U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Scientific Investigations Report 2005–5245

Prepared in cooperation with the

Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community

Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and 

Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee 

Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 

Southeastern Minnesota, 2004
Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton 

and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee 

Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 

Southeastern Minnesota, 2004

By Thomas A. Winterstein

Prepared in cooperation with the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community

Scientific Investigations Report 2005–5245

U.S. Department of the Interior

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

Gale A. Norton, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2005

For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services

Box 25286, Denver Federal Center

Denver, CO 80225

For more information about the USGS and its products:

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

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

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication 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:

Winterstein, T.A., 2005, Hydraulic properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux 

Community, southeastern Minnesota, 2004: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2005–5245, 30 p.

Prepared by U.S. Geological Survey in Mounds View, Minnesota (http://mn.water.usgs.gov)
Contents

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

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1

Hydrogeologic Setting...................................................................................................................................1

Previous Hydraulic Investigations ..............................................................................................................3

Aquifer Test.....................................................................................................................................................3

Aquifer-Test Analysis and Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones.............7

Summary........................................................................................................................................................14

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................17

Appendix........................................................................................................................................................19

Figures

1. Map showing location of study area, production well, and two observation wells, 

Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, southeastern Minnesota ..............................2

2. Comparison chart showing lithology beneath production well and two observation 

wells................................................................................................................................................3

3–10. Graphs showing:

3. Recorded water levels during aquifer test for production well, December 6–22, 2004, 

measured water levels in production well, December 9, 2004, and comparison of 

measured and recorded water levels during production well recovery, December 9, 

2004.............................................................................................................................................6

4. Recorded water levels in observation wells 1 and 2, November 26–December 22, 

2004.............................................................................................................................................7

5. Recorded water levels in observation wells 1 and 2 and recorded barometric pressure at observation well 1 before aquifer test, November 26–December 6, 2004.........8

6. Predicted changes in water levels in observation wells 1 and 2 due to changes in 

barometric pressure during aquifer test, November 26–December 22, 2004 ................9

7. Theis and Hantush fitted type curves and recorded water levels for observation 

wells 1 and 2, December 6–22, 2004....................................................................................12

8. Hantush-Jacob and Neumann-Witherspoon fitted type curves and recorded water 

levels for observation wells 1 and 2, December 6–22, 2004............................................13

9. Cooper-Jacob method of solution applied to recorded drawdown of observation 

well 1, observation well 2, and production well, December 6–9, 2004..........................15

10. Theis recovery method applied to residual recovery curves for observation well 1 

and observation well 2, December 9–22, 2004 ..................................................................16

Tables

1. Driller’s log and interpreted natural gamma borehole log of production well and driller’s 

logs of two observation wells, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, southeastern Minnesota ...............................................................................................................................4

2. Measured pumping rate from production well, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, southeastern Minnesota, December 6–9, 2004.............................................................10

iii
3. Estimated aquifer properties of Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee 

Mdewakanton Sioux Community, southeastern Minnesota................................................14

A1. Recorded water levels in production well, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 

southeastern Minnesota, December 6–22, 2004 ...................................................................20

A2. Measured water levels in production well, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 

southeastern Minnesota, December 9, 2004..........................................................................23

A3. Measured water levels in observation well 1 and observation well 2, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, southeastern Minnesota, December 6–22, 2004................24

Conversion Factors, Abbreviations, and Datums

Multiply By To obtain

Length

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter (mm)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Volume

gallon (gal) 3.785 liter (L) 

gallon (gal) 0.003785 cubic meter (m3) 

gallon (gal) 3.785 cubic decimeter (dm3

) 

Flow rate

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

foot squared per day (ft2/d) 0.9290 neter sqyared per day (m2/d)

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

Mass

pound per cubic foot (lb/ft3) 16.02 kilogram per cubic meter (kg/m3)

Pressure

millimeter of mercury (mmHg) 0.0193 pound per square inch (lb/in2)

pound per square inch (lb/in2) 6.895 kilopascal (kPa) 

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

°F=(1.8×°C)+32

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

°C=(°F-32)/1.8

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

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

(NAVD 88).

iv
Abstract

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the 

Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, conducted an 

aquifer test December 6–22, 2004, to improve definition of the 

hydraulic properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones 

beneath the Shakopee Community in southeastern Minnesota. 

Three wells were used in the aquifer test—a production well 

and two observation wells, located 3,247 feet northwest of 

the production well and 3,049 feet southeast of the production well. The production well, completed in the Ironton and 

Galesville Sandstones, was pumped at about 600 gallons per 

minute from 10:30 a.m. on December 6, 2004, to 3:26 p.m. on 

December 9, 2004. Drawdown and recovery water levels were 

measured in all three wells. 

Four curve-fitting methods and two graphical methods 

were used to estimate the transmissivity and storage coefficient of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones. The four curvefitting methods were the Theis, Hantush, Hantush-Jacob, and 

Neumann-Witherspoon methods. These methods were applied 

to the drawdown and residual recovery curves of the observation wells. The two graphical methods were the Cooper-Jacob 

method and the Theis recovery method. The Cooper-Jacob 

method was applied to the drawdown curve of the production 

well and the drawdown curves of the two observation wells. 

The Theis recovery method was applied to the residual drawdown curves of the two observation wells.

The transmissivity estimated using the six methods 

ranged from 450 to 650 feet squared per day. The average 

transmissivity for the six methods was 540 feet squared per 

day. The storage coefficient estimated using the six methods 

ranged from 4.2 to 5.7 x 10-5. The average storage coefficient 

for all six methods was 5.0 x 10-5. The hydraulic conductivity was estimated by dividing the estimated transmissivity by 

45 feet. The average hydraulic conductivity for the six methods was 12.1 feet per day.

Introduction

The Ironton and Galesville Sandstones are one of the 

sources of water for the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community (hereinafter termed Shakopee Community), Scott 

County, southeastern Minnesota (fig. 1). The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Shakopee Community, 

conducted an aquifer test from December 6–22, 2004, to 

improve definition of the hydraulic properties of the Ironton 

and Galesville Sandstones beneath the Shakopee Community. 

Information from the test will be useful to tribal officials for 

water-management plans, to nontribal government officials 

for development of regional water-management plans, and 

to water-resource investigators for subsequent studies on the 

hydraulic properties of the sandstones. 

The purpose of this report is to describe the aquifer-test 

design and analysis and to present the hydraulic properties of 

the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones beneath the Shakopee 

Community determined from the aquifer test. The test was 

conducted by pumping water from an existing production well 

(Franconia-Ironton-Galesville Well No. 2) for 76.9 hours 

and measuring the drawdown in the production well and two 

observation wells. The recovery was measured in the observation wells for 308.5 hours (12.9 days). 

Hydrogeologic Setting

The geologic units beneath the study area that were 

examined in this study include thick glacial sediments and six 

bedrock units. The bedrock units are, in descending order, the 

Prairie du Chien Group, the Jordan Sandstone, the St. Lawrence Formation, the Franconia Formation, the Ironton and 

Galesville Sandstones, and the Eau Claire Formation of Early 

Ordovician and Late Cambrian age (about 500 million years 

ago). The lithology beneath the study area was determined 

from driller’s logs of the production well and two observation 

wells and from an interpretation of a natural gamma borehole 

log of the production well (fig. 2 and table 1). The following 

description of the Franconia Formation, Ironton and Galesville 

Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville 

Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 

Southeastern Minnesota, 2004

By Thomas A. Winterstein
Sandstones, and the Eau Claire Formation was modified from 

Mossler and Tipping (2000, plate 1).

The Franconia Formation is of Late Cambrian age. In 

the study area, the upper part of the formation is greenishgray, medium-bedded, very fine-grained to fine-grained, 

dolomite-cemented, glauconitic and feldspathic sandstone and 

is between 133 and 159 ft thick (table 1). The lower part of 

the formation consists of green-gray to light-green interbedded shale, siltstone, with lesser amounts of very fine-grained 

feldspathic sandstone as thick as 30 ft, which overlie darkgreen, very fine-grained to fine-grained, medium to thick beds 

of highly glauconitic sandstone interlayered with thin beds of 

gray-orange to pink sandy glauconitic dolostone, also as thick 

as 30 ft. The contact with the underlying Ironton Sandstone is 

sharply defined but apparently conformable.

The Ironton and Galesville Sandstones are of Late 

Cambrian age. The sandstones consist of light-gray, very fine 

to fine-grained feldspathic sandstone and medium- to coarsegrained and very coarse-grained, commonly cross-laminated 

quartz sandstone interlayered with scattered thin beds of 

maroon or green shale. Although separated by a disconformity 

representing a hiatus of long temporal duration, the two formations cannot be distinguished with certainty where geologic 

control consists of water-well cuttings alone. The thickness of 

the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones beneath the study area 

is between 45 and 77 ft (table 1).

The Eau Claire Formation is of Late Cambrian age. The 

upper one-third to one-fourth of the formation consists of 

feldspathic sandstone that is light gray to yellow gray, very 

fine to fine grained, finely laminated to ripple cross-laminated, 

and slightly glauconitic; it is interlayered with scattered, thin 

partings of gray-green shale. 

The lower part of the Franconia Formation is a confining 

unit, whereas the upper part is an aquifer in much of the Twin 

Cities metropolitan area (Runkel and others, 2003, p. 46). The 

Eau Claire Formation is a confining unit (Runkel and others, 

2003, p. 38). The Franconia and Eau Claire Formations were 

considered to be confining units for the Ironton and Galesville 

Sandstones in the aquifer test described in this report. 

Figure 1. Location of study area, production well, and two observation wells, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 

southeastern Minnesota.

