x
Breaking News
More () »

MLGW restricting what researchers can say about our water supply

$5 million research project is most expansive look at Memphis Sands Aquifer.

MEMPHIS, Tenn. — Memphis Light Gas and Water customers are paying for a $5-million research project into our region's water source, so why aren't they making results public?

Critics have been calling on Memphis Light Gas and Water to be more transparent when it comes to a $5 million research project paid for by its customers. The five-year project has been considered most expansive and intense investigation into the Memphis Sands aquifer.

Critics said the utility company has a gag order on what has been discovered regarding the Memphis Sands Aquifer. 

"Public money is funding it, but the pubic has no information from it," said Jim Kovarik.

Memphis resident Jim Kovarik doesn't understand why MLGW isn't more transparent when it comes to publicly-funded research. Kovarik said every month, 18 cents per household goes to pay for researchers from the University of Memphis Center for Applied Earth Science and Engineering Research to investigate the water supply, but MLGW won't let researchers freely talk about what they have found.

"We’ve called it for years now a 'gag order.' and it’s exactly that," said Kovarik.

Graduate students are researching everything from potential breeches in the aquifer along the Wolf River to how minimize movement of contaminated water underground. A total of 20 different projects are either underway or already completed.

"It's the most expansive look at our water supply so far," said Dr. Brian Waldron, CAESER Director.

We caught up with him while he was out in the field doing research. 

"I think the students we have are exceptional. They are doing a phenomenal job," said Dr. Waldron.

Waldron said his students are pushing the envelope when it comes to science. He added, when all the projects are completed, "We will have a better picture of breeches, known breeches. We may even suspect some breeches in other places. We will have a better characterization of breeches. We will have a better understanding of flow and contamination toward breeches."

Waldron could answer most of our questions but was restricted from answering some. When reporter Jeni Diprizio asked, "What you are finding? Is it more or less than you thought (breeches)? What can you say about that?"

Waldron responded, "Uhh, that’s one of the questions you are going to have to write down for MLGW," said Waldron.

Waldron said the contract prevents him from freely answering that question. In fact, the contract states, "MLGW will schedule, coordinate, and approve all presentations, public statements, and communications regarding this research project."

In order to do the interview, MLGW required a submission of a list of questions, and we were told lawyers had to sign off on the answers. MLGW reminded us of that before the interview began, "We are staying around to the question you previously sent correct?," said Angelia Woods, MLGW spokesperson.

"They can’t comment on anything, and they can’t comment on anything unless there has been explicit permission and revise and approval by MLGW," said Sarah Houston, Executive Director, Protect Our Aquifer.

Houston said she is more than familiar with the "gag order." Houston used to work as one of the researchers on the project before taking the position at Protect Our Aquifer. Houston said MLGW isn't following it part of the agreement signed with the University. According to the contract, there is also supposed to be two educational meetings a year for the public a year, but Houston said MLGW hasn't held one since 2019, despite being asked. She said the utility needs to be more transparent, and the public has a right to know what is being discovered.

"There is so much information to learn about and unpack. That’s not going to happen in one meeting that’s not going to happen in one presentation that is an on ongoing conversation," said Houston.

RELATED: Local I-Team: 5-year, $5 Million study being done on Memphis Aquifer

RELATED: The Byhalia Pipeline is no more

MLGW did not respond for a request for an interview but in a statement said, "MLGW does not prohibit CAESER from giving interviews. The Aquitard Research contract between MLGW and CAESER requires CAESER to assist MLGW with responses to questions and communications with the media and others. MLGW does schedule, coordinate, and approve communications regarding the project since much of this research is done by students and, understanding questions prior to interviews helps to ensure accuracy, particularly in response to questions involving research that is incomplete, ongoing or subject to interpretation."

There is talk MLGW may hold a public education meeting as required by the contract coming up this fall. We will let you know if that happens.

Here is a list of the questions submitted to MLGW with "approved" response from Dr. Waldron.

What is being researched?

We are researching the presence and impact of breaches within the Upper Claiborne confining unit (UCCU) to the Memphis aquifer that fall within the MLGW water service area.

What research is complete, what have the students discovered?

Four projects have been fully completed. 

·       Project 1: Determine impact of known breaches in the Sheahan well field, determine presence of new breaches in the well field, and assess impact of Former Custom Cleaners site.  Five breach configurations, created based on past studies and a modeled ancient stream network constructed on top of the UCCU, were tested against known groundwater age information from a limited number of production wells (seven total) in the Sheahan well field to determine which configuration best described migration of water from the shallow to Memphis aquifers.  The “large paleochannel” feature was the best configuration although breach characteristics were not well constrained.

·       Project 2: Determine possible new breach locations proximal to the Wolf River by conducting riverbed seepage measurements, performing detailed discharge measurements, and developing well transects to monitor groundwater/surface water exchange. Hundreds of custom-built seepage meters were installed along a 30-mile stretch of the Wolf River to determine locations of where the river loses water to the underlying aquifer, which is indicative of a nearby breach.  Two sites with suspected stream loss were chosen for more detailed investigation using seepage meters, temperature measurements and measure of river discharge.  Two monitoring wells were drilled and constructed, one in the shallow aquifer and another in the Memphis aquifer, at one of the detailed study sites to further monitor water levels.  To date, a breach has not been identified, although two additional sites where breaches may be present should be investigated further.  Additionally, recommendations to improve instrumentation were provided.

