Environ Earth Sci (2015) 73:54975511
DOI 10.1007/s12665-014-3802-8
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Optimal distribution of groundwater monitoring wells
near the river barrages of the 4MRRP using a numerical model
and topographic analysis
Gyoo-Bum Kim
Received: 12 June 2013 / Accepted: 11 October 2014 / Published online: 31 October 2014
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014
Abstract The aim of the Four Major Rivers Restoration
Project (4MRRP) was to mitigate flood damage by con-
trolling surface water levels via the construction of large
barrages along the main rivers of South Korea. The
increase in surface water levels behind such barrages can
lead to a rise in groundwater levels upstream, which may
increase the likelihood of flooding after heavy rainfall or
during non-pumping periods. A total of 900 groundwater
monitoring sites, comprising 446 automatic and 454 man-
ual stations, are proposed on the low-lying plains alongside
the rivers based upon the following criteria: groundwater
flow directions, topography (determined using GIS ana-
lysis), the desire for equal spacing of monitoring wells,
economic efficiency, field accessibility, and cost. A
numerical model (MODFLOW) is used to estimate future
groundwater flow directions and the area likely to be
affected by a rise in surface water levels after barrage
construction. Since 2011, 137 automatic monitoring wells
have been constructed, and recent time series data show
that groundwater levels are closely linked to surface water
levels, and increased rapidly for the first 12 years after
barrage construction. Groundwater monitoring wells will
be essential for assessing the depth to groundwater, fore-
casting the extent of any potential flooding, and developing
countermeasures such as drainage system.
Keywords Monitoring well distribution  Barrage 
Flooding  Water level  Numerical model
G.-B. Kim (&)
K-water Institute, KWATER, 125 Yuseong Daero
1689 Beon-gil, Yuseong-Gu, Daejeon 305-730,
Republic of Korea
e-mail: gbkim@kwater.or.kr
Introduction
Climate change has been an issue in South Korea since the
late 1990s. Over the last 100 years, atmospheric tempera-
ture, average sea level, and rainfall intensity have increased
here by 1.5 C, 22 cm, and 18 %, respectively. Severe
droughts on the Korean peninsula have occurred more
frequently: every 57 years for the past 40 years (MLTM
2009). Additionally, annual average precipitation and flood
risk have increased steadily and clearly. Localized heavy
rainfall of over 100 mm/day has become more common,
and has caused huge economic losses.
The Four Major Rivers Restoration Project (4MRRP)
was a key initiative of the South Korean Government
launched in 2008 and had the vision of Reviving the
Rivers of a New Korea. The main objectives of the
4MRRP included: (1) the mitigation of water-related
problems caused by climate change; (2) achieving a bal-
ance between nature and the needs of humans; (3) the re-
creation of natural land; and (4) increasing harmony
between local development and green growth. Addition-
ally, the five core tasks of the 4MRRP were: (1) securing
water supply; (2) mitigating flood damage; (3) improving
water quality and restoring ecology; (4) creating public
spaces for residents; and (5) river-oriented community
development (MLTM 2009).
This project was designed to include most of Koreas
main rivers, i.e., the Han, Nakdong, Geum, and Yeongsan
rivers, and also included 13 major tributaries of these rivers
(Fig. 1). The project began in 2009, and was completed in
the summer of 2012, with an investment of 20 billion US
dollars. The main elements of the project were the dredging
of stream sediments, barrage construction, bank rein-
forcement, small-scale hydropower production, and eco-
streams. The total amount of dredging was about 0.57
123
5498
Fig. 1 Locations of the main elements of the 4MRRP (Four Major
Rivers Restoration Project), South Korea
billion m3 along the four rivers. Sixteen large barrages, and
three large dams, were planned and constructed to store
water and control flooding. To achieve the twin targets of
water storage and flood control required dredging to
expand the capacity of the rivers and an increase in river
water levels via the construction of barrages. However, the
latter also causes an increase in the surface water level, and
therefore groundwater levels may also increase along the
riverside plains.
Surface water and groundwater are hydraulically con-
nected at the bank or under the plains near a river. This
connection between surface water and groundwater has
been demonstrated by many researchers using diverse tools
such as water level measurement, geochemical data, tem-
perature, tracers, isotope studies, and numerical models
(Sophocleous et al. 1988; Winter et al. 1988; Harvey et al.
1997; Constantz et al. 2001; Paulsen et al. 2001; LaBolle
123
Environ Earth Sci (2015) 73:54975511
et al. 2003; Anderson 2005; Arumi et al. 2009; Guggen-
mos et al. 2011). The rise of surface water levels fol-
lowing barrage construction can also cause the rising of
groundwater table in low-lying areas near the river (Dre-
her and Gunatilaka 1998). Additionally, the shallow
groundwater levels can affect the intensity and duration of
flooding during a heavy rain or non-pumping periods.
Therefore, optimally designed networks of groundwater
monitoring wells are required at the riversides to observe
the change in groundwater levels and quality, and to
interpret the changes in interaction between stream water
and groundwater.
Various methods of groundwater monitoring have been
developed and implemented for decades, and represent the
only way to accurately determine the quantity and quality
of groundwater at a particular site. Recently, because of
abrupt climatic changes, the importance of groundwater
monitoring has increased. Indeed, groundwater monitoring
networks are essential to examine the impact of climate
change and human activity on groundwater quantity and
quality. Optimally, designed monitoring networks can
effectively acquire groundwater quantity and quality data
for various purposes.
The essential components of a system designed to
monitor groundwater levels are the location of observation
wells, the frequency of water level measurement, the
quality assurance of the monitoring data, and data reporting
and analysis (Taylor and Alley 2002). Many studies have
proposed methods to design the groundwater monitoring
networks. Existing approaches to the sitting of groundwater
monitoring wells can be classified into four categories: i.e.,
qualitative, simulation, variance-based, and optimization
