DATE: May 16, C.agd

Transcription

1 DATE: May 16, C.agd TO: FROM: Honorable Mayor Members of the City Council Tim Loose, P.E., City Engineer Mike Waltman, P.E., Asst. City Engineer AGENDA ITEM: 9C Wellhead Protection ****************************************************************************** ACTION REQUESTED: Consider attached letter from the Minnesota Department of Health Consider updating the City s wellhead protection plan, starting with Part 1 ****************************************************************************** BACKGROUND: City Staff received the attached letter from the Minnesota Department of Health. In summary, the letter notes that the City is required to update its Wellhead Protection Plan Parts 1 and 2 by April, Part 1 of the Wellhead Protection Plan was first completed in 2002 and Part 2 last updated in In some ways, this requirement is an unfunded mandate. From the Department of Health s perspective however, its function is to provide information to protect public water supplies. In response to the letter from the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) and to assist Public Works Director Haas in responding, we have prepared this agenda item to summarize efforts to complete the required Wellhead Protection Plan (WHPP). The MDH is requiring completion of the WHPP per the Minnesota Wellhead Protection Rule (Minnesota Rules parts to ). The results and determinations from Part 1 lay the groundwork for what is required in Part 2 of the WHPP. The attached sample from the former plans to aid with context and understanding the various acronyms. From the City s perspective, it is most appropriate to respond to the MDH letter by completing the minimum required work at lowest possible cost to City taxpayers. Bolton & Menk has approached Leggette, Brashears & Graham (LBG) to assist with groundwater modeling efforts. LBG completed Jordan s original groundwater model and delineation work for the WHPP in Given their familiarity with Jordan s former plan, LBG is the appropriate partner to complete Jordan s WHPP update. As a strategy to minimize cost, LBG will be directed to utilize previous efforts (namely the previous WHPP) as much as possible and only putting forth new, additional efforts where specifically required by the MDH. Based on this fundamental strategy, the main steps/tasks to be completed by Bolton & Menk / LBG for Part 1 the 2016 WHPP are as follows: Task 1: Assemble and Review the Data Required in the MDH Scoping Decision Much of the data necessary to develop the conceptual hydrogeologic model was obtained during the initial WHPP roughly 10 years ago. Data to be taken from past efforts include the groundwater flow model, the Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA), and the vulnerability assessments.

2 Per MDH rules, new information generated since 2002 will also need to be incorporated including updates due to recent well logs, geologic maps, water quality tests, and other relevant information. The MDH s Description of Aquifer Parameters- Aquifer Test Plan (DAP-APT) form will also be updated using the existing aquifer pumping test results from the City Well No. 6. As part of these required new efforts, we assume the MDH will require two hydrogeologic cross sections be prepared and included in the final report. Task 2: Delineate the Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA) and the DWSMA. Per MDH requirements, the current MetroModel must be used to delineate the WHPAs in MODFLOW software. The former model was completed using a different software as MODFLOW software model was not available in The MetroModel was developed over the last ten years in response to groundwater resource issues across the metro, including Jordan Aggregates considerations. It was also prominently used to answer challenging groundwater questions in the northeast metro areas such as White Bear Lake and Woodbury. As a result of suitable groundwater becoming scarcer and because groundwater is a regional commodity, MDH now requires this metro-comprehensive model be used across the Minneapolis- St. Paul metro area and therefore the older model used to develop Jordan s 2002 WHPP no longer meets MDH requirements. To meet 2016 MDH requirements, the WHPP team will use MetroModel to: a. Accurately delineate the Wellhead Protection Areas (WHPAs). b. Determine the required time-of-travel capture zones for the wells. c. Apply to each well in the model, water usage pumping rates provided by the City based on the maximum daily volume determined from either: 1) the previous five years; or, 2) the projected annual pumping over the next five years. d. Work with the City and MDH in delineating the boundaries of the Drinking Water Supply Management Area in accordance with state law (MR , subpart 3) based on the City s pumping rates. Task 3: Assess the Well Field and DWSMA Vulnerability The WHPP team will evaluate the data gathered and interpreted from Tasks 1 and 2 to assess the vulnerability of aquifer supplying the city wells and underlying the DWSMA. This will include evaluation of: a. Well construction record drawings b. Geologic logs c. Hydrogeologic cross sections and maps, d. Confining layer and aquifer thicknesses and extents e. Existing ground-water chemistry data Task 4: Draft Report Preparation Based on findings of Tasks 1 through 3, the WHPP team will prepare a draft report including the delineated WHPAs, the delineated DWSMA, and well and aquifer vulnerability assessments. Task 5: Prepare Draft Report The WHPP team will submit the draft report to MDH and City Staff. Following a review period, we will meet with both to discuss the report and take comments.

