Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES 2715 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO. 2715
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ADOPTING
WELL FIELD MONITORING STUDY AS A FACTUAL DOCUMENT
WHEREAS CH2M Hill has prepared a study for the City of
Renton entitled "Well Field Monitoring Study, March 1988" , and
WHEREAS that study is the factual basis for establishing
acquifer protection areas, and
WHEREAS the establishment of acquifer protection areas are
necessary elements of the Underground Storage Tank Secondary
Containment Ordinance, and
WHEREAS the acquifer protection areas are a given element in
the proposed Acquifer Protection Areas Ordinance, NOW THEREFORE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I : The above recitals are true and correct.
SECTION II: The City Council of the City of Renton hereby
adopts the Well Field Monitoring Study as a factual document
which may be utilitized by the City as a factual basis for
proposing and preparing necessary ordinances, resolutions, rules
or regulations .
1
RESOLUTION NO. 2715
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 4th day of April, 1988 .
Maxine E. Motor, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 4th day of April, 1988 .
Earl Clym er, Ma
Appro ed as to form:
Lawrence J. Warrky, City Attorney
RES : 12/3/29/88
2
OFFICE OF THE, CITY CLERK
REN"—__;
s. :jC'( AL BLDG.
.. t�VE. SOUTH
RE�1 FON, WASH. 93055_
Well Field Monitoring Study
Prepared for
City of Renton
March 1988
CITY CLLR4.
c S4s .=AL BLDG,
kr NULL AVE. SOUTH
RENTON, WASK 93055
i
rCONTENTS
Page
Recommendations v
Executive Summary vi
1 Introduction 1-1
Project Description 1-1
Scope of the Report 1-2
Report Organization 1-3
Related Studies 1-4
2 Monitoring Network 2-1
Monitoring Locations 2-1
Well Drilling 2-4
Well Construction and Development 2-4
Water Level Elevations 2-7
Extent of the Cedar River Aquifer 2-7
3 Well Field Zone of Potential Capture 3-1
Probable Directions of Groundwater
Movement 3-3
Cedar River-Aquifer Interactions 3-13
Zone of Potential Capture 3-19
4 Aquifer Protection Area 4-1
APA Delineation 4-1
Delineation of Zones 4-2
5 Groundwater Quality 5-1
6 References 6-1
Appendix A. Monitoring Well Site Maps
Appendix B. Well Log and Construction Diagrams
Appendix C. Well Logs for Existing and Replacement
Production Wells and the Maplewood
Golf Course Test Well
Appendix D. Geologic Cross-Sections for the Cedar
River Aquifer
Appendix E . Water Quality Sampling Results
TABLES
2-1 Monitoring Well Construction Details 2-6
2-2 Surveyed Elevation of Each New Monitoring Well
and Existing Observation and Production Wells 2-8
2-3 Surveyed Elevation of Each Stage Gauge 2-11
j ii
Page
2-4 Summary of Water Levels Measured During the Well
Field Monitoring Study and Well Field Aquifer
Test (NGVD) 2-12
3-1 Monitoring Date and Well Field Pumping Condition
for Each Potentiometric Map 3-3
4-1 Cedar River Aquifer Properties 4-2
4-2 Estimated Ranges of Gradients , Groundwater
Velocities, and Groundwater Travel Times Between
the Well Field and Selected Locations 4-5
5-1 Comparison of Maximum Concentration Levels (ug/1)
with Water Quality Sampling Results,
City of Renton Monitoring Wells 5-2
FIGURES
2-1 Well Field Study Area 2-2
i2-2 Monitoring Network 2-3
2-3 Generalized Well Construction, City of Renton
Monitoring Wells 2-5
2-4 Water Level Recording Form 2-9
2-5 Areal Extent of Cedar River Aquifer 2-10
' 2-6 North-South Geologic Cross-Section 2-13
2-7 City of Renton and Deep PACCAR Monitoring Wells 2-14
3-1 A Single Pumping Well in Uniform Flow 3-2
3-2 Groundwater Elevations (feet above NGVD)
January 23 , 1987 3-4
3-3 Groundwater Elevations (feet above NGVD)
November 16 , 1986 3-5
3-4 Groundwater Elevations (feet above NGVD)
November 8 , 1986 3-6
3-5 Groundwater Elevations (feet above NGVD)
September 16 , 1986 3-7
3-6 Groundwater Elevations (feet above NGVD)
November 6 , 1986 3-8
iii ,
Page
3-7 Groundwater Elevations (feet above NGVD)
September 11 , 1986 3-9
3-8 Groundwater Elevations (feet above NGVD)
August 26 , 1986 3-10
3-9 Groundwater Elevations (feet above NGVD)
August 8 , 1986 3-11
3-10 Groundwater Elevations (feet above NGVD)
November 6 and 14, 1986 Pocket
3-11 Groundwater Elevations (feet above NGVD)
July 28 and 29 , 1986 Pocket
3-12 Groundwater Elevations (feet above NGVD)
June 25 , 1987 Pocket
3-13 Groundwater Elevations (feet above NGVD)
June 26 , 1987 Pocket
' 3-14 Hydrographs for Monitoring Well MW2 and
Stage Gage SG1 3-15
3-15 Hydrographs for Monitoring Well MW2 , Stage
Gage SG1 , and Production Wells PW1 and PW2 3-16
3-16 Hydrographs for Monitoring Well MW1 , Stage
Gage SG1 , and Production Well PW8 3-17
3-17 Hydrographs for Monitoring Well MW1 , Stage
Gage SG1 , and Production Well PW9 3-18
3-18 Hydrograph for MW1 During Well Field Aquifer
Test 3-20
3-19 Production Well Flow Rates During Well Field
Aquifer Test 3-21
3-20 Cedar River Stage at Gage No. 12119000 During
Well Field Aquifer Test 3-22
3-21 Potential Zone of Capture for Well Field Pocket
4-1 Well Field Aquifer Protection Area (APA) Map 4-3
4-2 Potential Source Locations 4-6
iv
RECOMMENDATIONS
The results of the study show that additional monitoring of
the Cedar River aquifer should be conducted. Specifically,
the following types of monitoring and supplemental tests are
recommended:
1 . Three to four additional monitoring wells should be in-
stalled on the south side of the Cedar River to better
define aquifer properties and the extent of the zone of
potential capture.
2 . A monitoring well should be installed in the area of
the bedrock narrows . The well would help define the
thickness and properties of the aquifer in this area.
The well should be completed to provide the City of
Renton with a means of monitoring contaminant migration
from upgradient sources.
3 . Selected monitoring wells should be sampled annually to
monitor water quality conditions in the Cedar River
aquifer.
I4 . Vater levels in the Cedar River aquifer should be moni-
tored on a regular basis (e.g. , quarterly) and during
periods of extreme conditions (e.g. , Cedar River flood-
ing and high pumping following a dry summer) . Con-
tinued monitoring will be useful in determining whether
operation of the replacement wells will have any impact
on the conclusions of the study.
5 . Slug tests or pumping tests should be performed on se-
lected monitoring wells to determine how aquifer
properties vary.
6 . A numerical groundwater model should be applied to the
Cedar River aquifer. The model should be used to quan-
tify rates and directions of groundwater movement and
Cedar River-aquifer interactions . The model should
also be used to develop emergency response strategies
and to estimate the potential long-term yield of the
aquifer.
v
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
As part of the well field protection study conducted in
1984 , available geologic and hydrologic information per-
taining to the Cedar River aquifer and contributing recharge
areas was reviewed. The study concluded that the available
information was not sufficient to determine rates and direc-
tions of groundwater movement in the vicinity of the well
field. As a result, the well field protection study recom-
mended that water level fluctuations in the aquifer and
Cedar River be monitored.
STUDY OBJECTIVES
Based on this recommendation, the City of Renton contracted
with CH2M HILL to conduct a well field monitoring study.
The original objectives of this study were to determine:
1 . Rate and direction of groundwater movement under dif-
ferent pumping conditions
2. Interactions between the Cedar River and the aquifer
The City of Renton subsequently expanded the study to in-
clude two additional objectives :
1 . Delineation of the boundaries of an aquifer protection
area (APA) for the well field to satisfy the provisions
of the City of Renton aquifer protection ordinance
2 . Groundwater sampling to obtain additional information
on existing water quality conditions in the Cedar River
aquifer
MONITORING ACTIVITY
To meet these objectives, CH2M HILL designed a monitoring
network consisting of 11 groundwater monitoring wells and
three Cedar River stage gages . Figure 1 shows the location
of each monitoring well and stage gage, as well as the loca-
tion of the five production wells that constitute tie City
of Renton well field (PW1 , PW2, PW3 , PW8 , and PW9) . Except
for MW8 and MW9 , all of the monitoring wells shown in Fig-
ure 1 were installed during the well field monitoring study.
1Near the end of the well field monitoring study the City of
Renton initiated construction of three new wells to replace
PW1 , PW2 , and PW3 ; the three replacement wells (RW1 , RW2 ,
and RW3) are located immediately southeast of PW1 and PW2.
Vi
ay
c o m \. z � LU;
e Z
Qo
y' Z
a� a cc W
�
m �� Q
o �" F- LL
LLJ
00
4 LL U
All
SRI
\
N
\ z x
iW011=i d
. �:
; 3 w N.-
:� 3 3
a.
Lm
MRS
� ry
MA*
3 ?A.
IL
Vw
a
Ell
all i
a\
y h z i (A
00
CL
10
x
z a;
..SSM $- .,�-'•
Ln
LU
'^�<'�- �•' ,�/aL^xa`,- 'a`,. , "' .+c O Q
U
x N
V11
MW8 and MW9 are observation wells installed during the con-
struction and testing of PW9. The three Cedar River stage
gages installed during the well field monitoring study are
' also shown in Figure 1 .
CH2M HILL and City of Renton staff monitored water levels in
the monitoring wells and production wells and at the Cedar
River stage gages 21 times during the period of March 1986
to March 1987 . The data were analyzed by contouring water
levels to obtain potentiometric maps and by plotting water
level variations with time at selected wells or stage gages
to obtain hydrographs.
ZONE OF POTENTIAL CAPTURE
Based on the pote�tiometric maps and hydrographs, a zone of
potential capture for the well field was defined by deter-
mining probable directions of groundwater movement and Cedar
River-aquifer interactions.
Figure 2 is a potentiometric map that shows groundwater ele-
vations and probable directions of groundwater movement un-
der a nonpumping condition (i.e . , none of the wells is in
operation) . This potentiometric map indicates that the re-
gional direction of groundwater movement is generally to the
southwest and west, with a component to the northwest. The
southwestern and western components are in the same direc-
tion as the original Cedar River streambed prior to its di-
version towards Lake Washington. The northwestern component
is in the direction of Lake Washington.
When one or more of the wells is pumped, a cone of depres-
sion forms around the well (s) causing a local reversal in
the direction of groundwater movement back toward the well.
Figure 3 is a potentiometric map that illustrates this
condition.
The boundary between theortion of the Cedar River aquifer
P q
wherein groundwater movement continues in the regional direc-
tion (i .e. , to the northwest) and the portion wherein ground-
water movement reverses back toward the well field defines
the boundary of the zone of potential capture. This bound-
ary is referred to as a groundwater divide and is illustrated
as a dashed line in Figure 3.
1The zone of potential capture is thatq
ortion of an aquifer
P
wherein all groundwater would flow to a well or well field
if it were pumped continuously.
Viii
LU
3 w GoN
c 2Z ZWAmN�
a
LL LL LLL. LL LLu'i
D2 Q a III'
0 0 00 00 Q o V muj
E—
V r N M W Ol �O� �5 �Wha �� Y g� Q Z
CL IL zip cr z� WQ
E p�Z0 10 WO JQ •� 'S � :r
w> z
I n y
Z F-Z O
W v HG s Q
Wz
0 O ui
W Z
U.
>e �• �YV� �/ F—
KIM-
y „
C;
*41
N
.Nr •4i
�6 O
L
r N N n
CN
R �, O,
c 2a co
C
G
fa W
m�EHIM
my
2•.. ' �.N o �-c
coq
12
.�, �'L� '� :���a �+fr.�+e &+:_. ,.�' � "•` x � i �'*a .moi m
n
.. 0
N
U.
CL
CL
J
_ Axa L N J
a
1X
z r 'v r OD
O
4
E O > O
LLI
Ir
~ N m
'C LL {LLL {LLL LL W �O WLLW
p O O O O Q C7W QOR 0�0
�. O w
V N elf aD m GC9C W¢ KCD 2 L f—
c 3 3 3 3 3 zoo
cc o p�z Z �
oCa� JN ��
£ Oz w aV0 Ja > W
7 �JO LL_j apM WW �`.� , a. Wcn
d aLUU Z—LL
W Q Q
o3
W ' v r WC3Z
Ci T 3 g QZO
W W f'
M3
cc
• t —91 a W Z m LL
� Q O
c, g LL C'3 ivV
Ln Ui
M
ff
Q7 4
N �\�
co N
,
CO
s
en z
co
cd
Q?
T
O >
O a d o Ec
� did
E 76
y�o
c
r 0a0
-m
no
Ci
Y
cc
s
Mz
3 CO
C, II cid
' ,•fives' �: w� av'.
cm
Of Pc k 'v EEYE
,4
LO x
CL
k F / V
_ s x
'/ <;h'� - �" •, ....max b p, :aa - k-x �.�„C ^., „` ,
X
Cedar River-aquifer interactions identified as a result of
the well field monitoring study include:
1 . The Cedar River acts as a minor source of recharge to
the aquifer; in the vicinity of the well field the
amount of recharge is small compared to the flow in the
Cedar River.
2 . Well field pumping, particularly when PW1 and PW2 are
in operation, influences groundwater movement on the
opposite (south) side of the Cedar River.
Both interactions were tentatively identified based on the
data collected during the well field monitoring study; they
were confirmed based on additional water level data
collected during a well field aquifer test conducted by the
City of Renton. Measurements made by the USGS during the
aquifer test were unable to detect any difference in Cedar
River flow rate upstream and downstream of the well field.
Continuous monitoring during the aquifer test showed that
water level fluctuations in MW1 (see Figure 1) responded to
changes in well field pumping.
Based on the determination of probable directions of ground-
water movement and Cedar River-aquifer interactions, a zone
of potential capture for purposes of aquifer protection was
delineated. The position of the groundwater divide observed
while pumping the well field at the current water right of
11 ,400 gallons per minute was selected as the boundary of
the zone of potential capture. This boundary was extended
to the opposite side of the Cedar River in recognition of
the influence of the well field on groundwater movement
south of the river.
iAQUIFER PROTECTION AREA DELINEATION
The results of the well field monitoring study and well
field protection study provided a basis for delineating a
well field aquifer protection area (APA) to satisfy the pro-
visions of the City of Renton aquifer protection ordinance.
An APA encompasses the recharge area for a well or well
field. The boundary of the well field APA was divided into
two segments: a segment regionally downgradient of the well
field and a segment regionally upgradient. The regionally
downgradient boundary was delineated as the boundary of the
zone of potential capture for purposes of aquifer protection
(see Figure 4 ) . The regionally upgradient boundary was
delineated as the drainage basin boundary for the Cedar River
valley.
xi
i
r r r ars m = m m w m m m m r = ■r m r
1z, ru
sp
I o
1
1
9 1 '>.4 i;• Z E� . . ) •ze> , • SSr.,• _ r (10
O
�� y', 1 :i i :{'-..: ..- •„Uel ` 1
I'
u V,• 1
E£9 'AZO U. I .... •,. •"• „S .. .. .:..l..,", ....:... •tai
.�..... ... € •.467: •• 'is .:� :08 owe. ,
I• 9L4 W8 •� 1Ni3 Z6 1
D --- —fig — ----- -- — -- — e �, F +.---- --- ---- O --•t ----�+ -- =� —z I '{-•
OV
oti •� i I 1 11 1
o' Co�� j i ,” I ��I I °
,�r'�_ . T54 _ �' Igo til •
_ b �
F1
I Z8 \ 1 l..l— - EOZ 69T
LZ
—. o��, I�•���'L,-�-.�jl _ �i . I. :_ I. �i� -moi � I J _.� . .�.
964 M, z^. L— (
— W8-----QW B------- I — --- ----- —
442_ - ,' `t ( ---Lzo
N \\ , we
\ire Uoluq,
N �,?,x.,.��`ate ':•�-' .• � � I •� til=�/
WHO
oz
kv
_-
I,
d I
----------
El 9
.. •.• � __ '1.' \ I \:. _ :.�, ::::"` "mak
I
J
I
I
bi �.
I � _
I
nr
'I
I
.. I
- - J
I
I \ > \I
I
I
I
a
o u /
• P
f PlaA
"�d5 bZ4 t61 i __ __ _ II ` °,lal4)
�' j C' s I .. 1'.l�, '+ t 11�• 't Itl4$!HI r / 1 5��. 1
+ •ate(" •� - + ,
1 / fq6 ( Ci�s:4•
33
yl—
I I^'" ��1� r� • ,weld i ,�"
m -moi m a o s - ��_ ssr.
? D cr*x
mC:
D �
D '� I •or a9 1C 9
J h�� �, �� �� .� 1. r —1 It We
The APA was subdivided into two zones . Zone 1 , as defined
in the aquifer protection ordinance, ij the area between the
1-year groundwater travel time contour and the well field.
The location of the Zone 1 boundary was determined based on
probable groundwater velocities . Groundwater velocities
were estimated based on available pumping test data and hy-
draulic gradients estimated from the potentiometric maps .
Zone 2 , as defined in the ordinance, is the area between the
1-year travel time contour and the boundary of the APA.
Zone 2 encompasses upland areas north and south of the Cedar
River valley that contribute recharge to the Cedar River
aquifer (see Figure 4 ) .
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
The well field monitoring study also consisted of sampling
groundwater from four of the City of Renton monitoring
wells. Priority pollutant analyses were conducted on the
samples to obtain supplemental data on the quality of the
Cedar River aquifer. As shown in Table 1 , groundwater in
the Cedar River aquifer satisfies current and proposed maxi-
mum contaminant levels (MCLs) specified by the Environmental
Protection Agency for drinking water.
1 1The 1-year groundwater travel time contour encompasses that
portion of the aquifer wherein groundwater would migrate to
' the well field within 365 days.
i
1
1
xiii
1
1
Table 1
COMPARISON OF MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION LEVELS (ug/1) WITH
WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RESULTS
CITY OF RENTON MONITORING WELLS
MCLa June 12, 1986, Sampling Results Detection
Constituent Current Proposed MW1 MW4 MW5 MW7 Limit
Inorganic
Arsenic 50 ND ND ND ND 5
Barium 1,000 NM NM NM NM -
Cadmium 10 ND ND 2 2 1
Chromium 50 1 1 3 2 --
Selenium 10 ND ND ND ND 5
Lead 50 ND ND ND ND 10
Nitrate 10,000 NM NM NM NM --
Organic
Endrin 0.2 ND ND ND ND 0.04
Lindane 4 ND ND ND ND 0.02
Methoxychlor 100 ND ND ND ND 0.1
Toxaphene 0.5 ND ND ND ND 5
2,4-D 100
2,4,5-TP silvex 10
Benzene 5 ND ND ND ND 1
Carbon tetrachloride 5 ND ND ND ND 1
1,2-Dichloroethane 5 ND ND ND ND 1
1,1-Dichloroethylene 7 ND ND ND ND
p-Dichlorobenzene 750 ND ND ND ND 1
1,1,1-Trichloroethane 200 ND ND ND ND 1
Trichloroethylene 5 ND ND ND ND 1
Vinyl chloride 1 ND ND ND ND 1
aMaximum contaminant levels, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, September 1986.
Note: ND = not detected.
NM = not measured.
xiV
i
' Section 1
INTRODUCTION
' PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Background
' In 1984 the City of Renton completed the well field protec-
tion study (CH2M HILL, 1984 ) . The scope of this study
' included:
1 . An evaluation of available geologic and hydrologic in-
formation pertaining to the Cedar River aquifer and
' contributing recharge areas
2. An identification of potential contamination sources
and their possible impact on the City of Renton well
field
3 . Development of possible methods for eliminating or con-
trolling potential contamination sources or minimizing
their impact on the well field
The well field protection study concluded that the available
geologic and hydrologic information was not sufficient to
determine rates and directions of groundwater movement in
the vicinity of the well field. As a result, the study rec-
ommended that Cedar River levels and groundwater elevations
be monitored to determine how the Cedar River aquifer re-
sponds to different well field pumping conditions and sea-
sonal variations in streamflow and aquifer recharge. Based
on this recommendation, the City of Renton contracted with
CH2M HILL to conduct the well field monitoring study.
