ML11287A195: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:Beissel, Dennis From: Perkins, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 12:43 PM To: Beissel, Dennis | {{#Wiki_filter:Beissel, Dennis From: Perkins, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 12:43 PM To: Beissel, Dennis | ||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
FW: Response to NJGS Comments on Groundwater Impacts at Salem and Hope Creek Site Attachments: | FW: Response to NJGS Comments on Groundwater Impacts at Salem and Hope Creek Site Attachments: Rspns ToNJGSCmts onSalemHCGSGrndWtr_2.15.2011.doc | ||
Rspns ToNJGSCmts onSalemHCGSGrndWtr_2.15.2011.doc Dennis, FYI- Attached are responses from the applicant regarding the NJ Geological Survey's comments.Leslie From: Nancy.Ranek@_exeloncorp.com rmailto: Nancy. Ranekexeloncorp.com] | : Dennis, FYI- Attached are responses from the applicant regarding the NJ Geological Survey's comments. | ||
Leslie From: Nancy.Ranek@_exeloncorp.com rmailto: Nancy. Ranekexeloncorp.com] | |||
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 10:18 AM To: Pham, Bo; Perkins, Leslie Cc: Jeffrey.Pantazesdpseg.com; Helen.Greqorvypseg.com; Edward Keating@URSCorp.com; albert.fulviocýexeloncorp.com; john.hufnagel~sexeloncorp.com | Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 10:18 AM To: Pham, Bo; Perkins, Leslie Cc: Jeffrey.Pantazesdpseg.com; Helen.Greqorvypseg.com; Edward Keating@URSCorp.com; albert.fulviocýexeloncorp.com; john.hufnagel~sexeloncorp.com | ||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Response to NJGS Comments on Groundwater Impacts at Salem and Hope Creek Site Hi Bo and Leslie-I am attaching a file containing a response to the NJ Geological Survey's comments on the discussion concerning groundwater impacts in the Salem and Hope Creek License Renewal Environmental Reports. This information is provided to assist the NRC Staff with its environmental review of the Salem and Hope Creek license renewal applications. | Response to NJGS Comments on Groundwater Impacts at Salem and Hope Creek Site Hi Bo and Leslie-I am attaching a file containing a response to the NJ Geological Survey's comments on the discussion concerning groundwater impacts in the Salem and Hope Creek License Renewal Environmental Reports. This information is provided to assist the NRC Staff with its environmental review of the Salem and Hope Creek license renewal applications. | ||
The attachments (A through F) referred to in the attached response have file sizes that are too large for email. Therefore, I am not sending the attachments with this email. They will be provided on a CD delivered to Leslie.Please call if there are comments.Thanks.Nancy Nancy L. Ranek License Renewal Environmental Lead Exelon Nuclear, LLC 200 Exelon Way, KSA/2-E Kennett Square, PA 19348 Phone: 610-765-5369 Fax: 610-765-5658 Email: nancy.ranek@exeloncorp.com | The attachments (A through F) referred to in the attached response have file sizes that are too large for email. Therefore, I am not sending the attachments with this email. They will be provided on a CD delivered to Leslie. | ||
************************************************** | Please call if there are comments. | ||
This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon Corporation family of Companies. | Thanks. | ||
This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. | Nancy Nancy L. Ranek License Renewal Environmental Lead Exelon Nuclear, LLC 200 Exelon Way, KSA/2-E Kennett Square, PA 19348 Phone: 610-765-5369 Fax: 610-765-5658 Email: nancy.ranek@exeloncorp.com | ||
If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. | ************************************************** This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon Corporation family of Companies. This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. Thank You. | ||
If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. | * 1 | ||
Thank You. *1 Response to Comments from the New Jersey Geologic Survey (NJGS)on the Analysis of Groundwater Impacts in the Salem and Hope Creek License Renewal Environmental Reports 1. NJGS Comment: Pages 3-7, 3-9. In the section on Ground Water Usage they indicate the ground water levels in the PRM aquifer system in the plant area are the result of the pumping centers north of the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. On page 3-.8 they reference USGS (2001b) as the report which "...clearly shows that the pumping centers north of the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal influence the levels in the lower PRM in the Artificial Island vicinity." This report according to their references USGS 2001 b is Simulation of Ground-Water Flow in the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer System Near the Defense Supply Center Philadelphia, and the Point Breeze Refinery, Southern Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, US Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4218. The report and model is very specific only to the area around the Philadelphia Navy yard and Camden over 35 miles NNE of Artificial Island. Therefore this report obviously does not indicate the PRM ground water levels are the result of pumping centers north of the canal.Response: | |||
See Below.2. NJGS Comment: Then on page 3-9 they indicate that according to USGS (2009) the Delaware withdrawals have reduced the regional water levels and that the information in the report suggests that the decrease in water levels at Artificial Island in the lower and middle PRM are the result of the regional lowering.Response: | Response to Comments from the New Jersey Geologic Survey (NJGS) on the Analysis of Groundwater Impacts in the Salem and Hope Creek License Renewal Environmental Reports | ||
See Below.3. NJGS Comment: According to 3-7 and 3-8 and Table 3.1-3 the Salem and Hope Creek wells are in the upper and middle PRM, not the middle and lower PRM as implied on 3-9.Response: | : 1. NJGS Comment: Pages 3-7, 3-9. In the section on Ground Water Usage they indicate the ground water levels in the PRM aquifer system in the plant area are the result of the pumping centers north of the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. On page 3-.8 they reference USGS (2001b) as the report which "...clearly shows that the pumping centers north of the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal influence the levels in the lower PRM in the Artificial Island vicinity." This report according to their references USGS 2001 b is Simulation of Ground-Water Flow in the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer System Near the Defense Supply Center Philadelphia, and the Point Breeze Refinery, Southern Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, US Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4218. The report and model is very specific only to the area around the Philadelphia Navy yard and Camden over 35 miles NNE of Artificial Island. Therefore this report obviously does not indicate the PRM ground water levels are the result of pumping centers north of the canal. | ||
Site wells PW-5 (840' below ground surface [bgs]), HC-1 (816' bgs) and HC-2 (817' bgs) are screened in the Upper Raritan formation, while site well PW-6 (1138' bgs)is screened in the Middle Raritan formation (Dames and Moore, 1988; NJDEP 1975, 1980, and 1984). Both the Upper and Middle Raritan formations belong to the Middle aquifer of the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy (PRM) aquifer system (USGS 2009a). See Attachment A.4. NJGS Comment: Also, if USGS (1983) Plate 1 is examined there is a distinct cone of depression, at the plant site (PW 5), in the lower PRM which according to page 12 of the report"... includes essentially all water-bearing zones within the aquifer system below the upper aquifer." Response: | Response: See Below. | ||
USGS (1983) Plate 1 does show a cone of depression in the Lower aquifer of the PRM beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site in 1978 (Attachment B). However, well PW-5 pumps water from the Upper Raritan formation, which belongs to the Middle aquifer of the PRM, not the Lower aquifer of the PRM. No wells at the Salem and Hope Creek site pump water from the Lower aquifer of the PRM.USGS (2009a) Plate 7 shows no cone of depression beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site in the Upper aquifer of the PRM in 2003 (Attachment C). Similarly, USGS (2009a)Plate 9 shows no cone of depression beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site in the Lower aquifer of the PRM in 2003 (Attachment F). In the Middle aquifer of the PRM, USGS (2009a)2/15/2011 I Plate 8 does show a localized cone of depression in 2003 beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site (Attachment D). Hence, based on USGS (2009a) Plates 7, 8 and 9, it appears that groundwater production at the site may be contributing to a reduction in localized groundwater availability. | : 2. NJGS Comment: Then on page 3-9 they indicate that according to USGS (2009) the Delaware withdrawals have reduced the regional water levels and that the information in the report suggests that the decrease in water levels at Artificial Island in the lower and middle PRM are the result of the regional lowering. | ||
However, this reduction is limited to a small area within approximately 2 miles of well PW-5 and is not likely to impact other groundwater users.USGS (2011) reports that groundwater levels have increased in the City of Salem observation well over the past several years, and USGS (2008 and 2009b) indicate that groundwater levels in the area are not decreasing. | Response: See Below. | ||
Although groundwater use conflicts were enough of a regional concern to cause designation of two Critical Areas, the Salem and Hope Creek site was not included within either of the two Critical Areas. The success of the Critical Areas program in allowing groundwater levels to recover suggests that groundwater use conflicts in western Salem County may diminish with time, rather than grow.5. NJGS Comment: There is no information shown in USGS (1983) for the upper aquifer at the plant site. Table 2 indicates a water level for PW5 in 1978 at -78 feet. The well record for PW5 indicates static water levels of 35' (8/27/74) and 32' (11/4/75). | : 3. NJGS Comment: According to 3-7 and 3-8 and Table 3.1-3 the Salem and Hope Creek wells are in the upper and middle PRM, not the middle and lower PRM as implied on 3-9. | ||
The land surface at the well is about 17' above sea level which would indicate the water level at Artificial Island in 1974-75 was -18 to -15 feet. Three years after the plant started pumping out of the aquifer the water levels dropped to -78 feet or a decline of 60 feet in three years. That indicates the plant is causing the low levels not a pumping center over 10 miles away. USGS WRI 96-4206 Water levels in, Extent of Freshwater in, and Water Withdrawal from Eight Major Aquifers, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1993, by Pierre J. Lacombe and Robert Rosman, 1997, also shows the same cone of depression on Plate 7 of 8, Middle and undifferentiated Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer. This report has separated the PRM into three aquifers. | Response: Site wells PW-5 (840' below ground surface [bgs]), HC-1 (816' bgs) and HC-2 (817' bgs) are screened in the Upper Raritan formation, while site well PW-6 (1138' bgs) is screened in the Middle Raritan formation (Dames and Moore, 1988; NJDEP 1975, 1980, and 1984). Both the Upper and Middle Raritan formations belong to the Middle aquifer of the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy (PRM) aquifer system (USGS 2009a). See Attachment A. | ||
The water level on the plate is PW5 at -75 feet, the same well as in USGS (1983) Plate 1. The USGS reports above and in USGS (2009) show no wells at Artificial Island as being in the upper PRM. In the USGS reports and in their database lists PW5 as middle PRM and PW6 as being in the lower PRM, not upper and middle respectively. | : 4. NJGS Comment: Also, if USGS (1983) Plate 1 is examined there is a distinct cone of depression, at the plant site (PW 5), in the lower PRM which according to page 12 of the report | ||
Based on the depths of HC-1 and HC-2 would likely be in the middle and lower PRM respectively. | "... includes essentially all water-bearing zones within the aquifer system below the upper aquifer." | ||
Without having the construction of the other wells on Table 3.1-3 the NJGS can't tell which aquifer each is in, but the USGS (2009) shows pumpage from the upper aquifer at the site.Response: | Response: USGS (1983) Plate 1 does show a cone of depression in the Lower aquifer of the PRM beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site in 1978 (Attachment B). However, well PW-5 pumps water from the Upper Raritan formation, which belongs to the Middle aquifer of the PRM, not the Lower aquifer of the PRM. No wells at the Salem and Hope Creek site pump water from the Lower aquifer of the PRM. | ||
