HomeMy WebLinkAboutLog225
,
Page 1 of .10
Nancy Dorgan
# L~~~
Page_l_ ot5:l
~
From:
To:
"Cronin, Koko Z NWS" <Koko.Z.Cronin@nws02.usace.army.mil>
"David W. Johnson" <dwjohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>; "Nancy Dorgan"
<ndorgan@waypoint.com>; "Kennedy, Jack NWS" <Jack.Kennedy@nws02.usace.army.mil>
"Ochoa, Lori" <loch461@ECY.WA.GOV>; "Jeffree Stewart (E-mail)" <jste461@ecy.wa.gov>
Thursday, April 13, 2006 12:32 PM
RE: COE/JARPA Review - Marrowstone
Cc:
Sent:
Subject:
To all:
I'd like to put an end to this string of emails.Mr. Johnson, if you have a USACE Ref# for the project, please email
it to me so that I may investigate. Otherwise, there is not nor has been an application in this office and since you
say you sent it (the PO Box is correct), then it didn't get here. If there is a pipeline going into wetland or crossing
them and the project is more than 500 feet long (among other things), then it is the project proponent's
responsibility to procure all necessary permit, or jurisdictional determinations - neither of which are completed
overthe phone. USACE is never either a proponent or an opponent to any project for which a DA permit is
required; our agency facilitates coordination and consultation with the public, other Federal agencies, fulfills our
Tribal Trust responsibilities and make a final decision that is the least environmentally damaging practicable
alternative.
If we do not issue a permit for which may be later determined work that did require a permit, then the project
proponent is potentially opening up their agency to a lawsuit (by other parties) in addition to our agency
conducting investigations to d~ermine the extent of unauthorized impacts (if any) to all waters of the United
States. .
Our available resources generally prevents us from being able to comment on projects that do not have an active
application on file with our office, hence the low to nil number of comments that are received due to SEPA
documentation, public hearipgs, etc. That said, if I had a copy of the plans and the existing environmental
conditions, I may be able to provide the project proponent with comments to apply to the hearing record. No one
or agency can force the proponent to submit an application to our office. I have searched our database for all
projects with "Jefferson County" as the proponent back through 1996 and there is nothing associated with a
pipeline (water treatment or otherwise).
I hope this settles all the comments. The proponent knows what they need to do to finalize any questions on
jurisdiction and the citizens' groups can file a complaint through our Enforcement Section if they believe there are
unauthorized impacts to jurisdictional waters of the United States. When or if we receive an application for the
project, the Permit Processing Section will then proceed appropriately.
Sincerely,
RECEIVE1D
Koko
KtJleo Zt:irtft Cronin
Biologist/Project Manager
South Application Review Section
Seattle District Regulatory Branch
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
4735 East Marginal Way South
Seattle, Washington 98134
JEffERSON COUNlY OeD
P: 206.764.6878
F: 206.764.6602
1Irr.~. 0 I
4/17/2006
Page 2 of 10
From: David W. Jotlnson [mailto:dwjohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us]
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 20069:17 AM
To: Nancy Dorgan; Kennedy, Jack NWS
Cc: Ochoa, Lori; Cronin, Koko Z NWS; Jeffree Stewart (E-mail)
Subject: RE: COE/JARPA Review - Marrowstone
The Causeway has been removed from the proposal as well as the jurisdictional ditch associated with the wetland
at the south end of Mystery Bay. Most of the construction will not take place within shoreline jurisdiction. The
shoreline hearing is scheduled for next Tuesday.
From: Nancy Dorgan [mailto:ndorgan@waypoint.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 9:02 AM
To: Kennedy, Jack NWS
Cc: Ochoa, Lori; Cronin, Koko Z NWS; Jeffree Stewart (E-mail); David W. Johnson
Subject: COE/JARPA Review - Marrowstone
Jack,
It sounds like a few phone calls quietly disposed of J ARPA without the necessity of
applications and a paper trail. No agency is going negative on this one, so COE has
company.
As a follow-up to your email, if you're curious about the area, ESA, etc., I've attached a
few docs that give a snapshot of environmental concerns regarding this project, which in
its entirety is planned to run the length and width of Marrowstone and loop across the
causeway to connect with the Navy's Indian Island system. A significant portion of the
construction will happen within the shorelines jurisdiction, including boring in the
causeway, because that's where the roads are. Adjacent wetlands both in and outside of
the shorelines jurisdiction will be affected by construction, and all construction is to
occur within existing roadside drainage ditches. Four feet of soil will be removed,
stored, and then replaced during pipe installation. It didn't seem too much to
require water quality certification for this.
Attached:
. Shorelines map of Marrowstone Island, which is wholly classified as "Conservancy"
. NOAA map of the Hood Canal Summer Chum ESU, which includes Marrowstone
Island
. Jefferson County Shoreline Master Plan Update Inventory, Shoreline Inventory and
Analysis, 2005. Pages 52-57 will give you a quick read of environmental issues in
this area, e.g. eelgrass, juvenile salmonids, causeway, etc.: .. Between the two
islands is Kilisut Harbor and Scow Bay with rich shellfish beds, herring spawning
grounds and large concentrations of over wintering waterfowl'.
LOG ITEM .
# 1-1-r
Pag~._'b- ot_
4/17/2006
,
Page 3 of 10
We have some ducks here.
Nancy
-- Original Message -
From: Kennedy. Jack NWS
To: Nancy Dorgan
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 9:25 AM
Subject: WSDOT Funding
It doesn't walk like a duck. It doesn't swim like a duck. It doesn't quack like a duck. My guess is that it is not a
duck.
I, too, took a phone call on this a year and a half ago, and I forget its substance.
Sure looks like no action, no ESA, and at the worst, coverable by the "non-reporting phase" of NWP 18.
JK
From: Nancy Dorgan [mailto:ndorgan@waypoint.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 9:15 PM
To: Cronin, Koko Z NWS
Cc: Ochoq, Lori; David Johnson; Jeffree Stewart (E-mail); Kennedy, Jack NWS
Subject: Re: MLA06-0oo44
Koko,
I don't know of any DOT funding, but the PUD got a whopping Public Works Trust Fund
allocation (attached) for the system that might be relevant to your search. Legislators
thought they were voting for a public system intended to replace private wells and address
(unquantified) issues of saltwater intrusion. The PUD, however, consistently states that the
purpose of the proposal is not saltwater intrusion, but because residents asked for public
water. No wells are required to be commissioned after public supply is available.
Nancy
-- Original Message --
From: Cronin. Koko Z NWS
To: Nancy Dorgan
Cc: Ochoa. Lori ; David Johnson; Jeffree Stewart (E-mail) ; Kennedy. Jack NWS
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 11 :05 PM
Subject: RE: MLA06-00044
Are there WADOT funds for this proposal? We have a separate WADOT team for applications that have
state funding. I've cc'ed Jack Kennedy, he would be a person to contact if there is state funding. That still
would not explain why it isn't in our system; either the JARPA got lost getting to our office or it was never sent
to us directly.
Koko
From: Nancy Dorgan [mailto:ndorgan@waypoint.com]
Sent: Wed 4/12/2006 8:32 PM
To: Cronin, Koko Z NWS
.. LOG ~E..M-
# ~<-S
Pagt3. ot_
4/17/2006
Page 4 of 10
Cc: Ochoa, Lori; David Johnson; Jeffree Stewart (E-mail)
Subject: Re: MLA06-oD044
Koko,
Thanks for "setting the record straight". This proposal has been an extreme case of PUD
bob and weave that has made it difficult to know what is in or out of the proposal at any
particular time (e.g. causeway). We thought JARPA was "in" because of the signed and
dated application in the file.
JARPA and COE contacts were included in the attached pre-app summary, which is the
reason you received all those comment letters.
Nancy
- Original Message -
From: Cronin. Koko Z NWS
To: Ochoa. Lori; David W. Johnson; Nancy Dorgan
Cc: James parker; Paul Anderson; Stewart. Jeff R. (ECY)
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 8:10 PM '
Subject: RE: MLA06--00044
To all:
I did not receive a JARPA nor is there an active application pending in this office. I review all applications I
receive within 10 days and make contact with the applicant regarding completeness. What I did receive are
about 15 comment letters from citizens, which is why I called about the project. If there is a question of
Corps jurisdiction, then the application must be sent to our office is Jefferson County PUD wishes to have in
writing any documentation from our office.
I hope this clears up some questions regarding what we have or don't have.
Koko
From: Ochoa, Lori [mailto:loch461@ECY.WA.GOV]
Sent: Wed 4/12/2006 4: 12 PM
To: David W. Johnson; Nancy Dorgan
Cc: Cronin, Koko Z NWS; James parker; Paul Anderson; Stewart, Jeff R. (ECY)
Subject: RE: MLA06-00044
Hi David,
Just to clarify roles a bit, any review that Jeff Stewart provided was done in the context of shoreline
permitting. I am the Federal Permit Coordinator for the Southwest Regional Office and am responsible for
review of applications for 401 Certifications. I would be happy to talk with you or Parametrix about this
further.
Lori Ochoa
Federal Permit Coordinator
Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program
Southwest Regional Office
(360) 407-6926
LOG ITEM
-----Original Message-~--- .;.;. ("'") ""7 ~.
From: David W. Johnson [mailto:dwjohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us] TT'...L::. <- -::J
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 3:39 PM Pag A Lf f
To: Nancy Dorgan "'.~_ 0 __
Cc: Koko.Z.Cronin@nws02.usace.army.mil; Ochoa, Lori; James parker; Paul Anderson
4/17/2006
Page 5 of 10
Subject: RE: MLA06-00044
That's interesting since Koko actually called me in December and told me that the PUD needed to
check with the Coast Guard to see if they had jurisdiction over the Causway (since then, the
Causeway has been removed from the project). So, she did receive the reviewer materials that
included the JARPA (but never processed them) and this was also sent to Jeff Stewart. Parametrix's
impact assessment reviewed these requirements and states, "Ecology is not requiring a water quality
certification permit for this project." The only jurisdictional ditch that was identified is at the Southern
end of Mystery Bay and the water line will not be installed at that location.