' Objectives
' The original objectives of the well field monitoring study
were to determine :
' 1 . Rate and direction of groundwater movement under dif-
ferent pumping conditions
2 . Interactions between the Cedar River and the aquifer
' The City of Renton subsequently expanded the study to in-
clude two additional objectives:
1 . Delineation of the boundaries of an aquifer protection
area (APA) for the well field to satisfy the provisions
of the City of Renton aquifer protection ordinance
1-1
' 2. Groundwater sampling to obtain additional information
on existing water quality conditions in the Cedar River
aquifer
' SCOPE OF THE REPORT
This report documents the work that was conducted to meet
each of the study objectives. The scope of work, as out-
lined in an engineering services contract between the City
of Renton and CH2M HILL, was as follows:
' 1 . Determine the number, location, size, and configuration
of groundwater monitoring wells and river stage gages
' to measure water level fluctuations in the vicinity of
the well field
2 . Identify required monitoring equipment and develop a
' monitoring program
3 . Subcontract the drilling and construction of the moni-
toring wells
4 . Assist the City of Renton in the installation of the
' monitoring equipment and in the initiation of data
collection
5 . Determine rates and directions of groundwater movement
' based on water level data collected by the City of
Renton
6 . Delineate the boundaries of an APA for the well field
7. Analyze groundwater samples collected from selected
monitoring wells to obtain additional groundwater qual-
ity information on the Cedar River aquifer
REPORT ORGANIZATION
' The report is organized in four major sections . Section 2
discusses the monitoring network that was installed to meas-
ure water level fluctuations in the Cedar River aquifer and
Cedar River. This section presents monitoring well and
stage gage locations and discusses the methods used to drill
and construct the monitoring wells and to measure water
' levels. Finally, the lateral extent of the Cedar River
aquifer is presented based on available geologic
information.
Section 3 discusses how the water level data collected by
the City of Renton were analyzed to determine directions of
groundwater movement in the vicinity of the well field and
' Cedar River-aquifer interactions. This section also dis-
cusses how the estimated directions of groundwater movement
1-2
' were, in1turn, used to delineate a "zone of potential
capture" for the well field.
' Section 4 discusses how the boundary of the zone of poten-
tial capture was combined with the Cedar River drainage bound-
ary to delineate the boundary of an APA for the City of Renton
well field.
Finally, Section 5 presents water quality sampling results.
' RELATED STUDIES
During the same time frame that the well field monitoring
' study was being conducted, several other studies were con-
ducted in the vicinity of the well field by Ecology and
Environment Incorporated (E&E) , Olympic Pipe Line Company
(OLPC) , Pacific Car and Foundary Company (PACCAR) , and RH2
' Engineering. In addition, the City of Renton drilled three
new production wells to replace existing production wells
(PW1 , PW2 , and PW3) , and a test well in the Maplewood Golf
' Course. Investigations conducted as part of these studies
provided additional hydrogeologic and groundwater quality
information in the vicinity of the well field. Each study
is summarized below.
Site Inspection of Pacific Car and Foundary Company (E&E,
1986)
E&E conducted a file review and site inspection of the
PACCAR facility in Renton, Washington. This facility is
' located directly north of the City of Renton well field.
The purpose of the study was to evaluate the facility' s
status within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Un-
controlled Hazardous Waste Site Program. During the site
' inspection, soil and groundwater samples were collected on
the PACCAR facility, and groundwater samples were collected
from selected City of Renton monitoring and production
wells. Analyses of the groundwater samples produced
additional information on groundwater quality in the Cedar
River aquifer.
1The zone of potential capture is that portion of an aquifer
wherein all groundwater would flow to a well or well field
if it were pumped continuously.
1-3
! Olympic Pipe Line Company Leak Abatement Study (GeoEngineers,
Inc . , 1986b, 1987a, 1987b, and 1987c)
On October 1 , 1986 , OLPC initiated a study to evaluate a
leak from its two product pipelines that traverse the Cedar.
River valley approximately 1 mile east and regionally up-
gradient of the well field. The study initially involved
soil-gas reconnaissance to determine the leak location.
Subsequently, a hydrogeologic investigation involving the
installation of 31 monitoring wells and groundwater sampling
was conducted to determine the extent of groundwater contam-
ination. Analyses of groundwater samples found benzene,
toluene, and xylene (typical components of petroleum prod-
ucts) to be present in several of the monitoring wells .
Measured groundwater elevations showed that groundwater in
the vicinity of the leak moves to the southwest and gener-
ally discharges to the Cedar River. Little free petroleum
product was detected in the monitoring wells; most of it was
found to be distributed in the unsaturated zone. Remedial
actions implemented at the site include two vapor recovery
systems and three fuel recovery wells . Ongoing monitoring
of spill cleanup has been conducted.
' PACCAR Defense Systems Site Assessment and Remedial Action
Plan (Hart-Crowser, 1986a, 1986b, and 1987b)
PACCAR conducted a site assessment of its facility in
E Renton. The site assessment involved combining the results
of a number of earlier studies wherein soil andg roundwater
sampling was conducted. The study concluded that soils be-
neath the facility contain elevated concentrations of metals
and low concentrations of volatile and semivolatile organic
chemicals . Except for arsenic, nickel, and chromium, metal
concentrations in groundwater beneath the facility generally
met primary drinking water standards . Low concentrations of
volatile and semivolatile organic chemicals were detected in
onsite monitoring wells. The remedial action plan recom-
mends no remedial actions be implemented at the facility
except in one area where high concentrations of polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) were detected in soil. Remedial
actions proposed for this area include removal of visually
contaminated soil, backfilling the area with clean soil,
paving the area with asphalt, and quarterly sampling of
' groundwater. Since completing the site assessment and reme-
dial action evaluation, PACCAR initiated additional site
investigations that included the installation of offsite
monitoring wells and monthly water level monitoring. Based
on water level monitoring during the period of May to June
of 1987 , it was concluded that the "capture area" of the
Renton well field extends to the southeastern corner of the
PACCAR site and that groundwater flow from the PACCAR site
to the well field is probably less than 10 gpm.
1-4
Well Field Aquifer Test (RH2 Engineering, 1987a and 1987b)
During the period of June 24 to 26 , 1987 , a well field aqui-
fer test was conducted. The test consisted of an 8-hour
nonpumping period to allow the aquifer to recover to rela-
tively static conditions . Next, all of the existing pro-
duction wells and a recently completed replacement production
well were pumped for 24 hours at a rate approximately equal
to the current well field water right of 11, 400 gallons per
minute (gpm) . This was followed b17 an increase in the pump-
ing rate to 15, 000 gpm for a period of 25 hours. The test
concluded with a 1/2-hour shutdown of all the wells . During
the test, water levels in the production wells and selected
monitoring wells were measured. The flow rate of the Cedar
River was measured upstream and downstream of the well field
at the end of the 8-hour nonpumping period and the two pump-
ing periods . The results of the test showed that there was
no detectable decrease in flow in the Cedar River as a re-
sult of pumping the well field at either 11 ,400 gpm or
15, 000 gpm. The results also showed that pumping of the
well field influences groundwater movement south of the
Cedar River, indicating that the river does not act as a
hydraulic barrier to groundwater movement, as was originally
thought.
Maplewood Golf Course Test Well (GeoEngineers , Inc . , 1986a)
A test well was drilled at the Maplewood Golf Course to
evaluate the potential for developing an additional source
of municipal water supply. The 8-inch test well was drilled
to a depth of 182 feet below ground surface. During drill-
ing, two aquifer units were encountered, an upper aquifer
extending from 15 to 44 feet below ground surface and a
lower aquifer extending from 150 to 177 feet below ground
surface. A 15-foot well screen was installed between the
depths of 157 and 172 feet. Pumping test results indicate
that the well could yield between 300 and 500 gpm. Water
quality sampling found that manganese exceeded the drinking
water standard.
Replacement Production Wells (Hart-Crowser, 1987a)
The City of Renton drilled three new production wells to
replace existing production wells PW1 , PW2 , and PW3; the
replacement wells are referred to as RP71 , RW2 , and RW3 . All
three wells are located 50 to 100 feet southeast of PWl and
PW2 . The wells range in depth from 70 to 96 feet below
ground surface and have a maximum design pumping rate of
6, 600 gpm.
1-5
1
Section 2
MONITORING NETWORK
Monitoring wells and Cedar River stage gaging stations were
constructed to measure water level fluctuations in the
vicinity of the well field. This chapter describes monitor-
ing well and stage gage locations , monitoring well drilling
and construction methods, and water level measurement proce-
dures . It also presents the approximate extent of the Cedar
River aquifer based on available hydrogeologic information.
MONITORING LOCATIONS
Figure 2-1 shows the general location of the five production
wells (PW1 , PW2 , PW3 , PW8 , and PW9) that form the City of
Renton well field. Near the end of the well field monitor-
ing study the City of Renton completed construction of re-
placement wells RW1 , RW2, and RW3 . RW1 , RW2 , and RW3 are
located 50 to 100 feet southeast of wells PW1 and PW2 (see
Figure 2-1) . Once construction is completed, the City of
Renton plans to use PW1 and PW2 as observation wells and PW3
as an emergency supply well.
Prior to the initiation of the well field monitoring study
there were two monitoring wells (MW8 and MW9) in the immedi-
ate vicinity of the well field (see Figure 2-1) . A two-
phased approach was used to install nine additional monitor-
ing wells . During Phase 1 , five monitoring wells (MW1 , MW3 ,
MW4 , MW5 , and MW6) were installed between 500 and 1 ,300 feet
regionally downgradient of the well field (see Figure 2-2) .
The reason for locating these wells regionally downgradient
of the well field was to define the extent to which the well
field reverses the regional groundwater gradient back toward
the well field when the production wells are in operation.
Except for MW1 , all of the wells were installed north of the
Cedar River because it was originally thought that the river
was a significant source of recharge and acts as a hydraulic
barrier to groundwater movement. As will be discussed
later, the Cedar River is actually a minor source of re-
charge in the vicinity of the well field and pumping does
influence groundwater movement south of the river. The
other well installed during Phase 1 (MW7) was located re-
gionally upgradient of the well field (see Figure 2-2) .
After monitoring groundwater elevations for several months ,
it was discovered that the well field influences groundwater
movement farther to the northwest than was originally antic-
ipated. Under Phase 2 , two additional monitoring wells
(MW10 and MW11) were installed regionally downgradient of
MW4 (see Figure 2-2) . At the same time, permission was
granted by Burlington Northern to install another regionally
upgradient well (MW2) on the south side of the Cedar River.
2-1
i
— x� W
c C
O O C 4 T a q�1a�c h z��E 'A Z
cc
OI x ^
N N W w
W LL
:+ O
w 3 3 �+ g �J
.;, ee `••��s�RY. �`rY`R'��f,�a�. � xric���. �Mk��'K �' ,sa`�`�� '
MW
ttC
h
�N
� '_ i i Rt3 �`,x.,, -�r h"'r 5�''� .nix a x¢ •s-r �i �,�
,>� w �, S Z k�•4 �"-� :FSS� ' x%m � ;+
c
�' : yy3�� .�R:� v�'�r� � z�R 's ���• fx r �. S.:
k .:. Y R ,. 1N 'h^ � �..� : •3.51. E sac
z:
NA
s cc x
WE
t
E+ <rk r
F
y.� 1
raw �
9• ,� •�, mac. P ,+A�' '�"-3 v��
R o�^
00 a ..tri - om ,. "'n '� ::' i t,. "�. C
LO x
Ln
w
z
' 2-2
i
3 W ., 3
F— Q
_o
Z
00
c o s N LL!
mz
LL
Wfi a � =Z O
xm �'
3 F 0 O r
CL Nmv
H
? a
ao
ta
Ir
k
r�
k •� r
b t
3
M.
U
i
a
E Y
" tine err
W O,
Mir
INST
LL
3 t f
Ocn, i.
h
CL
"�..\ Nom:' 1 w.: � � ..:• A� x( 1A
LLI
p�
2-3
i
Detailed site maps showing the specific location of each
monitoring well installed during the well field monitoring
study are included in Appendix A.
Figure 2-2 also shows the location of the three Cedar River
stage gaging (SG) stations. SG1 was located directly across
the river from MW2 , near Carco Theatre. The staff gage at
the USGS gaging station downstream of the Mill Avenue bridge
was used for SG2. SG3 was located on the Wells Avenue
bridge. Except for SG2 , the stage gaging stations consisted
of an existing reference point that could be conveniently
used to measure the elevation of the Cedar River. Thus,
staff gages were not installed at SG1 or SG3 . Detailed de-
scriptions of the location of each stage gaging station are
presented later in this section.
WELL DRILLING
Hokkaido Drilling and Development drilled, constructed, and
developed each new monitoring well.
Prior to drilling, well locations were checked for any under-
ground utilities. The private firm, Underground Utility
Locators, was contacted and informed of the proposed well
locations . Leaflets explaining the purpose of the project
and the likelihood of noise were distributed to the resi-
dents living near each well prior to beginning drilling
operations.
All monitoring wells were drilled using the cable-tool
' method. The method consists of lifting and dropping a
string of tools suspended on a cable. The bit at the bottom
of the tool string rotates a few degrees between each stroke
so that the cutting face of the bit strikes a different area
of the hole with each stroke . Cuttings were bailed from the
hole after advancing the bit anywhere from 2 to 10 feet.
Sections of 8-inch steel casing were driven ahead of the bit ,
to keep the hole open after the cuttings were bailed. Bor-
ing logs were kept by a geologist. After the desired depth
was reached, the drill string was pulled from the hole, and
well construction was initiated.
Appendix B contains well logs for each monitoring well de-
scribing the types of geologic materials encountered while
drilling. Well logs for the existing and replacement pro-
duction wells and the Maplewood Golf Course test well are
provided in Appendix C.
WELL CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT
Figure 2-3 shows the general construction of each monitoring
well. PVC casing (2-inch) was assembled and lowered into
the borehole, and centering guides were placed at both ends
of the screen to assure an even sand pack around the screen.
2-4
PVC CAP (VENTED)
CONCRETE METER
GROUND +1 BOX WITH LID
-�8"STEEL CASING WITH
LOCKING CAP
CEMENTPLUG
DRAIN PIPE
w
J
m
Q
Q
>
2" PVC SCH 40 THREADED
FLUSH COUPLED CASING
CEMENT/BENTONITE SEAL
N
+t BENTONITE PELLETS
+I FINE SAND
N
+1 - CENTERING GUIDES
MACHINE SLOTTED SCH 40
- PVC SCREEN (20 SLOT SIZE)
SAND PACK (AQUA 8)
INSTALL 2"CASING THROUGH
= 8" MIN. TEMPORARY
STEEL CASING
Lu
CENTERING GUIDES
m
Q BOTTOM SUMP WITH FLUSH
> THREADED END CAP
NTS II
FIGURE 2-3
GENERALIZED WELL CONSTRUCTION
CITY OF RENTON MONITORING WELLS
CITY OF RENTON,WA
2-5
The 8-inch steel casing was pulled back about 3 feet to al-
low the native formation to cave around the bottom sump,
thus anchoring the well casing. Sand pack was then placed
to a level of about 2 feet above the top of the screen as
the 8-inch steel casing was removed. Fine sand, bentonite
pellets, and a cement/bentonite seal were placed around the
' well casing as shown in Figure 2-3 .
Concrete meter boxes were used to complete the wells at the
surface (see Figure 2-3) . A locking cap was placed over
each well. The PVC cap used to cover the well casing was
vented to allow the water level in the wells t h
o change free-
ly. A drain pipe was installed to allow any water collect-
ing in the meter box to drain away. The surface completion
details apply to all wells except for MW2 . MW2 is completed
with an 8-inch steel casing extending 2-1/2 feet above
ground.
After the installation was complete, the wells were devel-
oped. The development process removed fines in and around
the sand pack and also removed nonformation water introduced
during the drilling process . The wells were developed using
compressed air introduced into the bottom sump to produce a
surge-and-lift action. Development was continued until
visibly clear water was produced from the wells, usually
within about 1/2 hour.
Appendix B contains well construction information for each
well. Table 2-1 provides the total well depth, screened
interval, and sump length for each monitoring well.
Table 2-1
MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
Total Screened Sump
Well Depth Interval Length
Number (ft) (ft) (ft)
MWl 49 38 to 48 1
MW2 50 35 to 45 5
MW3 53 38 to 48 5
MW4 50 35 to 45 5
MW5 50 35 to 45 5
MW6 50 35 to 45 5
MW7 50 35 to 45 5
MW10 37 22 to 32 5
MWil 40 25 to 35 5
2-6
' WATER LEVEL ELEVATIONS
Each well and stream gage was surveyed to determine the ele-
vation of a convenient point for measuring water levels.
Table 2-2 lists the measuring point elevation for each pro-
duction and monitoring well. Table 2-3 provides the same
information for each stage gage, including the location of
the measuring point.
During the period of March 1986 to March 1987, groundwater
and Cedar River elevations were measured 21 times . The
first two rounds of monitoring were conducted by CH2M HILL
staff on March 7 and 12, 1986 . Subsequent rounds were con-
ducted by City of Renton staff. CH2M HILL provided City of
Renton staff with training on proper water level measurement
procedures and assisted City of Renton staff on several of
their first monitoring rounds. To promote consistency in
the collection and reporting of water level monitoring re-
sults, the City of Renton was provided a standard form for
recording measurements (see Figure 2-4 ) . CH2M HILL and the
City of Renton made all water level measurements with an
electronic water level sounder. Table 2-4 summarizes all
the water level data collected during the study.
Table 2-4 also contains the water levels measured by
CH2M HILL during the well field aquifer test. Water levels
in all of the monitoring wells were measured three times :
(1) at the end of the initial 8-hour recovery period, (2)
after pumping the well field at 11 ,400 gpm for 24 hours, and
(3) after pumping the well field at 15, 000 gpm for 25 hours.
EXTENT OF THE CEDAR RIVER AQUIFER
Monitoring well, replacement well, and test well installa-
tion provided additional hydrogeologic information useful in
delineating the approximate extent of the Cedar River aqui-
fer (see Figure 2-5) . It is important to recognize that the
aquifer limits shown in Figure 2-5 do not necessarily repre-
sent distinct boundaries that separate geologic materials
containing groundwater. Rather, these limits represent the
extent of the highly productive sand, gravel, and cobble
deposits found within the Cedar River valley and west of the
mouth of the valley. Groundwater occurs in less productive
materials beyond the limits shown in Figure 2-5; these less
productive materials contribute recharge to and accept dis-
charge from the Cedar River aquifer. The limits of the aqui-
fer are described below.
Lateral Extent
The lateral (northern and southern) extent of the aquifer is
defined by the Cedar River valley walls. The walls delineate
the contact between the alluvial and delta deposits of the
aquifer and the glacial drift, till, and outwash deposits of
the uplands.
2-7
Table 2-2
SURVEYED ELEVATION OF EACH NEW MONITORING WELL
AND EXISTING OBSERVATION AND PRODUCTION WELLS
Elevation
Well (NGVD)a Description of Measuring Point
MW1 40.91 Top of PVC casingb
MW2 53.32 Top of PVC casingb
MW3 35.50 Top of PVC casingb
MW4 36.44 Top of PVC casingb
MW5 38.32 Top of PVC casingb
MW6 38.83 Top of PVC casingb
MW7 47.16 Top of PVC casing b
' MW8 45.21 Top of steel casing
MW9 46.26 Top of steel casiEg
MW10 34.12 Top of PVC casing
MW11 32.24 Top of PVC casing
PW1 39.4 Access port for transducer Ared bushing)
c
PW2 39.79 Access port for well casing
PW3 30.9 Access port for transducer (red bushing)c b
PW8 45.70 Top of 1-inch pipe providing access to casingb
PW9 45.13 Top of 1-inch pipe providing access to casing
aNational Geodetic vertical datum.
bWith cap removed.
cOffset of access port from well casing accounted for in measured
elevation.
dMarked in black "MP."
Upgradient Extent
Based on available information, it is difficult to delineate
the upgradient (i.e. , eastern) extent of the aquifer. The
aquifer appears to extend at least several miles upgradient
of the bedrock narrows (see Figure 2-5) . Monitoring wells
installed as part of the Olympic Pipe Line leak abatement
study (GeoEngineers, Inc. , 1986b) encountered alluvial sands
and gravels, as did a test well installed at the Maplewood
Golf Course (GeoEngineers, Inc. , 1986a) ; Figure 2-5 shows
the location of the test well.