3 Task 6: Prepare Final Report and Submit to MDH. The final report will address all comments received on the Draft Report. All final supporting data and map files will be in ArcView format as required by the MDH. ****************************************************************************** FISCAL IMPACT: The estimated hourly cost of completing Wellhead Protection Plan Part 1 is $24,700. Once Part 1 is approved by the MDH, the City will need to proceed with completing Part 2 of the WHPP to maintain the necessary schedule to meet MDH deadlines. The scope of work for completing Part 2 is determined by completing Part 1 and determining the vulnerability of the DWSMA. For conceptual context, Part 2 can be completed for roughly $25,000 to be discussed at a later date. ****************************************************************************** STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Proceed with Part 1 of the update to the Wellhead Protection Plan per State requirements ****************************************************************************** COUNCIL ACTION: Motion: Second: Approved: Disapproved: Tabled: Other:

4 Revised: March 14, 2016 Mr. Scott Haas, Public Works Director City of Jordan 210 East First Street Jordan, Minnesota Dear Mr. Haas: Subject: Scoping Decision Notice No. 1 for the City of Jordan, PWSID , for Amending the Wellhead Protection Plan This letter provides notice of the results of the Scoping 1 meeting held with you, Robyn Hoerr (Minnesota Rural Water Association) and me (Minnesota Department of Health) on September 15, 2014, regarding wellhead protection planning. During the meeting, we discussed the preparation of Part I of a Wellhead Protection Plan that will document the 1) delineation of a wellhead protection area, 2) delineation of a drinking water supply management area, and 3) assessments of well and aquifer vulnerability related to these areas for the primary water supply wells that are used by the city of Jordan. The wellhead protection area is the surface and subsurface area surrounding your public water supply wells through which contaminants are likely to move and affect your drinking water supply. The drinking water supply management area is the area delineated using identifiable landmarks that reflect the wellhead protection area boundaries as closely as possible. It is our understanding that the city also has a well (Well 7 Unique No ) that it retains for emergency standby use. The city must manage an inner wellhead management zone that is defined by a 200-foot radius around each emergency standby well. According to the state wellhead protection rule, the city will have until April 12 th, 2017, to complete its entire Wellhead Protection Plan, Part I and Part II. As we discussed, the rule describes the criteria used for determining the time period for completion of the Wellhead Protection Plan (Minnesota Rules, part ). The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) highly recommends that half of the time allotted be dedicated to completing Part II of the plan. It is our understanding that you will be contracting a consultant to prepare the delineations and vulnerability assessments for the city. MDH has a draft Request for Proposal (RFP) that can be used to help select a competent consultant that has experience in wellhead protection planning and, in particular, with preparing a Part I report. Please contact me at the phone number below if you want to discuss using the draft RFP.