From: Nancy Dorgan [mailto:ndorgan@waypoint.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 2:50 PM
To: David W. Johnson
Subject: MLA06-o0044
David,
The PUD has intentionally broken up its Marrowstone project into bits and pieces for
stated and unstated reasons. MLA06-00044 is the first bit, but probably the most
significant. In the context of the constellation of related PUD permits, I would like to
note on the record that neither the Department of Ecology nor the Army Corps of
Engineers has a record of ever receiving a JARPA application from the PUD for the
Marrowstone system. Please include following messages in the record for MLA06-
00044.
Thanks.
Nancy
----- Original Message -----
From: Cronin. Koko Z NWS
To: Nancy Dorgan
Cc: Ochoa. Lori
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 20064:23 PM
Subject: RE: COE - Marrowstone Water System Construction Review
Nancy, we do not have anything pending or final under "JCPUD" or anything with a project name
including the word "Marrowstone."
Koko
From: Nancy Dorgan [mailto:ndorgan@waypoint.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 2:18 PM
To: Cronin, Koko Z NWS
Cc: Ochoa, Lori
SUbject: COE - Marrowstone Water System Construction Review
Importance: High
LOG ITEM
# 2?.,t1)'
Pag'3~~ut_
Koko,
Lori Ochoa gave me your name and email address so I could check with you
whether COE ever received an application from Jefferson County Public Utility
District no. 1 for review of their proposed Marrowstone Island water system
construction. The pipeline route includes adjacent wetlands and construction will
4/17/2006
Page 6 of 10
excavate existing roadside ditches that drain to saltwater. DOE does not have any
record of any such application, and I need to know the status of an application at
CaE.
This is a time sensitive question, as the comment period for one of the three permits
closes today and another next Tuesday for the shorelines permit. Could you quickly
check your database for me? As I noted to Lori in an email (below), the county's
project file includes a signed PUD JARPA application dated 5-03-05, but there's
nothing in the file from CaE regarding a jurisdictional determination. Is that
decisions still pending? Did you receive the application??
Thanks so much,
Nancy Dorgan
Port Townsend
- Original Message ----
From: Ochoa. Lori
To: Nancy Dorgan
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 1:19 PM
Subject: RE: More Questions Re: DOE Water Quality Certification Process for Marrowstone Pipeline
Permits
Hi Nancy -
In response to your questions:
. JARPA entries are never deleted from our database. If the Corps makes a jurisdictional
determination of no-jurisdiction, then that is the federal action and gets entered into the system
with the rest of the project information. My question to you is: Was that the federal action in this
case? If so, do you know what the basis for a no-jurisdiction call was? (Ecology still has
regulatory authority over isolated wetlands even though they are not under Corps jurisdiction.)
. It is the applicant's responsibility (or their agent) to submit an application for a401 Certification
to Ecology. They are not forwarded to us by the Corps.
. I found nothing in the database under the last name of Parker.
Sometimes, the applicant waits for the Corps decision to see if they need to come to Ecology for a
401 Certification. For Nationwide Permits (NWPs), the Corps has the ability to determine if the project
is in compliance with state water quality standards. When the Corps is unable to make that
determination, they will send the applicant to Ecology to make that determination. Not all NWP's
require a 401 Certification. It is not unusual for Ecology to not receive an application until after a
Corps decision has been made.
Lori Ochoa
Federal Permit Coordinator
Shorelands & Environmental Assistance Program
Southwest Regional Office
(360) 407-6926
-----Original Message-----
From: Nancy Dorgan [mailto:ndorgan@waypoint.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 10:45 AM
To: Ochoa, Lori
Cc: Stewart, Jeff R. (ECY)
Subject: More Questions Re: DOE Water Quality Certification Process for Marrowstone
.. LOG ITEM
# L2~
Pag'3_-Lof
--
4/17/2006
Page 7 of 10
Pipeline Permits
Lori,
Thanks so much for researching this so quickly. It's puzzling to me that your
database doesn't show a 401 application for Marrowstone, because our local
project file includes a 12-page JARPA application signed by PUD Manager
James G. Parker on 5-3-05. The file also contains a 11-14-05 memo from
Parker to County about needed studies for the JARPA permit.
More Questions:
. If the Corps made a subsequent determination that the project was not
jurisdictional, would the initial JARPA application still show up in your
database or would it have been deleted?
. Do you know if it is the applicant's responsibility to send a JARPA request
to DOE?
. Would you do a search under James G.Parker as applicant just in case it
didn't get entered for the PUD as applicant?
Thanks for Koko's email. I'll ask her if she ever received anything.
Nancy
----- Original Message -----
rom: Ochoa, Lori
0: Nancv Dorgan
c: Stewart. Jeff R. (ECY)
ent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 10:49 AM
ubject: RE: DOE Water Quality Certification Process for Marrowstone Pipeline Permits
i Nancy,
am still not seeing anything in our database for a 401 Certification Application for this
roject or applicant. Our database covers submittals of JARPA's as a request for a 401
ertification, as well as any federal action on a project that would potentially trigger the need
or a 401 Certification. You may want to check with the Corps of Engineers to see if they
ave a pending application for this project. The Corps Project Manager that covers the
efferson County area is Koko Cronin at Koko.Z.Cronin@nws02.usace.army.mil. Please feel
ree to give me a call if you would like to talk about this further.
ori Ochoa
ederal Permit Coordinator
horelands & Environmental Assistance Program
outhwest Regional Office
360) 407-6926
-----Original Message-----
From: Nancy Dorgan [mailto:ndorgan@waypoint.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 20064:49 PM
To: Ochoa, Lori
Cc: Stewart, Jeff R. (ECY); Lux, Gretchen; Lund, Perry
Subject: Re: DOE Water Quality Certification Process for Marrowstone Pipeline
Permits
Hi Lori,
LOG ITENa
# 't, ~.E)
Pagf3.~LOt_ 4/17/2006
Page 8 of 10
Thanks for your reply. The applicant is Jefferson County Public Utility
District no. 1, which has three permits now pending review with
Jefferson County Department of Community Development for the
construction of a new water system. One is a Shorelines permit, and
the other two are for construction in areas outside that jurisdiction.
I hope that will help you narrow your search. Would your database
include all certification applications or only those going forward in the
process? I'm trying to find any kind of paper trail regarding possible
DOE review in a CWA certification process.
Thanks again.
Nancy
- Original Message -
rom: Ochoa. Lori
0: ndorgan@waypoint.com
c: Stewart. Jeff R. (ECY)
ent: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 6:04 PM
ubject: FW: DOE Water Quality Certification Process for Marrowstone Pipeline
ermits
ello Nancy,
could not find anything in our database for this project. If you have an applicant
ame that I could query, that may be helpful.
ori Ochoa
ederal Permit Coordinator
horelands & Environmental Assistance Program
outhwest Regional Office
360) 407..6926
----Original Message-----
rom: Stewart, Jeff R. (ECY)
nt: Tuesday, April 11, 2006 11:58 AM
0: Ochoa, Lori
c: Lund, Perry; Lux, Gretchen
ubject: FW: DOE Water Quality Certification Process for Marrowstone Pipeline
ermits
I Marrowstone
effree Stewart
horeline Specialist
ashington Department of Ecology
60-407-6521
----Original Message----
rom: Nancy Dorgan [mailto:ndorgan@waypoint.com]
nt: Monday, April 10, 2006 10:01 AM
0: Stewart, Jeff R. (ECY)
c: David Johnson
ubject: DOE Water Quality Certification Process for Marrowstone Pipeline Permits
LOG. ITE.M
# 1-Lf;
Pag'3. ~ ot_
4/17/2006
Page 9 of 10
Jeffree,
Can you tell me whether DOE is doing a water quality certification
process for any of the three pending Marrowstone permits or whether
they have been given a State/Federal pass? I found the following
overall description of DOE's process from your website:
Conditioning Proiects: The agency issues water quality
certifications and Coastal Zone Management Act consistency
eterminations for water-related construction projects. Staff
provide early review on projects whenever possible (e.g. through
State Environmental Policy Act review and preapplication
meetings) and provide project guidance and technical assistance
through phone calls, e-mails, site visits, and workshops. Projects
are approved, denied, or conditioned to protect water quality,
sediment quality, and fish and shellfish habitat. This activity
allows the state to actively participate in federal permitting
activities to ensure state interests are adequately represented
and considered. (Authorizing Laws - Federal Clean Water Act
and 90.48 RCW)
Result: Review and certify projects to protect water quality,
habitat, and aquatic life. Review and certify projects in a timely,
efficient, consistent, and thorough manner. 0 90% of applicants
are notified within 14 calendar days (10 working days) when a
Joint Aquatic Resource Permit Application is received. 0 90% of
routine 401 water quality certifications are issued within 90 days.
I attended the Toxies in Puget Sound forum last week in Seattle, and
the research on environmental consequences of contaminants in
sediments was chilling The information and presentations made me
even more ooncerned than before about accumulated pesticide,
fertilizer, fecal, and automotive-related toxins now in Marrowstone
ditches either in or near the shoreline jurisdictions. The proposed
pipeline construction will excavate 4 feet of soil from the bottom of
miles of existing stormwater drainage ditches, pile that material
alonside the road while pipes are being installed in the ditches, and
then redeposit contaminated soil in the ditches.
At every step of the process, there is a significant possibility that
pollutants either long buried or already at the surface will be be blown
off the piles or transported through stormwater runoff to waters of the
State and critical aquatic habitat despite the best of intentions and
required BMP's.
