U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5019

Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Forest Service

Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–

2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10) 

of the Upper San Mateo Creek Basin near Mount Taylor, 

New Mexico
Cover: Cibola San Mateo Creek Basin.
Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer 

Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, 

Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10) of 

the Upper San Mateo Creek Basin near 

Mount Taylor, New Mexico

By Jeff B. Langman, Jesse E. Sprague, and Roger A. Durall

Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Forest Service

Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5019

U.S. Department of the Interior

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

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Marcia K. McNutt, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2012

This and other USGS information products are available at http://store.usgs.gov/

U.S. Geological Survey

Box 25286, Denver Federal Center

Denver, CO 80225

To learn about the USGS and its information products visit http://www.usgs.gov/

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:

Langman, J.B., Sprague, J.E., and Durall, R.A., 2012, Geologic framework, regional aquifer properties (1940s–2009), 

and spring, creek, and seep properties (2009–10) of the upper San Mateo Creek Basin near Mount Taylor, New 

Mexico: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5019, 96 p.
The cooperation of many individuals and organizations was essential for completion of 

this study. The authors acknowledge the support and help of personnel from the USFS’s Cibola 

National Forest. In particular, Mary Dereske and Livia Crowley who helped guide this study 

and provided useful insight for completion of study goals. Additionally, the authors wish to 

thank Harry Lee for allowing access to the springs, creeks, and seeps on the Lee Ranch and his 

insight into the hydrologic resources of the target area. 

v

Contents

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

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

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

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

Structural and Surface Geology ...............................................................................................3

Subsurface Geology ...................................................................................................................6

Climate and Surface Hydrology ................................................................................................6

Groundwater Hydrology and Primary Aquifers .....................................................................6

Valley Alluvium and Menefee Formation .......................................................................7

Point Lookout, Crevasse Canyon, Gallup, Dakota, and Morrison Formations .........8

Chinle Group .......................................................................................................................9

San Andres and Glorieta Formations .............................................................................9

Human Influence on Water Resources ...................................................................................9

Previous Studies ................................................................................................................................10

Study Methods ............................................................................................................................................10

Existing Data .......................................................................................................................................10

New Data .............................................................................................................................................11

Quality-Assurance .............................................................................................................................14

Geologic Framework and Regional Aquifer Properties ........................................................................15

San Mateo Creek Basin Geology ....................................................................................................15

Hydraulic Properties of Major Aquifers .........................................................................................15

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

Water-Level Elevations ............................................................................................................21

Hydraulic Conductivity .............................................................................................................22

Groundwater Composition of Major Aquifers ...............................................................................22

Major Elements .........................................................................................................................22

Trace Elements ..........................................................................................................................25

Contaminants of Concern ........................................................................................................25

Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties of the Upper San Mateo Creek Basin, New Mexico, 

2009 and 2010 .................................................................................................................................26

Spring, Creek, and Seep Flow ..........................................................................................................26

Spring, Creek, and Seep Water Composition ................................................................................27

Water Isotopes and Evaporation ............................................................................................30

Major Elements .........................................................................................................................31

Saturation Indices ....................................................................................................................31

Creek Flow Paths and Geochemical Model of Transition from Creek to Seep ...............32

Summary .......................................................................................................................................................35

References ...................................................................................................................................................36

Appendixes 

1. Historical Groundwater-Elevation Data .................................................................................41

2. Historical Groundwater Major-Element Data .......................................................................53

3. Historical Groundwater Trace-Element Data ........................................................................65

4. Historical Groundwater Contaminants-of-Concern Data ...................................................79
vi

Figures

1. Map showing location of the upper San Mateo Creek Basin ..............................................2

2. Map showing regional geologic structural areas, study area, and target area ...............3

3. Map showing San Mateo Creek Basin in the regional landform ........................................4

4. Map showing regional surface geology ..................................................................................5

5. Generalized stratigraphic column of the subsurface geology below the valley forms 

in the southern San Juan Basin ................................................................................................7

6. Geologic cross section from west to east through the upper San Mateo Creek 

Basin ..............................................................................................................................................8

7. Map showing sampling sites and surface topography of the upper San Mateo 

Creek Basin .................................................................................................................................12

8. Map showing surface geology of the upper San Mateo Creek Basin .............................18

9. Map showing relative differences in water-level elevations for the distribution of 

water-level data compiled for wells with screens located in the Quaternary 

alluvium .......................................................................................................................................19

10. Map showing relative differences in water-level elevations for the distribution of 

water-level data compiled for wells with screens located in Cretaceous, Jurassic, 

Triassic, and Permian formations ...........................................................................................20

11. Trilinear diagrams of major-element relations for groundwater collected from the 

deposits and formations found in the study area .................................................................24

12. Graphs showing landform gradients between sampling sites on El Rito and San 

Mateo Creeks and underlying geologic formations .............................................................27

13. Graph showing dissolved oxygen and pH relation for water from El Rito, San Lucas, 

and San Mateo Creeks .............................................................................................................30

14. Graph showing stable isotope ratios for water from El Rito, San Lucas, and San 

Mateo Creeks .............................................................................................................................31

15. Trilinear diagram of major-element relations for water from El Rito, San Lucas, and 

San Mateo Creeks .....................................................................................................................32

Tables

1. Information for the spring-, creek-, and seep-sample sites in the upper San Mateo 

Creek Basin .................................................................................................................................13

2. Sample analytes and laboratory analysis methods .............................................................14

3. Stratigraphic, lithologic, and aquifer characteristics of geologic deposits and 

formations in the study and target areas ...............................................................................16

4. Water-level elevation statistics for aquifers in consolidated formations in the study 

area ..............................................................................................................................................21

5. Formation characteristics indicative of horizontal hydraulic-conductivity variation 

among the aquifers in the study area .....................................................................................23

6. Number of detections of frequently detected trace elements in groundwater from 

the study area .............................................................................................................................25

7. Number of detections of contaminants of concern in groundwater from the study 

area ..............................................................................................................................................26

8. Physical and chemical properties of springs, creeks, and seeps within the target 

area, August 2009 ......................................................................................................................28
vii

9. Physical and chemical properties of springs, creeks, and seeps within the target 

area, May 2010 ...........................................................................................................................29

10. Saturation indices of possible common minerals for water collected from the 

spring, creek, and seep locations along El Rito Creek in the target area ........................33

11. Saturation indices of possible common minerals for water collected from the 

spring, creek, and seep locations along San Mateo Creek in the target area ................33

12. Geochemical model results for creek to seep locations along El Rito and San 

Mateo Creeks .............................................................................................................................34

Conversion Factors, Datums, and Abbreviations

Inch/Pound to SI

Multiply By To obtain

inch 2.540 centimeter (cm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

yard (yd) 0.9144 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

acre 4,047 square meter (m2)

gallon (gal) 3.785 liter (L)

foot per day (ft/d) 0.00035 centimeters per second (cm/s)

foot per year (ft/yr) 9.7xl0-7 centimeters per second (cm/s)

foot squared per day (ft2/d) 0.09290 meter squared per day (m2/d)

cubic feet per second (ft3/s) 0.0283 cubic meters per minute (m3/s)

acre-feet per year (acre-ft/yr) 1,233 cubic meter per year (m3/yr)

Temperature in degrees Celsius (oC) can be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (oF) as follows:

oF = (1.8 x oC) + 32 

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

(NAVD 88).

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

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

Abbreviations

< less than

> greater than

% percent

‰ per mil

± plus or minus

Ag silver

Al aluminum
viii

As arsenic

B boron

Ba barium

Be beryllium

Br

C

CO2

Ca

bromine

carbon

carbon dioxide

calcium

Cd cadmium

Cl chloride

Cr chromium

Co cobalt

Cu copper

δ delta, indicates isotopic ratio compared to standard, in per mil units

F fluoride

Fe iron

H hydrogen

HCO3 bicarbonate

Hg mercury

IAP ion activity product

K potassium

K hydraulic conductivity

Ksp solubility product

Li lithium

Ma million years before present

MDL method detection level

Mg magnesium

Mn manganese

Mo molybdenum

Na sodium

Ni nickel

NO3 nitrate (may also include nitrate plus nitrite)

NTU nephelometric turbidity unit

O oxygen

Pb lead

Ra radium

redox reduction-oxidation

Sb antimony

Se

Si

selenium

silicon

SO4 sulfate

TDS total dissolved solids

Tl thallium

U uranium

USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

USFS U.S. Forest Service

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

V vanadium

Zn zinc
Abstract

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

Forest Service, examined the geologic framework, regional 

aquifer properties, and spring, creek, and seep properties of 

the upper San Mateo Creek Basin near Mount Taylor, which 

contains areas proposed for exploratory drilling and possible 

uranium mining on U.S. Forest Service land. The geologic 

structure of the region was formed from uplift of the Zuni 

Mountains during the Laramide Orogeny and the Neogene 

volcanism associated with the Mount Taylor Volcanic Field. 

Within this structural context, numerous aquifers are present 

in various Paleozoic and Mesozoic sedimentary formations 

and the Quaternary alluvium. The distribution of the aquifers 

is spatially variable because of the dip of the formations and 

erosion that produced the current landscape configuration 

where older formations have been exhumed closer to the Zuni 

Mountains. 

Many of the alluvial deposits and formations that contain 

groundwater likely are hydraulically connected because of 

the solid-matrix properties, such as substantive porosity, but 

shale layers such as those found in the Mancos Formation and 

Chinle Group likely restrict vertical flow. Existing water-level 

data indicate topologically downgradient flow in the Quaternary alluvium and indiscernible general flow patterns in the 

lower aquifers. According to previously published material 

and the geologic structure of the aquifers, the flow direction in 

the lower aquifers likely is in the opposite direction compared 

to the alluvium aquifer. Groundwater within the Chinle Group 

is known to be confined, which may allow upward migration 

of water into the Morrison Formation; however, confining 

layers within the Chinle Group likely retard upward leakage. Groundwater was sodium-bicarbonate/sulfate dominant 

or mixed cation-mixed anion with some calcium/bicarbonate water in the study area. The presence of the reduction/

oxidation-sensitive elements iron and manganese in groundwater indicates reducing conditions at some time or in some 

location(s) in most aquifers. Frequent detections of zinc in the 

alluvium aquifer may represent anthropogenic influences such 

as mining. 

Along the mesas in the upper San Mateo Creek Basin, 

springs that form various creeks, including El Rito and San 

Mateo Creeks, discharge from the basalt-cap layer and the 

upper Cretaceous sedimentary layers. Streamflow in El Rito 

and San Mateo Creeks flows down steep gradients near the 

mesas sustained by groundwater discharges, and this streamflow transitions to shallow groundwater contained within 

the valley alluvium through infiltration where the subsequent groundwater is restricted from downward migration 

by the shaly Menefee Formation. This shallow groundwater 

reemerges at seeps where the land surface has been eroded 

below the groundwater level. Spring- and creek-water samples 

contained small amounts of dissolved solutes, and seep water 

contained substantially larger amounts of dissolved solutes. 

The pH of water within the creeks was neutral to alkaline, and 

all locations exhibited well-oxygenated conditions, although 

typically at substantially less than saturated levels. Changes in 

the stable-isotope ratios of water between spring and summer 

samples indicate differences in source-water inputs that likely 

pertain to seasonal recharge sources. Results of the waterisotope analysis and geochemical modeling indicate little 

evaporation and chemical weathering at the spring and creek 

sites but stronger evaporation and chemical weathering by the 

time the water reaches the seep locations in the center of the 

upper San Mateo Creek Basin.

Introduction

The water resources of the San Mateo Creek Basin 

(fig. 1) are important to the citizens of New Mexico, in 

particular, the town of San Mateo and the city of Grants, for 

potable-water sources. Citizens and tribal groups in this area 

are concerned about the possible effects on the water resources 

from exploratory drilling and possible mining of uranium (U) 

as currently (2011) proposed by various companies. Uranium 

mining in this region has historically targeted members of the 

Morrison Formation, and previous mining operations dewatered aquifers at and above the ore. Water generated during 

dewatering was discharged to natural waterways without 

Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–

2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10) 

of the Upper San Mateo Creek Basin near Mount Taylor, 

New Mexico

By Jeff B. Langman, Jesse E. Sprague, and Roger A. Durall 
2 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

treatment, because much of the U mining occurred prior to 

major environmental legislation such as the Clean Water Act. 

This mine water was a substantial source of contamination 

of sediment, alluvial aquifers, and deeper aquifers in areas 

of faulting (Schoeppner, 2008). The New Mexico Environment Department has issued a health advisory for current 

and future private wells within the San Mateo Creek Basin 

concerning various contaminants of concern including gross 

alpha activity, nitrate (NO3), radium (Ra), and U (New Mexico 

Environment Department, 2009). The U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS), in cooperation with the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), 

examined the geologic framework; regional aquifer properties; and spring, creek, and seep properties of the upper San 

Mateo Creek Basin near Mount Taylor, which contains areas 

proposed for exploratory drilling and possible uranium mining 

on USFS land. 

Purpose and Scope

This report presents the results of a study to characterize the geologic framework; regional aquifer properties; and 

spring, creek, and seep properties of the upper San Mateo 

Creek Basin. Existing data (data collected prior to this study; 

1940s to 2009) were used to describe groundwater characteristics of major aquifers including general directions of 

groundwater flow and groundwater composition. New data 

were collected in 2009 and 2010 to characterize the springs, 

creeks, and seeps within the upper San Mateo Creek Basin. To 

evaluate the geologic framework; regional aquifer properties; 

and spring, creek, and seep properties of the upper San Mateo 

Creek Basin, the target area of the study (target area) encompasses the upper San Mateo Creek Basin, but a larger study 

area composed of parts of the Zuni Uplift and Chaco Slope 

regions was used to ensure sufficient existing data for evaluation of geologic and aquifer properties relevant to the target 

area (fig. 2). 

Description of the Study Area

The study area is composed of the eastern slope of the 

Zuni Uplift and much of the Chaco Slope region within the 

southeastern part of the San Juan Basin (fig. 2). The area 

was a low-lying plain in the late Paleozoic Era and much of 

the Mesozoic Era, and the landscape was transformed to the 

current structure mostly because of the Laramide Orogeny 

during the late Cretaceous age (Woodward and Callender, 

1977; Baldwin and Anderholm, 1992; Cather, 2003). Prior 

to the Laramide Orogeny, the area was part of the Western 

Interior Basin, a broad foreland basin that subsided partially 

in response to tectonic loading in the Cordilleran thrust belt, 

which allowed repeated transgressive-regressive sequences 

(Cather, 2003). The Zuni Uplift that constitutes the Zuni 

Mountains was formed during the Ancestral Rockies and 

Laramide Orogenies (Strickland and others, 2003). The Chaco 

Slope represents the northeast flank of the Zuni Uplift where 

formation dip lessens with distance from the apex of the fold. 

Figure 1. Location of the upper San Mateo Creek Basin. 

Gallup

Grants CIBOLA NATIONAL FOREST

Thoreau

Prewitt

McCartys

San 

Mateo

MAP 

LOCATION

NEW MEXICO

San Mateo 

Creek Basin

SANDOVAL 

MCKINLEY 

40

40

371

605

547

MCKINLEY

MCKINLEY

CIBOLA

35 ̊ 30 ́

35 ̊ 00 ́

108 ̊ 30 ́ 108 ̊ 00 ́ 107 ̊ 30 ́

Mount Taylor Zuni Uplift/Mountains

0 5 10 MILES

0 5 10 KILOMETERS

San Juan Basin

San Juan Basin

Bluewater CIBOLA

CIBOLA NATIONAL FOREST
Introduction 3

The Acoma Embayment was a synclinal depositional area east 

of the Zuni Uplift and now includes Mount Taylor and the 

Rio Puerco Fault Zone to the east of the mountain (fig. 2). 

The study area includes valleys and mesas formed from 

regional folding of the landscape and subsequent erosion of 

less-resistant strata. The target area of upper San Mateo Creek 

Basin is the upper, northeast part of the basin above the confluence of San Mateo Creek and Arroyo del Puerto (fig. 3).

Structural and Surface Geology

The Zuni Mountains and Mount Taylor are the major 

elevated, structural features of the region. The axis of the 

Zuni Mountains is located about 15 mi west-southwest of 

Grants and is oriented southeast to northwest. The uplift that 

formed Zuni Mountains is a monoclinal fold about 75 mi long 

and 30 mi wide. The study and target areas are located along 

the east side of the monocline, which has a gentle slope to the 

north-northeast of about 5 to 10 degrees. The surface geology 

of the target area is dominated by Mount Taylor and its associated volcanic flows. Mount Taylor is located about 15 mi 

northeast of Grants and about 8 mi southeast of San Mateo 

(figs. 3 and 4). The mountain reaches 11,301 ft and is part of 

a larger, northeast-trending volcanic field. Mount Taylor is 

primarily an accumulation of thick, viscous trachydacitic and 

trachyandesitic lavas with a surrounding apron of lava debris 

and pyroclastics (Crumpler, 2003). This volcanic activity was 

caused by extensional tectonics that began in the Neogene and 

continued into the Quaternary period (Laughlin and others, 

1994; Keating and Valentine, 1998; WoldeGabriel and others, 

1999). Surrounding mesas tend to consist of an upper layer of 

Neogene rhyolitic domes and pyroclastic deposits with a resistant cap of basalt lava and scoria (Lipman and Mehnert, 1979; 

Perry and others, 1990; Laughlin and others, 1994). 

An erosional period that followed the Neogene volcanism 

created the valley forms in the study area. It is estimated that 

the land surface was eroded up to 150 to 200 feet (ft) below 

current land surface (Gordon, 1961). Following this erosional 

Figure 2. Regional geologic structural areas, study area, and target area. 

Gallup

Grants

CIBOLA NATIONAL FOREST

Target area

(upper San Mateo

Creek Basin)

40

40

108 ̊ 30 ́ 108 ̊ 00 ́ 107 ̊ 30 ́

Chaco Slope

(southeastern San Juan Basin)

Acoma

Embayment

Zuni Uplift

Lucero

Uplift

Rio Puerco

Fault Zone

Crownpoint

Pueblo

Pintado

Torreon

San 

Mateo

Thoreau

CIBOLA NATIONAL FOREST

Chaco Mesa

Regional geologic

structure boundaries

(modified from Fitzsimmons, 1959,

and Baldwin and Anderholm, 1992)

STUDY AREA BOUNDARY

Gallup

Embayment

Mount Taylor

0 5 10 MILES

0 5 10 KILOMETERS
4 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

Figure 3. San Mateo Creek Basin in the regional landform. 

San Mateo Creek

Rio San Jose

San Miguel Creek

San Lucas Creek

Rinconada Creek

Arroyo del Puerto

Rio Paguate

Seboyetita Creek

Lobo Creek

108°00' 107°50' 107°40' 107°30' 107°20'

State of New Mexico lands and trust

 lands, various designations

Federal lands

San Mateo Creek Basin

Mount Taylor

Zuni Mountains

Laguna Pueblo

San 

Mateo

Grants

Milan

Acoma Pueblo 

McCarty Syncline

(Hunt, 1938)

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

and 1:500,000. Projection: Universal Transverse Mercator zone 13N, 

North American Datum of 1983, Vertical Datum North American 

Vertical Datum of 1988.

MCKINLEY

CIBOLA 

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS

N

40

40

605

509

53

117

Syncline

Non-differentiated ownership

Developed areas

Pueblo, reservation, or trust lands

Land grant, undifferentiated

San Mateo Creek

 EXPLANATION

El Rito Creek

Target area: upper 

San Mateo Creek Basin

Lower San Mateo 

Creek Basin

Lower and upper San Mateo Creek Basin divided at the inflow of the Arroyo del Puerto. 

 The upper San Mateo Creek portion is representative of the target area of the study 

 (heavy dashed lines separate the upper San Mateo Creek Basin from the remainder of the 

 larger San Mateo Creek Basin)

La Jara Mesa

Jesus Mesa

35 ̊ 30 ́

35 ̊ 20 ́

35 ̊ 10 ́

35 ̊ 00 ́
Introduction 5

Figure 4. Regional surface geology. 

0 10 MILES

0 10 KILOMETERS

108°00' 107°50' 107°40' 107°30' 107°20'

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:24,000 and 1:500,000. 

Projection: Universal Transverse Mercator zone 13N, North American Datum of 1983.

Geology from New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources digital data, 1:500,000.

N

Mount Taylor

40

40

605

509

53

117

San Mateo

Grants

A

A’

San Mateo Creek

Rio San Jose

Jurassic

Upper Jurassic, undivided

Morrison

Lower Jurassic, undivided,

 may contain Entrada, Todilto,

 Summerville, and (or) Bluff

Crevasse Canyon

Dakota

Mancos and Dakota

Gallup

Mancos

Cretaceous

Menefee

Mancos, lower

Mulatto Tongue, Mancos

Rio Salado Tongue, Mancos

Satan Tongue, Mancos

Hasta Tongue, Point Lookout

Point Lookout

Permian

Permian, undivided

Abo

Glorieta

San Andres

Yeso

Quaternary

Alluvium

Basaltic to andesitic lava flows

Eolian deposit

Intrusive rocks of intermediate to 

 silicic composition

Basaltic to andesitic lava flows (Miocene)

Silicic to intermediate volcanic rocks

Intermediate to silicic volcanic rocks

Neogene

Basaltic to andesitic lava flows (Pliocene) Precambrian

Precambrian, 

 undivided

Landslide deposit

Triassic

Chinle (Group)

EXPLANATION

A--A’ is a trace for a geologic cross section shown in figure 6.

Zuni Mountains

35 ̊ 30 ́

35 ̊ 20 ́

35 ̊ 10 ́

35 ̊ 00 ́
6 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

period, the valleys filled with sediment and additional basalt 

flows to the present land-surface elevation. Sediment from the 

eroding highlands of the mesas was deposited in the valleys 

and formed unconsolidated alluvium mixed with boulder-sized 

basalt rocks that were transported to the valley floors through 

either colluvial or alluvial action. In the higher elevations 

of the target area, the alluvium is about 3 to 6 ft thick with 

increased thicknesses in the downstream direction; alluvium 

thicknesses can reach 65 ft or more where San Mateo Creek 

exits the target area (Brod, 1979). Beneath the basalt caps of 

the mesas, sedimentary formations are exposed in the target area including the Cretaceous Menefee, Point Lookout, 

Crevasse Canyon, Gallup, Mancos, and Dakota Formations 

and small exposures of the Morrison Formation of Jurassic 

age (New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources, 

2003). 

Subsurface Geology

Igneous and metamorphic bedrock of Precambrian age 

underlay younger rock throughout the region, and this bedrock 

is exposed within the Zuni Mountains (Gordon, 1961). No 

rocks of Cambrian to Middle Pennsylvanian age are present 

in the region, because this region was likely a stable paleohighland during that time (Baldwin and Anderholm, 1992). 

Deposition and preservation of open-marine sediment began in 

the late Pennsylvanian and transitioned to deposition of continental- and restricted-marine sediment in the early Permian 

age (Baars, 1962), during which time the Abo, Yeso, Glorieta, 

and San Andres Formations were deposited (fig. 5). The top 

of the San Andres Formation was eroded near the end of the 

Permian or beginning of the Triassic age, then was buried 

with deposition of the Triassic Chinle Group and Moenkopi 

Formation (not present in the target area but in the larger 

study area) when the area was a low plain in a continental 

and restricted marine environment (Baldwin and Anderholm, 

1992). Sedimentary formations overlaying the Chinle Group 

were deposited during the early Jurassic seas and the Cretaceous Western Interior Seaway by transgressive-regressive 

sequences (Lipman and others, 1979; Dillinger, 1990) and are 

exposed at land surface in a stairstep arrangement because of 

erosion of the Zuni Mountains (fig. 4). The early- to lateJurassic Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations commonly found in northwestern New Mexico are less 

pervasive in the study area because of erosion and thinning of 

the deposits, and for this report, these deposits are grouped as 

the Entrada Complex. 

Following deposition of the Mesozoic sediments, the 

regional area was folded as a result of the Laramide Orogeny 

starting about 80 million years before present (Ma) (Cather, 

2004), forming the Zuni Uplift, Chaco Slope, and Acoma 

Embayment (includes the McCarty Syncline) (Hunt, 1938; 

Crumpler, 1982). A cross-section of the San Mateo Creek 

Basin developed by McCraw and others (2009) indicates a 

number of confirmed and inferred normal faults bisecting 

the upper San Mateo Creek Basin (fig. 6). Uranium deposits 

within the sandstones of the Morrison Formation have been 

mined since 1948 in the regional area. The origin of the U is 

not well constrained, but it was likely deposited at the interface between two fluids of different composition and reduction-oxidation (redox) states that emplaced the tabular and 

lenticular deposits within the Morrison Formation (McLemore 

and Chenoweth, 2003). The U deposits consist of U-enriched 

humic matter coated upon sand grains within the host formation (Fitch, 1980).

Climate and Surface Hydrology

The climate of the region is arid to semiarid—precipitation has averaged 8.7 inches per year at San Mateo (1918 

to 1988) and 10.3 inches per year at Grants (1953 to 2005) 

(Western Regional Climate Center, 2009)—although greater 

precipitation may accumulate on Mount Taylor (Daly and 

Weisberg, 1997). San Mateo Creek is a tributary to the Rio 

San Jose and the confluence has been altered from past human 

development (note the lack of a confluence shown in fig. 3). 

From 1977 to 1982, the USGS operated a steamflow-gaging 

station on San Mateo Creek about 5 miles (mi) west of San 

Mateo just upstream from the confluence with the Arroyo 

del Puerto (upper to lower San Mateo Creek Basin) where 

monthly streamflow averaged 0 to 7 cubic feet per second 

(ft3/s). Most of the average monthly streamflows were less 

than 1 ft3/s (U.S. Geological Survey, 2009). Springs are present in the target area and are concentrated near the confluence 

of San Mateo Creek and El Rito Creek in the upper San Mateo 

Creek Basin (fig. 3). 

Groundwater Hydrology and Primary Aquifers

Substantial groundwater production in the study area 

typically is associated with three aquifer types—alluvium, 

sandstone, and limestone (Stone, 2003), such as the valley 

alluvium, sandstones of the Morrison and Glorieta Formations, 

and limestone of the San Andres Formation. Intergranular 

porosity provides the available space for water storage within 

the alluvium and poorly to moderately cemented sandstones, 

whereas fractures and dissolution create available storage 

space within well-cemented sandstones and limestones. Confining units such as the shales of the Mancos Formation or the 

Chinle Group can produce some water but typically inhibit 

flow because of their low permeability (Stone, 2003). 

Numerous aquifers are present in the study area and 

typically are found within the various Paleozoic and Mesozoic sedimentary formations and the Quaternary alluvium. 

Groundwater flow in the valley alluvium generally parallels the surface flow and likely receives substantial recharge 

from surface drainages (Baldwin and Anderholm, 1992). The 

groundwater hydraulic gradient in deeper aquifers such as the 

San Andres/Glorieta aquifer is away from the Zuni Uplift and 

steepest closest to the uplift (Baldwin and Anderholm, 1992). 

Wells typically are located in the valley areas of the successive mesa-valley landscape of the study area, and groundwater 
Introduction 7

generally is pumped from the valley alluvium or San Andres/

Glorieta aquifer (Baldwin and Anderholm, 1992; Agency 

for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 2008). Groundwater in the alluvium is hydraulically connected to groundwater in the San Andres/Glorieta aquifer in areas near the Zuni 

Uplift, but in other parts of the study area various members 

of the Chinle Group restrict flow between these two aquifers 

(Frenzel, 1992). During exploratory drilling in the 1970s north 

of San Mateo and within the target area, 15 water-bearing 

units (defined by formations and specific formation members) 

were encountered between land surface and 3,300 ft below 

land surface (Gulf Mineral Resources Company, written 

commun., 1977) indicating that many of the Mesozoic formations in the area likely contain water and may be hydraulically 

connected.

Valley Alluvium and Menefee Formation

An unconfined aquifer is present in the valley alluvium 

and the Menefee Formation in the upper San Mateo Creek 

Basin. The Menefee Formation is present at the surface in the 

eastern part of the basin in and near the town of San Mateo, 

and groundwater discharging from the upper Menefee supplies springs that form El Rito, San Lucas, and San Mateo 

Figure 5. Generalized stratigraphic column of the subsurface geology below the valley forms in the southern San Juan Basin (modified 

from various figures in Lucas and others, 2003; courtesy of the New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources). 

Owl Rock

Painted

Desert

Member

Sonsela

Member

Blue Mesa

Member

Bluewater Creek

Shinarump

Moenkopi

Chinle Group

 Petrified Forest

Conglomerate

Sandstone

Sandstone, laminated

Sandstone with cross bedding

Sandstone, ripples

Sandstone, ripples and soft sediment deformation

Siltstone

Limestone

Pisolitic limestone

Mudstone

Mudstone with calcrete nodules

Pedoturbated unit

McGaffeyMember

PereaBed

Entrada

Todilto

 Bluff and Summerville Jurassic Triassic

San Andres

Glorieta

Permian

Yeso

Abo

EXPLANATION
8 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

Creeks in the target area. The upper Menefee has been eroded, 

and unconsolidated material is present in thin layers in the 

easternmost part of the valley or along the base of the mesas. 

The alluvium thickens westward following San Mateo Creek 

where greater basin area contributes to the deposition of 

valley alluvium. Near the town of San Mateo, the alluvium 

aquifer overlies Menefee shales, and numerous intermittent 

or ephemeral springs and seeps are present in the area of the 

confluence of El Rito and San Mateo Creeks. West of this 

location, the Menefee is no longer present as the landscape 

transitions to older formations exhumed from previous erosion (fig. 4). Within the Rio San Jose Basin, alluvium-aquifer 

water typically has a specific conductance ranging from 600 

to 2,500 microsiemens per centimeter (μS/cm), although 

values of 6,000 μS/cm have been reported; dissolved-solids 

concentrations have ranged from 590 to 14,000 milligrams 

per liter (mg/L) (Brod and Stone, 1981; Stone and others, 

1983). Dissolved-solids concentrations in groundwater from 

the Menefee have ranged from 200 to 1,400 mg/L (Brod and 

Stone, 1981).

Point Lookout, Crevasse Canyon, Gallup, Dakota, and 

Morrison Formations

Besides the Menefee, the Cretaceous Point Lookout, 

Crevasse Canyon, Gallup, and Dakota Formations (predominantly sandstones) likely have the porosity to contain substantial groundwater. Located between the Gallup and Dakota, the 

Mancos Formation likely contains small amounts of water, 

but this clay-rich formation probably is more of a confining 

layer than an aquifer. A review of stratigraphic logs at the New 

Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources (NMBGMR) indicated that the Cretaceous layers can be discontinuous through the area. The Crevasse Canyon Formation can be 

substantial in thickness and contains two sandstone members 

(Dalton and Stray) that likely contain water, but these members are spatially variable and not present in many locations 

across the study area because of erosion (Stone and others, 

1983). The underlying Gallup and Dakota sandstones are more 

likely to be present as aquifers, although deposition of these 

formations was not prevalent for this area. The southern extent 

of the Gallup Formation is along the southern boundary of 

the study area (Stone and others, 1983). Dissolved-solids in 

the Cretaceous formations have ranged from concentrations 

of 200 to 700 mg/L for the Point Lookout (Brod and Stone, 

1981); 1,200 to 2,200 mg/L for the Gallup (Gulf Mineral 

Resources Company, written commun., 1979); and 600 to 

1,400 mg/L for the Dakota (Brod and Stone, 1981). 

Aquifers in the Jurassic formations likely exist in most 

parts of the study area, and most information is related to U 

ore extraction from the Morrison Formation. Water was commonly encountered during exploratory drilling and mining of 

U from the Morrison, and the groundwater was removed for 

ore extraction (McLemore and Chenoweth, 2003; Yancey and 

McLemore, 2008). The Morrison Formation is divided into 

the mudstone, sandstone, conglomerate, and limestone Brushy 

Basin Member; the conglomerate, sandstone, and mudstone 

Westwater Canyon Sandstone Member; and interbedded shale 

and sandstone Recapture Member (Stone and others, 1983). 

The Brushy Basin Member and Westwater Canyon Member 

Figure 6. Geologic cross section from west to east through the upper San Mateo Creek Basin (modified from McCraw and others, 

2009; courtesy of the New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources). 

Km

J

Kg Kmm Kcdi Kcd Kcg Kpl Kmf

NORTHWEST

A

SOUTHEAST

A’

 San Mateo

Kd

Cretaceous Formations

 Kmf Menefee

 Kpl Point Lookout

 Kcg Crevasse Canyon, Gibson Coal Member

 Kcd Crevasse Canyon, Dalton Sandstone Member

 Kmm Mancos, Mulatto Tongue Member

 Kcdi Creavasse Canyon, Dilco Coal Member

 Kg Gallup

 Km Mancos , main body

 Kd Dakota, undivided

Jurassic Formations

 J Morrison, undivided and lower Jurassic formations

Elevation, in feet above sea level

?

Inferred fault ?

0 1 MILE

0 1 KILOMETER

EXPLANATION

Trace of A to A ́ is shown in figure 4. Surface geology shown 

 here in figure 6 is more detailed than the surface geology 

 shown in figure 4

8,000

7,000

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

8,000

7,000

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

Fault—Arrow shows relative movement

Contact
Introduction 9

historically have contained water and were dewatered for U 

extraction, which caused local water-level declines during 

mining. Groundwater from the Westwater Canyon Member has contained dissolved-solids concentrations of 360 to 

2,200 mg/L (Brod and Stone, 1981). Roca Honda Resources, 

LLC (2009a) estimated the potentiometric surface of the 

Morrison aquifer at the Jesus Mesa (fig. 3) to be about 1,000 

to 1,300 ft below land surface. Given that groundwater was 

found in the upper part of the Jurassic formations (Morrison), 

it can be assumed that the lower Entrada Complex likely contains groundwater. 

Chinle Group

The Chinle Group is the only Triassic geologic unit in 

the study area, but this group can be up to 1,500 ft thick in 

the region and is composed primarily of mudstone and siltstone with some minor sandstone and limestone components 

(Stone and others, 1983). A likely discontinuous, confined 

aquifer(s) is present in the Chinle Group from recharge 

occurring around the Zuni Uplift, although this aquifer is 

not considered highly productive (Baldwin and Anderholm, 

1992). The Chinle Group tends to act more as a confining unit 

for the underlying San Andres/Glorieta aquifer (Baldwin and 

Anderholm, 1992). 

San Andres and Glorieta Formations

The confined San Andres/Glorieta aquifer is defined by 

the Permian San Andres and Glorieta Formations that underlie 

much of west-central New Mexico and is the primary aquifer 

of the region. The San Andres consists mostly of limestone 

and some sandstone and is unconformably overlain by the 

Chinle Group. The San Andres conformably overlies the 

Glorieta, which is composed of well-sorted, well-cemented 

fine- to medium-grained sandstone, and conformably overlies 

the Yeso Formation. The San Andres and Glorieta are considered to be a single aquifer because of the gradational contact 

between the formations, and much of the water in this aquifer travels through solution channels within the San Andres 

(Baldwin and Anderholm, 1992). Joints, fractures, and faults 

create anisotropic conditions within the San Andres/Glorieta 

aquifer (Kelley and Clinton, 1960). Groundwater flow is 

mostly towards the east-northeast away from the Zuni Uplift, 

and discharge from the aquifer as springs is common (Baldwin 

and Anderholm, 1992). Dissolved-solids concentrations in the 

aquifer in the Grants-Bluewater area (fig. 1), typically are less 

than 1,500 mg/L, and calcium (Ca) and magnesium (Mg) and 

bicarbonate (HCO3) and sulfate (SO4) are the dominant cations 

and anions (Baldwin and Anderholm, 1992).

Human Influence on Water Resources

Within the study area, municipal, industrial, and agricultural wells were primarily completed in the San Andres/

Glorieta aquifer. The city of Grants derives its municipal 

water from this aquifer. Prior to the 1940s, domestic and 

stock wells withdrew small amounts of water from the San 

Andes/Glorieta aquifer, but in the 1940s, new irrigation wells 

were completed to supply an increasing agricultural area 

(Baldwin and Anderholm, 1992). By 1955, 22 wells were 

supplying 13,600 acre-ft/yr for agriculture (85 percent of total 

withdrawal), municipal, and industrial use in the Grants area 

(Gordon, 1961). This increase in groundwater withdrawn from 

the San Andres/Glorieta aquifer is attributed with decreasing flow in the Ojo del Gallo (minor drainage immediately 

south of Grants) and substantially lowering the potentiometric 

surface of the aquifer (Baldwin and Anderholm, 1992). Water 

levels fluctuated with pumpage, and the largest declines were 

recorded in the early 1960s during the height of agricultural 

use. These declines recovered following decreases in agricultural use (Baldwin and Anderholm, 1992).

In addition to agricultural uses, mining influenced 

groundwater levels within the region because of the need 

to dewater formations containing U ore and water needed 

for milling operations. Mining and milling operations relied 

on water from the San Andres/Glorieta aquifer. Substantial 

U deposits were discovered in 1955 north of Grants, which 

initiated a boom in mining, increased the local population, 

and decreased the amount of irrigated land (Baldwin and 

Anderholm, 1992). The ratio of San Andres/Glorieta water 

used for agricultural, industrial, and municipal uses began to 

change with a greater share going to industrial uses (mostly 

mining or milling or related uses) and a smaller share going 

to agriculture with an overall drop in the volume of water 

withdrawn from the aquifer. By 1982, the volume of water 

withdrawn from the aquifer had decreased to 3,900 acre-ft/yr, 

and 38 percent of the water was used for industrial operations 

(Baldwin and Anderholm, 1992). Mining and milling operations decreased through the 1980s and 1990s, and water needs 

correspondingly decreased. With the decrease in mining and 

agriculture, municipal water became the primary use of San 

Andres/Glorieta water. 

Within the target area, there is a small population and 

no major agricultural land use. Most of the private land in 

the upper San Mateo Creek Basin outside of the town of San 

Mateo is part of the Lee Ranch (cattle ranch). Surface-water 

conveyances have been modified to support ranching operations. San Mateo Creek was dammed immediately above the 

town of San Mateo where incoming creek flow is allowed 

to infiltrate and discharges below the dam. Smaller retaining 

structures are present along El Rito and San Mateo Creeks on 

the valley floor for stock use. According to the New Mexico 

Water Rights System database managed by the New Mexico 

Office of the State Engineer (http://nmwrrs.ose.state.nm.us/

nmwrrs/index.html; database reviewed in 2010), most of the 

wells in and around the town of San Mateo draw water from 

the unconfined aquifer in the valley alluvium and Menefee 

Formation with the remaining wells drawing water from 

deeper Cretaceous formations.
10 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

Previous Studies

The upper San Mateo Creek Basin has not been studied 

as an entire hydrologic unit. There are a number of private 

company reports describing the hydrogeology of various locations in the target area because of the potential for U mining in 

these locations. These reports are in addition to a substantial 

amount of geologic work by the New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources such as the recent draft update 

to the San Mateo quadrangle (McCraw and others, 2009). 