Study area

Shakopee Mdewakanton

Sioux Community

HENNEPIN 

COUNTY

CARVER

COUNTY

SCOTT COUNTY

RAMSEY 

COUNTY

DAKOTA

COUNTY

13

12

169

394

94

494

35

35E

35W

Shakopee

Savage

Prior Lake

93o30' 93o15'

44o52'30"

44o50'

Study area

0 3,000 FEET

0 500

1,500

1,000 METERS

Study area

Index map

MINNESOTA

CANADA

Twin Cities

metropolitan

area

"Production well

#

#

Observation well 1

Observation well 2

Base from Minnesota Department of Transportation digital data 1:24,000

Base Map 97, revised 1997

Universal Transverse Meractor projection, Zone 15

North American Datum of 1983

0 5 10 MILES

0 5 10 KILOMETERS

Aquifer Thermal

Energy Storage site

   Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 2004
Previous Hydraulic Investigations

Packer tests were used to determine the hydraulic properties of the Franconia Formation and the Ironton and Galesville 

Sandstones at the Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage (ATES) 

site in St. Paul, Minnesota, about 22 mi northeast of the study 

area (fig. 1). Analysis of results of the packer tests indicated 

two hydraulic zones within the Franconia Formation and two 

hydraulic zones in the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, two 

of which act as a single aquifer (Runkel and others, 2003, 

p. 41). An aquifer test at the ATES site was used to determine 

that the transmissivity of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones was approximately 690 ft2

/d, and the storage coefficient was approximately 2.4 x 10-5 (Miller and Delin, 1993, 

p. A8–A9). The vertical-to-horizontal hydraulic conductivity 

ratio for the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones was determined 

by Miller and Delin (1993) to be 0.1.

Barr Engineering (Edina, Minnesota) constructed 

a ground-water flow model for the vicinity of the study 

area in 2004 (Scott Walz, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux 

Community, written commun., 2004). Barr Engineering 

estimated the horizontal hydraulic conductivity for the layer 

representing the Franconia Formation and the Ironton and 

Galesville Sandstones using the results of a 7-day aquifer test 

conducted in 1999 on the city of Savage well in the FranconiaIronton-Galesville aquifer. The horizontal hydraulic conductivity estimated for this layer was 6.6 ft/d, and the estimated 

storage coefficient was 0.4 x 10-6.

Aquifer Test

A production (pumped) well and two observation wells 

were used in the aquifer test described in this report (fig. 1). 

The production well is cased with a 20-in. diameter steel casing to a depth of 179 ft and a 16-in. diameter steel casing from 

170 to 570 ft. The casing ends about 25 ft above the bottom of 

the Franconia Formation. The production well is an open hole 

from a depth of 570 to 667 ft (table 1; fig. 2). The open hole 

Figure 2. Lithology beneath production well and two observation wells. Natural gamma log made March 16, 1998, by Summit 

Envirosolutions, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota. Interpretation of natural gamma log by Summit Envirosolutions, Inc. Data provided by 

Scott Walz, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, written commun., 2004.

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1,000

1,100

Driller's Log Driller's log

Land surface

Eau Claire, green, hard

Brown drift,

 medium hard

Brown limestone, hard

St. Lawrence, green, hard

White sandstone, soft

Franconia, green, hard

White sandstone, soft

Green dolomite, medium hard

Land surface

Ironton, white, medium hard Gray shale, hard

Gray drift, mixed clay and

gravel, medium hard

Brown limestone

medium hard/hard

Pink/red sandstone,

medium hard/hard

Green and black dolomite,

hard

White/gray siltstone,

medium hard

ELEVATION, IN FEET ABOVE NAVD 88

Interpreted natural gamma log Driller's log

Eau Claire, green, hard

Ironton and Galesville

Sandstones

Glacial sediment

Land surface

Franconia Formation

St. Lawrence Formation

Jordan Sandstone

Prairie du Chien Group

Eau Claire Formation

Franconia, green, hard

St. Lawrence, green, hard

Orange sandstone, soft

Brown limestone, hard

Land surface

Ironton-Galesville, 

white, hard

Brown drift, medium hard

Observation well 1 Production well Observation well 2

EXPLANATION

Bottom of hole

Cased hole

Open hole

Aquifer Text 
Table 1. Driller’s log and interpreted natural gamma borehole log of production well and driller’s 

logs of two observation wells, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, southeastern 

Minnesota. 

[Natural gamma log made March 16, 1998, by Summit Envirosolutions, Inc. (Minneapolis, Minnesota). Interpretation of natural gamma log by Summit Envirosolutions, Inc. Data provided by Scott Walz, written commun., 

Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 2004. NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988]

Thickness 

(feet)

Depth interval 

(feet)

Range in elevation above NAVD 

88 (feet)

Formation

Driller’s log of production well 

168 0–168 982–814 Gray drift, mixed clay and gravel, medium hard

144 168–312 814–670 Brown limestone, medium hard/hard

181 312–493 670–489 Pink/red sandstone, medium hard/hard

58 493–551 489–431 Green and black dolomite, hard

44 551–595 431–387 Green dolomite, medium hard

40 595–635 387–347 White sandstone, soft

21 635–656 347–326 Gray shale, hard

11 656–667 326–315 White/gray siltstone, medium hard.

Bottom of hole is 667 feet below land surface

Interpreted natural gamma log of production well

125 0–125 982–857 Glacial sediments

186 125–311 857–671 Prairie du Chien Group

90 311–401 671–581 Jordan Sandstone

47 401–448 581–534 St. Lawrence Formation

159 448–607 53–375 Franconia Formation

45 607–652 375–330 Ironton and Galesville Sandstones

15 652–667 330–315 Eau Claire Formation

Bottom of hole is 667 feet below land surface

Driller’s log of observation well 1

145 0–145 937–792 Brown drift, medium hard

120 145–265 792–672 Brown limestone, hard

100 265–365 672–572 White sandstone, soft

45 365–410 572–527 St. Lawrence, green, hard

145 410–555 527–382 Franconia, green, hard

65 555–620 382–317 Ironton, white, medium hard

620 317 Eau Claire, green, hard

Bottom of hole is 620 feet below land surface

Driller’s log of observation well 2

252 0–252 1,023–771 Brown drift, medium hard

88 252–340 771–683 Brown limestone, hard

105 340–445 683–578 Orange sandstone, soft

57 445–502 578–521 St. Lawrence, green, hard

133 502–635 521–388 Franconia, green, hard

77 635–712 388–311 Ironton-Galesville, white, hard

712 311 Eau Claire, green, hard

Bottom of hole is 712 feet below land surface

   Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 2004
was enlarged by blasting and removing sand and sandstone to 

form a chamber at least 20 ft across (Stan Ellison, Shakopee 

Mdewakanton Sioux Community, oral commun., 2004). The 

pump is set inside the casing. The bottom of the pump is at a 

depth of 465 ft. The production well was not pumped between 

September 17 and December 6, 2004, which was the beginning date for the aquifer test.

Observation well 1 is 3,247 ft northwest of the production well. The well is cased with an 8-in. diameter steel casing 

from 0 to 145 ft and 4-in. diameter casing from 145 to 520 ft. 

The well is a 4-in. diameter open hole from 520 to 620 ft. 

Observation well 2 is 3,049 ft southeast of the production 

well. The well is cased with 8-in. diameter steel casing from 

0 to 252 ft and with a 4-in. diameter steel casing from 252 to 

623 ft. The well is a 4-in. diameter open hole from 623 to 

712 ft. Both observation wells were cased to about the same 

elevation as the production well (fig. 2) so that they were all 

open to the same formations. 

Water levels in the production well were recorded every 

10 seconds during the aquifer test with a transducer that is 

part of the Shakopee Community’s monitoring system. The 

depth of the transducer below land surface was not known, 

and drawdown and recovery water levels in the well were 

measured from an arbitrary datum. The transducer appeared to 

have moved about the time recovery began; the recorded water 

levels at the end of recovery were about 8 ft higher than at the 

beginning of the aquifer test (fig. 3A, table A1 in appendix). 

Water levels in the production well also were measured manually with an electric tape for 1 hour at 1- to 5-minute intervals 

after the pump was shut off (fig. 3B, table A2 in appendix). 

The depth to water was measured from the measuring point 

at the top of the well, which is 985.02 ft above NAVD 88. A 

comparison of the water levels measured with an electric tape 

and those recorded by the transducer is shown in figure 3C.

Pressure transducers also were used to record changes 

in water levels in the observation wells (fig. 4, table A3). The 

pressure of the water above the transducer was measured and 

recorded every 90 seconds or when the pressure changed by 

0.004 lb/in2 (an approximate 0.01-ft change in water level). 

Manual measurements of the water depth below the top of the 

well casing were made using an electric tape during the aquifer test and during recovery. These measurements were used to 

convert the measured pressures to water-level elevations in the 

wells. 

Background water levels were measured before the 

beginning of the aquifer test in both observation wells (fig. 5). 

These measurements show that the potentiometric surface in 

the aquifer increased by about 1 ft in the week prior to the 

beginning of the test. 

Barometric pressure was measured at a weather station 

maintained by the Shakopee Community adjacent to observation well 1. The recorded barometric pressure is shown in 

figures 5 and 6. The barometric efficiency of both observation 

wells was computed from the water levels measured before the 

beginning of the aquifer test. The barometric efficiency (B) of 

a well is defined as: 

B h

pa

= gD

D , (1)

where γ is the specific weight of water (62.409 lb/ft3 at 50 °F, 

the approximate temperature of the water in the Ironton and 

Galesville Sandstones); ∆h is the change in water level in the 

well; and ∆pa is the change in atmospheric pressure (Todd, 

1980, p. 236). The barometric efficiencies of observation wells 

1 and 2 were estimated to be -0.52 and -0.34, respectively. The 

expected water-level changes caused by barometric pressure 

changes are shown in figure 6. The largest expected change 

in water level was about 1 ft for both wells. Consequently, the 

measured water levels in the observation wells during the test 

were not adjusted for changes in atmospheric pressure because 

the measured changes were greater than 33 ft, which is much 

greater than the 1-ft change in water level caused by changing 

atmospheric pressure. 

