THE WILTON, N.H. WELLHEAD
PROTECTION AREA PILOT PROJECT
by
Douglas L. Heath
Ground Water Management Section
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region I, Boston, Massachusetts
GUCIO-FLUV1AL
DEPOSITS
Prepared by the
United States Environmental Protection Agency
in cooperation with the
New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services
and the
Town of Wilton, New Hampshire
October, 1993
-------
WILTON, NEW HAMPSHIRE WELLHEAD PROTECTION
AREA DEUNEATION PILOT PROJECT —
OBJECTIVES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS
The Pilot Project demonstrated the:
- application of the Ten-Step Method of WHPA delineation for
overburden public supply wells
- procedures and results of microparticulate sampling of both surface
water and ground water
- use of the differential temperature method to quantify induced
infiltration for wells with GWUI
- comparison of locational accuracy in locating wells using quadrangle
interpolation, GIS igi tio and global positioning systems
- effectiveness of WHPA delineation using both Hydrogeological
M pp ng and Analytic Modeling methods
- comparison of USGS water-table mapping at 1:24,000 scale and
detailed field mapping at 1:2,400 scale
- use of shallow piezometers, stream boulders, staff gauges and
with existing observation wells for economical water-
table mapping
- effectiveness of GIS mapping of the WHPA for display and analysis
-------
Introduction
This report describes the delineation of the welihead protection area (WHPA) of two
municipal supply wells in Wilton, Hilisborough County, New Hampshire, approximately
17 miles west-northwest of Nashua, N.H. The size of the WHPA is approximately 0.52
square miles.The study is part of the Merrimack River Initiative, a cooperative effort
among environmental agencies at the local, state and federal levels, including the
Town of Wilton, the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (NHDES)
and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency in Boston, Massachusetts.
The weilfield is located within the watershed of the Souhegan River, a tributary of the
Merrimack River. It consists of two gravel-packed supply wells pumping ground water
from an unconfined, stratified-drift aquifer at a combined rate of approximately 8 million
gallons per month. The aquifer, which is bounded on the east and west by till and
bedrock uplands up to 1,000 feet in altitude, consists predominantly of fine sand to
coarse cobbles and boulders laid down by the retreat of the Wisconsinan ice sheet in
the pre-glacial Souhegan River valley, approximately 14,000 to 15,000 years ago.
Finer-grained deposits of silt and clay deposited by glacial ice or as lake deposits also
occur locally. These valley-fill materials are recharged by ground-water inflow from
surrounding highlands, and also from infiltration originating as precipitation or as
surface water, especially near pumping wells.
The delineation criteria, criteria thresholds and methods applied in the welihead
protection area meet or exceed the requirements of the NHDES Phase I Delineation
Guidelines of the NHDES Welihead Protection Program, which was approved by the
EPA on September 13, 1990 in accordance with the Safe Drinking Water Act
Amendments of 1986. These criteria are distance and flow boundaries, used in
conjunction with the following combined methods: arbitrary-fixed radius, analytical
modeling and hydrogeological mapping. One of the supply wells was also investigated
for its potential to induce infiltration and water-borne pathogens (including enteric
viruses) from the Souhegan River, located 91 feet away from the welihead.
The information and techniques used to delineate the wellhead protection area are
outlined as a ten-step process performed in sequential order. This approach was found
to be effective given New Hampshire’s well-developed hydrogeological data base and
the specific requirements of the selected delineation methods. Following NHDES
approval and adoption by the Town, it is hoped that the WHPA described in this report
will provide a basis for long-term protection of the aquifer as a high-quality source of
drinking water for Wilton’s residents from potentially adverse land-use practices.
-------
Acknowledgments
The author wishes to thank the many individuals who provided their time and valuable
assistance during this project. They are: Charlie McGettigan, Commissioner of the
Wilton Water Works. His good humor and keen knowledge about the water system’s
pumps, valves and mains were invaluable during all phases of this report; Stewart
Draper, Chairman of the Board of Selectmen; Philip Tuomala of Monadnock Survey,
Inc. for locational and topographical information; Sarah Pillsbury of the New Hampshire
Department of Environmental Services (NHDES) Wellhead Protection Program for
providing information regarding Phase I delineation guidelines; Bruce Hovland of the
Society for Protection of New Hampshire Forests for allowing access to SPNHF land for
piezometer installation and geologic reconnaissance.
I am also indebted to Ken Stem and Eugene Boudette of the NHDES for copies of well
logs and geologic reports for the Wilton area; Ken Toppin of the U. S. Geological
Survey in Bow, N.H. for seismic refraction survey data obtained at the weilfield; Gary L.
Smith of the 0. L. Maher Company for well construction and aquifer-test reports; Dr.
Jennifer Clancy and Scott Tighe of Industrial and Environmental Analysts, Inc. and
Prof. Aaron Margolin of the University of New Hampshire for microparticulate analysis
of water samples at the Abbott well site; Tim Bridges, Al Pratt, Tnsh Garrigan, Martha
Johnson and Alison Simcox of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency for help with
piezometer installation, global positioning system surveying, and microparticulate
sampling; Michele Notariani, N.H. Ground-Water Coordinator, for inspecting the draft
report; and finally, Marcy Berbrick and Amy Hoyt of ROW Sciences, Inc. (contractor to
the EPA Region I Information Management Branch) for GIS plot preparation.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
Acknowledgments
Page Number
STEP 1. OBTAIN THE LATEST 7.5-MINUTE
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY TOPOGRAPHIC
QUADRANGLE FOR THE WELLFIELD LOCATION 1-1
1.1 Introduction I-I
1.2 Sources of Books and Maps 1-1
STEP 2. VISIT THE WELLFIELD AND ACCURATELY LOCATE
THE SUPPLY WELLS ON THE GREENVILLE QUADRANGLE
TO THE NEAREST SECOND OF LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE 2-1
2.1 Introduction 2-1
2.2 Physical Positioning 2-1
2.3 WelIfield Reconnaissance 2-2
2.4 Determining Well Coordinates 2-3
STEP 3. EXAMINE REGIONAL AND LOCAL TOPOGRAPHY
AND SURFACE-WATER DRAINAGE PATTERNS SHOWN
ON THE QUADRANGLE AND ESTIMATE THE BOUNDARY
OF THE WELLFIELD RECHARGE AREA 3-1
3.1 Introduction 3-1
3.2 Description of Regional and Local Topography 3-1
3.3 Assumptions Governing the Initial Estimate
of the Wilton WelIfleId Recharge Area 3-2
3.4 Preliminary Estimate of the Weltfield’s Recharge
Area Boundary Based on Site Visit and Quadrangle Information 3-4
STEP 4. GATHER ALL AVAILABLE HYDROGEOLOGIC AND
LAND-USE INFORMATION ABOUT THE PRELIMINARY WELLFIELD
RECHARGE AREA AND ITS VICINITY 4-1
4.1 introduction 4-1
4.2 List of Information Sources and Specific References 4-1
4.2.1 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 4-1
4.2.2 U. S Geological Survey 4-2
4.2.3 U. S. Department of Agriculture - Soil Conservation Service 4-3
4.2.4 State of New Hampshire 4-3
-------
4.2.5 Dartmouth College 4 -4
4.2.6 Town of Wilton, New Hampshire 4-4
4.2.7 Private Consultants 4-4
STEP 5. DETERMINE THE MAXIMUM PUMPING DISCHARGE
OF THE SUPPLY WELLS 5-1
5.1 Introduction 5-1
5.2 Peak-Day Discharge 5-1
5.3 Peak-Day Discharge and Dynamic Head 5-2
5.4 Analysis of Historical Pumping Records 5-2
5.5 Pumping Frequency and Variability 5-3
STEP 6. ESTIMATE THE HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES
OF THE WELLFIELD PORTIONS OF THE AQUIFER
FROM PUMPING TEST DATA 6-1
6.1 Introduction 6-1
6.2 Aquifer-Test Information 6-1
6.3 Methods of Aquifer-Test Analyses 6-2
6.3.1 Cooper-Jacob Non-Equilibrium Method 6-2
6.3.2 Neuman Method 6-3
6.4 Chronology of Well Installation and Aquifer Testing
at the Abbott Well 6-3
6.5 Chronology of Well Installation and Aquifer Testing
at the Everett Well 6-7
STEP 7. MAKE A MAP OF GROUND-WATER AND
SURFACE-WATER ALTITUDES WITHIN THE ESTIMATED
BOUNDARIES OF THE RECHARGE AREA 7-1
7.1 Introduction 7-1
7.2 Previous Mapping of the Water Table by the U. S. Geological Survey 7-1
7.3 General Procedure for Water-Table Mapping 7-2
7.4 Specific Tasks of Water-Table Mapping 7-2
7.5 Selection and Installation of Ground-Water and
Surface-Water Altitude Stations 7-3
7.6 Field Procedure for Measuring Water Levels 7-5
7.7 Horizontal and Vertical Survey of Water-Altitude Stations 7-6
7.8 Results of Hand-Contouring of Water-Table Altitudes 7-7
7.9 Digitation of Water-Table Altitude Stations and Altitude Contours
Using a Geographic Information System 7-8
-------
STEP 8. DEVELOP A CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF WELLFIELD
RECHARGE AND FLOW CHARACTERISTICS 8-1
8.1 Introduction 8-1
8.2 Geology 8-1
8.2.1 Bedrock Geology 8-1
8.2.1 .1 Bedrock Altitudes 8-2
8.2.2 Surficial Geology 8-2
8.2.2.1 Water-laid Deposits 8-3
8.2.2.2 Recent Deposits 8-3
8.2.2.3 Soils 8-4
8.3 Hydrology 8-7
8.3.1 Retharge 8-7
8.3.2 Evapo-Transpiration 8-7
8.3.3 Streams and Rivers 8-8
8.3.4 Ponds and Wetlands 8-9
8.4 Hydrogeology 8-9
8.4.1 Aquifer Properties 8-9
8.4.2 Prevailing Boundaries 8-12
8.4.2.1 Water-Table Boundary 8-12
8.4.2.2 Lateral Boundaries 8-15
8.4.2.3 Bedrock No-Flow Boundary 8-17
8.4.3 Induced Infiltration 8-17
STEP 9. SELECTION OF CRITERIA, CRITERIA
THRESHOLDS, AND METHODS OF WELLHEAD
PROTECTION AREA DELINEATION 9-1
9.1 Introduction 9-1
9.2 Criteria 9-1
9.3 Criteria Thresholds 9-2
9.4 Methods of Delineation 9-2
9.5 Phase I Delineation Requirements of the New Hampshire
Wellhead Protection Program 9-3
9.6 Selection of Criteria, Criteria Thresholds, and Methods for
WHPA Delineation 9-3
STEP 10. MODEL THE WELLFIELD RECHARGE AREA
USING CONSERVATIVE AND PROTECTIVE INPUT
PARAMETERS AND BOUNDARY CONDITIONS 10-1
10.1 Introduction 10-1
-------
10.2 Description and Assumptions Regarding Analytical Modeling 10-1
10.3 Data Sources for Input to the ‘WHPA 2.0’ GPTRAC
Semi-Analytical Module for the Abbott Well 10-2
10.4 Data Sources for Input to the ‘WHPA 2.0’ GPTRAC
Semi-Analytical Module for the Everett Well 10-3
10.5 GPTRAC Semi-Analytical Capture Zone Model Output 10-4
10.6 Delineation of WHPA Boundaries Upgradient of the
Lateral Capture Zone Coordinates 10-4
10.7 Future WHPA Refinement 10-5
GIS PLOTS:
Figure 10-1: “Map of the Wellhead Protection Areas of the Abbott
and Everett Municipal Supply Wells and Elevations of Ground
Water and Surface Water on August 6, 1992”; Scale 1:4,800
Figure 10-2: “Location Map of Water Elevation Measurement Stations”;
Scale 1:4,800
APPENDIX A: TABLE OF WATER ALTITUDE MEASUREMENT
STATIONS
APPENDIX B: RESULTS OF MICROPARTICULATE SAMPLING
APPENDIX C: WHPA 2.0 GPTRAC MODEL INPUT AND OUTPUT
FOR THE ABBOTT AND EVERETT MUNICIPAL
SUPPLY WELLS
APPENDIX 0: WELL DRILLERS LOGS
-------
1—1
STEP 1. OBTAIN THE LATEST 7.5-MINUTE U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE FOR THE WELLFIELD LOCATION
1.1 Introduction
The first step in wellhead protection area (WHPA) delineation is procuring the latest
U. S. Geological Survey topographic quadrangle of the wellfield area. The Greenville,
New Hampshire quadrangle was selected from general knowledge about the location of
the Abbott and Everett municipal supply wells in Wilton, New Hampshire in western
Hilisborough County Because the quadrangle complies with national map accuracy
standards, and because it displays important information regarding land topography,
surface-water drainage and land use at a scale of 1:24,000, it is preferable to other
sources when first developing a conceptual understanding of welifield and watershed
hydrogeology.
The 1987 Greenville quadrangle is compiled from aerial photographs taken in 1981 and
field checked in 1984. Land-surface topography is presented at a contour interval of 20
feet, along with marked elevations on hill summits, ponds and road intersections.
Coordinate data consists of tick marks for latitude/longitude and the 10,000-foot New
Hampshire state grid. The quadrangle includes the area bounded from latitude 42° N
52’ 30” to 42° N 45’ 00” and longitude 71° W 52’ 30” and 71° W 45’ 00”. Superimposed
on the quadrangle is the 1 ,000-meter Universal Transverse Mercator grid. The vertical
and horizontal datums are the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 and the 1927
North American Datum, respectively. Coordinates adjusted to the North American
Datum of 1983 must be moved 5 meters south and 39 meters west.
1.2 Sources of Books and Maps
Books and maps published by the U. S. Geological Survey, including those cited in this
study, may be ordered from:
U. S. Geological Survey, Map Distribution
Federal Center, Box 25286
Denver, CO 80225
Ph: 303-236-7477
-------
1-2
U. S. Geological Survey, Aerial Maps
Eros Data Center
Sioux Falls, SD 57198
Ph: 1-800-367-2801
U. S. Geological Survey, Books and Open-File Reports
Federal Center, Box 25425
Denver, CO 80225
Ph: 303-236-7476
Topographic quadrangles may also be purchased from map stores, book stores, and
businesses that supply sporting, camping and recreational equipment. Maps and
reports are also available for inspection at most major libraries, colleges and
universities.
-------
2-1
STEP 2. VISIT THE WELLFIELD AND ACCURATELY LOCATE THE SUPPLY
WELLS ON THE GREENVILLE QUADRANGLE TO THE NEAREST SECOND OF
LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE
2.1 Introduction
Of all the procedures that are important for successful WHPA delineation, correctly
determining the weUs’ coordinates by physical positioning is one of the most critical.
The proximity of hydrogeological boundaries such as bedrock or surface water will
often affect a WHPA’s size and shape. Similarly, a well’s distance from sources of
contamination will affect the type of land-use management available for protection.
The Wilton welifield consists of two gravel-packed supply wells, known locally as the
Abbott well and the Everett well. The names are those of former owners of the
properties in which the wells were developed.
Location of a supply well usually consists of two tasks. The first is the field
measurement of the well with respect to fixed mapped features that surround it, such as
roads, buildings, surface water, electrical transmission lines, geodetic benchmarks, and
topography. The second is the deterniinationof the locational coordinates of the well
for entry into computer data bases.
This chapter describes the procedure for measuring distances between the Abbott and
Everett supply wells and important nearby features, and assigning coordinates of
latitude and longitude by both template and a global positioning system.
2.2 Physical Positioning
Positioning is accomplished by measuring in feet or meters the horizontal distance
between the well casing and other fixed features, and determining that distance on a
quadrangle (or other) map. Direct measurement in the field may be accomplished with
a: 1) steel or fiberglass tape; 2) distance measuring wheel; 3) hip-chain distance
measurer; 4) rangefinder; 5) electronic distance measurer; and 6) global positioning
system. Other less direct methods such as measurements on low-level aerial
photographs may also be used.
-------
2-2
In many cases, the location of a well’s pumphouse is given on the quadrangle as a
small black or purple square identical to the symbol used for houses, utility building,
barn or store. Its mapped location is based on photogrammetric analysis of aerial
photographs, so it is usually accurate. However, the location of the pumphouse and its
symbol should always be verified in the field to help withstand any scientific or legal
challenges to the WHPA boundaries once the delineation process is complete. Most
municipal wells in New Hampshire are in pumphouses with dimensions smaller than the
75X101-foot area of a second of latitude and longitude. However, if the well resides in a
large building, the location of the well casing within the building should be measured to
the nearest foot with an accurate measuring device.
2.3 Wellfield Reconnaissance
The Wilton wellfield was first visited on June 5, 1991 to measure the locations of the
supply wells, pumphouses, roads and nearby surface-water bodies with a measuring
tape, a distance-measuring wheel and the Greenville, N. H. quadrangle. During later
visits, the locations of wellfleld observation and test wells were identified and mapped.
The Abbott well, which has no pumphouse, is 446 feet east of the centerline of N. H.
Route 31, and 91 feet west of the the Souhegan River. The Everett well is 720 feet
southwest from the Abbott well, and 167 feet east of the Route 31 centerline. Its
pumphouse has outer dimensions of 25.55X1 5.73 feet and inner dimensions of
23.5X13.5 feet. The well casing is situated 3.9 and 2.5 feet from the southern and
eastern pumphouse walls, respectively.
On June 25, 1991, information was gathered about the numerous observation and test
wells installed next to the supply wells. As a result of historical test well drilling, there
are five observation wells from 2.85 to 284 feet from the Abbott well. The Everett well is
surrounded by nine observation wells located from 56 to 620 feet away. Information
about these wells may be found in Appendix A.
The Souhegan River at the Abbott well is approximately 70 feet wide along an
east-west axis. Its average depth at that location is 0.6 feet and its maximum depth was
1.3 feet at a location 10 feet from the west bank. The river’s channel is predominantly
cobbles and boulders with finer-grained sediments along the banks and floodplain.
Streamfiow is characterized by series of pools and riffles along the reach.
-------
2-3
2.4 Determining Well Coordinates
Latitude and longitude coordinates of the Abbott and Everett well were determined
using three methods. The first method consisted of overlaying a scaled acrylic template
on the mapped well locations plotted on the 1987 Greenville quadrangle. The mapped
locations were based on weilfield reconnaissance measurements. Use of the template,
called a ‘Topo-Aid’, is simple and inexpensive. First the well’s position was projected
normal to the nearest border of the quadrangle using a 1-square. Second, the template
was placed between the grid tic marks. In accordance with instructions accompanying
the template, the horizontal scale on the template was kept parallel to the map margin,
and the outer lines of the scale corresponded to the width of the tic marks. Third, the
template value to the nearest second was added to the nearest tic value to the south for
latitude and east for longitude. The EPA has established a horizontal locational
accuracy criterion of 25 meters (82 feet) for wells according to its “Minimum Set of Data
Elements for Ground Water Quality 1 ’ (EPA, July 1992, EPA 81 31B-92-002, p. 19).
The second method was use of a geographical information system, or GIS. Well
locations in latitude and longitude were digitized from a paper base map at a scale of
1:2400. Appendix A lists these coordinates for 37 water-altitude measurement stations
(described in STEP 7) that were measured with this technology. Digitizing with a GIS, if
done carefully, is generally more accurate than using templates.
The third and potentially most accurate method is use of a global positioning system, or
GPS, which relies on satellite telemetry for precise positioning of a transponder on
either the earth’s surface or in the atmosphere. On August 26, 1992 latitude and
longitude coordinates were obtained by staff from the Environmental Services Division
of EPA’s New England Regional Laboratory in Lexington, Massachusetts (Figure 2-1).
The results of all three methods (which show excellent agreement) are given below:
NAD27 LATITUDEILONGITUDE COORDINATES
WELL (Template) GIS Digitizing Global Positioning System )
AbbottWell 4249’08 ”/71 46’03 424908 5 ”171 46026” 4249’0820 ”/ 71 460269”
Everett Well 42 49’ 03” /71 4610” 42 49’ 03.6” /71 46’ 09.7” 42 49’ 03.43”! 71 46’ 09.77”
-------
F
Figure 2-1. Determining Well Coordinates with a Global Positioning
System at the Abbott (1) and Everett (R) Municipal Supply Wells,
Wilton, N. H. on August 26, 1992
Photograph: Douglas Heath
- *
-------
3-1
STEP 3. EXAMINE REGIONAL AND LOCAL TOPOGRAPHY AND
SURFACE-WATER DRAINAGE PATTERNS SHOWN ON THE QUADRANGLE AND
ESTIMATE THE BOUNDARY OF THE WELLFIELD RECHARGE AREA
3.1 Introduction
Once the supply wells have been accurately located on the quadrangle, the third step
in the WHPA delineation process is a detailed examination of the topography,
surface-water drainage patterns and other mapped information that may depict
surface-water and ground-water flow in and around the weilfield. The objectives of this
examination are to estimate the preliminary boundary of the Wilton wellfield recharge
area, and to help identify hydrogeologic information useful for boundary refinement in
STEP 4. It provides a conceptual precursor to the establishment of a more refined
WHPA boundary in STEP 10.
3.2 Description of Regional and Local Topography
The Abbott and Everett wells are installed 91 and 800 feet west, respectively, of the
Souhegan River, a tributary within the Merrimack River watershed. The Souhegan
drains portions of north-central Massachusetts and south-central New Hampshire,
flowing northeast from Greenville, N.H. and east towards Merrimack, N.H., where it
discharges into the Merrimack River. Figure 3-1 is a photocopy of a portion of the
Greenville quadrangle. Surrounding the supply wells are stream-terrace deposits of
gentle relief ranging from approximately 460 to 480 feet in elevation. Just northeast
(downstream) of the wells is the confluence of the Souhegan River and Gambol (also
known as Blood) Brook. At approximately 6,300 feet west of the Abbott well, an
unnamed hill at an altitude of 1,000 feet represents the highest elevation in the western
portion of the recharge area. The highest summit east of the Souhegan River is Abbott
Hill, also at approximately 1,000 feet altitude. On the flanks of both hills flow small
streams, many of which are dry from late summer to early spring. In several low-lying
areas of poor drainage are several small, shallow wetlands and bogs, such as that
located 2,700 feet west of the Abbott well at an elevation of about 650 feet
At approximately I ,000 feet south of the Everett well lies the northernmost of two low
hills (elevation 600 feet), representing kame terrace and kame delta glacio-fluvial
deposits of sand, cobbles and boulders. These hills are connected to highlands to the
-------
I
- - / - /‘ I
2
p4
C ,,
‘U
‘U
0
I ) 5
Abbott Well
,
I ’ ,
C,)
LU
‘ U
U. ’
I L \ \ ‘ . \ •-
EverettWell \,\
/ \\ )
§
el
(
dIi
t: t- ._
I T(
—“ ( i \ \ — ..-‘ V 7 1 • I -
Figure 3 -1. A Photocopy of a Portion of the USGS 7.5-Minute
Greenville, N.H. (1987) Topographic Quadrangle for
the Wilton Welifield and Vicinity
-------
3-2
west by a 3,600-feet long, narrow ridge of sand and gravel deposits called an esker. At
present, the esker, which is as much as 80-feet thick, supports sand and gravel
excavation operations on both sides of N.H. Route 31. The eastern terminus of the
esker outcrops at the Everett supply well. Figure 3-2 is a photograph of this outcrop.
Just east of the kame terrace deposits, the Souhegan River channel divides and rejoins
to form an island approximately 800 feet long. The wellfield reconnaissance conducted
in STEP 2 revealed bedrock outcrops at this location as well as along the river’s
eastern bank where it passes the welifield. The river’s width along most of its length in
this part of the valley ranges from about 30 to 70 feet. Where bedrock or boulders are
present in the stream channel, minor rapids exist, followed by longer, slow-moving
reaches of pooled water at depths up to three feet between flood stages. The gradient
of the Souhegan River between elevations 460 and 500 feet is relatively small,
approximately 0.0093 feet per feet, or 49 feet per mile.
Land use in the vicinity of the wellfield is a mixture of farms, residences, deciduous
and pine forest, automobile junkyards, and sand and gravel excavation pits. Currently,
parts of the welifield and its vicinity are zoned for industrial purposes.The nearest land
use of concern is a large automobile and truck junkyard just west of Route 31 and south
of Gambol Brook. However, quadrangle topography indicates that a surface-water
drainage (and by initial inference, a ground-water) divide may exist between this source
and the welifield. Detailed water-table mapping conducted during STEP 7 will confirm
the relationship between topography and ground-water flow patterns in this area. Other
potential locations of concern are individual septic systems at nearby houses and
farms. However, these are spread widely over the area. Information about the locations
of underground storage tanks upgradient of the weilfield was not available. Much of the
land area supports conifer forests and dense vegetation along river channels.
3.3 Assumptions Governing the Initial Estimate of the Wilton Welifield Recharge
Area
After an analysis of the topography and drainage patterns in the vicinity of the wellfield,
the preliminary boundary of the wellfield recharge area may be estimated. This area
will provide a basis for gathering additional hydrogeologic and land-use information,
developing a conceptual model of aquifer behavior, and refining the boundary more
accurately. The initial estimate in this case is based on the following assumptions:
-------
Figure 3-2. Photograph of Excavated Terminus of Esker Next
to the Everett Well Pumphouse
Photograph: Douglas Heath
i.
1 . .
- .. : .•;- -
-------
3-3
1. Apart from weilfield reconnaissance and quadrangle information, no other sources of
hydrogeologic data is available at this stage of the delineation process.
2. The extent and elevations of land, surface water and wetlands are accurately
represented on the Greenville U. S. Geological Survey quadrangle at 1:24,000
scale.
3. Supply well locations are accurately mapped on the Greenville quadrangle.
4. Surface water and ground water in the area are unconfined and hydraulically
connected.
5. Water under non-pumping conditions moves from areas of higher elevation to areas
of lower elevation. Therefore, surface and ground water from upland areas in the
Souhegan River valley eventually discharges into the Souhegan River channel.
6. Watershed, basin and sub-basin boundaries of the Souhegan River and its
tributaries are coincident with the highest land-surface elevations in the area.
7. Surface-water and ground-water divides are contiguous in the area.
8. Bedrock underlying and surrounding glacial and alluvial deposits contributes little or
no recharge to the unconfined aquifer that supplies the Abbott and Everett wells.
9. The Abbott well has the hydraulic potential to induce water from the Souhegan River
into its well screen, and pump it into the municipal distribution system, while the
Everett well is too distant to induce significant amounts of surface water during
pumping intervals.
10. Degradation of water quality in the Souhegan River may degrade the quality of
water in the Abbott well during periods of induced recharge.
The validity of assumptions numbered 4 through 10 will be considered as the data
gathering and delineation process continues. Important information about surface-water
and ground-water relationships within the wellfield recharge area will be gathered in
STEPS 4 through 9.
-------
3-4
3.4 Preliminary Estimate of the Welifield’s Recharge Area Boundary Based on
Site Visit and Quadrangle Information
At this early stage in the delineation process, the primary sources of inform tion about
the movement of water in the region are a site visit, welifield reconnaissance, and the
topographic and hydrographic data on the greenville, N.H. quadrangle. These sources
are powerful tools for building a conceptual model that will become the foundation for
final delineation.
Figure 3-3 shows the preliminary estimate of the weilfield’s recharge area boundary.
The estimate is based solely on land and water elevations on the Greenville 7.5-minute
quadrangle, the relationship between topography and drainage, and the location of the
400-foot radius, sanitary-protection areas of the supply wells.
-------
Figure 3-3. Preliminary Estimate of the Boundary of the Wilton
Weitfield Recharge Area Based on Quadrangle
Topography and Drainage Patterns
‘ r
; j
- c r 1
I I I I 3 —
- - .1 - J - -
I - - -.
-L AbbottWe ll
7O
EverettWeU 5
- - -- -
- NOP - -
•—r “ ‘ -- I -. -
- —- -- ( J - I - - — -
-: - - - — —--. •—
— -
— i i — - -
—
= — -- - - —
••-_ -
‘\\
?- S I DY sjcr ..•. :
J C ’
- __? \ ;, — ,j’ b”
)/ I1 - )V ,\— •
ç
4 r— ( i ‘*.
o i ::c
RES .
-
-
Hi
Ir)
LT
eT
0
-. —__‘ I ‘- . I:
L
‘,1
-------
4-1
STEP 4. GATHER ALL AVAILABLE HYDROGEOLOGIC AND LAND-USE
INFORMATION ABOUT THE PREUMINARY WELLFIELD RECHARGE AREA AND
ITS VICINITY
4.1 Introduction
One of the most difficult tasks in delineating the recharge area to a well or welifield is
collecting enough hydrogeological and land-use information to support conceptual,
analytical or numerical modeling of the aquifer. For many small community and
non-community public supply wells in New Hampshire, there is insufficient data or
resources to justify using delineation methods more refined than simple circles that
either under-protect or over-protect portions of the actual capture zone of a well.
Available information is frequently limited by lack of storage space, poor data
management, and the difficulty in finding time or staff to compile data from many
scattered sources at the federal, state, and local levels. In town offices, information for
most small wells (especially those screened in bedrock aquifers) may consist only of
well location, estimated well yield, and depth. Other items, such as well diameter,
screen length, and pump type may or may not be available. Aquifer data (thickness,
lithology, transmissivity, storage and boundaries) may exist at a scale too small to be
useful for detailed characterization.
However, the amount of regional hydrogeologic data in New Hampshire is quite
extensive, especially at the federal and state levels. The establishment of the New
Hampshire Wellhead Protection Program will help ensure the development of an
accessible database for hydrogeologists engaged in delineation work.
4.2 Ust of Information Sources and Specific References
For this project, the main sources of hydrogeologic and land-use information are listed
below. For convenience, the references have been grouped by source and arranged in
chronological order:
4.2.1 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
USEPA, 1987, Guidelines for delineation of wellhead protection areas: U. S.
-------
4-2
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Ground-Water Protection,
Washington, D.C. 20460
USEPA, July 1992, Definitions for the minimum set of data elements for ground water
quality: U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington,
D.C. 20460, EPA 81 31B-92-002, 98 p.
Blandford, T. N. and Huyakom, P. S., 1991, WHPA2.0: a modular semi-analytical
model for the delineation of welihead protection areas: prepared by
HydroGeoLogic, Inc. for the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of
Ground-Water Protection, Washington, D.C. 20460.
