U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Open-File Report 2013–1141

Prepared in cooperation with Broward County, Florida

Preliminary Stratigraphic and Hydrogeologic Cross Sections 

and Seismic Profile of the Floridan Aquifer System of 

Broward County, Florida

800

900

1,000

1,100

1,200

1,300

backup curve

scale of 270 to 170

μsec/ft

G-2984 (W-19318; test corehole; site 18) LANDMSL: 13 feet

Preliminary Stratigraphic and 

Hydrogeologic Cross Sections and 

Seismic Profile of the Floridan Aquifer 

System of Broward County, Florida

By Ronald S. Reese and Kevin J. Cunningham

Prepared in cooperation with Broward County, Florida

Open-File Report 2013–1141

U.S. Department of the Interior

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

SALLY JEWELL, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2013

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

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

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

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

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

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

U.S. Government.

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

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

Suggested citation:

Reese, R.S., and Cunningham, K.J., 2013, Preliminary stratigraphic and hydrogeologic cross sections and seismic 

profile of the Floridan aquifer system of Broward County, Florida: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2013–1141, 

10 p., http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2013/1141.
iii

Contents

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

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

Purpose and Scope ..............................................................................................................................1

Hydrogeologic Setting .........................................................................................................................3

Sources of Data..............................................................................................................................................4

Well and Corehole Data.......................................................................................................................4

Marine Seismic Data............................................................................................................................4

Preliminary Stratigraphic and Hydrogeologic Cross Sections and Seismic Profile of

the Floridan Aquifer System in Eastern Broward County..........................................................7

Selected References ....................................................................................................................................7

Figures

1. Map showing location of the study area in southeastern Florida, wells 

used in the study, and location of hydrogeologic sections and

seismic-reflection profile ............................................................................................................2

2. Chart showing stratigraphic units in the study area, generalized lithology, 

and correlation to hydrogeologic units.....................................................................................3

3. Uninterpreted seismic-reflection profile along Hillsboro Canal...........................................5

4. Preliminary interpreted seismic-reflection profile along Hillsboro Canal ..........................6

Plates

1. Hydrogeologic Section A–A’ ............................................http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2013/1141

2. Hydrogeologic Section C–C’.............................................http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2013/1141

3. Hydrogeologic Section Z–Z’ .............................................http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2013/1141

Tables

1. Well identifiers, locations, and construction

information for all wells used in the study ......................http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2013/1141

2. References for well data compiled for this study..........http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2013/1141

3. Stratigraphic boundaries identified from well 

data in the study area .........................................................http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2013/1141

4. Hydrogeologic boundaries identified from 

well data in the study area.................................................http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2013/1141
iv

Conversion Factors

Inch/Pound to SI

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter (mm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Abbreviations

ABI acoustic borehole image (log)

APPZ Avon Park permeable zone

ASR aquifer storage and recovery

bls below land surface

FAS Floridan aquifer system

GR gamma-ray

GWSI Groundwater Site Inventory (database)

LF1 uppermost major permeable zone of the Lower Floridan aquifer

LFA Lower Floridan aquifer

MC1 middle semiconfining unit 1

MC2 middle semiconfining unit 2

OBI optical borehole image (log)

Ω•m ohm-meter

RO reverse osmosis

SFWMD South Florida Water Management District

Δt sonic borehole geophysical log interval transit time, in microseconds per foot

UFA Upper Floridan aquifer

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

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

°F=(1.8×°C)+32

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

°C=(°F-32)/1.8

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

(NGVD 29).

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD 27) 

or North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).

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

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

foot of aquifer thickness [(ft3/d)/ft2]ft. In this report, the mathematically reduced form, foot 

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

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

at 25 °C).

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

or micrograms per liter (μg/L)
Abstract

To help water-resource managers evaluate the Floridan aquifer system (FAS) as an alternative water supply, the U.S. 

Geological Survey initiated a study, in cooperation with the Broward County Environmental Protection and Growth Management Department, to refine the hydrogeologic framework of the FAS in the eastern part of Broward County. This report 

presents three preliminary cross sections illustrating stratigraphy and hydrogeology in eastern Broward County as well as an 

interpreted seismic profile along one of the cross sections. Marker horizons were identified using borehole geophysical data 

and were initially used to perform well-to-well correlation. Core sample data were integrated with the borehole geophysical 

data to support stratigraphic and hydrogeologic interpretations of marker horizons. Stratigraphic and hydrogeologic units 

were correlated across the county using borehole geophysical data from multiple wells. Seismic-reflection data were collected 

along the Hillsboro Canal. Borehole geophysical data were used to identify and correlate hydrogeologic units in the seismicreflection profile. Faults and collapse structures that intersect hydrogeologic units were also identified in the seismic profile. The 

information provided in the cross sections and the seismic profile is preliminary and subject to revision. 