The New Mexico Environment Department has conducted 

various monitoring programs in conjunction with regulatory 

monitoring by the mining companies, but these data have not 

been compiled by the New Mexico Environment Department 

to derive an overview of the hydrologic resources within the 

upper San Mateo Creek Basin.

Study Methods

The characterization of the geologic framework; regional 

aquifer properties; and springs, creeks, and seeps of the upper 

San Mateo Creek Basin was performed by compiling and 

analyzing existing hydrogeologic data supplemented with 

new data from the analysis of spring-, creek-, and seep-water 

samples collected as part of this study. Compilation of existing 

data for the study area consisted of reviewing databases managed by the USGS, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

and the State of New Mexico along with relevant and readily available journal articles and government and private 

consultant reports. The data were screened to only include 

data relevant to deposits and formations found in the target 

area—upper San Mateo Creek Basin. The larger study area 

was used to compile sufficient hydraulic and geochemical data 

to describe the general water-level and geochemical characteristics of the major aquifers that are present in the study and 

target areas. Most of the existing data compiled for this study 

ranged from the 1970s to 2009, but some data extend back to 

the 1940s (date of collection). This large temporal scale was 

included to allow for comparison of hydraulic and geochemical characteristics of the multiple aquifers relevant to the 

upper San Mateo Creek Basin. 

Existing Data

A review of the study area geology was necessary to 

establish the geologic framework containing the aquifers. 

Stratigraphic descriptions were created from existing literature 

and the review of drilling logs at the New Mexico Bureau 

of Geology and Mineral Resources. Groundwater hydraulic 

data (aquifer water levels and hydraulic conductivities) and 

chemistry data (major and trace elements along with contaminants of concern such as NO3

, Ra, and U) were compiled to 

analyze basin-wide hydrogeologic characteristics. Water-level 

differences were interpreted to identify general flow patterns 

of the major aquifers in the San Mateo Creek Basin where 

possible. Hydraulic conductivity and transmissivity of aquifers 

and between aquifers were assessed where available. Aquifers 

were characterized by comparing concordant data across the 

various saturated deposits and formations in the study area that 

were relevant to the target area. 

To analyze the data relevant to aquifers in the target area, 

formation designations were standardized to current (2011) 

accepted formation nomenclature. This standardization was 

necessary because of the length of the existing data record 

(1940s to 2009) during which formation identification has 

changed with certain formation names dropped from accepted 

use or added as additional studies continued to update the 

stratigraphic nomenclature of the region. Although it is a 

geologic group, the Chinle Group is treated similar to the 

formation designation because of a lack of discrimination of 

the Chinle Group’s formations in this area regarding hydrogeologic data (it was recently elevated to Group status1

). In 

addition to this name standardization, data associated with 

formation members were grouped under the formation name. 

This grouping increases the variability of the data subsets 

because of member differences, but this grouping provides a 

more consistent discussion with all differences described at 

the formation level. There are a number of alluvial, colluvial, 

and landslide Quaternary deposits in the study area, and these 

unconsolidated deposits were grouped under a Quaternary 

alluvium (Qa) hydrostratigraphic unit designation with the 

assumption that these unconsolidated layers should hydraulically behave as a single unit. Similarly, the volcanoclastics of 

the Mount Taylor Volcanic Field also were grouped as a single 

unit. It is not assumed that these igneous extrusive rocks have 

similar hydraulic properties, but these units likely contain only 

young water recently recharged from the surface. For purposes of this report, data associated with the Entrada, Todilto, 

Summerville, and Bluff Formations were grouped as a single 

hydrostratigraphic unit described as the Entrada Complex. 

These early to mid-Jurassic formations have not been well 

defined for the study area, and the Entrada Formation likely is 

the dominant formation of these predominantly sandstone and 

limestone layers. Additionally, a small percent of data were 

attributed to multiple formations. These multiple-formation 

samples were assigned to the uppermost formation for analysis. The uppermost formation was assumed to represent the 

greater thickness of the saturated interval of the well, because 

it could not be ascertained as to whether the lower formations were fully penetrated by the wells. Designating individual formations for multiple-formation data mostly affected 

samples collected from the San Andres/Glorieta aquifer. Some 

data were attributed to the San Andres Formation and some 

were attributed to the Glorieta Formation, but a substantial 

part of the data was attributed to both formations. The singleformation designation of multiple-formation data greatly 

1

The Chinle Group was elevated from formation status by Lucas (1993), but 

this status change has not been fully accepted (e.g., Dubiel, 1994, and Woody, 

2006). The Chinle Group designation is used for purposes of this report.
Study Methods 11

increased the San Andres Formation data set compared to the 

Glorieta Formation data set. In most cases, these two data sets 

can be considered representative of one aquifer because of the 

gradational contact between these formations and the two data 

sets are discussed as one regarding certain data.

Existing water-level data were compiled from publicly 

available sources to evaluate possible groundwater flow patterns. To visualize likely flow patterns of the aquifers, relative 

differences in water-level elevations are presented through a 

categorical analysis of the distribution of water-level values 

for various groups (deposit or geologic time period). Using 

the statistical program SPlus (Tibco Software, version 8.1; 

http://spotfire.tibco.com/products/s-plus/statistical-analysissoftware.aspx), each water level was assigned to one of seven 

distribution categories given their relative differences across 

the entire distribution of the selected group. The presentation 

is similar to a categorical boxplot but is presented spatially to 

view relative differences in water-level elevations across the 

study area. Water levels were not used to construct potentiometric-surface contours because of the substantial length of 

the temporal record of the data, the variety of collectors of the 

data, the possible variety of methods for determining depth to 

water or water-level elevation, and the known anthropogenic 

and natural influences on water levels in the target and study 

area during the temporal record of the data. This compilation 

of data from numerous sources collected over a long temporal 

record is best viewed from a relativistic perspective than a 

contoured solution that implies a known hydraulic gradient at 

some point in time. 

The median value and interquartile range (first and third 

quartiles that encompass 50 percent of the distribution) of 

water-level elevations were determined for each aquifer to 

grossly view water-level elevations across the study area. The 

statistics cannot be used to infer vertical hydraulic relations 

between aquifers because of a lack of substantial overlap of 

wells between aquifers within the study area. Erosion of the 

landscape exposed older formations at the surface in various 

areas that provides major recharge entry points to the lower 

aquifer formations. It is assumed that a substantial portion 

of recharge to the lower, unconfined/semi-confined/confined 

(depending on restrictive overlying layers) aquifers is occurring at these surface exposures in areas of higher precipitation 

and concentrated flow that would allow recharge in this semiarid climate (Zuni Mountains, mesas, Mount Taylor, surfacewater bodies), and the groundwater then moves eastward and 

northeastward in the geologic structure and likely interacts 

with overlying or underlying aquifers as has been observed 

for the San Andres/Glorieta aquifer (Baldwin and Anderholm, 

1992). The water level of each aquifer reflects the sum of the 

recharge elevations at any one location. The median of each 

aquifer’s water-level data set represents a center point in the 

distribution of data that minimizes the influences of local 

effects such as dewatering from mining or other temporary 

withdrawals or inputs, and the interquartile range provides 

an estimation of the similarity or difference in water-level 

elevation ranges between aquifers across the study area. 

Existing major-ion data were screened to eliminate 

samples missing any of the major cations (Ca, Mg, and Na) 

or anions (HCO3 or alkalinity, SO4, and Cl). A review of pH 

values indicated that conversion of alkalinity values to HCO3

was appropriate (majority of all recorded pH values within 

the range of 7.0 to 8.5), and a single HCO3 value was determined for each sample that contained an alkalinity value by 

multiplying the value by 1.22. The total cation content in 

the samples (in milliequivalents per liter) had to balance 

within 10 percent of the total anion content in the samples 

for inclusion in the water-type analysis. The 10-percent 

acceptable-balance criteria was used instead of the more 

accepted 5-percent criteria because of the likely variability 

of sampling and analysis by different data collectors and 

laboratories. Samples were aggregated by geologic deposit or 

formation, and average major-element concentrations, along 

with dissolved-solids concentrations, were calculated for each 

aquifer. All groupings by deposit or formation balanced within 

the 10-percent acceptable criteria for the averaged concentrations. Average concentrations were chosen because median 

concentrations did not meet the ion-balance criteria.

For dissolved trace-elements and contaminants-ofconcern data, estimated concentrations (greater than the 

method detection level (MDL) but less than the reporting 

level) were accepted as actual concentrations. Some existing 

data sources presented MDLs and some sources only indicated nondetect data points. No attempts were made to include 

nondetect data, because of the lack of consistency in available 

MDLs and substantial presentation of nondetect data points 

without any indication of a detection level. Analysis of traceelement and contaminants-of-concern data sets were limited to 

only the detected presence of the constituents because of the 

lack of control regarding the left-tail of the distribution with 

the variable MDLs and non-inclusion of nondetect data.

New Data

To supplement the groundwater characterization, surfacewater samples were collected from seven spring, creek, and 

seep locations in the target area in August 2009 and May 2010 

(fig. 7 and table 1). Sites were selected by the availability of 

water. Three springs were flowing in the target area during 

the sampling periods. The spring sites are located along the 

southern (El Rito Creek and San Mateo Creek springs) and 

eastern (San Lucas Creek spring) rims of the basin (fig. 7) 

where recharge to the discharging aquifer(s) likely occurs 

from infiltration of precipitation occurring on Mount Taylor. 

These springs discharged from sandstone layers underlain 

by shales immediately below the volcanoclastic caps that 

form the top layers of the mesas. Samples also were collected 

downgradient from the springs on San Mateo and El Rito 

Creeks where the creeks transition from the steep gradients of 

the mesas to the valley floor. The most downstream sampling 

locations were seeps where ponding water was found along 

El Rito and San Mateo Creeks on the valley floor. The seeps 
Figure 7. Sampling sites and surface topography of the upper San Mateo Creek Basin. 

605

509

605

547

Rd 239

Rd 453

Rd 192 Rd 456

Rd 555 Rd 75 San Lucas Rd

Rd 239

Rd 453

La Jara Mesa

San Mateo Mesa

Jesus Mesa

San Mateo Creek

El Rito Creek

San Lucas Creek

San Miguel Creek

Cañada las Vacas

El Rito Creek

Arroyo del Puerto

San Mateo

San Mateo Creek

Base from U.S. Geological Survey 1:24,000 and 1:100,000 digital dataProjection: Universal Transverse Mercator zone 13N, North American Datum of 1983, North American Vertical Datum of 1988

0 2 

0 2 4 KILOME

N

“Rd” indicates county or U.S. Forest Service road

El Rito CreekSpring

El Rito Creek

El Rito Creek Seep

San Mateo Creek Seep

San Mateo Spring

San Lucas Spring

San Mateo Creek

Sampling site

Stock tank or pond

Cibola National Forest

Cebolla land grant

State lands

 EXPLANATION

35 ̊ 25 ́35 ̊ 20 ́35 ̊ 15 ́

107 ̊ 45 ́ 107 ̊ 40 ́ 107 ̊ 35 ́
Study Methods 13

were present where shallow groundwater is near the surface 

as indicated by numerous salt deposits and visible signs of 

ephemeral or intermittent springs and shallow water levels 

in nearby piezometers. All samples were analyzed for field 

properties (water temperature, pH, specific conductance, and 

dissolved oxygen), dissolved solids, major elements (Ca, Mg, 

Na, K, HCO3, SO4, and Cl), trace elements (Al, Sb, As, Ba, B, 

Be, Cd, Cr, Co, Cu, Fe, Li, Pb, Mn, Hg, Mo, Ni, Se, Si, Ag, 

Na, Tl, V, and Zn), stable isotopes of water (δ2H and δ18O), 

and contaminants of concern that have historically exceeded 

maximum contaminant levels in this area (gross alpha activity, NO3

, Ra, and U; table 2). Stable isotopes of hydrogen 

(2H/1H) and oxygen (18O/16O) composing water are reported 

as δ2H and δ18O per mil (‰), which is the ratio of the stableisotopic abundances of an element in a sample to those of 

the Vienna Mean Standard Ocean Water (VSMOW; Révész 

and Coplen, 2008a; Révész and Coplen, 2008b). All samples 

were collected as grab samples from atmospherically-exposed 

surfaces and filtered through a 0.45-micron capsule filter using 

a peristaltic pump and new, individual Teflon-coated tubing at 

each site.

The creek- and seep-solute concentrations were used to 

model potential geochemical mass-balance reactions between 

the creek sample sites and the seep sample sites on El Rito and 

San Mateo Creeks. These point-to-point locations represent 

the evolution of creek flow from groundwater discharged at 

the mesas to infiltration and flow through the valley alluvium 

and reappearance at downstream seeps. The reemerged shallow groundwater likely undergoes greater evaporation on the 

valley floor as it reappears at the surface through seep discharge that produces quiescent shallow ponds. Additionally, 

relative to water that remains on the surface as creek flow, 

water that infiltrates into the alluvium would be expected to 

undergo greater rock-water interactions as it migrates more 

slowly along the valley floor. This rock-water interaction was 

visible in the addition of clays and likely associated oxide 

polymorphs that were apparent in the samples collected from 

the seep sites. Some of these clays were present in the seep 

samples following filtration and are considered part of the 

“dissolved” fraction for concentration analysis because of acid 

preservation of the samples that draws elements from the clays 

and oxides into solution. Inclusion of elements associated with 

the clays that passed through the 0.45-micron filters influences 

charge balance determination and trace-element concentrations as trace elements sorbed to these very fine particles are 

not included for determining the charge balance (potential for 

imbalance with this exclusion) and may increase the concentration of typically low solubility trace elements such as 

aluminum (Al). 

The geochemical model NETPATH (Plummer and others, 

1994) was used to model the geochemical reactions between 

the creek and seep sites using the NETPATH-WIN interface 

(El-Kadi and Fujiwara, 2009). Each model of the creek to seep 

flow path for El Rito and San Mateo Creeks was constrained 

by specific elements that were identified as having substantial 

mass flux between the creek and seep sites with consideration for the changes in flow type (open channel to shallow 

groundwater) and the introduction of clays and oxides to the 

water as shallow groundwater travels through predominantly 

aluminosilicate alluvium and formations. Mineral phases were 

chosen based on the local geology, the introduction of aluminosilicate clays and Fe and Mn oxides that passed through the 

0.45-micron filter as part of the “dissolved” fraction, and a 

review of possible mineral phases produced from the calculation of saturation indices (log of the ratio of the ion activity 

product (IAP) and the solubility product (Ksp) from entering 

all available solute concentrations into PHREEQC (Parkhurst 

and Appelo, 1999) using the PHREEQCi interface (version 

2.17.0); http://wwwbrr.cr.usgs.gov/projects/GWC_coupled/

phreeqci/). The selected mineral phases represent the thermodynamically preferred mineral forms given the available element concentrations and general aqueous chemical conditions 

Table 1. Information for the spring-, creek-, and seep-sample sites in the upper San Mateo Creek Basin.

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; ft, feet; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988]

Local site 

name 

(fig. 7)

USGS 

site name

Latitude 

(NAD 83)

Longitude 

(NAD 83)

Land-surface 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

Exiting or flow 

through deposit/

formation

El Rito Creek spring 351710107412001 35o17 ́09.7 ̋ 107o41 ́19.6 ̋ 7,935 Volcanoclastic and upper Menefee

El Rito Creek 351828107411301 35o18 ́28.3 ̋ 107o41 ́13.1 ̋ 7,260 Menefee

El Rito Creek seep 351950107413101 35o19 ́49.5 ̋ 107o41 ́31.4 ̋ 7,023 Alluvium

San Mateo Creek spring 351649107355701 35o16 ́49.0 ̋ 107o35 ́57.4 ̋ 8,945 Volcanoclastic

San Mateo Creek 351918107375301 35o19 ́17.5 ̋ 107o37 ́53.2 ̋ 7,520 Menefee

San Mateo Creek seep 352017107410301 35o20 ́17.4 ̋ 107o41 ́03.2 ̋ 7,041 Alluvium

San Lucas Creek spring 352045107361701 35o20 ́44.7 ̋ 107o36 ́17.3 ̋ 7,871 Volcanoclastic and Menefee
14 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

(pH, temperature, and dissolved oxygen), but these selected 

mineral phases are not meant to indicate the only minerals likely to dissolve or precipitate or be available for cation 

exchange/sorption. These mineral phases are useful for viewing the mass flux of the available solutes between aqueous 

and solid phases with changes in element compositions and 

concentrations. 

Model results describe the mass transfers of the selected 

mineral phases that account for the observed changes within 

the constrained elements. Models were run with creek data 

representing the initial solution and the seep data representing the final solution. Evaporation was included as an effect 

along with the dissolution and precipitation of the mineral 

phases to account for changes in the water chemistry between 

the initial and final solutions. Cation exchange was attempted 

in the geochemical models but dismissed as an examinable 

process because of the leaching of elements from the less 

than 0.45-micron clays and oxides with acidification of the 

collected samples that altered the dissolved to exchange-site 

element ratios. A CO2 phase did indicate changes between the 

creek and seep sites, but this phase is not presented because of 

the lack of organic C data that would hinder this discussion, 

but this flux is visible in the pH differences between the sites. 

The mass transfer estimates of the dissolution or precipitation 

of mineral phases are represented by a positive (dissolution) 

or negative (precipitation) value in millimoles per kilogram 

(mmol/kg) of water, and the evaporation effect is quantified 

through an estimated value of the remaining water solution in 

grams as indicated by an outputted evaporation factor (concentrations increased by this multiplier through evaporation). 

Quality-Assurance 

Surface-water data collection was performed according to USGS quality-control and quality-assurance standards 

described in the USGS National Field Manual for the Collection of Water-Quality Data (U.S. Geological Survey, 2006). 

One sequential replicate sample was collected during each 

sampling period at a randomly selected site to evaluate laboratory precision, and matrix-spike samples were collected at the 

same site to ascertain matrix interference for all constituents. 

All replicate-sample results were within 10 percent of the 

environmental-sample results for concentrations greater than 

the reporting level, and matrix-spike sample results were 

within allowable laboratory limits. Additionally, laboratoryblank samples were analyzed to examine method contamination and no analytes were detected above the reporting level in 

the laboratory-blank samples. 

Table 2. Sample analytes and laboratory analysis methods.

[oC, degrees Celsius; %, percent; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius; NTU, nephelometric turbidity units; mg/L, milligrams per liter; 

μg/L, micrograms per liter; pCi/L, picocuries per liter; USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; δxX (‰) = (Ratiosample/Ratiostandard − 1) x 1,000 of specified isotope ratio; 

‰, per mil]

Constituent Description Method/lab code Medium Laboratory Analytical 

precision

Field values Water temperature, pH, 

conductance, turbidity

Orion 130A, Orion 250A+, 

Oakton T-100 (field meters)

Water Field collection 0.1 oC, 0.02 pH, 

0.5% μS/cm, 

0.1 NTU

Dissolved solids Filterable residue 1MCAWW 2540C Water TestAmerica Labs, 

Arvada, Co.

5 mg/L

Alkalinity Alkalinity as CaCO3

1

MCAWW 2320B Water TestAmerica Labs 1.1 mg/L

Major anions Br, Cl, F, SO4

1

MCAWW 300.0A Water TestAmerica Labs 0.06 to 1.2 mg/L

Major cations Ca, Mg, Na, K 1SW846 6010B Water TestAmerica Labs 0.034 to 1.1 mg/L

Trace elements 224 trace elements 1SW846 6010B, 6020, 7470A Water TestAmerica Labs 0.01 to 2 μg/L

Nitrate NO3 + NO2 as N 1USEPA 353.2 Water TestAmerica Labs 0.05 mg/L

Gross alpha 3USEPA 900.0 Water TestAmerica Labs 1 pCi/L

Radium isotopes Alpha-emitting isotopes 

of Ra (226Ra and 228Ra)

1

USEPA 903.0 and 904.0 Water TestAmerica Labs 1 pCi/L

Stable isotopes of water 2H/1H, 18O/16O Révész and Coplen, 2008a 

and b

Water USGS Reston Stable 

Isotope Laboratory

2‰ as δ2H and 

0.2‰ δ18O

1

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2009.

2

Al, Sb, As, Ba, B, Be, Cd, Cr, Co, Cu, Fe, Li, Pb, Mn, Hg, Mo, Ni, Se, Si, Ag, Tl, U, V, and Zn.

3

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1993. 
Geologic Framework and Regional Aquifer Properties 15

Geologic Framework and Regional 

Aquifer Properties 

Regional data were used to describe the geologic, 

hydraulic, and geochemical characteristics of the aquifers of 

the study area regarding formations relevant to the target area. 

Geologic and hydraulic characteristics include stratigraphy, 

formation properties, groundwater-flow patterns derived from 

existing water-level differences, and published hydraulic conductivities measured in the field or laboratory. Geochemically, 

groundwater variation among the aquifers was examined by 

reviewing existing data for differences in pH, dissolved solids, 

water type defined by the major elements, trace elements, and 

contaminants of concern. 

San Mateo Creek Basin Geology

The geologic framework of the study area consists of 

the Zuni Uplift, Chaco Slope, and the Mount Taylor Volcanic 

Field. Within this structural context, the sedimentary formations provide matrices for local and regional aquifers. Information regarding the study area stratigraphy was compiled 

along with associated aquifer information to present a table of 

deposit, formation, and aquifer properties that are relevant to 

the hydrologic resources of the target area (table 3). For this 

report, aquifers are described by the individual formations or 

deposits where groundwater is present. These descriptions are 

used to refer to the saturated portions of deposits or formations 

but are not meant to discriminate separate aquifers. Many 

of the aquifers likely are well-connected, but investigation 

of those connections is beyond the scope of this report. The 

distribution of the aquifers is spatially variable because of the 

dip of the formations and erosion that produced the current 

landscape configuration where older formations have been 

exhumed closer to the Zuni Mountains.

The thicknesses and range of deposits and formations 

present a potentially complex interaction of aquifers in the 

study and target areas. Many of the deposits and formations 

likely are hydraulically connected because of the solid-matrix 

properties, such as porosity and permeability (table 3), but the 

Mancos Formation (including the Mulatto Tongue) and Chinle 

Group likely restrict vertical flow given the shaly composition 

of these formations. The Mancos is a near-surface formation 

that may not be present in parts of the study and target areas 

because of thinning and erosion. It is more prevalent on the 

mesas and strongly visible at the surface of Jesus and San 

Mateo Mesas (fig. 8). The limited presence of the Mancos 

in the valley areas lessens its role as a potential inhibitor of 

vertical flow to the lower aquifers. The Chinle Group is a thick 

sequence of predominantly shale and silt that likely acts as a 

strong inhibitor to vertical flow between the overlying Jurassic 

formations and the underlying Permian formations. The Chinle 

Group is exposed at the surface west of the target area in the 

lower San Mateo Creek Basin (fig. 4). 

Hydraulic Properties of Major Aquifers

Groundwater in the study area occurs in numerous deposits and formations that form unconfined and confined aquifers, 

and recharge occurs in highlands such as the Zuni Mountains 

and Mount Taylor. Horizontal flow is driven by these recharge 

areas and the regional tilt of the landscape, but local effects 

such as the McCarty Syncline and differences in recharge 

locations likely influence local conditions. Vertical flow likely 

is occurring among many of the formations except where 

restricted by shaly formations such as the Menefee, Mancos, 

and Chinle. Existing water-level elevations compiled as part of 

this study are listed in appendix 1.

Horizontal Flow

Available water-level data were evaluated to try and 

identify general flow patterns within each of the aquifers. Only 

water-level data from the alluvium aquifer provided an indication of flow direction in the study and target areas. Water-level 

elevations in the alluvium aquifer decrease in the downstream 

direction along San Mateo Creek (fig. 9). This observation is 

consistent with Baldwin and Anderholm’s (1992) determination that groundwater flow in the alluvium aquifer generally is 

the same direction as that of surface water (or land topology) 

for this region. The water-level data from the lower aquifers 

in the sedimentary formations did not indicate similar relative 

differences in water-level elevations across the study area that 

could be interpreted as prevalent flow directions across the 

study or target areas. The relative distribution of water-level 

elevations in the study area for the lower aquifers is presented 

(fig. 10) as groupings of water levels for formations from 

geologic periods to indicate the variability in relative waterlevel elevations among each of the period groupings and no 

apparent flow directions from differences in relative waterlevel elevations. The large temporal and spatial extent of the 

water-level data (fig. 10 and table 1-1) appears to hinder identification of the general flow patterns for these deeper aquifers. 

In the target area, it is likely that groundwater in these lower 

aquifers generally flows eastward given the hydrogeologic 

framework where formation dip is eastward across the target 

area and the eastward flow direction identified by Baldwin 

and Anderholm (1992) for the San Andres/Glorieta aquifer. 

If the flow direction in the underlying aquifers is to the east 

in the target area, this flow direction is opposite of the flow 

direction in the alluvium aquifer in the upper San Mateo Creek 

Basin. Opposing flow directions would be a result of different 

recharge areas and the unconsolidated alluvium that conforms 

to the topological gradient compared to the consolidated formations that have a regional opposing gradient. 

The influence of faults on groundwater flow was not 

investigated as part of this study, but the presence of numerous normal faults in the target area (fig. 6) likely influences 

groundwater flow. Faults can inhibit flow by disconnecting 

permeable pathways or by reducing porosity from fault gouge, 
Table 3. Stratigraphic, lithologic, and aquifer characteristics of geologic deposits and formations in the study and target areas.—Continued [ft, feet; %, percent; NA, not available; <, less than] Deposit/ formation Geologic age 1Deposit/formation description Surface location in the target area (figs. 4 and 8) Thickness (ft) Porosity/ permeability 1Direct

of flow 

Quarternary Alluvium (Qa) Quaternary— upper Pleistocene to Holocene Alluvium eroded from surrounding formations Valley floor Highly variable Possibly large perme- ability Variable 

Neogene Flows and volca- noclastics (Tnv and Tpb) Neogene Lava, pyroclastic flows, and associated volcanoclastics from the Mount Taylor Volcanic Field Forms mesa caps on basin highlands Highly variable Possible large porosity in vesicular basalts, but low permeability unless fractured Away fr

MounTaylo

Cretaceous Menefee (Kmf) Late Cretaceous Interbedded mudstones, siltstones, fine- to medium-grained sandstones, mudstones, and thin coals Northeastern part of basin 2Highly variable (eroded), up to 1,000 ft thick 30% sandstone, 65% shale, decent lense permeability East to northe

Point Lookout (Kpl) Late Cretaceous Medium to fine-grained, cross-bedded sandstone Exposed along northern rim areas 4,5120 Likely porous with sandstone dominance East to northeCrevasse Canyon (Kcc) Late Cretaceous Interbedded siltstone, sandstone, and coal with thin conglomerates Exposed along rim 5800 Highly variable East to northeMulatto Tongue of Mancos (Kmm) Late Cretaceous Thin-bedded, tabular to ripple-laminated sandstone (well to moderately sorted and very fine grained) and black mudstone Exposed along rim 5305 Larger porosity than main body of Man- cos shale East to northeGallup (Kg) Late Cretaceous Cross-bedded, moderately-sorted, very fine- to fine-grained sandstone Exposed along rim 573–85 Likely porous with sandstone dominance East to northeMancos (Km) Middle Cretaceous Mudstone and silty mudstone with finely laminated to cross-bedded thin sandstone layers (well sorted and fine grained) Exposed along base of mesas on northern basin boundary 5125–710 Small permeability given dominance of shale layers East to northeDakota (Kd) Middle Cretaceous 5Sandstones derived from marine shore- faces, intertongues with Mancos Exposed along base of mesa on the south- west basin boundary 550–60 Likely porous with sandstone dominance East to northe

Jurassic Morrison (Jm) Upper 

Jurassic

Mudstone and sandstone Minor exposure on La 

Jara Mesa

2,5700 Highly variable East to 

northe

5Entrada Complex—Early to Middle Jurassic composed of the Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations

Table 3. Stratigraphic, lithologic, and aquifer characteristics of geologic deposits and formations in the study and target areas.[ft, feet; %, percent; NA, not available; <, less than] 
Table 3. Stratigraphic, lithologic, and aquifer characteristics of geologic deposits and formations in the study and target areas.—Continued[ft, feet; %, percent; NA, not available; <, less than]

Deposit/

formation

Geologic 

age

1Deposit/formation 

description

Surface location in

the target area 

(figs. 4 and 8)

Thickness 

(ft)

Porosity/

permeability

1Direct

of flow

Bluff (Jb) Middle 

Jurassic

Sandstone Not exposed in the basin 2<5–300 Small permeability for 

a sandstone2

East to 

northe

Summerville (Js) Middle 

Jurassic

Thin alternating beds of mudstone, siltstone, and sandstone Not exposed in the basin NA NA East to northe

Todilto (Jt) Early Jurassic Limestone Not exposed in the basin NA NA East to 

northe

Entrada (Je) Early Jurassic 2A three member formation consisting 

of upper and lower sandstones with a middle siltstone

Not exposed in the basin NA NA East to 

northe

Triassic

Chinle Group 

(TRc)

Triassic 7Mudstone and siltstone with clayey/silty 

sandstone lenses

Not exposed in the basin 71,250 7Small East to 

northe

Permian

San Andres (Psa) Late Permian 8Marine, upper and lower massive fossiliferous limestone separated by a 

sandstone unit

Not exposed in the basin 7225 (San 

Andres and Glorieta)

Large permeability 7East 

Glorieta (Pg) Middle to late 

Permian

8Massive, well-sorted, well-cemented, fineto medium-grained sandstone Not exposed in the basin NA 7East 

Yeso (Py) Early Permian 7,9Sandstone, clayey sandstone, and siltstone mixed with carbonates and evaporites deposited under marine conditions Not exposed in the basin 11,000 7Small permeability UnknowAbo (Pa) Early Permian 7Fine- to coarse-grained sandstone, 

siltstone, and mudstone with conglomerates in the lower unit deposited during continental conditions

Not exposed in the basin 71,000 7Small permeability Unknow

1Descriptions from McCraw and others (2009) and New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources (2003) unless otherwise noted. The flow-direction indication depe

references. According to the references, flow directions were mostly northeastward closer to the Zuni Mountains and more eastward closer to the McCarty Syncline under Moun

2Stone and others, 1983.3Given a review of existing local and regional information, a productive aquifer is unlikely present in these formations within the study area but small amounts of groundwate4Maximum thickness.5Roca Honda Resources, LLC, 2009a.6Entrada Complex—this term is used solely for this report to describe the early to late Jurassic deposits that have not been well discriminated in the study area. The Entrada is 

presence of the Todilto has been identified by the authors from review of driller’s notes. The presence of Bluff and Summerville Formations in this area is debatable and beyond 

7Baldwin and Anderholm, 1992.8Gordon, 1961.9Baars, 1962. 
Figure 8. Surface geology of the upper San Mateo Creek Basin.

K d

K ml

Volcanic rocks(Tnv)

Tmb

Ql

Kcc

Ql

Qa

Qa

Q

Kmf

Kmf

Jsr

Kcc

Kcc

Kg Km

m

Kml

Kcc

Jm

Jm San Mateo Creek

El Rito Creek

San Lucas Creek

San Miguel Creek

San Mateo

El Rito Creek

San Mateo Creek

605

509

605

547

Rd 239

Rd 453

Rd 192 Rd 456

Rd 556

Arroyo del Puerto

La Jara Mesa

San Mateo Mesa

Jesus Mesa

Lava flows(Tmb)

Menefee(Kmf)

Point Lookout(Kpl)

Crevasse Canyon(Kcc)

Mancos,Mulatto Tongue(Kmm)

Lower Mancos(Kml)

Gallup(Kg)

Dakota-Mancos(Kdm)

Dakota(Kd)

Colluvium(Ql)

Alluvium(Qa)

San Rafael,undivided(Jsr)

Morrison(Jm)

Cañada las Vacas

Spring

Creek

Seep

Spring

Creek

Seep

Spring

Base from U.S. Geological Survey 1:24,000 and 1:100,000 digital data.Projection: Universal Transverse Mercator zone 13N, North American Datum of 1983.Geology from New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources 1:500,000 digital data.

0 2 

0 2 4 KILOME

N

Spring, creek, or seep sampling site

EXPLANATION

35 ̊ 25 ́35 ̊ 20 ́35 ̊ 15 ́

107 ̊ 45 ́ 107 ̊ 40 ́ 107 ̊ 35 ́
Geologic Framework and Regional Aquifer Properties 19

Figure 9. Relative differences in water-level elevations for the distribution of water-level data compiled for wells with screens located 

in the Quaternary alluvium. Discrete water-level data are presented in appendix 1. 

605

509

. x

0 3 6 9 12 MILES

0 4 8 12 KILOMETERS

108°00'' 107°45'

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

Projection: Universal Transverse Mercator zone 13N, 

North American Datum of 1983, North American 

Vertical Datum of 1988

Rio San Jose

San Mateo Creek

40

40

Lower water-level elevation Higher water-level elevation

Water-level elevation comparison

 The relative difference in water levels is presented through a categorical analysis of the distribution of water-level values. Using the 

 statistical program SPlus (Tibco Software, version 8.1), each water level was assigned to one of seven distribution categories as 

 determined by the overall distribution of water levels found in the Quarternary alluivum for the period of record. The presentation is 

 similar to a categorical boxplot

Developed area

 EXPLANATION

35 ̊ 30 ́

35 ̊ 20 ́

Mount Taylor

Grants Milan
20 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

Figure 10. Relative differences in water-level elevations for the distribution of water-level data compiled for wells with screens 

located in Cretaceous, Jurassic, Triassic, and Permian formations. Discrete water-level data are presented in appendix 1. 

0 3 6 9 12 MILES

0 4 8 12 KILOMETERS

108°00' 107°45'

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

Projection: Universal Transverse Mercator zone 13N, 

North American Datum of 1983, 

North American Vertical Datum of 1988

Milan Grants

Rio San Jose

Mount

Taylor

40

40

6 0 5

5 0 9

. x

San Mateo Creek

Triassic formations

Jurassic formations

Cretaceous formations

Permian formations

Age period grouping of wells

 The relative difference in water levels is presented through a categorical analysis of the distribution of water-level values for each geologic

 age grouping (formations grouped by period). Using the statistical program SPlus (Tibco Software, version 8.1), each water level was 

 assigned to one of seven distribution categories as determined by the overall distribution of water levels found in each period grouping. 

 Each period grouping is separate, and similar-sized symbols between period groupings does not indicate similar water-level elevations. 

 The presentation is similar to a categorical boxplot for each of the individual period groupings

35 ̊ 30 ́

35 ̊ 15 ́

Lower water-level elevation Higher water-level elevation

Water-level elevation comparison

Developed area

 EXPLANATION
Geologic Framework and Regional Aquifer Properties 21

but faults also can create higher permeable pathways along the 

fault trace (Fetter, 2001). The influence of faults is dependent 

upon the material in the fault zone. There likely is substantial displacement along some of the faults in the target area 

(fig. 6), but given the consolidated nature and thickness of the 

sedimentary formations, it is likely that faults in the study area 

enhance groundwater flow by increasing hydraulic conductivity across the fault zones, as has been observed on regional 

scales with porous, sedimentary formations (Garven, 1995). 

Faults as barriers or conduits for groundwater flow, however, 

depend on the individual nature of a fault (Garven, 1995).

Water-Level Elevations

Median values and the interquartile range of the waterlevel elevations were ascertained for each aquifer in the study 

area. These statistics represent the midpoint of the data set 

and 50 percent of its distribution that allows water levels in 

the aquifers to be viewed without influence of outliers that 

may skew inferences about the data. In the San Juan Basin, it 

is common for there to be substantial differences in the water 

levels of the various aquifers in the basin and up to 200 ft 

or more of difference has been identified (Stone and others, 

1983). Within the study area, data for the various aquifers 

indicate 10s to 100s of ft of difference between median waterlevel elevations with minimal overlap in the range of uncertainty as indicated by the interquartile ranges except between 

the Dakota and Morrison Formations (table 4). Higher water 

elevations are found in the upper formations. Water-level 

elevations generally decrease with depth, although these 

values cannot be compared directly as the data of each aquifer 

represents only that discrete area within the study area containing each aquifer’s wells (see figs. 9 and 10 for the distribution of wells by age groupings). Insufficient overlap of wells 

inhibits the interpretation of general vertical flow directions 

between aquifers in the study area.

The changing basal unit beneath the valley alluvium 

alters shallow groundwater flow because of differences in 

permeability of the basal unit that allows or restricts vertical 

migration of groundwater. In the eastern part of the basin, the 

presence of the Menefee Formation appears to restrict downward migration of groundwater from the valley alluvium. The 

Menefee Formation consists of interbedded shales, siltstones, 

and sandstones and is underlain by the Point Lookout Formation (sandstone) (table 3). It is likely that the portion of 

the valley alluvium that is underlain by the Point Lookout 

instead of the Menefee (western part of the target area) allows 

greater opportunity for downward migration of water from the 

alluvium aquifer. This geologic transition from the Menefee to 

Point Lookout has a surface expression of numerous seeps and 

salt deposits present along the creek from the eastern part of 

the basin to the confluence of El Rito and San Mateo Creeks. 

Downgradient or westward of this location, seeps and salt 

deposits are no longer present, and the Point Lookout Formation underlies the alluvium in this area (figs. 4 and 8). 

Groundwater within the Chinle Group is confined 

(Frenzel, 1992), and upward migration from this aquifer 

into the Morrison Formation may be possible although the 

restricted nature of the water-elevation data sets do not 

allow for such a determination, given the limited overlap of 

Table 4. Water-level elevation statistics for aquifers in consolidated formations in the study area.

