Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout032811_ca07 i'fON" Consent Agenda i~~/0~) JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH \~8~~ 615 Sheridan Street. Port Townsend' Washington' 98368 '''J~. .' www.Jeffersoncountypubllchealth.org March 4, 2011 JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REQUEST TO: Board of County Commissioners Philip Morley, County Administrator FROM: Stuart Whitford, Environmental Health Director Michael Dawson, Water Quality Program Lead DATE: InI-UY"~h;;l '6 J de:> \ I SUBJECT: Agenda Item - Contract Agreement for US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey, Amendment #2; April 1, 2007 - December 31, 2011; TIme Extension Only - No Additional Funding Requested STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Jefferson County Public Health, Water Quality Department, Is requesting Board approval of the Contract Agreement for US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey, Amendment #2; April 1, 2007 - December 31, 2011; TIme Extension Only - No Additional Funding Requested. ANALYSIS/STRATEGIC GOALS/PROS and CQNS.. The purpose of this amendment Is to extend the end date of this agreement to evaluate the potential hydrologic effects of future ground-water withdrawals In the Chlmacum Creek Basin. The deadline extension wlll provide time for the USGS to produce two reports and conduct public Information meetings. The first will describe the hydrogeologic framework, water use and recharge. The second will describe the modeling results. .' FISCAL IMPACT ICOST BENEFIT ANALYSIS: No additional funding Is requested. This contract Is funded by the Department of Ecology grant G0800230 at 100%. COMMUNITY HEALTH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABilITIES MAIN: (360) 385-9400 FAX: (360) 385-9401 PDlue HEALTH AlWAYS WORKING FOR A SAFER AND HEALTHIER COMMUHm ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH WATER QUALITY MAIN: (360) 385-9444 FAX: (360) 379-4487 Consent Agenda RECOMMENDATION: JCPH management requests approval of the Contract Agreement for US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey, Amendment #2; April 1, 2007 - December 31, 2011; llme Extension Only - No Additional Funding Requested. REVIEWED BY: ~~~ 3/;~/;1 Date ' - - , ..-..-- -- Q r- o ~ -- @(Y) <E ,...., .... [G .... ~ ~ ~ 11 ~ 8 e S ~q~ I 6000000558(W A 136)07W4W A95001J 1 I UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY AMENDMENT OF JOINT FUNDING AGREEMENT FOR WATER RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS ThIs amendment is for the agreement dated April I. 2007 Paragraphs 2a and 2b of the agreement are hereby modified to read as follows: (a) $297.500 by the party of the first part during the period Auril I. 2007 to December 3 1.2011 (b) $297.500 by the party of the second part during the period April I. 2007 to December 3 I. 2011 The Joint Funding Agreement (JFA) between the U.S. Geological Survey, (USGS) and Jefferson County for a program to evaluate potential hydrologic effects of future ground-water withdrawals in the Chimacum Creek Basin, Jefferson County, WA, is hereby amended for a second time to extend the end date of the agreement by nine months, from March 31, 2011 to December 31, 2011. This extension will provide time to produce two reports. A report describing the hydrogeologic framework, water use, and recharge will be completed by June 30, 2011. A separate report describing the results of the ground water model will be produced by December 31, 2011. No additional funds are required. A Public meeting will be held on May 26, 2011 to discuss the status of the project. Public meetings also wUl be held after the publication of each of the two project reports to describe project results and answer related questions. A public meeting to be held In July 2011 will focus on hydrogeologic framework, groundwater recharge modeling, and water level, streamflow, and water-use data. A public meeting to be held in January 2012 will focus on groundwater flow model development, and examples of model use". All remaining terms and conditions, as Included in the oriainal JFA, are unchanged. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY JEFFERSON COUNTY ~tiA~~ Signature) Cynthia Barton Ph.D.. L.G.. LHG (Name) DIrector. USGS. W A Water ScIence Ctr. (Title) (SIgnature) (Name) (Title) Date ,'3-10 -II Date ~ , ),' " . A c{ . (-:; . fYI€N})ml'!Jl/ t . m , } . -~(WA136107W4WA9500JFY08..FY11-A UNITEI) STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOOICAL suRVEY ' AMENDMENT OF JOINT FuNDING AGREEMENT . . FOR . WATER RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS , ~:;. ".: :. . . ',' .,'l "'-,,\,\;.: .",-'0 " .,~ ". ..-,-'. ., - . -, . This ~tis for~~datedAPrll1.2007 p~ 2a and2bof$e ag[eem~areheniliy ~ned to read as folloWs: ' (a) , ' $ 297.5!lO" ", ,by the partY'oftbef\rstpartdUrlttgthe period April 1, 2007 .',,' ,,',' toMmrih ~nnH . ' (b) $297,600' · " April 1, ?007' . . ,.bythe party of the Secondpartdurlng tb.llperlod to'~"""" 31"011 ,- . . . -~ The .IolntFlJiidln9^g~tpi:'i\)~Jnheu.s.Geoiogk:i11 Survey,(lJSGS) arid JeffersOn<:O\lIlt)'fot a program to eval~ potentlaU\ydrolo9lc~ offllt!Jre ground-watet withdtawaIs In ~ Chlmac\.!lll Creek BasIn; Jefferson CountY.VlA-1s hereby amended to E!X!end~end date ohhe agreeMent by six months. from Septembet30.2010toMatQj~1;20n. '" " " . . . ' '.. . - '.' " .' . - This exrenS/Qnwm provide- f/meto_op ahydtogeolClliICfr.lmewo~Noadd1tlonal funds ate required. . . '" : .'" -, ~ - - ' ". '. - ,~ ' " ' Alltemalntrt9 tetmSand condltl()pS.aslni:l~inthl!or@nall\greemelrt, are unchllnged, " '; h. e .' -,,-; U'NlTED STATES (1 ~~.'~~' '1 (Si~) " , , ,', . ., ,," ,..",;', ~-'. ., " ", " " : " , '- .', -' ", -:,: - -~> ' -'.- ~:. ,- - --, CynthJ8 Barton Ph.D., LG.lHG' '(Name)',. ,1'--,.' DIreclot. USGS. WAWater ~ etT. (Title) JEfFE~An"'couNTv DEPARTMENTO};''I'HB INTERIO;R . . . . . . ' GEOLOGICAL SU;RVEY . Date "&i" '~~~) C~"l~&U U. "/(U'\ · . . ame) . . .... Chlh Y"MAV'\ (Title) - "'~ .,) , ,/.< ~ ;,:': ~.'. ".Date ~ ..4 } '2.-'\ .)>0 , ". -.,;- "'-;' . ~. .-, .' ,'AE:1""'fo~ ~iq116 ,_c..~ ' ' .' +;> ';:. ,;0' ".' ' '.~ ~ 't '.~ 'I I , I D/z'[(,AN PI L- c ( Form 9-1366 (Oct. 211115) U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Joint Funding Agreement Customer #: Agreement #: Project #: TlN#: Fixed Cost Agreement WA138 07W4WA95110 97229CYH 916001322 P' Yes r No FOR WATER RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS THIS AGREEMENT is entere.d into as of the 1STday of APRIL, 2007, by the U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, party of the fIrSt part, and the Jefferson County, party of the second part. 1. The parties hereto agree that subject to availability of appropriations and In accordance with their respective authorities there shall be maintaIned in cooperation a fixed-price agreement for evaluation of potential hydrologic effects of future ground-water withdrawals In the Chlmacum Creek Basin, Jefferson County, Washington, herein called the program. The USGS legal authority is 43 USC 35C; 43 USC 50; and 43 USC 50b. 2. The following amounts shall be contributed to cover all of the cost of the necessary field and iilnalytical work directly related to this program. 2(b) Includes In-Kind Services in the amount of $ N1A. (a) $297,500 by the party of the first part during the period APRIL 1, 2007 to SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 (b) $297,500 by the party of the second part during the period APRIL 1, 2007 to SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 (c) AddItIonal or reduced amounts by each party during the above period or succeeding periods as may be determined by mutual agreement and set forth In an exchange of letters between the parties. (d) The performance period may be changed by mutual agreement and set forth in an exchange of letters between the parties. 3. The costs of this program may be paid by either party in conformity with the laws and regulations respectivaly governing each party. 4. The field and analytical work pertaining to this program shall be under the direction of or subject to periodic review by an authorized representative of the party of the first pari. . 5. The areas to be included in the program shall be determined by mutual agreement between the parties hereto or their authorized representatives. The methods employed in the field and office shall be those adopted by the party of the first part to insure the required standards of accuracy subject to modification by mutuai agreement 6. During the course of this program, all field and analytical work of either party pertaining to this proglBm shall be open to the inspection of the other party, and if the work is not being carried on in a mutually satisfactory manner, either party may terminate this agreement upon 50 days written notice to the other party. 