REPORT ON A CONSTRUCTION AND PUMPING TEST PROJECT … · construction and pumping test project for a municipal production well village of chesterville morrison beatty limited 4500

REPORT ON A CONSTRUCTION AND PUMPING TEST PROJECT

FOR A MUNICIPAL PRODUCTION WELL

VILLAGE OF CHESTERVILLE

M O R R I S O N B E A T T Y L I M I T E D 4500 Dixie Road

Mississauga, Ontario (416) 624-9308

SEPTEMBER 1989 PROJECT NO. 664-881

A.W. TAYLOR, B.SC. W.D. MORRISON, P.ENG.

' @ morriron beatty ( Cmsutting Engineers and Hydrogeologists

September 26, 1989 MBL File 664-881

Olympic Drilling Co. Ltd. Box 9180 Terminal 1 Ottawa, Ontario K1G 3T9

Attn: Mr. Roy Renwick

I Re: Construction and Pumping Test Report Municipal Production Well PW 6

I Town of Chesterville Countv of Storrnont Dundas

Dear Mr. Renwick:

We are pleased to submit this final report on the construction and testing of the above proposed municipal water well for the Town of Chesterville.

We have concluded that this installation will provide the required perennial yield of 22.7 Lls (300 igpm). Although we calculated well efficiency at 76% which is slightly below the 80% needed, we feel that this is adequate.

I Water quality is generally good. Turbidity was the sole parameter to exceed the Ministry of the Environment water quality guidelines. The Drinking Water Section (Water Resources Branch) of the Ministry of the Environment indicates that

I particulate matter comprises an organic, high free sulphur suspension. This is a natural phenomenon and not related to well construction.

I I We trust that this is the information that you require at this time. Should you

have any questions or comments, please contact us.

Yours very truly, MORRISON BEA'ITY LIMITED

Andrew W. Taylor, B.Sc. AWTtlf

4500 Dixie Road, Unit 12A, Mississauga, Ontario L4W 1 V7 Bus. 416-624-9308 FAX. 41 6-624-2334 Dartmouth, N.S. 902-468-3844 Sydney, N .S. 902-564-404 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

t

2.0 WATER REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.0 GEOLOGY 2

3.1 Overburden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Bedrock 3

4.0 HYDROGEOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

4.1 Surface Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

4.2 Groundwater Occurrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

5.0 WELL CONSTRUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

6.0 PUMPING TESTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

6.1 Sandfree Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

6.2 Step-Drawdown Pumping Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3 Aquifer Performance Pumping Test January 17.20, 1989 7

.... cont'd

7.0 INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

7.1 Sandfree Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

7.2 Step-Drawdown Pumping Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

7.3 Aquifer Performance Pumping Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

8.0 SAFE WELL YIELD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

9.0 INTERFERENCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

10.0 RECHARGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

11.0 WATER QUALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

11.1 Interpretation of Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

12.0 CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

13.0 RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

14.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Figure 10

Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 14

Figure 15 -

LIST OF FIGURES

Topographic Location Plan

Airphoto Location Plan

Site Location Plan

Grain Size Distribution PW 6 6.1-7.6 m


Grain Size Distribution PW 6 10.7 m



Water Well Record PW 6

As-constructed Well Diagram Well PW 6

Step-Drawdown Test - Drawdown vs Time PW 6

Step-Drawdown Test - Drawdown vs Pumping Rate PW 6

Total Head Loss Attributable to Laminar Flow

Aquifer Performance Pumping Test - Semi-logarithmic

Drawdown vs Time PW 6 - January 17-20, 1989

Aquifer Performance Pumping Test - Semi-logarithmic *9:; I

Drawdown vs Time TW 4 - January 17-20, 1989 %' ,

I

I 8 Figure 16

- Aquifer Performance Pumping Test - Semi-logarithmic

Drawdown vs Time TW 5 - January 17-20, 1989

I Figure 17 - Aquifer Performance Pumping Test - Semi-logarithmic

I Drawdown vs Time Pz 1 - January 17-20, 1989

I Figure 18 - I Aquifer Performance Pumping Test - Semi-logarithmic

Drawdown vs Time Pz 2 - January 17-20, 1989

1 Figure 19 - Aquifer Performance Pumping Test - Semi-logarithmic

I Drawdown vs Time Pz 5 - January 17-20, 1989

Figure 20 Aquifer Performance Pumping Test - Semi-logarithmic

1 Drawdown vs Time Pz 13 - January 17-20, 1989




1 Drawdown vs Time Pz 19 - January 17-20, 1989



I Figure 24 - Groundwater Hydrograph Observation Well Pz 1


8 Figure 26 - Groundwater Hydrograph Observation Well TW 4




I

Figure 30 - Groundwater Hydrograph Observation Well Pz 19

Figure 31 - Groundwater Hydrograph Observation Well Pz 20

Figure 32 - Aquifer Performance Pumping Test - Semi-logarithmic

Drawdown vs Distance PW 6

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 - Mann Aqua Rapid Chemical Analysis Program Test Results

Table 2 - Chlorinated Herbicides and Organo-phosphate Pesticides

plus Tri-halomethane

Table 3 - Trace Metals, Phenols, Nitrogen Cycle and Radionuclides

APPENDICES

Appendix A - Bacteriological Analysis - 28, 48 and 70 hrs pumping PW 6

Appendix B - Supplemental Step-testing PW 6 and TW 5, April 1989

Appendix C - Ministry of the Environment Energy Dispersion X-Ray

Fluorescence Analysis

Appendix D - Metric Conversion Table

1.0 INTRODUCTION

At the request of Mr. Roy Renwick of Olympic Drilling Company Limited of

Ottawa, Morrison Beatty Limited undertook a construction and pumping test

evaluation of a proposed municipai production well for the Village of Chesterville.

A municipal water supply investigation for a new groundwater source was previously

conducted in 19&7 by Water and Earth Sciences Associates Ltd. The new production

well was installed within the granular deposits identified and tested during that study.

Figure 1 shows the topographic location of the new production well PW 6 about 4

krn west of Chesterville on the north side of the railway tracks. Figure 2 shows the

air photo location of the site plus wells used during this study. Figure 3 depicts the

site location plan.

We understand that existing supplies are obtained from two wells completed into

a river-connected gravel aquifer situated in a buried bedrock depression west of

Chesterville. Colour, odour, and turbidity problems occurred in water supplies from -

the existing well field.

This report describes briefly water requirements, geology and hydrogeology, well

construction, pumping tests, interference, safe well yield, recharge and water quality.

We will evaluate the data, draw conclusions and make recommendations.

As this evaluation has been compiled in metric units, we have provided in

Appendix D a conversion table.

2.0 WATER REQUIREMENTS

Background documentation from Water and Earth Sciences Associates Limited

indicated that the existing commercial and residential demands require a yield of

about 15 Wsec. As additional supplies have been unavailable, a development freeze

has been enforced within the community.

\

Totten Sims Hubicki Associates, acting as the engineer to the Village of

Chesterville determined that a production yield of about 22.7 Lls would adequately

provide the long-term supply requirements. This would enable additional

development to continue.

3.0 GEOLOGY

3.1 Overburden

The granular overburden materials within the study area result from the retreat

of the Wisconsin glaciation about 15,000 years ago. Glacial drift has been exposed

to weathering since the disappearance of the Champlain Sea which covered the area

9,000 to 12,000 years ago.

West of Chesterville, a granular deposit known as the Maple Ridge Glaciofluvial

Complex, occurs within the Pleistocene sediments. This band of sand and gravel

extends from south of Hwy. 43 near Maple Ridge norrhlnortheasterly to north of

Boyne Road. Fine to medium grained sands occur south of Hwy. 43 but increases

in gravel content northwards toward production well PW 6. In addition the coarsest

material within the granular deposit apparently narrows laterally through the

production well site.

The Maple Ridge Glaciofluvial Complex is bordered on both sides by a clay till

unit about 12 m thick. The till unit also occurs between the underlying bedrock and

the overlying sands and gravel south of the TW 4 well site.