1 2-8
i
CITY OF RENTON
Public Works Department
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS (Field)
Measured by
' Weather Conditions_
LOCA- Meas. Point Depth to Transducer Transducer Water ** Pumping
DATE TIME TION Elevation Water Elevation Reading Elevation Rate (gpm)
PW 1 39.4 -29.1
PW2 39.79
PW3 31.00 -21.4
PW8 45.70 -23.8
PW9 45.13 -29.7
MW 1 40.91
MW2 53.32
MW3 35.50
MW4 36.44
MW5 38.32
MW6 38.83
MW7 47.16
MW 8 45.21 -29.9
MW9 46.26 -27.6
MW10 34.12
MW11 32.24
SG1 32.6
SG2* 15.1
SG3 36.5
SG4 34.96
*At SG2 Water Elevation=Staff Gage Reading+ 15.1
*•Water Elevation=Meas. Point Elevation.—Depth to Water and/or Transducer Elevation+Transducer Reading
FIGURE 2-4
WATER LEVEL RECORDING FORM
CITY OF RENTON
i 2.9
rr rr rr rr rr rr ri r � r r r rr rr r �r rr r r�
f.
cn
N
00 €
Wt-
16
IA
IL
O \i
s
OON N
C "
f 4 €
td it ; /��I m 77
'S 'C) '-
Qk'ti£i
; �J£S'v�`i"' 0• F p ~g • `'•` —dam
'TY ;3' 0 .. 3 l tic. - � a'�.4•
61
£ I .,- O
s x •• l `
�` :•.R, w.. • e>",% a. ,xi�. �..� Vic, \ _Ij
ct, p
».
3 : ••000% •tea• x ; I�O4:,
O r
t •••• ter • . pC D �� ��
a
O Z o0
% ✓ W
�:..
m y
W \
r Cp42
m`• �.
.. O O�v
s s � M C Z O
t
[t m
pm
mD
=t
r_ {D
"
•
1 ,
y «
f..................: s:•, ........ p
CD
nD T
M
Om
DD C
Mr m
m m
GX N
M --qvn o
M
XZ
Do J
C T o 5•
T T
(D
m cD
� w
0
0
0
Table 2-3
SURVEYED ELEVATION OF EACH STAGE GAUGE
' Elevation
Gage (NGVD)a Description of Measuring Point
' SG1 32.6 Painted (red) rock near upstream end of
rock retaining wall, south of Carco
Theatre in Cedar River Park
' SG2 15.1b Staff gage on 2x6 post
SG3 36.5 Top painted bolt on guardrail post in
centerline, upstream edge of Wells Avenue
bridge
' aNational Geodetic vertical datum.
bRiver elevation at SG2 is equal to staff gage reading plus 15.1 feet.
Downgradient Extent
The downgradient (i.e. , northwest, west, and southwest) ex-
tent of the aquifer is also difficult to delineate because
of the complex interlayering of the alluvial and delta de-
posits of the Cedar River with the deposits of Lake Washing-
ton. The alluvial and delta deposits consist of coarse
gravel and cobbles near the mouth of the Cedar River valley.
These deposits become progressively finer grained in a radial
outward direction, grading from sand and gravel to silty
sands . Ultimately, silts and layers of peat, indicative of
' lake-type deposits, are encountered.
This trend is illustrated in a geologic cross-section which
starts at PW1 and progresses north through the PACCAR facil-
ity (see Figure 2-6) . Near PW1 the aquifer materials are
predominantly sand, gravel , and some cobbles . As one moves
to the north, the predominance of sand increases. In the
' vicinity of HC4I and MW10, aquifer materials transition from
sand to silty sand and silt. Another transition occurs in
the vicinity of LW12, with the occurrence of peat layers.
It is this transition that indicates the probable northern
' boundary of the Cedar River aquifer.
Figure 2-7 shows the location of the wells used to construct
the cross-section in relationship to the City of Renton
monitoring well network and a network of "deep" monitoring
wells installed on and near the PACCAR facility.
2-11
i
1
' 10 m v 1n m .fir .mi .n M m u1 n N u1 u1 to N
M m m O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
J1 N N N ry N N N N N N ry N N N N N N N N N
d
ro A A O r D N m 10 m M r 0\ m N v r v
111 10 10 r O N 10 eF 10 £ £ £ C
M N N ry N N N N N N N N N m m m m m a� Z Z Z O
ro N N N N N N N ry ry N N N ry N N N ry N ry ry ry O.
m I 'QN v O r m rm-1 m N r 1p ti ti .-I 10 m m .FED I
N N M N O 10 M O O 01 O O N ry N N Ot
m r r M 0 V 1 N v 1 1 u 1D h 10 10 10 n Z Z
N N N N N N N N N N N N N ry N N N N N N ry C1.
d
V a v T .y 01AV r .-1 01 n m 111 l0 m O r a� V� N 1D d
01 O m .-I C\ M O m m N m M ry N m N m 111 n S
.a
3 CD m m n n 10 1(1 r .p n or m a, O. 01 o a, o r r N
a
N N ttpp'Qn m m a+ v o .. v 10 o v
O ry O N O O N m m N V' M m er u1 O N r 1p 0 O
.y . . .
r, rn n 10 n m m � rn m o o O r r n
ro
a
N ri N H N N N N N N N H N N N N N N N N N
F a
v d
to
10 .�u1 1D .+ m 1c u1 m m a m 10 r o, o .-+ n
F £I m O r r O V t. Q\ m u1 m M try m 0. M O e-1 m m n m m aT fi
a o m W w co co r` of m w Ln ui m n r O m 0
O M o O m -a
N
H r r i-1 H 01 .I 10 M m .i .Y ri N .-r O 0 t!1 v m .-1 . N d
01 T 1! M N U1 M m 01 10 O M
3 N N N ry N N ry N N N N N N N N N N ry N N N N N N b
W I 10 m m M O m N n N m m
1p 01 m m 1p r-1 b M 01 r N .� m vl r-1 N ul M ry m n M d� 111
£ O O 1p n n n 0 V1 10 m m C1 m � o �
rl O N N •-I N N ti N N r-1 N N N N N rl N N .+ N
E N N T m m m m n r rm m m 0 0 0 .d - .+ m r d
C
7
O• M 10 .y N N M sT v O m n 10 T "J
eT O N n .-I m 10 10 O m
10 n m m m O m 0 1 10 � 0
D!r I r V� M AO O M 111 111 Q 111 C M
O O O m o 01 M y 7
- - o m O - N r - a
C ZH N O N N rl N N N N N N N N
N � #
N 111 ill O N N 01 N r d� N 10 N n ry r T 'o0
V1 v N
,p 3N £ M m m rn se r to rn m u1 u1 m ry 10 m M m r m r N r S
F W N N N ry ry N N ry N N N N N N N N N N N
a
..7 I m N m Q\ n 01 3
W .-a m 01 10 N C1
3 £'
01 N O N n 10
fi
F 10 < M m 1p M m N M OtA.m-r O\ N V1A111 N m C 111 .-1 U
Mm m m rn m m v 10 rn m 1n M u1 0 o m m o rn n n ro
a oaoo ^c � m � oowooimrym0m00 z€
OD 10 m 10 O r M M Y1 N n W r m M 1\ N M
m m .-I O 01
W Z O m r m m m 10 n n ul m m m 0 0 0 0
,Ef)¢.
S 3 y
SO l0 - N u1 m mIn N m W
fly G 3m3 £ 01 10 m '7 V ££ m O
.0-i m
U
a 0
O
0!. 1a 3N m O N m V�E £y yg' O T ul T a• ul .-1 m t} n ul O1 y£� H iS. 3 O D\ 01 m v m O Z Z m m M m m m oo, n n o M 2 2 W
3 .-1
' d
O O m N m 01
N M N m N 0• r 10 V� O 01 ul 01 01 .ti m YI m .-1 N m C
a
mI W
' x x x x x x o
o y
ti
mI x x x x x x x x x x x x x x +�+
d o c
.r
m 4 M
x X x x x x x x x w b
d
d Ad H
N
� x x x x x x x x x x u ro
3 a+ L d 6
d 7 S W
X X X x x X X x X X X X X X yO N m m G \
C7 6 C II
d 6 £L
1p "Do
10WX0M1010 10 mmn UnUr Ur Cd p m m m 0 m m 0 O m m m m m m 0\v 'H0Nd\ \ \ \ \ a M to n n n m m m m m a+ rn a+ .+ .� .+ M 10 to 10 ro A U Z y
2-12
Elevation (Ft. above NGVD)
V N N L
O UI O cn O
L I I i D
�xn
•ov
n =.a
N N 01
O X
cd3
–m
0
m
m Cedar River
v
m cn G7<n � v: L7 cn c7 L7 �
C m m m m y
CL mm ,� m
a < a < a < a <
m m m m m
0a > > m
Qm a a �
<
N �
d d 0r
m ] ] d ] m m`G
`m a a< a aI
36
� � m
G7 cn p(n rn p p(n N a
m m m m m
� a m ° am ma a
–m – m
c a a r
rn d
w 3
3
CL
S
n
I a cD
7 m 7.z m = :3m
a< a m a a<
1—T1�7 CCD m
<� a a� a v
L�to < r O
A m N 3 D
cn
cD�
r
N
m m ° N c o
CL a �
> > m a
a a a <<
C) v m
c
m D m
< -
m
r
U) p m N 0 O
m � a- m � m
� a vcn (D CL
–m
CL -a a
r
rn
m cn rn (n o
- m
v w o-
m m
m �
o-
N
I
N
W
n C)Z T
_+ MI05
O r0� � r
O = m
-
m — D
m N m N N O
Z 0� C=—
CL 0)
Z M � m ? a
N
D
m
n
O
Z
1
CW HI LL s20080.Ao
AMW2 LEGEND
LW1 " PW Existing Production Well
MW City of Renton Monitoring Well
rA � I' LW,DM,HC PACCAR Monitoring Well
and MW2
3
LW6 r '
N10 Nor
is ak a• �. v �:
HC61
� A F
;
MW10 F �u
q. 4F �� may. . " ... '..' '�A6 • ;.'
�e
MW4
�L
Mai
�MW9 '
PW9 a'
1 a a PWa
;
1p �1
0 250 500 FT
SCALE(Approx.) �] FIGURE 2-7
CITY OF RENTON AND
DEEP PACCAR MONITORING WELLS
' 2-14 CITY OF RENTON
Appendix D contains additional geologic cross-sections that
illustrate how the delta fan grades progressively to finer-
grained materials radially outward from the well field until
silt and peat deposts are encountered. These cross-sections
were prepared in support of the Cedar River aquifer sole-
source aquifer petition (CH2M HILL, 1988) .
The downgradient limits of the aquifer were extended to the
� southwest in the direction of the old Cedar River streambed
(see Figure 2-5) . Prior to its diversion into Lake Washing-
ton in 1916 , the Cedar River flowed to the southeast towards
the Black River.
2-15
i
Section 3
WELL FIELD ZONE OF POTENTIAL CAPTURE
When a well isum ed a cone of depression forms around the
P P P
well. If -
e the well is pumping in an aquifer with approxi-
mately uniform regional flow, a flow net typical of that
shown in Figure 3-1 will be created. An important feature
of this flow net is the groundwater divide. The groundwater
divide bounds the area of the aquifer supplying groundwater
to the well (Bear, 1979) . The groundwater divide will prop-
agate outward from the well until recharge from regional
inflow equals the pumping rate of the well. Thus, the posi-
tion of the groundwater divide will change, depending upon
the well pumping rate and the regional groundwater flow
rate.
The area encompassed by the groundwater divide is called the
"zone of potential capture. " Theoretically, all of the
groundwater within the zone of potential capture will be
captured if the well is pumped continuously for a long time.
Practically, most wells are pumped intermittently and ground-
water near the boundary of the zone of potential capture may
never reach a well because groundwater travel times are
longer than the duration of pumping. Thus, the actual zone
of capture for a well is generally smaller than the zone of
potential capture.
Because of the overwhelming need to protect the Cedar River
aquifer from contamination and because the entire well field
is pumped relatively continuously during summer when water
demands are the highest, the well field monitoring study
focused on delineating the zone of potential capture rather
than the actual zone of capture for the well field. The
zone of potential capture represents a larger and, there-
fore, more conservative area for purposes of aquifer pro-
tection. In addition, delineation of the actual zone of
capture would be difficult based simply on the measurement
of water levels; detailed computer modeling would be
required.
To define the zone of potential capture for the City of
Renton well field, the water level data collected during the
well field monitoring study were analyzed to determine :
1 . Probable directions of groundwater movement under dif-
ferent pumping conditions
2 . Cedar River-aquifer interactions
Probable directions of groundwater movement were determined
by constructing contour maps of measured water level eleva-
tions (i.e. , potentiometric maps) . Potentiometric maps were
3-1
r
r
3
0
' J
LL
2
cc
r cca 0
cc z LL
ELL
0O
J
J
W
3
r u z
3 a
0
Z
W
T
0
c�Wa
W
?LL �� J io
O :::; : :. C7D W
cc
E- Z d
OZ
a
a: cn
c�
N V: � <°n
LL Q
r
N
W
t
z
_J
a
W
N
r a
z
J W
J F
W
3 a
5
0
W
3-2
constructed for pumping conditions ranging from no wells in
operation (i.e. , no pumping) to pumping at 15 ,000 gpm, a
pumping rate which is approximately 3 , 600 gpm above the
current well field water right of 11 ,400 gpm.
Cedar River-aquifer interactions were determined by compar-
ing fluctuations in water levels measured on the opposite
side of the river from the well field (i.e. , MW1) with fluc-
tuations in Cedar River elevations and well field pumping.
Cedar River flow rates, measured by the USGS during the well
field aquifer test, were used to confirm the observed
interactions.
The remainder of this section discusses further how probable
directions of groundwater movement and Cedar River-aquifer
interactions were determined. The section concludes with a
discussion of how the zone of potential capture, for pur-
poses of aquifer protection, was delineated.
PROBABLE DIRECTIONS OF GROUNDWATER MOVEMENT
Figures 3-2 to 3-9 present potentiometric maps for selected
dates when the City of Renton measured water levels . Each
map represents a different pumping condition ranging from
nonpumping to pumping four out of the five existing produc-
tion wells. Table 3-1 lists the date of monitoring and
pumping condition corresponding to each potentiometric map.
t
Table 3-1
MONITORING DATE AND WELL FIELD PUMPING
CONDITION FOR EACH POTENTIOMETRIC MAP
Total Pumping
Potentiometric Production Wells Rate
Map Monitoring Date in Operation (gpm)
Figure 3-2 January 23, 1987 None 0
Figure 3-3 November 16, 1986 PW1 1,700
Figure 3-4 November 8, 1986 PW9 1,150
Figure 3-5 September 16, 1986 PW8 3,450
Figure 3-6 November 6, 1986 PW3 1,500
Figure 3-7 September 11, 1986 PW1, PW2 4,700
Figure 3-8 August 26, 1986 PW1, PW2, PW8 7,760
Figure 3-9 August 8, 1986 PW1, PW3, PW8, PW9 10,375
Figure 3-2 is a potentiometric map for what approximates a
nonpumping condition; operational constraints on the City of
Renton distribution system made it impossible to shut off
all five production wells long enough for complete recovery
of the water table. At the time that water levels were
3-3
O rn
cc
W Q r
s
3 w N
as O G¢
C zZ ZWa
p m m Z Q
LL LL LL LL LL O• cr
C LL LL LL LL LL W
0 0 0 0 0 0 QZ OW mC x H
V — N co co W cr 0 �W
00z) W— Z)m i x t l QZ
3 3 3 3 3 z0 m0 z5 z, f W Q
o a Q. a a a OQ� ¢3 _j Ch J
a' cm7v ?� W p Q
<
_ 3
LU a
Z O
Z ie04 W
z Q
MQ>
�N WZm W
LL
k s a v
All
3
c ppCo
1%L i
CL
C
Rft
W r.,
t0 ti
� c
m
N S r fi v a£c S'
v,^
; � �N�gS'
Z
co
N ,., a*, t s: a p
i F i \43C ZYc Q
a
�F p WL„ O �X \y its Lz N Q
Y
cm ul
3-
4
ILLILLI
..",.. ..........
� yz 3
O �Z G QW 6 n. '� x Z m
p oC 0O ¢
O LU
LL LLLL LL LL F.- gr NLLH LU W3
Q° O O O O QZ (7W QOQ m� y �zg O W
r N th ao as 30� O� RZ3 2W4, a
01 G_D W— x00 St .: r
a a a a a a zgoo s� opZ Z�
E O�j Z W D CVIL O J Q W Z
LL W t
C' C7wV iLL aha 3� ���z� § � � W p Q
Z
WAZO
■
e� W
LU
WZU.O
L16 Q O
t4 a
all
N kms -40�,, ZNAl
�
1p
M C a
CM
Cl
y77
y
o' :fIIA
h`�i' kIN
-
...:F �' ` � viz: S`'-a`,<•.• E m m��
y
lezo62
I F.
IR
LL
co
a
?a
• LO x
$ a= 12a
G
Q
W
Y.
J
rCD, y�
.. .. w.»....kasba .xK:., x., .. -r...e., .,s �� +�x,.rldy. .::aaw �. ,,. •°.,,.
3-5
r
y' k
Z :, ¢ co
O v
H a T
LU
Q
W Aja C6
s
O > D
W ^a\< r a Y
c zz D zmr W
0 o� a Z m
LL LL LL LL p W O� W W cc a '•
CLL LL LL LL T H ¢V H LL H w 3 , �. O W
O O 00 r a C7 ;COR m �. '
r N CD �Qw WS mzx Q y ���;_ # ... s Q>
X 3 3 3 3 3 zoo ¢� O�z z� >O
-a a n. a a a �aI.- ae3 ccQM _j CO W Z
a' -jcoi ?� a�� 3� s.. s W D
O �3 r3:< x �^ W O Z
rZ I ' rc � F-Z O,- c=
W a �aW Z
WZO �
� m U-
O Q O
x
a s x LL c.s' U U
r r
y'
sum Fr` :_.� 'ate. ,�°x`. `�a'3.. •1 V1a;. .`�S: k., z c�W m v_p�1
E£
On
22
MIS
IN
b
� 4
p ^¢S 5 aFa 3 = �a, n,M LL
o
zt
g a
n
N LU
z � w
� �v �•r�� � Y � '� is �' � � `�S,>r�����.���� ��,,. w'.<, U
3-6
z Go
O Fes' CO
W
LU iu*
3 o w co
rz CA
''a LL LL. LL. U.
LL W �h WLLW �Q
�Q O O O 6 O Q C7W <O< ma 0UJ
�
C7 r N M W M X mw
QQ? WQ XQ0 m
t^.
a3aaaaa <� cc ¢ate mai W
O�yjZ w aV0 JQ
O
LL O 0. W W J (n
Ln
W rIt 3
Z fto
WC3Z
coui ° ■ J F- Z
"
W Lu Z;z
$ (�
r
N
„.� S M..,�X��y.Lx 9,L�, •<,YY �;.",,J r �,. Y`�'r r z `x` a��N.. �.: �a:^� /��' m Z'
U.
All
ig
4
ElLr
>,..s,
r dT
mm.
CD
y3Bh E eA
r
aCL
h'
CY
J
u
x r.
:�,?,.
3-7
Z
I n
o > c NLLJW
F: LL UU. �O 02 mo o � o aa
R
W
U r N M OD Of 3Zm Om �Z3 �W 3> a EC.
c 33333 ZEo ¢o O�Z Zm Z
o a a a a a :ate CL
w3 ¢a6 JN J
-44
Cr 0
W S<
d C7WU ?LL QJv .__. e T x m ''�rtrt
uj V Z
Z Z O
LU
y T • r �'�Jt�'x � �
u
WZr"ll"lo wzo.lj�l 110110
m �
li
t� a
x s i °"Y•W.;��"'a § ' .;a� til�IO �' � �€ � �,z,� {: �'/:K `i
�tg .aye y -� a:.L Y � h � '4•..'7 x+' ."`.'.
d 'w
"
Vax ��
N £s,
Ve
r4 L
� �ra'•z." � 3 '�� d � v
! g Z
PE
C �
3 t M
S E L m
c 08��
a .W
k
�MMUMx �.�,.'^� CR
� + r
�4 ==$=_S
3
CIC
19
fa
U.
LO
CMO
Ln
LU
PIN
3-8
" .- q Inv t0
0 am
¢ ` r
{V
J
E 3 > W
E p Ocr
a CL
cr Lu
IM cm LU
LL LL LL W O— W W CCQzArk N m
g O O O Q CSU QOQ m3 _7''r 0
°
3: Cr coWc �z3 dCWrT _W
r N C.) co a 503 W— XOG
x
CL d d d d 6 'QD mO atQO JCA �
O Z U. aV0 JICU >W
E LL O W in
a' Owu ZLL QOJO 3� kz: J
z s
W O Q
a^
5
c
Z ' cc> 3
so d
W co � r � 34.,E � W 0 Z
O
J I ' �ui
Z Z
C4 M
W Z LL.