7. The original records resulting from this program will be deposited in the office of origin of those records. Upon request, copies of the original records will be provided to the office of the other party. Evaluation of potential hydrologic effects of future ground-water withdrawals in the Chimacum Creek Basin, Jefferson County, Washington SmnmAry Problem Projected increases in population and development in northeastern Jefferson County, Washington, are expected to lead to increased ground-water withdrawals in the Chimacmn Creek Basin. In addition, land- use and climate change could reduce ground-water recharge in the basin, thereby reducing ground-water levels in the basin and reducing discharge from the ground-water system to Chimacmn Creek. Ground- water discharge to the creek. also referred to as baseflow, is critical for maintaining ecological health in the creek throughout the year and it is especially important during the smnmer and early autumn, when it supplies most, if not all, streamfIow. Cbimacum Creek provides habitat for saImonids, including species Iisted under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), such as summer-run chmn salmon (threatenpd), coho salmon (species of concern), wd steeIhead (proposed for listing as threatened in March 2006) (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2006). Decision makers and water-resources managers need quantitative tools to assess the impact of different water-management options so they can plan for future growth and development in ways that minimi7.e adverse impacts on Chimacmn Creek. Objectives The general objective of the proposed study is to assess the effects of potential increases in ground-water withdrswals and potential decreases in ground-water recharge on ground-water and surface-water resources in the Chimacmn Creek Basin. Specific objectives are to: 1. Descrihe natural ground-water recharge for historical, current and possible future climate conditions and assuming curreut land-use conditions; 2. Describe effects of current and potential future ground-water withdrawal and recharge conditions on ground-water levels in the Cbimacum Creek Basin and streamfIows in Chimacmn Creek; 3. Identify which ground-water withdrswaI options are expected to m;n;m;7.e impacts on streamflow in Chimacmn Creek under various recharge conditions; and 4. Identify how the understanding of water resources of the Chimacmn Creek Basin can be improved in the future. Relevance and Benefits This study is consistent with the natio!lai USGS mission and goals and water-resources issues identified in the USGS Washington Water Science Center Science Plan. Specifically, the study addresses the following issues in "Strategic Directions of the Water Resources Division 1999-2008": effects of urbanization and suburbanization on waier resources (issue 1); effects of land use and population increases on water resources in the coastal zone (issue 2); drinking water availability and quality (issue 3); effects of climate on water-resource management (issue 7); surface-water and ground-water interactions as related to water-resource management (issue 8); and hydrologic-system management, including optimization of ground-water and surface-water use (issue 9). The study creates tools (simulation and combined simulation-optim;7-'1tion models) to help local decision makers evaluate complex management strategies and manage water-resources in the Chimacmn Creek Basin. Apl'roach The objectives will be met by creating a transient (time-varying) ground-water flow model for the study area and a combined simulation-optimi7-"tion model. The simulation-optimharion model can be used to directly incorporate specific management goals and constraints with respect to study objectives 2 and 3 into the modeling process. Water-management goals and constraints will be identified by Jefferson County and the WRIA 17 Planning Unit in consultation with the USGS. 1 ( ( the basin occurs near the month of Cliimacum