(Sophocleous et al. 1982; Meyer et al. 1989; Gibbons 1991;
Hudak et al. 1993; Storck et al. 1997). More recently,
Quevauviller (2005) indicated that groundwater monitoring
requires integration at various levels if a proper under-
standing and implementation of water policies is to be
achieved, with a focus on sciencepolicy integration and
groundwater policy. IGRAC (the International Groundwa-
ter Resources Assessment Centre) and UNESCO (United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization)
published guidelines on groundwater monitoring for gen-
eral reference purposes, and it covers the general aspects,
design procedure, and implementation of a groundwater
monitoring scheme (Jousma 2006). Lee et al. (2007)
reviewed the national groundwater monitoring network in
South Korea and suggested the need for a rain gauge at
monitoring sites and a higher measurement frequency
(hourly rather than six-hourly). Kim et al. (2007) used the
analytical hierarchy process (AHP) with a pair wise com-
parison method to optimally allocate 10,000 local
groundwater monitoring wells in Korea. Similarly, Kim
et al. (2009) applied the AHP technology to Southeast Asia
Environ Earth Sci (2015) 73:54975511
(Thailand, Cambodia, and east/west Malaysia). Kim
(2010b) proposed the use of GIS technology to determine
the most effective distribution of groundwater monitoring
sites, where the monitoring targets may include both
quality and the groundwater levels, using a weighting and
ranking method.
The main aim of this research is to develop an optimal
allocation procedure for groundwater monitoring wells on
the plains adjacent to large rivers that will be able to
measure groundwater levels following the construction of
the large barrages that form part of the 4MRRP project in
South Korea.
Topography and geology of South Korea
South Korea is located in the northeast of the Asian con-
tinent, with an area and population of about 99,601 km2
and 48 million (in 2010), respectively. Mountainous terrain
covers around 75 % of the country, and most of the rivers
flow from high mountains in the East to lowlands in the
West. The climate is intermediate between continental and
oceanic, and features four distinct seasons. Average annual
precipitation is 1,260 mm, and over 60 % of the precipi-
tation occurs during the rainy season between June and
early September.
The rivers typically flow through valleys because the
mountainous area is extensive and well developed in the
upper reaches. The plains, which range in width from 0.3 to
1 km, are distributed along the lower reaches of large
rivers. Therefore, alluvium is restricted to areas close to the
channels, and bedrock aquifers have been the main target
for groundwater abstraction. Two types of main aquifers
exist in South Korea: shallow alluvial aquifers and deep
bedrock aquifers. The unconsolidated sediments of the
shallow aquifers are mainly found near rivers and cover
27.5 % (27,390 km2) of South Korea. The thickness of the
unconsolidated sediments ranges between 2 and 50 m, and
groundwater yields from such aquifers range from 30 to
800 m3/day. The geology of South Korea is mainly com-
prised of granite, gneiss, schist, limestone, metamorphic
sedimentary rocks, and sedimentary rocks. They were
generally formed in the pre-Cambrian, the Paleozoic, and
the Mesozoic eras, whereas geologic layers in the Cenozoic
era are rare. About 60 % of the total land surface is covered
by granite and gneiss and their weathering has largely
resulted in sandy loam or loamy sand.
Bedrock aquifers generally accompany faults, fractures,
joints, or rock boundaries formed by tectonic activity, and
these aquifers are commonly overlain by a veneer of sed-
iments or topsoil. Groundwater yields from this type of
aquifer vary greatly (from 10 to 5,000 m3/day). The
demand for clean and uncontaminated water drives
5499
groundwater wells deeper and deeper, and bedrock aquifers
are now becoming increasingly important (MLTM 2007a).
Existing groundwater monitoring system and future
requirements
Five groundwater monitoring networks currently operate in
South Korea (Table 1): the National groundwater moni-
toring network (NGMN), the groundwater quality moni-
toring network (GQMN), the subsidiary groundwater
monitoring network (SGMN), the seawater intrusion
monitoring network (SIMN), and the groundwater moni-
toring network in farming area (GMFA).
The main purpose of the NGMN with 348 monitoring
wells is to monitor long-term general trends in water-level
fluctuations and groundwater quality throughout the
country. The GQMN with 2,113 wells is generally located
in areas with a high probability of contamination, such as
industrial complexes, waste treatment centers, golf courses,
oil storage facilities, etc. In 1996, the central government
formulated the basic plan for the SGMN, which is auxiliary
to the national groundwater monitoring network, with the
purpose of analyzing changes in groundwater levels. Kim
et al. (2007) proposed an optimal distribution pattern for
10,000 subsidiary monitoring wells across the whole
country, and 1,123 monitoring wells had been constructed
by 2011. The SIMN was constructed to monitor ground-
water levels and quality in coastal areas where there is a
high possibility of seawater intrusion affecting farming.
Finally, the GMFA was installed in rural areas, especially
farmland, to measure groundwater quantity and quality as
this has a significant effect on farming productivity.
Most of these monitoring wells are located in urban areas,
where the likelihood of contamination is high, and/or
farming areas, but only a small part of the network is in
riverside locations. Of the national groundwater monitoring
wells, 71.3 and 55.2 % are located in discharge areas and
lowland areas, respectively, at surface elevations between 0
and 70 m (AMSL) (Table 2). However, few wells are
located on the riverside plains, and most are in the wide
valleys or open hilly areas, with only 32 national ground-
water monitoring wells (9.2 %) being situated on the low-
lying alluvial plains near the five large rivers. The analysis
of data from these groundwater monitoring wells covering a
period of 10 years prior to barrage construction shows that
groundwater levels were considerably deep at the riversides:
7.0 m for the Han River, 8.6 m for the Nakdong River,
7.2 m for the Geum River, and 3.7 m for the Yeongsan
River, even though wells were close to the river. These deep
groundwater levels were the result of continuous ground-
water pumping for irrigation over the past few decades. As
described above, groundwater levels can increase following
123
5500 Environ Earth Sci (2015) 73:54975511

