Prepared in cooperation with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers 

of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5232

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Water-Level Conditions in the Confined 

Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 

2008

By Vincent T. DePaul and Robert Rosman

Prepared in cooperation with the

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5232

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

SALLY JEWELL, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2015

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living 

resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS.

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, 

visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials 

as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner.

Suggested citation:

DePaul, V.T., and Rosman, Robert, 2015, Water-level conditions in the confined aquifers of the New Jersey 

Coastal Plain, 2008: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5232, 107 p., 9 pl., http://dx.doi.

org/10.3133/sir20135232.

ISSN 2328–0328 (online)
iii

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the many well owners for allowing access to their wells and to the 

water purveyors and staff for adjusting withdrawal schedules and assisting in the collection 

of water-level measurements. The authors also wish to thank Nicholas Smith, Walter Jones, 

Richard Walker, Donald Rice, Stephen Cauller, and Glen Carleton of the U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS) for their assistance in data collection and Stewart Lovell and William Cocke of the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control for facilitating the collection of water-level data in Delaware. Critical reviews of the manuscript were provided by Glen 

Carleton and Edward Bugliosi of the USGS. Frederick Sickels and Diane Zalaskus of the New 

Jersey Department of Environmental Protection are gratefully acknowledged for their continued 

support of this program.

Contents

Abstract ..........................................................................................................................................................1

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................2

Purpose and Scope ..............................................................................................................................4

Description of Study Area ...................................................................................................................4

Hydrogeologic Framework.........................................................................................................4

Well Numbering System ............................................................................................................6

Previous Investigations........................................................................................................................6

Data Collection and Analysis.......................................................................................................................6

Cohansey Aquifer...........................................................................................................................................9

Water withdrawals ...............................................................................................................................9

Water levels.........................................................................................................................................12

Rio Grande Water-Bearing Zone...............................................................................................................15

Water Withdrawals ...........................................................................................................................15

Water Levels........................................................................................................................................15

Atlantic City 800-Foot Sand ........................................................................................................................19

Water Withdrawals ............................................................................................................................20

Water Levels........................................................................................................................................20

Piney Point Aquifer......................................................................................................................................24

Water Withdrawals ............................................................................................................................24

Water Levels........................................................................................................................................25

Vincentown Aquifer.....................................................................................................................................29

Water Withdrawals ............................................................................................................................30

Water Levels........................................................................................................................................30

Wenonah-Mount Laurel Aquifer ...............................................................................................................34

Water Withdrawals ............................................................................................................................35

Water Levels........................................................................................................................................35

Englishtown Aquifer System......................................................................................................................38
iv

Water Withdrawals ............................................................................................................................38

Water Levels........................................................................................................................................38

Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer System............................................................................................42

Extent of Saline Water .......................................................................................................................42

Groundwater Flow System................................................................................................................44

Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer.....................................................................................45

Water Withdrawals ...................................................................................................................45

Water Levels...............................................................................................................................45

Middle Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer....................................................................................52

Water Withdrawals ...................................................................................................................52

Water Levels...............................................................................................................................52

Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer.....................................................................................57

Water Withdrawals ...................................................................................................................57

Water Levels...............................................................................................................................57

Potentiometric Heads in Relation to the Tops of Aquifers ....................................................................60

Summary........................................................................................................................................................62

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................63

Appendixes 1–10.

1-1. Water-level data for wells screened in the confined Cohansey aquifer, 

 New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008................................................................................68

1-2. Water-level data for wells screened in the Rio Grande water-bearing zone, 

 New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008................................................................................69

2. Water-level data for wells screened in the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, New 

 Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008. ........................................................................................70

3. Water-level data for wells screened in the Piney Point aquifer, New Jersey 

 Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.......................................................................................................74

4. Water-level data for wells screened in the Vincentown aquifer, New Jersey 

 Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.......................................................................................................77

5. Water-level data for wells screened in the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, 

 New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008................................................................................78

6. Water-level data for wells screened in the Englishtown aquifer system, New 

 Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008 .........................................................................................83

7. Water-level data for wells screened in the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy 

 aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008 .................................................................86

8. Water-level data for wells screened in the Middle and undifferentiated 

 Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008 ................94

9. Water-level data for wells screened in the Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy 

 aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008 ...............................................................100

10-1. Results of the Mann-Kendall trend test on water levels from selected observation

 wells, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008 ..................................................................104

10-2. Results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for paired water levels...................................107
v

Plates

Plates 1–9. Maps showing:

1. Potentiometric surface of the Cohansey aquifer and the Rio Grande water-bearing 

 zone, 2008

2. Potentiometric surface of the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, 2008

3. Potentiometric surface of the Piney Point aquifer, 2008

4. Potentiometric surface of the Vincentown aquifer, 2008

5. Potentiometric surface of the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, 2008

6. Potentiometric surface of the Englishtown aquifer system, 2008

7. Potentiometric surface of the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, 2008

8. Potentiometric surface of the Middle and undifferentiated Potomac-Raritan-Magothy

 aquifer, 2008

9. Potentiometric surface of the Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, 2008

Figures

1. Map showing location of the study area and generalized representation of simulated 

prepumping flow in a hydrogeologic section through the Coastal Plain of southern 

New Jersey....................................................................................................................................3

2. Map showing location and volume of groundwater withdrawals from the confined 

Cohansey aquifer, southern Cape May County, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 ...........10

3. Graph showing estimated groundwater withdrawals from the confined Cohansey 

aquifer in Cape May County, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008 .................................11

4. Map showing water-level changes in the confined Cohansey aquifer, Cape May 

County, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2003–2008.......................................................................13

5. Graphs showing water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened 

in the confined Cohansey aquifer, Cape May County, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 

1978–2008 .....................................................................................................................................14

6. Maps showing location and volume of groundwater withdrawals from A, the Rio 

Grande water-bearing zone, B, the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, and C, the Piney 

Point aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 ......................................................................16

7. Graphs showing estimated groundwater withdrawals from A, the Rio Grande 

water-bearing zone, B, the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, and C, the Piney Point 

aquifer New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008 .......................................................................17

8. Maps showing groundwater-level changes in A, the Rio Grande water-bearing 

zone, B, the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, and C, the Piney Point aquifer, New Jersey 

Coastal Plain, 2003–2008............................................................................................................18

9. Graphs showing water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened 

in the Rio Grande water-bearing zone, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008................19

10. Graphs showing water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened 

in the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.........................22

11. Graphs showing water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened 

in the Piney Point aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008 .....................................27
vi

12. Graph showing water-level hydrograph for selected observation wells screened in 

the Piney Point aquifer, Delaware and eastern Maryland, 1978–2008 .............................29

13. Maps showing location and volume of groundwater withdrawals from A, the Vincen-

town aquifer, B, Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, and C, the Englishtown aquifer 

system, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 ................................................................................31

14. Graphs showing estimated groundwater withdrawals from A, the Vincentown 

aquifer, B, the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, and C, the Englishtown aquifer 

system, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008 ......................................................................32

15. Maps showing groundwater level changes in A, the Vincentown aquifer, B, the 

Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, and C, the Englishtown aquifer system, 

New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2003 to 2008..................................................................................33

16. Graphs showing water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened 

in the Vincentown aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.....................................34

17. Graph showing water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in 

the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer in the northern counties of the New Jersey 

Coastal Plain, 1978–2008............................................................................................................37

18. Graph showing water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in 

the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer in the southern counties of the New Jersey 

Coastal Plain, 1978–2008............................................................................................................37

19. Graphs showing water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened 

in the Englishtown aquifer system, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008 ......................41

20. Map showing area of saline groundwater, Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer 

system, New Jersey, 2008 .........................................................................................................43

21. Maps showing location and volume of groundwater withdrawals from A, the 

Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, B, the Middle Potomac-Raritan-Magothy 

aquifer, and C, the Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal 

Plain, 2008 ....................................................................................................................................46

22. Graphs showing estimated groundwater withdrawals from A, the Upper PotomacRaritan-Magothy aquifer, B, the Middle Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, and C, 

the Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 

1978–2008 .....................................................................................................................................47

23. Maps showing groundwater-level changes in the A, Upper Potomac-RaritanMagothy aquifer, B, Middle Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, and C, Lower 

Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2003–2008 .....................49

24. Graphs showing water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened 

in the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer in the northern counties, 

New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.....................................................................................50

25. Graphs showing water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened 

in the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer in the southern counties, 

New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.....................................................................................51

26. Graphs showing water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened 

in the Middle and undifferentiated Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer in the 

northern counties, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008...................................................55

27. Graphs showing water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in 

the Middle and undifferentiated Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer in the southern 

counties, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008 ...................................................................56

28. Graphs showing water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened 

in the Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 

1978–2008 .....................................................................................................................................59
vii

29. Graphs showing water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened 

in the Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, Delaware Coastal Plain, 

1978–2008 .....................................................................................................................................60

30. Maps showing available feet of potentiometric head above the top of the A, Piney 

Point aquifer, B, Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, and C, Englishtown aquifer 

system, central and southern New Jersey, 2008...................................................................61

Tables

1. Geologic and hydrogeologic units of the New Jersey Coastal Plain ..................................5

2. County prefix codes used in well-numbering systems in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, 

and Maryland ................................................................................................................................6

3. Groundwater withdrawals by county and aquifer from selected confined aquifers 

of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008....................................................................................11

Conversion Factors, Datums, and Abbreviations

Inch/Pound to SI

Multiply By To obtain

Length

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Area

square mile (mi2

) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) 

Flow rate

gallon per day (gal/d) 0.003785 cubic meter per day (m3

/d)

million gallons per day (Mgal/d) 0.04381 cubic meter per second (m3

/s)

Transmissivity*

foot squared per day (ft2

/d) 0.09290 meter squared per day (m2/d) 

Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 

(NGVD 29).

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).

Altitude, as used in this report, refers to distance above or below the vertical datum.

*Transmissivity: The standard unit for transmissivity is cubic foot per day per square foot times 

foot of aquifer thickness [(ft3

/d)/ft2]ft. In this report, the mathematically reduced form, foot 

squared per day (ft2/d), is used for convenience.

Concentrations of chemical constituents in water are given in milligrams per liter (mg/L).

Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the 

New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

by Vincent T. DePaul and Robert Rosman

Abstract 

Groundwater-level altitudes in 10 confined aquifers of the 

New Jersey Coastal Plain were measured and evaluated to provide an overview of regional groundwater conditions during 

fall 2008. Water levels were measured in more than 900 wells 

in New Jersey, eastern Pennsylvania, and northern Delaware 

and potentiometric surface maps prepared for the confined 

Cohansey aquifer of Cape May County, the Rio Grande 

water-bearing zone, the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, the Piney 

Point, Vincentown, and the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifers, 

the Englishtown aquifer system, and the Upper, Middle, and 

Lower aquifers of the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer system. In 2008, the highest water-level altitudes were observed 

in the Vincentown aquifer (median, 78 ft) and the lowest in 

the Atlantic City 800-foot sand (median, -45 ft). Persistent, 

regionally extensive cones of depression were present within 

the potentiometric surfaces of the Englishtown aquifer system 

in east-central New Jersey, the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer 

in east-central and southern New Jersey, the Upper, Middle, 

and Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifers in southern 

New Jersey, and the Atlantic City 800-foot sand in the southeastern part of the State. Cones of depression in the potentiometric surfaces of the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy and 

the Piney Point aquifers in east-central and southwestern New 

Jersey had broadened and deepened since 2003.

Declining water levels in many of New Jersey’s confined 

Coastal Plain aquifers intensified during the late 1970s and 

early 1980s, prompting the designation of two water-supply 

Critical Areas by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection; Critical Areas 1 and 2 continued to be 

of concern. To address that concern, water-level changes 

were assessed in nearly 800 wells measured during the fall 

of 2003 and 2008, and potentiometric-surface difference 

maps for each aquifer were constructed and evaluated. In 

addition, water-level trends were calculated for 77 wells for 

the periods 2003–8 and 1998–2008 and for 73 wells for the 

period 1978–2008. 

From 2003 to 2008 small to moderate water-level 

changes were observed in many Coastal Plain aquifers in New 

Jersey, but in places, groundwater levels continued to decline 

substantially as a result of pumping. Groundwater levels in 

the Atlantic City 800-foot sand were lower in 2008 than in 

2003; declines were greatest near pumping centers in eastern 

Atlantic County. Changes were less pronounced in Cape May 

County where water levels were, on average, 1 to 3 feet (ft) 

lower than those during the previous study (2003), except near 

Rio Grande where a localized cone of depression had formed 

as a result of increased withdrawals. Large and widespread 

declines occurred in the Piney Point aquifer in Cumberland 

County where water levels in and around the city of Bridgeton 

had fallen in excess of 100 ft since 2003, and by 30 ft to more 

than 60 ft in surrounding areas. Groundwater levels in the 

Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer and Englishtown aquifer system continued to recover in east-central New Jersey; however, 

groundwater levels in the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer 

throughout the southern part of the State continued to decline.

In the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, groundwater levels were substantially lower than in 2003 in parts of 

northern Ocean County but were stable in the area adjacent 

to Raritan Bay (Critical Area 1), and water levels continued 

to recover in southern New Jersey. In the Middle PotomacRaritan-Magothy aquifer, water levels rose near Raritan Bay in 

Middlesex County; however, modest declines were recorded 

in interior areas of Monmouth and Ocean Counties. Groundwater levels in both the Middle and Lower Potomac-RaritanMagothy aquifers were stable or rising within the regional 

cone of depression in Critical Area 2; beyond the critical area 

in southern New Jersey, however, water levels were slightly 

lower than in 2003.

Analyses of long-term water-level changes indicate that 

from 1978 to 2008 downward trends occurred at 20 wells 

(27 percent), upward trends at 27 wells (37 percent), and 

trends at 26 wells (36 percent) were insubstantial. Sustained, 

long-term declines were observed most often at wells within 

the Atlantic City 800-foot sand and at wells in the Piney Point 

aquifer in southern New Jersey, in which rates of decline 

were as great as 1.4 feet/year. Upward water-level trends were 

observed frequently at wells screened in the Englishtown 

aquifer system and the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer in 

Critical Area 1 in east-central New Jersey, and in the PotomacRaritan-Magothy aquifer system in parts of Critical Area 1 

and throughout most of Critical Area 2 in southern New 

Jersey. Annual rates of upward change were as great as 3.9 
2 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

and 5.6 ft/yr in the Englishtown aquifer system and WenonahMount Laurel aquifer, respectively. Among the units of the 

Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer system, annual rates of 

recovery were greatest in the Lower aquifer.

From 1998 to 2008, downward water-level trends 

were observed at 22 wells (29 percent), upward trends were 

observed at 21 wells (27 percent), and insubstantial trends at 

34 wells (44 percent). Downward trends were detected most 

often at wells open to the Piney Point aquifer and the Atlantic 

City 800-foot sand. Upward water-level trends were most frequent in wells open to the Englishtown aquifer system in Critical Area 1 and in wells within the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy 

aquifer system in southern New Jersey. 

Introduction

The Coastal Plain aquifers of New Jersey provide an 

important source of water for more than 2 million people. 

Groundwater withdrawals from Coastal Plain aquifers have 

steadily increased from less than 50 million gallons per 

day (Mgal/d) prior to 1920 to more than 300 Mgal/d in the 

late 1980s and early 1990s (unpublished data on file at the 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), New Jersey Water Science 

Center). As a result, water levels in the confined aquifers 

have steadily declined, and regional cones of depression have 

formed. In addition to the loss of storage, declining water levels in these aquifers have caused reversals in natural hydraulic 

gradients that have, in some areas, induced the movement of 

brackish or saline water from estuaries, bays, and adjacent 

aquifers to freshwater aquifers.

Prior to 1978, groundwater levels were measured and 

cones of depression were mapped in response to local hydrologic issues. To provide water-supply managers, regulators, 

and scientists with a regional assessment of groundwater 

conditions in multiple aquifers, the USGS, in cooperation 

with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 

(NJDEP), initiated a plan in 1978 to map the potentiometric 

surfaces of the major confined aquifers on a 5-year cyclical 

basis. Such assessments provide a broad view of the effects of 

groundwater development and are an essential component to 

managing and sustaining the region’s water supply. In 1988, 

the plan of study was expanded to include selected water-level 

measurements in Delaware in order to better define cones of 

depression that propagated beneath the Delaware River and 

Bay. To date, potentiometric surfaces in 1978, 1983, 1988, 

1993, 1998, and 2003 have been mapped. 

In 1985, concern over the long-term decline in water levels in areas where groundwater was the primary or sole source 

of supply prompted the NJDEP to designate two water-supply 

Critical Areas in the New Jersey Coastal Plain. Critical Area 1 

is in the east-central part of the State and Critical Area 2 is 

in the Camden County area of southern New Jersey. Each 

Critical Area is composed of a depleted zone and a threatened 

margin. The boundary of the depleted zone corresponds to the 

average -30-feet potentiometric contour in each of the regulated aquifers, which is based on the 1983 maps by Eckel and 

Walker (1986). A 3-mile-wide buffer, known as the threatened margin, surrounds the depleted zone of each aquifer and 

addresses the potential for saltwater intrusion as a result of 

this decline in water levels. Critical Area boundaries shown 

on maps in this report are composites that include the largest 

surface extents of both the depleted zone and the threatened 

margin of each of the affected aquifers.

Critical Area 1, designated in 1985, encompasses parts of 

Middlesex, Monmouth, and Ocean Counties (fig. 1). Regulated aquifers within Critical Area 1 apply to, in increasing 

order of depth, the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, the Englishtown aquifer system, and the Upper and Middle PotomacRaritan-Magothy aquifers (PRM). Mandatory reductions in 

groundwater withdrawals from production wells within the 

depleted zones of the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, the 

Englishtown aquifer system, and the Middle PRM aquifer 

were set at 50 percent relative to 1983 volumes, whereas those 

in the Upper PRM aquifer were set at 40 percent of 1983 

volumes. Within the threatened margin, allocated withdrawals 

remained at 1983 volumes (New Jersey Administrative Code 

7:19-8.4, 2005). Critical Area 1 restrictions were implemented 

in 1989, but because access to alternate water supplies was not 

initially available, compliance by most individual purveyors 

was deferred until 1991. 

Prior to the recovery and subsequent stabilization of 

water levels during the early 1990s throughout Critical Area 1, 

water levels declined by as much as 135, 260, and 300 feet relative to predevelopment conditions in the Middle PRM aquifer, Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, and Englishtown aquifer 

system, respectively. Upon completion of the Manasquan 

Reservoir in 1991, which can supply the region with approximately 30 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) of surface water 

(New Jersey Water Supply Authority, 2005), withdrawals 

from confined Coastal Plain aquifers in this area were reduced 

and replaced with surface-water withdrawals and, to a lesser 

extent, withdrawals from shallower, unconfined aquifers 

(Watt, 2000), initiating a reversal in the long-term decline in 

water levels. As of 2008, water levels have recovered from 

lows observed during 1983–88 by as much as 67, 150, and 

187 ft in the Middle PRM aquifer, the Wenonah-Mount Laurel 

aquifer, and the Englishtown aquifer system, respectively. 

In an effort to improve the management of groundwater 

resources of the PRM aquifer system in southern New Jersey, 

Critical Area 2 was designated in 1993. Groundwater availability issues within the region included widespread declining 

water levels and loss of storage associated with development 

of groundwater resources for public supply and the potential 

for movement of saline water from Gloucester County and 

downdip areas toward the Camden area cone of depression. 

The management area encompasses Camden, most of Burlington and Gloucester, and parts of Atlantic, Cumberland, 

Ocean, Monmouth, and Salem Counties (fig. 1), although 

regulations are most applicable to the first three counties. 

Restrictions on groundwater withdrawals apply only to the 
Introduction 3

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

NEW JERSEY

DELAWARE 

BAY

RARITAN

BAY

Fall Line

Base modified from U.S. Geological Survey digital 

data, 1:24,000 Universal Transverse Mercator 

Projection, Zone 18, NAD 83

CUMBERLAND

CAPE

MAY

MONMOUTH

OCEAN

BURLINGTON

ATLANTIC

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

SALEM

MERCER MIDDLESEX

A'

PENNSYLVANIA

Trenton

CA 1

CA 2

DELAWA

RE De la ware River

INNER COASTAL PLAIN

OUTER COASTAL

PLAIN

Philadelphia

A A'

KENT

NEW 

CASTLE

A

0 10 20 MILES 5

0 10 20 KILOMETERS 5

Line of section

Critical Area (CA)

boundary

EXPLANATION

ATLANTIC 

 OCEAN

Aquifer

Confining unit

Hydrogeologic unit

A1 Upper unconfined Kirkwood-Cohansey aquifer

Confining unit overlying the lower Kirkwood Formation aquifer

(Atlantic City 800-foot sand); also contains the Rio Grande 

water-bearing zone

Confining lower Kirkwood Formation aquifer

(Atlantic City 800-foot sand)

Basal Kirkwood Formation confining unit; the upper

part of the composite confining unit

Confined Piney Point aquifer

Composite confining unit

Vincentown aquifer

Navesink-Hornerstown confining unit

Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer

Marshalltown-Wenonah confining unit

Englishtown aquifer system

Merchantville-Woodbury confining unit

Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer

Confining unit between the Middle and Upper

Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifers

Middle Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer

Confining unit between the Lower and Middle

Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifers

Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer

Generalized direction 

of groundwater flow

C1

A2

C2

A3

C3

A4

C4

A5

C5

A6

C6

A7

C7

A8

C8

A9

EXPLANATION

Middle Miocene

and younger

sediments

Lower Miocene

sediments

OligoceneEocene

sediments

Paleocene

sediments

Cretaceous

sediments

A A’

Atlantic Ocean

Northwest Southeast

Fall Line

Bedrock

Idealized interface where groundwater

contains 10,000 milligrams per liter

chloride concentrations

Not to scale

A6 A5 A4 A3

A1

C1

A2

C2

C3

C4

C6

A7

C7 A8

C8 A9 C5

the Coastal Plain of southern New Jersey.

Figure 1. Location of the study area and generalized representation of simulated prepumping flow in a hydrogeologic section through 
4 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

aquifers of the PRM and were initiated in 1996. Groundwater 

withdrawals in the depleted zone were reduced by an average 

of 22 percent relative to 1983 volumes, whereas within the 

threatened margin, withdrawals were limited to the maximum 

annual volume between 1983 and 1991 (New Jersey Administrative Code 7:19-8.5, 2005). Development of shallower, 

non-restricted aquifers was encouraged and specific conservation measures introduced to curtail groundwater withdrawals 

within the region including the use of the Tri-County Pipeline, 

which began operation in 1996 and can provide more than 

30 Mgal/d of water from the Delaware River to users within 

Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester Counties. In addition, 

parts of Burlington County were recognized as a Water Allocation Credit Receiving Area, whereby allocated withdrawals may be transferred locally to developing areas based on 

formulae set forth by the NJDEP (New Jersey Administrative 

Code, 7:19-8.5, 2005). Reductions in groundwater withdrawals coupled with the use of alternative surface-water sources 

have resulted in substantial rises in water levels in Critical 

Area 2, and as of 2008, water levels have recovered from lows 

observed during 1988–93 by as much as 53, 40, and 50 ft in 

the Upper, Middle, and Lower PRM aquifers, respectively. 

Purpose and Scope

The scope and objectives of this report are to characterize 

2008 groundwater conditions within selected confined aquifers 

of the New Jersey Coastal Plain and to evaluate groundwaterlevel changes in each during selected time periods using 

potentiometric-surface and water-level-change maps and 

simple trend statistics. Hydrographs that illustrate seasonal 

variations and the long-term effects of groundwater withdrawals are provided for 83 wells. Groundwater withdrawals from 

the 10 confined aquifers in New Jersey are compiled for 1978 

to 2008 and presented in various maps, graphs, and tables 

throughout the report. Basic well-characteristic and waterlevel data are included in the appendixes. This report is the 

seventh in the series of reports that show the potentiometric 

surfaces for the major confined aquifers of the New Jersey 

Coastal Plain.

Description of Study Area

The study area encompasses the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province of New Jersey, eastern Pennsylvania, and 

parts of the Coastal Plain in Delaware. Although the study 

area extends offshore and beneath the continental shelf, the 

primary focus of the study was on the emerged parts of the 

Coastal Plain in the three States, an area of approximately 

5,400 square miles (mi2). The study area, shown in figure 1, 

is bounded on the west by the Fall Line and on the east by 

the Atlantic Ocean. This investigation focuses on the counties of Atlantic, Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, 

Gloucester, Monmouth, Ocean, Salem, and parts of Mercer 

and Middlesex in New Jersey but includes limited parts of 

Kent and New Castle Counties in Delaware and parts of Philadelphia County in Pennsylvania. Topography within the study 

area is relatively flat; altitudes range from 0 ft along estuaries, bays, and the Atlantic coastline to nearly 400 ft at the 

transition of the inner and outer Coastal Plain sub-provinces 

in western Monmouth County, New Jersey. For purposes of 

geographic comparison, the New Jersey counties of Mercer, 

Middlesex, Monmouth, and Ocean are referred to in this report 

as the northern counties within the Coastal Plain; the remaining counties within the Coastal Plain—Atlantic, Burlington, 

Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Gloucester, and Salem—are 

referred to as the southern counties.

Groundwater has historically been the primary source 

of potable supply throughout much of the study area. The 

broad, flat stream valleys characteristic of the low-relief 

topography of the Coastal Plain generally are not practical for surface-water impoundments. A thick sequence of 

unconsolidated sands and gravels that underlie the study area, 

however, provide an abundant source of freshwater, enabling 

the development of many areas within the Coastal Plain for 

moderate to large populations. In recent years, declining water 

levels and instances of saltwater intrusion initiated a shift 

toward alternate sources of supply. From 1985 to 2008 surface 

water as a percentage of the total public supply among Coastal 

Plain populations increased from 11 to nearly 25 percent. As 

a result, declining groundwater levels in threatened aquifers 

began, and continue, to recover.

Hydrogeologic Framework

The hydrogeologic framework used in this report was 

developed for the New Jersey Coastal Plain Regional Aquifer System Analysis (RASA) study by Zapecza (1989) and 

consists of a southeastward dipping and thickening wedge of 

unconsolidated deposits of sand, silt, and clay of Cretaceous 

to Tertiary age underlain by basement rocks and overlain by 

a veneer of locally occurring Quaternary sediments. Coastal 

Plain sediments were deposited in various shelf, marginal 

marine, near shore or coastal beach, and deltaic environments, 

the extent of which fluctuated in response to relative changes 

in sea level. Units composed of distinctly less permeable 

sediments (predominantly clays and fine-grained silts) form 

the confining units, and coarser, more permeable sand and 

gravel units, which readily produce water, form the aquifers. 

These deposits are less than 50 ft thick along the western 

limit of the Coastal Plain (Fall Line) and thicken to more than 

6,500 ft in southern Cape May County. Coastal Plain sediments of Cretaceous and Tertiary age generally strike northeast-southwest and dip 10 to 60 feet per mile (ft/mi) to the 

southeast (Zapecza, 1989); overlying Quaternary deposits are 

flat. Many of these units crop out near the Fall Line parallel to 

strike, transitioning into unconfined aquifers; others such as 

the Piney Point aquifer are confined throughout the study area. 

The aquifers and confining units discussed in this report range 

in age from Lower Cretaceous to Miocene (table 1). A brief 

description of each aquifer is included in sections devoted to 
Introduction 5

Table 1. Geologic and hydrogeologic units of the New Jersey Coastal Plain.

[Aquifers in bold print are those discussed in report. Modified from Zapecza, 1989, and Sugarman, 2001]

System Series Geologic unit Hydrogeologic unit

Quaternary

Holocene

Alluvial deposits

Undifferentiated

Beach sand and gravel

Pleistocene Cape May Formation Kirkwood-Cohansey 

aquifer system

Tertiary

Miocene

Pennsauken Formation

Bridgeton Formation

Beacon Hill Gravel

Cohansey Sand Kirkwood-Cohansey aquifer system

Kirkwood Formation

“Upper” Wildwood-Belleplain confining unit

Rio Grande water-bearing zone

“Lower” Wildwood-Belleplain confining unit

Atlantic City 800-foot sand

Composite confining unit

Oligocene Piney Point 

Formation

Shark River 

Formation

Piney Point aquifer

Eocene

Manasquan Formation

Paleocene

Vincentown Formation Vincentown aquifer

Hornerstown Sand Hornerstown Sand1

Cretaceous

Upper Cretaceous

Tinton sand

Red Bank Sand Red Bank Sand

Navesink Formation

Mount Laurel Sand

Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer

Wenonah Formation

Marshalltown Formation Marshalltown-Wenonah confining unit

Englishtown Formation Englishtown aquifer system

Woordbury Clay

Merchantville-Woodbury confining unit

Merchantville Formation

Magothy Formation

Potomac-RaritanMagothy aquifer system

Upper aquifer

Raritan Formation

Confining unit

Middle aquifer

Potomac group

Confining unit

Lower Cretaceous Lower aquifer

Pre Cretaceous Bedrock Bedrock confining unit

1

Not designated as a formal aquifer by Zapecza (1989).
6 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

individual aquifers; for a more detailed discussion, Zapecza 

(1989) and Sugarman and others (2005) describe the hydrogeology of New Jersey and Vroblesky and Fleck (1991), the 

hydrogeology of Delaware. 

Well Numbering System 

In this report, wells are listed by their USGS identification numbers. For wells located in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, the well-numbering system consists of a county code 

number followed by a sequence number for wells within that 

county. For example, well number 15-123 is the 123rdwell 

inventoried in Gloucester County. In Maryland, the numbering 

system consists of a county code, followed by the 5-minute 

quadrangle code and a number indicating the order in which 

the well was inventoried in that quadrangle. For example, 

well CO Bd 53 is located in Caroline County as indicated by 

“CO,” is in the 5-minute quadrangle “Bd,” and is the 53rd

well mapped in that quadrangle. County codes for New Jersey, 

Pennsylvania, and Maryland are listed in table 2. Well identifiers in Delaware are assigned by the Delaware Geological 

Survey and are numbered on the basis of a coordinate system 

using 5-minute quadrangles of latitude and longitude.

Table 2. County prefix codes used in well-numbering systems 

in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland.

County name Code County name Code

New Jersey

Atlantic 01 Mercer 21

Burlington 05 Middlesex 23

Camden 07 Monmouth 25

Cape May 09 Ocean 29

Cumberland 11 Salem 33

Gloucester 15

Pennsylvania

Philadelphia P

Maryland

Cecil CE

Caroline CO

Previous Investigations

Various regional studies describe groundwater-level data, 

potentiometric surfaces, and groundwater flow in the New Jersey Coastal Plain. Previous potentiometric surface maps in this 

series present groundwater levels in the study area at 5-year 

intervals from 1978 through 2003: 1978, Walker (1983); 1983, 

Eckel and Walker (1986); 1988, Rosman and others (1996); 

1993 and 1998, Lacombe and Rosman (1997, 2001); and 

2003, DePaul and others (2009). The confined-aquifer waterlevel map series is supplemented by water-table maps for the 

unconfined aquifers within the following basins of the New 

Jersey Coastal Plain: Mullica River Basin (Johnson and Watt, 

1996); Salem River, Raccoon, Oldmans, Alloway, and Stow 

Creek Basins (Johnson and Charles, 1997); Upper Maurice 

River Basin (Lacombe and Rosman, 1995); Great Egg Harbor 

River Basin (Watt and Johnson, 1992); Rancocas, Crosswicks, 

Assunpink, Blacks, and Crafts Creek Basins (Watt and others, 

2003); and the Toms River, Metedeconk River, and Kettle 

Creek Basins (Watt and others, 1994). 

Countywide water-resources studies were conducted by 

Barksdale and others (1943), Jablonski (1968), and Anderson and Appel (1969) for Middlesex, Monmouth, and Ocean 

Counties, respectively. Rush (1968), Farlekas and others 

(1983), Hardt and Hilton (1969), Rosenau and others (1969), 

Gill (1962), and Lacombe and Carleton (2002) completed 

water-resource studies for the southern counties of Burlington, 

Camden, Gloucester, Salem, and Cape May, respectively. 

Simulations of groundwater flow from a regional perspective within the New Jersey Coastal Plain are described in 

Martin (1998), Pope and Gordon (1999), and Voronin (2004). 

Pucci and others (1994), Navoy and Carleton (1995), and 

McAuley and others (2001) did detailed studies, including 

groundwater-flow models of Critical Area 1, Critical Area 2, 

and the Atlantic City area, respectively. In Critical Area 2, 

Navoy and others (2005) simulated the vulnerability of publicsupply wells open to the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer 

system to saltwater intrusion, and Navoy (1994) simulated 

the effects of projected withdrawals on water levels in the 

Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer. Groundwater-level recovery 

in Critical Area 1 and Critical Area 2 is discussed in Spitz and 

others (2008) and Spitz and DePaul (2008).

Simulations of the effects of allocated and projected 

withdrawals on water levels in the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy 

aquifer system in Gloucester and Salem Counties are reported 

by Charles and others (2011). Voronin and others (1996), Spitz 

(1998), and Lacombe and others (2009) simulated groundwater flow in confined aquifers in Cape May County. Pope 

(2006) simulated effects of increased withdrawals on water 

levels in the Atlantic City 800-foot sand. 

Data Collection and Analysis

Static groundwater-level altitudes were measured in 

926 wells in New Jersey and Pennsylvania by USGS personnel. Water levels were measured in additional wells in Delaware by personnel of the Delaware Department of Natural 

Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC). Water levels 

used in this study, most of which were measured during late 

October to mid-December 2008, are assumed to represent the 

2008 average annual water level in that aquifer at that location 

within the study area; in some cases water levels were recovering from high summer withdrawal rates and had not yet 

reached the mean annual water level, but the difference from 

mean annual, where it exists, is generally small. Water levels 
Data Collection and Analysis 7

measured at about the same time of year once every 5 years 

can be compared to each other to reveal long-term trends 

whether or not they are exactly the mean annual water levels 

for the respective years.

Water levels were measured at observation wells and 

production wells used for industrial, commercial, irrigation, 

domestic, and public supply; wells used for measurement were 

generally chosen on the basis of areal distribution within each 

aquifer. Measurements made at observation wells constitute 

about one-third of the dataset, and in order to maximize the 

geographic distribution and to capture low water levels associated with withdrawals, the network was augmented with production wells. Measurements were made using steel or electric 

tapes graduated to hundredths of a foot, which are the most 

accurate devices, or using an airline, which is less accurate. 

The airline method was used in limited instances and only at 

wells that were inaccessible for measuring by either electric or 

steel tape. Pumps in high-capacity supply wells were turned 

off for a minimum of 1 hour before measurement of the water 

level in the well. In addition, nearby pumping was controlled 

at the time of measurement; pumps in all other high-capacity 

production wells screened in the same aquifer within 0.25 mi 

of the measured well were idle for at least 1 hour prior to measurement of the water level. In accordance with USGS methods for the collection of water-level data, measurements were 

made in each well until two consecutive measurements within 

0.05 ft were obtained at least 5 minutes apart. The resulting 

water-level measurement was considered representative of 

static or near-static conditions. Importantly, “static” in this 

report is not intended to mean unaffected by withdrawals but 

rather representative of water levels in the area, not of those 

influenced by the very local effects of individual withdrawals. 

Water-level data are presented in appendixes 1 through 9. 

Groundwater in three observation wells measured in 

this study had chloride concentrations in excess of 5,000 milligrams per liter (mg/L). Water levels in these wells were 

converted from a measured saltwater hydraulic head to a 

calculated freshwater head. The conversion equation follows a 

modification of the Ghyben-Herzberg relation (Todd, 1980) to 

determine the equivalent length of freshwater in a well filled 

with saltwater:

l

f = (ps / pf ) ls ,

where 

l

f is length of the freshwater column in the well 

casing, 

ps is the density of saltwater, 

pf is the density of freshwater, and

l

s is the length of saltwater column in the well 

casing. 

The density of freshwater is 1.00 gram per cubic centimeter (g/cm3

), and the density of water increases with increasing solute concentrations. Adjusted water levels were used to 

contour the potentiometric surfaces; both the measured water 

levels and their freshwater equivalents are presented in the 

appendixes of the report.

The water level in a well represents the hydraulic head 

in the part of the aquifer to which the well is open. Hydraulic heads at each well were calculated by subtracting the 

water level, in feet below land surface, from the land-surface 

altitude, in feet above the National Geodetic Vertical Datum 

of 1929 (NGVD 29). In confined aquifers, this level typically 

stands above the top of the aquifer as a result of increases in 

pressure with depth and the presence of overlying, relatively 

impermeable strata. Maps depicting the areal distribution of 

hydraulic head within each aquifer then were constructed; 

lines of equal hydraulic head are represented on these maps 

by potentiometric-surface contours. From these maps groundwater flow in each aquifer can be inferred, as general flow 

directions are assumed to be perpendicular to the potentiometric-surface contours and in the direction of decreasing head. 

Although most of the data used in this study are composed of 

measurements made in the confined parts of the aquifers, in 

some cases, measurements made in the unconfined parts are 

included in order to guide placement of potentiometric contours at the aquifer outcrops. 

On the plate maps accompanying this report, the symbol 

for an observation well applies not only to the original use 

of the well, but to wells that had not been pumped during the 

7 days prior to measurement. Prior to 1998, reports in this 

series applied the term “observation well” to a well that had 

not been pumped within the 24 hours prior to measurement. 

Because of wide variations in the hydraulic characteristics 

among the aquifers within the study area, the residual effects 

of pumping stresses also differ greatly, and therefore, this “idle 

period” for observation-well classification was lengthened 

to 7 days.

Groundwater-level-change maps for selected aquifers 

were constructed by comparing the potentiometric surfaces 

and groundwater-level measurements from 2003 and 2008. 

Water-level-change values were calculated as the difference 

between the 2003 and 2008 groundwater-level altitudes, 

except where continuous or semi-continuous hydrograph data 

were available; in those cases, a calculated slope was used to 

determine water-level change. In limited cases, water levels 

measured during 2008 that were not measured during prior 

studies were compared to an estimated water level derived 

from the earlier potentiometric surface map at that location. In 

addition, where measurements were sparse or absent, particularly in downdip areas of some units, points representing the 

differences in the potentiometric surface at the intersections of 

two contours were used to provide additional spatial coverage. 

The water-level-change values were plotted on digital base 

maps and initially contoured by using geographic information 

systems (GIS) software to provide an unbiased interpolation of 

the data. The contours were then manually adjusted to reflect 

the understanding of the groundwater system. Raster datasets 

were constructed from the resulting “difference” contours 

and points in order to provide estimates of groundwater-level 

change in areas lacking measurements. While these maps 
8 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

provide a spatial perspective in assessing water-level change 

throughout individual aquifers over a given time period, 

interpretations based on these maps are best viewed with some 

caution. In most cases, the density of data throughout a given 

aquifer may be insufficient to support the interpretation and 

use on a local scale. Additionally, many of the data points used 

in the construction of these maps are based on two measurements that represent a long-term net change in water levels; 

in the absence of continuous long-term water-level data, the 

direction and rate of change during intervening time periods 

may fluctuate and not be known, and cannot be resolved 

through use of intermittent data points. Further, uncertainty 

may be introduced by the relative positions of the compared water-level measurements on the annual hydrograph. 

Finally, equivalent gradational scales were used on all maps 

to maintain consistency; a change of -5 to +5 ft is classified 

as “no substantial change,” and lesser water-level changes are 

not shown.

Water-level data from wells with at least 15 years of 

record were used to produce the hydrographs shown in various figures throughout this report, with the exception of those 

for the Rio Grande water-bearing zone, where water levels 

were collected intermittently. In many cases, hydrographs 

show periods of record beyond 15 years, and many span the 

30-year period from 1978 to 2008. The water-level data used 

to construct the hydrographs are a combination of continuous measurements and manual measurements collected on 

a seasonal basis. These data illustrate seasonal variations in 

water levels; the long-term effects of artificial stresses, such 

as pumping; and in some cases, the development and recovery 

of depressions in the potentiometric surface. Where temporal 

density and continuity of long-term water-level measurements 

were sufficient, trends were statistically analyzed by using the 

Mann-Kendall trend test, a commonly used method to assess 

monotonic change in time-series data (Mann, 1945; Helsel and 

Hirsch, 2002). The Mann-Kendall method is a nonparametric 

trend test that determines whether a statistically significant 

positive or negative change in a constituent (in this case, depth 

to water) has occurred over the period of interest. The method, 

however, does not imply whether change is linear nor does 

it determine the magnitude of change. Calculation of Sen’s 

slope for each of the test periods was used to quantify the 

magnitude of annual water-level change (Sen, 1968; Gilbert, 

1987). Because water levels may vary throughout the year as a 

result of seasonal demand and withdrawal patterns, a modified 

test that accounts for seasonality in the data, determined from 

Wilcoxon scores, was used (Hirsch and Slack, 1984; Winkler, 

2004). For the purposes of this study, an upward or downward 

change over a given period of time was considered statistically 

significant if the Mann-Kendall trend test had a 95-percent 

confidence level (p value of 0.05) and if the average yearly 

change, as indicated by the slope of the line, was greater than 

or equal to 0.2 feet per year (ft/yr). If the slope was less than 

0.2 ft/yr, the indicated yearly change was considered insubstantial. Analyses focused on the 5-year period from 2003 

to 2008, the decadal period of 1998 through 2008, and the 

30-year period from 1978 to 2008. The 30-year period coincides with the duration of the individual water-level synoptic 

studies in this series and is used to illustrate long-term trends 

not dominated by short-term variations in climate or withdrawal patterns. Because trends observed in many of the wells 

were not always unidirectional from the beginning to the end 

of a cycle, trends in different directions may cancel each other 

out, leading to the conclusion of an “insignificant trend” for a 

given time period. 

In addition to trend tests on long-term water-level data, 

hypothesis tests were performed on the medians of paired 

differences between the 2003 and 2008 and the decadal 

(1998–2008) measurements using the non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-rank test (Wilcoxon, 1945; Helsel and Hirsch, 

2002). The null hypothesis for each test was that the median 

difference between paired measurements is equal to zero or 

that no statistical difference exists between compared measurements. Because the ranks of differences rather than the 

actual values are used, the magnitude of the differences does 

not affect the outcome of the test. Differences were considered significant if a p-value of less than or equal to (≤) 0.05 

(95-percent confidence level) was attained, that is, a 1 in 20 

chance of obtaining this correlation by random occurrence. As 

the p-value decreases, evidence for rejecting the null hypothesis increases. Tests were performed on data grouped according to aquifer, aquifer and county, and aquifer and selected 

management-area boundaries.

The location of the 10,000-mg/L line of equal chloride 

concentration (approximately half that of seawater) was 

simulated for selected aquifers in the New Jersey Coastal Plain 

by use of the USGS SHARP model (Pope and Gordon, 1999). 

The locations of these lines (hereafter referred to as isochlor) 

on selected plates represent the toe of the saltwater interface, 

that is, the intersection of the interface with the bottom of 

the aquifer, generally its farthest landward or updip position. 

Because of disequilibrium of the flow system with present day 

sea level, the position of the interface is more closely related 

to predevelopment rather than current groundwater conditions, 

and despite future scenarios of increasing withdrawals and 

deepening cones of depression, numerical simulations indicate 

little to no movement (Pope and Gordon, 1999). As such, these 

boundaries likely have not moved substantially in response 

to changing groundwater conditions observed throughout 

past study cycles and, therefore, have not been updated. The 

locations of the 10,000-mg/L isochlors for the aquifers of the 

Delaware Coastal Plain are based on maps by Vroblesky and 

Fleck (1991). The location of the 250-mg/L isochlor, which 

designates the limit of potable water in each aquifer as defined 

by NJDEP secondary drinking-water standards (New Jersey 

Administrative Code, 2004), is based on published maps that 

are cited for each aquifer. If no map was available to show the 

location of the 250-mg/L isochlor in a particular aquifer, the 

line was determined from chloride data stored in the USGS 

National Water Information System database (NWIS) and the 

NJDEP quarterly monitoring database. Modifications from 

previously published maps in this report series were made to 
Cohansey Aquifer 9

these 250-mg/L isochlors as current (2003–8) water-quality 

data warranted. 

Groundwater-withdrawal data for central and southern 

New Jersey were tabulated and mapped in order to assess 

volumes of water pumped from each of the aquifers. Data 

were compiled from permitted data only, that is, wells in 

which daily withdrawals meet or exceed 100,000 gallons for a 

period of more than 30 days in a consecutive 365-day period. 

Such wells include those used for public-supply, large-scale 

agriculture (irrigation), and commercial or industrial purposes. 

No attempt was made to estimate withdrawals from numerous smaller-capacity production wells, such as those used 

for domestic supply, which is a limitation of the analysis. 

Withdrawal data cited in this report were obtained from data 

reported to the New Jersey Department of Environmental 

Protection and were quality reviewed and incorporated into the 

water-use database of the USGS New Jersey Water Science 

Center. Additional withdrawal data from the late 1970s were 

obtained from Zapecza and others (1987).

Cohansey Aquifer

The Cohansey aquifer in Cape May County is the youngest and uppermost confined aquifer considered in this study. 

The aquifer is composed of gravel and coarse- to fine-grained 

sands and includes the lower part of the Cohansey Formation 

and the sand-rich uppermost section of the Kirkwood Formation (Zapecza, 1989). Throughout Cape May County, Pleistocene deposits of sand and clay overlie the Cohansey aquifer, 

providing effective confinement from surficial recharge. In 

northern Cape May County, the Cohansey aquifer underlies 

the Holly Beach water-bearing zone and is confined by one 

or more discontinuous clay deposits, whereas in the southern 

part of the county two intervening widespread and uniform 

confining units and the estuarine sand aquifer overlie the 

Cohansey aquifer. The aquifer in Cape May County ranges 

in thickness from 50 ft near Ocean City to more than 150 ft 

near the southern tip of the peninsula (Lacombe and Carleton, 

2002). The limit of confinement is in northern Cape May 

County, approximately bounded by the Tuckahoe River and a 

northeast-trending line from the mouth of the Maurice River at 

Delaware Bay to the intersection of Cape May, Cumberland, 

and Atlantic Counties.

The Cohansey aquifer contains freshwater throughout 

most of the extent underlying mainland Cape May County; 

however, saline water is present in the aquifer beneath the 

extreme southern part of the peninsula, beneath the back bays 

and barrier islands north of Wildwood, and beneath near-shore 

and offshore areas of the Atlantic Ocean and the Delaware Bay 

(pl. 1). Additionally, saltwater has migrated into freshwater 

parts of the aquifer along the western coast of the peninsula, 

west of the village of Rio Grande. The saltwater-freshwater 

interface (hereafter referred to as saltwater front), as indicated 

by 250-mg/L isochlor, was originally mapped by Gill (1962) 

and updated by Lacombe and Rosman (2001), Lacombe and 

Carleton (2002), and DePaul and others (2009). The estimated 

position of the saltwater front is mapped farther inland than in 

previous studies, near Villas, Cape May County, reflecting the 

rapidly rising chloride concentrations observed in well 9-187, 

which increased from 190 mg/L in 1996 to 805 mg/L in 2005. 

A groundwater sample collected in early 2010 yielded a 

chloride concentration of 1,150 mg/L, confirming the 70-mg/L 

annual rate of increase. The chemistry of the water from this 

well is consistent with seawater intrusion into coastal fresh 

groundwaters. The composition of the groundwater is that of 

a calcium-chloride type, indicative of base-exchange reactions 

with aquifer materials, whereby the uptake of sodium into the 

solid phase (primarily on clay minerals and organic matter 

within the aquifer matrix) is enhanced, replacing calcium ions 

that are subsequently released to solution (Vengosh, 2003). 

