Document klickitatcounty_gov_doc_d355546093

HYDROGEOLOGIC ASSESMENT Knight-Dillacort Area of High Prairie, WRIA 30 Prepared for: Klickitat County Department of Natural Resources Project No. 090045-017B-01  July 27, 2015 e a r t h w a t e r + pect C O N S U L T I N G ---PAGE BREAK--- earth+w a t e r Aspect Consulting, LLC 401 2nd Avenue S. Suite 201 Seattle, WA 98104 [PHONE REDACTED] www.aspectconsulting.com ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 i Contents 1 Introduction and Background 1 2 Hydrogeologic Setting 2 2.1 Aquifer Units 2 2.1.1 Columbia River Basalts (Wanapum and Grande Ronde) 3 2.1.2 Groundwater Occurrence in Basalt Aquifer Systems 4 2.1.3 Dalles Formation 4 2.2 Geologic Structures 4 2.3 Groundwater Recharge 5 2.4 Groundwater Flow 5 3 Groundwater Level Trends Over 6 4 Assessment of Causes for Water Level Declines 8 4.1 Precipitation Changes (Climate Change) 9 4.2 Well Construction and Deepening in Area 9 4.2.1 Well Installations Over Time 10 4.2.2 Deepening of Wells Over Time 10 5 Assessment of Deeper Aquifer Zones in Study Area 12 5.1 Groundwater Quality Testing to Assess Groundwater Age and thus Recharge 12 5.1.1 Conventional Water Quality Parameter Data 13 5.1.2 Radiocarbon Age Dating 15 5.2 Reported Well Yields 16 6 Conclusions and 17 7 References 19 Limitations 20 ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING ii PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 List of Tables 1 Groundwater Level Monitoring Network for High Prairie 2 Groundwater Level Data from Monitoring Network 3 Groundwater Quality Analytical Results, April 2015 List of Figures 1 High Prairie Well Monitoring Network and Knight-Dillacort Study Area 2 Geologic Cross Section B-B’ 3 Geologic Cross Section C-C’ 4 High Prairie Monitoring Network Water Level Hydrographs 5 Areas with Reported Groundwater Declines and Recently Deepened Wells 6 Measured Water Level Declines, Eastern Knight-Dillacort Area 7 Long-Term Precipitation Trends 8 Well Density within Knight-Dillacort Area 9 Number of Well Installations Over Time 10 Number of Wells Deepened Over Time 11 Timing of Water Level Declines and Local Well Deepenings 12 Wells Sampled for Groundwater Quality 13 Piper Plot of Groundwater Common Ion Concentrations 14 Groundwater Cation Ratios and Silicon Concentrations vs Well Depth 15 Groundwater Chloride and Nitrate Concentrations vs Well Depth 16 Groundwater Age vs Well Depth and vs Cation Ratio 17 Well Available Drawdown vs Well Depth 18 Reported Well Yield vs Well Depth 19 Reported Well Yield Distribution in Study Area 20 Reported Well Yield vs Year of Well Installation List of Appendices A Laboratory Certificates of Analysis for Groundwater Analyses B Well Logs for Study Area Wells Deeper than 400 Feet (Sections 21, 22, 27, 28 of T13N/R13E) ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 1 1 Introduction and Background Water level monitoring initiated in the High Prairie area of the Klickitat River Watershed, Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 30 (Figure has documented trends of declining groundwater levels in three wells within the monitoring network. This information was initially documented in the 2011 report entitled Hydrologic Information Report Supporting Water Availability Assessment, High Prairie Study Area (Aspect, 2011), which was presented to a meeting of the High Prairie community in August 2011. Following two additional years of water level monitoring in the High Prairie well network, the water level declines in the previously identified wells were documented to persist, although one showed signs of stabilizing (Aspect, 2013). The observed water declines are limited to wells located within the portion of High Prairie between Knight Canyon and Dillacort Canyon (“Knight-Dillacort area”; Figure Residents of High Prairie have contacted Klickitat County periodically over the past few years to express concerns regarding wells and declining water levels in the area. In July of 2014, the High Prairie Community Council wrote a letter to the Klickitat County (County) Board of Commissioners expressing concerns regarding declining water levels and wells being deepened within an area near the intersection of Centerville Highway and Mount Adams View Road (High Prairie Community Council, 2014). Some of the wells identified in the letter were being monitored as part of the High Prairie well monitoring network, and some were not. In response, the County engaged Aspect Consulting LLC (Aspect) to compile the available information regarding local hydrogeology, the well monitoring program, and the water level declines that had been measured. In December 2014, Aspect and the County participated in a meeting of High Prairie residents to present the technical information, answer questions, and discuss a path forward. As an outcome of the December 2014 meeting, the County authorized Aspect to conduct a supplemental hydrogeologic assessment of the Knight-Dillacort area focused on identifying potential cause(s) of the observed declines, evaluating available information on the deeper aquifer system as a viable source for water supply, and, depending on identified cause(s) of the declines, assisting the County with identifying actions that can be taken to address the issue. This report presents the results of the hydrogeologic assessment for the Knight-Dillacort area. Subsequent sections of this report are organized as follows:  Section 2: Hydrogeologic Setting;  Section 3: Groundwater Level Trends Over Time;  Section 4: Assessment of Causes for Water Level Declines;  Section 5: Assessment of Deeper Aquifer Zones in Study Area;  Section 6: Conclusions and Recommendations; and ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 2 PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015  Section 7: References. 2 Hydrogeologic Setting A detailed discussion of the hydrogeologic setting for the High Prairie study area is provided in Aspect (2011). This section provides an overview of the hydrogeologic information most pertinent to the groundwater conditions of the Knight-Dillacort area. Figures 2 and 3 are subsurface cross sections oriented east-west and north-south, respectively, across the Knight-Dillacort study area and the surrounding area of High Prairie. Figure 1 depicts the locations of the cross sections1. The location of the Knight- Dillacort area is shown on each cross section for reference. The cross sections were developed using well logs from Ecology’s well log database, Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) regional 1:100,000 geologic mapping, and available information from other studies. The cross sections integrate the following data from each well log: location of well to the nearest quarter-quarter section; well depth; cased interval2; static water level; depth and thickness of geologic units encountered; water- bearing zones, if reported; and the surface elevation from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) digital elevation model (DEM). Each cross section depicts the inferred distribution of geologic units, reported water-bearing zones, mapped geologic structures, and wells along its alignment. For each well on the cross section, the figures also present the water level, well yield (in gallons per minute [gpm]), and, if available, specific capacity (gpm yield/feet of drawdown at that yield) that were reported at the time of drilling by the driller on the well log. The cross sections have 10-fold vertical exaggeration, meaning that depicted slopes in surface topography and geologic layering are 10 times greater than reality. 2.1 Aquifer Units Water wells in the study area generally completed within the bedrock units of the Columbia River Basalt Group (CRBG), with some wells completed in the Dalles Formation, both of which are described below. Although there are pockets of unconsolidated deposits found at the surface in the study area, these units are not expected to be a significant source of groundwater due to their limited continuity and thickness. The primary water-bearing geologic units (aquifer units) in the study area are described below. 1 These cross sections B-B’ and C-C’, while modified for this report, were initially presented in Aspect (2011). Cross section A-A’ from that 2011 report is located outside the focus area of this report, so is not included. However, we retain the B-B’ and C-C’ designations in this report to avoid confusion if referencing back to the 2011 report. 2 The well’s cased portion is not open to adjacent formation and the uncased portion is open to the formation. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 3 2.1.1 Columbia River Basalts (Wanapum and Grande Ronde) The CRBG units are regionally continuous and in the study area have a collective thickness of several thousand feet. The Wanapum basalt formation is consistently present beneath the study area, except where removed by erosion within incised drainages (Klickitat River, Dillacort Canyon, Wheeler Canyon, and Swale Creek), and to the south of the Columbia Hills thrust fault, where it was uplifted and eroded. Where present, the Wanapum basalt is relatively thick, with thicknesses ranging between 500 and 900 feet based on the cross sections (Figures 2 and The Wanapum formation consists of three separate members (from youngest to oldest [shallowest to deepest]) - the Priest Rapids Roza, and Frenchman Springs - each of which is present within the study area (see Figures 2 and Each member is described briefly below.  The Priest Rapids member (Mv[wpr]) is generally exposed at the surface across the majority of the study area. However, as depicted on the cross sections it is commonly absent (eroded away) within deeper drainages and is absent south of the Columbia Hills thrust fault. Where present, the Priest Rapids member is typically 100 to 300 feet thick. Few wells are completed solely in this shallowest basalt unit.  The Roza member (Mv[wr]) is commonly exposed at the surface along the flanks of the major drainages. The Roza member is absent to the south of the southern thrust fault. Where present north of the Columbia Hills thrust fault, the Roza member can be as much as 150 feet thick. Some wells appear to be producing principally from this unit.  The Frenchman Springs member (Mv[wfs]) is also generally exposed at the surface in the major drainages and their respective tributaries. The Frenchman Springs member is also absent immediately south of the Columbia Hills thrust fault. Where present, the Frenchman Springs member generally ranges between 450 and 600 feet in thickness across the study area. Numerous wells in the study area are drilled into the Frenchman Springs, with water bearing zones reported at depths of roughly 600 feet below ground, as depicted on Figure 2. The Grande Ronde formation underlies the Wanapum basalt. The Grande Ronde basalt is present beneath the entire study area, but is generally exposed at the surface only at the base of deeply incised drainages and where it has been uplifted immediately south of the Columbia Hills thrust fault as illustrated in cross section on Figure 3. As the cross sections indicate, there are numerous wells open to and withdrawing groundwater from both the Wanapum and Grande Ronde basalts, but very few wells are completed solely in the Grande Ronde, except where it is exposed in the vicinity of the Klickitat River or other deep drainages, or to the south of the Columbia Hills thrust fault. In the latter area, wells T03/R13-27 and T03/R13-27Q1 are completed solely in the Grande Ronde basalt and are included in the water level monitoring network. These wells have reported static water levels ranging between 100 and 265 feet bgs and driller-reported yields of about 15 gpm. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 4 PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 2.1.2 Groundwater Occurrence in Basalt Aquifer Systems Throughout the Columbia Basin, groundwater in the CRBG occurs primarily within the tops of the individual flows (flow tops) that became vesicular (porous) as gas bubbles escaped the flows during cooling, and/or within the fractured flow bottoms (sometimes referred to as pillows). Flow tops and bottoms – collectively referred to as interflow zones – are usually porous and permeable, and therefore transmit water more readily than the intervening massive portions of the basalt flow interior, which generally constitute flow barriers, except where fractured. In addition, terrestrial sediments can be deposited between the underlying flow top and overlying flow bottom during time periods between basalt flows. These sediments are collectively considered part of the Ellensburg formation (Mc[e]) and can be either relatively permeable or impermeable; depending on composition, thickness, and lateral extent (Brown, 1979). Based on the cross sections and the individual well logs, the water-bearing interflow zones in the study area have thicknesses ranging between 10 and 80 feet. However, both the lateral continuity and thickness of the water-bearing interflow zones are highly variable. This leads to variability in depths and productivity of water wells throughout the study area. 2.1.3 Dalles Formation Geologically younger than the CRGB, the Dalles Formation (Mc[d]) consists of thickly bedded volcaniclastic and sedimentary deposits, which can be as much as 250 feet thick in the study area. Where the Dalles Formation is present at the surface, wells appear to be drilled through it into the underlying Wanapum basalt, indicating the basalt is the principal source of water see wells T3/R13-22C1 and T3/R13-27B1 on Figure 2.2 Geologic Structures The major geologic structures (faults and folds) in the project area, taken from DNR regional geologic mapping, are identified on Figure 1 and the cross sections (Figures 2 and The geologic structures, along with topography (incised canyons) described above, have a substantial effect on the groundwater flow regime within the study area. Regional north-south compression of the earth’s crust that began during the deposition of the Grand Ronde basalt approximately 16 million years ago created the regionally extensive southwest-northeast trending Yakima Fold Belt, which includes the Columbia Hills ridge on the southern edge of the study area (Reidel et al., 1989). This compression resulted in the formation of the numerous southwest-northeast trending folds [troughs] and anticlines [ridges]) and the associated reverse and thrust faults (older rocks are slid upward over younger rocks) found in the region including the study area. The Columbia Hills thrust fault, with several hundred feet of low-angle vertical displacement, is likely associated with the formation of the Columbia Hills. The several southwest- northeast trending geologic structures across the study area are shown on Figure 1. Superimposed upon the major southwest-northeast trending structures within the study area are numerous northwest-southeast trending normal faults (younger rocks are slid downward over older rocks) and strike-slip faults (rocks are slid laterally past each other), likely created from a rotational component of the same north-south compression that resulted in the southwest-northeast trending structures (Reidel et al., 1989). ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 5 In the subsurface, folds and faults may represent partial or complete barriers to lateral groundwater flow, laterally compartmentalizing flow within the study area. Newcomb (1969) theorized that tight anticlinal folding of basalt forms breccia (broken rock) and fine-grained fault gouge between the individual flows near the axis of an anticline, which decreases the transmissivity of the basalt and impedes groundwater flow across the anticlinal crest. In addition, due to the folding and upwarping of the individual flows in the creation of the anticlinal crest, higher heads are needed for groundwater to flow over this crest. If significant vertical displacement occurs across faults to offset the water- bearing interflow zones, the faults may act as impermeable barriers to lateral groundwater flow. Fault gouge may also decrease the permeability of the interflow zones in the vicinity of faults including strike-slip faults where horizontal displacement occurs. The Warwick Fault (strike-slip), cutting across the northeast corner of High Prairie (Figure is documented to be a barrier to lateral groundwater flow in the basalt aquifer system to the east of it within Swale Valley. 2.3 Groundwater Recharge As described above, the isolation of the High Prairie area by deep canyons and geologic structures limits lateral groundwater movement to replenish groundwater withdrawn by pumping. Therefore, the source of groundwater to the basalt aquifers is largely limited to vertical recharge within the footprint of High Prairie. Recharge of basalt aquifer systems may occur where interflow zones exposed at the surface or where covered only by thin units, and/or through open fractures/faults. Recharge water can move downward to deeper aquifer zones via fractures/faults with vertical permeability and/or where lower- permeability zones pinch out depositionally or from prior erosion or tectonic offset. Relying on estimates from a prior USGS regional hydrologic modeling assessment (Bauer and Vaccaro, 1990), Aspect (2011) estimated an average recharge rate of 7.5 inches per year, or 22,250 acre-feet per year, across the entire High Prairie study area. The recharge occurs predominantly to the shallowest aquifer zones; however, there is a strong downward vertical gradient between aquifer zones in the High Prairie area (described below), which can allow the shallower aquifer zones to gradually recharge deeper zones. While there has not been a detailed assessment of differences in recharge to the various aquifer zones of High Prairie, groundwater quality analyses were performed as part of this assessment to estimate the age of groundwater withdrawn from shallower versus deeper wells as an indirect means to evaluate groundwater recharge from shallower to deeper aquifer zones. The groundwater quality investigation is described below in Section 5.1. 2.4 Groundwater Flow In general, groundwater in the basalt aquifer system is expected to flow regionally away from anticlinal axes, in the direction of regional geologic dip of the basalt flows, and towards major surface water bodies (Steinkampf, 1989). During the formation of an anticline, the compression of the various basalt flows leads to both the folding and uplift of the respective flows. Erosion of the upper flows exposes the lower flows at the surface, thus allowing for the areal recharge of the respective flow. For this reason, groundwater ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 6 PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 generally flows away from these topographically higher points of recharge and down the geologic dip. Aspect (2011) mapped groundwater elevations and thus inferred lateral groundwater flow directions for the collective Wanapum basalt aquifer system beneath High Prairie. While there is variability in the measured groundwater elevations across the entire area, the mapping indicates the highest groundwater elevations generally occur in the area near Laurel Fault (Figure 1) and along the southern portion of Schilling Road east of it (topographically higher area which is also a surface water divide). The groundwater elevation data indicate that groundwater in the Wanapum basalt west of Laurel Fault flows to the southwest towards the Klickitat River. East of Laurel Fault, there appears to be a groundwater divide along the western extension of the Horseshoe Bend anticline: north of the anticline groundwater flows to the north-northwest towards Wheeler Canyon and south of the anticline, it flows to the south-southeast towards Swale Creek canyon. While a regional groundwater flow regime was defined from the groundwater elevation mapping, the numerous geologic structures across the area can impede flow and create highly complex flow regime on the local scale. The water level data from wells completed in vertically distinct aquifer zones indicate a consistent downward vertical gradient across High Prairie – i.e., the groundwater levels of the wells completed in the upper zones are higher than the groundwater levels of the wells completed in the lower zones. Based on the cross sections (Figures 2 and groundwater levels (heads) are in the range of 200 to 400 feet lower in the deeper Grande Ronde basalt than in the shallower Wanapum basalt. The layered nature of the basalts, with thin permeable interflow zones (aquifer zones) separated vertically by thick layers of low permeability massive basalt (aquitards restricting flow), allows the large head differences between shallower and deeper zones to persist. If the aquitard layers were not present, the heads in shallower and deeper aquifer zones would equilibrate and vertical gradients would not exist. 3 Groundwater Level Trends Over Time In 2007, the High Prairie well network was established with 14 wells for water level measurements. In 2010, the network was expanded to 23 wells. Water level measurements have typically been collected twice per year, in the spring and fall. In spring 2015, seven additional wells, including several wells in the deeper aquifer, were added to the network. Table 1 provides information for the current well network; all of the wells monitored to date are included, although some wells are no longer participating. The 23 wells monitored since 2010 were professionally surveyed by County staff (location and wellhead elevation); the wells added in spring 2015 are not yet surveyed. Table 2 provides the water level data collected from the network wells from 2007 through spring 2015. To date, 17 rounds of water level measurements have been collected from the High Prairie well network. Based on the well network measurements over the past 5 to 8 years, water levels are generally stable in 20 of 23 wells covering the majority of High Prairie. This is illustrated ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 7 visually by the groundwater hydrographs (groundwater elevations versus time) representing the long-term water level measurements (Figure As noted on Figure 4 and in prior reports, three wells with documented water level declines include wells T03/R13-20N13, T03/R13-22C1, and T03/R13-22P1, all located in the Knight-Dillacort area. Wells -22C1 and -22P1 are located within roughly ¼ mile of each other in the eastern portion of the Knight-Dillacort area, whereas well -20N1 is located toward the western side of the area (Figure On the west end of the area, well T3/R13-20N1 (520 feet deep) showed a water level decline on the order of 40 feet from the start of its monitoring in summer 2010 until spring 2012, but since then has shown more than 15 feet of water level rise as of spring 2015 (Figure Discussions with the owner of well -20N1 indicates they have been actively conserving water and managing their pumping schedule so as to accommodate a well of limited yield. The adjacent well T3/R13-20N2 (530 feet deep) showed a decline on the order of 30 feet between the first two measurements (winter 2010 and winter 2011), but since then has exhibited water level rise on the order of 70 feet, far surpassing the first (winter 2010) measured water level elevation (Figure Based on the measured data, the -20N1 and -20N2 wells do not demonstrate ongoing water level declines in the western portion of the Knight-Dillacort area. Conversely, water level continue to decline in the eastern end of the Knight-Dillacort area as of the spring 2015 measurements. In that area, wells -22C1 and -22P1 showed stable water levels between 2007 (start of monitoring) and spring 2009. Since then, water level declines on the order of 57 and 39 feet, respectively, have been measured from spring 2009 through spring 2015 with no indication of trend reversal (Table In 2014, the High Prairie Community Council (2014) reported that a cluster of wells in this same general area was experiencing severely declining water levels, and that several had deepened their wells as a result. Figure 5 illustrates in pink the parcels where water level declines have been reported – either measured in the aforementioned network wells highlighted on the figure or by anecdotal information from the local community. Parcels where wells have been deepened since 2010, based on Ecology’s well log records, are outlined in red on Figure 5. Other wells within the Knight-Dillacort area do not show water level declines based on the available data, namely wells T03/R13-21M1, -27, -27Q1, -28B1, and -28L1 (Figure 4; Figure Of these wells, well -21M1 is 520 feet deep and the others range in depth from 90 to 310 feet (Table Wells -27 and -27Q1 are located south of the Columbia Hills thrust fault (Figure 1) and are likely hydraulically isolated from the basalt aquifer to the north where the declines are occurring. 3 The local well number designations used are based on location information (quarter-quarter section) in Ecology’s online well log database and may not be accurate. Locations of wells in the monitoring network have been surveyed and are accurate on the maps. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 8 PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 Figure 6 presents a pair of hydrographs illustrating the measured water level declines in wells -22C1 and -22P1. Based on the measurements collected twice per year, well -22C1 has experienced a decline of approximately 57 feet between 2009 and 2015, whereas well -22P1, located to the north, experienced a decline of approximately 39 feet in the same time period. As stated above, both wells showed generally stable water levels from their start of monitoring in 2007 through spring 2009. Well -22C1 initially showed a 13-foot decline between the spring and fall 2009 monitoring events, whereas well -22P1 showed a smaller initial decline (4 feet) between fall 2009 and spring 2010 measurements. Both wells show an accelerated rate of decline over time, as noted on Figure 6:  At well -22C1, a 23-foot decline was measured in the 3-year period between 2009 and 2012 (7.9 feet/year) followed by a 33-foot decline in the 3-year period between 2012 and 2015 (11.0 feet/year).  At well -22P1, a 13-foot decline was measured in the 5-year period between 2009 and 2014 (2.5 feet/year) followed by a 26-foot decline in the 1-year period between 2014 and 2015 (26 feet/year). Based on the collective information available, we conclude that large ongoing water level declines are localized to the shallow aquifer in the eastern portion of the Knight-Dillacort area as documented by wells -22C1 and -22P1 located within approximately ¼ mile of each other; therefore, that area has been the focus of this assessment. The following section evaluates potential causes of the observed declines in the eastern portion of the Knight-Dillacort area. 4 Assessment of Causes for Water Level Declines As outlined in Section 2, the topographic incisement and numerous regional geologic structures combine to have a substantial effect on the groundwater flow regime within the High Prairie area including the Knight-Dillacort area. High Prairie as a whole is incised on three sides (east, north, and west) by the Swale Creek and Klickitat River canyons, and it is bounded on the south by the collection of large-scale geologic structures forming the Columbia Hills. Superimposed on this isolated upland are numerous geologic structures that cut across the area, as depicted on Figure 1. The Knight-Dillacort area is further constrained by Knight Canyon and Dillacort Canyon on the southwest and northeast, respectively. The topographic canyons incise through the shallower aquifer zones, whereas it is believed that the regional geologic structures penetrate and form hydraulic barriers through the entire CRBG sequence. This combination of naturally occurring features can create compartmentalized blocks of basalt aquifer with limited lateral continuity, which, in turn, limits lateral flow of groundwater to replenish groundwater withdrawn by pumping within an aquifer block. In short, the hydrogeologic setting of High Prairie makes it sensitive to overpumping (overdraft) of the groundwater resource. Despite that, the available data indicate that groundwater levels across most of High Prairie appear stable across the 8-year period of monitoring in the well network (Figure ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 9 indicating that the current level of pumping across most of the area is sustainable. The substantial ongoing declines in groundwater levels observed over the past 6 years are limited to the shallow aquifer within the eastern portion of the Knight-Dillacort area. Possible causes for these localized declines include changes to precipitation and/or changes to groundwater withdrawals from the shallow aquifer resulting from numbers of wells constructed or deepened. Each possibility is examined below. 