Table 1 Groundwater Category Based on Function Number Managed by

monitoring stations in South of wells
Korea
NGMN (National groundwater Article 17 of Primary 348 MLTM and
monitoring network) Groundwater Act network K-water
GQMN (groundwater quality Article 18 of Secondary 2,113 MOE and local
monitoring network) Groundwater Act network government
MLTM Ministry of land, SGMN (subsidiary groundwater Article 17 of Secondary 1,123 Local government
transportation and maritime monitoring network) Groundwater Act network
affairs, K-water Korea water SIMN (seawater intrusion monitoring Rural area Secondary 167 MAF
resources corporation, MOE network) consolidation Act network
ministry of environment, MAF GMFA (groundwater monitoring Rural area Secondary 84 MAF
ministry of agriculture and network in farming area) consolidation Act network
forest

Table 2 Topographic and hydrological distributions for the national groundwater through the bed, they lose water by outflow
groundwater monitoring wells through the bed, or they do both, gaining in some reaches and
Contents Number of Percentage (%) losing in other reaches (Winter et al. 1998). For groundwater
monitoring wells to discharge into a river, the elevation of the water table in the
Rechargedischarge area vicinity of the channel must be above the river level. Con-
Recharge area 62 17.8
versely, for surface water to seep into groundwater, the
Discharge area 248 71.3
height of the water table near the channel must be below the
Intermediate area 38 10.9
river level. Prior to construction of the large 4MRRP bar-
rages in South Korea, river levels were typically higher than
Aquifer productivity
the water table because low groundwater levels were due to
High 106 30.5
the continuous pumping at many wells over previous dec-
Intermediate 53 15.2
ades. The filling of the large reservoir behind a barrage brings
Low 189 54.3
about a rise in the surface water level (Winter et al. 1998).
Land surface elevation
This means that the elevation of the water table becomes
070 m 192 55.2
similar to that of the river level.
71180 m 94 27.0
Table 3 shows the rise in surface water levels following
181370 m 51 14.6
barrage construction along the Nakdong River, which is the
[370 m 11 3.2
largest river in South Korea. 38 sites along the Nakdong River
Total 348
are selected every 5 km from the ChangnyeongHaman
Barrage to calculate the river water levels rise. The hori-
barrage construction, and so, groundwater monitoring is an zontally arranged diamond symbols in the Fig. 2 mean the
important issue on the alluvial plains. However, the existing management level of river water at the barrage and the rect-
32 national groundwater monitoring wells are insufficient to angular boxes mean averaged river water levels calculated
monitor the change in groundwater in these riverside areas. using hourly data measured for 5 years at the gauging stations
The total area of alluvial plains along the four rivers is before a barrage construction. A regression model of the
320.4 km2, and the density of one monitoring well per 5-year average water levels was constructed from this data:
10 km2 is too low to reliably capture the pattern of y = 0.0009x2 ? 0.0299x ? 2.2392, and the estimated water
groundwater levels and flow in unconsolidated sediments. levels derived from this equation were compared with the
Therefore, a new monitoring system is required to monitor present managed water levels at the 38 sites. Here, y is the
groundwater conditions and interpret the interaction between estimated surface water level, and x is the distance from the
surface water and groundwater on the alluvial plains after ChangnyeongHaman Barrage along the Nakdong River. The
barrage construction. average rise in water level along the Nakdong River was
*3.27 m, while the maximum was about 9.94 m at site 36,
Changes in surface water levels after barrage which is close to the Sangju Barrage. However, two sites just
construction downstream from the HapcheonChangnyeong Barrage
showed a decrease in water level of 0.17 and 0.68 m. The
The interaction between surface water and groundwater other three rivers showed a similar pattern, i.e., a rise in both
occurs in three basic ways: rivers gain water by the inflow of surface water levels and groundwater levels.

123
Environ Earth Sci (2015) 73:54975511 5501

Table 3 Estimated rise in Barrage Calculating Area for Distance 5 years average Management Increase
surface-water level along the site (from alluvium from a water levels water levels (m)
Nakdong River after lower to at starting before barrage after barrage
construction of eight barrages upper riversides positiona construction construction
streams) (km2) (km) (El.m) (El.m)

Changnyeong Site 1 4.9 2.9 2.33 4.5 2.17

Haman Site 2 10.1 5.0 2.53 4.5 1.97
Barrage
Site 3 6.0 5.0 2.77 4.5 1.73
Site 4 2.0 5.0 3.06 4.5 1.44
Site 5 2.7 5.0 3.40 4.5 1.10
Site 6 3.1 5.0 3.77 4.5 0.73
Site 7 6.2 5.0 4.20 4.5 0.30
Site 8 1.8 5.0 4.67 4.5 -0.17
Site 9 4.4 5.0 5.18 4.5 -0.68
Hapcheon Site 10 3.3 4.0 5.62 10.5 4.88
Changnyeong Site 11 5.1 5.0 6.22 10.5 4.28
Barrage
Site 12 3.0 5.0 6.85 10.5 3.65
Site 13 3.3 5.0 7.54 10.5 2.96
Site 14 5.6 5.0 8.27 10.5 2.23
Site 15 7.1 5.0 9.04 10.5 1.46
Dalseong Site 16 5.9 5.0 9.86 14.0 4.14
Barrage Site 17 8.9 5.0 10.72 14.0 3.28
Site 18 15.5 5.0 11.63 14.0 2.37
Site 19 20.9 5.4 12.67 14.0 1.33
Gangjeong Site 20 4.0 5.2 13.71 19.5 5.79
Koryeong Site 21 9.0 5.0 14.76 19.5 4.74
Barrage
Site 22 8.1 5.0 15.85 19.5 3.65
Site 23 6.1 5.0 16.99 19.5 2.51
Site 24 8.1 5.0 18.18 19.5 1.32
Chilgok Site 25 11.2 5.5 19.53 25.5 5.97
Barrage Site 26 10.5 5.5 20.94 25.5 4.56
Site 27 11.3 5.5 22.41 25.5 3.09
Site 28 14.4 5.5 23.92 25.5 1.58
Site 29 12.1 5.3 25.44 25.5 0.06
Gumi Barrage Site 30 6.8 6.0 27.21 32.5 5.29
Site 31 4.8 6.0 29.06 32.5 3.44
Site 32 8.6 6.1 30.99 32.5 1.51
Nakdan Barrage Site 33 3.4 5.0 32.63 40.0 7.37
Site 34 5.1 5.0 34.31 40.0 5.69
Site 35 10.1 4.9 36.01 40.0 3.99
Sangju Barrage Site 36 2.6 3.0 37.06 47.0 9.94
Site 37 5.8 5.0 38.86 47.0 8.14
Site 38 2.4 5.0 40.71 47.0 6.29
a Average 3.27
Starting position is a barrage

Optimal distribution of groundwater monitoring wells
Procedure for groundwater monitoring well location
If the depth to groundwater is too shallow and the aquifer is
saturated, the amount of infiltration during rainfall may be
reduced and this could lead to an increase in direct runoff
and subsequent inundation of some low-lying areas (Kim
et al. 2012). Therefore, multiple wells are required to
monitor any changes in groundwater levels. The following
procedure was used to determine the optimal distribution of
groundwater monitoring wells in this study (Fig. 3).