This results in low molar ratios of sodium to chloride relative 

to seawater (< 0.86), as well as low ratios of both sulfate and 

boron to chloride. Lacombe and others (2009) indicate that 

withdrawals at the Rio Grande well field are a possible cause 

of intrusion in this area. Similarly, chloride concentrations 

in well 9-89, along the western coast of the peninsula and 

2.8 miles to the north of well 9-187, have increased linearly 

since 2003; sodium to chloride molar ratios in groundwater from this well also have decreased during the same time 

period, indicating a mix of seawater with fresher groundwaters. Immediately to the south of Villas, however, the groundwater remains fresh along the western coast of the peninsula 

where chloride concentrations are typically less than 15 mg/L, 

and no sustained increases have been observed during the 

past decade. Approximately 2 mi to the east of well 9-187, at 

the Rio Grande well field (fig. 2), chloride concentrations in a 

production well have increased from about 15 mg/L to as high 

as 83 mg/L during 1998–2009. Although concentrations in this 

well are typically around 50 mg/L, decreasing sodium to chloride ratios along with increasing chloride concentrations indicate the possible movement of water from the Delaware Bay. 

Water withdrawals

The distribution of withdrawals from the Cohansey 

aquifer in Cape May County is shown in figure 2. Groundwater withdrawals are most common in the southern part of 

the peninsula in upland areas of Middle and Lower Townships, although smaller-capacity production wells are located 

throughout the central and northern parts of the county. During 

2008, approximately 4 Mgal/d (75 percent of total withdrawals) were withdrawn for public supply, lesser amounts were 

withdrawn for industrial, irrigation, and other purposes. In 

2008, the Wildwood Water Utility (WWU), the largest user of 

groundwater from the Cohansey aquifer, withdrew an average of 2.0 Mgal/d. Most of the withdrawals were concentrated 

at the well field at Rio Grande and accounted for 50 percent 

of public-supply withdrawals from the aquifer in 2008. The 

second largest user of the Cohansey aquifer, Lower Township 
10 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

Avalon

Cape May

Wildwood

Rio Grande

Stone Harbor

Cape May Court House

Villas

EXPLANATION

75° 74°45'

39°15'

39°

CAPE

MAY

ATLANTIC

CU

M

B

ERLAN

D

Upper Township

Middle Township

Lower

Rio Grande

well field

Township

0 5 MILES

0 5 KILOMETERS

Tuckahoe River

Woodbine

Dennis Township

Water withdrawal, in million

gallons per year

1–99

100–199

200–299

300–399

Greater than 400

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:24,000

Universal Transverse Mercator Projection, Zone 18, NAD 83

AT LANT IC

OCEA

N

DELAWARE

BAY

New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008.

Figure 2. Location and volume of groundwater withdrawals from the confined Cohansey aquifer, southern Cape May County, 

Municipal Utilities Authority (LTMUA), accounted for an 

additional 1.1 Mgal/d. 

From 1978 to 2008, estimated withdrawals from the 

Cohansey aquifer ranged from 3.8 to 6.9 Mgal/d. By 1982, 

withdrawals were at their peak and remained greater than 

6 Mgal/d throughout the 1980s (fig. 3). During 1991–92 withdrawals decreased by 14 percent, and throughout the 1990s, 

average withdrawal rates were about 5.5 Mgal/d. Following 

a brief increase from 1996 to 1998, withdrawals decreased 

with the introduction of Cape May City Water Department 

(CMCWD) wells tapping the Atlantic City 800-foot sand 

and supplying water to the desalination plant completed in 

1998. From 1998 to 1999, withdrawals from the Cohansey 

aquifer decreased by 24 percent, the largest such reduction 

from any given year to the next. Withdrawal rates increased 

during 2000–1, but from 2003 to 2008 withdrawals were 

further reduced by an additional 20 percent. Withdrawals of 

3.8 Mgal/d in 2008 were the lowest since this series of studies 

commenced in 1978 (fig. 3; table 3). 

Withdrawals by the two major utilities remained relatively constant from the early the 1980s to 2006; however, farther to the south substantial reductions occurred in Cape May 

City, coinciding with the use of production wells open to the 

Atlantic City 800-foot sand. LTMUA slightly reduced withdrawals during 2006–7; however, they returned to antecedent 

withdrawal rates in 2008. From 2007 to 2008, WWU reduced 

withdrawals from the Cohansey aquifer at the Rio Grande well 

field by nearly 1 Mgal/d and replaced those by using withdrawals from deeper, less vulnerable aquifers.
Cohansey Aquifer 11

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

10

8

6

4

2

0

Water withdrawals, in 

million gallons per day

Figure 3. Estimated groundwater withdrawals from the confined Cohansey aquifer in Cape May County, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 

1978–2008. (Thin vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection periods)

Table 3. Groundwater withdrawals by county and aquifer from selected confined aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008.

[Withdrawals are in million gallons per day; only permitted and reported values included; <, less than; --, not applicable]

County

Aquifer

Cohansey1

Rio Grande 

waterbearing 

zone

Atlantic City 

800-foot 

sand

Piney 

Point

Vincentown

WenonahMount 

Laurel

Englishtown 

aquifer

system

Upper 

PotomacRaritanMagothy

Middle 

PotomacRaritanMagothy

Lower 

PotomacRaritanMagothy

Atlantic -- -- 11.8 0.6 -- -- -- -- -- --

Burlington -- -- -- 0.03 <0.01 2.8 0.9 4.5 18.0 9.5

Camden -- -- -- 0.02 -- 2.1 1.4 8.1 6.5 24.4

Cape May 3.8 0.3 8.7 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Cumberland -- -- -- 0.5 -- -- -- 0.1 -- --

Gloucester -- -- -- -- 0.1 1.4 0.04 8.7 6.0 2.8

Mercer -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.8 9.0 --

Middlesex -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 15.8 8.4 --

Monmouth -- -- -- -- 0.6 0.6 2.9 8.6 7.3 --

Ocean -- 0.3 6.2 4.7 0.4 0.14 2.0 7.0 7.0 --

Salem -- -- -- -- 0.03 1.2 -- 1.5 2.7 0.6

Total 3.8 0.6 26.8 5.8 1.1 8.2 7.2 55.1 64.9 37.2

1

Cape May County only.
12 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

Water levels

The potentiometric surface map for fall and early winter 

2008 for the confined Cohansey aquifer is shown on plate 1 

(fig. 1-1); supporting water-level data used to construct this 

map are presented in appendix 1-1. Because water-level altitudes in the northern part of Cape May County did not change 

appreciably since pumping began, the potentiometric surface 

of the aquifer underlying only the southern half of the Cape 

May peninsula was mapped. The configuration of the groundwater surface shows a broad cone of depression centered 

beneath major withdrawal locations in the southern part of the 

peninsula, encompassing all of Lower Township, Cape May, 

and West Cape May, as well as large parts of Middle Township 

and Wildwood Crest. The highest measured water-level altitudes in the confined Cohansey aquifer occurred in central and 

western Middle Townships and in areas to the north, ranging 

from about 4 to 6 ft. The lowest groundwater-level altitudes 

occurred in central and southern Lower Township in the vicinity of the LTMUA and CMCWD well fields, ranging from 

-9 to -17 ft. In comparison, withdrawals from the WWU Rio 

Grande well field to the north are substantially greater than 

those from the LTMUA and CMCWD Cohansey aquifer wells 

(82 percent), yet heads are slightly higher. Lower observed 

groundwater levels to the south and west are consistent with 

a decrease in transmissivity toward the southwestern part of 

the peninsula and greater recharge in Middle Township and 

to the north. The groundwater surface within the study area 

slopes concentrically inward toward potentiometric lows in 

central and southern Lower Township, and flow is radially 

inward from the north and south, as well as from the Atlantic 

Ocean and Delaware Bay coastlines. The configuration of the 

potentiometric surface is similar to that of 2003; however, the 

area encompassed by the -10-ft contour has contracted slightly 

from its previous extent as a result of reductions in Cohansey 

aquifer withdrawals at the WWU Rio Grande well field. 

Vertical head differences were calculated as the differences in groundwater altitude between each aquifer and 

adjacent hydrogeologic units. These head differences are an 

indication of the direction and magnitude of hydraulic gradients that affect the vertical component of flow and provide 

insight into the potential for inter-aquifer flow. Calculation 

of such differences is predicated on the collection of accurate 

head data from multiple aquifers at individual wells or at wells 

in close proximity to one another. However, data of this type 

are limited throughout the study area, and estimated groundwater altitudes were compared to those in adjacent units above 

and below each aquifer to supplement the analysis. Because 

the Cohansey aquifer is the uppermost aquifer in this study 

and a recent potentiometric surface has not been constructed 

for the overlying estuarine sand aquifer, comparison could be 

made only with the underlying unit, the Rio Grande waterbearing zone. Throughout the study area, water levels within 

the Cohansey aquifer are greater than those in the Rio Grande 

water-bearing zone. The potential for downward flow from 

the aquifer is strongest throughout the central part of Cape 

May County, where vertical head differences are typically 20 

to 25 ft, and probably weakest toward the southern tip of the 

peninsula.

Small to moderate net water-level changes were measured in most wells during 2008; from a regional perspective, 

however, water levels generally remained about the same 

relative to those observed in 2003. Results of the Wilcoxon 

signed-rank test indicate that no statistically significant difference is present among 38 matched data pairs measured in 2003 

and 2008. Water levels increased in 21 wells (55 percent), 

were unchanged in 4 wells (11 percent), and decreased in 

13 wells (34 percent). Water-level changes range from declines 

of 2 to 3 ft at the northeastern and southwestern edges of the 

cone of depression to rises of 2 to 9 ft in central and northern 

Lower Township (fig. 4). For the 10-year period 1998–2008, 

results indicate that there was a statistically significant rise in 

water levels.

Long-term water-level trends in the Cohansey aquifer 

were evaluated both graphically and statistically. The magnitude of groundwater-level changes in the Cohansey aquifer, 

as well as the other confined aquifers throughout the Coastal 

Plain, depends upon changes in storage within the aquifer, 

which is a function of its hydraulic properties, and the distribution and changes in patterns of recharge and discharge 

(including withdrawals). Climatic variations affect water levels in confined aquifers only indirectly and are not considered 

in this report. 

Hydrographs of four wells located within and at the 

edges of the cone of depression in southern Cape May County 

are shown in figure 5. Each hydrograph depicts water-level 

altitudes at or below 0 ft since the initial study in 1978. 

The hydrographs also show the response of water levels to 

seasonal changes in withdrawals; these fluctuations were as 

much as 19 ft, with wells located closest to pumping centers 

(9-60 and 9-150) exhibiting the greatest annual variability. 

The water level in well 9-80, located near the northeastern 

edge of the cone of depression, shows the least annual variability. The net change in water levels in this well during the 

5-year (2003–8), the decadal, and the 30-year periods was 

negligible. The hydrograph of observation well 9-150, which 

is located near the southern tip of the peninsula, shows rising 

water levels from 1979 through the mid-1980s, stabilization 

through the mid-1990s, and rising levels again from 1998 to 

2003. From 2004 through 2008, the near-zero slope of the 

hydrograph indicates stable groundwater levels. The recovery 

in water levels in well 9-150 during 1979–86 resulted from 

the abandonment of public-supply wells in Cape May Point 

and a decrease in withdrawals from Cape May City’s southernmost supply well (Lacombe and Carleton, 2002); rising 

water levels and the lower amplitude of seasonal fluctuations 

observed between 1998 and 2004 were the result of further 

reductions in withdrawals by Cape May City. From 2005 to 

2008, annual variability again increased, although this may 

be an artifact of an increase in data-collection frequency. The 

net change during 2003–5 in the water level in well 9-150 was 

negligible. Well 9-60, located in northern Lower Township 
Cohansey Aquifer 13

near LTMUA production wells and less than 1 mi from the 

WWU Rio Grande well field, had annual high water levels of 

-7 to -12 ft and seasonal fluctuations of 10 to 19 ft; the summer level was nearly 20 ft below the annual high. Although 

measurements in this well were made at a rate of only 2 to 

3 times per year, an upward slope in the hydrograph can be 

observed during 2005–8, indicating a rise in water levels corresponding to reductions in withdrawals from the Cohansey 

aquifer at the well field. Withdrawals from the nearby pumping center remained relatively constant from 1980 through 

2006, averaging 3.2 Mgal/d; consequently, the water level in 

this well shows neither a distinct upward nor downward trend 

during that period.

Results of the Mann-Kendall trend analysis are listed in 

appendix 10-1. Temporal density of the data for well 9-60 was 

not sufficient, and trends were not calculated. No significant 

upward or downward trends were observed in the remaining Cohansey aquifer wells for the 5-year period from 2003 

to 2008; however, a slight downward trend was indicated for 

well 9-150 during 1998–2008. In contrast, an upward trend 

was indicated for the 30-year period. Although upward and 

downward trends were detected at the 95-percent confidence 

level during several periods at wells 9-49 and 9-80, the slopes 

of the hydrographs during these periods were negligible, and 

the magnitude of change was not considered important. 

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

0 1 2 3 4

0 1 2 3 4

75° 74°45'

39°15'

39°

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:24,000

Universal Transverse Mercator Projection, Zone 18, NAD 83

5 KILOMETERS

5 MILES

EXPLANATION

Decline, in feet

Greater than or equal to 60

40 – <60

20 – <40

10 – <20

>5 – <10

No substantial change

Recovery, in feet

Greater than or equal to 40

20 – <40

10 – <20 

>5 – <10 

-5 – +5

DELAWARE 

BAY

CUMBERLAND

CAPE

MAY

Cape May

Villas

Rio 

Grande

Wildwood

Stone Harbor

Avalon

Cape May 

Court House

ATLANTIC

Strathmere

ATLANTIC 

 OCEAN

DENNIS TOWNSHIP

UPPER TOWNSHIP

MIDDLE TOWNSHIP

LOWER

TOWNSHIP

<, less than

>, greater than

Figure 4. Water-level changes in the confined Cohansey aquifer, Cape May County, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2003–8.
14 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

0

-5

-10

-15

-20

-25

0

5

10

-5

-10

-15

-20

-25

-30

-35

0

-5

-10

-15

-20

-25

-30

-35

0

-5

-10

-15

-20

-25

-30

-35

9-49

9-60

9-80

9-150

Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008. (All hydrographs are at the same scale; vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection cycles; well locations 

shown on pl. 1-1)

Figure 5. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the confined Cohansey aquifer, Cape May County, New 
Rio Grande Water-Bearing Zone 15

Rio Grande Water-Bearing Zone

The Rio Grande water-bearing zone, as described by 

Zapecza (1989), is a relatively thin unit composed of coarseto fine-grained sand situated midway within the confining 

unit that overlies the Atlantic City 800-foot sand. The updip 

extent of the Rio Grande water-bearing zone approximately 

coincides with that of the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, though 

it is slightly eastward, extending from southern Ocean County 

through eastern Cumberland County (fig. 1-2 on pl. 1). The 

Rio Grande water-bearing zone is laterally continuous from 

Cape May to the southern Ocean County mainland and barrier island beaches; however, the formation pinches out in 

Egg Harbor Township, Atlantic County, and is generally not 

recognizable farther updip in this area (Sugarman and Miller, 

1997; Zapecza, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 

2011). The water-bearing zone is approximately 40 ft thick 

throughout its extent in coastal Ocean and Atlantic Counties 

(Zapecza, 1989) but thickens considerably in southeastern 

Cape May where, near Stone Harbor, it is as great as 170 ft 

thick (Lacombe and Carleton, 2002). Although water levels 

differ from those in the underlying Atlantic City 800-foot 

sand, demonstrating substantial hydraulic separation between 

the aquifers, Lacombe (U.S. Geological Survey, written 

commun., 2011) showed that geophysical and driller’s logs 

collected at the WWU Rio Grande well field were not definitive regarding the depth and thickness of the confining unit 

separating the Rio Grande water-bearing zone from the 

Atlantic City 800-foot sand, resulting in two wells intended 

for the lower part of the Rio Grande water-bearing zone being 

installed instead in the upper part of the Atlantic City 800-foot 

sand.

Fresh groundwater is present within the aquifer underlying coastal regions of the mainland and the barrier islands 

from its northwestern limit in southern Ocean County southward through most of mainland Cape May County. The aquifer contains saline water south of the canal in southern Cape 

May County and likely beneath the back bays, barrier islands, 

and near shore areas along the Atlantic Coast from Avalon to 

the city of Cape May. Limited available water-quality data 

provide no evidence of increasing chloride concentrations 

through 2008. The location of the 10,000-mg/L isochlor has 

not been determined for this aquifer but may be near the location of the 10,000-mg/L isochlor in the underlying Atlantic 

City 800-foot sand.

Water Withdrawals 

The Rio Grande water-bearing zone is of minor importance as a source of potable water in New Jersey and is the 

least utilized of the aquifers included in this study (table 3). 

Withdrawals from the aquifer totaled approximately 225 million gallons (0.6 Mgal/d) during 2008. Withdrawals are made 

primarily by water purveyors in Long Beach and Little Egg 

Harbor Townships in southern Ocean County and in Middle 

Township in Cape May County (fig. 6A). Several smallercapacity production wells withdraw water from the aquifer, 

although the amounts are not thought to be substantial; 

these wells are located in parts of northern Cape May and 

eastern Cumberland Counties. Average withdrawals from 

1978 to 2008 were less than 1 Mgal/d (fig. 7A). Withdrawal 

amounts were apportioned equally between Ocean and Cape 

May Counties from 1978 to 1988 (approximately 0.3 to 

0.4 Mgal/d); thereafter, withdrawals generally were greater in 

Cape May County.

Water Levels

Groundwater-level data used in preparing the 2008 

potentiometric surface for the Rio Grande water-bearing zone 

are presented in appendix 1-2. The groundwater surface configuration is an elongated cone of depression centered beneath 

coastal New Jersey extending from the Cape May peninsula 

northward to Ship Bottom in southern Ocean County (fig. 1-2 

on pl. 1). Water levels within the Rio Grande water-bearing 

zone ranged from a low of -27 ft (well 9-67) in southern Cape 

May to a maximum of 16 ft (well 9-149) in northwestern Cape 

May County. As noted by Lacombe and Rosman (2001), the 

configuration of the regional cone of depression is consistent 

with the configuration of, and sustained head decline of the 

cone of depression in, the underlying Atlantic City 800-foot 

sand, and low water levels observed in downdip parts of the 

Rio Grande water-bearing zone probably result from downward flow to the Atlantic City 800-foot sand. Locally, withdrawals from the Rio Grande water-bearing zone at the Rio 

Grande well field in southern Cape May contribute to the low 

water levels in this vicinity. Water levels at the Rio Grande 

well field rose by as much as 9 ft relative to 2003 levels as a 

result of reductions in groundwater withdrawals that began 

in 2006. In contrast, the water level in well 9-526, 2.2 mi to 

the west, was 8 ft lower than in 2003 despite the absence of 

withdrawals from the aquifer (fig. 8A). Elsewhere, most water 

levels measured in the Rio Grande water-bearing zone showed 

small to moderate declines from 2003 (fig. 8A), although 

withdrawal data indicate little change during the same period. 

Despite the absence of wells and data, groundwater levels 

most likely declined throughout eastern and coastal Atlantic 

County in response to declines in the underlying Atlantic 

City 800-foot sand. Water-level altitudes in the Rio Grande 

water-bearing zone were greater than those in the Atlantic City 

800-foot sand throughout the study area; vertical differences 

increased where heads were most depressed in the underlying 

aquifer in central and eastern Atlantic County and, to a lesser 

extent, in southern Cape May County. An upward vertical gradient from the Atlantic City 800-foot sand to the Rio Grande 

water-bearing zone previously observed at the Rio Grande 

well field reversed and as of 2008 is downward.

Hydrographs for two observation wells located in Cape 

May County are shown in figure 9. Water-level data were collected intermittently at these two wells, and distinct long-term
16 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

!

!

!

(

(

(

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone Harbor

Atlantic City

Point Pleasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

CUMBERLAND

MONMOUTH

CAPE MAY

MERCER

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

MIDDLESEX

HUNTERDON SOMERSET

ATLANT IC

OCEAN

DELAWARE

PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

0 5

DELAWARE

BAY

0 5

PHILADELPHIA

75°30' 75° 74°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

10 20 KILOMETERS

10 20 MILES

A. Rio Grande 

water-bearing zone

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone Harbor

Atlantic City

Point Pleasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

CUMBERLAND

MONMOUTH

CAPE MAY

MERCER

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

MIDDLESEX

HUNTERDON SOMERSET

ATLANT IC

OCEAN

DELAWARE

PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

0 5

DELAWARE

BAY

0 5

PHILADELPHIA

75°30' 75° 74°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

10 20 KILOMETERS

10 20 MILES

B. Atlantic City

800-foot sand

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone Harbor

Atlantic City

Point Pleasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

CUMBERLAND

MONMOUTH

CAPE MAY

MERCER

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

MIDDLESEX

HUNTERDON SOMERSET

ATLANT IC

OCEAN

DELAWARE

PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

0 5

DELAWARE

BAY

0 5

PHILADELPHIA

75°30' 75° 74°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

10 20 KILOMETERS

10 20 MILES

C. Piney Point

aquifer

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! !

!

!!

!

!!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

! !

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! !

! !

!

!

!

!

! !!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

! (

!!

(

(

(

(

(

(

(

(

( ( (

(

((

(

((

(

( (

(

(

(

(

(

(

(

(

(

(

(

(

(

(

(

((

(

(

((

(

(

(

(

(

( (

(

(

(

( (

(

((

(

(

(

(

(

( ( (

( (

(

(

(

(

( ((

(

(

(

(

(

((

(

(

((

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!

!

! !

!

! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

(

(

(

(

((

((

(

(

( (

(

( ( (

(

(

(

(

(

(

( (

((

(

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:24,000

Universal Transverse Mercator Projection, Zone 18, NAD 83

EXPLANATION

Aquifer outcrop area 

Updip limit of aquifer

Water withdrawal, in 

million gallons per year

1 – 99

100 – 199

200 – 299

300 – 399

!( Greater than 400

!(

!(

!(

!(

Pleasantville

Brigantine

Absecon Island

Figure 6. Location and volume of groundwater withdrawals from A, the Rio Grande water-bearing zone, B, the Atlantic City 800-foot 

sand, and C, the Piney Point aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008.
Rio Grande Water-Bearing Zone 17

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

10

8

6

4

2

0

Water withdrawals, in million gallons per day

EXPLANATION

Ocean County

Atlantic County

Cape May County

Northern counties

Southern counties

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0

40

30

20

10

0

A

B

C

Piney Point aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008. [Thin vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection periods; note different vertical 

scaling]

Figure 7. Estimated groundwater withdrawals from A, the Rio Grande water-bearing zone, B, the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, and C, the 

trends are difficult to evaluate. Seasonal fluctuations in water 

levels are evident at both wells during the early 1990s but are 

more pronounced in well 9-71 because of its location among 

production wells at the Rio Grande well field. Data were collected more frequently at well 9-304 than at well 9-71. From 

2003 to 2008, the change in the water level in well 9-304 was 

negligible, but for the period of record, a decline a nearly 7 ft 

was observed.

Results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicate no 

significant change in paired samples from 2003 to 2008 (app. 

10-2). Water levels increased in 2 wells (17 percent), were 

unchanged in 1 well (8 percent), and decreased in 9 wells (75 

percent). One Rio Grande water-bearing zone well had sufficient data for the Mann-Kendall trend test (app. 10-1). Water 

levels from 2003 to 2008 did not significantly change; from 

1998 through 2008, however, there was a statistically significant downward trend, although the annual rate of decline 

of 0.12 ft/yr was considered insubstantial. Additional wells 

within the aquifer need to be identified and data collected in 

order for substantive interpretations to be made.
18 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Trenton

C ape May

Bridgeton

O cean C ity

Stone H arbor

Atlantic C ity

Point P leasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

CUMBERLAND

MONMOUTH

CAPE MAY

MERCER

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

MIDDLESEX

HUNTERDON SOMERSET

ATLANT IC

OCEAN

D E L AWAR E

PENNSY LVANIA

F all line

0 5

DELAWARE

BAY

0 5

PHILADELPHIA

75°30' 75° 74°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

10 20 KILOMETERS

10 20 MILES

A. Rio Grande 

water-bearing zone

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Trenton

C ape May

Bridgeton

O cean C ity

Stone H arbor

Atlantic C ity

Point P leasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

CUMBERLAND

MONMOUTH

CAPE MAY

MERCER

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

MIDDLESEX

HUNTERDON SOMERSET

ATLANT IC

OCEAN

D E L AWAR E

PENNSY LVANIA

F all line

0 5

DELAWARE

BAY

0 5

PHILADELPHIA

75°30' 75° 74°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

10 20 KILOMETERS

10 20 MILES

B. Atlantic City

800-foot sand

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Trenton

Bridgeton

Point P leasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

CUMBERLAND

MONMOUTH

CAPE MAY

MERCER

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

MIDDLESEX

HUNTERDON SOMERSET

ATLANT IC

OCEAN

D E L AWAR E

PENNSY LVANIA

F all line

0 5

DELAWARE

BAY

0 5

PHILADELPHIA

75°30' 75° 74°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

10 20 KILOMETERS

10 20 MILES

C. Piney 

Point aquifer

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:24,000

Universal Transverse Mercator Projection, Zone 18, NAD 83

EXPLANATION

Decline, in feet

Greater than or equal to 60

40 – <60

20 – <40

10 – <20

>5 – <10

No substantial change

Recovery, in feet

Greater than or equal to 40

20 – <40

10 – <20 

>5 – <10 

-5 – +5

Aquifer outcrop area 

Updip limit of aquifer

Ocean City

Atlantic City

Stone Harbor

Cape

May

<, less than

>, greater than

Pleasantville

Absecon Island

Rio Grande 

well field

Cape May 

desalination wells

Point aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2003–8.

Figure 8. Groundwater-level changes in A, the Rio Grande water-bearing zone, B, the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, and C, the Piney 
Atlantic City 800-Foot Sand 19

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

0

-10

-20

-30

-40

0

-10

-20

-30

-40

-50

-60

-70

9-71

9-304

Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

Missing 

data

Plain, 1978–2008. (All hydrographs are at the same scale; vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection cycles; well locations shown on pl. 1-2)

Figure 9. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the Rio Grande water-bearing zone, New Jersey Coastal 

Atlantic City 800-Foot Sand

The Atlantic City 800-foot sand, originally named for the 

depth of production wells in the Atlantic City area, is a major 

confined aquifer within the Kirkwood Formation. The aquifer 

is composed of medium- to coarse-grained quartz sands with 

interspersed shell material. The updip limit of the aquifer is 

based on the updip limit of the overlying confining unit; however, this confining unit is poorly defined in places. The updip 

boundary extends, from northeast to southwest, from southern Ocean County 1.7 mi north of Barnegat Light to eastern 

Cumberland County (pl. 2). The downdip limit of the aquifer 

is offshore from Ocean, Atlantic, and Cape May Counties. 

The aquifer thickens downdip and southward from a thickness of 40 ft near Barnegat Light to more than 200 ft at Cape 

May City (McAuley and others, 2001). Recharge is through 

vertical flow from the overlying Kirkwood-Cohansey aquifer 

throughout the extent of the aquifer, although recharge is more 

substantial near the updip limit where the confining unit is 

leaky or where the aquifers are in direct contact (Pope, 2006). 

Recharge also occurs via lateral flow from the KirkwoodCohansey aquifer near the updip boundary.

The Atlantic City 800-foot sand contains freshwater 

throughout southern Ocean, Atlantic, and northern Cape May 

Counties where dissolved chloride concentrations typically 

range from 2 to 20 mg/L. Proceeding south from Avalon, however, the groundwater becomes progressively more chloriderich, and near the southern tip of the Cape May Peninsula, 

concentrations range from 400 mg/L to more than 1,500 mg/L. 

The estimated position of the 250-mg/L isochlor is approximately 4 mi to the south-southeast of production wells at 

Stone Harbor. Concentrations of chloride in groundwater from 

observation well 9-337, located between the saltwater front 

and the Stone Harbor pumping center have not increased. At 

the Stone Harbor production wells nearest the front, chloride 

concentrations have remained largely constant over time. 

From the mid-1960s through 2008, concentrations generally ranged from 30 to 40 mg/L, only occasionally exceeded 

these values, and subsequently returned to antecedent levels. 

Recently reported chloride concentrations were as high as 

87 mg/L, as low as 26 mg/L, and fluctuated with pumping. 

The highest concentrations typically occurred during the late 

summer or early fall. Concentrations decreased during the 

winter and spring. Moreover, recent flow simulations indicate 

that the 250-mg/L isochlor will not intersect production wells 

at Stone Harbor for at least 720 years under various waterallocation scenarios (Pope, 2006). Farther to the north and 

offshore of Atlantic County, the saltwater front is estimated 

to be about 9.6 and 8 mi to the southeast of production wells 

in Ventnor and Brigantine, respectively. Dissolved chloride in 

samples from production wells at Brigantine remained at concentrations consistently below 8 mg/L for the period of record 

through 2008. Similarly, data from production wells at Ventnor 

showed little or no sustained increase in dissolved chloride 

concentrations through 2008; for the period 1998 to 2008, 

reported values only infrequently exceeded 10 mg/L and were 

typically below this value. Farther to the south, the estimated 

saltwater front bisects the southern part of the Cape May 
20 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

peninsula, trending approximately east-west from Wildwood 

to the south of Villas. South of this line, chloride concentrations in groundwater at or near pumping centers increased 

modestly from 1998 to 2008; concentrations at wells 9-508 

and 9-302, although elevated, have remained stable. The estimated location of the 10,000-mg/L isochlor is approximately 

36 mi offshore and to the southeast of Atlantic City.

Water Withdrawals

The Atlantic City 800-foot sand is the principal confined 

aquifer supplying water to New Jersey’s barrier island communities from Harvey Cedars in southern Ocean County to 

Cape May City and as far inland as Mays Landing and Egg 

Harbor City in Atlantic County. Withdrawals from the aquifer 

ranged from 17.9 to 27 Mgal/d during 1978 to 2008 (fig. 7B). 

Withdrawals have gradually increased since 1978; from any 

given year to the next increases ranged from 2 to 14 percent, 

with intervening periods of reduction of generally a few percent or less. Increases of 5 percent or more from the previous 

year occurred in 1986, 1993 to 1994, 1997, 2001, and 2004. 

Withdrawals in 2008 averaged nearly 27 Mgal/d, the greatest 

of the 30-year period from 1978 to 2008. Withdrawal amounts 

were greatest in Atlantic County and least in Ocean County, 

where the aquifer thins and becomes less transmissive. From 

1978 to 2008, average withdrawals in Atlantic County ranged 

from 7.8 to 12.0 Mgal/d, gradually increasing throughout the 

30-year period; nearly 60 percent of withdrawals occurred 

along the barrier islands. Three major pumping centers are 

within Atlantic County: Absecon Island, Brigantine, and 

Pleasantville (fig. 6B). The Pleasantville pumping center is 

composed of well fields of the Atlantic City Municipal Utility 

Authority and New Jersey American Water Company-Atlantic 

and includes several supply wells in eastern Hamilton Township. During 2008, average daily withdrawals from Pleasantville of 5.9 Mgal were greatest among the three pumping 

centers. Withdrawals ranged from a low of 2 Mgal/d in 1985 

to the highs in 2008. Increases of more than 20 percent from 

a given year to the next occurred in 1996, 2001, and 2005–6. 

The Absecon Island pumping center, which includes Atlantic 

City, Margate, Ventnor, and Longport, historically accounted 

for a greater percentage of withdrawals than the other pumping centers. During the 1980s, withdrawals from Absecon 

Island center were equal to the combined withdrawals from 

the other two centers. In 2005 withdrawals at the Pleasantville 

and Absecon Island centers were nearly equal, and while withdrawals at the former have since increased, those at the latter 

decreased. Withdrawals at the Absecon Island pumping center 

were relatively constant from 1980 to 2006; average withdrawals generally fluctuated between 4 and 5 Mgal/d, until 

reductions during 2007–8. At Brigantine, average withdrawals 

in 2008 were 1.8 Mgal/d. Withdrawals increased from 1.5 to 

2 Mgal/d during 1980–86; thereafter, combined withdrawals 

from all wells were approximately 2 Mgal/d.

In Cape May County, most of the groundwater withdrawals were distributed throughout the barrier islands, although 

substantial withdrawals were also made near Cape May Court 

House and near Cape May City at the southern end of the 

peninsula (fig. 6B). From 1978 to 2008, average withdrawals 

ranged from 5.0 to 8.9 Mgal/d. Withdrawals decreased during 

1986–92 from 7.5 Mgal/d to less than 6 Mgal/d; however, 

during 1992–2003 withdrawals increased by more than 

20 percent. In early 1998, a desalination plant in lower Cape 

May County began operation to augment existing groundwater 

supply, and by 2003, associated withdrawals from the aquifer 

were approximately 1 Mgal/d. During 2003–8, withdrawals throughout the county further increased by 25 percent. In 

2008, withdrawals of 8.7 Mgal/d represented the greatest total 

during 1978–2008.

In southern Ocean County, withdrawals from the 

aquifer were made over nearly the entire length of the barrier island complex; the largest volumes were withdrawn 

within the mainland communities of Stafford and Little Egg 

Harbor Townships. Average withdrawals in Ocean County 

during 2008 were 6.2 Mgal/d, a 9 percent increase from 

2003 volumes.

Water Levels

The 2008 potentiometric surface of the Atlantic City 

800-foot sand is shown on plate 2; groundwater-level measurements used in the preparation of this map are presented in 

appendix 2. Long-term groundwater withdrawals have created 

a large, elongated cone of depression that aligns along the 

general strike of the Kirkwood Formation and extends beneath 

the coastal barrier island communities from Barnegat Light in 

Ocean County south to Cape May City. Water levels within 

the Atlantic City 800-foot sand range in altitude from greater 

than 40 ft near the updip boundary in central Atlantic County 

to more than 90 ft below NGVD 29 within the deepest part of 

the cone, beneath the eastern Atlantic County municipalities 

of Atlantic City, Margate, and Ventnor. At the northern end of 

the cone of depression, south of Barnegat Light, water levels 

ranged from -29 ft near the northern limit of the confined 

aquifer to -35 ft (well 29-9) near the southern end of Long 

Beach Island. Southwest from the center of the regional cone, 

water levels were progressively higher toward the southern 

end of the Cape May peninsula, where the highest water level 

measured in coastal Cape May County was -24 ft. Two small 

cones of depression are present in southern Cape May County 

at the Cape May City (wells 9-479 and 9-480) and WWU 

well fields. 

Groundwater levels measured in 72 wells in 2003 and 

2008 were compared to evaluate water-level changes in the 

Atlantic City 800-foot sand and to map the potentiometric 

differences (fig. 8B). In 2008, water levels declined in 64 wells 

(89 percent), were unchanged in 4 wells (5.5 percent), and 

rose in 4 wells (5.5 percent). Owing to the substantial increase 

in withdrawals at the Pleasantville pumping center, groundwater decline was greatest in Atlantic County in an area near 

the center of the cone of depression, extending throughout the 

mainland communities of Egg Harbor Township and the city 
Atlantic City 800-Foot Sand 21

of Pleasantville to the barrier island communities of Brigantine, Atlantic City, and Ventnor. From 2003 to 2008 throughout 

eastern Atlantic County, groundwater-level declines were 

typically about 9 ft but as great as 16 ft. To the north and east, 

small to moderate declines were observed throughout much 

of southern Ocean County, were greatest at and near mainland 

pumping centers, and were smallest along the barrier island. In 

Cape May County, groundwater-level declines were greatest 

in the vicinity of the Rio Grande well field. Because not all 

wells measured in 2008 were available during the 2003 study, 

water-level data were compared to estimates derived from the 

2003 potentiometric surface at those locations, resulting in 

apparent declines of nearly 25 ft at the Rio Grande well field. 

These values may overestimate the 5-year decline, whereas the 

measured change of -7 ft at an observation well 1 mile (mi) 

to the east probably underestimates the overall decline in the 

vicinity of the well field (fig. 8B). In the vicinity of the Cape 

May City desalination wells, interspersed but modest declines 

and rises relative to 2003 were observed.

Results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicate statistically significant differences (declines) in paired measurements 

during both the 5- and 10-year periods across the aquifer. 

Given recently (2003–8) declining water levels throughout 

Atlantic County, this relationship was strongest during the 

5-year period. Differences (declines) are considered statistically significant among paired measurements throughout the 

counties of Atlantic, Ocean, and Cape May for the 5-year 

period, and in Atlantic and Cape May Counties for the 10-year 

period (appendix 10-2, fig. 8B).

Results of the Mann-Kendall statistical trend test are 

listed in appendix 10-1. Supporting hydrographs for seven 

observation wells that depict long-term and seasonal trends in 

the Atlantic City 800-foot sand from 1978 to 2008 are shown 

in figure 10. Water-level trends during 2003–8 were downward 

at six wells; data from the seventh well (1-37) were insufficient for testing. Downward trends were strongest at wells in 

eastern Atlantic County at and near the center of the cone of 

depression (wells 1-180, 1-578, and 1-702) and weakest on the 

western side of the Cape May peninsula (well 9-306). From 

1998 to 2008, trends were downward at four wells (1-578, 

9-302, 9-306, and 9-337) and insignificant at the remaining 

three wells (1-37, 1-180, and 1-702). For the 30-year period, 

significant downward trends were observed at all seven wells. 

Trend tests for each were run for the periods of record, and 

trends were downward with rates of decline ranging from 0.5 

to 1 ft/yr. 

Photograph was provided by U.S. Geological Survey field personnel
22 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

0

-10

-20

-30

-40

-50

-80

-70

-60

-90

-100

-110

-120

-60

-50

-60

-70

-80

-90

-100

-110

-30

-40

-50

-60

-70

-80

-90

Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

1-578

1-37

1-702

1-180

Missing 

data

Missing 

data

Manual 

measurement

Plain, 1978–2008. (All hydrographs are at the same scale; vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection cycles; well locations shown on pl. 2)

Figure 10. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, New Jersey Coastal 
Atlantic City 800-Foot Sand 23

-20

-15

-10

-25

-30

-35

-40

-10

-15

-20

-25

-30

-35

-40

-10

-15

-20

-25

-30

-35

-40

Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

9-302

Missing 

data

9-306

9-337

Figure 10. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, New Jersey Coastal 

Plain, 1978–2008. (All hydrographs are at the same scale; vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection cycles; well locations shown on 

pl. 2)—Continued
24 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

Piney Point Aquifer

The Piney Point aquifer, of middle to late Eocene age, 

is composed of fine- to coarse-grained glauconitic sands 

interspersed with shell material. The Piney Point aquifer does 

not crop out within the study area and, therefore, cannot be 

recharged directly by precipitation; recharge occurs by leakage 

through confining layers, primarily from the overlying aquifer. 

The updip limit of the aquifer is in central Ocean, Burlington, 

Camden, Gloucester, and Salem Counties and approximately 

near the downdip limit of the Vincentown aquifer. Near this 

updip limit, the aquifer is generally 40 ft thick. There are two 

areas within the aquifer extent in New Jersey of substantial 

sand accumulation (Zapecza, 1989)—southern Burlington 

and Ocean Counties where thicknesses can exceed 130 ft 

and, to the southwest, in southern Cumberland County where 

maximum thicknesses are greater than 200 ft. In the former, a 

greater percentage of coarse-grained materials readily permits 

the transmission of water and is favorable to development, and 

in the latter, thin clay beds and clay-silt in the aquifer matrix 

limit productivity (Sugarman and others, 2005). In Delaware, 

the Piney Point aquifer is composed of two geologic units, 

the Piney Point Formation and the basal sand of the Calvert 

Formation, that together function as a single hydrologic unit 

(McLaughlin and Velez, 2006). The Piney Point aquifer in 

Delaware is predominantly an upward coarsening, shelly 

quartz sand containing glauconite that grades to a muddier 

facies north and west of the city of Dover. The updip limit of 

the aquifer is in central Kent County, and the downdip limit 

extends into southeastern Sussex County (Vroblesky and 

Fleck, 1991). The maximum thickness of the aquifer in Delaware, approximately 250 ft, occurs near the city of Dover.

Groundwater in the Piney Point aquifer is typically a 

calcium-sodium or sodium-bicarbonate type water that evolves 

to a sodium-chloride type water in downdip areas. Owing to 

recharge via vertical flow through the upper confining unit, 

ion-exchange reactions are likely important determinants of 

the water chemistry of the aquifer, as evidenced by the enrichment of sodium and potassium relative to chloride (Lettini 

and others, 2003). Sodium to chloride molar ratios range from 

1.8:1 to more than 100:1 with highest ratios present in updip 

sections and beneath the barrier island complex of central 

Ocean County, indicative of the greater capacity for cationexchange within the aquifer in these areas. In many areas 

of the aquifer, sodium concentrations exceeded the NJDEP 

secondary maximum contaminant level of 50 mg/L. Chloride 

concentrations in groundwater ranged from 2 to 10 mg/L 

throughout much of Ocean and central Burlington Counties 

but increased to the south and seaward where concentrations 

exceeded 300 mg/L in groundwater in coastal Atlantic County. 

In southern and southwestern New Jersey, concentrations 

ranged from 1 to 200 mg/L and increased with decreasing 

distance to the Delaware Bay. Historical data indicate possible saltwater intrusion into wells at bay front communities in southern Cumberland County; owing to the lack of 

supporting chemical data, it is unclear whether increases in 

chloride concentrations resulted from lateral intrusion from 

the Delaware Bay or from vertical leakage from the overlying 

aquifer via compromised annular well seals. Further, recent 

(2008) water-quality data for the aquifer in this area were 

not available.

For this study, the location of the 250-mg/L isochlor in 

New Jersey was modified from Schaefer (1983) and Lacombe 

and Rosman (2001); in Delaware, the location was mapped 

by Woodruff (1969) and modified by Lacombe and Rosman 

(2001). The location of the onshore part of the line extends 

from eastern Atlantic County southwest to northern Cape May 

County. To the north, the position of this line was estimated 

by Lacombe and Rosman (2001) to be 12 mi downdip from 

production wells at Barnegat Light; however, neither observed 

nor simulated data were available to substantiate this estimate. The simulated 10,000-mg/L isochlor is located offshore, 

approximately 8 mi from production wells at Barnegat Light 

(Pope and Gordon, 1999). Measured chloride concentrations in 

production wells at Barnegat Light ranged from 5 to 15 mg/L 

but were typically 10 mg/L or less; sustained increases have 

not occurred during 1998–2008. Similarly, chloride concentrations in groundwater from observation wells near the saltwater front have not increased substantially, and the extent of 

freshwater remains similar to that in 2003. In Delaware, the 

position of the front is approximately 10 mi downdip from the 

major pumping center at Dover. 

Water Withdrawals

In New Jersey, groundwater withdrawals from the Piney 

Point aquifer were made predominantly in the coastal region 

of Ocean County, particularly in the central Barnegat Bay 

region, in Buena Borough in western Atlantic County, and 

in and around the city of Bridgeton in southern Cumberland 

County where water-quality issues in the overlying KirkwoodCohansey aquifer have spurred recent development of the 

Piney Point aquifer (fig. 6C). Withdrawals from the Piney 

Point aquifer also are made in the updip parts of the aquifer 

in southeastern Burlington and Camden Counties in locations 

where yields are favorable to development. In Delaware, the 

Piney Point aquifer is a major source of groundwater in Kent 

County and has long been utilized for supply in and around the 

city of Dover. 

Average withdrawals in New Jersey from the Piney 

Point aquifer ranged from less than 2 to 5.8 Mgal/d during 

1978–2008 (fig. 7C). Withdrawals from the Piney Point aquifer were relatively minor from 1978 to 1992 at 2 Mgal/d with 

most withdrawals in Ocean County and negligible amounts 

in Atlantic and Cumberland Counties. Withdrawals increased 

by more than 50 percent from 1992 to 1993, largely owing to 

increasing development in the Toms River area. From 1993 

to 2002, development of the aquifer in Ocean County continued to expand, and by 2003 withdrawals there accounted 

for 90 percent (4.3 Mgal/d) of all withdrawals from the Piney 

Point aquifer within New Jersey. Combined withdrawals in 

Atlantic, Burlington, Camden, and Cumberland Counties
Piney Point Aquifer 25

ranged from 0.1 to 0.6 Mgal/d from 1978 through 2002, followed by increases of 56 and 41 percent in 2003 and 2004, 

respectively, as withdrawals in the Bridgeton area began.

Water Levels

The potentiometric surface of the Piney Point aquifer 

during late fall 2008 in New Jersey and Delaware is shown 

on plate 3; the groundwater-level data that were used in the 

analysis are listed in appendix 3. The maximum groundwater 

altitude within the Piney Point aquifer (118 ft in well 29-425) 

occurred near the up-dip extent along the border of Burlington 

and Ocean Counties, and the minimum (less than -150 ft, various wells) occurred in south-central Cumberland County, New 

Jersey. The configuration of the 2008 potentiometric surface 

indicates the presence of six distinct cones of depression. The 

northernmost cone underlies Seaside Park in Ocean County 

near the area where the aquifer is most heavily utilized in New 

Jersey; the minimum water level at the center of this cone of 

depression was -45 ft (well 29-1681). To the south, the cone 

of depression centered beneath Barnegat Light had a potentiometric minimum of -39 ft (well 29-607). 

A cone of depression in coastal Atlantic County is consistent with sustained head decline in the overlying Atlantic 

City 800-foot sand. The Piney Point aquifer is unused in this 

area, and the presence of this cone indicates upward leakage 

in response to lower water levels in the overlying aquifer. 

Above the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, a cone of depression 

in the infrequently used Rio Grande water-bearing zone also 

is an indicator of hydraulic stress propagating through the 

hydrogeologic section in this area. The 2008 water level at 

the center of this cone (-38 ft, well 1-834) was approximately 

4 ft lower than that observed during the previous study. Water 

levels in the overlying Atlantic City 800-foot sand declined as 

much as 16 ft in this area from the previous study.

Development of the aquifer in Bridgeton, Cumberland 

County, after 2003 caused a deep and regionally extensive 

cone of depression to form within an area already characterized by persistent potentiometric lows and long-term gradual 

declines in water levels as a result of withdrawals at Dover, 

Delaware. Yields within the Piney Point aquifer vary at different locations because of variations in hydraulic conductivity that result from facies changes within the Piney Point 

Formation. The depth and extent of this cone are greater than 

expected given the relatively small amounts of groundwater 

withdrawn. Measured water level altitudes at the pumping 

center in Bridgeton ranged from -154 to -157 ft; a subsequent 

review of purveyor-collected data reported throughout 2009 

confirmed these observations (NJDEP, 2012). With the introduction of the supply wells in Bridgeton and the deepening of 

the cone of depression, the hydraulic gradient was somewhat 

reversed, forming a groundwater divide within the aquifer 

beneath the Delaware Bay. Groundwater that previously 

flowed beneath the bay from New Jersey toward pumping 

centers in Dover is now partially captured by production wells 

at Bridgeton. 

In Delaware, a cone of depression, with a minimum 

water-level altitude of -138 ft (well Jd14-15) persists in and 

around the city of Dover. This cone is the most regionally 

extensive within the Piney Point aquifer in the study area. 

