Prepared in Cooperation with the Indiana Army National Guard

Hydrogeologic Framework and Ground-Water Flow

in Quaternary Deposits at the U.S. Army Atterbury

Joint Maneuver Training Center near Edinburgh, Indiana,

2002–2003

Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5172

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Cover. Photograph of the direct-push drill rig used to collect sediment cores and construct 

piezometers and a photograph of flowing well MW6 at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint 

Maneuver Training Center, near Edinburgh, Indiana.

Hydrogeologic Framework and GroundWater Flow in Quaternary Deposits at 

the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver 

Training Center near Edinburgh, Indiana, 

2002–2003

By Bret A. Robinson and Martin R. Risch

Prepared in Cooperation with the Indiana Army National Guard

Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5172

U.S. Department of the Interior

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

DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2006

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:

Robinson, B.A., Risch, M.R., 2006, Hydrogeologic Framework and Ground-Water Flow in Quarternary Deposits at the 

U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center near Edinburgh, Indiana, 2002–2003: U.S. Geological Survey, 

Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5172, 48 p. 
iii

Contents

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

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

Purpose and Scope ................................................................................. 2

Description of Study Area .............................................................................. 2

Site History .......................................................................................... 2

Physical Setting .................................................................................... 2

Physiography, Topography, and Soils ............................................................ 5

Climate ................................................................................................ 5

Previous Studies .................................................................................... 5

Methods of Study ....................................................................................... 7

Design of the Monitoring Network ............................................................... 7

Hydrogeologic-Data Collection .................................................................. 9

Boreholes .................................................................................... 9

Monitoring Wells and Piezometers ......................................................... 11

Water-Level Measurements ............................................................... 11

Hydrogeologic Mapping and Nomenclature ................................................... 13

Hydrogeologic Framework .............................................................................. 13

Quarternary Deposits .............................................................................. 14

Hydrogeologic Regions ........................................................................... 14

Bedrock Region .............................................................................. 14

Jessup Till Region ........................................................................... 14

Trafalgar Till Region ........................................................................... 14

Atherton Outwash Region .................................................................. 15

Ground-Water Flow ....................................................................................... 15

Infiltration Areas .................................................................................... 15

Horizontal Flow .................................................................................... 15

Vertical Flow ....................................................................................... 21

Ground-Water/Surface-Water Interaction ...................................................... 21

Summary and Conclusions .............................................................................. 22

Acknowledgments ....................................................................................... 23

References Cited .......................................................................................... 23

Appendix 1. Geologic logs and diagrams for monitoring wells and piezometers constructed 

by the U.S. Geological Survey for the hydrogeologic-framework investigation 

at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center near Edinburgh, 

Indiana, 2002–2003 ........................................................................ 26

Appendix 2. Geologic logs and diagrams for monitoring wells constructed in 1981 and 1996 

and water-supply wells constructed in 2003 at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint 

Maneuver Training Center near Edinburgh, Indiana ................................. 38
iv

Figures

1–3. Maps showing—

 1. U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center and surrounding 

region near Edinburgh, Indiana .................................................................................. 3

 2. Locations of U.S. Geological Survey monitoring wells, piezometers, and 

selected surface-water-monitoring sites, and existing monitoring wells .......... 4

 3. Physiographic divisions ............................................................................................... 6

4–5. Photographs showing—

 4. Truck-mounted hollow-stem auger drill rig used to collect sediment cores 

and construct monitoring wells and an example core collected with this 

drill rig ............................................................................................................................. 9

 5. Direct-push drill rig used to collect sediment cores and construct 

piezometers and a core collected with this drill rig ............................................. 10

6. Diagram of monitoring wells and piezometers for investigation of the 

hydrogeologic framework in Quaternary deposits ........................................................ 12

7. Photographs of a piezometer with a protective cover and tubular marker and 

a monitoring well with a flush-mount well vault ............................................................. 13

8. Map showing hydrogeologic regions in the study area ................................................ 16

 9. Generalized geologic columns associated with the hydrogeologic regions in 

the study area. ...................................................................................................................... 17

10–11. Maps showing—

10. Infiltration areas determined by low topographic relief and(or) coarsegrained soil texture in the hydrogeologic-framework study area ...................... 18

11. Ground-water elevations at selected monitoring locations, generalized 

ground-water elevation contours, and generalized directions of 

horizontal ground-water flow on July 31 and August 1, 2003, in the 

hydrogeologic-framework study area ..................................................................... 19

Tables

1. Soil associations at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center 

near Edinburgh, Indiana .................................................................. 7

2. Selected characteristics of monitoring wells, piezometers, and water-supply 

wells ............................................................................................. 8

3. Measuring-point elevation, screen-midpoint elevation, and water-level elevation 

measured July 31 to August 1, 2003, in monitoring wells and piezometers ......... 20

4. Vertical hydraulic gradients on July 31 and August 1, 2003, between selected 

pairs of monitoring wells/piezometers ................................................ 21

5. Surface-water-level elevations and ground-water-level elevations measured at 

adjacent sites on July 31 and August 1, 2003 .......................................... 22
v

Conversion Factors

Multiply By To obtain

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

acre 0.004047 square kilometer (km2)

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) 

foot per minute (ft/min) 0.3048 meter per minute (m/min)

foot per foot (ft/ft) 1 meter per meter (m/m)

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

°C = (°F - 32) / 1.8

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

(NAVD 88).

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

Elevation, as used in this report, refers to distance above the vertical datum.

Abstract 

A hydrogeologic framework was developed for unconsolidated Quaternary deposits at the U.S. Army Atterbury 

Joint Maneuver Training Center. The framework describes the 

potential for the occurrence of ground water on the basis of 

physiography and the distribution of geologic materials within 

the study area. Four geologic units—the Jessup, Trafalgar, 

Atherton, and Martinsville Formations—were identified, and 

their distribution was mapped as four hydrogeologic regions. 

The Jessup and Trafalgar Formations are fine-grained, poorly 

sorted tills. At least two facies of the Atherton Formation, the 

lacustrine and outwash facies, are in the study area. The Martinsville Formation includes materials deposited or reworked 

since the glacial period. With the exception of the Atherton 

Formation outwash facies, the Quaternary deposits are primarily fine-grained, silt- and clay-rich sediments that function as 

confining layers or aquitards. The Atherton Formation outwash facies includes sand and gravel deposits that constitute 

the primary aquifers in the study area. The four hydrogeologic 

regions mapped in this investigation are designated as the 

Bedrock, Jessup Till, Trafalgar Till, and Atherton Outwash 

Regions. Each region represents an area with a distinctive 

physiographic expression and vertical sequence of Quaternary 

deposits.

The Bedrock Region in the western and southwestern 

part of the study area commonly is underlain by 0 to 15 feet of 

Martinsville Formation resting directly on bedrock. Potential 

ground-water yields are limited. The Jessup Till Region in 

the southeastern part of the study area includes the uplands on 

either side of the stream valleys. Sediments commonly range 

from 30 to 90 feet in thickness. This region includes clay-rich 

till of the Jessup Formation and sand and gravel deposits of 

the Atherton Formation outwash facies; the Atherton Formation outwash facies tends to be thin, and ground-water yields 

will be moderate. The Trafalgar Till Region in the north and 

northwest-central part of the study area commonly is underlain 

by 10 to 30 feet of Trafalgar till or Trafalgar till over 25 to 

50 feet of Jessup till. Within, separating, and beneath these tills 

are deposits of the Atherton Formation outwash facies—the 

sand and gravel deposits with the best potential to support a 

water-supply well. Generally, the outwash facies in this region 

are thin sand and gravel lenses, except in a few locations that 

are in excess of 30 feet thick. The Atherton Outwash Region 

is the lowland area associated with the major valleys in all but 

the far southwestern part of the study area. This region has 

the greatest thickness of outwash facies sands and gravels 

(often in excess of 20 feet), which are the primary aquifers. 

In the Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center, the 

combined Atherton Outwash Region and the Trafalgar Till 

Region have the greatest potential as infiltration areas because 

of low topographic relief and(or) sandy soils. From waterlevel data collected in July and August 2003, horizontal 

ground-water flow was determined generally to be toward 

the Atherton Outwash Region and the valley of the Driftwood River to the east. Vertical hydraulic gradients were 

documented at nested well pairs. At two sites, upwardly 

directed gradients are reflected by flowing wells. 

Ground-water discharge to surface water is likely in 

some eastern reaches of the valleys of Nineveh and Lick 

Creeks. In the valley of Nineveh Creek, potential for groundwater discharge is indicated by the presence of a flowing well, 

upwardly directed vertical hydraulic gradients, and groundwater heads that were higher than surface-water elevations. 

In the valley of Lick Creek, ground-water discharge also is 

indicated by the presence of flowing wells and ground-water 

heads that were higher than surface-water elevations. 

Introduction

Through a variety of programs, the U.S. military has 

been obtaining environmental data, including information 

about water resources, at its facilities nationwide (U.S. Department of Defense, 2006). Information about groundwater resources is necessary for compliance with Federal 

water-pollution-control regulations and for water-qualitymanagement programs. Facility-specific knowledge of the 

occurrence of ground water and an understanding of local 

ground-water-flow systems are required for development and 

protection of water supplies and for evaluation of potential or 

known environmental-quality concerns. The U.S. Geological 

Survey (USGS) has been assisting Department of Defense 

agencies on earth-science issues through the Department of 

Hydrogeologic Framework and Ground-Water Flow 

in Quaternary Deposits at the U.S. Army Atterbury 

Joint Maneuver Training Center near Edinburgh, Indiana, 

2002–2003

By Bret A. Robinson and Martin R. Risch
2 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Defense Earth Science Program (2006). The USGS provides 

support for facility restoration, water management, geographical information, geologic assessments, and biological 

resources. 

The U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training 

Center (referred to as Camp Atterbury) in central Indiana near 

Edinburgh (fig. 1) primarily has been a training facility for the 

U.S. Army and Indiana Army National Guard for more than 

50 years. The Guard needed information about ground-water 

resources at Camp Atterbury to plan water supplies to support 

training and for environmental-management programs. The 

USGS previously had completed investigations of surfacewater quality at Camp Atterbury (Risch, 2004; Robinson, 

2004). The Guard requested the USGS complete an initial 

assessment of ground water sufficient to delineate a hydrogeologic framework for Camp Atterbury. The framework 

would provide a basis for evaluating environmental concerns 

and help focus future data collection. 

During 2002 and 2003, the USGS collected geologic 

data and made hydrologic measurements to delineate the 

hydrogeologic framework for ground water beneath much 

of Camp Atterbury. The investigation was focused on the 

Quaternary deposits. Quaternary deposits are defined as all of 

the unconsolidated geologic materials above bedrock, including Pleistocene deposits, which are predominantly glacially 

derived, and Holocene deposits, which are from the postglacial epoch. Ground water within the Quaternary deposits 

has the greatest potential for contamination from activities at 

Camp Atterbury and for use as a potable-water supply. The 

data-collection network designed and installed for this investigation resulted in a permanent network of monitoring wells 

for use in any future investigations.

Purpose and Scope

This report documents the results of a hydrogeologic 

investigation of the Quaternary deposits at Camp Atterbury 

based on previously published information and additional data 

collection during 2002 and 2003. The investigation resulted 

in delineation of a hydrogeologic framework for the approximate northern two-thirds of the military facility that describes 

the potential for the occurrence of ground water, based on 

characterization of unconsolidated sediments in relation to 

their capability to store and transmit ground water. The report 

describes the hydrogeologic framework, defines areas of 

expected infiltration, and interprets directions of ground-water 

flow and ground-water/surface-water interactions. In addition, 

methods of data collection and interpretation are described.

The scope of work included collection and description 

of 12 sediment cores to refine the distribution of Quaternary 

sediments at Camp Atterbury, installation of 9 monitoring 

wells and 11 piezometers, and measurement of ground-water 

levels to interpret directions of flow. Measurements of surfacewater levels at three locations were used to determine potential 

ground-water/surface-water interactions. Previously published 

information about the geology, physiography, topography, and 

soils of the area were consulted to aid in development of the 

hydrogeologic framework. 

Description of Study Area

This description of the Camp Atterbury region is based 

on previously published information that describes facility 

history, hydrology, water use, physiography, topography, soils, 

and climate. The study area for the hydrogeologic-framework 

investigation comprised the approximate northern two-thirds 

of the Camp Atterbury property (fig. 2). 

