Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the 

Leetown Area, West Virginia

By Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, David J. Weary, Malcolm S. Field, Herbert A. 

Pierce, William Bane Schill, and John A. Young

Open-File Report 2007–1358 

U.S. Department of the Interior

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

DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Mark D. Myers, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2007

For product and ordering information:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

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

natural hazards, and the environment:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

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

U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to 

reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation:

Geohydrology and water quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia, by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, David J. Weary, 

Malcolm S. Field, Herbert A. Pierce, William B. Schill, and John A. Young: U.S. Geological Survey Open-file Report 

2007-1358, 100 p, http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1358.
iii

Contents

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

Introduction - by Mark D. Kozar and Kurt J. McCoy................................................................................2

Study Area .............................................................................................................................................2

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

Approach................................................................................................................................................4

Previous Investigations .......................................................................................................................4

Acknowledgements............................................................................................................................12

Hydrogeology - By M. D. Kozar, K. J. McCoy, D. J. Weary, and H. A. Pierce.....................................12

Geology - by David J. Weary.............................................................................................................12

Bedrock Geology .......................................................................................................................12

Structural Geology.....................................................................................................................13

Bedding .......................................................................................................................................13

Joints. .........................................................................................................................................13

Faults. .........................................................................................................................................18

Cleavage......................................................................................................................................18

Fracture Traces..........................................................................................................................18

Karst. .........................................................................................................................................18

Geophysics - By Herbert A. Pierce and Kurt J. McCoy................................................................22

Surface Geophysics - by Herbert A. Pierce ..........................................................................22

Audio-Magnetotelluric Methods.............................................................................................22

Results of AMT Surveys ..................................................................................................25

Borehole Geophysics - by Kurt J. McCoy..............................................................................25

Borehole Geophysical Methods..............................................................................................25

Results of Borehole Geophysical Surveys ...................................................................25

Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young ............................................34

Precipitation, Surface Drainage, and Streamflow - 

by Mark D. Kozar and Kurt J. McCoy ............................................................................34

LiDAR Data Acquisition and Processing for Landform Analysis - by John A. Young.....38

LiDAR Acquisition and Quality Control..........................................................................38

LiDAR Data Processing....................................................................................................38

Landform Analysis ............................................................................................................40

Landform Interpretation to Identify Sinkholes.............................................................40

Ground-Water Levels - by Kurt J. McCoy..............................................................................40

Base-Flow Discharge Measurements - by Mark D. Kozar and Kurt J. McCoy...............46

Ground-Water Recharge/Discharge - by Mark D. Kozar....................................................46

Water Budgets - by Mark D. Kozar.........................................................................................52

Aquifer Properties - by Kurt J. McCoy ...................................................................................52

Single-Well Aquifer Tests................................................................................................53

Step-Drawdown Tests......................................................................................................53

Multiple-Well Aquifer Tests ............................................................................................55

Straddle-Packer Tests......................................................................................................56

Ground-Water Flow - by Mark D. Kozar.................................................................................56

Dye Tracer Tests and Analyses - by Malcolm S. Field.........................................................58

Previous Tracer Work ......................................................................................................60

Tracer Tests........................................................................................................................60

Results of Tracer Tests.....................................................................................................60

Breakthrough Curve Modeling.......................................................................................65

Spring Recharge Delineation - by Mark D. Kozar ................................................................67
iv

Contents—continued

Water Quality - by Mark D. Kozar and William B. Schill .......................................................................69

Field Measurements and Inorganic Constituents - by Mark D. Kozar.......................................69

Specific Conductance, pH, and Temperature.......................................................................69

Dissolved Oxygen and Turbidity ..............................................................................................73

Alkalinity, Water Hardness, and Major Ions..........................................................................73

Trace Elements...........................................................................................................................75

Radioactive Elements................................................................................................................75

Nutrients and Bacteria - by Mark D. Kozar....................................................................................77

Nitrogen and Phosphorous Compounds................................................................................77

Indicator Bacteria......................................................................................................................77

Microbial and Molecular Studies - by William B. Schill ..............................................................77

Organic Constituents - by Mark D. Kozar .......................................................................................84

Pesticides....................................................................................................................................84

Volatile and Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds...................................................................84

Ground-Water Age Constituents and Radionuclides - by Mark D. Kozar.................................84

Dissolved Gases.........................................................................................................................84

Tritium...........................................................................................................................................85

Chlorofluorocarbons .................................................................................................................85

Deuterium/Oxygen 18................................................................................................................89

Macroinvertebrates - by Mark D. Kozar.........................................................................................90

Summary .......................................................................................................................................................90

References Cited .........................................................................................................................................94

Appendices .................................................................................................................................................100
v

Figures

1-2: Maps showing:

1. Location of study area with sites sampled or measured during the study and boundary 

of the ground-water flow model for the Leetown area, West Virginia.......................3

2. A) Geology, B) geologic cross section, and C) stratigraphic column of the Hopewell 

Run surface water drainage basin, and the USGS Leetown Science Center, West 

Virginia. ...............................................................................................................................14

3. Conceptual diagram showing geometric and spatial relations between bedding planes,

 joints, and drill holes in a tightly-folded terrain, such as that in the Leetown area, West 

Virginia. ........................................................................................................................................16

4. Lower hemisphere stereographic projection of poles to bedding from outcrop data collected in 

the Leetown area, West Virginia. ............................................................................................17

5. Compass-rose diagram showing the dominant joint trends in the Paleozoic rocks of the Leetown 

area, West Virginia.....................................................................................................................19

6-7: Lower hemispheric stereographic projections:

6. of poles to joint planes measured at the ground surface (green points and blue 

contours) and fractures measured in monitoring wells (red squares and purple 

contours) in the Leetown area, West Virginia. ............................................................20

7. of lineations defined by beta pair intersections of bedding and joints measured at the 

ground surface in the Leetown area, West Virginia. ..................................................21

8. Map showing Audio-magnetotelluric station locations and electrical resistivity cross sections 

developed for the Leetown area, West Virginia. ..................................................................23

9. Schematic diagram showing a conceptual model of the geologic structure and epikarst weathering typical of the Leetown area, West Virginia. ....................................................................24

10. Two-dimensional apparent resistivity map of the AMT data at 33 feet below land surface, Leetown area, West Virginia. ..........................................................................................................26

11. Two-dimensional invariant electrical-resistivity section (LL1) across the USGS Leetown Science 

Center, West Virginia. ................................................................................................................27

12. Composite map showing the 2-dimensional audio-magnetotelluric resistivity at 197 ft below land 

surface, surficial geologic map, and USGS topographic map of the Leetown area, West 

Virginia. ........................................................................................................................................28

13. Rose diagrams of a) cleavage and joints in bedrock of the Leetown area and b) fracture traces 

in Jefferson and Berkeley Counties, West Virginia. .............................................................29

14. Examples of fracture images from acoustic and optical televiewer logs of boreholes in the Leetown area, West Virginia. . .........................................................................................................31

15. Illustration showing the method of determining fracture strike and dip orientation from televiewer logs. .................................................................................................................................32

16-17: Schmidt equal-area stereo-net projections

16. of poles to planes for 683 fractures identified in acoustic-televiewer (ATV) logs of 11 

wells at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia. .....................................33

17. (segregated by geologic structure) of poles to planes for fractures identified in 

acoustic-televiewer logs of 11 wells at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West 

Virginia.................................................................................................................................35

18. Potentiometric-surface map of simulated ground-water levels and generalized directions of 

ground-water flow in the Leetown area, West Virginia.......................................................37

19. LiDAR derived digital-elevation model for the Leetown area, West Virginia...............................39
vi

Figures—

20. Detail of LiDAR derived digital elevation model, color coded by levels of topographic position 

index, with small circular topographic depressions showing sink holes in the Hopewell 

Run Watershed, Leetown area, West Virginia...................................................................... 41

21-24. Graphs showing:

21. Precipitation measured at Gray Spring and hydrograph for well Jef-0526 at the 

USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia.............................................................42

22. Hydrograph of Balch and Gray Springs, USGS Leetown Science Center, West 

Virginia. ...............................................................................................................................45

23. Location of base-flow survey sites and flows measured along Hopewell Run and its 

tributaries in the Leetown area, West Virginia............................................................ 47

24. Graph showing the average standardized departures of the minimum stream flows 

from the record period average for 1930-2002 for five stream gaging stations in 

the Eastern Panhandle of West Virginia. ..................................................................... 51

25. Ground-water flow connections determined from dye tracer studies conducted in the Leetown area, West Virginia. ......................................................................................................... 61

26. Estimated recharge areas of Balch, Blue, and Gray Springs during average hydrologic conditions, Leetown, West Virginia. .................................................................................................68

27-33. Graphs showing:

27. Water temperature, stage, and precipitation for the period from April 

2003-November 2005, measured at Gray Spring, Leetown, West Virginia...............74

28. Distribution of concentrations of major ions, hardness, and total dissolved solids 

in water samples collected from 8 wells and 3 springs at the USGS Leetown 

Science Center, West Virginia.........................................................................................76

29. Microbial contamination observed in September, 2004 for wells and springs 

sampled at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia. ................................79

30. Multidimensional scaling analysis showing the relations between abiotic and biotic 

parameters for 12 ground-water sources in the Leetown area, West Virginia. ....80

31. Multidimensional scaling analysis showing the relations between 12 ground-water 

sources in the Leetown area, West Virginia................................................................ 81

32. Melting curve analysis of bacterial 16S ribosomal DNA gene fragments amplified 

by polymerase chain reaction from the bacterial assemblage of the new Kaiser 

farm well, Leetown, West Virginia, on two occasions. ..............................................83

33. Relation of oxygen-18 and deuterium isotopes showing evaporative enrichment 

trend for sites sampled on the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia. .....89
vii

Tables

1. List of wells, springs, and streams where data was collected in the Leetown area, West Virginia, 

during the investigation and the type of data collected at each site. .................................5

2. Description and application of borehole logging techniques utilized at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia........................................................................................................30

3. Precipitation in inches at the Eastern West Virginia Regional Airport, Martinsburg, West Virginia, 

2003-2005......................................................................................................................................36

4. Summary statistics from monthly water level observations, July 2003-October 2005, at the USGS 

Leetown Science Center, West Virginia .................................................................................44

5. Estimates of quarterly ground-water recharge for the Hopewell Run and Opequon Creek watersheds, West Virginia and Virginia, for water years 2003-2005 ...........................................48

6. Quarterly and annual estimates of ground-water recharge for the Opequon Creek watershed 

with statistical rank (highest to lowest) for years 1948-2005 .............................................49

7. Summary statistics for transmissivities (T) in ft2/day calculated from single well aquifer tests for 

geologic units near Leetown, West Virginia ..........................................................................54

8. Specific capacities (gal/min//ft) calculated from step-discharge tests conducted at the USGS 

Leetown Science Center, West Virginia .................................................................................54

9. Radial-flow model results from multiple-well aquifer tests conducted at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia........................................................................................................57

10. Transmissivities computed from straddle packer tests conducted at the USGS Leetown Science 

Center, West Virginia..................................................................................................................57

11. Depth of regolith and epikarst as seen in drill logs at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West 

Virginia .........................................................................................................................................59

12. Locations and date and time of recent tracer injections conducted in the Leetown area, West 

Virginia..........................................................................................................................................62

13. Locations and distance of tracer-resurgence sampling stations from injection sites, Leetown 

area, West Virginia.....................................................................................................................62

14. Ground-water travel times and velocities for the eight recent tracer tests conducted in the 

Leetown area, West Virginia. ...................................................................................................64

15. QTRACER2-estimated flow parameters for selected sampling sites in the Leetown area, West 

Virginia..........................................................................................................................................66

16. CXTFIT-estimated parameters for selected breakthrough curves from tracer tests conducted in 

the Leetown area, West Virginia..............................................................................................67

17. Summary statistics for constituents and parameters detected in water samples collected at the 

USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

drinking water and aquatic life standards ............................................................................70

18. Wells and springs sampled and analyzed for microbial and DNA studies at the USGS Leetown 

Science Center, West Virginia..................................................................................................78

19. Chlorofluorocarbon, tritium, helium, neon, dissolved gas, and isotope data from water samples 

collected from selected wells and springs sampled at the USGS Leetown Science Center, 

West Virginia ...............................................................................................................86
viii

Conversion Factors and Datums

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter (mm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

millimeter (mm) 0.03937 inch (in)

Area

Acre 0.004047 square kilometer (km2

)

square mile (mi2

) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) 

Volume

gallon (gal) 3.785 liter (L) 

gallon (gal) 0.003785 cubic meter (m3

) 

million gallons (Mgal) 3,785 cubic meter (m3

)

cubic foot (ft3

) 0.02832 cubic meter (m3) 

cubic centimeter (cm3

) 0.06102 cubic inch (in3)

Mass

ounce, avoirdupois (oz) 28.35 gram (g)

pound, avoirdupois 0.4536 kilogram (kg)

picogram (pg) 1 x 10-12 gram (g)

kilogram (kg) gram (g)

Flow rate

foot per day (ft/d) 0.3048 meter per day (m/d)

cubic foot per second (ft3

/s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second (m3/s)

cubic foot per second per square mile 

[(ft3

/s)/mi2]

 0.01093 cubic meter per second per square kilometer [(m3

/s)/km2]

cubic foot per day (ft3

/d) 0.02832 cubic meter per day (m3/d)

gallon per minute (gal/min) 0.06309 liter per second (L/s)

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

/d)

inch per year (in/yr) 25.4 millimeter per year (mm/yr)

Specific capacity

gallon per minute per foot (gal/min)/ft 0.2070 liter per second per meter [(L/s)/m]

Hydraulic conductivity

foot per day (ft/d) 0.3048 meter per day (m/d)

Hydraulic gradient

foot per mile (ft/mi) 0.1894 meter per kilometer (m/km)

Transmissivity*

foot squared per day (ft2

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

Conversion Factors and Datums—continued

Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 

(NAVD 88) and horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 

1983 (NAD 83). Altitude and elevation, as used in this report, refer to distance above 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.

Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) as follows:

°F=(1.8×°C)+32

Specific conductance is given in microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius (μS/cm at 

25 °C).

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

or micrograms per liter (μg/L).

Dissolved-gas concentrations are presented in units of mg/L or as cubic centimeters of gas at 

standard temperature and pressure per gram water (ccSTP/g H2O).

 Excess-air content is given in cubic centimeters per kilogram of water (cm3/kg H2O).

Concentrations of chlorofluorocarbons in water are given in units of picograms per kilogram 

(pg/kg), and concentrations of chlorofluorocarbons in air are given in units of parts per trillion by 

volume (pptv). 

Frequency, as it pertains to audio-magnetotellurics discussions in this report is referred to in 

Hertz (Hz), an expression of cycles per second. 

Fluorescence, as discussed in this report is presented in relative fluorescence units (RFU). 

Turbidity is expressed within this report in nephelometric turbidity units (NTU). 
 1

Abstract

The U.S. Geological Survey’s Leetown Science Center 

and the co-located U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National 

Center for Cool and Cold Water Aquaculture both depend on 

large volumes of cold clean ground water to support research 

operations at their facilities. Currently, ground-water demands 

are provided by three springs and two standby production 

wells used to augment supplies during periods of low spring 

flow. Future expansion of research operations at the Leetown 

Science Center is dependent on assessing the availability and 

quality of water to the facilities and in locating prospective 

sites for additional wells to augment existing water supplies. 

The hydrogeology of the Leetown area, West Virginia, is a 

structurally complex karst aquifer. Although the aquifer is a 

karst system, it is not typical of most highly cavernous karst 

systems, but is dominated by broad areas of fractured rock 

drained by a relatively small number of solution conduits. 

Characterization of the aquifer by use of fluorometric tracer 

tests, a common approach in most karst terranes, therefore 

only partly defines the hydrogeologic setting of the area. In 

order to fully assess the hydrogeology and water quality in 

the vicinity of Leetown, a multi-disciplinary approach that 

included both fractured rock and karst research components 

was needed.

The U.S. Geological Survey developed this multidisciplinary research effort to include geologic, hydrologic, 

geophysical, geographic, water-quality, and microbiological 

investigations in order to fully characterize the hydrogeology and water quality of the Leetown area, West Virginia. 

Detailed geologic and karst mapping provided the framework 

on which hydrologic investigations were based. Fracture trace 

and lineament analysis helped locate potential water-bearing 

fractures and guided installation of monitoring wells. Monitoring wells were drilled for borehole geophysical surveys, 

water-quality sampling, water-level measurements, and aquifer 

tests to characterize the quality of water and the hydraulic 

properties of the aquifer. Surface geophysical surveys provided a 3-dimensional view of bedrock resistivity in order to 

assess geologic and lithologic controls on ground-water flow. 

Borehole geophysical surveys were conducted in monitoring 

wells to assess the storage and movement of water in subsurface fractures. Numerous single-well, multi-well, and straddle 

packer aquifer tests and step-drawdown tests were conducted 

to define the hydraulic properties of the aquifer and to assess 

the role of bedrock fractures and solution conduits in the flow 

of ground water. Water samples collected from wells and 

springs were analyzed to assess the current quality of ground 

water and provide a baseline for future assessment. Microbiological sampling of wells for indicator bacteria and human and 

animal DNA provided an analysis of agricultural and suburban 

development impacts on ground-water quality. Light detection 

and ranging (LiDAR) data were analyzed to develop digital 

elevation models (DEMs) for assessing sinkhole distribution, 

to provide elevation data for development of a ground-water 

flow model, and to assess the distribution of major fractures 

and faults in the Leetown area.

The flow of ground water in the study area is controlled 

by lithology and geologic structure. Bedrock, especially low 

permeability units such as the shale Martinsburg Formation 

and the Conococheague Limestone, act as barriers to water 

flowing down gradient and across bedding. This retardation of 

cross-strike flow is especially pronounced in the Leetown area, 

where bedding typically dips at steep angles. Highly permeable fault and fracture zones that disrupt the rocks in crossstrike directions provide avenues through which ground water 

can flow laterally across or through strata of low primary 

permeability. Significant strike parallel thrust faults and crossstrike faults typically coincide with larger solution conduits 

and act as drains for the more pervasive network of interconnected diffuse fractures.

Results of borehole geophysical surveys indicate that 

although numerous fractures may intersect a borehole, only 

one or two of the fractures typically transmit most of the water 

to a well. The diffuse-flow dominated network of fractures that 

provides the majority of storage occupies only a small proportion of the total aquifer volume but constitutes the majority of 

porosity within the aquifer. Solution conduits, while occupying 

a relatively small volume of the overall aquifer, are especially 

important because they serve as primary drains for the groundwater flow system. Surface resistivity maps and cross-sections 

Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, 

West Virginia

By Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, David J. Weary, Malcolm S. Field, Herbert A. Pierce, William Bane Schill, 

and John A. Young
2 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

show anomalous areas of low resistivities coincident with the 

prevailing geologic strike at N. 20o E., with major cross-strike 

faults, and with major springs in the region.

Transmissivity derived from straddle packer tests was 

highly variable, and ranged over three orders of magnitude 

(1.8 x 10-6 to 5.9 x 10-3 ft2/d) in diffuse-flow fractures. A 

similar large variability in transmissivity was documented by 

single- and multi-well aquifer tests conducted in conduit-flow 

dominated portions of the aquifer (2.0 x 103 to 1.4 x 104 ft2/d) 

in lowland areas immediately adjacent to the Leetown Science 

Center.

A stream-gaging station installed on Hopewell Run 

near the point where the stream exits the Leetown watershed 

indicates average daily streamflow for the Hopewell Run 

of approximately 11.2 ft3/s, and ranged from a minimum of 

1.80 ft3/s on September 28, 2005, to a maximum of 73.0 ft3/s 

on December 11, 2003. Base-flow (ground-water) discharge 

surveys identified numerous small seeps adjacent to streams in 

the area. Hydrographs of the stage of Balch Spring show rapid 

response to individual storms. Strong correlation of the flow 

of Hopewell Run and Balch Spring indicates the nearby losing 

stream reach is partly responsible for higher fluctuations in 

the stage of Balch Spring. A water budget for the study period 

(2003-2005), based on measured precipitation and hydrograph 

analyses, is expressed as Precipitation (38.60 in/yr) = Surface 

Runoff (1.36 in/yr) + Ground-Water Discharge (17.73 in/yr) + 

Evapotranspiration (24.23 in/yr) – Change in storage (4.72 in/

yr).

Flow of ground water through the epikarst, a shallow 

zone of intensely weathered rock and regolith, can be rapid 

(on the order of days or weeks) as flow is concentrated in solution conduits. Flow within the intermediate and deeper zones 

is typically much slower. Eight dye-tracer tests conducted 

in the Leetown area found ground-water flow patterns to be 

divergent, with velocities ranging from about 12.5 to 610 ft/

day and a median velocity of 50 ft/day. Estimates of groundwater age in carbonate rocks in the region are on the order of 

15 years in the shallower portions of the aquifer to 50 years or 

older for deeper portions of the aquifer. Shallow springs can 

have a significant component of fairly young water (< 5 years 

in age).

Ground-water samples collected from 16 sites (12 wells 

and 4 springs) in the Leetown area were analyzed for more 

than 340 constituents. Only turbidity, indicator bacteria, and 

radon were typically present in concentrations exceeding U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) drinking-water or 

aquatic life standards.

Introduction - by Mark D. Kozar and 

Kurt J. McCoy

In Jefferson and Berkeley Counties in West Virginia, 

fractured-carbonate aquifers are relied upon to supply the 

rapidly increasing demand of water for domestic, commercial, 

and government users. In such carbonate aquifer settings, well 

and spring yields are generally high and ground-water supply 

is considered abundant. In part, these yields can be explained 

with detailed geologic mapping, yet the heterogeneity of the 

subsurface system remains poorly understood. However, an 

understanding of flow and long-term availability of water from 

such a complex heterogeneous system is essential before engineering solutions to production development can be considered. Therefore, there is a need to further define the aquifer at 

depth and the characteristics of subsurface flow.

Aquifer permeability can range over several orders of 

magnitude within a few tens of feet, making adequate conceptualization of the nature of the fractured-carbonate aquifer in 

the Great Valley difficult at a regional scale. The Great Valley 

is a sub-region of the Valley and Ridge geomorphic province 

(Fenneman, 1938) and is one of the most important karst 

carbonate aquifers in the Eastern United States. Accounting 

for the spatial distribution and connectivity of smaller less 

pervasive fractures on a more limited local scale permits a 

comprehensive analysis of additional aquifer complexities. 

Comprehensive conceptual and mathematical models are best 

employed where multiple tools have been used to characterize 

the aquifer such that the density and degree of interconnectedness of a given fracture system and resulting conduit drains 

can be better understood regionally. 

At the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Leetown Science 

Center near Kearneysville, West Virginia, (fig. 1) scientists 

evaluated the carbonate aquifer during a 4-year comprehensive 

study (2002-2006). Detailed work using multiple approaches 

was conducted to further the understanding of aquifer characteristics and the lithologic and structural controls on groundwater flow in this complex hydrogeologic setting. Such 

characterization involved surficial geologic mapping, borehole 

and surface geophysical surveys, open-hole and packer aquifer 

testing, dye tracing, numerical modeling, continuous waterlevel and streamflow monitoring, and analyses of groundwater quality. This report presents the results of this multidisciplinary investigation.

Study Area

The Leetown Science Center (hereafter referred to as the 

Center) is an approximately 455-acre research facility operated 

by the USGS Biological Resources Discipline and is located 

in the eastern panhandle of West Virginia near Kearneysville, 

about 70 miles west of Washington, DC. The primary mission of the Center is to conduct research and investigate the 

health and habitats of aquatic species, including studies of fish 

diseases, declining species, invasive species, genetics, aquaculture, and ecology. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s 

(USDA) National Center for Cool and Cold Water Aquaculture (NCCWA) is co-located at the facility. Large quantities 

of good-quality cold water are needed to support the diverse 

research activities at these facilities. 
Introduction - by Mark D. Kozar and Kurt J. McCoy 3

Figure 1. Location of study area with sites sampled or measured during the study and boundary of the ground-water flow model for 

the Leetown area, West Virginia.

"

"

y

"

"

"

"

"

#

#

#

L

L

! !

!

! !!

! !

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!!

!!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

! !

24

10

9

8

7

6

4

5

2 3

1

99

98

97

96

95

94

93 92

91

9089

88

87

86

85

84

83 82 81

80 79

78

76

75

74

73

72

71

70

69

68

67

66

65

63

62

61

60

57

56

55

54

53

52

51

45&46

43&44

41&42

37 40

36

33

32

31

30

29 28

27

26

25

21

20 19

17

15 14

11&23

B

129

128

127

125 126

124

123

122

121

120

119 118

117

116

1 5

114

113

112

111 110

109

108

107

105

104

103

102

101

100

22

35

13

12&18 51

58&59 A

78°0'0"W 77°58'0"W 77°56'0"W 77°54'0"W

39°22'0"N

39°20'0"N

39°18'0"N

EXPLANATION

Model Boundary

Hopewell Run

Watershed

Roads

Streams

Study Sites

Spring or streamflow measuring site

# Spring and streamflow measuring with water quality monitoring

" Potential contaminant sources

! Ground-water model head observation well

! Ground-water model head observation well and aquifer test

! Ground-water model head observation well and monthly water 

level well

! Ground-water model, aquifer test, and production well

! Ground-water model, aquifer test, and monthly water level well

! Ground-water model, aquifer test, montly head observation, and 

water quality monitoring well

0 .5 1 .25 Miles

0 .5 1 Kilometers

Location of study area in West Virginia

WV

OH

PA

KY VA

HOPEWELL RUN

JOHNSONTOWN

BROWN'S 

CORNER

State Route 51

OPEQUON CREEK

County Route 1

Leetown Pike

KEARNEYSVILLE

HAREWOOD

MIDDLEWAY

SOUTH BRANCH

EAST BRANCH

WEST BRANCH
4 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Purpose and Scope

This report presents the results of a four-year assessment 

of the hydrogeology of the Leetown area, West Virginia, and 

includes: (1) revision of the conceptual model of ground water 

flow in the fractured karst aquifer that supplies water to the 

Center; (2) discussion of borehole geophysical surveys and 

water level and water quality data collected during the study; 

(3) presentation of data from detailed aquifer tests conducted 

to determine hydraulic properties of the aquifer (4) assessment of the impact of ground-water withdrawals in certain 

portions of the aquifer on the yield and long term availability 

of existing spring flows, (4) delineation of the potential areas 

of recharge to the Center’s major springs to protect the availability and quality of water necessary for operations, and (5) 

analysis of the water-quality and geochemistry of the karst 

aquifer in the Leetown area.

Approach

A multi-disciplinary assessment of the resource was used 

to describe the karst aquifer from which the Center obtains 

its water. Geologic mapping, fracture-trace and lineament 

analysis, and surface-geophysical surveys provided the framework from which hydrologic investigations were conducted. 

Hydrologic investigations included monitoring well installation, stream seepage surveys, stream gaging of Hopewell Run 

and Gray and Balch Springs, hydrograph analysis, estimation 

of ground-water recharge rates, development of water budgets, 

water-level monitoring, water-quality sampling, borehole 

geophysical surveys, and single-, multi-, step-drawdown, and 

packer aquifer tests. A light detection and ranging (LiDAR) 

survey provided additional data on locations of sinkholes and 

a digital-elevation model (DEM) was developed from the data. 

The DEM was used to define the upper surface of a groundwater flow model developed for the area. Dye tracer tests 

confirmed previously mapped ground-water flow patterns and 

velocities. Microbial and DNA studies helped improve understanding of the potential contaminants entering the aquifer as 

well as their mechanisms of transport and potential fate. A 

listing of the wells, springs, and stream sites where data were 

collected in support of this investigation, along with the types 

of data collected at each site, is shown in table 1.

Previous Investigations

The relation between geology and ground-water supply 

and quality in the study area was first discussed by Jeffords 

(1945a, 1945b). Graeff (1953) and Beiber (1961) further 

elaborated and explained the lithologic control that carbonate 

units have on the quality and quantity of ground water, and on 

the direction of flow in the aquifers of Jefferson and Berkeley 

Counties, West Virginia. Large springs discharging in excess 

of 1,000 gallons per minute (gal/min) from these carbonate 

units were correlated with the faults in the area by Hobba 

and others (1972). Taylor (1974) concluded that systematic 

fracturing of the carbonate bedrock, attributed to a four-phase 

deformation history, is partially evident from topographic 

analysis of the area. He found that well yields and spring 

locations in lowland areas are related to structural features, 

such as joints, faults, and fractures, that allow large quantities 

of ground water to flow down gradient. Seasonal and annual 

fluctuations in ground-water storage and base flow to streams 

associated with these features can be high (Hobba, 1976, 

1981). Base-flow stream discharge and water-level data from 

Kozar and others (1991) and Shultz and others (1995) were 

used to calculate aquifer transmissivity values that range over 

an order of magnitude due to the anisotropic nature of fracturing in the carbonate rocks. Preferential flow in the direction 

of strike was verified by the dye tracing work of Jones (1991), 

Kozar and others (1991), and Shultz and others (1995). Previous dye tracing work at the Center by Jones and Deike (1981) 

concluded that the aquifer is characterized by steeply dipping 

bedding planes with a diffuse network of fractures which may 

retard travel times and force circulation to depths below that 

common to other karst systems. McCoy and Kozar (2007b) 

found that vertical flow of ground water in the Great Valley 

could be described as down-gradient along continuous interconnected fractures in the direction of bedding that is eventually forced to the surface along structural offsets perpendicular 

to strike. In nearby Frederick County, Virginia, Harlow and 

others (2005) modified the conceptual model of Wolfe and 

others (1997) to describe the influence of structural features on 

karst development at moderate depths.

Ground-water flow patterns in the Great Valley are 

complex. The once flat-lying sedimentary rocks have been 

folded, faulted, and intensely weathered such that a variably 

thick layer of regolith overlies steeply dipping deformed 

bedrock units. Recharge in the form of infiltration of precipitation initially moves into the regolith where much of it 

is stored. Water moves to the underlying bedrock by way of 

leakage to open fractures, faults, and bedding planes or by 

direct runoff into surficial karst features. Flow within the 

bedrock is controlled by the orientation and connectivity of the 

fracture system and the location of solution-enlarged conduits. 

Relict structure in the regolith and continuous bedding planes 

apparently force flow parallel to regional gradients (Jones, 

1991). Frazier and others (1988) conducted a detailed surfacewater assessment of the Center and adjacent property using 

watershed models to assess flooding potential and long-term 

stability of engineered ponds proposed for construction. A 

major conclusion of the study, supported by the work of Jones 

and Deike (1981), was that sufficient water for operations at 

the Center is not available during drought years and operations 

at the Center would have to be adjusted to compensate for 

reduced water availability under drought conditions or periods 

of prolonged below normal ground-water levels. Additional 

borehole-log and surface geophysical data were collected by 

Mayle and Schnabel (1998) as part of geotechnical investigations prior to construction of the NCCWA facility.
Previous Investigations 

5

Table 1. List of wells, springs, and streams where data was collected in the Leetown area, West Virginia, during the investigation and the type of data collected at 

each site.

[1 - Continuous water-level or discharge (b) measured at these sites, 2 - Sites sampled in previous U.S. EPA studies, 3, latitude and longitude are expressed in degrees, minutes and decimal seconds in 

the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)].

Report ID Station Number Site Name Latitude Longitude Model Head 

Observation 

Wells

Aquifer 

Test 

Wells

Monthly 

Water-Level 

Monitoring 

Wells

WaterQuality 

Monitoring 

Sites

Springs

1 392042077554301 Jef-0521S (Gray Spring) 392043.7 775543.4 X

2 392049077554601 Jef-0659S (Blue Spring) 392048.7 775545.7 X

3 392055077552501 Jef-0758S (Tabb Spring) 392055.4 775525.3

4 392110077555201 Jef-0327S (Balch Spring) 392110.7 775549.5 X

5 392035077544001 Jef-0306S (Bell Spring) 392037.6 775436.1 X

6 392054077540201 Jef-0754S (Link Spring) 392054.0 775403.0

7 391513077562101 Jef-0109S (Owen's Farm Spring) 392010.0 775615.0

Stream Gaging Station

8 01616425 Hopewell Run Gaging Station 392116.7 775601.0

Stream-Flow Measuring Sites

9 392053077545601 East Branch Above Dairy Spring Overflow 392052.5 775456.4

10 392053077545602 Wetland Discharge from Dairy Spring 392052.6 775456.311 392102077555801 Tributary near Ball Field Below Sinkhole 392102.2 775558.1

12 392108077555201 East Branch near Wetlands Restoration Lab 392108.4 775552.013 392105077553901 Pond Overflow 392104.9 775538.614 392104077553401 East Branch Reservoir Spillway 392104.3 775534.315 392057077552501 East Branch with Spring Overflow 392057.4 775525.316 392058077550101 Unnamed Spring (west) 392057.9 775501.017 392052077545601 Unnamed Spring (tile drain) 392052.1 775455.818 392107077555001 East Branch @ County Route 1 392107.3 775550.0
6 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia Table 1. List of wells, springs, and streams where data was collected in the Leetown area, West Virginia, during the investigation and the type of data collected at each site. [1 - Continuous water-level or discharge (b) measured at these sites, 2 - Sites sampled in previous U.S. EPA studies, 3, latitude and longitude are expressed in degrees, minutes and decimal seconds in the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)]. Report ID Station Number Site Name Latitude Longitude Model Head Observation Wells Aquifer Test Wells Monthly Water-Level Monitoring Wells Water- Quality Monitoring Sites 19 392059077560801 South Branch Below Spillway 392059.4 775607.9 20 392057077551201 East Branch @ Ridge 392056.8 775511.7 21 392054077540201 Link Spring Tributary 392054.2 775402.2 22 392038077543601 East Branch and Bell Spring Confluence 392037.7 775435.9 23 392060077555301 Gray and Blue Spirings Oveflow near Degasser 392059.7 775553.4 24 392116077555901 East Branch above Hopewell Run Gage 392115.5 775559.4 25 392123077560501 Handicap Fishing Pond Overflow 39217 775605.0 26 392116077560001 South Branch above Hopewell Run Gage 392115.9 775600.1 27 392038077543501 East Branch above Bell Spring (intermittent) 392037.8 775434.5

28 392056077550501 Two Springs Discharge to East Branch 392055.5 775504.7

29 392057077552401 East Branch above Tabb Spring Inflow 392057.0 775524.4

30 392039077560701 South Branch near Headwaters (Below Owen's 

Spring)

392038.6 775606.5

31 392100077560701 Gray and Blue Springs overflow @ Mouth 392100.2 775607.1

32 392053077545701 East Branch below discharge from Dodson Farm 

Pond

392052.9 775456.9

33 392057077552601 Tabb Spring @ Mouth 392057.1 775525.7

Monitoring Wells

34 392119077554701 Jef-0603 (USDA Sulfur Well) 392118.7 775547.2 X X X X

35 392121077551702 Jef-0596 (Low Road Piezometer) 392120.6 775517.3 X X X

36 392121077551701 Jef-0587 (Low Road Well) 392120.5 775517.3 X X X X
Previous Investigations 

7

Table 1. List of wells, springs, and streams where data was collected in the Leetown area, West Virginia, during the investigation and the type of data collected at 

each site.

[1 - Continuous water-level or discharge (b) measured at these sites, 2 - Sites sampled in previous U.S. EPA studies, 3, latitude and longitude are expressed in degrees, minutes and decimal seconds in 

the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)].

Report ID Station Number Site Name Latitude Longitude Model Head 

Observation 

Wells

Aquifer 

Test 

Wells

Monthly 

Water-Level 

Monitoring 

Wells

WaterQuality 

Monitoring 

Sites

37 392117077550304 Jef-0601 (Stable Well A) 392116.6 775503.1 X X X X

38 392117077550302 Jef-0585 (Stable Well B) 392117.0 775502.9 X X X X

39 392117077550301 Jef-0592 (Stable Well C) 392116.6 775502.6 X X X X

40 392117077550303 Jef-0597 (Stable Piezometer) 392116.8 775502.9 X X X

41 392115077544801 Jef-0589 (Anticline Well) 392114.6 775447.9 X X X X

42 392115077544802 Jef-0598 (Anticline Piezometer) 392114.6 775447.9 X X X

43 392112077544101 Jef-0588 (Syncline Well) 392112.1 775441.4 X X X

44 392112077544102 Jef-0600 (Syncline Piezometer) 392112.1 775441.4 X X X

45 392037077553501 Jef-0594 (Tabb Lower Piezometer) 392037.3 775534.9 X X X X

46 392038077552601 Jef-0593 (Tabb Upper Piezometer) 392037.8 775525.9 X X X

47 392101077554902 Jef-0595 (Ball Field Piezometer) 392100.6 775548.6 X X X

48 392101077554901 Jef-0590 (Ball Field Well) 392100.7 775548.6 X X X X

49 392102077554601 Jef-0584 (Bone Yard Well Upper) 392101.5 775546.2 X X X X

50 392102077554801 Jef-0591 (Bone Yard Well Lower) 392102.1 775547.9 X X X

51 392104077554801 Jef-0526 (Well D) 392103.3 775545.5 X X

52 392105077545501 Jef-0657 (Wetland Piezometer North) 392104.6 775455.1 X X

53 392055077545501 Jef-0658 (Wetland Piezometer South) 392054.7 775455.0 X X

54 392118077554202 Jef-0599 (USDA Fault Piezometer) 392118.2 775541.8 X X X

55 392051077544301 Jef-0602 (Old Dodson Farm Well) 392051.2 775443.0 X X X X

56 392119077560201 Jef-0656 (Fish Pond Well) 392118.7 775602.2 X X
8 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia Table 1. List of wells, springs, and streams where data was collected in the Leetown area, West Virginia, during the investigation and the type of data collected at each site. [1 - Continuous water-level or discharge (b) measured at these sites, 2 - Sites sampled in previous U.S. EPA studies, 3, latitude and longitude are expressed in degrees, minutes and decimal seconds in the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)]. Report ID Station Number Site Name Latitude Longitude Model Head Observation Wells Aquifer Test Wells Monthly Water-Level Monitoring Wells Water- Quality Monitoring Sites Production Wells 57 392117077554501 Jef-0581 (Domestic Well @ USDA) 392117.0 775545.0 X X 58 392104077555201 Jef-0756 (Well B) 392104.4 775551.8 X X 59 392102077555401 Jef-0755 (Well A) 392101.6 775553.5 X X Possible New Production Well 60 392118077554201 Jef-0586 (USDA Fault Well) 392118.3 775541.8 X X 61 392051077544302 Jef-0752 (New Dodson Farm Well) 392051.3 775443.0 X X X 62 392102077552001 Jef-0753 (New Kaiser Farm Well) 392102.0 775520.0 X X X Aquifer Test and Water-Level for Model

63 392047077561301 Jef-0629 (United Methodist Church) 392047.4 775613.4 X X

64 392032077543801 Jef-0630 (Moore) 392032.3 775437.6 X X

65 392125077550601 Jef-0627 (Jack Scott Well) 392124.7 775505.6 X X

66 392141077553501 Jef-0626 (Beverly Boice Well) 392141.3 775535.1 X X

67 392121077545201 Jef-0623 (Micheal Dodson Well) 392121.4 775452.2 X X

68 392013077544301 Jef-0622 (Jefferson County Landfill MW6B) 392013.2 775442.9 X X

69 392001077540701 Jef-0619 (Jefferson County Fairgrounds) 392000.9 775407.1 X X

70 392024077551401 Jef-0606 (E. Demory Well) 392024.4 775514.1 X X

71 392128077550001 Jef-0639 (Walls) 392127.9 775500.0 X X

72 392128077551001 Jef-0642 (Barbara Heinz Well) 392127.9 775510.4 X X

73 392040077555201 Jef-0643 (Jay Wilson Well) 392040.1 775551.9 X X

74 392017077550601 Jef-0644 (Ralph Coffman Well) 392016.9 775506.4 X X
Previous Investigations 

9

Table 1. List of wells, springs, and streams where data was collected in the Leetown area, West Virginia, during the investigation and the type of data collected at 

each site.

[1 - Continuous water-level or discharge (b) measured at these sites, 2 - Sites sampled in previous U.S. EPA studies, 3, latitude and longitude are expressed in degrees, minutes and decimal seconds in 

the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)].

Report ID Station Number Site Name Latitude Longitude Model Head 

Observation 

Wells

Aquifer 

Test 

Wells

Monthly 

Water-Level 

Monitoring 

Wells

WaterQuality 

Monitoring 

Sites

75 392124077550401 Jef-0645 (Carl Wiley Well) 392123.9 775503.5 X X

76 392009077543901 Jef-0701 (Jefferson County Landfill MW106) 392008.7 775438.8 X X

77 392024077542701 Jef-0673 (Jefferson County Landfill SMW-3) 392023.8 775427.2 X X

78 392024077542701 Jef-0673 (Jefferson County Landfill SMW-3) 392023.8 775427.2 X X

79 392009077542301 Jef-0703 (Jefferson County Landfill MW11) 392008.8 775423.2 X X

80 392009077542401 Jef-0702 (Jefferson County Landfill MW101UG) 392008.6 775424.3 X X

81 392029077543901 Jef-0667 (Jefferson County Landfill MW102) 392029.0 775439.3 X X

82 392029077543901 Jef-0667 (Jefferson County Landfill MW102) 392029.0 775439.3 X X

83 392026077543101 Jef-0666 (Jefferson County Landfill MW105DG) 392025.9 775430.9 X X

84 392028077543801 Jef-0665 (Jefferson County Landfill MW4) 392027.5 775438.3 X X

85 392127077555301 Jef-0683 (Larry Grove) 392127.2 775553.0 X X

86 392140077551501 Jef-0684 (Tom Langmore) 392140.1 775514.5 X X

87 392052077551301 Jef-0692 (Magaret Burke) 392051.9 775512.5 X X

88 392034077554901 Jef-0691 (Cam Tabb) 392034.1 775548.7 X X

89 392133077552301 Jef-0690 (Gasman Well) 392133.0 775523.0 X X

90 392133077553201 Jef-0697 (Jean Myers) 392133.0 775531.7 X X

91 392200077551601 Jef-0696 (Cole Well) 392200.2 775516.4 X X

92 392027077544201 Jef-0694 (James Burrows Well) 392027.3 775442.0 X X

93 392030077551201 Jef-0679 (Billy Edwards) 392029.9 775511.6 X X
10 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia Table 1. List of wells, springs, and streams where data was collected in the Leetown area, West Virginia, during the investigation and the type of data collected at each site. [1 - Continuous water-level or discharge (b) measured at these sites, 2 - Sites sampled in previous U.S. EPA studies, 3, latitude and longitude are expressed in degrees, minutes and decimal seconds in the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)]. Report ID Station Number Site Name Latitude Longitude Model Head Observation Wells Aquifer Test Wells Monthly Water-Level Monitoring Wells Water- Quality Monitoring Sites 94 392011077544401 Jef-0681 (Leetown Park Well) 392011.2 775443.9 X X 95 392109077542101 Jef-0660 (Hannum Well) 392109.2 775421.3 X X 96 392124077550701 Jef-0652 (Stuckey's Well) 392123.7 775507.0 X X 97 392051077555901 Jef-0651 (Eda Dodson Well) 392051.4 775558.9 X X 98 392107077554901 Jef-0744 (Collis) 392107.2 775549.3 X X 99 392117077554502 Jef-0796 (USDA Monitor Well) 392117.0 775545.0 X X Water-Level for Model 100 392102077565901 Jef-0763 (Domestic # 1) 392101.7 775659.1 X

101 392041077572201 Jef-0764 (Domestic # 2) 392041.3 775722.5 X

102 392021077572101 Jef-0765 (Domestic # 3) 392020.7 775720.8 X

103 392031077572901 Jef-0766 (Domestic # 4) 392030.7 775729.4 X

104 392033077563601 Jef-0767 (Domestic # 5) 392032.7 775636.1 X

105 391921077574901 Jef-0768 (Domestic # 6) 391921.1 775749.2 X

106 391918077575801 Jef-0769 (Domestic # 7) 391917.5 775757.5 X

107 391912077580801 Jef-0770 (Domestic # 8) 391911.6 775808.5 X

108 391914077580201 Jef-0771 (Domestic # 9) 391914.2 775802.3 X

109 391915077580001 Jef-0772 (Domestic # 10) 391915.0 775800.4 X

110 391900077582101 Jef-0773 (Domestic # 11) 391900.2 775821.0 X
Previous Investigations 11

Table 1. List of wells, springs, and streams where data was collected in the Leetown area, West Virginia, during the investigation and the type of data collected at 

each site.

[1 - Continuous water-level or discharge (b) measured at these sites, 2 - Sites sampled in previous U.S. EPA studies, 3, latitude and longitude are expressed in degrees, minutes and decimal seconds in 

the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)].

Report ID Station Number Site Name Latitude Longitude Model Head 

Observation 

Wells

Aquifer 

Test 

Wells

Monthly 

Water-Level 

Monitoring 

Wells

WaterQuality 

Monitoring 

Sites

111 391854077584201 Jef-0774 (Domestic # 12) 391854.3 775842.4 X

112 391838077584101 Jef-0775 (Domestic # 13) 391837.9 775841.1 X

113 392024077561601 Jef-0776 (Domestic # 14) 392024.5 775615.9 X

114 392042077561101 Jef-0777 (Domestic # 15) 392042.1 775610.6 X

115 392047077561401 Jef-0778 (Domestic # 16) 392047.2 775613.8 X

116 391825077553101 Jef-0779 (Domestic # 17) 391825.3 775531.1 X

117 391833077552801 Jef-0780 (Domestic # 18) 391832.8 775527.5 X

118 391932077545301 Jef-0781 (Domestic # 19) 391932.2 775453.3 X

119 391932077551201 Jef-0782 (Domestic # 20) 391931.8 775512.2 X

120 391925077551801 Jef-0783 (Domestic # 21) 391924.7 775518.5 X

121 391906077552401 Jef-0784 (Domestic # 22) 391906.5 775523.7 X

122 391902077552101 Jef-0785 (Domestic # 23) 391901.9 775521.2 X

123 391839077563101 Jef-0579 (Domestic # 24) 391838.5 775530.8 X

124 391850077565601 Jef-0786 (Domestic # 25) 391850.0 775656.4 X

125 391942077584201 Jef-0787 (Domestic # 26) 391942.3 775841.8 X

126 391946077583201 Jef-0788 (Domestic # 27) 391945.5 775832.0 X

127 392001077583601 Jef-0789 (Domestic # 28) 392001.3 775836.1 X

128 392042077581401 Jef-0790 (Domestic # 29) 392041.5 775814.0 X

129 392036077580101 Jef-0791 (Domestic # 30) 392036.0 775801.2 X

Potential Contaminant Source

A Leetown Pesticide Dump 392047.4 775434.2

B Jefferson County Landfill 392049.0 775433.0
12 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the U.S. Geological Survey Biologic Resources Discipline Leetown Science Center. 

The authors would like to thank all who contributed time 

and assistance to the project. Much appreciation is due the 

following individuals: Allen Shapiro, Carol Johnson, and 

Neil Plummer of the USGS for advice from their prospective 

areas of expertise and to Wil Orndorff of the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (Natural Heritage Karst 

Program) for his collection and analysis of macroinvertebrates 

within the karst aquifer of the Leetown area. Also, appreciation goes to the residents of Leetown and the surrounding area 

who allowed access to their wells and property for collection 

of scientific data during the course of this investigation. The 

study could not have been completed without the support of all 

the aforementioned individuals.

Hydrogeology - By M. D. Kozar, K. J. McCoy, D. J. 

Weary, and H. A. Pierce

The hydrogeologic setting of the study area is complex 

and ground-water flow is affected by both lithologic and 

structural geologic controls. The lithology of the bedrock in 

the study area is important with respect to rock permeability, 

fracture density, solution conduit development, and hydraulic 

conductivity. Rocks with a high content of calcium carbonate 

tend to be more soluble than those with interbedded sandstone 

and shale. Conduits that develop in more calcite rich bedrock tend to be larger more dominant solution conduits. The 

Martinsburg Formation and the Conococheague Limestone 

are important controls on ground-water flow in the Leetown 

area due to their low hydraulic conductivity (Kozar and others, 

2007). Portions of the Conococheague Limestone are resistant to weathering, especially where siliceous interbeds crop 

out, and tend to form upland areas within the study area. The 

low hydraulic conductivity of the Martinsburg Formation, 

a predominantly gray to dark brown shale, impedes ground 

water as it flows down gradient towards Opequon Creek. This 

effectively dams ground water behind the Martinsburg Formation forcing it to flow laterally along bedding planes and thrust 

faults that parallel the general geologic strike of bedrock in the 

region (generally N. 20o

 E. or S. 200o W.). Cross-strike faults 

and fracture zones provide avenues for ground water to flow 

across or through lower permeability units. Bedrock fractures 

occur at various orientations within the rock matrix and will be 

discussed in detail in the following section of the report.

Geology - by David J. Weary

The Center is located in the Great Valley of the Valley 

and Ridge geomorphic province (Fenneman, 1938). Most of 

the sedimentary rocks in this area were deposited in shallow 

marine environments over about a 200 million year (m.y.) 

period of relative tectonic quiescence from the Late Cambrian 

period (about 540 m.y.) into the Mississippian period (about 

340 m.y.). From about 340 m.y. to about 280 m.y. ago, collision between the continents of North America and Africa, 

the Alleghenian orogeny, produced most of the folds, faults, 

and joints seen in the Great Valley today. Earlier episodes of 

tectonism evident in rocks to the east of the Blue Ridge, such 

as the Taconic and Acadian orogenies, apparently did not 

affect the rocks of the Great Valley (Southworth and others, 

2006). Post-Paleozoic erosion has removed younger sediments 

to expose Cambrian and Ordovician-aged rocks at the land 

surface today. 

A geologic map of the Middleway 1:24,000 quadrangle, 

containing the Leetown area, has been published by the West 

Virginia Geologic and Economic Survey (Dean and others, 

1990). This map was used as a guide for the more detailed 

geologic mapping by the USGS concentrated in the immediate 

Center area and the surface-water drainage basin of Hopewell 

Run. This mapping included location of bedrock contacts, 

and the measurement of the orientation of cleavage, fractures, 

and other structural features. Audio-magnetotelluric (AMT) 

soundings were collected on the Center property in an attempt 

to image buried geologic structures and potentially assess 

ground-water content. A detailed discussion of the AMT 

technique and studies follows later in this report. Updates to 

previous geological interpretations of the area include slight 

adjustments in the location of some of the bedrock contacts 

within the Hopewell Run drainage basin and the recognition 

of the existence of at least two northwest-trending cross-strike 

faults on Center property that affect the ground-water hydrology (fig. 2). 

Bedrock geology

The bedrock of the Leetown area is primarily fractured 

limestone and dolomite of the Upper Cambrian and Lower 

Ordovician Conococheague Limestone; Lower Ordovician 

Stonehenge Limestone, Rockdale Run Formation, and Pinesburg Station Dolomite; the Middle Ordovician New Market 

and Chambersburg Limestones; and the Upper and Middle 

Ordovician Martinsburg Formation (fig. 2). 

The Conococheague Limestone in the Center area is 

chiefly a thick bedded light-gray limestone, with thin-wispy 

bands or interbeds of dolomite. Some beds contain rip-up 

clasts, forming flat-pebble edgewise conglomerates. The sandstone-rich, basal Big Springs Station Member of the Conococheague Limestone is not present in the immediate Center 

area. The largest sinkholes in the study area are formed in the 

Conococheague Limestone. The Conococheague Limestone is 

exposed in two north-northeast trending belts, one just east of 

the main Center facilities, and the other just east of Jefferson 

Orchard Road in the eastern part of the study area. These mark 

the western and eastern limbs of the Blizzard Syncline (Dean 

and others, 1990). The Conococheague Limestone is about 

2,400 ft thick in this part of Jefferson County, West Virginia. 
Geology - by David J. Weary 13

The base of the Conococheague Limestone is not exposed in 

the study area. The upper contact with the Stonehenge Limestone is transitional and marked by an increase in siliceous silt 

content and darker colored limestone. 

The Ordovician aged Stonehenge Limestone is a thick 

to massive-bedded, dark-gray, siliceous limestone. The silt is 

commonly in wispy laminae that often weather out in raisedrelief in natural exposures. The silt content of the rock has 

allowed a pervasive axial planar cleavage, related to Alleghenian folding, to develop. In some exposures the cleavage is 

so penetrative that it has obscured or obliterated the bedding 

planes. In such areas, the cleavage probably has a greater 

effect on the hydrologic properties of the rocks than does the 

bedding. The lower part of the Stonehenge Limestone has 

been differentiated from the rest as the Stoufferstown Member. 

This member is distinguished by the anastomosing crinkly 

siliceous laminae permeating the limestone, and commonly 

forms distinct strike-parallel linear ridges and fins in outcrop. 

The Stoufferstown Member was not mapped as a separate unit 

in this study. The Stonehenge Limestone grades into the overlying Rockdale Run Formation; the contact is placed where 

the rock becomes less silty, less cleaved, lighter colored, and 

begins to contain thin interbeds of dolomite. 

The Rockdale Run Formation and the superjacent Pinesburg Station Dolomite were combined as one unit for this 

study. The Pinesburg Station Dolomite is removed by faulting and does not crop out in any areas near the Center. The 

Rockdale Run comprises thick-and medium-bedded light-gray 

limestone and minor dolomite in cyclic, peritidal deposits. 

It is characteristically lighter colored and less cleaved than 

the underlying Stonehenge Limestone and tends to weather 

as blocky ledges with bedding better defined than the Stonehenge. The upper Pinesburg Station Dolomite is in unconformable contact with the overlying Middle Ordovician New 

Market Limestone. The Rockdale Run Formation is usually 

about 2,500 ft thick in this part of the Great Valley (Dean and 

others, 1990). 

The New Market Limestone is a pure, dove-gray, limemudstone. It is quarried extensively at various locations in 

the region. The New Market Limestone has been removed by 

faulting and is not exposed in the immediate vicinity of the 

Center, although a few belts of it exist within the southwestern 

part of the drainage basin of Hopewell Run. The New Market 

Limestone ranges from 40 to 250 ft thick in the Leetown area 

(Dean and others, 1990). 

The Middle Ordovician Chambersburg Limestone conformably overlies the New Market Limestone. The Chambersburg Limestone comprises thin to medium-bedded dark gray 

limestone with thin, silty interbeds. The Chambersburg Limestone is poorly exposed in the western part of the Hopewell 

Run drainage basin. This unit underlies the Center to the west 

of West Virginia County Route 1. The Chambersburg Limestone is about 500 ft thick in the Leetown area.

The Martinsburg Formation is the youngest stratigraphic 

unit in the study area. The Martinsburg Formation contains 

brownish to black shales and siltsone, commonly weathering to a light yellowish or orange-brown color. Axial planar 

cleavage is well developed along folds and in places obscures 

the bedding. As a primarily siliciclastic unit, the Martinsburg 

Formation is the only formation in the study area that does 

not have any karst features. The Martinsburg Formation is 

confined to the western edge of the Hopewell Run basin and 

underlies the fish ponds on the western edge of the Center. The 

total thickness of the Martinsburg Formation exceeds 1,500 ft 

in the Leetown area (Dean and others, 1990).

Structural Geology

The geologic structure of the area is complex, with 

numerous thrust faults oriented parallel or sub-parallel to 

the regional bedrock strike and fault traces trending approximately N 20° E. Cross-strike longitudinal and oblique faults 

also occur with traces at attitudes of approximately N 80° W 

and N 65° E respectively (fig. 2). The rocks are tectonically 

deformed, and the numerous upright and overturned folds 

in the area affect ground-water flow. The overturned folds 

verge to the northwest with limbs dipping steeply toward the 

southeast. 

Because the Paleozoic bedrock underlying the Center 

comprises lithologies with low primary permeability, groundwater flow is dependant on secondary permeability produced 

by bedrock fractures or karst solution features. This secondary 

permeability is especially important in areas like the Center 

where the strike of the bedrock is predominantly to the northnortheast, but the hydrologic gradient is towards the outflow 

of Hopewell Run, to the northwest. Bedrock fractures include 

tectonically induced faults and joints as well as partings 

between bedding planes (fig. 3). 

Bedding

Rock beds underlying the Center are folded as a result of 

tectonism in the geologic past. Bedding is generally steeply 

dipping, although it can range from nearly flat-lying in some 

areas to nearly vertical or overturned in others. The predominant strike direction of bedding planes is about N. 20o E. and 

most dips are steep and directed towards the southeast (fig. 2 

and fig. 4).

Joints

Joints were measured at the ground surface during geologic mapping and were also measured in the subsurface in 

monitoring wells via acoustic-televiewer images. The surface 

joints were characterized by their orientation, spacing, and 

persistence. Joints confined to individual beds are classified as 

non-through-going, and joints extending across bedding planes 

into surrounding beds are classified as through-going. A rose 

diagram (fig. 5) showing joints measured as part of geologic 

mapping illustrates the dominant directions of joint planes 

within the bedrock in the vicinity of the Center. Two dominant 
14 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Figure 2. A) Geology, B) geologic cross section, and C) stratigraphic column of the Hopewell Run surface water drainage basin, and 

the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia. [Geology modified from Dean and others, 1990]
Geology - by David J. Weary 15

C A M B R I A N O R D O V I C I A N

1,000 ft

Lithologic Unit

(thickness)

shale and siltstone

dolomite

knobbly limestone

and calcareous shale

limestone

interbedded dolomite

and limestone

sandy interbedded

dolomite and limestone 

shaly limestone

Conococheague

Limestone

(~2400 ft) 

Stonehenge Limestone (600-650 ft) 

Rockdale Run

Formation

(1,500 ft) 

Pinesburg Station Dolomite

(0-400 ft)

New Market Limestone (40-250 ft)

Chambersburg Limestone

(500 ft)

Martinsburg Formation

(>1500 ft)

Stoufferstown Member

Beekmantown Group

EXPLANATION

Geologic

 Age

FIG. 2C.
16 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

strike of bedrock to the north-northeast 

ground surface

Test well

Test well

diagonal joints

longitudinal joints

dip joints

beta intersections

bedding planes

EXPLANATION

Figure 3. Conceptual diagram showing geometric and spatial relations between bedding planes, joints, and drill holes 

in a tightly-folded terrain, such as that in the Leetown area, West Virginia. [Beta intersections are calculated based on 

the attitudes of lineations created by intersections of bedding planes, joints, or other fractures].
Geology - by David J. Weary 17

N=73

N

S

W E

Figure 4. Lower hemisphere stereographic projection of poles to bedding from outcrop data collected in the Leetown 

area, West Virginia. [N, S, E, and W are compass azimuths, solid circles are individual dip measurements, and blue lines 

show clusters of measurements that pertain to certain structural features].
18 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

directions are apparent; one oriented approximately normal 

(dip joints) to and the other approximately parallel to (longitudinal joints) the regional strike of bedrock. The traces of the 

dip joints strike in a range from about N. 90o W. to N. 60o W. 

and the longitudinal joints from about due North to N. 40o E. 

