EPA-R2-73-268
                        Environmental Protection Technology Series
JUNE 1973                                          a
Ground  Water Pollution

in the South Central  States


                           ^ PRO^°
                                    National Environmental Research Center


                                    Office of Research and Monitoring


                                    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

                                    Corvallis, Oregon 97330

-------
            RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the  Office  of  Research  and
Monitoring,  Environmental Protection Agency, have
been grouped into five series.  These  five  broad
categories  were established to facilitate further
development  and  application   of   environmental
technology.   Elimination  of traditional grouping
was  consciously  planned  to  foster   technology
transfer   and  a  maximum  interface  in  related
fields.  The five series are:

   1.  Environmental Health Effects Research
   2.  Environmental Protection Technology
   3.  Ecological Research
   H.  Environmental Monitoring
   5.  Socioeconomic Environmental Studies

This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION   TECHNOLOGY   series.    This   series
describes   research   performed  to  develop  and
demonstrate   instrumentation,    equipment    and
methodology  to  repair  or  prevent environmental
degradation from point and  non-point  sources  of
pollution.  This work provides the new or improved
technology  required for the control and treatment
of pollution sources to meet environmental quality
standards.                  /

-------
                                                         EPA-R2-73-268
                                                         June 1973
                GROUND WATER POLLUTION

              IN THE SOUTH CENTRAL STATES
                             by
       M. R. Scalf, J. W. Keeley and C. J. LaFevers
     Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
                    Post Office Box 1198
                   Ada, Oklahoma 74820
                   Project No. 21 AIO-03
                  Program Element IB 1024
          National Environmental Research Center
             Office of Research and Monitoring
           U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                  Corvallis, Oregon 97330
For sale by tho Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402
              I'rleo S2.35 domestic postpaid or $2 Gligfc Bookstore

-------
                           ABSTRACT
An investigation was conducted to determine the present and potential
ground-water pollution problems of Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico,
Oklahoma, and Texas, to locate problem areas and to suggest research
and other methods to prevent or control future pollution and reclaim
contaminated areas.

Mineralization due to natural causes is the most influential factor on
ground-water quality in the five-state area. Large quantities of saline
ground waters are located throughout the region, and some of this
returns to the surface as springs over large areas  of the Permian Basin.
Oil-field activities are overwhelmingly the greatest man-made cause of
ground-water pollution in the area. Disposal of oil-field brines com-
bined with hundreds of thousands of improperly completed and plugged
oil and gas wells and test holes has polluted a great, though undeter-
mined, amount of ground water throughout the region. Overpumping has
resulted in salt water intrusion of inland ground waters, as well as
ground waters along the Gulf Coast of Louisiana and Texas. Water well
construction in some areas has permitted pollutants from the surface and
from other formations to enter fresh water aquifers, and irrigation return
flows have increased the mineralization of ground waters in the Pecos
and  Rio Grande Basins.
                                111

-------
                           CONTENTS

Section

I         Conclusions                                          1

II         Recommendations                                     3

III        Introduction                                          5

IV        Description of Project Area                          12

              Physiography                                   12
              Population                                       14
              Climate                                         15
              Ground-Water Resources                         15

                  Arkansas                                   15
                  Louisiana                                   22
                  New Mexico                                 27
                  Oklahoma                                   34
                  Texas                                       40

V         Ground-Water Pollution  Indicators                    49

              Arkansas                                        50
              Louisiana                                       52
              New Mexico                                     58
              Oklahoma                                       64
              Texas                                           71

VI        Causes  of Ground-Water Pollution                    78

              Natural Pollution                                79
              Oil  Field Brines                                 83
              Well Construction                                88
              Overpumping                                    92
              Irrigation Return Flows                          93
              Land Application of Wastes                       97
              Solid Wastes                                    100
              Evapotranspiration  by Native Vegetation         102
              Animal Wastes                                  103
              Waste Lagoons                                  105
              Accidental Spills of Hazardous Materials         IQ&
              Subsurface Waste Disposal                      106
              Artificial Recharge  of Aquifers                  109
              Other Causes
                                IV

-------
Section                                                      Page

VII       Research and Other Needs                           112

              General Research Needs                         112
              Specific Research Needs                         113

                  Natural Leaching                            113
                  Oil Field Brines and Other Materials          114
                  Well Construction                           115
                  Overpumping                               117
                  Irrigation Return Flows                      117
                  Septic Tanks                               117
                  Land Application of Wastes                   118
                  Solid Waste Disposal                         119
                  Evapotranspiration by Native Vegetation      119
                  Animal Wastes                              120
                  Waste Lagoons                              120
                  Accidental Spills of Hazardous Materials      121
                  Subsurface Waste Disposal                   121
                  Aquifer Recharge                           122

VIII       Acknowledgements                                  123

IX        References                                         124

X        Glossary of Terms                                   136

XI        Appendix A - Water Quality Standards                142

XII       Bibliography                                       152

-------
 18   Crude Oil Production
                           FIGURES

No.

 1    Comparison of Ground-Water Use to Surface-Water
        Use in 1970                                         7

 2    Comparison of Ground-Water to Surface-Water
        Irrigation Use in 1970                                9

 3    Ground-Water Regions in the South Central States       13

 4    Average Annual Precipitation in Inches                 16

 5    Average Annual Pan Evaporation in Inches              17

 6    Most Important Water-bearing Deposits in Arkansas      18

 7    Approximate Well Yields in Arkansas                   19

 8    Major Water-bearing Formations of Louisiana            23

 9    Eight Major Ground-Water Areas in New Mexico         28

 10    Relative Water Yields of New Mexico Aquifers            29

 11    Principal Water-bearing  Formations of Oklahoma         35

 12    Major Aquifers in Texas                               41

 13    Minor Aquifers in Texas                              43

 14    Location of Salt Domes in Louisiana                    53

 15    Location of Saline Ground Waters in New Mexico         £Q

 16    Approximate Boundary of the Permian Basin            go

 17    A Typical Cross-section  of the Water Quality of the
        Tularosa Basin of South Central New Mexico           32
                                                         86
 19   Upward Flow and Downward Leakage Through Open,
        Unsealed,  or  Corroded Casings                    go

 20   Approximate Depths to the Base of Fresh Water in
        Arkansas
                               VI

-------
No.                                                      Page

 21   Migration of Salt Water Up Into the Fresh Water Zone
        When a Well is Pumped                             92

 22   Potential for Horizontal Movement of Salt Water Caused
        by Overpumping                                   92

 23   Major Irrigation Areas of the Five South Central States  95
                                VII

-------
                           TABLES

No.                                                     Page

 1    Withdrawal Use of Water                          v     6

 2    Water Use in Conterminous United States in Billion
        Gallons Per Day                                   H

 3    Population of Five South Central States                14

 4    Summary of Minerals in Ground Water in the Various
        Ground-Water Regions  of Arkansas                  51

 5    Summary of Minerals in Ground Water in the Various
        Ground-Water Regions  of Louisiana                  54

 6    Summary of Minerals in Ground Water in the Various
        Ground-Water Regions  of New Mexico                59

 7    Summary of Minerals in Ground Waters of Oklahoma     66

 8    Summary of Chemical Analyses of Water from the
        Boone Formation                                  70

 9    Summary of Chemical Analyses of Water from the
        Roubidoux  Aquifer                                70

 10    Summary of Chemical Analyses of  Water from the
        Burgen  Sandstone                                71

 11    Summary of Minerals in Ground Water in the Various
        Ground-Water  Regions of Texas                     73

 12    Summary of Estimated Ground Water Available in the
        Tularosa Basin and Vicinity                        81

 13    Irrigated Acreage in 1969                            94

 14    Mean Annual Discharge and Dissolved Solids Concen-
        trations  at Successive Locations Along the
        Rio Grande                                       95

 15    Waste Disposal Wells in the Study Area               1Q8
                               Vlll

-------
                          SECTION I

                        CONCLUSIONS
1.    Ground water is the major source of water supply for western
     Texas and Oklahoma and most of New Mexico and is the only
     source of water in much of this area.

2.    Many of the western aquifers are being developed beyond the
     "safe yield," and water tables are falling rapidly.

3.    Because of this critical shortage of water resources in the western
     half of the project area, any contamination of fresh water has an
     immediate and long-lasting effect.

4.    More ground water in the five-state region is contaminated through
     natural processes of mineralization than all other sources of pollu-
     tion .  Saline ground water can be found at some depth under almost
     all of the region.  Chlorides are  the most widespread contaminant,
     but sulfates, nitrates, fluorides, and iron are also common natural
     contaminants.

5.    Pollution from  oil-field brines is the most serious form of man-made
     pollution in the five south-central states. Decades of oil pro-
     duction combined with inadequate well construction and minimal
     limitations on brine disposal methods have grossly polluted the
     ground-water resources of many areas of the five  states—
     especially in Texas and Oklahoma.

6.    Although most or all of the subject states have for  many years
     required plugging and sealing of oil and gas test holes, thousands
     of such improperly plugged holes blanket the region and provide
     avenues of pollution from a variety of sources—most notably oil-
     field brines and natural brines.  Until the last few years, very
     little effort has been made by the states to enforce plugging
     regulations, and even now these requirements  are enforced
     sparingly by some states in this  region. At least some of this
     reluctance to enforce proper well construction and abandonment
     is because the  state agencies  reponsible are more  related to
     petroleum production than to  pollution control.

7.    Overpumping is a serious cause  of salt water intrusion in many
     sections of the region. Ground waters most seriously affected
     are located along the Gulf Coast of Texas and Louisiana—
     especially the Houston and Baton Rouge  areas—and along the
     Pecos River in Texas and New Mexico.

-------
 8.    Irrigation return flows contribute to mineralization of ground
      waters in the Pecos and Rio Grande Valleys of New Mexico and
      Texas because of the close interrelationship of ground and sur-
      face waters in this region and the limited water supply.

 9.    With the increased restrictions on air pollution and waste dis-
      charge to surface waters, application of wastes—both solid and
      liquid—to land is becoming increasingly popular.  Care must be
      exercised in locating, designing, and loading disposal or treat-
      ment areas so as to prevent contamination of ground water by
      known or unknown leachates.          '

10.    Evapotranspiration by native vegetation contributes to increased
      mineralization of ground  waters in the western part of the five-
      state region—primarily in the Rio Grande and Pecos River Basins

11.    Most large feedlots in the region are located in the Texas and
      Oklahoma panhandle where water tables are deep and aquifer
      recharge from the surface is small.  It is unlikely that these
      feedlots are a threat to large areas of ground water but animal
      wastes can be a local source of contamination, depending on the
      geology, soil conditions, and depth to the water table.

12.    Waste lagoons may or may not be a problem, depending on the
      geology and soil conditions and type of waste  involved.  Gen-
      erally, sewage lagoon pollution is limited to increased nitrate
      concentrations in the ground water unless these lagoons overlie
      fractured or cavernous formations. On the  other hand, indus-
      trial waste lagoons may contain known and unknown chemicals
      which may be highly toxic and/or highly mobile in ground water.

13.    Petroleum products have been found in ground water at several
      locations and represent a constant hazard because of their wide-
      spread use, production,  and transportation in the project area.

14.    There has been little work done concerning ground water pollu-
      tion by organics, metals, bacteria and viruses.  Consequently,
      the true pollutional potential of many of man's activities cannot
      be fully evaluated.

15.    The subsurface injection of fluids and other substances poses an
      existing and potential threat to ground-water  quality. Records
      of such injection are not adequate in some states.

-------
                          SECTION II

                      RECOMMENDATIONS
1.   Conduct investigations, similar to those reported herein,  to
     identify ground-water pollution problems in all the remaining
     parts of the United States .

2.   In cooperation with the various states, the Environmental Pro-
     tection Agency should identify, develop, and establish quality
     control criteria to protect ground-water quality throughout the
     United States.

3.   A comprehensive study is needed of the Pecos and Rio Grande
     Basins to evaluate water resources, uses and needs, and  the
     effect of these uses and natural salinity on ground and surface
     water quality and quantity, and to develop a long-range plan of
     water use within the "safe yield" of both ground and surface
     water supplies.

4.   Sources and locations of significant natural pollution should be
     identified and isolated, if possible, to protect adjacent fresh
     water from contamination.

5.   Areas of ground-water pollution from oil field brines shduld be
     located and mapped.  Efforts should be made to assign responsi-
     bility for the pollution, extract damages from those responsible,
     and to rehabilitate the contaminated aquifers.

6.   A concentrated effort should be made to locate and plug abandoned
     oil  and gas test holes.  Some of the remote sensing techniques may
     be applicable to this problem.

7.   The disposal of wastes below the surface should be a responsi-
     bility of the state water pollution control agency.

8.   Rules and regulations for completing water wells should be
     developed and  enforced in  those states that now have no such
     regulations for protecting water supplies.

9,   Areas where geology,  soil  conditions, or high water tables, or
     any combination, are conducive to rapid ground water recharge
     from the surface should be identified.  Surface activities such
     as feedlots and discharge of wastes to land or unlined lagoons
     should be restricted.

-------
10.    Expand research efforts aimed at solution of the high priority
      needs with emphasis on those problems most likely to achieve
      the most valuable impact.  For detailed research recommenda-
      tions, refer to Section VII herein.

11.    There is a need for states to maintain detailed records of the
      subsurface injection of fluids and other materials.

12.    Techniques of adequately'monitor ing the travel of pollutants
      through the subsurface environment should be developed and
      applied to safeguard ground-water resources.

-------
                           SECTION III

                         INTRODUCTION
About 97 percent of the earth's fluid fresh water is ground water and
ground water is used as a water supply by about two-thirds of the
people in the United States. 1/2/  To preserve this most valuable
natural resource, a national program of ground-water quality protec-
tion and restoration is a necessity.  A major need in developing such
a program is a definition of ground-water pollution problems and
potential problems and the scope and significance of each.  This report
is designed to outline the ground-water problems of five south-central
states (Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas), to
indicate the extent of the problems and their relative priority to the
region, and to suggest possible measures for the renovation of contami-
nated supplies and the protection of uncontaminated  supplies.  Four
southwestern states were studied in a previous report and  the rest of
the United States will be covered in  subsequent reports.2/

Much ground-water pollution results from natural phenomena that takes
place over long periods of time but there is also a great deal of pollution
^resulting from careless or deliberate acts of man. It is also important
to consider that ground water and surface water are hydrologically
related and interdependent and that ground water may be polluted by
surface water or ground water may pollute surface water.  Whatever
the cause, ground-water pollution us'ually takes place slowly.  Because
ground water movement is very slow, it may take many years to pollute
a large volume of ground water.  However, once the ground water is
polluted, it may also take many years, decades, even centuries, and
untold cost to restore the quality of the water after the source of pollu-
tion is removed.  Therefore, prevention of ground-water pollution is
much more desirable than renovation and both require a  thorough
understanding of the uses of ground water, location  of ground-water
resources, and real and potential pollution sources.

                      Use  of  Ground Water

Ground water supplied about one-fifth of all water used in the United
States during 1970.  This ratio of ground water to total water use varies
widely from one region to another, with the greatest ground-water use
being in the central and western states.  In the five states of this report,
57 percent of total fresh water used is ground water. Only in Louisiana
is there significantly more surface water than ground water used. Table
and Figure 1 show the use of water withdrawn from the project area. V

-------
Table 1. WITHDRAWAL
Arkansas
Surface Water
Ground Water
TOTAL
Public
Supply
95
71
166
USE OF
Rural
Supply
19
64
83
WATERS IN
Industrial*
200
330
530
1970 (MGD)3
Irrigation
230
1100
1330

Total
544
1565
2109
  % of Total from
     Ground Water

Louisiana
                   42%
  Surface Water    240
  Ground Water    140
     TOTAL        380
  % of Total from
     Ground Water   36%

New Mexico

  Surface Water     16
  Ground Water    130
     TOTAL        146
  % of Total from
     Ground Water   89%

Oklahoma

  Surface Water    190
  Ground Water     72
     TOTAL        262
  % of Total from
     Ground Water   27%

Texas

  Surface Water    740
  Ground Water    690
     TOTAL      1430
  % of Total from
     Ground Water   48%

GRAND TOTAL   2384
% of  Grand Total from
  Ground Water     46%
77%
                             11
                             78
                             89

                             87%
                             33
                             29
                             62

                             46%
                             50
                             31
                             81

                             38%
                             52
                            190
                            242

                             78%

                            557
62%
          2900
           460
          3360

            14%
            14
            72
            86

            84%
            95
            32
           127

            25%
          1200
           480
          1680

            29%

          5783
82%
            780
            770
           1550

             49%
           1500
           1300
           2800

            46%
            99
           720
           819

            87%
           2500
           7800
          10300

             75%

          16749

             69%
74%
        3931
        1448
        5379

          28%
        1563
        1531
        3094

          49%
         434
         855
        1289

          66%
        4492
        9160
       13652

          67%

       25523
                             70%        24%          69%       57%

*Does not include saline water or water used for thermoelectric power.

-------
       — GROUND WATER
D   ~
SURFACE WATER
               FIGURED   COMPARISON OF GROUND-WATER USE TO SURFACE-WATER USE IN 197 O-3

-------
Public Water Supply—includes all water entering public supply systems.
The water is used for many different purposes including industrial,
domestic, livestock, military and governmental facilities.

In 1970, ground water constituted about 35 percent of the water in pub-
lic supply systems in the United States. However, in the five states
discussed here, ground water accounted for 46 percent of the water
withdrawn for public supply.  Large cities such as Albuquerque,
Amarillo, Baton Rouge, El Paso. Galveston, Lubbock, Midland, and
San Antonio relied wholly on ground water; other large cities obtained
a significant part of their supply from ground water.  Houston, for
example, obtained about 75 percent of its supply from wells.  A large
percentage of the smaller cities and towns have ground-water supplies.
In 1962, Texas had 1,326 municipal supplies using ground water, or
about 90 percent of all municipalities in the state.

Rural Supplies—provide water for domestic and livestock use on farms,
ranches,  and residences throughout the United States.  Indeed, the
development and expansion of the country has been closely related to
the availability and development of ground water to meet farm and
ranch needs.  About 98 percent of the rural domestic use in the project
area is  ground water.  About 70 percent of all rural water used, includ-
ing that for livestock,  is from this resource.

Industrial Supplies—provide water for cooling, processing, washing,
sanitizing, etc.   The amounts provided for industrial use by public
supplies are not included as industrial supplies.  It is estimated that
70 percent of all industrial water is used for cooling.

Thermoelectric Power Supplies—provide water for coolers, boilers,
and sanitary purposes in fossil and nuclear fueled power plants.
Approximately 97 percent is used for cooling to condense steam. Since
less than 1 percent is consumed, this use is not included in Figure 1  or
Table 1.

Irrigation Supplies—consume more water than any other use in  the
United States.  In  1970, irrigation use in the United States was 140
million acre-feet, of which about 60 percent or 82 million acre-feet
were consumed. Figure 2 shows the percentages of ground water and
surface water used for irrigation in the project area.  In these states,
69 percent of all irrigation use is ground water.

Air Conditioning—use  is not well documented since much of the water
used for this purpose is taken from supplies used for other purposes.
The quantities of water used for air conditioning are included in public
and industrial supplies.

-------
—GROUND WATER





—SURFACE WATER
      FIGURE 2,   COMPARISON  OF GROUND-WATER TO SURFACE-WATER IRRIGATION USE IN 1970

-------
                           Future Use

The future use of water in the United States was projected by the Senate
Select Committee on National Water Resources in 1960.4/  Their projec-
tions are summarized in Table 2.  Usage is expected to double by the
year 2000 and although the projection may lack precision, it is certain
that there will be a large increase in the use of water and that much of
the increase will come  from ground water.  Several predictions concern-
ing this increase have  been reported by McGuiness. 5/  Even the most
conservative of these involves a threefold increase by 2000 and the
least conservative, a tenfold increase.  From these predictions, the
use of ground water  will  more than double between I960 and 1980 and
will increase almost  five  times by the year 2000.  Regardless of the
accuracy of these predictions, it is certain that ground water will be
of increasing importance in coming years, and care must be taken to
protect it and develop it for the maximum benefit to all.
                                 10

-------
?able 2. WATER USE IN CONTERMINOUS UNITED STATES IN BILLION
1954 1980
Public Supply
Industry (Mfg)
Irrigation
Subtotal
Steam-Electric (Cooling)
TOTAL
With-
drawal
16.7
31.9
176.1
224.7
74.1
298.8
Consump-
tive Use
2.1
2.8
103.9
108.8
0.4
109.2
With-
drawal
28.6
101.6
167.2
297.4
258.9
556.3
Consump-
tive Use
3.7
8.7
104.5
116.9
1.7
118.6
GALLONS PER DAY
2000
With-
drawal
42.2
229.2
184.2
455.6
429.4
885.0
Consump-
tive Use
5.5
20.8
126.3
152.6
2.9
155.5

-------
                           SECTION IV

                DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREA


The project area includes the states of Arkansas, New Mexico, Okla-
homa, Louisiana, and Texas.  Within this region are vast stretches of
desert, high mountain ranges, great agricultural areas, and large
swamps along the Gulf Coast.  The project area is composed of 560,000
square miles, or about 16 percent of the fifty United States. Water use
in this region was over 25 billion gallons per day in 1970, of which
57 percent was taken from ground-water sources.

                         Physiography

The project area is characterized by the widest variation in physio-
graphic features.  From the  towering Rocky Mountains in New Mexico,
the project area flattens out  and descends eastward as it nears the
lowland on the Gulf of Mexico.

Using the classification of Thomas who divided the United States into
ten ground-water regions, the project area includes parts of six of the
basic ground-water regions  (Figure 3) .6_/

      1.  Western Mountain Ranges

      2.  Alluvial Basins

      3.  Colorado Plateaus

      4.  High Plains

      5.  Unglaciated Central Region

      6.  Gulf Coastal Plain
Only a small part of the project area is in the Western Mountain Ranges,
the Colorado Plateaus or the Alluvial Basins. However, the Alluvial
Basins are very important to New Mexico where the Rio Grande Basin
overshadows all other sources of ground water in the state.  The Gulf
Coastal Plain is the ground-water region that contains the most exten-
sive ground-water reservoirs in the project area.

Once out of the foothills of the Rocky Mountains,  the area becomes
topographically a series of plains. These plains gradually slope east-
ward from elevations  approaching 6,000 feet in eastern New Mexico to
sea level at the Gulf of Mexico.

                               12

-------
m
GROUND-WATER REGIONS
UNCONSOLIDATED OR
SEMI CONSOLIDATED AQUIFERS

CONSOLIDATED-ROCK
AQUIFERS

CONSOLIDATED ROCK AQUIFERS
INTERBEDDED WITH OR OVER-
LAIN BY I/CONSOLIDATED OR
SEMI CONSOLIDATED AQUIFERS
                                                                           WESTERN MOUNTAIN RANGES
                                                                           ALLUVIAL BASINS
                                                                           COLORADO PLATEAUS
                                                                           HIGH PLAINS
                                                                           UNGLACIATED CENTRAL
                                                                           REGION
                                                                           GULF COASTAL PLAIN
                   FIGURE 3,  GROUND-WATER REGIONS IN THE SOUTH CENTRAL STATES
                                                                               6/

-------
The High Plains of eastern New Mexico, the Oklahoma panhandle, and
western Texas are relatively flat portions of a physiographic province
known as the Great Plains,  which stretches north all the way to Canada
and covers a vast area of the central United States. Elevations charac-
teristically range between 2,500 and 5,000 feet and are almost completely
without erosion.

Just east of the Cap Rock Escarpment, which is the eastern boundary of
the High Plains, part of the unglaciated Central Region known as the
Osage Plains sweeps from the Edwards Plateau on the south across
part of north central Texas and most of Oklahoma.   Limestone once
formed a continuous cover over all of this area, and the extent of ero-
sion determines the topography of the  region.  The limestone of the
Edwards Plateau on the south is intact although deeply disected and
consists mostly of brushy hills and canyons.

To the north, the limestone of the Osage Plains has been eroded away
as has much of the underlying rocks.  This area is generally charac-
terized by slightly rolling,  exposed beds of clay and shale and light
timber and scrub brush.

The Gulf Coastal Plain includes almost the southeast half of Texas and
Arkansas and all of Louisiana. This region is bounded on the west by
the Balcones Escarpment, a fault zone  which runs east and then north
from Del Rio, Texas, all the way to the Red River.  Most of the  area is
gently rolling with rich-soiled prairies on  the west, heavy timber
land in east Texas and northwest Louisiana, and level coastal prairie
and marshlands along the Gulf of Mexico and the Mississippi River.

                           Population

The project area includes some of the largest metropolitan areas in the
United States, as well as some of the most sparsely populated desert
areas. The total population is currently almost 20  million people, as
shown in Table 3.
    Table 3.  POPULATION OF FIVE SOUTH-CENTRAL STATES

                               1960                 1970

        Arkansas            1,786,272            1,886,210
        Louisiana            3,257,022            3,564,310
        New Mexico           951,023              998,257
        Oklahoma            2,328,284            2,498,378
        Texas               9,579,677           10,989,123
                               14

-------
                             Climate

The climate of the five-state region is as variable as the elevations
within the area.  Annual rainfall varies from as low as 8 inches in the
deserts of New Mexico and west Texas to as high as 64 inches in the
marshlands of Louisiana. The eastern portion is typically humid, the
western portion typically dry, and the vast midsection of the area is
characterized by alternation of humid and dry conditions.

The study region is at a juncture with two major climatic conditions —
warm, moist  gulf air masses and relatively cooler and drier air masses
from the continental interior.  Precipitation occurs when the warm gulf
air is forced  aloft by relatively cooler air masses from the north such
as occurs over the Balcones Escarpment in central Texas.

Except in the mountains of New Mexico, snow is not very common or
persistent, but it can be a valuable source of moisture in the High
Plains of Texas and New Mexico .

Most of the western part of the study area receives less than 20 inches
of annual rainfall. The average annual precipitation is shown in
Figure 4.

Limited moisture conditions and high summer temperatures character-
istic of much of the study area have a detrimental effect on ground-water
quality, especially where natural land drainage is restricted.  Temper-
atures of over 100° F  are not uncommon in July and August, and the
high evapotranspiration rate results in mineral buildup in the  soils and
ground water. Average annual  pan evaporation, shown in Figure 5,
is indicative  of the high evapotranspiration rates in the area.

                     Ground-Water Resources

                           ARKANSAS

Arkansas is roughly divided into two physiographic divisions.  The
northwestern higher and more rugged half is part of the Interior High-
lands , and the southeastern half is in the Coastal Plain province.
Geohydrologically, as well as physiographically, the state is divided
sharply into  two parts.  The northwestern half contains ground-water
supplies that are prevailingly srtall to moderate (though ample for
domestic use) , and the southeastern half contains larger supplies.
Figure 6 shows the approximate productive areas of the most important
water-bearing deposits in Arkansas, and Figure 7 shows the approxi-
mate yields to be expected from  wells.
                                 15

-------
FIGURE 4,   AVERAGE ANNUAL DREC!PITAT!ON IN INCHES

-------
FIGURE 5,   AVERAGE ANNUAL PAN EVAPORATION IN INCHES

-------
oo
                                                                                  UNNAMED UNITS
                                                                                  COCKFIELD FORMATION
                                                                                  SPARTA SAND
                                                                                  1400  FOOT SAND
                                                                                  ^DIFFERENTIATED
                        FIGURE  .6..  MOST IMPORTANT WATER-BEARING DEPOSITS IN ARKANSAS -

-------
WASHINGTON    MADISON    NEWTON
CRAWFORD FRANKLIN
               JOHNSON    POPE   VAN8UREN
                                                        WOODRUFF -ZCR
                YELL  /  PERRY
                                  PUCASKU f\ LONOKE
                                          JEFFERSON- IZZAR KANSAS
                                      CLEVELANDF LINCOI
                                                                         LESS THAN  50 GALLONS PER MINUTE



                                                                         MORE THAN  500 GALLONS PER MINUTE



                                                                      1  50 TO 500  GALLONS  PER MINUTE
                                                                      Ji
                                                                         II
                    FIGURE  7,   APPROXIMATE WELL YIELDS IN ARKANSAS -'

-------
Ground water is one of Arkansas' most important assets. The state has
few ground-water supply problems, other than those related to unavail-
ability of large supplies in some areas, poor quality of water in sub-
stantial areas, and ground-water depletion in the Grand Prairie or
extreme eastern region.  The general lack of serious water problems
has resulted in a corresponding lack of legislation controlling water
use.  As water use increases and competition develops, the time may
come when the state will need to enact more restrictive legislation.

                        Interior Highlands

The Interior Highlands are located in the northwestern half of the state
where ground-water supplies are prevailingly small to moderate.

In most of the Interior Highlands, well yields rarely exceed  50 gpm and
are generally less than 25 gpm.7/  Thus, only domestic and stock needs
and small municipal needs can be met in most of the region.  There are
several areas within the highlands where moderate and locally large
supplies are available.  The most important of these are in the northern
tier of counties (the Springfield-Salem Plateaus of the Ozark Plateaus)
and the Arkansas River Valley.

Ground water in the Springfield-Salem Plateaus occurs in fractures,
many of them solutionally enlarged,  and in thick strata of limestone
and dolomite. The limestone formations of Ordovician Age are the
principal source of ground water in the Salem Plateau area.   The
Springfield Plateau yields ground water over most of its area and is
supplied by the Boone Formation and the Batesville Sandstone.  Well
yields range from 50 gpm or less up to 500 gpm. 5/

Ground water in the Arkansas Valley occurs in two distinct environ-
ments.  One includes the unconsolidated alluvial deposits of the
Arkansas River and its tributaries and the other includes the consoli-
dated rocks that underlie the entire region.

The principal aquifer in the bedrock of the Arkansas Valley  section is
the Atoka Formation of Pennsylvanian Age, which consists of shale and
sandstone.  Wells generally yield less than 50 gpm, but yields of this
amount or more are available locally ,TJ  The most productive rock is
not sandstone but hard, fractured shale adjacent to the sandstone beds.
The bedrock is important because it underlies a  large area.

The most consistently productive aquifer in  the Interior Highlands is
the alluvium along the Arkansas River.  The alluvium is composed of
sand, gravel, silt,  and clay and grades generally  from fine grained at
the surface to coarse grained at the base.  Yields ranging from 300 to
                                20

-------
750 gpm have been obtained from wells tapping the alluvium.8/
Although few large capacity wells have been drilled into the alluvium
to date, large supplies could be developed in places by induced infil-
tration from the river.

                        Gulf Coastal Plain

The coastal plain is underlain by southward- to southeastward-dipping
(and thickening) strata of unconsolidated to  slightly compacted and
cemented clay, silt, sand, gravel, shale, limestone, and lignite of
Cretaceous and Tertiary Ages.  Overlying the Cretaceous and Tertiary
strata in valleys are flat-lying unconsolidated sediments of Quaternary
Age, generally sandy  and gravelly in the lower part and finer  grained
above.  There are five major water-bearing units in this area.  These
include the Cockfield Formation, Sparta Sands, Wilcox Formation
("1400 foot Sand"), Cretaceous undifferentiated deposits, and the
Quaternary Alluvium.

The primary ground-water problem in the Gulf Coastal Plain region of
Arkansas is one of depletion in the irrigated Grand Prairie area in the
Mississippi Alluvial Plain.

The .Cockfield Formation of Tertiary Age—consisting chiefly of fine to
medium-grained gray  sand, in part lignitic, interbedded with light to
dark-gray lignitic  clay—underlies a large area in east central  and
southeastern Arkansas.  The formation is an important source of water
for industrial use in the vicinity of Pine Bluff and for municipal supplies
in most of the area  in which it occurs.  Water from the Cockfield Forma-
tion is pumped for  irrigation from about 20 or 30  wells in east central
Arkansas,  chiefly in the Grand Prairie Region, and water of fair to good
quality can be obtained at most places . Locally,  the upper sand beds
yield moderately mineralized water, but less mineralized water is
generally available in  deeper beds of the formation.

The Sparta Sand of Tertiary Age is an important  source of ground water
in south central Arkansas, where it is used extensively for industrial
and municipal supplies and in  the oil fields.  This formation consists
of massive beds of white to gray, fine to medium-grained sand  with
beds and lenses of  sandy or silty clay and some thin beds of lignite.
The Sparta Sand is a high yield aquifer yielding  up to 700 gpm in  some
areas.9/

In northeastern Arkansas there is an important water-bearing deposit
of Tertiary Age, known locally at Memphis, Tennessee,  as the  "1400
foot sand. "10/  These  sands in Arkansas are part of the Wilcox Forma-
tion and occur  at a depth of 1900 feet in the east central part of the
state. 7/
                                 21

-------
The "1400 foot sands" are composed of a prominent bed of fine to medium
sand and forms an artesian aquifer over most of the area.  The artesian
pressure has been greatly reduced as a result of excessive usage and
it is now necessary to use pumps in most of the wells.

In southwestern Arkansas there occurs a general east-trending band of
undifferentiated deposits of Cretaceous Age, consisting chiefly of sand
or crumbly sandstone overlain and underlain by sandy clay,  shale, and
marl.  Some of these deposits will yield good water in sufficient quantity
for domestic and small industrial or municipal supplies but most yields
are less than 500 gpm.ll/

The Quaternary Alluvium is the most important and highest yielding
source of ground water in the coastal plain,  and most water is used for
irrigation. Deposits of Quaternary Age occur in a large part  of the
Gulf Coastal Plain in eastern Arkansas and in the valleys of the Saline,
Ouachita, Red, and Arkansas Rivers. The upper part of these forma-
tions consist of sand and gravel and generally yield large amounts of
water to wells.

                           LOUISIANA

Louisiana,  second only to Hawaii in total annual precipitation, is a
"water-rich" state with large supplies of ground water and large and
occasionally excessive supplies of surface water. 12/ More than three-
fourths of the  state is underlain by fresh-water aquifers capable of
yielding moderate  to large supplies of ground water, a considerable
part of it soft and low in mineral matter.  About two-thirds of all ground
water pumped in the state is from Quaternary deposits of Pleistocene
and Recent Ages which underlie most  of Louisiana, as shown  in Figure 8.

Water use in Louisiana is greater than in any other southern  state
excluding Texas.  Even though Louisiana has a large water supply,
there is a shortage in some streams in dry weather.  This shortage
leads to deficiencies in supply in inland stretches and to salt-water
encroachment  in some tidal stretches.  Storing the over-abundant
flood flow for dry weather use, is difficult because of the lack  of good
reservoir sites in the flat terrain. Although flood-control reservoirs
retard flood runoff and provide storage, sedimentation in the  reser-
voirs and streams rapidly reduce storage capacity.

Most of the previous studies on Louisiana ground-water resources have
been prepared by the United States Geological Survey in cooperation
with the Louisiana Geological Survey and the Louisiana Department of
Public Works.  In this report the state has been divided into the five
geographic areas of Southwestern Louisiana, Baton Rouge Area,  Baton
Rouge-New Orleans Area, Southeastern Louisiana,  and Northern and
Central Louisiana.


                                22

-------
to
CO
                                                                          MIOCENE  DEPOSITS




                                                                      Fxl QUARTERNARY ALLUVIUM





                                                                          COCKFIELD FORMATION





                                                                          SPARTA SAND
                                                                      V|  WILCOX GROUP
                                                                      • •I



                                                                           PLIOCENE DEPOSITS
                          FIGURE 8-  MAJOR HATER-BEARING FORMATIONS OF LOUISIANA

-------
                     Southwestern Louisiana

 Southwestern Louisiana is underlain by a thick sequence of southerly
 and southeasterly dipping interbedded gravels, sands, silts, and clays
 that have been divided into the Atchafalaya, Chicot, Evangeline, and
 Jasper Aquifers. The Chicot Aquifer is the principal, most heavily
 pumped source of fresh water.  The Atchafalaya is a source of fresh
 water only in the extreme eastern part of the area.  The Evangeline
 and Jasper Aquifers contain fresh water only  in the northern and
 central part of the area.

 The sands of the Chicot and Atchafalaya Aquifers are hydraulically
 connected; therefore, in the areas where they overlap they are con-
 sidered to be a single ground-water reservoir designated as the Chicot
 reservoir. IV The Chicot Reservoir underlies most of southwestern
 Louisiana and extends an unknown distance beneath the Gulf of Mexico
 and is composed of beds of clay, silt, sand, and gravel of Pleistocene
 Age.  These  sediments dip  toward the south and southeast  and increase
 in thickness  from less than 100 feet in the northern part of the area to
 more than 7,000 feet beneath the Gulf of Mexico. 13/

 The geology  and climate  (heavy rainfall) of southwestern Louisiana
 combine to form one of the largest sources  of fresh ground water in
 North America.  Large quantities of ground water are available for
 agricultural, municipal,  domestic, and industrial purposes with over
 three-fourths of all ground-water pumpage being used for  rice irriga-
 tion.  However, with the decline of water levels,  salt-water encroach-
 ment is a local problem or potential problem in coastal streams during
 dry weather periods. Thus far, major pollution has been limited to an
 area along the Vermilion River.

 Heavy ground-water pumpage in southwestern Louisiana, and in the
 Lake Charles industrial area in particular, has caused a reversal in the
 piezometric gradient south of the areas of heavy pumpage.  This has
 allowed salty water in the southern part of the reservoir to move slowly
 northward.

 The Evangeline and Jasper Reservoirs consist of unconsolidated fine to
 medium-grained sand of Pliocene Age.  The volume of water pumped
 from these reservoirs is relatively small compared with the total pump-
 age in southwestern Louisiana.

                        Baton Rouge Area

The Baton Rouge area is underlain by a complex sequence  of continental
and marine sediments. Pumpage is from the alluvium and from the older
artesian aquifers known for their general depths as the "400-foot,"
                                24

-------
"600-foot," "800-foot," "1,000-foot," "1,200-foot," "1,500-foot,"
" 1,700-foot,11 "2,000-foot," "2,400-foot," and "2,800-foot" sands.

Alluvial deposits of Recent and Pleistocene Ages are limited to the flood-
plain of the Mississippi River near Baton Rouge.  These deposits
consist of approximately  80 percent water-bearing sands and  gravels
and 20 percent silt and clay.14/  In the floodplain, the deposits range
in thickness from 250 feet in northern West Baton Rouge Parish to
600 feet in the south-central part of the area.

Most water for public and industrial use is pumped from artesian
aquifers in the area which vary in thickness, grain  size and depth.

The shallow sands—the "400-foot" and "600-foot"—were formerly the
most heavily pumped, and water levels were drawn  rather low.   In
recent years, withdrawals have been reduced and the water levels
have recovered substantially. The quality of the water is fairly good,
but encroachment of brackish water has been detected in one area of
the "600-foot"  sand.

Water levels in deeper sands are declining as they are pumped more
heavily to meet demands. Salt water is encroaching toward Baton Rouge
in the artesian aquifers and poses a real or potential threat to fresh
ground-water supplies.  Large scale faulting across the southern Baton
Route area acts somewhat as a hydraulic barrier to the northward move-
ment of salt water in the  deeper aquifers.  However, salty water  has
been found north of the fault zone in the "1,000-foot,"  "1,500-foot," and
"2,000-foot" sands, as well as the "600-foot" sand.40/

                 Baton  Rouge-New Orleans Area

The Baton Rouge-New Orleans area is that area south of Baton Rouge
down to and including New Orleans. It is a  part of the upper  deltaic
plain of the Mississippi River.

Aquifers that contain  fresh water are largely limited to  the upper 800
feet of  sediments.  Deposits making up the deltaic complex are of Pleis-
tocene  and Recent Ages .  Except for local  problems , fresh ground water
in at least moderate quantities can be obtained throughout the area.
However, at many places careful development is necessary to  minimize
upward or lateral movement of salt water into the fresh water. The
main water-bearing deposits are the "700-foot"  sand which supplies
most of the New Orleans  area and the Mississippi River alluvium.

Water in the New Orleans area grades from fresh to  salty in a  north to
south direction, but salt-water encroachment caused by declining water
                                25

-------
levels is not deemed serious, provided the current distribution of the
pumping is maintained. Wells yielding 1,000 gpm or more can be con-
structed almost anywhere. .15/

Relatively large amounts of water are available locally from shallow wells
that tap the alluvial deposits of the Mississippi River. However, in some
areas, continuous pumpage would result in salt-water encroachment
from brackish water in the basal part of the aquifer.

                     Southeastern Louisiana

Southeastern Louisiana is one of the most promising areas for future
development in the state.  Enormous quantities of soft, fresh water are
available from sands of Quaternary and Tertiary Ages which extend to
depths exceeding 3,500 feet in some places.  Water is available by flow-
ing artesian wells in large parts of the area, but some of the shallow
water is corrosive.

                 Northern and Central Louisiana

Northern and central Louisiana are underlain by a series of deposits
yielding from small to large amounts of ground water. Three of the
more important water-bearing formations are the Sparta Sand of the
Claiborne group, the Wilcox group, and the Quaternary Alluvium of
the Red River.

The Sparta Sand, which is the most important aquifer in north central
Louisiana, ranges in thickness from about 500 to 900  feet where it con-
tains fresh water. 12/ Ground water in the Sparta Sand is unconfined
in its sandy outcrop areas, and is under artesian conditions where
the sands are overlain by impermeable material.  Water quality varies
depending on whether it is found in the outcrop area or under artesian
conditions.  Pumping from the Sparta has caused water levels to de-
cline at Hodge in Jackson Parish, Monroe in Ouachita Parish, and
Bastrop in Morehouse Parish. Pumping in these areas may eventually
cause salt water to encroach from down-dip to the east.

