Passage could impact ecosystems within the
tidal estuary and potentially areas of Moreton Bay.
We need to understand the processes in coastal aquifers and develop an adequate
monitoring bore network to research and ultimately protect these resources.
Further aquifer studies with adequate field monitoring and subsequent recalibration
of the model will improve performance and increase accuracy of the central Bribie
Island model.
79
7.
REFERENCES
American Society for Testing and Materials (1994). D5611-94, Standard Guide for
Conducting a Sensitivity Analysis for a Ground-Water Flow Model Application.
Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Philadelphia.
American Society for Testing and Materials (1996). D5981-96, Standard Guide for
Calibrating a Ground-Water Flow Model Application. Annual Book of ASTM
Standards, Philadelphia.
Appelo, C.A.J. and Postma, D. (2005). Geochemistry, groundwater and pollution.
A.A. Balkema Publishers, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Armstrong, T.J. and Cox, M.E. (2002). The relationship between groundwater and
surface water character and wetland habitats, Bribie Island, Queensland.
Balancing the Groundwater Budget: 7th IAH National Groundwater Conference,
Darwin, Australia.
Armstrong, T.J. (2006). Determination of aquifer properties and heterogeneity in a
large coastal sandmass: Bribie Island, Southeast Queensland. Masters thesis
(unpublished), School Natural Resource Sciences, Queensland University of
Technology, Brisbane.
Anderson, P.F. (1993).
Fundamentals of Ground-Water
80
Condesso de Melo, M.T., Harques da Silva, M.A. and Edmunds, W.M. (1999).
Hydrochemistry and Flow Modelling of the Aveiro Multilayer Cretaceous
Aquifer. Physi. Chem. Earth (B), 24, 4: 331 336.
Cox, M.E., Harbison, J., Ezzy, T., Preda, M., Brooke, B., Lee, R., Lester, J.,
Oberhardt, M. and Laycock, J. (2000a). Coffee Rock: an Overview of its
Character and Occurrence in the Pumicestone Region.
PASSCON 2000.
Groundwater monitoring
81
Evans, P.A., Werner, A and Olsen, M. (2002). Impact assessment for development
of a sand aquifer in a coastal wetland area.
Jersey.
Geoscience Australia, 2003. Australian Government. www.ga.gov.au
Harbaugh, A.W., Banta, E.R., Hill, M.C., and McDonald, M.G. (2000). MODFLOW2000, the U.S. Geological Survey modular ground-water model -- User guide to
modularization concepts and the Ground-Water Flow Process: U.S. Geological
Survey Open-File Report 00-92, 121 p.
Harbison, J. (1998). The occurrence and chemistry of groundwater on Bribie Island,
a large barrier island in Moreton Bay, Southeast Queensland. Masters thesis
(unpublished), School Natural Resource Sciences, Queensland University of
Technology, Brisbane.
Harbison, J.E. and Cox, M.E. (1998).
groundwater on Bribie Island, Moreton Bay. In: Tibbetts, I.R., Hall, N.J. and
Dennison, W.C. (editors) Moreton Bay and Catchment.
School of Marine
PASSCON 2000.
Science
82
Bribie Island.
(unpublished).
Lang, S.C., McClure, S.T., Grosser, M., Lawless, M. and Herdy, T. (1998).
Sedimentation and Coastal Evolution, Northern Moreton Bay. In: Tibbetts, I.R.,
Hall, N.J. and Dennison, W.C. (editors) Moreton Bay and Catchment. School of
Marine Science, University of Queensland, Brisbane. pp. 55-66.
Langevin, C.D., Stewart, M.T. and Beaudoin, C.M. (1998). Effects of Sea Water
Canals on Fresh Water Resources: An example from Big Pine Key, Florida.
Groundwater, 36, 3: 503 513.
Lumsden, A.C. (1964). Bribie Island water supply. Geological Report, Geological
Survey of Queensland. Record 1964/8 (unpublished), Brisbane.
Lundstrom, U.S., Breemen, N. and Bain, D. (2000). The podzolization process. A
review. Geoderma, 94: 91 - 107.
83
Mace, R., Chowdury, A.H., Anaya, R. and Way, S-C. (2000). Groundwater
availability of the Trinity Aquifer, Hill Country Areas, Texas: Numerical
Simulations through 2050. Texas Water Development Board. Report 353.
Marszalek, A.S. and Isaacs, L.T. (1988). A Field Investigation of the Effects of
Treated Effluent Recharge into a Sandy Aquifer: Bribie Island Groundwater
Study, University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Masselink, G. and Hughes, M.G. (2003). Introduction to coastal processes and
geomorphology. Arnold, London, 354 p. pp.
McDonald, M.G., and Harbaugh, A.W. (1988). A modular three-dimensional finitedifference ground-water flow model: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of
Water-Resources Investigations, 586 p.
McKellar, J.L. (1993).
southeastern Queensland. In: J.L. McKellar, L.C. Cranfield and A.D. Robertson
(editors), Queensland Geology 5. Dept. of Minerals and Energy Queensland,
Brisbane.
Mercer, J.W. and Faust, C.R. (1981). Ground-Water Modeling. National Water
Well Association, Ohio.
Middlemis, H. (2000). Groundwater flow modelling guideline: Murray-Darling Basin
Commission. Aquaterra Consulting Pty Ltd, www.mdbc.gov.au
Paul, L. (2003).
in South
Strategic Guide to
84
Bribie Island, Queensland. ICHE 2004, 6th International Conference on Hydroscience and Engineering, Brisbane, Australia.
Spring, K. (2005) Groundwater flow model for a large sandmass with
heterogeneous media, Bribie Island, Southeast Queensland. Masters thesis
(unpublished), School Natural Resource Sciences, Queensland University of
Technology, Brisbane.
Thompson, C.H. (1992).
Queensland .I. Field relationships and profile morphology. Aust. J. Soil Res.,
30: 593-613.
Thompson, C.H., Bridges, E.M. and Jenkins, D.A. (1996). Pans in humus podzols
(Humods and Aquods) in coastal southern Queensland. Aust. J. Soil Res., 34:
161 - 182.
Voss, C.I. (1998). Editors Message. Groundwater modelling: Simply powerful.
Hydrogeology Journal 6 (4).
Waterloo Hydrogeologic Inc (1995). Visual MODFLOW manual. Electronic version.
Werner, A. (1998a).
85
86
APPENDIX A
Climate Records
Rainfall Stations
Bongaree Bowls
Club
University of
Queensland
Dept. of Natural
Resources & Mines
Bore 14100090
Station Number
040027
040685
540055
1931 - 1990
1978 - 1993
1993 - present
59
15
11
Minimum
Rainfall (mm)
725.8
940.1
924.0
Maximum
Rainfall (mm)
2471.2
1639.0
2344.0
Average
Rainfall (mm)
1358.2
1287.3
1362.6
Redcliffe
Council
Cape Moreton
Lighthouse
Caloundra
Signal Station
040697
040043
040040
1981 - present
1869 - present
1899 - present
24
136
106
Duration of
Records
Years of Record
Stations
Station Number
Duration of
Records
Years of Record
APPENDIX B
Epan
(mm/day)
Epan
(mm/month)
January
31
6.2
192.2
February
28
5.4
151.2
March
31
4.8
148.8
April
30
3.9
117.0
May
31
2.9
89.9
June
30
2.6
78.0
July
31
2.7
83.7
August
31
3.5
108.5
September
30
4.7
141.0
October
31
5.5
170.5
November
30
6.1
183.0
December
31
6.5
201.5
365
4.6
1679.0
Annual
APPENDIX C
Bore Id.