4.2.2 U. S. Geological Survey
U. S. Geological Survey, 1976-1984, USGS site schedules for test wells and borings
WNA-1, WNA-4, WNB-1, WNB-2, WNB-3, WNW-1, MNW-2, WNW-3, WNW-5,
and WNW-6: U. S. Geological Survey, Bow, New Hampshire 03301
U. S. Geological Survey, 1983, Unpublished SIPT seismic refraction data, line 1,
spreads 1-4 and line 2, spread 1, Wilton, N. H., dated 4/27/83: U. S. Geological
Survey, Bow, N. H. 03301, 15 p.
U. S. Geological Survey, 1987, Greenville, New Hampshire topographic quadrangle
(provisional edition): U. S. Geological Survey, Federal Center, Box 25425,
Denver, CO 80225; scale = 1:24,000.
Toppin, Kenneth W., 1987, Hydrogeology of stratified-drift aquifers and water quality in
the Nashua Regional Planning Commission area, south-central New Hampshire:
U. S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report 86-4358,
Bow, NH 03301, 45 p., 6 plates.
Lapham, Wayne W., 1989, Use of temperature profiles beneath streams to determine
rates of vertical ground-water flow and vertical hydraulic conductivity: U. S.
Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 2337, U. S. Geological Survey, Federal
Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225
Harte, Philip T. and Mack, Thomas J., 1992, Geohydrology of, and simulation of
-------
4-3
ground-water flow in, the Milford-Souhegan glacial-drift aquifer, Milford, New
Hampshire: U. S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report
91-4177, 75 p.
4.2.3 U. S. Department of Agriculture - Soil Conservation Service
U. S. Department of Agriculture - Soil Conservation Service, 1985, Soil survey of
Hillsborough County, New Hampshire, western part: USDA-SCS in cooperation
with the New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station, 141 p.
4.2.4 State of New Hampshire
Greene, Robert C., 1970, The geology of the Peterborough quadrangle, New
Hampshire: N. H. Department of Resources and Economic Development,
Concord, NH 03301
N. H. Department of Environmental Services, 1990, New Hampshire welihead
protection program: NHDES, Water Supply and Pollution Control Division,
Wellhead Protection program, 6 Hazen Drive, Concord, NH 03301
N. H. Department of Environmental Services, 1991, Phase I welihead protection area
delineation guidance: NHDES, Water Supply and Pollution Control Division,
Wellhead Protection Program, 6 Hazen Drive, Concord, NH 03301
N. H. Department of Environmental Señiices, 1991, Developing a local inventory of
potential contamination sources: NHDES, Water Supply and Pollution Control
Division, 6 Hazen Drive, Concord, NH 03301
N. H. Department of Environmental Services, Water Well Board, 64 North Main Street,
P0 Box 2008, Concord, NH 03301-2008. Source of well completion records for
water-supply and monitoring wells in New Hampshire.
N. H. Department of Public Works and Highways, 1960, 1:2,400-scale topographic
maps based on aerial photographs and photogrammetric surveys, photography
dated 4/30/60 to 5/3/60, Keene -Bedford, N.H. corndor, Sheets 22 and 23 of 42
-------
4-4
4.2.5 Dartmouth College
Duke, Edward F., 1984, Part I. Stratigraphy, structure and petrology of the
Peterborough 15-minute quadrangle, New Hampshire and part II. graphite
textural and isotopic variations in plutonic rocks, south-central New Hampshire;
unpublished Ph.d dissertation: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755
4.2.6 Town of Wilton, New Hampshire
Wilton Water Works, 1989-1992, Wilton weilfield pumping records: January, 1989 to
August, 1992: Town Hall, P0 Box 83, Wilton, NH 03086
4.2.7 Private Consultants
D. L. Maher Co., 1983, Groundwater exploration, Town of Wilton, New Hampshire: D.
L. Maher Co., P0 Box 127, North Reading, MA 01864 (letter report dated April
26, 1983)
D. L. Maher Co., 1983, 8” Pump test, Wilton, New Hampshire: D. L. Maher Co., P0 Box
127, North Reading, MA 01864, (letter report dated December 6, 1983)
D. L. Maher Co., 1985, Abbott well, well construction and 48 hour pumping test: D. L.
Maher Co., P0 Box 127, North Reading, MA 01864 (letter report dated April 1,
1985)
D. L. Maher Co., 1987, Pumping test at the Everett site, Wilton, N.H.: D. L. Maher Co.,
P0 Box 127, North Reading, MA 01864 (report dated July, 1987)
0. L. Maher Co., 1987, Hydrogeological report of the construction of a 24’ X 18’
production well at the Everett site, Wilton, N. H.: D. L. Maher Co., P0 Box 127,
North Reading, MA 01864 (report dated October, 1987)
Northern Groundwater, 1987, Test well exploration program, April 1987, Town of
Wilton, N.H.: Northern Groundwater, P.O. Box 632, Henniker, New Hampshire
03242, Letter report to the Wilton Water Commissioner dated April 6, 1987
-------
4-5
Monadnock Survey, Inc. , Wilton Station, Main Street, P0 Box 607, Wilton, NH 03806:
1. Subdivision plan of land, Edward N. Everett, Wilton, N. H., 10130/86
2. Boundary worksheet, Everett, Rt.31, Wilton, N.H., 8129/88
3. Lot line relocation plan, Edward N. Everett and Society for the Protection of
New Hampshire Forests, Wilton, N. H., 11/16/88
4. Site excavation plan of earth removal operation on land of Edward N.
Everett, Wilton, N. H., 9/27/89
5. Location worksheet, Environmental Protection Agency, N.H. Route 31, Wilton,
N.H., 814/92, Scales 1:2,400 and 1:600
4.2.8. Miscellaneous
Hildreth, Carol T. and Moore, Richard B., 1993, Late Wisconsinan deglaciation styles
of parts of the Contoocook, Souhegan and Piscataquog drainage basins, New
Hampshire: 56th Annual Reunion, Friends of the Pleistocene, May 21-23 May, 1993,
Concord, New Hampshire. 62 p.
-------
5-1
STEP 5. DETERMINE THE MAXIMUM PUMPING DISCHARGE OF THE SUPPLY
WELLS
5.1 Introduction
The Wilton Water Works maintains daily pumping records for both supply wells in its
system. These records, which have been compiled since the wells were brought on line
in 1989 and 1990, include the day of the month, the time of the day in which in-line
flowmeters were read, total gallons pumped during the day for each well, and monthly
totals of gallons pumped. In addition, the times of pumping and non-pumping intervals
are recorded on circular charts in the Everett pumphouse. These charts are changed
weekly and filed away.
These pumping data are a valuable source of information for wellhead delineation
purposes. They may be used to compare actual pumping rates with estimates of safe
yield, to assess the overall, transient stresses on the aquifer, and to evaluate well yield.
The objective of STEP 5 is to compile and analyze pumping data to identify the
peak-day discharges of the supply wells for capture zone model input.
5.2 Peak-Day Discharge
An important parameter for ground-water flow modelling input and WHPA delineation is
known as ‘peak-day discharge.’ This is defined as the largest volume of ground water
pumped by a well over a 24-hour period. It typically occurs in the summer months
during high demand. Most analytical and numerical models used for WHPA delineation
require an estimate of well discharge for a worse-case analysis, and the parameter is
frequently called either ‘safe yield’ or ‘peak-day discharge.’ The first term refers to the
maximum pumping rate of which the well is capable. This depends on pump size,
efficiency, horsepower, depth to water, amount of screen clogging, total head in the
distribution line, and other factors. safe yield may also refer to the rate of withdrawal
that may safely be pumped over time without depleting overall aquifer storage, or the
aquifer’s ability to renew itself. Thus the term ‘safe yield’ is sometime ambiquous and
may mean one thing to a hydraulic engineer and another to a hydrogeologist.
-------
5-2
5.3 Peak-Day Discharge and Dynamic Head
A more appropriate term to use for WHPA delineation is peak-day discharge, because
it is based on actual, observed well performance, and is therefore more reliable as an
indicator of pumping stress on the surrounding aquifer. It, too, is dependent on several
factors. The most important is the total dynamic head at the well, which is a measure of
the force required by the well pump to overcome resistance to flow in the pipes,
standpipes and storage tanks of the distribution system. The dynamic head tends to
decrease during the summer months of heavy water use when the elevation of water
falls at a greater rate in the 600,000-gallon storage tank. As the level falls, so do line
pressures, making it easier for the wells to pump at higher rates than when the tank is
full.
The supply wells of the Wilton Water Works operate on an alternate-cycle pumping
regimen. That is, one well pump operates while the other is idle, allowing for aquifer
recovery. The pump is automatically turned on or off by storage tank water levels,
which are recorded in the Everett pumphouse (see Section 5.5 below). This
arrangement ensures that well-interference effects, electric power consumption, and
mechanical wear on moving parts are reduced to a minimum. During most of the year,
either well may continuously pump up to about eight hours in any 24-hour period.
5.4 Analysis of Historical Pumping Records
Pumping records for the period January, 1989 to August, 1992 were obtained from the
Wilton Water Works. Table 5-1 provides the monthly total discharges for the wellfield,
and average daily discharges in gallons per day and gallons per minute for the Everett
and Abbott wells. Figure 5-1 shows graphs of wellfield performance over this time
interval. Because the Abbott well was not brought on line until May 1990, records of its
performance before that date are not available. The highest wellfield discharge during
the period was 11,672,300 gallons in June, 1991. According to Mr. Charles McGettigan,
Commissioner of the Wilton Water Works, much of this high demand was attributed to
several leaks in distribution lines that have since been discovered and repaired.
Monthly demands since June, 1991 have generally declined as a result. The lowest
monthly discharge of 5,950,000 gallons occurred in February, 1989 when only the
Everett well was operating. Presently, the wellfield pumps an average of approximately
8 million gallons per month when averaged over a 12-month period.
-------
Table 5-1. Wdton Weilfield Monthly Pumping Rates
EVERETT WELL ABBOTT WELL TOTAL WELLFIELD
M/YR DAILY a AVE GPM DAILY 0 AVE GPM GALLONS DAILY 0 AVE GPM
1/89 221853 154 6655600 221853 154
212500 148 5950000 212500 148
229942 160 7128200 229942 160
213025 148 5964700 213025 148
260355 180 8071000 260355 180
6189 262700 182 7355600 262700 182
265058 184 8216800 265058 184
255429 177 7918300 255429 177
280713 195 8421400 280713 195
253110 176 7846400 253110 176
249753 173 7492600 249753 173
285748 198 8858200 285748 198
1/90 280116 194 8683600 280116 194
278843 194 7807600 278843 194
275213 191 8531800. 275213 191
295210 205 8856300 295210 205
311132 216 1190 1 9682000 312322 217
6190 153703 107 175767 122 9884100 329470 229
158871 110 204087 142 11251700 362958 252
147797 103 167832 116 9784500 315629 219
138017 96 178580 124 9497900 316597 220
124758 87 158300 110 8774800 283058 197
128100 89 155527 108. 8508800 283627 197
134413 93 197077 137 10276200 331490 230
1191 137929 96 172487 120 9622900 310416 216
142568 99 165543 115 8627100 308111 214
1921645 133 122210 85 9745600 314374 218
178143 122 181817 126 10738800 357960 248
180984 126 190439 132 11514100 371423 258
6191 190000 132 199077 138 11672300 389077 270
145513 101 175397 122 9948200 320910 223
119219 83 136648 95 7931900 255858 178
99793 69 118293 82 6542600 218087 151
98835 69 111287 77 6513800 210123 146
91480 63 109087 76 6017000 200567 139
96919 67 107942 75 6350700 204881 142
1192 97803 68 115210 80 6803400 213013 148
112086 78 131052 91 7051000 243138 169
95477 66 115581 80 6542800 211058 146
98487 68 127400 89 6776600 225887 157
129048 90 147393 102 8569700 276442 192
6 / 92 125770 87 152630 106 8352000 278400 193
7 / 92 118119 82 138693 96 7961200 256813 178
8/92 132913 92 123645 88 7953300 258558 178
-------
W1LTON WELLFIELD - MONTHLY DISCHARGE IN GALLONS- 1/89 TO W92
G
A
L
L
0
N
S
p
U
M
P
E
0
WILTON WELLFIELD - AVERAGE DAILY DISCHARGE IN GPM - 1189 TO 8/82
S 9 WO &9 0 WI &91
MONTWYEAR
Figure 5-1. Graph of Monthly and Average Daily Discharges of the W,Iton Welifield:
January, 1989— August, 1992, Wilton, N H.
Source of Data Wilton Water Works
MONThtYEAR
-------
5-3
Individual well performance for the Everett and Abbott wells is shown on Figure 5-2.
Discharges over time are given in both average daily pumpage and average gallons per
minute. The first was calculated by dividing the monthly discharge in gallons by the
number of days in the month. The second was obtained by dividing the calculated
average daily discharge by the number of minutes in a day, or 1440. Although the
resulting pumping rate is less than the actual peak-daily discharge (because it cannot
account for the many minutes during the day when the well is idle), it can provide an
indication of relative well yield between the two wells According to the pumping
records from June, 1990 until August, 1992, the Abbott well pumped approximately 15
percent (or 13.6 gpm) more than the Everett well. Although the Abbott well was
originally meant to serve as a standby source of water, it apparently has the capacity to
yield slightly more than the main well in the system.
It is difficult to calculate the actual peak-daily discharge for either supply well over the
44-month period of record because the total operating time in minutes per day for each
well is not reported. However, there are two known occasions when one well was off for
several days and the other provided water to the system. From 7:20 pm on August 6 to
12:20 pm on August 12, 1991, the Everett well pumped 1,468,400 gallons and operated
50.2 hours or 3,012 minutes. The average pumping rate was therefore 487.5 gallons
per minute. The Everett well was placed off-line from September 3 - 11, 1992 when it
experienced electrical problems. During that time, the Abbott well pumped 1,769,600
gallons during approximately 56.7 hours or 3,402 minutes of operation. The average
pumping rate for the Abbott well was 520 gallons per minute.
Mr. Charles McGettigan, Commissioner of the Wilton Water Works, has stated
(personal communication, 1992) that the ‘safe yield’ or peak-day discharge for both
wells is about 535 gpm. Although the calculated discharges for the Everett and Abbott
supply wells are slightly less than this rate, they are average values measured over a
period of hours or days. It is possible that either well is capable of achieving a pumping
rate of 535 gpm, especially if distribution-line dynamic heads are temporarily less than
usual due to high demand. Therefore, the conservative 535-gpm peak-day discharge
value shall be used to calculate lateral and down-gradient capture zone boundaries in
STEP 10.
5.5 Pumping Frequency and Variability
Both wells in the Wilton wellfleld operate only a few hours a day on an alternate
-------
ABBOTT WELL - AVERAGE DAILY DISCHARGE - 1189 TO 8192
Figure 5-2. Graph of Average Daily Discharge of the Abbott and Everett WeIls
January, 1989— August, 1992, Wilton, N. H.
Source of Data: Wilton Water Works
G
A
L
L
0
N
S
P
U
PA
P
E
p
G
A
I.
I.
0
N
S
P
U
PA
P
E
p
MONTWY’EAR
EVERETT WELL - AVERAGE DAILY DISCHARGE -1189 TO 8192
11
MONThIYEAR
ii i
691
-------
5-4
pumping program. While one well pump is on in response to low water levels in the
storage tank, the other remains off, allowing the aquifer to recover to static levels.
Pumping intervals are recorded on 7-day circular charts in the Everett well pumphouse
to show storage tank water levels. An example is shown in Figure 5-3 for the period
from August 30 to September 6, 1992. Water levels rise during pumping and fall during
non-pumping intervals. Using these records, one can estimate the periods of pumping
in hours and minutes, although they do not indicate which of the two wells is on or off.
Over the 44 months of record, neither well pumped a full 24 hours a day. For example,
during August, 1992, the wells operated 45 times from 4.3 to 7.2 hours at an average
pumping interval of 5.56 hours. Together, the wells pumped ground water 33.6 percent
of the time; or separately, about 16.8 percent of the time. Because of the relatively
short pumping intervals, the aquifer at each well has about 18 hours on average to
recover until the onset of the next pumping cycle. This low percentage of operating time
not only avoids undue stress on the aquifer during dry years, but also helps to ensure
greater longevity of pumping equipment. However, as system demand increases in
Wilton, pumping frequency and duration are also likely to increase.
-------
4:
4 -’
4
I ’,.
I
I
c
*
1
NOON
AY 9J$
Figure 5-3. Circle Chart Record of Storage Tank Water Levels
and Pumping Intervals: August 30 — September 6, 1992,
Wilton, N. H.
Source: Wilton Water Works
-------
6-I
STEP 6. ESTiMATE THE HYDRAULIC PROPERTIES OF THE WELLFIELD
PORTIONS OF THE AQUIFER FROM PUMPING TEST DATA
6.1 Introduction
Hydraulic properties of the glacio-fluvial aquifer that supplies ground water to the
Abbott and Everett supply wells were derived from documented pumping test data
obtained by D. L. Maher Company in 1983, 1985 and 1987 (see references in Section
4.2.7). This data consists of time and drawdown measurements at both observation and
gravel-packed supply wells after they were installed, and earlier data from test holes
obtained by well drillers during the exploratory phase of welifield development. Pump
test information for the two supply wells is available at the Wilton Water Works and the
D. L. Maher Company in North Reading, Massachusetts.
6.2 Aquifer-Test Information
The type of records required for adequate aquifer-test analysis are described by
Stallman (1961). His list includes:
1. Pumping well discharge
2. Depth to water in wells below a measuring point, such as the top of the well
casing or the ground surface
3. Distance from the pumping well to the observation well
4. Synchronous time in days, hours, minutes and seconds of pumping and
recovery
5. Description of measuring points
6. Elevations of measuring points
7. Vertical distance between the measuring point and ground surface
8. Total depths of all wells
9. Depth and length of screened intervals of all wells
10. Diameter, casing length, screen type, and method of construction of all wells
11. Location of all wells in plan, relative to land-survey net or latitude-longitude
-------
6-2
6.3 Methods of Aquifer-Test Analyses
It is important to match the appropriate method or methods of aquifer-test analyses to
prevailing site conditions. For example, test, observation and pumping well information
indicates that the Wilton welifield aquifer consists of thick, unconsolidated sand and
gravel deposits underlain by bedrock. Recharge to the aquifer occurs from infiltration,
lateral inflow from surrounding till and bedrock, and locally from induced infiltration of
surface water. Significant confining layers of silt and clay are generally absent (except
southwest and southeast of the Everett well), water-table conditions exist, and all
pumping and observation wells partially penetrate the aquifer.
Analyses of supply-well aquifer-test data were performed by D. L. Maher Company in
1985 and 1987. Estimates of aquifer transmissivity, specific yield and boundary
conditions were obtained using two common methods of interpretation: Cooper-Jacob
Non-Equilibrium method (Cooper and Jacob, 1946) and the Neuman method
(Neuman, 1975). A summary of aquifer-test results may be found in Section 8.4.1.
6.3.1 Cooper-Jacob Non-Equilibrium Method
The first method is a useful, general-purpose approach of graphical analysis that
clearly shows recharge (surface water) and negative boundary effects (bedrock,
low-permeability deposits) on a plot of drawdown vs. the log of elapsed time of pumping
or recovery. The Cooper-Jacob (1946) method is a modification of the Theis (1935)
method for confined aquifers. The key assumptions on which it is based are that the:
a. aquifer has infinite areal extent
b. aquifer is homogeneous, isotropic, and of uniform thickness
c. potentiometnc surface is essentially horizontal
d. pumping well is fully penetrating
e. pumping rate is constant
f. flow of water to the pumping well is horizontal
g. diameter of well is small so that well storage can be neglected
h. water is released instantaneously from storage with decline of hydraulic head
i. values of u are small (that is, time is large and well radius is small)
-------
6-3
6.3.2 Neuman Method
The Neuman method is appropriate to analyze unsteady flow to a well in an unconfined
aquifer exhibiting delayed yield response. Like the Cooper-Jacob method, it is useful
for deriving accurate estimates of transmissivity, specific yield and boundary conditions.
In aquifer tests of suitable design, the method will also provide correction for
partial-penetration effects and delayed yield (the change in drawdown over time in
wells due to gravity drainage of ground water as a result of pumping) and estimates of
vertical and horizontal conductivity. The assumptions on which it is based are that the:
a. aquifer has infinite areal extent
b. aquifer is homogeneous
c. aquifer has uniform thickness
d. water-table surface is initially horizontal
e. pumping rate is constant
f. flow to the well is unsteady
g. pumping well diameter is small so that well storage can be neglected
6.4 Chronology of Well Installation and Aquifer Testing at the Abbott Well
In early 1983, the Town of Wilton contracted D. L. Maher Company of North Reading,
Massachusetts to locate a ground-water source capable of yielding at least 360,000
gallons a day. After considering glacial geology, access and historical highway borings,
three properties in Wilton were selected for exploration: the Abbott, Page and Glines
parcels near the junction of NH Routes 101 and 31. Maher’s test wells were
constructed with 2.5-inch diameter casing and screen, and drilling was accomplished
with the drive-and-wash method. Screens were typically six feet in length. Test wells
were frequently pulled if well development was hindered by boulders or low yields;
however, a large proportion of test wells had been left in the ground and were used for
this delineation project in STEP 7. Figure 6-1 is a D. L. Maher Company map of
locations of test wells 1-83 to 10-83.
Driller J. Anderson and his assistant, B. Callahan, began drilling on the Abbott property
on March 29, 1983. The first test well, named I -83, was drilled to refusal at a depth of
71.5 feet two days later. Located 59 feet north of Gambol Brook and 163 feet west of
the west wall of the Rt. 31 bridge, the well (which still existed in August, 1992) was
installed in the following geologic materials:
-------
Figure 6-1. Location Map of Test Wells 1-83 to 10-83, Wilton, N. H.
Source: 0. L. Maher Company (1983)
EXISTING
8”WELL SITE
I 83
J?iVet
-------
6-4
Depth (ft )
0- 1.5
1.5-19
19-30
30-34
34-45
45-56
56-63
63-71.5
71.5
Driller’s Descriotion of Sediments
Top soil
Fine to medium brown sand, some coarse gravel (water at 2.5 feet)
Fine brown sand, some medium coarse sand
Fine to medium brown sand, some coarse sand and fine gravel
Fine brown sand, some medium-coarse sand, and clay
Fine brown sand, some medium-coarse sand and fine gravel
Fine to medium brown sand, some coarse sand and fine gravel
Fine to coarse brown sand, fine to medium gravel, sharp and broken
gravel
Refusal
Because of insufficient yield, the driller decided to move to another location upstream
and 80 feet south of Gambol Brook on the Page property. On March 31, 1983, test
wells 2-83 and 2A-83 were attempted but large boulders at 6 and 8 feet, respectively,
precluded further drilling. Finally on April 4th, test well 2B-83 was drilled to bedrock at a
depth of 62.5 feet. The geologic materials were similar in composition and permeability
to those at TW 1-83.
The test drilling program continued with test wells 3 to 9A on April 5th and 6th at
several other locations along the Gambol Brook channel. However, boulders were
repeatedly encountered from 3 to 12 feet in depth and all well casings were pulled out.
On April 8th, test well 10-83 was successfully drilled on the Glines property at a
location 720 feet SE of the Route 31 bridge over Gambol Brook and 300 feet west of
the confluence of the Souhegan River and Gambol Brook. The 63-foot well was drilled
through sediments that yielded 60 gpm with a drawdown of 1.10 feet after 30 minutes. A
second (observation) well was installed at 39 feet about two feet away. The driller’s log
describes the geologic materials as follows:
Driller’s Descriøtion of Sediments
Top soil
Fine to coarse brown sand, fine to medium gravel and broken gravel
Fine to medium reddish brown sand, some coarse sand and fine gravel
Fine to medium brown sand, some coarse sand and fine to medium
gravel, sharp and broken gravel
63 Hardpan
DeDtti (ft
0-2
2-45
45-51
51 -63
The static water level was 4.0 feet below the ground surface. Based on D. L. Maher’s
-------
6-5
preliminary hydrogeologic analysis at TW 10-83, the contractor recommended to the
town by letter dated April 26, 1983 that an 8-inch diameter well be installed at 42 feet
and pump tested for a minimum of five days. It estimated that a 48” X 18” gravel-packed
well could sustain a safe yield of 350 gallons per minute at that location.
Despite these favorable conditions for development, the TW 10-83 site on the Glines
property was abandoned due to “unsatisfactory land negotiations.” Therefore, D. L.
Maher Company continued the test well exploratory program on June 30, 1983. TW
11 A-83 was successfully drilled (TW 11-83 encountered boulders at 18 feet) on Abbott
property at a location about 20 feet north of the present Abbott supply well. Bedrock
was reached at a depth of 65.5 feet and ground water measured at 5.0 feet on July 7th.
The driller’s log provides the following description of unconsolidated sediments:
Depth (if) Driller’s Descriotion of Sediments
0-2 Top soil
2 -27 Coarse brown sand, some medium and fine sand, fine to medium gravel
and broken gravel
27 -29 Fine brown sand, some medium and coarse sand
29-36 Coarse brown sand, some medium-fine sand, fine-medium gravel and
broken gravel
36-37 Fine brown sand, some medium and coarse sand
37-42 Coarse brown sand, some medium and fine sand, fine to medium gravel
and broken gravel
42 -45 Fine to medium brown sand, some coarse sand and fine gravel
45-57 Fine to coarse brown sand, fine to medium gravel and broken gravel
57 -58 Fine brown sand, some medium and coarse sand
58-61 Fine to coarse brown sand, fine to medium gravel and broken gravel
61 - 65.5 Fine brown sand, some medium and coarse sand, traces of silt and clay
65.5 Refusal
This location proved to be more favorable than that at TW 10-83. With its screen set at
44-50 feet depth, TW I IA-83 yielded 75 gpm at a drawdown of 3.5 feet after four hours.
On September 27, 1983, 1W 20C-83 was installed 20 feet south of TW I IA-83 at a
depth of 63 feet. The well driller reported sediments similar to those at I 1A -83 and
hard driving from the ground surface to 22 feet because of boulders. Screened at 43 to
49 feet, the well yielded 60 gpm. Based on these results, D. L. Maher Company
estimated that a 48” X 24” gravel-packed well could safely yield 450 to 500 gpm.
-------
6-6
During the first week in October, additional observation wells were installed at
distances of 2, 68, 120, and 284 feet from 1W 20C-83. On October 26th, an 8-inch
diameter well was completed to a depth of 50 feet just two feet from 20C-83. A stainless
steel screen was set from 40 to 50 feet and the well was developed for twelve hours. To
convey pumped water away from the site a discharge line was connected to the well
pump and extended 150 feet towards the Souhegan River. The 8-inch well was then
pumped for 120 hours (six days) from 10:00 AM November 1St until 10:00 AM
November 7th at a rate of 351 gpm. Time-drawdown measurements were taken at
frequent intervals in the pumped well and in seven observation wells, including the
Glines property well (TW 10-83) 509 feet to the north. Recovery readings were also
taken for six hours after the pump was shut down.
Aquifer-test analysis of the 8-inch well test was complicated by rising water levels in the
Souhegan River and aquifer from prolonged rainfall, which began about 2:00 PM on
November 3rd and ended 10:00 AM on November 5th. Initially, ground-water levels in
the observation wells declined until 4,320 minutes into the test (10:00 AM, November
4th), then began to slowly rise or stabilize. However, sufficient data was obtained to
justify development of the wellfield with a large gravel-packed well pumping at 450 gpm,
or 640,000 gallons per day. The test also showed that the aquifer west of the well
provided recharge, whereas bedrock outcropping 250 approximately feet east of the
well was a negative boundary. D. L. Maher Company estimated aquifer transmissivity
and specific yield to be 34,067 gal/day/ft ( 4,554 ft 2 /day) and 0.14, respectively.
In a letter dated December 6, 1983, the contractor recommended that an additional
supply well be developed to serve as a back-up well for the town.
Over a year passed before work began on the Abbott supply well on January 3, 1985.
Located two feet north of TW 20C-83, the well was installed by A. G. Proctor and
assistant B. Hammond of the D. L. Maher Company. A 24”-diameter, stainless steel
well screen was set 40 to 50 feet below the ground surface in medium to coarse brown
sand, gravel and cobbles. After 60 hours of development to remove fine particles, the
well was completed on February 18, 1985. Figure 6-2 is a photocopy of the well
construction diagram for the finished Abbott supply well.
Next the supply well was pump tested for 48 hours to measure its hydraulic
characteristics and efficiency. The test consisted of a 4-stage step test beginning at a
pumping rate of 300 gpm at 12:00 noon on March 11th and ending at 525 gpm at noon
on March 13th, 1985. Water levels were measured in five observation wells at
-------
REMARKS
Design of W.lI_
Gravel DuvelO ‘le .5
Gravel
r v
Total Depth
50’o”
Material Sit
L.ngthof Blank Pipe
Size 4
?04cs
Size
2.4” 7ez’Jeco,Qe
Slot
Va. .y ., ç
Length
S ?
10 —o
Screen Fitting
Top P u,-e k
Bottom - . — — .
T.mporsry Casing Used
Inch— From To
inch — from To
Inch — From To
______ inch — From To
Inch — From To
Gravel Used
_________ Grad. Yds. Used
________ Grade _________Yds. Used
__________ Grade Yds. Used
________ Grade Yds. Used
Grade Yds. Used
lype 01 Sesi
________________Yd..Us.d
Set From To
Size of Seal Casing 31.. ’
Length of Seai Casing O 0 ’
Did Wii Clear Up c.c How Soon 1..O J
Length of Surging Time / ) A’-c
Static Level c Date _________
Capecity £ S _pumpng Levei2Ll ‘ 048A
fro , i 7e C.
Driller A .t.
Helper , I4 j I4 Oa
Figure 6-2 Well Construction Diagram for the Finished Abbott
Municipal Supply Well, Wilton, N. H
Source D L Maher Company (1985)
0. L.. MA HER CD. P0. BOX 127 71 C ONCORD SIRE ET
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
,.--.---.• I - 4 PRODUCTION WELL REPORT
e r LUo. kc W.II N . .. - I
,wIItu a...
Address U i 1 4— U 14.