[All values have been rounded to the nearest 5 feet; values are only shown for aquifers containing nine or more data points; NA, not available]

Deposit/formation General formation 

description1

Water-level 

elevation 

median

Water-level 

elevation 

interquartile 

range2

Number of 

water-level 

values in the 

study area

Menefee (Kmf) Mudstone, siltstone, and sandstone 7,190 7,130–7,240 61

Point Lookout (Kpl) Sandstone 6,975 6,940–7,045 10

Crevasse Canyon (Kcc) Siltstone and sandstone NA NA 0

Mulatto Tongue of Mancos (Kmm) Sandstone and mudstone NA NA 0

Gallup (Kg) Sandstone NA NA 2

Mancos (Km) Mudstone and sandstone 6,815 6,710–6,830 9

Dakota (Kd) Sandstones 6,615 6,495–6,790 13

Morrison (Jm) Mudstone and sandstone 6,550 6,530–6,585 92

Entrada Complex Sandstone, siltstone, mudstone, and limestone NA NA 3

Chinle Group (TRc) Mudstone and siltstone 6,685 6,570–6,750 49

San Andres (Psa) Limestone 6,455 6,440–6,480 30

1

See table 3 for full formation description.

2

The interquartile range consists of the first and third quartiles, thereby encompassing 50 percent of the distribution. 
22 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

water-level elevations between these aquifers. Water-level 

data for the Entrada Complex consisted of only three data 

points, and median and interquartile range values of the waterlevel elevation were not calculated. The Entrada Complex, 

located between the Morrison and the Chinle, should have 

sufficient permeability (table 3), given its sandstone dominance, to allow vertical movement of water through this 

formation. Flow through the Entrada Complex will depend 

upon available flow paths through the sandstones (or lack of 

restrictive layers such as thin mudstones that may be present 

in the Entrada Complex) and the local relation between the 

various potentiometric surfaces.

Hydraulic Conductivity

Hydraulic conductivity (K) is the capacity of a rock to 

transmit water and represents the volume of water that will 

move through a unit area of an aquifer’s matrix given a specific unit of time and hydraulic gradient (Heath, 1983). With 

the substantial variation in composition of the deposits and 

formations in the study area, K values likely are highly variable, horizontally and vertically, within and between formations. The alluvium aquifer’s K likely is highly variable, but 

published values indicate the possibility for relatively quick 

groundwater flow through the alluvium aquifer (table 5). 

The K values of other surficial deposits, such as the volcanoclastics atop the mesas, likely are more site specific and 

dependent upon depositional characteristics and fracturing as 

indicated by the large estimated K range for these deposits 

(table 5). 

Few K data are available within the study area for the 

deeper aquifers, but inferences can be made for the various 

aquifers, given formation characteristics and the limited K 

data. Generally, matrices that are unconsolidated, composed of 

larger grain sizes, well-sorted, less cemented, highly fractured, 

or strongly weathered would have larger K values compared 

to matrices with opposing characteristics. Brod and Stone 

(1981) and Stone and others (1983) compiled characteristics 

of the study area Neogene, Cretaceous, and Jurassic formations within the San Juan Basin related to aquifer K values 

(table 5). The characteristics listed in table 5 are highly variable but provide an indicator of the gradation of deposition 

of the nonmarine sediments composing the Cretaceous and 

Jurassic formations found in the study area. Fracturing of the 

formations is not inferred by any of these characteristics, and 

fracturing can provide substantial pathways for flow. None 

of the characteristics listed in table 5 can be used to estimate 

the overall K of an aquifer contained within a formation, but 

taken together these characteristics can potentially indicate 

which formations may have larger relative K values. The 

shale-dominated Chinle Group has relatively small horizontal 

K values (table 5) and correspondingly small vertical K values 

of 3 x 10-5 to 1 x 10-4 ft/d (area sampled was north of Milan in 

the lower San Mateo Creek Basin (Hydro-Engineering, written 

commun., 1983)). Hydraulic conductivities of the San Andres/

Glorieta aquifer can be the largest of all the deeper formation 

aquifers (table 5). 

Groundwater Composition of Major Aquifers

Insufficient data exist to fully describe the geochemical 

environments of the various aquifers and how they change 

with time, but sufficient data exist to evaluate overall water 

types and detections of trace element and contaminants of 

concern (apps. 2, 3, and 4) in the study area. 

Major Elements

Water types in the study area are Na-HCO3/SO4 or mixed 

cation-mixed anion with some Ca-HCO3 water, and the variation of major elements primarily is between changes in Na 

and Ca and HCO3 and SO4 (fig. 11A, B, and C; app. 2). The 

major-element variations appear related to typical weathering of silicate minerals and a few common evaporite minerals. Comparison of fresh granitic-type rock to weathered 

material has shown a possible introduction of the following 

elements in order of greatest contribution to solution: Na, Ca, 

Mg, K, Fe (strongly dependent on redox conditions), and Si 

(Langmuir, 1997). Depending on the level of mineral weathering, clays are primarily aluminosilicates with bound cations 

that may exchange with groundwater solutes (Bullen and 

Kendall, 1998). For an aqueous environment in a siliciclastic 

matrix, major anions primarily are influenced by atmospheric 

precipitation and soil concentrations because of the lack of 

these elements in igneous minerals. Bicarbonate is primarily influenced by atmospheric and soil gas inputs (carbon 

dioxide) and subsequent redox reactions that can decrease 

HCO3 in aquifers, although increases in HCO3 can indicate 

weathering of CO3-rich minerals such as limestone (CaCO3), 

which are not present in any substantial amount in the study 

area. The change from a water type of Ca–Mg–HCO3 to larger 

dissolved-solids concentrations and Na–SO4–Cl groundwater 

is common with dissolution of evaporite minerals such as gypsum (CaSO4

·H2O) and halite (NaCl) (Vengosh, 2003), which 

also are not present in the study area in substantial amounts. 

Very little Cl is present in the aquifers in the study area except 

for a sample from the Chinle Group, which also indicated SO4-

dominant samples and groundwater with the largest dissolvedsolids concentrations. The possible addition of Cl or SO4

 with 

evaporite mineral dissolution in the Chinle aquifer is difficult 

to attribute to any specific flow path and interaction with a 

certain formation in the Chinle Group given the gross nature 

of this analysis, but evaporite deposits have been observed 

in the Chinle Group in the region (Heckert and Lucas, 2003). 

Additionally, the shaly nature of much of the Chinle Group 

provides ample opportunity for cation exchange that can alter 

groundwater composition such as the exchange of Ca or Mg 

for Na (loss of Ca or Mg in solution with gain of Na in solution) (Appelo and Postma, 2005) that may account for some of 

the Na input instead of just silicate mineral weathering.
Geologic Framework and Regional Aquifer Properties 23

Table 5. Formation characteristics indicative of horizontal hydraulic-conductivity variation among the aquifers in the study area (from 

Brod and Stone, 1981; Stone and others, 1983, unless otherwise indicated).

[S/M, sand to mud ratio; T, transmissivity; ft2/d, square feet per day; K, hydraulic conductivity; ft/d, feet per day; NA, not available]

Formation Median 

grain size Sorting S/M ratio

Porosity 

(percent)

Horizontal T1

(ft2/d)

Horizontal K 

(ft/d)

Quaternary

Alluvium (Qa) NA NA NA NA NA 22–300

Neogene

Flows and volcanoclastics (Tnv and Tpb) NA NA NA NA NA 31–1,000+

Cretaceous

Menefee (Kmf) Very fine to fine 

sand

Poor to moderate 4.6 9 2.7–112 .005–.01

Point Lookout (Kpl) Fine to medium sand Moderate to moderately well19.1 2–9 .4–240 .002–.02

Crevasse Canyon (Kcc), sandstone unit Fine sand Poor to well 8.4 4 3–250 NA

Mulatto Tongue (Kmm) Fine sand Moderate to very 

well

5.7 11 NA NA

Gallup (Kg) Fine to coarse sand Moderate 13.7–33.5 4–9 415–390 .1–1.0

Dakota (Kd) Fine to medium sand Moderate 6.1–18.2 2–6 444–370 .0004–1.5

Jurassic

Morrison (Jm) Fine sand Moderate to very 

well

15.7–101.1 0–10 2–480 50.1

Entrada Complex: Early to Middle Jurassic composed of the Bluff, Summerville, Todilto, and Entrada Formations

Bluff (Jb) Medium sand Poor to well 12 7 3–50 NA

Summerville (Js) Very fine sand Moderate to moderately well6.7–10.8 5–6 8.2 NA

Entrada (Je) Very fine to fine 

sand

Extremely poor to 

very well

1.3–9.8 5–11 .84–400 .5–5

Triassic

Chinle Group (TRc) Mudstone mixed with sandstone and 

limestone

NA NA 4.7–100 610-8–10-1

Permian

San Andres and Glorieta (Psa and Pg) Micritic limestone and fine to medium 

sand

NA NA 710–450,000 340–60

1

Transmissivity is the rate at which water is transmitted through a unit width of an aquifer under a unit hydraulic gradient. It equals the hydraulic conductivity 

multiplied by the aquifer thickness (Heath, 1983).

2

Frenzel, 1992; Risser and Lyford, 1983.

3

Dames and Moore, written commun., 1986.

4

Possible overlap of test interval between the Gallup and Dakota Formations.

6

Roca Honda Resources, LLC, 2009b.

6

Wolff, 1981.

7

Brod and Stone, 1981; Brod and Stone, 1983; Frenzel, 1992.
Figure 11. Trilinear diagrams of major-element relations for groundwater collected from the deposits and formations found in the study area. The daavailable major-element concentrations collected in the study area from 1958 to 2009. 

PERCENT Calcium

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

 0 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Magnesium

 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Sodium plus potassium

Chloride plus fluoride

 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

 0 

Bicarbonate

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

 0 

Sulfate

 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Sulfate plus chloride 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 100 

Calcium plus magnesium

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

 0 

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

 0 

PERCENT

PERCENT

Quarternary alluvium

PERCENT Calcium

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Magnesium

 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Sodium plus potassium

C

 0 

 20 

 100 

 80 

 60 

 

 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Sulfate plus chloride 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 100 

Calcium plus magn

 80 

 60 

 40 

2

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

PERCENT

Crevasse Canyon

Dakota

GallupMancos

Menefee

Point Lookout

PERCENT Calcium

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

 0 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Magnesium

 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Sodium plus potassium

Chloride plus fluoride

 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

 0 

Bicarbonate

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

 0 

Sulfate

 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Sulfate plus chloride 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Calcium plus magnesium

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

 0 

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

 0 

PERCENT

PERCENT

Entrada Complex*

Morrison

San Andres/Glorieta

*Entrada Complex represents the combined formations of the Bluff, Summerville, Todilto, and Entrada Formations that are difficult to discriminate in this area and combined for purposes of this report.

PERCENT Calcium

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

 0 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Magnesium

 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Sodium plus potassium

 0 

 20 

 100 

 80 

 60 

 

Bicarbonate

 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Sulfate plus chloride 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

 100 

Calcium plus magn

 80 

 60 

 40 

2

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

PERCENT

< 1,000 milligrams  per liter (mg/L)

Average dissolved solids

1,000−2,000 mg/L2,000−4,000 mg/L

4,000−6,000 mg/L> 6,000 mg/L

A. Quarternary aquifer formation B. Cretaceous aquifer formationsC. Jurassic, Triassic, Permian, aquifer formations D. Averages for all aquifer formations

Bicarbonate

Chinle

Entrada Complex*

Morrison

Crevasse Canyon

Dakota

Gallup

Menefee

Point Lookout

San Andres/Glorieta

Quarternary alluvium

Chinle

Mancos

EXPLANATIONEXPLANATION

EXPLANATIONEXPLANATION
Geologic Framework and Regional Aquifer Properties 25

Trace Elements

A search of existing trace-element data in the study area 

produced data for Al, Sb, As, Ba, Be, B, Br, Cd, Cr, Co, Cu, 

Fe, Pb, Li, Mn, Mo, Ni, Se, Ag, Tl, V, and Zn. Very few of 

these elements were consistently detected in any aquifer, and 

only Ba, B, Fe, Li, Mn, V, and Zn were detected with any 

frequency. All existing data sources indicated some data where 

the elements were not detected at concentrations greater than 

the MDL(s), although MDLs were not regularly presented in 

the literature. Nondetect data were not included for analysis 

in this report because of missing MDLs, which severely limits 

the statistical analysis of the data because of the bias from 

this exclusion. The elements of Ba, B, Fe, Li, Mn, V, and Zn 

are abundant in the Earth’s crust and can be mobile in natural 

waters, and each element can indicate certain characteristics 

of mineral weathering and redox-environment changes (Hem, 

1989; Nimz, 1998). The presence of the redox-sensitive 

elements Fe and Mn (and to a lesser degree V) indicates 

reducing conditions at some time in some location in most 

formations (table 6). Fe is present in the aquifers in various concentrations (app. 3), and it can enter solution under 

reducing conditions that substantially increase its solubility 

(Hem, 1989). As part of the USGS National Water-Quality 

Assessment Program redox classification system, McMahon 

and Chapelle (2008), proposed a reducing condition threshold 

50 μg/L for Mn and 100 μg/L for Fe. As shown in appendix 3, 

each aquifer contained groundwater at some time that met one 

or both of the thresholds for reducing conditions. Given the 

gross nature of this analysis and data compilation and interconnectedness of the aquifers, persistence of reducing conditions in any aquifer at any specific location is unknown. 

Boron is the most common trace element detected 

and had the largest concentrations except for Fe in specific 

aquifers (table 6 and app. 3). Boron is an abundant element 

in the Earth’s crust and is highly mobile in natural waters 

(Bullen and Kendall, 1998; Nimz, 1998). Chemical weathering appears strongest in the upper formations because of the 

frequency of detections of B and Li and the presence of the 

other common trace elements (table 6), although this could 

be attributed to sampling frequency. Lithium is common in 

pegmatites, substitutes for Mg in some minerals, and tends 

to remain in solution as it is less favored in common-ion 

exchange compared to other ions (Kelly, 1948; Heier and 

Billings, 1970). Because of the nature of the data and the 

likely interconnectedness of the aquifers, the larger presence 

of these elements cannot be attributed to any characteristic of 

the upper formations. It is possible that chemical weathering 

of minerals containing these elements is occurring in overlying formations, such as the Menefee Formation, and being 

transported into lower formations, such as the Point Lookout 

Formation. Zinc was most commonly detected in the upper 

aquifers and the Morrison aquifer, which could represent 

anthropogenic influences such as mining, where mined water 

or materials containing Zn were brought to the surface from 

the Morrison Formation and Zn was transported to the upper 

aquifers.

Contaminants of Concern

Groundwater in the San Mateo Creek Basin has been 

contaminated by past mining and milling operations, and a 

health advisory has been issued for existing and future private 

wells within the basin concerning contaminant concentrations in excess of Federal drinking-water standards for gross 

alpha, NO3, Ra, and U (New Mexico Environment Department, 2009). The sources of contamination are suspected to be 

naturally occurring ore deposits and former U mines and mills 

(New Mexico Environment Department, 2009). For purposes 

Table 6. Number of detections of frequently detected trace elements in groundwater from the study area. 

[Concentrations of the detected occurrence are presented in appendix 3; NA, not available]

Deposit/formation Barium Boron Iron Lithium Manganese Vanadium Zinc

Alluvium (Qa) 4 39 22 1 7 1 6

Menefee (Kmf) 8 50 40 7 13 5 21

Point Lookout (Kpl) 12 21 16 NA 4 1 11

Crevasse Canyon (Kcc) NA 7 7 NA NA NA NA

Gallup (Kg) NA 13 13 1 3 NA 2

Mancos (Km) NA 2 2 1 1 NA NA

Dakota (Kd) 1 12 14 1 2 NA 2

Morrison (Jm) 4 22 11 5 5 NA 11

Entrada Complex (Je) NA 11 15 2 2 1 1

Chinle Group (TRc) 1 9 11 NA 1 NA NA

San Andres (Psa) NA 26 27 NA 3 NA 1
26 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

of this report, estimated concentrations of contaminants of 

concern in groundwater (above the MDL but below the reporting level) were accepted as valid detections of the contaminant. All nondetections or less than method detection level 

indicators were disregarded because of the variety of laboratory analysis methods and MDLs. An estimate of the number 

of nondetections from analysis of groundwater in the area is 

difficult to ascertain given the variety of data compiled for this 

report. For this reason, this discussion only references detected 

values and only the number of detections is presented with 

no discussion of concentration levels. A number of negative 

values were reported for 226Ra, 228Ra, and gross alpha. A negative value implies that the number of alpha emissions detected 

was smaller than the count of background alpha emissions. 

These values were disregarded because their negative value 

implies relatively small concentrations and possible nondetections. The detection counts by formation for the contaminants 

of concern are shown in table 7. Overall, the contaminants 

were detected more frequently in the upper aquifers (alluvium, 

Menefee, and Point Lookout) likely because of sampling frequency targeting mining contamination from surface activities.

Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties 

of the Upper San Mateo Creek Basin, 

New Mexico, 2009 and 2010

Snowmelt and precipitation on Mount Taylor and the 

surrounding mesas provide groundwater to the Neogene 

volcanoclastics, which recharge the underlying Cretaceous 

formations. The recharge areas around Mount Taylor and dip 

of the Cretaceous layers direct groundwater along layers that 

restrict vertical flow (formation contacts and bedding layers 

in the volcanoclastics and sedimentary layers) and produce 

discharges at springs that form El Rito, San Mateo, and San 

Lucas Creeks, all of which are oriented northward and exit the 

mesas within or just below the Neogene volcanoclastics. No 

active springs were found along Jesus and San Mateo Mesas 

in the northern part of the target area, because of lack of an 

upgradient watershed (such as Mount Taylor) to catch sufficient precipitation and provide concentrated flow for recharge 

in this semiarid environment. 

Spring, Creek, and Seep Flow

Discharge was occurring in August 2009 and May 2010 

from the springs that form El Rito, San Mateo, and San Lucas 

Creeks. Late spring and summer discharges were about 1 to 

2 ft3/s at all three locations (flows were estimated by determining the cross-sectional area and estimating the streamflow velocity by the float method; Rantz and others, 1983), 

although quantifying the flow rate was imprecise because 

of the diffuse nature of the springs. Flow in El Rito and San 

Mateo Creeks increased between the spring and creek sampling sites. The amount of flow increase varied between the 

late summer and late spring sampling events, but increased 

flow was observed in the downgradient direction during both 

sampling events. This increase in creek streamflow likely 

is from additional discharges from the underlying Menefee 

Formation (fig. 12). The spring locations indicate an inhibitor to vertical flow that drives water laterally to a spring, and 

downslope contributions that increase flow indicate lower 

saturated layers with similar restrictions to vertical flow and 

subsequent lateral discharge. Some vertical hydraulic connectivity is likely between the volcanoclastics and formations 

that compose the mesas, and lateral flow occurs at changes in 

vertical permeability.

Table 7. Number of detections of contaminants of concern in groundwater from the study area. 

[Concentrations of the detected occurrence are presented in appendix 4; NA, not available]

Deposit/formation Nitrate Uranium Radium 

226

Radium 

228

Radium 

226 + 288

Gross 

alpha

Quaternary alluvium (Qa) 61 13 6 14 14 15

Menefee (Kmf) 52 19 10 15 15 20

Point Lookout (Kpl) 14 NA 9 10 11 11

Crevasse Canyon (Kcc) 17 NA NA NA NA NA

Gallup (Kg) 37 NA 5 4 5 5

Mancos (Km) 2 NA NA NA NA NA

Dakota (Kd) 33 1 NA NA NA NA

Morrison (Jm) 34 13 10 10 11 11

Entrada Complex (Je) 28 NA NA NA NA NA

Chinle (TRc) 28 NA NA NA NA NA

San Andres/Glorieta (Psa/Pg) 78 NA NA NA NA NA
Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties of the Upper San Mateo Creek Basin, New Mexico, 2009 and 2010 27

Differences in downstream flow of El Rito and San 

Mateo Creeks were observed between the August 2009 and 

May 2010 sampling events. Streamflows were larger in 

El Rito Creek during the May event than the August event, 

but streamflow was larger in San Mateo Creek during the 

August event than the May event. El Rito Creek appears to 

react more quickly to snowmelt from Mount Taylor as compared to San Mateo Creek. This difference may be a result of 

location and timing of spring snowmelt around Mount Taylor 

and the watershed orientation of each creek. El Rito Creek 

drains the western part of Mount Taylor, and San Mateo Creek 

drains the northern part of the mountain. Remaining snowpack 

was observed during the May event in the San Mateo Creek 

watershed but not in the El Rito Creek watershed. The difference in watershed orientation likely is the reason the larger 

flow was observed in El Rito Creek in May and in San Mateo 

Creek in August. 

Water from El Rito and San Mateo Creeks is captured by 

man-made diversions for livestock purposes as the creeks exit 

the higher elevations where the landscape transitions to the 

valley floor. The creeks were dry below these diversions during both sampling events as the diverted water and remaining 

creek flow infiltrate into the alluvium aquifer. Springs previously have been mapped in the area and indicators of spring 

flow (dry discharge points and associated salt crusts) were 

present along the valley floor near El Rito and San Mateo 

Creeks. Seeps were present in both creek beds along the valley 

floor as stagnant water that supported wetlands and small wetted depressions. During both sampling events, there was no 

flowing water in San Mateo or El Rito Creeks along the valley 

floor in the upper San Mateo Creek Basin. 

Spring, Creek, and Seep Water Composition

Spring- and creek-water samples from the target area 

contained small amounts of dissolved solutes, and seep water 

contained substantially larger amounts of dissolved solutes 

(tables 8 and 9). The specific conductance of water exiting 

the springs and within the creeks was less than 200 μS/cm, 

and dissolved-solids concentrations were less than or equal to 

150 mg/L during August 2009 and May 2010. Dissolved solids 

did not substantially increase between the spring and creek 

locations, although a larger increase was present between the 

spring and creek locations on San Mateo Creek as compared 

to El Rito Creek (tables 8 and 9), which may be because of the 

greater distance between these locations on San Mateo Creek 

(figs. 8 and 12). The small difference in dissolved solids and 

similar composition between the spring and creek locations 

in each system (tables 8 and 9) indicates similar composition 

for water discharging from the Menefee Formation (indicated 

by increased downstream flow) as compared to the upper 

volcanoclastics supplying the springs. Dissolved-solids 

concentrations substantially increased at the downstream 

seep sites for El Rito and San Mateo Creeks (tables 8 and 

9) indicating mineral dissolution and likely evaporation that 

concentrated solutes in the water. Samples collected from the 

seep locations contained particulates less than 0.45-micron in 

diameter (after filtering), which likely were clay particles and 

various oxide complexes as indicated by their tannish color. 

The presence of the small-sized particulates contributes to 

the “dissolved” concentrations listed in tables 8 and 9. Such 

particulates were not present in the water from the creek and 

spring sites following filtering. 

The pH of water within the creeks was neutral to alkaline, 

and all locations indicated oxygenated conditions (dissolved 

oxygen concentrations were greater than 3 mg/L for all 

samples; although nearly all samples were undersaturated) 

that reflects atmospheric exposure (fig. 13, tables 8 and 9). 

The pH of El Rito Creek did not substantially change from site 

to site or between August 2009 and May 2010, but the pH of 

San Mateo Creek changed substantially from site to site and 

between August 2009 and May 2010. Water in El Rito Creek 

Gradient of San Mateo Creek

Distance, feet Distance, feet

Elevation, in feet above NAVD 88

Elevation, in feet above NAVD 88

Menefee

Formation

Point Lookout Formation

?

Basalt

cap

Spring

Creek

Seep

Sampling site

Vertical exaggeration is about 3.5x, basalt cap refers to the volcanoclastics and flows 

Additional discharge to

creek between sites

Loss of surface flow

between sites

Gradient of El Rito Creek

Menefee

Formation

Basalt cap

Point Lookout Formation

Spring

Creek

Seep

Sampling site

Vertical exaggeration is about 1.7x, basalt cap refers to the volcanoclastics and flows 

Additional discharge to

creek between sites

Loss of surface flow

between sites

Alluvium present along creek

from creek to seep sites Alluvium present along creek

from creek to seep sites

9,200

6,500

9,200

6,500

0 14,000 0 7,000

Figure 12. Landform gradients between sampling sites on El Rito and San Mateo Creeks and underlying geologic formations. 
28 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

Table 8. Physical and chemical properties of springs, creeks, and seeps within the target area, August 2009.

[cond., conductance; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25oC; mg/L, milligrams per liter; oC, degrees Celsius; %, percent; NTU, nephelometric turbidity 

unit; <, less than; μg/L, micrograms per liter; δxX (‰) = (Ratiosample/Ratiostandard − 1) x 1,000 of specified isotope ratio; ‰, per mil; pCi/L, picocurie per liter]

Constituent Units El Rito 

Creek Spring

El Rito 

Creek

El Rito 

Creek Seep

San Mateo 

Creek Spring

San Mateo 

Creek

San Mateo 

Creek Seep

San Lucas 

Creek Spring

General properties

pH 8.34 8.29 8.38 7.49 8.1 7.29 7.27

Specific cond. μS/cm 151 159 600 119 129 1,009 181

Dissolved O2 mg/L 6.07 8.2 3.79 5.43 5.22 3.86 5.61

O2 saturation % 60 78 39 53 55 47 55

Temperature oC 14.7 13.1 16.5 14.2 17.5 24.8 13.8

Turbidity NTU 1.1 4.1 850 4.9 6.3 NA 4.3

Dissolved solids mg/L 130 130 1,300 72 120 590 130

Major elements

Calcium mg/L 14 14 8.2 13 11 42 17

Magnesium mg/L 4 4.2 3.3 3.6 3.1 26 6.4

Sodium mg/L 9.7 9.7 130 3.8 8.9 140 9.6

Potassium mg/L 3.6 3.4 6.3 *1.2 3.4 4.1 3.4

Silica mg/L 53 51 26 23 47 21 45

Alkalinity mg/L 72 77 380 36 62 440 89

Sulfate mg/L *1.5 *1.4 24 6.9 *1.5 60 *1.6

Chloride mg/L *2.1 *2 21 *1.7 *1.7 29 *2.5

Fluoride mg/L *.24 *.29 1.3 <.06 *.18 1.7 *.12

Trace elements

Aluminum μg/L <18 <18 700 <18 <18 <18 <18

Antimony μg/L <3.1 <3.1 <3.1 *3.2 <3.1 <3.1 <3.1

Arsenic μg/L <4.4 <4.4 17 <4.4 <4.4 <4.4 <4.4

Barium μg/L 19 33 28 39 26 170 24

Beryllium μg/L <.47 <.47 <.47 <.47 <.47 <.47 <.47

Boron μg/L *8.4 *10 190 *6.3 *8.3 110 *11

Bromide μg/L <110 <110 *170 <110 <110 230 <110

Cadmium μg/L <.45 <.45 <.45 <.45 <.45 <.45 <.45

Chromium μg/L <.66 <.66 <.66 <.66 <.66 <.66 <.66

Cobalt μg/L <1.2 <1.2 *1.8 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2 <1.2

Copper μg/L <1.4 <1.4 *12 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4 <1.4

Iron μg/L <22 *54 790 610 *27 <22 <22

Lead μg/L <2.6 *2.6 <2.6 <2.6 <2.6 <2.6 <2.6

Lithium μg/L *8.5 *8.9 17 *4 *9 66 *7

Manganese μg/L <.25 *1.7 39 100 *2 310 *1.8

Molybdenum μg/L <3.1 <3.1 *7.6 <3.1 <3.1 *8.6 <3.1

Nickel μg/L <1.3 <1.3 *3.4 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3 <1.3

Selenium μg/L <4.9 <4.9 <4.9 <4.9 <4.9 <4.9 <4.9

Silver μg/L *1.4 *1.6 *1.4 *1.4 *1.6 *1.6 *1.2

Strontium μg/L 93 110 120 87 76 1,000 120

Thallium μg/L <4.9 <4.9 <4.9 <4.9 <4.9 <4.9 <4.9

Vanadium μg/L *3.7 *3.4 57 <1.1 *2.2 *1.5 *4.8

Zinc μg/L *5.8 <4.5 *7.6 *6.1 *5.4 <4.5 *8.9

Isotopes

δ2H (2H/1H) ‰ -89.10 -88.46 -39.39 -83.79 -90.14 -81.92 -90.13

δ18O (18O/16O) ‰ -12.58 -12.48 -5.16 -11.81 -12.52 -11.02 -12.47

Local contaminants of concern

Nitrate, as N mg/L .44 *.036 *.036 *.045 *.069 *.044 .19

Uranium μg/L *.59 *.39 2.7 <.02 *.25 4.2 *.49

Mercury μg/L <.027 <.027 <.027 <.027 <.027 <.027 <.027

Radium-226 pCi/L *.19 *.28 *.21 <.15 <.15 *.2 <.15

Radium-228 pCi/L <.4 <.4 <.4 <.4 *.76 *.46 <.4

Gross alpha pCi/L <1.5 <1.5 3.5 <1.5 <1.5 3.4 <1.5

*Estimated value—concentration was detected below the reporting level but above the method detection level. 
Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties of the Upper San Mateo Creek Basin, New Mexico, 2009 and 2010 29

Table 9. Physical and chemical properties of springs, creeks, and seeps within the target area, May 2010.

[cond., conductance; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter at 25oC; mg/L, milligrams per liter; oC, degrees Celsius; %, percent; NTU, nephelometric turbidity 

unit; <, less than; μg/L, micrograms per liter; δxX (‰) = (Ratiosample/Ratiostandard − 1) x 1,000 of specified isotope ratio; ‰, per mil; pCi/L, picocurie per liter]

Constituent Units El Rito 

Creek Spring

El Rito 

Creek

El Rito 

Creek Seep

San Mateo 

Creek Spring

San Mateo 

Creek

San Mateo 

Creek Seep

San Lucas 

Creek Spring

General properties

pH 8.16 8.19 8.57 6.98 8.09 9.23 7.98

Specific cond. μS/cm 151 178 1,027 58.7 134 2,460 191

Dissolved O2 mg/L 6.80 9.84 6.03 7.98 7.83 9.66 7.39

O2 saturation % 64 78 69 69 79 >100 68

Temperature oC 12.7 5.4 21.8 8.7 15.8 25.0 11.6

Turbidity NTU .8 11 1.8 2.2 9.8 74 8.7

Dissolved solids mg/L 130 150 690 63 130 1,600 140

Major elements

Calcium mg/L 13 16 29 5 10 12 18

Magnesium mg/L 3.5 4.4 22 1.3 2.8 7.9 6.2

Sodium mg/L 9.6 12 190 2.9 9.8 590 10

Potassium mg/L 3.8 3.8 9.5 *.99 3.7 6.8 3.7

Silica mg/L 51 51 54 17 45 7.5 45

Alkalinity mg/L 71 85 550 15 64 840 96

Sulfate mg/L *1.5 *2 27 7.6 *2.6 380 *1.6

Chloride mg/L *2.2 *2.7 14 *1.6 *2.2 130 *2.8

Fluoride mg/L *.27 *.3 2.4 *.08 *.23 2.9 *.16

Trace elements

Aluminum μg/L <18 <18 <18 410 *78 190 *52

Antimony μg/L <3.1 <3.1 <3.1 <3.1 <3.1 <3.1 <3.1

Arsenic μg/L <4.4 <4.4 *13 <4.4 <4.4 21 <4.4

Barium μg/L 18 37 73 14 25 48 33

Beryllium μg/L <.47 <.47 <.47 <.47 <.47 <.47 <.47

Boron μg/L *9.9 *11 220 *4.4 *10 280 *12

Bromide μg/L <110 <110 240 <110 <110 1,000 <110

Cadmium μg/L <.45 <.45 <.45 <.45 <.45 <.45 <.45

Chromium μg/L <.66 <.66 <.66 <.66 <.66 <.66 <.66

Cobalt μg/L <.12 <.12 <.12 <.12 <.12 *.98 <.12

Copper μg/L *1 *1.1 *4.4 *1.2 *.62 23 *1.0

Iron μg/L <22 *52 <22 200 *68 340 *39

Lead μg/L <.26 <.26 <.26 <.26 <.26 <.26 <.26

Lithium μg/L *7.9 *5.1 78 <.26 *4 51 *2.3

Manganese μg/L <.25 <.25 *.51 *2 *.79 *7.2 *.95

Molybdenum μg/L <3.1 <3.1 *7.8 <3.1 <3.1 42 <3.1

Nickel μg/L <1.3 <1.3 *1.9 <1.3 <1.3 *5.8 <1.3

Selenium μg/L <4.9 <4.9 <4.9 <4.9 <4.9 <4.9 <4.9

Silver μg/L <.93 <.93 <.93 <.93 <.93 <.93 <.93

Strontium μg/L 86 120 510 32 69 280 120

Thallium μg/L <4.9 <4.9 <4.9 <4.9 <4.9 <4.9 <4.9

Vanadium μg/L *2.7 *2.6 13 <1.1 *2.4 38 *4.3

Zinc μg/L <4.5 <4.5 <4.5 <4.5 <4.5 <4.5 <4.5

Isotopes

δ2H (2H/1H) ‰ -89.51 -88.18 -73.49 -88.77 -88.67 -48.08 -89.14

δ18O (18O/16O) ‰ -12.68 -12.46 -9.15 -12.59 -12.39 -3.51 -12.46

Local contaminants of concern

Nitrate, as N mg/L .37 *.17 <.042 <.042 *.09 <.042 *.16

Uranium μg/L *.63 *.54 7.1 *.025 *.37 26 *.58

Mercury μg/L <.027 <.027 <.027 <.027 <.027 <.027 <.027

Radium-226 pCi/L <.15 <.15 <.15 <.15 <.15 *.34 <.15

Radium-228 pCi/L <.67 <.67 <.67 <.67 *.92 .77 <.67

Gross alpha pCi/L <1.5 <1.5 *2.8 <1.5 <1.5 29 <1.5

*Estimated value—concentration was detected below the reporting level but above the method detection level. 
30 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

indicated a greater increase in dissolved-oxygen percent 

saturation with flow from the spring to creek locations as 

compared to San Mateo Creek, likely because of the larger 

topological gradient on El Rito Creek between the spring 

and creek locations (more turbulent flow). Dissolved-oxygen 

concentrations and percent saturation were equal or greater 

during the May 2010 sampling as compared to the August 

2009 sampling for all locations. 

Water Isotopes and Evaporation

The variation in isotopic composition of precipitation 

may allow discrimination of recharge because of changes in 

the isotopic composition from temperature changes during formation of precipitation and additional evaporation (Genereux 

and Hooper, 1998; Ingraham, 1998). The δ2H and δ18O values 

in the two creek systems generally plot near the global meteoric water line (GMWL) (fig. 14), which is atypical of the 

southwestern United States, where the semiarid climate generally produces values for any surface water or groundwater that 

plot below the GMWL with a reduced trend slope (evaporation 

line) because of a greater fractionation influence on H than 

O (Friedman and others, 1992; Kendall and Coplen, 2001). 

Only the seep samples indicate values below the GMWL. 

The larger values of the seeps indicate heavier isotope ratios 

or greater loss of the lighter isotopes likely from fractionation during evaporation, assuming no other water sources of 

different isotopic composition (no identifiable upward leakage 

sources given the geologic framework and likely vertical flow 

directions). 

The water isotopes also indicate differences in source 

waters and (or) evaporative effect between El Rito and San 

Mateo Creeks. The seep in El Rito Creek contained water 

with a heavier isotopic value for the August sample compared 

to the May sample, which is expected given the higher rate 

of evaporation during August. This seasonal influence was 

different for the seep in San Mateo Creek, which contained 

a heavier isotopic value for the May sample. This contrast in 

seasonal influences between the two creeks, indicates differences in source-water inputs between the two sampling 

events that likely pertain to differences in source-water mixing 

(winter precipitation and snowmelt compared to summer thunderstorms) and evaporation during snowmelt. This difference 

may be the quicker melt in the El Rito Creek watershed, given 

the observed lack of snow in this watershed and the presence 

of snow in the San Mateo Creek watershed during the May 

sampling event, as discussed in the Spring, Creek, and Seep 

Flow section. Such seasonal differences in the stable isotopes 

of water is common for shallow groundwater where the isotope signal is not attenuated (seasonal sources are not mixed) 

prior to discharge from the springs or seeps (Leibundgut and 

others, 2009). A lack of attenuation of the seasonal isotopic 

signal indicates that seasonal changes in flow or solutes will 

be visible in the spring, creek, and seep discharges.

3.5 4.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 8.5 9.5 10.5

Dissolved oxygen, in milligrams per liter

6.5

7.5

8.5

9.5

pH, in standard units

S C

Se

S

C

Se

S C

Se

S

C

Se El Rito Creek: S (spring), C (creek), Se (seep), black for August 2009, red for May 2010

San Mateo Creek: S (spring), C (creek), Se (seep), black for August 2009, red for May 2010

San Lucas Spring, black for August 2009, red for May 2010

EXPLANATION

Figure 13. Dissolved oxygen and pH relation for water from El Rito, San Lucas, and San Mateo Creeks. 
Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties of the Upper San Mateo Creek Basin, New Mexico, 2009 and 2010 31

Major Elements

The ion-exchange pool at any location in a flow path 

exemplifies water-rock interactions and atmospheric inputs, 

and ions will exchange at the mineral surfaces at relatively 

constant rates that reflect clay mineralogy, water pH, and 

water chemistry (Bullen and Kendall, 1998); although, waterrock interactions that produce mineral dissolution or adsorption can result in nonconservative solute behavior that limits 

the utility of major-element and trace-element concentrations 

for identifying source waters and flow paths (Langmuir, 

1997). Results from the creek sampling indicated similarities 

in composition between the El Rito and San Mateo Creeks at 

comparable sampling sites (spring to spring or creek to creek) 

and large changes in downstream composition in each creek, 

mostly as a result of changes in Na and smaller changes in SO4

between the creek and seep sites (fig. 15 and tables 8 and 9). 

These changes alter the composition in El Rito and San Mateo 

Creeks from a mixed cation-HCO3 water type at the spring and 

creek locations to Na-HCO3 at the seeps, which can occur with 

silicate weathering or cation exchange (Stumm and Morgan, 

1996).

The major-element data indicated a strong electrical 

(cation-anion) imbalance for the sample from the seep along 

El Rito Creek in August 2009 (14 percent greater anion 

charge). Water at the seep along El Rito Creek in 2009 appears 

to contain additional buffering compounds such as hydroxides 

(largest pH value of all samples), borates (largest boron value 

of all samples), aluminosilicates (largest aluminum value of 

all samples), and organic ligands (largest concentrations for 

many of the trace elements) (table 8), which resulted from 

the inclusion of very fine suspended particles passing through 

the 0.45-micron filter and were visible to the naked eye. The 

major cations and anions also did not balance for the sample 

collected from the spring at San Mateo Creek during the 

August 2009 sampling event, but this unbalanced charge was 

positive. This location appears to be influenced by a change in 

oxidation conditions. Water from the spring was oxygenated 

(5.43 mg/L dissolved oxygen at a saturation level of 53 percent), but the water contained relatively large concentrations 

of Fe (610 μg/L) and Mn (100 μg/L). It appears that reducing 

conditions may be present in the aquifer contained within the 

young, cap-forming basalts. The water chemistry of the aquifer may not be fully represented by the spring sample site as 

the water becomes oxygenated and kinetic reactions of various 

soluble or insoluble solutes occur at different rates with the 

transition from reduced to oxygenated conditions.