Easting
Northing
Natural
Elevation
Relative
Elevation
Top of
screen
Bottom of
screen
Bottom of
hole
m (AHD)
m (AHD)
Source
14100079
508273
7021931
2.26
2.78
1.6
5.0
8.0
DNRMW
14100080
509460
7022453
1.57
2.09
1.0
5.5
12.0
DNRMW
14100081
510371
7023867
1.77
2.30
1.5
5.5
12.0
DNRMW
14100082
511889
7024604
6.65
7.17
11.5
17.5
22.0
DNRMW
14100083
509371
7014423
1.49
1.98
5.5
11.5
17.0
DNRMW
14100084
510832
7015006
2.96
3.37
7.0
13.0
19.6
DNRMW
14100085
512240
7016943
2.32
2.77
8.0
14.0
19.6
DNRMW
14100086
514225
7017526
3.51
3.94
11.5
17.5
24.2
DNRMW
14100087
513337
7011619
3.51
3.88
18.6
30.6
35.0
DNRMW
14100088
514053
7012117
8.43
8.86
34.0
40.0
42.6
DNRMW
14100089
515709
7012636
5.62
6.02
33.0
41.0
46.0
DNRMW
14100090
516314
7012892
3.58
3.95
16.0
22.0
38.0
DNRMW
14100090
516314
7012892
3.58
3.95
28.0
34.0
38.0
DNRMW
14100090
516314
7012892
4.88
DNRMW
14100091
513828
7007465
1.67
2.07
3.5
7.5
10.4
DNRMW
14100092
515309
7008251
7.04
7.44
12.0
16.0
24.2
DNRMW
14100093
516282
7009216
5.70
12.0
24.0
35.0
DNRMW
14100094
515615
7004079
1.93
2.31
6.5
11.5
15.0
DNRMW
14100095
517047
7004385
6.08
6.55
10.0
13.0
19.6
DNRMW
14100096
517818
7004599
5.69
6.11
11.0
15.0
19.6
DNRMW
Bore Id.
Easting
Northing
Natural
Elevation
Relative
Elevation
Top of
screen
Bottom of
screen
Bottom of
hole
m (AHD)
m (AHD)
Source
14100097
518122
7005306
5.71
6.06
13.0
18.0
28.8
DNRMW
14100098
520189
7005672
5.11
5.50
16.0
19.0
24.0
DNRMW
14100099
518122
7005183
5.71
6.03
4.1
7.1
7.1
DNRMW
14100100
515693
7012648
5.62
6.06
14.0
20.0
20.0
DNRMW
14100101
514038
7012112
8.43
8.83
12.0
20.0
20.0
DNRMW
14100102
518670
7003367
3.47
3.69
0.0
10.1
10.1
DNRMW
14100102
518670
7003367
3.76
DNRMW
14100103
520186
7004318
3.95
4.31
0.0
6.6
6.6
DNRMW
14100104
518036
7002845
2.80
3.04
0.0
4.2
4.2
DNRMW
14100104
518036
7002845
3.16
DNRMW
14100105
517761
7003122
3.92
4.30
0.0
9.1
9.1
DNRMW
14100106
518234
7006290
3.82
4.05
7.6
8.2
8.2
DNRMW
14100106
518234
7006290
3.96
4.20
DNRMW
14100107
517792
7005307
4.14
4.54
7.6
8.2
8.2
DNRMW
14100107
517792
7005307
5.15
DNRMW
14100108
517655
7006107
3.59
3.89
7.1
7.7
7.7
DNRMW
14100108
517655
7006107
4.45
DNRMW
14100109
518373
7007336
2.70
3.03
7.4
8.0
8.0
DNRMW
14100110
517713
7008014
5.12
5.54
13.8
14.4
14.4
DNRMW
14100111
516972
7009800
4.59
4.89
11.7
12.3
12.3
DNRMW
Bore Id.
Easting
Northing
Natural
Elevation
Relative
Elevation
Top of
screen
Bottom of
screen
Bottom of
hole
m (AHD)
m (AHD)
Source
14100112
515879
7006791
6.47
6.82
8.2
8.8
8.8
DNRMW
14100112
515879
7006791
7.49
DNRMW
14100113
517660
7005035
3.98
4.65
0.0
3.8
3.8
DNRMW
14100114
516239
7009368
5.67
6.23
0.0
3.9
3.9
DNRMW
14100115
515031
7010068
6.31
6.96
0.0
3.8
3.8
DNRMW
14100116
515215
7006738
1.55
2.18
0.0
5.3
5.3
DNRMW
14100117
516222
7005001
2.87
2.90
0.0
1.5
1.5
DNRMW
14100118
519005
7006228
1.58
DNRMW
14100119
513559
7013404
9.50
10.05
20.0
26.0
28.5
DNRMW
14100119
513559
7013404
10.03
DNRMW
14100120
513371
7017342
10.34
10.87
20.0
23.0
23.3
DNRMW
14100120
513371
7017342
10.37
10.81
DNRMW
14100121
513070
7020327
9.32
9.89
20.0
23.0
23.5
DNRMW
14100122
511739
7012052
6.53
6.97
18.5
21.5
22.0
DNRMW
14100123
511112
7019436
6.37
6.84
7.0
10.0
11.3
DNRMW
14100124
511114
7021498
6.86
7.33
16.0
19.0
19.3
DNRMW
14100125
513559
7013404
9.50
28.5
DNRMW
14100126
511895
7012207
6.44
6.81
3.0
4.0
4.9
DNRMW
14100127
511112
7019498
6.50
7.32
2.9
4.4
4.7
DNRMW
14100128
510860
7014945
2.95
3.42
DNRMW
Bore Id.
Easting
Northing
Natural
Elevation
Relative
Elevation
Top of
screen
Bottom of
screen
Bottom of
hole
m (AHD)
m (AHD)
Source
14100128
510860
7014945
3.01
3.51
1.2
1.7
1.7
DNRMW
14100129
512264
7011835
DNRMW
14100130
513199
7011681
4.05
4.81
0.4
0.9
0.9
DNRMW
14100131
515146
7010749
6.33
6.73
2.6
5.6
6.1
QUT
14100132
515443
7010894
5.70
6.18
2.6
5.6
6.1
QUT
14100133
515664
7010969
5.32
5.71
2.6
5.6
6.6
QUT
14100134
516438
7011217
4.30
4.73
1.0
4.0
6.6
QUT
14100135
516666
7011284
3.17
3.82
0.2
3.0
10.5
QUT
14100136
516040
7012805
4.09
4.49
33.5
39.5
43.6
QUT
14100137
516030
7012800
4.16
4.67
0.2
3.2
3.2
QUT
14100138
515717
7012656
5.79
6.40
1.8
4.8
5.5
QUT
14100139
515188
7012486
6.66
7.14
2.7
5.7
6.1
QUT
14100140
514731
7012328
7.62
8.07
23.3
29.3
44.3
QUT
14100141
514721
7012325
7.53
8.00
2.0
5.0
6.5
QUT
14100142
514028
7012110
8.19
8.69
1.7
4.7
6.7
QUT
14100143
514028
7012098
8.08
8.45
7.0
10.0
10.7
QUT
14100144
513078
7011843
3.84
4.25
22.0
28.0
35.9
QUT
14100145
513083
7011853
3.96
4.41
0.2
2.7
3.2
QUT
14100146
512452
7011906
3.67
4.08
1.0
4.0
5.4
QUT
14100147
512447
7011911
3.74
4.13
20.0
26.0
32.0
QUT
Bore Id.
Easting
Northing
Natural
Elevation
Relative
Elevation
Top of
screen
Bottom of
screen
Bottom of
hole
m (AHD)
m (AHD)
Source
14100148
511873
7012200
6.48
6.83
15.0
21.0
27.0
QUT
14100149
511860
7011751
4.80
5.18
0.5
3.5
3.5
QUT
14100150
511855
7011746
4.79
5.24
4.0
7.0
7.0
QUT
14100151
511855
7011756
4.72
5.19
27.0
33.0
34.9
QUT
MW 1S
514483
7010444
7.61
7.80
6.0
HLA
MW 2S
514541
7010513
7.36
5.0
HLA
MW 3S
514922
7010622
6.63
6.93
HLA
MW 3D
514911
7010622
6.69
7.05
17.0
20.0
21.0
HLA
MW 4S
513978
7010331
5.19
5.52
HLA
MW 4D
513968
7010329
5.23
5.81
19.0
22.0
23.0
HLA
MW 5S
513759
7010794
5.11
5.54
HLA
MW 5D
513768
7010804
5.11
5.62
16.8
19.8
21.0
HLA
MW 6S
514051
7011182
6.58
7.07
HLA
MW 6D
514043
7011171
6.58
6.91
20.0
23.0
24.0
HLA
MW 7S
514816
7009985
6.72
7.31
HLA
MW 7D
514818
7009973
6.70
7.15
25.0
28.0
29.0
HLA
MW 8S
514984
7011115
7.82
8.09
HLA
MW 8D
514991
7011107
7.76
8.31
19.0
22.0
23.0
HLA
Bore Id.
