Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “groundwater dating”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3

Investigation of Scale-Dependent Groundwater/Surface-water Exchange in Rivers by Gradient Self-Potential Logging: Numerical Modeling and Field Experiments

Exchanges of groundwater and surface-water are fundamental to a wide range of water-supply and water-quality management issues but challenging to map beyond the reach scale. Waterborne gradient self-potential (SP) measurements are directly sensitive to water flow through riverbed sediments and can be used to infer exchange locations, direction (gain versus loss), scale, and relative changes, but to date applications to river corridor hydrology are limited. Numerical modeling and field experiments were therefore performed herein, each emphasizing waterborne gradient SP logging for identifying and locating focused vertical groundwater discharge (surface-water gain) and recharge (surface-water loss) in a river. Two and three-dimensional numerical models were constructed to simulate the polarities, appearances, and peak amplitudes of streaming-potential and electric-field anomalies on a riverbed and in the surface-water that were attributable to steady-state vertical fluxes of groundwater through high-permeability conduits in the riverbed. Effects of varied hydraulic length-scale of exchange and surface-water depth were tested through numerical modeling. Modeling results aided in data acquisition and interpretation for three repeated field experiments performed along a 1.5–2.0 km reach of the Quashnet River in Cape Cod, Massachusetts, where focused, meter-scale groundwater discharges occur at discrete locations within otherwise ubiquitous and more diffuse groundwater upwelling conditions. Strong gradient SP anomalies were repeatedly measured in the Quashnet River at previously confirmed locations of focused groundwater discharge, showing the efficacy of waterborne gradient SP logging in identifying and characterizing groundwater/surface water exchange dynamics at multiple river network scales.

Engineering↗

Supply Warehouse#3, SWMU 088 Operations, Maintenance, and Monitoring Report Kennedy Space Center, Florida

This document presents the findings, observations, and results associated with Operations, Maintenance, and Monitoring (OM&M) activities of Corrective Measures Implementation (CMI) activities conducted at Supply Warehouse #3 (SW3) located at John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Florida from October 8, 2015, to September 12, 2016, and performance monitoring results for semi-annual sampling events conducted in March and September 2016. The primary objective of SW3 CMI is to actively decrease concentrations of trichloroethene (TCE) and vinyl chloride (VC) to less than Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Natural Attenuation Default Concentrations (NADCs), and the secondary objective is to reduce TCE, cis-1,2-dichloroethene (cDCE), trans-1,2-dichloroethene (tDCE), 1,1-dichloroethene (11DCE), and VC concentrations to less than FDEP Groundwater Cleanup Target Levels (GCTLs). The SW3 facility has been designated Solid Waste Management Unit (SWMU) 088 under KSC's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action Program. Based on the results to date, the SW3 air sparging (AS) system is operating at or below the performance criteria as presented in the 2008 SW3 Corrective Measures Implementation (CMI) Work Plan and 2009 and 2012 CMI Work Plan Addenda. Since the start of AS system operations on December 19, 2012, through the September 2016 groundwater sampling event, TCE concentrations have decreased to less than the GCTL in all wells within the Active Remediation Zone (ARZ), and VC results remain less than NADC but greater than GCTL. Based on these results, team consensus was reached at the October 2016 KSC Remediation Team (KSCRT) meeting to continue AS system operations and semi-annual performance monitoring of volatile organic compounds in March 2017 at ten monitoring wells at select locations, and in September 2017 at four monitoring wells at select locations to reduce VC concentrations to below GCTL. Additionally, surface water samples will be collected at locations SW0001, SW0002, and SW0003 during both the March and September 2017 events. Team consensus was also reached at the October 2017 KSCRT meeting to continue with operation and maintenance (O&M) of the AS system at SW3.

REPORT↗

Mountain Basin Controls on the Snow-to-Streamflow Signal: An AIC-Weighted Multiple Linear Regression Framework