Saturation Indices

The presence of the major elements and trace elements in 

surface water in the upper San Mateo Creek Basin may allow 

various mineral compounds and phases to either dissolve in or 

precipitate from solution given the elements’ concentrations. 

Figure 14. Stable isotope ratios for water from El Rito, San Lucas, and San Mateo Creeks. 

-14 -13 -12 -11 -10 -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3

-100

-90

-80

-70

-60

-50

-40

-30

δ18Ο, per mil relative to Vienna Mean Standard Ocean Water (VSMOW) 

δ2H, per mil relative to VSMOW

Global precipitation: δ2H = 8.13δ18O + 10.8

CS

Se

S

C

Se

S C

Se

SC

Se

El Rito Creek: S (spring), C (creek), Se (seep), black for August 2009, red for May 2010

San Mateo Creek: S (spring), C (creek), Se (seep), black for August 2009, red for May 2010

San Lucas Spring, black for August 2009, red for May 2010

EXPLANATION
32 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

The saturation indices of possible common mineral forms 

were determined for the water samples from the August 2009 

and May 2010 sampling events (tables 10 and 11). Negative 

values indicate undersaturation where a mineral might dissolve in the water and positive values indicate supersaturation 

where a mineral may precipitate from the water. The saturation 

indices indicate similar water composition and solute concentrations for spring to creek flow paths indicating no inputs of 

different water chemistries (tables 10 and 11). The increased 

flow between the spring and creek sites that was observed for 

El Rito and San Mateo Creeks is a result of the addition of 

water that is similar in composition to that discharging from 

the springs. The change from an open channel flow to infiltration into the alluvium from the creek to seep sites allows 

increased mineral weathering and provides available surfaces 

for sorption and cation exchange as seen with the substantial differences in mineral phases (tables 10 and 11). Such a 

change in the flow system can induce large changes in the 

aqueous chemical environment as the elemental composition 

is altered with new inputs/outputs from weathering, cation 

exchange, and possible precipitation of various minerals along 

with sorbed elements (Bullen and Kendall, 1998). 

Creek Flow Paths and Geochemical Model of 

Transition from Creek to Seep

El Rito and San Mateo Creeks are fed by precipitation 

(seasonal snow and rain) around Mount Taylor that feed the 

springs forming these creeks near the base of the mountain. 

PERCENT

Calcium

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

 0 

 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Magnesium

 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Sodium plus potassium

Chloride plus fluoride

 0 

 20 

 40 

 60  80 

 100 

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

 0 

Carbonate plus bicarbonate

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

 0 

Sulfate

 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Sulfate plus chloride

 0 

 20 

 40 

 60 

 80 

 100 

Calcium plus magnesium

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

 0 

 100 

 80 

 60 

 40 

 20 

 0 

PERCENT

PERCENT

El Rito Creek

El Rito Creek Seep

El Rito Creek Spring

San Lucas Creek Spring

San Mateo Creek

San Mateo Creek Seep

San Mateo Creek Spring

EXPLANATION

Dissolved solids, in milligrams 

 per liter (mg/L)

<200 

>200 to <1,000 

>1,000 

Black symbol is August 2009, 

 red symbol is May 2010

Figure 15. Trilinear diagram of major-element relations for water from El Rito, San Lucas, and San Mateo Creeks. 
Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties of the Upper San Mateo Creek Basin, New Mexico, 2009 and 2010 33

Table 10. Saturation indices of possible common minerals for water collected from the spring, creek, and seep locations along El Rito 

Creek in the target area.

[Saturation indices were calculated in PHREEQC (2.17.0) and represent the log of the ratio of the ion activity product (IAP) and the solubility product (Ksp)]

Phase Mineral 

composition

August 2009 May 2010

Spring Creek Seep Spring Creek Seep

Anhydrite CaSO4 -4.14 -4.17 -7.68 -4.16 -3.95 -2.88

Barite BaSO4 -1.72 -1.48 -10.67 -1.7 -1.11 -.31

Calcite CaCO3 -.1 -.14 -8.11 -.34 -.26 1.2

Celestite SrSO4 -4.36 -4.32 -9.84 -4.39 -4.1 -2.67

Chalcedony SiO2 .61 .62 -3.37 .62 .72 .52

Chrysotile Mg3Si2O5(OH)4 -1.24 -1.72 31.32 -2.78 -3.33 2.76

Dolomite CaMg(CO3)

2 -.54 -.63 -16.4 -1.07 -1.06 2.61

Fluorite CaF2 -2.67 -2.49 -12.32 -2.57 -2.29 -.72

Gypsum CaSO4·2H2O -3.89 -3.91 -7.68 -3.91 -3.69 -2.65

Halite NaCl -9.2 -9.22 -5.56 -9.18 -8.98 -7.16

Sepiolite Mg2Si3O7.5OH·3H2O .37 .12 15.26 -.55 -.46 2.62

Strontianite SrCO3 -1.77 -1.73 -10.27 -1.99 -1.81 -.06

Table 11. Saturation indices of possible common minerals for water collected from the spring, creek, and seep locations along San 

Mateo Creek in the target area.

[Saturation indices were calculated in PHREEQC (2.17.0) and represent the log of the ratio of the ion activity product (IAP) and the solubility product (Ksp)]

Phase Mineral 

composition

August 2009 May 2010

Spring Creek Seep Spring Creek Seep

Anhydrite CaSO4 -3.48 -4.22 -2.33 -3.79 -4.02 -2.46

Barite BaSO4 -.72 -1.62 .33 -.95 -1.36 .26

Calcite CaCO3 -1.26 -.45 .1 -2.7 -.51 1.3

Celestite SrSO4 -3.71 -4.43 -2.03 -4.02 -4.23 -2.06

Chalcedony SiO2 .26 .53 .1 .2 .53 -.46

Chrysotile Mg3Si2O5(OH)4 -7.21 -2.72 -5.03 -12.54 -3.17 3.15

Dolomite CaMg(CO3)

2 -2.88 -1.2 .34 -5.9 -1.36 2.83

Gypsum CaSO4·2H2O -3.23 -3.97 -2.11 -3.53 -3.77 -2.25

Halite NaCl -9.7 -9.34 -6.99 -9.81 -9.18 -5.77

Manganite MnOOH -4.73 -4.72 -5.18 -7.9 -5.15 -2.37

Rhodochrosite MnCO3 -.88 -1.82 .26 -3.58 -2.25 -.67

Sepiolite Mg2Si3O7.5OH·3H2O -4.17 -.86 -3.39 -7.6 -1.09 1.12

Strontianite SrCO3 -2.92 -2.12 -1.07 -4.35 -2.17 .22
34 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

El Rito and San Mateo Creeks transition from steep gradients 

along the mesas where flow is sustained by groundwater discharges from mesa volcanoclastics and the Menefee Formation to low gradients in the valleys where surface flow has 

infiltrated into to the valley alluvium. The subsequent shallow 

groundwater is restricted (or retarded) from downward migration by a shaly layer in the Menefee Formation. This change 

from open-channel flow to shallow groundwater substantially 

alters the influences on the chemistry of the water. The upper 

creek flow that originates at the springs is influenced by 

infiltration of precipitation from Mount Taylor that remains 

dilute indicating relatively quick entry into the surface-water 

system without substantial addition of dissolved solutes that 

could occur with longer residence times in these upper layers 

of the mesas (additionally shown with the lack of isotopic 

signal attenuation for seasonal inputs described in the Water 

Isotopes and Evaporation section). With transition to the lower 

gradient valley floor of upper San Mateo Creek Basin, creek 

flow infiltrates into the valley alluvium but does not progress 

to substantial depths because of an apparent shale layer within 

the underlying Menefee found near the surface in the eastern 

part of the basin. The transitions from the mesa to the valley 

floor were geochemically modeled to compare the potential 

evaporation and water-rock influences on the water chemistry 

of the creeks. 

All geochemical data were entered into NETPATH for the 

El Rito and San Mateo creek and seep locations. Each model 

was constrained by changes in Al, C, Ca, Fe, K, Mg, Mn, Na, 

and S, which were the elements that indicated large changes 

in concentration between the creek and seep sites in each 

system. Each model also was constrained by mineral phases 

that were chosen according to the local geology and changes 

in typical minerals according to the saturation indices derived 

for each location (tables 10 and 11). Results of the geochemical modeling (table 12) are indicative of changes in water 

chemistry from the dissolution and precipitation of various 

minerals (including the presence of very fine clay particles 

from weathering) and cation exchange/sorption as solutes 

enter the system from water-rock interaction and the increase 

in concentration of solutes from evaporation. As visible in 

the concentrations (tables 8 and 9) and saturation indices 

(tables 10 and 11), elements of the selected minerals typically 

increase in groundwater concentration from creek to seep locations, which conforms to the conceptual model of chemical 

weathering and inputs of additional elements between these 

locations; although, certain minerals decrease in prevalence 

(become more undersaturated), such as gypsum in the August 

2009 El Rito Creek samples, reflecting the changing element 

composition and preferred mineral forms. The mineral phases 

presented in table 12 are not meant to represent the entire 

chemical environment, but are common minerals that are thermodynamically preferred given the elemental composition of 

the waters. The mineral phases do reflect the presence of clays 

(thermodynamically preferred phases of montmorillinite and 

kaolinite possible in these solutions) that were observed in the 

filtered solution from the seeps. These clay phases do not represent the only clays present, but reflect the presence of very 

fine weathered aluminosilicate particles in solution. In addition to the likely substantial chemical weathering from creek 

to seep locations, the model results indicate a strong evaporative effect between the creek and seep locations (table 12). 

The evaporative effect was stronger in the May 2010 results 

Table 12. Geochemical model results for creek to seep locations along El Rito and San Mateo Creeks.

[Aug 2009, August 2009 sampling event; May 2010, May 2010 sampling event; positive value represents an addition of the elements composing the mineral 

phase to the solution through dissolution in millimoles per kilogram of water (mmol/kg); negative value represents a subtraction of the elements composing the 

mineral phase to the solution through precipitation (mmol/kg); evaporation values are based on 1 kilogram of solution; <, less than]

Phase Mineral 

composition

El Rito Creek San Mateo Creek

Aug 2009 May 2010 Aug 2009 May 2010

Albite NaAlSi3O8 2.37* 2.78 4.03 13.54

Calcite CaCO3 2.54 2.53 6.76 6.64

Ca-Montmorillonite Ca0.165Al2.33Si3.67O10(OH)2 -17.37 -16.35 -39.94 -53.03

Goethite FeOOH .01 <-.01 <-.01 <.01

Gypsum CaSO4·2H2O .12 .09 .50 2.13

Halite NaCl .26 <.01 .63 <.01

Kaolinite Al2Si2O5(OH)4 19.05 17.65 44.51 55.02

Rhodochrosite MnCO3 <.01 .00 .01 <.01

Talc Mg3Si4O10(OH)2 -.03 .06 .25 .02

Grams of water (H2O) remaining after evaporation 539 400 829 543

Evaporation factor (divisor) 1.85 2.50 1.21 1.84

*A secondary model was run with cation exchange (Ca substitution of Na on clay surfaces) as an additional influence. Results of this model were similar to 

the model results shown in the table except for the lack of albite dissolution and proportional decreases in Ca-montmorillonite and kaolinite (silicate layered 

clays). 
Summary 35

(2.50 and 1.84 evaporation factors) as compared to the August 

2009 results (1.85 and 1.21 evaporation factors). These results 

support the conceptual model of substantial mineral dissolution with increased water-rock interaction because of the 

entrance of the creek flow into the subsurface with the transition to the valley floor followed by substantial evaporation 

of the water as it reappears at the surface from seeps near the 

confluence of El Rito and San Mateo Creeks.

Summary

The water resources of the San Mateo Creek Basin are 

important to the citizens of New Mexico, in particular, the 

town of San Mateo and the city of Grants, for potable water 

sources. Citizens and tribal groups in this area are concerned 

about the possible effects on the water resources from exploratory drilling and possible mining of uranium as currently 

(2011) proposed by various companies for U.S. Forest Service 

land in the upper San Mateo Creek Basin. Existing data were 

used to describe the geologic framework and regional aquifer properties, and new data were collected to characterize 

the springs, creeks, and seeps in the upper San Mateo Creek 

Basin. The geologic framework of the study area consists of 

the Zuni Uplift, Chaco Slope, and the Mount Taylor Volcanic 

Field. The major landscape features of the San Mateo Creek 

Basin are a result of folding and tilting during the Laramide 

Orogeny and the Neogene volcanism associated with the 

Mount Taylor Volcanic Field. Within this structural context, 

the sedimentary formations provide matrices for local and 

regional aquifers.

Groundwater in the study area occurs in numerous deposits and formations that form unconfined and confined aquifers, 

and recharge occurs in highlands such as the Zuni Mountains 

and Mount Taylor. Existing water-level data indicate topologically downgradient flow in the Quaternary alluvium aquifer 

and indiscernible general flow patterns in lower aquifers. 

According to previously published material and the geologic 

structure of the aquifers, the flow direction in the lower aquifers likely is in the opposite direction compared to the alluvium aquifer. These opposing horizontal-flow directions are a 

result of different recharge areas, the unconsolidated alluvium 

that follows the topological gradient, and a regional opposing 

gradient of the lower sedimentary formations. 

Insufficient data exist to fully describe the geochemical 

environments of the various aquifers and how they change 

with time, but sufficient data exist to evaluate general water 

types in the study area. Water types in the study area are 

sodium-bicarbonate/sulfate or mixed cation-mixed anion with 

some calcium-bicarbonate water, and the variation of major 

elements is primarily between changes in sodium and calcium and bicarbonate and sulfate. The major-element variations appear related to typical weathering of silicate minerals 

and a few common evaporite minerals and cation-exchange 

processes. The presence of the reduction/oxidation-sensitive 

elements iron and manganese indicates reducing conditions 

at some time or in some location in most formation aquifers. 

The large concentrations of zinc in the alluvium aquifer could 

represent anthropogenic influences such as mining.

Snowmelt and precipitation on Mount Taylor and the surrounding mesas provide groundwater to the Neogene volcanoclastics, which recharge the underlying Cretaceous formations. 

The upgradient recharge areas and regional dip of the Cretaceous layers towards the north-northeast direct groundwater 

along likely bedding planes that restrict vertical flow and 

cause discharges at springs that form El Rito, San Mateo, and 

San Lucas Creeks. Streamflows were larger in El Rito Creek 

during May 2010 compared to August 2009, but streamflow 

was larger in San Mateo Creek during August 2009 compared 

to May 2010. El Rito Creek appears to react more quickly to 

snowmelt from Mount Taylor than does San Mateo Creek. 

This difference may be a result of location and timing of 

spring snowmelt around Mount Taylor because of differences 

in watershed orientation. Water from El Rito and San Mateo 

Creeks is captured by man-made diversions for livestock 

purposes as the creeks exit the higher elevations where the 

landscape transitions to the valley floor. The creeks were dry 

below these diversions during the sampling events in 2009 and 

2010. The diverted water and remaining creek flow infiltrate 

into the alluvium aquifer, but some of this water did reemerge 

in seeps in the center of the upper San Mateo Creek Basin near 

the confluence of El Rito and San Mateo Creeks.

Spring- and creek-water samples from the target area 

contained small amounts of dissolved solutes, and seep water 

contained substantially larger amounts of dissolved solutes. 

The specific conductance of water exiting the springs and 

within the creeks was less than 200 microsiemens per centimeter and dissolved-solids concentrations were less than or equal 

to 150 milligrams per liter during August 2009 and May 2010. 

The pH of water within the creeks was neutral to alkaline, and 

all locations indicated oxygenated conditions with nearly all 

samples being undersaturated for dissolved oxygen. Results 

of water-isotope analyses indicate limited evaporation at the 

spring and creek sites but greater evaporation by the time the 

water reaches the seep locations in the center of upper San 

Mateo Creek Basin. Variations in water isotopes between 

El Rito and San Mateo Creeks indicate differences in sourcewater inputs between the two sampling events that likely 

pertain to spring snowmelt compared to summer-thunderstorm 

precipitation.

Results from the creek sampling indicated similarities in 

composition between the El Rito and San Mateo Creeks at the 

comparable sampling sites (spring to spring or creek to creek) 

and large changes in downstream composition in each creek, 

mostly as a result of changes in sodium and smaller changes in 

sulfate between the creek and seep sites. These changes alter 

the composition in El Rito and San Mateo Creeks from mixed 

cation-bicarbonate water type at the spring and creek locations 

to sodium-bicarbonate water type at the seeps. Geochemical 

modeling of the transition from creek to seep locations along 

El Rito and San Mateo Creeks indicates chemical weathering 
36 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

and additional element inputs through water-rock interactions and possible element composition changes from cation 

exchange. Additionally, the model results indicate an evaporative effect between the creek and seep locations and differences in the chemical weathering and evaporation effects by 

season. 

References

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 2008, 

Health Consultation, Homestake Mining Company Mill 

Site, Milan, Cibola County, New Mexico: Division of 

Health Assessment and Consultation, Agency for Toxic 

Substances and Disease Registry, Department of Health 

and Human Services, 26 p., accessed July 6, 2010, at 

http://www.epa.gov/region6/6sf/newmexico/homestake_

mining/nm_homestake_mining_atsdr_rpt.pdf. 

Appelo, C.A.J., and Postma, D., 2005, Geochemistry, groundwater, and pollution, 2d edition: AA Balkema Publishers, 

Rotterdam, 638 p.

Baars, D.L., 1962, Permian system of the Colorado Plateau: 

American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 

v. 46, no. 2, p. 149–218.

Baldwin, J.A., and Anderholm, S.K., 1992, Hydrogeology 

and ground-water chemistry of the San Andres/Glorieta 

aquifer in the Acoma embayment and eastern Zuni uplift, 

west-central New Mexico: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 91–4033, 304 p.

Brod, R.C., 1979, Hydrogeology and water resources of the 

Ambrosia Lake–San Mateo area, McKinley and Valencia 

counties, New Mexico: Socorro, N. Mex., M.S. thesis, New 

Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, 194 p.

Brod, R.C., and Stone, W.J., 1981, Hydrogeology of Ambrosia Lake–San Mateo area, McKinley and Cibola Counties, 

New Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral 

Resources, HS–2, text and map, scale 1:62,500.

Bullen, T.D., and Kendall, C., 1998, Tracing of weathering 

reactions and water flowpaths, a multi-isotope approach, 

in Kendall, C., and McDonnell, J.J., eds., Isotope tracers in 

catchment hydrology: Amsterdam, Elsevier Science B.V., 

chap. 18, p. 611–643.

Cather, S.M., 2003, Polyphase Laramide tectonism and sedimentation in the San Juan Basin, New Mexico, in Lucas, 

S.G., Semken, S.C., Berglof, W.R., and Ulmer-Scholle, 

D.S., eds., Geology of the Zuni Plateau: New Mexico Geological Society, Fifty-Fourth Annual Field Conference, Las 

Vegas, New Mexico, New Mexico Highlands University, 

September 24–27, 2003, p. 119–132.

Cather, S.M., 2004, The Laramide Orogeny in central and 

northern New Mexico and southern Colorado, in Mack, 

G.H., and Giles, K.A., eds., The geology of New Mexico, a 

geologic history: Socorro, New Mexico Geological Society 

Special Publication 11, p. 203–248.

Crumpler, L.S., 1982, Volcanism in the Mount Taylor region: 

New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook 33, p. 291–

298.

Crumpler, L.S., 2003, The Mount Taylor Volcanic Field, 

in Lucas, S.G., Semken, S.C., Berglof, W.R., and 

Ulmer-Scholle, D.S., eds., Geology of the Zuni Plateau: 

New Mexico Geological Society, Fifty-Fourth Annual Field 

Conference, Las Vegas, New Mexico, New Mexico Highlands University, September 24–27, 2003, p. 75–77.

Daly, C., and Weisburg, J., 1997, Average annual precipitation, New Mexico: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural 

Resources Conservation Service, National Water and 

Climate Center, accessed July 25, 2011, at http://www.wrcc.

dri.edu/pcpn/nm.gif.

Dillinger, J.K., 1990, Geologic map of the Grants 30' x 60' 

quadrangle, west-central New Mexico: U.S. Geological 

Survey Coal Investigations map C–118–A, scale 1:100,000.

Dubiel, R.F., 1994, Triassic deposystems, paleogeography, 

and paleoclimate of the Western Interior, in Caputo, M.V., 

Peterson, J.A., and Franczyk, K.J., eds., Mesozoic systems 

of the Rocky Mountain region, USA: Rocky Mountain 

Section, Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, p. 133–168.

El–Kadi, A., and Fujiwara, K., 2009, NETPATH-WIN—

Windows version of NETPATH based on original model 

of Plummer and others (2009), distributed by the Isotope 

Hydrology Section of the International Atomic Energy 

Agency, Vienna, Austria.

Fetter, C.W., 2001, Applied hydrogeology: New Jersey, 

Prentice Hall, Inc., 598 p.

Fitch, D.C., 1980, Exploration for uranium deposits, Grants 

Mineral Belt, in Rautman, C.A., ed., Geology and mineral technology of the Grants uranium region 1979: New 

Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Memoir 

38, p. 40–51. 

Fitzsimmons, J.P., 1959, The structure and geomorphology 

of west-central New Mexico, in Weir, Jr., J.E., Baltz, E.H., 

and Cardwell, W.D.E., eds., Guidebook of west-central New 

Mexico: Socorro, New Mexico Geological Society, 10th 

Field Conference, p. 112–116.

Frenzel, P.F., 1992, Simulation of ground-water flow in the 

San Andres/Glorieta aquifer in the Acoma Embayment 

and eastern Zuni Uplift, west-central New Mexico: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

91–4099, 381 p.
References 37

Friedman, I., Smith, G.I., Gleason, J.D., Warden, A., and 

Harris, J.M., 1992, Stable isotope composition of waters 

in southeastern California—modern precipitation: Journal 

Geophysical Research, v. 97, p. 5795–5812.

Garven, G., 1995, Continental-scale groundwater flow and 

geologic processes: Annual Review of Earth and Planetary 

Sciences, v. 23, p. 89–118.

Genereux, D.P., and Hooper, R.P., 1998, Oxygen and hydrogen isotopes in rainfall-runoff studies, in Kendall, C., and 

McDonnell, J.J., eds., Isotope tracers in catchment hydrology: Amsterdam, Elsevier Science B.V., p. 319–346.

Gordon, E.D., 1961, Geology and ground-water resources of 

the Grants–Bluewater area, Valencia County, New Mexico: 

New Mexico State Engineer Technical Report 20, 109 p. 

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

Heckert, A.B., and Lucas, S.G., 2003, Triassic stratigraphy in 

the Zuni Mountains, west-central New Mexico, in Lucas, 

S.G., Semken, S.C., Berglof, W.R., and Ulmer-Scholle, 

D.S., eds., Geology of the Zuni Plateau: New Mexico 

Geological Society, Fifty-Fourth Annual Field Conference, 

September 24–27, 2003, p. 245–262. 

Heier, K.S., and Billings, G.K., 1970, Lithium, in Wedepohl, 

K.H., ed., Handbook of geochemistry: Berlin, Springer–

Verlag, v. II–1, p. 3I1–3I3.

Hem, J.D., 1989, Study and interpretation of the chemical 

characteristics of natural water: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Supply Paper 2254, 263 p.

Hunt, C.B., 1938, Igneous geology and structure of the Mount 

Taylor Volcanic Field, New Mexico: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 189–B, p. 51–80.

Ingraham, N.L., 1998, Isotopic variations in precipitation, in

Kendall, C., and McDonnell, J.J., eds., Isotope tracers in 

catchment hydrology: Amsterdam, Elsevier Science B.V., 

p. 87–118.

Keating, G.N., and Valentine, G.A., 1998, Proximal stratigraphy and syn-eruptive faulting in rhyolitic Grants Ridge Tuff, 

New Mexico, USA: Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal 

Research, v. 81, no. 1–2, p. 37–49.

Kelley, V.C., and Clinton, N.J., 1960, Fracture systems and 

tectonic elements of the Colorado Plateaus: Albuquerque, 

University of New Mexico Press, Publications in Geology, 

no. 6, 104 p.

Kelly, W.P., 1948, Cation exchange in soils: New York, 

Reinhold Publishing Corporation, 114 p.

Kendall, C., and Coplen, T.B., 2001, Distribution of oxygen18 and deuterium in river waters across the United States: 

Hydrological Processes, v. 15, no. 7, p. 1363–1393.

Langmuir, D., 1997, Aqueous environmental geochemistry: 

New Jersey, Prentice Hall, Inc., 600 p.

Laughlin, A.W., Perry, F.V., Damon, P.E., Shafiqullah, M., 

WoldeGabriel, G., McIntosh, W., Harrington, C.D., Wells, 

S.G., and Drake, P.G., 1994, Geochronology of Mount 

Taylor, Cebollita Mesa, and Zuni–Bandera volcanic fields, 

Cibola County, New Mexico: New Mexico Geology, v. 15, 

no. 4, p. 81–92.

Leibundgut, C., Maloszewski, P., and Külls, C., 2009, Tracers 

in hydrology: West Sussex, United Kingdom, WileyBlackwell, 415 p.

Lipman, P.W., and Mehnert, H.H., 1979, Potassium-argon ages 

from the Mount Taylor Volcanic Field, New Mexico: U.S. 

Geological Survey Professional Paper 1124–B, 8 p.

Lipman, P.W., Pallister, J.S., and Sargent, K.A., 1979, 

Geologic map of the Mount Taylor quadrangle, Valencia County, New Mexico: U.S. Geological Survey Map 

GQ–1523, scale 1:24,000.

Lucas, S.G., 1993, The Chinle Group—revised stratigraphy 

and biochronology of upper Triassic nonmarine strata in the 

western United States: Museum of Northern Arizona Bulletin, v. 59, p. 27–50.

Lucas, S.G., Semken, S.C., Berglof, W.R., and Ulmer–Scholle, 

D.S., eds., 2003, Geology of the Zuni Plateau: New Mexico 

Geological Society, Fifty-Fourth Annual Field Conference, 

Las Vegas, New Mexico, New Mexico Highlands University, September 24–27, 2003, variously paged.

McCraw, D.J., Read, A.S., Lawrence, J.R., Goff, F., and Goff, 

C.J., 2009, Preliminary geologic map of the San Mateo 

quadrangle, McKinley and Cibola Counties, New Mexico: 

New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources, 

Open-file Digital Geologic Map OF–GM 194, map. 

McLemore, V.T., and Chenoweth, W.L, 2003, Uranium 

resources in the San Juan Basin, New Mexico, in Lucas, 

S.G., Semken, S.C., Berglof, W.R., and Ulmer–Scholle, 

D.S., eds., Geology of the Zuni Plateau: New Mexico Geological Society, Fifty-Fourth Annual Field Conference, Las 

Vegas, New Mexico, New Mexico Highlands University, 

September 24–27, 2003, p. 165–177. 

McMahon, P.B., and Chapelle, F.H., 2008, Redox processes 

and water quality of selected principal aquifer systems: 

Ground Water, v. 46, no. 2, p. 259–271.

New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources, 

2003, Geologic map of New Mexico, 1:500,000: New 

Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources, map 

with explanation.
38 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

New Mexico Environment Department, 2009, Health advisory 

for the private wells within the San Mateo Creek Basin: 

New Mexico Environment Department, 3 p., accessed 

July 1, 2010, at http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/OOTS/

documents/wellhealthadvisory01072009final.pdf.

Nimz, G.J., 1998, Lithogenic and cosmogenic tracers, in

Kendall, C., and McDonnell, J.J., Isotope tracers in catchment hydrology: Amsterdam, Elsevier Science B.V., chapter 8, p. 247–289.

Parkhurst, D.L., and Appelo, C.A.J., 1999, User’s guide to 

PHREEQC (version 2)—A computer program for speciation, batch-reaction, one-dimensional transport, and inverse 

geochemical calculations: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 99–4259, 310 p.

Perry, F.V., Baldridge, W.S., DePaolo, J., and Shafiqullah, M., 

1990, Evolution of a magmatic system during continental 

extension: the Mount Taylor Volcanic Field, New Mexico: 

Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 95, p. 19327–19348.

Plummer, L.N., Prestemon, E.C., and Parkhurst, D.L., 1994, 

An interactive code (NETPATH) for modeling NET geochemical reactions along a flowpath—Version 2.0: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

94–4169, 130 p.

Rantz, S.E., and others, 1982, Measurement and computation 

of streamflow, volume 1— Measurement of stage and discharge: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2175, 

284 p.

Révész, K., and Coplen, T.B., 2008a, Determination of the 

δ(2H/1H) of water—RSIL Lab Code 1574, in Révész, 

K., and Coplen, T.B., eds., Methods of the Reston Stable 

Isotope Laboratory: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and 

Methods, book 10, section C, chapter 1, 27 p.

Révész, K., and Coplen, T.B., 2008b, Determination of the 

δ(18O/16O) of water—RSIL Lab Code 489, in Révész, 

K., and Coplen, T.B., eds., Methods of the Reston Stable 

Isotope Laboratory: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and 

Methods, book 10, section C, chapter 2, 28 p. 

Risser, D.W., and Lyford, F.P., 1983, Water resources on the 

Pueblo of Laguna, west-central New Mexico: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 83–4038, 

308 p.

Roca Honda Resources, LLC, 2009a, 11-20-2009 permit 

application, Phase II of a new mine application—Baseline 

data report: Permit application to the Mining and Minerals 

Division of the New Mexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural 

Resources Department, variously paged, accessed January 

3, 2011, at http://www.emnrd.state.nm.us/MMD/MARP/

permits/MARP_Permits.htm.

Roca Honda Resources, LLC, 2009b, 11-20-2009 permit 

application, Phase II of a new mine application—Sampling 

and analysis plan revision, phase I of new mine application: 

Permit application to the Mining and Minerals Division of 

the New Mexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources 

Department, variously paged, accessed January 3 , 2011, 

at http://www.emnrd.state.nm.us/MMD/MARP/permits/

MARP_Permits.htm. 

Schoeppner, J., 2008, Groundwater remediation from uranium 

mining in New Mexico: Southwest Hydrology, November/

December issue, p. 22–23.

Stone, W.J., 2003, Hydrostratigraphy, hydrodynamics, and 

hydrochemistry—Geologic controls of groundwater phenomena in the San Juan Basin, in Lucas, S.G., Semken, 

S.C., Berglof, W.R., and Ulmer–Scholle, D.S., eds., Geology of the Zuni Plateau: New Mexico Geological Society, 

Fifty-Fourth Annual Field Conference, Las Vegas, New 

Mexico, New Mexico Highlands University, September 

24–27, 2003, p. 191–195.

Stone, W.J., Lyford, F.P., Frenzel, P.F., Mizell, N.H., and 

Padgett, E.T., 1983, Hydrogeology and water resources 

of San Juan Basin, New Mexico: Socorro, New Mexico 

Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Hydrologic 

Report 6, 70 p.

Strickland, D., Heizler, M.T., Selverstone, J., and Karlstrom, 

K.E., 2003, Proterozoic evolution of the Zuni Mountains, western New Mexico—Relationship to the Jemez 

Lineament and implications for a complex cooling history, 

in Lucas, S.G., Semken, S.C., Berglof, W.R., and Ulmer–

Scholle, D.S., eds., Geology of the Zuni Plateau: New 

Mexico Geological Society, Fifty-Fourth Annual Field Conference, Las Vegas, New Mexico, New Mexico Highlands 

University, September 24–27, 2003, p. 109–117.

Stumm, W., and Morgan J.J., 1996, Aquatic chemistry—

Chemical equilibria and rates in natural waters, (3d): New 

York, Wiley-Interscience, 1,022 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1993, Methods for 

the determination of inorganic substances in environmental 

samples: EPA/600/R–93/100, including updates, variously 

paged.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2009, Methods and 

guidance for the analysis of water (official EPA versions) 

including updates, variously paged on CD-ROM.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2006, Collection of water samples 

(ver. 2.0): U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, book 9, chap. A4, variously 

paged, accessed July 1, 2010, at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/

twri9A4/.
References 39

U.S. Geological Survey, 2009, USGS surface-water 

monthly statistics for New Mexico, USGS 08342600 

San Mateo Creek near San Mateo, NM: U.S. Geological 

Survey National Water Information System Web interface, http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nm/nwis/nwisman/?site_

no=08342600&agency_cd=USGS.

Vengosh, A., 2003, Salinization and saline environments, in

Holland, H.D., Turekian, K.K., and Sherwood Lollar, B., 

eds., Treatise on geochemistry: Elsevier Sciences, v. 9.09, 

p. 333–365.

Western Regional Climate Center, 2009, New Mexico climate summaries for cooperator stations, variously paged, 

accessed September 9, 2010, at http://weather.nmsu.edu/

cooperator1/index.htm. 

WoldeGabriel, G., Keating, G.N., and Valentine, G.A., 1999, 

Effects of shallow basaltic intrusion into pyroclastic deposits, Grants Ridge, New Mexico, USA: Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, v. 92, no. 3–4, p. 389–411.

Wolff, R.G., 1981, Porosity, permeability, distribution coefficients, and dispersivity, in Touloukian, Y.S., Judd, W.R., and 

Roy, R.F., eds., 1981, Physical properties of rocks and minerals: New York, McGraw Hill/CINDAS, v. II–2, p. 45–81.

Woodward, L.A., and Callender, J.F., 1977, Tectonic framework of the San Juan Basin, in Fassett, J.E., and James, 

H.L., eds., 1977, Guidebook of San Juan Basin III, northwestern New Mexico: New Mexico Geological Society, 

28th Field Conference, p. 209–212.

Woody, D.T., 2006, Revised stratigraphy of the lower Chinle 

Formation (upper Triassic) of Petrified Forest National 

Park, Arizona, in Parker, W.G., Ash, S.R., and Irmis, R.B., 

eds., A century of research at Petrified Forest National Park, 

1906–2006: Museum of Northern Arizona Bulletin 62, 

p. 17–45.

Yancey, C.L., and McLemore, V.T., 2008, Uranium geology 

of the West: Southwest Hydrology, November/December 

2008, p. 20–34. 

Appendix 1.—Historical Groundwater-Elevation Data

Appendix 1 43

Existing groundwater-elevation data in the study area are presented in table 1-1. The spatial distribution of the associated 

wells across the study area is shown in fig. 1-1 (individual well locations can be located through latitude and longitude coordinates presented in table 1-1). The water-level data set is a compilation of multiple sources and is presented in order of increasing 

geologic age of the associated formation. Initial formation designations were determined by the authors/data collectors of the 

source references (references listed following the table). Groundwater-elevation data without formation designations were not 

included for analysis in this study. For this study, formation designations were homogenized to currently (2011) accepted formation nomenclature. This homogenization was necessary because of the long data record (1940s onward) during which formation 

identification has changed with certain formation names dropped from the lexicon or added as additional studies continued to 

update the stratigraphic nomenclature of the region (see Methods section).