Easting
Northing
Natural
Elevation
Relative
Elevation
Top of
screen
Bottom of
screen
Bottom of
hole
m (AHD)
m (AHD)
Source
MW 09D
514010
7010957
5.80
6.35
4.5
5.5
8.0
HLA
MW 10D
514112
7010403
5.83
6.33
4.5
5.5
8.0
HLA
MW 11D
514105
7010112
5.07
5.64
10.0
11.0
12.0
HLA
MW 12D
514299
7010611
8.19
8.75
13.5
14.5
17.0
HLA
MW 13D
514490
7010966
6.83
7.36
11.8
12.8
17.0
HLA
MW 14D
514529
7010693
6.59
7.19
4.0
5.0
10.0
HLA
MW 15D
514697
7010221
6.63
7.13
4.0
5.0
9.5
HLA
MW 16D
514814
7010962
7.00
7.59
5.0
6.0
9.3
HLA
MW 17D
514833
7010114
6.60
7.10
10.2
11.2
13.7
HLA
MW 18D
514780
7010561
6.53
7.11
12.0
13.0
14.1
HLA
MW 19D
515008
7010109
6.59
7.15
21.5
22.5
31.1
HLA
MW 09S
513810
7010610
5.45
5.97
1.8
2.3
4.0
HLA
MW 10S
514004
7010745
5.96
6.47
2.0
2.5
3.9
HLA
MW 11S
514080
7010538
5.99
6.49
1.5
2.0
3.3
HLA
MW 12S
514101
7010114
5.03
5.56
2.0
2.5
2.7
HLA
MW 13S
514102
7010278
5.67
6.19
1.7
2.2
3.2
HLA
Bore Id.
Easting
Northing
Natural
Elevation
Relative
Elevation
Top of
screen
Bottom of
screen
Bottom of
hole
m (AHD)
m (AHD)
Source
MW 14S
514304
7010609
8.19
8.70
3.0
3.5
4.2
HLA
MW 15S
514302
7011012
8.34
8.86
3.0
3.5
5.0
HLA
MW 16S
514423
7010113
8.00
8.57
3.5
4.0
5.8
HLA
MW 17S
514463
7011102
6.75
7.30
1.3
1.8
3.5
HLA
MW 18S
514562
7010611
6.71
7.23
1.5
2.0
3.3
HLA
MW 19S
514611
7010766
6.67
7.19
1.3
1.8
4.0
HLA
MW 20S
514693
7010223
6.68
7.20
1.8
2.3
3.3
HLA
MW 21S
514753
7010115
6.52
7.08
1.8
2.3
3.0
HLA
MW 22S
514761
7010991
7.12
7.65
1.4
1.9
3.0
HLA
MW 23S
514808
7009977
6.43
6.96
6.0
6.5
9.3
HLA
MW 24S
514932
7010927
6.69
7.21
1.0
1.5
3.0
HLA
MW 25S
515000
7010408
6.17
6.67
1.0
1.5
10.0
HLA
MW 26S
515006
7010111
6.58
7.11
2.3
2.8
2.8
HLA
MW 27S
515076
7010694
6.71
7.23
1.3
1.8
2.1
HLA
APPENDIX D
Bore Id
SWL
EC
(m b ToC)
(S/cm)
088
6.30
402
088
6.47
088
pH
Eh
D.O.
Temp.
(mV)
(ppm)
(oC)
5.76
161
0.96
22.0
376
5.65
150
0.56
6.58
344
5.64
204
092
6.92
315
5.62
092
6.58
320
092
6.56
092
Colour
Odour
Date
Clear
17/07/03
22.9
Crystal clear
24/09/03
1.35
22.4
Crystal clear
13/11/03
218
1.77
20.1
Medium brown
14/05/03
5.31
234
1.24
21.4
16/07/03
307
5.22
246
0.72
22.2
Milky clear
15/09/03
6.79
307
5.28
272
1.12
22.7
Milky clear
11/11/03
101
6.34
193
4.85
240
0.96
21.8
Almost clear
17/07/03
101
6.50
93
4.60
258
0.82
23.4
Weak tea
24/09/03
101
6.69
101.8
5.30
236
0.66
22.7
Weak tea
13/11/03
112
4.94
331
6.55
135
3.17
21.0
15/05/03
112
4.98
287
5.02
174
0.92
21.6
Dark tea
16/07/03
112
5.09
264
5.25
162
0.73
22.2
Weak tea
15/09/03
112
5.43
262
5.14
185
1.1
22.3
Weak tea
11/11/03
114
0.96
216
3.77
270
1.00
21.2
Dark tea
17/07/03
114
1.28
178
4.23
281
0.85
20.4
Dark tea
15/09/03
114
1.46
180.4
4.09
284
0.97
22.4
Tea
11/11/03
115
0.70
362
3.62
323
3.64
21.1
Dark brown
14/05/03
115
0.72
335
3.71
309
2.32
21.1
Dark tea
16/07/03
115
1.09
319
3.67
319
0.87
21.0
Dark tea
15/09/03
115
1.31
319
3.74
331
1.08
22.4
Dark tea
11/11/03
Bore Id
Eh
D.O.
Temp.
Odour
Date
(mV)
(ppm)
(oC)
6.52
139
1.73
21.3
Light brown
15/05/03
18350
5.95
155
2.16
21.0
saline
16/07/03
1.61
16420
5.45
176
2.34
21.1
Milky clear
15/09/03
116
1.55
17720
5.59
187
1.98
21.5
Milky clear
11/11/03
126
3.36
74
4.48
335
0.75
22.0
Dark tea
24/09/03
126
3.52
106.1
4.48
398
1.21
23.9
Tea
13/11/03
129
1.76
68
4.85
336
3.63
20.7
24/09/03
129
2.20
65.8
4.51
364
0.97
21.9
13/11/03
131
1.00
67
4.06
319
3.66
20.4
Dark brown
14/05/03
131
1.08
63
4.19
320
4.35
19.8
Dark brown
15/07/03
131
1.38
61
4.60
323
0.89
21.2
24/09/03
131
1.49
62.2
4.30
310
1.04
23.2
Lt murky brown
12/11/03
132
1.10
396
3.85
306
0.75
20.5
24/09/03
132
1.03
403
3.67
321
2.38
22.1
Dark brown
12/11/03
133
0.89
373
3.64
349
4.83
20.4
24/09/03
133
1.90
314
3.68
356
4.02
23.8
Dark brown
12/11/03
139
1.33
398
4.28
269
0.72
21.2
24/09/03
139
1.35
402
4.38
255
0.89
21.8
13/11/03
140
5.37
321
4.99
212
2.07
21.5
Clear tea
17/07/03
140
5.55
303
4.91
250
0.60
22.7
Clear
24/09/03
140
5.65
307
4.80
250
0.62
22.4
Clear
13/11/03
SWL
EC
(m b ToC)
(S/cm)
116
0.88
24300
116
1.35
116
pH
Colour
Bore Id
SWL
EC
(m b ToC)
(S/cm)
141
0.97
170
141
1.26
141
Eh
D.O.
Temp.
Odour
Date
(mV)
(ppm)
(oC)
4.49
250
1.41
19.2
17/07/03
168
4.33
282
0.81
20.6
24/09/03
1.23
188.4
4.63
281
0.98
22.8
13/11/03
142
1.20
83
4.18
265
3.48
19.7
Medium brown
14/05/03
142
1.26
72
4.80
250
3.82
19.4
17/07/03
142
1.68
69
4.34
266
0.68
21.5
24/09/03
142
1.79
70.7
4.44
256
1.29
22.7
13/11/03
143
4.89
99
3.90
356
3.21
-19.3
Dark brown
14/05/03
143
5.02
105
3.89
290
0.54
22.4
Dark brown
17/07/03
143
5.40
121
3.72
295
0.64
22.8
24/09/03
143
5.60
90.2
3.80
286
0.76
22.3
13/11/03
144
2.12
1018
4.87
259
0.82
20.2
Dark tea
17/07/03
144
2.42
882
5.10
235
0.62
21.4
Dark tea
24/09/03
144
2.70
941
5.18
266
1.03
21.1
Tea
13/11/03
145
1.30
154
3.70
372
3.41
18.3
Dark brown
17/07/03
145
1.51
142
3.78
339
1.29
20.4
24/09/03
145
1.59
146.6
3.69
344
1.96
21.8
13/11/03
146
1.88
64
4.36
298
3.92
22.8
24/09/03
146
2.17
64.6
4.18
270
0.83
23.2
13/11/03
147
2.04
86
4.66
253
1.05
21.5
Weak tea
17/07/03
147
2.36
83
4.73
255
0.50
22.4
Weak tea
24/09/03
pH
Colour
Bore Id
SWL
EC
(m b ToC)
(S/cm)
147
2.62
78
148
4.64
148
Eh
D.O.