The discharge from the production well pump was measured by a discharge meter that recorded the number of gallons 

pumped. The pumping rate in gallons per minute (gal/min) 

was determined by dividing the gallons pumped over 6 minutes by 6. Pumping rates measured by this method are listed 

in table 2. The discharge from the pump was not regulated; 

the pump operated at its greatest output. Therefore, when the 

water level in the production well declined, the output of the 

pump decreased. Average discharge during the aquifer test was 

610 gal/min. The water pumped from the well was discharged 

to a wetland about 430 ft from the well. The discharged water 

did not infiltrate to the pumped aquifer because of the intervening confining units (fig. 2) and was assumed not to affect 

the measured water levels during the test. 

The aquifer test began at 10:30 a.m. on December 6, 

2004. The pump was shut off December 9 at 3:26 p.m. The 

pump was turned on briefly December 13 as indicated by the 

drawdown spike in figure 3. The recorded and measured water 

levels for the production well are presented in tables A1 and 

A2 in the appendix and are shown in figure 3. Drawdowns for 

the pumped well and observation wells were used in the analyses of aquifer properties. However, the measured recovery for 

the production well was not used in the analyses of aquifer 

properties because the transducer seemed to have moved when 

the pump was turned off on December 9 and when it was 

turned on briefly on December 13. Drawdown and recovery 

were recorded in both observation wells from December 6–22, 

2004. The recorded drawdown and recovery for both observation wells are given in table A3 of the appendix and are shown 

in figure 4. 

The cities of Prior Lake, Savage, and Shakopee, Minnesota (fig. 1), also withdraw water from wells screened in the 

Ironton and Galesville Sandstones. Pumpage in these wells 

may affect the water levels in the two observation wells used 

for this aquifer study (Jay Frischman, Minnesota Department 

of Natural Resources, written commun., 2005). However, the 

Aquifer Test 
DEC. 5

DEC. 8

DEC.11

DEC. 14DEC. 17DEC. 20

MONTH/DAY

350

300

250

200

150

100

DEPTH BELOW ARBITRARY DATUM, IN FEET

Beginning of pumping

End of pumping

Pump briefly turned on

15:20 15:30 15:40 15:50 16:00 16:10 16:30

24 - HOUR TIME

450

410

370

330

290

250

DEPTH BELOW MEASURING POINT, IN FEET

0 24 48 72 96 120

TIME SINCE END OF PUMPING, IN MINUTES

0

40

80

120

160

200

HEIGHT ABOVE LOWEST DEPTH, IN FEET

Measured 

water level 

Measured 

water level 

Recorded water level

Recorded water level

(A) Recorded water levels in

production well

(B) Measured water level in production well (C) Comparison of measured and recorded water levels

during recovery

DEC. 23

Figure 3. (A) Recorded water levels during aquifer test for production well, December 6–22, 2004, (B) measured water levels in production well, December 9, 2004, and (C) comparison of measured and recorded water levels during production well recovery, December 9, 

2004.

 Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 2004
wells in these nearby communities were not pumped during 

the aquifer test (Lanya Ross, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux 

Community, oral commun., 2005).

Aquifer-Test Analysis and Hydraulic 

Properties of the Ironton and Galesville 

Sandstones

Four curve-fitting methods and two graphical methods 

were used to estimate the transmissivity and storage coefficient of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones. The commercial software AQTESOLV (HydroSOLVE, 2000) was used to 

apply the six methods to the data collected during the aquifer 

test. The four curve-fitting methods were the Theis, Hantush, 

Hantush-Jacob, and Neumann-Witherspoon methods. These 

methods were applied to the drawdown and residual recovery 

curves of the observation wells. The two graphical methods were the Cooper-Jacob method and the Theis recovery 

method. The Cooper-Jacob method was applied to the drawdown curve of the production well and the drawdown curves 

of the two observation wells. The Theis recovery method was 

applied to the residual drawdown curves of the two observation wells. 

All six methods were developed for very specific aquifer 

and ground-water flow conditions. The following conditions apply for all six methods (HydroSOLVE, 2000): (1) the 

aquifer has infinite areal extent, (2) the aquifer is homogenous, 

isotropic, and of uniform thickness, (3) the flow is unsteady, 

(4) water is released instantaneously from storage with decline 

of hydraulic head, and (5) the diameter of the pumped well 

is very small so that storage in the well can be neglected. 

The Theis, Cooper-Jacob, and Theis recovery methods were 

developed for confined aquifers that are not leaky; that is, 

water does not pass through the confining layers into the 

aquifer. The Hantush, Hantush-Jacob, and Neumann-Witherspoon methods were developed for leaky aquifers; that is, 

water moves through the confining layers into the aquifer from 

aquifers above or below it. Additional conditions for the use of 

the methods are mentioned in the discussion for each method.

The Theis (Ferris and others, 1962; Todd, 1980; HydroSOLVE, 2000), Hantush (Hantush, 1960; HydroSOLVE, 

2000), Hantush and Jacob (Hantush and Jacob, 1955; HydroSOLVE, 2000), and Neuman-Witherspoon (Neuman and Witherspoon, 1969; HydroSOLVE, 2000) methods were applied to 

the drawdown and recovery data for the two observation wells. 

The equations for each method are discussed briefly in following paragraphs. 

Additional conditions necessary for use of the Theis 

method (HydroSOLVE, 2000) are: (1) the pumped well is 

NOV. 26

NOV. 28

NOV. 30

DEC. 2

DEC. 4DEC. 6

DEC. 8

DEC. 10

DEC. 12

DEC. 14

720

730

740

750

760

770

780

790

Observation well 1

Beginning of pumping

Observation well 2

End of pumping

DEC. 16DEC. 18

DEC. 20

DEC. 22

WATER LEVEL, IN FEET ABOVE NAVD 88

MONTH/DAY

Figure 4. Recorded water levels in observation wells 1 and 2, November 26–December 22, 2004.

Aquifer-Test Analysis and Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones 
fully or partially penetrating, (2) flow to the pumped well is 

horizontal when the pumped well fully penetrates the aquifer, 

and (3) the aquifer is confined. The Theis method relates the 

drawdown (s) observed in a well as a result of pumping from 

another well at a discharge (Q) to the transmissivity (T) and 

storage coefficient (S) of an aquifer by the following equation: 

s

Q

T = W u æ

è

ç

çç

ö

ø

÷

÷÷ ( )

4p , (2)

where W(u), termed the well function, is a convenient symbolic form of the following integral:

e du

u

u

u

¥ -

ò ; (3)

where 

u

r S

Tt =

2

4 , (4)

r is the radial distance from the pumped well, and t is the time 

since beginning of pumping (Todd, 1980, p. 123). The integral 

can be expanded as a convergent series (Todd, 1980, p. 124):

- - + - × + × - × 0 5772 +

2 2 3 3 4 4

2 3 4

. ln ! ! !u u ... u u u

. (5)

Additional conditions necessary for use of the Hantush 

method are (HydroSOLVE, 2000): (1) the aquifer potentiometric surface is initially horizontal, (2) the pumped well fully or 

partially penetrates the aquifer, (3) flow to the pumped well is 

horizontal when the pumped well fully penetrates the aquifer, 

(4) the aquifer is leaky, (5) the confining bed(s) has infinite 

areal extent, uniform vertical hydraulic conductivity and storage coefficient, and uniform thickness, (6) confining bed(s) 

has uniform storage coefficient, (7) confining bed(s) is overlain or underlain by an infinite constant-head plane source, and 

(8) the flow in the confining bed(s) is vertical. 

The drawdown curve given by Hantush (Hantush, 1960; 

HydroSOLVE, 2000) is

s

Q

T

e

y

erfc u

y y u

dy

y

u

= ( ) -

¥ -

ò 4p

b , (6)

where

u

r S

Tt =

2

4 ; and (7)

NOV. 26 NOV. 27 NOV. 28 NOV. 29 NOV. 30 DEC. 1 DEC. 2 DEC. 3 DEC. 4 DEC. 5 DEC. 6

7

8

9

10

WATER LEVEL ABOVE ARBITRARY DATUM, IN FEET

740

750

760

770

780

BAROMETRIC PRESSURE, IN MILLIMETERS OF MERCURY

Water level in observation well 1

Water level in observation well 2

Arbitrary datum for observation well 1 is 755.00 feet above NAVD 88

Arbitrary datum for observation well 2 is 770.00 feet above NAVD 88

Barometric pressure recorded at observation well 1

MONTH/DAY

Figure 5. Recorded water levels in observation wells 1 and 2 and recorded barometric pressure at observation well 1 before aquifer test, 

November 26–December 6, 2004.

   Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 2004
b = ¢ ¢ ¢

+ ¢¢ ¢¢ ¢¢ é

ë

ê

ê

ê

ù

û

ú

ú

ú

r K b

T

S

S

K b

T

S

4 S

/ / , (8)

where y is the variable of integration;

b’, b” are the thickness of the confining layers;

K’, K” are the vertical hydraulic conductivities of the confining layers;

S’, S” are the storage coefficients of the confining layers; 

and all other terms as previously defined.

Additional conditions necessary for use of the HantushJacob method are (HydroSOLVE, 2000): (1) the aquifer 

potentiometric surface is initially horizontal, (2) pumped well 

fully or partially penetrates the aquifer, (3) the aquifer is leaky, 

(4) the confining bed(s) has infinite areal extent, uniform vertical hydraulic conductivity, and uniform thickness, (5) confining bed(s) is overlain or underlain by an infinite constanthead plane source, and (6) the flow in the confining bed(s) 

is vertical.

The drawdown curve given by Hantush and Jacob (1955) 

is:

s

Q

T = w u( ) r B4p , / , (9)

where w(u,r/B) is the Hantush function for leaky aquifers;

e

y

dy

y r B y

u

¥ - - ò

2 2 / 4

; (10)

and

u

r S

Tt =

2

4 ; (11)

B Tb

K = ¢

¢

; and (12)

all other terms as previously defined.

Additional conditions necessary for use of the Neumann-Witherspoon method are (HydroSOLVE, 2000): (1) the 

aquifer potentiometric surface is initially horizontal, (2) the 

pumped well fully penetrates the aquifer, (3) flow to the 

pumped well is horizontal, (4) the aquifer is leaky, (5) the confining bed(s) has infinite areal extent, uniform vertical hydraulic conductivity, uniform storage coefficient, and uniform 

thickness, (6) confining bed(s) has uniform storage coefficient 

(7) confining bed(s) is overlain or underlain by an 

-1

0

1

CHANGE IN WATER LEVEL, IN FEET

740

750

760

770

780

BAROMETRIC PRESSURE, IN MILLIMETERS OF MERCURY

Predicted change in water level in observation well 2

Predicted change in water level in observation well 1

Barometric pressure recorded at observation well 1

MONTH/DAY

Period of aquifer test

Period of aquifer test

NOV. 26

NOV. 28

NOV. 30

DEC. 2

DEC. 4

DEC. 6

DEC. 8

DEC. 10

DEC. 12

DEC. 14

DEC. 16

DEC. 18

DEC. 20

DEC. 22

Figure 6. Predicted changes in water levels in observation wells 1 and 2 due to changes in barometric pressure during aquifer test, 

November 26–December 22, 2004.

Aquifer-Test Analysis and Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones 
Table 2. Measured pumping rate from production well, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux 

Community, southeastern Minnesota, 

December 6–9 , 2004.

[gal/min, gallons per minute]

Time from start of 

pumping (hours)

Measured pumping rate 

(gal/min)

1 644.5

2 637.0

3 630.0

4 630.0

5 627.0

21 612.0

22 613.0

23 611.0

24 611.0

25 609.4

26 610.0

28 609.8

29 609.2

45 604.4

46 604.4

49 603.8

50 603.2

53 602.2

54 603.0

69 600.0

70 599.8

72.75 599.2

Average 610

infinite constant-head plane source, and (8) the flow in the 

confining bed(s) is vertical.

The drawdown equation given by Neuman and Witherspoon (Neuman and Witherspoon, 1969; HydroSOLVE, 2000) 

is:

s

Q

T

e G y J y

G y J y dy

yt

o

o

= - D

( )[ ] + ( ) [ ] ( ) +

[ ] - ( ) [ ] ( )

-

¥

ò 4

1 1

1

1

0

1

2

p w

w

(

)

y ,

(13)

where

bi is the thickness of ith aquifer;

bj is thickness of jth confining layer;

Ki is permeability of the i

th aquifer;

Kj is permeability of the j

th aquifer;

Si is specific storage for the i

th aquifer;

Sj is specific storage for the j

th confining layer;

t

K t

Ss r Di

i

i

= 2 , (14)

dimensionless time for pumped (i

th) aquifer;

t

t r

B D

D

1

1

11

4

11

2

4 =

æ

è

ç

ç

çç

ö

ø

÷

÷

÷

÷

( ) b ; (15)

r

B

r

K

Tb ij

j

i j

= ¢

¢

, (16)

r/B11 refers to the pumped aquifer, r/B21 refers to the 

unpumped aquifer;

bij

i

i si

r

b K jS sj

K S

= ¢ ¢ 4;

 (17)

ß11 refers to the pumped aquifer, ß21 refers to the unpumped 

aquifer;

G y M y

F y ( ) = ( )

( ) ; (18)

w1

2 1

2 ( ) y N = [ ( ) y F + ( ) y ]; (19)

G y M y

F y ( ) = ( )

( ) ; (20)

F y M y

r

B

r

B y

y

2 2 11 21

2

( ) = ( )+

æ

è

ç

ç

çç

ö

ø

÷

÷

÷

÷

æ

è

ç

ç

çç

ö

ø

÷

÷

÷

÷

é

ë

ê

ê

ê

ê

ê

ê

sin

ê

ù

û

ú

ú

ú

ú

ú

ú

ú

2

; (21)

10 Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 2004
M y

r

B

r

B ( ) =

æ

è

ç

ç

çç

ö

ø

÷

÷

÷

÷

( ) -

æ

è

ç

ç

çç

ö

ø

÷

÷

÷

÷

( )

é

ë

ê

ê 11

4

11

2

21

4

21

2

4 4 b b

ê

ê

ê

ê

ê

ù

û

ú

ú

ú

ú

ú

ú

ú

-

æ

è

ç

ç

çç

ö

ø

÷

÷

÷

÷

-æ

è

ç

ç

çç

ö

ø

÷

÷

÷

÷

é

ë

ê

ê

ê

ù

y

r

B

r

B

2

11 21

2

û

ú

ú

ú

y y cot ;

(22)

and all other terms are as previously defined. The fitted 

curves and recorded data are shown in figures 7 and 8, and the 

estimated aquifer transmissivities and storage coefficients are 

given in table 3. 

The Cooper-Jacob method (Todd, 1980, p. 129–130) was 

applied to the drawdown curves of the production well and the 

two observation wells. The Theis recovery method (Ferris and 

others, 1962, p. 100–102; Jacob, 1963, p. 283; Todd, 1980, 

p. 131–133) was applied to the residual drawdown curves of 

the two observation wells. 

Additional conditions necessary for use of the CooperJacob method are (Hydrosolve, 2000): (1) aquifer potentiometric surface is initially horizontal, (2) the pumped well fully 

penetrates the aquifer, (3) flow to the pumped well is horizontal, (4) the aquifer is confined, and (5) values of u are small. 

The Cooper-Jacob method is derived from the Theis equation 

for unsteady radial flow in a confined aquifer (Todd, 1980, 

p. 129). In this method a straight line is fitted to the straight 

portion of the drawdown curve plotted on semilogarithmic 

paper. The drawdown across one log cycle (s10) is determined, 

and the transmissivity (T) and storage coefficient (S) are determined from the following two equations: 

S Tt

r

o = 2 25

2

. , (23)

and 

T Q

s = 2 304 10

. , p (24)

where t

0

 is the point where the fitted line crosses the time axis 

(the drawdown, s, is 0), r is the distance from the pumped 

well, and Q is the pumping rate. This method can be used 

when 

u

r S

Tt = £

2

4

0 0. , 5 (25)

(Heath, 1983).

The Cooper-Jacob method was applied to the drawdown 

record of the production well and the two observation wells 

(fig. 9). The storage coefficient was not computed for the 

production well because it is dependent on the radius of the 

production well chamber, which is not known. The value of u

ranges from 0.06 to 0.24 for the observation wells and is less 

than 1 x 10-5 for the production well. The estimated aquifer 

transmissivities and storage coefficients are given in table 3. 

The Theis recovery method is derived from the fact that 

if a well is pumped for a known period of time and then shut 

down and allowed to recover, the residual drawdown at any 

instant will be the same as if the discharge of the well had 

been continued and a recharge well with the same flow had 

been introduced at the same point at the instant the discharge 

stopped. The residual drawdown is the difference between 

the observed water level and the water level before pumping 

began. The residual water level is plotted on a semilogarithmic 

plot against 

t

t

′

, where t is the time since the aquifer test 

began and t ́ is the time since the pump was shut off (Todd, 

1980, p. 133). A straight line is fitted to the straight portion 

of the curve, and the residual drawdown per log cycle (∆s ́) is 

determined. The transmissivity is determined from: 

T Q

s = ¢

2 30

4

. . pD (26)

The storage coefficient cannot be estimated using the Theis 

recovery method. 

AQTESOLV was used to solve the Theis recovery 

method. It solves for a slightly different equation (Hydrosolve, 2000):

s

Q

T

t

t

Sr '' = ln ln( ) , ¢

æ

è

ç

çç

ö

ø

÷

÷÷- é

ë

ê

ê

ù

û

ú

4p ú (27)

where s′′ is the residual displacement, and Sr is the ratio of 

storativity during pumping to storativity during recovery 

Equation 27 can be transformed into equation 26 if log10 is 

used instead of the natural log and the s′′ is selected a log cycle 

apart. Sr is determined by where the straight line intercepts 

the log10(t/t′) axis. The value of Sr should be about 1 if there 

are no boundary effects (HydroSOLVE, 2000). If Sr > 1, there 

is indication of a recharge boundary during the aquifer test; 

Sr < 1 suggests the presence of a barrier or no-flow boundary 

(Hydrosolve, 2000).

The Theis recovery method was applied to the residual 

drawdown data for both observation wells (fig. 10). The estimated transmissivities are shown in table 3. 

The transmissivity estimated using the six methods 

ranged from 450 to 650 ft2/d (table 3). As shown in table 3, the 

average transmissivity for the fitted methods (Theis, Hantush, 

Hantush-Jacob, and Neuman-Witherspoon) was 510 ft2/d; the 

average transmissivity for the Cooper-Jacob and Theis recovery graphical methods was 600 ft2

/d; and the average transmissivity for all six methods was 540 ft2

/d. The average transmissivity for the three methods developed for nonleaky aquifers, 

Theis, Cooper-Jacob, and Theis recovery, was 590 ft2/d. The 

Aquifer-Test Analysis and Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones 11
DEPTH BELOW BEGINNING WATER LEVEL, IN FEET

0 0.1 1.0 10 100

TIME SINCE BEGINNING OF AQUIFER TEST, IN DAYS

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

End of pumping

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

End of pumping

Beginning of pumping

Beginning of pumping

(A) Theis solution

(B) Hantush solution

Recorded drawdown observation well 1

Recorded drawdown observation well 2

Fitted type curve observation well 1

Fitted type curve observation well 2 

Recorded drawdown observation well 1

Recorded drawdown observation well 2

Fitted type curve observation well 1

Fitted type curve observation well 2 

Figure 7. (A) Theis and (B) Hantush fitted type curves and recorded water levels for observation wells 1 and 2, December 6–

22, 2004.

12 Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 2004
DEPTH BELOW BEGINNING WATER LEVEL, IN FEET

0 0.1 1.0 10 100

TIME SINCE BEGINNING OF AQUIFER TEST, IN DAYS

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

End of pumping

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

End of pumping

Beginning of pumping

Beginning of pumping

(A) Hantush-Jacob solution

(B) Neumann-Witherspoon solution

Recorded drawdown observation well 1

Recorded drawdown observation well 2

Fitted type curve observation well 1

Fitted type curve observation well 2 

Recorded drawdown observation well 1

Recorded drawdown observation well 2

Fitted type curve observation well 1

Fitted type curve observation well 2 

Figure 8. (A) Hantush-Jacob and (B) Neumann-Witherspoon fitted type curves and recorded water levels in observation 

wells 1 and 2, December 6–22, 2004.

Aquifer-Test Analysis and Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones 13
average transmissivity for the other three methods, which were 

developed for leaky aquifers, was 490 ft2/d. 

The storage coefficient estimated using the six methods 

ranged from 4.2 to 5.7 x 10-5. As shown in table 3, the average storage coefficient for the fitted methods, Theis, Hantush, 

Hantush-Jacob, and Neuman-Witherspoon, was 5.1 x 10-5; the 

average storage coefficient for the Cooper-Jacob graphical 

method was 4.4 x 10-5; and the average storage coefficient for 

all six methods was 5.0 x 10-5. The average storage coefficient 

for the two methods developed for nonleaky aquifers, Theis 

and Cooper-Jacob, was 4.9 x 10-5. The average storage coefficient for the other three methods with estimated values, which 

were developed for leaky aquifers, was 5.0 x 10-5.

The hydraulic conductivity was estimated by dividing the 

estimated transmissivity by 45 ft, which is the thickness of the 

aquifer at the production well. As shown in table 3, it ranged 

from 10.0 to 14.4 ft/d. The average hydraulic conductivity for 

all six methods was 12.1 ft/d.

Summary

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the 

Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, conducted an 

aquifer test December 6–22, 2004, to improve definition of the 

hydraulic properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones 

Table 3. Estimated aquifer properties of Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, southeastern Minnesota.

[Sr, ratio of storativity during pumping to storativity during recovery; r/B, dimensionless leakage factor; B, leakage factor; T’ , vertical transmissivity in 

confining unit overlying aquifer; S’, coefficient of storage in confining unit overlying aquifer; Kv/Kx, ratio of vertical hydraulic conductivity to horizontal 

hydraulic conductivity; b, thickness of aquifer; ft2/d, feet squared per day; ft, feet; ft/d, feet per day; --, not applicable]

Method 

used to 

estimate 

aquifer 

properties

Well(s) for which 

estimates were 

made

Transmissivity, T, 

(ft2/d)

Storage 

coefficient, 

S (dimensionless)

Sr r/B B T’ 

(ft2/d) S’ Kv

/Kx

b 

(ft)

Hydraulic 

conductivity, K 

(ft/d)

Theis Observation well 1 590 5.1 x 10-5 -- -- -- -- -- 0.1 45 13.1

Observation well 2 560 5.6 x 10-5 -- -- -- -- -- .1 45 12.4

Hantush Observation well 1 450 4.3 x 10-5 -- -- 0.0767 -- -- .1 45 10.0

Observation well 2 480 4.8 x 10-5 -- -- .0530 -- -- .1 45 10.7

HantushJacobObservation well 1 520 5.2 x 10-5 -- 0.2319 -- -- -- .1 45 11.6

Observation well 2 500 5.7 x 10-5 -- .2218 -- -- -- .1 45 11.1

NeumanWitherspoonObservation well 1 490 5.0 x 10-5 -- .2496 .0400 1.0 x 10-5 0.0591 -- -- 10.9

Observation well 2 490 5.0 x 10-5 -- .2496 .0400 1.0 x 10-5 .0591 -- -- 10.9

Average fitted methods 510 5.1 x 10-5 11.3

CooperJacob Observation well 1 650 4.2 x 10-5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 14.4

Observation well 2 620 4.6 x 10-5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 13.8

Production well 590 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 13.1

Theis 

recovery 

Observation well 1 580 -- 1.105 -- -- -- -- -- -- 12.9

Observation well 2 540 -- 1.111 -- -- -- -- -- -- 12.0

Average graphical methods 600 4.4 x 10-5 13.2

Average all methods 540 5.0 x 10-5 12.1

14 Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 2004
0.01 0.10 1.0 10

TIME SINCE BEGINNING OF AQUIFER TEST, IN DAYS

225.0

187.5

150.0

112.5

75.0

DRAWDOWN, IN FEET

T = 590 ft2/d

s10 = 36.6 ft

0.10 1.0 10

T = 620 ft2/d

S = 4.6 x 10-5

t

0 = 0.30 d

s10= 34.4 ft

0.10 1.0 10

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

DRAWDOWN, IN FEET

Fitted line Fitted line

Fitted line

Recorded data Recorded data

Recorded data

(C) Production well

(A) Observation well 1 (B) Observation well 2

T = 650 ft2/d

S = 4.2 x 10-5

t

0 = 0.30 d

s10= 32.9 ft

Figure 9. Cooper-Jacob method of solution applied to recorded drawdown of (A) observation well 1, (B) observation well 2, and 

(C) production well, December 6–9, 2004. [T = transmissivity; S = storage coefficient; to = point where line crosses axis at 0 drawdown; 

S10 = drawdown across one log cycle]

Summary 15
beneath the Shakopee Community in southeastern Minnesota. 

One production well and two observation wells were used 

in the aquifer test. The production well, Franconia-IrontonGalesville Well No. 2, is cased with a 20-in. diameter steel 

casing from 0 to 179 ft and a 16-in. diameter steel casing from 

170 to 570 ft, and is an open hole from 570 to 667 ft. The 

casing ends about 25 ft above the bottom of the Franconia 

Formation. The bottom of the pump is at a depth of 465 ft. 

Observation well 1 is located 3,247 ft northwest of the production well. The well is cased with an 8-in. diameter steel casing 

from 0 to 145 ft, a 4-in. diameter steel casing from 145 to 

520 ft, and is a 4-in. diameter open hole from 520 to 620 ft. 

Observation well 2 is located 3,049 ft southeast of the production well. The well is cased with a 8-in. diameter steel casing 

from 0 to 252 ft, a 4-in. diameter steel casing from 252 to 

623 ft, and is a 4-in. diameter open hole from 623 to 712 ft. 

Both observation wells were cased to about the same elevation as the production well so that they were open to the same 

formations. 

The aquifer test began at 10:30 a.m. December 6, 2004. 

The production well was pumped at about 600 gal/min. The 

pump was shut off December 9, 2004, at 3:26 p.m. Drawdown 

and recovery were recorded in the production well and both 

observation wells December 6–22. 

Four curve-fitting methods and two graphical methods 

were used to estimate the transmissivity and storage coefficient of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones. The four curvefitting methods were the Theis, Hantush, Hantush-Jacob, and 

Neumann-Witherspoon methods. These methods were applied 

to the drawdown and residual recovery curves of the observation wells. The two graphical methods were the Cooper-Jacob 

method and the Theis recovery method. The Cooper-Jacob 

method was applied to the drawdown curve of the production 

well and the drawdown curves of the two observation wells. 

The Theis recovery method was applied to the residual drawdown curves of the two observation wells

The transmissivity estimated using the six methods 

ranged from 450 to 650 ft2/d. The average transmissivity for 

the fitted methods, Theis, Hantush, Hantush-Jacob, and Neuman-Witherspoon, was 510 ft2

/d; the average transmissivity for 

the Cooper-Jacob and Theis recovery graphical methods was 

600 ft2/d; and the average transmissivity for all six methods 

was 540 ft2/d. The average transmissivity for the three methods developed for nonleaky aquifers, Theis, Cooper-Jacob, 

and Theis recovery, was 590 ft2/d. The average transmissivity 

for the other three methods, which were developed for leaky 

aquifers, was 490 ft2/d. 

Figure 10. Theis recovery method applied to residual recovery curves for (A) observation well 1 and (B) observation 

well 2, December 9–22, 2004. [T = transmissivity drawdown per log cycle; Ds ́ = change in coefficient of storage]

16  Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 2004

1.0 10 100

T = 540 ft2/d

Δs’ = 39.5 ft

1.0 10 100

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

RESIDUAL DRAWDOWN, IN FEET

T = 580 ft2/d

Δs’ = 36.9 ft

TIME SINCE BEGINNING OF AQUIFER TEST (t) DIVIDED BY TIME SINCE END OF PUMPING (t’), IN DAYS/DAYS

(A) Observation well 1 (B) Observation well 2

Fitted line Fitted line

Recorded data Recorded data
The storage coefficient estimated using the six methods 

ranged from 4.2 to 5.7 x 10-5. The average storage coefficient 

for the fitted methods, Theis, Hantush, Hantush-Jacob, and 

Neuman-Witherspoon, was 5.1 x 10-5; the average storage 

coefficient for the Cooper-Jacob graphical method was 4.4 x 

10-5; and the average storage coefficient for all six methods 

was 5.0 x 10-5. The average storage coefficient for the two 

methods developed for nonleaky aquifers, Theis and CooperJacob, was 4.9 x 10-5 . The average storage coefficient for the 

other three methods with estimated values, which were developed for leaky aquifers, was 5.0 x 10-5.

The hydraulic conductivity was estimated by dividing 

the estimated transmissivity by 45 ft. It ranged from 10.0 to 

14.4 ft/d. The average hydraulic conductivity for all six methods was 12.1 ft/d.

References Cited

Ferris, J.G., Knowles, D.B., Brown, R.H., and Stallman, R.W., 

1962, Theory of aquifer tests: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Supply Paper 1536–E, 174 p.

Hantush, M.S., 1960, Modification of the theory of leaky 

aquifers: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 65, no. 11, 

p. 3713–3725.

Hantush, M.S., and Jacob, C.E., 1955, Non-steady radial flow 

in an infinite leaky aquifer: American Geophysical Union 

Transactions, v. 36, p. 95–100.

Heath, R.C., 1983, Basic ground-water hydrology: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2220, 84 p.

Hydrosolve, 2000, AQTESOLV for Windows user guide: Reston, Virginia, Hydrosolve, Inc., unpaged.

Jacob, C.E., 1963, The recovery method for determining the 

coefficient of transmissibility, in Bentall, Ray, compiler, 

Methods of determining permeability, transmissibility 

and drawdown: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply 

Paper 1536–I, p. 283–292.

Miller, R.T., and Delin, G.N., 1993, Cyclic injection, storage, 

and withdrawal of heated water in a sandstone aquifer at 

St. Paul, Minnesota—field observations, preliminary model 

analysis, and aquifer thermal efficiency: U.S. Geological 

Survey Professional Paper 1530–A, 55 p.

Mossler, J.H., and Tipping, R.G., 2000, Bedrock-geology and 

structure of the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area, 

Minnesota: University of Minnesota, Minnesota Geological 

Survey Miscellaneous Map Series Map M–104, 1 pl. 

Neuman, S.P., and Witherspoon, P.A., 1969, Theory of flow in 

a confined two aquifer system: Water Resources Research, 

v. 5, no. 4, p. 803–816. 

Runkel, A.C., Tipping, R.G., Alexander, E.C., Jr., Green, J.A., 

Mossler, J.H, and Alexander, S.C., 2003, Hydrogeology of 

the Paleozoic bedrock in southeastern Minnesota: Minnesota Geological Survey Report of Investigations 61, 105 p., 

2 pl.

Todd, D.K., 1980, Groundwater hydrology (2d ed.): New 

York, John Wiley & Sons, 535 p. 

References Cited 17
18 Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 2004
Appendix 

19

Appendix
Table A1. Recorded water levels in production well, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, December 6–22, 

2004.

[Aquifer test began at 10:30 a.m., December 6, 2004]

Time since 

beginning of 

pumping, in 

days

Recorded 

water level, 

in feet below 

datum

Time since 

beginning of 

pumping, in 

days

Recorded 

water level, 

in feet below 

datum

Time since 

beginning of 

pumping, in 

days

Recorded 

water level, 

in feet below 

datum

Time since 

beginning of 

pumping, in 

days

Recorded 

water level, 

in feet below 

datum

0 122 0.022 241 0.101 272 0.499 302

.001 146 .023 242 .108 273 .526 303

.001 163 .024 243 .114 274 .550 304

.002 178 .025 244 .119 275 .597 305

.003 190 .026 245 .126 276 .631 306

.003 194 .027 246 .133 277 .731 307

.005 195 .029 247 .140 278 .783 308

.006 198 .030 248 .148 279 .833 309

.006 203 .031 249 .156 280 .915 310

.007 206 .033 250 .163 281 .974 311

.008 209 .034 251 .167 282 1.079 312

.008 213 .036 252 .174 283 1.136 313

.009 216 .037 253 .181 284 1.285 314

.01 217 .038 254 .205 285 1.355 315

.010 220 .041 256 .215 286 1.417 316

.011 222 .044 257 .229 287 1.545 317

.012 223 .046 258 .238 288 1.650 318

.013 225 .049 259 .251 289 1.767 319

.013 226 .053 260 .258 290 1.906 320

.014 227 .054 261 .272 291 2.061 321

.015 228 .057 262 .288 292 2.294 322

.015 230 .059 263 .302 293 2.587 323

.016 231 .065 264 .321 294 2.678 324

.017 232 .068 265 .333 295 2.904 325

.017 233 .074 266 .345 296 3.032 326

.018 235 .081 267 .376 297 3.190 326

.020 236 .083 268 .392 298 3.191 339

.020 237 .087 269 .416 299 3.192 325

.021 238 .090 270 .436 300 3.192 305

.022 240 .097 271 .463 301 3.193 291

20 Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 2004
Table A1. Recorded water levels in production well, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, December 6–22, 

2004.—Continued

[Aquifer test began at 10:30 a.m., December 6, 2004]

Time since 

beginning of 

pumping, in 

days

Recorded 

water level, 

in feet below 

datum

Time since 

beginning of 

pumping, in 

days

Recorded 

water level, 

in feet below 

datum

Time since 

beginning of 

pumping, in 

days

Recorded 

water level, 

in feet below 

datum

Time since 

beginning of 

pumping, in 

days

Recorded 

water level, 

in feet below 

datum

3.194 294 3.215 199 3.245 184 3.914 144

3.194 292 3.216 195 3.246 184 3.990 143

3.195 288 3.217 193 3.247 177 4.008 142

3.196 287 3.217 188 3.247 188 4.078 141

3.197 288 3.218 185 3.248 195 4.156 140

3.197 293 3.220 184 3.249 183 4.235 139

3.198 301 3.221 182 3.249 176 4.301 138

3.199 297 3.223 181 3.250 177 4.392 137

3.199 299 3.224 178 3.251 176 4.724 136

3.200 302 3.226 181 3.251 180 4.824 135

3.201 304 3.227 219 3.252 178 4.944 134

3.201 303 3.228 192 3.343 164 5.107 133

3.202 302 3.229 187 3.351 163 5.272 132

3.203 301 3.230 181 3.367 162 5.419 131

3.203 297 3.231 180 3.387 161 5.647 130

3.204 298 3.231 175 3.405 160 5.953 129

3.205 292 3.232 173 3.415 159 6.167 128

3.206 290 3.233 171 3.437 157 6.433 127

3.206 266 3.234 170 3.461 156 6.743 126

3.207 250 3.236 174 3.472 155 6.958 125

3.208 240 3.236 170 3.494 154 6.959 124

3.208 235 3.238 169 3.506 153 6.981 305

3.209 231 3.238 171 3.529 152 6.981 309

3.210 223 3.240 177 3.558 151 6.982 298

3.210 216 3.240 179 3.695 150 6.983 305

3.211 211 3.241 172 3.709 149 6.983 306

3.212 208 3.242 171 3.752 148 6.984 141

3.212 204 3.243 174 3.784 147 6.985 232

3.214 203 3.244 165 3.863 146 6.985 171

3.215 201 3.244 166 3.879 145 6.986 182

Appendix 21
Table A1. Recorded water levels in production well, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, December 6–22, 

2004.—Continued

[Aquifer test began at 10:30 a.m., December 6, 2004]

Time since 

beginning of 

pumping, in 

days

Recorded 

water level, 

in feet below 

datum

Time since 

beginning of 

pumping, in 

days

Recorded 

water level, 

in feet below 

datum

Time since 

beginning of 

pumping, in 

days

Recorded 

water level, 

in feet below 

datum

Time since 

beginning of 

pumping, in 

days

Recorded 

water level, 

in feet below 

datum

6.987 193 6.994 140 7.020 128 10.210 116

6.988 200 6.994 138 7.021 127 10.210 115

6.988 204 6.995 136 7.022 126 11.128 114

6.989 190 6.997 135 7.920 117 15.483 113

6.990 167 7.000 134 7.040 123 15.555 114

6.990 154 7.002 133 7.079 122

6.991 151 7.003 132 7.442 121

6.992 149 7.007 131 7.503 120

6.992 145 7.009 130 7.506 119

6.993 142 7.010 129 7.765 118

22 Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 2004
Table A2. Measured water levels in production well, Shakopee 

Mdewakanton Sioux Community, southeastern Minnesota, 

December 9, 2004.

Time 

(24-hour)

Water level 

below top of casing 

(feet)

Water-surface 

elevation (feet above 

North American 

Vertical Datum of 1988)

15:25 405 580

15:27 378 607

15:28 365 620

15:29 355 630

15:30 346 639

15:31 340 645

15:32 336 649

15:33 332 653

15:34 328 657

15:35 325.5 659.5

15:36 323 662

15:37 321 664

15:38 319 666

15:39 317.1 667.9

15:40 315.2 669.8

15:41 313.7 671.3

15:46 308 677

15:51 303 682

15:56 299.5 685.5

16:01 297 688

16:06 294.5 690.5

16:11 292 693

16:16 289 696

16:21 287.3 697.7

16:26 286 699

Appendix 23
Table A3. Measured water levels in observation well 1 and observation well 2, Shakopee Mdewakanton 

Sioux Community, southeastern Minnesota, December 6–22, 2004.

[Aquifer test began 10:30 a.m., December 6, 2004. Pump was turned off 3:26 p.m., December 9, 2004. Water level was 

measured in observation well 1 until 10:27 a.m., December 22, 2004. Water level was measured in observation well 2 until 

11:55 a.m., December 22, 2004. --, no data]

Observation well 1 Observation well 2

Time since 

beginning 

of aquifer 

test (days)

Drawdown 

(feet)

Recovery 

(feet)

Elevation 

above North 

American 

Vertical Datum of 1988 

(feet)

Time since 

beginning 

of aquifer 

test (days)

Drawdown 

(feet)

Recovery 

(feet) Elevation (feet)

0 0 -- 764.32 0 0 -- 779.82

.034 0 -- 764.32 .036 0 -- 779.81

.035 .01 -- 764.31 .037 .01 -- 779.80

.036 .01 -- 764.31 .038 .01 -- 779.80

.037 .02 -- 764.30 .039 .02 -- 779.80

.039 .02 -- 764.30 .040 .02 -- 779.79

.040 .02 -- 764.30 .041 .03 -- 779.79

.041 .03 -- 764.30 .042 .03 -- 779.78

.042 .04 -- 764.29 .043 .04 -- 779.77

.043 .04 -- 764.28 .044 .04 -- 779.77

.044 .05 -- 764.27 .046 .06 -- 779.75

.045 .05 -- 764.27 .050 .09 -- 779.73

.046 .06 -- 764.26 .054 .13 -- 779.68

.047 .07 -- 764.25 .058 .18 -- 779.64

.048 .08 -- 764.24 .063 .24 -- 779.58

.049 .08 -- 764.24 .069 .31 -- 779.51

.050 .09 -- 764.24 .074 .39 -- 779.43

.051 .10 -- 764.22 .080 .48 -- 779.34

.052 .11 -- 764.21 .086 .58 -- 779.24

.053 .12 -- 764.20 .093 .71 -- 779.11

.054 .13 -- 764.19 .100 .85 -- 778.97

.055 .14 -- 764.18 .108 1.02 -- 778.80

.056 .15 -- 764.17 .117 1.20 -- 778.62

.057 .16 -- 764.16 .126 1.40 -- 778.41

.058 .17 -- 764.15 .136 1.63 -- 778.19

.059 .18 -- 764.14 .147 1.87 -- 777.94

.060 .19 -- 764.14 .159 2.16 -- 777.66

.062 .21 -- 764.11 .171 2.45 -- 777.37

.064 .23 -- 764.09 .185 2.80 -- 777.02

.066 .26 -- 764.06 .200 3.14 -- 776.68

24 Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 2004
Table A3. Measured water levels in observation well 1 and observation well 2, Shakopee Mdewakanton 

Sioux Community, southeastern Minnesota, December 6–22, 2004.—Continued

[Aquifer test began 10:30 a.m., December 6, 2004. Pump was turned off 3:26 p.m., December 9, 2004. Water level was 

measured in observation well 1 until 10:27 a.m., December 22, 2004. Water level was measured in observation well 2 until 

11:55 a.m., December 22, 2004. --, no data]

Observation well 1 Observation well 2

Time since 

beginning 

of aquifer 

test (days)

Drawdown 

(feet)

Recovery 

(feet)

Elevation 

above North 

American 

Vertical Datum of 1988 

(feet)

Time since 

beginning 

of aquifer 

test (days)

Drawdown 

(feet)

Recovery 

(feet) Elevation (feet)

0.068 0.29 -- 764.04 0.216 3.53 -- 776.28

.071 .33 -- 764.00 .233 3.96 -- 775.86

.074 .37 -- 763.96 .251 4.41 -- 775.41

.078 .42 -- 763.90 .272 4.90 -- 774.91

.081 .47 -- 763.86 .293 5.42 -- 774.40

.084 .52 -- 763.80 .317 5.98 -- 773.84

.088 .58 -- 763.74 .342 6.56 -- 773.26

.093 .67 -- 763.65 .369 7.17 -- 772.64

.097 .75 -- 763.58 .398 7.82 -- 771.99

.102 .84 -- 763.48 .430 8.52 -- 771.30

.108 .93 -- 763.39 .464 9.23 -- 770.59

.114 1.05 -- 763.27 .501 9.98 -- 769.84

.120 1.18 -- 763.14 .541 10.76 -- 769.06

.127 1.32 -- 763.00 .585 11.55 -- 768.27

.134 1.48 -- 762.84 .631 12.38 -- 767.44

.142 1.65 -- 762.68 .681 13.26 -- 766.56

.151 1.84 -- 762.49 .736 14.16 -- 765.66

.160 2.05 -- 762.28 .795 15.11 -- 764.71

.170 2.27 -- 762.05 .858 16.08 -- 763.73

.181 2.52 -- 761.81 .926 17.10 -- 762.72

.193 2.78 -- 761.54 1.000 18.11 -- 761.71

.205 3.08 -- 761.24 1.080 19.17 -- 760.65

.219 3.41 -- 760.91 1.166 20.22 -- 759.59

.234 3.76 -- 760.56 1.260 21.37 -- 758.45

.250 4.14 -- 760.19 1.360 22.52 -- 757.30

.267 4.54 -- 759.78 1.468 23.68 -- 756.14

.285 4.97 -- 759.35 1.585 24.79 -- 755.02

.305 5.44 -- 758.88 1.712 25.89 -- 753.93

.327 5.94 -- 758.39 1.848 27.06 -- 752.76

.350 6.46 -- 757.87 1.996 28.24 -- 751.57

Appendix 25
Table A3. Measured water levels in observation well 1 and observation well 2, Shakopee Mdewakanton 

Sioux Community, southeastern Minnesota, December 6–22, 2004.—Continued

[Aquifer test began 10:30 a.m., December 6, 2004. Pump was turned off 3:26 p.m., December 9, 2004. Water level was 

measured in observation well 1 until 10:27 a.m., December 22, 2004. Water level was measured in observation well 2 until 

11:55 a.m., December 22, 2004. --, no data]

Observation well 1 Observation well 2

Time since 

beginning 

of aquifer 

test (days)

Drawdown 

(feet)

Recovery 

(feet)

Elevation 

above North 

American 

Vertical Datum of 1988 

(feet)

Time since 

beginning 

of aquifer 

test (days)

Drawdown 

(feet)

Recovery 

(feet) Elevation (feet)

0.403 7.60 -- 756.72 2.154 29.34 -- 750.47

.432 8.21 -- 756.11 2.327 30.55 -- 749.26

.464 8.86 -- 755.46 2.513 31.74 -- 748.07

.499 9.55 -- 754.78 2.712 32.84 -- 746.97

.536 10.26 -- 754.06 2.929 34.03 -- 745.78

0.575 10.98 -- 753.34 3.162 35.16 -- 744.65

.618 11.73 -- 752.59 3.205 35.38 -- 744.44

.665 12.53 -- 751.79 3.207 35.38 -0 744.44

.716 13.36 -- 750.96 3.208 35.39 -.01 744.43

.770 14.23 -- 750.09 3.209 35.40 -.02 744.42

.829 15.13 -- 749.20 3.210 35.40 -.02 744.42

.892 16.07 -- 748.25 3.211 35.40 -.02 744.42

.961 17.01 -- 747.31 3.212 35.40 -.03 744.41

1.034 17.97 -- 746.35 3.213 35.41 -.03 744.41

1.114 18.95 -- 745.37 3.214 35.41 -.04 744.40

1.201 19.98 -- 744.34 3.215 35.42 -.04 744.40

1.293 21.06 -- 743.27 3.216 35.43 -.05 744.39

1.393 22.14 -- 742.19 3.217 35.43 -.05 744.39

1.503 23.21 -- 741.11 3.218 35.43 -.06 744.38

1.619 24.24 -- 740.08 3.219 35.44 -.06 744.38

1.745 25.27 -- 739.06 3.220 35.45 -.07 744.37

1.882 26.36 -- 737.96 3.221 35.45 -.07 744.37

2.030 27.44 -- 736.89 3.222 35.46 -.08 744.36

2.189 28.47 -- 735.85 3.223 35.46 -.08 744.36

2.361 29.60 -- 734.72 3.224 35.46 -.09 744.36

2.546 30.68 -- 733.64 3.225 35.47 -.09 744.35

2.746 31.69 -- 732.63 3.226 35.47 -.09 744.35

3.020 33.10 -- 731.22 3.227 35.48 -.10 744.34

3.196 33.88 -- 730.44 3.228 35.48 -.10 744.34

3.205 33.92 -- 730.40 3.229 35.48 -.10 744.34

26  Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 2004
Table A3. Measured water levels in observation well 1 and observation well 2, Shakopee Mdewakanton 

Sioux Community, southeastern Minnesota, December 6–22, 2004.—Continued

[Aquifer test began 10:30 a.m., December 6, 2004. Pump was turned off 3:26 p.m., December 9, 2004. Water level was 

measured in observation well 1 until 10:27 a.m., December 22, 2004. Water level was measured in observation well 2 until 

11:55 a.m., December 22, 2004. --, no data]

Observation well 1 Observation well 2

Time since 

beginning 

of aquifer 

test (days)

Drawdown 

(feet)

Recovery 

(feet)

Elevation 

above North 

American 

Vertical Datum of 1988 

(feet)

Time since 

beginning 

of aquifer 

test (days)

Drawdown 

(feet)

Recovery 

(feet) Elevation (feet)