Data suggests that the Maple Ridge complex can be traced further north to join

the similar Morewood complex.

3.2 Bedrock

Underlying the granular overburden deposits are Palaeozoic rocks of the Ottawa

Formation of Ordovician age. Geologic mapping of the area indicates subcropping

of the Pamelia beds consisting of limestone, dolomite, shale and thin bedded

sandstone (A.E. Wilson, 1976). This geologic member apparently underlies the

production well on the study site at a depth of about 13 m below ground level.

4.0 HYDROGEOLOGY

4.1 Surface Water

Situated within old gravel/sand pit workings, little surface drainage occurs at the

immediate wellhead site due to the coarse granular surface deposits. Outside the

immediate area, surface water drains easterly to a tributary of Kittle Creek. This

creek discharges into South Nation River upstream of Chesterville.

A surface water divide occurs about 1 krn north of the production well site.

Flow there is northward toward tributaries of Black Creek which eventually discharges

into the South Nation River downstream of Chestenille.

A small pond north of the production well exists resulting from high groundwater

conditions. The pond surface was frozen at the time of the pumping tests.

4.2 Groundwater Occurrence

4.2.1 Overburden

Water well records on file with the Ministry of the Environment indicate sand

and gravel intervals in nearby domestic drilled wells. Some wells are completed into

this water bearing zone while others show penetration into the underlying bedrock.

At the production well site, a sand and gravel aquifer was test drilled down to

about 13 m in which the bottom 3.7 m consisted of a coarse sand to boulder gravel.

This formation is believed capable of providing in excess of 23 Wsec of groundwater.

The presence of a silty clay layer apparently does not produce confined aquifer

conditions. Previous pumping tests showed the aquifer behaves hydraulically as an

unconfined formation. The water table occurs about 1 m below ground level at the

test site. t

4.2.2 Bedrock

Water bearing intervals occur within fissured or fractured zones within the

limestone bedrock. The majority of local drilled wells were completed into this

aquifer. Both the Winchester School on the south side of Hwy. 43 and the High

School on the north side were public supply systems completed to a depth of about

43 m into bedrock. Water quality would be mineralized due to the carbonate

bedrock.

5.0 WELL CONSTRUCTION

The production well PW 6 was constructed in accordance with the tender

specifications and the general description contained within the Water and Earth

Science Associates Ltd. 1988 report.

The well was constructed using an initial 200 mm diameter exploratory drillhole

and casing advanced to a depth of 13.7 m below ground surface. Formation samples

were taken and sieved for grain size analysis. Figures 4 through 8 show the grain

size curves. Based on the grain size distribution, the final sizing of the gravel pack

and the well screen was selected.

The 200 mm diameter steel well casing was withdrawn and a 762 mm diameter

steel surface casing was installed to 6.1 m below ground surface. Subsequently a 508

mm diameter steel working casing inside the surface casing was advanced to a depth

of 12.2 rn below ground level. Boulders prevented completion to 13.7 m below

ground surface.

4

The final well completion consisted of a steel bottom plate welded to a 3 m

section of 250 mrn diameter pipe size #I00 slot continuous wire wound stainless steel

well screen. This was attached to 250 mm diameter steel casing. Prior to installation

down the hole, a centralizer was welded to the 250 mm diameter steel casing at the

top of the screen assembly.

A uniform 6 x 3 mm graded gravel pack was then placed around the screen

section up to a level of 3 m above the top of screen. During this process a 25 mm

diameter PVC piezometer tube was placed within the gravel pack with the tip about

60 cm below the top of screen. The 508 mm diameter casing was then pulled back

to the top of screen at 9.1 m below ground level.

A shaft drive vertical turbine pump was installed within the well to develop the

well by surging and overpumping. Approximately 100 hours of pumping was

expended to develop the production well. Sandfree, step-drawdown and a 72-hour

aquifer performance tests were then performed on the well. Cement grout was -

added between the working and surface casings. The surface casing was then pulled

out.

Subsequent to the above pumping tests, the 250 mm diameter casing was

positioned for true vertical plumbness. A 9.5 mm thick steel doughnut plate was

welded to both the 250 mm and 508 mm diameter well casings. A 50 mm coupling

provides access to the gravel pack piezometer.

A bolt-on well cap currently protects the wellhead. Figure 9 shows the driller's

water well record. Figure 10 shows the interpreted as-constructed diagram of

production well PW 6.

6.0 PUMPING TESTS

To determine the adequacy of the well development and to evaluate the

hydraulic characteristics of the aquifer, pumping tests were conducted on the

production well. A sandfree test was performed to demonstrate the sandfree quality

of the supply. A step-drawdown test was undertaken to determine the safe yield of

the well and well loss. To determine aquifer coefficients a 72-hour aquifer

performance test was conducted.

6.1 Sandfree Test

On January 16, 1989, the well was pumped at a rate of about 23 L/sec for a

period of 10 minutes on, 10 minutes off. Samples were collected after 2, 5 and 10

minutes of pumping. Startup samples contained about 10 very fine sand grains per

litre but then appeared constant at about 2 grains per litre to the end of each test

segment.

A supplemental sandfree test was conducted on June 27, 1989 with representa-

tives of Olympic Drilling Co. Ltd., Ministry of the Environment, Morrison Beatty,

Totten Sims Hubicki Associates and Water and Earth Science Associates Limited.

The well was pumped at a constant discharge rate of 23 Lls and samples were taken

for sandfree content following MoE guidelines. Two to three grains of extremely fine

sand were noted initially, finally becoming sandfree.

During this test, observations were taken as to possible affects of passing freight

trains immediately south of the site. Water samples taken during the train's passage

indicated no appreciable sand. The pump was then shut down and restarted at a

rate of 11.5 Lls. No appreciable sand was observed.

6.2 Step-Drawdown Pumping Test

On January 16, 1989, a 5-step Mogg type step-drawdown pumping test was

conducted on production well PW 6 at rates of 11.4, 15.2, 18.9, 22.7, 26.5 and 30.3

I Llsec with a vertical drive shaft turbine pump. The discharge rate was controlled

with a circular orifice weir and manometer. Flow adjustments were made with a gate

valve.

I The well was pumped at the desired controlled rate for 30 minutes and the

depth to water level over time was measured. Following pump shut down the water

level was allowed to recover prior to the commencement of the next step.

Figure 11 shows a semi-logarithmic plot of drawdown vs time for the test data.

8 An arithmetic plot of drawdown vs pumping rate is shown in Figure 12.

I 6 3 Aquifer Performance Pumping Test - January 17-20, 1989

8 On January 17, 1989, a 72-hour constant rate aquifer performance test was

I started at a controlled rate of 22.7 Lls on the Production well PW 6 using a vertical

drive shaft turbine pump. The discharge rate was controlled using a circular orifice

weir and adjusted with a gate valve.

I A rigid steel pipeline conveyed the discharge about 150 m south to the railway

drainage ditch. This ditch empties into ~ i t t l e Creek and finally into the South

Nation River. We understand from previous investigations by Water and Earth

I Science Associates that a silty clay underlies the ditch bottom and thus no re-

infiltration of pumped water should occur.

During the 72-hour constant rate test, the depth to water over time was

I measured at the pumping well PW 6 and at nine observation wells varying from 6 to

2100 m from the production well. Seven piezometer (Pz) installations consisting of

I 32 mm PVC pipe along with two 200 mm diameter steel test wells (TW) are shown

on the site location plan in Figure 3.

Recovery measurements were recorded on the production and observation wells

for a 24-hour period following the completion of the pumping regime.

Figure 14 shows a semi-logarithmic plot of drawdown versus time for the

production well PW 6 data. Figures 15 through 23 show similar semi-logarithmic

plots for the observation wells TW 4, TW 5, Pz 1, Pz 2, Pz 5, Pz 13, Pz 14, Pz 19,

and Pz 20. Figures 24 through 31 show the groundwater hydrographs during the

pumping test for the observation wells. The TW 5 data is shown in semi-logarithmic

format in Figure 16. Figure 32 shows a distance-drawdown plot after 72 hours of

pumping.