Introduction

The Biscayne aquifer of southeastern Florida is shallow and prolific, and has provided most of the water supply in eastern 

Broward County during the last century. Concerns about water-level declines and saltwater intrusion in the Biscayne aquifer 

have limited the increase in municipal withdrawals and restricted the issuance of new water-supply well-field permits. Therefore, 

Broward County is considering the potential use of the brackish Floridan aquifer system (FAS) as an alternative water supply, 

either by direct withdrawal from supply wells or by aquifer storage and recovery (ASR, Reese and Alvarez-Zarikian, 2007), 

reverse osmosis (RO), or blending with freshwater from the Biscayne aquifer. The ability to select new well locations based on 

aquifer properties conducive to these alternative water-supply technologies requires an improved definition of the stratigraphic 

and hydrogeologic frameworks. In general, a stratigraphic framework describes the 3-dimensional distribution of stratigraphic 

units and their boundaries as identified by distinct and pervasive vertical and lateral changes in lithologic characteristics and 

depositional sequences. Likewise, a hydrogeologic framework describes the 3-dimensional distribution of hydrogeologic 

units and their boundaries as identified by distinct and pervasive vertical and lateral changes in hydrologic characteristics. The 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with Broward County, initiated a study in 2008 to refine the stratigraphic and 

hydrogeologic frameworks of the FAS in eastern Broward County to address this need.

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to present three preliminary stratigraphic and hydrogeologic cross sections and an interpreted 

seismic profile of the FAS in eastern Broward County (fig. 1) to help water-resource managers evaluate the FAS as an alternative water supply. The cross sections and profile provide a basis for refinement of the existing stratigraphic and hydrogeologic 

frameworks of the FAS in Broward County (fig. 2) described in Reese and Richardson (2008), including the introduction of 

subdivisions within the Arcadia and Avon Park Formations. As part of this study, a 1,308-foot-deep test corehole (G-2984) was 

drilled in northeastern Broward County along Hillsboro Canal (fig. 1). Data collected from G-2984 were interpreted using both 

a traditional lithostratigraphic approach and a sequence-stratigraphic methodology, and correlated with existing data across the 

Preliminary Stratigraphic and Hydrogeologic Cross 

Sections and Seismic Profile of the Floridan Aquifer 

System of Broward County, Florida

By Ronald S. Reese and Kevin J. Cunningham
2 Preliminary Stratigraphic and Hydrogeologic Cross Sections and Seismic Profile of the Floridan Aquifer System

PALM BEACH

BROWARD

MIAMI–DADE

BROWARD

North New

River Canal

Hillsboro Canal

C-13 Canal

C-12 Canal

C-11 Canal

C-10 Canal

C-9 Canal

C-14 Canal

A

TL

A

N

TIC

O

CEA

N

SAWGRASS EXPRESSWAY

FLORIDA’S 

TURNPIKE

Base from U.S. Geological Survey 

digital data, 1:24,000, datum NAD83

Albers Equal Area Conic Projection, 

Standard parallels 29 ̊30’” and 45 ̊30’

central meridian -83 ̊00’

EXPLANATION

G-2989

G-2916

2

Hillsboro Canal marine 

seismic profile tract

Hydrogeologic section 

line–For this study

Hydrogeologic section 

line (or part thereof)–

From Reese and 

Richardson, 2008 

Well location and–

Site number 

Well number

Well number for well 

 on section 

Study

area

F l o r i d

a

Z

Zʹ

Aʹ

A Aʹ

Cʹ

A

C

D

Dʹ

E

Eʹ

Y

Yʹ

Y Yʹ

80°20' 80°10'

26°20'

26°10'

26°00'

0 2.5

0 2.5

5 KILOMETERS

5 MILES

17 16

18

8

9

2

28

21

5

33

6

10

27

30

31

32

25

26 14 13

7

12

11

19

29

20

15

23

24 22

4

1

3

G-2970

G-2978

G-2979

G-2982

G-2983

G-2942

G-2943

D-365

G-2887

G-2968

G-2969

S-567

CS-I1

CS-I2

CS-M2

SUN-I3

SUN-M1

SUN-M1A

SUN-M2

SUN-M3

G-2980

PLT-I1

PLT-I2

PLT-M1

PBP-I1

PBP-I2

PBP-M1

G-2944

G-2945

G-2946

G-2989

G-2961

G-2962

G-2975

G-2917

G-2918 G-2914

G-2292

MAR-I2

MAR-M2

G-2889

G-2916

FTL-I1

FTL-I3

FTL-I4

FTL-M1

FTL-M2

G-2938

G-2939

G-2940

BCN-I1

BCN-I2

BCN-I3

BCN-I4

BCN-I5

BCN-I6

BCN-M2

BCN-M3

BCN-M4

PB-1775

PB-1776

PB-1765

PB-1766

PB-1841

G-2981

G-2988

HOL-RO1

G-2966

G-2967

PLT-ROI1

PLT-ROM1

G-2971

G-2972

G-2984

G-2987

G-2986

G-2985

G-2991

G-2963

G-2964

G-2976

G-2973

G-2974

HAL-RO1

75

95

595

1

441

Figure 1. Location of the study area in southeastern Florida, wells used in the study, and location of hydrogeologic sections and 

seismic-reflection profile. Site numbers and well information are provided in table 1.
Introduction 3