Temp.
Odour
Date
(mV)
(ppm)
(oC)
4.46
275
1.17
22.0
Weak tea
13/11/03
76
4.38
310
0.74
22.6
Weak tea
24/09/03
4.90
78.1
4.54
334
0.68
23.2
Weak tea
13/11/03
149
1.19
224
3.52
310
1.14
19.3
24/09/03
149
1.31
214.8
3.53
332
1.4
22.2
13/11/03
150
1.25
294
3.56
307
5.52
19.9
17/07/03
150
2.15
237
3.51
311
1.80
19.8
24/09/03
150
2.47
234
3.48
317
1.63
21.4
13/11/03
151
3.31
210
3.81
289
0.83
21.2
Dark tea
17/07/03
151
3.62
203
3.68
291
0.73
21.9
Dark tea
24/09/03
151
3.87
205.9
3.77
288
0.9
21.7
Dark tea
13/11/03
MW 1S
1.07
152
4.13
334
3.35
20.0
Dark brown
15/07/03
MW 1S
1.38
128
4.25
348
3.41
19.8
16/09/03
MW 1S
1.58
137.9
4.23
348
2.21
22.3
12/11/03
MW 3S
0.75
399
4.31
262
2.33
20.3
15/07/03
MW 3S
1.40
387
4.45
273
3.75
19.8
16/09/03
MW 3S
1.59
493
4.30
287
1.17
22.8
12/11/03
MW 4D
4.64
393
5.33
269
4.66
19.6
14/05/03
MW 4D
4.67
386
4.61
304
1.40
21.2
Milky
15/07/03
MW 4D
4.98
390
5.24
262
0.79
21.5
Milky clear
16/09/03
MW 4D
5.12
392
4.94
294
0.97
22.4
Clear
12/11/03
pH
Colour
Bore Id
SWL
EC
(m b ToC)
(S/cm)
MW 4S
1.89
233
MW 4S
1.87
MW 4S
Eh
D.O.
Temp.
Odour
Date
(mV)
(ppm)
(oC)
4.00
410
4.34
Dark brown
14/05/03
294
3.61
443
5.50
18.3
15/07/03
2.50
308
3.52
423
6.77
19.1
16/09/03
MW 4S
2.53
353
3.45
454
1.94
22.0
12/11/03
MW 5D
4.17
263
4.52
296
1.36
20.4
Very clear
15/07/03
MW 5D
4.37
258
5.06
273
0.81
21.5
Crystal clear
16/09/03
MW 5D
4.65
254
4.51
326
1.18
22.2
Crystal clear
12/11/03
MW 5S
1.34
277
3.95
346
5.35
20.0
15/07/03
MW 5S
1.64
263
3.73
358
4.52
19.4
16/09/03
MW 5S
1.75
259
3.71
397
2.48
23.2
12/11/03
MW 6D
5.33
364
4.88
277
1.20
20.8
Milky
15/07/03
MW 6D
5.43
354
5.41
239
0.73
21.6
Milky clear
16/09/03
MW 6D
5.70
361
5.39
255
0.94
22.4
Milky clear
12/11/03
MW 6S
0.64
220
4.53
296
1.91
20.3
15/07/03
MW 6S
0.98
203
4.57
281
2.93
19.8
16/09/03
MW 6S
1.06
206.9
4.32
310
0.89
21.8
12/11/03
MW 8D
5.89
343
5.07
254
4.22
14/05/03
MW 8D
5.94
350
4.86
260
1.49
21.9
Milky
15/07/03
MW 8D
6.03
409
5.02
269
0.76
22.5
Milky clear
16/09/03
MW 8D
6.22
379
4.50
292
1.05
22.7
Milky clear
12/11/03
MW 8S
1.46
130
3.55
324
4.21
-14.3
Medium brown
14/05/03
pH
Colour
Bore Id
SWL
EC
(m b ToC)
(S/cm)
MW 8S
1.52
120
MW 8S
1.73
MW 8S
Eh
D.O.
Temp.
Odour
Date
(mV)
(ppm)
(oC)
3.85
333
3.17
21.2
15/07/03
111
3.85
343
3.68
21.1
16/09/03
1.88
120.2
3.77
346
1.38
23.4
Lt murky brown
12/11/03
MW 11-1D
4.80
34800
6.06
215
0.22
22.9
Dark brown
15/05/03
MW 11-1D
6.37
16/07/03
MW 11-1D
6.23
15/09/03
MW 11-1D
4.86
26400
5.19
227
2.99
23.9
12/11/03
MW 11-1S
1.59
14400
3.55
480
3.64
21.9
Dark brown
15/05/03
MW 11-1S
2.60
16/07/03
MW 11-1S
2.33
15/09/03
MW 11-1S
1.99
13650
3.25
427
3.26
24.6
12/11/03
MW 11D
4.80
248
4.78
262
0.75
20.2
Clear tea
15/07/03
MW 11D
4.97
233
5.01
247
0.89
21.6
Tea
16/09/03
MW 11D
5.15
238
4.83
277
0.95
22.0
Tea
12/11/03
MW 12S
1.38
344
3.39
348
2.81
18.7
15/07/03
MW 12S
1.72
331
3.44
347
4.58
19.8
16/09/03
MW 12S
1.89
304
3.47
332
0.84
22.0
12/11/03
MW 15S
1.59
112
3.79
325
4.59
20.6
Medium brown
15/07/03
MW 15S
1.91
112
3.76
330
5.51
20.0
16/09/03
MW 15S
2.13
108.2
3.77
327
1.33
22.8
Light brown
12/11/03
MW 16D
0.89
268
4.10
285
1.71
20.6
15/07/03
pH
Colour
Bore Id
SWL
EC
(m b ToC)
(S/cm)
MW 16D
1.14
250
MW 16D
1.33
MW 22S
Eh
D.O.
Temp.
Odour
Date
(mV)
(ppm)
(oC)
4.21
300
0.88
20.3
16/09/03
253
4.51
316
2.02
21.9
12/11/03
0.89
314
3.83
317
4.80
18.7
15/07/03
MW 22S
1.16
313
3.55
322
6.19
19.3
16/09/03
MW 22S
1.32
310
3.58
324
2.4
23.6
12/11/03
QM 114
1.16
5310
4.90
222
0.29
23.6
Dark brown
15/05/03
QM 114
1.41
2085
5.06
204
1.59
19.9
15/07/03
QM 114
1.56
1596
4.85
237
4.30
22.3
15/09/03
QM 114
1.54
1950
4.79
285
3.01
25.6
11/11/03
Slnder Dr
5.31
308
3.64
285
0.81
22.8
Dark tea
16/07/03
Slnder Dr
5.44
284
3.60
326
0.71
23.5
Dark tea
15/09/03
Slnder Dr
5.91
330
4.01
347
1.05
23.2
Dark tea
11/11/03
TCLP nth
4.69
397
4.21
300
4.17
23.4
Dark brown
15/05/03
TCLP nth
4.90
590
4.15
274
5.33
22.7
Dark brown
16/07/03
TCLP nth
4.97
413
4.18
289
5.73
22.6
15/09/03
TCLP nth
5.09
384
4.14
305
3.08
23.7
11/11/03
W Patch
2.68
130
6.33
264
4.25
20.9
Dark tea
15/05/03
W Patch
2.83
186
4.92
398
1.76
16.1
Tea
15/07/03
W Patch
2.93
132
4.60
377
0.93
21.5
Dark tea
15/09/03
W Patch
2.59
152.1
4.86
386
1.41
22.0
Tea
11/11/03
pH
Colour
APPENDIX E
Sample Id.