Creek (fig. 3), in the general area of Irondale, Port Hadlock, and Chimacum, which is also referred to as Tri-Area The Chimacum Creek Basin is underlain by bedrock at depth, which crops out at the surface in some areas (fig. 4). The bedrock forms a north-south-trending bowl that dips to the north and is filled with glacial and interglacial sedimentary deposits. In their compilation of the hydrogeology of the Chimacum Creek Basin, Simonds and others (2004) identified five major sedimentary units, two of which contain the main water-bearing units of regional significance. These are the Vashon Advance Outwash (Qva) and undifferentiated Older Glacial Deposits (Qgo). Simonds and others (2004) did not identify extensive, laterally continuous confining units and suggest that the entire thickness of unconsolidated sediments may act as a single hydrogeologic unit. A sample cross-section, which cuts through the study area in an east-west direction near Chimacum, shows the general distribution of hydrogeologic units (fig. 5). Due to the sparseneSs of deep wells that penetrate the Qgo, little is currently known about the distribution of possible water-bearing and confining layers within the unit. More is expected to be leamed about unit Qgo in 2007, as the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) recently made funding available to the Jefferson County Public Utility District No. 1 (PUD) for a deep test well in the Chimacum Valley (L. Blackmore, Cascadia Consulting Group, written commun., 2007). Based on water levels measored in about 110 wells during a well inventory in May 2002 and in about 48 wells during a synoptic measurement in October 2002, Simonds and others (2004) concluded that the regional ground-water flow direction in the sedimentary deposits of the study area is from south to north, with localized flow towards Chimacum Creek (fig. 6). Most of the ground-water withdrawals in the study area are from water-bearing units in the sedimentary deposits with only limited withdrawals from fractured bedrock. Possible future increases in water demand are expected to be supplied by the sedimentary units. Problem Projected increases in population and development in northeastern Jefferson County, Washington, are expected to lead to increased ground-water withdrawals in the Chimacum Creek Basin. In addition, land-use and climate change couId reduce ground-water recharge in the basin, thereby reducing ground-water levels in the basin and reducing discharge from the ground-water system to Chimacum Creek. Ground-water discharge to the creek, also referred to as baseflow, is critical for maintaining ecological health in the creek throughout the year and it is especially important during the summer and early autunm, when it supplies most, if not all, streamflow. Chimacum Creek provides habitat for salmonids, including species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), such as summer-run chum salmon (threatened), coho salmon (species of concern), and steelhead (proposed for listing as threatened in March 2006) (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2006). Decision makers and water-resources managers need quantitative tools to assess the impact of different water-management options so they can plan for future growth and development in ways that minimize adverse impacts on Chimacum Creek. 3 ( ( The simulated results will be compared with long-term average estimates previously computed by Pacific Groundwater Group as part of the Stage 1 Technical Assessment of WRIA 17 (plll'lIIDetrlx and others, 2000) using a proprietary spreadsheet versipn of the DPM. Input to the DPM will consist of time series of daily precipitation and air temperature, and current land-use, vegetation, and soil data from existing data sources. Model plll'llIDeters will be obtained from recharge studies based on calibmted DPM simulations in the Puget Sound lowlands, such as Bauer and Mastin (199'7), Bidlake and Payne (2001), Orr and others (2002), Sumioka and Bauer (2003), and possible other recharge studies. To evaluate the adequacy of the model simulations, model-simulated runoff for the study area will be compared with the runoff -component of daily streamflow measured in Chimacum Creek. Available data include USGS station no. 12051500 (Chimacum Creek near Chimacum) with a daily record from June 1952 through December 1957 and ECology station no. 17B050 (Chimacum Creek near mouth) with a daily record from April 2003 to the present. Natuml ground-water recharge for possible future climate conditions will be simulated by rerunning the DPM with air tempemtures increased over historical conditions and precipitation increased and decreased over historical conditions. Even though there is no consensus among different climate models regarding future precipitation in the area that includes the Chimacum Creek Basin (M. Dettinger, written cornmun., 2006), including both air tempemture and precipitation in the analysis will provide insight into the sensitivity of recharge to both variables. Task 2: AlllJrOach for achieving obiective 2. A three-dimensional, finite-difference ground-water flow model will be created for the sedimentary deposits in the study area using a version of the USGS model MODFLOW (Harbaugh, 2005; Harbaugh and others, 2000; McDonald and Harbaugh, 1988). Initial assiguments of model layers and hydrologic properties will be based on the hydrogeologic interpretation by Simonds and others (2004). Records of wells drilled since the study's well inventory in spring 2002 will be reviewed to determine if there are new wells that penetrate the deeper parts of hydrogeologic unit Qgo. Available lithologip logs for such wells will be used to update the current hydrogeologic interpretation of unit Qgo aud the conceptual model of the overall hydrogeologic system, as needed. The flow model will be run in both steady-state and transient (time-varying) mode and calibrated to steady-state and transient hydrologic conditions. For the steady-state simulation, long-term natural ("predevelopment") conditions will be simulated to the extent possible by applying long- term average recharge, by assuming no ground-water withdmwals and no recharge from septic systems, and by assuming that water levels measured in wells prior to a yet-to-be-determined date represent predevelopment water levels that can be used to calibmte the steady-state model. Current water-levels may also be used for the steady-state calibmtion, if it is determined that differences between historical and current water levels are small. For the transient simulation, monthly varying historical ground-water recharge will be applied as computed in Task 1, and estimates ofhistorlcal ground-water withdmwals and recharge from septic drainage will be incorpomted. The transient model will be calibmted to available historical ground-water levels and baseflow data, including ground-water levels and baseflows measured by Simonds and others (2004), and new data to be collected as part of the current study. The measurements by Simonds and others (2004) include relatively small changes in ground-water levels (less than 3 ft) and streamflow gains and losses that occurred primarily in response to seasonal changes in ground-water recharge. 5 ( ( Prudic and others, 2004). Any remnhiing uncertainty about the hydrogeology of the deep part of the flow system (unit Qgo) may be addressed by simulating the deep system as extremes, with one extreme assuming thick, laterally continuous high-permeability units and the other extreme assuming primarily low-permeability units. The simulated results would be used to try to infer the most likely conditions of the deep syStem. Once the model has been calibrated in both steady-state (predevelopment) and transient modes, it will be used to simulate the effects of potential future ground-water withdrawal and recharge conditions on ground-water levels in the Chimacum Creek Basin and streamflows in Chimacum Creek. Up to six different water-management scenarios will be simulated and these will be selected by Jefferson County and the WRIA 17 Planning Unit in consultation with the USGS by March 30, 2009. Jefferson County and the WRIA 17 Planning Unit will select preliminary scenarios by March 31, 2008. If a water-Dianagement scenario incorpomtes a significant future land-use change, the details of the land-use change will also need to be provided by March 31, 2008. If a significant future land-use change is anticipated, the USGS will rerun the PPM developed as part of Task 1 to estimate natural ground-water recharge for the new land-use conditions. Only one set of new land-use conditions will be simulated with DPM in this study. Task 3: Annroach for achievim. obiective 3. The ground-water mnnneement process of program MF2K-GWM (Ahlfeld and others, 2005) will be applied to the calibmted ground-water flow model described under Task 2 to identify numerically optimal water-management options that meet predetermined hydrologic constraints. This optimization process is called simulation-optimi7.