Borough of Grove City, Pennsylvania
                   July 1993
                  Submitted To:
         U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                   Region 3
                  Prepared By:

             HORSLEY & WTTTEN, INC.



                    TABLE OF CONTENTS j



 Introduction                                  !                i

 Purpose                                      I                i

 Step #1 - Identify Duties and Responsibilities                      1

 Step #2 - Delineation of Wellhead Protection Areas                2


 Step #3 - Identification of Potential Contamination Sources         6

 Step #4 - Management Tools                    ;                8

 Step #5 - Public Education                       i              14
                        LIST OF TABLES


1.   Summary of Wellhead Protection Tools
                        LIST OF FIGURES


Wellhead Protection Areas


 member of the Utility Committee and the Borough Manager attended a
 workshop in Grove City, sponsored by EPA Region 3 on 5 May 1993.  Also
 present were representatives of the Pennsylvania Rural Water Association
 and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Regulation and the
 EPA. All of these organizations will play key roles in the development and
 implementation of a wellhead protection program for Grove City.
 The Grove City Borough should set up a wellhead protection! committee
 made up of local officials (including water department, planning board, and
 the Borough Manager), a representative of Pennsylvania DER, and a
 representative of the Pennsylvania Rural Water Association. Specific duties
 of each member should be defined by local officials.  The Grove City Borough
 Water Department is responsible for delivering potable water to consumers
 and it may be the most appropriate lead agency for the wellhead protection
 program.  Technical assistance is available from Pennsylvania Rural Water
 Association, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental  Regulation and the
 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.                    !
 Step #2 - Delineation of Wellhead Protection Areas

 The Borough of Grove  City is dependent upon ground water as its source of
 drinking water. Three  wells (#1,2 and 3), located in the downtown area, were
 abandoned due to trichloroethylene (TCE) contamination.  Foiir new wells
 (#4, 5, 6 and Memorial  Park) currently serve 8,162 Grove City eind 890 Pine
 Township residents. These four wells have a rated maximum! pumping
 capacity of 2.6 million gallons per day (MGD), and an average pumping rate of
 1.2 MGD (or 46% of capacity).                              i
 Wells #4, #5, and #6 are approximately 350 feet  deep  and tap the Upper and
 Lower Connoquenessing Sandstone Aquifer which is confined between layers
 of low-permeability shale.  A great deal of hydrologic information can be
 obtained from the pumping tests  of the Grove City wells, the tests
 immediately preceded most of the constant pumping  rate tests with step tests
 without sufficient recovery before beginning the constant rate long-term tests.
Grove City WHP Program                -2-                  Horsley & Witten, Inc.
27 July 1993                                                 |

                             GROVE CITY

 The wellhead protection (WHP) program was established in 1986 after
 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).  The WHP program
 was designed for, and has been extremely successful in, protecting ground
 water which supplies wells and wellfields that contribute drinking water to
 public water supply systems. Wellhead protection requires the participation
 of all levels of government.  The foremost responsibility for ensuring that
 ground water is adequately protected lies at the local government level.


 Because of their interest in promoting wellhead protection iri local
 communities, Region  3  of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
 funded a project to provide wellhead protection in two Pennsylvania
 communities, one of which is Grove City. The purpose of this project was to
 provide "hands on" training for applying EPA's Wellhead Protection
 Program. This report summarizes our analysis of background materials, a site
 visit, and a public meeting coordinated in Grove City, Pennsylvania.  It is
 structured according to  the five steps for wellhead protection outlined in the
 Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986. The report was prepared by
 Horsley & Witten, Inc. (H&W) under contract to the EPA Region 3 office in
 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.  The project was also coordinated with the
 Pennsylvania Rural Water Association and the Pennsylvania Department of
 Environmental Resources.