Sands of the Wilcox group yield fresh water in northwestern Louisiana.
This aquifer is  composed of a heterogenous sequence of beds of lignitic
sand, silty sand, sandy and silty clay, and clay. These fine grained
deposits form a deltaic sequence that thickens rapidly southward.
Artesian conditions  prevail in much of the Wilcox Sands; however,
only a few wells have flowing water. Yields from wells tapping the
Wilcox Sands are generally small, but larger  yields are  sometimes
found locally.
                                26

-------
Alluvial deposits in the Red River Valley constitute a relatively un-
developed but potentially important aquifer in northwestern and central
Louisiana.  The alluvium consists of an upper unit of clay and silt with
sand and gravel making up the lower half of the deposits.  Ground water
in the Red River Valley generally is under artesian conditions.  Other
than for stock and irrigation supplies, the water is used very little but
there is great potential for additional irrigation.

                          NEW MEXICO

The Major ground-water producing areas of New Mexico are located in
alluvial deposits of the Rio Grande Valley which transverse the  state
from north to south and in the High Plains and Pecos Valley of extreme
eastern New Mexico.  Less productive aquifers are scattered through-
out the state and many of these are of major local importance even
though their overall development is comparatively  minor.

Being an area of semi-arid climate, New Mexico relies on ground water
to supply about one-half of its large and growing water needs.  Irriga-
tion is a major user and in 1970 accounted for almost 85 percent of the
total ground water used in New Mexico.3/ Heavy pumping combined
with low rainfall and limited recharge of most of the aquifers has
resulted in ground-water mining.

Ground-water mining also has a profound effect on surface water
supplies in New Mexico because of the close hydraulic association
between ground and surface water along major  developed streams.
New Mexico was one of the earliest states to recognize this interconnec-
tion in the  adoption and administration of legislation pertaining  to water
rights.

The U.S. Geological Survey and the New Mexico State Engineer's office
have conducted extensive studies concerning both  the quantity and
quality of ground water and their reports are the primary source of
this summary  on New Mexico.   The New Mexico Bureau of Mines and
Mineral Resources, University of New Mexico, New Mexico Geological
Society and the Pecos River Commission have also  contributed signifi-
cant studies of the ground-water resources of New  Mexico in terms of
eight major areas: High Plains, Rio Grande Valley, Canadian and
Cimarron River Basins, Pecos River Basin, basins in central  and south
central New Mexico, basins  in southwestern New Mexico, Gila and  San
Francisco River Basins,  and Colorado Plateaus. These areas are shown
in Figure 9 and relative water yields are shown in  Figure 10.
                                 27

-------
                                                   CANADIAN AND
                                                  CIMARRON RIVER
                                                      BASINS
            COLORADO
            PLATEAUS
GILA-ond- SAN-FRANCISCO
     RIVER BASINS
                                CENTRAL

                                  AND

                             SpUTH-CENTRAL

                              NEW MEXICO
SOUTHWESTERN
 NEW MEXICO
      FIGURE 9,   EIGHT MAJOR GROUND-WATER AREAS  IN NEW MEXICO
                                  28

-------
FIGURE 10,  RELATIVE WATER YIELDS OF
                                       LESS  THAN  100 GPM/ HIGHLY
                                       SALINE WATER AREAS/  OR AREAS  FOR
                                       WHICH DATA ARE  INADEQUATE  FOR
                                       APPRAISAL
                                       100 TO  300 GPM

                                       MORE  THAN  300 GPM
MEXICO AQUIFERS ~
                                    29

-------
                           High Plains

The sand and gravel aquifers in the High Plains of New Mexico are the
western part of the massive series of aquifers which underlie much of
northwest Texas and parts of several states all the way to South Dakota.
The High Plains in New Mexico is an area of heavy pumping and ground-
water mining.  Most water is from the Ogallala Aquifer, although along
the edges of the Plains and in basins excavated into the plains, such as
the Portales Valley, alluvium of Quaternary Age also yields heavy pump-
ing.

As with much of New Mexico, the major water resource problem in  the
High Plains is the  lack of natural ground-water recharge. Average
annual  rainfall is less than 20 inches and there is no surface runoff to
perennial streams. Essentially, the only recharge to the ground water
is seepage from undrained depressions and arroyos during infrequent
periods of flooding and infiltration of precipitation into dune sand such
as that  in the Portales Valley.

The Ogallala is heavily developed all the way from southern Quay
County  to southern Lea County with the thickest and most productive
area being in northern Lea County. Individual wells yield up to
1,600 gpm but water levels are declining and pumping lifts are as
much as 400 feet. IT/

The Ogallala is thinner in southern Lea County where much of the water
is obtained from Quaternary sediments which overlie it in the east and
replace it in the west.

These Quaternary  deposits are also an important ground-water source
in the Portales Valley where they lie in a broad shallow valley cut into
and  through the Ogallala Formation in northern Roosevelt and eastern
De Baca counties.  Individual wells yield from 300 to 1,000 gpm, but
water levels have been declining at almost three feet per year since
195p.16/

Although the overwhelming majority of water in the High Plains of New
Mexico is obtained from alluvium formations, the Santa Rosa and Chinle
Sandstones of Roosevelt, Chaves, Eddy, and Lea Counties do yield
small but important supplies for domestic and stock use.

                       Rio Grande Valley
                                 i
The valley of the Rio Grande is an alluvial trough that stretches from
Colorado's San Luis Valley on the north across New Mexico to El Paso,
Texas on the south. This  trough is up to 30 miles wide in some locations
and is known to reach depths of 6,000 feet near Albuquerque. 18/
                                30

-------
This alluvium produces large yields of water and beneath the river's
floodplain the water table is only a few feet below the surface but is
more than 1,000 feet deep along the margin of the trough. W Although
the Rio Grande Valley contains usable ground water to great depths.
the hydraulic interrelationship with the surface water would result in
hydrologic and legal problems if uncontrolled development of the
ground-water reservoir were permitted. Reduction of the ground-water
table would reduce the flow in the river where the surface waters are
already fully appropriated.

               Canadian and Cimarron River Basins

The Canadian and Cimarron River Basins in northeastern New Mexico
overlie meager ground-water supplies.  The only moderately productive
areas are the Ogallala north of the Canadian River, an area of Mesozoic
rocks near Tucumcari, and a small  alluvial aquifer in Union County.
The most common sources of ground water are  the sandstone formations
and one of the most productive is the Entrada Sandstone which provides
water for the city of Tucumcari.

     1                   Pecos River Basin

The Pecos River heads in the mountains east of Santa Fe and flows
south-southeast into Texas south of Carlsbad, New Mexico.  In the
northern part of the basin, the river has cut through the Ogallala
Formation and into rock, mostly sandstone and shale of low permea-
bility . Ground-water supplies in the  area are  meager although
domestic supplies  are available from limestone fractures in the moun-
tain region and from the Abo Sandstone farther south. From the
northern part of De Baca County on southward, alluvial fill is a pro-
ductive source of ground water.  Of more importance to the basin as
a whole are the underlying limestone formations which constitute the
artesian aquifers of the Roswell and Carlsbad area.  With the heavy
development for irrigation the artesian pressure has declined until
most wells in the area must now be pumped. Nevertheless, wells of
a few thousand gallons per minute are common near Roswell.

The San Andres Limestone  in the vicinity of Santa Rosa contains large
supplies of ground water and discharges a considerable amount to the
Pecos River south  of Santa  Rosa.  Much of this discharge is water
which has disappeared into the stream bed north of Santa Rosa.  Ground
water in the Pecos Valley is more an essential part of the hydrologic
system than in most stream valleys.  Soluble rock formations are found
almost everywhere beneath the land surface resulting in subsurface
erosion and surface sinks.  These are evidenced in losses and gains of
flow at a number of locations along the river.
                                31

-------
          Basins in Central and South Central New Mexico

The principal basins between the Rio Grande and Pecos include the
Estancia Valley, the Tularosa Basin, and the Jornada del Muerto.

The Estancia Valley is located in Torrance and southern Santa Fe
counties and has no surface water outlets.  Precipitation either infil-
trates into the subsurface, evaporates from saline lakes, or transpires
from vegetation.  The major source of water in this area is the alluvium;
but the Madera Limestone in the west, the Glorieta Sandstone in the
north, and the Yeso Formation in the southern and northeastern parts
of the valley also yield considerable water.  Generally, the water in
this valley is limited and of poor quality.

Ground water in the Tularosa Basin aquifer and vicinity is of the poorest
quality in New Mexico.  The Tularosa is a large alluvial basin with no
surface outlet and a large supply of saline ground water but very little
fresh water.  There are a few scattered locations around the edges of
the basin where fresh water is available but only two of these are prin-
cipal water sources.  One consists of a long narrow area around
Tularosa and Alamogordo;  the other more productive area is in the
extreme southwestern part of the basin.  Nevertheless, fresh water
is very scarce in the Tularosa Basin and current supplies are being
depleted. 19/

The Jornado del Muerto is a large alluvial basin between the Tularosa
Basin and the Rio Grande. Ground water in sufficient quantity for
watering stock can be found almost everywhere in the basin fill at
depths ranging from 30 feet to about 400 feet. However, most of the
ground water is  not of sufficiently good chemical quality for human
consumption. In rare locations, sufficient water for irrigation has
been developed from the Dakota Sandstone and the underlying San
Andres Formation but this water is not potable.  The  few known sources
of potable water  in the Jornado del Muerto are around the edges of the
basin in alluvial-fan deposits. 16/

               Basins in Southwestern New Mexico

Southwestern New Mexico is an area of extensive alluvium deposits
throughout a number of scattered intermountain valleys.  The principal
basins include the Mimbres Valley; the Animas Valley; the Playas,
Hachita, and Lordsburg Valleys; the San Augustin Plains; and the
Gila and San Francisco River Basins.  With the exception of the San
Augustin Plains and the Gila and San Francisco River Basins, all
these basins have similar characteristics. The Mimbres Valley has
the longest history of gound-water development and large capacity
                                32

-------
wells in the alluvium commonly yield from 500 to 1,000 gpm of fair
quality water. 5/  Water levels are declining because most of the water
being pumped is taken from storage.  When the water levels reach a
point where pumping is too expensive for irrigation,  sufficient ground
water will remain for domestic, stock, municipal, and other uses
where pumping costs are a secondary consideration.

The San Augustin Plains is a large, almost uninhabited basin with no
external surface drainage and there is no irrigation development.  Much
of the ground water is  saline, but there may be areas of good water
around the edge of the surrounding mountains.

The Gila and San Francisco River Basins contain extensive ground-water
supplies in alluvial deposits.  Ground water is extensively developed
for irrigation along the Gila, and well yields are as high as 2,500
gpm. 5_/ Water levels have not declined significantly because of the
shallow pumping depths and rapid recharge during periods of high
river flows.  Ground water along the San Francisco River Basin has
experienced very little development and there is additional irrigable
land along both the San Francisco and Gila.

                        Colorado Plateaus

The Colorado Plateaus  area is roughly the northwest quarter of the
state, west of the Rio Grande Valley. Most of the area drains to the
Colorado and San Juan Rivers. Generally, ground-water supplies
are small and scattered and commonly at considerable depth or of poor
quality, or both.

Despite the scarcity of ground water, the San Juan River Basin has the
largest remaining water supply available to New Mexico.  However,
this supply is not expected to be adequate for increasing needs result-
ing from the population increase and the expanding oil and gas industry.

The area of heaviest pumping is in the vicinity of Gallup where coal
and uranium mining and associated industrial growth have created a
relatively heavy demand on sparse water supplies. Water is obtained
primarily from fine-grained sandstone, alluvium, and basalt.  Well
yields range from 1 to  250 gpm but most yield less than 50 gpm.20/

The Rio Puerco and Rio San Jose  drain the southeastern and eastern
parts of the Colorado Plateaus in New Mexico.  The San Jose Basin
contains the heavily developed Grants-Bluewater irrigation area, as
well as a large proportion of the nation's uranium reserves.  The most
productive aquifer in the Rio Puerco-Rio San Jose area is the San
Andres Limestone with smaller ground-water  supplies coming from
                                33

-------
alluvium, basalt, and fine-grained sandstone.  Well yields range
from 10 to 2,800 gpm.5/  Beginning in 1951, water used for uranium
mining and milling in the Grants-Bluewater area increased with a
corresponding decrease in irrigation pumpage so that the total with-
drawal has remained rather constant.:  The maximum development has
been reached and water levels are continuing to decline.

                           OKLAHOMA

Ground water is not as abundant in Oklahoma as it is in some other
states, but it is an important factor in the State's economy and is capa-
ble of  greater development. Ground water is Oklahoma's most valuable
mineral resource and supplies approximately 87 percent of the irriga-
tion water used in the state.21/  Various ground-water reservoirs
throughout the state are estimated to contain over 300 million acre-feet
of water.  Approximately 300 towns and cities obtain their municipal
supplies from wells and springs.  In fact, over half the people in  the
state rely on ground-water sources for drinking water and household
supplies.

Ground water is available over most of Oklahoma in sufficient quantity
for domestic  supplies;  however, in some parts of the state, the water is
too high in chlorides or sulfates for most uses.  In some areas where
ground water may be of better quality than surface water, industries
and commercial users have developed private supplies for their own
needs. The major aquifers used in Oklahoma are  shown in  Figure 11.

                        High Plains Area

The High Plains covers all but a small fraction of the three panhandle
counties and extends a short distance into adjacent counties of north-
western Oklahoma. The area is underlain by deposits of sand, gravel,
and minor amounts of clay and these sediments in some areas are  capped
by a limy rock called caliche.

The deposits of the High Plains are composed primarily of the Ogallala
Formation, the most important aquifer in the state.  This is probably
the best aquifer in Oklahoma because of its area, thickness and high
permeability, despite the fact that it  is only partially saturated with
water. Because of low annual precipitation and high 'evaporation  in
this area, insufficient water reaches the Ogallala to keep it sufficiently
recharged to offset pumping losses .

The Ogallala  is as much as several hundred feet thick. In Oklahoma
alone,  it contains more than 100 million acre-feet of available water  and
supplies most of the water requirements of the panhandle.  Ground water
                                34

-------
u>
     DEPOSITS OF THE HIGH PLAINS


     ALLUVIAL DEPOSITS
                   mamr
                   •.•.•.•.'.-.'.•.•.•.\f
ATOKA   I PIMHMATAHA I M.CURTAIN

 7--..V.

     SIMPSON AND ARBUCKLE GROUPS/
     UNDIFFERENTIATED
     SANDSTONE AQUIFERS
        ROUBIDOUX FORMATION
        VAMOOSA FORMATION
        GARBER SANDSTONE AND WELLINGTON
         FORMATION
        WICHITA FORMATION
        WHITEHORSE GROUP
        TRINITY GROUP
     LIMESTONE AQUIFERS
        BOONE FORMATION
        DOG CREEK AND ELAINE FORMATION
                                                                                         6/
                               FIGURE 11,   PRINCIPAL WATER-BEARING FORMATIONS OF OKLAHOMA -

-------
from the Ogallala is used to irrigate about 135,000 acres, for the indus-
trial needs of the Keyes helium plant and the natural gas industry in the
panhandle and for all public and domestic supplies in the area. 26/

Wells in the thickest and most permeable sections of these deposits
yield as much as 1,000 gallons per minute, and yields of several hun-
dred  gallons per minute are common throughout large areas.

                     Western Oklahoma Area

This area includes the western half of Oklahoma,  excluding the High
Plains area.  It is composed of the following formations:  Rush Springs
Sandstone, Garber Sandstone and Wellington Formation, Elaine Gypsum
and Deg Creek Shale, and Wichita Formation.

The Rush Springs Sandstone underlies an area of about 1,840 square
miles in west central Oklahoma. The topography  is characterized by
rolling plains interrupted in places by sand dunes or deeply eroded
stream valleys.  The formation is composed of fine-grained, cross-bedded
to even-bedded sandstone. It is the principal aquifer in this area and
yields moderate to large supplies for most domestic, municipal, irriga-
tion,  and industrial uses.  The maximum reported yield is about 1,000
gallons per minute and common yields to irrigation wells are about 400
gallons per minute . 23 /

The Garber Sandstone and Wellington Formation outcrop across the
eastern two-thirds of Cleveland and Oklahoma Counties in a north
trending belt 6 to 20 miles wide.  The area of outcrop is characterized
by rolling, steep-sided hills  that are forested with scrub oak and other
small, slow-growing deciduous trees.  It consists of lenticular beds of
massive-appearing,  cross-bedded sandstone irregularly interbedded
with shale which is, in part,  sandy to silty. The sandstone layers are
fine to very fine grained and  loosely cemented.  The two formations
as a unit have a total thickness of 800 to 1,000 feet.24/

The Dog Creek Shale and Elaine Formation in Harmon and part of Jackson
and Greer Counties constitute the most important aquifer in these counties.
The aquifer consists principally of interbedded shale, gypsum, anhydrite,
dolomite, and limestone.  Solution cavities containing large quantities of
water may yield some water high in calcium  sulfate.  The pattern of fresh
water is erratic,  so a "dry" well may be drilled within 100 feet of a well
of high yield. Yields from wells tapping this formation range from less
than 10 to 2,000 gallons per minute.

The Wichita^ Formation of Permian age consists  of fine-grained sandstone
and red shale, similar to the rocks of the Garber and Wellington Forma-
tions and of roughly  equivalent age.  This formation supplies water
                                 36

-------
principally for industrial and municipal use in western Garvin, all of
Carter, and southern Stephens Counties. West of Ardmore, fresh water
has been reported to depths of as much as 900 feet and wells yield as
much as 250 gallons per minute. Yields of more than 100 gallons per
minute are common in other areas. The quality is suitable for municipal
and industrial purposes at many places.

                     Eastern Oklahoma Area

The Eastern Oklahoma Area is composed of the following aquifers:
Nelagony-Vamoosa, Boone Formation, Simpson and Arbuckle Group;
Trinity Sandstone, Roubidoux Sandstone, Washita and Kiamichi Group,
Goodland Limestone, Woodbine Formation, Tokio Formation, Ozan and
Brownstown Formations.

The Vamoosa Formation crops out in a north-south band approximately
20 miles wide extending from Seminole to Osage County and is an
important aquifer in that and nearby  areas. The formation consists of
250 to 600 feet of interbedded sandstone,  shale, and conglomerate. It
supplies water for municipal and industrial uses along its outcrop and
for several miles downdip to the west.  The best wells seem to be  in
the Seminole area where wells produce about 150 gallons per minute.25/
Elsewhere, yields range from a few gallons per minute to 100 gallons
per minute.

The Boone Formation of early and late Mississippian age consists pri-
marily of limestone and cherty limestone and is an important aquifer
over a large part of the Ozark  area of northeastern Oklahoma. It aver-
ages about 300 feet in thickness and contains numerous fracture and
solution openings.  The Boone forms  a sizable ground-water reservoir
and is the source for many  springs in that area.  Springs issuing  from
the Boone play an important part in maintaining the year-round flow
of streams such as Spavinaw Creek in northern Delaware County.
Spring flow from the Boone in Ottawa County has  been estimated at 14
million gallons per day.

In the Arbuckle Mountain region several sandstones of the Simpson
group of Middle Ordovician Age supply potable water in the outcrop
area and for a short distance downdip. A sandstone of equivalent age
crops out in Cherokee and Adair Counties in the Ozark part of north-
eastern Oklahoma and supplies water locally to domestic and farm wells.
Little information is available on the sandstone of the Simpson, but
apparently they contain highly mineralized water at short distances
downdip from the outcrop .

Beneath the Simpson group in south central Oklahoma is the Arbuckle
group of late Cambrian and Early Ordovician Ages.  This group is com-
posed of a thick section of limestone and dolomite beds which have been
                               37

-------
tilted, folded, and broken by faults. In and near the outcrop south of
Ada, fresh water occurs in solution openings to depths of more than
2,500 feet, and yields of 2,000 gallons per minute are reported from
well tests. 28/ The aquifer supplies water for municipal, industrial,
and irrigation purposes in the Arbuckle Mountains area.  In the out-
crop , water is somewhat hard but contains only a moderate amount of
dissolved solids. At varying distances from the outcrop area, water
in the Arbuckle is highly mineralized.

The Trinity group is the basal division of the Cretaceous rocks in
McCurtain County,  Oklahoma. The group is divided into three forma-
tions which, ih ascending order, are the Holly Creek Formation, the
DeQueen Limestone, and the Paluxy Sand. The Holly Creek is composed
of a series of red clays, thin sand beds, and gravel lenses .  It yields
potable water to farm wells in east  central McCurtain County.  The
DeQueen Limestone consists of varicolored calcareous clays and
pinkish-gray limestones and marls in beds generally less than a foot
thick. Downdip beneath younger rocks it contains gypsum and
anhydrite beds.  The DeQueen yields little ground water in McCurtain
County.

The Paluxy Sand is composed of white and yellow  sands, some iron-
cemented sandstones, conglomerates, and red, yellow, purple, or blue
clays, and a few limestone lenses.   The Paluxy, the most important
aquifer in McCurtain County, is the source of municipal supply at
Valliant, Millerton, and Garvin and supplies water to farmsteads
throughout its outcrop  area.

The Trinity group ranges  from a featheredge up to about 2,200 feet.
Water is pumped for municipal and industrial use throughout the
productive belt and is beginning to be pumped for irrigation. Properly
constructed  wells penetrating the most permeable  deposits yield 450
gallons per minute or more, and  natural flowing wells  are possible on
low ground in lightly pumped areas. The quality  of the water varies
greatly from place to place.  In some places, fresh water extends to a
depth of 800 feet, but locally elsewhere salt water is found at a shallow
depth.

The Roubidoux Formation consists  of about 150 feet of dolomite and
interbedded sandstone. It is an aquifer of substantial importance in a
sizable area of Ottawa,  northern  Delaware, and eastern Craig Counties
in northeastern Oklahoma.  It yields water to wells 800 to more than
1,000 feet deep in the northeast corner of Oklahoma. Although some
wells produce as much  as 600 gallons per minute,  the aquifer has been
                               38

-------
overdeveloped locally and water levels have declined several hundred
feet since the first wells were drilled more than 50 years ago.27/ The
water is moderately hard  but low in dissolved solids.  The Roubidoux
is used for both public and industrial supplies.

The Washita Group, including the Kiamichi Formation in southern
McCurtain County, crops  out as an east-west belt that is only about
half a mile wide at the Arkansas State line and widens irregularly
westward. Logs of wells  near the outcrop show that the formation thins
from about 200 feet on the western side of the county to less than 70 feet
on the eastern side.  Only the Kiamichi, which is 20 feet thick, is pre-
sent on the south side of Little River at the Arkansas State line.  It is
composed of gray fossiliferous limestones and calcareous dark-blue
shale;  thins eastward and contains relatively small amounts of poor
quality water in solution openings and cracks in the limestone.

The outcrop of the Goodland Limestone crosses the McCurtain County
line from Arkansas just north of Cerrogordo and extends westward
across McCurtain County  in a narrow strip one-eighth to one-half mile
wide.  Along most of its length the outcrop is immediately south of
Little River,  and the sinuous outcrop pattern follows the river and its
tributaries.  It is -thin-bedded dense limestone at the top with soft
chalky and massive limestone in lower parts.  The entire formation is
fossiliferous and does not yield much water.  The presence of many
solution pits,  openings, and enlarged fractures in the outcrop of the
Goodland Limestone shows that the formation is susceptible to solution
by water.  However, records show that few wells tap ground water in
this formation and these yield water of poor quality.
      - • '           . .              !.'
The Woodbine Formation crops out across the middle of the southern
half of McCurtain County.  It ranges in thickness from a featheredge
at the outcrop to more than 355 feet in the subsurface in the southeastern
part of the county. The outcrop ranges in width from a quarter of a
mile to as much  as four miles. The upper member of this formation is
mostly gray to brown cross-bedded dark tufaceous sand, red clay, and
gravel lentils . The formation is not a productive aquifer; most wells
yield only sufficient water for domestic or stock use.  The water is
generally of inferior quality because of the mineral matter it dissolves
from the tufaceous material.

The outcrop of the Tokio Formation in McCurtain County covers about
80 square miles  in an irregular wedge, the point of which is  about five
miles southwest of Idabel. It is composed of gray cross-bedded sand,
interbedded with gray and dark-gray shale.  Because of clay and silt,
transmissibility is generally low resulting in yields of lesfe than 20
gallons per minute.297  The sandy matter of the Tokio Formation
                               39

-------
 suggests that it might be a good aquifer but interspersed clay and silt
 appreciably lower the permeability and transmissibility.  Water quality
 from wells in the outcrop area is poor.
                             TEXAS

 Underground reservoirs in Texas store approximately 1.25 billion acre-
 fee of potable water .30/  Of this vast amount, it is estimated that the
 potential yield of all aiquifers, which would not seriously deplete
 storage, is about 5 million acre-feet annually. 31/ As a result of geologic
 factors, these aquifers are distributed unequally throughout the state
 and do not necessarily coincide with locations of maximum need.  Never-
 theless, ground water furnishes about two-thirds of the more than 14
 million acre-feet used annually for municipal, industrial, and irriga-
 tion purposes.

 The state  of Texas recognizes  three major problems affecting ground
 water.  The first is ground-water mining in the western part of the
 state caused primarily from heavy irrigation pumpage.  The second
 major problem is the lack of sufficient quantitative information on the
 maximum  sustained yields of aquifers, and the third major problem is
 existing or potential pollution  of ground water resulting from discharge
 of both natural and man-made  substances. 5_/

 Several studies have been conducted on the ground-water situation in
 Texas, including those by the Texas Board of Water Engineers and its
 successors, the Texas Water Commission and the Texas Water Develop-
 ment Board,  the main source of this report.  In this report the aquifers
 of Texas have been divided into five geographic  regions:  the coastal
 area; the  high plains; central, north central, and northeast Texas; south-
 west Texas; and the west Texas area.  Major and minor  aquifers in these
 areas are  shown in Figures 12 and 13.

                          Coastal  Area

 A tremendous volume of fresh  water is in transient storage in aquifers
 underlying the Gulf Coast region.  The aquifers  are generally composed
 of sand and gravel which alternate with silt and clay. This area can be
 divided into three areas containing  significant amounts of ground water:
 the coastal sands, the Carrizo-Wilcox Sands, and the Sparta-Queen City
 aquifers.

Most ground water is withdrawn in  the northeastern three-fifths of this
region and these large withdrawals  have caused  two major problems.
They are the encroachment of salt water near the coast,  such as in
                               40

-------
    OGALLALA
    ALLUVIUM
    EDWARDS-TRINITY (PLATEAU)
    EDWARDS (BALCONES FAULT
             ZONE)
"ol\ TRINITY GROUP
    CARRIZO-WILCOX
    GULF COAST
    FIGURE 12.  MAJOR AQUIFERS IN TEXAS
                                        3V

-------
N)
         WOODBINE
         QUEEN CITY
         SPARTS
         EDWARDS-TRINITY
          (HIGH  PLAINS)
         SANTA ROSA
         ELLENBURGER-SAN SABA
         HICKORY
            ' *M*n>            t
 fK     ,  ,!  ,,  v>  -•    (
• •'»*•>."-•  ......— -...,-,-«. •-.  	V
 l  A       •«••    '••'"      /
       FIGURE 13.   MINOR AQUIFERS IN TEXAS

-------
Galveston County, and the subsidence of the land surface in the Houston-
Pasadena-Bay town area of Harris County.

Because the coastal sands (Goliad-Willis-Lissie-Beaumont Formations)
and the Miocene Sands (Catahoula-Oakville-Lagarto Formations) are
lithologically similar and overlap in part of the Gulf Coast region, they
are sometimes considered together as a single aquifer.  They store a
large amount of water ranging from 2,000 acre-feet per square mile in
the Corpus Christi area to 13,000 acre-feet per square mile in the
Houston area. 32/

The Carrizo-Wilcox Sands which supply water for irrigation, munici-
pal, and some industrial uses,  extends from the Rio Grande northeast-
ward across the entire state. These sands are actually composed of
two separate formations.  The Wilcox group of early Eocene Age con-
tains sands which are good aquifers  especially in the northeastern
part of the state;  however, the  Carrizo Sand of middle Eocene Age is
the principal aquifer of this belt and is especially productive in the
south central part where fresh water occurs at a maximum depth
exceeding 6,000 feet.5/  Ground water occurs in the  Carrizo-Wilcox,
under artesian conditions, being confined by overlying beds of clay.
The eastern portion of this aquifer is full; however,  in the western
portion, discharge by irrigation wells has exceeded the rate of annual
recharge and water levels are dropping.

The Sparta-Queen City aquifers, extending from southwestern Texas
into the area of the east Texas geosyncline, yield ground water of
importance  to local areas. The Sparta-Queen City aquifers yield small
to moderate quantities of fresh to moderately saline water to wells in
and near outcrop areas.  Both the Sparta and the Queen City are
regarded as minor aquifers, but where the two formations coincide,
they may yield fairly large volumes of ground water.

                           High Plains

The Ogallala Formation, consisting of interfingered and intergraded
lenses and layers of sand, gravel, silt,  clay, and caliche, is the
principal aquifer in the High Plains area, which is an erosional remnant
of nearly flat country ranging from about 2,600 to 4,700 feet above sea
level. The  High Plains  area begins at the north edge of the Edwards
Plateau in northern Ector and Midland Counties'and widens northward
to the full width of the panhandle in the northeastern most two rows of
counties. The east edge of the Plains is deeply scalloped by the valleys
of the larger streams, and the Canadian River divides the Plains into
northern and southern parts.
                                43

-------
Large quantities of ground water are available from the Ogallala; how-
ever, pumpage from the aquifer is far in excess of the rate of replenish-
ment which is about one inch annually. This heavy pumpage, principally
for irrigated agriculture, has resulted in declines of the water table and
lowering of well yields in some areas.

Water in the Ogallala is unconfined,  and the useful life of the reservoir
in each locality is determined principally by the water in storage, the
rate and distribution of withdrawals, and the character of water-bearing
strata.  The total amount of water in storage in the High Plains is
estimated to be in excess of 350 million acre-feet.32/

The northern High Plains includes an area of approximately 9,300 square
miles in the Panhandle north of the Canadian River. 5_/ The zone of
saturation in most places is 100 to 500 feet thick.  Irrigation has developed
slower in the northern High Plains than in the southern High Plains;
therefore, at the  current rate of withdrawal, the remaining water in
storage will be adequate for many years.

The southern High Plains is the area of largest ground-water develop-
ment in Texas. It covers about 25,000 square miles between the
Canadian River and northern Ector,  Midland,  and Glasscock Counties.
In the southern High Plains,  ground water is generally of good chemi-
cal quality and is the principal source of water for all uses, of which
irrigation is by far the largest.  A large increase in irrigation has
accompanied a substantial growth in population and municipal water
demand.  With the total ground-water recharge to the southern High
Plains being small in comparison to the withdrawal, the supply is being
seriously depleted.  Measures such as conservative use of water,
elimination of avoidable losses, and  artificial recharge are being
practiced and will prolong the life of the supply but cannot maintain
it indefinitely.

            Central, North Central, and Northeast Texas

There are a variety of ground-water bearing formations underlying
central, north central, and northeast Texas. The major formations are:
the Trinity Sands located in the northeastern and north central part of
the state;  the Woodbine Formation in the northeast; the Ellenberger-
San Saba and Hickory Formations in  the central part;  and the Seymour
Formation situated in north central Texas. The diversity of water
quality and availability make it practical to discuss each aquifer
separately.

In north central Texas, the Trinity Sands, composed primarily of the
Paluxy and Travis Peak Formations of Cretaceous Age  comprise the
principal water-bearing formation.  These sands are interbedded with
                                44

-------
layers of shale and thin beds of limestone.  Most recharge to this
aquifer is from precipitation and surface water sources and the largest
percentage of discharge is by wells.  Maximum yields of these wells
vary from 50 gpm to as much as 2,000 gpm near Dallas.  The largest
user of ground water from this  aquifer is the Dallas-Fort Worth area
where in 1955 about 34 million gallons of water per day was pumped
mostly from the Travis Peak Sands. 5/  The total  amount of water with-
drawn from the entire Trinity Sands was about 60 million gallons per
day in 1955 and the principal use was for municipal and industrial
purposes.  Water levels have been lowered so much that the cost of
pumping has increased to very near the economic limit of feasibility
and in many wells the drop in water levels has necessitated well
reconstruction to continue production.

The Woodbine Formation, a minor aquifer of late Cretaceous Age, is one
of the chief ground-water reservoirs in north central Texas.  The
Woodbine supplies small to moderate quantities of water to municipal
and industrial wells in an area  extending northward and northeastward
from Waco to the Red River.  The heaviest concentration of pumpage is
in Dallas County where  about 60 percent of the total 1960 pumpage was
located.33_/ This aquifer is a broad wedge of sand and sandy clay which
is thickest near the outcrop and thins southeastward.  The Woodbine is
characterized by fine-grained sands of low permeability and low pump-
ing yields which average about 130 gpm. The upper of the formation's
two sand members generally  yields saline water, and the lower yields
water of good quality.

The Ellenberger-San Saba Aquifer underlies parts of Menard, McCulloch,
San Saba, Kimble, and Gillespie Counties in central Texas.  Although
two separate geologic units, the Ellenberger and San Saba both consist
of cavernous limestone and dolomite formations and are usually consid-
ered as one aquifer.  This aquifer yields considerable water to springs
and wells within the Llano region and is a source of water for irrigation
and for small towns and communities, as well as  for domestic and
livestock-watering purposes.  Development is small and occurs mostly
in and very near its outcrop.   The estimated total pumpage for 1960
was about 1,300 acre-feet with  about 800 acre-feet for municipal use
and 490 acre-feet for irrigation. Thickness  of the Ellenberger-San
Saba ranges from a few  inches to over 2,000 feet and yields vary
greatly from one well to another.  Although some wells yield more than
1,000 gpm,  most yield less than 500 gpm.34_/

The Hickory Sandstone of upper Cambrian Age is the oldest ground-
water aqiofer  in Texas.  Although it is not a major reservoir, it is
of considerable local importance because it supplies the cities of Eden,
Mason, and Brady, and furnishes limited supplies of water for irriga-
tion chiefly in McCulloch and Mason Counties. The aquifer ranges in
                               45

-------
thickness from about 275 feet in the southeast part of the Llano region
to 500 feet in the northwestern part.30/  Total pumpage from the
Hickory in I960 was about 10.000 acre-feet, of which 3,900 acre-feet
was for municipal use, 270 acre-feet for industrial use, and 6,000
acre-feet for irrigation.  Pumping rates  from the Hickory range as
high as 1,500 gpm but are usually in the range of 200 to 500 gpm.34/

The Seymour Formation, consisting of scattered terrace deposits of
gravel, sand, and clay of Quaternary Age, is the principal aquifer in
the Osage Plains region of north central Texas. Most of these deposits
are small, but some are as long as 40 miles and as wide as 10 miles and
range in thickness from 0 to 85 feet.5_/  The larger deposits are in
Wilbarger, Foard, Baylor,  Knox, Wheeler, Collingsworth, Hall,
Briscoe, Motley, and Dickens Counties. 35/  In 1957,  this aquifer
supplied generally good quality water to about 1,600  irrigation wells
and was a source of supply for 13 municipalities.  Well yields range
from 50 to more than 1,000 gpm.3_2/ Approximately 100,000 acre-feet of
water available annually from 13 areas exceeds the present total with-
drawal rate. However, pumpage in a few areas does  exceed the esti-
mated average annual recharge and pumpage from these.areas may have
to be reduced in the future.31/

                        Southwest Texas

The Edwards and Associated Limestones, the main ground-water reser-
voir in southwest Texas, actually forms  two ground-water reservoirs.
One underlies the Edwards Plateau where ground water is unconfined and
the other, an artesian aquifer, underlies the Balcones fault zone.  The
hydrologic system of the plateau receives and stores large amounts of
rainfall and slowly discharges these supplies as spring flow to perennial
streams, which, in turn, recharge the artesian aquifer in the Balcones
fault zone.

Although the Edwards and Associated Limestones underlie three major
river basins (Nueces, San Antonio,  and Guadalupe),  it obtains about
three-fourths of its recharge from its western part which is the Nueces
River Basin.36/ Most of its discharge is through Comal Springs and
San Marcos Springs in the eastern part of the area and through irriga-
tion and municipal wells. The total discharge of  the two springs in 1957
was about 210,000 acre-feet, and the total withdrawals from irrigation
and municipal wells in 1957 was also about 210,000 acre-feet.32/

Pumpage of water from either the Edwards-Trinity or the Edwards
Limestone (fault zone) where both aquifers occur directly affects the
quantity of additional water available for development from the Edwards
Limestone (fault zone) in the same basin and in adjacent basins.  Because
                                46

-------
of the interrelationship of pumpage and its effect on the potential avail-
ability of additional water .from the Edwards Limestone (fault zone) ,
programs for altering or adding to the present rate of recharge will
have far-reaching effects upon the economy of the area and of the state
as a whole.

                         West Texas Area

Quaternary  alluvium is the main aquifer in three relatively small but
important areas in west Texas.  These include the El Paso area, the
Salt Basin,  and the Pecos River Basin.  These alluvial deposits consist
generally of interconnected lenticular layers of sand and gravel inter-
bedded with clay and silt and occur as remnants of once vast alluvial
plains and as extensive stream deposits.

The El Paso area can be divided into three areas:  the upper valley,
which extends  northward along the Rio Grande into New Mexico; the
lower valley, which extends southeastward from El Paso to Fort
Quitman; and the Mesa or Hueco Bolson, which extends northward into
New Mexico and continues as the Tularosa Basin.  The principal water-
bearing beds are the Bolson deposits (valley fill) beneath the Mesa and
the valley, and the younger surficial alluvium of the Rio Grande beneath
the floodplain in the valley.   The thickness of these deposits ranges to
more than 4,900 feet, but only a relatively small part of the El Paso
area receives ground-water supplies suitable for most uses.32/ Where
fresh water is available, it is overlain, underlain, or adjoined by
saline water, which represents an actual or potential source of contami-
nation.  The total amount of saline water, most of which is in the Bolson
deposits, is probably several times as great as the amount of fresh
ground water.

The Salt Basin  area is a closed depression about 150 miles long and 5 to
15 miles wide.  It extends from northern Presidio County across western
Jeff Davis and Culberson Counties and northeastern Hudspeth County,
continuing into New Mexico as the Crow Flats area. It can be divided
into three main areas of irrigation called the Dell City, the Wildhorse,
and the Lobo Flats. The chief aquifer is alluvium except in the Dell
City area, where it is the highly permeable Bone Spring Limestone of
Permian Age.  Water in the Lobo Flats and Wildhorse areas is generally
of good quality; however, that in  the Dell City area is highly mineral-
ized and contains objectional quantities of sulfate. Between 1950 and
1960, water levels declined as much as 19 feet in the Dell City area and
14 feet in the Wildhorse area;  the  decline was greatest in the Lobo Flats
with declines up to 70 feet or more.5_/

The Pecos River Valley is an alluvial area of substantial size in Reeves,
Loving, Pecos, Ward,  and Winkler Counties.  Ground water is obtained
                                 47

-------
from alluvial deposits and from troughs formed by subsidence of older
beds and recharge is principally by runoff from the mountains to the
west and southwest.  Under natural conditions, water moves toward
and is discharged into the Pecos River.  Movement toward the river has
been stopped or reduced in the heavily irrigated areas, and persistent
declines in water levels indicate that the rate of pumping exceeds the
maximum possible sustained yield.  Irrigation development has apparently
passed its peak and the Pecos River water is already fully appropriated,
Since there are no other large sources of surface water, the Pecos Valley
is faced with a serious lack of water supplies.
                               48

-------
                           SECTION V

            GROUND-WATER POLLUTION INDICATORS


Ground water is one of the most widely distributed resources of man
and one of the most important.  As such, it is subject to both natural
and man-made contamination. To evaluate a ground-water pollution
problem,  it is necessary to have an understanding of indicators that
reflect pollution and the concentrations at which these indicators affect
beneficial uses of the water.

The concentrations at which indicators become pollutants depends upon
the use to be made of the water but water pollution is generally indicated
by  excessive concentrations of the following:

      1.   Chemical indicators—Total dissolved solids,  chlorides,
           sulfates, calcium, magnesium,  fluorides,  sodium, iron,
           boron, nitrates, phosphates, and others.

      2.   Biological indicators—Coliform organisms, biochemical
           oxygen demand, viruses, bacteria, etc.

      3.   Industrial indicators—pesticides, herbicides, acids,
           arsenic, heavy metals, detergents, phenols,  gasoline,
           and others.

There are also many other elements that indicate pollution for a variety
of reasons. An element may be a pollutant because of its toxicity—such
as arsenic for humans and animals or boron for agricultural  crops—or,
because of its undesirable characteristic for a specific use—such as
hardness  in boiler waters. Standards for irrigation, domestic and a
number of uses have been formulated by various agencies and some of
these are  presented in the appendix of this report.

Many pollution indicators reach the ground water because of man's
activities, but many others contaminate ground water through natural
processes not related to man.  The great majority of the data referred
to in this  section  of the report deals with water quality resulting from
natural conditions. One exception may be over-pumping which some-
times causes intrusion of saline waters into otherwise fresh water areas.
Very little data is available concerning specific pollutant concentrations
in areas contaminated by man's activities, such as brine disposal pits
or sanitary landfills,  etc.  The information presented in Tables 4 through
11 on pollution indicators  does not imply any level of statistical reliability
but is intended to give a general indication of the water  quality param-
eters which have been detected and measured within the study area.


                                 49

-------
                           ARKANSAS

Although Arkansas has a large total water supply and relatively few
water problems, limitations on ground-water availability or use are
imposed by the chemical quality in nearly all parts of the state.

Ground water throughout Arkansas is subject to some mineralization.
Much of this water has a high iron content, generally accompanied by
hardness of the calcium bicarbonate type.  The largest area of hard,
irony water is the western two-thirds of the Mississippi Alluvial Plain.