MEIRMIM Y! �R
,... � z•";fin 3 �,. N °• x `.� V _
LLOU
=3. ' a:, ��. x �; Z '�� �» �' �` '<��'2 x• �' �` y`.: c
6 1IN
ty:`71�f
' I
�, • sa a Y c
lo T
°'
z zY r m> t m
Em—oma
NYc. m
fid•' a;s CD90
'Se.' .� `
;#z'
z
a
d1,
Ci
Bar cm
Cl
co
Ln x
CL
O sL
dR �;
ei N Q
3-9
�: � - �,� _�-' �`°• ��`� ago
zy
0 R z C)
cr
<
3 w � z NN
c a a a Z Z� ��� Z~
por ppCa o� ¢ p a a �M
C 8 O LL lA7 LL F �V W3 °• YZ :-
O r 0 ti O O3<Z
N O)Pr OD 0 m p Ot W L r Q
_p p
w- ¢
33333 za0 mp zm
CL .�
a a a a a C�z w3 W p 3
O Z� ww CC>
CL OLUO U. LU a
Wz00 i vk. } W x
r r3e sa M Q O W
03 s W=m LL
CC
sem. - Q O
k cc
-�^� ,.,.� ...�•r, .`,� r •� $ cry � \k ;l � # a M
LL Q L)
cm
y ' x �`•.��' X;'J ">,%^'�,' ) Q�:z�� �' z 'fir ��' .
.�\ � �' a ��, s<,�5, ;� � � Ccs � ._• ��x�
r 7
rw �a
vi N
LVs�` n N Of £m
N 3 C..•
rz�ZS L� MEN
z c
pie, k:x a,.a.,,,•>.4 z' ` m m°E'�'u
•P -¢ s ' u2 f0 .r �', yL,• �, .r,; E a m v c
a
n.<o£
�`.'� h � � '� p ''y � 4L.v. •M1',a i m W���O
C
R-Op
.-FE
-'oY ��Y. ''���'•" :mss" 'meq'& ��1 � �=i A iid,... `3�c S .FyFw.. O
c CL
cm LU
k ,;:i'N Y ki'�. A' ynT•". Y vS » Viz. x'� .� �YP . Z
� L F x.•
F
g
r W x
p � �
b
-Z
v
ip
Z5 o to
3-10
Z y c0
O � �
T
W ui
co
3 W 2J Z
E E E GZ N
m cc
O.. r
c a a a Z Z •.
W
OI �s4Y r
O Cf O) Cl O Q x .ia a
pp LL H W O C pC Q r
r O r Cc* r Q C7 m •�a`4.. ^•, � ..za ''r t• ,. W
N M CD Of 3 Z cr C 2 W a ��
523 W� OM
Im 33333 HO ac Z � � WE<
aaaaaa CQz W3 -Aa r° rte cc> 3
E O s a x r
7 oc�0 Z J W W .�o `s Y .: ,s :vizi" ' __.ta' W C3 Z
OLUO _w it
a . : �. .� ter.= H Z p
` 3
W CO Ix
� Y
LUZ U.
W109
te 01.1.1 ME
u
PRIII
Re
jr
tz
A,
L& g 0, z(q
m 3
a Z
x�
co
x,
gym :
• ��„a�a �a.. L Y C � � a z :.
i1 �1Yi
t m H
� �U
�a 3 gan^MI. ui
M
r:
m
a : :�' •3' '"
cm
h � Azx a 6
N Qi O
3� .� '3 r ,',3 x d � �, :K> ''ia ,.a •. � i z` �ks4; a �o
Al
r '� � •+�YG. U m 5 a r
< » n > xs> co x, k.
U-
N NCL
= d
r
Q
cm LU
4M :,a •a*�'L .M. :..<� ^...� ..... .^....a_ ...:.:>..i.,e .. ... «,: .: t�,a is
3-11
measured on January 23 , 1987, none of the wells were operat-
ing; however, all of the wells had been in operation earlier
in the day. Regardless, Figure 3-2 does indicate that the
regional direction of groundwater movement is generally to
the southwest and west, with a component to the northwest.
The southwestern and western components are in the same
direction as the original Cedar River streambed prior to its
diversion towards Lake Washington. Measured groundwater
elevations in the southwestern portion of Renton are lower
than those measured near the well field indicating there is
a gradient towards the Black River. The northwestern
component is in the direction of Lake Washington. Lake
Washington is maintained at an elevation of 13 to 15 feet.
This elevation range is several feet lower than groundwater
elevations measured to the northwest of the well field.
Figure 3-2 illustrates an important feature of the Cedar
River aquifer that needs to be considered when constructing
potentiometric maps . A comparison of the Cedar River eleva-
tion measured at SG1 with the groundwater elevation measured
at MW2 shows a difference of just over 1 foot. As will be
discussed later, this difference in elevation appears to be
due to a zone of low-permeability material that limits com-
munication between the river and the aquifer. Thus , Cedar
River elevations are not representative of water table ele-
vations in the vicinity of the well field.
Figures 3-3 through 3-6 are potentiometric maps for single-
well pumping conditions . These maps illustrate how a
groundwater divide forms regionally downgradient of each
pumping well. Between the pumping well and the groundwater
divide there is a reversal in the direction of groundwater
movement. Beyond the groundwater divide (i.e, farther to
the northwest) , groundwater movement is in the direction of
the regional gradient (see Figure 3-2) . The groundwater
divide shown in each figure delineates the approximate
boundary of the downgradient portion of the aquifer that has
the potential to supply water to the pumping well (i.e. , the
zone of potential capture) . Figures 3-3 through 3-6 illu-
strate the extent of the zone of potential capture when PW1 ,
PW9 , PW8 , and PW3 are in operation, respectively.
It is important to note that the exact position of the
groundwater divide is difficult to determine because the
water table is relatively flat in the area bounded by moni-
toring wells MW3 , MW4 , MW10, and MW11 . Generally, water
level elevations measured at these wells are within several
tenths of a foot.
Figures 3-7 through 3-9 are potentiometric maps for typical
multiple well pumping conditions. With wells PW1 and PW2
pumping (see Figure 3-7) , the zone of potential capture ex-
pands beyond its position when only well PW1 is pumping (see
3-12
Figure 3-3) , with the groundwater divide located somewhere
beyond monitoring wells MW10 and MW11 . When PW8 is pumped
in combination with PWl and PW2 (see Figure 3-8) , the
groundwater divide is also beyond MW10 and MW11 , as it is
when wells PW1 , PW3 , PW8 , and PW9 are operating (see Fig-
ure 3-9) .
Because the zone of potential capture extends beyond the
City of Renton monitoring well network under high pumping
conditions (see Figures 3-7 through 3-9) , it was not pos-
sible to determine the position of the groundwater divide
based only on data collected during the well field monitor-
ing study. Additional water level data from the Olympic
Pipe Line leak abatement study (GeoEngineers , 1986b) , PACCAR
defense systems site assessment study (Hart-Crowser, 1986a) ,
and the well field aquifer test {RH2 Engineerling, 1987a and
1987b) were used. Figures 3-10 through 3-13 are regional
potentiometric maps that illustrate the probable position of
the groundwater divide for:
o Late July of 1986 with PW2 pumping
o Mid-November of 1986 with PW1 , PW2, and PW8 pumping
o June 25 , 1987 , with PW1 , PW2 , PW3 , PW8 , PW9, and
RW2 pumping
o June 26 , 1987, with PW1 , PW2, PW3 , PW8 , PW9 , RW1 ,
and RW2 pumping
A comparison of the position of the groundwater divide shown
in Figures 3-10 through 3-13 shows that the zone of poten-
tial capture expands to the northwest as well field pumping
increases . On November 6 , 1986 , PW3 was pumping at a rate
of 1 , 500 gpm (see Figure 3-10) ; on July 28 , 1986, the well
■ field was pumping at 7,700 gpm (see Figure 3-11) ; on
June 24 , 1987 , the well field was pumping at the current
well field water right of 11 ,400 gpm (see Figure 3-12) ; and
on June 25, 1987, the well field was pumping at 15 ,000 gpm
(see Figure 3-13) .
CEDAR RIVER-AQUIFER INTERACTIONS
Cedar River-aquifer interactions were determined by:
1 . Comparing groundwater elevations measured in MW1 and
MW2 with measured Cedar River elevations and with well
field pumping
2 . Evaluating the results of the City of Renton well field
aquifer test
1Figures 3-10 through 3-13 are located in pockets at the end
of the report.
3-13
Monitoring of Cedar River and groundwater elevations during
the well field monitoring study found that the Cedar River
is typically higher in elevation than the water table. Fig-
ure 3-14 shows hydrographs for monitoring well MW2 and stage
gage SG1 . A comparison of the elevations measured at these
two locations shows a difference of 1 to 3 feet . The same
relationship holds between MW1 and SG2 . This difference in
elevation appears to be due to a zone of low-permeability
material that limits communication between the river and the
aquifer. Drillers logs for RW1 , RW2, and RW3 show the pres-
ence of a low-permeability material that may underlie the
Cedar River in the vicinity of the well field (Hart-Crowser,
1987a) . This material probably limits the amount of ground-
water recharge coming from the river. Further evidence of
the presence of this material is that pumping tests on RW1 ,
RW2 , and RW3 (Hart Crowser, 1987a) and RW9 (Hart Crowser,
1983) indicate that locally the aquifer behaves as a semi-
confined aquifer.
Monitoring of water level fluctuations in MW1 during the
well field monitoring study found that well field pumping
probably influences groundwater movement on the south side
of the Cedar River. Figures 3-15 through 3-17 compare water
level fluctuations in MW1 with those for PW1 and PW2, PW8,
and PW9, respectively. Fluctuations in Cedar River eleva-
tions at SG1 are also plotted in each figure. All three
figures show that water level fluctuations in MW1 generally
correspond to those measured at SG1. On August 26, 1986,
November 16, 1986, and March 5, 1987 , however, MW1 shows a
slight response to the pumping of PW1 and PW2 (see Fig-
ure 3-15) . This response indicates that pumping of PW1 and
PW2 influences groundwater movement on the opposite side of
the river. As will be discussed later, the results of the
well field aquifer test more clearly demonstrate the in-
fluence of PWl and PW2 . As Figures 3-16 and 3-17 indicate,
pumping of PW8 and PW9 appears to have little or no effect
on groundwater movement south of the river, probably because
of the distance of these wells from the river. This finding
is consistent with the results of the PW9 hydrogeologic
analysis (Hart-Crowser, 1983) .
The well field aquifer test provided an opportunity to con-
firm some of the observations made based on the well field
monitoring study results . Cedar River streamflow measure-
ments made by the USGS while the well field was pumping at
the current water right of 11 ,400 gpm and a rate of
15 ,000 gpm confirmed that in the vicinity of the well field
' the amount of Cedar River water recharging the aquifer is
small compared to the river flow rate. Within the accuracy
of the flow rate measurements (i.e. , ±5 percent) , the USGS
was unable to detect any difference in flow rate upstream
and downstream of the well field under either pumping con-
dition (RH2 Engineering, 1987b) . The mean and standard
3-14
i
' J
J
W
3
z
oc
o r
0 .
' Z�
OW
�0
LO
ac a
' 1
�
Wa
3
N r a N 0�
Am0w
°Cma O
1 I_2 �
z
o \
w I ' N ~
J
W ' w
'
J
W 1
J i ' co
ccall ' coO
3 ' I co
N
a
i
1 � Go 3V.
1
I
C*
eh
M t0cz 7 N N r O O
(133:1)NOUVA313
' 3-15
1
J
Wz
30
zv
00
c.
Za
00
2z N
1 0,r MU)p 3
aWao
o
Cn LL.W
\� � pGQJ O
LL
•+ \
• Of
N �
' W i c O
� I
( G
cr G
W
Go
Go
\ •
1
N
' N d d
o
c
so
M
CO) M N N r Or O
U33:1) NOUVA313
3-16
r d
J
m W
J3
WZ
' 30
OU
Z_
� � G
' OCC
•''�••�•''"•
co 00
cm
••• O r Q
c
3
o
T
�CL 0
'— CrE
LU
►•
O � •..� as �0W LL.' 1 = Q ('30
••• T L)
N ,,..• T W = co U
Z .; Os
W
W i co �-
' J ••.■ Q
W
J ■
W
JO
•
O
H 1 :
•
•� N
•
1 � O
co•
r
M d
�, '•'•''''•--...•• TCO 1 :
•.ti to 1
■
h :
CO)CM N N r In
O
' (133i)NOUVA313
3-17
3
"a
T
' 3J
�W
J3
W Z
30
' a
Zcc av
00
CO) f' Cc
• z a.
co 00
T � Z
O•• T
w.••••••.••••••.•••
co
N N
.............f. = = W Z
� acso
•• ••• M Q Z
•..•• N @9 �e W
' r LU 0 LU
0
' N 1 • r LL = NUJ
U
1 ,
J I ��•• N Q
W '•'
J 1 �•.
ui
I •••~ co
1
co
W � •
•
`••••• N
3 1 \
0) d
co
' cc
.
1
r
M
N MN N r OT
' (133:1)NOUVA313
3-18
' deviation of the 14 Cedar River streamflow measurements made
by the USGS were 335. 9 cubic feet per second (cfs) and
10 . 6 cfs, respectively (RH2 Engineering, 1987a) .
Continuous water level measurements made during the City of
Renton well field aquifer test confirmed that water levels
in MW1 respond to the pumping of PW1 and PW2 . Figure 3-18
shows how measured water levels in MW1 changed with time
during the test. Figure 3-19 shows how well field pumping
varied during the test, and Figure 3-20 shows the variation
' in Cedar River stage during the test. The water level fluc-
tuations in MW1 correlate well with changes in well field
pumping. As Figure 3-18 illustrates, water levels in MW1
recovered during the 8-hour nonpumping period and then de-
clined in response to well field pumping. The sudden de-
cline 32 hours after the start of the test represents the
response of MW1 to the increase in well field pumping rate
' from 11 ,400 gpm to 15, 000 gpm. As Figure 3-20 illustrates,
the elevation of the Cedar River was relatively constant
throughout the test.
' ZONE OF POTENTIAL CAPTURE
In reviewing the potentiometric maps discussed earlier (see
Figures 3-2 through 3-13) , the largest observed zone of
potential capture occurred when the well field was pumping
at 15, 000 gpm (see Figure 3-13) . This well field pumping
' rate does not represent a current pumping condition in that
it is 3 ,600 gpm higher than the current well field water
right. The next largest observed zone of potential capture
' occurred at a pumping rate of 11 ,400 gpm (see Figure 3-12) .
Because this pumping rate is representative of current con-
ditions, it was selected for purposes of aquifer protection.
The groundwater divide delineating the boundary of this zone
' of potential capture was extended south of the Cedar River
to encompass that portion of the aquifer wherein the probable
direction of groundwater movement is toward the well field.
' Figure 3-21 shows the resultant boundary of the zone of
potential capture delineated for purposes of aquifer
protection.
' 1Figure 3-21 is in a pocket at the end of the report.
3-19
N
W
H
1 w
W
LL
T
3Q
ow -C
CD LL� 3
' o
ao Q w O-
? C4) w
NWO400 C� LL
�wz0
Ln 0
LL2OU
Cl)
1 > 0
Z_ _
N N m
00 Ln
H N
L
Q 0 w
w cl a
J Q
W
W N
W W
J F-
LL
� Q
W O W
Q N
3 �
00
O N
r 400
O
OQI
N r r r r Cl) V-
(1331)
(1331) NOI1dA313
3-20
r
H
N
N W
W
H
M LL
OQ
J<
LL
J
�J W Q
3:LL 3
. .
�OLi Xo
' ''—
oWc
N oWc z LL
noac O
LL a G (L)
' I
. I
. I I � oNc
;I
Ln
---- --- . LLI cm
y in
-' I.- to
LL----- -- :-. W
r ;
W
I • �
1 N
I ' � 1 O
J fa
N m c7 O)
O
r � i
to 1ff � C7 N T O Qf OD f� tD 4'! � M N r O
T T T T T T T
L (0001. x wd6)31V]IMOI:l II3M
3-21
H
cn
'W
H
cr
W
LL
Q
o Q
W��
Q�W Q
cn 3
O
04
so oWOW O
M�W3 W
WOC(�Q LL
t QC7cc LE oc
Q
W ►-
L�()QG U
o cc
O
2
LLJ
N
N
LL m
O W
� Q
N
W
H
LL
Q
—CD tJJ
n
1OD
O N
T
to
O
co
(133:)3JV1S
3-22
1
Section 4
AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA
The City of Renton aquifer protection ordinance will require
that an APA be delineated around each well , well field, or
spring owned or operated as a potable water supply. An APA
encompasses the recharge area for a well , well field, or
spring. Each APA may be subdivided into two zones, each
having a different level of protection. For a well or well
field, Zone 1 is defined as the area between the well or
well field and the 1-year groundwater travel time contour. l
Zone 2 is defined as the area between the 1-year groundwater
travel time contour and the overall boundary of the APA.
The decision as to whether or not to subdivide an APA into
one or two zones will be based on the susceptibility of the
well or wells in that APA to contamination. An APA that
contains at least one shallow well that is susceptible to
contamination will be divided into two zones . An APA that
contains only deep wells that are protected by overlying
geologic materials will not be subdivided; in this case, the
entire APA will be classified as a Zone 2 area .
This section discusses how the APA for the City of Renton
well field was delineated, given the boundary of the zone of
potential capture (discussed in Section 3) , estimates of
probable groundwater travel times , and the hydrogeologic
characterization performed during the well field protection
study. This section also discusses how the well field APA
was subdivided into two zones.
APA DELINEATION
The APA was delineated by determining the boundary of the
area contributing recharge to the well field. This boundary
was divided into two segments: a segment regionally down-
gradient of the well field and a segment regionally upgradi-
ent. The regionally downgradient segment corresponds to the
boundary of the zone of potential capture selected for pur-
poses of aquifer protection (see Figure 3-21) . Under cur-
rent pumping conditions (i.e. , under the current water
right of 11 ,400 gpm) , groundwater within this boundary could
be captured by the well field. The regionally upgradient
' segment encompasses those portions of the uplands north and
1The 1-year contour bounds that portion of the aquifer
wherein the time for groundwater to move to a well is ap-
proximately equal to or less than 365 days.
' 4-1
south of the Cedar River that contribute recharge to the
Cedar River aquifer. Although the entire Cedar River drain-
age basin theoretically contributes recharge to the aquifer,
it is not practical to include the entire basin in the APA.
Figure 4-1 shows how the two segments were merged to obtain
an overall boundary for the APA. The eastern boundary of
the APA corresponds to the Renton city limits.
DELINEATION OF ZONES
As was stated earlier, Zone 1 is the area situated between
the well field and the 1-year groundwater travel time con-
tour. Conceptually, Zone 1 encompasses groundwater that is
within a 1-year travel time of the well field, assuming
continuous pumping. To delineate the boundary of Zone 1 ,
probable groundwater velocities and associated travel times
' under different pumping conditions were calculated.
The average groundwater velocity is directly related to the
gradient (i.e. , slope of the water table) , hydraulic con-
ductivity, and effective porosity in the following manner.
V = Ki/ne
where
V = average linear groundwater velocity, ft/day
K = hydraulic conductivity, ft/day
i = gradient, ft/ft
n = effective porosity, dimensionless
Table 4-1 summarizes information available on Cedar River
aquifer properties. Pumping tests in the vicinity of the
production wells indicate that the transmissivity is on the
order of 1 , 000 , 000 gpd/ft. Upgradient of the bedrock nar-
rows the transmissivity decreases to about 55, 000 gpd/ft.
Table 4-1
CEDAR RIVER AQUIFER PROPERTIES
Transmissivity Storage
Location (gpd/ft) Coefficient Reference
iProduction Well 9 2,300,000 0.02 Hart-Crowser, 1983
1 Replacement Wells
1, 2, and 3 1,000,000 0.025 Hart-Crowser, 1987a
Olympic Pipe Line
Monitoring Wells 55,000 - GeoEngineers, Inc. ,
1986b
4-2
I I
I I
- I I
v
v
a
v v
� �`—��_• '� •Ili
II MAN
N
low,jRM
I \�
.o
� ,►� . IIF�
► �'.� ,�;,,, ��� Y � ; _�,�, �. � '111-
� 11 i li�ii�a��, i � i ��` •.i
I - _
-
)Aa'
. , E
Assuming the transmissivity of 1 , 000,000 gpd/ft is represen-
tative of the entire Cedar River aquifer downgradient of the
bedrock narrows, a hydraulic conductivity of 1 , 900 feet per
day was estimated as follows, using an average saturated
thickness of 70 feet.