123
5502
Fig. 2 Distribution of surface
water levels before and after
damming at eight barrages on
the Nakdong River
Fig. 3 Procedure for optimal design of a groundwater monitoring
network
Firstly, existing data from the riverside areas regarding
their geology, hydraulic coefficients, groundwater wells,
and topography were collected from previous reports and
reviewed. Secondly, a topographic analysis involving
comparison of the surface elevation of the riversides with
the managed level of river water was conducted to define
the low-lying areas and determine the model boundaries.
Thirdly, numerous field measurements of surface water
levels, groundwater levels, and drainage water levels were
conducted to feed into the model; land conditions (swamp)
and pumping stations were also investigated. Fourthly, a
numerical model of groundwater flow was constructed for
the target area, and the groundwater flow directions, and
areas likely to experience high groundwater levels fol-
lowing barrage construction, were proposed. Finally, the
optimal locations for groundwater monitoring were
123
Environ Earth Sci (2015) 73:54975511
determined based on the following criteria: groundwater
flow directions, areas with high water levels and increased
flood risk, an appropriate monitoring density (3 wells/km2),
accessibility, and installation costs.
Collection and analysis of existing data
The flat, low-lying floodplains that flank large rivers are
typically 0.52 km wide (or less). The difference between
the surface elevation of this floodplain and the managed
river level tends to be similar to the depth to groundwater,
assuming that the two water sources are reasonably well
connected and that there is no groundwater pumping effect.
The difference between land surface elevation and the
managed level of the river water was calculated using the
ArcView GIS software, and distribution maps for six ele-
vation difference scenarios were produced for the four
rivers (Fig. 4). This figure shows an example of these
distribution maps based on elevation difference scenarios
of 05 m at the HapcheonChangnyeong Barrage.
The average range of the seasonal fluctuations in
groundwater levels in the National Groundwater Monitor-
ing Wells in South Korea is *2.15 m (Kim and Yum
2007). This means that if the groundwater level is \2.15 m
below the land surface, there may be flooding during heavy
rainfall, and that an elevation difference of 3 m should be
sufficient to prevent groundwater flooding produced by a
rise in groundwater levels. Therefore, the area with an
elevation difference of \3 m was selected for detailed
investigation and a numerical model.
If the managed river level is extended horizontally and
infinitely to the riversides, the areas corresponding to two
levels difference, which are expressed as horizontal dashes
in the Fig. 4, can be deducted. In the case of a difference of
0 m in Fig. 4a, the dashed area is contained within the river
channel and does not extend onto the riverside. As the
Environ Earth Sci (2015) 73:54975511
Fig. 4 Example of topographic
analysis around the Hapcheon
Changnyeong Barrage using
GIS software (horizontal dashes
areas corresponding to the
differences between managed
river level and land surface after
barrage construction; dark line
artificial river bank)
groundwater level may be equal to the managed river level in
a flat alluvial region with an unconfined aquifer, Fig. 4a
shows that groundwater exposure on the land surface will not
occur in this region. The areas (regions A, C, and D), where
the difference between the land surface and river level is
smaller than 1 m, are distributed on the riversides (Fig. 4b).
This indicates that the groundwater level can be between 0
and 1 m below the land surface at these sites. This depth to
groundwater may be problematic for watermelon farming
because shallow groundwater supplies too much moisture to
the crop, and the growth and development of the watermelon,
which is the principal crop on the alluvial plains of the lower
Nakdong River, would be restricted and productivity would
decrease. In the case of a 2 m difference, the dashed area
extends into zone B, and this depth to groundwater means
that special attention must be paid to the possibility of
5503
inundation during heavy rain or when there is no ground-
water pumping, and to the reduction in farm productivity
caused by the shallow groundwater levels. In Fig. 4cf, the
area increases on the wider riversides.
As described above, an elevation difference of 0 m
suggests a high possibility of groundwater overflow onto
the land surface, a difference of 1 m brings a high possi-
bility of reduced agricultural productivity, and 2 m indi-
cates that careful consideration is required regarding the
shallow groundwater levels. Therefore, a difference of 3 m
is considered to be an adequate and conservative standard
with which the investigation boundary is defined. As this
topographic analysis does not reflect exactly the actual
groundwater level, a groundwater numerical model was
necessary to more accurately forecast groundwater levels
and flow directions.
123
5504
Fig. 5 Drainage channels and pumping station in the alluvial plains near a large river
Data regarding groundwater levels, drainage systems,
groundwater wells, and pumping stations for drainage were
collected across the whole alluvial plain from February to
August 2010. About 20 hydrogeologists participated in this
survey, and groundwater levels were measured at 1,455
wells; 744 surface water levels were also measured along
rivers and drainage channels.
Drainage and water supply systems for irrigation are
well developed in South Korea, and are used to supply
water for agricultural activity, especially rice farming,
during the planting season, and also for draining the used
water back to the rivers. This drainage system plays an
important role in the surfacegroundwater interaction due
to the connection between water in drainage channels and
groundwater. Drainage channels are typically 310 m wide
and 0.55 m deep, and the bottom and/or the walls of the
channels may be made of watertight concrete or permeable
soil (Fig. 5). The watertight concrete does not allow water
to flow between drainage channels and aquifers, while the
soil allows water to flow in and out freely. The nature of
the wall/bottom material in the channels was investigated
to estimate the drain conductance. Additionally, because
water levels in the channel are affected and controlled by
the operation of pumping stations, which are located on the
outlet close to the main river, the location and pumping
capacity of these stations was also investigated.
Numerical model and estimation of groundwater flow
This regional groundwater model developed using MOD-
FLOW was used to estimate the groundwater flow direc-
tions and the areas with high water levels, which could then
be used as the key criteria to locate the groundwater
monitoring wells. The model boundary was simply deter-
mined based on the topographic boundary, and its total area
was about 1,225 km2 along the banks of the four main
rivers. A digitized topographic map with a scale of 1:5,000
was used to create a base map with the mapping software
Surfer. The grid size of the model was generally
25 9 25 m or smaller. The layer composition of each
model was determined depending on the lateral and vertical
123
Environ Earth Sci (2015) 73:54975511
distributions of sediments and bedrock based on the dril-
ling and pumping data from the 4MRRP project.
Groundwater recharge rates for 117 hydrological unit
watersheds were estimated using the WTF (water table
fluctuation) method, and the groundwater levels time series
of the National Groundwater Monitoring Wells (Healy and
Cook 2002; MLTM 2007a). These recharge rates for the
117 watersheds were applied to the representative recharge
rate for each numerical model area. As seen in Fig. 5, the
two types of drainage channel bottom/wall (i.e., concrete or
soil) explain the difference in channel conductance of the
model. The bottom conductance (C) was estimated using
the following equation (Kim 2010a).
KLW
C
M
Here, K is the vertical hydraulic conductivity of the
channel/stream bed, L is the length of the channel/stream,
W is the width of the channel/stream, and M is the thick-
ness of the channel/stream bed. The bottom conductance
was estimated using the channel size and field measure-
ments, and generally ranged 220 m/day.
It was not possible to measure the pumping rate at each
groundwater well due to the lack of flow meters, manpower
shortages, etc. Therefore, an estimated pumping rate was
used in the regional groundwater model. The government
has measured the monthly pumping rates at 621 wells in
four regions (city or county) during 2006 and finally sug-
gested the representative pumping rates for 17 categories of
groundwater use (Table 4; MLTM 2007b). These data
were then used to assign a pumping rate to each well
located in the model area.
Numerous drilling investigations were completed along
the rivers, banks, and barrage axis lines from 2009 to 2010
during the 4MRRP. Between 30 and 100 investigations
were conducted at each barrage site, and a total of 800
investigation wells were drilled to obtain geotechnical
information on soil and bedrock. The representative
hydraulic conductivity of each stratigraphic layer was
determined using the permeability data from Lugeon tests
(Lugeon 1933; Lancaster-Jones 1975; Terzaghi et al. 1996)
Environ Earth Sci (2015) 73:54975511 5505