14100087
14100087
14100088
14100088
14100088
14100088
14100088
14100088
14100088
14100088
14100089
14100089
14100089
14100089
14100089
14100089
14100089
14100089
14100090
14100090
14100090
14100090
14100090
14100090
14100090
14100091
14100091
14100092
Na
K
Mg
Ca
Sr
Mn
Fe
Zn
Cu
F
Cl
Br
SO4 NO3 NO2 HCO3
mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
44.0
1.4
4.4
1.7
0.04
2.70
0.10
71.0
2.0
0.5
16.5
63.0
2.4
5.5
3.4
0.17
8.50
0.00
97.0
23.0
2.4
9.2
57.0
4.3
6.0
7.7
0.05
5.00
0.10
68.0
2.2
0.5
98.0
64.0
5.3
8.2 14.0
0.30
9.00
0.15
82.0
4.5
0.0
124.4
49.2
4.6
7.1
8.7
0.00
0.25 0.03 0.08 0.08
50.2
0.0
3.3
104.9
51.4
4.9
6.9
6.4
0.03
0.10 0.03 0.00 0.01
46.6
0.0
0.0
111.8
49.1
5.3
6.8
6.2 0.07 0.04 12.15 0.04 0.00 0.05
46.4 0.11
0.2
0.3
99.8
47.2
4.2
6.9
6.5
0.03
0.00 0.07 0.00 0.07
46.5
0.0
0.0
108.7
49.2
5.4
7.0
6.6 0.08 0.04 12.37 0.03 0.01 0.01
52.4 0.12
1.4
1.1
120.0
51.3
4.6
6.0
6.3
0.01
0.00 0.01 0.07 0.10
47.3
0.0
0.0
111.8
53.0
5.9
9.0 12.0
0.22
6.90
0.10
80.0
2.0
0.5
105.0
81.0
4.3 33.0 51.0
8.60 13.00
0.00
72.0
1.0
0.5
451.3
52.4
3.7 13.9 20.5
3.03
0.21 0.00 0.06 0.03
69.2
0.0
0.0
159.7
46.6
4.1
8.7 15.8
1.80
0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00
65.7
0.0
0.0
110.1
43.7
4.7
6.6 11.1 0.11 0.88 15.92 0.02 0.00 0.04
62.8 0.15
0.1
0.1
88.3
41.8
3.9
6.9 11.7
0.80
0.00 0.15 0.00 0.02
65.2
0.5
0.0
83.2
43.5
5.1
6.8 11.2 0.12 0.85 16.43 0.03 0.01 0.13
61.4 0.18
0.6
0.2
110.0
43.6
4.6
6.5
9.9
0.47
0.00 0.03 0.04 0.03
65.8
0.0
0.0
79.9
53.0
4.3
4.5
4.1
0.04
0.02
0.10
95.0
2.0
0.5
16.5
43.0
2.5
3.2
3.3
0.08
2.00
0.00
70.0
6.4
0.0
4.8
44.0
2.8
3.4
1.6
0.05
2.30
0.00
64.0
5.7
0.0
19.7
45.3
4.2
3.6
4.3
0.03
3.58 0.16 0.03 0.01
72.9
0.4
3.9
20.2
34.1
2.9
2.7
2.2
0.02
2.80 0.07 0.00 0.00
58.9
0.9
0.0
17.1
43.7
3.9
3.7
4.6
0.04
4.28 0.91 0.01 0.00
75.9
1.1
0.0
29.8
37.5
3.2
2.9
3.2
0.02
0.02 0.56 0.49 0.01
66.1
3.2
0.0
17.5
350.0 15.5 63.0 55.0
2.00 23.00
0.20 550.0
120.0
1.0
320.0
150.0
9.4 28.0 26.0
3.40
2.30
0.50 215.0
74.0
0.5
200.0
65.0
3.0 11.0 19.0
0.60
8.30
0.10
96.0
29.0
0.5
84.0
Sample Id.
14100087
14100087
14100088
14100088
14100088
14100088
14100088
14100088
14100088
14100088
14100089
14100089
14100089
14100089
14100089
14100089
14100089
14100089
14100090
14100090
14100090
14100090
14100090
14100090
14100090
14100091
14100091
14100092
CO3 PO4
Al
SIO2
B
Site
mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
0.0
19.0
deep
0.0
90.0
deep
0.0
17.0
deep
0.0
20.0
deep
0.1
0.00 16.0 0.10 deep
0.0
0.00 16.0 0.10 deep
0.02
0.02
deep
0.0
0.01 17.0 0.07 deep
0.00
0.00 24.3
deep
0.0
0.01 18.0 0.09 deep
0.0
14.0
deep
0.1
24.0
deep
0.4
0.00 21.0 0.10 deep
0.0
0.00 19.0 0.00 deep
0.03
0.00
deep
0.0
0.00 20.0 0.05 deep
0.00
0.14 27.7
deep
0.0
0.00 19.0 0.06 deep
0.0
10.0
deep
0.0
24.0
deep
0.0
21.0
deep
0.0
0.00 13.0 0.10 deep
0.0
0.08 15.0 0.00 deep
0.0
0.02 13.0 0.03 deep
0.0
0.00 15.0 0.04 deep
0.0
36.0
shallow
0.0
31.0
shallow
0.0
14.0
deep
Cond
S/cm
280
370
385
420
320
325
374
327
326
326
410
830
454
384
390
347
364
340
325
236
245
324
240
315
260
2350
1100
510
pH
Date
4.8
5.0
6.6
6.4
7.1
6.6
6.6
6.7
5.6
6.4
5.1
6.2
7.6
6.4
5.7
6.3
5.9
6.1
6.1
5.2
5.5
5.7
5.7
5.8
5.6
6.0
6.2
4.9
11 Feb 92
03 Mar 92
07 Feb 92
03 Mar 92
06 Sep 95
08 Aug 96
14 Sep 00
15 May 01
19 Sep 01
07 Aug 02
06 Feb 92
03 Mar 92
06 Sep 95
09 Aug 96
14 Sep 00
17 May 01
19 Sep 01
07 Aug 02
19 Feb 92
03 Mar 92
03 Mar 92
06 Sep 95
09 Aug 96
17 May 01
07 Aug 02
07 Feb 92
02 Mar 92
07 Feb 92
22
31
44
69
51
44
13
27
20
45
268
20
41
27
19
20
40
67
263
108
75
3
66
20
58
108
30
34
19
27
51
29
21
18
26
17
27
20
397
180
93
36
23.4
21.6
23.2
21.2
20
20
7
5
16
93
101
118
4
3
6
13
9
Sample Id.
14100092
14100092
14100092
14100092
14100092
14100100
14100100
14100100
14100100
14100100
14100100
14100100
14100100
14100100
14100101
14100101
14100101
14100101
14100101
14100101
14100101
14100110
14100110
14100111
14100111
14100112
14100112
14100114
Na
K
Mg
Ca
Sr
Mn
Fe
Zn
Cu
F
Cl
Br
SO4 NO3 NO2 HCO3
mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
49.0
2.3
6.7 12.0
1.20 12.00
0.00
75.0
5.4
0.0
84.3
41.2
1.7
5.4
4.2
0.12
0.27 0.16 0.05 0.00
66.9
2.1
0.0
13.3
42.7
2.0
5.1
3.0
0.11
0.34 0.12 0.01 0.00
70.7
1.1
0.0
15.8
39.8
1.7
5.5
4.9
0.07
2.42 0.13 0.00 0.00
69.2
2.0
0.0
33.1
38.4
1.8
5.0
3.0
0.02
0.27 0.08 0.06 0.00
69.0
0.6
0.0
16.0
57.0
2.5
9.0
6.4
0.08
0.15
0.10 105.0
2.0
0.5
29.5
53.0
1.2
6.9
2.9
0.10
2.70
0.00
89.0
0.0
0.0
21.7
52.2
1.6
5.8
2.3
0.03
0.34 0.12 0.04 0.00
89.9
2.9
0.0
7.0
52.6
1.3
7.0
2.9
0.04
0.54 0.10 0.00 0.00
92.2
0.9
0.0
14.9
54.9
1.4
8.0
1.0 0.02 0.01
0.73 0.00 0.00 0.02
99.2 0.31
0.7
0.2
18.0
54.3
1.3
7.2
1.2
0.02
0.46 0.06 0.00 0.00
99.7
2.1
0.0
0.0
55.5
2.3
4.3
0.8 0.01 0.00
0.39 0.04 0.00 0.11 102.1 0.25
0.6
0.3
0.6
10.0
50.1
1.5
6.4
1.2 0.02 0.01
0.42 0.03 0.01 0.09
86.5 0.23
37.0
0.2
7.5
55.7
1.5
7.7
1.5
0.01
0.39 0.20 0.18 0.00
97.6
2.2
0.0
0.0
41.0
2.4
8.2 10.5
0.05
0.70
0.10
77.0
2.0
0.5
26.0
24.0
1.3
5.3
5.0
0.10
3.50
0.00
30.0
0.0
0.0
46.7
11.4
0.6
3.2
0.9
0.01
0.64 0.20 0.06 0.00
22.3
1.5
0.0
9.2
13.9
0.5
2.5
1.9
0.02
0.49 0.04 0.01 0.00
28.2
3.0
0.0
5.2
22.6
1.2
2.7
0.8 0.01 0.01
1.75 0.01 0.00 0.00
37.4 0.11
0.7
0.5
9.0
15.8
0.2
2.9
0.6 0.01 0.01
3.42 0.04 0.02 0.05
31.5 0.10
0.3
1.0
10.0
16.1
1.1
2.2
0.9
0.00
0.31 0.09 0.21 0.00
28.5
0.5
0.0
5.9
24.6
2.9
3.6
4.2
0.47
0.16 0.13 0.03 0.00
27.3
8.0 32.4
0.0
37.7
2.1
4.9
5.7
0.04
0.61 0.02 0.01 0.00
45.7
0.4
0.0
59.2
84.2
6.5 13.6 26.2
0.43
0.09 0.04 0.04 0.00 192.1
1.4 15.5
35.0
68.9
1.0
7.9
1.3
0.06
8.85 0.06 0.00 0.00 115.2
3.3
0.0
14.0
23.1
0.9
3.5
1.0
0.05
5.54 0.18 0.01 0.00
37.7
3.3
0.0
11.0
26.5
1.0
3.9
1.0
0.08
1.24 0.17 0.14 0.00
43.8
8.1
0.0
5.5
17.5
0.5
3.1
1.9
0.00
0.30 0.03 0.01 0.00
29.5
0.4
0.0
6.7
Sample Id.