So,
. Has DOE concluded that the Marrowstone permits are exempt
from DOE water quality certification?
. If so would you send me a copy of that determination?
. Would you send me the criteria DOE uses for determining
LOG 'TEM- whether or not certification is required?
'# '1..,'lJ;. With.out a pr?'per water quality ce~ification pr?cess of water .
.- 0, j. ~ quality conditions before construction, how Will we ever know If
Pagf'3_--=+-O -- 4/17/2006
Page 10 of 10
impairment has happened as a result of the construction?
Public comment on one of the permits ends April 14, and it would be
very helpful if you could clarify this today or tomorrow.
Thanks so much for any help with this.
Nancy
# LO~.f~
Page i ,D of
....v_ __
4/17/2006
Page 1 of 1
Nancy Dorgan
From:
To:
Cc:
Sent:
Subject:
"Kennedy, Jack NWS" <Jack.Kennedy@nws02.usace.army.mil>
<ndorgan@waypoint.com>
"Cronin, Koko Z NWS" <Koko.Z.Cronin@nws02.usace.army.mil>
Thursday, April 13, 2006 11: 19 AM
FW: WSDOT Funding
Nancy, I had meant the comment I sent to you to go to Koko Cronin instead, and merely be my comment on the
evolving sets of information that spread outward from many centers. I had just wanted to say it did not look like
any WSDOT money was involved
We need a JARPA, and a good amount of our own careful considerations to the answers in its questions about
location, description, purpose, and extent. If a water line runs from a new well, through "some jurisdictional
ditches" and elsewhere in an upland distribution system, that is one thing, and relatively simple. If the water is
being piped from oft-island under navigable waters, that is quite another. For all the commentary, we have not
received enough information to even set the boundaries for what we call "the total and complete project." Atter
that, we make some sort of jurisdictional determination about the various pieces it has been broken into, and
THEN we decide how to proceed.
None of that has happened, and it probably all should. Otherwise the project is vulnerable to being stopped by
an activist opponent who discovers that a necessary permit requirement has been overlooked by project
proponents.
Stick with Koko on this case, and have the other participants do that, too.
Jack Kennedy
Transportation Liaison Team
From: Cronin, Koko Z NWS
Sent: Thursday, April!3, 2006 8:10 AM
To: Kennedy, Jack NWS
Subject: RE: WSDOT Funding
in december he told me there was a segment that crossed tidal waters - sounds like it has changed.
From: Kennedy, Jack NWS
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2006 8:03 AM
To: Cronin, Koko Z NWS
Subject: FW: WSDOT Funding
Koko, I sent this to Nancy Dorgan by mistake. Meant it for you. JK
LOG ITEM
# 7-7-5-
Page-LL ot __ _.
Arr, '" Ill, ~
4/17/2006
--=--.~
POWER PLAY ON AIRPORT ROAD
TOM THOMPSON/PE:'<i'\Sl L\ D,\JLY NEWS
~/"> .~ I () -, d
j-')--1/\/ ' t)<j'
Worhers lay pipe to run electricit.y and water service underground across
Airport Road at US. Highu.Jay 101 in Port .L4..ngeles on Tu.esday. The section
of highway is being transformed to allow power and water upgrades that will
help support the new Port Angeles Hardu)ood LLC mill ullder cT6~1W
the nearby Eclipse lndustnal Park south of the highway. .,
4rr. d a
Page
Hydrogeologic Evaluation of
Four Corners Well #1
Prepared for:
PUD #1 of Jefferson County
Prepared by:
Pacific Groundwater Group
2377 Eastlake Avenue East
Seattle, WA 98102
May 18, 2005
JZ0403
LOG ITE..M.
# ~7-6
Page_Cg ({
An-:tIo 4-
issuing a water right transfer for the well. Specifically, this report documents the water right to be
changed, evaluates the potential for water-right impairment and detrimental environmental impacts,
and describes the source of water for both the original water right and the proposed new point of
withdrawal.
Pacific Groundwater Group's (PGG's) role in the project included: observation of well drilling,
providing well design recommendations, review of hydrogeologic data, aquifer testing, reduction
and analysis of test data, yield and impact assessment, and report preparation. JCPUD prepared
technical specifications for the well and worked cooperatively with PGG to log the geology during
well drilling, locate wells in the site vicinity, and collect data during aquifer testing.
This work was performed and this report was prepared in accordance with generally accepted
hydrogeologic practices at this time and in this area for the exclusive use of JCPUD. No other
warranty, expressed of implied, is made.
2 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Well FC-I is located at the Jefferson County Airport, approximately 1.5 miles northwest of
JCPUD's Sparling Well. The well was drilled to a depth of263 feet below land surface (bls),
and completed with well screen and a sand pack between 222 to 258 feet bls.
2. During drilling, the well penetrated about 70 feet ofVashon till (Qvt) underlain by about 55 feet
of coarse-grained (sandy) Vashon Advance Outwash deposits (Qvac), about 45 feet of fine-
grained (silt/clay) Vashon Advance Outwash deposits (Qvaf), and about 90 feet of variably
sandy, variably silty older glacial deposits (Qgo). Limited saturation in the Qvac led to deeper
drilling and ultimate well completion in the Qgo.
3. Observation of shallow till in the Airport vicinity caused PGG to revise the geologic cross-
section prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) through the same area. The USGS
previously interpreted conditions in this area as Vashon Recessional Outwash deposits (Qgo)
immediately overlying Vashon Advance Outwash deposits. Till in Well FC-I appears to
correlate to similar deposits in neighboring wells.
4. The groundwater flow system in the study area is a regionally interconnected sequence of
aquifer units. The USGS observe that the Qvac, Qvaf and Qgo comprise an interconnected flow
unit, and that the Qva deposits are directly connected with surficial Qvr deposits where Qvt is
absent. Qvt is absent near the Sparling Well, allowing an interconnection between Qva, Qvr,
and Chimacum Creek.
5. Although the various hydrogeologic units appear to be interconnected on a regional scale,
PGG's local investigations showed some degree ofconfmement and/or leakage between units on
a local scale. PGG monitored three wells before, during, and after testing of Well FC-I. The
monitoring data and the testing data suggest varying degrees of hydraulic connection and
confmement. In some cases the observed responses are contradictory, suggesting a degree of
Pacific Groundwater Group
Four Comers Well #1
Page 2
LOG ITEM
# "22- e;-..
Psg '3 ~C.':ft)l
radius, interference drawdowns on the order of 0.9 to 1.5 feet are not expected to impair existing
groundwater users.
12. Chimacum Creek is hydraulically connected to the Qva/Qgo groundwater flow system, and
pumping from either unit will cause some degree of baseflow reduction in the creek. Approval
of the proposed water-right transfer requires that net baseflow impacts to the creek associated
with transferred pumping to Well FC-l not exceed net impacts expected from similar pumping
in the Sparling Well, and that the impacts associated with Well FC-l pumping not occur
upstream of those associated with Sparling Well pumping. PGG's review of hydrogeologic
conditions found this to be the case for the following reasons:
· The Sparling Well is located much closer to Chimacum Creek than Well FC-l;
· The Sparling Well is located closer to bedrock features than Well FC-l;
· The Sparling Well is completed shallower in the flow system than Well FC-l; and,
· The nearest point along Chimacum Creek to the Sparling Well is farther upstream than the
nearest point to Well FC-l.
13. PGG evaluated saltwater intrusion potential associated with drawdowns caused by pumping well
FC-l at an average annual withdrawal of 200 af7yr. Model predicted drawdowns at depths
where the aquifer system is connected to marine water bodies range from around 0.2 to 0.3 feet
along Port Townsend Bay to around 0.3 to 0.5 feet along portions Discovery Bay (i.e. near
Adelma Beach). These estimated drawdowns are relatively small. Available data suggest that
wells near Adelma Beach exhibit no pr\or history of saltwater intrusion, nor are they rated "at-
risk" to saltwater intrusion by Jefferson County. Along Port Townsend Bay, several sampled
wells ate not rated as "at-risk" by the County; however, one "at-risk" well has a documented
chloride concentration of 165 mg/l.
14. Based on the findings of this study, PGG recommends that:
· JCPUD submit this report to Ecology in support of the proposed water right transfer.
· JCPUD instrument Well FC-l and nearby monitoring wells with pressure transducers and
automated data loggers to gather background data useful in better understanding the factors
influencing the groundwater flow system and interconnection between aquifer zones.
· During pump installation, JCPUD install access ports in Well FC-l for a water-level sounder
and a dedicated pressure transducer. Installation of a transducer will allow automated water-
level monitoring in the well. JCPUD should also monitor pumping rates and water use in
Well FC-l so well performance can be evaluated periodically.
· JCPUD should consider monitoring a well along both Discovery Bay and Port Townsend
Bay for water-level elevation and chloride concentration. Collection of both background
data and data once pumping begins will help in better assessing saltwater intrusion potential
Pacific Groundwater Group
Four Comers Well #1
Page 4
LOG ITENi
# '2-z-~
Pagl3 ___l5:...of
The drawdowns predicted by the model are unlikely to impair the customary use of private wells
surrounding Well FC-I. Well AP-2a is owned and operated by JCPUD, and should have sufficient
available drawdown to sustain 1.4 feet of interference drawdown. Based on the current pumping
rates and reported specific capacity values shown above, OMY's primary pumping well (OMY -1) is
estimated to use only about 10 to 15 feet of its available drawdown, and can easily sustain an
additional foot of drawdown. If Well OMY-2 were pumped at a similar rate, it would use about 22
feet of its 47 feet of available drawdown. The Ocean Grove Lotowners Association Well was
installed in 1981 with the proposed use listed as "community". However, the well is sited on
currently undeveloped land, and shows no sign of use. Finally, the Brees Well (located in the NE y..
of the SE y.. of Section 33) is unlikely to be pumped at high rates for domestic use, and should be
able to withstand loss of 1.5 feet of its 35 feet of available drawdown.