FORMATION
SKETCH OF WELL
Locatlon A *z Pr- per Ly
D L.Maher Co. Job No.___________________
& ‘Ouf) d ACt#c /
Screen
‘U
— 24—
‘ - A C 01.1..
Stcj:c. Js.. 4 C Lc&#cf
t; ’3’ te T..p.
Pipe.
—Co, cre € Sea_i
S
20.0
£u’ pir Lc et
f F. ur K Pe.di’er
4o
4,
_______ tSloif
_______ /40 Slot S 13 e
________ 47
_______ 40 S1I,é
CO
30
3S
40
4’
Sb
(.0%
4 fti i
Lo%
2.b,,, m.i
.7,’m
3.SOp,iv
(DO7,
I.35m-,
COMMENTS
-------
6-7
distances of 2, 20, 68, 120 and 284 feet from the pumped well. According to the D. L.
Maher letter report to the town dated April 1, 1985, the results of the pumping test are
as follows:
Discharge Drawdown Spec. Cap. Spec. Drawdown Efficiency
(aom (feet) (aom/ft) (ft/gpm (oercent)
300 10.37 28.25 0.03455 91%
400 13.82 28.94 0.03455 91%
450 16.85 26.71 0.03744 84%
525 19.08 27.51 0.03634 87%
Aquifer transmissivity was estimated to be 37,944 gal/day/ft (5,072 sq. ft 2 /day). At a
saturated thickness of about 60 feet, the hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer within the
cone of depression was approximately 85 ft/day. Based on the Cooper-Jacob
straightline analysis of drawdown vs. the log of distance, transmissivity was also
calculated to be 37,434 gal/day/ft (5,004 ft 2 /day), which is comparable. Specific yield
was approximately 0.155. The well’s maximum radius of influence at 525 gpm was
estimated at 550 feet after two days of sustained pumping. In the table above, the
decrease in specific capacity with higher discharge rates is due to increased well
losses that develop from well screen turbulence at higher entrance velocities.
After the pump was shut off, recovery of the aquifer was measured for 1560 minutes.
The water level in the Abbott well recovered fully in about twelve hours. Analysis of the
recovery data indicated an aquifer transmissivity of 35,642 gal/day/ft (4,765 ft 2 /day),
which also correlated well with the other estimates.
6.5 Chronology of Well Installation and Aquifer Testing at the Everett Well
Test well exploration for a second ground-water supply in Wilton was conducted in two
phases in May and July, 1985 on land once owned by Edward Everett.. The first phase
began at 12:30 PM on May 6, 1985. Driller J. Anderson and assistant P. McManus of
the D. L. Maher Company drove up from North Reading, Massachusetts, set up their
drilling rig on the Everett property 700 feet SW of the Abbott well, and “spudded”
(began drilling) 1W 1-85 as a supply for wash water. The next day, 1W 1 A-85 was
drilled to refusal at 55 feet depth, and a second observation well was installed two feet
-------
6-8
away for drawdown readings. A six-foot long screen was set at 49 feet. The driller’s log
provides the following description of sediments found at TW IA-85:
Depth (fO Driller’s Description of Sediments
0-1 Topsoil
1 -21 Brown fine to medium sand, some angular gravel and layers of silt
21 -29 Brown fine to coarse sand, fine and angular gravel
29-36 Brown fine to coarse sand, fine to medium gravel and broken gravel
36-42 Brown fine to medium sand, some coarse sand and mica
42-50 Brown fine to coarse sand, some fine and broken gravel
50-55 Brown fine sand, some coarse sand and broken gravel
55 Refusal
After development, 1W IA-85 was pump tested the next day (May 8th) at 45 gpm for
3.5 hours. Drawdown was only 1.85 feet and the well recovered quickly within 0.05 feet
after 30 minutes. The drilling crew then took a water sample, loaded their rig back on a
trailer and returned to the D. L. Maher Company office.
The second phase of test well drilling in 1985 began on July 15th and ended on July
25th. Over those ten days, Maher attempted 24 wells. Figure 6-3 is a driller’s sketch
showing the locations of the test wells. Because of numerous boulders at depths
ranging from 5 to 21 feet, two-thirds of the wells were not completed and their casing
was pulled. The remainder, TW 1-85, IA-85 (reset), 5A, 7A, 8B, 9A, IOA and IOA Obs.,
were left in the ground. Although IA-85 reached bedrock at 55 feet, other wells such
as 6A, 7A, 8B were drilled to slightly greater depths of 65, 62, and 56 feet, respectively,
without reaching refusal. Ground water was encountered at depths from 2.6 to 7.6 feet.
In March 1987, test well exploration of the Everett site was continued by Northern
Groundwater of Henniker, NH with the objective of evaluating the glacial geology in the
area. Eight wells were bored by driller Mark Poland from March 23rd to April 3rd. Of
those wells, five ( IA-87. 2-87, 2A-87, 3-87, and 6-87) were completed as observation
wells and left in the ground. Figure 6-4 is a photocopy of the Northern Groundwater
sketch map showing the locations of these finished wells.
With a specific capacity of 111.1 gpmlft and a saturated thickness of 50 feet, the report
concluded that the aquifer at Test Well 2-87 could support 24 X 18” gravel-packed well
pumping 500 to 600 gallons per minute. TW 2-87 was just 55 feet from 1W 1 OA-85.
Aquifer properties tested at the other locations were less favorable for development.
-------
(_f ‘I f.
SocscTy f..t T c /rgTccT,o.i c / N / I Fore:
,0
if ”,
7i’
34
Figure 6-3 Dnllers Sketch of Locations of Test Wells IA-85 to
IOA-85, Everett Well Site, Wilton, N H
Source D L Maher Company (1985)
1\J
A/fl.
/
5- isc- l
1 os’”
250
io
_L___ \. jj 0 aJ3
-—----
‘¼
H
-------
Abbott Property
Abbott Property
—
—
-
24 Inch w ii 9 3
- -
Lorden Property
400 SANiTARY
RADIUS
...
Society for Protection of
New Hampshire Forests
Figure 6-4. Location Map of Test Wells 1-87 to 6-87, Everett Well Site, Wilton, N. H.
Source: Northern Groundwater (1987)
SITE PLAN
GROUND WA TER
EXPLORA TIOl ’!
PROGRAM
1987
Wilton, N.H.
0 5—87
0 6-87
-------
6-9
For example, TW 4-87 and 5-87 were drilled west of Route 31 to depths of 63 and 71
feet, respectively, and encountered significant amounts of brown silt and clay till with
small yields. The aquifer at 1W 6-87 at a location about 620 feet SW of TW 2-87 had
insufficient saturated yield (18 feet) for a municipal supply well.
On April 6, 1987, Northern Groundwater recommended in a letter report to the Wilton
Water Works that an 8-inch diameter test well be installed at the TW 2-87 location and
subjected to a five day pump test. The town later contracted with D. L. Maher Company
to carry out these recommendations. Driller George Bums and helper Ron Farwell
began drilling the well on May 26th just two feet from 2-87 and 2A-87. Three days later,
it was completed at 53 feet depth with a 1 0-foot long stainless steel screen.
Beginning at 2:00 pm on June 11, 1987, a 7.79-day (187-hour) long pumping test was
conducted on the 8-inch well. The discharge was maintained at a constant rate of 300
gpm and nine observation wells were measured for drawdown. Rain, sometimes heavy,
fell over a 12-hour period after midnight, June 11th. Despite the precipitation,
measurements of flyer stage at a staff gauge in the Souhegan River showed a steady
decline of 0.45 feet from June 9th to June 22nd. Total drawdown in the 8-inch well was
11.65 feet. The temperature of pumped ground water throughout the test was relatively
constant at 46 470 F (7.8-8.3° C). The pump was shut off at 8:15 am June 19th and
recovery readings were made for 460 minutes and later at 2:00 pm on June 22nd.
Aquifer transmissivities calculated by D. L. Maher Company ranged from 83,500 to
106,000 galldaylft (11.162 - 14,170 ft 2 /day) using both the Cooper - Jacob straightline
and Neuman methods of analysis of time-drawdown and distance-drawdown data.
Uncorrected drawdowns of 0.59 feet at 1W 6-87 (620 feet distant) and 0.41 feet at the
Abbott well (720 feet distant) near the end of the pumping test imply that the cone of
depression of the 8-inch well extended beyond the Abbott well. Therefore, operation of
the future Everett well would incur well interference with the Abbott well, and vice versa.
Although the well interference effects may not be major, it would somewhat reduce the
long-term ‘safe yields’ of both wells pumping together at peak discharge.
D. 1. Maher Company, in its report dated July 1987, made the following conclusions
based on the 8-inch pumping test:
1. The well depth is 53.0 feet with 49.0 feet of saturated thickness.
-------
6-10
2. Pumping test data shows the effects of two barrier boundaries. Stabilization [ of
water levels] was not achieved during the 7.79 day continous-rate test at 300 gpm.
3. Short-term recharge to the aquifer white pumping at 300 gpm for 7.79 days appears
to be absent. However, 27 feet of water was still available over the top of the
10-foot well screen, after 7.8 days of pumping.
4. It is projected that 16 to 18 feet of water would still be available above the top of the
production well screen after 180 days of continuous pumping at 300 gpm.
5. The aquifer at the Everett site appears to have a maximum sustained yield of
396,000 gallons per day or 275 gpm.
6. A 396,000 gallon per day maximum withrawal rate may be realized through
continuous pumping at 275 gpm or pumping at 425 gpm for cycles of 15.5 hours on,
8.5 hours off.
7. The well should be constructed as a driven 24” X 18” gravel pack well with 10 feet
of stainless stell well screen. A concrete seal is not necessary as long as temporary
casings larger than the 24 inches are not utilized.
8. A 72- 120 hour pumping test at 425 gpm should be performed on the gravel pack
welt as the 8-inch well did not stabilize. This pumping test will determine the precise
pumping level, welt efficiency and corroborate our aforementioned projected welt yield
estimates.
9. Long term pumping of the production well at average day demands over a I to 2
year period combined with weekly monitoring of the pumping levels wilt determine
the aquifer’s tong term sustained yield at the Everett site.
10. Water quality data indicates that all parameters analyzed at the time of the report
are below the SDWA standards. The well water, however, will require corrosion
control.
On July 30, 1987, James A. Tuttle, Chairman of the Wilton Water Works, signed a
contract proposal with the D. L. Maher Company to construct, develop and test a 24” X
18” gravel-packed well on the Everett property. Well drilling by S. Kelly and hetper M.
Barry began on August 12, 1987 at the same location as the 8-inch well, which was
-------
6-Il
pulled. Ten feet of 18-inch diameter stainlees-steel screen was set from 42 to 52 feet
below the ground surface. Figure 6-5 is a photocopy of the 0. 1. Maher Company’s well
construction diagram for the finished Everett supply well.
The driller reported the following sediments at depth:
Depth (ft) Drillers Descriotion of Sediments
0- 35 Coarse brown sand and gravel, large boulders
35-52 Coarse brown sand and gravel, large cobbles
52-53 Fine to medium brown sand
Following construction and development, a four-stage step test was performed on the
18” well from 12 noon to 4:00 pm on September 22, 1987. Discharges of 150, 250, 351
and 450 gpm were sustained over 60 minute intervals. After four hours of pumping,
drawdown in the well was 9.50 feet. The next day, a 2-day constant-rate pump test at
425 gpm commenced at 1:00 pm. Drawdowns were measured in the pumped well and
eight observation wells at distances of 2, 2.1, 55, 72, 77, 355, 471, and 720 feet away,
and ranged from 10.64 to 0.29 feet at the end of the test. Measurements of recovery
were made for only three hours after the pump was shut off.
Aquifer properties of transmissivity, hydraulic conductivity and specific yield were
estimated by the D. L. Maher Company using the Cooper-Jacob straightline and
Neuman methods of analysis. Transmissivities calculated with the former method for
observation wells 7A-85 and IA-85 were 77,624 and 86,194 gal/day/ft (10,377 and
11,523 ft 2 /day), respectively. The value estimated for the production well was 78,766
gal/day/ft (10,530 ft 2 /day). Semi-log analysis of distance-drawdown relationships for
late-time measurements provided a transmissivity of 89,881 gal/day/ft (12,015 ft 2 /day).
Transmissivity values calculated using the Neuman method for unconfined aquifers
were 71,625 and 90,194 gal/day/ft (9,575 and 12,057 ft 2 /day) for observation wells
7A-85 and IA-85, respectively. Using a saturated thickness of approximately 50 feet,
estimated hydraulic conductivities ranged from 191.5 to 241 ft/day. D L. Maher
Company reported that specific yields of .03 and .08 were obtained for observation
wells 7A-85 and I A-85.
Drawdown measurements in 7A-85 and 1 A-85 (located 77 and 72 feet from the 18”
well) plotted against the semi-log of pumping time show that the spreading cone of
depression encountered two negative boundaries at 90 and 780 minutes into the test
-------
D CL MAHER CD.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
PR000CTTON WELL REPORT
Contract: • ‘1 ) I Wo-K. > w.ai
Address W, (+Or.,. VUi 44.
Startad___________ Compist.d g/.2. 5/27
FORMATION SKETCH OF WELL
IM
Coarse Brown
Sand and Gravel _____
w/ Boulders
35
Coarse Brown _____
Sand and Gravel
w/ Large Cobbles .
52
53 Fine-Medium Sand
I.ciml 4.3
F. .i
.1. ..
P. L.
j5.oo’
Fr0
• o.t -
—
• 1
—I
-f
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREE
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/ 933-” 321i
2.
Loca E Lt
DL Mah.rCo.Job No. 7 ’
.Dedsn of L
Graval DavsIo d -
Gi a vuilP ksd -
B.drock _______________
Total Death G.L .
Matanal S.t , ,.
L thoI_ ___
5 1 . _ .2c -”i 8 ” 4Z
croen
.,r—
3.1 i.so.
304
S.S.
SIz.
if” P.
p
S
S, 3 e
Slot
L•ngth
/00
I,
Scrs.n Fitting
y Jq. ?. R 1 SS .
Top
T.mpory Caaing Ua.d
indi From To
Inch — From_____ To
inch — From To
Inch — From To
_______ Inch — From _______To
Gr.vsI I l iad
________ Grads Yds. Used
Grads Yds. Used
______ ________ Grids Yds.Us.d
________ Grads Yds. Used
Grads Yds. 1usd
_____ Typ. of Seal
_____ Z4’ Skci(.s ’rnIjds.Us.d
S.tFiom b i 4/
of Seal Casing
Langth of Ssai CasIng__4 1
ON ii uPi.c. Ho Soon S
Lingth of Surging Tin I
Static Lsesl .3,5 Date /23 187 ,
Capsdty 4z5 Pun ng Level i.c. 00 G.L.
COMMENTS
Figure 6-5 Well Construction Diagram for the Finished Everett
Municipal Supply Well, Wilton, N H.
Source D L Maher Company (1987)
Driller
Hsipsr
5. )( ‘l L
p’vi,k’, ,
Qrooric L i r (
a 4 ct P K
24”
REMARKS
-------
6-12
(see Figure 6-6). These boundaries probably represent low-permeable, fine-grained
sediments located SE and SW of the pumped well (see the driIler s logs for TW 5A-85,
6A-85, 4-87, 5-87 and 6-87. Based on a similar response noted during the 8-inch well
pump test (see Maher, July 1987, p. 6), the boundary distances from the Everett well
were estimated by D. L. Maher to be 210 and 477 feet, respectively.
Additional References Cited:
Cooper, H.H. and Jacob, C.E., 1946, A generalized graphical method for evaluating
formation constants and summarizing well field history: American Geophysical Union
Transactions, Vol. 27, p. 526-534.
Neuman, Shiomo P., 1975, Analysis of pumping test data from anisotropic unconfined
aquifers considering delayed yield: Water Resources Research, Vol. 11, No. 2, p.
329-342.
Stallman, R.W., 1961, Aquifer-test design, observation and data analysis: U. S.
Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations, Chapter BI, Book 3, Application of
Hydraulics.
Theis, Charles V., 1935, The relation between the lowering of the piezometric surface
and the rate and duration of discharge of a well using ground-water storage: American
Geophysical Union Transactions, Vol. 14, Pt. 2, p. 519-524.
-------
———-—----.---——- — -————-———- .--——— . -.-— -.-——.-.—--- —-.——-----———-—.- .“.-—---... --.—..—.-.“--—-—--.--, .— -.—.——--. .-—
LINE APPROXTMATION METHOD
- r [ 1 [ 1] [ 44 9 3 fl 1J I
. ‘ t
I -• L-. . . -- . ... J. . 86194.. .. .. ... L
...4 I. .i. ..
•
I
2 .. -— . .. . - . ., 3 RRIE aOUN A Y .. •. ._. .. . .. .
I 68
••I •- - .k.. ..• - - ?
I I I1
D3 I
z 1 l u ll
£ J_ I I
-..-—.—--. - . . .
4 2--f - -
i... ,4•
5 J .j ..i. . ..i
Ii:T:LT1 1 L : H I r:ff :i ii.::: :it.i t.
1 1 10 100 1000 10000
TIME SINCE PUMPING STARTED (minutas)
PROJECT 1 24 X 18 GRAVEL WELL 1 08. WELLI IA-85
LOCATION 1 WILTON NH l DISTANCE 1 72
PUMPING WELL 1 18 INCH 0” 425 GP J S.W.L’ . 2.68
0. L. MAHER Co. COMPUTER AIDED ANALYSIS FIGURE 4
Figure 6-6. Photocopy of the Time-Drawdown Graph of Test Well IA-85,
Showing Two Negative Boundaries, Everett Well Aquifer Test,
Wilton, N. H.
Source: D. L. Maher Company (1987)
-------
7-1
STEP 7. MAKE A MAP OF GROUND-WATER AND SURFACE-WATER ALTITUDES
WITHIN THE ESTIMATED BOUNDARIES OF THE RECHARGE AREA
7.1 Introduction
Altitudes of ground water and surface water in portions of the Wilton welifield recharge
area were measured on August 4th and 6th, 1992 and hand-contoured to create a map
of the water table. The objectives of water-table mapping were to: 1) identify
ground-water flow directions within the aquifer under non-pumping conditions; 2) verify
previous mapping of water altitudes by the U. S. Geological Survey; 3) refine sub-basin
watershed boundaries for WHPA delineation; 4) help provide a hydraulic-head
distribution for analytical capture zone modeling; 5) describe ground-water and
surface-water relationships; and 6) provide a planning tool for town use in future
ground-water monitoring studies.
Water-altitude stations consisted of 14 existing observation and test wells installed by
drilling contractors from 1983 to 1987, 6 piezometers, I dug well, and 16 measurement
points made up of rebar staffs, bridges, culverts and stream boulders. The cost of
materials was less than $300. Three D. L. Maher Company test wells (1-83, 10-83, and
8B-85) were found too late to be included in the August, 1992 survey.
7.2 Previous Mapping of the Water Table by the U. S. Geological Survey
Contours of water-table altitudes for the Wilton wellfield recharge area were published
by the U. S. Geological Survey in 1987 as part of Water Resources Investigations
Report 86-4358, entitled “Hydrogeology of Stratified-Drift Aquifers and Water Quality in
the Nashua Regional Planning Commission Area, South-Central New Hampshire.” This
study describes the extent of stratified-drift deposits, water quality, the locations of test
and pumping wells, and surface-water drainage divides in southern Hilisborough
County.
Water-table contours were mapped at 20-foot intervals at a scale of 1:24,000, or 2,000
feet per inch. Figure 7-1 is a photocopy of a portion of Plate I of the report that includes
the Wilton wellfield and the Souhegan River valley. Contoured altitudes of water in
stratified-drift deposits range from 660 feet above NGVD about 3,000 feet west of the
Abbott well to 440 feet above NGVD just downstream of the Abbott Hill Road bridge
-------
SCALE 1:24000
I MILE
7000 FEET
0
=
1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
5 0 I KILOMETER
CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET
NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929
Figure 7 -1. Photocopy of a Portion of Plate I of U. S. Geological Survey
WRIR 86-4358 for the Wilton, N. H. Welifield and Vicinity
-------
7-2
over the Souhegan River. Altitudes of the water table in areas of till and bedrock were
not mapped in the report.
In general, contours were primarily based on the topography of the ground surface and
altitudes of surface water. Water-level information from wells was limited in most of the
mapped areas. Because of its relatively small depth below the ground surface, the
gradient and configuration of the water table closely resembles that of the land, flowing
from areas of high elevation to areas of low elevation. The USGS contours indicate that
ground water flows from higher areas of till and bedrock west, south, and east of the
wellfield to lower areas filled with gtacio-fluvial and alluvial sediments in the Souhegan
River valley. Water that does not recharge the Souhegan River and Gambol Brook
channels either moves downgradient as underfiow, is pumped by the supply wells, or is
lost to the atmosphere from evapo-transpiration.
7.3 General Procedure for Water-Table Mapping
Mapping of water altitudes requires several tasks, including station selection, data
gathering and recording, gaining access to property from private owners, field
inspections, conducting vertical surveys, and data contouring. After the map is
prepared by hand, it is digitized into electronic form with a geographic information
system.
With the exception of the 22 piezometers and surface-water measurement stations,
installation of additional observation or monitoring wells for water-altitude data was
beyond the scope and budget of this study. Instead, emphasis was placed on using
existing wells and surface-water bodies within the recharge area to produce a
water-table map and measurement-station database. Fortunately, many test wells had
been left in the ground, thereby increasing the resolution of the hydraulic gradient
(slope) of the aquifer near the Abbott and Everett supply wells. This resolution
enhanced the quality of data input to the WHPA Code (see STEP 10 and Appendix C),
which requires both the slope and direction of ground water flow for capture-zone
modeling.
7.4 Specific Tasks of Water-Table Mapping
The essential tasks for creating a water-table map for a stratified-drift aquifer are
-------
7-3
summarized as follows:
1. Perform an inventory of existing wells, surface-water measurement stations and
altitude benchmarks.
2. Select and install additional measurement stations as needed, consisting of wells,
piezometers, and bridge culverts, after obtaining access from property owners
and conducting field inspections to verify station utility. Record detailed
information about each station on a ‘Water-level Station Record.”
3. Accurately locate these stations on an accurate base map, such as a USGS
quadrangle. See STEP 2 for information about determining location.
4. Within a designated 24-hour period, measure the depths (or heights) of the
non-pumping water surface with respect to established measurement points, and
record this information on the ‘Water-Level Station Record” form.
5. Conduct a leveling survey of station measurement-point altitudes according to state
procedures and standards for vertical surveys. If the budget allows, this task
should be performed by a registered surveyor.
6. Contour the water altitudes by hand on the USGS quadrangle.
7. If GIS technology is available, digitize station locations and water-altitude contours
as separate coverages. Use GIS to determine the latitude and longitude of each
station and the supply wells.
8. If both time and budget permit, repeat tasks 4 and 6 at other times of the year to
determine changes, if any, in hydraulic gradient or flow directions. After
adequate training, water works employees or volunteers can make such
measurements.
7.5 Selection and Installation of Ground-Water and Surface-Water Altitude
Stations
Prospective sites for water-level measurements were identified during the summer
months of 1991 and 1992. Much of this time was spent in dense vegetation searching
-------
7-4
for existing test wells that could be added to those located earlier. For example, the
observation well installed 284 feet north of the Abbott well was nearly completely buried
by piles of branches and twigs left by woodcutters. TW 10-83 (the “Glines Well”) was
not found until August 26, 1992 after repeated attempts had been made to locate it. Of
all the test wells presumed to have been left in the ground by the driller, only one, 1W
2B-83, was never found by the author.
All 14 test wells used for water-table mapping were inspected to ensure good hydraulic
connection with the surrounding aquifer. All wells were plumbed with a weighted
graduated tape to measure the amount, if any, of screen filling by fine-grained
sediments based on their drillers logs. Repeated measurements were made to
compare well response to changes in water-table altitude due to supply well pumping
and natural changes in storage.
The installation of six 1.5-inch diameter PVC piezometers in areas more distant from
the supply wells provided shallow water-level data in the flood plain of the Souhegan
River. See Figure 10-2 for locations. Three of these (GW-2, 3 and 5) were placed in or
near the channel of an unnamed ephemeral stream that flowed from spring to
mid-summer from a sub-basin southwest and west of the welifield. Each piezometer
was 6.1 feet long, and had a 0.008-inch slotted screen that was 0.7 feet in length. After
a 3-inch diameter hole was bored with a hand auger to the saturated zone, the
piezometer was driven several feet below the water table with a 10-pound sledge
hammer. The hole was then back-filled with natural materials, and capped with
bentonite pellets. Development consisted of both pumping and surging until the
discharge was clear (see Figure 7-2). Water levels were not measured until they had
time to equilibrate.
Shallow aquifer materials penetrated by hand augering consisted of several inches of
loam or muck over brownish-yellow, fine to coarse sand and gravel. Numerous cobbles
and boulders were also encountered at every site selected, therefore penetration to
greater depths was often difficult or impossible. Depths to water below the ground
surface ranged from zero to 2.3 feet.
Piezometer GW-1 is located 200 feet WNW of the Abbott well to help provide accurate
water altitudes and gradients upgradient of the supply well. Two piezometers (GW-2
and 5) are installed in or near the channel of an unnamed ephemeral stream that flows
from spring to mid-summer from a small sub-basin southwest and west of the wellfield.
These stations also provide important upgradient ground-water altitudes for WHPA
-------
Figure 7-2. Photographs of Piezometer GW-5 Installation and Purging,
Wilton Wellfield, Wilton, N. H. on June 25, 1992.
Photographs: Douglas Heath
-------
7-5
boundary and capture zone estimates. Piezometer GW-3 had been installed at a
shallow depth (due to cobbles) in the same channel next to SW-3 (approximately 600
feet NW of the Abbott well), but became dry in July, 1992 as ground-water levels
declined. It was therefore removed and not used for water-table mapping purposes. In
order to measure the water-table altitude south of the Everett Gravel Pit for WHPA
boundary estimate purposes, GW-4 was installed 1,730 feet SW of the Everett welt.
Station GW-6 is located 650 feet south of the Abbott well for altitude data of
ground-water moving northeast along the trend of the Souhegan River valley.
Unlike stations GW-1 through GW-6, which are piezometers, GW-7 is a dug well
adjacent to a sand and gravel processing building west of Rt. 31 and 2,950 feet SW of
the Everett well. Its measuring point is the top edge of a cement wall above the water
surface.
In addition to ground water atitudes, surface-water attitudes were measured at 16
locations (designated SW-i to SW-i 6) consisting of boulders, rebar sections, bridges
and culverts (see Figure 7-3). Most were located in the Souhegan River, Gambol
Brook, the unnamed tributary, and one ponded wetland south of the Blanchard auto
salvage yard. Altitude data from these locations, when combined with ground-water
elevations between precipitation events, provided a more accurate water-table map in
this hydrogeologic setting. Because of the high degree of hydraulic connection between
the aquifer and surface water in the Souhegan River valley, contours of water-table
altitudes were connected with those of surface-water attitudes measured on August 4th
and 6th, 1992 at these stations.
7.6 Field Procedure for Measuring Water Levels
After the selection, installation and description of all water-level measurement stations
were completed, the vertical distances to ground and surface water below the MP’s
were measured to the nearest hundredth of a foot with a wooden engineers ruler or
graduated tape with a sounding weight, or ‘plunker’. MP’s at all wells and piezometers
were considered to be at the top of casings. Those for boulders were the highest point
or feature of the rock, on WhiCh a carpenters level was placed. Once the bubble level
was horizontal, a wooden ruler was used to measure the vertical distance from the level
to the water surface. Figure 7-3 is a photograph that illustrates this procedure. Depths
to water ranged from 0.12 feet at SW-15 in Gambol Brook to 21.88 feet at 1W 6-87.
Because water levels had to be taken during non-pumping conditions, and
-------
Figure 7-3. Measuring Water Levels at SW-I (left) and SW-I 5 (right), Located
at the Route 31 Bridge over Gambol Brook and at a Boulder Located
500 Feet Farther Downstream, September 11, I 992, Wilton, N. H.
Photographs: Douglas Heath
4.
A
A -
1
as
-------
7-6
because it was impossible to turn off both supply wells at the same time because of
system demands, measurements at all stations were made on two dates: August 4th
and 6th, 1992.
According to storage tank water-level charts, the Abbott well pumped from 9:30 am until
4:00 pm on August 3rd. Measurements of ground-water levels at the eight observation
wells most affected by the supply well’s cone of depression were not made until 10:00
to 11:00 am the next day, after water levels had returned to static levels. By that time,
over 18 hours had elapsed since the well had shut off. These observation wells were
20C-83, I IA-83, I IA-B-83, 120 ‘E’, 284 ‘F’, GW-1, GW-2, and 3-87. Several
measurements were taken at these wells on August 4th to verify that water levels had
stabilized. The Everett well, on the other hand, had operated between 2:00 am and
6:45 am on August 4th. With the assistance of Mr. Charles McGettigan, Commissioner
of the Wilton Water Works, it was taken off line at 10:00 am on August 4th. The Abbott
well was then allowed to pump water, as needed, to meet system demands until after all
water levels had been measured again two days later.
Therefore, the water-table map prepared for this delineation study is based on
measurements taken at all 36 stations on August 6th, with the exception of those from
the eight wells cited above (potentially impacted by operating the Abbott well) taken on
August 4th. Combining measurements taken over a 48-hour period was warranted
because: 1) both supply wells could not be shut off during the same time because of
operating requirements; 2) the 720 feet distance between the supply wells ensured that
each supply well only slightly affects the water level in the other during short pumping
intervals; and 3) over the two-day period, ambient water levels in both rivers and the
surrounding aquifer showed little change. For example, the stage of the Souhegan
River next to the Abbott supply well rose just 0.01 feet from August 4th to 6th. Gambol
Brook at the Rt. 31 bridge rose only 0.05 feet. In the aquifer, water levels rose 0.04 at
GW-7 (2,950 feet from the Everett well) and 0.05 feet at observation well 6-87 (about
850 feet from the Everett well). The only precipitation that fell over this period was a
light drizzle from 9:00 to I 0:50 am on August 4th. The slight increase in water levels
(possibly due to the rainfall) represents only a change of 0.1 percent over the 49.96-
feet range of water-table altitudes measured in the vicinity of the wellfield.