No well at the Salem and Hope Creek site is screened in the Upper aquifer of the PRM. PW-6 (1138' bgs) is screened in the Middle Raritan formation, while PW-5 (840'bgs), HC-1 (816' bgs) and HC-2 (817' bgs) are screened in the Upper Raritan formation (Dames and Moore, 1988; NJDEP 1975, 1980, and 1984). Both the Upper and Middle Raritan formations belong to the Middle aquifer of the PRM (USGS 2009a). See Attachment A.Similar to USGS (2009a), which is discussed in previous responses above, USGS (1997) WRI-96-4206 shows a localized cone of depression in 1993 in the Middle aquifer of the PRM beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site. This suggests that groundwater production at the site may be contributing to a reduction in localized groundwater availability. | USGS (2009a) Plate 7 shows no cone of depression beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site in the Upper aquifer of the PRM in 2003 (Attachment C). Similarly, USGS (2009a) | ||
However, this reduction is limited to a small area within approximately 2 miles of well PW-5 and is not likely to impact other groundwater users.USGS (2009a) Figures 31, 36 and 42 show amounts of groundwater withdrawn per year from the Upper, Middle, and Lower aquifers of the PRM, respectively, in the region surrounding the Salem and Hope Creek site. At the location of the Salem and Hope Creek site, these figures show groundwater being withdrawn only from the Middle aquifer of the PRM (Attachment E).2/15/2011 2 | Plate 9 shows no cone of depression beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site in the Lower aquifer of the PRM in 2003 (Attachment F). In the Middle aquifer of the PRM, USGS (2009a) 2/15/2011 I | ||
: 6. NJGS Comment: Page 4.11, Section 4.5 Ground-Water Use Conflicts (Plants Using>100 gpm of Ground-Water). | |||
Here again they indicate PW5 and PW6 are in the upper and middle PRM aquifers, whereas the USGS indicates the wells are in the middle and lower PRM.Response: | Plate 8 does show a localized cone of depression in 2003 beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site (Attachment D). Hence, based on USGS (2009a) Plates 7, 8 and 9, it appears that groundwater production at the site may be contributing to a reduction in localized groundwater availability. However, this reduction is limited to a small area within approximately 2 miles of well PW-5 and is not likely to impact other groundwater users. | ||
PW-6 (1138' bgs) is screened in the Middle Raritan formation, while PW-5 (840' bgs), HC-1 (816' bgs) and HC-2 (817' bgs) are screened in the Upper Raritan formation (Dames and Moore, 1988; NJDEP 1975, 1980, and 1984). Both the Upper and Middle Raritan formations belong to the Middle aquifer of the PRM (USGS 2009a). See Attachment A. At the location of the Salem and Hope Creek site, USGS (2009a) Figures 31, 36, and 42 show groundwater being withdrawn only from the Middle aquifer of the PRM (Attachment E).7. NJGS Comment: They also indicate the impacts from the pumpage at the current rates at the site are "... SMALL and would not warrant mitigation." Examination of the synoptic data down through the years since PW5 was installed shows the plant has caused a deep cone of depression in the middle PRM which is also now being affected by pumpage from Delaware. | USGS (2011) reports that groundwater levels have increased in the City of Salem observation well over the past several years, and USGS (2008 and 2009b) indicate that groundwater levels in the area are not decreasing. Although groundwater use conflicts were enough of a regional concern to cause designation of two Critical Areas, the Salem and Hope Creek site was not included within either of the two Critical Areas. The success of the Critical Areas program in allowing groundwater levels to recover suggests that groundwater use conflicts in western Salem County may diminish with time, rather than grow. | ||
If the plant ever pumped at the current diversion approval the affect would be felt in Delaware.The plant is the only diversion within 8 to 10 miles of the plant and yet the water levels in the PMR middle PRM are about -70 feet and the lower PRM are about -45 feet.Response: | : 5. NJGS Comment: There is no information shown in USGS (1983) for the upper aquifer at the plant site. Table 2 indicates a water level for PW5 in 1978 at -78 feet. The well record for PW5 indicates static water levels of 35' (8/27/74) and 32' (11/4/75). The land surface at the well is about 17' above sea level which would indicate the water level at Artificial Island in 1974-75 was -18 to -15 feet. Three years after the plant started pumping out of the aquifer the water levels dropped to -78 feet or a decline of 60 feet in three years. That indicates the plant is causing the low levels not a pumping center over 10 miles away. USGS WRI 96-4206 Water levels in, Extent of Freshwater in, and Water Withdrawal from Eight Major Aquifers, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1993, by Pierre J. Lacombe and Robert Rosman, 1997, also shows the same cone of depression on Plate 7 of 8, Middle and undifferentiated Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer. This report has separated the PRM into three aquifers. The water level on the plate is PW5 at -75 feet, the same well as in USGS (1983) Plate 1. The USGS reports above and in USGS (2009) show no wells at Artificial Island as being in the upper PRM. In the USGS reports and in their database lists PW5 as middle PRM and PW6 as being in the lower PRM, not upper and middle respectively. Based on the depths of HC-1 and HC-2 would likely be in the middle and lower PRM respectively. Without having the construction of the other wells on Table 3.1-3 the NJGS can't tell which aquifer each is in, but the USGS (2009) shows pumpage from the upper aquifer at the site. | ||
USGS (1997) and USGS (2009a) show a localized cone of depression in 1993 and 2003, respectively, in the Middle aquifer of the PRM beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site. This suggests that groundwater production at the site may be contributing to a reduction in localized groundwater availability. | Response: No well at the Salem and Hope Creek site is screened in the Upper aquifer of the PRM. PW-6 (1138' bgs) is screened in the Middle Raritan formation, while PW-5 (840' bgs), HC-1 (816' bgs) and HC-2 (817' bgs) are screened in the Upper Raritan formation (Dames and Moore, 1988; NJDEP 1975, 1980, and 1984). Both the Upper and Middle Raritan formations belong to the Middle aquifer of the PRM (USGS 2009a). See Attachment A. | ||
However, this reduction is limited to a small area within approximately 2 miles of well PW-5 and is not likely to impact other groundwater users.USGS (2009a) indicates that the depression within the Middle aquifer of the PRM was at approximately 60 feet in 2003.USGS (2011) reports that groundwater levels have increased in the City of Salem observation well over the past several years, and USGS (2008 and 2009b) indicate that groundwater levels in the area are not decreasing. | Similar to USGS (2009a), which is discussed in previous responses above, USGS (1997) WRI-96-4206 shows a localized cone of depression in 1993 in the Middle aquifer of the PRM beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site. This suggests that groundwater production at the site may be contributing to a reduction in localized groundwater availability. However, this reduction is limited to a small area within approximately 2 miles of well PW-5 and is not likely to impact other groundwater users. | ||
Although groundwater use conflicts were enough of a regional concern to cause designation of two Critical Areas, the Salem and Hope Creek site was not included within either of the two Critical Areas. The success of the Critical Areas program in allowing groundwater levels to recover suggests that groundwater use conflicts in western Salem County may diminish with time, rather than grow.8. NJGS Comment: Based on the various synoptic water level measurements from 1978 to 2003 the plant has caused significant water level declines which are reaching out an unknown distance from the plant. There needs to be a detailed study much like USGS (2001b)to determine the impacts of all the pumpage in the PRM around Artificial Island with a cluster of observation wells, offsite in each of the PRM aquifers.Response: | USGS (2009a) Figures 31, 36 and 42 show amounts of groundwater withdrawn per year from the Upper, Middle, and Lower aquifers of the PRM, respectively, in the region surrounding the Salem and Hope Creek site. At the location of the Salem and Hope Creek site, these figures show groundwater being withdrawn only from the Middle aquifer of the PRM (Attachment E). | ||
USGS (1997) and USGS (2009a) show a localized cone of depression in 1993 and 2003, respectively, in the Middle aquifer of the PRM beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site. USGS (2009a) Figures 31, 36, and 42 show groundwater being withdrawn only from the Middle aquifer of the PRM at the location of the Salem and Hope Creek site (Attachment E).These figures show no groundwater withdrawals from the Upper aquifer or Lower aquifer of the PRM (Attachment E). The cone of depression beneath the site is localized, and there are no groundwater users nearby. Hence, the impacts to local groundwater use are SMALL, and a detailed study of the PRM aquifers is not warranted. | 2/15/2011 2 | ||
2/15/2011 3 Attachments Attachment A: | : 6. NJGS Comment: Page 4.11, Section 4.5 Ground-Water Use Conflicts (Plants Using | ||
These are the only calculations performed. | >100 gpm of Ground-Water). Here again they indicate PW5 and PW6 are in the upper and middle PRM aquifers, whereas the USGS indicates the wells are in the middle and lower PRM. | ||
Response: PW-6 (1138' bgs) is screened in the Middle Raritan formation, while PW-5 (840' bgs), HC-1 (816' bgs) and HC-2 (817' bgs) are screened in the Upper Raritan formation (Dames and Moore, 1988; NJDEP 1975, 1980, and 1984). Both the Upper and Middle Raritan formations belong to the Middle aquifer of the PRM (USGS 2009a). See Attachment A. At the location of the Salem and Hope Creek site, USGS (2009a) Figures 31, 36, and 42 show groundwater being withdrawn only from the Middle aquifer of the PRM (Attachment E). | |||
: 7. NJGS Comment: They also indicate the impacts from the pumpage at the current rates at the site are "... SMALL and would not warrant mitigation." Examination of the synoptic data down through the years since PW5 was installed shows the plant has caused a deep cone of depression in the middle PRM which is also now being affected by pumpage from Delaware. If the plant ever pumped at the current diversion approval the affect would be felt in Delaware. | |||
The plant is the only diversion within 8 to 10 miles of the plant and yet the water levels in the PMR middle PRM are about -70 feet and the lower PRM are about -45 feet. | |||
Response: USGS (1997) and USGS (2009a) show a localized cone of depression in 1993 and 2003, respectively, in the Middle aquifer of the PRM beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site. This suggests that groundwater production at the site may be contributing to a reduction in localized groundwater availability. However, this reduction is limited to a small area within approximately 2 miles of well PW-5 and is not likely to impact other groundwater users. | |||
USGS (2009a) indicates that the depression within the Middle aquifer of the PRM was at approximately 60 feet in 2003. | |||
USGS (2011) reports that groundwater levels have increased in the City of Salem observation well over the past several years, and USGS (2008 and 2009b) indicate that groundwater levels in the area are not decreasing. Although groundwater use conflicts were enough of a regional concern to cause designation of two Critical Areas, the Salem and Hope Creek site was not included within either of the two Critical Areas. The success of the Critical Areas program in allowing groundwater levels to recover suggests that groundwater use conflicts in western Salem County may diminish with time, rather than grow. | |||
: 8. NJGS Comment: Based on the various synoptic water level measurements from 1978 to 2003 the plant has caused significant water level declines which are reaching out an unknown distance from the plant. There needs to be a detailed study much like USGS (2001b) to determine the impacts of all the pumpage in the PRM around Artificial Island with a cluster of observation wells, offsite in each of the PRM aquifers. | |||
Response: USGS (1997) and USGS (2009a) show a localized cone of depression in 1993 and 2003, respectively, in the Middle aquifer of the PRM beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site. USGS (2009a) Figures 31, 36, and 42 show groundwater being withdrawn only from the Middle aquifer of the PRM at the location of the Salem and Hope Creek site (Attachment E). | |||