Substantial long-term withdrawals in Dover placed significant hydraulic stress on the aquifer with the breadth of effects 

extending throughout a large area beneath the Delaware 

Bay and into southern New Jersey. Until 2004, the longterm withdrawals were the primary cause of declining water 

levels in the Piney Point aquifer in Cumberland County. The 

potentiometric surface shows a slight deepening and apparent 

movement of the center of the cone to the north; this change is 

probably a result of spatial shifts in the withdrawal patterns or 

the configuration of the water levels relative to those of previous studies.

In updip areas of the aquifer, vertical head differences 

between the overlying Kirkwood- Cohansey aquifer and the 

Piney Point aquifer were greatest in Camden, Gloucester, 

Cumberland, and western Atlantic Counties, and flow is downward, recharging the aquifer. A downward vertical gradient 

to the Piney Point aquifer persists throughout much of Ocean 

County; however, in southern Burlington County estimated 

heads were generally higher in the Piney Point aquifer, particularly in low-lying areas near the Batsto and Mullica Rivers, 

resulting in a strong upward vertical gradient that is demonstrated by the presence of flowing artesian wells. Vertical head 

differences between the Piney Point and the Wenonah-Mount 

Laurel aquifers indicate strong downward gradients and the 

potential for flow out of the Piney Point aquifer in central 

Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester Counties, particularly in 

areas where the underlying Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer is 

stressed, such as in Winslow and Monroe Townships (Williamstown quadrangle). Vertical water-level differences range 

from 60 to 80 ft in this area, and maximum differences may 

exceed 100 ft. In south-central Cumberland County, estimated 

vertical differences within the regional cone of depression 

exceed 150 ft both above and below the Piney Point aquifer; 

thus there is the potential for induced flow from both the 

underlying and overlying units into the Piney Point aquifer.

In the northern extent of the aquifer, vertical differences 

between the Piney Point and Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifers diminish in the downdip direction, and the potential for 

a downward gradient lessens. At the northernmost cone of 

depression in the Piney Point aquifer in Ocean County, the 

vertical gradient reverses, and flow is upward into the Piney 

Point aquifer. At Barnegat Light and immediately to the south, 

a potential downward vertical gradient into the Piney Point 

aquifer from the transitional area of the Kirkwood-Cohansey 

aquifer system and the Atlantic City 800-foot sand is present. From Harvey Cedars and proceeding down the coast, the 

gradient reverses and strengthens. Near Atlantic City, vertical head differences are as great as 60 ft, and flow is upward 

from the Piney Point aquifer into the overlying Atlantic City 

800-foot sand. This potential upward gradient weakens south 

and to the west; however, vertical head differences between 

the two units remain substantial throughout Cape May County 
26 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

(where Piney Point aquifer water levels are believed to be 

higher than -20 ft and Atlantic City 800-foot sand water 

levels are known to be generally lower than -20 ft and as low 

as -60 ft).

Of the confined aquifers included in this study, groundwater levels in the Piney Point aquifer changed more from 

2003 to 2008 than water-levels in other units in terms of mean 

(-14 ft) and maximum (-136 ft) change. Although water levels 

were essentially unchanged or had recovered throughout much 

of the State (fig. 8C), declines exceeding 130 ft were observed 

in southern New Jersey. Of the 50 wells measured in both 

2003 and 2008, groundwater levels declined in 38 (76 percent), remained about the same in 4 (8 percent), and rose in 8 

(16 percent) wells. Stable groundwater levels to a slight recovery of groundwater levels were observed throughout southern 

Ocean, Burlington, and parts of northern Atlantic Counties. 

Moderate to large declines were most common at the cones 

of depression in western Atlantic and Cumberland Counties 

in New Jersey and Kent County in Delaware (fig. 8C). In 

Bridgeton, Cumberland County, moderate withdrawals created 

a deep cone of depression and caused groundwater levels to 

decline more than 130 ft at the center of the cone and from 

25 to 60 ft through much of Cumberland County. In western 

Atlantic County, the cone of depression centered beneath the 

Borough of Buena widened and deepened as groundwater levels declined 17 ft relative to 2003 levels. Although withdrawals from borough wells increased during 2003–8, declining 

groundwater levels probably were, to some degree, affected by 

the expansion of the area with water levels below NGVD 29 

throughout Cumberland County.

Moderate groundwater-level declines were observed in 

most wells in Kent County, Delaware. Near Dover, declines 

ranged from 9 ft to 17 ft with the largest declines occurring 

near the center of the cone of depression and the most temperate declines to the south and west.

Results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicate significant differences in the paired water-level measurements 

throughout the dataset as a whole for both the 5-year and the 

decadal period. Given steeply declining groundwater levels in 

southern New Jersey during 2004–8, this relation was strongest for the 5-year period. Repeated measurements made at 

individual wells were not available in sufficient numbers to 

group and test by county, except for Ocean County, where 

no differences were detected during either period, indicating 

that statistical significance is attained on the basis of changes 

observed in wells in southern New Jersey.

Results of the Mann-Kendall statistical trend test are 

listed in appendix 10-1. Hydrographs for 13 observation wells 

that show long-term and seasonal trends for the Piney Point 

aquifer in New Jersey and Delaware are provided in figures 11

and 12. Downward trends during 2003–8 were observed at 

seven wells, most notably at wells in southern Cumberland 

County—11-44, 11-96 and 11-163—where annual rates of 

decline exceeded 9, 6, and 7 ft/yr, respectively. Slight downward trends were observed at wells 1-834, 5-407, 29-18, and 

29-585 located in downdip areas of Atlantic, Burlington, and 

Ocean Counties, respectively. At two wells located in updip 

and mid-dip areas of Burlington and Ocean Counties (5-676 

and 29-425), no significant upward or downward trend was 

observed. Results were similar for the 10- and 30-year periods; statistically significant downward trends were detected 

at observation wells in Atlantic and Cumberland Counties. 

No significant trend was detected at well ID55-01, located 

near Dover, Delaware, for the period 2003 to 2008; however, 

downward trends were observed for both the 10-year and 

30-year periods.

Photograph was provided by U.S. Geological Survey field personnel
Piney Point Aquifer 27

Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29 -10

0

10

-20

-30

-40

-50

-20

-40

-60

-80

30

20

0

-20

-60

0

-80

-40

20

0

-20

-40

-60

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

1-834

11-96

11-163

11-44

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

Figure 11. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the Piney Point aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 

1978–2008. (All hydrographs are at the same scale; vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection cycles; well locations shown on pl. 3)
28 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

15

20

40

10

5

0

-5

120

110

60

55

50

45

130

120

110

130

Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29

-10

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

5-676

29-425

05-407

29-585

29-18

Figure 11. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the Piney Point aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 

1978–2008. (All hydrographs are at the same scale; vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection cycles; well locations shown on pl. 3)—

Continued 
Vincentown Aquifer 29

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

-120

-130

-140

-150

-160

-70

-80

-90

-100

-110

40

-20

-50

-40

-60

30

20

0

-30

10

-10

NC13-03

Id55-01

Kc31-01

CO Bd-53

Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

Missing 

data

Maryland, 1978–2008. (Vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection cycles; well locations shown on pl. 3) 

Figure 12. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the Piney Point aquifer, Delaware and eastern 

Vincentown Aquifer

The Vincentown aquifer is composed of the sandy parts 

of the Paleocene Vincentown Formation. Within the outcrop 

and from 8 mi to 10 mi downdip, the Vincentown Formation can yield quantities of groundwater capable of sustaining small production and domestic-supply wells; beyond this 

extent, it functions primarily as a confining unit (Zapecza, 

1989). In the outcrop and the shallow subsurface, the formation is composed primarily of a massive quartzose sand 

containing abundant glauconite, mica, and shell material. The 

formation grades to silty sand then to silt downdip from the 

outcrop (Sugarman, 1992). The formation is thickest (more 

than 100 ft thick) in Monmouth County, the area where it is 

most often used for water supply. The aquifer is well defined 

in northern Ocean and southern Monmouth Counties but is 

less well defined in the rest of the Coastal Plain. Beyond Monmouth and Ocean Counties, the Vincentown Formation is silty 

and produces appreciable quantities of water only locally; the

Vincentown Formation is not a significant source of water in 

any part of southwestern or south-central New Jersey.

The Vincentown aquifer is recharged by direct infiltration 

of rainfall on outcrop areas and in areas where the overlying confining unit is thin or absent. The aquifer also receives 

recharge from the lower part of the Kirkwood-Cohansey 

aquifer where the overlying confining unit is thin or leaky. The 

Vincentown aquifer contains freshwater throughout its confined extent. Chloride concentrations range from 1 to 20 mg/L 

throughout the northern counties; in southern counties, concentrations range from 1 to 25 mg/L. Locally, greater concentrations are present in groundwater within the outcrop, likely 

owing to anthropogenic sources such as road deicers, agricultural chemicals, and septic system effluent. Despite presumed 

hydraulic contact between the aquifer and the Atlantic Ocean 

and the aquifer and the lower Delaware River, no evidence 

of saltwater intrusion exists. Because of the low to moderate 

chloride concentrations in groundwater, the 250-mg/L isochlor 

was not determined for the Vincentown aquifer.
30 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

Water Withdrawals

Groundwater withdrawals from the Vincentown aquifer are most common in Monmouth County and parts of 

northern Ocean County. The aquifer in this area is used for 

public supply, but it also is an important source for domestic 

and irrigation supply (fig. 13A). Withdrawals for self supply 

and irrigation are made from the sandy parts of the aquifer 

in Salem and Burlington Counties and, to a lesser extent, in 

Gloucester and Camden Counties. Groundwater withdrawals 

from the Vincentown aquifer ranged from 0.8 to 1.5 Mgal/d 

from 1978 to 2008 (fig. 14A). From any given year to the next, 

withdrawals increased or were reduced by relatively large 

percentages, ranging from 5 to 44 percent. Average withdrawals during 2008 were 1.1 Mgal/d with more than 95 percent 

occurring throughout Ocean and Monmouth Counties. Production wells located in close proximity to the Metedeconk 

River, which forms the border between northern Ocean and 

southern Monmouth Counties, accounted for nearly 65 percent 

(0.7 Mgal/d) of total reported withdrawals from the aquifer.

Water Levels

The 2008 potentiometric surface map for the Vincentown 

aquifer is shown on plate 4; supporting water-level data are 

presented in appendix 4. Where water-level data were sparse, 

particularly in southwestern New Jersey, previously published 

potentiometric surface maps (DePaul and others, 2009), as 

well as simulated water levels from Voronin (2004), were 

used to estimate the position and shape of the contours. The 

configuration of the potentiometric surface for the Vincentown aquifer is nearly identical to that interpreted for 2003; 

however, small declines in water-level altitudes are indicated 

by a slight updip and northeastern shift in the mapped contours relative to 2003. The highest groundwater-level altitudes 

occurred near the updip limit in western Monmouth and 

northwestern Ocean County in areas of greatest topographic 

relief; the lowest observed water-level altitudes occurred in 

coastal Monmouth and Salem Counties in the northeastern and 

southwestern extent of the aquifer, respectively. A potentiometric high in northern Ocean County, indicated by the 160 ftcontour, reflects prevailing water-table altitudes in the outcrop. 

Groundwater flow in Monmouth, Ocean, and northern Burlington Counties is generally to the east-southeast from areas of 

high water-level altitudes near the updip boundary in the west 

toward areas of discharge to pumped wells and the Atlantic 

Ocean and toward the eastern areas at the downdip limit of the 

aquifer where flow recharges the underlying Wenonah-Mount 

Laurel aquifer.

The lack of accessible wells in Burlington and Camden 

Counties precluded mapping of 2008 conditions, although the 

infrequent usage of the aquifer here would indicate that water 

levels remain essentially unchanged and the potentiometric 

surface has a configuration similar to that simulated by Martin 

(1998). The limited water-level data for central Gloucester 

County indicate that a local potentiometric high, originally 

mapped by Hardt and Hilton (1969) and confirmed by DePaul 

and others (2009), is present. Potentiometric lows of near 0 ft 

observed during previous studies where the aquifer underlies 

the Salem River and Delaware estuary were not confirmed in 

2008 owing to the loss of observation wells in southwestern 

Salem County. Reported static water levels at several irrigation wells (not shown on map) during 2008, however, confirm 

the presence of low water-level altitudes in Salem County. 

Groundwater altitudes progressively decrease to the southwest 

of the potentiometric high in Gloucester County, indicating 

regional flow toward the Delaware River.

Vertical water-level differences between the Vincentown aquifer and the overlying Kirkwood-Cohansey aquifer 

are generally less than 20 ft in Monmouth and Ocean Counties; a weak to moderate downward hydraulic gradient to the 

Vincentown aquifer from the water-table aquifer is present and 

increases in the downdip direction toward the east. In central 

and southern New Jersey, vertical water-level differences are 

as great 60 ft, indicating a downward gradient from the watertable aquifer to the Vincentown aquifer. A downward vertical 

gradient is present from the Vincentown to the WenonahMount Laurel aquifer throughout most of Monmouth and 

Ocean Counties, strengthening toward the downdip boundary 

of the Vincentown aquifer where water-level altitudes ranged 

from 40 to 80 ft higher than in the underlying Wenonah-Mount 

Laurel aquifer. In areas where localized potentiometric highs 

in the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer coincide with the downdip boundary of the Vincentown aquifer, groundwater-level 

altitudes are similar and vertical gradients are nearly neutral. 

At limited observation wells in southern New Jersey, a downward gradient that weakens to the southwest was apparent.

Substantive interpretations of water-level changes could 

not be made for the extent of the aquifer in 2008, given the 

spatial limitations of the data collected at individual wells 

during both studies. Of the 21 wells measured during both 

the 2003 and 2008 studies, water levels declined in 15 

(72 percent), remained the same in 3 (14 percent) and rose 

in 3 (14 percent) of wells. Water-level changes were minor, 

owing to the relative constancy of withdrawals, and generally 

declined or rose by 1 to 3 ft. Declines of 5 or 6 ft occurred 

at four wells, but no spatial patterns are apparent. Declines 

were not always associated with withdrawals from the aquifer 

(fig. 13, 15A).

Results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicate 

significant declines in the paired water-level measurements 

throughout the dataset as a whole for the 5-year period, but no 

significant change was observed for the 10-year period (appendix 10-2). Long-term water-level data collected at three wells 

open to the Vincentown aquifer are represented in figure 16; 

results of the trend test are provided in appendix 10-1. No 

significant upward or downward trends were detected at any 

well for the 5-, 10-, or 30-year periods.
Vincentown Aquifer 31

EXPLANATION

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:24,000

Universal Transverse Mercator Projection, Zone 18, NAD 83

Aquifer outcrop area 

Downdip limit of aquifer

Water withdrawal, in 

million gallons per year

1 – 99

100 – 199

200 – 299

300 – 399

!( Greater than 400

!(

!(

!(

!(

Critical area 1

Critical area 2

Critical area–From New Jersey 

 Department of Environmental 

 Protection (unpublished). 

 Boundaries are approximate 

 and should not be used for 

 regulatory compliance purposes

Dover

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone 

Harbor

Atlantic City

Point Pleasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

MONMOUTH

CUMBERLAND

HUNTERDON

MIDDLESEX

CAPE 

MAY

MERCER

SOMERSET

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

UNION

ESSEX

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

AT LANT IC

OCEA

N

DELAWARE

PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

DELAWARE

BAY

Dover

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone 

Harbor

Atlantic City

Point Pleasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

MONMOUTH

CUMBERLAND

HUNTERDON

MIDDLESEX

CAPE 

MAY

MERCER

SOMERSET

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

UNION

ESSEX

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

AT LANT IC

OCEA

N

DELAWARE

PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

DELAWARE

BAY

NEW YORK

RARITAN BAY

0 10 20 MILES 5

0 10 20 KILOMETERS 5

PHILADELPHIA

C. Englishtown

 aquifer system

A. Vincentown 

 aquifer NEW YORK

RARITAN BAY

0 10 20 MILES 5

0 10 20 KILOMETERS 5

PHILADELPHIA

Dover

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone 

Harbor

Atlantic City

Point 

Pleasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

MONMOUTH

CUMBERLAND

HUNTERDON MIDDLESEX

CAPE

 MAY

MERCER

SOMERSET

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

UNION

ESSEX

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

AT LANT IC

OCEA

N

DELAWARE

PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

DELAWARE

BAY

NEW YORK

RARITAN BAY

0 10 20 MILES 5

0 10 20 KILOMETERS 5

PHILADELPHIA

B. Wenonah-Mount

 Laurel aquifer

the Englishtown aquifer system, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008.

Figure 13. Location and volume of groundwater withdrawals from A, the Vincentown aquifer, B, Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, and C, 
32 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

14

10

8

12

6

4

2

0

Water withdrawals, in million gallons per day

EXPLANATION

Northern counties

Southern counties

4

3

2

1

0

14

10

6

2

12

8

4

0

A

B

C

Figure 14. Estimated groundwater withdrawals from A, the Vincentown aquifer, B, the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, and C, the 

Englishtown aquifer system, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008. (Thin vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection periods; note different 

vertical scaling)
Vincentown Aquifer 33

<, less than

>, greater than

EXPLANATION

Decline, in feet

Greater than or equal to 60

40 – <60

20 – <40

10 – <20

>5 – <10

No substantial change

Recovery, in feet

Greater than or equal to 40

20 – <40

10 – <20 

>5 – <10 

-5 – +5

Aquifer outcrop area 

Downdip limit of aquifer

Critical area 1

Critical area 2

Critical area–From New Jersey 

 Department of Environmental 

 Protection (unpublished). 

 Boundaries are approximate 

 and should not be used for 

 regulatory compliance purposes

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:24,000

Universal Transverse Mercator Projection, Zone 18, NAD 83

Dover

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone 

Harbor

Atlantic City

Point Pleasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

MONMOUTH

CUMBERLAND

HUNTERDON

MIDDLESEX

CAPE 

MAY

MERCER

SOMERSET

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

UNION

ESSEX

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

AT LANT IC

OCEA

N

DELAWARE

PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

DELAWARE

BAY

Dover

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone 

Harbor

Atlantic City

Point Pleasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

MONMOUTH

CUMBERLAND

HUNTERDON

MIDDLESEX

CAPE 

MAY

MERCER

SOMERSET

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

UNION

ESSEX

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

AT LANT IC

OCEA

N

DELAWARE

PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

DELAWARE

BAY

NEW YORK

RARITAN BAY

0 10 20 MILES 5

0 10 20 KILOMETERS 5

PHILADELPHIA

C. Englishtown

 aquifer system

A. Vincentown 

 aquifer

No

data

NEW YORK

RARITAN BAY

0 10 20 MILES 5

0 10 20 KILOMETERS 5

PHILADELPHIA

Dover

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone 

Harbor

Atlantic City

Point 

Pleasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

MONMOUTH

CUMBERLAND

HUNTERDON MIDDLESEX

CAPE

 MAY

MERCER

SOMERSET

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

UNION

ESSEX

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

AT LANT IC

OCEA

N

DELAWARE

PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

DELAWARE

BAY

NEW YORK

RARITAN BAY

0 10 20 MILES 5

0 10 20 KILOMETERS 5

PHILADELPHIA

B. Wenonah-Mount

 Laurel aquifer

Jackson 

Twp

aquifer system, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2003–8.

Figure 15. Groundwater level changes in A, the Vincentown aquifer, B, the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, and C, the Englishtown 
34 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

Missing 

data

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

80

70

60

110

100

90

140

130

120

50

25-636

29-139

5-1250

Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

Figure 16. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the Vincentown aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 

1978–2008. (All hydrographs are at the same scale; vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection cycles; well locations shown on pl. 4)

Wenonah-Mount Laurel Aquifer

The Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer is composed of the 

sand of the Mount Laurel Formation and, locally, the upper 

part of the Wenonah Formation where the latter is not composed predominantly of silt. The Mount Laurel Formation is 

a slightly glauconitic, micaceous quartz sand; shell beds are 

fairly common throughout. The upper part of the Wenonah 

Formation consists of slightly glauconitic, clayey fine sand 

or silt containing abundant lignite fragments and occasional 

pyrite (Owens and others, 1970); at its base, the formation 

grades to a silt. The aquifer crops out within the exposures of 

the Mount Laurel and Wenonah Formations from Monmouth 

and Middlesex Counties in the northeastern part of the Coastal 

Plain to Salem County in the southwest (pl. 5). The downdip limit of the aquifer is offshore of Monmouth and Ocean 

Counties; in the southern New Jersey counties—Atlantic, 

Cumberland, and Cape May—this limit is poorly defined. The 

productivity at any location is based on the thickness and silt 

content of the materials composing the aquifer. The aquifer is 

thickest in southwestern New Jersey (western Salem, and central Gloucester and Camden Counties) where it is most often 

used for water supply. In this area, thicknesses of 100 ft to 

200 ft are common (Zapecza, 1989). In Salem County, the silt 

content increases, and the productive sands decrease accordingly. In the northeastern part of the Coastal Plain, the aquifer 

is used for water supply in central and eastern Monmouth and 

northern Ocean Counties; the aquifer here is generally 60 ft to 

80 ft thick (Zapecza, 1989), although thicknesses may exceed 

100 ft in some areas of Monmouth County.

The Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer contains freshwater 

throughout much of its confined extent. In the northern part of 

the study area, chloride concentrations in groundwater generally range from 2 to 20 mg/L with concentrations increasing 

in the downdip direction. The highest chloride concentrations 

along the coast in Monmouth County typically were less than 

25 mg/L. Occasional elevated concentrations were observed 

in close proximity to outcrop areas where recently recharged 

groundwater may discharge to pumped wells finished in the 

confined aquifer. In southern Cumberland and Salem Counties, 

a zone of saline groundwater is present along the Delaware 

estuary, extending approximately 2 mi inland in the southwestern part of Salem County (pl. 5). Elevated chloride concentrations (50 to greater than 100 mg/L) also are present in 
Wenonah-Mount Laurel Aquifer 35

groundwater in and near the city of Salem. During 1990–2004, 

chloride concentrations in some supply wells increased to 

more than 150 mg/L, with the greatest annual rates of increase 

occurring during 2000–2. Concentrations have since stabilized at approximately 100 mg/L. Elsewhere in southern New 

Jersey, in areas where the aquifer is used, the groundwater is 

generally fresh, and chloride concentrations are typically less 

than 25 mg/L.

Water Withdrawals

Groundwater withdrawals from the Wenonah-Mount 

Laurel aquifer occur mostly in southern New Jersey where 

the aquifer is confined throughout a narrow band from central 

Burlington County to central Salem County from the outcrop 

to less than 10 mi downdip (fig. 13). Groundwater is also 

withdrawn in eastern Monmouth County, along and within 

10 mi of the Atlantic coast. From 1978 to 2008, withdrawals 

ranged from 4.1 to 8.8 Mgal/d; in 2008, withdrawals averaged 8.2 Mgal/d (fig. 14B, table 3). During 2008, most of 

the groundwater (7.5 Mgal/d, 91 percent) was pumped from 

the aquifer underlying the southern counties of New Jersey 

and, during most years, was typically greater by an order of 

magnitude than that pumped in the north. Withdrawals in the 

northern counties decreased from about 1.4 Mgal/d in 1978 

to 0.7 Mgal/d in 1993 with the largest reduction occurring 

in 1991 as a result of the implementation of Critical Area 1 

cutbacks. During the same period, groundwater withdrawals 

in the southern counties increased only marginally; thereafter, withdrawals increased to more than 8 Mgal/d with peak 

volumes occurring during 1997–98 and 2005 (fig. 14B). From 

1996 to 1997, average withdrawals from the aquifer in southern counties increased by 34 percent in an effort to supplement 

lost allocation from the regulated PRM aquifers in Critical 

Area 2.

Water Levels

The potentiometric surface map, depicting water levels 

during the fall and early winter 2008 for the Wenonah-Mount 

Laurel aquifer, is shown in plate 5; supporting water-level data 

used to construct this map are presented in appendix 5. The 

2008 potentiometric surface shows high groundwater altitudes 

near the outcrop in northern New Jersey Coastal Plain counties, a potentiometric low near the outcrop in north-central 

Burlington County, and three cones of depression within the 

aquifer. The highest groundwater altitudes were observed near 

the outcrop in Monmouth County (147 ft in well 25-412); the 

lowest were observed in coastal Monmouth County and along 

the border of central Camden and Gloucester Counties. The 

northernmost cone of depression, located in the coastal region 

of Monmouth and Ocean Counties, is elongate in shape; is 

centered beneath the boroughs of Point Pleasant, Brielle, and 

Spring Lake Heights; and extends throughout a broad area 

from Seaside Park in northern Ocean County north to Long 

Branch in Monmouth County and west toward Lakewood. The 

configuration and shape of the cone of depression is similar to 

that in the underlying Englishtown aquifer system, though the 

generally lower transmissivity of the aquifer produces a cone 

that is narrower. Simulated contours (Voronin, 2004) were 

used to guide the closure of contours at the eastern or offshore 

edge of the cone. At the deepest part of the cone, groundwaterlevel altitudes ranged from -63 to -68 ft, a rise of 6 to 8 ft 

from levels observed in 2003. Within the area encompassed by 

the 0–ft contour, groundwater withdrawals from the aquifer in 

2008 were estimated to be approximately 0.4 Mgal/d. Given 

the depth and breadth of this cone, this amount is not substantial; the relatively low transmissivity of the aquifer of 500 to 

700 square feet per day (ft2/d) (Martin, 1998), coupled with 

long-term withdrawals and low potentiometric head in the 

underlying Englishtown aquifer system, contribute to the size 

and persistence of the cone.

The central cone of depression, the smallest of the three, 

is centered beneath the community of Browns Mills and has a 

minimum water-level altitude of -27 ft (well 5-367). Average 

groundwater withdrawals during 2008 from 10 wells in the 

Browns Mills area were modest at 0.54 Mgal/d. Since 1980, 

average withdrawals ranged from 0.5 to 1.2 Mgal/d, peaking 

in the early 1990s and generally decreasing thereafter. Notable 

reductions in withdrawals of more than 15 percent from the 

previous year occurred in 1994, 1996, and 2006.

The southern cone of depression underlies parts of central 

Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester Counties. This elongated 

cone of depression began to form after 1983. Two smaller 

cones of depression have since merged to form the larger, 

more regionally extensive feature present in 2008, extending approximately 30 mi along the direction of the strike of 

the Wenonah and Mount Laurel Formations. The northernmost “center” of the cone underlying Medford Lakes has a 

potentiometric-surface low of -55 ft (well 5-1253), a decline 

of more than 20 ft from the previous study. The southernmost 

“center” underlies an area straddling the border between 

Camden and Gloucester Counties; its length is approximately 

8 mi along the direction of strike. The low water level of -82 ft 

(well 7-847) represents a decline of 11 ft from 2003. Each center is characterized by steep, lateral hydraulic gradients in their 

respective updip areas, ranging from 42 to 50 ft/mi.

Vertical head differences between the Piney Point and the 

Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifers indicate a moderate to strong 

downward gradients in central Burlington, Camden, and 

Gloucester Counties, particularly in areas where the WenonahMount Laurel aquifer is experiencing pumping stresses, such 

as Winslow and Monroe Townships (Williamstown quadrangle). Potentiometric differences range from 60 to 80 ft in this 

area, with maximum differences exceeding 100 ft. Throughout 

much of the mid-dip and updip areas of the aquifer, a downward hydraulic gradient is present from the Wenonah-Mount 

Laurel aquifer to the underlying Englishtown aquifer system. 

At the deep cone of depression in the Wenonah-Mount Laurel 

aquifer in coastal Ocean and Monmouth Counties, water-level 

differences between the two units can be substantial, although 
36 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

along the eastern and northern edges, these differences moderate and, in places, are neutral.

Groundwater-level changes in the Wenonah-Mount 

Laurel aquifer from 2003 to 2008 are shown in figure 15B. 

Most groundwater levels measured showed small to moderate changes relative to 2003, although large declines were 

indicated in a few areas. Water levels declined in 84 wells 

(74 percent), recovered in 21 wells (19 percent), and remained 

about the same in 8 wells (7 percent). Water levels, in general, 

rose 5 to 10 ft near the center of the regional cone of depression underlying eastern Monmouth County (fig. 15B), continuing the long-term trend of recovery in this area. This rise in 

water-levels can be attributed to a reduction in withdrawals 

and corresponding recovery in the underlying Englishtown 

aquifer system, as the volume of, and year to year changes 

in, withdrawals from the Wenonah-Mount Laurel are minor. 

Away from the center of the cone of depression, changes in 

groundwater levels were subtle, and declines or rises of 2 to 

3 feet were most common. Beyond the 0-ft contour and to the 

north and west, the potentiometric surface showed little to no 

change from 2003. In central Jackson Township, however, 

water levels were as much as 20 ft lower than in 2003 despite 

modest increases in withdrawals of less than 10 percent.

Throughout the southern counties, water levels measured 

in 2003 and 2008 declined in 66 percent of wells, recovered 

in 10 percent, and remained about the same in 24 percent. 

Within the Browns Mills cone of depression, water levels 

remained about the same as in 2003, reflecting stable trends in 

withdrawals. Groundwater levels in central Burlington County 

declined from 2 to 23 ft in response to increasing withdrawals 

in the vicinity of Medford Lakes. In comparison, water-level 

declines near the Camden/Gloucester County line were more 

moderate, and stable to rising water levels were observed in 

surrounding municipalities, reflecting an 11 percent decrease 

in withdrawals since 2003.

Results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicate a 

statistically significant difference (decline) in paired waterlevel measurements in the dataset as a whole (app. 10-2) from 

2003 to 2008. A similar relation was observed in measurements throughout Critical Area 2; however, no significant 

difference among compared measurements throughout Critical 

Area 1 was indicated. Significant decreases between paired 

measurements were observed for Burlington, Camden, Ocean, 

and Salem Counties, but not for Monmouth or Gloucester 

Counties. From 1998 to 2008, significant differences between 

paired measurements were not observed.

Results of the Mann-Kendall statistical trend test are 

listed in appendix 10-1. Supporting hydrographs for eight 

observation wells that show long-term and seasonal trends 

in the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer from 1978 to 2008 are 

provided in figures 17 and 18. From 2003 to 2008, statistically significant downward trends were observed for 5 wells 

(7-118, 7-478, 29-140, 33-20, and 33-252), and upward trends 

were observed for 2 wells (25-486 and 25-637). Downward 

trends were strongest for wells 7-478 and 33-20 and weakest for wells nearest the outcrop (33-252 and 7-118). No 

significant upward or downward trend was observed for 

well 25-353. From 1998 to 2008, significant downward trends 

were observed for two wells, 7-478 and 29-140. Observation well 7-478 is located near the border between Camden 

and Gloucester Counties and along the downdip side of the 

southern cone of depression. Following a 70-ft water-level 

decline over an 18-year period (1983–2001), water levels 

stabilized, then rose during 2004–5, but have since declined. 

Well 29-140, located in the mid-dip section of the aquifer in 

northern Ocean County, shows only a modest decline for the 

10-year period, as well as for the period of record. Upward 

trends were observed for wells 25-353, 25-486, and 25-637 

for their respective periods of record; in contrast, downward 

trends were observed for wells 7-478 and 33-20 from 1978 

to 2008.

Photograph was provided by U.S. Geological Survey field personnel
Wenonah-Mount Laurel Aquifer 37

Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29 -100

-140

-180

-120

-160

-200

20

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

140

120

100

80

60

40

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

25-486

25-637

25-353

29-140

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

counties of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008. (Vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection cycles; well locations shown on pl. 5)

Figure 17. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer in the northern 

Year

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

7-118

33-20

7-478

33-252

Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

counties of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008. (Vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection cycles; well locations shown on pl. 5)

Figure 18. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer in the southern 
38 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

Englishtown Aquifer System

The Englishtown Formation is a fine- to medium-grained 

feldspathic quartzose sand that in some places grades to a silt. 

The formation is thickest (200 ft) in Monmouth County and 

remains sandy and thick a substantial distance downdip from 

the outcrop; therefore, the aquifer yields large quantities of 

water in Monmouth and Ocean County. In central and southern Ocean County, a confining unit partitions the Englishtown 

aquifer system into upper and lower aquifers. The aquifer 

system is underlain by the Merchantville-Woodbury confining 

unit, which is the most extensive confining unit in the Coastal 

Plain. The Englishtown Formation thins considerably to the 

southwest, where sandy units are discontinuous and silt beds 

predominate (Zapecza, 1989). The approximate downdip limit 

of the aquifer system is shown on plate 6; it extends from the 

Forked River in Ocean County, southwest through Hammonton and Buena in Atlantic County, then along an east-west 

trending line through Bridgeton in Cumberland County to the 

Delaware Estuary in Salem County. The distance from outcrop 

to the downdip boundary is approximately 34 mi in Ocean 

County, but to the southwest, the lateral extent of the confined 

aquifer decreases to about 12 mi in southern Salem County. To 

the south and east the aquifer is not recognized on geophysical 

logs that penetrate the section (Zapecza, 1989). Transmissivity in the Englishtown aquifer system decreases substantially 

to the southwest as geologic material composing the aquifer 

matrix becomes finer-grained (Nichols, 1977), and little water 

is produced from the aquifer in the southwestern part of the 

State (Zapecza, 1989).

Most of the confined part of the Englishtown aquifer 

system contains fresh groundwater, except in a limited area at 

and surrounding the Sandy Hook observation well (25-771) 

in northeastern Monmouth County where chloride concentrations exceed 15,000 mg/L. The geochemical imprint on the 

groundwater from this well indicates a direct connection to, 

and mixing with, seawater. The saline water is present below 

a 5-ft-thick clay lens, however, and is effectively segregated 

from the upper part of the aquifer where the groundwater is 

fresh and used for potable supply.

In updip and mid-dip sections of the confined aquifer, 

calcium and bicarbonate are the predominant ionic species, 

and concentrations of chloride are low, ranging from 1 to less 

than 10 mg/L, except in northern Monmouth County where 

concentrations at times exceed 10 mg/L. In far downdip areas 

of northern Ocean County, sodium is the predominant cation, 

and the groundwater exhibits high sodium to chloride molar 

ratios, ranging from 5:1 to 100:1, evidence of substantial 

amounts of cation exchange. Concentrations of chloride in 

groundwater from the lower part of the confined aquifer in 

these areas occasionally exceeded 15 mg/L and have been 

observed to be as high as 40 mg/L but are most often less than 

the former. No evidence of upward trends has been observed.

Chloride concentrations in the Englishtown aquifer 

system in southern New Jersey generally ranged from less 

than 1 to 9 mg/L throughout the confined aquifer, although 

higher concentrations were observed within and near outcrop 

areas. Chloride concentrations showed no apparent increase 

with increasing distance in the downdip direction; however, 

most of the chloride data from the southern counties are from 

wells within 10 mi of the outcrop. Water-quality data farther 

downdip are sparse, and substantive conclusions about the 

evolution of groundwater toward this boundary could not be 

made. Chloride data for individual wells through time also are 

rare, and temporal trends could not be determined.

Water Withdrawals

Withdrawals from the Englishtown aquifer system are 

made primarily in Monmouth and northern Ocean Counties 

and in central Camden County; however, smaller-capacity 

production wells are present throughout north-central Burlington County (fig. 13C). The aquifer is used locally in eastern 

Mercer County and near the outcrop in Salem and Gloucester 

Counties where withdrawals are made primarily for domestic self-supply. Average withdrawals from the Englishtown 

aquifer system in 2008 were approximately 7.2 Mgal/d 

(table 3); withdrawals from the northern counties accounted 

for 67 percent of this volume. Withdrawals decreased from 

approximately 11 Mgal/d in 1978 to less than 7 Mgal/d by 

1996 (fig. 14C) as a result of mandated cutbacks in Critical 

Area 1 and, beginning in 1991, the use of the Manasquan 

Reservoir as an alternative source of water. Reductions during 

1989–91 (26 percent) were the most notable. In 1997 withdrawals increased to nearly 9 Mgal/d and, during the ensuing 

decade, ranged from 7 to 8.5 Mgal/d. In northern Coastal Plain 

counties, withdrawals averaged nearly 9 Mgal/d during the 

1980s, 5.7 Mgal/d during the 1990s, and from 2000 to 2008, 

5.2 Mgal/d. 

Withdrawals from the aquifer system in the southern 

counties were constant at approximately 0.5 Mgal/d from 

1978 through 1987 (fig.14C); in 1988 withdrawals began to 

increase gradually. By 1996, average withdrawals were nearly 

1.7 Mgal/d; a sharp increase to 3.3 Mgal/d followed in 1997. 

In 1997 in Camden County, estimated withdrawals more than 

doubled from the previous year because of new wells brought 

on line in the county. This increase in the use of the Englishtown aquifer system was a consequence of restrictions placed 

on withdrawals from the underlying PRM aquifer system in 

1996. From 1998 to 2001 withdrawals averaged approximately 

3 Mgal/d. In 2002, withdrawals from the aquifer system in 

the southern Coastal Plain began a gradual decline, then 

leveled at approximately 2 Mgal/d. In 2008 average withdrawals throughout the southern Coastal Plain counties were 

2.3 Mgal/d.

Water Levels

The potentiometric surface during the fall and early winter of 2008 for the Englishtown aquifer system is shown on 

plate 6; supporting water-level data used to construct this map 
Englishtown Aquifer System 39

are presented in appendix 6. The highest groundwater altitudes 

within the confined aquifer exceeded 100 ft and occurred near 

the outcrop in western Monmouth County, roughly coinciding 

with areas of greatest topographic relief. The lowest groundwater altitudes (-84 to -101 ft) occurred along the Monmouth/

Ocean County boundary and are associated with pumping centers near Point Pleasant and Lakewood. The dominant feature 

of the groundwater flow system is a prominent cone of depression underlying northeastern Ocean and eastern Monmouth 

Counties (pl. 6). This regionally extensive cone of depression 

has been well documented; a 1958 potentiometric surface map 

by Seaber (1965) shows water levels in this area in excess of 

100 ft below NGVD 29. Nichols (1977) similarly documents 

declines in water levels from 1900 to 1959 of greater than 

100 ft near the border of Monmouth and Ocean Counties; 

from 1959 to 1983, groundwater levels in this region declined 

an additional 150 ft.

The location and configuration of this cone is similar to 

that in the overlying Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer; vertical leakance through the confining unit allows good hydraulic 

connection between the two aquifers. Closed contours on 

the seaward side of the cone were mapped on the basis of 

simulations by Voronin (2004). The lateral hydraulic gradient on the updip side of the cone of depression is relatively 

steep, ranging from 12 to 30 ft/mi; on the downdip side this 

gradient is generally less than 5 ft/mi. The cone of depression 

is composed of several smaller cones underlying pumping 

centers located at Point Pleasant, Spring Lake, and Lakewood, 

the largest of which underlies coastal communities from 

Mantoloking in northern Ocean County to Belmar in southern 

Monmouth County. Lowest water-level altitudes in this area 

(< -80 ft) were measured in production wells at Point Pleasant.

The remaining local cones underlie areas near the town 

of Lakewood. Each is radially small but deep, and each is 

associated with either a single well or two wells. This area is 

characterized by a potentiometric head of less than -70 ft, with 

the minimum groundwater altitude (-101 ft) observed in the 

northern part of the municipality, near the Metedeconk River.

A local depression in the potentiometric surface at 

Freehold (well 25-727) is indicated on the map (pl. 6) by the 

upswept 80-ft contour in the southeastern part of the Freehold 

quadrangle. This feature was initially included on the 1993 

potentiometric map and verified during the 1998 and 2003 

studies (Lacombe and Rosman, 2001; DePaul and others, 

2009). A measured water-level altitude near this feature was 

62 ft, a decline from the previous study of 6 ft. In the southern 

counties, groundwater altitudes ranged from a high of 96 ft in 

northern Burlington County to a low of -38 ft where a small, 

localized cone of depression is present in central Burlington 

County beneath the community of Browns Mills.

Vertical head differences between the Englishtown 

aquifer system and the Upper PRM aquifer are significant in 

updip and mid-dip areas of western Monmouth, northeastern 

Ocean, and Camden Counties. Groundwater altitudes during 

2008 in the Englishtown aquifer system were as much as 117, 

115, and 104 ft higher in Monmouth, Ocean, and Camden 

Counties, respectively, and the potential for downward flow 

out of the Englishtown aquifer system is greatest in these 

areas. In eastern Monmouth and northeastern Ocean County, 

however, groundwater altitudes are higher in the Upper PRM 

aquifer than in the Englishtown aquifer system. Despite heads 

that are more than 40 ft higher in the Upper PRM aquifer than 

in the Englishtown aquifer system beneath the cone of depression in eastern Monmouth and Ocean Counties, upward flow 

is impeded owing to the thickness and low permeability of 

the underlying Merchantville-Woodbury confining unit in that 

area (Martin, 1998).

Water-level differences between the Englishtown aquifer 

system and the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer are generally less than those between the Upper PRM aquifer and the 

Englishtown aquifer system. Water-level differences range 

from 10 to 25 ft in updip areas of Monmouth and Ocean 

County; however, in mid-dip areas where the Englishtown 

aquifer system is used for supply, water levels may be as much 

as 45 ft lower than those in the overlying Wenonah-Mount 

Laurel aquifer. Along the western edge of the cone of depression in coastal Monmouth and Ocean Counties, water-level 

differences are as much as 60 ft, and the Englishtown aquifer system receives downward recharge from the overlying 

Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, contributing to the sustained 

potentiometric lows in the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer. 

Flow from the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer to the Englishtown aquifer system may be substantial in areas where vertical 

gradients are strong because of the relatively high leakance 

of the Marshalltown-Wenonah confining unit (Martin, 1998). 

Water-level differences decrease toward the east and north of 

the cone of depression, ranging from 5 to 20 ft.

Water-level changes from 2003 to 2008 were calculated 

for the 76 wells open to the Englishtown aquifer system and 

measured in both years. A map showing these water-level 

changes is provided in figure 15C. Of the wells measured in 

both 2003 and 2008, water levels declined in 40 (53 percent), 

recovered in 32 (42 percent), and remained the same in 4 

(5 percent). Water-level declines ranged from 1 to 23 ft and 

were most common in central Monmouth County to the north 

and updip from the regional cone of depression, and in updip 

and mid-dip areas of northwestern Ocean and Burlington 

Counties. In mid-dip areas of north-central Ocean County, 

groundwater levels did not change. The largest changes were 

observed at and near the center of the regional cone of depression where a 40-percent reduction in withdrawals relative to 

2003 volumes caused water levels to recover by 28 to 38 ft. 

On the western and updip side of the cone of depression, 

water levels were stable or had recovered by 3 to 18 ft. At the 

southern edge of the cone of depression, water levels were 

unchanged or modestly recovered.

In central Camden County in southern New Jersey, water 

levels were as much as 20 ft higher than those observed in 

2003. Rising water levels occurred throughout several small 

municipalities as a result of a 20-percent reduction in withdrawals during this period.

Results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicate that, 

from 2003 to 2008 and from 1998 to 2008, the differences in 
40 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

paired water-level measurements throughout the aquifer were 

not significant (appendix 10-2). In Critical Area 1, water levels 

recovered during 1998–2008 and 2003–8, although during 

2003–8, rises are not statistically significant at the 95-percent 

confidence level. Evaluated by county, water-level rises from 

2003 to 2008 in Ocean County were significant, and declines 

in Burlington County were significant during the same period. 

There were no significant changes in other counties during 2003–8 and no significant changes in any county during 

1998–2008.

Results of the Mann-Kendall statistical trend test are 

listed in appendix 10-1. Supporting hydrographs for nine 

observation wells that graphically depict long-term and 

seasonal trends in the Englishtown aquifer system from 

1978 to 2008 are shown in figure 19. The hydrographs for 

wells 23-104 and 25-715 show little to no change in water 

levels during the periods of record, whereas the hydrograph 

for well 29-138 shows periods of modest decline and subsequent recovery. Wells 23-104 and 25-715 are located in updip 

areas, and well 29-138 is within the mid-dip section of the 

aquifer system. These wells are distant from the regional cone 

of depression along the coast.

The water level in well 25-715, located near Sandy Hook 

Bay in northern Monmouth County, has remained relatively 

constant since the well was installed in 1991. Withdrawals 

from the aquifer are made 1.25 mi to the west but are minor; 

therefore, the range in seasonal fluctuations is small, from 2 to 

less than 4 ft, and the long-term water-level change is barely 

perceptible. Temporal fluctuations observed in well 23-104 

show responses to changes in precipitation and subsequent 

recharge; this well is located away from the influence of 

pumping wells and within the outcrop where infiltration is 

rapid and recharge paths are relatively short. From 1978 to 

2008, the water level in this well has remained essentially 

unchanged. Results of trend testing indicated a near-zero slope 

for the periods of record (1978–2008) at both wells.

The hydrograph for well 29-138 (fig. 19) shows a gradual 

decline of 7 ft during 1978–93, followed by a rise of 8 ft 

through 1998; thereafter, annual high-water levels generally stabilized at 66 ft. During the latter part of the period of 

record, a slight downward trend was observed, and the water 

level declined by nearly 4 ft from 2003 to 2008.

Observation wells 25-250 and 5-259 are located in updip 

areas of western Monmouth and Burlington Counties, respectively, far from major cones of depression but near areas where 

the aquifer is pumped. From 2003 to 2008 a slight, downward 

trend was observed at well 5-259. A calculated slope of -0.46 

indicates a water-level decline of 2 to 3 ft during this period. 

In comparison, the trend observed at well 25-250 was statistically insignificant. For the 10-year period, however, a slight 

upward trend was observed in well 25-250, and for the 30-year 

period, the trend, though insubstantial, was slightly downward.

Water-level change within the aquifer was more 

dynamic at wells located nearer the regional cone of depression. Well 29-530 is located near the center of the cone, 

and proceeding updip, in order of increasing distance, are 

wells 25-429 and 25-638. Water-level trends observed in each 

of the wells parallel one another, and with increasing distance 

inland, the slopes of the hydrographs become shallower, 

groundwater altitudes increase, and the seasonal variability 

is tempered. Owing to Critical Area conservation strategies 

introduced in the late 1980s, water levels rose sharply in all 

three wells from 1990 to 1996; the magnitude of recovery 

during this period was greatest in well 29-530 at approximately 100 ft. From 1998 to 2008, despite a brief decline 

during 2001–3, an upward trend in water levels occurred for 

wells 25-429 and 29-530. From 1998 to 2008, results of the 

Mann Kendall trend test indicate that no change occurred in 

the water levels in well 25-638; however, for the 5-year period 

2003 to 2008, an upward trend is indicated. Both graphical and 

statistical analyses of data from well 29-534 indicate a trend 

similar to those in wells described above; however, the position of the well on the southern edge of the depression, distant 

from withdrawal centers, and the depth of its screened interval 

contribute to the moderation in both decline and recovery. 

Water levels in this well lack seasonality, and the inflection 

point indicating recovery lagged others by nearly 3 years. 

Results of the Mann Kendall trend test indicate significant 

upward trends for the 5-, 10-, and 30-year periods.