K = T/b
where
T = transmissivity, gpd/ft
b = saturated thickness, ft
Upgradient of the bedrock narrows, the estimated hydraulic
conductivity is 460 feet per day, assuming a 15-foot sat-
urated thickness.
The silty sands and silts to the northwest and southwest of
the Cedar River aquifer have a comparatively low hydraulic
conductivity. Information in the PACCAR site assessment
(Hart-Crowser, 1987b) suggests that the hydraulic conductiv-
ity for these materials could be on the order of 0 .4 foot
per day.
The effective porosity of all the aquifer materials was as-
sumed to be 0 .25 .
The gradient varies throughout the Cedar River aquifer, de-
pending upon well field operation and regional groundwater
flow conditions. Table 4-2 summarizes ranges in average
gradients between the well field and some of the potential
contamination sources identified in the well field protec-
tion study (see Figure 4-2) . Table 4-2 also summarizes
ranges in average gradients between the well field and two
other locations: the regionally downgradient limits of the
zone of potential capture delineated for purposes of aquifer
protection (see Figure 3-21) and the bedrock narrows (see
Figure 2-5) . Gradients were estimated by tracing the ground-
water flow path between the potential source and one of the
wells in the well field. The potentiometric maps described
in Section 3 were used to obtain gradients for a range of
pumping conditions. The difference in elevation between the
potential source and the well was calculated and then divided
by the length of the groundwater flow path. Average gradi-
ents for the downgradient limits of the zone of potential
capture and bedrock narrows were estimated by determining
the shortest and longest groundwater flow paths to one of
the wells in the well field. An average groundwater velocity
corresponding to each gradient was calculated with the equa-
tion above. Each calculated velocity was then converted
into a groundwater travel time by dividing the length of the
groundwater flow path by the corresponding velocity. Table 4-2
lists ranges of calculated groundwater velocities and ground-
water travel times.
4-4
Table 4-2
ESTIMATED RANGES OF GRADIENTS, GROUNDWATER VELOCITIES, AND GROUNDWATER TRAVEL TIMES
BETWEEN THE WELL FIELD AND SELECTED LOCATIONS
Groundwater
Gradient Groundwater Velocity Travel Time
Location (ft/ft) (ft/day) (days)
Potential Contamination Sources
Texaco Service Station 0.002 - 0.016 20 - 120 1 - 90
Union Service Station 0.002 - 0.013 20 - 100 9 - 70
Exxon Service Station 0.004 - 0.007 30 - 50 30 - 50
Abandoned service station 0.004 - 0.013 30 - 100 20 - 50
Stoneway Concrete Plant 0.004 - 0.015 30 - 110 9 - 70
North American Refractories
Brick Plant 1 - - -
0.0 0 0.021 80 160 7 30
Other Locations
Bedrock Narrows 0.003 - 0.004 20 - 30 160 - 180
Regionally downgradient
limits of the zone
of potential capture 0.001 - 0.013 8 - 100 20 - 365
aIdentified in the well field protection study (CH2M HILL, 1984);
see Figure 4-2 for locations.
bDelineated for purposes of aquifer protection (see Figure 3-21).
i
4-5
• C �(,�Yr: � �h L F'.: :rte `�� i, J
o h
o Q
FO— � � Q <ff
W
2 sa ge sacn LijZ
� QZ
' k o W
Lu 0
iLI+'
r.. .
- L
> aA
/z
5 �
oy�
?7
y � �
y�� "`����k� � � � \ �¢ sem`?O! �"`� 'z'.' � a. �' 5 ❑ ,���.
-.0 ¢r 4Y c k
C9 ,'
F
R
��
<
g
s$
a'
I,
30 A
cm
ILL
- J' �; k'� � •Y'� � .tea
A�
"TIM LL
LO
CL
CL
Ln
C4 LU
���.�,. �, tea-•.��':°� �, �. ' � .�
N
e
6
The results in Table 4-2 show that groundwater travel times
from potential sources of contamination range from one day
to several months. Contaminants with a low affinity for
adsorption to aquifer materials would exhibit similar travel
times if the effects of dispersion are neglected. Thus, the
time available to respond to a release from one of these
sources is relatively short.
The groundwater travel time from the bedrock narrows is es-
timated to be on the order of 160 to 180 days. Thus , the
' City of Renton would have more time to respond to a release
of contamination from potential sources upgradient of the
bedrock narrows . This range of travel times is probably
conservative) low because a transmissivit of
Y Y
1, 000, 000 gpd/ft was assumed for the entire Cedar River
aquifer downgradient of the bedrock narrows; the actual
transmissivity of the aquifer between the bedrock narrows
and the well field is probably lower.
Travel times from the regionally downgradient limits of the
zone of potential capture delineated for aquifer protection
purposes range from 20 to greater than 365 days for the con-
ditions that were monitored. Travel times greater than
365 days occur in an area north of the well field where the
zone of potential capture extends beyond the limits of the
sand, gravel, and cobbles associated with the Cedar River
aquifer, into the silt and peat deposits associated with
Lake Washington. The relatively low hydraulic conductivity
of these lake-type deposits results in small groundwater
velocities and long groundwater travel times.
The boundary of Zone 1 was delineated based on the calcu-
lated travel times. The regionally downgradient boundary
of Zone 1 was delineated as the zone of potential capture
boundary (see Figure 3-21) except to the north where the
zone of potential capture extends beyond the limits of the
Cedar River aquifer (see Figure 2-5) . In this area the
aquifer limits were used as the Zone 1 boundary. Ground-
water velocities in aquifer materials beyond the Cedar River
aquifer limits will be relatively low, given the much lower
hydraulic conductivity of these materials. In addition, the
actual hydraulic conductivity of the materials near the
aquifer limits is probably lower than the assumed value of
1 ,000 , 000 gpd/ft, given the higher percentage of sands and
' silty sands . Figure 4-1 illustrates the location of the
Zone 1 boundary relative to the overall APA boundary.
Regionally upgradient of the well field, the walls of the
Cedar River valley were selected as the boundaries for
Zone 1 . According to the hydrogeologic characterization
performed during the well field protection study, the valley
walls represent a distinct hydrogeologic boundary that sepa-
rates the alluvial deposits comprising the Cedar River
r
4-7
i
aquifer and the glacial drift, till , and outwash deposits
that comprise the upland areas . Figure 4-1 shows the
regionally upgradient extension of the Zone 1 boundaries .
iThe position of the eastern, or most upgradient, boundary of
Zone 1 was estimated by calculating the distance groundwater
upgradient of the bedrock narrows, would travel in 195 days.
This timeframe is the difference between the 1-year (365 day)
travel time established for the Zone 1 boundary and the aver-
age estimated travel time from the bedrock narrows to the
well field (i.e. , 170 days) . Assuming a hydraulic conduc-
tivity of 460 feet per day, a gradient of 0 .0048 foot per
foot, and an effective porosity of 0 .25 , groundwater would
travel a distance of approximately 1 , 700 feet in 195 days;
the gradient was estimated based on groundwater elevations
measured during the Olympic Pipe Line Leak Abatement Study
(see Figure 3-10 . Thus the eastern boundary g ) Y of Zone 1 was
determined to be 1 , 700 feet upgradient of the bedrock nar-
rows.
Zone 2 of the APA is the portion of the aquifer between the
180-day groundwater travel time contour and upland areas
that contribute recharge to the aquifer (see Figure 4-1) .
1
4-8
Section 5
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
Existing groundwater quality conditions in the Cedar River
aquifer were evaluated as part of the well field protection
study. This evaluation involved the review of available
water quality data for the City of Renton production wells.
The available data consisted of bacteriological, inorganic,
chemical, and physical parameters measured in accordance
with the Washington Department of Social and Health Services
(DSHS) regulations . Data were also available on turbidity,
trihalomethanes , corrosivity, pesticides , and radionuclides .
The available water quality data indicate that, at the time
sampling was conducted, groundwater in the Cedar River
' aquifer satisfied current DSHS drinking water requirements.
To supplement the existing groundwater quality data base ,
priority pollutant analyses were conducted on water samples
from monitoring wells MW1 , MW4 , MW5 , and MW7 . All four
wells were sampled with a stainless steel bailer on June 12 ,
1966 . Three to five well volumes were purged from each well
prior to sampling, and the bailer was decontaminated before
sampling each well . Except for the water samples submitted
for metals analysis , all of the samples were unfiltered.
' The samples for metals analysis were filtered in the field
with a 0 .45-micron filter.
Table 5-1 provides a comparison of current and proposed max-
imum contaminant levels (MCLs) with the sampling results .
MCLs are enforceable standards for drinking water specified
by the Environmental Protection Agency under the Safe Drink-
ing Water Act. The results in Table 5-1 show that in June
of 1986 groundwater in the Cedar River aquifer satisfied
both the current and proposed MCLs.
Appendix E contains the laboratory report for the priority
pollutant analyses . No extractable organics or pesticides
were detected in any of the samples . The only volatile or-
ganics that were detected were methylene chloride and
acetone at concentrations ranging from 20 to 64 ug/l and
trace to 9 ug/l, respectively. According to the laboratory
report (see Appendix E) , methylene chloride and acetone are
common laboratory solvents, and it is probable that the
presence of these compounds is because of unavoidable
laboratory contamination.
The metals results (see Appendix E) show that cadmium chro-
mium, copper, nickel, silver, and zinc were detected in
' concentrations ranging from 1 to 75 ug/1. Table 5-1 shows
that both cadmium and chromium were detected at levels below
current MCLs .
5-1
Table 5-1
COMPARISON OF MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION LEVELS (dig/L) WITH
WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RESULTS,
' CITY OF RENTON MONITORING WELLS
a
MCL June 12, 1986, Sampling Results Detection
' Constituent Current Proposed MW1 MW4 MW5 MW7 Limit
Inorganic
Arsenic 50 ND ND ND ND 5
Barium 1,000 NM NM NM NM -
Cadmium 10 ND ND 2 2 1
Chromium 50 1 1 3 2 --
Selenium 10 ND ND ND ND 5
Lead 50 ND ND ND ND 10
Nitrate 10,000 NM NM NM NM --
Organic
Endrin 0.2 ND ND ND ND 0.04
Lindane 4 ND ND ND ND 0.02
Methoxychlor 100 ND ND ND ND 0.1
Toxaphene 0.5 ND ND ND ND 5
2,4-D 100
' 2,4,5-TP silvex 10
Benzene 5 ND ND ND ND 1
Carbon tetrachloride 5 ND ND ND ND 1
1,2-Dichloroethane 5 ND ND ND ND 1
1,1-Dichloroethylene 7 ND ND ND ND 1
p-Dichlorobenzene 750 ND ND ND ND 1
1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 200 ND ND ND ND 1
Trichloroethylene 5 ND ND ND ND 1
Vinyl chloride 1 ND ND ND ND 1
' aMaximum Contaminant Levels, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, September 1986.
Note: ND=Not detected.
NM=Not measured.
All concentrations in ug/1.
5-2
' As part of its site inspection of the PACCAR site, E&E col-
lected and analyzed groundwater samples from monitoring
wells MW3 , MW4 , and MW5 and production wells PW1 and PW8
' during the period of February 26 through 28 , 1986 . Table 5-2
presents the sampling results for the inorganics. Aluminum,
arsenic, calcium, chromium, cobalt, copper, iron, lead, mag-
nesium, manganese, nickel, potassium, silver, sodium, vana-
dium, and zinc were detected. Care should be used in com-
paring the concentrations reported in Table 5-2 with those
in Table 5-1 . Although the E&E site inspection report did
not state whether groundwater samples were filtered or not,
the relatively high concentrations of some inorganics sug-
gest that the samples were not filtered. The results repor-
ted in Table 5-1 are for filtered samples. Despite this
difference in sampling methodology, the E&E results are in
general agreement with those reported in Table 5-1 .
�I
5-3
Section 6
REFERENCES
Bear, J. Hydraulics of Groundwater. McGraw Hill,
Incorporated, New York, New York. 1979 .
' CH2M HILL. Well Field Protection Study, prepared for the
City of Renton, Washington. 1984 .
' CH2M HILL. Sole-Source Aquifer "Petition for the Cedar River
Aquifer, prepared for the City of Renton, Washington. 1988 .
' Ecology and Environment, Inc. , Site Inspection Report of
Pacific Car and Foundry Company, Renton, Washington, pre-
pared for U.S . Environmental Protection Agency, Region X,
' Seattle, Washington. 1986 .
Hart-Crowser. Summary Report, Hydrogeologic Analysis,
Renton Well 9 , Renton, Washington, prepared for the City of
Renton and RH2 Engineering. November 11 , 1983 .
Hart-Crowser. Site Assessment, Soil and Groundwater Qual-
ity, PACCAR Facility, Renton, Washington, prepared for
PACCAR Defense Systems. December 5, 1986a.
' Hart-Crowser. Remedial Action Plan, PACCAR Facility,
Renton, Washington, prepared for PACCAR Defense Systems .
December 5 , 1986b.
' Hart-Crowser. Replacement Production Wells RW-1 , RW-2 , and
RW-3 , City of Renton, Washington, prepared for RH2 Engineer-
ing, July 14, 1987a.
Hart-Crowser. Additional Groundwater Flow Assessment Data,
PACCAR Defense Systems Facility, Renton, Washington, pre-
pared for PACCAR Defense Systems. October 5 , 1987b.
GeoEngineers, Inc . Report of Phase 1 Hydrogeologic
Services , Test Well Installation, Maplewood Golf Course,
prepared for the City of Renton, Washington. 1986a.
GeoEngineers, Inc. Progress Report No. 1 , Geotechnical
' Engineering Services, Pipeline Leak Abatement, Maplewood
Neighborhood, Renton, Washington, prepared for Olympic Pipe
Line Company. December 29 , 1986b.
' GeoEngineers, Inc. Progress Report No. 2 , Geotechnical
Engineering Services, Pipeline Leak Abatement, Maplewood
Neighborhood, Renton, Washington, prepared for Olympic Pipe
' Line Company. March 6 , 1987a.
6-1
GeoEngineers, Inc. Progress Report No. 3, Geotechnical
Engineering Services., Pipeline Leak Abatement, Maplewood
Neighborhood, Renton, Washington, prepared for Olympic Pipe
Line Company. May 14 , 1987b.
GeoEngineers, Inc. Progress Report No. 4 , Geotechnical
' Engineering Services, Pipeline Leak Abatement, Maplewood
Neighborhood, Renton, Washington, prepared for Olympic Pipe
Line Company. July 22, 1987c.
' RH2 Engineering. Data Report for the City of Renton Cedar
River Valley Aquifer Test, prepared for the City of Renton,
' Washington. 1987a.
RH2 Engineering. Analysis Report for the City of Renton
Cedar River Valley Aquifer Test, prepared for the City of
' Renton, Washington. 1987b.
6-2
i I
Appendix A
MONITORING WELL SITE MAPS
i
i
t
i
1
1
i
T
1
J=
t uJ Q
Ln N �: 3
HOUSE R WAY T Z�^y O
14M VuJ
�Oocn CC
a o 0
SIDEWALK (300
tL�JZ U
LU
N �
Q
F—
z �
J Q �
a
Y
J
Q
W
LL
O
Z
W
a
�1
J
Q
_ 2
U
Z
O
Lu
1
1 CF
o�
�s-
tMW2
0b-
ao
FENCE AND
GATE
T�Qyc�
R
010
FENCE AND
GATE
NORTH AMERICAN
REFRACTORIES
PROPERTY
TRAILER
FIGURE A-2
MONITORING WELL MW2
LOCATION SKETCH
(Not to Scale)
CITY OF RENTON,WA
I
� 3
J
= a
3W 3
Z
Old MZN 4) O�
az
Lucr
cc LL
PELLY AVENUE nz c 0
Li.2J?U
i
Al
J �O` �
U-- � A�
Z UJ 11
Z U
w Q
1 CC > O
� M
Z
O
M
'�b
er
3
m W U Q
� 3
w Q 3W Z
Lu U Y
J < e!Z N
U) O U QUO cc
o m WO—N
zto p mf-Q O
O 0OOZLu cc
V) C7 Y m IL
= J Q
Q CL
m Lu W
O 0 m
Y
V) U
�t m
N
Ct
Ct
W
z
0
a
Lu Lu
GARDEN AVENUE NORTH Lu O
ui
w
w
m
z
0
U
W
2
I—
m
O
z
I
3
Jr
z� 3 W 3
z
�ZCazz-
LLJ 0 oWc
Mza ,8 0
000 c �_
LL�J?U
Ob
�8
ON�
bM
N
o
z
W
YX
J
Q
m W
O X
J x }
H Q m
W W
W
W
W m
m W m Q �
� ~ m x J
Y �p Z
O a Z
crm
= W
co
x
H Wa
m m
O ~
Z
�I x
i
x x x x 3
3W 3
X Y z
wzcO
_ 0 UZI
wp0� ?
t=!R .2
O
U�
c�ooZ
x o
� �
O — LLMJ`.0
J
U
_Z
Y �1
cc
a x
u)Y
Oa
U}
Z W
Z_m
W J
N
X
CD
yQ Q x
Z
0 0
Z N
O
crm
io
r
L
3
' P J=
Z
?Z v ea z
P \ Q rr w
� f WpON o�
Q� \ cc~Q0, O
�`P t
00 06
\ S } LL�JCw
LU
w
cr
p U
LU 1° U z
U
LL Q
� Q�
UwUU
cn O O
cn
1—
Ir
Y
Q
a
L
LU
>
(r 0
cc z
Q Y
C cc:
LU Q
U a
0
r
di3
= a
3W 3
t
aoZNY d to-
QrZ mo w
� ccZa o LLO
(500 c
H
W
W
o:
H
3nN3AV N30EIVE)
M
H
0:
0
.80 L Z
N oaen3inos ssdaa
io )IIVM3a IS
y �
H
� ZJ
LU 0
QWO =
J J
0WH
i
T
T
3
J=
J Q
Y
z
_ H
ai 0) Z �p Z
> Q� V w
a WOOou�.
w
co COU c
N LL.r2O?U
1
Nl</M3aIS
g (IHVA3inoa ssvug
y
3nN3AV S113M
w
LU
H
H
0
z
O
U
w
N
H
O
Z
i
f
f
Appendix B
WELL LOG AND CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAMS
f�
f
f
f
f
f
se5807/001/2
f
CH2M HILL MONITORING WELL LOG
iPROJECT: CITY OF RENTON GROUNDWATER MONITORING {ELLS WELL: MW-1
NUMBER. 520080.AO
DRILLING METHOD: CABLE TOOL, 8-INCH CASING
1
COMPLETION DATE: January 23, 198E
DRILLER: HOKKAIDO DRILLING AND DEVELOPEMENT CO,
LOCATION: RENTON, WASHINGTON GRAHAM, WA
GROUND ELEVATION: 40.9 ft MSL INSPECTOR: SCOTT MCKINLEY / SEA
DVC CASINGELEVATION: 40. 1 ft MSL
SAMPLING METHOD: EXAMINATION OF BAILED CUTTINGS
DEPTH TO WATER FROM
GROUND 6 DATE: 21.1 ft., 2-22-86
DEPTH I DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS II RECORD I WELL CONSTRUCTIOPi----
BELOW 1 II DRAWING I DETAILS
SURFACE I II
(feet) I if 1
I 1! I
0 + SANDY LOAM brown, I+ r I I Concrete meter box with lid
I SAND AND GhAVEL, fine to coarse sand and II 1 8° steel casing with lcckinfi ca G,
I fine to med gravel If I (See Generalized Well Corstructior,
I II 1 diagram for detail)
I it I
5 + GRAVEL, fine to med rounded gravel with some I+ I
I fine to coarse sand II I
I II I
I II I
I II I
10 + 1+ i
1 11 1 Cement/bentonite seal
I it I
1 II I
I 11 1 2° SCH 40 PVC threaded flush.
15 + I+ I coupled casing
1 GRAVEL, fine to coarse gravel with some 11 I
I coarse sand 11 i
I SAND, med to coarse sand with some fine II i
I to coarse oravel If i
20 + SAND AND GRAVEL, coarse sand and fine to I+ I
I med gravel fl I
I I! I
I it t
II i
2J + I+ i
I II !