The ground water is generally low in total dissolved solids, averaging
about 271 nig/1 and rarely exceeding 1,000 mg/1.  The water is also
very low in chloride and sulfate.  Table 4 lists the major chemical con-
stituents of the ground water in the more important water-bearing areas
of the state.

                        Interior Highlands

Although the northwestern half of Arkansas,  the Interior Highlands,
contains limited ground-water supplies, the water is generally of good
quality.  There are, however, some natural and man-made pollutants
that affect  the ground-water supply.

Ground water in areas of cavernous limestone in the Ozark Plateaus, as
in similar areas elsewhere in the country, is readily contaminated from
surface sources and wells must be constructed properly to exclude  the
polluted water. These surface sources include septic tank effluents
and industrial wastes.

Salt water  is known to be present beneath the fresh ground water in
Arkansas.  In general,  salt water lies at a much greater depth in the
Highlands  than in the coastal plain, probably because, the  rocks are
older, higher and have had more time to have the saline water flushed
out at greater depths .

Another source of saline water is the disposal of brines from oil and gas
fields.  A considerable part of the  salt in ground water in the Arkansas
River Valley area has resulted from the dumping of brine from oil and
gas wells into the Arkansas River  or into pits in the alluvium. 8/

                        Gulf Coastal Plain

Nearly all the  Gulf Coastal Plain, roughly the southeastern half of
Arkansas,  is underlain by  one or more deposits that will yield fairly
                                 50

-------
tn
Table 4.

Interior
SUMMARY OF MINERALS
location
Highlands
IN GROUND WATER IN
Total
Dissolved
Solids
fag/1)
N Range A N

THE VARIOUS
Chlorides
(mg/1)
Range A

GROUND WATER REGIONS
Sulfates
tar/i)
N flange A

OF ARKANSAS
Total
Hardness
(as CaOOs)
(mg/1)
N Range A

              Arkansas River Valley
72    37-1450  393     82   1.5-378    52.2
81  0.0-255   26.4
                                                                                                                               72   0.0-1100    165
            Gulf Coastal Plain

              Cockfield Formation
              Sparta Sand
              Wiloox Formation  ("1400  ft. Sand")
              Cretaceous Undifferentiated Deposits
              Quaternary ?lluviun
63
82
37
9
89
27-958
37-776
12-1170
124-637
80-652
212
217
157
387
262
63
82
67
97
298
2.2-58
1.0-304
0.0-540 .
3.2-2100
0.5-1190
8.6
44.2
82
195.4
27.2
63
82
67
97
278
0.0-470
0.0-218
0.0-100
0.0-560
0.0-155
22.4
7.3
4.8
78.7
15.4
63
82
67
97
276
5.0-488
4.0-288
1.0-328
4.0-396
6.0-588
47
62.7
18
70.4
170
               N - Number of determinations.
               Range - Pange in concentration for samples analyzed.
               A - Average of concentrations for samples analyzed.

-------
large amounts of good quality water.  Because the ground water is
derived chiefly from precipitation that falls as rain or snow,  mineraliza-
tion results from the water passing through rocks and soil to the zone of
saturation.

The principal constituents that are picked up by this infiltration are
calcium and bicarbonate.  The CaCO- hardness ranges from 1.0 to 588
mg/1 from the more productive aquifers and the average concentration
is about 86.2 mg/1.7/ Water containing between 75 and 150 mg/1 hard-
ness is considered to be moderately hard.

Iron is another constituent that is present locally in objectional
quantities.  Iron is dissolved from many rocks and soils and concen-
trations range from 0.01 to 54 mg/1, generally exceeding the recom-
mended standard quantity of 0.3 mg/1 set by the U.S. Public Health
Service, ll/

Arsenic has been found in several areas including water wells near the
Pine Bluff Arsenal in Jefferson County.

                           LOUISIANA

Although  Louisiana contains vast amounts of ground-water supplies, it
is faced with a growing number of problems.  One problem is salt-water
encroachment due primarily to heavy irrigation pumpage.  Along with
the problem of salt-water  encroachment goes the potential problem of
contamination of fresh water by salt domes and surficial " salt licks . "
Figure 14 shows the locations of salt domes which are concentrated
largely in southern Louisiana; however, a fairly large number occur in
the parishes immediately east of the Red Rivery Valley and also in a few
parishes adjacent to the Mississippi River. In areas of shallow alluvial
and terrace deposits, surface disposal of wastes is a critical problem.

Iron and hardness are a persistent problem over much of the state.
Other constituents that are found to be present locally in the water in
objectional quantities include fluoride, silica, sulfate, and chloride.
Table 5 gives  water quality data for the more important water-bearing
areas of the state.  Other sources of contamination present in some
areas of the state include methane and  hydrogen sulfide gas and oil
field brines.

                     Southwestern Louisiana

Southwestern Louisiana is one of the largest areas of ground-water and
surface water  use and has several pressing problems, the most serious
of which is salt-water encroachment.  The transition from fresh to salt
                                52

-------
U1
OJ
                   OESOTO    RED
                            RIVER
                                                                WEST    EAST
                                                                LICIANA>EL1C1ANA  ST

                                                                               ELENA
                                      FIGURE  14,  LOCATION OF SALT DOMES IN LOUISIANA

-------
Ul
Table 5. SUMMARY OF M
Location
Southwest Louisiana
Atchafalaya
Chicot
Chicot-Atchafalaya
Evangeline
Baton Rouge Area
Quaternary Alluvium
Shallow Sands (400-600 ft.)
Deep Sands (800-2800 ft.)
Baton Rouge-New Orleans Area
"700-Foot" Sand
Mississippi River Alluvium
INERALS IN GROUND WATER
Total
Dissolved
Solids
(mg/1)
N
24
32
29
29
8
11
49
30
13
Range C
300-350
220-248
121-699
333-870
172-719
184-1300 1»1000
165-5290 1>1000
382-3840 12>1000
199-2839 2>1000
N
24
29
36
35
19
13
50
34
14
IN THE VARIOUS GROUND WATER REGIONS OF LOUISIANA
Total
Hardness
Chlorides Sulfates (as 03003)
(mg/1) (mg/1) (mg/1)
Range C
16-34
4.2-20
3.0-128
2-984 4>2.50
3.8-126
3.8-113
2.5-3050 2>250
42-2160 14>250
11-1470 3>25C
N
24
33
32
32
6
11
50
34
13
Range C
0.5-13
0.0-17
0.0-13
0.0-23
0.0-1.6
0.8-8.6
0.0-12
0.0-12
0.0-23
N
26
29
34
35
19
13
49
34
14
Range
200-254
116-181
38-620
4-84
123-388
6.5-347
0.0-319
8-290
81-446
C
29>100
12>100
19>IOO
1>100
1>000
7>100
12>100
         Southeastern Louisiana

         Northern -and Central Louisiana

           Sparta Sand
           Wilcox Group
           Quaternary Alluvium of
            the  Red  River
                                           22
                                                165-877
32    43-1080  2>1000
48   3.5-4470 11>1000
76    51-3120  5>100C
                         25  2.2-222
33
56
79
 20-214
2.5-1260
2.0-687
                                                                                             24
                                                                                                  0.0-20
         "  30   0.2-237
10>250     56   0.0-1080  5>250
 3>250     54   0.0-495   1»250
                                                                                                                      25
                                                                                0.0-33
32   0.0-168
56   0.0-975
79     8-1030
 1>100
12>100
72>100
             N  -  Number  of  determinations.
             Range  -  Range  in concentration for  samples  analyzed.
             C  -  Number  of  determinations more than (>)  or  less  than  (<)  selected  concentrations.

-------
water varies throughout the area, but it usually occurs in a fairly sharp
zone.  The base of fresh water is generally deepest in Northern
Beauregard Parish where the Evangeline aquifer contains fresh water
to depths greater than 3,000 feet below sea level.3_7/  The base of fresh
water is shallowest along the coast and in the Atchafalaya River Basin.

The fresh ground water in southwestern Louisiana is generally low in
chlorides and only in a few instances does it exceed 250 mg/1.  The vast
areas of salty or brackish water, however, contain up to 2,000 mg/1
chloride.38/                                                  .-"

The water varies from the calcium bicarbonate to the  sodium bicarbonate
type and tends to be softer with increased  depth and distance from the
outcrop areas. Some natural softening takes place due to the occurrence
of natural zeolites in the underground deposits.

Water from many wells in southwestern Louisiana contains excessive
amounts of silica. Silica concentrations in excess of 30 mg/1 are not
uncommon and occasionally concentrations of 50 to 60 mg/1 are
present. 13_/

Other constituents that are present locally  in objectional quantities
include iron and fluoride.  In several areas the fluoride content exceeds
1.5 mg/1, the maximum allowable concentration recommended by the
United States Public Health Service.

Another source of contamination to the,ground-water  supplies is the
presence of methane gas. Methane concentrations in fresh water aqui-
fers in southwestern Louisiana range from zero to 127 mg/1.39/ The
areas of largest methane concentrations occur in the vicinity of three
oil and gas-producing fields and in some wells in the vicinity of Lake
Charles where continuous pumping has lowered water levels greatly.
Generation of methane from organic matter within the fresh water aqui-
fers and intrusion of methane into the aquifers from underlying oil and
gas sands are two possible sources of this  gas.

Water from the Evangeline and Jasper aquifers is generally of better
quality than that from the overlying Chicot reservoir  for uses other
than irrigation.  Typically, the water is of the sodium bicarbonate
type, very soft, slightly alkaline, low in chloride content, and free of
excessive quantities of dissolved iron.

                        Baton Rouge Area

Ground water in the Baton Rouge area varies from hard calcium bicarbonate
type in the alluvium deposits to the soft sodium bicarbonate type in the
deeper  artesian sands.
                                 55

-------
The water typically exceeds 0.3 mg/1 of iron and ranges as high as
18 mg/1 in some parts of the alluvium. Hardness is variable according
to its location and ranges from 123-452 mg/1.14/

Water from most of the deeper artesian sands is soft, alkaline and typi-
cally contains less than 0.3 mg/1 of iron.  Chloride concentrations are
generally low except in areas where heavy pumping has resulted in salt
water encroachment. 40/

The shallow sands have been subject to encroachment of brackish water
in the southern part of the  Baton Rouge area.  In reality, the fresh water
in the aquifers of the Baton Rouge area is the contaminant because,
initially,  the aquifers were filled with salty water.  The fresh water
has flushed the brackish water from the formations throughout most
of the area.

                 Baton Rouge-New Orleans Area

The chemical quality of the ground water in the Baton Rouge-New Orleans
area varies greatly. Except for waters having high concentrations of
chloride, all water is of the bicarbonate type.  However, in some areas
the water is hard to extremely hard and commonly contains iron in
objectional quantities;  in others, the hardness is low and the water
is of the sodium bicarbonate type.

With the exception of the northeastern part of Ascension Parish, most
shallow wells yield water that is very hard and relatively high in iron.
The hard water containing  large quantities of iron is generally associ-
ated with the Mississippi River Alluvium. The hardness, which is
caused mainly by calcium and magnesium normally ranges from about
60 to 370 mg/1.41/ It has been noted that hardness increases with
increasing chloride concentrations, thus, salty water may have a
hardness higher  than the above range. The concentration of iron
ranges widely, generally from about 1 mg/1 to more than 10 mg/1.

Except where there is local salt-water contamination, the chloride
concentration in water from wells tapping the alluvium is generally
less than  50 mg/1. Like other areas of the state, fresh ground water
in the shallow aquifers has completely or partially  flushed out the
salty or brackish water from the formations. In  the local areas where
the salty or brackish water is still present,  the chloride concentrations
may be as high as 1,470 mg/1.15/ In general,  the depth to which fresh
water has displaced the salt water increases as the head of fresh water
above sea level increases.

Deeper wells from the older deltaic deposits generally yield water that
is relatively soft except where chloride concentrations are high.  The
                                56

-------
decrease in hardness of water from deeper wells probably results from
the greater distance the water has traveled from the source area, which
allows greater opportunity for base exchange to take place.

In the northern part of the area, the "700-foot"  sand yields fresh, soft
water that is  low in iron but has a distinct yellow color, generally
attributed to  organic debris which is common in alluvial and deltaic
deposits.

                     Southeastern Louisiana

Ground water problems are not serious in southeastern Louisiana.
Large quantities of soft, fresh water are available although there is
concern about the high acidity in the northern part of the area and
some waste of water from flowing wells.

                  Northern and Central Louisiana

The quality of ground water in northern and central Louisiana varies
according to  the area of the state and the formation it is derived from.
The three formations that supply the majority of ground water for the
area are the Wilcox Formation, Sparta Sands, and Quaternary Alluvium
of the Red River Valley.

The Wilcox Formation, the oldest water-bearing sands of Tertiary Age,
yield soft, high sodium bicarbonate water throughout much of the area.
Water from most of the wells has an iron content greater than the maxi-
mum recommended by the U.S . Public Health Service for drinking water.
Sulfate  and chloride contents generally are below recommended limits,
but the fluoride content commonly is greater than the recommended limit
of 1.6 mg/1.42/  Dissolved solids concentrations usually exceed 500 mg/1
and sometimes exceed 1,000 mg/1.

Salty water in the Wilcox group is found at depths that range from about
200 feet above sea level to more than 800 feet below sea level.  The alti-
tude of the base of fresh ground water  ranges greatly; therefore, it is
difficult to predict accurately the maximum depth of fresh water at any
specified  location.

The Wilcox group  is subject to contamination by leakage from improperly
plugged oil wells, movement of salt water in the vicinity of faults, down-
ward movement of wastes in areas of surface disposal, and movement of
salt water through confining beds of clay.

The Sparta Sand is the most important  aquifer in northern Louisiana.  It
supplies ground water that ranges from soft to hard but generally con-
tains less  than 10 mg/1 hardness.  Dissolved solids content averages
                                 57

-------
 slightly more than 300 mg/1.  In the unconfined aquifer, the water is
 soft, has a low dissolved solids content and acidic pH.  The artesian
 water is alkaline and generally suitable for most uses, but iron content
 usually exceeds 0.3 mg/1.

 The quality of water in the Red River Alluvial aquifer greatly restricts
 its use. The average hardness is 500 mg/1 and the average iron con-
 tent is  6 mg/1, both far above the concentration desirable for potable
 water. 43/  The high hardness and iron concentrations in the water
 have their origin in the iron-bearing calcareous alluvium of the Red
 River through which the water moves.

 The aquifer is contaminated in a few places by upward leakage of salt
 water from underlying formations.  Such contamination generally is of
 small areal extent.  One of the larger areas of salt water contamination
 is at Clarence, in Natchitoches Parish, where the water has  concentra-
 tions of chloride as great at 8,000 mg/1.44/ However, salinity increases
 with depth and small quantities of potable water are available in the
 upper part of the aquifer.

                          NEW MEXICO

 New Mexico is the westernmost state in the study area and the major
 ground-water quality problems are typical of most of the southwestern
 states.  As with most of the study area, mineralization of the ground
 water is the most common and widespread quality problem.   Nearly all
 ground water in New Mexico is derived from infiltration of precipitation
 and seepage from streams and is at least slightly mineralized because
 of contact with soil  and rock.

 Few of  the aquifers in New Mexico contain exclusively fresh or saline
 water.  Most aquifers may contain fresh water at one locality and saline
 water at another. In some parts of New Mexico all ground water is
 saline and in some of these areas all the aquifers yield comparatively
 small amounts of water. 45/

 Mineralization is normally described in terms of total dissolved solids
 and water containing more than 1,000 mg/1 is classified as saline.
 The ground waters  in the various regions are summarized in Table 6,
 and Figure 15 indicates the general areas of the state where the shallow
 ground water is saline.  In most areas of New Mexico, mineralization or
 total dissolved solids results primarily from two specific ions—chlorides
 and sulfates.  However,  hardness is a problem in many areas of New
 Mexico  as are fluorides and nitrates, and occasionally arsenic.

                               High Plains

The Ogallala aquifer of the High Plains contains some of the best quality
water in New Mexico. Although fluoride concentrations commonly

                                58

-------
Ul
vo
Table 6. SUMMARY OF MINERALS IN GROUND WATER IN THE VARIOUS GROUND WATER REGIONS IN NEW MEXICO
•total
Dissolved ~ Percent
Solids Chlorides Sol fa tea Fluorides Hardness Sodium
(mo/1) ta/1) (nn/1) (TO/1) ITO/D <»>
location N Range C N Range C N Range C
High Plains 25 156-3680 7>1000 89 6.0-1750 19*250 65 15.0-2250 28>200
Rio Grande Valley 195 98-26500 38>1000 233 2.0-4310 55*100 210 3.5-16500 20*1000
Canadian and Cirarrm
Mvur Bands 97 96-8210 28*1000 122 2.0-1390 17>100 123 4.9-5860 43*400
16*2000
Peoos Riwer Basin 198 105-275000 133>1000 415 4.5-158000 97>250 394 29.0-10200 333>250
Southwestern Hew Mexico 31 186-1659 3*1000 42 5.0-156 2>50 45 4.9-686 7*100
Colorado Plateaus 200 71-4470 52 » 1000 227 1.4-4650 10>250 205 0.6-2880 84>2SO
Oantral and Southomtral
New Mexioo
Tularosa Basin 529 45-112000 280*1000 670 4.0-66000 219>250 655 18.0-10270 428*250
Estancia Valley 107 207-12300 - 165 3.0-5260 - 109 9.1-3230
Cra* Flats Ares 6 400-3300 4*1000 21 2.0-275 1*250 21 72.0-2230 19»250
N Range C N Range C N Range C
22 0.3-4.4 17*1.5 55 22-2400 9>1(100 5 25.0-42
170 0.0-4.0 17*1.5 227 11-5000 36>500 141 7.0-95 19V60
50>100
80 0.1-7.0 18>1.5 105 35-5360 39.300 98 7.0-97 21>60
50>100
59 0.1-3.2 16>1.5 397 53-9330 319>500 127 0.0-79 6*60
26 0.2-13.0 18*1.5 45 11-1094 , 12>200 28 24.0-93 17*60
180 0.1-7.0 22*1.5 181 3-2680 100*120 62 1.0-98 28>60
314 0.0-20.0 4S>1.5 464 24-16200 213*500 ...
99 0.0-3.8 - 108 160-8370 - -
7 0.4-3.2 1>1.5 21 352-2500 - 10 0.0-5
                       H - Hxittoer of determinations.
                       Ranqe - Ranqe in concentration for sanples analyzed.
                       C - Nxntier of determinations mm than (y) or less than (<) selected concentrations-

-------
 .>'iAN\jyXN ;/://>;.y^^^^
   NO SALINE WATER KNOWN



/j  1,000-3,000 MG/L




3  3,000-10,000 MG/L
                                                         10,000-35,000 MG/L




                                                         OVER  35/000 MG/L
FIGURE 15.  LOCATION OF SALINE GROUND WATERS  IN  NEW MEXICO




                                    60

-------
exceed limits recommended by the U.S. Public Health Service, dissolved
solids content is typically less than 1,000 mg/1.  Recharge of the Ogallala
on the High Plains is due entirely to inadequate precipitation and water
use in this area is heavy.  This combination plus a high evaporation
rate leads to mining of the water supply and concentration of minerals
in the remaining waters.

A typical water from the Ogallala contains approximately 25 mg/1
magnesium, 50 mg/1 sodium and potassium,  240 mg/1 bicarbonate,
15 mg/1 sulfate, 10 mg/1 chloride, 2.5 mg/1 fluoride, and variable
concentrations of nitrates but generally less than 10 mg/1.46/

The Ogallala in some areas  of the High Plains is above the water table
and the Quaternary Alluvium is the major source of ground water.  In
the southern and western part of Lea County and in the Portales Valley,
the Ogallala has been replaced by the alluvium.

Ground water from these Quaternary alluvial deposits is not  as good
quality as from the Ogallala and could be classified as slightly saline.
Total dissolved solids are in the 1,000-2,000 mg/1 range with chlorides
from 100 to 600 mg/1 and sulfates about 500 mg/1.45_/  Water is generally
high in silica  (65-82 mg/1), moderately high in calcium-plus-magnesium,
and low in sodium-plus-potassium.

Sandstone formations underlying the High Plains, though of low yield,
are nevertheless important  sources of water  for stock and homes.  Water
quality in these formations is  extremely variable but generally is more
saline than either the Ogallala or the alluvium.

Oil is a problem in and  around water in at least one location in the High
Plains.  An area of about a half-section east of Hobbs contains about six
feet of oil of unknown origin covering the top of the ground-water table
which is about 30 feet below the land surface.

                        Rio Grande Valley

The Rio Grande Valley contains the largest supply of fresh water in
New Mexico.  Because of the close interrelationship of the surface water
with the ground water in this valley and because of continued recycling
of available water,  the quality of the ground water tends to decrease
from the Colorado to the Texas line.

As with most of the state, mineralization is the principal water quality
problem in the Rio Grande Valley.  Most of the  ground water in the
valley near Santa Fe is  low  in dissolved solids  (less than 300 mg/1),
chlorides (less than 20  mg/1), and sulfates  (less than 30 mg/1), although
it could be classified as hard  (155 mg/1 CaCO3) .
                                61

-------
In the area of Albuquerque, ground-water quality is more erratic but
most wells still have less than 500 mg/1 dissolved solids, 50 mg/1
chlorides, and 250 mg/1 sulfates.  Water of the alluvial aquifer is more
highly mineralized than that of the Santa Fe formation.  Dissolved solids
concentrations are highest at the water table but decrease rapidly in the
upper few feet of the aquifer and then more slowly to the base of the
aquifer. 18/

               Canadian and Cimarron River Basins

Ground water in the Canadian and Cimarron River Basin is scarce but
generally is of fair quality. Most of the water is hard,  some of it is very
hard, but most of it is low  in chlorides and free of odor and color.  Sul-
fate is present in objectional concentrations in some waters. Some areas,
such as western Colfax County, have ground water high in sodium
chloride, sodium bicarbonate, and fluoride.

                        Pecos River Basin

Ground water throughout the Pecos River Basin is highly mineralized,
as noted earlier in Figure 12.  Virtually all of the ground water in the
alluvium of the Pecos Valley south of Carlsbad is not potable.  Mineral
content increases  progressively toward the Pecos River and generally
downstream. Chloride concentrations range from less than 10 mg/1 in
rare instances to many thousands and even near saturation but most
wells contain several hundred mg/1.  Sulfate concentrations similarly
are quite variable ranging up to several thousand mg/1.

Fluorides and nitrates may be problems in local areas but salinity is the
major ground-water problem that overshadows all others in the basin.

          Basins  in Central and South Central New Mexico

The quality of ground water of the Estancia Valley differs considerably
with the locality.   Generally, in the  alluvium, the mineral content
becomes progressively higher from the outer edges of the valley to
the central playa  areas.  Sulfates, chlorides,  and hardness concentra-
tions all range up to over 3,000 mg/1.  Di'ssolved solids range from
207 to 6,170 mg/1 and fluoride concentrations as high as 3.6 mg/1 are
found.  Starting on a line about two to three miles east of Highway 41,
ground water from there west in the Estancia Valley is generally of
satisfactory quality for domestic, stock or irrigation supplies.   Ground
water to the east of this line is generally of poor quality—very high in
salinity.

Salinity is also the major water quality problem of the Tularosa Basin.
Almost 98 percent of the  alluvial deposits  in this basin contains sodium
                                62

-------
chloride brines with dissolved solids concentrations greater than
35,000 mg/1.  The best quality water is found near the mountain fronts
and generally increases in salinity with distance from the mountain
front and with depth.  Fresh water, or that containing less than 1,000
mg/1 dissolved solids, is found at several locations of the Tularosa
Basin.  Two of the largest include an alluvial area south of Alamogordo
and an area adjacent to the southern San Andres Mountains. 19/

The  great majority of the ground water of the Jornado del Muerto is also
highly mineralized.  The water is generally very hard but high chloride
and sulfate concentrations are the principal contaminants that make the
water impotable.  Over 99 percent of the potential perennial yield of
the more than 11 million acre-feet per year of ground water  in the
Jornado del Muerto is classified as impotable, using the definition  of
more than 500 mg/1 of chloride or sulfate or more than 750 mg/1 of
both.47/

               Basins in Southwestern New Mexico

Almost all the ground water used in the basins of southwestern New
Mexico is from the alluvial deposits and is generally of good quality.
In the Hachita Valley, the ground water is moderately hard and some
contains excessive sulfates and fluorides but, generally, dissolved
solids are less than 750 mg/1, sulfates less than 300 mg/1, and chlorides
less'than 50 mg/1.48/

In the Playas Valley, some of the ground water is soft but hardness and
dissolved solids concentrations increase toward the northern and east-
ern parts of the valley. Sulfate concentrations are generally less than
80 mg/1 but increase to more than 4,000 mg/1 in a well in the north-
eastern part of the valley.  Sodium concentrations are somewhat high
and most wells sampled contain fluoride concentrations above the rec-
ommended maximum of 1.5 mg/1 for public water supplies.49/

All of the ground water in the Animas Valley is relatively low in hard-
ness, sulfates and dissolved solids.  Sodium is moderately high, ranging
up to 93 percent and most wells contain more than 60 percent which would
be excessive in more highly mineralized water. Most of the ground water
does contain fluoride concentrations in excess of 1.5 mg/1 and one well
contains as much as 13 mg/1.

The Mimbres Valley has the longest history of ground-water develop-
ment in southwestern New Mexico and water is generally of  good
quality  for most uses but some of the water does have a high fluoride
content.

The San Augustin Plains is a large, almost uninhabited,  basin of
internal drainage in Catron and Socorro Counties.  Much of the water


                                63

-------
in the central part of the basin is saline but in the southwestern part,
ground water of relatively good quality is found.

Like the rest of southwestern New Mexico,  ground water of the Gila and
San Francisco River Basins is of good quality for most purposes.  Al-
though  it could be classified as hard to moderately hard, dissolved
solids range from 200-400 mg/1, chlorides and sulfates are usually
less than 25 mg/1 and fluorides are generally less than 1 mg/1.

                         Colorado Plateau

Like southwest New Mexico, the Colorado Plateau is an area of limited
ground-water supplies but unlike the southwestern area, the widely
available small quantities are often of poor  quality.

Ground-water quality data for this area is limited but it is apparent
that quality varies widely between the many different aquifers and even
at different locations in the  same aquifer.  Ground water from  the
Gallup  sandstone, the principal aquifer in the Gallup  area, contains
hard water in the range from 280 to 600 mg/1.  Dissolved solids range
from 740 to 968 mg/1 and sulfates from 261 to 514 mg/1.20/

Similar quality water is obtained from the Chinle formation in the Fort
Wingate area to the east of Gallup. Gound water used from both loca-
tions is generally low in chlorides although saline water is known to
be at greater depth. 50/

In the western part of San Juan County on the Navajo  Reservation,
small quantities of ground water are obtained from several formations,
primarily sandstones.  Most of this water is of relatively good quality
with chlorides less than 100 mg/1 and dissolved solids generally less
than 1,000 mg/1. Sulfates,  hardness, and sodium are high in  some of
the ground water used.

                           OKLAHOMA

Ground-water quality in Oklahoma varies greatly both with respect to
the properties of the water-bearing rocks and the geographical location
within the  state.  Quality in the west is generally inferior to that of the
east due largely to the effects of rainfall and evaporation, and to the
type of  geologic formation.  An exception to this generalization is
the Ogallala Formation in the High Plains region where natural recharge
is minor in relation to withdrawals.

Limestone rocks characteristic of the Arbuckle and Ozark Mountains
produce relatively hard water due to the presence of calcium carbonate
                                64

-------
Sandstones in Oklahoma generally yield a soft water containing princi-
pally sodium bicarbonate and sulfates with small concentrations of
calcium carbonate.

The rocks of western Oklahoma contain much higher quantities of solu-
ble salts than those in the east.  Water from these formations is, there-
fore, more highly mineralized.

Water from terrace deposits or from stream alluvium again tends to be
more highly mineralized in the western part of the state than in the east.
Gound-water quality from these  sources mirrors that of its surface
counterpart with respect to chemical character but is usually a little
higher in concentration. In these types of formations,  both surface
and ground-water quality tend to correlate with rainfall and evapora-
tion with increases in mineralization occurring during  prolonged
droughts.

Deep aquifer water usually becomes more mineralized both with distance
from the recharge zone and with depth.  Although rare in Oklahoma, it
has been found that in the Norman area shallow water is inferior to that
found at greater depths . 28/

Exceptions to the above generalizations occur in locations where oil
field brines have contaminated both surface and ground water.

For purposes of describing ground-water quality in Oklahoma, the
state has been divided into the High Plains, Western, and Eastern
areas.  The following section will discuss quality generally for those
areas while more specific information can be obtained from Table 7,
which uses the quality of municipal supplies to describe that ground-
water source from which it is taken.

                        High Plains Area

The Ogallala Formation, which underlies most of the Oklahoma panhandle
and much of Harper,  Ellis and Roger Mills Counties, is composed  mostly
of sand and gravel with small amounts of clay. It is capped by a calcium
carbonate rock called caliche.

Water from the Ogallala is of good quality with the exception of its
moderate hardness which ranges between 150-300 mg/1 expressed as
calcium carbonate. 51/ Chlorides are low and fluorides are moderately
high at some times and locations.

Redbeds underlying the Ogallala do provide some water for stock water-
ing, but it is generally very hard and high  in chlorides and sulfates.
                                 65

-------
Table 7. SUMMARY OF MINERALS
Total

Municipality

Source

Date
Dissolved
Solids

IN GROUND
Chlorides
lmg/1)
WATERS
Sulfatea
(mq/1)
OF OKLAHOMA
Total
Hardness
(ng/1)
Sodium
(mg/1)
Fluorides
("iq/D
HIGH PLAINS AREA
Boise City
Guymon
Shattuck


Beaver



Laverne

Woodward

WESTERN
Thomas


Hinton

Ft. Cobb

Apache

Hush Springs

Marlow

Edmond

Moore

Lexington

Ringling

Healdton

Hollis

Tipton
Ogallala
Ogallala
Ogallala


Alluvial/Terrace
(North Canadian)


Alluvial/Terrace
(North Canadian)
Alluvial/Terrace
(North Canadian)
OKLAHOMA AREA
Rush Springs


Rush Springs

Rush Springs

Rush Springs

Rush Springs

Rush Springs

Garber

Garber

Garber

Wichita

Wichita

Alluvial/Terrace
(Salt Fork)
Alluvial/Terrace
11/20/S1
12/63
11/20/51
12/64
1/18/51
8/62
8/62
8/18/51
2/65
11/29/39
?/61
11/9/52
2/64
2/20/51
6/65

7/26/51
5/65
5/65
6/30/52
6/64
8/23/51
6/64
8/22/51
6/65
8/1/51
7/63
9/8/50
4/65
12/1/49
5/65
6/30/52
7/63
6/30/52
2/64
8/21/51
6/64
12/13/51
4/65
8/10/50
12/63
6/8/53
(North Fork of Red) 9/65
Davidson

Wynnewood

Maysville

Yukon


Waynoka

Crescent

Tonkawa

Xaw City

Alluvial/Terrace
(Red)
Alluvial /Terrace
(Washita)
Alluvial/Terrace
(Washita)
Alluvial/Terrace
(North Canadian)

Alluvial/Terrace
(North Canadian)
Alluvial /Terrace
(Cimarron)
Allux-ial/Terrace
(Arkansas)
Alluvial/Terrace
(Arkansas)
1/30/52
,6/65
8/14/52
3/65
12/13/51
3/65
6/30/52
6/62
6/62
6/9/51
8/64
10/23/51
11/64
11/24/52
11/63
10/23/52
2/64
324
280
331
305
296
274
276
413
330
_
326
556
600
197
340

618
1150
1200
347
320
318
590
296
370
407
280
522
380
712
580
279
290
574
310
675
600
1060
1120
410
420
778
680
516
590
516
680
731
920
807
702
403
310
220
642
280
644
640
616
790
26
24
8.5
12
12
24
22
55
34
49
34
52
84
26
64

26
40
40
16
24
7.2
22
7.0
38
23
10
127
16
150
84
7.8
12
42
16
18
24
139
192
14
14
162
138
48
90
48
56
38
110
66
84
84
16
26
112
28
16
42
90
142
63
37
77
85
11
34
33
51
36
38
13
114
74
23
82

183
1180
1200
13
33
79
405
12
98
77
32
84
125
68
55
6.7
8
84
27
66
61
15
100
54
43
87
1
59
90
59
65
69
195
138
_
-
32
25
54
19
216
245
76
91
226
153
239
192
230
200
224
234
222
174
184
350
340
107
152

352
1048
992
192
258
220
564
254
206
288
216
266
272
82
136
222
220
398
220
3
12
12
32
250
274
336
276
334
352
334
352
590
616
505
408
156
202
232
400
158
423
466
384
412
24
20
21
20
14
48*
28*
56
26
-

54
71
18
37

70
80
100
50
35
13
25
15
31
20
7*
91
34
243
140
23
43*
58
32
277
320
437
720
39
31
160
148
56
72
56
195
50
79
103
13*
9*
76
74
76
38
50
54
65
88
1.3
1.4
1.2
, 1.98
0.0
0. 2
0.2
0.3
2.02
-
~
0.7
1.05
0.0
0.3

0.1
0.75
1.2
0.1
0.0
0.3
o.s:
0.1
o.:
0.1
0.75
-
0.52
1.4
1.0
0.1
0.45
C.>
0.38
1.3
1.2
1.5
2.86

0.75
o.-
0.75
C.7
1.05
0.7
1.47
0.3
0.45
0.5
0.7
0.7
0 . 1
0.38
0. 1
0.52
C . 1
o'.i
C . 3
0.38
66

-------
Table 7. SUMMARY

Municipality

Source
CF MINERALS IN GROUND WATERS CF OKLAHOMA. (Continued)
Total

Date
Dissolved
Solids
(mg/1)
EASTERN OKLAHOMA AREA
Drumwright

Bristow

Stroud

Prague

Boley

Seminole

Roff

Sulphur

Marietta

Kingston

Caddo

Banning ton

Bo swell

Ft. Towson

Garvin

Haworth

Stillwell


Locust Grove

Commerce

Miami

Quapaw
Afton

Davis

•Calculated
Vamoosa

Vamoosa

Vamoosa

Vamoosa

Vamoosa

Vamoosa

Arbuckle

Arbuckle

Trinity

Trinity

Trinity

Trinity

Trinity

Trinity

Trinity

Tokio

Boone


Boone

Boone

Roubidoux

Roubidoux
Roubidoux

Alluvial/Terrace
(Washita)

7/25/50
9/63
7/24/51
5/«5
7/23/51
6/64
10/24/51
1/64
7/24/51
6/65
5/1/51
6/65
10/26/51
9/64
3/9/51
9/64
3/2/51
7/65
3/19/48
3/65
12/27/52
12/63
8/16/51
12/63
12/27/52
7/63
6/11/53
12/64
8/16/51
4/65
12/27/52
2/65
9/11/51
12/63
12/63
8/30/51
4/65
9/6/51
4/65
5/15/51
2/65
9/6/51
12/64
9/6/51
12/64
8/14/52
9/64

300
350
457
680
2480
450
409
375
263
450
244
235
468
470
344
320
427
450
612
_ 570
503
420
827
870
621
427
189
195
308
305
69
52
147
150
165
129
95
159
200
217
360
152
140
758
850
646
620


Chlorides

8.2
20
54
252
400
16
11
18
12
16
4.5
12
91
95
5.0
12
13
30
21
18
20
16
74
78
83
36
11
12
16
24
17
14
6.2
12
10
5.5
12
8
22
42
102
4
8
348
379
82
94


Sulfates

63
37
44
44
1080
123
29
10
8.8
123
47
37
35
22
16
0
45
53
87
45
32
49
38
39
'70
73
11
15
42
42
0.3
5
4.1
10
20
6.5
12
16
26
15
15
ia
10
18
10
38
5

Total
Hardness
(BO/1 )
^_*li:j/ „ /
208
84
314
360
528
42
12
24
221
42
124
156
297
284
330
300
48
36
22
8
2
22
4
16
394
310
148
188
40
48
16
30
120
128
136
100
66
123
136
135
134
130
lie
172
184
388
376


Sodium
(mg/1)

.
103*
38
96
619
41
161
160
14
41
40
23
66
69
7.1
8
145
210
-
40
201
150
336
332
43
14*
6.0
4
100
92
9.6
13
3.9
2
23*
3.5
10
9.6
20
29
68
4.4
7
220
144
78
63


Fluorides
(mg/1)

.
0.05
0.1
0.0
0.9
1.64
0.3
0.45
0.1
1.64
0.3
0.52
0.3
0.75
0.0
0.52
0.1
0.82
0.1
0.6
0.1
0.45
1.3
1.36
0.0
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.9
0.68
0.0
0.45
0.0
0.38
0.12
0.0
1.36
0.5
0.2
0.3
0.52
0.3
0.2
1.8
1.3
0.0
0 .3

67

-------
Water from alluvial deposits varies greatly in its chemical composition,
ranging from that similar to the redbeds to that comparable to the
Ogallala.  Alluvial deposits along the North Canadian and Cimarron
are higher in mineral composition  than the Ogallala.

                     Western Oklahoma Area

A major source of ground water in southwestern Oklahoma is the Dog
Creek and Elaine Formations in Harmon and parts of Greer and Jackson
Counties.  The aquifer consists of interbedded shale, gypsusm,
anhydrite, dolomite, and limestone.  Due partly to the type of rocks
in the formation and to apparent over-development of the aquifer, water
quality is very high in sulfates (1,500-2,000 mg/1)  and often high in
chlorides. 52/

As in most sandstone aquifers. water quality in the Rush Springs Forma-
tion is good except for moderate hardness, which is generally between
200-300 mg/1.  This is due to patches of gypsum on the outcrop which
have contributed sulfate to Rush Springs water. Otherwise,  both the
Rush Springs and Elk City aquifers are of good quality suitable for
domestic, municipal, irrigation, and industrial use.

The Garber-Wellington Formation lies principally in Oklahoma and
Cleveland Counties. It consists of sandstone, shale, and conglomerate.
The chemical quality of this aquifer is generally good and suitable for
most purposes.  Dissolved solids are less than 500 mg/1 in Oklahoma
County but may go up to 1,500 mg/1 in Cleveland County. 2_5_/ Water
is moderately hard  in the outcrop area and characterized by calcium
and  magnesium bicarbonate. In the Norman area the water is very
soft, being of the sodium bicarbonate type.  Farther downdip in
McClain County and in western Oklahoma County the sandstone grades
into shale, and the  water is highly mineralized.  In other areas, wells
obtain fresh water from depths of 1,000 feet.

The  Wichita Formation provides small quantities of water to much of
Stephens County and parts of Garvin and Carter Counties.  Being of
about the  same age  and composition as the Garber-Wellington, its
chemical characteristics are similar. Like  most waters from sandstone,
it can be rather high in sodium bicarbonate and sulfate.  The water is
moderate to high in fluorides.

In some unusual cases,  private wells obtain water from the Arbuckle
in the vicinity of Lawton. In this area, the water is a soft, sodium
bicarbonate type and contains high concentrations of fluorides.

Alluvial and terrace deposits are most important along major  rivers,
but some small municipalities have developed sources along tribu-
taries .  Generally,  these deposits are of the poorest quality in the

                               68

-------
western part of the area where sodium chloride and gypsum deposits
exist.  Ground water, much like surface water, tends to improve
toward the east by moving away from these mineral deposits and dilu-
tion becomes effective.  Alluvial and terrace deposits of the Cimarron
River, Salt Fork of the Arkansas,  and Elm Fork of the Red Rivers in
the west are particularly high in chlorides. 28_/

                     Eastern Oklahoma Area

The Vamoosa Formation, like the Garber-Wellington, is composed of
sandstone, shale,  and conglomerate.  It extends as a narrow formation
from Seminole County northerly to Osage County where it outcrops.
The presence of large amounts of shale and siltstone in the outcrop
area limits its use in the northern part of the formation. Although
water quality is generally good, hardness and sulfate present the
most troublesome problems.  Hardness is generally in the range from
300-1,500 mg/1 25/; however, in a 1951 sample from Stroud's munici-
pal supply, hardness was reported to be 2,480 mg/1 and sulfates
amounted to 1,080 mg/1.

Well development in the Arbuckle Formation is at the present time
sparse but it serves as a large potential water supply for parts of
Pontotoc, Murray, and Johnston Counties.  Although water in the
Arbuckle is moderately  hard, it is otherwise low in dissolved solids
and is considered  good for most purposes. 53/

The Trinity Sands exist along the southern border of Oklahoma from
Love County to the Arkansas state line.  A number of private and
municipal wells take water from this formation. Water quality is gen-
erally good and is characterized as being of the sodium bicarbonate
type with low hardness  except in a few locations.  A few samples
indicate that this water contains amounts of one or  more constituents'
in excess of recommended limits.54/ In one instance, a fluoride con-
centration of 3.0 mg/1 was reported which exceeded the drinking
water standard of 1.5 mg/1.  Mineralization in the Trinity tends to
increase slightly downdip from the outcrop area,

There are four water-bearing formations in the extreme southeastern
corner of Oklahoma, other than the Trinity and the river alluvium.  These
are the Goodland,  Tokio, Woodbine, and Washita.  Quality data for
these formations is very scarce but indications are that these waters
are often high in dissolved solids with the Woodbine and Washita being
particularly troubled by chlorides. One sample from the Goodland was
high in sulfates with a concentration of 778 mg/1.