Site History

Camp Atterbury was established in 1942 as a 40,320-

acre U.S. Army installation, and operations continued through 

1968. The installation was a troop-training, militaryhospital, and prisoner-of-war facility during World War II. 

Camp Atterbury was deactivated from 1948 through 1950 

and again in 1954 after the Korean Conflict. In 1968 and 

1969, approximately 7,000 acres were sold and the remaining 

U.S. Army property was redesignated the Atterbury Reserve 

Forces Training Area. At that time, the installation was placed 

under the control of the Indiana Army National Guard (Indiana Army National Guard, 1995). The facility is named the 

U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center.

The current mission of Camp Atterbury is to support 

training of the Army and Air National Guard; Army and Air 

Force Reserve; specialized units of the U.S. military; and 

emergency, public-safety, and law-enforcement personnel. 

In 2002, the year-round facilities and operations provided an 

expanded role as a mobilization site for processing and preparing soldiers and equipment to serve overseas.

Physical Setting

Camp Atterbury is in central Indiana about 30 mi south 

of Indianapolis (fig. 1). Nearby cities and towns include Edinburgh (population 4,505), less than 3 mi to the east of Camp 

Atterbury; Nineveh (population 4,133), less than 1 mi to the 

northwest; Franklin (population 19,463), about 8 mi to the 

north; and Columbus (population 39,059), about 6 mi to the 

southeast (Indiana Business Research Center, 2000).

In 2006, Camp Atterbury encompasses approximately 

33,760 acres1, spanning 4 to 6.5 mi by 9.5 mi (fig. 1). Most 

of the property is within northwestern Bartholomew County, 

with smaller parts in northeastern Brown and southern Johnson Counties. Nearby transportation routes include State Road 

252 to the north, I-65 and U.S. Highway 31 to the east, State 

Road 46 to the south, and State Road 135 to the west. The 

study area for this investigation included the northern two 

thirds of the property, approximately 22,820 acres1 north

1

Area computed from maps of Camp Atterbury training areas and 

installation boundary (unpublished data, Indiana Army National Guard, 2002, 

Geographic Information System for Camp Atterbury), converted from square 

meters to acres by multiplying with a conversion factor of 0.0002471 acres per 

square meter.
Figure 1. U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center and surrounding region near Edinburgh, Indiana.

JOHNSON COUNTY

BROWN COUNTY

BARTHOLOMEW COUNTY

BARTHOLOMEW COUNTY

BROWN COUNTY

Nineveh

Princes Lakes

Cordry 

Lake

Columbus

Edinburgh SHELBY COUNTY JOHNSON COUNTY

Franklin

U.S. ARMY ATTERBURY

 JOINT MANEUVER

 TRAINING CENTER

 (Camp Atterbury)

Drif wt oo d Riv er

Big Blue River

Sug ar Creek Lick Creek

Muddy Branch

Hospital Road

Sugar Creek

Yo un gs Cr eek

Cathe rin e Creek

S ad dle Cr eek

Duck 

Pond Puff 

Lake

Mud Creek

31

31

65

65

46

135

252

135

252

East Fork White Ri ver

Base modified from Defense Mapping Agency, 1985, 1:50,000

Projection: Universal Transverse Mercator, Zone 16,

North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83)

EXPLANATION

46

Camp Atterbury

Lake or pond

City or town

Road or highway

Stream or river

County boundary

Prince Creek

Common Impact Area

86 07' 30'' 86 

East Fork Salt Creek

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 MILES

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 KILOMETERS

39 25'

39 15'

M ud Creek

SHELBY COUNTY

MORGAN COUNTY

JOHNSON COUNTY

Nineve h

Creek

INDIANA

U.S. Army Atterbury

Joint Maneuver

Training Center 

 

Indianapolis

135

Description of Study Area 3
4 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Figure 2. Locations of U.S. Geological Survey monitoring wells, piezometers, and selected surface-water-monitoring sites, and 

existing monitoring wells at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center near Edinburgh, Indiana.

Camp Atterbury 

Stream

EXPLANATION

Catherine Creek

Lick Creek

Mud Creek

Prince Creek

Nineveh Creek

Muddy Branch

Saddle Cre ek

Puff Lake

Duck Pond

0 1 2 MILES

0 1 2 KILOMETERS

Common Impact Area

Mauxferry Rd

Reservation Boundary Rd

Wallace Rd

Hospital Rd

Wilder Rd

Mt Moriah Rd

Lincoln Rd

PZ1

MW1

PZ2

MW2

PZ3

MW3

PZ4

MW4

PZ5

MW5

PZ6A

MW6

MW7

PZ8A

PZ8B

PZ9

MW9

PZ10

W1

W5

W7

W8

PZ1 U.S. Geological Survey piezometer

MW1 U.S. Geological Survey monitoring well

W7 Previously installed monitoring well 

W13

PZ12

MW11 Road

Lake or pond

W14 W16

W15

W2

W3

W4

Base from Indiana National Guard Environmental Office

Geographic Information System for Camp Atterbury (2002)

86o

86o 05'

39o 20’ 

39o 17' 

Study Area

Non-Study Area

Line separates the study area 

 to the north from the non-study 

 area to the south

Ohio Ridge Rd

Lowell Rd

Hendricks Ford Rd

Rangeline Rd

Pleasant Run

Eggleston St

County Line Rd

Schoolhouse Rd

Tipton Trail

B2

B1

E3

E7

A4 E5

A5

A10

A11

B5

B5 U.S. Geological Survey 

 surface-water-monitoring site

Evans Rd
of Ohio Ridge Road (fig. 2). Within the study area is the 

approximately 6,000-acre Common Impact Area for 

the weapons-training, aerial-gunnery, and bombing ranges. 

For safety reasons, the Common Impact Area was not directly 

investigated in this study.

Camp Atterbury (fig. 1) is in the East Fork White River 

Basin; more than 90 percent of surface water at the property 

drains eastward to the Driftwood River (Risch, 2004), a tributary of the East Fork White River. The largest stream draining 

the property is Nineveh Creek, with a drainage area of approximately 44 mi2

 (fig. 2). Nineveh Creek originates upstream 

from the northern property boundary and, within the boundaries of Camp Atterbury, receives drainage from Prince Creek, 

Mud Creek, Saddle Creek, and unnamed tributaries. Muddy 

Branch, Lick Creek, and Catherine Creek (with drainage areas 

of 2 to 6 mi2) are headwater streams that originate inside the 

property boundary. Less than 10 percent of surface water at 

Camp Atterbury drains southwest to East Fork Salt Creek. 

The study area for the hydrogeologic-framework investigation 

includes all surface-water-drainage areas, with the exception 

of Catherine Creek and East Fork Salt Creek. Several manmade lakes, including Puff Lake, are within Camp Atterbury’s 

boundaries. A number of large manmade lakes with residential 

communities—Princes Lakes and Cordry Lake—are upstream 

from Camp Atterbury (fig. 1).

Camp Atterbury, along with many private residences 

in the vicinity, is served by the Princes Lakes public-watersupply system that obtains water from wells in the Big Blue 

River Valley northwest of Edinburgh. In the area from the 

Camp Atterbury boundary east and southeast to the Driftwood 

River (fig. 1), at least 50 private water-supply wells serve individual residences, according to the Indiana water-well database (Indiana Department of Natural Resources, 2003). The 

median depth of these wells is approximately 50 ft, and most 

wells are completed in unconsolidated Quaternary deposits.

Physiography, Topography, and Soils

Camp Atterbury falls within three of the physiographic 

divisions (fig. 3) described by Gray (2000). The northern 

part—in southern Johnson County, northeastern Brown 

County, and northwestern Bartholomew County—is within the 

New Castle Till Plains and Drainageways division, a till plain 

of low relief crossed by many major tunnel valleys. The southwestern part of Camp Atterbury—in eastern Brown County 

and western Bartholomew County—is within the Norman 

Upland division, an area of high local relief that has bedrock at 

or near the land surface. The central and southeastern part—in 

Bartholomew County—is within the Scottsburg Lowland division, an area of low relief where glacial deposits as much as 

150 ft thick cover bedrock.

The surface topography of Camp Atterbury includes flat 

to rolling terrain in the north and northeast to steep, hilly terrain in the south and southwest. Terrain along Nineveh Creek 

and the Driftwood River (fig. 1) to the east is lowland flanked 

by terraces. Land-surface elevations range from about 645 ft 

where Nineveh Creek crosses the eastern property boundary 

to approximately 960 ft at the drainage divide between the 

Lick Creek and East Fork Salt Creek Watersheds. Elevation in 

the central part of Camp Atterbury ranges from 740 to 820 ft 

(Defense Mapping Agency, 1985).

Numerous soil associations (table 1) are recognized at 

Camp Atterbury (Noble and others, 1990; Sturm, 1979). Their 

slopes, drainage characteristics, and position on the landscape 

influence infiltration capacity and the potential for recharge to 

underlying aquifers.

Climate

Camp Atterbury has a humid continental climate, characterized by distinct winter and summer seasons with large 

annual temperature ranges. Mean monthly temperatures at 

Columbus, Indiana, about 6 mi southeast of the study area, 

range from about 28°F in January to about 76°F in July. At 

Columbus, normal annual precipitation is 42 in.; normal 

monthly precipitation ranges from about 2.6 in. during 

February to about 4.6 in. during May (Midwestern Regional 

Climate Center, 2004). 

Previous Studies

Previous studies at Camp Atterbury provided information 

about geology and water resources that was used in the 2002 

and 2003 hydrogeologic-framework investigation. A general 

understanding of the geology of the Camp Atterbury region 

was derived from Schneider and Gray (1966), who describe 

the geology of the upper East Fork White River drainage basin 

in south-central Indiana. Maps from that report had a coarse 

scale for the study area in Camp Atterbury; additional hydrogeologic data were collected and evaluated during the 2002 

and 2003 investigation. 

A total of 16 monitoring wells had been constructed at 

Camp Atterbury prior to 2002. In the vicinity of a closed sanitary landfill at Mauxferry Road and County Line Road, five 

monitoring wells were constructed by the U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency (1981) to evaluate shallow groundwater quality. In the vicinity of several former waste-disposal 

sites in the northeastern part of Camp Atterbury, the Military 

Department of Indiana constructed 11 monitoring wells to 

evaluate shallow ground-water quality (Military Department 

of Indiana, 1997). Geologic logs from these wells were consulted when locations for hydrogeologic-data collection were 

selected for this investigation.

A network of 27 surface-water stations was established 

for a base-wide assessment of chemical and biological quality 

of surface water at Camp Atterbury by the USGS in 2000 and 

2001 (Risch, 2004). An inventory of aquatic macroinvertebrates in the streams of Camp Atterbury in 2003 was based on

Description of Study Area 5
6 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Figure 3. Physiographic divisions at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center near Edinburgh, Indiana.
this network (Robinson, 2004). These surface-water stations 

were included in the design of the data-collection network for 

the hydrogeologic-framework investigation.

Methods of Study

Methods used for the investigation included design of a 

data-collection network, collection and description of sediment cores, installation of monitoring wells and piezometers, 

and measurement of ground-water and surface-water levels. 

Data collection was completed during 2002 and 2003. The 

data-collection network designed and installed for this investigation resulted in a permanent network of monitoring wells 

for use in future investigations.

Design of the Monitoring Network

The monitoring network developed for this investigation 

consisted of 11 monitoring wells previously constructed for 

environmental investigations at Camp Atterbury (U.S. Army 

Environmental Hygiene Agency, 1982; Military Department 

of Indiana, 1977), 10 surface-water stations from a previous 

investigation of water quality (Risch, 2004), and 9 monitoring wells and 11 piezometers installed for this investigation. 

In this report, the term “monitoring well” is used to describe 

wells with a diameter of 2 in. or more that were constructed 

to permit sampling for water quality. The term “piezometer” 

is used to describe 1-in.-diameter wells that were installed for 

measurement of water levels only.

Previously constructed monitoring wells were installed 

for investigations at specific sites in northeastern Camp Atterbury and, therefore, did not provide information for other parts 

of the facility. Locations for monitoring wells and piezometers 

installed for the hydrogeologic-framework investigation were 

selected to provide areal coverage and target areas where 

water-bearing sediments (sand and gravel) were expected. 

Locations were selected to be accessible by the drill rigs and 

to avoid buried utilities and unexploded ordnance. In some 

cases, hydrogeologic information gathered from drilling was 

used to select the next location for drilling. 

Monitoring wells and piezometers installed by the USGS 

were named, using a combination of letters and numbers 

(fig. 2 and table 2). The letters designate a monitoring well 

(MW) or piezometer (PZ), and the number designates each of 

the 12 monitoring locations. For locations where shallow and 

deep piezometers were installed, the deep one has the suffix A 

and the shallow one has the suffix B. Previously installed 

monitoring wells were designated with the prefix W and the 

 Table 1. Soil associations at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center near Edinburgh, Indiana.