A regression-based analysis quantifies how basin characteristics modulate the snow-to-streamflow signal. First, we use the ERA5-Land reanalysis gridded product (European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasts reanalysis 5 -Land component) for 4,655 hydrologic unit code - 10 (HUC10) mountain basins across the western United States (US) for water years 1987–2024. Linear regressions are performed for peak snow water equivalent (SWE) and annual streamflow for each mountain basin. Models use ordinary least squares in Python’s statsmodels package. After which, an Akaike Information Criterion (AIC)–weighted ensemble multiple linear regression (MLR) framework with 47 watershed traits is used to predict the linear regression coefficient of determination (r-squared) defining the ability of peak SWE to predict annual streamflow across all mountain basin. Predictor sets are constrained to avoid multicollinearity by excluding models with variance inflation factors (VIF) greater than 5. Mountain basin traits included in the MLR include seasonal climate, topography, vegetation type and structure, and bedrock geology. Accepted models are considered if their AIC is within 2.0 of the model with the minimum AIC, or best model. To compare predictor influence across acceptable models, we computed standardized regression coefficients. To evaluate structural redundancy among models, we constructed binary inclusion vectors for each acceptable model, denoting whether a predictor was present (1) or absent (0). Core predictor variables are defined as occurring in at least 67% of the acceptable models. For this regional analysis, only one model was found acceptable, with higher snow-to-streamflow translation (higher r-squared) occurring in colder mountain basins with higher relative winter precipitation, more snow accumulation and a lower fraction of annual precipitation that falls in the spring and summer. The second component of the data package uses previously published, high-resolution output from an integrated hydrological model of the East River watershed using the U.S. Geological Survey Groundwater and Surface water Flow model (GSFLOW, doi:10.15485/1998576). East River MLR expands upon the approach described above to explore the response of five streamflow metrics—annual streamflow, runoff efficiency, 7-day minimum flow, low-flow duration, and non-perennial stream fraction to snow system indicators including peak SWE, snow-covered area, snow disappearance date, and the fraction of basin area characterized by low-to-no snow, as well as seasonal precipitation and temperature, and annual hydrologic variables representing soil moisture, evapotranspiration (ET), the partitioning of incoming precipitation to evapotranspiration (ET/P), groundwater storage, and groundwater inflow to streams. MLR was done on all water years (P0: 1987-2024) and for each period as determined in the split analysis using pooled regression techniques (P1: 1987-2011 and P2: 2012-2024) to evaluate shifting predictor variable emphasis on streamflow generation. Results indicate that since 2012, peak SWE has lost statistical strength in its prediction of annual streamflow and runoff efficiency, and the indirect influence of spring temperature has emerged as critically important. Low-flow metrics remain largely influenced by soil moisture, vegetation water use and groundwater inflows with summer precipitation becoming a direct influence on minimum summer flow. Together, these data and Python-based analysis tools provide a framework for identifying the key watershed characteristics that control how streamflow responds to snow from year to year. The package also helps quantify uncertainty in statistical models and assess how snow–streamflow relationships vary across regions and over time. This dataset contains comma-separated values files (.csv), text files (.txt), python code files (.py), figure files (.png), and shapefiles (.cpg, .dbf, .prj, .sbn, .sbx, .shp, .xml). Further details on file contents and MLR execution can be found in the readme file and the FLMD files. Work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Hybrid Sorbents for 129 I Capture from Contaminated Groundwater

Radioiodine ( 129 I) poses a risk to the environment due to its long half-life, toxicity, and mobility. It is found at the U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Site due to legacy releases of nuclear wastes to the subsurface where 129 I is predominantly present as iodate (IO 3 – ). To date, a cost-effective and scalable cleanup technology for 129 I has not been identified, with hydraulic containment implemented as the remedial approach. Here, novel high-performing sorbents for 129 I remediation with the capacity to reduce 129 I concentrations to or below the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) drinking water standard and procedures to deploy them in an ex-situ pump and treat (P&T) system are introduced. Furthermore, this includes implementation of hybridized polyacrylonitrile (PAN) beads for ex-situ remediation of IO 3 – -contaminated groundwater for the first time. Iron (Fe) oxyhydroxide and bismuth (Bi) oxyhydroxide sorbents were deployed on silica substrates or encapsulated in porous PAN beads. In addition, Fe–, cerium (Ce)–, and Bi–oxyhydroxides were encapsulated with anion-exchange resins. The PAN–bismuth oxyhydroxide and PAN–ferrihydrite composites along with Fe- and Ce-based hybrid anion-exchange resins performed well in batch sorption experiments with distribution coefficients for IO 3 – of >1000 mL/g and rapid removal kinetics. Of the tested materials, the Ce-based hybrid anion-exchange resin was the most efficient for removal of IO 3 – from Hanford groundwater in a column system, with 50% breakthrough occurring at 324 pore volumes. The functional amine groups on the parent resin and amount of active sorbent in the resin can be customized to improve the iodine loading capacity. These results highlight the potential for IO 3 – remediation by hybrid sorbents and represent a benchmark for the implementation of commercially available materials to meet EPA standards for cleanup of 129 I in a large-scale P&T system.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. The first two characters of each file name is the abbreviation for the state the in which the file contains data for. After the abbreviation is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file type described in detail: XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, this file is the merging of XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv and XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv by state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state the data comes from. FIPS - The two digit numeric state ID code. waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. origWaterUse - The original stated water use from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. CFS - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). Arizona is unique among the states, as its surface and groundwater resources are managed with two different sets of boundaries. So, for Arizona, the basinNum column is missing and instead there are two columns: surBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the surface water WMA the record belongs to. grdBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the groundwater WMA the record belongs to. XXStatePOD.shp: A shapefile which identifies the location of the Points of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records in XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv have coordinates, and therefore may be missing from this file. XXStatePOU.shp: A shapefile which contains the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to included within this file. XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized groundwater rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized surface water rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. Additionally, one file, stateWMALabels.csv, is not stored within a sub-directory. While we have referred to the spatial boundaries that each state uses to manage its water resources as WMAs, this term is not shared across all states. This file lists the proper name for each boundary set, by state.