Photograph was provided by U.S. Geological Survey field personnel
Englishtown Aquifer System 41

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

-160

-180

-200

-220

-240

-60

-80

-100

-120

-140

20

0

-20

-40

40

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

-20

25-429

29-530

25-638

29-534

5-259 25-715

23-104

25-250

29-138

Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

Missing 

data

Plain, 1978–2008. (Hydrographs are at the same scale; vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection cycles; well locations shown on pl. 6)

Figure 19. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the Englishtown aquifer system, New Jersey Coastal 
42 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer 

System

The PRM aquifer system includes the most productive aquifers in the New Jersey Coastal Plain. In order of 

increasing depth they are the Upper, Middle, and Lower PRM 

aquifers. The Upper PRM aquifer generally corresponds to the 

Magothy Formation in New Jersey (Zapecza, 1989) and is the 

most extensive unit within the aquifer system. In Monmouth 

and Middlesex Counties, the aquifer is locally referred to as 

the Old Bridge aquifer. The aquifer consists of coarse-grained 

permeable sands with thin interbedded clay and clayey silt 

layers present locally. The outcrop extends in a northeast to 

southwest trending band from the Raritan Bay to the Delaware River adjacent to Salem County and is mostly coincident 

with the outcrop of the Magothy Formation. The downdip 

part of the aquifer is well defined offshore of Monmouth and 

Ocean Counties but less well defined in Atlantic, Cumberland, 

and Cape May Counties. The thickness of the sand interval 

ranges from more than 200 ft in eastern Monmouth County 

to about 50 ft in Cape May County. Recharge to the aquifer is 

mainly from outcrop areas in Mercer, Middlesex, and Monmouth Counties and from the overlying Englishtown aquifer 

system, but water also enters the system from outcrop areas 

in Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester Counties because 

long-term withdrawals and cones of depression in these areas 

have altered the natural flow paths, converting areas formerly 

receiving discharge into recharge areas. The overlying confining unit, ranging in thickness from 200 to 300 ft throughout 

Monmouth, Ocean, and southern Burlington Counties, is 

relatively impermeable and effectively impedes vertical flow 

in downdip areas (Zapecza, 1989). Transmissivity of the 

aquifer is greatest in the eastern part of Monmouth County, 

although the sand bodies remain highly conductive throughout 

western Monmouth County, as well as in western Camden and 

Gloucester Counties.

The Middle and undifferentiated aquifer of the PRM 

aquifer system extends from the Raritan Bay in the northeastern part of the study area to Maryland in the southwest. 

Northeast of Burlington County, the aquifer is locally referred 

to as the Farrington aquifer. The aquifer in this area is well 

defined from the outcrop area to about 20 mi downdip; beyond 

this distance the aquifer cannot be separated from the underlying sediments within the PRM aquifer system. Zapecza 

(1989) refers to the aquifer in eastern Middlesex County 

and western Monmouth County as the undifferentiated PRM 

aquifer. Similarly, in southern New Jersey the aquifer can be 

traced in the subsurface from the outcrop to an area extending approximately 10 mi to 12 mi downdip, beyond which 

the aquifer is indistinguishable from the Lower PRM aquifer. 

Where the confining unit between the Lower and Middle 

aquifers is absent, the aquifer unconformably overlies bedrock 

or weathered bedrock. The transmissivity of the aquifer is 

greatest in northern Ocean County (greater than 16,000 ft2/d), 

but the aquifer is most productive in Burlington, Camden, and 

Gloucester Counties in, and within a short distance from, the 

outcrop area where the transmissivity ranges from 6,000 ft2/d 

to more than 10,000 ft2/d (Martin, 1998). To the southwest, 

discontinuous silt and clay beds within the Middle aquifer 

in Salem County inhibit its productivity. The Middle PRM 

aquifer is continuous into Delaware where it is composed of 

the sandy parts within the upper part of the Potomac Formation. The updip limit of the aquifer in Delaware is within the 

outcrop of the Potomac Formation in northern New Castle 

County. The downdip limit of the freshwater-saltwater interface, as indicated by the 10,000 mg/L isochlor, extends into 

eastern Sussex County, Delaware.

The Lower PRM aquifer is the lowermost aquifer within 

the Coastal Plain of New Jersey and Delaware. The aquifer 

does not crop out in New Jersey but is entirely overlain by 

the confining bed separating the Middle and the Lower PRM 

aquifers. The aquifer is recognizable about 8 to 12 mi downdip 

from the outcrop area of the Potomac and Raritan Formations (Zapecza, 1989); beyond this limit the aquifer cannot 

be differentiated from the overlying sediments of the Middle 

PRM aquifer. The transmissivity of the aquifer is highest 

in northwestern and central Camden County and adjoining 

areas in Gloucester and Burlington Counties; this is where 

the aquifer is most productive. The Lower PRM is continuous 

into Delaware, coinciding with the lower part of the Potomac 

Formation. The updip limit of the aquifer in Delaware lies 

between the western edge of the Coastal Plain sediments and 

the updip limit of the Middle PRM aquifer; the downdip limit 

is in northern Kent County (Vroblesky and Fleck, 1991).

Extent of Saline Water

The PRM aquifer system contains saline water throughout a broad area of southern New Jersey (2,490 mi2

), extending from the banks of the Delaware River in Salem and 

Gloucester Counties east through southern Ocean County 

and to the south, encompassing parts of Burlington, Camden, 

and Ocean Counties, much of Gloucester and Salem Counties, and all of Atlantic, Cumberland, and Cape May Counties 

(fig. 20). The presence of saline water in the aquifer system 

throughout much of southern New Jersey largely resulted 

from past seawater incursions and the subsequent deposition 

of paleoseawaters that accompanied eustatic rises in sea level. 

Long residence times and continued reaction with minerals in the aquifer matrix, particularly in far downdip areas in 

southern New Jersey, resulted in a dense, highly mineralized, 

and geochemically mature groundwater. These waters have not 

yet been flushed with more dilute groundwater from northern 

recharge areas owing to low freshwater heads at and near the 

transitional zone. The saltwater front arcs in the updip direction and toward the Delaware River in southern Gloucester 

County, reflecting predevelopment flow paths and movement 

of groundwater toward predevelopment discharge areas. 

Chloride concentrations in the groundwater range from 1 mg/L 

to more than 20,000 mg/L, generally increasing in the seaward 
Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer System 43

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

NEW JERSEY

DELAWARE 

BAY

RARITAN

BAY

Fall Line

Base modified from U.S. Geological Survey digital 

data, 1:24,000 Universal Transverse Mercator 

Projection, Zone 18, NAD 83

CUMBERLAND

CAPE

MAY

MONMOUTH

BURLINGTON

ATLANTIC

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

SALEM

MERCER MIDDLESEX

PENNSYLVANIA

Trenton

DELAWA

RE De la ware River Philadelphia

KENT

NEW

CASTLE

0 5 10 20 MILES

0 5 10 20 KILOMETERS

Aquifer outcrop

Area of saline

groundwater

EXPLANATION

ATLANTIC 

 OCEAN

RARITAN

BAY

MIDDLESEX

OCEAN MONMOUTH

Red Bank

Keansburg East Brunswick

Fall Line

HUNTERDONSOMERSET

Area of 

detail Raritan River

0 2 4 6 MILES

0 2 4 6 KILOMETERS

Richmond 

(NY)

Figure 20. Area of saline groundwater, Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer system, New Jersey, 2008.

direction and with depth throughout the aquifer system. 

Although saline groundwater in deeper parts of the aquifer system in Salem, Gloucester, and Cumberland Counties 

occasionally exhibits geochemical properties similar to those 

of seawater (sodium and bromide to chloride ratios of 0.86 and 

1.5 × 10-3, respectively), the composition of the groundwater 

generally indicates a reverse base-exchange reaction, whereby 

calcium and magnesium ions are lost to sodium-bearing 

exchange sites, resulting in sodium enrichment of the groundwater (Meisler, 1989). As sodium enrichment progresses, calcium-magnesium to chloride ratios decrease relative to those 

for seawater. Concurrent increases in boron to chloride ratios 

in the groundwater relative to seawater are consistent with 

desorption from clay confining units (Pucci and others, 1997; 

DePaul and Szabo, 2007; Vinson and others, 2011). Because 

the aquifer system is in good hydraulic connection with the 

Delaware River in Camden, Gloucester, and to a lesser degree 

in Salem County (Navoy and others 2005), induced infiltration 

during periods of drought and low river discharge may also be 

a source of chloride contamination in southern New Jersey.

In the northern parts of the Coastal Plain, the PRM 

aquifer system underlying Middlesex and Monmouth Counties 

is hydraulically connected to the Raritan and South Rivers, 

the Washington Canal, and the Raritan Bay, permitting saline 

water to recharge the aquifer system where prevailing hydraulic gradients are landward (Pucci and others, 1994).

Within the Upper PRM aquifer, freshwater is present throughout much of the updip extent, but saline water is 

present in Salem County, east through southern Ocean County 

and south, encompassing most of Atlantic and all of Cumberland and Cape May Counties (pl. 7). Chloride concentrations in the Upper aquifer range from 1 mg/L to more than 

4,000 mg/L. The lowest concentrations occurred in mid-dip 

and downdip areas of the aquifer throughout Monmouth, 

Middlesex, northern Ocean, Burlington, and Camden Counties, where values are less than 10 mg/L. In updip areas adjacent to the aquifer outcrop, concentrations are typically higher, 

ranging from 2 to 92 mg/L, likely resulting from anthropogenic sources such as road deicers and agricultural runoff in 

nearby recharge areas. The highest concentrations of chloride 

were observed in the downdip areas of Salem and Gloucester 

Counties and in areas of limited extent near the Raritan Bay in 

northern Monmouth County.

In areas adjacent to, and where the Upper PRM is in 

good hydraulic connection with, the Raritan Bay, saline water 

recharges the aquifer underlying parts of Keyport, Union 

Beach, and Keansburg. Increasing chloride concentrations 

and the related chemical quality of groundwater during the 

past decade (1998–2008) indicate continued active saltwater 

intrusion in this area. From 1998 to 2008 chloride concentrations in wells 25-206 and 25-567 increased at rates of more 

than 60 mg/L per year. In southern New Jersey, saline groundwater is present within the aquifer throughout large parts of 

southern Salem, central and western Gloucester, and southern 

Camden Counties. Saline groundwater occurs throughout all 

of Cumberland County and points south and likely beneath 
44 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

much of Atlantic and parts of southern Burlington and Ocean 

Counties. Water-quality data for the area east of Gloucester 

County is limited, and the location of the freshwater-saltwater 

interface is inferred from water-quality data for wells located 

to the north and by the relative position of this interface within 

the underlying Middle PRM aquifer. Chloride concentrations 

ranged from less than 1 mg/L to 30 mg/L in and around the 

Camden cone of depression to as high as 250 mg/L in central 

Gloucester County. At observation wells in the downdip direction of the saltwater front, chloride concentrations are as high 

as 3,300 mg/L. Trends in chloride concentrations are most 

often upward along this line in the direction of the Camden 

cone of depression, particularly at production wells in Glassboro and Clayton, although annual rates of increase typically 

are small.

Within the Middle PRM aquifer, groundwater is generally fresh throughout the northern counties, except in areas 

where the aquifer underlies or is adjacent to the Raritan and 

South Rivers in Middlesex County. The recent movement of 

the saltwater front in the Raritan River and Bay area and the 

extent of saline groundwater are not fully known because of 

the lack of current data and wells open to the aquifer; therefore, the mapped location of this line has not changed during the past several data-collection cycles. Recent (2006–8) 

water-quality data for a limited number of observation wells, 

however, indicate that moderate to highly saline groundwater 

(500–4,800 mg/L) is still (2008) present in the Sayreville area 

of Middlesex County. Within the southern extent of the Middle 

PRM aquifer, the saltwater front roughly bisects southern 

New Jersey from Salem County in the west to southern Ocean 

County in the east. In similar fashion to the geographic pattern of saltwater occurrence in the Upper aquifer, a tongue of 

saline groundwater arcs in an updip direction toward areas 

of higher potentiometric head in central Gloucester County 

(pl. 8). To the west of this line in Salem County, trends in 

dissolved chloride in groundwater were not significant or, in 

some cases, were downward for 1998 to 2008. Northeast of 

this line, toward the Camden cone of depression but in areas 

where chloride concentrations are low to moderate (15 to 

60 mg/L), slight upward trends were sometimes observed for 

production wells.

The extent of freshwater within the Lower PRM aquifer is shown on plate 9. The location of the saltwater front, 

based on previously published works by Barksdale and others 

(1958), Gill and Farlekas (1976), and Schaefer (1983), was 

updated by using recent water-quality data (DePaul and others, 2009). Chloride concentrations in groundwater from the 

Lower PRM aquifer ranged from less than 2 mg/L to more 

than 11,000 mg/L. The lowest concentrations, which generally did not exceed 20 mg/L, occurred in downdip areas of 

Burlington and Camden Counties and away from the Delaware River. Highest concentrations of chloride are present in 

the aquifer underlying much of western Gloucester County 

and northwestern Salem County and areas to the south and 

east, where concentrations ranged from 143 to 850 mg/L. The 

presence of chloride concentrations in excess of 22,000 mg/L 

has also been determined in groundwater in eastern Cumberland County where, in the undifferentiated part of the system, highly concentrated brines are encountered at depths of 

3,000 ft or greater. The simulated 10,000 mg/L isochlor trends 

northeast to southwest from southern Burlington to southern 

Salem County (Pope and Gordon, 1999). This line, along with 

the 250-mg/L isochlor, approximately defines the transition or 

dispersion zone, whereby fresh and saline groundwater mix 

primarily through the process of diffusion but by advection 

and mechanical dispersion as well. The simulated location of 

this line is 2 mi in the downdip direction from the 250-mg/L 

isochlor in Gloucester and 3 mi distant in southern Salem 

County, indicating a laterally narrow zone of dispersion 

in places.

Groundwater Flow System

Groundwater flow in the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer system is discussed in detail in Martin (1998) and Voronin 

(2004), and for the Camden area, in Navoy and Carleton 

(1995). Prior to water-supply development (pre-1900), groundwater flow within the PRM aquifer system was controlled 

primarily by variations in hydraulic properties of the saturated 

sediments, as well as by land-surface topography. The aquifer 

system was recharged by precipitation at outcrop areas in Mercer and Middlesex Counties and by leakage from the overlying 

Englishtown aquifer system. Groundwater flowed to the east 

and southeast from topographic highs in Mercer, Monmouth, 

and Middlesex Counties toward topographic low points near 

the Raritan Bay and the Atlantic Ocean. Groundwater in the 

shallow part of the system followed short flow paths and discharged locally to surface-water bodies; water that entered the 

deeper, regional groundwater flow system followed intermediate and relatively long flow paths toward discharge points 

beneath the Raritan Bay and Atlantic Ocean. Longer flow 

paths curved toward the southwest, trending arcuately across, 

then up the aquifer dip, discharging to the Delaware River 

and other low-lying surface-water bodies in outcrop areas of 

Camden, Gloucester, and Salem Counties (Martin, 1998; Spitz 

and DePaul, 2008).

After development, potentiometric surfaces and groundwater flow patterns in the PRM aquifer system were substantially altered by the location and magnitude of groundwater withdrawals. Withdrawals throughout the system had 

increased, causing groundwater levels to decline and large 

cones of depression to form. Long flow paths indicative of the 

unstressed system were supplanted by short and intermediate 

flow paths in many places, with groundwater discharging to 

pumped wells. By the early 1980s, cones of depression had 

formed in both the Upper and Middle aquifers in the northern 

section of the Coastal Plain, marked by water levels below 

-50 ft in both the Upper and Middle aquifers, and water levels 

in the Middle aquifer were below -100 ft in northern Monmouth County. In southern New Jersey, regional cones of 

depression underlying central Camden County extended more 
Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer System 45

than 45 miles in the downdip direction and encompassed all 

three aquifers. By the late 1980s and early 1990s, groundwater 

levels in the Upper, Middle, and Lower PRM aquifers had 

reached minima of -109, -92, and -107 ft , respectively. Owing 

to this decline, groundwater flow patterns were reversed such 

that recharge and discharge were redistributed throughout 

the system, and areas that once supplied recharge to downdip 

areas of the aquifer now (2008) supply discharge to production wells. Moreover, areas of discharge, such as those in the 

southwestern part of the State adjacent to the Delaware River, 

were converted to recharge areas.

With the establishment of the Critical Areas and associated management strategies, the progressive, long-term 

declines in groundwater levels began to stabilize and subsequently recover. By 2008 groundwater levels typically recovered from 10 ft to more than 30 ft in the Upper and Middle 

aquifers across much of Monmouth County, with maximum 

recoveries of 37 ft and 51 ft, respectively. In Middlesex 

County, recovery of groundwater levels in the Middle aquifer 

typically ranged from less than 10 ft to 40 ft but was as much 

as 67 ft. Recovery in northern Ocean County was less dynamic 

and ranged from 2 ft to 25 ft. In places, water levels continued to decline in the Upper aquifer. In southern New Jersey 

groundwater levels recovered by as much as 53, 40, and 50 ft 

in the Upper, Middle, and Lower aquifers, respectively.

A more detailed discussion of groundwater-level recovery 

in the PRM aquifers as a result of Critical Area management 

strategies is provided in Spitz and others (2008), DePaul and 

others (2009), and Spitz and DePaul (2008). Groundwaterlevel conditions in the PRM aquifer system during fall 2008 

are discussed in the following sections.

Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer

Water Withdrawals

Withdrawals from the Upper PRM aquifer are made in 

Middlesex, Monmouth, and northern Ocean Counties from 

upland recharge areas to the Atlantic coastline (fig. 21A); 

however, in the southern part of the study area from Burlington County south to Salem County, withdrawals are confined 

to a narrow band extending from the aquifer outcrop to about 

12 mi downdip. Beyond this limit, depth to the top of the 

aquifer is substantial and elevated (higher than background) 

dissolved solids in the groundwater prompts the use of shallower aquifers. The primary pumping centers are located in 

eastern Middlesex County within and near the outcrop of the 

Magothy Formation and in central Camden and Gloucester 

Counties. Substantial withdrawals also are made in northwestern Burlington, northern Ocean, and throughout Monmouth 

County. Minor withdrawals are made in Mercer County and 

in Salem County within close proximity to the up dip limit of 

the aquifer.

Estimated groundwater withdrawals from the Upper PRM 

aquifer during 1978–2008 ranged from 54.4 to 80.5 Mgal/d; 

average withdrawals during 2008 were 55.1 Mgal/d (fig. 22A; 

table 3). Withdrawals peaked during the early to mid-1980s 

prior to emplacement of mandatory restrictions and alternative sources of supply. From 1989 to 1995, withdrawals were 

relatively constant, ranging from 65 to 69 Mgal/d, and were 

followed by a reduction of 8 Mgal/d or 12 percent during 

1994–95. From 1996 to 2008 withdrawals ranged from 54.4 to 

62.9 Mgal/d with reductions occurring in successive years, 

except for 2000–1, 2004–5 and 2006–7. Average withdrawals 

throughout the aquifer during 2008 were about the same as 

in 2003.

Upper PRM aquifer withdrawals were highest in Middlesex, Gloucester, and Monmouth Counties, at 15.8, 8.7, and 

8.6 Mgal/d, respectively (table 3). Throughout the northern 

counties average withdrawals during 2008 were 32 Mgal/d, 

nearly 30 percent greater than those in the southern counties (table 3, fig. 22A). Combined withdrawals from the 

northern counties peaked from 1981 to 1984 (approximately 

47 Mgal/d); from 1984 to 2000, withdrawals generally 

decreased in successive years with the largest reductions 

occurring during 1988–89. A marked increase occurred during 

2001 when withdrawals were 17 percent greater than during 

the previous year. Withdrawals decreased again by 2003 and 

were followed by modest increases in 2005 and 2007. In the 

southern counties, water withdrawals generally were stable 

(approximately 30–32 Mgal/d) from 1978 through 1995; in 

1996 withdrawals decreased to 27 Mgal/d, or by 16 percent, 

from the year prior. Mandatory restrictions on withdrawals 

from the Upper PRM aquifer further reduced these amounts, 

and from 1997 to 2008, withdrawals ranged from 23 to 

27 Mgal/d. Average withdrawals during 2008 (23 Mgal/d) 

were at the low end of this range.

Water Levels

The potentiometric surface map for 2008 for the Upper 

PRM aquifer is shown on plate 7; supporting water-level data 

used to construct this map are provided in appendix 7. The 

dominant feature of the potentiometric surface is the extensive 

cone of depression that extends from the Raritan Bay in the 

northeastern part of the study area to Salem and Cumberland 

Counties in the southwest. The highest groundwater altitudes occurred in and near the outcrop area in eastern Mercer 

and Middlesex Counties; the lowest groundwater altitudes 

occurred in northern Ocean and central Camden Counties. Previous water-level studies documented low water levels extending into northern Delaware and eastern Maryland (Lacombe 

and Rosman, 2001; DePaul and others, 2009). Because of the 

unavailability of data during 2008, groundwater conditions in 

the Upper PRM aquifer in Delaware were not determined.

The regional cone of depression can be divided into two 

sub-regional segments, northeastern and southwestern segments. The northeastern sub-regional depression encompasses 

most of Ocean and Monmouth Counties. This cone of depression has expanded and deepened since the 2003 study as a 

result of continued increases in groundwater withdrawals. The 

well-defined center of the cone is beneath pumping centers 
46 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

EXPLANATION

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:24,000

Universal Transverse Mercator Projection, Zone 18, NAD 83

Aquifer outcrop area 

Northern limit of aquifer

Water withdrawal, in 

million gallons per year

1 – 99

100 – 199

200 – 299

300 – 399

!( Greater than 400

!(

!(

!(

!(

Critical area 1

Critical area 2

Critical area–From New Jersey 

 Department of Environmental 

 Protection (unpublished). 

 Boundaries are approximate 

 and should not be used for 

 regulatory compliance purposes

Dover

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone 

Harbor

Atlantic City

Point Pleasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

MONMOUTH

CUMBERLAND

HUNTERDON

MIDDLESEX

CAPE 

MAY

MERCER

SOMERSET

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

UNION

ESSEX

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

AT LANT IC

OCEA

N

DELAWARE

PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

DELAWARE

BAY

Dover

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone 

Harbor

Atlantic City

Point Pleasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

MONMOUTH

CUMBERLAND

HUNTERDON

MIDDLESEX

CAPE 

MAY

MERCER

SOMERSET

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

UNION

ESSEX

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

AT LANT IC

OCEA

N

DELAWARE

PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

DELAWARE

BAY

NEW YORK

RARITAN BAY

0 10 20 MILES 5

0 10 20 KILOMETERS 5

PHILADELPHIA

A. Upper 

PotomacRaritanMagothy 

aquifer

NEW YORK

RARITAN BAY

0 10 20 MILES 5

0 10 20 KILOMETERS 5

PHILADELPHIA

Dover

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone 

Harbor

Atlantic City

Point 

Pleasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

MONMOUTH

CUMBERLAND

HUNTERDON MIDDLESEX

CAPE

 MAY

MERCER

SOMERSET

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

UNION

ESSEX

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

AT LANT IC

OCEA

N

DELAWARE

PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

DELAWARE

BAY

NEW YORK

RARITAN BAY

0 10 20 MILES 5

0 10 20 KILOMETERS 5

PHILADELPHIA

B. Middle

PotomacRaritanMagothy 

aquifer

C. Lower

PotomacRaritanMagothy 

aquifer

Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, and C, the Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008.

Figure 21. Location and volume of groundwater withdrawals from A, the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, B, the Middle 
Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer System 47

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

100

80

60

40

20

0

Water withdrawals, in million gallons per day

EXPLANATION

Northern counties

Southern counties

100

80

40

20

0

100

60

80

60

40

20

0

A

B

C

Magothy aquifer, and C, the Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008. (Thin vertical bars denote 

5-yr data collection periods)

Figure 22. Estimated groundwater withdrawals from A, the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, B, the Middle Potomac-Raritanin Manchester and Toms River Townships and Lakehurst 

Borough; groundwater altitudes in this area ranged from -81 to 

-95 ft. Lateral hydraulic gradients are steeper on the updip side 

of this cone (because of proximity to recharge at and near the 

outcrop) than on the downdip side; therefore, hydraulic stress 

extends eastward and beneath the Barnegat Bay, encompassing pumping centers on the barrier island from Mantoloking 

to Seaside Heights. Moreover, despite constant or decreasing 

withdrawals on the barrier islands, water levels were generally lower than in 2003 and likely were affected by increases 

in groundwater withdrawals to the west. The small, localized 

cone near Seaside Heights has deepened, and water levels 

throughout the barrier islands declined by 6 ft to as much as 

15 ft. Approximately 15 mi to the southwest, the water level 

in well 5-1391 declined by nearly 10 ft to -35 ft, and the area 

of aquifer encompassed by the -30 ft potentiometric contour 

became contiguous with that in southern New Jersey.

Elsewhere throughout the northern counties, water levels 

ranged from -37 to 76 ft with high altitudes near the outcrop in 

Mercer and Middlesex Counties and low altitudes at the center 

of a localized depression near Asbury Park. Such localized 

depressions were more common in the potentiometric surfaces during previous studies; however, owing to rising water 

levels in central and northern Monmouth County coupled with 

declining water levels in southern Monmouth and northern 

Ocean Counties, such depressions are no longer evident.

The southern segment of the regional cone of depression encompasses much of Burlington, Camden, Gloucester, 

and eastern Salem Counties. In areas where data are sparse or 

absent, simulated potentiometric contours by Voronin (2004) 

were adapted to close the contours on the downdip edge of 

the regional cone. Groundwater-level altitudes in this segment ranged from highs of 0–19 ft in extreme updip areas of 

Burlington and Salem Counties to lows of -70 to -91 ft at and 
48 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

near the center of the cone in Berlin, Pine Hill, and Clementon 

in Camden County and Medford Lakes in Burlington County. 

From 2003 to 2008, water levels in this central segment, in 

general, remained stable or had recovered modestly; however, 

water levels at the center of the cone were as much as 16 ft 

higher in 2008.

Water-level differences between the Upper and Middle 

PRM aquifers are generally small to moderate near the outcrop 

and to about 8 mi downdip, ranging from near neutral to 

approximately 20 ft and indicating the potential for downward 

flow out of the Upper PRM aquifer. Vertical head differences 

in the southwest in Salem County are locally as much as 30 ft 

along the Delaware River and, in the northeast within and 

along the outcrop of the Magothy Formation in Middlesex 

and western Monmouth Counties, range from 20 ft to as much 

as 50 ft above the potentiometric low in the Middle PRM 

aquifer. The potential for downward flow from the outcrop 

to the underlying Middle aquifer is greatest in this area, and 

the natural flow patterns have been altered such that recharge 

to the Middle aquifer is enhanced, reducing the volume of 

groundwater in the Upper aquifer that formerly flowed to 

the south and east. Because of the reduction of groundwater 

flow in the Upper aquifer, coupled with the loss of upward 

discharge beneath the Raritan Bay from both the Upper and 

Middle PRM aquifers, refreshening of the aquifer in the Union 

Beach area cannot progress. In eastern Monmouth County, the 

vertical gradient reverses; groundwater altitudes in the Upper 

PRM aquifer are as much as 25 feet lower than in the underlying Middle PRM aquifer in the Red Bank, Monmouth County, 

and area. In north-central Ocean County within the cone of 

depression near Lakehurst, vertical head differences between 

the Upper and Middle aquifers increase to nearly 70 ft, and the 

potential for vertical flow is upward into the Upper PRM. In 

southern New Jersey, near the cone of depression in Camden 

and Burlington Counties, vertical head differences range from 

10 to 20 ft, and flow is upward from the Middle aquifer. To the 

south and southeast (downdip) from the cone of depression, 

vertical head differences are uncertain owing to the limited 

amount of data in these areas.

Vertical head differences between the Upper PRM aquifer 

and the Englishtown aquifer system are substantially greater 

than those between the Upper and Middle PRM aquifers. Head 

differences and potential for downward flow into the aquifer 

are greatest in updip and mid-dip areas. Estimated vertical 

head differences in 2008 were as much as 104 ft in Camden, 

117 ft in Western Monmouth, and 115 ft in northwestern 

Ocean County. In eastern Monmouth and northeastern Ocean 

County, however, groundwater altitudes are higher in the 

Upper PRM than in the Englishtown aquifer system. Despite 

differences of more than 40 ft between the Upper PRM and 

the Englishtown aquifer system beneath the cone of depression in eastern Monmouth and Ocean Counties, upward flow 

is probably limited because of the thickness and low permeability of the overlying Merchantville-Woodbury confining 

unit (Martin, 1998).

The mapped difference in the potentiometric surfaces 

of the Upper PRM aquifer from 2003 to 2008 is shown in 

figure 23A. Of 182 wells measured in 2003 and 2008, water 

levels declined in 110 (60 percent) wells in 2008; declines 

of 5 ft or greater were observed in 50 wells (27 percent) 

and declines of 10 ft or more in 21 wells (12 percent). In 

contrast, water levels rose in 61 wells (34 percent); rises of 

5 ft or greater were observed in 27 wells (15 percent), and 

rises of 10 ft or more were observed in 6 wells (3 percent). 

Water levels remained about the same in 11 wells (6 percent). 

Results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicate that, on an 

aquifer-wide basis, water levels were statistically lower in 

2008 than in 2003 (appendix 10-2). When grouped by county, 

this relation held for Monmouth, Ocean, and Salem Counties 

but was strongest for Monmouth and Ocean, providing further 

evidence of declining groundwater levels in these areas as 

shown in figure 23A. In Burlington, Gloucester, and Middlesex Counties, differences in water levels from 2003 to 2008 

are not significant; however, differences in Camden County 

were substantially higher. Similarly, water levels, grouped 

according to management area, declined in Critical Area 1 but 

recovered in Critical Area 2. For the 10-year period, significant declines occurred in Critical Area 1, as well as in the subregional group of Middlesex, Monmouth, and Ocean Counties. 

Water-level increases occurred in Critical Area 2, as well as in 

the sub-regional group of Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester 

Counties.

Results of the Mann-Kendall trend analysis are listed 

in appendix 10-1; supporting water-level hydrographs for 

the northern and southern counties are shown in figures 24

and 25, respectively. In the northern counties, water levels 

followed an upward trend from 2003 to 2008 at two wells 

(23-292 and 23-228). Trends were insignificant at 3 wells 

(23-351 25-206, 25-316), and a downward trend was observed 

at 1 well (25-639). Observation well 25-639 is located in 

southern Monmouth County at the northern edge of the 

expanding sub-regional depression. In the southern counties, 

upward trends from 2003 to 2008 were observed at 2 wells 

(5-258 and 7-117), and insubstantial trends were observed at 

2 wells (7-477 and 15-741). Downward trends were observed 

at two wells (15-728 and 33-253); both are located beyond 

the boundary of Critical Area 2. Downward trends for wells 

in the southern counties, though statistically significant, were 

generally small with annual rates of decline of less than 0.6 ft 

that are sometimes difficult to see graphically. The absence 

of nearby withdrawals and the lack of distinct seasonality in 

water levels in well 33-253, much like those in observation 

wells in Delaware, indicate regional influences from withdrawals and sustained head declines in adjacent aquifers on 

both sides of the Delaware Bay (DePaul and others, 2009).

From 1998 to 2008, for observation wells in the northern counties, trends were similar to those observed during 

the 5-year period; trends were upward in 2 wells (23-228 and 

23-292), insignificant in 3 wells (23-351, 25-206, and 25-316), 

and downward in well 25-639 along the periphery of the cone 
Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer System 49

EXPLANATION

Decline, in feet

Greater than or equal to 60

40 – <60

20 – <40

10 – <20

>5 – <10

No substantial change

Recovery, in feet

Greater than or equal to 40

20 – <40

10 – <20 

>5 – <10 

-5 – +5

Aquifer outcrop area 

Northern limit of aquifer

CRITICAL AREA—From New Jersey 

Department of Environmental Protectionm 

(unpublished). Boundaries are approximate 

and should not be used for regulatory 

compliance purposes.

Critical Area 1

Critical Area 2

<, less than

>, greater than

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:24,000

Universal Transverse Mercator Projection, Zone 18, NAD 83

Dover

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone 

Harbor

Atlantic City

Point Pleasant

Barnegat Light

Dover

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone 

Harbor

Atlantic City

Point Pleasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

MONMOUTH

CUMBERLAND

HUNTERDON

MIDDLESEX

CAPE 

MAY

MERCER

SOMERSET

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

UNION

ESSEX

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

MONMOUTH

CUMBERLAND

HUNTERDON

MIDDLESEX

CAPE 

MAY

MERCER

SOMERSET

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

UNION

ESSEX

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

AT LANT IC

OCEA

N

DELAWARE PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

AT LANT IC

OCEA

N

DELAWARE PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

DELAWARE

BAY DELAWARE

BAY

AT LANT IC

OCEA

N

DELAWARE PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

DELAWARE

BAY

Dover

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone 

Harbor

Atlantic City

Point Pleasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

MONMOUTH

CUMBERLAND

HUNTERDON

MIDDLESEX

CAPE 

MAY

MERCER

SOMERSET

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

UNION

ESSEX

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

A. Upper 

PotomacRaritanMagothy 

aquifer

NEW YORK

RARITAN BAY

0 5 10 20 MILES

0 5 10 20 KILOMETERS

PHILADELPHIA

C. Lower

PotomacRaritanMagothy 

aquifer

B. Middle 

PotomacRaritanMagothy 

aquifer

NEW YORK

RARITAN BAY

0 5 10 20 MILES

0 5 10 20 KILOMETERS

PHILADELPHIA

NEW YORK

RARITAN BAY

0 5 10 20 MILES

0 5 10 20 KILOMETERS

PHILADELPHIA

Figure 23. Groundwater-level changes in the A, Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, B, Middle Potomac-Raritan-Magothy 

aquifer, and C, Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2003–8.
50 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

Missing 

data

Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29

0

-10

-20

-30

50

40

30

20

10

90

80

70

60

-10

-20

-30

-40

10

0

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

25-206

25-316

23-228

23-292

23-351

25-639

the northern counties, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008. (All hydrographs are at the same scale; vertical bars denote 5-yr data 

collection cycles; well locations shown on pl. 7)

Figure 24. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer in 
Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer System 51

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

-40

-70

-80

-50

-60

-90

-100

-20

-50

-60

-30

-40

5

0

-25

-35

-5

-15

-10

-20

-30

-70

-80

-110

7-117

7-477

5-258

15-741

33-253

15-728

Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

the southern counties, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008. (All hydrographs are at the same scale; vertical bars denote 5-yr data 

collection cycles; well locations shown on pl. 7)

Figure 25. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer in 
52 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

of depression. For observation wells in the southern counties, 

trends were upward at four wells (5-258, 7-117, 7-477, and 

15-741). The 10-year trend at well 15-728 was considered 

insignificant; a downward trend was indicated for well 33-253.

In the northern Coastal Plain counties from 1978 to 2008 

upward water-level trends were observed at 3 wells (23-292, 

25-206 and 25-316), and water-level change was insubstantial at 3 wells (23-228, 23-351, and 25-639) (app. 10-1). The 

upward trend at well 25-206 was attained largely through a 

substantial rise in water levels during 1990–92, which corresponds to the cessation of withdrawals from the aquifer. In the 

southern counties, upward trends in water levels were determined for four wells (same as those for the 10-year period); 

rates of recovery ranged from 0.36 to 1.13 ft/yr. Results also 

indicate slightly increasing water levels in well 15-728; however, the annual rate of recovery was considered insubstantial. 

The highest annual rates of recovery coincided with the steepest lateral hydraulic gradients on the updip side of the regional 

cone of depression; annual rates of recovery were lower on the 

northern and downdip sides of the depression. A downward 

trend was observed for well 33-253 for the 30-year period; the 

net change in the water level in this well was 9 ft.

Middle Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer

Water Withdrawals

Groundwater withdrawals from the Middle and undifferentiated PRM aquifer occurred throughout its extent from 

the Raritan Bay to Salem County. Primary pumping centers in 

the aquifer’s northern extent are located in eastern Middlesex, 

northern Monmouth, and northern Ocean Counties and, in the 

south, Burlington, Camden, Gloucester, and Salem Counties. 

The distribution of withdrawals is similar to that in the Upper 

PRM aquifer in that withdrawals are made in the updip and 

mid-dip areas of the aquifer throughout the northern counties 

of New Jersey, but withdrawals are confined to a relatively 

narrow band extending from the outcrop to approximately 

8 mi downdip in the southern counties (fig. 21B). Beyond this 

limit, the presence of elevated concentrations of dissolved 

solids in the groundwater inhibits development of the aquifer.

Groundwater withdrawals from the Middle PRM aquifer 

from 1978 to 2008 ranged from 61 to 84 Mgal/d (fig. 22B). 

Withdrawals peaked during the early 1980s, but from 1984 to 

2000, withdrawals were reduced by 18 Mgal/d (22 percent) 

as a result of mandated Critical Area cutbacks. From 2001 to 

2005, however, withdrawals increased by 13 percent. By 2008 

average withdrawals throughout the aquifer declined again, 

and the reported withdrawals of nearly 65 Mgal/d represent 

a 6-percent decrease from 2003, the year of the last regional 

water-level study (table 3).

In the northern counties of New Jersey, average withdrawals ranged from 26 to 43 Mgal/d from 1978 to 2008. 

Withdrawals generally decreased during 1980–96; Critical 

Area restrictions triggered notable single-year reductions from 

1988 to 1989 and again from 1991 to 1992. From 1997 to 

2002, withdrawals again increased and by 2005 were approximately 34 Mgal/d. Withdrawals across the northern counties 

subsequently declined and in 2008 were at 32 Mgal/d, nearly 

1 Mgal/d greater than the 2003 withdrawals. In the northern 

counties in 2008, average groundwater withdrawals were 

greatest in Mercer County (9 Mgal/d), followed by Middlesex, 

Monmouth, and Ocean Counties at 8.4, 7.3, and 7.0 Mgal/d, 

respectively (table 3). Historically, withdrawals among the 

northern counties were greatest in Middlesex County and, at 

their maximum in 1980, exceeded 15 Mgal/d. Declining water 

levels and saltwater encroachment along tidal reaches of the 

Raritan River and its tributaries led to the systematic reduction 

of withdrawals in this area, and by 1990, average withdrawals 

were approximately 8 Mgal/d. Since 1991, however, average withdrawals throughout Middlesex County increased and 

receded during successive short 1- to 3-year periods. During 

1998–2008, average withdrawals in Middlesex County peaked 

in 2004 at 11.2 Mgal/d, but withdrawals decreased during 

2005–8. In Ocean County, average withdrawals decreased 

by approximately 7.2 Mgal/d or 58 percent during 1980–98; 

thereafter, average withdrawals ranged from 6 to 8 Mgal/d. 

Withdrawals in Monmouth County followed a similar trend 

with the smallest annual volumes withdrawn during 1992–97. 

Withdrawals increased slightly in 1998 and, from 1999 to 

2000, ranged from 5.7 to 7.3 Mgal/d. In comparison, withdrawals from the aquifer in Mercer County were relatively 

constant during the 1980s, ranging from 7 to 8 Mgal/d, 

increased in 1991, and stabilized through the early 2000s until 

peaking in 2007 at 9.5 Mgal/d.

Withdrawals from the aquifer in the southern counties 

were slightly greater on average than those in northern counties during 1978–2008. Average groundwater withdrawals in 

the southern counties ranged from 33.3 to 46.1 Mgal/d during 

the 30-period. Groundwater withdrawals in the combined 

southern counties peaked in 1983, decreased by nearly 

9 Mgal/d to 37 Mgal/d in 1984 and were relatively constant 

from 1986 to 2007, alternately increasing or decreasing in any 

given year by 1 to 10 percent. Average withdrawals in 2008 

of approximately 33 Mgal/d were at their lowest levels since 

1978. Withdrawals from the aquifer in southern New Jersey 

were greatest in Burlington County and least in Salem County.

Water Levels

Water-level data from 173 wells open to the Middle and 

undifferentiated PRM aquifer are provided in appendix 8; the 

2008 potentiometric surface is shown on plate 8. The highest groundwater-level altitudes in the Middle PRM aquifer 

occurred near the updip limit in Mercer and Middlesex 

County, New Jersey. This potentiometric high coincides with 

groundwater highs in the overlying Upper PRM aquifer and is 

where the aquifer historically received most of the recharge. 

The lowest groundwater-level altitudes occurred in central 

Camden County where they are associated with the longterm regional cone of depression and in southwestern Salem 

County, adjacent to the Delaware Estuary. The major feature 
Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer System 53

of the potentiometric surface is the regionally extensive cone 

of depression that encompasses much of the study area and 

extends from the Raritan Bay in the northeast to Salem in 

the southwest. Much like the regional cone of depression in 

the Upper PRM aquifer, several discrete sub-regional cones 

or areas of low potentiometric head are present within the 

northern, north-central, central, and southwestern parts of the 

larger cone.

The northern segment underlies eastern Middlesex 

County and part of northwestern Monmouth County in New 

Jersey and is within Critical Area 1. Groundwater altitudes in 

the northern segment of the regional cone ranged from -11 ft 

(well 23-194) to -36 ft (well 25-545) in 2008; water levels 

were lowest along the Raritan Bay front and inland and south 

to about 6 mi. Groundwater altitudes increased toward the 

outcrop because of topographic influences. The north-central 

area of the regional cone of depression includes much of 

southeastern Monmouth County and is within Critical Area 1. 

Groundwater altitudes in this segment ranged from -11 to 

-33 ft (wells 23-194 and 25-272); lowest altitudes occurred 

near pumping centers in and around Freehold, with groundwater altitudes increasing to the north and west.

The central segment of the regional cone of depression underlies a broad area of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 

extending from Ocean County southwest to Gloucester County 

and eastward to Atlantic County; it includes substantial parts 

of Burlington and Camden Counties. Water-level altitudes in 

this segment ranged from 0 ft to -66 ft; the lowest water levels 

were observed in central Camden County and in the vicinity 

of Marlton in Burlington County. The shape and orientation 

of the cone of depression is similar to that in the overlying 

Upper PRM aquifer, though groundwater altitudes generally 

were higher in the Middle aquifer near its center and on the 

downdip side, indicating the potential for upward flow out of 

the aquifer. Lateral hydraulic gradients on the updip side of 

the cone of depression of nearly 8 ft/mi are steeper than those 

in either the Upper or Lower aquifers, although at 1 to 2 ft/mi 

on the downdip side, the gradients are similar to those of the 

Upper aquifer and slightly less than those of the Lower aquifer. Large areas of low hydraulic head are present in central 

Camden County despite the absence of withdrawals from the 

Middle aquifer; substantial withdrawals from both the Upper 

aquifer and the underlying Lower PRM aquifer likely induce 

leakage through adjacent confining layers, contributing to the 

depth of the cone of depression here. Near the southeastern 

edge of this central segment, depths to the top of the aquifer 

are considerable, and the groundwater is highly mineralized; 

consequently, few wells are open to the aquifer. Observation 

well 11-137 in eastern Cumberland County, New Jersey, is 

the farthest downdip well open to the aquifer included in this 

study; total dissolved solids in the groundwater are such that 

the density of the groundwater is substantially greater than 

fresher waters within other parts of the aquifer. Correcting for 

density, the measured groundwater altitude of -52 ft yields 

a freshwater equivalent of -29 ft. In northern Ocean County, 

at the northeastern edge of this segment, water levels ranged 

from -16 ft (well 29-626) to -39 ft (well 29-576); the lowest water levels were measured at or near production wells 

throughout Jackson Township.

The southwestern segment of the regional cone of depression encompasses Salem County in New Jersey and most of 

New Castle County in Delaware. Groundwater altitudes in 

Salem County ranged from -20 ft (wells 33-305 and 33-166) 

to -75 ft (well 33-934). Groundwater altitudes were estimated 

to be highest in the south-central part of Salem County, and 

measured water levels were lowest along the Delaware River 

and estuary where localized cones of depression are present in 

Pennsville and on Artificial Island. Previous studies documented potentiometric lows extending beneath the Delaware Bay and into northern Delaware and eastern Maryland 

(Lacombe and Rosman, 2001; DePaul and others, 2009). 

Water-level data for a comparable time period were not available, and groundwater conditions could not be determined.

Water-level differences were small to moderate near the 

outcrop of the Middle aquifer and to about 8 mi downdip; 

higher groundwater altitudes in the Middle aquifer indicate a 

weak downward vertical gradient and the potential for flow 

into the Lower aquifer. Despite the relatively small vertical 

head differences between the two aquifers, flow rates between 

the two may be substantial owing to high leakance of the 

intervening confining unit (Martin, 1998). On the downdip 

side of the cone of depression, estimated heads may be higher 

in the Lower aquifer than in the Middle aquifer, by as much as 

15 ft, indicating the potential for upward flow into the Middle 

PRM aquifer. Water-level differences between the Upper PRM 

aquifer and Middle PRM aquifer are presented in detail in 

the previous section. In brief, a downward hydraulic gradient is present from the Upper to the Middle PRM aquifer in 

most places along, and for short distances downdip from, the 

western boundary of the Upper PRM aquifer. In parts of Monmouth and north-central Ocean County where the Upper PRM 

aquifer is stressed, the potential for flow is upward through the 

top of the Middle aquifer. In southern New Jersey, within the 

regional cone of depression, flow is generally upward through 

the top of the Middle aquifer.

The 5-year change in water levels in the Middle PRM 

aquifer is shown in figure 23B. Of 151 wells measured in both 

2003 and 2008, water levels declined in 71 (47 percent) wells 

in 2008. Declines of 5 ft or greater were observed in 15 wells 

(10 percent) and of 10 ft or more in only 3 wells. In contrast, 

water levels recovered in 63 wells (42 percent); rises of 5 ft 

or greater were observed in 29 wells and of 10 ft or greater in 

5 wells (19 percent). Water levels remained about the same in 

17 wells (11 percent). Stable or rising water levels were most 

often associated with the regional cone of depression in Critical Area 2 but were also observed throughout eastern Middlesex and northern Monmouth Counties. Moderate declines were 

observed in central Monmouth and northern Ocean Counties 

and in updip areas of Burlington, Gloucester, and Salem Counties, beyond the boundary of Critical Area 2.

Groundwater levels in northern Ocean and southern 

Monmouth Counties were generally at or slightly below those 
54 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

observed during 2003 with declines of 1 to 6 ft typical. In 

northwestern Monmouth County groundwater levels declined 

by 5 to 10 ft since 2003, but near the Raritan Bay and in updip 

sections in Middlesex County, water levels were stable or had 

recovered. Near the Raritan and South Rivers, water levels 

showed modest to substantial recovery, ranging from 2 to 8 ft, 

as a result of continued reduction in groundwater withdrawals. Semi-annual water-level data collected from observation 

wells in this area confirm small to moderate rises from 2003 to 

2008 (U.S Geological Survey, 2010). Mapped recovery near 

the Raritan Bay in Sayreville (greater than 20 ft) was based on 

observations at a single well (23-401); however, a review of 

reported static water-level measurements from nearby production wells during this period indicated rises of at least as much. 

Such large differences may be an artifact of residual pumping 

effects during the earlier measurement period; however, rising 

groundwater levels are likely because withdrawals from the 

Middle aquifer were discontinued in this area by 2004, and 

those from the Upper aquifer were minor.

In the central segment and within Critical Area 2, small to 

moderate recovery of water levels was observed in most wells 

(range of 2–11 ft), except for scattered wells located along 

the updip side of the cone and beyond the depleted zone of 

Critical Area 2. Although withdrawals typically decreased and 

water levels recovered throughout much of the area, withdrawals at individual wells or small groups of wells have increased 

since 2003 as a result of temporal and spatial shifts in local 

pumping patterns, resulting in local declines in groundwater 

levels. Near the center of the cone of depression, water levels 

rose 3 to 8 ft in 10 wells and were unchanged in 3 wells. 