7.7 Horizontal and Vertical Survey of Water-Altitude Stations
An accurate survey of MP altitudes and locations at all water-altitude measurement
-------
7-7
stations is a critical part of water-table mapping. Once surface-water and ground-water
elevations are determined, they can be contoured for more precise hydraulic gradient
measurements of direction and magnitude. The horizontal and vertical locations of all
36 stations were surveyed by a private firm, Monadnock Survey, Inc. of Wilton, N.H.
during July, 1992. Vertical elevations of the station MPs were based on Benchmark ‘79
ATA’, set as a bronze disk in the NW abutment of the Rt. 31 bridge over Gambol Brook.
Its assigned altitude is 473.31 feet above the NGVD of 1929.
Following the survey, Monadnock compiled station data in two forms. The first was a
map at scale 1:2,400 (1 inch = 200 feet) of all stations and reference points. The
second was a table listing the station name, MSI point number, location according to
the New Hampshire Coordinate System, MP altitude above the National Geodetic
Vertical Datum of 1929, and brief descriptions of station characteristics. Surveyed MP
altitudes ranged from 457.50 feet at SW-i 5 to 509.92 feet at GW-7.
7.8 Results of Hand-Contouring of Water-Table Altitudes
The next task was to hand-contour the water altitudes based on the August 4th and 6th
measurements. The contouring was accomplished over several hours by the writer at
the EPA Region I office in Boston, Massachusetts. Because of its superior
topographical details and large scale, the N.H. Department of Transportation maps
referenced in STEP 4 provided an excellent base map to draw station locations, water
altitudes and contours. Although many PC-based contouring software packages are
available to the hydrogeologist, hand contouring is preferable in the Wilton wellfield
area because of the existence of direct surface- and ground-water connections in its
unconfined, sand and gravel aquifer. In addition, the topographical maps depict
hydrologic boundaries and surface features that aid the hydrogeologist in contouring
both surface-water and ground-water altitudes in areas were no stations exist. This is
not possible with machine contouring programs that are blind to surface water and
boundary features.
Water-table contour intervals were based on several factors: the density of
measurement stations, the steepness of the hydraulic gradient, mapped legibility at the
scale used, and the degree of topographic control. Contours in the vicinity of the supply
wells were spaced at one-foot intervals from 459 to 480 feet above NGVD. Contours
above 480 feet were drawn at 5-foot intervals up to 500 feet. The last contour estimates
the location of the water table at 520-feet altitude.
-------
7-8
In general, the positions of the August, 1992 water-table contours compare favorably
with those published by the U. S. Geological Survey in 1987. Where they exist,
differences may be ascribed to two important factors: 1) the contours produced by this
study are based on altitudes at 36 accurately surveyed and measured locations and
5-foot contour interval, 1:2,400-scale topographical control. The vertical error is less
than 0.1 feet at the surveyed stations and less than one foot for the base map: and 2)
the USGS contours are estimates based on a 20-foot contour, 1:24,000-scale
topographical quadrangle published in 1968. Its topographical error is probably less
than five feet. However, In the latest Greenville, NH quadrangle, published in 1987,
topographical contours have been modified in many places compared to those of its
predecessor. Because of their large contour interval, the USGS contours in Wilton are
less sensitive to local changes in hydraulic gradient, especially where relatively steep
gradients become ‘flatter in the valley floor terraces, than contours at intervals of I to 5
feet (see the discussion of these differences in Section 8.4.2.1 and Figure 10-1 A).
7.9 Digitation of Water-Table Altitude Stations and Contours using a Geographic
Information System
During September, 1992, the EPA Geographical Information System office in Boston
processed information from the Wilton welifield WHPA study and other sources to
facilitate its data input, analysis and display. Spatial data such as water altitude
stations, surface water, roads, and water-table altitude contours based on August,
1992 measurements were digitized from the 1:2,400-scale base map described above.
Additional information such as geologic boundaries and historic water altitude contours
were digitized from the 1:24,000-scale Plate I of the U. S. Geological Survey’s
Water-Resources Investigations Report 86-4358. All of these coverages were used to
create the GIS plot “Map of the Welihead Protection Areas of the Abbott and Everett
Municipal Supply Wells and Elevations of Ground Water and Surface Water on August
6, 1992” (see Figures 10-1 and 10-2), which accompany this report in STEP 10.
-------
8-1
STEP 8. DEVELOP A CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF WELLFIELD RECHARGE AND
FLOW CHARACTERISTICS
8.1 Introduction
A conceptual model in WHPA delineation is a qualitative appraisal of geological,
hydrological and hydrogeological information obtained from a wide variety of sources. It
exemplifies and identifies what is understood about the ground-water environment
under study, as well as areas of uncertainty. The model describes the entire flow
system that contributes water to the Wilton wellfield. It is organized to address local
and regional geology (bedrock, surficial deposits and soils); hydrological parameters
(recharge, evapo-transpiration, and surface water); and hydrogeology (aquifer
properties and boundary conditions). It also forms the basis for selecting relevant and
conservative criteria, criteria thresholds and methods of WHPA delineation, which
depend on requirements of the New Hampshire Wellhead Protection Program, and on
data availability, cost and resource considerations.
8.2 Geology
8.2.1 Bedrock Geology
The stratigraphy, structure and petrology of pre-Pleistocene rocks in the vicinity of the
Wilton wellfield portion of the Peterborough 15-minute USGS quadrangle have been
described in detail by Robert C. Greene (1970) and Edward F. Duke (June 1984). The
oldest rocks consist of the highly metamorphosed lower member (SrI) of the Rangely
Formation of Silurian age. It consists of “massive, monotonous, moderately aluminous
pelitic schist composed of quartz, plagioclase, biotite, and muscovite, with subordinate
garnet, tourmaline, and sillimanite” (obid., p. 14). The youngest rocks consist of the
Spaulding Quartz Diorite of Devonian age. These were intruded as sills or large sheets,
and include a wide range of lithologies from diorite to granite. In the Souhegan River
valley, Duke (Plate I C) has ascribed several members of this formation as Dst:
“medium to dark gray, biotite, garnet, cordierite, homblende granodiorite to tonalite”;
and overlain by Dsg: “white to light gray muscovite, biotite, garnet, tourmaline granite to
quartz monzonite.” These rocks have been dated at 393 +1- 5 million years of age by
the Rb-Sr method (obid., p.36).
-------
8-2
Both formations trend NE-SW, sub-parallel to the Souhegan River valley and the
Pinnacle Fault, about a mile west of the wellfield. Extensive tectonism and folding of the
rocks began in the middle Devonian. Where exposed, foliations dip approximately 26
to 56 degrees to the northwest. No other faults have been mapped in or near the
wellfield. Figures 8-1 and 8-2 show the areal and vertical distribution of the Rangety
and Spaulding Quartz Formations.
8.2.1.1 Bedrock Altitudes
The altitude of bedrock in the vicinity of the Wilton weilfield varies from relatively low
elevations beneath the Souhegan River channel to approximately 1000 feet in the
highlands east and west of the valley. According to seismic refraction surveys
conducted by the U. S. Geological survey in 1983 (see cross-sections a-a’ and b-b’ in
Toppin (1987, p. A-46), and Figure 8-3 (this report), the lowest measured bedrock
altitude is approximately 374 feet at about 1,000 feet NW of the Abbott well. About 100
feet of saturated glacial and alluvial sediments overlie the Spaulding Quartz Diorite
Formation at this location. In general, the bedrock surface forms a bowl-like depression
west of the confluence of Gambol Brook and the Souhegan River. Refusal depths of
test wells drilled at the Abbott and Everett supply wells show bedrock altitudes of 401.4
and 417.7 feet above NGVD, respectively.
Bedrock is exposed at at least four locations near the wellfield. The closest is
approximately 400 feet NE of the Abbott well, along the eastern bank of the Souhegan
River. Its altitude is approximately 458 feet. Figure 8-4 is a photograph of this
exposure taken in September, 1992. Bedrock also crops out east of the Souhegan
channel about 450 feet upstream from the well at elevation 462 feet, and again at
1,700 feet upstream, where an island separates the stream channel at 477 feet. The
fourth locality is along Gambol Brook, about 500 feet downstream from the Russell Hill
Road bridge at stream elevation 512 feet. Numerous other exposures exist in the till
and bedrock highlands on the flanks of Russell and AbbOtt Hills.
8.2.2 Surficial Geology
As a result of the most recent period of glaciation, which ended about 14,000 years
ago, unconsolidated deposits of clay, silt, sand, gravel and boulders were laid down
over the eroded bedrock surface. These materials tend to be thickest in valleys, and
-------
• •.1 •
I•
A . I ‘•.
S. /
N ‘ ‘. I •
.-. 4
- .c6,j -
pr’ :‘ ..‘, i’.
£
4.
‘ /. YJ ’\/
7.;’. J.i 4/’ r ’,zii.;. I
/. f .c’ y ,... . . C F
, ‘,: J(
4 I i ,
M ... /. /
n) .•I . I
. ‘ :
- - • . \‘•‘
.. )‘
“
•; . •. I
.1
, J/’
‘4/ . / ‘
(
• .\ç )/*
#1 ! .
/ : A jbot
- .1 / pi u
.‘
•1 •’ . .
• ‘ .: - -- , ;,‘_l •
4.. ,
•./•_.. ‘I.
7 £ .- r• 1/
‘‘ .OR.: : I
Figure 8-1. Map of Bedrock Geology in the Vicinity of the Wilton, N. H. Welifield.
[ Sri = Lower Siiunan Rangely Formation; Sru = Upper Silunan Rangely
Formation; Dst = Devonian Spaulding Tonolite; Dsg = Devonian
Spaulding Quartz Diorite; d = Mesozoic dike rocks]
Source: Duke (1984) Scale = 1:63,360
A
A’
1 . .
L
,. -(
.••...//. I.
If /
I, /
-------
Figure 8-2. Geologic Cross-Section along Axis A-A’ Shown on Figure 8-1.
[ Sri = Lower Silunan Rangely Formation; Sru = Upper Silurian
Rangely Formation; Dst = Devonian Spaulding Tonolite;
Dsg = Devonian Spaulding Quartz Diorite; d = Mesozoic dike rocks]
Source: Duke (1984)
A
-------
E SEISMIC SURVEY CROSS—SECTION a—a’
SEISMIC SURVEY CROSS—SECTION 0—0’
50O W
450-1
400 4— — _________
350- I
500 1000 1500 2000 2500
DISTANCE IN FEET
Figure 8-3. Seismic Refraction Survey Profile Along Axis a-a’ Shown on
Plate I of U. S. Geological Survey WRIR 86-4358. The
Cross-Section Shows the Altitude of the Land Surface, Water
Table and Bedrock Surface in Feet Above NGVD. The Upper
Graph is Drawn at a Vertical Exaggeration of 7.64; the Lower
is Drawn at No Exaggeration.
Source of Data: U. S. Geological Survey, Bow, N. H.
I.-
uJ
uJ
Li
z
z
0
>
Ui
-J
Ui
w
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
DISTANCE IN FEET
E
I-
L ii
L i i
z
z
0
I—
>
L ii
-J
L i i
0
-------
Figure 8-4. Photograph of the Spaulding Quartz Diorite Exposed on the
Eastern Bank of the Souhegan River Approximately 400 Feet
NE of the Abbott Supply Well, September 11, 1992.
Photograph: Douglas Heath
-------
8-3
thin or absent at higher elevations. In the Wilton welifield area, as in much of New
England, surficial deposits consist of till, stratified drift, alluvial and recent sediments.
Previous mapping of surficial geology in the study area was performed by the U.S.
Geological Survey and published in 1987 as Plates I and 2 in its Water Resources
Investigations Report 86-4358. The maps display the contact boundary between areas
of till/bedrock and stratified drift (undifferentiated). The saturated thickness and
transmissivity of the unconsolidated sediments are also shown. Figure 8-5 displays
these relationships in the vicinity of the Wilton welifield. Recently, Hildreth (see Figure
8-5A) has mapped the surficial deposits and related glaciated morphology of the
Greenville, NH quadrangle in detail.
8.2.2.1 Water-laid Deposits
Water-laid deposits (or stratified drift) consists of material once entrained in glacial ice
that was reworked and deposited by flowing meltwater in streams and lakes. The clay,
silt, sand and gravel was laid down in contact with or beyond stagnant glacial ice.
These materials formed kame terraces, deltas, lake bottom deposits and eskers in the
Souhegan River valley and its tributaries. For example, the hill located 2,000 feet west
of the Abbott supply well at elevation 660 feet is primarily a delta made up of sand and
gravel deposited in a former glacial lake in the Souhegan River valley.The angle of
foreset beds indicate that they were laid down by meltwater streams flowing from north
to south. The lake level (at approximately 640-660 feet above sea level) was controlled
by a spillway to the south at the same elevation located about 2,000 feet north of Pratt
Pond (see Figure 8-5A from Hildreth and Moore, 1993, p. 7). Lake water to the north
was temporarily impounded by retreating or stagnant glacial ice until drainage was able
to resume down the Souhegan River valley.
Kame terrace and esker deposits are also found just south of the Everett supply well.
The two small hills at altitude 600 feet to the south of the weilfield represent kame
terrace sand, gravel and boulder material over till and bedrock. An esker runs SW from
the Everett well, through the Everett sand and gravel pit, across Route 31 and through
another gravel pit. Because of moderate to high sorting, these highly transmissive
materials are relatively more vulnerable to contamination than surrounding sediments.
Figure 3-2 is a photograph of the exposed esker south of the Everett well.
-------
ft
SCALE 1:24000
1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET
L 1 I __ { I _J
5 0 I KILOMFIER
=____
CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET
Figure 8-5. Photocopies of Portions of Plates I and 2 from U. S. Geological
Survey WRIR 86-4358 Showing Water-Table Altitude Contours, Well
Locations, Seismic Survey Axes and the Till/Bedrock-Stratified Drift
Contact (left) and Transmissivity and Saturated Thickness lsopachs
in Feet Squared Per Day and Feet, Respectively; Wilton, N. H.
I MILE
-------
Figure 8-5A. Surficial Geology Map and Cross-section of the Wilton,
NH Welifleld. The Hatchured Pattern Zones are Areas of Exposed and
Shallow Bedrock; Qt = Till; Oral ,2 and Owal ,2 = Kame Terrace,
Esker and Glacial Lake-Bottom Deposits; Qsth = High-Stream Terrace
Deposits; Ost = Stream-Terrace Deposits; Os = Swamp Deposits.
Modified from Hildreth and Moore (1993).
5Ecr? .v -S
(,. .J”.,. vI• a.,.)
-------
8-4
8.2.2.2 Recent Deposits
Recent deposits are muck, peat, silt, sand and gravel of Holocene age laid down after
glacial retreat by water and wind. They are primarily fine-grained sediments and
organic matter categorized as swamp deposits up to five feet thick, found in both
valleys and highlands. There are also alluvium deposits up to ten feet thick along
existing rivers and streams, formed by flood events and channel aggradation.
In the vicinity of the Wilton welifield, there are four major areas where swamp deposits
have developed. The first is a ponded wetland 500 feet west of Route 31 and south of
the Blanchard auto salvage yard. The altitude of the pond, which is a shallow but
perennial water body, has been measured at 478.64 feet on August 6, 1992 at SW-4, a
rebar section driven into muck at its eastern end.The pond is recharged by precipitation
and by shallow ground-water flowing from the west.
The second area consists of thin deposits of muck and peat along the channel of the
unnamed tributary to the Souhegan that drains the area SW of the welifield. The
fine-grained materials of partially-decomposed vegetation, generally less than a foot
thick, overlie yellow-brown, fine to coarse sand and gravel. During the months of
spring and early summer, this area is frequently covered with standing water due to the
high water table and poor drainage.
The third area of swamp deposits lies immediately east of station GW-4, south of the
Everett sand and gravel pit on Route 31. This wetland of poorly-drained soils is
recharged by surface and ground water flowing northeast until it reaches the
southern-most kame terrace, which has created a bamer to flow. The ponded water is
then forced to slowly drain eastward into the Souhegan River.
The fourth area lies at an elevation of about 650 feet on the large kame delta located
about 2,700 feet west of the Abbott well. Like areas I and 3, it is saturated throughout
the year. Because it is on private land, the writer was unable to gather more information
about this swamp.
Many other areas of lesser size exist in low-lying depressions in the Souhegan River
valley and adjacent till/bedrock highlands to the east and west.
8.2.2.3 Soils
Soil series, complexes and groups have been mapped in the Wilton area by the U. S.
-------
8-5
Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with the New
Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station. The results were published in 1985 in the
“Soil Survey of Hilisborough County, New Hampshire, Western Part” which contains
soil descriptions, tables of properties, a glossary, and soil maps at a scale of 1:20,000.
This survey publication contains significant detail that is beyond the scope of this
report, and should be consulted by those who desire more information about specific
soils than is given here.
Approximately 21 separate soil types or series have been mapped in the Wilton
weitfield recharge area. These soils have evolved either directly from surficial
weathering of parent bedrock and glacial deposits, or as a result of post-glacial
reworking, erosion or transport processes. They range from humic and organic-rich
swamp soils in poorly-drained lowlands to sandy, gravelly and bouldery soils from
glacial outwash, ice-contact and till materials. Soil thickness ranges from less than one
inch to more than six feet over the area.
Soil types in the vicinity of the wellfield recharge area are shown in Figure 8-6, which is
a photocopy of a portion of Map 27 in the soil survey report. The soil numbers and
series names on the figure are as follows:
15- Searsport muck
22- Colton loamy sand
36- Adams loamy sand
76- Marlow loam
77- Marlow stony loam
79- Peru stony loam
104 - Podunk fine sandy loam
105- Rumney loam
142 - Monadnock fine sandy loam
143 - Monadnock stony fine sandy loam
160 - Tunbridge-Lyman-Monadnock complex, stony
161 - Lyman-Tunbridge-Rock outcrop complex
197 - Borohemists, ponded
214 - Naumburg fine sandy loam
247 - Lyme stony loam
549 - Peacham stony muck
558 - Skerry fine sandy loam
-------
8-6
559 - Skerry stony fine sandy loam
613- Croghan loamy fine sand
646 - Pillsbury loam
647 - Pillsbury stony loam
w - water
The soil map also classifies soils according to percentages of slope, which are
identified by letters following the numbers above:
A -0 to 3 percent
B -3 to 6 percent
C -8 to 15 percent
0 - 15 to 35 percent
E - 15 to 50 percent
These soils have been categorized (USDA-SCS, 1985, p. 141) according to parental
material, such as till, stratified drift, alluvium, and swamp deposits. In western
Hillsborough County, the breakdown of soil series and equivalent source materials is
as follows:
Till Kames. Eskers Alluvium Swamp
Lyman Adams Podunk Borohemists
Lyme Colton Rumney
Marlow Croghan
Monadnock Naumburg
Peacham Searsport
Peru
Pillsbury
Tunbridge
Most of the Wilton wellfield’s highly transmissive aquifer materials are overlain by
Colton and Adams loamy sands, mapped as numbers 22 and 36 on Figure 8-6. The
“Soil Survey of Hillsborough County, Western Paft’ on pagel2 describes Colton sand
as “nearly level and excessively drained. It is on terraces and outwash plains. Areas of
the soil are irregular in shape, and range from 5 to 150 acres...lncluded with this soil in
mapping are small areas of Croghan soils in slight depressions and scattered small
-------
I 3/4 /2 1/4 0 MILE
I -i I
0.5 0 I KILOMETER
Scaie 1:20.000
Figure 8-6. Distribution of Soil Types in the Vicinity of the Wilton, N. H. WeUfield
See Section 8.2.2.3 in Text for Key to Numbers Shown.
Source: Map 27, USDA-SCS (1985)
-------
8-7
areas of Adams soils. Also included are a few areas where stones 1 to 1 1/2 feet in
diameter and 5 to 30 feet apart are on the surface... Permeability of this Colton soil is
rapid or very rapid in the surface layer and very rapid in the substratum. The available
water capacity is very low. Depth to bedrock is more than 60 inches. Depth to the
seasonal high water table is more than 6 feet. Potential frost action is low... If the soil is
used as sites for septic tank absorption fields and sewage lagoons, the ground water
can be contaminated because of permeability and the poor filtering action in the
substratum.”
8.3 Hydrology
8.3.1 Recharge
Recharge to the stratified drift aquifer of the Wilton wellfield occurs primarily through
three sources: precipitation from rain and snow; infiltration from surface water; and
inflow from surrounding till and bedrock. Apart from several residences in the
Souhegan River valley, there are no known sources of significant recharge from
waste-water disposal sites in the vicinity of the wellfield.
Average annual precipitation based on long-term records kept at Milford, New
Hamphire is 44 inches/year (Harte and Mack, 1992). As a result of numerical modeling
in the Souhegan River valley just east of the study area, Harte and Mack have
estimated that ground-water recharge from direct infiltration of precipitation is 13.1
inches/year (ibid., p. 26). This recharge reaches the aquifer as inflow from till-covered
uplands and from vertical infiltration from overlying unsaturated deposits. Most
recharge tends to occur from mid-October through April, when plant activity and
evaporation rates are substantially lower than during the growing season.
8.3.2 Evapo-Transpiration
Water loss from evaporation to the atmosphere or transpiration by plants is called
evapo-transpiration or ET. In the Souhegan River valley (as in much of New England),
ET occurs mostly during the growing season of May through October. During this
period, water levels in the subsurface generally decline as less water is received
through infiltration than is discharged in the root zone, or lost through capillary action
where the water table is near the ground surface. Declining water levels in streams,
-------
8-8
ponds and wetlands also tend to occur during this time of year.
Of the 44 inches/year that falls over the area on average, Harte and Mack (1992, p. 26)
estimated that approximately 22 inches/year, or one-half of the recharge, is consumed
by evapo-transpiration. Because most of the preliminary recharge area of the Wilton
wellfield is forested, ET losses are likely to be more uniform over the area than would
be the case where large open fields or paved areas exist.
8.3.3 Streams and Rivers
Principal streams and rivers draining the Wilton welifield aquifer and surrounding
highlands are the Souhegan River, Gambol (or Blood) Brook, and the unnamed
tributary described earlier in STEP 3. When not at flood stage, the first two rivers are
characterized as having a pool and riffle channel morphology. Both streambeds are
rocky, and filled with rounded or sub-rounded cobbles and boulders up to ten feet in
diameter. Channel widths range from approximately 10 to 80 feet for the Souhegan
and from less than 10 to 50 feet for Gambol Brook. The width of the unnamed stream is
generally less than 10 feet, and 5 feet or less in most areas. Except during flood events
caused by spring melt-water runoff or high rainfall, stream and river depths are usually
less than 2 feet. Locally, isolated pools may exceed that depth.
The gradients of river and stream channels closely correspond to surrounding hydraulic
gradients of the water table. From an altitude of 500 to 459 feet over a linear reach of
4,300 feet, the gradient of the Souhegan River on August 6, 1992 was 0.0095. Over the
same altitude range and a reach of 3,400 feet, Gambol Brook’s gradient was slightly
steeper at 0.1206. The gradient of the unnamed stream was approximately 0.0137 from
500 to 459 feet altitude over a linear reach of 3,000 feet.
Locally, there are no gauging stations for the Souhegan River or for Gambol Brook and
no flow data was available for these rivers in the vicinity of Wilton weilfield.
Numerous smaller streams and seeps contribute water to the Wilton wellfield aquifer
part of the year through vertical infiltration. The surface-water altitude of the unnamed
tributary at station GW-5 was 0.42 feet greater than the water table on June 25, 1992.
By July 1 st, the stream no longer flowed, although farther upstream, the channel was
flowing at a sluggish pace. Runoff is heaviest during the spring months. Channels
frequently dry up by mid-summer as water levels decline due to the effects of ET, dry
-------
8-9
periods, and supply well pumping.
8.3.4 Ponds and Wetlands
Bodies of stagnant water in ponds and wetlands have already been described in
Section 8.2.2.2 above (Recent Deposits). Such bodies are small in size, and tend to be
more numerous in till and bedrock uplands adjacent to the Wilton weilfield aquifer. All
support a diverse community of plant and animal wildlife. Because most are
hydraulically connected to the underlying aquifer, water levels in these features tend to
fluctuate in dry periods nearly as much as the water table. For example, the water level
in the pond next to station SW-4 fell 1.03 feet from July 1 to August 6, 1992; whereas
ground-water at nearby station GW-5 fell 1.96 feet from June 25 to August 6, 1992, a
slightly longer period.
8.4 Hydrogeology
The conceptual model of hydrogeology integrates geological and hydrological
information to describe ground-water occurrence and movement in the Wilton wellfield
recharge area. It describes the hydraulic and storage properties of geologic materials,
and the boundary conditions that govern ground-water movement under both pumping
and non-pumping conditions. In some cases, the conceptual hydrogeological model for
wellhead protection should also describe surface-water and ground-water quality,
particularly when natural or human sources of contamination exist.
8.4.1 Aquifer Properties
Aquifer properties that help define the movement of ground water in the subsurface
toward pumping wells are transmissivity, hydraulic conductivity, saturated thickness
and specific yield. Information about these factors in Wilton is available from several
sources, chiefly reports prepared by the U. S. Geological Survey and the D. L. Maher
Company.
Heath (1987) has defined transmissivity as “the rate at which water of the prevailing
kinematic viscosity is transmitted through a unit width of an aquifer under a unit
hydraulic gradient.” It is also the product of hydraulic conductivity (defined below) and
-------
8-10
saturated thickness, which is the vertical distance from the water table to an underlying
boundary, such as the bedrock surface.
Unfortunately, no single reference provides a map of transmissivity for the entire
recharge area. However, a map of estimated transmissivities of unconsolidated
deposits in the vicinity of the weilfield may be found on Plate 2 of the U.S.G.S. Water
Resources Investigations Report 86-4358. A photocopy of a portion of this plate is
shown on Figure 8-5. Transmissivities range from less than 2,000 to greater than 8,000
feet squared per day, with the darkest shading representing the higher value. The area
of highest transmissivities is shaped roughly like a triangle and is centered west of the
Route 31 bridge over Gambol Brook. Its extent is severely limited by areas of till,
bedrock and lake-bottom deposits to the north, east and west. To the south (in the
upstream direction), transmissivity values are estimated to gradually decrease to 2,000
or less feet squared per day. The map also shows contours of saturated thickness of
the unconsolidated deposits based on well logs and seismic refraction surveys. The
maximum thickness is approximately 100 feet west of Route 31 and south of Gambol
Brook.
The ability of rock to transmit water is measured in terms of hydraulic conductivity (K).
Heath (1987) has defined it as “the volume of water at the existing kinematic viscosity
that will move in unit time under a unit hydraulic gradient through a unit area measured
at right angles to the direction of flow.” It is expressed in units of velocity, such as feet
per day. Because hydraulic conductivity depends largely on the arrangement and size
of pores and fractures in aquifer materials, as well as water density, viscosity and the
gravitational field, it can vary over 12 orders of magnitude in the world’s aquifers (from
0.0000001 to 10,000 feet per day.
With the exception of hydraulic conductivity estimates from aquifer testing of the supply
wells, Which were calculated by dividing transmissivity by saturated thickness, there
are no known sources of such information from previous investigations in the Wilton
wellfield recharge area. Harte and Mack (1992), in their investigation of the Mifford
aquifer, report horizontal hydraulic conductivities in stratified-drift deposits ranging from
3 to 1,240 ft/day and vertical K values from 0.15 to 2.5 ft/day in the Keyes welifield
area. Most horizontal K values are less than 500 ft/day. In till and lake bottom deposits
which lie adjacent or under coarser aquifer materials, K values are usually less than 10
ft/day.
The specific yield (Sy) of aquifer materials indicates how much water is stored in voids
-------
8-Il
and how much can be released by gravity. Along with the hydraulic conductivity and
hydraulic gradient, it also affects ground-water velocity, and indicates how much water
is available to pumping wells. Heath (1987) defines this property as “the ratio of the
volume of water that will drain under the influence of gravity to the volume of saturated
rock.” The typical range of specific yield in unconfined aquifers made up of granular
materials is 0.1 to 0.3. For confined aquifers, the term ‘storage coefficient’ is used to
describe “the volume of water released from storage in a unit prism of an aquifer when
the head is lowered a unit distance” (ibid.).
Previous investigations by the U. S. Geological Survey in Milford, N. H. and by the D. L.
Maher Company in Wilton provide some specific yield estimates based on aquifer-test
analyses. Harte and Mack (1992) of the USGS determined Sy data in the Milford
aquifer ranging from 0.0002 to 0.12, largely reflective of semi-confined and confined
conditions. In some cases, the low estimates may be attributed to partial-penetration
effects, water expansion, aquifer compression and by aquifer tests of short duration.
Estimated values of transmissivity, hydraulic conductivity and specific yield derived
from aquifer test analyses (D.L. Maher Co., 1983 -87) of the Abbott and Everett supply
wells are listed below.
____ ____________ h Iftl K IftIdl Sv Pwnp Test Method
— 1111-7183 1
0.14 11/1-7183 2
— 1111-7183 3
— 3111-13185 1
0155 3111-13185 2
! I11 1 %
015
Everett
89,881
12,016
50
240
0.01
9172- 187
2
1A-85
86,194
11,523
50
0.01
9 122-25187
1
7A-85
77.624
10.377
50
Z)7
0.007
9122-25187
1
IA-85
90,194
12,0
50
241
008
9122-25 187
4
7A.85
71 .
9.575
50
191
0.08
9122-25187
4
Average
83,104
11,110
50
222
0.08
where T transrnissivity
b saturated thickness
K = horizontal hydraulic conductivity
Sy = specific yield
Method =1: Cooper-Jacob (1946) Time-Drawdown analysis
2. Cooper-Jacob (1946) Distance-Drawdown analysis
3 Cooper-JaCob (1946) Recovery analysis
4 Neuman (1975) analysis
The transmissivity estimates above are those measured after about 90 minutes of
pumping, when wellbore storage effects become negligible in both wells. T values tend
Well
Abbott
Abbott
Abbott
Abbott
Abbott
Abbott
Average
T ( aodlft) T ( It2Id )
34,067 4,554
83, 4,
38,544 5,1
37,944 5,073
37,434 5,004
35.642 4.755
36,221 4,842
60
60
90
61
61
61
60.5
76
72
86
83
82
78
80
-------
8-12
to decrease, however, in the Everett well after about 760 minutes (12.7 hours) of
pumping due to the existence of barrier boundaries consisting of fine-grained materials
located approximately 477 feet from the supply well (D. L. Maher Co., July 1987, p.6).