Table 4 Standard groundwater usage estimated from various types of well in South Korea
Category Sub-category Monthly water use per a single well (unit:m3/month)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Public and Domestic well 27.1 21.0 20.3 19.4 22.8 25.6 22.0 23.7 21.3 19.7 23.5 27.4
domestic Non-domestic wells 291.3 238.2 245.3 270.9 276.5 302.6 246.9 241.1 210.4 180.1 230.9 281.7
School well 330.9 273.9 490.3 540.5 502.7 537.1 430.9 350.7 466.7 439.7 403.9 368.2
Emergency well 27.1 21.0 20.3 19.4 22.8 25.6 22.0 23.7 21.3 19.7 23.5 27.4
Multi-house supply well 115.4 101.7 144.8 143.8 154.7 147.2 101.6 107.9 126.9 129.9 129.2 128.5
Public supply well-village 115.4 101.7 144.8 143.8 154.7 147.2 101.6 107.9 126.9 129.9 129.2 128.5
scale
Public supply well-county 968.0 917.6 903.9 722.6 824.1 910.9 878.7 959.8 1098.0 802.7 870.9 939.1
scale
Co-purposed well for 99.7 81.3 91.1 97.1 106.1 114.6 97.3 103.8 80.0 76.6 87.0 97.5
agriculture and domestic
Others 291.3 238.2 245.3 270.9 276.5 302.6 246.9 241.1 210.4 180.1 230.9 281.7
Industrial Well for individual 291.3 238.2 245.3 270.9 276.5 302.6 246.9 241.1 210.4 180.1 230.9 281.7
enterprise
Others 291.3 238.2 245.3 270.9 276.5 302.6 246.9 241.1 210.4 180.1 230.9 281.7
Agricultural Farm and field 132.3 132.3 132.3 132.3 132.3 132.3 132.3 132.3 132.3 132.3 132.3 132.3
Rice field 2.7 7.2 105.1 523.3 1076.1 880.4 415.4 133.5 190.6 528.2 324.0 119.8
Gardening 1381.6 1129.8 531.1 255.2 303.6 293.5 161.6 190.2 262.7 114.0 233.2 352.4
Livestock 431.9 285.9 271.7 236.7 250.2 290.3 307.1 280.9 182.9 182.4 285.4 388.4
Others 368.9 368.9 368.9 368.9 368.9 368.9 368.9 368.9 368.9 368.9 368.9 368.9
Others 291.3 238.2 245.3 270.9 276.5 302.6 246.9 241.1 210.4 180.1 230.9 281.7

and hydraulic conductivities from injection tests, or
pumping tests at the drilling sites. As hydraulic conduc-
tivities generally follow a lognormal distribution, the
average calculated from the following exponential equation
was assumed to be the representative value (Helsel and
Hirsch 2002).
 