7.2 POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO SURFACE WATERS
Chimacum Creek is a perennial stream that is located about 850 feet from the Sparling Well and
about a mile from Well FC-l (Figure 1). The creek is hydraulically connected to the saturated Qvr
sediments, which are hydraulically connected to the Qva/Qog aquifer system. Pumping from either
of the two wells will cause drawdown to propagate through the aquifer system and ultimately
stabilize at a new equilibrium. Drawdown beneath the creek will cause a proportionate reduction in
base flow either by reducing groundwater discharge into the creek or by increasing seepage losses
out of the creek. Given this hydraulic connection, some degree of pumping impact is unavoidable.
The WRIA 17 basin planning process is currently in the process of setting regulatory minimum
instream flow requirements for Chimacum Creek. Because the proposed flow requirements are
currently unmet, new water right applications within the Chimacum Creek basin will likely be
denied unless the water rights are accompanied by flow mitigations. However, the basin planning
process recognizes that active water rights issued prior to setting regulatory flow requirements are
senior to these requirements. The Sparling water right was issued in 1956 for municipal use, and
was allotted an annual withdrawal quantity (Qa) designed to meet the needs of the community over a
given time period. As previously noted, the Sparling water right currently uses about 80 percent of
its Qa, with the remainder dedicated to meeting the future needs of the community. JCPUD could
withdraw this remaining 200 aflyr from the Sparling Site; but instead proposes to withdraw it from
Well FC-I.
Approval of the proposed water-right transfer from the Sparling Well to Well FC-l will require that
the baseflow impacts of pumping 200 aflyr from Well FC-I do not exceed those associated with
pumping an equivalent volume from the Sparling Well. Impacts are measured as change in total
streamflow, and the "non-exceedence" criteria holds for all points along the stream. That is, at any
point along the stream, the net impact from pumping Well FC-I must not exceed the net impact
associated with increased pumping in the Sparling well. The locations of the two wells and the
hydrogeology of the basin strongly suggest that the Sparling Well will derive a greater portion of its
pumping from baseflow depletion in Chimacum Creek, and that the associated depletion will extend
farther upstream. The following observations support this finding:
Pacific Groundwater Group
Four Comers Well #1
Page 26
LOG ITEM
# L--z.-C)
Pag~~&ot_
1. The Sparling Well is located much closer to Chimacum Creek than Well FC-l;
2. The Sparling Well is located closer to bedrock features than Well FC-I; and,
3. The Sparling Well is completed shallower in the flow system than Well FC-l;
4. The nearest point along Chimacum Creek to the Sparling Well is farther upstream than the
nearest point to Well FC-I.
The closer proximity from the Sparling Well to the creek suggests higher drawdowns beneath the
creek and therefore greater baseflow reductions. The greater distance between Well FC-l and the
creek implies that less drawdown will occur beneath the creek. Rather than baseflow depletion,
more of the water pumped from Well FC-l will be derived from precipitation recharge to the water
table and reduced discharge to marine water bodies. The Sparling Well's proximity to bedrock
boundaries (Figure 3) could also serve to increase local drawdown relative to drawdown associated
with pumping Well FC-I. More importantly, the deeper completion elevation of Well FC-l (Figure
5) is likely to support less hydraulic connection between the production zone and the shallower
portion of the flow system that supports baseflow in Chimacum Creek. Although the Qva/Qgo
aquifer system may function as an interconnected unit, silty layers and localized confining units tend
to cause "anisotropy" (where vertical hydraulic conductivity is less than horizontal hydraulic
conductivity), which inhibits the prorogation of drawdown from deeper portions of the system to
shallower portions of the system. Finally, because the Sparling Well nears Chimacum Creek farther
upstream than Well FC-l, its (greater) baseflow depletion will occur farther upstream from any
depletion caused by pumping Well Fe-I.
7.3 SALTWATERINTRUSIONPOTENTIAL
Freshwater in the Qva/Qgo aquifer system is hydraulically connected to saltwater in Discovery Bay
and Port Townsend Bay. The fresh groundwater and the marine saltwater maintain a dynamic
balance, with the lighter freshwater "floating" above the denser saltwater. The saltwater forms a
"wedge" beneath the freshwater that extends farther inland with depth. The interface between
freshwater and saltwater can be somewhat diffuse, and is referred to as the "zone of diffusion". The
extent to which saltwater penetrates inland in an aquifer depends on the freshwater hydraulic heads
(groundwater elevations) in the aquifer and the bottom depth of the aquifer. In some aquifer
systems, freshwater heads are sufficiently high to preclude the occurrence of saltwater altogether. In
other systems, limited recharge can make freshwater heads sufficiently low that saltwater naturally
extends inland with depth. Reduction of groundwater elevations increases the potential for inland
occurrence of saltwater. Because pumping causes drawdown of groundwater levels, all pumping has
the potential to cause (or exacerbate) saltwater intrusion. However, ifhead changes associated with
pumping are sufficiently small, or where aquifers exhibit sufficiently high groundwater elevations to
start, pumping drawdowns can occur without significant impact to groundwater salinity.
The groundwater model presented in Section 7.1 allows estimation of drawdown along the
coastlines of Discovery Bay and Port Townsend Bay. The contours shown on Figure 16 represent
drawdown in a deeper portion of the groundwater flow system, below the elevation of either
Pacific Groundwater Group
Four Comers Well #1
Page 27
LOG ITENI
# L-2-5
Pagf3._Llot_
Page 1 of 2
Nancy Dorvan
From:
To:
Cc:
"Tung, Simon (DOH)" <Simon.Tung@DOH.WAGOY>
"Nancy Dorgan" <ndorgan@waypoint.com>
"Waybright, Bonnie (DOH)" <Bonnie.Waybright@DOH.WAGOY>; "Lahmann, Denise (DOH)"
<Denise.Lahmann@DOH.WAGOY>; "Klocke, Karen (DOH)" <Karen.Klocke@DOH.WAGOY>
Friday, April 14, 2006 6:35 PM
RE: Marrowstone Project Report Capacity analysis and Sparling Water Right Conditions
Sent:
Subject:
Dear Ms Dornan.
Thank you for your email and its attachments. They were very informative.
I have not had the opportunity to review the Marrowstone Island Water System Improvements Project Report file
in detail as yet. I do note that the most recent comment pertaining to this project requested information regarding
options for additional source capacity. As of this date, we have not received a response to this letter, which was
sent on August 4, 2005.
Be assured that we will give due consideration to your comments as we continue with the review of this project.
**********************************************************************
Simon T. Tung, P.E.
Acting Regional Engineer
Office of Drinking Water
Southwest Drinking Water Operations
POBox 47823
Olympia, WA 98504-7823
Phone: 360-664-8734
FAX: 360-664-8058
Email: simon.tung@doh.wa.gov
Drinking Water Program website: http://www.doh.wa.gov/ehp/dw
Public Health - Always working for a safer and healthier Washington
From: Nancy Dorgan [mailto:ndorgan@waypoint.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 20067:25 PM
To: Tung, Simon (DOH)
Cc: Klocke, Karen (DOH); Stohr, Joe; Peter, Marie; Waybright, Bonnie (DOH); Marti, Jeff (ECY)
Subject: Marrowstone Project Report Capacity analysis and Sparling Water Right Conditions
Simon,
I have an answer to the questiol] , asked you in my last email about which agency monitors
static levels. I've attached a cie..~~y of the 1997 DOE Sparling primary water right approval, and
you will see that its Report of~amination and Certificate are heavily conditioned with DOE
monitoring and reporting requirements. Maintaining static levels is also a requirement imposed
by that water right.
In that regard, I've also attached a handout/report prepared by the PUD's consultant Peter
Schwartzmann of Pacific Groundwater Group. This report was done last August for a PUD
commissioners' workshop on aRematives for increasing Sparling capacOOG ~rt, PGG
# L7 /1R/2006
t4rr. ~ S- Pagf3.-.L S ot_
Page 2 of 2
states that the static level dropped 12 feet from 1998 to 2003.
However, the water right does not allow excessive pumping that lowers static levels. It seems
pretty clear that the level of pumping needed to supply water for an additional possible 916
platted lots (and future subdivions of large parcels) on Marrowstone would further lower static
levels even beyond the planned pumping already approved in the WSP for the new Hadlock
UGA. (The City/County population allocation agreement for the UGA is in the WSP).
I think this "new" information about the water right and diminished static levels is crucial to your
capacity analysis of the PUD's MaITowstone Project Report. In a 2005 email to me, Jerrod
Davis had stated:
"The details of the proposed Marrowstone Island water system are not included in the Water
System Plan. The PUD is required to submit a Water System Plan Amendment that will include
the engineering, including an updated capacity analysis, and construction documents for the
proposed system ".
It was DOH's decision not to do a WSP amendment for Marrowstone and instead to only
require a Project Report with that same information. However, I think before you get too far
into your pending capacity analysis, you should check with DOE to confirm the PGG results vs
their monitoring data as required by the water right to understand the documented failure of the
Sparling well to meet existing demand without aquifer impairment.
As you read through the PUD/Marrowstone files at DOH, it will become pretty clear to you that
there is very strong opposition to the construction of the Marrowstone system. This
is because it relies on out-of-basin water from the Chimacum watershed. WRIA 17 is on~ of
the State's 16 critical watersheds. Supposedly, we plan under GMA, a Coordinated Water
System Plan, and an adopted Watershed Plan, but you would never know it.
Chimacum Creek runs down most of the Quimper Peninsula and right through the UGA.