See the driller’s logs for test wells 6A-85, 4-87 and 5-87 in Appendix A for a description
of these sediments southeast and southwest of the Everett well. Because both supply
wells generally pump for periods less than 113 of a day, the transmissivities based on
mid-time drawdown data (i.e., after 90 minutes of pumping) are appropriate to use for
analytical capture-zone determinations for WHPA delineation purposes.
On average, aquifer transmissivities at the Everett supply well are about 2.3 times
greater, saturated thicknesses (b) are about 10 feet less, and K values are about 2.8
times greater than those at the Abbott supply well. Although results of aquifer testing at
both wells were somewhat compromised by the effects of heavy rainfall and/or lack of
drawdown stabilization, these properties are probably generally representative of
aquifer conditions.
8.4.2 Prevailing Boundaries
Accurate delineation of wellhead protection areas requires a clear understanding of
aquifer boundary conditions that affect both the regional and local ground-water flow
systems surrounding a pumping well or welifield. If the information and conditions used
during model conceptualization and calibration are poorly defined, then model
predictions will likely be erroneous and unrealistic. Boundary types in the Wilton
welifield recharge area are typical to any three-dimensional body of porous media
(particles of clay, silt, sand and gravel) that is saturated with flowing water.
The principal boundary types in the Wilton aquifer are the water-table or free-surface
boundary, which includes wetlands and surface-water bodies that are hydraulically
connected to saturated materials under atmospheric pressure; lateral no-flow
boundaries such as ground-water divides and streamlines; and the relatively
impermeable bedrock boundary underlying unconsolidated aquifer materials.
8.4.2.1 Water-Table Boundary
STEP 7 described mapping of water-table altitudes as a key and highly important
activity to support WHPA delineation. The water table (or free-surface boundary) is the
-------
8-13
boundary surface between the atmosphere and saturated earth materials. Unlike other
boundary types, its position is not fixed, but rises and falls over time in response to
recharge from precipitation and wastewater, streambed infiltration, well discharge,
evaporation and transpiration from plants.
The altitudes of the water table were measured at 36 measurement stations on August
4 and 6, 1992. Other periodic measurements were obtained on other dates and are
given in Appendix A. As described in STEP 7 of this report, water-table and
surface-water altitudes were contoured and digitized to produce the GIS plot shown on
Figure 10-1. These data, in combination with contours made earlier by the U. S.
Geological Survey, show that ground water flows toward the Souhegan River from
upland areas east and west of the welifield, as well as from the southwest along the
valley axis. Although the water table exists in areas characterized as bedrock and till,
its altitude was estimated or measured only in stratified-drift deposits that fill the
Souhegan River and Gambol Brook valleys. There are few wells in the upland areas in
Wilton that could be used for altitude measurement because their water levels tend to
be affected by pumping for domestic uses.
Based on studies conducted in other areas of New England, the configuration of the
water table generally corresponds to the topography of the land surface, rivers and
lakes. Harte and Mack (1992, pp. 14-15) state that “flow is from areas of high
water-table altitude to areas of low water-table altitude. The flow pattern has a regional
component from the valley sides to the Souhegan River and a secondary component in
the downstream direction, ... along the Souhegan River... Ground-water level contours
coincide with surface-water elevations along the Souhegan River and its major
tributaries and are consistent with seepage losses and gains along stream reaches.”
As shown in Figure 10-1, the horizontal direction of ground-water flow to the Abbott and
Everett supply wells is generally from the west and southwest. The non-pumping
hydraulic gradient (i) of the water table at the Abbott well, based on August, 1992
measurements, was calculated as I = (464 -460)1350 = 0.0114, where the numerator is
the contoured head difference in feet and the denominator is the horizontal distance in
feet between the contours. The direction of flow at the supply well is 77 degrees true.
The hydraulic gradient at the Everett well was calculated as i = (470-468)/240 = 0.0083
using the same procedure. The direction of ground-water flow at the well on August 6,
1992 was 54 degrees true.
The contours of ground-water altitude show that the Everett well lies upgradient from
-------
8-14
the Abbott well, approximately 722 feet distant. Water that is not captured by the
Everett well may eventually be intercepted by the pumping Abbott well, or if not, will
discharge into the Souhegan River upstream of its confluence with Gambol Brook.
Based on the flow gradients and directions suggested by water-table mapping, it is
likely that the Everett well WHPA lies wholly within that of the Abbott well.
Comparison of wellfield hydraulic gradients from recent and USGS water-table
mapping in Wilton indicates that use of the latter tends to over-estimate gradients at the
supply wells. For example, August 6, 1992 hydraulic gradients at the Abbott and
Everett supply wells were 0.0114 and 0.0083, respectively. However, gradients
calculated from the 480 and 460-foot contours on Plate 1 of USGS WRIR 86-4358 are
0.016 and 0.02, respectively (see figure 10-lA). The large difference at the Everett well
is due to an abrupt increase in gradient just upgradient of the well, which is located
close to a kame deposit. A 20-foot interval is too coarse in this area to characterize this
change as well as a one-foot interval. In this locality, use of the higher gradients from
the 20-foot contours in capture-zone modeling with the uniform flow equation would
tend to underestimate the size of the capture zone.
Water-table fluctuations are caused by seasonal variations in aquifer recharge and
discharge. No long term record of such changes exists in the Wilton wellfield area;
however, Harte and Mack (1992) report that USGS monitoring well MOW-36 located
southwest of the Savage well in neighboring Milford had a maximum observed
fluctuation of 6 feet in 1978. The record of observations at this well began in 1962. In
general, water levels fluctuate about 3.5 to 4 feet during most years of record. The
highest water levels tend to occur during March and April and the lowest during
late-summer or fall.
Available observations made during the summer and fall of 1992 show that while
ground-water altitudes declined steadily from May through October, surface-water
altitudes changed relatively little between storm events over the same period. For
example, water levels at observation well 6-87, located about 770 feet southwest of the
Everett well in kame sands, steadily declined 2.28 feet from May 20th to October 9th.
However, the water level of Gambol Brook at station SW-I, located at the Route 31
bridge, varied only 0.37 feet from July 1St to October 9th. Water levels of the Souhegan
River showed even less change at SW-5 next to the Abbott well: only 0.11 feet from
August 4th to October 9th. In general, the range of ground-water fluctuations tends to
increase with distance from the Souhegan River and its major tributaries.
-------
8-15
8.4.2.2 Lateral Boundaries
Lateral boundaries are the second category of boundary conditions that help to define
the overall shape and extent of the Wilton weilfield WHPA. There are three types of
lateral boundaries: no-flow, streamline and flux. No-flow boundaries consist of
ground-water divides that delineate watershed, basin and sub-basin areas in glaciated
uplands. They exist in locations where horizontal ground-water flow directions are
either parallel or divergent with respect to an axis, which usually falls along the crest of
mountains or hills.
In New England, ground-water and surface-water boundaries are assumed to coincide,
unless proven otherwise by detailed studies. This relationship may not strictly apply in
many coastal areas, where hydraulic gradients are affected by tides and subdued
topography. Ground-water divides are usually based on land topography and
potentiometric maps, where available. Most of the Wilton wellfield WHPA boundary
coincides with the watershed boundary of the unnamed tributary that flows toward the
Souhegan River from the southwest. Its size is approximately 0.5 square mile. It is
shown on the GIS plot (Figure 10-1) that accompanies this report.
Lateral no-flow boundaries are also assumed to exist in areas where bedrock is
exposed on the land surface. For example, Spaulding Quartz Diorite (see Section
8.2.1 .1) outcrops along the east bank of the Souhegan River about 400 feet NE and
450 feet SE of the Abbott well. It is also exposed east of the two low kame terrace hills
that lie 1,000 feet south of the Everett well. These exposures along the Souhegan River
help to define the eastern extent of stratified-drift deposits in the vicinity of the wellfield.
Although this bedrock is fractured, ground-water flow and storage is assumed to be
negligible compared to adjacent unconsolidated deposits.
Boundary conditions consisting of areas of fine-grained till or lake bottom deposits
and/or decreasing saturated thickness of the aquifer with distance affect drawdown
patterns at both supply wells. These are manifested as a steepening of the
time-drawdown curve during aquifer testing. For example, Figure 6-6 in STEP 6 is a
photocopy of D. L. Maher Company’s semi-logarithmic time-drawdown graph for
observation well 1A-85, 72 feet from the Everett well, which was pumped for 48 hours
in September, 1987. Two ‘barrier’ boundaries appear on the graph after 90 and 760
minutes of pumping. Transmissivities calculated from the drawdown slope decrease
from 86,194 to 46,188 gallons per day per foot squared (11,523 to 6,174 feet squared
per day), a reduction of 46 %. These boundaries may correspond to areas in the
-------
8-16
aquifer where fine-grained, less permeable deposits exist. Evidence for these
conditions given in driller’s logs for test wells 6A-85 and 5-87, about 500 feet SE and
SW of the Everett well, show that the aquifer is predominantly silt and clay at these
locations:
Test Well 6A-85 Description of Sediments
Depth (ft) Materials
0-2 Top Soil
2 - 16 Brown fine, coarse sand and broken gravel mixed with silt
16 -22 Brown and gray silt, some broken gravel and sand
22 -29 Gray silt, some sand and gravel
29-65 Gray clay and silt
65 Not refusal
Test Well 5-87 Description of Sediments
Depth (ft) Materials
0-24 Top soil with brown medium gravel
24-36 Brown silt
36-39 Medium red gravel
39-62 Brown silt
62 -71 Brown silt, clay and broken sharp gravel
Due to a lack of sufficient borings or geophysical surveys in the vicinity of these wells,
the extent of these low-permeable sediments is unknown.
Lateral streamline boundaries occur near pumping wells and define the zone of capture
(ZOC) both downgradient and upgradient from the well. They are usually extended to
the ground-water divide. Except when estimated by steady-state modeling, which
assumes fixed parameters of discharge, recharge and aquifer properties, their location
actually varies over time and space in response to hydraulic pressure changes in the
aquifer, or other conditions that affect ground-water movement around and upgradient
of the well. These transient boundaries continue to expand while the well pump is on
until equilibrium is attained. When the pump is shut off, the boundaries slowly collapse
and dissipate. Because such boundaries around any well are affected by local transient
variations in well discharge, aquifer recharge and transmissivity, the ZOC is usually
based on conservative estimates of these factors to add extra protection where
uncertainty exists.
-------
8-17
8.4.2.3 Bedrock No-Flow Boundary
The underlying boundary of the unconfined, unconsolidated deposits in the Wilton
welifield recharge area is the surface of crystalline and metamorphic bedrock.
According to driller’s logs made in 1983 and 1985, this surface lies approximately 65.5
feet below the Abbott well and 55 feet below the Everett well. As described in
preceding sections, bedrock is highly variable in altitude and configuration, ranging
from about 1,000 feet to 458 feet above sea level in the recharge area. Although the
bedrock aquifer is transmissive through fractures and pores, and presumably
contributes some flow upward into the overburden aquifer, the amount of this flow is
probably small when compared with that in the sand and gravel aquifer. The yields of
supply wells drilled in bedrock in Wilton are usually less than 10 gallons per minute.
Harte and Mack, in their construction of the 3-D MODFLOW transport model of the
Milford aquifer, assumed the underlying bedrock to be a no-flow boundary in their
simulations. Until additional detailed information becomes available to confidently
support estimates of ground-water influx from bedrock at the wellfield, the boundary is
assumed to be an impermeable, no-flow boundary in this conceptual model.
8.4.3 Induced Infiltration
Surface water that is drawn into a pumping well next to or near a river, stream, pond or
lake is known as induced infiltration. This phenomenon may be considered a type of
flux boundary, in which ground-water is recharged through a streambed as a result of
river stage and hydrualic-gradient reversal. Because the Abbott well is located only 91
feet from the Souhegan River, studies to determine the well’s susceptibility to induced
infiltration and water-borne pathogens such as Giardia lamblia, Cnmtospiridium ,
coliform and enteric viruses were conducted last summer. Drinking water supplies that
have been determined to be under the influence of surface water (i.e., there is either
documented evidence or a high risk of pathogens from surface water entering the well
screen) must comply with filtration procedures outlined by the Safe Drinking Water Act.
An east-west vertical cross-section through the Abbott well and the Souhegan River is
shown on Figure 8-7. In this sketch, the vertical scale is equal to the horizontal scale.
During periods of non-pumping, ground water moves from the west and southwest
toward the well and the streambed. When the pump is turned on for a sufficient time,
the hydraulic gradient between the river and the well is reversed, allowing some river
water to move toward and reach the well screen. The linear flowpath of this water
-------
4’.ID
4’ao
:sfo
go6s.
t I
,4e O7r
WELL
4 Jj
it
t 111111
. ..
. L:
::htg
;;
4
J ;
I$-.i.’— ..4
j
IilU1IIIllllh1IUllUBlltUIll1tHIHhIU $11fl1ffl.llllBllllhIllll
- /f e a it
144 1-4 I U ê• 1441 11-44-Il 14-14 II UI SV1.-4I
I +4-$+ ++ $I44
:
11! iii
t t1 ’ ! Li !I
p.’
‘t
lWW IUf}HHHfffiH
j;
II.IU1 IILL IT1 IL
I I I I tllh4IlI Iftf{H+f+Hff +f+H1
iiimiim iimiiminntiittmi
.4
. . .. ! : i : . ii 11 Jll llff MllMMllh1 llllflI
I I I fI 1I I lI1 t I 1’ 1
. . .. . i;1 1;i :: : ! t!1 : • • !
>1 i tt! I I ItIli2t U I ii’! 1111 ttJ
. I [ : )
I • ‘ J ! ‘‘ HO I ‘:‘ ‘ II I; Ilfl 4j! ; i i M k
. . I I I I t I j Ii Ii 11 Li I I I t ‘ L I ji II I thud ii .
I :. .. ‘ L I i..i.:I. : h’ I I U I I I i LIii i [ I
I I LI t III I’ II’Id lJ [ i1i1t .iI11i p
. I • •• • : i: 11: j. I •II.fI. :1; I 1 I1IIHII t i!
1 I l ;I i: l,,1 £j .!
JI I I 1 t t.J .i.tLl I t
Figure 8-7 East-West Hydrogeologic Cross-Section Through the Abbott ‘ 1 141 I I tIJ I’
Municipal Supply Well and the Souhegan River I I ff1 I
I :. • . fl it. . • •I j . . .
Vertical Scale = Horizontal Scale I I II i 11 1
I I I IlIt If jl iI ! it t ij r I J
-------
8-18
ranges from approximately 97 to 165 feet, as the channel is 70 feet wide at this
location. The actual flowpath, which is non-linear in the cone of depression, is probably
longer. Therefore, the filtration capacity of the sand and gravel aquifer to attenuate
water-borne pathogens is fairly substantial.
Laboratory analysis performed on water samples taken from the well detected no
water-borne pathogens on August 12, 1991. Apart from fecal and total coliform
bacteria, no Giardia lamblia, Cryptospiridium or enteric viruses were found in either
well or river water. The results of microbiological sampling and microparticulate
analysis may be found in Appendix B of this report.
Estimation of the Abbott well’s potential to induce surface water was made on the basis
of volumetric temperature differences over time for surface and ground water. However,
the well occasionally turned off because the storage tank and water system could not
handle the surplus water. Two water hydrants were opened near the Everett well to
reduce the surplus.
Measurements were made at 10-minute intervals using dataloggers and vibrating-wire
transducers set in observation well 1 IA-83 at 19.4 feet depth and in a stilling well in the
Souhegan River for 3.71 days (89 hours) from 1:00 pm on August 9 to 6:00 am on
August 13, 1991. Ambient ground-water temperature was measured at a constant 47°F
(8.3°C) in observation well 284 ‘F’, located 284 feet north of the supply well. The
effectiveness of the volumetric mixing analysis relies on large temperature contrasts
(i.e., greater than 5°C) between surface water and ground water. These contrasts are
usually largest during the summer months, when the Souhegan’s average stream
temperature is approximately 20°F (11.1 °C) higher than ambient ground-water
temperatures.
The temperature of pumped ground water at the Abbott well increased after the pump
was turned on and gradually returned to ambient levels when the pump is shut off. The
maximum observed drawdown in observation well 20C-83 (2 feet from the supply well)
was 16.24 feet prior to shut off at 8:37 pm on August 12th. A static level of 7.49 feet
below the top of well casing was measured ten minutes before the Abbott well was
turned on at 3:00 pm on August 9th. Temperatures in I IA-83 ranged from 47.1 °F
(background level) to 51.7°F as the pump operated over several cycles during the
study.
Surface-water temperatures rose and fell in a diurnal pattern from 64.0 °F to
-------
ABBOTT WELL — SWIOW TEMP. ( F) AND IND. INF. (%) — AUGUST 9-13, 1991
o
E 0.,,,,. ,,
0
R 6C
E
E
$ • ________ _________ __________________
F
• GWTEMP
I
0 8W TEMP
A %IND INF.
N 3&
0
i 2C— A-A-A AAAAAAAA
N
AAA
F 4
ic A A A
A A
A A
c —& ,—aI—&I—A—AIIIlIII ———4———IIIIIII_1—__+_$4IIIIiIIIIItIIIIII 4A4
1315171921231 3 5 7 9111315171921231 3 5 7 9111315171921231 3 5 7 9111315171921231 3 5 8
81-HOURLY OBSERVATIONS
Figure 8-8. Graph of Water Temperature in the Abbott Supply Well, the
Souhegan River, and the Aquifer During August 9 -13, 1991.
-------
8-19
739°F. The minimum river temperature occurred about 8:00 am and the maximum
around 7:00 pm. Apart from changes in air temperature over the river, afternoon water
temperatures were elevated by solar radiation falling on the dark streambed of
algae-covered cobbles and boulders, which retained some heat into the evening hours.
Because the channel next to the Abbott well was shallow (<2 feet) and well-mixed,
there was no detectable variation in the river’s temperature with depth at the
measurement site. Approximately two inches of rain fell over the weekend beginning at
3:40 pm August 9th.
The estimated rates of induced infiltration in percent of well pumpage were calculated
using the following equation:
(T - T ) I (Ta. - T ) x 100 = Induced Infiltration (%)
where T = temperature
GWP = pumped ground water at the wellhead or adjacent observation well
GWA = ambient ground water
SW = harmonic mean of surface water temperatures
A graph of temperature measurements and infiltration rates over time is shown in
Figure 8-8. The temperature of ground water at the supply well increased as much as
4.7° F during pumping intervals as warmer river water was drawn into the well screen.
In addition, the harmonic mean of river water temperatures increased at a rate of 1.6°F
per day. According to the data, the maximum induced infiltration over the period was
24.6 %. Because of the uncertainties regarding volumetric mixing in an anisotropic
aquifer, this estimate should be considered approximate. Numerical modeling of the
distribution of heat transfer (and other physical parameters) over a longer period of time
in more observation wells would increase the accuracy of the estimate.
An effort was made by the Wilton Water Works to pump the Abbott well as long as
possible after August 9th to ensure that the well’s full potential to induce river water
was realized. However, the pump apparently turned off on several occasions because
the water distribution system could not handle the surplus water. Later, two water
hydrants were opened near the Everett well pumphouse to ‘bleed off’ the excess supply
and to increase the period of pumping. According to data obtained with insitu
transducers, the Abbott well pumped water over the following intervals:
August 9: 3:00 to 4:57 pm and 7:32 to 7:39 pm
-------
8-20
August 10: 6:32 am to August 11: 1:57 am
August 11: 1:51 pm to August 12: 2:02 pm
August 12: 2:13 pm to 8:37 pm
While temporal temperature analysis is a simple procedure, the method depends on
precise field measurements and several factors that govern heat flow through the
aquifer. These factors are thermal diffusivity, viscosity, heat capacity, thermal
conductivity, dry-bulk density and wet-bulk density. An excellent discussion of these
factors and the use of temperature profiles to determine vertical hydraulic conductivity
may be found in Lapham, Wayne W., 1989, Use of Temperature Profiles Beneath
Streams to Determine Rates of Vertical Ground-Water Flow and Vertical Hydraulic
Conductivity: U. S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2337, 35 p.
Additional Reference Cited:
Heath, Ralph, 1987, Basic ground-water hydrology: U. S. Geological Survey Water
Supply Paper 2220, 84 p.
-------
9-1
STEP 9: SELECT THE CRITERIA, CRITERIA THRESHOLDS AND METHODS OF
WELLHEAD PROTECTION AREA DEUNEATION
9.1 Introduction
Section 1428(e) of the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1986, which
established the federal Wellhead Protection Program, refers to hydrogeological ‘factors’
or criteria used for delineation:
“Such guidance may reflect such factors as the radius of influence around a well or
wellfield, the depth of drawdown of the water table by such well or weilfield at any given
point, the time or rate of travel of various contaminants in various hydrologic
conditions, distance from the well or welifield, or other factors affecting the likelihood of
contaminants reaching the well or wellfield.”
These criteria support a number of possible methods of delineation, ranging from
circles to analytical methods to complex numerical flow models. The choice of criteria,
thresholds and methods used at any weilfield depends on: 1) data quality and
availability; 2) cost; 3) hydrogeological expertise; 4) aquifer vulnerability to
contamination; 5) local institutional infrastructure; and 6) state Wellhead Protection
Program requirements.
9.2 Criteria
Criteria are defined as conceptual standards on which WHPA delineation is based.
During the autumn, winter and spring of 1986-87, a Technical Committee on
Hydrogeological Aspects of the SDWA Amendments met in Bethesda, Maryland,
overseen by the EPA’s Office of Ground-Water Protection, and wrote a guidance
document entitled “Guidelines for Delineation of Wellhead Protection Areas,” published
by the EPA in June, 1987. The guidelines describe five criteria applicable for state
programs: distance, drawdown, time-of-travel, flow boundaries, and assimilative
capacity.
-------
9-2
9.3 Criteria Thresholds
Criteria thresholds are quantitative limits that define where or when a given criterion will
no longer provide the desired degree of protection. Minimum thresholds for delineation
are usually specified in state Welihead Protection Programs. Local municipalities and
well owners may adopt more stringent criteria thresholds to protect ground-water
resources. For example, most states require owners or operators to establish a specific
‘setback radius’ around a supply well or welifield to restrict or prohibit sources of
water-borne pathogens that may reach the well, such as residential septic systems,
sewage lines or PO1Ws. The threshold radius may be based on well discharge, aquifer
type, population served or other factors. The criterion is usually distance in feet. In New
Hampshire, the criteria threshold for each sanitary protective area is 400 feet radius for
community public supply wells such as the Abbott and Everett wells, that pump more
than 100 gallons per minute.
9.4 Methods of Delineation
The EPA Technical Commitee also identified six primary delineation methods used for
WHPA delineation. These are commonly used techniques that translate criteria and
associated thresholds into mapped WHPA boundaries based on various rationales and
data bases. The EPA Guidelines list the methods as:
1. Arbitrary Fixed Radii
2. Calculated Fixed Radii
3. Simplified Variable Shapes
4. Analytical Methods
5. Hydrogeological Mapping
6. Numerical Flow/Transport Models
The EPA Guidelines define and describe the methods and their respective advantages
and disadvantages, and should be consulted by those who need additional information.
A detailed discussion is beyond the scope of this report. In many cases, such as this
study of the Wilton wellfield, WHPAS may be mapped by combining two or more
methods to improve accuracy and efficiency.
-------
9-3
9.5 Phase I Delineation Requirements of the New Hampshire Wellhead Protection
Program
The New Hampshire Wellhead Protection Program (NHWPP) was approved by the
EPA on September 13, 1990. It is administered by the N. H. Department of
Environmental Services. The NHWPP specifies the criteria, thresholds and methods for
delineating initial Phase I WHPAs for public supply wells in overburden and bedrock.
Two areas are mapped. The first portion of the WHPA is the circular sanitary protective
area, ranging in radius from 150 feet for wells pumping less than 14,400 gallons per
day (10 gpm) to 400 feet for wells pumping more than 144,000 gallons per day (100
gpm). The state has assigned strict management requirements in this area for well
owner/operators to prevent the infiltration of any contaminants that may affect drinking
water quality in the immediate vicinity of the well.
The second portion of the WHPA consists of lateral and downgradient boundaries
mapped by an analytical method — the uniform flow equation — and the upgradient
boundary mapped as a fixed-radius distance of 4,000 feet from the well or by
ground-water flow divides, whichever are closer. The uniform flow equation requires the
input of three hydraulic parameters: well discharge; aquifer transmissivity; and
hydraulic gradient. Based on the complex potential theorem of fluid hydrodynamics, the
equation provides the x-y coordinates of the streamline no-flow boundary that contains
the region of the aquifer that supplies the pumping well’s recharge. Within the boundary
all flow is towards the well; outside the boundary flow passes the well screen. The
results are based on assumptions of steady-state, homogeneous and isotropic
conditions in a two-dimensional, uniform flow domain. Once calculated, the lateral and
downgradient boundaries are oriented with respect to the direction of ground-water flow
through the well, and then continued upgradient to the fixed-radius or
hydrogeologically-mapped ground-water divide to complete the WHPA.
9.6 Selection of Criteria, Criteria Thresholds and Methods for WHPA Delineation
Based on NHWPP requirements, the available data base, and the conceptual model of
ground-water movement, aquifer properties and boundary conditions, the following
criteria, criteria thresholds and methods are recommended for WHPA delineation at the
Wilton, New Hampshire wellfield:
-------
9-4
Sanitary Protective Area (11.5 acres )
Criteria: distance
Threshold: 400-feet radius (per state water-supply regulations)
Method: arbitrary-fixed radius
Welihead Protection Area
Criteria: flow boundaries
Threshold: none
Methods: uniform flow equation and hydrogeologic mapping
Details regarding specific information for WHPA delineation according to the selected
methods may be found in the next chapter, STEP 10.
-------
10-1
STEP 10: MODEL THE WELLFIELD RECHARGE AREA USING CONSERVATIVE
AND PROTECTIVE INPUT PARAMETERS AND BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
10.1 Introduction
Selecting appropriate criteria, thresholds and methods of WHPA delineation is based
on New Hampshire Wellhead Protection Program requirements, data availability and
cost. The objective of delineation is to accurately simulate and display actual
hydrogeological forces at work in the subsurface, and thereby identify the land area
that must be managed to protect water quality and the health of Wilton’s residents.
Conservative assumptions and judgment are used by hydrogeologists where necessary
to offset the impacts of conceptual uncertainty with respect to aquifer anisotropy and
heterogeneity because it is impossible to perfectly understand everything about these
subsurface conditions.
10.2 Description and Assumptions Regarding Analytical Modeling
In compliance with NHWPP Phase I delineation requirements using the Uniform Flow
Equation Analytical Method of delineation, the lateral and downgradient capture-zone
boundaries of the Abbott and Everett supply wells were modeled using the
semi-analytical GPTRAC module of the EPA ‘WHPA 2.0’ computer software (Blandford
and Huyakom, 1990, version 4/12191). This code can simulate ground-water flow
patterns around a pumping well in an unconfined aquifer experiencing areal recharge.
The model also generates coordinate and pathline files of capture zones in ASCII,
HPGL and ARC/INFO formats. The solution is steady-state and is based on the
following assumptions:
1. Recharge to the aquifer is uniform over the modeled area.
2. Ground-water flow in the aquifer is horizontal.
3. All pumping wells and boundaries are fully penetrating; well discharge is constant.
4. Aquifer properties such as transmissivity, hydraulic gradient and specific yield are
uniform, isotropic and homogeneous over the modeled domain.
-------
10-2
10.3 Data Sources for Input to the ‘WHPA 2.0’ GPTRAC Semi-Analytical Module
for the Abbott Well
Hydrogeological parameters required for capture-zone model input for the Abbott well
were obtained from the following sources:
Peak Daily Discharge (Q): 535 gallons per minute or 102, 987.8 ft/day, based on a
personal communication from Charles 0. McGettigan, Commissioner, Wilton Water
Works, Wilton, NH 03086. This maximum pumping rate was also supported by daily
and monthly fiowmeter records maintained by the department since May 30, 1990.
Transmissivity (T): 36,221 gallons per day per foot or 4,842 ft 2 /day, based on the mean
transmissivity of those reported by the D. L. Maher Company for aquifer tests of
November 1-7, 1983 and March 11-13, 1985. See Section 8.4.1 in STEP 8 for more
information.
Hydraulic Gradient (I): 0.0114 (dimensionless) at the well based on the 464 to 460 feet
contours of hydraulic head measured on August 6, 1992, divided by a horizontal
distance of 350 feet, measured perpendicular to the contours.
Ground-Water Flow Direction at the Welihead : from S77°W to N77°E true, based on the
water-table map of August 6, 1992.
Saturated Thickness (b): 60.5 feet, from Section 8.4.1 in STEP 8. The depth to refusal
at test well I IA-83 was reported by the D. L. Maher Company at 65.5 feet in its report
“8-Inch Pump Test. Wilton, New Hampshire,” dated December 6, 1983. The static water
levels at the pumped well during the aquifer tests of November 1 -7, 1983 and March
11-13, 1985 (4.53 and 5.81 feet below the ground surface, respectively) were
subtracted from 65.5 feet. The resulting rounded b values of 61 and 60 feet were then
averaged to 60.5 feet.
Søecific Yield (Sy): 0.15 (dimensionless), based on the mean value of Sy data from
Section 8.4.1.
Hydraulic Conductivity (K): 80 ft/day, based on mean value of K data from Section
8.4.1.
Ground-Water Recharae (R): 13.1 inches per year or 0. 002989 ft/day, based on a
-------
10-3
value reported by Harte and Mack (1992, p. 26) for the Milford aquifer.
Effective Radius (r): 550 feet at 525 gpm, from page 4 of the D.L. Maher Company
report “Abbott Well Construction and 48 Hour Pumping Test,” dated April 1, 1985.
10.4 Data Sources for Input to the ‘WHPA 2.0’ GPTRAC Semi-Analytical Module
for the Everett Well
Hydrogeological parameters required for capture-zone model input for the Everett well
were obtained from the following sources:
Peak Daily Discharge (Q): 535 gallons per minute or 102,987.8 ft/day, based on a
personal communication from Charles 0. McGettigan, Commissioner, Wilton Water
Works, Wilton, NH 03086. This maximum pumping rate was also supported by daily
and monthly flowmeter records maintained by the department since January, 1989.