7.0 INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS

7.1 Sandfree Test

The sandfree testing indicated some sand grains upon immediate startup. After

10 minutes, 2 extremely fine grains per litre were detected. After 30 minutes of the

aquifer performance pumping test run at the proposed final discharge rate, sandfree

conditions were noted.

The second test indicated no appreciable sand and consequently all parties

involved agreed that Production Well PW 6 passed the sandfree test.

7.2 Step-Drawdown Pumping Test

The step-drawdown test on production well PW 6 indicated a linear relation of

drawdown to flow rate (Figure 12) at rates up to 11.4 Lls. At flows in excess of

11.4 L/s, the rate of change in drawdown increases.

For the proposed pumping rate of 23 L/s, the amount of total head loss that is

attributable to laminar flow, by the Rorabaugh method was calculated to be 80%.

The equation s = BQ + (CQ2) plus the coefficients B and C are presented in Figure

13 along with resulting efficiencies BQ x 100 BQ + CQ2

Using water level measurements from the constant rate pumping test, the

theoretical drawdown of PW 6 after 3 days would be 2.4 m. With the measured drawdown of 3.82 m and corrected due to reduced saturated thickness to 3.17 m, the

well system has a calculated 76% hydraulic efficiency (2.4 ml3.17 m x 100). We note

that the gravel pack piezometer indicates a 94% efficiency (3.59 m/3.82 m x 100)

across the well screen (see Figure 32).

7 3 Aquifer Performance Pumping Test

The transmissivity was calculated from the drawdown time curves at observation

wells completed into the granular overburden aquifer. Sample calculations are

provided on each graph. These wells include TW 4, TW 5, Pz 5 and Pz 19. The

first straight-line section on each graph represents the true aquifer transmissivity.

The limited width of this formation is evident when a barrier boundary is intercepted

after about 1000 minutes of pumping causing increased drawdown with time.

Transmissivity of about 2000 m2/day was calculated on both drawdown and recovery

curves of the above observation wells. The apparent transmissivity due to boundary

effects was calculated at 1000 m2/day.

Transmissivity on the latter stages of the production well recovery data also was

estimated at 2000 m2/day. The reduction in water level elevation in both the

production and TW 5 wells after 6 minutes from pump shutdown may be due to

suction when the 200 m steel pipeline was draining. A distinct gurgling was noted

at that time and lasted for about 20 to 30 seconds.

Observation wells Pz 1 and Pz 2 near the High School were largely influenced

by the daily pumping from the school well than by the production well testing. The

rhythmic daily usage is particularly evident on the groundwater hydrographs in

Figures 24 and 25 respectively. Constant water withdrawal occurs during weekdays

between 8:00 AM and 4:00 PM but not on Saturday when the school was not in use.

Pumping at PW 6 started at 12:00 noon January 17, 1989 and continued for 72 hours.

Recovery occurred over the next 24 hours.

Water well records on file with the Ministry of the Environment show that the

High School well (MoE 18-992) was completed into limestone bedrock to a depth of

44.2 m. Overburden consisted of gravel and sand to a depth of 19.8 m. The

elementary school, located south of Hwy. 43 opposite the High School also obtains

groundwater supplies from its own well (MoE 18-959). The bedrock well was

similarly completed to a depth of 42.3 m. Overburden consisted of 17.9 m of

granular medium sand, gravel and boulders. Although completed into a different

water bearing strata, water level fluctuations, especially in the Pz 2 piezometer,

resulted from the school well pumping. T h e granular materials over the bedrock

allows communication between the overburden aquifer and the bedrock aquifer.

Water level reductions observed are more easily produced due to these large facilities

than domestic usage nearby.

Barely measurable water level declines were noted at Pz 13 as shown in the

hydrograph on Figure 28.

Water levels at observation well Pz 14 resulted from nearby influences rather

than noticeable production well pumping as shown in Figure 29.

During the 72-hour pumping test, we noted that passing railroad traffic resulted

in changing water levels at observation wells completed into the granular overburden

aquifer. Variations of about 1 cm were recorded during and after the passage of

freight trains. Water levels rose as trains passed through and declined as they left.

Subsequent pumping tests on both the production and test well TW 5 confirmed the

aquifer response to train traffic.

Coefficient of storage averaged about 5 x 10" on the observation well data which

indicates unconfined conditions.

8.0 SAFE WELL YIELD

The safe well yield represents the discharge rate at which a well may be pumped

without mining groundwater or causing detrimental interference. In this evaluation,

I for a safety factor, we used 60% of the total available drawdown for our pumping

range.

\

Total available drawdown at PW 6 amounts to the distance from static water

I level to the top of the well screen or about 8 m (9.14 m - 1.10 m = 8.04 m). As a

safety factor we employ 60% of the total available drawdom for safe available

1 drawdown which in this case amounts to 4.8 m (8 m x 60% = 4.8 m). From the

aquifer performance pumping test time vs drawdown plot, the extension of the

I drawdown trend to 10 years continuous pumping at 22.7 Us results in about 4.85 m

of drawdown. As the projected drawdown and safe available drawdown levels are

approximately equal, the safe continuous pumping rate for this well is about 23 LJs.

I Therefore, following an analysis of the step-drawdown and aquifer performance

I pumping test data, the static water level and pump intake levels, and aquifer

coefficients, the safe yield of Production Well PW 6 is about 23 LJs based on 10

I years of continuous pumping.

9.0 INTERFERENCE

Water level measurements were made on nine observation wells to determine

interference generated from the pumping of Production Well PW 6.

Water level changes occurred as a result of test pumping at five wells closest to

the production well (TW 4, TW 5, Pz 5, Pz 19, and Pz 20). Water levels fluctuated

in wells Pz 1 and Pz 2 as a result of pumping of the adjacent high school well.

Hydrographs in Figures 24 and 25 show the daily rhythmic fluctuations during the

week. Slight water level changes occurred at Pz 13 that might be associated with the

production well pumping. At observation well Pz 14, localized and seasonal declines

were interpreted to be occurring.

The closest private residence is situated about 600 m south of the production

well on the north side of Highway 43 opposite observation well Pz 13. We noted on

January 20, 1989 that the well was being drilled on that date. From the lithology

described in Pz 13, we suspect completion may be in the granular sand and gravel

interval. Drilling records are unavailable at this time.

Due to the~effect of aquifer boundaries, we used a late time transmissivity of

1000 m2/day to calculate long-term drawdown effects. With a coefficient of storage

of 5 x lo3 and a discharge of 23 L/s, approximately 1.3 m of drawdown is generated

600 m from the production well after 10 years continuous pumping assuming no

groundwater recharge when calculated from the following equation:

s = 0.183Q log 2.25 Tt T r2S

where: s = drawdown created (m) Q = pumping rate (m3/d) T = transmissivity (m2/d) r = radius from pumping well (m) S = coeffient of storage (dimensionless) t = time since pumping started (days)

This drawdown will not significantly reduce the yield from the well.

As the main drawdown cone of the overburden aquifer has been interpreted not

to occur more than 800 m from the production well, no significant interference

problems will occur due to the production well pumping. Recharge to the granular

overburden deposits will reduce interference impacts.

Water supply difficulties can occur as a result of problems with substandard

wells and minimum well interference. The problems cannot be forecast and

consequently non-occurrence cannot be guaranteed since they are related as much

to well design as to interference itself. Remedial action such as the lowering of the

pump intake level allows easy correction.

I Samples were submitted to the Ministry of Health and Accutest for

bacteriological analyses. Appendix A shows the test results.

I Supplemental testing of both the production and the proposed standby well TW

5 were undertaken by Water and Earth Science Associates Limited in April 1989 to

provide information on the source of the turbidity and trends in iron concentration

I with time and discharge rate. Appendix B contains their test results and analysis.