Table 1-1. Historical groundwater-elevation data in the study area, 1946–2009.—Continued

[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; ft, feet; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988; Qa, Quaternary alluvium; NA, a specific date is not 

available, but the data are associated with documents that place the date within the range of 1946–2009; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous 

Point Lookout Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison 

Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres 

Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data 

source*

Data 

identifier**

Latitude 

(NAD 83)

Longitude 

(NAD 83) Date

Water 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

Land-surface 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

1 Qa RHR 21 35.323 107.684 03/23/78 7,062 7,077

2 Qa RHR 23 35.325 107.683 03/23/78 7,055 7,070

3 Qa RHR 24 35.324 107.682 03/23/78 7,055 7,070

4 Qa RHR 28 35.337 107.654 NA 7,144 7,224

5 Qa RHR 33 35.334 107.657 06/17/78 7,122 7,152

6 Qa RHR 36 35.335 107.649 07/03/80 7,194 7,224

7 Qa RHR 40 35.344 107.637 NA 7,274 7,279

8 Qa RHR 43 35.342 107.637 NA 7,277 7,285

9 Qa RHR 53 35.339 107.637 NA 7,303 7,307

10 Qa RHR 54 35.336 107.637 NA 7,310 7,349

11 Qa RHR 59 35.333 107.637 NA 7,362 7,470

12 Qa RHR 60 35.333 107.637 NA 7,362 7,470

13 Qa RHR 69 35.338 107.635 NA 7,326 7,328

14 Qa RHR 70 35.336 107.636 NA 7,326 7,354

15 Qa RHR 76 35.330 107.644 09/01/62 7,303 7,339

16 Qa RHR 79 35.331 107.645 09/01/62 7,267 7,287

17 Qa RHR 85 35.330 107.643 06/22/81 7,250 7,300

18 Qa RHR 87 35.330 107.643 08/18/80 7,352 7,402

19 Qa RHR 88 35.331 107.653 05/29/05 7,181 7,215

20 Qa RHR 96 35.331 107.647 12/12/79 7,238 7,274

21 Qa RHR 106 35.364 107.769 08/31/89 6,863 6,900

22 Qa RHR 115 35.347 107.776 03/01/75 6,797 6,834

23 Qa RHR 116 35.345 107.786 05/10/05 6,744 6,824

24 Qa RHR 119 35.346 107.756 03/01/76 6,816 6,867

25 Qa RHR 120 35.348 107.738 12/01/57 6,856 6,913

26 Qa RHR 121 35.348 107.739 12/01/57 6,856 6,913

27 Qa Stone 15.10.32.214 35.491 107.914 09/18/62 7,451 7,460

28 Qa Stone 13.09.24.221a 35.347 107.737 12/06/57 6,853 6,910

29 Qa Stone 13.08.25.111 35.333 107.661 09/11/62 7,276 7,295

30 Qa Stone 12.09.06.312 35.296 107.831 07/25/56 6,599 6,673

Appendix 1
44 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

Table 1-1. Historical groundwater-elevation data in the study area, 1946–2009.—Continued

[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; ft, feet; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988; Qa, Quaternary alluvium; NA, a specific date is not 

available, but the data are associated with documents that place the date within the range of 1946–2009; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous 

Point Lookout Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison 

Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres 

Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data 

source*

Data 

identifier**

Latitude 

(NAD 83)

Longitude 

(NAD 83) Date

Water 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

Land-surface 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

31 Qa Stone 12.09.07.3431 35.278 107.830 11/30/55 6,582 6,640

32 Qa Stone 12.11.15.214 35.273 107.981 NA 6,550 6,630

33 Qa Stone 12.10.27.222 35.246 107.871 09/01/58 6,520 6,570

34 Qa Stone 12.10.32.211 35.232 107.914 01/04/47 6,480 6,555

35 Qa Stone 11.10.04.422 35.210 107.889 07/26/56 6,462 6,538

36 Qa Stone 11.10.02.421 35.210 107.856 03/01/59 6,468 6,598

37 Qa Stone 11.10.16.142a 35.185 107.898 10/15/57 6,450 6,530

38 Qa Stone 11.10.21.242 35.171 107.889 06/12/49 6,467 6,515

39 Qa Stone 11.10.22.243 35.169 107.873 10/01/58 6,800 6,910

40 Qa Stone 11.09.30.211 35.160 107.821 NA 6,437 6,475

41 Qa Stone 11.09.30.122a 35.160 107.828 NA 6,429 6,470

42 Qa Stone 11.09.30.122 35.160 107.828 05/11/49 6,417 6,470

43 Qa Stone 11.10.25.221 35.160 107.839 08/26/56 6,429 6,440

44 Qa Stone 11.10.26.321a 35.153 107.865 09/05/57 6,431 6,465

45 Qa Stone 11.10.26.441 35.149 107.857 09/20/57 6,435 6,450

46 Qa Stone 11.10.27.414 35.151 107.876 01/03/47 6,459 6,495

47 Qa Stone 12.10.26.23 35.241 107.860 03/05/54 6,450 6,550

48 Qa Stone 11.10.26.414 35.151 107.858 09/28/56 6,435 6,450

49 Qa Stone 10.09.06.111 35.131 107.835 11/27/58 6,426 6,430

50 Qa USGS 351638107495001 35.277 107.831 11/30/55 6,585 6,643

51 Qa USGS 351640107494801 35.278 107.831 03/29/84 6,603 6,645

52 Qa USGS 351722107502001 35.289 107.840 03/29/84 6,623 6,655

53 Qa USGS 351745107495301 35.296 107.832 07/25/56 6,603 6,677

54 Qa Brod A3 35.290 107.850 07/01/56 6,589 6,657

55 Qa Brod A5 35.281 107.841 08/01/77 6,585 6,640

56 Qa Brod A4 35.277 107.844 07/01/56 6,567 6,625

57 Qa Brod A6 35.275 107.866 07/01/56 6,571 6,621

58 Qa Brod A1 35.296 107.830 07/01/56 6,593 6,673

59 Qa Brod A2 35.276 107.830 11/01/55 6,582 6,640

60 Qa Brod A10 35.338 107.788 03/01/75 6,721 6,829

61 Qa Brod A11 35.347 107.782 12/01/57 6,743 6,830

62 Qa Brod A12 35.347 107.749 12/01/57 6,584 6,910

63 Qa Brod A3 35.347 107.749 12/01/57 6,853 6,910

64 Qa Brod A14 35.333 107.788 08/05/77 6,722 6,780

65 Qa Brod A8 35.387 107.806 03/01/75 6,876 6,896

66 Qa Brod A9 35.388 107.815 03/01/75 6,880 6,904

67 Qa Brod A16 35.408 107.837 02/01/75 6,925 6,958

68 Qa Brod A17 35.409 107.832 02/01/75 6,923 6,947

69 Qa Brod A18 35.409 107.830 02/01/75 6,915 6,952

70 Qa Brod A19 35.398 107.828 03/01/75 6,923 6,926
Appendix 1 45

Table 1-1. Historical groundwater-elevation data in the study area, 1946–2009.—Continued

[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; ft, feet; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988; Qa, Quaternary alluvium; NA, a specific date is not 

available, but the data are associated with documents that place the date within the range of 1946–2009; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous 

Point Lookout Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison 

Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres 

Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data 

source*

Data 

identifier**

Latitude 

(NAD 83)

Longitude 

(NAD 83) Date

Water 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

Land-surface 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

71 Qa Brod A20 35.403 107.805 02/01/75 6,890 6,936

72 Qa Brod A21 35.396 107.817 02/01/75 6,907 6,910

73 Qa Brod A22 35.398 107.819 02/01/75 6,901 6,922

74 Qa Brod A23 35.398 107.821 02/01/75 6,895 6,924

75 Kmf RHR 5 35.384 107.637 08/18/79 7,159 7,231

76 Kmf RHR 7 35.368 107.659 NA 7,121 7,198

77 Kmf RHR 9 35.353 107.646 09/10/62 7,114 7,185

78 Kmf RHR 20 35.342 107.664 10/23/62 7,066 7,103

79 Kmf RHR 27 35.335 107.657 02/01/78 7,138 7,178

80 Kmf RHR 31 35.334 107.651 10/17/72 7,170 7,205

81 Kmf RHR 34 35.335 107.655 06/03/05 6,915 7,175

82 Kmf RHR 42 35.342 107.640 10/01/72 7,198 7,257

83 Kmf RHR 45 35.340 107.637 NA 7,290 7,303

84 Kmf RHR 47 35.348 107.737 NA 7,335 7,425

85 Kmf RHR 48 35.343 107.631 06/02/73 7,138 7,323

86 Kmf RHR 57 35.333 107.642 09/10/62 7,207 7,297

87 Kmf RHR 31 35.335 107.637 NA 7,301 7,316

88 Kmf RHR 61 35.333 107.642 02/01/78 7,196 7,297

89 Kmf RHR 62 35.334 107.643 05/29/05 7,209 7,297

90 Kmf RHR 63 35.335 107.640 03/01/78 7,141 7,280

91 Kmf RHR 37 35.335 107.637 NA 7,301 7,316

92 Kmf RHR 66 35.339 107.633 NA 7,092 7,352

93 Kmf RHR 75 35.331 107.642 09/10/62 7,260 7,303

94 Kmf RHR 77 35.329 107.642 10/01/72 7,259 7,339

95 Kmf RHR 80 35.329 107.642 10/11/72 7,312 7,339

96 Kmf RHR 82 35.329 107.640 07/31/71 7,317 7,392

97 Kmf RHR 84 35.328 107.641 09/08/80 7,229 7,349

98 Kmf RHR 89 35.334 107.653 08/01/73 7,179 7,215

99 Kmf RHR 91 35.331 107.641 10/24/72 7,221 7,254

100 Kmf RHR 92 35.331 107.646 02/01/78 7,255 7,277

101 Kmf RHR 94 35.330 107.648 04/21/89 7,200 7,270

102 Kmf RHR 98 35.325 107.680 08/01/77 7,046 7,070

103 Kmf RHR 100 35.320 107.693 01/01/47 7,050 7,070

104 Kmf RHR 104 35.309 107.687 01/01/67 7,142 7,192

105 Kmf Stone 13.08.14.422 35.354 107.646 09/10/62 7,109 7,180

106 Kmf Stone 13.08.24.223 35.345 107.631 09/10/62 7,189 7,330

107 Kmf Stone 13.08.22.242 35.344 107.664 10/23/62 7,073 7,110

108 Kmf Stone 13.08.23.432 35.336 107.651 NA 7,142 7,180

109 Kmf Stone 13.08.24.334 35.335 107.643 NA 7,240 7,290

110 Kmf Stone 13.08.24.334a 35.335 107.643 09/10/62 7,210 7,300
46 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

Table 1-1. Historical groundwater-elevation data in the study area, 1946–2009.—Continued

[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; ft, feet; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988; Qa, Quaternary alluvium; NA, a specific date is not 

available, but the data are associated with documents that place the date within the range of 1946–2009; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous 

Point Lookout Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison 

Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres 

Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data 

source*

Data 

identifier**

Latitude 

(NAD 83)

Longitude 

(NAD 83) Date

Water 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

Land-surface 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

111 Kmf Stone 13.08.24.334b 35.334 107.642 09/10/62 7,205 7,295

112 Kmf Stone 13.08.26.211 35.333 107.653 09/11/62 7,182 7,215

113 Kmf Stone 13.08.25.114 35.331 107.642 09/11/62 7,274 7,310

114 Kmf Stone 15.08.21.4414 35.509 107.685 09/20/62 6,747 6,857

115 Kmf USGS 352004107383001 35.334 107.642 09/10/62 7,259 7,299

116 Kmf Brod MF9 35.254 107.637 05/15/05 7,240 7,290

117 Kmf Brod MF1 35.354 107.654 10/01/72 7,124 7,180

118 Kmf Brod MF1 35.354 107.654 09/01/62 7,108 7,180

119 Kmf Brod MF2 35.343 107.676 10/01/72 7,077 7,110

120 Kmf Brod MF2 35.343 107.676 10/01/62 7,073 7,110

121 Kmf Brod MF4 35.336 107.658 02/01/78 7,132 7,169

122 Kmf Brod MF5 35.336 107.652 09/01/62 7,142 7,180

123 Kmf Brod MF6 35.344 107.632 02/01/78 7,189 7,248

124 Kmf Brod MF8 35.345 107.645 09/01/62 7,179 7,320

125 Kmf Brod MF8 35.345 107.645 10/01/72 7,125 7,320

126 Kmf Brod MF10 35.335 107.643 09/01/62 7,211 7,300

127 Kmf Brod MF10 35.335 107.643 02/01/78 7,207 7,295

128 Kmf Brod MF14 35.336 107.641 03/01/78 7,186 7,325

129 Kmf Brod MF15 35.331 107.632 09/01/62 7,277 7,320

130 Kmf Brod MF16 35.331 107.630 10/01/72 7,263 7,290

131 Kmf Brod MF17 35.331 107.630 09/01/62 7,274 7,310

132 Kmf Brod MF18 35.331 107.630 10/01/72 7,230 7,310

133 Kmf Brod MF19 35.332 107.656 09/01/62 7,182 7,215

134 Kmf Brod MF20 35.332 107.656 08/01/73 7,171 7,207

135 Kmf Brod MF21 35.332 107.663 02/01/78 7,246 7,267

136 Kpl RHR 25 35.333 107.664 06/15/00 7,049 7,136

137 Kpl RHR 50 35.340 107.631 NA 6,899 7,369

138 Kpl RHR 83 35.332 107.640 05/29/05 7,044 7,313

139 Kpl RHR 90 35.332 107.651 09/11/62 6,973 7,254

140 Kpl RHR 93 35.331 107.649 NA 7,041 7,251

141 Kpl RHR 103 35.311 107.686 08/01/77 7,056 7,169

142 Kpl Stone 13.08.26.221 35.333 107.648 09/11/62 6,934 7,215

143 Kpl RHR 123 35.433 107.607 NA 6,913 6,925

144 Kpl RHR 127 35.456 107.634 NA 6,972 6,986

145 Kpl Brod P2 35.333 107.659 NA 6,959 7,240

146 Kg RHR 32 35.338 107.662 05/28/02 7,016 7,123

147 Kg USGS 352632107394801 35.442 107.664 07/23/86 6,485 7,184

148 Km RHR 72 35.339 107.633 05/29/05 6,649 7,349

149 Km RHR 72 35.339 107.633 NA 6,649 7,368

150 Km RHR 107 35.360 107.750 02/01/58 6,799 6,942
Appendix 1 47

Table 1-1. Historical groundwater-elevation data in the study area, 1946–2009.—Continued

[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; ft, feet; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988; Qa, Quaternary alluvium; NA, a specific date is not 

available, but the data are associated with documents that place the date within the range of 1946–2009; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous 

Point Lookout Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison 

Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres 

Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data 

source*

Data 

identifier**

Latitude 

(NAD 83)

Longitude 

(NAD 83) Date

Water 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

Land-surface 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

151 Km Stone 14.09.05.4323 35.466 107.813 12/16/57 6,831 7,245

152 Km Stone 14.08.15.244 35.442 107.663 04/03/61 6,978 7,478

153 Km Brod MN4 35.398 107.848 03/01/75 6,977 7,010

154 Km Brod MN1 35.443 107.673 NA 6,710 7,210

155 Km Brod MN3 35.398 107.816 02/01/75 6,815 6,923

156 Km Brod MN2 35.467 107.815 12/01/57 6,831 7,245

157 Kd RHR 14 35.358 107.704 04/01/81 5,863 7,178

158 Kd RHR 17 35.358 107.728 06/14/03 6,417 7,041

159 Kd RHR 18 35.360 107.719 12/31/74 6,333 7,133

160 Kd Stone 14.09.34.422 35.396 107.769 12/18/58 6,500 7,008

161 Kd Stone 15.11.25.334 35.494 107.959 08/02/61 6,615 7,280

162 Kd Stone 13.09.13.1114 35.361 107.750 02/13/58 6,792 6,935

163 Kd Stone 13.09.16.3241 35.353 107.796 12/17/57 6,734 6,810

164 Kd Stone 13.09.16.333 35.349 107.803 12/17/57 6,822 6,910

165 Kd Stone 14.09.28.233 35.414 107.960 10/10/57 6,569 6,999

166 Kd Stone 14.09.28.234 35.414 107.791 10/30/57 6,493 7,022

167 Kd Brod DK2 35.361 107.735 02/01/58 6,792 6,935

168 Kd Brod DK3 35.349 107.803 12/01/57 6,822 6,910

169 Kd Brod DK4 35.351 107.799 12/01/57 6,734 6,810

170 Jm Stone 13.09.14.4143 35.352 107.757 10/04/58 6,625 6,896

171 Jm Stone 14.10.11.434a 35.450 107.862 10/18/60 6,495 7,065

172 Jm RHR 1 35.324 107.614 NA 7,709 8,209

173 Jm RHR 73 35.339 107.637 10/01/76 6,238 7,300

174 Jm RHR 109 35.348 107.758 04/02/86 6,643 6,890

175 Jm RHR 110 35.347 107.781 12/01/57 6,614 6,837

176 Jm RHR 111 35.349 107.780 07/21/86 6,643 6,847

177 Jm RHR 112 35.346 107.786 NA 6,611 6,831

178 Jm RHR 113 35.347 107.783 12/01/58 6,632 6,837

179 Jm RHR 114 35.346 107.785 10/01/62 6,639 6,837

180 Jm RHR 117 35.346 107.783 01/18/79 6,641 6,831

181 Jm RHR 134 35.393 107.750 NA 6,511 7,093

182 Jm RHR 135 35.396 107.768 NA 6,526 7,034

183 Jm RHR 137 35.393 107.747 NA 7,133 7,133

184 Jm Stone 15.10.20.124 35.520 107.919 09/19/77 6,554 7,554

185 Jm Stone 15.11.29.1132 35.505 108.033 07/26/76 6,632 7,075

186 Jm Stone 14.10.11.434 35.450 107.862 11/07/57 6,600 7,060

187 Jm Stone 14.10.22.214 35.433 107.880 03/27/57 6,552 7,077

188 Jm Stone 14.10.23.114 35.432 107.871 05/07/57 6,551 7,053

189 Jm Stone 14.10.23.132 35.430 107.871 05/07/57 6,549 7,034

190 Jm Stone 14.10.23.141 35.430 107.869 05/07/57 6,549 7,047
48 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

Table 1-1. Historical groundwater-elevation data in the study area, 1946–2009.—Continued

[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; ft, feet; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988; Qa, Quaternary alluvium; NA, a specific date is not 

available, but the data are associated with documents that place the date within the range of 1946–2009; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous 

Point Lookout Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison 

Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres 

Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data 

source*

Data 

identifier**

Latitude 

(NAD 83)

Longitude 

(NAD 83) Date

Water 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

Land-surface 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

191 Jm Stone 14.10.23.142 35.430 107.867 05/17/57 6,548 7,037

192 Jm Stone 14.10.23.232 35.430 107.862 05/17/57 6,547 7,022

193 Jm Stone 14.10.23.232b 35.430 107.862 05/17/57 6,546 7,022

194 Jm Stone 14.10.23.232a 35.430 107.862 05/17/57 6,543 7,022

195 Jm Stone 14.10.23.134 35.429 107.871 05/08/57 6,547 7,030

196 Jm Stone 14.10.22.422 35.427 107.876 03/17/56 6,574 7,023

197 Jm Stone 14.10.24.423 35.425 107.842 12/18/57 6,531 6,980

198 Jm Stone 14.09.30.222c 35.420 107.822 10/02/56 6,065 6,990

199 Jm Stone 14.09.30.2213 35.419 107.825 04/30/57 6,541 6,984

200 Jm Stone 14.10.22.132a 35.416 107.853 04/11/57 6,550 6,974

201 Jm Stone 14.10.22.132c 35.416 107.853 04/11/57 6,549 6,974

202 Jm Stone 14.10.22.132b 35.416 107.853 04/11/57 6,549 6,974

203 Jm Stone 14.10.22.132d 35.416 107.687 04/11/57 6,549 6,975

204 Jm Stone 14.10.25.14 35.416 107.850 11/06/56 6,546 6,970

205 Jm Stone 14.09.28.143 35.414 107.798 09/28/56 6,541 6,981

206 Jm Stone 14.10.25.321 35.413 107.852 05/24/57 6,541 6,971

207 Jm Stone 14.10.25.411 35.413 107.847 05/24/57 6,541 6,970

208 Jm Stone 14.10.25.411a 35.413 107.847 05/24/57 6,539 6,971

209 Jm Stone 14.09.29.312 35.413 107.818 02/28/58 6,520 6,980

210 Jm Stone 14.10.35.221 35.405 107.859 12/18/57 6,549 7,010

211 Jm Stone 14.09.32.122b 35.405 107.813 11/06/57 6,529 6,943

212 Jm Stone 14.10.25.413 35.397 107.847 05/24/57 6,539 6,971

213 Jm Stone 14.09.32.314 35.395 107.819 12/20/57 6,513 6,910

214 Jm Stone 13.10.11.242 35.373 107.858 08/27/62 6,508 7,240

215 Jm Stone 13.09.15.343 35.349 107.781 12/05/57 6,616 6,840

216 Jm Stone 13.09.22.121 35.347 107.781 10/12/62 6,637 6,835

217 Jm Stone 13.08.24.2433 35.344 107.631 05/10/74 6,276 7,364

218 Jm Stone 14.09.32.122 35.405 107.813 04/30/57 6,530 6,942

219 Jm Stone 14.09.32.122a 35.405 107.813 04/30/57 6,530 6,942

220 Jm Stone 14.10.25.132 35.416 107.853 04/25/57 6,545 6,976

221 Jm USGS 352023107473201 35.340 107.793 03/26/09 6,666 6,789

222 Jm USGS 352037107465701 35.346 107.784 08/06/09 6,733 6,834

223 Jm Brod B1 35.451 107.864 NA 6,600 7,060

224 Jm Brod Mw 35.254 107.637 10/01/72 6,302 7,364

225 Jm Brod W2 35.349 107.781 12/01/57 6,616 6,840

226 Jm Brod W5 35.338 107.792 10/01/57 6,643 6,785

227 Jm Brod W6 35.347 107.771 NA 6,605 6,825

228 Jm Brod W8 35.347 107.775 10/01/62 6,637 6,835

229 Jm Brod W7 35.347 107.775 12/01/58 6,625 6,830

230 Jm Brod W9 35.347 107.764 03/01/75 6,602 6,653
Appendix 1 49

Table 1-1. Historical groundwater-elevation data in the study area, 1946–2009.—Continued

[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; ft, feet; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988; Qa, Quaternary alluvium; NA, a specific date is not 

available, but the data are associated with documents that place the date within the range of 1946–2009; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous 

Point Lookout Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison 

Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres 

Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data 

source*

Data 

identifier**

Latitude 

(NAD 83)

Longitude 

(NAD 83) Date

Water 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

Land-surface 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

231 Jm Brod W29 35.433 107.859 05/01/57 6,551 7,053

232 Jm Brod W30 35.431 107.865 05/02/57 6,549 7,034

233 Jm Brod W31 35.429 107.863 05/03/57 6,549 7,030

234 Jm Brod W32 35.431 107.859 05/04/57 6,549 7,047

235 Jm Brod W33 35.431 107.861 05/05/57 6,548 7,037

236 Jm Brod W34 35.431 107.874 05/06/57 6,549 7,022

237 Jm Brod W35 35.431 107.874 05/07/57 6,543 7,022

238 Jm Brod W36 35.431 107.874 05/08/57 6,545 7,022

239 Jm Brod W37 35.425 107.847 02/01/57 6,531 6,980

240 Jm Brod W38 35.416 107.848 04/01/57 6,045 6,476

241 Jm Brod W39 35.416 107.848 04/01/57 6,550 6,974

242 Jm Brod W40 35.416 107.848 04/01/57 6,549 6,974

243 Jm Brod W41 35.416 107.848 04/01/57 6,550 6,974

244 Jm Brod W42 35.416 107.848 04/01/57 6,549 6,975

245 Jm Brod W43 35.412 107.854 05/01/57 6,541 6,971

246 Jm Brod W44 35.412 107.841 05/01/57 6,540 6,970

247 Jm Brod W45 35.412 107.841 05/01/57 6,539 6,971

248 Jm Brod W46 35.411 107.843 05/01/57 6,539 6,971

249 Jm Brod W47 35.405 107.872 12/01/57 6,554 7,015

250 Jm Brod W10 35.443 107.834 NA 6,456 7,200

251 Jm Brod W11 35.415 107.789 09/01/56 6,547 6,987

252 Jm Brod W13 35.415 107.801 10/01/57 6,493 7,022

253 Jm Brod W15 35.415 107.801 NA 6,577 7,022

254 Jm Brod W18 35.412 107.817 02/01/58 6,530 6,980

255 Jm Brod W19 35.419 107.837 12/01/57 6,506 6,984

256 Jm Brod W21 35.405 107.812 04/01/57 6,529 6,942

257 Jm Brod W22 35.405 107.812 04/01/57 6,530 6,942

258 Jm Brod W23 35.405 107.812 11/01/57 6,529 6,943

259 Jm Brod W25 35.396 107.814 12/01/57 6,513 6,910

260 Jm Brod W27 35.397 107.776 05/01/58 6,500 7,008

261 Jm Brod W28 35.397 107.745 05/01/58 6,488 7,070

262 Je Stone 13.10.18.4113 35.357 107.936 11/13/63 6,685 7,050

263 Je Stone 13.09.30.213 35.331 107.829 10/30/57 6,557 6,910

264 Je Brod T1 35.338 107.830 NA 6,630 6,990

265 TRc Stone 14.11.30.2112 35.420 108.041 08/03/61 6,787 6,848

266 TRc Stone 13.11.06.424 35.382 108.035 06/23/48 6,745 6,790

267 TRc Stone 13.11.06.424a 35.382 108.035 09/05/62 6,735 6,785

268 TRc Stone 13.11.06.313 35.381 108.050 09/05/62 6,751 6,790

269 TRc Stone 13.11.08.2211 35.376 108.021 06/24/48 6,734 6,770

270 TRc Stone 13.12.12.1422 35.374 108.061 08/04/61 6,777 6,822
50 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

Table 1-1. Historical groundwater-elevation data in the study area, 1946–2009.—Continued

[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; ft, feet; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988; Qa, Quaternary alluvium; NA, a specific date is not 

available, but the data are associated with documents that place the date within the range of 1946–2009; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous 

Point Lookout Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison 

Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres 

Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data 

source*

Data 

identifier**

Latitude 

(NAD 83)

Longitude 

(NAD 83) Date

Water 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

Land-surface 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

271 TRc Stone 13.12.12.424 35.367 108.053 06/04/59 6,763 6,825

272 TRc Stone 13.11.07.431 35.366 108.042 08/03/61 6,758 6,810

273 TRc Stone 13.11.07.344 35.364 108.044 03/12/75 6,770 6,845

274 TRc Stone 13.11.17.113a 35.360 108.033 08/02/69 6,820 6,900

275 TRc Stone 13.11.17.123 35.360 108.029 06/23/48 6,656 6,800

276 TRc Stone 13.11.17.133 35.356 108.033 08/02/61 6,711 6,822

277 TRc Stone 13.11.17.411a 35.355 108.024 09/18/62 6,720 6,805

278 TRc Stone 13.11.17.411b 35.355 108.024 06/23/48 6,653 6,800

279 TRc Stone 13.11.17.3333 35.349 108.034 10/24/62 6,539 6,920

280 TRc Stone 13.11.23.324 35.338 107.976 08/03/61 6,496 6,800

281 TRc Stone 13.11.27.3142 35.324 107.995 12/07/55 6,594 6,720

282 TRc Stone 13.09.29.343 35.320 107.816 06/05/59 6,522 6,750

283 TRc Stone 13.10.33.4443 35.306 107.894 07/25/56 6,680 6,718

284 TRc Stone 13.11.34.433 35.306 107.989 09/19/62 6,528 6,710

285 TRc Stone 12.10.01.222 35.304 107.836 07/24/56 6,629 6,675

286 TRc Stone 12.10.05.341 35.293 107.918 05/18/49 6,641 6,705

287 TRc Stone 12.11.03.342 35.293 107.986 08/31/56 6,533 6,660

288 TRc Stone 12.11.10.411 35.282 107.984 05/10/46 6,532 6,650

289 TRc Stone 12.11.10.411a 35.279 107.983 10/01/55 6,480 6,640

290 TRc Stone 12.09.18.311 35.268 107.834 04/01/59 6,567 6,625

291 TRc Stone 12.10.23.233a 35.256 107.831 07/11/46 6,519 6,594

292 TRc Stone 12.10.26.322 35.239 107.862 05/26/56 6,503 6,573

293 TRc Stone 12.10.34.2141 35.231 107.878 NA 6,476 6,558

294 TRc Stone 13.11.173.114 35.360 108.031 03/28/61 6,728 6,795

295 TRc Stone 13.10.20.114 35.346 107.925 09/17/69 6,444 6,890

296 TRc Stone 13.10.18.212 35.362 107.934 06/16/76 6,993 7,040

297 TRc Stone 13.11.18.122 35.362 108.044 09/05/62 6,753 6,840

298 TRc Stone 13.11.18.221 35.362 108.038 08/02/61 6,732 6,805

299 TRc Stone 13.11.18.224 35.360 108.035 06/23/48 6,812 6,900

300 TRc Stone 13.11.17.114a 35.360 108.031 06/23/48 6,741 6,800

301 TRc Stone 13.11.17.141 35.358 108.028 08/02/61 6,735 6,810

302 TRc Stone 13.11.17.442a 35.351 108.018 07/21/61 6,730 6,830

303 TRc Stone 13.11.17.442 35.351 108.018 12/18/57 6,685 6,830

304 TRc USGS 351815107501001 35.304 107.837 07/24/56 6,633 6,679

305 TRc USGS 351918107485601 35.322 107.816 03/29/84 6,676 6,764

306 TRc USGS 351644107482901 35.279 107.809 07/25/56 6,689 6,774

307 TRc Brod C2 35.304 107.853 07/01/56 6,629 6,675

308 TRc Brod C5 35.255 107.870 07/01/46 6,519 6,594

309 TRc Brod C1 35.278 107.806 07/01/56 6,685 6,770

310 TRc Stone 14.12.14.143 35.444 108.080 09/05/62 6,845 7,090
Appendix 1 51

Table 1-1. Historical groundwater-elevation data in the study area, 1946–2009.—Continued

[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; ft, feet; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988; Qa, Quaternary alluvium; NA, a specific date is not 

available, but the data are associated with documents that place the date within the range of 1946–2009; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous 

Point Lookout Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison 

Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres 

Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data 

source*

Data 

identifier**

Latitude 

(NAD 83)

Longitude 

(NAD 83) Date

Water 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

Land-surface 

elevation 

(in ft above 

NAVD 88)

311 TRc Stone 14.11.19.124 35.433 108.043 08/04/61 6,821 6,880

312 TRc Stone 14.11.19.4113 35.427 108.042 08/03/61 6,810 6,870

313 TRc Stone 13.10.08.211 35.377 107.919 10/02/56 6,669 7,000

314 Psa Stone 14.10.22.414 35.425 107.880 03/22/57 6,442 7,016

315 Psa Stone 12.11.03.212 35.304 107.981 03/01/59 6,510 6,690

316 Psa Stone 12.10.05.341a 35.293 107.919 01/08/58 6,454 6,700

317 Psa Stone 12.10.07.1433 35.284 107.935 10/15/55 6,458 6,635

318 Psa Stone 12.11.15.211 35.274 107.984 02/19/57 6,475 6,632

319 Psa Stone 12.11.15.223 35.273 107.979 NA 6,510 6,630

320 Psa Stone 12.11.24.424 35.251 107.942 05/10/46 6,480 6,590

321 Psa Stone 12.11.24.334 35.248 107.956 NA 6,438 6,598

322 Psa Stone 12.11.24.334a 35.248 107.955 NA 6,435 6,595

323 Psa Stone 12.11.25.122 35.246 107.951 04/06/48 6,547 6,595

324 Psa Stone 12.11.25.12 35.245 107.952 03/05/54 6,553 6,600

325 Psa Stone 15.18.14.133 35.244 107.944 02/01/51 6,473 6,590

326 Psa Stone 12.10.26.242 35.243 107.854 05/22/58 6,410 6,590

327 Psa Stone 12.10.28.44 35.234 107.890 09/01/54 6,479 6,560

328 Psa Stone 12.10.29.434b 35.233 107.911 02/01/51 6,472 6,555

329 Psa Stone 12.10.31.211 35.232 107.931 11/17/77 6,453 6,575

330 Psa Stone 12.10.31.12 35.231 107.934 09/01/58 6,440 6,580

331 Psa Stone 11.10.04.333 35.204 107.905 01/28/58 6,454 6,540

332 Psa Stone 11.10.04.344 35.204 107.898 07/26/56 6,450 6,534

333 Psa Stone 11.10.10.111a 35.204 107.888 11/14/47 6,451 6,536

334 Psa Stone 11.10.16.434 35.176 107.894 07/27/56 6,443 6,515

335 Psa Stone 11.10.26.321c 35.153 107.865 06/26/58 6,443 6,465

336 Psa Stone 11.10.27.444 35.147 107.871 10/01/58 6,385 6,490

337 Psa Stone 12.11.23.111 35.261 107.975 07/20/56 6,521 6,610

338 Psa Stone 13.11.14.32 35.354 107.974 10/09/69 6,493 6,855

339 Psa USGS 352433107462101 35.409 107.773 NA 6,455 6,986

340 Psa Brod S2 35.255 107.870 02/01/46 6,476 6,592

341 Psa Brod S2 35.255 107.870 08/01/57 6,444 6,592

342 Psa Brod B2 35.426 107.877 03/01/57 6,442 7,016

343 Psa Stone 14.9.28.441 35.409 107.788 10/01/57 6,440 6,982

*

Data sources:

Brod—Brod, R.C., and Stone, W.J., 1981, Hydrogeology of Ambrosia Lake-San Mateo area, McKinley and Cibola Counties, New Mexico: New Mexico Bureau 

of Mines and Mineral Resources, HS-2, text and map, 1:62,500.

Stone—Stone, W.J., Lyford, F.P., Frenzel, P.F., Mizell, N.H., and Padgett, E.T., 1983, Hydrogeology and water resources of San Juan Basin, New Mexico: 

Socorro, New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Hydrologic Report 6, 70 p.

RHR—Roca Honda Resources, LLC, 2009a, 11-20-2009 Permit application, Phase II of a new mine application—Baseline data report: Permit application to the 

Mining and Minerals Division of the New Mexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department, http://www.emnrd.state.nm.us/MMD/MARP/permits/

MARP_Permits.htm.

USGS—U.S. Geological Survey, 2009, Groundwater levels for New Mexico: U.S. Geological Survey National Water Information System, http://nwis.waterdata.

usgs.gov/nm/nwis/gwlevels.

**Data identifiers: these values are data indicators used by the source to identify the data within the report or database.
52 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

Figure 1-1. Spatial distribution of historical groundwater-elevation data in the study area. 

!!!

!!!

!!!!!

!! !!!

!

! ! ! !

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

! !

!

! !

! !!

! !!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!! !

!

!

!

! !

!

!!

!!!

! ! !!!

!

!

!

!

!!!

!!

!

! !

!!!!! !!! !!!! ! !

!

!

! !

!

!!!!

!

!

!

!

! !!

! !

!! !!! !!

!

!!!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!! !

!

!

!

!!

! !

!

! !

!

!

! !!!!!! !

! !!

!

!

!

!!

!!!!!! ! !! !!!! ! ! !

! !

! !

!

!! !

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!!!

!!!!!! !

!!!! !

!

! ! ! !

!

! ! !

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

!!!!!!! !

!

! !

! ! !

! !

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!!!! !

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!! ! !!! !

!! ! !

!! !

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

¬«605

¬«509

. x

0 3 6 9 12 MILES

0 4 8 12 KILOMETERS

108° 00 ́ 107° 45 ́

! Well location from which data were collected

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

Projection: Universal Transverse Mercator zone 13N, 

North American Datum of 1983, 

North American Vertical Datum of 1988

Chaco Slope

Zuni Uplift

Milan Grants

Rio San Jose

San Mateo Creek

Mount

Taylor Acoma Embayment

Chaco Slope

Regional geologic

structure boundaries

(modified from Fitzsimmons,

1959, and Baldwin and 

Anderholm, 1992)

Zuni Uplift

40

40

35 ̊ 30 ́

35 ̊ 15 ́

Developed area

 EXPLANATION
Appendix 2.—Historical Groundwater Major-Element Data

Existing major-element data in the study area are presented in table 2-1. The spatial distribution of the associated wells 

across the study area is shown in fig. 2-1 (individual well locations can be located through latitude and longitude coordinates 

presented in table 2-1). The major-element data set is a compilation of multiple sources and is presented in order of increasing 

geologic age of the associated formation. Initial formation designations were determined by the authors/data collectors of the 

source references (references listed following the table). Existing major-element data without formation designations were not 

included for analysis in this study. For this study, formation designations were homogenized to currently (2011) accepted formation nomenclature. This homogenization was necessary because of the long data record (1950s onward) during which formation 

identification has changed with certain formation names dropped from the lexicon or added as additional studies continued to 

update the stratigraphic nomenclature of the region (see Methods section). 