The dip joints are over-represented in this sampling due to the 

linear geometry of the outcrops, which typically exposes them 

more clearly than the longitudinal set (fig. 3). Fractures measured via acoustic-televiewer images in nine of the monitoring wells were plotted on a stereogram with the surface joint 

data for comparison (fig. 6). The well data are undifferentiated, including both joints and bedding-plane fractures. The 

plot of the well data indicate the majority of fractures have a 

north-northeast strike and dips to the southeast centered on an 

attitude of about N. 30o E. and dipping 40o E., which is the predominant bedding plane direction in the area. A large subset 

of the data indicate planes striking to the northeast and dipping 

to the northwest centered on an attitude of about N. 30o

 E. and 

dipping 50o W. These fractures are a combination of bedding 

from a well drilled on the axis of an anticline (the only well in 

west-dipping bedrock) and the longitudinal joint set from the 

other wells (fig. 3). 

Intersections of bedding plane fractures and joints can 

become important conduits for ground-water movement, at 

least locally, as they can form the loci for enhanced solutional 

enlargement of voids in the carbonate bedrock and provide 

an avenue for water to move along or across the strike of the 

bedding. Calculations of the attitudes of lineations created by 

these intersections, known as beta intersections, were completed for the data collected in this study (fig. 7). 

The stereogram indicates abundant intersections in the 

bedding-parallel direction, produced by the bedding and 

longitudinal joints, striking to the north-northeast with chiefly 

shallow dips north-northeast or south-southwest. A second set 

of abundant intersections occurs in the dip direction, produced 

by the bedding and dip joints, striking west-northwest to eastsoutheast and dipping moderately to steeply to the west-northwest or east-southeast (fig. 7). 

Faults

Two types of faults are found in the Hopewell Run basin, 

thrust faults and high-angle cross-strike faults. The locations 

of all thrust faults, and some of the cross-strike faults in the 

study area were identified by previous workers (Dean and 

others, 1990) and confirmed by field work for this study. Two 

new cross-strike faults were identified in the course of this 

study. One lies nearly beneath and parallel to Leetown Pike, 

which traverses the Hopewell Run basin just to the south of 

the Center in a southeastern to northwestward direction (fig. 

2). The trace of the fault has a strike of about N 55o

 W. This 

fault is inferred on the basis of: 1) a sudden attenuation in the 

width of the outcrop belt of the Rockdale Run Formation and 

concomitant dislocation of the contact between the Rockdale 

Run Formation and the underlying Stonehenge Limestone 

as the beds cross Leetown Pike from south to north; 2) the 

syncline of Stonehenge Limestone with the Rockdale Run Formation in its axis is open and upright to the south of Leetown 

Pike, and overturned to the west to the north of the road; and, 

3) AMT soundings of the area show a marked and almost 

linear offset of subsurface resistivity values along the trend of 

the inferred fault. The other cross-strike fault lies further to 

the north (fig. 2), crossing the Hopewell Run basin along the 

major stream axis from the east-southeast to west-northwest. 

The trace of this fault has a strike of about N. 70o W. Evidence 

for this fault is the offset of the bedrock contacts between the 

Rockdale Run Formation and Stonehenge Limestone. Both of 

these faults are interpreted to be normal faults showing vertical displacement down to the south. Both faults break at least 

the upper thrust sheet and may also penetrate the entire thrust 

sheet underlying the Center and extend into the outcrop belt of 

the Martinsburg Formation to the west. Data are not currently 

available to constrain this concept. 

Cleavage

Cleavage is produced by alignment of platey minerals in 

rocks under tectonic stress and usually forms in planes normal 

to the direction of maximum compression. Some fanning of 

cleavage direction also occurs in relation to the axes of folds. 

At the Center, cleavage is common in the Martinsburg Formation and in the Stonehenge Limestone. The Stonehenge has 

a silty component, especially within the basal Stoufferstown 

Member. The predominant attitude of cleavage planes at the 

Center have a strike of about N. 20o E. and dip near-vertically 

either to the east or west, with east dips being more numerous. 

Cleavage in the Stonehenge Limestone is so well developed, 

especially in the Stoufferstown Member, that it completely 

obscures the bedding in places and results in a massive rock 

with low primary permeability. 

Fracture Traces

Linear features identified on aerial photographs and topographic maps have been noted for more than a half century 

(Lattman, 1958). These features are believed to be traces of 

fractures in the underlying bedrock, which result in zones of 

increased porosity and permeability. A fracture trace analysis, 

based on stereo aerial photographic analysis was done for the 

Center as part of a larger hydrogeologic study of Jefferson 

County, West Virginia (McCoy and others, 2005b). Fracture 

traces identified in that report are shown on the geologic map 

(fig. 2). 

Karst

While dissolution of limestone in karst areas is common, the Leetown area does not exhibit classic mature karst 

topography. Sinkholes occur, but are sparse and confined 

primarily to the Conococheague Limestone in the eastern part 

of the study area (fig. 2). Although dye traces in the area have 
Geology - by David J. Weary 19

n=109

S

N

W E

0o

90o

180o

270o

135o

315o 45o

225o

Figure 5. Compass-rose diagram showing the dominant joint trends in the Paleozoic rocks of the Leetown area, West 

Virginia. [Joint sets were weighted by counting closely spaced joint sets three times, moderately spaced sets two times, 

and widely spaced sets one time. This system approximates the importance of each set relative to the volume of rocks. 

Numbers labeling concentric circles on diagram are percent of total number (n) of joints].
20 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

N 

N

N

S

W E

Figure 6. Lower hemisphere stereographic projection of poles to joint planes measured at the ground surface 

(green points and blue contours) and fractures measured in monitoring wells (red squares and purple contours) 

in the Leetown area, West Virginia. [N, S, E, and W are compass azimuths; N = number of joints or fractures 

available for the analysis; concentric circles represent the degree of dip of the feature with points plotting at the 

center of the plot indicating horizontal features and those plotting near the edge representing vertical features].
Geology - by David J. Weary 21

N=237

N

E

S

W

Figure 7. Lower hemisphere stereographic projection of lineations defined by beta pair intersections of bedding and 

joints measured at the ground surface in the Leetown area, West Virginia. [N=237 is the number of individual points 

plotted and N, S, E, and W are compass azimuths and concentric circles represent the degree of dip of the feature 

with points plotting at the center of the plot indicating horizontal features and those plotting near the edge of the plot 

representing vertical features].
22 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

yielded very slow travel times, and the quantity of dye recovery is typically very low, springs in the area indicate that a 

karst conduit ground-water flow component is present (Jones, 

1997).

Geophysics - By Herbert A. Pierce and Kurt J. 

McCoy

Borehole and surface geophysical surveys were conducted to better define the composition and distribution of 

the fracture network within the study area and to refine the 

conceptual understanding of how these fractures relate to 

ground-water flow. Investigation of fractures in both conduit 

dominated and diffuse dominated portions of the aquifer were 

conducted to identify the connectivity of solution conduits 

with the more dominant diffuse-flow fracture network. An 

investigation of the nature and extent of the epikarst, the 

highly fractured and solutionally enlarged upper interval 

of karst bedrock immediately below the soil zone, was also 

conducted by close examination of borehole video logs and 

interpretation of borehole geophysical data. The borehole data 

provided a better understanding of the nature and extent of 

fracture occurrence and aperture width, fracture orientation, 

and ground-water flow within the aquifer. Surface geophysical surveys using Audio-magnetotelluric soundings provided 

a horizontal and vertical distribution of electrical resistivity within the aquifer. Electrical resistivity is a measurable 

physical property of the earth that can vary widely both in 

the horizontal and vertical dimensions. This wide range of 

resistivities is the result of the complex interplay of physical 

parameters such as rock porosity, temperature, lithology, fluid, 

and electrolyte content. The resistivity data was used to assess 

structural and lithologic controls on ground-water flow.

Surface geophysics - by Herbert A. Pierce

Surface geophysical surveys use remote sensing methods on the Earth’s surface to determine the properties, and 

the spatial distribution of those properties, of the underlying 

near-surface materials composing the Earth’s crust. Audiomagnetotelluric methods were used in this investigation to 

characterize and better understand the properties of the materials underlying the Center, 

Audio-magnetotelluric Methods

Audio-magnetotelluric soundings are made to determine 

variations in the electrical resistivity of the earth with depth 

(Cagniard, 1950, 1953; Tikhonov, 1950; Wait, 1962; Keller 

and Frischknecht, 1966; Hoover and Long, 1976; Hoover and 

others, 1976; Hoover and others, 1978; Dmitriev and Berdichevsky, 1979; Vozoff, 1986, 1991). The AMT method uses 

natural-source multi-frequency electromagnetic signals from 

lightning or atmospheric disturbances as an energy source. 

These natural signals diffuse into the earth and the diffusion 

governs the electromagnetic (EM) induction. For this survey, a 

controlled-source transmitter was used to supplement natural source EM signals when signal strength from the natural 

source was low. 

These AMT soundings consist of electric and magnetic 

field measurements over a range of frequencies from 10- to 

100,000-Hertz with fixed receiver and transmitter locations. 

The distribution of currents induced in the earth depends on 

the earth’s electrical resistivity, earth’s magnetic permeability, 

and frequency measured. Since low-frequency signals penetrate to greater depths than high-frequency signals, measurements of the electromagnetic (EM) response at several 

frequencies contain information on the variation of resistivity 

at depth. These soundings are inverted and stitched together 

to form pseudo sections at various angles to the geologic 

structures. For a more complete discussion of AMT theory the 

reader is referred to publications by Weaver, 1994; Simpson, 

and Bahr, 2005; Mackie and others, 1997; Tikhonov, 1950; 

Cagniard, 1950, 1953; Swift, 1962; and Gamble and others 

1979a, 1979b.

During calendar years 2003, 2004, and 2005, fifty-three 

AMT soundings were collected within and outside of Center 

property (fig. 8, app. 1 table 1). Three soundings were parallel 

sensor tests of the AMT instrument providing a total of fifty 

AMT soundings. The soundings were collected to improve 

understanding of the geologic structure and hydrology, as well 

as provide widespread vertical resistivity information for the 

Center area (fig. 8). AMT soundings were recorded using a 

Geometrics EH-4 system. No vertical magnetic field (Hz

) data 

were recorded because the system is limited to four channels 

(Ex, Ey, Hx, and Hy). About 2,000 frequencies were collected 

and then reduced to approximately 40 frequencies for each 

direction (Ex and Ey) from 10- to 100,000-Hertz. The EH-4’s 

system includes a 60 Hz notch filter to reduce power-line 

interference. Inversions that are invariant with rotation angle 

were chosen to assess the data and models in order to compare 

them with the known geology and hydrology.

Limestone rocks in the Leetown area are broken into 

roughly orthogonal blocks that have weathered along fractures 

(fig. 9). Soils and clays (karstic weathering products) between 

the fractured limestone blocks are not as permeable as the 

fractured rocks (see tables 1 and 8) and are more electrically 

conductive than the limestone blocks (fig. 10).

Once a series of 2-dimensional models are generated, 

resistivity cross sections and associated maps can be made of 

different depths below land surface. The electrical sections 

and maps at various depth slices are compared with the known 

surficial geology, borehole data, and hydrologic information. 

Additional hydrologic and geologic interpretations can be 

made and the interpretations modified.
Geophysics - By Herbert A. Pierce and Kurt J. McCoy 23

N

Base from USGS 1:24,000 Middleway, W.Va. topographic quadrangle

EXPLANATION

Resistivity cross section line

Resistivity measurement 

station

LL7

0 1,000 5,000 ft

39o20'

39o

21'

77o56' 77o

55'

Figure 8. Map showing Audio-magnetotelluric station locations and electrical resistivity cross sections developed for 

the Leetown area, West Virginia. [Line locations labeled LL1 through LL8 are 2-D invariant electrical sections. AMT station 

locations are labeled LT3-LT12 and LT14-LT53].
24 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

North

20o

eat er eat e

Normal fault

Normal fault

Thrust fault

Thrust fault

Genera decrease in hydrau ic conductivity and e ectrica resistivity with depth

e F

Geologic strike

e i e

e

Figure 9. Schematic diagram showing a conceptual model of the geologic structure and epikarst weathering 

typical of the Leetown area, West Virginia. [Resistivity lows are associated with the block epikarst weathering 

features (solution conduits), steeply dipping thrust and cross-strike faults, and major springs].
Geophysics - By Herbert A. Pierce and Kurt J. McCoy 25

Results of AMT Surveys

AMT profiles and maps of inverted data reveal gradients 

and areas of high and low resistivities coincident with the 

prevailing geologic strike, N. 20o E. (figs. 10, 11, and 12). One 

example (fig. 12) includes a resistive anticline (Dave Weary, 

oral commun., 2005). Low resistivity examples were measured along a syncline and near faults and fractures, especially 

thrust and cross-strike normal faults. Springs show up as low 

resistivity areas due to the increased porosity and higher fluid 

content in the rock. Even with the uncertainty of interpreting 

electromagnetic data in a two- to three-dimensional environment, electrical sections correlate well with the mapped 

geologic units, geologic structure, and the sub-surface hydrology. Resistivity lows positively correlate with areas (figs. 

10-12) where water is near-surface (near springs) or near high 

yield wells verified by drilling or aquifer tests (syncline well – 

Jef-0588).

A map view of the invariant resistivity model at a depth 

of 197 ft below land surface shows correlation to features 

identified by surface geologic mapping (fig. 12). A general 

pattern of high resistivity in most areas underlain by the Stonehenge Limestone and lower resistivity in areas underlain by 

other units demonstrates differences in resistivity between the 

lithologic units. Faults appear as linear anomalies or gradients 

separating areas of relatively high or low bedrock resistivity.

The resistivity map (fig. 12) indicates three areas of 

profoundly lower resistivity. Anomaly 1 is an area in the north 

central part of the study area and coincides with a synclinal 

feature in the Rockdale Run Formation that underlies the 

Stonehenge Limestone. This resistivity low is interpreted as 

ground water saturating and filling the trough of the syncline 

with perhaps some solution enhancement of the porosity of the 

bedrock, especially the Rockdale Run Formation. One of the 

monitoring wells, drilled in the axis of a syncline (Jef-0588), 

is located in this anomaly and is one of the most productive 

wells based on aquifer tests conducted on the Center and in 

the surrounding area (McCoy and others, 2005b). A second 

area of low resistivity (Anomaly 2) is located at the north 

edge of the study area. This area may indicate a ground-water 

saturated fracture zone, or may be the result of edge effect 

from contouring the data, as it is outside of the extent of the 

AMT stations. A third area (Anomaly 3) lies beneath the 

Center facility in the western part of the study area. This area 

has enhanced ground-water flow and storage associated with 

springs, multiple thrust faults, and two cross-strike faults.

AMT apparent resistivity data in the study area can be 

correlated with the mapped geology and provides a series 

of useful cross sections and map images around the Center. 

These data can be used to identify areas of low resistivity that 

correspond to productive areas for wells. Potential productive 

areas for development of additional wells include the synclinal axes of fold structures, especially overturned structures. 

In this case, cross-strike faults also enhance the productivity 

of wells drilled near or through such structures. Thrust faults 

with enhanced fracturing may enhance well yields, but conduit 

development along some faults may preclude water-supply 

development as conduit dominated areas may yield water with 

high turbidity levels that are unacceptable for the Center. This 

phenomenon is discussed in more detail in the water-quality 

section of this report.

Borehole Geophysics - by Kurt J. McCoy

In bedrock terranes such as the Great Valley in West 

Virginia, complex aquifer properties are the result of hydraulic 

interaction among an intricate network of fractures. Fractures 

that are open, water saturated, and hydraulically connected 

serve to store and transmit water in the subsurface. A general 

understanding of subsurface fracturing in the Leetown area of 

the Great Valley can be obtained by surficial measurement of 

steeply dipping joint and cleavage planes of the area as shown 

in figure 13, the orthogonal orientation of which can also 

be viewed at much larger scales (McCoy and others 2005a, 

2005b). Information on the distribution, orientation, and flow 

properties of subsurface fractures at depth requires the use of 

advanced borehole geophysical techniques. 

Borehole Geophysical Methods

Fracture analysis at the Center was accomplished through 

collection of caliper, natural gamma, fluid-resistivity, fluidtemperature, electromagnetic (EM) or heat-pulse flow-meter, 

spontaneous-potential, electromagnetic-induction, acousticteleviewer (ATV), and optical-televiewer (OTV) logs (table 2). 

The ATV and OTV logs are used to define the location 

and orientation of fractures and bedding intersecting the borehole. Imaged fractures appear as planar features that parallel 

the borehole in the case of vertical fracturing, are perpendicular to the borehole in the case of flat lying structures, or as 

sinusoids in the case of fractures intersecting the borehole at 

other angles (fig. 14). Once a fracture is identified, the strike 

and dip are determined using methods as shown in figure 15. 

Results of Borehole Geophysical Surveys

Complete ATV, OTV, heat-pulse flow-meter, and fracture 

orientation (tadpole) logs for 11 wells (fig. 1 and table 1) at 

the Center are presented in Appendix 2. Profiles of fracture 

orientations, determined from ATV logs of 11 wells at the 

Center, are included in Appendix 3. Four of these wells are 

located along fault zones, four in diffuse-flow dominated 

areas, two along fold structures, and one near the contact with 

the Martinsburg Formation. A total of 683 fractures were 

mapped and plotted on a Schmidt equal-area stereo-net projection of poles to planes of fractures (fig. 16). The dominant 

orientation fractures align with strike-parallel fractures of dip 

generally ranging from 15o

 to 70o to the northwest and southeast. These trends are consistent with surficial mapping of 

strike parallel fractures in the Great Valley of West Virginia. 

However, numerous cross-strike joints seen in outcrops during this and previous studies (Jones and Deike, 1981) are not 
26 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Figure 10. Two-dimensional apparent resistivity map of the AMT data at 33 feet below land surface, Leetown 

area, West Virginia. [All springs except Tabb Spring are in resistivity lows (<650 Ohm-m) and Balch, Blue, and 

Gray Springs are near one or more thrust faults. Tabb Spring is on a resistivity high but near a NE-SW trending 

resistivity gradient and a normal fault (see fig 3). Wells with high transmissivity (2,000 ft2

/d or higher) are plotted 

and all but two are also in areas of low resistivity. The shallow old Dodson farm well (Jef-0602) has the highest 

transmissivity (1,900ft2

/d) of all wells tested on the Center and is located in a subtle NW-SE cross fault].

95

131

18

180

248

248

248

342 

342

342

342

471

471

471

471

471

471

 471

471

649

649 

649

649

649

649

894

894

894

 894

894

894

1232

1232

1232

1232

 1232

1698

1698 

1698

1698

2339

LT03

LT04 LT05

LT06

LT08 LT07

LT09

LT10

LT11 LT12

LT14

LT15

LT16

LT17

LT18

LT19 LT20

LT21

LT22

LT23

LT24

LT25

LT26

LT27

LT29 LT28

LT30

LT31

LT32

LT33

LT34

LT35

LT36

LT37

LT38

LT39

LT40

LT41

LT42

LT44 LT43

LT45

LT46

LT47

LT48

LT49

LT50

LT51

LT52

LT53

LL 1

LL 2

L

L

3

LL4

LL5

LL6

LL7

LL8

AMT sounding station

16,000

11,613

8,429

6,118

4,440

3,223

2,339

1,698

1,232

 894

 649

 471

 342

 248

 180

 131

 95

 69

 50

(Ohm-m)

N

Bell

Gray

Blue

EXPLANATION

Monitoring well

Spring

Resistivity cross section

Resistivity

77o56' 77o

55'

248 Resistivity isoline

0 1,000 3,000

Feet

Gray

LT 45

LL1

Jef-0593

Jef-0592

Tabb

Balch J

39o20'30"

39o

21'30"

Jef-0593

Jef-0591

Jef-0584

Jef-0602

Jef-0588

Jef-0593
Geophysics - By Herbert A. Pierce and Kurt J. McCoy 27

Figure 11. Two-dimensional invariant electrical-resistivity section (LL1) across the USGS Leetown Science 

Center, West Virginia. [The resistivity low on the left of the section is coincident with steeply dipping (60o E.) 

thrust faults and the low on the right is coincident with a synclinal fold and the well (Jef-0588) with the highest 

transmissivity on the Center. The broad resistivity high is coincident with an area of exposed low-permeability 

limestone ridges. ft, feet; NAVD88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988; AMT, audio-magnetotellurics]

1414

 1898

2548 

3420

 3420

 4590

6162

 8270 

11101

14900

 785 

1054 

 1054 

 1414

1898

2548

 2548

 3420

 585

 785

1054

1898

 1414

2548

 2548

3420 

 3420 

4590

6162

 8270

 242 

 325

436

 436

585 

585

785 

 785

1054 

 1054

 1414 

 1414

1898

DISTANCE (ft)

ELEVATION

(ft above NGVD88)

20,000

14,900

11,101

8,270

6,162

4,590

3,420

2,548

1,898

1,414

1,054

785

585

436

325

242

180

134

100

Vertical Exaggeration = 5

AMT sounding station

(Ohm-m)

EXPLANATION

Resistivity

Horizontal Scale 1 : 20,000

Vertical Scale

LT18

LT09

LT08

LT07

LT12

LT33

LT11

LT10

LT06

LT05

LT03LT14

LT04

LT45

LT51

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500 Feet

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000

1 : 4,000

-200

0

200

400

600

800

436 Resistivity isoline
28 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Figure 12. Composite map showing the 2-dimensional audio-magnetotelluric resistivity at 197 ft below land surface, 

surficial geologic map, and USGS topographic map of the Leetown area, West Virginia. [White numbers are low-resistivity 

anomalies; anomaly 1 is the productive syncline area, anomaly 2 is a potential productive area but may be influenced by grid 

edge effects, and anomaly 3 is the productive area near Balch Spring].

AMT Station

LL3 AMT cross

section

Center Boundary

8,429 342 6,118

4,440

3,223

2,339

1,698

1,232

 894

 649

 471

 342

 248

 180

 131

 95

 69

 50

Resistivity

 Ohm-m

39o21'30"

39o

20'30"

77o

56' 77o

55'

Opr

Oc

Om

Os

Os

Os

Occ

Os

Occ

Os

Or

Or

Oc Chambersburg Limestone

OCc Conococheague Limestone

Rocckdale Run and Opr Pinesburg Station Dolomite

Os Stonehenge Limestone

Om Martinsburg Formation

EXPLANATION

Spring

Formation

Contact

Thrust Fault

Cross Fault

Os

Resistivity isoline

0 1,000 3,000 Feet

2

3
Geophysics - By Herbert A. Pierce and Kurt J. McCoy 29

Figure 13. Rose diagrams of a) cleavage and joints in bedrock of the Leetown area (Jones and Deike, 1981) 

and b) fracture traces (McCoy and others, 2005 a; 2005b) in Jefferson and Berkeley Counties, West Virginia. 

[Concentric circles mark the percentage of total observations grouped in each “vector class”, at 10 intervals. 

The values indicated by the length of the rose “petals” for each hemisphere of the plot sums to 100].

a)

270o

0

o

A

a)

b)

EXPLANATION

Fracture trace/lineament

Joints

Cleavage

0

o

180o

90o 270o

180o

90o

270o

0

o
30 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Table 2. Description and application of borehole logging techniques utilized at the USGS Leetown Science 

Center, West Virginia

Type of borehole-geophysical log Description and application

Caliper log Mechanical calipers with spring loaded arms record the 

borehole diameter and with change in depth. Acoustic 

calipers calculate the distance to the borehole wall for the 

travel time of an acoustic signal from an acoustic televiewer 

(Keys, 1990). Caliper logs are used in conjunction with 

ATV, OTV, fluid resistivity, fluid temperature, and heatpulse flowmeter logs to identify fractures or flow zones in 

the borehole.

Natural-gamma log Records the total gamma radiation emitted by rocks surrounding the borehole (Keys, 1990). Clay minerals within rocks 

may be indicated by elevated gamma responses. Gamma 

logs are most commonly used for lithologic correlations.

Fluid-resistivity log Records the electrical resistivity of the water in a borehole and 

is related to its dissolved-solids concentration (Williams 

and Conger, 1990). Logs are collected under pumping and 

ambient conditions to identify zones where water moves 

into and out of the borehole.

Fluid-temperature log Records the temperature of the water in the borehole as a 

function of depth. Temperature contrasts if present provide 

information to support the movement of water into or out of 

the borehole at discrete fracture zones (Keys, 1990).

Heat-pulse flowmeter log Measures the vertical flow in a borehole using a thermal tracer 

and is used to determine which fractures are accepting 

or contributing water to the borehole under pumping and 

nonpumping conditions (Keys, 1990).

Spontaneous-potential log Records the naturally occurring electrical potential differences 

along the borehole wall and are used to identify changes in 

lithology and bed thickness (Keys, 1990).

Electromagnetic-induction log Records the electrical conductivity of the rocks and water 

surrounding the borehole. Induction logs are used for 

lithologic interpretations and in delineations of porosity and 

dissolved-solid concentrations of water in the rock matrix 

(Williams and others, 1993).

Acoustic-televiewer log Provides high resolution, magnetically oriented, 360° image 

of acoustic energy reflection and travel time. Fractures of 

greater than 0.1 in. can be detected and their orientation 

determined on ATV images (Keys, 1990).

Optical televiewer logs High-resolution 360° optical image of the borehole (Williams 

and Lane, 1998). The OTV log can be used to produce a 

virtual core to permit visualization of fractures as they occur in the borehole. Fractures apertures and orientation can 

be determined from OTV logs. 
Geophysics - By Herbert A. Pierce and Kurt J. McCoy 31

Figure 14. Examples of fracture images from acoustic and optical televiewer logs of boreholes in the Leetown 

area, West Virginia. [Note sinusoidal of fracture imaged in borehole Jef-0592 indicative of fracture dipping 73 

degrees and parallel to regional strike of about N. 20o E. A fracture of dip 19 degrees and parallel to regional 

strike of about N. 20o E. in borehole Jef-0602 is imaged as a sub-horizontal feature].

35

41

Depth below land surface (ft)

137

143

 Acoustic 

televiewer 

 log

 Optical 

televiewer 

 log

Jef-0592

Jef-0602
32 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Figure 15. Illustration showing the method of determining fracture strike and dip orientation from televiewer 

logs (Paillet and others, 1987).
Geophysics - By Herbert A. Pierce and Kurt J. McCoy 33

Figure 16. Schmidt equal-area stereo-net projections of poles to planes for 683 fractures identified in acousticteleviewer (ATV) logs of 11 wells at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia. 

N

S

W E

EXPLANATION

Fracture

180o

0

o

270o

90o

45o

135o

225o

315o
34 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

well represented by ATV log analysis. The discordance likely 

represents sample bias because vertical boreholes are not 

effective for imaging high-angle fractures (Kaehler and Hsieh, 

1994). Cross strike fractures have been shown to correlate 

with high yield wells (McCoy and Kozar, 2007b). Dip angles 

of cross-strike joints mapped at the Center commonly exceed 

60o (Jones and Deike, 1981), and are likely under-represented 

in the present dataset.

Generally, numerous fractures intersect a borehole, but 

typically only one or two fractures transmit most of the water 

to a well. Matrix porosity and permeability are negligible and 

occur in micro fractures with little or no effective porosity. 

Many of the smaller fractures provide storage potential for 

water but are not major avenues of ground-water flow. These 

less dominant fractures may provide storage of water and 

yield water to larger water-bearing fractures, which in turn are 

drained by solution conduits within the carbonate rock. The 

conduits typically occur along thrust and cross-strike faults 

and drain water over a wide area. Less prominent conduits 

may also form along fracture zones not associated with faults. 

The diffuse-flow dominated network of fractures that provides the majority of storage occupies only a small proportion 

of the total aquifer volume but constitutes the majority of 

porosity within the aquifer. Solution conduits occupy an even 

smaller proportion of the overall volume of the aquifer, but are 

important because they constitute the primary drains for the 

ground-water flow system. Based on individual well log analyses (appendices 2a and 2b), appendix 2c includes detailed 

description of the geologist’s well logs with depths of clay, 

depth to bedrock, static water level, potential water-bearing 

fractures and their depth, and estimated yield of water to the 

well. Overall orientations of the major water bearing fractures 

are presented in Appendix 3 and are illustrated in fig. 17.

Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, 

and John A. Young

Within the study area, diffuse fractures are a dominant 

pathway for ground-water flow. Conduit-dominated flow 

appears to be concentrated at the major thrust and cross-strike 

faults. These higher permeability faults and conduits act as 

drains, collecting water from an intricate network of diffuse 

fractures over a broad area. Zones of high hydraulic conductivity, indicated by surface geophysical data in areas where faults 

are not mapped, are most likely highly transmissive fracture 

zones but may also be unmapped faults. Previous conceptual 

models of ground-water flow in the area (Kozar and others, 

1991; and Shultz and others, 1995) recognized the importance 

of solution-enlarged fractures and conduits along bedding 

planes in governing ground-water flow but did not fully recognize the importance of cross-strike faults or complex geologic 

structures such as overturned or tightly folded anticlines and 

synclines in controlling ground-water flow.

Precipitation, surface drainage, and streamflow - 

by Mark D. Kozar and Kurt J. McCoy

Precipitation records for the National Weather Service 

station at the Eastern West Virginia Regional Airport, located 

in Martinsburg, West Virginia (hereafter referred to as the 

Martinsburg Airport) (NOAA, 2006), which is 4 mi northeast 

of the study area, recorded annual precipitation totals of 53.94, 

46.41, and 30.38 inches per year (in/yr) for 2003, 2004, and 

2005 respectively (table 3). Long-term average precipitation 

(1892-2004) for the Martinsburg airport is 39.39 in/yr (NOAA, 

2004). The mean precipitation of 38.39 in. for the two-year 

period 2004-2005 is within an inch of the long-term average. Precipitation also was measured at a rain gage located 

on the Center at Gray Spring (Jef-0521S in table 1 on fig. 1) 

for the period of this study (Kozar and others, 2007). Periods 

of heaviest precipitation generally occur in March through 

May but the largest precipitation event of more than 5 in. of 

rainfall occurred in October of 2005, a result of the remnants 

of a tropical storm that crossed the region. Precipitation and 

ground-water recharge do not necessarily correlate, primarily 

due to higher rates of evapotranspiration in late spring to early 

fall. Thus, ground-water recharge is typically highest in late 

Fall to Early Spring when evapotranspiration is at a minimum.

Surface drainage in the Leetown area is topographically 

controlled and mostly exhibits a trellis type pattern. The trellis 

drainage is a reflection of structural features, such as bedding, 

cleavage planes, thrust faults, and by cross-strike joints and 

faults within the bedrock. Lithology also is an important factor governing surface drainage and ground-water flow. Water 

flows primarily from topographically higher areas in the east 

towards Opequon Creek to the west. The lower permeability 

of the Martinsburg Formation, however, retards ground-water 

flow and funnels water toward the Leetown area, where 

Hopewell Run turns north-west along a zone of enhanced fracturing, eventually flowing into Opequon Creek (fig. 18). The 

south branch of Hopewell Run flows northward towards the 

Center, parallel to bedrock strike and several areally extensive 

thrust faults. The east branch of Hopewell Run flows primarily 

westward towards the Center and parallels a large cross-strike 

fault. 

A gaging station was constructed on Hopewell Run at 

Leetown to aid in determining a water budget and to provide 

calibration data for a numerical ground-water flow model 

for the area (Kozar and others, 2007). Average daily flow of 

Hopewell Run at the Leetown gaging station for the period 

April 2003 through March 2006 was approximately 11.2 cubic 

feet per second (ft3

/s), and ranged from a minimum of 1.80 

ft3/s on September 28, 2005 to a maximum of 73.0 ft3/s on 

December 11, 2003. Streamflow exhibits seasonal fluctuations, with highest flows in the winter months when evapotranspiration is low and minimum flows in late summer when 

evapotranspiration is high.
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 35

Figure 17. Schmidt equal-area stereo net projections (segregated by geologic structure) of poles to planes for 

fractures identified in acoustic-televiewer logs of 11 wells at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia.

Jef-0589

Jef-0752 Jef-0590

Jef-0753

Jef-0587

Jef-0602

Jef-0601 Jef-0592 Jef-0585

Jef-0586

Jef-0603

Boreholes located along fault zones

Boreholes located near fold hinges or lithologic contact zones

Boreholes located in diffuse-flow dominated portions of the aquifer

N N N N

N N N

N N N N

S S S

S S S S

S S S S

E

E

E

W

W

W

n=50 n=10 n=13 n=15

n=86 n=89 n=22

n=49

n=53 n=112 n=98 n=117
36 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Table 3. Precipitation in inches at the Eastern West Virginia Regional Airport, 

Martinsburg, West Virginia, 2003-2005.

Month Year

2003 2004 2005

January 2.31 1.78 2.05

February 4.49 3.43 1.38

March 3.12 1.92 4.44

April 2.92 5.84 2.63

May 7.53 7.06 2.03

June 9.20 4.49 1.64

July 3.80 4.04 2.92

August 3.43 2.13 2.92

September 6.50 7.75 0.14

October 3.01 2.38 5.29

November 3.75 3.11 3.63

December 3.88 2.48 1.31

Annual total 53.94 46.41 30.38

Departure from long-term average 1 14.55 7.02 -9.01

1

 The departure from normal is the difference between the current annual precipitation and 

the long-term average precipitation (39.39 in/yr) for the station for the period of record (1898 

to 2005).
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 37

Figure 18. Potentiometric-surface map of simulated ground-water levels and generalized directions of groundwater flow in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

510

500

485

495

490

480

455

440

475

470

465

460

450

435

515

525

520

430

425

420

530

535

540

545

550

410

560

565

405

575

580

585 590 595

395

West Branch

JOHNSONTOWN

"

" MIDDLEWAY " HAREWOOD

OPEQUON CREEK

"

BROWN'S 

CORNER

EXPLANATION

Model cell assignment

Inactive

Active

Model boundary

Stream

Production well

Potentiometric contour-- shows altitude

at which water level would have stood in

tightly cased wells. Contour interval is

5 feet. Datum is North American 

Vertical Datum of 1988

0 0.5 1 Mile

0 0.5 1 Kilometer

Leetown Science Center boundary

General direction

of ground-water flow

78°00' 77°58' 77°56' 77°54'

39°18'

39°20'

39°22'

South Branch

HOPEWELL 

RUN

East Branch
38 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

LiDAR Data Acquisition and Processing for 

Landform Analysis - by John A. Young

Hydrologic analyses often benefit from high-quality 

digital representations of terrain to assist in determination of 

runoff, streamflow, and ground-water levels. These “digitalelevation models” (DEMs) have been used extensively in 

geographic information system (GIS) applications for spatial 

modeling. DEMs have been created at a variety of scales 

(most commonly at 1:24,000 and 1:250,000) using various 

photogrammetric, stereoscopic, and height-finding methods. 

While very useful for regional or watershed-scale studies, 

these elevation models are limited by the technology used in 

their creation to moderate spatial resolutions (for example, 

100-ft horizontal spacing between observations) and are often 

plagued by systematic errors that influence the accurate depiction of topography and surface-water flow paths. 

The advent of laser-based Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) technology in recent years promises a new era 

of accurate, fine resolution DEMs. These remote sensing 

systems resolve surface height by sending out laser pulses 

in a scanning pattern from an aircraft-mounted sensor, and 

computing the time required for returned laser backscatter 

to reach the sensor. The time required for the laser pulse to 

travel to the surface and back is converted to distance (that is 

to say, range); this distance is then compared to the altitude 

of the plane as determined by a differential global positioning 

system (GPS) at the time of acquisition (Wehr and Lohr 1999). 

Because of the precision of laser and GPS measurements, very 

accurate surface topography can be computed (generally less 

than 6 in. vertical accuracy). When laser pulses are scanned as 

a dense series of postings, extremely detailed DEMs can result 

(for instance, a 3.3 ft pixel resolution). DEMs resulting from 

laser scanning can for the first time provide detailed topographic data for site-specific hydrologic applications, as well 

as for a host of other applications in earth sciences, mapping, 

and forestry (Lefsky and others, 2002). 

LiDAR data for the watershed surrounding the Center 

were acquired and processed through a partnership with the 

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 

Flight planning, a quality-control ground survey, and post-processing of the acquired LiDAR data were conducted to assist 

the NRCS. While the primary goal of the USGS portion of the 

project was to develop fine-scale DEMs to delineate sinkholes 

and identify other features relevant to ground-water recharge 

in the vicinity of Center, the DEMs created are generally useful in other applications including ground-water modeling (fig. 

18) and mapping of geologic structure.

LiDAR Acquisition and Quality Control

The NRCS contracted with a private remote sensing 

firm in March of 2005 to acquire LiDAR data over Jefferson 

County, West Virginia, at an average resolution of 1 meter 

(3.28 ft) point spacing or better, and vertical accuracy of 15 

centimeters (6 in.) root mean square error (RMSE), on bare, 

flat ground. The primary purpose of the data acquisition was 

to develop a high resolution DEM for Jefferson County to use 

in hydrologic applications. Coincidentally, scientists at the 

Center were preparing to acquire LiDAR data for a study of 

the locations of sinkholes potentially affecting ground water 

used by the Center and by the surrounding community. Rather 

than duplicate efforts, the USDA-NRCS and USGS combined 

efforts to acquire and process LiDAR data (fig. 19) to meet 

the needs of both agencies. The LiDAR data were also used to 

assign elevations to nodes and head-observation and pumping 

wells in the upper layer of a ground-water model developed 

for the Leetown area, West Virginia (Kozar and others, 2007).

LiDAR data were acquired over Jefferson County, WV, 

between April 11-18, 2005, prior to vegetation leaf-out, to 

maximize ground surface visibility. Data were acquired using 

an Optech ALTM LiDAR system at an altitude of approximately 4,000 ft, an airspeed of 140 knots, and a laser pulse 

rate of 50,000 Hertz. Two GPS systems were used by the 

vendor during data collection, one located at the Martinsburg 

Airport, and one located in eastern Jefferson County. Postprocessing of the data consisted of GPS trajectory and laserrange corrections, first and last return extraction, and vegetation and building removal for a “bare earth” surface model. 

Vendor-derived estimates of accuracy during in-flight quality 

assurance tests over the Martinsburg Airport averaged 0.10 ft 

RMSE in surface height.

USGS Center scientists were asked by the NRCS to 

initiate a quality-control survey as an independent source of 

validation for the data collected. The USGS conducted ground 

surveys using survey-grade differential GPS instruments to 

measure surface elevations of different land cover types in 

Jefferson County. These elevation measurements were compared to LiDAR data postings provided by the vendor. The 

accuracy standard was met in 36 of 37 (97 percent) of the field 

measured, quality-control stations, and the overall root mean 

square error (RMSE) of the data provided was 0.30 ft (0.09 m 

vertical), well within the specified accuracy requirements.

LiDAR Data Processing

LiDAR data were delivered as unprocessed x, y, z 

(surface location and elevation) data files, and as “bare earth” 

models that were processed to remove trees, vegetation, and 

buildings in order to represent a “bare” ground surface. However, close inspection of these models revealed that numerous 

vegetation artifacts remained, reducing their effectiveness for 

modeling fine surface features such as small sinkholes. Evans 

and Hudak (2006) proposed a method of processing LiDAR 

data to remove vegetation artifacts that is based on a “progressive curvature filter”. This filtering method fits a series of 

thin-plate splines to a local cluster of laser returns (points), 

and determines which returns are anomalous in elevation 

compared to surrounding returns. Returns that are anomalies 

at multiple scales, such as those coming from tree tops (that 

is to say, those higher than the surrounding ground surface) 

are filtered out of the resulting models. This technique is 
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 39

Figure 19. LiDAR derived digital-elevation model for the Leetown area, West Virginia.

77°57'0"W 77°56'0"W 77°55'0"W 77°54'0"W

39°18'0"N

39°19'0"N

39°20'0"N

39°21'0"N

Hopewell Run surface drainage basin for the Leetown gaging 

station and watershed of the USGS Leetown Science Center

EXPLANATION

USGS Leetown Science Center boundary

0 0.5 1 Mile

0 0.5 1 Kilometer
40 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

potentially much more effective at identifying the true groundsurface elevation than single pass algorithms or other iterative 

algorithms, because it considers the inherent scale of features 

in the determination of surface form. 

Progressive curvature filtering algorithms provided by 

Evans and Hudak (2006) were used to filter LiDAR data 

points to remove returns from vegetation and buildings. After 

filtering, the resulting point dataset was interpolated to a gridbased surface-elevation model at a resolution of 6.6 ft using a 

finite differencing algorithm available in the TopoGrid module 

of the Arc-GIS software version 9.1 (copyright ESRI Inc., 380 

New York Street, Redlands, CA 92373-8100) (fig. 20). Due 

to the data volume inherent in LiDAR imagery, the data were 

processed in tiles equivalent to 1/16th of a USGS 1:24,000 

quadrangle. Processed tiles were merged together to create a 

seamless DEM at a 6.6-ft spatial resolution. 

Landform Analysis

Once a filtered DEM was prepared for the drainage area 

encompassing the Center, landform analysis was conducted 

to reveal small topographic depressions that may indicate 

sinkhole development. A topographic position index (TPI) was 

calculated using routines developed by Jenness (2005). This 

algorithm scores each 43 ft2 (2-m2) area (referred to as a pixel) 

on the surface model with a value representing the difference 

between the elevation at each pixel and elevations in surrounding pixels. Positive TPI values indicate local topographic 

highs while negative TPI values indicate local topographic 

depressions. TPI values around zero indicate topographically 

flat terrain. 

By varying the size of the area considered around each 

pixel, different scales of landforms can be determined. In 

addition to varying the area size, the area shape can be varied 

to capture surface forms in different configurations (such 

as a circle or square), or to evaluate surface forms within a 

specified distance range (doughnut), or direction (wedge). A 

doughnut shaped area was used to calculate TPI in an area 

between 6.6 and 33 ft (2 and 10-m) around each pixel on the 

DEM. The scale and area shape were maximized for determining locations of small, circular topographic depressions. 

Landform Interpretation to Identify Sinkholes

The TPI values were grouped into 13 classes for visual 

interpretation; each class represented 0.25 standard deviations 

from the mean TPI value (fig. 20). This classification was 

useful for depicting anomalous bowl-shaped areas. Anomalies 

were compared in this classification to 1-meter (3.28 foot) 

resolution color infrared aerial photographs of the same area 

flown in 2003. Areas that appeared as circular local depressions (especially in forests) that could not be easily explained 

as farm ponds, road depressions, or other man-made features 

were flagged as points for further investigation. A total of 

94 such small circular depressions were flagged as potential 

sinkholes in the Leetown area. 

Potential sinkholes flagged in this manner were compared to sinkholes mapped in the area by other investigators. 

David J. Weary (coauthor of this report) mapped 11 sinkholes 

in the Leetown area with a GPS as part of geologic mapping 

conducted for this study(fig. 2). Kozar and others (1991) 

mapped 687 sinkholes in Jefferson County, West Virginia, in 

a ground-reconnaissance survey. Nine of 11 sinks mapped by 

Weary corresponded to topographic depressions identified in 

our analysis. Most of the sinkholes mapped by Kozar and others (1991) were also in close proximity but varied in accuracy 

due to limitations of field mapping technology available prior 

to the common availability of GPS. 

Attempts were made to visually inspect all mapped 

topographic depressions in the field by navigating to locations 

with handheld GPS. Of the 94 sites mapped, 39 could not be 

field assessed due to private property access restrictions. Of 

the 55 sites visited in the field, 47 (85 percent) were depressional features, but 14 of these were observed to be other than 

sinkholes (such as home site excavations, ditches, old road 

beds, and so on). Approximately 63 percent (35 of 55) of sites 

visited were natural depressions that are possible sinkholes, 

including 9 with obvious drainage holes. While identifying 

and locating landscape depressions using LiDAR proved successful, not all depressions are obvious sinkholes, and more 

work needs to be completed to fine tune methods for mapping 

active sinks. However, the LiDAR-derived DEM developed 

for this project improved the ground-water flow model developed for the Leetown area by refining the upper surface elevations assigned within the model. Finally, high-resolution topographic maps constructed using LiDAR data also shows great 

promise for fracture trace and lineament analysis to locate 

surface expressions of subsurface faults or fracture zones.

Ground-Water Levels - by Kurt J. McCoy

Ground-water levels are critical to understanding groundwater flow processes in the complicated flow system of the 

study area. Water-level data for 17 monitoring wells was 

analyzed for this study (app. 1 in Kozar and others, 2007). 

Topographic variability in water levels is pronounced, with 

shallower water levels (sites Jef-0584, 590, 591, 594, 595, 600, 

602, 656, and 657; table 1, fig. 1) common in lowland areas 

(valleys and topographic depressions) and deeper water levels 

(sites Jef-0585-587, 589, 592, 593, 596-599, and 601; table, 

fig. 1) in upland areas (hillside and hilltop settings). Depth to 

water in upland wells is approximately twice that in lowland 

wells. There is also significant seasonal variability in water 

levels between the two settings. Water levels are typically 

lowest in late summer to early fall and highest in the winter 

to early spring (fig. 21). This corresponds with ground-water 

recharge rates that are typically lowest in late spring through 

early fall and highest in late Fall through Early Spring.

The average maximum and minimum monthly water 

levels for well Jef-0526 for the period of record (1985-2005) 

occur respectively in the months of April (average April water 

level is 21.39 ft bls) and September (average September water 
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 41

Figure 20. Detail of LiDAR derived digital elevation model, color coded by levels of topographic position 

index, with small circular topographic depressions showing sink holes in the Hopewell Run Watershed, 

Leetown area, West Virginia.

77 54'0"W

77 54'0"W

77 54'15"W

77 54'30"W 77 54'15"W

39 21'30"N

39 21'30"N

39 21'15"N

39 21'15"N

0 250 500 750 1,000 125

Feet

TPI convex concave

area 

shown

Location of sinkholes Topographic position index

EXPLANATION
42 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Figure 21. Precipitation measured at Gray Spring and hydrograph for well Jef-0526 at the 

USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia. [Gaps in water level plot denote periods of 

missing record].

TER LEVEL, in feet below land surface WA

PRECIPITATION, in inches

no precipita iondata available

1617

18

19

20

21

22232425

26

6.05.5

5.0

4.5

4.0

2.5

3.02.52.01.51.00.5

0.0

J F M

A S O N D M J J A N D J F M

A S O M J J A N D J F M

A S O M J J A N D J F M

2003 2004 2005

EXPLANATION

Precipitation, in inchesmeasured at Gray Spring

Water level, in feet below land surface in well Jef-0526
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 43

level is 23.06 ft bls). Summary statistics for ground-water 

levels in the Leetown area during July 2003 through September 2005 are presented in table 4. In 2003 ground-water levels 

stayed above normal for the entire year due to above average 

precipitation during the period. The water-level hydrograph for 

well Jef-0526 shows that ground-water levels in the Leetown 

area respond quickly to precipitation (fig. 21). Response to 

rainfall is dependent upon season. Generally, intense rainfall 

produces more substantial increases in ground-water levels 

when evapotranspiration (ET) is low (winter and early spring) 

than in periods when ET is high (summer months). The exceptions to this general trend are tropical storms and hurricanes 

which can produce a significant increase in ground-water 

levels even during periods of high ET.

Hydraulic gradients may be determined by comparing 

water levels for pairs of co-located wells completed at different depths within the aquifer. Eight such well pairs (well pairs 

Jef-0588/600, 590/595, 589/598, 587/596, 586/599, 601/597, 

585/597, and 592/597 in table 1, fig. 1) were installed as part 

of this study. Typically, water-level elevations of the well pairs 

differed only slightly. This most likely is due to the deeper 

wells being constructed as open-rock boreholes, thus measurements represent a composite hydraulic head which is dominated by the more permeable fractures typically encountered 

in the upper portion of the borehole.

For a typical hydrograph in a karst setting, the response 

time to individual precipitation events is dependent on the 

origin of recharge, structure of the conduit system, area of the 

contributing ground-water basin, and antecedent hydrologic 

conditions (White, 2002). Often in such settings, conduit and 

basin geometry are difficult to define, but the interaction of 

matrix storage and conduits can be determined with careful 

analysis of hydrograph data. Florea and Vacher (2006) found 

that the magnitude and associated accessibility of karst matrix 

storage during individual precipitation events is reflected in 

the “flashiness” of a hydrograph. At the Center, hydrographs 

for Balch and Gray Springs (fig. 22) indicate a rapid response 

to individual storm pulses by these springs that may be related 

to a number of factors including (1) losing stream reaches, 

(2) epikarst characteristics, (3) regional geology, (4) climatic 

conditions, and (5) antecedent moisture levels (White, 2002; 

Florea and Vacher, 2006). The stage-only data are consistent 

with other karst settings in Kentucky and Missouri where the 

limestone rock matrices contain minimal storage. Similar to 

those settings, the limestone rock matrix in the Leetown area 

is impervious and flow is limited to secondary fractures and 

conduits (Jones and Deike, 1981). The result is an aquifer that 

displays unmodified secondary fractures and a system of wellconnected solution-enlarged conduits similar to that described 

by Shuster and White (1971) in nearby Central Pennsylvania.

Loss of stream flow in the east branch of Hopewell Run 

adjacent to Balch Spring (Evaldi and Paybins, 2006) indicates 

that rapid infiltration of precipitation from storm pulses flowing into the nearby losing stream reach are partly responsible 

for higher water-level fluctuations at Balch Spring than those 

noted in the hydrograph of Gray Spring. Examination of the 

recession curves for both springs indicates that the stage of 

Gray Spring declines at a much slower rate than the stage 

of Balch Spring. It is uncertain whether this difference is 

related to the area of the aquifer draining to either spring. Both 

springs exhibit a mixture of both conduit “quick flow” and 

diffuse “slow flow” draining to the springs. However, Balch 

spring exhibits a more pronounced conduit flow signature 

than does Gray Spring, which appears to exhibit a significant 

component of diffuse flow. Continuous monitoring data for 

well Jef-0526 (fig. 21) illustrates that the rapid response of the 

aquifer at the Center is not limited to shallow flow to springs. 

Well Jef-0526 is in an area dominated by solution-enlarged 

coalescing thrust fault zones and had depths to water ranging 

from 18.0 to 24.5 ft bls during the study period (fig. 21).

Pumping withdrawals from Balch Spring during periods of low flow resulted in numerous rapid drawdown spikes 

throughout the period of record. The marked decline in spring 

stage during August and September 2004 is a result of the 

coupled effects of dry weather and pumping from the spring. 

Monthly water-level data collected from 23 wells at the Center 

during the period of study from July 2003 through September 

2005 (app. 1 in Kozar and other, 2007) also show this short 

period of water level decline and indicate the potential of rapidly draining the aquifer during periods of high evapotranspiration and low recharge. Following the period of dry weather 

in 2004, wells located in discharge zones began to rebound 

one month prior to similar rebound measured in upland wells. 

In upland or recharge areas, depths to water are generally deeper and water level fluctuations greater than those near 

discharge areas (table 4). However, the two deepest wells at 

the Center (Jef-0603 and Jef-0587 on fig. 1 and in table 1) are 

located in upland areas, yet the fluctuation in water level more 

closely resembles discharge area wells. These two wells are 

located in areas of low permeability and are sufficiently deep 

to limit the influences of shallow ground water and short-term 

precipitation on their ground-water levels. Fluctuations in 

shallow and deep well pairs were in general agreement and 

showed occasional reversal of vertical gradients.

During the spring of 2004, water levels were measured 

in 83 wells on and adjacent to the Center and were used in the 

calibration of a steady-state ground-water flow model for the 

Leetown area (Kozar and others, 2007). Measured water levels 

ranged from 571 ft above NAVD88 in the far southeastern part 

of the study area to 440 ft above NAVD88 near the mouth of 

Hopewell Run. Examination of the potentiometric surface (fig. 

18) for the Hopewell Run watershed simulated by the model 

provides insight into ground-water flow processes in the 

watershed. Ground water in the Leetown area moves towards 

discharge points along Hopewell Run. In the southern part of 

the watershed (south of the Center) ground water flows primarily from the southeast to the northwest along thrust faults 

and permeable bedding parallel features or westward along 

two primary cross-strike faults. In the northern portion of the 

watershed (north of the Center) ground-water flows primarily from the northeast to the southwest along thrust faults and 

permeable bedding parallel features. Small topographic ridges 
44 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia Table 4. Summary statistics from monthly water level observations, July 2003-October 2005, at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia [ft, feet; bls, below land surface; nd, no data available for open interval of this piezometer; std. dev., standard deviation] Well name and (report number) Total well depth (ft) Topographic set- ting Open Interval (ft bls) Depth to Water (ft) Mean Std. Dev. Minimum Maximum Range Jef-0602 (55) 61 upland 20-61 8.93 1.76 5.72 13.99 8.27 Jef-0597 (40) 47 upland 37-42 34.52 2.79 28.80 38.25 9.45 Jef-0596 (35) 101 upland 86-91 46.43 1.56 41.74 48.48 6.74 Jef-0595 (47) 51 lowland 41-46 18.76 1.73 14.54 22.99 8.45 Jef-0594 (45) 41 upland 26-31 4.41 1.78 1.03 7.44 6.41 Jef-0593 (46) 56 lowland 41-46 16.77 2.31 12.29 20.83 8.54 Jef-0584 (49) 113 lowland 43-63, 73-83, 93-103 20.66 1.21 17.94 23.41 5.47 Jef-0588 (43) 150 upland 93-150 14.10 3.35 8.01 19.93 11.92 Jef-0591 (50) 93 lowland 29-39, 49-69, 79-89 18.07 1.36 15.13 21.47 6.34 Jef-0590 (48) 160 lowland 38.5-160 19.53 1.73 15.40 23.67 8.27 Jef-0589 (41) 260 upland 38.5-260 19.32 3.26 13.36 24.79 11.43 Jef-0587 (36) 410 upland 37-410 46.32 1.65 42.06 48.61 6.55 Jef-0586 (60p) 201 lowland 98-201 17.19 0.92 15.57 19.55 3.98 Jef-0585 (38) 326 upland 39-326 35.38 3.23 29.36 40.81 11.45

Jef-0592 (39) 321 upland 38-321 34.18 3.05 28.51 39.37 10.86

Jef-0601 (37) 312 upland 37-312 38.09 2.93 32.45 43.28 10.83

Jef-0600 (44) 79 upland 59-79 10.79 3.30 4.51 16.70 12.19

Jef-0599 (54) 37.5 lowland 27.5-32.5 15.51 1.19 12.65 18.29 5.64

Jef-0598 (42) 41.5 upland 31-36 17.98 3.19 11.90 23.45 11.55

Jef-0603 (34) 475 upland 56-475 37.44 1.22 35.23 39.80 4.57

Jef-0658 (53) 6 upland 1-6 2.36 1.39 0.29 4.13 3.84

Jef-0657 (52) 4 upland 0-4 1.90 1.03 0.15 2.90 2.75

Jef-0656 (56) 16 lowland nd 6.21 0.39 5.65 7.03 1.38

Jef-0526 (51) 160 lowland 36.7-155 21.46 1.10 18.01 24.50 6.49
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 45

Figure 22. Hydrograph of Balch and Gray Springs, USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia. [Gaps in water level plot 

denote periods of missing record].

N D

2003

J F M A M J J A S O N D

2004

J F M A M J J A S O N D

2005

J F M A M J J A S O

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Jef-0521S (Gray Spring)

Jef-0327S (Balch Spring)

STAGE OF SPRING, in feet

EXPLANATION
46 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

underlain by the Conococheague Limestone, just east of the 

Center, form hydrologic boundaries separating the headwaters of Hopewell Run from larger perennial discharge areas 

to the west. During wet seasons, several ephemeral springs 

discharge in the headwater area along the banks of Hopewell 

Run.

Base-flow discharge measurements - by Mark D. 

Kozar and Kurt J. McCoy

Base-flow discharge measurements were made in the 

study area as part of a survey to document channel gains 

and losses and to assess ground-water discharge to streams. 

Numerous small seeps were encountered during the base-flow 

surveys and discharge measurements were made at specific 

intervals along stream channels and at major points of tributary or apparent ground-water inflow. Generally, most measurements showed an increase in stream flow from upstream 

to downstream areas. There were a few notable exceptions to 

this trend, and significant losses of streamflow to ground water 

were documented at several locations. A series of major thrust 

faults traverse the Leetown area in a southwest to northeast 

direction. The East Branch of Hopewell Run and the channel 

that drains the Blue and Gray Spring complex both traverse 

the thrust faults at right angles. Base-flow measurements 

were made at numerous sites in the Hopewell Run watershed 

(fig. 23) on two separate occasions, June 29 to July 1 and 

October 25-27, 2004. A loss of streamflow was measured 

across the thrust faults at two separate locations during both 

periods. A loss of 0.350 ft3/s was documented in the Gray and 

Blue Spring tributary on June 30, 2004, and a smaller loss of 

0.002 ft3/s was measured on the same tributary during a lower 

base-flow period on October 26, 2004. For the East Branch 

of Hopewell Run a loss of 0.870 ft3/s was measured across 

the same series of faults on June 30, 2004, and a corresponding smaller loss of 0.170 ft3

/s was also measured for the East 

Branch near West Virginia County Route 1 on October 26, 

2004. The losses are attributed to the streams losing water to 

the aquifer when they traverse the faults. Since the stage of 

Balch Spring is artificially lowered due to pumping and Balch 

Spring and the Center’s production wells A and B (sites 58 

and 59 on fig. 1 and in table 1) are along the same fault, it 

is likely that ground-water withdrawals from the spring and 

wells may induce additional capture of stream water from the 

fault.