Economics↗

Development of a Complete Landsat Evapotranspiration and Energy Balance Archive to Support Agricultural Consumptive Water Use Reporting and Prediction in the Central Valley, CA

Mapping evapotranspiration (ET) from agricultural areas in Californias Central Valley is critical for understanding historical consumptive use of surface and groundwater. In addition, long histories of ET maps provide valuable training information for predictive studies of surface and groundwater demands. During times of drought, groundwater is commonly pumped to supplement reduced surface water supplies in the Central Valley. Due to the lack of extensive groundwater pumping records, mapping consumptive use using satellite imagery is an efficient and robust way for estimating agricultural consumptive use and assessing drought impacts. To this end, we have developed and implemented an algorithm for automated calibration of the METRIC remotely sensed surface energy balance model on NASAs Earth Exchange (NEX) to estimate ET at the field scale. Using automated calibration techniques on the NEX has allowed for the creation of spatially explicit historical ET estimates for the Landsat archive dating from 1984 to the near present. Further, our use of spatial NLDAS and CIMIS weather data, and spatial soil water balance simulations within the NEX METRIC workflow, has helped overcome challenges of time integration between satellite image dates. This historical and near present time archive of agricultural water consumption for the Central Valley will be an extremely useful dataset for water use and drought impact reporting, and predictive analyses of groundwater demands.

valleys↗

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. The first two characters of each file name is the abbreviation for the state the in which the file contains data for. After the abbreviation is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file type described in detail: XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, this file is the merging of XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv and XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv by state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state the data comes from. FIPS - The two-digit numeric state ID code. waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. origWaterUse - The original stated water use(s) from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. CFS - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). Arizona is unique among the states, as its surface and groundwater resources are managed with two different sets of boundaries. So, for Arizona, the basinNum column is missing and instead there are two columns: surBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the surface water WMA the record belongs to. grdBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the groundwater WMA the record belongs to. XXStatePOD.shp: A shapefile which identifies the location of the Points of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records in XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv have coordinates, and therefore may be missing from this file. XXStatePOU.shp: A shapefile which contains the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to include within this file. XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized groundwater rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized surface water rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. Additionally, one file, stateWMALabels.csv, is not stored within a sub-directory. While we have referred to the spatial boundaries that each state uses to manage its water resources as WMAs, this term is not shared across all states. This file lists the proper name for each boundary set, by state. For those whom may be interested in exploring our code more in depth, we are also making available an internal data file for convenience. The file is in .RData format and contains everything described above as well as some minor additional objects used within the code calculating the cumulative curves. For completeness, here is a detailed description of the various objects which can be found within the .RData file: states: A character vector containing the state names for those states in which data was collected for. More importantly, the index of the state name is also the index in which that state's data can be found in the various following list objects. For example, if California is the third index in this object, the data for California will also be in the third index for each accompanying list. rightsByState_ground: A list of data frames with the cleaned ground water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. rightsByState_surface: A list of data frames with the cleaned surface water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. fullRightsRecs: A list of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxFullHarmonizedRights.csv files. projProj: The spatial projection used for map creation in the beginning of the project. Specifically, the World Geodetic System (WGS84) as a coordinate reference system (CRS) string in PROJ.4 format. wmaStateLabel: The name and/or abbreviation for what each state legally calls their WMAs. h2oUseByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed area(s) of use in this object. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to be included in this object. h2oDivByState: A list of spatial points data frames which identifies the location of the Point of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed Point of Diversion in this object. spatialWMAByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the spatial WMA boundaries for each state. The only data contained within the table are identifiers for each polygon. It is worth reiterating that Arizona is the only state in which the surface and groundwater WMA boundaries are not the same. wmaIDByState: A list which contains the unique ID values of the WMAs for each state. plottingDim: A character vector used to inform mapping functions for internal map making. Each state is classified as either "tall" or "wide", to maximize space on a typical 8x11 page. The code related to the creation of this dataset can be viewed within HarDWR GitHub Repository/dataHarmonization.