Figure 2. Stratigraphic units in the study area, generalized lithology, and correlation to hydrogeologic units. Subdivisions of the 

Arcadia and Avon Park Formations defined in this study are informal.

county. Seismic-reflection data acquired along the Hillsboro Canal were used mainly to define hydrogeologic units in profile, 

and to identify structural features that vertically intersect hydrogeologic units and provide potential pathways for the vertical 

transport of groundwater in the FAS. Water-quality data obtained from other studies were used to delineate the base of the 

brackish-water zone within the FAS in the three cross sections. The information provided in the cross sections and the seismic 

profile will be used to refine the stratigraphic and hydrogeologic frameworks in Broward County. This information should be 

considered preliminary and subject to revision. 

Hydrogeologic Setting

The FAS is the deepest of three principal hydrogeologic units present in the study area and is overlain by the intermediate 

confining unit and shallow surficial aquifer system (fig. 2). The intermediate confining unit separates the FAS from the surficial 

aquifer system (fig. 2). The Biscayne aquifer, which is the primary source of freshwater in Broward County, is included 

within the surficial aquifer system (fig. 2). The FAS in southeastern Florida comprises a thick sequence of highly permeable carbonate strata of Paleocene to Miocene age and is part of the broad carbonate Florida Platform that extends beneath 

Series Geologic formation or

lithostratigraphic unit Lithology Hydrogeologic unit Approximatethickness, in feet 

Holocene 

to 

Pliocene

Holocene-age undifferentiated

 and 

Pleistocene-age formations1

Quartz sand; silt; clay; shell; 

limestone; sandy shelly limestone

Surficial 

aquifer system

Biscayne aquifer

200–450 

Confining beds

Gray limestone aquifer

Confining unit

Intermediate confining unit 

35–210 

Upper Floridan 

aquifer (UFA)

40–350 

700–1,200 

Lower 

Floridan 

aquifer 

(includes 

permeable zones 

and confining units)

Boulder

Zone 400–650

1,700–2,000

Miocene 

to 

possibly 

Late 

Oligocene

Eocene 

Middle

Paleocene Cedar Keys 

Formation

Dolomite and dolomitic 

limestone

Massive anhydrite beds Sub-Floridan confining unit

Tamiami 

Formation2

Stock Island 

Formation3

Silt; sandy clay; sandy, shelly

limestone; calcareous sandstone; and quartz sand/ planktic

foraminiferal limestone

Hawthorn Group

Peace

River

Formation

Interbedded sand, silt,

gravel, clay, carbonate,

and phosphatic sand

Arcadia Formation

Carbonate mudstone 

to grainstone; claystone; 

shell beds; dolomite; 

phosphatic and quartz 

sand; silt; and clay 

Sandy, molluscan limestone; phosphatic 

quartz sand, sandstone, and limestone

 Floridan aquifer system

Avon Park Formation

Fossiliferous, lime mudstone

to packstone and grainstone; 

dolomitic limestone; and

dolomite; abundant 

cone-shaped benthic 

foraminifera

Oldsmar Formation

500–830

1,200?

Avon Park permeable zone

Early

Middle semiconfining 

unit 2 (MC2)

Upper

Lower 

Upper

LF1 35–310

 Middle 

semiconfining 

unit 1 (MC1)

Lower

Lower

Focus of this study

Upper

Middle

Micritic limestone, dolomitic limestone, 

and dolomite

344–670 

150–500 

EXPLANATION

Uppermost major permeable zone 

 of the Lower Floridan aquifer 

LF1

? ? ? 

1 Pleistocene-age formations in southeastern Florida (Pamlico Sand, Miami Limestone, Anastasia Formation, Fort Thompson Format

2 Tamiami Formation (Pinecrest Sand Member, Ochopee Limestone Member). 3 Stock Island Formation, after Cunningham and others, 1998.
4 Preliminary Stratigraphic and Hydrogeologic Cross Sections and Seismic Profile of the Floridan Aquifer System

peninsular Florida. In descending order, the FAS has generally been divided into the Upper Floridan aquifer (UFA), the middle 

confining unit or middle semiconfining units (MC1 and MC2), and the Lower Floridan aquifer (LFA) (Miller, 1986). Reese 

and Richardson (2008) identified a permeable unit within the middle semiconfining unit, specifically, the Avon Park permeable 

zone (APPZ, fig. 2). Permeable units of the Lower Floridan aquifer include the uppermost major permeable zone of the Lower 

Floridan aquifer (LF1) and the Boulder Zone (fig. 2).