Transmissivity (T): 83,104 gallons per day per foot or 11,110 ft 2 /day, based on the mean
transmissivity of those reported by the 0. L. Maher Company for the aquifer test of
September 22-25, 1987. See Section 8.4.1 for more information.
Hydraulic Gradient (i): 0.00833 (dimensionless) at the well based on the 470 to 468
feet contours of hydraulic head measured on August 6, 1992, divided by a horizontal
distance of 240 feet, measured perpendicular to the contours.
Ground-Water Flow Direction at the Wellhead : from S53.5°W to N53.5°E true, based on
the water-table map of August 6, 1992.
Saturated Thickness (b): 50 feet, from Section 8.4.1. The depth to refusal at test well
IA-85 was reported by the D. L. Maher Company at 55 feet in its letter proposal dated
August 8, 1985. The static water level at the pumped well during the aquifer test of
September 22-25, 1987 (4.80 feet below the ground surface) was rounded to 5 feet and
subtracted from 55 feet to obtain the saturated thickness at the beginning of the test.
Specific Yield (Sy): 0.03 (dimensionless), based on the mean value of Sy data in
Section 8.4.1.
Hydraulic Conductivity (K): 222 ft/day, based on the mean value of K data in Section
-------
10-4
8.4.1.
Ground-Water Recharae (R): 13.1 inches per year or 0.002989 ft/day, based on a
value reported by Harte and Mack (1992, p.26) for the Milford aquifer.
Effective Radius (r): 2,000 feet at 425 gpm, from page 20 of the D. L. Maher Company
report “Hydrogeologic Report on the Construction of a 24” X 18” Production Well at the
Everett Site, Wilton, N.H.,” dated October, 1987.
10.5 GPTRAC Semi-Analytical Capture Zone Model Output
The semi-analytical option of the GPTRAC module was run to obtain the lateral and
downgradient boundaries of the capture zones for both supply wells. The period of
simulation was one year. The potential impact of the Souhegan River, a surface-water
flux boundary, was neglected at the Abbott well so that conservative assumptions may
be maintained. Although the GPTRAC module has the capability of simulating barrier or
surface-water boundaries, the model tends to over- or underestimate these capture
zone boundaries because the it assumes full penetration of both the well screen and
river.
The data input and output plots generated by the WHPA 2.0 GPTRAC module may be
found in Appendix C.
10.6 Delineation of WHPA Boundaries Upgradient of the Lateral Capture Zone
Coordinates
After the model was run, the GPTRAC capture zone boundaries were drawn on the
1:2,400-scale base map used for water-table mapping in STEP 7. The lateral
coordinates were carefully located transverse to the direction of ground-water flow at
each well, as measured on August 6, 1992.
The remaining upgradient WHPA boundaries were then traced by hand from each
well’s lateral capture zone coordinates (as streamlines perpendicular to the water-table
altitude contours) until the ground-water divide was reached south and west of the
welifield. Because of the configuration of the flow field with respect to well locations, the
WHPA for the Everett well falls entirely within that of the Abbott well. After the
-------
10-5
boundaries were drawn on the base map, they were digitized at the EPA Region I GIS
facility using ARC/INFO software.
Figure 10-1 is a GIS plot that shows the WHPA boundary for the Wilton welifield at a
scale of 1:4,800. It is superimposed on other coverages (roads, hydrography,
water-table contours and geologic contacts) for reference. According to ARC/INFO
planimetry, the total land area of the WHPA polygon is 0.52 square miles. The
boundary symbology has been coded on the plot to show the data sources on which it
is based.
Figure 10-2 is another GIS plot at the same scale that displays the locations of the 36
water level measurement stations descnbed in STEP 7.
10.7 Future Refinement of the Wilton WHPA
This report supports a WHPA delineation of the Wilton wellfield that meets or exceeds
the Phase I - initial WHPA delineation requirements of the NHWPP. It is recommended
that future refinement of the recharge-area boundary should be based on field
investigations in the following areas:
1. Detailed potentiometric-surface mapping with additional piezometers installed in
those portions of the WHPA not covered by the August 6, 1992 water-table map to
verify the location of the upgradient ground-water divides that are assumed to coincide
with surface-water sub-basin boundaries. This includes the northern, western and
southern segments of the WHPA boundary. The most important (and most vulnerable
to contamination) portion of the boundary is that section extending between the low hill
located I ,085 feet south of the Everett well and the USGS till/bedrock and stratified
drift-contact line, approximately 3,000 feet to the southwest. This boundary is underlain
by highly-permeable, sand and gravel, glacio-fluvial deposits that allow for little or no
attenuation of ground-water contaminants that, once introduced, could move rapidly to
the welifield. Portions of these deposits are currently undergoing commercial
excavation of sand and gravel. As this material is removed, the depth to vulnerable
ground-water resources will be reduced.
2. Water-table mapping of hydraulic heads and surface-water altitudes in the spring
and autumn to help characterize seasonal changes in ground-water flow direction and
aquifer transmissivity.
-------
10-6
3. Three-dimensional modeling of the supply wells’ capture-zones under transient
conditions of discharge, induced infiltration, pumping intervals and saturated thickness.
This detailed modeling will map the wells’ WHPAs more accurately than is possible with
two-dimensional, steady-state, analytical methods. It will also quantify the impacts of
Induced infiltration at the Abbott well more accurately.
4. Studies using conservative tracers to assess ground-water velocities and directions
in the WHPA upgradient of the wells. This information can be used to help identify the
optimum locations for detection, compliance and ambient-trend monitoring wells.
-------
WILTON, NEW HAMPSHIRE WELLHEAD
PROTEC11ON AREA DELINEATION PILOT PROJECT
Map of the Welihead Protection Areas of the Abbott and Everett
Municipal Supply Wells and Elevations of Ground Water and Surface
Water on August 6, 1992
TILL
BEDROCK
x
0
I I
E
S..
Figure 10-1
XPLANATION
Q — n
Municipal Well
Water Elevation Meeeurefl d
Statioa - Elev on ee ot
Auguat 6, 1992
— Protective Met
(4OO et R
Weilbeed Pzc !€ i Area
Wdude’ S.’ PIeted Area)
total Area - 318 Aaee (.5 Square
1owtd oI Sub4 n Based on
ia&ooo Scab U.S.G.S. Gteivlfle,
NIL Quadraugb (1
Boundary 1 Sublindn , Based o at
t2, )O Scab N.H. Dept. c Public
Works Topography
Bowidarv Sub-Bndn Based on
12M0 8cale NiL Dept Public
Works Hydrography
Mb .)
WaterTable Contour kt Feet Above
NGVD from U.S.G.S. WRIR 86-1358,
pistol
Elevation Contour 01 Ground Water
and Su e Water ht Feet ___
Above NGVD. Dasb.d W re &
loundy 01 SteaUfled Drift Deposib
from U.S.G.S. WRW 86-1358, Plate 1.
Surface Water
so,.
I., pc.t
liydT.Ju1.OV Ip Jingles 1. Hulk
U.S. I*virir w.tnfi1 Prof set ion Agency
02203
Deafen, Nrsseeknaef Is
I ’
4 50
*
+
0
-------
Figure 10-lA. Detail of Figure 10-1 Showing Contours of Water Altitudes Measured on
August 6, 1992 (small numbers) and those Published by the U. S. Geological Survey in
WRIR 86-4358 (large numbers). Contours are dashed where inferred. The Circles
around the Supply Wells are 400-Foot Radius Areas (Sanitary Protection Zones)
Required by New Hampshire Water Supply Regulations.
-------
WILTON, NEW HAMPSHIRE WELLHEAD
PROTECTION AREA DELINEATION PILOT PROJECT
ocation Map of Water Elevation Measurement Stations
IIllI’
A!
Cl-I
0
0
Figure 10-2
EXPLANATION
EW — EVERB’IT WELL
Water Elevation Me.mn Station
B nd y 01 StratIfied t Deposit.
frcm U.S.G.S. WR1R 864358, Plate 1
SUTf Water
Roed
l 00 0 2O O 3coo
Scm.I
1ydro uIo y by bugle, L . H ulk
U.S. Inv r.nr*,nl.j Protre*lop, Ageney
1 . 510*, 1auscekuise(f 122t3
G
(
TILL
BEDROCK
ACJO-FLU VIAL
P 08 ITS
+
/
-------
I IA-I.
0
CBS
d A - 85
S a.lc. js-
Figure 10-2A. Detail of Figure 10-2 Showing the Locations and Names of the Water
Altitude Measurement Stations Used for the Water Table Map of August 6, 1992.
A- 85
A-es
/1
//
-------
APPENDIX A: TABLE OF WATER ALTITUDE MEASUREMENT STATIONS
-------
TABLE OF WATER ALTITUDE MEASUREMENT STATIONS
STA11OM
NUMBER
C-83
suRvEYf LATITUDF
NUMBEP’
d-m-e
901 42 4608$
‘.ONGITUD
dm .e
71 46C .6
DATE OF
INSTALL
IT T
8127 3
MP
TYPE
TOG
MP
ELEV
feet
467.87
STICIW
feet
02
5CREE ’3ORINO
.ENGT DEPTH
feet j ....
6 68
OTBcM
46 8
1 ’YIWcM
82
WATER
ALT
•... ..
67
DATE OF
MEAS
812691
748
49038
8 91
878
08
811391
715
49072
8 14192
812
75
8 l90
I
868
19
8111 92
1 1A .83
9f
424608.7
71 45 L5
717s83
TOC
46798
11
6
R68
4018
85
48
6126191
778
49018
81991
887
08
8113191
746
4905
8I4
828
7
816192
1 1A-3 .68
968
4246087
7146 .5
i 68
TOG
46868
1.2
6
46
39.90
8.68
. 5
8126191
740
49054
814192
838
64
816192
130T
904
424007.3
71 46 .3
1013183
TOG
467.90
17
6
40
3728
7.90
49004
668191
76
49038
81991
876
25
811391
726
49071
814
808
91
816190
. L
1424611.1
71 48034J 1Cb5163
I
TOG
46871
19
6
46
4873
590
573
49016
98
812591
811391
497
49074
5 130 192
526
49046
814190
10 83 (7
424612.5
71 48984
416 3
TOG
1
1 68
6
83
2661
548
6.37
49025.f 61990
8126197
IA.85
1168
42Q .9
714608.3
58185
TOG
47376
108
6
R90
3108
612
519
46764
46857
612591
814190
-
489
46887
88192
.1.
49
46886
9l11
5A.68
1301
424690.1
714668.51
71161165
TOG
478.26
272 . 0
25
2138
1042
46784
612591
I
868
48946
513 )92
-______
—
979
8Ml92
975
46851
816192
[
986
4684
9 111192
7A.85
1101
4246686
71 46686
71161165
TOG
472.78
—
17
6 92
5768 612
46664 6 1
46818 8 14192
I
I
I
368
46883 819921
I
426
4685 9111192
-------
STATIOP
SURVE
.ATITUDF
1.ONGITUC
DATE OF
NP
NP cflCKU SCREEI
8ORIN(
OTB4AP 1TWcM WATER
)ATE OF
NUMBER
NUMBE
INSTALL.
TYPE
ELEV.
I.ENGTI
DEPTh
ALT.
MEAS
di..
d4fl4
fl
m
88.85
4756068
7146062
7F 65
TOG
196
6
58
4600
6
9111492
M .65
11
47.4606.5
714600.3
712485
TOC
47396
2.3
6
56
46.31
556
4561
8l4 2
483
46675
8 i92
514
46161
9111192
1 -85
1100
474606.0
7146100
7I 5
TOC
47461
2.
6
56
30.16
7
467.61
600191
561
45601
8l4 92
500
45680
81992
5.35
456.24
9111192
108.85
1106
475606.0
7146100
7I 85
TOC
4747
2..
6
30
31
706
47461
8125191
500
40601
814492
511
40680
81992
546
46124
9111492
1A-87
110?
475602.4
7146009
3r24197
TOC
47706
3.25
5
30
35.56
846
40656
612591
7.9
45619
81492
7
40674
81992
767
40047
9l11
3.87
801
4746067
7146116
312007
TOG
47485
373
5
89
3435
688
467.97
7(2191
8.51
456.34
84991
7.56
45686
8112491
551
489.25
9 92
806
46679
8 1492
6.66
785
45619 84992
4678 J .9l11492
789
46696
j10992
687
1801
4748574
7146155
43197
TOG
560.34
1
5
48
.57
fl.07
2118
477274 ig oi
478161500192
2183
47751 I 81492
2188
47746
81992
T
22.83
47671
9111
I
2546
41588
104992
GW-1
906
4756001
7146002
812592
TOG
45656
1.3
07
48
61
210
40044
812592
296
46167
8 1492
324
46139
819492
330
461.25
9111492
GW-2
801
474800.3
7146105
&2592
TOG
47144
207
01
400
61
26
45684
612592
506
45638
81492
525
46621
816192
561
46692
9111192
576
466684 1 4992
-------
STATiON
SURVEY
I ATflhJfl
I (W( mIn
flAT fl
MP
MP
TItI 1 II
trccci nnch.it
,WflaJ:
flWttI .aI
.—.-—--—-
—.
WflUfl #IWW
#UVV
NUMBEP NUMBEI
INSTALL
TYPE
ELEV
LENG 11
DEPTH
ALT
MEAS
d .m-s
d
mMa c
I e
fe
f fe I e
I e
I e
GW-3
703
4646130 1146075
W 02
TOC
470.97
381
07
2.29
61
405
40802
6 12902
- - - -
46676 15 0.7 46 61 16 16 6 12902
-4
1701
4640561
7146 .9
61
TOC
368
68
8 1492
377
55
81002
GW -5 1001
4646035
714613.7
6
TOC
475 7
25
07
35
61
246
4.38
47256
41068
60392
8 1492
438
47068
8 1692
473
470.34
6111102
58
46827
10902
GW-6
1461
464603.1 7146011
603132
TOC
4704
2.5
07
36
6.1
312
467.29 612902
384
40656
81492
302
46646
81602
-_____
355
46
611192
GW-7
2101
4646301
7146462
612992
CEMEN’
.SZ
0
—
—
2.54
56738
81492
2 56
56734
81002
SW-I
4646194
71 46032
7l1 192
BRIDGE
47364
12.24
461.4 I 711 102
12.3
46134
814102
12.29
46139
81692
1•
.1
1238
461.29
8 2S92
I
1236
461.29
9111192
11.96
46166
10992
SW-2
703
4646138
714603.9
711102
CULVER
46774
396
46419
7 11102
466
40308
814102
.1.
400
40281
8
SW.3
701
4646130 714607$
711102
REBAR
46702
J
413
40346
8 1492
4.3
403
81692
SW-4
661
4646143 7146125
781192
REBAR
46029
166
47864
78192
266
47703
81402
268
47761
81692
SW-S
3001
46409671 7140013
781492
REBAR
400.97
103
92
88492
106
102
91
55
81692
882692
103
92I61I192
___
113
84 1
-------
STATION SURVE
NUMBER
LATITUDE LONGITLJ
NUMBE
DATE OF
INSTALL
MP
TYPE
MP STICKUFISCREEr
ELEV. — I LENGTI
BORINGIDTBCM
DEPTH
F DTW.cN
WATEF
ALT.
DATE 0
MEAS J
d..n d s
I 4748097 1
ntMa y
feet feet
feel
feet
jeet
eel
SW- ?
3
1391
4748392
714601.3
7148178
71 1 i 5 2
7 11 e92
ROCK
REBAR
4 52
479.V
0.71
2.07
2.7
.9i
477.15
47652
8 52
711 152
W4 52
27
47652
8
SW.8
SW-O
36
474806.9
7146398
7l1I52
ROCK
466
038
439.2
8. 152
3701
4748396
7148669
7Il
ROCK
46639
039
466.54
& 52
SW-la
SW-il
3391
4748579
7146397
711e92
ROCK
47147
2.66
46857
8 52
4748441
714609.5
7I1&2
ROCK
439 .
039
73
8 18 ,92
SW-12
SW-13
31
01
4746472
4748384
7146144
7148 8
711192
7114w
ROCK
REBAR
46474
487 64
f
0.38
004
36
4876
818 92
8
SW-14 3801
SW-IS 41
4746481 7146091 711812
4749150 711839.8 7 11a92
ROCK 479.38
ROCK 4875 —
I
05
012 I
018
47878 81852
81692
487. 9’1152
-------
APPENDIX B: RESULTS OF MICROpARTICU TE SAMPLING
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION I
\ , / J.F. KENNEDY FEDERAL BUILDING, BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02203-2211
September 26, 1991
Mr. Charles McGettigari
Wilton Water Works
Town Hall
Wilton, NH 03086
Dear Charlie,
The analytical results of ground—water and surface—water samples
taken from the Abbott well and the Souhegan River on August 12
and 13, 1991 are enclosed. Water quality analyses for
microparticulates, Giardia lamblia cysts and Crv tos iridium
oocysts were performed by Industrial Environmental Analysts (lEA)
of Essex Junction, Vermont. Laboratory analyses for enteric
viruses, poliovirus and heterotrophic plate count, coliforms,
fecal coliforins and coliphage were performed by staff at the
Department of Microbiology at the University of New Hampshire
(UNH) in Durham. Furthermore, field measurements of physical
parameters of well and river water, such as temperature,
pressure, specific conductance, pH, salinity and discharge were
made by personnel from the Region I offices of the U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency in Boston and in Lexington,
Massachusetts.
The purpose of the sampling was to estimate the relative risk to
public health from ingesting ground water obtained from the
Abbott Well in the Wilton Water Works welifield in Wilton. This
24-inch gravel—packed well has a depth of 50 feet, a screen
length of 10 feet, and a typical discharge of about 500 gpm. The
Souhegan River, a Merrimack River tributary that flows near the
well, was approximately 70 feet wide with an average depth of 0.6
feet on August 12th. The river channel at the wellfield consists
primarily of gravel, cobbles and boulders. As the Abbott Well is
91 feet from the bank of the Souhegan River, there is the
potential for surface water to be induced into the well screen
during pumping, including water-borne pathogens identified by the
Surface Water Treatment Rule of the Safe Drinking Water Act as
potential hazards to human health.
Before the Abbott well was turned on at 3:00 p.m. on August 9th,
it had lain idle for three days. The aquifer was then stressed by
pumping the well at full capacity for 67.33 hours (2.80 days)
before sampling commenced at 10:20 a.m. on August 12, 1991. The
duration of pumping for the entire period before and during
sampling was 77.62 hours (3.23 days). Total drawdown in the well
before turning off the pump at 8:37 p.m. on August 12 was 16.24
feet. Well interference effects from operation of the Everett
PRINTED O . ‘EC C..E ‘A E
-------
—2—
well, which is approximately 720 feet from the Abbott well, were
kept to a minimum by pumping the Everett well as little as
possible from August 6th to 12th.
Rain began to fall at the well site at 3:40 p.m. on August 9th
and continued to fall during most of the following day. Two
inches of precipitation were recorded on site during the weekend
prior to sampling.
sampling for Inicroparticulates, viruses and coliforin bacteria in
well and river water required different periods of time. All
equipment (consisting of flowmeters, pumps, filters, valves and
hoses) was furnished by the contracting laboratories. A total of
504 gallons of Abbott well water passed through in-line filters
for znicroparticulates and viruses over a 10-hour period. At the
Souhegan River (next to the well site), which exhibited much
higher turbidity than well water, obtaining samples for the same
constituents using in—line filters required only 33 minutes for
103.5 gallons. As recommended by Dr. Aaron Margolin of UNH, the
portable gasoline-powered pump was allowed to run until it shut
of f automatically because of filter clogging. Coliform samples,
which have a comparatively short preservation time, were obtained
as grab samples at the well and river early the next day (August
13th), packed in ice, and transported with the virus samples to
the Department of Microbiology of the University of New Hampshire
in Durham.
The results of the laboratory analyses indicate that no Giardia
lamblia, Cr\mtospiridiuin , enteric viruses or poliovirus were
detected in the river or well at the time of sampling. Although
the Souhegan River was apparently free of these pathogens during
the August 12th sampling episode, only repeated sampling over
time could support firm conclusions about the river’s biological
quality and its potential impact on the Abbott well. If these
constituents had been present in the river, conclusions about the
filtration capacity of the aquifer for these specific organisms
could have been made with greater confidence.
However, the analytical results provide some evidence that
natural filtration in the sand and gravel aquifer is occurring.
With regard to total and fecal coliform levels, which were 170
and 80 per 100 milliliters, respectively, in river water,
concentrations were <2 per 100 milliliters in well water, or
below the detection limit. The microparticulate analysis of the
Abbott well sample detected one surface-water indicator, i.e.,
chlorophyll-containing algae, which was also found at high levels
in the river. According to Dr. Jennifer L. Clancy of lEA (see the
enclosed letter), the 21-count level in well water may be
considered “not significant” based “on the numbers of biological
indicators present in filtered surface water.” All other
indicators, such as vegetative debris, rotifers, spores, pollen,
and nernatodes, were present in Souhegan River water in relatively
-------
—3—
high concentrations, but were absent in well water.
Frequent measurements of physical and chemical parameters during
pumping and the 10-hour sampling period indicate that
temperature, specific conductance and pH in water from the Abbott
well had stabilized before sampling began on August 12th.
Throughout the period of pumping, water temperature and pressure
were also monitored constantly by transducers and data loggers in
observation wells located 2 and 19 feet from the Abbott well and
in the Souhegan River. Additional periodic downhole measurements
of temperature, specific conductance and pH were also made in
observation wells located 120 and 286 feet away. The
observations show that the temperature of well water was 4
degrees celsius higher than those in surrounding observation
wells (12.2 vs. 8.2 °C) before the pump was turned of f, perhaps
as a result of induced infiltration of warmer river water, which
ranged between 18 and 23.6 degrees celsius over the same period.
A more comprehensive assessment of induced infiltration during
well pumping will be based on numerical modeling that EPA will
perform in 1992 as part of the wellhead protection area
delineation phase of the pilot-project for both the Abbott and
Everett wells in the Wilton Water Works system.
I wish to express my sincere gratitude to you and the other water
commissioners for your assistance and cooperation during this
study. Your keen knowledge of the water distribution system kept
the Abbott well pumping over the four—day period, even during
times of low demand. If you have any questions regarding this
letter or the enclosed water—quality analyses, please do not
hesitate to cal ]. me at 617—565—3548.
Sincerely,
__ ‘ -
Douglas L. Heath, Hydrogeologist
Ground Water Management Section
enclosure
cc: Rene Pelletier, NHDES
Jerome 3. Healey, EPA
David Delaney, EPA
Kim Franz, EPA
Martha Johnson, EPA
Kevin Reilly, EPA
Ray Thompson, EPA
-------
an environmental testing company
_______ P0 Box 626
Essex Junction, Vermont 05453
L (002) 878-5130
FAX (802) 878.6765
August 26, 1991
LI)
\ M13Qj :
j ’l ___________
Mr. Douglas Heath C LJNDWATER MAN GEMEI .
USEPA WPTFR suppt i BRANCH
JFK Federal Bldg. WGP — — - -
Boston, MA 02203
Dear Doug:
Enclosed please find the results of the microscopic particulate
analysis (NPA) samples which were collected on 12 August 1991.
Although surface water indicators, ie, chlorophyll—containing
algae, were seen in the well, I feel that the numbers were not
significant. To date, the EPA has not decided what does constitute
a “significant number” of surface water indicators. I base my
definition of significant partly on the numbers of biologicaa
indicators present in a filtered surface water. If the Wilton, NH
well is under the influence of surface water, then extremely
effective natural filtration is occurring to reduce the numbers of
indicators to the level seen in the well. The role of the
laboratory in GWUI assessments is analytical, with interpretation
of the data. The laboratory’s role is not to determine if a source
is GWUI and MPA data alone does not answer that question. However,
I feel it is an appropriate role for the laboratory to determine if
a source is at risk of waterborne disease. I have examined
hundreds of water samples using MPA and feel that this particular
source is not at risk.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
INDUSTRIAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSTS, INC.
((cI,,.,
3ç nife 1. Clancy,J Ph.D.
Senior Microbiologist
JLC/ ska
Enclosures
a F,n.’ ca w ’, , ra..
r _ II !, — S MdSSdC’JSI’ç ‘ . 5•S Jr S. ‘.a ‘ Ca c.a
7C a . 1e S r, op 7O ‘a’ £ 7 ;i 2’ .’ , 5 • a’ I (7’
-------
an environmental testing company
P0 5ox626
— Essex Junctton, Vermont 05453
(802) 878.5138
FAX (802) 878.6765
DATA INTERPRETATION
The samples in this study were collected after a heavy rainfall
event (2”) when the source was most susceptible to surface water
influence. The particulate characteristics were those of
groundwater, i.e. very little sediment, very low numbers of
microorganisms, and microorganisms which were primarily
characteristic of groundwater. Twenty-one chlorophyll-containing
algae were seen in the concentrated equivalent of 100 gallons of
water. Chlorophyll—containing algae are an indicator of surface
water.
The Surface Water Treatment Rule partially defines ground water
under direct influence of surface water (GWUI) as “any water
beneath the surface of the ground with (i) significant occurence of
insects or other macroorganisms, algae or other large—diameter
pathogens such as Giardia lamblia . . •“.
No insects or macroorganisms were seen in the well, although high
concentrations of surface water indicators (algae, rotifers,
spores, pollen, and vegetative debris) were seen in the river. The
21 algae/lao gallons in the well are not considered a significant
number, especially after heavy rainfall. Filtered surface waters
contain 101 to io algae per 100 gallons.
NPA is one factor used to determine if a well is GWUI. The MPA
results of this sampling event indicate that this source is not at
risk of waterborne disease due to the direct influence of surface
water.
Signature L .4c L (• I r C
Jënnife L. C1ancy Ph.D.
‘) Senior Nicrobio ogist
Reference: 270—226
L O. Oe . 8 r’
no .0. III, ..os M,ssoC S. . .. J ..’. M.
203 !. 52OC 080 0918 708 705 O7 0 C 7 ! 2C -‘28 8 0 0 7 00°3
-------
Sample No.: 270—226—1
Sample Location: Wilton, N.H.
Sampling Date: 8/12/91
Date Received: 8/14/91
Water Type: Raw River
Volume filtered: 83.5 gallons
Turbidity: Unknown
PARTICULATE ANALYSIS
Numbers reported are per 100 gallons.
Large Amorphous Debris: 2.38 x l0
Pine Amorphous Debris: 3.23 x 10’
Vegetative Debris: 4.76 x 10’
Diatoms: ND
Algae: 9.47 x 10’
Rotifers: 2.38 x iO
Spores: 2.38 x lO
Pollen: 3.57 x 10
GIARDZA AND CRIPTOSPOPIDIUK
Filter Color: Drown
Chlorinated: No
Sediment Volume: 11.5 eL
Volume Floated: 0.5 mL
Pellet V After Float: 250 pL
Filter: CUNO DPPPY 1pm
pH: Unknown
ND = None detected.
Insects: ND
Insect Parts: ND
CrustaceanB: ND
Crustacean Eggs: ND
Nematodes: 2.38 x 10’
Nezuatode Eggs: ND
Amoebae: 4.76 x 10’
Other: 2.14 x iO
an environmental testing company -
______ PD Box626
— Esse: Junction. Vermont 05453
(802) 878-5138
— —- FAX (802) 878-6765
SA8 LE DATA
REPORT: PARTICULATES, GIAP.DIA AND CRYPTOSPORIDZUN
Samples were examined uBing immunofluorescent dual antibody staining. Sediment equivalent
to 2 L of water was examined. Positive controls were stained and examined concurrently.
No Giardia cysts or Cryntosporidium oocysts were observed.
Reference: 270—226
39009
Uric.
Mum.’
Seh.umburg
t SOupe.
W. ippa ’%
Co.uneci ,cut
Flo nCi
11 1 mb ,,
N
203 .452. 1200
407-980-092 5
705-705 07.40
o’; 272 52.;
25’ 425 I ’ S ’
‘
-------
Sample No.: 270—226—2
Sample Location: Wilton, N.E.
Sampling Date: 8/12/91
Date Received: 8/14/91
Water Type: Well water
Volume filtered: 504 gallons
Turbidity: Unknown
PARTICULATE ANALYSIS
Numbers reported are per 100 gallons.
Large Amorphous Debris: 32
Fine Amorphous Debris: 1920
Vegetative Debris: ND
Diatoms: ND
Algae (with chlorophyll): 21
Rotifers: ND
Spores: ND
Pollen: ND
Filter Color: Clean
Chlorinated: No
Sediment Volume: 400 p1.
Volume Floated: 400 pL
Pellet V After Float: Trace
Filter: CUNO DPPPY 1pm
pH: 6.04
Insects: ND
Insect Parts: ND
Crustaceans: ND
Crustacean Eggs: ND
Nematodes: ND
Nematode Eggs: ND
Protozoa: 54
Ciliates: 10
Amoebae: 10
Other: 32
CIARDIA AND CRYPT0SPORIDIUII
Samples were examined using immunofluorescent dual antibody staining. Sediment equivalent
to 100 gallons of water was examined. Positive controls were stained and examined
concurrently.
No Giardia cysts or CrvUtosporidium oocysts were observed.
Reference: 270—226
39009
SCN.W,DWQ
N BNe ca
Wh ooen
IlI,fl0 I
S
JP’SP
706 705-0710
6 22 521
70 ’ 426 818
j an environmental testing company
______ P0 Box 626
Essex Junction, Vermont 05453
(802) 878.5138
FAX (802) 8784765
SAMPLE DATA
REPORT: PARTICULATES, GIARDIA AND CRIPTOSPORZDIUIf
ND = None detected.
Mo ,, ”
ConnecTc ,I
703 ‘52 8200
M 7arna ’
rIo’c.
407 989-0925
h• , ’ Co o no
‘ ‘ 927 oo’
-------
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Deparrn err M ‘ticrobiotogv
pauIdu g Lire 5c ence Bu1duig
Durham \e Hampshire O3824-3 44
fitB) $62- 5O
SUMMARY OF RESULTS
AND PROCEDURE
Sample
Identification: Abbott Wdl of Wilton Water Works. Wilcon. NH .