5 Mr. Scott Haas Page 2 March 14, 2016 At our meeting, we discussed rule requirements and the types of information needed to prepare the Part I report. The Wellhead Protection Plan must be prepared in accordance with Minnesota Rules, parts to General wellhead protection requirements and criteria for delineating the wellhead protection area and data reporting are presented in Minnesota Rules, parts to The enclosed Scoping Decision Notice No. 1 formally identifies the information that the city must provide to MDH to meet rule requirements for preparing Part I of the Wellhead Protection Plan. The wellhead rule refers to the existing information required for wellhead planning as data elements. Much of this information is available in the public domain, as described in the Scoping Decision Notice No. 1 form. You only need to provide the information that is not in the public domain and, therefore, not available to MDH. The Scoping Decision Notice No. 1 form also 1) lists the Minnesota unique well number and well construction for each well that will be included in the Wellhead Protection Plan [Table 1]; 2) lists the pumping volumes for each well [Table 2]; and 3) includes a map of the well locations. An inner wellhead management zone (IWMZ), which is the area within a 200-foot radius around the well, serves as the wellhead protection area for emergency wells. A summary of the information the city needs to provide is included at the end of the Scoping Decision Notice No. 1 form. After we have had an opportunity to review the information listed in the Scoping Decision Notice No. 1 that you will be providing to MDH, we would appreciate the opportunity to again meet with you and select the appropriate method for delineating your wellhead protection area. We also will discuss how you can become involved in the preparation of the Part I report. After your consultant has had an opportunity to develop a conceptual model of the local hydrogeologic setting, we would like to meet with your consultant to discuss the proposed delineation approach. This pre-delineation meeting may be accomplished by a conference call if 1) MDH approves, and 2) the consultant provides figures for the discussion beforehand. Prior to finalizing the wellhead protection area boundaries, we highly recommend that we informally review preliminary model results and assess whether any changes are needed to meet rule requirements. Model input and solution files should be submitted in electronic form. The same applies to geographical data, such as the wellhead protection area and drinking water supply management area. When geographic data are submitted electronically, ArcInfo export or ArcView shapefile formats are preferred. It will greatly accelerate our review if these geographic data use the 1983 North American Datum (NAD83), Universal Transverse Mercator, Zone 15 North (UTM, Z15N) projection, with meter distance units. Other datum and projection systems are acceptable as long as they are documented. Specific questions regarding electronic geographic data can be directed to Michael Baker, Source Water Protection Unit, at 651/ Finally, it is our understanding that you will serve officially as the wellhead protection manager on behalf of the city. You are responsible for providing written notice to local units of government of the city's intent to develop the Wellhead Protection Plan, as required by the wellhead protection rule (part , subpart 3). A copy of this notice should be forwarded to MDH and must include a list

6 Mr. Scott Haas Page 2 March 14, 2016 of the city wells, their unique well numbers, and contact information for you as wellhead protection manager. Robyn Hoerr can provide you with some examples of the notification of intent that other communities have used. Please contact her at 320/ In closing, we look forward to working with you on completion of your Wellhead Protection Plan. If you have any questions regarding our comments, please contact me at 651/ or at john.woodside@state.mn.us. Sincerely, John Woodside, Hydrologist Source Water Protection Unit Environmental Health Division P.O. Box St. Paul, Minnesota JSW:ds-b Enclosures: Scoping Decision Notice No. 1; Summary of Data Requested; Table 1 - Public Water Supply Well Information; Table 2 - Annual Volume of Water Pumped From PWS Wells; Map of Well Locations cc: Karen S. Voz, Planner, Source Water Protection Unit, St. Cloud District Office Robyn Hoerr, Minnesota Rural Water Association

7 Local Well ID Unique Number Use / Status Case Diameter (inches) Table 1 - Water Supply Well Information Case Depth (feet) Well Depth (feet) Date Constructed / Reconstructed Aquifer Well Vulnerability Primary 18 x /15/1991 CTCW - Tunnel City-Wonewoc Not Vulnerable Primary 18 x /24/1999 CWEC - Wonewoc-Eau Not Vulnerable Claire Emergency 24 x /20/2003 CMTS - Mt.Simon Not Vulnerable Primary 24 x /27/2008 CMTS - Mt.Simon Not Vulnerable Source: MN Dep't. of Health - 9/10/2014 Table 2 - Annual Volume of Water Discharged from Water Supply Wells SWUDS Permit ID Well Name Unique No ,924 39,054,000 29,549,000 34,663,000 34,472,000 35,834, ,649 37,128,000 34,046,000 39,746,000 44,441,000 39,461, ,065 43,576,000 8,124, ,000 83, , ,671 64,380,000 94,043, ,035,000 95,388, ,542, Projected Pumping (Expressed as gallons. Bolding indicates greatest annual pumping volume.) Source: MN Dep't. of Natural Resources Division of Waters - State Water Use Data System (SWUDS)

8 Table 3 - Other Permitted High-Capacity Wells within 2 miles of located Jordan PWS water sources. Unique Number Well Name VALLEY VIEW OF JORDAN LLC DNR Permit Number Aquifer QWTA Use Commercial/Institutional Waterworks Annual Volume of Water Pumped* Daily Volume (cubic meters) * = Expressed as millions of gallons. Source year = Source: MN Dep't. of Natural Resources Division of Waters - State Water Use Data System (SWUDS) GIS Data Source: SWP.swuds_cwi_2011

9 JORDAN 6!. JORDAN 5!.!. JORDAN 7!. JORDAN 8 Explanation!. Jordan PWS Wells Drinking Water Supply Management Area ,290 1,720 Feet Figure 1 Drinking Water Supply Management Area City of Jordan

10

11