Sources of Data

Well data acquired for this study and existing well data (fig. 1) were used to delineate hydrogeologic units in the upper 

part of the FAS. Lithostratigraphic and sequence-stratigraphic units were identified in the sections and form the foundation of 

the stratigraphic framework. Seismic-reflection data were recorded along Hillsboro Canal (fig. 1), interpreted, and used for 

delineation of hydrogeologic, lithostratigraphic, and sequence stratigraphic units. 

Well and Corehole Data

Information from 84 wells at 33 sites (fig. 1; table 1) was used to construct cross sections and maps of stratigraphic and 

hydrogeologic units. This information includes data obtained from previously drilled wells and from test corehole G-2984, 

drilled by the Florida Geological Survey for this study. Well identification, location, and construction information were compiled 

from a series of well construction reports (table 2). The data are stored in the USGS Groundwater Site Inventory (GWSI) 

database and can be accessed using the USGS local well identifiers (table 1).

Test corehole G-2984 (site 18) was continuously cored from the surface into the UFA to a depth of 1,308 feet (ft) below 

land surface. Stratigraphic markers were identified using core samples from G-2984 and correlated with optical and acoustic 

borehole images (OBIs and ABIs, respectively). Standard borehole geophysical data also collected from G-2984 include natural 

gamma-ray (GR) activity, caliper, induction resistivity, spontaneous potential, single point resistance, borehole-fluid conductivity and temperature, and sonic-interval transit time (sonic Δt) (plate 1). Logs of these types of geophysical data were used to 

indicate vertical changes in the rock, fluid properties, or both, within G-2984, and to correlate identified markers and units with 

those in other wells. Recognizable patterns in the borehole geophysical logs were used to correlate stratigraphic or hydrogeologic units between wells (plates 1, 2, and 3). Sonic Δt data collected in G-2984 provide information about relative porosity of 

the hydrogeologic units and spinner flowmeter data were used to locate flow zones. 

Borehole geophysical data were also acquired in three additional FAS wells for this investigation, (G-2916 at site 2 and 

G-2939 and G-2940 at site 6; fig. 1, table 1) and include OBI, caliper, spinner flowmeter, borehole fluid properties, and induction resistivity data. Borehole geophysical data from other previously drilled wells were compiled and include GR, caliper, 

spontaneous potential, dual-induction and shallow resistivity, sonic Δt, borehole fluid properties, and spinner flowmeter data. In 

addition, existing borehole image data collected by commercial logging companies, including acoustic televiewer and formation 

microresistivity images, were used in this investigation.

Lithology and depositional sequences were described for cores from test corehole G-2984 and well PB-1766, and for 

cuttings from well G-2968 (plate 1). A total of 255 ft of FAS core material was recovered in the 355-ft interval in well G-2984; 

a total of 43 ft was recovered in the 248-ft intervals in well PB-1766. Additional lithologic data from wells in the study area 

were compiled from (1) the Florida Geological Survey online lithologic database (http://www.dep.state.fl.us/geology/gisdatamaps/litholog-temp.htm), (2) South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) well-construction reports available at the 

DBHYDRO website (http://www.sfwmd.gov/portal/page/portal/xweb%20environmental%20monitoring/dbhydro%20application), and (3) SFWMD technical reports (table 2). Because lithologic descriptions provided by well-construction reports are 

generally based on cuttings, lithologic information from these sources was only used to support stratigraphic and hydrogeologic 

interpretations based on borehole geophysical data. 

Marine Seismic Data

Digital, high-resolution, multichannel, water-based seismic-reflection data were acquired by the Walker Marine 

Geophysical Company along approximately 14 miles of the Hillsboro Canal as part of another USGS study with Broward 

County. These data were correlated with borehole geophysical data, OBI data, and lithologic descriptions from test corehole 

G-2984 and wells PB-1766 and PB-1775 (figs. 1, 3 and 4). Stratigraphic units, including some depositional sequences, and 

hydrogeologic units identified in the three wells were correlated with seismic reflections displayed on the 2-dimensional seismic 

profile (figs. 3 and 4). A sequence boundary that has been mapped regionally coincides with the top of the Arcadia Formation 

(Cunningham and others, 1998).
Sources of Data 

5

Figure 3. Uninterpreted seismic-reflection profile along Hillsboro Canal (fig. 1).