These figures show no groundwater withdrawals from the Upper aquifer or Lower aquifer of the PRM (Attachment E). The cone of depression beneath the site is localized, and there are no groundwater users nearby. Hence, the impacts to local groundwater use are SMALL, and a detailed study of the PRM aquifers is not warranted. | |||
2/15/2011 3 | |||
Attachments Attachment A: Table 1 from USGS 2009a Attachment B: Plate 1 from USGS 1983 Attachment C: Plate 7 from USGS 2009a Attachment D: Plate 8 from USGS 2009a Attachment E: Figures 31, 36, and 42 from USGS 2009a Attachment F: Plate 9 from USGS 2009a 2/15/2011 4 | |||
Calculation Package for Groundwater Pumpage ER Section 3.1.4 Groundwater Salem & Hope Creek Generating Station Environmental Report for License Renewal November 18, 2008 Prepared for: | |||
Exelon Prepared by: | |||
Gary L. Gunter Tetra Tech NUS Alken, South Carolina Date: | |||
=Avie 425ýý Aut r: | |||
OCPEBY. - | |||
49 | |||
= | |||
Wole ager: | |||
Supporting Information for ER Section 3.1.4- SalemlHCGS ER for License Renewal The spread sheet input data supplied by PSEG (Keating 2008a, b, c, d) was selected to represent a range of usage and groundwater level/elevation data as close to the current year as possible. | |||
Tetra Tech calculated ground-water elevations using an Excel spreadsheet. These are the only calculations performed. | |||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
Keating (Edward J.) 2008a, Groundwater Diversion Calculations for Salem/Hope Creek Generating Stations, E-mail from E. Keating (PSEG) to Gary Gunter (TtNUS) on November 14, 2008.Keating (Edward J.) 2008b, Groundwater Elevation Data for Salem Generating Stations, E-mail from E. Keating (PSEG) to Gary Gunter (TtNUS) on May 5.Keating (Edward J.) 2008c, Groundwater Level Data for Hope Creek Generating Stations, E-mail from E. Keating (PSEG) to Gary Gunter (TtNUS) on May 9.Keating (Edward J.) 2008d, Total Head Calculation Sheet for Salem/Hope Creek Generating Stations, E-mail from E. Keating (PSEG) to Gary Gunter (TtN US) on May 8, 2008. | Keating (Edward J.) 2008a, Groundwater Diversion Calculations for Salem/Hope Creek Generating Stations, E-mail from E. Keating (PSEG) to Gary Gunter (TtNUS) on November 14, 2008. | ||
Mt Laurel -V" Mt Laurel -Upper Rant Upper Rarit Upper Rani Mid Roritan Upper Rarit Mid Raritan Upper Rarit Mt"Laurel | Keating (Edward J.) 2008b, Groundwater Elevation Data for Salem Generating Stations, E-mail from E. Keating (PSEG) to Gary Gunter (TtNUS) on May 5. | ||
-Wen Year Month PW-2 PW-3 PW-5 HC-1 HC-2 PW46 OW-J ' OW-6 OW-I OW-G 2000 Jan 11.60 13.00 72.50 78.00 75.00 77.30 70.30 78.00 62.30 17.80 2000 Feb 12.20 10.80 71.00 76.00 81.00 51.80 11.70 50.50 62.90 11.00 2000 Mar 11.30 10.95 73.30 79.00 80.00 50.50 76.50 55.40 67.10 16.60 2000 Apr 11.90 12.30 64.40 74.00 78.00 56.10 79.40 56.60 63.90 17.20 2000 May 11.40 11.10 73.50 74.00 78.00 55.20 63.90 55.60 73.90 16.40 2000 Jun 11.90 12.00 77.10 82.00 82.00 56.20 75.40 61.50 67.00 17.00 2000 Jul 11.40 11.00 76.90 78.00 80.00 66.70 80.40 70.90 66.00 16.80 2000 Aug 12.20 17.00 46.20 76.00 81.00 86.20 55.00 70.90 16.20 2000 Sep 12.20 11.10 85.00 75.00 77.00 54.90 84.50 53.00 69.20 16.70 2000 Oct 12.40 12.10 78.00 75.00 80.00 54.00 73.80 55.00 73.60 18.70 2000 Nov 12.90 11.50 80.00 78.00 76.00 4ý.40 78.70 72.80 67.50 19.50 2000 Dec 15.30 15.50 83.90 76.00 78.00 57.00 69.00 57.30 22.60 19.40 2001 Jan 13.70 13.70 78.30 77.00 82.00 5t.50 80.50 57.00 67.90 20.60 2001 Feb 12.00 11.20 71.50 74.00 75.00 5 .00 73.80 55.90 68.00 17.10 2001 Mar 12.70 11.70 76.70 79.00 78.00 5;.50 76.40 58.80 65.30 17.90 2001 Apr 12.80 14.50 78.50 76.00 80.00 5 .70 78.50 16.50 66.50 19.50 2001 May 12.30 12.80 89.40 76.00 77.00 56.80 94.00 57.40 88.70 15.70 2001 Jun 13.80 15.00 79.90 80.00 80.00 5 .80 80.80 59.30 69.30 18.20 2001 Jul 11.40 11.00 76.90 76.00 74.00 6 .70 80.40 70.90 66.00 16.80 2001 Aug 12.10 12.80 72.80 73.00 75.00 6 .80 75.60 58.00 68.00 18.60 2001 Sep 11.50 10.80 81.70 78.00 78.00 55.30 88.80 57.90 70.00 14.00 2001 Oct 12.50 12.30 75.30 78.00 84.00 56.90 75.60 57.60 64.10 18.50 2001 Nov 11.70 10.20 79.80 78.00 77.00 5t.40 85.40 57.00 66.80 15.90 2001 Dec 13.70 10.70 58.80 79.00 78.00 5 .00 79.90 56.10 66.90 16.80 2002 | Keating (Edward J.) 2008c, Groundwater Level Data for Hope Creek Generating Stations, E-mail from E. Keating (PSEG) to Gary Gunter (TtNUS) on May 9. | ||
Keating (Edward J.) 2008d, Total Head Calculation Sheet for Salem/Hope Creek Generating Stations, E-mail from E. Keating (PSEG) to Gary Gunter (TtN US) on May 8, 2008. | |||
Mt Laurel - V"Mt Laurel - Upper Rant Upper Rarit Upper Rani Mid Roritan Upper Rarit Mid Raritan Upper Rarit Mt"Laurel - Wen Year Month PW-2 PW-3 PW-5 HC-1 HC-2 PW46 OW-J ' OW-6 OW-I OW-G 2000 Jan 11.60 13.00 72.50 78.00 75.00 77.30 70.30 78.00 62.30 17.80 2000 Feb 12.20 10.80 71.00 76.00 81.00 51.80 11.70 50.50 62.90 11.00 2000 Mar 11.30 10.95 73.30 79.00 80.00 50.50 76.50 55.40 67.10 16.60 2000 Apr 11.90 12.30 64.40 74.00 78.00 56.10 79.40 56.60 63.90 17.20 2000 May 11.40 11.10 73.50 74.00 78.00 55.20 63.90 55.60 73.90 16.40 2000 Jun 11.90 12.00 77.10 82.00 82.00 56.20 75.40 61.50 67.00 17.00 2000 Jul 11.40 11.00 76.90 78.00 80.00 66.70 80.40 70.90 66.00 16.80 2000 Aug 12.20 17.00 46.20 76.00 81.00 5,*.90 86.20 55.00 70.90 16.20 2000 Sep 12.20 11.10 85.00 75.00 77.00 54.90 84.50 53.00 69.20 16.70 2000 Oct 12.40 12.10 78.00 75.00 80.00 54.00 73.80 55.00 73.60 18.70 2000 Nov 12.90 11.50 80.00 78.00 76.00 4ý.40 78.70 72.80 67.50 19.50 2000 Dec 15.30 15.50 83.90 76.00 78.00 57.00 69.00 57.30 22.60 19.40 2001 Jan 13.70 13.70 78.30 77.00 82.00 5t.50 80.50 57.00 67.90 20.60 2001 Feb 12.00 11.20 71.50 74.00 75.00 5 .00 73.80 55.90 68.00 17.10 2001 Mar 12.70 11.70 76.70 79.00 78.00 5;.50 76.40 58.80 65.30 17.90 2001 Apr 12.80 14.50 78.50 76.00 80.00 5 .70 78.50 16.50 66.50 19.50 2001 May 12.30 12.80 89.40 76.00 77.00 56.80 94.00 57.40 88.70 15.70 2001 Jun 13.80 15.00 79.90 80.00 80.00 5 .80 80.80 59.30 69.30 18.20 2001 Jul 11.40 11.00 76.90 76.00 74.00 6 .70 80.40 70.90 66.00 16.80 2001 Aug 12.10 12.80 72.80 73.00 75.00 6 .80 75.60 58.00 68.00 18.60 2001 Sep 11.50 10.80 81.70 78.00 78.00 55.30 88.80 57.90 70.00 14.00 2001 Oct 12.50 12.30 75.30 78.00 84.00 56.90 75.60 57.60 64.10 18.50 2001 Nov 11.70 10.20 79.80 78.00 77.00 5t.40 85.40 57.00 66.80 15.90 2001 Dec 13.70 10.70 58.80 79.00 78.00 5 .00 79.90 56.10 66.90 16.80 2002 Jan 13.50 13.60 78.00 84.00 56.50 82.50 55.50 69.70 16.50 2002 Feb 12.50 12.90 82.20 85.00 88.00 56.50 80.10 58.00 71.30 16.30 2002 Mar 13.30 12.50 83.50 89.00 83.00 56.10 92.10 57.00 74.00 17.00 2002 Apr 13.50 13.50 75.50 75.00 76.00 5;.50 80.50 63.00 69.00 18.50 2002 May 12.50 13.00 74.50 76.00 74.00 5 . .10 78.50 53.50 87.50 18.40 2002 Jun 11.40 11.00 76.90 74.00 74.00 55.10 77.70 55.00 66.60 17.50 2002 Jul 11.40 11.70 74.30 75.00 78.00 5 .10 77.60 61.50 99.50 16.80 2002 Aug 12.00 11.80 72.60 75.00 74.00 55.70 73.80 56.40 65.30 18.20 2002 Sep 12.00 12.20 71.60 72.00 75.00 5ý.10 72.90 56.50 63.60 17.70 2002 Oct 11.30 10.10 75.50 72.00 72.00 53T.70 74.00 58.30 66.00 17.00 2002 Nov 11.90 11.10 75.70 81.00 81.00 5*.00 77.90 56.30 65.80 15.80 | |||
2002 Dec 10.70 9.80 74.60 74.00 85.00 50.30 77.50 56.80 65.70 18.30 2003 Jan 12.00 12.20 73.00 75.00 76.00 5 .40 *73.50 58.00 65.90 17.70 2003 Feb 12.70 12.70 78.80 82.00 75.00 5 .70 79.00 57.40 68.00 18.50 2003 Mar 12.60 13.00 78.30 78.00 81.00 55.30 78.50 58.40 68.00 19.50 2003 Apr 12.50 85.60 78.00 82.00 57.90 84.00 58.70 69.70 18.70 2003 May 12.60 10.90 77.00 78.00 82.00 5 .70 78.50 59.20 68.00 18.20 2003 Jun 11.00 11.00 8100t 80.00 82.00 5 .30 79.30 56.50 63.30 16.80 2003 Jul 12.80 11.20 78.30 79.00 80.00 5 .30 76.80 63.30 69.50 17.60 2003 Aug 12.00 11.50 76.70 84.00 82.00 5 .00 74.50 58.30 68.50 19.50 2003 Sep 12.50 12.00 80.30 79.00 82.00 5 3.20 81.80 58.40 73.00 18.60 2003 Oct 12.00 10.60 88.00 84.00 86.00 5 .10 86.90 59.00 73.40 17.10 2003 Nov 12.00 11.30 81.70 80005 5.10 82.30 58.00 72.00 17.30 2003 Dec 11.50 12.00 87.30 86.00 88 00 55.90 75.00 56.50 72.00 17.70 2004 Jan 10.80 10.40 80.60 88.00 90.00 5 .10 85.00 55.80 71.00 15.00 2004 Feb 12.00 11.90 82.00 80* 80 57.40 89.20 57.30 75.50 16.00 2004 Mar 11.60 20.30 83.00 72.00 93.00 5 v.50 85.60 56.50 83.80 56.00 2004 Apr 11.50 12.00 86.00 73.00 86.00 5 .90 90.80 56.40 81.80 19.10 2004 May 12.00 21.70 79.00 85.00 84.00 5 * .00 83.10 57.50 72.30 19.60 2004 Jun 13.80 18.30 75.50 79.00 90.00 5 3.50 86.20 59.40 76.00 18.50 2004 Jul 11.80 11.00 85.40 80.00 86.00 5 .30 84.70 57.30 68.00 16.50 2004 Aug 11.40 11.00 87.60 85.00 86.00 55.80 83.20 56.60 73.00 16.90 2004 Sep 11.00 10.50 93.50 83.00 83.00 5 .80 78.80 56.20 73.50 15.10 2004 Oct 11.00 10.80 84.00 76.00 85.00 5 .00 87.30 56.60 74.40 16.20 2004 Nov 10.70 10.70 81.60 85.00 98.00 6 .20 86.90 59.50 83.40 16.00 2004 Dec 11.60 12.80 95.40 83.00 95.00 50.20 104.10 58.30 89.20 18.30 2005 Jan 12.30 13.20 85.50 89.00 100.00 5- .00 102.60 56.20 89.00 16.80 2005 Feb 11.10 12.80 89.70 78.00 92.00 57.30 89.30 58.10 90.40 17.60 2005 Mar 11.40 11.70 87.90 82.00 96.00 53.00 96.00 58.40 88.90 16.00 2005 Apr 10.60 10.00 95.00 78.00 91.00 5 .70 92.80 57.40 77.10 17.10 2005 May 10.00 12.50 98.00 83.00 92.00 5 .00 89.70 56.00 75.00 17.80 2005 Jun 11.00 11.00 90.00 76.00 88.00 5 .50 87.50 57.30 80.00 13.00 2005 Jul 3.60 2.40 93.00 76.00 89.00 4 .30 78.70 48.90 69.10 11.80 2005 Aug 10.80 12.00 89.40 88.00 87.00 5P.60 92.50 57.00 77.30 17.50 2005 Sep 10.00 <0.1 83.6.0 75.00 90.00 5 .00 79.00 58.60 75.00 17.00 2005 Oct 11.60 10.00 81.60 78.00 88.00 5 ?.10 79.00 57.50 67.00 12.00 2005 Nov 10.00 10.50 96.00 76.00 94.00 5 .60 86.00 57.00 83.00 17.50 2005 Dec 11.40 10.20 88.00 79.00 96.00 5j7.10 83.90 57.50 67.60 17.00 2006 Jan 12.00 11.00 8.88. 0 0 81.00 95.00 5 .50 91.50 58.00 78.50 17.00 | |||
2006 Feb 11.10 12.80 89.70 80.00 93.00 5 U.30 89.30 58.10 90.40 17.60 2006 Mar 11.00 12.00 86.50 79.00 93.00 5 3.00 90.00 58.50 80.30 17.90 2006 Apr 12.10 11.25 88.45 81.00 94.00 5 r.75 92.83 58.50 80.10 17.33 2006 May 11.10 11.75 76.60 76.00 85.00 5 r.50 84.60 57.80 71.50 17.10 2006 Jun 11.00 12.00 79.50 74.00 85.00 5 3.00 84.50 57.60 71.50 18.00 2006 Jul 11.25 11.00 79.50 68.00 83.00 5 3.00 82.10 58.25 71.00 17.75 2006 Aug 11.50 11.40 86.50 74.00 86.00 5 r.90 84.30 58.40 73.10 17.30 2006 Sep 11.20 10.50 92.60 75.00 84.00 5 3.20 82.50 58.90 70.70 16.00 2006 Oct 11.50 11.90 84.20 70.00 88.00 5 3.80 82.70 59.30 72.50 17.60 2006 Nov 11.30 10.30 80.00 88.00 85.00 5 3.70 84.80 59.30 71.20 16.20 2006 Dec 11.50 11.40 81.70 70.00 83.00 5 3.80 83.50 59.20 71.20 17.40 | |||
==Reference:== | ==Reference:== | ||
: 1) Keating 2008a Mt Laurel -WMt Laurel -Upper Rart Upper Rarit Upper Rarit Mid Raritan Year | : 1) Keating 2008a Mt Laurel - WMt Laurel - Upper Rart Upper Rarit Upper Rarit Mid Raritan Year Month PW-22 PW-3' PW-5 HC-1 HC-23 PW-2007 Jan 11.50 12.30 80.30 75.00 84.00 5 3.50 2007 Feb 11.20 11.00 85.80 70.00 85.00 5 3.60 2007 Mar 12.00 12.20 94.50 75.00 97.00 5 3.50 2007 Apr 10.10 11.50 90.00 80.00 95.00 5 2007 May 12.30 11.20 96.90 79.00 91.00 5 3.20 2007 Jun 11.70 11.20 81.00 77.00 88.00 6 ).50 2007 Jul 11.50 11.10 85.30 78.00 90.00 5 3.00 2007 Aug 11.10 11.00 87.30 78.00 90.00 5 3.70 2007 Sep 11.60 10.90 85.60 77.00 87.00 5 3.40 2007 Oct 11.00 11.00 89.50 78.00 91.00 5 ).10 2007 Nov 11.30 12.30 90.30 80.00 93.00 5 ).40 2007 Dec 12.70 12.90 90.50 80.00 96.00 6 ).90 | ||
==References:== | ==References:== | ||
: 2) Keating 2008 b | |||
: 3) Keating 2008 c | |||
Keating (Edward J.) 2008a, Groundwater Diversion Calculations for Salem/Hope Creek Generating Stations, E-mail i rom E. Keating (PSEG) to Gary Gunter (TtNUS) on May14. | |||
Keating (Edward J.) 2008b, Groundwater Elevation Data for Salem Generating Stations, E-mail from E. Keating (PSI :G) to Gary Gunter (TtNUS) on May 5. | |||
Keating (Edward J.) 2008c, Groundwater Level Data for Hope Creek Generating Stations, E-mail from E. Keating (P.' ;EG) to Gary Gunter (TtNUS) on May 9. | |||
Middle Raritan 120 100 80 1k 60 | |||
/XIVJ K 40 20 0 A 1999 1999 2000 2000 2001 2001 2002 2002 2003 2003 2004 2004 r005 2005 2006 2006 2007 2007 2008 I PW6 -OW6 |
Revision as of 13:24, 12 November 2019
ML11287A195 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Salem, Hope Creek |
Issue date: | 02/16/2011 |
From: | Leslie Perkins NRC/NRR/DRA |
To: | Beissel D Division of License Renewal |
References | |
FOIA/PA-2011-0113 | |
Download: ML11287A195 (28) | |
Text
Beissel, Dennis From: Perkins, Leslie Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 12:43 PM To: Beissel, Dennis
Subject:
FW: Response to NJGS Comments on Groundwater Impacts at Salem and Hope Creek Site Attachments: Rspns ToNJGSCmts onSalemHCGSGrndWtr_2.15.2011.doc
- Dennis, FYI- Attached are responses from the applicant regarding the NJ Geological Survey's comments.