It supports endangered salmon, but is temperature and flow-impaired most of the year. It is
only 750 feet from the Sparling well. Millions of dollars in habitat restoration grants have been
spent and countless volunteer hours given to restore Chimacum salmon habitat. The small
hard-won gains could easily be lost by illegal over-pumping in the very near future. And that's
what this is all about.
Just some things to think about when you open the file.
Nancy
LOG ITENI
# '7 _15
Pagf3_~ot_. 4/18/2006
Page 1 of 2
Nancy Dorgan
From:
To:
Cc:
"Klocke, Karen (DOH)" <Karen.Klocke@DOH.WAGOV>
"'Nancy Dorgan'" <ndorgan@waypt.com>
"Brower, Fred (DOH)" <Fred.Brower@DOH.WAGOV>; "Waybright, Bonnie (DOH)"
<Bonnie.Waybright@DOH.WAGOV>
Tuesday, October 11, 2005 12:32 PM
RE: Marrowstone Project Report
Sent:
Subject:
Greetings!
I don't know if you are aware of all the changes that have occurred in our office. Fred Brower is the new
regional engineer for Jefferson County. His phone number is 360-664-8734. Bonnie Waybright is our new
temporary assistant regional manager. Her phone number is 360-586-2510.
1. The Quimper Water System, Marrowstone Water Extension project number is #05-0417. Do you have a
copy of the project? If not, I can send it up to you. The project was reviewed and comments were sent to
the PUD on 8/4/05. To date, they have not replied to the comments. The letter is as follows:
August 4, 2005
Jim Parker
Jefferson County Public Utility District #1
Post Office Box 929
Port Hadlock, Washington 98339
Dear Mr. Parker:
Subject:
Quimper Water System, ID #05783, Jefferson County; Water System Improvements
(Marrowstone Island), ODW Project #05~0417
Thank you for submitting a project report for proposed improvements for the referenced system. I have reviewed
the report and the following items are needed prior to project approval.
1. The capacity analysis in this report includes two proposed sources (Four Corner #1 and #2) with a total
capacity of300 gallons per minute (gpm). There are currently no water rights associated with these sources.
Jefferson County Public Utility District's intent was to transfer water rights from the Sparling wellfield to these
wells. However, it is my understanding that the Department of Ecology may not allow this. Please explain what
other options are being considered to obtain the additional source capacity. If a new source capacity
strategy is pursued, please submit a revised project report.
Regulations establishing a schedule of fees for review of planning, engineering, and construction documents were
adopted July 1,2004 (WAC 246-290-990). An itemized bill for $377 is enclosed.
If you have any questions, please contact Bonnie Waybright at (360) 586-2510.
Sincerely,
JERROD DAVIS, P.E.
Office of Drinking Water Assistant Regional Manager
cc: Jefferson County Health Department
LOG ITENI
#1__1-C;-
Pag'3__-:L9Jt_
4/18/2006
Enclosures
Page 2 of 2
2. To the best of my knowledge, nothing has changed since June, except for the comment letter (above).
Quimper does have a project in for iron-manganese pre-design review (#05-1001). It is for well #2, which
will serve Indian Island, and if Marrowstone gets the nod, will serve Marrowstone, too. It was submitted
on 9/30/05, and has not get been reviewed or approved.
3. Amendment means that they (JPUD) will have to write a revision to the current WSP for the Quimper
area portion of the plan. They will have to change their budget, the O&M plan, the coliform plan, the
service area plan, etc. Basically everything that is effected by the project.
4. The last thing I heard (which was earlier this summer) was that JPUD is not planning on doing a SEPA.
Let me know if you need anything else.
Karen J. Klocke
Regional Planner
WSDOH, Office of Drinking Water
Southwest Regional Office
Post Office Box 47823
Olympia, WA 98504-7823
(360) 664-2999
FAX 360-664-8058
Public Health - Always Working for a Safer and Healthier Washington
From: Nancy Dorgan [mailto:ndorgan@waypt.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 05,2005 10:04 AM
To: Klocke, Karen
Subject: Marrowstone Project Report
Hi Karen,
I have a couple of info requests:
1. Can you give me an update on DOH's review/approval of the PUD's
Marrowstone Project Report?
2. Have there been any revisions to the copy that Jerrod gave me in June?
3. Jerrod's deposition for the LUD appeal states: "Project report will be an
amendment to the Water System Plan" (p.3). What
does "amendment" mean in terms of the current approval process?
4. SEPA?
Thanks,
Nancy
LOG ITEM
# '1- '7- ':J
Pag'3__Uot_
4/18/2006
DRAFT
DRAF T
TO:
FROM:
CC:
Tom Loumger, SWRO Section ManageI'
JeffMmt4 Permitting Unit Head
Mmie Peter, Pelmit Writer
SUBJECT:
Spading Well and Enlm'gement
As you are aware, Jefferson County PUD has applied to add an additional point of
withdtawal fOI" Groundwatet. Certificate No_ 3297 - by adding the Fom Comers well as a
sowee for exercising this light.
In evaluating the amendment of a gro-undwatm right, Ecology must comply with RCW
90.44.100(2)( c), which pIOhibits enlargement of the OIiginallight.
Thus, in evaluating this application for change, Ecology must ask, what was the right
conveyed by the oliginal petmit 01 celtificate?
Certificate No_ 3297 has a long and somewhat convoluted history. It was originally
issued in 1956 as a backup well to the City of Po It Iownsend. The ROE authorized a
quantity based upon,
The water requit'ement of the city if calculated on a per capita consumption of 200
gallons a day, OI a total of 1 120 acre-feet annually for the city of 5000 persons,
less any amount withdrawn undel existing rights lOT the same use. (Italics
added)
Ih~ the intent of the water light was to provide what we commonly refer to as a
supplemental water light with what would be considered non-additive quantities. At the
time the original permit issu~ both the Spading well and the OGWS were
interconnected with the City's water distIibution system.
The Permit that issued in July 1956 authOIized a Qi of2250 gpm and a Qa of 1120 does
not desclibe the light as a supplemental reserve right, as the ROE clearly intended. Ihis
does not moot the ROE, because the ROE provisions callY through and inform the intent
ofth.~ light (See Schuh v. Ecology; and, more recently, Kison v. Ecology, PCHB NO.. 01-
044)..
1 In Kison v Ecology, the PCHB held, "The filet that the same express language on total acreage found in
the Report of Examination was not contained in the peImit or certificate is not controlling. .__ Looking
beyond the language appearing on the face of the certificate to other docwnents issued by the Department
in processing the water right is appropriate under the ruling in Schuh v. Department of Ecology . 100 Wn
2d 180,185,667 P 2d 64 (1983)." http://eho.wa.gov/searchdocwnentsl2001%20archivelpchbo/02001-
044o/020finaI.htm
,,{ Deleted: ]1
I 1/23/2006 4:3~:10 P~_u_ _ u_ u~__u - u______ n_U_n Un Un n-n-uL-OG-J!E'~
Y:\JEFF\sparlmg\sparlmg enlargement DRAFT .doc #?.-'2 t;
Pag '3. L.:2-tJf
...~._----- --,
,
A-r-r: lid 6
DRAFT
DRAFT
It is also clear ~ at the time, the City understood the right to serve as reserve right..
The Completion of Construction form filed by city indicated the "well is capped and not
in use." A May 1958 letter from the City to the Department of Conservation stated, "[A]s
you know, the form for PlOof of ApplOpriation is not entitely designed for this situation
where the water is held in reserve." The Proof of Appropriation filed by the city in 1956
indicated that the waters were, "now being held in leseIve only, and not appropriated to
any other use. II The City answered the question on the Proof form, During What Months
is Water Used. with "none, other than as reserve.,"
The certificate that issued also does not repeat the provisions of the ROE. But the state
would likely have been aware that the Proofwas consistent with the intent of the ROE
and likely issued the certificate with the understanding the City could use the quantities at
the Sparling Well whenever the City's primmy rights were unfulfilled.
Up until at least the 1970s, the City of Port Townsend supplied the I ri Area with water
using the Olympic Gravity Water System, which relies upon SUIface water diverted from
the Quilcene and Little Quilcene Rivels.. The Spmling well served as a back-up supply
but was not commonly used until the 1970s because of high iron and manganese
content.,
By the late 1980s, the City was withdrawing approximately 455 acre feet year from both
the Spmling and Kivley wells.
In 1996 the City applied to add another' point of withdrawal to the Spading well.. A
letter from the City stated, "Prior to 1995, the City used this well as a supplemental water
supply for its out oftOWD. setvice area. However', due to chlorine contact time limitations
on the smface water supply....... the City has moved toward using the groundwater' supply
as the ptimary SOUI'ce of water for this service mea. n
Ecology issued a decision approving the additional point of withdrawal. Ecology's ROE
noted, u[D]ue to more stringent smface water treatment requiIements, the City is now
relying on glOundwater as its primmy water som'ce."
By 1999 use from the Spmling and Kively wells approximated 524 acre-feet/year?
The state supreme comt has held that a supplemental tight may only be used if the
primary tight goes unfulfilled (OWL v.. I wisp).. But in authorizing the new point of
withdIawal- and, tacitly, the conve!sion of a supplemental to a primmy light -- Ecology
failed to address whether any of the City's othe!' primmy lights should have been either
reduced by a corresponding amount or made conditional upon the operation of the
Spar"ling Well, I am not aware of any information indicating that the City sUIrendered
any sUIface water lights in exchange for making the glOundwater tight a primary source.
2 http://wria17.co.iefferson.wa.us/PMX response to Water Ouanity Comments. doc FA Deleted: II
1~~~~~~p~;~~~:~g-eDlBrrgernenifjRJlFf~dOC-----------------------[:()tj-l1rEi~
# L-L-1
Pagl3~_~or
DRAF T
DRAF T
In retrospect, it appears the City should been required to submit an application for a new
water right as transfonning a leserve water light to a full-time opetating status essentially
constituted a new appropriation in the Chimacum Basin.
Ecology's appmval of the change decision lead the City to believe it could operate the
well even if its primary smface lights were being :fulfilled.. Ihus. the Sparling Right was
no longer viewed as supplementing the other lights up to a cumulative limit of 1120 acre-
feet pet. year, but rather ADDING a whole new allocation of 1120 -feet per year on top of
the existing appmpriations. In other words, A inclusive ofB became A plus' B.
Ibis directly contradicts the requirements of90.44.l00. ''[W]hele an additional well 01
wells is constructed, the original well 07 wells may continue to be used, but the combined
total withdlllWal flom the original and additional well 01' wells shall not enlarge the right
conveyed by the oliginal pe7mit or certificate. "
The City has acknowledged the apparent disparity between the ROE and the subsequent
pelmit and certificate. In its 1998 watel system plan, the City stated, "The Report of
Examination for this water right, dated Aplill9, 1956, contains a recommendation for a
supplemental limitation which is inconsistent with the subsequently issued petmit and
certificate.. and with the requitement ofRCW 90.03.290 to issue municipal water lights
for a quantity sufficient for futwe gmwth.... [The supplemental limit], had it been set
forth in the pelmit would not have allocated any additional annual quantity of water to
the City.. Because the permit and certificate do not contain this limitation, the City
interprets this water' right as a primary light."
But it's not unusual for the state to authorize alternate SOUlCes that do not actually grant
additional quantities.. Ihe petmit and certificate do not negate the ROE, but must be
read consistently with it in Older to understand the tme intent of the water right (See
Schuh).
There are now two wells at the Spmling location. In 2002, the PUD took over ownership
of the wells and uses them to supply the Quim.pel water system (along with the Kivley
Well). The PUD has applied for a third well- the Four Comers well -- fot" the purpose
of using the full quantity specified on the petmit and certificate as if those quantities are
primmy quantities.
Although ther'e lemains a physical connection between the PUD and the City's
distribution systems, the City and the PUD operate independently of each other without
regard to the supplementa1l-elationship of the PUD's Sparling light to the City's swface
water lights.
The Spmling well was oliginally issued to act as a backup supply to serve a number of
surface water rights in order to seJ:ve a population of 5,000 people. It now serves 4600
people entirely on its own on a full-time basis_ In this situation, enlargement is a forgone
fact. The question we now face, however, is, do we compound the enlmgement, or do
J A Deleted: 11
I 1/23/20064:32:10 PM. _uu_u hu _u_ hU__U_ ____u_ uu _ __ - h---LOG-LTE.JV(
Y:\JEFF\sparling\spmling enlargement DRAF T .doc # 7 ~C;'"
Pag'3 ~~t_
DRAF T
DRAF I
we hold the line and explore other options fO! helping the PUD achieve its water supply
objectives?
I ~~~~:'~g~~jjRAFi:doc--m------~---n~g~~'l~'"
".- /
~
~~,~:, v
~., "
~'
'"'
"1.-.
.~
.,
~
I
3
~
.
~
~
I
~
(c'l -
'.
. , HI~
Depa.tment of Public workl
5210 KUHN STREET
PORT TOWNSEND. WASHINGTON_
3601385-7212
3601385-7675 FAI<
c..... L- I L r ;' , .u I L, .-
J8DIIIIY II. 1996
Depor1Jnair ofEooJogy
Soulhwcst RcgiooaI Office
P.O. Box4mS
Olympia. WA 98SlM-mS
Re: Application for Addilional Point(s) ofGrowdwalcr Divcuioa
. City ofPolt Towmend WalerSavic:c Atea
"-
9" ~~r:' 1 ~
j'
~ 11
.P
'"
.;"
- i,., . ~
(()~
Enclosed is a compIelcd applicalinn form lOr a rtquesl forthe City 10 add anothtr point of
divasion 1IIIdcr Cc:rIificaIt 3297 rllis waIer right, daicd Man:h 2. 1959, aIloWs.the City 10
divert 22SO pI10ns pel" miuutt (peak) and 1120 acre-fCCl pa y_<aw:ragc) The City docs not
in~to~"IlVaIrruse a~1~ lI!Xi-rtin" w:d~ri~hr
~
~
~
~
I
,
The City cooslrlK.ted the exisIiog prodl1C1iolt WeD (City Spadiua WeI1) 1IIIdcr this groundwater
right i81959. In 1995 the insidt of the well was cleaned and a video log of the casing was
n:cordcd. The video sbowtd sigaificanl conosion of the wdI casiDa- In addition. the well
comains iulermi_ s=encd inIaw1s from 75 fect 10 175 ftct bcIowlbe tap ..fthe casing The
_n _ drilled originally to I SO feel; oowever.. sediJncrt on the bou.xn of the _11 prcvtl11td
the video liom recording the IasI S ftel.
Based on the llrisiual clrilliogloa of the ~ll (attacbed) and tbe vidc:o oftbe _II, it would appear
!hot tbe wcIJ is dJawing water fiom a munber of aqbifers. High Don and D1lIDS8IICSlO levels in tme
waIcr rtquiIe tbat the City lnat "'" waler prior 10 seMoa it.
Prior to 1995, the City used Ihis u.tli :IS a sopplcmtota1 waltl'suppIy for its our-of.toWD saviet
llICll(.... ~ map) However. due tochlorioe~ timillllioos on the Surfac:ewaltr
supply, under an Agn:cdOrder wilh lhe Department of Heal1h.the City hIlS moved towoRls usiDJ!.
the groundWater supply as "'" primary soun:e of water for this service area. In the interest or
public hcaIth. it is tbcrefmc critical ~_Ihe (ily be able 10 rely "" the poundwalcr supply
II is the City's lolC1lt 10 drill an additional well or weDs to provide rcdundaocy, thereby
incJasiug the relIability of I~ water systan. llle City is cumDIly negotialiog for purchax of
IlO *""" of proper:ty adjaceollo tbe Cily proJ>CrIY cooWnin& tbe c:xisIioa well. The C"JIy will be
installing monitoring wells to tcs11~ hydrogeologic ehanlctuislics oftbe aquifez(s). The City
"""*I prcrcrlO draw _",. only from !he dccpcr aquifcr{s). as thcx _ likely to be more
protected from.....r..., contamination.
The enclosed -wlic:ation anliciplles one wclllocalcd wilbiu!be JlIOIl"!tY cunenlly beina .
"
"?'
~
LOG IT..EM-
# L.?-~
Pag'3~ 1-(9 of.
-;"
"
..:.
:
<.
(
'.'
-;
i.
0;
".
~
~:
negoIialcd forpun:ba!e.. If those ~oIiations faiJ.... ifdoc City needs... adcfiIioDal wd1 to_
the demands of the savicc --. iI would be the aty's iIIleDt to driD a wcIJ adjacent 10 the
existin& production weU (SparfilI& weIJ) on the cunaitJyoOWDl:d City propaty. 'The newwdl(s)
would then be used. doc piaI8ry _ SOUI'l:e, while doc S)sling wdI"WOU1d be used IS a
beck-up, The _~I(s) will be CllIJSlnItIed witlrin aq;.ter.-:tica oftbe SJ*liJlg welt
If you have any questions npding the encIosrd appIicaOOB, please call me at (3611) 3&5- nl2 or
Bob LaCroix, W~ Quality Supcn>isor eOI' the City 1II (360) 319-8653.
11umk you for y.- consideraCion of this appIicatiotL
stl.t~
~
Robert L Wbedcr. P-E..
Public Worb 'bin:ctoc
,
~
i
)
,
~
cmklpt\waIaIappIic 1lr
Euclo$wcs
cc: Bob LaCroix
Tim McMaban, City Attorney
(
,
f,
~
E,
~
~
~
~}
i~'
"' . ....~ . ~>_. ..~'..".'~....-"",,
......."1
...:':;."" -,' .-
LOG ITEWI
# t:'{--z.c;-
Pag'3~~f
ITA" or "LAJOH
( . DlPMnBI'CJI'IGClLOlIf (
~1IONFOIl QWlBI .'
REPOK/' OF I!L4JI1lU'110N
10 AI'PllOI'IMlE I'I&IC WA1BII OFlIE ....AlE OF ~
o eurr__ =" ~..::r-.~-""-~---''''--'''''-'''-~
1
j
J
!
[iJ
~.... ......._...........,.PIIIlIIt~..-............_..............--....................
, ..-----".......
--
Fcbtuary 2, 1956
142i5'-
\--
l;m--
-
ClIy 01 Port TOWIlICDd
--
~~JO IuIm SIteet
.pI1I
Port TCMI\tC1lIf
-
WashinRton
...--
98368
-
2 or _ 'IidII
-",,,--
I'U8UC WATEM TO II .aHAOfINo\1S)
........1'lIfIlCll'...JlIIIIClC- ~
U20 IICR-Iect per JCU
MualdpeI supply
1;-----
Year.round, as needed
__~rwr"~
I;~"'--
~~gp____ __ 10CA11DIIJCW;DIWB~"
WeI #1: 1200 feet WlIIllllld 100 feet SoudIof1lle !!lie .... COI"IIa'of SectioIl3.. .
~ of ~ well to be 4o.le....w4
...
-
....... -
17 JdfenolI
SEK ----.
Clly of PortTOWDIaId waletlaYke area.
..;,:.lfH~~!_~;.~~'!,~,~
-
..-,....- .-"
.--.- ,'~
LOG ITEfv.