The Boone Formation, located in the northeastern part of the state,
consists mainly of  fractured massive chert with beds of cherty lime-
stone in the lower  part.   It is one of three major aquifers located in


                                 69

-------
the same general area. In addition to analyses of municipal supplies
which take water from this formation, as shown in Table 7, Table 8
presents a statistical summary of water quality in the Boone Formation.
         Table 8.  SUMMARY OF CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF
                  WATER FROM BOONE AQUIFER 27/
Concentration (mg/1)

Hardness
Sulfate
Chloride
Nitrate
Total Dissolved Solids
Maximum
328
79
103
79
494
Median
154
10
10
5.2
236
Minimum
26
0.2
0.2
0.1
106
Number of
Analyses
28
28
28
25
28
Where the aquifer is more deeply buried than 200 feet, it becomes
less favorable as a water resource both from the standpoint of quality
and quantity.

The Roubidoux Formation consists of sandy and cherty dolomite. It is of
generally good quality in Ottawa County where it is characterized as a
calcium bicarbonate type, but it changes to sodium chloride farther west
in Craig and Mayes Counties and becomes unusable for most purposes.
The water in Craig County also contains hydrogen sulfide. In addition
to Table 7, which deals with municipal supplies,  Table 9 summarized
water quality in the Roubidoux.
         Table 9.  SUMMARY OF CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF
                  WATER FROM THE ROUBIDOUX AQUIFER *27/

                            Concentration  (mg/1)          Number of
                        Maximum   Median   Minimum    Analyses

Hardness                  420        146       118           32
Sulfate                     124         16         0.3         32
Chloride                   780         79         1.6         32
Nitrate                      8.0        0.8       0.0         32
Total Dissolved Solids     1570        276       140           32

   '"Includes  several analyses of water from other  deep aquifers.
                                70

-------
The Bur gen Sandstone is a third major formation in the northeastern
part of the state. It is mainly fine to medium-grained sandstone with
some shale, limestone and dolomite. Many of the wells in this formation
yield hard water but the sulfates,  chlorides, and nitrates are generally
low. A summary of water quality for this formation is presented in
Table 10.
         Table 10.  SUMMARY OF CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF
                   WATER FROM THE BURGEN SANDSTONE 27/

                             Concentration (mg/1)          Number of
                        Maximum   Median   Minimum    Analyses

Hardness                  404        118         9           20
Sulfate                    166         16         0.6         20
Chloride                    92         12         2-4         20
Nitrate                     26          1.1       0.0         20
Total Dissolved Solids     900        221       118           20
The alluvium along the Arkansas River is one of the most favorable
sources of water in the northeastern part of the state.  It yields rela-
tively large amounts of water of low mineral content and is chemically
suitable for most purposes .55/  Most other alluvium deposits in this
part of the state are characterized as being hard and many samples
indicate that the dissolved solids exceed 500 mg/1.  Generally, sulfates,
chlorides, and nitrates of the Arkansas River alluvium are low.

Two samples from the Red River alluvium in southern McCurtain County
show that the water, at least in that location, is of good quality with
dissolved solids being less than 200 mg/1 and all other parameters
being well within the criteria for drinking water. 54/

Generally, water quality in  alluvial deposits in the  eastern Oklahoma
area tends to mirror that of  the stream with perhaps higher mineral
concentration.  Exceptions to this occur broadly over the area,  a result
of the activities of man particularly with  respect to  contamination by oil
field brines.

                             TEXAS

Texas is a state plagued by  many ground-water problems. The ground-
water quality is threatened by the discharge of wastes, by increases in
                                71

-------
mineralization as a result of recycling of irrigation return flows and
seepage losses,  modification through pumping of the natural hydro-
dynamics of aquifers, just to name a few.

The chemical quality of the ground water varies from aquifer to aquifer
and from place to place within the same aquifer. Table 11 indicates the
concentration of the major chemical constituents in the various aquifers
throughout the state.  Other chemical constituents that may be present
in excessive amounts include fluoride, iron, hydrogen sulfide and
methane  gases, and silica.

                          Coastal Area

                     Coastal-Miocene Sands

Ground water  from the coastal-Miocene sands is generally fresh to
moderately saline, with salinity increasing toward the Gulf. The con-
centrations of chemical constituents range widely.  Throughout most of
the eastern part of the  area, the ground water is low in dissolved solids,
generally containing less than 500 mg/1.  Sodium and bicarbonate are
the principal constituents and the water is comparatively soft.  The
presence of iron and dissolved gases are problems locally.

The ground water generally becomes more saline in the southern part
of the aquifer and in some areas highly saline water immediately overlies
and underlies the fresh water  aquifer.5_6/ In the Rio Grande Valley,
ground water pumped from the aquifer for irrigation and municipal use
typically contains between 1,000 and 1,500 mg/1 of dissolved solids.65/

                      Carrizo-Wilcox Sands

The chemical quality of the ground water from the Carrizo-Wilcox Sands
varies with location and depth. Ground water that is relatively low in
mineral content and suitable for most purposes  is found in and near
outcrop areas  and the quality generally deteriorates downdip.  The
water is generally soft; however, moderate to very hard water may be
encountered in local areas.  Most water that is being used from the
aquifer contains less than 1,000 mg/1 dissolved solids.  Iron, silica,
and hydrogen  sulfide and methane gas may be present in objectionable
quantities locally. The Wilcox Sands have lignite stringers in some
places that impart an undesirable color to the water.

                   Sparta-Queen City Aquifers

The Sparta-Queen City Aquifers contain water of good chemical quality
that extends downdip for a considerable distance and remains fairly
uniform in quality.  The  ground water is soft and the dissolved solids
                                72

-------
Table 11.   SUMMARY OF MINERALS IN GROUND WATER IN 1HE VARIOUS GROUND WATER REGIONS OP TEXAS
Total
Dissolved
Solids

Location
Coastal Area
Coastal Sands-Miocene Sands
Miocene Sands
Coastal Sands
Carrizo-Wilcox
Sparta and Queen City
High Plains
Central, North Central, and
Northeast Texas
Trinity Sands
Woodbine Formation
Ellenburger, San Saba,
and Hickory
Seymour Formation
Southwest Texas
Edwards-Trinity
Edwards Limestone
West Texas Area
El Paso Area
Big Bend Area
Pecos River Basin

N

83?
385
649
1130
56
189


361
91
14

286

417
20

228
317
136
(mg/1)
Range

20-14356
12-15100
217-129957
12-25342
29-1361
199-9733


104-41414
444-5650
561-598

91-55400

231-69000
311-10300

970-4807
188-2980
] 34-74300

C

92>1000
15>1000
154--1000
204=1000
7>1000
55>1000


!38>1000
72>1000
_

96>1000
-
141>1000
4>1000

2276*
227--1000
43: 1000

N

1060
380
811
1458
56
276


409
136
14

286

431
20

228
322
203
Chlorides
(mg/1)
Range

6.0-8500
0.5-3060
12-72000
0.5-15050
2.0-464
1.6-3000


2.4-2880
2.4-1540
76-101

3-35100

4-3600
18-4500

340-1990
7-1790
3.2-58600


C

63>250
22>250
383>250
206>250
2--25C
37-250


54*250
18>250


87>250

64^250
8>250

742*
178>250
M3>250


N

843
377
737
1257
56
272


405
132
14

286

424
20

228
320
190
Sulfates
(mg/1)
Range

0.0-2490
0.0-608
0.0-10870
0.0-4000
0.0-336
11-4570


5-4380
11-1460
32-105

0.0-1340

4.6-6800
10-1800

422-2390
13-2370
10-6100


C

41>250
2>250
76>250
103>250
5>250
62>250


113>250
33>250


81>250

120>250
5>250

960*
212-250
76>250


N

721
361
752
1384
56
264


400
129
14

286

419
17


341
184
Total
Hardness
(as CaCO3)
(ir.g/1)
Range

0.0-2389
1.0-1960
12-29400
0.0-3040
2-228
13-2790


1.0-3320
1.9-610
342-450

6-20000

145-2590
9-1610


37-3240
64-10400


C

32>500
35>100
101>500
461>100
6>100
55>1000


58>500
15>100
1 2>350

54' 500

34 1000
6--500


173>1000
43>1000
 N - Number of determinations.
 Range  - Range in concentration for samples analyzed.
 C - Number of determinations more than (>) or less than (<) selected concentrations.
 •Average

-------
 range from about 100 to less than 700 mg/1. Some excessive amounts
 of iron are present locally and a number of wells tapping these aquifers
 have been reported to contain hydrogen sulfide gas.  Improper casing
 and casing leaks in oil wells,  as well as improper disposal of wastes
 and inadequate protection measures,  have allowed water of poorer
 quality to enter the fresh water producing strata.
                                                                v ,, • •..

                           High Plains

 The chemical quality of the ground water  in the Ogallala aquifer varies
 widely within relatively short distances.  The ground water is generally
 hard and in almost all cases its fluoride content exceeds the 1.5 mg/1 '
 limit recommended by the U.S. Public Health Service for municipal
 supplies.  The water typically contains between 300 and 1,000 mg/1
 dissolved solids, of which calcium, magnesium, and bicarbonate are
 the principal constituents.  In general, the water of better quality
 occurs in those  areas where the depth to water is greatest.  Waters
 that are  highly mineralized because of natural causes are often asso-
 ciated with areas of shallow water-table conditions, notably areas near
 water-table lakes and near draws.  This is evident in the vicinity of
 the Lost Draw complex of Terry, Lynn and Dawson counties.  In areas
 where the water table is at or  very near the land surface, evapo-
 transpiration processes produce highly mineralized ground waters  by
 the concentration of residual salts . 34/

           Central,  North  Central, and Northeast Texas

                          Trinity Sands

 Ground water derived from the Trinity Sands formation is typical of
 the sodium bicarbonate type and is generally of good  quality.  Dissolved
 solids concentrations are usually less than 1,000 mg/1 and the chloride
 and sulfate content is low.  In a few limited areas near the outcrop area,
 the ground water contains  excessive amounts of iron.

 Water in the outcrop areas is generally hard but otherwise of good
 chemical quality.  Eastward, downdip from the outcrop, the water
 becomes softer,  but total solids, sodium,  sulfates, chlorides,  and
 fluorides increase.  Toward the east, in deeper parts of the aquifer,
 dissolved solids range from about 500 to 1,500 mg/1.30/

Evidence of encroachment of salt water has caused concern in some
areas underlain by the Trinity Sands. Salt water  contamination in  the
heavily pumped Sherman area has caused increases in chloride content
in many of the public-supply wells .3_5/  Improper plugging of oil and
water test holes has allowed saline water in overlying beds to enter
the fresh water-bearing zones of the Trinity Sands in many areas.
                                74

-------
                       Woodbine Formation

The Woodbine Formation supplies considerable amounts of variable
quality ground water.  This water is characterized by a high sodium
bicarbonate content and generally high concentrations of iron, dissolved
solids, sulfates, fluorides, and in some places chlorides .  Except for
higher iron concentrations and localized hardness, Woodbine water is
usually of best quality in the outcrop area that extends from central
Johnson County across eastern Tarrant County,  eastern Cooke and
western Grayson County to the Red River.  Downdip to the east,  the
water becomes progressively more mineralized and exceeds U.S. Public
Health Service recommended limits in many locations.

                Ellenberger-San Saba and Hickory

Ground water usually occurs in the Ellenberger-San Saba  aquifers under
artesian head and is usually of good quality,  although very hard. Dis-
solved solids content is consistently less than 1,000 mg/1.   The chemical
quality of the ground water deteriorates rapidly  away from the outcrop
areas and at distances greater than 20 miles downdip, the  water is
generally unsuitable for most uses. In the northwestern part of the
aquifer, mineralization is due to sodium and chloride and in the south-
eastern part to calcium and sulfate.

The Hickory Formation contains water of the sodium bicarbonate type
and, although sometimes objectionably hard,  is generally  suitable for
most uses.  Dissolved  solids generally range  from about 300 to 500 mg/1.
The poorest quality water used is found in the vicinity of Eden, in
Concho County where the dissolved solids range from about 1,000 to
1,500 mg/1.

Few contamination problems have occurred except at great distances
from the outcrop areas, where there may be a possibility of saline
waters being drawn into a cone of depression caused by excessive
pumpage.  Local contamination has occurred at Melvin in McCulloch
County and into uncased wells or where salt water has entered the
well through corroded casings.34/

                       Seymour Formation

Ground water from the Seymour Formation is  very hard, and the
dissolved solids content generally exceeds the standards recommended
by the U.S. Public Health Service.  Sulfate and chloride content is
generally  high, sulfates ranging up to about 1,200 mg/1.35/

Salinity has increased in much of the water from the Seymour. This is
due primarily from excessive pumpage from the ground-water sources.
                                 75

-------
 Ground water in these areas also contains relatively high concentra-
 tions of nitrate, which are considered to be undesirable for human
 consumption.

                         Southwest Texas

                Edwards-Trinity  (Plateau) Aquifer

 Ground water from the Edwards Plateau aquifer is generally very hard
 and has a wide range in dissolved solids.  The dissolved solids tend
 to increase in a northerly direction.  Calcium,  magnesium and bicarbo-
 nate are commonly the principal chemical constituents.  Locally, con-
 centrations of fluoride range up to 2.8 mg/1.

 Salinity increases toward the west where the aquifer is overlain by
 younger geologic formations. The water in these younger formations
 contains saline water and has probably leaked into the fresh water
 aquifer. Oil field brines are another source of contamination that
 contributes to the  salinity of the Edwards-Trinity Aquifer.

                   Edwards-Balcones Fault Zone

 Ground water from the Edwards and Associated Limestone  (Balcones
 Fault Zone) is almost uniformly calcium bicarbonate water of good
 quality,  except it is very hard.  The hardness  generally exceeds
 200 mg/1.  Dissolved solids are relatively low,  as in Bexar County
 where they average around 300 mg/1.  The mineral content of the
 water increases as the artesian pressure decreases along the southern
 and southeastern boundary of the aquifer.

 Highly saline water also containing hydrogen sulfide gas occurs in the
 limestone beds south of the heavily pumped areas of the Balcones
 Fault Zone.  As a result, there is a possible threat of saline water
 intrusion into the fresh water supplies.

                        West Texas Area

                          El Paso Area

Ground water supplies in the El Paso area range from fresh to very
saline.  Fresh ground water constitutes a small fraction of the total
quantity of water in storage. Where fresh ground water is available
it is underlain, overlain, or adjoined by slightly saline water,  thus,
endangering the quality of the fresh water.  The water is  generally
soft to moderately hard, but varies  greatly areally and with depth.
                                76

-------
                         Salt Basin Area

The quality of ground water ranges  between wide limits, but most is of
relatively good quality.  The ground water occurs chiefly in deposits
of Quaternary Alluvium and is, for the most part, hard and high in
fluoride content. In many areas, the water is unsuitable for  domestic
purposes because of the high sulfate content.

South of Van Horn in Culberson County, water from Quaternary deposits
is typically low in dissolved solids,  chloride, and sulfate content.  As
you move northward into  the Wildhorse Flat area, the ground water
increases in mineralization, as well  as chloride and sulfate content.
Even further northward in the Dell City area, ground water is slightly
to moderately saline. Dissolved solids range from less than 1,000 mg/1
east of the  Culberson County line to  nearly 8,000 mg/1 near the south-
west edge of the Salt Lakes.56J  Hardness concentrations average
around 1,200 mg/1 and fluorides average about 1.4 mg/1.

The increasing  salt content of the ground water is a serious problem
in the Dell City area. As irrigation  continues and ever-increasing
amounts of excess water are applied in order to leach the accumulated
salts from the soil, it can be expected that the salinity of the  ground
water will  increase even further.

                  Pecos River Valley Alluvium

Ground water in the Pecos River Valley is derived mainly from alluvial
deposits of Quaternary Age.  The quality of this water varies with loca-
tion and depth. Normally, wells penetrating the  deeper parts of the
alluvium yield water with higher mineral concentration than wells
tapping the shallower alluvial material.

Dissolved solids range from around  200 to 13,000 mg/1 with the water
nearer the Pecos River  containing the highest concentration of dissolved
solids.  Water of poorer quality near the river has moved into some
fresh water areas where heavy pumpage has lowered the water levels.
The fresh water typically contains 700 to 800 mg/1 of sulfate and chloride
and usually contains less than 200 mg/1 of bicarbonate.

In some areas of the Northeastern Pecos Valley, waste water from oil
production and possibly other sources has, apparently, contaminated
the alluvial aquifer, resulting in higher mineral concentrations than
normally is expected.
                                 77

-------
                           SECTION VI

            . CAUSES OF GROUND-WATER POLLUTION


 In the previous section,  some of the measured parameters of ground-
 water pollution were discussed and summarized for each section of the
 project area.  Most of the available data is related to mineral parameters
 probably resulting from  natural conditions although little attempt was
 made previously to assign a cause of pollution.

 In fact, poor quality ground water may result from a combination of
 several contributing factors or sources.  In this section, various condi-
 tions or activities which  have a known or suspected polluting effect on
 ground water are discussed approximately in the order of their signifi-
 cance in the project area:

          Natural Pollution

          Oil Field Brines

          Well Construction

          Overpumping

          Irrigation Return Flows

          Land Application of Wastes

          Solid Wastes

          Evapotrarispiration by Native Vegetation

          Animal Wastes

          Waste Lagoons

          Accidental Spills of Hazardous Materials

          Subsurface Waste Disposal

          Artificial Recharge of Aquifers

          Other Causes

Locations  and specific pollution cases are not intended to be all-inclusive
but can serve as examples of pollution types and locations.  Those cases


                                78

-------
cited are only the ones obvious enough to be noticed by a complainant
and bad enough to be investigated. Undoubtedly, there are dozens of
other cases that were noticed and investigated but did not come to the
attention of the authors.  There are also probably thousands of other
instances of ground-water pollution that are yet to be recognized as
such.

                         Natural Pollution

Natural pollution occurs to some extent throughout the five-state area
but is especially important in several locations in Texas, Oklahoma and
New Mexico.   This problem undoubtedly affects the quality of more
ground water in the project area than all other sources of contamina-
tion combined.

Mineralization due to leaching is the most common type of natural
pollution.  Natural leaching may take  place within a water-bearing
aquifer or within the  soils and rocks of the watershed area.  Natural
accumulation of soluble minerals is greatest in areas of low precipita-
tion , especially where ground water is near the surface and evaporation
and transpiration combine to concentrate the minerals in the waters left
behind.  Precipitation percolating through the salt laden soils or ground-
water movement takes some of the minerals in solution and carries them
into the aquifer.  Where hydrogeology permits, the resulting highly
mineralized water may even return to the  surface as springs and con-
taminate  surface water.

The source of much highly mineralized water in the south central states
is located in an area known as the Permian Basin (Figure 16) which
underlies large sections of Oklahoma, New Mexico and Texas.  Rock
formations of Permian Age are composed of red and  gray gypsiferous
shale, siltstone, sandstone, gypsum,  anhydrite, dolomite, and some-
times halite.   Halite usually occurs as lenses in relatively impervious
shales, but thick massive beds are not uncommon.  Leaching of the
salt is generally accomplished by small quantities of water which
pass through  small joints  and fractures.

In the Permian Basin, salt water occurs at depths of less than 100 feet
to more than  1,000 feet. In much of the area, leaching of salt-bearing
formations near the surface and regional circulation of water from out-
crop areas on the west to outcrop areas in the east result in springs
and seeps which contaminate much of the surface water of the Pecos,
Arkansas, Red and Brazos Rivers.  Although flow from these springs
is small, chloride concentrations in the water range up to 190,000 mg/1
depending on the dilution by fresh water. Alluvium near these springs
is saturated with high chloride, high sulfate waters and evaporation
                               79

-------
                                                                        •Arkansas River
oo
o
             ST^ES OF BRINE-DISCHARGE FEATURES

             AC-PROXIMATE BOUNDARY OF THE
             c-ERMTAN  BASIN
                            FIGURE  16,   APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY OF THE PERMIAN BASIN

-------
from the surface causes the formation of salt crust during dry weather.
These springs are estimated to contribute over 20,000 tons of sodium
chloride per day to the waters of the Arkansas, Red, Brazos and Pecos
Rivers.

Although not as obvious at the surface as in the Permian Basin, natural
leaching of minerals into the ground water affects tremendous volumes
of ground water in other parts of the five-state area. A fairly typical
cross-section of the water quality of the intermountain valleys of south
central New Mexico is shown in Figure 17. This particular cross-section
indicates that most of the ground water of the Tularosa Basin contains
more than 35,000 mg/1 of dissolved solids. Near the basin recharge
area—the mountains on the west—ground water near the surface is
relatively fresh with less than 1,000 mg/1 of dissolved solids.  However,
as the water moves into the basin through the salt laden alluvial mater-
ial, soluble minerals are dissolved, adding to the mineral content of
the water.

Where bedrock is igneous and alluvial fans are composed of detritus
from igneous rocks, percolating waters will be of calcium magnesium
bicarbonate type.  Where the bedrock and alluvial deposits are moder-
ately soluble limestones and dolomites, the water in the alluvial fans is
a relatively fresh calcium bicarbonate  type. Alluvial fans which receive
runoff from areas underlain by soluble evaporite deposits contain water
high in calcium sulfate and sodium chloride. 197

The effect of natural leaching can be seen in relative amounts of fresh
and saline ground waters available in parts of south central New Mexico,
as summarized in Table 12. Potable water is defined as having less
than 250 mg/1 chlorides or sulfates, inferior water has more than 250
mg/1 of chlorides or sulfates but less than 750 mg/1 of both, and
impotable water has more than 500 mg/1 of either or more than 750 mg/1
of both.
       Table 12.  SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED GROUND WATER
                 AVAILABLE IN TULAROSA BASIN AND VICINITY 47/

                            Potential Perennial Yield  (Ac.-Ft./Yr.)
        Area                 Potable     Inferior     Impotable

North Jornada del Muerto          30         200      "'JJOO.OOO
North Tularosa Basin             30         200       6,000,000
Crow Flats-Dell City Area        300       1,000       4,000,000
Southern  Tularosa  Basin      60,000       5,000      65,000,000
                                81

-------
      WEST
                                                            EAST
 5000
 4000
 3000
 2000
  1000
   SEA
  LEVEL
 -1000
-2000
-3000'
  IOOO.Q.^35000


More Than 35000 mg/l Dissolved Solids
   FIGURE  17,   A TYPICAL CROSS-SECTION OF THE WATER QUALITY
                      OF THE TULAROSA BASIN
                                  82

-------
Saline water from natural leaching is a common problem in all of the states
in the project area.  In fact, salt water can be found at some level in
almost any part of the region and, as noted earlier, is by far the most
common contaminant of ground water.  However, other natural leachates
are localized problems in parts of the project area.

In Runnels County, Texas, nitrates in extremely high concentrations
in ground water are believed the result of leaching of natural deposits.
Over 80 percent of 800 wells sampled in the area have nitrate concen-
trations above the Public Health Service recommended limit of 45 mg/1.
Many wells contain nitrate concentrations of over 500 mg/1, and some
are more than 1,000 mg/1.58/ These extremely high concentrations are
much more than can be attributed to man-related sources of the area.

Other minerals are  found in localized parts of the project area.  Fluorides
in excess of Public  Health Service recommended limits are common in
parts of eastern New Mexico and western Texas.  Iron is a common
natural contaminant in many areas, notably in the western two-thirds
of the Mississippi Alluvial Plain in Arkansas,  the open pit mining areas
of southeastern Oklahoma, and the alluvium of the  Baton Rouge, Louisiana
area. Zinc can be found in the ground water near Blackwell, Oklahoma.
Radioactivity is a natural contaminant around uranium mining areas such
as Karnes City, Texas;  Claremore, Oklahoma; and Gallup, New Mexico.
Caustic or acid problems in ground water are  notable in bauxite mining
areas such as Bauxite, Arkansas.

Organic pollutants from natural  sources are also problems in some areas.
Nitrogen gas, methane, hydrogen sulfide and  carbon dioxide gases are
found in  many shallow aquifers in northeast Texas, southwest Arkansas,
and western Louisiana.  The source of these gases is believed to be the
decay of  lignitic or carbonaceous material naturally occurring in the
aquifer.  In 1970, three well drillers in Cass County, Texas, died from
breathing gases escaping from such a source.

Because  of the immense and unknown hydrological patterns associated
with natural pollution in ground water, there appears to be little oppor-
tunity of preventing such contamination. For  instance, it is  theoretically
possible  to prevent recharge to salt-bearing formations and prevent fur-
ther leaching of brines to the surface; however, the practical problems
of finding and sealing thousands of square miles of recharge areas pre-
clude serious consideration except in very  unique small areas.

                         Oil Field Brines

In 1969 the states of the project area produced over 70 percent of the
total United States crude oil from more than 300,000 producing wells.59_/
Each oil or gas well is a potential or actual  source  of pollution to
                                83

-------
 aquifers because of improper control of gas, oil,  salt water, or the
 many chemicals used in drilling and production operations. Production
 of crude oil is usually accompanied by the production of wastewater of
 variable but usually high chloride content.  The amount of this salt
 water produced is also quite variable and may range from zero to as
 much as a dozen or more barrels of brine for each barrel of oil pro-
 duced.   This ratio generally increases with the age of the well and is
 fairly high in the south central states.  In 1963 the five states of the
 project area produced about 1.8 billion barrels of oil and slightly over
 5 billion barrels of brine water .607  Since oil was discovered in 1902,
 Texas alone has produced over 31 billion barrels of crude oil—36 per-
 cent of the total U.S. production.597

 Until about the last decade, the common methods of oil field brine dis-
 posal consisted of discharge to streams or to "evaporation" ponds.  In
 both cases, brine-contaminated aquifers became commonplace in most
 or all areas of oil production as infiltration from the streams and ponds
 moved to the ground water. Thousands of unlined brine pits were in
 use in the five state area until only  a few years ago when they were
 prohibited by the oil regulatory agencies of the respective states.
 Texas was one of the first states to enact a state-wide ban on unlined
 pits in January 1969, and other states have adopted similar regulations.
 Despite this ban, and the fact that few of the brine contaminated areas
 have been mapped, enough have been located to indicate a serious
 ground-water pollution problem for many years to come. Because of
 the slow movement of ground water, brine-contaminated ground water
 is only now being discovered in many areas of oil development aban-
 doned 20 or 30 or more years ago.  It is probable that such discoveries
 will continue for many years.  It is  also apparent that even if no more
 brine contamination occurs, the slow ground-water movement will
 require many years and even centuries for natural cleansing  and
 rehabilitation of the aquifers .

 With the ban on unlined evaporation pits, oil companies were forced to
 construct pits lined with an impervious material.  Brines theoretically
 must now be evaporated or injected back into the  subsurface, either
 back into the oil-bearing formation or into another formation far enough
 removed from fresh water aquifers to prevent contamination.  Neverthe-
 less , there are numerous reported and suspected violations of these
 regulations, primarily by economically marginal oil producers.  Such
 violations may be in the form of bypassing brine pits, by accidental or
 deliberate rupture of pit liners, overflowing waste pits, or by leakage
 from broken lines.

Another problem has been the inadequate design of brine disposal wells.
It has been common practice in the past to use abandoned production
                                84

-------
wells for brine disposal.  Since the wells were not designed, cased or
cemented for brine injection, there have been numerous instances of
injection wells with undetected ruptures beneath the surface where
injected brines have seeped into fresh water aquifers for many years
before being discovered.  Some state regulatory agencies have some-
what alleviated this problem by requiring injection tubing inside a
casing filled with an inhibited fluid under pressure so that ruptures
can be detected by changes in the fluid pressures.

Currently, most oil field brines are returned to subsurface formations
either for waterflooding—increasing the pressure in an oil producing
formation—or just as a disposal method. However, even with properly
designed and constructed injection wells, brine disposal is not without
real or potential problems.  Much of the problem results from the nature
of early oil exploration and to abandoned and inadequately plugged oil,
gas, and injection wells.  Thousands of such wells are scattered through-
out much of the project area.  For many years of oil exploration, it was
a common practice to abandon test holes without proper plugging—
thereby leaving a vertical pathway of contact between the various sub-
surface formations.

The contamination problems inherent in such a ground-water environ-
ment are apparent. Whether the source of the brine is injection from
the surface or natural brines in a subsurface formation, unplugged  wells
offer a connection to the fresh water aquifer.  In some cases, artesian
pressure alone may be adequate to force salt water up the well and into
the fresh water aquifer.   In other cases, injection of brine into the for-
mation may increase the pressure sufficiently to move formation salt
water up the well.

Some idea of the magnitude and location of oil field brine problems can
be obtained by looking at the crude oil production. Of the estimated
74,000 salt water injection wells in the United States in 1970, about
one-half of these were in  Texas alone with another 15,000 in Oklahoma,
and over 1,000 in Arkansas .61/ In the  five-state area,  365 of the 502
counties have produced some oil or gas.  The  only large nonproductive
areas are in Arkansas and New Mexico.  New Mexico produces from the
northwest and southeast portions of the state—the great majority of the
production is in Lea County alone. Arkansas oil production is in the
extreme southern portion of the state with additional gas fields in a few
west central  counties.  One major area of oil production is along  the
Gulf Coast of Texas and Louisiana. In fact,  almost 95 percent of
Louisiana's oil production is along the Gulf Coast. As indicated in
Figure 18, other areas of  much production include northeast Texas and
an area approximately parallel to the coast but extending from west
Texas  and southeastern New Mexico across Texas and central Oklahoma.
                                85

-------
00
       BARRELS PER DAY
                                           FIGURE 18.  CRUDE OIL PRODUCTION

-------
Although there are no reliable statistics on the total number of wells
drilled in the five-state area since oil production began, there were
more than 15,000 test wells drilled in Texas in 1963, and more than
half of these were abandoned without completion. 60/ The percentage
of dry holes and the more than 300,000 producing wells, plus an un-
known number of depleted wells, would indicate that more than
1,000,-000 holes may have been drilled in the five ;;tates in search of
oil and gas.  If the wells were distributed evenly,  there would be
almost two per square mile over the entire five states.

Many streams have been contaminated by salt water from the disposal
of oil field brines and ground water lying adjacent to these streams is
subject to salt water intrustion.  Arkansas streams that have been most
affected are in the southern part of the state and include Bodcaw,
Cornie, Smackover,  and Lapile Creek, Bayous Dorcheat, and the
southern reaches of the Ouachita River. 63_/  In Oklahoma, the Arkansas,
Canadian, Cimarron and Red Rivers and many of their  tributaries have
been affected.  Similarly, most of the major streams in  Texas, especially
the Brazos and Pecos Rivers, have been contaminated by oil field brines.

Examples  of ground-water pollution from oil field brines are legion in
many parts  of the five-state area, especially Texas and Oklahoma, and
many cases  are documented in published and open-file  reports of the
respective state regulatory agencies . Brine pits, both active and
abandoned,  have been implicated as sources of ground water pollution
in Baylor  64/,  Cochran, Colorado, Comanche 65/,  Cook, Dawson 66/,
Ector 67/, Gaines, Glasscock 68/, Harris 697, Karnes,  Knox,
Montague  TO/, Pecos, Matagordo, Runnels 71/, Rusk 72/, Victoria 73/,
Wilbarger 74/, Wilson and Winkler Counties in Texas, just to name a
few.

Much ground water in eastern Oklahoma has been contaminated by oil
field brine pits, notably in Garvin,  Pontotoc and Seminole,  Oklahoma,
Pottawatomie, Lincoln, Okfuskie and Creek Counties.  Several munici-
palities in this area of Oklahoma, including Shawnee, Stroud, Meeker
and  Chandler,  have had to abandon ground water supplies in favor of
surface water sources.  The ground water sources have either been
polluted directly by leakage from brine pits or brines entering the
Canadian River from the oil fields have recharged the aquifer along
its course and subsequently contaminated the municipal wells. 75_/

In Lea County, New Mexico, an aquifer contaminated by a leaking brine
disposal pit has been renovated by pumping the salt water from the
fresh water  aquifer and using the contaminated water for waterflooding
in a  nearby  oilfield.76/  In Miller County, Arkansas, remedial measures
and economic damage have been examined for an aquifer contaminated
by both a brine pit and a faulty brine disposal well.77/


                               87

-------
Brine injection wells, both waterflood and disposal wells have also
demonstrated their capacity for pollution in Coleman County, Texas,78/
where salt water from a waterflooding operation has moved through
inadequately plugged oil test wells and into the Trinity Formation.
Similar problems from brine disposal wells have been noted in
Karnes, Victoria 73/, and Wilbarger 74/ Counties, Texas, and Garvin
County, Oklahoma. In Wood County, Texas, brine and gas were found
to leak through fault zones into fresh water.  In Shackelford County,
Texas, salt water seeps at the ground surface resulted  from brine dis-
posal wells.

                        Well Construction
 Improperly constructed wells are a threat to the quality of ground water
 throughout the project area and are sometimes considered the major
 cause of ground-water pollution.  Such wells offer an avenue of contami-
 nation to fresh water aquifers from a variety of surface sources or from
 subsurface formations of inferior quality water.

 Contamination from surface sources is possible where the casing is not
 properly sealed to an adequate depth below the ground surface. Such
 contamination problems are prevalent in cavernous limestone areas
 such as the Edwards Plateaus in Texas and the Ozark Plateaus of
 Arkansas.  The most serious problems result from improperly con-
 structed wells that penetrate formations with undesirable quality water.
 If the confining strata are not properly sealed, the poor quality water
 may move up or down the well, depending on the hydraulic gradients,
 and into fresh water aquifers as shown in Figure 19.  Pumping of the
 fresh water will increase this movement.  These conditions exist through-
 out the five states and some of the more notable problems are along the
 Gulf Coast  in both Texas  and Louisiana, in the Winter garden area south-
 west of San Antonio and in east Texas. The Trinity Sands in the heavily
 pumped Sherman, Texas  area has shown signs of  salt water encroach-
 ment from overlying saline formations because of improper plugging of
 oil and water test holes. 35/

 Uncased or unplugged wells or wells with rusted or leaky casing,
 especially those abandoned, further complicate the pollution problem.
 As noted in the preceding section, thousands of these wells dot the
 region.  Many are water wells but most are exploration and oil produc-
 tion wells that may penetrate many formations of both good and bad
 quality water in addition  to oil and gas formations. Although the states
 of the project area now have regulations calling for proper plugging of
wells to isolate zones of oil and gas and zones of good water and saline
water, thousands of abandoned, unmarked wells cannot even be
located.  Because of the time elapsed, the different legal conditions
under which they were drilled,  changes in property ownership, etc.,
responsibility for plugging cannot be determined for many of these
wells that are located.

-------
      Pumping
       Well
                    Corrpded
                    Casing
                           Abandoned
                          Unplugged Hole
                        ;acej)f_Sgljnejygter_Agulfer
                            «>o0  ooo o coo  °0ovc o ro  0«0o-

                           CSALINE WATER" FORMATION?"! fT^T ° » °'
                              «_-°o~_o» ~ „ '« I I  °_ . o .
         UPWARD FLOW THROUGH  OPEN, UNSEALED, OR CORRODED

                               CASING
        Pumping
      00
 o

O 0

                    Corroded
                    Cosing
             Piezomefric
           o °   o «
           0  o  o ° °.
             0   ° ^^-*
                     o V
                           Abandoned
                          Unplugged Hole
                              If
Surface of Pol luteOo  D0o
«%'>OLLUTED OR  SALINE
^ °  . •  c FORMATION <^!g-^.
                           IMPERMEABLE FORMATION
    DOWNWARD LEAKAGE THROUGH OPEN, UNSEALED, OR CORRODED

                                 CASING
   FIGURE 19   UPWARD FLOW AND DOWNWARD LEAKAGE THROUGH OPEN,
                UNSEALED/ OR CORRODED CASINGS
                                   89

-------
Unplugged wells and artesian brine aquifers have resulted in reported
flowing salt water wells in Knox, Hopkins, and Young Counties, Texas.
In Hopkins County, one abandoned oil test hole was flowing between
100 and 125 barrels per day of brine water before it was plugged.  Salt
water has moved into fresh water zones via poorly constructed or un-
plugged wells in Crockett, Duval 80/, Fisher 81/,  Glasscock 687,
Runnels 71/, and Scurry 82/ Counties, Texas.  Examples of natural
gas contamination due to faulty well construction can be found in
Caldwell 83/ ,  Bastrop 797, Comanche 84/, and Wharton 8_5/ Counties.
Sea water was found to move through an abandoned water well into the
fresh water zone in the Trinity Bay area of Chambers County, Texas.
                                                '                    •. •
Texas and New Mexico now have water well driller licensing laws which
specify rules and regulations for plugging of wells that encounter undesir-
able water. New wells are located on maps and logs  are filed with the
appropriate state regulatory agency in each state.

                          Overpumping

Ground-water depletion is sometimes considered the  only result of over-
pumping but water quality deterioration is more often the first and major
detrimental effect on an aquifer.  As discussed in an earlier section on
natural pollution,  saline water can be found at some level at most loca-
tions in the five states of the project area. In many locations, there is
a direct interface between fresh and saline ground water such as beneath
the gulf coast of Texas and Louisiana.  However, many inland fresh water
aquifers also are in direct contact with saline water.  In most cases, the
heavier, saline water underlies the fresh water. Therefore, where
wells are too deep or where excessive pumping reverses the hydraulic
gradient,  saline water may be drawn into zones formerly composed of
fresh water.

Overpumping is a  common problem throughout eastern New Mexico,
western Texas and Oklahoma, and much of Louisiana and eastern
Arkansas.  Figure 20 shows the depth to the base of the fresh water in
the Coastal Plain of Arkansas. Care must be taken while drilling and
pumping wells in this area to avoid pumping the saline waters which
lie below the fresh water.  The flow lines in Figure 21 demonstrate how
salt water can migrate up into the fresh water zone when a well is pumped.
As Overpumping lowers the water table and the relative thickness 6f the
fresh water zone, the movement of salt water up into the well becomes
more pronounced.

The potential for horizontal movement of salt water caused by overpump-
ing is typified in Figure 22.  This is a generalized section showing the
principal aquifers  south of the Baton Rouge as  they dip gently in the
direction of the Gulf Coast.86/ Fresh water has entered the aquifers
in the recharge area and flushed out salt water originally occurring
                                 90

-------
LITTLE mvEFNSi'*'!3'fEAB> NEVADA
LESS THAN 500
500 TO  1000
1000 TO 1500
1500 TO 2000
2000 JO 2500
GREATER THAN 2500
       FIGURE 20.  APPROXIMATE DEPTHS  TO THE BASE OF FRESH WATER  IN ARKANSAS

-------
                             lift^SSSSSSSSS
FIGURE 21.  MIGRATION OF SALT WATER UP INTO THE FRESH WATER ZONE
                    WHEN A WELL IS PUMPED
              • Fresh Water
               Salt Water
    FIGURE  22,  POTENTIAL FOR HORIZONTAL MOVEMENT OF SALT WATER
                     CAUSED BY OVERPUMPING
                               92

-------
there.  Salt water fronts in each aquifer generally parallel and are
typical of aquifers along the Texas-Louisiana Coast.  Excessive pumping
of these aquifers in some locations has lowered the hydrostatic pressure
so that the salt water fronts are moving inland.  Salt-water encroachment
has been especially prevalent in the Baton Rouge and Lake Charles
areas of Louisiana and in the Houston, Galveston-Texas City, and
Matagorda-Lavaca Bay areas of Texas.

Heavy withdrawals for irrigation along the Pecos River Valley, espe-
cially in Pecos and Reeves Counties of Texas have caused similar gra-
dient reversals along the Pecos River. Normally, the fresh water
aquifer discharges water to the river  but with the lowered water tables,
highly mineralized water from the river and adjacent formations is
recharging the aquifer.

Also in Texas, overpumping has resulted in salt water intrusion of the
Beaumont clay aquifer in Brazoria County, the Seymour Formation in
Knox County, the Chicot aquifer in Orange County 87/, and the alluvium
in Ward County. 88/

                     Irrigation Return Flows

Irrigation return flow is water diverted for irrigation purposes that
finds its way back into a supply.  Through irrigation return flow,
salts are concentrated by evapotranspiration and other substances are
conveyed from irrigated lands to the ground water by infiltration.
Pollutants in irrigation return flows may come from many sources
before, during, and after irrigation.  These sources include animals,
soils, fertilizers, pesticides, industrial and municipal wastes, and
even natural sources such as fixed nitrogen from lightening, etc.

Whenever water is diverted for irrigation use, the quality of the return
flow is  degraded. In irrigation, pure water  is extracted by the plants
from the water supply, resulting in a  concentration of those dissolved
solids which are characteristic of all natural water supplies.  In addi-
tion, much of the water applied to the  soil is evaporated leaving the
dissolved minerals on or near the land surface where they  may be
leached to the ground water.

All irrigation water contains dissolved minerals (salts)  and some of
these salts will accumulate in the soil unless leached from it by excess
irrigation water or by natural precipitation.  The major pollution prob-
lems associated with irrigation return  flows in the project area are in
the arid portions of Oklahoma, New Mexico and Texas where water is
in short supply.  Natural precipitation in this region is  insufficient to
leach the salts from the soil and excess irrigation is generally adequate
only to move the salts from the topsoil  to the subsoil or to the ground
                                93

-------
water.  However, while increasing salt concentration, irrigation may
remove other pollutants. Nutrients and other organic wastes deposited
on land with irrigation water may be used by the crop, fixed by the
soil, or degraded so that they are not contained in the irrigation return
flow.