Economics↗

The Incorporation of Pump-and-Treat Data in the New Tracking Restoration and Closure (TRAC)Web-Based Mapping Tool - 20339

Groundwater pump-and-treat (P and T) systems are a common remediation strategy for sites with contaminated groundwater within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM). Currently, there are six DOE-EM sites with active P and T systems, but integrated information on individual systems is only primarily available in separate annual reports. To provide a broad view of both current and historical P and T operations, data has been collected on all of the P and T systems. This summary information not only includes capital and average annual costs, but also identifies contaminants treated and forecasted P and T closure dates. Principal contaminants of concern treated with P and T systems include trichloroethylene, chromium (VI), strontium-90, technetium-99, and uranium. DOE-EM is continuing to create a web-based mapping tool that compiles information on groundwater contaminants, remediation strategies and, current data related to plumes and cleanup progress within all DOE-EM sites. The information collected on P and T systems will be added to the TRAC (Tracking Restoration and Closure) tool using interactive maps to quickly access and share information. This information sharing supports the transition from active to passive remediation methods and long-term monitoring approaches. TRAC can ensure that managers, stakeholders, regulators, and contractors remain up to date on cleanup progress for all sites within the complex. The information on P and T systems expands the use of TRAC and can assist in project monitoring and budget planning and support potential shifts in management plans based on plume data. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Geothermal Hydraulic Stimulation: Overview of Methods and Best Practices

This paper outlines important information related to the hydraulic stimulation of geothermal wells and considerations for regulators responsible for evaluating applications to conduct these operations. Hydraulic stimulation applied to geothermal wells is an evolving technology that is different from the hydraulic fracturing process widely used to complete unconventional oil and gas wells. Important differences relate to operating pressures, variations in rock and fracture processes, and characteristics and disposal of hydraulic fracture fluids. Hydraulic stimulation is not widely used in the geothermal industry; however, future development of enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) will require hydraulic stimulation in order to enhance and create fracture permeability to allow wells to deliver sufficient heat and fluid to power plants. Gigawatts of EGS potential have been identified (U.S. Department of Energy 2019), so it is expected that the use of hydraulic stimulation of geothermal wells will be more common in the future. At present, there are no formal regulations guiding drilling programs or sundry notices that propose hydraulic stimulation of geothermal wells. On federal lands, important constraints and oversight are embedded in the process for obtaining Geothermal Drilling Permits outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations (43 CFR Section 3262.11); in Geothermal Resource Order 2 (GRO 2) guidance for assessment and mitigation of impacts of geothermal operations as well as construction and testing of geothermal wells; and in a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Induced Seismicity Instruction Memorandum (BLM 2018). Additionally, local knowledge from BLM field offices and expertise of BLM engineers, or that of state regulators for operations on private and state lands, will be applied to fully assess operator applications to conduct geothermal hydraulic stimulation activities. Significant research effort has been directed toward EGS, so geothermal hydraulic stimulation techniques, impacts, and results are evolving and becoming better understood, including adaptation of decades of oil and gas industry experience with hydraulic fracturing of unconventional reservoirs. Recent EGS activities in the United States provide details about hydraulic stimulation with respect to oversight, stimulation design, execution, and results. Based on experience to date, the important issues to address when hydraulically stimulating a geothermal well include the following: 1. Wellbore construction and integrity must be appropriate to protect groundwater and manage stimulation pressures. 2. Understanding of lithology, faults, fractures, and subsurface stress state is necessary to design stimulation plans and predict results. 3. Seismic monitoring allows for observation and mitigation of induced seismicity.