K exp y 0:5  S2y
Here, K is the average hydraulic conductivity, y is the
sample mean, and S2y is the sample variance of y in natural
log units.
Using the above information, 34 numerical groundwater
models along the four rivers were constructed to model
groundwater flow nets and water levels after barrage con-
struction. Figure 6a is an example of the model setting for
the upper SincheonBaekcheon watershed of the Gangj-
eongKoryeong Barrage. The northwest boundary of the
model is a mountain ridge, and the northeast and southern
boundaries are the Baekcheon and Sincheon streams,
respectively. Data from 45 field measurements by Lugeon
tests, injection tests, and pumping tests at the drilling wells
were used as the representative hydraulic conductivities in
the model. The hydraulic conductivities were 2.33 9 10-4
to 1.47 9 10-2 cm/s for layer 1 (alluvial sediments), and
8.44 9 10-6 to 2.31 9 10-4 cm/s for layer 2 (bedrock)
(Fig. 6b). The groundwater recharge was *12.4 % of
annual rainfall, which is a representative value for the
hydrological unit watershed, code 2011, along the Nakdong
River.
The steady-state model was simulated under the condi-
tions of the 5-year average river level before barrage
construction, drainage levels, and groundwater pumping
rates. This steady-state model was calibrated by trial and
error to minimize some measure of goodness of fit between
the simulated and observed values of groundwater level
(Fig. 6d). Groundwater levels were adjusted step by step to
produce a best fitted model through the calibration of
geologic layer distribution and hydraulic conductivity,
which were relatively unclear factors.
The transient model was developed under the assump-
tion that river levels will increase up to the managed level
after barrage construction and will not be fluctuated.
Additionally, it was assumed that precipitation, ground-
water recharge and pumping rate, which were used in a
steady-state model, will not be changed for the next
10 years.
Figure 6e shows groundwater flow from the steady-state
model for the period before barrage construction, and
Fig. 6f shows the estimated groundwater flow forecast by
the transient model after construction of the Gangjeong
Koryeong Barrage, which is a simulation result for

123
5506
Fig. 6 Numerical modeling of groundwater flow upstream from the
GangjeongKoryeong Barrage. a Model boundary. b Distribution of
hydraulic conductivity. c Location of pumping wells. d Result of
10 years. Figure 7a, b shows the distribution of the low-
elevation areas based on the comparison between the land
surface elevation and managed river level. As mentioned
above, the area with a 3 m difference between these two
levels can be considered as a target for groundwater
monitoring based on the seasonal fluctuation of
123
Environ Earth Sci (2015) 73:54975511
model calibration. e Groundwater flow under steady-state conditions.
f Groundwater flow under transient conditions
groundwater levels. Figure 7c shows the areas where the
depth to groundwater is \1 m, as simulated by the
numerical model. The distribution of this area is similar to
the region analyzed by topographic comparison of the 3 m
difference, but the depth to groundwater estimated by the
model is shallower than indicated by the topographic
Environ Earth Sci (2015) 73:54975511 5507

Fig. 7 GIS analysis of

topography and areas of
potentially high groundwater
levels estimated using a
numerical model upstream from
the GangjeongKoryeong
Barrage. a Low-level area
determined by topographic
analysis (1 m difference).
b Low-level area determined by
topographic analysis (3 m
difference). c Area of high
groundwater levels determined
by numerical model
(groundwater level exists \1 m
below land surface)

123
5508 Environ Earth Sci (2015) 73:54975511

Fig. 8 Possible distribution

pattern for a network of
groundwater monitoring wells
upstream from the Gangjeong
Koryeong Barrage

Table 5 Proposed groundwater monitoring wells upstream from the Optimal distribution of groundwater monitoring wells
GangjeongKoryeong Barrage
Monitoring site Criteria Remarks This study aims to collate and analyze groundwater data that
could be used to forecast groundwater flooding and define its
GJM-13 B, C, D, E limits. Based on the results outlined above, we consider the
GJM-14 C, D, E following factors to be the most appropriate criteria to guide
GJM-15 B, E Two wells (shallow/deep) the optimal distribution of monitoring sites.
GJM-16 B, C, D
GJM-17 C, D Two wells (shallow/deep)
Groundwater flow after barrage construction was
GJM-18 A, E One group with three wells
predicted by the numerical model, and multiple mon-
itoring wells should be distributed along these flow
GJM-19 A, D, E
directions.
GJM-20 A, E,
A focus on areas with high groundwater levels (and so
GJM-21 B, E,
a high probability of inundation) as indicated by both
GJM-22 B, E,
the numerical modeling and topographic analysis.
GJM-23 A, E,
Monitoring wells are generally spaced at equal inter-
GJM-24 F Reference well
vals in case of similar geologic layer, with an ideal
GJM-25 F Reference well
density of 3 wells/km2.
Criteria for site selection: (A) installation of multiple wells along a The cost of the construction and management of the
flow direction; (B) area with a change in groundwater flow direction groundwater monitoring wells should be minimized.
after barrage construction; (C) low level area identified from topo-
graphic analysis; (D) area of high groundwater level identified by Monitoring wells should be situated both upstream and
numerical model; (E) consideration of monitoring well density and downstream of the barrages to allow a comparison of
interval; and (F) reference monitoring well not affected by a river the hydrogeological setting to either side.

analysis. This is because the groundwater level and flow
forecast by the numerical model can additionally reflect the
hydraulic gradient in the watersheds.
Groundwater monitoring wells should be constructed to
detect flow directions as well as groundwater levels, and
therefore some wells are sited parallel to the flow direction.
The estimated groundwater flow direction can provide
information on the arrangement of groundwater monitoring
wells. Some regions likely to be affected by large increases
in water level were also identified by this model, and they
should be observed continuously due to the relatively high
possibility of inundation.
Figure 8 shows an example of groundwater monitoring
well location around the GangjeongKoryeong Barrage.
The group of three monitoring wells, bounded by a large
ellipse, indicates that they are distributed along the simu-
lated regional flow direction. The double circle indicates
that monitoring sites, with both alluvial and bedrock wells,
are required to compare groundwater levels in both types of
aquifer. The closed box, GJM-25, is the key monitoring
well, which is located at a site far enough from the river to
be unaffected by a rise in water level. Table 5 shows the
criteria for each monitoring site near the Gangjeong
Koryeong Barrage.