Leslie From: Nancy.Ranek@_exeloncorp.com rmailto: Nancy. Ranekexeloncorp.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 10:18 AM To: Pham, Bo; Perkins, Leslie Cc: Jeffrey.Pantazesdpseg.com; Helen.Greqorvypseg.com; Edward Keating@URSCorp.com; albert.fulviocýexeloncorp.com; john.hufnagel~sexeloncorp.com
Subject:
Response to NJGS Comments on Groundwater Impacts at Salem and Hope Creek Site Hi Bo and Leslie-I am attaching a file containing a response to the NJ Geological Survey's comments on the discussion concerning groundwater impacts in the Salem and Hope Creek License Renewal Environmental Reports. This information is provided to assist the NRC Staff with its environmental review of the Salem and Hope Creek license renewal applications.
The attachments (A through F) referred to in the attached response have file sizes that are too large for email. Therefore, I am not sending the attachments with this email. They will be provided on a CD delivered to Leslie.
Please call if there are comments.
Thanks.
Nancy Nancy L. Ranek License Renewal Environmental Lead Exelon Nuclear, LLC 200 Exelon Way, KSA/2-E Kennett Square, PA 19348 Phone: 610-765-5369 Fax: 610-765-5658 Email: nancy.ranek@exeloncorp.com
- This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon Corporation family of Companies. This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. Thank You.
- 1
Response to Comments from the New Jersey Geologic Survey (NJGS) on the Analysis of Groundwater Impacts in the Salem and Hope Creek License Renewal Environmental Reports
- 1. NJGS Comment: Pages 3-7, 3-9. In the section on Ground Water Usage they indicate the ground water levels in the PRM aquifer system in the plant area are the result of the pumping centers north of the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal. On page 3-.8 they reference USGS (2001b) as the report which "...clearly shows that the pumping centers north of the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal influence the levels in the lower PRM in the Artificial Island vicinity." This report according to their references USGS 2001 b is Simulation of Ground-Water Flow in the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy Aquifer System Near the Defense Supply Center Philadelphia, and the Point Breeze Refinery, Southern Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, US Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4218. The report and model is very specific only to the area around the Philadelphia Navy yard and Camden over 35 miles NNE of Artificial Island. Therefore this report obviously does not indicate the PRM ground water levels are the result of pumping centers north of the canal.
Response: See Below.
- 2. NJGS Comment: Then on page 3-9 they indicate that according to USGS (2009) the Delaware withdrawals have reduced the regional water levels and that the information in the report suggests that the decrease in water levels at Artificial Island in the lower and middle PRM are the result of the regional lowering.
Response: See Below.
- 3. NJGS Comment: According to 3-7 and 3-8 and Table 3.1-3 the Salem and Hope Creek wells are in the upper and middle PRM, not the middle and lower PRM as implied on 3-9.
Response: Site wells PW-5 (840' below ground surface [bgs]), HC-1 (816' bgs) and HC-2 (817' bgs) are screened in the Upper Raritan formation, while site well PW-6 (1138' bgs) is screened in the Middle Raritan formation (Dames and Moore, 1988; NJDEP 1975, 1980, and 1984). Both the Upper and Middle Raritan formations belong to the Middle aquifer of the Potomac-Raritan-Magothy (PRM) aquifer system (USGS 2009a). See Attachment A.
- 4. NJGS Comment: Also, if USGS (1983) Plate 1 is examined there is a distinct cone of depression, at the plant site (PW 5), in the lower PRM which according to page 12 of the report
"... includes essentially all water-bearing zones within the aquifer system below the upper aquifer."
Response: USGS (1983) Plate 1 does show a cone of depression in the Lower aquifer of the PRM beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site in 1978 (Attachment B). However, well PW-5 pumps water from the Upper Raritan formation, which belongs to the Middle aquifer of the PRM, not the Lower aquifer of the PRM. No wells at the Salem and Hope Creek site pump water from the Lower aquifer of the PRM.
USGS (2009a) Plate 7 shows no cone of depression beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site in the Upper aquifer of the PRM in 2003 (Attachment C). Similarly, USGS (2009a)
Plate 9 shows no cone of depression beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site in the Lower aquifer of the PRM in 2003 (Attachment F). In the Middle aquifer of the PRM, USGS (2009a) 2/15/2011 I
Plate 8 does show a localized cone of depression in 2003 beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site (Attachment D). Hence, based on USGS (2009a) Plates 7, 8 and 9, it appears that groundwater production at the site may be contributing to a reduction in localized groundwater availability. However, this reduction is limited to a small area within approximately 2 miles of well PW-5 and is not likely to impact other groundwater users.
USGS (2011) reports that groundwater levels have increased in the City of Salem observation well over the past several years, and USGS (2008 and 2009b) indicate that groundwater levels in the area are not decreasing. Although groundwater use conflicts were enough of a regional concern to cause designation of two Critical Areas, the Salem and Hope Creek site was not included within either of the two Critical Areas. The success of the Critical Areas program in allowing groundwater levels to recover suggests that groundwater use conflicts in western Salem County may diminish with time, rather than grow.
- 5. NJGS Comment: There is no information shown in USGS (1983) for the upper aquifer at the plant site. Table 2 indicates a water level for PW5 in 1978 at -78 feet. The well record for PW5 indicates static water levels of 35' (8/27/74) and 32' (11/4/75). The land surface at the well is about 17' above sea level which would indicate the water level at Artificial Island in 1974-75 was -18 to -15 feet. Three years after the plant started pumping out of the aquifer the water levels dropped to -78 feet or a decline of 60 feet in three years. That indicates the plant is causing the low levels not a pumping center over 10 miles away. USGS WRI 96-4206 Water levels in, Extent of Freshwater in, and Water Withdrawal from Eight Major Aquifers, New Jersey Coastal Plain, 1993, by Pierre J. Lacombe and Robert Rosman, 1997, also shows the same cone of depression on Plate 7 of 8, Middle and undifferentiated Potomac-Raritan-Magothy aquifer. This report has separated the PRM into three aquifers. The water level on the plate is PW5 at -75 feet, the same well as in USGS (1983) Plate 1. The USGS reports above and in USGS (2009) show no wells at Artificial Island as being in the upper PRM. In the USGS reports and in their database lists PW5 as middle PRM and PW6 as being in the lower PRM, not upper and middle respectively. Based on the depths of HC-1 and HC-2 would likely be in the middle and lower PRM respectively. Without having the construction of the other wells on Table 3.1-3 the NJGS can't tell which aquifer each is in, but the USGS (2009) shows pumpage from the upper aquifer at the site.
Response: No well at the Salem and Hope Creek site is screened in the Upper aquifer of the PRM. PW-6 (1138' bgs) is screened in the Middle Raritan formation, while PW-5 (840' bgs), HC-1 (816' bgs) and HC-2 (817' bgs) are screened in the Upper Raritan formation (Dames and Moore, 1988; NJDEP 1975, 1980, and 1984). Both the Upper and Middle Raritan formations belong to the Middle aquifer of the PRM (USGS 2009a). See Attachment A.
Similar to USGS (2009a), which is discussed in previous responses above, USGS (1997) WRI-96-4206 shows a localized cone of depression in 1993 in the Middle aquifer of the PRM beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site. This suggests that groundwater production at the site may be contributing to a reduction in localized groundwater availability. However, this reduction is limited to a small area within approximately 2 miles of well PW-5 and is not likely to impact other groundwater users.
USGS (2009a) Figures 31, 36 and 42 show amounts of groundwater withdrawn per year from the Upper, Middle, and Lower aquifers of the PRM, respectively, in the region surrounding the Salem and Hope Creek site. At the location of the Salem and Hope Creek site, these figures show groundwater being withdrawn only from the Middle aquifer of the PRM (Attachment E).
2/15/2011 2
- 6. NJGS Comment: Page 4.11, Section 4.5 Ground-Water Use Conflicts (Plants Using
>100 gpm of Ground-Water). Here again they indicate PW5 and PW6 are in the upper and middle PRM aquifers, whereas the USGS indicates the wells are in the middle and lower PRM.
Response: PW-6 (1138' bgs) is screened in the Middle Raritan formation, while PW-5 (840' bgs), HC-1 (816' bgs) and HC-2 (817' bgs) are screened in the Upper Raritan formation (Dames and Moore, 1988; NJDEP 1975, 1980, and 1984). Both the Upper and Middle Raritan formations belong to the Middle aquifer of the PRM (USGS 2009a). See Attachment A. At the location of the Salem and Hope Creek site, USGS (2009a) Figures 31, 36, and 42 show groundwater being withdrawn only from the Middle aquifer of the PRM (Attachment E).
- 7. NJGS Comment: They also indicate the impacts from the pumpage at the current rates at the site are "... SMALL and would not warrant mitigation." Examination of the synoptic data down through the years since PW5 was installed shows the plant has caused a deep cone of depression in the middle PRM which is also now being affected by pumpage from Delaware. If the plant ever pumped at the current diversion approval the affect would be felt in Delaware.
The plant is the only diversion within 8 to 10 miles of the plant and yet the water levels in the PMR middle PRM are about -70 feet and the lower PRM are about -45 feet.
Response: USGS (1997) and USGS (2009a) show a localized cone of depression in 1993 and 2003, respectively, in the Middle aquifer of the PRM beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site. This suggests that groundwater production at the site may be contributing to a reduction in localized groundwater availability. However, this reduction is limited to a small area within approximately 2 miles of well PW-5 and is not likely to impact other groundwater users.
USGS (2009a) indicates that the depression within the Middle aquifer of the PRM was at approximately 60 feet in 2003.
USGS (2011) reports that groundwater levels have increased in the City of Salem observation well over the past several years, and USGS (2008 and 2009b) indicate that groundwater levels in the area are not decreasing. Although groundwater use conflicts were enough of a regional concern to cause designation of two Critical Areas, the Salem and Hope Creek site was not included within either of the two Critical Areas. The success of the Critical Areas program in allowing groundwater levels to recover suggests that groundwater use conflicts in western Salem County may diminish with time, rather than grow.
- 8. NJGS Comment: Based on the various synoptic water level measurements from 1978 to 2003 the plant has caused significant water level declines which are reaching out an unknown distance from the plant. There needs to be a detailed study much like USGS (2001b) to determine the impacts of all the pumpage in the PRM around Artificial Island with a cluster of observation wells, offsite in each of the PRM aquifers.
Response: USGS (1997) and USGS (2009a) show a localized cone of depression in 1993 and 2003, respectively, in the Middle aquifer of the PRM beneath the Salem and Hope Creek site. USGS (2009a) Figures 31, 36, and 42 show groundwater being withdrawn only from the Middle aquifer of the PRM at the location of the Salem and Hope Creek site (Attachment E).
These figures show no groundwater withdrawals from the Upper aquifer or Lower aquifer of the PRM (Attachment E). The cone of depression beneath the site is localized, and there are no groundwater users nearby. Hence, the impacts to local groundwater use are SMALL, and a detailed study of the PRM aquifers is not warranted.
2/15/2011 3
Attachments Attachment A: Table 1 from USGS 2009a Attachment B: Plate 1 from USGS 1983 Attachment C: Plate 7 from USGS 2009a Attachment D: Plate 8 from USGS 2009a Attachment E: Figures 31, 36, and 42 from USGS 2009a Attachment F: Plate 9 from USGS 2009a 2/15/2011 4
Calculation Package for Groundwater Pumpage ER Section 3.1.4 Groundwater Salem & Hope Creek Generating Station Environmental Report for License Renewal November 18, 2008 Prepared for:
Exelon Prepared by:
Gary L. Gunter Tetra Tech NUS Alken, South Carolina Date:
=Avie 425ýý Aut r:
OCPEBY. -
49
=
Wole ager:
Supporting Information for ER Section 3.1.4- SalemlHCGS ER for License Renewal The spread sheet input data supplied by PSEG (Keating 2008a, b, c, d) was selected to represent a range of usage and groundwater level/elevation data as close to the current year as possible.
Tetra Tech calculated ground-water elevations using an Excel spreadsheet. These are the only calculations performed.
References:
Keating (Edward J.) 2008a, Groundwater Diversion Calculations for Salem/Hope Creek Generating Stations, E-mail from E. Keating (PSEG) to Gary Gunter (TtNUS) on November 14, 2008.
Keating (Edward J.) 2008b, Groundwater Elevation Data for Salem Generating Stations, E-mail from E. Keating (PSEG) to Gary Gunter (TtNUS) on May 5.