 Step #1 - Identify Duties and Responsibilities

The primary  contact for coordination of the wellhead protection program has
been the Borough of Grove City.  Three members of the Borough Council,  a
Grove City WHP Program                -1-                 Horsley & Witten, Inc.
27 July 1993



          T -aSM
".C^ '•'•;-   s| :sg|| '.
                                                          -     $!     ''    '
                                                       .'••.   -.  \       r
                                                        •   •   •"•,•-, -  .    o
                                                                . -^   .  • LB  ./

                     f?     ~     '             "' "
             Aquifer and

      Wellhead Protection Areas

             Grove City, PA
 Aquifer Protection Areas

         Burgoon Sandstone Outcrop

         Connoquesnessing Formation Outcrop

 Wellhead Protection Areas

 |      |  WHPA

 1000    0         2000    3000

         scale (feet)           H&W,
                               -r         .'    ,   .•   !    •:...-•-
                               «-..     i    f  ". A     i   '  .   ;
                                  . -  .."••/  v-•«•*,   :•)     '.—
                                    "•  ^.- r    Sx"1    -  \'>.   ,-  I'""    ,
                               \     A    ,%    '.vV       ., -//•-  I;

4rfN   •

 Analyses for aquifer properties are not possible from these data effected by the
 step tests. The data also could not be analyzed with the Jacobs equations for
 distance-drawdown because the more distant observation well (#6 at 900 feet)
 had a greater drawdown that a closer observation well (#4 at 800 feet).  This
 deviation from expected conditions indicates that the aquifer transmissivity
 and/or storativity are not homogeneously distributed throughout the aquifer.
 However, analysis of one test, that of pumping well #6 while observing water
 levels in well #4, which was not effected by a step test, yields a transmissivity
 of 55,000 gpd/ft. and an artesian (confined conditions) storativity of 0.0001.
 Radii of influence calculated with these confined aquifer values would be
 exceedingly large (about 5 miles after 2 days!). Possible reasons could be that
 the town overlays deep coal mines and this well could be inducing flow from
 Wolfe Creek.                                           I
 All of the semilog plots of drawdown versus time showed boundary
 conditions were encountered during the tests.  Pumping well #4 at 310 gpm
 showed the development of steady state conditions in which recharge equals
 discharge after about 14 hours of pumping (no increase of drawdown from
 800 to 2,880 minutes).  This indicates a nearby recharging boundary
 contributing 310 gpm. Definite decreases in anticipated drawdown (deviation
 from the straight line plot)  for observations in wells #4, #5 and #6 are shown
 at about 600, 600, and 560 minutes respectively while pumping well #5.  The
 significance of the times of encounter for these boundaries isi uncertain
 because of the complications created by the effects of the step test, but all three
 of these deviations represent the presence of a recharging boionclary near the
 three wells and, perhaps, somewhat closer to well #6, the most westerly of the
 three wells. Indeed, well #6 is closer to Wolf Creek. Well #6 is located
 between the pumping well  and where Wolf Creek crosses th«> outcrop areas of
 the sandstone aquifer. It is concluded that where Wolf Creek crosses the
 aquifer outcrop area, a significant recharge to the aquifer occurs under
pumping conditions.                                    j
In addition, observations in well #4 during test pumping of well #6 shows
the effect of a recharge boundary at about 1,440 minutes, whi<;h strongly
Grove City WHP Program               -4-                  Hprsley & Witten, Inc.
27 July 1993                                               i

suggests that the recharging boundary is on the opposite side of well #6 from
well #4. This test of well #6 also showed some deviations toward increasing
drawdown at earlier times during this test.  These could represent low
permeability boundaries or, more likely, other wells pumping in the vicinity.

The 48-hour test of the Memorial Park well, to the west of Wolf Creek, does
not reveal any boundary conditions, either because they are too close or too
far away.  There is no tendency toward stabilization during the 48-hour test
on this well. The Burgoon Aquifer, which is tapped by this well, is
stratigraphically below and separated by a confining shale bed from the Upper
and Lower Connoquenessing Sandstone aquifer tapped by wells  #4,  #5, and
#6, and does not outcrop nearby at Wolf Creek, but outcrops farther to the
north of Grove City. Although the engineering report determined a
transmissivity of 61,600 gpd/ft. for the aquifer here, observations from the
pumping well cannot be analyzed for storage coefficient, except to say that it is
small as typical with confined conditions.