4.1 Precipitation Changes (Climate Change) Trends in precipitation (and thus recharge) over the past 6 years relative to prior conditions are evaluated by review of annual precipitation data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Weather Observation Stations in Goldendale (Station Nos. 453222 and 453226). Based on location, elevation, and surrounding topography, the Goldendale stations are assumed to be the most representative of the actual precipitation for the Knight-Dillacort study area. While the magnitude of precipitation at Goldendale will be different from High Prairie, the trends over time (above or below normal) should be similar. The upper plot on Figure 7 presents both the annual precipitation and the calculated 16.9- inch mean annual precipitation at Goldendale for the 83-year period of record (1931 through 2014), excluding several years for which much data are missing. In addition, a cumulative departure from the mean annual precipitation is presented in the lower plot on Figure 7. The cumulative departure analysis adds the inches above or below the average precipitation for each year into a running total, and thereby illustrates longer-term drought or wet periods. While the values of the cumulative departure (i.e. numbers on the y-axis) depend on the year the analysis is started, the trend of above- or below-normal (shape of the curve) does not depend on the year started. The annual precipitation data indicate that while there is substantial inter-annual variability in precipitation over the period of record, the long-term trend is generally stable. Since 2009, precipitation has been within a few inches of normal with the exception of 2013 which was 6.8 inches below normal. If precipitation were a causal factor, we would expect to see water level declines across all of High Prairie, which is not the case as described above. Based on the information, we conclude that changes in precipitation are not a cause of the localized water level declines observed in the eastern Knight-Dillacort area. 4.2 Well Construction and Deepening in Area The Knight-Dillacort area generally has a higher population density and thus higher well density than other areas of High Prairie. Figure 8 graphically depicts the numbers of wells by quarter-quarter section within and around the Knight-Dillacort area, based on records in Ecology’s online well log database as of early 2015. While there are many wells reported in and around the area of documented water level declines (around Adams View Road), there is an equal or greater density of wells reported in areas just to the west and southwest, where there is no indication of long-term declines from either monitoring data or anecdotal information from the community (see ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 10 PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 Figure Based on this information, the number (density) of wells by itself does not correlate with the location of documented water level declines. There are no known significant changes in water use within the eastern Knight-Dillacort area corresponding in time to the observed declines (since 2009). However, there has been a steady increase in numbers of wells installed in the area, and an increase in the numbers of wells deepened to seek a more reliable source of water. These factors are evaluated below. 4.2.1 Well Installations Over Time As illustrated on Figure 8, there are numerous wells installed within the Knight-Dillacort area and, based on Ecology’s well log records, wells in the area have been installed consistently over the past few decades. Figure 9 depicts the numbers of wells installed per year between 1970 and 2014 within the 4-section area encompassing the eastern Knight-Dillacort area (Sections 21, 22, 27, and 28 of Township 3 North Range 13 East); the cumulative number of wells installed over time is also shown as the red line. The number of wells installed per year are plotted relative to the y-axis on the left side of the plot (0 to whereas the cumulative number of wells installed since 1970 are plotted relative to the y-axis on the right side of the plot (0 to 70). Ecology’s records indicate that 70 wells have been installed in the 4-section area since 1970, with 0 to 3 wells installed during most years and 5 or more wells installed during a few years. This pattern is the same during the years of 2007 through 2014 (0 to 3 wells per year), so there is no indication of increased numbers of new wells in the area during the time period of measured water level declines. If cumulative withdrawal of groundwater from increasing numbers of wells in the area were a cause of water level declines, we would expect declines to be a more widespread phenomenon across the entire 4-section area. Instead, the declines appear to be highly localized as described above. Based on the distribution and timing of the measured water level declines relative to well installations, the total number of wells in the area does not appear to be a cause of the observed declines. 4.2.2 Deepening of Wells Over Time Figure 5 depicts the parcels within the Knight-Dillacort area where wells have been reportedly been deepened since 2010. All of the well deepenings occur in the eastern area where the water level declines are measured. Based on Ecology’s well log database, Figure 10 depicts the numbers of wells deepened per year between 1970 and 2014 within the same four Sections 21, 22, 27, and 28 of Township 3 North Range 13 East; the cumulative number of wells deepened over time is also shown as the red line. The number of wells deepened per year are plotted relative to the y-axis on the left side of the plot (0 to whereas the cumulative number of wells deepened since 1970 are plotted relative to the y-axis on the right side of the plot (0 to 10). ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 11 Ecology’s records indicate that ten wells have been deepened in the 4-section area since 1970: none during the 1970s, one during the 1980s, two during the 1990s, one during the 2000s, and six during the 2010s with 4 of those 6 occurring in 2014 (Figure 10). There is a strong spatial correlation between locations of recent (since 2010) well deepenings and locations of shallow aquifer wells showing recent water level declines in the eastern Knight-Dillacort area (Figure There is also a strong correlation between timing of the recent well deepenings and timing of the water level declines in that area as measured at network wells -22C1 and -22P1, as illustrated on Figure 11. The fact that well -22C1 is located closer to the deepened wells and showed an earlier onset and greater magnitude of water level decline, relative to well -22P1 (Figure 10), further strengthens the recent well deepenings as a cause for the declines. As discussed in Section 2, there is a strong downward hydraulic gradient (a few hundred feet of head difference) between shallower and deeper aquifer zones throughout High Prairie including the Knight-Dillacort area. Therefore, there is a driving hydraulic force for groundwater to naturally move downward from shallower to deeper aquifer zones. However, the thick layers of low-permeability massive basalt (aquitards) vertically separating the basalt interflow aquifer zones greatly restrict downward movement of groundwater. If not for that vertical permeability restriction, the heads in the various aquifer zones would equilibrate, eliminating vertical gradients. When a borehole is drilled through the basalt aquitard layers without sealing off the interflow (aquifer) zones it creates a permeable conduit for groundwater to move downward from shallower to deeper aquifer zones. Appendix B presents well logs for the 21 wells in Ecology’s database that were installed to depths of 400 feet or greater within Sections 21, 22, 27, and 28 of Township 3 North Range 13 East; this includes wells drilled to that depth initially and formerly shallow wells that were deepened. Based on our review of the recorded well construction information, only one of the 21 deeper wells in the area documents sealing off of shallower aquifer zones. Several of the wells have liners installed, but the liners are designed only to prevent borehole collapse; they do not seal against the borehole4 so they do not prevent vertical water movement in the annular space outside of them. The one deeper well where sealing off of a shallower aquifer zone is documented on the well log, is located in the SW¼ of the NE¼ of Section 27 (well 27G, not in the monitoring network); this well was deepened from a depth of 330 to 680 feet in 2014 (formation had caved in between depths of 280 and 330 feet prior to deepening). The well log documents the presence of cascading water at a depth of 290 feet, which was sealed off using a shale trap with bentonite grout installed between the liner and borehole wall. The cumulative effect of several wells drilled into deep aquifer zones without sealing off shallow aquifer zones can be a gradual draining of the shallow aquifer zone(s) into the deeper aquifer zone(s). Based on the collective available information described above, we conclude that this phenomenon is the primary reason for the localized water level declines in the shallow aquifer of the eastern Knight-Dillacort area. 4 Liner is typically 4.5-inch-diameter light-gage steel casing within a 6-inch borehole. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 12 PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 5 Assessment of Deeper Aquifer Zones in Study Area In light of the substantial water level declines in the shallower aquifer system of the eastern Knight-Dillacort area, and the fact that several wells had been deepened in the past few years, a primary point of interest from the December 2014 meeting of High Prairie residents was the viability of the deeper aquifer system as a water supply source. Little information is available regarding the deeper aquifer zones, including no data regarding their water level trends, in the general area of the observed shallow aquifer declines. Of the seven wells added to the well monitoring network in 2015 as part of this assessment, four are greater than 400 feet deep (Table so future monitoring of local water level trends in the deeper aquifer zones can be conducted. The following subsections present data from groundwater quality testing conducted as one means to assess recharge to the deeper aquifer zone, followed by a discussion of the available information regarding reported well yields in the study area. 5.1 Groundwater Quality Testing to Assess Groundwater Age and thus Recharge As stated in Section 2.3, groundwater quality analyses were performed as part of this assessment to estimate the age of groundwater withdrawn from shallower versus deeper wells as an indirect means to evaluate groundwater recharge from shallower to deeper aquifer zones. In April 2015, Aspect received owner permission and collected groundwater samples from six wells located in the eastern part of the Knight-Dillacort area where water level declines are documented (discussed above). An attempt was made to select both shallower and deeper wells for comparative analysis of groundwater quality between shallower and deeper aquifer zones in the immediate area. As depicted on Figure 12, the four shallower wells sampled were -22P1 (280 feet deep), -27A2 (220 feet deep), -27C1 (168 feet deep), and -28B1 (220 feet deep), and the two deeper wells sampled were -27D4 (634 feet deep) and -27D6 (410 feet deep). Aliquots of the six groundwater samples were submitted to Analytical Resources Inc. (ARI) of Seattle, Washington, for analysis of conventional water quality parameters including common cations (calcium, magnesium, potassium, and sodium), common anions (bicarbonate [alkalinity], chloride, and sulfate), fluoride, nitrate, and silicon. In addition, an aliquot of each sample was submitted to Beta Analytic Inc. of Miami, Florida, for radiocarbon (Carbon-14 isotope) dating analysis. The following subsections describe the information and interpretation regarding conventional water quality parameters and for the radiocarbon dating. The groundwater analytical data are presented in Table 3, which also lists the depth of wells sampled. Appendix A includes the laboratory reports for the two data sets (conventionals and radiocarbon dating). ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 13 5.1.1 Conventional Water Quality Parameter Data CRBG groundwater chemistry evolves with greater residence time in the aquifer. In very general terms, recently recharged groundwater is typically dominated by calcium (Ca) and magnesium (Mg) cations and the bicarbonate anion (HCO3) – i.e., a Ca-Mg-HCO3 type water. As groundwater moves along its regional flow path, spending greater time in contact with the basalt matrix, dissolution and hydrolysis of selected minerals and precipitation of other secondary minerals (e.g. clays) within the basalt matrix commonly remove calcium and magnesium in exchange for sodium, resulting in higher sodium concentrations in solution. The water-rock reactions also precipitate from solution into the basalt matrix carbonate, silica, and potassium and can release from the basalt matrix into solution chloride, fluoride, and hydroxyl (thus raising groundwater pH). With very long residence times, the oldest CRBG groundwaters can therefore evolve to an oxygen-depleted, alkaline, sodium chloride (Na-Cl) type water with elevated fluoride concentrations (Hearn et al, 1990; Riedel et al, 2002; 2009b). Detected fluoride concentrations were the same (0.2 mg/L) in five of six wells sampled, thus no trend with well depth is apparent; the detected fluoride concentrations are an order of magnitude below the 4.0 mg/L drinking water standard. The field-measured groundwater pH was comparable for the six wells (7.0 to 8.2, neutral to alkaline), also without any apparent correlation to well depth (Table Figure 13 is a “Piper plot” graphically depicting the common ion (cation and anion) data for the six water samples. The shallower wells 300 feet deep) and deeper wells 400 feet deep) are depicted with different colored symbols on the figure. The lower left triangle on the Piper plot displays the relative proportion of each major cation (Ca, Ng, K, Na), and the lower right triangle displays the relative proportion of each major anion (HCO3, Cl, and sulfate (SO4)) 5 in the samples. The position of the samples’ cation and anion proportions are then projected onto the upper diamond-shaped plot as a means to represent the major ion composition (combined cations and anions) for each sample as a single point. Differences in major ion composition would be expected for younger versus older groundwaters as outlined above evolution from a predominantly Ca-Mg water type to a predominantly Na water type). If deeper wells represent older (more chemically evolved) groundwaters, samples from the deeper wells would be expected to cluster toward the lowermost corner of the upper diamond of the Piper plot. As indicated on Figure 13, a trend in groundwater composition (major ions) is not apparent from the Piper plot. All of the samples represent a Ca-Mg-dominant water type, which suggests relatively little water-rock interaction. Another approach to assess the major ion data is the cation ratio, which is calculated as the sum of sodium and potassium concentrations divided by the sum of the four major cation concentrations [Na+K]/[Na+K+Ca+Mg]). In theory, groundwaters with greater residence time in basalt aquifers should be more Na-rich and therefore have 5 The plot includes HCO3 plus carbonate (CO3) on one axis; however, CO3 is essentially absent in the samples (Table 3) so only the HCO3 is relevant. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 14 PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 higher cation ratios 2009b). If greater well depth equates to older and more geochemically evolved groundwater, cation ratio would increase with well depth. The upper plot on Figure 14, depicting cation ratio as a function of well depth for the six samples, does not indicate that trend. In fact, the five wells excluding the deepest (-27D4, 634 feet deep) suggest the opposite trend – cation ratio generally decreasing with depth – with the most geochemically evolved groundwater being in the 220-foot-deep well -28B1. The deepest well -27D4 is a clear outlier from the other data (much lower cation ratio than expected). We infer that, because the two deeper well (-27D4 and -27D6) boreholes are open to shallower and deeper aquifer zones6, the water sampled from those wells represents a mixture of groundwater from shallow and deeper aquifer zones. As stated above, silica7 concentrations in CRBG groundwater can decrease with greater residence time as a result of silica being incorporated into secondary minerals, thus removed from groundwater. The lower plot on Figure 14, depicting silicon concentrations as a function of well depth, follows that trend for five of the six wells. The deepest well (-27D4) is again an outlier from the other samples (much higher silicon concentration than expected), which, again, is inferred to reflect a mixed groundwater quality. There is no drinking water standard for silicon. In theory, higher chloride concentrations are indicative of an older (geochemically evolved) groundwater, as stated above. The six samples do not show a clear trend of chloride concentrations versus well depth (upper plot on Figure 15). The 220-foot-deep well -28B1 had the highest detected chloride concentration (13.1 mg/L), like it had the highest cation ratio. Detected chloride concentrations in the other five wells are similar (2.5 to 4.6 mg/L), with no clear correlation to well depth. The detected chloride concentrations are an order of magnitude below the 250 mg/L secondary drinking water standard based on aesthetics (taste). Nitrate is typically associated with surface processes (including fertilizers and septic systems), therefore higher nitrate concentrations would be expected in groundwater from shallower aquifers. The lower plot on Figure 15 depicts the six wells’ nitrate concentrations as a function of well depth, which may indicate that trend generally but not clearly. Nitrate was not detected 0.1 mg/L) in samples from wells -22P1 (280 feet deep) and -27D6 (410 feet deep). The detected nitrate concentrations in the other four wells ranged from 0.2 to 1.0 mg/L, with all being an order of magnitude below the 10 mg/L drinking water standard. The highest nitrate concentration was detected in well -28B1, which also had the anomalously high chloride detection (described above) and the highest measured water temperature (13.9° C; Table Well -27C1 (168 feet deep) had the second highest detected concentrations of both nitrate (0.9 mg/L) and chloride (4.6 mg/L) (Table High nitrate in combination with high chloride can be indicative of septic system effluent; however, radiocarbon dating data indicates that groundwater from 6 Well -27D4 (634 feet deep) has a 4.5-inch-diameter liner extending to 350 feet, but the liner does not seal off the nominal 6-inch borehole in which it is set. 7 Silica refers to a combination of silicon and oxygen (e.g. quartz), but the laboratory analyzes for the element silicon. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 15 that well is a few thousand years old, thus precluding septic as a cause (discussed below in Section 5.1.2). In summary, the water quality data from shallower versus deeper wells do not demonstrate the patterns of water quality change that are observed regionally in the CRBG, where deeper wells tap into older and thus more geochemically evolved groundwater. We expect that is largely due to the fact that the two deeper wells sampled in the study area are open across both shallower and deeper aquifer zones, so their samples likely reflect a blend of groundwater quality from the various zones. 5.1.2 Radiocarbon Age Dating The six groundwater samples were submitted for radiocarbon age dating, which is commonly used to estimate the age of carbon-containing materials that are less than approximately 50,000 years old. Radiocarbon, or carbon-14, is an unstable isotope of carbon that is naturally produced in the atmosphere and converts to the stable carbon-12 and/or carbon-13 isotopes over time, with a half-life of approximately 5,730 years. The analytical method determines the proportion of unstable carbon-14 to stable carbon-12 or carbon-13 isotopes and estimates the age based on comparison of the measured isotope ratios to reference samples (the older the sample, the less carbon-14 will remain). Inorganic carbon present in the groundwater samples is the material dated for this assessment. Radiocarbon dates are rounded by the laboratory to the nearest 10 years per the conventions of the 1977 International Radiocarbon Conference. Table 3 presents for each sample the measured fraction of carbon-14 (“modern carbon”) with the reported error range and the resulting estimated radiocarbon age and error range in years. The upper plot on Figure 16 presents the estimated radiocarbon ages as function of well depth. As presented in Table 3 and Figure 16, the estimated age of the groundwater sampled from the six wells ranges from approximately 3,560 to 7,570 years. In other words, all of the groundwater sampled in this assessment is older than 3,500 years. Samples from five of the six wells show a general trend of increasing age with increasing well depth, but the deepest well (-27D4, 634 feet deep) is an outlier to that trend, like it is an outlier for other geochemical indicators as discussed above. Mixing of groundwater from shallower and deeper aquifer zones is a likely explanation for that outlier result. This range of age values is consistent with measurements of groundwater age within the CRBG elsewhere in the Columbia Basin (ranging from a few thousand to several tens of thousands of years; Douglas et al, 2007; 2009). The age data indicate relatively long flow paths, and thus residence times, for recharge water to reach the aquifer zones being tapped for water supply by these wells. Note that the estimated 5,920-year age for groundwater from well -28B1 indicates that that well’s elevated nitrate and chloride concentrations are not attributable to septic systems (generated near surface in past decade), as was mentioned above as a possibility. The lower plot on Figure 16 presents cation ratio as a function of radiocarbon age, with the expectation that older groundwater (longer residence time) should have a greater cation ratio. The sample data do not show that trend. In fact, the opposite trend is ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 16 PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 generally indicated for five of six wells (including deepest well -27D4), but with well -28B1 being an outlier relative to the other five wells. 5.2 Reported Well Yields Driller’s logs commonly present information on well yield (gallons per minute [gpm]) as measured from the driller’s air lift well development conducted on newly installed or deepened wells. Air lifting is conducted primarily to remove from the well accumulated sediment and turbid water generated during drilling. The air lifting is commonly conducted for time periods of 1 to 4 hours and the reported information on flow rate may not be accurate nor representative of a well’s true yield since it is short term and it is controlled by the air pressure generated by the driller’s air compressor. A permanent pump placed in the well may yield lesser or greater quantities of groundwater than the rate reported on the driller’s log. Nevertheless, in the absence of more reliable data, the yield data reported on the drillers’ logs is readily available information from nearly all of the wells in the study area, so is worth evaluating for general patterns with respect to both geographic location and well depth (aquifer zone). The yield of a well is controlled both by the transmissivity of the aquifer zone(s) adjacent to the well and the available drawdown8 within the well, the latter being a function largely of the artesian pressure within the aquifer zone(s) supplying the well. The depth at which the pump is set is also a factor in well yield, but that is not a function of the aquifer productivity or well construction and it is not typically reported on driller’s logs, so is not considered in this evaluation. The upper plot on Figure 17 plots the depth to water reported at time of drilling (on driller’s log) versus the well total depth for all wells in the 4-section area encompassing the eastern Knight-Dillacort area (Sections 21, 22, 27, 28 of T03N/R13E). The data show a clear pattern of deeper static water levels with increasing well depth. Shallower static water levels could occur in deeper wells if the deeper aquifer zones tapped by the deeper wells had great excess pressure (artesian pressure). The data indicate that such highly pressurized deep aquifer zones are not present to the depths of drilling (approximately 700 feet) within the study area. The lower plot on Figure 17 presents the wells’ available drawdown as a function of well depth. While there is considerable variability among wells, there is an overall pattern of greater available drawdown with greater well depth. However, the general trend of the data is considerably less than a 1:1 slope; in other words, for the majority of wells, drilling an extra X feet in well depth does not return the same X feet in available drawdown. Nevertheless, the generally greater available drawdown afforded by deeper wells overall suggests that somewhat greater yields should be available in deeper wells in the study area, if deeper aquifer zones are equally transmissive to shallow aquifer zones, which is not known. While there is in general somewhat greater available drawdown in deeper wells of the study area, the reported well yields do not show a clear trend with well depth. The upper plot on Figure 18 presents the reported well yields as a function of well depth, which 8 The length of water column within the well (static water level depth minus well depth). ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 17 demonstrates considerable variability with no clear trend overall. Because well depth is a function of the ground surface elevation that the well is drilled from (to reach a specific aquifer zone), the lower plot on Figure 18 presents the same reported well yields as a function of the elevations of the well bottoms, which normalizes changes in ground surface elevation; there is no clear trend of reported yield versus the well’s bottom elevation. As stated above, the well yields reported on driller’s logs may not be representative of yields that the wells would produce with a permanent pump installed. While the existing information on well yields is of limited reliability, it does not indicate that deeper aquifer zone(s) beneath the study area are more productive (higher yielding) than the shallower aquifer zones. Figure 19 presents the reported well yield data in plan view for the 4-section area, without consideration of well depth. Listed for each quarter-quarter section are the number of reported wells and the minimum, average, and maximum reported well yields for those wells. Each quarter-quarter section is color coded based on the maximum reported yield. Notwithstanding the caveats on reliability of the yield data reported on driller’s logs, the available data indicate an area with yields of 100 gpm or higher in the northern quarter-quarter sections of Sections 27 and 28. Review of the well log information also indicates no correlation between the reported yields of the wells and the years they were installed (Figure 20). 6 Conclusions and Recommendations Although the natural hydrogeologic setting of High Prairie limits recharge to the groundwater aquifers and thus makes the area sensitive to groundwater depletion from overpumping, water level monitoring conducted since 2010 or earlier indicates that groundwater levels are generally stable over time across the vast majority of High Prairie. However, within a localized eastern portion of the Knight-Dillacort area, near Adams View Road, substantial and ongoing declines in water levels have been measured in two wells since 2009, and the rates of declines have accelerated in the past few years. The observed water level declines do not appear to be related to the increased total number of wells in the area. Rather, based on multiple lines of evidence, the accelerating declines appear to be related to recent deepening of several wells in the immediate area of the declining wells. During the deepening process, the shallow aquifer zone(s) do not appear to have been sealed off to prevent vertical movement of water (cascading water) from the shallow aquifer zone(s) within the deepened well. Consequently, it appears that the deepened wells have been gradually draining groundwater from the shallow aquifer zone(s) in which the declining wells are completed. Little information is currently available regarding the deeper aquifer system within the eastern Knight-Dillacort area, but deeper wells in the area were added to the well monitoring network as part of this assessment so monitoring for water level trends can continue into the future. There is no consistent evidence that the local deeper aquifer zone is more productive than the shallower aquifer zones. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 18 PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 Based on these conclusions, we provide the following recommendations:  Retrofit the deepened wells in the area of declines to seal off the shallower aquifer zones and prevent cascading water. We expect that this would not create a rapid recovery of the declines that have already occurred, but it should curb further declines in affected wells and limit expansion of the area of decline.  Continue the High Prairie water level monitoring program with regular evaluation of the data to watch for changes in groundwater levels over time. The value of the monitoring program is evident by now having the data that document the localized groundwater declines and provide a basis to diagnose their cause. We recommend that additional wells be added to the network, as practical, to provide greater coverage of areas lacking monitoring, and, where possible, to monitor water levels in shallower and deeper aquifer zones.  Implement voluntary water conservation measures throughout High Prairie, particularly limiting outdoor water use. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 19 7 References Aspect, 2011, Hydrologic Information Report Supporting Water Availability Assessment, High Prairie Study Area, WRIA 30, June 30, 2011. Aspect, 2013, Hydrologic Information Report Addendum Supporting Water Availability Assessments, Swale Creek, Little Klickitat, High Prairie, Columbia Tributaries, and Appleton Study Areas, WRIA 30, June 28, 2013. Bauer, H.H., and Hansen, A.J. Jr., 2000, Hydrology of the Columbia Plateau Regional Aquifer System, Washington, Oregon, and Idaho, USGS Water-Resources Investigation Report 96-4106. Bauer, H.H. and J.J. Vaccaro, 1990, Estimates of Ground-Water Recharge to the Columbia Plateau Regional Aquifer System, Washington, Oregon, and Idaho, for Predevelopment and Current Land-Use Conditions, USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 88- 4108. Brown, J.C., 1979, Geology and Water Resources of Klickitat County, Water Supply Bulletin No, 50, p. 1 - 413. Columbia Basin Groundwater Management Area 2009a, Groundwater Geochemistry of the Columbia River Basalt Group Aquifer System: Columbia Basin Groundwater Management Area of Adam, Franklin, Grant, and Lincoln Counties, Washington, June 2009. Columbia Basin Groundwater Management Area 2009b, A Summary of Columbia River Basalt Group Physical Geology and its Influence on the Hydrogeology of the Columbia River Basalt Aquifer System: Columbia Basin Groundwater Management Area of Adam, Franklin, Grant, and Lincoln Counties, Washington, June 2009. Douglas, A.A., J.L, Osiensky, and C.K. Keller, 2007, Carbon-14 Dating of Ground Water in the Palouse Basin of the Columbia River Basalts, Journal of Hydrology, v. 334, pp. 502- 512. Hansen, Jr. A.J., J.J. Vaccaro and H.H. Bauer, 1994, Ground-Water Flow Simulation of the Columbia Plateau Regional Aquifer System, Washington, Oregon, and Idaho, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 91-4187. Hearn, P.P, W.C. Steinkampf, L.D. White, and J.R. Evans, 1990, Geochemistry of Rock-Water Interactions in Basalt Aquifers of the Columbia River Plateau, in Doe, B.R., editor, Proceedings of a U.S. Geological Survey Workshop on Environmental Geochemistry, USGS Circular 10933, pp. 63-68. High Prairie Community Council, 2014, Letter from Mike Richards to Klickitat County Board of Commissioners regarding declining water levels in area near intersection of Centerville Highway and Mount Adams View Road, July 22, 2014. Newcomb, R.C.,1969, Effect of Tectonic Structure on the Occurrence of Ground Water in the Basalt of the Columbia River Group of the Dalles Area Oregon and Washington, USGS Professional Paper 383-C. ---PAGE BREAK--- ASPECT CONSULTING 20 PROJECT NO. 090045-017B-01  JULY 27, 2015 Reidel, S.P., Fecht, K.R., Hagood, M.C., and Tolan, T.L., 1989, The Geologic Evolution Of The Central Columbia Plateau, in Reidel, S.P., and Hooper, P.R., eds, Volcanism And Tectonism In The Columbia River Flood-Basalt Province: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America, Special Paper 239. Riedel, S.P., V.G. Johnson, and F.A. Spane, 2002, Natural Gas Storage in Basalt Aquifers of the Columbia Basin, Pacific Northwest USA: A Guide to Site Characterization, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, August 2002. Steinkampf, W.C., 1989, Water-Quality Characteristics of the Columbia River Regional Aquifer System in Parts of Washington, Oregon, and Idaho, USGS Water-Resources Investigation report 87-4242. Limitations Work for this project was performed for the Klickitat County Department of Natural Resources (Client), and this report was prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional practices for the nature and conditions of work completed in the same or similar localities, at the time the work was performed. This report does not represent a legal opinion. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. All reports prepared by Aspect Consulting for the Client apply only to the services described in the Agreement(s) with the Client. Any use or reuse by any party other than the Client is at the sole risk of that party, and without liability to Aspect Consulting. Aspect Consulting’s original files/reports shall govern in the event of any dispute regarding the content of electronic documents furnished to others. ---PAGE BREAK--- TABLES ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 1 - Groundwater Level Monitoring Network for High Prairie Hydrogeologic Assessment Knight-Dillacort Area Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\Tables 1&2 + Figs 4 6-7 1 Monitoring Network Table 1 Page 1 of 1 TRS Label Well Log Date Dia. (in) Depth (ft) Northing1 (SPS 83; ft) Easting1 (SPS 83; ft) Top of Casing Elevation2 (NAVD 88; ft) Comments as of Spring 2015 Wells in Original Monitoring Network T03/R13-3B1 11/12/86 6 76 162902.9 1472929.6 2011.17 T03/R13-3R1 4/15/87 6 745 159389.4 1472760.9 2146.99 No longer monitored due to numerous obstructions in the well. T03/R13-4L1 10/25/95 6 620 160519.0 1464962.0 2126.25 T03/R13-11M1 8/31/94 6 524 155087.0 1474093.1 2037.44 T03/R13-14A1 10/16/92 6 500 152621.1 1478289.8 2181.16 T03/R13-14G1 7/7/95 6 500 151451.4 1476350.7 2085.99 T03/R13-14G2 2/28/07 6 458 151661.4 1476308.2 2082.02 T03/R13-14J 5/30/90 6 460 149010.8 1477037.7 2000.84 Located under bird house. Owner does not have well log. Well log chosen based on water level. T03/R13-15L1 8/13/87 6 105 149748.7 1470418.5 1885 Limited access; remove expansion bolt. Airline installed to unknown depth. GPS Location; Google Earth elevation. T03/R13-20N1 11/22/94 6 520 144704.4 1457869.5 1452.74 Airline installed at approximate depth of 520 ft. T03/R13-20N2 7/15/04 6 530 144430.9 1458080.8 1427.90 Well Tag: AKL-875 T03/R13-21M1 7/11/97 6 520 145315.8 1463014.1 1745.30 Sonic water level indicator not accurate. T03/R13-21P1 5/6/94 6 200 139938.4 1465005.9 1569.93 T03/R13-22C1 5/9/02 6 225 143235.9 1470655.1 1777.48 T03/R13-22P1 10/19/95 6 280 144550.2 1470944.8 1763.36 T03/R13-23L1 5/30/81 6 449 145104.1 1475387.6 1808.08 Originally had an airline installed at depth of 140 ft. Access port later installed (May/June 2010). T03/R13-27 8/7/08 6 165 140168.2 1469338.5 1747.10 Well Tag: APT-283 T03/R13-27Q1 10/27/93 6 310 138228.3 1471376.8 1996.03 T03/R13-28B1 9/7/94 6 220 143022.4 1466216.1 1622.75 T03/R13-28F1 11/4/03 6 335 140751.7 1464326.2 1527.26 Well Tag: AHK-331 2 wells; well not currently in use is monitored. T03/R13-28L1 12/27/72 8 90 141586.1 1465563.3 1498.67 T03/R14-18N1 5/20/97 6 695 149041.9 1484973.1 2153.66 T04/R14-31L1 10/12/00 6 506 167675.2 1486274.0 1785.85 No longer wants to participate in monitoring program. T03/R13-24C1 5/30/1997 6 560 147297 1480932 NA Well Tag: AAG-918 T03/R13-27A2 8/13/1998 6 220 142706 1472370 NA Well Tag: ACX-768 T03/R13-27C1 7/30/2002 6 168 142810 1470134 NA Well Tag: AGB-465 T03/R13-27D4 10/8/2001 6 634 142393 1470381 NA Well Tag: AGM-070 T03/R13-27D5 2/17/2010 6 665 142756 1469398 NA Well Tag: AFQ-965 T03/R13-27D6 7/11/2014 6 410 143353 1471194 NA Well Tag: BIF-979 T03/R13-28C2 5/9/1990 6 160 141541 1464199 NA Note: The wells added in 2015 have not been surveyed at the time of this report. The cooridantes (northing/easting) are from GPS. NA: Surveyed elevation not available at time of this report. Wells Added During this Study (2015) Well Survey Data Ecology Well Log Data ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2 - Groundwater Level Data from Monitoring Network Hydrogeologic Assessment Knight-Dillacort Area Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\Tables 1&2 + Figs 4 6-7 2 GW Level Data Table 2 Page 1 of 3 Ecology Well Log ID TRS Label Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation2 (ft) Comments Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation2 (ft) Comments Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation2 (ft) Comments Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation2 (ft) Comments Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation2 (ft) Comments Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation2 (ft) Comments Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation2 (ft) Comments 140432 T03/R13-3B1 203.6 1807.5 - - Well box frozen shut - - No permission 207.2 1804.0 205.6 1805.6 206.2 1805.0 204.5 1806.7 141250 T03/R13-3R1 549.5 1597.5 549.7 1597.3 549.7 1597.3 549.7 1597.3 549.4 1597.6 549.0 1598.0 - - Not monitored 377250 T03/R13-4L1 - - - - - - - - - - - - 524.7 1601.6 141715 T03/R13-11M1 115.1 1922.3 115.1 1922.4 115.2 1922.2 116.1 1921.4 115.4 1922.0 114.8 1922.6 115.5 1921.9 139955 T03/R13-14A1 435.4 1745.7 434.4 1746.8 435.2 1746.0 434.2 1747.0 435.8 1745.4 - - Not monitored 434.8 1746.4 377252 T03/R13-14G1 195.1 1890.9 196.0 1890.0 197.4 1888.6 197.0 1889.0 196.4 1889.6 196.8 1889.2 195.1 1890.9 477832 T03/R13-14G2 173.2 1908.8 174.5 1907.6 177.6 1904.4 180.5 1901.6 181.1 1900.9 - - Unstable water level 176.8 1905.2 136943 T03/R13-14J - - - - - - - - - - - - 323.4 1677.5 Rising water level 145893 T03/R13-15L1 - - - - - - - - - - - - 13.4 1871.6 144433 T03/R13-20N1 - - - - - - - - - - - - 462.0 990.7 384137 T03/R13-20N2 - - - - - - - - - - - - 436.5 991.4 Rising water level 143160 T03/R13-21M1 - - - - - - - - - - - - 492.4 1252.9 145685 T03/R13-21P1 - - - - - - - - - - - - 179.5 1390.5 Rising water level 335153 T03/R13-22C1 162.2 1615.3 161.3 1616.2 160.7 1616.8 161.9 1615.6 162.0 1615.5 175.0 1602.5 182.0 1595.5 377254 T03/R13-22P1 139.5 1623.8 Unstable water level 139.7 1623.7 140.2 1623.2 139.7 1623.7 139.6 1623.8 140.9 1622.5 145.3 1618.1 139217 T03/R13-23L1 75.3 1732.8 Airline measurement - - Not monitored - - Not monitored - - Not monitored - - Not monitored - - Not monitored 41.7 1766.4 556399 T03/R13-27 - - - - - - - - - - - - 