Keating (Edward J.) 2008c, Groundwater Level Data for Hope Creek Generating Stations, E-mail from E. Keating (PSEG) to Gary Gunter (TtNUS) on May 9.
Keating (Edward J.) 2008d, Total Head Calculation Sheet for Salem/Hope Creek Generating Stations, E-mail from E. Keating (PSEG) to Gary Gunter (TtN US) on May 8, 2008.
Mt Laurel - V"Mt Laurel - Upper Rant Upper Rarit Upper Rani Mid Roritan Upper Rarit Mid Raritan Upper Rarit Mt"Laurel - Wen Year Month PW-2 PW-3 PW-5 HC-1 HC-2 PW46 OW-J ' OW-6 OW-I OW-G 2000 Jan 11.60 13.00 72.50 78.00 75.00 77.30 70.30 78.00 62.30 17.80 2000 Feb 12.20 10.80 71.00 76.00 81.00 51.80 11.70 50.50 62.90 11.00 2000 Mar 11.30 10.95 73.30 79.00 80.00 50.50 76.50 55.40 67.10 16.60 2000 Apr 11.90 12.30 64.40 74.00 78.00 56.10 79.40 56.60 63.90 17.20 2000 May 11.40 11.10 73.50 74.00 78.00 55.20 63.90 55.60 73.90 16.40 2000 Jun 11.90 12.00 77.10 82.00 82.00 56.20 75.40 61.50 67.00 17.00 2000 Jul 11.40 11.00 76.90 78.00 80.00 66.70 80.40 70.90 66.00 16.80 2000 Aug 12.20 17.00 46.20 76.00 81.00 5,*.90 86.20 55.00 70.90 16.20 2000 Sep 12.20 11.10 85.00 75.00 77.00 54.90 84.50 53.00 69.20 16.70 2000 Oct 12.40 12.10 78.00 75.00 80.00 54.00 73.80 55.00 73.60 18.70 2000 Nov 12.90 11.50 80.00 78.00 76.00 4ý.40 78.70 72.80 67.50 19.50 2000 Dec 15.30 15.50 83.90 76.00 78.00 57.00 69.00 57.30 22.60 19.40 2001 Jan 13.70 13.70 78.30 77.00 82.00 5t.50 80.50 57.00 67.90 20.60 2001 Feb 12.00 11.20 71.50 74.00 75.00 5 .00 73.80 55.90 68.00 17.10 2001 Mar 12.70 11.70 76.70 79.00 78.00 5;.50 76.40 58.80 65.30 17.90 2001 Apr 12.80 14.50 78.50 76.00 80.00 5 .70 78.50 16.50 66.50 19.50 2001 May 12.30 12.80 89.40 76.00 77.00 56.80 94.00 57.40 88.70 15.70 2001 Jun 13.80 15.00 79.90 80.00 80.00 5 .80 80.80 59.30 69.30 18.20 2001 Jul 11.40 11.00 76.90 76.00 74.00 6 .70 80.40 70.90 66.00 16.80 2001 Aug 12.10 12.80 72.80 73.00 75.00 6 .80 75.60 58.00 68.00 18.60 2001 Sep 11.50 10.80 81.70 78.00 78.00 55.30 88.80 57.90 70.00 14.00 2001 Oct 12.50 12.30 75.30 78.00 84.00 56.90 75.60 57.60 64.10 18.50 2001 Nov 11.70 10.20 79.80 78.00 77.00 5t.40 85.40 57.00 66.80 15.90 2001 Dec 13.70 10.70 58.80 79.00 78.00 5 .00 79.90 56.10 66.90 16.80 2002 Jan 13.50 13.60 78.00 84.00 56.50 82.50 55.50 69.70 16.50 2002 Feb 12.50 12.90 82.20 85.00 88.00 56.50 80.10 58.00 71.30 16.30 2002 Mar 13.30 12.50 83.50 89.00 83.00 56.10 92.10 57.00 74.00 17.00 2002 Apr 13.50 13.50 75.50 75.00 76.00 5;.50 80.50 63.00 69.00 18.50 2002 May 12.50 13.00 74.50 76.00 74.00 5 . .10 78.50 53.50 87.50 18.40 2002 Jun 11.40 11.00 76.90 74.00 74.00 55.10 77.70 55.00 66.60 17.50 2002 Jul 11.40 11.70 74.30 75.00 78.00 5 .10 77.60 61.50 99.50 16.80 2002 Aug 12.00 11.80 72.60 75.00 74.00 55.70 73.80 56.40 65.30 18.20 2002 Sep 12.00 12.20 71.60 72.00 75.00 5ý.10 72.90 56.50 63.60 17.70 2002 Oct 11.30 10.10 75.50 72.00 72.00 53T.70 74.00 58.30 66.00 17.00 2002 Nov 11.90 11.10 75.70 81.00 81.00 5*.00 77.90 56.30 65.80 15.80
2002 Dec 10.70 9.80 74.60 74.00 85.00 50.30 77.50 56.80 65.70 18.30 2003 Jan 12.00 12.20 73.00 75.00 76.00 5 .40 *73.50 58.00 65.90 17.70 2003 Feb 12.70 12.70 78.80 82.00 75.00 5 .70 79.00 57.40 68.00 18.50 2003 Mar 12.60 13.00 78.30 78.00 81.00 55.30 78.50 58.40 68.00 19.50 2003 Apr 12.50 85.60 78.00 82.00 57.90 84.00 58.70 69.70 18.70 2003 May 12.60 10.90 77.00 78.00 82.00 5 .70 78.50 59.20 68.00 18.20 2003 Jun 11.00 11.00 8100t 80.00 82.00 5 .30 79.30 56.50 63.30 16.80 2003 Jul 12.80 11.20 78.30 79.00 80.00 5 .30 76.80 63.30 69.50 17.60 2003 Aug 12.00 11.50 76.70 84.00 82.00 5 .00 74.50 58.30 68.50 19.50 2003 Sep 12.50 12.00 80.30 79.00 82.00 5 3.20 81.80 58.40 73.00 18.60 2003 Oct 12.00 10.60 88.00 84.00 86.00 5 .10 86.90 59.00 73.40 17.10 2003 Nov 12.00 11.30 81.70 80005 5.10 82.30 58.00 72.00 17.30 2003 Dec 11.50 12.00 87.30 86.00 88 00 55.90 75.00 56.50 72.00 17.70 2004 Jan 10.80 10.40 80.60 88.00 90.00 5 .10 85.00 55.80 71.00 15.00 2004 Feb 12.00 11.90 82.00 80* 80 57.40 89.20 57.30 75.50 16.00 2004 Mar 11.60 20.30 83.00 72.00 93.00 5 v.50 85.60 56.50 83.80 56.00 2004 Apr 11.50 12.00 86.00 73.00 86.00 5 .90 90.80 56.40 81.80 19.10 2004 May 12.00 21.70 79.00 85.00 84.00 5 * .00 83.10 57.50 72.30 19.60 2004 Jun 13.80 18.30 75.50 79.00 90.00 5 3.50 86.20 59.40 76.00 18.50 2004 Jul 11.80 11.00 85.40 80.00 86.00 5 .30 84.70 57.30 68.00 16.50 2004 Aug 11.40 11.00 87.60 85.00 86.00 55.80 83.20 56.60 73.00 16.90 2004 Sep 11.00 10.50 93.50 83.00 83.00 5 .80 78.80 56.20 73.50 15.10 2004 Oct 11.00 10.80 84.00 76.00 85.00 5 .00 87.30 56.60 74.40 16.20 2004 Nov 10.70 10.70 81.60 85.00 98.00 6 .20 86.90 59.50 83.40 16.00 2004 Dec 11.60 12.80 95.40 83.00 95.00 50.20 104.10 58.30 89.20 18.30 2005 Jan 12.30 13.20 85.50 89.00 100.00 5- .00 102.60 56.20 89.00 16.80 2005 Feb 11.10 12.80 89.70 78.00 92.00 57.30 89.30 58.10 90.40 17.60 2005 Mar 11.40 11.70 87.90 82.00 96.00 53.00 96.00 58.40 88.90 16.00 2005 Apr 10.60 10.00 95.00 78.00 91.00 5 .70 92.80 57.40 77.10 17.10 2005 May 10.00 12.50 98.00 83.00 92.00 5 .00 89.70 56.00 75.00 17.80 2005 Jun 11.00 11.00 90.00 76.00 88.00 5 .50 87.50 57.30 80.00 13.00 2005 Jul 3.60 2.40 93.00 76.00 89.00 4 .30 78.70 48.90 69.10 11.80 2005 Aug 10.80 12.00 89.40 88.00 87.00 5P.60 92.50 57.00 77.30 17.50 2005 Sep 10.00 <0.1 83.6.0 75.00 90.00 5 .00 79.00 58.60 75.00 17.00 2005 Oct 11.60 10.00 81.60 78.00 88.00 5 ?.10 79.00 57.50 67.00 12.00 2005 Nov 10.00 10.50 96.00 76.00 94.00 5 .60 86.00 57.00 83.00 17.50 2005 Dec 11.40 10.20 88.00 79.00 96.00 5j7.10 83.90 57.50 67.60 17.00 2006 Jan 12.00 11.00 8.88. 0 0 81.00 95.00 5 .50 91.50 58.00 78.50 17.00
2006 Feb 11.10 12.80 89.70 80.00 93.00 5 U.30 89.30 58.10 90.40 17.60 2006 Mar 11.00 12.00 86.50 79.00 93.00 5 3.00 90.00 58.50 80.30 17.90 2006 Apr 12.10 11.25 88.45 81.00 94.00 5 r.75 92.83 58.50 80.10 17.33 2006 May 11.10 11.75 76.60 76.00 85.00 5 r.50 84.60 57.80 71.50 17.10 2006 Jun 11.00 12.00 79.50 74.00 85.00 5 3.00 84.50 57.60 71.50 18.00 2006 Jul 11.25 11.00 79.50 68.00 83.00 5 3.00 82.10 58.25 71.00 17.75 2006 Aug 11.50 11.40 86.50 74.00 86.00 5 r.90 84.30 58.40 73.10 17.30 2006 Sep 11.20 10.50 92.60 75.00 84.00 5 3.20 82.50 58.90 70.70 16.00 2006 Oct 11.50 11.90 84.20 70.00 88.00 5 3.80 82.70 59.30 72.50 17.60 2006 Nov 11.30 10.30 80.00 88.00 85.00 5 3.70 84.80 59.30 71.20 16.20 2006 Dec 11.50 11.40 81.70 70.00 83.00 5 3.80 83.50 59.20 71.20 17.40
Reference:
- 1) Keating 2008a Mt Laurel - WMt Laurel - Upper Rart Upper Rarit Upper Rarit Mid Raritan Year Month PW-22 PW-3' PW-5 HC-1 HC-23 PW-2007 Jan 11.50 12.30 80.30 75.00 84.00 5 3.50 2007 Feb 11.20 11.00 85.80 70.00 85.00 5 3.60 2007 Mar 12.00 12.20 94.50 75.00 97.00 5 3.50 2007 Apr 10.10 11.50 90.00 80.00 95.00 5 2007 May 12.30 11.20 96.90 79.00 91.00 5 3.20 2007 Jun 11.70 11.20 81.00 77.00 88.00 6 ).50 2007 Jul 11.50 11.10 85.30 78.00 90.00 5 3.00 2007 Aug 11.10 11.00 87.30 78.00 90.00 5 3.70 2007 Sep 11.60 10.90 85.60 77.00 87.00 5 3.40 2007 Oct 11.00 11.00 89.50 78.00 91.00 5 ).10 2007 Nov 11.30 12.30 90.30 80.00 93.00 5 ).40 2007 Dec 12.70 12.90 90.50 80.00 96.00 6 ).90
References:
- 2) Keating 2008 b
- 3) Keating 2008 c
Keating (Edward J.) 2008a, Groundwater Diversion Calculations for Salem/Hope Creek Generating Stations, E-mail i rom E. Keating (PSEG) to Gary Gunter (TtNUS) on May14.
Keating (Edward J.) 2008b, Groundwater Elevation Data for Salem Generating Stations, E-mail from E. Keating (PSI :G) to Gary Gunter (TtNUS) on May 5.
Keating (Edward J.) 2008c, Groundwater Level Data for Hope Creek Generating Stations, E-mail from E. Keating (P.' ;EG) to Gary Gunter (TtNUS) on May 9.