14100092
14100092
14100092
14100092
14100092
14100100
14100100
14100100
14100100
14100100
14100100
14100100
14100100
14100100
14100101
14100101
14100101
14100101
14100101
14100101
14100101
14100110
14100110
14100111
14100111
14100112
14100112
14100114
CO3 PO4
Al
SIO2
B
Site
mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
0.0
22.0
deep
0.0
0.10 13.0 0.10 deep
0.0
0.26 14.0 0.00 deep
0.0
0.18 15.0 0.05 deep
0.0
0.13 14.0 0.07 deep
0.0
12.0
deep
0.0
12.0
deep
0.0
1.06 12.0 0.10 deep
0.0
1.62 12.0 0.00 deep
0.0 0.02
1.92
deep
0.0
1.78 12.0 0.05 deep
0.0 0.00
1.49 15.4
deep
0.0 0.00
1.78 16.9
deep
0.0
2.68 12.0 0.12 deep
0.0
6.0
deep
0.0
7.0
deep
0.0
1.08
4.0 0.10 deep
0.0
1.54
6.0 0.00 deep
0.0 0.00
1.55
deep
0.0 0.00
1.73 11.4
deep
0.0
1.05
8.0 0.07 deep
0.0
0.00
9.0 0.10 deep
0.0
0.06 16.0 0.00 deep
0.0
0.00 19.0 0.00 deep
0.0
0.80 12.0 0.00 deep
0.0
2.20
9.0 0.09 shallow
0.0
0.44
9.0 0.10 shallow
0.0
0.35
5.0 0.00 shallow
Cond
S/cm
362
274
282
297
266
400
346
328
347
389
372
351
354
367
330
170
108
111
148
118
121
209
246
716
426
166
188
155
pH
Date
5.9
5.6
5.4
5.9
5.4
4.7
4.8
5.2
5.3
4.5
4.9
4.9
5.0
4.8
4.4
4.6
4.6
5.1
4.7
4.5
5.1
6.1
6.2
6.2
5.4
5.3
5.0
4.2
02 Mar 92
04 Sep 95
07 Aug 96
15 May 01
07 Aug 02
06 Feb 92
03 Mar 92
06 Sep 95
09 Aug 96
14 Sep 00
17 May 01
19 Sep 01
30 Jul 02
07 Aug 02
07 Feb 92
03 Mar 92
06 Sep 95
08 Aug 96
14 Sep 00
19 Sep 01
07 Aug 02
07 Sep 95
07 Aug 96
07 Sep 95
07 Aug 96
15 May 01
07 Aug 02
07 Aug 96
15
16
20
18
209
280
57
33
28
35
28
53
36
30
36
333
33
57
80
109
19
271
803
85
11
1
57
22.8
20
20.9
22.3
20
20
15
231
482
426
265
35
60
34
15
15
122
20
131
47
351
778
112
550
11
25
34
121
36
17
19
17
14
119
17
21
23
23.4
21.6
20
8
9
8
355
207
45
11
8
13
122
Sample Id.
14100114
14100114
14100114
14100114
14100115
14100115
14100115
14100115
14100115
14100115
14100116
14100116
14100116
14100116
14100116
14100116
14100119
14100122
MW 2S
MW 3D
MW 3D
MW 3S
MW 3S
MW 3S
MW 4D
MW 4D
MW 4D
MW 4D
Na
K
Mg
Ca
Sr
Mn
Fe
Zn
Cu
F
Cl
Br
SO4 NO3 NO2 HCO3
mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
24.1
0.8
5.8
0.6
0.00
0.34 0.05 0.00 0.00
49.6
1.5
0.0
0.0
29.5
1.3
6.3
0.6 0.02 0.05
0.39 0.01 0.01 0.02
50.9 0.16
4.4
0.2
4.6
21.4
0.5
3.9
0.4
0.00
0.26 0.09 0.09 0.00
39.6
0.7
0.0
0.0
18.7
0.1
3.6
0.4 0.01 0.00
0.20 0.15 0.01 0.02
39.4
9.8
1.0
0.0
39.9
2.6
7.0
0.8 0.01 0.01
0.51 0.10 0.00 0.02
76.3 0.24
2.1
2.8
0.0
39.7
0.8
6.4
0.7 1.49 0.01
0.73 0.01 0.00 0.00
77.8 0.25
1.2
3.9
0.0
35.5
0.6
6.1
0.7
0.01
0.41 0.11 0.01 0.00
74.2
2.1
0.0
0.0
35.7
1.7
5.9
0.4 0.01 0.01
0.29 0.05 0.01 0.14
69.9 0.21
1.4
0.3
0.0
34.0
0.8
5.3
0.6 0.01 0.01
0.41 0.03 0.01 0.15
64.5 0.26
2.1
0.2
0.0
34.4
0.8
5.4
0.8
0.00
0.27 0.12 0.20 0.00
71.2
2.6
0.0
0.0
1181.5 41.6 147.0 120.6
0.40
0.01 0.03 0.03 0.61 1851.0
658.5
4.5
235.8
1113.9 40.4 128.1 104.7
0.42
0.01 0.04 0.00 0.60 1624.0
718.9
0.0
189.9
1471.0 58.7 202.7 153.3
0.55
0.00 0.11 0.04 0.61 2478.8
792.0
0.0
204.0
4965.0 128.0 778.0 450.0
2.97 32.30 0.08 0.08 0.11 9933.0
1584.4
0.0
0.0
3558.0 94.0 634.5 304.3 3.99 2.04 136.40 <0.50 <0.05 1.80 6107.4 19.80 4831.2
173.9
2719.2 71.5 460.5 226.4 2.75 1.42 99.24 0.23 0.05 3.00 4932.0 16.50 1060.5
353.2
40.4
3.1
2.3
3.7
0.19
3.83 0.08 0.00 0.00
61.5
0.6
0.3
25.4
12.9
1.3
1.4
1.4
0.00
0.23 0.08 0.00 0.00
22.7
0.0
0.0
7.4
53.3
0.3
9.4
4.8 0.04 0.09
9.51 0.02 0.01 0.04 105.8 0.47
11.2
0.2
0.0
50.0
2.0
4.0
2.0
0.09
5.93
0.00
85.0
0.5
0.0
20.0
48.0
3.0
4.0
3.0
0.03
9.78
0.00
83.0
1.0
0.6
10.0
23.0
0.5
6.0
2.0
0.02
2.70
0.00
52.0
0.5
4.8
0.5
21.0
0.3
4.0
1.0
0.01
0.80
0.00
40.0
4.0
1.7
0.2
15.0
1.2
3.6
1.4 0.02 0.01
1.13 0.09 0.02 0.00
44.0 0.17
0.7
0.8
0.4
52.0
3.0
4.0
3.0
0.04
9.25
0.00
88.0
0.5
0.7
20.0
49.0
4.0
5.0
5.0
0.04
2.16
0.00
88.0
7.0
0.3
9.0
50.1
4.3
4.3
3.6 0.04 0.04
9.99 0.03 0.01 0.01
92.5 0.22
0.4
0.5
19.0
46.9
3.0
4.8
3.0 0.04 0.10 11.37 0.19 0.11 0.12
77.9
0.3
0.0
19.5
Sample Id.