Irrigated agriculture provides the economic base for much of the south
central states, especially western Texas and Oklahoma and eastern and
central New Mexico. The 1969 acreages under irrigation in the five
states of the project area are given in Table 13 and the major irrigation
areas are indicated in Figure 23.
            Table 13.  IRRIGATED ACREAGE IN 1969 897

                Arkansas                   1,435,000
                Louisiana                     580,687
                New Mexico                 1,000,000
                Oklahoma                     619,278
                Texas                      8,200,000
The major area of water quality deterioration from irrigation return flows
in the project area is the Rio Grande Basin in New Mexico and Texas.
Other problem areas caused by irrigation return flows include the Pecos
River in New Mexico and Texas and the Arkansas River in Oklahoma and
Arkansas. Of possible future significance is the proposed Navajo irriga-
tion project in the San Juan River Basin of northwestern New Mexico and
the Concho irrigation project in the Canadian River Basin of northeastern
New Mexico.

There were over two million irrigated acres in the Rio Grande Basin in
1969.89/  Essentially all of this irrigation is scattered along the arid
expanse of the 1,900 miles of river from southern Colorado to the Gulf
of Mexico. Because the river water is used over and over again,  each
successive use further degrades the water quality which generally
becomes progressively worse downstream. Also because of the close
interrelationship between the surface water and ground water in the
river alluvium, there is a tendency for the quality to deteriorate down-
stream both in surface water and ground water.

Diversions for irrigation occur throughout the length  of the Rio Grande
both in New Mexico and Texas and a close correlation exists between
the irrigated  areas, decreased discharge, and increased salt load of
                                94

-------
Ul

                                                            K Southwestern
                                                                Oklahomo
                                                                  North-Central
                                                                    Texas
                                                          (^•V^^yV-Lower Rio Grande Valley
                      FJOi.IRE  J'i,   HAJOR IRRIGATION AREAS OF  THE FIVE SOURI"CFNiRA., STATIC

-------
the river.  Between Otowi Bridge near Santa Fe, New Mexico and Fort
Quitman, Texas south of El Paso, there are more than 250,000 irrigated
acres.  While the flow in this stretch of river is decreased to one-fifth
of its original value, the dissolved solids concentration is increased
almost tenfold and the total salt load is almost doubled, as shown in
Table 14.897
   Table 14. MEAN ANNUAL DISCHARGE AND DISSOLVED SOLIDS
            CONCENTRATIONS AT SUCCESSIVE LOCATIONS
            ALONG THE RIO GRANDE

                                                 Dissolved
                                  Discharge        Solids

    Otowi Bridge, New Mexico       1079             221
    San Marcial, New Mexico         853             449
    Elephant Butte,  New Mexico       790             478
    Caballo Dam,  New Mexico         781             515
    Leasburg  Dam, New Mexico       743             551
    El Paso, Texas                   525             787
    Fort Quitman, Texas              203            1691
Irrigation return flow is also one of the major reasons for the highly
mineralized ground and surface waters of the Pecos Valley in both New
Mexico and Texas.  Because of the water-short climate of the Pecos
Valley,  the importance of the ground water to the general hydrologic
system is greater than in most stream valleys.  In most parts of the
Pecos Basin, water used for irrigation is already relatively high in
mineral content. Return of excess irrigation water to the hydrological
system further concentrates these minerals but this return flow is
critical to an already negative water balance in the basin. The major
irrigation areas in the basin are near Roswell and Carlsbad, New
Mexico and near Pecos,  Texas.

The San Juan River Basin in northwestern New Mexico is a part of the
project area where irrigation return flows may  seriously affect the
ground water in the future. The Navajo Indian Irrigation Project now
under construction will irrigate 110,000 acres in the San Juan  Basin.
There is some concern that salts may be concentrated in the irrigation
return flows by leaching of the gypsiferous  deposits of the area as well
as by the irrigation process .
                                96

-------
There are other large areas of irrigation in the region but return flows
from these do not pose the threat to the ground water that the aforemen-
tioned areas do.  The greatest effect on quality of surface and subse-
quently ground water is during periods of low flow in the streams so
common to the Rio Grande and Pecos.

In the High Plains geographic region of Texas and New Mexico, very
little of the return flow rejoins  the river systems.  Most of the leachate.
rejoins the ground water but because of the high quality of the ground
water, the large storage capacity of the underground reservoirs and
the kind of geologic formations present, the effect of the return flow
on the ground-water quality has hardly been noticeable. However, as
the amount of water in the Ogallala Aquifer decreases, the effect of
irrigation return flow on quality of the ground water will increase.

There is considerable irrigation in the gulf coastal area of Texas and
Louisiana as  well as the Mississippi Valley of Arkansas.  However, these
are regions of excess precipitation and irrigation return flows are not a
large part of the hydrological system.  Most of these return flows are
highly diluted with precipitation, with high capacity ground-water
reservoirs and by streams in the area so that the mineralization effect
on water quality is minimal  or, at the worst, a local problem. An un-
known factor could be  the effect of agricultural chemicals such as
pesticides and herbicides where return flows may reach the ground
water.  There is very little  data related to this subject but one study in
the Texas high plains indicated little pesticide or herbicide contamination
of agricultural runoff water. 90/

                   Land Application of Wastes

Wastewaters have been applied to land in some manner since the inception
of water  carriage systems.  Sometimes application to the land has been
designed such as with septic tank-soil absorption systems,  infiltration-
percolating systems, spray-runoff systems and cropland irrigation
systems.  Oftentimes, land application has been incidental to the waste
disposal such as seepage from sewers, waste-filled streams or just
spills.

Although land systems have been used for both municipal and industrial
wastewaters for many years, most have been relatively small scale with
major emphasis on disposal.91/ However, within the last few years,
there has been an upsurge of interest in land systems for treatment
and/or reuse of wastewaters.

Cesspools, disposal pits and sewage farms were the early methods  of
land disposal.  Septic tank-soil absorption systems have largely
                                97

-------
replaced cesspools for individual homes and remain the greatest single
use of soil for wastewater disposal at the present time.  "Sewage farm"
is a term which is not used much anymore because of its repugnance to
the general population but the principal of using municipal effluents
for irrigation is very much in evidence throughout the United States.
This is demonstrated by the construction of a 90 million gallon per day
system to spray-irrigate about 6,000 acres of farmland in Muskegon
County, Michigan with municipal and industrial wastes.

Thomas and Harlin 92/ grouped the most promising approaches to land
spreading into three categories:  (1) infiltration-percolation, (2) crop-
land irrigation, or (3) spray-runoff. Cropland irrigation is a well-
established practice in the project area and has developed because of a
need for water as well as a waste-management approach.  According to
a 1965 survey, many municipalities in Texas have practiced cropland
irrigation continuously for over 30 years—some as long as 70 or  80
years.93_/  Over  160 towns and cities in the five south central states
use sewage effluent for land application  and the great majority, includ-
ing San Antonio, Amarillo, Abilene and Lubbock,  Texas, practice
irrigation of cropland, parks, golf courses  and cemeteries.

Despite the long history of use, there is little information relating to the
effect on ground-water  quality. The nature of wastewater irrigation is
to use much more water than is generally used from  fresh water sources
and a substantial portion of the applied wastewater percolates through
the soil to the ground water. The limited data available indicate  that
over-irrigation with municipal wastewater can  contribute to undesirable
levels of nitrate in the ground water. Lubbock, Texas has been using
cropland irrigation of municipal effluent for several  years and reportedly
has developed  a mound of relatively high nitrate water under the irriga-
tion  area. 94/  A similar problem has developed at Hobbs, New Mexico.95/
Despite nitrate problems, there appears to be little other ground-water
quality problems associated with irrigation with either treated or un-
treated municipal effluents but there is a general lack of quantitative
data as a basis for this judgment.

Infiltration-percolation systems have also been used for many years as
a disposal practice with little effort to maximize the treatment capability.
However, within the last few years, considerable  interest and  research
has been directed toward optimizing the treatment capability.   Infiltration-
percolation systems are designed for high hydraulic loading rates,
require rapidly permeable soils and length of drying and wetting periods
greatly influences the treatment efficiency,  especially nitrogen removal.
Since crops and plants are not involved, the treatment efficiency is
entirely dependent on the filtering and ion-exchange action of the soil.
Because essentially all of the wastewater percolates  to the ground water,
the influence on ground water quality is significant.
                                 98

-------
Except for septic tank systems, infiltration-percolation systems are not
widely used in the five-state area.  However, septic tank systems are
widely used and constitute a significant ground-water problem through-
out the region.  State authorities in New Mexico consider septic tanks
to be the major contributor to ground-water pollution in the Albuquerque
area as well as many rural areas.  The major problem in the Rio Grande
Valley at Albuquerque is the high water tables and the high concentra-
tion of septic tanks in the valley. It is estimated that there are 25,000
septic tanks in southern Albuquerque. 95_/  Water wells in this area are
also shallow and many are contaminated with chlorides,  nitrates and
coliform organisms.

Of growing concern is the tremendous growth of mountain homesites in
the Rocky Mountains of New Mexico where septic tanks are used but
soil and geologic conditions are not conducive to efficient removal of
pollutants.  Similar problems occur in many other rural areas of New
Mexico as well as the other states of the project area.  In 1960, 27 per-
cent of the housing units in New Mexico used septic tanks or cesspools.
The percentage was 25, 38, 24, and 28 for the states of Arkansas,
Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas, respectively.%/  It is unlikely  that
these percentages have changed significantly since  1960.

The overall effect of these infiltration-percolation systems can only be
estimated but it is apparent that they can be a source of  ground-water
pollution  in some areas under some conditions. In areas such as the
Edwards Plateau in central Texas where porous limestone formations
predominate near the surface, septic tanks are of great concern.  Also
in areas where the ground-water table is near the surface, such as the
Albuquerque Valley and the Coastal areas of Texas and Louisiana,
septic tanks are considered significant causes of ground-water problems.

Bacterial  contamination from septic tanks has been noted in ground
waters of Atacosa 57/, Newton 9_?/> Jack, Montague, Travis 98/,
McLennan, Potter 99/, Stephens, and Knox Counties in Texas, as well
as Bernalillo County", New Mexico.

Certainly the  soil has demonstrated a tremendous capacity for absorbing
and degrading both industrial and municipal wastewaters. Problems
with infiltration-percolation systems such as septic  tanks arise when
not enough soil contact time is available before the waste reaches  the
ground water. This condition results both in areas of high ground-
water tables and areas of porous rock formations.
                                     I
Spray-runoff  is a relatively recent approach to land disposal which has
found most application to industrial wastes. This technique  is most
                                99

-------
 suitable to use on tight soils where more than half of the applied waste-
 water is returned directly to the surface water as controlled runoff.
 Treatment efficiency depends on physical, chemical, and biochemical
 processes that take place as the liquid trickles slowly along the soil
 surfaces.

 Of all the land treatment or disposal systems, spray-runoff probably
 has the least effect on ground-water quality because most of the applied
 wastewater runs off the surface and much of the remainder is lost
 through evapotranspiration. In a well-operated system, the fraction
 of wastewater that does reach the ground water is of good quality.  The
 Campbell Soup Company of Paris, Texas treats about three MGD of
 cannery wastewaters on about 300 acres of specially prepared grass-
 land   Ithout any discernible deterioration of ground-water quality. 100/

 With  the increasing pressure to clean up waste effluents and the
 increasing interest in recycling processes,  it is probable that soil
 treatment systems will increase in popularity,  especially in the project
 area  because of suitable year-around temperatures.   The limiting
 factor in all these soil systems  appears to be the nitrogen concentra-
 tions in the effluents.

                           Solid Wastes
In 1967 there was an estimated 10 pounds of household, commercial
and industrial solid wastes generated each day for every man, woman
and child in the United States . Of this amount, more than half was
collected by municipal and private waste collection agencies for recycle,
processing  and/or disposal.  Landfilling, the most prevalent method of
disposal in  the United States  accounted for over 90 percent of the
collected solid waste at an estimated 12,000 individual landfill sites. 101/

The project area is rather typical of the rest of the United States in
respect to solid waste management and mismanagement. Open dumps
and burning was formerly the accepted method of disposal.  The tend-
ency has been to locate dumps and landfills in abandoned  gravel pits
or other low-lying areas where ground-water is in contact with or at
least in close proximity to the waste materials.

With increased emphasis on curbing air pollution and nuisance condi-
tions related to open dumps,  more attention is being given to converting
such operations to sanitary landfills. A  sanitary landfill can generally
be described as a disposal operation where solid wastes are dumped
into an excavated area and covered over daily without causing pollu-
tion or nuisance conditions.

Although few landfills meet this relatively simple criteria, there are very
few reported case histories of serious contamination of ground water that
                              100

-------
can be directly attributable to leachates from sanitary landfills.  In
Harris County, Texas, a garbage dump was reported to be the source
of ammonia nitrogen contamination in ground water. 102/ There  are
undoubtedly many more unreported cases of people routinely using
water contaminated somewhat by land disposal of solid wastes.

Precipitation, surface water runoff characteristics, evapotranspiration,
the location and movement of ground water, and solid waste content all
determine characteristics of leachates from landfills.  However,  the
literature confirms that such leachates usually contain high concentra-
tions of total dissolved solids, calcium, magnesium, BOD, acidity and
alkalinity and gases such as carbon dioxide and methane.  The lack of
reported serious problems can be attributed to the great capacity of
most soils to attenuate the contaminated leachates generated from land-
fill operations and possibly to the lack of monitoring of landfill operations

The soil provides sites for the microbial degradation of the organics
as well as a surface where inorganics are adsorbed and ion exchange
reactions replace the more undesirable ones.  The extremely low
velocity of ground water movement provides the time necessary for
these reactions and confines most of the degradation processes to the
immediate vicinity of the landfill. The soluble degradation products
are further attenuated by the vastness of ground-water formations
simply by dilution.

Ground-water pollution by solid wastes becomes a problem because
this attenuation process does not work efficiently for all geological
formations. In unconsolidated formations of coarse sand and gravels
with high permeabilities or consolidated formations such as limestone
or shale with fissures, faults or fractures, not enough time is available
to complete the degradation process.  Ground-water flow is often fast
enough in these types of formations to permit poorly degraded and
diluted leachates to appear at considerable distances from the landfill
or dump site.

The major solid waste threat to ground-water  quality in the future  will
probably be from the land disposal of industrial wastes.  Many such
wastes decompose slowly or not at all and can impart odor, taste, and
even toxic characteristics to ground water at extremely low concentra-
tions .  With the increased amount and complexity of solid industrial
wastes produced and the trend toward more stringent surface water
quality standards, many more industries will  probably look to land for
industrial waste disposal. 103/  There may be  practically no basis for
establishing guidelines for disposal of many of these new compounds.
The part of the project area most likely to encounter such problems is
along the gulf coast of Texas and Louisiana where the chemical and
petrochemical industries are concentrated.
                                101

-------
Almost unnoticed because they are generally located in sparsely popu-
lated areas, mining and mineral processing wastes are generated in
the United States at four times the rate of municipal wastes.  These
wastes include mine wastes, mill tailings, washing plant rejects, pro-
cessing wastes, and slag and fly ash.104/  Mining and milling wastes
that cannot be reclaimed are generally disposed of on the soil, thereby
creating the potential for leaching of contaminants into the ground
water.

New Mexico has considerable mining activity with uranium in McKinley
and Valencia Counties, copper in Grant County, molybdenum in Taos
County  and potash in  Eddy and Lea Counties.  Arkansas mines sulfur
from  Lafayette, Columbia, and Union Counties; bauxite from Saline and
Pulaski Counties; and mercury from Pike County. Oklahoma produces
copper from Jackson County and zinc from Ottawa County.  In addition,
processing mills for zinc and associated minerals  are located in Black-
well , Henryetta, Bartlesville, and Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Most of Louisiana's mining is limited to sulfur and other nonmetals.
Sulfur is mined in Plaquemines, Terrebonne, and Calcasieu Parishes.
Salt is mined in several parishes and Louisiana is one of the leading salt
producing states in the United States.

Texas has a varied assortment of mining and milling activities
scattered throughout the state.  Mercury is mined in Brewster and
Presidio Counties, iron ore—usually from open pits—is mined in
Cherokee, Morris, Cass, and Nachodoches Counties.  Sulfur is mined
from  several counties including Liberty, Jefferson, Pecos, Culberson,
Fort Bend, Brazoria,  Andrews, Ector, Hockley, Van Zandt,  Wood,
Metagorda, Wharton and Franklin.  As noted earlier,  Karnes County
has some uranium mining.  Mills for processing the different metals
are located in Calhoun, Milam, Webb, Neuces, El  Paso, Morris, Harris,
Brazoria, Galveston,  Potter, and Moore Counties.

Another source of solid waste is agriculture which generates nearly 10
times as much wastes  as municipalities. About three-fourths of this is
animal manure which  is discussed in a later section but about one-fourth
includes such items as logging debris, crop residues, and food pro-
cessing wastes. 104/

              Evapotranspiration by Native Vegetation

Water-loving plants that derive their water by sending roots down to
the water table are sometimes referred to as phreatophytes,  especially
if they consume large amounts of water without commensurate benefits
to man.  Phreatophytes do not belong to any specific plant family but
                                102

-------
 the common characteristic is their heavy use of a large supply of water.
 They occupy about 15 million acres of land in the western states. In
 New Mexico 300,000 acres of phreatophytes are estimated to use 900,000
 acre-feet of water, and in Texas 262,000 acres are estimated to use about
 436,500 acre-feet of water per year. IPS/

 The effect of phreatophytes  on ground-water quality is the same as  from
 evaporation—the concentration of minerals.  Generally, transpiration of
 water by plants is greater than evaporation from bare soil because roots
 of many plants lift water much higher than it can be lifted by the capil-
 lary action of the soil.  Depending on the type of vegetation, mineral
 content of the ground water, depth to water table, soil texture, length
 of growing season, hours of daylight, temperature, rainfall and humidity,
 phreatophytes may transpire as much as 10 acre-feet per acre of water
 each year. Generally, water use is greatest  during a long, hot  growing
 season, with little precipitation and low humidity and a ground-water
 table near the surface.

 Obviously, phreatophytes exert their greatest effect on water quality in
 water-short areas such as the deserts of New Mexico and west Texas
 and where the water table is near the surface.  The greatest effect is
 felt along the Rio Grande and Pecos Rivers of New Mexico and Texas.
 It was estimated by the Pecos River Compact  Commission in  1949, that
 if 15,000 acres of salt cedar on the delta above Lake McMillan could be
 controlled, an additional 39,000 acre-feet of water annually  might be
 added to the water in the Pecos River.

 Phreatophytes also occur extensively in the humid sections of the pro-
 ject area and use great amounts of water. However, because of the
 greater rainfall, the effect on water supplies  and quality is proportion-
 ately less serious than in the more arid areas.

                          Animal Wastes

 Animal waste is a relatively new environmental problem—at least on the
 large scale of today.  Until 10 or 15 years ago, most beef animals were
 raised on pasture land where wastes were easily assimilated into the soil
 without significant surface or ground-water contamination.  With the
 increasing demand for more and better quality meat, livestock producers
 have responded with thousands of large concentrated feeding operations.
 During 1972 there were over two million beef cattle in feedlots in Texas
 and most of these were located in feedlots of 1,000 to 50,000 head capac-
,ity.

 During a beef animal's stay  of 120-150 days in a feedlot, it will produce
 over a half-ton of manure on a dry weight basis.  The heavy concentra-
 tions of animals overtaxes the natural assimilative capacity of the
                                 103

-------
receiving soil.  Rainfall runoff that conies in contact with the manure
carries high concentrations of various pollutants into receiving ponds
and streams.  Ground water can then be contaminated by leachate from
the receiving ponds and streams or from the feedlot itself.

There remains considerable controversy regarding the extent of the
effect of feedlots on ground-water quality.  Nitrates in high concentra-
tions have been found under some feedlots in some soil profiles.  In
Corgell County, Texas, a feedlot was considered a  source of contamina-
tion to the Paluxy Aquifer.HNS/ The Texas Water Quality Board, the
state agency regulating waste discharges in Texas, is concerned enough
,to require permeability tests of soils under  newly constructed feedlot
runoff collection ponds.  When such soils indicate excessive permea-
bility, lining of waste holding ponds with a relatively impermeable
material is required.

Fortunately, from a ground-water standpoint, about three-fourths of the
fed cattle in the five states are located in feedlots in the panhandle area
of northwest Texas and western Oklahoma where relatively deep ground-
water tables, low rainfall amounts and impermeable soil barriers combine
to restrict the downward movement of waste leachates. Analysis of
ground-water samples from beneath 80 feedlots in this area indicated
little contamination reaching the water table. 107/ It was determined that
local surficial material and regional soils patterns are closely related to
quality of ground water beneath feedlots.

Large feedlots are scattered over much more of the project area and
several are probably located on geologic formations conducive  to
ground-water pollution. For example, in the Edwards Plateau  of
central Texas, relatively shallow soils overlie porous limestone forma-
tions which could recharge feedlot pollutants to the ground water before
they can be assimilated by the soil.

Permeability and depth to the water table are the major considerations
for feedlot location because permeability controls the rate of movement of
water and pollutants that might be with it and both control the time of
travel.  Given time to react with the soil,  most pollutants will be removed
from feedlot leachates by a combination of sorption, biodegradation and
even dilution.  Even though nitrogen converted to nitrates is very
mobile in ground water, given time and the  proper  soil medium, bio-
logical denitrification can reduce the nitrates before they reach the
ground water.

Although the potential for localized pollution of a water table aquifer
with nitrates is great under animal feeding areas, the limited acreage
of feedlots in most areas makes widespread  ground-water pollution
unlikely.
                                104

-------
                         Waste Lagoons

Lagoons or ponds are one of the oldest forms of wastewater storage and
disposal and perhaps should be rated higher as a cause of ground-water
pollution.  However, the most significant pollution in the subject five
state area has been caused by so-called evaporation ponds for oil field
brines and these were discussed in an earlier section.  In reality, most
"evaporation" ponds were actually seepage pits. Only in arid western
Texas and Oklahoma and eastern New Mexico is evaporation adequate to
evaporate large volumes of water.

Lagoons have been used for  many other  wastes in addition to oil field
brines. They have been used extensively for municipal wastes, animal
wastes, and practically every type of industrial waste,  especially as
regulations concerning  stream discharge have become more strict.
Thousands of sewage lagoons are scattered throughout the five state
area and undoubtedly contribute much seepage to the ground water.
Fortunately, except for  nitrates, contaminants common to municipal
wastes are attenuated rapidly in most soil environments underlying
such lagoons.  Exceptions could occur in fractured or cavernous lime-
stone formations such as occur in the Edwards Plateau area of Texas.
As noted earlier, nitrates move freely with the ground water and are
often found in relatively high concentrations under sewage lagoons.

Lagoons used for storage of  industrial wastes are a serious threat  to
ground water in industrial areas.  The petrochemical industry concen-
trated along the gulf coast, especially around Houston and Baton Rouge,
produces  a myriad of waste products which are often stored in lagoons.
Many of these waste products are highly toxic and highly mobile in
ground water.

Examples of ground-water contamination from waste lagoons have been
reported in Howard County, Texas at two locations. At one location,
hydrocarbons from refinery holding ponds  seeped into the ground water.
At another, unlined pits used for  disposal of slaughterhouse wastewaters
were indicated as sources of bacteriological contamination of nearby
wells .1087 Acid waste discharge to unlined pits were identified as a
pollution~problem in Terry County, Texas. 1097  In Andrews IIP/ and
Travis 111/ Counties in Texas, municipal oxidation ponds have been
implicated in ground-water pollution.

Fortunately, industry and regulatory officials are becoming more cogni-
zant of the threat of industrial, municipal and agricultural waste lagoons
to the ground water and many such lagoons are being lined with imper-
meable materials.
                               105

-------
              Accidental Spills of Hazardous Materials

Many materials that are normally considered as hazardous provide a
significant benefit to modern society while many materials not normally
considered hazardous can have severe damaging effects if accidentally
released. Although most attention in the past has concerned hazardous
material that was an immediate threat to human life and property,
increasing attention is being given to those materials that threaten
environmental quality such as oil spillage.             >              •.

Hazardous material problems are generally thought of as transportation
accidents but many spills originate from storage and production facilities,
Numerous fish kills have resulted from leaks from storage tanks and
lagoons.  Most concern about spills of hazardous material has been    u,
related to surface water and air pollution such as oil spills and rupture
of gas storage tanks but ground water can be severely affected, too.

The project area contains most of the petroleum and petrochemical
industry of the United States.  As noted earlier, oil is produced in a
great majority of the counties of the five states involved and thousands
of miles of transmission lines for oil and gas  crisscross the region and
along with petroleum  storage tanks create a significant potential for
ground-water pollution.  The oil contamination mentioned earlier near
Hobbs, New Mexico probably results from a leaking oil  well or trans-
mission line.
                          }_
Because of its widespread use and its mobility in ground water, gasoline
is a common pollutant.  Leaking service station storage tanks have
polluted ground waters in Childress 112/,  Coleman 113/,  Hamilton 114/,
Starr and Tom Green 115/ Counties in Texas.

The petrochemical industry, which is heavily concentrated along the
Texas and Louisiana Gulf Coast presents a special problem. Not only
is the production, storage, transportation and use of the thousands of
toxic products a major potential pollutant but treatment, storage and
disposal of waste by-products is even more of a threat to ground water.

                    Subsurface Waste Disposal

Subsurface disposal of waste has been practiced in this country for
many years beginning with oil field brines, as discussed  earlier.  Other
industries began using injection wells around 1950, and by 1968 there
were over 60 such wells in Texas and Louisiana alone; presently, the
number is about 175 for the project area.

The concept of subsurface injection of wastes involves the introduction
of waste into a permeable formation hydraulically isolated from both
                                106

-------
higher and lower formations by impervious confining layers.  It is
important to note that fluids already fill the void in those formations
into which wastes are injected. In order for the receiving formation
to accept the waste, it is necessary that the injected fluid be at a
higher pressure than that naturally existing in the receiving formation
This pressure may result from an applied pressure at the well head or
may be gained by the weight of fluid standing in the injection tubing.
In either case, the pressure within the receiving formation must be
increased, and it is this increased pressure that must be considered
when evaluating the effect of a subsurface injection well on ground-
water .

Since the receiving formation contains natural fluid and a pressure
must exist in order to force waste into and through the formation, it
follows that the waste can only be accepted by compressing or dis-
placing the fluids involved or by compressing the formations contain-
ing or confining the fluids.

If an injection well is located in an area where natural or man-made
connections exist between the injection formation and other formations,
the increase in pressure may force injected or native fluids into other
formations containing fresh water or to points of surface discharge.
Even without the existence of these avenues for fluid migration, injec-
tion pressures may reach a critical point great enough to fracture
confining formations or damage parts of the injection system,  allowing
fluids to escape into surface or subsurface water resources. Since
pressure increases are greatest near the point of injection, most
failures can be expected in or near the injection well.

The exact number of industrial disposal wells in the study area  is
difficult to determine. The literature is not consistent in this respect
for a number of reasons including  the rapid rate of growth over the
past few years, deletions when use is discontinued, and differences
in classification.

Table 15 provides a general accounting of the number of disposal wells
in the study  area.
                                 107

-------
        Table 15.  WASTE DISPOSAL WELLS IN STUDY AREA*


                         1965—/     1968—/     1971
                                                    1187
    Louisiana             10          28           62	  (includes 3
Arkansas             0

                                 28          621W
                                                    municipal wells)
    New Mexico           11           —

    Oklahoma              1            4           13—/

    Texas                30           35           91—/  (includes 4
                                                         municipal wells)

   *Does not include wells used for disposal of oil field brines.
Disposal wells in the study area are mostly associated with the chemical
industry, oil refineries, and metal product plants.  Wastes that are
injected vary  greatly and include many types of organic and inorganic
compounds, acid and alkalis, salts, cooling and wash water, and in
some cases treated municipal sewage.

There have been no  reported incidences of ground-water pollution
attributable to the practice of industrial waste injection in the study
area.  The potential for damage is, however, evidenced by a recent
case in which a United States District Court enjoined an industrial
firm from disposing  of liquid waste by means of an injection well sys-
tem until abandoned oil and gas wells within a 2\ mile radius of the
injection well  were adequately plugged.

Of the five states in this study  area, only Texas has specific laws and
regulations dealing entirely with the deep well disposal of industrial
wastes. 117/ The other states assume jurisdiction based on other legis-
lation related to the production of oil and gas, the disposal of wastes
in general, or laws pertaining to the protection, conservation, and
development of fresh water.

In addition to the possibilities of pollution that do exist  in well disposal
of industrial waste, another complicating factor exists in the recovery of
                                108

-------
damages in the event such pollution does occur.  By its nature, ground-
water laws have been characterized as vague,  uncertain, and inade-
quate. 12V In his article, Kreiger points out:  "Because what goes on
beneath the surface of the earth cannot be seen, it is difficult to compre-
hend the problems of the underground, let alone fashion meaningful and
enforceable rules  to govern subsurface activities . "

Walker and Stewart 122/ summarized the legal proceedings for adjudi-
cating matters associated with injection wells.  They class such matters
into the doctrines  of trespass, negligence, nuisance, and strict liability.
These doctrines and the violation of state statutes prohibiting the pollu-
tion of ground water constitute the legal constraints and liabilities asso-
ciated with subsurface waste disposal. 123/

The obligation for the plaintiff to prove  that damages have occurred and
that they result from  subsurface injection will often be difficult, expen-
sive, and time consuming.  By the nature of ground-water movement,
damages may not become apparent until long after a  ground-water
resource has been polluted.  A ground-water resource that has been
damaged is likely  to remain damaged for a protracted period while
efforts to restore an aquifer will prove difficult and costly.

                  Artificial Recharge of Aquifers

With the increasing demands on the normal water resources, ground-
water recharge is gaining increasing attention throughout the  United
States .  In huge arid sections of the five south central states, ground
water is being mined at an alarming rate and in  some locations, current
supplies are good for less than 20 years at the present rate of use.  As
noted earlier, heavy  ground-water withdrawals along the gulf coast
have reversed the natural hydraulic gradients and permitted intrusion
of salt water into heretofore fresh  water zones.  For these reasons and
because soil filtration is an economical and efficient  method of tertiary
treatment of wastewaters , aquifer  recharge will become increasingly
important in the recycle and conservation of water resources.

Although artificial recharge is used extensively along the California
coast to prevent, retard and reverse sea-water intrusion, there is
presently no significant adoption of this practice along the Gulf Coast.
However, with the continued overdraft of coastal aquifers around
Houston and Baton Rouge, some type of recharge may be necessary,
especially around Houston where land subsidence is a problem.

There are a number of recharge wells in the high plains area of Texas
where water is being recharged to the Ogallala Formation.  Sources of
the recharge water are playas or natural lakes that dot the area and
                                 109

-------
collect surface runoff during heavy rainfall periods.  Ordinarily, the
water collected in playas is rapidly evaporated in the semi-arid climate
of the high plains.

Artificial recharge is also of interest in the high plains because of plans
to import water to the area. Water storage in the Ogallala is highly
desirable because large storage volumes are available, water is avail-
able to users wherever the aquifer exists,  little or no water is lost from
the aquifer by evaporation, ground-water  quality is usually good,
ground-waters are not easily polluted,  and often there is no other
feasible storage site.

Despite the many apparent advantages of artificial recharge, many
questions remain concerning the introduction to the aquifer of pollut-
ants with the recharge water. Little is known of  the fate of such
pollutants in the ground-water environment. Nitrates are a signifi-
cant problem, especially where  municipal effluents are used as
recharge water.  Nitrates are a primary constituent of such effluents
and are not appreciably altered  by movement through the ground-water
environment. 124/

Where agricultural wastewaters, such as runoff collected in playas, are
recharged, pesticides and other agricultural chemicals are of concern.
However, analysis of water from 39 playas in the high plains of Texas
did not indicate pesticide concentrations that would be hazardous if
recharged to the ground-water. 9_0/ Analyses were made for six pesti-
cides in common use in the area. Of unknown importance are the dozens
of other agricultural chemicals that were not analyzed for and may be
in the runoff water.

Treated municipal effluents have been recharged for several years, both
intentionally 125/ 126/ and unintentionally, without known serious
ground-water contamination problems—except for possible nitrate
increases. Most of the recharge in the five south central states is
unintentional.  It has been estimated that one-third of all sewage
effluents from western Texas towns is recharged  to the ground water
by infiltration. 12 7/

Again, the major hazard may not be from contaminants routinely checked
in municipal wastewaters but from the dozens of new industrial and
household chemicals that find their way into the sewer.

There are also other physical and chemical problems related to artificial
recharge and water quality.  Clogging of the soils can occur from sus-
pended sediments in the recharge water.  Chemical precipitation can
                                110

-------
occur if the aquifer water and the recharge water are not chemically
compatible and algal or bacterial growths are often a problem near the
point of recharge.

                          Other Causes
There are many other activities or sources of ground-water pollution
applicable to the project area.  Over-fertilization of agricultural lands
can be a source of excess nutrients, especially nitrogen, in the ground-
water.  Similarly, pesticides are widely used in the region and much is
still unknown concerning their fate in the subsurface environment.
Leaking sewers are common in all areas and thermal pollution can have
serious effects in industrial areas where heated wastewaters are dis-
charged to the ground water.

Undoubtedly, there are numerous other causes of ground-water
pollution--both known and unknown.  It should be borne in mind that
any material that reaches the soil or surface water has the potential to
reach the ground water.
                                 Ill

-------
                           SECTION VII

                  RESEARCH AND OTHER NEEDS
Traditionally, ground-water research or related investigations have
been concerned chiefly with availability, hydrology, or simply the
measurement of inorganic quality parameters.  It has only been in
relatively recent times that ground-water investigations have dealt
with the cause and effect aspects of quality alterations.  Ground-water
investigators, therefore, find a great many areas for which effort is
needed in order to protect, enhance,  and in some cases restore the
quality of ground-water resources.

Although this section will primarily be concerned with the  technical
aspects of ground-water quality, it cannot be implied that the totality
of problems rests with technical solutions alone.  Indeed, many pollu-
tional problems  do rest with technical solutions alone.  Many other
pollutional problems can only be eliminated or avoided by appropriate
rules and regulations soundly based and for which adequate resources
are  available for their implementation.

Additionally, the solution to existing and potential subsurface water
resource problems will depend greatly on the cooperation of public,
private, and academic institutions. For example, industry and govern-
ment may be required to marshal their resources to eliminate natural
salts which contaminate both surface and subsurface water resources.
Municipalities, irrigators, and industry must work together to control
the overdevelopment of aquifers and the resulting intrusion of waters
of poor quality.   The development of river basin plans must incorporate
subsurface water resources because of their inseparability. Universi-
ties  and consultants should work actively to assure that wastewater and
solid waste treatment facilities are designed in  the interest of ground-
water quality protection.

Above all, the makers of policy and the public in general must contin-
ually be informed of the value and magnitude of our ground-water
resources and that the natural restoration of ground water  may take
hundreds or thousands of years after a single introduction  of polluting
material.

                     General Research Needs
Basic to the needs of ground-water research are the development of
reports such as this for the rest of the country.  One such report has
                                112

-------
been completed for the southwestern United States 2/ and, at this writing,
another is just beginning for the North Atlantic States.  These should
be prepared regionally by experts familiar with particular geographical
areas so that their knowledge of that area and their association with
consultants, universities, water resources agencies, and regulatory
agencies in that area can be combined to produce the most comprehen-
sive assessment of existing and potential ground-water pollution
problems.

The development of technology is a necessary and first step  to any
successful attack in  the unusually complicated area of ground-water
investigations.  In order to predict, with some certainty, the fate of
pollutants in the subsurface environment, it is necessary to  understand
the environment itself as the receptor of those pollutants. New drilling
techniques should necessarily be developed so that physical, chemical,
and biological measurements of the subsurface environment can be made
accurately. A difficult example would be the measurement of the oxida-
tion-reduction potential.

Another area where  technology is needed is that of pollutant identification.
Information is particularly lacking in organics and in indicators of organic
pollution.  The use of stable  isotope ratios shows great promise in char-
acterizing the source of pollutants while coprostinol or its degradation
products could possibly  be developed as indicators of fecal pollution.
Additionally, the general aspects of collecting, handling, and analyzing
samples from the subsurface environment should be standardized to the
extent possible so that comparability between different investigators  can
be established.

The results of basic  or applied research are for  little purpose unless an
avenue is developed by which these results can  be made clearly and
simply available to those who will eventually put them into practice.  The
National Ground Water Quality Symposium held in Denver in August of
1971 presented such an avenue of technology transfer by its  composition
of actual case histories followed by detailed discussions by those in
attendance.

                     Specific Research Needs

                        Natural Leaching

While this is the greatest single problem in the study area affecting both
surface and subsurface waters,  it is also one of  the most difficult to
attack. It is a natural phenomena extending in most cases over broad
geographical areas .  Some work is being done by the U .S . Corps of
Engineers particularly as the problem affects surface water.  The prob-
lems are probably of more concern to surface supplies than ground
                               113

-------
water because once the subsurface flows emerge at the surface, the
damage becomes much more widespread.  The phenomena is, nonetheless,
subsurface in origin and should be addressed here in terms of alleviating
predominantly surface pollution.

      1.  Technology associated with demineralization has been
      advanced to a considerable degree.  Work remains to be
      done on the application of these techniques to waters of
      this chemical composition so that the economics of providing
      at least small quantities of water can be established.

      2.  The development of technology to collect small heavily
      mineralized alluvial flows should be pursued along with
      ways to lower alluvial water tables in order to prevent
      surface accumulation  of brine crystals which are washed
      into streams during periods of runoff.

      3.  Opportunities for secondary oil recovery by water-
      flooding exist in many of the areas where natural brines
      are present. Since the volume  of water needed for water-
      flood greatly exceeds that available from natural brine
      springs, the possibility of using these natural brines  for
      this purpose should be investigated.  Collection facilities
      and incompatibility due to high sulfate concentration in
      the natural brines may present obstacles that will have
      to be resolved.

      4.  Deep well disposal of natural brines is being studied
      by the U.S . Corps of  Engineers .  This work should be
      encouraged particularly in view of the disposal of brines
      into formations which naturally discharge into the sea.

      5.  In situ evaporation rates should be established for the
      various natural brines encountered in the study area.  This
      would allow for optimizing systems of disposal or use  which
      are a function of volume.

               Oil Field Brines and Other Materials

The practice of disposing of oil field brines has changed over the last
decade.  The use of evaporation pits has almost been abandoned in favor
of subsurface injection either for waterflood or disposal.   The protracted
use of pits has resulted in the discharge of large volumes of brines to
both the  saturated and unsaturated subsurface environment and is likely
to remain a problem for many years even though the use of pits is gen-
erally abandoned. Technology for brine injection either  for disposal
                                114

-------
or waterflooding is generally available but the consequences of these
types of brine disposal on ground-water resources has not been fully
evaluated. Ideally, brines should be returned to the formation from
which they were extracted.

      1.  Techniques for locating areas of subsurface brine
      pollution should be developed so that these areas can be
      investigated. Remote  sensing and resistivity techniques
      show promise.

      2.  Aquifer restoration should be demonstrated and
      encouraged particularly in areas where polluted ground
      water can be used for  waterflooding.

      3.  The geologic and hydraulic relationship between  fresh
      water aquifers and brine disposal formations must be
      evaluated in order  to establish sound disposal criteria
      in forms of disposal volume and pressure.  Economic  tech-
      niques for making these  appraisals should  be improved
      and demonstrated so that regulatory agencies could
      regulate disposal activities more soundly and in individ-
      ual fields, if necessary.

      4.  Existing inspection and monitoring techniques should
      be evaluated and,  if necessary, modified to assure that
      the pollution potential  to ground water is minimized.

      5.  A conceptual appraisal of the pollutional hazards  of
      using oil field drilling fluids and chemicals should be
      made.  The  results of such an appraisal would dictate
      future studies, if required.

      6.  A handbook should be developed by a firm with
      exceptional  expertise in  the field of design, construc-
      tion, and  operation of  disposal or waterflood wells.
      The handbook should dwell on techniques. materials,
      treatment, operation, monitoring, and training.

                         Well Construction

As pointed out in the previous section, well construction is  a major
source of ground-water pollution. Well construction pertains both to
water wells and to other man-made penetrations particularly associated
with the oil and  gas industry.  In all cases,  these problems  should not
exist in the future because technology is available for their  control.
                      f                         '
      1.  With respect to water wells, any additional research
      that is needed would be primarily in their location with
                               115

-------
      respect to either subsurface or surface sources of pollu-
      tion .  These items will be covered at least in concept in
      other sections pertaining to research needs.

      2.   State regulatory agencies  should license drillers,
      review design, and inspect completed wells to assure
      that the latest drilling and completion techniques are
      practiced.

      3.   Opportunities for continuing education should be
      made available to drillers. Perhaps this could be done
      in  cooperation with the National Water Well Association
      where adequate state programs are lacking.

      4.   Well owners should be encouraged to receive periodic
      inspections to assure that the integrity of their well contin-
      ues to provide pollution protection.

      5.   Intermixing between aquifers can result from improper
      cementing. Procedures should be developed by which
      this type of pollution can be discovered before extensive
      damage is done.  This should be followed by reworking
      the well or abandoning and plugging to prevent further
      pollution.

Many problems of pollution result from existing wells, particularly in
the oil and gas industry, which were inadequately constructed or aban-
doned many years ago.  Most research will be associated with the loca-
tion of these penetrations when unknown and evaluating the pollutional
potential of those for which the location is known.

      1.   Develop technology for locating abandoned oil
      and gas test wells.  Remote sensing shows some
      promise while pollutant concentration  vectors may
      be considered.

      2.   Tracer techniques should  be developed to
      describe the extent and manner of pollution resulting
      from abandoned wells.

      3.   Technology should be improved to describe
      hydraulic  conditions in  an area where a pollutional
      potential exists in connection with abandoned wells.
      This will establish criteria by  which the potential
      can be evaluated.

      4.  Technology should be improved to adequately plug
      wells which have been located as  described above.
                                116

-------
                          Overpumping

When overpumping occurs, water levels decline and the movement of
mineralized water into the aquifer is possible. In other cases, fresh
water may be over brackish water and pumping can cause intermixing.