WEST EAST

PB-1766 PB-1775 G-2984

0

200

Depth below canal water level, in feet

Depth below canal water level, in feet

400600800

1,0001,2001,400

0

100200300400500600700

1,6001,8002,0002,2002,4002,6002,8003,000

02004006008001,0001,2001,4001,6001,8002,0002,2002,4002,6002,800

Two-way traveltime, in milliseconds

0100200300400500600700

Two-way traveltime, in milliseconds

AIV=5,569 ft/s AIV=7,899 ft/s AIV=10,030 feet per second (ft/s)

AIV=6,159 ft/s AIV=6,508 ft/s AIV=10,030 feet per second (ft/s)

Shot point

41,100

41,000

40,900

40,800

20,400

20,300

20,200

20,100

20,000

500

400

300

2000

100

30,800

30,700

30,600

30,500

30,400

30,300

30,200

30,100

10,300

10,200

10,100

10,000

30,000

20,500

Vertical scale greatly exaggerated

2 MILES 0

2 KILOMETERS 0

1

1

EXPLANATION

Average vertical-interval velocities shown on right and left sidesNoisy, low-amplitude vertical bands—Probably caused by energy 

attenuation at or near the canal bottom

AIV White-line anomalies—Most occur from top to bottom of the profile and 

were caused by acquisition during passage under bridges and pipelines. This can cause the onboard navigation system to lose connection to navigational satellites
6 Preliminary Stratigraphic and Hydrogeologic Cross Sections and Seismic Profile of the Floridan Aquifer System

No data

EAST

Depth below canal water level, in feet

02004006008001,0001,2001,4001,6001,8002,0002,2002,4002,6002,800

WEST

PB-1766

0

200

Depth below canal water level, in feet

400600800

1,0001,2001,400

0

100200300400500600700

1,6001,8002,0002,2002,4002,6002,8003,000

Two-way traveltime, in milliseconds

0100200300400500600700

Two-way traveltime, in milliseconds

AIV=5,569 ft/s AIV=7,899 ft/s AIV=10,030 feet per second (ft/s)

AIV = 6,159 ft/s AIV = 6,508 ft/s AIV = 10,030 ft/s Top lower Arcadia Formation

G-2984 PB-1775

Ochopee

Ochopee

Limestone

Limestone

Member

Island

Formation

Stock

Member Ochopee

Ochopee

Limestone

Limestone

Member

Member

Uppermost permeable

zone of Lower Floridan aquifer

Shot point

41,100

41,000

40,900

40,800

20,400

20,300

20,200

20,100

20,000

500

400

300

200

0

100

30,800

30,700

30,600

30,500

30,400

30,300

30,200

30,100

10,300

10,200

10,100

10,000

30,000

20,500

CS-4

CS-6

CS-7

CS-5

Top 

Pinecrest Sand

Member

Upper

Floridan

aquifer

Top Arcadia

Formation

Top 

Peace River

Formation

Avon Park

permeable

zone

Top AP1

sequence

CS-2

CS-1

CS-3

1

Island

Formation

Stock

Intermediate

confining unit

Middle

confining 

unit 1

Middle

confining 

unit 2

Unnamed 

sequence 

boundary

Top AR4

sequence

EXPLANATION 

Semi-vertical faults

—Common within the limits of the 

structural sags. Dashed where most uncertain

Average vertical-interval velocities shown on right and left sides Seismic-sag structure and numerationTruncation of reflections

—At the upper surface of the Arcadia Formation

AIV

CS-1

1 Stock Island Formation, after Cunningham and others, 1998.

Vertical scale greatly exaggerated

2 MILES 0

2 KILOMETERS 0

1

1

Figure 4. Preliminary interpreted seismic-reflection profile along Hillsboro Canal (fig. 1). AR4 is the top of Arcadia depositional sequence 4. AP1 is the top of Avon park depositional sequence 1.
Selected References 7

Preliminary Stratigraphic and Hydrogeologic Cross Sections and Seismic Profile 

of the Floridan Aquifer System in Eastern Broward County

The cross sections and interpreted seismic profile presented herein are part of a study to refine the stratigraphic and 

hydrogeologic framework of the FAS in Broward County. Most of the stratigraphic and hydrogeologic units in eastern Broward 

County delineated here are based on Reese and Richardson (2008). The cross sections presented here provide greater vertical 

and lateral resolution of the distribution of hydraulic characteristics deemed important to consider in planning alternative watersupply practices. In addition, subdivisions within the Avon Park and Arcadia Formations are introduced, including the upper, 

upper-middle, lower middle and lower Avon Park Formation, and the upper and lower Arcadia Formation (fig. 2). Sequence 

stratigraphic units are also introduced, including AP1, AP2, AR1, AR2, AR3, and AR4 (plates 1, 2, and 3). Stratigraphic and 

hydrogeologic units were identified based on geophysical, lithologic, and hydraulic characteristics, and in the case of depositional sequences, the character of bounding surfaces. Stratigraphic boundaries in the upper part of the FAS were identified by 

distinct vertical changes in lithology observed in core samples from test corehole G-2984 and correlated with marker horizons 

identified in borehole geophysical logs (table 3). Where lithologic changes could not be identified or lithologic data were 

unavailable, characteristic patterns in borehole geophysical data, such as gamma-ray logs, sonic Δt logs, or both, were used to 

identify distinct and pervasive geophysical marker horizons that reflect changes in lithology. 