Middle Raritan 120 100 80 1k 60
/XIVJ K 40 20 0 A 1999 1999 2000 2000 2001 2001 2002 2002 2003 2003 2004 2004 r005 2005 2006 2006 2007 2007 2008 I PW6 -OW6 -D&M11871
STATIC WATER LEVELS (feet)
Year Month PW-6 OW-6 1987 Jul 105.50 1987 Sep >100 1999 Jan 105,5 1999 Feb 105.5 1999 Mar 105.5 1999 Apr 105.5 1999 May 105.5 1999 Jun 105.5 1999 Jul 105.5 1999 Aug 105.5 1999 Sep 105.5 1999 Oct 105.5 1999 Nov 105.5 1999 Dec 105.5 2000 Jan 77.30 78.00 105.5 2000 Feb 52.80 105.5 2000 Mar 50.50 55.40 105.5 2000 Apr 56,10 56,60 105.5 2000 May 55.20 55.60 105.5 2000 Jun 59.20 61.50 105.5 2000 Jul 66.70 70.90 105.5 2000 Aug 54.90 55.00 105.5 2000 Sep 54.90 53,00 105.5 2000 Oct 54.00 55.00 105.5 2000 Nov 48.40 72.80 105.5 2000 Dec 57.00 57.30 105.5 2001 Jan 56.50 57.00 105.5 2001 Feb 55.00 55.90 105.5 2001 Mar 57.50 58.80 105.5 2001 Apr 56.70 105.5 2001 May 56.80 57.40 105,5 2001 Jun 68.80 59.30 105.5 2001 Jul 66.70 70.90 105.5 2001 Aug 61.80 58.00 105.5 2001 Sep 55.30 57.90 105.5 2001 Oct 56,90 57.60 105.5 2001 Nov 56.40 57.00 105.5 2001 Dec 56.00 56,10 105.5 2002 Jan 56.50 55.50 105.5 2002 Feb 56.50 58.00 105,5 2002 Mar 56.10 57.00 105.5 2002 Apr 57.50 63.00 105.5 2002 May 5510 53.50 105.5 2002 Jun 55.10 55.00 105.5 2002 Jul 55.10 61.50 105.5 2002 Aug 55.70 56.40 105.5 2002 Sep 56.10 56.50 105.5 2002 Oct 57.70 58,30
2007 Mar 59.50 60.00 105.5 2007 Apr 57,90 58.30 105.5 2007 May 58,20 55.40 105.5 2007 Jun 60.50 57.90 105.5 2007 Jul 105.5 2007 Aug 105.5 2007 Sep 105.5 2007 Oct 105.5 2007 Nov 105.5 2007 Dec 105.5 2008 Jan 60.50 61.00 105.5 2008 Feb 60.00 88.70 105.5 2008 Mar 60.60 61.40 105.5 2008 Apr 61.10 61.40 105,5 2008 May 59.30 59.90 105.5 2008 Jun 60.20 60.10 105.5 Notes:
Sources:
Dames & Moore (1988) Table 1 - 1987 Wells i&2 (08 data).xls - Includes only HC-1, HC-2 (S) 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2007 Total Head Calc Sheet.xls - (not Including HC-1, HC-2) 2001, 2002 Private Water Diversion Reports - Oct-Nov 2003, 2004, 2005, Jan-Mar 2006, Jan-Jun 2008 Well Reports -(not including HC-1, HC-2) Jan-Sep 2003, Apr-Dec 2006, Jan-Jun 2007
140.00 120.00 100.00 80.00 60.00 40.00 20.00 0 .0 0 1 .. ... . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . i . . . . . . . .
,1- so ro p A V A 'V I-PW5 -HC 1 HC2 -OVJ--OWI- \vg 1987 -Average Depth I
STATIC WATER LEVELS (feet)
Year Month PW-5 HC.1 HC-2 OW-J OW-I Avg 1987 1987 Jul 71.40 70.80 1987 Sep 76.00 71.90 1999 Jan 78.00 75.00 72.525 76.50 1999 Feb 122.00 77,00 72.525 99.50 1999 Mar 81.00 75,00 72.525 78.00 1999 Apr 77.00 74.00 72.525 75.50 1999 May 70.00 73.00 72.525 71.50 1999 Jun 78.00 76,00 72.525 77.00 1999 Jul 118.00 78.00 72.525 9.8.00 1999 Aug 74,00 76.00 72.525 75.00 1999 Sep 77.00 76.00 72.525 76,50 1999 Oct 78,00 79,00 72.525 78.50 1999 Nov 78.00 76.00 72,525 77.00 1999 Dec 77.00 73.00 72.525 75.00 2000 Jan 72.50 78.00 75.00 70.30 62.30 72.525 71.62 2000 Feb 76.00 8LUU 8-.00 1,'0-20-7525-60 .52 2000 Mar 73.30 79.00 80.00 76.50 67.10 72.525 75.18 2000 Apr 64.40 74,00 78.00 79.40 63.90 72,525 71.94 2000 May 73,50 74.00 78.00 63.90 73.90 72.525 72.66 2000 Jun 77.10 82.00 82.00 75.40 67.00 72.525 76.70 2000 Jul 76.90 78.00 80,00 80.40 66.00 72.525 76,26 2000 Aug 46.20 76.00 81,00 86.20 70,90 72.525 72,06 2000 Sep 85.00 75.00 77.00 84,50 69.20 72.525 78.14 2000 Oct 78.00 75.00 80.00 73.80 73.60 72.525 76.08 2000 Nov 80.00 78.00 76.00 78.70 67,50 72.525 76.04 2000 Dec 83.90 76.00 78.00 69.00 22.60 72.525 65.90 2001 Jan 78.30 77.00 82.00 80.50 67.90 72.525 77.14 2001 Feb 71.50 74,00 75.00 73.80 68.00 72,525 72.46 2001 Mar 76,70 79.00 78.00 76.40 65,30 72.525 75.08 2001 Apr 78,50 76.00 80.00 78.50 66.50 72.525 75.90 2001 May 89.40 76.00 77.00 94.00 88.70 72.525 85,02 2001 Jun 79.90 80.00 80.00 80.80 69.30 72.525 78.00 2001 Jul 76.90 76.00 74.00 80.40 66.00 72.525 74.66 2001 Aug 72.80 73.00 75.00 75.60 68.00 72.525 72.88 2001 Sep 81.70 78.00 78.00 88.80 70.00 72.525 79.30 2001 Oct 75.30 78.00 84.00 75.60 64.10 72.525 75.40 2001 Nov 79.80 78.00 77.00 85.40 66.80 72.525 77.40 2001 Dec 58.80 79.00 78.00 79.90 66.90 72.525 72.52 2002 Jan 78.00 84.00 82.50 69.70 72.525 78.55 2002 Feb 82.20 85.00 88.00 80.10 71.30 72.525 81.32 2002 Mar 83.50 89.00 83.00 92.10 74.00 72,525 84.32 2002 Apr 75.50 75.00 76.00 80.50 69.00 72.525 75.20 2002 May 74.50 76.00 74,00 78.50 87,50 72.525 78,10 2002 Jun 76,90 74.00 74.00 77.70 66.60 72.525 73.84 2002 Jul 74.30 75.00 78.00 77.60 99.50 72.525 80.88 2002 Aug 72.60 75.00 74.00 73.80 65.30 72.525 72.14 2002 Sep 71.60 72.00 75.00 72.90 63.60 72.525 71.02 2002 Oct 75.50 72.00 72.00 74.00 66.00 72.525 71.90
2007 Mar 94.50 75.00 97.00 101.10 86.80 72.525 90.88 2007 Apr 90,00 80.00 95.00 98.40 81.80 72.525 89.04 2007 May 96.90 79.00 91.00 93.50 88.40 72.525 89.76 2007 Jun 81.00 77.00 88.00 80.20 72.30 72.525 79.70 2007 Jul 78.00 90,00 72.525 84.00 2007 Aug 78.00 90.00 72.525 84.00 2007 Sep 77.00 87.00 72.525 82.00 2007 Oct 78.00 91.00 72.525 84.50 2007 Nov 80.00 93.00 72.525 86.50 2007 Dec 80,00 96.00 72.525 88.00 2008 Jan 84.90 80.00 94.00 94.00 83.00 72.,525 87.18 2008 Feb 91.40 82.00 93.00 96.50 85.60 72.525 89.70 2008 Mar 91.40 80.00 92.00 97.00 84.20 72.525 88.92 2008 Apr 90.00 82.00 94.00 97.00 80.10 72.525 88.62 2008 May 91.60 79.00 102,00 98.00 84.20 72.525 90.96 2008 Jun 85.30 86.00 93.00 97.90 87.40 72.525 89.92
STATIC WATER LEVELS (feet)
Ml Laurel - Ml Laurel. Upper Rarli Upper Raet Upper Raril Mid Raritan Upper Raritan Mid Raritan Upper Raritan MI Laurel . Wei Year Month p PW-2 PW.3 PW.5 HC-I tlC.2 PW.6 Ow-J OW.6 OW.I OW.G 1987 Jul 71.40 70.80 105.50 21.30 1987 Sep 10.00 27.60 76.00 71.90 '100 88.30 23.40 1999 Jan 70.90 75.00 1999 Feb 122.00 77.00 1909 Mar 81.00 75.00 1D99 Apr 77,00 74.00 1999 May 70,00 73,00 1999 Jun 78.00 76,00 1999 Jul 118.00 76.00 1999 Aug 74.0D 76.00 1999 Sep 77.00 76.00 1999 Oct 78.00 79.00 1999 Nov 78.00 7,.00 1999 Dec 77.00 73.00 2000 Jan 11.60 13.00 72.50 78.00 75.00 77.30 70.30 78.00 62.30 17.80 2000 Feb 12.20 10.80 71.00 76.00 81.00 52.80 11,70 50.50 62.90 11.00 2000 Mar 11.30 10.95 73.30 79.00 B0.00 50.50 76.50 55.40 67.10 16.60 2000 Apr 11,90 12.30 84.40 74.00 76.00. 5B.10 79.40 56.60 63,90 17.20 2000 May 11..40 11.10 73.50 74.00 78.00 55.20 03.90 65.60 73.90 18.40 2000 Jun 11,90 12,00 77.10 82.00 02.00 59.20 75.40 61.50 67.09 17.00 2000 Jul 11.40 11.00 76,90 78.00 80.00 68.70 80.40 70.90 66.00 16.80 2000 Aug 12.20 17,00 48.20 76.00 81,00 54.90 86.20 55.00 70.90 16.20 2000 Sep 12.20 11.10 85.00 75.00 77,00 54.90 84.50 53.00 69.20 16.70 2000 Oct 12.40 1.10 78.00 75.00 0.0o0 54,00 73.80 55.00 73.60 18.70 2000 Nov 12.90 11.50 60.00 78.00 70.00 48.40 78.70 72.60 67,50 19.50 2000 Dec 15.30 15.50 83.90 76.00 78.00 57.00 69.00 57.30 19.40 2001 Jan 13.70 13.70 78.30 77.00 82,00 50,50 80.50 57.00 67.90 20.60 IZ.Uu ri.2u 11,eIU tq.uO ,5.u0 WEUU 7SO0 -S5.5-2001 Mar 12.70 11.70 78.70 79,00 78,00 57.50 76.40 58.80 65.30 17.90 2001 Apr 12.80 14.50 78.50 70,00 80.00 68.70 78.50 16.50 66.50 19,50 2001 May 12.30 12.80 69.40 78.00 77,00 56.80 94.oo 57.40 88.70 15.70 2001 Jun 13.80 15.00 79.90 80.00. 80.00 58.80 80.80 59.30 69.30 18.20 2001 Jul 11,40 11 00 76.90 76.00 74.00 00.70 80.40 70.90 68.00 18,80 2091 Aug 12.10 12.80 72.80 73.00 75,00 61.80 75.60 58.0D 68.00 18.60 2001 Sep 11.50 10.80 81.70 76.00 78.00 85.30 88.80 57.90 70.00 14.00 2001 Oct 12.50 12.30 75.30 70.00 64.00 58.90 75,60 57.60 14.10 18.50 2001 Nov 11.70 10.20 79.80 76.00 77.00 56.40 85.40 57.00 66.80 15,90 2001 DeC 13.70 10.70 56.80 79.00 78,00 56.00 79.90 55.10 86.90 16.80 2002 Jan 13.50 13,0 78.00 84.00 58.50 82.50 55.50 69.70 16.50 2002 Feb 12.50 12.90 82.20 85.00 88.00 58.50 80.10 58.00 71.30 16.30 2002 Mar 13.30 12.50 83.50 89,00 83.00 56.10 92.10 57.00 74,00 17,00 2002 Apr 13.50 13.50 75.50 75.00 76.00 57.50 80.50 63.00 60.00 18.50 2002 May 12.50 13.00 74.50 76.00 74.00 85.10 78.50 53.50 87.50 18.40 2002 Jun 11.40 11.00 76.90 74.00 74.09 55.10 77.70 55,00 68:60 17.50 2002 Jul 11.40 11.70 74.30 75.00 76.00 55.10 77,60 61.50 99.50 16.80 2002 Aug 12.01 11.80 72.60 75.00 74.00 55.70 73.80 60.40 65.30 18.20 2002 Sep 12.00 12.20 71.60 72.00 75.00 58.10 72.0 56.50 63.60 17,70 2002 Oct 11.30 10.10 75.50 72.00 72.00 57.70 74.00 58.30 61.00 17.00 2002 Nov 11.90 11.10 75,70 81.00 81.00 55.00 77.90 56,30 65.80 15.60 2002 Dec 10.70 0.80 74.80 74.00 85.00 56.30 77.50 56.80 65.70 18.30 2003 Jan 12.00 12.20 73.00 75.00 76.00 67.40 73.50 58.00 05,90 17.70 2003 Feb 12.70 12.70 78,80 82.00 76.00 50.70 79.00 57.40 68.00 18,50 2003 Mar 12.60 13.00 78.30 78.00 81.00 55.30 78.60 58.40 88.00 19.50 2003 Apr 12.50 85,60 76.00 82.00 57.90 84.00 68.70 89.70 18.70 2003 May 12.60 10.90 77.00 78.00 82.00 57,70 78.50 59.20 86.00 18.20 2003 Jun 11.00 11.00 81.00 80.00 82.00 55.30 79.30 58.50 63.30 16,80 2003 Jul 12.80 11.20 78.30 79,00 60.00 57.30 78.80 63.30 69.50 17.60 2003 Aug 12.00 11.50 70.70 84.00 82.00 53.00 74.50 56.30 68.50 19.50 2003 Sep 12.50 12.00 80.30 79.00 82.00 58.20 61.80 56.40 73.00 18.60 2003 Oct 12.00 10.60 88.00 84.00 86.00 57.10 86.90 59.00 73.40 17.10 2003 Nov 12.00 11 30 8170 80.00. , 85.00: 57.10 82.30 58.00 72.00 17.30 2003 Dec i1.S0 12.00 87.30 60.00 "8.000, 55.90 76.00 58.50 72.00 17.70 2004 Jan 10.80 10.40 .60.60 80.00 90.00 54.10 85.00 55.80 71,00 15.00 2004 Feb 12.00 11.90 82.00 V*o08.00" 88.00 57.40 89.20 57.30 75.50 16.00 2004 Mar 11.60 20.30 83.00 72.00 03.00 57.50 85.00 56.50 83.80 58.00 2004 Apr 11.50 12.00 86.00 73.00. 