# rz--'1-t:)
Pag'3 L.B of
--..----- --
DnCMI'11OflI ~-~ WOM8
One or more additicDal wells
-~_...~
Staned
_r-~---NJ-_~__---
SepCcmber 1,201.:5 ScpIcmber I, 2016
AEPOftT
RAClCGROUND:
J'lIrJaant 10 Oiapters 9ll.O3 and 90.44 Revised Code of WIISbiJI&loI (RCW), the City of Port TOWDICDd fiJed
ail application for c:hanae of Walel" Ri....1 Certifiealc #3791-A to lIUtborize additioIIaI poiDlS cf wiIIIdIanl.
The c:et1ificate has a prioriIy dale or February 2, 19.:56. It authorizes witbdJawals of up to 2,250 plkIIII per
minulc (Bpm) and ],120 auc-fect per )'CllJ" from one -U for IDlIJIicipeJ supply.
~ LcpJ 1IQti,;:c Of tile proposed approprialilm ".pIlblis!u:d ia the PoIt ToMum4 J~ CoIIIrly 1.-16 oa
i April) an4 10, 1996. No proICAS .uc m:cived .. a rcsuJr of tIUs ~
~
f Prior 101995, the Ory cf Port TowmcDd relied primarily. oa surface water lIIId used the cxistiDJ wdllIIldcr
· thi& ~ IaIowa u the Sp.rlioa Well, lJIIIy ..a suppIemcutaI aoun:c for iD out-o{-town tcnIcc ana.
~ "'--. due to more Ilrinaelit surface water treatJncnt ~ the Oty is now relying OIl pouad-
t water .. ill JXimaJy walel" ooun:e.
~
f
.
I
t
1-
~
The Oty llItcJlda to driJI al Icast one addiIionaI weIJ to iocn:Mc the JdiabiIity cf its watcrl)'SlClD. The
~ wdl(a) wlI/ be Jocaf.Cd on .DdpIioIiaB JlIOFUIJ wiIbia the __ quuw--KCtioa u the cxiotint
.at. If thia is DOC pouibk; or if ~ uotlIcT weIJ II needed, the ory iaIeDds to driB . wdI adjaeeDt to the
CIilotiaI wcIJ. UpClII compJctiao, the new -1(.) wiIJ hccomc the p6mIuy -n(.), and the Spv!iD& WeD wiD
bedclcplCd u a bKt-up I<IUn:c..No iDmlac ill ~ me or amwaI quantity lJ\ICI" that~
8lIIbllrlIcd 1IIIder CertilIcaIC #3'197 is ~ uadez' tIUs -wJicatioa. .
}
f
JNVFSIl(JATJONS .. DISCUSSlON.
~
~- 111 coasIderaLioll or this 1eqUCll, I rmcwed DepartJJlCnt.ol ~ m:ords. of gound-water _ aDd weIJ
....wcoo. .... .
WeD Information
The SpUq weIJ dtaws waU:f from multiple watcr'bearina :rona aKQUDlCred bc*-1I1S and 175 Roct
belolr the top of the a:as.ina- A 22-foo1 tbidl Jaycr or day from 124. to 146 fect /Jtdic:atcI1hIU the well. m-
- from tMl different "'luifcn. The new _11(.) will draw water oaly from the deeper Of tbfte a<Juifcn..
DriIIIDa dale:
Well bead cbatioti:
We2 dcpIh:
CaoIaI diamcler:
SIatic watcr lnd:
Marda 6, 19$9.
130 fc:ct a"'- -.....,. Jevocl (MSL)
184 fc:ct
12~
3lJ feet (3-6-59)
P-. "" F~ RIp1s
TIll foIIowlnJ-- of puIIIld-...tcr _1IriIhID altalr mlIc of the proJJOIed poInt(l) of wiIIlcIrnMIue CD
llJc wkb the Departmenl rI &olc:Ju:
, 0Ilc ... ripe ccrtifkalc, IIIlIIoriIiaII a ~ of 400 IPID IIId IQ IIC21>fcct JIIIl" ,.. fi]r ~
1lIppIJ. ... becm ilIuM rar . -.root .." -a.
. Scwral... ~ Jgp 11III WI/Cr ~ cIaimI.. IIIg JlllllI(dId. Malt of 1M. ... IJlP'WIlI III
compIclecIl1I tile thaIIowcr _..... .....
0. 10 low ...n denNIy IIId tIIc ~ err- 01 the n-foIMItlc:t ., .,., ~ tile .."... "..._
...... -. wl:'*-lI from tIIc propoeed IIddItlonIJ well(1) 1Ioa.Id.1IOt impair .... pMIlI'"
/
~"'-
'"
..
......
,'-"
j
J
f
J
i
I
11-
Page
lOG ITEM
LL5
1E[of
I
i
~
J
FINDINGS and CDNCUJSION: 1..
In aa:onIalIl:e willi CbapIcrs 9lUO and !lO.44 RCW. J find that: ~
. The proposed wdl(s} wiD be completed in the I&IIIC aquifer as die cxiaIin& 1Il:1L I
. ~lionaI poiDt{s) of wi~ rbouId DOl impair exislina rlshts.. be dclrialcDIaJ 10 1JIc public .
ApprowI of Ibc ~ed dJapp: is amsistcDl wilh.1bc r___OOas ollhe ~ Water '..
Rcsourccs MamJ&emeut Plan which enalUlllJC'S IarJe COIDIIIIIlIity/muDiclpl WlllU ~ aad ef6cieDt UIC j
of existinJ _er IIIJlPIicJ.. i
Report Contiaucd
riJhU. The prDpDKd wil~ from the Jowu aqulfer shoIIkI aIIo prewnt lmpaimleAt of surfaee ....
ri&hlS and streamllow on Dcarby Chimacum Creek
RECOMMENDA'lfONS:
I retoJDJDeDd approval of this c:bange appli<:atioD 10 add Up.1O ... oMltVvutt wd:L IIDd iss_. D! a
supetsediDg cettificatc 10 allow approprialioD of 2,2SO JPlI1 and 1,120 lIaC.Ceet per year for mumc;p.J
supply. The period of use :dIalI be year-rowld, as needed.
The supeflediD, cerlifk:ale shaD be SlIbject 10 aD applicable Slate Jaws and rCJll!aIioDs aDd 10 the foBawiD&
provisions:
fmmilmI
All water wells COIISlr1itIcd within the Stale sbaII meet !be minimum staDdanIs for wdI aJOSUucIioa and
. maintenance as provided under RCW 18.104, WashiDJIOII WaleJ Well CoaIIructioD Act dIm. and
Chapter 173-160 WAC. MinllDllm Standards for Constructioo and Ma__ ofWdk.
A _pJelCd weD reporl of the wc:lI shaI1 be submitted by Ibc driller 10 the J)epmmeIIl of EcoIosY widiII
30 daJ$ of complcliDJ this well AD pump test dalll for this wD IItaII be submitted 10 the DepNUDeat .. it
is obtained.
JDSIaDation and maiDll'IIDIICC of aDa~ pori as dcscribcd ill WAC 113-160-355.. required. AD air IiDc
IllIlI puge may be insta\Jcd in additioDlO !be _ pod.
An 8Jl1lfll\'Cd DlCIcring device sbaII be instaIIcd and maioIaUled in ac:eardlIIIcc . RCW !lO.033W. WAC
508-64-020 tbrougb -040 (installalion, opetalion, and mainleuance requlremcnts are alladlcd). Mc=
readinp shaD be recorded III Iees1 monthly.
In Older 10 mafntaiu a _in8bJc .upply Otwater. pum. PinI- be. -... 10 11IM -E~dD-
. not projlf~iweIy dccIiDc from veal' 10 )eU' Water........ tbalI be -.--cd and rccoi3Cii . ..... .
consisleut mcrJiodology. The JcIlJlh of !be pulDJIlDI period or ~ period ~ . . _.
shlD be COIlllaJd, aDd IllaU be incJudcd iD tharaeord. Dalll shaD be submktcd NIIIWlIIy, ia ihc lIIIlIlIII at .
February, 10 !be Di:pamnent ofEcoloJy. ,(
-Well .lnformallon indicates that water from two aquiCen are co-min&Iina in Iha eDlJJla _lJ under tbis
urtificaIe.. The aquitcn ahaII eflller be _led off to pR\'CJIt co-mJn&li"" or the Cty of Port TownaetIl1
sbaD monitor _er quality at kuIICJDi..aDn\laIly..in !be upper IIIid Jower aqllifers, 10__ that
~nIamilllmllcvels In the Jower aquffCl' do not ClICecd dIllIC Ia the upper aquifer. If...... cpaIII.y cla1ll
~.. that """.lmnInatllS arc beinJ introltumIto 1'- lIpJlCr aqtdfer, EcoIo&r wiD raquJnllItat 1JIc well be
modified or abaudoued 10 prevent furtller ~.
.Waler.puntpII.... _cr quaIII):.,.and ....11Ic__.1fteI.Jfa~ 8Jonr willi allllllllW)' IUId anaIJsia of the .data.
.ban be sllbmlllad lIJIDualIy, 01" muD ffiiiiiiIiiJ1 IIJllltI ....-. to EcoIo&r's SoutItwat Rq/aalll 0ftIce Waw
R....urces Ptopam. ~ cla1ll shan be submJttcd Ia dIpaI fottMtlUld IIba1IlnducIedle ~ --...:
llEI'OIIT Of 1XAWlA1lON
.
..
LOG ITEM
~ 1-ZS-.