Lab
[ dentification: EPA-i __________________
Date received: 8/13/91
Special instructions: 504 gallons filtered ___________________
Analysis requested: Enteric viruses by cell culture
Poliovirus by gene orobes
Heterotrophic Diare count. coliforrus. fecal coliforms. and colioha e
ELIJTION AND CONCENTRATION
Date elured: 8/14/91
By whom: Norman Moore
Volume of eluent: 200 ml
Date concentrated: 8/14/91
By whom: Norman Moore
Volume of reconcentrared sample: 30 ml
-
OUJ 1 IT AI D
WATER SUPPLY SRANCI4
-------
ASSAY DATA
Volume of tissue culture sample: 10 ml
Date assayed: 8/26/91
Volume assayed/75 cm 2 flask of Buffalo Green Monkey kidney cells: 2.5 ml
Number of flasks used:
Results: Flask # Remarks
1 No viruses detected
2 No viruses detected
3 No viruses detected
4 No viruses detected
Volume of gene probe sample: 10 ml
Date assayed: 9/10/90
Volume spotted/well: Li
Number of wells spotted: j .Q
Types of gene probes used: Poliovirus ____
Results: Well # Remarks
I No poliovirus detected
2 No poliovirus detected
3 No poliovirus detected
4 No poliovirus detected
5 No poliovirus detected
6 No poliovirus detected
7 No poliovirus detected
8 No poliovirus detected
9 No poliovirus detected
10 No poliovirus detected
Tissue culture assay by: Amy Sufat
Gene probe assay by: Amy Sufat
I -
• • r.. ‘?‘ .
• — • J L!z
• I
r [ 16 I9j h
D” ATER t A -C r.iElf .:
: ri q p , r’ c:i
• ------- -
-------
Sample
Identification: Souhe an River Sample. Wilton. NH .
Lab
Identification: EPA-2
Date received: 8/13/91
Special instructions: 103 gallons
Analysis requested: Enteric viruses by cell culture
Poliovirus by gene vrobes
Heterotro hic plate count. coliforrns. feca] coliforms. and coliphage
ELUTION AND CONCENTRATION
Date eluted: 8/14/91
By whom: Norman Moore
Volume of eluent: 200 ml
Date concentrated: 8/14/91
By whom: Norman Moore
16 [
‘DWATER MAN4GEME”
- ____ _______
Volume of reconcentrated sample: 30 ml
-------
ASSAY DATA
Volume of tissue culture sample: 10 ml
Date assayed: 8/26/91
Volume assayed/75 cm 2 flask of Buffalo Green Monkey kidney cells: 2.5 ml
Number of flasks used:
Results: Flask # Remarks
1 No viruses detected
2 No viruses detected
3 No viruses detected
4 No viruses detected
Volume of gene probe sample: 10 ml
Date assayed: 9/10/90
Volume spotted/well: j .j &P [ Li & [ cP :
Number of wells spotted: j .
Types of gene probes used: Poliovirus
Results: Well # Remarks
1 No poliovirus detected
2 No poliovirus detected
3 No poliovirus detected
4 No poliovirus detected
5 No pcliovirus detected
6 No poliovirus detected
7 No poliovirus detected
8 No poliovirus detected
9 No poliovirus detected
10 No poliovirus detected
Tissue culture assay by: Amy Sufat
Gene probe assay by: Amy Sufat
-------
Male-specific Bacteriophage Analysis
Performed by Dr. William Burkhardt III, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Davisville,
Rhode Island.
Bacterial Host Strain: . jj (F-amp), HS(F-amp)RR
Method: Water Concentration Technique.
Abbott Well of Wilton Water Works, Wilton, NH.
Sampled 8/13/91 at 0820.
Density/lOOmI: < 1.0 pfu.
Souhegan River Sample, Wilton, NH.
Sampled 8/13/91 at 0833. ____________
Density/lOOmi: < 1.0 pfu.
Bacterial Analysis
Each of the two samples was analyzed for heterotrophic plate count, total coliforms and
fecal coliforms. Analysis was performed according to Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wasrewarer. 1989, 17th Ed.. Heterotrophic Plate Count, 921 5A;
Multiple Tube Fermentation Technique / Total Coliforms and Fecal Coliforms, 9221A-C.
Analysis was started at 1100
The analysis was performed by Patrick M. Regan.
Results:
Abbot Well of Wilton Water Works, Wilton, NH.
Plate Count: C <10) estimated CFU/ml.
Total Coliforms: < 2/100 n tIs.
Souhegan River sample, Wilton, NH.
Plate Count: 650 CFU/ml.
Total Coliforrns: 170/100 mis.
Fecal Colifornis: 80/100 mis.
W! FP c’jppt ,
All controls utilized were satisfactory.
-------
APPENDIX C: WHPA 2.0 GPTRAC MODEL INPUT AND OUTPUT FOR THE
ABBOTT AND EVERETT MUNICIPAL SUPPLY WELLS
-------
WEPA CODE INPUT FOR THE ABBOTT WELL
_____________________________-- GPTRAC --___________
Run Title: ABBOTT WELL CAPTURE ZONE MODEL
Units to use for Current Problem: 1
o = meters and days
1 = feet and days
Aquifer Type Selection: 2
o = confined aquifer
1 = semi—confined aquifer
2 = unconfined aquifer
= select value = options menu = DOS shell
-- GPTRAC --_____________________
** STUDY AREA BOUNDARIES AND STEP LENGTH **
Minimum X—Coordinate Cf t): 0
Maximum X—Coordinate Cf t): 500.0
Minimum Y—Coordinate Cf t): -500.0
Maximum Y—Coordinate Cf t): 500.0
Maximum Spatial Step Length (ft): 2.0
Change Any Values On This Screen (Y/N)?
= select value = options menu = DOS shell
-------
-- GPTRAC ——
** NUMBER OF WELLS AND AQUIFER PARAMETERS **
Number of Pumping Wells in study area: 1
Transmissivity (ft**2/d): 4842.0
Saturated Thickness Prior to Pumping (ft): 60.5
Aquifer Porosity (dimensionless): 0.15
Hydraulic Gradient (dimensionless): 0.011400
Angle of Ambient Flow (degrees): 0.00
Areal Recharge Rate (f t/d): 0.002989
change Any Values On This Screen (Y/N)?
= select value = options menu = DOS shell
-— GPTRAC -—___________________________
** TIME AND BOUNDAWI PARAMETERS **
Time Limit for Simulation (days): 365.00
Time Value for Capture Zones (days): 365.00
Input Boundary Condition Type: 0
0 = no boundary
1 = one stream boundary
2 = one barrier boundary
3 = strip aquifer <= not available for semi—
and unconfined aquifer cases
Change Any Values On This Screen (Y/N)?
= select value = options menu = DOS shell
-------
-- GPTRAC --
** PUMPING WELL PAI ANETERS **
Pumping Well Number 1
X — Coordinate (ft): 0
I — Coordinate (ft): 0
Discharge (ft**3/d): 102987.8
Well Radius (ft): 2.0
Radius of Influence of the Well (ft): 550.0
Delineate Capture Zone for this Well: 1
1 = Yes, 0 = No
Number of Pathlines Desired: 50
(Default = 20)
Change Any Values On This Screen (YIN)?
= select value = options menu = DOS shell
-------
LATERAL MID DOWNGRADIENT CAPTURE
ZONE FOR TEE ABBOTT WELL
I
0
N
I,
N
I I
N N
I I
N N
-------
WHPA CODE INPUT FOR THE EVERETT WELL
-- GPTRAC OPTIONS-—
1 — SEMI—ANALYTICAL calculation of Capture Zones for
single or multiple pumping/recharge wells in a
2—D aquifer with uniform hydraulic properties
2 — NUMERICAL calculation of Capture Zones using the
hydraulic head values output from a numerical
ground-water flow model. Uniform or nonuniform
grid options available.
Enter Choice: 2.
-- GPTRAC --______________
Run Title: EVERETT WELL CAPTURE ZONE MODEL
Units to use for Current Problem: 1
o = meters and days
1 = feet and days
Aquifer Type Selection: 2
o = confined aquifer
2. = semi—confined aquifer
2 = unconfined aquifer
(I Change Any Values On This Screen (YIN)?
= select value = options menu = DOS shell
-------
_________________-- GPTRAC --____________
** STUDY AREA BOUNDARIES AND STEP LENGTH **
Minimum X—Coordinate (ft): 0
Maximum X—Coordinate (ft): 500.0
Minimum Y—Coordinate (ft): -500.0
Maximum Y—Coordinate (ft): 500.0
Maximum Spatial Step Length (ft): 2.0
Change Any Values On This Screen (YIN)? JJ
= select value = options menu = DOS shell
-- GPTRAC --
** NUMBER OF WELLS AND AQUIFER PARAMETERS **
Number of Pumping Wells in study area: 1
Transmissivity (ft**2/d): 11110.0
Saturated Thickness Prior to Pumping (ft): 50.0
Aquifer Porosity (dimensionless): 0.03
Hydraulic Gradient (dimensionless): 0.008330
Angle of Ambient Flow (degrees): 0.00
Areal Recharge Rate Cf t/d): 0.002989
Change Any Values On This Screen (Y/N)?
= select value = options menu = DOS shell
-------
__________________-- GPTRAC --_________________________
** TIME AND BOUNDARY PARAMETERS **
Time Limit for Simulation (days): 365.00
Time Value for Capture Zones (days): 365.00
Input Boundary Condition Type: 0
0 = no boundary
1 = one stream boundary
2 = one barrier boundary
3 = strip aquifer <= not available for semi—
and unconfined aquifer cases
= select value = options menu = DOS shell
____________________________-- GPTRAC --____________________
** PUMPING WELL PARAMETERS **
Pumping Well Number 1
X - Coordinate (ft): 0
Y - Coordinate (ft): 0
Discharge (ft**3/d): 102987.8
Well Radius (ft): 1.5
Radius of Influence of the Well (ft): 2000.0
Delineate Capture Zone for this Well: 1
1 = Yes, 0 = No
Number of Pathlines Desired: 50
(Default = 20)
Change Any Values On This Screen (Y/N)?
= select value = options menu = DOS shell
-------
LATERAL AND DOWNGRAD tENT CAPTURE
ZONE FOR THE EVERETT WELL
a
U,
U,
I ,
U,
e
__:
-------
APPENDIX D: WELL DRILLERS LOGS
-------
D.L.MAHER CO.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
SollClassIfIcatIOfl
5
l, l
O• I’/a• i
LYE.
. L.
i ’ 7m;a ‘tii
:i i
•
C
.
.ii_
C*rct F t ve /
/s.’ 30mt
Me’ 4 ‘ Cetr .
30
3’
I# ,,icA id’di
o#c coq,JC r c
E
£ I
ic.., , ,,
-
-
‘ 3
—.
.rc
mcot - Ce Jt .rq,,cA •
-
høc SoM(
3,1 e0J• Co IJc ‘4 ?O4. l I
—
J:
. a
L
,$(QVC/
7; SICG1 S n 2 mD(,
J o int o $C. 54n0 4 , .
j
—
. 2._
2L L
fi’ e ’ e(
/-u 7 eowc ,,
S’ n0I, t; /0 m,o4 sr .i,e,
Yc
—
—
p.kci 1 fq.#e,
/?r7’ i/
I
1’. .t Will No. I - ? 3
D.L.M.JobNo
7 0 ’ S )
Ocher 74ato.4c,joi
HiIp.r
A
(q//q’ 4 q’,
Client
N / I
Location / 64 ZT
/ op
i k
C
Own.,. R.pr.s.nt.tiv.
,
,,
.ts $t.rt.d: 3 / 2 )7) Dat.F,nshsd: 3/3 J 53
I
C, 0..
1—
.
C
S
200 r
300
400
500
SITE PLAN 600 1 ’ 400
I _6. ’..r
--_____
1%.
1,(IJ - /
j
Csl .’ “ ?
- -— -
______________________________________ I —
_________________ _______ 7 ‘°!
TIME AND MATERIALS
bst
w.u Total Comp. Casing SCrP Hours Hour.
No. DIam. D.pth D.pth Lift Lsngth ExpO$id Mat.rlaI plot S z . RIsir Dsv. P p.d
I.F3 2 ’h i,C ‘ .rC J• ‘ ç .3° ,.r ’ ‘ I a
REMARKS: .)cT o1t (0 rioT r 4 T 70 ’.. o yotc. 4
4 T C 2’ . 30 slot ‘ a4c.r /opoo4 2. A” ________________________________________
Pup Wit on Nel. No. Oat. Wat.r S.m$s
_________ Oat. 3/3#1t3
Wat.r Lsvels
0b .
TIm. G.RM. Vac No.
Ohs. Obs.
No. No.
T.
Field Ou .Iity
Tlm• e 0O
CO 2 Taste_
_____________________ Odor
Mn Nardniss -
—
StatIc
. “,$
Ph
Color
-------
TIME AND MATERIALS
bat
W.ll - Houis Noun
No . ______ _____ _______ _______ Mat•rial slot Sia . RIar Dv. PumpSd
Total Comp. Ca. 1n9
Diam. Dspth D.pth Lstt Lsngth ExpOSSd
0•
Pump bst on I4ols No. Dat•
Wat•r Sampla
Ob.. Obs.
No. No.
S.nt To:
Fisid Quality
Mn
D.LMAHER CD.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
, 4 ,c.
(O l$ ,vcoi,
REMARKS:
Scra m
Wt.r Lvsis
pb s.
Tims G. M. Vac No.
Tasts
F. ______________ Odor
Hardn.u
Ph
Color
-------
,0 5
:i,
/_ L
..
T E 7 o c.q Jt L,,#, Se
e 7; .r . o4 ‘q ., C
‘
-
S..
.= -
L L_
.L!
b,oke i q .ie /
Ps ’c JO d L d 4, q,o/
S’omC o%f C q,to(.
/ro.t q,q,eI
! __
.L _
F 1M h,A si iI / SO.*C mr L
s ’/T
—
3 _
. ! .
F; 4 ’ c. :
fr,e0 4 Sqb,04’
. _
!2_
hnr L’w somc rn ,c.j
coifsc c.,c4 ‘- .u pq ic I
n..
F,4 1 i qIS C 6 A q.,c
1 c 11 /oflec 4 irovelihe’g
—
£2_
£ .!
i .kca iaueI
Cit.’l To c.C i’ 4 iS4
A,”c 7 me”i
g/4VCI sherp k’ok *
• S
It
it.ti.
N.
I.
0
w
I-
U i
-a
i.
00
TSStWOIINO. 24 D.L.M.J
obNo
Ti -
DruII.r J Helper
6
e I/s 44
CII.nt W’I/04 1(1 11.
Location e
Owners Representative D’c k C
c ,t
DateStarted: 313’I’J DateFinished: S’/ V/P.)
N
— 1°
/ o. r_
100
200
300
400
500
SITE PLAN 600 1’ 400
00 1 (3 •
L0CU
— _—&‘ 4o1- ic
—S
______ — --
C / _ :C
- — 4r7.’g
TIME AND MATERIALS
To.,
W.II Total Comp. Casing Scr•en Hours Hours
No. DIem. Depth Depth Left Length Eaposed Mat.rIaI iot Size RIs.r Dew. Pwmpsd
Z IlL CZC 10 0’ c S”t C ’! ” ‘JO ‘i
c r •. o 2 1.T t • d/ J i / . i’i ZluiC A.ieT .T . 7
— - .- --- - - - - - - - -
OnC £0 sloT. c4c cl.joeJ / ‘, S pm 7 1 iJec
Re c 7 4 Y /, j4/i,h wcII cAok co4. t
Water Sample
Pump Tost on Hol. No. Date
Water L.v.ls -.
Dat. Time
Vae
“p..
No.
Obs. Obs.
No. No.
S.nt To
Field Quality
CO 2 Taste
F. Odor
Hardness
D.LMAHERCO.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
RO. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864. 617/9333210
U01Y I M
From To
C’
Soil ClassIficatIon
/Yz
Time GRM.
Static
Pt.
Color
-------
) 14
II
Screen
list
w.ii Total Comp. Casing _________________________________________ Hours Hours
No. Ohm. Depth Depth Lift Length Exposed Matinal Iot Size Risur D iv. Pumped
S 2I 0’
REMARKS:
Pump st on Hal. No. - Date
Wat.r Sampi.
Wat.r LIVeS
ubs.
Tim. G.RM. Vac No.
Obs. Obs.
No. No.
S,nt To:
Field Quality
Co 2
Fe
Test.
Odor
Hardness
D.LMAHER CD . 4
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
RO.BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864’ 617/933-3210
#3
Flj
TIME AND MATERIALS
Static
Ph
Color
-------
TIME AND MATERIALS
______ _____ L.ngth Expossd Mst.rlsI Iot Slz . ______ _______
REMARKS: .Qc.J off 6ovgcdc’;
Pump list on Hot. p lo. Dsts W•t.r SsmpIs
Not.r L•vsls Dot. __________________ T lfl 5 _________________
TIms G.PN. Vac No.
Obs. Obs.
No. No.
Ssnt To:
FI&d OuslIty
Tsst.
F. Odor
Mn N.,dn.ss
D.L..MAHER CD.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
‘4
.7
L? ,c .k
4 44 WDOOIJ
— __ •: _ - ::; — —
—— AT ‘Ol
DIam.
2 Ii.
Total Comp.
Dspth Dspth
r
-
list $crpsn Hours Hours
w.I CasIng
No . L.f I RIsEr D.v. Pumpd
Ph
Color
-------
TIE
w.ii Total Comp. C•slng Scr .n vo . Hours
No. Diam. Dspth D•pth L•ft Lsngth EXPOSSd Natsrt•l Iot Slzs Rlssr D.v. Pumpid
0 _______________________________________________
Pump list on 140$. No. Dat.
W.t.r S.mpl.
W.t.r L•vsls
u S I a.
G.PN. Vac No .
StatIc -___________
Oba. Oba.
No. No.
Ssnt To.
Fi&d QualIty
CO 2 Tasta
Fs Odor
Mn Hardn .a$
D.LMAHER CD. ’
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864. 617/933-3210
4 /1 /9
Ph
Color
-------
,t 5 I,__i.,
:i
ii
F - c 7 ‘c ”
£I.1C 4 1 fi,c T. s,ec.4
. L3_
LE
I , 4 k a 3 4u e
1 C ‘ e ,a
S4 ’ 1 T 0 o1ec.l
3 , l.Ic! . I%’ #/
—
LL..
£L.
, iCI
F,,c i s s 1 (Jy(C.4CASS4
‘!CJ
—
LL.
b 1 . 1 £ifllC 4 , So1l’t coV
‘ f#’t 3 teI
Fi’ Te .rg 4 Io
CJ
So C Co4’i C
f 1 ,i . m 4
—
I 3L fp (.dOA ’S.u
£
jf litf
tI’ ’°4pc.
—
0’
1 ’
11
a
S I
I-
SI
-a
5.
I I -
00
F
TsstWsliNo. /9*3
D.LM.JobNo.
T3 - o ?c-7J
Drills,
4,,o4crjc.. Hslpsr
6
Ca F/i 4 a. 5
Client
/ i
/1,1 ii
Location
C g
Owner’s
R.prsrontstiv.
, ,c k
ci r f
Dst.Started: (JJ . /JJDat.FnsJl.d: L//fr/JJ
N
4
I /
4-
V
‘ 0
100
200
300
400
500
SITE PLAN 600 1”= 400’
4r 1o
LOCUS /
Ir
I.,
I V ‘
I O .
TIME AND MATERIALS
Test
w.ii Total Comp. Casing Hours
No. Diem. Depth Depth Left Length ExpOsed Material tot Six. Riser 0ev. Pompsd
10 i.’h’ (.3 4 j1 ’ JJ t L’ /7, ., 70 (•.J•’ j ‘/. .
01. 1ft’ 3 ¶‘ i)’ U .r ’ t £ i “•, & i . o ,ç., 3:. 4
REMARKS: Pi,m .o ic’iT well £0 /Si’sc 7 t Ôf ‘/i øL WC(I 4ø4 l’so”
P .mp eb wclI ir ,om ZP a .c Y ’or ‘li 1.i. Ierr wcii 4 f”
PumpIbstonNolsNo. /O r) Det. ‘jIiJJJ Wat.rSainPl
Dat. 1.jJ7)#3 i’IJ
Wol.r Levels
s.
Time OR N. Yac No. 2 .
Ohs.
No.
Ohs.
No.
Sent To:
Field Quality
TIm
To
Taste
Fe Odor
Hardness
£m’ L .
0
D.LMAHER CD I
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864. 617/933-3210
D PTM
From To
2
Soil Classification
I 7• I
St lc
‘ £0 ir”
Ph
Color C lC° .s”
-------
T.stw.llNo.lf/IA 3 D.L.M.J.bNo. 3 -O7S i’ )
D.L.MAHER CD .’
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864. 617/933-3210
DEPTH
From To
1 &lr = I
Soil Cl .ssific•tiOn vit.r -
/5 iAk.i7 f ?’f hoJ (4r’
—
—
fi.//eel •. T, iic..( IS
j q
.
7 ’ ‘!
—
27
(o ’sc k , ’, mc
mol’ i, ,ed ‘snc / 4
meJ .,“ .iel
‘ id
.2_2_.
2if•
h 0 c k,n g i n o 4 s.. e m ° 1
Colf,c j1#p3
A.c
‘
(4• rJe I,r”, .t,,,.d s.*c
‘jdi
—
—
•, o4. .,,,cI ,cne
. L,, Aen gr .,C /
J.L.
.22_
1 -’ e A J4 S ‘4 C
CO1’iC
2!_
( ‘, c ‘n st’,c some
me 4 1 1 ne 4n0 1 , ?‘,nc
7 .d 4UC/ i i, PCA
?
.i.?_
LA_
P’ne 7. mrcl jq. 4/
—
jme Co.’ e
stat’
0
4 -
h
I
DrIll., J ,4e,dcrsc.i Hslp.r
j j
Li. ft
4 i’
Cll.nt
w,,r. 1.1/I
Locatioa
ô /7 p, ., 1 ,
g r
j /
Owii.rs
Riprs$inl ativ• j.h k
Lp,c
D.t.SI.rted: 6/)o/iJ D.t.punu&I.d: 7/7/j.J
SITE PLAN 600 1: 400
LOCUS
TIME AND MATERIALS
T..t
w.II
No Diam
hR
6b
Total
D. th
Comp
Depth
C..,n.
L.ft
Scr•.n
I sj
D. c.
Hours
Pumpsd
Length
Eiposld M.t.rs.I
RIOt Sii.
Ris.
t Sc
L i
.rci.”
,
c
/4•
J•••j
3
/ ./ I
2 / , , 5• J• ( 70 / /
REMARKS Cf.;. ci , c ell ‘/ £ . I, se r 75 .6 3 •/•• , •,.
,m 2&’ v’4C r 5 clJ ) •/4 $‘ ‘ - ft, , . _ Ø 7 sr7 . _
Pump 1 st on Hole No // A ‘P D a t. 7 / 7/ ) Waler S.mpl .
oat. ? /7/?3
W.t.r Level .
uba
Tlm G.PM. Vac No. 2
Obs. Obs.
No No.
Sl.tic
7s__ ‘S
- ‘ /. ht
S.nt To &‘ “ T
Fisid Ou ahty
F.
Mn
Time
rec Io s,c
Tail.
Odor
‘I
Ph
Color C/ci’
-------
-R
Ts 1
W•II Tot.i Comp Casing Scr•.n
No 0 1.10. D.ptI D.pth Loft LineD. EaPOind M.tsnot RIot Stz•
REMARKS:
Pump uI on Not. No. D ot•
Wit., Sampl•
G.RM. Vac No.
Stitic -
Obs. Obs.
No. No.
D.LMAHER CD.
GROUND TER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
TIME AND MATERIALS
Hours
RIs. , D i v.
Hours
S.nt To:
Fiitd Qusitty
F.
Tails
Odor
Hsrdnsis
P 1 1
Color
-------
Pump T.st on Hal. No. Oat.
Witi? Luvala
ub.. Obi. Obs.
Tim. G.PM. V ic No. No. No.
Stst,c
10 IC
to
W.t.r Ssmple
Oat• Tims _________________
S.nt To.
Pisid Ouslity
CO 2 Tss ls
F. -- Odor
Mn PlirdasM
DUILMAHER CD.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
Tots i
Da.m DspIh
2 I 15
Comp
Dspth
‘1,
TIME AND MATERIALS
T..t
Will Scr•.n
Ho. _____ _____ ______ _____ _______ _______ _______
2
Cuing
Lift
Lflgtk Exposid Mutirlil plOt Sizs
4 c !:f’ ’ -0
_______ Hours
R,s.r Div.
- JJ 1/(
V/ i 9 ‘ /1 ., I., ‘C r 3’ / .4 ,
REMARkS: eieT • , f,. / .- ‘ t..mp 2 A (o, /1,.
2 eL c.4ia.4 t’u)Ico4 I1.1 zc, c .i i.,.i ‘.7W C l
Hour.
Puffipid
/h, 1.1*.,
2 i4
1
Ph
Color
-------
I
D.LMAHER CO.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
z0.
I c r I 79
From To
j .
Soil Classification
i e iI ,ff
—
—
—
t p_•Ilc. I 1 - ftIL’U (
7 , qsT
—
—
.L __
f’?
‘. c c 1 T — -
.ç ., 7
P c 19T c.ff beji:1c
—
C
‘f JIIc.A ,.,T
c ic’-
—
—
zs
S• I•
Ccs’,c
‘ics
1 i,i • e.rri’cI jo C
7-
/ 1 1 C C 1 P1V (1 * tOátC 1i
—
—
‘it,./. f,.ic.mi cI
—
.j’ 4j• 4
—
—
- L_
—
L2_
F I - c o f J C
—
L
—
4 , J1 ’ ’,
—
7i.’i v l i mC
—
1 , . , - ;,9cC 4 f.it,C/
C2 F .. 1 ( 11fJ C
I I
— I
‘I
7 %
0
I I ,
I-
w
-J
‘ I-
00
U—
. 20 0,+ Zo4
TSSIWSIINi. , ‘ a. 3D.LN.JobNo. T) iJ
DrsUr
H•lpsr 5 C’ f / i 4 , ” ,
Clmi.t
w ir. 79 1(114
Location
,44 L iT
/Ot , C
Own.r’s
R.p •SSflt.tiv.
Oat. Staft d JZ C/f) D.t.F.n.s .d: 9/c 7/F.)
N
\ 300
\ -40O
500
SITE PLAN —600 1: 400
LOCUS
TIME AND MATERIALS
T.st
win Tot.I
No Dam Duptti
Comp
D.pth
Casing Scrs.n
Lift L.ngtli E 8 pOsld Mat.r ,.I
tours
RIot Si*i RiS.r Div
Hours
Pumpsd
2C ( t
/ U
,ç
‘j 9•. L t ! /r’ .cI.,
£0
,y ,,,,
— ilL - - ./1 %fl t //., ,j 1 . ?O .s-’J• /
REMARKS: .4Jc II rO z_i.i t 4( . T r..f ‘-i r’ ’#’ 0’- 2Z’(8cw)iJicrS)
Rese.t Sc?-eCj a *ii’ ,..p -d /4’ v,qe.
Pump 1 st on Nol. No. Oats
With SainpI.
D at i Tumi
Wut•r L.vats
gas.
Vsc No.
abs. Obs.
No. No.
zo’ti
20
L cC
TIm.
Static
G.P M
3 1•
! 1.
S.nt To-
Fisid Duality
CO 2
Mn
Tast•
Odor
N ardi,.ss
Pt , ___
Color
-------
tq3C —
Pup bit on Moss No. Dais
Wat.f Saispi.
Dat. T 5.
D.LMAHER CD.
GROUND TER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD 1REET
NORTH READIIG • MA. OIBU • 817/933-3210
TIME AND MATERIALS
Tsst
win Total coinp ca.tnq Scrisn sss . sssv,.
No DISITI. 01 1t D•pth L&t Lsnqth EzpO$id Matsnal RIot Sla . RIssr D i v. Piu jed
TI . ,. G PN. Vie No.
Obs. Obs.
No. No.
Ssnt To
Fluid Ouallty
- - a
F.
Tsst•
Pb
Color
-------
3
Tolai Comp
DIam DsptPi D.pth
C7•
Scr•.n Hours Hour,
L.nIth EZPOSC Matinal Iot Sue Riser Dew. Pumped
6 //v I.. TO . r i” )/ . 34 ,
Pump TUt Ofl Not. No Date
Wstr LevIls ZG C
Obs.7 T Obs.
Tim. G.PM V.c No. .cii No
Obs.
— No.iI/
St.lIc : •1
)L2.2, 7O I-Is
70 cAcJI 3 4’
l’o hr.
IcLL J it,-i
Water Sampi. Al.
Date ________________ Time _______________
S.nt To.
Field Quality
CO 2
Fe
Mn
Taste
Odor
Hard,,ss
D.L.MAHER CD.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
1•
Test
Well
No
£q T
TIME AND MATERIALS
Casing
Lift
liz S
-------
Test
Well lotel
No Diem Depth
)2c ? ‘i (:
Comp Casing
Depth Left Length
..1) ]Ff_ .
REMARKS: ‘/ 0 ( Ji iq u. .,. •
Ptsmp bet on Hot. No Oat.
Water Sample
Water Levels
Obs.
Time CPU. Vec No
Obs Obs.
No No
Sent To
Field Quality
CO 2 ______
Fe
Taste
Odor
D.L..MAHER
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING e MA. 01864 ° 617/933-3210
TIME ANO MATERIALS
Screen
Exposed Material plot Sic. Riser Dev.
// . —,.:.. c /
Hours
Pumped
/ .1
Static SIL
2.0
Color
-------
Test
W.,I
No Diem
3004 zv
Screen
_________ Hours
Riser 0ev.
. 1’i.• /
Pump Tsst on Hole No Date
Water Sample N.
D i i . Turns
Water LSVSIS
Obs.
I.!!!!. G.P.M Vsc No
Static
Obs. Obs.
No. No.
Sent To.
Ftsid Quality
Co 2 ______
Fe -_______
Taste
Odor
Nsidnsss
DSL.MAHERCD.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
RO BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 e 617/933-3210
TINE ANO MATERIALS
Totai
Depth
‘ 1 5
Comp
L..pt ll
‘1,
Casing _________
Left Lsngth
E pO$5d M•terial tot Size
L //yV4/ , PO
Hours
Pumpsd
/3-,
.7..