' I A spun down non-acidified 72-hour water. quality sample was evaluated by the

Ministry of the Environment to identify the main constituents of the turbidity

3 particles. The sample was subjected to the Energy Dispersion X-Ray Fluorescence

analysis. Appendix C shows the graphical results along with the MoE interpretation.

I All parameters met the Ministry of the Environment Ontario Drinking Water

I Objectives except for turbidity. Those parameters deal with both health-related and

aesthetic water quality. A laboratory anomally occurred on the 72 hour fluoride

concentration. Earlier samples indicated levels below 0.1 mg/L. We interpret

fluoride levels to meet the MoE concentration of 2.4 mg/L.

Turbidity levels steadily increased during the aquifer performance test. The

1 Maximum Acceptable Concentration (MAC) for this health-related parameter has

been established at 1 nephelometric turbidity unit - NTU. Turbidity levels rose from

1.6 to 3.2 NTU throughout the samplings. Subsequent analysis of a second aliquot

from the 72-hour sampling had a slightly reduced concentration of 2.5 NTU.

11.1 Interpretation of Results

I Data from the supplemental pumping test suggests that turbidity levels at the

production well site resulted from both iron and particulate matter. The total iron

1 concentrations exceeded the MoE Ontario Drinking Water Objectives during the first

step at 7.6 L/s, but remained below guideline levels of 0.3 mg/L during the succeeding

I flow rates. At the proposed 22.7 L/s flow rate, both iron and turbidity levels stayed

below MoE parameter concentrations.

However, at standby well TW 5, total iron and turbidity concentrations exceeded

the MoE criteria levels consistently throughout a similar step-drawdown test.

Variations in turbidity values also were noted from laboratory to laboratory.

The numbers were in the same ballpark of each other but one laboratory was not

consistently higher or lower than another.

$

The MoE energy dispersion X-ray fluorescence results indicate a high sulphur

and calcium content but no detectable elevated iron concentration from the

particulate matter. The presence of iron would result in a noticeable peaking within

the spectrum plot between chromium (Cr) and copper (Cu). The mineralogical

analysis indicated an organic nature of the turbidity particles.

Although chemical analyses on acidized and non-acidized water samples suggest

iron precipitation as part of the turbidity particulate matter, X-ray scanning of those

I particles does not reveal any trace iron content. The iron may be fixed onto larger

settled particles that were not included in the turbidity particulate.

Petroleum spills from pit operations will occur into the shallow granular aquifer

deposits if adequate protective measures are not taken. Also, freight train

derailments and product spillage may be of concern due to the well site's proximity.

12.0 CONCLUSIONS

Production Well PW 6 was completed to a depth of 12.2 m into a shallow granular overburden aquifer. A 3 m length of 250 mm diameter stainless steel screen is centred within an artificial gravel pack. A 250 mm diameter steel well casing is welded to the top of the screen and extends to surface. An outer 500 mm diameter steel well casing serves as a working casing. Additional gravel pack material can be added if required into the annulus between the two casings. A 25 mm diameter PVC piezometer tube allows the measurement of the gravel pack water level. The well was developed by surging and overpumping to a sandfree condition.

I 2. The sandfree test on PW 6 shows 2 grains per litre after 10 minutes. After 20 minutes of pumping during the aquifer performance test, water samples were sandfree. The supplemental test on June 27, 1989 resulted in water samples from Production well PW 6 passing the sandfree tset.

3. The step-drawdown pumping test shows that at the proposed flow rate of 23 Us, the amount of head loss attributable to laminar flow was calculated to be 80%. Based on corrected water level versus theoretical water level within the

1 production well, the well system has a calculated 76% hydraulic efficiency. We feel this efficiency is adequate even though the tender calls for a minimum well efficiency of 80%.

4. The aquifer performance constant rate pumping test was conducted for 72 hours at 22.7 L/s. Transmissivity was calculated at 2000 m2/day. Boundary conditions reduced it to an apparent 1000 m2/day. Coefficient of storage was calculated at 5 x 10" indicative of unconfined conditions.

5. The safe well yield, based on the step-drawdown, aquifer performance testing and 60% of the total available drawdown, was calculated at 23 L/s continuous pumping for 10 years.

6. Interference was calculated at the closest residential well about 600 m from PW 6. After 10 years continuous pumping assuming no groundwater recharge, about 1.3 m of drawdown would occur at that well. Interference effects will lessen as the distance from PW 6 increases. No significant interference problems will occur due to production well pumping. Recharge to the granular overburden deposits will reduce interference impacts.

7. Recharge to the overburden materials of the Maple Ridge Aquifer Complex had originally been estimated at about 109 mmfyear (Charron, 1978). For the size of the aquifer complex, given that at least double Charron's estimate (or 200- mm/yr) infiltrates into the coarse granular overburden material, adequate

recharge occurs to support Production Well PW 6.

8. Water quality from the test well is good. All parameters except turbidity meet the Ministry of the Environment parameter guidelines. Iron precipitation and fine particulate matter were suspected to cause turbidity. X-ray analyses of turbidity particles revealed high sulphur and calcium but no iron. Organic material from natural sources is suspected according to MoE testing. Turbidity levels during subsequent testing at a flow of 22.7 L/s meet the MoE turbidity level.

I ! 13.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

I Based on the above discussion, we recommend that:

3 1. Production Well PW 6 be equipped to pump a t a rate not exceeding 23 Us. The pump intake should be set at 9 m below ground level.

1 2. In order td control turbidity, a future study of the turbidity particles be undertaken to potentially isolate and remove the source if feasible.

I 3. Preventive measures be undertaken by gravel pit operators to avoid petroleum spills near the well site.

0 4. Although minor interference effects may be experienced within 800 m of the well site, any complaints should be investigated by the Township and remedied

1 immediately.

5. Contingency measures be developed in case of a freight car accident and

I possible spillage adjacent to the well site.

Respectfully submitted,

I MORRISON BEA'ITY LIMITED

17

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Castang, G., 1967. 'Traite Pratique Des Eaux Souterraines," Dunod, Paris.

Davis, S.N. and R.J.M. Dewiest, 1966. "Hydrogeology", John Wiley and Sons, New York.

Driscoll, F.G., 1986. "Groundwater and Wells," U.O.P. Johnson Division, St. Paul, Minnesota.

MNR, 1979, Ontario Geological Survey, Geological Highway Map, Map 2441.

Water and Earth Science Associates Ltd., March 1988. "Municipal Water Supply Investigations, Groundwater Source, Maple Ridge Aquifer Complex".

LEGEND

0 PROOUCTION WELL PW6

TEST WELL ( T W ) or PIEZOMETER (P2 1 MONITORING INSTALLATIONS

OLYMPIC DRILLINGCO. LTD. Pumping Test Evaluatian Production W e l l P W 6 C H E S T E R V I L L E

I SUE L O C A T W

PROJECT NO. 6 6 4 - 8 8 1 I APR.. 1989

morriron beat ty limited conrultincj engineerr and hydrog~ologirtr 1

f@ morriron Contty limited Grain Size Distribution F&? conrultinq engineers an3 hydrogeologirt~

4500 dime mad. wlt 121. mbrsbnauga. ontwlo L4W lV7 (418621.9308) 4

Project No. 664-881 Dote Nov. 27, 1988

Hole No. - PW6 Sample No. 346 ~ ~ ~ ~ h 6 . 1 - 7.6m(ZO-25 ft)

0 ' ' I 1 I I I I I

3 s 10 1720 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 ' 0

1 16" $32" SLOT OPENING IN THOUSANDTHS OF AN INCH J o b Hole no. - Depfh-

t

Sievr Cumulative NOTES :

SLOT OPENING RECOMMENDED:

RECOMMENDED SCREEN: d i a . i n . length f t .

BY:

I I morriron beottg limited Grain Size ~ i s t r i b u t i o h

@? conrultinq engineerr and hydrogeologirt~ 4.wO ~ I X I O road. o n ~ t 12.. m~ss~srauga, ontarlo uw 1V7 (418624 9308) 5

664-881 NOV. 27, 1989 Project No.

PW6 347 Depth

7.6-g.lm(25-30ft Hole No. Sample No.

100

90

8 0

70

60 n W 5 u t; so K

I- Z y 40 0: W n 30

W

L t- 4 J 20

I 3 0

10

0

J o b Hole no. -Depth-,

N O T E S :


RECOMMENDED S C R E E N : d i m i n . length f t.

BY:

I I f~ moffilon begtty limited Grain Sire Distribution\

Q@ consultinq engineers and hydro~eologirt~ 4500 dlxla road. unrt 12.. rnlsslssauga. onturn L4W 1V7 (416824.9508) 6

I Project No. 664-881 Date Nov. 27, 1989

Hole No. PW6 Sample No. Depth 10.7m ( 3 5 f t ) 348

100

90

8 0

70

60 0 W z u = so a

C 5 40

I a W Q

30 W F + a -r 2 0 3 I 3 w

10

0

J o b Hole no. -- Depth-

NOTES :,

- a E 0 . cn


RECOMMENDED SCREEN: d i a . i n . length tt.

BY:

Steve Omnlq

.375

. I 8 7

, 0 7 9

.033

017

,010

. 0 0 6

. 0 0 3

PAN

SCRtfN SLOT

Cumulattve We~ght Retamed (grns)

Wetght P a u ~ n g (gms)

percent Retained

11.0

35.0 70.6 89.7

m.fJ. 97.5. 98.8 99.7

100 .

I I f@ motfiron bp0tty limited Grain Size ~istribution)

conrutting onginoors an3 hy3rogtzoIogi~tl 4500 alx~e rcwa. un~t 121. rn~as~ssauga. ontarlo L4W 1V7 (418624.8308) 7

I Project NO. 664-881 oate NOV. 27, 1989

I Hole No. PW6 sample NO. 349 Depth 10.7- 12.2m C3fi-40f -- t)

1 Sieve Cumulative Weight Waiqhf percent

I Retained Passing Retained (grnr) l gms)

I i

NOTES :


RECOMMENDED SCREEN: d i o . i n . length ft .

BY:

SLOT I

B I I 1

B I /Q rnortiron boottr~ limited Grain Size ~istribution\

@7 conrulting engineers an3 hydroguologirtr 4500 dlrla road untt 12a. mlsslsrauga, oniu~o LIW 1V7 (416.624 931x1 8

I Project No. 664-881 Date Nov. 27, 1989

I Hole No. PW6 Sample No. 350 Depth 12.2-13.7m (40-45f t )

100

90

80

70

6 0 a W Z u & so K

t-

2 40 U

a W 0-

30 W

Z I- 4 J 20 3 I 2 0

10

U

J o b Hole no. Depth- SLOT OPENING IN THOUSANDTHS OF AN INCH -

Sieve Cumulative NOTES :

I 57.0 SLOT OPENING RECOMMENDED:

0 97.7 RECOMMENDED SCREEN: d i a . i n . length f t .

- BY:

S C R f f N

Water We1 1 Record moffi80n bocitty limited Production Me, 1 p ~ 6 conrulting engineerr ond hydroguologirtr ~ S O O ~ I X I O road, unlt 121. m l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a u g . , Ontario L ~ W lV7 (416424-93081 Ches tervi 11 e, Project No. 664-881

@ ' Minisuy The Ontario Water Resources Act of Ill0 1 'l~lllllllll"llI

Or~tanu WATER WELL RECORD

O >.,,lrc l 0 0.8"l.' I

0-4.. O or".. r , rr .n . , r 3b532 ....

I ..". " "I. -,-ID. .........I...... L1SI"SI I"*.*.

(L IN-CO-LTD. ... 4006 5 Q .LySw- L - I 1

* "l., 0.4.8. ,..<,.-.a(*.

r r-. . . 1.1 # - . I . o......... .r,...,. .".,. Y ."I*', , S T O W N T DUNDAS

I..*.. ......... I."._* ....%I... ,.,<..a . I" ..................... CHESTEWVILLE. ONTARIO Corn 5

".'.,.,".....HI.,

I "I

. . - . - - - .. 12 .. ..IS. o . ~ , , . . ' .

1 Town o f Chesterv i 1 l e CHESTERVILLE Ont. KM: 1HO 2 3 - 0 . J 89-

PRODUCTION WELL .................

............... ..O,,," "A,,",.. , 1

(,I , IVI!I : ~ l l l l l c ~ ~ , .......

(dyered

Stones . Cobbles- l o o 5 q . . ..

I * -.. U '

22 ' . - .. -. 3 0 '

.--

.-

. - --

. . .

....

- - - ...... --- .- . - - - - - -.

--.-

--.A. --

w r . . , , , , ,

(U .. ...- 22'

- - 30' 4 0 '

--

a&--

.- - - -. - . . -- -

- - ... - . . . . . .

. . . . . . - . . . - . . . . -

. .

..

. -

. . .

- - - - - - . - . - - . -

- - - ... -. - . - . -

... - -- -.

r n ~ f t i t ~ , bt~cttty limited As Constructed We1 I conrulting engineerr on3 hydrogeo1ogirtr Diagram PW6 F&7 4600 41sIa r o d , l 2 0 ~ r l s ~ I s 8 a s r 0 , o m a r k trlel a t 4 - raw 10

C L I E N ~ Olympic D r i l l i n g Co. Ltd. FILE NO. 664-881 PROJECT Chesterv i 1 l e C o c ~ ~ l ~ ~ Monas t P r o ~ e r t v

WELL No. PRODUCTION WELL PW6, CHESTERVILLE STATIC L N E L 2.47 m. below top of casing,stickup 1.37 m. TEST DATE January 16.1 989

mottiron beotty limited c v l t i n ~ enginee,~ oncthycJ~oyo~ogifii 13

3 : o & r - 0

E k = 9 3

3," Y - 3

0 Z w : 3 r

S c g' 0 2 g C -.

;$

8 I

I

I

€ ' j w A 0 2 a€ u 3 C Y O m oln W '3 " 10, 03 I1 - Q ) I

e- zzg 3

J 0 - 4 Lo- !$ ""

z 1 z- Z ~ P I- .-- 2 € $ W m f i 3 g? 5 '-7

00 I

r

3 = u -& 2s E L = 0

3

32' Y - 3

G z u 5 3 r

.s c g' 2 0 - C

z $

i rS lo 2 'I€ W 3 I - A 0 0.0 0 W u u l I? " 3 " - a L -

C\1 NU^ a cg 1

J 0- _I Lo- g =%

3 22 I

W mM 3 m y = om:

-I W

sk' d ~ , ="n A!&

Li?

WELL No. OBSERVATION WELL Pz5 , CHESTERVILLE STATIC LWEL 1.45 m. below ground level,stickup 0.1 7m. @ morrl,on brot ty limited TEST DATE January 17 - 20,1989 r = 235 m. conlult~ng tng~nt t f~ ond hydrogtolop~t~ 19

CV

3 ,' @ 6 - 0 'p - -- B;

5 32' Y - 3

G s Y : 3 r 6 C c

0 * r g ' f z

E YG 4- 2 a~ w J b2: wrcv x "?! " 3 " a;' 7

N T J ~ a rQ =I='

J 0-.

d bg 3 2s '

W m b = m$ = ON:

-I

J- J2b S W

I GROUNDWATER HYDROGRAPH 72 HOUR AQUIFER PERFORMANCE TEST I WELL No. OBSERVATION WELL Pz 14, CHESTERVILLE STATIC LEVEL 3.91 m. b.m.p. stick up 1.53 m. TEST DATE January 17 - 21,1989 r = 2120 m.

@ rnorrlron Centty limited conrtAtq tngmttr nnd hychogtolog~~tr

0 C3

i- - cn 5 2 w &, z2 u E k

0 -= 5 9 Z 3z z= m ,C; E s* 0 c k

:a E -. w f d 0, € 8

L. - 3 0 4

E 3 - 0 I

C\1 r\ Y " >

-0

ki Es WN

30 II I

G n I - = n N ~ Z 4 a.o,

n acF

w a 0 ma' =r m:g o m ,

2 3 -1 o w -81

O J < 3 zoo 0

-JF& QZ Ul-w a 3mt-

I GROUNDWATER HYDROGRAPH 72 HOUR AQUIFER PERFORMANCE TEST I I I

WELL No. OBSERVATION WELL Pz 20, CHESTERVILLE ,

STATIC LEVEL 3.1 5 m. b.m.p. stick up 0.51 m. TEST DATE January 1 7 - 21,1989 r = 270 m.

@ morrlron beotty limited contult i~ engineerr ancl hydtogrolog~rlf 1 3 1 )

Well e f f i c i ency =

PW6 G r v l Pack Piezometer TW5 TW4

WELL No. PRODUCTION WELL PW6,CHESTERVILLE, 664-881 STATIC LEVEL 2.47 m. below top of casing,stickup 1.37 m. @ morrlron beot ty l imited TEST DATE January 16,1989 Q = 22.7 I/s t = 4320 min. e!s conrvlting rnginttrt ond hydtogtologirtr

-. 'SEIIdWrld JCI SaflClH ZL 0NH '09 '8P ' 9 ~ . 'PZ 'ZI d313H 03ldi4HS

'(3NIZ ONH a3dd03 '353NH3NtlW ' NOdI SlH 13W lH101 ONH A l l fi113nON03 'A1101 Endl ' ~ d ld33X3

z - 1 LOP 90 'CI PL 'L SZS 60P s - I L6 '0 6Z'S E l 'S Z'Z B'L OFS Z'E' E :,. Z0 '0 20 -0 10'0 :>

10'0 :. PU'O 20-0 PZ '0 01 -0 so-0 > SCI'O > 10-0 L -21 0'9 St 602 LtZ 61 L9 6 - 1 S 'E

9'1 60? L I '0 €2 'L E:ES P I P P'1 Ld -0 9E'S ZZ'S S- 1 6'L 0E:S L'Z E €0 -0 P0'0 10-0 10'0 90'0 E:0-0 PZ'0 EO'O S0'0 so-0 10-0 8 -21 O'L 9 t 112 1 SZ 0Z +

L9 8'1 S 'E:

9 '1 00z L1 'CI €2 ' L 9E:S S1 P 6'0 86 ' 0 YE "2 LZ 'S S ' I 6 'L E:E:S 1 ' 2 E SO '0 ZO'Q 10-0

, 10-0 90'0 EO 'O ZZ '0 eo.0

> S0'0 > so-0

10'0 6'ZI 0 ' L L t 01Z ESZ OZ 89 6'1 S'E

Z'1 El07 90'0 PL 'L ZE.5 P I P 1.3 96 '0 HE 'S SI 'S P'1 B'L 0SS P.7

> P 20 -0 z0 -0 10'0 ::

> 10'0 ::. Z0 -0 10'0 L I 'CI ZO '0

> so-0 ::. :) S0'0 ::

10'0 0'E:I 0'L 8 t 0 1 Z LPZ 61 99 0 -3 8 'F

z - 1 013 90'0 PL 'L SES 91P 6 '1 96'0 UP 'S 0Z'S Z.1 fl'L 0ss 6'1 E 10'0 10'0 10'0 IC I 'O ZO'U 10'0 E l '0 20'0 S0'0 so-0 10'0 O'El 0 'L L P 112 6t.Z OZ 99 0 - 2 R'E

9'1 802 91 -0 PL -L SES 0.1 P €-I L6-0 LE 'S E.Z'S Z - 1 6'L 09s 9 -1 E > ZU'O 70 '0

> 10-0 j.

:> 10'0 >. Z0'0 10-0 S1 '0

> ZCI ' CI > > so-0 > >, so-0 :.

10-0 O'E1 O'fl L t 0IZ 1 S? 0Z L9 0.2 8-E:

1 / 6 ~ 0 ' 1 1 / . 6 ~ 0 ' 1

10'0 10-0

u13,mqwn I - 0 1/60 1'0

% 1'0 ICI'0

l/tlaU 10 -0 lt'bau 10'0

1 / .6~ S '0 10'0

uI-J,#oqlun 1 -0 ' f l ' l 'N 1'0 'fl.3-1 5'0 1/,fiut 10 '0 1,8.60 10-0 l /~ 1 [I '0 1/6w 10'0 1 / . 6~ 1CI.0 1/60 10-0 1/6e 20 -0 1,*-6u1 ~0 0 1/.60 so-0 1/60 S0'0 1 / 6 ~ 10'0 1 / 6 ~ S'O 1/.60 0 - 1 1/60 0 - 1 1/6u1 0 - 1

1/60 S0'0 7/60 100 '0 1/6ue SCl0 - 0

1/6w 1-0 1/60 s - n

I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I C C(

! I I

I I I LQ l I t- I I I

- 1 <iiii'i'<<i<<i'i ZI Q D D P D D D Q D D P P P D D D

I 31 E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E I I

I I I

L(\ I ~ t n IWW OP03lWO3 Insod

frjnr(51<.>1 u ~ l l l A l U M 4 1 XI13

v t \ ~ I \ d C ) @a 3 0Xl-1 I~IW raw3 8 u mu1 ON xog ' u u IWJS

U ~ L I H I 1 A~\.ve$.g O'.IUJOW- WON / W I N

f~ morriron bootty limited BACTERIOLOGICAL WATER QUALITY

coruulting engineers an3 hydrogeologists PRODUCTION WELL PW6,CHESTERVILLE 4500 dlxm road. unn 12.. rnlsslssmga. m t u m L4W 1V7 (416424-0rW)) 7Q burs i , h t ~ punping test

!

ACCUTEST ~obomtoriw W.

1 1 I I

RESULT IN%RPkElAIION ON REVERSE Interpr6)aHon R(ku#Pb au doc

I I

APPENDIX B I I I I -

I I I I I I I I I I

REPORT ON THE ADDITIONAL STEP TESTS

FOR CHESTERVILLE WATER SUPPLY

WELLS P6 AND TW5

Prepared For:

Totten Sims ~ubicki Associates

Prepared By:

Water and Earth science Associates Ltd. Box 430, Carp, Ontario, Canada. KOA 1LO

May 1, 1989

INTRODUCTION

The search for a new municipal water supply for the village of ~hesterville has continued for the past several years. In January, 1989, a production well was completed within the Maple ~idge aquifer located 4 km west of town. Geochemical analyses obtained during the 72 hour aquifer revealed excellent water quality with the exception of turbidity values in excess of the Provincial Water Quality objective of 1.0 NTU.

A technical liaison meeting was held on March 28, 1989, with personnel from Totten Sims ~ubicki Associates, Morrison Beatty Limited, Ministry of the Environment and Water and Earth Science Associates Limited.

STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES

The consensus of the representatives at the technical liaison meeting was that additional step discharge tests were required on the production and test wells. These test were to provide information as the source of the turbidity and iron, trends in concentration with time and discharge and the relative magnitudes at the conclusion of the respective pumping periods. The results of the additional testing are presented in this report.

METHOD OF STUDY

All equipment for the step tests was installed and maintained by Olympic Drilling Company Limited under direct field supervision of WESA.

A 7.5 hp pump was installed in TW5 to a depth of 10.7 m (35 ft.). The first step was run at 100 IGPM for 3 hours and 20 minutes and the second step at 200 IGPM for 3 hours. An attempt was made to step the discharge rate up to the pump's maximum of 275 IGPM. However, a discharge rate of only 218 IGPM could be maintained and the test was terminated. When the pump was removed from the well, it was observed that the intake screen had been folded inward and small pebbles were stuck in the screen. This prevented the pump from attaining its projected discharge rate of 275 IGPM.

The 7.5 hp pump was installed in the production well to a depth of 10.7 m. The first step of 100 IGPM was run for 3 hours. At the 2 hour and 15 minute mark a 5 hp pump was installed in the production well to a depth of 8.5 m (28 ft.) in order to obtain a higher yield for the third step. The second step was run for 3 hours at 200 IGPM. For the third step of 3 hours, the 7.5 hp pump produced 275 IGPM and the 5 hp pump produced 25 IGPM.

The 7.5 hp and 5 hp pumps were both installed in TW5 to depths of 1 0 . 7 m ( 3 5 ft.) and 8 . 5 m ( 2 8 ft.) respectively. The pumps were run for 3 hours. Initially, the 7 . 5 hp produced 250 IGPM and the 5 hp produced 50 IGPM. However, during the step the discharge from the 7.5 hp pump dropped and the discharge from the 5 hp pump was increased to maintain a constant yield of 300 IGPM. Even though both pumps were discharging as much water as they were capable, the total discharge fell gradually and at the end of the 3 hours the combined discharge was 278 IGPM.

\

Water level measurements were observed in both wells during both step tests.

A set of geochemical samples was obtained hourly throughout the tests. A set consisted of 2 , 1 litre plastic bottles. One sample was acidified with concentrated nitric acid to pH of <2 and one sample was left unacidified. All of these samples were sent to Mann Aqua for turbidity and iron analysis. The TW5 samples were also analyzed for colour. At the third hour of every step, two or three additional sets of samples were collected. One set of samples was sent to the MOE laboratories in Kingston for similar analyses as those performed by Mann Aqua. A second set of samples was sent to Accutest Laboratories of Nepean for turbidity analysis. A final set of samples has been kept in storage should any further geochemical testing be warranted.

RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION

All geochemical results are shown in Table 1.

Production Well

A plot of the turbidity and iron values with time is shown in Figure 1. The turbidity level dropped at every hour during the test. The exception was the third hour of the first step when the turbidity increased from the second hour. One explanation for this could be that the 5 hp pump was installed in the production well after 2 hours and 1 5 minutes of the step. The installation required that the 7.5 hp pump be moved slightly and this agitation visibly increased the turbidity of the discharge. It appeared to visibly clear up with further pumping, but the data indicates the turbidity had not returned to the 2 hour value. The turbidity was less than 1 NTU by the second hour of step 2 but rose to 1 . 3 NTU at hour 3 . Turbidity rose slightly during the final step from 0.6 NTU to 0 . 9 NTU.

The turbidity values of the acidified samples are consistently lower than those of the unacidified samples. It is probable that the acidification of the samples prevented the precipitation of calcium and magnesium carbonate, and iron that would cause an increase in turbidity. However, acidifying the

sample leached iron from the particulate matter resulting in higher iron values in the acidified samples than in the unacidified samples. The total iron concentrations are similar for the acidified and unacidified samples and the acidified soluble iron because the total iron analysis involves acidification of the samples in the laboratory.

The production well was producing sand throughout the step test. Improvement was noted with time but the well did not pass the sand free test until the first hour of step 3.

TW5 A plot of the turbidity and iron values with time are

shown in Figure 2. The general trends visible in the production well data are also present in the TW5 data. Turbidity decreased with time throughout the test but at no time did the levels decrease to less than 1.0 NTU for the unacidified samples. The acidified sample for the second hour of step 1 had a turbidity of 0.3 NTU and the samples during step 3 had values 0.4 NTU or less. The unacidified sample from the third hour of step 3 had a turbidity value of <1.0 NTU according to the Accutest analysis.

The most striking data from the TW5 step test is the increase turbidity at the third hour of step 1. At the 2 hour and 53 minute mark of step one a train passed along the nearby CPR line. There was a visible increase in the turbidity of the water and a great increase in the amount of sand produced within 5 minutes of the train passing. Samples were collected at the 3 hour mark. The discharge was maintained at 100 IGPM for a further 20 minutes and another set of samples was collected. Turbidity and the amount of sand produced improved visibly during the 20 minutes and the unacidified values decreased from 14 NTU to 10 NTU. Roy Renwick of 0lympic Drilling reported that he could see slight changes in turbidity when trains passed during subsequent steps but this change was very short lived. These possible changes were not observed by the writer. The TW5 acidified samples also had lower turbidity values and higher iron values than the unacidified samples.

When both the 7.5 hp pump and 5 hp pump were in operation there was a distinct turbidity difference in the discharge waters. The 5 hp discharge had a much higher turbidity than the 7.5 hp discharge. When the 5 hp pump was turned off the discharge from the 7.5 hp pump immediately became more turbid.

Colour values were all <3 TCU during the step test. This parameter had been slightly elevated during the 72 hour test.

The test well was producing sand throughout the test and although the condition improved with time the well would not pass a sand-free test at the end of step test.

DISCUSSION

The additional step test of the production well and test well have shown that turbidity problems associated with the wells are the result of a combination factors. These factors include the passing of particulate matter through the screen and iron precipitation in the well bore and in the sample container. The positive correlation between soluble iron and turbidity shown in Figures 1 and 2 is reconfirmed in the iron versus turbidity graphs shown in Figures 3 and 4. The graphs show a straight line correlation between iron and turbidity. There is slightly more scatter in the TW5 data. This scatter may be the result of TW5 producing more sand. The best fit line of the data crosses the y axis at a value above 0 mg/l iron concentration mark. his would indicate that the pumped water could contain some dissolved iron before the iron will start to affect turbidity.

The turbidity concentrations appear to be affected by both iron and particulate matter. The effects of the particulate matter (acid insoluble silicates) can be removed by plotting the total iron concentration against the difference between acidified and unacidified turbidity in a sample. These plots are shown in Figures 5 and 6. Again, there is a straight line correlation. An iron concentration of 1.0 mg/l could cause a 10 NTU difference in turbidity between an acidified and unacidified samples. Interpretation of the curves indicate that in the sampled waters, iron does impart a significant contribution to the turbidity.

The observation of the increased turbidity in TW5 at low pumping rates brings up the question of how much disturbance the CPR line could have on the water supply. The effects of the train were not as noticeable at discharge rates in excess of 200 IGPM. A number of factors may also have influenced the situation. The production well was developed for a much longer time period than TW5 and therefore the formation would be expected to be more stable than in the test well location. The test well would appear to be more poorly developed especially near the top of the screen (more fines). The production well has a gravel pack where as the test well was a naturally developed well. Naturally developed wells are more successfully developed and more fines tend to be removed than in gravel pack wells. However, it is obvious that the CPR line does disturb the aquifer material and may therefore contribute to the elevated turbidity values observed. The effects of the train were not noticed during the original test well investigation since a low discharge rate was maintained for only 30 minutes during the step test. A train did not pass during the 30 minutes and therefore no change in turbidity was visible.

The difference in turbidity level in water sampled from the 7.5 hp pump discharge and the 5 hp pump discharge indicates

that more particulate matter appears to be entering TW5 near the top of the screen or even at the casing/screen junction. It is not unusual in high producing wells to preferentially develop on

I part of the screen over another. The sand production problem may possibly be eliminated with further development.

CONCLUSIONS

The following points were concluded from the testing described above:

1) Turbidity values showed an overall decrease with time in during both tests on both wells.

2) ~urbidity values were less than 1 NTU in the production well at the projected production rate of 300 IGPM. There was a slight rise in turbidity, however, during the final 3 hour step.

3) The turbidity values in TW5 even at the production rate of 300 IGPM still remain in excess of the provincial drinking water objectives. It is likely that this well will meet the objective with additional development.

4) ~cidified samples have consistently lower turbidity values than unacidified samples. It is most probable that the acidification prevents the precipitation of calcium and magnesium carbonate and iron. The acidified samples also have higher soluble iron since the acid leaches iron from the particulate matter.

5) Iron precipitation contributes to the observed turbidity trends in both the production and test wells. However, the observed turbidity values are the total result of fine particulate matter and iron precipitation.

6) There is a positive correlation between sand production and elevated ~urbidity in both wells with the passing of trains on the adjacent CPR right-of-way. It is recommended that the wells not be pumped into the system when trains pass. Pumping to waste for these periods would be an appropriate measure. With time the condition may improve.

Respectfully submitted,

Ian Macdonald, M.Sc. Hydrogeologist

~oger M. ~oeller M.Sc. Hydrogeologist

CHESTERVILLE - PRODUCTION WELL

Time o ours)

acidified sample --- iron (soluble) - w unacidified sample turbidity -

- \- 4 - -&

- 1 - - - - -0 - - - - -0 - - - - -0 - F

- - -0 -

- - & Y -

- - - -

I I I 1 I 1 I f o 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

F i g u r e 2 : T u r b i d i t y and Iron w i t h Time T e s t Nell i

o acidified sample --- iron (soluble) - r unacidified sample turbidity - 1 00 - - - - - - - - - - - -0.80 - - - - - - - -

-0.60 - - - - - - - / - - - -0.40 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-+t --3- - - 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Time o ours)

F i g u r e 3 : I r o n v s . T u r b i d i t y P r o d u c t i o n Well <


1 c 0 0.00 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , ~ 1 ~ 1 ,

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 I I Turbidity - unacidif ied (NTu)

F i g u r e 4 : I r o n v s . T u r b i d i t y T e s t W e l l

CHESTERVILLE - TEST WELL

Turbidity - unacidified (NTu)

I Figu re 5 : I r o n vs. 4 T u r b i d i t y P roduc t i on Hell


del ta Turbidity

F i g u r e 6 : I r o n vs. d T u r b i d i t y T e s t Well

\

CHESTERVILLE - TEST WELL

delta Turbidity

Table 1 Geocheaical Data - Production Hell and TY5 Turbidity (NTUl Ifon (89/ll Colour

Sarple I Sarple tlann Accu tlann Aqua HOE TCU Tire Preservation Aqua IOE test Total Soluble Soluble tlann Aour ...............................................................................

PY Steo 1 10 ain 28.0 1.20 0.04 10 rin acidified 16.0 1.10 0.93

el00 16pn HOW 1 13.0 0.55 0.03 Hour 1 acidified 6.5 0.63 0.51 Hour 2 6.7 0.36 0.02 Hour 2 acidified 3.7 0.38 0.33 Hour 3 22.0 16 0.79 0.05 Hour 3 acidified 12.0 11 1.00 0.82

PY Step 2 Hour 1 2.2 0.11 0.03 Hour 1 acidified 0.6 0.20 0.19

e200 16PH Hour 2 0.8 0.12 0.02 Hour 2 acidified 0.3 0.16 0.15 Hour 3 1.3 (1.0 0.14 0.02 Hour 3 acidified (0.3 (1.0 0.15 0.17

PY Ste~ 3 Hour 1 0.6 0.10 0.03 Hour 1 acidified (0.3 0.13 0.12

C300 IGPH Hour 2 0.8 0.12 0.02 Hour 2 acidified (0.3 0.13 0.13 Hour 3 0.9 1.7 0.13 0.03 Hour 3 acidified (0.3 (1.0 0.14 0.13

TY Step 1 Hour 1 Hour 1 acidified

eioo 16PH Hour 2 Hour 2 acidified Hour 3 Hour 3 acidified Hour 3.3 Hour 3.3 acidified

TW Steo 2 Hour 1 Hour 1 acidified

e2OO I6Ptl Hour 2 Hour 2 acidified Hour 3 Hour 3 acidified

TY Steo 3 Hour 1 Hour 1 acidified Hour 1 5 h p

e300 I6Pn Hour 2 Hour 2 acidified Hour 3 Hour 3 acidified Hour 3 5 hp

?AX COVER SXXET

, MIWISTRY O? T#g XWVIRONnXWt 126 l U 3 0 0 1 C t S ROAD

RSXDALI, OMTAR10 new s t 1

DATE : ~ i y 8 / TXMX : / r&' / I

OUR FAX NUMblER X 8 < 4 1 6 ) 236-6669

NOTE: IF YOU DID MOT I U C t I V L ALL OI THE PAOtS 8PECIlIEb OR IF YOU HAW TROOBtt RtADIMO THEM, PLMSZ CALL THE mtNB8R BELOW ?OR A88ISTAUCt.

MINISTRY OF EhNIROWENT FRI B S m - 8 1 14 849

~ u r a o r t 0 . 8 8 8 k e ~ * 0 ROI c0> 0.0008 0.000

E n v i r o n m e n t O n t a r i o FINAL REPORT

H u n i c i p a l i t y / P r o j e c t : C H E S T E R V I L L E

Pa e 1 P r i n t e d 0 8 9 0 5 / 8 9

S u b m i s s i o n : P C 0 6 7 0 7

S a m p l i n g Date(s1: A P R 2 1 , 1 9 8 9

F

P r o g r a m . . . . . 0700801 WATER TREATtlENT RESEARCH TECHNICAL ADVISORY Agency . . . . . . 0102011501 MUNIC. DR. WATER QUALITY

S a m p l e d b y : M . BEATTY D a t e S u b m i t t e d : 21 / 0 4 / 8 9 , D a t e R e c e i v e d : 24/04/89

. . . . . . . M a i l t h i s copy t o . . . . . . . . . M R . A . U . TAYLOR IIORRISONCBEATTY LTD. 4500 D I X I E RD. UNIT 12A HISSISSAUGA. ONTARIO

F i n a l r e p o r t s t o DART,JI t l HR. A . W. TAYLOR

MOE T e l e p h o n e : 416-235-5816 MORRISONCBEATTY LTD. T e l e p h o n e : 416-624-9308

' - F i z T a - - - - - - - - " " - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- ---------------- SampTi n g

Sample S a m p l i n g L o c a t i o n S a m p l i n g L o c a t i o n D e s c r i p t i o n D a t e T ime Zone -------- .................... ........................................ -------- ----- -- D21-WC CODE NOT GIVEN CHESTERVILLE TW1 21 104189 5

Sample D e s c r i p t i o n L a b Sample# Remarks L a b Sample# Remarks L L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C - - - ----------- -------- ----------- -------- CENTRIFUGE CONC. OF RAW WATER El8-0003

TESTS REQUESTED: +IDENT

- -- -

- ~ ~ ~ m R u I I = - - - - n n

Environment Ontario PC06707 FINAL REPORT

CHESTERVILLE Pa e 3 Printed 0 8 9 0 5 / 8 9

Sample Class. E Textual Information

Electron Microscopy ITC Inquiries at: U.B. Uood / Ollle Lindow (Textual information after numerical data) Telephone: 41 6-235-5g63 - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUBMISSION. P C 0 6 7 0 7 AUTHORED B Y : Eva Just-Przygodzka

The raw water sample was received from Morrison and Beatty LTD.

along with a request to identify the inorganic particles.

The material was examined b y means of stereo, polarized and electron

microscopes. The selected particles were determined by means of

energy dispersive x-ray(EXDRA1.

The electron microscope along with x-ray analysis indicated

the presence of the following elements:

S, Ca, Si, K, Al, Hg.

The mineralogical analysis of the particles exhibited the organic

nature of the material

-

- - l l m u l m I m ~ 1 9 R m l l ) ~

E n v i r o n m e n t O n t a r i o PC06707 CHESTERVILLE Pa e 4 FINAL REPORT P r i n t e d 0 8 7 0 5 / 8 9 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REMARK CODE EXPLANATIONS ......................... * BHK ---L----------PESCBfPI1ON------------------

! R b SEE ATTACHED REPORT (NO NUMERIC RESULT) I T C S

* * * END OF REPORT * * *

1

0.03937 i n

3.2808 ft

0.6214 m i

220.14 imperial gallons

0.1529 igpm

0.0466 igpm/ft (speci f ic capacity)

67.11 i g p d / f t ( t ransmissiv i ty )

13.1985 igpm

Documents

REPORT ON A CONSTRUCTION AND PUMPING TEST PROJECT … · construction and pumping test project for a municipal production well village of chesterville morrison beatty limited 4500