123
Environ Earth Sci (2015) 73:54975511 5509

Table 6 Proposed groundwater monitoring wells on the banks of the four main rivers
River Barrage Target Area Category of automatic monitoring site Manual Density Installed
(Km2) monitoring (no./1 km2) (by 2012)
Alluvial Comparison Bedrock Low Total site
stream

Han River Ipo 6.88 9 1 1 3 14 10 3.34

Yeoju 5.59 6 1 1 3 11 7 3.15
Kangcheon 6.27 4 1 1 3 9 9 2.87
Nakdong Haman 81.67 81 11 11 3 106 121 2.92 64
River Changnyeong
Changnyeong 17.52 23 3 3 3 32 26 3.31 8
Hapcheon
Dalseong 28.01 23 4 4 3 34 38 2.53 9
Gangjeong 14.35 19 3 3 3 28 15 3.09 8
Koryong
Chilgok 23.64 22 5 4 2 33 38 3.04 8
Gumi 5.03 6 1 1 2 10 9 3.78 4
Nakdan 5.95 6 2 2 3 13 7 3.77 3
Sangju 17.46 11 2 2 2 17 20 2.12 5
Geum Buyeo 11.81 8 2 2 5 17 19 3.05
River Geumgang 2.21 3 1 1 1 6 2 3.62
Geumnam 4.74 5 1 1 2 9 6 3.16
Yeongsan Juksan 61.09 44 6 6 5 61 80 2.52 16
River Seungchon 28.17 32 5 5 4 46 47 4.13 12
Total 320.39 302 49 48 47 446 454 2.81 137

9. An automatic measurement system was introduced to

periodically measure groundwater levels and quality
(Fig. 9). Groundwater level, temperature, and electric
conductivity are measured automatically every hour, and
this system has been installed in 137 riverside groundwater
monitoring wells since 2011, and the data are transmitted
to the main server of the Water Management Center
established by K-Water using a code division multiple
access (CDMA) transmission technology.

Discussion and conclusions

Fig. 9 Groundwater monitoring well installed at the riverside
The final sites selected for groundwater monitoring were
identified using the above principles and processes
(Table 6). The total number of proposed groundwater
monitoring wells is 900, and the density is about 3/km2.
The groundwater monitoring wells cover 320.4 km2
including 30 small watersheds and 16 barrages. The aver-
age distance between adjacent wells is about 0.51 km in
the flat low-lying areas, and the number of groundwater
monitoring wells in a watershed is typically between 5 and
The river basin, groundwater flow system, and aquifer
should be the scale at which monitoring programs are
designed. Groundwater monitoring wells installed in riv-
erside locations can form the basis of an integrated
hydrological approach to flood analysis. The purpose of
these monitoring wells is clear, i.e., to monitor the state of
the water table and prevent flooding during heavy rainfall
or non-pumping periods. Additionally, the monitoring data
will be used to collect information regarding over-pumping
or contamination near the main rivers.
The present 137 automatic groundwater monitoring
wells showed that groundwater levels have continued to
increase after barrage construction. The average rise in