On the downdip side of the cone, water levels recovered 

slightly. Adjacent to the outcrop in and around Camden, N.J., 

unchanged water levels or rises of 2 to 4 ft were most common, although combined withdrawals from the Middle and 

Lower aquifers remained at 2003 volumes. In eastern Cumberland County, far from withdrawal centers, the water level in 

well 11-137 did not change. Within the southwestern segment 

of the cone, water levels declined 1 to 5 ft throughout southern 

Gloucester County and central Salem County.

Results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicate that, 

from 2003 to 2008, the differences in water levels between 

paired measurements throughout the aquifer were not significant (app. 10-2). A similar result was calculated for paired 

measurements from Critical Area 1; however, within Critical Area 2, a significant increase was observed. Significant 

increases are also indicated for Camden and Middlesex 

Counties and significant decreases for Gloucester and Salem 

Counties. Water levels in Monmouth, Ocean, Burlington, and 

Mercer Counties did not appreciably change. For the period 

1998 to 2008, a statistically significant rise in water levels was 

observed in the study area as a whole, as well as in Critical 

Area 2; however, differences between paired measurements 

were not significant throughout Critical Area 1. Results 

indicate significant increases in water levels in Burlington 

and Gloucester Counties, significant decreases in water levels 

throughout Monmouth and Salem Counties, and no significant 

difference in the paired measurements for Camden, Middlesex, and Ocean Counties.

Water-level hydrographs for seven wells screened in 

the Middle and undifferentiated aquifer of the PRM aquifer 

system in the northern counties of New Jersey are shown in 

figure 26; well locations are shown on plate 8. From 2003 to 

2008, statistically significant downward trends in water levels 

were detected at wells 29-19 and 29-85 (app. 10-1). Changes 

were subtle, at -0.28 ft/yr at well 29-19 and -0.38 ft/yr at 

well 29-85 and were, in part, responses to the increased 

withdrawals and the deepening cone of depression within the 

Upper PRM aquifer. Water levels in wells 25-635 and 23-291 

showed no significant change during this period; however, 

trend test results indicated a significant rise in the water level 

in well 25-272. Limited water-level data during targeted periods precluded a statistical analysis of wells 23-97, 23-273, and 

23-439. During 1998–2008, downward trends were detected 

at three observation wells (29-19, 29-85, and 25-635), and 

an upward trend was detected at well 23-291. No significant 

upward or downward trends were observed at well 25-272. 

The water level in observation well 29-19 declined during 

this period. Although results of the Mann-Kendall produced 

a p-value of less than 0.001 for well 29-19, the annual rate 

of decline was less than 0.2 ft and, therefore, was considered 

unimportant for the purposes of this discussion. During the 

30-year period, 1978–2008, upward trends were detected 

at five wells (23-291, 23-439, 25-272, 25-635, and 29-85); 

neither an upward nor a downward trend was determined for 

well 29-19.

Groundwater hydrographs for 10 wells open to the 

Middle aquifer and the undifferentiated part of the PRM aquifer system in southern counties of New Jersey are shown in 

figure 27; observation well locations are shown on plate 8. For 

the southern counties from 2003 to 2008, upward trends were 

indicated for 6 wells, and downward trends were indicated 

for 3 wells. The geographic patterns of both downward and 

upward trends are consistent with observations based on the 

water-level-change maps. Upward trends were detected at 

observation wells within the depleted zone of Critical Area 2, 

and downward trends were detected beyond the Critical Area 2 

boundary and to the southwest in Gloucester and Salem Counties. Seasonal water-level fluctuations and the annual rate 

of recovery were greatest at wells nearest the cone’s center 

(7-413 and 5-261) and more temperate on the northern and 

southeastern sides of the cone. Annual rates of decline were 

highest in mid-dip areas in Salem County (wells 33-187 and 

33-251) and moderate in updip areas of Gloucester County. 

The wider seasonal fluctuations observed in well 33-187 show 

the effects of nearby production wells at Woodstown; the 

absence of distinct seasonality in water levels in wells 11-137 

and 33-251 illustrate long-term regional trends that are not 

dominated by the effects of local withdrawals.
Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer System 55

Missing 

data

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

10

0

-10

-20

-30

-40

-50

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

0

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100

29-19

25-635

23-439

25-272

23-291

23-273

29-85

Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

Middle aquifer

Middle aquifer

Undifferentiated aquifer

Figure 26. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the Middle and undifferentiated Potomac-RaritanMagothy aquifer in the northern counties, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008. (All hydrographs are at the same scale; vertical bars 

denote 5-yr data collection cycles; well locations shown on pl. 8)
56 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

-10

-20

-30

-40

-50

-60

-10

-20

-30

-40

-50

-60

-70

-80

-90

-100

10

0

-10

-20

-30

-40

11-137

5-683

7-476

15-713

5-63

5-440

33-251

33-187

5-261

7-413

Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

Middle aquifer

Middle aquifer

Undifferentiated aquifer

Figure 27. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the Middle and undifferentiated Potomac-RaritanMagothy aquifer in the southern counties, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008. (All hydrographs are at the same scale; well 11-37 

corrected for density; vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection cycles; well locations shown on pl. 8)
Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer System 57

Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer

Water Withdrawals

Groundwater withdrawals from the Lower PRM aquifer 

in New Jersey were made predominantly in areas adjacent to 

the Delaware River, with most (approximately 24.4 Mgal/d 

or 66 percent) in Camden County (table 3). Most withdrawals were made in the northwestern part of the county near the 

eastern bank of the Delaware River, although pumping centers 

are located as far as 11 mi downdip in the central part of the 

county (fig. 21C). Substantial withdrawals (9.5 Mgal/d) were 

made in Burlington County along the Camden border and 

near the northern limit of the aquifer. In Salem and Gloucester Counties, withdrawals were made in the extreme updip 

parts of the aquifer owing to the presence of saline water in 

downdip areas. Groundwater withdrawals from the aquifer 

in Delaware were most common within or near the outcrop 

area of the Potomac Formation; however, production wells are 

also located in downdip areas adjacent to the Delaware River 

(Delaware City).

From 1978 to 2008, average withdrawals from the 

Lower PRM aquifer ranged from 37 to 75 Mgal/d (fig. 22C). 

Withdrawals peaked in the early and mid-1980s; thereafter, 

withdrawals generally decreased until 2000 and, from 2000 to 

2005, remained constant at approximately 38 to 40 Mgal/d. 

In 2006, groundwater withdrawals were further reduced by 

1 Mgal/d to 37 Mgal/d. In 2008, average withdrawals were 

37 Mgal/d with 66 percent occurring in Camden County. In 

Camden County, most withdrawals were made by the Camden City Water Department (United Water Camden), the 

Merchantville-Pennsauken Water Commission, and New 

Jersey American Water; together these utilities accounted for 

78 percent of withdrawals in the county during 2008.

Trends in withdrawals throughout Camden and Gloucester Counties were similar to regional trends, and although the 

percentage of reductions was higher in Gloucester County, 

reductions in volume were much greater in Camden County. 

Reductions of 20 percent or greater from the previous year 

occurred in 1989, 1991, 2000, and 2006 in Gloucester County; 

in Camden County, reductions of 10 percent or greater 

occurred in 1986, 1989, 1993, 1996, and 2006. In Burlington 

County, withdrawals generally increased from 1978 through 

1990, and during the ensuing decade withdrawals were relatively constant, ranging from 8 to 10 Mgal/d. During 2001–4 

withdrawals nominally decreased, and during 2005–8, withdrawals increased by nearly 30 percent. These large increases 

were associated with the city of Camden wells located along, 

but just beyond, the boundary of Critical Area 2. In Salem 

County, withdrawals were limited because of the widespread 

presence of saline groundwater. Withdrawals were relatively 

small at approximately 1 Mgal/d from 1982 to 2006, although 

withdrawals in Salem County peaked during the early 1990s 

at nearly 1.5 Mgal/d. Notable reductions in withdrawals (20 

percent or greater) from any given year to the next occurred 

during 1985, 1994, 2000, and 2007.

Withdrawals from the aquifer in Delaware ranged from 

approximately 3.5 to more than 8 Mgal/d during 1978–2001 

and peaked during 1999–2001 (DePaul and others, 2009). 

Recent data (2002–8) for this aquifer in Delaware were not 

tabulated for this study.

Water Levels

The potentiometric surface map for fall and early winter 

2008 for the Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer is 

shown on plate 9; water-level data used to construct this map 

are listed in appendix 9. Most of the water-level measurements 

were made at wells located within New Jersey (80); 8 wells 

in Delaware and 3 in Pennsylvania were included. Despite 

the limited availability of water-level data, interpretation of 

the potentiometric surface was extended into northeastern 

Delaware, given the lateral flow beneath the bay and the effect 

of long-term withdrawals in Delaware on low water levels 

observed in southwestern New Jersey In addition, the cone of 

depression in Delaware historically has been well documented 

and mapped.

The configuration of the potentiometric surface in New 

Jersey is a generally ovate depression, slightly elongated from 

northeast to southwest along strike and centered beneath the 

Camden County community of Gibbsboro. The location and 

configuration of the cone of depression are similar to those 

in the overlying Middle and Upper PRM aquifers, though the 

Lower aquifer is shallower at its center and slightly updip 

from the Middle aquifer. Lateral hydraulic gradients on the 

updip side of the cone of approximately 8 ft/mi are similar to 

those of the Middle aquifer along the same hydrogeologic section; the estimated lateral gradient of 2.5 ft/mi on the downdip 

side is slightly greater than that of the Middle aquifer.

During 2008, water-level altitudes ranged from 4 ft 

to -66 ft throughout southern New Jersey. Throughout the 

aquifer, groundwater altitudes typically were at or below 0 ft; 

water levels greater than 0 ft occurred adjacent to the Delaware River along the northwestern boundary of the aquifer 

in Burlington County and immediately adjacent to the updip 

boundary in New Castle County, Del. The lowest water levels 

were observed in central Camden County. The general direction of lateral groundwater flow is dominated by the large 

cone of depression in central Camden and is similar to that in 

the southern extents of the Upper and Middle PRM aquifers; 

flow moves radially from the updip and downdip margins of 

the aquifer toward potentiometric lows at pumping centers. A 

groundwater divide is present approximately along the border 

between Gloucester and Salem Counties; beyond this divide, 

groundwater flow is to the southwest and beneath the Delaware Bay toward the regional cone of depression in Delaware. 

Water-level differences between the Middle and Lower PRM 

aquifers are discussed in the previous section, which describes 

water levels within the Middle PRM aquifer in detail.

The 5-year change in water levels in the Lower PRM 

aquifer is shown in figure 23C. Of the 84 wells measured 

in both 2003 and 2008, water levels in 2008 were lower in 
58 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

22 of the wells (26 percent); however, all declines in New 

Jersey were typically less than 5 ft (water levels in one well in 

Delaware declined by 6 ft) and are represented as no substantial change in figure 23C. Water levels increased in 54 wells 

(64 percent) and remained the same in 8 (10 percent). Water 

levels increased in 12 wells by more than 5 ft relative to 2003; 

these changes occurred primarily in wells in north-central 

Camden County and southwestern Burlington County.

Results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicate increasing water levels from 2003 to 2008 in the Lower aquifer as a 

whole, in Critical Area 2, and in Camden County (app. 10-2). 

Test results indicate differences in water levels throughout 

Burlington and Gloucester Counties were insignificant likely 

because scattered, modest declines and rises within the aquifer 

offset one another. For 1998–2008, a statistically significant 

increase was observed in the aquifer as a whole, in Critical 

Area 2, and in Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester Counties.

Groundwater hydrographs for seven monitoring wells 

in southern New Jersey and northern Delaware are presented 

in figures 28 and 29; well locations are shown on plate 9. 

Results of the Mann Kendall trend test (app. 10-1) indicate 

that, from 2003 to 2008 upward trends were observed for four 

wells (5-262, 7-412, 15-671, and Dc34-05). A downward trend 

was indicated for 1 well (15-712), and water-level changes 

were insignificant for 2 wells. Much like recent trends in the 

Upper and Middle PRM aquifers, upward trends observed 

within Critical Area 2 were strongest for wells located nearest 

the center of the cone of depression. Water levels observed at 

Dc34-05, located within the outcrop of the Potomac Formation 

on the northeastern side of the cone of depression in east-central New Castle County, Del., followed a pattern similar to that 

observed in Db33-17. From 1984 to 2003, water levels in both 

wells, despite numerous brief periods of decline and recovery, 

generally did not change, and from 2003 to 2008, water levels 

recovered slightly. On the other hand, water levels in well 

Ec32-07, located on the southern side of the cone of depression, declined from the early 1980s through 2007, followed by 

rising water levels in 2008.

During 1998–2008, upward trends were indicated for 

3 wells (5-262, 7-412, and 15-671), a downward trend was 

indicated for 1 well (Ec32-07), and an insubstantial trend was 

indicated for well 15-712. For the 30-year period, water-level 

trends were upward for 4 wells, downward for 1 well, and 

insubstantial for 1 well (appendix 10-1).

Photograph was provided by U.S. Geological Survey field personnel
Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer System 59

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

-30

-40

-50

-60

-70

5

-5

-15

-25

0

-10

-20

-80

-40

-50

-60

-70

-80

-90

-30

-40

-50

-60

-70

-80

15-671

15-712

7-412

5-262

Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008. (All hydrographs are at the same scale; vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection cycles; well locations 

shown on pl. 9)

Figure 28. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New 
60 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Water-level altitude, in feet referenced to NGVD 29

-70

-80

-90

-100

-110

-20

-30

-40

-50

-60

-120

-100

-110

-50

-60

-70

-80

-90

1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Year

Ec32-07

Db33-17

Dc34-05

EXPLANATION

Water-level measurement

Continuous

Manual

Delaware Coastal Plain, 1978–2008. (All hydrographs are at the same scale; vertical bars denote 5-yr data collection cycles; well 

locations shown on pl. 9)

Figure 29. Water-level hydrographs for selected observation wells screened in the Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, 

Potentiometric Heads in Relation to the 

Tops of Aquifers

Withdrawals from confined aquifers can reduce the 

pressure head, resulting in a lowering of the potentiometric 

surface, but in most cases do not cause a dewatering of the 

aquifer. Desaturation of confined aquifers can lead to adverse 

effects, such as the compression of the aquifer materials 

(resulting in decreased porosity and hydraulic conductivity) 

and the deterioration of water quality by enhanced leakage through confining units of poor water quality, as well as 

through potential oxidation reactions with the aquifer matrix. 

In order to identify areas within selected confined aquifers that 

are potentially unsaturated, the altitudes of the 2008 potentiometric surfaces were compared to digital surfaces of the 

associated hydrogeologic unit-top altitudes. Raster datasets 

representing the differences between the two surfaces were 

created and contoured by using GIS software. The contours of 

the differences were then manually adjusted on the basis of the 

current understanding of the hydrogeologic framework of the 

Coastal Plain. Analyses were conducted for aquifers characterized by persistent potentiometric lows: the Atlantic City 

800-foot sand, the Piney Point aquifer, the Wenonah-Mount 

Laurel aquifer, the Englishtown aquifer system, and the Upper, 

Middle, and Lower aquifers of the PRM aquifer system. 

Selected analyses and maps (fig. 30) are provided for informative purposes only and are best not applied at a local scale. 

In the updip areas of the aquifers, the height of hydraulic 

head above the unit top approaches zero as distance from the 

outcrop decreases and is presumed to be at or near zero at the 

downdip edge of the outcrop. Given the presence of an unsaturated zone throughout much of the extent of the outcrops, this 

difference is expected to be less than zero within the outcrop, 

except at discharge points near lakes, streams, and major 

rivers. Because water-level measurements from wells at the 

downdip edges of the aquifer outcrops are generally not made 

during data-collection cycles, the density and configuration 

of available water-level data in these areas are not sufficient 

for substantive interpretation. In downdip areas of confined 

aquifers, however, a negative value would indicate that the 

potentiometric surface is below the unit top and thus, the 
Potentiometric Heads in Relation to the Tops of Aquifers 61

300

200

100

400

500 600

700

800 900 1000

50

50

EXPLANATION

Potentiometric head of less 

than or equal to -30 ft NGVD 29

Updip limit of aquifer

CRITICAL AREA—From New Jersey 

Department of Environmental Protectionm 

(unpublished). Boundaries are approximate 

and should not be used for regulatory 

compliance purposes.

Critical area 1

Critical area 2

300

350

400

450

500

550

600 650

250

700

850

750

200

800

150

100

900

950

50

250

900

Aquifer outcrop area 

Down dip limit of aquifer

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:24,000

Universal Transverse Mercator Projection, Zone 18, NAD 83

Dover

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone 

Harbor

Atlantic City

Point Pleasant

Barnegat Light

Dover

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone 

Harbor

Atlantic City

Point Pleasant

Barnegat Light

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

MONMOUTH

CUMBERLAND

HUNTERDON

MIDDLESEX

CAPE 

MAY

MERCER

SOMERSET

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

UNION

ESSEX

OCEAN

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

SALEM

MONMOUTH

CUMBERLAND

HUNTERDON

MIDDLESEX

CAPE 

MAY

MERCER

SOMERSET

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

UNION

ESSEX

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

AT LANT IC

OCEA

N

DELAWARE PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

AT LANT IC

OCEA

N

DELAWARE PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

OCEAN

SALEM

MONMOUTH

CUMBERLAND

HUNTERDON

MERCER

SOMERSET

UNION

ESSEX

150 100

200

300

400 500

50

600

700

800

900

700

100

600

50

50

50

DELAWARE

BAY DELAWARE

BAY

AT LANT IC

OCEA

N

DELAWARE PENNSYLVANIA

Fall line

DELAWARE

BAY

Dover

Trenton

Cape May

Bridgeton

Ocean City

Stone 

Harbor

Atlantic City

Point Pleasant

Barnegat Light

ATLANTIC

BURLINGTON

MIDDLESEX

CAPE 

MAY

GLOUCESTER

CAMDEN

75°30' 75° 74°30' 74°

40°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

A. Piney Point 

 aquifer

NEW YORK

RARITAN BAY

0 5 10 20 MILES

0 5 10 20 KILOMETERS

PHILADELPHIA

C. Englishtown

 aquifer system

B. WenonahMount Laurel 

aquifer

NEW YORK

RARITAN BAY

0 5 10 20 MILES

0 5 10 20 KILOMETERS

PHILADELPHIA

NEW YORK

RARITAN BAY

0 5 10 20 MILES

0 5 10 20 KILOMETERS

PHILADELPHIA

CONTOUR—shows difference, in feet, 

between the potentiometric surface 

and the top of aquifer. Contour interval

is variable

300

Figure 30. Available feet of potentiometric head above the top of the A, Piney Point aquifer, B, Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, and C, 

Englishtown aquifer system, central and southern New Jersey, 2008.
62 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

aquifer is potentially desaturated. On the basis of these comparisons, altitudes of selected 2008 potentiometric surfaces do 

not approach unit-top altitudes in areas away from outcrops. In 

areas of extreme potentiometric lows, such as the Piney Point 

aquifer in Cumberland County, the minimum available head 

above the top of the aquifer was approximately 50 ft where the 

cone of depression intersected the updip boundary, and available head averaged more than 150 ft throughout the deepest 

part of the cone (fig. 30). In comparison, within the deep cones 

of depression in the Englishtown aquifer system and Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, minimum available head above 

the unit tops was 310 ft and 230 ft, respectively (along the 

updip edge of the -30 ft contour for 2008), and available heads 

averaged 680 ft and 470 ft, respectively. Even at their lowest 

historical levels during the mid-1980s, potentiometric heads 

within the Englishtown aquifer system and Wenonah Mount 

Laurel aquifer exceeded the unit-top altitudes by a minimum 

of 275 ft and 145 ft, respectively. Within the Critical Area 2 

cones of depression, as defined by the -30 ft contour for the 

Lower PRM aquifer, groundwater altitudes in the PRM aquifer 

system exceeded unit-top altitudes on average by more than 

370 ft for each of the three units (371, 560, and 860 ft; Upper, 

Middle, and Lower aquifers, respectively). Minimum available 

potentiometric heads during 2008, observed near the updip 

edges of the cones of depression, were 42, 75, and 195 ft in the 

Upper, Middle, and Lower PRM aquifers, respectively.

Summary

Groundwater levels measured in 936 wells in New Jersey, 

eastern Pennsylvania, eastern Maryland, and northern Delaware during fall 2008 were used to map the potentiometric 

surfaces of 10 confined aquifers in the New Jersey Coastal 

Plain. Potentiometric surface maps were prepared for the confined Cohansey aquifer in Cape May County, the Rio Grande 

water-bearing zone, the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, the Piney 

Point aquifer, the Vincentown aquifer, the Wenonah-Mount 

Laurel aquifer, the Englishtown aquifer system, and the Upper, 

Middle, and Lower aquifers of the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy 

(PRM) aquifer system.

Water-level differences, evaluated in 800 wells measured 

during the fall of 2003 and 2008, indicate small to moderate changes in many Coastal Plain aquifers in New Jersey. 

Groundwater levels stabilized or had recovered, but in places, 

water levels continued to decline as a result of withdrawals. 

In the confined Cohansey aquifer in Cape May, groundwater 

altitudes generally did not change. Groundwater levels in the 

Atlantic City 800-foot sand typically were below those in 

2003; declines were greatest near pumping centers in coastal 

Atlantic County. Changes were less pronounced in Cape May 

County, and water levels were, on average, less than 3 ft lower 

than those measured during the previous study in 2003, except 

near Rio Grande, N.J., where a localized cone of depression 

had formed as a result of increased withdrawals. Large and 

widespread water-level declines were observed in the Piney 

Point aquifer in Cumberland County where water levels fell in 

excess of 100 ft in and around Bridgeton and by 30 to 60 ft in 

surrounding areas. Groundwater levels in the Wenonah-Mount 

Laurel aquifer and Englishtown aquifer system continued to 

recover in Critical Area 1. In Critical Area 2 water levels in the 

Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer continued to decline.

In the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, groundwater levels were substantially lower than those observed in 

2003 in parts of northern Ocean County but did not change 

appreciably in the Raritan Bay area, and water levels continued to recover in Critical Area 2. In the Middle Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, water levels recovered near the Raritan 

and South Rivers in Middlesex County; however, modest 

declines occurred in the interior parts Monmouth and Ocean 

Counties. Groundwater levels in both the Middle and Lower 

PRM aquifers were stable to recovering in Critical Area 2. 

Beyond Critical Area 2 in southern New Jersey, however, 

water levels were slightly lower than in 2003.

Water-level trends were calculated for 73 wells for the 

30-year period (1978–2008) and for 77 wells for both the 

10-year (1998–2008) and 5-year (2003–8) periods. Results of 

analyses of long-term water-level changes show that, during 

1978–2008, trends were downward at 20 wells (27 percent), 

upward at 27 wells (37 percent), and were insubstantial or 

insignificant at 26 wells (36 percent). Declining water levels 

were observed most often in wells screened within the Atlantic 

City 800-foot sand where rates of decline ranged from less 

than 0.1 to 1 foot per year (ft/yr) and in wells in the Piney 

Point aquifer in southern New Jersey where rates of decline 

were as much as 1.4 ft/yr. Upward water-level trends were 

observed commonly for wells in the Englishtown aquifer 

system and the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer in Critical 

Area 1 and in the PRM aquifer system in parts of Critical 

Area 1 and most of Critical Area 2. Annual rates of increase 

ranged from 1.1 to 5.6 ft in the Englishtown aquifer system 

and Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer. For the aquifers of the 

PRM aquifer system, annual rates of recovery were greatest in 

the Lower aquifer.

From 1998 to 2008, downward water-level trends were 

observed for 22 wells (29 percent), upward trends for 21 wells 

(27 percent), and insubstantial trends for 34 wells (44 percent). 

Downward water-level trends were observed most often for 

wells open to the Piney Point aquifer and the Atlantic City 

800-foot sand; rates of decline ranged from less than 0.2 to 

7.6 ft/yr. Upward trends were observed mostly for wells open 

to the Englishtown aquifer system in Critical Area 1 and for 

wells within the PRM aquifer system in Critical Area 2 and 

southern New Jersey.

From 2003 to 2008, downward trends were observed 

for 30 wells (39 percent), upward trends for 20 wells (26 percent), and insubstantial or insignificant trends for 27 wells 

(35 percent). The geographic pattern of water-level trends for 

the 30-year period was similar to that for the 10-year period 

(1998–2008); however, annual rates of decline markedly 

increased throughout the Atlantic City 800-foot sand and the 
References Cited 63

Piney Point aquifer in southern New Jersey where water levels 

declined by as much as 9.4 ft/yr.

Long-term withdrawals from confined aquifers of the 

New Jersey Coastal Plain have resulted in the lowering of the 

potentiometric surface in places but have not caused aquifer 

dewatering within the study area. In areas of persistent low 

water levels and deep cones of depression, available potentiometric head above the tops of the aquifers is sufficient, and no 

evidence of desaturation was observed.

References Cited

Anderson, H.R., and Appel, C.A., 1969, Geology and groundwater resources of Ocean County, New Jersey: New Jersey 

Department of Conservation and Economic Development, 

Special Report No. 29, 93 p.

Barksdale, H.C., Johnson, M.E., Baker, R.C., Schaefer, E.J., 

and DeBuchananne, G.D., 1943, The groundwater supplies 

of Middlesex County, New Jersey: New Jersey State Water 

Policy Commission Special Report 8, 160 p.

Barksdale, H.C., Greenman, D.W., Lang, S.M., Hilton, G.S., 

and Outlaw, D.W., 1958, Groundwater resources in the 

tri-state region adjacent to the lower Delaware River: New 

Jersey Department of Conservation and Economic Development Special Report 13, 190 p.

Charles, E.G., Nawyn, J.P., Voronin, L.M., and Gordon, A.D., 

2011, Simulated effects of allocated and projected 2025 

withdrawals from the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer 

system, Gloucester and Northeastern Salem Counties, New 

Jersey: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations 

Report 2011–5033, 145 p.

Cushing, E.M., Kantrowitz, I.H., and Taylor, K.R., 1973, 

Water resources of the Delmarva Peninsula: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 822, 58 p., 12 pls.

DePaul, V.T., and Szabo, Zoltan, 2007, Occurrence of 

radium-224, radium-226, and radium-228 in water from 

the Vincentown and Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifers, the 

Englishtown aquifer system, and the Hornerstown and 

Red Bank Sands, southwestern and south-central New 

Jersey: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations 

Report 2007–5064, 62 p.

DePaul, Vincent, Rosman, Robert, and Lacombe, P.J., 2009, 

Water-level conditions in selected confined aquifers of the 

New Jersey and Delaware Coastal Plain, 2003: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2008–5145, 

123 p., 9 pl.

Eckel, J.A., and Walker, R.L., 1986, Water levels in major 

artesian aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1983: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 86–4028, 62 p., 7 pls.

Farlekas, G.M., Nemickas, Bronius; Gill, H.E., 1983, Geology and ground-water resources of Camden County, New 

Jersey: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 83–4029, 158 p.

Gilbert, R.O., 1987, Statistical methods for environmental 

pollution monitoring: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold 

Company, 320 p.

Gill, H.E., 1962, Groundwater resources of Cape May County, 

New Jersey—Saltwater invasion of principal aquifers: 

New Jersey Department of Conservation and Economic 

Development, Division of Water Policy and Supply Special 

Report 18, 171 p.

Gill, H.E., and Farlekas, G.M., 1976, Geohydrologic maps of 

the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer system in the New 

Jersey Coastal Plain: U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic 

Investigations Atlas HA-557, 2 sheets, scale 1:500,000.

Hardt, W.F., and Hilton, G.S., 1969, Water resources and 

geology of Gloucester County: New Jersey Department 

of Conservation and Economic Development, Division of 

Water Policy and Supply Special Report 30, 130 p.

Helsel, D.R., and Hirsch, R.M., 2002, Statistical methods in 

water resources: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of 

Water Resources Investigations, book 4, chap. A3, 522 p.

Hirsch, R.M., and Slack, J.R., 1984, A nonparametric trend 

test for seasonal data with serial dependence: Water 

Resources Research, v. 20, p. 727–732.

Jablonski, L.A., 1968, Groundwater resources of Monmouth 

County, New Jersey: Department of Conservation and Economic Development Special Report 23, 114 p.

Johnson, M.L., and Charles, E.G., 1997, Hydrology of the 

unconfined aquifer system, Salem River Area: Salem River 

and Raccoon, Oldmans, Alloway, and Stow Creek Basins, 

New Jersey, 1993–94: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 96–4195, 5 sheets.

Johnson, M.L., and Watt, M.K., 1996, Hydrology of the 

unconfined aquifer system, Mullica River Basin, New 

Jersey, 1991–92: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 94–4234, 6 sheets.

Lacombe, P.J., and Carleton, G.B., 2002, Hydrogeologic 

framework, availability of water supplies, and saltwater 

intrusion, Cape May County, New Jersey: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01–4246, 

151 p.
64 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

Lacombe, P.J., Carleton, G.B., Pope, D.A., and Rice, D.E., 

2009, Future water-supply scenarios, Cape May County, 

New Jersey, 2003–50: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific 

Investigations Report 2009–5187, 159 p.

Lacombe, P.J., and Rosman, Robert, 1995, Hydrology of 

the unconfined aquifer system in the upper Maurice River 

Basin and adjacent areas in Gloucester County, New Jersey, 

1986–87: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 92–4128, 3 sheets.

Lacombe, P.J., and Rosman, Robert, 1997, Water levels in, 

extent of freshwater in, and water withdrawals from eight 

major confined aquifers, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1993: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 96–4206, 8 pls.

Lacombe, P.J., and Rosman, Robert, 2001, Water levels in, 

extent of freshwater in, and water withdrawals from ten 

major confined aquifers, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1998: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 00-4143, 10 pls.

Lettini, B.P., Wright, J.D., Szabo, Zoltan, and DePaul, V.T., 

2003, Possible effects of pore water from confining units 

on geochemistry of water in the Piney Point aquifer in New 

Jersey: Geological Society of America Abstracts, v. 35, 

no. 3, p. 31.

Mann, H.B., 1945, Non-parametric tests against trend: Econometrica v. 13, p. 245–259.

Martin, Mary, 1984, Simulated ground-water flow in the 

Potomac aquifers, New Castle County, Delaware: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

84–4007, 85 p.

Martin, Mary, 1998, Ground-water flow in the New Jersey 

Coastal Plain: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 

1404 H, 146 p.

McAuley, S.D., Barringer, J.L., Paulachok, G.N., Clark, J.S., 

and Zapecza, O.S., 2001, Ground-water flow and quality in 

the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, New Jersey: New Jersey 

Geological Survey Report GSR 41, 86 p.

McLaughlin, P.P., and Velez, C.C., 2006. Geology and extent 

of the confined aquifers of Kent County, Delaware: Delaware Geological Survey Report of Investigations No. 72, 

40 p.

Meisler, Harold, 1989, The occurrence and geochemistry of 

salty ground water in the northern Atlantic Coastal Plain: 

U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1404 D, 51 p., 

6 pl.

Navoy, A.S., Voronin, L.M., and Modica, Edward, 2005, 

Vulnerability of production wells in the Potomac-RaritanMagothy aquifer system to saltwater intrusion from the 

Delaware River in Camden, Gloucester, and Salem Counties, New Jersey: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2004–5096, 35 p.

Navoy, A.S., 1994, Simulated effects of projected withdrawals 

from the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer on ground-water 

levels in the Camden, New Jersey, area and vicinity: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

92–4152, 22 p.

Navoy, A.S., and Carleton, G.B., 1995, Groundwater flow and 

future conditions in the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer 

system, Camden area, New Jersey: New Jersey Geological 

Survey Report GSR 38, 183, 184 p.

New Jersey Administrative Code, 2004, Safe drinking water 

act regulations: title 7, chapter 10, subchapter 7: Trenton, 

N.J., 83 p.

New Jersey Administrative Code, 2005, New Jersey water 

supply allocation rules: title 7, chapter 19, subchapter 8: 

Trenton, N.J., 82 p.

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, 2012, 

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 

Open Public Records Act, DEP-Data Miner-Water Allocation: Trenton, N.J., accessed January 10, 2011, at http://

datamine2.state.nj.us/DEP_OPRA/OpraMain/categories?

category=Water+Allocation.

New Jersey Water Supply Authority, 2005, Annual report 

of the New Jersey Water Supply Authority: Clinton, N.J., 

accessed June 14, 2007, at http://www.njwsa.org/2005_

Annual_ Report.pdf.

Nichols, W.D., 1977, Geohydrology of the Englishtown 

formation in the northern Coastal Plain of New Jersey: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

76–123, 62 p.

Owens, J.P., Minard, J.P., Sohl, N.F., and Mello, J.F., 1970, 

Stratigraphy of the outcropping Post-Magothy Upper Cretaceous formations in southern New Jersey and northern Delmarva Peninsula, Delaware, and Maryland: U.S. Geological 

Survey Professional Paper 674, 60 p. 

Pope D.A., and Gordon, A.D., 1999, Simulation of groundwater flow and movement of the freshwater-saltwater 

interface in the New Jersey Coastal Plain: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 98–4216, 

159 p.
References Cited 65

Pope, D.A., 2006, Simulation of proposed increases in groundwater withdrawals from the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, 

New Jersey Coastal Plain: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5114, 17 p.

Pucci, A.A., Jr., Pope, D.A., and Gronberg, J.M., 1994, Hydrogeology, simulation of ground-water flow and saltwater 

intrusion, Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer system, northern Coastal Plain of New Jersey: New Jersey Geological 

Survey GSR-36, 206 p. 

Pucci, A.A., Jr., Szabo, Zoltan, and Owens, J.P., 1997, Variations in pore-water quality, mineralogy, and sedimentary 

texture of clay-silts in the lower Miocene Kirkwood Formation, Atlantic City, New Jersey, in Miller, K.G., and Snyder, 

S.W., eds., Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program, 

Scientific Results, v. 150X, p. 317–341. (Also available at 

http://wwwodp.tamu.edu/publications/150X_SR/24X_CHP.

PDF.)

Rosenau, J.C., Lang, S.M., Hilton, G.S., and Rooney, J.G., 

1969, Geology and groundwater resources of Salem County, 

New Jersey: New Jersey Department of Conservation and 

Economic Development Special Report 33, 142 p.

Rosman, Robert, Lacombe, P.J., and Storck, D.A., 1996, 

Water levels in the major artesian aquifers of the New 

Jersey Coastal Plain, 1988: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 95–4060, 74 p., 7 pls.

Rush, F.E., 1968, Geology and groundwater resources of 

Burlington County, New Jersey: New Jersey Department 

of Conservation and Economic Development Special 

Report 26, 45 p.

Schaefer, F.L., 1983, Distribution of chloride concentrations 

in the principal aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 

1977–81: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 83–4061, 56 p.

Seaber, P.R., 1965, Variations in chemical character of water 

in the Englishtown Formation, New Jersey: U.S. Geological 

Survey Professional Paper 498-B, 35 p.

Sen, P.K., 1968, Estimates of the regression coefficient based 

on Kendall’s tau: Journal of the American Statistical Association, v. 63, p.1379–1389.

Spitz, F.J., 1998, Analysis of ground-water flow and saltwater 

encroachment in the shallow aquifer system of Cape May 

County, New Jersey: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply 

Paper 2490, 51 p.

Spitz, F.J., Watt, M.K., and DePaul, V.T., 2008, Recovery 

of ground-water levels from 1988 to 2003 and analysis 

of potential water-supply management options in Critical 

Area 1, east-central New Jersey: U.S. Geological Survey 

Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5193, 40 p.

Spitz, F.J., and DePaul, V.T., 2008, Recovery of ground-water 

levels from 1988 to 2003 and analysis of effects of 2003 

and full-allocation withdrawals in Critical Area 2, southern 

New Jersey: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2008–5142, 28 p.

Sugarman, P.J., 1992, Geologic controls on aquifer distribution in the Coastal Plain of New Jersey, in Gohn, G.S., ed., 

Proceedings of the 1988 U.S. Geological Survey Workshop 

on the Geology and Geohydrology of the Atlantic Coastal 

Plain: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1059, p. 35–38.

Sugarman, P.J., and Miller, K.G., 1997, Correlation of 

Miocene sequences and hydrogeologic units, New Jersey 

Coastal Plain: Sedimentary Geology, v. 108, p. 3–18.

Sugarman, P.J., Miller, K.G., Browning, J.V., and others, 

2005, Millville site report, Initial Reports ODP Leg 174AX, 

Supplement: College Station, Texas, Texas A&M University, Ocean Drilling Program, 94 p.

Sugarman, P.J., 2001, Hydrostratigraphy of the Kirkwood and 

Cohansey Formations of Miocene Age in Atlantic County 

and vicinity, New Jersey: New Jersey Geological Survey 

Geological Survey Report 40, 26 p

Sugarman, P.J., Miller, K.G., Browning, J.V., Kulpecz, A.A., 

McLaughlin, P.P., and Monteverde, D.H., 2005, Hydrostratigraphy of the New Jersey Coastal Plain: sequences and 

facies predict continuity of aquifers and confining units: 

Stratigraphy, v. 2, p. 259–275.

Todd, D.K., 1980, Groundwater hydrology: New York, John 

Wiley & Sons, 535 p.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1990, Digital wetlands delineation maps (data base): St. Petersburg, Fla., U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2010, Water resources data for 

New Jersey, water year 2009, volume 2: U.S. Geological 

Survey WDR-US-2009, Ground Water Data, CD-ROM, 

unpaginated.

Vengosh, A., 2003, Salinization and saline environments, in 

Sherwood Lollar, Barbara, ed., Treatise on geochemistry, 

v. 9: Amsterdam, Elsevier, p. 333–365.

Vinson, D., Schwartz, H., Dwyer, G., and Vengosh, A., 2011, 

Evaluating salinity sources of groundwater and implications 

for sustainable reverse osmosis desalination in coastal North 

Carolina, USA: Hydrogeology Journal, v. 19, p. 981–994. 

Voronin, L.M., 2004, Documentation of revisions to the 

Regional Aquifer System Analysis model of the New Jersey 

Coastal Plain: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 03–4268, 49 p.
66 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008

Voronin, L.M., Spitz, F.J., and McAuley, S.D., 1996, Evaluation of saltwater intrusion and travel time in the Atlantic 

City 800-foot sand, Cape May County, New Jersey, 1992, 

by use of a coupled-model approach and flow-path analysis: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 95–4280, 38 p.

Vroblesky, D.A., and Fleck, W.B., 1991, Hydrogeologic 

framework of the Coastal Plain of Maryland, Delaware, and 

District of Columbia: U.S. Geological Survey Professional 

Paper 1404–E, 45 p.

Walker, R.L., 1983, Evaluation of water levels in major aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 82–4077, 

56 p.

Watt, M.K., 2000, A hydrologic primer for New Jersey 

watershed management: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 00–4140, 108 p.

Watt, M.K., and Johnson, M.L., 1992, Water resources of the 

unconfined aquifer system of the Great Egg Harbor River 

Basin, New Jersey, 1989–90: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 91–4126, 5 pls.

Watt, M.K., Johnson, M.L., and Lacombe, P.J., 1994, Hydrology of the unconfined aquifer system, Toms River, Metedeconk River, and Kettle Creek Basins, New Jersey, 1987–90: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 93–4110, 5 sheets. 

Watt, M.K., Kane, A.C., Charles, E.G., and Stork, Donald, 

2003, Hydrology of the unconfined aquifer system, Rancocas Creek Area: Rancocas, Crosswicks, Assunpink, Blacks, 

and Crafts Creek Basins, New Jersey, 1996: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 02–4280, 

5 pls.

Wilcoxon, F., 1945, Individual comparisons by ranking methods: Biometrics, v. 1, p. 80–83.

Winkler, S., 2004, A user-written SAS program for estimating 

temporal trends and their magnitude: St. Johns Water Management District Technical Publication SJ2004-4, 37 p.

Woodruff, K.D., 1969, The occurrence of saline groundwater 

in Delaware aquifers: Delaware Geological Survey Report 

of Investigations 13, 45 p. 

Zapecza, O.S., Voronin, L.M., and Martin, Mary, 1987, 

Ground-water-withdrawal and water-level data used to 

simulate regional flow in the major Coastal Plain aquifers 

of New Jersey: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 87–4038, 120 p.

Zapecza, O.S., 1989, Hydrogeologic framework of the New 

Jersey Coastal Plain: U.S. Geological Survey Professional 

Paper 1404-B, 49 p., 24 pls.
Appendixes 1–10.