14100114
14100114
14100114
14100114
14100115
14100115
14100115
14100115
14100115
14100115
14100116
14100116
14100116
14100116
14100116
14100116
14100119
14100122
MW 2S
MW 3D
MW 3D
MW 3S
MW 3S
MW 3S
MW 4D
MW 4D
MW 4D
MW 4D
CO3 PO4
Al
SIO2
B
Site
mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
0.0
0.58
4.0 0.03 shallow
0.0 0.03
0.51
4.5
shallow
0.0
0.39
4.0 0.06 shallow
0.0
0.25
shallow
0.22
0.93
shallow
0.00
0.76
6.8
shallow
0.0
0.96
6.0 0.04 shallow
0.00
0.66
6.9
shallow
0.00
0.73
8.8
shallow
0.0
0.71
7.0 0.09 shallow
0.2
0.00 44.0 0.80 Brackish Ck
1.3
0.01 46.0 0.80 Brackish Ck
0.1
0.00 40.0 0.94 Brackish Ck
0.0
0.71 53.0 1.69 Brackish Ck
1.70
Brackish Ck
0.82
Brackish Ck
0.0
0.12 13.0 0.00
0.0
0.39 10.0 0.00
0.17
2.54
6.5
shallow
0.08
5.10
deep
0.01
1.00
deep
0.11
8.35
shallow
0.03
1.44
shallow
0.07
1.13
5.5
shallow
0.06
0.70
deep
0.02
0.13
deep
0.00
0.10 18.1
deep
0.20
deep
Cond
S/cm
258
245
202
180
372
372
336
338
341
7021
6040
8460
25700
0
17720
254
96
248
344
pH
Date
3.8
3.7
3.9
4.1
3.1
3.3
3.6
3.6
3.4
3.6
6.8
7.8
6.7
3.4
6.5
5.6
5.9
5.4
4.2
5.4
18 May 01
19 Sep 01
08 Aug 02
11 Nov 03
14 Sep 00
15 Nov 00
15 May 01
19 Sep 01
30 Jul 02
07 Aug 02
04 Sep 95
07 Aug 96
15 May 01
08 Aug 02
15 May 03
11 Nov 03
08 Aug 96
08 Aug 96
19 Sep 01
26 Apr 00
17 Jul 00
26 Apr 00
17 Jul 00
19 Sep 01
26 Apr 00
17 Jul 00
19 Sep 01
14 May 03
239 4.7
174 4.8
351 5.4
341 5.3
393 5.3
999
25
20
999
0
17
29
999
27
24
905
788
1216
4322
203
158
316
226
605
217
19
9
265
61
19.6
22.4
20.7
19.6
20.9
4
6
6
21.3
21.5
1380
999
11
16
7
12
0
0
133
103
18.5
25
18.6
40
20.8
19.6
Sample Id.
MW 4D
MW 4S
MW 5D
MW 6D
MW 7D
MW 8D
MW 8D
MW 8D
MW 8S
MW 8S
MW11-1D
MW11-1D
MW11-1S
MW11-1S
14100131
14100131
14100132
14100133
14100135
14100135
14100135
14100136
14100136
14100139
14100140
14100140
14100142
14100144
Na
K
Mg
Ca
Sr
Mn
Fe
Zn
Cu
F
Cl
Br
SO4 NO3 NO2 HCO3
mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
46.4
3.3
4.9
3.3 0.04 0.03
9.86 0.15 0.01 0.63
91.7
2.3
1.4
43.9
21.0
0.7
4.0
1.0
0.01
0.87
0.00
34.0
11.0
2.5
0.6
40.9
3.6
3.2
1.8 0.03 0.03
3.53 0.02 0.00 0.00
67.4 0.15
0.6
0.3
18.0
45.2
5.2
5.4
5.4 0.06 0.09
7.27 0.03 0.00 0.00
76.3 0.16
0.2
0.6
27.0
51.1
0.0
4.4
3.3 0.04 0.04 10.06 0.03 0.02 0.00
77.6 0.17
0.4
0.4
32.0
53.1
3.2
5.1
1.7 0.02 0.05
6.06 0.02 0.00 0.00
96.2 0.24
2.2
1.0
20.0
51.3
1.9
6.1
0.7 0.01 0.15
2.16 0.11 0.07 0.12
82.8 0.15
0.0
9.8
49.2
2.1
5.6
1.0 0.01 0.02
4.81 0.12 0.02 0.03
98.6 0.24
4.4
1.1
15.9
8.9
1.2
1.1
0.6 0.01 0.01
0.64 0.02 0.00 0.01
13.4 0.04
3.6
1.4
0.8
8.7
1.7
1.8
0.7 0.01 0.01
0.73 0.14 0.02 0.09
17.4 0.07
5.2
1.6
0.0
6258.0 231.3 895.3 364.3 5.44 1.77 131.31 0.95 <0.30 2.60 9594.0 26.00 1645.8
5.2
490.4
4257.0 167.6 467.6 176.7 2.28 1.11 129.33 1.18 0.16 2.25 6457.5 29.25 1451.3
760.1
2359.8 65.9 265.5 183.8 1.50 3.97 68.22 0.02 <0.10 4.80 3524.4 6.00 1078.8
0.0
1953.5 71.8 262.3 179.0 1.50 2.57 280.00 0.63 0.09 2.00 3858.0 17.00 1443.0
0.0
8.8
0.0
1.2
1.0 0.02 0.02
0.78 0.02 0.00 0.34
19.5 0.08
1.6
0.4
0.0
7.9
1.3
1.7
1.1 0.02 0.01
0.49 0.17 0.01 0.11
14.1 0.07
5.3
1.2
0.0
19.2
0.4
4.9
0.3 0.01 0.00
0.43 0.03 0.01 0.04
52.3 0.31
1.1
0.2
0.0
43.7
0.7
8.7
1.9 0.04 0.00
1.89 0.21 0.01 0.16
82.3 0.26
6.9
1.5
0.0
66.4
0.6
9.9
0.6 0.03 0.00
1.08 0.03 0.00 0.03 124.3 0.28
19.8
2.6
0.0
34.1
0.4
4.5
0.6 0.01 0.01
1.36 0.02 0.00 0.16
63.4 0.24
5.6
0.4
0.9
72.3
1.6
7.4
0.6 0.02 0.00
0.79 0.03 0.02 0.14 135.0 0.33
24.3
0.5
0.0
61.9
2.9
5.1
1.6 0.02 0.02
1.95 0.04 0.01 0.04
83.9 0.24
2.4
0.3
20.0
42.9
3.4
4.3
2.5 0.03 0.02
2.98 0.06 0.01
77.8 0.12
0.0
0.0
10.5
35.6
0.6
6.0
0.4 0.02 0.00
0.58 0.03 0.01 0.00
68.9 0.32
0.8
0.4
0.4
44.5
3.2
5.1
2.8 0.04 0.03
5.80 0.03 0.00 0.00
77.1 0.15
2.2
0.8
27.0
43.8
3.7
4.0
2.8 0.03 0.02
4.94 0.02 0.01 0.11
73.2 0.20
2.2 21.8
23.0
6.8
2.6
1.5
0.8 0.01 0.04
0.37 0.02 0.02 0.01
9.9 0.07
2.8
0.6
0.5
165.5 10.1 20.4 12.4 0.16 0.12
7.78 0.02 0.00 0.09 256.6 0.67
79.8
0.8
2.4
Sample Id.