Ground-water recharge/discharge - by Mark D. 

Kozar

Ground-water recharge is an essential component for 

assessing ground-water availability, calculating water budgets, 

and developing ground-water flow models. The Hopewell Run 

at Leetown gaging station was installed (fig. 1) in April 2003 

to provide data for model development and calibration and to 

provide data from which estimates of ground-water recharge 

could be made. Streamflow data for a 30-month period was 

evaluated by hydrograph analysis (Rutledge, 1998) to estimate 

ground-water recharge and to provide base-flow discharge data 

(Kozar and others, 1997). As a result of the analysis, an average value of 16.5 in/yr of recharge (table 5) was estimated for 

the Hopewell Run watershed for the period from September 

2003 through October 2005.

Streamflow data were available for the Hopewell Run 

at Leetown gaging station for only a 3-year period; therefore 

recharge was also estimated for the Opequon Creek at Martinsburg, West Virginia. Streamflow data has been collected 

at the Opequon Creek at Martinsburg gage since 1947, and 

provides a measure of the variability of stream flow and 

ground-water recharge during average and drought periods. 

The long-term average recharge for the Opequon Creek watershed was estimated to be 9.8 in/yr (Kozar and Mathes, 2001). 

The higher recharge rate of 16.5 in/yr for the Hopewell Run 

watershed is due to the higher proportion of surface exposures 

of karstic limestone bedrock in the Hopewell Run basin, as 

compared to the Opequon Creek watershed, which has substantial exposures of the less permeable Martinsburg Formation. A review of meteorological records (Cornell University, 

2006) indicates the most recent drought in the area occurred 

from November 1998 - February 2000. This was the fourth 

worst drought on record, dating back to 1895, and the longest 

drought on record, lasting for approximately 16 months. An 

analysis of potential recharge for the Opequon Creek watershed (table 6), to which Hopewell Run drains, was conducted 

to estimate recharge for the Hopewell Run watershed during 

droughts. Estimated ground-water recharge for the Opequon 

Creek watershed for the period November 1998 - February 

2000 drought was 6.19 in/yr. Using simple linear regression, 

a correlation of the recharge data from the two gages was 

conducted and a regression equation developed to estimate the 

magnitude of the drought for the Hopewell Run watershed. 

The correlation yielded an estimate of 8.3 in/yr for the drought 

period for the Hopewell Run watershed. This value was used 

in the drought simulation included in the report documenting the ground-water flow model that was developed for the 

Hopewell Run watershed (Kozar and others, 2007). It should 

be noted that low-flow stream flow statistics for the Eastern 

Panhandle of West Virginia clearly show that stream flow 

conditions for the period 1970 through 2002 are anomalously 

high (fig. 24) when compared to the period from 1930 to 1970 

(Wiley, 2006). The data plotted on fig. 24 results in a unit-less 

number, that is the average of the normalized departures for 

five gaging stations, where the departure is the annual minimum streamflow minus the average annual minimum streamflow for each station, and the station departures are normalized 

by dividing by the standard deviation of the departure for 

each station. Prudent water use planning should consider the 

possibility that conditions prior to 1970 will return, and that 

as a result of climate and land-use change, more severe and 

frequent droughts are possible.
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 47

Figure 23. Location of base-flow survey sites and flows measured along Hopewell Run and its tributaries in the Leetown 

area, West Virginia. [ft3

/s, cubic feet per second]

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

*# .!

*#

*# #*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

#*

*#

*#

*#

#*

#*

#*

*#

#*

#*

#*

#*

*#

*##*

*# 1.30

5.73

4.49

4.86

1.75 3.92

4.03

2.03 6.91

1.65

2.83

4.76 0.67

2.62

4.882

0.694

10.94

0.323

0.334 5.576

0.027

0.086

0.075

0.0

77°56'0"W 77°55'30"W 77°55'0"W 77°54'30"W 77°54'0"W

39°21'30"N

39°21'0"N

39°20'30"N

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

*#

*#

*#

*# *#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*#

*##* 0.0

2.70

1.78

2.35

2.78

1.24

2.61

0.73

8.08

0.94

2.75

5.33

1.45

2.14

0.427

0.029

0.126

0.126 3.127

0.203

0.414

0.412

2.35 0.0

0.0

0.0

Gray 

Spring

Gray 

Spring

Blue 

Spring

Blue 

Spring

Tabb 

Spring

Tabb 

Spring

 Bell 

Spring

 Bell 

Spring

 Link 

Spring

 Link 

Spring

Hopewell Run

Hopewell Run

 Balch 

Spring

Balch 

Spring

Base from U.S. Geological Survey Middleway, W.Va. 1:24,000 topographic quadrangle

77°56'0"W 77°55'30"W 77°55'0"W 77°54'30"W 77°54'0"W

39°21'30"N

39°21'0"N

39°20'30"N

EXPLANATION

#*

#* 0.73

5.33

!.

Streamflow measurement 

site, mainstem in ft3/s

Streamflow measurement 

site, seeps or springs in ft3

/s

Spring

October 2005 Seepage Data

EXPLANATION

#*

#* 0.73

5.33

!.

Streamflow measurement 

site - mainstem in ft3/s

Streamflow measurement 

site - mainstem in ft3

/s

Spring

June 2005 Seepage Data
48 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Table 5. -- Estimates of quarterly ground-water recharge for the Hopewell Run and Opequon 

Creek watersheds, West Virginia and Virginia, for water years 2003-2005 

[nd, no data; na, not applicable; WY (water year), the period from October 1st through September 30th]

Quarterly Recharge - Water Year Statistics (inches) 

Hopewell Run At Leetown, West Virginia

OctDecJanMarAprJuneJulySeptAnnual

Total

WY 2003 nd nd 8.35 2.61 na

WY 2004 6.46 5.21 6.01 3.54 21.22

WY 2005 3.48 5.76 1.65 0.97 11.86

Median 4.97 5.49 6.01 2.61 16.54

Mean 4.97 5.49 5.34 2.37 16.54

Quarterly Recharge - Water Year Statistics (inches) 

Opequon Creek near Martinsburg, West Virginia

OctDecJanMarAprJuneJulySeptAnnual

Total

Statistical

Rank1

WY 2003 3.75 6.33 5.68 2.86 18.62 2nd or 3rd

WY 2004 4.77 3.93 4.42 2.92 16.04 3rd to 4th

WY 2005 3.25 5.02 1.05 1.10 10.42 16th to 17th

Median 3.75 5.02 4.42 2.86 16.05

Mean 3.92 5.09 3.72 2.29 15.02
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 49

Table 6. -- Quarterly and annual estimates of ground-water recharge for the Opequon Creek watershed 

with statistical rank (highest to lowest) for years 1948-2005 

[nd, no data; na, not applicable; WY (water year), the period from October 1st through September 30th]

Jan-Mar Apr-June July-Sept Oct-Dec Annual Total Annual Statistical Rank

1948 1.62 2.17 0.90 4.84 9.53 20th

1949 3.71 2.12 1.45 1.56 8.85 26th

1950 3.01 1.84 1.52 3.66 10.03 17th

1951 6.01 2.65 1.26 0.57 10.49 16th

1952 4.02 4.28 1.49 2.58 12.36 13th

1953 5.03 2.40 0.83 0.72 8.99 24th

1954 1.34 0.98 0.45 1.83 4.60 55th

1955 2.14 0.91 2.00 0.80 5.85 51st

1956 3.41 1.23 1.23 2.30 8.17 32nd

1957 2.99 1.93 0.64 1.27 6.83 46th

1958 3.81 2.34 1.36 0.53 8.03 33rd

1959 1.18 1.81 0.56 1.34 4.89 54th

1960 3.51 2.27 1.09 0.49 7.36 43rd

1961 4.32 2.62 0.88 1.07 8.89 25th

1962 4.89 1.75 0.90 0.96 8.50 28th

1963 3.47 1.24 0.46 1.02 6.19 50th

1964 4.82 1.89 0.80 0.77 8.28 31st

1965 4.18 1.30 0.57 0.46 6.51 49th

1966 1.58 1.59 0.81 1.51 5.50 53rd

1967 3.26 1.18 1.43 1.96 7.84 35th

1968 3.95 1.55 0.81 1.21 7.52 40th

1969 1.17 0.83 0.93 0.77 3.70 57th

1970 2.44 3.29 1.29 2.51 9.53 20th

1971 5.27 2.26 2.17 2.69 12.38 12th

1972 4.77 5.86 1.03 4.60 16.26 3rd

1973 3.20 4.97 1.25 3.74 13.16 10th

1974 4.14 1.25 0.90 2.16 8.44 30th

1975 4.18 3.15 3.82 2.27 13.43 9th

1976 3.75 1.71 1.01 3.36 9.82 18th

1977 2.39 1.91 0.68 2.46 7.44 42nd

1978 5.09 1.65 2.60 1.71 11.05 15th

1979 6.06 2.63 2.14 3.87 14.70 6th

1980 3.46 2.99 1.19 0.83 8.46 29th

1981 1.14 1.66 0.86 0.84 4.50 56th

1982 3.84 2.57 1.33 1.01 8.75 27th
50 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Table 6. -- Quarterly and annual estimates of ground-water recharge for the Opequon Creek watershed 

with statistical rank (highest to lowest) for years 1948-2005 

[nd, no data; na, not applicable; WY (water year), the period from October 1st through September 30th]

Jan-Mar Apr-June July-Sept Oct-Dec Annual Total Annual Statistical Rank

1983 3.11 4.46 0.71 3.56 11.84 14th

1984 10.42 1.03 1.71 2.17 15.32 4th

1985 2.45 1.22 0.90 3.11 7.68 37th

1986 4.37 1.26 0.54 1.61 7.78 36th

1987 2.46 3.44 1.63 1.90 9.44 22nd

1988 2.11 3.59 1.02 0.85 7.57 39th

1989 2.80 2.56 0.90 1.18 7.45 41st

1990 1.86 2.03 1.32 4.61 9.82 18th

1991 4.13 1.29 0.78 1.02 7.23 44th

1992 2.35 2.01 1.20 2.48 8.03 33rd

1993 7.61 2.75 1.34 3.31 15.02 5th

1994 8.20 1.16 1.51 1.55 12.41 11th

1995 2.63 1.83 0.53 2.68 7.66 38th

1996 7.51 4.12 6.18 6.15 23.96 1st

1997 4.23 1.36 0.98 2.66 9.22 23rd

1998 9.09 3.15 0.93 0.85 14.01 8th

1999 1.95 1.01 1.51 1.22 5.69 52nd

2000 2.75 1.55 1.55 0.96 6.81 47th

2001 3.16 1.46 1.06 0.91 6.60 48th

2002 0.86 1.49 0.86 3.75 6.96 45th

2003 6.33 5.68 2.86 4.77 19.64 2nd

2004 3.93 4.42 2.92 3.25 14.52 7th

2005 5.02 1.05 1.10 ND NA NA

Max 10.42 5.86 6.18 6.15 23.96

Min 0.86 0.83 0.45 0.46 3.70

Median 3.51 1.91 1.06 1.71 8.46

Mean 3.82 2.27 1.33 2.08 9.50
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 51

Figure 24. Graph showing the average standardized departures of the minimum stream flows from the record 

period average for 1930-2002 for five stream gaging stations in the Eastern Panhandle of West Virginia. [The 

standardized departure is a dimensionless number and the gaging stations in West Virginia analyzed were 

the Shenandoah River at Millville, Cacapon River near Great Cacapon, South Branch Potomac River near 

Springfield, South Branch Potomac River near Petersburg, and the North Fork Shenandoah River at Cootes Store 

in Virginia].

1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

YEAR

-1-2

43210

STANDARDIZED DEPARTURES
52 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Water budgets - by Mark D. Kozar

A water budget is a simple mass balance of inputs to 

and outputs from a drainage basin. The major input for the 

budget was recharge from precipitation. Recharge estimated 

for the simulated period by hydrograph analysis of streamflow 

data for the Hopewell Run at Leetown gaging station using 

separation methods (Rutledge, 1998) was 16.5 in/yr. No other 

major inputs to the basin, such as interbasin transfer of water, 

are known to occur in the Hopewell Run watershed. Outputs 

from the basin include stream flow, withdrawal of water from 

wells, evaporation of water from land and water surfaces, and 

transpiration of water by trees, grasses, and other vegetation. 

Precipitation was measured on the Center (app. 4 in Kozar and 

others, 2007) and at the nearby Martinsburg Airport (table 3). 

The major output, stream discharge from Hopewell Run, was 

measured by the Hopewell Run at Leetown gaging station just 

downstream of the Center and adjusted to account for a small 

diversion. The only component to the water budget which was 

not directly measured was evapotranspiration, which was estimated by difference of the precipitation and total streamflow.

A mathematical representation of the water budget can be 

expressed by the equation

P = SRO + GWD + ET ± δS, (1)

where P is the total precipitation, SRO is the component of 

stream flow that occurs as a result of surface runoff, GWD is 

the streamflow that occurs as a result of ground-water discharge to the stream (base stream flow), ET is evapotranspiration, and δS is the change in ground water storage. Changes 

in storage (δS) were computed by comparing the difference in 

mean discharge between the beginning and ending periods of 

the water year and estimating the net change in storage over 

the 8.95 mi2 drainage basin. As streamflow decreased over the 

two year period, the average change in storage was -4.72 in/yr. 

Therefore, the only unmeasured quantity was ET, which was 

estimated by difference. Given average measured precipitation 

of 38.60 in/yr over the 2-year period, total measured stream 

flow of 19.09 in/yr (surface runoff of 1.36 in/yr and groundwater discharge of 17.73 in/yr) based on hydrograph separation techniques, the water budget equation was rearranged to 

solve for ET by filling in the known terms:

ET = P – (SRO + GWD ± δS) and (2)

ET = 38.60 – (1.36 + 17.73 - 4.72) = 24.23 in/yr.

Having solved for ET, the complete water budget equation can then be written as: 

P = SRO + GWD + ET ± δS and (3)

38.60 = 1.36 + 17.73 + 24.23 – 4.72,

with all terms being expressed as in/yr. The average precipitation for the two-year period at the Martinsburg airport of 

38.60 in/yr and base-flow discharge estimated by hydrograph 

separation of stream-flow data from Hopewell Run of 17.73 

in/yr (Rutledge, 1998) compare favorably to the long-term 

average precipitation for the Martinsburg airport of 39.39 in/yr 

and recharge of 16.5 in/yr estimated by hydrograph analysis of 

stream-flow data for Hopewell Run using Rorabaugh methods 

(Rutledge, 1998). The difference in the base-flow groundwater discharge and recharge estimates may be attributed to 

the relatively minor amounts of water lost to riparian evapotranspiration. Also, on the basis of hydrograph separation, 

approximately 93 percent of water in Hopewell Run is derived 

from discharge of ground water and only 7 percent is estimated to be derived from surface runoff.

Aquifer Properties - by Kurt J. McCoy

Ground-water flow is controlled by a network of fractures, in both carbonate and shale areas in the Leetown 

area. The hydraulic system in the carbonate rocks has been 

conceptualized as a heterogeneous network of fractures and 

conduits separated by a relatively impermeable crystalline 

mass. The ability of the aquifer to transmit water is almost 

solely related to the degree of connectivity of these fracture 

networks. Representation of ground-water movement through 

this intricate fracture network requires knowledge of the 

orientation of fractures and quantification of aquifer properties 

such as transmissivity (T) and storativity (S). Aquifer properties are most commonly defined by conducting tests in which 

wells are pumped to disturb the flow system and the aquifer 

response (drawdown or recovery in pumping or observation 

wells) is monitored. At the Center and surrounding area, a rigorous program of aquifer testing was developed to evaluate the 

spatial variability of aquifer properties. To assess the issues 

of scale, well productivity, and the role of structural boundaries, a series of single-well, step-drawdown, multiple-well, and 

packer tests were conducted. 

In fractured rock environments, aquifer properties are 

routinely evaluated using analytical techniques that by design 

may be insufficient to characterize the heterogeneity of the 

system. Characteristics such as fracture aperture, spacing, 

orientation, and hydraulic connectivity that are unique to different portions of the carbonate aquifer at the Center make the 

interpretation of analytical results difficult. The type-curve 

matching method of Theis (1935) is the most commonly used 

analytical technique for aquifer test analysis. However, use 

of the Theis method or other radial-flow methods based on an 

equivalent porous media (EPM) approach may be problematic 

for analysis of well data in this terrain. Nevertheless, the aquifer has commonly been conceptualized as homogeneous and 

isotropic and the fracture network assumed to behave as an 

EPM (Trainer and Watkins, 1975; Jones, 1991; Shultz and others, 1995). Although the Theis method relies on hydrogeological assumptions that are unrealistic given the field situation at 

the Center, it can provide a comparison of the relative magnitude of aquifer properties in different portions of the carbonate 

aquifer. Simple radial-continuum models can be successfully 
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 53

applied in fractured carbonates with an understanding of their 

limitations (Allen and Michel, 1998). 

Single-well aquifer tests

Single-well aquifer tests were conducted at 57 well locations on and adjacent to the Center (fig. 1 and table 1). All 

constant-discharge test data were plotted on log-log and semilog graphs to evaluate and enhance certain features of the data. 

Analysis of the data in this manner allows the application 

of appropriate type-curve solutions. In this case, type-curve 

analysis was preferentially limited, if applicable, to periods in 

which radial flow was evident. More complicated methods 

yielding solutions for fractured rock aquifers that evaluate 

both early and late-time data were not used for the single-well 

tests. Although likely applicable, fractured-rock solutions 

require longer pumping periods, which were not practical for 

most of the private domestic wells tested. The majority of 

the data were analyzed using the Cooper-Jacob straight-line 

(Cooper and Jacob, 1946) or Theis curve-matching (Theis, 

1935) methods.

Water levels were initially measured and recorded at 

each test site at the time of arrival of field personnel on the 

site. Additional measurements were made as test preparations were completed and finally when the pressure transducer 

was secured in place. In most cases, two to three background 

water-level measurements were made with an electric tape 

in the 15-30 minutes prior to starting the aquifer test. Some 

tests were conducted using a portable, submersible pump. A 

control box was used to start and maintain the pumping rate. 

In other cases, drawdown tests were conducted using in-place 

residential homeowner well pumps. Outside spigots were used 

to start and control the pump, and homeowners were asked to 

avoid using additional water for the duration of the tests. For 

all tests, outflow of the well was metered with a flow-through 

totaling meter. A discharge rate was recorded at the start of 

the test and checked periodically. Final discharge rates were 

computed as the total flow volume divided by the time of 

duration of pumping. The period of pumping generally lasted 

30 minutes and recovery data were observed and recorded for 

at least 100 minutes after pumping ceased. Transmissivity 

data from the single-well aquifer tests are summarized in table 

7 and clearly show the wide variability in aquifer properties 

typical of a triple porosity karst ground-water flow system 

containing matrix, fracture, and conduit porosity.

Step-drawdown tests

To meet ground-water supply needs, the locations of three 

potential water-supply wells at the Center were chosen based 

on the statistical analysis of over 300 specific capacity tests 

conducted in Jefferson and Berkeley Counties, West Virginia 

(McCoy and others 2005a, 2005b). The tests were conducted 

on wells completed in the same formations that crop out in 

the study area. The statistical analyses indicated that potential 

high yielding wells in the region are commonly associated 

with cross-strike faults and thrust faults, complex geologic 

structures such as overturned anticlines and synclines, and are 

most prevalent in geologic formations of the Beekmantown 

Group. These characteristics were used to locate and drill 

three wells; one located on a thrust fault (Jef-0586 – site 60 on 

fig. 1 and in tables 1 and 8), a second on a cross-strike fault 

(Jef-0752 – site 61 on fig. 1 and in tables 1 and 8), and the 

third on the eastern limb of an overturned anticline (Jef-0753 

– site 62 on fig. 1 and tables 1 and 8). At the time of drilling, 

each well intersected multiple water-bearing fractures with 

total estimated yields exceeding 100 gal/min. 

Optimal pumping schemes for each of the three wells 

were defined using step-drawdown tests (app. 4, figs. 1-5). 

Step-drawdown tests provide an evaluation of well performance attributed to incremental changes in pumping rate. For 

the tests at the Center, specific capacity (pumping rate divided 

by drawdown in the well) was calculated for each change in 

pumping rate using the Hantush-Bierschenk method (Hantush 

1964; Bierschenk 1963). These methods define incremental 

drawdown by extrapolating observed data beyond the end of 

each step and subsequently calculating the difference in drawdown from previous steps over a fixed-time interval. For the 

step-drawdown tests, the duration of each step for each well 

was variable. Generally, turbidity of the discharged water was 

high at the initiation of pumping and following all subsequent 

increases in rate. In most cases, turbidity failed to clear at 

the highest pumping rates (> 200 gal/min) but was generally absent or significantly reduced at lower withdrawal rates 

(≤100 gal/min). 

Specific capacity calculated for all steps at each well 

(table 8) ranged from 6.5 to 313 gallons per minute per foot 

of drawdown (gal/min/ft). The highest values were found in 

Jef-0753 (well 62 on fig. 1 and table 1) which is located in an 

area characterized by extensional related fracturing of the eastern limb of an overturned anticline (Dean, 1966). The maximum value (313 gal/min/ft) at Jef-0753 represents 0.08 ft of 

drawdown during pumping at 25 gal/min, but specific capacity remained high (37.9 gal/min/ft) with minimal drawdown 

(<4.0 ft) even at a withdrawal rate of 150 gal/min. Similar 

values were estimated by McCoy and others (2005a, 2005b) 

in Jefferson and Berkeley Counties, West Virginia. However, 

since pumping rates and periods for these tests were typically 

less than or equal to 15 gal/min and less than 1 hour in duration, specific capacity estimates for the wells tested in the two 

county studies may yield slightly different estimates. 

Two tests were conducted on Jef-0753 to evaluate the 

difference in well productivity during the fall and spring 

seasons. At a pumping rate of approximately 150 gal/min, 

specific capacity is slightly lower in the fall than in the spring 

when the well was pumped at a rate of 180 gal/min. For the 

test conducted in the fall, a short period of pumping at 239 gal/

min resulted in an additional 7 ft of drawdown and an increase 

in turbidity that failed to return to acceptable levels (5 Nephelometric turbidity units [NTU]) once pumping rates were 

reduced.

The target pumping rate of 300 gal/min at Jef-0586 (site 

60 on fig. 1 and in table 1) was not met before the test was ter-
54 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Table 7. Summary statistics for transmissivities (T) in ft2/day calculated from single well aquifer tests for 

geologic units near Leetown, West Virginia

Conococheague 

Limestone

Stoufferstown 

Member

Stonehenge 

Limestone

Rockdale 

Run 

Formation

Middle/Upper 

Ordovician 

Units

Martinsburg 

Formation

Number of Wells 12 6 16 19 2 2

Minimum T 0.3 40 3.0 2.0 100 4.0

Maximum T 20,000 10,000 40,000 10,000 3,000 200

Median T 55.0 700 1,250 2,000 1,550 102

Mean T 1,890 2,920 5,300 3,100 1,550 102

Standard deviation 5,731 4,145 10,115 3,479 2,051 139

Coefficient of variation 303% 142% 191% 112% 132% 136%

Table 8. Specific capacities (gal/min//ft) calculated from step-discharge tests conducted at the USGS 

Leetown Science Center, West Virginia

[gal, gallon, min, minute, ft, foot]

Well Step Discharge 

(gal/min)

Specific Capacity 

(gal/min/ft)

Duration of Step 

Interval (min)

Jef-0753 (spring 2006)

(site # 62p on fig. 1)

1 25 313 100

2 157 32.9 100

3 183 30.3 100

Jef-0753 (fall 2005)

(site # 62p on fig. 1)

1 105 32.6 100

2 150 37.9 100

3 176 26.4 100

4 203 26.6 100

Jef-0586

(site # 60p on fig. 1)

1 94 10.8 180

2 170 13.8 180

Jef-0752

(site # 61p on fig. 1)

1 78 11.4 240

2 149 6.5 240

3 235 7.5 240
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 55

minated due to drawdown in nearby Balch Spring. Additional 

monitoring at wells Jef-0793, Jef-0792, Jef-0526, and Jef-0490 

showed near-instantaneous response to incremental changes in 

pumping rate of the production well at radial distances of 302; 

770; 1,540; and 1,600 ft, respectively. The thrust faults (fig. 

2) on which the wells are located are inferred to be a series of 

well-connected preferential ground-water pathways. Drawdown of well Jef-0586 rapidly changed from 13.4 ft to 23.4 

ft at a pumping rate of 254 gal/min. Concerns of subsidence, 

turbidity, and disruption of flow to Balch Spring precluded the 

continuation of the test at higher pumping rates. 

Overall there were no water-level trends with regards to 

time of pumping or increased pumping rate among the wells. 

From the data, it appears (app. 4, figs. 1-5) that extensional 

related fractures along the eastern limb of an overturned 

anticline may provide more sustainable water volumes than 

comparable locations along compression or shear zones. With 

considerations for turbidity, the threshold values for pumping 

determined for the wells Jef-0753, Jef-0586, and Jef-0752 are 

150, 100, and 100 gal/min, respectively.

Multiple-well aquifer tests

At the Center, radial and linear flow models were used 

to evaluate the results of seven multiple-well aquifer tests. 

Results from single-well tests (McCoy and others, 2005a, 

2005b) have shown that aquifer hydraulic properties range 

over several orders of magnitude within tens of feet. While 

single-well analysis can be used to define structural controls 

on flow, understanding the complexities attributed to preferential karst and fracture ground-water pathways requires a 

more comprehensive evaluation with the use of monitoring 

wells. The objectives of the multiple-well aquifer tests were 

to describe the storage properties of the aquifer and assess 

hydraulic behavior of the aquifer attributed to fracture flow. 

During this phase of aquifer testing emphasis was placed 

on characterization of the faults and adjacent rock mass near 

the Center’s main research buildings. This area coincides with 

the conduit dominated area of coalescing thrust faults and 

cross-strike faults. All aquifer tests were of constant-discharge 

type, ranging in duration from 100 minutes to 72 hours, and 

with discharge rates of 8 gal/min to 93 gal/min. 

Evaluation of time-series data from aquifer tests requires 

careful consideration of well-bore storage. Well-bore storage 

effects occur when most of the water discharged from a well 

is attributed to water stored in the borehole and not to inflow 

from the tested formation. Well-bore storage is noted by a 1:1 

slope on a log-log plot of time versus drawdown, or a distinct 

“hump” in first-derivative plots of drawdown against the logarithm of time (app. 4, fig. 6). 

Derivative plots can be used to identify the effects of 

well-bore storage and hydrologic boundaries, and periods of 

radial flow (Spane and Wurstner, 1993). The derivative of 

pressure with respect to the log of time enhances less obvious features unnoted in time-drawdown plots, as it is more 

sensitive to small variation in the pressure change during 

testing. Different segments of drawdown curves can be used 

to identify dominant flow regimes and valid periods of testing 

for radial-flow analysis. The result is a more rigorous estimate 

of aquifer properties and a better conceptual understanding of 

the aquifer. 

Assumptions of radial flow and use of radial-flow 

solutions are adequate when the pressure derivative curve is 

horizontal. Non-radial flow, evidenced by the test data, plot 

linearly on a log-log plot and are shown as deviations from the 

horizontal in derivative curves. This depicts the importance of 

identifying periods of radial flow, for which radial-flow solutions are most valid. Attempting to fit radial-flow solutions 

to time segments before or after these periods could result 

in significant error in transmissivity estimates. Plots of each 

test are shown in Appendix 4 and figures 7-12, and resulting 

aquifer properties, calculated using radial flow solutions, are 

shown in table 9.

At all locations, steep drawdown gradients were observed 

in the pumped well during pumping. Substantially less drawdown was typically observed in associated monitoring wells. 

Analysis of monitoring well data such as these can easily be 

misinterpreted in diffuse flow portions of the aquifer, subsequently producing transmissivity estimates that are much 

higher than actual values. It is likely that the hydraulic connection between wells in diffuse flow portions of the aquifer is 

much lower than estimates of transmissivity would suggest. 

In one example from a diffuse portion of the aquifer, pumping well Jef-0601 (site 37 on fig. 1 and in table 

1) produced instantaneous drawdown in Jef-0585 (site 38 

on fig. 1 and in table 1) that is along strike of bedding. A 

one-minute delayed response in drawdown at wells Jef-0597 

(site 40 on fig. 1 and in table 1) and Jef-0592 (site 39 on fig. 

1 and in table 1), that are perpendicular to strike, is presumably attributed to bed-limited permeability (app. 4, fig. 13). 

Similar delayed responses of 10 to 17 minutes were noted in 

wells located perpendicular to longitudinal faults (app. 4, figs. 

10-11). Values of transmissivity from these monitor wells 

represent the ability of the fracture network adjacent the fault 

to transmit water. Instantaneous response to pumping along 

strike of the longitudinal faults was seen at distances ranging from 10 to 266 ft, and is evidence of laterally continuous 

fracturing along that zone. Although similarly delayed in 

response, pumping in karstic areas at wells Jef-0591 (site 50 

on fig. 1, in table 1, and in app. 4, fig. 9) and Jef-0584 (site 49 

on fig. 1, in table 1, and in app. 4, fig. 12) produced near uniform amounts of drawdown in both strike parallel and strike 

perpendicular directions. In addition, time-drawdown curves 

from observation wells in those tests are of similar shape. In 

these areas, the highly fractured network may allow nearradial flow or the karst area may be located at the intersection 

of two orthogonal fracture systems where flow is great in 

either direction. 
56 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Straddle-packer tests

The carbonate aquifer in the Leetown area is highly 

heterogeneous, and its hydraulic properties vary by orders of 

magnitude that can be attributed to the diversity of fracture 

orientation, size, and connectivity. The ability of the aquifer 

to transmit water depends entirely upon the network of interconnecting fractures, as the surrounding rock mass is mostly 

impervious. Aquifer hydraulic properties determined from 

aquifer response to extended periods of pumping incorporate 

many fractures over a large area. Results from these aquifer 

tests are indicative of a composite fracture network and require 

careful consideration of aquifer heterogeneity. However, these 

tests fail to fully characterize the roles of individual fractures 

within the karst continuum. Further, discrete fracture zones 

may be appropriately characterized by assuming that laminar 

and parallel flow conditions are bulk hydraulic properties of a 

nearly radial flow regime (Carlsson and Olson, 1992). 

Using the BAT3 (Bedrock Aquifer Transportable Testing 

Tool) (Shapiro, 2001) system developed by the USGS, a series 

of packer tests were conducted in wells Jef-0601, Jef-0585, 

and Jef-0592 (sites 37, 38, and 39, on fig. 1 and in table 1) 

at the Center to evaluate the ability of individual fractures 

to transmit water in a diffuse-flow dominated portion of the 

aquifer. Test intervals were determined from borehole log 

analyses. A packer assembly is simply a rubber bladder that is 

expanded against the side of the borehole to prevent leakage of 

water between the intervals above and below the packer. Two 

packers were used for the tests, which isolated an approximately 5-ft interval of the rock allowing individual fractures to 

be hydraulically tested. Three pressure transducers, one above 

the upper packer, one below the lower packer, and a third in 

between the packers, were used to measure pressure (piezometric) head changes in those zones. A pump and a fluid injection port were installed in the interval between the packers to 

allow fluid injection or pumping of the individual fractures for 

aquifer test analyses.

Transmissivity results were analyzed from isolated intervals and are summarized in table 10. From data in table 10 it is 

evident that transmissivity ranges over three orders of magnitude (1.8 x 10-6 to 5.9 x 10-3 to feet squared per day [ft2

/d]) in 

the diffuse-flow dominated portion of the aquifer, indicating 

a high variability in the hydraulic properties of individual 

fracture zones. Although a general decrease in transmissivity 

with depth is evident, it does not appear to be correlated with 

a decrease in fracture aperture. Despite the large number of 

fractures in these boreholes, it is thought that most are unproductive, discontinuous, and poorly interconnected. Supporting 

evidence from borehole logs indicate that in diffuse-flow portions of the aquifer, the majority of flow occurs only through 

one or two of the fractures intersecting the borehole.

In summary, the extreme range in transmissivity among 

individual fractures in the diffuse-flow dominated portion of 

the aquifer (5.9 x 10-3 to 1.8 x 10-6 ft2/d) and the solutionally 

enlarged fractures (conduits) within the conduit dominated 

portion of the aquifer (2.0 x 103

 to 1.4 x 104 ft2/d) is common in karst aquifers and can be even more pronounced in 

areas with large caves and interconnected solution conduits. 

The flow system in the Leetown area is a triple-porosity flow 

system with small matrix porosity representing one end of the 

karst continuum and solutionally enlarged conduits representing the other end of the continuum. Fractures of various 

aperture width fall in the intermediate interval between these 

extremes and typically have transmissivities somewhere 

between 5.9 x 10-3 and 2.0 x 103

 ft2/d. Proper management of 

such aquifers, including mathematical modeling of groundwater flow in the aquifer, requires detailed knowledge of the 

distribution of fractures across the entire continuum, both 

vertically and horizontally within the aquifer. 

Ground-water flow - by Mark D. Kozar

The conceptual model of ground-water flow in the Jefferson and Berkeley County, West Virginia, areas has been modified on the basis of borehole- and surface-geophysical data 

and geologic mapping conducted as part of this investigation. 

A ground-water flow model developed as part of this investigation (Kozar and others 2007) also helped test and revise the 

conceptual model of ground-water flow in the Leetown area. 

Focused recharge is a dominant process only when surface 

runoff occurs, typically as a result of intense local rainfall. 

While focused recharge to sinkholes can and does occur, the 

dominant process of ground-water recharge is areally diffuse 

precipitation over a broad area. Precipitation falling on the 

surface quickly infiltrates the soil and regolith and percolates 

into the upper epikarst, a zone of intense weathering that 

extends from land surface to a depth of approximately 30 to 60 

ft (table 11). 

The ground-water flow system is a triple-porosity aquifer 

matrix with intergranular porosity and small micro fractures 

providing minor storage of water. A dominant set of diffuse 

fractures provide the majority of storage, and a system of 

solutionally enlarged fractures act as drains for the intricate 

network of primary and secondary porosity features (Kozar 

and others, 2007). The majority of solutionally enlarged 

conduits occur in a relatively thin zone within the epikarst 

but some smaller conduits occur at depths as great as 200 ft 

bls. The epikarst is characterized by the presence of solutionally enlarged bedding plane separations and high angle joints 

which allow rapid infiltration of water to the deeper bedrock 

aquifer. Below the epikarst, a zone of less weathered bedrock 

is present.

This zone of moderately fractured bedrock does not typically contain a high density of solutionally enlarged conduits 

and the hydraulic conductivity is approximately 2 or 3 times 

less than the epikarst. Below a depth of about 250 ft bls, the 

aperture of bedrock fractures decreases significantly, and the 

estimated hydraulic conductivity, from aquifer test and surface 

geophysical resistivity data, is approximately half that of the 

intermediate zone (Kozar and others, 2007).

Flow of ground water through the epikarst can be rapid, 

on the order of weeks, especially if flow is concentrated in 
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 57

Table 9. Radial-flow model results from multiple-well aquifer tests conducted at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West 

Virginia

[gpm, gallons per minute; ft, foot; ft2,/d, feet squared per day; C-J, Cooper-Jacob method] 

Test No. Pumping well 1 Pumping rate 

(gpm)

Observation 

well 1

Radial distance (ft)Transmissivity (ft2

/d)

Storativity 

(1)

Method

1 Jef-0318(59) 90.0 Jef-0490(58p) 266 3,900 0.0003 C-J (1946)

2 Jef-0490(58) 93.0 Jef-0318(59p) 266 3,900 0.0022 C-J (1946)

3 Jef-0591(50) 14.0 Jef-0590(48) 147 19,700 0.0001 C-J (1946)

Jef-0584(49) 141 19,700 0.0001 C-J (1946)

4 Jef-0581(57) 80.0 Jef-0793(99) 10 11,300 0.0031 Theis (1935)

Jef-0603(34) 260

Jef-0599(54) 413 7,400 0.0037 Theis (1935)

Jef-0586(60p) 433 9,900 0.0055 Theis (1935)

5 Jef-0490(58) 69.0 Jef-0318(59p) 266 5,600 0.0086 Theis (1935)

Jef-0591(50) 387 4,800 0.0900 Theis (1935)

Jef-0590(48) 434 4,800 0.0900 Theis (1935)

6 Jef-0584(49) 15.0 Jef-0591(50) 141 9,900 0.0077 C-J (1946)

Jef-0526(51) 180 7,200 0.0026 C-J (1946)

7 Jef-0601(65) 8.20 Jef-0597(40) 25 110 0.0027 C-J (1946)

Jef-0585(38) 50

Jef-0592(39) 50 110 0.0027 C-J (1946)

Table 10. Transmissivities computed from straddle packer tests conducted at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia

[Site locations shown on fig. 1 and in table 1. Abbreviations: ft bls, feet below land surface; ft2/d, feet squared per day; BD, below detection limits; I, 

injection test; P, pumping test; --, no analysis] 

Well Interval top 

(ft bls)

Interval bottom 

(ft bls)

Transmissivity 

(ft2

/d)

Test 

Method

Analysis Method Total fracture aperture for interval (ft)

Jef-0601 36.2 42.9 8.6 X 10-4 I Transient Radial 0.02

52.6 59.4 5.4 X 10-4 I Steady-State Radial 0.60

68.1 74.9 1.5 X 10-4 I Steady-State Radial 0.29

91.1 97.9 BD I -- 0.32

109.5 116.3 1.5 X 10-3 I Steady-State Radial 0.65

144.4 151.2 BD I -- 0.39

218.0 224.8 6.2 X 10-4 I Steady-State Radial 0.74

242.1 bottom of hole 1.5 X 10-5 I Steady-State Radial 1.46

265.1 bottom of hole BD I Steady-State Radial 0.31

Jef-0585 40 46.78 7.5 X 10-4 I Transient Radial 0.19

54.34 61.12 1.8 X 10-6 I Steady-State Radial 0.46

69.34 76.12 8.1 X 10-6 I Transient Radial 0.32

114.34 121.12 BD I -- 0.17

231.34 238.12 2.0 X 10-5 I Steady-State Radial 0.44

285.31 bottom of hole 2.7 X 10-5 P Steady-State Radial 0.30

Jef-0592 Top Hole 47.89 5.9 X 10-3 P Steady-State Radial 1.03

60.41 67.19 2.0 X 10-3 I Steady-State Radial 0.25
58 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

solutionally enlarged conduits. Flow within the intermediate 

zones is much slower, with estimates of ground-water age for 

the carbonate rocks in the region ranging from 15 to 50 years 

(McCoy and Kozar, 2007a). There are few data to approximate 

the age of ground water in the deeper portions of the aquifer. 

It is likely that ground water flows slowly at depths greater 

than about 300 ft bls; one chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) analysis 

of water from a 475 ft deep well on the Center indicated an 

apparent ground-water age of approximately 50 years. Water 

from this well is likely a mixture of some older and younger 

components and water from greater depths is likely much 

older.

Topography also has a major effect on ground-water flow. 

Depth to water on hilltops is typically greater than that in valley or hillside settings. Uplands usually are in areas of more 

resistive rock. The bedrock underlying the Center comprises 

sedimentary rocks, chiefly limestone, dolomite, and shale. The 

bedrock, especially low permeability lithologic units such as 

the Martinsburg Formation and the Conococheague Limestone 

(fig. 2), controls ground-water flow by acting as a barrier to 

water moving down the hydrologic gradient and across the 

strike of the bedding. This retardation of cross-strike flow is 

especially pronounced in the Leetown area, where the bedding 

typically dips at steep angles. Geologic structures that disrupt 

the rocks in cross-strike directions, especially highly permeable cross-strike faults and fracture zones, provide avenues 

through which water can flow laterally across or through strata 

with low primary permeability. These rock formations also 

typically have lower hydraulic conductivities than the more 

permeable bedrock in lowland areas. The Conococheague 

Limestone and Martinsburg Formation, and to a lesser extent 

the New Market Limestone (fig. 2), are the principal lowerpermeability units which tend to act as barriers to water 

flowing down topographic gradients (Kozar and others, 2007). 

Within the study area, local ground-water flow is primarily 

from the topographically higher uplands to the east towards 

Opequon Creek to the west. Although ground-water flow in 

lower permeability units is impeded on its westward path, 

cross-strike faults and oblique faults provide avenues along 

which ground water can flow either across or through the less 

permeable units. The lower permeability Martinsburg Formation exerts a dominant control on ground-water flow, impeding 

westward flow of ground-water towards Opequon Creek and 

forcing water to flow along solutionally enlarged faults which 

cross the Center (Kozar and others, 2007). The hydrogeologic 

setting of the Leetown and Center area is desirable from a 

ground-water development perspective, as large quantities 

of ground water are funneled through the area. This is the 

primary reason for the highly productive springs that have 

historically supplied ground water for Center operations.

Dye Tracer Tests and Analyses - by Malcolm S. 

Field

Ground-water flow rates and trajectories at the Leetown 

Science Center are an issue of concern. The primary concern 

is the low flows of Balch, Blue, and Gray Springs during 

drought, but additional concerns are the recharge areas to the 

springs. For example, to the east and up gradient of the Center 

are the Leetown Pesticide Site and the Jefferson County Landfill (sites A and B on fig. 1 respectively and in table 1), a U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency Superfund site (CERCLIS 

I.D. WVD980693402) where pesticide compounds consisting of isomers of benzenehexachloride (BHC), DDT, DDE, 

DDD, endrin, endosulfan, and aldrin were detected. Potential 

Table 10. Transmissivities computed from straddle packer tests conducted at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia

[Site locations shown on fig. 1 and in table 1. Abbreviations: ft bls, feet below land surface; ft2/d, feet squared per day; BD, below detection limits; I, 

injection test; P, pumping test; --, no analysis] 

Well Interval top 

(ft bls)

Interval bottom 

(ft bls)

Transmissivity 

(ft2

/d)

Test 

Method

Analysis Method Total fracture aperture for interval (ft)

78.41 85.19 2.3 X 10-5 I Steady-State Radial 0.52

91.41 98.19 1.8 X 10-5 I Steady-State Radial 0.22

125.41 132.19 BD I -- 0.38

138.41 145.19 1.8 X 10-4 P Steady-State Radial 0.50

151.41 158.19 3.8 X 10-4 I Steady-State Radial 0.10

174.41 181.19 7.3 X 10-6 I Steady-State Radial 0.19

216.41 223.19 2.7 X 10-6 I Steady-State Radial 0.22

239.11 bottom of hole 4.6 X 10-6 I Steady-State Radial 1.23
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 59

Table 11.— Depth of regolith and epikarst as seen in drill logs at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia [ft bls, feet below land surface; nd, not determined, +, yield may be higher but could not be quantified; na, not applicable; gpm, gallons per minute, (*), report id number as on figure 1 and in Table 1]

USGS site name 

and report id 

number (*)

Depth 

drilled 

(ft bls)

Depth of 

clay layer 

(ft bls)

Depth to 

deepest 

void 

(ft bls)

Depth of 

weathered 

rock 

(ft bls)

Depth to 

bedrock 

(ft bls)

Total yield and depth of fractures yielding water 

(gpm - ft bls)

Probable 

Epikarst Depth 

(ft bls)1

Jef-0590 (48) 160 0-10.0 131.0 na 10.0 5 gpm @ 35 ft 38.0

Jef-0584 (49) 161 0-14.0 105.0 na 14.0 40 gpm @ 55 and 67 ft 55.0

Jef-0591 (50) 105 0-10.0 91.0 na 16.5 100+ gpm @ 34, 49, 65, 71, and 78 ft 60.5

Jef-0595 (47) 51 0-8.0 30.0 na 8.0 21+ gpm - nd 30.0

Jef-0586 (60p) 201 0-4.0 155.0 na 4.0 300 gpm @ 31, 47, 61, 115, 131, and 155 ft 61.0

Jef-0599 (54) 37.5 0-12.5 18.0 na 12.5 5 gpm @ 14 ft 37.5

Jef-0587 (36) 410 0-22.0 39.5 22-26 26.0 18 gpm @ 115, 372, and 399 ft 26.0

Jef-0596 (35) 101 0-22.5 No voids na 22.5 7 gpm @ 90 ft 22.5

Jef-0585 (38) 326 0-11.0 35.0 11-13 13.0 6 gpm @ 106 and 313 ft 35.0

Jef-0592 (39) 321 0-18.0 No voids 18-20 20.0 22 gpm @ 37, 61, 71, and 133 ft 38.0

Jef-0597 (40) 51 0-12.5 37.5 na 12.5 35+ gpm - nd 37.5

Jef-0589 (41) 260 0-20.0 52.0 20-25 25.0 20 gpm @ 29, 137, 170, and 250 ft 30.0

Jef-0598 (42) 42 0-24.0 30.0 na 24.0 7 gpm @ 24 ft 38.0

Jef-0588 (43) 220 0-12.0 216.0 12-28 28.0 300 gpm @ 41, 102, and 142 ft 56.0

Jef-0600 (44) 79 0-16.5 66.0 16.5-18 18.0 100 gpm @ 25 and 70 ft 57.0

Jef-0593 (46) 56 0-1.0 35.0 1-2 2.0 20 gpm @ 35 ft 35.0

Jef-0594(45) 41 0-3.0 24.0 na 3.0 20 gpm @ 16 and 27 ft 24.0

1 The probable depth of the epikarst is determined by the combined interval of clay zones, regolith, weathered rock, and voids.
60 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

transport of contaminants in ground water from these sites is a 

concern.

Tracer tests conducted in the Leetown area were limited 

to the immediate vicinity of the Center to provide additional 

hydraulic information about general flow directions, velocities, and mean residence time of ground water. Additionally, 

the tracer tests provided information on how ground-water 

flow is affected by withdrawal of water from springs and wells 

for use at the Center.

Previous Tracer Work

Seven tracer tests were conducted at the Center in 1979 

and 1980 using fluorometric tracers (Jones and Deike, 1981). 

These early tests were among the first efforts to characterize 

the flow of ground water in the conduit-dominated portion of 

the flow system in the region. Travel times for the previous 

tests all indicated long ground-water transit times for a karst 

aquifer; 58 to 81 day travel times for dye recovery at resurgence points were documented over distances ranging from 

0.9 to 2.21 miles. These early tracer tests show that travel 

times are uncharacteristically long for a karst aquifer and typically are detected at multiple resurgence points. This is indicative of a karst system with a significant slow-flow component 

connected to a rapid-flow component typical of more permeable, solutionally enlarged fractures. The tests also determined 

that dye recovery usually occurs following significant precipitation.

Tracer tests were also conducted at the Leetown Pesticide 

Site and the Jefferson County Landfill area (NUS, 1986, p. 

5-48). Although these tests focused primarily on detecting 

leakage from the landfill with expected detection in the site 

monitoring wells, at least one test resulted in recovery at the 

Center (Gray Spring) 42 days after injection, which is slightly 

more rapid than reported by Jones and Deike (1981). The 

time required for tracer breakthrough indicates a flow velocity 

of 171 feet per day (ft/d), which is extremely slow compared 

to a more conduit-dominated karst aquifer such as that in 

Greenbrier County, West Virginia with typical velocities of 

about 1,000-10,000 ft/d (Jones, 1997). Each of the tracer test 

recoveries were found to coincide with precipitation events 

(NUS, 1986, p. 5-55–5-56) suggesting increased flow velocity 

or flushing after heavy rainfall.

These findings were also seen in additional tracer tests 

conducted in other areas of Jefferson County, West Virginia in 

1987 and 1988 (Kozar and others, 1991). Heavy precipitation 

was found to mobilize dye that was being sequestered within 

the subsurface, allowing it to flow down gradient (Kozar 

and others, 1991). When not mobilized by precipitation, it is 

believed that a significant portion of the dye either remains 

relatively immobile within the subsurface or moves slowly 

down gradient through the less permeable, diffuse-flow matrix 

of interconnected fractures that are drained by the more permeable solution conduits (Kozar and others, 1991).

Tracer Tests

Eight dye tracer tests were conducted during 2004-2005 

in the Leetown area (fig. 25) as part of this investigation to 

provide additional data on ground-water flow paths, determine 

typical ground-water flow velocities in the conduit dominated 

portion of the aquifer, to better understand the role of conduits 

and large solutionally interconnected fractures in conveying 

ground water, and to refine the conceptual model of groundwater flow in the Leetown area. These tests were conducted 

using fluorescent tracers, primarily Rhodamine WT (C.I. AR 

388) and to a lesser extent sodium fluorescein (C.I. AY 73).

Dye was either released into surface streams (Tests 1 and 

2) or injected into piezometers in highly permeable bedrock 

(Tests 4 and 6) or sinkholes (Tests 3, 7, and 8) (fig. 25 and 

table 12). An additional tracer test (Test 5) was conducted by 

injecting dye into a hole augered in a dry stream bed coincident with a thrust fault (fig. 25 and table 12). Except for 

the stream tracer tests, which were conducted to assess the 

potential for stream leakage into ground water, all injections 

consisted of mixing and delivering the dyes into the piezometers or sinkholes with a constant stream of water, followed 

by flushing with 2,000 gallons of water to assure dye entry 

into ground water. Suspected resurgence points, consisting 

of down-gradient springs, wells, and streams (fig. 25 and 

table 13), were then monitored by grab samples or by use of 

automated water samplers on a regular schedule. The sampling interval ranged from less than one per hour to one per 

day depending on the length of the test and distance from the 

point of injection. A prime emphasis of the tracer tests was to 

determine transport rates and trajectories from injection points 

to recovery sites. No effort was made to determine tracer mass 

recoveries because the manner in which water is pumped from 

the Center springs made it impossible to establish accurate 

discharge estimates needed to assess flux changes. 

Results of Tracer Tests

A discussion of each of the eight tracer tests conducted 

for this investigation are presented in appendix 5A. Table 14 

lists the peak times of travel and peak velocities for the eight 

tracer tests. It is apparent from table 14 that flow times and 

velocities varied considerably throughout the investigation, 

probably as a result of subsurface conditions developed during 

wet and dry periods. The raw data for the individual tracer 

tests are presented in appendix 5B. Tracer tests conducted as 

part of this investigation agree well with the ground-water 

flow velocities and directions obtained by Jones and Deike 

(1981) and NUS (1986). The data provided by these tracer 

tests indicate relatively slow ground-water flow velocities 

when tracer dye was released into sinkholes and augured holes 

(table 14). Coupled with the relatively poor tracer recoveries 

obtained, this indicates that much of the tracer dye is retained 

in the epikarstic zone, flow in phreatic solution conduits may 

be blocked by fallen rocks or sediment, or both. These slow 

flow velocities and weak recoveries are not typical of most 

karstic terranes but are easily explained.
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 61

Figure 25. Ground-water flow connections determined from dye tracer studies conducted in the Leetown area, West 

Virginia. [Numbers next to injection site symbols designate the number of the test and letters next to monitoring site 

symbols designate the letter for the monitoring sites discussed in the dye tracer test section of the report and in Appendix 

5.]

EXPLANATION

39o 20'

39o 21'

77o 56' 77o 55' 77o 54'

Base from U.S. Geological Survey 1:24,000 Middleway, W.Va. topographic quadrangle

SpringsMonitoring sites and identifier

Injection sites 2004-2005Injection sites (Jones, 1997)

Ground water

Ground water (unconfirmed)

Surface water

Surface water (unconfirmed)

Dye Path Results 2004-2005

Dye Path Results 1997

Leetown Dye Tracer Tests
62 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Table 12. Locations and date and time of recent tracer injections conducted in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[lbs, pounds; o, degrees; ‘, minutes, “, decimal seconds; N, north; W, West]

Test No. Tracer Dye Type Injection Location When Injected Mass Injected, 

(lbs) Common Name Color Index Latitude (oN) Longitude (oW) Date Time

1 Rhodamine WT Acid Red 388 39o20 ́14.0 ́ ́ 77o56 ́15.0 ́ ́ 04/20/2004 11:34 AM 0.635

2 Rhodamine WT Acid Red 388 39o20 ́39.0 ́ ́ 77o54 ́42.0 ́ ́ 05/17/2004 10:30 AM 0.635

3 Rhodamine WT Acid Red 388 39o21 ́13.0 ́ ́ 77o54 ́59.7 ́ ́ 06/17/2004 11:20 AM 1.05

4 Rhodamine WT Acid Red 388 39o20 ́37.8 ́ ́ 77o55 ́25.9 ́ ́ 07/22/2004 9:30 AM 1.05

5 Rhodamine WT Acid Red 388 39o20 ́36.1 ́ ́ 77o55 ́46.1 ́ ́ 08/31/2004 11:20 AM 3.5

6 Fluorescein Acid Yellow 73 39o20 ́18.2 ́ ́ 77o55 ́41.8 ́ ́ 10/07/2004 10:20 AM 0.66

7 Rhodamine WT Acid Red 388 39o20 ́59.2 ́ ́ 77o55 ́40.6 ́ ́ 10/07/2004 12:30 PM 6.0

8 Rhodamine WT Acid Red 388 39o20 ́19.9 ́ ́ 77o54 ́12.3 ́ ́ 04/19/2005 11:22 AM 11.9

Table 13. Locations and distance of tracer-resurgence sampling stations from injection sites, Leetown area, West Virginia.

[ft, feet; o, degrees; ‘, minutes, “, decimal seconds; N, north; W, West]

Test No Injection Site Location Sampling Station Name Sampling Station Location Distance 

(ft) Latitude (oN) Longitude (oW)

1 Owen’s Farm Spring Pond South Branch @ gage 39o21 ́15.9 ́ ́ 77o56 ́00.1 ́ ́ 6,400

East Branch @ gage 39o21 ́15.5 ́ ́ 77o55 ́59.4 ́ ́ 6,360

Ball Field Well 39o21 ́00.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́48.6 ́ ́ 5,180

Production Well A 39o21 ́01.6 ́ ́ 77o55 ́53.5 ́ ́ 5,120

Blue Spring 39o20 ́48.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́45.7 ́ ́ 4,190

Gray Spring 39o20 ́43.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́43.4 ́ ́ 3,900

Balch Spring 39o21 ́10.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́49.5 ́ ́ 6,100

2 E. Branch below Bell 

Spring

South Branch @ gage 39o21 ́15.9 ́ ́ 77o56 ́00.1 ́ ́ 7,200

East Branch @ gage 39o21 ́15.5 ́ ́ 77o55 ́59.4 ́ ́ 7,120

Ball Field Well 39o21 ́00.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́48.6 ́ ́ 5,680

Production Well A 39o21 ́01.6 ́ ́ 77o55 ́53.5 ́ ́ 6,070

Blue Spring 39o20 ́48.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́45.7 ́ ́ 5,120

Gray Spring 39o20 ́43.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́43.4 ́ ́ 4,860

Balch Spring 39o21 ́10.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́49.5 ́ ́ 6,190

East. Branch below Two Springs 39o20 ́56.8 ́ ́ 77o55 ́11.7 ́ ́ 3,760

3 Sinkhole near Stables East Branch @ gage 39o21 ́15.5 ́ ́ 77o55 ́59.4 ́ ́ 4,660

Two Springs 39o20 ́57.4 ́ ́ 77o55 ́00.8 ́ ́ 1,550

East. Branch above Two Springs 39o20 ́54.1 ́ ́ 77o55 ́03.0 ́ ́ 1,900

East. Branch below Two Springs 39o20 ́56.8 ́ ́ 77o55 ́11.7 ́ ́ 2,650

4 Piezometer in Cornfield South Branch @ gage 39o21 ́15.9 ́ ́ 77o56 ́00.1 ́ ́ 4,750

East Branch @ gage 39o21 ́15.5 ́ ́ 77o55 ́59.4 ́ ́ 4,660

Ball Field Well 39o21 ́00.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́48.6 ́ ́ 2,950

Blue Spring 39o20 ́48.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́45.7 ́ ́ 1,910

Gray Spring 39o20 ́43.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́43.4 ́ ́ 1,490
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 63

Table 13. Locations and distance of tracer-resurgence sampling stations from injection sites, Leetown area, West Virginia.