Tables

1-1. Water-level data for wells screened in the confined Cohansey aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008

1-2. Water-level data for wells screened in the Rio Grande water-bearing zone, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008

2. Water-level data for wells screened in the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008

3. Water-level data for wells screened in the Piney Point aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008

4. Water-level data for wells screened in the Vincentown aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008

5. Water-level data for wells screened in the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008

6. Water-level data for wells screened in the Englishtown aquifer system, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008

7. Water-level data for wells screened in the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 

 1978–2008

8. Water-level data for wells screened in the Middle and undifferentiated Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New 

 Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008

9. Water-level data for wells screened in the Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 

 1978–2008

10-1. Results of the Mann-Kendall trend test on water levels from selected observation wells, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 

 1978–2008

10-2. Results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for paired water levels
68 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 1-1. Water-level data for wells screened in the confined Cohansey aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier New Jersey permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 9-11 57-04898 Cape May -74.91545 38.93678 281–321 7 -- -20 -14 -17 -15 -11 -10 1 12/8/2008 9-18 -- Cape May -74.89045 38.94789 295–325 4 -- -- -- -- -- -14 -14 0 12/8/2008 9-27 37-00013 Cape May -74.92556 38.94520 277–306 10 -21 -27 -17 -21 -18 -11 -12 -1 12/8/2008 9-30 -- Cape May -74.88573 38.94733 305–325 11 -- -- -- -- -14 -13 -14 -1 12/8/2008 9-36 -- Cape May -74.92406 38.95039 174–282 10 -26 -33 -20 -26 -17 -15 -16 -1 12/8/2008 9-42 37-00268 Cape May -74.87739 38.95650 259–289 5 -- -18 -12 -- -16 -19 -11 8 12/7/2008 9-43 57-00011 Cape May -74.92217 38.95645 246–276 18 -- -25 -13 -21 -16 -8 -9 -1 12/8/2008 9-48 37-00159 Cape May -74.92545 38.96345 242–252 17 -- -22 -17 -21 -17 -12 -10 2 12/3/2008 9-49 -- Cape May -74.96129 38.96789 241–250 6 -16 -15 -13 -14 -13 -11 -9 2 12/4/2008 9-52 37-00113 Cape May -74.95306 38.98164 241–262 18 -- -15 -16 -22 -19 -14 -17 -3 12/8/2008 9-54 37-00223 Cape May -74.93937 38.98508 212–247 14 -- -18 -16 -20 -21 -17 -16 1 12/7/2008 9-60 -- Rio Grande -74.90684 39.01567 242–257 13 -- -12 -12 -15 -12 -13 -9 4 12/3/2008 9-74 57-00007 Rio Grande -74.89670 39.02756 191–231 9 -- -- -- -- -13 -- -12 -- 12/15/2008 9-78 37-00002 Rio Grande -74.89787 39.03034 229–250 9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -7 -- 12/15/2008 9-80 -- Stone Harbor -74.84850 39.03706 242–252 14 -2 -2 -4 -5 -4 -2 -4 -2 12/3/2008 9-89 37-00158 Rio Grande -74.91239 39.07372 195–210 7 -2 -2 -2 -1 -0 -2 0 2 12/3/2008 9-99 35-00680 Stone Harbor -74.81017 39.10317 214–230 11 4 5 4 3 4 5 4 -1 12/4/2008 9-150 37-00155 Cape May -74.93184 38.93539 283–293 7 -18 -19 -13 -17 -14 -10 -9 1 12/4/2008 9-159 37-00241 Wildwood -74.83900 38.97417 249–360 8 -- -8 -8 -11 -8 -6 -6 0 11/24/2008 9-180 37-00375 Rio Grande -74.89359 39.03345 -- 15 -- -- -- -- -- -- -5 -- 12/15/2008 9-187 -- Rio Grande -74.93545 39.03845 186–190 10 -- -- -6 -7 -3 -4 -5 -1 12/7/2008 9-188 -- Rio Grande -74.91073 39.03761 229–233 6 -- -- -10 -11 -9 -7 -5 2 12/7/2008

9-207 35-06772-1 Woodbine -74.85350 39.18928 80–90 10 -- -- -- -- -- 5 5 0 12/16/20089-210 -- Cape May -74.95656 38.99622 216–221 11 -- -- -8 -13 -12 -10 -9 1 12/8/20089-213 -- Rio Grande -74.94378 39.02456 203–208 12 -- -- -- -8 -7 -5 -3 2 12/7/20089-219 35-03380 Rio Grande -74.87878 39.10039 150–200 19 -- -- -- 2 3 5 14 9 12/16/20089-281 37-00254 Stone Harbor -74.85906 39.11956 176–181 11 -- -- 5 5 4 6 5 -1 12/7/20089-292 37-03035 Stone Harbor -74.77266 39.06039 251–261 5 -- -- 1 2 1 0 2 2 12/7/20089-301 37-00831 Wildwood -74.85622 38.96003 190–245 2 -- -- -- -- -11 -10 -9 1 12/15/20089-310 37-01781 Stone Harbor -74.79664 39.00514 279–357 7 -- -- 1 0 2 3 5 2 11/24/20089-314 37-00640 Wildwood -74.81375 38.99242 212–325 7 -- -- -- -1 0 1 3 2 11/24/20089-315 35-01373 Stone Harbor -74.83572 39.05484 228–248 10 -- -- -- -- -- 7 6 -1 12/15/2008
Appendix 1 69

Appendix 1-1. Water-level data for wells screened in the confined Cohansey aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS 

well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

9-353 37-04871 Cape May -74.95990 38.98206 262–272 20 -- -- -- -12 -12 -8 -11 -3 12/8/20089-354 37-04873 Stone Harbor -74.81575 39.02992 230–240 5 -- -- -- 2 2 4 4 0 12/7/20089-358 37-02274 Stone Harbor -74.83156 39.06567 240–270 15 -- -- -- -- -0 2 -1 -3 12/4/20089-366 37-01039 Wildwood -74.83128 38.99456 270–290 5 -- -- -- -- -3 -2 -1 1 12/15/20089-385 37-00861 Rio Grande -74.88934 39.03250 156–274 15 -- -- -- -- -14 -10 -5 5 12/15/20089-394 37-00327 Wildwood -74.86656 38.95817 250–275 5 -- -- -- -- -9 -11 -7 4 12/7/20089-395 37-04368 Cape May -74.89934 38.98595 255–275 15 -- -- -- -17 -15 -15 -12 3 12/8/20089-492 35-16575 Woodbine -74.78017 39.13650 105–135 22 -- -- -- -- -- 7 6 -1 12/15/20089-505 37-00508 Stone Harbor -74.86203 39.03197 260–280 20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -3 -- 12/15/20089-518 36-24677 Marmora -74.73222 39.26194 245–265 30 -- -- -- -- -- -- 8 -- 12/10/20089-525 -- Rio Grande -74.91317 39.00089 –260 20 -- -- -- -- -- -22 -13 9 12/8/20089-630 37-09436 Wildwood -74.85647 38.95986 148–254 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -8 -- 12/8/20089-662 37-09403 Rio Grande -74.91028 39.00417 245–275 20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -13 -- 12/8/2008

Appendix 1-2. Water-level data for wells screened in the Rio Grande water-bearing zone, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS 

well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

9-67 37-00271 Rio Grande -74.89684 39.02650 461–590 10 -- -- -- -- -46 -33 -27 6 12/8/20089-71 -- Rio Grande -74.89628 39.02734 473–523 8 -- -12 -12 -- -33 -24 -15 9 12/15/20089-149 37-00005 Tuckahoe -74.83139 39.30425 250–290 20 -- 20 18 -- 18 18 16 -2 12/15/20089-304 37-03763-3 Rio Grande -74.90239 39.00067 495–505 25 -- -- -- -- -21 -19 -20 -1 12/3/20089-415 35-01233 Woodbine -74.85795 39.24734 –306 29 -- -- -- -- 6 7 5 -2 12/16/20089-519 36-22762 Marmora -74.65444 39.26506 478–498 31 -- -- -- -- -- -25 -26 -1 12/3/20089-526 37-05559 Rio Grande -74.93583 39.03833 578–598 10 -- -- -- -- -- -18 -26 -8 12/7/200811-737 35-03449 Heislerville -74.95323 39.21039 307–317 10 -- -- -- -- 2 1 0 -1 12/15/200829-775 32-08715 New Gretna -74.38348 39.56120 293–318 5 -- -8 -6 -- -2 -1 -1 0 11/26/200829-813 32-11971 Tuckerton -74.34670 39.58595 307–337 20 -- -- -3 -- 1 3 -3 -6 12/16/200829-1621 33-40378 Tuckerton -74.26297 39.53528 417–456 5 -- -- -- -- -- -19 -24 -5 11/14/2008
70 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 2. Water-level data for wells screened in the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier New Jersey permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 1-37 56-00071 Atlantic City -74.41598 39.36428 782–837 10 -65 -70 -80 -83 -88 -85 -93 -8 12/2/2008 1-39 56-00012 Oceanville -74.39598 39.39156 733–788 10 -60 -65 -74 -68 -78 -74 -90 -16 12/2/2008 1-117 32-00477 Egg Harbor City -74.64180 39.53692 350–432 41 23 21 19 20 17 18 14 -4 11/17/2008 1-180 36-00294 Oceanville -74.44987 39.46512 560–570 27 -28 -32 -39 -41 -47 -43 -50 -7 12/2/2008 1-367 56-00038 Ocean City -74.52207 39.31648 750–800 10 -66 -68 -75 -80 -86 -81 -82 -1 12/2/2008 1-369 36-00402 Ocean City -74.52371 39.31817 760–810 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -76 -- 12/2/2008 1-376 36-00278 Ocean City -74.50432 39.33567 741–791 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -86 -- 12/1/2008 1-565 36-00014 Pleasantville -74.51293 39.41067 610–660 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -74 -- 12/11/2008 1-578 36-00295 Ocean City -74.61877 39.30734 670–680 10 -45 -51 -55 -59 -66 -64 -69 -5 12/2/2008 1-593 36-00372 Atlantic City -74.48076 39.34181 740–790 9 -- -75 -96 -- -- -87 -98 -11 12/2/2008 1-599 56-00015 Atlantic City -74.48257 39.34234 800–830 9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -91 -- 12/1/2008 1-600 56-00016 Atlantic City -74.47718 39.34601 750–810 8 -69 -73 -79 -83 -93 -88 -88 0 12/2/2008 1-637 32-05113 Egg Harbor City -74.63996 39.53720 335–425 35 -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 -- 11/17/2008 1-648 36-01084 Atlantic City -74.43404 39.35706 775–835 7 -- -74 -80 -- -- -83 -94 -11 12/3/2008 1-650 -- Mays Landing -74.71461 39.44762 –380 22 -- -- 16 19 16 16 13 -3 12/10/2008 1-683 36-02091 Brigantine Inlet -74.37398 39.40312 725–775 8 -- -- -64 -70 -71 -70 -70 0 12/2/2008 1-702 -- Ocean City -74.50182 39.34234 740–750 5 -- -- -87 -92 -103 -93 -96 -3 12/2/2008 1-703 36-05092 Pleasantville -74.54182 39.44428 560–570 38 -- -- -45 -46 -58 -47 -63 -16 11/26/2008 1-704 -- Mays Landing -74.62544 39.39539 596–606 51 -- -- -38 -37 -49 -50 -61 -11 11/26/2008 1-706 36-04982-1 Pleasantville -74.52460 39.49262 520–530 41 -- -- -25 -25 -35 -30 -39 -9 12/3/2008

1-889 36-11871 Ocean City -74.50274 39.33426 735–795 8 -- -- -- -86 -94 -87 -87 0 12/1/20081-967 36-13010 Brigantine Inlet -74.35565 39.41559 702–776 5 -- -- -- -62 -64 -60 -62 -2 12/2/20081-990 36-19288 Pleasantville -74.58916 39.38562 496–652 30 -- -- -- -- -55 -50 -66 -16 12/3/20081-991 36-16204 Pleasantville -74.57003 39.41922 492–642 63 -- -- -- -- -55 -48 -61 -13 12/3/20081-1218 36-17655 Mays Landing -74.62738 39.43901 520–610 67 -- -- -- -- -48 -47 -55 -8 12/10/20081-1220 36-17339 Pleasantville -74.61627 39.44651 552–603 66 -- -- -- -- -51 -49 -58 -9 12/10/20081-1252 32-20165 Egg Harbor City -74.64055 39.53664 337–441 41 -- -- -- -- -- 16 13 -3 11/17/20081-1253 36-16750 Pleasantville -74.54452 39.46384 344–598 55 -- -- -- -- -43 -36 -50 -14 12/3/20081-1256 36-17667 Ocean City -74.51504 39.32573 649–796 6 -- -- -- -- -- -94 -88 6 12/1/20081-1456 36-21156 Pleasantville -74.50724 39.41389 602–652 5 -- -- -- -- -- -64 -71 -7 12/11/2008
Appendix 2 71

Appendix 2. Water-level data for wells screened in the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS 

well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

1-1974 36-32164 Marmora -74.63422 39.37097 356–660 65 -- -- -- -- -- -- -62 -- 12/3/20081-1975 36-22085 Pleasantville -74.50714 39.43122 550–650 21 -- -- -- -- -- -- -67 -- 12/4/20081-1976 36-22109 Pleasantville -74.50756 39.47842 531–631 42 -- -- -- -- -- -- -38 -- 12/3/20081-2037 -- Atlantic City -74.47103 39.36553 -- 8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -87 -- 12/4/20089-2 37-00280 Avalon -74.74305 39.07247 821–861 5 -36 -40 -46 -44 -49 -50 -51 -1 12/4/20089-4 37-00265 Avalon -74.72791 39.09081 880–920 10 -40 -42 -40 -43 -51 -48 -50 -2 12/4/20089-79 -- Stone Harbor -74.79128 39.03622 833–876 2 -- -- -- -36 -46 -41 -44 -3 12/7/20089-92 37-00240 Stone Harbor -74.81517 39.09020 681–791 17 -32 -31 -34 -38 -41 -42 -45 -3 12/4/20089-106 56-00006 Sea Isle City -74.63149 39.22859 760–810 8 -46 -46 -51 -54 -62 -61 -62 -1 12/4/20089-108 36-00412 Sea Isle City -74.61221 39.24975 774–840 7 -- -57 -58 -88 -70 -67 -69 -2 12/4/20089-109 56-00008 Ocean City -74.60260 39.25998 749–809 8 -49 -56 -57 -- -69 -65 -70 -5 12/3/20089-116 56-00007 Ocean City -74.58038 39.27714 760–810 7 -- -62 -64 -74 -75 -74 -75 -1 12/3/20089-125 36-00314 Ocean City -74.56421 39.29112 –800 10 -- -- -66 -76 -87 -73 -76 -3 12/4/20089-135 37-00009 Stone Harbor -74.75655 39.05650 838–878 9 -30 -34 -31 -38 -43 -40 -43 -3 12/15/20089-136 56-00147 Sea Isle City -74.65713 39.19778 802–834 7 -- -45 -45 -47 -54 -54 -58 -4 12/4/20089-144 36-00451 Marmora -74.63472 39.28925 650–690 9 -47 -54 -50 -60 -70 -66 -70 -4 12/11/20089-161 -- Stone Harbor -74.79667 39.11817 639–654 16 -- -26 -32 -35 -38 -37 -41 -4 12/8/20089-185 37-01340-8 Marmora -74.73181 39.27261 640–650 15 -- -- -35 -- -41 -41 -45 -4 12/4/20089-291 36-09846 Avalon -74.71438 39.10834 764–941 7 -- -- -- -45 -49 -49 -51 -2 12/4/20089-296 35-06073 Stone Harbor -74.82825 39.08334 682–812 20 -- -- -27 -33 -35 -36 -41 -5 12/4/20089-302 37-03628-9 Wildwood -74.85739 38.95261 883–893 5 -- -- -- -14 -18 -27 -31 -4 12/4/20089-306 35-09239 Rio Grande -74.91267 39.07289 656–666 6 -- -- -- -17 -19 -22 -27 -5 12/3/20089-311 36-10378 Sea Isle City -74.71202 39.13025 732–896 8 -- -- -- -46 -50 -48 -51 -3 12/12/20089-337 37-04660 Stone Harbor -74.78850 39.00345 910–960 10 -- -- -- -20 -24 -28 -32 -4 12/4/20089-359 36-07286 Avalon -74.74952 39.11559 708–773 5 -- -- -- -46 -52 -50 -52 -2 12/7/20089-423 37-05244 Rio Grande -74.87658 39.02678 825–875 20 -- -- -- -19 -21 -23 -30 -7 12/16/20089-459 36-00377 Ocean City -74.62294 39.28692 –620 7 -- -- -- -- -67 -66 -70 -4 12/2/20089-479 37-06313 Cape May -74.92431 38.94339 655–825 7 -- -- -- -- -17 -37 -42 -5 12/8/20089-480 37-06314 Cape May -74.92537 38.94547 621–820 14 -- -- -- -- -17 -49 -42 7 12/8/20089-481 36-17001 Marmora -74.65416 39.26487 603–738 33 -- -- -- -- -- -55 -58 -3 12/3/2008
72 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 2. Water-level data for wells screened in the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier New Jersey permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 9-482 36-20238 Sea Isle City -74.69216 39.15723 724–884 8 -- -- -- -- -- -49 -53 -4 12/12/2008 9-507 37-06563 Cape May -74.92234 38.95642 615–810 18 -- -- -- -- -- -33 -34 -1 12/7/2008 9-508 37-06564 Cape May -74.95917 38.95789 585–765 10 -- -- -- -- -- -23 -24 -1 12/7/2008 9-521 37-07541 Stone Harbor -74.76172 39.05072 830–953 10 -- -- -- -- -- -40 -42 -2 12/15/2008 9-522 37-07594 Rio Grande -74.89444 39.02472 570–664 12 -- -- -- -- -- -- -59 -- 12/11/2008 9-523 37-07593 Rio Grande -74.89472 39.02917 563–653 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -59 -- 12/15/2008 9-527 36-23696 Sea Isle City -74.74016 39.18150 660–790 20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -60 -- 12/12/2008 9-613 36-28902 Sea Isle City -74.69444 39.14639 722–815 5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -55 -- 12/12/2008 29-9 53-00031 Beach Haven -74.24181 39.56298 572–656 5 -28 -30 -31 -32 -34 -33 -35 -2 11/13/2008 29-111 33-01180 Ship Bottom -74.14305 39.69290 465–500 9 -22 -52 -23 -27 -30 -26 -28 -2 11/13/2008 29-112 33-00674 Ship Bottom -74.13511 39.70518 451–493 5 -20 -36 -24 -27 -29 -26 -29 -3 11/13/2008 29-457 33-01275 Beach Haven -74.22392 39.58606 551–650 8 -26 -27 -26 -- -- -43 -37 6 11/14/2008 29-549 33-01723 Ship Bottom -74.18105 39.64690 528–588 5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -35 -- 11/14/2008 29-561 33-01268 Ship Bottom -74.16478 39.66340 520–562 10 -25 -28 -24 -20 -30 -28 -31 -3 11/12/2008 29-597 32-05858 Tuckerton -74.33881 39.60289 400–500 25 -- -6 -3 -- -- -18 -19 -1 11/26/2008 29-598 33-00967 Ship Bottom -74.20214 39.70061 -- 2 -- -- -21 -25 -26 -26 -28 -2 11/13/2008 29-814 32-12329 New Gretna -74.38515 39.54787 512–552 10 -- -- -- -24 -26 -24 -32 -8 11/12/2008 29-936 33-24693 Beach Haven -74.19689 39.62384 528–594 9 -- -- -25 -25 -26 -31 -33 -2 11/14/2008 29-1063 32-15207 Tuckerton -74.36409 39.58856 475–521 33 -- -- -24 -25 -27 -28 -27 1 11/26/2008 29-1077 33-25686 Ship Bottom -74.17283 39.65406 514–574 7 -- -- -- -- -- -- -25 -- 11/12/2008

29-1078 33-26875 Ship Bottom -74.24967 39.69365 366–429 24 -- -- -- -- 26 28 22 -6 11/13/200829-1421 32-22507 Tuckerton -74.33831 39.59348 405–511 12 -- -- -- -- -- -19 -20 -1 11/26/200829-1433 33-41143 West Creek -74.26947 39.72675 375–415 58 -- -- -- -- -- 48 40 -8 11/12/200829-1624 33-42213 Ship Bottom -74.18111 39.64448 501–582 5 -- -- -- -- -- -35 -35 0 11/14/200829-1729 33-40839 Beach Haven -74.21022 39.60419 518–634 6 -- -- -- -- -- -33 -36 -3 11/14/200829-1730 32-25614 Tuckerton -74.36583 39.58667 460–521 35 -- -- -- -- -- -- -27 -- 11/26/200829-1731 32-23935 West Creek -74.33639 39.62611 416–514 63 -- -- -- -- -- -- -16 -- 11/26/200829-1774 33-41391 Ship Bottom -74.24806 39.69611 365–431 23 -- -- -- -- -- -- 20 -- 11/13/200829-1779 33-39413 Beach Haven -74.20861 39.60917 541–616 5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -35 -- 11/13/200829-1803 32-27684 Tuckerton -74.33437 39.62641 403–520 78 -- -- -- -- -- -- -28 -- 11/26/2008
Appendix 2 73

Appendix 2. Water-level data for wells screened in the Atlantic City 800-foot sand, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS 

well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

29-2007 33-42856 Ship Bottom -74.16736 39.66067 500–550 11 -- -- -- -- -- -- -29 -- 11/13/200829-2056 33-45394 Ship Bottom -74.23564 39.67858 379–421 8 -- -- -- -- -- -- 10 -- 11/13/200829-2057 P200905744 West Creek -74.27018 39.72529 356–432 64 -- -- -- -- -- -- -45 -- 11/13/200829-2058 32-28028 Tuckerton -74.338 39.59327 406–509 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -22 -- 11/12/2008
74 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 3. Water-level data for wells screened in the Piney Point aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier State- issued permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 1-270 31-03648 Newtonville -74.78931 39.62028 390–410 93 -- 33 33 31 22 18 19 1 11/20/2008 1-700 35-04274 Dorothy -74.76739 39.49262 479–539 40 -- -- 17 12 18 18 17 -1 11/17/2008 1-701 35-03992 Buena -74.93806 39.53023 410–460 120 -- -- -- -- -- -26 -43 -17 11/12/2008 1-713 35-04656 Dorothy -74.84711 39.48401 525–535 100 -- -- -2 -4 -6 -8 -9 -1 11/17/2008 1-834 -- Ocean City -74.50015 39.33817 970–991 5 -- -- -28 -30 -32 -34 -38 -4 12/2/2008 1-1219 36-16546 Pleasantville -74.62294 39.44456 722–742 68 -- -- -- -14 -16 -18 -19 -1 11/26/2008 1-1238 55-00008 Buena -74.93086 39.53081 391–463 108 -- -- -- -- -31 -17 -34 -17 11/12/2008 1-1405 36-23678 Mays Landing -74.71769 39.46355 545–620 23 -- -- -- -- -- -6 -8 -2 12/10/2008 1-1445 35-22078 Buena -74.95903 39.51153 360–540 99 -- -- -- -- -- -29 -45 -16 11/12/2008 5-407 -- Atsion -74.71877 39.73956 240–260 47 52 51 51 51 50 50 49 -1 10/21/2008 5-488 32-00913 Atsion -74.64847 39.64583 419–449 37 51 50 50 54 48 47 47 0 11/17/2008 5-676 -- Woodmansie -74.42904 39.82067 530–540 199 121 119 118 119 120 118 117 -1 10/21/2008 5-800 32-04454 Medford Lakes -74.75683 39.79234 200–210 85 -- 73 72 73 72 73 72 -1 11/5/2008 5-1162 32-05879 Indian Mills -74.73585 39.77670 215–235 60 -- -- -- -- -- -- 53 -- 11/7/2008 7-572 31-14078 Hammonton -74.84119 39.68239 304–314 108 -- 60 55 53 50 51 50 -1 12/9/2008 7-980 31-09893 Hammonton -74.84266 39.68584 274–294 102 -- -- -- -- -- 49 42 -7 12/9/2008 7-1147 31-64921 Williamstown -74.88472 39.68056 –390 139 -- -- -- -- -- -- 71 -- 12/30/2008 7-1280 31-72548 Hammonton -74.84111 39.68240 290–320 108 -- -- -- -- -- -- 43 -- 12/9/2008 11-44 35-01197 Bridgeton -75.15768 39.45900 361–376 82 17 12 7 0 -5 -7 -70 -63 11/19/2008 11-92 -- Ben Davis Point -75.25241 39.29623 397–417 5 -- -28 -37 -44 -44 -46 -75 -29 12/9/2008

11-96 34-00852 Cedarville -75.20185 39.30817 365–375 10 -15 -20 -28 -34 -34 -34 -61 -27 11/19/200811-163 35-01196 Millville -75.11157 39.42400 463–473 80 22 13 8 2 -4 -11 -48 -37 11/19/200811-341 34-00991 Ben Davis Point -75.32228 39.32683 300–357 4 -- -35 -44 -49 -50 -50 -81 -31 12/9/200811-349 34-01463 Cedarville -75.23958 39.28189 380–410 5 -- -28 -35 -42 -42 -44 -70 -26 12/10/200811-1151 34-01814 Cedarville -75.20886 39.26383 466–476 5 -- -- -- -- -40 -42 -66 -24 12/9/200811-1220 34-06736 Bridgeton -75.22003 39.40900 235–375 29 -- -- -- -- -- -22 -154 -132 12/8/200811-1221 34-06556 Bridgeton -75.21081 39.41092 250–390 36 -- -- -- -- -- -21 -157 -136 12/8/200811-1571 34-06557 Bridgeton -75.21713 39.41067 245–390 42 -- -- -- -- -- -- -155 -- 12/8/200815-1592 31-58699 Buena -74.90919 39.58997 290–350 101 -- -- -- -- -- -- -2 -- 11/20/2008
Appendix 3 75

Appendix 3. Water-level data for wells screened in the Piney Point aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS well 

identifier

Stateissued 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

15-1593 31-58698 Buena -74.96125 39.61933 335–405 118 -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 -- 11/20/200815-1757 31-70478 Buena -74.96061 39.61978 290–350 119 -- -- -- -- -- -- 21 -- 11/20/200829-2 33-01206 Barnegat Light -74.10958 39.75623 597–654 7 -- -40 -33 -38 -- -38 -35 3 11/13/200829-18 -- Barnegat Light -74.09264 39.80818 468–474 9 1 0 -0 -2 -2 -3 -3 0 10/17/200829-23 33-01494 Seaside Park -74.08230 39.90634 490–527 7 -- -- -- -57 -58 -43 -40 3 12/2/200829-116 53-00020 Toms River -74.14764 39.94484 267–293 3 -- -1 -1 -2 -22 -13 -13 0 11/24/200829-425 -- Whiting -74.38070 39.88956 348–348 128 -- -- -- 119 119 118 118 0 10/22/200829-537 53-00001 Seaside Park -74.07753 39.94320 400–430 4 -- -35 -30 -35 -58 -17 -19 -2 12/2/200829-582 33-04511 Seaside Park -74.07558 39.92995 435–485 12 -- -- -- -51 -- -48 -37 11 12/3/200829-585 -- Forked River -74.17847 39.84123 412–422 15 -- 15 15 12 14 14 12 -2 10/30/200829-607 33-07876 Long Beach NE -74.11497 39.74843 597–662 5 -- -41 -34 -38 -44 -40 -39 1 11/14/200829-616 53-00005 Toms River -74.13878 39.92440 340–360 7 -- -6 -12 -- -- -17 -16 1 11/25/200829-739 33-01247 Lakewood -74.16525 40.01233 200–220 20 -- 13 11 13 8 11 10 -1 11/10/200829-808 33-06595 Seaside Park -74.07891 39.93540 395–475 5 -- -- -29 -46 -76 -30 -31 -1 12/2/200829-1096 33-29653 Toms River -74.16136 39.89940 345–440 32 -- -- -- -- -1 -9 -7 2 12/3/200829-1114 29-24912 Point Pleasant -74.05736 40.01292 206–276 10 -- -- -- -- -3 1 -1 -2 11/5/200829-1210 36-20855 Tuckerton -74.31903 39.52095 860–880 6 -- -- -- -- -14 -16 -19 -3 10/22/200829-1215 33-31998 Toms River -74.17264 39.96706 196–258 25 -- -- -- -- -- -- -16 -- 12/4/200829-1217 33-29690 Forked River -74.18486 39.86433 468–583 32 -- -- -- -- -- 17 15 -2 11/25/200829-1579 33-41928 West Creek -74.26803 39.72931 595–645 61 -- -- -- -- -- 25 24 -1 11/13/200829-1675 33-40849 Toms River -74.21089 39.90275 335–445 72 -- -- -- -- -- -- 19 -- 12/3/200829-1681 33-40235 Seaside Park -74.08297 39.91442 459–503 5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -45 -- 12/2/200829-1999 33-41870 Toms River -74.20556 39.92778 301–386 62 -- -- -- -- -- -- 8 -- 11/25/2008

Delaware and Maryland

De-KE-10400 10040 Wyoming -75.5781 39.0044 -- 54 -- -- -- -- -- -- -66 -- 12/23/2008DE-KE-11221 112218 Wyoming -75.5661 39.0381 -- 49 -- -- -- -- -- -- -86 -- 12/16/2008DE-KE-225743 225743 Wyoming -75.5858 39.0894 -- 55 -- -- -- -- -- -- -103 -- 12/30/2008CO Bd 53 CO73-0541 Goldsboro -75.7835 39.0409 300–312 60 30 30 26 22 20 17 17 0 3/31/2009Id55-01 10225 Dover -75.5133 39.1739 329–349 20 -- -- -132 -128 -127 -115 -128 -13 1/15/2009
76 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 3. Water-level data for wells screened in the Piney Point aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier State- issued permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 Jd14-15 10211 Dover -75.5192 39.1547 370–450 21 -- -- -- -- -155 -121 -138 -17 12/17/2008 Jd25-03 -- Dover -75.5086 39.1458 327–484 20 -- -- -- -- -130 -117 -132 -15 12/18/2008 Jd34-18 D010208 Dover -75.5325 39.1247 330–337 20 -- -- -- -- -177 -116 -125 -9 12/17/2008 Je12-03 D031640 Little Creek -75.4827 39.1557 340–502 22 -- -- -- -- -123 -114 -131 -17 12/18/2008 Kc31-01 -- Marydel -75.6541 39.0401 370–380 55 -- -- -- -- -56 -61 -66 -5 2/5/2009 Nc13-03 10223 Greenwood -75.6161 38.8264 620–630 62.7 -- -- -- -- -26 -29 -34 -5 1/15/2009
Appendix 4 77

Appendix 4. Water-level data for wells screened in the Vincentown aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS 

well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

5-1250 28-20189-2 New Egypt -74.58849 40.03011 45–55 112 -- -- -- -- 102 103 103 0 12/29/20085-1720 28-10989 New Egypt -74.59613 40.05081 118–126 123 -- -- -- -- -- -- 110 -- 11/4/200815-123 31-00216 Pitman West -75.15944 39.71494 121–150 140 -- -- -- -- 75 77 78 1 12/9/200815-1005 30-03319 Pitman West -75.22397 39.67906 140–156 148 -- -- 70 -- 62 70 64 -6 12/9/200815-1360 31-42096 Pitman West -75.13417 39.72972 166–191 120 -- -- -- -- 78 80 80 0 12/3/200815-1544 31-32489 Pitman West -75.14222 39.71889 130–140 138 -- -- -- -- -- 83 86 3 12/1/200825-448 29-04725 Asbury Park -74.12236 40.19289 219–235 125 -- -- -- -- 70 72 69 -3 10/24/200825-636 29-18404-5 Farmingdale -74.20014 40.18484 85–95 112 -- -- 59 -- 73 73 71 -2 10/22/200825-685 29-13792 Marlboro -74.13125 40.28567 68–76 80 -- -- -- -- -- -- 70 -- 12/2/200825-691 29-15843-5 Farmingdale -74.18542 40.18456 5–25 50 -- -- 43 -- 45 46 45 -1 11/3/200825-702 29-09528 Asbury Park -74.04669 40.22753 129–140 45 -- -- -- -- 44 42 43 1 10/24/200825-703 29-11712 Asbury Park -74.11389 40.22147 167–187 80 -- -- -- -- 70 70 70 0 10/22/200825-717 29-28188 Adelphia -74.33348 40.17956 38–43 150 -- -- -- -- 131 133 130 -3 10/30/200825-788 29-36417 Long Branch -74.02086 40.25192 120–166 50 -- -- -- -- 29 31 29 -2 11/12/200825-789 29-06311 Farmingdale -74.18625 40.18317 –198 70 -- -- -- -- -- 46 45 -1 10/29/200825-847 29-23330 Farmingdale -74.15861 40.21389 88–118 87 -- -- -- -- -- -- 83 -- 10/24/200825-1065 29-05506 Adelphia -74.25467 40.15078 110–195 97 -- -- -- -- -- -- 79 -- 11/6/200829-139 28-04784 Cassville -74.45015 40.07067 161–171 136 -- 129 129 -- 130 130 129 -1 10/22/200829-230 28-05038 Cassville -74.39456 40.12344 85–100 150 -- -- 130 -- 132 133 129 -4 10/23/200829-241 29-07425 Adelphia -74.26067 40.15286 115–165 82 -- -- -- -- -- 83 77 -6 10/27/200829-658 29-08966 Lakehurst -74.31237 40.11678 202–215 115 -- -- 96 -- 94 94 89 -5 10/30/200829-698 28-11275 Cassville -74.41508 40.10008 120–132 152 -- -- 141 -- 137 137 134 -3 10/22/200829-916 29-13024 Adelphia -74.27903 40.14734 139–155 125 -- -- 106 -- 111 110 106 -4 11/5/200829-917 29-16962 Adelphia -74.25409 40.14722 126–186 75 -- -- 75 -- 63 69 65 -4 10/28/200833-292 30-00397 Woodstown -75.25574 39.63734 190–218 142 -- -- -- -- -- 43 37 -6 12/9/2008
78 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 5. Water-level data for wells screened in the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier New Jersey permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 5-257 51-00156 Mount Holly -74.84969 39.92081 –90 80 27 25 27 54 50 54 52 -2 10/28/2008 5-354 32-00103 Pemberton -74.66338 39.97042 178–198 62 40 39 36 40 36 39 36 -3 11/20/2008 5-355 52-00004 Pemberton -74.68530 39.97400 155–185 81 39 38 38 41 39 42 39 -3 11/4/2008 5-359 32-00539 Pemberton -74.68710 39.95695 181–242 70 36 35 37 34 37 42 36 -6 11/6/2008 5-365 32-00386 Browns Mills -74.58177 39.96475 290–330 95 18 -3 -11 -12 0 6 4 -2 11/5/2008 5-367 32-00818 Browns Mills -74.54377 39.96539 308–338 90 -- -- -- -- -- -- -27 -- 11/6/2008 5-427 32-00749 Pemberton -74.70099 39.89175 260–348 70 11 -8 -13 -5 -5 3 -8 -11 11/5/2008 5-464 32-00637 Medford Lakes -74.75997 39.85392 -- 120 -- -- -- -- -- -- -45 -- 11/13/2008 5-695 32-01240 Browns Mills -74.62182 39.89123 428–496 102 24 18 15 9 7 8 -2 -10 11/5/2008 5-711 31-05707 Medford Lakes -74.79377 39.85789 260–275 75 -- -- -- -- -- -12 -35 -23 11/6/2008 5-718 32-00361 Browns Mills -74.50960 39.96012 376–388 95 -- -- -- -- -8 -4 -3 1 11/5/2008 5-724 32-03118 Pemberton -74.70763 39.90403 199–275 43 18 15 6 6 -6 -1 -8 -7 11/5/2008 5-725 48-00021 New Egypt -74.61902 40.03692 142–162 145 128 126 125 126 125 126 125 -1 11/4/2008 5-744 32-00520 Whiting -74.49742 39.94425 –456 100 9 -13 -21 -21 -9 -6 -6 0 11/6/2008 5-1004 32-08631 Pemberton -74.67010 39.95400 209–254 84 -- -- 29 36 36 31 26 -5 11/6/2008 5-1082 31-19052 Mount Holly -74.79197 40.00036 82–92 48 -- -- 22 23 18 24 23 -1 10/29/2008 5-1087 32-09937 Pemberton -74.74433 39.89261 227–232 55 -- -- 11 9 -2 5 -7 -12 11/5/2008 5-1155 31-39849 Mount Holly -74.82939 39.88767 120–180 46 -- -- -- 31 23 25 18 -7 10/27/2008 5-1165 32-00490 Browns Mills -74.58866 39.98220 275–307 120 -- -- -- 6 14 17 17 0 11/11/2008 5-1166 28-17342 New Egypt -74.56463 40.07514 119–129 135 -- -- -- 100 97 100 98 -2 11/05/2008

5-1178 32-13264 Pemberton -74.73688 39.92784 140–180 40 -- -- -- 30 19 21 15 -6 10/21/20085-1186 32-15968 Browns Mills -74.55152 39.98745 267–358 90 -- -- -- -27 -6 -1 -1 0 11/6/20085-1245 52-00082 Mount Holly -74.75238 39.91400 -- 39 -- -- -- -- 10 19 10 -9 10/29/20085-1253 31-46953 Medford Lakes -74.80155 39.82789 357–417 118 -- -- -- -- -47 -32 -55 -23 11/7/20085-1387 31-40373 Clementon -74.87908 39.80000 335–355 119 -- -- -- -- 2 1 -6 -7 11/7/20085-1414 31-49988 Medford Lakes -74.85461 39.84789 199–259 65 -- -- -- -- -- -12 -30 -18 11/7/20085-1415 31-50015 Medford Lakes -74.85033 39.86292 162–212 50 -- -- -- -- -- 3 -13 -16 11/13/20085-1449 32-12425 Pemberton -74.69639 39.94333 160–198 45 -- -- -- -- -- 27 19 -8 10/29/20085-1475 32-18506 Browns Mills -74.58654 39.97623 276–326 110 -- -- -- -- 7 12 4 -8 11/5/20085-1495 32-06317 Whiting -74.47800 39.93550 512–522 120 -- -- -- -- 2 5 5 0 11/6/2008
Appendix 5 79

Appendix 5. Water-level data for wells screened in the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS 

well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

5-1776 31-38296 Medford Lakes -74.87444 39.82778 295–305 90 -- -- -- -- -- -- -1 -- 02/23/20097-22 31-00513 Clementon -74.93650 39.79378 310–360 147 34 -- 11 -7 4 3 0 -3 11/3/20087-118 31-04898 Clementon -74.95294 39.87484 137–147 158 69 69 68 68 68 68 67 -1 11/7/20087-308 51-00014 Runnemede -75.00536 39.82464 –126 77 57 58 56 55 49 50 48 -2 12/23/20087-391 31-05628 Clementon -74.96453 39.77839 315–335 168 36 37 16 2 -14 -9 -12 -3 11/14/20087-401 31-02371 Clementon -74.96905 39.78956 –267 85 36 43 23 9 -6 -3 -2 1 11/6/20087-414 51-00010 Clementon -74.94136 39.82303 237–275 150 60 52 36 51 58 52 49 -3 11/19/20087-421 -- Clementon -74.95378 39.85261 220–234 175 91 91 89 89 87 88 86 -2 11/3/20087-449 31-04749 Clementon -74.90297 39.77159 420–460 159 20 19 -4 -- -10 -9 -12 -3 11/6/20087-478 -- Williamstown -74.93767 39.70428 520–530 111 36 40 21 3 -25 -29 -32 -3 11/7/20087-513 31-07766 Clementon -74.93933 39.75900 410–460 166 -- -- -4 -19 -31 -34 -27 7 11/21/20087-685 31-22273 Williamstown -74.98686 39.75370 322–427 144 -- -- -- -20 -62 -50 -51 -1 12/2/20087-847 31-36246 Pitman East -75.02128 39.73317 329–380 150 -- -- -- -- -81 -71 -82 -11 12/3/20087-1079 31-22832 Runnemede -75.01961 39.80400 120–130 67 -- -- -- -- -- 51 50 -1 11/20/20087-1086 31-61104 Clementon -74.99722 39.77889 299–389 180 -- -- -- -- -- -- -16 -- 12/2/20087-1202 31-62243 Medford Lakes -74.84016 39.76678 495–525 114 -- -- -- -- -- -- -13 -- 11/21/200815-687 31-22088 Woodbury -75.19683 39.77542 5.5–23.5 28 -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 -- 11/25/200815-910 30-02454 Pitman West -75.23686 39.69800 140–160 108 -- -- 82 81 78 85 81 -4 12/9/200815-953 31-06570 Runnemede -75.10073 39.78845 86–100 81 -- -- 56 55 54 55 52 -3 11/20/200815-1009 31-22018 Pitman East -75.10836 39.74078 149–178 100 -- -- 65 62 58 62 59 -3 12/02/200815-1040 30-05046 Woodstown -75.30658 39.71595 77–87 120 -- -- 77 79 78 81 78 -3 12/3/200815-1060 31-30571 Pitman East -75.09804 39.68339 335–386 136 -- -- -- 20 -47 -23 3 26 12/2/200815-1104 30-02422-6 Woodstown -75.32074 39.73067 –40 102 -- -- -- 81 79 82 79 -3 12/04/200815-1126 31-34033-4 Pitman East -75.10712 39.68873 328–338 146 -- -- -- -- -22 -3 8 11 11/14/200815-1203 31-34604 Pitman East -75.08128 39.70956 298–308 147 -- -- -- -- -31 -3 -2 1 1/8/200915-1206 31-39283 Pitman West -75.16125 39.72781 195–215 139 -- -- -- -- -- 82 86 4 12/3/200815-1223 31-33093-2 Pitman East -75.08795 39.65345 485–495 137 -- -- -- -- -- -7 -13 -6 1/8/200915-1349 31-33937 Pitman East -75.03350 39.72428 680–690 160 -- -- -- -- -- -63 -60 3 11/20/200815-1357 31-25418 Pitman East -75.09823 39.68261 340–390 137 -- -- -- -- -- -23 2 25 12/2/200815-1384 31-45999 Pitman East -75.03231 39.72231 342–382 160 -- -- -- -- -- -47 -65 -18 1/8/2009
80 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 5. Water-level data for wells screened in the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier New Jersey permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 15-1387 51-00215 Woodbury -75.12914 39.76211 70–100 45 -- -- -- -- -- -- 37 -- 11/25/2008 15-1452 31-36292 Pitman West -75.14231 39.71886 198–258 142 -- -- -- -- -- 74 78 4 12/1/2008 15-1517 30-11753 Pitman West -75.22208 39.72372 112–132 88 -- -- -- -- 65 67 64 -3 12/9/2008 15-1524 31-22318 Runnemede -75.07989 39.76484 174–225 90 -- -- -- -- -- 66 65 -1 12/2/2008 15-1634 31-56244 Pitman West -75.17639 39.65056 340–370 140 -- -- -- -- -- -- 26 -- 12/12/2008 25-14 49-00017 Asbury Park -74.02233 40.19386 424–504 20 -153 -170 -210 -91 -85 -67 -60 7 10/23/2008 25-88 29-05886 Adelphia -74.28289 40.24456 143–163 150 -- -- 114 112 113 113 110 -3 11/25/2008 25-95 29-04709 Freehold -74.27848 40.27178 128–140 162 -- -- -- 133 134 133 131 -2 10/28/2008 25-166 29-04381 Farmingdale -74.23448 40.16450 336–396 123 -- -- -29 21 21 23 22 -1 10/22/2008 25-168 29-03105 Farmingdale -74.22103 40.16597 354–440 160 -46 -44 -56 -- -2 11 0 -11 10/2/2008 25-185 29-02607 Farmingdale -74.17320 40.24400 229–250 119 59 60 56 65 66 65 59 -6 10/29/2008 25-335 -- Asbury Park -74.06875 40.20428 465–480 90 -110 -118 -136 -56 -59 -38 -37 1 10/22/2008 25-353 -- Long Branch -74.09125 40.26178 321–327 140 -- -21 -15 10 15 16 13 -3 10/17/2008 25-391 29-07506 Asbury Park -74.03617 40.15798 485–561 25 -190 -161 -215 -104 -83 -72 -68 4 10/23/2008 25-396 28-06896 New Egypt -74.52599 40.11622 92–102 122 85 85 83 86 83 86 82 -4 11/3/2008 25-405 -- Roosevelt -74.48654 40.16817 –124 158 127 128 126 127 145 147 145 -2 10/23/2008 25-412 28-05835 Roosevelt -74.47206 40.17967 100–140 194 153 152 151 152 150 150 147 -3 10/23/2008 25-443 29-02871 Asbury Park -74.06428 40.18161 435–465 75 -147 -158 -- -- -- -63 -55 8 10/23/2008 25-486 -- Point Pleasant -74.03347 40.11984 604–614 10 -- -- -185 -102 -74 -69 -59 10 10/17/2008 25-533 29-05113 Farmingdale -74.22570 40.13789 349–365 120 -- -61 -74 -21 -16 -8 -21 -13 11/25/2008

25-542 -- Asbury Park -74.12431 40.16425 430–450 68 -- -99 -115 -51 -34 -25 -25 0 10/23/200825-637 29-18400-2 Farmingdale -74.20014 40.18484 307–317 112 -- -- -28 7 16 13 13 0 10/22/200825-687 29-15008 Long Branch -74.04747 40.30217 177–187 20 -- -- 1 8 11 11 8 -3 11/5/200825-698 29-17963 Asbury Park -74.07203 40.18789 421–451 75 -- -- -- -- -- -- -58 -- 10/23/200825-720 29-16821 Adelphia -74.26570 40.18150 235–255 120 -- -- -- -- -- -- 80 -- 11/6/200825-829 29-36936 Farmingdale -74.16169 40.14233 395–402 61 -- -- -- -- -- -32 -26 6 10/24/200825-897 29-17602 Farmingdale -74.14792 40.22456 288–298 95 -- -- -- -- -- -- 45 -- 11/3/200825-976 29-45800 Long Branch -74.09208 40.30733 -- 61 -- -- -- -- -- -- 28 -- 11/4/200829-31 29-04663 Lakewood -74.13678 40.04294 605–625 13 -117 -124 -133 -120 -73 -59 -54 5 11/10/200829-36 29-06021 Lakewood -74.15339 40.07058 518–548 30 -- -131 -146 -115 -75 -63 -57 6 10/31/2008
Appendix 5 81

Appendix 5. Water-level data for wells screened in the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS 

well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

29-37 29-04283 Point Pleasant -74.11464 40.07511 576–591 20 -136 -141 -155 -129 -90 -76 -68 8 11/24/200829-49 29-06022 Point Pleasant -74.11772 40.08439 556–586 29 -- -135 -149 -122 -82 -69 -63 6 11/10/200829-140 28-04785 Cassville -74.45015 40.07067 257–267 135 115 -- 112 112 112 112 107 -5 10/22/200829-227 29-05007 Lakehurst -74.32029 40.10175 –358 110 42 38 -- 47 46 39 19 -20 10/31/200829-234 28-08255 Roosevelt -74.42515 40.13595 180–200 140 123 130 122 121 121 119 114 -5 10/24/200829-699 28-07966 Roosevelt -74.39181 40.15483 214–226 160 -- 124 121 123 122 118 109 -9 10/23/200829-713 28-10063 Lakehurst -74.35015 40.11011 318–324 130 -- 83 82 84 84 78 58 -20 10/27/200829-740 29-08522 Lakehurst -74.35483 40.05897 340–380 105 -- 41 39 42 52 53 46 -7 11/3/200829-781 29-09069 Lakehurst -74.33209 40.10623 302–325 110 -- -- 40 36 42 59 38 -21 11/3/200829-782 29-09348 Lakehurst -74.25653 40.11928 375–381 120 -- -- -- -- -- -1 -2 -1 11/5/200829-783 29-09681 Adelphia -74.29967 40.12950 310–325 112 -- 49 39 39 48 46 42 -4 11/6/200829-784 29-10449 Lakehurst -74.30181 40.09734 341–347 90 -- -- 2 4 9 6 -10 -16 11/7/200829-786 29-08581 Lakehurst -74.29126 40.10845 364–379 110 -- -0 -3 4 13 9 -3 -12 10/30/200829-926 28-18902 Cassville -74.45737 40.10289 127–160 105 -- -- 109 110 110 110 107 -3 11/5/200829-1138 28-23392 New Egypt -74.50265 40.10456 100–120 95 -- -- -- -- 96 97 93 -4 11/3/200829-2055 28-56401 Adelphia -74.37000 40.14806 249–269 157 -- -- -- -- -- -- 101 -- 11/3/200833-2 -- Alloway -75.27463 39.53400 462–472 85 -- 22 20 19 14 15 10 -5 12/15/200833-8 30-00030 Alloway -75.30608 39.55819 322–345 62 -- -- 12 10 7 9 4 -5 12/5/200833-20 -- Alloway -75.29741 39.59289 –283 77 33 32 30 28 25 27 22 -5 11/14/200833-22 31-04612 Elmer -75.17179 39.59273 460–500 105 28 30 27 20 6 14 3 -11 12/5/200833-50 -- Salem -75.44381 39.59319 73–97 20 5 6 4 5 6 7 5 -2 12/8/200833-56 -- Salem -75.42308 39.60186 –93 25 7 7 7 7 7 8 6 -2 12/8/200833-249 50-00042 Salem -75.45464 39.56189 110–150 5 0 -2 -5 -- -- -6 -6 0 12/9/200833-252 -- Salem -75.46467 39.56370 91–96 3 1 0 -0 0 -1 1 -1 -2 11/20/200833-381 30-01505 Salem -75.45214 39.58150 85–125 10 -- -0 1 1 -0 1 0 -1 12/9/200833-384 30-01356 Salem -75.41664 39.52722 –320 15 -- 1 -- 0 -1 1 0 -1 12/9/200833-407 34-01600 Salem -75.43353 39.50258 250–300 5 -- -- -- -- -7 -2 -2 0 12/15/200833-456 31-19206 Elmer -75.17940 39.58548 443–503 125 -- 28 27 22 8 9 8 -1 12/5/200833-664 30-01454 Woodstown -75.35269 39.62622 123–166 70 -- -- -- -- 36 38 36 -2 12/9/200833-842 35-17374 Elmer -75.14268 39.51539 675–695 77 -- -- -- -- -- -- 18 -- 11/19/2008
82 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 5. Water-level data for wells screened in the Wenonah-Mount Laurel aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier New Jersey permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 33-886 30-06741 Pitman West -75.22742 39.63106 358–378 144 -- -- -- -- -- 38 31 -7 12/15/2008 33-902 30-09510 Woodstown -75.31766 39.64592 100–143 48 -- -- -- -- 36 38 36 -2 12/5/2008 33-904 30-05669 Pitman West -75.23525 39.64997 300–310 143 -- -- -- -- -- 48 40 -8 12/2/2008 33-932 30-05631 Salem -75.42425 39.60108 70–80 30 -- -- -- -- 9 11 9 -2 12/9/2008 33-937 30-08556 Alloway -75.28458 39.57298 318–338 102 -- -- -- -- -- 15 9 -6 12/5/2008 33-938 34-00970 Taylors Bridge -75.52944 39.46208 270–290 18 -- -- -- -- 2 3 5 2 12/10/2008 33-973 30-05372 Alloway -75.36419 39.55892 230–240 39 -- -- -- -- -- 14 11 -3 12/5/2008
Appendix 6 83

Appendix 6. Water-level data for wells screened in the Englishtown aquifer system, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS 

well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

5-195 31-01164 Mount Holly -74.84458 39.97606 70–74 60 25 23 22 26 22 22 21 -1 10/31/20085-197 31-01191 Mount Holly -74.82211 39.94817 148–159 41 26 25 19 26 24 26 22 -4 10/31/20085-256 31-01399 Mount Holly -74.84956 39.92078 –440 79 -- -- -- -- 19 20 18 -2 10/28/20085-259 -- Mount Holly -74.83989 39.92345 253–263 73 25 -- 24 24 20 19 18 -1 10/27/20085-375 32-00276 Pemberton -74.64321 39.96873 343–378 72 19 29 25 20 12 21 26 5 11/5/20085-387 32-01103 Pemberton -74.68849 39.99539 208–228 50 52 54 49 52 49 48 49 1 11/10/20085-437 28-03831 Columbus -74.69349 40.03622 94–105 74 62 61 61 66 58 62 59 -3 10/29/20085-754 -- Browns Mills -74.54619 39.99483 419–447 100 50 46 43 37 32 31 29 -2 11/4/20085-1390 32-21804 Browns Mills -74.58877 39.88595 615–635 107 -- -- -- -- 10 11 7 -4 10/21/20085-1427 27-11807 Bristol -74.79516 40.01456 40–60 55 -- -- -- -- -- 51 47 -4 10/23/20085-1437 28-11130 New Egypt -74.57543 40.11456 165–245 170 -- -- -- -- -- 100 96 -4 10/27/20085-1476 31-55694 Mount Holly -74.84044 39.99122 9–14 17 -- -- -- -- -- 12 10 -2 10/27/20085-1482 32-18441 Browns Mills -74.58793 39.97623 431–511 113 -- -- -- -- -- -- -38 -- 11/6/20085-1492 32-22557 Browns Mills -74.55182 39.98761 411–451 88 -- -- -- -- 23 23 21 -2 11/6/20085-1493 32-22560 Browns Mills -74.55024 39.98773 430–470 100 -- -- -- -- -- 28 30 2 11/6/20085-1762 31-65897 Mount Holly -74.80000 39.91472 249–279 55 -- -- -- -- -- -- 12 -- 10/28/20085-1763 31-70362 Mount Holly -74.79944 39.91694 231–281 55 -- -- -- -- -- -- 10 -- 10/28/20087-166 31-01202 Clementon -74.96828 39.80225 367–457 150 0 47 11 15 13 10 19 9 12/3/20087-529 31-13543 Clementon -74.98711 39.80900 250–283 55 1 50 26 3 0 4 20 16 10/31/20087-672 31-24779 Runnemede -75.00611 39.82458 195–215 76 -- -- 49 46 28 3 23 20 12/23/20087-673 31-24778 Runnemede -75.00617 39.82461 195–215 76 -- -- 50 -- -- 6 24 18 12/23/20087-731 31-29319 Clementon -74.98222 39.83089 216–236 69 -- -- -- 52 46 27 10 -17 12/23/200815-676 -- Woodbury -75.19681 39.77542 68–78 28 -- -- 30 30 30 30 30 0 11/25/200823-104 -- Freehold -74.31320 40.36205 0–11 77 -- -- 69 74 70 73 72 -1 10/20/200823-211 28-07520 Jamesburg -74.37942 40.30558 43–49 105 90 93 91 -- 95 94 93 -1 10/21/200825-9 49-00050 Sandy Hook -74.04236 40.41150 -- 15 10 11 5 10 9 -- 8 -- 10/22/200825-16 29-00045 Asbury Park -74.02961 40.17611 563–594 20 -188 -196 -202 -91 -68 -68 -52 16 10/23/200825-28 29-05292 Point Pleasant -74.07447 40.10659 770–820 90 -219 -220 -207 -119 -93 -100 -63 37 11/13/200825-30 29-00069 Point Pleasant -74.06197 40.11256 690–750 33 -233 -249 -225 -116 -91 -100 -62 38 11/13/200825-46 29-04196 Marlboro -74.20542 40.29650 212–232 122 70 68 61 -- 58 52 41 -11 11/7/2008
84 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 6. Water-level data for wells screened in the Englishtown aquifer system, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier New Jersey permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 25-63 29-04386 Farmingdale -74.17170 40.19659 420–460 75 -- -- -83 -39 -27 -29 -11 18 10/29/2008 25-80 29-05417 Adelphia -74.24987 40.23761 294–334 120 75 78 73 73 78 75 68 -7 11/25/2008 25-96 29-04435 Freehold -74.25015 40.27344 327–356 200 87 88 81 74 68 70 60 -10 10/27/2008 25-144 49-00031 Marlboro -74.16556 40.36200 –154 104 -- -- 59 -- 57 58 57 -1 11/25/2008 25-162 29-07043 Farmingdale -74.17820 40.13761 500–560 69 -114 -120 -125 -66 -48 -51 -48 3 11/5/2008 25-165 29-05346 Farmingdale -74.22289 40.14500 363–550 135 -- -- -94 -46 -36 -30 -53 -23 11/6/2008 25-250 29-04437 Freehold -74.25765 40.32178 185–215 139 100 99 95 92 90 92 89 -3 10/20/2008 25-277 29-00030 Keyport -74.24242 40.37528 138–152 180 -- -- -- -- 92 91 90 -1 10/15/2008 25-365 29-04513 Long Branch -74.01764 40.34622 268–333 8 -- -- -- 6 2 8 6 -2 11/12/2008 25-383 49-00014 Asbury Park -74.03533 40.14703 631–711 15 -- -- -- -- -- -- -61 -- 10/23/2008 25-389 29-00398 Asbury Park -74.05180 40.14920 660–711 60 -203 -232 -224 -109 -83 -96 -65 31 10/23/2008 25-408 28-06655 Allentown -74.53321 40.16872 96–119 105 -- 100 100 99 -- 99 100 1 10/24/2008 25-428 29-02869 Asbury Park -74.08197 40.13956 689–740 100 -- -- -- -- -- -- -74 -- 10/23/2008 25-429 29-04140 Farmingdale -74.14236 40.14289 623–633 98 -143 -149 -149 -78 -58 -66 -47 19 10/30/2008 25-441 29-05289 Asbury Park -74.10975 40.17500 549–649 120 -162 -163 -170 -74 -65 -73 -50 23 10/23/2008 25-442 49-00032 Asbury Park -74.06144 40.18114 627–657 70 -- -177 -- -- -- -67 -50 17 10/23/2008 25-638 29-18401-1 Farmingdale -74.20014 40.18484 483–493 112 -- -- -53 -14 -3 -6 -2 4 10/22/2008 25-686 29-15362 Marlboro -74.13125 40.29928 320–340 80 -- -- -- 31 -- 27 28 1 12/2/2008 25-697 29-13591 Long Branch -74.07522 40.32836 247–277 77 -- -- 25 28 29 29 26 -3 11/5/2008 25-704 29-15337 Adelphia -74.30848 40.24733 290–320 195 -- -- 105 107 107 106 102 -4 11/7/2008

25-710 29-16728 Lakewood -74.15267 40.10181 594–644 45 -- -- -164 -96 -70 -71 -60 11 10/30/200825-714 29-25383 Sandy Hook -74.02858 40.40680 198–248 80 -- -- -- -- -- 10 4 -6 10/28/200825-715 29-25384 Sandy Hook -74.00486 40.40733 350–360 229 -- -- -- 5 4 5 4 -1 10/15/200825-727 29-24425 Freehold -74.29315 40.27922 149–206 112 -- -- -- -- -- 68 62 -6 10/27/200825-733 29-28556 Marlboro -74.19764 40.27233 316–366 135 -- -- -- -- 47 48 39 -9 11/7/200825-735 29-26191 Marlboro -74.23042 40.35091 140–191 140 -- -- -- 33 83 84 82 -2 11/7/200825-771 29-36217 Sandy Hook -73.97708 40.39733 258–278 8 -- -- -- -- -1 2 0 -- 10/15/200825-771 29-36217 Sandy Hook Freshwater equivalent -- -- -- -- 4 6 5 -1 10/15/200825-782 28-14424 Allentown -74.52015 40.13539 215–245 150 -- -- -- -- -- 104 92 -12 10/29/200825-786 29-30436 Marlboro -74.13681 40.30039 233–273 87 -- -- -- -- 32 33 30 -3 11/20/2008
Appendix 6 85

Appendix 6. Water-level data for wells screened in the Englishtown aquifer system, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS 

well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

25-787 28-36906 Allentown -74.52606 40.18197 90–100 133 -- -- -- -- 113 114 113 -1 10/22/200825-837 29-26791 Adelphia -74.32917 40.20667 243–318 118 -- -- -- -- -- -- 96 -- 11/6/200825-1002 29-45380 Marlboro -74.22376 40.31317 -- 123 -- -- -- -- -- -- 76 -- 11/25/200829-5 49-00002 Point Pleasant -74.04480 40.06839 750–834 4 -232 -225 -208 -159 -110 -100 -70 30 11/5/200829-138 -- Cassville -74.45015 40.07067 417–427 137 65 63 60 61 65 65 61 -4 10/22/200829-236 29-03883 Adelphia -74.25870 40.14011 541–577 170 -- -43 -53 -16 -56 -7 -9 -2 10/27/200829-430 29-05721 Lakewood -74.19820 40.03876 752–817 104 -- -182 -176 -105 -- -76 -76 0 11/12/200829-433 29-05110 Lakewood -74.18839 40.05253 673–741 45 -207 -202 -184 -105 -78 -75 -71 4 11/12/200829-434 29-04304 Lakewood -74.22106 40.06114 697–757 123 -189 -160 -- -93 -68 -72 -64 8 11/6/200829-438 29-04834 Lakewood -74.23484 40.07750 600–758 78 -152 -170 -161 -112 -79 -90 -91 -1 11/5/200829-441 29-05068 Lakewood -74.18686 40.08478 726–736 30 -136 -141 -140 -112 -70 -61 -53 8 11/5/200829-450 29-03324 Lakewood -74.22978 40.10653 520–582 70 -135 -153 -133 -87 -61 -70 -65 5 11/5/200829-451 29-02207 Lakehurst -74.25376 40.11011 510–530 60 -102 -108 -103 -64 -52 -54 -51 3 11/5/200829-452 -- Seaside Park -74.07625 39.96181 1,120–1,180 11 -- -115 -104 -85 -- -51 -51 0 11/24/200829-454 -- Seaside Park -74.07189 39.96876 1,009–1,136 5 -119 -118 -107 -85 -85 -43 -37 6 11/24/200829-503 29-01325 Point Pleasant -74.05236 40.03623 845–906 5 -- -194 -194 -133 -98 -94 -66 28 11/5/200829-518 -- New Egypt -74.53293 40.06706 218–238 75 -- -- 61 62 62 54 51 -3 10/21/200829-530 29-04530 Point Pleasant -74.07036 40.08133 730–790 17 -236 -211 -202 -146 -99 -102 -74 28 11/20/200829-532 49-00075 Point Pleasant -74.06605 40.08303 748–798 10 -- -259 -216 -- -- -115 -84 31 11/20/200829-534 33-01117 Toms River -74.21070 39.93595 1,080–1,146 18 -79 -86 -86 -85 -66 -54 -46 8 10/30/200829-938 28-20499 Lakehurst -74.35584 40.06600 487–527 123 -- -- -15 0 15 16 16 0 10/31/200829-1316 29-26316 Lakehurst -74.32681 40.07789 512–553 105 -- -- -- -- 4 2 3 1 11/3/200829-1336 28-34164 Cassville -74.49353 40.07483 305–355 130 -- -- -- -- 76 76 71 -5 10/29/200829-2013 28-41494 Roosevelt -74.42071 40.14150 378–398 144 -- -- -- -- -- -- 100 -- 10/24/200829-2023 29-55507 Lakewood -74.19867 40.10414 533–700 55 -- -- -- -- -- -- -101 -- 11/5/200833-168 30-00029 Penns Grove -75.37378 39.66119 113–124 40 -- -- -- -- 17 19 16 -3 12/3/200833-581 30-01467 Penns Grove -75.37736 39.65881 95–115 22 -- -- 16 11 -- 15 13 -2 12/3/2008
86 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 7. Water-level data for wells screened in the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier New Jersey permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 5-116 28-02847 Columbus -74.64294 40.11900 247–253 102 7 6 3 4 5 -1 0 1 10/29/2008 5-165 31-05458 Moorestown -74.90469 39.87498 464–500 121 -64 -70 -94 -93 -74 -74 -70 4 11/9/2008 5-167 31-07883 Mount Holly -74.86411 39.87959 478–548 46 -74 -83 -88 -92 -73 -77 -72 5 1/8/2009 5-212 28-03560 Columbus -74.68544 40.08761 290–310 83 -13 -15 -18 -18 -17 -21 -22 -1 10/30/2008 5-218 -- Columbus -74.74766 40.12178 –100 65 3 1 1 3 2 3 -2 -5 10/30/2008 5-229 31-08922 Moorestown -74.98228 39.94217 160–200 40 -47 -57 -56 -53 -48 -37 -35 2 11/3/2008 5-249 31-05282 Medford Lakes -74.84502 39.86889 523–541 55 -65 -75 -84 -86 -68 -60 -64 -4 11/13/2008 5-254 31-10560 Mount Holly -74.81527 39.90675 451–471 32 -- -- -- -77 -66 -60 -60 0 10/29/2008 5-258 31-04627 Mount Holly -74.83989 39.92345 400–410 71 -52 -65 -66 -69 -59 -54 -52 2 10/27/2008 5-317 31-00212 Moorestown -74.88794 39.98067 192–222 45 -- -- -45 -46 -46 -32 -29 3 12/9/2008 5-438 -- Bristol -74.76738 40.03844 220–230 41 -22 -23 -- -- -- -23 -25 -2 10/24/2008 5-707 31-14627 Moorestown -74.91733 39.89561 405–441 100 -- -86 -94 -- -71 -67 -64 3 11/9/2008 5-728 -- Pemberton -74.72766 39.97206 485–500 55 -31 -31 -37 -42 -43 -33 -36 -3 11/5/2008 5-731 -- Trenton East -74.70738 40.12761 118–128 93 5 4 3 3 3 2 1 -1 11/3/2008 5-745 27-05937 Bristol -74.80489 40.03261 260–290 102 -18 -17 -21 -23 -23 -20 -21 -1 10/23/2008 5-759 31-16976 Medford Lakes -74.82572 39.85956 593–672 65 -- -- -- -- -- -86 -91 -5 11/7/2008 5-795 31-09595 Moorestown -74.89325 39.88595 416–463 60 -79 -96 -97 -97 -76 -74 -76 -2 11/10/2008 5-820 31-06841 Clementon -74.89175 39.84603 545–591 87 -- -81 -83 -- -- -78 -73 5 11/10/2008 5-1157 28-28845 Columbus -74.72544 40.05344 251–266 45 -- -- -- -25 -- -27 -26 1 11/3/2008 5-1159 28-15286 Bristol -74.75199 40.06297 165–205 50 -- -- -- -9 -9 -9 -12 -3 10/21/2008

5-1170 27-10144 Bristol -74.82377 40.05372 140–215 58 -- -- -- -- -- -- -10 -- 10/22/20085-1181 31-41329 Mount Holly -74.78050 39.99325 313–343 19 -- -- -- -79 -53 -48 -49 -1 10/21/20085-1183 28-28543 Bristol -74.77433 40.05928 200–220 75 -- -- -- -16 -14 -14 -16 -2 10/22/20085-1194 31-29146 Moorestown -74.89506 39.93047 300–310 80 -- -- -- -64 -53 -48 -44 4 11/04/20085-1389 32-22005 Browns Mills -74.58877 39.88595 900–920 107 -- -- -- -- -42 -38 -43 -5 10/21/20085-1391 32-21805 Woodmansie -74.42626 39.81790 1,416–1,436 187 -- -- -- -- -32 -26 -35 -9 10/21/20085-1490 31-17792 Mount Holly -74.82266 39.94761 364–376 41 -- -- -- -- -57 -50 -50 0 10/31/20085-1499 31-55693 Camden -75.00573 39.97067 44–49 18 -- -- -- -- -- -- -12 -- 11/19/20087-13 51-00032 Runnemede -75.10956 39.87281 111–160 31 -- -46 -44 -39 -30 -27 -25 2 11/18/20087-15 31-06208 Clementon -74.93866 39.78095 675–745 150 -78 -89 -97 -97 -- -90 -74 16 11/3/2008
Appendix 7 87

Appendix 7. Water-level data for wells screened in the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS 

well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

7-18 31-02079 Clementon -74.93675 39.79417 650–713 147 -- -- -93 -96 -100 -76 -74 2 11/3/20087-115 31-00051 Clementon -74.98545 39.86372 400–420 70 -- -84 -101 -95 -62 -58 -56 2 11/13/20087-117 31-04897 Clementon -74.95294 39.87484 552–562 158 -75 -79 -84 -91 -67 -66 -61 5 11/7/20087-131 31-05096 Moorestown -74.95183 39.89817 –342 71 -74 -87 -83 -86 -54 -65 -59 6 12/23/20087-249 31-02703 Runnemede -75.06203 39.79870 426–447 65 -- -- -86 -86 -63 -64 -51 13 12/2/20087-252 31-05581 Runnemede -75.03139 39.80042 407–477 65 -83 -94 -91 -96 -66 -68 -56 12 12/2/20087-274 31-05226 Runnemede -75.06234 39.84220 269–349 55 -86 -92 -86 -91 -58 -63 -63 0 11/19/20087-275 31-03375 Camden -75.05284 39.87522 236–267 60 -77 -78 -81 -72 -- -61 -47 14 11/20/20087-279 31-04798 Camden -75.05412 39.87731 224–275 65 -76 -72 -77 -- -47 -53 -47 6 11/18/20087-285 31-03308 Camden -75.07601 39.87967 144–191 37 -50 -51 -51 -45 -29 -29 -27 2 11/18/20087-299 21-02570 Camden -75.03239 39.88956 206–246 65 -- -- -- -- -- -- -54 -- 11/12/20087-311 31-04723 Runnemede -75.00703 39.82428 395–473 75 -80 -86 -91 -88 -63 -72 -56 16 12/23/20087-316 31-05100 Runnemede -75.04153 39.85884 271–348 75 -- -87 -83 -79 -52 -59 -51 8 11/19/20087-322 31-04283 Camden -75.07889 39.89981 101–112 33 -- -53 -50 -46 -34 -31 -28 3 11/19/20087-398 31-06646 Clementon -74.98586 39.79078 668–698 200 -81 -96 -97 -- -- -75 -68 7 11/14/20087-404 31-03307 Runnemede -75.07128 39.84889 297–339 67 -78 -83 -82 -75 -50 -54 -51 3 11/18/20087-410 31-02360 Runnemede -75.01528 39.84486 –441 95 -90 -95 -94 -93 -63 -69 -63 6 11/18/20087-422 31-03306 Clementon -74.99770 39.85772 379–421 71 -84 -88 -104 -109 -58 -62 -56 6 11/19/20087-423 -- Clementon -74.99795 39.85789 –459 70 -- -- -- -- -61 -65 -59 6 11/19/20087-477 -- Williamstown -74.93767 39.70428 829–839 111 -64 -73 -77 -81 -70 -62 -63 -1 11/7/20087-521 31-12301 Clementon -74.99286 39.79600 600–629 186 -- -- -97 -98 -81 -78 -80 -2 11/14/20087-573 -- Philadelphia -75.12686 39.89892 –89 11 -- -10 -9 -5 -3 -2 -2 0 11/19/20087-727 31-31110 Moorestown -74.98956 39.91545 175–202 40 -- -- -- -70 -53 -52 -45 7 11/19/20087-824 31-37826 Clementon -74.98561 39.77836 590–665 150 -- -- -- -- -90 -72 -74 -2 11/6/20087-1234 31-63874 Clementon -74.92489 39.85039 475–505 31 -- -- -- -- -- -- -67 -- 11/21/200815-3 31-06676 Pitman East -75.09981 39.67045 670–740 140 -63 -33 -71 -74 -62 -53 -51 2 12/3/200815-8 51-00101 Woodbury -75.13668 39.77450 244–307 21 -50 -53 -61 -- -52 -46 -41 5 11/19/200815-28 30-00432 Woodbury -75.22363 39.79847 191–216 70 -21 -23 -23 -27 -24 -19 -20 -1 11/25/200815-60 31-02358 Pitman West -75.13240 39.70178 562–612 150 -60 -70 -66 -70 -63 -65 -47 18 12/2/200815-63 31-04176 Pitman East -75.11648 39.71900 549–599 150 -59 -65 -64 -67 -57 -63 -58 5 12/2/2008
88 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 7. Water-level data for wells screened in the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier New Jersey permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 15-127 31-03280 Pitman West -75.16531 39.72969 –524 140 -46 -49 -50 -- -45 -37 -35 2 12/9/2008 15-187 -- Woodbury -75.12906 39.76206 325–355 45 -- -- -69 -66 -- -53 -53 0 11/15/2008 15-194 31-05309 Woodbury -75.17651 39.79220 230–265 10 -42 -47 -45 -46 -35 -34 -40 -6 12/03/2008 15-238 50-00036 Woodstown -75.30885 39.74381 217–240 30 -- -- -- -- -- -- -22 -- 12/05/2008 15-240 30-00973 Bridgeport -75.31019 39.75289 190–231 32 -21 -19 -21 -21 -19 -16 -19 -3 11/17/2008 15-248 51-00029 Pitman East -75.07564 39.72856 559–618 125 -63 -68 -80 -73 -- -54 -53 1 11/21/2008 15-274 51-00065 Woodbury -75.14995 39.79528 273–310 80 -- -- -- -- -- -- -41 - 12/30/2008 15-275 31-00170 Woodbury -75.15137 39.79736 268–310 59 -42 -44 -53 -54 -57 -36 -34 2 12/30/2008 15-276 31-04567 Woodbury -75.17321 39.80575 242–289 60 -39 -44 -46 -48 -40 -32 -30 2 1/8/2008 15-281 31-03021 Woodbury -75.17318 39.81975 227–243 61 -35 -40 -37 -38 -30 -25 -27 -2 11/21/2008 15-303 -- Woodbury -75.20963 39.84178 84–114 10 -6 -8 -9 -8 -7 -4 -5 -1 11/20/2008 15-330 31-06356 Woodbury -75.14604 39.81620 190–235 40 -44 -50 -49 -47 -38 -31 -30 1 11/20/2008 15-339 30-01161 Woodstown -75.31908 39.73067 247–267 90 -19 -19 -20 -21 -20 -18 -22 -4 12/4/2008 15-346 30-01565 Woodbury -75.22683 39.75728 267–343 80 -- -24 -29 -35 -27 -21 -26 -5 11/25/2008 15-355 30-01426 Woodbury -75.21318 39.80595 205–245 42 -28 -30 -28 -28 -29 -19 -19 0 11/25/2008 15-378 -- Bridgeport -75.26907 39.75650 –239 105 -- -- -21 -21 -19 -15 -18 -3 12/9/2008 15-433 31-17801 Runnemede -75.08789 39.77475 512–552 149 -- -55 -64 -68 -53 -51 -45 6 11/21/2008 15-617 30-03533-3 Bridgeport -75.32074 39.77706 60–70 31 -- -- -7 -7 -8 -4 -8 -4 11/12/2008 15-728 30-04549 Bridgeport -75.28963 39.80234 46–56 4 -- -- -7 -7 -8 -4 -6 -2 11/12/2008 15-741 -- Woodbury -75.16740 39.78122 293–313 82 -- -- -44 -46 -38 -31 -32 -1 11/14/2008

15-773 31-26238 Woodbury -75.18796 39.86845 30–50 10 -- -- -7 -1 0 2 1 -1 11/12/200815-779 31-26239 Woodbury -75.18847 39.87283 25–35 5 -- -- -8 -1 -1 0 0 0 12/12/200815-1000 31-21614 Runnemede -75.10823 39.77956 354–359 75 -- -- -71 -70 -56 -52 -57 -5 11/20/200815-1031 30-03412 Bridgeport -75.32185 39.76484 95–105 47 -- -- -9 -10 -9 -6 -10 -4 11/12/200815-1088 50-00050 Pitman West -75.22602 39.73567 –285 35 -- -- -- -- -- -18 -25 -7 11/24/200815-1089 31-37705 Runnemede -75.10470 39.83778 198–258 45 -- -- -- -- -45 -42 -39 3 11/21/200815-1105 30-04335 Woodstown -75.28269 39.71234 357–377 145 -- -- -- -25 -22 -19 -20 -1 12/4/200815-1106 30-07949 Woodbury -75.21467 39.85422 101–111 10 -- -- -- -9 -9 -6 -7 -1 11/20/200815-1346 30-03764 Bridgeport -75.26935 39.80734 60–90 10 -- -- -- -- -11 -7 -9 -2 11/17/200815-1365 31-45998 Pitman East -75.03234 39.72234 628–712 160 -- -- -- -- -- -62 -59 3 11/20/2008
Appendix 7 89

Appendix 7. Water-level data for wells screened in the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS 

well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

15-1483 30-12606 Woodstown -75.33630 39.74261 186–216 102 -- -- -- -- -17 -12 -14 -2 12/3/200815-1513 30-05444 Woodstown -75.27019 39.69067 357–367 78 -- -- -- -- -33 -30 -31 -1 12/4/200815-1528 30-12878 Pitman West -75.24713 39.74067 210–280 45 -- -- -- -- -- -- -32 -- 11/24/200815-1531 30-13147 Woodstown -75.26419 39.74644 206–256 59 -- -- -- -- -- -- -25 -- 11/24/200815-1543 31-62302 Pitman East -75.05073 39.72567 616–703 150 -- -- -- -- -- -67 -64 3 11/20/200815-1545 30-06144 Pitman West -75.23581 39.68594 476–486 130 -- -- -- -- -- -35 -36 -1 12/9/200815-1577 31-61731 Runnemede -75.08639 39.79528 – 80 -- -- -- -- -- -- -38 -- 11/21/200815-1755 31-60817 Pitman East -75.01278 39.70421 700–820 150 -- -- -- -- -- -- -60 -- 11/20/200821-1 -- Allentown -74.51394 40.23025 285–315 125 -- -- -- -- 36 35 31 -4 10/22/200821-19 28-05897 Hightstown -74.56632 40.26966 133–181 90 71 68 69 70 71 69 68 -1 10/20/200821-46 28-02489 Trenton East -74.63571 40.18872 138–141 60 32 -- -70 -- 26 35 32 -3 10/28/200821-84 48-00063 Hightstown -74.52440 40.27250 181–205 84 61 54 51 56 57 56 55 -1 10/20/200823-15 48-00064 Hightstown -74.51468 40.31172 –110 95 59 65 64 67 69 68 67 -1 10/22/200823-98 28-01426 Jamesburg -74.43412 40.34739 99–120 50 47 44 41 45 42 46 46 0 10/22/200823-108 48-00194 New Brunswick -74.37932 40.38150 87–107 23 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- 10/21/200823-109 -- New Brunswick -74.38182 40.38400 –101 24 1 -2 -2 -2 17 7 14 7 10/21/200823-142 49-29698 South Amboy -74.30848 40.39622 199–249 90 8 4 9 8 -- 2 3 1 10/17/2008

23-143 -- South Amboy -74.34348 40.39650 81–91 30 -- 5 5 7 6 8 5 -3 10/15/200823-173 -- South Amboy -74.27147 40.40178 173–193 60 -4 -7 -8 1 -1 -0 -1 -1 10/16/200823-180 -- South Amboy -74.35765 40.41066 57–67 19 4 4 4 5 4 5 4 -1 10/15/200823-182 -- South Amboy -74.30487 40.41372 66–71 31 17 15 13 16 17 16 15 -1 10/16/200823-213 28-06470 Jamesburg -74.39414 40.31319 195–198 100 -- -- -- -- 15 16 12 -4 10/21/200823-228 28-04251 Jamesburg -74.46543 40.33761 128–138 147 66 58 55 60 62 61 62 1 10/24/200823-292 28-04250 Hightstown -74.50293 40.35261 93–104 107 76 71 71 72 74 75 76 1 10/24/200823-344 -- South Amboy -74.33654 40.43288 31–37 22 15 13 14 17 16 17 15 -2 10/20/200823-351 -- South Amboy -74.33265 40.43483 76–82 35 20 17 17 20 20 23 20 -3 10/20/200823-490 28-08490 Jamesburg -74.43860 40.32350 287–325 167 51 -- -- -- -- 49 47 -2 10/23/200823-508 -- Hightstown -74.53142 40.30036 –90 105 68 65 63 65 66 65 63 -2 10/20/200823-565 28-11720 Jamesburg -74.46932 40.33602 165–197 137 -- 52 -- -- 56 54 56 2 10/23/200823-569 29-11861 South Amboy -74.28242 40.46066 102–132 100 -- -- -- -- -- -- 46 -- 10/16/2008
90 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 7. Water-level data for wells screened in the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier New Jersey permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 23-581 28-08423 South Amboy -74.34311 40.45978 24–44 80 -- -- -- -- -- -- 61 -- 10/16/2008 23-775 28-11436 Jamesburg -74.45514 40.28825 182–190 118 -- -- -- -- 39 39 35 -4 10/21/2008 23-1156 29-12379 Freehold -74.30586 40.37650 230–238 60 -- -- -4 4 3 1 0 -1 11/4/2008 23-1159 29-19607-8 South Amboy -74.33015 40.45566 95–105 86 -- -- -- -- -- -- 44 -- 10/21/2008 23-1172 29-19614-1 South Amboy -74.32070 40.46288 68–78 103 -- -- -- -- -- -- 42 -- 10/21/2008 23-1200 28-17439 Jamesburg -74.49933 40.30308 166–176 111 -- -- -- -- 66 65 63 -2 10/21/2008 23-1358 29-45498 South Amboy -74.26265 40.43983 50–55 50 -- -- -- -- -- -- 8 -- 10/16/2008 25-4 28-08915 Allentown -74.59013 40.18111 212–262 68 -- 21 -- -- 26 20 15 -5 10/28/2008 25-6 49-00049 Sandy Hook -74.04292 40.41039 519–582 20 -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 -- 10/28/2008 25-13 29-07461 Asbury Park -74.02230 40.19367 1,105–1,165 29 -16 -27 -29 -15 -17 -15 -24 -9 10/23/2008 25-37 29-04068 Marlboro -74.20169 40.26889 686–706 137 -30 -35 -21 -14 -18 -15 -22 -7 11/7/2008 25-56 28-05400 Freehold -74.35965 40.29530 363–384 70 9 1 18 16 12 14 7 -7 10/23/2008 25-62 29-03492 Farmingdale -74.17014 40.19289 831–885 80 -20 -34 -29 -11 -15 -16 -25 -9 10/29/2008 25-91 29-05708 Freehold -74.25792 40.25456 632–685 140 -38 -47 -34 -13 -15 -15 -25 -10 10/27/2008 25-97 29-04708 Freehold -74.24987 40.27372 596–656 195 -42 -47 -38 -19 -23 -19 -29 -10 10/27/2008 25-103 29-07494 Freehold -74.29317 40.27933 478–575 107 -53 -36 -39 -14 -17 -11 -20 -9 10/27/2008 25-112 29-03096 Keyport -74.15953 40.42727 312–352 44 -41 -36 -39 -14 -12 -20 -14 6 10/30/2008 25-116 29-03509 Sandy Hook -73.98605 40.40000 600–660 10 -15 -18 -16 -- -4 -5 -5 0 10/16/2008 25-154 29-04207 Keyport -74.17153 40.41261 400–430 73 -- -- -- -- -- -- -15 -- 10/30/2008 25-175 29-05851 Adelphia -74.25462 40.21289 681–762 102 -27 -32 -38 -- -- -12 -27 -15 10/29/2008

25-195 29-01297 Keyport -74.12853 40.43922 290–350 15 -- -35 -32 -21 -18 -19 -13 6 10/30/200825-197 29-08379 Keyport -74.20376 40.42664 304–354 35 -27 -26 -25 -10 -10 -12 -10 2 10/30/200825-206 -- Keyport -74.19542 40.44039 225–249 14 -13 -14 -15 -3 -4 -8 -5 3 10/15/200825-214 21-07184 Adelphia -74.36248 40.24286 585–641 195 -1 0 -- -- 8 8 -1 -9 10/23/200825-218 -- Jamesburg -74.38793 40.26594 510–527 250 20 13 12 -- 22 22 27 5 10/23/200825-220 28-06114 Freehold -74.33672 40.26017 539–569 125 -16 -24 -24 -5 -8 -7 -16 -9 10/27/200825-244 29-05790 Freehold -74.25109 40.31344 524–594 161 -34 -42 -47 -19 -25 -18 -26 -8 10/30/200825-259 29-00073 Marlboro -74.24053 40.34286 508–593 155 -18 -26 -27 -5 -5 -5 -8 -3 11/7/200825-284 29-01731 Keyport -74.24645 40.42122 231–271 90 -7 -7 -11 4 4 0 3 3 10/15/200825-290 -- Keyport -74.21236 40.40081 –353 71 -- -- -- -- -- -8 -11 -3 10/20/2008
Appendix 7 91

Appendix 7. Water-level data for wells screened in the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS 

well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

25-292 29-03729 Keyport -74.20914 40.39969 341–414 87 -33 -33 -34 -- -- -12 -15 -3 10/20/200825-303 29-05164 Marlboro -74.13570 40.35178 527–600 70 -- -- -61 -19 -14 -22 -24 -2 11/10/200825-316 29-04299 Sandy Hook -73.98430 40.42678 371–397 11 -5 -4 -9 -2 -1 -1 -2 -1 10/15/200825-322 28-01842 Roosevelt -74.40459 40.19928 667–697 210 4 -2 -4 7 7 5 -3 -8 10/24/2008

25-334 29-00137 Asbury Park -74.06486 40.20400 1,013–1,065 23 -21 -37 -37 -- -29 -41 -34 7 10/22/200825-341 -- Asbury Park -74.01648 40.20955 – 19 -- -- -- -- -- -- -23 -- 10/22/200825-360 29-07941 Long Branch -74.05492 40.34847 668–759 146 -31 -34 -34 -- -- -33 -27 6 10/29/200825-436 29-06193 Asbury Park -74.12364 40.16417 990–1,033 60 -26 -41 -43 -17 -21 -19 -30 -11 10/23/200825-456 29-08092 Keyport -74.15070 40.44455 277–316 17 -- -- -- -- -- -- -12 -- 10/15/200825-459 29-09335 Long Branch -74.05975 40.37186 551–612 80 -- -24 -25 -15 -19 -13 -15 -2 11/5/200825-493 29-07784 Farmingdale -74.19014 40.20872 –860 115 -- -35 -38 -17 -19 -19 -29 -10 10/23/200825-496 29-10478 Sandy Hook -74.04195 40.41183 510–543 16 -- -- -- -- -- -- -6 -- 10/28/200825-500 28-12215 Allentown -74.56753 40.14722 270–305 88 -- 4 0 -- 4 2 -4 -6 10/27/200825-501 29-11335 Asbury Park -74.06569 40.20428 1,000–1,075 30 -- -- -- -- -- -- -37 -- 10/23/200825-502 29-11033 Adelphia -74.26873 40.23689 616–671 117 -- -59 -51 -- -28 -22 -32 -10 10/27/200825-509 28-12280 Roosevelt -74.46943 40.22108 390–430 167 -- 26 24 34 33 31 25 -6 10/23/200825-514 29-12732 Keyport -74.15264 40.44483 266–312 14 -- -26 -27 -15 -9 -16 -12 4 10/15/200825-550 29-13610 Adelphia -74.27431 40.21622 636–656 105 -- -- -39 -12 -16 -13 -25 -12 10/27/200825-567 29-15851 Keyport -74.17431 40.44177 250–270 10 -- -- -23 -9 -7 -14 -11 3 10/20/200825-568 29-16343 Keyport -74.18292 40.44789 245–265 10 -- -- -12 -2 -0 -5 -1 4 10/20/200825-568 29-16343 Keyport Freshwater equivalent -- -- -- -- -- -4 0 4 10/20/200825-639 29-18403-7 Farmingdale -74.20014 40.18484 891.2–901.2 112 -- -- -35 -16 -19 -19 -29 -10 10/22/200825-712 29-21610 Long Branch -74.11556 40.31697 598–668 43 -- -- -- -- -- -21 -27 -6 10/20/200825-721 29-15170 Asbury Park -74.08600 40.19184 999–1,149 130 -- -- -- -- -17 -15 -27 -12 10/22/200825-724 29-17817 Freehold -74.25828 40.32317 446–551 120 -- -- -- -12 -18 -13 -29 -16 10/30/200825-729 29-21611 Long Branch -74.11328 40.31875 575–655 35 -- -- -- -17 -18 -17 -24 -7 10/20/200825-736 29-21612 Long Branch -74.11911 40.31886 569–669 40 -- -- -31 -- -- -21 -27 -6 10/20/200825-749 48-00045 Allentown -74.53988 40.14567 –350 100 -- -- -- -- -0 -2 -9 -7 10/24/200825-823 29-49204 Long Branch -74.07228 40.34636 605–700 40 -- -- -- -- -- -14 -22 -8 10/29/200825-828 29-44304 Keyport -74.16675 40.41181 399–428 63 -- -- -- -- -- -20 -12 8 10/30/2008
92 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 7. Water-level data for wells screened in the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier New Jersey permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 25-830 28-18879 Allentown -74.54172 40.17361 330–340 102 -- -- -- -- -- 16 10 -6 10/22/2008 25-1063 29-55195 Keyport -74.12814 40.44136 312–352 12 -- -- -- -- -- -- -14 -- 10/30/2008 25-1083 29-53160 Freehold -74.31489 40.33469 334–354 126 -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 -- 10/30/2008 29-70 33-01159 Seaside Park -74.06611 39.98509 1,375–1,495 5 -21 -28 -26 -22 -27 -29 -44 -15 11/5/2008 29-134 29-03570 Lakehurst -74.32881 40.05803 846–962 97 -22 -26 -29 -41 -50 -42 -65 -23 10/28/2008 29-238 28-08229 Roosevelt -74.44248 40.13889 584–648 130 -10 -4 -- -5 -14 -7 -18 -11 10/27/2008 29-504 29-03142 Point Pleasant -74.05230 40.03645 1,263–1,368 5 -18 -27 -25 -18 -22 -23 -35 -12 11/05/2008 29-531 29-03345 Point Pleasant -74.07028 40.08125 1,256–1,342 18 -19 -33 -29 -18 -25 -22 -32 -10 11/13/2008 29-577 33-05553 Seaside Park -74.07639 39.96173 1,394–1,498 7 -- -22 -20 -20 -21 -33 -47 -14 11/25/2008 29-1040 29-23401 Lakehurst -74.25351 40.01095 1,013–1,184 38 -- -- -- -27 -38 -49 -95 -46 10/31/2008 29-1309 33-37783 Toms River -74.20823 39.99070 –1,340 75 -- -- -- -- -- -47 -81 -34 12/4/2008 29-1365 33-37776 Seaside Park -74.07825 39.94362 1,389–1,580 4 -- -- -- -- -27 -60 -66 -6 12/2/2008 29-1380 32-39030 Lakehurst -74.32598 40.01012 937–1,024 65 -- -- -- -- -32 -52 -82 -30 10/30/2008 29-1381 29-41029 Lakehurst -74.32545 40.01076 928–984 64 -- -- -- -- -- -- -82 -- 10/30/2008 29-1577 29-48781 Lakehurst -74.32431 40.02878 905–985 78 -- -- -- -- -- -40 -67 -28 10/31/2008

129-1623 29-48193 Point Pleasant -74.06769 40.06928 1,190–1,283 8 -20 -33 -30 -- -- -25 -34 -9 11/20/200829-2011 28-41493 Roosevelt -74.42071 40.14150 692–712 144 -- -- -- -- -- -- -7 -- 10/24/200833-76 30-00661 Penns Grove -75.41242 39.72456 118–123 27 3 0 2 1 1 3 0 -3 12/3/2008

33-111 30-01253 Penns Grove -75.49825 39.62956 190–235 10 -14 -15 -17 -19 -20 -21 -21 0 11/18/200833-253 -- Salem -75.46473 39.56375 335–340 3 -22 -23 -27 -28 -27 -28 -31 -3 11/20/200833-342 -- Penns Grove -75.45670 39.71059 46–51 18 -5 1 -1 -1 3 9 5 -4 11/20/200833-348 -- Penns Grove -75.43883 39.72197

– 25 -- -- -- -- -- -- 19 -- 11/20/2008

33-355 -- Woodstown -75.32463 39.65400 –360 58 -29 -22 -24 -17 -24 -22 -26 -4 12/5/200833-361 30-01815 Penns Grove -75.44942 39.70109 44–54 13 -9 -8 -9 -6 1 4 2 -2 11/24/200833-671 30-05148 Wilmington South -75.50345 39.66514 87–102 7 -- -- -- -3 -7 -3 -4 -1 11/18/200833-697 30-01113 Penns Grove -75.44808 39.70125 47–62 12 -- -- -- -- -- 2 0 -2 11/24/200833-841 35-17766 Elmer -75.14268 39.51539 1,005–1,025 77 -- -- -- -- -48 -43 -43 0 11/19/200833-920 30-11400 Woodstown -75.36689 39.71075 184–204 79 -- -- -- -- -- -6 -17 -11 12/4/200833-952 30-13727 Delaware City -75.54236 39.61356 147–152 24 -- -- -- -- -- -8 -9 -1 11/20/200833-953 30-13726 Delaware City -75.54027 39.62356 109–114 7 -- -- -- -- -- 2 0 -2 11/20/2008
Appendix 7 93

Appendix 7. Water-level data for wells screened in the Upper Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS 

well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

33-955 -- Wilmington South -75.50581 39.65820 124–134 6 -- -- -- -- -- -- -2 -- 11/20/200833-956 -- Penns Grove -75.49671 39.66426 140–150 17 -- -- -- -- -- -- -7 -- 11/20/2008P10116 -- Philadelphia -75.14184 39.91206 60–75 9.4 -- -- -- -- -6 -7 -6 1 11/19/2008

1Formerly well 29-524.
94 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 8. Water-level data for wells screened in the Middle and undifferentiated Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier New Jersey permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 5-63 -- Bristol -74.85183 40.03706 284–294 45 -16 -16 -21 -21 -21 -16 -17 -1 10/24/2008 5-70 27-05259 Bristol -74.83405 40.05372 140–200 60 -13 -11 -16 -- -16 -17 -8 9 10/22/2008 5-87 27-03694 Beverly -74.87964 40.06872 50–60 10 -- -8 -13 -9 -11 -16 -11 5 10/29/2008 5-114 28-02901 Columbus -74.65599 40.10178 388–392 85 -7 -8 -12 -13 -11 -11 -13 -2 11/3/2008 5-119 28-04082 Trenton East -74.64544 40.13928 –305 100 -- -- -- -- 8 6 3 -3 10/24/2008 5-122 28-05042 Trenton East -74.67049 40.16136 337–367 75 4 0 -1 -4 -0 -1 -1 0 10/29/2008 5-126 31-04276 Moorestown -74.98939 39.99125 157–196 73 -8 -15 -16 -16 -15 -13 -5 8 11/20/2008 5-127 31-04697 Moorestown -74.96906 39.99400 179–229 35 -- -- -- -- -- -- -10 -- 11/18/2008 5-128 31-04733 Moorestown -74.96903 39.99392 –225 35 -- -- -- -- -- -16 -10 6 11/18/2008 5-214 -- Columbus -74.74136 40.09169 –319 60 -10 -- -13 -12 -12 -18 -20 -2 11/3/2008 5-232 31-06020 Moorestown -74.98700 39.95714 210–270 9 -40 -46 -44 -46 -46 -36 -44 -8 11/3/2008 5-261 -- Mount Holly -74.83989 39.92372 740–750 73 -48 -58 -61 -62 -51 -47 -44 3 10/27/2008 5-265 31-04727 Moorestown -74.96811 39.95064 248–288 24 -56 -65 -65 -- -54 -51 -46 5 11/3/2008 5-284 31-03806 Moorestown -74.91414 39.99356 298–338 62 -26 -29 -28 -- -28 -23 -19 4 10/31/2008 5-290 31-06674 Mount Holly -74.78116 39.99342 545–615 15 -55 -57 -63 -60 -48 -45 -45 0 10/21/2008 5-297 31-01610 Moorestown -74.90308 39.92411 441–457 51 -- -- -68 -66 -54 -49 -46 3 11/4/2008 5-330 52-00008 Browns Mills -74.61485 39.99700 1,056–1,086 140 -49 -51 -65 -65 -59 -53 -41 12 11/4/2008 5-332 48-00269 New Egypt -74.62188 40.01828 1,064–1,104 150 -39 -42 -52 -51 -39 -33 -28 5 11/4/2008 5-333 32-07668 New Egypt -74.61482 40.02456 1,030–1,051 128 -50 -51 -64 -- -49 -42 -36 6 11/4/2008 5-336 28-00795 New Egypt -74.57382 40.03064 1,036–1,089 105 -- -- -55 -63 -53 -43 -35 8 11/4/2008

5-385 32-03778 Pemberton -74.71322 39.97761 747–823 30 -- -52 -61 -70 -52 -51 -41 10 11/4/20085-388 52-00009 Pemberton -74.62810 39.99428 1,090–1,140 160 -42 -47 -62 -50 -52 -38 -36 2 11/4/20085-436 -- Columbus -74.66905 40.02178 757–800 96 -- -- -- -42 -33 -31 -31 0 10/29/20085-440 28-05128 Columbus -74.70639 40.04528 603–613 72 -29 -29 -36 -35 -30 -31 -30 1 10/21/20085-634 47-00001 Bristol -74.80225 40.01086 –516 55 -56 -58 -60 -64 -77 -72 -42 30 10/21/20085-683 -- Chatsworth -74.50432 39.85623 2,102–2,117 141 -30 -34 -42 -39 -32 -29 -28 1 10/21/20085-726 28-08443 New Egypt -74.61466 40.03686 667–732 140 -- -- -41 -36 -37 -23 -25 -2 11/4/20085-749 31-07140 Moorestown -74.92706 39.91903 –425 75 -60 -69 -75 -73 -61 -54 -51 3 11/4/20085-801 27-06877 Frankford -75.02017 40.00567 5–25 20 -- 0 -1 -4 -3 -1 1 2 10/22/20085-1089 27-08534 Beverly -74.88569 40.03372 176–251 19 -- -- -25 -25 -35 -15 -23 -8 10/21/2008
Appendix 8 95

Appendix 8. Water-level data for wells screened in the Middle and undifferentiated Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS 

well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

5-1158 28-28844 Columbus -74.72572 40.05456 450–460 45 -- -- -- -28 -24 -26 -25 0 11/3/20085-1172 28-20985 Bristol -74.75711 40.12039 270–290 42 -- -- -- -- 1 -0 -2 -2 10/23/20085-1430 28-35104 Trenton East -74.73155 40.13705 160–170 55 -- -- -- -- -- 8 7 -1 10/27/20085-1472 27-10750 Beverly -74.89631 40.01425 190–240 25 -- -- -- -- -- -25 -27 -2 10/22/20085-1484 27-14624 Beverly -74.88875 40.04711 215–253 39 -- -- -- -- -17 -12 -14 -2 10/21/20085-1524 27-15940 Beverly -74.95295 40.01956 155–175 70 -- -- -- -- -- 6 8 2 10/21/20085-1525 28-19074 New Egypt -74.58654 40.05011 800–820 130 -- -- -- -- -- -27 -41 -14 11/4/20085-1527 27-15342 Bristol -74.79111 40.09417 70–110 47 -- -- -- -- -- 1 -3 -4 10/24/20085-1546 27-12676 Bristol -74.82750 40.06194 168–178 82 -- -- -- -- -- -- -7 -- 10/23/20085-1702 31-26455 Moorestown -74.94767 39.97928 176–254 79 -- -- -- -- -- -- -10 -- 10/31/20085-1806 28-54748 New Egypt -74.61461 40.03686 660–725 140 -- -- -- -- -- -- -30 -- 11/4/20087-39 51-00060 Camden -75.11065 39.91597 123–163 21 -- -- -- -- -- -- -13 -- 11/17/20087-124 31-07020 Moorestown -74.99281 39.88050 483–626 77 -77 -84 -92 -85 -55 -60 -52 8 11/19/20087-132 31-05095 Moorestown -74.95183 39.89817 –500 71 -82 -81 -81 -- -53 -66 -66 0 11/20/20087-135 31-05218 Moorestown -74.95047 39.89797 443–493 72 -- -- -73 -81 -50 -64 -66 -2 11/20/20087-142 31-04098 Camden -75.01723 39.91070 321–378 32 -- -- -66 -64 -48 -44 -38 6 11/19/20087-186 -- Clementon -74.98156 39.83067 –35 70 -77 -85 -88 -89 -64 -65 -57 8 12/23/20087-304 31-05108 Camden -75.03350 39.90122 307–372 50 -- -- -72 -75 -59 -46 -42 4 11/12/20087-329 31-04836 Camden -75.06795 39.94072 110–140 16 -36 -31 -34 -29 -21 -17 -13 4 11/18/20087-413 31-04561 Clementon -74.94128 39.82289 706–717 149 -69 -78 -82 -85 -66 -63 -59 4 11/12/20087-476 -- Williamstown -74.93767 39.70428 1,485–1,495 111 -46 -53 -57 -58 -49 -43 -43 0 11/7/20087-726 31-31111 Moorestown -74.98853 39.91470 276–422 40 -- -- -- -70 -53 -52 -45 7 11/19/20087-733 31-40817 Runnemede -75.04153 39.85850 452–535 75 -- -- -- -82 -53 -61 -53 8 11/19/20087-734 31-40970 Runnemede -75.05012 39.87170 333–499 55 -- -- -- -- -54 -58 -51 7 11/18/20087-986 31-43797 Camden -75.06878 39.94178 102–180 28 -- -- -- -- -25 -19 -15 4 11/18/20087-1007 31-58577 Camden -75.04194 39.96542 99–109 33 -- -- -- -- -- -12 -10 2 11/19/20087-1022 31-58628 Camden -75.04978 39.98286 63–73 25 -- -- -- -- -- -- -14 -- 11/18/20087-1040 31-59619 Camden -75.04239 39.96231 105–115 40 -- -- -- -- -- -15 -14 1 11/19/20087-1057 31-59365 Camden -75.05967 39.97167 78–83 66 -- -- -- -- -- -8 -7 1 11/10/20087-1264 31-60880 Camden -75.06583 39.90194 305–407 50 -- -- -- -- -- -- -4 -- 11/12/2008
96 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 8. Water-level data for wells screened in the Middle and undifferentiated Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier New Jersey permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 11-137 -- Dorothy -74.87100 39.42067 2,083–2,093 85 -37 -43 -49 -53 -55 -53 -52 1 11/19/2008 11-137 -- Dorothy Freshwater equivalent -14 -19 -25 -30 -32 -30 -29 1 11/19/2008 15-24 31-05513 Runnemede -75.11784 39.85409 282–345 35 -53 -55 -51 -45 -36 -33 -32 0 11/21/2008 15-135 30-01314 Marcus Hook -75.37769 39.75456 130–180 7 -- -1 -2 -2 -3 -1 -4 -3 11/10/2008 15-140 30-01248 Bridgeport -75.35936 39.76900 132–184 6 2 -1 -2 -11 -2 -1 -2 -1 11/12/2008 15-213 30-00602 Woodbury -75.23893 39.82989 135–175 10 -10 -10 -10 -10 -10 -6 -8 -2 11/19/2008 15-236 30-01177 Woodstown -75.31105 39.74292 241–312 75 -21 -20 -22 -12 -20 -19 -19 0 12/5/2008 15-348 30-01776 Bridgeport -75.26093 39.81945 105–135 20 -9 -10 -11 -10 -10 -7 -10 -3 11/12/2008 15-374 31-13385 Runnemede -75.12420 39.81503 430–486 50 -- -65 -63 -63 -50 -46 -43 3 11/21/2008 15-415 31-14478 Woodbury -75.17851 39.80956 287–307 40 -- -42 -39 -42 -34 -27 -29 -2 11/21/2008 15-444 30-02032 Marcus Hook -75.39519 39.79900 65–70 16 -- -- -- -- -8 -7 -7 0 11/20/2008 15-569 30-02405 Bridgeport -75.34744 39.75936 161–201 32 -- -- -12 -9 -8 -5 -8 -3 11/24/2008 15-585 30-02522 Bridgeport -75.34908 39.78456 79–89 8 -- -- 1 1 -1 1 1 0 11/12/2008 15-616 30-03532-5 Bridgeport -75.32074 39.77706 230–240 31 -- -- -8 -8 -8 -5 -8 -3 11/12/2008 15-620 30-03677 Bridgeport -75.32547 39.80122 131–141 7 -- -- 2 2 1 4 2 -2 11/12/2008 15-679 30-03624 Bridgeport -75.26963 39.82956 118–128 10 -- -- -3 -7 -5 -2 -3 -1 11/18/2008 15-713 30-04348 Bridgeport -75.28963 39.80234 125–155 6 -- -- -8 -7 -7 -4 -6 -2 11/12/2008 15-727 30-04548 Bridgeport -75.28963 39.80234 195–205 5 -- -- -8 -8 -8 -5 -7 -2 11/12/2008 15-774 31-26241 Woodbury -75.18796 39.86845 93–113 10 -- -- -1 -- -- -1 -1 0 11/12/2008 15-780 31-26244 Woodbury -75.18768 39.87317 75–85 5 -- -- -2 -5 -4 -3 -1 2 12/12/2008

15-998 -- Pitman East -75.10194 39.67533 820–837 141 -- -- -64 -- -56 -47 -46 1 12/3/200815-1015 -- Bridgeport -75.29074 39.82900 137–142 5 -- -- -- -- -- -4 -5 -1 11/12/200815-1036 31-22504 Woodbury -75.13523 39.79472 259–319 60 -- -- -- -63 -51 -45 -48 -3 11/21/200815-1176 31-43251 Woodbury -75.17081 39.82506 174–184 44 -- -- -- -- -27 -21 -21 0 11/21/200815-1484 30-12608 Woodstown -75.33630 39.74289 280–300 104 -- -- -- -- -14 -14 -16 -2 12/3/200815-1485 31-48720 Woodbury -75.14129 39.84372 160–306 30 -- -- -- -- -33 -29 -28 1 11/19/200815-1504 30-12671 Bridgeport -75.26074 39.75761 458–478 92 -- -- -- -- -29 -27 -28 -1 12/5/200815-1530 30-13148 Woodstown -75.26324 39.74539 376–396 52 -- -- -- -- -- -- -25 -- 11/24/200815-1540 -- Woodbury -75.23794 39.84411 130–140 16 -- -- -- -- -- -4 -5 -1 11/26/200815-1728 30-13075 Bridgeport -75.37500 39.77778 30–40 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- 11/24/2008
Appendix 8 97

Appendix 8. Water-level data for wells screened in the Middle and undifferentiated Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS 

well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

21-12 28-07034 Jamesburg -74.48776 40.26019 520–560 115 28 27 23 25 37 32 27 -5 10/29/200821-22 28-05440 Hightstown -74.51790 40.28411 337–367 103 50 45 35 41 47 46 43 -3 10/20/200821-25 28-01262 Hightstown -74.56404 40.28816 205–226 100 65 64 67 64 64 64 63 0 10/22/200821-43 28-05409 Trenton East -74.69724 40.18378 118–138 6 -- 2 4 4 3 3 2 -1 10/28/200821-54 28-04602 Trenton East -74.65491 40.21842 194–243 85 -- -- -- 40 39 36 43 7 10/28/200821-73 28-02927 Trenton East -74.66819 40.23891 128–144 80 -- -- -- 47 40 45 47 2 10/28/200821-101 28-06030 Allentown -74.57864 40.21153 366–421 140 35 42 40 43 42 41 37 -4 10/21/200821-120 28-05368 Hightstown -74.61757 40.26555 96–121 74 71 69 57 -- 68 71 70 -1 10/22/200821-122 28-06455 Hightstown -74.61618 40.26511 75–126 75 -- -- -- -- 67 71 69 -2 10/22/200821-561 28-14731 Hightstown -74.52189 40.25508 230–270 113 -- -- -- -- -- 56 57 1 10/20/200821-706 -- Hightstown -74.52496 40.27280 –400 83 -- -- -- -- -- -- 44 -- 10/20/200823-9 28-00180 Hightstown -74.53631 40.30064 250–280 98 69 -- 62 65 65 67 64 -3 10/20/200823-16 28-07800 Hightstown -74.51504 40.31172 230–260 95 66 60 58 62 63 63 61 -2 10/22/200823-17 28-04589 Hightstown -74.51439 40.31183 268–298 98 67 61 60 -- 65 64 62 -2 10/22/200823-70 -- New Brunswick -74.45487 40.43205 0–21 73 57 56 56 57 57 58 56 -2 10/20/200823-97 -- New Brunswick -74.41710 40.37983 236–301 39 2 2 6 29 27 18 24 6 10/21/200823-106 -- New Brunswick -74.37959 40.38094 –132 27 -- -- -- 4 13 7 9 2 10/21/200923-107 -- New Brunswick -74.37904 40.38122 311–334 28 -- -3 -0 -- 8 6 9 3 10/21/200823-114 -- New Brunswick -74.37904 40.38872 225–237 26 -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 -- 10/21/200823-132 -- South Amboy -74.35959 40.39316 262–267 25 -44 -38 -36 -3 4 13 11 -2 10/15/200823-147 29-04998 South Amboy -74.31051 40.39780 425–475 80 -- -79 -65 -16 -18 -28 -18 10 10/17/200823-171 48-00208 South Amboy -74.36687 40.40111 240–300 20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -10 -- 10/21/200823-176 29-06429 South Amboy -74.32293 40.40205 321–363 45 -61 -- -- -- -- -29 -20 9 10/17/200823-194 -- South Amboy -74.33793 40.42677 201–281 18 -76 -46 -59 -8 -14 -17 -11 6 10/20/200823-273 -- Hightstown -74.59099 40.32566 70–75 76 -- -- -- 47 47 48 47 -1 10/24/200823-291 28-04249 Hightstown -74.50321 40.35261 192–203 107 73 65 64 67 70 70 70 0 10/24/200823-365 -- South Amboy -74.35515 40.44261 148–160 5.7 -52 -43 -51 -9 -14 -- -1 -- 12/22/200823-401 29-05352 South Amboy -74.27420 40.46244 254–288 44 -75 -80 -77 -- -14 -38 -13 25 10/16/200823-439 28-05987 South Amboy -74.36626 40.44261 121–126 21 -40 -32 -38 -2 -5 -9 -3 6 10/20/200823-482 -- Perth Amboy -74.27098 40.54510 44–76 11 -3 9 10 10 10 10 10 0 10/15/2008
98 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 8. Water-level data for wells screened in the Middle and undifferentiated Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier New Jersey permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 23-552 28-10991 Hightstown -74.50549 40.33830 116–166 105 -- -- 59 88 68 64 60 -4 10/21/2008 23-1160 28-20882-0 South Amboy -74.33015 40.45566 210–230 86 -- -- -54 -13 -13 -19 -11 8 10/21/2008 23-1181 29-19615-9 South Amboy -74.31793 40.46177 127–137 70 -- -- -- -24 -20 -25 -23 2 10/21/2008 23-1346 28-40082 Jamesburg -74.46928 40.33606 276–337 130 -- -- -- -- 44 41 41 0 10/22/2008 23-1500 28-45485 Jamesburg -74.45272 40.32506 444–514 155 -- -- -- -- -- -- 35 -- 12/2/2008 23-1501 28-50046 Jamesburg -74.48283 40.30330 350–445 117 -- -- -- -- -- -- 42 -- 12/2/2008 25-153 29-05942 Keyport -74.16889 40.41222 635–690 65 -47 -75 -116 -20 -21 -21 -24 -4 10/30/2008 25-230 29-06353 Freehold -74.31481 40.33461 580–670 125 -41 -36 -49 -14 -16 -13 -18 -5 11/12/2008 25-247 29-04285 Freehold -74.30179 40.31680 762–832 146 -26 -34 -48 -8 -16 -14 -24 -10 10/30/2008 25-262 29-05023 Marlboro -74.23073 40.35091 730–810 141 -36 -- -- -- -- -22 -16 6 11/7/2008 25-268 29-06361 Freehold -74.25203 40.35628 632–698 114 -40 -50 -64 -12 9 -24 -20 4 10/30/2008 25-272 29-06527 Marlboro -74.24737 40.36900 670–680 117 -44 -55 -73 -17 -21 -29 -33 -4 10/20/2008 25-320 29-48826 Sandy Hook -73.99931 40.45150 838–878 14 -4 -9 -10 -1 -1 0 2 2 10/16/2008 25-495 -- Long Branch -74.05003 40.31417 –1,000 10 -- -- -11 -3 -2 -2 -2 0 10/29/2008 25-545 29-13277 Keyport -74.16848 40.41177 –712 60 -- -- -- -- -- -- -36 -- 10/30/2008 25-562 29-13329 Keyport -74.20342 40.42791 500–555 30 -- -- -- -- -- -37 -32 5 10/30/2008 25-634 29-16237 Freehold -74.28626 40.25567 877–914 170 -- -- -- -22 -20 -25 -30 -5 11/5/2008 25-635 29-18402-9 Farmingdale -74.20014 40.18484 1,226–1,330 111 -- -- -38 -23 -18 -22 -28 -6 10/22/2008 25-711 29-14303 Freehold -74.31709 40.29555 649–756 90 -- -- -35 -4 -8 -7 -11 -4 10/30/2008 25-728 28-21488 Freehold -74.35948 40.29533 541–621 70 -- -- -24 -1 -3 -4 -10 -6 10/23/2008

25-731 28-22008 Freehold -74.36625 40.31131 541–628 71 -- -- -- -- 3 2 -3 -5 10/23/200825-1064 29-24446 Adelphia -74.27442 40.21729 921–976 100 -- -- -- -- -- -- -33 -- 10/28/200829-19 -- Barnegat Light -74.09264 39.80818 2,736–2,756 9 0 -6 -11 -10 -5 -5 -4 1 10/17/200829-47 -- Lakewood -74.14261 40.07489 1,709–1,749 8 -36 -41 -65 -45 -40 -17 -21 -4 11/4/200829-85 -- Toms River -74.23848 39.99151 1,460–1,480 67 -23 -29 -40 -30 -20 -23 -25 -2 10/30/200829-118 29-04322 Lakehurst -74.35237 40.03345 1,397–1,583 96 -27 -28 -41 -29 -41 -23 -27 -4 10/31/200829-132 29-03726 Lakehurst -74.32912 40.05803 1,606–1,728 98 -30 -34 -48 -42 -38 -29 -32 -3 10/28/200829-440 29-06549 Lakewood -74.22353 40.08381 1,357–1,602 72 -20 -31 -44 -29 -20 -21 -24 -3 11/6/200829-490 33-01343 Keswick Grove -74.35844 39.98658 1,436–1,636 100 -30 -47 -33 -18 -19 -21 -22 -1 11/5/200829-576 29-08936 Lakehurst -74.28740 40.11475 1,276–1,462 135 -32 -35 -48 -40 -36 -33 -39 -6 10/27/2008
Appendix 8 99

Appendix 8. Water-level data for wells screened in the Middle and undifferentiated Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS 

well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

29-581 48-00056 Roosevelt -74.44498 40.14061 876–976 130 -1 -16 -26 -17 -14 -12 -9 3 10/27/200829-588 29-09259 Lakewood -74.18486 40.07737 1,410–1,620 73 -- -24 -53 -33 -21 -25 -24 1 11/12/200829-595 29-08356 Lakewood -74.13486 40.07095 1,565–1,800 25 -- -- -- -- -- -- -4 -- 11/4/200829-626 33-10224 Toms River -74.20778 39.95598 1,700–1,875 9 -- -23 -33 -23 -14 -24 -16 8 11/25/200829-779 29-12006 Lakewood -74.14153 40.07595 1,700–1,860 34 -- -- -- -- -- -- -21 -- 11/4/200829-1113 29-25859 Point Pleasant -74.05733 40.01295 1,852–1,974 10 -- -- -- -- -7 -7 -10 -3 11/5/200829-1659 29-34751 Adelphia -74.29139 40.15389 1,100–1,300 142 -- -- -- -- -- -- -15 -- 10/28/200829-1781 29-44970 Adelphia -74.29444 40.15750 1,100–1,325 150 -- -- -- -- -- -- -13 -- 10/28/200833-65 -- Penns Grove -75.40964 39.65345 501–512 30 -14 -15 -18 -- -18 -17 -22 -5 12/5/200833-106 -- Salem -75.48770 39.58734 359–365 5 -- -- -- -31 -31 -31 -34 -3 12/15/200833-119 30-00018 Wilmington South -75.51145 39.66917 210–230 7 -46 -39 -43 -44 -38 -46 -48 -2 11/20/200833-158 30-00763 Woodstown -75.33575 39.64678 562–575 62 -- -- -25 -17 -25 -23 -26 -3 12/5/200833-166 -- Penns Grove -75.37575 39.66178 568–578 47 -14 -15 -18 -- -18 -16 -20 -4 11/5/200833-187 -- Woodstown -75.32036 39.67714 664–672 73 -25 -26 -28 -29 -28 -25 -29 -4 11/14/200833-251 -- Salem -75.46467 39.56370 699–709 3 -27 -28 -32 -32 -31 -32 -35 -3 11/20/200833-305 30-01083 Penns Grove -75.41603 39.67039 381–457 14 -13 -14 -16 -- -16 -15 -20 -5 12/5/200833-918 34-01512 Taylors Bridge -75.53594 39.46414 1,115–1,135 12 -- -- -- -- -- -44 -43 1 12/10/200833-933 30-13120 Woodstown -75.31880 39.64617 535–670 48 -- -- -- -- -33 -31 -33 -2 12/5/200833-934 34-04055 Taylors Bridge -75.52979 39.46214 826–836 16 -- -- -- -- -60 -70 -75 -5 12/10/200833-972 30-12165 Wilmington South -75.50525 39.67181 202–264 11 -- -- -- -- -- -- -51 -- 11/20/2008P10105 -- Philadelphia -75.17212 39.89511 –101 9 -9 -- -7 -4 -4 -6 -4 2 11/19/2008
100 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 9. Water-level data for wells screened in the Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier New Jersey permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 5-123 31-05321 Camden -75.00245 39.98461 226–261 25 -10 -12 -16 -16 -16 -12 -8 4 11/18/2008 5-125 31-03835 Moorestown -74.98884 39.99114 239–281 79 -11 -15 -16 -19 -17 -15 -10 5 11/18/2008 5-129 27-04844 Camden -75.00267 39.99595 –174 60 -- -- -- -- -- -0 3 3 11/12/2008 5-130 31-04576 Frankford -75.01098 40.00006 167–198 70 -4 -3 -14 -12 -14 -9 -6 3 11/18/2008 5-146 27-03080 Beverly -74.96809 40.02292 89–130 25 3 2 0 -- -- 5 4 -1 11/18/2008 5-228 31-08923 Moorestown -74.98234 39.94206 440–500 40 -47 -51 -60 -53 -55 -38 -42 -4 11/3/2008 5-262 -- Mount Holly -74.83989 39.92345 1,125–1,145 72 -48 -58 -60 -61 -52 -47 -44 3 10/27/2008 5-274 31-03674 Moorestown -74.98434 39.97817 241–262 40 -20 -26 -29 -31 -28 -25 -19 6 11/7/2008 5-645 -- Bristol -74.87072 40.00289 431–441 40 -31 -35 -41 -41 -38 -30 -29 1 10/27/2008 5-648 -- Beverly -74.90217 40.01736 306–316 34 -20 -23 -29 -28 -29 -19 -22 -3 10/21/2008 5-746 31-12925 Moorestown -74.98739 39.95736 389–450 13 -29 -41 -43 -43 -38 -32 -29 3 11/3/2008 5-819 31-19212 Moorestown -74.94595 39.93531 499–590 20 -- -59 -68 -65 -- -47 -47 0 11/3/2008 5-823 -- Moorestown -74.92122 39.93819 590–640 35 -48 -62 -75 -64 -50 -50 -47 3 11/3/2008 5-1075 31-26130 Moorestown -74.93250 39.94253 528–644 40 -- -- -63 -61 -- -43 -42 1 11/3/2008 5-1811 31-64874 Camden -75.05490 39.99261 –119 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -13 -- 11/17/2008 5-1813 31-64870 Camden -75.05128 39.99261 –122 15 -- -- -- -- -- -- -5 -- 11/17/2008 7-12 31-02687 Runnemede -75.10979 39.87272 334–359 31 -57 -60 -52 -50 -41 -36 -33 3 11/18/2008 7-68 31-00904 Camden -75.09287 39.93267 185–225 24 -- -- -- -- -- -- -14 -- 11/17/2008 7-111 31-03456 Camden -75.08854 39.95686 139–170 9 -- -- -26 -- -10 -7 -8 -1 11/18/2008 7-121 -- Moorestown -74.99333 39.88092 672–729 76 -89 -98 -107 -- -59 -73 -57 16 11/19/2008 7-122 31-07021 Moorestown -74.99489 39.88122 684–741 80 -- -- -- -- -- -- -51 -- 11/19/2008

7-130 31-05077 Moorestown -74.95183 39.89817 743–748 71 -67 -75 -80 -79 -52 -59 -51 8 11/20/20087-144 31-00684 Camden -75.01695 39.91145 491–527 39 -60 -64 -67 -65 -49 -42 -38 4 11/19/20087-157 31-05033 Camden -75.00839 39.93284 376–427 45 -- -- -- -- -43 -37 -32 5 11/19/20087-163 31-04051 Camden -75.00764 39.93606 371–453 39 -46 -51 -53 -45 -36 -35 -26 9 11/19/20087-171 31-04797 Camden -75.08717 39.90736 224–313 15 -- -- -- -- -- -- -17 -- 11/13/20087-172 31-04799 Camden -75.08534 39.90781 218–312 10 -46 -40 -37 -38 -- -35 -8 27 11/13/20087-175 31-00079 Camden -75.07687 39.92089 266–306 21 -55 -52 -51 -- -38 -31 -29 2 11/13/20087-185 -- Clementon -74.98156 39.83067 940–950 70 -- -- -- -- -- -- -63 -- 12/23/20087-188 31-05950 Clementon -74.98258 39.83059 934–986 65 -- -- -89 -97 -62 -69 -66 3 12/23/2008
Appendix 9 101

Appendix 9. Water-level data for wells screened in the Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

7-221 -- Philadelphia -75.12694 39.89894 162–170 11 -39 -35 -30 -26 -22 -18 -16 2 11/19/20087-273 31-04756 Runnemede -75.06234 39.84222 612–712 54 -78 -77 -83 -82 -61 -59 -56 3 11/19/20087-278 31-02434 Camden -75.05389 39.87725 452–594 65 -72 -76 -82 -- -50 -56 -49 7 11/20/20087-283 31-04282 Camden -75.07573 39.87956 445–455 24 -62 -64 -64 -61 -48 -43 -40 3 11/18/20087-284 31-05054 Camden -75.07601 39.87981 –484 30 -- -- -66 -61 -45 -44 -40 4 11/18/20087-302 31-02130 Camden -75.02745 39.88867 523–572 21 -76 -83 -89 -95 -62 -55 -52 3 11/12/20087-320 31-04642 Camden -75.05289 39.94733 245–285 69 -33 -36 -34 -32 -26 -18 -15 3 11/18/20087-335 31-02915 Camden -75.03934 39.95545 243–278 61 -33 -35 -35 -34 -29 -27 -20 7 11/18/20087-341 31-01417 Camden -75.06915 39.96533 115–145 45 -22 -20 -19 -21 -10 -7 -6 1 11/19/20087-350 51-00064 Camden -75.02189 39.96742 232–257 12 -- -- -- -- -23 -18 -15 3 11/18/20087-368 51-00053 Camden -75.06292 39.97983 106–126 10 -13 -22 -17 -- -- -12 -9 3 11/17/20087-372 31-05110 Camden -75.03498 39.98153 195–230 68 -- -- -23 -20 -16 -13 -12 1 11/18/20087-412 31-09560 Clementon -74.94128 39.82289 1,082–1,092 149 -62 -72 -78 -80 -58 -58 -55 3 11/12/20087-523 31-12315 Runnemede -75.09217 39.86434 458–557 81 -56 -58 -61 -58 -43 -38 -38 0 11/18/20087-528 31-08526 Camden -75.05061 39.97686 140–180 20 -23 -28 -32 -22 -14 -13 -11 2 11/17/20087-541 31-15720 Camden -75.09573 39.93650 215–253 20 -- -34 -31 -26 -19 -14 -10 4 11/17/20087-547 31-18944 Camden -75.08231 39.95881 155–195 35 -- -- -32 -- -12 -10 -7 3 11/18/20087-597 31-20270 Camden -75.08684 39.95503 136–176 11 -- -- -30 -- -11 -8 -8 0 11/18/20087-723 31-28896 Camden -75.05484 39.90036 418–470 64 -- -- -- -- -49 -43 -42 1 11/10/20087-739 31-38319 Moorestown -74.99406 39.88178 695–754 85 -- -- -- -- -- -- -51 -- 11/19/20087-932 31-43420 Camden -75.07092 39.96656 125–145 29 -- -- -- -- -11 -7 -5 2 11/17/20087-933 31-45075 Camden -75.02128 39.96900 177–182 28 -- -- -- -- -22 -19 -16 3 10/10/20087-965 31-26140-0 Camden -75.03323 39.99345 85–105 19 -- -- -- -- -12 -7 -5 2 10/28/20087-1006 31-58576 Camden -75.04192 39.96539 250–260 33 -- -- -- -- -- -16 -14 2 11/18/20087-1027 31-58626 Camden -75.04972 39.98283 148–158 26 -- -- -- -- -- -- -15 -- 11/18/20087-1042 31-59990 Camden -75.05303 39.96475 265–275 89 -- -- -- -- -- -- -10 -- 11/10/20087-1043 31-59991 Camden -75.05306 39.96472 210–220 89 -- -- -- -- -- -- -11 -- 11/10/20087-1055 31-59303 Camden -75.05961 39.97161 210–220 67 -- -- -- -- -- -9 -8 1 11/10/20087-1070 31-56691 Camden -75.05639 39.98839 93–120 11 -- -- -- -- -- -- -10 -- 11/17/20087-1085 31-59128 Camden -75.06028 39.90167 355–445 51 -- -- -- -- -- -40 -39 1 11/10/2008
102 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 9. Water-level data for wells screened in the Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geo- detic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008] USGS well identifier New Jersey permit number USGS quadrangle Longitude Latitude Screened interval (ft) Altitude of land surface (ft) Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 change (ft) 2008 measurement date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008 15-133 30-01222 Marcus Hook -75.37852 39.75289 317–367 20 -- -- -2 -4 -4 1 2 1 11/10/2008 15-139 30-01223 Bridgeport -75.35936 39.76900 301–345 7 -10 -10 -11 -1 -11 -9 -11 -2 11/12/2008 15-282 31-07056 Woodbury -75.18443 39.82034 388–450 55 -30 -- -34 -32 -51 -19 -19 0 11/21/2008 15-308 -- Woodbury -75.21047 39.84483 231–271 10 -14 -15 -19 -41 -26 -13 -15 -2 11/20/2008 15-312 51-00063 Woodbury -75.16243 39.85189 322–372 20 -58 -55 -56 -45 -52 -29 -25 4 11/21/2008 15-321 31-00028 Woodbury -75.14767 39.87225 237–277 13 -- -57 -61 -- -- -34 -30 4 11/20/2008 15-326 31-05689 Woodbury -75.12723 39.87134 243–277 12 -- -- -- -- -- -- -34 -- 12/14/2008 15-331 31-04259 Woodbury -75.15225 39.83175 405–457 35 -44 -47 -53 -49 -42 -34 -32 2 11/19/2008 15-349 -- Marcus Hook -75.38741 39.78067 170–220 6 -5 -5 -8 -5 -6 -4 -5 -1 11/10/2008 15-357 -- Bridgeport -75.29324 39.83261 –105 4 -4 -4 -- -- -- -6 -7 -1 11/12/2008 15-430 31-17788 Woodbury -75.16167 39.86514 256–328 15 -- -49 -53 -- -- -19 -20 -1 11/20/2008 15-615 30-03530-9 Bridgeport -75.32074 39.77706 378–388 29 -- -- -15 -16 -15 -12 -15 -3 11/12/2008 15-618 30-03531-7 Bridgeport -75.32547 39.80122 230–240 7 -- -- -7 -7 -8 -5 -7 -2 11/12/2008 15-671 -- Runnemede -75.09128 39.83261 650–670 35 -- -- -69 -69 -53 -47 -46 1 11/14/2008 15-678 30-03625 Bridgeport -75.26963 39.82956 194–204 9 -- -- -8 -5 -8 -5 -6 -1 11/18/2008 15-680 30-03602 Bridgeport -75.26768 39.84400 186–196 9 -- -- -5 -6 -5 -2 -5 -3 11/18/2008 15-712 30-04347 Bridgeport -75.28963 39.80234 275–290 7 -- -- -11 -11 -11 -8 -10 -2 11/12/2008 15-738 30-03612-7 Bridgeport -75.25630 39.83011 188–198 5 -- -- -9 -9 -9 -6 -7 -1 11/18/2008 15-742 31-25266-4 Woodbury -75.16740 39.78122 757–777 84 -- -- -37 -37 -32 -26 -26 0 11/14/2008 15-770 31-26237-6 Woodbury -75.18712 39.86734 204–224 10 -- -- -25 -21 -17 -12 -10 2 11/12/2008 15-772 31-26242 Woodbury -75.18796 39.86845 196–216 10 -- -- -- -- -- -12 -11 1 11/12/2008

15-778 31-26245 Woodbury -75.18856 39.87278 170–190 5 -- -- -- -- -17 -13 -8 5 12/12/200815-1004 -- Pitman East -75.10073 39.73928 1,038–1,206 80 -- -- -- -63 -55 -49 -48 1 12/3/200815-1125 30-04112 Bridgeport -75.29074 39.82706 186–196 15 -- -- -- -3 -4 -3 -3 0 11/12/200815-1201 30-11328 Woodbury -75.24685 39.84011 235–245 12 -- -- -- -- -- -5 -6 -1 11/18/200815-1487 30-12609 Woodstown -75.33630 39.74261 495–525 104 -- -- -- -- -15 -16 -17 -1 12/3/200815-1726 30-13076 Bridgeport -75.37528 39.77722 180–200 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -6 -- 11/24/200833-86 30-01139 Marcus Hook -75.42269 39.76595 169–189 13 -10 -12 -11 -17 -14 -12 -13 -1 11/17/200833-330 50-00098 Penns Grove -75.44947 39.70139 –394 16 -38 -15 -23 -40 -34 -34 -38 -4 11/24/200833-335 30-01133 Penns Grove -75.46203 39.70314 270–430 13 -- -30 -33 -- -- -32 -36 -4 12/5/2008
Appendix 9 103

Appendix 9. Water-level data for wells screened in the Lower Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; --, data not available; blue type indicates well with accompanying hydrograph; horizontal datum is North American Datum of 1983; vertical datum is National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929; positive differences in water-level change indicate a rise in water levels from 2003 to 2008, whereas negative values indicate a decline in water levels from 2003 to 2008]

USGS well 

identifier

New Jersey 

permit 

number

USGS 

quadrangle Longitude Latitude

Screened 

interval 

(ft)

Altitude of 

land surface 

(ft)

Water-level altitude (ft) 2003–2008 

change 

(ft)

2008 

measurement 

date 1978 1983 1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

33-843 30-12116 Woodstown -75.31741 39.64567 825–855 42 -- -- -- -- -- -- -38 -- 12/5/200833-951 30-08958 Marcus Hook -75.41217 39.78144 130–150 22 -- -- -- -- -- -- -8 -- 11/17/2008P10113 -- Philadelphia -75.17740 39.90234 -- 6 -7 -- -5 -4 -3 -3 -1 2 11/19/2008P10114 -- Philadelphia -75.14157 39.91261 122–167 10 -- -- -8 -6 -6 -5 -5 0 11/19/2008

Delaware and Maryland

Db15-05 8006 Newark East -75.6708 39.6548 216–238 20 -- -- -- -- -1 0 0 0 1/13/2009Db33-17 10398 Wimington South -75.6194 39.6262 185–189 48 -- -- -40 -51 -57 -6 12/17/2008Dc34-05 -- Wimington South -75.6130 39.6321 574–579 28 -- -- -68 -65 -64 -74 -68 6 12/17/2008Dc53-07 -- St Georges -75.6310 39.5976 534–539 55 -- -- -- -- -- -- -110 -- 12/16/2008DE-NC 10058 10058 St Georges -75.6358 39.5715 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -138 -- 12/16/2008

DE-NC 53066 53066 Delaware City -75.6046 39.5734 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -121 -- 12/16/008

Ec32-07 -- St Georges -75.6336 39.5442 586–596 9 -- -- -93 -87 -101 -102 -90 12 1/12/2009
104 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 10-1. Results of the Mann-Kendall trend test on water levels from selected observation wells, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft/yr, feet per year; blue indicates statistically significant upword trend; red indicates statistically significant downword trend; 

p = 0.05, slope ≥ |0.2|; Insubstantial, 

p = 0.05 

and slope < |0.2|; NA, not applicable; --, amount of data insufficient for analysis; <, less than; ≥, greater than or equal to]

USGS 

well 

identifier

Name Aquifer 

2003 to 2008 1998 to 2008 1978 to 2008

Trend p

Sen’s 

slope 

(ft/yr) 

Seasonality Trend p Sen’s slope (ft/yr) Season- ality Trend p Sen’s slope (ft/yr) Season- ality

9-49 Higbee Beach 3 Obs Cohansey insignificant 0.061 NA x insubstantial 0.033 -0.16 x insubstantial <0.001 0.13 x9-80 Cape May 42 Obs Cohansey insignificant 1 NA x insignificant 0.402 NA x insubstantial <0.001 -0.06 x9-150 West Cape May 1 Cohansey insignificant 1 NA x decreasing 0.004 -0.22 x increasing <0.001 0.29 x9-304 Airport Rio Grande obs Rio Grande wbz insignificant 0.791 NA x insubstantial 0.003 -0.12 x -- -- --1-37 Galen Hall Obs Atlantic City 800-foot sand -- -- -- insignificant 0.524 NA x decreasing <0.001 -0.82 x1-180 Oceanville 1 Obs Atlantic City 800-foot sand decreasing <0.001 -1.58 x insignificant 0.137 NA x decreasing <0.001 -0.55 x1-578 Jobs Point Obs Atlantic City 800-foot sand decreasing <0.001 -1.56 x decreasing <0.001 -0.31 x decreasing <0.001 -0.62 x1-702 Burk Ave TW Obs Atlantic City 800-foot sand decreasing <0.001 -1.38 x insignificant 0.128 NA x 1decreasing <0.001 -0.45 x9-302 Coast Guard 800 Atlantic City 800-foot sand decreasing <0.001 -0.38 x decreasing <0.001 -0.67 x 1decreasing <0.001 -0.979-306 Oyster 800 Obs Atlantic City 800-foot sand decreasing <0.001 -0.32 x decreasing <0.001 -0.29 x 1decreasing <0.001 -0.38 x9-337 N Wildwood 800 Obs Atlantic City 800-foot sand decreasing <0.001 -0.43 x decreasing <0.001 -0.56 x 1decreasing <0.001 -0.72 x1-834 Margate Firehouse Obs Piney Point decreasing <0.001 -0.75 decreasing <0.001 -0.57 1decreasing <0.001 -0.525-407 Atsion 1 Obs Piney Point insubstantial 0.012 -0.11 x insignificant 0.574 NA x insubstantial <0.001 -0.05 x5-676 Coyle Airport Obs Piney Point insignificant 0.5224 NA insignificant 0.419 NA insignificant 0.072 NA11-044 Vocational Sch 3 Obs Piney Point decreasing <0.001 -9.41 decreasing <0.001 -7.55 decreasing <0.001 -1.3911-096 Jones Island 2 Obs Piney Point decreasing <0.001 -6.41 decreasing <0.001 -2.75 decreasing <0.001 -1.0211-163 Fair Grounds 3 Obs Piney Point decreasing 0.0043 -7.82 decreasing <0.001 -5.01 decreasing <0.001 -1.4429-18 Island Beach 2 Obs Piney Point decreasing <0.001 -0.32 x insubstantial 0.003 -0.13 x insubstantial <0.001 -0.11 x29-425 Webbs Mills 2 Obs Piney Point insignificant 0.836 NA x insignificant 0.092 NA x insubstantial 0.007 -0.04 x29-585 DOE-Forked River Piney Point insubstantial <0.001 -0.15 x insubstantial <0.001 -0.05 x 1insubstantial <0.001 -0.09COBd-53 COBd-53 Piney Point decreasing 0.02 -0.33 decreasing <0.001 -0.48 decreasing <0.001 -0.57ID55-01 ID55-01 Piney Point insignificant 0.078 NA x decreasing 0.024 -0.54 x decreasing <0.001 -0.97 xKc31-01 Kc31-01 Piney Point decreasing <0.001 -0.85730 decreasing <0.001 -0.69 -- -- --Nc13-03 Nc13-03 Piney Point decreasing <0.001 -0.59110 decreasing <0.001 -0.46 decreasing <0.001 -0.495-1250 McGuire 08-MW-5 Vincentown insubstantial <0.001 -0.13 x insubstantial 0.016 0.05 x -- -- --25-636 Howell Twp 2 Ob Vincentown insubstantial 0.004 -0.16 x insubstantial 0.003 0.09 x 1insubstantial <0.001 0.10 x29-139 Colliers Mills 2 Obs Vincentown insubstantial 0.019 -0.12 x insubstantial 0.002 0.06 x insignificant 0.737 NA x7-118 Hutton Hill 2 Obs Wenonah-Mt. Laurel decreasing <0.001 -0.24 x insubstantial 0.002 0.08 x insubstantial <0.001 -0.05 x7-478 New Brooklyn Pk 3 Wenonah-Mt. Laurel decreasing <0.001 -1.50 decreasing <0.001 -0.44 decreasing <0.001 -3.2125-353 Fort Monmouth 1 Wenonah-Mt. Laurel insignificant 0.361 NA x insubstantial <0.001 -0.13 x 1increasing <0.001 1.35 x
Appendix 10-1 105

Appendix 10-1. Results of the Mann-Kendall trend test on water levels from selected observation wells, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft/yr, feet per year; blue indicates statistically significant upword trend; red indicates statistically significant downword trend; p = 0.05, slope ≥ |0.2|; Insubstantial, p = 0.05 and slope < |0.2|; NA, not applicable; --, amount of data insufficient for analysis; <, less than; ≥, greater than or equal to]

USGS 

well 

identifier

Name Aquifer 

2003 to 2008 1998 to 2008 1978 to 2008

Trend p

Sen’s 

slope 

(ft/yr) 

Seasonality Trend p Sen’s slope (ft/yr) Season- ality Trend p Sen’s slope (ft/yr) Season- ality

25-486 DOE-Sea Girt Obs Wenonah-Mt. Laurel increasing <0.001 2.46 x increasing <0.001 1.11 x 1increasing <0.001 5.57 x25-637 Howell Twp 3 Ob Wenonah-Mt. Laurel increasing 0.003 0.66 x insignificant 0.13 NA x 1increasing <0.001 1.11 x29-140 Colliers Mills 3 Obs Wenonah-Mt. Laurel decreasing <0.001 -0.47 x decreasing <0.001 -0.22 x insubstantial <0.001 -0.13 x33-020 Horner Obs Wenonah-Mt. Laurel decreasing 0.005 -0.93 x insignificant 0.078 NA x decreasing <0.001 -0.36 x33-252 Salem 2 Obs Wenonah-Mt. Laurel decreasing 0.0065 -0.34 insignificant 0.202 NA insubstantial <0.001 -0.04 x5-259 Medford 2 Obs Englishtown decreasing 0.001 -0.46 x insignificant 0.132 NA x decreasing <0.001 -0.25 x23-104 Morrell 1 Obs Englishtown insignificant 1 NA x insubstantial 0.038 0.03 x insignificant 0.64 NA x25-250 Village 215 Obs Englishtown insignificant 0.151 NA x increasing 0.004 0.31 x insubstantial <0.001 -0.15 x25-429 Allaire State Pk Obs Englishtown increasing <0.001 2.94 x increasing <0.001 1.37 x increasing <0.001 3.86 x25-638 Howell Twp 4 Ob Englishtown increasing <0.001 1.09 x insignificant 0.072 NA x 1increasing <0.001 1.58 x25-715 Atlantic Highlands B Englishtown insubstantial <0.001 -0.17 x insignificant 0.317 NA x -- -- --29-138 Colliers Mills 1 Obs Englishtown decreasing <0.001 -0.62 x decreasing <0.001 -0.20 x insubstantial <0.001 0.06 x29-530 Pt Pleasant 6 Obs Englishtown increasing 0.038 5.06 x increasing 0.004 3.33 x -- -- -- --29-534 Toms River 2 Obs Englishtown increasing <0.001 1.67 increasing <0.001 2.24 increasing <0.001 2.145-258 Medford 1 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, upper increasing 0.001 0.76 x increasing <0.001 0.71 x increasing <0.001 0.59 x7-117 Hutton Hill 1 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, upper increasing 0.015 0.71 x increasing <0.001 0.69 x increasing <0.001 1.13 x7-477 New Brooklyn Pk 2 Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, upper insignificant 0.357 NA x increasing <0.001 0.40 x increasing <0.001 0.36 x15-728 Stefka 4 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, upper decreasing <0.001 -0.31 x insignificant 0.084 NA x 1insubstantial <0.001 0.09 x15-741 Mantua Shallow Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, upper insignificant 1 NA x increasing <0.001 0.36 x 1increasing <0.001 0.74 x23-228 Forsgate 3 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, upper increasing 0.0258 0.83 increasing <0.001 0.63 insubstantial 0.012 0.07 x25-206 Keyport 4 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, upper insignificant 0.371 NA x insignificant 0.742 NA x increasing <0.001 0.41 x23-292 Forsgate 2 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, upper increasing 0.011 0.44 x increasing <0.001 0.57 x increasing <0.001 0.20 x23-351 Sayreville 1 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, upper insignificant 0.08 NA insignificant 0.928 NA insubstantial 0.01 0.12 x25-316 Sandy Hook SP 1 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, upper insignificant 0.617 NA x insignificant 0.089 NA x increasing <0.001 0.2125-639 Howell Twp 5 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, upper decreasing <0.001 -1.15 x decreasing <0.001 -0.57 x 1insignificant 0.852 NA x33-253 Salem 3 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, upper decreasing 0.026 -0.59 decreasing <0.001 -0.26 decreasing <0.001 -0.255-063 Willingboro 1 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, middle insignificant 0.12 NA x increasing 0.011 0.49 x insignificant 0.137 NA x5-261 Medford 5 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, middle increasing <0.001 0.80 x increasing <0.001 0.74 x increasing <0.001 0.39 x5-440 Rhodia 1 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, middle increasing 0.029 0.28 x insignificant 0.078 NA x insubstantial <0.001 0.10 x
106 Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008 Appendix 10-1. Results of the Mann-Kendall trend test on water levels from selected observation wells, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1978–2008.—Continued [USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft/yr, feet per year; blue indicates statistically significant upword trend; red indicates statistically significant downword trend; 

p = 0.05, slope ≥ |0.2|; Insubstantial, 

p = 0.05 

and slope < |0.2|; NA, not applicable; --, amount of data insufficient for analysis; <, less than; ≥, greater than or equal to]

USGS 

well 

identifier

Name Aquifer 

2003 to 2008 1998 to 2008 1978 to 2008

Trend p

Sen’s 

slope 

(ft/yr) 

Seasonality Trend p Sen’s slope (ft/yr) Season- ality Trend p Sen’s slope (ft/yr) Season- ality

5-683 Butler Place 1 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, middle increasing <0.001 0.26 x increasing <0.001 0.31 x increasing <0.001 0.277-413 Elm Tree 3 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, middle increasing <0.001 0.79 x increasing <0.001 0.68 x increasing <0.001 0.71 x7-476 New Brooklyn Pk 1 Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, middle increasing <0.001 0.26 x increasing <0.001 0.58 x increasing <0.001 0.57 x15-713 Stefka 2 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, middle decreasing <0.001 -0.30 x insubstantial 0.039 0.09 x 1insubstantial <0.001 0.09 x23-291 Forsgate 1 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, middle insignificant 0.472 NA x increasing 0.002 0.60 x increasing <0.001 0.23 x23-439 South River 2 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, middle insignificant 0.121 NA x insignificant 0.839 NA x increasing <0.001 1.51 x25-272 Marlboro 1 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, middle increasing <0.001 1.10 x insignificant 0.103 NA x increasing <0.001 0.90 x25-635 Howell Twp 1 Ob Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, middle insignificant 0.117 NA x decreasing <0.001 -0.56 x 1increasing 0.002 0.25 x29-19 Island Beach 3 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, middle decreasing <0.001 -0.28 x insubstantial <0.001 -0.17 x insubstantial 0.004 0.05 x29-085 Toms River 84 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, middle decreasing <0.001 -0.38 decreasing <0.001 -0.44 increasing <0.001 0.2633-187 Point Airy Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, middle decreasing <0.001 -0.74 x insignificant 0.255 NA x insubstantial <0.001 -0.05 x33-251 Salem 1 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, middle decreasing <0.001 -0.66 decreasing <0.001 -0.31 x insubstantial <0.001 -0.1911-137 Ragovin 2100 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, undiff insubstantial <0.001 0.18 increasing <0.001 0.27 decreasing <0.001 -0.525-262 Medford 4 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, lower increasing <0.001 0.80 x increasing <0.001 0.74 x increasing <0.001 0.68 x7-412 Elm Tree 2 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, lower increasing 0.004 0.58 x increasing <0.001 0.83 x 1increasing <0.001 1.05 x15-671 Deptford Deep Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, lower increasing 0.05 0.40 x increasing <0.001 0.75 x 1increasing <0.001 1.32 x15-712 Stefka 1 Obs Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, lower decreasing <0.001 -0.27 x insubstantial 0.024 0.09 x insubstantial <0.001 0.13 xDc34-05 Dc34-05 Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, lower increasing <0.001 1.78 -- -- -- increasing <0.001 0.68Ec32-07 Ec32-07 Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, lower insignificant 0.061 NA decreasing 0.002 -0.66 decreasing <0.001 -1.08

1 period of record only
Appendix 10-2 107

Appendix 10-2. Results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test for paired water levels.[blue indicates significant difference (increase); red indicates significant difference (decrease); p = 0.05; <, less than; --, no data]

Aquifer

All Atlantic Burlington Camden Cape May Cumberland Gloucester

2003–8 1998–08 2003–8 1998–08 2003–8 1998–08 2003–8 1998–08 2003–8 1998–08 2003–8 1998–08 2003–8 1998–08

Cohansey 0.103 <0.0001 -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.103 <0.0001 -- -- -- --Rio Grande wbz 0.170 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --Atlantic City 800-ft sand <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.040 -- -- -- -- <0.0001 0.0028 -- -- -- --Piney Point <0.0001 0.017 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --Vincentown 0.001 0.410 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --Wenonah-Mt. Laurel <0.0001 0.315 -- -- <0.0001 0.287 0.027 0.677 -- -- -- -- 0.890 0.129Englishtown 0.521 0.300 -- -- 0.042 0.193 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, Upper 0.001 0.563 -- -- 0.496 0.043 <0.0001 0.0002 -- -- -- -- 0.418 <0.0001Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, Middle 0.585 0.033 -- -- 0.118 <0.0001 0.0005 0.147 -- -- -- -- 0.004 <0.0001Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, Lower 0.000 <0.0001 -- -- 0.091 0.002 <0.0001 <0.0001 -- -- -- -- 0.715 <0.0001

Aquifer

Mercer Middlesex Monmouth Ocean Salem Critical Area 1 Critical Area 2

2003–8 1998–08 2003–8 1998–08 2003–8 1998–08 2003–8 1998–08 2003–8 1998–08 2003–8 1998–08 2003–8 1998–08

Cohansey -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --Rio Grande wbz -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --Atlantic City 800-ft sand -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.012 -- -- -- -- -- -- --Piney Point -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.587 0.424 -- -- -- -- -- --Vincentown -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --Wenonah-Mt. Laurel -- -- -- -- 0.841 0.669 0.051 0.348 <0.0001 0.359 0.553 0.535 <0.0001 0.802Englishtown -- -- 0.812 0.674 0.027 0.117 -- -- 0.054 0.0483 0.854 0.735Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, Upper -- -- 0.1187 0.015 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.001 0.004 0.0005 -- <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, Middle 0.375 0.820 0.029 0.729 0.135 0.003 0.204 0.850 0.002 0.004 0.353 0.175 0.0004 <0.0001Potomac-Raritan-Magothy, Lower -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- <0.0001 <0.0001
Prepared by the West Trenton Publishing Service Center

For more information, contact:

New Jersey Water Science Center

U.S. Geological Survey

3450 Princeton Pike, Suite 110

Lawrenceville, NJ 08648

http://nj.usgs.gov/
DePaul and Rosman—Water-Level Conditions in the Confined Aquifers of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, 2008—Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5232

ISSN 2328–0328 (online) 

http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20135232