Three methods were applied to delineate wellhead protection areas  for the
Grove City wells. Aquifer recharge areas were mapped utilizing United States
Geological Survey and Pennsylvania Geologic Survey bedrock geology maps
of the area (reference). Recharge areas were mapped where the producing
unit (Connoquenessing for wells 4, 5 & 6 and Burgoon for Memorial Park)
were mapped as an outcrop (appearing at the land's surface and therefore
susceptible to  contamination sources).

A semi-analytic model developed by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) known as the WHPA Code (MWCAP Module) was utilized to map the
area which contributes to the #4, 5 & 6 wells. This method was selected
because sufficient data was available and it incorporates ground  water flow
direction.  Aquifer properties (hydraulic conductivity and aquifer thickness)
were determined from the pump test data and boring logs as  discussed above.
Ground water flow  direction was assumed to be northwesterly toward Wolfe
Creek as indicated in the mapping of piezometric surfaces at the Osborne
landfill. A hydraulic gradient of 0.0036 was utilized based upon piezometric
Grove CityWHP Program              -5-  '                Horsley & Witten, Inc.
27 July 1993

 measurements in the Connoquenessing Formation at the Osborne landfill
 site.  Wolfe Creek was modeled as a stream boundary recharge zone because
 the Connoquenessing Formation has been mapped to coincide with the
 stream.  Five-, ten-, and fifteen-years time of travel was selected for use in the
 model. Two pumping rates (average and maximum rated) were modeled.
 A calculated fixed radius method was employed to determine the WHPA for
 the Memorial Park well.  This method calculates that portion of the aquifer
 which contributes water to the pumping well over a specified time period (10
 years was modeled). In this case, because no information about ground water
 flow  was available, a flat water table was assumed with ground water flowing
 into the pumping well radially from all directions.

 The mapping of both aquifer and wellhead protection areas for the Grove City
 wells is appropriate due to their unique hydrogeologic setting. All of the
 wells draw water from aquifers which are overlain by low permeability strata
 (shale) resulting in a semi-confined condition.  For this reason the outcrop
 areas were mapped showing were water enters these aquifers. However, the
 confining shale layers are likely to be fractured allowing the pumping wells to
 draw ground water downward from overlying aquifers and ultimately from
 the overlying land's surface. The WHPAs show those land areas where water
 may be induced downward through the semi-permeable shale layers and into
 the producing aquifer.                                  j

 Step #3 - Identification of Potential Contamination Sources
 Potential sources of contamination within the delineated wellhead protection
 areas  to the two existing wells and the proposed well were determined from
 USGS topographic maps and from information supplied by the Grove City
 Municipal Waterworks.  The delineated WHPAs contain two sites where
 ground water contaminants have been reported in the past. First, the
 Osborne Landfill site is located to the southeast of the  wellfield and at the 15
 year time of travel boundary when the wells are pumping at maximum
 capacity.  Two considerations make this source unlikely to actually impact the
Grove City WHP Program               -6-                 Horsley & Witten, Inc.
27 July 1993

 wells: a) the wells have never been pumped at this rate for extended periods
 of time, and b) ground water contamination at the site is reported to be
 limited to the upper aquifer and not in the deeper Connoquesnessing and
 Burgoon formations where Grove City's wells are screened.

 The second potential source is the industries which reportedly caused the
 contamination of wells 1, 2 and 3 located to the south of the current wellfield
 (4, 5 and 6).  The WHPA delineation shows that these industries are located to
 the south of the wellfield. The delineations suggest that the industries would
 not impact the wells at lower pumping rates (whereby the WHPA does not
 extend as far southwesterly). Furthermore, even if contaminants from this
 site  enter the WHPA, sufficient dilution may occur between the
 contamination source and the wellfield to prevent concentrations in excess of
 drinking water standards.