Soil association Description Landscape position

Berks-Wellston-Trevlac Moderately deep and deep, moderately sloping to very steep, welldrained soils formed in loess and in material weathered from shale, 

siltstone, and sandstone

Uplands.

Hickory-Cincinnati-Rossmoyne Deep, gently sloping to very steep, well-drained and moderately 

well-drained soils formed in loess and in underlying loamy and 

silty glacial drift and till

Uplands.

Miami-Hennepin Well drained, deep, gently sloping to very steep soils formed in a 

thin silty layer and underlying glacial till

Uplands.

Crosby-Miami-Rensselaer Deep, nearly level to strongly sloping, somewhat poorly drained, 

well-drained, and very poorly drained soils formed in loess and 

underlying loamy glacial till, in glacial till, and in stratified loamy 

sediments

Uplands and terraces.

Pekin-Chetwynd-Bartle Deep, nearly level to very steep, somewhat poorly drained to welldrained soils formed in silty and loamy depositsTerraces.

Rensselaer-Whitaker Deep, very poorly drained and somewhat poorly drained, moderately 

fine-textured and medium-textured, nearly level and gently sloping 

soils formed in loess and underlying glacial till, in glacial till, or in 

outwash

Terraces.

Stonelick-Chagrin Deep, nearly level, well-drained soils formed in loamy alluvial deposits Flood plains.

Genesee-Ross-Shoals Deep, well-drained and somewhat poorly drained, nearly level soils 

formed in loamy alluvium

Bottom lands.

Methods of Study 7
8 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Table 2. Selected characteristics of monitoring wells, piezometers, and water-supply wells at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint 

Maneuver Training Center near Edinburgh, Indiana.

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; in., inch; MW, monitoring well; PZ, piezometer; W, existing monitoring well; WS, water-supply well; 

--, unknown or not listed]

Name USGS site 

identification

Latitude

(degrees,

minutes, 

seconds)

Longitude

(degrees,

minutes, 

seconds)

Screened 

interval 

(ft below 

land surface)

Land-surface

elevation

(ft)

Height of 

measuring 

point above 

land surface

(ft)

Screen

length

(ft)

Casing 

diameter

(in.)

MW1 392145086041401 39° 21’ 45” 86° 04’ 14” 42 - 46 728.3 3.7 4 2

PZ1 392145086041501 39° 21’ 45” 86° 04’ 15” 12.5 - 22.5 731.6 4.2 10 1

MW2 392011086044301 39° 20’ 10” 86° 04’ 43” 22 - 26 732.6 3.4 4 2

PZ2 392011086044302 39° 20’ 11” 86° 04’ 43” 20 - 25 732.7 -.4 5 1

MW3 391824086042901 39° 18’ 24” 86° 04’ 29” 18 - 22 692.4 2.6 4 2

PZ3 391824086042902 39° 18’ 24” 86° 04’ 29” 18 - 23 693.3 -.5 5 1

MW4 391948086020501 39° 19’ 48” 86° 02’ 05” 32 - 40 679.5 3.2 8 2

PZ4 391948086020502 39° 19’ 48” 86° 02’ 05” 12.5 - 22.5 679.3 4.0 10 1

MW5 392037086013301 39° 20’ 36” 86° 01’ 33” 24 - 28 689.4 3.6 4 2

PZ5 392037086013302 39° 20’ 37” 86° 01’ 33” 16.5 - 21.5 689.1 3.9 5 1

MW6 391855086003301 39° 18’ 55” 86° 00’ 33” 26 - 34 657.1 2.3 8 2

PZ6A 391856086003001 39° 18’ 57” 86° 00’ 30” 8.5 - 13.5 657.2 3.8 5 1

MW7 391753086003101 39° 17’ 53” 86° 00’ 31” 20.5 - 25.5 668.8 3.3 5 2

PZ8A 391835085592601 39° 18’ 35” 86° 59’ 26” 24 - 29 647.6 3.9 5 1

PZ8B 391835085592602 39° 18’ 35” 86° 59’ 26” 12 - 17 647.9 3.3 5 1

MW9 391650086003101 39° 16’ 50” 86° 00’ 31” 52 - 62 662.4 3.4 10 2

PZ9 391649086003101 39° 16’ 49” 86° 00’ 31” 37 - 42 662.1 3.1 5 1

PZ10 391513086002801 39° 15’ 13” 86° 00’ 28” 14.5 - 19.5 676.3 4.0 5 1

MW11 391918086003301 39° 19’ 18” 86° 00’ 33” 22 - 30 677.7 3.2 8 2

PZ12 391859086003301 39° 18’ 59” 86° 00’ 33” 10.5 - 15.5 659.2 3.9 5 1

W1 -- 39° 20’ 43” 86° 00’ 39” 45 - 55 743.8 1.6 10 2

W2 -- 39° 20’ 22” 86° 00’ 22” 13 - 23 689.8 1.2 10 2

W3 -- 39° 20’ 28” 86° 00’ 21” 10 - 20 699.8 1.3 10 2

W4 -- 39° 20’ 36” 86° 00’ 23” 27 - 37 714.3 1.6 10 2

W5 -- 39° 20’ 42” 86° 00’ 28” 36 - 46 716.9 1.7 10 2

W7 -- 39° 19’ 39” 86° 00’ 10” 5 - 15 653.1 -.5 10 2

W8 -- 39° 18’ 08” 86° 00’ 30” 20 - 30 664.6 -.5 10 2

W13 -- 39° 21’ 11” 86° 02’ 03” 22.3 - 32.3 711.2 -.5 10 2

W14 -- 39° 20’ 49” 86° 01’ 18” 19.3 - 29.3 708.7 -.4 10 2

W15 -- 39° 20’ 44” 86° 01’ 11” -- 716.6 -.6 -- 2

W16 -- 39° 20’ 46” 86° 01’ 06” -- 727.5 -.5 -- 2

WS22 -- -- -- 50 - 70 -- -- 20 5

WS42 -- -- -- 90 -120 -- -- 20 5
number assigned when they were constructed in 1981 or 

1996. Water-supply wells were designated with the prefix 

WS. (By USGS policy and Indiana Code IC 5-14-3-4 [Indiana 

Legislative Services Agency, undated], the location of watersupply wells are identified neither by coordinates nor shown 

on maps.)

The hydrogeologic data collection associated with this 

investigation resulted in the construction and rehabilitation of 

a network of monitoring wells and piezometers coupled with 

surface-water stations, all surveyed to a common datum. The 

combination of new and previously constructed wells and 

piezometers, along with the surface-water stations, provided 

a network for synoptic water-level measurements sufficient 

to describe ground-water-flow directions and ground-water/

surface-water interactions. 

Hydrogeologic-Data Collection

Hydrogeologic information was obtained through a 

review of previous site-specific and regional studies and 

additional data collection at Camp Atterbury. Installation 

of monitoring wells and piezometers included collection of 

sediment cores and geophysical logging. Water levels were 

measured in 20 monitoring wells and 11 piezometers and at 

10 surface-water stations. The data were compiled and used 

to interpret generalized hydrogeologic regions, ground-waterflow directions, and vertical hydraulic gradients.

Boreholes

Drilling for this investigation was completed at 12 locations (fig. 2) during October and November 2002, April 2003, 

and June 2003. At seven locations, a monitoring well and a 

piezometer were installed. At three locations, only piezometers 

were installed. At the remaining two locations, only monitoring wells were installed. All the drilling equipment and tools 

were pressure washed prior to use in each borehole.

A truck-mounted hollow-stem auger drill rig (fig. 4) was 

used to drill nine boreholes (eight were drilled to bedrock). A 

nearly continuous core of sediment was collected with a 3-in.-

A B

Figure 4. Photographs of (A) the truck-mounted hollow-stem auger drill rig used to collect sediment cores and construct monitoring 

wells and (B) an example core collected with this drill rig at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center, near Edinburgh, 

Indiana.

Methods of Study 9
10 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

diameter, 5-ft-long core barrel advanced inside the lead auger. 

Occasionally, sediment or borehole conditions interfered with 

recovery of a continuous core. Sediments that were not cohesive (sand) fell from the bottom of the core barrel when it 

was removed from the borehole or when subsurface-water 

pressure forced loose sediments into the bottom of the core 

barrel. 

A truck-mounted direct-push drill rig (fig. 5) was used 

for drilling boreholes in which piezometers were installed. 

The direct-push drill rig made a 2-in.-diameter borehole and 

retrieved a 1.5-in.-diameter sediment core from a hydraulically advanced 4-ft-long coring tube with an acrylic liner. 

Nearly continuous sediment cores were collected from boreholes that ranged in depth from 13.5 to 42 ft.

Geologic logs were developed from descriptions of 

the sediment cores and were used to select the depth and 

screen length for monitoring wells and piezometers. In most 

cases, monitoring wells were screened in the deepest waterbearing unit and, where paired with a piezometer, the depth 

of the piezometer was selected to provide water-level data 

from a different shallow water-bearing unit or from a different 

depth in the same unit as the monitoring well. Sediment cores 

were examined and described with methods consistent with 

those in Storer (1994). 

Geophysical logs of natural-gamma activity were made 

with a portable digital logger at nine of the drilling locations—

seven monitoring-well locations and two locations where 

water-supply wells had been drilled recently. The logging 

tool was lowered with a cable and winch into the hollow-stem 

augers or well casing. All geophysical logs were run at a rate 

of 10 ft/min. The gamma-tool electric signal was logged digitally every 0.2 ft, and the data value and depth were recorded 

with logging software on a laptop computer. Borehole logs of 

natural gamma activity are used widely for identifying textural 

characteristics of subsurface materials (Keys, 1990). Finegrained sediments that contain abundant clay tend to contain 

naturally occurring radioisotopes that emit gamma radiation. 

The intensity of natural-gamma radiation emitted by subsurFigure 5. Photographs of (A) the direct-push drill rig used to collect sediment cores and construct piezometers at the U.S. Army 

Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center, near Edinburgh, Indiana, and (B) a core collected with this drill rig.

A

B
and piezometers constructed by the USGS in 2002 and 2003 

have a brass tablet set in the concrete pad. Painted steel posts 

and a red-, yellow-, and white-striped tubular marker surround 

monitoring-well and piezometer sites (fig. 7).

Selected characteristics (such as site identification, 

location, land-surface elevation, and screen length) of the 

monitoring wells and piezometers are presented in table 2. 

The screened interval for each well and piezometer is diagrammed in appendix 1 or appendix 2 with the geologic 

description at each monitoring location. Records of the monitoring wells installed by the USGS were filed with the Indiana 

Department of Natural Resources Division of Water. Well and 

water-level data were entered into the USGS National Water 

Information System (NWIS) database.

Monitoring wells and piezometers installed by the USGS 

were developed by pumping until the water appeared to be 

clear. The connection of the water level in the well to water 

in the aquifer in each of the previously installed wells was 

tested by measuring water-level recovery after displacement 

by a plastic slug temporarily inserted in each well. Where the 

connection was found to be poor, water was pumped from the 

well to improve the connection and the connection between 

the aquifer and well screen was re-tested. Eleven previously 

installed monitoring wells were determined to be suitable 

for water-level measurements and were incorporated into the 

monitoring network for this investigation.

Water-Level Measurements

Traditional surveying techniques and a high-resolution, 

survey-grade global positioning system (GPS) were used to 

determine the geographic coordinates, land-surface, and 

measuring-point elevations of the monitoring wells, piezometers, and surface-water stations in the monitoring network 

(table 2). To complete the GPS survey of the monitoring 

network, a temporary GPS base station was established at 

Camp Atterbury. Then, a GPS roving unit was taken to eight 

National Geodetic Survey permanent benchmarks in the surrounding area. With the known location and elevation of the 

benchmarks, the position and elevation of the temporary base 

station and reference points at the monitoring sites were determined. The horizontal accuracy of 0.06 ft northing and 0.42 ft 

easting and vertical accuracy of 0.18 ft was established. The 

GPS-surveying method allowed the entire monitoring network 

to be tied to a common reference datum. Traditional surveying 

with a level and stadia rod was used to determine the relative 

elevations of the measuring points for the paired wells and 

piezometers.

A synoptic measurement of water levels in the monitoring network was completed July 31 and August 1, 2003. An 

electric water-level tape was used to measure depth to water in 

monitoring wells and piezometers and depth to surface water 

from surveyed reference points on bridges and culverts above 

streams. Measurements of water levels were recorded to the 

nearest 0.01 ft and subtracted from the measuring-point elevation to determine water-level elevations.

face layers that contain more clay is larger than the intensity 

of radiation emitted by strata with less clay. 