Appendix 2
Table 2-1. Historical groundwater major-element data in the study area, 1958–2009.—Continued [NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; TDS, total dissolved solids; mg/L, milligrams per liter; Ca, calcium; Mg, magnesium; Na, sodium; K, potassium; HCO3, bicarbonateF, fluoride; Qa, Quaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon FoGallup Formation; Km, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, TFormations); TRc, Triassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)] Line no. Form- ation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date pH TDS (mg/L) Ca (mg/L) Mg (mg/L) Na (mg/L) K (mg/L) HCO3 (mg/L) 

1 Qa RHR 120 35.346 107.737 11/18/08 7.7 603 54 20 279 3.0 401 2 Qa Stone 16W.16W.30.3431 35.588 108.574 07/17/70 8.5 1,330 24 43 400 5.0 670 3 Qa RHR 33 35.335 107.659 11/17/08 7.5 655 71 17 264 2.0 514 4 Qa Stone 15N.17W.14.4224 35.531 108.608 09/17/75 8.2 867 26 11 160 2.0 290 5 Qa RHR 21 35.320 107.684 08/21/08 7.0 NA 54 16 78 1.0 382 6 Qa Stone 19N.05W.25.4144 35.848 107.317 01/14/76 8.3 703 120 13 110 6.1 427 7 Qa RHR 115 35.346 107.774 05/26/09 NA NA 43 8.0 144 3.0 348 8 Qa RHR 120 35.346 107.737 08/06/08 7.1 NA 69 25 227 3.0 400 9 Qa Stone 19N.05W.09.4112 35.892 107.371 01/14/76 8.0 642 45 3.0 190 5.1 499 

10 Qa Stone 18W.04W.21.220 35.777 107.264 03/19/70 8.3 640 31 5.5 190 3.0 400 

11 Qa Stone 19N.05W.01.1212 35.906 107.318 03/19/70 8.0 924 94 9.1 200 5.0 350 

12 Qa Stone 20N.07W.24.222 35.950 107.532 01/05/76 7.6 4,890 440 400 520 7.2 388 13 Qa Stone 19N.06W.01.3242 35.907 107.425 01/28/76 7.4 2,740 140 22 800 2.9 867 14 Qa Stone 15N.17W.15.1321 35.530 108.625 09/10/69 8.3 760 21 6.1 250 NA 390 15 Qa RHR 33 35.335 107.659 09/23/08 NA NA 71 17 263 2.0 540 16 Qa Stone 18N.05W.14.221 35.791 107.335 10/18/71 8.3 6,610 74 47 2,100 NA 1,090 17 Qa Stone 20N.02W.19.124 35.949 107.086 04/01/78 6.0 2,800 350 56 450 8.5 320 18 Qa Stone 15N.11W.29.1132 35.500 108.026 09/18/62 7.5 3,580 530 330 51 9.5 142 19 Qa RHR 120 35.346 107.737 02/18/09 9.3 748 10 4.0 313 4.0 472 20 Qa Stone 13N.08W.26.221 35.326 107.655 10/24/61 8.0 71 10 2.4 10 3.0 68 21 Qa Stone 13N.07W.20.1232 35.341 107.603 10/23/62 7.9 160 19 7.2 13 3.5 127 22 Qa Stone 19N.05W.04.214 35.906 107.371 01/14/76 8.3 744 16 2.5 270 2.3 586 23 Qa Stone 19N.05W.18.2211 35.878 107.407 01/14/76 8.2 563 27 2.9 180 2.8 443 24 Qa Stone 19N.05W.23.3431 35.863 107.335 01/13/76 8.1 499 53 4.3 88 5.7 178 25 Qa Stone 20N.07W.20.1444 35.950 107.603 01/05/76 7.7 482 67 8.4 89 4.2 342 26 Qa Stone 20N.07W.22.1221 35.950 107.567 01/05/76 8.3 1,300 120 44 230 6.4 318 27 Kmf Stone 19N.05W.17.4434 35.877 107.389 01/13/76 7.4 1,880 150 40 410 8.3 501 28 Kmf Stone 20.03.15.44 35.964 107.140 06/18/59 8.9 596 2 NA 226 .4 324 29 Kmf RHR 62 35.333 107.642 11/11/08 8.0 446 30 9.0 183 1.0 400 30 Kmf RHR 87 35.327 107.642 08/12/08 7.8 NA 21 7.0 135 2.0 377 
Table 2-1. Historical groundwater major-element data in the study area, 1958–2009.—Continued[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; TDS, total dissolved solids; mg/L, milligrams per liter; Ca, calcium; Mg, magnesium; Na, sodium; K, potassium; HCO3, bicarbonateF, fluoride; Qa, Quaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon FoGallup Formation; Km, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, TFormations); TRc, Triassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date pH TDS (mg/L) Ca (mg/L) Mg (mg/L) Na (mg/L) K (mg/L) HCO3 (mg/L) 

31 Kmf RHR 27 35.335 107.655 08/06/08 6.8 NA 72 11 38 4.0 310 32 Kmf Stone 19N.12W.27.14 35.849 108.101 02/20/67 8.7 1,710 3 .6 470 .8 410 33 Kmf Stone 20N.06W.11.4244 35.979 107.443 01/13/76 7.3 173 11 .9 43 .7 65 34 Kmf Stone 19N.09W.35.13 35.833 107.762 08/27/70 8.7 830 19 7.3 250 2.0 200 35 Kmf Stone 18.09.15.42 35.790 107.780 12/07/72 9.0 799 6 NA 300 NA 400 36 Kmf Stone 18.09.12.1 35.804 107.744 02/20/67 9.0 1,120 2 .6 400 NA 360 37 Kmf Stone 15N.09W.09.2442 35.544 107.796 10/03/62 8.4 223 5 1.1 81 1.5 207 38 Kmf Stone 18N.09W.12.1A 35.804 107.744 12/04/72 8.9 2,110 2 NA 800 2.0 1,220 39 Kmf RHR 62 35.333 107.642 05/26/09 NA NA 22 7.0 168 1.0 380 40 Kmf Stone 15N.06W.22.3123 35.514 107.460 10/03/62 8.4 290 3 .5 109 1.4 270 41 Kmf RHR 62 35.333 107.642 08/20/08 7.4 NA 48 14 188 2.0 415 42 Kmf Stone 16N.08W.20.1312 35.602 107.708 10/15/62 8.7 625 6 1.8 220 2.0 320 43 Kmf Stone 13N.09W.15.343 35.355 107.778 09/18/62 8.1 516 14 3.4 179 1.7 370 44 Kmf Stone 18N.11W.29.3111 35.762 108.030 07/27/64 8.7 768 2 .7 270 .8 24 45 Kmf RHR 100 35.320 107.693 11/08/08 7.8 202 29 9.0 39 11 228 46 Kmf Stone 20N.04W.34.4421 35.920 107.246 05/14/64 8.5 519 3 NA 190 .6 308 47 Kmf Stone 21N.07W.35.1231 36.008 107.546 01/27/76 8.2 275 60 3.5 21 1.7 119 48 Kmf Stone 20N.05W.22.4422 35.949 107.353 11/01/63 8.2 168 14 4.1 38 .4 120 49 Kmf Stone 21N.01W.29.223 36.017 106.972 06/18/59 7.1 1,030 208 20 92 4.4 254 50 Kmf RHR 100 35.320 107.693 08/21/08 7.0 NA 18 5.0 39 9.0 158 51 Kmf Stone 18N.06W.04.3421 35.820 107.478 02/21/67 8.7 1,720 4 .6 600 1.0 600 52 Kmf RHR 27 35.335 107.655 11/13/08 7.4 249 63 10 34 4.0 304 53 Kmf Stone 15N.09W.13.144 35.529 107.745 10/16/62 7.5 731 140 57 32 3.0 570 54 Kmf RHR 7 35.367 107.658 02/16/09 8.7 1,988 18 5.0 986 4.0 947 55 Kmf RHR 87 35.327 107.642 02/16/09 8.5 331 27 9.0 113 2.0 398 56 Kmf Stone 19N.02W.21.34 35.863 107.051 04/25/78 6.2 5,800 300 570 630 13 470 57 Kmf RHR 62 35.333 107.642 02/18/09 8.4 417 19 6.0 154 1.0 376 58 Kmf RHR 27 35.335 107.655 05/19/09 NA NA 56 9.0 41 4.0 314 59 Kmf RHR 100 35.320 107.693 02/11/09 7.6 209 33 10 35 8.0 254 60 Kmf RHR 27 35.335 107.655 02/16/09 7.7 250 57 9.0 35 4.0 302 
Table 2-1. Historical groundwater major-element data in the study area, 1958–2009.—Continued [NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; TDS, total dissolved solids; mg/L, milligrams per liter; Ca, calcium; Mg, magnesium; Na, sodium; K, potassium; HCO3, bicarbonateF, fluoride; Qa, Quaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon FoGallup Formation; Km, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, TFormations); TRc, Triassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)] Line no. Form- ation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date pH TDS (mg/L) Ca (mg/L) Mg (mg/L) Na (mg/L) K (mg/L) HCO3 (mg/L) 

61 Kmf Stone 17N.11W.15. 35.704 107.994 02/20/67 7.8 1,400 190 24 190 2.0 250 62 Kmf RHR 100 35.320 107.693 05/19/09 NA NA 34 10 34 6.0 258 63 Kmf RHR 87 35.327 107.642 05/19/09 NA NA 23 8.0 111 2.0 401 64 Kmf Stone 20N.07W.18.4112 35.965 107.621 12/27/75 8.6 1,750 2 .7 670 2.5 859 65 Kmf Stone 19N.05W.25.424 35.848 107.317 01/15/76 8.9 2,510 9 58 790 .2 543 66 Kmf Stone 19N.06W.35.3244 35.834 107.443 12/28/75 8.6 2,000 2 .7 770 3.2 1,250 67 Kmf Stone 16N.13W.11.3413 35.632 108.185 11/24/64 7.1 1,400 380 74 69 5.0 31 68 Kmf Stone 18N.08W.09.111 35.804 107.691 03/19/70 8.1 3,560 400 150 430 11 510 69 Kmf Stone 20N.09W.08.343 35.979 107.815 01/28/76 7.3 857 140 85 26 2.3 456 70 Kmf Stone 19N.08W.04.2144 35.906 107.691 01/26/76 8.7 2,010 10 3.1 650 2.5 237 71 Kmf Stone 19N.06W.35.3244 35.834 107.443 12/28/75 8.3 1,320 7 3.1 520 6.4 1,270 72 Kmf Stone 19N.08W.34.2131 35.833 107.673 01/05/76 8.0 1,700 4 2.2 590 2.3 529 73 Kmf Stone 19N.09W.07.3324 35.891 107.833 09/22/75 4.3 2,060 280 170 72 3.6 NA 74 Kmf Stone 19N.07W.01.4112 35.907 107.532 01/12/76 7.3 953 93 41 160 3.5 344 75 Kmf Stone 20N.10W.01.22 35.994 107.850 01/28/76 8.0 1,940 150 78 350 4.5 280 76 Kpl Stone 19N.05W.18.2224 35.878 107.407 01/14/76 7.7 383 62 14 49 1.2 209 77 Kpl Stone 19N.06W.24.2212 35.863 107.425 01/15/76 8.6 2,770 3 1.3 1,000 3.4 1,040 78 Kpl Stone 19N.05W.12.3234 35.892 107.318 01/13/76 8.4 1,610 3 1.0 600 2.2 891 79 Kpl Stone 16N.07W.26.2214 35.588 107.549 10/03/62 8.7 875 3 .7 320 2.0 380 80 Kpl Stone 19N.13W.13.444 35.878 108.173 11/02/71 8.7 2,060 6 1.2 700 3.0 420 81 Kpl Stone 13N.09W.22.2124 35.341 107.778 09/11/62 8.1 510 74 24 76 3.0 360 82 Kpl Stone 16N.09W.22.4444 35.602 107.778 10/02/62 8.5 964 7 1.8 342 2.2 395 83 Kpl Stone 16N.08W.33.1341 35.573 107.691 10/02/62 8.3 1,470 6 2.3 557 2.3 826 84 Kpl Stone 16N.10W.08.321 35.631 107.918 09/20/62 8.7 1,390 7 NA 482 2.7 393 85 Kpl Stone 19N.12W.34 35.834 108.101 11/02/71 8.6 1,920 4 1.2 670 3.0 470 86 Kpl Stone 16N.11W.17.4322 35.616 108.026 09/19/62 7.4 1,550 96 53 338 6.1 307 87 Kpl Stone 15N.17W.12.34 35.545 108.591 10/04/62 7.0 1,940 330 162 54 4.9 546 88 Kpl Stone 16N.07W.32.4141 35.573 107.602 10/02/62 7.6 2,000 62 24 573 4.3 326 89 Kpl Stone 13N.07W.09.433 35.368 107.585 09/21/62 7.7 174 23 9.4 13 6.0 150 90 Kpl Stone 17N.11W.35.223 35.660 107.977 02/20/67 8.7 1,710 8 2.4 580 NA 270 
Table 2-1. Historical groundwater major-element data in the study area, 1958–2009.—Continued[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; TDS, total dissolved solids; mg/L, milligrams per liter; Ca, calcium; Mg, magnesium; Na, sodium; K, potassium; HCO3, bicarbonateF, fluoride; Qa, Quaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon FoGallup Formation; Km, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, TFormations); TRc, Triassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date pH TDS (mg/L) Ca (mg/L) Mg (mg/L) Na (mg/L) K (mg/L) HCO3 (mg/L) 

91 Kpl Stone 13N.07W.11.1313 35.370 107.550 08/27/62 7.7 216 31 13 20 4.0 190 92 Kpl Stone 14N.08W.04.3343 35.472 107.690 08/29/62 7.8 149 20 8.5 10 3.0 120 93 Kcc Stone 18N.13W.23.3212 35.776 108.190 11/02/71 8.5 2,000 6 1.2 720 2.0 510 94 Kcc Stone 17N.02W.07.422 35.719 107.086 11/04/68 8.3 242 33 9.1 38 7.0 190 95 Kcc Stone 16N.14W.21.3334 35.603 108.326 07/11/61 7.0 3,410 620 230 110 11 710 96 Kcc Stone 15N.11W.17.1111 35.529 108.026 01/15/70 7.9 2,320 120 170 280 7.0 180 97 Kcc Stone 15N.10W.04.1311 35.558 107.901 09/12/62 7.5 3,440 88 23 990 8.0 170 98 Kcc Stone 15N.10W.32.214 35.486 107.919 08/01/61 7.5 1,450 110 44 290 7.0 270 99 Kg Stone 16N.05W.19.414 35.602 107.407 04/13/78 9.2 312 1 .3 120 .8 269 

100 Kg RHR 16 35.356 107.704 05/19/09 NA NA 14 20 158 4.0 226 101 Kg Stone 14N.09W.18.243 35.442 107.831 10/01/62 9.6 3,340 3 1.8 1,120 5.1 194 102 Kg RHR 16 35.356 107.704 08/25/08 7.9 NA 32 32 169 5.0 293 103 Kg Stone 15N.11W.17.1111 35.529 108.026 09/18/62 8.8 1,130 3 .9 401 1.8 348 104 Kg Stone 16N.11W.33.332 35.573 108.008 02/12/73 7.9 882 78 34 160 1.0 190 105 Kg Stone 16N.08W.14.1114 35.617 107.655 10/02/62 7.9 1,110 9 5.0 365 3.2 276 106 Kg Stone 15N.10W.32.214 35.486 107.919 07/18/73 8.1 1,110 100 36 180 3.1 210 107 Kg Stone 17N.13W.10.44 35.718 108.208 03/10/70 7.8 654 80 26 87 5.0 270 108 Kg Stone 16N.07W.13.2244 35.617 107.531 09/19/62 8.2 2,190 10 2.1 718 3.2 308 109 Kg RHR 16 35.356 107.704 02/12/09 8.9 466 17 22 152 6.0 245 

110 Kg Stone 16N.18W.35.14 35.574 108.716 01/24/69 7.9 879 46 9.5 240 6.0 280 

111 Km Stone 16N.15W.21. 35.603 108.432 11/18/71 8.7 799 7 2.4 300 .8 510 

112 Km Stone 16N.04W.36.2321 35.573 107.210 06/05/73 8.5 7,760 120 9.0 2,400 6.6 241 113 Kd Stone 16N.14W.33.22 35.574 108.326 03/20/74 9.0 977 9 NA 340 NA 310 114 Kd Stone 16N.15W.20. 35.603 108.450 02/23/70 9.3 592 2 NA 220 .7 370 115 Kd Stone 16N.17W.25.1132 35.588 108.591 03/26/74 8.8 982 14 2.4 340 NA 500 116 Kd Stone 14N.09W.28.143 35.414 107.795 04/30/63 7.7 1,520 140 56 280 8.0 320 117 Kd Stone 15N.06W.22.3123 35.514 107.460 10/30/68 8.4 820 65 21 180 2.0 310 118 Kd Stone 14N.09W.28.143 35.414 107.795 08/30/63 7.7 1,525 140 56 276 7.6 319 119 Kd Stone 16N.15W.17.1431 35.618 108.450 02/13/74 8.3 324 38 8.5 73 3.0 280 

120 Kd Stone 14N.09W.18.400 35.442 107.831 08/08/62 7.6 742 38 11 200 8.0 280 
Table 2-1. Historical groundwater major-element data in the study area, 1958–2009.—Continued [NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; TDS, total dissolved solids; mg/L, milligrams per liter; Ca, calcium; Mg, magnesium; Na, sodium; K, potassium; HCO3, bicarbonateF, fluoride; Qa, Quaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon FoGallup Formation; Km, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, TFormations); TRc, Triassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)] Line no. Form- ation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date pH TDS (mg/L) Ca (mg/L) Mg (mg/L) Na (mg/L) K (mg/L) HCO3 (mg/L) 

121 Kd Stone 14N.09W.18.400 35.442 107.831 08/08/62 7.5 1,410 71 27 360 6.0 300 122 Kd Stone 17N.13W.10.42 35.718 108.208 10/29/74 8.3 379 12 4.1 120 2.3 252 123 Kd Stone 14N.09W.17.300 35.442 107.814 10/16/62 8.1 4,470 420 200 691 13 383 124 Kd Stone 15N.12W.17.111 35.531 108.131 07/31/61 8.4 431 6 1.7 147 2.8 247 125 Kd Stone 14N.10W.11.434A 35.457 107.867 04/24/64 7.8 945 53 13 252 5.2 209 126 Kd Stone 14N.10W.11.434A 35.457 107.867 05/06/63 7.6 1,050 100 33 200 4.0 340 127 Kd Stone 14N.09W.18.400 35.442 107.831 08/08/62 7.7 606 29 6.2 170 6.0 280 128 Kd Stone 16N.10W.22.212 35.602 107.883 05/23/75 NA 915 31 17 250 4.3 271 129 Jm RHR 116 35.345 107.780 02/10/09 7.3 1,727 538 142 240 6.0 210 130 Jm RHR 114 35.346 107.781 02/18/09 7.8 1,688 524 135 215 11 229 131 Jm RHR 116 35.345 107.780 11/13/08 6.9 1,687 518 144 240 6.0 213 132 Jm Stone 16N.12W.16.23 35.617 108.114 09/08/72 8.5 790 30 4.9 210 3.0 160 133 Jm Stone 14N.09W.32.314 35.399 107.813 05/03/63 8.1 478 20 7.3 140 8.0 250 134 Jm RHR 113 35.346 107.781 11/10/08 7.4 1,833 539 148 224 6.0 212 135 Jm RHR 116 35.345 107.780 05/21/09 NA NA 496 136 242 6.0 222 136 Jm Stone 14N.09W.34.422 35.399 107.777 02/14/58 8.3 420 6 5.0 140 2.0 240 137 Jm RHR 113 35.346 107.781 09/22/08 6.6 NA 548 147 236 7.0 205 138 Jm Stone 14N.10W.22.414 35.428 107.884 08/08/62 7.6 478 32 9.7 120 6.0 240 139 Jm RHR 116 35.345 107.780 08/19/08 6.5 NA 544 146 236 6.0 214 140 Jm Stone 14N.10W.22.414 35.428 107.884 08/08/62 7.6 477 30 10 120 6.0 240 141 Jm Stone 15N.12W.17.123 35.531 108.131 09/30/76 NA 801 44 16 210 7.0 220 142 Jm RHR 113 35.346 107.781 05/26/09 NA NA 501 142 237 7.0 219 143 Jm Stone 14N.09W.28.233 35.414 107.795 08/30/63 8.0 611 25 9.2 178 6.2 300 144 Jm Stone 15N.12W.19.223 35.516 108.149 05/04/63 8.3 247 29 5.8 52 3.0 220 145 Jm Stone 14N.09W.32.122 35.399 107.813 08/13/59 7.8 1,370 211 62 127 4.2 256 146 Jm RHR 113 35.346 107.781 02/12/09 7.6 1,715 507 138 231 6.0 205 147 Jm Stone 14N.09W.36.313 35.398 107.742 08/11/59 7.3 524 46 12 114 7.6 220 148 Jm Stone 14N.10W.25.132 35.414 107.849 04/29/63 7.8 437 32 17 90 7.4 247 149 Jm Stone 14N.10W.11.434 35.457 107.867 04/24/63 8.2 718 15 4.9 226 3.7 252 150 Jm RHR 114 35.346 107.781 09/18/08 6.6 NA 504 125 208 10 213 
Table 2-1. Historical groundwater major-element data in the study area, 1958–2009.—Continued[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; TDS, total dissolved solids; mg/L, milligrams per liter; Ca, calcium; Mg, magnesium; Na, sodium; K, potassium; HCO3, bicarbonateF, fluoride; Qa, Quaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon FoGallup Formation; Km, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, TFormations); TRc, Triassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date pH TDS (mg/L) Ca (mg/L) Mg (mg/L) Na (mg/L) K (mg/L) HCO3 (mg/L) 

151 Jm Stone 14N.09W.28.143 35.414 107.795 10/17/62 7.9 1,880 90 26 485 5.6 253 152 Jm Stone 16N.17W.33.4223 35.574 108.645 03/26/74 8.3 736 34 11 200 .1 300 153 Jm Stone 14N.10W.22.414 35.428 107.884 08/08/62 8.0 386 11 2.3 120 4.0 240 154 Jm Stone 14N.10W.22.214 35.428 107.884 10/18/60 8.3 2,260 26 3.9 700 4.0 170 155 Jm RHR 114 35.346 107.781 05/26/09 NA NA 433 114 201 11 210 156 Je Stone 14N.12W.17.3333 35.444 108.131 09/05/62 9.0 656 3 .6 254 2.2 395 157 Je Stone 16N.17W.15.2324 35.617 108.626 02/13/74 8.5 303 20 1.6 100 2.0 250 158 Je Stone 13N.10W.18.4113 35.356 107.938 02/02/67 NA 242 12 2.4 140 3.0 210 159 Je Stone 14N.12W.14.143 35.443 108.078 08/04/61 7.7 1,150 115 43 206 2.6 332 160 Je Stone 15N.13W.22.1111 35.517 108.202 07/11/61 7.9 528 36 5.8 141 4.8 228 161 Je Stone 16N.15W.16.300 35.618 108.432 11/05/73 8.2 361 26 2.4 69 1.6 200 162 Je Stone 20N.07W.08.321 35.980 107.603 04/24/75 NA 2,740 67 5.8 850 8.9 615 163 Je Stone 19N.05W.01.3323 35.906 107.318 12/27/75 7.5 8,240 100 8.4 2,600 22 343 164 Je Stone 13N.10W.18.212 35.356 107.938 02/28/58 7.6 1,890 260 9.7 320 3.0 190 165 TRc Stone 14N.13W.33.141 35.401 108.221 07/18/61 7.2 567 124 25 39 2.2 265 166 TRc Stone 14N.15W.28.1434 35.415 108.432 05/14/69 7.9 796 160 33 35 3.0 250 167 TRc Stone 13N.10W.20.114 35.341 107.920 06/18/76 7.9 15,200 660 67 4,600 16 100 168 TRc Stone 15N.16W.06.2 35.559 108.574 06/15/66 NA 624 180 39 29 .8 240 169 TRc Stone 13N.11W.08.2211 35.370 108.026 03/12/75 NA 337 18 6.3 100 3.0 301 170 TRc Stone 13N.10W.20.114 35.341 107.920 12/22/76 7.9 23,000 1,100 91 7,100 27 52 171 Psa Stone 16N.04W.18.4444 35.617 107.300 06/05/73 6.8 11,100 350 61 3,500 88 1,410 172 Psa Stone 15N.16W.06.2 35.559 108.574 07/01/70 7.2 893 190 38 27 NA 230 173 Psa Stone 14N.13W.20.4322 35.430 108.238 07/14/70 8.5 467 31 14 170 NA 220 174 Psa Stone 15N.16W.30.3443 35.502 108.574 03/23/72 8.4 1,070 170 82 27 5.0 190 175 Psa Stone 15N.12W.17.123A 35.531 108.131 01/26/75 7.7 628 54 18 130 NA 180 176 Psa Stone 15N.12W.19.22 35.516 108.149 02/08/77 9.3 775 6 NA 270 3.0 220 177 Psa Stone 15N.17W.12.34 35.545 108.591 10/02/68 7.3 4,560 260 59 1,100 21 110 178 Psa Stone 14N.13W.33.124 35.401 108.221 03/13/75 7.3 652 150 28 11 1.8 177 179 Psa Stone 14N.15W.04.1134 35.473 108.432 07/19/61 7.4 344 90 15 10 1.2 280 180 Psa Stone 15N.16W.06.2 35.559 108.574 11/06/69 7.7 936 190 38 22 2.0 240 
Table 2-1. Historical groundwater major-element data in the study area, 1958–2009.—Continued [NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; TDS, total dissolved solids; mg/L, milligrams per liter; Ca, calcium; Mg, magnesium; Na, sodium; K, potassium; HCO3, bicarbonateF, fluoride; Qa, Quaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon FoGallup Formation; Km, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, TFormations); TRc, Triassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)] Line no. Form- ation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date pH TDS (mg/L) Ca (mg/L) Mg (mg/L) Na (mg/L) K (mg/L) HCO3 (mg/L) 

181 Psa Stone 15N.16W.06.2 35.559 108.574 03/16/72 7.9 906 190 37 25 NA 240 182 Psa Stone 15N.17W.13.3141 35.531 108.590 08/18/64 NA 883 120 59 110 4.0 23 183 Psa Stone 15N.16W.06.2 35.559 108.574 12/08/70 7.7 895 190 38 27 .1 42 184 Psa Stone 14N.15W.04.1134 35.473 108.432 03/13/75 NA 356 91 16 10 1.4 279 185 Psa Stone 14N.13W.33.124 35.401 108.221 12/06/67 7.4 770 180 29 10 NA 250 186 Psa Stone 14N.13W.33.124 35.401 108.221 04/07/72 7.5 724 180 28 7 NA 250 187 Psa Stone 15N.17W.13.3141 35.531 108.590 01/01/67 8.0 1,050 120 60 110 4.0 230 188 Psa Stone 15N.17W.13.1142 35.531 108.590 01/01/67 8.2 1,060 120 15 200 3.0 200 189 Psa Stone 14N.13W.20.4323 35.430 108.238 03/13/75 NA 399 2 .1 150 2.0 326 

*Data sources: Stone—Stone, W.J., Lyford, F.P., Frenzel, P.F., Mizell, N.H., and Padgett, E.T., 1983, Hydrogeology and water resources of San Juan Basin, New Mexico: Socorro, New Mexico 

Resources, Hydrologic Report 6, 70 p. RHR—Roca Honda Resources, LLC, 2009a, 11-20-2009 Permit application, Phase II of a new mine application—Baseline data report: Permit application to the Mining and MiMexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department, http://www.emnrd.state.nm.us/MMD/MARP/permits/MARP_Permits.htm. **Data identifiers: these values are data indicators used by the source to identify the data within the report or database.
Appendix 2 63

Figure 2-1. Spatial distribution of historical groundwater major-element data in the study area. 

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! !

!

! !

! !

!

!

!!!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!! !

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

! ! !

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

£¤550

¬

¬

¬«602

¬«197

¬«605

¬«509

x

Brimhall 

Nizhoni

107° 107 00 ́ ° 108 30 ́ ° 108 00 ́ ° 30 ́

0 10 20 30 MILES

0 10 20 30 KILOMETERS

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

Projection: Universal Transverse Mercator zone 13N, 

North American Datum of 1983, 

North American Vertical Datum of 1988

Sheep 

Springs

Naschitti

Tohatchi

Twin Lakes

Yah-ta-hey

Gallup

Church Rock

Crownpoint

Thoreau

Ramah

Black

Rock

Milan Grants

Encinal Paguate

Paraje

Pueblo

Pintado

Torreon

Mt. Taylor

40

40

57

53

Regional geologic

structure boundaries

(modified from Fitzsimmons,

1959, and Baldwin and 

Anderholm, 1992)

Chaco Slope

(southern San Juan Basin)

Zuni Uplift Acoma 

Embayment

Rio Puerco

Fault Zone

£¤550

Cuba

¬96

La Jara

Regina Nageezi

Acomita

Laguna

Nakaibito

£¤491

¬«371!

! Well location from which data were collected

36 ̊ 00 ́

35 ̊ 30 ́

Developed area

 EXPLANATION

Appendix 3.—Historical Groundwater Trace-Element Data

Appendix 3

Appendix 3 67

Existing trace-element data in the study area are presented in table 3-1. The spatial distribution of the associated wells 

across the study area is shown in fig. 3-1 (individual well locations can be located through latitude and longitude coordinates 

presented in table 3-1). The trace-element data set is a compilation of multiple sources and is presented in order of increasing 

geologic age of the associated formation. Initial formation designations were determined by the authors/data collectors of the 

source references (references listed following the table). Existing trace-element data without formation designations were not 

included for analysis in this study. For this study, formation designations were homogenized to currently (2011) accepted formation nomenclature. This homogenization was necessary because of the long data record (1940s onward) during which formation 

identification has changed with certain formation names dropped from the lexicon or added as additional studies continued to 

update the stratigraphic nomenclature of the region (see Methods section). 
Table 3-1. Historical groundwater trace-element data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued [NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; Ba, barium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; B, boron; Fe, iron; Li, lithium; Mn, manganese; V, vanadium; Zn, zinc; Qa, Quaternary alluvKmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, CretaceCretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic CAndres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)] Line no. Form- ation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date Ba (μg/L) B (μg/L) Fe (μg/L) Li (μg/L) Mn (μg/

1 Qa RHR 120 35.346 107.737 08/06/08 NA 200 NA NA 70 2 Qa RHR 120 35.346 107.737 02/18/09 NA 500 80 NA 10 3 Qa RHR 120 35.346 107.737 05/26/09 NA 200 NA NA 100 4 Qa RHR 121 35.346 107.737 08/18/08 NA 300 NA NA NA 5 Qa RHR 21 35.320 107.684 08/21/08 100 NA NA NA NA 6 Qa RHR 21 35.320 107.684 11/08/08 100 100 NA NA NA 7 Qa RHR 115 35.346 107.774 11/13/08 NA 200 NA NA NA 8 Qa RHR 33 35.335 107.659 09/23/08 NA 300 50 NA 260 9 Qa RHR 33 35.335 107.659 11/17/08 NA 300 NA NA 140 

10 Qa Stone 20N.07W.20.1444 35.950 107.603 01/05/76 NA 270 10 NA NA 

11 Qa Stone 20N.07W.20.1423 35.950 107.603 01/05/76 NA 70 10 NA NA 

12 Qa Stone 20N.07W.18.4112 35.965 107.621 01/05/76 NA 50 NA NA NA 13 Qa Stone 19N.05W.25.424 35.848 107.317 01/28/76 NA 80 140 NA NA 14 Qa Stone 19N.05W.25.4144 35.848 107.317 01/29/76 NA 150 20 NA NA 15 Qa Stone 19N.05W.18.2224 35.878 107.407 01/14/76 NA 110 NA NA NA 16 Qa Stone 19N.05W.18.2211 35.878 107.407 01/13/76 NA 700 100 NA NA 17 Qa Stone 19N.05W.12.3234 35.892 107.318 01/14/76 NA 30 NA NA NA 18 Qa Stone 19N.05W.01.3323 35.906 107.318 01/14/76 NA 70 NA NA NA 19 Qa Stone 19N.05W.01.1212 35.906 107.318 01/14/76 NA 40 70 NA NA 20 Qa Stone 19N.04W.09 35.892 107.264 03/19/70 NA NA 70 NA NA 21 Qa Stone 18N.04W.23.13 35.777 107.229 10/18/71 NA 380 NA NA NA 22 Qa Stone 18N.04W.06 35.820 107.300 03/19/70 NA 50 70 NA NA 23 Qa Stone 16N.17W.33.4223 35.574 108.645 03/26/74 NA 670 NA NA NA 24 Qa Stone 16N.17W.25.1132 35.588 108.591 10/06/76 NA 180 20 NA NA 25 Qa Stone 16N.16W.19.1 35.603 108.574 07/17/70 NA 50 70 NA NA 26 Qa Stone 15N.17W.14.2322B 35.531 108.608 09/17/75 NA 300 NA NA NA 27 Qa Stone 15N.17W.14.1A 35.531 108.608 08/07/75 NA 540 NA NA NA 28 Qa Stone 15N.17W.14.1 35.531 108.608 08/07/75 NA 260 NA NA NA 29 Qa Stone 15N.17W.13.3414 35.531 108.590 10/15/65 NA NA 20 NA NA 30 Qa Stone 15N.10W.32.214 35.486 107.919 09/18/62 NA 80 NA NA NA 
Table 3-1. Historical groundwater trace-element data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; Ba, barium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; B, boron; Fe, iron; Li, lithium; Mn, manganese; V, vanadium; Zn, zinc; Qa, Quaternary alluvKmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, CretaceCretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic CAndres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date Ba (μg/L) B (μg/L) Fe (μg/L) Li (μg/L) Mn (μg/

31 Qa Stone 12N.11W.14.311A 35.269 107.968 07/12/46 NA 37 NA NA NA 32 Qa Stone 12N.11W.14.311 35.269 107.968 07/12/46 NA NA NA NA NA 33 Qa Stone 12N.10W.29.434 35.240 107.916 07/12/46 NA 36 NA NA NA 34 Qa Stone 11N.10W.21.221 35.168 107.898 06/07/57 NA 30 NA NA NA 35 Qa Stone 11N.010W.26.321 35.154 107.863 05/07/57 NA 70 NA NA NA 36 Qa Stone 13N.07W.31.414 35.311 107.620 10/24/62 NA 40 NA NA NA 37 Qa Stone 13N.07W.20.1232 35.341 107.603 08/29/62 NA 30 10 NA NA 38 Qa Stone 13N.07W.09.433 35.368 107.585 10/23/62 NA 50 10 NA NA 39 Qa Stone 15N.17W.13.3243 35.531 108.590 10/13/65 NA NA 10 NA NA 40 Qa Stone 15N.17W.14.4224 35.531 108.608 10/05/65 NA NA 20 NA NA 41 Qa Stone 15N.17W.13.3141 35.531 108.590 10/15/65 NA NA 30 NA NA 42 Qa Stone 15N.17W.13.3141 35.531 108.590 10/15/65 NA NA 30 NA NA 43 Qa Stone 15N.17W.13.3141 35.531 108.590 10/05/65 NA NA 30 NA NA 44 Qa Stone 15N.17W.14.2324A 35.531 108.608 09/10/69 NA 580 190 NA NA 45 Qa Stone 20N.07W.22.1221 35.950 107.567 12/27/75 NA 190 20 20 50 46 Qa RHR 21 35.320 107.684 05/19/09 100 NA NA NA NA 47 Qa RHR 115 35.346 107.774 05/26/09 NA 200 NA NA NA 48 Qa RHR 115 35.346 107.774 09/16/08 NA 200 NA NA NA 49 Qa RHR 33 35.335 107.659 05/19/09 400 NA NA NA NA 50 Qa RHR 120 35.346 107.737 11/18/08 NA 300 NA NA 70 51 Kmf Stone 20N.07W.08.321 35.980 107.603 02/21/67 NA 30 190 NA NA 52 Kmf Stone 19N.05W.17.4434 35.877 107.389 01/14/76 NA 20 NA NA NA 53 Kmf Stone 19N.05W.04.214 35.906 107.371 01/13/76 NA 400 30 NA NA 54 Kmf Stone 20N.07W.24.222 35.950 107.532 12/28/75 NA 470 10 110 20 55 Kmf Stone 19N.06W.01.3242 35.907 107.425 01/15/76 NA 360 170 80 40 56 Kmf Stone 19N.05W.09.4112 35.892 107.371 01/13/76 NA 1,500 10 NA NA 57 Kmf RHR 87 35.327 107.642 02/16/09 NA 300 NA NA NA 58 Kmf RHR 100 35.320 107.693 08/21/08 NA NA NA NA 100 59 Kmf RHR 100 35.320 107.693 11/08/08 NA NA NA NA 300 60 Kmf RHR 100 35.320 107.693 02/11/09 100 NA NA NA 260 
Table 3-1. Historical groundwater trace-element data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued [NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; Ba, barium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; B, boron; Fe, iron; Li, lithium; Mn, manganese; V, vanadium; Zn, zinc; Qa, Quaternary alluvKmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, CretaceCretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic CAndres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)] Line no. Form- ation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date Ba (μg/L) B (μg/L) Fe (μg/L) Li (μg/L) Mn (μg/

61 Kmf RHR 100 35.320 107.693 05/19/09 100 NA NA NA 210 62 Kmf Stone 20N.05W.22.4422 35.949 107.353 01/13/76 NA 10 NA NA NA 63 Kmf Stone 20N.04W.34.4421 35.920 107.246 11/01/63 NA NA 40 NA NA 64 Kmf Stone 20N.03W.15.44 35.964 107.140 05/14/64 NA 70 10 NA NA 65 Kmf Stone 20N.02W.31.2 35.920 107.086 09/29/52 NA NA 580 NA NA 66 Kmf Stone 20N.02W.19.124 35.949 107.086 06/18/59 NA 270 700 NA NA 67 Kmf Stone 21N.12W.33.1222 36.010 108.120 04/02/74 NA 350 NA NA NA 68 Kmf Stone 20N.12W.26.444 35.936 108.083 05/02/67 NA 20 190 NA NA 69 Kmf Stone 20N.05W.07.33C 35.978 107.407 01/29/76 NA 920 30 NA NA 70 Kmf Stone 19N.09W.35.13 35.833 107.762 02/20/67 NA 20 260 NA NA 71 Kmf Stone 19N.09W.07.3324 35.891 107.833 08/27/70 NA 80 110 NA NA 72 Kmf Stone 19N.01W.08.223 35.892 106.962 04/25/78 NA 650 3,700 570 NA 73 Kmf Stone 18N.09W.12.1A 35.804 107.744 11/30/66 NA 10 70 NA NA 74 Kmf Stone 18N.09W.12.121 35.804 107.744 07/27/64 NA NA 80 NA NA 75 Kmf Stone 18N.09W.12.1131 35.804 107.744 12/07/72 NA 580 150 NA NA 76 Kmf Stone 18N.08W.09.111 35.804 107.691 02/20/67 NA 10 260 NA NA 77 Kmf Stone 18N.05W.01.134 35.820 107.318 02/21/67 NA 20 110 NA NA 78 Kmf Stone 17N.08W.30.4143 35.674 107.726 11/30/77 NA 10 110 NA NA 79 Kmf Stone 17N.08W.19.434 35.689 107.726 02/20/67 NA NA 110 NA NA 80 Kmf Stone 16N.08W.33.1341 35.573 107.691 10/02/62 NA 260 30 NA NA 81 Kmf Stone 16N.07W.32.4141 35.573 107.602 10/15/62 NA 130 NA NA NA 82 Kmf Stone 15N.08W.21.4414 35.515 107.692 10/16/62 NA 90 20 NA NA 83 Kmf Stone 15N.06W.22.3123 35.514 107.460 10/22/62 NA 300 230 NA NA 84 Kmf Stone 15N.06W.20.121 35.515 107.495 10/03/62 NA 100 20 NA NA 85 Kmf Stone 13N.08W.24.3348 35.341 107.637 09/10/62 NA 130 20 NA NA 86 Kmf Stone 18N.06W.04.3421 35.820 107.478 02/26/71 NA NA 220 NA NA 87 Kmf Stone 18N.06W.04.3421 35.820 107.478 12/04/72 NA NA 250 NA NA 88 Kmf RHR 27 35.335 107.655 11/13/08 200 NA NA NA NA 89 Kmf RHR 27 35.335 107.655 05/19/09 200 NA NA NA NA 90 Kmf RHR 27 35.335 107.655 08/06/08 200 NA NA NA NA 
Table 3-1. Historical groundwater trace-element data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; Ba, barium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; B, boron; Fe, iron; Li, lithium; Mn, manganese; V, vanadium; Zn, zinc; Qa, Quaternary alluvKmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, CretaceCretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic CAndres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date Ba (μg/L) B (μg/L) Fe (μg/L) Li (μg/L) Mn (μg/

91 Kmf RHR 27 35.335 107.655 02/16/09 200 NA NA NA NA 92 Kmf RHR 7 35.367 107.658 09/17/08 NA 400 120 NA 10 93 Kmf RHR 7 35.367 107.658 11/16/08 NA 500 510 NA 10 94 Kmf RHR 83 35.331 107.640 08/20/08 NA 700 NA NA NA 95 Kmf RHR 7 35.367 107.658 02/16/09 NA 500 570 NA 60 96 Kmf RHR 83 35.331 107.640 11/10/08 NA 700 NA NA NA 97 Kmf RHR 62 35.333 107.642 08/20/08 NA NA NA NA 10 98 Kmf RHR 62 35.333 107.642 05/26/09 NA 100 NA NA NA 99 Kmf RHR 62 35.333 107.642 11/11/08 NA 100 NA NA NA 

100 Kmf RHR 87 35.327 107.642 11/12/08 100 400 NA NA NA 101 Kmf RHR 87 35.327 107.642 05/19/09 NA 300 NA NA NA 102 Kmf RHR 62 35.333 107.642 02/18/09 NA 100 NA NA NA 103 Kmf RHR 7 35.367 107.658 05/18/09 NA 500 540 NA 60 104 Kmf RHR 87 35.327 107.642 08/12/08 200 400 NA NA NA 105 Kmf Stone 16N.11W.33.411 35.573 108.008 11/24/64 NA NA 100 NA NA 106 Kmf Stone 16N.11W.33.313 35.573 108.008 06/06/62 NA NA 140 NA NA 107 Kmf Stone 21N.05W.32.424 36.006 107.386 01/23/78 NA 80 20 200 NA 108 Kmf Stone 19N.08W.04.2144 35.906 107.691 09/22/75 NA 150 NA NA NA 109 Kmf Stone 19N.06W.35.3244 35.834 107.443 01/26/76 NA 200 NA NA NA 