87.6 1659.5 139404 T03/R13-27Q1 262.3 1733.7 261.4 1734.6 262.2 1733.8 261.8 1734.2 261.4 1734.6 260.0 1736.0 261.4 1734.6 143537 T03/R13-28B1 141.2 1481.6 145.8 1477.0 141.8 1480.9 145.1 1477.6 Rising water level 141.4 1481.3 143.8 1478.9 142.0 1480.7 372465 T03/R13-28F1 - - - - - - - - - - - - 107.3 1420.0 139337 T03/R13-28L1 21.4 1477.3 Rising water level 25.2 1473.5 20.4 1478.2 24.4 1474.3 Rising water level 21.0 1477.7 23.0 1475.7 19.4 1479.3 354742 T03/R14-18N1 516.7 1637.0 518.3 1635.4 517.9 1635.7 519.5 1634.2 518.3 1635.3 - - Not monitored 518.6 1635.1 302764 T04/R14-31L1 267.1 1518.7 265.4 1520.5 264.9 1521.0 265.2 1520.7 265.9 1520.0 264.8 1521.1 - - No permission 144057 T03/R13-24C1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 418100 T03/R13--27A2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 341503 T03/R13--27C1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 316087 T03/R13--27D4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 648556 T03/R13--27D5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 923889 T03/R13--27D6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 146705 T03/R13--28C2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ecology Well Log Data June 2007 Measurements November 2007 Measurements Wells in Original Monitoring Network Wells Added in 2015 April 2008 Measurements December 2008 Measurements April 2009 Measurements December 2009 Measurements May/June 2010 Measurements ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2 - Groundwater Level Data from Monitoring Network Hydrogeologic Assessment Knight-Dillacort Area Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\Tables 1&2 + Figs 4 6-7 2 GW Level Data Table 2 Page 2 of 3 Ecology Well Log ID TRS Label 140432 T03/R13-3B1 141250 T03/R13-3R1 377250 T03/R13-4L1 141715 T03/R13-11M1 139955 T03/R13-14A1 377252 T03/R13-14G1 477832 T03/R13-14G2 136943 T03/R13-14J 145893 T03/R13-15L1 144433 T03/R13-20N1 384137 T03/R13-20N2 143160 T03/R13-21M1 145685 T03/R13-21P1 335153 T03/R13-22C1 377254 T03/R13-22P1 139217 T03/R13-23L1 556399 T03/R13-27 139404 T03/R13-27Q1 143537 T03/R13-28B1 372465 T03/R13-28F1 139337 T03/R13-28L1 354742 T03/R14-18N1 302764 T04/R14-31L1 144057 T03/R13-24C1 418100 T03/R13--27A2 341503 T03/R13--27C1 316087 T03/R13--27D4 648556 T03/R13--27D5 923889 T03/R13--27D6 146705 T03/R13--28C2 Ecology Well Log Data Wells in Original Monitoring Network Wells Added in 2015 Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation2 (ft) Comments Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation2 (ft) Comments Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation2 (ft) Comments Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation2 (ft) Comments Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation2 (ft) Comments Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation2 (ft) Comments Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation2 (ft) Comments 214.6 1796.6 212.5 1798.7 211.5 1799.6 212.5 1798.7 206.0 1805.2 205.0 1806.2 204.9 1806.3 - - Not monitored - - Not monitored - - Not monitored - - Not monitored - - Not monitored - - Not monitored - - Not monitored 524.2 1602.1 524.8 1601.4 524.7 1601.6 524.0 1602.3 524.2 1602.1 523.9 1602.3 - - No access - road too wet 115.7 1921.8 115.8 1921.6 115.7 1921.7 114.4 1923.0 114.7 1922.7 114.7 1922.7 113.2 1924.2 436.1 1745.1 436.5 1744.6 439.5 1741.7 435.8 1745.4 436.4 1744.8 436.4 1744.7 439.1 1742.0 197.2 1888.8 197.6 1888.4 197.0 1889.0 196.4 1889.6 195.9 1890.1 196.3 1889.7 195.8 1890.2 182.7 1899.3 182.7 1899.4 181.6 1900.4 181.6 1900.4 181.5 1900.6 186.8 1895.3 183.1 1898.9 322.3 1678.5 320.5 1680.4 - - No Permission - - No Permission - - No Permission - - No Permission - - 11.4 1873.6 - - No Permission - - Airline 23 psi 14.6 1870.4 Airline 26 psi 19.6 1865.4 Airline 24 psi 14.9 1870.1 Airline 26 psi 17.3 1867.8 Airline 25 psi 478.4 974.3 478.4 974.3 492.2 960.5 506.1 946.6 Airline 6 psi 496.9 955.8 Airline 10 psi 496.9 955.8 Airline 10 psi 496.9 955.8 Airline 10 psi 326.2 1101.7 343.0 1084.9 Rising water level 355.9 1072.0 Airline 58 psi 449.4 978.5 (Pump on) Airline 20 psi 341.4 1086.5 Airline 64 psi 399.4 1028.5 (Recovering) Airline 40 psi 315.4 1112.5 492.5 1252.8 489.3 1256.0 486.3 1259.0 485.1 1260.2 Airline 4 psi 484.0 1261.3 Airline 8 psi 483.0 1262.3 Airline 8.5 psi 482.0 1263.3 179.0 1390.9 177.1 1392.8 178.5 1391.4 177.9 1392.0 179.2 1390.7 178.1 1391.8 - - No permission 185.0 1592.5 185.7 1591.8 188.1 1589.4 185.7 1591.8 193.8 1583.7 196.4 1581.1 205.1 1572.4 146.4 1617.0 150.6 1612.8 148.1 1615.3 149.2 1614.2 150.1 1613.3 151.0 1612.4 151.6 1611.8 38.6 1769.5 37.5 1770.6 38.4 1769.7 42.1 1766.0 39.1 1768.9 38.4 1769.7 40.0 1768.1 88.7 1658.4 87.6 1659.5 87.8 1659.3 86.9 1660.2 88.6 1658.5 88.5 1658.6 89.5 1657.6 262.4 1733.6 263.3 1732.7 263.0 1733.0 263.3 1732.7 263.0 1733.0 264.0 1732.0 263.5 1732.5 Well head icy - lots of negative pressure 143.2 1479.6 139.4 1483.3 141.0 1481.8 137.9 1484.8 147.9 1474.8 143.2 1479.5 144.4 1478.3 100.7 1426.6 95.8 1431.5 97.0 1430.3 94.3 1433.0 - - No Permission - - No Permission - - No Permission 22.6 1476.1 18.6 1480.1 20.6 1478.1 17.6 1481.0 27.1 1471.5 22.1 1476.6 23.7 1475.0 519.1 1634.6 518.7 1635.0 - - No Permission - - No Permission - - No Permission - - No Permission 520.0 1633.6 - - Not monitored - - Not monitored - - No Permission - - No Permission - - No Permission - - No Permission - - No Permission - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - November 2013 Measurements November/December 2011 Measurements November/December 2010 Measurements October/November 2012 Measurements April 2013 Measurements April-June 2012 Measurements April 2011 Measurements ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 2 - Groundwater Level Data from Monitoring Network Hydrogeologic Assessment Knight-Dillacort Area Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\Tables 1&2 + Figs 4 6-7 2 GW Level Data Table 2 Page 3 of 3 Ecology Well Log ID TRS Label 140432 T03/R13-3B1 141250 T03/R13-3R1 377250 T03/R13-4L1 141715 T03/R13-11M1 139955 T03/R13-14A1 377252 T03/R13-14G1 477832 T03/R13-14G2 136943 T03/R13-14J 145893 T03/R13-15L1 144433 T03/R13-20N1 384137 T03/R13-20N2 143160 T03/R13-21M1 145685 T03/R13-21P1 335153 T03/R13-22C1 377254 T03/R13-22P1 139217 T03/R13-23L1 556399 T03/R13-27 139404 T03/R13-27Q1 143537 T03/R13-28B1 372465 T03/R13-28F1 139337 T03/R13-28L1 354742 T03/R14-18N1 302764 T04/R14-31L1 144057 T03/R13-24C1 418100 T03/R13--27A2 341503 T03/R13--27C1 316087 T03/R13--27D4 648556 T03/R13--27D5 923889 T03/R13--27D6 146705 T03/R13--28C2 Ecology Well Log Data Wells in Original Monitoring Network Wells Added in 2015 Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation 2 (ft) Comments Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation 2 (ft) Comments Depth to Water (ft bTOC) GW Elevation2 (ft) Comments 204.0 1807.2 216.1 1795.1 Not static - - No permission - - Not monitored - - No permission - - No permission; no contact info -discontinue monitoring 523.6 1602.6 523.8 1602.5 520.1 1606.2 access issues; Sonic usually inaccurate 112.6 1924.8 111.4 1926.0 112.2 1925.2 Sonic OK. 435.5 1745.6 436.5 1744.7 Not static 429.4 1751.8 194.7 1891.3 142.4 - Measurement ~50 ft higher than normal; likely measurement error 193.9 1892.1 182.3 1899.8 182.5 1899.5 181.5 1900.5 316.9 1683.9 - - No permission - - No permission 16.1 1868.9 Airline 25.5 psi 15.1 1869.9 Airline 24.5 psi 13.1 1871.9 492.3 960.5 Airline 12 psi 492.3 960.5 Airline 12 psi 486.5 966.2 Airline 14.5 psi 286.6 1141.3 Airline 88.5 psi; non- static - - No permission 284.1 1143.8 480.8 1264.5 - 1266.2 Airline 9 psi; waterline access issues 479.1 1266.2 Airline 9.0 psi 179.8 1390.2 180.5 1389.5 178.6 1391.3 207.4 1570.1 217.2 1560.3 218.8 1558.7 152.3 1611.1 173.9 1589.5 178 1585 Reading provided by well owner. - - Airline 37.5 psi 39.4 1768.6 Airline 38 psi 33.2 1774.9 89.0 1658.1 88.8 1658.3 91.0 1656.1 264.6 1731.5 259.9 1736.1 266.4 1729.6 142.0 1480.7 142.4 1480.3 143.0 1479.7 - - No Permission - - No permission - - No permission; no contact info -discontinue monitoring Notes: 21.0 1477.7 23.9 1474.7 Not static 20.9 1477.8 1 Northing and Easting coordinates are in Washington South State Plane coordinate system (NAD 1983 datum). 519.0 1634.6 Sonic inaccurate 312.8 - Waterline access issues; Sonic likely inaccurate 248.8 - Sonic likely inaccurate (248.8 deep, 61.9 normal); use waterline only 2 Elevations are in NAVD88 vertical datum. - - No Permission - - No permission - - Discontinue monitoring; no contact info - 3 Blank cell in Depth to Water column indicates that the well was not yet included in the monitoring network. 4 See Table 1 regarding survey of wells added in 2015. - - - - 333.6 Not static, sonic ok - - - - 173.4 Tape stuck at 150', used sonic - - - - 148.9 Sonic no good - - - - - Cannot acces well, port too small to fit tape. Sonic no good - - - - 457.7 Sonic no good - - - - 207.9 Sonic no good - - - - - Removed well cap, water shot out November 2014 Measurements April 2015 Measurements April 2014 Measurements ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 3 - Groundwater Quality Analytical Results, April 2015 Knight-Dillacort Area Hydrogeologic Assessment Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\Table 3 + Figs 13 14 15 16 GW Quality.xlsx Table 3 Page 1 of 1 Conventionals Common Cations Calcium in mg/L 24.4 16.1 21 22.2 23.5 19.8 Magnesium in mg/L 15.4 7.88 9.91 11.6 14.0 11.4 Potassium in mg/L 3.4 2.4 2.3 3.2 2.6 2.6 Sodium in mg/L 11.7 8.8 11.6 11.2 11.3 14.6 Cation Ratio (calculated) 0.28 0.32 0.31 0.30 0.27 0.36 Common Anions Alkalinity in mg/L as CaCO3 129 88.8 113 124 138 103 Bicarbonate in mg/L as CaCO3 129 88.8 113 124 138 103 Carbonate in mg/L as CaCO3 1 U 1 U 1 U 1 U 1 U 1 U Hydroxide in mg/L as CaCO3 1 U 1 U 1 U 1 U 1 U 1 U Chloride in mg/L 3.2 2.6 4.6 3.8 2.5 13.1 Sulfate in mg/L 21.0 1.7 1.6 3.4 3.8 7.0 Other Constituents Fluoride in mg/L 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 Nitrate in mg-N/L 0.1 U 0.4 0.9 0.2 0.1 U 1.0 Silicon in mg/L 22.1 27.0 28.5 23.4 19.7 26.1 Carbon 14 Isotope Parameters fMDN (fraction modern carbon) with error range 0.4756 0.0018 0.6010 0.0022 0.6420 0.0024 0.5386 0.0020 0.3897 0.0014 0.4786 0.0018 Radiocarbon Age in Years 5,970 4,090 3,560 4,970 7,570 5,920 Estimated Error in Radiocarbon Age (Years 20 10 10 20 30 20 Field Parameters Temperature in deg C 9.3 9.7 12.6 12.5 12.8 13.9 Specific Conductance in uS/cm 282 178 223 237 257 254 Dissolved Oxygen in mg/L 8.9 5.4 8.7 3.8 0.1 4.2 pH in pH units 8.2 7.0 7.5 7.7 8.1 7.6 ORP in mV 94 102 89 88 82 86 Turbidity in NTU 1 7 1 3 14 1 Radiocarbon age estimates rounded to nearest 10 years. U: Not detected at associated reporting limit. Analyte 22P1 27A2 27C1 27D4 220 ft deep 280 ft deep 634 ft deep 168 ft deep 28B1 4/15/2015 4/15/2015 4/15/2015 4/15/2015 4/15/2015 4/15/2015 27D6 220 ft deep 410 ft deep ---PAGE BREAK--- FIGURES ---PAGE BREAK--- + + + + & + + ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; & + + + + + + + + + ; & ; ; $ ; $ $ $ $ + + + $ + ; ; + ; ; ; ; ; ; ; + + ; ; + + ; ; ; ; ; ; ; + + ; ; + + + + & & & & & + + + + ; + + ; ; ; & + + + + + + & ; & ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; & & ; ; & ; & & & & ; & & & & & & & & ; ; ; ; ; & & ; ; & & & ; & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & ; ; & ; & & ; ; & & & ; ; ; ; ; & & & & & & & & & & ; ; ; & ; & ; F M M M M M M F F F M M M M M F F F F F F F M M M F M M M M M M M M M M M M F F F F F F R R R R R R R R M M M M M F F M M M M M M M M M M M M F F F F F F F F F F M M M M M M M M M M M M F F M M M M M M F F F F F F F F F F F M M M M F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F ] ] ] ] @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? LAUREL FAULT WARWICK FAULT HORESHOE BEND ANTICLINE MOSIER SWALE CREEK COLUMBIA HILLS ANTICLINE C C' B' B T03NR13E T03NR13E T03NR12E T03NR12E T04NR13E T04NR13E T04NR12E T04NR12E T04R12E T04NR13E T04NR13E T04NR13E T04NR13E T04NR14E T04NR14E T03NR13E T03NR13E T03NR14E T03NR14E 18N1 31L1 3B1 11M1 14A1 14G1 14G2 22C1 22P1 27Q1 28B1 28L1 4L1 20N1 20N2 21P1 21M1 15L1 14J 23L1 27 28F1 3R1 27A2 27D6 27D4 27C1 24C1 28C2 27D5 STATE ST H ORSESHOE BEND RD MOTT RD FINN RIDGE RD B ALCH R D SUN B O W LN L O V E R S LN A C O R N L N AKI RD FRO NT I E R RD MT V IE W R D CLARK R D PY L E R D CIMMIYOTTI RD SILV A C U T O F F R D MEA D O WS L O OP HIGH PRAIRIE RD HARMS RD FURLONG DR S HADY L N BL A C K T A IL RD FI S H ON RD BIL L M OO RE R D REM I N G T O N R D RANDALL RD MCGOWAN RD SLEEPY HOLLOW RD AP P LET ON RD LYLE SNOWDEN RD KLICKITAT APP LETON RD STATE R O UTE 14 DAL L ES MTN RD CENTERVI L LE HWY FIS H ER HILL RD DU R KE E R D UECKER R D SCHILLING RD MOR R I S RD G E NE DR CAR R I GG RD BUMPY RD H 18 00 BAKER RD WHITES RANCH RD P 2 2 0 0 S T AC KER B U T T E RD SOU T H M AJ OR C R EE K R D HARTLAND RD AHOLA RD HARMS RD NIVA RD JO H NS ON RD OLD HWY 8 LYL E SNO WDEN RD CANY O N RD STATE H W Y 1 4 2 RAND ALL RD 18 15 14 17 16 13 15 18 17 16 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 19 20 23 21 22 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 22 23 21 20 24 19 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 5 4 6 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 7 8 10 11 9 12 7 8 9 10 11 7 8 12 9 10 11 12 7 18 17 15 14 16 13 18 17 16 15 18 17 14 13 16 14 13 15 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 23 24 22 19 30 29 27 26 28 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 26 25 28 27 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 35 36 34 31 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6 12 7 11 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 GIS Path: II Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Washington South FIPS 4602 Feet II Date Saved: 7/21/2015 II User: ecrumbaker II Print Date: 7/21/2015 High Prairie Well Monitoring Network and Knight-Dillacort Study Area Knight-Dillacort Area Hydrogeologic Assessment WRIA 30, Washington C O N SU LTI N G FIGURE NO. 1 JUL-2015 PROJECT NO. 090045-17B BY: JMS / PPW REV BY: EAC 0 6,000 12,000 Feet 3B1 @ ? Monitoring Started 2015 @ ? Monitored Since 2010 or Earlier ] ] Cross Section Knight-Dillacort Study Area High Prairie Area Roads High Prairie Area WRIA 30 Le w is Ri v e r Folds (Washingtion DNR 1:100K mapping) F Anticline (dashed where inferred). M (dashed where inferred). R Monocline, anticlinal bend (dashed where inferred). Faults (Washingtion DNR 1:100K mapping) Thrust fault (dashed where inferred). Sawteeth on upper plate. Normal fault (dashed where inferred). Bar and ball on block. ; ; + Fault, unknown offset (dashed where inferred). Strike-slip fault (dashed where inferred; arrows show relative motion) & High Prairie Well Network 8 Sections Township/Range ---PAGE BREAK--- 3000 600 1200 0 6000 2400 900 2100 300 1800 1500 9000 12000 15000 18000 21000 24000 27000 30000 33000 36000 39000 42000 45000 0 Mv Mv (wpr) Mv (wr) Swale Creek Intersection Cross Section C-C' 1200 2100 1800 1500 QMc Mv Mv (wfs) Mv (wfs) Mc Mv (wpr) Mv (wr) Mv (wfs) WB WB Mc WB 600 900 300 0 ? Laurel Fault (Right-Lateral Strike-Slip) 40/- 50/- 30/- 20/- 20/- 15/- 12/- 20/- 85/- 25/- 20/0.13 100/- 28/- 50/- 7/0.07 15/- 15/- 20/- Klickitat River Dillacort Canyon Knight-Dillacort Study Area High Prairie Scale: 1" = 3000' Horiz. 