The geologic and geophysical logs for the boreholes 

provide a description of the thickness and type of geologic 

materials in the Quaternary deposits at Camp Atterbury. The 

geophysical logs were used to confirm and supplement visual 

descriptions of the geology made from the sediment cores. 

Geophysical logs collected inside the augers were affected by 

the change in thickness of the auger wall at joints, which made 

interpretations difficult. In several cases, the geophysical logs 

provided a better indication of the bedrock surface than could 

be obtained from the sediment cores. In general, however, 

the geophysical logs were of limited quality and geological 

interpretations were based primarily on data derived from the 

collected cores. Appendix 1 contains the geologic logs and 

includes a visual description of the sediment cores from the 

on-site geologist and the drill-rig operator. Geologic and wellconstruction data for the USGS-installed monitoring wells and 

piezometers are stored in the USGS National Water Information System (NWIS) database.

Monitoring Wells and Piezometers

Monitoring wells were constructed in 9 boreholes completed with the hollow-stem auger drill rig, and piezometers 

were constructed in 11 boreholes completed with the directpush drill rig. Monitoring wells were constructed to be 

suitable for water-quality sampling and water-level measurements. Piezometers were constructed only for water-level 

measurements. At 8 of the 12 monitoring locations, two 

piezometers or one well and one piezometer were paired so 

that water levels could be measured at two depths in one aquifer or in two distinct aquifers separated by a confining layer. 

Monitoring wells were constructed (fig. 6) with 2-in.-

diameter polyvinyl chloride (PVC) casing and well screen. 

Piezometers were constructed (fig. 6) with 1-in.-diameter 

PVC casing and well screen. Monitoring well and piezometer 

screens ranged from 4 to 10 ft in length, with 0.01-in. slot size. 

A filter pack of clean silica gravel was placed in the borehole 

around the screen of monitoring wells if native sand did not 

collapse into the borehole and fill the annular space. The 

remaining opening around the casing was filled from the top 

of the filter pack to within a few feet of land surface with highsolids bentonite manufactured specifically for environmentalmonitoring applications. For the monitoring wells, powdered 

bentonite and water were placed in a grout mixer and pumped 

through a tremie pipe down the annulus. For the piezometers, 

native sand was allowed to fill in around the screen. Dry 

granular bentonite chips were poured into the annular space 

not filled by collapsed natural materials to within 2 ft of the 

land surface. 

Monitoring wells and piezometers were finished with 

either an above-ground riser that was enclosed with a paintedsteel, lockable, protective cover or with a flush-mount well 

vault. Both enclosures were set in a concrete pad that extended 

from the top of the grout in the borehole to land surface. Wells 

Methods of Study 11
12 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Figure 6. Diagram of monitoring wells and piezometers for investigation of the hydrogeologic framework in 

Quaternary deposits at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center near Edinburgh, Indiana.
Hydrogeologic Mapping and Nomenclature

To map the hydrogeologic framework within the Quaternary deposits at Camp Atterbury, geologic and geophysical 

logs from boreholes and existing well records were combined 

with geomorphic interpretation of topographic maps. The 

geologic and geophysical logs provided a description of the 

subsurface sediments underlying each monitoring location. 

The geomorphic interpretation of the topographic maps identified basic landforms and determined the area to which each 

geologic log could be extrapolated. 

The names applied to the Quaternary deposits discussed 

in this report are based on a nomenclature system for Indiana 

originated by Wayne (1963). In that system, the Quaternary 

deposits are grouped into formations that are divided into 

members (for the till formations) or facies (for the non-till 

formations). Each formation, member, or facies represents a 

group of sediments that shares some common aspects in their 

mode of origin or textural characteristics. Five formations/

facies are most relevant to the study area—the Martinsville 

Formation, Jessup Formation, Trafalgar Formation, Atherton Formation lacustrine facies, and the Atherton Formation 

outwash facies. 

Hydrogeologic Framework

The hydrogeologic framework for Camp Atterbury 

identified five geologic formations/facies within four hydrogeologic regions mapped in the study area. Generalized 

geologic columns were developed to present the vertical 

sequences of the formations/facies in each region. Descriptions of the Quaternary deposits in each region determined the 

potential for water supply related to the presence, thickness, 

and extent of aquifers and aquitards. Ground-water resources 

Figure 7. Photographs of (A) a piezometer with a protective cover and tubular marker and (B) a monitoring well with a 

flush-mount well vault at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center near Edinburgh, Indiana.

A B

Hydrogeologic Framework 13
14 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

are described in terms of infiltration potential, horizontal and 

vertical flow, and ground-water/surface-water interactions.

Quaternary Deposits

In this report, the Martinsville Formation includes all 

materials deposited or reworked in recent time (the past 8,000 

to 11,000 years or the post-glacial period). For this investigation, the Martinsville Formation is assumed to include 

colluvial (slope-wash) deposits and the thin layer of soil that 

caps the Pleistocene deposits and bedrock. To include colluvium and the modern soils in the Martinsville Formation is 

to deviate slightly from Wayne’s (1963) original definition; 

including these, however, greatly simplifies the geologic 

descriptions and does not affect the hydrogeologic interpretation. In the study area, the Martinsville Formation consists 

predominately of fine-grained and poorly sorted materials 

and holds little potential as an aquifer.

The Jessup Formation and the Trafalgar Formation are 

similar in most respects. Both formations are fine-grained till 

(poorly sorted materials deposited directly from glacial ice). 

Tills do not transmit water readily; therefore, these formations 

represent confining layers or aquitards. One characteristic that 

distinguishes these two formations is age—the older Jessup 

Formation is pre-Wisconsinan and the younger Trafalgar 

Formation is Wisconsinan. Some water-deposited and waterbearing sand and gravel lenses either underlie or are interbedded within the tills of the Jessup and Trafalgar Formations. 

Most of these lenses are thin, are not of significant lateral 

extent, and do not constitute important aquifers at Camp 

Atterbury.

The Atherton Formation represents sediments that were 

deposited extraglacially (not in contact with glacial ice). The 

Atherton Formation lacustrine facies are very well-sorted 

silts and clays deposited in lake environments. Within the 

hydrogeologic framework, the lacustrine facies functions 

as a confining layer or aquitard because it can be of great 

thickness and has a uniform fine-grained texture. The Atherton Formation outwash facies contains sand and gravel 

deposits transported and deposited by flowing water. These 

deposits tend to be coarse grained, are moderately to well 

sorted, and can store and transmit substantial quantities of 

ground water. Within the hydrogeologic framework, the sands 

and gravels of the outwash facies constitute the primary aquifers of the study area.

Hydrogeologic Regions

The study area was mapped into four hydrogeologic 

regions (fig. 8), each with a distinct set of Quaternary deposits. 

The Quaternary deposits underlying each region are illustrated 

in the corresponding generalized geologic columns in figure 9. 

Each of the hydrogeologic regions can be characterized by one

to four generalized geologic columns; however, natural variation and some deviation from the simplified geology presented 

in these columns should be expected.

Bedrock Region

The Bedrock Region is mapped as the upland area west 

of Mt. Moriah Road, west and south of Saddle Creek and 

Duck Pond, and southwest of Puff Lake (fig. 8). A generalized 

geologic column (fig. 9, column B) shows that this region is 

characterized by Martinsville Formation resting directly on 

bedrock. In this region, the Martinsville Formation is expected 

to range from 0 to 15 ft in thickness; bedrock is Late Devonian 

and Mississippian shales and siltstones. Potential groundwater yields are limited because the Quaternary deposits are 

thin and tend to be fine grained.

Jessup Till Region

The Jessup Till Region is mapped as the uplands on either 

side of the valleys of Lick Creek and Muddy Branch, the 

upland area south of Nineveh Creek, and an isolated upland 

north of Nineveh Creek and west of Mauxferry Road (fig. 8). 

Two generalized geologic columns (fig. 9, columns J1 and J2) 

show that the Jessup Formation till is the dominant Quaternary 

deposit, with some thin deposits of the Atherton Formation 

lacustrine and outwash facies. The Quaternary deposits in this 

region typically range from 30 to 90 ft in thickness. Within 

this region, the Atherton Formation outwash facies holds the 

best potential to provide a water supply, but it tends to be thin 

and ground-water yields will be moderate. 

Trafalgar Till Region

The Trafalgar Till Region is mapped as the area bordering and north of County Line Road and east of Nineveh 

Creek and five isolated upland areas in the northwest quarter 

of Camp Atterbury (fig. 8). This region roughly defines the 

southward-most advance of Wisconsinan glaciers in the study 

area. Two generalized geologic columns (fig. 9, columns T1 

and T2) show that this region typically is underlain by till of 

the Trafalgar and Jessup Formations. Of these two till units, 

Trafalgar Formation till was nearest the land surface and 

typically ranged from 10 to 30 ft in thickness (well MW2 and 

well MW5, appendix 1). Where it was recognized, the till of 

the Jessup Formation was below the Trafalgar Formation and 

ranged from 25 to 50 ft in thickness. Within, separating, and 

beneath these till units can be found sediments of the Atherton 

Formation. The sediments of the Atherton Formation outwash facies have the best potential to support a water-supply 

well. Generally, the outwash sediments in this region are thin, 

except in the area bordering and north of County Line Road 

where the thickness tends to increase (40 ft at well W1 and 

42 ft at well W5, appendix 2). 
Infiltration Areas

Precipitation falling on the land surface can follow one 

of several potential pathways. It can be returned to the atmosphere through evapotranspiration (the combined processes 

of evaporation from the land surface and transpiration from 

plants); it can flow over the land surface as runoff and eventually become incorporated in surface-water bodies; or it can 

infiltrate through soils and percolate into underlying geologic 

materials to become part of the ground-water system. This 

final pathway of infiltration and percolation as ground water 

describes the process of recharge to aquifers. 

Topography and soil texture are two factors that influence infiltration and the potential for recharge to an 

underlying aquifer. In areas of low topographic relief, precipitation tends to puddle on the land surface, allowing the 

time required for infiltration. In areas of high topographic 

relief, precipitation quickly is translated into runoff and 

infiltration is reduced. Infiltration rates tend to be greatest in 

areas with coarse-grained soils (soils developed in sand- and 

gravel-rich materials). In areas with fine-grained soils (soils 

developed in silt- and clay-rich materials), infiltration—and 

therefore recharge—tends to be limited. Therefore, with other 

factors being equal, infiltration is most likely in an area with 

low topographic relief and coarse-grained soils.

In Camp Atterbury, the combined Atherton Outwash 

Region and the Trafalgar Till Region have the greatest 

potential as infiltration areas (fig. 10). The Atherton Outwash 

Region exhibits low topographic relief and sandy soils, the 

characteristics discussed above that promote infiltration. 

Although the Trafalgar Till Region lacks sandy soils, its topographic relief is low enough to allow puddling of precipitation 

and consequent infiltration. 

Horizontal Flow

Horizontal ground-water flow directions can be interpreted from a water-level-contour map (fig. 11). Water-level 

elevations (table 3) measured July 31 to August 1, 2003, in 

wells and piezometers were plotted on a map, and contour 

lines were drawn to connect areas of equal water-level elevations. The general directions of ground-water flow (shown by 

arrows) are perpendicular to the contour lines.

From the water-level-elevation data collected, the 

regional direction of horizontal ground-water flow in the 

Camp Atterbury study area is east toward the valley of the 

Driftwood River (fig. 1). Within the valleys of the study area, 

local horizontal ground-water flow tends to be away from 

the areas mapped as the Bedrock, Jessup Till, and Trafalgar 

Till Regions and toward the Atherton Outwash Region. In the 

valleys of Lick Creek and Muddy Branch, ground-water flow 

follows the slope of the land surface from the ridge tops into 

the valley bottoms and then east toward the Driftwood River. 

In the northern half of the study area, horizontal ground-water 

flow generally is from the north and west toward the sand 

Atherton Outwash Region

The Atherton Outwash Region is mapped as the lowland 

areas associated with the major valleys of the study area, 

including the valley bottoms and terraces associated with Lick, 

Nineveh, Prince, Mud, and Saddle Creeks and Muddy Branch 

(fig. 8). Within the study area, this region has the greatest 

thickness of Atherton Formation outwash facies sands and 

gravels, which are the primary aquifers of the study area. 

Four generalized geologic columns (fig. 9, columns 

A1–A4) show that the depth to bedrock and the thickness of 

the outwash facies vary greatly. In the western (well MW3, 

appendix 1) and southern part of the region and in the valleys 

of Muddy Branch (well MW7, appendix 1) and Lick Creek 

(well MW9, appendix 1), the depth to bedrock is approximately 45 to 60 ft and the sands and gravels range from 4 to 

25 ft in thickness. An example of the aquifer in the valley of 

Lick Creek of this region is at monitoring location 9 where 

sand and gravel are present between 39.5 to 64.5 ft below land 

surface. In the northern part of the region (wells MW1 and 

MW4, appendix 1), depth to bedrock is 105.5 to 126 ft and 

sands and gravels exceed 25 ft in thickness. In the eastern part 

of the region (well MW11 and piezometer PZ8A), the depth to 

bedrock is 44 to 96 ft; approaching the valley of the Driftwood 

River (fig. 1), the coarse-grained outwash sediments can be in 

excess of 30 ft in thickness.

In this region, more than one potential aquifer may be 

present in a vertical sequence separated by aquitards. For 

example, at monitoring location 1 (well MW1, appendix 1), 

potential aquifers include sand from 8 to 20.5 ft; sand and 

gravel from 24.5 to 52 ft; sand and gravel from 59 to 61 ft; 

and sand from 83.5 ft to an unknown lower contact.

Within the Atherton Outwash Region, the Atherton 

Formation lacustrine facies also exhibits its greatest thickness. 

The silts and clays of this formation were deposited as lake 

sediments when former tributaries to the ancestral Driftwood 

River were blocked by meltwater and outwash. The best 

examples are in the valleys of Muddy Branch and Lick Creek 

(wells MW7 and MW9, appendix 1) where lacustrine deposits 

can exceed 20 ft in thickness.

Ground-Water Flow

Recognizing the areas with greatest infiltration potential and the directions of ground-water flow is important for 

the protection and management of water resources. In this 

investigation, the topography and soil characteristics of the 

study area served as guides to mapping the areas with greatest 

infiltration potential. Synoptic measurements of ground-water 

levels were used to interpret horizontal ground-water-flow 

directions on a water-level-contour map. Calculated vertical 

hydraulic gradients between paired wells were used to interpret potential vertical ground-water-flow directions.

Ground-Water Flow 15
16 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Figure 8. Hydrogeologic regions in the study area at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center near 

Edinburgh, Indiana.
Figure 9. Gene raining Center near 

Edinburgh, Indiana.

B T1 T2 J1 J2 A1 A2

GEOLOGIC COLUMN EXPLANATION 

These columns show the geologic materials underlyingCamp Atterbury. Each column is associated with a hydrogeologic region. For the three regions where multiple columns are shown, the multiple columns are used to illustrate the degree of variability that is expected in the sub-surface materials.

Martinsville Formation— Recently deposited colluvial (slope-wash) material and  modern soils Bedrock— Late Devonian and Mississippian shales and siltstones 

Trafalgar Formation— Wisconsinan-age glacial deposits. Mostly till with some thin layers  of statified drift 

Jessup Formation— Pre-Wisconsinan-age glacial deposits.  Mostly till with some thin layers of  statified drift

Atherton Formationlacustrine facies—

 Predominately silt and(or) clay

Atherton Formationoutwash facies—

 Sand and gravel deposits that represent the primary aquifer materials of the study area

0

ACE FEET BELOW LAND SURF 2550

75

100

Generalized Geologic Columns for the Hydrogeologic Regions of Camp Atterbury

A3 A4

Bedrock Jessup Till Trafalgar Till Atherton Outwash

Region Region Region Region

Ground-Water Flow 17
Figure 10. Infiltration areas determined by low topographic relief and(or) coarse-grained soil texture in the 

hydrogeologic-framework study area at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center near Edinburgh, 

Indiana.

18 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003
Figure 11. Ground-water elevations at selected monitoring locations, generalized ground-water elevation contours, 

and generalized directions of horizontal ground-water flow on July 31 and August 1, 2003, in the hydrogeologicframework study area at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center near Edinburgh, Indiana.

Ground-Water Flow 19
20 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

USGS 

site name Location

Measuringpoint 

elevationa

(ft)

Screenmidpoint

elevation 

(ft)

Water- level 

elevation

(ft)

MW1 East of Lincoln Rd, south of Hospital Rd 732.0 684.3 722.1

PZ1 East of Lincoln Rd, south of Hospital Rd 735.8 714.1 721.9

MW2 North of Wilder Rd, west of Tipton Trail 736.0 708.6 721.5

PZ2 North of Wilder Rd, west of Tipton Trail 732.3 710.2 721.5

MW3 East of Mt. Moriah Rd, west of Lincoln Rd 695.0 672.4 688.4

PZ3 East of Mt. Moriah Rd, west of Lincoln Rd 692.8 672.8 688.6

MW4 South of Rangeline Rd, west of Schoolhouse Rd 682.7 643.5 672.1

PZ4 South of Rangeline Rd, west of Schoolhouse Rd 683.3 661.8 668.6

MW5 South of County Line Rd, east of Eggleston St 693.0 663.4 685.4

PZ5 South of County Line Rd, east of Eggleston St 693.0 670.1 685.5

MW6b East of Mauxferry Rd, south of Nineveh Creek 659.4 625.1 664.1

PZ6 East of Mauxferry Rd, south of Nineveh Creek 661.0 646.2 652.2

MW7 East of Mauxferry Rd, south of Muddy Branch 672.1 645.8 666.0

PZ8A West of Wallace Rd, north of Muddy Branch 651.5 621.1 640.3

PZ8B West of Wallace Rd, north of Muddy Branch 651.2 633.4 642.3

MW9b East of Mauxferry Rd, south of Lick Creek 665.8 605.4 665.8

PZ9b East of Mauxferry Rd, south of Lick Creek 665.2 622.6 665.6

PZ10 West of Reservation Boundary Rd, at Lowell Rd 680.3 659.3 671.7

MW11 East of Mauxferry Rd, south of Pleasant Run 680.9 651.7 666.0

PZ12 East of Mauxferry Rd, north of Nineveh Creek 663.1 646.2 653.1

W1 West of Mauxferry Rd, south of County Line Rd 745.4 693.8 693.5

W2 North of Hendricks Ford Rd, east of Mauxferry Rd 691.0 671.8 684.2

W3 North of Hendricks Ford Rd, east of Mauxferry Rd 701.1 684.8 687.0

W4 North of Hendricks Ford Rd, east of Mauxferry Rd 715.9 682.3 688.8

W5 South of County Line Rd, east of Mauxferry Rd 718.6 675.9 691.4

W7 South of Pleasant Run, east of Mauxferry Rd 652.6 643.1 648.9

W8b East of Mauxferry Rd, north of Muddy Branch 664.1 639.6 671.0

W13 North of Evans Rd, west of Eggleston St 710.7 683.9 708.4

W14 West of Mauxferry Rd, north of County Line Rd 708.3 684.4 707.7

W15 South of County Line Rd, west of Mauxferry Rd 716.0 -- 707.2

W16 East of Mauxferry Rd, north of County Line Rd 727.0 -- 708.3

a

For all wells and piezometers, the measuring point was a reference mark on the top of the well and piezometer casing.

b

Flowing well.

Table 3. Measuring-point elevation, screen-midpoint elevation, and water-level elevation measured July 31 

to August 1, 2003, in monitoring wells and piezometers at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training 

Center near Edinburgh, Indiana.

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, feet; MW, monitoring well; Rd, Road; PZ, piezometer; St, Street; W, previously installed well; 

--, no data]
and gravel of the Atherton Outwash Region in the valley of 

Nineveh Creek and then east toward the valley of the Driftwood River.

Precipitation data for Columbus, Indiana (6 mi southeast 

of Camp Atterbury), reveals that July 2003 was wetter than 

normal. For 1971 through 2000, the July precipitation normal 

was 4.02 in. (National Climatic Data Center, 2002). In July 

2003, the Columbus, Indiana, climatic-data-collection site 

received 8.4 in. (National Climatic Data Center, undated), 

more the twice the monthly normal. 

The horizontal-flow directions described above are 

derived from only one set of water-level measurements. 

Additional water-level measurements could establish the 

consistency of the relations demonstrated with the July and 

August 2003 water levels. The directions of ground-water flow 

may vary seasonally or in years with below- or above-nomal 

precipitation.

Vertical Flow

The potential for vertical ground-water flow was interpreted by calculating vertical hydraulic gradients between 

pairs of nested wells/piezometers. In this case, vertical 

hydraulic gradient is the difference in water-level elevation, 

in feet, for every foot of elevation difference in the midpoints 

of the screens of two nested wells (two or more wells drilled 

in proximity to each other and screened at different depths). 

A measured gradient implies the potential for flow, but it does 

not necessarily indicate actual flow. Large-magnitude gradients may develop where effective aquitards (confining layers) 

prevent ground-water movement between water-bearing 

layers.

Vertical hydraulic gradients were calculated for eight 

well pairs (table 4) from one set of water-level measurements 

collected July 31 to August 1, 2003. For well pairs MW1–PZ1, 

MW2–PZ2, MW5–PZ5, and MW9–PZ9, the magnitude of the 

calculated gradients were small (0.0 to 0.015 ft/ft), indicating 

an absence of aquitards separating the midpoint of the well 

screens in these well pairs. 

Well pairs PZ8A–PZ8B and MW3–PZ3 showed downward gradients of 0.16 ft/ft and 0.5 ft/ft, respectively. Well 

pairs MW4–PZ4 and MW6–PZ6 showed upward gradients, 

indicating a potential for ground water to flow toward the land 

surface under hydrostatic pressure. Two field observations 

also indicate an upward gradient in the vicinity of well MW6: 

(1) an area of wetland west of Mauxferry Road and north of 

piezometer PZ12 appears to be sustained by ground-water 

discharge, and (2) well MW6 is a flowing well (this well, 

when observed during periodic field visits, consistently had 

water levels several feet above the land surface). 

Although the vertical gradient calculated for well pair 

MW9–PZ9 was slight, the fact that these wells flow indicates 

an upwardly directed gradient (and flow) in the vicinity of this 

monitoring site. Monitoring well W8 is a flowing well, indicating an upwardly directed gradient at that location.

Table 4. Vertical hydraulic gradients on July 31 and 

August 1, 2003, between selected pairs of monitoring 

wells/piezometers at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint 

Maneuver Training Center near Edinburgh, Indiana.

[ft/ft, foot per foot; MW, monitoring well; PZ, piezometer]

Well 

paira

Vertical 

gradientb

(ft/ft)

Direction of 

potential 

vertical flow

MW1–PZ1 0.007 Up.

MW2–PZ2 .0 (No gradient.)

MW3–PZ3 -.5 Down.

MW4–PZ4 .19 Up.

MW5–PZ5 -.015 Down.

MW6–PZ6 .56 Up.

PZ8A–PZ8B -.16 Down.

MW9–PZ9 .012 Up.

a

Locations of well pairs are shown on figure 2.

b

Vertical hydraulic gradient was calculated by dividing 

the difference in ground-water elevations between the two 

wells by the difference in the elevations of the midpoint of 

the screens.

Ground-Water/Surface-Water Interaction

The monitoring network in the hydrogeologic-framework 

study area includes locations where ground-water and surfacewater elevations (table 5) were measured. These elevations, 

along with calculated vertical hydraulic gradients, can be 

used to evaluate the potential for ground-water/surface-water 

interactions. Such interactions include ground-water discharge 

from the aquifer through the streambed into the stream, which 

is important for providing base flow to the stream during 

periods without precipitation. One area likely to have groundwater discharge to surface water is the valley of Nineveh 

Creek. This is indicated by the presence of a flowing well 

(MW6), upwardly directed vertical hydraulic gradients at well 

pairs MW4–PZ4 and MW6–PZ6, and ground-water elevations 

that were higher than surface-water elevations (for example, 

668.6 ft at piezometer PZ4 and 667.6 ft at surface-watermonitoring site E5; 652.2 ft at piezometer PZ6 and 648.6 ft at 

surface-water-monitoring site A5). Another area likely to have 

ground-water discharge to surface water is the valley of Lick 

Creek, indicated by the presence of flowing wells (MW9 

and PZ9) and ground-water elevations that were higher than 

surface-water elevations (for example, 665.6 ft at piezometer 

PZ9 and 653.4 ft at surface-water-monitoring site B5). 

During the investigation of surface-water quality at 

Camp Atterbury in 2000 (Risch, 2004), base flow sustained 

by ground-water discharge was documented in Nineveh Creek 

and Lick Creek in periods of low flow and no precipitation. 

Ground-Water Flow 21
22 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Under the same conditions, some reaches of Saddle Creek and 

Prince Creek in the western part of the study area were dry or 

held only isolated pools, indicating that not all stream reaches 

are sustained by ground-water discharge throughout the year.

Summary and Conclusions

A hydrogeologic framework was developed for unconsolidated Quaternary deposits at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint 

Maneuver Training Center (Camp Atterbury) near Edinburgh, 

Indiana. The framework describes the potential for the occurrence of ground water on the basis of physiography and the 

distribution of geologic materials within the study area. The 

hydrogeologic framework, coupled with information about 

surface-water hydrology, land-surface topography, and waterlevel measurements, enables estimates of the directions of 

horizontal and vertical ground-water flow. 

Four geologic units—the Jessup, Trafalgar, Atherton, and 

Martinsville Formations—were identified, and their distribution was mapped as four hydrogeologic regions. The Jessup 

and Trafalgar Formations are fine-grained, poorly sorted tills. 

At least two facies of the Atherton Formation, the lacustrine 

and outwash facies, are in the study area. The Martinsville 

Formation includes materials deposited or reworked since 

the glacial period. With the exception of the Atherton Formation outwash facies, the Quaternary deposits primarily are 

fine-grained, silt- and clay-rich sediments that function as 

confining layers or aquitards. The Atherton Formation outwash facies includes sand and gravel deposits that constitute 

the primary aquifers in the study area. The four hydrogeologic 

regions mapped in this investigation are designated as the 

Bedrock, Jessup Till, Trafalgar Till, and Atherton Outwash 

Regions. Each region represents an area with a distinctive 

physiographic expression and vertical sequence of Quaternary 

deposits.

The Bedrock Region in the western and southwestern 

part of the study area commonly is underlain by 0 to 15 ft of 

Martinsville Formation resting directly on bedrock. Potential 

ground-water yields are limited because the Quaternary deposits are thin and tend to be fine grained. The Jessup Till Region 

in the southeastern part of the study area includes the uplands 

on either side of the stream valleys. Sediments commonly 

range from 30 to 90 ft in thickness. This region includes clayrich till of the Jessup Formation and sand and gravel deposits of the Atherton Formation outwash facies; the Atherton 

Formation outwash facies tends to be thin, and ground-water 

yields will be moderate. The Trafalgar Till Region in the north 

and northwest-central part of the study area commonly is 

underlain by 10 to 30 ft of Trafalgar till or Trafalgar till over 

25 to 50 ft of Jessup till. Within, separating, and beneath these 

tills are deposits of the Atherton Formation outwash facies—

the sand and gravel deposits with the best potential to support 

a water-supply well. Generally, the outwash facies in this 

region are thin sand and gravel lenses, except in a few locations that are in excess of 30 ft thick. The Atherton Outwash 

Region is the lowland area associated with the major valleys in 

all but the far southwestern part of the study area. This region 

has the greatest thickness of outwash facies sands and gravels 

(often in excess of 20 ft), which are the primary aquifers at 

Camp Atterbury. Within the Atherton Outwash Region, the 

Atherton Formation lacustrine facies also exhibits its greatest 

thickness, at some locations exceeding 20 ft in thickness.

Table 5. Surface-water-level elevations and ground-water-level elevations measured at adjacent sites on July 31 and August 1, 2003, 

at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center near Edinburgh, Indiana.

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; ft, foot; --, no data]

USGS 

surface-watermonitoring site

USGS 

site identification 

Surface-water-level 

elevation 

(ft)

Adjacent ground-waterlevel-monitoring site

Ground-water-level 

elevation 

(ft)

B1 392012086042901 703.2 -- --

E3 391813086035601 671.8 -- --

E7 392046086013101 685.8 -- --

A4 391937086003401 657.5 -- --

B2 392142086035301 707.5 -- --

E5 391949086020401 667.6 PZ4 668.6

A5 391857086003401 648.6 PZ6 652.2

A10 391804086003201 663.1 -- --

A11 391814085592401 642.8 -- --

B5 391652086003001 653.4 PZ9 665.6
At Camp Atterbury, the combined Atherton Outwash 

Region and the Trafalgar Till Region have the greatest potential as infiltration areas because of low topographic relief 

and(or) sandy soils. The Atherton Outwash Region exhibits 

low topographic relief and sandy soils. Although the Trafalgar Till Region lacks sandy soils, its topographic relief is low 

enough to allow for infiltration.

From water-level-elevation data, horizontal ground-water 

flow was determined generally to be toward the Atherton 

Outwash Region and the valley of the Driftwood River to the 

east. Within the valleys of the study area, local horizontal 

ground-water flow tends to be away from the areas mapped 

as the Bedrock, Jessup Till, and Trafalgar Till Regions and 

toward the Atherton Outwash Region. In the northern half of 

the study area, horizontal ground-water flow generally is from 

the north and west and toward the valley of Nineveh Creek and 

the Driftwood River to the east.

Vertical hydraulic gradients were documented for eight 

nested well pairs. At four sites, calculated gradients were 

small, indicating an absence of aquitards separating the well 

screens. At two sites, downward gradients were calculated. 

At the remaining two sites, upwardly directed gradients have 

resulted in flowing wells. 

Ground-water discharge to surface water is likely in some 

eastern reaches of the valleys of Nineveh and Lick Creeks. 

In the valley of Nineveh Creek, potential for ground-water 

discharge is indicated by the presence of a flowing well, 

upwardly directed vertical hydraulic gradients, and groundwater heads that were higher than surface-water elevations. In 

the valley of Lick Creek, ground-water discharge is indicated 

by the presence of flowing wells and ground-water heads that 

were higher than surface-water elevations. 

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of 

Lieutenant Colonel Richard Jones, Supervisory Environmental 

Protection Specialist with the Indiana Army National Guard, 

who provided technical guidance for design and implementation of the investigation described in this report. The authors 

and USGS field personnel greatly appreciate the assistance 

of Master Sergeant Russell Reichart, Camp Atterbury Range 

Control Officer, who coordinated scheduling and safety for 

the drilling and hydrogeologic-data-collection activities. The 

USGS drill-rig operators, Patrick Mills and Stephen Grant, 

along with the licensed well drillers of the USGS, Lee Watson 

and Mark Hopkins, were essential to the successful completion of drilling and well construction, while providing considerable technical input. Thanks also are extended to Walter 

Anderson, Camp Atterbury Environmental Protection Coordinator and Nancy McWhorter, Camp Atterbury Geographic 

Information Specialist, who helped with logistical arrangements and access to maps and historical records.

References Cited

Defense Mapping Agency, 1985, Installation map of Indiana Atterbury Reserve Forces Training Area, ed. 1-DMA, 

series V751S: Washington, D.C., Defense Mapping Agency 

Hydrographic/Topographic Center, scale 1:50,000.

Department of Defense Earth Science Program, 2006, USGS–

DOD publications, accessed February 7, 2006, at http://

dodesp.er.usgs.gov/publications.html

Gray, H.H., 2000, Physiographic divisions of Indiana: Indiana 

University, Indiana Geological Survey Special Report 61, 

15 p.

Indiana Business Research Center, 2000, Bartholomew County 

IN Depth Profile: STATS Indiana; Indiana University Kelley 

School of Business, accessed November 2, 2001, at http://

www.stats.indiana.edu/profiles/pr18081.html

Indiana Business Research Center, 2000, Johnson County IN 

Depth Profile: STATS Indiana; Indiana University Kelley 

School of Business, accessed November 2, 2001, at http://

www.stats.indiana.edu.profiles/pr18081.html

Indiana Department of Natural Resources, 2003, Water well 

record database: Division of Water, accessed April 1, 2003, 

at http://www.in.gov/dnr/water/groun_water/well_database/.

Indiana Legislative Services Agency, undated, Indiana Code 

IC 5-14-3-4: accessed March 23, 2006, at http://

www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title5/ar14/ch3.html

Indiana National Guard, 1995, Atterbury News: Edinburgh, 

Ind., Indiana National Guard, v. 1, no. 1, 19 p.

Keys, W.S., 1990, Borehole geophysics applied to groundwater investigations: Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations of the United States Geological Survey, book 2, 

chap. E2, p. 66.

Midwestern Regional Climate Center, 2004, Historical climate 

summaries online date: accessed February 10, 2004, at 

http://mcc.sws.uiuc.edu/html/MWclimate_data_summaries.

htm

Military Department of Indiana, 1997, Final site investigation 

report, Atterbury Reserve Forces Training Area, Edinburgh, 

Indiana, v. 1: Novi, Mich: Montgomery Watson, File 

no. 4162.0200, 75 p. 

National Climatic Data Center, undated, Hourly precipitation data, Indiana, July 2003: accessed March 30, 2006, at 

http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/orders/0E338C94-930ED078-8FA2-35F78AB08C66.PDF

National Climatic Data Center, 2002, Monthly station normals of temperature, precipitation, and heating and cooling 

degree days 1971–2000: accessed March 30, 2006, at http://

www5.ncdc.noaa.gov/climatenormals/clim81/INnorm.pdf

Acknowledgments 23
Noble, R.A., Wingard, Jr., R.C., and Ziegler, T.R., 1990, Soil 

survey of Brown County and part of Bartholomew County, 

Indiana: U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation 

Service, 135 p.

Risch, M.R., 2004, Chemical and biological quality of surface 

water at the U.S. Army Atterbury Reserve Forces Training 

Area near Edinburgh, Indiana, September 2000 through July 

2001: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4149, 87 p.

Robinson, B.A., 2004, An inventory of aquatic macroinvertebrates and calculation of selected biotic indices for 

the U.S. Army Atterbury Reserve Forces Training Area 

near Edinburgh, Indiana, September 2000–August 2002: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 

2004-5010, 19 p.

Schneider, A.F., and Gray, H.H., 1966, Geology of the Upper 

East Fork Drainage Basin, Indiana: Department of Natural 

Resources, Geological Survey, Special Report 3, 55 p.

Storer, R.A., dr. ed. services, 1994, ASTM standards on environmental sampling: Scranton, Penn.: American Society for 

Testing and Materials, 975 p.

Sturm, R.H., 1979, Soil Survey of Johnson County, Indiana: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, 

76 p.

U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency, 1981, Solid waste 

management study no. 38-26-0146-81, Atterbury Reserve 

Forces Training Area, Edinburgh, Indiana: Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., 50 p.

U.S. Department of Defense, 2006, Defense Environmental 

Programs annual report to Congress Fiscal Year 2005 : 

accessed June 1, 2006, at https://www.denix.osd.mil/denix/

Public/News/OSD/DEP2005/deparc2005.html

Wayne, W.J., 1963, Pleistocene formations in Indiana: Indiana 

Department of Conservation, Geological Survey, Bulletin 

No. 25, 85 p.

24 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003
Appendixes 1–2
26 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Appendix 1. Geologic logs and diagrams for monitoring wells and 

piezometers constructed by the U.S. Geological Survey for the hydrogeologicframework investigation at the U.S. Army Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training 

Center near Edinburgh, Indiana, 2002–2003

Monitoring Site 1

Located at north end of Lincoln Rd, south of Hospital Rd, inside gate E12, 30 feet east of Lincoln Rd, 35 feet south of gate E12, 

at edge of grassed area. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 7.5-min topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T11N, R4E, Section 27, 

NW1/4, SE1/4, SE1/4. Water level [ ] measured 7/31/2003. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land 

surface (dashed where approximate). Shaded gray bar identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as 

aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description

20.5

8

0

CL

SP

GW

SC

Till 

Dark brown, moist, firm, sandy, silty clay, with thin gravel stringers

Some fine gravel in the sand (10 to 12 feet)

Light brown, moist, loose, well-sorted fine to medium sand

Till Gray, moist, firm, sandy, silty clay with some gravel

Glacio-fluvial (sand)

Very moist, moderately sorted gravel and sand (19 to 20.5 feet)

126

24.5

52

Glacio-fluvial (sand and gravel) 

Gray, wet, loose, very poorly sorted sand and gravel

GW

Till Dark gray with few green mottles, moist, very stiff, sandy,

silty clay with gravel

59

61

CL

Glacio-fluvial (sand and gravel) Gray, wet, loose, poorly sorted,

GW sand and gravel

82

Till Dark gray, moist, very stiff, sandy, silty clay with gravel

(A paleosol seen from 78 to 82 feet, brown with gastropods common)

CL

Lacustrine silt Gray, very moist, laminated lake silt (with some very

fine varves) 83.5

ML

Beach sand Gray, wet, very well-sorted sand

? unknown contact

SP

Till Gray, dry, hard sandy, silty clay with gravel

Total drill depth 126 feet

MW1

42

46

PZ1

22.5

12.5

Screened

interval

CL

Aquifer

potential

4 Fill
Geologic Logs and Diagrams 27

Monitoring Site 2

Located north side of Wilder Rd (gravel extension), south of Prince Ck, west of metal bridge over Prince Ck on 

Wilder Rd, west of gravel road across Prince Ck, 30 feet inside woods. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 7.5-min 

topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T10N, R4E, Section 3, NW1/4, NE1/4, SW1/4. Water level [ ] measured 

7/31/2003. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface. Shaded gray bar 

identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description

0

61.5

GW

CL

Till Gray, moist, firm, sandy, silty clay with pebbles

Lacustrine clay Medium gray, moist, stiff to very firm, 

very well-sorted clay

ML

Total drill depth 61.5 feet

MW2

22

26

PZ2

25

20

Screened

interval

CL

Aquifer

potential

Bedrock Light gray, soft fissile shale

57.5

48

27

SP

SW

SP 17.5 Glacio-fluvial (alternating bands of sand and gravelly sand) 

Gray, wet, dense, well-sorted sand (17.5 to 19.5 feet)

4.5

Loess Dark brown to orange brown, abundant mottling, slightly

moist to moist, firm, clayey silt

11.5

Till Red brown with gray mottling below 8 feet, sandy, silty clay 

with gravel CL

Till Dark gray, moist, firm, sandy, silty clay with abundant pebbles

Dark gray, wet, poorly sorted gravelly sand (19.5 to 20 feet)

Gray, very moist, poorly sorted, fine to coarse sand (20 to 24 feet)

Gray, wet, fine to very fine well-sorted sand (24 to 27 feet)

CL

Shale

Gray, very moist, firm, fine sand (28 to 28.5 feet)

Gray, moist, laminated lake clay (30.5 to 31.5 feet)

Gray, moist, well-sorted medium to fine sand (32 to 32.5 feet)
28 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Monitoring Site 3

East of Mt Moriah Rd, north of Saddle Ck, south and west of Mud Ck, east of first north-south section of 

Mt Moriah Rd after Mud Ck bridge, in weed field 25 feet from road. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 7.5-min 

topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T10N, R4E, Section 15, SW1/4, NW1/4, SE1/4. Water level [ ] measured 

7/31/2003. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface. Shaded gray bar 

identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description

0

ML

SW

Loess and modern alluvium Light brown with abundant orange,

gray, and dark brown mottling; moist, firm, sandy silt with few rootlets

52

CL

Glacio-fluvial (sand and gravel) Light to medium brown, moist, 

loose, poorly sorted gravelly sand with a few clay-rich bands

Till Brown, moist, firm, sandy, silty clay with pebbles

grades to medium gray (22 to 23 feet)

CL

Lacustrine silt Light gray with abundant mottling, very well-sorted

clayey silt

Interbedded till and lacustrine deposits

Blue, moist, firm, clay and silty clay (lake deposits)

Dark gray silty, sandy clay with fine gravel (till)

Total drill depth 52 feet

18

22

PZ3

23

18

Screened

interval

CL

Aquifer

potential

7.5

16.5

ML

20.5

23

Till Gray, moist, very stiff, sandy, silty clay with gravel

Wood fragments (27.5 to 35 feet)

35

Some woody debris and thin gravel lenses (44 to 48 feet)

Shale Bedrock Blue/gray weathered shale 48

MW3
Geologic Logs and Diagrams 29

Monitoring Site 4

South of Rangeline Rd, west of Nineveh Ck, edge of grassed area south of guardrail and 35 feet south of 

centerline of Rangeline Rd, by Range 9. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 7.5-min topographic map, Nineveh 

quadrangle, T10N, R4E, Section 12, NW1/4, NW1/4, NE1/4. Water level [ ] measured 7/31/2003. Unit contacts 

and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). Shaded gray bar

identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description

0

105.5

24

Glacio-fluvial (alternating gravelly sand and organic/clayey sand)

Light brown to gray, slightly moist, loose, fine sand with wood 

fragments (10 to 14.5 feet)

Gray, wet, loose, very poorly sorted, gravelly sand (14.5 to 17.5 feet)

Till Gray, moist, stiff, sandy, silty clay with angular gravel

Total drill depth 111.5 feet

MW4

32

40

PZ4

22.5

12.5

Screened

interval Aquifer

potential

10

Loess and modern alluvium Dark brown, slightly moist, sandy silt 

with rootlets (A horizon and B horizon)

Light brown, slightly moist, loose, sandy silt (3.5 to 10 feet)

17.5

Till Dark gray, moist, stiff, sandy silty clay with gravel

CL

SP

20

ML

Glacio-fluvial (sand and gravelly sand) Dark gray, moist, loose,

fine sand (20 feet) grading to poorly sorted, gravelly sand (24 feet)

SP

?

Unknown 28.5

31.5 CL

Glacio-fluvial (sand) Gray, wet, medium to very fine sand SP

?

(Significant sand heave into augers, no coring below 31.5 feet)

Shale
30 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Monitoring Site 5

South of County Line Rd, 125 feet west of center of gravel drive to Rapelling Tower (Bldg 40164), east of unnamed

tributary of Nineveh Ck, west of Bldg 40164, west of metal shed, inside weed field. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 

7.5-min topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T10N, R5E, Section 6, NW1/4, NW1/4, NW1/4. Water level [ ] 

measured 7/31/2003. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where 

approximate). Shaded gray bar identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers.

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description 0

Glacio-fluvial (gravel and sand) Dark brown, wet, loose,

slightly sorted, fine gravel to medium sand (fining downward)

85?

GW

Till Light brown/orange, slightly moist, firm, sandy, silty clay with 

pebbles

CL

CL

Total drill depth 87 feet

MW5

24

28

PZ5

21.5

16.5

Screened

Aquifer interval

potential

Shale Bedrock

2 Loess Dark brown, mottled, slightly moist, silt

7

Till Medium gray, slightly moist, firm, sandy, silty clay with pebbles

CL

14.6

19.2

SP

20 Till Dark gray, moist, stiff, sandy, silty clay with abundant pebbles

28

Glacio-fluvial (sand and gravel) Gray, wet, loose, sand and gravel

Till Gray, slightly moist, very stiff, sandy, silty clay with gravel

(No core 28 to 48 feet)

Gray, slightly moist, stiff till (at 48 feet)

Dark brown/black, moist, loose, clayey sand and gravel (50 to 51 feet)

Green to gray, slightly moist, hard till (51 to 52 feet)

(No core 52 to 65 feet)

Some interlayered gray/brown medium sand and silty clay

Dark brown, wet gravel and cobble with soft sand and gravel

and some wood fragments (69 feet)

(Gamma log shows potential sand and gravel [73 to 76 feet])

CL
Geologic Logs and Diagrams 31

Monitoring Site 6

East of Mauxferry Rd, south of Nineveh Ck, MW6 is 100 feet east of Mauxferry Rd and 25 feet south of dirt trail. 

PZ6 is 360 feet east of Mauxferry Rd, 38 feet north of dirt trail. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 7.5-min topographic 

map, Nineveh quadrangle, T10N, R5E, Section 17, NW1/4, NW1/4, NW1/4. Water level [ ] measured 8/1/2003. 

Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). 

Shaded gray bar identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description

7

0

35

11.5

14

19

Glacio-fluvial (sand and gravel) Medium gray, wet, loose, dirty,

very poorly sorted sand and gravel

GM

Till Medium gray, slightly moist, very stiff, sandy, silty clay with 

pebbles CL

unknown contact

Total drill depth 35 feet

MW6

26

34

PZ6

13.5

8.5

Screened

interval Aquifer

potential

(flowing

 well)

28

Overbank deposits and colluvium Light gray, dry, hard, sandy silt

9

Alluvium Light brown, dry, loose, well-sorted, fine to medium sand

ML

SW

CL Till (with sand and gravel lenses) Brown, very moist, firm, sandy, 

silty clay with thin interbedded sand or sand and gravel lenses

Sand Gray, wet, dense, poorly sorted sand

SW

Lacustrine silt Medium gray, wet (above) to dry (below), very stiff silt

15.5

ML

(No cores collected below 28 feet)

Slightly finer sand and gravel (24 to 28 feet)

?

+7 feet
32 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Monitoring Site 7

East of Mauxferry Rd, south of Muddy Branch. MW7 is 135 feet east of Mauxferry Rd, 105 feet south of 

Bearrs Rd. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 7.5-min topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T10N, R5E, 

Section 20, SW1/4, NW1/4, NW1/4. Water level [ ] measured 7/31/2003. Unit contacts and screened 

intervals are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). Shaded gray bar identifies 

geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description

4.5

0

47.5

Glacio-fluvial (sand and gravel) Light gray, wet, loose, dirty,

very poorly sorted sand and gravel

SP

Total drill depth 47.5 feet

MW7

20.5

25.5

Screened

interval Aquifer

potential

Loess and colluvium Dark gray brown grading to light gray brown, 

dry, crumbly silt

10.5 Sandy silt Gray and brown, fine sand and silt with some gravel

CL

Till (with sand and gravel lenses) Dark gray with brown mottles, 

moist, very stiff, sandy clay with with few pebbles

Thin sand lens (40.5 to 41.5 feet)

Lacustrine clay Dark brown, very stiff clay

24

ML

12

ML

CL

Shale

CL

Till Green/gray, dry to moist, stiff, sandy, silty clay with pebbles

GC Thin lens of green/grey, wet, loose gravel with clay

CL

(Poor recovery below 12 feet)

Medium gray, dry, hard, sandy, silty clay with pebbles

31

SW

(40-percent recovery)

Thin limestone gravel resting on bedrock
Geologic Logs and Diagrams 33

Monitoring Site 8

65 feet west of Wallace Rd, 2,700 feet north of 700N, 3,640 feet south of Nineveh Creek. U.S. Geological Survey, 

1961, 7.5-min topographic map, Edinburgh quadrangle, T10N, R5E, Section 17, SE1/4, SE1/4, NE1/4. Water level [ ] 

measured 8/1/2003. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface. Shaded gray bar 

identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description

7

0

44

Glacio-fluvial (sand) Light brown, wet, loose, perfectly sorted,

very fine sand

(Coarsening downward to medium sand by 19 feet)

Total drill depth 44 feet

PZ8A

24

29

Screened

Aquifer interval

potential

Modern alluvium and colluvium Dark brown with abundant

mottling, moist, very stiff, sandy silt

Alluvium Dark brown with gray mottling, moist, dense, silty sand

(Saturated at 8 feet)

SM

Shale

PZ8B

17

12

SM

CL

GM

SP

ML

SP

10

11

Till Dark gray, moist, very stiff, gravely, silty clay

Glacio-fluvial (sand and gravel) Medium brown, very moist, dense, 

dirty, very poorly sorted sand and gravel (gray by 13 feet)

15

19

21

Glacio-fluvial (sand) Medium gray, wet, loose, fine to medium sand

Lacustrine(?) silt/clay Light to medium gray, fine, sandy, silty clay

Thin lens of dark gray, wet, loose, sand and gravel resting on 

bedrock (43.7 feet)
34 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Monitoring Site 9

Southeast of the Mauxferry Rd bridge over Lick Ck, 40 feet east of Mauxferry Rd, 225 feet south of Lick Ck. 