86,00 56.90 90.80 56.40 81.80 19.10 2004 May 12.00 21.70 70.00 85.00 84.00 57 00 83.10 57 50 72.30 1900 2004 Jun 13.80 18,30 75.50 79.00 90.00 58.50 86.20 59.40 76.00 18.50 2004 Jutl 11.80 11.00 85.40 80.00 86.00 56.30 64.70 57.30 88.00 16.50 2004 Aug 11.40 11.00 87,60 55.00 66.00 55.80 83.20 58,60 73.00 16.90 2004 Sep 11.00 10.50 93.50 8300 8300 55.80 78.80 58.20 73.50 15.10 2004 Oct 11 00 10.80 04.00 76800 85.00 56.00 87.30 56.60 74,40 16.20 2004 Nov 10.70 10.70 61.60 8500 98,00 65.20 8.,00 59.50 83.40 16.00 2004 Dec 11.60 12.80 95.40 83.00 95.00 58.20 104.10 58.30 89.20 10.30 2005 Jan 12.30 1350 85.50 8B.00 100.00 58600 102,80 56.20 60.00 16.80 2005 Feb 11 10 12,80 80,70 76.00 92.00 57.30 8930 58.10 90,40 17.00 2005 Mar 11.40 11.70 87.00 82.00 96.00 58.00 06.00 58,40 88.90 16.00 2005 Apr 10,60 10.00 05.00 7860 91 00 57 70 92.80 57.40 77 10 17 10
Year Month PW-2 PW.3 PW.5 HC.1 HC.2 PW.6 OW*J ow-0 OW.' OW-G 200n Jan 12.00 11 .00. 88,00 81.00 95.00 57.50 91.50 78,50 17.00 2006 Feb 11,10 12.80 89,70 80.00 9300 57.30 89.30 58.10 90.40 17 60 2006 Mar 11.00 12.00 86.50 79.00 93.00 68.00 90.00 58.50 80.30 17.90 2006 Apr 12.10 11.25 88.45 81.00 94.00 57,76 92.83 58.50 80.10 17.33 2006 May 11.10 11.75 76.60. 76.00 85.00 57.50 84,.0 57.80 71,50 17.10 2006 Jun 11.00 12.00 79.50 74.00 85.00 58,00 84,50 57.60 71.50 18.00 2006 Jul 11.25 11.00 79.50 68.00 83.00 58.00 82.10 58.25 71.00 17.75 2006: Aug 11,50 11.40 86.50 74.00 86.00 57.90 84.30 58.40 73.10 17.30 2006 Sep 11.20 10.50 92.60 75.00 64,00 68.20 82.50 58:90 70.70 16.00 2008. Oct 11.50 11.90 84.20 70.00 88.00 68.80 82.70 72.50 17.60 2006 Nov 11.30 10.30 00.00 88.00 85.00 58.70 84:80 69,30 71.20 16.20 2008 Dec 11.50 11.40 81.70 70.00 83.00 58.80 83.50 59.20 71.20 17.40 2007 Jan 11.50 12.30 80.30 75.00 84.00 58.50 81.50 50.0M 71.80 18,30 2007 Feb 11.20 11.00 85.80 70.00 85.00 58.60 86.60 59.00 74.30 18,00 2007 Mar 12.00 12.20 04.50 75.00 97.00 59,50 101.10 60.00 86.80 18.40 2007 Apr 10.10 11.50 00.00 80.00 05.00 57.90 98.40 58.30 81.80 16.90 2007 May 12.30 11.20 96.90 79.00 91 00 58.20 93.50 55.40 08.40 17.30 2007 Jun 11.70 11.20 81.00 77.00 88.00 60.50 00.20 57.00 72.30 17.70 2007 Jul 78.00 90.00 2007 Aug 78.00 00.00 2007 Sep 77.00 87.00 2007 Oct 78.00 91.00 2007 Nov 80.00 93.00 2007 Dec 89.00 96.00 2005 Jan 11.70 11.00 84.00 80.00 94.00 00.50 94.00 81.00 83.00 10.90 2008 Feb 11.80 11.80 91.40 82.00 93.00 60.00 06.50 88.70 85.00 17.00 2008 Mar 11.00 10.70 91.40 80.00 02.00 60.60 97.00 61.40 84.20 17.50 2008 Apr 11.50 10.00: 90.00 82.00 94.00 61.10 07.00 61.40 80.10 17.90 2008 May 11.30 11.50 91.00 79.00 102.00 59,30 98.00 59.90 84.20 17.20 2008 Jun 10.90 10,70 85.30 08.00 03.00 60.20 07.90 60.10 87.40 17.80 2000 Jul Aug Sep 2008 Oct Nov Dec 2008 2008 Aug 2008 2008 Sep 2008 2008 Oct 2008 2008 Nov 2008 Dec Notes:
'm=easured while pumping =not static Sources:
Dames & Moore (1988) Table I 1987 Wells 1&2 (08 data).xls - Includes only HC.1, HC-2 (S) 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2008, 2007 Total Heed Calc Sheet.xls - (not Including HC-I, HC.2) 2001, 2002 Private Water Diversion Reports- Oct-Nov 2003, 2004, 2005, Jan.Mar 2008, Jan-Jun 2008 Well Reports -(not Including HC-N,HC-2) Jan-Sep 2003, Apr-Dec 2006. Jan-Jun 2007
2007 JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE DEPTH] CL- DEPTH CL- DEPTHJ CL- DEPTH CL- DEPTH CL- DEPTH CL-W-2 11.5' 73.8 ppm 11.2' Integ 12.0' Integ 10.1 116ppm 12.3 11.7 181 ppm 1/23/07 Integ 2/27/07 626 3/13/07 626 5/1/07 13/07 5/23/07 6/7/07 6/6/07 626 Iiteg 6 9 W-3 12.3' N/A 11.0' N/A 12.2' N/A 11.5 N/A 11.2 N/A 11.2 N/A 1/24/07 2/27/07 3/13/07 5/2/07 5/30/07 6/7/07 W-5 80.3' 21.9 ppm 85.8' Integ 94.5' Integ 90.0 teg 96.9 Integ 81.0 21.4 PPM 1/25/07 1/25/07 2/28/07 409494 3/20/07 489936 5/2/07 679035 5/31/07 703679 6/8/07 6/18/07 Integ Integ 297563 703839 W-6 58.5' Integ 58.6' Integ 59.5' 196 ppm 57.9 Ir teg 58.2 202 ppm 60.5 228 ppm 1/23/07 109810 2/27/07 116107 3/13/07 3/20/07 5/1/07 1 1224 5/30/07 5/31/07 6/14/07 6/7/07 Integ Integ Integ 120076 1282707 150724 0-6 59.0' N/A 59.0' N/A 60.0' N/A 58.3 /A 55.4 N/A 57.9 N/A 1/23/07 2/27/07 3/13/07 5/1/07 5/23/07 6/14/07 O-G 18.3' Integ 18.0' 18.4' 13.6ppm 16.9 17.3 17.7 1410 ppm 1/24/07 5838 2/27/07 3/26/07 3/26/07 5/1/07 5/23/07 6/8/07 6/8/07 0-I 71.8' Integ 74.3' 86.8' 20.6 ppm 81.8 88.4 72.3 <5 ppm 1/24/07 12028 2/27/07 3/26/07 3/26/07 5/1/07 5/30/07 6/8/07 6/11/07 0-J 81.5' N/A 86.8' 101.1' No 98.4 93.5 34.2 ppm 80.2 1/24/07 2/27/07 3/26/07 sample 5/1/07 5/23/07 6/23/07 6/8/07 SAMPLE REQUIREMENTS: DEPTH - MONTHLY ALL WELLS ALL WELL READINGS ARE IN G ALLONS AS OF JANUARY 1998. POTABLE WATER-TOTAL COLIFORM - MONTHLY (2 SAMPLES) CHLORIDES QUARTERLY - WELLS 2,5,6,OB-G, OB-I, OB-J. (OB-6 IS BACKUP TO WELL 6)
Cu/Pb, NITRATE. NITRITE -YEARLY C:\Documents and Settings~gary.gunter\Local Settings\Temporary Intemet Files\ContenLOutlook\SFKLHQqN\Wel Report 2007 IsL.doc 11/17/2008
2007 JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBiER NOVEMBER DECEMBER DEPTH CL- DEPTH CL- DEPTH CL- DEPTH CL- DEPTH CL- DEPTH CL-W-2 11.5 166 ppm 11.1 Integ 11.6 Integ 11.0 1 4 ppm 11.3 12.7' Integ 7/25/7 7/13/07 8/28/7 67700 9/24/7 67700 10/24/7 1IC'12/07 11/15/7 12/17/07 70600 Integ 67700 W-3 11.1 11.0 10.9 11.0 12.3 12.9' 7/25/7 8/28/7 9/24/7 10/25/7 11/16/7 12/17/07 W-5 85.3 Integ 87.3 19.5 ppm 85.6 Integ 89.5 21.7 ppm 90.3 Integ 90.5' Integ 7/26/7 5523 8/21/7 9/12/07 9/25/7 188457 10/25/7 1(/30/07 1.1/16/7 394624 12/19/07 496689 Integ In eg 99894 3(0613 W-6 58.0 Integ 58.7 208 ppm 59.4 Integ 59.1 237 ppm 59.4 Integ 60.9/ Integ 7/25/7 150724 8/20/7 8/22/07 9/24/7 163593 10/24/7 1(/25/07 11/15/7 171473 12/17/07 179427 Integ In eg 163593 1( 9135 0-6 58.8 59.3 59.6 59.7 59.9 61.0' 7/25n 8/28/7 9/24/7 10/2417 11/15/7 12/17/07 O-G 16.4 17.2 1190 16.8 15.9 17.6 1530 18.5' 7/25/7 8/20/7 ppm 9/24/7 10/22/7 11/16/7 ppm 12/17/07 8/8/07 11/28/07 0-I 76.9 78.0 77.9 79.2 80.7 5.47 ppm 80.4' 7/25/7 8128/7 <5 ppm 9/24/7 10/30n 11116/7 11/29107 12/19/07 8/10/07 o-J 86.7 98.0 35.6 ppm 90.0 95.7 90.4 3.8.1 ppm 97.2' 7/25/7 8/10/7 8/10/07 9124/7 10/22/7 11/16/7 11/28/07 12/17/07 SAMPLE REQUIREMENTS: DEPTH - MONTHLY ALL WELLS ALL WELL READINGS ARE IN G4LLONS AS OF JANUARY 1998, POTABLE WATER-TOTAL COLIFORM - MONTHLY (2 SAMPLES) CHLORIDES QUARTERLY - WELLS 2, 3,5,6, OB-G, OB-I, OB-J. (OB-6 IS BACKUP TO WELL 6)
Cu/Pb. NITRATE, NITRITE- YEARLY C:\Documents and Seutings\ugary.gunter\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\ContenLOutIook\SFKLHQ0,AWell Report 2007 2nd.doc 11/17/2008
Levels Well#IlA) Well#2 ýB)
Date Level ( Level (it.)
6/4/1998 88( e S >160_ DD__
._73ýtape)- 77 (t) D 6/25/1998 87A. L. D >160 (g) S 76 (t_.a*e_ D 77(tape) S8 7/9/1998 7.(* S >160 (g.) D-2ta).s 7_2____ 78(t) D 7/17/1998. 83 (!.pej D >160(g) S 8 D
___D___ 78 (,tape S 7/31/1998 none 78(. S ....
none 72 (tape) S 8/20/1998 _none _65__(g) S none 63 (tape) S 7O0(g) 74()
- S 8/27/1998 D
-I 67(tap~e). S 1--_13 (tape)---- 4 D 1-S 71(g) D none _ __ I__
--- -- - ----
9/2/1998 64 (a) 69 (a) D
- V
- W B I I*
- 64 iG 9/23/1998 5 D >160 g)_S 71 (tape) D 7 pet
.9)_ S 10/7/1998 7(4_W) S 78 (g) D
_ 72 (tape) S 75 (tape) 0D.
10/21/1998 76 (g) D 74 (g) 11/4/1998 9_ S 87 D ......
_87() S 85 (t) D 1/6/1999 78 (gL 8 79 (g) D D,"__ ..
1/19/1999 74(_)D 75 S 2/2/1999 122 (g)__ S 1151(9,) D 2/23/1999 78.(g.) 77 () S 3/2/1999 __81.9L S 8 (g). D 3/16/1999 75 (g D 75(9). S 4/6/1999 77 (g) S 78 (g) D 4/20/1999 _ 6 ( 74(.)__ S 5/4/1999 70_(*L s 72_a) D 5/19/1999 72 (_ 8 SS 6/2/1999 78(L S 8.(_ D 6/15/1999 77.jg) D 76(g) ___S 7/6/1999 _ 118i(g 8 120S(g 157 D
7/22/1999 .. _ ) O 78(g.((g).. _ S ........ .
8/3/1999 4 S 75(g) . D .........