·       Project 3: Perform aquifer characterization across Shelby County to constrain numerical model parameter estimation. The aquifer characteristics, hydraulic conductivity and storativity, were measured using a detailed procedure at five well fields: Sheahan, Morton, Davis, Mallory, Germantown, to improve our ability to simulate groundwater flow using computer models.  The measured values are within the broad range of published values but locally show a smaller range.

·       Project 4: Map potential aquitard breaches in Ensley Bottoms near the Davis well field, TVA, and proximal to the Allen well field using geophysical techniques.  The geophysical technique, ground penetrating radar (GPR), was used to map the underground stratigraphic layers, focusing one known breach (Ensley) and one suspected breach (President’s Island).  GPR was not able to resolve the stratigraphic layers at depths where the breaches in the Upper Claiborne confining clay could be definitively mapped, but did identify a fault plane that may contribute to the Ensley breach.

What is still in the works? 

There are 18 remaining efforts that are at different levels of completion, two of which will be fully completed in August.  These projects are as follows:

  1. Groundwater pumping optimization to minimize contaminant movement from the water table aquifer to Memphis Aquifer using stochastic modeling
  2. Use geophysical well records to investigate hypothetical paleo-drainage network atop the upper Claiborne confining unit. This will potentially help identify new breach locations and better inform numerical groundwater flow simulations
  3. Subsurface mapping of geologic units to identify the presence of aquitard breaches and characterize the hydraulic properties of identified breaches using geophysical techniques in conjunction with other traditional methods
  4. Conduct multi-scale investigation of surface water-groundwater interactions along the Loosahatchie River and Nonconnah Creek using a variety of methodologies to identify breaches. Incorporate these findings plus those of the Wolf River (Project 1-2) into Shelby County numerical groundwater model
  5. Development of hypothetical groundwater models focusing on groundwater sustainability and modeling the fate and transport of various contaminants while conducting bench scale testing of retardation reactions
  6. Build upon Davis well field age-dating results to further refine and quantify source waters to the Memphis aquifer at the Davis well field through sampling water chemistry, groundwater age-dating, characterization of the hydrogeologic properties of a known breach impacting Davis, and development of a conceptual model of groundwater flow for later incorporation into a numerical model [almost completed]
  7. Determine in-situ riverbed properties (hydraulic conductivity and thickness) for the Loosahatchie River, Wolf River and Nonconnah Creek to further constrain the Shelby County numerical groundwater model and for site-scale hydrogeologic analyses
  8. Investigate Shaw well field to determine source waters and potential for modern water migration into the Memphis aquifer, development of unconfined conditions and vulnerability to nearby contaminated sites [almost completed]
  9. Determine recharge mechanisms and rates to the shallow aquifer within Shelby County that contributes to its replenishment and source of additional inflow to the Memphis aquifer through aquitard breaches
  10. Determine numerical modeling best practice for simulating groundwater conditions in the shallow aquifer that better represent groundwater levels and flow direction, vertical leakage through aquitard breaches, and avoiding inherent cell flooding (too much recharge) and drying (thin saturation depths)
  11. Numerical modeling to correlate age-dating and geochemical observations to known/potential breaches that will include possible paleo-drainage atop the upper Claiborne confining unit
  12. Formulate and test methodologies to reduce or eliminate preferential inter-aquifer water exchange
  13. Investigate a suspected aquitard breach near McCord well field by using electric resistivity and possibly other geophysical techniques within available open space.  Project to include drilling as well for stratigraphic control
  14. Investigate Mallory well field to determine source waters and potential for modern water migration into the Memphis aquifer field through sampling water chemistry, groundwater age-dating, mapping of the subsurface stratigraphy, and development of a conceptual model of groundwater flow for later incorporation into a numerical model
  15. Incorporate more complete age-dating of Sheahan production wells into numerical model to resolve the probable location of breach(es) in the southern portion of the well field with attempted validation through geophysical techniques or drilling of an observation well
  16. Conduct a county-wide water level survey of the shallow aquifer
  17. Fly AEM (airborne electromagnetism) over section of north Shelby County that includes a suspected breach location
  18. Develop lithologic database of well logs for Shelby County for 3D representation and use for stratigraphic mapping and other upscaling tasks

How many students are/have worked on the project?

Each of the 22 projects has a graduate student assigned.  Additionally, undergraduates assist the graduate students in fieldwork.  I’d estimate around 10 undergrads have helped over the course of the project.

It is my understanding that they are using this research for their thesis papers. Have those papers been published?

Each of the 4 fully completed projects exist as a thesis.  Students will try to publish their results in professional, peer reviewed journals. 

Where can I find them? 

One project was recently successfully published in the Journal of Hydrologic Engineering. https://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/%28ASCE%29HE.1943-5584.0002117.  Theses and dissertations are housed in the University of Memphis McWherter Library.  Follow the following library link and use the following search words to find the completed theses:

https://umwa.memphis.edu/etd/

Search words: Torres (for Hugo), Sahagun (for Sofia), Hasan (for Rizwanul), Pandit (for Sagar)

The students were researching the potential breaches. How many have they found?

Torres suggested that the known breach by Parks (1990) and suspected breach by Ivey (2008) are not configured as suggested, but that a breach approximating a paleochannel was more likely and warrants further investigation.  Upcoming projects yet to be completed are expected to reveal more on this question.

Any surprises? 

Not any “surprises” that can be reported at present but definitely more questions and improvements made in surface and subsurface data acquisition.

 

Before You Leave, Check This Out