USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2018-5091: Characterization and Occurrence of Confined and Unconfined Aquifers in Quaternary Sediments in the Glaciated Conterminous United States

Interactive Maps

Figure 1A. Hydrogeologic terranes and the maximum glacial advance in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 2A. Terranes 1A and 4A in the northeastern glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 2B. Terranes 1B, 2A, and 3A in western Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, eastern Wisconsin, and a small area of northern Kentucky in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 2C. Terranes 1C, 2C, 2D, 3C, and 4B in Iowa, southern Minnesota, southeastern South Dakota, northern Missouri, eastern Nebraska and Kansas, and a small area of western Illinois in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 2D. Terranes 1D, 1E, 2B, and 3B in Minnesota, Wisconsin, upper Michigan, northern Illinois, and eastern North and South Dakota in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 2E. Terranes 1F and 2E in North and South Dakota and in eastern Montana in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 2F. Terrane 1G in Washington, Idaho, and western Montana in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 4. Hydrochemical regions in the glaciated conterminous United States; regions delineated by Arnold and others (2008) from a statistical analysis of water-quality data.

Figure 5. Glacial Environment and Surficial Sediments (GESS) geodatabase map units (GESS_MU attribute) map units in the glaciated conterminous United States; surficial geology from Haj and others (2018).

Figure 6. Textural classification of Glacial Environment and Surficial Sediments geodatabase map units in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 7. Generalized bedrock lithology (modified from the Integrated Geologic Map Databases for the United States) and overlying Glacial Environment and Surficial Sediments geodatabase coarse-grained, stratified surficial sediments in the glaciated conterminous United States; surficial geology from Haj and others (2018).

Figure 8. Density of lithologic logs aggregated on a 5-kilometer grid in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 12A. Thickness of Quaternary sediment, estimated from lithologic logs, in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 12B. Percentage of coarse material of Quaternary sediment, estimated from lithologic logs, in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 14A. Median number of aquifer-material intervals (at least 3 meters of coarse material) penetrated by lithologic logs in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 14B. Probability of penetrating at least one aquifer-material interval (at least 3 meters of coarse material) by lithologic logs in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 17A. Median depth to bottom aquifer-material interval, estimated from lithologic logs, in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 17B. Median thickness of bottom aquifer-material interval, estimated from lithologic logs, in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 20A. Thickness of unconfined (water-table) aquifer-material intervals in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 20B. Probability that an aquifer-material interval is confined, if present, in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 21. Annual recharge in the glaciated conterminous United States based on the soil-water balance model.

Figure 23A. Total annual groundwater withdrawals in 2010, by county, in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 23B. Annual public-supply groundwater withdrawals in 2010, by county, in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 23C. Percentage of public-supply groundwater withdrawals from Quaternary sediments, by county, in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 24. Annual groundwater withdrawals in 2010 as a ratio to recharge, by county, in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 50A. Probability of penetrating at least one aquifer-material interval in lithologic logs from selected confined and unconfined aquifers in Illinois and Indiana in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 50B. Conditional probability that the interval, if penetrated by a lithologic log, is a confined aquifer in Illinois and Indiana in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 51A. Probability of penetrating at least one aquifer-material interval in lithologic logs from selected confined and unconfined aquifers in North Dakota in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 51B. Conditional probability that the interval, if penetrated by a lithologic log, is in a confined aquifer in North Dakota in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 1.1A. Available water capacity in the soil-water balance model (this study) in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 1.1B. Maximum recharge rate in the soil-water balance model (this study) in the glaciated conterminous United States.

Figure 1.4A. Recharge and spatial distribution of residuals between base flow in the glaciated conterminous United States computed by PART and recharge computed by the soil-water balance model in this study.

Figure 1.4B. Recharge and spatial distribution of residuals between base flow in the glaciated conterminous United States computed by PART and recharge computed by the soil-water balance model in Trost and others (2018).

Figure 1.4C. Recharge and spatial distribution of residuals between base flow in the glaciated conterminous United States computed by PART and recharge computed by the soil-water balance model in Reitz and others (2017).

Figure 1.5A. Differences in recharge in the glaciated conterminous United States computed by the soil-water balance model in this study minus the soil-water balance model in Trost and others (2018).

Figure 1.5B. Differences in recharge in the glaciated conterminous United States computed by the soil-water balance model in this study minus the soil-water balance model in Reitz and others (2017).