8/20/1999 82 __ D 76 () S 9/21/1999 __.77(g)_ D SD76(9 -
10/5/1999_. 78 .(L9.)_ 83 (g) D 10/20/1999 78(. D 79 (g) S 1112/1999 78 (g) S 82 _) D 11/22/1999 75(g). 76(g) S..
Page 1
Levels 12/2/1999 77 (g) sS 7 (g_ D _
12/14/1999 74 (g) D .- 3g) s _
1/5/2000 78(g . s 80 (g) D 1/18/2000 .75(g) D 75 (g) S _
2/2/2000 7_61g)9 s 76 (9)_
2/15/2000 86(g)__D 81(g) s 3/2/2000 79 g_)_ S 80 igL D . .
3/15/2000 85 (g) D 80(g) S 4/6/2000_ _ 4_(g)_ S 7S*) D 4/19/2000 76 (gL_. D 78(_) S 5/4/2000 74(q) S 75(g) D 5/18/2000 81(g) D..8 -
6/6/2000 82(g) s 83 (g) P D __..................
6/21/2000 (g) D 82(g) S 7/6/2000 - 7_ _s_ 79(g) D 7/20/2000 0.-q(_gL__ ..D 80 (g) S 811/2000 76 ( .... - 77 (g D.
8/15/2000 81 (gj _ D 81 (g) S 9/5/2000 n 14 75 (q)
-- , , I S
-
76 (Q) D A
f--]
10/2(2000 IgL S75 S 78 (g) D 10/12/20001 80 (g) D 80(g) S 11/1/2000 70 _- S 7 8 (g)-
11/9/2000 77 (g D 76 (g) S 12/7/2000 76(g) S 76 (g0__ D 12/14/2000 _ 78 g)_ D 78 (g) S 1/4/2001 -Z7.7 S 82kg) D 1/16/2001 D 82_g s 2/2/2001 7_g(q S 78 (g) D 2/9/2001 75 (g)__ 75(g) S 3/1/2001 79 S 82 (g) D 3/5/2001 78q(q____ D 78.g) S 4/4/2001 -16(g) S 78__9_-_D 4/10/2001 79 (g) D 80 S _
5/3/2001 76 (g) S (g) D D78 D
5/11/2001 78(g) D 77(g S 6/4/2001 8-(g) S 7__L_ D -_
6/11/2001 80(g) D 80 (g S __,,
7/2/2001 76.(g)., S 78 (9) D 7/12/2001 75(g) D . 74 _ .. S 8/8/2001 73..(9)_ S 73 (.) ......
D 8/13/2001 75(9)D 75. ), .
9/10/2001 78.(aJ_. S 79 D) .
9/17/2001 76(_ D 78 sS.
10/8/2001 78(9)S 76 ) . -
10/25/200183(9_ __ D 0 84()_
_8 78(9) _D S 11/13/2001 7( S 11/19/2001 18L. D 77 _ ._S 12/11/2001 7 S 81 (g) D 12/18/2001 80_ D 78(g) -
1/7/2002 ()
78__18 S 82 (g.).
-§ 0 1/17/2002 86 (g) D 84 (g) S_...
Page 2
Levels
.2/11/2002 j 85 (U) F ~ i 91 D _____ ____ _____ _ _
2/19/2002 85g D a.~ SI___ __
3/I12/202(U I 8l a) Q1 (0) D 1.1 1n 85 *.g),*._ S~ I IL --L- ~~ 91 _(* __ - -ID 3/18/2002 2/11/2002 82(g) D S 4/16/2002 D 83 ()
5/8/2002 73 (g) D S 76 (a} 87 '74 (g)~ D D S 5/15/2o02 754(g) 6/6200 74 (q)
S 75 (al I D 6/10/2002 74 (g) D S 7/5/2002 75 (g) 75 sL .. .D, .. ___ _ 4
-- -------- - -l 7/10/2002 77 (9,1_ 78 (g.
8/112002 8 D
8/8/2002 79 (9. 74 .(g) S 9/5/2002 74 (g) D 9/9/2002 75 (CA I S --I. 4- . -.- -- - - I
...................
10/3/2002 D 72 (Z__ D .-
10/7/2002 73._S_(q)_ S S5 11/1/2002 84 (g) D 171ao02 79 (al D 81 (01 1C
-. - +/- 1 + + + 4 -=--.--..=-. I.__________ -________
~1WrIUU2 75(a)
I _ t VX.A~*......-I-761() D 12/11/2002 1/3/2003 75 (a)
D 85 (9L1 75 (ao
~D IL______I I____U _______ _______
1/7/2003 7 (9)g).76 S 782 (g) SDO 2/3/2003 82 2/10/2003 .tgL D5 7 L SD -
3/6/2003 7 (9g) s 176 ._._ _
79(_g ) _ __81 g)
((_)_ S 3 /1 3 /20 0 3 4/4/2003 78 (g) 8 82 (g) D 4/8/2003 _6_2 (9)_ __Q 82 (§ ) -. ____.____ __
5/2/2003 78(9L S 82()_ D 5/7/2003 8_0 D 8(gL S 6/6/2003 80_) S 82 (q) D 6/9/2003 8_(_ . 2*
82(g) S 7/3/2003 79 . S 82_A D--
7/7/2003 79 (g) 0 80(.) "S--
8/7/2003 82.(g), 0 82 (* S.......
- ._ ____
9/4/2003 _ 85 (g) D 9 /8 / 2 0 0 3 8429) "0 82 ___-.S 9104/2003_84jg. .S 86(g) . D 10/6/2003 86(g) D 86(g) S 11/7/2003 80(g) _ 85(9) D 11/14/2003 * 'Well 111 caution tagged(41 12858) due to high vibes. No static for 112e 1241/2003 26 D_8__
1/6/2005 89(_W S 132 D Dg) 1/13/2005 86 D 100 (_)
0g)__ S 2/3/2005 78 (g)_ S 83(g) D 2/10/2005 ___}. O 9L(. S 3/3/2005 82(g 9 ._ O 3/10/2005 _o3(g)_D . 9. ) .
4/7/2005 78 (g) S 95 (2) D ___ ________ I Page 3
Levels 4/12/2005 78S__ D 91(g_ s 5/5/2005 83 (g) s 91 (g) D.
5/12/2005 _j? D 92 (_,g), _. S 6/2/2005 76 (g) S 114(g)L_ D - --
6/9/2005 80 (g) D 88(g) S 7/7/2005 , S 89(g. D 7/14/2005 81(_jL_ D 89 _ S-__
8/3/2005 87 (g) S 8/5/2005 88 t __ S8 8/22/2005 77_JQ)D_ __P 87.(q__ D ___
9/8/2005 76(*- 90 (g) S 9/9/2005 _75_(__ S 92A(li D ........
10/612005 1 78 (g) S 92 (g) D
-
10/13/2005I
-~-j 78 (M)~L 4 D 1I -~
88 (a)'- I-----
S 4 11/3/2005 76 (g) S D 11/9/2005 D 94 (g) 12/1/2005 S. D D 94 (gj)._
12/8/2005 83 (Q) 96 (qi) S 1/5/2006 1/10/2006 81j()__
115 (g)
S D
j 120 (U_
95 (g)jS D
I ~ I~ 1 I '1~~ I~ I I~ I I --
r/ -'uJUU 2/7/2006 SD I93 (g) S I---- I---I------'~--~I 3/2/2006 S...
3/9/2006 82(a) D 1 93 (0) 1 4/6/2S06 81 97 (g). D 4/12/2006 80L D 94 (g) S 5/5/2006 76 __§ 87 (g) D____
5/9/2006 73 .) D ,85 (91 S .........
6/2/2006 74(._ S 84 (g) D 6/8/2006 7 D 85 (9L S .....
7/6/2006 68(g) S 82 (g) D _
7/11/2006 _ (g)_ 2D - L ... .
8/3/2006 74 ( S (8) 0 D ll 8/8/2006 75 _ D 8 L S -.- _)__
9/5/2006 _ S 89(I) D 9/12/2006 7_4(gL D 8__L4(_g) _ .. ....
_
10/5/2006_ 70_(g_ __83 (g) D 10/11/2006 74_( D 88(g)_ S 11/2/2006 88__) s_ 92_*)._ D 11/9/2006 73(g) D 8.5 S ___-
12/5/2006 70-g) S 85. D 12/12/2006 _ 0 (_l. D 83 S__ _
1/4/2007 . S 83.(.9)_ D 1/9/2007 72_(g) D 84 S . _..
2/2/2007 70g) S 86l .
2/9/2007 73 §LD 8D ___)___-.
3/2/2007 75g__ S 88 (L_ D .
3/7/2007 84 (SD 97g S 4/5/2007 80M _S 97(e) D 4/10/2007 8_) D 95 S 5/3/2007 , .._ ) S 95(--.. D 5/8/2007 77 (g) D 91 (g) S Page 4
Levels 6/4/2007 177g)__ S 90 (g) D ,,
6/12/2007 _75 )__ D 88 (g) S_
S 7/3/2007 78 (g) S 89 (gL D-7/10/2007 78(9L) D 90 (g) S 8/1/2007 78 S 92 (g) D 8/8/2007 78(e)-- D 90 (g) S 9/4/2007 77(*) S 91 ( D ....
9/11/2007 78 (.*) ___ 87___.
(q) S 10/2/2007 78 (g) S 93 D Dg.
10/9/2007 78(g_ D 91 (gj S 10/25/2007 78(.g) S 92 (g) 0.D 11/12/2007 82(9) . 93 (g) -
11/20/2007 8Dg. S 99 ( ......
12/4/2007 83 ( __D 9S(g) S 12/11/2007 80 (gl_ D9(9L _
1/3/2008 .80_(q __S 96(_ D
- 1/8/2008 83(Lg) D 94_g S __
2/1/2008 823L 96.1 _ O 2/7/2008 1 86 (g) 1 )
- 93(g)
....
1 S.
- L
_ A__I__-I 3/11/2008 1 80 (g) I D1 92 (g) S Page5
TOTAL HEAD = SITE ELEVATION - STATIC LEVEL TOTAL HEAD = SITE ELEVATION - STATIC LEVEL F
jan-03 Feb-03 Mar-03 Apr-03 May-03 Jun-03 Jul-03 Aug-03 Sep-03 Oct-03 Nov-ý03 Dec-03
.-.------.-.-----
PWS2 1.66 0.96 1.06 13.66 1.06 2.66 0..86 1.66 1.16 13..66 13.66 13.66 PWS3 1.68 1.18 0.88 1.38 2.98 2.88 2.68 2.38 1.88 13.88 13.88 13.88 PWS5 -55.73 -61.53 -61.03 -68.33 -59.73 -63.73 -61.03 -59.43 -63.03 17.27 17.27 17.27 PWS6 -44.85 -44.15 -42.75 -45.35 -45.15 -42.75 -44.75 -40.45 -45.65 12.55 12.55 12.55 PWHC1 -60.94 -67.94 -63.94 -63.94 -63.94 -65.94 -64.94 -69.94 -64.94 14.06 14.06 14.06 PWHC2 -62.35 -61.35 -67.35 -68.35 -68.35 -68.35 -66.35 -68.35 -68.35 13.65 13.65 13.65 OWl -56.25 -58.35 -58.35 -60.05 -58.35 -53.65 -59.85 -58.85 -63.35 9.65 9.65 9.65 OWG 0.62 -0.18 -1.18 -0.38 0.12 1.52 0.72 -1.18 -0.28 18.32 18.32 18.32 OWJ -57.88 -63.38 -62.88 -68.38 -62.88 -63.68 -61.18 -58.88 -66.18 15.62 15.62 15.62 OW6 -45.15 -44.55 -45.55 -45.85 -46.35 -43.65 -50.45 -45.45 -45.55 12.85 12.85 12.85 STATIC WATER LEVEL - RAW DATA ENTRY STATIC WATER LEVEL - RAW DATA ENTRY Jan-03 Feb-03 Mar-03 Apr-03 May-03 Jun-03 Jul-03 Aug-03 Sep-03 Oct-03 Nov-03 Dec-03 PWS2 12.00 12.70 12.60 12.60 11.00 12.80 12.00 12.50 PWS3 12.20 12.70 13.00 12.50 10.90 11.00 11.20 11.50 12.00 PWS5 73.00 78.80 78.30 85.60 77.00 81.00 78.30 76.70 80.30 PWS6 57.40 56.70 55.30 57.90 57.70 55.30. 57.30 53.00 58.20 PWHCI 75.00 82.00 78.00. 78.00 78.00 80.00 79.00 84.00 79.00 PWHC2 76.00 75.00 81.00 82.00 82.00 82.00 80.00 82.00 82.00 OW' 65.90 68.00 68.00 69.70 68.00 63.30 69.50 68.50 73.00 OWG 17.70 18.50 19.50 18.70 18.20 16.80 17.60 19.50 18.60 OWJ 73.50 79.00 78.50 84.00 78.50 79.30 76.80 74.50 81.80 OW6 58.00 57.40 58.40 58.70 59.20 56.50 63.30 58.30 58.40 LEVEL SUSPECT ELEVATION SURVEY RESULTS
TOP OF TOP OF TOP OF TOP OF REFERENCI PIPE PAD FLOOR WELL PUMP POINT PWS2 13.66 13.47 13.03 17.2 13.66 PWS3 13.88 13.54 13.24 17.11 13.88 PWS5 16.38 15.06 21.49 17.27 PWS6 11.85 10.89 16.47 12.55 PWHC1 13.63 18.63 14.06 PWHC2 13.22 18.23 13.65 OWl 9.65 9.65 OWG 18.32 18.32 OWJ 15.62 15.62 OW6 12.83 12.85 12.85