[ft, feet; o, degrees; ‘, minutes, “, decimal seconds; N, north; W, West]

Test No Injection Site Location Sampling Station Name Sampling Station Location Distance 

(ft) Latitude (oN) Longitude (oW)

Gray Spring Overflow 39o20 ́44.0 ́ ́ 77o55 ́42.7 ́ ́ 1,490

Balch Spring 39o21 ́10.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́49.5 ́ ́ 3,860

5 Augured Hole near Pike South Branch @ gage 39o21 ́15.9 ́ ́ 77o56 ́00.1 ́ ́ 4,200

East Branch @ gage 39o21 ́15.5 ́ ́ 77o55 ́59.4 ́ ́ 4,140

Ball Field Well 39o21 ́00.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́48.6 ́ ́ 2,500

Tabb Spring 39o20 ́55.4 ́ ́ 77o55 ́25.3 ́ ́ 1,910

Blue Spring 39o20 ́48.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́45.7 ́ ́ 1,260

Gray Spring 39o20 ́43.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́43.4 ́ ́ 810

Balch Spring 39o21 ́10.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́49.5 ́ ́ 3,540

6 Piezometer on USDA 

Fault

South Branch @ gage 39o21 ́15.9 ́ ́ 77o56 ́00.1 ́ ́ 1,470

East Branch @ gage 39o21 ́15.5 ́ ́ 77o55 ́59.4 ́ ́ 1,390

Ball Field Well 39o21 ́00.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́48.6 ́ ́ 1,860

Tabb Spring 39o20 ́55.4 ́ ́ 77o55 ́25.3 ́ ́ 3,360

Blue Spring 39o20 ́48.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́45.7 ́ ́ 3,020

Gray Spring 39o20 ́43.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́43.4 ́ ́ 3,520

Balch Spring 39o21 ́10.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́49.5 ́ ́ 970

7 Tabb Sinkhole South Branch @ gage 39o21 ́15.9 ́ ́ 77o56 ́00.1 ́ ́ 7,970

East Branch @ gage 39o21 ́15.5 ́ ́ 77o55 ́59.4 ́ ́ 7,910

Ball Field Well 39o21 ́00.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́48.6 ́ ́ 6,290

Blue Spring 39o20 ́48.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́45.7 ́ ́ 5,070

Gray Spring 39o20 ́43.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́43.4 ́ ́ 4,550

Tabb Spring 39o20 ́55.4 ́ ́ 77o55 ́25.3 ́ ́ 5,030

Balch Spring 39o21 ́10.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́49.5 ́ ́ 7,330

8 Sinkhole north of Hite 

Road

East Branch @ gage 39o21 ́15.5 ́ ́ 77o55 ́59.4 ́ ́ 8,420

Blue Spring 39o20 ́48.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́45.7 ́ ́ 8,030

Gray Spring 39o20 ́43.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́43.4 ́ ́ 8,070

Balch Spring 39o21 ́10.7 ́ ́ 77o55 ́49.5 ́ ́ 7,700

Two Springs 39o20 ́57.4 ́ ́ 77o55 ́00.8 ́ ́ 4,440

East. Branch below Two Springs 39o20 ́56.8 ́ ́ 77o55 ́11.7 ́ ́ 6,240

Syncline Well 39o21 ́12.1 ́ ́ 77o54 ́41.4 ́ ́ 2,870

Anticline Well 39o21 ́14.6 ́ ́ 77o54 ́47.9 ́ ́ 2,450
64 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Table 14. Ground-water travel times and velocities for the eight recent tracer tests 

conducted in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

[ft, feet; d, day; ft/d, feet per day]

Tracer Test 

No.

Sampling Stations Transport 

Distance 

(ft)

Peak Time of 

Travel 

(d)

Peak Flow 

Velocity 

(ft/d)

1 Balch Spring 6,100 6 1,020

1 Ball Field Well 5,180 12 430

1 East Branch Hopewell Run 6,360 4 1,600

2 Balch Spring 6,190 2-51 1,240- 3,1001

2 Blue Spring 5,130 5 1,030

2 Gray Spring 4,860 4 1,220

2 Two Springs 3,760 7 540

2 Ball Field Well 5,680 0.88 6,4902

3 Two Springs 1,575 21 75

4 Balch Spring 3,860 12 320

4 Blue Spring 1,910 6 320

4 Gray Spring 1,490 7 210

5 Balch Spring 3,540 15 240

5 Blue Spring 1,260 29 44

5 Gray Spring 810 29 28

5 Tabb Spring 1,910 28 68

6 Balch Spring 970 64-711 14-151

6 East Branch Hopewell Run 1,390 25 56

7 Balch Spring 7,180 12-451 160-6001

7 Blue Spring 5,020 104 48

7 Gray Spring 4,540 142-1461 31-321

8 Balch Spring 7,700 22 350

8 Blue Spring 8,030 15 540

8 Gray Spring 8,070 19 430

8 Two Springs 6,240 15 420

8 Anticline Well 2,450 199 123

8 Syncline Well 2,870 199 143

1

 Two possible travel times and flow velocities are listed as multiple peaks of dye were recovered 

during the tests.

2

 This result may have been affected by recovery of dye from the previous tracer test

3

 These two wells were not continuously sampled and were not sampled earlier during the test. 

Therefore, flow velocity to these wells could be faster than indicated in this table.
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 65

More rapid transit times and generally stronger recoveries were obtained when dye was released in the losing stream 

reaches providing evidence that losing stream reaches provide 

some recharge to the Center springs and wells (app. 5B, figs. 

2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10). Leakage through losing stream beds 

complicated the design of the first two tracer tests and led 

to the modification of the Efficient Hydrologic Tracer Test 

Design (EHTD) program which was used for this project to 

assist in the design of the tracer tests (Field, 2003, 2006). It 

is possible that leakage from the losing branches of Hopewell 

Run caused ground-water to accumulate in subsurface flow 

channels beneath the site slowing ground-water transit times 

and resulting in poor dye recoveries when dye was released 

into sinkholes and augured holes. The effect of leakage of 

streamflow to subsurface flow channels would be to reduce the 

flow of the dye released in the sinkholes or augured holes and 

dilution of the dye resulting in very low recovery concentrations.

A significant issue associated with the dye-tracing study 

relates to the repeated use of Rhodamine WT for most of 

the traces (sodium fluorescein was only used for Tracer test 

No. 6). The potential for recovery of dye from earlier traces 

(Rhodamine WT and sodium fluorescein) may confound the 

results. (It should be noted that all rhodamines have been 

found to degrade to a greenish compound that fluoresces very 

near to that of sodium fluorescein.) However, the potential 

cross-over effect is not considered to be a major problem 

because dye injections were intentionally staggered between 

the north and south sides of the east branch of Hopewell Run 

to avoid cross contamination. On the date that both sodium 

fluorescein and Rhodamine WT were released, a large separation distance coupled with injection locations north and south 

of Hopewell Run were used to prevent cross contamination.

Most significant in addressing potential cross contamination was the reliance on conducting dye analysis on water 

samples using a fluorometer. Dye concentrations in water 

are additive so increasing background is not a concern when 

directly analyzing water samples for dye. In this sense, a 

positive dye recovery may be established if the recovered dye 

peak(s) represent a proportionally significant increase over the 

background.

Travel times obtained for this study were found to be 

comparable with those obtained by Jones and Deike (1981) 

which further leads to confidence in the results obtained for 

this study. Although some of the transport velocities obtained 

for this study were slightly faster than those obtained by Jones 

and Deike, the difference is most likely a reflection of differing hydrologic conditions which facilitated faster transport 

velocities.

Consider, for example, on April 20, 2004, 288 g of Rhodamine WT was released into the south branch of Hopewell 

Run. The vast majority of this release was recovered downstream at the Hopewell Run at Leetown gaging station on the 

south branch of Hopewell Run where peak recovery exceeded 

15 μg/L (app. 5B fig. 1) and Balch Spring where peak recovery exceeded 10 μg/L (app. 5B fig. 3), but where a reasonably 

good recovery was also obtained from the ball field well where 

peak recovery exceeded 1.5 μg/L (fig. 2). On May 17, 2004, 

another 288 g of Rhodamine WT was released into the east 

branch of Hopewell Run. The vast majority of this second 

dye release was recovered at the downstream Hopewell Run 

at Leetown gaging station on the east branch of Hopewell 

Run where peak recovery was approximately 6 μg/L (app. 5B 

fig. 5) and a reasonably good recovery was obtained at Blue 

Spring where peak recovery was approximately 3 μg/L (app. 

5B fig. 6)

Breakthrough Curve Modeling

To better understand the results obtained from the tracer 

tests, selected breakthrough curves were modeled, first using 

the QTRACER2 program (Field, 2002) to obtain approximate 

transport parameters and then using the CXTFIT program 

(Toride and others, 1995) as modified by the author for use 

with data obtained from tracer tests conducted in karstic 

systems. QTRACER2 statistically evaluates breakthrough 

curves and extracts relevant hydraulic data. However, the 

results obtained from QTRACER2 are approximate and need 

to be calibrated using a theoretical model. Using CXTFIT 

for inverse modeling of the data and the results obtained from 

QTRACER2, the data were calibrated so that a better understanding of the flow properties obtained from the tracer tests 

may be established.

Unfortunately, the complexity of many of the breakthrough curves obtained from the eight tracer tests cannot 

adequately be modeled using CXTFIT. Some individuals 

have advocated using a multi-velocity, multi-dispersion model 

to address the problem of multiple peaks and long tails in a 

breakthrough curve (Małoszewski and others, 1992). Modeling of this type utilizes coupling of the advection-dispersion 

equation to itself as many times as necessary to obtain a near 

perfect model fit to the data. While the model fits appear 

excellent, there is little proven basis to support such modeling.

The breakthrough curves selected for analysis using 

QTRACER2 are listed in table 15 along with selected flow 

parameters developed using QTRACER2. In general, as 

determined from the breakthrough curves, flow rates appear 

to be considerably slower than is typical for karstic aquifers. 

However, most subsurface flow was still found to be advection 

dominated as determined from the Peclet numbers. The Peclet 

number is a measure of the relative contribution of mechanical dispersion and diffusion to solute transport. It relates the 

effectiveness of mass transport by advection to the effectiveness of mass transport by either dispersion or diffusion 

(Schiesser and Silebi, 1997, p. 372). Peclet numbers below 

0.4 indicate diffusion control; 0.4–6.0 indicate that diffusion 

and advection are in transition and thus approximately equal 

to each other; and >6.0 indicates advection control (Fetter, 

1993, p. 54–55). In most nonporous media instances of solute 

transport in karst conduits, Peclet numbers will be greater than 

6.0. Often, Peclet numbers will be many times greater than 

6.0. Only flow to the ball field well during Tracer Test No. 2 
66 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Table 15. QTRACER2-estimated flow parameters for selected sampling sites in the Leetown area, West 

Virginia.

[ft, feet, d, days, ft/d, feet per day, ft2/d, square feet per day}.

Test No. Sampling Site Transport 

Distance1

 (ft)

Mean Travel 

Time 

(d)

Mean Flow 

Velocity

 (ft/d)

Longitudinal 

Dispersion 

(ft2

/d)

Peclet 

Number

1 Balch Spring 7,929 6.4 1,289 74,897 132.2

2 Blue Spring 6,663 4.9 1,394 33,298 278.9

2 Gray Spring 6,316 4.0 1,584 48,482 206.4

2 Ball Field Well 7,379 5.2 1,426 1,790,8121 5.93

4 Blue Spring 2,484 12.6 198 29,463 16.7

4 Gray Spring 1,941 14.0 138 17,859 15.0

5 Balch Spring 4,603 20.3 226 27,855 37.4

5 Blue Spring 1,642 23.2 70.8 2,259 51.5

5 Gray Spring 1,054 24.5 43.0 1,881 24.1

5 Tabb Spring 2,478 21.0 118 27,200 10.8

7 Balch Spring 9,528 23.2 412 551,286 7.1

7 Blue Spring 6,585 6.3 76.3 41,220 12.2

7 Gray Spring 5,915 135.4 43.7 5,391 48.0

8 Balch Spring 10,007 97.0 103 225,163 4.6

8 Blue Spring 10,436 75.6 138 410,875 3.5

8 Gray Spring 10,489 65.5 160 857,387 2.0

1

 Corrected for sinuosity = 1.3.

2

 Dispersion estimate likely too large because of singularity in Chatwin analysis (Field, 2002, pp. 35–38).

3

 Peclet number estimate likely too small because of large dispersion estimate.
Hydrology - by Mark D. Kozar, Kurt J. McCoy, and John A. Young 67

and flow to Balch, Blue, and Gray Springs during Tracer Test 

No. 8 produced Peclet numbers in which advection equals 

diffusion.

The program, CXTFIT was used to model the breakthrough curve for Balch Spring developed from Tracer Test 

No. 1 (app. 5B, fig. 35) and the breakthrough curves for Blue 

and Gray Springs developed from Tracer Test No. 2 (app. 5B, 

figs. 36 and 37, respectively). All the model fits to the breakthrough curves were quite good (table 16). The mobile fluid 

velocities are very close to the mean flow velocities for each 

of the modeled datasets and the degree of non-equilibrium 

(ratio of mobile fluid to immobile fluid) for each of the modeled data sets are quite high. These two parameters indicate 

that the flow channels are not severely restricted by blockages, such as from falling rocks or clay plugs and support the 

hypothesis that once the tracer dyes reach the phreatic solution 

conduits transport is relatively unrestricted.

The very low mass transfer coefficient for Balch Spring 

for the first tracer test indicates that the subsurface water 

spends almost no time in immobile-flow regions. The larger 

mass transfer coefficients for Blue and Gray Springs from 

the second tracer test indicate that the small volume of water 

detained in immobile-flow regions takes a longer period of 

time to move back into the mobile-flow regions. The major 

delaying factor of leakage from the losing streams to the 

solution conduits is probably the porosity and thickness of the 

Hopewell Run stream bed and the underlying fractures.

Transport through the vadose zone, as occurs when tracer 

dyes are released into sinkholes, appears to be more significantly restricted. Data sets from the sinkhole tracer tests 

could not be modeled because of the multimodal nature of the 

breakthrough curves. These multimodal breakthrough curves 

and consequent slow transport rates are indicative of the poor 

recharge occurring from the limited number of sinkholes in the 

area. Some recharge to the springs and wells in the vicinity 

of the Center, as indicated by tracer tests, appears to be from 

the south and east branches of Hopewell Run as water leaks 

through the stream beds.

Also of considerable importance to the Center is the 

quality of recharge water. Because a significant proportion of recharge appears to come from leakage from the east 

and south branches of Hopewell Run, it is imperative that 

Hopewell Run be protected from contamination. Whatever 

gets released into Hopewell Run (e.g. agricultural runoff or 

wastewater treatment return flows) could easily be transported 

to the Center springs and wells relatively quickly (see tracers tests 1 and 2 in table 14) and eventually into the Center’s 

processing water. 

Spring Recharge Delineation - by Mark D. Kozar

An analysis of potential recharge areas to the Blue and 

Gray Spring complex and to Balch Spring was conducted as 

part of development of the ground-water flow model for the 

Leetown area (Kozar and others, 2007). Results of the previously discussed dye tracer tests were also used to better define 

potential recharge areas to the Center’s springs and well fields. 

The probable and possible areas of recharge to the springs are 

shown in figure 25. Available hydrogeologic data and results 

of the tracer tests and current ground-water flow model indicate primary recharge areas for Balch Spring to the east and 

north, for Blue Spring to the south, and for Gray Spring to the 

east and southeast (fig. 26). It is possible, although unlikely, 

that an undetermined amount of ground water may flow 

towards Balch Spring from the area south of Kearneysville, 

West Virginia, in the northern part of the model area (possible 

recharge area on fig. 26). Also, the likely contributing area 

of recharge to Balch Spring is much larger than that of either 

Blue or Gray Springs. This is due to the fault which crosses 

the Center and is connected to Balch Spring, providing an 

added area of potential recharge to the spring that would not 

normally be considered if the fault were not such a dominant 

ground-water flow path.

Due to the nature of bedrock fractures in the area, it is 

difficult to assess the exact recharge areas contributing water 

to Blue and Gray Springs. Results of a particle-tracking 

analysis conducted as part of the development of the groundwater flow model indicate that areas to the south are likely 

to contribute water to Blue Spring and areas to the east are 

likely to contribute water to Gray Spring. It is probable that 

the recharge areas to the springs overlap and may shift with 

changing hydraulic head within the aquifer. While there is 

Table 16. CXTFIT-estimated parameters for selected breakthrough curves from tracer tests conducted in the Leetown 

area, West Virginia.

[ft/d, feet per day; ft2/d, feet squared per day; h-1, reciprocal of hours; R2, correlation coefficient]

Tracer Test Breakthrough 

Curve

Flow Velocity Longitudinal DispersionDegree of 

Nonequilibrium

Mass Transfer 

Coefficient (h−1)

Model Fit - 

Coefficient of 

Variation (R2

) Mean 

Flow 

(ft/d)

Mobile 

Fluid 

(ft/d)

Mean 

Flow 

(ft/d)

Mobile 

Fluid 

(ft/d)

1 Balch Spring 1,356 1,358 7,489 7,497 0.9990 5.0 × 10−5 0.9891

2 Blue Spring 1,248 1,432 16,673 19,127 0.8717 7.8 × 10−2 0.9918

2 Gray Spring 1,516 1,634 4,849 5,228 0.9274 1.8 × 100 1.0000
68 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

EXPLANATION

Potential recharge areas

Blue Spring

Gray Spring

Balch Spring

Model boundary

Hopewell Run

Watershed

Stream

Road

Spring

0 0.5 1 Mile

0 0 5 1 Kilometers

Leetown Science Center

boundary

Major Fault

78° 77°58' 77°56' 77°54'

39°18'

39°20'

39°22'

"

KEARNEYSVILLE

JOHNSONTOWN

"

BROWN'S 

CORNER

"

" State Route 51 HAREWOOD

HOPEWELL RUN

OPEQUON CREEK

County Route 1

M DDLEWAY

"

Study area

Link Spring

Bell Spring

Tabb Spring

Gray Spring

Balch Spring

Blue Spring

Figure 26. Estimated recharge areas of Balch, Blue, and Gray Springs during average hydrologic conditions, Leetown, 

West Virginia. [Recharge areas delineated are approximate and vary with changing hydrologic conditions.]
Water Quality - by Mark D. Kozar and William B. Schill 69

some uncertainty in the results of current (fig. 25) and past dye 

tracer tests (Jones and Deike, 1981; NUS, 1986) conducted 

in the Leetown area, they generally confirm the results of the 

mathematical simulation of ground-water flow to the springs. 

Another potential problem in delineation of recharge 

areas to Blue and Gray Spring is documented flow of ground 

water across the East Branch of Hopewell Run from an area 

northeast of the Center (Leetown sinkhole on fig. 22). This 

appears to contradict the general directions of ground-water 

flow indicated by the particle-tracking analysis. It does, 

however, confirm the connection established by a previous 

tracer test conducted a few decades earlier (Jones and Deike, 

1981). The reason for this anomalous connection is uncertain 

but is most easily explained by leakage of water from the East 

Branch of Hopewell Run to thrust faults that trend southwest 

to northeast through the area and connect with Blue and Gray 

Springs. Additional data would be needed to better quantify 

the contribution of ground water to Blue, Gray, and Balch 

Springs. Even with these data; it may be difficult or impractical to determine the exact areas contributing water to the 

various springs. While a better understanding of the connection between ground water and leakage of water from tributary 

streams is important, the general ground-water recharge areas 

delineated here should be more than adequate for purposes of 

watershed management and protection.

Water Quality - by Mark D. Kozar and William B. 

Schill

Ground-water samples collected from 16 sites (12 wells 

and 4 springs) in the Leetown area were analyzed for approximately 340 constituents, including common ions, trace elements, nutrients (including nitrate and phosphorous), indicator 

bacteria (fecal coliform, E. coli, and total coliform), volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs), semi-volatile organic compounds 

(including industrial compounds), pesticides (herbicides, 

fungicides, and insecticides), radioactive elements (radon-222 

and Uranium), stable isotopes (deuterium and oxygen-18), and 

constituents useful for age dating of water (tritium, helium, 

and chlorofluorocarbons). Results of the analyses were used 

to: 1) establish a baseline of ground-water chemistry data for 

use in assessing potential changes in ground-water quality 

over time; 2) assess potential impacts of a former USEPA 

Superfund site (Leetown pesticide dump) and the Jefferson 

County, West Virginia, landfill east of the Center; 3) characterize the age of water within various hydrogeologic settings; and 

4) assess potential impacts of agriculture and rural suburban 

development on the quality of ground water in the Leetown 

area.

Field Measurements and Inorganic Constituents 

- by Mark D. Kozar

Ground water was sampled using the techniques 

described in Wilde and others (1999). Springs were sampled 

with a submersible pump as close as possible to the point 

of issuance from the bedrock. Field values of pH, specific 

conductance, dissolved oxygen (DO), water temperature, and 

turbidity were continuously monitored during purging of the 

wells or springs and samples were collected only after the 

values of these parameters stabilized. All samples were filtered 

and preserved in the field, and subsequently shipped to the 

U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory 

(NWQL) in Lakewood, Colorado, where they were analyzed 

for the constituents listed above. Carbonate alkalinity, bicarbonate alkalinity, and total alkalinity were measured in the 

field using the techniques described in Wilde and Radtke 

(1998). Total-coliform, fecal-coliform, and E. coli bacteria 

were plated on site, incubated, and counted using techniques 

described in Myers and Wilde (2003). 

Specific Conductance, pH, and Temperature

Water from wells in the carbonate formations exhibited 

little variation in specific conductance, pH, and temperature, 

and were within the ranges typical of carbonate rocks in the 

area (app. 6). Specific conductance varied from 565 to 3,180 

microsiemens per centimeter (μS/cm) (app. 6) with a median 

value of 623 μs/cm. Well Jef-0587 (in app. 6 and site 36 on 

fig. 1 and in table 1) had the highest specific conductance 

within the carbonate formations (975 μS/cm); was greater than 

350 μS/cm above the median, and reflects longer contact and 

residence time of ground water at depth or mixing with deeper 

connate waters, or both. Another well (Jef-0603 in app. 6 and 

site 34 on fig. 1 and in table 1) was completed at the contact 

between the Chambersburg Limestone and the Martinsburg 

Formation along a thrust fault. The ground-water chemistry 

from this well (app. 6) is not typical of the carbonate-rock 

formations, reflects both interactions from carbonate and 

non-carbonate bedrock, and is affected by water from deeper 

within the formation. Specific conductance of water from this 

well was 3,180 μS/cm, reflecting intense mineral dissolution 

as a result of geochemical reactions between the overlying 

carbonate and underlying shale strata and mixing with deeper 

connate waters. The pH of all water samples varied little and 

ranged from 6.6 to 7.0, with a median of 6.7. These pH values 

are typical of water from carbonate rocks in the region (table 

17). 

Water temperature of all samples varied from 11.4 to 

15.3o

C with a median of 13.6oC. There was no apparent correlation between water temperature and well depth, which may 

indicate mixing of water from multiple levels within the openbedrock boreholes sampled. Hourly measurements of water 

temperature were collected at Gray Spring (Jef-0521S – site 

1 on fig. 1 and in table 1) from April 2003 through November 
70 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia Table 17. Summary statistics for constituents and parameters detected in water samples collected at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency drinking water and aquatic life standards [na, not available; mg/L, milligrams per Liter; oC; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter; %, percent; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; U.S. EPA, United States Environmental Protection Agency; MCL, maxi- mum contaminant level; MCLG, maximum contaminant level goal; NSDWR National secondary drinking water regulations, N, nitrogen; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micorgram per Liter] Summary Statistics Constituent/Parameter Number of sites sampled Number of sites with detections Maximum Minimum Mean Median U.S. EPA MCL, NSDWR, MCLG or other drinking water standard U.S. EPA aquatic life cri- teria for chronic exposure Percentage of sites exceed- ing U.S. EPA standards Depth of well (feet) 12 12 475.0 41.0 230.5 213 na na na Water level, below land surface (feet) 10 10 43.45 6.35 28.27 30.09 na na na Landsurface altitude (feet) 16 10 533.93 456.10 501.37 500.86 na na na Redox potential (millivolts) 14 14 340 -8 145 126 na na na Turbidity (NTU) 13 12 270.0 0.45 45.5 5.1 5other na 54 Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 16 15 6.6 0.6 3.2 3.5 na na na Dissolved oxygen, (% saturation) 13 13 66.0 6.0 32.8 38.0 na na na pH (standard units) 16 16 7.0 6.6 6.8 6.7 6.5-8.5 6.5-9.0 0 Specific conductance at @ 25 oC (μS/cm) 16 16 3180 565 807 623 na na na Temperature, water (oC) 16 16 15.3 11.4 13.5 13.6 na na na

Hardness, water (mg/L CaCO3

) 12 12 550 290 368 350 na na na

Non-Carbonate hardness, dissolved 

(mg/L CaCO3

)

12 12 240 24 82 81 na na na

Calcium, dissolved (mg/L) 15 15 142 92.4 119 120 na na na

Magnesium, dissolved (mg/L) 15 15 59.90 5.24 13.75 8.20 na na na

Potassium, dissolved (mg/L) 15 15 7.66 1.10 2.04 1.74 na na na

Sodium, dissolved (mg/L) 15 15 402.00 2.56 33.01 4.12 na na na

Alkalinity, dissolved (mg/L CaCO3

) 15 15 373 238 286 278 na na na

Bicarbonate, dissolved (mg/L) 15 15 455 290 349 339 na na na

Bromide, dissolved (mg/L) 12 11 0.68 0.01 0.08 0.03 na na na

Chloride, dissolved (mg/L) 13 13 538.0 5.59 55.6 9.14 250 NSDWR 230 8

Fluoride, dissolved (mg/L) 13 6 1.9 0.1 0.3 0.2 2 SMCL na 0

Silica, dissolved (mg/L) 15 15 15.2 10.3 12.0 11.4 na na na

Sulfate, dissolved (mg/L) 13 13 409.0 12.8 47.7 16.7 250 NSDWR na 8
Field Measurements and Inorganic Constituents - by Mark D. Kozar 71

Table 17. Summary statistics for constituents and parameters detected in water samples collected at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency drinking water and aquatic life standards [na, not available; mg/L, milligrams per Liter; oC; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter; %, percent; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; U.S. EPA, United States Environmental Protection Agency; MCL, maximum contaminant level; MCLG, maximum contaminant level goal; NSDWR National secondary drinking water regulations, N, nitrogen; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micorgram per Liter]

Summary Statistics

Constituent/Parameter Number 

of sites 

sampled

Number of 

sites with 

detections

Maximum Minimum Mean Median U.S. EPA MCL, 

NSDWR, MCLG 

or other drinking 

water standard

U.S. EPA 

aquatic life criteria for chronic 

exposure

Percentage of 

sites exceeding U.S. EPA 

standards

Residue, whole, sum of constituents 

(mg/L)

11 11 1740 323 499 356 500 SMCL na 9

Residue on evaporation @ 180 oC, 

dissolved (mg/L)

12 12 1720 170 373 236 500 NSDWR na 8

Ammonia, dissolved (mg/L as N) 12 3 0.61 0.03 0.09 0.04 na na na

NO2+NO3, dissolved (mg/L as N) 13 12 8.53 <0.06 2.92 2.24 10 MCL na 0

Nitrite, dissolved (mg/L as N) 12 1 0.014 <0.008 0.010 0.008 1 MCL na 0

E. coli, NA-MUG (colonies/100mL) 11 5 20 <1 3.2 1 0 goal na 45

Fecal coliforms (colonies/100mL) 11 5 37 1 4.7 1 0 goal na 45

Total Coliform,M-Endo 

(colonies/100mL)

11 9 700 <1 209 143 0 goal na 82

Aluminum, dissolved (μg/L) 15 3 3 <1 <2 <2 50 NSDWR 87 0

Antimony, dissolved (μg/L) 12 2 0.21 0.19 <0.2 <0.2 6 MCL na 0

Arsenic, dissolved (μg/L) 15 6 1.00 0.06 <0.3 <0.2 10 MCL 150 0

Barium, dissolved (μg/L) 15 15 100 33 56 51 2000 MCL na 0

Boron, dissolved (μg/L) 15 6 770 4 60 8 na na na

Chromium, dissolved (μg/L) 13 6 1.5 0.03 0.7 0.8 100 MCL 11 0

Cobalt, dissolved (μg/L) 12 11 1.150 <0.04 0.416 0.406 na na na

Copper, dissolved (μg/L) 14 14 16.6 0.4 2.7 0.6 1000 NSDWR 9 0

Iron, dissolved (μg/L) 15 10 20 3.0 8.9 7.0 300 NSDWR 1000 0

Lead, dissolved (μg/L) 15 2 0.16 0.05 <0.09 <0.08 15 action level 2.5 0

Lithium, dissolved (μg/L) 15 15 512.0 0.8 36.8 2.7 na na na

Manganese, dissolved (μg/L) 15 14 22.5 0.1 4.2 1.0 50 NSDWR na 0

Molybdenum, dissolved (μg/L) 13 4 0.8 <0.1 <0.4 <0.4 na na na

Nickel, dissolved (μg/L) 13 13 2.90 0.10 0.72 0.42 na 52 0

Selenium, dissolved (μg/L) 14 5 1.8 0.1 <0.6 <0.4 50 MCL 5 0
72 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia Table 17. Summary statistics for constituents and parameters detected in water samples collected at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency drinking water and aquatic life standards [na, not available; mg/L, milligrams per Liter; oC; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter; %, percent; CaCO3, calcium carbonate; U.S. EPA, United States Environmental Protection Agency; MCL, maxi- mum contaminant level; MCLG, maximum contaminant level goal; NSDWR National secondary drinking water regulations, N, nitrogen; mL, milliliter; μg/L, micorgram per Liter] Summary Statistics Constituent/Parameter Number of sites sampled Number of sites with detections Maximum Minimum Mean Median U.S. EPA MCL, NSDWR, MCLG or other drinking water standard U.S. EPA aquatic life cri- teria for chronic exposure Percentage of sites exceed- ing U.S. EPA standards Strontium, dissolved (μg/L) 15 15 11300 244 1832 736 na na na Vanadium, dissolved (μg/L) 15 14 1.7 0.1 0.9 0.8 na na na Zinc, dissolved (μg/L) 13 6 42.3 0.3 5.0 <0.60 5000 SMCL 120 0 CIAT, dissolved (μg/L) 9 8 0.364 <0.006 0.157 0.157 na na na Atrazine, dissolved (μg/L) 9 8 0.226 <0.007 0.106 0.125 3 MCL na 0 Phenol, dissolved (μg/L) 4 2 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.6 na na na Phenol, total (μg/L) 4 1 1.2 1.2 <1.5 <1.6 na na na Prometon, dissolved (μg/L) 9 6 0.07 0.01 0.02 0.01 na na na Simazine, dissolved (μg/L) 9 7 0.045 0.005 0.024 0.024 4 MCL na 0 Tebuthiuron, dissolved (μg/L) 9 3 0.12 0.01 0.03 0.02 na na na Terbacil, dissolved (μg/L) 9 1 0.016 0.016 <0.032 <0.034 na na na 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, total (μg/L) 10 3 0.05 <0.03 <0.034 <0.030 2 MCL na 0

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene, total (μg/L) 10 1 0.03 0.03 <0.057 <0.060 na na na

Acetone, total (μg/L) 10 1 8 <6 <6 <6 na na na

m- + p-Xylene, total (μg/L) 10 1 0.04 0.04 <0.06 <0.06 10 MCL 1 na 0

o-Xylene, total (μg/L) 10 1 0.03 0.03 <0.04 <0.04 10 MCL 1 na 0

Tetrachloroethene, total (μg/L) 10 2 0.02 0.02 <0.05 <0.06 na na na

Toluene, total (μg/L) 10 2 1.1 0.03 <0.19 <0.05 1000 MCL na 0

Trichloromethane, total (μg/L) 10 1 0.48 0.02 <0.07 <0.02 na na na

Radon-222, total (pCi/L) 9 9 1280 10 799 840 300 MCL primary na 78

Tritium, total (pCi/L) 5 5 25.6 19.8 24.1 25.0 na na na

Uranium, dissolved (μg/L) 15 14 1.48 0.08 0.46 0.35 30 MCL na 0

1 U.S. EPA MCL for Xylenes is based on total concentration of all derivatives including m-, p-, and o- xylenes
Field Measurements and Inorganic Constituents - by Mark D. Kozar 73

2005. A plot of the data (fig. 27) indicates that water temperature varied seasonally from a low of 10.9o

C in February 2004 

to a high of 12.8 and 12.9oC in June 2003 and 2004, respectively. There was no correlation between individual precipitation events and the water temperature of the spring indicating 

a significant source of water to the spring is derived from storage in the broad interconnected network of diffuse fractures.

Dissolved Oxygen and Turbidity

Dissolved oxygen concentrations for the wells and 

springs sampled (app. 6) varied from a minimum of 0.6 milligrams per liter (mg/L) in the 475 ft deep well (Jef-0603 in 

app. 6 and site 34 on fig. 1 and in table 1) completed at the 

shale/limestone bedrock interface to a maximum of 6.6 mg/L 

in an upland bedrock well (Jef-0601 in app. 6 and site 37 on 

fig. 1 and in table 1). The dissolved oxygen concentrations are 

characteristic of wells in carbonate rock of the region with a 

median dissolved oxygen content of 3.5 mg/L. The median 

dissolved oxygen concentration for 70 wells sampled in similar bedrock in Jefferson County (Kozar and others, 1991) was 

4.4 mg/L. Only the deep well previously discussed (Jef-0603) 

had a dissolved oxygen concentration of less than 1.0 mg/L. 

The higher dissolved oxygen concentrations reflect the karstic 

nature of the bedrock in the region. The shallow epikarst in 

the Leetown area allows rapid infiltration of recharge to enter 

ground water which maintains relatively high dissolvedoxygen concentrations in ground water. Many wells in noncarbonate terranes typically have dissolved-oxygen concentrations less than 1 mg/L (Mathes and others, 1998), as evidenced 

by the one well (Jef-0603) with a significant contribution of 

water from the deeper underlying Martinsburg Formation.

Field measured turbidity for 8 wells and 3 springs sampled on the Center ranged from a minimum of 0.45 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) to a maximum of 270 NTU with 

a median of 5.1 NTU (app. 6). The USEPA goal for turbidity 

in drinking water is less than or equal to 5 NTU and there is 

no USEPA chronic exposure turbidity standard for aquatic life. 

Turbidity is an important parameter to discuss for the karst 

ground-water flow system. Borehole video camera inspection of wells drilled at the Center indicate that all conduits 

intercepted contained some deposits of silt and clay, which are 

likely by products of dissolution of calcium carbonate bedrock 

and minerals, but also potentially deposited by flow and transport from upland areas dominated by non-carbonate bedrock 

such as the Martinsburg Formation.

High levels of turbidity in ground water are caused by 

several factors. First, the larger conduits tend to have a much 

higher percentage of silt and clay than smaller conduits. 

Individual fractures with little dissolution of calcium carbonate have little, if any, silt and clay deposited within them. 

Second, pumping rates of production wells which intersect 

such conduits may affect turbidity levels. This was seen during 

several aquifer tests conducted on the Center. In one instance, 

pumping a well at rates in excess of 225 gal/min produced 

extremely high turbidity (unquantifiable using a standard turbidimeter). At a pumping rate of 200 gal/min, turbidity levels 

fell to a range between 20 and 60 NTU. At pumping rates of 

185 gal/min or less, turbidity was generally not a problem, 

with turbidity levels less than 5 NTU common. An explanation for the higher turbidity at higher pumping rates is related 

to the rapid ground-water approach velocity within a conduit. 

At pumping levels of 225 gal/min or greater, the velocity and 

flow of water to the well bore through the conduit is high 

enough to mobilize sediments deposited within the conduit. At 

lower pumping rates, flow velocities to the pumping well do 

not attain sufficient velocity to mobilize sediments. 

Unfortunately, there is no easy way to assess the potential turbidity problems of a given well, although the higher 

yielding wells (200 gal/min or higher) and wells developed in 

the larger conduits tend to be more prone to turbidity problems than lower yielding wells (100 gal/min or less). Anecdotal reports from homeowners in the area indicate that wells 

sometimes exhibit turbidity problems, mostly during periods 

of drought or periods of low-water table and many of the wells 

return to acceptable quality over time. While the phenomenon is not common, it does indicate the potential for a well 

intersecting a conduit to experience sporadic turbidity problems. Individuals planning on using ground water as a source 

of supply should have a contingency plan to address turbidity 

problems should they occur. 

Alkalinity, Water Hardness, and Major Ions

The alkalinity of water is defined as the capacity of the 

solutes it contains to react with and neutralize acid (Hem, 

1992). Alkalinity is proportional to the hardness and total 

dissolved solids content, as both result from the dissolution 

of carbonate bedrock and minerals. For the wells and springs 

sampled at the Center, alkalinity ranged from a minimum of 

238 mg/L to a maximum of 373 mg/L (app. 6). Such values of 

alkalinity are characteristic of ground water derived from the 

carbonate limestone and dolomitic rocks in the region (Kozar 

and others, 1991). 

The hardness of water is a measure of soap-consuming 

capacity and is also a good indicator of the potential for 

encrustation of pipes with scale deposits (Hem, 1992). It is primarily a function of calcium and magnesium content but may 

be affected by other constituents. Because calcium and magnesium are the primary contributors to alkalinity, hardness tends 

to be elevated in carbonate-rich bedrock such as limestone and 

dolomite. Water with a hardness of 0-60 mg/L as CaCO3

 is 

considered soft, 60-120 mg/L is considered moderately hard, 

120-180 mg/L is considered hard, and more than 180 mg/L is 

considered extremely hard (Hem, 1992). Hardness for wells 

and springs sampled on the Center ranged from 290 to 550 

mg/L, with a median of 350 mg/L (fig. 28). As such, all the 

samples are characteristic of extremely hard water and could 

result in the accumulation of scale deposits in boilers, pipes, or 

hot water heaters.

The total dissolved solids concentration of water is a 

function of not only the carbonate but also the non-carbonate 
74 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

2003

A M J J A S O N D

2004

J F M A M J J A S O N D

2005

J F M A M J J A S O 0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4 14

13121110

SPRING STAGE, in feet and PRECIPITATION, in inches

Spring stage, in feet

Water temperature, in degrees CelsiusPrecipitation, in inches

URE, in degrees Celsius AT TER TEMPER WA

Figure 27. Water temperature, stage, and precipitation for the period from April 2003-November 2005, measured at Gray Spring, 

Leetown, West Virginia. [Gaps in spring stage and water temperature line plots represent periods for which no data are available.]
Field Measurements and Inorganic Constituents - by Mark D. Kozar 75

minerals dissolved by contact with bedrock and minerals 

within the aquifer. Residue on evaporation (total dissolved 

solids concentration) for the wells and springs sampled at the 

Center ranged from 170 to 1,720 mg/L with a median total dissolved solids content of 236 mg/L (fig. 28). The site with the 

highest dissolved solids concentration is the well completed at 

the fault contact between the overlying Chambersburg Limestone and underlying Martinsburg Formation (Jef-0603 site 

34 on fig. 1 and in table 1). The more chemically-aggressive 

water of the Martinsburg Formation mixing with the carbonate 

rich waters of the Chambersburg Limestone and with deeper 

connate waters result in a high total dissolved-solids content, 

with large concentrations of dissolved constituents, including chloride, sodium, sulfate, ammonia, boron, lithium, and 

strontium, not common in limestone dominated bedrock of the 

region (app. 6). 

Water can be characterized by the dominant cations and 

anions it contains (fig. 28). With the exception of one well, 

samples collected from wells and springs at the Center exhibit 

a calcium-carbonate signature, characteristic of water from 

limestone and dolomitic rocks. The exception is the well 

(Jef-0603) tapping the fault and the Martinsburg Formation, 

which exhibits a sodium chloride signature. Generally, none of 

the water samples from wells or springs in carbonate rock have 

concentrations of common ions in excess of USEPA primary 

maximum contaminant level (MCL) or national secondary 

drinking water regulations (NSDWR) or aquatic life criteria 

(table 17). Well Jef-0603, however, exceeds USEPA NSDWRs 

(table 17) for chloride, sulfate, and total dissolved solids.

Trace Elements

Water samples from wells and springs sampled at the 

Center were analyzed for a broad suite of trace elements (app. 

6). None of the samples had concentrations of trace elements 

in excess of USEPA primary or secondary drinking water 

standards or aquatic life criteria (table 17). However, elevated 

concentrations of boron (770 μg/L) and lithium (512 μg/L) 

were detected in water from the deep fault well (Jef-0603 in 

app. 6 and site 34 on fig. 1 and in table 1). Neither boron nor 

lithium are common in ground water in the region and the 

source of these constituents is not known. While boron is present in some laundry detergents, lithium is typically not found 

at such high concentrations in domestic waste water. Boron 

and lithium are common in brines and in evaporite deposits 

(Hem, 1992) indicating that a component of water to the well 

is likely derived from a deeper, connate source.

Two wells, Jef-0603 and Jef-0587, also had elevated concentrations of strontium (8,450 and 11,300 μg/L respectively), 

and are the deepest wells sampled during the study at 475 and 

410 ft deep respectively (app. 6). The source of the strontium 

in samples from these two wells is also not known but deep 

connate brines or minerals such a strontianite or celestite are 

possible sources (Hem, 1992). Some agricultural fertilizers 

may also contain strontium. However, given the fact that well 

Jef-0603 exhibits a sodium chloride water signature, connate 

brines are a strong possibility.

Radioactive Elements

Samples from selected springs and wells sampled on 

the Center were also analyzed for the radioactive elements 

uranium, tritium, and radon-222 (spring samples were not 

analyzed for radon). Tritium is derived primarily from atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons during the Cold War and 

typically is present in ground water in only trace amounts. 

Uranium and radon are naturally-derived radioactive elements 

present in rock. 

Radon-222 is a radioactive gas derived from the natural 

radioactive decay of the element Radium. Radon decays to 

form polonium by losing a proton, and emits an alpha particle 

(Otton and Gundersen, 1993). Radon is a known carcinogen 

and the primary health effects of inhalation of air with a high 

concentration of radon is an increased risk of lung cancer. 

The USEPA MCL for radon in indoor air is 4 picocuries per 

liter (pCi/L). The proposed USEPA MCL for radon in drinking water is 300 pCi/L, with an alternate MCL (AMCL) of 

4,000 pCi/L if indoor air mitigation programs are established 

to minimize the risk of inhalation of radon in indoor air (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1999). Of the 9 wells 

sampled for radon in the Leetown area, none contained radon 

in excess of the 4,000 pCi/L AMCL, but 7 sites (78 percent) 

exceed the proposed drinking water standard of 300 pCi/L. 

The maximum concentration of radon detected in the 9 wells 

sampled in the Leetown area was 1,280 pCi/L, with a median 

concentration of 840 pCi/L. None of the springs were sampled 

for radon due to the potential for degassing of radon in shallow 

ground water and potential data bias that might result. Radon 

data from 31 sites sampled between 1989 and 2006 in similar carbonate rocks (8 springs and 23 wells) in Jefferson and 

Berkeley Counties (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006, NWIS-Web 

database available at http://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov/wv/

nwis/qwdata) indicate similar median radon concentrations 

for the wells (610 pCi/L) and springs (695 pCi/L) sampled. 

Given the elevated concentrations of radon detected in the 

Leetown area, and because most of the ground water at the 

Center is used indoors, testing of indoor air for radon would 

be appropriate. Radon mitigation measures may be needed if 

radon concentrations in indoor air are found to exceed the 4 

pCi/L USEPA indoor air standard. 

Uranium and tritium also were analyzed in ground-water 

samples collected at the Center. Uranium-238 and the less 

frequently occurring daughter products thorium-232 and uranium-235 are responsible for the majority of naturally occurring radioactivity in natural waters (Hem, 1992). The uranium 

nuclide is the starting point in a radioactive decay series that 

includes radon-222 and ends with the stable isotope lead-206. 

Tritium, a radioactive hydrogen isotope (3

H), was extensively 

used in the past to determine the relative age of ground water. 

Its usefulness for dating water declined after airborne concentrations of tritium decreased when nuclear atmospheric testing 
76 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia 9080 150 140 130 120 110 100

R CALCIUM, DISSOLVED, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITE

1

10

10

2

103

CHLORIDE, DISSOLVED, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

600500400300200

E HARDNESS, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER AS CALCIUM CARBONAT

1

10

10

2

R MAGNESIUM, DISSOLVED, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITE

10-210-1

1

1010

2

NITRATE PLUS NITRITE, DISSOLVED, IN MILLIGRAMS PER 

N LITER AS NITROGE

10

R POTASSIUM, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITE 1

16141210

SILICA, DISSOLVED, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER 1010

2

103

R SODIUM, DISSOLVED, IN MILLGRAMS PER LITE

10

10

2

103

R SULFATE, DISSOLVED, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITE

102103104

TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS, TOTAL AS RESIDUE ON EVAPORATION, 

R IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITE

CHLORIDE SILICA SODIUM

 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS NITRATE + NITRITE

CALCIUM MAGNESIUM, HARDNESS, POTASSIUM SULFATE

1

EXPLANATION

outlier

75th percentile

50th percentile (median)

25th percentile

90th percentile

10th percentile

Figure 28. Distribution of concentrations of major ions, hardness, and total dissolved solids in water samples collected from 

8 wells and 3 springs at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia.
Nutrients and Bacteria - by Mark D. Kozar 77

was banned in the late 1960’s. It is still used in conjunction 

with helium as a ground-water age tracer.

The USEPA MCL for uranium in drinking water is 30 

μg/L. None of the ground-water samples collected in the 

Leetown area had uranium concentrations exceeding the MCL. 

The maximum concentration of uranium detected in samples 

collected in the Leetown area was 1.48 μg/L with a median 

concentration of 0.35 μg/L (table 17 and app. 6). Currently, 

there is no USEPA MCL water standard for Tritium. At 

the five sites in the Leetown area sampled and analyzed for 

tritium, concentrations ranged from 19.8 to 25.6 pCi/L (6.2 – 

8.0 tritium units [TU]) with a median of 25.0 pCi/L (7.8 TU). 

Tritium levels may also be used to derive estimates of groundwater age, which will be discussed later in this report.

Nutrients and Bacteria - by Mark D. Kozar

Nutrient compounds analyzed for this study included 

nitrate, nitrite, ammonia, and orthophosphate. Nutrients and 

bacteria share common sources, primarily fecal material from 

animals and humans. Synthetic fertilizers, commonly used in 

agricultural applications, are an additional source of ammonia, 

nitrite, nitrate, and orthophosphorous, but would not carry the 

bacterial signatures common to human and animal wastes. 

Past investigations of ground-water quality in the Leetown 

area and in surrounding Jefferson and Berkeley Counties, West 

Virginia, have documented extensive nitrate and bacterial contamination in and around the study area (Hobba, 1976; Hobba, 

1981; Kozar and others; 1991; Shultz and others, 1995; and 

Mathes, 2000). Microbial studies and DNA analyses of human 

and animal DNA present in water samples were conducted to 

assess potential sources of contaminants to the aquifer.

Nitrogen and Phosphorous Compounds

Eleven sites sampled at the Center had detectable concentrations of nitrate, two sites contained detectable concentrations of ammonia, and one site had a detectable concentration 

of nitrite (app. 6). Ammonia and nitrite are typically not present in highly oxygenated water and therefore were detected at 

only two sites. The deep well completed at the fault interface between the Martinsburg Formation and Chambersburg 

Limestone (Jef-0603 - site 34 on fig. 1 and in table 1) had an 

ammonia concentration of 0.61 mg/L and a shallow piezometer adjacent to a corn field (Jef-0594 - site 45 on fig. 1 and in 

table 1) had a very low ammonia concentration of 0.03 mg/L. 

Nitrite was only detected at one site, (well Jef-0587 – site 36 

on fig. 1 and in table 1), at a concentration of 0.014 mg/L. 

Combined nitrate and nitrite (as nitrogen) concentrations 

ranged from <0.06 to 8.53 mg/L with a median concentration 

of 2.24 mg/L (table 17). None of the sites sampled exceeded 

the USEPA drinking water MCL of 10 mg/L for nitrate (as 

nitrogen) or the 1 mg/L MCL for nitrite (as nitrogen) (table 

17). In 1988, Kozar and others (1991) sampling for nitrate in 

Jefferson County, West Virginia, found that 18 of the 70 (26 

percent) ground-water sites sampled contained concentrations 

of nitrate in excess of the 10 mg/L MCL. The Center does not 

have the widespread nitrate contamination documented in the 

previous studies of water quality in Jefferson County. However, a shallow well (Jef-0594 – site 45 on fig. 1 and in table 

1) down gradient from a corn field, did contained an elevated 

concentration of nitrate (8.53 mg/L). 

Indicator Bacteria

More than half of 70 ground-water samples collected in 

Jefferson County in 1988 contained indicator bacteria, either 

fecal coliform or fecal streptococcus bacteria. Ten of 11 sites 

sampled at the Center as part of this investigation (91 percent 

had total coliform and 5 of 11 (45 percent) sites had fecal coliform and E. coli bacteria (table 17). These frequency of bacteria detections are similar to those documented in 1988 (Kozar 

and others, 1991), which suggested that animal feedlots and 

land application of manure as a fertilizer were likely the principal sources of bacteria and nitrate within the aquifer. There 

has been a shift in land use in Jefferson County since 1988 to 

less agriculture and more residential-suburban development, 

principally housing subdivisions and single family homes. 

The impact of this shift in land use on ground-water quality is 

not fully understood. Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and other 

indicators of potential animal and human source contamination were analyzed in ground-water samples collected during the study to further refine the understanding of bacterial 

contamination of ground water in the study area.

Microbial and Molecular Studies - by William B. 

Schill

Ground water in the Leetown area is subject to infiltration of contaminants from the surface that is often manifested 

by elevated concentrations of bacteria associated with animal 

and human feces. Determining the animal or human source of 

bacteria is further complicated by complex patterns of groundwater flow in the karst aquifers of the region. Thus, it is difficult to determine if two wells or springs access the same or 

different sources of water, or if potential contaminant sources 

may affect ground water quality narrowly or broadly. 

Part of the effort to examine water quality and availability 

in the Leetown area was to apply, and if possible, develop new 

approaches and methodologies that might aid in determining 

quantity, quality, and connectivity of ground-water sources. 

These efforts focused on the application of statistical analyses 

and modern, molecular methods to examine the interactions 

of bacteria and ground-water chemistry and the development 

of new methods to detect DNA shed by humans and animals 

that is indicative of fecal contamination when transported to 

ground water.

Multivariate statistical analysis is a useful tool to determine correlative water chemistry parameters and to highlight 

relationships of wells and springs by similarities of their 
78 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

water chemistries. Incorporation of biotic parameters, such 

as microbial species composition, makes statistical analysis 

more robust and can yield clues as to sources of microbial 

contaminants in particular wells or springs. Because bacteria 

react quickly to changes in their environment, large shifts in 

microbial populations can be triggered by subtle environmental cues. Thus, the species composition of bacterial assemblages inhabiting ground-water sources can be a reflection of 

known and measured, as well as unknown and unmeasured 

water chemistry or pollutants. A more refined understanding 

of the interconnectivity of an area’s springs and wells can be 

achieved when this information is coupled with knowledge 

of land use and an understanding of ground-water flow in the 

area. Potential recharge areas of ground-water and threats to 

these recharge areas can also be better defined. 

Coliform bacteria, Escherichia coli (E. coli), and Enterococcus, are associated with fecal contamination. Drinking 

and recreational waters are commonly tested for the presence 

of these “indicator bacteria”. Nine wells and three springs in 

the Leetown area were sampled and analyzed for microbial 

contamination (table 18). Standard membrane filtration and 

plating methodology was used to assay coliform and Enterococcus bacteria. Coliforms and E. coli numbers were determined using m-ColiBlue24® (Millipore, Billerica, MA) while 

Enterococcus was enumerated by growth on m-Enterococcus

Agar. Digital photographs of plates were made and bacteria 

were counted using image-analysis techniques. All wells and 

springs tested in September, 2004, with the exception of the 

USDA-Sulfur Well (Jef-0603), contained fecal indicator bacteria. Balch Spring (Jef-0327S), a traditional water source for 

the old federal hatchery at the Center had (on this occasion) 

particularly elevated levels of total coliform (fig. 29).

Fluorescence in ground-water samples was measured in 

an attempt to detect dissolved compounds including laundry 

brighteners (Hagedorn and others, 2003; McDonald and others, 2006). Emission at 460 nM was measured when samples 

were excited at 360 nM. The fluorometer (RF-Mini-150; Shimadzu Scientific Instruments, Inc., Columbia, MD) gain and 

scaling were adjusted so that a 0.001 percent (v/v) solution of 

Purex® (Dial Corporation, Macustah, IL) laundry detergent 

in distilled water produced a reading of 1,000 relative fluorescence units (RFU) and distilled water produced a reading of 

0 RFU. Microcrystalline cellulose was extensively washed by 

repeatedly suspending the material in boiling distilled water 

and recovering it by vacuum filtration. Cycles of boiling and 

recovery were repeated until the filtrate showed no fluorescence. Samples were treated with 10 percent (w/v) microcrystalline cellulose and re-examined to detect the presence of 

laundry brighteners (determined by a reduction in fluorescence 

due to the removal of laundry brighteners binding to the cellulose). Fluorescence in the ground-water samples was not 

diminished by treating samples with 10 percent (w/v) microcrystalline cellulose. Thus, the fluorescence that was observed 

is related to unknown dissolved compound(s) that are probably 

naturally occurring. Wells Jef-0584, Jef-0590, and Jef-0327S 

shared high relative fluorescence values of 1159 RFU, 1204 

RFU, and 909 RFU, respectively, and may be hydraulically 

connected. This connection is supported by hydrogeological 

data reported earlier in this report. The spring sources and 

many of the other well sources yielded much lower or intermeTable 18. Wells and springs sampled and analyzed for microbial and DNA studies at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West 

Virginia

[1, USGS station name and report id as presented on fig. 1 and in Table 1; na, not applicable].

Station Name Overall Depth 

(feet)

Station Name/Report ID1 Sample Dates

USDA sulfur well 200 Jef-0603 (34) Sept. 13-17, 2004, May 2-6, 2005

USDA fault well 201 Jef-0586 (60) Aug. 28, 2005

low road well 410 Jef-0587 (36) Sept. 13-17, 2004, May 2-6, 2005

stable A well 312 Jef-0601 (37) Sept. 13-17, 2004, May 2-6, 2005

anticline well 260 Jef-0589 (41) Sept. 13-17, 2004, May 2-6, 2005

ball field well 160 Jef-0590 (48) Sept. 13-17, 2004, May 2-6, 2005

old Dodson farm well 61 Jef-0602 (55) Sept. 13-17, 2004, May 2-6, 2005

boneyard upper well 105 Jef-0584 (49) Sept. 13-17, 2004, May 2-6, 2005

Tabb lower piezometer 43 Jef-0594 (45) Sept. 13-17, 2004, May 2-6, 2005

Balch Spring na Jef-0327S (4) Sept. 13-17, 2004

Gray Spring na Jef-0521S (1) Sept. 13-17, 2004

Blue Spring na Jef-0659S (2) Sept. 13-17, 2004
Microbial and Molecular Studies - by William B. Schill 79

100,000

10,000

1,000

100

10

1

CFU. colony forming units

EXPLANATION

Total Coliforms

Escherichia coliEnterococcus

USDA Sulfur Well

(JEF-0603)

Lower Piezometer

(JEF-0594)

Old Dodson Farm

Well (JEF-0602)

Balch Spring

(JEF-0327S)

Bone Yard Upper

Well (JEF-0584)

Ball Field Well

(JEF-0590)

Low Road Well

(JEF-0587)

Stable A Well

(JEF-0601)

Anticline Well

(JEF-0589)

Gray Spring

(JEF-0521S)

Blue Spring

(JEF-0659S)

Figure 29. Microbial contamination observed in September, 2004 for wells and springs sampled at the USGS Leetown Science 

Center, West Virginia.
80 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

diate fluorescence [Jef-0603 = 181 RFU, Jef-0589 = 272 RFU, 

Jef-0587 = 409 RFU, Jef-0601 = 431 RFU, Jef-0602 = 568 

RFU, Jef-0594 = 659 RFU, Jef-0753 = 256 RFU, Jef-0521S = 

272 RFU, Jef-0659S = 318 RFU). 

Multivariate statistical analyses were performed to 

examine relationships among water chemistry (abiotic) and 

microbial (biotic) water quality parameters (fig. 30). Classical (metric solution) multidimensional scaling (CMDS) 

as implemented in NCSS (NCSS, Kaysville, UT) revealed 

some interesting correlations. First, fecal indicator bacteria 

were directly associated with turbidity and nitrate as might be 

expected. Second, blue fluorescence measured as described 

earlier, was directly associated with the stable isotope signatures of H2

 and O18 and thus is probably another indicator of 

surface influence. Dissolved oxygen and phosphate also cluster in this area of the plot. CMDS was also used to examine 

relationships among Center wells and springs as reflected in 

abiotic and biotic water quality constituents. Abiotic constituents were first analyzed alone and resulted in the CMDS map 

shown in figure 31a. The uniqueness of the USDA sulfur well 

(Jef-0603) is apparent (fig. 31a); as are the similarities of the 

ball field (Jef-0590), bone yard upper (Jef-0584) wells, and 

Balch Spring (Jef-0327S). Other possible relations resulting 

from this analysis include that of Blue Spring (Jef-0659S) 

and Gray Spring (Jef-0521S) and that of the anticline well 

(Jef-0589) and the new Kaiser Farm Well (Jef-0753). It is 

important to understand that while these relations may imply 

physical connectivity, only similarities of water chemistry are 

actually indicated. Some relations delineated by water chemistry remain while others are disrupted when the biotic (microbial) parameters are added to the analysis [fig. 31b]. Notable 

are the shifts of Balch Spring (Jef-0327S) away from the ball 

field (Jef-0590) and bone yard upper (Jef-0584) wells and 

the displacement of the position of the old Dodson farm well 

(Jef-0602). Comparison of the relations depicted in figures 31a 

and 31b reveal potential microbial contamination of otherwise 

similar (or possibly connected) sources. 

Many studies have focused on identification of contamination source by typing bacterial strains thought to be specific 

to humans or other animals. These efforts have generally not 

been successful when fully tested (Stoeckel and others, 2004). 