geothermal↗

Remediation Technologies Eliminate Contaminants

All research and development has a story behind it, says Jacqueline Quinn, environmental engineer at Kennedy Space Center. For Quinn, one such story begins with the Saturn 1B launch stand at Kennedy and ends with a unique solution to a challenging environmental problem. Used in a number of Apollo missions and during the Skylab program, the Saturn 1B launch stand was dismantled following the transition to the Space Shuttle Program and stored in an open field at Kennedy. Decades later, the Center s Environmental Program Office discovered evidence of chemicals called polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in the field s soil. The findings were puzzling since PCBs a toxin classified as a probable carcinogen by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have been banned in the United States since 1979. Before the ban, PCBs were commonly used in transformer oils that leached into the ground when the oils were changed out and dumped near transformer sites, but there were no electrical transformers near the dismantled stand. It soon became apparent that the source of the PCBs was the launch stand itself. Prior to the ban, PCBs were used extensively in paints to add elasticity and other desirable characteristics. The PCB-laden paint on the Saturn 1B launch stand was flaking off into the field s soil. Nobody knew there were PCBs in the paint, says Quinn, noting that the ingredient was not monitored carefully when it was in use in 1960s. In fact, she says, the U.S. EPA was not even established until 1970, a year after Neil Armstrong first set foot on the Moon. Nobody knew any better at the time, Quinn says, but today, we have the responsibility to return any natural environmental media to as close to pristine a condition as possible. Quinn, fellow engineer Kathleen Loftin, and other Kennedy colleagues already had experience developing unprecedented solutions for environmental contamination; the team invented the emulsified zero-valent iron (EZVI) technology to safely treat groundwater tainted by chlorinated solvents once used to clean rocket engine components. The award-winning innovation (Spinoff 2010) is now NASA s most licensed technology to date. PCBs in paint presented a new challenge. Removing the launch stand for recycling proved a difficult operation; the toxic paint had to be fully stripped from the steel structure, a lengthy and costly process that required the stripped paint to be treated before disposal. Noting the lack of efficient, environmentally friendly options for dealing with PCBs, Quinn and her colleagues developed the Activated Metal Treatment System (AMTS). AMTS is a paste consisting of a solvent solution containing microscale particles of activated zero-valent metal. When applied to a painted surface, the paste extracts and degrades the PCBs into benign byproducts while leaving the paint on the structure. This provides a superior alternative to other methods for PCB remediation, such as stripping the paint or incinerating the structure, which prevents reuse and can release volatized PCBs into the air. Since its development, AMTS has proven to be a valuable solution for removing PCBs from paint, caulking, and various insulation and filler materials in older buildings, naval ships, and former munitions facilities where the presence of PCBs interferes with methods for removing trace explosive materials. Miles of potentially toxic caulking join sections of runways at airports. Any of these materials installed before 1979 potentially contain PCBs, Quinn says. "This is not just a NASA problem," she says. "It s a global problem."

Source record↗

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a collection of objects stored within an RDate file, stateWaterRightsHarmonized.RData. Each object either describes how one should interact with the other objects, or contains the harmonized water rights data. Here is each object described in detail: states: A character vector containing the state names for those states in which data was collected for. More importantly, the index of the state name is also the index in which that state's data can be found in the various following list objects. For example, if California is the third index in this object, the data for California will also be in the third index for each accompanying list. rightsByState_ground: A list of data frames with the cleaned ground water rights collected from each state. The column headers for each data frame are: waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. allocatedFlow - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. origWaterUse - The original stated water use from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. rightsByState_surface: A list of the cleaned surface water rights collected from each state. See rightsByState_ground for more details on how the data is formatted. fullRightsRecs: A list of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, these lists are the merging of rightsByState_ground and rightsByState_surface by state. See rightsByState_ground for more details on how the data is formatted. projProj: The spatial projection used for map creation in the beginning of the project. Specifically, the World Geodetic System (WGS84) as a coordinate reference system (CRS) string in PROJ.4 format. wmaStateLabel: The name and/or abbreviation for what each state legally calls their WMAs. h2oUseByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed area(s) of use in this object. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to be included in this object. h2oDivByState: A list of spatial points data frames which identifies the location of the Point of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed Point of Diversion in this object. spatialWMAByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the spatial WMA boundaries for each state. The only data contained within the table are identifiers for each polygon. It is worth reiterating that Arizona is the only state in which the surface and groundwater WMA boundaries are not the same. wmaIDByState: A list which contains the unique ID values of the WMAs for each state. plottingDim: A character vector used to inform mapping functions for internal map making. Each state is classified as either "tall" or "wide", to maximize space on a typical 8x11 page.