II I
II
1 II I
30 + 1+ I
1 II Bentonite pellets
I II Centering guide
I I! Fire sar,d
I II I
35 + I+ i
I II I
tl
I II I
I 11 1
40 + I+ 1
!I 1
I fl1 Sand pack (Monterey- Aqua #E)
I II i
I II1 Machine slotted SCH 40 PVC screen,
45 + I+ 1 (20 slot size)
it
I II Centering guide
I 11 Bottom sump
I II End cap
I 11 I
t II I
1 II i
I II I
55 _ + i+ I FIGURE B-1
I II I
11 I MW-1 WELL LOG AND
1 1 f 1 CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAM
I CLAY, grayish-white clay, ggod plasticity, 11 1 CITY OF RENTON WA
60 + extremely dense (refusal) End of Boring i+ I
I II I
Cr:G" tEILL PIONI TERING WELL LOG
PRt� ECT. L !Y GF RENiUIt f;R�Ji�iilNe{TEK l�G%tiTGRiiN= 1�ELL9 WELL: MW
niUtI SEilow,A0
DRILLING I4UHOD: CABLE OL. &-INC; I v'=
COVOLETION DA TE: April 29, 19861
p DRDRILLER: HOR"AIUG DRILLING A`+L UcVcLC�Mciti;=:`r'
LGCP7iL-1N: Rtti__0N. WASH!i\-G—ON GRAHAM,,, WP,
6KGGti cLEVr 100": 51.2 ft. V2- IN PEC MR: J. NIiv EMAN / SEA
VCL CASING ELEVATION: 53...Ji
ft. MS: r
_ A
4,P°LiNli M`UH01): EXAMINATION OF niLEE
DEPTH TO WATER FROM SP4,PLING
GROUND I DA E: BE.G ft, 4-S'0-Sv
DEµTr------------- UE;;CniPTIuNOF N�ATERIA.S ------ ,t --~RECGRu ----I ----------WELL CCiti�'RuC:TI �--------- -
Bc_Gi� I U,
I! DRAMiiNu i DETAILS
ifL
t --------------------------------------------------------
II i .
�---b" atee, casir�e wit- i0c.K.r;e ;:c
t + SILTY. SAN'D'Y LOR r, organic odor, blaci;, soft l+
is Concrete Piue
�ISAN-J. reef to coarse, wit;, some si It !i
i'
+ i+
it
5F!tt: ;IiGL ti":FiJcL• rOEcoarSE Sa-rr� an 'lrte TO
} roet crave: wia'; a iittle
'Insand anc silt, it
brown. dr-:s=_ e / .E sr=
}i „enc nt Dentor_-. --
1E + j+
i Silt iayer Ii
I i _
1I i Flue, W-Eac.EC. ✓
li
SIS`.: AND GP:.;,L, Poorly snore—, with sot z silt, I 1 }
2C + Pray—brow-ti, Gentzc j+ j
is
i I
C + j+ !
11 1
I ii i
i I BentG'r;,._ Delict=_
sE^ + }+ j
i !j Fine sari,
It
! ii ; Centering 94ide
3` + I+ i
If }
GRI VE;, mostly pie' to coarse and some oec to
I coarse sand. ant a i:ttie silt. brown, easier li Sand. Pack (framer-e}- Nat:: Vic.'
" crii:ing, cleaner, hole begins making water ii i
4 + i+ }
I II i
Machine slotted SCh Q EVC
I i i (20 slot, size)
i it 1
45 + I+ !
I li I Centering >;l;de
l i Natural for1r.ation
k_-ttorn surd
`C + EN, OF BGRIN }+ End cae
! li
FIGURE B-2
MW-2 WELL LOG AND
CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAM
CITY OF RENTON, WA
CH2M HILL MONITORING WELL LOG
PROJECT: CITY OF RENTON GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS WELL: MW-3
NUMBER: 520080.AO
COMPLETION DATE: January 27, 1986 DRILLING METHOD: CABLE TOOL, 8-INCH CASING
DRILLER: HOKKAIDO DRILLING AND DEVELOPEMENT CO,
LOCATION: RENTON, WASHINGTON GRAHAM, WA
GROUND ELEVATION: 36.1 ft MSL INSPECTOR: SCOTT MCKINLEY / SEA
PVC CASING ELEVATION: 35. 0 ft, MSL
SAMPLING METHOD: EXAMINATION OF BAILED CUTTINGS
DEPTH TO WATER FROM
GROUND i DATE: 16.1 ft., 2-22-86
DEPTH I DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS II RECORD I WELL CONSTRUCTION
BELOW 1 11 DRAWING 1 DETAILS
SURFACE I II I
(feet) I li I
1 II
0 + SILTY LOAM, gray-brown, loose 1+ I Concrete meter box with lid
! II 1 8' steel casing with lockinc coo
I SILTY LOAM, browny wet 11 1 (See Generalized Well Construction
1 I1 1 diagram for detail)
1 II 1
5 + SAND, fine to coarse with some silt and clay, I+ I
I low plasticity If I
I If I
I GRAVEL, fine to coarse, with some fine to coarse II I
I sand II I
10 + 1+ Cement/bentonite seal
1 II i
I II I
i II
I II I
15 + GRAVEL, fine to coarse, rounded gravel I+ 1 2' SCH 40 PVC threaded flush
1 II I coupled casing
1 II
i II I
20 + GRAVEL, fine gravel with trace med to coarse I+ l
I sand II 1
! II
I II I
I SAND, coarse sand with some fine to med, II I
25 + rounded gravel I+ !
i Il
I II I
16RRVEL, fine to coarse, rounded gravel with II i
I some coarse sand 11 I
30 + 1+ i
I SILTY SANL', fine silty sand, brown, with 11 I
I some clay, red plasticity II I
1 II i
1 11 Bentonite pellets
35 + I+ Centering guide
I If 1 Fine sand
I SAND AND GRAVEL, coarse sand with fine to coarse, 11 I
I rounded gravel II I
40 + I+ I
Sand pack (Monterey- Aqua #8)
I SAND, coarse sand with some fine gravel II 1 Machine slotted SCH 40 PVC screen:
1 11 1 (20 slot size)
45 + 1+
I SAND AND GRAVEL, fine to coarse sand with _ I! 1
I fine gravel 11 l
l II I
I II Centering guide
50 + I+ I
1 II Natural formation
1 II Bottom sump
I End of boring II ;End cap
FIGURE B-3
MW-3 WELL LOG AND
CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAM
CITY OF RENTON,WA
CH2M HILL MONITORING WELL LOG
PROJECT: CITY OF RENTON GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS WELL: MW-4
NUMBER: S20080.A0
DRILLING METHOD: CABLE TOOL, 8-INCH CASING
COMPLETION DATE: January 29, 1986
DRILLER: HOKKAIDO DRILLING AND DEVELOPEMENT CC,
LOCATION: RENTON, WASHINGTON GRAHAM, WA
GROUND ELEVATION: 36.9 ft, MSL INSPECTOR: SCOTT MCKINLEY / SEA
PVC CASING ELEVATION: 36.44 ft, MSL
DEPTH TO WATER FROM SAMPLING METHOD: EXAMINATION OF BAILED CUTTINGS
GROUND 6 DATE: 16.9 ft., 2-22-86
--_��_____----- ------------ ____— __--------------------------
DEPTH I DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS II RECORD I WELL CONSTRUCTION,
BLOW 1 11 DRAWING DETAILS
SURFACE I
(feet) I If I
1 II
0 + SANDY LOAM, coarse sand, brown and some 14 I Concrete meter box with lid
I silty clay 11 1 8" steel casing with locking ca.
I II I (See Generalized Well Constructior:
1 it I diagram for detail)
i II
5 + SAND RNU GRAVEL, coarse sand with fine, rounded I+ I
I gravel !I I
I II I
I it I
10 + SAND, coarse sand and some fine oravel 1+ 1 Cement/bentonite seas
I I! I
I 11
I II I
II I
1` + 1+ 2" SCH 40 FVC threaded flu
1 if I coupled casing
I II I
I II I
I SAND, coarse sand and some fine to coarse, !I !
20 + rounded gravel I+
I it
25 +
I II I
I it I
I II I
I II I
I 11 f
I SAND, fine to coarse sand and minor fine gravel 11 I
I 11 I
30 + I+ I
I 11 Bentonite pellets
1 11Z= I Centeringg guide
I GRAVEL, fine to sed rounded gravel and II Fine sarxi y
I some coarse sand II I
35 + 1+
I 11 I
I 11 1
1 i II Sand pack (Monterey- Aqua 1118)
II
40 + 1+ I
I SAND AND GRAVEL, coarse sand with fine to sed, I! 1 Machine slotted SCH 40 PVC screen
I rounded gravel �1 1 (20 slot size)
45 + I+ A-41Centering guide
I 1f I
I SAND, fine to coarse sand and minor fine gravel II Natural formation
1 11 Bottom sump
50 + END OF BORING 1+ 1 End cap
I Il
FIGURE B-4
MW-4 WELL LOG AND
CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAM
CITY OF RENTON,WA
CH2M HILL MONITORING WELL LOG
PROJECT: CITY OF RENTON GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS WELL. MW-5
NUMKR: 520080.AO
' COMPLETION DATE: January 31, 1985 DRILLING METHOD: CABLE TOOL, B-INCH CASING
DRILLER: HOKKAIDO DRILLING AND DEVELOPEMENT CO,
LOCATION: RENTON, WASHINGTON Go", WA
GROUND ELEVATION: 38.8 ft MSL INSPECTOR: SCOTT MCKINLEY / SFA
PVC CASING ELEVATION: 38.k ft, MSL
DEPTH TO WATER FROM SAMPLING METHOD: EXAMINATION OF BAILED CUTTINGS
GROUND 6 DATE: 17.4 ft, 2-22-86
DEPTH I DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS �y 11 RECORD I WELL CONSTRUCTION ----
BELOW 1 II DRAWING 1 DETAILS
SURFACE 1 11 1
(feet) 1 II I
I
ff
0 + SILTY-CLAY LOAM, brown 1 Concrete Neter box with lid
1 8° steel casing with locking cap
I II I (See Generalized Well Construction,
1 II 1 diagram for detail)
I II
5 + 1+ I
I II I
I CLAY, approximate 4° layer of gray clay it I
I SAND, fine to coarse sand and some fine II I
I to med rounded gravel. Trace of brown silt it I
10 + SAND k GRAVEL, coarse sand with fine gravel I I Cement/bentonite seal
l
1 II I
I II I
I II 1
15 + 1+ 2° SCH 40 PVC threaded flush
1 I1 I coupled casing
I 11 I
I SMD, coarse sand and some fine to coarse 11 I
1 rounded gravel IE I
20 + I+ I
I II I
1 I
if
I II I
i II I
25 + SILTY CLAY, dark gray-brawn, plastic and I+ I
I clumpy II I
1 II
I 11 1
I 11 1
30 + GRAVEL, fine to med, rounded gravel and I+ i
I some coarse sand, grayish in color II Bentonite pellets
i II Centerino guide
I II Fine sand
I 11 1
35 + I+ 1
1 11 = I
I SAND, Ned to coarse sand and some fine II I
I to med, rounded gravel, brown If 1 Sand pack (Monterey- Aqua (k8)
i
1 II Machine slotted SCH 40 PVC screen,
1 (20 slot size)
1
i 11 I
45 + 1+ 1
II Centering guide
I it 1
I it Natural formation
1 II Bonar sump
50 + END OF BORING I+ End cap
1 II I
FIGURE B-5
MW-5 WELL LOG AND
CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAM
CITY OF RENTON, WA
CH2M HILL MONITORING WELL LOS
PROJECT: CITY OF RENTON GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS WELL: MW-6
NUMBER: S2008O.AO
COMPLETION DATE: FEBRUARY 5, 1986 DRILLING METHOD: CABLE TOOL, 8-INCH CASING
DRILLER: HOKKAIDO DRILLING AND DEVELOPEMENT CO,
LOCATION: RENTON, WASHINGTON GRAHAM, WA
i GROUND ELEVATION: 39.1 ft MSL INSPECTOR: SCOTT MCKINLEY / SEA
PVC CASING ELEVATIO 38.h3 ft, MSL
SAMPLING METHOD: EXAMINATION OF BAILED CUTTINGS
DEPTH TO MATER FROM
GROUND 3 DATE: 19.4 ft, 2-22-86
DEPTH I DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS 11 RECORD , I---� WELL CONSTRUCTIO14 ------
I BELOW 1 II DRAWING t DETAILS
SURFACE I Il I
(feet) I II t
-------------------
1 II
0 + SILTY-CLAY LOAM, brown, Hoist, clumpy, 1+ I Concrete peter box with lid
I and trace coarse sand 11 1 8' steel casing with locking car
1 II I (See Generalized Well Construction
1 it I diagram for detail)
5 I II
1 II I
1II i
1 II i
10 + SAND, fine to coarse sand and some fine to coarse, l+ 1 Cement/bentonite sea;
I rounded gravel, loose Il I
i II I
i II i
1 1t 1
15 + I+ 2' SCH 40 PVC threaded flush
1 II I coupled casino
1 II 1 _
I SAND, fine to coarse sand II 1
I II I
20 + I+ I
1 II I
1 II
1 II I
1 II i
25 + SAND, med to coarse sand and minor fine gravel I+ I
I II 1
I II i
1 II t
1 II I
30 + I+ !
1 II ntonite pellets
Ii Centerino guide
1 IIj Fine sand
1 II i
3` + I+
I II I
I II I
Sand pack t Monterey-aqua #8 )
1 11 Machine slotted SCH 40 PVC screen
I SAND, coarse sand and some fine, rounded gravel It 1 (20 slot size)
1 11 I
1 II
45 + I+ I
I GRAVEL, fine to coarse rounded gravel and if Centering guide
I sow coarse sand 1 Natural formation
1 II I
1
50 + END OF BORING I+ Bootttompsump
1 11 I
FIGURE B-6
MW-6 WELL LOG AND
CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAM
' CITY OF RENTON,WA
CH2111 HILL MONITORING WELL LOG
PROJECT: CITY OF RENTON GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS WELL: MW-7
NUMBER: S20080.AO
COMPLETION DATE: January 17, 1986 DRILLING METHOD: CABLE TOOL, B-INCH CASING
DRILLER: HOKKAIDO DRILLING AND DEVELOPEMENT CO,
LOCATION: RENTON, WASHINGTON GRAHAM, WA
GROUND ELEVATION: 47.12 ft MSL INSPECTOR: SCOTT MCKINLEY / SEA
PVC CASING ELEVATION: 47.1 ft, MSL
DEPTH TO WATER FROM SAMPLING METHOD: EXAMINATION OF BAILED CUTTINGS
GROUND I DATE: 23.1 ft., 2-22-86
DEPTH I DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS II RECORD I —~WELL CONSTRUCTION
' BELOW 1 11 DRAWING 1 DETAILS
SURFACE I II t
(feet) I I! t
II
0 + SILTY SAND, fine sand, brown and wet I+ r 1 I Concrete meter box with lid
I 11 1 8' steel casing with lockine cap
i II I (See Generalized Well Construction
i diagram for detail)
5 + I+
I SAND AND GRAVEL, coarse sand to fine rounded II I
I gravel If I
1It
I SAND AND GRAVEL, fine to coarse sand and fine II Cement/bentonite seal
10 + rounded gravel i+ I
I II t
II I
1 11 2 - in. SCH 40 PVC casino.
i
If 'I Flush threaded.
15 + I+ I
I SAND AND GRAVEL, coarse sand to fine oravel with II I
I some fine to med sand II i
I II I
I II I
20 + I+ I
I it l
I tl I
I II . 1
+ I+ I
I SMD AND GRAVEL, fine to coarse sand and fine II I
I gravel with a little med to coarse gravel 11 i
IL, '
If
i 11 I
30 + 1+ 1 Centering guide
1 11 1 Bentonite Pellets-
I SAND AND GRAVEL, coarse sand to medium rounded III Fine sand
I gravel with some fine to med sand and coarse 11 I
I gravel it i
1 II I
I Il I
i 111 Sand pack (Monterey- Acua X8i
1 II I
1 II I
1 Il1 Machine slotted SCH 40 PVC screEn
II 1 (20 slot size)
1 II i
45 + I+ I
! SAND AND GRAVEL, coarse sand to coarse rounded II Centering guide
I gravel with some fine to med sand II l
1 11 Natural formation
1 IIBottom sump
50 + End of boring I+ 1 End cap
FIGURE B-7
MW-7 WELL LOG AND
CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAM
' CITY OF RENTON,WA
CH2M HILL MONITORING WELL LOG
PROJECT: CIT!' OF RENTON GRDMWATER MONITORING WELLS WELL: MW-10
NUMBER: S200K.AE
'
COIdPLETION DATE: April 23, 1986
_
DRILLING METHOD: CABLE TOLL, S-INCH CWK1
DRILLER: HOiuiAIDO DRILLING AND DEVELOPE^ENT CGS,
LOCATION: RENTON, WASHINGTON GRAHAM, WA
' GROUND ELEVATION: 34.0 ft, MSL INSPECTOR: J. NINTEMAN / SEA
PVC CASING ELEVATION: 34.12 ft, MSL
SWLING METHOD: EXAMINATION OF BAILED CUTTINGS
DEPTH TO WATER FROM
GROUND d DATE: 13.8 ft., 4-30-86
_��--____ -------- —_____—__-----------------
DEPTH I DESCRIPTION OF MATERIALS 11 RECORD I WELL CONSTRZ ION.
BELOW i if DRAWING i DETAILS
SURFACE 1 II I
(feet) i If I
i ---I! --I- — --------------
1 II 7 1
0 + SILTY LOAD, brown to black. i+ 1 Concrete meter box with, lid
8' steel casing with lockin ca
i
if I (See Generalized we:; Constru,tic,.
I SANDY SILT, fine sand with some med to coarse i1 1 diagram for detai,)
i sand and fine gravel, brown, If i
If i
1 SILTY SAND AND GRAY-1-i-, brown silt, mostly coarse If i
i sand to fine grave; If 1 Cement/bentonite sea'
10 + i+ i
if I
if 2 - in. SCI) 40 PVE cas r"'
i
1! 1 Flush tnreade;.
' 1` + SANDY, GRAVELLY SILT, layered zones of silty i+ i
I sane an;: gravei, and gravelly silt, fire to If i
1 mea grave:, gray silt 11 i
if bentonite Peliets
if i
20 + 1+ Fine sand
if I Centering guide
i li 1
iit I
c� + i+ i
i
if Sand Pack (Monterey- A❑ua
i
if i
If Machine slotted SC+ 4t• PVL- scree•.
If i (20 slot size)
R. + SILTY CLAY, whin sane fine to mea gravei 1+ I
i and a little fine sand, soft, no thread, blue- 11 1
1 gray !I I
1
if I
i ii i
+ 1+ Natural formation
i1 bottom sump
i 11 End cap
1 II i
I ENT) OF BORING
40 + 1+ 1
FIGURE B-8
MW-10 WELL LOG AND
CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAM
CITY OF RENTON,WA
CK2M HILL MONITORING WELL LDS
PROJECT: CITY OF RENTON GROUNDWATER KONITORINS WELLS WELL: MW-II
NUMBER: KMO.A0
COMPLETION DATE: April 27, 1986 DRILLING METHOD: CABLE TOOL, 8-INCH CASING
'
DRILLER: HOKKAIDO DRILLING AND DEVELOPEMENT CO,
LOCATION: RENTOR, WASriINSTDN GRAHIAM. WA
' GROtXuI.1 ELEVATION: 32.0 ft, MSL INSPECTOR: J. NINTEMAN / SEA
PVC CASING ELEVATION: 32.24 ft, M(St
SAMPLING METHOD: EXAMINATION OF BAILED UI TINES
DEPTH TO WATER FROM
GROUND I DATE: 12.0 ft, 4-30-86
DEPTH i--~-- DESCRIPTION OF fTEkIALS Ii RECORD I WELL CONSTRvCTIOr, ------
BELOW I Ii DRAWING I DETAILS
(feet) i
—---------------
0
0 + SANi1Y SILT, fine sand, with a trace of fine li Concrete meter box witri -Jr-,
'I gravel, soft, brown li I 8'` steel casing with ioci;ir ca,-
I (See Generalized Weil Constru^_zi_ ,
II I diagrar, for detail)
I increasing sand and Aravei content if i
I If I
( SILTY SAND AND WOOD UELaiilS, fine sand, dark: Ii Cement/bentonite seal
' 10 + brown to black, soft j+ j
if f
i! 2 - in. SCH 40 PVLE casin_.
1f Flush threaded.