>1tion modeling (Barlow, 2005). The hydrologic constraints for the simulation-optimization modeling will be provided by Jefferson County and the WRIA 17 Planning Unit, in consultation with the USGS. By March 31, 2008, the USGS will need to know the types, locations, and timing of hydrologic constmints that will need to be met in the study area For example, the USGS will need to know the locations and timing of required instream flows so the ground-water flow model can be properly designed and used to address the questions of interest. Specific values for the constraints, such as required instream flows and minimum ground-water levels, need to be provided by June 30, 2009 (prior to the' start of the simulation-optimization modeling). Additional information needed by June 30, 2009 includes an estimate of anticipated significant land-use changes, if any, and future mtes of ground-water withdrawals and ASR, if not already provided by March 31,2008 as part.of Task 2. The USGS will use this information to identify water-management options that meet the combined requirements as closely as possible. If time permits, MF2K-GWM will also be used to generate response coefficients for all or selected model cells that indicate the relative contribution of hypothetical pumping in those cells to the streamflow depletion of selected reaches of Chimacum Creek. This information could be used by water-resource planners to identify the relative effect of pumpage in various parts of the study area on streamflow. For example, Cosgrove and Johnson (2005) describe such an analysis of the Snake River Plain aquifer for steady-state conditions. Task 4: Anl}roach for acbievlnl! obiective 4. Based on what is leamed about the ground-water system of the Chimacum Creek Basin during the study, USGS will identify and prioritize the need for additional data and information that could significantly improve the reliabilitY of the ground-water flow model. Suggestions for future data collection could include continued measuring of water levels and streamflows, and 7 ,c ( ( Water-level monitoring network USGS will evaluate the nine-well water-level network established in the study by Simonds and others (2004) and determine whether to remove wells from the network and, in coordination with Jefferson CountylPUDlECology, whether to expand it. The network will be measured monthly by Jefferson CountylPUD/Ecology for a one-year period starting in about April 2007 and a subset of 4-6 wells may be measured continuously by Jefferson CountylPUD/Ecology using pressure transducers and data loggers owned by Ecology and possibly the PUD. USGS will obtain permissions from well owners for making water-level measurements, demonstrate the method used for collecting water levllls, provide field data sheets to ensure consistent data collection, and provide a brief description of calibration procedures for the continuous data. Field data sheets will be given to the USGS who will enter the new data in the USGS National Water Information System (NWIS). Snmmlll"V of critical information Jefferson Countv and the WRIA 17 Plannint: Unit need to provide. in consultation with the USGS: March 31, 2008: 1. up to six specific, but preliminary, water-management scenarios (Task 2); 2. the types, locations, and timing of hydrologic constraints that will need to be met in the study area (for example, the locations and timing of required instream flows) (Task 3); March 31, 2009: 3. Finalized versions of the preliminary water-management scenarios (Task 2); June 30, 2009: 4. Specific values for the hydrologic constraints (for example, the required instream flows) (Task 3); 5. Future rates of ground-water withdrawals and ASR; and 6. One set of anticipated significant land-use changes, if not already provided