Sam Ziemann From - Region of Waterloo

More documents

Recommendations

Info

HYDROGEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTSTRANGE STREET WATER SUPPLY CLASS EA UPDATEREGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOOResults for Test WellMarch 19, 2012to 24.4 m BGS and a 15 slot screen to 27.5 m BGS. The design of the well screen wasdetermined based on grain size analysis of the aquifer material collected at K-SS-OW1B-11;• Following installation of the well screen, the 154 mm well casing was raised to 21.3 m BGScreating a naturally developed sand pack;• The annular space between the formation and the well casing was sealed with bentonitepellets followed by bentonite slurry to ground surface using positive displacementtechniques. The 254 mm temporary casing was removed as the annular space was sealed;and• Development of the well was completed between March 7 th and 9 th , 2011 over a period ofapproximately 8 hours. Water pumped during development of the well was first dischargedto a settling tank and then pumped into the sanitary sewer located on Rossford Crescent(Figure 7) once the water met the sewer use criterion for total suspended solids. TheRegion obtained approval for the discharge from the City of Kitchener (City). A copy of theLetter of Compliance which includes the conditions for discharge from the Region and theCity is presented in Appendix K. A copy of the Standard Operating Procedure forDischarging Drilling Fluids to Municipal Sewers (Stantec, 2010b) is also presented inAppendix K.4.4 GROUNDWATER DISCHARGEPrior to the start of performance testing, a risk assessment was completed by Stantec (2011) toassess whether water pumped from K-SS-TW1-11 during the performance testing could bedischarged to the Westmount Drain without resulting in unacceptable effects to human orecological receptors. The details of the assessment were documented in Stantec (2011) andare presented in Appendix K for reference. Based on the available site information and theanalytical results obtained from historical wells in the vicinity of K-SS-TW1-11 and data fromK-SS-TW1-11, no adverse effects to human and ecological receptors were expected as a resultof the temporary water discharge.During the performance testing, discharge water from K-SS-TW1-11 was transferred through atemporary 110 m pipeline and discharged into a storm water sewer within Gzowski Park(Figure 7). The storm water sewer leads to the Westmount Drain which discharges intoSchneider Creek, which then discharges into Victoria Park Lake.4.5 VARIABLE RATE PUMPING TESTFigures 8 and 9 present the results of the variable rate pumping test completed atK-SS-TW1-11. Prior to the testing, the static water level of the aquifer was estimated to be336.6 m AMSL (8.70 m BGS), based on water level data collected from Test Well K-SS-TW1-11on June 13, 2011. Test Well K-SS-TW1-11 was pumped at rates of 5 L/s, 10 L/s, 15 L/s and4.4 hls v:\01609\active\161110897_strange_st\planning\report\final hydrogeo assessment\final\fnl_rpt_120319.docx
HYDROGEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTSTRANGE STREET WATER SUPPLY CLASS EA UPDATEREGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOOResults for Test WellMarch 19, 201220 L/s with each step lasting 30 minutes and no recovery between steps. Drawdowns of0.86 m, 1.76 m, 2.85 m and 4.07 m were observed at the end of each step. The specificcapacity was observed to decline with each increase in pumping rate (Table 3), decreasing from5.8 L/s per metre of available drawdown at a pumping rate of 5 L/s, to 4.9 L/s per metre ofavailable drawdown at a pumping rate of 20 L/s.4.6 CONSTANT RATE PUMPING TESTA 24 hour constant rate pumping test was completed at K-SS-TW1-11 to estimate potentialproduction rates from Aquifer 1 (AFB2).The test started immediately following the final step of the variable rate performance test onJune 13, 2011 at 14:20 at a pumping rate of 20 L/s. Groundwater levels were monitored atseven (7) locations during the pumping test, K-SS-OW1-82, K-SS-OW1A/B/C-11, K13,STOW2-07, and K-SS13-99 (Figure 1). All monitoring wells were screened within the pumpedaquifer (Aquifer 1) except for K-SS-OW1A-11 which was completed in Aquifer 2 (Table1).Figure 9 presents the hydrographs of monitoring wells that were monitored during the pumpingtest at K-SS-TW1-11, as well as pumping data for production wells in the Strange Street WellField.Weather conditions during the pumping test ranged from daily average temperatures of 13 o C to18 o C, with no precipitation events, according to observations recorded at the University ofWaterloo Weather Station located 5 km to the north of the site. The most recent precipitationevent occurred 6 days prior to the test and consisted of 4.5 mm of rain.During the pumping test, pumping rates from production wells within the well field remainedrelatively stable and therefore did not cause fluctuation of water levels within the aquifer(Figure 9). The only monitoring wells that were observed to respond to pumping from theStrange Street Well Field production wells were OW1-82 (Figure 9), which is located adjacent toProduction Well K10A, and to a lesser extent K13 and STOW2-07. These wells exhibiteddrawdown when K10A and K19 began pumping on June 7, 2011. During the constant ratepumping test, the only production wells that were in operation were K10A and K19, and none ofthe other monitoring wells appeared to respond to either of these production wells (Figure 9).All drawdown references presented in this section are relative to the water levels measuredprior to the start of the pumping test on June 13, 2011, which are interpreted to represent staticwater level conditions. The static water level data for each well is illustrated on Figure 9. Totaldrawdown observed at each monitoring location is also summarized on Table 1.hls v:\01609\active\161110897_strange_st\planning\report\final hydrogeo assessment\final\fnl_rpt_120319.docx 4.5
Page 2 and 3:
August 26, 2011Sam ZiemannPage 2 of
Page 4 and 5:
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9: August 26, 2011Sam ZiemannPage 8 of
Page 10 and 11: August 26, 2011Sam ZiemannPage 10 o
Page 12 and 13: August 26, 2011Sam ZiemannPage 12 o
Page 14 and 15: Pressure (kPa)K18/K19 Well House to
Page 16 and 17: Figure 4a - Existing ConditionsPump
Page 18 and 19: Figure 6a - Existing System w/Combi
Page 20 and 21: Figure 8a - Existing ConditionsWell
Page 22 and 23: Figure 10a - Future System w/Combin
Page 24 and 25: MD-80 CATALYTIC MEDIAIRON, MANGANES
Page 26 and 27: NR - Pressure FiltersHorizontal and
Page 28 and 29: Napier-Reid Ltd.Pressure FiltersSal
Page 30 and 31: APPENDIX EHydrogeological Assessmen
Page 32 and 33: HYDROGEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTSTRANGE S
Page 70: HYDROGEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTSTRANGE S
Page 78 and 79: 25Pumping Rate20Pumping Rate (L/s)1
Page 82 and 83: TABLE 2SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER ANALY
Page 84 and 85: CALCULATION OF SPECIFIC CAPACITY FR
Page 111 and 112:
March 2, 2011Reference: 006-189Stan
Page 113 and 114:
TABLE 1REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WAT
Page 132 and 133:
HYDROGEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTSTRANGE S
Page 134 and 135:
July 23, 2010Lisa Lachuta, P.Eng.Pa
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140:
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM A1 -STRANGE ST
Page 143 and 144:
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM A1 -STRANGE ST
Page 145:
TABLE 1SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER ANALY
show all

Sam Ziemann From - Region of Waterloo

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?