123
5510
groundwater levels ranged between 0.5 and 2.5 m on the
flat riversides at each barrage over the last 1 or 2 years. In a
previous study in Slovakia (Hlavaty et al. 1999), ground-
water levels beside the Danube increased for 3 years fol-
lowing construction of the Gabcikovo Barrage before
equilibrium was attained with the river. The rate of
increase there was high during the first year due to the
effect of the rising river level after construction, but slowed
from then on. Based on time series data obtained from the
137 monitoring wells in South Korea, groundwater levels
have similarly increased rapidly for the first 1 or 2 years,
but have recently slowed and begun to show seasonal
fluctuations.
Cross-correlation analysis between groundwater and
river levels for the GangjeongKoryeong Barrage and
ChangnyeongHaman Barrage indicates that the lag time is
shorter than 2 days and the cross-correlation coefficient is
high, ranging from 0.5 to 0.95. However, for the relation-
ship between groundwater levels and rainfall, the lag time
is longer and the cross-correlation coefficient is lower (Kim
et al. 2012). The response of groundwater levels to the
changing river level is much stronger and faster than to
rainfall because the high managed water level after barrage
construction restricts groundwater discharge to the river,
and so groundwater remains in the aquifer for longer due to
the slow flow rate.
As farming activity is reduced during the dry season
from November to April, groundwater abstraction for irri-
gation on the riversides decreases. For example, the
pumping rate for irrigation at one well is typically between
20 to 200 m3/day, and is *3,000 m3/day abstracted in total
from 80 groundwater wells in the SincheonBaekcheon
watershed. Therefore, a pause in groundwater abstraction
causes an abrupt rise in groundwater levels, and produces
damp land by the capillary effect, or flooded areas due to
overflow. The shallowest depth to water in November 2012
was about 81 cm, and therefore boggy areas developed.
This problem of groundwater rise will occur repeatedly
during the dry season, and therefore groundwater moni-
toring wells must play a key role in forecasting the degree
of rise, and in the design of a drainage system (or other
reduction measures) using long-term monitoring data.
Additionally, the rise in groundwater levels can increase
during heavy rainfall because elevated river levels maintain
high groundwater levels. However, the water gate at the
barrage is opened before heavy rainfall to lower the water
level and prevent flooding, and this can also cause
groundwater levels at the riversides to fall. The timing of
the opening of the water gate is very important because of
the lag time associated with the response of groundwater to
a change in the surface water level. Groundwater moni-
toring data can also be used to determine the optimal
123
Environ Earth Sci (2015) 73:54975511
timing for water gate control through data analysis using
statistical methods and numerical models.
The major conclusions of this study are as follows:
(a) The estimated groundwater flow directions, and the
extent of the area liable to flood, produced by
numerical modeling and GIS analysis should be used
to maximize the usefulness of groundwater moni-
toring wells and to ensure their optimal distribution.
Additionally, the equal spacing of monitoring wells,
field accessibility, and costs should also be
considered.
(b) A total of 446 automatic and 454 manual monitoring
sites are proposed alongside the main rivers, and the
data from the present 137 automatic monitoring
wells indicate that the increase in groundwater levels
has reached between 0.5 and 2.5 m in the flat
riverside areas over the last 1 or 2 years.
Acknowledgments This work was supported by the research pro-
ject of Advanced Technology for Groundwater Development and
Application in Riversides (Geowater?) in Water Resources Man-
agement Program (code 11 Technology Innovation C05) of the
MOLIT and the KAIA in Korea.
References
Anderson MP (2005) Heat as a ground water tracer. Ground Water
43(6):951968
Arumi JL, Rivera D, Holzapfel E, Boochs P, Billib M, Fernald A
(2009) Effect of the irrigation canal network on surface and
groundwater interactions in the lower valley of the Cachapoal
River, Chile. Chil J Agric Res 69(1):1220
Constantz J, Stonestrom D, Stewart AE, Niswonger R, Smith TR
(2001) Analysis of streambed temperatures in ephemeral chan-
nels to determine streamflow frequency and duration. Water
Resour Res 37:317328
Dreher J, Gunatilaka A (1998) Groundwater management system in
Viennaan evaluation after three years of operation. In: Peters J
et al (eds) Artificial recharge of groundwater. Balkema,
Amsterdam
Gibbons RD (1991) Statistical tolerance limits for groundwater
monitoring. Ground Water 29:563570
Guggenmos MR, Daughney CJ, Jackson BM, Morgenstern U (2011)
Regional-scale identification of groundwatersurface water
interaction using hydrochemistry and multivariate statistical
methods, Wairarapa Valley, New Zealand. Hydro Earth Sys Sci
Discuss 8:64436487
Harvey FE, Lee DR, Rudolph DL, Frape SK (1997) Locating
groundwater discharge in large lakes using bottom sediment
electrical conductivity mapping. Water Resour Res
33:26092616
Healy RW, Cook PG (2002) Using groundwater levels to estimate
recharge. Hydrogeo J 10:91109
Helsel DR, Hirsch RM (2002) Statistical methods in water resources.
USGS Techniques of Water Resources Investigations, Book 4,
Chapter A3, USGS, Reston
Hlavaty Z, Bansky L, Rodak D, Kucarova K (1999) Surface water,
groundwater and soil moisture regime. In: Gabcikovo part of the
Environ Earth Sci (2015) 73:54975511
hydroelectric power project environmental impact review.
Faculty of Natural Sciences, Comenius University, Bratislava,
Slovakia
Hudak PF, Loaiciga HA, Schoolmaster FA (1993) Application of
geographic information systems to groundwater monitoring
network design. Water Resour Bull 29:383390
Jousma G (2006) Guideline on: groundwater monitoring for general
reference purposes. IGRAC, Utrecht
Kim GB (2010a) Application of analytical solution for stream
depletion due to groundwater pumping in Gapcheon watershed,
South Korea. Hydrol Process 24(24):35353546
Kim GB (2010b) Integrated consideration of quality and quantity to
determine regional groundwater monitoring site in South Korea.
Water Resour Manag 24:40094032
Kim GB, Yum BW (2007) Classification and characterization for
water level time series of shallow wells at the National
Groundwater Monitoring Stations. J Soil Groundwater Environ
12(5):8697 (in Korean)
Kim JW, Lee JY, Yi MJ, Kim GB, Won JH, Lee KK (2007)
Allocation local groundwater monitoring stations for South
Korea using an analytic hierarchy process. Hydrogeo J
15:615632
Kim GB, Ahn JS, Marui A (2009) Analytic hierarchy models for
regional groundwater monitoring well allocation in Southeast
Asian countries and South Korea. Environ Earth Sci
59(2):325338
Kim GB, Son YC, Lee SH, Jeong AC, Cha EJ, Ko MJ (2012)
Understanding of surface watergroundwater connectivity in an
alluvial plain using statistical methods. J Eng Geol
22(2):207221 (in Korean)
LaBolle EM, Ahmed AA, Fogg GE (2003) Review of the integrated
groundwater and surface-water model (IGSM). Ground Water
41:238246
Lancaster-Jones PFF (1975) The interpretation of the Lugeon water-
test. Q J Eng Geol Hydrogeol 8(2):151154
Lee JY, Yi MJ, Yoo YK, Ahn KH, Kim GB, Won JH (2007) A review
of the national groundwater monitoring network in Korea.
Hydrol Process 21(7):907919
Lugeon M (1933) Barrage et Geologie. Dunod, Paris
Meyer PD, Ranjitham R, Valocchi AJ, Eheart JW (1989) Ground-
water monitoring network design using coupled Monte Carlo
5511
simulation and optimization. Proc. 1989 National Conference on
Hydraulics Engineering, ASCE, New York, pp 404409
MLTM (Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs) (2007a)
Master plan for groundwater management in Korea
(20072011). Seoul, Korea
MLTM (Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs) (2007b)
Report on the investigation of the groundwater use. Seoul, Korea
MLTM (Ministry of Land, Transportation, and Maritime Affairs)
(2009) Master plan for the four major rivers restoration project.
Seoul, Korea
Paulsen RJ, Smith CF, ORourke D, Wong T-F (2001) Development
and evaluation of an ultrasonic ground water seepage meter.
Ground Water 39:904911
Quevauviller P (2005) Groundwater monitoring in the context of EU
legislation: reality and integration needs. J Environ Monit
7:89102
Sophocleous MA, Paschetto JE, Olea RA (1982) Groundwater
network design for Northwest Kansas using the theory of
regionalized variables. Ground Water 20:4858
Sophocleous MA, Townsend MA, Bogler LD, McClain TJ, Marks
ET, Coble GR (1988) Experimental studies in streamaquifer
interaction along the Arkansas River in central Kansas: field
testing and analysis. J Hydrol 98:249273
Storck P, Eheart JW, Valocchi AJ (1997) A method for the optimal
location of monitoring wells for detection of groundwater
contamination in three-dimensional heterogeneous aquifers.
Water Resour Res 33(9):20812088
Taylor CJ, Alley WM (2002) Ground water level monitoring and the
importance of long-term water level data. US Geological Survey
Circular 1217, US Department of the Interior, Reston, Virginia
Terzaghi K, Peck R, Mesri G (1996) Soil mechanics in engineering
practice, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York, pp 7273
Winter TC, LaBaugh JW, Rosenberry DO (1988) The design and use
of a hydraulic potentiomanometer for direct measurement of
differences in hydraulic head between groundwater and surface
water. Limnol Oceanogr 33:12091214
Winter TC, Harvey JW, Franke OL, Alley WM (1998) Ground water
and surface water; A single resource. US Geological Survey
Circular 1139, US Department of the Interior, Denver, Colorado
123