In the first case,  state water resource agencies can regulate overpumping
by using available technology.  In the second case, technology should be
developed which will permit the pumpage of fresh water overlying miner-
alized water.  Some success might be gained using two pump techniques
or, in rare cases , the creation of separatory barriers.

                     Irrigation Return Flows

The practice of irrigation has detrimental effects on water quality mostly
in terms of mineralization.  Irrigation can have beneficial aspects such
as denitrification, phosphate removal in the subsurface return flows,
and biological improvement.

      1.  Investigations should be undertaken to define
      specific pollutants reaching ground water and the
      magnitude of each.

      2.  Conduct basic studies of the precipitates and
      exchange reactions which occur as water moves
      through mineralized soil.

      3.  Conduct basic studies related to  adsorption of
      phosphates, heavy metals, and various agricultural
      chemicals which may be carried into  the soil with
      irrigation water.

      4.  Subsurface return flow quality prediction tech-
      niques should be developed along with economic
      evaluations which might result from control measures
      imposed on irrigative systems.

      5.  Research and demonstration projects should be
      initiated to determine the response to various
      practical quality control measures for subsurface
      return flows.

                          Septic Tanks

Septic tanks have received a great deal of study over a long period of
time mostly with respect to design and efficiency.  In recent years,
                              117

-------
many people have moved out of the cities either to summer homes or
retirement communities,  many of which are located near streams or
reservoirs.  This practice has again given rise to the need for addi-
tional research of septic  tanks but of a somewhat different nature. The
pollution of ground water is gaining importance, as well as the contri-
bution of nutrients to reservoirs, often after the effluent has passed
through the ground water.

      1.  As in other types of waste treatment,  a need exists
      for the identification of persistent pollutants in both the
      unsaturated soils and in the ground-water table.

      2.  The use and development of stable isotope ratios
      shows promise in tracing septic tank effluents into and
      through the ground water and often to surface reservoirs.

      3.  Investigations should be  made leading to decision
      criteria for the allowable density of septic tanks before
      collection and central treatment facilities are required.

                    Land Application of Wastes

The practice of applying liquid and solid waste to  the land for treatment
and disposal is gaining momentum in the study area.  These practices
include spray irrigation, flooding,  and spray runoff.  The latter poses
the least threat to ground water since it is confined to areas where the
infiltration rate is low.   While the theory of these  practices shows
considerable promise with respect to the removal of pollutants, care
must be taken to assure that design and operation  are not abused and
ground water is not polluted.

      1.   A handbook should be prepared  outlining the design
      criteria for these systems particularly with respect to
      ground-water hydrology and the necessity for an under-
      drain network.

      2.   Stable isotope ratio techniques or other means of
      waste identification should be perfected by demonstration
      in these types of waste disposal systems.  These tools are
      needed in order to accurately monitor the ground-water
      quality and detect  failures at an early stage.

      3.   Vertical soil and moisture profiles above the saturated
      zone should be studied to identify the presence and define
      the characteristics of movement of pollutants, particularly
      those of a recalcitrant nature.
                               118

-------
      4.  Ground-water samples would be collected below and
      down gradient from disposal sites to define, at least by
      class, those pollutants which persist over time and dis-
      tance either in the form of the parent parameter or its
      degradation products.

      5.  Criteria must be developed which dictates the need
      for underdraining based on water quality criteria.

                       Solid Waste Disposal

Most research to date has been confined to the contribution of Inorganics
from landfills and dumps.  Generally, it is suggested that future research
deal with organics and their degradation products and the establishment
of regulations limiting the types of waste that may be disposed of in this
fashion.

      1.  Vertical soil and moisture profiles above the
      saturated zone should be studied to  identify the
      presence and  define the characteristics of move-
      ments of pollutants, particularly those of a recalci-
      trant nature.

      2.  Ground-water samples should be collected below
      and down gradient from solid waste  disposal sites to
      define, at least by class, those pollutants which per-
      sist over time and distance either in the form of the
      parent parameter or its degradation  products.

      3.  Those pollutants which prove to be particularly
      persistent and toxic must be identified so that they can
      be handled in a separate fashion and not allowed to
      enter ground water.

      4.  The contribution to and solubility of heavy metals
      in ground water should be studied.

              Evapotranspiration by Native Vegetation

The prospect of salvaging valuable water now being wasted by compara-
tively useless vegetation, while at the same time decreasing the accom-
panying mineralization of the water supply, has provided an attractive
goal for many engineers  and scientists.  Various programs of vegeta-
tion eradication have been attempted with very limited success.  The
growth usually returns within a short period of time. Erosion resulting
during the eradication period has created serious soil loss problems in
                                119

-------
the eradication areas and sedimentation problems in the nearby stream
channels.  Nevertheless, the authors believe that research along the
following lines could be fruitful:

       1.  Development and evaluation of replacement vege-
       tation having lower water use characteristics than the
       water-loving phreatophytes.

       2.  Investigation of the possibilities of leveling areas of
       phreatophyte growth and utilizing the areas for agricul-
       tural production.  Such a program should involve  consid-
       eration of subsidization because of the intermittent flooding,
       poor soil conditions and low yield potential.

                         Animal Wastes

The study area contains  a number of agricultural operations where large
numbers of either cattle, chickens, and, less frequently, hogs are placed
in small areas.  These pose a pollutional threat to both surface and ground
water. Some work has been completed covering cattle feeding in the
High Plains of Texas and other investigations are underway for both'
alluvial deposits and limestone areas.  These studies are concerned with
the effect of cattle feeding operations on ground water.

       1.  These studies should be  continued until various
       waste handling techniques are investigated for the
       types of geologic conditions that exist in the study
       area.   The work should identify the organic and
       inorganic pollutants that reach ground water under
       the various geologic conditions encountered.

       2.  Research  should particularly address the fate  and
       movement of hormones and antibiotics into and through
       the ground water.

       3.  Work should be done concerning the possibility of
       waste treatment lagoons sealing after a period of use.
       If sealing does occur, its mechanism should be deter-
       mined  for the geological conditions encountered.  If
       sealing does not occur in a reasonable time, efforts
       should be made for artificial  sealing.

                         Waste Lagoons

Waste lagoons have been constructed for many types of wastes on many
types of soils and, in most cases, little consideration has been given to
protecting the underlying ground water.  Research needs here are
similar to those suggested for  other means of waste treatment.
                                120

-------
      1.  The identification of persistent pollutants and their
      degradation products is needed for both unsaturated and
      saturated zones.

      2.  Stable isotope ratio techniques or other means of waste
      identification should be perfected and demonstrated for
      those types of waste facilities.

      3.  Research should be conducted concerning the capac-
      ities of various soil types to seal after a period of use.
      Techniques should be developed to accelerate natural
      sealing when possible and assure that such seals remain
      intact.

      4.  Decision criteria is needed which dictates the need
      for artificial lagoon seals.

              Accidental Spills of Hazardous Material

Accidental spills are both diverse and numerous.  Although data are not
readily available to describe the magnitude of these types of problems,
it is evident that detection and control technology is needed.  Because
of the diverse nature of this type of potential pollution, the following
are only suggestions of the types of work needed.

      1.  The concept of continuous  monitoring of pipelines
      should be investigated  so that failures can be detected
      early and the extent of  pollution can be minimized.

      2.  Techniques should be developed to detect leaks in
      buried gasoline storage tanks.

      3.  Research is needed which  will lead to the in situ
      degradation or treatment of spilled hydrocarbons which
      have  entered the subsurface environment.

                    Subsurface Waste Disposal

With more stringent regulations covering the discharge of effluents to
the environment, the use of injection wells may provide an attractive
alternative to more conventional techniques. Research is needed to
assure that  the subsurface disposal of waste is a true alternative with
respect to environmental protection.

      1.  Develop a manual covering the design, construction,
      operation, monitoring,  and  maintenance of well disposal
      systems.  Such items as material selection for various
                                121

-------
      wastes should be included.  The manual should be developed
      by a company with considerable experiences in the field.
      Provisions should be made to add to the manual as new
      technology is developed.

      2.  Since many problems would be based on pressure
      increases, projects should be initiated which evaluate the
      effects of pressure increases in the subsurface.

      3.  Efforts are needed to relate hydraulic formation
      fracturing to subsurface waste injection.

      4.  A model should be developed to serve as a tool in the
      appraisal  of the effects of each subsurface waste injection
      project.

      5.  Research is  needed to define the movement and
      degradation of wastes in an environment such  as that
      found in deep formations .

      6.  A compilation of existing laws and regulations of the
      states should be made.

      7.  Methodology  should be developed for monitoring the
      effects of subsurface waste injection projects.

                        Aquifer Recharge

Aquifer recharge is accomplished both intentionally and as a result of
other activities discussed in this section such as septic tanks,  irriga-
tion , and lagoons.  Intentional recharge may be accomplished in a
number of ways, including spreading, ponding, or the use of wells.
Research needs  suggested here are confined to water quality aspects
and, as such, are much like those in other research  suggestions.
Research needs on the physical aspects  of recharge are better  addressed
by others and are not included.

      1.  Pollution identification techniques are needed to
      assure that the aquifer is not degraded by recharge.

      2.  Both the saturated and unsaturated zones should
      be investigated to assure that no parameter present in
      the recharge water is  accumulating or otherwise
      persistent in undesirable concentrations.

      3.  The fate of any constituent of the recharge water
      should be  determined  to assure degradation products
      are non-polluting or synergistic.
                               122

-------
                          SECTION VIII

                     ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


This report is based on assistance and information from many agencies
and individuals.  Much of the water resource and water quality informa-
tion was obtained from reports of the U.S. Geological Survey and various
state agencies. Additional information was supplied by many other pub-
lications and most of these and some of the private individuals are listed
in the bibliography.

Appreciation is extended to the Arkansas Department of Pollution Control
and Mr. Ladd Davies; Arkansas Geological Survey and Mr. Norman
Williams; Louisiana Geological Survey and Mr. Leo Hough;  Louisiana
State Health Department and Mr . John Trigg; New Mexico State Engi-
neers Office and Messrs. Joe Yates, P. D. Akin, Jim Williams and Fred
Hennighausen;  New Mexico Environmental Improvement Agency and
Messrs . John Wright and Mike Snavely;  Texas Water Development Board
and Messrs. Fred Osborne, Bruce Fink and Wayne Wyatt; Oklahoma
Water Resources Board and Messrs. Lee  Burton and Alan Haws;
Dr. Frank Titus of the New Mexico Institute of Mines and Mineral
Resources; Drs. John Hernandez and John Clark of the Water Resources
Research Institute at New Mexico State University; Mr. George Cardwell
of the U.S. Geological Survey in Baton Rouge; Mr. Dick Peckham of the
EPA Regional Office in Dallas,  Texas; and, Mr. Marvin Wood of EPA,
Ada, Oklahoma.

The authors of this report are Sanitary Engineer, Program Chief, and
Research Assistant, respectively, of the  National Ground Water Research
Program, Robert S . Kerr Environmental  Research Laboratory, Ada,
Oklahoma.  Special appreciation is extended to several  other staff mem-
bers who contributed significant time and effort to the project.  Mrs.
Linda Harmon was instrumental in the data collection and format and
final preparation of the report. Mr. Montie Fraser aided in data
collection and reduction, and Mr. Leslie  McMillion provided much
assistance with information, references,  and comments. Appreciation
is also extended to Mrs. Joan Elliott for the final typing of the manu-
script and to Mr. Tom Redman for preparation of the illustrations.
                               123

-------
                         SECTION IX

                     REFERENCES CITED
  1.  Mack, L. E., "Ground-water Management in Development of a
     National Policy on Water," National Water Commission Report
     NWC-EES-71-004, Jan. 31, 1971.

  2.  Fuhriman, D.  K. and J. R. Barton, "Ground-water Pollution in
     Arizona, California, Nevada, and Utah," Environmental Protec-
     tion Agency, Water Pollution Control Research Series 16060 ERU,
     Dec.  1971.

  3.  Murray, C.  R. and E. B. Reeves, "Estimated Use of Water in the
     United States in 1970," U.S. Geological Survey Circular 676,
     1972.

  4.  Select Committee on National Water Resources, United States
     Senate, "Water Resources Activities in the United States,"
     Committee Print No. 32, 1960.

  5.  McGuinness, C. L., "The Role of Ground Water in the National
     Water Situation," U.S.  Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper
     1800, 1963.

  6.  Thomas, H.  E., "Ground Water Regions of the United States—
     Their Storage  Facilities," U.S. 83rd Congress, House Interior
     and Insular Affairs Committee—The Physical and Economic
     Foundation of Natural Resources, Vol. 3, 1952.

  7.  Baker, R. C., "Arkansas' Ground-water Resources," Arkansas
     Geological and Conservation Commission Water Resources Circu-
     lar No. 1, 1955.

  8.  Bedinger, M. S., L. F. Emmett and H. G. Jeffery, "Ground-water
     Potential of the Alluvium of the Arkansas River Between Little
     Rock  and Fort  Smith, Arkansas," U.S. Geological Survey Water-
     Supply Paper 1669-L,  1963.

  9-  Albin, D. R.,  "Geology and Ground-water Resources of Bradley,
     Calhoun, and Ouachita Counties, Arkansas," U.S. Geological
     Survey Water-Supply Paper 1779-G, 1964.

10.  Ryling, R. W., "Ground Water Potential of Mississippi County,
     Arkansas," Arkansas Geological and Conservation Commission
     Water Resources Circular No. 7,  I960.


                              124

-------
11.  Counts, H. B ., et al.,  "Ground-water Resources in a Part of
     Southwestern Arkansas," Arkansas Geological and Conservation
     Commission Water Resources Circular No. 2, 1955.

12.  Rollo, J. R. , "Ground Water in Louisiana,"  Louisiana Geological
     Survey Water Resources Bulletin No. 1, August I960.

13.  Whitman, H. M. and Chabot Kilburn, "Ground-water Conditions
     in Southwestern Louisiana, 1961 and  1962,"  Louisiana Geological
     Survey Water Resources Pamphlet No. 12, Sept.  1963.

14.  Morgan, C. O., "Ground-water Conditions in the Baton Rouge
     Area, 1954-1959," Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources
     Bulletin No. 2, December 1961.

15.  Rollo, J. R., "Ground-water Resources of the Greater New Orleans
     Area, Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources
     Bulletin No. 9, July 1966.

16.  Hale, W. E.,  L. J. Peiland and J. P.  Beverage, "Characteristics
     of the Water Supply in New Mexico," New Mexico State Engineer
     Technical Report  31, 1965.

17.  Nicholson, A., Jr., and A. Clebsch,  Jr., "Geology and Ground-
     water Conditions  in Southern Lea County, New Mexico," New
     Mexico State Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources  Ground-water
     Report 6,  1961.

18.  Bjorklund, L. J.  and B . W. Maxwell, "Availability of Ground Water
     in the Albuquerque Area, Bernalillo and Sandoval Counties, New
     Mexico," New Mexico State Engineer Technical Report 21, 1961.

19.  Department of the Interior, "Saline Ground-water Resources of the
     Tularosa Basin, New Mexico," Research and Development Progress
     Report No. 561, July 1970.

20.  West, S. W.,  "Availability of Ground  Water in the Gallup Area,
     New Mexico,"  U.S.  Geological Survey Circular 443, 1961.

21.  Oklahoma Water Resources Board, "Reported Water Use in Okla-
     homa, 1971," Oklahoma Water Resources Board Publication 41,
     Sept.'1972.

22   Bureau of Water Resources  Research and Oklahoma Water Resources
     Board, "Water, Oklahoma's No. 1 Problem," 3rd Edition, Dec.  1961.
                               125

-------
23.  Tanaka, H. H. andL. V. Davis, "Ground Water, Rush Springs
     Sandstone," Oklahoma Geological Survey Circular 61, 1963.

24.  Wood, P. R. and L. C. Burton, "Ground-water Resources in
     Cleveland and Oklahoma Counties, Oklahoma," Oklahoma Geologi-
     cal Survey Circular 71,  1968.

25.  Oklahoma Water Resources Board, "Appraisal of the Water and
     Related Land Resources  of Oklahoma, Region Eight," Oklahoma
     Water Resources Board Publication 19, 1968.

26.  Murphy, R.  S., et al., "Soil Survey of Cimarron County, Okla-
     homa," U.S. Department of Agriculture Series 1956, No. 11,
     June 1960.

27.  Oklahoma Water Resources Board, "Appraisal of the Water and
     Related Land Resources  of Oklahoma, Region Nine, " Oklahoma
     Water Resources Board Publication 36, 1971.

28.  Dole, R.  H., "Ground-water Supplies in Oklahoma and Their
     Development."

29-  Oklahoma Water Resources Board, "Appraisal of the Water and
     Related Land Resources  of Oklahoma, Regions Five and Six,"
     Oklahoma Water Resources Board Publication 27,  1969.

30.  United States Study Commission on the Neches, Trinity, Brazos,
     Colorado, Guadalupe, San Antonio, Nueces, and San Jacinto
     River Basins and Intervening Areas, "The Report of the U.S.
     Study Commission-Texas, Part II:  Resources and Problems,"
     March 1962.

31.  Texas Water Development Board,  "Additional Technical Papers on
     Selected Aspects of the Preliminary Texas Water Plan," Texas
     Water Development Board Report 38,  Feb. 1967.

32.  McMillion, L. G., "A Review of the Major Ground-water Formations
     in Texas," Presented at  the Western Resources Conference,
     Boulder, Colorado, August 1960.

33.  Peckham, R. C., et al.,  "Reconnaissance Investigation of the
     Ground-water Resources of the Trinity River Basin, Texas,"
     Texas Water Commission Bulletin  6309, Sept. 1963.

34.  Mount, J. R.,  et al., "Reconnaissance Investigation of the Ground-
     water Resources of the Colorado River Basin, Texas," Texas
     Water Development Board Report 51,  July 1967.
                              126

-------
35 -   Baker, E. T ., et al., "Reconnaissance Investigation of the Ground-
     water Resources of the Red River, Sulphur River, and Cypress
     Creek Basins, Texas," Texas Water Commission Bulletin 6306,
     July 1963.

36.   Texas Board of Water Engineers,  "A Plan for Meeting the 1980
     Water Requirements of Texas," for submittal to the 57th legis-
     lature, May 1961.

37.   Harder, A. H., et al., "Effects of Ground-water Withdrawals on
     Water Levels and Salt-water Encroachment in Southwestern
     Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources
     Bulletin No.  10, Oct.  1967.

38.   Jones, P . H., "Water Resources of Southwestern Louisiana, " U.S.
     Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1364, 1956.

39.   Harder, H. H. , H. M. Whitman and S. M. Rogers, "Methane in the
     Fresh-water Aquifers of Southwestern Louisiana and Theoretical
     Explosion Hazards," Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources
     Pamphlet No. 14, Feb. 1965.

40.   Rollo, J. R., "Salt-water Encroachment in Aquifers of the Baton
     Rouge Area, Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Water
     Resources Bulletin No. 13, August 1969.

41.   Cardwell, G. T. and J. R.  Rollo,  "Interim Report on Ground-
     water Conditions between Baton Rouge and New Orleans.
     Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources
     Pamphlet No. 9, Aug. I960.

42.   Page, L. V., R. Newcome, Jr. and G. D. Graeff, Jr.,  "Water
     Resources of Sabine Parish, Louisiana," Louisiana Geological
     Survey Water Resources Bulletin No. 3, May 1963.

43.   Newcome, R., Jr., "Ground-water Resources of the Red River
     Valley Alluvium in Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Water
     Resources Pamphlet No. 7, April 1960.

44.   Newcome, R., Jr., "Water Resources of Natchitoches Parish,
     Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources Bulletin
     No. 4, July 1963.

45   Hood, J. W.  and L. R. Kister, "Saline-water Resources of New
     Mexico," U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1601,  1962.
                              127

-------
46.  Howard, J. W., "Reconnaissance of Ground-water Conditions in
     Curry County, New Mexico," New Mexico State Engineer Techni-
     cal Report 1, Dec.  1954.

47.  Herrick, E.  H. , "Appraisal of Ground-water Resources of the
     Tularosa Basin and Adjoining Areas, New Mexico and Texas,"
     U.S. Geological Survey Open-file Report 246.

48.  Trauger, F. D. and E. H. Herrick, "Ground Water in Central
     Hachita Valley Northeast of the Big Hatchet Mountains, Hidalgo
     County, New Mexico," New Mexico State Engineer Technical
     Report 26, 1962.

49.  Doty, G. C., "Reconnaissance of Ground Water in Playas Valley,
     Hidlago County, New Mexico, " New Mexico State Engineer Techni-
     cal Report 15, 1960.

50.  Callahan, J. T. and R. L. Cushman, "Geology and Ground-water
     Supplies of the Fort Wingate Indian School Area,  McKinley County,
     New Mexico," U.S. Geological Survey Circular 360,  1955.

51.  Marine, I. W. and S. L. Schoff,  "Ground-water Resources of
     Beaver County, Oklahoma," Oklahoma Geological Survey Bulletin
     97, May 1962.

52.  Oklahoma Water Resources Board, "Appraisal of the Water and
     Related Land Resources of Oklahoma, Region 1," Oklahoma Water
     Resources Board Publication 17, 1967.

53.  Oklahoma Water Resources Board,  "Appraisal of the Water and
     Related Land Resources of Oklahoma, Region 3," Oklahoma Water
     Resources Board Publication 23, 1968.

54.  Davis, L. V., "Geology and Ground-water Resources of Southern
     McCurtain County, Oklahoma," Oklahoma Geological Survey Bulletin
     86, 1960.

55.  Oklahoma Water Resources Board,  "Appraisal of the Water and
     Related Land Resources of Oklahoma, Region 7," Oklahoma Water
     Resources Board Publication 29, 1970.

56.  Texas Water Commission, "Reconnaissance Investigations of the
     Ground-water Resources of the Rio Grande Basin, Texas," Texas
     Water Commission Bulletin 6502, July 1965.
                              128

-------
57.   Mason, C . C.. "Ground-water Geology of the Hickory Sandstone
     Member of the Riley Formation, McCulloch County, Texas," Texas
     Board of Water Engineers Bulletin 6017, Feb. 1961.

58.   Osborne, Fred, "An Investigation of the Nitrate Contamination of
     the Ground Water in Runnels County, Texas Using the Nitrogen
     Isotope Ratio Technique," Submitted to the Texas Water Develop-
     ment Board, Publication Pending.

59.   Minerals Yearbook, United States Bureau of Mines. 1969.

60.   Subcommittee on Water Problems Associated with Oil Production
     in the United States,  "Water Problems Associated with Oil Produc-
     tion in the United States," Interstate Oil Commission Compact,
     June  1967.

61.   Smith, W. W., "Salt Water Disposal:  Sense and Dollars,"
     Petroleum Engineer,  Vol. 42, No. 11, pp. 64-72, Oct. 1970.

62.   Texas Oil and Gas Fields (Map) , Distributed by Oil Information
     Committee, Texas Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association.

63.   U.S.  Geological Survey,  "Water For Arkansas," U.S.  Geological
     Survey in Cooperation with the Arkansas Geological Commission,
     1969.

64.   Wood, L. A., et al.,  "Reconnaissance Investigation of the Ground-
     water Resources of the Gulf Coast Region, Texas, " Texas Water
     Commission Bulletin 6305, June 1963.

65.   Texas Water Development Board, "The Texas Water Plan," Texas
     Water Development Board Unnumbered Report, November 1968.

66.   Raynor,  F. A., "Alleged Contamination of Irrigation Wells in
     Northern Dawson Co.," Texas Water Development Open-file
     Report, Sept. 1959.

67.   Ginn, R. F., "Goldsmith Community Park, Ector Co.,  Texas,"
     Texas Water Development Board Open-file Report Cl-7111, March
     1972.

68   Bayha, D.,  "Investigation of Water Well Reports Contamination
     by Salt Water in the Area of the Howard-Glasscock Oil Field,
     Glasscock Co., Texas," Texas Water Development Board Open-
     file Report,  April 1969.
                              129

-------
69.  Evans, Daniel, "Ground-water Contamination in the Vicinity of
     Pierce Junction Salt Dome,  (Stevens, M. T.) Harris County,"
     Texas Water Development Board Open-file Report Cl-6601,
     Sept. 1971.

70.  Cooper, Wallace, "Field Investigation of Ground-water Contamina-
     tion in the Bowie Area, Montague County, Texas," Texas Water
     Development Board Open-file Report, March 27, 1967.

71.  Shamburger, V. M., Jr., "Reconnaissance of Water Well Pollu-
     tion and the Occurrence of Shallow Ground Water, Runnels Co.,
     Texas," Texas Water Development Board Contamination Report
     No.  1, July  1958.

72.  Burnitt, S. C., "Investigation of Ground-water Contamination,
     Henderson Oil Field Area, Rusk Co., Texas," Texas Water
     Development Board Memorandum Report LD-0262 MR, Oct. 1962.

73.  Thornhill, J. T., "Investigation of Ground-water Contamination
     Coleto Creek Oil Field Victoria County,  Texas," Texas Water
     Commission  Report LD-0564-MR, March 1964.

74.  Stearman, Jack, "A Reconnaissance Investigation of Alleged
     Contamination of Irrigation Wells near Lockett, Wilbarger Co. ,
     Texas," Texas Board of Water Engineers Report No. 8, I960.

75.  Burton, Lee, Private Communication, Oklahoma Water Resources
     Board, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

76.  McMillion, L. G., "Ground-water Reclamation by Selective Pump-
     ing," American Soc. of Mining Engineers Reprint No.  70-AG-55,
     Feb. 1970.

77.  Fryberger, J. S.,  "Rehabilitation of a Brine-Polluted Aquifer,"
     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Water Pollution Control
     Research Series 14020 DLN, March 1972.

78.  Cooper, Wallace, "Investigation of Reported Ground-water
     Contamination, Novice Area, Colemon Co., Texas," Texas Water
     Development Board Open-file Report, July 1970.

79.  White, D.  J., "Contamination of the W. W. Osburn Water Wells in
     the Vicinity of the Hilbig Oil Field, Bastrop Co., Texas," Texas
     Water Development Board Open File Report, November  15, 1972.
                              130

-------
80.  White, D. J., "Improperly Completed and Plugged Water Wells,
     Duval Co., Texas," Texas Water Development Board Open-file'
     Report Cl-6604, October 1970.

81.  Burnitt,  S. C. . "Reconnaissance of Soil Damage and Ground-water
     Quality,  Fisher County, Texas," Texas Water Commission Memo-
     randum Report No. 63-02, Sept.  1963.

82.  Muller, D. A. and H. E. Couch,  "Water Well and Ground Water
     Chemical Analysis Data, Schleicher County, Texas," Texas
     Water Development Board Report 132, August 1971.

83.  Evans, D. S., "JohnC. Young Water Well Problems (Lockhart)
     in the Vicinity of the Luling-Branyon Field, Caldwell Co.,  Texas,"
     Texas Water Development  Board Open-file Report, Sept. 1971.

84.  White, D. J., "Investigation of Ground-water Contamination in
     Northern Comanche Co., Texas," Texas Water Development Board
     Open-file Report, August 1970.

85.  Bayha, David, "Investigation of the Presence of Natural Gas in
     a Ground-water Aquifer, Menefee Field Area, Wharton Co.,
     Texas,"  Texas Water Development Board Open-file Report,
     Feb. 1967.

86.  Meyer, R. R. and J. R. Rollo, "Salt Water Encroachment Baton
     Rouge Area, Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Water
     Resources Pamphlet No. 17, Nov. 1965.

87.  Wesselman, J. B., "Geology and Ground-water Resources of
     Orange Co., Texas," Texas Water Commission Bulletin No. 6516,
     July 1965.

88.  White, D. E., "Water Resources of Ward. County, Texas," Texas
     Water Development Board Report 125, Feb. 1971.

89.  Skogerboe, G. V. and J. P. Law, Jr., "Research Needs for
     Irrigation Return Flow Quality Control,"  U.S. Environmental
     Protection Agency Water Pollution Control Research  Series  13030,
     Nov. 1971.

90.  Wells, D. M., E.  W. Huddleston and R. G. Rekers,  "Potential
     Pollution of the Ogallala by Recharging Playa Lake Water-
     pesticides ," U .S . Environmental Protection Agency Water
     Pollution Control Research Series 16060 DCO, Oct. 1970.
                              131

-------
 91.  Law, J. P., "Agricultural Utilization of Sewage Effluent and
      Sludge, An annotated Bibliography," Federal Water Pollution
      Control Administration,  1968.

 92.  Thomas,  R. E. and C. C. Harlin, Jr.,  "Experiences with Land
      Spreading of Municipal Effluents," Prepared for presentation at
      the First Annual IF AS Workshop on Land Renovation of Waste
      Water in  Florida, 1972.

 93.  Thomas,  R. E.,  "Applying Wastewaters to the Land for Treatment,"
      Prepared for presentation  at the 23rd Oklahoma Industrial Waste
      and Advanced Water Conference, Oklahoma State University,
      April 1972.

 94.  Wells,  D. M., "Ground-water Recharge with Treated Municipal
      Effluent," Municipal  Sewage Effluent for Irrigation, The Louisi-
      ana Tech. Dept.  of Agricultural Engineering, July 1968.

 95.  Snavely, Michael, Private Communication, New Mexico Environ-
      mental Improvement Agency, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

 96 .  United States Department of Agriculture, "Status of Water and
      Sewage Facilities in Communities Without Public Systems,"
      USDA Agricultural Economic Report No. 143.

 97.  Webster,  Richard, "Ground-water Contamination (Grady Woods)
      from Nitrate Near Newton,  Newton Co.,  Texas," Texas Water
      Development Board Open-file Report Cl-7112, Nov. 1971.

 98.  Jorgasen, D. M., "Contamination of the Roland Bloomquist and
      Other Water Wells at Ford Oaks, Travis Co., Texas," Texas
      Water Development Board Open-file Report Cl-7110, April 10,
      1972.

 99.   Cooper, Wallace,  "Possible Ground-water Contamination in  the
      Rolling Hills Addition, Potter Co., Texas," Texas Water
      Development Board C1-68Q2, August 1970.

100.  Law, J. P., et al., "Cannery Wastewater Treatment by High-rate
      Spray on Grassland," WPCF Journal, Vol. 42, No. 9, Sept.  1970-

101.  Environmental Science and Technology, "Solid Wastes, " Environ-
      mental  Science and Technology„ Vol. 4, No. 5, pp. 384-391,
      May 1970.
                              132

-------
102.  Beffort, J. D.,  "Investigation of Ground-water Contamination
      Hazards in the Vicinity of Tanner Red Garbage Dumps, Harris
      Co., Texas," Texas Water Development Board Open-file Report
      Cl-6906, July 1970.

103.  Zanoni, A. E.,  "Ground-water Pollution and Sanitary Landfills—
      A Critical Review," Presented at the National Ground-water
      Quality Symposium, Denver, Colorado, Aug. 1971.

104.  Hershaft, Alex, "Solid Waste Treatment Technology," Environ-
      mental Science and Technology, Vol. 6, No. 5, pp.  412-421,
      May 1972.

105.  Fletcher, H. C. andH. B. Elmendorf, "Phreatophytes~A Serious
      Problem in the West," Water:   The Yearbook of Agriculture, 1955,
      U.S. Dept.  of Agriculture, pp. 423-429, 1956.

106.  Hill, Robert, "Influence of Erwin Feed Lot Wastes on  Ground Water
      in Fort Gates, Coryell Co., Texas," Texas Water Development
      Board Open File Report, Dec. 1967.

107.  Texas Tech University,  "Infiltration Rates and Ground-water
      Quality Beneath Cattle Feedlots, Texas High Plains," Environ-
      mental Protection Agency Water Pollution Control Research Series
      16060 EGS,  Jan. 1971.

108.  Holloway, H. D.,  "Bacteriological Pollution of Ground Water in
      the Big Spring Area, Howard County, Texas," Texas Water
      Commission Report LD-0163-MR, June 1963.

109.  Fink.B.E., "Investigation of Ground-water Contamination by
      Cotton Seed Delinting Acid Waste,  Terry County," Texas Water
      Commission Report LD-0864, October 1964.

110.  White,  D. J., "Investigation of Ground-water Contamination in
      Southeast Andrews , Andrews County, Texas," Texas Water
      Development Board Open-file Report, April 1970.

111.  Hill, Robert, "Investigation of the  Presence of Coliform Organisms
      in Ground Water in Walnut Creek Area,  Travis Co., Texas,"
      Texas Water Development Board Open-file Report, Nov.  1968.

112   Hill  Robert  "Ground-water Contamination from Gasoline,
      Childress, Childress Co. , Texas," Texas Water Development
      Board Open-file Report, March 1967.
                               133

-------
113.  White, D. J., Investigation of Contamination by Gasoline of Water"
      Wells in Valera, Coleman Co., Texas," Texas Water Development
      Board Open-file Report, Aug. 1972.

114.  Bayha, David, "Investigation of All Ground-water Contamination
      Carlton Area, Hamilton Co., Texas," Texas Water Development
      Board Open-file Report, Jan.  1966.

115.  Ginn, R. F., "San Angelo Gasoline Problem (D. C. Cuningham),
      Tom Green Co., Texas," Texas Water Development Board Open-
      file Report Cl-7109, July 1971.

116.  Warner, D. L., "Deep-well Injection of Liquid Waste, " U.S.
      Department of Health,  Education and Welfare, Public Health
      Service, Division of Water  Supply and Pollution Control,
      Cincinnati, Ohio,  April 1965.

117.  Interstate Oil Compact Commission, "Subsurface Disposal of
      Industrial Wastes," Interstate Oil Compact Commission, June
      1968.

118.  Louisiana Geological Survey, "Underground Industrial Waste
      Disposal in Louisiana," Submitted to Senate Subcommittee on
      Air and Water Pollution, New Orleans, Louisiana, April 1971.

119.  Oklahoma Water Resources Board (Private Conversation) .

120-  Texas Water Quality Board (Private Conversation) .

121.  Kreiger, J. H., "The Law of the Underground," Civil Engineering.
      pp. 52-53, March 1969.

122.  Walker, W.  R. and R.  C. Stewart, "Deep Well Disposal of Wastes,"
      Am.  Soc. Civil Engineers Proc. Paper 6171, Jour.  Sanitary Eng.
      Div., Vol. 94, No. SA 5, pp. 945-968.

123.  Cleary, E. J. and D. L. Warner,  "Perspective on the Regulation
      of Underground Injection of Wastewaters," Ohio River Valley
      Water Sanitation Commission, Dec. 1969.

124.  Scalf, M. R., et al., "Fate of DDT and Nitrate in Ground Water,"
      U.S. Department of the Interior, April 1968.

125.  Bouwer, Herman, et al., "Renovating Secondary Sewage by
      Ground Water Recharge with Infiltration Basins," Environmental
      Protection Agency Water Pollution Control Research Series 16070
      DRV, March 1972.
                              134

-------
126.  Doen, D. F., et al., "Study of Reutilization of Wastewater Recycled
      Through Ground Water,  Vol. 1," Environmental Protection Agency
      Water Pollution Control Research Series 16060 DDZ, July 1971.

127.  Woods, Calvin (Private Communication), Texas A&M University,
      1973.

128.  National Technical Advisory Committee, FWPCA, "Water Quality
      Criteria," U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, B.C.,
      1968.

129-  U.S. Public Health Service, "Drinking Water Standards, 1962,"
      USDHEW Publication No. 956,  1962.

130.  McGauhey, P. H., "Engineering Management of Water Quality,"
      McGraw-Hill  Book Company, New York, 1968.

131.  Economic Research Service, "Major Uses of Land and Water in the
      United States," Agricultural Economic Report No. 13, Economic
      Research Service, U.S .  Department of Agriculture, July, 1962.

132.  American Society for Testing Materials, "First National Meeting
      on Water Quality Criteria," ASTM Publication No. 4-6,  1966.
                                135

-------
                           SECTION X

                      GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Aquifer - A geologic formation which contains water and has the capa-
bility of transmitting it from one point to another in quantity to permit
economic  development.

Aquifer Restoration - Restoration of the water quality in a polluted
aquifer to its normal quality, usually by removing the source of pollu-
tion and the polluted ground water.

Artificial  Recharge - The addition of water to the ground-water reservoir
by activities of man, such as irrigation or induced infiltration from
streams,  wells, or spreading basins .

Beneficial Use of Water - The use of water for any purpose from which
benefits are derived, such as  domestic, irrigation,  or industrial supply,
power development, or recreation.

Brackish  Water - Water containing dissolved minerals in excess of
acceptable normal municipal, domestic, and irrigation standards,  but
less than  that of sea water.

Cambrian Age - Oldest period of geological history in the Paleozoic Era.

Cenozoic  Age •- Era of geological history from the beginning of the
Tertiary  (first period in the Cenozoic Era) to the present.

Cretaceous Age - Youngest period of geological history in the Mesozoic
Era.

Closed Basin  - A basin is considered closed with respect to surface flow
if its topography prevents the occurrence of visible outflow. It is  closed
hydrologically if neither surface nor underground outflow can occur.

Confined  (Artesian) Aquifer - An aquifer which is bounded above and
below by  formations of impermeable or relatively impermeable material.

Connate Water - Sea water held  in the interstices of sedimentary deposits
and sealed in by the deposition of overlying beds.

Deep Well Disposal - The disposal of waste materials by injection  into a
subsurface formation, usually at much greater depth than known fresh-
water aquifers.
                                136

-------
Degradable - Capable of being decomposed, deteriorated, or decayed
into simpler forms with characteristics different from the original.  Also
referred to  as biodegradable.

Degradation of Water Quality - Decrease in water quality due to in-
creased concentration of any substance classified as a pollutant.

Demineralization - The process of removing the mineral salts from water.

Depletion (Ground-Water) - The withdrawal of water from a ground-
water source at a rate greater than its rate of replenishment, usually
over an extended period of several years.

Dissolved Solids - Chemicals in true solution.

Evaporation Pits - Ponds commonly used to store wastewaters, theoreti-
cally for evaporation. In most cases, there is probably more water lost
through infiltration than by evaporation.

Evapotranspiration - The sum of the quantity of water used by vegetative
growth in transpiration or building of plant tissue and the quantity
evaporated  from  adjacent soil or plant surfaces in a given specified time.

Ground Water - Underground water that is in the zone of saturation.

Ground Water Basin - A ground water reservoir together with all the
overlying land surface  and the underlying aquifers that contribute water
to the reservoir. In  some cases, the boundaries of successively deeper
aquifers may differ in a way that creates difficulty in defining the limits
of the basin.

Ground Water Mining - See Depletion (Ground-Water) .

Ground Water Recharge - Inflow to a ground water reservoir.

Ground Water Reservoir - An aquifer or aquifer system in which ground
water is  stored.  The water may be placed in the aquifer by artificial or
natural means.

Ground Water Storage  Capacity - The reservoir space contained in a
given volume of deposits.  Under optimum conditions of use, the usable
ground water  storage capacity volume of water that can be alternately
extracted and replaced in the deposit, within specified economic limita-
tions .
                                137

-------
Hydrologic  Cycle - The circuit of water movement from the atmosphere 1
to the earth and return to the atmosphere through various stages or
processes as precipitation, interception, runoff, infiltration, percola-
tion, storage, evaporation, and transpiration.

Igneous Rock - Rock formed by volcanic action or  great heat.

Infiltration - The process whereby water passes through an interface,
such as from air to soil or between two soil horizons.

Land Subsidence - The lowering of the natural land surface in response
to:  earth movements; lowering of fluid pressure;  removal of underlying
supporting material by mining or solution of solids, either artificially
or from natural causes; compaction due to wetting  (Hydrocompaction);
oxidation of organic matter in soils; or added load  on the land surface.

Mesozoic Age - The geological era after the Paleozoic and before the
Cenozoic eras.

Metamorphic Rock - Rock formed by a change in structure due to
pressure, heat, chemical action, etc.

mg/1 - Abbreviation for milligrams per liter.

Milligrams Per  Liter  - The weight in milligrams of any substance con-
tained in one liter of liquid. Approximately equivalent to parts per
million.

Mineralization - The process of accumulation of mineral elements and/or
compounds in soil or  water. See also Salinization.

Mining  of Ground Water - See Depletion  (Ground-Water) .

Natural Brines - Highly mineralized water resulting from percolation of
ground water through soils or rocks containing soluble minerals.

Natural Leaching - The process whereby percolation of water  through
soils and rocks dissolves material from the formation.

Nutrients - Compounds of nitrogen, phosphorus, and other elements
essential for plant growth.

Overdraft - The amount by which pumpage of ground water exceeds the
safe yield of the ground water aquifer or basin.

Oxidation-Reduction Potential - Denotes the potential required to trans-
fer electrons from the oxidized form to the reduced form.
                               138

-------
Perched Ground Water - Ground water supported by a zone of material
of low permeability and located above an underlying main body of ground
water with which it is not hydro static ally connected.

Percolation - The movement of water within a porous medium such as soil.

Perennial Yield (Ground Water) - The amount of usable water of a
ground water reservoir that can be withdrawn and consumed economi-
cally each year for an indefinite period of time.  It cannot exceed the
natural recharge to that ground'water reservoir.

Permeability - The property of a material which  permits appreciable
movement of water through it when actuated by hydrostatic pressure of
the magnitude normally encountered in natural subsurface water.

Pesticides - Chemical compounds used for the control of undesirable
plants, animals, or insects .  The term includes insecticides, weed
killers, rodent poisons, nematode poisons, fungicides, and growth
regulators.

Phreatophyte - A plant that habitually obtains its water supply from the
zone of saturation, either directly or through the capillary  fringe.

PI ay as  - Flat floored  lakes formed in undrained natural depressions.