In the study area, boundaries between hydrogeologic units in the FAS were determined using borehole-flowmeter and 

fluid-property data, borehole geophysical data, hydraulic test data (such as from aquifer and packer tests), well-to-well correlative relations, and drilling characteristics (table 4). Hydrogeologic units may be composed of one or more flow zones that 

were typically identified by abrupt and substantial changes in vertical borehole flow or borehole fluid properties (temperature, 

conductivity, or both). Where hydraulic test data or borehole flowmeter and fluid properties data were not available, hydrologic 

unit boundaries were based on correlation of other data between wells, including lithologic descriptions and borehole geophysical data. The geophysical data included formation resistivity, sonic Δt, natural gamma ray, borehole diameter, and spontaneous 

potential. 

West-to-east cross sections A–A’ and C–C’ (plates 1 and 2), and south-to-north cross section Z–Z’ (plate 3) show the 

correlation of stratigraphic and hydrogeologic units between wells in the study area. Borehole flowmeter analyses were used to 

indicate discrete flow zones within the intervals tested. Observed lithologic characteristics are shown for cored intervals in test 

corehole G-2984 and well PB-1766 as well as for well cuttings in well G-2968. Other lithologic information shown is based 

on well-cutting descriptions compiled from sources listed in table 2. Depositional sequences and the base of the brackish-water 

zone in the FAS are shown on these cross sections.

Selected References 

 AECOM, 2010, Engineering report on the construction and testing of test production well TPW–1 for the Town of Davie: 

Prepared for the Town of Davie, p. 1–1 to 5–2, plus apps.

Bennett, M.W., Linton, P.F., and Rectenwald, E.E., 2001, Completion report for the exploratory well EXW-1, western Hillsboro 

basin site, Palm Beach County: South Florida Water Management District hydrogeologic investigation of the Floridan aquifer 

system, 34 p., 7 app.

Black, Crow, and Eidsness Inc., 1974, Results of drilling and testing of monitoring and deep disposal wells at Margate, Florida: 

Engineering report prepared for the City of Margate Utilities Authority and LAH Associates, Limited, Fla., 31 p.

Camp, Dresser, and McKee, Inc., 1987, City of Plantation deep injection well—number 1: Final well completion report, p. 1–1 

to 5–1, plus apps.

Camp, Dresser, and McKee, Inc., 1991a, City of Plantation Central District Water Treatment Facility R.O. reject disposal 

well - no. 1: Well completion report v. 1. 

Camp, Dresser, and McKee, Inc., 1991b, City of Plantation Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant effluent injection well - no. 2: 

Well completion report v. 1, p. 1–0 to 6–1. 

Camp, Dresser, and McKee, Inc., 1993a, Floridan aquifer test/production well and monitor well: Completion report prepared for 

the City of Deerfield Beach, Florida, and South Florida Water Management District, 29 p.
8 Preliminary Stratigraphic and Hydrogeologic Cross Sections and Seismic Profile of the Floridan Aquifer System

Camp, Dresser, and McKee, Inc., 1993b, Wastewater Treatment Plant III well completion report dual zone monitor well 1A: 

Engineering report prepared for City of Sunrise, Fla., p. 1–0 to 5–2, plus apps.

Camp, Dresser, and McKee, Inc., 1993c, Wastewater Treatment Plant III well completion report dual zone monitor well 2: 

Engineering report prepared for City of Sunrise, Fla., p. 1–0 to 5–2, plus apps.

Camp, Dresser, and McKee, Inc., 1996, Engineering report supporting operational testing of IW-3 at Sunrise, Florida: Engineering report prepared for City of Sunrise, Fla., v. 1, p. 1–1 to 8–3, plus apps.

Camp, Dresser, and McKee, Inc., 2008, City of Deerfield Beach West Water Treatment Plant concentrate injection well system: 

Well completion report, v. 1, p. 1–1 to 7–1, plus apps.

Camp, Dresser, and McKee, Inc., 2010, City of Deerfield Beach West Water Treatment Plant Floridan aquifer well no. 2 final 

completion depth proposal: Memorandum to the South Floridan Water Management District, 6 p.

CH2M HILL, 1984, Engineering report on drilling and testing of the deep injection and monitoring wells at the City of Margate 

Wastewater Treatment Plant: Prepared for the City of Margate Department of Utilities Margate, Florida, p. 1–1 to 4–4, 

plus apps.

CH2M HILL, 1985, Engineering report on the drilling and testing of the City of Sunrise injection and monitoring wells: 

Prepared for the City of Sunrise, Broward County, Florida, p. 1–1 to 5–1, plus apps.