Economics↗

Snow Depth Datasets for Snodgrass Catchment, Colorado, Water Year 2022-2023

This data package presents snow depths data from distributed temperature probes at 18 locations near Snodgrass catchment, Colorado. These data show that snow melt-out dates are approximately one or two weeks later under evergreen forests compared to other vegetation types even at the same elevation. These data were collected to understand how snowmelt heterogeneity impacts headwater hydrology, including streamflow and groundwater levels. They were also used to compare with process-based model simulations of snow depth to evaluate whether the model accurately represents snowmelt dynamics and their effects on headwater hydrology. Snow_DTPs_locations.csv includes all probes locations and their associated elevation and vegetation types. Snow_Depth_Snodgrass_WY2022_2023.csv includes processed snow depths datasets for Water Year (WY) 2022 and 2023. This dataset also includes a file-level metadata (flmd.csv) file that lists each file contained in the dataset with associated metadata and a data dictionary (dd.csv) file that contains column/row headers used throughout the files along with a definition, units, and data type. Several probes have recordings for WY 2021.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Environmental associations of Ophidiomyces ophidiicola , the causative agent of ophidiomycosis in snakes

Emerging pathogenic fungi have become a topic of conservation concern due to declines observed in several host taxa. One emerging fungal pathogen, Ophidiomyces ophidiicola, is well documented as the causative agent of ophidiomycosis, otherwise known as snake fungal disease (SFD). O. ophidiicola has been found to cause disease in a variety of snake species across the United States, including the eastern massasauga (Sistrurus catenatus), a federally threatened rattlesnake species. Most work to date has involved detecting O. ophidiicola for diagnosis of infection through direct sampling of snakes, and attempts to detect O. ophidiicola in the abiotic environment to better understand its distribution, seasonality, and habitat associations are lacking. We collected topsoil and groundwater samples from four macrohabitat types across multiple seasons in northern Michigan at a site where Ophidiomyces infection has been confirmed in eastern massasauga. Using a quantitative PCR (qPCR) assay developed for O. ophidiicola, we detected Ophidiomyces DNA in topsoil but observed minimal to no detection in groundwater samples. Detection frequency did not differ between habitats, but samples grouped seasonally showed higher detection during mid-summer. We found no relationships of detection with hypothesized environmental correlates such as soil pH, temperature, or moisture content. Furthermore, the distribution of Ophidiomyces positive samples across the site was not linked to estimated space use of massasaugas. Our data suggests that season has some effect on the presence of Ophidiomyces. Differences in presence between habitats may exist but are likely more dependent on the time of sampling and currently uninvestigated soil or biotic parameters. These findings build on our understanding of Ophidiomyces ecology and epidemiology to help inform where and when snakes may be exposed to the fungus in the environment.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

Openet: Applications of Satellite-Based Evapotranspiration Data for Water Resources Management in the Western United States

Advancing water security in overallocated river basins globally requires consistent and reproducible information on consumptive use of water that can anchor the development of data-driven solutions to the challenge of balancing water supply and demand. OpenET is a fully automated system for field-scale (30 m), satellite-based mapping of evapotranspiration (ET) at daily, monthly and annual timesteps. OpenET currently provides spatially contiguous data throughout the 23 westernmost states in the continental US, and includes both current information as well as multi-year timeseries of ET. The OpenET consortium has implemented an ensemble of satellite-based ET models (ALEXI/DisALEXI, eeMETRIC, PT-JPL, geeSEBAL, SIMS and SSEBop) on Google Earth Engine, which provides a shared computing platform for collaboration on processing of data from Landsat and other satellites, land cover and meteorological inputs, leading to increased consistency and accuracy across the ensemble of models. Earth Engine also facilitates hosting and distribution of data via open data collections and an application programming interface. We provide updates on the OpenET framework, open data services and data access tools, approach to geographic expansion, recent accuracy assessments, and describe how a user-driven design approach has facilitated successful applications of OpenET data for a wide range of water resource management activities. Applications to date include: use of ET data to improve quantification of ET and consumptive use in Oregon, Utah and the Upper Colorado River Basin; streamlining of water use reporting requirements in the California Delta; support for calculation of water budgets for the implementation of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act in California; and integration into decision support tools for irrigation management. The use cases demonstrate how satellite-derived ET data that are easily accessed and seen as broadly accepted can accelerate adoption of innovative water management practices at scale, and support advances in the sustainability of water supplies. Uptake and use of data by the OpenET science community has also led to advances in our understanding of the impacts of landcover change, irrigation intensification and wildfire events on hydrology and the water security.