+j + +
I SANDY SILT, with trace of wood debris, dark. Q-2y it i
i If I
Bentonite Pellets
20 + I+ j
i! 1 Fine sand
' SAND AND GRAVEL, mostly coarse sand to fine
i gravel and some brown silt if i Centering guide
25 + I+ i
i fl I
- f fi Sand Paco! (Monterey- Aqua
i same but with some wood chips it f
sh + I+ Machine slotted SCH, 40 PVC screer:
it I (20 slot size)
f II i
I ji I
f Ij j
35 + SAND AND GRAVEL, coarse sand to med gravel, i+ i
I rounded, hole is making alot of water ii I Centering guide
� If Natural formation
f If Bottom sump
40 + END OF BORING I+ End cap
FIGURE B-9
MW-11 WELL LOG AND
' CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAM
CITY OF RENTON, WA
i
i
1
1
Appendix C
WELL LOGS FOR EXISTING AND REPLACEMENT
PRODUCTION WELLS AND THE MAPLEWOOD GOLF
COURSE TEST WELL
i
1
1
i
i
se5807/001/3 _
1
c� s ul
O p
p o
it
� I I
i
rn
O n°n• r
yn ^ _ � ` � x zcp0 •• f
o
61
z
z
I K K oa a p
.,u'I
o n ' �� A °
rn
30 IIS
pp N r j r" O t
in
3g; Orn
av on
qny ^ rn.
F Dg D 8 S i ) O Z
T
r.► > r
r€? < U)
i=
N
aa pp I �PL'nn�•MROI I �
a yea Snm - m" i rnv � � R3Z€R o9 9 f r
vc
m
z y' S ° 'n^ Z
p ° m
" b .• ": .tet 1 2 f�„ in
Q a y0 L < ¢ ,yyp _,�j'!�� Rp5 z D
0 �2 04, zy LyyDf(Iy�0["y, 'tea 31 F, D: r L 2 U L
° 1 r N bQA K7Q1 (4� IDIy Dn, �7Q Q" �Q �1C Z 2A W D 2 _ = pF N PEnrG�N t�iED II
,•D °
yrp
<<
W N fA- Q a;�Dr 1A'E A y in D U O C L __ •--_ S
s D r zo - rn
f i v ji A" K U A y N O "DIV^1 AF N C r
a ^m D A N r y <8 (g ^AFm $� pp In
r z
'0
� IZ
=ppQP3O0a I m
±I" >U D in �.�(I .o .e�1°: l' I I,�o•e7 •�;'.e. s '
Z- 01 r y •,•-a -•+ l •0. N
a mz (us iN u a ip 'f f �' 6F
rN° y J C f y° r i n r
1,4y(orn3 rc F N " ° i ° $ m m
00 � N r ~l. i r
Old lii" a r
0(4Iii
0 IN r
----------------
�F III v_ ;l'I• • p
Fp �' IoaL ITI
r
00 n r-
lr �z : s ► Fac a ;� .c n8 !r Z
n €
to
A C " O
oD g As 8 Q
<Z
IgA z I I• I I I I on
n J L I
D° 3 � � p � 5 �0� ���.�iF X11 ��i_Is' ��pp:�.�.-.'_ �i.l '.� ilk . tl. I1 I _h. ISI ( . �•��,�i I. �
- <^ �R;r� �
01 is a Ij
2 g m ) r I
r� r
nN r {r, r�1p r \
A.
.p dl {VPo
w < A
A Q 62 r �Teq� R
f I pq 13, OZ
ir V _ " � O� I " t-
00
Fn
a t7
R o � z
0 D z o
i
•t I I1 l i -<
< n ; N �y'
c U a f I .y ?z z g p
rrt� i O u r6� o "S r1 t za 7 n nn pN Na UD n <r
zD )F1 Q mL�Dy OR
D 1)
r D 0 K A.Ip1 { {O zj'rY<O„V,D<() n� yq �E _
O P Yz E O ip
rn i )n
�
j z G7 u o
F rrl 3 0 I renrt�n_ <reeT'j
C
C mrn z' FO boj
F p1 A3 �Ei i-
z '0
i
pi r9 — p@ Dy Kyp< i SK m3 S
YH Z D — to n aK r� N z f
z I@nil m �QU N p
r✓ z )
Q
•"' Z O ao IziA °`r a10
A in
T z DO 00 iz0 I
yE� lZ�-•aK '1 ,y iy lu-
;A
ryn rT
aO tceQ5 �n = gpS7 ly>n oI S �
0 0 i nl� it n1 K m [ m < Az
AO
x
o a,
�OLLo Y 5
Za F � J w _� m m
V O w r d W
0 0 0
p P O 'c7
p
_._.. __._ ..... J P
---- LU v
V)
f Q
w \ O N
oc W W w V O
w w_ _
a a o 3 � Z 0
3 u z
° a O
a a IpCO Z O z
z
a lz 0
z z z =
V)
v N 0 0 CN <
H
W - (,o
Qf Z z
f O
w V
U- dS
O
o o } ,^
O F-
v a 0 a p u O N m V O
V V p O
w w O w N W v N W O p J
LLJ
�r co! ____ i— v
---------•.-•------ Z V)
-.j
O
------------------ i �-
----_--- I Q
> m WI
>
N N
N N a
v
.,o O n O P O O
Boring Log and Construction Data for Well 9
Geologic Log Well Design
L i Top Casing Elevation In Feet —44'
i Casing Stickup In Feet ti 2'
around Surface Elevation In Feet ti42' Sample
0
Silty SAND (reported) 30inon•
10 6unaee Se.f
20 Brown GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY (reported)
100/3/83
30 20 InohO(19.1/4, ID)
Stool Casing
Gray-brown, saturated, very sandy GRAVEL and COBBLE S-1
40 S-2
S-3
S-4 mr
5o S-5
Brown, saturated, silty, gravelly, cobbly SAND with S-6 Monterey sand
M
mottled, silty, fine sand interbeds. S_7 1 F-9 F-Pbackliil
80
S-9 GS
Brown to gray, saturated, cobbly, sandy GRAVEL. e.11ee Steel casing
S-10 GS (:' 20-Inch•to 16-Inch at
70 a.a., silty 5-11
Brown, saturated, slightly silty to trace silty, S-12 GS
gravelly, fine to medium SAND. Aqua re Monterey
S-13 G5 �'.'' S.nd backfill
80
s-la
S-15 GS '
:; ---24•Inoh0drilled hole
90
S-16
S-17
40-PI of 16-Inch(1610
pips size Johnson
100 Brown, saturated, meditml to fine SAND with traces S_18 �:' slsinlss.steel Well
of gravel and cobbles. S-19 GS slots n, 0.035•Incn
�;'•
110 S-20 GS
—16-Inch 1 Blenk SUN
Gray, saturated, silty to very silty, slightly 5-21 Casing
gravelly, fine to coarse SAND. (Glacial Deposits 5-22 Psa prevelb.akllll
120 Bottom of Boring at 117 Feet. Bottom Plate
Completed 8/25/83.
130-
140
150
(reported) Raiers to material type encountered as reported by driller.
GS Grain Size Analysis
6.a. As Above
NOTES: 1. Soil descriptions .re Interpretive and actual ehenpea may be gradual.
J-1148 September 1983
2. Water Level V Is for date Indicated and may vary with firms of year. HART-CROWSER & associates, inc.
ATD: Al Time o1 Drilling
3. Elevation estimated to be same as Observation Well 6 and was obtained from Figure A-1
City of Renton Well Location Map W665. Sheet 2 of 2, drawn by RH2 Engineering. 1962.
Boring Log and Construction Data for Observation Well 9
_ Geologic Loft Well Design
t •
nti Top casing Elevation In Feel
o• Casing Slickup In Feel
Ground Surface Elevation in Feet Sample
0 "
'ynSA�8,sw{tA pgc e�ssti �i Q an r�i�ny r�o S. gr
Brown, moist, slightly silty to clean, slightly S-1
10 ravelL_SAND.
t2-Inch a Surlace Seal ,
Brown, moist to saturated, gravelly SAND with layers
of slightly gravelly to clean sand.
20
5-Z 0/
foiaiea
30 e•Inen 0 welded
SI a el Caeing
Brown, saturated, very sandy GRAVEL and COBBLES. 5-3
10
50 S-4
i I I
� I I
611
Millsknife Slots.
' $-5 I I 6
,,:!aloft 1-Der round,
I ■ 1/2
70 I I
S-6 I
80 S-7
Gray, saturated, slightly silty to silty, sandy
GRAVEL and COBBLES, interbedded with fine sandy
silt layers. ;
90 S-8
Gray, saturated, interbedded silty, fine SAND and
fine sandy SILT; sand layers water bearing -j
(Glacial Deposits) r,
100 S-9
S-1
110 '
s.
i —Casing backfilled with
120 Pee Oraval
end B mlonita
d
130
140 5-tl
• A
150
NOTES: 1 J-1148 September 1983
. Soil descriptions are Interpretive end actual changes may be gradual, 'i
2. Water Leval V Is for dale Indicated and may very with time of year. HART-CROWSER & associates, inc.
ATO: At Time of Drilling
Sheet 1 of 3 -Figure A-2
IL
Boring Log and Construction Data for Observation Well 9
t �
Geologic Log
O LL
•
� C
Sample
150
S-12
1 160 a.a., few wood fragments noted
170
5-13
Gray, hard, slightly gravelly, slightly sandy to
sandy, clayey SILT to silty CLAY. (Till-like)
180
$-14 P•• ar•v•I and
B•ntonit• b•cktl 11
190 S-15
Gray, saturated, slightly silty to silty, gravelly
SAND, with layers of silty sand.
200
S-16 \
210
e•Inen 0w•ia•d st«I Culno—
S-1
220 y
230 S-1
240 \ \ \\
T
250 $_1
Gray, hard, fine sandy, clayey SILT to clayey,
260 silty, fine SAND with scattered gravel.
5-2
270 }
o-
280
S-21 �r
290 .
1 300
J-1 148 September 1983
HART-CROWSI R & associates, Inc.
Sheet 2 of 3 Figure A-2
Boring Lo and Construction Data for Observation servat,on Well 9
Geologic Lop
O LL
O�
300
Sample
S-Z2
Gray, hard, fine sandy, clayey SILT to clayey, silty,
fine SAND with scattered gravel.
310
Pu Gravel and
Bentonite backfill
320 5-23
330 5-24
8-Inch 0 Weldad -
Steel caning
340 5-25
S-2
350
360 Drive Shoe
370-
.
m
380 l�J--Drllled 8-Inch e0pen Hole
'moo
390 buy
400
Bottom of Boring at 400 Feet.
Comoleted 8/5/83.
410
420
430
440
450
J-1 148 September 1983
HART-CROWSER & associates, inc.
II' ` Sheet 3 of 3 Figure A-2
I
Boring Log and Construction Data for Well RW- 1
_ Geologic Log
t . Well Design
nli . Top Casing Elevation In Feet
01 Casing Sllckup in Feet
t3round Surface Elevation In Feet approx. 40 feet Sample Lab
0 t
Silty SAND
10 Gravelly, silty SAND m Surface semi
Y0 "Claybound" GRAVEL and COBBLE a N
m
m24-inch a black
t9 r steel oroouction
30 0 casing
J
40 ME
Brown, sandy, cobbly GRAVEL 2E 1
'So Brown, gravelly SANG MM 7
Neoorane K-Decker
—Drive shoe
$-56 GS Riser aloe
80 I-42 foot length
01 24-inch a
S-G4 GS I tel.scooic
stainless sleet
_ screen assembly.
Brown, very sandy GRAVEL S-68 GS
71) I -- - x.250 inch slot size
Brown, slightly grave lly5775 THLdvin91 S-72 mE GS - .050-inch slot size
Brown, very sandy GRAVEL
$-77 G$ `clank Dioe
80 Brown sandy cobbly bouldOry ? GRAVELI — ____-_ _
.080-inch slot size
' Brown, Silty, sandy GRAVEL (Tight)
—Blank DIDe
Brown, cobbly, very Sandy GRAVEL
9U $-89 GS —.200-Inch slot size
'weathered SANDS TOfiE j
I—Tari nice with bail
Dotlom
bottom of Boring at 96 Feet.
loo Comoleted 3/26/87. Screen assemniy materials
(Casing advanced to 92 feet)
1. Johnson stainless steel continuous
10 slot screen.
2. Stainless steel blank sections.
riser and tall orae.
20
�30
40
ISO
1
�OTFS: 1. Soil descrioUons ars Interorailvs and actual changes may be gradual.
2. Water Level _$L la for dila indicated and may vary with time of year.
ATU: At Ilme of (trilling Hart Crowser, Inc.
J- 1667 7/87
Figure 2
Boring Log and Construction Data for Well RW-2
Geologic Log Well Design
t Top Casing Elevation In Feet
Casing Stickup In Feet
©round surface Elevation In Feet approx. 40 feet Sample Lab
0 To soil
' Sandy LOAM `
GRAVEL and COBBLE •
10 c Surface seal
D
D m
20 "Claybound" GRAVEL to SAND and GRAVEL a N
m
a
O T -24-inch m black
J steel production
JO casing
'10 7
Brown, slightly sandy to very sandy, cobbly GRAVEL Mc
Neoprene K-packer
Drive shoe
SO I �-2-foot length
5-56
blank riser Pipe
GS
—20-toot,nCh length o
60 I I 2a-incn x telescopic
m
.200- cn Biot size
S-64 = GS I stainless steel
1 ebr een
S-66 mm GS
'
70
Brown, slightly gravelly to very gravelly SAND I "not tengfn of
ta
S-75 GS I I d DID a wnn bail
bottom
Brown, sandy, cobbly GR;`:EL
80
' Brown, silty(?), gravelly SAND (Tight)
90 __ Brown, very gravelly SAND with cobbles
S-91 GS
Brown, slightly gravelly SAND
f,ray. '.4eathered SANDSTONE
100
Bottom of Boring at 100 Feet.
Screen assembly materials:
Completed 4/7187.
(Casing advanced t0 99 feet) 1.Johnson stemless steel continuous
110
slot screen.
2.Stainless steel blank sections,riser
and tad Dice.
1 120
190
140
ISO
NOTFS: 1. Soil deacrlollous are Interpretive and actual changes may be gradual.
2. Water t evet -.y Is for dal• Indicated and may very with time of year.
AfU: At fima of (Trilling Hart Crowser, InC•
J- 16-6 7 7187
Figure 3
' Boring Log and Construction Data for Well RW-3
Geologic Log Well Design
t Top Casing Elevation In Feet
nl'- Casing Silckup In Feet
•
around Surface Elevation in Feet approx. 40 feet Sample Lab
� ° 1
SANG and GRAVEL (FILL)
10
o
"Cemented" SAND and GRAVEL —Surface seal
a m
� N
20 •
otO
0
O
J
-24-inch m black
1
steel
30
Brown, gravelly SAND
40
Neoprene
Brown, sandy to very Sandy, cobbly GRAVEL 23 K-packer
50 Drive shoe
5-51 GS
2.5-toot length
blank mer pipe
5-51 2Z GS
60 2o-tootlengtn of
24-inch a
5-64 GS telescopic
.200-rncn slot
size stainless
steel screen
70
Brown SAND (Heavin to ver ravell $AND 4-toot length of
—11 L3'— _� S-7o GS ball DDltbmth
80 Brown, very sandy, cobbly GRAVCL
Brown, silty (?), very sandy GRAVEL with cobbles
Bottom of Boring at 84 Feet.
Completed 5120187. Screen assembly materials:
90 (Casing advanced to bottom of boring) t.,lohnson stainless steel continuous
' slot screen.
2.Stainless steel blank sectinns.riser
100 7 and tail pipe.
110
120
130
140
150
' NOTFS: 1. Solt descripllot's ere InUrOraliv• and actual changes may be pteduel.
2. 1sr le
Wevel Is for del• Indicated and msy very with time of year.
ATO: At flat* at Drilling Hart Crowser, Inc.
J- 1667 7/87
iFigure 4
CITY OF RENTON TEST WELL
11 MAPLEWOOD GOLF COURSE
GEOLOGIC LOG CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
O
Brown Fins Sandy Silt
5' Bsntonito Surface Seal, 12-inch O.D.
Mottled Gray and Brown Silt QZ- 9.6' Static Water Level In Lower Aquifer on
15' 11.1 8/21/88, Prior to Pumping
20 Gray Sandy Fins to Coarse 18.6'Ststic Water Level In Upper Aquifer
Gravel with Numerous Cobbleson 8/7/88
and Lenses of Silty Fine to
Coarse Sand (Upper Aquifer) *\Water Level in Cedar River on 8/21/88
40-
44'
8' I.D. Steal Casing
80
Gray Silty Fine Sand Interbedded
with Gray Sandy Silt
� 80
11 LL 86 -Stabilized Water Level In Well
t
during 513 GPM Pump Test
a
G 100 97
Gray Fine Sand with Silt and
Occasional Pieces of
Organic Matter
117'
120-120
Gray Silty Fine Sand
140-
! 250' Neoprene (K) Packer
Dark Gray Fins to Coarse Sand 154'
v and Gravelly Sand with 157' 7' Diameter Riser Pipe
C ,80 Occasional Cobbles and Lenses
of Fine to Medium Sand Johnson Stainless Steel Well Screen
�m (Lower Aquifer) 8' Nominal Diameter, 100-Slot
a 172' 7' Diameter Tall Pips with Welded
180 r Fine to Med. and with lit 179' .. 178' Bottom Plats
8 118 Bottom of W•II
Gray Silty Fine to Coarse Gravel Sand Backfill
Maximum Depth of Well Boring
Note: Ground Surface Elevation Is 71.1 Fest, City of Renton Datum.
f
m
1t r
r
r
O
T O
C Z
= v
m en
a A
S i
m
1
0
I�
Appendix D
' GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTIONS FOR THE CEDAR RIVER AQUIFER
(SOURCE: CH2M HILL, 1988)
1
1
i
1
1
i
1
se5807/001/4 "
ww iw ww ww �w w ww w ww w� ww ww ww ww ww ww ■w wR rw I
NN
co
D
0
w
4
Ar
Ilk
s
co
9
...�
W w •:'�: m
• °° °' ,
ol� ' eta W ,
wit
- 9 5
V x
ry
a �• a"&d
�r
At
Y
3 £
oO� T
_I MMC)
O r- c
o rr- m 0
n ocnm
m �C0 0
n
co
OOH o
Z M-4 m
O
vcn
n
0
0 o
N o
m
OU)
0
z0
cn -A
i w w w w w w w w w w w■ w w w w w w� w
Elevation (Ft. above NGVD)
A N N A
O O O O O
N
W
2D cn_T -10 w (n -p T C, cn V_7 @ co
�-C :3 N 7 7 d 7 ] 7 c
II N.� O. a a CL
Ocn
O X
oma N a
m <
2 N� <
F--
U)W
No
O N
co W
O
D
o co
cn cn -n v cn G7 T n
m
< a a � < < a
Qo < m
v > > v
d d
N
W _
Y,
W CD
CD
W-n N T d cn N TI
< C
3 3 d m
C/)
° O
CL � � Z
C W
c� W
N �
W
U
W �.
C/) cn V7 cn cn T W Z
—
< C
� a
—QO <
V)
— m
N
W
CT1
Cf) cn_o cn Q.71 cn v
C-
L
cn cn
CD a
< <
cn m cn
cn cn cn N co cn cn n W
-
CL
7 7 < 7 7 d 7 < .»
Q. n QO a< ' o a r-
0
d 3
<
m
G7 n m n cn-nc r C)cn
C7 �r -n < ° � m ° � � o< _ O�
a
a y �. a a 3<
� OZ
C � 3 Q.
c�
O r a
n0.:� m
Z� Oc �
0
D
Z
z rD
r
D O _. W
M
n
O
Z
Elevation (Ft. above NGVD)
A N N A
O O O O O
I
r — D
60
cn�T cnr cnT mcn T
m m -m m -
SSD `D5 > > o 3
=
0-0 0—
n _ —
�� L'. a o m
cn ° m
= p m Q° Tp d
c
3 cn
D r
m a
O cn W cn T N G�
�' � m <
'O_ m G rD
CL d ° 9
c
cn cn cn co n Qo cn
° — o ° W° N
a < a m a
G7 m L7 F cn
< CL° am m ��
m Qo m
CD
m
d c
0
o > > a
o. n.
a N o D cn cn
< a n< H
Cn
CEDAR RIVERCD
T
ca cn
m
CD n
n �
O
o Z
-D D
;v D
z <.
O M
C)c c� ��_ f
< 3
< a < <<
< m
m
CL
Z
O
d d v co
a < < <
6 m o
m — —
z
< < m
m a
< L) ° n
CD CD m — <CL m d
R. a n <
m � <
'a n
m
N
W
CJl
cn - n cn cn m
co
.2 Q.
m � I <
<
cn <
m o
0-
0
0 -i -n
m M E
O (nzm
M I n cn<m
m cnmZMM
N
zN Y"1
- m "w ET w " D
O CL a
zm a< co
� 9.0 �
n p Qr Q a
O <
� n
n <
D r
r <
i
1
Appendix E
WATER QUALITY SAMPLING RESULTS
�I
i
se5807/001/5
1
Laauclks
TesfirW Laboratoees, Inc. Certificate
940 South HameSSt..Seattle.Washington 98]08 (206)767-5060
Chernistry.Micro&doU and Technical Services
CLIENT CH2M Hill LABORATORY NO. 97207
P.O. Box 91500
Bellevue, WA 98009-2050 DATE July 17, 1986
ATTN: Jerry Ninteman
P
REPORT ON WATER
SAMPLE Submitted 6/12/86 and identified as shown below:
IDENTIFICATION
1 ) MW1 Rent MW1 6/86
2) MW4 Rent MW4 6/86
TESTS PERFORMED 3) MW5 Rent MW5 6/86
AND RESULTS: 4) MW7 Rent MW7 6/86
9
Samples were analyzed for priority pollutants in accordance with Test Methods
for Evaluating Solid Waste, (SW-846), U.S.E.P.A. , 1982, Methods 8240 volatile
organics) , 8270 semi-volatile extractables) , 8080 (pesticides and PCB's) , 9010
(cyanide) , 6010 and the 7000 series (metals analysis) . Phenol analysis was in
accordance with Method 420.2, Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water & Wastes,
U.S.E.P.A. , March, 1979.
parts per billion (ug/L)
Method
Inorganics 1 2 3 4 Blank
I
Dissolved Antimony L/5. L/5. L/5. L/5. L/5.
Dissolved Arsenic L/5. L/5. L/5. L/5. L/5.
Dissolved Beryllium L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 .
Dissolved Cadmium L/1 . L/1. 2. 2. L/1 ♦
Dissolved Chromium 1 . 1 . 3. 2. 3.
Dissolved Copper 3. 3. 4. 4. 2.
Dissolved Lead L/10. L/10. L/10. L/10. L/10.
Dissolved Mercury L/1. L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 .
Dissolved Nickel 4. 4. 9. 6. L/2.
Dissolved Selenium L/5. L/5. L/5. L/5. L/5.
t� Dissolved Silver 2. 2. 3. 5. L/1.
x Dissolved Thallium L/5. L/5. L/5. L/5. L/5.
Dissolved Zinc 15. 23. 24. 75. 4.
r Total Cyanide L/5. L/5. L/5. L/5. L/5.
Total Phenol L/5. L/5. L/5. L/5. L/5.
This report is submitted for the exclusive use of the person,partnership,or
f t corporation vv whom his addressed, ntrSubsequentt.This use of the name of this company or any
member o1 its staff in connection with the advertising or sale of any product or process will be granted only on contract.This company accepts no responsibility except
`�`. for the due performance of inspection and/or analysis in good faith and awarding to the rules of the trade and of science.
r
Laucks
Testing Laboratories, Inc. Certificate
940 South Harney St..Seattle.Washington 98108 (206)767-5060
Chemistry.Microbiology.and Technical Services
PAGE NO. 2
CH2M Hill LABORATORY NO. 97207
parts per billion (ug/L)
Field
Volatile Organics (by GC/MS) 1 2 3 4 Blank
Chloromethane L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Bromomethane L/1 .
Vinyl Chloride L/1 .
Chloroethane L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Methylene Chloride 26. 29. 64. 20. trace
Acrolein L/5. L/5. L/5. L/5. L/5.
*Acetone 7. 9. 7. trace trace
Acrylonitrile L/5. L/5. L/5. L/5. L/5.
*Carbon Disulfide L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
1 ,1-Dichloroethylene L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
1 ,1-Dichloroethane L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
trans-1 ,2-Dichloroethylene L/1. L/1 . L/1 .. L/1 . L/1 .
Chloroform L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
*2-Butanone L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 .
1,2-Dichloroethane L/1. L/1. L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
1 ,1 ,1-Trichloroethane L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 .
*Vinyl Acetate L/1. L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
Bromodichloromethane L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
Carbon Tetrachloride L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 .
1,2-Dichloropropane L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 .
Trichloroethylene L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 .
�. This report is submitted for the exclusive use of the person,partnership,or corporation to whom it is addressed.Subsequent use of the name of this company or any
member of its stall in connection with the advertising or agile of any product or process will be granted only on contract.This company accepts no responsibility except
for the due pe formance of inspection antlror analysis in good faith and according to the rules of the trade and of science.
6
,
Laucks
Testing Laboratories, Inc. Certificate
940 South Harney St.,Seattle.Washington 98108 (206)767-5060
f Chemistry.Micn�t�iolog ..and Technical Services
PAGE NO. 3
CH2M Hill LABORATORY NO 97207
r
a
parts per billion (ug/L)
Field
Volatile Organics (by GC/MS) 1 2 3 4 Blank
Benzene L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Chlorodibromomethane L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
1 ,1 ,2-Trichloroethane L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Bromoform L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
*4-Methyl-2-pentanone L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
*2-Hexanone L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
1 ,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Tetrachloroethylene L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
Toluene L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
Chlorobenzene L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
trans-1,3-Dichloropropene L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
Ethylbenzene L/1. L/1. L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
cis-1 ,3-Dichloropropene L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Styrene L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
o-Xylene L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
r
This report is submitted for the exclusive use of the person,partnership,or corporation to whom it is addressed.Subsequent use of the name of this company or any
member of its staff in connection with the advertising or sale of any product or process will be granted only on contract.This company accepts no responsibility except
for the due performance of inspection and/or analysis in good faith and according to the rules o1 the trade and of science.
t 6
I
Lsaucks
Testing Laboratories, Inc. Certificate
940 South HameySt..Seattle.Washington 98108 (206)767-5060
ChernmU Microbiology.and Technical Services
PAGE NO. 4
CH2M Hill LABORATORY NO 97207
1
parts per billion (u /L)
Method
Extractables (by GC/MS) 1 2 3 4 Blank
!� N-nitrosodimethylamine L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Bis(2-chloroethyl )ether
2-Chlorophenol
! Phenol
1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
t 1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene L/1 . L/1 . - L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
1,2-Dichlorobenzene L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Bis(2-chloroisopropyl )ether L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Hexachloroethane L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1. L/1 .
N-nitroso-di-n-propylamine L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Nitrobenzene L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Isophorone L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
2-Nitrophenol L/1. L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 .
2,4-Dimethylphenol L/1. L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 .
2,4-Dichlorophenol L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 .
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1. L/1 .
Naphthalene L/1. L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 .
Hexachlorobutadiene L/1. L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 .
4-Chloro-m-cresol L/1. L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 .
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
2-Chloronaphthalene L/1. L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
3�
1
r
This report is submitted for the exclusive use of the persm,partnership.or corporation to whom h is addressed.StbWuent use of the name of this company or any
member of its staff in connection with the advertising or sale of any product or process will be granted only on contract.This company accepts no responsibility except
for the due performance of inspection and/or analysis in good faith and according to the rubs of the trade and of science.
6
LILaucks
Testing Laboratories, Ince Certificate
940 South Harney St..Seattle.Washington 98108 (206)767-5060
Chemistry.Microbiology,and Technical Services
t
PAGE NO. 5
CH2M Hill 97207
LABORATORY NO.
arts per billion (u
P P q/L)
Extractables (b GC/MS) 1 Method
t 2 3 4 Blank
Acenaphthylene L/1. L/1. L 1 .
Dimethylphthalate L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 .
2,6-Dinitrotoluene L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Acenaphthene L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 .
2,4-Dinitrophenol L/1. L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
2,4-Dinitrotoluene L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
4-Nitrophenol L/1. L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 .
Fluorene L/1. L/1. L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether L/1.
Diethylphthalate
4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol L/1. L/1. L/1. L/1. L/1 .
1,2-Dipheny1hydrazine L/1. L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 .
4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
Hexachlorobenzene L/1. L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 .
Pentachlorophenol L/1. L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 .
Phenanthrene L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1. L/1 .
Anthracene L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1. L/1 .
Dibutylphthalate L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 . L/1.
Fluoranthene L/1. L/1. L/1. L/1. L/1
Pyrene L/1. L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
Benzidine
Butyl benzyl phthalate L/1. L/1. L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
Benzo(a)anthracene L/1. L/1. L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
Chrysene L/1. L/1. L/1. L/1 .
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine L/1. L/1. L/1. L/1 .
j .. This report is submitted for the exclusive use of the person,partnership,or corporation to whom it is addressed.Subsequent use of the name of this company or any
KC
'..-1 member of its staff in connection with the advertising or sale of any product or process will be granted only On contract.This company accepts no responsibility except
Ctil f: for the due performance of inspection speciwn endlor analysis in good faith and according t0 the rules Of the trade and Of science.c
f
}
' t
i
Laucks
Testing lzbomtories, Ince Certificate
i� 940 South Harney St..Seattle.Washington 98108 (206)767-5060
Chemistry.Microbiology,and Technical Services
PAGE NO. 6
CHN Hill LABORATORY NO. 97207
1
parts per billion (ug/L)
Method
Extractables (by GC/MS) 1 2 3 4 Blank
Bis(2-ethylhexyl )phthalate L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
N-nitrosodiphenylamine L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Di-n-octyl phthalate L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Benzo(b)fluoranthene L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Benzo(k)fluoranthene L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Benzo(a)pyrene L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Indeno(1 ,2,3-cd)pyrene L;1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Dibenzo(ah)anthracene L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
Benzo(ghi )perylene L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
*Aniline L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
*Benzoic Acid L/1. L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
*Benzyl Alcohol L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
*4-Chloroaniline L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
*Dibenzofuran L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
{ *2-Methylnaphthalene L/1 . L/1 . L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
*2-Methylphenol L/1. L/1. L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
*4-Methylphenol L/1. L/1. L/1 . L/1. L/1 .
*2-Nitroaniline L/1. L/1. L/1 . L/1. L/1 .
*3-Nitroaniline L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1. L/1 .
*4-Nitroaniline L/1. L/1. L/1 . L/1 . L/1 .
*2,4,5-Trichlorophenol L/1 . L/1. L/1. L/1 . L/1 .
This report is submitted for the exclusive use of the parson,partnership,or corporation to whom 0 is addressed.Subsequent use of the name of this company or any
member of its staff in connection with the advertising or sale of any product or process will be granted only on contract.This company accepts no responsibility except
for the due performance of inspection and/or analysis in good faith and according to the rules of the trade and of science. -
_ C
i
Lsaucks
Testing Lawmtorles, Ince Certificate
940 South HameySt_Seattle.Washington 98108 (206)767-5060
Chemistry.Microbiobgy,and Technical Services
f
7
PAGE NO.
CH2M Hill 97207
LABORATORY NO.
f
parts per billion (ug/L)
Method
Pesticides (by GC/ECD) 1 2 3 4 Blank
alpha-BHC L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02
beta-BHC L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 1-/0.02
delta-BHC L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02
gamma-BHC (lindane) L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02
heptachlor L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02
aldrin L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02
heptachlor epoxide L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02
dieldrin L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02
' 4,4t-DDE L/0.02 L/0.02 L/0.02 1-/0.02 L/0.02
4,4t-DDD L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04
endosulfan sulfate L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04
4,4t -DDT L/0.04 L/0:04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04
chlordane L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04
alpha endosulfan L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04
beta endosulfan L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04
endrin L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04
endrin aldehyde L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04
toxaphene L/5.0 L/5.0 L/5.0 L/5.0 L/5.0
PCB 1016 L/1.0 L/1.0 L/1 .0 L/1 .0 L/1 .0
PCB 1221 L/1 .0 L/1 .0 L/1.0 L/1 .0 L/1 .0
PCB 1232 L/1 .0 L/1.0 L/1 .0 L/1 .0 L/1 .0
PCB 1242 L/1.0 L/1 .0 L/1.0 L/1 .0 L/1.0
PCB 1248 L/1.0 L/1.0 L/1 .0 L/1 .0 L/1 .0
PCB 1254 L/1.0 L/1 .0 L/1.0 L/1 .0 L/1 .0
PCB 1260 L/1 .0 L/1.0 L/1 .0 L/1.0 L/1 .0
Methoxychlor L/0.1 L/0.1 L/0.1 L/0.1 L/0.1
Endrin Ketone L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04 L/0.04
This report is submitted for the exclusive use of the person,partnership,or corporation to wham it is addressed.Subsequent use of the name of this company or any
CD-'j"'
member of rts staff in connection with the advertising or sale of any product a process will be granted only on contract.This company accepts no responsibility except
for the due performance of inspection and/or analysis in good faith and according to the rules of the trade and of science.
6
Laucks
Testing lzbmtories, Ince Certificate
940 South HameySt..Seattle.Washington 98108 (206)767-5060
Chemistry.Microt�iology.and Technical Services
i,
PAGE NO. 8
' CH2M Hill LABORATORY NO. 97207
i,
Comment
f Methylene Chloride and Acetone were found to be present in the samples. These
{� are common laboratory solvents and it is probable that these values are the
result of unavoidable laboratory contamination.
!� Note:
t
Samples for dissolved metals analysis were filtered by you in the field prior to
submission.
!� Key
L/ indicates "less than"
* indicates Additional compounds from the EPA's Hazardous Substances List.
trace = an unquantifiable number between 1 and 5 ug/L
�i
Respectfully submitted,
Laucks Testing L boratories, Inc.
. M. Owens
JMO: laj
m
This repos is submitted for the exclusive use of the person,partnership,or corporation to whom h is addressed.Subsequent use of the name of this company or any
' member of its staff in connection with the advertising or sale of any product or process will be granted only on contract.This company accepts no responsibility except
`
for the due performance of inspection and/or analysis In good faith and according IO the rules of the trade and of fOlenCe.
ILaucks
Testing Laboratories, Inc. Certificate
i940 South Harney St..Seattle.Washington 98108 (206)767-5060
Chemistry.Microbiology.and Technical Services
PAGE NO. 9
CH2M Hill LABORATORY NO. 97207
i
' APPENDIX
Surrogate Recovery Quality Control Report
Listed below are surrogate (chemically similar) compounds utilized in the analysis
of volatile and organic compounds. The surrogates are added to every sample prior
extraction and analysis to monitor for matrix effects, purging efficiency, and
sample processing errors. The control limits represent the 95% confidence interval
established in our laboratory through repetitive analysis of these sample types.
parts per billion (ug/L)
Spike Spike % Control
Sample No. Surrogate Compound Level Found Recovery Limit
MB d4-1 ,2-Dichloroethane 50.0 45.7 91 .4 77-120
MB d8-Toluene 50.0 51 .5 103. 86-119
MB p-Bromofluorobenzene 50.0 51 .5 103. 85-121
1 d4-1,2-Dichloroethane 50.0 47.9 95.8 77-120
1 1 d8-Toluene 50.0 51 .5 103. 86-119
1 p-Bromofluorobenzene 50.0 51 .2 102. 85-121
2 d4-1,2-Dichloroethane 50.0 47.5 95.0 77-120
2 d8-Toluene 50.0 50.7 101 . 86-119
2 p-Bromofluorobenzene 50.0 50.9 102. 85-121
t
' 3 d4-1,2-Dichloroethane 50.0 47.3 94.6 77-120
3 d8-Toluene 50.0 50.6 101 . 86-119
3 p-Bromofluorobenzene 50.0 50.6 101 . 85-121
This report is submitted for the exclusive use of the person,partnership,or corporation to whom it is addressed.Subsequent use of the name of this company or any
member of its staff in connection with the advertising or sale of any product or process will be granted only on contract.This company accepts no responsibility except
S La F
for the due performance of inspection and/or analysis in good faith and according to the rules of the trade and Of science.
� f9
Lsaucks
Testing Laboratories, Inc. Certificate
940 South Harney St..Seattle.Washington 98108 (206)767-5060
Chemistry.Mi Tobidogy.and Technical Services
PAGE NO. 10
i
I CN2M Hill LABORATORY N0. 97207
� i
' parts per billion (ug/L)
Spike Spike % Control
Sample No. Surrogate Compound Level Found Recovery Limit
4 d4-1 ,2-Dichloroethane 50.0 47.7 95.4 77-120
4 d8-Toluene 50.0 50.7 101 . 86-119
' 4 p-Bromofluorobenzene 50.0 51 .6 103. 85-121
Blank 2-Fluorophenol 200. 100. 50.0 21-100
Blank d5-Phenol 200. 80.2 40.1 10-94
Blank 2-Bromophenol 200. 140. 69.8 62-96
Blank d5-Nitrobenzene 100. 85.6 85.6 35-114
Blank 2-Fluorobiphenyl 100. 78:9 78.9 43_116
Blank d10-Azobenzene 100. 93.0 93.0
Blank 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 200. 181 . 90.4 10-123
Blank d14-Terphenyl 100. 87.4 87.4 33-141
1 2-Fluorophenol 200. 92.6 46.3 21-100
1 d5-Phenol 200. 76.6 38.3 10-94
1 2-Bromophenol 200. 133. 66.4 62-96
1 d5-Nitrobenzene 100. 87.0 87.0 35-114
1 2-Fluorobiphenyl 100. 91 .9 91 .9 43-116
1 d10-Azobenzene 100. 101 . 101 . ------
' 1 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 200. 169. 84.5 10-123
1 d14-Terphenyl 100. 66.5 66.5 33-141
2 2-Fluorophenol 200. 95.2 47.6 21-100
2 d5-Phenol 200. 80.8 40.4 10-94
2 2-Bromophenol 200. 139. 69.7 62-96
' 2 d5-Nitrobenzene 100. 88.5 88.5 35-114
2 2-Fluorobiphenyl 100: 90.5 90.5 43-116
2 d10-Azobenzene 100. 94.7 94.7 ------
2 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 200. 168. 83.8 10-123
2 d14-Terphenyl 100. 77.1 77.1 33-141
This report is submitted for the exclusive use of the person,partnership,or corporation to whom it is addressed.Subsequent use of the name of this company or any
i a member of its staff in connection with the advertising or sale of any product or process will be granted only on contract.This company accepts no responsibility except
# for the due performance of inspection andior analysis in good faith and according to the rules of the trade and of science.
6
Laucks
Testing Laboratories, Inc. Certificate
940 South HarneySt..Seattle.Washington 98108 (206)767-5060
Chemistry.Mic rob"ogy.and Technical Services
PAGE NO. 11
CH211 Hill LABORATORY NO. 97207
parts per billion (ug/L)
Spike Spike % Control
p
Sample No. Surrogate Compound Level Found Recovery Limit
3 2-Fluorophenol 200. 58.6 29.3 21-100
3 d5-Phenol 200. 51 .0 25.5 10-94
3 2-Bromophenol 200. 108. 54.1 62-96
3 d5-Nitrobenzene 100. 86.9 86.9 35-114
3 2-Fluorobiphenyl 100. 94.4 94.4 43-116
3 d10-Azobenzene 100. 95.1 95.1 ------
3 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 200. 100. 50.2 10-123
3 d14-Terphenyl 100. 65.7 65.7 33-141
4 2-Fluorophenol 200, 100. 50.1 21-100
4 d5-Phenol 200. 85-.8 42.9 10-94
4 2-Bromophenol 200. 139. 69.7 62-96
4 d5-Nitrobenzene 100. 84.6 84.6 35-114
4 2-Fluorobiphenyl 100. 92.2 92.2 43-116
4 d10-Azobenzene 100. 95.3 95.3 ------
4 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 200. 166. 82.8 10-123
4 d14-Terphenyl 100. 70.9 70.9 33-141
Blank Isodrin 0.50 0.42 85.0 43-118
1 Isodrin 0.50 0.36 72.0 43-118
2 Isodrin 0.50 0.41 82.4 43-118
3 Isodrin 0.50 0.43 86.6 43-118
4 Isodrin 0.50 0.36 72.6 43-118
Blank Dibutylchlorendate 1 .00 0.84 83.7 24-150
1 Dibutylchlorendate 1 .00 0.65 64.8 24-150
2 Dibutylchlorendate 1.00 0.73 73.2 24-150
3 Dibutylchlorendate 1 .00 0.89 89.4 24-150
4 Dibutylchlorendate 1 .00 0.68 68.2 24-150
MB = Method Blank
Cam
i This report is submitted for the exclusive use of the person,partnership,or corporation to whom it is ddressed.Subsequent use of the name o1 this company or any
mber o1 its staff in connection with the advertising or sale of any product or process will be granted only on contract.This company accepts no responsibility except
for the due performance of inspection and/or analysis in good faith and according to the rules of the trade and of science.
G _
i
cI-
.+7 M�'h'ICII'1`Y CLEc2Iy
�ilIy AVE SOUBLDG„
egI''k'I(.Is l.j TIIE (,`I7'V CURB
("-'q MUNICIPAL
AVE. SLBLDG.
� � MILL
VTO1N: WAS54 UTH
I