by March 31, 2008 as part of the specific water-management scenarios. No information needs to be provided if no significant land-use changes are anticipated in the study area. Budeet The total cost of the project is $595,000, of which $297,500 will be paid by Jefferson County and $297,500 is expected to be paid by the USGS Cooperative Water Program. USGS contributions are subject to change depending on Congressional aIIocations of funding. Fundin Sources A *FY2007 FY2008 Jefferson Co $34,000 $95,000 USGS $34,000 $95,000 Total $68,000 $190,000 oFY: Federal FIscal Year, which starts October 1 of the previous year. FY2009 $115,000 $115,000 $230,000 FY2010 $53,500 $53,500 $107,000 9 ( ( (assign layers, hydraulic properties, etc.) '" f.. ~ 2i. Calibrate model to steady-state X ii.' '. conditions 2j. Cah"brale model to transient X X I;' "', conditions 2k. Use calibrated model to simJl1ate X . f:!}; ": effects of different water-management ~l:; h;, . ii'~ options identified in consultation with t.. Jefferson County and WRIA 17 Planning , ,'" 'I,,.' Unit (see 2t) \: :.' ;:'f' ~ iT 1< :' . iV; ,',; Task 3 - Find numerically optimal "'. :ii I':". 1/'; water- ment outlons 3a. Jefferson County identifies X X ,in it 'i, f;}~l optimization constraints and goals in i'. consultation with the USGS 3b. Apply optimization process to ., X ,." ..C' identify ~~y optimal water- :1 '...... manalrement ons . ~ ',~: :J,t,. l'i Task 4 - Identlfy.data needs for . X imuro und-water model : , I: Task 5 - Write and produce report ~; X Task 6 - Transfer of information , :Of 6a. Give presentation with study update X ,:, 6b. Transfer ground-water model for " .. ..y; local use References Cited Ahlfeld, D.P., Barlow, P.M., and Mulligan, A.B., 2005, GWM-A grotmd-water management process for the U.S. Geological Survey modular grotmd-water model (MODFLOW-2000): U.S. Geological Survey Open-Ftle Report 2005-1072, 124 p. Barlow, P.M., 2005, Use of simu1ation-optimization modeling to assess regional ground-water systems: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2005-3095, 4 p. Bauer. H.H., and Vaccaro, JJ., 1987, Documentation of a deep percolation model for estimating ground-water recharge: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 86-536, 180 p. Bauer, HE, and Mastin. M.C., 1997, Recharge from precipitation in three small g1acial-till-mant1ed catchments in the Puget Sound lowland, Washington: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4219, 199 P. Bidlake, W.R., and Payne, n., 2001, Estim.fTnll recharge to groundwater from precipitation at Naval Submarine Base Bangor and vicinity, Kitsap County, Washington: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4110, 33 p. Cascadia Consulting Group, 2003, Watershed Management Plan for the Quilcene-Snow Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA 17), 195 p., URL hl\p:llwww.ecy.wa.l!ov/pubsl0306029.pdf. 11 ( ( 123" ;s . (H' 11:4!. l1l> FlfCl EXPiANAIIOlV __ W8:lA 11 boundaty .. Q~lJ'fI'1~ >0> =.. ~llIIl 41" .,(< Ill' ' ~~~-~.;-~~~=:ft:'~ ,.."........">t...,.""'......n...,,~~..u.,,''''.. h..k~_ljtUt(""'""..,~~JIW~"...j.,... ~.._...... ,.-,-... 't\~ ,,'..,~o~~.......l1t: Ifj o . 1" o I 1 ,! f. t . 'VMllES . I . . , 1 J ~- I I J . 6 $ W l~ 14 K1\llMimlS Figure 1. Cbimacum Creek Basin in Jeffetson County, Washington, and apptOllimate boundaIyofstady area (modified from Simonds and others, 2004). 13 .' ( ~/ ~,,\ '-('" /~ \-: -~~ { I /~- . \ ... ( ... - , \ \' .~~~i . 1 '-, '- r \. .,. / \,\ \. J ), I '1' ., j ,- ~ , r~ ' /,r'..~_./ ~ . II " c'- .............-....'._. _... _._._. y, '--- \ -""1..__~~ , \ ...,..J \ , ' , \ ;'" /'-~'~-.i.-_-J r ~ ...... \! _J."....r \ ~. ~'~--~~---l11o ~ (~ ~ .,... - - ~.,.. -'-'. / ... - -".... ",'- .... -.- ~ -< ..,-""'-"",--,,> "VWC'; ( - '., ~.J , h RIve "'-{... ~-"-v"-""""""'~ , w..Do,pI.ofEdooy. G1S__ lIlI21'll> . Figure 3. Population density in WRIA 17 in 2000 (Washington Department of Ecology, htto:l/www.ecv,wal!ov/serviceslrrlslmanslwrialoonInonden17.odf), 15 ',,;'" ,--,,-: 'f; "iff-- '"~. .,," - . ~~ "'"' ~";" S C' " ~~ " ,~' ,~-, ,..". V~fJf____~;iI01lon_"'" 1 '".iiat~~ ", ~~ ~..aildleB,20(4).UuitQwi"~~ 11 f-.I,~Qvt nu.'~ r~~~.. t. QgoOlder("Uid~(~_ . bedroek. ;~> ",", .,~ ' ,,'~ "!-, " /:' ,. ,;. he f" /f '.j; '~,. >,. ~'" .' - ,< ~-: . "-'~.