One reason for these failures is that many targeted bacteria 

Microbial

Related 

Factors

 Water

 Age

Indicators

 Total 

coliforms E. coli

Fecal coliforms

Turbidity

Nitrate + Nitrite

Enterococcus

Calcium Nitrite

Alkalinity and Bicarbonate

Silica

Temperature

Resdue (Total 

δ deu- Dissolved Solids)

terium

δ oxygen 18 Phosphate

Blue

fluoresence

Dissolved

Oxygen

DO %

saturation

pH

Potassium

Oxidation

Reduction

Potential

Hardness

Magnesium

}

Other

Ionic

Species Hardness

(non-carbonate)

-1.00 -0.50 0.00 0.50 1.00

-1.00

-0.50

0.00

0.50

1.00

DIMENSION 1

DIMENSION 2

Figure 30. Multidimensional scaling analysis showing the relations between abiotic and biotic parameters for 12 ground-water 

sources in the Leetown area, West Virginia. [Dimensions 1 and 2 are normalized measures of Euclidian distance determined from 

pairwise comparisons of parameters projected onto a two-dimensional map. The first shows a correlation of fecal indicators, 

turbidity, and nitrate + nitrite. The second shows the correlation of blue fluoresence with d oxygen-18 and d deuterium (measures of 

water age or residence time).]
Microbial and Molecular Studies - by William B. Schill 81

Bone Yard Upper

Well (Jef-0584)

Ball Field 

Well (Jef-0590)

Balch Spring

(Jef-0327S)

Lower Piezometer (Jef-0594)

Old Dodson Farm

Well (Jef-0602)

Stable A Well

(Jef-0601) New Kaiser Farm

Anticline Well Well (Jef-0753)

(Jef-0589)

Gray Spring

(Jef-0521S)

Low Road Well 

(Jef-0587)

Blue Spring

(Jef-0659S)

USDA Sulfur

Well (Jef-0603)

DIMENSION 1

DIMENSION 2

-0.60 -0.30 0.00 0.30 0.60

-0.20

-0.05

0.10

0.25

0.40

DIMENSION 1

DIMENSION 2

Old Dodson Farm

Well (Jef-0602)

Stable A Well

(Jef-0601)

An icline Well

(Jef-0589)

Lower Piezometer (Jef-0594)

Balch Spring

(Jef-0327S)

Blue Spring

(Jef-0659S)

New Kaiser Farm

Well (Jef-0753)

Gray Spring

(Jef-0521S)

Low Road Well 

(Jef-0587)

Ball Field 

Well (Jef-0590)

Bone Yard Upper

Well (Jef-0584)

USDA Sulfur

Well (Jef-0603)

-0.40

-0.20

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

-0.60 -0.30 -0.00 0.30 0.60

Figure 31a (top). Multidimensional scaling analysis (abiotic parameters only) showing the relations between 12 ground-water 

sources in the Leetown area, West Virginia. [Dimensions 1 and 2 are the normalized measures of Euclidian distance determined 

from pairwise comprisons of parameters and projected onto a two-dimensional map. Note the clustering of wells Jef-0584 and 

Jef-0590 with Balch Spring.] 

31b (bottom). Multidimensional scaling analysis (biotic and abiotic parameters) showing the relations between 12 groundwater sources in the Leetown area, West Virginia. [Dimensions 1 and 2 are the normalized measures of Euclidian distance 

determined from pairwise comprisons of parameters and projected onto a two-dimensional map. Note the relative positions shift 

somewhat when microbial parameters are added).]
82 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

are not totally specific to any particular host and readily move 

from one host (animal or human) to another. The detection of 

human or animal DNA shed from the intestinal tract directly 

eliminates this confounding factor. During the course of this 

study, Center scientists applied general approaches typically 

used for the characterization of ancient DNA (from extinct 

animals, mummies, and so on) and forensic analysis to the 

identification of human and animal DNA present in ground 

and surface waters. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction 

(PCR) (Heid and others, 1996; Morrison and others, 1998; 

Wittwer and others, 1997) was used to detect and measure 

amounts of dissolved human and other animal DNA present. 

Water samples (1,000 ml) were filtered (47 mm, 0.45 

micron cellulose acetate) through sterile filtration devices to 

collect and concentrate bacteria and particulate-bound DNA. 

Sterilization and decontamination of filtration setups were 

accomplished by soaking the apparatus (without filters) in 10 

percent household bleach for 30 minutes, rinsing thoroughly 

with sterile distilled water, and autoclaving 20 minutes. Just 

before use and after installation of the membrane filter, the 

device was irradiated with ultraviolet light to further insure 

against laboratory contamination. For quality control, 100 ml 

of distilled water was passed through the filter apparatus to 

detect any possible laboratory contamination from filter units 

and extraction/ purification reagents. Filters were frozen for 

later processing. DNA from bacteria and particulates retained 

by filtration was obtained from the frozen filters using a Water 

Kit (MoBio, Carlsbad, CA) following the manufacturer’s 

instructions. The filtered water was processed to concentrate 

and purify dissolved DNA. Dissolved DNA was obtained from 

the filtrate of the samples and was concentrated and purified according to a previously published method (Matsui and 

others, 2004) with minor modifications. Specifically, 0.25 M 

EDTA was used to re-dissolve precipitated DNA complexes 

and chelate calcium and magnesium, rather than the TE buffer 

used in the original procedure. Recovered DNA was further 

purified by combining it with the corresponding reserved, 

frozen filter and extraction with a Water DNA Kit (Epicentre, 

Madison, WI) following the manufacturer’s instructions. The 

purified DNA was further concentrated by ultra-filtration using 

an Amicon Ultra-4 30,000 MW spin concentration device 

(Millipore, Billerica, MA).

Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (QPCR) was used 

to detect host DNA sequences, specifically the presence of 

mitochondrial cytochrome b sequences from humans (Homo 

sapiens) and cows (Bos taurus), using methods developed at 

the Center during the course of this project. These methods are 

similar in approach, but developed independently, from that 

of Martellini and others (2005). Significant differences, that 

should increase the sensitivity of detection, are that targeted 

sequences were smaller in this study (approximately 100-200 

base pairs) as opposed to those published by Martellini 

(400-934 base pairs). Targeting smaller sequences should 

yield increased sensitivity in detecting the DNA expected to 

be degraded in the environment. Also, Martellini and others (2005) only analyzed DNA that was retained by filters or 

sedimented by centrifugation while the current study adapted 

techniques for concentrating and purifying dissolved DNA as 

described above. Moreover, the current study used QPCR that 

is inherently more sensitive than the gel electrophoresis used 

in the previous study.

Reactions (25 μL) were conducted using a Corbett 

RotorGene instrument using SYBR Green detection as 

described earlier. Absolute standards for mitochondrial 

sequences were not available, so human placental DNA and 

calf thymus DNA (Sigma, Chicago, IL) were used as surrogates. Decimal dilutions of the surrogate standard DNAs 

were used to generate standard curves that were, in turn, used 

to estimate the amounts of human DNA and cow DNA in 

samples. During the melting curve analysis, double-stranded 

DNA products are dissociated (melted) by increasing temperature and monitoring the dissociation of these gene fragments. 

This is accomplished by following the decrease in the fluorescence of a dye (SYBR Green) that binds specifically to 

double-stranded DNA as particular fragments dissociate. Each 

peak represents a fragment with a unique composition and 

thus represents a particular bacterial species or strain in the 

assemblage (fig. 32). 

Four wells and one spring were tested for the presence 

of human and cow DNA. Balch Spring (Jef-0327S) had high 

levels of microbial contamination (total coliform bacteria) but 

the ball field well (Jef-0590) had very low levels of microbial 

contamination. Both sources contained human DNA, but the 

Balch Spring (Jef-0327S) level was greater than 30 times 

that of the ball field well (Jef-0590) which was just above 

background. Thus, Balch Spring (Jef-0327S) seems to have 

some source of fecal contamination not shared with the ball 

field well (Jef-0590). Streamflow measurements and aquifer 

tests documented earlier in this report indicate that the East 

Branch of Hopewell Run loses water to the fault on which 

Balch Spring is situated. The East Branch has numerous cattle 

in its upland recharge area, and manure from these animals 

is believed to be one of the sources of bacterial contamination detected in Balch spring. Another well (USDA fault well; 

Jef-0586) to the north appears to be connected to Balch Spring 

(Jef-0327S) and has shown high levels of fecal contamination, the source of which is both human (majority) and cow, as 

identified directly by DNA analysis. This area is immediately 

down gradient from pastures and a large cluster of single family homes. A connection between this area and Balch Spring 

(Jef-0327S) was established by fluorometric dye-tracer tests 

conducted during the investigation (Test 6, this report).

Two additional wells were drilled to augment water 

supplies for the Center. Both are on the eastern parts of the 

Center property adjacent to Hopewell Run. The first is located 

on the former Dodson farm property (new Dodson farm well; 

Jef-0752), while the second is located on the former Kaiser 

Farm property (new Kaiser farm well; Jef-0753). Both were 

tested for microbial contamination as well as human and 

animal DNA. The new Dodson farm well (Jef-0752) was 

found to be contaminated with coliform bacteria (1,320 colony 

forming units (CFU) / 100 ml of sample), Escherichia coli (40 
Microbial and Molecular Studies - by William B. Schill 83

CFU / 100 ml), and Enterococcus (30 CFU / 100 ml). Human 

DNA was also detected. The new Kaiser Farm well (Jef-0753) 

initially was only lightly contaminated with fecal indicator 

bacteria and was further investigated as a potential production 

source for the Center. The well was shocked with chlorine, 

purged, and retested. Following the shock on March 14, 2006, 

no fecal indicator bacteria were identified, and no human or 

animal DNA was detected. Other bacterial indicators, such as 

Bacteroides and Cyanobacteria, were only detected at trace 

levels. Bacteroides is a marker indicative of fecal contamination (Dick and Field, 2004) and Cyanobacteria is a marker 

associated with a surface connection (Janse and others, 2003). 

The well was retested approximately one month later (April 

16, 2006) after a small rain event. At this time coliform, E. 

coli, and Enterococcus bacteria were detected, but the levels 

of Bacteroides, Cyanobacteria, and total bacterial DNA as 

measured by QPCR (Bertilsson, Cavanaugh, and Polz, 2002) 

did not change significantly (less than or equal to 3 percent). 

This seems to rule out a bulk influx of bacteria into the well 

as a source of the fecal indicator bacteria, and may support the 

premise that the indicators have re-grown or slowly migrated 

back into the well from refugia in the aquifer after the chlorine 

shock. A shift in the bacterial assemblage species composition 

after the chlorine shock was detected by QPCR and melting curve analysis. The increase of some prominent bacterial 

species in the second sample relative to the first was observed 

(fig. 32). After one month and a rainfall event, the bacterial 

assemblage composition was found to have changed dramatically from that observed immediately after the well was 

chlorine shocked. These changes are reflected by the differing 

traces (fig. 32).

Taken together, the bacterial and molecular investigations support the hydrogeological interpretations of potential 

recharge areas to the Center’s springs and wells previously 

discussed. These are (1) deeper connate water such as that 

found at the fault contact between the Martinsburg Formation 

and overlying carbonate units, (2) the Blue and Gray Springs 

complex whose recharge area is principally to the south and 

east of the Center along a series of coalescing thrust faults, 

(3) the large network of diffuse fractures that connects Balch 

Spring with sources to the north and is influenced by shallow 

epikarstic flow and leakage of streamflow from the nearby 

East Branch of Hopewell Run, and (4) a similar diffuse-flow 

source, but located to the east, north of Hopewell Run and 

south of Hite Road (northeast of the Center) and is the principal recharge area for the new Kaiser Farm well (Jef-0753). 

Any future application of these microbial and molecular methods should be directed toward simplifying and standardizing 

methods to allow wider application of these newly developed 

molecular approaches to the study of ground water. Further 

and more frequent sampling of the Center water sources will 

Temperature oC

70 75 80 85 90 95

-δ Fluoresence / 

δ Temperature

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

One month after shock

 Immediately after shock

EXPLANATION

Figure 32. Melting curve analysis of bacterial 16S ribosomal DNA gene fragments amplified by polymerase chain reaction 

from the bacterial assemblage of the new Kaiser farm well, Leetown, West Virginia, on two occasions. [δ (delta), indicates the 

change in fluoresence over time]
84 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

be required to determine what conditions exacerbate or ameliorate ground water contaminant concentrations.

Organic Constituents - by Mark D. Kozar

A wide variety of pesticides and volatile and semi-volatile compounds were analyzed in water samples collected at 

the Center to assess the potential migration of contaminants 

from a former USEPA Superfund pesticide disposal site and 

the Jefferson County, West Virginia landfill and active refuse 

transfer station (sites A and B on fig. 1 and in table 1). Both 

sites are up gradient of the Center and in the recharge areas of 

the Center’s principal springs and well fields.

Most of the inorganic constituents previously discussed, 

with the exception of the nutrient compounds, are derived 

primarily from natural geochemical processes. Organic 

constituents, with a few minor exceptions, are mostly derived 

from anthropogenic (human) sources. Organic compounds 

sampled in wells and springs in the Leetown area include 

triazine, carbamate, and nitrile herbicides, organophosphorous 

and organochlorine insecticides, volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs), semi-volatile organic compounds, and waste-water 

compounds. A full list of all analytes is presented in Appendix 

6. 

Pesticides

Of the 82 pesticides analyzed in water samples collected from 6 wells and 3 springs on the Center, only 6 were 

detected, including atrazine, CIAT, prometon, simazine, 

tebuthiron, and terbacil at maximum concentrations of 0.226, 

0.364, 0.070, 0.045, 0.120, and 0.016 μg/L respectively (app. 

6). Atrazine and CIAT were commonly detected, found in 

water from 8 of 9 sites sampled. Simazine was detected in 7 

samples, prometon in 6 samples, tebuthiron in 3 samples, and 

terbacil in 1 sample. Much of the area adjacent to the Center is 

currently, or was previously, used for agricultural crops (such 

as corn, soy beans and other crops). There were also several 

orchards on land now maintained by the Center. None of the 

sites sampled contained pesticides in concentrations in excess 

of USEPA drinking water standards or aquatic life criteria. 

Volatile and Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds

Approximately 85 VOCs, 63 semi-volatile compounds, 

and 67 constituents commonly detected in waste water were 

also analyzed for in water samples (app. 6) collected from 

10 sites, (7 wells and 3 springs). Only 4 sites (1 well and 3 

springs) were sampled for the waste water compounds. Of 

the 215 non-pesticide organic compounds analyzed, 10 were 

detected in water from at least one of the sites sampled (app. 

6). These include: 1,1,1-trichloroethane detected in samples 

from 3 of 10 sites; phenols, tetrachloroethene, and toluene in 4 

of 10 sites sampled; and 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, acetone, m + 

p-xylenes, o-xylene, and trichloromethane detected only once. 

As with the pesticides, none of the sites sampled had concentrations of volatile, semi-volatile, or waste-water compounds 

that exceeded USEPA drinking-water standards or aquaticlife criteria. Acetone was detected at a concentration of 8.0 

μg/L and toluene was detected at a concentration 1.1 μg/L 

at separate sites. All other concentrations of non-pesticide 

organic compounds detected were less than 1.0 μg/L. None 

of the constituents analyzed were present in concentrations 

exceeding USEPA drinking-water standards or aquatic-life 

criteria (table 17) The 8.0 μg/L detection of acetone was the 

highest concentration of any pesticide, VOC, or semi-volatile 

compound detected and likely was contaminated in an isolated 

event during drilling or development of the well.

Ground-Water Age Constituents and 

Radionuclides - by Mark D. Kozar

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are stable compounds 

developed in the late 1930’s that are commonly used as 

refrigerants and solvents. Three CFC compounds, trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11), dichlorodifluoromethane (CFC-12), 

and trichlorotrifluoroethane (CFC-113), are commonly used as 

environmental tracers in ground-water investigations. Because 

CFCs are relatively stable in an aquifer under ideal conditions, ground water preserves a record of the prevailing CFC 

atmospheric concentrations at the time infiltration reaches the 

water table. Therefore, the apparent CFC recharge date of the 

water sample can be computed by comparing calculated partial 

pressures of CFCs in solubility equilibrium with the sample 

to historical concentrations of CFCs in the North American 

atmosphere from about 1940 to the present (Busenberg and 

Plummer, 1992; Plummer and others, 1993; and Plummer and 

Busenberg, 2000). 

Ground-water age dating with CFCs is based on partitioning of CFCs between the gas phase and the liquid phase at the 

base of the unsaturated zone. This partitioning is governed by 

Henry’s Law of solubility and requires knowledge of recharge 

temperatures estimated from dissolved gas data (Busenberg 

and Plummer, 1992). 

Dissolved Gases

Ground-water samples were collected for analysis of 

dissolved gases at five CFC sampling sites to estimate groundwater recharge temperatures (table 19). Dissolved-gas data 

for the wells at the Center are presented by White and Mathes 

(2006). To calculate air-equilibrium CFC concentrations in a 

sample, it is critical that the temperature of water recharging 

the aquifer be measured or estimated as accurately as possible 

from N2

-Ar solubility data (Heaton, 1981). Recharge temperature estimates are calculated by plotting N2

-Ar solubilities, at total pressures of 760 mm Hg and excess-air contents 

of 0 to 20 cm3/kg H2O, against N2- and Ar-concentration data 

collected from the wells sampled for CFCs (Weiss, 1970). 
Ground-Water Age Constituents and Radionuclides - by Mark D. Kozar 85

Recharge temperature estimates from the 5 wells at the Center 

ranged from 11.4 to 15.9 oC; mean annual air temperature 10 

miles from the Center at Martinsburg, West Virginia is 12.1 oC 

(NOAA, 2006).

Like the N2 and Ar data, dissolved-methane concentrations can be used to identify samples for which input parameters into CFC-age calculations need careful consideration. 

Methane can be of natural origin in reducing environments or 

produced from microbial degradation of VOCs. The degradation of CFCs in anoxic conditions can affect ground-water 

recharge temperature and CFC age estimates. In these reducing environments where CFCs are degraded primarily by dechlorination reactions that produce hydrochlorofluorocarbons 

(HCFCs), the CFC method results in apparent ages that are 

older than the actual age of the sample. Only one of the CFC 

sample sites at the Center (Jef-0603 – site 34 on fig. 1 and in 

table 1) contained methane (3.2 mg/L). Jef-0603 is completed 

at the contact between the Chambersburg Limestone and the 

underlying Martinsburg Formation. 

Tritium

Water samples from 2 wells and 3 springs were analyzed for tritium; concentrations ranged from 19.8 to 25.6 

pCi/L with a median of 25.0 pCi/L, roughly equivalent to 

7.83 tritium units (TU). Current tritium concentrations in the 

atmosphere are approximately 8.2 TU and concentrations prior 

to 1953 typically were less than 8.8 TU. Thus, reconstruction of local tritium atmospheric curves for the Leetown area 

indicate that such low tritium concentrations (6.2 to 8.0 TU) 

are probably representative of either older water, prior to the 

mid-1960’s bomb peak (> 40 years in age) or are very young, 

recently recharged water (< 6 years in age). Another possibility is that the tritium data represent a mixture of older and 

younger ground water. It is probable that significant components of both older and younger water are reflected in the 

samples. The younger water would represent the rapid flow 

detected in the epikarst by dye-tracer tests and the older water 

would represent deeper flow in the diffuse-flow dominated 

network of interconnected fractures. 

Chlorofluorocarbons

The three chlorofluorocarbon compounds (CFCs) commonly used to estimate the apparent age of a ground-water 

sample are CFC-11 (trichlorofluoromethane), CFC-12 (dichlorofluoromethane), and CFC-113 (trichlorotrifluoroethane). 

CFC concentrations were highly variable and ranged from 25, 

17, and 31 to 2,149; 22,839; and 94 picograms per kilogram 

(pg/kg) of CFC-11, CFC-12, and CFC-113, respectively (table 

19). A comprehensive discussion of CFC data-collection 

techniques, laboratory-analysis methods, and applications is 

presented in a statewide assessment of ground-water age in 

West Virginia, and includes the data collected in the Leetown 

area (McCoy and Kozar, 2007a). The variability in ranges of 

CFC concentrations for replicate samples was fairly low; most 

sites had less than a 10 percent variation. Where variability 

was greater, it is possible that water of different ages and from 

separate fracture zones was being intercepted by the well at 

various times during purging and sampling. Final apparent 

CFC ground-water age determinations were based on: (1) 

mixing ratios if any combination of the three CFC compounds 

fell within mixing and piston flow boundaries and were not 

degraded or contaminated; (2) piston-flow models if data plot 

along the piston-flow line; or (3) piston-flow models if only a 

single tracer was suitable for dating. Of the 5 sample locations 

at the Center, only CFC samples from sites Jef-0590, Jef-0585, 

and Jef-0603 (sites 48, 38, and 34, on fig. 1 and in table 1) 

were suitable for dating. Apparent ages from these wells 

ranged from 15 to 45 years (table 19) (McCoy and Kozar, 

2007a).

Because CFCs were commonly used as refrigerants and 

solvents in industrial and domestic applications, contamination of ground water with CFCs is common in karst aquifers 

where such near-surface or atmospheric sources are prevalent. 

However, gross contamination is readily recognized because 

calculated concentrations of a particular CFC in equilibrium 

with the atmosphere will be much larger than the highest concentration of the CFC used in developing the air-concentration 

curves. Contamination is evident in samples containing 

concentrations above potential maximum air-water equilibrium at 10°C, and such samples cannot be used to calculate 

apparent ages (table 19). Contamination was found in 4 of the 

5 CFC-11 and CFC-12 samples collected at the Center. Nearly 

all CFC concentrations from a recent study in West Virginia 

(McCoy and Kozar, 2007a) exceeded the 5 pg/kg threshold 

value established by Nelms and others (2003) for aquifer vulnerability in Virginia. 

On the basis of CFC data (table 19), the one spring site 

tested (Blue Spring – Jef-659S) appears to have been contaminated and therefore the age of water for this sample is not 

reliable. An old disposable area for junked vehicles is located 

along the strike of bedrock and up gradient of Blue Spring. 

This area is a suspected source of contamination to the spring. 

Of the three remaining sites, the ball field well at the Center 

(Jef-0590 – site 48 on fig. 1 and in table 1) is the shallowest 

of the wells tested at 160 ft in depth. The well also receives a 

majority of water from a large cavernous area between 70 and 

81 ft bls and a fracture at approximately 36 ft bls. The apparent age of water from well Jef-0590 is fairly young at approximately 15 years in age. The intermediate depth well (Jef-0585) 

was drilled in a diffuse dominated portion of the aquifer and is 

326 ft deep. Water samples collected from this well were taken 

at a fracture at a depth of between 285 ft and the bottom of 

the well, by using a packer and submersible pump assembly. 

The apparent age of water from this well was approximately 

23 years. Finally, the deepest interval tested was in the 475 ft 

deep well (Jef-0603) completed at the fault contact between 

the overlying Chambersburg Limestone and underlying Martinsburg Formation. The apparent age of water from this well 

was 45 years, and most of the water entering this well is likely 
86 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia Table 19. Chlorofluorocarbon, tritium, helium, neon, dissolved gas, and isotope data from water samples collected from selected wells and springs sampled at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia [pg/kg, picograms per kilogram; contam, contaminated; np, not possible; %, percent] Station Number Station Name Sampling Date Concentration in Solution % young in Mix from CFC-12 Estimated date of recharge Estimated age of water (years)1 CFC-11 (pg/kg) CFC-12 (pg/ kg) CFC-113 (pg/kg) CFC-11 Age (years) CFC-12 Age (years) CFC-113 Age (years) 392101077554901 Jef-0590 9/16/2004 2148.89 1285.85 86.30 contam. contam. 9.2 np 1989 15 392101077554901 Jef-0590 9/16/2004 2047.84 1187.36 74.04 contam. contam. 15.2 np 392101077554901 Jef-0590 9/16/2004 1987.92 1174.79 73.29 contam. contam. 15.2 np 392049077554601 Jef-0659S 9/16/2004 1328.90 515.49 93.94 contam. contam. Modern np 2004 <2 392049077554601 Jef-0659S 9/16/2004 1298.24 511.95 94.34 contam. contam. Modern np 392117077550302 Jef-0585 7/21/2004 995.62 22247.65 28.52 contam. contam. 22.6 np 1981 23 392117077550302 Jef-0585 7/21/2004 1018.76 22839.35 28.05 contam. contam. 22.6 np

392117077550301 Jef-0592 7/27/2004 898.90 10076.55 90.26 contam. contam. contam. np No age estimate possible as 

CFCs contaminated above maximum atmospheric levels

392117077550301 Jef-0592 7/27/2004 869.76 9670.41 88.63 contam. contam. contam. np

392119077554701 Jef-0603 9/16/2004 24.71 19.12 31.00 45.7 46.2 23.7 43.5 1959 45

392119077554701 Jef-0603 9/16/2004 25.01 16.74 30.71 45.7 47.2 23.7 27.5

1 Ground-water age was based on an average of estimate for replicate samples excluding outlier data. 
Ground-Water Age Constituents and Radionuclides - by Mark D. Kozar 87

Table 19-continued. Chlorofluorocarbon, tritium, helium, neon, isotope and dissolved gas data from water samples collected from selected wells and springs sampled at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia[nd, not determined; cc/g, cm3/gram; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; nmols/kg; nano moles per kilogram; oC, degrees Celsius; mm Hg, millimeters of mercury; H O, 

2

water; STP, standard temperature and pressure; d, delta]

 Station Number Station 

Name

 Sampling 

Date

d Deuterium (per 

mil)

d Oxygen-18 18 

(per mil)

Tritium 

2-sigma 

(pCi/L)

Tritium 

(pCi/L)

 Helium (nMols/

kg)

 Hydrogen 

(nMols/

kg)

 Neon 

(nMols/

kg)

Helium 

(cc/g 

of H O 

2

@ stp)

Hydrogen 

(cc/g 

of H O 

2

@ stp)

Neon 

(cc/g 

of H O 

2

@ stp)

392117077550302 Jef-0585 7/21/2004 -51.1 -8.12 1.6 19.8 nd nd nd nd nd nd

392049077554601 Jef-0659S 9/15/2004 -50.7 -8.25 1.6 25.0 4.4 1.30 13.6 100 29.2 305

392117077550301 Jef-0592 7/27/2004 -50.0 -8.26 1.6 24.6 nd nd nd nd nd nd

392101077554901 Jef-0590 9/16/2004 -49.6 -7.96 nd nd 3.3 0.78 11.6 73 17.5 259

392117077550304 Jef-0601 9/14/2004 -51.5 -8.25 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd

392042077554301 Jef-0521S 9/13/2004 -50.9 -8.22 1.9 25.3 nd nd nd nd nd nd

392110077555201 Jef-0327S 9/14/2004 -47.0 -7.35 1.6 25.6 nd nd nd nd nd nd

392037077553501 Jef-0594 9/15/2004 -49.7 -8.05 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd

392119077554701 Jef-0603 9/16/2004 -50.2 -8.20 nd nd 216.7 26.83 nd 4858 601.4 nd

392121077551701 Jef-0587 9/14/2004 -48.6 -8.13 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd

392051077544301 Jef-0602 9/15/2004 -49.1 -8.06 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd

392102077554801 Jef-0584 9/16/2004 -46.4 -7.40 nd nd nd nd nd nd nd nd
88 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia Table 19-continued. Chlorofluorocarbon, tritium, helium, neon, isotope and dissolved gas data from water samples collected from selected wells and springs sampled at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia [stp/L, standard temperature and pressure per Liter; mg/L, milligrams per Liter; ft ab ls, feet above land surface; mg/L, milligrams per Liter; ft ab msl, feet above mean sea level; %, percent; oC, degrees Celsius; mm Hg, millimeters of mercury; cc, cubic centimeter] Station Number Station Name Sampling Date Water Tempera- ture (oC) Nitrogen (mg/L) Argon (mg/L) Oxygen (mg/L) Carbon Dioxide (mg/L) Methane (mg/L) Recharge Elevation (ft ab ls) Barom- eteric Pressure (mm Hg) Recharge Tempera- ture (oC) Excess Air cc stp/L 392101077554901 Jef-0590 9/16/2004 12.6 19.823 0.6790 0.29 67.49 0.000 500.0 746.2 13.5 3.3 392101077554901 Jef-0590 9/16/2004 12.6 21.627 0.7148 0.83 67.27 0.000 500.0 746.2 12.9 4.9 392101077554901 Jef-0590 9/16/2004 12.6 19.781 0.6812 0.46 66.65 0.000 500.0 746.2 13.1 3.1 392101077554901 Jef-0590 9/16/2004 12.6 19.985 0.6841 0.60 67.02 0.000 500.0 746.2 13.2 3.3 392049077554601 Jef-0659S 9/16/2004 13.3 21.083 0.7093 0.25 56.04 0.000 500.0 746.2 12.4 4.2 392049077554601 Jef-0659S 9/16/2004 13.3 20.832 0.7051 0.47 55.85 0.000 500.0 746.2 12.4 3.9 392049077554601 Jef-0659S 9/16/2004 13.3 20.057 0.6873 0.21 57.28 0.000 500.0 746.2 12.9 3.3 392049077554601 Jef-0659S 9/16/2004 13.3 20.713 0.7005 0.55 56.11 0.000 500.0 746.2 12.7 3.9 392117077550302 Jef-0585 7/21/2004 13.7 21.237 0.6908 0.06 39.79 0.000 540.0 745.1 15.0 5.2 392117077550302 Jef-0585 7/21/2004 13.7 21.210 0.6922 0.06 39.42 0.000 540.0 745.1 14.7 5.1 392117077550302 Jef-0585 7/21/2004 13.7 21.187 0.6927 0.06 39.42 0.000 540.0 745.1 14.6 5.1 392117077550302 Jef-0585 7/21/2004 13.7 21.040 0.6874 0.06 39.34 0.000 540.0 745.1 15.0 5.0

392117077550301 Jef-0592 7/27/2004 14.5 20.760 0.6740 1.00 56.96 0.000 540.0 745.1 16.1 5.1

392117077550301 Jef-0592 7/27/2004 14.5 21.066 0.6812 1.21 57.30 0.000 540.0 745.1 15.8 5.3

392117077550301 Jef-0592 7/27/2004 14.5 20.708 0.6766 1.38 56.43 0.000 540.0 745.1 15.7 4.9

392117077550301 Jef-0592 7/27/2004 14.5 20.644 0.6718 1.46 56.17 0.000 540.0 745.1 16.1 5.0

392119077554701 Jef-0603 9/16/2004 14.1 25.779 0.7994 0.06 29.32 3.311 510.0 745.9 11.2 8.6

392119077554701 Jef-0603 9/16/2004 14.1 25.793 0.7973 0.07 29.07 3.346 510.0 745.9 11.5 8.7

392119077554701 Jef-0603 9/16/2004 14.1 25.953 0.7980 0.07 29.56 3.387 510.0 745.9 11.7 8.9

392119077554701 Jef-0603 9/16/2004 14.1 25.428 0.7940 0.07 29.34 3.192 510.0 745.9 11.2 8.2
Ground-Water Age Constituents and Radionuclides - by Mark D. Kozar 89

derived from the nearly 2-ft wide solution void encountered at 

the bottom of the borehole. The CFC data correlate well with 

similar ground-water depth relations indicated by deuterium 

and oxygen-18 samples collected during the investigation.

Deuterium/Oxygen 18

A total of 11 sites were sampled for analyses of the stable 

isotopes (table 19) deuterium (δ2H) and oxygen-18 (δ18O) 

to help qualitatively assess the potential depths of flow and 

better understand potential areas of recharge. A plot of the 

δ18O and δ2H values shows three distinct regions of potential 

ground-water groupings (fig. 33). The data for Balch Spring 

(Jef-0327S) and the bone yard upper well (Jef-0584) lie along 

an evaporative trend away from the average value of the other 

samples, which lie closer to the meteoric water line (MWL); 

mean precipitation for the region is represented by the MWL. 

The slope of this line parallels the Global Meteoric Water Line 

(GMWL) at approximately 8 (fig. 33); however, the deuterium 

excess value is greater for this region at 16.1 (Plummer et 

al, 2001). Thus, these two ground-water sources seem most 

affected by evaporative enrichment. This could be due to mixing with surface water that has undergone evaporation, such as 

might be found in nearby wetlands adjacent to Blue and Gray 

Springs (Jef-0659S and Jef-0521S). 

Generally, samples that are isotopically heavier tend 

to indicate older and deeper waters than isotopically lighter 

waters which tend to represent younger and shallower water. 

Ground-water samples that show relatively higher δ18O and 

δ2H values indicate waters that have either undergone recharge 

or mixed with waters derived from precipitation at lower 

elevations (higher temperatures), or water that may have 

experienced a certain degree of evaporative enrichment (fig. 

33). Evaporative enrichment would be evident by an evolution 

of water along a slope of approximately 5 (a dimensionless 

number) away from the meteoric water line (MWL). 

Balch Spring (Jef-0327S) is believed to discharge a significant component of relatively shallow ground water based 

on its water chemistry, its bacteria and DNA composition, and 

results of aquifer tests conducted in the area. The isotopic data 

support the premise of a significant proportion of shallow flow 

as samples from Balch Spring and the nearby bone yard upper 

well (Jef-0584) both exhibit an isotopically heavier signature 

than the other local ground waters. The older waters identified 

as part of CFC dating, the USDA sulfur well (Jef-0603) and 

stable well B (Jef-0585), exhibit the lowest isotopic signature 

of the wells sampled and analyzed (group D on fig. 33). The 

Figure 33. Relation of oxygen-18 and deuterium isotopes showing evaporative enrichment trend for sites sampled on the USGS 

Leetown Science Center, West Virginia.

-54

-53

-52

-51

-50

-49

-48

-47

-46

-45

-44

-8.5 -8.3 -8.1 -7.9 -7.7 -7.5 -7.3 -7.1

δ18O per mil

δ2H per mil

Meteoric Water Line

(Plummer et al., 2001)

Blue Spring 

(Jef-0659S)

Gray Spring 

(Jef-0521S)

Balch Spring 

(Jef-0327S)

Stable wells (Jef-0601,

Jef-0585, and Jef-0592)

USDA Sulfur Well 

(Jef-0603)

Low Road Well

 (Jef-0587)

Boneyard Upper Well 

(Jef-0584)

Other conduit wells 

(Jef-0602, Jef-0594, and

Jef-0590)

Meteoric Water Line

Evaporative Enrichment Trend

Evaporative Enrichment Trend

EXPLANATION
90 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

ball field well (Jef-0590) and several others have isotopic 

signatures that are intermediate. Even though the bone yard 

upper well (Jef-0584) and Balch Spring (Jef-0327S) were 

not sampled for CFCs as part of this investigation, it is likely 

the ages of water for these two sites would be significantly 

younger than the 15-year apparent age of water from the ball 

field well. Finally, Blue and Gray Springs (sites Jef-0659S and 

Jef-0521S) obviously have a different isotopic signature than 

Balch Spring. Whereas Balch Spring represents ground water 

mixing with evaporated surface water, the isotopic data and 

water-level responses previously discussed for Gray Spring 

indicate that these springs are more representative of meteoric 

recharge that has not undergone significant evaporative enrichment.

Macroinvertebrates - by Mark D. Kozar

On May 4, 2005, Wil Orndorff of the Virginia Natural 

Heritage Program worked with Mark Kozar and Kurt McCoy 

of the USGS to sample 6 wells and 1 spring at the Center for 

macroinvertebrate stygobitic crustaceans (Craig Stihler, West 

Virginia Division of Natural Resources, oral commun., 2007). 

The crustaceans were collected using baited traps to assess 

the range and variability of Antrolana lira, commonly known 

as the Madison Cave Isopod, a species listed as threatened 

in the region. The full range of Antrolana lira, especially in 

the Eastern Panhandle of West Virginia, had not been well 

documented. Traps consisted of perforated plastic containers, with approximately 500 mL capacity, with raw shrimp 

as bait, and were weighted to achieve negative bouyancy. 

Traps were left for 15 to 16 hours, at levels approximately 50 

ft below the water surface. The wells sampled were: stable 

A (Jef-0601), low road (Jef-0587), syncline (Jef-0588), old 

Dodson farm (Jef-0602), ball field (Jef-0590), and the USDA 

fault (Jef-0599) wells (table 1). In addition, a trap was left in 

the spring box at Gray Spring (Jef-0521S). 

Two of the wells yielded stygobitic macroinvertebrates 

(aquatic cave animal obligates), the old Dodson farm well 

(Jef-0602) and the ball field well (Jef-0590). Gray Spring 

(Jef-0621S) yielded no individuals, and the syncline well 

(Jef-0588) trap was filled with sediment indicating it had been 

lowered too deeply into the well. The old Dodson farm well 

trap (Jef-0602) captured 10 of the Shenandoah Valley Cave 

Amphipods (Stygobromus gracilipes), up to nearly 2 cm in 

length. The ball field well (Jef-0590) yielded similar numbers of Stygobromus gracilipes, and a 1-cm long specimen of 

Antrolana lira - the federally protected (threatened) Madison 

Cave Isopod. No macroinvertebrate fauna were detected in 

traps from the stable A (Jef-0601), low road (Jef-0587), and 

USDA fault wells (Jef-0599). It should be noted that the two 

wells in which the crustaceans were trapped are high-yield 

wells intersected by significant solution voids. This finding 

indicates a probable relation between high-flow areas and the 

presence of macroinvertebrate fauna. Additional species commonly found in the epikarst that likely reside in the Leetown 

area include Caecidotea priceii (Price’s Cave Isopod) and 

Stygobromus biggersi (Biggers Cave Amphipod). 

Summary

This report summarizes a multi-disciplinary assessment 

of the geology, hydrology, and water quality of the Leetown, 

West Virginia, area, particularly the U.S. Geological Survey’s 

Leetown Science Center. The primary objectives of the investigation were to:

1. assess current and future availability of ground water at 

the Center; 

2. revise the current conceptual model of ground-water flow 

in the area; 

3. develop a monitoring well program for water levels and 

water quality; 

4. conduct detailed aquifer tests to determine hydraulic properties of the aquifer and to assess the impact of pumping 

in certain portions of the aquifer on the yield and longterm availability of existing spring flows; and,

5. determine the potential areas of recharge to the Center’s 

major springs to provide information for protecting the 

availability and quality of water relied on for operations at 

the Center. 

Objective 1 was addressed in an earlier publication summarizing results of simulations made with a ground-water flow 

model developed for the Leetown area.

A multi-disciplinary assessment of the resource was 

conducted due to the complicated nature of the karst aquifer 

from which the Center obtains its water. Geologic mapping, 

fracture-trace and lineament analysis, and surface-geophysical 

surveys provided the framework from which hydrologic investigations were conducted. Hydrologic investigations included 

monitor well installation, stream seepage surveys, stream gaging of Hopewell Run and Gray and Balch Springs, hydrograph 

analysis, estimation of ground-water recharge rates, development of water budgets, water-level monitoring, water-quality 

sampling, borehole geophysical surveys, and aquifer tests. A 

light detection and ranging (LiDAR) survey provided additional data on locations of sinkholes and a digital-elevation 

model (DEM) was developed from the data. The DEM was 

the basis for the upper surface of the ground-water flow model 

developed for the area. Dye tracer tests provided confirming 

evidence of previously mapped ground-water flow patterns 

and velocities. Microbial and DNA studies helped to better 

define the sources of contaminants entering the aquifer as well 

as their potential fate.

Bedrock underlying the Leetown area is primarily fractured limestone and dolomite of the Lower Ordovician and 

Upper Cambrian Conococheague Limestone; Lower Ordovician Stonehenge Limestone, Rockdale Run Formation, and 
Macroinvertebrates - by Mark D. Kozar 91

Pinesburg Station Dolomite; the Middle Ordovician New 

Market and Chambersburg Limestones; and shale of the Upper 

and Middle Ordovician Martinsburg Formation. The geologic 

structure of the area is complex, with numerous thrust faults 

oriented parallel or sub-parallel to the regional bedrock strike 

trending approximately N. 20o E. Cross-strike longitudinal and 

oblique faults also occur with traces at attitudes of approximately N. 80o W. and N. 65o E., respectively. The rocks are 

tectonically deformed, and the numerous upright and overturned folds in the area affect ground-water flow. The overturned folds verge to the northwest with limbs dipping steeply 

towards the southeast.

The flow of ground water in the study area is controlled 

by both lithology and geologic structure. Bedrock, especially 

low permeability lithologic units such as the shale Martinsburg 

Formation and the Conococheague Limestone, act as a barrier 

to water flowing down the hydrologic gradient and across the 

strike of the bedding. This retardation of cross-strike flow is 

especially pronounced in the Leetown area, where the bedding 

typically dips at steep angles. Geologic structures that disrupt 

the rocks in cross-strike directions, especially highly permeable fault and fracture zones, provide avenues through which 

ground water can flow laterally across or through strata of low 

primary permeability. Cross-strike faults are present near the 

Center, parallel to the East Branch of Hopewell Run and parallel to Leetown Pike east of the Center.

The lithology of the bedrock in the study area is as 

important as geologic structure in controlling ground-water 

flow. The relatively low-permeability Conococheague Limestone forms upland areas within the study area. The low 

hydraulic conductivity of the Martinsburg Formation impedes 

water as it flows down gradient towards the Opequon Creek. 

This effectively dams water behind the Martinsburg Formation, forcing water to flow laterally along bedding planes 

and thrust faults that parallel the general geologic strike of 

bedrock in the region (generally N. 20o

 E.). A ridge of the 

Conococheague Limestone just east of the Center also acts as 

a barrier to flow and is primarily responsible for the wetland 

area that forms to the east of the Center along the East Branch 

of Hopewell Run.

Audio-magnetotelluric (AMT) surveys were conducted in 

the area to characterize the resistivity of bedrock and to identify resistivity anomalies. High resistivity areas were found to 

correlate with low permeability bedrock and resistivity lows 

were found to correlate with water-bearing fracture zones and 

faults with a high fluid content or with springs. AMT maps 

and cross-sections show anomalous areas of high and low 

resistivities coincident with the prevailing N. 20o E. geologic 

strike. Examples include a highly resistive anticline and low 

resistivity anomalies along a syncline, near several faults and 

fractures, and along numerous thrust and cross-strike faults. 

Springs show up as low resistivity areas due to the increased 

porosity and higher fluid content in the rock.

Borehole geophysical surveys were conducted in 11 wells 

on the Center to develop a better understanding of the nature 

and distribution of fractures, bedding planes, and faults in the 

subsurface. Standard borehole surveys included temperature, 

electrical and fluid-resistivity, EM induction, spontaneouspotential, and gamma logs. In addition to the standard logs, 

acoustic and optical-televiewer logs were compiled to identify 

the location and attitude of fractures within the boreholes. 

Once the fractures had been identified, electromagnetic and 

heat-pulse flow logs were used to assess the potential flow of 

water from the fractures. 

Results of the borehole surveys indicate that although 

numerous fractures may intersect a borehole, only one or two 

of the fractures typically transmit most of the water to a well. 

Matrix porosity and permeability are negligible and occur in 

micro fractures within the rock. Many of the smaller fractures 

provide storage potential for water but are not major avenues 

of ground-water flow. These less dominant fractures yield 

water to larger fractures, which in turn are drained by solutionally enlarged conduits within the carbonate rock. The conduits 

typically occur along thrust and cross-strike faults or parallel to bedding planes and drain water over a large area. The 

diffuse-flow dominated network of fractures, while occupying 

only a minor proportion of the total aquifer volume, constitutes the majority of porosity within the aquifer. Solution conduits, while occupying a relatively small volume of the overall 

aquifer, are especially important because they are the primary 

drains for the ground-water flow system. 

The majority of solutionally enlarged conduits occur in a 

relatively thin zone within the epikarst to a depth of between 

30 and 60 ft, but some smaller conduits are present as deep 

as 200 ft. Below the epikarst, a zone of less weathered and 

moderately fractured bedrock is present, and permeability 

of the rock decreases with depth. This intermediate zone of 

moderately fractured bedrock does not typically contain the 

high density of solutionally enlarged conduits that are evident 

within the epikarst. 

Numerous single-well, multiple-well, step drawdown, and 

discrete-zone (packer) aquifer tests were conducted to assess 

the hydraulic properties of the aquifer; including transmissivity, hydraulic conductivity, and storativity. Representation of 

ground-water movement through an intricate fracture network 

drained by solution conduits requires a thorough knowledge 

of the orientation of fractures and quantification of aquifer 

properties. Transmissivity, derived from straddle packer tests, 

was determined to range over three orders of magnitude (1.8 x 

10-6 to 5.9 x 10-3 ft2

/d) in the diffuse-flow dominated portion of 

the aquifer, which indicates a high variability in the hydraulic 

properties of individual fracture zones. Although a general 

decrease in transmissivity with depth is evident, it does not 

appear to be correlated with an associated decrease in fracture 

aperture. Despite the large number of fractures in these boreholes, most are unproductive, discontinuous, and poorly interconnected. Supporting evidence from borehole logs shows that 

in diffuse flow portions of the aquifer, most of the flow occurs 

only through one or two fractures intersecting the borehole. 

A large variability in transmissivity also was documented 

by single- and multi-well aquifer tests conducted in conduitflow dominated portions of the aquifer (2.0 x 103

 to 1.4 x 
92 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

104 ft2/d) in the lowland areas immediately adjacent to the 

Leetown Science Center’s main administration and laboratory buildings. This area is dominated by coalescing thrust 

faults and was found to define a broad, well connected aquifer 

exhibiting nearly radial flow characteristics. Drawdown, as a 

result of pumping production wells in this area, was almost 

instantaneously reflected by water levels in monitoring wells 

approximately a half mile away from the production wells. 

The karst ground-water flow system in the Leetown area 

comprises a triple porosity flow system with small matrix 

porosity representing one end of the karst continuum and 

solutionally enlarged conduits representing the other end. 

Fractures of various aperture widths fall in the intermediate 

interval between the extremes. Fractures characteristic of the 

intermediate interval typically have transmissivities between 

5.9 x 10-3 and 2.0 x 103 ft2/d. Based on analyses of available 

aquifer-test data, related extensional fractures along the eastern limb of an overturned anticline may provide more sustainable water volumes than comparable locations along compression or shear zones. 

A stream-gaging station was installed on Hopewell Run 

near the point where the stream exits the Leetown watershed. 

Average daily streamflow for the Hopewell Run at Leetown 

gaging station, for the period from April 2003 through March 

2006, was approximately 11.2 ft3

/s, and ranged from a minimum of 1.80 ft3

/s on September 28, 2005, to a maximum of 

73.0 ft3/s on December 11, 2003. Stream flow exhibits typical 

seasonal fluctuations, being highest in the winter months when 

evapotranspiration is least and lowest in late summer when 

evapotranspiration is highest. Flow-duration statistics, estimated by correlation of the Hopewell Run gage with the longterm record of the nearby gaging station on Opequon Creek 

at Martinsburg, provides flow data from which management 

of water availability to the Center may be assessed, especially 

during periods of low streamflow in late summer to early 

fall. The flow data can provide a measure of available water 

resources in the watershed.

Base-flow (ground-water) discharge surveys were also 

conducted in the study area to document streamflow gains and 

losses and assess ground-water inputs to stream flow. Numerous small seeps were identified during the surveys. Generally, 

most measurements showed increases in stream flow from 

upstream to downstream areas. A few notable exceptions, 

however, were documented. The East Branch of Hopewell Run 

and the channel that drains the Blue and Gray Spring complex 

both traverse thrust faults at right angles. A loss of stream flow 

was measured across the thrust faults at two separate locations during both periods. A loss of 0.35 ft3

/s was measured 

in the Gray and Blue Spring tributary on June 30, 2004, and a 

smaller loss of 0.002 ft3

/s was measured on the same tributary 

during a lower base flow period on October 26, 2004. For the 

East Branch of Hopewell Run a loss of 0.87 ft3/s was measured across the same series of faults on June 30, 2004, and 

a corresponding smaller loss of 0.17 ft3/s was measured for 

the East Branch near West Virginia County Route 1 during 

a lower base-flow period on October 26, 2004. The losses 

are attributed to streamflow loss to ground water across the 

faults. Since the stage of Balch Spring is artificially lowered 

due to pumping and Balch Spring and the Center’s production wells A and B are located along the same fault, it is likely 

that ground-water withdrawals from the spring and wells may 

induce additional capture of stream water by the fault.

Water-level measurements were made in 23 wells across 

the Center to assess potential factors affecting the levels. Topographic variability in water levels is pronounced, with shallower water levels common in lowland areas and deeper water 

levels common in upland areas (hillside and hilltop settings). 

Depth to water in upland wells is approximately twice that of 

lowland wells. There is also a significant seasonal variability 

in water levels, which are typically lowest in late summer to 

early fall and highest in the winter to early spring. Continuous 

water-level data for a long-term monitoring well (Jef-0526) 

also was analyzed. The average maximum and minimum 

monthly water levels for well Jef-0526 for the period of record 

(1985-2005) occur, respectively, in the months of April (21.39 

ft below land surface) and September (23.06 ft below land 

surface). Close inspection of the water-level hydrograph for 

the well indicate that ground-water levels in the Leetown area 

respond quickly to precipitation.

At the Leetown Science Center, hydrographs of the flow 

of Balch Spring show rapid response to individual storm 

pulses. Strong correlation of the spring flow with Hopewell 

Run gage data and loss of flow in the east branch of Hopewell 

Run adjacent to Balch Spring (Evaldi and Paybins, 2006) indicates the nearby losing stream reach is partly responsible for 

higher fluctuations in the stage of Balch Spring during storms 

than those noted in the hydrograph of Gray Spring. Likewise, 

examination of the recession limbs for both springs indicates 

that the flow of Gray Spring declines at a much lower rate 

than the flow of Balch Spring. This may be partly due to a 

higher proportion of flow in Gray Spring being derived from 

a broader network of diffuse fractures than in Balch Spring, 

which appears to have a distinctive conduit signature.

A water budget was prepared for the Hopewell Run basin 

based on measured streamflow and precipitation. The measured components of the budget include average precipitation 

of 38.60 in/yr, estimated change in storage of -4.72 in/yr, and 

total stream flow of 19.09 in/yr (surface runoff of 1.36 in/yr 

and ground-water discharge of 17.73 in/yr) based on hydrograph analyses. Assuming changes in storage to be negligible 

for steady-state conditions, the water budget equation may be 

written as: Precipitation (P) = surface runoff (SRO) + groundwater discharge (GWD) + evapotranspiration (ET) ± storage 

effects (δS); or P (38.60 in/yr) = SRO (1.36 in/yr) + GWD 

(17.73 in/yr) + ET (24.23 in/yr) - δS (4.72 in/yr). 

Flow of ground water through the epikarst, a shallow 

zone of intensely weathered rock and regolith, can be rapid 

(on the order of days or weeks). This is especially true if flow 

is concentrated in solution-enlarged conduits. Flow within 

the intermediate and deeper zones is typically much slower. 

Estimates of ground-water age in carbonate rocks in the 

region are on the order of 15 years in the shallower portions 
Macroinvertebrates - by Mark D. Kozar 93

of the aquifer to 50 years or older for deeper portions of the 

aquifer (McCoy and Kozar, 2007a). Within the study area, 

local ground-water flow is primarily from the topographically 

higher areas in the east toward Opequon Creek to the west. 

The hydrogeologic setting of the Leetown area is desirable 

from a ground-water development perspective because large 

quantities of ground water are funneled through the area 

where the Center is located. This is also the primary reason for 

the highly productive springs that have historically supplied 

ground water for Center operations.

Eight dye-tracer tests were conducted in the Leetown area 

to further refine the understanding of ground-water flow rates 

and directions, especially to the Center’s principal springs and 

wells. The tests confirmed the results of previous tracer tests 

conducted in the area in the early 1980s. Ground-water flow 

patterns were found to be divergent, with flow velocities ranging from about 12.5 to 610 ft/day with a median velocity of 

approximately 50 ft/day. The tracer tests also helped document 

that streams gain and lose water to the aquifer, especially in 

the vicinity of major faults.

LiDAR data were analyzed to assess potential locations 

of sinkholes and to provide elevation data for the groundwater flow model described earlier. A 2-m spatial resolution DEM with a root mean square error of 0.30 ft (0.09 m) 

provided the elevation data for the upper layer of the model, 

and was significantly more accurate than the existing 30- or 

10-m DEMs typically available for most areas of the country. 

Using the LiDAR-derived DEM and geographic information 

systems-based terrain analysis, 94 small circular depressions 

were mapped as potential sinkholes in the Leetown area. 

Visual inspection of all mapped depressions in field visits 

was attempted, but 39 sites were inaccessible. Of the 55 sites 

that were visited, 63 percent were natural depressions that are 

possible sinkholes, including 9 features with obvious drainage holes. LiDAR shows great promise as a tool for sinkhole 

mapping, and applications for fracture-trace and lineament 

analysis are equally as promising. The low density of sinkholes in the Leetown area further reflects the dominance of 

the fractured-bedrock aquifer (diffuse-flow component) in 

respect to the very low density of solution conduits (conduitflow component) known to occur in the area. It also further 

indicates that focused recharge by way of sinkholes is not a 

dominant process in the Leetown area and recharge is areally 

diffuse over the study area.

Ground-water samples collected from 16 sites (12 wells 

and 4 springs) in the Leetown area were analyzed for a wide 

variety of chemical constituents to characterize the current 

quality of ground water and to provide a baseline for assessment of future changes in ground-water quality. Of the more 

than 340 constituents for which samples were analyzed, only 

turbidity, indicator bacteria, and radon were typically present 

in concentrations exceeding U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (USEPA) drinking-water standards or aquatic life criteria. In addition, well Jef-0603 exceeded USEPA secondary 

drinking-water standards for chloride, sulfate, and dissolved 

solids.

Of the 9 wells sampled at Leetown for radon, none contained radon in excess of the 4,000 picocurie per Liter (pCi/L) 

alternate maximum contaminant level (AMCL) but 7 sites 

(78 percent) exceeded the 300 pCi/L proposed primary MCL. 

The maximum concentration of radon detected was 1,280 

pCi/L and the median concentration was 840 pCi/L. As large 

volumes of ground water with potentially high concentrations 

of radon are used in research operations at the Center, testing 

of indoor air in laboratory spaces is advisable.

Turbidity exceeded the 5 nephelometric turbidity unit 

(NTU) USEPA standard in 6 of 11 sites sampled (3 springs 

and 8 wells). Maximum and minimum turbidity concentrations ranged from 0.45 NTU to 270 NTU with a median of 5.1 

NTU. Turbidity was not a problem in the springs sampled, but 

wells are susceptible to turbidity problems. Typically, shallower wells and wells drilled in solution conduits or wells with 

yields greater than 200 gal/min may yield water with high 

turbidity. Turbidity was also shown to be influenced by the 

rate at which wells were pumped. Low to moderate turbidity was evident when wells were pumped at low to moderate 

flow rates (100 gal/min or less), but turbidity concentrations 

increased dramatically due to increased approach velocity 

towards the wells when pump output was increased to higher 

rates (200 gal/min or greater).

For wells and springs sampled at the Center as part of 

this investigation, 10 of 11 (91 percent) tested positive for 

total coliform and 5 of 11 (45 percent) tested positive for fecal 

coliform and E. coli bacteria. The bacterial concentrations are 

similar to those documented in a 1988 ground-water study. 

Five sites were analyzed for the presence of DNA in addition 

to indicator bacteria. Human DNA were detected in Balch 

Spring (Jef-0327S), the new Dodson farm well (Jef-0752), 

and the ball field well (Jef-0590). Cow DNA was detected 

in the USDA fault well (Jef-0586) and the new Kaiser farm 

well (Jef-0753) showed no human or animal DNA. Human 

DNA was detected in wells immediately down gradient from 

a cluster of single-family dwellings, and the cattle DNA was 

detected down gradient from several large pastures. The bacterial and molecular investigations support the hydrogeological interpretations of potential recharge areas to the Center’s 

springs and wells.

Of the 82 pesticides analyzed in water samples collected 

on the Center, only 6 were detected. The pesticides detected 

were atrazine, CIAT, prometon, simazine, tebuthiron, and 

terbacil, at maximum concentrations of 0.226, 0.364, 0.070, 

0.045, 0.120, and 0.016 μg/L, respectively. Atrazine and CIAT 

were detected in water from 8 of 9 sites sampled. Most of the 

area adjacent to the Center is currently or was previously used 

for agricultural crops (e.g. corn, soy beans and other crops). 

There were also several orchards on land now owned by the 

Center. Of the 215 non-pesticide organic compounds analyzed, 10 were detected in water from at a least one of the sites 

sampled. These include toluene in samples from 4 of 10 sites; 

1,1,1-trichloroethane in samples from 3 of 10 sites; phenols, 

tetrachloroethene, and trichloromethane in samples from 2 of 

10 sites and; 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, acetone, m + p-xylenes, 
94 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

o-xylene and trichloromethane were only detected once. None 

of the pesticides or industrial, waste water, volatile, or semivolatile organic compounds analyzed for were detected in 

concentrations exceeding USEPA drinking-water standards or 

aquatic life criteria.

The hardness of water samples from wells and springs 

on the Center ranged from 290 to 550 mg/L as CaCO3, with 

a median of 350 mg/L. As such, all the samples are classified 

as extremely hard water. Pipe and boiler scale deposits are a 

problem and could result in corrosion of galvanized or copper 

pipe commonly used in plumbing.

The apparent age of ground water was determined 

from analysis of chlorofluorocarbon data and ranged from 

15 to 45 years. The oldest water (45 years in age) dated was 

obtained from a thrust fault at a depth of approximately 475 

ft. The youngest water (15 years in age) was obtained from 

a shallow 160-ft deep well with dominant fractures from 20 

to 50 ft below land surface, which intersects a large cavern. 

Intermediate-age water (23 years in age) was obtained using 

a packer and submersible pump assembly from a well drilled 

in a diffuse-flow dominated portion of the aquifer. The well 

sampled is 326 ft deep with major fractures at a depth of 

between 285 ft below land surface and the bottom of the well. 

Results of the CFC age dating analyses compared favorably 

with qualitative estimates of circulation depths assessed from 

deuterium/oxygen-18 isotope samples. 

The findings presented in this report are the result of a 

detailed multi-disciplinary hydrogeologic investigation of a 

fracture-dominated karst aquifer system within the Great Valley of West Virginia. Such detailed site specific investigations 

are uncommon, especially one that incorporates such a broad 

scope of standard methods such as dye-tracing, aquifer tests, 

potentiometric surface mapping, baseflow seepage surveys, 

and ground-water modeling with new and innovative applications such as Audio-magnetotellurics, LiDAR sinkhole and 

fracture analysis, and the application of fractured rock investigative techniques to a karst aquifer. The data and findings 

discussed within this report are applicable to similar hydrogeologic settings throughout the Great Valley aquifer which spans 

from Maine to Alabama. The concepts and methods utilized in 

this investigation are also transferable and may be applied to 

many similar fracture-dominated karst aquifers worldwide.

References Cited

Allen, D.M., and Michel, F.A., 1998, Evaluation of multi-well 

test data in a faulted aquifer using linear and radial flow 

models: Ground Water, v. 36, no. 6, p 938-948

Beiber, P.B., 1961, Ground-water features of Berkeley and Jefferson Counties, West Virginia: West Virginia Geological 

Survey Bulletin 21, 81 p.

Bertilsson, S., Cavanaugh, C.M., and Polz, M.F., 2002, 

Sequencing-independent method to generate oligonucleotide probes targeting a variable region in bacterial 16S 

rRNA by PCR with detachable primers: Applied Environmental Microbiology, v. 68, no. 12, p. 6077-86.

Bierschenk, W.H., 1963, Determining well efficiency by 

multiple step-drawdown tests: International Association of 

Science Hydrology Publication 64, p, 493-507.

Bostick, F.X., Jr., 1977, A simple and almost exact method of 

MT analysis: Geothermal Workshop Report, University of 

Utah, USGS contract 14-08-0001-G-359, p. 175-177.

Busenberg, E., and Plummer, L.N., 1992, Use of chlorofluorocarbons (CCl3

F and CCl2F2) as hydrologic tracers and 

age dating tools: the alluvium and terrace system of central 

Oklahoma: Water Resources Research, v. 28, no. 9, p. 

2257-2283.

Cagniard, Louis, 1950, Procedure of geophysical prospecting: 

French patent no. 1025683.

Cagniard, Louis, 1953, Basic theory of the magneto-telluric 

method of geophysical prospecting: Geophysics, v. 18, no. 

3, p. 605-635.

Carlsson, A., and Olsson, T., 1992, The analysis of fractures, 

stress, and water flow for rock engineering projects: Comprehensive Rock Engineering, v. 2, Pergamon Press, Oxford 

England, p. 415-438.

Cooper, H.H., and Jacob, C.E., 1946, A generalized graphical 

method for evaluating formation constants and summarizing 

well field history: American Geophysical Union Transactions, v. 27, no. 4, p. 526-534.

Cornell University, 2006, West Virginia Drought Periods: 

Cornell University internet data for drought periods in West 

Virginia for the period January 1895 through July 2003 

– Based on data available from the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration National Climatic Data Center 

in Asheville, NC; web site http://www.nrcc.cornell.edu/

drought/ WV_drought_periods.html accessed on February 

10, 2006, 4 p.

Dean, S.L., 1966, Geology of the Great Valley of West 

Virginia: Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, West Virginia 

University, Morgantown, West Virginia, 226 p.

Dean, S.L., Lessing, P., and Kulander, B.R., 1990, Geology of 

the Berryville, Charles Town, Harpers Ferry, Middleway, 

and Round Hill quadrangles, Berkeley and Jefferson Counties, West Virginia: West Virginia Geologic and Economic 

Survey, Map-WV35, scale 1:24,000, 1 sheet.

Dick, L.K., and Field, K.G., 2004, Rapid estimation of numbers of fecal bacteroides by use of a quantitative PCR assay 

for 16S rRNA genes: Applied Environmental Microbiology, 

v. 70, no. 9, p. 5695-5697.
References Cited 95

Dmitriev, V.I., and Berdichevsky, M.N., 1979, The fundamental model of magnetotelluric sounding: Piscataway, New 

Jersey, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 

IEEE proceedings, v. 67, no. 7, p. 1034-1044.

Evaldi, R.D., and Paybins, K.S., 2006, Channel gains and 

losses in the Opequon Creek watershed of West Virginia, 

July 25-28, 2005: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 

Report 179, 7 p.

Evans, J.S. and A.T. Hudak. (in press). A progressive curvature filter for identifying ground returns from discrete return 

LiDAR in forested environments. IEE Transactions on 

Geoscience and Remote Sensing. 

Even, H. I., Margaritz, M. and Gerson, R., 1986, Timing 

the transport of water through the upper vadose zone in a 

karstic system above a cave in Israel, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, Vol. 11, p. 181–191.

Fenneman, N.M., 1938, Physiography of Eastern United 

States: New York, McGraw-Hill, 534 p

Fetter, C.W., 1993, Contaminant Hydrogeology, Macmillan 

Publishing Co., New York, 458 p.

Field, M. S., 2002, The QTRACER2 program for tracerbreakthrough curve analysis for hydrological tracer tests: 

Technical Report EPA/600/R-02/001, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., 179 p.

Field, M. S., 2003, Tracer-test planning using the efficient 

hydrologic tracer-test design (EHTD) program: Technical 

Report EPA/600/R-03/034 and EPA/600/CR-03/034, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., 175 p.

Field, M. S., 2006, Tracer-test design for losing stream–aquifer systems, International Journal of Speleology, v. 35, no. 

1, p. 25–36.

Florea, L.J., and Vacher, H.L., 2006, Spring flow hydrographs: 

Eogenetic vs. telogenetic karst: Ground Water, v. 44, no. 3, 

p 352-361.

Frazier, D.A., Jascott, B.J., and McGowan, M.J., 1988, Construction of experimental research ponds at the National 

Fisheries Center, Leetown, West Virginia: Report submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by Merrick and 

Company, Denver Co., 22 p.

Gamble, T.D., Goubau, W.M., and Clarke, J., 1979a, Magnetotellurics with a remote reference: Geophysics, v. 44, p. 

53-68.

Gamble, T.D., Goubau, W.M., and Clarke, J., 1979b, Error 

analysis for remote reference magnetotellurics: Geophysics, 

v. 44, p. 959-968.

Graeff, G.D., Jr., 1953, Ground-water conditions in a typical 

limestone area near Inwood, West Virginia: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report, 6 p.

Hagedorn, C., Reneau, R.B., Saluta, M., and Chapman, A., 

2003, Impact of onsite wastewater systems on water quality 

in coastal regions: Virginia Coastal Resources Management 

Program Memorandum of Agreement 50312-01-13-PT, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Virginia 

Department of Health, Richmond, Virginia, 4 p.

Hantush, M.S., 1964, Hydraulics of wells, in Chow, V.T., ed., 

Advances in Hydroscience, vol. 1: New York, Academic 

Press, p. 281-432,

Harlow, G.E., Jr., Orndorff, R.C., Nelms, D.L., Weary, D.J., 

and Moberg, R.M., 2005, Hydrogeology and ground-water 

availability in the carbonate aquifer system of Frederick 

County, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5161, 30 p.

Heaton, T.H.E., 1981, Dissolved gases: Some applications 

to groundwater research: Transactions of the Geological 

Society of South Africa, v. 84, p. 91-97.

Heid, C.A., Stevens, J., Livak, K.J., and Williams, P.M., 1996, 

Real time quantitative PCR: Genome Research, v. 6, no. 10, 

p. 986-94.

Hem, J.D., 1992, Study and interpretation of the chemical 

characteristics of natural water (3rd. ed.): U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Supply Paper 2254, 263 p.

Hobba, W.A., Jr., Friel, E.A., and Chisholm, J.L., 1972, Water 

resources of the Potomac River basin, West Virginia: West 

Virginia Geologic and Economic Survey, River Basin Bulletin 3, 110 p.

Hobba, W.A., Jr., 1981, Ground-water hydrology of Jefferson 

County, West Virginia: West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey Environmental Geology Bulletin EGB-16, 21 

p.

Hobba, W.A., Jr., 1976, Ground-water hydrology of Berkeley 

County, West Virginia: West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey Environmental Geology Bulletin 13, 21 p.

Hoover, D.B., Frischknecht, F.C., and Tippens, C., 1976, 

Audio-magnetotelluric soundings as a reconnaissance 

exploration technique in Long Valley, California: Journal of 

Geophysical Research. v. 81, no. 5, p. 801-809.

Hoover, D.B., and Long, C.L., 1976, Audio-magnetotelluric 

methods in reconnaissance geothermal exploration: Proceedings of the 2nd United Nations Symposium for the 

Development of Geothermal Resources, p.1059-1064.
96 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Hoover, D.B., Frischknecht, F.C., and Tippens, C., 1976, 

Audio-magnetotelluric soundings as a reconnaissance 

exploration technique in Long Valley, California: Washington, D.C., American Geophysical Union, Journal of 

Geophysical Research. v. 81, no. 5, p. 801-809.

Hoover, D.B., Long, C.L., and Senterfit, R. M., 1978, Some 

results from audio-magnetotelluric investigations in geothermal areas: Geophysics, v. 43, no. 7, p. 1501-1514.

Janse, I., Meima, M., Kardinaal, W.E., and Zwart, G., 2003, 

High-resolution differentiation of Cyanobacteria by using 

rRNA-internal transcribed spacer denaturing gradient gel 

electrophoresis: Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 

v. 69, no. 11, p. 6634-6643.

Jeffords, R.M., 1945a, Water Supply at Martinsburg, West 

Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey, unnumbered report, 8 p.

Jeffords, R.M., 1945b, Water supply at the Newton D. Baker 

Hospital near Martinsburg, West Virginia: U.S. Geological 

Survey, unnumbered report, 12 p.

Jenness, J. 2005, Topographic Position Index (tpi_jen.avx) 

extension for ArcView 3.x. Jenness Enterprises. Available 

at: http://www.jennessent.com/arcview/tpi.htm.

Jones, W.K., 1997, Karst Hydrology Atlas of West Virginia: 

Karst Waters Institute, Special Publication 4, 111 p.

Jones, W.K., 1991, The carbonate aquifer of the northern 

Shenandoah Valley of Virginia and West Virginia, in Kastning, E.H., and Kastning, K.M. (eds.), Proceedings Appalachian Karst Symposium: National Speleological Society, 

Huntsville, Alabama, p. 217-222.

Jones, W.K., and Deike, G.H., III, 1981, A hydrogeologic 

study of the watershed of the National Fisheries Center at 

Leetown, West Virginia: Prepared for the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service by Environmental Data, Frankford, West 

Virginia, 84 p.

Kaehler, C.A., and Hsieh, P.A., 1994, Hydraulic properties 

of a fractured-rock aquifer, Lee Valley, San Diego County, 

California: U.S. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 

2394, 64 p.

Keller, G.V., and Frischknecht, F.C., 1966, Electrical methods 

in geophysical prospecting: London, Great Britain, Pergamon Press, 519 p.

Keys, W.S., 1990, Borehole geophysics applied to groundwater investigations: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of 

Water-Resources Investigations, book 2, chap. E2, 150 p.

Kozar, M.D., Weary, D.J., Paybins, K.S., and Pierce, H.A., 

2007, Geohydrology and Simulation and Analysis of 

Ground-Water Flow of the Leetown Area, West Virginia: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 

2006-5066, 70 p.

Kozar, M.D., Hobba, W.A., and Macy, J.A., 1991, Geohydrology, water availability, and water quality of Jefferson 

County, West Virginia, with emphasis on the carbonate area 

: U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigation 

Report 90-4118, 93 p.

Kozar, M.D., and Mathes, M.V., 2001, Aquifer Characteristics 

Data for West Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 01-4036, 74 p.

Lattman, L.H., 1958, Technique of mapping geologic fracture 

traces and lineaments on aerial photographs: Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, vol. 24, no. 4, p. 

568-576.

Lefsky, M.A., W.B. Cohen, G.G. Parker, and D.J. Harding, 

2002, LiDAR remote sensing for ecosystem studies: BioScience, v. 52, no. 1, p. 19-30.

Mackie, R.L., Rieven, S., and Rodi, W., 1977, User’s Manual 

and Software Documentation for Two-Dimensional Inversion of Magnetotelluric Data: San Francisco, GSY-USA 

Inc., 125p.

Małoszewski, P., Harum, T. and Benischke, R., 1992, Mathematical Modeling of Tracer Experiments in the Karst of 

Lurbach System, in, Himmelsbach, T. and Hötzl, H. and 

Käß, W. and Leibundgut, Ch. and Małoszewski, P. and 

Meyer, T. and Moser, H. and Rajner, V. and Rank, D. and 

Stichler, W. and Trimborn, P. and Veulliet, E., eds., Application of Tracer Models: Steirische Beiträge zur Hydrogeologie, 6th International Symposium on Water Tracing, 

Transport Phenomena in Different Aquifers (Investigations 

1987–1992), v. 43, Joanneum Research, Graz, Germany, p. 

116–158.

Mathes, M.V., 2000, Relation of bacteria in limestone aquifers 

to septic systems in Berkeley County, West Virginia: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

00-4229, 12 p.

Mathes, M.V., Jr., Kozar, M.D., and Brown, D.P., 1998, Summary of ground-water quality in West Virginia: West Virginia Division of Environmental Protection, Office of Water 

Resources, Ground-Water Program, 54 p.

Matsui, K., Ishii, N., Honjo, M., and Kawabata, Z.I., 2004, 

Use of the SYBR Green I fluorescent dye and a centrifugal filter device for rapid determination of dissolved DNA 

concentration in fresh water: Aquatic Microbial Ecology, v. 

36, p. 99-105.

Mayle, D., and Schnabel, J.J., 1998, Geotechnical engineering 

report for the proposed National Center for Cool and Cold 

Water Aquaculture, Leetown, West Virginia: Report submitted to the U.S. Geological Survey by Schnabel Engineering 

Associates, Inc., Bethesda, Maryland, 20 p. 
References Cited 97

McCoy, K.J., and Kozar, M.D., 2007a, Relation of chlorofluorocarbon ground-water age dates to water quality in aquifers 

of West Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5221, 36 p.

McCoy, K.J., and Kozar, M.D., 2007b, Use of sinkhole and 

specific capacity distributions to assess flow directionality 

in a carbonate aquifer, Great Valley, West Virginia, U.S.A., 

Environmental Geology, v. (in press), 15 p.

McCoy, Kurt J., Podwysocki, Melvin H., Crider, E. Allen, and 

Weary, David, J., 2005a, Fracture trace map and singlewell aquifer test results in a carbonate aquifer in Berkeley 

County, West Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 2005-1040, 1 Plate.

McCoy, Kurt J., Podwysocki, Melvin H., Crider, E. Allen, and 

Weary, David, J., 2005b, Fracture trace map and singlewell aquifer test results in a carbonate aquifer in Jefferson 

County, West Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 2005-1407, 1 Plate.

McDonald, J.L., Hartel, P.G., Gentit, L.C., Belcher, C.N., 

Gates, K.W., Rodgers, K., Fisher, J.A., Smith, K.A., and 

Payne, K.A., 2006, Identifying sources of fecal contamination inexpensively with targeted sampling and bacterial 

source tracking: Journal of Environmental Quality, v. 35, 

no. 3, p. 889-897.

Morrison, T.B., Weis, J.J., and Wittwer, C.T., 1998, Quantification of low-copy transcripts by continuous SYBR Green 

I monitoring during amplification: Biotechniques, v. 24, no. 

6, p. 954-8, 960, 962.

Myers, D. N., and Wilde, F. D., 2003, National field manual 

for the collection of water-quality data – Biological indicators: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, Book 9 Chapter A7, 49 p.

Nelms, D.L., Harlow, G.E., Jr., Plummer, L.N., and 

Busenberg, E., 2003, Aquifer susceptibility in Virginia, 

1998-2000: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigation Report 03-4278, 58 p.

NOAA, 2006, U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration website for airport 

weather data: http://www.erh.noaa.gov/er/lwx/climate/mrb/

mrb0301.txt-mrb1205.txt accessed 3-1-06.

NOAA, 2004, Climatological Data Annual Summary – West 

Virginia 2004: U.S. Department of Commerce, National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, v. 112, no. 113, 

21 p.

NUS, 1986, Remedial Investigation Report, Leetown Pesticide 

Site, Jefferson County, West Virginia, EPA Work Assignment 65-3L52, Contract Number 68-01-6699, NUS Project 

Number S794, 47 p..

Otton, J.K., and Gundersen, L.C.S., 1993, Preliminary geologic radon potential assessment of West Virginia: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 93-0292-C, p.185-206.

Paillet, F.L., Hess, A.E., Cheng, C.H., and Hardin, E., 1987, 

Characterization of fracture permeability with high-resolution vertical flow measurements during borehole pumping: 

Groundwater, v. 25, no. 1, p. 28-40.

Plummer, L.N., and Busenberg, E., 2000, Chlorofluorcarbons, 

in Cook, P.G., and Herczeg, A., eds., Environmental tracers 

in subsurface hydrology: Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers, p. 441-478.

Plummer, L.N., Michel, R.L, Thurman, E.M., and Glynn, P.D., 

1993, Environmental tracers for age-dating young ground 

water, in Alley, W.M., ed., Environmental tracers for 

age-dating young ground water: New York, Van Nostrand 

Reinhold, p. 255-294. 

Plummer, L.N., Busenburg, E., Bohlke, J.K., Nelms, D.L., 

Michel, R.L., and Schlosser, P. 2007, Groundwater residence times in Shenandoah National Park, Blue Ridge 

Mountains, Virginia, USA: a multi-tracer approach: Chemical Geology 179 (2001).p. 93–111.

Rutledge, A. T., 1998, Computer programs for describing the 

recession of ground-water discharge and for estimating 

mean ground-water recharge and discharge from stream 

flow records – update: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigation Report 98-4148, 43 p.

Schiesser, W.E., and Silebi, C.A., 1997, Computational Transport Phenomena – Numerical methods for the solution of 

transport problems: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge England, p. 372.

Shapiro, A.M., 2001, Characterizing ground-water chemistry 

and hydraulic properties of fractured-rock aquifers using 

the multifunction bedrock-aquifer transportable testing tool 

(BAT3): U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet FS-075-01, 4 p.

Shultz, R.A., Hobba, W.A., and Kozar, M.D., 1995, Geohydrology and ground-water quality of Berkeley County, 

West Virginia, with emphasis on the carbonate area: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water Resources Investigation Report 

93-4073, 88 p.

Shuster, E.T., and White, W.B., 1971, Seasonal fluctuations in 

the chemistry of limestone springs: A possible means for 

characterizing carbonate aquifers: Journal of Hydrology, v. 

14, p. 93-128.

Simpson, F., and Bahr, K., 2005, Practical Magnetotellurics: 

Cambridge University Press, New York, 254 p.
98 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Southworth, S., Drake, A.A. Jr., Brezinski, D.K., Wintsch, 

R.P., Kunk, M.J., Aleinikoff, J.N., Naeser, C.W., and 

Naeser, N.D., (in press), Central Appalachian Piedmont 

and Blue Ridge Tectonic transect, Potomac River Corridor. 

Geological Society of America Field trip Guidebook 8.

Spane, F.A., Jr., and Wurstner, S.K., 1993, DERIV – A computer program for calculating pressure derivatives for use 

in hydraulic test analysis: Ground Water, v. 31, no. 5, p. 

814-822.

Stoeckel, D.M., Mathes, M.V., Hyer, K.E., Hagedorn, 

C., Kator, H., Lukasik, J., O’Brien, T.L., Fenger, T.W., 

Samadpour, M., Strickler, K.M., and Wiggins, B.A., 2004, 

Comparison of Seven Protocols To Identify Fecal Contamination Sources Using Escherichia coli: Environmental 

Science Technology, v. 38, no. 22, p. 6109-6117.

Swift, C. M., 1962, A magnetotelluric investigation of an 

electrical conductivity anomaly in the southwestern United 

States: Cambridge, Mass, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 211 p.

Taylor, L.E., 1974, Bedrock geology and its influence on 

ground-water resources in the Hedgesville and Williamsport 

71/2 minute quadrangles, Berkeley County, West Virginia: 

Toledo, Ohio, The University of Toledo, unpublished M.S. 

thesis, 82 p.

Theis, C.V., 1935, The lowering of the piezometer surface and 

the rate and discharge of a well using ground-water storage: American Geophysical Union Transactions, v. 16, p. 

519-524.

Tikhonov, A.N., 1950, The determination of the electrical 

properties of deep layers of the Earth’s crust: Dokl. Acad. 

Nauk., SSR, 73, 295-297.

Toride, N., Leij, F. J., and van Genuchten, M. Th., 1995, The 

CXTFIT code for estimating transport parameters from 

laboratory of field tracer experiments, version 2.0: Research 

Report No. 137, U.S. Salinity Laboratory, USDA, ARS, 

Riverside, Calif.

Trainer, F.W., and Watkins, F.A., Jr., 1975, Geohydrologic 

reconnaissance of the upper Potomac River Basin: United 

States Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2035, 68 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999, Proposed 

Radon in Drinking Water Rule: U.S. EPA Publication EPA 

815-F-99-006; accessed July 25, 2006 at internet web 

address http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw000/radon/fact.html.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2006, NWIS-Web database available 

at http://nwis.waterdata.usgs.gov/wv/ nwis/qwdata, accessed 

4-18-06.

Vozoff, Keeva, 1986, Magnetotelluric methods: Tulsa, Oklahoma, Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Geophysics 

Reprint Series Number 5, 763 p.

Vozoff, Keeva, 1991, The Magnetotelluric Method; Chapter 

8, in Electromagnetic methods in applied geophysics: 

Nabighian, M.N., ed., Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa, Oklahoma, Series, Investigations in Geophysics 

Number 3, p. 641-712.

Wait, J.R., 1962, Theory of magnetotelluric fields: U.S. 

Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, 

Journal of Research, Radio Propagation, v. 66D, p. 509-541.

Weaver, J.T., 1994, Mathematical methods for geo-electromagnetic induction: Kendal, P.C., ed., Wiley, New York, 

316 p.

Wehr, A. and Lohr, U., 1999, Airborne laser scanning – an 

introduction and overview:. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, v. 54, p. 68-82.

Weiss, R.F., 1970, The solubility of nitrogen, oxygen, and 

argon in water and seawater: Deep-Sea Research, v. 17, p. 

721-735.

White, J.S., and Mathes, M.V., 2006, Dissolved gas concentrations in ground water in West Virginia, 1997-2005: U.S. 

Geological Survey Data Series Report 156, 8 p.

White, W.B., 2002, Karst hydrology: recent developments and 

open questions: Engineering Geology, v. 65, p. 85-105.

Wilde, F. D., Radtke, D. B., Gibs, Jacob, and Iwatsubo, R. T., 

1999, National field manual for the collection of waterquality data – Collection of water samples: U.S. Geological 

Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, Book 

9, Chapter A4, 156 p.

Wilde, F.D., and Radtke, D.B., 1998, National field manual for 

the collection of water-quality data – Field measurements: 

U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources 

Investigations, Book 9, Chapter A6, variously paged.

Wiley, J. B., 2006, Low-flow analysis and selected flow statistics representative of 1930-2002 for stream flow gaging 

stations in or near West Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey 

Scientific Investigations Report 2006-5002, 190 p.

Williams, J.H., and Conger, R.W., 1990, Preliminary delineation of contaminated water-bearing fractures intersected 

by open-hole bedrock wells: Ground Water Monitoring 

Review, v. 10, no. 3, p. 118-126.

Williams, J.H., Lapham, W.W., and Barringer, T.H., 1993, 

Application of electromagnetic logging to contamination 

investigations in glacial sand and gravel aquifers: Ground 

Water Monitoring Review, v. 13, no. 3, p. 129-138.

Williams, J.H., and Lane, J.W., Jr., 1998, Advances in borehole geophysics for ground-water investigations: U.S. 

Geological Survey Fact Sheet 002-98, 4 p.
References Cited 99

Wittwer, C.T., Herrmann, M.G., Moss, A.A., and Rasmussen, 

R.P., 1997, Continuous fluorescence monitoring of rapid 

cycle DNA amplification: Biotechniques, v. 22, no. 1, p. 

130-1 - 134-8.

Wolfe, W.J., Haugh, C.J., Webbers, Ank, and Diehl, T.H., 

1997, Preliminary conceptual models of the occurrence, 

fate, and transport of chlorinated solvents in karst regions 

of Tennessee: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 97-4097, 80 p.
100 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendices

Appendix 1: Audiomagnetotelluric (AMT) 

soundings in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Appendix 2a: Caliper, natural gamma, fluidresistivity and fluid-temperature logs for wells at the 

USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia.

Appendix 2b: Optical-televiewer, acousticteleviewer, and heat-pulse flow-meter logs for wells 

at the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia.

Appendix 2c: Interpretation of borehole logs for 11 

wells on the USGS Leetown Science Center, West 

Virginia

Appendix 3: Depth, strike, and dip of fractures 

imaged in boreholes, at the USGS Leetown Science 

Center, West Virginia.

Appendix 4: Single-well, multi-well, step 

drawdown, and packer aquifer tests conducted at the 

USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia.

Appendix 5a: Interpretation of fluorometric tracer 

tests done in the USGS Leetown Science Center, 

West Virginia

Appendix 5b: Data from dye tracing experiments at 

the Leetown Science Center, West Virginia.

Appendix 6: Water chemistry data for 12 wells and 

3 springs sampled in 2004 and 2005 at the USGS 

Leetown Science Center, West Virginia 
Appendix 1: Audiomagnetotelluric (AMT) soundings in the 

Leetown area, West Virginia.

This appendix includes additional supporting material for the AMT survey of 

Leetown Science Center, West Virginia.
2 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Table 1. Audiomagnettelluric (AMT) soundings in the Leetown area, West Virginia. [Universal Tranverse 

Mercator and coordinates are in NAD 83 with a central meridian of -75o and base latitude of 0o 

(zone 18). Latitude-Longitude coordinates are in NAD 83 and elevations are in NGVD88].

Station 

Number

UTM 

Easting (m)

UTM 

Northing 

(m) Latitude Longitude

GPS 

Elevation 

(m)

GPS 

Elevation (ft)

LT03 248992.4 4360066.5 39 21 13.0 77 54 47.0 158 518.4

LT04 249134.0 4360000.2 39 21 11.0 77 54 41.0 147 482.3

LT05 248872.7 4360070.3 39 21 13.0 77 54 52.0 163 534.8

LT06 248729.0 4360075.0 39 21 13.0 77 54 58.0 157 515.1

LT07 248060.7 4360158.3 39 21 15.0 77 55 26.0 166 544.6

LT08 247916.1 4360132.1 39 21 14.0 77 55 32.0 158 518.4

LT09 247768.5 4360013.4 39 21 10.0 77 55 38.0 155 508.6

LT10 248612.3 4360171.3 39 21 16.0 77 55 03.0 162 531.5

LT11 248591.4 4360264.6 39 21 19.0 77 55 04.0 170 557.8

LT12 248230.3 4360214.6 39 21 17.0 77 55 19.0 170 557.8

LT14 249058.2 4359879.1 39 21 07.0 77 54 44.0 157 515.1

LT15 249029.3 4359725.7 39 21 02.0 77 54 45.0 156 511.8

LT16 249024.3 4359571.6 39 20 57.0 77 54 45.0 158 518.4

LT17 249019.4 4359417.4 39 20 52.0 77 54 45.0 153 502.0

LT18 247606.9 4360203.9 39 21 16.0 77 55 45.0 146 479.0

LT19 247713.7 4360540.0 39 21 27.0 77 55 41.0 145 475.7

LT20 247620.9 4360635.6 39 21 30.0 77 55 45.0 151 495.4

LT21 248156.5 4359414.4 39 20 51.0 77 55 21.0 157 515.1

LT22 248127.5 4359261.0 39 20 46.0 77 55 22.0 159 521.7

LT23 248049.7 4359078.3 39 20 40.0 77 55 25.0 158 518.4

LT24 248022.8 4358986.6 39 20 37.0 77 55 26.0 154 505.3

LT25 248784.1 4358386.6 39 20 18.4 77 54 53.4 154 505.3

LT26 247947.0 4358865.6 39 20 33.0 77 55 29.0 144 472.5

LT27 247885.2 4359917.1 39 21 07.0 77 55 33.0 163 534.8

LT28 247696.3 4359634.6 39 20 57.6 77 55 40.5 149 488.9

LT29 247580.9 4359402.2 39 20 50.0 77 55 45.0 147 482.3

LT30 247782.4 4358963.5 39 20 36.0 77 55 36.0 151 495.4

LT31 247643.7 4359122.3 39 20 41.0 77 55 42.0 144 472.5

LT32 247336.5 4359255.8 39 20 45.0 77 55 55.0 150 492.2

LT33 248532.5 4359927.0 39 21 08.0 77 55 06.0 152 498.7

LT34 248455.7 4359775.1 39 21 03.0 77 55 09.0 152 498.7

LT35 248403.9 4359653.3 39 20 59.0 77 55 11.0 146 479.0

LT36 247087.1 4359696.0 39 20 59.0 77 56 06.0 133 436.4

LT37 248916.6 4359204.6 39 20 45.0 77 54 49.0 156 511.8

LT38 248302.9 4358696.6 39 20 27.9 77 55 13.9 162 531.5

LT39 248951.6 4358802.2 39 20 32.0 77 54 47.0 156 511.8

LT40 248275.2 4360861.3 39 21 38.0 77 55 18.0 150 492.2

LT41 248640.3 4359553.1 39 20 56.0 77 55 01.0 151 495.4

LT42 249465.1 4360606.8 39 21 31.0 77 54 28.0 159 521.7

LT43 249299.5 4360673.9 39 21 33.0 77 54 35.0 160 525.0

LT44 248653.2 4360694.8 39 21 33.0 77 55 02.0 153 502.0

LT45 249748.5 4359733.4 39 21 03.0 77 54 15.0 170 557.8

LT46 249480.9 4359389.0 39 20 51.6 77 54 25.7 170 557.8

LT47 247134.9 4358791.0 39 20 29.7 77 56 02.8 148 485.6

LT48 249051.4 4358181.7 39 20 12.0 77 54 42.0 180 590.6

LT49 247564.0 4359618.8 39 20 57.0 77 55 46.0 146 479.0

LT50 247974.9 4359728.9 39 21 01.0 77 55 29.0 157 515.1

LT51 247129.1 4360250.3 39 21 17.0 77 56 05.0 140 459.3

LT52 247317.4 4358669.9 39 20 26.0 77 55 55.0 150 492.2

LT53 247822.2 4357974.4 39 20 04.0 77 55 33.0 156 511.8
Appendix 1 3

95

13

18

180

248

248

248

342 

342

342

42

471

471

471

471

471

471

 471

471

649

649 

649

649

649

649

894

894

894

 894

 894

894

1232

1232

232

1232

 1232

1698

1 98 

1 98

1698

2339

L 0 LT 4

LT06 T05

T 7 L 08

LT0

0

L 11 LT12

L 1

LT18

T19

T20

LT2

T22

T2

LT

LT25

LT26

T

28 L

LT30

LT31

LT32

LT 3

T3

L LT 6

LT37

LT38

LT 9

LT 0

T 1

LT42

LT4 LT43

LT45

LT46

LT47

LT48

LT49

LT50

LT51

LT52

LT53

LL 1

LL 2

LL3

L4

LL5

LL6

LL7

LL8

95

13

 180 

248 

248

248

2

342

342

34

2

 342

47

471

47

471

471

471

471

471

64

649

649

649

649

649 

894

894

894

894

894 

894

1232

1232

1232

1232

1232

1698 

8

1698

1698

2339

247,000 248,000 249,000

4361000

4,360,000

4,359,000

4,358,000

LL 1

L 2

LL3

L4

LL5

LL6

LL7

LL8 16000

11613

8429

6118

4440

3223

2339

1698

1232

894

649

471

342

248

180

131

95

69

50

Resistivity

(Ohm-m)

N

5

24

248

342

342

342

342

471 471 47

1

471

649

649

649

649

649

49

894

894

894

8 4

894

1232

1232

1232

 123 

1232

 1698

1698

169

2339

LT0 4

LT06LT05

LT LT08

LT09

1

L 11 LT12

1

LT1

LT18

T19

LT20

LT2

T 2

LT2

L

LT25

LT2

T 7

T28 9

LT30

LT

LT32

33

T3

LT36

LT37

LT38

LT 9

0

T41

LT42 LT43

LT45

LT46

LT 7

LT48

LT50

LT51

LT52

LT53

LL 1

L 2

LL3

L4

LL5

LL6

LL7

LL8

50

 5

248

342

 342

342

342

471

47

471

471

471

471

471

9

649

49

649 

9

649

894

894

894

894

894

1232

1232

 1232 

1232

1232

 1698

169

1698

1698

2339

2339

LL 1

LL3

L4

LL5

LL6

LL7

LL8

AMT Soundings

a) 10 meters bls b) 20 meters bls

c) 30 meters bls d) 60 meters bls

247,000 248,000 249,000 247,000 248,000 249,000

247,000 248,000 249,000

4,361,000

4,360,000

4,359,000

4,358,000

4,361,000

4,360,000

4,359,000

4,358,000

4,361,000

4,360,000

4,359,000

4,358,000

EXPLANATION

Figure 1. A series of 2-dimensional resistivity maps made for 10, 20, 30, and 60 meters below land

surface (bls). These maps show that the rocks become progressively more resistive with depth, most 

likeley as a function of decreasing weathering, porosity, fluid storage, or fracture density.

m

0 500 1000 1500

Tabb

Balch

Tabb

Balch

Tabb

Balch

Tabb

Balch

Bell

Gray

Blue

Bell

Bell Be l

Blue

Blue Blue

Gray Gray

Gray

Balch Spring and spring name
4 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

18

48

342

342

342

471

471

471

471

47

649

64

649

649

649

649

894

894

894

89

894

1232

1232

1232

1232 

1698

1698

1698

1698

1698

2 39

2339 

2339 

2339 

3223

03 T 4

LT06L 05

L 07 LT08

LT09

L 10

L 11 LT12

LT1

LT1

LT18

T19

LT20

LT21

LT2

LT23

L 2

LT25

T26

T 7

8

LT30

LT 1

LT32

T33

LT3

LT36

LT37

LT38

LT39

LT40

LT4

LT42

LT4 T43

LT45

LT46

LT4

LT48

LT4

LT50

LT51

LT52

LT53

LL 1

LL 2

LL3

LL4

LL5

LL6

LL7

LL8

180

2 8

342

342

471

1

471

649

6

649

649

649

649

894 

 894

894

894

94

894 1232

1232

1232

1232

1232

1698

1698

16

1698 169

1698

2339

2339

2339

2339

2339

3223

32 3

3223

LT 3 4

LT06LT05

L 07 LT08

LT09

0

T11 LT12

LT16

LT

LT18

T19

LT20

LT21

T

LT2

LT

LT25

LT2

T 7

T 8 L

LT30

LT31

LT32

LT33

T3

LT LT36

LT37

LT38

LT39

LT40

LT4

LT42

LT4 T4

LT45

LT46

LT47

LT48

LT49

LT50

LT51

LT52

LT53

LL 1

LL 2

LL3

LL4

LL5

LL6

LL7

LL8

894

1232 1698 

1698

1698 

2339 

2339

2339

2 39

2339

322

3223 

 3223

3223

3223

3223 4 40

4440

4440

4440

 6118 

6118

 6118

6118

6118

8429

LT03LT 4

LT06LT05

LT07 LT08

LT09

L 10

L 11 LT12

14

T

LT1

LT

LT18

T19

LT20

LT21

T2

LT2

L

LT25

LT26

T2

T 8 LT2

LT30

LT31

LT32

LT33

LT34

LT3 LT36

LT3

LT38

LT39

LT40

LT41

LT42

LT44 T 3

LT45

LT46

LT47

LT48

T49

LT50

T51

LT52

LT53

LL 1

LL 2

LL3

LL4

LL5

LL6

LL7

LL8

894 

12 2

698

233

9

23 9

2339

32

3223

3223

3223 

3223

44 0

4440

4440

4440

611

6118 

6118 

6118 

18

6118

8429

 8429 

84 9

8

8429

 1613

1161

1 3

11 13

16000

16000

LT03 T 4

T06 T05

L 07 LT08

LT09

L 0

LT11 LT12

LT

LT15

T16

LT1

LT18

T19

L 20

LT21

LT22

LT23

LT

LT25

T26

T27

LT 8 LT29

L 30

L 3

LT32

LT33

LT34

T3 LT36

LT37

LT38

LT3

LT40

LT41

LT42

LT44 LT43

LT45

LT46

LT47

LT48

LT 9

LT50

T51

LT52

LT53

LL 1

LL 2

LL3

LL4

LL5

LL6

LL7

LL8

a) 90 meters bls b) 120 meters bls

c) 240 meters bls d) 300 meters bls

16000

11613

8429

6118

4440

3223

2339

1698

1232

894

649

471

342

248

180

131

95

69

50

Resistivity

(Ohm-m)

N

AMT Soundings

EXPLANATION

4,361,000

4,360,000

4,359,000

4,358,000

4,361,000

4,360,000

4,359,000

4,358,000

4,361,000

4,360,000

4,359,000

4,358,000

4,361,000

4,360,000

4,359,000

4,358,000

m

0 500 1000 1500

247,000 248,000 249,000 247,000 248,000 249,000

247,000 248,000 249,000 247,000 248,000 249,000

Figure 2. A series of 2-dimensional resistivity maps made for 90, 120, 240, and 300 meters below land

surface (bls). These maps show that the rocks become progressively more resistive with depth, most 

likeley as a function of decreasing weathering, porosity, fluid storage, or fracture density.

Tabb

Balch

Tabb

Balch

Tabb

Balch

Tabb

Balch

Bell

Gray

Blue

Bell

Bell Bell

Blue

Blue Blue

Gray Gray

Gray

Balch Spring and spring name
Appendix 1 5

 1414 

 1898 

 2548 

 3420 

 3420 

 4590 

 6162 

 8270 

 11101 

 14900 

 785 

 4 

 1054 

 1414 

 14 4 

 189 

 2548 

 2548 

 3420 

 585 

 785 

 1054 

 1414 1898 

 2548 

 2548 

 3420 

 3420 

 90 

 6162 

 270 

 242 

 325 

 436 

 436 

 585 

 585 

 785 

 785 

 105 

 1054 

 14 4 

 1414 

 18 8 

LT51

LT18

LT09

LT08

LT07

LT12

LT33

LT06

LT05

LT03

LT14

LT45

LT10

LT12

LT04

 1414 

 1898 

 548 

 3420 

 45 0 

 6162 

 8270 

 785 

 1054 

 1414 

 1898 

 1898 

 2548 

 3420 

 4590 

 6162 

 1054 

 1414 

 1898 

 548 

 3420 

LT36

LT29

LT31

LT30

LT24

LT25

LT48

 54 

 1414 

 1898 

 2548 

 3420 

 3420 

 4590 

 4590 

 585 

 785 

 1054 

 1054 

 1414 

 436 

 585 

 785 

 1054 

 1414 

 1898 

 

 3420 

 3420 

 180 

 242 

 5 36 

 436 

 85 

 585 

 785 

 785 

 1054 

LT48

LT25

LT39

LT37

LT17

LT16

LT15

LT14

LT04

LT43

20,000

14,900

11,101

8,270

6,162

4,590

3,420

2,548

1,898

1,414

1,054

785

585

436

325

242

180

134

100

Resistivity 

(Ohm-m)

 2 48 

 3420 

 4 90 

 6162 

 82 

 8270 

 1414 

 1898 

 2548 

 2 48 

 3420 

 4590 

 6 62 

 8270 

 11101 

 189 

 2548 

 3420 

LT53

LT26

LT24

LT23

LT22

LT21

LT35

LT34

LT33

LT10

LT11

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500

300

200

100

0

-100

DISTANCE, (meters)

LL1

LL2

LL3

LL4

Figure 3. A series of 2-dimensional resistivity cross sections (LL1 - LL4) across the USGS 

Leetown Science Center area. 

[See fig. 8 in main text for locations of the sections].

EXPLANATION

AMT sounding station

Horizontal Scale 1:20,000 m

Vertical Scale 1:4,000 m

Vertical Exaggeration = 5 

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500

 1 

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500

 189 

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500

6162

Resistivity

 Isoline

METERS, (a. NGVD 88)

DISTANCE, (meters)

DISTANCE, (meters)

DISTANCE, (meters)

300

200

100

0

-100

METERS, (a. NGVD 88)

300

200

100

0

-100

METERS, (a. NGVD 88)

300

200

100

0

-100

METERS, (a. NGVD 88)
6 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

20,000

14,900

11,101

8,270

6,162

4,590

3,420

2,548

1,898

1,414

1,054

785

585

436

325

242

180

134

100

Resistivity 

(Ohm-m)

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

300

200

100

0

-100

DISTANCE, (meters)

Figure 4. A series of 2-dimensional resistivity cross sections (LL5 - LL8) across the USGS 

Leetown Science Center area. 

[See fig. 8 in main text for locations of the sections].

EXPLANATION

AMT sounding station

Horizontal Scale 1:20,000 m

Vertical Scale 1:4,000 m

Vertical Exaggeration = 5 

1,000 2,000

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

6162

Resistivity

 Isoline

DISTANCE, (meters)

DISTANCE, (meters)

DISTANCE, (meters)

300

200

100

0

-100

METERS, (a. NGVD 88)

300

200

100

0

-100

METERS, (a. NGVD 88)

 585 

 585 

 85 785 

 054 

 1054 

 1414 

 1414 

 1898 

 1898 

 2548 

 2548 

 3420 

 4590 

 6162 

LT20

LT19

LT40

LT44

LT43

LT42

LL8

 1898 

 2548 

 3420 

 4590 

 61 2 

 270 

 785 

 785 

 1 5 

 105 

 1414 

 1414 

 1898 1898 

 785 

 10 

 1414 

 3420 

 2548 

 1898 

 4590 

 4590 

 6162 

 8270 

 1110 4900 

 36 

 1054 

 785 

 585 

 1414 

 1898 

 1898 

 2548 

 2548 

 3420 

 3420 

LT52

LT47

LT31

LT29LT28

LT49

LT50

LT27

LT08

LT07

LT12

LT40

LL5

0 500 1,500 2,500

300

200

100

0

-100

METERS, (a. NGVD 88)

LL6

 1898 

 2548 

 3420 

 590 

 6162 

 82 0 

 105 

 1414 1 98 

 141 

 1898 

 2548 

 3420 

 4590 

 85 

 785 

 1054 

 1054 

 2548 

 1898 

 1414 

 3420 

LT47

LT52

LT31

LT30

LT26

LT39

LL7

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500

 785 

 1054 

 1414 

 1898 

 2548 

 3420 

 4590 

 6162 

 8270 

 11101 

 436 

 585 

 585 

 785 

 1054 1414 

 1898 

 2548 

 342 

 4590 

 2548 

 3420 

 4590 

 6162 

 1054 

 414 

 1898 

 1898 

 25 8 

 2548 

 3420 

LT36

LT49

LT50

LT35

LT41

LT16

LT46
Appendix 2a: Caliper, natural gamma, fluid resistivity, and 

fluid temperature borehole logs for wells at the Leetown 

Science Center, Leetown West Virginia.
2 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia 5 67 8 100 125 150

175200225250

255075

0

DEPTH, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE

-50 100 17.5 18.7 11.4 12.5

 (CALIPER)HOLE DIAMETER, IN INCHES

NATURAL GAMMA, IN COUNTS PER SECOND

FLUID RESISTIVITY, IN OHM-METERS

 FLUIDTEMPERATURE, IN DEGRESS  CELSIUS

11.9

Appendix 2a Figure 1. Borehole-geophysical logs for borehole Jef-0589 (Anticline well), collected on May 5, 2004, in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

13.65

EXPLANATION

STATIC WATER LEVEL--  measured in borehole at the  time of geophysical logging

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER PUMPING CONDITIONS 

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER AMBIENT CONDITIONS 
Appendix 2a 

3

 (CALIPER)HOLE DIAMETER, IN INCHES

NATURAL GAMMA, IN COUNTS PER SECOND

FLUID RESISTIVITY, IN OHM-METERS

 FLUIDTEMPERATURE, IN DEGRESS  CELSIUS

5 10 15 20

01020304050607080

DEPTH, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE

0 30 60 90 18 19 10.6 11.7

Appendix 2a Figure 2. Borehole-geophysical logs for borehole Jef-0590 (ball field well), collected on May 3, 2004, in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

EXPLANATION

STATIC WATER LEVEL--  measured in borehole at the  time of geophysical logging

18.54

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER PUMPING CONDITIONS 

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER AMBIENT CONDITIONS 
4 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia (CALIPER) HOLE DIAMETER, IN INCHES NATURAL GAMMA, IN COUNTS PER SECOND FLUID TEMPERATURE, IN DEGRESS CELSIUS

DEPTH, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE

-50 150 10.0 10.6 11.1 11.7 5.0 12.5 20.0

75100125150

02550

Appendix 2a Figure 3. Borehole-geophysical logs for borehole Jef-0752 (new Dodson farm well), collected on August 30, 2005, in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

EXPLANATION

STATIC WATER LEVEL--  measured in borehole at the  time of geophysical logging

13.26

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER PUMPING CONDITIONS 

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER AMBIENT CONDITIONS 
Appendix 2a 

5

 (CALIPER)HOLE DIAMETER, IN INCHES

NATURAL GAMMA, IN COUNTS PER SECOND

FLUID RESISTIVITY, IN OHM-METERS

 FLUIDTEMPERATURE, IN DEGRESS  CELSIUS

DEPTH, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE

579

75100

02550

-50 150 26.0 26.8 10 11.1 12.2

Appendix 2a Figure 4. Borehole-geophysical logs for borehole Jef-0753 (Kaiser farm well), collected on August 31, 2005, in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

EXPLANATION

STATIC WATER LEVEL--  measured in borehole at the  time of geophysical logging

6.51

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER PUMPING CONDITIONS 

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER AMBIENT CONDITIONS 
6 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia (CALIPER) HOLE DIAMETER, IN INCHES NATURAL GAMMA, IN COUNTS PER SECOND FLUID RESISTIVITY, IN OHM-METERS FLUID TEMPERATURE, IN DEGRESS CELSIUS

DEPTH, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE

6.0 6.5 7.0

120160200240280320360400

4080

0

0 150 13.5 14.5 15.5 11.4 12.2 13.0

Appendix 2a Figure 5. Borehole-geophysical logs for borehole Jef-0596 (Low Road well), collected on May 4, 2004, in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

EXPLANATION

STATIC WATER LEVEL--  measured in borehole at the  time of geophysical logging

42.33

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER PUMPING CONDITIONS 

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER AMBIENT CONDITIONS 
Appendix 2a 

7

5 7 9

0102030405060

DEPTH, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE

-10 20 50 80 15 20 9.7 11.9

 (CALIPER)HOLE DIAMETER, IN INCHES

NATURAL GAMMA, IN COUNTS PER SECOND

FLUID RESISTIVITY, IN OHM-METERS

 FLUIDTEMPERATURE, IN DEGRESS  CELSIUS

Appendix 2a Figure 6. Borehole-geophysical logs for borehole Jef-0602 (Old Dodson farm well), collected on May 3, 2004, in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

EXPLANATION

STATIC WATER LEVEL--  measured in borehole at the  time of geophysical logging

6.09

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER PUMPING CONDITIONS 

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER AMBIENT CONDITIONS 
8 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia 6.0 6.5 04080120 160 200

240280

DEPTH, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE

-50 0 50 100 150 15.5 17.5

,

11.4 13.1

 (CALIPER)HOLE DIAMETER, IN INCHES

NATURAL GAMMA, IN COUNTS PER SECOND

FLUID RESISTIVITY, IN OHM-METERS

 FLUIDTEMPERATURE, IN DEGRESS  CELSIUS

Appendix 2a Figure 7. Borehole-geophysical logs for borehole Jef-0585 (stable A well), collected on April 30, 2004, in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

EXPLANATION

STATIC WATER LEVEL--  measured in borehole at the  time of geophysical logging

31.75

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER PUMPING CONDITIONS 

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER AMBIENT CONDITIONS 
Appendix 2a 

9

6 7

4080120160200240280320

0

DEPTH, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE

-50 0 50 100 150 200 17 18 11.1 12.2 13.3

 (CALIPER)HOLE DIAMETER, IN INCHES

NATURAL GAMMA, IN COUNTS PER SECOND

FLUID RESISTIVITY, IN OHM-METERS

 FLUIDTEMPERATURE, IN DEGRESS  CELSIUS

Appendix 2a Figure 8. Borehole-geophysical logs for borehole Jef-0586 (stable B well), collected on May 1, 2004, in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

EXPLANATION

STATIC WATER LEVEL--  measured in borehole at the  time of geophysical logging

30.95

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER PUMPING CONDITIONS 

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER AMBIENT CONDITIONS 
10 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia 5 9 13 4080120 160 200

240280320

0

DEPTH, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE

-50 0 50 100 150 200 15 20 11.4 12.5 13.6

 (CALIPER)HOLE DIAMETER, IN INCHES

NATURAL GAMMA, IN COUNTS PER SECOND

FLUID RESISTIVITY, IN OHM-METERS

 FLUIDTEMPERATURE, IN DEGRESS  CELSIUS

Appendix 2a Figure 9. Borehole-geophysical logs for borehole Jef-0592 (Stable C well), collected on April 30, 2004, in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

EXPLANATION

STATIC WATER LEVEL--  measured in borehole at the  time of geophysical logging

27.70

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER PUMPING CONDITIONS 

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER AMBIENT CONDITIONS 
Appendix 2a 11

5.0 6.5 8.0

50100150200250300350400450

0

DEPTH, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE

-50 0 50 100 150 0 25 50 75 100 125 10.0 11.9 13.9

 (CALIPER)HOLE DIAMETER, IN INCHES

NATURAL GAMMA, IN COUNTS PER SECOND

FLUID RESISTIVITY, IN OHM-METERS

 FLUIDTEMPERATURE, IN DEGRESS  CELSIUS

Appendix 2a Figure 10. Borehole-geophysical logs for borehole Jef-0603 (USDA sulfur well), collected on May 2, 2004, in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

EXPLANATION

STATIC WATER LEVEL--  measured in borehole at the  time of geophysical logging

35.90

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER PUMPING CONDITIONS 

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER AMBIENT CONDITIONS 
12 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia 5 8 11 04080120

160200

DEPTH, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE

-25 0 25 50 75 100 15.0 17.5 20.0 10.3 11.4

 (CALIPER)HOLE DIAMETER, IN INCHES

NATURAL GAMMA, IN COUNTS PER SECOND

FLUID RESISTIVITY, IN OHM-METERS

 FLUIDTEMPERATURE, IN DEGRESS  CELSIUS

Appendix 2a Figure 11. Borehole-geophysical logs for borehole Jef-0586 (USDA fault well), collected on November 18, 2003, in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

EXPLANATION

STATIC WATER LEVEL--  measured in borehole at the  time of geophysical logging

16.49

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER PUMPING CONDITIONS 

BOREHOLE MEASUREMENTUNDER AMBIENT CONDITIONS 
Appendix 2b: Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and 

heat-pulse flow meter logs for wells at the USGS Leetown 

Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia
2 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 2b fig. 1 Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse flow meter logs 

for well Jef-0589 (anticline well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia. 

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]

 
Appendix 2b fig. 1 (Continued) Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse flow 

meter logs for well Jef-0589 (anticline well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]

 

Appendix 2b 3
4 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 2b fig. 2 Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse flow meter logs 

for well Jef-0590 (ball field well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]
Appendix 2b 5

Appendix 2b fig. 3 Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse flow 

meter logs for well Jef-0752 (new Dodson farm well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia 

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the 

borehole logs]

.
6 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 2b fig. 4 Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse flow 

meter logs for well Jef-0753 (new Keyser farm well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]

 
Appendix 2b 7

Appendix 2b fig. 5 Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse flow meter logs 

for well Jef-0587 (low road well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia 

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]

.
8 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 2b fig. 5 (Continued) Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse

flow meter logs for well Jef-0587 (low road well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]
Appendix 2b 9

Appendix 2b fig. 5. (Continued) Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse 

flow meter logs for well Jef-0587 (low road well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]

.
10 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 2b fig. 5. (Continued) Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse flow mete 

logs for well Jef-0587 (low road well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]

.
Appendix 2b 11

Appendix 2b fig. 6 Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse flow meter logs 

for well Jef-0602 (old Dodson farm well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs
12 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 2b fig. 7 Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse flow meter 

logs for well Jef-0601 (stable A well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]

.
Appendix 2b 13

Appendix 2b fig. 7 (Continued) Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse 

flow meter logs for well Jef-0601 (stable A well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]
14 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 2b fig. 7 (Continued) Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse 

flow meter logs for well Jef-0601 (stable A well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]
Appendix 2b 15

Appendix 2b fig. 8 Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse flow meter logs 

for well Jef-0585 (stable B well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]
16 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 2b fig. 8 (Continued) Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse 

flow meter logs for well Jef-0585 (stable B well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]
Appendix 2b 17

Appendix 2b fig. 8 (Continued) Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse 

flow meter logs for well Jef-0585 (stable B well) at the Leetown Science Center, Leetown, WV

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]
18 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 2b fig. 9 Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse flow meter logs 

for well Jef-0592 (stable C well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]
Appendix 2b 19

Appendix 2b fig. 9 (Continued) Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse 

flow meter logs for well Jef-0592 (stable C well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]
20 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 2b fig. 9 (Continued) Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat 

pulse flow meter logs for well Jef-0592 (stable C well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]
Appendix 2b 21

Appendix 2b fig. 10 Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse flow meter logs 

for well Jef-0603 (USDA sulfur well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]
22 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 2b fig. 10 (Continued) Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse 

flow meter logs for well Jef-0603 (USDA sulfur well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]
Appendix 2b 23

Appendix 2b fig. 10 (Continued) Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse 

flow meter logs for well Jef-0603 (USDA sulfur well) inthe Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]
24 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 2b fig. 10 (Continued) Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse 

flow meter logs for well Jef-0603 (USDA sulfur well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]
Appendix 2b 25

Appendix 2b fig. 11 Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse flow meter logs for well 

Jef-0586 (USDA fault well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the borehole logs]
26 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 2b fig. 11 (Continued) Optical televiewer, acoustic televiewer, and heat pulse 

flow meter logs for well Jef-0586 (USDA fault well) in the Leetown area, West Virginia

[See first page of appendix 2b for explanation of symbols used in the 

borehole logs]
Appendix 2c – Interpretation of borehole logs for 11 wells 

on the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia
Appendix 2c 2

Jef-0589 (anticline well)

Borehole Jef-0589 (site 41 on fig. 1 and in table 1) was 

constructed as a 6-inch (in.) diameter open hole to a depth 

of 260 ft and cased to 38.5 ft below land surface (bls). It is 

located on the crest of a small anticline and completed entirely 

in the Ordovician Rockdale Run Formation of the Beekmantown Group. The geologist’s well log indicates 25 ft of clay 

overlying bedrock and a total yield of 18 gal/min from waterbearing zones at 91-92 and 137-140 ft bls. Additional fracture 

zones were noted at 52-55, 57-60, 77-79, 91-92, and 137-140 

ft bls. The static water level in the borehole at the time of geophysical logging was 13.65 ft bls. 

The caliper log recorded major fractures at 52, 64, and 

124 ft bls, plus numerous small fractures throughout the openhole interval (app. 2a, fig. 1). Under ambient (non-pumping) 

conditions changes in fluid-resistivity are seen at 38.5 ft (the 

bottom of the casing), 50 and 194 ft bls. Subtle changes in 

slope can be seen in the fluid-temperature log between 190 

and 200 ft bls. Integrated analysis of the fluid-resistivity, 

fluid-temperatures, and flow-meter logs (app. 2b, fig. 1) indicate no vertical flow of water in the borehole under ambient 

conditions. 

A pump was placed in the well casing and the well 

pumped at 5.8 gal/min. The fluid-resistivity log recorded more 

resistive water entering the borehole at 65-70 ft bls. Slope 

changes in fluid-temperature are seen at 64 ft and between 70 

and 75 ft bls. Under pumping conditions, the fluid-resistivity, 

fluid-temperature, and flow-meter data indicate that all water 

enters the borehole at the N. 24° E. strike and N. 43° W. dip 

trending fracture at 63 ft bls. The deflection of the EM flow 

log at 52 ft bls is associated with an increase in borehole diameter and flow circumventing the tool at that depth.

The ATV and OTV logs indicate the borehole is intersected by 102 fractures between 38.5 and 260 ft bls (app. 3, 

table 1). Eighty seven of the 102 fractures have apertures 

ranging from 0.2 to 8.0 in. The character and orientation of 

these data, plotted on a lower-hemisphere equal-area net as 

poles to planes, indicate one major fracture-population cluster 

with a strike orientation of 167 - 266o

 and dips of N. 28 - 67o

W. (fig. 17). In Appendix 3 strike is reported in azimuthal 

degrees, east of true North in the “right hand rule” where the 

direction of dip is to the right of bedrock strike.

Jef-590 (ball field well)

Borehole Jef-0590 (site 48 on fig. 1 and in table 1) was 

constructed as a 6-in. diameter open hole to a depth of 160 

ft and cased to 38.5 ft bls. The borehole was drilled into the 

Ordovician Rockdale Run Formation of the Beekmantown 

Group at the inferred intersection of a thrust fault and land surface. The geologist’s log (observations made by a geologist at 

the time the well was drilled) indicate 10 ft of clay overlying 

bedrock and a total yield exceeding 100 gal/min from zones 

located at 40-50 and 131-140 ft bls and a large void at 85-100 

ft bls. Additional voids and weathered zones were noted at 

52-53, 60-70, 75-76, 78, 82-83, 100-113, and 129-131 ft bls. 

The static water level in the borehole at the time of geophysical logging was 18.54 ft bls. 

The caliper log recorded major fractures at 39, 42, 78, 

and 80-90 ft bls, plus several small fractures throughout the 

open-hole interval (app. 2a, fig. 2). Under ambient conditions the fluid-resistivity log shows a slight increase in fluid 

resistivity with depth. A sharp change in slope can be seen on 

the fluid-temperature log between 68 and 72 ft bls. Integrated 

analysis of the fluid-resistivity, fluid-temperatures, and flowmeter logs (app. 2b, fig. 2) indicate that water enters the borehole at 70 and 85 ft bls and flows upward, exiting the borehole 

at fracture zones at 39 and 42 ft bls. 

A pump was placed in the well casing and the well 

pumped at 10.8 gal/min. The fluid-resistivity log recorded 

fluctuations in fluid resistivity at 42, 50, 53, 80, and 85 ft 

bls. Slope changes in fluid-temperature are seen at 42 ft and 

between 68 and 72 ft bls. Integrated analysis of the fluidresistivity, fluid-temperature, and flow-meter data indicate that 

under pumping conditions water enters the borehole at 70 and 

85 ft bls and flows upward. 

The ATV and OTV logs indicate the borehole is intersected by 15 fractures between 38.5 and 160 ft bls (app. 3, 

table 2). The fractures have apertures ranging from 0.8 - 40 in. 

A plot of these data on a lower-hemisphere equal-area net as 

poles to planes indicates that 11 of 15 fractures cluster about 

a strike orientation of 1 - 152o

 with dips ranging from 31 - 68o

southeast and southwest (fig. 17). 

Jef-0752 (new Dodson farm well)

Borehole Jef-0752 (site 61 on fig. 1 and in table 1) was 

constructed as a 6-in. diameter open hole to a depth of 166 

ft and cased to 38 ft bls. The borehole was completed in the 

Ordovician Stonehenge Limestone of the Beekmantown Group 

near a cross-strike fault. The geologist’s well log recorded 8.5 

ft of clay overlies bedrock and a total yield exceeding 200 gal/

min from zones located at 116-118, 128, and 148-150 ft bls. 

Additional fractures were noted at 85-86, 111-116, 118-121, 

122-124, 144-147, and 155-156 ft bls. The static water level 

in the borehole at the time of geophysical logging was 13.26 

ft bls. 

The caliper log recorded major fractures at 145, 147, 

and 152 ft bls plus several small fractures throughout the 

open-hole interval (app. 2a, fig. 3). The natural-gamma log 

recorded an increase in gamma readings between 145 and 152 

ft bls that correlates to clay and water filled fractures noted in 

the drilling log. Under ambient (non-pumping) conditions a 

change in slope with depth can be seen in the fluid-temperature log at 60, 120-125, and 140-160 ft bls. Integrated analysis 
3 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

of the fluid-temperatures and flow-meter logs (app. 2b, fig. 3) 

indicate that potential water-bearing fractures are present at 

depths of approximately 144, 146, and 152 ft bls. 

During pumping, sharp changes on the fluid-temperature 

log are shown at 104, 144-148, and 153 ft bls. Integrated 

analysis of the fluid-temperature and flow-meter logs indicate 

that the majority of water enters the borehole at the major 

water-bearing fracture located at 144-148 ft bls. 

The ATV and OTV logs indicate the borehole is intersected by 10 fractures between 38 and 166 ft bls (app. 3, table 

3). The fractures have maximum apertures ranging from 0.9 

- 15 in. The orientation of these fractures change abruptly and 

become 

sub-horizontal at depths below 80 ft bls. Fracture data plotted on a lower-hemisphere equal-area net as poles to planes 

indicates that 7 fractures are sub-horizontal with orientations 

of 142 - 186o and a dip of 2 - 3o SW. (fig. 17). 

Jef-0753 (new Kaiser farm well)

Borehole Jef-0753 (site 62 on fig. 1 and in table 1) was 

constructed as a 6-in. diameter open hole to a depth of 121 ft 

and cased to 39.5 ft bls. It was completed in the Ordovician 

Stonehenge Limestone of the Beekmantown Group along the 

eastern limb of an overturned anticline. The geologist’s well 

log recorded 8.5 ft of clay overlying bedrock and a total yield 

exceeding 200 gal/min from fracture zones located at 89-90 

and 96 ft bls. Additional fractures or weathered zones were 

noted at 66-68 and 87-88 ft bls. The static water level in the 

borehole at the time of geophysical logging was 6.51 ft bls. 

The caliper log recorded major fractures at 66, 73, and 

89 ft bls plus several small fractures throughout the open-hole 

interval (app. 2a, fig. 4). The fluid-temperature log recorded 

minor deflections in temperature at 47, 73, and 95 ft bls. Integrated analysis of the fluid-temperature and flow-meter logs 

(app. 2b, fig. 4) indicate potential water-bearing fractures at 

depths of 66, 73, and 89 ft bls. 

During pumping, the fluid-temperature log recorded 

minor deflections in temperature at 47, 67, 73, and 91 ft bls. 

A slight increase in fluid resistivity is recorded with depth; 

subtle slope changes are noted at 43 and 85 ft bls. Integrated 

analysis of the fluid-resistivity, fluid-temperature, and EM 

flow-meter data indicates that the majority of water enters the 

borehole at a dominant fracture at a depth of 89 ft bls. 

The ATV and OTV logs indicate the borehole is intersected by 22 fractures between 39.5 and 121 ft bls (app. 3, 

table 4). The fractures have maximum apertures ranging from 

0.3 - 6.9 in. The character and orientation of these data plotted on a lower-hemisphere equal-area net as poles to planes 

indicate two steeply dipping groups sub-parallel to strike of 

bedrock with orientations of 3 - 42o

 with dips of S. 44 - 83o E. 

and 185 - 218o with dips of N. 73 - 83o W. (fig. 17). A third 

group, consisting of two near horizontal fractures (1o dip), 

strike at 187o and 229o. 

Jef-0587 (low road well)

Borehole Jef-0587 (site 36 on fig. 1 and in table 1) was 

constructed as a 6-in. diameter open hole to a depth of 410 ft 

and cased to 38 ft bls. It is located on a small topographic rise 

in an area characterized as a diffuse flow type setting and is 

absent of any nearby karst features. The borehole was drilled 

near the contact of the Conococheague Limestone and the 

Stoufferstown Member of the Stonehenge Limestone. The 

geologist’s well log recorded 26 ft of clay overlying bedrock and a total yield of 18 gal/min from zones at 119, 192, 

276-279, and 369-370 ft bls. No additional fracture zones 

were noted. The static water level in the borehole at the time 

of geophysical logging was 42.33 ft bls. 

The caliper log recorded numerous small fractures 

throughout the open-hole interval (app. 2a, fig. 5). Under 

ambient conditions the fluid-resistivity log shows changes 

between 160 - 180 ft bls. The fluid-temperature log recorded 

a gradual increase in temperature that is due to the geothermal 

gradient. Integrated analysis of the fluid-resistivity, fluidtemperature, and flow-meter logs (app. 2b, fig. 5) indicate that 

the fracture zone at 181 ft bls is contributing flow across the 

borehole. The geologist’s well log also notes appreciable flow 

of water from fractures near the bottom of the borehole at 369 

- 399 ft bls during drilling.

A pump was placed in the well casing and the well 

pumped at a rate of 4.4 gal/min. The fluid-resistivity log 

recorded more resistive water entering the borehole at the 181 

ft bls fracture zone. A slight cooling of water at that zone is 

also seen in the fluid-temperature log. Integrated analysis of 

the fluid-resistivity, fluid-temperature, and flow-meter data 

indicates that under pumping conditions water enters the 

borehole at the fractures at 181, 280, 375, and 400 ft bls. The 

major fracture at 181 ft bls has a strike of 14° and dips S. 42° 

E.

The ATV and OTV logs indicate that the borehole is 

intersected by 53 fractures between 38 and 410 ft bls (app. 3, 

table 5). The fractures have apertures ranging from 0.16 to 

7.7 in. The character and orientation of the data plotted on a 

lower-hemisphere 

equal-area net as poles to planes indicates one major fracturepopulation cluster with a orientation of 4 - 41o

 with dip angles 

from S. 39 - 74o E., that are approximately sub-parallel to local 

bedrock strike of 20 - 30o (fig. 17). 

Jef-0602 (old Dodson farm well)

Borehole Jef-0602 (site 55 on fig. 1 and in table 1) was 

constructed as a 6-in. diameter open hole to a depth of 61 ft 

and cased to 20 ft bls. It is located near an inferred crossstrike fault and is completed in the Ordovician Stonehenge 

Limestone of the Beekmantown Group. Construction of 
Appendix 2c 4

Jef-0602 preceded the period of study, thus geologist’s or 

driller well logs for the well were unavailable. The static 

water level in the borehole at the time of geophysical logging 

was 6.09 ft bls. 

The caliper log recorded one large fracture in the borehole at 36-37 ft bls with aperture width of 8.4 in (app. 2a, 

fig. 6). Under ambient conditions changes in fluid resistivity 

correlate with this fracture. The flow-meter log indicates no 

ambient flow in the borehole but integrated analysis of the 

fluid-resistivity and fluid-temperature logs indicate that some 

ambient flow may occur in the well, mostly in the interval 

from 37 - 61 ft bls (app. 2b, fig. 6). 

A pump was placed in the well casing and the well 

pumped at a rate of 10.5 gal/min. The fluid-resistivity log 

recorded a slope change in the borehole at the 36-37 ft bls 

fracture zone. Cooler water at that zone is also seen in the 

fluid-temperature log. Integrated analysis of the fluid-resistivity, fluid-temperature, and flow-meter logs indicate that all 

water under pumping conditions enters the borehole at the 

fracture zone 36-37 ft bls. This fracture has a strike of 22o and 

dips N. 41o W. 

The ATV and OTV logs indicate that the borehole is 

intersected by 13 fractures from 20 - 61 ft bls (app. 3, table 

6). These fractures have apertures range from 0.2 - 8.4 in. 

The character and orientation of the data plotted on a lowerhemisphere equal-area net as poles to planes indicate a scatter 

of planes predominantly dipping N. 19 to 77o W. (fig. 17).

Jef-0601 (stable A well)

Borehole Jef-0601 (site 37 on fig. 1 and in table 1) was 

constructed as a 6-in. diameter open hole to a depth of 312 ft 

and cased to 37 ft bls. It is located in an area characterized 

by a diffuse flow type setting and does not contain any karst 

features. The well is entirely completed in the Ordovician 

Stonehenge Limestone of the Beekmantown Group. Construction of Jef-0601 preceded the period of study, thus driller’s or 

geologist’s well logs for the well are unavailable. The static 

water level in the borehole at the time of geophysical logging 

was 31.75 ft bls. 

The caliper log recorded numerous small fractures 

throughout the open-hole interval (app. 2a, fig. 7). Under 

ambient (non-pumping) conditions changes in fluid resistivity 

are seen between 210 and 230 ft bls. A spike in fluid-temperature log is recorded from 218 - 220 ft bls, although a gradual 

increase in fluid-temperature is due to the geothermal gradient. 

Integrated analysis of the fluid-resistivity, fluid-temperatures, 

and flow-meter logs indicates there is no ambient flow in the 

borehole (app. 2b, fig.7). 

A pump was placed in the well casing and the well 

pumped at a rate of 1.6 gal/min. Under pumping conditions, 

the fluid-resistivity log recorded more resistive water entering 

the borehole between 210 - 230 ft bls with a decrease in fluidtemperature from 170 - 211 ft bls indicating a water-bearing 

zone. Integrated analysis of the fluid-resistivity, fluid-temperature, and flow-meter logs indicates that under pumping 

conditions, water enters the borehole through two zones at 111 

and 218 ft bls.

The ATV and OTV logs indicate that the borehole is 

intersected by 112 fractures between 37 and 312 ft bls (app. 

3, table 7). The fractures have apertures ranging from 0.2 - 

6.9 in. A plot of these data on a lower-hemisphere equal-area 

net as poles to planes indicates a major fracture-population 

clusters with strike orientations of 2 - 52o

 and dips of S. 23 to 

82o E., approximately sub-parallel to local bedrock strike of 20 

to 30o (fig. 17).

Jef-0585 (stable B well)

Borehole Jef-0585 (site 38 on fig. 1 and in table 1) was 

constructed as a 6-in. diameter open hole to a depth of 326 ft 

and cased to 39 ft bls. It is located in an area characterized as 

a diffuse flow type setting absent of any nearby karst features. 

The well is entirely completed in the Ordovician Stonehenge 

Limestone of the Beekmantown Group. The geologist’s well 

log recorded 13 ft of clay overlying bedrock and a total yield 

of 6 gal/min from zones at approximately 106, 115, 231, and 

313 ft bls. No additional fracture zones were noted. The static 

water level in the borehole at the time of geophysical logging 

was 30.95 ft bls. 

The caliper log recorded numerous small fractures 

throughout the open-hole interval (app. 2a, fig. 8). Under 

ambient conditions, the fluid resistivity log chows changes 

near the bottom of the borehole at 320 ft bls that may indicate 

a water-bearing fracture at that interval. The fluid-temperature 

log shows a gradual increase in temperature that is due to the 

geothermal gradient. Integrated analysis of the fluid-resistivity, 

fluid-temperatures, and flow-meter logs indicates there is no 

ambient flow in the borehole (app. 2b, fig. 8). 

A pump was placed in the well casing and the well 

pumped at a rate of 1.5 gal/min. The fluid-resistivity log 

recorded changes at about 310 ft bls indicating a water-bearing 

zone. Integrated analysis of the fluid-resistivity, fluid-temperature, and flow-meter data indicates that under pumping 

conditions, water enters the borehole at fracture zones near 53 

and 310 ft bls. 

The ATV and OTV logs indicate the borehole is intersected by 120 fractures between 39 and 326 ft bls (app. 3, 

table 8). The fractures have apertures ranging from 0.11 - 5.1 

in. A plot of these data on a lower-hemisphere equal-area net 

as poles to planes indicates a major fracture-population cluster 

with a strike orientation of 1 - 69o

 with dips of S. 15 - 57o E., 
5 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

that are approximately sub-parallel to the local bedrock strike 

of 20 - 30o (fig. 17).

Jef-0592 (stable C well)

Borehole Jef-0592 was constructed as a 6-in. diameter 

open hole to a depth of 321 ft and cased to 38 ft bls (site 39 on 

fig. 1 and in table 1). It is located in an area characterized as 

a diffuse flow type setting absent of any nearby karst features. 

The well is completed entirely in the Ordovician Stonehenge 

Limestone of the Beekmantown Group. The geologist’s well 

log recorded 18 ft of clay overlying bedrock and a total yield 

of 37 gal/min from fracture zones at 61, 71, 133, 141-145, 

151, 247, and 270 ft bls. Additional fractures and weathered 

zones were noted at 135 and 175 ft bls. The static water level 

in the borehole at the time of geophysical logging was 27.70 

ft bls. 

The caliper log recorded a large fracture just below the 

casing at 40 ft bls and numerous small fractures throughout 

the open-hole interval (app. 2a, fig. 9). Under ambient conditions, the fluid-resistivity log shows changes between 130 and 

160 ft bls and near the bottom of the borehole at 310 ft bls. 

The fluid-temperature log shows a gradual increase in temperature due to the geothermal gradient. Integrated analysis 

of the fluid-resistivity, fluid-temperatures, and flow-meter 

logs indicates that under ambient conditions, water enters the 

borehole at a fracture at 40 ft bls and exits the borehole at 138 

ft bls (app. 2b, fig. 9). 

A pump was placed in the well casing and the well 

pumped at a rate of 6.5 gal/min. The fluid-resistivity log 

recorded fluctuations between 130 and 160 ft bls that correlates to fractures on the caliper and ATV logs. Under pumping 

conditions the fluid-temperature log represents the geothermal 

gradient. Integrated analysis of the fluid-resistivity, fluidtemperature, and flow-meter data indicates that under pumping 

conditions, water enters the borehole through the fracture at 

138 ft bls. 

The ATV and OTV logs indicate that the borehole is 

intersected by 98 fractures between 38 and 321 ft bls (app. 3, 

table 9). The fractures have apertures ranging from 0.16 - 12.4 

in. A plot of these data on a lower-hemisphere equal-area net 

as poles to planes indicate a major fracture-population cluster 

with strike orientations of 1 - 57o

 with dips from S. 23 - 81o E., 

that are approximately sub-parallel to local bedrock strike of 

20 - 30o (fig. 17).

Jef-0603 (USDA sulfur well)

Borehole Jef-0603 (site 34 on fig. 1 and in table 1) was 

constructed as a 6-in. diameter open hole to a depth of 475 

ft and cased to 56 ft bls. The well was completed at a fault 

contact between the overlying Chambersburg Limestone and 

underlying Martinsburg Formation. Construction of Jef-0603 

preceded the period of study, so geologist’s or driller well logs 

for the well were unavailable. The static water level in the 

borehole at the time of geophysical logging was 35.90 ft bls. 

The caliper log recorded major fractures at 99, 150, 340, 

and 473 ft bls and numerous small fractures throughout the 

open-hole interval (app. 2a, fig. 10). The natural gamma log 

shows higher gamma readings at 101, 312, 336, and 394 ft 

bls likely indicating shaly layers within the Chambersburg 

Limestone. Under ambient conditions subtle changes in fluid 

resistivity are recorded between 140 and 198 ft bls. The fluidtemperature log recorded a gradual increase in temperature 

that represents the geothermal gradients. Integrated analysis 

of the fluid-resistivity, fluid-temperatures, and flow-meter logs 

indicates there is no ambient flow in the borehole (app. 2b, fig. 

10). 

Significant deviation in fluid-resistivity values measured 

under ambient and pumping conditions reflects the unique 

chemistry of ground water in borehole Jef-0603. A pump was 

placed in the well casing and the well pumped at a rate of <10 

gal/min. Under pumping conditions, the fluid-temperature log 

represents the geothermal gradient below 200 ft bls. Integrated analysis of the fluid-resistivity, fluid-temperature, and 

flow-meter data indicates that under pumping conditions all 

water enters the borehole from the fracture zone at the fault 

contact near the bottom of the borehole at 473 ft bls. 

The ATV and OTV logs indicate that the borehole is 

intersected by 89 fractures between 56 and 475 ft bls (app. 3, 

table 10). A plot of these data on a lower-hemisphere equalarea net as poles to planes indicates one major fracture-population cluster with strike orientations of 1 - 75o

 with dips of S. 

22 - 78o E. (fig. 17). 

Jef-0586 (USDA fault well)

Borehole Jef-0586 (site 60 on fig. 1 and in table 1) was 

constructed as a 6-in. diameter open hole to a depth of 201 ft 

and cased to 98 ft bls. The well was constructed along a fault 

zone and is completed in the Ordovician Rockdale Run Formation of the Beekmantown Group. At the time of drilling, 

rock cuttings of fault breccia were collected. The geologist’s 

well log recorded 4 ft of clay overlying bedrock and a total 

yield of 300 gal/min from zones at 104-115, 124-131, and 151 

ft bls. Numerous additional fractures and weathered zones 

were noted during drilling. The static water level in the borehole at the time of geophysical logging was 16.49 ft bls. 

The caliper log recorded major fractures at 103, 124-132, 

142, and 146-151 ft bls with numerous small fractures 

throughout the open-hole interval (app. 2a, fig. 11). Under 

ambient conditions an increase in fluid resistivity is seen 
Appendix 2c 

6

above 155 ft bls. The fluid-temperature log recorded slight 

deviations at 115, 158, and 187 ft bls. Integrated analysis of 

the fluid-resistivity, fluid-temperatures, and flow-meter logs 

indicate that under ambient conditions, water enters the bore-

hole at the fracture zone at 152 ft bls and exits at 104 and 142 

ft bls (app. 2b, fig. 11). 

A pump was placed in the well casing and the well 

pumped at a rate of <10 gal/min. The fluid-resistivity log 

recorded changes at 105 and 155 ft bls, and the fluid-tem-

perature log recorded slight deviations at 108 and 140 ft bls. 

Integrated analysis of the fluid-resistivity, fluid-temperature, 

and flow-meter data indicates that under pumping conditions, 

water enters the borehole from the fracture zones at 110 and 

158 ft bls. 

The ATV and OTV logs indicate the borehole is inter-

sected by 50 fractures between 98 and 201 ft bls (app. 3, table 

11). A plot of these data on a lower-hemisphere equal-area 

net as poles to planes indicates two major fracture-population 

clusters. The first cluster, with strike orientations of 7 - 59

o

and dips of S. 35 - 84

o

 E. are approximately sub-parallel to 

local bedrock strike of 20 - 30

o

 (fig. 17). The second cluster 

of fractures has strike orientations of 200

o

 - 238

o

 with dips of 

N49

o

 to 87

o

 W.
Appendix 3: Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged in 

boreholes, Leetown Science Center, Leetown West Virginia.
Appendix 3 2

Appendix 3 Table 1. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures 

imaged in borehole Jef-0589 (anticline well), Leetown 

Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike] 

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

1 41.5 329 21

2 44.1 266 35

3 45.4 217 28

4 51.6 20 66

5 57.3 307 51

6 63.4 205 43

7 66.6 224 42

8 67.8 221 37

9 75.9 219 48

10 76.8 230 43

11 77.2 219 43

12 78.1 228 39

13 82.1 183 38

14 85.5 31 45

15 89.8 217 67

16 90.4 217 64

17 93.5 228 42

18 94.6 224 39

19 95.0 243 28

20 96.2 258 48

21 96.7 216 47

22 97.0 223 50

23 98.8 218 48

24 101.2 212 37

25 103.0 228 38

26 105.3 229 40

27 105.9 210 46

28 107.7 229 42

29 108.3 220 48

30 109.0 219 44

31 109.5 224 39

32 110.0 222 46

33 110.9 229 46

34 112.1 244 47

35 113.2 223 52

36 113.7 229 52

37 115.6 221 57

Appendix 3 Table 1. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures 

imaged in borehole Jef-0589 (anticline well), Leetown 

Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike] 

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

38 117.5 224 55

39 118.2 225 49

40 120.5 218 54

41 121.2 225 55

42 123.7 221 57

43 135.8 224 44

44 137.7 236 50

45 142.0 220 54

46 143.1 221 55

47 152.5 201 47

48 153.2 214 44

49 153.4 201 40

50 153.7 223 32

51 154.1 193 42

52 154.6 217 40

53 155.7 191 39

54 164.6 188 43

55 170.1 201 50

56 170.8 207 49

57 172.4 176 57

58 177.3 223 41

59 177.6 222 40

60 182.4 208 46

61 189.1 194 50

62 189.7 193 50

63 190.9 187 56

64 194.1 12 59

65 194.9 178 44

66 196.0 189 55

67 196.9 167 55

68 199.9 216 37

69 200.8 222 46

70 201.8 203 51

71 202.6 209 50

72 203.5 191 50

73 204.8 202 54

74 205.7 206 53
3 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 3 Table 1. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures 

imaged in borehole Jef-0589 (anticline well), Leetown 

Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike] 

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

75 206.0 196 51

76 206.4 182 49

77 206.9 189 53

78 207.8 191 50

79 209.2 193 50

80 209.9 201 46

81 210.5 194 50

82 211.8 188 56

83 213.5 198 58

84 214.7 206 58

85 214.8 3 70

86 215.7 206 57

87 217.1 204 57

88 218.5 205 56

89 218.8 200 55

90 219.7 204 50

91 220.2 209 54

92 233.2 212 54

93 233.3 16 73

94 235.2 225 57

95 236.2 208 50

96 239.7 220 55

97 245.4 222 50

98 246.7 230 40

99 247.1 222 48

100 248.7 222 53

101 249.0 219 52

Appendix 3 Table 2. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0590 (ball field well), Leetown Science Center, 

Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in "right hand 

rule" where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

1 49.1 19 62

2 50.4 6 51

3 51.5 349 56

4 58.3 26 54

5 58.9 1 46

6 60.4 22 63

7 61.5 10 54

8 69.4 152 31

9 69.7 335 21

10 71.0 28 61

11 71.8 341 54

12 73.8 32 68

13 76.3 91 44

14 78.9 358 58

15 81.4 124 69

Appendix 3 Table 3. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0752 (new Dodson farm well), Leetown Science 

Center, Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in "right hand 

rule" where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

1 61.5 3 74

2 67.8 45 48

3 80.2 25 68

4 84.7 186 2

5 107.1 160 2

6 113.9 157 2

7 144.0 142 2

8 145.7 146 2

9 146.4 143 3

10 152.2 146 3
Appendix 3 4

Appendix 3 Table 4. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures 

imaged in borehole Jef-0753 (new Kaiser farm well), 

Leetown Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in "right hand 

rule" where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

1 42.7 90 71

2 47.3 32 70

3 48.3 37 74

4 49.3 37 71

5 51.2 28 59

6 54.0 18 69

7 57.1 31 69

8 57.9 25 70

9 61.1 25 67

10 64.4 218 81

11 64.9 26 83

12 66.0 185 82

13 69.7 210 77

14 72.6 187 1

15 86.3 190 76

16 88.8 229 1

17 89.9 194 73

18 94.1 29 70

19 98.2 37 67

20 99.1 42 57

21 99.8 3 44

22 101.3 11 56

Appendix 3 Table 5. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures 

imaged in borehole Jef-0587 (low road well), Leetown 

Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

1 45.3 16 44

2 45.6 22 46

3 46.6 31 40

4 47.7 19 49

5 48.6 26 59

6 49.3 27 59

7 49.9 39 55

Appendix 3 Table 5. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures 

imaged in borehole Jef-0587 (low road well), Leetown 

Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

8 51.1 4 45

9 111.5 18 49

10 111.8 205 81

11 114.1 40 67

12 114.8 219 83

13 120.4 36 58

14 122.6 22 51

15 125.2 18 52

16 128.8 10 52

17 138.6 21 58

18 141.4 25 53

19 144.6 358 39

20 150.0 24 51

21 153.1 19 50

22 160.6 12 50

23 171.3 19 46

24 180.3 14 42

25 186.8 22 46

26 191.5 23 74

27 234.7 201 73

28 238.6 9 40

29 239.3 20 46

30 243.9 205 79

31 273.4 11 52

32 277.2 17 48

33 307.1 31 43

34 307.8 24 40

35 319.0 33 52

36 328.3 16 57

37 336.2 34 54

38 366.9 16 59

39 374.0 33 56

40 378.0 26 49

41 382.3 20 53

42 386.2 27 49

43 387.5 29 48
5 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 3 Table 5. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures 

imaged in borehole Jef-0587 (low road well), Leetown 

Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

44 391.0 29 44

45 394.4 41 47

46 396.4 36 50

47 397.6 167 59

48 398.6 22 56

49 401.2 194 88

50 403.0 12 46

 Appendix 3 Table 6. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0602 (old Dodson farm well), Leetown Science 

Center, Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

1 25.8 192 47

2 26.9 222 50

3 28.2 43 47

4 28.3 130 38

5 28.6 244 53

6 32.7 222 29

7 34.3 243 19

8 36.8 203 41

9 40.0 176 42

10 42.9 230 69

11 44.0 207 76

12 45.3 182 71

13 46.4 74 28

 Appendix 3 Table 7. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0601 (Stable A well), Leetown Science Center, 

Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

1 45.6 339 39

2 54.3 23 54

3 57.1 24 48

 Appendix 3 Table 7. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0601 (Stable A well), Leetown Science Center, 

Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

4 58.7 246 59

5 60.2 346 42

6 64.2 358 45

7 68.4 26 50

8 68.9 28 51

9 69.3 29 50

10 78.4 233 43

11 79.1 172 69

12 93.9 26 39

13 97.2 25 67

14 98.5 13 47

15 99.0 28 46

16 99.5 23 53

17 104.0 213 61

18 104.5 19 46

19 110.4 26 51

20 111.4 235 60

21 111.8 30 59

22 124.5 10 82

23 136.1 124 64

24 138.7 21 43

25 138.8 190 66

26 139.8 177 61

27 139.9 9 44

28 145.0 22 35

29 145.8 46 38

30 146.9 44 23

31 147.3 33 33

32 148.2 31 40

33 149.3 28 37

34 149.8 22 37

35 150.5 38 39

36 151.0 32 42

37 151.3 32 40

38 151.5 30 43

39 152.2 39 47

40 152.6 52 38

41 153.3 29 41
Appendix 3 6

 Appendix 3 Table 7. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0601 (Stable A well), Leetown Science Center, 

Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

42 154.0 49 44

43 154.4 22 38

44 154.8 351 33

45 159.1 37 29

46 161.4 35 29

47 161.8 51 27

48 162.0 36 27

49 164.5 22 32

50 164.7 20 38

51 168.2 48 28

52 168.4 31 31

53 168.5 38 29

54 169.3 26 34

55 169.8 2 30

56 170.4 49 33

57 171.0 46 32

58 178.7 41 81

59 186.8 33 53

60 189.7 23 39

61 191.3 20 49

62 198.1 31 39

63 200.7 24 31

64 202.5 20 30

65 203.3 28 32

66 205.0 37 35

67 206.0 16 39

68 206.3 26 52

69 206.7 43 65

70 208.4 20 39

71 209.0 29 49

72 209.3 38 42

73 210.2 23 29

74 210.8 156 71

75 211.9 26 32

76 212.2 27 37

77 213.0 26 28

78 214.3 13 35

79 214.8 30 35

 Appendix 3 Table 7. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0601 (Stable A well), Leetown Science Center, 

Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

80 215.3 33 39

81 215.8 29 32

82 217.1 30 35

83 217.5 34 43

84 217.8 29 40

85 218.3 23 42

86 218.8 19 40

87 219.3 26 43

88 219.8 185 69

89 221.4 42 35

90 222.1 21 38

91 222.5 35 27

92 222.8 36 30

93 226.4 9 36

94 228.9 42 34

95 229.8 38 37

96 232.7 12 42

97 247.9 42 42

98 248.2 32 43

99 248.5 245 80

100 249.2 23 36

101 249.9 32 41

102 250.6 13 52

103 255.0 18 40

104 255.9 45 25

105 273.3 37 35

106 281.1 219 30

107 281.2 31 39

108 281.3 206 37

109 287.0 37 46

110 294.0 197 37

111 294.0 39 54

112 297.3 30 31
7 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 3 Table 8. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0585 (stable B well), Leetown Science Center, 

Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in "right hand 

rule" where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

1 40.1 155 44

2 42.2 204 68

3 42.7 159 54

4 52.7 16 47

5 53.3 25 49

6 54.0 35 43

7 64.6 224 46

8 64.9 6 51

9 69.3 26 41

10 70.0 8 40

11 74.3 10 57

12 83.4 11 70

13 87.5 29 29

14 94.0 36 46

15 95.3 35 37

16 95.5 15 40

17 95.7 35 32

18 96.1 23 28

19 103.6 32 42

20 105.3 13 34

21 105.5 21 32

22 113.1 32 46

23 113.6 161 58

24 114.6 26 44

25 140.3 7 40

26 141.1 273 50

27 142.0 39 39

28 143.8 216 54

29 144.4 12 50

30 146.2 16 29

31 148.1 45 33

32 148.5 17 34

33 148.8 27 29

34 149.4 220 40

35 149.5 36 37

36 151.4 33 29

37 152.8 51 31

38 153.6 33 40

Appendix 3 Table 8. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0585 (stable B well), Leetown Science Center, 

Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in "right hand 

rule" where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

39 155.3 29 39

40 156.7 29 44

41 157.3 19 36

42 157.8 50 37

43 158.3 247 42

44 160.8 20 37

45 161.1 32 37

46 164.1 33 35

47 167.2 30 32

48 168.0 18 41

49 171.0 252 64

50 173.1 44 26

51 174.8 39 34

52 184.1 233 53

53 192.7 37 52

54 194.5 21 38

55 196.5 201 54

56 196.9 29 51

57 198.8 21 42

58 201.0 26 42

59 201.6 44 39

60 204.1 26 32

61 206.8 21 41

62 206.8 244 16

63 209.9 18 30

64 211.9 10 33

65 212.9 39 36

66 214.8 28 34

67 215.4 14 34

68 215.8 35 21

69 216.4 44 21

70 217.6 1 15

71 218.4 30 40

72 218.9 21 53

73 219.4 36 22

74 220.2 29 27

75 222.1 29 34

76 222.5 14 33
Appendix 3 8

Appendix 3 Table 8. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0585 (stable B well), Leetown Science Center, 

Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in "right hand 

rule" where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

77 222.9 20 28

78 223.1 26 27

79 224.5 40 27

80 225.5 16 32

81 225.5 183 19

82 226.6 37 33

83 228.6 15 32

84 229.4 36 25

85 229.9 33 43

86 230.4 52 38

87 230.8 32 35

88 231.6 23 35

89 231.8 37 32

90 232.6 45 26

91 233.4 27 37

92 234.8 21 25

93 235.1 75 30

94 238.3 15 35

95 238.7 184 36

96 241.3 38 33

97 242.3 43 31

98 244.0 26 36

99 244.2 200 22

100 248.3 14 54

101 249.0 206 62

102 261.7 35 32

103 262.2 20 33

104 263.5 200 44

105 263.9 28 51

106 264.4 215 50

107 264.7 19 34

108 265.0 222 55

109 265.5 31 43

110 265.8 30 46

111 269.0 212 59

112 278.7 69 75

113 280.7 242 57

114 285.9 37 43

Appendix 3 Table 8. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0585 (stable B well), Leetown Science Center, 

Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in "right hand 

rule" where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

115 291.9 12 34

116 301.1 33 34

117 304.7 16 34

118 312.1 36 37

119 313.9 208 56

120 324.4 34 24

Appendix 3 Table 9. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0592 (stable C well), Leetown Science Center, 

Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

1 37.7 191 21

2 39.3 18 50

3 48.3 197 31

4 50.6 41 42

5 54.1 312 38

6 58.7 88 50

7 61.7 24 46

8 67.8 321 55

9 79.1 7 66

10 79.5 231 62

11 90.8 31 26

12 91.1 24 43

13 100.5 38 33

14 103.8 43 30

15 104.5 57 39

16 105.1 41 40

17 105.6 38 32

18 110.0 15 72

19 115.7 241 56

20 116.6 27 70

21 117.3 29 69

22 123.4 19 70

23 123.8 32 62

24 124.0 45 53
9 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 3 Table 9. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0592 (stable C well), Leetown Science Center, 

Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

25 126.2 5 43

26 131.5 293 64

27 133.2 96 89

28 138.5 280 73

29 141.6 31 51

30 144.9 19 44

31 150.7 231 48

32 150.9 356 67

33 154.9 17 81

34 171.0 24 36

35 171.2 13 38

36 171.6 23 30

37 171.9 31 33

38 173.5 27 49

39 174.6 194 67

40 178.6 33 40

41 180.3 18 40

42 181.0 15 49

43 181.3 26 42

44 181.5 49 56

45 186.4 34 45

46 187.2 1 43

47 189.3 16 53

48 192.7 8 51

49 193.3 344 39

50 195.6 36 45

51 195.9 39 45

52 196.4 43 46

53 196.8 37 44

54 200.2 27 58

55 203.2 24 56

56 211.2 35 42

57 212.7 30 38

58 215.5 345 26

59 215.6 243 69

60 217.6 280 31

61 220.8 207 49

62 223.6 25 40

Appendix 3 Table 9. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0592 (stable C well), Leetown Science Center, 

Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

63 227.2 206 55

64 231.6 14 42

65 232.3 27 35

66 232.7 36 46

67 234.0 45 40

68 235.3 220 58

69 239.3 32 47

70 241.6 19 57

71 243.0 51 40

72 243.5 28 59

73 244.5 36 52

74 245.9 44 34

75 246.8 37 48

76 247.1 41 54

77 250.0 247 58

78 252.8 34 27

79 253.8 42 32

80 255.3 43 44

81 256.5 50 38

82 257.1 44 44

83 258.9 34 42

84 262.5 172 79

85 263.8 349 45

86 270.8 26 40

87 271.3 34 42

88 272.3 23 23

89 272.7 9 49

90 272.9 22 49

91 273.5 19 35

92 273.9 37 39

93 277.6 32 44

94 285.1 42 30

95 288.5 232 49

96 303.7 26 49

97 303.7 203 32

98 307.7 160 50
Appendix 3 10

Appendix 3 Table 10. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0603 (USDA sulfur well), Leetown Science 

Center, Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

1 60.4 346 61

2 69.7 33 71

3 72.1 352 60

4 76.3 25 50

5 77.4 28 48

6 78.8 20 42

7 80.6 30 54

8 83.4 8 58

9 90.4 49 58

10 99.0 1 37

11 101.2 19 33

12 105.6 25 51

13 109.8 63 72

14 115.4 40 65

15 120.7 34 65

16 122.8 38 69

17 134.2 42 65

18 135.2 38 64

19 136.3 38 64

20 145.1 12 78

21 145.8 29 72

22 163.1 38 77

23 167.4 354 76

24 169.7 18 56

25 170.4 358 50

26 179.4 15 74

27 183.8 28 43

28 185.4 18 61

29 232.1 40 55

30 235.3 14 59

31 236.5 34 55

32 237.8 21 51

33 240.8 30 63

34 241.7 12 40

35 242.4 22 41

36 242.7 18 57

Appendix 3 Table 10. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0603 (USDA sulfur well), Leetown Science 

Center, Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

37 243.3 17 61

38 259.7 59 55

39 260.3 54 58

40 275.7 12 46

41 276.5 22 54

42 283.7 36 68

43 286.5 321 59

44 289.7 75 49

45 303.0 49 53

46 303.8 52 49

47 315.6 25 73

48 316.9 53 68

49 320.8 332 62

50 322.1 57 65

51 332.9 40 43

52 340.7 36 58

53 367.0 32 67

54 368.1 40 46

55 372.7 19 22

56 388.3 45 39

57 394.3 357 68

58 395.0 10 39

59 395.6 27 50

60 402.0 18 71

61 402.8 5 69

62 404.4 28 63

63 406.9 22 55

64 407.3 5 58

65 407.8 18 56

66 408.6 27 56

67 410.6 18 61

68 411.3 22 56

69 413.6 5 58

70 414.1 27 67

71 418.2 351 56
11 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Appendix 3 Table 10. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0603 (USDA sulfur well), Leetown Science 

Center, Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

72 419.9 18 70

73 422.0 14 73

74 424.4 24 71

75 425.6 14 54

76 427.3 10 67

77 428.1 33 61

78 428.8 22 68

79 431.0 23 73

80 432.7 30 67

81 438.4 22 70

82 439.1 27 69

83 440.2 18 62

84 441.4 32 56

85 441.9 18 56

86 448.3 19 44

87 448.5 36 55

88 449.8 255 43

89 453.5 11 42

Appendix 3 Table 11. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0586 (USDA fault well), Leetown Science 

Center, Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

1 103.5 113 40

2 104.6 85 42

3 105.3 35 61

4 105.7 48 71

5 108.4 205 57

6 110.3 178 38

7 110.5 205 49

8 111.3 51 48

9 111.9 34 71

10 113.9 221 73

11 114.2 41 66

12 118.7 221 70

Appendix 3 Table 11. Depth, strike, and dip of fractures imaged 

in borehole Jef-0586 (USDA fault well), Leetown Science 

Center, Leetown, West Virginia 

[Strike reported in azimuthal degrees, east of True North in “right hand 

rule” where the direction of dip is to the right of the strike]

Fracture No. Depth, in feet Strike, in 

degrees

Dip, in degrees

13 118.7 49 50

14 122.7 28 44

15 124.5 45 61

16 125.0 219 58

17 126.8 211 87

18 130.0 34 84

19 142.7 209 56

20 144.7 215 62

21 149.0 209 86

22 149.6 35 81

23 150.2 34 80

24 152.7 34 62

25 152.9 182 50

26 153.0 15 44

27 157.1 226 69

28 157.6 200 53

29 158.1 215 65

30 159.7 36 68

31 161.9 51 83

32 161.9 219 81

33 165.5 227 83

34 166.7 238 38

35 168.4 7 35

36 174.9 37 80

37 175.2 204 62

38 175.8 39 82

39 178.9 25 68

40 180.1 39 69

41 180.9 210 59

42 181.1 43 65

43 183.1 73 76

44 183.9 59 71

45 184.6 53 73

46 186.2 220 70

47 186.7 51 74

48 190.7 173 42

49 192.1 50 60

50 192.6 31 73
Appendix 4: Single-well, multi-well, step drawdown, and 

packer aquifer tests conducted at the Leetown Science 

Center, Leetown, West Virginia.
Appendix 4 

2

0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000

ELAPSED TIME, IN MINUTES

DEPTH TO WATER, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE 800 600 400 200

0

PUMPING RATE, IN GALLONS PER MINUTE

Jef-0752Jef-0602Pumping rate in Jef-0752

Appendix 4 fig. 1. Step-drawdown test conducted at well Jef-0752 in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

504030

2010
3 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000

ELAPSED TIME, IN MINUTES

50

3025201510

DEPTH TO WATER, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE

5004003002001000

PUMPING RATE, IN GALLONS PER MINUTE

Jef-0753Pumping rate in Jef-0753

5,000

Appendix 4 fig. 2. Step-drawdown test conducted during Fall 2005 at well Jef-0753 in the Leetown area, West Virginia.
Appendix 4 

4

0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000

ELAPSED TIME, IN MINUTES

50

1510

DEPTH TO WATER, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE

7006005004003002001000

PUMPING RATE, IN GALLONS PER MINUTE

Jef-0753Pumping rate in Jef-0753

Appendix 4 fig. 3. Step-drawdown test conducted during Spring 2006 at well Jef-0753 in the Leetown area, West Virginia
5 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000

ELAPSED TIME, IN MINUTES

5

0

504540353025201510

DEPTH TO WATER, IN FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE

10009008007006005004003002001000

PUMPING RATE, IN GALLONS PER MINUTE Jef-0599 Jef-0586 Pumping rate in Jef-0586

Appendix 4 fig. 4. Step-drawdown test conducted at well Jef-0586 in the Leetown area, West Virginia.
Appendix 4 

6

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000

ELAPSED TIME, IN MINUTES

2.001.751.501.251.000.750.500.250.00

DRAWDOWN, IN FEET

Jef-0490Jef-0526Jef-0792Jef-0793Jef-0327S

Pumping rate in Jef-0586

0

300200100

 PUMPING RATE, 

IN GALLONS PER

 MINUTE

Appendix 4 fig. 5. Monitoring well observations during step-drawdown test conducted at well Jef-0586 in the Leetown area, West Virginia.
7 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

10-1 100 101 102 103 104

0

4

8

12

16

20

Jef-0490

Jef-0318

Jef-0318 AQUIFER TEST

Q = 90 gpm

SEMI-LOG PLOT

ELAPSED TIME, IN MINUTES

DRAWDOWN, IN FEET

Appendix 4 fig. 6. Semi-log plot of drawdown versus time for multiple well test conducted 

on well Jef-0318 in the Leetown area, West Virginia.
Appendix 4 8

10-1 100 101 102 103 104

10-2

10-1

100

101

102

Jef-0490

Jef-0318

Jef-0490 AQUIFER TEST

Q = 93 gpm

LOG-LOG PLOT

ELAPSED TIME, IN MINUTES

DRAWDOWN, IN FEET

Appendix 4 fig. 7. Log-log plot of drawdown versus time for multiple well test conducted 

on well Jef-0490 in the Leetown area, West Virginia, October 1999.
9 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

100 101 102 103

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

Jef-0584

Jef-0591

Jef-0590

Jef-0591 AQUIFER TEST

Q = 14 gpm

SEMI-LOG PLOT

ELAPSED TIME, IN MINUTES

DRAWDOWN, IN FEET

Appendix 4 fig. 8. Semi-log plot of drawdown versus time for multiple well test conducted 

on well Jef-0591 in the Leetown area, West Virginia.
Appendix 4 10

10-1 100 101 102 103 104

10-2

10-1

100

101

Jef-0586

Jef-0793

Jef-0599

Jef-0581 AQUIFER TEST

Q = 80 gpm

LOG-LOG PLOT

ELAPSED TIME, IN MINUTES

DRAWDOWN, IN FEET

Appendix 4 fg. 9. Log-log plot of drawdown versus time for multiple well test conducted 

on well Jef-0581 in the Leetown area, West Virginia.
11 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

10-1 100 101 102 103 104

10-2

10-1

100

101

Jef-0318

Jef-0490

Jef-0590

Jef-0591

Jef-0490 AQUIFER TEST

Q = 69 gpm

LOG-LOG PLOT

ELAPSED TIME, IN MINUTES

DRAWDOWN, IN FEET

Appendix 4 fig. 10. Log-log plot of drawdown versus time for multiple well test conducted 

on well Jef-0490 in the Leetown area, West Virginia, May 2004.
Appendix 4 12

10-1 100 101 102 103

10-2

10-1

100

101

Jef-0584

Jef-0526

Jef-0591

Jef-0584 AQUIFER TEST

Q = 15 gpm

LOG-LOG PLOT

ELAPSED TIME, IN MINUTES

DRAWDOWN, IN FEET

Appendix 4 fig. 11. Log-log plot of drawdown versus time for multiple well test conducted 

on well Jef-0584 in the Leetown area, West Virginia.
13 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

10-2 10-1 100 101 102 103

10-2

10-1

100

101

102

Jef-0585

Jef-0601

Jef-0597

Jef-0592

Jef-0601 AQUIFER TEST

Q = 7.6 gpm

LOG-LOG PLOT

ELAPSED TIME, IN MINUTES

DRAWDOWN, IN FEET

Appendix 4 fig. 12.Log-log plot of drawdown versus time for multiple well test conducted 

on well Jef-0601 in the Leetown area, West Virginia.
Appendix 5a – Interpretation of fluorometric tracer tests 

done in the USGS Leetown Science Center, West Virginia
Appendix 5 2

Tracer Test No. 1

The first tracer test was initiated on April 20, 2004, at 

11:34 AM by releasing 0.635 pounds (lbs) of Rhodamine WT 

dye into the south branch of Hopewell Run just below the 

Owen’s Farm Spring pond (fig. 25 and table 12). Possible dye 

recovery sites monitored were the south and east branches of 

Hopewell Run (points f and g on fig. 25), Gray, Blue, Balch, 

and Tabb Springs (sites a, c, h, and i on fig. 25 and table 13), 

and two wells at the Center (sites d and e on fig. 25 and table 

13).

Peak dye recovery occurred at the monitoring point (point 

f on fig. 25) on the south branch of Hopewell Run at 4:38 PM 

on April 20, 2004, indicating an approximate five hour time of 

travel within the stream and through several ponds in the area 

(app. 5, fig. 1). Ground-water discharge to the south branch of 

Hopewell Run could not be firmly established because of the 

surface water transport of the dye. However, small dye peaks 

approximately three days and six days after injection could 

reflect recovery of dye from upstream leakage of surface water 

into ground water.

Peak dye recovery in the ball field well (Jef-0590 – site 

48 on fig. 1 and in table 1) (point d on fig. 25) on the Center 

occurred at 7:30 AM on May 02, 2004, indicating a 12-day 

time of travel (app. 5, fig. 2) and a linkage between surface 

and ground water, most likely as the south branch of Hopewell 

Run crosses the thrust faults which occur adjacent to the Center. The distance from the injection point to the ball field well 

is 5,181 ft which translates into a flow velocity of 430 ft/d. 

Base-flow discharge measurements conducted on the east and 

south branches of Hopewell Run indicate a loss of streamflow 

as the streams cross the thrust faults.

An isolated peak concentration of dye was detected in 

Balch Spring (Jef-0327S – site 4 on fig. 1 and in table 1) at 

8:50 AM on April 22, 2004, which may be a result of induced 

capture of water by pumping of Balch Spring. The south 

branch of Hopewell Run flows across the thrust fault on which 

Balch Spring is located. The time of travel for peak arrival to 

Balch Spring was approximately six days (app. 5, fig. 3), but 

the exact path of travel is not known and is likely associated 

with the thrust faults which cross the area. The distance from 

the injection point to Balch Spring is 6,099 ft which translates 

into a flow velocity of about 1,020 ft/d.

A weak multimodal recovery of dye was obtained at the 

monitoring point on the east branch of Hopewell Run (point 

g on fig. 25) with a peak recovery occurring at 8:00 AM on 

April 24, 2004 indicating a time of travel of about four days 

(app. 5, fig. 4). This erratic recovery probably reflects spillover of Balch Spring water into the east branch and possibly a 

slight rise of dye along a portion of its length. This hypothesis 

was not tested, however. With a straight-line travel distance 

of 6,358 ft and assuming that the peak dye recovery reflects a 

discharge of ground water to the east branch of Hopewell Run, 

the estimated flow velocity is 1,600 ft/d.

Tracer Test No. 2

The second tracer test was initiated on May 17, 2004, at 

10:30 AM by injecting 0.635 lbs of Rhodamine WT dye into 

the east branch of Hopewell Run just below Bell Spring (fig. 

25 and table 12). Resurgence was monitored at the same sites 

monitored for the first tracer test with the addition of a second 

site on the east branch of Hopewell Run below two intermittent springs (site j on fig. 25 and table 13).

Peak dye recovery occurred at the on the east branch of 

Hopewell Run at the Leetown gaging station (site g on fig. 25) 

at 7:10 PM on May 18, 2004, indicating a slightly less than 

1.5-day time of travel within the stream and through a large 

reservoir (app. 5, fig. 5). The distance from the injection point 

to the sampling station is 7,120 ft and yielded a calculated 

streamflow velocity of 4,750 ft/d, although this is likely an 

indication of the stream velocity only. A second smaller peak 

in the breakthrough curve (BTC) occurred on May 26, 2004, 

9 days after injection with a subsequent flattening of the curve 

indicating dye recovery and a streamflow velocity of about 

790 ft/d.

Dye peaks were detected at Gray and Blue Springs 

(app. 5, figs. 6 and 7, respectively) (sites a and c on fig. 25), 

although data are limited and recoveries at Gray Spring were 

very poor. Such poor breakthrough data indicates that the 

sampling frequency was insufficient for this particular test. 

However, the smooth distribution of data allowed for modeling the breakthrough curves. Peak dye recovery occurred at 

Gray Spring on May 21, 2004 and at Blue Spring on May 22, 

2004, approximately 4 and 5 days after injection, respectively. 

The travel distances to Gray Spring was 4,860 ft and to Blue 

Spring was 5,130 ft, providing calculated flow velocities of 

1,220 ft/d and 1,030 ft/d.

The dye resurgences at Blue and Gray Springs provide an 

indication of a connection between surface and ground water, 

but the limited sampling data around the recovery times is 

problematic. The geologic map for the area indicates a thrust 

fault crossing through the areas adjacent to the south branch of 

Hopewell Run and the springs, indicating a possible connection between the two.

A strong multimodal recovery of the dye was also 

obtained at the ball field Well (Jef-0590 – site d on fig. 25) 

where peak recovery exceeded 7 μg/L (>6 μg/L when the 

~1 μg/L background concentration is subtracted from the 

measured peak concentration) (app. 5 fig. 8). Peak recovery 

occurred at 7:35 AM on May 18, 2004, indicating a 21 hour 

(.875 d) time of travel (app. 5, fig. 8). The multimodal nature 

of the breakthrough curve cannot be easily explained, but may 

be a result of leakage (losing reaches) along the east branch 

of Hopewell Run. An alternative explanation may be that dye 

leaked into the well at various fractures along the well bore. 
3 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

An early peak indicates fairly rapid transit by the bulk of the 

dye, but the long strong tail also is indicative of slow leakage 

from tighter fractures. The distance from the injection point 

to the ball field well is 5,680 ft, providing a calculated flow 

velocity of approximately 6,490 ft/d). These results indicate 

recoveries at the ball field well from both tracer tests 1 and 

2. The travel time discrepancy (travel times from the April 

20, 2004, release were much longer than the travel times from 

the May 17, 2004, release) is not easily resolved, but probably 

reflects the proximity of the east branch of Hopewell Run to 

the ball field well relative to the south branch of Hopewell 

Run.

Very low peak dye recoveries were obtained at Balch 

Spring, at Hopewell run just below the two intermittent 

springs, and on the south branch of Hopewell Run at the Leetown gaging station. The recoveries at Balch Spring were very 

low, multimodal and occurred on May 19, 2004, and May 22, 

2004, yielding travel times of about 2 and 5 days, respectively 

(app. 5, fig. 9). The distance from the injection point to Balch 

Spring is 6,190 ft, indicating flow velocities of 1,240 and 

3,100 ft/d. Similar results were obtained from the two intermittent springs. The peak recovery occurred on May 24, 2004, 

seven days after injection (app. 5, fig. 10). The recovery point 

is 3,760 ft from the injection site, indicating a flow velocity of 

540 ft/d was calculated.

A somewhat erratic recovery was also obtained at the 

Hopewell Run at Leetown gaging station on the south branch 

of Hopewell Run with the main peak dye recovery occurring 

on May 26, 2004, about nine days after injection (app. 5, fig. 

11). The recovery point is 7,200 ft from the injection point, 

indicating a calculated flow velocity of about 800 ft/d. 

Although the dye recoveries at Balch Spring, Gray 

Spring, the east branch of Hopewell Run just below the two 

intermittent springs, and on the south branch of Hopewell 

Run were quite low, their travel distances and peak times of 

recovery were comparable with each other and with the other 

sampling sites where stronger recoveries were obtained. This 

relation indicates that the weak recoveries are probably real. 

The first two tracer tests were based on injections into streams 

while the remaining tests concentrated on injections into 

ground water through sinkholes or shallow wells.

Tracer Test No. 3

The third tracer test was initiated on June 17, 2004, at 

11:20 AM by injecting 1.05 lbs of Rhodamine WT dye into a 

sinkhole on the Center north of the east branch of Hopewell 

Run near Hite Road (site 3 on fig. 25 and table 12). Resurgence sites were monitored on the south (site f on fig. 25) and 

east branches of Hopewell Run (sites g, j, and k on fig. 25 

and table 13), and at the confluence of two small intermittent 

springs down gradient of the injection sinkhole (site l on fig. 

25 and table 13).

Peak dye recovery occurred at the confluence of the two 

intermittent springs (site l on fig. 25) on July 8, 2004 (app. 5, 

fig. 12), at the east branch of Hopewell Run downstream of the 

confluence of the two springs (site j on fig. 25) also on July 8, 

2004, and on the east Branch of Hopewell Run at the Leetown 

gaging station on July 9, 2004. The estimated time of travel 

from the injection sinkhole for peak arrival at the two intermittent springs was approximately 21 days. The distance between 

the sinkhole and the confluence of the two overflow springs is 

approximately 1,580 ft, yielding an approximate flow velocity 

of 75 ft/d.

Tracer Test No. 4

The fourth tracer test was initiated on July 22, 2004, at 

9:30 AM by injecting 1.05 lbs of Rhodamine WT dye into a 

46 ft deep piezometer drilled in bedrock along a fracture zone. 

This piezometer is located on a cross-strike fracture zone (fig. 

25 and table 12) that parallels a nearby cross-strike fault and 

connects to a small intermittent spring approximately 1,490 ft 

up-gradient of Gray Spring. Resurgence sites were monitored 

on the south and east branches of Hopewell Run (points f and 

g on fig. 25 and table 13), at Gray, Blue, and Balch Springs, 

and at the small tributary stream that starts at Gray Spring 

(sites b, a, h, and c on fig. 25 and table 13).

Peak dye recovery occurred at Blue Spring on July 23, 

2004, six days after injection (app. 5, fig. 13), at Gray Spring 

on July 24, 2004, about seven days after injection (app. 5, fig. 

14a), and at the tributary just below Gray Spring on July 23, 

2004, about six days after injection (app. 5, fig. 14b). Dye 

recoveries were very low with multiple peaks, indicative of 

poor flushing from the piezometer. The estimated peak time of 

travel from the injection piezometer to the tributary monitoring point was approximately six days indicating the overflow 

receives water from Blue Spring before Gray Spring. The 

straight line distance between the piezometer and Blue Spring 

was approximately 1,910 ft, yielding an approximate groundwater flow velocity of 320 ft/d. The straight line distance 

between the piezometer and Gray Spring is approximately 

1,490 ft, yielding an approximate ground-water flow velocity 

of 210 ft/d.

Dye was also recovered at Balch Spring at extremely low 

concentrations, again with erratic multiple peaks (app. 5, fig. 

15). Poor flushing of the dye from the piezometer is a possible reason for the very poor tracer recovery. Peak recovery 

at Balch Spring occurred on July 29, 2004, about 12 days after 

injection. The distance between the injection piezometer and 

Balch Spring is 3,860 ft, indicating a calculated flow velocity 

of 320 ft/d.

This poor flushing may be evidence that the piezometer 

was not in good hydraulic connection with the main flow 

system, at least at the depth where the dye was released. Alternatively, although precautions were taken to control the rate of 

release of dye into the piezometer, it is possible that the slow 
Appendix 5 4

rate of dye injection into the top of the piezometer, followed 

by chaser water, was too great for the piezometer to be able 

to absorb the injected water. The net effect would be that the 

head in the piezometer may have been sufficiently raised as 

to force the dye up into the vadose zone. Such an occurrence 

would result in a slow, perhaps pulsing release of the dye back 

into the piezometer and subsequent release into the aquifer 

over a relatively long period of time.

Tracer Test No. 5

The fifth tracer test was initiated on August 31, 2004, at 

11:22 AM by injecting 3.5 lbs of Rhodamine WT dye into a 6 

ft deep augered hole in a dry stream channel (point 5 on figure 

25) coincident with a thrust fault that connects to Gray Spring 

(fig. 25 and table 12). Resurgence sites were monitored on the 

south and east branches of Hopewell Run (sites f and g on fig. 

25 and table 13) and at Gray, Blue, Balch and Tabb Springs 

(sites a, c, h, and i on fig. 25 and table 13). 

Peak recovery occurred at Blue and Gray Springs on 

September 29, 2004, 29 days after injection (app. 5, figs. 16 

and 17, respectively); at Tabb Spring on September 28, 2004, 

28 days after injection (app. 5, fig. 18); at Balch Spring on 

September 15, 2004, 15 days after injection (app. 5, fig. 19); 

and on the south and east branches of Hopewell Run on September 29, 2004, 29 days after injection (app. 5, figs. 20 and 

21, respectively).

Interestingly, breakthrough curves for the south and east 

branches of Hopewell Run are remarkably similar in appearance to each other. Similarly, Blue and Gray Springs also have 

similarly appearing curves. The similarity in breakthrough 

curves between the two branches of Hopewell Run and 

between Blue and Gray Springs lend themselves to confirmation of recovery. Even more significant was the more rapid 

recovery of dye at Balch Spring where peak recovery was 

approximately 14 days sooner than the nearby Blue, Gray, 

and Tabb Springs. The rapid transport to Balch Spring might 

be related to (1) solution enlargement of fractures and faults 

between the injection site and Balch Spring and (2) due to 

the pumping of Balch Spring or both. The distances between 

the augered injection hole and Balch, Blue, Gray, and Tabb 

Springs are approximately 3,540, 1,260, 810, and 1,910 ft 

respectively; resulting in calculated peak ground-water flow 

velocities of approximately and 240, 44, 28, and 68 ft/d, 

respectively.

Tracer Test No. 6

The sixth tracer test was initiated on October 7, 2004, at 

10:20 AM by injecting 0.66 lbs of sodium fluorescein dye into 

a 37.5-ft deep piezometer (site 54 on fig. 1 and in table 10) 

completed in shallow bedrock on a thrust fault that connects 

to Balch Spring (fig. 25 and table 12). Resurgence sites were 

monitored on the south and east branches of Hopewell Run 

(sites f and g on fig. 25 and table 13) and at Gray, Blue, Balch 

and Tabb Springs (sites a, c, h, and i on fig. 25 and table 13).

Peak dye recovery occurred at the east branch of 

Hopewell Run at the Leetown gaging station on October 30, 

2004 (app. 5, fig. 22), and in Balch Spring on December 10, 

2004 (app. 5, fig. 23). An even stronger resurgence occurred 

at Balch Spring on December 17, 2004 just as sampling was 

terminated due to freezing of equipment. As a result, final 

recoveries at Balch Spring could not be determined.

These data indicate approximately 25 days for peak time 

of travel to Hopewell Run and approximately 64-71 days for 

peak time of travel to Balch Spring. The distances between 

the injection piezometer and Balch Spring is 970 ft and to the 

Hopewell Run at Leetown gaging station is 1,390 ft. These 

data yielded a calculated peak flow velocity to Balch Spring 

of 14-15 ft/d and to the east branch of Hopewell Run of 56 

ft/d. The differences in flow velocities to Balch Spring and to 

Hopewell Run indicate that different fractures associated with 

the fault zones are connected to the two sites.

In August 2005 an aquifer test was conducted on a 6-in. 

diameter well (Jef-0586, site 60 on fig. 1 and in table 1) adjacent to the injection piezometer (Jef-0599, site 54 on fig. 1 and 

in table 1) used for injection of dye in the sixth tracer test. A 

72-hour aquifer test was conducted on the well and water was 

withdrawn from the well at rates varying from 100 to more 

than 300 gal/min. Visible concentrations of sodium fluorescein 

were detected in a down gradient monitoring well approximately 200 ft from the injection piezometer. Sodium fluorescein dye had remained trapped in the aquifer for more than 10 

months, possibly in the clay filled area between pinnacles or 

isolated voids in the epikarst. The documentation of this phenomenon is important, as historically, only very low concentrations of dye are retrieved as a result of fluorometric tracer 

injections conducted in the region. The long-term trapping of 

water and solutes in the epikarstic zone has been documented 

in other karstic terranes (Even and others, 1986). Long-term 

trapping in the epikarstic zone is indicative of poor hydrologic 

connections between the vadose zone and the phreatic zone 

until heavy precipitation mobilizes the stored solutes.

Tracer Test No. 7

The seventh tracer test was initiated on October 7, 2004, 

at 12:30 PM by injecting 6.0 lbs of Rhodamine WT dye into 

a sinkhole 1 mile southeast of Leetown (fig. 25 and table 12). 

This was a repeat of a former tracer test conducted by Jones 

and Deike (1981). Resurgence sites were monitored on the 

south and east branches of Hopewell Run (sites f and g on fig. 

25 and table 13) and at Gray, Blue, Balch and Tabb Springs 

(sites a, c, h, and i on fig. 25 and table 13). Unfortunately, 

freezing of automatic samplers at several sites forced a discontinuance of sampling. However, sampling was continued 
5 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

at several other sites for most of the winter and at Gray Spring 

through March, 2005.

Peak dye recovery occurred at Gray Spring on February 

26, 2005, with a secondary peak on March 2, 2005 (app. 5, 

fig. 24). These recoveries indicate ground-water time of travel 

to Gray Spring of 142-146 days, respectively. The distances 

between the injection sinkhole and Gray Spring is 4,540 ft, 

yielding an approximate flow velocity from the injection sinkhole to Gray Spring of 31-32 ft/d.

Peak dye recovery occurred at Blue Spring on January 

19, 2005, (app. 5, fig. 25), and at Balch Spring on October 

19, 2004, with a secondary peak on November 21, 2004 (app. 

5, fig. 26), although the recovery concentrations at Balch 

Spring are quite low. No data was available for these sites in 

early 2005 due to freezing of automated samplers. Because 

data were unavailable for Balch and Blue Springs, flow to 

these sites may not be representative of peak ground-water 

travel times. Estimated time of travel to Blue Spring was 104 

days and to Balch Spring was 12 days with a secondary peak 

45 days since injection. The apparent rapid transit of dye to 

Balch Spring was probably induced by pumping of Balch 

Spring. 

Estimated flow velocities are equally uncertain. The 

distance from the injection sinkhole to Blue and Balch Springs 

are approximately 5,020 and 7,180 ft, respectively. Estimated 

flow velocities were approximately 48 ft/d to Blue Spring 

and 160–600 ft/d to Balch Spring. The previous tracer test 

conducted by Jones and Deike (1981) reported a transit rate of 

81 ft/d to Gray Spring, 86 ft/d to Blue Spring, and 127 ft/d to 

Balch spring (Jones and Deike, 1981). The apparent discrepancy in flow velocities are probably a result of higher precipitation during this study.

Tracer Test No. 8

The eighth and final tracer test was initiated on April 19, 

2005, at 11:22 AM by injecting 11.9 lbs of Rhodamine WT 

dye into a sinkhole northeast of Leetown (fig. 25 and table 

12). Resurgence sites were monitored on the east branch of 

Hopewell Run at the Leetown gaging station (site g on fig. 26 

and table 13) and at Gray, Blue, and Balch Springs and the 

confluence of the two intermittent springs just down gradient 

of the injection sinkhole (sites a, c, h, and l on fig. 25 and table 

13). Resurgence sites were also monitored on the east branch 

of Hopewell Run above and below the confluence of the 

discharge of the two intermittent springs on the east branch of 

Hopewell Run (sites j and k of fig. 25 and table 13) and downstream from a spring fed pond (site m on fig. 25 and table 13).

Unfortunately, the three springs nearest the injection sinkhole ceased flowing at the end of May 2006. These springs 

were likely resurgence sites for the tracer test. It is possible 

that a peak dye recovery occurred on May 4, 2006 at the two 

intermittent springs (site l on fig. 25) indicating a 15-day time 

of travel (app. 5, fig. 27). Dye was also detected in the east 

branch of Hopewell Run downstream of the two overflow 

springs (site j on fig. 25). The first peak on the Hopewell Run 

downstream of the two intermittent springs occurred on May 

8, 2005 (19 days after injection), with a second and larger 

peak on June 1, 2005 (43 days after injection); and subsequent 

smaller peaks occurring later in the year (app. 5, fig. 28).

The distance between the injection sinkhole and the two 

intermittent springs is 6,240 ft and the Hopewell Run monitoring site downstream of the two intermittent springs is 6,250 

ft. These data indicated an estimated flow velocity of 420 ft/d 

for flow to the two intermittent springs and an estimated flow 

velocity of 150 to 330 ft/d to the Hopewell Run monitoring 

site downstream of the two intermittent springs.

Spiked dye peaks were detected on the east branch of 

Hopewell Run at the Leetown gaging station (app. 5, fig. 29) 

at about the same time, but may represent flow in the east 

branch of Hopewell Run after resurgence from the upstream 

site. Transit times and velocities to the gage were, therefore, 

not determined.

Dye was also detected at two monitoring wells drilled 

on anticlinal (Jef-0589) and synclinal (Jef-0588) axes (sites n 

and o on fig. 25) down gradient of the injection sinkhole on 

November 4, 2005 (app. 5, figs. 30 and 31, respectively). The 

monitoring wells were not continuously sampled and dye may 

have emerged at the site prior to November 4, 2005. However, 

assuming the depicted dye peaks are representative of peak 

travel times, transport to the two wells was 199 days. The distances from the injection point to the anticline and the syncline 

monitoring wells are 2,450 and 2,870 ft respectively, indicative of flow velocities of 12 and 14 ft/d. A previous tracer test 

conducted in the area in 1979 documented a transit rate of 

150 ft/d (Jones and Deike, 1981). The discrepancy is most 

logically explained by the fact that the monitoring wells were 

not continuously sampled, especially earlier in the test. Also, 

wells are notoriously poor recovery locations for tracer tests 

in karstic terranes. As a result, ground-water flow velocities to 

these wells are likely faster than the velocities presented here.

Similar appearing breakthrough curves occurred at Blue, 

Gray, and Balch Springs with peak recoveries occurring on 

May 4, May 8, and May 11, 2005, respectively, yielding calculated travel times of 15, 19, and 22 days (app. 5, figs. 32, 33, 

and 34, respectively). This is significant because these springs 

are the main sources of water to the Center. The distance from 

the injection point to Blue, Gray, and Balch Springs are 8,030; 

8,070; and 7,700 ft, indicating flow velocities of 540, 430, 

and 350 ft/d. It is also possible that the recoveries at Balch, 

Blue, and Gray Springs may have been the result of secondary 

or tertiary recoveries of dye from a previous test. However, a 

previous tracer test showed a connection between the area and 

Gray Spring so the test is considered to be representative of 

ground-water flow the area.
Appendix 5 6

Appendix 5b: Data from dye tracing experiments at the Leetown Science Center, 

Leetown, West Virginia.
7 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Figure 1. Tracer breakthrough curve at the gage on the south 

branch of Hopewell Run from the April 20, 2004 dye tracer 

test (Test 1). Early sharp peak probably represents flow in 

Hopewell Run while the later smaller peaks may represents 

ground-water inflow into Hopewell Run.

Figure 2. Tracer breakthrough curve at the Ball Field Well 

from the April 20, 2004 dye tracer test (Test 1).

Figure 3. Tracer breakthrough curve at Balch Spring from 

the April 20, 2004 dye tracer test (Test 1) . Sharp peak 

recovery is probably representative of forced gradient 

extraction of ground water as a result of pumping Blach Spring.

Figure 4. Tracer breakthrough curve at the gage on the 

east branch of Hopewell Run from the April 20, 2004 dye 

tracer test (Test 1). The multipeaked nature of the Breakthrough curve may represent both flow from Balch 

Spring and ground-water rise into Hopewell Run.

Appendix 5b. Data from dye tracing experiments in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter
Appendix 5 8

Figure 5. Tracer breakthrough curve at the gage on the east 

branch of Hopewell Run from the May 17, 2004 dye tracer test 

(Test 2). Early smooth peak probably represents flow in Hopewell 

Run while the later smaller peak may represent ground-water 

inflow into Hopewell Run.

Figure 6. Tracer breakthrough curve at Blue Spring from the 

May 17, 2004 dye tracer test (Test 2). Strong smooth peak is 

indicative of tracer recovery from ground water.

Figure 7. Tracer breakthrough curve at Gray Spring from the 

May 17, 2004 dye tracer test (Test 2). Strong smooth peak is 

indicative of tracer recovery from ground water. Skewness 

suggests some tracer detention in immobile flow zones.

Figure 8. Tracer breakthrough curve at the Ball Field Well 

from the May 17, 2004 dye tracer test (Test 2). The strong 

multipeaked breakthrough curve may be due to leakage 

of ground water into the well from differing fractures.

Appendix 5b. Data from dye tracing experiments in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days
9 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Figure 9. Tracer breakthrough curve at Balch Spring from the 

May 17, 2004 dye tracer test (Test 2). The very low dual peaked 

Breakthrough curve may be a result of forced recovery of small 

quantities of tracer dye detained in immobile flow regions as 

a result of pumping Balch Spring.

Figure 10. Tracer breakthrough curve at two high-level 

overflow springs from the May 17, 2004 dye tracer test

(Test 2).

Figure 11. Tracer breakthrough curve at the gage on the south 

branch of Hopewell Run from the May 17, 2004 dye tracer test

(Test 2). Tracer recoveries are a result of ground-water rise up 

into Hopewell Run.

Figure 12. Tracer breakthrough curve at two high-level 

overflow springs from the June 17, 2004 dye tracer test

(Test 3). The late peak was substantially greater than the 

strong background dye levels suggesting good dye 

recovery from the tracer test.

Appendix 5b. Data from dye tracing experiments in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter
Appendix 5 10

Figure 13. Tracer breakthrough curve at Blue Spring from the 

July 17, 2004 dye tracer test (Test 4). The very low multipeaked breakthrough curve may be a result of slow release 

from the injection piezometer.

Figure 14a. Tracer breakthrough curve at Gray Spring from 

the July 17, 2004 dye tracer test (Test 4). The very low multipeaked breakthrough curve may be a result of slow release 

from the injection piezometer.

Figure 14b. Tracer breakthrough curve at the Gray Spring 

Overflow from the July 17, 2004 dye tracer test (Test 4).

Figure 15. Tracer breakthrough curve at Balch Spring from 

the July 17, 2004 dye tracer test (Test 4). The very low multipeaked breakthrough curve may be a result of slow release 

from the injection piezometer.

Appendix 5b. Data from dye tracing experiments in the Leetown area, West Virginia. Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days
11 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Figure 16. Tracer breakthrough curve at Gray Spring from 

the August 31, 2004 dye tracer test (Test 5).

Figure 17. Tracer breakthrough curve at Blue Spring from 

the August 31, 2004 dye tracer test (Test 5).

Figure 18. Tracer breakthrough curve at Tabb Spring from 

the August 31, 2004 dye tracer test (Test 5). The late peak 

was substantially greater than the strong background dye 

levels suggesting good dye recovery from the tracer test.

Figure 19. Tracer breakthrough curve at Balch Spring from 

the August 31, 2004 dye tracer test (Test 5).

Appendix 5b. Data from dye tracing experiments in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter
Appendix 5 12

Figure 20. Tracer breakthrough curve at the gage on the 

south branch of Hopewell Run from the August 31, 2004 dye 

tracer test (Test 5). The late peaks were substantially greater 

than the strong background dye levels suggesting good dye 

recovery from the tracer test.

Figure 21. Tracer breakthrough curve at the gage on the 

east branch of Hopewell Run from the August 31, 2004 

dye tracer test (Test 5). The late peaks were substantially 

greater than the strong background dye levels suggesting 

good dye recovery from the tracer test.

Figure 22. Tracer breakthrough curve at the gage on the east 

branch of Hopewell Run from the October 7, 2004 (1020 in the 

morning) dye tracer test (Test 6 & 7). The early peaks were 

substantially greater than the strong background dye levels 

suggesting good dye recovery from the tracer test. Recoveries 

were greater and occurred earlier than occurred at Balch Spring 

which proves that apparent recoveries were not due to releases 

from Balch Spring.

Figure 23. Tracer breakthrough curve at Balch Spring 

from the October 7, 2004 (1020 in the morning) dye 

tracer test (Test 6 & 7). The late peaks were substantially 

greater than the strong background dye levels suggesting 

good dye recovery from the tracer test.

Appendix 5b. Data from dye tracing experiments in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter
13 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Figure 24. Tracer breakthrough curve at Gray Spring from the 

October 7, 2004 (1230 in the afternoon) dye tracer test (Test 6 

& 7).

Figure 25. Tracer breakthrough curve at Blue Spring from 

the October 7, 2004 (1230 in the afternoon) dye tracer test

(Test 6 & 7).

Figure 26. Tracer breakthrough curve at Balch Spring from 

the October 7, 2004 (1230 in the afternoon) dye tracer test

(Test 6 & 7).

Figure 27. Tracer breakthrough curve at two high-level 

overflow springs from the April 19, 2005 dye tracer test

(Test 6 & 7). The strong peak was substantially greater 

than the strong background dye levels suggesting good 

dye recovery from the tracer test.

Appendix 5b. Data from dye tracing experiments in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter
Appendix 5 14

Figure 28. Tracer breakthrough curve downstream of the two 

high-level overflow springs from the April 19, 2005 dye tracer 

test (Test 8).

Figure 29. Tracer breakthrough curve at the gage on the 

east branch of Hopewell Run from the April 19, 2005 dye 

tracer test (Test 8).

Figure 30. Tracer breakthrough curve at the Anticline Well from 

the April 19, 2005 dye tracer test (Test 8). The strong peaks 

suggest good tracer dye recovery, but the late start of sampling 

may have resulted in earlier dye peaks being missed.

Figure 31. Tracer breakthrough curve at the Syncline 

Well from the April 19, 2005 dye tracer test (Test 8). The 

strong peaks suggest good tracer dye recovery, but the 

late start of sampling may have resulted in earlier dye 

peaks being missed.

Appendix 5b. Data from dye tracing experiments in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter
15 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Figure 32. Tracer breakthrough curve at Blue Spring from the 

April 19, 2005 dye tracer test (Test 8).

Figure 33. Tracer breakthrough curve at Gray Spring 

from the April 19, 2005 dye tracer test (Test 8).

Figure 34. Tracer breakthrough curve at Balch Spring from 

the April 19, 2005 dye tracer test (Test 8).

Figure 35. CXTFIT model fit to the Balch Spring breakthrough curve from the April 19, 2004 dye tracer test

(Test 8).

Appendix 5b. Data from dye tracing experiments in the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days

Time since injection, in days Time since injection, in days

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

 Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter
Appendix 5 16

Figure 36. CXTFIT model fit to the Blue Spring breakthrough curve from the May 17, 2004 dye tracer test

(Test 2).

Figure 37. CXTFIT model fit to the Gray Spring breakthrough curve from the May 17, 2004 dye tracer test

(Test 2).

Appendix 5b. Data from dye tracing experiments in the Leetown area, West Virginia. Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter Dye concentration, in micrograms per Liter

Time since injection, in days

Time since injection, in days
Appendix 6: Water quality data from sampling locations at 

the Leetown Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia.
Appendix 6 2

Table 1. Water quality data from samples collected at the USGS Leetown Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia.

Station number Local identifier Local Name Geologic Formation Date Depth of well 

(feet)

392037077553501 Jef-0594 Tabb Lower Piezometer Stoufferstown Member 9/15/2004 41

392042077554301 Jef-0521S Gray Spring Stonehenge Limestone 9/13/2004 --

392049077554601 Jef-0659S Blue Spring Stonehenge Limestone 9/15/2004 --

392051077544301 Jef-0602 Old Dodson Farm Well Stonehenge Limestone 9/15/2004 61

392051077544302 Jef-0752 New Dodson Farm Well Stonehenge Limestone 9/8/2005 166

392101077554901 Jef-0590 Ball Field Well Rockdale Run Formation 9/16/2004 160

392102077552001 Jef-0753 New Kaiser Farm Well Stonehenge Limestone 9/14/2005 121

392102077554801 Jef-0584 Bone Yard Upper Well Rockdale Run Formation 9/16/2004 113

392110077555201 Jef-0327S Balch Spring Rockdale Run Formation 9/14/2004 --

392115077544801 Jef-0589 Anticline Well Rockdale Run Formation 9/13/2004 260

392117077550301 Jef-05921 Stable C Well Stonehenge Limestone 7/27/2004 321

392117077550302 Jef-05851 Stable B Well Stonehenge Limestone 7/21/2004 326

392117077550304 Jef-0601 Stable A Well Stonehenge Limestone 9/14/2004 312

392119077554701 Jef-0603 USDA Sulfur Well Martinsburg Formation 9/16/2004 475

392121077551701 Jef-0587 Low Road Well Conococheague Limestone 9/14/2004 410

392035077544001 Jef-0306S Bell Spring Stoufferstown Member 7/22/2004 --

Table 1 (continued). Water quality data from samples collected at the USGS Leetown Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia.

Local identifier Date Water level, 

below land 

surface (feet)

Landsurface 

altitude (feet)

Redox 

potential 

millivolts

Turbidity 

(NTU)

Dissolved 

oxygen 

(mg/L)

Dissolved 

oxygen, (% 

saturation)

pH 

(standard 

units)

Jef-0594 9/15/2004 6.35 491.67 128 2.4 1.8 18 6.7

Jef-0521S 9/13/2004 -- 478.32 179 <1 4.4 41 6.6

Jef-0659S 9/15/2004 -- 479.37 136 0.45 4.1 39 6.8

Jef-0602 9/15/2004 -- 510.05 112 240 4.0 39 6.7

Jef-0752 9/8/2005 -- 522.59 279 270 6.0 57 6.6

Jef-0590 9/16/2004 22.53 478.06 99 11 3.1 30 6.7

Jef-0753 9/14/2005 8.09 512.42 228 2.9 3.9 38 6.7

Jef-0584 9/16/2004 22.91 479.16 -8 43 <2.0 -- 6.6

Jef-0327S 9/14/2004 -- 456.10 121 0.88 4.0 39 6.9

Jef-0589 9/13/2004 24.6 516.76 124 -- 2.9 28 6.7

Jef-05921 7/27/2004 35.58 528.55 -- -- 1.3 -- 7.0

Jef-05851 7/21/2004 38.56 529.89 44 1.0 1.1 10 7.0

Jef-0601 9/14/2004 43.45 532.36 131 5.1 6.6 66 6.8

Jef-0603 9/16/2004 38.48 489.72 340 7.0 0.6 6.0 7.0

Jef-0587 9/14/2004 42.16 533.93 119 6.9 1.6 16 6.7

Jef-0306S 7/22/2004 -- 483.00 -- -- -- -- 6.8
3 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Table 1--continued. Water quality data from samples collected at the USGS Leetown Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia.

Local identifierDate Specific 

conductance 

at @25 oC (μS/

cm)

Temperature, 

water (oC)

Hardness, 

water 

(mg/L 

CaCO3)

Non-Carbonate hardness, 

dissolved 

(mg/L CaCO3)

Calcium, 

dissolved 

(mg/L)

Magnesium, 

dissolved 

(mg/L)

Potassium, 

dissolved 

(mg/L)

Jef-0594 9/15/2004 694 15.3 360 90 132 6.45 1.87

Jef-0521S 9/13/2004 773 12.1 340 96 120 8.49 1.58

Jef-0659S 9/15/2004 623 13.3 320 85 115 8.35 1.74

Jef-0602 9/15/2004 621 13.2 350 87 125 8.27 2.28

Jef-0752 9/8/2005 602 12.6 -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0590 9/16/2004 634 12.6 360 77 129 7.79 1.65

Jef-0753 9/14/2005 623 13.6 340 33 127 5.24 1.1

Jef-0584 9/16/2004 667 13.6 350 45 128 7.53 1.79

Jef-0327S 9/14/2004 579 13.7 290 24 105 7.48 1.97

Jef-0589 9/13/2004 586 13.3 320 57 113 7.94 1.98

Jef-05921 7/27/2004 586 14.5 -- -- 2

110 28.20 21.1

Jef-05851 7/21/2004 581 13.7 -- -- 2

92.4 223.20 21.1

Jef-0601 9/14/2004 630 14.9 350 25 129 7.79 1.18

Jef-0603 9/16/2004 3180 14.1 550 240 116 59.9 7.66

Jef-0587 9/14/2004 975 13.9 490 120 142 30.7 1.42

Jef-0306S 7/22/2004 565 11.4 -- -- 2

102 28.9 22.2

Table 1--continued. Water quality data from samples collected at the USGS Leetown Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia.

Local identifierDate Sodium, dissolved (mg/L)Alkalinity, 

dissolved 

(mg/L CaCO3)

Bicarbonate, dissolved (mg/L)Carbonate, 

Dissolved 

(mg/L)

Bromide, 

dissolved 

(mg/L)

Chloride, 

dissolved 

(mg/L)

Fluoride, 

dissolved 

(mg/L)

Jef-0594 9/15/2004 4.12 266 324 <1 0.01 9.14 <0.2

Jef-0521S 9/13/2004 2.83 240 293 <1 0.02 7.54 <0.2

Jef-0659S 9/15/2004 2.94 238 290 <1 0.01 7.5 <0.2

Jef-0602 9/15/2004 3.98 259 316 <1 0.03 8.83 <0.2

Jef-0752 9/8/2005 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0590 9/16/2004 3.46 278 339 <1 0.03 7.67 <0.2

Jef-0753 9/14/2005 4.87 305 372 <1 -- 9.48 0.1

Jef-0584 9/16/2004 5.43 307 374 <1 0.04 11.5 <0.2

Jef-0327S 9/14/2004 17.3 270 329 <1 0.04 14.4 <0.2

Jef-0589 9/13/2004 2.56 259 316 <1 0.02 5.59 0.2

Jef-05921 7/27/2004 2

4.03 263 321 <1 -- -- --

Jef-05851 7/21/2004 2

4.28 284 346 <1 -- -- --

Jef-0601 9/14/2004 5.5 330 402 <1 0.02 10.1 0.2

Jef-0603 9/16/2004 402 304 371 <1 0.68 538 1.9

Jef-0587 9/14/2004 28.5 373 455 <1 0.04 84.2 0.2

Jef-0306S 7/22/2004 2

3.4 313 382 2<1 2<0.05 28.4 20.2
Appendix 6 4

Table 1--continued. Water quality data from samples collected at the USGS Leetown Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia.

Local identifierDate Silica, dissolved (mg/L)Sulfate, dissolved (mg/L)Residue, 

whole, sum 

of constituents (mg/L)

Residue on 

evaporation 

@ 180 oC, dissolved (mg/L)

Ammonia, 

dissolved 

(mg/L as N)

NO2+NO3, 

dissolved 

(mg/L as N)

Nitrite, 

dissolved 

(mg/L as N)

Jef-0594 9/15/2004 12.2 16.4 379 264 E0.03 8.53 <0.008

Jef-0521S 9/13/2004 11.4 17.5 332 170 <0.04 3.8 <0.008

Jef-0659S 9/15/2004 11.1 16.7 324 233 <0.04 3.89 <0.008

Jef-0602 9/15/2004 12.6 16.2 356 233 <0.04 5.27 <0.008

Jef-0752 9/8/2005 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0590 9/16/2004 11.2 17.5 350 189 <0.04 1 <0.008

Jef-0753 9/14/2005 12 12.8 364 <0.04 1.78 <0.008

Jef-0584 9/16/2004 10.9 16.1 367 228 <0.04 0.14 <0.008

Jef-0327S 9/14/2004 11.4 16.7 345 240 <0.04 1.78 <0.008

Jef-0589 9/13/2004 10.3 15.6 323 186 0.07 2.24 <0.008

Jef-05921 7/27/2004 2

11.3 -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-05851 7/21/2004 2

11.3 -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0601 9/14/2004 15.2 14.2 395 249 <0.04 3.18 <0.008

Jef-0603 9/16/2004 13.2 409 1740 1720 0.61 <0.06 <0.008

Jef-0587 9/14/2004 14.8 33.8 577 398 <0.04 1.48 0.014

Jef-0306S 7/22/2004 2

10.8 217.9 -- -- -- 24.87 --

 Table 1--continued. Water quality data from samples collected at the USGS Leetown Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia.

Local identifierDate Orthophosphate, 

dissolved (mg/L 

as P)

E. coli, NAMUG (colonies/

100mL)

Fecal coliforms 

(colonies/

100mL)

Total Coliform, MEndo (colonies/

100mL)

Aluminum, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Antimony, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Jef-0594 9/15/2004 <0.02 5 3 290 <2 <0.2

Jef-0521S 9/13/2004 <0.02 1 <1 143 <2 <0.2

Jef-0659S 9/15/2004 <0.02 1 1 55 <2 <0.2

Jef-0602 9/15/2004 <0.02 20 37 700 <2 <0.2

Jef-0752 9/8/2005 -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0590 9/16/2004 <0.02 <1 1 E105 <2 <0.2

Jef-0753 9/14/2005 <0.02 -- -- -- E1 <0.2

Jef-0584 9/16/2004 <0.02 <1 <1 <92 <2 <0.2

Jef-0327S 9/14/2004 <0.02 2 4 360 <2 <0.2

Jef-0589 9/13/2004 <0.02 <1 <1 280 <2 <0.2

Jef-05921 7/27/2004 -- -- -- -- 2

<1 --

Jef-05851 7/21/2004 -- -- -- -- 2

1 --

Jef-0601 9/14/2004 <0.02 <1 <1 207 <2 <0.2

Jef-0603 9/16/2004 <0.02 <1 <1 <1 <3 E0.21

Jef-0587 9/14/2004 <0.02 <1 <1 68 <2 E0.19

Jef-0306S 7/22/2004 -- -- -- -- 2

3 --
5 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Table 1--continued. Water quality data from samples collected at the USGS Leetown Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia.

Local identifierDate Arsenic, dissolved (μg/L)Barium, dissolved (μg/L)Beryllium, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Boron, dissolved (μg/L)Cadmium, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Chromium, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Cobalt, dissolved (μg/L)

Jef-0594 9/15/2004 E0.1 46 <0.06 <8 <0.04 <0.8 0.355

Jef-0521S 9/13/2004 <0.2 47 <0.06 <8 <0.04 E0.5 0.303

Jef-0659S 9/15/2004 E0.1 47 <0.06 <8 <0.04 E0.4 0.31

Jef-0602 9/15/2004 <0.2 63 <0.06 E5 <0.04 E0.5 0.476

Jef-0752 9/8/2005 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0590 9/16/2004 <0.2 52 <0.06 <8 <0.04 <0.8 0.482

Jef-0753 9/14/2005 E0.06 38 <0.06 8 <0.04 E0.03 <0.04

Jef-0584 9/16/2004 <0.2 55 <0.06 E4 <0.04 <0.8 0.431

Jef-0327S 9/14/2004 <0.2 51 <0.06 E6 <0.04 <0.8 0.225

Jef-0589 9/13/2004 <0.2 50 <0.06 <8 <0.04 E0.5 0.409

Jef-05921 7/27/2004 2

<1 239.3 -- 2<20 2<0.05 -- --

Jef-05851 7/21/2004 2

<1 273.4 -- 2<20 2<0.05 -- --

Jef-0601 9/14/2004 <0.2 33 <0.06 <8 <0.04 1.5 0.403

Jef-0603 9/16/2004 E0.2 55 <0.12 770 <0.08 <0.8 0.41

Jef-0587 9/14/2004 0.4 95 <0.06 8 <0.04 <0.8 1.15

Jef-0306S 7/22/2004 2

0.2 2100 -- 2<10 -- 2<1.0 --

Table 1--continued. Water quality data from samples collected at the USGS Leetown Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia.

Local identifierDate Copper, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Iron, dissolved 

(μg/L)

Lead, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Lithium, dissolved (μg/L)Manganese, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Molybdenum, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Nickel, dissolved (μg/L)

Jef-0594 9/15/2004 0.4 7 <0.08 0.8 E0.1 <0.4 0.21

Jef-0521S 9/13/2004 0.5 E6 <0.08 2.2 <0.2 E0.3 0.10

Jef-0659S 9/15/2004 0.4 <6 <0.08 2.3 0.2 <0.4 0.14

Jef-0602 9/15/2004 0.6 E6 <0.08 3.7 0.5 <0.4 0.40

Jef-0752 9/8/2005 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0590 9/16/2004 0.6 9 <0.08 2.3 1.3 <0.4 0.45

Jef-0753 9/14/2005 14 <0.08 1.9 0.4 <0.4

Jef-0584 9/16/2004 0.5 7 <0.08 2.4 6.2 <0.4 0.42

Jef-0327S 9/14/2004 0.4 <6 <0.08 2.6 E0.2 <0.4 0.38

Jef-0589 9/13/2004 0.7 E4 <0.08 2.7 22.5 E0.3 0.80

Jef-05921 7/27/2004 2

16.6 220 20.12 23.0 212 -- 20.60

Jef-05851 7/21/2004 2

7.1 2<10 2<0.05 25.0 26.0 -- 20.40

Jef-0601 9/14/2004 0.5 <6 <0.08 3.3 0.2 E0.3 0.92

Jef-0603 9/16/2004 5.8 20 <0.16 512 9.4 <0.8 1.65

Jef-0587 9/14/2004 0.8 E3 0.12 4.0 3.2 0.5 2.90

Jef-0306S 7/22/2004 2

2.5 2<10 2<0.05 24.0 21.0 2<0.1 --
Appendix 6 6

Table 1--continued. Water quality data from samples collected at the USGS Leetown Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia.

Local identifierDate Selenium, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Silver, dissolved (μg/L)Strontium, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Thallium, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Vanadium, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Zinc, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

CIAT, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Jef-0594 9/15/2004 <0.4 <0.2 244 <0.04 0.8 <0.6 E0.364

Jef-0521S 9/13/2004 <0.4 <0.2 804 <0.04 1.1 E0.3 E0.143

Jef-0659S 9/15/2004 E0.2 <0.2 780 <0.04 0.8 <0.6 E0.159

Jef-0602 9/15/2004 <0.4 <0.2 543 <0.04 0.2 <0.6 E0.338

Jef-0752 9/8/2005 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0590 9/16/2004 E0.3 <0.2 866 <0.04 1.6 <0.6 --

Jef-0753 9/14/2005 0.13 <0.2 250 <0.04 0.1 42.3 E0.024

Jef-0584 9/16/2004 <0.4 <0.2 790 <0.04 1.6 <0.6 --

Jef-0327S 9/14/2004 <0.4 <0.2 691 <0.04 1.2 <0.6 E0.183

Jef-0589 9/13/2004 <0.4 <0.2 426 <0.04 1.1 1.9 E0.157

Jef-05921 7/27/2004 2

<1 -- 2289 -- 20.4 -- --

Jef-05851 7/21/2004 2

<1 -- 2736 -- 20.3 -- --

Jef-0601 9/14/2004 <0.4 <0.2 245 <0.04 1.4 8 E0.039

Jef-0603 9/16/2004 0.8 8450 <0.08 0.7 2.7 <0.006

Jef-0587 9/14/2004 1.8 <0.2 11300 <0.04 1.7 4.7 --

Jef-0306S 7/22/2004 -- 2

1060 -- 2<0.1 2<1.0 --

Table 1--continued. Water quality data from samples collected at the USGS Leetown Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia.

Local identifierDate Atrazine, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Phenol, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Phenol, total 

(μg/L)

Prometon, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Simazine, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Tebuthiuron, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Terbacil, 

dissolved 

(μg/L)

Jef-0594 9/15/2004 0.19 <0.01 0.024 0.12 <0.034

Jef-0521S 9/13/2004 0.128 0.9 <1.6 0.01 0.034 <0.02 <0.034

Jef-0659S 9/15/2004 0.135 <0.5 <1.6 0.01 0.035 0.02 <0.034

Jef-0602 9/15/2004 0.226 <0.5 <1.6 0.02 0.045 E0.01 <0.034

Jef-0752 9/8/2005 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0590 9/16/2004 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0753 9/14/2005 0.01 -- -- <0.01 <0.005 <0.02 <0.034

Jef-0584 9/16/2004 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0327S 9/14/2004 0.125 0.6 E1.2 0.01 0.028 <0.02 <0.034

Jef-0589 9/13/2004 0.094 -- -- 0.01 0.023 <0.02 <0.034

Jef-05921 7/27/2004 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-05851 7/21/2004 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0601 9/14/2004 0.036 -- -- 0.07 0.013 <0.02 E0.016

Jef-0603 9/16/2004 <0.007 -- -- <0.01 <0.005 <0.02 <0.034

Jef-0587 9/14/2004 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0306S 7/22/2004 -- -- -- -- -- -- --
7 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Table 1--continued. Water quality data from samples collected at the USGS Leetown Science Center, Leetown, West Virginia.

Local identifierDate 1,1,1-Trichloro-ethane, 

total (μg/L)

1,2,4-Trimethyl-benzene, 

total (μg/L)

Acetone, 

total (μg/L)

m- + pXylene, total 

(μg/L)

o-Xylene, 

total (μg/L)

Tetrachloroethene, 

total (μg/L)

Toluene, total 

(μg/L)

Jef-0594 9/15/2004 <0.03 <0.06 <6 <0.06 <0.04 <0.06 <0.05

Jef-0521S 9/13/2004 <0.03 <0.06 <6 <0.06 <0.04 <0.06 <0.05

Jef-0659S 9/15/2004 <0.03 <0.06 <6 <0.06 <0.04 <0.06 <0.05

Jef-0602 9/15/2004 E0.04 <0.06 <6 <0.06 <0.04 E0.02 <0.05

Jef-0752 9/8/2005 E0.04 <0.06 8 <0.06 <0.04 <0.03 0.45

Jef-0590 9/16/2004 <0.03 <0.06 <6 <0.06 <0.04 <0.06 <0.05

Jef-0753 9/14/2005 <0.03 <0.06 <6 <0.06 <0.04 E0.02 1.1

Jef-0584 9/16/2004 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0327S 9/14/2004 <0.03 <0.06 <6 <0.06 <0.04 <0.06 <0.05

Jef-0589 9/13/2004 E0.05 E0.03 <6 E0.04 E0.03 <0.06 E0.05

Jef-05921 7/27/2004 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-05851 7/21/2004 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0601 9/14/2004 <0.03 <0.06 <6 <0.06 <0.04 <0.06 E0.03

Jef-0603 9/16/2004 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0587 9/14/2004 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Jef-0306S 7/22/2004 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Table 1--continued. Water quality data from samples collected at the USGS Leetown Science Center, Leetown, West 

Virginia.

Local identifier Date Trichloromethane, 

total (μg/L)

Rn-222, total (pCi/L) Tritium, total (pCi/L) Uranium, dissolved 

(μg/L)

Jef-0594 9/15/2004 <0.02 1180 -- 0.47

Jef-0521S 9/13/2004 <0.02 -- 25.3 0.35

Jef-0659S 9/15/2004 <0.02 -- 25 0.34

Jef-0602 9/15/2004 <0.02 800 -- 0.29

Jef-0752 9/8/2005 <0.02 -- --

Jef-0590 9/16/2004 E0.02 1100 -- 0.35

Jef-0753 9/14/2005 <0.02 840 -- 0.39

Jef-0584 9/16/2004 -- 1280 -- 0.3

Jef-0327S 9/14/2004 0.48 -- 25.6 0.27

Jef-0589 9/13/2004 <0.02 650 -- 0.28

Jef-05921 7/27/2004 -- -- 24.6 2

0.4

Jef-05851 7/21/2004 -- -- 19.8 2

0.92

Jef-0601 9/14/2004 <0.02 1080 -- 0.63

Jef-0603 9/16/2004 -- 10 -- <0.08

Jef-0587 9/14/2004 -- 250 -- 1.48

Jef-0306S 7/22/2004 -- -- -- 2

0.30

1

Data were collected from discrete intervals using a packer assembly.

2

 Data for calcium, magnesium, sodium, and potassium were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma (icp) methods and data for arsenic, 

boron, barium, cadmium, copper, lithium, manganese, nickel, lead, selenium, strontium, uranium, and vanadium were analyzed by icp with mass 

spectrometry (icpms) at the USGS dissolved gas laboratory in Reston Virginia. All other data in this table were analyzed by standard laboratory 

methods at the USGS National Water Quality laboratory in Lakewood Colorado.
Appendix 6 8

Appendix 6. Table 2. Additional laboratory analyses conducted on samples collected from wells and springs in the Leetown area, 

West Virginia.

Local Station 

Number

Local Station 

Name

Date 

Sampled

VOCs 

(Schedule 

2020)

Organophosphate + 

Organochlorine Pesticides 

(Schedule 

1399)

Triazine 

Pesticides 

(Schedule 

2001)

Waste-Water 

Compounds 

(Schedule 

1433)

Semi-Volatile 

Compounds 

(Schedule 

1383)

Jef-0601 Stable well A 09/14/04 X X X

Jef-0585 Stable well B 07/21/04

Jef-0592 Stable well C 07/27/04

Jef-0327S Balch Spring 09/14/04 X X X X X

Jef-0659S Blue Spring 09/15/04 X X X X X

Jef-0521S Gray Spring 09/13/04 X X X X X

Jef-0589 Anticline well 09/13/04 X X X

Jef-0587 Low road well 09/14/04

Jef-0584 Boneyard upper 

well

09/24/04

Jef-0594 Tabb lower 

piezometer

09/15/04 X X X

Jef-0590 Ball field well 09/16/04 X

Jef-0603 USDA sulfur 

well

09/16/04 X X

Jef-0602 Old Dodson farm 

well

09/15/04 X X X X X

Jef-0753 New Kaiser farm 

well

09/14/05 X X X

Jef-0752 New Dodson 

farm well

09/08/05 X

Jef-0306S Bell Spring 07/22/04
9 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Table 3. Compounds not detected in any sample collected from 

the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Analyte USGS Parameter CodeCAS Number1Reporting 

Limit (μg/L)

Volatile Organic Dompounds (VOCs) in Unfiltered Water Samples

1,2,3,4-Tetramethylbenzene 49999 488-23-3 0.14

1,2,3,5-Tetramethylbenzene 50000 527-53-7 0.12

2-Butanone 81595 78-93-3 1.6

trans-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene 73547 110-57-6 0.6

2-Hexanone 77103 591-78-6 0.6

4-Methyl-2-

pentanone 

78133 108-10-1 0.4

Acetone 81552 67-64-1 4

Acrylonitrile 34215 107-13-1 0.4

Benzene 34030 71-43-2 0.016

1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 77613 87-61-6 0.08

1,2,3-Trimethylbenzene 77221 526-73-8 0.08

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 34551 120-82-1 0.08

Bromobenzene 81555 108-86-1 0.02

Chlorobenzene 34301 108-90-7 0.02

Ethylbenzene 34371 100-41-4 0.04

1,3-Dichlorobenzene 34566 541-73-1 0.04

Butylbenzene 77342 104-51-8 0.14

n-Propylbenzene 77224 103-65-1 0.04

1,2-Dichlorobenzene 34536 95-50-1 0.02

1,4-Dichlorobenzene 34571 106-46-7 0.02

sec-Butylbenzene 77350 135-98-8 0.04

tert-Butylbenzene 77353 98-06-6 0.06

Bromoethene 50002 593-60-2 0.12

Bromoform 32104 75-25-2 0.08

Hexachlorobutadiene 39702 87-68-3 0.06

Carbon disulfide 77041 75-15-0 0.06

Tetrachloromethane 32102 56-23-5 0.08

Chloroform 32106 67-66-3 0.02

Isopropylbenzene 77223 98-82-8 0.04

Table 3. Compounds not detected in any sample collected from 

the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Analyte USGS Parameter CodeCAS Number1Reporting 

Limit (μg/L)

1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 77562 630-20-6 0.04

1,1,1-Trichloroethane 34506 71-55-6 0.02

1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane 77652 76-13-1 0.04

1,2-Dibromoethane 77651 106-93-4 0.04

1,2-Dichloroethane 32103 107-06-2 0.06

Hexachloroethane 34396 67-72-1 0.14

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 34516 79-34-5 0.1

Chloroethane 34311 75-00-3 0.1

Diethyl ether 81576 60-29-7 0.12

Ethyl tert-butyl 

ether 

50004 637-92-3 0.04

cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 77093 156-59-2 0.02

Tetrachloroethylene 34475 127-18-4 0.04

trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene 34546 156-60-5 0.018

Trichloroethylene 39180 79-01-6 0.02

1,1-Dichloroethane 34496 75-34-3 0.04

Tetrahydrofuran 81607 109-99-9 1.4

Diisopropyl ether 81577 108-20-3 0.06

m- and p-Xylene 85795 m=108-38-3

p=106-42-3

0.08

1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene 77226 108-67-8 0.04

Ethyl methacrylate 73570 97-63-2 0.14

Methyl methacrylate 81597 80-62-6 0.2

Methyl acrylonitrile 81593 126-98-7 0.2

Bromochloromethane 

77297 74-97-5 0.06

Bromodichloromethane 

32101 75-27-4 0.04

Dibromochloromethane 32105 124-48-1 0.12
Appendix 6 10

Table 3. Compounds not detected in any sample collected from 

the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Analyte USGS Parameter CodeCAS Number1Reporting 

Limit (μg/L)

Dichlorodifluoromethane 34668 75-71-8 0.14

Trichlorofluoromethane 34488 75-69-4 0.08

Methyl acrylate 49991 96-33-3 0.6

Bromomethane 34413 74-83-9 0.4

Chloromethane 34418 74-87-3 0.1

Methyl iodide 77424 74-88-4 0.4

tert-Butyl methyl 

ether 

78032 1634-04-4 0.1

Dibromomethane 30217 74-95-3 0.04

Dichloromethane 34423 75-09-2 0.04

Naphthalene 34696 91-20-3 0.2

o-Xylene 77135 95-47-6 0.04

4-Isopropyl-1-

methylbenzene 

77356 99-87-6 0.08

1,2,3-Trichloropropane 77443 96-18-4 0.12

1,3-Dichloropropane 77173 142-28-9 0.06

2,2-Dichloropropane 77170 594-20-7 0.06

1,2-Dibromo-3-

chloropropane 

82625 96-12-8 0.5

1,1-Dichloropropene 77168 563-58-6 0.04

3-Chloropropene 78109 107-05-1 0.08

cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 34704 10061-01-5 0.1

trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 34699 10061-02-6 0.1

1,2-Dichloropropane 34541 78-87-5 0.02

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 77222 95-63-6 0.04

Styrene 77128 100-42-5 0.04

tert-Pentyl 

methyl ether 

50005 994-05-8 0.06

Toluene 34010 108-88-3 0.018

2-Chlorotoluene 77275 95-49-8 0.04

o-Ethyl toluene 77220 611-14-3 0.04

4-Chlorotoluene 77277 106-43-4 0.04

Vinyl chloride 39175 75-01-4 0.08

1,1,2-Trichloroethane 34511 79-00-5 0.06

Table 3. Compounds not detected in any sample collected from 

the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Analyte USGS Parameter CodeCAS Number1Reporting 

Limit (μg/L)

1,1-Dichloroethylene 34501 75-35-4 0.02

Organochlorine and Organophosphate Pesticides And Gross PCBs 

in Unfiltered Water Samples

Aldrin 39330 309-00-2 0.0018

S,S,S-Tributylphosphorotrithioate 39040 78-48-8 0.02

Chlordane, technical mix -mrl39350 57-74-9 0.1

Chlorpyrifos 38932 2921-88-2 0.02

Diazinon 39570 333-41-5 0.02

Dieldrin 39380 60-57-1 0.0016

Disulfoton 39011 298-04-4 0.02

alpha-Endosulfan 39388 959-98-8 0.0016

Endrin 39390 72-20-8 0.0019

Ethion 39398 563-12-2 0.018

Fonofos 82614 944-22-9 0.018

Heptachlor 39410 76-44-8 0.0016

Heptachlor 

epoxide 

39420 1024-57-3 0.0016

Lindane 39340 58-89-9 0.0014

Malathion -mrl 39530 121-75-5 0.1

p,p'-Methoxychlor 39480 72-43-5 0.002

Parathion-methyl 39600 298-00-0 0.018

Mirex 39755 2385-85-5 0.0011

p,p'-DDD 39360 72-54-8 0.0012

p,p'-DDE 39365 72-55-9 0.0019

p,p'-DDT 39370 50-29-3 0.0014

Parathion 39540 56-38-2 0.02

Polychlorinated 

biphenyls, 

total -mrl

39516 1336-36-3 0.1

Phorate 39023 298-02-2 0.019

Toxaphene -mrl 39400 8001-35-2 1

Carbophenothion 39786 786-19-6 0.02

Triazine Pesticides in Filtered Water Samples

alpha-HCH 34253 319-84-6 0.002

Acetochlor 49260 34256-82-1 0.006

Alachlor 46342 15972-60-8 0.006
11 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Table 3. Compounds not detected in any sample collected from 

the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Analyte USGS Parameter CodeCAS Number1Reporting 

Limit (μg/L)

2,6-Diethylaniline 82660 579-66-8 0.002

Atrazine 39632 1912-24-9 0.007

Azinphos-methyl 82686 86-50-0 0.12

Benfluralin 82673 1861-40-1 0.004

Butylate 4028 2008-41-5 0.002

Carbaryl 82680 63-25-2 0.06

Carbofuran 82674 1563-66-2 0.02

Chlorpyrifos 38933 2921-88-2 0.005

cis-Permethrin 82687 54774-45-7 0.01

Cyanazine 4041 21725-46-2 0.02

Dacthal 82682 1861-32-1 0.003

2-Chloro-4-isopropylamino6-amino-s-triazine {CIAT} 

4040 6190-65-4 0.014

Diazinon 39572 333-41-5 0.005

Dieldrin 39381 60-57-1 0.009

Disulfoton 82677 298-04-4 0.04

EPTC 82668 759-94-4 0.002

Ethalfluralin 82663 55283-68-6 0.009

Ethoprophos 82672 13194-48-4 0.012

Desulfinylfipronil 

amide 

62169 0.029

Fipronil sulfide 62167 120067-83-6 0.013

Fipronil sulfone 62168 120068-36-2 0.024

Desulfinylfipronil 62170 0.012

Fipronil 62166 120068-37-3 0.02

Fonofos 4095 944-22-9 0.01

Lindane 39341 58-89-9 0.006

Linuron 82666 330-55-2 0.06

Malathion 39532 121-75-5 0.016

Parathion-methyl 82667 298-00-0 0.008

Metolachlor 39415 51218-45-2 0.01

Metribuzin 82630 21087-64-9 0.012

Molinate 82671 2212-67-1 0.002

Napropamide 82684 15299-99-7 0.018

p,p'-DDE 34653 72-55-9 0.003

Parathion 39542 56-38-2 0.01

Pebulate 82669 1114-71-2 0.004

Table 3. Compounds not detected in any sample collected from 

the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Analyte USGS Parameter CodeCAS Number1Reporting 

Limit (μg/L)

Pendimethalin 82683 40487-42-1 0.012

Phorate 82664 298-02-2 0.04

Prometon 4037 1610-18-0 0.008

Propyzamide 82676 23950-58-5 0.004

Propachlor 4024 1918-16-7 0.006

Propanil 82679 709-98-8 0.006

Propargite 82685 2312-35-8 0.04

Simazine 4035 122-34-9 0.006

Tebuthiuron 82670 34014-18-1 0.016

Terbacil 82665 5902-51-2 0.018

Terbufos 82675 13071-79-9 0.018

Thiobencarb 82681 28249-77-6 0.01

Tri-allate 82678 2303-17-5 0.006

Trifluralin 82661 1582-09-8 0.006

Waste-Water Compounds in Filtered Water Samples

Cotinine 62005 486-56-6 0.4

5-Methyl-1Hbenzotriazole 62063 136-85-6 0.08

Anthraquinone 62066 84-65-1 0.16

Acetophenone 62064 98-86-2 0.1

Acetyl hexamethyl tetrahydronaphthalene (AHTN) 

62065 21145-77-7 0.5

Anthracene 34221 120-12-7 0.08

1,4-Dichlorobenzene 34572 106-46-7 0.08

Benzo[a]pyrene 34248 50-32-8 0.12

Benzophenone 62067 119-61-9 0.12

Bromacil 4029 314-40-9 0.4

Bromoform 34288 75-25-2 0.08

3-tert-Butyl4-hydroxy 

anisole (BHA) 

62059 25013-16-5 0.6

Caffeine 50305 58-08-2 0.1

Camphor 62070 76-22-2 0.1

Carbaryl 82680 63-25-2 1

Carbazole 62071 86-74-8 0.08

Chlorpyrifos 38933 2921-88-2 0.12

Cholesterol 62072 57-88-5 1.4

3-beta-Coprostanol 62057 360-68-9 1
Appendix 6 12

Table 3. Compounds not detected in any sample collected from 

the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Analyte USGS Parameter CodeCAS Number1Reporting 

Limit (μg/L)

Isopropylbenzene 62078 98-82-8 0.1

N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide 

(DEET) 

62082 134-62-3 0.1

Diazinon 39572 333-41-5 0.08

Bisphenol A 62069 80-05-7 0.4

Triethyl citrate 

(ethyl citrate) 

62091 77-93-0 0.2

Tetrachloroethylene 34476 127-18-4 0.08

Fluoranthene 34377 206-44-0 0.08

Hexahydrohexamethylcyclopentabenzopyran (HHCB) 

62075 1222-05-5 0.5

Indole 62076 120-72-9 0.14

Isoborneol 62077 124-76-5 0.06

Isophorone 34409 78-59-1 0.08

Isoquinoline 62079 119-65-3 0.2

d-Limonene 62073 5989-27-5 0.04

Menthol 62080 89-78-1 0.2

Metalaxyl 50359 57837-19-1 0.08

Metolachlor 39415 51218-45-2 0.08

Naphthalene 34443 91-20-3 0.1

1-Methylnaphthalene 62054 90-12-0 0.1

2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene 62055 581-42-0 0.12

2-Methylnaphthalene 62056 91-57-6 0.08

4-Nonylphenol 

diethoxylates 

62083 5

4-Octylphenol 

diethoxylates 

61705 1

4-Octylphenol 

monoethoxylates 

61706 1

p-Cresol 62084 106-44-5 0.18

4-Cumylphenol 62060 599-64-4 0.1

para-Nonylphenol (total) 

62085 84852-15-3 1

4-n-Octylphenol 62061 1806-26-4 0.16

4-tert-Octylphenol 62062 140-66-9 1

Phenanthrene 34462 85-01-8 0.08

Table 3. Compounds not detected in any sample collected from 

the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Analyte USGS Parameter CodeCAS Number1Reporting 

Limit (μg/L)

Phenol 34466 108-95-2 0.2

Pentachlorophenol 34459 87-86-5 2

Tributyl phosphate 62089 126-73-8 0.2

Triphenyl phosphate 62092 115-86-6 0.1

Tris(2-butoxyethyl)phosphate 62093 78-51-3 0.4

Tris(2-chloroethyl)phosphate 62087 115-96-8 0.1

Prometon 4037 1610-18-0 0.18

Pyrene 34470 129-00-0 0.08

Methyl salicylate 62081 119-36-8 0.1

3-Methyl1(H)-indole 

(Skatole) 

62058 83-34-1 0.08

beta-Sitosterol 62068 83-46-5 1.6

beta-Stigmastanol 62086 19466-47-8 1.2

Triclosan 62090 3380-34-5 0.2

62088 13674-87-8 0.12

Semi-Volatile Compounds in Unfiltered Water Samples

Dibenz[a,h]

anthracene 

34556 53-70-3 0.4

Chrysene 34320 218-01-9 0.33

bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether 34283 108-60-1 0.38

2,4-Dimethylphenol 34606 105-67-9 0.6

4,6-Dinitro-2-

methylphenol 

34657 534-52-1 0.77

4-Bromophenylphenylether 34636 101-55-3 0.36

4-Chlorophenyl 

phenyl ether 

34641 7005-72-3 0.34

Fluorene 34381 86-73-7 0.33

Acenaphthene 34205 83-32-9 0.28

Acenaphthylene 34200 208-96-8 0.3

Anthracene 34220 120-12-7 0.39

Benz[a]anthracene 34526 56-55-3 0.26

1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 34551 120-82-1 0.2
13 Hydrogeology and Water Quality of the Leetown Area, West Virginia

Table 3. Compounds not detected in any sample collected from 

the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Analyte USGS Parameter CodeCAS Number1Reporting 

Limit (μg/L)

Hexachlorobenzene 39700 118-74-1 0.3

1,3-Dichlorobenzene 34566 541-73-1 0.2

Nitrobenzene 34447 98-95-3 0.21

1,2-Dichlorobenzene 34536 95-50-1 0.2

1,4-Dichlorobenzene 34571 106-46-7 0.2

Benzidine 39120 92-87-5 1000

3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine 34631 91-94-1 0.4

Benzo[a]pyrene 34247 50-32-8 0.33

Benzo[b]fluoranthene 34230 205-99-2 0.4

Benzo[ghi]

perylene 

34521 191-24-2 0.4

Benzo[k]fluoranthene 34242 207-08-9 0.4

bis(2-Chloroethyl)ether 

34273 111-44-4 0.3

Hexachlorobutadiene 39702 87-68-3 0.2

Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 34386 77-47-4 0.4

N-Nitrosodi-npropylamine 34428 621-64-7 0.4

N-Nitrosodimethylamine 34438 62-75-9 0.33

N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 34433 86-30-6 0.4

Hexachloroethane 34396 67-72-1 0.2

Fluoranthene 34376 206-44-0 0.3

1,2-Diphenylhydrazine 82626 122-66-7 0.3

Indeno[1,2,3-cd]

pyrene 

34403 193-39-5 0.4

Isophorone 34408 78-59-1 0.4

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 34452 59-50-7 0.55

bis(2-Chloroethoxy)

methane 

34278 111-91-1 0.35

Naphthalene 34696 91-20-3 0.32

Table 3. Compounds not detected in any sample collected from 

the Leetown area, West Virginia.

Analyte USGS Parameter CodeCAS Number1Reporting 

Limit (μg/L)

2-Chloronaphthalene 34581 91-58-7 0.2

Phenanthrene 34461 85-01-8 0.32

Phenol 34694 108-95-2 0.44

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 34621 88-06-2 0.6

2,4-Dichlorophenol 34601 120-83-2 0.39

2,4-Dinitrophenol 34616 51-28-5 0.8

2-Chlorophenol 34586 95-57-8 0.42

2-Nitrophenol 34591 88-75-5 0.6

4-Nitrophenol 34646 100-02-7 0.51

Pentachlorophenol 39032 87-86-5 0.4

bis(2-Ethylhexyl) 

phthalate 

39100 117-81-7 2

Butylbenzyl 

phthalate 

34292 85-68-7 0.4

Di-n-butyl phthalate 39110 84-74-2 0.4

Diethyl phthalate 34336 84-66-2 0.61

Dimethyl phthalate 34341 131-11-3 0.59

Di-n-octyl phthalate 34596 117-84-0 0.4

Pyrene 34469 129-00-0 0.35

2,4-Dinitrotoluene 34611 121-14-2 0.43

2,6-Dinitrotoluene 34626 606-20-2 0.43

1

This table contains CAS Registry Numbers®, which is a Registered 

Trademark of the American Chemical Society. CAS recommends the 

verification of the CASRNs through CAS Client Services.