 The numerous coal mines (commonly 40 feet in depth) throughout the
 delineated WHPAs are a potential source of contamination which were noted
 during the 5 May workshop . These mine shafts may serve as direct conduits
 from the land surface to the producing aquifers making the ground  water
 more vulnerable to surface-derived contamination sources such as road
 runoff and accidental spills. These mine sites should be inventoried and
 evaluated as  potential sources (or conduits) of contamination.

Numerous small businesses along Main Street and South Madison Avenue
may utilize hazardous materials and may generate hazardous wastes. While
the quantities may be small, they may represent a serious threat to the ground
water quality. A door-to-door inventory of these land uses may be the most
effective  method of evaluating these potential sources.  An example of a
successful volunteer inventory of this type is the City of El Paso, Texas who
utilized retired senior citizens to complete such an inventory. This  case study
is documented in guidance materials available from USEPA.

The modelling of the wellfield shows that a significant .amount of water is
likely to be induced from Wolfe Creek under pumping conditions.  This
Grove City WHP Program               -7-                  Horsley & Witten, Inc.
27July 1993

           being the case, additional potential sources upstream must be considered in
           the wellhead protection program. Extensive farmlands and ^Interstate 84
           represent potential contamination threats in these areas. Farmlands may
           generate pesticides and fertilizer runoff which could find its way into Wolfe
           Creek and be induced by the pumping wells.  Stormwater drainage from
           Interstate 84 may contain metals, oils, greases and de-icing chemicals.
           Step #4 - Management Tools                             j

           Management approaches to wellhead protection can include both regulatory
           and non-regulatory measures. Regulatory resources include zoning,
           subdivision, and health ordinances.  The Pennsylvania State; Enabling
           Legislation provides extensive authority to local governments to protect
           water resources.  Non-regulatory measures include monitoring and public
           education. Table 1 provides a summary of potential wellhead protection
           measures.                                              ;
           Several non-regulatory tools may be appropriate in beginning Grove City's
           wellhead protection program. Several of the potential contamination sources
           identified in the preceding  section of this report could  be further evaluated
           (and possibly managed) with non-regulatory techniques such, as public
           education and monitoring.  It will be important to educate business owners
           within the delineated WHPAs who utilize hazardous  materials  that even
           small quantities of these materials must be handled carefully. Monitoring of
           water quality at the abandoned wellfield (1,2 and 3) may be important in
           evaluating the  potential movement of contaminants toward the new
           wellfield. Similarly, monitoring at the Osborne landfill site should be
           coordinated with Grove City's wellhead protection efforts.  Horsley & Witten,
           Inc. has made the  initial contact with EPA's Superfund site manager for this
           facility. Additional contacts should be made by the municipality to encourage
           the sharing  of  information.                              \
          Grove City WHP Program               -8-                  Horsley & Witten, Inc.
          27 July 1993                                               !


                  ra    :s 3


                       TJ 3
                      2 C CO

                      22 =

                      — 01 X
4)   C «

—   »!H


S g 8
.»- a ."^
i §

3 .5

a: o
   f S

   •° '5i



a ^ w

O! > .5
•p > 3 § 5
S S eo S E

S 1 * £ .= S
•§ 11 g II

fi 1 f 11
S .^ ei cj Q i
C£ O Su^ Cu.5



                                                  flj cj
Grove City WHP Program

27 July 1993
                                           Horsley & Witten, Inc.

      12 •§ 12
tJ5l 3tS E 3
            U t3 O U "u S
                                            n XI
                          = 03  S .50"

                         S-1 S  lags

                                                            •s E
                                                S a s

                                                E c S
                                                             in u.

                                                             § *O ."