Pleistocene Age - The first epoch of the Quaternary Age of  geological
history.

Pliocene Age - Most recent epoch of Tertiary Age and just prior to
beginning of the Quaternary Age.

Pollution - The presence of any substance (organic, inorganic, bio-
logical, thermal, or radiological) in water at intensity levels which
tend to impair,  degrade, or adversely affect its  quality or usefulness
for a specific purpose.

Quaternary Age - Division of recent geological history from the end
of Tertiary Age in the Cenozoic Era to  the present.

Recharge - See Ground Water Recharge.

Recharge Basin - A basin provided to increase infiltration  for the pur-
pose of replenishing  ground water supply.

Return Flow - That part of a diverted flow which is not consumptively
used and which returns to a source of supply  (surface or underground) .
                                139

-------
 Safe  Ground-Water Yield - The annual pumpage that can be sustained  ,v
 without permanent change in ground water storage.                  .i:

 Saline Water - Water containing dissolved salts.  See also Brackish
 Water.

 Salinity - Salt content concentration of dissolved mineral salts in water
 or soil.                                                          '"

 Salinization - The process of accumulation of soluble salts in soil or
 water.  See also Mineralization.

 Salt Balance - A condition in which specific or total dissolved solids
 removed from a specified field, stratigraphic zone, political area, or
 drainage basin equals the comparable dissolved solids added to that
 location from all outside sources during a specified period of time.

 Salt Water Barrier - A physical facility or method of operation designed
 to prevent the intrusion of salt water into a body of fresh water.  In
 underground water management, a barrier may be created by injection
 of relatively fresh water to create a hydraulic barrier against salt water
 intrustion.

 Salt Water Intrusion - The invasion of a body of fresh water by salt
 water.  It can occur either in surface or ground water bodies.

 Secondary Oil Recovery - The injection of water into an oil producing
 formation to increase pressure so as to increase the percent of recover-
 able oil.

 Seepage - The gradual movement of a fluid into, through, or out of a
 porous medium.

 Suspended Solids - Solids which are not in true solution and which can
 be removed by filtration.

 Sustained Yield - Achievement and maintenance, in perpetuity, of a
 high-level  annual or regular periodic output or harvest of the various
 renewable land and water resources.

 Stable Isotope  Ratio - Refers to the tendency of isotopes of different
 mass  of the same chemical species to react at different rates when under-
 going the same chemical biological reaction.

 Total  Dissolved Solids (TDS) - The total dissolved solids in water,
usually expressed in milligrams per liter  (mg/1) .
                                 140

-------
Waste Water Reclamation - The process of treating salvaged water from
municipal, industrial, or agricultural waste water sources for beneficial
uses, whether by means of special facilities or through natural processes.

Waterflooding - See Secondary  Oil Recovery.

Water Quality - A term used to  describe the chemical, physical,  and
biological characteristics of water, usually in respect to its suitability
for a particular purpose.

Water Right - A legally protected right to take possession of water
occurring in a water supply and to divert that water and put it to
beneficial use.

Water Table - The surface in a ground-water body at which the water
pressure is atmospheric.
                                  141

-------
                          SECTION XI

                          APPENDIX A


                                                         Page

WATER QUALITY STANDARDS                               143

      Table A-l.  Surface Water Criteria for Public
                 Water Supplies                            144

      Table A-2.  Chemical Standards of Drinking Water      146

      Table A-3.  Guides to the Quality of Water for
                 Livestock                                147

      Table A-4.  Suggested Guidelines for Salinity in
                 Irrigation Water                           148

      Table A-5.  Trace Element Tolerances for Irrigation
                 Water                                    149

      Table A-6.  Levels of Herbicides in Irrigation Water
                 at Which Crop Injury  Has Been Observed    150

      Table A-7.  Preferred Limits for Several Criteria of
                 Water for Use in Industrial Processes        151
                               142

-------
                                             2/
                WATER QUALITY STANDARDS -'
The extent of undesirability of a given level of pollution in water is
dependent upon the use or intended use of the water.  Standards of
quality of water used for domestic water supply have been established
by the National Technical Advisory Committee on Water Quality
Criteria 128/, and the U.S.  Public Health Service 129/ .  Tables A-l
and A-2 presented herein, are taken from their reports.

Various agencies have set standards of quality for waters used for
other purposes.  Table A-3  gives standards for livestock watering as
reported by McGauhey 13Q/ . Tables A-4, A-5 and A-6 present irriga-
tion water quality standards as suggested by the Economic Research
Service 131/. Table A-7 gives standards for water used in various
industrial processes as reported by the American Society for Testing
Materials 132/.
                                143

-------
Table A-l.  SURFACE WATER CRITERIA FOR PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES
                                                                    128/
                                         a
Constituent or Characteristic

    Physical:
    Color (color units)

    Microbiological:
    Coliform organisms
    Fecal coliforms

    Inorganic Chemicals:
    Ammonia
    Arsenic
    Barium
    Boron
    Cadmium
    Chloride
    Chromium, hexavalent
    Copper
    Dissolved Oxygen

    Iron (filterable)
    Lead
    Manganese (filterable)
    Nitrates plus nitrites
    pH (range)
    Selenium
    Silver
    Sulfate
    Total  dissolved  solids,
      (filterable residue)
    Uranyl ion
    Zinc
Permissible
  Criteria
     75
10,000/100 ml
 2,000/100 mlc

    mg/1
  0.5 (as N)
  0.05
  1.0
  1.0
  0.01
250
  0.05
  1.0
4 (monthly mean)
3 (indiv.  sample)
  0.3
  0.05
  0.05
 10 (as N)
  6.0 to 8.5
  0.01
  0.05
250
500

  5
  5
Desirable
  Criteria
<100/100 ml
< 20/100 mlc

    mg/1
  <0.01
  Absent
  Absent
  Absent
  Absent
 <25
  Absent
Virtually absent
Near Saturation

Virtually Absent
  Absent
  Absent
Virtually Absent
 Variable
  Absent
  Absent
 <50
<200

  Absent
Virtually absent
d
 Permissible criteria—Those characteristics and concentrations of sub-
 substances in raw surface water which will allow the production of a
 safe, clear, potable,  aesthetically pleasing, and acceptable public
 water supply which meets the limits of Drinking Water Standards after
 treatment.

 Desirable criteria—Those characteristics and concentrations of sub-
 stances in the raw surface waters which represent high-quality water
 in all respects for use as public water supplies.  Water meeting these
 criteria can be treated in the defined plants with  greater factors of
 safety or at less cost  than is possible with waters meeting permissible
 criteria.
                                144

-------
Table A-l (cont'd) SURFACE WATER CRITERIA FOR PUBLIC WATER
                  SUPPLIES 128/
Constituent or Characteristic
  Permissiblea
     Criteria
    Organic  Chemicals:
    Carbon chloroform
      extract (CCE)
    Cyanide
    Methylene blue  active
       substances
    Oil and Grease
    Pesticides:
       Aldrin
       Chlordane
       DDT
       Dieldrin
       Endrin
       Heptachlor
       Heptachlor epoxide
       Lindane
       Mathoxychlor
       Organic phosphates  plus
         Carbamates
       Toxaphene

    Herbicides:
       2, 4-D plus  2, 4, 5-T
         plus 2, 4, 5-TP
    Phenols
     (mg/1)

     0.15
     0.20

     0.5
  Virtually Absent

     0.017
     0.003
     0.042
     0.017
     0.001
     0.018
     0.018
     0.056
     0.035

     O.ld
     0.005
    0.1
    0.001
    Radioactivity:
    Gross beta
    Radium-22 6
    Strontium-90
1,000
    3
   10
     (pc/1)
Desirable
  Criteria

  (mg/1)

  <0.04
  Absent

Virtually Absent
  Absent

  Absent
  Absent
  Absent
  Absent
  Absent
  Absent
  Absent
  Absent
  Absent

  Absent
  Absent
  Absent
  Absent

  (pc/1)
<100
  <1
  <2
aSee Previous page.

 See Previous page.
CMicrobiological limits are monthly arithmetic averages based upon an
 adequate number of samples.  Total coliform limit may be relaxed if
 fecal concentration does not exceed the specified limit.

Expressed as parathion in cholinesterase inhibition.  It may be neces-
 sary to resort to even lower concentrations for some compounds or
 mixtures.
                                145

-------
Table A-2.  CHEMICAL STANDARDS OF DRINKING WATER 1297

Category A — Maximum allowable concentrations where other more
              suitable supplies are, or can be made available:

          Substance                             Concentration
                                                  in mg/1

    Alkyl Benzene Sulfonate (ABS)                     0.5
    Arsenic (As)                                     0.01
    Chloride  (Cl)                                   250
    Copper (Cu)                                     1
    Carbon Chloroform Extract (CCE)                  0.2
    Cyanide  (CN)                                     0.01
    Iron (Fe)                                        0.3
    Manganese (Mn )                                 0.05
    Nitrate (NO,)  a                                 45
    Phenols                                          0.001
    Sulfate (S04)                                   250
    Total Dissolved Solids  (TDS)                    500
    Zinc (Zn)                                        5

Category B --Maximum concentrations which shall constitute grounds
             for outright rejection of the supply:

          Substance                             Concentration
                                                   in mg/1

    Arsenic (As)                                     0.05
    Barium (Ba)                                     1.0
    Cadmium  (Cd)             +6                     0.01
    Chromium (Hexavalent)  (Cr  )                     0.05
    Cyanide (CN)                                     0.2'
    Fluoride  (F)                                0.6 to 1.7b
    Lead (Pb)                                        0.05
    Selenium  (Se)                                     0.01
    Silver (Ag)                                       0.05
in areas in which the nitrate content of water is known to be in excess
of the listed concentration,  the public should be warned of the poten-
tial dangers of using the water for infant feeding.

Varies with water temperature.
                               146

-------
Table A-3,  GUIDES TO THE QUALITY OF WATER FOR LIVESTOCK ISO/
       Quality Factor
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)C
Cadmium
Calcium
Magnesium
Sodium
Arsenic
Bicarbonate
Chloride
Fluoride
Nitrate as NO,
Nitrite
Sulfate
Range of pH
 Threshold
Concentration

    2500
       5
     500
     250
    1000
       1
     500
    1500
       1
     200
    None
     500
 6.0 to  8.5
  Limiting
Concentration

    5000

    1000
     500
    2000

     500
    3000
       6
     400
    None
    1000
 5.6 to  9.0
 Threshold values represent/concentrations at which poultry or sensitive
 animals might show slight effects from prolonged use of water. Lower
 concentrations are of little or no concern.

h                                                  '''*••
 Limiting concentrations based on interim criteria,  South Africa studies.
 Animals in lactation or production might show definite adverse reaction.

°Total magnesium compounds plus sodium sulfate should not exceed 50
 percent of the total dissolved solids.
                                147

-------
Table A-4. SUGGESTED GUIDELINES FOR SALINITY IN IRRIGATION
           WATER 131/

         Crop Response             TDS in mg/1        ECa

Water for which no detrimental
 effects will usually be noticed       less than 500    less than 0.75

Water which can have detrimental
 effects on sensitive crops           500-1000         0.75-1.50

Water that may have adverse effects
 on many crops and requiring careful
 management practices               1000-2000         1.50-3.00

Water that can be used for salt-
 tolerant plants on permeable soils
 with careful management practices   2000-5000         3.00-7.50
 Electrical Conductivity expressed in millimhos per centimeter.
                              148

-------
Table A-5. TRACE ELEMENT TOLERANCES FOR IRRIGATION WATER 131. /

                            For Water Used     For Short-term Use
                           Continuously on     on Fine-Textured
                              All Soils             Soils Only
      Element                   mg/1	    	mg/1	
Aluminum                        1.0                 20.0
Arsenic                          1.0                 10.0
Beryllium                        0.5                  1.0
Boron                           0.75                 2.0

Cadmium                         0.005                0.05
Chromium                        5.0                 20.0
Cobalt                           0.2                 10.0
Copper                          0.2                  5.0

Lead                            5.0                 20.0
Lithium                          5.0                  5.0
Manganese                       2.0                 20.0
Molybdenum                     0-005                0.05

Nickel                           O-5                  2.0
Selenium                         0.05                 0.05
Vanadium                       10.0                 10.0
Zinc                            5.0                 10.0
                               149

-------
 Table A-6.  LEVELS OF HERBICIDES IN IRRIGATION WATER AT WHICH
            CROP INJURY HAS BEEN OBSERVED 131/
     Herbicide
 Acrolein
 Aromatic Solvents
    (Xylene)
 Copper Sulfate


 Amitrole-T

 Delapon

 Dequat

 Enothall Na and K
    salts

 Dimethylamines

 2, 4-D


 Dichlobenil


 Fenac


 Picloram
      Crop Injury Threshold in Irrigation
         Water, expressed in mg/1	

Flood or Furrow: beans-60, corn-60, cotton -
80, soybeans-20, sugar beets-60.
Sprinkler: corn-60, soybeans-15, sugar
beets-15.

Alfalfa >1600, beans-1200, carrots-1600, corn-
3000, cotton-1600, grain sorghum >800, oats-2400,
potatoes-1300, wheat >1200.

Apparently, above concentrations used for weed
control.

Beets (rutabaga) >3.5, corn >3. 5.

Beets >7.0, corn <0.35

Beans-5.0, corn 125.0.

Corn-25, field beans <1.0, alfalfa >10.0.


Corn >25, soybeans >25. sugar beets-25.

Field Beans >3.5 <10, grapes-0.7-1.5, sugar
beets-3.5.

Alfalfa-10, corn >10, soybeans-1.0, sugar beets-
1.0-10.

Alfalfa-1.0, corn-10, soybeans-0.1, sugar beets-
0.1-10.

Corn >10, field beans-0-1, sugar beets <1.0.
Note:  Where the symbol ">" is used, the concentrations in water cause
      no injury.  Data are for furrow irrigation unless otherwise
      specified.
                               150

-------
Table A-7.  PREFERRED LIMITS FOR SEVERAL CRITERIA OF WATER
            FOR USE IN INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES 132/
         Process

Aluminum (hydrate Wash)
Baking

Boiler Feed:
0 to 150 psi
150 to 250 psi
250 to 400 psi
400 to 1000 psi
Over 1000 psi
Turbidity
   Max.
   Ppm
   10
   80
   40
    5
    2
Brewing                          10
Carbonated beverages              2
Confectionery
Dairy
Electroplating and finishing, rinse
Fermentation                     low
Food Canning and Freezing        10
Food Processing, general          10
Ice Manufacturing
Laundering
Oil Well Flooding
Photographic process             low

Pulp and Paper:
Groundwood paper                 50
Solda and Sulfate pulp             25
Kraft paper, bleached             40
Kraft paper, unbleached          100
Fine paper                        10

Sugar Manufacture
Tanning Operations                20
Textile Manufacture                 0.3
    PH
Min.    Max.
8.0
8.4
9-0
9.6
           6.5
           7.0
           7.5
           6.0
           7.0
       7.0
   TDS
   Max.
   mg/1

   low
   3000
   1500
   2500
     50
      0.5

   1500

    100
    500
   low

    850

170 to  1300
       6.8
                             500
                             250
                             300
                             500
                             200

                             low
           6.0
       8.0
Note:  The values in this table are taken from summaries in the compre-
hensive review by McKee and Wolf, cited in the ASTM report 131/, and
are presented here only as a general guide.  They should be used only
after study of the original references cited in the ASTM report.
                              151

-------
                          SECTION XII

                        BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alexander, W. H., B. N. Myers and O. C. Dale, "Reconnaissance
Investigations of the Ground Water Resources of the Guadalupe, San
Antonio, and Nueces River Basins, Texas," Texas Water Commission
Bulletin 6409, August 1964.

Baker,  B. B., et al.,  "Reconnaissance Investigation of the Ground Water
Resources of the Neches River Basin, Texas," Texas Water Commission
Bulletin 6305, August 1963.

Baker,  B . B ., et al.,  "Reconnaissance Investigation of the Ground Water
Resources of the Sabine River Basin, Texas," Texas Water Commission
Bulletin 6307, August 1963.

Baker,  E. T., et al.,  "Reconnaissance Investigations of the Ground Water
Resources of the Red River, Sulphur River and Cypress Creek Basins,
Texas," Texas Water Commission Bulletin 6306, July 1963.

Baker,  S. E., "A Statistical Study of the Depth of Precipitable Water in
Western Texas and Eastern New Mexico," Texas Water Development
Board Report 96, June 1969.

Ballance, W. C., et al. , "Ground Water Levels in New Mexico, I960,"
New Mexico State Engineer Technical Report 27,  1962.

Bayha,  D. C., "Occurrence and Quality of Ground Water in Stephens
County, Texas," Texas Water Commission Bulletin 6412, September 1964.

Bean, R. T., "Geology of the Roswell Artesian Basin,  New Mexico, and
its Relation to the Hondo Reservoir," New Mexico State Engineer Techni-
cal Report 9, 1949.

Bedinger, M. S., L. F. Emmett and H. G. Jeffery, "Ground Water
Potential of the Alluvium of the Arkansas River Between Little Rock and
Fort Smith, Arkansas," U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper
1669-L,  1963.

Bedinger, M.S., and H. G. Jeffery,  "Ground Water in the Lower Arkansas
River Valley, Arkansas," U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper
1669-V,  1964.

Bedinger, M.S., and J. E. Reed, "Geology and Ground Water Resources
of Desha and Lincoln Counties, Arkansas," Arkansas Water Resources
Circular No. 6,  1961,

                              152

-------
Bieger, P. P., and M. J. Forbes, Jr., "Pumpage of Water in Louisiana,"
Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources Pamphlet No. 20, August
1966.

Bjorklund, L. J., and B. W. Maxwell, "Availability of Ground Water in
the Albuquerque Area, Bernalillo and Sandoval Counties, New Mexico,"
New Mexico State Engineer Technical Report 21, 1961.

Bjorklund, L. J., and W. S. Motts, "Geology and Ground Water Resources
of the Carlsbad Area, Eddy County, New Mexico," U.S. Geological
Survey Open-File Report 235.

Blaney, H. F., and E.G. Hanson, "Consumptive Use and Water Require-
ments in New Mexico," New Mexico State Engineer Technical Report 32,


Blank, H. R., W. G.  Knisel and R. W. Baird, "Geology and Ground Water
Studies in Part of the Edwards Plateau of Texas, Including Sutton and
Adjacent Counties," Agricultural Research Service ARS 41-103, April
1966.

Broom, M. E., "Ground Water Resources of Cass and Marion Counties,
Texas," Texas Water Development Board Report 135, October  1971.

Broom, M. E., "Ground Water Resources of Gregg and Upshur Counties,
Texas," Texas Water Development Board Report 101, October  1969.

Broom, M. E. , "Ground  Water Resources of Wood County, Texas,"
Texas Water Development Board Report 79, August 1968.

Brunner, D. R., and D. J. Keller, "Sanitary Landfill Design and Opera-
tion," U.S . Environmental Protection Agency, Solid Waste Management
Series, SW-65ts, 1972.

Bureau of Water Resources Research and Oklahoma Water Resources
Board, "Water,  Oklahoma's No.  1 Problem," 3rd edition, Dec. 1961.

Burke, R. G., "Texas Toughens Antipollution Line," Oil and Gas
Journal, Vol. 64, No.  1, pp. 47-48,  1966.

Burnitt,  S. C., "City of Hawkins, Wood County, Texas; Investigation
of Ground Water Contamination," Texas Water Commission Report LD-0162,
September 1963.

Burnitt  S  C , et al., "Reconnaissance of Soil Damage and Ground Water
Quality! Fisher County, Texas," Texas Water Commission Memorandum
Report No.  63-02, September 1963.
                              153

-------
Burnitt, S. C., et al.,  "Reconnaissance Survey of Salt Water Disposal in
the Mexia, Negro Creek, and Cedar Creek Oil Fields, Limestone County,
Texas, " Texas Water Commission Memorandum Report No.  62-02, May
1962.                                                          ;;;:;;%

Busch, F. E., and J. D. Hudson,  "Ground Water Levels in New Mexico,"
New Mexico State Engineer Technical Report 34, 1965.

Bushman, F. X., and C. P. Valentine, "Water Well Records and Well
Water Quality in Southwestern San Augustin Plains, Catron County,
New Mexico," New Mexico Institute of Mining  and Technology
Circular 26, April 1954.                                           ;%

Calandro, A. J., "Water Resources of the Belmont-Marthaville-
Robeline Area, Louisiana,"  Louisiana Geological Survey Water  Resources
Pamphlet No. 25, November 1970.

Callahan,  J.  T. and R. L. Cushman, "Geology and Ground Water Supplies
of the Fort Wingate Indian School Area, McKinley County, New  Mexico,"
U.S. Geological Survey Circular 360, 1955.

Cardwell, G. T., et al., "Progress Report on the Availability of Fresh
Water Lake Pontchartrain Area,  Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey
Water Resources Pamphlet No. 18, May 1966.

Cardwell, G. T., M. J. Forbes, Jr.  and M. W. Gaydos,  "Water Resources
of the Lake Pontechartrain Area," Louisiana Geological Survey  Water
Resources Bulletin No. 12, December 1967.

Cardwell, G. T., and J. R. Rollo, "Interim Report on Ground Water  Condi-
tions between Baton Rouge and New Orleans,  Louisiana," Louisiana Geo-
logical Survey Water Resources  Pamphlet No. 9, August  1960.

Carr, J. T.,  Jr., "The Climate  and Physiography of Texas," Texas  Water
Development Board Report 53, July 1967.

Clark, I. G., "Administration of Water Resources in New Mexico," Water
Resources Research Institute Report No. 3, June 1968.

Cleary, E. J., and D. L. Warner,  "Perspective on the Regulation of
Underground Injection  of Wastewaters," Ohio River Valley  Water Sanita-
tion Commission, December  1969.

Collins, A. G., "Geochemistry of Some Petroleum-Associated Waters
from Louisiana," Bureau of Mines, Report of Investigations 7326,
January 1970.
                               154

-------
Conover, C. S., "Ground Water Resources in New Mexico," New Mexico
Professional Engineer and Contractor, Vol. 3(7), 1951.    "	

Conover, C. S., "Municipal Water Supplies in New Mexico," American
Water Works Association Journal, Vol. 49, No. 4, pp. 475-479"!

Conover, C. S ., et al.,  "The Occurrence of Ground Water in South
Central New Mexico," New Mexico Geological Society, 6th Field
Conference, pp. 108-119, 1955.

Conover, C. S., C. V. Theis and R. L. Griggs,  "Geology and Hydrology
of Valle Grande and Valle Toledo, Sandoval County, New Mexico," U.S.
Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1619-Y, 1963.

Cooper, J. B., "Ground Water in the Causey-Lingo Area, Roosevelt
County, New Mexico," New Mexico State Engineer Technical Report 14,
1960.

Cooper, J. B ., "Ground Water Investigations of the Project Gnome Area,
Eddy and Lea Counties, New Mexico,"  U.S. Department of the Interior
Geological Survey TEI-802, March 1962.

Cooper, J. B., and E.G. John, "Geology and Ground Water Occurrence
in Southeastern McKinley County, New Mexico,"  New Mexico State
Engineer Technical Report 35, 1968.

Cordova, R. M.,  "Reconnaissance of the Ground  Water Resources of the
Arkansas Valley Region Arkansas," U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply
Paper 1669-BB, 1963.

Core Laboratories, Inc., "A Survey of the Subsurface Saline Water of
Texas," Texas Water Development Board Report 157, Vol. 1, Oct. 1972.

Counts, H. B ., "Ground Water Resources of Parts of Lonoke, Prairie, and
White Counties, Arkansas," Arkansas Geological and Conservation
Commission Water Resources Circular No. 5, 1957.

Counts, H. B., et al. , "Ground-Water  Resources in a Part of Southwestern
Arkansas," Arkansas Geological and Conservation Commission Water
Resources Circular No. 2, 1955.

Cox, E. R. , and H. O. Reeder, "Ground Water Conditions in the Rio Grande
Valley between Truth or Consequences and Las Palomas, Sierra County,
New Mexico," New Mexico State Engineer Technical Report 25, 1962.

Cronin  J. G.,  "A Summary of the Occurrence and Development of
Ground Water in the Southern High Plains of Texas," Texas Board of
Water Engineers Bulletin 6107, September 1961.


                               155

-------
 Cronin, J. G.,  and C. A. Wilson, "Ground Water in the Flood-Plain
 Alluvium of the Brazos River, Whitney Dam to Vicinity of Richmond,
 Texas," Texas Water Development Board Report 41, March 1967.
                                                                    f

 Crouch, R. L. , and S. C.  Burnitt, "Investigation of Ground Water
 Contamination in the Vealmoor Oil Field, Howard and Borden Counties,
 Texas," Texas Water Commission Report LD-0265, January 1965.

 Crouch, R. L. , "Investigation of Alleged Ground Water Contamination,
 Tri-Rue and Ride Oil Fields, Scurry County, Texas," Texas Water
 Commission Report LD-0464-MR, March 1964.

 d'Arge, R. C. , "Quantitative Water Resources Basin Planning:  An
 Analysis of the Pecos River Basin, New Mexico," Water Resources
 Research Institute Report No. 8, December 1970.

 Davis, L. V. , "Geology and Ground Water Resources of Grady and
 Northern Stephens Counties, Oklahoma," Oklahoma Geological Survey
 Bulletin No. 73, 1955.

 Davis, L. V., "Geology and Ground Water Resources of Southern
 McCurtain County, Oklahoma," Oklahoma Geological Survey Bulletin
 86, 1960.

 Davis, M. E., and J. D. Gordon, "Records of Water Levels and Chemical
 Analysis from Selected Wells in Parts of the Trans-Pecos Region, Texas,
 1965-68," Texas Water Development Board Report 114, April  1970.

 Davis, M. E., andE. R. Leggat, "Reconnaissance Investigation of the
 Ground Water Resources of the Upper Rio Grande Basin, Texas," Texas
 Water Commission Bulletin 6502, July 1965.

 Dial, D. C., "Pump age of Water  in Louisiana, 1970," Louisiana Geological
 Survey Water Resources Pamphlet No. 26, July  1970.

 Dial, D.C. , "Water Level Trends in Southeastern Louisiana," Louisiana
 Geological Survey Water Resources Pamphlet No. 22,  May 1968.

 Dott, R. H., "Groundwater Supplies in Oklahoma and Their Development."
 Oklahoma Geological Survey (Unpublished Paper n.d.) .

 Doty, G.  C.,  "Reconnaissance of Ground Water  in Playas Valley, Hidalgo
 County, New Mexico," New Mexico State Engineer Technical Report 15,
 1960.

Dover, T. B., and J. W. Geurin, "Summary of Annual Records of Chemical
Quality of Water of the Arkansas River in Oklahoma and Arkansas 1945-52:
A Progress Report," U.S. Geological Survey Circular 499, 1965.
                               156

-------
       Oklahnpi      Chafacter of Public Water Supplies in Oklahoma,
       Oklahoma Planning and Resources Board Bulletin No. 8, 1953.

Economic Research Service, "Status of Water and Sewage Facilities in
Communities Without Public Systems," U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Agricultural Economic Report No. 143, 20 pp.,  1968.

Engineering Enterprises, "Analysis of Ground Water Development in the
Barber-Wellington Aquifer," November 17, 1970.

Environmental Science and Technology,  "Deep Well Injection is Effective
for Waste Disposal," Environmental Science and  Technology   Vol  2
No. 6, pp. 406-410,  I96JT   ~~             '	

Evans, D. M. , and Albert Bradford, "Under the Rug," Environment,
Vol. 11, No. 8, pp. 3-31,  1969.                      	

Fader, S. W. , "An Analysis of Contour Maps of Water Levels in Wells in
Southwestern Louisiana, 1954," Louisiana Geological Survey Water
Resources Pamphlet No. 2, May 1955.

Fader, S. W. , "An Analysis of Contour Maps of 1955 Water Levels with a
Discussion of Salt-Water Problems in Southwestern Louisiana," Louisiana
Geological Survey Water Resources Pamphlet No. 4, July 1957.

Fader, S. W., "Contour Maps of Water Levels in Wells in  Southwestern
Louisiana 1952 and 1953."  Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources
Pamphlet No. 1,  November 1954.

Fader, S. W. , "Water Levels and Water-Level Contour Maps for South-
western Louisiana 1956 and Spring 1957," Louisiana Geological Survey
Water Resources Pamphlet No. 5, January 1958.

Ferris, J. G., D. B. Knowles, R. H. Brown andR. W. Stallman,
"Theory of Aquifer Tests," U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply
Paper 1536, 1962.

Fink, B. E. , "Investigation of Ground- and Surface-Water Contamination
near*Harrold, Wilbarger County, Texas," Texas Water Commission Report
LD-0365, February 1965.

Fink  B. E., "Investigation of Ground Water Contamination by  Cotton  Seed
Delin'ting Acid Waste, Terry County, Texas," Texas Water Commission
Report LD-0864, October 1964.

Fletcher  H  C., and H. B. Elmendorf, "Phreatophytes—A Serious
Problem in the West, " Water:   The Yearbook of Agriculture.  1955,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, pp. 423-429, 1956.
                               157

-------
 Follett, C. R., "Ground Water Resources of Bastrop County, Texas,"
 Texas Water Development Board Report 109, March 1970.

 Fuhriman, W. O. ,  "Agricultural Utilization of Wastewater Effluents,"
 Water Pollution  Control Federation Highlights, Vol. 9, No.  8, Aug. 1972.

 Gabrysch, R. K.,  "Development of Ground Water in the Houston District,
 Texas, 1961-65," Texas Water Development Board Report 63, October
 1967.

 Gabrysch, R. K.,  "Development of Ground Water in the Houston District,
 Texas, 1966-69," Texas Water Development Board Report 152, June 1972.

 Gabrysch, R. K. .  et al. (compilers), "Records of Water-Level Measure-
 ments in Wells in Harris County,  Texas, 1966-69," Texas Water Development
 Board Report 122,  November 1970.

 Gabrysch, R. K.,  etal. (compilers), "Records of Water-Level Measure-
 ments in Wells in Galveston County, Texas, 1894-1969," Texas Water
 Development  Board Report 123, December, 1970.

 Gabrysch, R. K.,  etal. (compilers), "Records of Water-Level Measure-
 ments in Observation Wells in Harris County, Texas," Texas Water
 Development  Board Report 103, December 1969.

 Card, L. M., Jr.,  "Geologic Studies Project Gnome Area, Eddy County,
 New Mexico," U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 589, 1968.        /

 Garza, Sergio, "Water-Delivery Study,  Lower Nueces River Valley,
 Texas," Texas Water Development Board Report 75, May 1968.

 George, W. O., and W. W. Hastings, "Nitrate in the Ground Water of
 Texas," Transactions, American Geophysical Union, Vol. 32, No. 3,
 June  1951.

 Gilbert, C. R., "Water-Loss Studies of Lake Corpus Christi, Nueces
 River Basin,  Texas,  1949-65," Texas Water Development Board
 Report 104, January 1970.

 Gilbertson, etal.,  "Runoff, Solid Wastes, and Nitrate Movement on
 Beef Feedlots," Journal  of the Water Pollution  Control Federation,
 Vol. 43, No.  3, Part 1, March 1971.
                                                                 t
 Gray, J. R. ,  andH. R.  Stucky, "New Mexico Agriculture—1970," New
Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Research
Report 195.
                              158

-------
Green, PL. , III, "Wastewater Reuse in the El Paso-Trans Pecos Area,"
            enCe "* EngineerinS Thesis> University of Texas at El Paso,
Griggs, R. L. , "Geology and Ground-Water Resources of the Eastern
Part of Coif ax County, New Mexico," New Mexico Bureau of Mines and
Mineral Resources Ground Water Report 1 ,  1948 .

Grozier, R. U. , et al. , "Water-Delivery and Low-Flow Studies, Pecos
River, Texas, Quantity and Quality, 1964 and 1965," Texas Water
Development Board Report 22, May 1966.

Grozier, R. U. , et al. , "Water Delivery Study, Pecos River, Texas,
Quantity and Quality, 1967," May 1968.

Guyton, W. F. , and Associates, "Ground Water Conditions in Angelina
and Nacogdoches Counties, Texas," Texas Water Development Board
Report 110, March 1970.

Halberg, H. N. , C. T. Bryant and M.S. Hines, "Water Resources of
Grant and Hot Spring Counties, Arkansas," U.S. Geological Survey
Water Supply Paper 1857, 1968.

Halberg , H . N . , and I.E. Reed , "Ground Water Resources of Eastern
Arkansas in the vicinity of U.S. Highway 70," U.S.  Geological Survey
Water-Supply Paper  1779-V, 1964.

Hale, W. E. , "Availability of Ground Water in New Mexico," New Mexico
6th Annual Water Conference, University Park, New Mexico, pp. 11-24,
1961.

Hale, H. , et al. , "Public Water Supplies of Arkansas," University of
Arkansas Research Series No. 11, June 1947.

Hale, W. E. , L. S. Hughes  and E. R.  Cox,  "Possible Improvement of
Quality of Water of the Pecos River by Diversion of Brine at Malago
Bend, Eddy County,  New Mexico."  Pecos River Commission:  New
Mexico and Texas; Carlsbad, New Mexico.

Hale  W. E. ,  L. J. Peiland  and J. P. Beverage, "Characteristics of
the Water Supply in New Mexico," New Mexico State Engineer Technical
Report 31,  1965.

Hammond,  W. W. ,  Jr. , "Ground Water Resources of Matagorda County,
Texas," Texas Water Development Board Report 91,  March 1969.
                             159

-------
 Hantush, M.S., "Preliminary Quantitative Study of the Roswell Ground
 Water Reservoir New Mexico," New Mexico Institute of Mining and
 Technology, 1957.

 Harder, A.  H., "Water Levels and Water-Level Contour Maps for South-
 western Louisiana 1958 and 1959," Louisiana Geological Survey Water
 Resources Pamphlet No. 8, August I960.

 Harder, A.  H., "Water Levels and Water-Level Contour Maps of South-
 western Louisiana 1959 and Spring I960," Louisiana Geological Survey
 Water Resources Pamphlet No. 10, July 1961.

 Harder, A.  H., et al., "Water Resources of the Lettsworth-Innis-Batchelor
 Area, Pointe Coupee Parish, Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey
 Water Resources Pamphlet No. 21, January 1968.

 Harder, A.  H., et al., "Effects of Ground Water Withdrawals on Water
 Levels and Salt-Water Encroachment in Southwestern Louisiana,"
 Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources Bulletin No. 10, October
 1967.

 Harder, A.  H., et al., "Methane in the Fresh-Water Aquifers of South-
 western Louisiana and Theoretical Explosion Hazards," Louisiana
 Geological Survey Water Resources Pamphlet No.  14, February 1965.

 Harris, H.  B ., "Ground-Water Resources of La Salle and  McMullen
 Counties, Texas," Texas Water Commission Bulletin 6520, August 1965.

 Harshbarger, J. W., and C. A.  Repenning, "Water Resources of the
 Chuska Mountains Area, Navajo Indian Reservation, Arizona and New
 Mexico," U.S. Geological Survey Circular 308, 1954.

 Harshbarger, J. W., et al., "Stratigraphy of the Upper-most Triassic
 and the Jurassic Rocks of the Navajo Country," U.S. Geological Survey
 Professional Paper 291, 1957.

 Hart, D. L., "Ground Water Levels in Observation Wells in Oklahoma,
 1965-66," U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, 1967.

 Hauser, V. L., and D. C. Signer, "Water Conservation and Ground Water
 Recharge Research," Texas A and M University, Texas Agricultural
 Experiment Station MP-850, September 1967.

 Hayes, P. T., "Geology of the Guadalupe Mountains, New Mexico,"
 U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 446, 1964.

Heckard, J. M., "Deep Well Injection of Liquid Waste," Dames and
Moore Engineering Bulletin 35.


                             160

-------
Hendrickson G E   andR. S. Jones, "Geology and Ground Water
           T      i                  ' " New Mexico *»*tute of
  ining and Technology Ground Water Report 3, 1952.

Hennighausen, F.  H. , "Change of Chloride Content of Water in Response
to Pumping in the Artesian Aquifer in the Roswell-East Grand Plains
Area , Chaves County , New Mexico . "

Hennighausen, F.  H. , "New Mexico Water Law and Administration and
Pollution Abatement," Pollution Abatement Workshop , Albuquerque, New
Mexico, January 13, 1972.                             11

Hernandez,  J. W. , "A Compilation of Water Resources Research and
Graduate Training Activities at New Mexico State University," WRRI
Publications No. 1, New Mexico State University (n.d.) .

Hernandez,  J. W. , "Management Alternatives in the  Use of the Water
Resources— Pecos  River Basin," WRRI Report 12, New Mexico State
University,  1971.

Hernandez,  J. W. , and T. J. Eaton, Jr. , "A Bibliography Pertaining to
the Pecos River Basin in New Mexico, " Water Resource Research Institute
Publication No. 2,  New Mexico State University (n.d.) .

Herrick, E.  H. , "Appraisal of Ground Water Resources  of Tularosa
Basin and Adjoining Areas, New Mexico and Texas," U.S. Geological
Survey Open-File Report 246,  I960.

Her shaft, Alex, "Solid Waste Treatment Technology ," Environmental
Science and Technology.  Vol. 6, No. 5, pp. 412-421, May  1972.

Hines, M. S., "Water-Supply Characteristics of Selected Arkansas
Streams," U.S. Geological Survey Water  Resources Circular No. 9,
1965.

Hollander, J. T. ,  "Possible Flow of Water Between Rito Resumidera and
Poleo Canyon Spring, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico," New Mexico
State Engineer Technical Report 2, May 1954.

Holloway, H. D. , "Bacteriological Pollution  of Ground Water in the Big
Spring Area, Howard County,  Texas," Texas Water  Commission Report
LD-0163-MR, June 1963.

Holloway  H D . , "Investigation of Alleged Ground Water Contamination
near Kilgorc, Gregg County, Texas," Texas Water Commission Report
LD-0664, April 1964.

Hodees A   L , et al. , "Gas and Brackish Water in Fresh-Water
Aquifers Lake Charles Area, Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey
Water Resources Pamphlet No.  13, September 1963.
                               161

-------
 Hood, J. W. , "Saline Ground Water in the Ro swell Basin, Chaves and
 Eddy Counties, New Mexico," U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply
 Paper 1539-M, 1963.

 Hood, J. W. , et al., "The Occurrence of Saline Ground Water near
 Roswell, Chaves County, New Mexico," New Mexico State Engineer
 Technical Report 17, 1960.

 Hood, J. W., and E. H. Herrick, "Water Resources of the Three Rivers
 Area, Otero and Lincoln Counties, New  Mexico," U.S. Geological Survey
 Map Atlas HA-192, 1965.

 Hood, J. W., and L. R. Kister,  "Saline-Water Resources of New Mexico,"
 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1601, 1962.

 Hosman, R. L.,  et al., "Water Resources of Northwestern St. Landry
 Parish and Vicinity, Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Water
 Resources Pamphlet No. 23, January  1970.

 Hough, Leo W. ,  "Underground Industrial Waste Disposal in Louisiana,"
 Louisiana Geological Survey, Submitted to Senate Subcommittee on Air
 and Water Pollution, New Orleans, Louisiana, April 5, 1971.

 Howard, J. W. ,  "Reconnaissance of Ground Water Conditions in Curry
 County, New Mexico," New Mexico State Engineer Technical Report 1,
 December 1954.

 Howard, J. W.,  "Water-Level Data from Observation Wells in the North-
 western Gulf Coastal Plain of Texas," Texas Water Development Board
 Report 70, January 1968.

 Hubbert, M. K., "The Mineral Resources of Texas," Shell Development
 Company Publication 167, 1958.

 Hughes, W.  C. ,  "Economic Feasibility - Pecos Basin - Evaporation and
 Evapotranspiration, " Water  Resources Research Institute Report No. 9.

 Iglehart, H. H.,  "Occurrence and Quality of Ground Water in Crockett
 County, Texas," Texas Water Development Board Report 47, May 1967.

 Ingram, H. M. , "Patterns of Politics in Water Resource Development:
A Case Study of New Mexico's Role in the Colorado River Basin Bill,"    >
 The University of New Mexico, December 1969.

Interstate Oil Compact Commission,  "Subsurface Disposal of Industrial
Wastes," June 1968.

Ives, R. E., and G. E. Eddy, "Subsurface Disposal of Industrial Wastes,"
Oklahoma Interstate Oil Compact Commission Study, 109  pp., 1968.

                               162

-------
ITL H' S''  "^ Sm7ey of E1 Pas° County, Texas," U.S. Department
of Agriculture, November 1971.

Jenkins, K. H   "Municipal Waste Facilities in the United States," U.S.
Department of the Interior, 1968 .

Johnson S . L   Jack Rawson and R.  E. Smith, "Characteristics of
Tide-Affected Flow in the Brazos River Near Freeport, Texas
March 29-30, 1965," Texas Water Development Board Report 69,
December 1967.

Jones, P. H., et al.,  "Water Resources of Southwestern Louisiana,"
U.S.  Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1364, 1956.

Jones, P. H., "Geology and Ground Water Resources of Southwestern
Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Geological Bulletin No. 30,
January 1954.

Jones, P. H., "Hydrology of Neogene Deposits in the Northern Gulf of
Mexico Basin," Louisiana Water Resources Research Institute Bulletin
GT-2, April 1969.

Jones, W. R., et al., "General Geology of Santa Rita Quadrangle,
Grant County, New Mexico," U.S. Geological Survey Professional
Paper 555, 1967.                             :

Jorhansen, Sighurd,  "Population Changes in New Mexico," New Mexico
State University Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report 191,
June, 1971.