110 Kmf Stone 19N.06W.31.2242 35.835 107.514 01/12/76 NA 150 20 NA NA 

111 Kmf Stone 19N.06W.24.2212 35.863 107.425 12/28/75 NA 290 NA NA NA 

112 Kmf Stone 19N.06W.10.2111 35.892 107.460 12/28/75 NA 400 10 NA NA 113 Kmf Stone 18N.05W.14.221 35.791 107.335 03/19/70 NA 50 70 NA NA 114 Kmf Stone 19N.05W.23.3431 35.863 107.335 01/15/76 NA 240 NA NA NA 115 Kmf Stone 20N.062.29.4143 35.936 107.496 12/28/75 NA 450 NA 80 10 116 Kmf Stone 19N.07W.01.4112 35.907 107.532 01/05/76 NA 340 10 50 NA 117 Kmf Stone 20N.06W.34.1143 35.921 107.460 12/27/75 NA 300 1,100 60 50 118 Kpl RHR 90 35.331 107.649 11/10/08 400 100 NA NA NA 119 Kpl RHR 122 35.398 107.559 03/06/79 NA 130 180,000 NA 6,000 

120 Kpl RHR 132 35.418 107.635 10/18/79 450 250 NA NA 20,000 
Table 3-1. Historical groundwater trace-element data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued [NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; Ba, barium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; B, boron; Fe, iron; Li, lithium; Mn, manganese; V, vanadium; Zn, zinc; Qa, Quaternary alluvKmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, CretaceCretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic CAndres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)] Line no. Form- ation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date Ba (μg/L) B (μg/L) Fe (μg/L) Li (μg/L) Mn (μg/

121 Kpl Stone 19N.13W.13.444 35.878 108.173 11/02/71 NA 750 270 NA NA 122 Kpl Stone 19N.12W.27.14 35.849 108.101 11/02/71 NA 750 50 NA NA 123 Kpl Stone 19N.12W.05. 35.907 108.137 11/02/71 NA 750 30 NA NA 124 Kpl Stone 17N.11W.24.413 35.689 107.959 02/20/67 NA NA 150 NA NA 125 Kpl Stone 14N.05W.14.422 35.438 107.334 08/29/62 NA 50 NA NA NA 126 Kpl Stone 13N.08W.26.221 35.326 107.655 09/11/62 NA 140 20 NA NA 127 Kpl Stone 16N.10W.22.212 35.602 107.883 09/19/62 NA 140 NA NA NA 128 Kpl Stone 16N.09W.22.4444 35.602 107.778 09/20/62 NA 330 NA NA NA 129 Kpl Stone 16N.08W.20.1312 35.602 107.708 10/02/62 NA 140 100 NA NA 130 Kpl Stone 16N.08W.14.1114 35.617 107.655 10/02/62 NA 220 310 NA NA 131 Kpl Stone 16N.07W.13.2244 35.617 107.531 10/02/62 NA 190 NA NA NA 132 Kpl Stone 16N.06W.29.231 35.588 107.495 10/03/62 NA 210 40 NA NA 133 Kpl Stone 15N.09W.13.144 35.529 107.745 10/04/62 NA 120 NA NA NA 134 Kpl Stone 16N.04W.18.444 35.617 107.300 07/27/78 90 110 50 NA 9 135 Kpl RHR 90 35.331 107.649 08/11/08 400 100 30 NA NA 136 Kpl RHR 102 35.311 107.687 09/24/08 200 500 40 NA 20 137 Kpl RHR 102 35.311 107.687 02/11/09 100 400 90 NA NA 138 Kpl RHR 102 35.311 107.687 11/08/08 NA 500 250 NA NA 139 Kpl RHR 90 35.331 107.649 02/16/09 200 400 NA NA NA 140 Kpl RHR 22 35.342 107.664 05/19/09 300 NA NA NA NA 141 Kpl RHR 22 35.342 107.664 11/13/08 300 NA 30 NA NA 142 Kpl RHR 90 35.331 107.649 05/19/09 400 NA NA NA NA 143 Kpl RHR 22 35.342 107.664 08/21/08 300 NA NA NA NA 144 Kpl RHR 22 35.342 107.664 02/11/09 300 NA 40 NA NA 145 Kcc Stone 15N.09W.09.2442 35.544 107.796 09/12/62 NA 360 20 NA NA 146 Kcc Stone 18N.13W.23.3212 35.776 108.190 11/02/71 NA 750 40 NA NA 147 Kcc Stone 18N.13W.01.4 35.820 108.173 11/02/71 NA 1300 80 NA NA 148 Kcc Stone 16N.13W.11.3413 35.632 108.185 07/11/61 NA 350 10 NA NA 149 Kcc Stone 15N.10W.06.2421 35.558 107.936 08/01/61 NA 220 20 NA NA 150 Kcc Stone 15N.10W.13.1314 35.529 107.848 07/18/73 NA 260 20 NA NA 
Table 3-1. Historical groundwater trace-element data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; Ba, barium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; B, boron; Fe, iron; Li, lithium; Mn, manganese; V, vanadium; Zn, zinc; Qa, Quaternary alluvKmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, CretaceCretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic CAndres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date Ba (μg/L) B (μg/L) Fe (μg/L) Li (μg/L) Mn (μg/

151 Kcc Stone 15N.10W.06.2421 35.558 107.936 01/15/70 NA 150 70 NA NA 152 Kg RHR 32 35.336 107.662 08/21/08 NA 400 60 NA 10 153 Kg RHR 16 35.356 107.704 11/11/08 NA 500 NA NA NA 154 Kg RHR 16 35.356 107.704 05/19/09 NA 400 NA NA NA 155 Kg Stone 17N.13W.21.111 35.689 108.226 09/17/76 NA 120 10 NA NA 156 Kg Stone 17N.12W.33.244 35.660 108.119 03/10/70 NA NA 320 NA NA 157 Kg Stone 16N.18W.35.14 35.574 108.716 05/25/56 NA NA 10 NA NA 158 Kg Stone 16N.11W.17.4322 35.616 108.026 02/12/73 NA 120 10 NA NA 159 Kg Stone 16N.07W.26.2214 35.588 107.549 10/02/62 NA 120 20 NA NA 160 Kg Stone 16N.05W.19.414 35.602 107.407 09/19/62 NA 130 200 NA NA 161 Kg Stone 16N.04W.36.2321 35.573 107.210 04/13/78 NA 80 10 30 NA 162 Kg Stone 15N.10W.04.1311 35.558 107.901 07/18/73 NA 180 NA NA NA 163 Kg Stone 14N.08W.15.244 35.442 107.672 10/01/62 NA 800 NA NA NA 164 Kg Stone 15N.18W.14.2223 35.531 108.716 11/28/55 NA NA 10 NA NA 165 Kg Stone 15N.18W.13.1134A 35.531 108.698 11/22/48 NA NA 20 NA NA 166 Kg Stone 15N.18W.14.2223 35.531 108.716 12/06/48 NA NA 30 NA NA 167 Kg Stone 15N.10W.13.1314 35.529 107.848 09/18/62 NA 240 570 NA NA 168 Kg RHR 16 35.356 107.704 02/12/09 NA 400 13,800 NA 80 169 Kg RHR 16 35.356 107.704 08/25/08 NA 300 NA NA 20 170 Km Stone 16N.01W.29.2322 35.588 106.961 06/05/73 NA 1,800 30 1,200 20 171 Km Stone 16N.15W.20.1314 35.603 108.450 11/18/71 NA 600 20 NA NA 172 Kd Stone 16N.10W.02.23 35.646 107.864 05/23/75 NA NA 1,300 NA 60 173 Kd Stone 14N.08W.04.3343 35.472 107.690 10/16/62 NA 380 20 NA NA 174 Kd Stone 17N.12W.30.3243 35.675 108.154 10/29/74 NA NA 10 NA NA 175 Kd Stone 17N.12W.30.142 35.675 108.154 10/13/64 NA NA 30 NA NA 176 Kd Stone 16N.16W.15.4322 35.617 108.521 02/07/74 NA 20 NA NA NA 177 Kd Stone 16N.15W.11.3323 35.632 108.397 02/13/74 NA 120 NA NA NA 178 Kd Stone 16N.14W.21.3334 35.603 108.326 03/20/74 NA 40 500 NA NA 179 Kd Stone 16N.14W.15.1342 35.617 108.309 03/20/74 NA 320 2,000 NA NA 180 Kd Stone 15N.11W.17.1111 35.529 108.026 07/31/61 NA 100 20 NA NA 
Table 3-1. Historical groundwater trace-element data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued [NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; Ba, barium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; B, boron; Fe, iron; Li, lithium; Mn, manganese; V, vanadium; Zn, zinc; Qa, Quaternary alluvKmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, CretaceCretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic CAndres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)] Line no. Form- ation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date Ba (μg/L) B (μg/L) Fe (μg/L) Li (μg/L) Mn (μg/

181 Kd Stone 14N.09W.36.313 35.398 107.742 04/24/63 NA NA 80 NA NA 182 Kd Stone 14N.09W.36.313 35.398 107.742 05/06/63 NA NA 20 50 NA 183 Kd Brod 16N.15W.20.1314 35.603 108.450 11/23/70 NA 120 40 NA NA 184 Kd Brod 16N.15W.17.1431 35.618 108.450 07/29/70 NA 50 110 NA NA 185 Kd Brod 16N.15W.17.1431 35.618 108.450 02/23/70 NA 20 390 NA NA 186 Kd Stone 14N.09W.17.300 35.442 107.814 08/08/62 NA 170 NA NA NA 187 Kd Stone 16N.15W.20.1314 35.603 108.450 02/13/74 NA 60 100 NA NA 188 Kd Stone 16N.17W.15.2324 35.617 108.626 03/26/74 10 740 10 NA 8 189 Jm Stone 17N.16W.35.413 35.660 108.510 03/23/71 NA NA 500 NA NA 190 Jm Stone 16N.17W.21.3442 35.603 108.644 03/26/74 NA 200 NA NA NA 191 Jm Stone 16N.16W.17.2114 35.617 108.556 02/07/74 NA 60 30 NA NA 192 Jm Stone 16N.14W.33.22 35.574 108.326 03/06/73 NA 1,700 NA NA NA 193 Jm Stone 16N.11W.33.332 35.573 108.008 09/08/72 NA NA 20 NA NA 194 Jm Stone 15N.12W.17.123A 35.531 108.131 05/04/63 NA NA 260 10 NA 195 Jm Stone 14N.10W.25.100 35.414 107.849 08/18/59 NA 210 NA NA NA 196 Jm Stone 14N.09W.32.314 35.399 107.813 08/11/59 NA 100 NA NA NA 197 Jm Stone 14N.09W.32.122 35.399 107.813 02/14/58 NA NA 2,100 NA NA 198 Jm Stone 14N.09W.30.2213 35.414 107.831 05/03/63 NA NA NA 120 NA 199 Jm Stone 14N.09W.29.312 35.413 107.813 08/13/59 NA 170 430 NA NA 200 Jm Stone 14N.09W.18.400 35.442 107.831 08/30/63 NA NA 60 50 NA 201 Jm Stone 14N.09W.18.243 35.442 107.831 10/17/62 NA 230 10 NA NA 202 Jm Stone 14N.10W.11.434A 35.457 107.867 10/18/60 NA 330 NA NA NA 203 Jm Stone 16N.16W.30.3431 35.588 108.574 05/02/72 NA 80 10 NA NA 204 Jm Stone 15N.11W.29.1132 35.500 108.026 09/30/76 30 50 NA NA NA 205 Jm Stone 14N.09W.34.422 35.399 107.777 04/24/63 NA NA NA 70 NA 206 Jm Stone 14N.10W.24.400 35.428 107.849 04/29/63 NA NA 20 50 NA 207 Jm Stone 14N.10W.22.2 35.428 107.884 08/08/62 NA 160 10 NA NA 208 Jm Stone 14N.10W.22.2 35.428 107.884 08/08/62 NA 140 NA NA NA 209 Jm RHR 113 35.346 107.781 02/12/09 NA NA NA NA 170 210 Jm RHR 116 35.345 107.780 08/19/08 NA 300 NA NA NA 
Table 3-1. Historical groundwater trace-element data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; Ba, barium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; B, boron; Fe, iron; Li, lithium; Mn, manganese; V, vanadium; Zn, zinc; Qa, Quaternary alluvKmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, CretaceCretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic CAndres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date Ba (μg/L) B (μg/L) Fe (μg/L) Li (μg/L) Mn (μg/

211 Jm RHR 113 35.346 107.781 09/22/08 NA 300 NA NA 110 

212 Jm RHR 116 35.345 107.780 05/21/09 NA 300 NA NA NA 213 Jm RHR 116 35.345 107.780 02/10/09 NA 200 NA NA NA 214 Jm RHR 116 35.345 107.780 11/13/08 NA 200 NA NA NA 215 Jm RHR 114 35.346 107.781 02/18/09 100 300 NA NA 70 216 Jm RHR 114 35.346 107.781 09/18/08 200 200 NA NA 70 217 Jm RHR 113 35.346 107.781 11/10/08 NA 200 NA NA NA 218 Jm RHR 114 35.346 107.781 05/26/09 200 300 NA NA 60 219 Jm RHR 113 35.346 107.781 05/26/09 NA 300 NA NA NA 220 Je Stone 14N.12W.14.143 35.443 108.078 09/05/62 NA 310 100 NA NA 221 Je Stone 14N.12W.09.221 35.458 108.114 09/05/62 NA 1,600 30 NA NA 222 Je Stone 14N.11W.19.124 35.428 108.043 08/04/61 NA 180 10 NA NA 223 Je Stone 13N.10W.08.211 35.370 107.920 02/02/67 NA 60 70 NA NA 224 Je Stone 13N.10W.20.114 35.341 107.920 07/23/76 NA 1,000 280 NA NA 225 Je Stone 20N.06W.32.23 35.921 107.496 04/24/75 NA NA 170 450 90 226 Je Stone 16N.16W.25.2344 35.588 108.486 02/13/74 NA 500 220 NA NA 227 Je Stone 15N.14W.13.413 35.531 108.273 06/10/70 NA NA 260 NA NA 228 Je Stone 13N.10W.18.4113 35.356 107.938 04/26/72 NA 1,200 630 NA NA 229 Je Stone 15N.13W.12.144 35.546 108.167 07/11/61 NA 150 210 NA NA 230 Je Stone 15N.17W.14.4224 35.531 108.608 10/15/65 NA NA 40 NA NA 231 Je Stone 15N.13W.22.1111 35.517 108.202 09/24/70 NA 890 150 NA NA 232 Je Stone 15N.17W.14.4224 35.531 108.608 09/30/66 NA NA 520 NA NA 233 Je Stone 15N.13W.22.1111 35.517 108.202 03/20/74 NA 1,030 340 NA NA 234 Je Stone 19N.04W.13.111C 35.877 107.211 12/27/75 NA 1,900 800 1,200 90 235 TRc Stone 13N.12W.10.2444 35.370 108.096 08/23/67 NA 500 400 NA NA 236 TRc Brod 14N.13W.20.4323 35.430 108.238 07/12/61 NA 210 80 NA NA 237 TRc Stone 13N.11W.07.344 35.370 108.043 03/12/75 NA NA 10 NA 30 238 TRc Brod 12N.10W.23.233 35.254 107.862 07/12/46 NA 550 NA NA NA 239 TRc Brod 14N.13W.33.124 35.401 108.221 07/18/61 NA 120 10 NA NA 240 TRc Stone 15N.15W.20.313 35.517 108.449 06/15/66 NA NA 40 NA NA 
Table 3-1. Historical groundwater trace-element data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued [NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; Ba, barium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; B, boron; Fe, iron; Li, lithium; Mn, manganese; V, vanadium; Zn, zinc; Qa, Quaternary alluvKmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, CretaceCretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic CAndres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)] Line no. Form- ation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date Ba (μg/L) B (μg/L) Fe (μg/L) Li (μg/L) Mn (μg/

241 TRc Stone 15N.15W.20.313 35.517 108.449 10/24/67 NA 200 70 NA NA 242 TRc Stone 13N.10W.18.212 35.356 107.938 06/18/76 NA NA 90 NA NA 243 TRc Stone 13N.10W.18.212 35.356 107.938 12/22/76 660 2,600 100 NA NA 244 TRc Stone 14N.13W.25.1334 35.415 108.167 09/30/71 NA 450 150 NA NA 245 TRc Brod 14N.15W.04.1134 35.473 108.432 05/14/69 NA NA 220 NA NA 246 TRc Stone 14N.13W.25.1334 35.415 108.167 03/01/66 NA 30 230 NA NA 247 TRc Stone 15N.16W.06.2 35.559 108.574 03/28/72 NA 80 NA NA NA 248 Psa Stone 15N.16W.30.3443 35.502 108.574 10/02/68 NA 1,100 110 NA NA 249 Psa Stone 14N.13W.33.3341 35.401 108.221 07/19/61 NA 110 10 NA NA 250 Psa Stone 13N.12W.34.332 35.313 108.097 09/04/62 NA 140 NA NA NA 251 Psa Stone 12N.10W.32.111 35.225 107.915 07/12/46 NA 70 NA NA NA 252 Psa Stone 12N.10W.30.421 35.240 107.933 05/07/57 NA 70 NA NA NA 253 Psa Stone 12N.10W.27.333 35.240 107.880 05/07/57 NA 330 NA NA NA 254 Psa Stone 12N.10W.23.233 35.254 107.862 07/12/46 NA 276 NA NA NA 255 Psa Stone 11N.10W.16.121 35.182 107.898 07/12/46 NA 70 NA NA NA 256 Psa Stone 11N.10W.09.221 35.197 107.898 07/11/46 NA 70 NA NA NA 257 Psa Stone 11N.10W.04.333 35.211 107.898 08/23/66 NA 160 NA NA NA 258 Psa Stone 11N.10W.04.211 35.211 107.898 06/07/57 NA 40 NA NA NA 259 Psa Stone 15N.17W.13.222 35.531 108.590 10/01/64 NA NA 60 NA NA 260 Psa Stone 15N.16W.23.3132 35.517 108.503 03/23/72 NA 80 NA NA NA 261 Psa Stone 14N.13W.20.4322 35.430 108.238 03/13/75 NA NA 10 NA 20 262 Psa Stone 14N.13W.20.4321 35.430 108.238 03/13/75 NA NA 50 NA NA 263 Psa Stone 14N.13W.19.1 35.430 108.256 07/14/70 NA 300 NA NA NA 264 Psa Stone 14N.15W.04.1134 35.473 108.432 03/03/75 NA NA 20 NA NA 265 Psa Stone 14N.13W.33.124 35.401 108.221 03/13/75 NA NA 10 NA 30 266 Psa Stone 11N.10W.16.121A 35.182 107.898 08/15/62 NA 150 NA NA NA 267 Psa Stone 15N.17W.24.4121 35.517 108.591 07/22/65 NA NA 10 NA NA 268 Psa Stone 15N.17W.24.4121 35.517 108.591 07/22/65 NA NA 10 NA NA 269 Psa Stone 15N.18W.13.1134A 35.531 108.698 07/25/67 NA NA 10 NA NA 270 Psa Stone 15N.17W.24.4121 35.517 108.591 06/05/64 NA NA 20 NA NA 
Table 3-1. Historical groundwater trace-element data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; Ba, barium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; B, boron; Fe, iron; Li, lithium; Mn, manganese; V, vanadium; Zn, zinc; Qa, Quaternary alluvKmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, Cretaceous Gallup Formation; Km, CretaceCretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, Summerville, and Bluff Formations); TRc, Triassic CAndres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date Ba (μg/L) B (μg/L) Fe (μg/L) Li (μg/L) Mn (μg/

271 Psa Stone 15N.17W.24.4121 35.517 108.591 10/06/60 NA NA 40 NA NA 272 Psa Brod 15N.15W.18.3344 35.531 108.467 11/06/69 NA 220 70 NA NA 273 Psa Brod 15N.17W.12.34 35.545 108.591 04/01/69 NA NA 70 NA NA 274 Psa Brod 15N.15W.18.3344 35.531 108.467 06/15/66 NA NA 70 NA NA 275 Psa Stone 15N.15W.18.3344 35.531 108.467 08/12/70 NA NA 70 NA NA 276 Psa Stone 15N.15W.18.3344 35.531 108.467 08/01/68 NA 50 80 NA NA 277 Psa Stone 15N.15W.18.3344 35.531 108.467 11/06/69 NA 50 110 NA NA 278 Psa Stone 15N.17W.13.1142 35.531 108.590 08/18/64 NA NA 120 NA NA 279 Psa Stone 14N.13W.127.342A 35.458 108.167 12/06/67 NA NA 140 NA NA 280 Psa Stone 15N.18W.13.1134A 35.531 108.698 08/31/66 NA NA 170 NA NA 281 Psa Brod 15N.17W.12.34 35.545 108.591 11/30/66 NA 50 190 NA NA 282 Psa Brod 15N.17W.13.1142 35.531 108.590 11/30/66 NA 20 260 NA NA 283 Psa Brod 15N.17W.24.4121 35.517 108.591 08/25/58 NA NA 270 NA NA 284 Psa Brod 15N.12W.17.111 35.531 108.131 02/08/76 NA 1,400 360 NA NA 285 Psa Stone 15N.17W.24.4121 35.517 108.591 02/05/42 NA NA 600 NA NA 286 Psa Stone 12N.11W.25.213 35.240 107.950 07/11/46 NA 147 NA NA NA 287 Psa Stone 11N.10W.16.121A 35.182 107.898 08/22/66 NA 260 NA NA NA 288 Psa Brod 12N.11W.25.213 35.240 107.950 05/07/57 NA 330 NA NA NA 289 Psa Stone 14N.13W.127.342A 35.458 108.167 04/07/72 NA 120 NA NA NA 290 Psa Stone 15N.15W.20.313 35.517 108.449 03/16/72 NA 160 NA NA NA 291 Psa Stone 12N.11W.15.211 35.269 107.985 05/06/57 NA 1,200 NA NA NA 292 Psa Stone 15N.12W.17.111 35.531 108.131 01/26/75 NA NA 1,900 NA 180 

*Data sources:

Brod—Brod, R.C., and Stone, W.J., 1981, Hydrogeology of Ambrosia Lake-San Mateo area, McKinley and Cibola Counties, New Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mmap, 1:62,500.Stone—Stone, W.J., Lyford, F.P., Frenzel, P.F., Mizell, N.H., and Padgett, E.T., 1983, Hydrogeology and water resources of San Juan Basin, New Mexico: Socorro, New Mexico Resources, Hydrologic Report 6, 70 p.RHR—Roca Honda Resources, LLC, 2009a, 11-20-2009 Permit application, Phase II of a new mine application—Baseline data report: Permit application to the Mining and MiMexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department, http://www.emnrd.state.nm.us/MMD/MARP/permits/MARP_Permits.htm.**Data identifiers: these values are data indicators used by the source to identify the data within the report or database.
78 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

Figure 3-1. Spatial distribution of historical groundwater trace-element data in the study area. 

£¤550

¬

¬

¬«602

¬«197

¬«605

¬«509

x

Brimhall 

Nizhoni

107° 107 00' ° 108 30' ° 108 00' ° 30'

0 10 20 30 MILES

0 10 20 30 KILOMETERS

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

Projection: Universal Transverse Mercator zone 13N, 

North American Datum of 1983, 

North American Vertical Datum of 1988

Sheep 

Springs

Naschitti

Tohatchi

Twin Lakes

Yah-ta-hey

Gallup

Church Rock

Crownpoint

Thoreau

Ramah

Black

Rock

Milan

Grants

Encinal Paguate

Paraje

Pueblo

Pintado

Torreon

Mt. Taylor

40

40

57

53

Regional geologic

structure boundaries

(modified from Fitzsimmons,

1959, and Baldwin and 

Anderholm, 1992)

Chaco Slope

(southern San Juan Basin)

Zuni Uplift Acoma 

Embayment

Rio Puerco

Fault Zone

550

Cuba

96

La Jara

Regina Nageezi

Acomita

Laguna

Nakaibito

¤491

¬«371!

!

!

! !

!!

!

! !

! !

!

!

! !!

!!!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!!

!

!

! ! !

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

! ! !

!

!

! !

! ! !

!

!

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! ! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

!

!! !

!

! !

!

!

!

! !

!!

! !

!

!

! ! !

!

! !

! !

!

! !!!

! !

!

!

!

! !

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!! !!

!

!

!

! !

!!

!

!

!

! ! ! !!

!

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

36 ̊ 00 ́

35 ̊ 30 ́

! Well location from which data were collected

Developed area

 EXPLANATION
Appendix 4.—Historical Groundwater Contaminants-of-Concern 

Data

Appendix 4 81

Data for the contaminants of concern in the study area (NO3, U, Ra, and gross alpha) are presented in table 4-1. The spatial 

distribution of the associated wells across the study area is shown in fig. 4-1 (individual well locations can be located through 

latitude and longitude coordinates presented in table 4-1). The contaminants-of-concern data set is a compilation of multiple 

sources and is presented in order of increasing geologic age of the associated formation. Initial formation designations were 

determined by the authors/data collectors of the source references (references listed following the table). Contaminant data 

without formation designations were not included for analysis in this study. For this study, formation designations were homogenized to currently (2011) accepted formation nomenclature. This homogenization was necessary because of the long data record 

(1940s onward) during which formation identification has changed, with certain formation names dropped from the lexicon or 

added as additional studies continued to update the stratigraphic nomenclature of the region (see Methods section). 

Appendix 4
Table 4-1. Historical groundwater contaminants-of-concern data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued [NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NO3, nitrate or nitrate plus nitrite; N, nitrogen; mg/L, milligrams per liter; U, uranium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; Ra, radium; pCi/LQuaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, CrKm, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, SummervillTriassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)] Line no. Form- ation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date NO3 (as N, mg/L) U (μg/L) Ra 226 (pCi/L) Ra 228 (pCi/L) 

1 Qa RHR 120 35.348 107.738 08/06/08 NA 3.3 0.41 0.42 2 Qa RHR 120 35.348 107.738 11/18/08 NA 2.7 .41 .25 3 Qa RHR 120 35.348 107.738 02/18/09 NA NA NA .71 4 Qa RHR 120 35.348 107.738 05/26/09 NA 3.6 .51 2.60 5 Qa RHR 121 35.348 107.739 08/18/08 1.7 NA NA .27 6 Qa RHR 21 35.323 107.684 08/21/08 NA 4.9 .03 .31 7 Qa RHR 21 35.323 107.684 11/08/08 NA 5.3 .09 2.40 8 Qa RHR 21 35.323 107.684 02/11/09 NA 5.5 NA .46 9 Qa RHR 21 35.323 107.684 05/19/09 NA 5.1 NA 1.00 

10 Qa RHR 115 35.347 107.776 09/16/08 5.7 180 NA .32 

11 Qa RHR 115 35.347 107.776 11/13/08 5.6 166 NA .01 

12 Qa RHR 115 35.347 107.776 05/26/09 5.7 192 NA .03 13 Qa RHR 33 35.334 107.657 09/23/08 2.0 8.5 NA NA 14 Qa RHR 33 35.334 107.657 11/17/08 2.8 8.0 NA .01 15 Qa RHR 33 35.334 107.657 05/19/09 NA NA .3 .05 16 Qa Stone 11N.10W.21.221 35.168 107.898 06/07/57 8.2 NA NA NA 17 Qa Stone 11N.10W.26.321 35.154 107.863 05/07/57 3.1 NA NA NA 18 Qa Stone 11N.10W.26.321A 35.154 107.863 10/21/44 5.7 NA NA NA 19 Qa Stone 11N.10W.26.321A 35.154 107.863 06/15/55 3.8 NA NA NA 20 Qa Stone 12N.10W.27.244 35.240 107.880 07/25/56 10 NA NA NA 21 Qa Stone 12N.10W.29.434 35.240 107.916 07/12/46 14 NA NA NA 22 Qa Stone 12N.11W.14.213 35.269 107.968 07/23/56 .9 NA NA NA 23 Qa Stone 12N.11W.14.311A 35.269 107.968 07/18/56 16 NA NA NA 24 Qa Stone 13N.07W.09.433 35.368 107.585 10/23/62 .1 NA NA NA 25 Qa Stone 13N.07W.20.1232 35.341 107.603 08/29/62 .2 NA NA NA 26 Qa Stone 13N.07W.31.414 35.311 107.620 10/24/61 .5 NA NA NA 27 Qa Stone 13N.09W.22.2124 35.341 107.778 12/06/57 12 NA NA NA 28 Qa Stone 15N.10W.32.214 35.486 107.919 09/18/62 10 NA NA NA 29 Qa Stone 15N.15W.07.23 35.545 108.468 04/07/53 20 NA NA NA 30 Qa Stone 15N.17W.13.3243 35.531 108.590 10/13/65 2.7 NA NA NA 
Table 4-1. Historical groundwater contaminants-of-concern data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NO3, nitrate or nitrate plus nitrite; N, nitrogen; mg/L, milligrams per liter; U, uranium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; Ra, radium; pCi/LQuaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, CrKm, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, SummervillTriassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date NO3 (as N, mg/L) U (μg/L) Ra 226 (pCi/L) Ra 228 (pCi/L) 

31 Qa Stone 15N.17W.13.3243 35.531 108.590 10/12/66 0.2 NA NA NA 32 Qa Stone 15N.17W.13.3414 35.531 108.590 10/15/65 .4 NA NA NA 33 Qa Stone 15N.17W.14.1 35.531 108.608 08/07/75 .6 NA NA NA 34 Qa Stone 15N.17W.14.1A 35.531 108.608 08/07/75 .6 NA NA NA 35 Qa Stone 15N.17W.14.2322B 35.531 108.608 09/17/75 .5 NA NA NA 36 Qa Stone 15N.17W.15.1321 35.530 108.625 03/07/65 .2 NA NA NA 37 Qa Stone 15N.17W.15.24142 35.530 108.625 03/19/65 29 NA NA NA 38 Qa Stone 16N.15W.19.42 35.603 108.468 05/11/50 .1 NA NA NA 39 Qa Stone 16N.15W.20.1134 35.603 108.450 08/30/49 2.2 NA NA NA 40 Qa Stone 16N.16W.19.1 35.603 108.574 07/17/70 1.2 NA NA NA 41 Qa Stone 18N.04W.06. 35.820 107.300 03/19/70 8.7 NA NA NA 42 Qa Stone 18N.04W.22.21 35.777 107.247 12/14/50 .9 NA NA NA 43 Qa Stone 18N.04W.22.231 35.777 107.247 01/04/64 .4 NA NA NA 44 Qa Stone 19N.04W.09. 35.892 107.264 03/19/70 5.0 NA NA NA 45 Qa Stone 20N.05W.23.3 35.949 107.335 07/26/54 .8 NA NA NA 46 Qa Stone 16N.17W.25.1132 35.588 108.591 10/06/76 NA 2.1 NA NA 47 Qa Stone 11N.10W.26.321B 35.154 107.863 06/12/58 .1 NA NA NA 48 Qa Stone 12N.10W.30.242 35.240 107.933 06/08/56 26 NA NA NA 49 Qa Stone 12N.10W.30.242 35.240 107.933 05/07/57 20 NA NA NA 50 Qa Stone 12N.11W.11.334 35.284 107.968 06/27/56 16 NA NA NA 51 Qa Stone 12N.11W.11.334 35.284 107.968 05/09/57 14 NA NA NA 52 Qa Stone 12N.11W.14.311 35.269 107.968 06/07/57 6.6 NA NA NA 53 Qa Stone 12N.11W.14.311 35.269 107.968 10/21/44 36 NA NA NA 54 Qa Stone 12N.11W.14.311 35.269 107.968 07/12/46 30 NA NA NA 55 Qa Stone 12N.11W.15.211 35.269 107.985 05/08/57 16 NA NA NA 56 Qa Stone 15N.17W.13.3141 35.531 108.590 10/15/65 .2 NA NA NA 57 Qa Stone 15N.17W.13.3141 35.531 108.590 10/05/66 .2 NA NA NA 58 Qa Stone 15N.17W.14.2324A 35.531 108.608 10/01/64 9.2 NA NA NA 59 Qa Stone 15N.17W.14.2324A 35.531 108.608 09/10/69 6.2 NA NA NA 60 Qa Stone 16N.17W.25.1132 35.588 108.591 06/22/54 13 NA NA NA 
Table 4-1. Historical groundwater contaminants-of-concern data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued [NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NO3, nitrate or nitrate plus nitrite; N, nitrogen; mg/L, milligrams per liter; U, uranium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; Ra, radium; pCi/LQuaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, CrKm, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, SummervillTriassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)] Line no. Form- ation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date NO3 (as N, mg/L) U (μg/L) Ra 226 (pCi/L) Ra 228 (pCi/L) 

61 Qa Stone 16N.17W.33.4223 35.574 108.645 09/24/53 0.3 NA NA NA 62 Qa Stone 16N.17W.33.4223 35.574 108.645 03/26/74 13 NA NA NA 63 Qa Stone 18N.09W.12.1 35.804 107.744 08/20/48 14 NA NA NA 64 Qa Stone 18N.09W.12.1 35.804 107.744 07/27/64 1.1 NA NA NA 65 Qa Stone 21N.10W.29.2 36.024 107.922 03/05/63 8.1 NA NA NA 66 Qa Stone 21N.10W.29.2 36.024 107.922 04/18/64 7.5 NA NA NA 67 Qa Stone 21N.10W.29.2 36.024 107.922 05/28/65 6.6 NA NA NA 68 Qa Stone 21N.10W.29.2 36.024 107.922 01/23/66 8.1 NA NA NA 69 Qa Stone 21N.10W.29.2 36.024 107.922 04/15/67 5.8 NA NA NA 70 Qa Stone 21N.10W.29.2114 36.024 107.922 02/05/68 3.3 NA NA NA 71 Qa Stone 21N.10W.29.2114 36.024 107.922 09/14/56 5.1 NA NA NA 72 Kmf RHR 27 35.335 107.657 08/06/08 NA 4.9 NA .03 73 Kmf RHR 27 35.335 107.657 11/13/08 NA 4.9 NA NA 74 Kmf RHR 27 35.335 107.657 02/16/09 NA 5.1 NA 1.30 75 Kmf RHR 27 35.335 107.657 05/19/09 NA 414 NA NA 76 Kmf RHR 87 35.330 107.643 08/12/08 NA 2.5 .12 .39 77 Kmf RHR 87 35.330 107.643 11/12/08 .5 1.8 NA NA 78 Kmf RHR 87 35.330 107.643 02/16/09 .8 1.6 NA 2.10 79 Kmf RHR 87 35.330 107.643 05/19/09 NA 1.6 NA NA 80 Kmf RHR 62 35.334 107.643 08/20/08 NA 4.8 NA .77 81 Kmf RHR 62 35.334 107.643 11/11/08 NA 2.9 NA NA 82 Kmf RHR 62 35.334 107.643 02/18/09 NA 1.6 .16 .85 83 Kmf RHR 62 35.334 107.643 05/26/09 NA 1.7 .14 .70 84 Kmf RHR 100 35.320 107.693 08/21/08 NA .4 .13 .79 85 Kmf RHR 100 35.320 107.693 11/08/08 .8 .9 .01 1.50 86 Kmf RHR 100 35.320 107.693 02/11/09 NA 5.3 .12 .60 87 Kmf RHR 100 35.320 107.693 05/19/09 NA 2.4 .01 .58 88 Kmf RHR 7 35.368 107.659 09/17/08 1.0 .7 NA .10 89 Kmf RHR 7 35.368 107.659 11/16/08 .9 .4 .89 .14 90 Kmf RHR 7 35.368 107.659 02/16/09 1.0 NA 1.3 2.60 
Table 4-1. Historical groundwater contaminants-of-concern data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NO3, nitrate or nitrate plus nitrite; N, nitrogen; mg/L, milligrams per liter; U, uranium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; Ra, radium; pCi/LQuaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, CrKm, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, SummervillTriassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date NO3 (as N, mg/L) U (μg/L) Ra 226 (pCi/L) Ra 228 (pCi/L) 

91 Kmf RHR 7 35.368 107.659 05/18/09 0.7 NA 0.37 0.45 92 Kmf Stone 13N.08W.24.334B 35.341 107.637 09/10/62 8.3 NA NA NA 93 Kmf Stone 13N.08W.26.221 35.326 107.655 09/11/62 14 NA NA NA 94 Kmf Stone 14N.05W.14.422 35.438 107.334 08/29/62 1.4 NA NA NA 95 Kmf Stone 15N.06W.22.3123 35.514 107.460 10/22/62 1.0 NA NA NA 96 Kmf Stone 15N.08W.21.4414 35.515 107.692 10/16/62 .7 NA NA NA 97 Kmf Stone 15N.13W.08. 35.546 108.238 11/15/48 .4 NA NA NA 98 Kmf Stone 15N.18W.19.244 35.515 108.786 06/10/55 .6 NA NA NA 99 Kmf Stone 16N.05W.15.233 35.617 107.353 09/19/62 1.1 NA NA NA 

100 Kmf Stone 16N.07W.32.4141 35.573 107.602 10/15/62 .6 NA NA NA 101 Kmf Stone 16N.08W.33.1341 35.573 107.691 10/02/62 .4 NA NA NA 102 Kmf Stone 16N.11W.33.411 35.573 108.008 11/24/64 9.2 NA NA NA 103 Kmf Stone 17N.08W.19.434 35.689 107.726 02/20/67 1.9 NA NA NA 104 Kmf Stone 17N.11W.24.413 35.689 107.959 02/20/67 1.1 NA NA NA 105 Kmf Stone 17N.11W.30.431 35.674 108.048 07/18/73 .6 NA NA NA 106 Kmf Stone 18N.03W.01.23 35.820 107.104 12/14/50 .4 NA NA NA 107 Kmf Stone 18N.04W.16.4 35.791 107.264 01/20/57 2.1 NA NA NA 108 Kmf Stone 18N.05W.01.134 35.820 107.318 02/21/67 1.5 NA NA NA 109 Kmf Stone 18N.05W.14.221 35.791 107.335 03/19/70 1.9 NA NA NA 

110 Kmf Stone 18N.06W.04.3421 35.820 107.478 02/26/71 .6 NA NA NA 

111 Kmf Stone 18N.09W.12.121 35.804 107.744 07/27/64 1.1 NA NA NA 

112 Kmf Stone 19N.02W.21.34 35.863 107.051 05/20/65 .2 NA NA NA 113 Kmf Stone 19N.03W.34.34 35.834 107.140 12/12/50 143 NA NA NA 114 Kmf Stone 19N.05W.36.1132 35.834 107.318 04/16/56 2.6 NA NA NA 115 Kmf Stone 19N.06W.10.2111 35.892 107.460 04/16/56 2.2 NA NA NA 116 Kmf Stone 19N.08W.34.2131 35.833 107.673 08/20/48 1.3 NA NA NA 117 Kmf Stone 19N.09W.07.3324 35.891 107.833 08/27/70 .1 NA NA NA 118 Kmf Stone 19N.09W.11.4433 35.891 107.762 08/20/48 1.3 NA NA NA 119 Kmf Stone 19N.09W.35.13 35.833 107.762 02/20/67 2.4 NA NA NA 