                                                            = i§S
                                                            o "3 "^ ~
                                                            oo So cj =^
                                                            c ?r as
                                                            *• w <3 _

                                                            a-5.5 J

                                                            « 5 5 -

                                                            ™ S8 |

                                                            &S a '«
                                                §2 a 3
                                                c3 32 =

                                                            " .=  1 i ^
                                                            £ ?  « .2P~

                                                            5 S>  "5. "2. e

                                                            1H iff
                                                            2 -S r 2 | „

                                                            11-5 I §1

                                                         »  S-
                                                         g.  I
                                                         O  01
Grove City WHP Program

27 July 1993
                                         Horsley & Witten, Inc.


c ra 60 «
.2 i: c «


                                                                         •S 2
                                                                          g «
                                                                          -E Si
                                                                           o 3 S
                                                                         -o "
                                                                       o S i s

                                                            K c



                                                                         § o:
                                                                         o oo
                                             •O jn

                                             i .2
                                             jj S

Grove City WHP Program

27 July 1993
 Horsley & Witten, Inc.




 S 8
§!§!  s
*ll«  I
IH*  1
•2 S « o  9-
S-3 ^> -  §
•§ 8-5?  | .
w *• S s  ™ M
&2 I t  §.5
S S 2 S .38
                      -2 B.-
                     § 8 §
                     O, S «
                     S g
                      3 O
                      f S
•3 | 1 §

  •*•• w o
   a. S
Grove City WHP Program
27 July 1993
                         Horsley & Witten, Inc.





01 — •—
SB eotJ
2 = 2
•3 c ra
f sg-

i i  s 11 < a
E 60  — .5 .2 <= .5
                                                  2 ~
                                                  a 2
                                              S >N.2 £ 3 S-i 3 S
                                              •3 h eo ra 5- O. c S->-
                                              < S 2iS £3 8 8 2L
                                             O 3
                                             u a

                                             3 a
               60-C •
               'w g .5*
               a £g
              -g. S 'S
               (3 eft *.S
              •Sis =

                                                 « s-
                                                 .2.JS n
                                                 •5 ~ tn
                                                 W 3 " O •

                                                 11 HI

                                                 8 x E ||g

                                                 3* S- O §i £ G
                                                 *75 **• ^o o *• ***"*

                                                 1 1 I f -i f
                                                  a e Q-
                                                 !a a >,— o a
                                                 „ js -° 60 x =


                                                 It! Ill


                                = 5^0-

                                  1 c5^ §•

> >
1 1
m o
? 1


' «2
Grove City WHP Program

27 July 1993
  Horsley & Witten, Inc.

 Watershed protection efforts for the Wolfe Creek may also play a key role in
 Grove City's wellhead protection program. Stormwater management
 activities related to Interstate 84 by the Pennsylvania Department of Public
 Works should be coordinated with the objective of water quctlity protection of
 Wolfe Creek. Best management practices should be encouraged by the
 farmers within this watershed (upgradient of Grove City).
 Step #5 - Public Education
 A public meeting was held on 5 May 1993, in the Borough of
Grove City.  This
 preliminary wellhead protection plan was presented and discussed.
 Approximately twelve citizens and local officials attended.  Future public
 meetings and workshops are recommended to ensure implementation of the
 wellhead protection plan. To ensure full development implementation of
 Grove City's wellhead protection program, a Committee should be
 formulated. The Committee should meet at least quarterly and preferably
 monthly (to ensure better continuity). Regular agenda items to be discussed
 could include water quality monitoring data, progress at the Qsborne landfill
 site, well pumping information, review of proposed development projects,
 and public education efforts.                              j .
 The posting of "Wellhead Protection Area" signs would serve as an effective
 public education tool. Such signage would alert truck drivers carrying
 hazardous cargo that they are entering a sensitive environmental resource
 area.  They would also serve to remind citizens that they live on top of their
 drinking water supply and therefore need to take preventative actions to
 protect it.                                                i
Grove City WHP Program               -14-                 Horsley & Witten, Inc.
27 July 1993