3.206 33.92 0 730.40 3.230 35.49 -0.11 744.33

3.207 33.93 -.01 730.39 3.231 35.49 -.11 744.33

3.208 33.93 -.01 730.39 3.232 35.49 -.12 744.32

3.209 33.94 -.02 730.38 3.233 35.49 -.12 744.32

3.212 33.95 -.03 730.37 3.234 35.50 -.12 744.32

3.214 33.96 -.04 730.36 3.235 35.50 -.12 744.32

3.215 33.96 -.04 730.36 3.236 35.50 -.13 744.31

3.216 33.97 -.05 730.35 3.237 35.51 -.13 744.31

3.217 33.97 -.05 730.35 3.238 35.51 -.13 744.31

3.218 33.97 -.06 730.34 3.239 35.51 -.13 744.31

3.219 33.98 -0.06 730.34 3.240 35.51 -0.13 744.31

3.220 33.99 -.07 730.33 3.241 35.51 -.13 744.31

3.221 33.99 -.07 730.33 3.242 35.51 -.14 744.30

3.222 34.00 -.08 730.32 3.245 35.51 -.13 744.31

3.223 34.00 -.08 730.32 3.248 35.51 -.13 744.31

3.224 34.00 -.08 730.32 3.253 35.50 -.13 744.31

3.225 34.01 -.09 730.31 3.256 35.49 -.12 744.32

3.226 34.01 -.09 730.31 3.260 35.48 -.10 744.34

3.227 34.01 -.09 730.31 3.264 35.46 -.08 744.36

3.228 34.02 -.10 730.30 3.268 35.43 -.05 744.39

3.229 34.02 -.10 730.30 3.273 35.39 -.01 744.43

3.230 34.03 -.11 730.30 3.279 35.33 .04 744.48

3.231 34.03 -.11 730.29 3.285 35.28 .10 744.54

3.232 34.03 -.11 730.29 3.291 35.21 .17 744.61

3.233 34.03 -.12 730.28 3.298 35.12 .25 744.69

3.234 34.04 -.12 730.28 3.305 35.02 .36 744.80

3.235 34.04 -.12 730.28 3.313 34.91 .47 744.91

3.236 34.04 -.12 730.28 3.322 34.78 .60 745.04

3.237 34.04 -.12 730.28 3.331 34.63 .75 745.19

3.239 34.05 -.13 730.27 3.341 34.47 .91 745.35

Appendix 27
Table A3. Measured water levels in observation well 1 and observation well 2, Shakopee Mdewakanton 

Sioux Community, southeastern Minnesota, December 6–22, 2004.—Continued

[Aquifer test began 10:30 a.m., December 6, 2004. Pump was turned off 3:26 p.m., December 9, 2004. Water level was 

measured in observation well 1 until 10:27 a.m., December 22, 2004. Water level was measured in observation well 2 until 

11:55 a.m., December 22, 2004. --, no data]

Observation well 1 Observation well 2

Time since 

beginning 

of aquifer 

test (days)

Drawdown 

(feet)

Recovery 

(feet)

Elevation 

above North 

American 

Vertical Datum of 1988 

(feet)

Time since 

beginning 

of aquifer 

test (days)

Drawdown 

(feet)

Recovery 

(feet) Elevation (feet)

3.239 34.05 -0.13 730.27 3.352 34.27 1.10 745.54

3.240 34.05 -.13 730.27 3.364 34.07 1.30 745.74

3.241 34.05 -.13 730.27 3.376 33.85 1.53 745.97

3.243 34.05 -.13 730.27 3.390 33.61 1.77 746.21

3.246 34.05 -.13 730.27 3.405 33.33 2.04 746.48

3.249 34.05 -.13 730.27 3.421 33.05 2.32 746.76

3.256 34.03 -.12 730.29 3.438 32.74 2.64 747.08

3.260 34.02 -.10 730.30 3.457 32.39 2.99 747.43

3.264 34.00 -.08 730.33 3.476 32.02 3.36 747.80

3.269 33.97 -.05 730.36 3.498 31.62 3.76 748.20

3.274 33.93 -0.01 730.39 3.522 31.20 4.18 748.62

3.280 33.88 .04 730.44 3.547 30.74 4.63 749.07

3.285 33.83 .09 730.49 3.574 30.26 5.12 749.56

3.292 33.76 .16 730.57 3.603 29.75 5.62 750.06

3.298 33.69 .23 730.64 3.635 29.21 6.17 750.61

3.306 33.59 .33 730.73 3.670 28.63 6.74 751.18

3.314 33.48 .44 730.84 3.706 28.05 7.33 751.77

3.322 33.36 .56 730.96 3.746 27.44 7.93 752.37

3.332 33.22 .69 731.10 3.790 26.82 8.56 753.00

3.342 33.07 .85 731.25 3.836 26.19 9.19 753.63

3.353 32.89 1.03 731.43 3.887 25.53 9.85 754.29

3.364 32.70 1.21 731.62 3.941 24.87 10.51 754.95

3.377 32.49 1.43 731.83 4.000 24.20 11.18 755.62

3.391 -- 1.67 732.07 4.063 23.47 11.91 756.35

3.405 31.99 1.93 732.33 4.132 22.73 12.65 757.09

3.421 31.72 2.20 732.60 4.205 21.99 13.38 757.82

3.438 31.42 2.50 732.91 4.285 21.25 14.12 758.56

3.457 31.08 2.83 733.24 4.371 20.54 14.84 759.28

3.477 30.71 3.21 733.61 4.465 19.78 15.59 760.04

3.498 30.33 3.59 734.00 4.565 18.99 16.39 760.83

28 Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 2004
Table A3. Measured water levels in observation well 1 and observation well 2, Shakopee Mdewakanton 

Sioux Community, southeastern Minnesota, December 6–22, 2004.—Continued

[Aquifer test began 10:30 a.m., December 6, 2004. Pump was turned off 3:26 p.m., December 9, 2004. Water level was 

measured in observation well 1 until 10:27 a.m., December 22, 2004. Water level was measured in observation well 2 until 

11:55 a.m., December 22, 2004. --, no data]

Observation well 1 Observation well 2

Time since 

beginning 

of aquifer 

test (days)

Drawdown 

(feet)

Recovery 

(feet)

Elevation 

above North 

American 

Vertical Datum of 1988 

(feet)

Time since 

beginning 

of aquifer 

test (days)

Drawdown 

(feet)

Recovery 

(feet) Elevation (feet)

3.522 29.90 4.02 734.42 4.673 18.16 17.21 761.66

3.547 29.46 4.46 734.87 4.790 17.30 18.08 762.52

3.574 28.98 4.94 735.34 4.917 16.47 18.90 763.34

3.604 28.48 5.44 735.85 5.054 15.64 19.74 764.18

3.636 27.94 5.98 736.39 5.200 14.75 20.63 765.07

3.670 27.37 6.55 736.95 5.360 13.88 21.50 765.94

3.707 26.78 7.13 737.54 5.532 13.08 22.30 766.74

3.747 26.17 7.75 738.15 5.717 12.21 23.17 767.61

3.790 25.56 8.36 738.77 5.917 11.48 23.90 768.34

3.837 24.94 8.98 739.39 6.134 10.80 24.58 769.02

3.887 24.29 9.63 740.03 6.368 10.17 25.21 769.65

3.942 23.63 10.29 740.70 6.620 9.63 25.74 770.18

4.001 22.97 10.95 741.35 6.892 8.95 26.42 770.86

4.064 22.25 11.67 742.08 7.187 8.48 26.89 771.33

4.132 21.53 12.39 742.79 7.507 7.92 27.46 771.90

4.206 20.81 13.11 743.52 7.851 7.18 28.20 772.64

4.286 20.08 13.84 744.24 8.226 6.39 28.99 773.43

4.372 19.38 14.54 744.94 8.622 5.68 29.70 774.14

4.465 18.65 15.27 745.67 9.049 4.91 30.47 774.91

4.565 17.89 16.03 746.43 9.517 4.39 30.99 775.43

4.673 17.09 16.83 747.23 10.028 3.97 31.41 775.85

4.791 16.25 17.67 748.08 10.570 3.59 31.79 776.23

4.917 15.47 18.45 748.85 11.153 2.90 32.48 776.92

5.054 14.68 19.24 749.64 11.788 2.32 33.06 777.50

5.202 13.83 20.09 750.50 12.476 2.28 33.10 777.54

5.360 13.00 20.92 751.32 13.215 1.75 33.62 778.06

5.533 12.25 21.67 752.07 14.007 .89 34.48 778.93

5.718 11.43 22.48 752.89 14.872 .72 34.65 779.09

5.918 10.75 23.17 753.57 15.799 .68 34.69 779.13

6.134 10.13 23.79 754.19 16.059 .66 34.71 779.15

Appendix 29
Table A3. Measured water levels in observation well 1 and observation well 2, Shakopee Mdewakanton 

Sioux Community, southeastern Minnesota, December 6–22, 2004.—Continued

[Aquifer test began 10:30 a.m., December 6, 2004. Pump was turned off 3:26 p.m., December 9, 2004. Water level was 

measured in observation well 1 until 10:27 a.m., December 22, 2004. Water level was measured in observation well 2 until 

11:55 a.m., December 22, 2004. --, no data]

Observation well 1 Observation well 2

Time since 

beginning 

of aquifer 

test (days)

Drawdown 

(feet)

Recovery 

(feet)

Elevation 

above North 

American 

Vertical Datum of 1988 

(feet)

Time since 

beginning 

of aquifer 

test (days)

Drawdown 

(feet)

Recovery 

(feet) Elevation (feet)

6.368 9.57 24.35 754.75

6.620 9.08 24.84 755.24

6.893 8.46 25.46 755.86

7.187 8.04 25.88 756.28

7.509 7.54 26.37 756.78

7.852 6.85 27.07 757.47

8.227 6.10 27.82 758.23

8.623 5.42 28.50 758.91

9.050 4.68 29.24 759.65

9.519 4.18 29.74 760.14

10.019 3.78 30.14 760.54

10.571 3.42 30.50 760.90

11.155 2.72 31.20 761.60

11.790 2.15 31.77 762.18

12.467 2.12 31.80 762.21

13.207 1.59 32.33 762.73

14.009 .71 33.21 763.61

14.873 .53 33.39 763.80

15.800 .47 33.44 763.85

16.019 .47 33.45 763.86

30 Hydraulic Properties of the Ironton and Galesville Sandstones, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, 2004