120 Kmf Stone 19N.12W.05. 35.907 108.137 11/02/71 1.9 NA NA NA 
Table 4-1. Historical groundwater contaminants-of-concern data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued [NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NO3, nitrate or nitrate plus nitrite; N, nitrogen; mg/L, milligrams per liter; U, uranium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; Ra, radium; pCi/LQuaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, CrKm, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, SummervillTriassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)] Line no. Form- ation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date NO3 (as N, mg/L) U (μg/L) Ra 226 (pCi/L) Ra 228 (pCi/L) 

121 Kmf Stone 19N.12W.27.14 35.849 108.101 11/02/71 0.1 NA NA NA 122 Kmf Stone 19N.13W.28.1 35.849 108.227 01/05/50 1.2 NA NA NA 123 Kmf Stone 20N.07W.08.321 35.980 107.603 02/21/67 1.1 NA NA NA 124 Kmf Stone 20N.09W.08.343 35.979 107.815 12/20/63 .1 NA NA NA 125 Kmf Stone 20N.10W.01.22 35.994 107.850 01/24/64 .1 NA NA NA 126 Kmf Stone 20N.12W.26.444 35.936 108.083 05/02/67 .9 NA NA NA 127 Kmf Stone 20N.13W.07.31 35.980 108.263 09/13/49 1.3 NA NA NA 128 Kmf Stone 21N.08W.25.3223 36.022 107.635 02/21/67 2.7 NA NA NA 129 Kmf Stone 21N.12W.33.1222 36.010 108.120 04/02/74 4.3 NA NA NA 130 Kmf Stone 16N.04W.18.444 35.617 107.300 07/27/78 NA 1.1 NA NA 131 Kmf Stone 15N.06W.20.121 35.515 107.495 10/03/62 1.2 NA NA NA 132 Kmf Stone 18N.08W.09.111 35.804 107.691 12/04/72 2.5 NA NA NA 133 Kmf Stone 18N.08W.09.111 35.804 107.691 02/20/67 2.4 NA NA NA 134 Kmf Stone 18N.09W.12.1131 35.804 107.744 08/01/58 1.4 NA NA NA 135 Kmf Stone 18N.09W.12.1131 35.804 107.744 12/07/72 1.2 NA NA NA 136 Kmf Stone 19N.13W.13.444 35.878 108.173 01/04/52 2.7 NA NA NA 137 Kmf Stone 19N.13W.13.444 35.878 108.173 11/02/71 .3 NA NA NA 138 Kpl RHR 90 35.332 107.651 08/11/08 NA NA .24 2.10 139 Kpl RHR 90 35.332 107.651 11/10/08 NA NA .01 .32 140 Kpl RHR 90 35.332 107.651 02/16/09 NA NA NA 1.10 141 Kpl RHR 90 35.332 107.651 05/19/09 NA NA .36 .76 142 Kpl RHR 22 35.343 107.664 08/21/08 NA NA .31 1.10 143 Kpl RHR 22 35.343 107.664 11/13/08 NA NA .24 .57 144 Kpl RHR 22 35.343 107.664 02/11/09 NA NA .28 .22 145 Kpl RHR 22 35.343 107.664 05/19/09 NA NA .21 .60 146 Kpl RHR 102 35.311 107.687 09/24/08 NA NA .08 NA 147 Kpl RHR 102 35.311 107.687 11/08/08 NA NA NA 1.60 148 Kpl RHR 102 35.311 107.687 02/11/09 NA NA .06 1.30 149 Kpl Stone 16N.06W.29.231 35.588 107.495 10/03/62 .9 NA NA NA 150 Kpl Stone 16N.07W.13.2244 35.617 107.531 10/02/62 1.5 NA NA NA 
Table 4-1. Historical groundwater contaminants-of-concern data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NO3, nitrate or nitrate plus nitrite; N, nitrogen; mg/L, milligrams per liter; U, uranium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; Ra, radium; pCi/LQuaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, CrKm, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, SummervillTriassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date NO3 (as N, mg/L) U (μg/L) Ra 226 (pCi/L) Ra 228 (pCi/L) 

151 Kpl Stone 16N.08W.14.1114 35.617 107.655 10/02/62 0.5 NA NA NA 152 Kpl Stone 16N.08W.20.1312 35.602 107.708 10/02/62 .8 NA NA NA 153 Kpl Stone 16N.09W.22.4444 35.602 107.778 09/20/62 .8 NA NA NA 154 Kpl Stone 16N.10W.22.212 35.602 107.883 09/19/62 .6 NA NA NA 155 Kpl Stone 18N.11W.29.3111 35.762 108.030 04/06/53 .2 NA NA NA 156 Kpl Stone 20N.02W.17.132 35.964 107.069 04/30/58 .4 NA NA NA 157 Kpl Stone 20N.04W.34.4421 35.920 107.246 11/01/63 4.3 NA NA NA 158 Kpl Stone 21N.01W.28.213 36.021 106.945 10/19/57 .2 NA NA NA 159 Kpl Stone 21N.01W.29.24 36.017 106.972 10/24/55 .1 NA NA NA 160 Kpl Stone 15N.09W.13.144 35.529 107.745 08/01/51 .1 NA NA NA 161 Kpl Stone 15N.09W.13.144 35.529 107.745 10/04/62 .1 NA NA NA 162 Kpl Stone 20N.02W.21.22 35.949 107.051 06/18/59 .4 NA NA NA 163 Kcc Stone 14N.08W.04.3343 35.472 107.690 10/16/62 14 NA NA NA 164 Kcc Stone 15N.09W.09.2442 35.544 107.796 09/12/62 2.7 NA NA NA 165 Kcc Stone 16N.12W.16.23 35.617 108.114 05/19/55 .2 NA NA NA 166 Kcc Stone 17N.11W.35.223 35.660 107.977 06/18/59 .2 NA NA NA 167 Kcc Stone 17N.12W.03.41 35.733 108.101 08/03/49 1.8 NA NA NA 168 Kcc Stone 17N.13W.11.33 35.718 108.190 12/03/51 1.4 NA NA NA 169 Kcc Stone 18N.13W.23.3212 35.776 108.190 11/02/71 .3 NA NA NA 170 Kcc Stone 18N.13W.01.4 35.820 108.173 08/03/49 2.8 NA NA NA 171 Kcc Stone 18N.13W.01.4 35.820 108.173 11/02/71 .1 NA NA NA 172 Kcc Stone 15N.06W.20.331 35.515 107.495 10/16/62 .2 NA NA NA 173 Kcc Stone 15N.10W.06.2421 35.558 107.936 02/05/54 .1 NA NA NA 174 Kcc Stone 15N.10W.06.2421 35.558 107.936 02/17/54 .1 NA NA NA 175 Kcc Stone 15N.10W.06.2421 35.558 107.936 08/01/61 .2 NA NA NA 176 Kcc Stone 15N.10W.13.1314 35.529 107.848 01/15/70 .6 NA NA NA 177 Kcc Stone 15N.10W.13.1314 35.529 107.848 07/18/73 3.1 NA NA NA 178 Kcc Stone 16N.13W.11.3413 35.632 108.185 03/18/54 .2 NA NA NA 179 Kcc Stone 16N.13W.11.3413 35.632 108.185 07/11/61 1.1 NA NA NA 180 Kg RHR 32 35.338 107.662 08/21/08 NA NA .13 1.20 
Table 4-1. Historical groundwater contaminants-of-concern data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued [NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NO3, nitrate or nitrate plus nitrite; N, nitrogen; mg/L, milligrams per liter; U, uranium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; Ra, radium; pCi/LQuaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, CrKm, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, SummervillTriassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)] Line no. Form- ation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date NO3 (as N, mg/L) U (μg/L) Ra 226 (pCi/L) Ra 228 (pCi/L) 

181 Kg RHR 16 35.359 107.703 08/25/08 0.6 NA 0.85 1.10 182 Kg RHR 16 35.359 107.703 11/11/08 NA NA .32 NA 183 Kg RHR 16 35.359 107.703 02/12/09 1.1 NA .71 .13 184 Kg RHR 16 35.359 107.703 05/19/09 .6 NA .48 .53 185 Kg Stone 14N.08W.15.244 35.442 107.672 10/01/62 5.8 NA NA NA 186 Kg Stone 15N.10W.04.1311 35.558 107.901 10/22/64 .1 NA NA NA 187 Kg Stone 15N.18W.08.320 35.545 108.769 02/24/56 .2 NA NA NA 188 Kg Stone 15N.18W.13.324 35.531 108.698 12/10/53 11 NA NA NA 189 Kg Stone 15N.18W.14.2223 35.531 108.716 11/28/55 .8 NA NA NA 190 Kg Stone 15N.18W.14.2244 35.531 108.716 02/06/56 1.9 NA NA NA 191 Kg Stone 15N.18W.16.341 35.530 108.751 12/13/55 .1 NA NA NA 192 Kg Stone 15N.18W.18.3444 35.530 108.786 06/22/55 .6 NA NA NA 193 Kg Stone 15N.18W.24.23 35.516 108.698 01/02/56 40 NA NA NA 194 Kg Stone 15N.18W.30.3232 35.501 108.786 06/10/55 .1 NA NA NA 195 Kg Stone 16N.05W.19.414 35.602 107.407 09/19/62 .1 NA NA NA 196 Kg Stone 16N.07W.26.2214 35.588 107.549 10/02/62 1.8 NA NA NA 197 Kg Stone 16N.18W.07.423 35.630 108.785 01/31/68 .1 NA NA NA 198 Kg Stone 16N.18W.17.122A 35.616 108.767 01/12/69 .2 NA NA NA 199 Kg Stone 16N.18W.32.44 35.574 108.768 12/06/55 .1 NA NA NA 200 Kg Stone 17N.12W.33.244 35.660 108.119 03/10/70 .3 NA NA NA 201 Kg Stone 15N.10W.06.2421 35.558 107.936 07/18/73 .1 NA NA NA 202 Kg Stone 15N.10W.13.1314 35.529 107.848 09/18/62 .4 NA NA NA 203 Kg Stone 15N.18W.13.1134A 35.531 108.698 12/06/48 .4 NA NA NA 204 Kg Stone 15N.18W.13.1134A 35.531 108.698 11/28/55 .4 NA NA NA 205 Kg Stone 15N.18W.14.144 35.531 108.716 02/06/56 1.9 NA NA NA 206 Kg Stone 15N.18W.20.211 35.515 108.769 09/15/57 .1 NA NA NA 207 Kg Stone 15N.18W.20.211 35.515 108.769 09/24/57 .1 NA NA NA 208 Kg Stone 15N.18W.20.2211 35.515 108.769 05/19/57 .1 NA NA NA 209 Kg Stone 16N.11W.17.4322 35.616 108.026 02/12/73 .6 NA NA NA 210 Kg Stone 16N.18W.17.122 35.616 108.767 03/04/68 .3 NA NA NA 
Table 4-1. Historical groundwater contaminants-of-concern data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NO3, nitrate or nitrate plus nitrite; N, nitrogen; mg/L, milligrams per liter; U, uranium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; Ra, radium; pCi/LQuaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, CrKm, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, SummervillTriassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date NO3 (as N, mg/L) U (μg/L) Ra 226 (pCi/L) Ra 228 (pCi/L) 

211 Kg Stone 16N.18W.17.122 35.616 108.767 03/09/68 0.8 NA NA NA 

212 Kg Stone 16N.18W.17.122 35.616 108.767 03/09/68 .2 NA NA NA 213 Kg Stone 16N.18W.17.122 35.616 108.767 03/10/68 .3 NA NA NA 214 Kg Stone 16N.18W.17.122 35.616 108.767 03/12/68 .4 NA NA NA 215 Kg Stone 16N.18W.17.122 35.616 108.767 03/13/68 .6 NA NA NA 216 Kg Stone 16N.18W.17.122 35.616 108.767 03/13/68 1.4 NA NA NA 217 Kg Stone 16N.18W.32.211 35.574 108.768 01/24/69 .2 NA NA NA 218 Kg Stone 17N.12W.30.4111 35.675 108.154 08/02/51 .2 NA NA NA 219 Km Stone 16N.15W.20.1314 35.603 108.450 11/18/71 .1 NA NA NA 220 Km Stone 16N.15W.20.32 35.603 108.450 08/31/49 24 NA NA NA 221 Kd Stone 15N.12W.19.22 35.516 108.149 05/21/56 .4 NA NA NA 222 Kd Stone 15N.12W.19.223 35.516 108.149 09/02/49 2.3 NA NA NA 223 Kd Stone 15N.13W.07.33 35.546 108.255 11/19/48 .3 NA NA NA 224 Kd Stone 16N.14W.21.3334 35.603 108.326 03/20/74 4.9 NA NA NA 225 Kd Stone 16N.15W.11.3323 35.632 108.397 02/13/74 .2 NA NA NA 226 Kd Stone 16N.16W.01.2344 35.646 108.485 06/09/55 1.5 NA NA NA 227 Kd Stone 16N.16W.15.4322 35.617 108.521 02/07/74 52 NA NA NA 228 Kd Stone 16N.17W.15.2324 35.617 108.626 03/26/74 5.6 NA NA NA 229 Kd Stone 14N.09W.17.300 35.442 107.814 08/08/62 .2 NA NA NA 230 Kd Stone 14N.09W.17.300 35.442 107.814 08/08/62 .2 NA NA NA 231 Kd Stone 14N.09W.17.300 35.442 107.814 08/08/62 .1 NA NA NA 232 Kd Stone 14N.09W.18.243 35.442 107.831 04/30/63 1.0 NA NA NA 233 Kd Stone 14N.09W.18.243 35.442 107.831 08/30/63 1.0 NA NA NA 234 Kd Stone 14N.09W.28.233 35.414 107.795 10/10/57 .3 NA NA NA 235 Kd Stone 14N.09W.28.233 35.414 107.795 10/10/57 .5 NA NA NA 236 Kd Stone 14N.09W.36.313 35.398 107.742 04/24/63 .3 NA NA NA 237 Kd Stone 14N.09W.36.313 35.398 107.742 05/06/63 .7 NA NA NA 238 Kd Stone 15N.06W.20.121 35.515 107.495 02/10/54 .5 NA NA NA 239 Kd Stone 15N.06W.20.121 35.515 107.495 05/15/54 .2 NA NA NA 240 Kd Stone 15N.06W.20.121 35.515 107.495 10/30/68 .5 NA NA NA 
Table 4-1. Historical groundwater contaminants-of-concern data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued [NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NO3, nitrate or nitrate plus nitrite; N, nitrogen; mg/L, milligrams per liter; U, uranium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; Ra, radium; pCi/LQuaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, CrKm, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, SummervillTriassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)] Line no. Form- ation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date NO3 (as N, mg/L) U (μg/L) Ra 226 (pCi/L) Ra 228 (pCi/L) 

241 Kd Stone 15N.11W.17.1111 35.529 108.026 10/23/52 0.2 NA NA NA 242 Kd Stone 15N.11W.17.1111 35.529 108.026 07/31/61 .4 NA NA NA 243 Kd Stone 15N.12W.17.123 35.531 108.131 04/08/53 .2 NA NA NA 244 Kd Stone 15N.12W.17.123A 35.531 108.131 05/21/56 .4 NA NA NA 245 Kd Stone 16N.14W.15.1342 35.617 108.309 11/02/51 .6 NA NA NA 246 Kd Stone 16N.14W.15.1342 35.617 108.309 03/20/74 4.3 NA NA NA 247 Kd Stone 16N.15W.17.1431 35.618 108.450 02/23/70 .6 NA NA NA 248 Kd Stone 16N.15W.17.1431 35.618 108.450 07/29/70 .6 NA NA NA 249 Kd Stone 16N.15W.17.1431 35.618 108.450 11/23/70 .6 NA NA NA 250 Kd Stone 16N.15W.17.1431 35.618 108.450 05/01/72 .6 NA NA NA 251 Kd Stone 16N.15W.17.1431 35.618 108.450 02/13/74 .2 NA NA NA 252 Kd Stone 17N.12W.30.142 35.675 108.154 12/12/48 .5 NA NA NA 253 Kd Stone 17N.12W.30.142 35.675 108.154 10/13/64 .1 NA NA NA 254 Kd Stone 14N.09W.17.300 35.442 107.814 08/30/63 NA 3.4 NA NA 255 Jm Stone 14N.09W.34.422 35.399 107.777 04/24/63 .2 NA NA NA 256 Jm Stone 14N.10W.11.434A 35.457 107.867 10/18/60 1.1 NA NA NA 257 Jm Stone 15N.11W.29.1132 35.500 108.026 09/30/76 .1 NA NA NA 258 Jm Stone 16W.16W.30.3431 35.588 108.574 05/02/72 20 NA NA NA 259 Jm Stone 16N.14W.33.2223 35.574 108.326 02/22/52 .5 NA NA NA 260 Jm Stone 16N.14W.33.2223 35.574 108.326 05/14/53 .1 NA NA NA 261 Jm Stone 16N.14W.33.2223 35.574 108.326 03/06/73 .6 NA NA NA 262 Jm RHR 116 35.345 107.786 08/19/08 19.7 10.9 .35 .77 263 Jm RHR 116 35.345 107.786 11/13/08 21.3 10.6 .37 .50 264 Jm RHR 116 35.345 107.786 02/10/09 20.1 12.1 .27 .58 265 Jm RHR 116 35.345 107.786 05/21/09 18.2 10.3 .47 1.30 266 Jm RHR 114 35.346 107.785 09/18/08 24.3 19.9 .96 .79 267 Jm RHR 114 35.346 107.785 02/18/09 19.2 21.7 .45 .90 268 Jm RHR 114 35.346 107.785 05/26/09 23.3 20.8 .47 .50 269 Jm RHR 113 35.347 107.783 09/22/08 24.6 15.8 .26 NA 270 Jm RHR 113 35.347 107.783 11/10/08 19.8 15.5 .27 .35 
Table 4-1. Historical groundwater contaminants-of-concern data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NO3, nitrate or nitrate plus nitrite; N, nitrogen; mg/L, milligrams per liter; U, uranium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; Ra, radium; pCi/LQuaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, CrKm, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, SummervillTriassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date NO3 (as N, mg/L) U (μg/L) Ra 226 (pCi/L) Ra 228 (pCi/L) 

271 Jm RHR 113 35.347 107.783 02/12/09 22.3 16.9 0.31 0.32 272 Jm RHR 113 35.347 107.783 05/26/09 23.9 16.1 NA .53 273 Jm Stone 13N.09W.15.343 35.355 107.778 02/13/58 7.7 NA NA NA 274 Jm Stone 14N.09W.18.400 35.442 107.831 08/30/63 .2 NA NA NA 275 Jm Stone 14N.09W.29.312 35.413 107.813 08/13/59 15 NA NA NA 276 Jm Stone 14N.09W.30.2213 35.414 107.831 05/03/63 .2 NA NA NA 277 Jm Stone 14N.10W.22.214 35.428 107.884 03/19/57 4.6 NA NA NA 278 Jm Stone 14N.11W.03.3334 35.471 107.991 03/13/57 4.0 NA NA NA 279 Jm Stone 16N.11W.33.332 35.573 108.008 09/08/72 .1 NA NA NA 280 Jm Stone 16N.14W.33.22 35.574 108.326 03/06/73 .6 NA NA NA 281 Jm Stone 16N.16W.17.2114 35.617 108.556 02/07/74 2.4 NA NA NA 282 Jm Stone 16N.17W.21.3442 35.603 108.644 03/26/74 3.7 NA NA NA 283 Jm Stone 14N.09W.18.400 35.442 107.831 08/30/63 NA 55 NA NA 284 Jm Stone 14N.09W.29.312 35.413 107.813 08/13/59 NA 12 NA NA 285 Jm Stone 14N.09W.18.243 35.442 107.831 10/17/62 1.2 NA NA NA 286 Jm Stone 14N.10W.22.2 35.428 107.884 08/08/62 .2 NA NA NA 287 Jm Stone 14N.10W.22.2 35.428 107.884 08/08/62 4.9 NA NA NA 288 Jm Stone 14N.10W.22.2 35.428 107.884 08/08/62 3.9 NA NA NA 289 Jm Stone 14N.10W.24.400 35.428 107.849 08/18/59 .1 NA NA NA 290 Jm Stone 15N.12W.17.123A 35.531 108.131 05/04/63 .7 NA NA NA 291 Je Stone 13N.09W.29.143 35.327 107.813 02/28/58 25 NA NA NA 292 Je Stone 13N.10W.08.211 35.370 107.920 02/02/67 17 NA NA NA 293 Je Stone 14N.11W.19.124 35.428 108.043 08/04/61 4.8 NA NA NA 294 Je Stone 14N.12W.09.221 35.458 108.114 09/05/62 5.7 NA NA NA 295 Je Stone 14N.12W.14.143 35.443 108.078 09/05/62 20 NA NA NA 296 Je Stone 14N.12W.17.3333 35.444 108.131 11/15/48 8.6 NA NA NA 297 Je Stone 15N.13W.12.144 35.546 108.167 07/11/61 1.0 NA NA NA 298 Je Stone 15N.13W.22.1111 35.517 108.202 03/20/74 5.0 NA NA NA 299 Je Stone 15N.14W.13.413 35.531 108.273 06/10/70 5.0 NA NA NA 300 Je Stone 16N.14W.33.234 35.574 108.326 11/05/73 1.2 NA NA NA 
Table 4-1. Historical groundwater contaminants-of-concern data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued [NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NO3, nitrate or nitrate plus nitrite; N, nitrogen; mg/L, milligrams per liter; U, uranium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; Ra, radium; pCi/LQuaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, CrKm, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, SummervillTriassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)] Line no. Form- ation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date NO3 (as N, mg/L) U (μg/L) Ra 226 (pCi/L) Ra 228 (pCi/L) 

301 Je Stone 16W.16W.25.2344 35.588 108.486 02/13/74 5.5 NA NA NA 302 Je Stone 13N.10W.18.4113 35.356 107.938 11/15/63 .7 NA NA NA 303 Je Stone 13N.10W.18.4113 35.356 107.938 04/26/72 13 NA NA NA 304 Je Stone 15N.13W.22.1111 35.517 108.202 05/08/64 1.2 NA NA NA 305 Je Stone 15N.13W.22.1111 35.517 108.202 09/24/70 .6 NA NA NA 306 Je Stone 15N.17W.14.4224 35.531 108.608 10/15/65 .3 NA NA NA 307 Je Stone 15N.17W.14.4224 35.531 108.608 09/30/66 .6 NA NA NA 308 TRc Stone 12N.10W.23.233A 35.254 107.862 07/12/46 4.4 NA NA NA 309 TRc Stone 12N.10W.33.444 35.225 107.898 06/28/56 2.4 NA NA NA 310 TRc Stone 12N.10W.34.412 35.225 107.880 08/28/56 .6 NA NA NA 

311 TRc Stone 13N.10W.20.114 35.341 107.920 07/23/76 .3 NA NA NA 

312 TRc Stone 13N.11W.07.433 35.370 108.043 06/24/48 5.6 NA NA NA 313 TRc Stone 13N.11W.08.2211 35.370 108.026 06/23/48 5.5 NA NA NA 314 TRc Stone 13N.12W.10.2444 35.370 108.096 08/23/67 77 NA NA NA 315 TRc Stone 13N.12W.11.32 35.370 108.079 06/23/48 .5 NA NA NA 316 TRc Stone 14N.12W.20.111 35.429 108.131 05/11/50 1.1 NA NA NA 317 TRc Stone 14N.13W.20.4323 35.430 108.238 07/12/61 1.1 NA NA NA 318 TRc Stone 14N.13W.33.141 35.401 108.221 12/06/48 10 NA NA NA 319 TRc Stone 14N.13W.33.314 35.401 108.221 12/06/48 9.3 NA NA NA 320 TRc Stone 14N.15W.04.1134 35.473 108.432 05/14/69 .6 NA NA NA 321 TRc Stone 15N.15W.31.1242 35.488 108.468 06/04/68 .5 NA NA NA 322 TRc Stone 15N.16W.27.2312 35.502 108.521 04/03/52 .5 NA NA NA 323 TRc Stone 12N.10W.34.2141 35.225 107.880 05/07/57 .2 NA NA NA 324 TRc Stone 12N.10W.34.2141 35.225 107.880 07/17/56 14 NA NA NA 325 TRc Stone 12N.10W.34.2141 35.225 107.880 04/20/65 2.0 NA NA NA 326 TRc Stone 13N.10W.18.212 35.356 107.938 06/18/76 .1 NA NA NA 327 TRc Stone 14N.13W.25.1334 35.415 108.167 03/01/66 1.9 NA NA NA 328 TRc Stone 14N.13W.25.1334 35.415 108.167 09/03/71 .1 NA NA NA 329 TRc Stone 14N.13W.28.1234 35.415 108.221 12/03/48 .9 NA NA NA 330 TRc Stone 14N.13W.33.124 35.401 108.221 08/18/48 4.5 NA NA NA 
Table 4-1. Historical groundwater contaminants-of-concern data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NO3, nitrate or nitrate plus nitrite; N, nitrogen; mg/L, milligrams per liter; U, uranium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; Ra, radium; pCi/LQuaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, CrKm, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, SummervillTriassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date NO3 (as N, mg/L) U (μg/L) Ra 226 (pCi/L) Ra 228 (pCi/L) 

331 TRc Stone 14N.13W.33.124 35.401 108.221 04/03/53 1.4 NA NA NA 332 TRc Stone 14N.13W.33.124 35.401 108.221 09/30/64 .1 NA NA NA 333 TRc Stone 15N.15W.20.313 35.517 108.449 03/01/58 .6 NA NA NA 334 TRc Stone 15N.15W.20.313 35.517 108.449 06/15/66 .5 NA NA NA 335 TRc Stone 15N.15W.20.313 35.517 108.449 10/24/67 .6 NA NA NA 336 Psa Stone 11N.10W.04.333 35.211 107.898 08/23/66 33 NA NA NA 337 Psa Stone 12N.10W.07.1433 35.284 107.933 06/27/56 .3 NA NA NA 338 Psa Stone 12N.10W.26.242 35.240 107.862 05/22/58 1.2 NA NA NA 339 Psa Stone 12N.10W.26.3222 35.240 107.862 10/15/56 3.2 NA NA NA 340 Psa Stone 12N.10W.27.4311 35.240 107.880 07/25/56 6.9 NA NA NA 341 Psa Stone 12N.10W.30.421 35.240 107.933 05/07/57 26 NA NA NA 342 Psa Stone 12N.10W.30.433 35.240 107.933 10/21/44 32 NA NA NA 343 Psa Stone 12N.11W.24.411 35.255 107.950 04/23/52 15 NA NA NA 344 Psa Stone 13N.12W.34.332 35.313 108.097 09/04/62 .1 NA NA NA 345 Psa Stone 14N.10W.22.414 35.428 107.884 11/21/56 .6 NA NA NA 346 Psa Stone 14N.15W.01.3134 35.473 108.379 01/20/50 .5 NA NA NA 347 Psa Stone 14N.15W.14.3423 35.444 108.397 01/20/50 .3 NA NA NA 348 Psa Stone 14N.15W.28.1434 35.415 108.432 01/20/50 .5 NA NA NA 349 Psa Stone 15N.17W.13.1124 35.531 108.590 05/09/50 .1 NA NA NA 350 Psa Stone 15N.17W.13.222 35.531 108.590 10/01/64 .1 NA NA NA 351 Psa Stone 15N.17W.16.21 35.530 108.644 08/06/53 .2 NA NA NA 352 Psa Stone 15N.17W.16.2222A 35.530 108.644 08/06/53 .4 NA NA NA 353 Psa Stone 15N.17W.16.3131 35.530 108.644 06/12/52 .2 NA NA NA 354 Psa Stone 15N.17W.16.3131A 35.530 108.644 12/31/57 .2 NA NA NA 355 Psa Stone 11N.10W.04.311 35.211 107.898 07/17/56 14 NA NA NA 356 Psa Stone 11N.10W.04.311 35.211 107.898 06/07/57 17 NA NA NA 357 Psa Stone 11N.10W.04.311 35.211 107.898 07/29/68 18 NA NA NA 358 Psa Stone 11N.10W.04.311 35.211 107.898 07/24/56 19 NA NA NA 359 Psa Stone 11N.10W.16.121 35.182 107.898 07/12/46 27 NA NA NA 360 Psa Stone 11N.10W.16.121A 35.182 107.898 07/17/56 13 NA NA NA 
Table 4-1. Historical groundwater contaminants-of-concern data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued [NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NO3, nitrate or nitrate plus nitrite; N, nitrogen; mg/L, milligrams per liter; U, uranium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; Ra, radium; pCi/LQuaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, CrKm, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, SummervillTriassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)] Line no. Form- ation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date NO3 (as N, mg/L) U (μg/L) Ra 226 (pCi/L) Ra 228 (pCi/L) 

361 Psa Stone 11N.10W.16.121A 35.182 107.898 08/15/62 15 NA NA NA 362 Psa Stone 11N.10W.16.121A 35.182 107.898 08/19/63 14 NA NA NA 363 Psa Stone 11N.10W.16.121A 35.182 107.898 08/22/66 14 NA NA NA 364 Psa Stone 11N.10W.16.121A 35.182 107.898 07/29/68 16 NA NA NA 365 Psa Stone 11N.10W.26.321C 35.154 107.863 12/15/58 1.0 NA NA NA 366 Psa Stone 12N.10W.23.233 35.254 107.862 07/12/46 .6 NA NA NA 367 Psa Stone 12N.10W.27.333 35.240 107.880 10/06/54 11 NA NA NA 368 Psa Stone 12N.10W.27.333 35.240 107.880 07/17/56 9.5 NA NA NA 369 Psa Stone 12N.10W.27.333 35.240 107.880 05/07/57 9.1 NA NA NA 370 Psa Stone 12N.10W.27.333 35.240 107.880 04/20/65 13 NA NA NA 371 Psa Stone 12N.10W.29.434A 35.240 107.916 06/28/56 31 NA NA NA 372 Psa Stone 12N.10W.30.1121 35.240 107.933 07/18/56 32 NA NA NA 373 Psa Stone 12N.10W.30.1121 35.240 107.933 05/08/57 58 NA NA NA 374 Psa Stone 12N.10W.30.412 35.240 107.933 05/10/46 32 NA NA NA 375 Psa Stone 12N.10W.30.421 35.240 107.933 07/18/56 27 NA NA NA 376 Psa Stone 12N.10W.32.111 35.225 107.915 07/12/46 21 NA NA NA 377 Psa Stone 12N.10W.32.111 35.225 107.915 06/15/55 22 NA NA NA 378 Psa Stone 12N.10W.32.111 35.225 107.915 07/18/56 14 NA NA NA 379 Psa Stone 12N.11W.10.4312 35.283 107.985 05/10/46 3.6 NA NA NA 380 Psa Stone 12N.11W.15.211 35.269 107.985 06/27/56 7.0 NA NA NA 381 Psa Stone 12N.11W.15.211 35.269 107.985 05/06/57 6.6 NA NA NA 382 Psa Stone 12N.11W.23.231 35.255 107.968 06/04/47 18 NA NA NA 383 Psa Stone 12N.11W.23.231 35.255 107.968 10/28/52 47 NA NA NA 384 Psa Stone 12N.11W.23.231 35.255 107.968 06/27/56 76 NA NA NA 385 Psa Stone 12N.11W.23.231 35.255 107.968 07/18/56 75 NA NA NA 386 Psa Stone 12N.11W.24.233 35.255 107.950 07/18/56 19 NA NA NA 387 Psa Stone 12N.11W.24.334 35.255 107.950 05/07/57 56 NA NA NA 388 Psa Stone 12N.11W.24.334 35.255 107.950 06/28/56 13 NA NA NA 389 Psa Stone 12N.11W.24.334 35.255 107.950 06/07/57 15 NA NA NA 390 Psa Stone 12N.11W.25.122 35.240 107.950 07/18/56 18 NA NA NA 
Table 4-1. Historical groundwater contaminants-of-concern data in the study area, 1942–2009.—Continued[NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NO3, nitrate or nitrate plus nitrite; N, nitrogen; mg/L, milligrams per liter; U, uranium; μg/L, micrograms per liter; Ra, radium; pCi/LQuaternary alluvium; NA, not available; Kmf, Cretaceous Menefee Formation; Kpl, Cretaceous Point Lookout Formation; Kcc, Cretaceous Crevasse Canyon Formation; Kg, CrKm, Cretaceous Mancos Formation; Kd, Cretaceous Dakota Formation; Jm, Jurassic Morrison Formation; Je, Jurassic Entrada Complex (includes Entrada, Todilto, SummervillTriassic Chinle Group; Psa, Permian San Andres Formation (including Glorieta Formation)]

Line 

no.

Formation Data source* Data identifier** Latitude (NAD 83) Longitude (NAD 83) Date NO3 (as N, mg/L) U (μg/L) Ra 226 (pCi/L) Ra 228 (pCi/L) 

391 Psa Stone 12N.11W.25.122 35.240 107.950 05/07/57 65 NA NA NA 392 Psa Stone 12N.11W.25.122 35.240 107.950 06/27/56 35 NA NA NA 393 Psa Stone 12N.11W.25.213 35.240 107.950 07/11/46 27 NA NA NA 394 Psa Stone 12N.11W.25.213 35.240 107.950 07/18/56 62 NA NA NA 395 Psa Stone 14N.13W.19.1 35.430 108.256 07/14/70 1.2 NA NA NA 396 Psa Stone 14N.13W.27.342A 35.415 108.203 04/07/72 .1 NA NA NA 397 Psa Stone 15N.12W.17.123 35.531 108.131 02/08/77 .1 NA NA NA 398 Psa Stone 15N.15W.18.3344 35.531 108.467 06/15/66 .9 NA NA NA 399 Psa Stone 15N.15W.20.313 35.517 108.449 11/06/69 .1 NA NA NA 400 Psa Stone 15N.15W.20.313 35.517 108.449 07/01/70 .6 NA NA NA 401 Psa Stone 15N.15W.20.313 35.517 108.449 12/08/70 .6 NA NA NA 402 Psa Stone 15N.15W.20.313 35.517 108.449 03/16/72 .3 NA NA NA 403 Psa Stone 15N.16W.23.3132 35.517 108.503 05/03/50 .3 NA NA NA 404 Psa Stone 15N.16W.23.3132 35.517 108.503 03/23/72 .1 NA NA NA 405 Psa Stone 15N.17W.13.1142 35.531 108.590 08/18/64 1.9 NA NA NA 406 Psa Stone 15N.17W.24.4121 35.517 108.591 02/05/42 .2 NA NA NA 407 Psa Stone 15N.17W.24.4121 35.517 108.591 10/14/55 .2 NA NA NA 408 Psa Stone 15N.17W.24.4121 35.517 108.591 08/25/58 .1 NA NA NA 409 Psa Stone 15N.17W.24.4121 35.517 108.591 10/06/60 .1 NA NA NA 410 Psa Stone 15N.17W.24.4121 35.517 108.591 02/28/63 .1 NA NA NA 

411 Psa Stone 15N.17W.24.4121 35.517 108.591 06/05/64 .1 NA NA NA 

412 Psa Stone 15N.16W.30.3443 35.502 108.574 10/02/68 .1 NA NA NA 413 Psa Stone 12N.11W.25.213 35.240 107.950 06/22/62 29 NA NA NA 

*Data sources:

Stone—Stone, W.J., Lyford, F.P., Frenzel, P.F., Mizell, N.H., and Padgett, E.T., 1983, Hydrogeology and water resources of San Juan Basin, New Mexico: Socorro, New Mexico Resources, Hydrologic Report 6, 70 p.RHR—Roca Honda Resources, LLC, 2009a, 11-20-2009 Permit application, Phase II of a new mine application—Baseline data report: Permit application to the Mining and MiMexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department, http://www.emnrd.state.nm.us/MMD/MARP/permits/MARP_Permits.htm.**Data identifiers: these values are data indicators used by the source to identify the data within the report or database.
96 Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)

Publishing support provided by

Lafayette Publishing Service Center

Figure 4-1. Spatial distribution of historical groundwater contaminants-of-concern data in the study area. 

£¤550

¬

¬

¬«602

¬«197

¬«605

¬«509

4

x

A

Brimhall 

Nizhoni

107° 107 00 ́ ° 108 30 ́ ° 108 00 ́ ° 30 ́

0 10 20 30 MILES

0 10 20 30 KILOMETERS

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

Projection: Universal Transverse Mercator zone 13N, 

North American Datum of 1983, 

North American Vertical Datum of 1988

Sheep 

Springs

Naschitti

Tohatchi

Twin Lakes

Yah-ta-hey

Gallup

Church Rock

Crownpoint

Thoreau

Ramah

Black

Rock

Milan

Grants

Encinal Paguate

Paraje

Pueblo

Pintado

Torreon

Mt. Taylor

40

40

57

53

Regional geologic

structure boundaries

(modified from Fitzsimmons,

1959, and Baldwin and 

Anderholm, 1992)

Chaco Slope

(southern San Juan Basin)

Zuni Uplift Acoma 

Embayment

Rio Puerco

Fault Zone

£¤550

Cuba

¬96

La Jara

Regina Nageezi

Acomita

Laguna

Nakaibito

£¤491

¬«371!

! ! ! !

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !!!

! !!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!!

!!

! !

!

!

!!! !

!

!!

!

! !

!

!

!

! ! !

! ! !

!

!

!

!

! !

!

! !

!

!

! !

!

!

! !

! ! !

!

!

! !

!

!

! !

!

!!

!

!

! ! ! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

! !! ! !!

! !

! !

!!

!

!

!

!! ! !

! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

!!

! !

! ! !

! !

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

!! !

!

! !

! !

!

! ! !

!

!

!

!

!! !

!

! !

! !

!

! !

!

!!

!

!! !!

! !

!

! ! !

!

!

! ! !

!

!

!

! !! !

!

!

!

!

!

! !

!

!

!

! !! ! !

!

!!!

!

! !

! ! ! ! !

!!

!

! Well location from which data were collected

36 ̊ 00 ́

35 ̊ 30 ́

Developed area

 EXPLANATION
 
Langman, Sprague, and Durall—Geologic Framework, Regional Aquifer Properties (1940s–2009), and Spring, Creek, and Seep Properties (2009–10)—SIR 2012–5019

Printed on recycled paper

I SBN 978- 1- 4113-3359- 8

9 7 8 1 4 11 333 598