CH2M HILL, 1994, Report on the modification to monitor well MW-2: Prepared for the City of Margate Department of Environmental and Engineering Services, 7 p.1–1 to 1–9, attachments. 

CH2M HILL, 1995, Rehabilitation of monitor well MW-1 and construction and testing of monitor well MW-2 and regional 

monitor well RMW-1 at the G.T. Lohmeyer Wastewater Treatment Plant: Engineering report prepared for the City of Fort 

Lauderdale, Broward County, Fla., p. 1–1 to 6–2, plus apps.

CH2M HILL, 1996, Construction and testing of monitor well MW-3 at the G.T. Lohmeyer Wastewater Treatment Plant: Engineering report prepared for the City of Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Fla., p. 1–1 to 6–1, plus apps.

CH2M HILL, 1997, Construction and testing of the aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) system at the BCOES 2A Water Treatment Plant: Engineering report prepared for the Broward County Office of Environmental Services and Montgomery Watson, 

p. 1–1 to 6–3, 13 apps.

CH2M HILL, 1999, Construction and testing of injection well IW-4 at the City of Fort Lauderdale G.T. Lohmeyer Wastewater 

Treatment Plant: Engineering report prepared for the City of Fort Lauderdale, v. I, p. 1–1 to 6–1, plus apps.

CH2M HILL, 2000, Injection well system injection zone redefinition at the Margate Wastewater Treatment Plant: Engineering 

report prepared for the City of Margate, Broward County, Florida, p. 1–1 to 1–7, plus attachments. 

Cunningham, K.J., McNeill, D.F., Guertin, L.A., Ciesielski, P.F., Scott, T.M., and deVerteuil, Laurent, 1998, New tertiary stratigraphy for the Florida Keys and southern peninsula of Florida: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 110, no. 2, 

p. 231–158.

Florida Geological Survey, 2012, Lithologic database: Accessed December 11, 2012, at http://publicfiles.dep.state.fl.us/FGS/

WEB/lithologic/.

Geraghty and Miller, Inc., 1984, Construction and testing of disposal wells 1, 2 and 3 at the George T. Lohmeyer Plant Fort 

Lauderdale, Florida: Report prepared for Broward County, v. I, 39 p., plus app. 

Geraghty and Miller, Inc., 1986, Construction and testing of an injection well at the Coral Springs Improvement District: Report 

prepared for Broward County, Fla., 30 p., plus apps. 

Geraghty and Miller, Inc., 1990a, Construction and testing of injection wells #1 and #2 with associated deep monitor well #1, 

Broward County North District Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant: Report prepared for James M. Montgomery, Consulting Engineers, Inc. in association with Hazen and Sawyer, P.C, Engineers, 30 p., plus apps.

Geraghty and Miller, Inc., 1990b, Construction and testing of injection well system #2 at the Coral Springs Improvement District 

Wastewater Treatment Plant: Report prepared for the City of Coral Springs, Fla., 31 p., plus apps. 
Selected References 9

Geraghty and Miller, Inc., 1991, Construction and testing of injection wells #3 and #4 with associated deep monitor well #2, 

Broward County North District Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant: Report prepared for James M. Montgomery, 

Consulting Engineers, Inc. in association with Hazen and Sawyer, P.C, Engineers, 32 p., plus apps.

Geraghty and Miller, Inc., 1995, Construction and testing of injection well #2 at the Pembroke Pines Wastewater Treatment 

Plant: Report prepared for the City of Pembroke Pines, Fla., 23 p., plus apps.

Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., 1989, Completion report for the City of Hallandale Floridan aquifer test well: City of Hallandale, Fla.

Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., 1996, City of Miramar, Florida Utilities Department Wastewater Reclamation Facility injection well 

construction: Well construction report prepared for the technical advisory committee members, p. 1–1 to 4–4, plus apps.

Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., 1999, North Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant monitor well 4 construction completion report: 

Prepared for Broward County Office of Environmental Services, p. 1–1 to 4–1, plus apps.

Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., 2000, Injection wells 5 and 6 construction completion report, North Regional Wastewater Treatment 

Plant: Prepared for Broward County Office of Environmental Services, p. 1–1 to 5–4, plus apps.

Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., 2001, Injection well no. 1 construction completion report—Water/Wastewater Treatment Plant: 

Prepared for Cooper City Utility Department, p. 1–1 to 5–5, plus apps.

Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., 2002a, Engineering well completion report concentrate disposal system: Prepared for the City of 

Pompano Beach in association with Water Technology Associates, Inc., p. 1–1 to 5–5, plus apps. 

Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., 2002b, Underground Injection Control application, aquifer storage and recovery Class V injection well 

system at the Broward County 2A Water Treatment Plant Site: 4 p., plus apps.

Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., 2003, Engineering well completion report, Hollywood Southern Regional WWTP injection well 

effluent disposal system: Prepared for the City of Hollywood in association with Water Technologies Associates, Inc., p. 1–1 

to 5–5, plus apps.

Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., 2006, Engineering well completion report—Peele-Dixie Water Treatment Plant concentrate disposal 

well: Prepared for City of Fort Lauderdale, p. 1–1 to 5–5, plus apps.

Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., 2007, Engineering well completion report Hallandale Beach WTP concentrate disposal well: Prepared 

for the City of Hallandale Beach, p. 1–1 to 5–5, plus apps.

Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., 2008, City of Plantation Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant engineering well completion report for 

dual zone monitoring well: Prepared for City of Plantation, p. 1–1 to 4–3, plus apps.

Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., and Geraghty and Miller, Inc., 1981, Construction and testing of the test injection well, City of Fort 

Lauderdale, Florida: Final report prepared for EPA project C-120474-220 city project 7089, 61 p., plus apps.

Lukasiewicz, John, 2003, Floridan aquifer system test well program, C-13 Canal, Oakland Park, Florida: South Florida Water 

Management District Technical Publication WS-16, 49 p., plus apps.

Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., 1990, City of Hollywood Water Treatment Plant Floridan aquifer test well: p. 1–1 to 7–1, plus apps.

Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., 2009, Technical memorandum detailing installation of test production wells F1 and F2: City of Miramar, 

Fla., p. 1–1 to 5–1, plus apps.

Metcalf and Eddy, Inc., and Missimer International, Inc., 2000, City of Plantation East Water Treatment Plant concentrate 

injection well no. 1 completion report, v. 1: Prepared for City of Plantation Utilities, Plantation, Fla., 81 p., plus apps.

Miller, J.A., 1986, Hydrogeologic framework of the Floridan aquifer system in Florida and in parts of Georgia, Alabama, and 

South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1403–B, 91 p.

Missimer and Assoc., Inc., 1992, Technical memorandum on the construction and testing of well F-2, City of Hollywood, 

Florida: Prepared for Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., 32 p., plus apps.

Montgomery Watson, 1996, City of Miramar Western Water Treatment Plant Injection Well System, Injection Wells IW-1 and 

IW-2 and Monitor Well DZMW-1: Prepared for the City of Miramar, Florida, 2 reports and plus apps.
10 Preliminary Stratigraphic and Hydrogeologic Cross Sections and Seismic Profile of the Floridan Aquifer System

Montgomery Watson, 1997, Modification of monitor well MW-1A at the Sawgrass Wastewater Treatment Plant: Report 

prepared for the City of Sunrise, Fla., plus apps.

Montgomery Watson, 1998a, Springtree Water Treatment Plant aquifer storage and recovery system well construction report: 

Prepared for the City of Sunrise, Florida, p. 1–1 to 5–1, 13 apps.

Montgomery Watson, 1998b, Fiveash Water Treatment Plant aquifer storage and recovery system well construction report: 

Prepared for the City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, p. 1–1 to 6–1, 14 apps.

Montgomery Watson Americas, Inc., 1999, Sawgrass Water Treatment Plant concentrate disposal system report and appendix I: 

Prepared for City of Sunrise, Florida, p. E-2 to 6–14, plus apps.

Montgomery Watson Americas, Inc., 2007, Sawgrass Water Treatment Plant Floridan Blending Test Well: Sunrise Project 

no. 06–005 final report, 24 p., plus apps.

Palm Beach County Water Utilities Department, 2003, Eastern Hillsboro Canal Water Treatment Plant #9 aquifer storage and 

recovery well: Well construction report and operational testing request, p. 1–1 to 4–1, 16 apps.

Post, Buckley, Schuh and Jernigan, Inc., 1987, Engineering report for deep test/injection well and deep monitor well: Prepared 

for the City of Pembroke Pines, Broward County, Fla., p. 1–1 to 11–4, plus apps. 

Reese, R.S., and Alvarez-Zarikian, C.A., 2007, Hydrogeology and aquifer storage and recovery performance in the Upper Floridan aquifer, southern Florida: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5239, 110 p., plus apps. (on CD).

Reese, R.S. and Richardson, Emily, 2008, Synthesis of the hydrogeologic framework of the Floridan aquifer system and delineation of a major Avon Park permeable zone in central and southern Florida: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations 

Report 2007–5207, 60 p., plus apps. and pls. (on CD).
Manuscript approved June 24, 2013

Prepared by the Raleigh Publishing Service Center

Mike Deacon, Editor

Ron Spencer, Illustrations

Kim Swidarski, Layout

For more information about this publication, contact:

Ronald S. Reese

USGS Florida Water Science Center

7500 SW 36th St

Davie, Florida 33314

(954) 377-5900

Or visit the USGS home page at:

http://fl.water.usgs.gov/
Reese and Cunningham—Preliminary Stratigraphic and Hydrogeologic Cross Sections and Seismic Profile of the Floridan Aquifer System—OFR 2013-1141