Applications↗

COMPASS-FME Terrestrial Ecosystem Manipulation to Probe the Effects of Storm Treatments (TEMPEST) Experiment Level 1 Sensor Data v2-1

This is the version 2-1 Level 1 (L1) data release for COMPASS-FME environmental sensors located at our Terrestrial Ecosystem Manipulation to Probe the Effects of Storm Treatments (TEMPEST) experimental site. This manipulative, ecosystem-scale TEMPEST experiment addresses the potential for freshwater and estuarine-water disturbance events to alter tree function, species composition, and ecosystem processes in a deciduous coastal forest in MD, USA. The experiment uses a large-unit (2000 m2), un-replicated experimental design, with three 50 m × 40 m plots serving as control, freshwater, and estuarine-water treatments. L1 data are close to raw, but are units-transformed and have out-of-instrument-bounds, out-of-service, and outlier flags added. Duplicates and missing data are removed but otherwise these data are not filtered, and have not been subject to any additional algorithmic or human QA/QC. Any scientific analyses of L1 data should be performed with care. **This dataset will be updated quarterly with new data for the duration of the project** This dataset includes: - An overall dataset README file that describes the current version, gives citation and contact information, etc. - Site- and year-specific folders, each holding variable-specific CSV (comma separated value) data files for each site and plot in that year. - Metadata files within each site-year folder provide full information on data units, expected ranges, contact information, detailed flood times, as well as a general description of the site. - Environmental sensor types that appear in the data files include weather (ClimaVUE50, CS, RM Young, and LI instruments in the graphs below); soil conditions (TEROS12); soil redox state (Redox); groundwater variables (AquaTROLL200 and AquaTROLL600); open water sondes (Exo); tree sap velocity (Sapflow); and system voltage and state (Datalogger). Data are normally logged every 15 minutes. Please see v2-1 TEMPEST L1 Sensor Package Quick Start.pdf for detailed information on data package structure, temporal coverage, and versioning. The TEMPEST flood events occurred on the following dates. They lasted for ~10 hours each day and delivered ~80,000 gallons to each plot; many data streams are available at 1 or 5 minute frequency during these periods. * Tests: Aug 25 (fresh plot) and Sep 9 (salt plot), 2021 * TEMPEST 1: June 22, 2022 * TEMPEST 2: June 6-7, 2023 * TEMPEST 3: June 11-13, 2024 This dataset was updated 2026-03-12: (i) data now go through 2025-12-31 (previous end was 2025-06-30) and (ii) dataset and file names updated to “…v2-1” (previously was “v2-0”).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

COMPASS-FME Terrestrial Ecosystem Manipulation to Probe the Effects of Storm Treatments (TEMPEST) Experiment Level 1 Sensor Data v1-2

This is the version 1-2 Level 1 (L1) data release for COMPASS-FME environmental sensors located at our Terrestrial Ecosystem Manipulation to Probe the Effects of Storm Treatments (TEMPEST) experimental site. This manipulative, ecosystem-scale TEMPEST experiment addresses the potential for freshwater and estuarine-water disturbance events to alter tree function, species composition, and ecosystem processes in a deciduous coastal forest in MD, USA. The experiment uses a large-unit (2000 m2), un-replicated experimental design, with three 50 m × 40 m plots serving as control, freshwater, and estuarine-water treatments.L1 data are close to raw, but are units-transformed and have out-of-instrument-bounds and out-of-service flags added. Duplicates and missing data are removed but otherwise these data are not filtered, and have not been subject to any additional algorithmic or human QA/QC. Any scientific analyses of L1 data should be performed with care. **This dataset will be updated quarterly with new data for the duration of the project**This dataset includes:- An overall dataset README file that describes the current version, gives citation and contact information, etc.- Site- and year-specific folders, each holding up to 12 CSV (comma separated value) data files for each site and plot in that year.- Metadata files within each site-year folder provide full information on data units, expected ranges, contact information, detailed flood times, as well as a general description of the site.- Environmental sensor types that appear in the data files include weather (ClimaVUE50, CS, RM Young, and LI instruments in the graphs below); soil conditions (TEROS12); soil redox state (Redox); groundwater variables (AquaTROLL200 and AquaTROLL600); open water sondes (Exo); tree sap velocity (Sapflow); and system voltage and state (Datalogger). Data are normally logged every 15 minutes.Please see v1-2 TEMPEST L1 Sensor Package Quick Start.pdf for detailed information on data package structure, temporal coverage, and versioning.The TEMPEST flood events occurred on the following dates. They lasted for ~10 hours each day and delivered ~80,000 gallons to each plot; many data streams are available at 1 or 5 minute frequency during these periods.* Tests: Aug 25 (fresh plot) and Sep 9 (salt plot), 2021* TEMPEST 1: June 22, 2022* TEMPEST 2: June 6-7, 2023* TEMPEST 3: June 11-13, 2024

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Noctis Landing: A Proposed Landing Site/Exploration Zone for Human Missions to the Surface of Mars

