BULLETIN NO. 68 A meaningful comparison of the IAS/ICU potentiometric surface (Duerr, 2001) with that of the FAS is qualitative at best (see discussion starting on page 62). A more accurate, although site-specific method for assessing the recharge/discharge relation between the IAS/ICU and FAS is to compare water levels in nested wells, many of which are located at District ROMP sites. As noted above, Miller (1986) subdivided the FAS into the Upper Floridan aquifer (UFA) and the Lower Floridan aquifer (LFA). The UFA is the principal source of groundwater throughout the study area except for Charlotte County, where only 20 percent of total w ithdia% als originate from the UFA (based on data from 2000 as compiled by Marella, 2004) due to naturally poor water quality. The most productive units of the UFA are located within the Avon Park Formation, Ocala Limestone and the Suwannee Limestone (Ryder, 1985). A highly permeable facies of the FAS, referred to as the "Boulder Zone" (Kohout, 1965), is characterized by cavernous, fractured dolostones with very high transmissivities (Puri et al., 1973). Vernon (1970) reported "Boulder Zone" facies throughout the Florida peninsula. More recently, however, this hydrogeologic facies has been recognized as discontinuous and found to be limited to the southern third of the Florida peninsula (Miller, 1986). The facies does not occur within the same lithostratigraphic unit throughout its extent (Miller, 1986). Maliva et al. (2001) report occurrences of "Boulder Zone" facies in the Early Eocene Oldsmar Formation in Charlotte, Lee and Collier County injection wells. This facies has been reported to occur at depths shallower than -1300 ft (-396.2 m) MSL in Charlotte County (Maliva et al., 2001), which corresponds to Avon Park Formation carbonates. In the southernmost peninsula, the facies occurs within the Paleocene Cedar Keys Formation as well as the Eocene Avon Park Formation and Ocala Limestone (Puri and Winston, 1974). Wolansky et al. (1980) mapped "the highly permeable dolomite zone" of the Avon Park Formation throughout the southern two-thirds of the District. These well-indurated dolostones are commonly fractured and contain large dissolution channels. The zone occurs -100 ft (~ 30.5 m) below the top of the Avon Park Formation in the central part of the study area and ~ 400 ft (~ 122 m) below the Avon Park Formation surface in the southern region. The SAS and IAS/ICU generally provide confinement of the UFA (Berndt et al., 1998) except for areas in the northern region where the UFA may be unconfined and where karst and paleokarst promote inter-aquifer connectivity. Hydrogeologic conditions vary considerably between the northern and southern regions depending on the degree of confinement. The interpolated surface of the UFA ranges from greater than 75 ft (22.9 m) MSL along the Brooksville Ridge to less than -825 ft (-251 m) MSL in southern Charlotte County (Plate 58). Locally, maximum elevations exceed 130 ft (39.6 m) along the Brooksville Ridge (W-14917 [ROMP 109], Plate 7). A map of overburden thickness provides a different perspective on the depth to the top of the UFA (Figure 31). This map, developed by subtracting the UFA surface from a 15 m (49.2 ft) resolution DEM (Arthur et al., in review), allows comparison of the aquifer system to geomorphic features. For example, note the thin overburden along the Brooksville Ridge compared to the Lake Wales Ridge, as well as the maximum overburden thickness of -900 ft (-274 m) in Charlotte County. The base of the UFA occurs within the lower Avon Park Formation, where vertically and laterally persistent evaporite minerals (gypsum and anhydrite) are present in the carbonate rocks (e.g., Ryder, 1985; Hickey, 1990; see Middle Floridan confining unit [MFCU], p. 75, for more information). Thickness of the UFA, calculated as a "grid difference map," ranges from less than 300 ft (91.4 m) to more than 1500 ft (457 m; Figure 32). Regional subjacent confinement of the UFA is comprised of the MFCU where present. Examples of basal UFA confinement are represented in several cross sections (e.g., Plates 7, 9, 21 and 31). Note, however, that Miller's (1986) delineation of overlapping MFCU units by default suggests that the base of the UFA in these areas is a complex discontinuous surface. This aspect of the UFA is described in more detail in the next section.