Kane, J. W., "Monthly Reservoir Evaporation Rates for Texas 1940
through 1965," Texas Water Development Board Report 64, October 1967.

Kashef, A.,  "Salt Water  Intrusion in  Coastal Well Fields," Proceedings
of the National Symposium on Ground Water  Hydrology, November 6-8,
1967.

Kelley, V. C., "Albuquerque:   Its Mountains, Valley, Water, and
Volcanoes," State Bureau of Mines and Mineral  Resources, New Mexico
Institute of Mining and Technology Scenic Trips to the Geologic Past
No. 9, 1969.

Kilburn, C., and H. M. Whitman, "Water Levels in Southwestern
Louisiana, April 1960 to April 1961,"  Louisiana Geological Survey Water
Resources Pamphlet No. 11, December 1962.

Kirschner Associates, Inc.,  "Economic, Population and Housing Charac-
teristics of Torrance County," The Middle Rio Grande Council of
Governments Summary Highlights, April 1970.

                                163

-------
Kirschner Associates, Inc., "Economic, Population and Housing Charac-
teristics of Valencia County," The Middle Rio Grande Council of
Governments Summary Highlights, February  1970.

Klug, M. L., "Geology and Ground Water Resources of the Alexandria
Area, Rapides Parish, Louisiana," Louisiana  Geological Survey Water
Resources Pamphlet No .  3, November 1955.

Koopman, F. C ., et al., "Water Resources Appraisal of the Silver City
Area, New Mexico," New Mexico State Engineer Technical Report 36,
1969.

Kreiger, J. H., "The Law of the Underground," Civil Engineering,
pp.  2-53, March 1969.

Lamonds, A. G., M.  S. Hines and R. O. Plebush, "Water Resources of
Randolf and Lawrence Counties, Arkansas," Arkansas Geological Survey
Water Supply Paper 1879-B. 1969.

Lanseford, R. R.,  et al., "Irrigation Water Requirements for Crop Pro-
duction, Roswell Artesian Basin," Water Resources Research Institute
Report 5, November 1969.

Law, J. P., Jr., and H. Bernard, "Impact of  Agricultural Pollutants on
Water Users," Reprint from the Transactions of the ASAE, Vol. 13, No. 4,
pp.  474-478, 1970.

Lee, J.  N. , and M. L. Maderak, "Quantity and Chemical Quality of Low
Flow in the Prairie Dog Town Fork Red River  Near Wayside, Texas,
February 6-9, 1968," Texas Water Development Board Report 116,
May 1970.

Le Grand, H. E.,  "Monitoring of Changes in Quality of Ground Water,"
Ground Water, Vol. 6, No. 3, May-June, 1968.

Le Grand, H. E.,  "Movement of Agricultural Pollutants With Ground
Water," Agricultural Practices and Water Quality, Proceedings  of a
Conference Concerning the Role of Agriculture in Clean Water,  Nov.
1969.

Leifeste, D. K., J. F. Blakey and L. S. Hughes, "Reconnaissance of the
Chemical Quality of Surface Waters of the Red River Basin, Texas,"
Texas Water Development Board Report 129, May 1971.

Leggat,  E. R., M. E. Lowry and J. W. Hood,  "Ground Water Resources
of the Lower Mesilla Valley, Texas and New Mexico," U.S. Geological
Survey Water Supply Paper 1669-AA, 1963.
                              164

-------
           T* '                '     e  eC°S   V6r Co<™iSsion * New
ch»   N   ?'        * °f a DeCade °f Pr°gress, 1950-1969,"
Carlsbad, New Mexico,
Lockwood, Andrews and Newnam, Inc. ,  "A New Concept-Water for
Preservation of Bays and Estuaries," Texas Water Development Board
Report 43, April 1967.                               *

Lohr, E. W. , and S. K. Love,  "The Industrial Utility of Public Water
Supplies in the United States, 1952; Part 2, States West of the Mississippi
River,  U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1300, 1954.

Long, R. A. , "Feasibility of a Scavenger-Well System as a Solution to
the Problem of Vertical Salt-Water Encroachment," Louisiana Geological
Survey Water Resources Pamphlet No. 15, August 1963.

Long, R. A. , "Ground Water in the Geismar-Gonzales Area, Ascension
Parish, Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources
Bulletin No. 7,  October 1965.

Los Lunas Planning and Zoning Commission,  "A Pilot Study Establishing
Environmental Controls for Soils and Septic Tanks , " Middle Rio Grande
Council of Governments of New Mexico (n . d . ) .

Louis Koenig-Research, "Ultimate Disposal of Advanced-Treatment
Waste," U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, May 1964.

Luff, G. S. ,  "Underground Waste Disposal for American Airlines, Inc. , "
in Proceedings  of the  Oklahoma Water, Sewage, and Industrial Wastes
Association for  1960, Stillwater,  Okla., Oklahoma State University,
1960,  pp. 71-80.

Lynn, R. D. , and Z. E. Arlin, "Anaconda Successfully Disposes  of
Uranium Mill Waste Water by Deep Well Injection," Mining Eng . ,  Vol. 14,
No. 7, pp. 49-52, 1962.

Lynn, R. D. , and Z. E. Arlin, "Deep Well Construction for the Disposal
of Uranium Mill Tailing Water by the Anaconda Co. at Grants, N.M. ,"
Soc. Mining  Engineers Trans.,  Vol. 223, No.  3, pp. 230-237, 1962.

MacKichan, K.  A. , and J. C. Kammerer, "Estimated Use of Water in the
United States, I960,"  U.S. Geological Survey Circular 456, 1961.

Maehler  C. A., and A. E.  Greenberg, "Identification of Petroleum
Industry Wastes in Ground Waters," Water Pollution Control Federation
Journ., Vol.  34, No.  12, pp. 1262-1267, 1962.
                                165

-------
Maher, J. C., "Ground Water Resources of Grant and LaSalle Parishes,
Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Geological Bulletin No. 20,
August 1, 1941.

Maher, J. C., "Ground Water Resources of Rapides Parish, Louisiana,"
Louisiana Geological Survey Geological Bulletin No.  17, January 1960.

Maher, J. C., "Preliminary Report on Ground Water Conditions at
Alexandria, Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Geological
Pamphlet No. 2,  June 1940.

Maker, H. J., D. N. Cox and J. U. Anderson,  "Soil Associations and
Land Classification for Irrigation, Hidalgo County, New Mexico,"
New Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Research
Report 177, August 1970.

Maker, H. J., C. W. Keetch and J. U. Anderson, "Soil Associations and
Land Classification for Irrigation, San Juan County," New Mexico State
University Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report 161,
September 1969.

Maker, H. J., R. E. Neher and J. U. Anderson, "Soil  Associations and
Land Classification for Irrigation, Grant County, New Mexico," New
Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Research
Report 200, July 1971.

Maker, H. J. , et al. , "Soil Associations and Land Classification for
Irrigation, Sandoval and Los Alamos Counties,  New Mexico," New
Mexico State University Agricultural Experiment Station Research
Report 188, June 1971.

Marie, J. R. ,  "Ground Water of Avoyelles Parish, Louisiana," Louisiana
Geological Survey Water Resources Bulletin No. 15, February  1971.

Marine, I. W., and S. L. Schoff, "Ground Water Resources of Beaver
County, Oklahoma," Oklahoma Geological Survey Bulletin 97, May 1962.

McClure,  T. M., "Sixteenth and Seventeenth Biennial Reports of the
State Engineer of New Mexico," Office of the State Engineer, 1946.

McGuinness, C.  L.,  "The Water Situation in the United States with Special
Reference to Ground Water," U.S. Geological Survey Circular 114, June
1951.

McGuire, L. A. (editor), "International Oil and Gas Development,"
Vol. 41, Part 2, Production U.S. and Canada, International Oil Scouts
Associations, 1971.
                               166

-------
McMillion, L. G., "A Review of the Major Ground Water Formations i
Texas," Presented at the Western Resources Conference, Boulder,
Colorado, August 19,  1960.
in
McMillion, L. G. , "Hydrologic Aspects of Disposal of Oil-Field Brines
in Texas," Ground Water. Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 36-42, 1965.

Meyer, R. R., and J. R. Rollo, "Salt Water Encroachment Baton Rouge
Area, Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources
Pamphlet No. 17, November  1965.

Meyers, B . N.,  "Compilation of Results of Aquifer Tests in Texas,"
Texas Water Development Board Report 98, July 1969.

Miner, J. R.,  andT. L.  Willrich, "Livestock Operations and Field-Spread
Manure as Sources of Pollutants," Agricultural Practices and Water
Quality, Proceedings of a Conference Concerning the Role of Agriculture
in Clean Water, FWPCA Report 13040 EYX,  1969.

Moench, R. H.,  and  J. S. Schlee, "Geology and Uranium Deposits of the
Laguana District, New Mexico," U.S. Geological Survey Professional
Paper 519,  1967.

Mogg, J. L., S. L. Schoff andE. W. Reed, "Ground Water Resources of
Canadian County, Oklahoma,"  Oklahoma  Geological Survey Bulletin 87,
1960.

Moore, J., and J. R. Runkles, "Evaporation from Brine Solutions Under
Controlled Laboratory Conditions," Texas Water Development Board
Report 77, May 1968.

Morgan, C. O.,  "Ground Water Conditions  in the Baton Rouge Area,
1954-1959," Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources Bulletin
No. 2, December 1961.

Morris, D. E., "Occurrence and Quality  of Ground Water in Archer
County, Texas," Texas Water Development Board Report 52, July 1967.

Morris, D- E., and W. L. Prehn, Jr., "The Potential Contribution of
Desalting to Future Water Supply in New Mexico," Office of the State
Engineer, State of New Mexico Report, March 1971.

Moseley, J. C., II, and J. F. Malina, "Relationships Between Selected
Physical Parameters  and  Cost Responses for the Deep-Well Disposal of
Aqueous Industrial Wastes," U.S. Public Health Service,  EHE 07-6801,
CRWR 28, August 1968.
                                167

-------
Motts, W. S., and R. L. Cushman,  "An Appraisal of the Possibilities of
Artificial Recharge to Ground Water Supplies in Part of the Roswell
Basin, New Mexico," U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1785,
1964.
                                                         /
Mount, J. R.,  "Ground Water Conditions in the Vicinity of Burnet,
Texas,"  Texas Water Commission Memorandum Report No. 62-01,
February 1962.

Mount, J. R., et al., "Reconnaissance Investigation of the Ground Water
Resources of the Colorado River Basin, Texas," Texas Water Develop-
ment Board Report 51, July 1967.

Mourant, W. A., "Water Resources and Geology of the Rio Hondo Drainage
Basin, Chaves, Lincoln, and Otero Counties, New Mexico," New Mexico
State Engineer Technical Report 28, 1963.

Muller, D. A. ,  and H. E. Couch, "Water Well and Ground Water Chemical
Analysis Data, Schleicher County, Texas," Texas Water Development
Board Report 132, August 1971.

Murray, C. R., "Estimated Use of Water in the United States, 1965,"
U.S. Geological Survey Circular 556, 1968.
     /
Murray, C. R., "Ground Water Conditions in the Nonthermal  Artesian-
Water Basin South of Hot Springs, Sierra County, New Mexico," New
Mexico State Engineer Technical Report 10, 1959.

Myers, B. N., and O. C. Dale, "Ground Water Resources of  Bee County,
Texas,"  Texas Water Development Board Report 17, February 1966.

Myers, B. N., and O. C. Dale, "Ground Water Resources of  Brooks
County,  Texas," Texas Water Development Board Report 61,  October
1967.

Newcome, R., Jr., "Ground Water Resources of the Red River Valley
Alluvium in Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources
Pamphlet No. 7, April I960.
                                          ', "' 5,
Newcome, R., Jr., "Water Resources of Natchitoches Parish, Louisiana,"
Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources BuHetin No. 4,  July  1963.

New Mexico Oil  Conservation Commission (Compiler) ,  "Monthly
Statistical Report:  Southeast New Mexico," Vol.  I, September 1971.

New Mexico State Engineer's Office, "Water Resources of New Mexico:
Occurrence, Development, and Use," State Planning Office, Santa  Fe,
1967.

                              168

-------
New Mexico State University, "An Economic Land Classification of the
Irrigated Cropland in the Pecos River Basin, New Mexico," Water
Resources Research Institute Report No. 7, April 1970.

New Mexico State University, "People and Water in River Basin Develop-
ment," Tenth Annual New Mexico Water Conference, April 1 and 2,
1965.

New Mexico State University, "Water Economics with Limited Supplies
and an Increasing Population," Eleventh Annual New Mexico Water
Conference, March 31 and April 1, 1966.

New Mexico State University, "Water Quality—How Does it Affect You?"
Twelfth Annual Water Conference, New Mexico, March 30, 31, 1967.

Nicholson, A.,  Jr., and A. Clebsch, Jr., "Geology and Ground Water
Conditions in Southern Lea County, New Mexico," New Mexico State
Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources Ground Water Report 6, 1961.

Oklahoma State Department of Health, Division of Sanitary Engineering,
Public Water Supply Section, "Chemical Analyses of Public Water
Supplies in Oklahoma,  1965."

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, "Appraisal of the Water and Related
Land Resources of Oklahoma, Region One," Oklahoma Water Resources
Board,  1967.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, "Appraisal of the Water and Related
Land Resources of Oklahoma: Region Two," Oklahoma Water Resources
Board Publication 34, 1971.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, "Appraisal of the Water and Related
Land Resources of Oklahoma, Region Three," Oklahoma Water Resources
Board Publication 23, 1968.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, "Appraisal of the Water and Related
Land Resources of Oklahoma, Region Four," Oklahoma Water Resources
Board Publication 24, 1969.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, "Appraisal of the Water and Related
Land Resources of Oklahoma, Regions Five and Six," Oklahoma Water
Resources Board Publication 27, 1969.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, "Appraisal of the Water and Related
Land Resources of Oklahoma, Region Seven," Oklahoma Water Resources
Board Publication 29, 1970-
                               169

-------
Oklahoma Water Resources Board, "Appraisal of the Water and Related
Land Resources of Oklahoma, Region Eight," Oklahoma Water Resources
Board Publication 19, 1968.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, "Appraisal of the Water and Related
Land Resources of Oklahoma, Region Nine," Oklahoma Water Resources
Board Publication 36, 1971.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, "Oklahoma's Water Resources, 1965,"
Oklahoma Water Resources Board Publication No. 10, 1965.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, "Oklahoma's Water Resources, 1967,"
Oklahoma Water Resources Board Publication 16, 1967.

Onellion,  F. E., "Geology and Ground Water Resources of Drew County,
Arkansas, " U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Circular No. 4,
1956.

Onellion,  F. E., and J. H. Criner, Jr., "Ground Water Resources of
Chicot County, Arkansas," Arkansas Water Resources Circular No. 3,
1955.

Page, R. D. , "Pollution Control for Oil Field Brines," Drill Bit, Vol.  15,
No. 9, pp. 32-36, 1967.

Page, L. V.,  "Water Resources of Bossier and Caddo Parishes,
Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources Bulletin
No. 5, October 1964.

Page, L. V.,  R. Newcome, Jr. andG.  D.,Graeff, Jr., "Water Resources
of Sabine Parish, Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Water
Resources Bulletin No. 3, May 1963.

Parker, G. G., "Pure Water for Farms  and Cities," Water;  The Yearbook
of Agriculture, 1955, U.S. Dept.  of Agriculture, pp. 615-635, 1956.    ~

Patterson, J.  L., "Floods in Arkansas, Magnitude and Frequency
Characteristics Through 1968," U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources
Circular No.  11, 1971.

Patterson, J.  L. , "Storage Requirements for Arkansas Streams," U.S.
Geological Survey Water Resources Circular No. 10,  1967.

Peckham,  R.  C., et al., "Reconnaissance Investigation of the Ground
Water Resources of the Trinity River Basin, Texas," Texas Water
Commission Bulletin 6309, September 1963.

Petitt, B.  M., Jr., and A. G. Winslow, "Geology and Ground Water
Resources of  Galveston County,  Texas," Texas  Board of Water Engineers
Bulletin 5502, October 1955.

                              170

-------
Petroleum Engineer, "Crack Down on Oil Field Pollution," Petroleum
Engineer, Vol. 39, No. 7, pp.  33-36, 1967.              	

Pettyjohn, W.  A.  (editor), "Water Quality in a Stressed Environment,"
Burgess Publishing Co., Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1972.

Pierce, W. G., and E. I. Rich, "Summary of Rock Salt Deposits in the
United States as Possible Storage Sites for Radioactive Waste Materials,"
U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1148, 91pp., 1962.

Piper, A.M., "Disposal of Liquid Wastes by Injection Underground—
Neither Myth nor  Millennium," U.S. Geological Survey Circular 631, 1969.

Plebuch, R. O. , "Changes in Ground Water Levels in Deposits of Quater-
nary Age in Northeastern Arkansas," U.S. Geological Survey Water
Resources Summary No. 3, 1962.

Plebuch, R. O,, "Fresh Water Aquifers of Crittenden County, Arkansas, "
Arkansas Water Resources Circular No. 8, 1961.
        \
Plebuch, R. O., "Ground Water Temperatures in the Coastal Plain of
Arkansas," U.S.  Geological Survey Water Resources Summary No. 2,
1962.

Plebuch, R. O., and M.S. Hines, "Water Resources of Clark,  Cleveland
and Dallas Counties, Arkansas," U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply
Paper  1879-A, 1969.

Plebuch, R. O., and M.S. Hines, "Water Resources of Pulaski and Sabine
Counties, Arkansas," U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1839-B,
1967.

Popkin. B. P., "Ground Water Resources of Montgomery County, Texas,"
Texas  Water Development Board Report 136, November 1971.

Preston, R. D., "Occurrence and Quality of Ground Water in Shackleford
County, Texas,"  Texas Water Development Board Report 100, October
1969.

Preston, R. D., "Occurrence and Quality of Ground Water in Throckmorton
County,' Texas,"  Texas Water Development Board Report 113, April 1970.

Rawson Jack, "Reconnaissance of the Chemical Quality of Surface Waters
of the Guadalupe River Basin, Texas," Texas Water Development Board
Report 88, December 1968.
                              171

-------
 Rawson, Jack, D. R. Reddy and R. E. Smith,  "Low-Flow Studies,
 Sabine and Old Rivers Near Orange, Texas, Quantity and Quality,
 April 12, October 31-November 4, 1966," Texas Water Development
 Board Report 66, November 1967.

 Rawson, Jack, and O.K. Schultz, "Base-Flow Studies, Leon and Lampasas
 Rivers, Texas, Quantity and Quality, January 16-17, 1968," Texas Water
 Development Board Report 97, June 1969.

 Rayner, F. A., andL.  G. McMillion,  "Underground Water Conservation
 Districts in Texas," Texas Board of Water Engineers, August 1960.

 Reeder, H. O., "Ground Water in the Animas Valley, Hidalgo County,
 New Mexico,"  New Mexico State Engineer Technical Report 11, 1957.

 Reeves, R. D., "Ground Water Resources  of Kendall County, Texas,"
 Texas Water Development Board Report 60, September 1967.

 Reeves, R. D., "Ground Water Resources  of Kerr County, Texas," Texas
 Water Development Board Report 102, November 1969-

 Reeve,s, W. E. , and H.  L. Kunze,  "Quantity and Chemical Quality of Low
 Flow in Cibolo Creek, Texas, March 4-8,  1968," Texas Water Develop-
 ment Board Report 112, April 1970.

 Reid, L.  D. , and B . W. Viens, "Index of Water Resources Data for
 Arkansas," U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Summary Number 6,
 1968.

 Reid, G. W., et al., "Deep Subsurface Disposal of Natural Man-made
 Brines in the Arkansas  and Red River Basins," University of Oklahoma,
 August 1960.

 Reynolds, S. E., "Twenty-Seventh Biennial Report of the State Engineer
 of New Mexico, "  Office of the State Engineer, 1966.

 Rima, D. R., E.  B. Chase and B. M.  Myers, "Subsurface Waste Disposal
 by Means of Wells—A Selective Annotated Bibliography," U.S. Geological
 Survey Water-Supply Paper 2020,  1971.

 Rogers, J. E., "Water Resources of Vernon Parish, Louisiana," Louisiana
 Geological Survey Water Resources Bulletin No. 6, February 1965.

Rollo, J. R., "Ground Water in Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey
Water Resources  Bulletin No. 1, August 1960.
                              172

-------
Rollo. J. R   "Ground Water Resources of the Greater New Orleans Area,
Louisiana, Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources Bulletin No.  9,
July 1966.

Rollo, J. R. , "Salt Water Encroachment in Aquifers of the Baton Rouge
Area, Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources
Bulletin No. 13, August 1969.

Ryling, R. W., "Ground Water Potential of Mississippi County, Arkansas,"
Arkansas Geological and Conservation Commission Water Resources Circular
No. 7, I960.

Sadow, R. D. , "How Monsanto Handles its Petrochemical Wastes,"
Wastes Eng., Vol. 34, No. 12, pp. 640-644, 1963.

Saleem and Jacob, "Dynamic Programming Model and Quantitative
Analysis—Roswell Basin,  New Mexico," Water Resources Research
Institute  Report No . 10,  January 1971.

Sandeen, W. M., "Ground Water Resources of San Jacinto County,
Texas," Texas Water Development Board Report 80, August 1968.

Sayre, D. M., "Analysis of Well Production from Unconfined Aquifers
Contaminated by Saline Water," Master of Science in Civil Engineering,
New Mexico State University, September 1968.

Scalf, M. R., W.  R. Duffer and R. D.  Kreis, "Characteristics and Effects
of Cattle  Feedlot Runoff," Presented at the 25th Annual Purdue Industrial
Waste Conference at Lafayette, Indiana, May 1970.

Schoff, S. L., and E. W. Reed, "Ground Water Resources of the Arkansas
River Flood Plain near Fort Gibson,  Muskogee County, Oklahoma,"
Oklahoma Geological Survey Circular No. 28, 1951.

Secretary of Agriculture and The Director of the Office of Science and
Technology, "Control of Agriculture-Related Pollution," A Report to the
President, January 1969.

Shafer, G. H., "Ground Water Resources of Arkansas County, Texas,"
Texas Water Development Board Report 124, December 1970.

Shafer, G. H., "Ground Water Resources of Nueces and  San Patricio
Counties, Texas," Texas Water Development Board Report 73,
May 1968.

Shamburger, V. M., Jr.,  "Ground Water Resources of Mitchell and
Western Nolan Counties, Texas," Texas Water Development Board
Report 50, June 1967.

                                173

-------
Sloss, R.,  "Water Resources of Rapides Parish, Louisiana," Louisiana
Geological Survey Water Resources Bulletin No. 8, April 1966.

Smith, J. T.,  "Ground Water Resources of Collingsworth County, Texas,"
Texas Water Development Board Report 119, July  1970.

Smith, R. E. ,  "Geology and Ground Water Resources of Torrance County,
New Mexico,"  New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources Ground
Water Report 5, 1957.

Smith, W. W., "SaltWater Disposal:  Sense and Dollars,"  Petroleum
Engineer, Vol. 42, No. 11, pp. 64-72, October 1970.

Snider, J.  L., and M. J. Forbes, Jr., "Pumpage of Water in Louisiana,
I960," Louisiana Department of Conservation Geological Survey, May 1961.

Sniegocki, R.  T.,  "Geochemical Aspects of Artificial Recharge in the
Grand Prairie  Region, Arkansas," U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply
Paper 1615-E,  1963.

Sniegocki, R.  T.,  "Hydrogeology of a Part of the Grand Prairie Region,
Arkansas," U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1615-B, 1964.

Soil Conservation Service, USDA, "Soil Survey, Beaver County, Okla-
homa," Series 1959, No. 11, August 1962.

Soil Conservation Service, USDA, "Soil Survey, Cimarron  County, Okla-
homa," Series 1956, No. 11, June 1960.

Soil Conservation Service, USDA, "Soil Survey, Texas County, Oklahoma,"
Series 1958, No. 6, July 1961.

Spiegel,  Zane, "Hydraulics of Certain Stream-Connected Aquifer Systems,"
New Mexico State Engineer Special Report, 1962.

Speigel,  Zane, "Geology and Ground Water Resources of Northeastern
Socorro County, New Mexico," New Mexico State Bureau of Mines and
Mineral Resources Ground Water  Report 4, 1955.

Spiegel,  Zane, and B. Baldwin,  "Geology and Water Resources of the
Santa Fe  Area, New Mexico," Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper
1525, 1963.

Stachowiak, A. S., "Ground Water Resources of the River Alluvium of
El Paso Valley, Texas," Master of Science in Engineering Thesis, The
University of Texas at El Paso, 1969.

Stephens, J. W., andH. N. Halberg, "Use of Water in Arkansas, I960,"
Arkansas Geological Commission Special Ground Water Report No. 4,
    '
                               174

-------
Stewart, B .  A   et al.,  "Agriculture's Effect on Nitrate Pollution of
Ground Water,"  Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. Vol. 23, No. 1,
Jan.-Feb. 1968.           ,    ~	~	

Stewart, -B.  A.. et al.,  "Distribution of Nitrates and Other Water Pollutants
Under Fields and Corrals in the Middle South Platte Valley of Colorado,"
United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service,
ARS 41-134, December 1967.

Storm, Robt. R. (ed.),  "Deep Injection Wells," Water Well Journal,
Vol. 22, No. 8, pp. 12-13,  1968.	

Stringfield,  V. T., "Artesian Water in Tertiary Limestone in the South-
eastern States," U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper  517, 1966.

Stucky, H. R., R. R. Lansford and B.  J. Creel, "Citizens Conference on
Water 1971," Water Resources Research Institute Report No. 11, October
1971.

Summers, W. K., "Chemical Characteristics of New Mexico's Thermal
Waters—A Critique," New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology •
Circular 83.  1965.

Tait, D. B . , et al., "Artesia Group of New Mexico and West  Texas,"
Bulletin of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Vol.  46,
No. 4, pp. 504-517,  4 figs., April 1962.

Tait, D. B . , et al. , "The Ground Water Resources of Columbia County,
Arkansas:  A Reconnaissance," U.S. Geological Survey Circular 241,
1953.

Tanaka, H.  H.,  and L. V. Davis, "Ground Water Resources  of the Rush
Springs Sandstone in the Caddo County Area, Oklahoma," Oklahoma
Geological Survey Circular 1809-T, 1966.

Tarver, G. R.,  "Ground Water Resources of Polk County, Texas," Texas
Water Development Board Report 82, August 1968.

Tarver, G. R.,  "Ground Water Resources of Tyler County, Texas,"
Texas Water Development Board Report 74, May 1968.

Task Committee on Saltwater Intrusion of the Committee on Groundwater
Hydrology of the Hydraulics Division, "Salt-Water Intrusion in the United
States  " Journal of the  Hydraulics Division, Proceedings of the American
Society of Civil Engineers,  pp. 1651-1669, September 1969.

Texas Board of Water Engineers, "A Plan for Meeting the 1980 Water
Requirements of Texas," for Submittal to the 57th Legislature, May 1961.


                                175

-------
 Texas Board of Water Engineers, "Reconnaissance Investigation of the
 Ground Water Resources of the Canadian River Basin, Texas," Texas
 Water Commission Bulletin 6016, September I960.
                                                                   i
 Texas Technological College,  "Proceedings of the Fourth West Texas
 Water Conference," February  4, 1966.

 Texas Technological College,  "Proceedings of the Sixth West Texas Water
 Conference," February 2,  1968.

 Texas Technological College,  "Studies of Playa Lakes in the High Plains
 of Texas," Texas Water Development Board Report 10, December 1965.

 Texas Tech University, "Infiltration Rates and Groundwater Quality
 Beneath Cattle Feedlots, Texas High Plains," U.S. Environmental Protec-
 tion Agency Water Pollution Control Research Series 16060 EGS,
 January 1971.

 Texas Water Commission, "Twenty-Sixth Report of the Texas Water
 Commission, Covering the Biennium, September 1,  1962 to August 31,
 1964," 1965.

 Texas Water Development Board, "Inventories of Irrigation in Texas,
 1958, 1964, and 1969," Texas  Water Development Board  Report 127,
 May 1971.

 Texas Water Development  Board, "Report of the Texas Water Development
 Board for the Biennium September 1, 1968 through August 31, 1970," 1971.

 Texas Water Development  Board, "Rules, Regulations,  and  Modes of
 Procedure Relating to the Texas Water Well Drillers Act," Texas Water
 Development Board, September 1972.

 Texas Water Development  Board, "The Texas Water Plan," November
 1968.

 Texas Water Development Board,  "The Texas Water Plan Summary,"
 November 1968.

 Texas Water Development Board, Water  for Texas,  Vol. 1, No.  1,
 October 1970.

 Texas Water Development Board, Water  for Texas,  Vol. 1, No.  2,
 November 1970.

 Texas Water Development Board, Water  for Texas,  Vol. 1, No.  3,
December  1970.
                               176

-------
                                              ' V°L l> No« 4'
February t3eVel°PmentBOard' Water  for Texas. Vol. 1, No. 5,
                                    for Texas. Vol. 1, No. 7,


Texas Water Development Board and Water Resources Engineers, Inc. ,
 bystems Simulation for Management of a Total Water Resource," Texas
Water Development  Board Report 118, May 1970.
                                            >
Texas Water Development Board, "Texas Water Development Board List
of Publications ," Texas Water Development Board Circular 3, January
1968 .

Texas Water Development Board, "Additional Technical Papers on
Selected Aspects of  the Preliminary Texas Water Plan," Texas Water
Development Board  Report 38, February 1967.

Theis, C. V. , and C.  S. Conover, "Pumping Tests in the Los Alamos
Canyon Well Field Near Los Alamos , New Mexico , " U.S. Geological
Survey Water-Supply  Paper 1619-1, 1962.

Thomas, R. E. , "Applying Wastewaters to the Land for Treatment,"
presented at the 23rd Oklahoma Industrial Waste and Advanced Water
Conference, Oklahoma State University, April 3-4, 1972.

Thomas, R. E., and C. C. Harlin, Jr., "Experiences with Land Spreading
of Municipal Effluents , " presented at the First Annual IFAS Workshop on
Land Renovation of Waste Water in Florida, 1972.

Thomas, R. E. , "Land Treatment of Wastewater — An Overview of Methods,"
Prepared for Presentation at the Water Pollution Control Federation,
Atlanta, Georgia, October 9-13,  1972.

Thompson, D. R. , "Occurrence  and Quality of Ground Water in Brown
County, Texas," Texas Water Development Board Report 46,  May 1967.

Thompson, G. L. , "Ground Water Resources of Ellis County, Texas,"
Texas Water Development Board Report 62, October 1967.

Thompson, G. L. , "Ground Water Resources of Johnson County, Texas,"
Texas Water Development Board  Report 94, April 1969.

Thornhill, J. T., "Investigation of Ground Water Contamination, Coleto
Creek Oil Field, Victoria County, Texas," Texas Water Commission
ReportLD-0564-MR, March  1964.


                              177

-------
Titus, F. B ., Jr., "Ground Water Geology of the Rio Grande Trough in
Northcentral New Mexico, with Section on the Jemes Caldera and the
Lucero Uplift," New Mexico Geological Society, 12th Field Conference,
pp. 186-192,  1961.                                               v/

Torrey» P. D., "Future Water Requirements for the Production of Oil
in Texas," Texas Water Development Board Report 44, April 1967.

Trauger, F. D., "Availability of Ground Water at Proposed Well Sites
in Gila National Forest,  Sierra and Catron Counties, New Mexico," New
Mexico State Engineer Technical Report 18, I960.

Trauger, F. D., and F. X. Bushman, "Geology and Ground Water in the
Vicinity of Tucumcari,  Quay County, New Mexico," New Mexico State
Engineer Technical Report No. 30, 1964.

Trauger, F. D., and E. H. Herrick, "Ground Water in Central Hachita
Valley Northeast of the Big Hatchet Mountains, Hidalgo County, New
Mexico," New Mexico State Engineer Technical Report 26, 1962.

Turcan, A. N., Jr., "Calculation  of Water Quality from Electrical Logs,
Theory and Practice," Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources
Pamphlet No. 19,  May 1966.
   i
Turcan, A. N., and S. W. Fader,  "Summary of Ground Water Conditions
in Southwestern Louisiana,  1957 and 1958," Louisiana Geological Survey
Water Resources Pamphlet No. 7, June 1959.

United States Study Commission, "The Report of the U.S . Study
Commission—Texas, Part I:  The Commission Plan," Report to the
President and Congress, March, 1962.

United States Study Commission, "The Report of the U.S. Study
Commission--Texas, Part II: Resources and Problems," Report to the
President and Congress, March  1962.

United States  Study Commission, "The Report of the U.S. Study
Commission—Texas, Part III:  The Eight Basins," Report to the
President and Congress, March, 1962.

U.S. Geological Survey, "Mineral  and Water Resources of New Mexico,"
State Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, New Mexico Institute of
Mining and Technology Bulletin 87, 1965.

U.S. Public Health Service, "Arkansas and Red River Basins Water
Quality Conservation," June 1964.
                               178

-------
 ™*             Department, The University of Texas at El Paso,
 Water Resources of the Upper Rio Grande Basin," Texas Water Right
Commission, Austin, Texas, August 1970.
™ili' B ;,Bi* ' '^elanese Deep-Well Disposal Practices , » Water and Sewage
Works. Vol. 116, No. 5, pp. I/W21-I/W24, 1969.       - *~

Viets, F. G. , Jr . , "Cattle Feedlot Pollution," Animal Waste Management,
Proceedings of the National Symposium on Animal Waste Management,
Warrenton, Virginia, September 1971.

Walker, W. R., andR. C. Stewart,  "Deep Well Disposal of Wastes ,"
Am. Soc. Civil Engineers Proc . Paper 6171, Jour. Sanitary  Eng. Div.,
Vol. 94, No. SA 5, pp. 945-968.           - * - B -

Walton, Graham,  "Problems in Ground Water Pollution, " Department of
Health, Education and Welfare,  Public Health Service Technical Report
W62-25, 1962.

Warner, D. L. , "Deep Well Disposal of Industrial Wastes," Chem. Eng.,
Vol. 72, No. 1, pp. 73-78, 1965.

Warner, D. L., "Deep-Well Injection of Liquid Waste, "  U.S.  Department
of Health , Education and Welfare , Public Health Service , Division of
Water Supply and Pollution Control, Cincinnati, Ohio, April  1965.

Warner, D. L. , "Deep-Well Injection of Liquid Waste — A Review of
Existing Knowledge and an Evaluation of Research Needs," U.S. Public
Health Service  Pub .  999-WP-21, 55pp.,  1965.

Warner, D. L. , "Deep Wells for Industrial Waste Injection in the United
States, Summary of Data," Federal Water Pollution Control Adm. , Water
Pollution Control Research Ser. Publ. , WP-20-10,  45 pp. , 1967.

Water Resources Research Institute, "Water — There is No Substitute,"
Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual  Water Conference,  New Mexico State
University, Las Cruces, New Mexico,  March 12-13, 1970.

Water Resources Research Institute, "Water—A Key to a Quality Environ-
ment," Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Water Resources Research
Institute Water  Conference, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces,
New Mexico, March 25-26, 1971.

Water Resources Research Institute, "Water for New Mexico to the Year
2000 and 2060," Thirteenth Annual Water Conference, New Mexico State
University, Las Cruces, New Mexico, March 28-29, 1968.

Webber L. R. , and T. H. Lane, "The Nitrogen Problem in the Land
Disposal of Liquid Manure, " Animal  Waste Management, Cornell Univer-
sity Conference on Agricultural Waste Management, January  1969.

                               179

-------
 Weir, J. E., Jr., "Geology and Hydrology of the Valles Caldera, Sandoval
 County, New Mexico," New Mexico Geological Society 9th Field Conference,
 1958.

 Wesselman, J. B ., "Ground Water Resources of Jasper and Newton Counties,
 Texas," Texas Water Development Board Report 59, September 1967.

 West, S. W., "Availability of Ground Water in the Gallup Area, New
 Mexico." U.S. Geological Survey Circular 443,  1961.

 West, S. W., "The Gallup Sandstone as a Fresh Water Aquifer," New
 Mexico Geological Society, 9th Field Conference, pp. 184-185, 1958.

 West, S. W., and H. L. Baldwin, "The Water Supply of El Morro National
 Monument," U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper  1766, 1965.

 Whetstone, G. A.  "Re-Use of Effluent in  the Future with an Annotated
 Bibliography," Texas Water Development Board Report 8, December
 1965.

 White, D, E.,  "Ground Water Resources of Upton County, Texas," Texas
 Water Development Board Report 78, May  1968.

 White, D. E.,  "Water Resources of Ward County, Texas," Texas Water
 Development Board Report 125, February 1971.

 White, W. N., "Ground Water  Supply of Mimbres Valley, New Mexico,"
 U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 637-B, 1931.

 Whiteman,  C. D. , et al.,  "Water Resources of the  Slagle-Simpson-
 Flatwoods Area, Louisiana," Louisiana Geological  Survey Water
 Resources Pamphlet No.  24, April  1970.

 Whitman, H. M., "Estimating Water Quality from Electrical Logs  in
 Southwestern Louisiana," Louisiana Geological Survey Water Resources
 Pamphlet No.  16, November 1965.

 Whitman, H. M., and C. Kilburn,  "Ground Water  Conditions  in South-
 western Louisiana, 1961 and 1962," Louisiana Geological Survey Water
 Resources Pamphlet No.  12, September 1963.

 Wilson, C.  A., "Ground Water Resources of Austin and Waller Counties,
 Texas," Texas Water Development  Board  Report 68, December 1967.

Winner, M. D., Jr., M. J. Forbes, Jr. andW. L. Broussard, "Water
Resources of Pointe Coupee Parish, Louisiana," Louisiana Geological
Survey Water Resources Bulletin No. 11,  March 1968.
                              180

-------
Winograd, I J.. "Ground Water Conditions and Geology of Sunshine
Valley and Western Taos County, New Mexico," New Mexico State
Engineer Technical Report 12,  1959.

Winograd, I. J., "Occurrence and Quality of Ground Water in the Fort
Union Area, Mora County, New Mexico," U.S. Geological Survey Open-
File Report 183, 1956.

Winslow, A. G., and W. W. Doyel, "Salt Water and its Relation to Fresh
Ground Water in Harris County, Texas," Texas Board of Water Engineers
Bulletin 5409, June 1954.

Wintz, W. A., Jr., et al,, "Subsidence and Ground Water Off-Take in the
Baton Rouge Area," Louisiana Water Resources Research Institute
Bulletin 6, October 1970.

Witherow, J. L., M.  R. Scalf andL. R. Shuyler, "Animal Feedlot Waste
Research Program,"  Treatment and Control Research Program, Robert S.
Kerr Water Research Center, Environmental Protection Agency, April 1971,

Wood, L. A., et al.,  "Reconnaissance Investigation of the Ground Water
Resources of the Gulf Coast Region, Texas," Texas Water Commission
Bulletin 6305, June 1963.

Wood, P. R., and L.  R. Burton,  "Ground Water Resources in Cleveland
and Oklahoma Counties, Oklahoma," Oklahoma Geological Survey
Circular 71, 1968.

Wyatt, A.  W., et al., "Water Level Data from Observation Wells in the
Southern High Plains of Texas, 1965-70," Texas Water Development
Board Report 121, November 1970.

Yarbrough, D.  B. (compiler),  "Laws and Programs Pertaining to Water
and Related Land Resources,"  Texas Water Development Board Report
89, December 1968.

Zack, A. L., "Ground Water Pumpage and Related Effects, Southwestern
Louisiana,  1970," Louisiana Geological Survey Water  Resources Pamph-
let No. 27, April 1971.

Zanoni, A. E.,  "Ground Water  Pollution and Sanitary Landfills—A Critical
Review," Presented at the National Ground Water Quality Symposium,
Denver, Colorado, August 25-27, 1971.
                               181

-------
SELECTED WATER
RESOURCES ABSTRACTS

INPUT TRANSACTION FORM
Wo.
           w
GROUND WATER POLLUTION  IN  THE SOUTH CENTRAL STATES,
                                                        r.  Report Lste
                                                       S.
Scalf, M.  R.,  Keeley, J.W.,  and LaFevers, C. J.
                                                               ..
                                                          RepcrtNo.
                                                          21 AIO-03
National  Ground Water Research Program
Robert  S.  Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory
Environmental Protection  Agency
Ada, Oklahoma
 12.  S; vitsorin* Orgutuxation
Environmental Protection Agency report number EPA-R2-73-268,  June 1973,
          If Type .-Rep-:,  md
                 Cz street
     A study was conducted to determine the ground-water  pollution
problems in the states of  Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico,  Oklahoma,
and Texas.  Information  was obtained through review of  the  literature
and through interviews with engineers, scientists, and  governmental
officials concerned with water pollution in the five  states of the
project area.

     Natural salinity was  the greatest factor affecting the quality
of ground water of the region.  Disposal of oil-field brines was the
most widespread source of  man-made pollution.  Other  causes of ground -
water  pollution included poor well onstruction and abandonment
procedures, over-pumping,  irrigation return flows and land  disposal
of solid and liquid wastes.
 11s. Descriptors
    *Ground water, *water pollution, water resources,  natural pollution,
     oil-field brines,  over-pumping
 17b, I den? ifi
   *South-Central United States, Arkansas, Louisiana,  New Mexico,
     Oklahoma, Texas
                     05B
            /?.  St'i'-T/f» Class,


            "'!).  Se>, ztty Ci- ,?s.

            ___W*_____V__1

Marion R.  Scalf
                                    21, No. of



                                     2, Pi!,..:
 Send To :
 WATER RESOURCES SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CENTER
 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
 WASHINGTON. D. C. 2O24O
                                                 ftU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:!973 5H-156/346 1-3

-------