The proposed Noctis Landing Site/Exploration Zone (LS/EZ) is shown in Figure 1. Our preliminary study suggests that the proposed site meets all key Science and Resources (incl. Civil Engineering) requirements. The site is of significant interest, as the EZ not only offers a large number and wide range of regions of interest (ROIs) for short-term exploration, it is also located strategically at the crossroads between Tharsis and Valles Marineris, which are key for long-term exploration. The proposed site contains Regions of Interest (ROIs) that meet the following Science requirements: -­‐ Access to (1) deposits with a high preservation potential for evidence of past habitability and fossil biosignatures and (2) sites that are promising for present habitability. The site presents a wide variety of ROIs qith likely aqueous features and deposits, including sinous channels and valleys, slope gullies, lobate debris aprons, impact craters with lobate ejecta flows, and "bathtub ring" deposits. Neutron spectrometry also suggests hydrogen is present within the topmost 0.3 m or so of 4 to 10 wt% WEH (Water Equivalent Hydrogen). -­‐ Noachian and/or Hesperian rocks in a stratigraphic context that have a high likelihood of containing trapped atmospheric gases. Collapsed canyon rim material with preserved stratigraphy is abundantly present and accessible. -­‐ Exposures of at least two crustal units that have regional or global extents, that are suitable for radiometric dating, and that have relative ages that sample a significant range of martian geological time. Canyons floors in Ius Chasma, Tithonium Chasma, and plateau tops on Tharsis and in Sinai Planum offer access to distinct crustal units of regional extent. -­‐ Access to outcrops with linked morphological and/or geochemical signatures indicative of aqueous or groundwater/ mineral interactions. Iron and sulfur-bearing deposits on canyon floors in Noctis Labyrinthus, and in Ius Chasma (IC) and Tithonium Chasma (TC) offer many such outcrop options. -­‐ Identifiable stratigraphic contacts and cross-cutting relationships from which relative ages can be determined. In place and collapsed canyon walls in NL, TC, and IC offer such opportunities. -­‐ Other types of ROIs include access points to surrounding plateau top areas for longer term regional exploration. A key attribute of the proposed Noctic Landing site is its strategic location to allow the shortest possible surface excusions to Tharsis and Valles Marineris (VM). VM is the feature and region on Mars that exposes the longest record of Mars' geology and evolution through time. Tharsis is the region of Mars that has experienced the longest and most extensive volcanic history, and might still be volcanically active. Some of the youngest lava flows on Mars have been identified on the western flanks of the Tharsis Bulge, i.e., within driving range of future longrange (500 - 1000 km) pressurized rover traverses. The proposed site also contains ROIs that offer the following Resources (incl. Civil Engineering) characteristics: -­‐ Access to raw material that exhibits the potential to (1) be used as feedstock for water-generating in situ resource utilization (ISRU) processes and (2) yield significant quantities (greater than 100 MT) of water. The raw material is likely in the form of hydrated minerals, and possibly ice/regolith mix. The top of the raw material deposit is at the surface. -­‐ Access to a region where infrastructure can be emplaced or constructed. This region is less than 5 km from the LS and contains flat, stable terrain. The region exhibits evidence for an abundant source of loose regolith. Several deep pits in the area combined with the availability of sand suggests that some natural terrain features can be adapted for construction purposes. -­‐ Access to raw material that exhibits the potential to be used as metal feedstock for ISRU and construction purposes. Iron and sulfur-rich mineral surface deposits have been identified in CRISM data in many locations in this area. Noctis Landing is the lowest-altitude location on Mars that straddles both the Tharsis region (above average geothermal gradients) and Valles Marineris (minimal crustal thickness from surface (valley floor) to a subsurface liquid water table. Noctis Landing has the potential for being an ideal site for eventual deep drilling on Mars to access deep subsurface liquid water and potentially encountering extant life. Available data remains insufficient to fully qualify the Noctis Landing site. Additional remote sensing data (visible, Near and Mid-IR, and radar) and surface reconnaissance via a high-mobility robotic rover are recommended. In particular, it will be important to assess the trafficability of the site, and its potential for yielding water and metals as a resource. Access to plateau tops from the Noctis Landing site on the canyon floor should be demonstrated. Future exploration of the site would also be enhanced significantly by the availability of robotic (tele-operatable) surveying and sample-collecting drones. Testing of the use of such collaborative science and exploration technologies should be conducted at terrestrial sites such as the Haughton-Mars Project site on Devon Island, High Arctic, among others. Note: Noctis Landing is not an official Mars nomenclature name for this location. Because the area of the proposed LS/EZ had no name, and because it is close to Noctis Labyrinthus to the West while being distinct from it, the provisional name Noctis Landing is proposed. Noctis means night in Latin.

Lee, Pascal↗