MW 4D
MW 4S
MW 5D
MW 6D
MW 7D
MW 8D
MW 8D
MW 8D
MW 8S
MW 8S
MW11-1D
MW11-1D
MW11-1S
MW11-1S
14100131
14100131
14100132
14100133
14100135
14100135
14100135
14100136
14100136
14100139
14100140
14100140
14100142
14100144
CO3 PO4
mg/L mg/L
0.12
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.06
3.72
0.10
0.68
0.00
0.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
6.41
0.00
Al
SIO2
B
Site
mg/L mg/L mg/L
0.35
deep
0.99
shallow
0.20 17.8
deep
0.06 21.6
deep
0.14 17.8
deep
0.29 19.4
deep
1.01
deep
0.63
deep
0.47
4.2
shallow
0.47
shallow
120.12
near canal
58.30
near canal
108.90
near canal
114.00
near canal
0.68
4.7
shallow
0.42
shallow
1.75
9.1
shallow
2.69
4.3
shallow
3.21
2.4
shallow
2.66
6.7
shallow
5.95
7.6
shallow
0.41 16.5
deep
0.26 18.3
deep
1.89
8.6
shallow
0.35 19.8
deep
0.16 20.2
deep
0.24 16.3
shallow
0.15 20.3
deep
Cond pH
Date
T(Wa) Depth colour HARD TURB
S/cm
392 4.9 12 Nov 03
22.4
0
17 Jul 00
2200
251 5.1 19 Sep 01
20.8
316 5.5 19 Sep 01
20.5
287 5.3 19 Sep 01 208.0
338 5.0 19 Sep 01
20.8
343 5.1 14 May 03
0
379 4.5 12 Nov 03
22.7
0
102 3.9 19 Sep 01
20.6
120 3.8 12 Nov 03
23.4
0
0 6.1 15 May 03
22.9
0
26400 5.2 12 Nov 03
23.9
0
0 3.6 15 May 03
21.9
0
13650 3.3 12 Nov 03
24.6
0
53 4.2 19 Sep 01
19.9
62 4.3 12 Nov 03
23.2
0
252 3.8 19 Sep 01
18.5
417 3.4 30 Jul 02
17.5
800
2680
577 3.4 05 Jun 01
21.7
295 3.8 19 Sep 01
19.0
568 3.6 30 Jul 02
19.4
203
5540
270 4.7 19 Sep 01
21.3
306 5.0 30 Jul 02
22.7
289
7600
291 4.3 19 Sep 01
19.8
289 5.0 19 Sep 01
20.9
328 5.3 30 Jul 02
22.9
146
26
71 3.9 19 Sep 01
19.3
1119 5.7 05 Jun 01
21.2
Sample Id.
14100144
14100144
14100145
14100145
14100146
14100147
14100147
14100147
14100148
14100151
Bell nth
Bell nth
Bell pub
Bell pub
Sland Dr
TCLP nth
Na
K
Mg
Ca
Sr
Mn
Fe
Zn
Cu
F
Cl
Br
SO4 NO3 NO2 HCO3
mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
92.9
9.7 13.3
7.9 0.09 0.08
5.42 0.00 0.00 0.00
54.4 0.14
17.6
1.1
180.0
123.2
6.3 16.7
7.6 0.10 0.07
5.72 0.12 0.01 0.10 153.4 0.30
59.3
89.7
14.7
0.6
2.2
0.4 0.00 0.00
0.34 0.10 0.00 0.02
17.9 0.07
0.5 14.1
0.0
13.2
2.0
4.5
0.2 0.00 0.00
0.69 0.12 0.00 0.16
24.3 0.10
3.9
1.3
0.0
31.1
0.4
2.6
1.4 0.03 0.04
3.24 0.03 0.01 0.00
55.6 0.19
1.8
0.2
0.6
5.2
1.6
0.9
0.5 0.01 0.00
0.42 0.02 0.01 0.11
11.5 0.06
0.7
0.3
4.1
11.2
1.2
2.0
1.4 0.01 0.01
0.92 0.04 0.01 0.24
24.0 0.12
3.1
0.4
0.0
10.2 <0.4
1.8
1.2 0.01 0.01
2.88 0.28 0.02 0.09
30.3 0.13
2.7
0.6
13.7
0.2
1.5
0.3 0.01 0.00
0.29 0.00 0.01 0.00
22.4 0.09
0.8
0.2
5.3
36.0
1.3
2.8
1.8 0.03 0.01
1.63 0.03 0.01 0.29
59.2 0.18
6.5
0.5
0.0
993.4 38.4 127.1 40.8 0.68 0.18 23.38 <0.09 <0.06 0.60 1473.0
363.6
138.5
1399.6 45.0 266.2 93.4 1.51 0.41 49.44 0.10 0.09 1.00 2803.0
409.0 21.0
158.0
50.9
2.1
9.7 28.3 0.20 0.03
0.28 0.00 <0.03 0.10
73.9
40.5
0.6
74.4
57.0
4.6 15.4 40.5 0.28 0.05
0.54 0.14 0.03 0.08
43.0 0.48
30.2
0.7
190.9
32.5
0.4
5.0
1.8 0.02 0.00
0.36 0.18 0.02 0.36
53.9 0.21
15.8
0.0
39.7
1.3
8.3
7.7 0.06 0.04
1.69 0.72 0.02 0.36
73.6 0.30
19.7
2.5
0.0
Sample Id.
14100144
14100144
14100145
14100145
14100146
14100147
14100147
14100147
14100148
14100151
Bell nth
Bell nth
Bell pub
Bell pub
Sland Dr
TCLP nth
CO3 PO4
Al
SIO2
B
Site
mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
19.46
0.20 20.0
deep
0.25
deep
0.19
1.57
3.0
shallow
3.84
2.18
5.3
shallow
0.03
2.60
6.8
shallow
0.00
1.33
9.3
deep
0.00
0.86
9.4
deep
0.82
deep
0.00
0.38 13.0
deep
0.28
0.58 14.5
deep
0.72
near Dux Ck
0.51
near Dux Ck
0.12
near shore
0.02
near shore
0.57
near canal
2.88
near canal
Cond
S/cm
1109
941
185
198
57
50
91
78
65
251
10060
532
772
330
384
pH
Date
5.5
5.2
3.5
3.5
4.3
4.8
4.8
4.5
4.5
4.4
6.2
5.9
6.8
6.3
4.0
4.1
19 Sep 01
13 Nov 03
05 Jun 01
30 Jul 02
19 Sep 01
19 Sep 01
30 Jul 02
13 Nov 03
19 Sep 01
30 Jul 02
15 May 03
11 Nov 03
15 May 03
11 Nov 03
11 Nov 03
11 Nov 03
0
980
302
0
43
2870
0
0
0
0
0
0
APPENDIX F
APPENDIX G
Layer 1
Layer 4
Bore Id. Obs. Head Calc. Head Calc.-Obs. Bore Id. Obs. Head Calc. Head Calc.-Obs.
091
0.99
0.83
-0.16
087
1.89
1.68
-0.21
112
2.42
2.88
0.46
088
2.32
2.35
0.03
114
5.01
5.05
0.04
089
2.25
2.29
0.04
115
5.82
6.12
0.30
090/1*
2.24
1.87
-0.37
2.24
1.87
-0.37
126
3.49
3.41
-0.08
090/2
131
5.16
5.55
0.39
092
1.46
1.45
-0.01
132
4.91
4.63
-0.28
110
2.16
1.88
-0.28
133
2.78
3.26
0.48
111
1.74
1.83
0.09
134
3.28
3.15
-0.13
119
2.95
2.92
-0.03
135
1.26
2.20
0.94
136
1.55
2.15
0.60
137
3.34
3.51
0.17
140
2.3
2.54
0.24
138
4.93
4.92
-0.01
144
1.56
1.74
0.18
139
5.83
5.89
0.06
147
1.51
1.65
0.14
141
6.87
6.70
-0.17
148
2.01
2.06
0.05
142
7.32
7.20
-0.12
151
1.34
1.36
0.02
145
2.99
3.10
0.11
3D
2.08
2.13
0.05
146
2.03
2.22
0.19
4D
1.32
1.23
-0.09
149
3.87
3.64
-0.23
5D
1.66
1.63
-0.03
1S
7.10
6.70
-0.40
6D
1.89
2.08
0.19
3S
6.33
6.08
-0.25
7D
1.86
1.68
-0.18
4S
2.39
2.45
0.06
8D
2.55
2.40
-0.15
5S
4.42
4.34
-0.08
6S
6.80
6.17
-0.63
7S
6.77
6.39
-0.38
8S
6.85
6.53
-0.32
Note:
* First screen
#
Second screen