U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 7.5-min topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T10N, R5E, Section 29, SW1/4, 

SW1/4, NW1/4. Water level [ ] measured 8/1/2003. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet 

below land surface. Shaded gray bar identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as 

aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description

7.5

0

64.5

Glacio-fluvial (sand and gravel) Gray to dark gray, moist to wet, 

loose, very poorly sorted sand and gravel with some darker organicrich layers

Total drill depth 65.5 feet

MW9

52

62

Screened

interval

Aquifer

potential

Loess and modern alluvium Dark brown, slightly moist, firm, 

sandy silt

(mottled with gray by 5.5 feet)

Lacustrine Clay Gray with some brown mottles, moist, firm, 

silty clay with few, small, white shell fragments

(most likely gastropods)

SM

ML

Shale

SP

PZ9

42

37

39.5

Flowing

wells

(+3 feet)
Geologic Logs and Diagrams 35

Monitoring Site 10

110 feet west of Reservation Boundary Rd, 70 feet south of Lowell Rd. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 7.5-min 

topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T10N, R5E, Section 29, SW1/4, SW1/4, NW1/4. Water level [ ] measured 

8/1/2003. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface. Shaded gray bar identifies 

geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description

0

Glacio-fluvial (sand and gravel) Medium brown, wet, loose, sand

and gravel (80-percent recovery)

(Fining upward with well-rounded pea gravel)

Total drill depth 24 feet

14.5

19.5

Screened

Aquifer interval

potential

Till Light gray with abundant brown mottling, sandy, silty clay

CL

SC

PZ10

24

15.5

CL

Sand-rich lens (11 to 12 feet)

18.5

SW

CL

Till Dark gray, moist, hard, sandy, silty clay with abundant pebbles
36 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Monitoring Site 11

65 feet east of the center line of Mauxferry Rd and 2,150 feet north of Nineveh Ck. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 

7.5-min topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T10N, R5E, Section 29, SW1/4, SW1/4, NW1/4. Water level [ ] 

measured 8/1/2003. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface. Shaded gray

bar identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description

0

Glacio-fluvial (sand) Brown, moist, soft to loose sand

Total drill depth 96 feet

22

30

Screened

Aquifer interval

potential

Till Brown, moist, very stiff, sandy, silty clay with gravel

CL

MW11

40.5

CL

SW

CL

Till Gray, dry, hard, sandy, silty clay with pebbles

8

11.5

SP

Till Gray, slightly moist to dry, very stiff to hard,

sandy, silty clay with gravel

20

Glacio-fluvial (sand and gravel) Gray, wet, loose sand and gravel

(Up to 2-inch gravel resulted in poor recovery)

(No cores collected 44.5 to 53 feet)

58

59.5 SP Glacio-fluvial (sand and gravel) Dark brown, wet, soft, fine sand

Till Dark gray, dry, sandy, silty clay with pebbles

(No cores collected 61.5 to 68.5 feet)

CL

Clay-rich sand stringer 68.5 to 69 feet

(No cores collected 71.5 to 96 feet)

Shale 96
Geologic Logs and Diagrams 37

Monitoring Site 12

50 feet east of Mauxferry Rd, 135 feet north of Nineveh Ck, in woods. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 7.5-min 

topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T10N, R5E, Section 17, NW1/4, NW1/4, NW1/4. Water level [ ] 

measured 8/1/2003. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where

approximate). Shaded gray bar identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description 0

SW

13.5

unknown contact

Total drill depth 16 feet

PZ12

15.5

10.5

Screened

Aquifer interval

potential

(No cores collected from land suface to 10.5 feet)

Alluvium Medium gray, wet, loose, moderately sorted sand and

gravel

10.5

unknown contact

(No cores collected from 13.5 to 16 feet)

16
38 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Appendix 2. Geologic logs and diagrams for monitoring wells constructed 

in 1981 and 1996 and water-supply wells constructed in 2003 at the U.S. Army 

Atterbury Joint Maneuver Training Center near Edinburgh, Indiana

Data for these well logs were obtained from: U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency, 1981; Military Department of Indiana, 

1997; and Walter Anderson, written commun., 2004.

Monitoring Well W1

West of Mauxferry Rd, south of County Line Rd. Land-surface elevation, 744 feet, U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 7.5-min 

topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T10N, R5E, Section 6, NE1/4, NE1/4, NE 1/4. Water level [ ] measured 7/31/2003. Unit 

contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface. Shaded gray bar identifies geologic materials with the 

greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description 0

Total drill depth, 70 feet

W1

Screened

interval Aquifer

potential

Dark brown, clayey silt

Brown, clayey silt with fine sand

Brown, sandy silt

70

6

10

30 Brown, silty sand with small stones

35

Brown, sandy gravel

48

Brown, medium sand with small pebbles

45

55

SC

SC

SC

SC

SC

SM-SC

Well

depth

58 feet
Geologic Logs and Diagrams 39

Monitoring Well W2

East of Mauxferry Rd, north of Hendricks Ford Rd. Land-surface elevation, 690 feet. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 

7.5-min topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T10N, R5E, Section 5, SE1/4, SW1/4, NW 1/4. Water level [ ] 

measured 7/31/2003. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface. Shaded gray

bar identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description 0

Total drill depth, 24 feet

W2

Screened

interval Aquifer

potential

Brownish gray, silty clay

Tan, sandy clay

6

24

13

23

SC

SC

Well

depth

25 feet
40 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Monitoring Well W3

East of Mauxferry Rd, north of Hendricks Ford Rd. Land-surface elevation, 700 feet. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 

7.5-min topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T10N, R5E, Section 5, NE1/4, SW1/4, NW 1/4. Water level [ ] 

measured 7/31/2003. Unit contacts are shown in feet below land surface. Shaded gray bar identifies geologic 

materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description

0

Total drill depth, 35 feet

W3

Screened

interval Aquifer

potential

Brown clayey silt

Red-brown, silty clay

Tan, medium to fine sand

10 10

20

SC

SC 2

8 Red-brown, clayey sand

35

SC

SM-SC

Well

depth

22 feet
Geologic Logs and Diagrams 41

Monitoring Well W4

East of Mauxferry Rd, north of Hendricks Ford Rd. Land-surface elevation, 714 feet. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 

7.5-min topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T10N, R5E, Section 5, SE1/4, NW1/4, NW 1/4. Water level [ ] 

measured 7/31/2003. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface. Shaded gray 

bar identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic materials and description 0

Total drill depth, 45 feet

W4

Screened

interval Aquifer

potential

Brown, silty clay

37

27

45

SC

SM-SC

9 Tan, sandy clay

Tan, fine to medium sand with fines 24

Well

depth

39 feet
42 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Monitoring Well W5

South of County Line Rd, east of Mauxferry Rd. Land-surface elevation, 717 feet. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 

7.5-min topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T10N, R5E, Section 5, NE1/4, NW1/4, NW 1/4. Water level [ ] 

measured 7/31/2003. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface. Shaded gray 

bar identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description 0

Total drill depth, 60 feet

W5

Screened

interval Aquifer

potential

Brown, silty clay

Tan, sandy clay

10

36

46

SC

SC

Tan, medium to coarse sand

SC

SM-SC

60

18

Tan, fine to medium sand

50

SC

Well

depth

48 feet
Geologic Logs and Diagrams 43

Monitoring Well W7

South of Pleasant Run, east of Mauxferry Rd. Land-surface elevation, 653 feet. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 

7.5-min topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T10N, R5E, Section 7, NW1/4, SE1/4, NW 1/4, Water level [ ] 

measured 8/1/2003. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where

approximate). Shaded gray bar identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic materials and description 0

Total drill depth, 15 feet

W7

Screened

interval Aquifer

potential

5

15

2

15

CL

13

Medium stiff, dark brown, silty clay with little sand and trace gravel CL

Medium stiff, brown, silty clay with trace sand

6 Medium dense, fine to coarse sand with some gravel and trace silt

SP

Medium dense, fine to medium sand with some silt SP

Well

depth

15 feet
44 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Monitoring Well W8

East of Mauxferry Rd, north of Muddy Branch. Land-surface elevation, 665 feet. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 

7.5-min topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T10N, R5E, Section 17, SW1/4, SW1/4, SW 1/4. Water

level [ ] measured 8/1/2003. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface 

(dashed where approximate). Shaded gray bar identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to 

function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic materials and description

Stiff, gray with no mottling, silty clay with trace to little fine sand

Total drill depth, 30 feet

W8

Screened

interval Aquifer

potential

20

30

15

12.5

8.5

20.5

Soft, medium brown/gray, silty clay, with little fine (sic) and humus 0.5

Soft, yellow-brown with little light gray and reddish-brown mottling,

silty clay with little fine sand

CL

CL

11

Medium stiff, gray, little reddish-brown mottling, silty clay

CL with little to some fine sand

Medium stiff, gray, little reddish-brown mottling, silty clay with little

to some fine sand (plastic)

Very soft, gray with brown mottling, silty clay with little sand

CL

CL

CL

22

24

24.5

17

Medium stiff, gray, silty clay with little fine to medium sand

CL

Stiff, gray with no mottling, silty clay CL

CL Soft, gray with no mottling, silty clay

CL Soft, gray, silty clay with some sand and gravel

Medium dense, gravel with some sand

GP

30

(flowing well +6.4 ft)

Well

depth

30 feet
Geologic Logs and Diagrams 45

Monitoring Well W13

North of Evans Rd, west of Eggleston St. Land-surface elevation, 711 feet. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 7.5-min 

topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T11N, R4E, Section 36, SE1/4, SW1/4, NE 1/4. Water level [ ] measured 

8/1/2003. Unit contacts and screened interval are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). 

Shaded gray bar identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic materials and description

Total drill depth, 32.5 feet

W13

Screened

Aquifer interval

potential

22.3

32.3

8.5

7

3.5

14

2

4.5

CL

CL

CL

16

20

25.5

12

CL

CL

CL

SP 26

27

32.5

Light brown, fine to coarse sand, some humus, little gravel

Loose, brown, fine to coarse sand, some gravel

Medium dense, light brown, silty sand, with trace gravel,

brown/rust mottling

SP

SP

SM

Medium stiff, gray, silty clay with brown mottling

Medium stiff, brown with gray mottling, silty clay with trace gravel

Medium stiff, gray, silty clay with trace gravel and sand

Medium stiff, gray, silty clay with trace gravel

Medium stiff, gray, silty clay with little gravel

Medium stiff, gray, silty clay with little gravel and trace sand

Medium stiff to stiff, brown, silty clay with trace gravel

CL

Medium dense, gray, silty sand

SM

Medium dense, fine to coarse sand with trace gravel and silt

Medium stiff, gray, silty clay with trace gravel

CL

Well

depth

32.5 feet
46 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Monitoring Well W14

West of Mauxferry Rd, north of County Line Rd. Land-surface elevation, 709 feet. U.S. Geological Survey, 1962, 

7.5-min topographic map, Nineveh quadrangle, T11N, R5E, Section 31, SE1/4, SE1/4, SW 1/4. Water level [ ] 

measured 7/31/2003. Unit contacts and screened intervals are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where 

approximate). Shaded gray bar identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Unified soil

classification Geologic material and description

Total drill depth, 30 feet

W14

Screened

Aquifer interval

potential

19.3

29.3

7.5

7

12

2.5

CL

CL

CL

17

20.5

10.5

CL

CL

CL

SP

CL

5.5

8.5

18.5

30

Loose, brown, gray, fine to coarse sand, little gravel and silt

Medium stiff, brown, silty clay, with little sand,

light brown mottling

Medium stiff, brown, silty clay, with little sand, trace gravel, light brown mottling

Medium stiff, brown, silty clay, light brown/rust mottling

Medium stiff, brown, silty clay, no mottling

CL

SP

Medium stiff, brown, silty clay with little gravel, no mottling

Medium stiff, brown and gray and light brown mottling,

silty clay with trace gravel

Medium stiff, brown, silty clay with trace gravel

Medium stiff, brown, silty clay with little gravel

Medium dense, fine to coarse, silty sand with some gravel

SP

Medium dense, fine to medium, silty sand with rust mottling

(6-inch fine to medium sand seam at 29.5 feet)

Well

depth

30 feet
Geologic Logs and Diagrams 47

Water-Supply Well WS22

Unit contacts and screened interval are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). 

Shaded gray bar identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Geologic materials

Total drill depth, 100 feet

W22

Screened

Aquifer interval

potential

50

70

30

45

70

85

100

5

15

65

Gravel, clay

Clay

Gravel, sand

20 Gravel, sand, clay

Gravel, clay

Unknown 35

40 Clay, sand

Clay, gravel

60 Unknown

Clay, gravel, sand

Gravel, clay, sand

75 Gravel, clay

Clay

?

Well

depth

90 feet
48 Hydrogeologic Framework, Ground-Water Flow, Atterbury, 2002–2003

Water-Supply Well WS42

Unit contacts and screened interval are shown in feet below land surface (dashed where approximate). 

Shaded gray bar identifies geologic materials with the greatest potential to function as aquifers. 

Geologic materials

Total drill depth, 140 feet

W42

Screened

Aquifer interval

potential

90

120

85

5

80

25

Unknown

35

40

75

120

90

125

140

Clay

Clay / Gravel

Gravel

Blue clay / Gravel

Blue clay

Blue clay / black gravel

Blue clay / large gravel

Gravel and sand

Clay and gravel

Limestone

130 Shale and limestone

Well

depth

125 feet
Robinson, Risch—Hydrogeologic Framework, U.S. Army Atterbury Training Center, Edinburgh, Indiana, 2002–2003—Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5172

Printed on recycled paper