1" = 300' Vert. Vertical Exaggeration = 10X Elevation in Feet (NGVD) B West B' East Elevation in Feet (NGVD) Feet 0 6,000 3,000 Legend Mv (wpr) Mv (wfs) Mv (wr) - Continental sedimentary rocks - Dalles Formation - Ellensburg formation - Wanapum basalt, Priest rapids - Wanapum basalt, Rosa - Wanapum basalt, Frenchman Springs - Grand Ronde Basalt - Cased Borehole - Open or Screened Borehole - Water Bearing Zone on drillers log - Water level on drillers log - Well Yield (gpm) from Driller's Log/Specific Capacity (gpm/ft) - Fault/Fold Mc WB Mv QMc Mc 20/0.13 Note: Cross section originally presented in Aspect (2011) CAD Path: Q:\WRIA\090045 WRIA 30\2015-07 Knight-Dillacort Hydrogeologic Assessment\090045-BB.dwg Cross Section B-B' II Date Saved: Jul 24, 2015 10:47am II User: scudd Geologic Cross Section B-B' Knight-Dillacort Hydrogeologic Assessment WRIA 30, Washington JUL-2015 PROJECT NO. 090045 FIGURE NO. 2 BY: DFR/SCC REVISED BY: SCC ---PAGE BREAK--- 1200 2400 2100 2700 1800 1500 Intersection Cross Section A-A' Intersection Cross Section B-B' Mv (gr) Mv (wpr) Mv (wr) Mv (wr) Mv (wpr) Mc Qls Mv (wfs) Thrust Fault Laurel Fault (Right-Lateral Strike-Slip) 10/- 10/- 8/0.08 25/- 10/- 18/- 85/- 20/- 11/- 15/- 30/- 15/- Mv (wfs) Knight-Dillacort Study Area Dillacort Canyon C North C' South Legend Mv (wpr) Qls Mv (wfs) Mv (wr) - Landslide - Continental Sedimentary Rocks - Dalles Formation - Ellensburg Formation - Wanapum Basalt, Priest Rapids - Wanapum Basalt, Rosa - Wanapum Basalt, Frenchman Springs - Grand Ronde Basalt - Cased Borehole - Open or Screened Borehole - Deepened Well - Water Bearing Zone on Drillers Log - Water Level on Drillers Log - Water Level (2014) - Well Yield (gpm) from Driller's Log/Specific Capacity (gpm/ft) - Fault/Fold Mc WB Mv (gr) QMc Mc 20/0.13 Feet 0 4000 2000 CAD Path: Q:\WRIA\090045 WRIA 30\2015-07 Knight-Dillacort Hydrogeologic Assessment\090045-CC Detail.dwg Cross Section C-C' II Date Saved: Jul 21, 2015 11:54am II User: scudd Geologic Cross Section C-C' Knight-Dillacort Hydrogeologic Assessment WRIA 30, Washington JUL-2015 PROJECT NO. 090045 FIGURE NO. 3 BY: DFR/SCC REVISED BY: SCC 0 3000 6000 9000 12,000 15,000 18,000 21,000 24,000 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400 2700 Elevation in Feet (NGVD) Distance in Feet Elevation in Feet (NGVD) Vertical Exaggeration = 10X Scale: 1" = 2000' Horiz. 1" = 200' Vert. Note: Cross section is modified from that presented in Aspect (2011) ---PAGE BREAK--- Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 S:\WRIA 30\Phase 4\-017B Knight-Dillacort Area\Report\Tables & Figures\Tables 1&2 + Figs 4 6-7 9-11 Figure 4 - High Prairie Monitoring Network Water Level Hydrographs Hydrogeologic Assessment Knight-Dillacort Area of High Prairie 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 Jan‐07 Jan‐08 Jan‐09 Jan‐10 Jan‐11 Jan‐12 Jan‐13 Jan‐14 Jan‐15 Water Level Elevation (ft NAVD88) T03N/R13 T03/R13‐3B1 T03/R13‐3R1 T03/R13‐4L1 T03/R13‐11M1 T03/R13‐14A1 T03/R13‐14G1 T03/R13‐14G2 T03/R13‐14J T03/R13‐15L1 T03/R13‐20N1 T03/R13‐20N2 T03/R13‐21M1 T03/R13‐21P1 T03/R13‐22C1 T03/R13‐22P1 T03/R13‐23L1 T03/R13‐27 T03/R13‐27Q1 T03/R13‐28B1 T03/R13‐28F1 T03/R13‐28L1 T03N/R14 T03/R14‐18N1 T04N/R14 T04/R14‐31L1 Notes: Any depth‐to‐water measurements from Table 6 which had non‐static water levels were not included in the hydrographs. T03/R13‐22C1 T03/R13‐22P1 T03/R13‐20N1 T03/R13‐20N2 Note: Labeled wells are discussed in the text. ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? MOSIER COLUMBIA HILLS ANTICLINE COLUMBIA HILLS THRUST FAULT LAUREL FAULT T03NR12E T03NR12E T03NR13E T03NR13E Kl ickita t R i ve r Stanley Cany T h r e e m ile C r e e k g C a n y o n D illa c o r t C a n y o n W id e S k y C a n y o n K n ig h t C a n y o n Luftfel d Qu i nns Zephyr Harroll High Meadow Mott R a p pe O liv e r P oint Clark Mott R o wl a nd F is h er Hi l l S o uth H i gh Pr a i r i e Struck Oda Kni g ht S t at e Hw y 142 Ce nterville H ar t wi g R ive rvista R i v e rs E d g e K n a p p Adams V i e w Stack er Bu tte Ald e r Sp r ing A lder S p rin g H artlan d Hartland S P ENCE F REY RD LU P I NE L N JOHN S ON RD MOTT RD R A P P E DR HENDERSON RD O LIV E R P O I N T RD CLARK RD ROWLAND RD FISHER HILL RD SOUTH HIGH P R A I R IE RD STRUCK RD ODA KNIGHT RD STATE HWY 142 CEN TERV ILLE HWY KN A P P R D ADA M S V IEW RD STA CKER BUTTE RD WI N D RI DGE RD A LD ER SP R ING RD HARTLAND RD 18 17 16 15 14 13 19 20 21 22 23 24 30 29 28 27 26 25 31 32 33 34 35 36 27A2 27D6 27D4 27C1 24C1 28C2 27D5 14G1 14G2 22C1 22P1 27Q1 28B1 28L1 20N1 20N2 21P1 21M1 15L1 14J 23L1 27 28F1 GIS Path: II Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Washington South FIPS 4602 Feet II Date Saved: 7/20/2015 II User: ecrumbaker II Print Date: 7/21/2015 Areas with Reported Groundwater Declines and Recently Deepened Wells Knight-Dillacort Area Hydrogeologic Assessment WRIA 30, Washington C O N SU LTI N G FIGURE NO. 5 JUL-2015 PROJECT NO. 090045-17B BY: JMS / PPW REVISED BY: EAC 0 2,000 4,000 Feet 3B1 Folds (Washingtion DNR 1:100K mapping) F Anticline (dashed where inferred). M (dashed where inferred). R Monocline, anticlinal bend (dashed where inferred). Faults (Washingtion DNR 1:100K mapping) Thrust fault (dashed where inferred). Sawteeth on upper plate. + Normal fault (dashed where inferred). Bar and ball on block. ; ; Fault, unknown offset (dashed where inferred). Strike-slip fault (dashed where inferred; arrows show relative motion) & Township/Range @ ? Monitoring Started 2015 @ ? Monitored Since 2010 or Earlier ! Monitoring Network Well with Documented Ongoing Water Level Decline Knight-Dillacort Study Area High Prairie Area Parcels with Well Deepened Since 2010 Parcels with Observed Decline in Groundwater Level or Yield Roads 8 Sections High Prairie Well Network ---PAGE BREAK--- Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\Tables 1&2 + Figs 4 6-7 9-11.xlsx Figure 6 Measured Water Level Declines, Eastern Knight-Dillacort Area 1550 1560 1570 1580 1590 1600 1610 1620 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Groundwater Elevation (ft NAVD88) Well 22C1 1560 1570 1580 1590 1600 1610 1620 1630 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Groundwater Elevation (ft NAVD88) Well 22P1 13 ft decline 2009-2014 39 ft total decline 2009-2015 26 ft decline 2014-2015 24 ft decline 2009-2012 (7.9 ft/yr) 33 ft decline 2012-2015 (11.0 ft/yr) 57 ft total decline 2009-2015 ---PAGE BREAK--- Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\ Tables 1&2 + Figs 4 6-7 9-11.xlsx Figure 7 Long-Term Precipitation Trends Notes: Individual months with more than 5 days of missing data were not used for either or annual statistics. Considered most applicable and reliable for evaluating long-term trends for High Prairie, the annual precipitation data are from Goldendale station (NOAA #453222) and Goldendale 2E station (NOAA #453226). While the magnitude of preciptation will be different from High Prairie, the trends (above or below normal) should be comparable. 5 10 15 20 25 30 1925 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015 Annual Precipitation (in) Annual Precipitation Annual Precipitation (Goldendale) Mean Annual Precipitation (Goldendale) -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 1925 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015 Cumulative Departure (in) Cumulative Departure from Mean Annual Precipitation Cumulative Departure (Goldendale) ---PAGE BREAK--- $ + + + + $ + + ; + + ; ; ; ; + + + + + + ; + + + + ; ; ; + + + + + + + + + + + ; ; ; + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ; ; ; ; & & & & & ; ; M M M M M M M M M M M F F F F M M M M M M M M M M F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F MOSIER COLUMBIA HILLS ANTICLINE COLUMBIA HILLS THRUST FAULT LAUREL FAULT D i l l a c o r t C a n y o n K n i g h t C a n y o n K lickita t Ri ver T03NR12E T03NR12E T03NR13E T03NR13E 2 2 1 1 4 1 3 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 4 2 3 2 7 3 1 4 1 3 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 5 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 3 2 2 2 3 1 2 2 1 3 1 2 1 2 1 1 5 2 2 1 1 5 2 1 1 1 1 2 5 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 1 4 3 1 5 S P ENCE F REY RD L U PIN E L N MOTT RD R A P P E DR J OHNS O N RD HENDERS ON RD O L IVE R PO I N T RD CLARK RD ROWLAND RD FISHER HI L L RD S O U T H HIG H PRAIRIE R D ODA KNIGHT RD STATE H WY 142 K N A P P R D ADAM S V I EW RD STA CKER BUTTE RD AL DE R SP RING R D HARTLAND RD GIS Path: II Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Washington South FIPS 4602 Feet II Date Saved: 7/20/2015 II User: ecrumbaker II Print Date: 7/20/2015 Well Density within Knight-Dillacort Area Knight-Dillacort Area Hydrogeologic Assessment WRIA 30, Washington C O N SU LTI N G FIGURE NO. 8 JUL-2015 PROJECT NO. 090045-17B BY: DFR / RAA REVISED BY: EAC 0 2,000 4,000 Feet Knight-Dillacort Study Area Township/Range Sections Folds (WA DNR 1:100K) F Anticline (dashed where inferred). M (dashed where inferred). Faults (WA DNR 1:100K) + Thrust fault (dashed where inferred). Sawteeth on upper plate ; Normal fault (dashed where inferred). Bar and ball on block Strike-slip fault (dashed where inferred; arrows show relative motion) & Well Density (Number of Wells per Quarter Quarter Section) 1 7 Note: Data from Dept. of Ecology well log database (Nov. 2014). ---PAGE BREAK--- Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\ Tables 1&2 + Figs 4 6-7 9-11.xlsx Figure 9 Number of Well Installations Over Time Wells within Sections 21, 22, 27, and 28 of Township 3 North Range 13 East. Data based on Ecology well log database. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Number of Wells Installed Per Year Cumulative Number of Wells Installed since 1970 Wells Completed Per Year Cumulative Number of Wells ---PAGE BREAK--- Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\Tables 1&2 + Figs 4 6-7 9-11.xlsx Figure 10 Number of Wells Deepened Over Time Wells within Sections 21, 22, 27, and 28 of Township 3 North Range 13 East. Data based on Ecology well log database. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Cumulative Number of Wells Deepened since 1970 Number of Wells Deepened per Year Wells Deepened Annually Cumlative Wells Deepened ---PAGE BREAK--- Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\Tables 1&2 + Figs 4 6-7 9-11.xlsx Figure 11 Timing of Water Level Declines and Local Well Deepenings 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 1550 1560 1570 1580 1590 1600 1610 1620 1630 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Deepened Wells since 2007 Groundwater Elevation (ft MSL) Well 22C1 Groundwater Elevation Well 22P1 Groundwater Elevation Total No. of Wells Deepened Since 2007 ---PAGE BREAK--- ! ! ! ! ! ! @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? @ ? MOSIER COLUMBIA HILLS ANTICLINE COLUMBIA HILLS THRUST FAULT LAUREL FAULT T03NR12E T03NR12E T03NR13E T03NR13E 27D4 Depth 634' 27D5 28C2 24C1 Stanley Cany T h re e m ile C r e e k g C a n y o n D illa c o r t C a n y o n C a n y o n Klickitat River K n ig h t C a n y o n 14G1 14G2 22C1 22P1 Depth 280' 27Q1 28B1 Depth 220' 28L1 20N1 20N2 21P1 21M1 15L1 14J 23L1 27 28F1 27A2 Depth 220' 27D6 Depth 410' 27C1 Depth 168' SPE N C E FREY R D L U P I N E L N JOHNS ON RD MOTT RD R A P P E DR HENDERS ON RD O L IVE R PO I N T RD CLARK RD ROWLAND RD FISHER HILL RD S OUTH HIGH P RA IR I E R D STRUCK RD ODA K NIGH T RD STATE H WY 142 CENTERVILLE HWY K N A P P R D STA CKER BUTTE RD W I N D R IDGE RD A LD ER SPR ING RD HARTLAND RD 18 17 16 15 14 13 19 20 21 22 23 24 30 29 28 27 26 25 31 32 33 34 35 36 GIS Path: II Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Washington South FIPS 4602 Feet II Date Saved: 7/21/2015 II User: ecrumbaker II Print Date: 7/21/2015 Wells Sampled for Groundwater Quality Knight-Dillacort Area Hydrogeologic Assessment WRIA 30, Washington C O N SU LTI N G FIGURE NO. 12 JUL-2015 PROJECT NO. 090045-17B BY: JMS / PPW REVISED BY: EAC 0 2,000 4,000 Feet 3B1 Folds (Washingtion DNR 1:100K mapping) F Anticline (dashed where inferred). M (dashed where inferred). R Monocline, anticlinal bend (dashed where inferred). Faults (Washingtion DNR 1:100K mapping) Thrust fault (dashed where inferred). Sawteeth on upper plate. + Normal fault (dashed where inferred). Bar and ball on block. ; ; Fault, unknown offset (dashed where inferred). Strike-slip fault (dashed where inferred; arrows show relative motion) & Township/Range @ ? Monitoring Started 2015 @ ? Monitored Since 2010 or Earlier ! Sampled Wells Knight-Dillacort Area High Prairie Study Area Parcels with Well Deepened Since 2010 Parcels with Observed Decline in Groundwater Level or Yield Roads 8 Sections High Prairie Well Network ---PAGE BREAK--- Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\ Table 3 + Figs 13 14 15 16 GW Quality.xlsx Figure 13 Piper Plot of Groundwater Common Ion Concentrations ---PAGE BREAK--- Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\ Table 3 + Figs 13 14 15 16 GW Quality.xlsx Figure 14 Groundwater Cation Ratios and Silicon Concentrations vs Well Depth 22P1 (280 ft) 27A2 (220 ft) 27C1 (168 ft) 28B1 (220 ft) 27D4 (634 ft) 27D6 (410 ft) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0.26 0.28 0.30 0.32 0.34 0.36 Well Depth (ft) Cation Ratio (Na+K)/(Na+K+Ca+Mg) Cation Ratio vs Well Depth 22P1 (280 ft) 27A2 (220 ft) 27C1 (168 ft) 28B1 (220 ft) 27D4 (634 ft) 27D6 (410 ft) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Well Depth (ft) Silicon Concentration (mg/L) Silicon Concentration vs Well Depth ---PAGE BREAK--- Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\ Table 3 + Figs 13 14 15 16 GW Quality.xlsx Figure 15 Groundwater Chloride and Nitrate Concentrations vs Well Depth 22P1 (280 ft) 27A2 (220 ft) 27C1 (168 ft) 28B1 (220 ft) 27D4 (634 ft) 27D6 (410 ft) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Well Depth (ft) Chloride Concentration (mg/L) Chloride Concentration vs Well Depth 22P1 (280 ft) 27A2 (220 ft) 27C1 (168 ft) 28B1 (220 ft) 27D4 (634 ft) 27D6 (410 ft) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 Well Depth (ft) Nitrate Concentration (mg/L) Nitrate Concentration vs Well Depth Non-detect nitrate values are plotted at the detection limit (0.1 mg/L). ---PAGE BREAK--- Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\ Table 3 + Figs 13 14 15 16 GW Quality.xlsx Figure 16 Groundwater Age vs Well Depth and Cation Ratio 22P1 (280 ft) 27A2 (220 ft) 27C1 (168 ft) 28B1 (220 ft) 27D4 (634 ft) 27D6 (410 ft) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 Well Depth (ft) Estimated Groundwater Age (Years) Groundwater Age vs Well Depth Minimum estimated groundwater age ~ 3,500 years 22P1 (280 ft) 27A2 (220 ft) 27C1 (168 ft) 28B1 (220 ft) 27D4 (634 ft) 27D6 (410 ft) 0.26 0.28 0.30 0.32 0.34 0.36 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 Cation Ratio (Na+K)/(Na+K+Ca+Mg) Estimated Groundwater Age (Years) Cation Ratio vs Groundwater Age ---PAGE BREAK--- Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\Figs 17 & 18.xlsx Figure 17 Well Available Drawdown vs Well Depth 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Depth ot Water in Feet Well Depth in Feet Depth to Water vs Well Depth 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Depth ot Water in Feet Well Depth in Feet Available Drawdown in Well vs Well Depth ---PAGE BREAK--- Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\Figs 17 & 18.xlsx Figure 18 Reported Well Yield vs Well Depth 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 50 100 150 200 250 Well Depth in Feet Reported Well Yield in gpm Reported Well Yield vs Well Depth 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Well Bottom Elevation in Feet Reported Well Yield in gpm Reported Well Yield vs Well Bottom Elevation ---PAGE BREAK--- 15 21 29 20 16 34 22 17 32 26 35 27 33 28 14 23 HARTLAND RD STRUCK RD 27 SENE 28 SENE 22 SESE 22 SENE 21 SENE 22 NESE 21 NESE 22 NENE 21 SENW 21 SWNE 22 SWNE 21 NWSE 22 NWSE 22 SENW 21 NENW 22 NESW 22 NWNE 27 NWSW 21 SWSW 21 SWNW 21 NWNW 22 SWNW 22 NWSW 22 NWNW 27 SESE 1 Min: 15 Avg: 15 Max: 15 27 NESE 2 Min: 15 Avg: 21 Max: 27 28 SESE 2 Min: 20 Avg: 20 Max: 20 28 NESE 2 Min: 37 Avg: 56 Max: 75 27 NENE 2 Min: 60 Avg: 70 Max: 80 28 NENE 1 Min: 30 Avg: 30 Max: 30 21 SESE 2 Min: 15 Avg: 15 Max: 15 27 SESW 1 Min: 75 Avg: 75 Max: 75 21 NENE 1 Min: 12 Avg: 12 Max: 12 27 SWNE 3 Min: 15 Avg: 30 Max: 45 27 SENW 1 Min: 4 Avg: 4 Max: 4 28 SWSE 1 Min: 13 Avg: 13 Max: 13 28 SWNE 3 Min: 15 Avg: 30 Max: 45 28 SENW 1 Min: 65 Avg: 65 Max: 65 28 NWSE 2 Min: 30 Avg: 33 Max: 35 28 NWNE 2 Min: 15 Avg: 58 Max: 100 28 NENW 2 Min: 10 Avg: 130 Max: 250 21 SESW 1 Min: 6 Avg: 6 Max: 6 21 SWSE 1 Min: 12 Avg: 12 Max: 12 22 SWSE 1 Min: 30 Avg: 30 Max: 30 27 SWSW 1 Min: 30 Avg: 30 Max: 30 21 NWNE 1 Min: 15 Avg: 15 Max: 15 22 NENW 1 Min: 25 Avg: 25 Max: 25 28 SWSW 2 Min: 11 Avg: 21 Max: 30 28 SWNW 1 Min: 20 Avg: 20 Max: 20 28 NWSW 1 Min: 60 Avg: 60 Max: 60 27 NWNW 5 Min: 12 Avg: 52 Max: 150 27 SWSE 2 Min: 15 Avg: 16 Max: 17 27 NENW 1 Min: 35 Avg: 35 Max: 35 28 NESW 5 Min: 10 Avg: 28 Max: 50 22 SESW 3 Min: 5 Avg: 45 Max: 85 21 NESW 2 Min: 5 Avg: 53 Max: 100 28 NWNW 3 Min: 30 Avg: 50 Max: 60 21 NWSW 2 Min: 15 Avg: 18 Max: 20 28 SESW 7 Min: 0 Avg: 23 Max: 60 27 NWSE 2 Min: 11 Avg: 21 Max: 30 27 NESW 2 Min: 15 Avg: 23 Max: 30 22 SWSW 2 Min: 20 Avg: 25 Max: 30 27 SWNW 3 Min: 3 Avg: 13 Max: 25 27 NWNE 2 Min: 10 Avg: 27 Max: 40 GIS Path: II Coordinate System: NAD 1983 HARN StatePlane Washington North FIPS 4601 Feet II Date Saved: 7/20/2015 II User: ecrumbaker II Print Date: 7/22/2015 0 2,000 4,000 Feet Maximum Yield (gallons/minute) NA < 25 25 - 50 50 - 75 75 - 100 100 - 250 Knight-Dillacort Study Area Township & Range Sections Roads C O N SU LTI N G FIGURE NO. 19 JUL-2015 PROJECT NO. 090045-17B-01 BY: MML / EAC REVISED BY: - - - Reported Well Yield Distribution in Study Area Knight-Dillacort Area Hydrogeologic Assessment WRIA 30, Washington Basemap Layer Credits II Content may not reflect National Geographic's current map policy. Sources: National Geographic, Esri, DeLorme, HERE, UNEP-WCMC, USGS, NASA, ESA, METI, NRCAN, GEBCO, NOAA, increment P Corp. Well Yield Data by Quarter-Quarter Section as Reported on Driller's Logs Quarter-quarter section designation No. of wells Min: Minimum yield (gpm) Avg: Average Yield (gpm) Max: Maximum Yield (gpm) Quarter-quarter sections are color coded by reported maximum yield. ---PAGE BREAK--- Aspect Consulting 7/27/2015 W:\090045 WRIA 31 Phase 4\Deliverables\Hydrogeologic Assessment\Tables & Figures\Fig 20.xlsx Figure 20 Reported Well Yield vs Year of Well Installation 0 50 100 150 [PHONE REDACTED] 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Reported Well Yield in gpm ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX A Laboratory Certificates of Analysis for Groundwater Analyses ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Digital signature on file May 7, 2015 Mr. David Rugh Aspect Consulting 401 2nd Ave South Seattle, WA 98104 United States RE: Radiocarbon Dating Results For Samples 27A2-041415 , 27D6-041415 , 28B1-041415 , 22P1- 041415 , 27C1-041415 , 27D4-041415 Dear Mr. Rugh: Enclosed are the radiocarbon dating results for six samples recently sent to us. The report sheet contains the Conventional Radiocarbon Age (BP), the method used, material type, and applied pretreatments, any sample specific comments and, where applicable, the two-sigma calendar calibration range. The Conventional Radiocarbon ages have been corrected for total isotopic fractionation effects (natural and laboratory induced). All results (excluding some inappropriate material types) which fall within the range of available calibration data are calibrated to calendar years (cal BC/AD) and calibrated radiocarbon years (cal BP). Calibration was calculated using the one of the databases associated with the 2013 INTCAL program (cited in the references on the bottom of the calibration graph page provided for each sample.) Multiple probability ranges may appear in some cases, due to short-term variations in the atmospheric 14C contents at certain time periods. Looking closely at the calibration graph provided and where the BP sigma limits intercept the calibration curve will help you understand this phenomenon. Conventional Radiocarbon Ages and sigmas are rounded to the nearest 10 years per the conventions of the 1977 International Radiocarbon Conference. When counting statistics produce sigmas lower than 30 years, a conservative 30 BP is cited for the result. All work on these samples was performed in our laboratories in Miami under strict chain of custody and quality control under ISO/IEC 17025:2005 Testing Accreditation PJLA #59423 accreditation protocols. Sample, modern and blanks were all analyzed in the same chemistry lines by qualified professional technicians using identical reagents and counting parameters within our own particle accelerators. A quality assurance report is posted to your directory for each result. Thank you for prepaying the analyses. As always, if you have any questions or would like to discuss the results, don’t hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Page 1 of 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Mr. David Rugh Report Date: 5/7/2015 Aspect Consulting Material Received: 4/24/2015 Sample Data pMC Fmdn d13C Beta - 409509 60.1 0.2 pMC 0.6010 0.0022 -18.7 o/oo SAMPLE : 27A2-041415 ANALYSIS : AMS-Standard delivery MATERIAL/PRETREATMENT : (water DIC): acidify-gas strip COMMENT: The equivalent “Apparent” radiocarbon age to the reported pMC/fMDN values is ~ 4090 BP (not adjusted for any hydro-geochemical effects on meteoric water 14CO2). Given the complex nature of groundwater DIC14 chemistry, duplicate measurements within 1-2 pMC are reasonable for a single water sample. For very low DIC concentration waters 20 mg/L HCO3) DIC14 and waters with complex organic chemistry, results can vary significantly outside of this expectation. Beta - 409510 39.0 0.1 pMC 0.3897 0.0014 -19.8 o/oo SAMPLE : 27D6-041415 ANALYSIS : AMS-Standard delivery MATERIAL/PRETREATMENT : (water DIC): acidify-gas strip COMMENT: The equivalent “Apparent” radiocarbon age to the reported pMC/fMDN values is ~ 7570 BP (not adjusted for any hydro-geochemical effects on meteoric water 14CO2). Given the complex nature of groundwater DIC14 chemistry, duplicate measurements within 1-2 pMC are reasonable for a single water sample. For very low DIC concentration waters 20 mg/L HCO3) DIC14 and waters with complex organic chemistry, results can vary significantly outside of this expectation. Beta - 409511 47.9 0.2 pMC 0.4786 0.0018 -19.4 o/oo SAMPLE : 28B1-041415 ANALYSIS : AMS-Standard delivery MATERIAL/PRETREATMENT : (water DIC): acidify-gas strip COMMENT: The equivalent “Apparent” radiocarbon age to the reported pMC/fMDN values is ~ 5920 BP (not adjusted for any hydro-geochemical effects on meteoric water 14CO2). Given the complex nature of groundwater DIC14 chemistry, duplicate measurements within 1-2 pMC are reasonable for a single water sample. For very low DIC concentration waters 20 mg/L HCO3) DIC14 and waters with complex organic chemistry, results can vary significantly outside of this expectation. Page 2 of 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Mr. David Rugh Report Date: 5/7/2015 Sample Data pMC Fmdn d13C Beta - 409512 47.6 0.2 pMC 0.4756 0.0018 -18.5 o/oo SAMPLE : 22P1-041415 ANALYSIS : AMS-Standard delivery MATERIAL/PRETREATMENT : (water DIC): acidify-gas strip COMMENT: The equivalent “Apparent” radiocarbon age to the reported pMC/fMDN values is ~ 5970 BP (not adjusted for any hydro-geochemical effects on meteoric water 14CO2). Given the complex nature of groundwater DIC14 chemistry, duplicate measurements within 1-2 pMC are reasonable for a single water sample. For very low DIC concentration waters 20 mg/L HCO3) DIC14 and waters with complex organic chemistry, results can vary significantly outside of this expectation. Beta - 409513 64.2 0.2 pMC 0.6420 0.0024 -19.0 o/oo SAMPLE : 27C1-041415 ANALYSIS : AMS-Standard delivery MATERIAL/PRETREATMENT : (water DIC): acidify-gas strip COMMENT: The equivalent “Apparent” radiocarbon age to the reported pMC/fMDN values is ~ 3560 BP (not adjusted for any hydro-geochemical effects on meteoric water 14CO2). Given the complex nature of groundwater DIC14 chemistry, duplicate measurements within 1-2 pMC are reasonable for a single water sample. For very low DIC concentration waters 20 mg/L HCO3) DIC14 and waters with complex organic chemistry, results can vary significantly outside of this expectation. Beta - 409514 53.9 0.2 pMC 0.5386 0.0020 -17.5 o/oo SAMPLE : 27D4-041415 ANALYSIS : AMS-Standard delivery MATERIAL/PRETREATMENT : (water DIC): acidify-gas strip COMMENT: The equivalent “Apparent” radiocarbon age to the reported pMC/fMDN values is ~ 4970 BP (not adjusted for any hydro-geochemical effects on meteoric water 14CO2). Given the complex nature of groundwater DIC14 chemistry, duplicate measurements within 1-2 pMC are reasonable for a single water sample. For very low DIC concentration waters 20 mg/L HCO3) DIC14 and waters with complex organic chemistry, results can vary significantly outside of this expectation. Page 3 of 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Quality Assurance Report This report provides the results of reference materials used to validate radiocarbon analyses prior to reporting. Known value reference materials were analyzed quasi-simultaneously with the unknowns. Results are reported as expected values vs measured values. Reported values are calculated relative to NIST SRM-4990B and corrected for isotopic fractionation. Results are reported using the direct analytical measure percent modern carbon (pMC) with one relative standard deviation. May 11, 2015 Report Date: Mr. David Rugh Submitter : Reference 1 96.7 0.5 pMC 96.3 0.4 pMC Reference 2 47.9 0.3 47.9 0.2 pMC Reference 3 27.2 0.2 27.3 0.1 pMC COMMENT: All measurements passed acceptance tests. Measured Value: Expected Value: Agreement: Accepted Expected Value: Measured Value: Agreement: Accepted Expected Value: Measured Value: Agreement: Accepted Validation: Date: May 11, 2015 QA MEASUREMENTS ---PAGE BREAK--- APPENDIX B Well Logs for Study Area Wells Deeper than 400 Feet (Sections 21, 22, 27, 28 of T13N/R13E) ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK---