Loading...
RES2715 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