30
Ph
Color
-------
Totil Comp Casing
Depth O.pth Lilt L.nsth EspoSso Malarial iot Size Riser
co -o” ci’ . ’ 4 -e’ lJ’-r’ lO & .t--- 1— Lt
Hours
D . c.
1-,
Hews
Pumpid
REMARKS: 3.o4 gp,., - £‘ (sieSi 6’-o ” b.b. 34
‘- “ Db.
Pump at on Mol. No. Dat.
Wit.! Simple
Dat. Tims
Wits, Levels
Obs.
G.RM. Vie No
Ohs. Ohs.
No. No.
S.nt To
Field Quality
lasts
Fe Odor
D.LMAHER CO.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 e 617/9333210
Q &1% .&Scree 5 P?
TIME AND MATERIALS
Test
Scr..r
Well
No Dusm
‘. ci’
Tim.
Static
Hardnev.
Ph
Color
-------
Test
Will Total Camp C.sln
No DIam Depth Depth Lift Length EzpOSid Usterual plot Size
jq” Jf9 5 ’ 4’A li-I Jo ’ JJ P (e ’
Hours Hours
Riser Div. Pumped
/ t A.v. Okr
RENAR S: k e.It D 47
Pump Test on Hole No. Date
Water Sample
.
Dat. Time
Water Levels
ybs.
Time GeM. Vie No .
Static
Obe. abs.
No. No.
To:
Field Quality
CO 2 ______
Fe
Mn
D.LMAHER CD.
GROUND WATER DEVELOI MENT .s
71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 e 617/9333210
TIME AND MATERIALS
Taste
Odor
Hardness
Ph
Color
-------
Total
DIam. Depth
.2!
_______ I irS
Riser D iv.
.S- J” 2
23 ‘17 ‘12.3 ?d - , S
REMARKS: 7sT e Ii t or ‘It 4, f YSy.uu 20 iice 2 .IJ I. VS. Po o 2 1 r ‘/ h . iT
10 oc jsTijil/de1 ItS P ’Af, 7sT ’Ii 7’ 3 7 z h,.r
Pump Nel’ No. - o•. 47 tJF.r Water Sample ? s
cO
Date TIme /2
% T ’ Tim.
DS)0 St.tic
Wat.r L.v.ls
Obs.
G.P.N. Vac No.24
Obs.
No.
ohs.
No.
2. Igi
‘fJ 2a•’ i.?S
‘15 20’
‘/5 .
2°
I- :4
Sent To. qu 6 , . M6/(
Field Quality
CO 2 _____
DL. MAHER CD.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01884 • 817/933-3210
bet
Well
No
H -
2 .4 ’
/ i4
Comp
Depth
Casing
Lilt
‘12.5
Screen
TIME AND MATERIALS
Length Exposed Material slot $izs
£ JO
Hours
Pianpsd
aloe
‘I da
— VS . Ps
‘ S 2 Mn
— L/f 1ff
Tact.
Odor
Hardoses
Color
‘iLu .DS SZ, ‘,‘z
Ph
-------
£0 /J’
Scr•.n
L.ngth Ezpo$Sd Nats ,Iai iot S zs
(V l Pc
.24 5f’ ?‘ (‘ t /Yy” ,,f. 70 S3 /
REMARkS: Pc//ed $CICC#1J it 7i ,rrcr it 34• it ’? esr eii 7 e ‘/ h, .
2 ’ 1.1 ItS 1 a’p 2 / i qTtO ,m /f jcc. )s7 17
Pump st n Hot. No. — Oat. Watsr S.mDI. 4/’
sv.I
TIM. G.PM. Vac No.
;;;:- ‘i /
Oat. Tim.
S.nt To:
Ft.ld Quality
— CO 2 _______________ Tast._
— Fs _________________ Odor_
— MA Hat dn sss
Ph
D.L..MAHER CD.1
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • NA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
bst
Holl
No Dism
‘V7 T .2S
2 ‘.
r
et
Total Comp.
Depth Dspth
TINE AND MATERIALS
Casing
L.f I
________ Hours
RIsir Dsv.
005. Obs.
No.
Color
-------
Ts1
W.iI
No Diam.
21 q-jj
Coinp. Casino
D.pth taft t..ngth
o• #‘ —
Scr..n
tours
Pumpd
.2( If ’ 6 0’ — —
NENARkS baokders 2 &erc 2 ‘qp.rT
Pump st on Hots No. Oat•
W.t., Sanpis
Wat.r L.V.IS
s.
DR U. Vie - No .
Static
Obs. Ohs.
No. No.
S.nt To.
Field Quality
— Co 2
F.
Mn
Ph
Test.
Odor
l tardnss
b.L..MAHER
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
PC. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01884 • 617/933-3210
Tots
Depth
9.
TIME AND MATERIALS
LipOsid Matinal RIot Size
________ Hours
Riser Dsv .
0
Color
-------
T.st
w.uu Total Comp. Casing
No Diam Depth Ospla LSIt LeIIgtil
%2 .25 7’ 0’ 0’ —
Scr•.a
REMARKS: h /d .,.r 24 gj Jo ei r / ‘ $ / 9
PuMp bst on 14o4 No. Oats
Water Sampls
Tims G.PN.
Waler Levels
ubs.
Vac No.
Obs. Obs.
No. No
S.nt To
Field Ou.lIty
CO 2
Fs
Mn
Tssts
Odor
Hardness
D.LMAHER CD.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
TIME AND MATERIALS
- Hours Hours
£ pO$Sd Material iot Sir . Ris., Dsv. Pumped
— — __ — a a
Static
Ph
Color
-------
Tol d
Diem. Depth
2c £
Comp. Cuing
Dspth taft L.ngtb
a. “
- 2S 2!’ 0’ 0’ — — — — a
REMARKS: 3 , J r 4,C 1/ I c ! e iS
Pump st on Hots No. Dat.
Wit. ’ Sa.pI.
Witsr LeVdIs
s.
Time G.PN. Vie No .
Obs. Obs.
No. No.
To
Fi.ld Ousilty
Co 2 ______
Fe
Mn
Tests
Odor
H.rdn$s
DL. MAHER CD.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
st
W.lI
No
PP
—3’,
Scr•.n
TIME AND MATERIALS
________ Hauls Hours
EspOsid Material slot Size Riser Os .. Pumped
— — — — 0 0
Static
Ph
Color
-------
Test
w.ll
No
,v qA
- .2( V dS — 0 0
REMARKS: 6oc.io(ers ‘I ’ ‘ii ,eie. 3 epcrt
Pump Test on Itoh No. Date
Wet. ’ Sample -•t—
wat.i Levels
I!!.!. GEM. Vec No .
Static -_______________________
Ohs. Ohs.
No. No.
Sent To:
Field Ouetlty
Co 2 ______
Fe
Tsste
Odor
hardness
D.L..MAHER CD.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
Total
Diam . Depth
.2.$ I/•
Scram
Comp. Casing
Depth Lift Length Exposed Mst.rI.l slot Six . Riser
s a’
Hours
Des.
0
Hours
Pumped
0
Ph
Color
-------
Test
wan Total Comp Csslng ___________________________________________ Hours Hours
No Diem Depth Depth Left Length E pO5Sd Mat.rIal plot Size Riser Dsv. Pumped
. !f 2S — — — — 0
I i
: .2S 2s / 1 r/z / — — — — 0
REMARKS: ‘/ 7.. - / d c l yeT, scfec, 1 / PS “S 5
L. 1 £1174M 3’,,f #sA- s
Pump II t on Hole No. Date
W.t.r Sempi. 4/a
Water Levels
b..
Time G.PU. Vac N..
Obs. Obs.
No. No.
Sent To.
Field Qualltp
Co 2 ______
Fe
Taste
Odor
Hardness
DULSMAHER CO.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING e MA. 01884 e 617/933-3210
IUE AND MATERIALS
Scr..n
Static ‘7
Ph
Color
-------
__ 0
.25 -
- l1._# 7 ’ i, .11 t
R aR S: ec .u., q
* p 6 f £, re JIthh. ‘2 n 0(eI D1* P
Wot., $omls Al.
Pum ToSt 00 HOtS No. - DOt. -
Tim.
Tim. G.PN. VR No.
Obs. Obs.
No. No .
S.nt To:
__ 7• •7
— FiOtd Quality
— . Co 2
—
Nil
Tsst•
Odor
DOLMAHER CD. ’
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01854 • 517/933-3210
Tst
w.Ii
No.
Total
Diam. Distil
2Y /07
Comp.
D.øti l
0 ’
Casing
Loft
0’
L .nsth g 5 p051d
—
U• C’ —
Scrosn — sours Hoofs
Nat.da$ iot Sin . Issr 0.5. P-. z
— — a
S.fl
“ I
Color
-------
Tot.I
Dism. Dspth
?S 2’12
. .S V .rc L 1 9 ‘ SO .V3 2
REMARKS: 7 ?S cqsi off q ho.,/O/er 7F5 &j S 3 W
Pump list on Hots No. 7 4 Data 7/ -. 2/ PS
Wat., SIflPI Al’
Dats TIm
Wtsr L.v.Is
is. ft
CPU. VIC N . . ! A
Obs. Ohs.
No. No.
i 2
.1
— ‘—I.—
/300
.1
S.nt To:
F.&d Quality
Co 2 _____
F.
Ta st.
Odor
Hordn .sS
D.L.MAHER CD.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
I
Tst
WsII
No
,1
# 74
TIME AND MATERIALS
Camp. Casing Scram Hours Hours
Depth Lstt Lsngth ExpO$d Matsrl.I RIOt Size RIur D. . Pumped
o• a’ — 0 0
lcrTe.,1 Tim.
f?3O :
Ph
Color
-------
T.st
Wilt
No Ohm
t -2 .2J
Tol l
D.pth
Hours
Pumpid
7 1 , 2 i / 0 • 0. — — — — a c
REMARKS: I - S S C s, T ff q 4 ,j it/et / - I r cc i,, hen r
# (-$ f
Pump list on Hoe. No. Oats ‘—
Wstsr S.mph.
W.t.r Livils
ubs.
Tim, G.PM. V•c No .
Obs. Obs.
•o. No.
$.nt To
Fh.Id Ou .Ilty
F.
T.st.
Odor
H .rdn .ss
/1
DL MAHER CD.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
Scrp.n
TIME AND MATERIALS
Comp. CasIng N 0Uf 5
Dspth Lift Lsngth ExpOSid Matinal Iot Sizi Rlssr Div.
Os — — — — — a
Ph
Color
-------
T.st
w.sI
No Diam. _____ _____
R 4
Wat., Lsvsls
Obs.
Tims GMM. vac No.
Scria ”
M.t.rIaI slot Sia .
I/y tL, 30
REMARKS: I,,ij . /1 d, .’c / , r 4 .rJ r e i/ i A- . r
Pump on Itoh No. ‘ Oats
Watsr S.mpl. /L/o
Cbs. Obs.
No. No.
Static £/. 7
0
S.nt To:
Fisld Ousllty
— -s
F.
Mn
Ti sts
Odor
Hsrdns•S
D.L..MAHER CD ’
GROUND WATER DEVEL.OPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01884 • 617/933-3210
TIME AND MATERIALS
Total
Depth
Comp. Casing
Depth L.ft Length EapOsid
‘IS £12’ ‘ - ______
________ hl o ui s
Rhssr 0. ’ .
a
Hours
Pumped
0
Ph
Color
-------
Scrisi,
gU S3 f ‘j9 C C $ 10 .f1 / I a
REMARKS: /‘ ‘A hr 4t (0 V i dol C /j 4 ?
‘hi ,, :r SS m ?3 v4c 9.4 d l 7 7! , P,.iie / 2’ i, ?/ZS/IS
PuivIp st on Ifols No. Dali Watir Simp4. No
TIm. G.PM. V .5 No.
Obs. 011$.
No. No.
SIstic g
o
S S- 23
S.nt To
Flild Ou•lity
CO 2 _____
F.
Tails
Odor
tirdnsss
D.L.MAHER CD.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0 BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
Tsst
Will
No
TIME
* Z
Totsi
Diam. 0.011
. 5_ cC,
Comp.
Dspt h
AND MATERIAL S
Casing
Lift
99.
Lsngth Esposid Matirl.I plot Slas
C 20
________ Hours
RIs.r Dsv.
Hours
Pumpsd
‘I
Ph
Colo
-------
,ZY scr sr is C e /00 J 3 /
REMARKS: i/p/f iGt ‘ii 4, f /3 .‘cc * 2 ç 0101 7.3. ,. -, . 7 , /2 h qr
)OVAI - . 7 r i1 I d .i zA * i r 0 1,
Pump bet on Hots No. /O 4 .g o.t• Wat.r S.mpt. Yc j
1 500
,sl 0
ts, L.vels
uba. , Obs. Obs.
G.PM. Vec No.2 ob No. M No.
‘ 1.3 ________
70 13 2.3
oat. 1(2 .r 1 Ps Tli i. /(3 0
Sent To: To C c# , Sm’r4
Fi&d Ouslity
CO 2 __________________ Tests ________
Fe ____________________ Odor ________
— Mn Hardness
psi _____
70 i3 .c7
2.5 .c’7
- c ’l
D.L.MAHER CO.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
w
Test
well
No Diem .
0 ’fo,4 . r
2 ‘oh
Totel
Depth
C ’s
Comp
Depth
‘ 15’
Casing
Left
is’
Scrpen
Length EspOend Materiel plot 555 .
C’ C’ /‘/ ;q, /00
s mrrcd Time
1’,30 ;;;;
________ H SUTS
R1ar Dee.
•ç.j /
Hours
Pumped
2 ‘/,.
70 / .3 ____
,fri... C T ’ qflá, J ,.
Color ________
-------
l ist
Will
No Ohm .
.7-c
2 ‘oh
‘1.3
70
2.3c
Scram
.zr ir • , J-•3- /
REMARKS: ‘/0,1 i 5 ’ ‘/z h, e t 70 ym /3 /re ‘ 2 dd 7.3. c -’ 2 4 7 . ‘/ 4# g r
70 . , IS vce a/of 2. I ,4’c* z 4 . i ,r_.,__7 ’ r_g.e/I
Pump list on Ho. No. /o 4 h S Oat. 7/2J/IJ Wat., SaoIs Yec
Oats 7/ZJ/PS TIi /(30
Obs. Obs.
G.PM. Yam No.2.6 No.! d No .
Tims ________________________________________
— Ssnt To: Cc’e Ta S S ’ T4
jo —
‘ .f!_ O 2. .07
1Sj2. 10 J3 .07 FI.IdOua l lty
20 1 .3 . 2.i .c ’7
/4_L . - -- .- - Co 2
— Aeeove,ed L ,t4,.. os gfL. Fi
— Mn
PR
Odor
Naidnira
DULMAHER CD.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
TIME AND MATERIALS
Total
DIP,”
IS
Comp.
DspU ’
CasIa l
Lift
3 5 ,
1.1111th EzpO$id - Matilhal loI Slam
C C’ I ..i. . /00
Rlsir D l v.
.5_3” /
Nours
P.m =
2 ‘/
Color
-------
NO RTHERN GROUND WATE.
P.O. Box 632 Henniker. N H 0324.
Tel. (603) 428- 7099
C
0 ‘,2( F.4je. . Date: 3/ QJ/ P7ms7 Well No. 27
( hi ’O Z) A) 1• R Aid °“ ‘ Client: f44h.4 Location: /J/ Y/. dil
A)7% ,“JL? € .rgA)of N Test Well Location Map
30 ‘to 3 M - c .
bro&v ’j yevei ‘ S e /ly
J ’i-e’f7 Cr. Ple al
_____________ e//,/ 0 . ‘7
.h, k€J
°LA)4J J.aotitf a e c
No? ro Scale
( n )..X J€dI Pumping Test On
Well No. _____
NOTE: All m.osurem.nrs from ground aurfocO
f•st Nell Oba. Wail
No . No.
Static Water Level
Depth of Well
Casing Left
Screen Length Exposed
Screen Left
Slot Size
Development
Pumping
Remarks: 3’J.t ° 7’ V.Z7
eJP// o ’p Aa / ibAJI
, ,jp I/ 4 6e cit ai *Ae
I . 7 ,IP ? (o £ !1P..
j i’ 01 ef QAJI -
Time
Obs. ii
005.1* 11
G P M
VA C
Recovery
Water Sample:_Yes — No Dote: _____
Dr filer: /
+ 7.
0A1
i
Test Well Record
LOG OF WELL
0’ Ground Surface
-------
Test Well Record
LOG OF WELL
0’ Ground Surface
o -i- ,a F:A,e. -
1 rou),J - Wo( g r’g ve.l
a
‘I
1 LL)k)
.1.
e ‘ o 3S r’7 d ‘t- t oq’se .
i ’OjJ)AJ c3110VP 1
NORTHERN GROUND WA TE
P0. Box 632 Henniker. Nil 0324
Tel. (603) 428- 7099
Date: 4 12V/P7 Test Well No. _______
______________Location: *& N / I
Client: ______________
N
4
No? ro Scale
Test Well Location Mop
We/f
Static Water Level
Depth of Well
Casing Left
Screen Length Exposed
Screen Left
Slot Size
Development
Pumping
—
NOTE: All meosurem•nrs from ground surfoc•
T. 5 t t bll Obs.W.sI
No. No.
Remarks: .re# Jq e/ g /4ee J
i i ,4 ,,, S° 3’ fc?AiI
/ o / pp7
Jo
5 .
0
I a
/
Pumping Test On
Well No. ___
Ti me
Obs.Wi1
Ob, Well ObS
WIII CPM J_VAC
.1 1
I I
Recovery
Water Sample: Yes J ’Ne Date: ______
Driller: , 1 frf4 /
‘S ’e
:tl _ P7
3.
j.
k
-------
Test Well Record
LOG OF WELL
0 Ground Surface _______________________________________
0 tc ? Top rc. ‘ I Dote: __________ Test Well No.
Fe i ob Ies
Client: , /J. Location: ____________
7t S t ied ‘- Coarse Zih,-ks
bpe , N Test Well Location Mop
JG
_________________ fr7ct
_________________ ‘o
No? ? O Scale
Pumping Test On
Well No. ______
. ct rpe, cett-:...,q
.\fOTE All m.asu,•m.f’?S from gr. d surfcc•
T 5? Well Obs. Well
?lo. No.
Static Water Level
Depth of Well 4_•J
Casing Left 97
Screen Length Exposed S
Screen Left S
Slot Size
Development
Pumping — ______ ______
? emarks: Z*..I/ ,‘..k J’
.,4dPMP, 25’.43 pAll
h, /o 1 a !J
p l! 4
7 5__ p,,7
/2 Y*e
Ohs. Well Ohs. Well Ohs Will 6 p M VA C
Time
Recovery
Water Sample:_Y•s_NO Dote: ____
Driller: ) ir4 ,/ /I 4i9 d ’
NORTHERN GROUND WA TE
P0.8ax632 Henniker.N.H 032
Tel. (603) 420 - 7099
4
-------
Test Well Record
LOG OF WELL
0’ Ground Surface
NORTHERN GROUND WA TE:
P0.9ox632 Henn,ker.N.H. 0324;
Tel. (603) 428 7099
o + ‘? Top : I
Dote: J,/fi7 Test Well No. ‘4 P7
Client: 12h’AJ
zehr ., 4’A J! A/ / I
eoJ , )es
7t 0 53 M ocirse..
brc iL L4J;1-k
N Test Well Location Map
+
S’ee, /‘1c jc
sL)o/D á 7
No? ro Scale
Q
i°7
cr iso
Qj. •IAJe,1J -á’ I
NOTE: All m.osur.m.n,s trom groono surl ca
T.sr wan 00,. W.ll
No. No.
Static Water Level
Depth of Well
Casing Left
Screen Length Exposed
Screen Left
Slot Size
Development
Pumping
4-3.
,7.
4-.
4—a
S
Remarks: I.,, o i7’
J
-á’7’ 7-Pfr7J2Yac
Pumping Test On
Well No. ; L.-1 ’
foa..wa,,
Time Ilf4-i7
00, i il
.c-y.
*
ob3.WC1L
3.c
G P M
VA C
‘ .C7
L.O2
“5
7 .;
5”
5.3
T .’?
‘ .j-
ic ”
,;4)*
4,) -)
d c
/6”
‘J;cc
4.11
,I,
4i.)9.
/ “
‘ 3C
. ,3
2.i j
‘ 7
q
1- i.
. 3
4.36
I
+iPl
..J4 .
4,37
‘9c
, il
Recovery
I;oI
4,,$
A.I
3 +
i.c’
3 ?
1 ’.7 C’
3• ,3 :?
Water Sample: No Date: #‘ r
Driller: 7 !M/ ) IL Y / 1
(3
-------
Test Well Record j
O +o + P Q.t Date: JJa2& / 27 Thst Well No.
-I1 &.& j i”lecI
Client: 4.4 J,’ . ) L.acction: IL , ’ ,
1 JgPppLIJ.ri s A/h’
i 1 ,J N Test Well Location Map
£2 .1’ -3° ’ ç
1 t’OLLThJ !c JGt
F 1 ,u€. brouj,... ) AA3 -á 7
Si A)OI iAJ,1h 31 .ft
Y3i- re &. J fled
aro.r-ej iii.1-h s,1 4
‘I
Nor ro Scale
NOTE: All m.osu,.menr, tronf row,a surfaco
T.sr $ lf Obs W•ll
No. No.
Static Water Level
Depth of Well
Casing Left
Screen Length Exposed
Screen Left
Slot Size
Development
Pumping _____ ______
Remarks: 4// c23 Pf1
23 , ?L jhlL
/ ,,4L )4 ,4 oAs. ,aPJ/
Time
jObs. W.li
Obs.We,
G PM
VA C
Recovery
I
Water Sample: Ths. .y.(lVo Date: _____
Driller: P 4 J
s-a
NORTHERN GROUND WA TE
P0.8ox632 Henn,ker.N.h 0324
Tel. (603) 428 7099
Pumping Test On
Well No. ______
-,
&
LOG OF WELL
& Gr - — f Surface
-------
Test Well Record
LOG OF WELL
0’ Ground Surface
NORTHERN GROUND WA TE
P0. Sox 632 Henn,ker. N.H. 0324
Tel. (603) 428- ? 99
j g 7’
t .2.7•
Date: ‘J rest Well NO. ._f :: Z
C1ient // .) Loeotion JA ‘i-’
d 47’. .i- iIIo,kj
N Test Well Location Mop
1
g.JQPP /
22 ‘—1 d 3 . .j,..
(ç3b j “1pI cQ.411
4r. 4 eA ’ cAgrp
J ’ec
I / /1 t.’°. - - p
Nor ro Scale
‘ 1
i d’ ,‘
a.,”- dg’,’ ,J’ gLIdjJ’
#I ’, m e
-e7 A4 e
41’ 3 ’ . i’ P
£16
NOTES All m.asur.n,.n?s Irom ground suri.c•
Static Ware ,- Level
Depth of Well
Casing Lef?
Screen Length Exposed
Screen Left
Slot Size
Development
Pumping
fist Y*ll Obs.W.ll
Pie. P ie.
6
—C —’
000
/
Remarks: 4oe 1 ’E
/ 474 , . gdcda( ii//ed
7 -A, ! //
Pumping Test On
Well No.
lObs. W.ll lObs I* 1 1 1 0b& Well I G P M VA C
Time
I
.
I—
Recovery
Water Sample:_Yes_eVe Dote: _____
Driller: $ Z I I 4 4 i! . .’ ø /
-------
Test Well Record
LOG OF WELL
0’ Ground ur face
O, ’f• -r ei’j c j. hDote :
t 3 fo .Q Vied ar’aufej
24’i- 0 36 ’ a 0 L .H—
( eJ
tQr’Pj
sJt
1 71 t r LhL) s 1 I
Jc ‘ 6 d hroke,.)
ch i j 3 rc ’Qj
NORTHERN GROUND WA 7.
P0.Sox 632 Henn,ker.N.H 032
Tel. (603) 428- 7099
J/3 ° Test Well No.
C/lent: _ á /7’o,tI LOcation: e 2”, it A !
ig 4/,, iiA ,.j-s A’,’, ’
N Test Well Location Mop
4
Nor ro Sc ie
fr’?4f
NOTE: All n,.ogur.m.nr. fron, ground aurf c•
Tag? fl U Obs.W•Il
P lo.
7,
Static Water Level
Depth of Well
Casing L.eft
Screen Length Exposed
Screen Left
Slot Size
Development
Pumping _____ ______
Remarks: 7 1 ( l4 .r •/7
-I- .
L,4 £ 1t // oii7’
Pumping Test On
Well No. ____
Time
Obs. W.i,
Obs rn,i oos.we,,
GPM
VAC
Recovery
Water Somple:_Yes_PJo Dote: ____
Driller: / i I( 4 .vJ
-------
Test Well Record
NORTHERN GROUND WA TE
P0. Box 632 Henn,ker. N.b 0324
LOG OF WELL Tel. (603) 428- 7099
0’ Ground Surface -
o è dUi . i). fh Oore 1/f Test WeliNo.
1rc jJ c I &v ir
Client: // 7 AJ Location iz2iit . .,
17’ jJd r
.g.. . - Test Well Locorion Mop
3 n Me i
( e tA) j . ¼ 1 o1 /1
; .6 f
. i r+ £f! - ( cc r.
________________________________________ 1 I
I_/ 7 -
/7
_________________ 3
I / I ’
/ Jill
, /.____
cbroke...) rci /eJ
I ’
• ., of ce tc i..i
T r IWII Obs.WelI
No. No.
NOTE .411 m.asur.m.n?s tram greu d aurfoca
24 Jo
Static Water Level
Depth of W.ll
Casing Left
Screen Length Exposed (
Screen Left
Slot Size IG
Development odi i ”
Pumping ic.// ,qrgc
Remarks: f cP
Q7 4 •3Pg 74
gJ•pAh/ ;7L pX(
._fo
3’.
‘ r- ’•
71; 33 dI JJ
, . 7 L
,
4 ’ aAh
No? ,a Scale
Pumping Test On
Well No. ____
Time
Obs.WiglIObs.ig
Cbs Well
GPM
VAC
I
Re co very
Water Sampl.:_Yes._/No Date: ____
#,7 -’ %-4 • ,4,. aA Dril!er: $4i ’/ /i 2 ’J
-
3.
-------
Comp. Casmi
D.ath Lot t L105th
•1 • 1.
dC4’ ‘J /ô
R!MARKS: :z If/;1CI//5; 1 (e , i, /rir/M/ .C 2f ___2 /
Watsr Sarnols
Pup bit on Nob No. Data
Tlrns
Obs. Obs.
No No.
S.nt To:
Fssld Ouallty
1 iUc o c .P# Vobsi Vnr
—
— Fs
T..t.
Odor
Hardnou
DSLMAHER CD.
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
PO.BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 6171933-3210
TIME AND MATERIALS
bat
w.si Total Scip.n Hours Hours
No Dl i i i. Dsoth _____ _____ ______ EzPO 5 Nat.fi.I IOt S i• Rs..r Day. P anpsd
1- 4 -2w _________ j / 45 ,O’
wit., I..vsls
ubs.
Turns G.PM. Vie No .
stg lc
Color
-------
Evcrelt kiell
DSL.SMAHER CD. Y
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STREET
NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933-3210
UNPiN
Prom To Soil CIusIfIcatioS
/1
4;;,a -g,ilJ , 2 ,-
——r y
/;4: L ;I
,4 #t,.a #‘? ai J..1 t’
-— -— - -.i-- ‘— ---- —
. C,,,j1 c ° ,i
—
çT r- i
-- ---- -- - -
A . P AA/ C.
-—-- — —- --
i 4 ,t k + c Jh,dAI.,l
-
—
L
jff/ . ,fl}1 tS r J
I
r
0
w
7 .ulW..IIN..aE ’.W” D.LM.JobNo.
7-2 -i
Nslpsr /)
6’ I t3/
Locatsos tvp e
Own. vs R•pren.Rtstws
\ 2oo / /
300-__’
400—lp
SITE PLAN OO 1”400’
LOCUS
TIME AND MATERIALS
list
woo Total Coinp. Casing Scrcan Hours Hours
No. Diem. Depth Depth LIft Length poS .d Matinal plot SIzo Riser D i v. Pumped
42.i ’ /t, ’ lt.o’ S $.
PUMP list on Nets No. Dat.
•‘
Vie No.
Ohs. Ohs.
TIm• G.E M. wo. No.
;;;; :c.3c’
— CO 2
— Fe
— Mn_
Ph
Water SimpI
Dats T hou
Snt To:
Fluid Ouahlty
Taut.
Odor
Hardnsu
h’i’,iuul
Color
-------
P0. BOX 127 71 CONCORD STRE
JUL... I NORTH READING • MA. 01864 • 617/933—3
GROUND WATER DEVELOPMENT
REPORT
uJi) o& i u) ’-&..-. , 2. EvereltWe
Contract:
Address
Dais Started
-
L i). 1+o - .
S1/I I! )
v J I.
Ccnvpiet.d yasfc7
0
Coarse Brown
Sand and Gravel
WI Boulders
Coarse Brown
Sand and Gravel
w/ Large Cobbles
ç. Fine-MediUm Sand
&VLP tt S, +e /&.th.,,*/’/ /
D L.Msiw Co. Job No. 7- 2 -
REMARKS
.D.$igii of IL
is,sI
Smt.s lPcksd
c; ’-c’ .c ,..-.G.L ’
tu,w Set ,, ,,
L,tP.*P!p V -Z4-4l
Y -is 42
.a
It’
P.g t Sije
Slot
Lacgth
. I,
j :iè 5.5.
pI_ - ,p c-.
Tempoimy Casing Uasd
inch_From To
_____inch_From To
inch... From To
_____ inch — From To
______inch — From ______To
Gisesi Used
‘ ‘ Grsde . Used
________ Grads Yds. Used
________ Grade Yds. Used
________ Grads . Used
________ Grads Yds. Used
T 1 pe of SssI
r; I ’ 24” SfrCJ C*su. dL Used
S.tFro” b b 41
Sla of Sssl Casing
L hdSedCasblg 41
Did lI O - Up. frI4ow Soon
LthofSUIgiIsTIem
.G.L.
StsiicLeml oat.
____ 4 z3 Lemi 1J G .’
COM NTS
Drillor . K€H.
Help.’ pil,kp ¶ c .r-r f _
PaflnflCTlflN WELL
1---
Sasen Fitting
Top
35
24”
------- |