Pag'3_~~ 0 of
Repan Continued
Foe Water Use Rt:portlQF
1. Mc:aswement method (ie; tlllaliDC meter. aalIIIlil: ~. etc.) for eac:Il well
2. Total volume pumped from eacl1 wel1 bf moDlb In 1bousands or millions of pJIoIII
3. Unique Well m number
For Water ~J Reportil1l'
J. Unique well number
1. Meas\1mDeIlldatuDd time
Measurement method rJC;air iDe, elcdric lape. prcuurc uamducer, etc.}
4. WeU status (r, pumpiDr.m:entIy pumped, cu:.)
5. Water Jcvd aa:lll1lC)' (ie: to nearest foot, len1b of foot, etc..)
6. DcICripriOII of the JlX8SuriD&:poiDl [Ie; lOp of casiD& souncIinJ "be, etl:.)
7. MeasuriJl&: point clc:vation m.- or below I:lDd awDce to tbc IICllrest 02 fOOl
8. ...... ~ elcvat.ioa lit tile well bead to the nearest foot
For Water Ouality MonitoriJ1l'
J. Unique well IIUl:Dber
1. Samplln8date aDd lime
3. Submit paper copy of !aboralOJ)' ...pan
REPORTED BY: ""'WI.-:... P.1:..
Date: .SeDtemll@r 20. 1996
fINDJNGS OF PACT AND DECISION
UpoIl reviewina the above n:port, J find 11II facII, lclcvantllld _lCriaJ to tbe lubjcclappliQltloo, bne bc:ca
~ lnw:atIp_ FanbenDon, I find WIler II ftl!iJabIe for apprapriation 8IIlI the appropriation ..
ret_"'lNI. lIa IleaefIdaI UIe aJl!I WiI_ be detrllDeJIW to..... riptI or .the. public wdfant..
Tbcrcfbrc, I ORDER a ~ cettiflcarc bcluued lIIIder GIOlIJId Water AppIIcaIioIl NuIIIbor
3297.1Dbject to exIstlns ilabll and iDdIcated provIIionI, to allow appropriadaa of pubIlc potmd _to:r Ibr
the __ 8IIlI_ apcdficd In the foresoInI report.
SIped at Olympia, W~npon,thls~da7 01 Sept__ .Jll!l6.
~~
Gale BtomstroIII
Sborelanda A Wlller RaourceI SuperWor
Soulhwat ReJIonal om.:.
i
.....
IIIPOItl' Of' ~l1OH
...
.....
LOG ITEM
# LLfJ
Pag'3~Uot_
o
SI..daca....... .......__....----~.,U' ................ ...---...............................
..~...........
..,co....,.... '~"-.'.'.'-"~"--"--"--"l..' .
_1EOF~
\ ..-.d\niIIIIIT Of ICOLOOY (' .
C~F~mB;BT .
~
~
t
[!)
Ground w..,-. ..................,...,.....~-.~.........-......._......_.....-......-
_~.......J
-....
Fcbtua'Y 2. 1956
1--
4215
14iin-
13i97-
-
CiIy of Pan TOWJIICDd
~~ pI"rJ _ .... t1PlXIDlt
5210 Ituba Sued Port TOWDICDd W~ 9836&
DII.. 111 ano..,....... ..... ~......".,,. *......... _ ,..,..." UJ/JI#IW1If.""""""
<I *,.- _ <I*.s.- "''''.......... .......,.., - ~ -1JI"'CibIIi'1IIbi<<t...... ~ ---." iI *
__",*~"'&..Iop.___.........._"'__...._~iI~_*-
<1* ._"'W.......... _;,....., ....""...,,,,* ~"'EI>tIIDf1- --"'~.. ~...;,....,-.
-.......,~... .
PU8UC WATfA5 TO. ~1EO
-
2or_~
..".,OI".-...ct .....
......... "'''UIIl___goua-
1120 acrc-fea per )'Car
I-~.........
22SO .
Municipal supply
1;----
Year-round, as ueeded
~UEJIIQIICJI'~",",,~ lOCA.noNOF~.'
WeB #1: 1200 feet Wesl and 100 feet South of Ihc EasI qtI8tla' comer of SectioII 3..
LocaIioq Di additiooal wells 10 be determined
SE:-"~UtIIM.~
....... -
17 Jellionoa
CIIy Dil'on fOMlleDd watcrlClYia! ~
~
'. '-"'....~...
LOG ITEM
# '1- 7-f)
Pat:] ~ ?> 2-I..)f
~, ..--- --^-;-,..-
~
All wascr wcJls COIIIln1CIl:d _ IllC SIa1e IhIIlI meel1llc miIlimum IUlIIdIrdI b weD CQlIItI1IdimI ....
maiot__ as.JllUrided W1du RCW 18.104, W~ Water WdI Coaslru<tiDol Act of 1972, and ~
173-160 WAC, Minimum Slandard. fur ConIIn!ctloa aDd ....,....... ofWdIs.
Au~ metcriD& cIcvicc shall be iaAalledaad --..-. ilI-.Jacc witb RCW 9IL03..36O, WAC_
64-020 tbrouah -D4O. McICJ readlDp abaD be n:cunlaI. least 1tIIlIll1IIy.
In onIct 10 maintain a SIl$lainablc supply of_fer, JlUIIIPins 11I1III be lllID8fCd to that stBtie water ~ do ..
propcs$iVel)' ddnc from year to pIf. Water -IMII shall be lIll!8S1lmlud recarded -thly. usia& ·
consistent metbodoIo&Y. The length of the JIDII'PiaI pcriocI<< reca>tef'/ period prior to ClIdl....4 _Ill....
be caBtant, and sba1I be induded ill 1he rcconL Deta shall be oubmitIcd unuaDy, ill the IIIOItlh of. i'dlnIllrJ,
10 lbe DepaI1mcal of Ecology.
"WeB iDformatioa indicalCS lhalwatctfrtim two irqUifmuc ~ iD1be aiIIiIJa weJI -- tIli&
ceni6adc.Tbe aquifers shall eilhcrbc tcakd oIfto JlI1"aItaHJlillllinl, <<dIaaa,.ClfPort TOWIIICDd....
moaiIorwalct quaIi1y at 1easl-u.:annua1ly. ill the lIPfCI" 8Dd kMu.aqaikn.lO CIIIURl tb&t ~. ~
in the lOwer aquilc:r do DOt acced thl>>e ilIlllC upper tIIpIifcr. If _ quaIIty~. iadicates that _...:-..
ate trilJ iIltrDduced to the upper aqoiCer, EcoIollJ Will n:quirc that lIic. weD be Jt!OdificcI or ~ 10
pn:vatt further c:o-tttinptf&."
; . .~~..=qu.iiJy. and 1Ia1ic-watcr-1evd data,aJoaawidl.-.yand....... olthed;!i.."IJid._
"- . / . be suIlmittcd atIIItI&IIy, or _ frequcDIIy IIpllII tequar. to &oIotr'a ~.ItcJIioaaI' ()fi:a Waacr '.'\
~_ Resomt:es Prapam. The data shall be submiIIed ia cipaI bJMt and.. fadDdc ... fo1IoooiIrc ~ )
-----------
SEE NEXT PAGE
'"
i
-
..
,..
~-.g
LOG ITEM
# 7 _7-tJ
Pag'3.~_ 3Jut_.
for WIltel' the ~ ( (
J. Measuremelll method (ie; totalillJ meter, KDUItic meter, etc.) for eaclt well
2. Total volume pumped fJotn eacb wen by month in t/JouIIII1ds CI" ItIiIIiOns of pJkJaI
3. Unique: WclIlD number
For Water 1..,...,\ Rq/orlinll:
J. Unique well number
2. Measurement data and time
3. Mas_Ill mclhod (Ie; air IiDe, e\ectrie tape, poessure uaorduc:er. ct<:.)
4. wen ...111I (ic; pumpinr. recently pumped, eu:..)
1. Water Ievd ICCUIIICJ (ie; to nearest fOOl, teDtIl of Wet, etc.)
6. Description of Ibc: me ~ poinI (le; lOp of c::asiDI. IOUDlliDI tube, CIe.)
7. MasurinJ poiJIl elevation aIlowe 01 bdow Jaad Iurfacc to !he. ac:an:at 02 fOot
8. Land aurfac# eIewtion 8t the wcI head to the IIC8re&I foot
For Water Ouatitt MonitoriQe:
1. Unique well Dumber
Z. Samplins dale aDd time
3. Submit peper copy of I8bonlOI)' rqlOrt
'l7w dtJtllOtIre _ ofIM ...,_1I/0fl!$IIid Iutd1y COII/it-d is ~ kI 1M lImh orplaa of- hcrdt
~ a:upl1U prrwided .. RCW 9O.1ll38O. 9O.1,lJ-m .,., 90.44.DZt1
:;=-"'_rIgIlII"~eul>jod",,,,,,-,,,,,_,,,__ """'1ll11CW
Gi_1IItdo "'1 '-d lIIJIl 1M -' of this ofJ" tit ~ W~
IhiI 7th d4y of January . 192..-.
Mary Rlveland. Director
Depanmcnt of Ec:oJoay
__ IMTA
OIl "-I'
by ~.. t.N.-.~
fOIl COUHTt \lIE ClHI..Y
ClIIIlPIOIlll
.a.
-:w.;~~-~.p~~.'
# 7 1-,-
Pag'3~~t_.
'VATER StiPPLY DEVELOPl\lENT OPTIONS AT S))ARLING ''''ELL SITE
M ai I}Iill1.inlLPQinl~
1. Groundwater Level Trends at the Sparling Site
2. Options for Additional Groundwater Supply
3. \Vell Drilling Strategy
.GJ~Q!m(t).ya~r Level Trends
,
I. Available data: static and pumping groundwater levels (1998-present including monitoring
\vells), groundwater withdra\vals (1988~prcsent), precipitation at Chimacum (long rt..>cord)
2. Groundwater levels shov.' about 12 feet of decline trom 1998 through the end of 2003 then
A _ _ _ _ _ .....
approach stabilization in 2004Q(ld 200S.
3. PGG rcvic\vcd availablc pumping and ~)recipitation data to evaluate cause for groundwater
levcl decline.
· Pumping has not varied significantly over the 7-year data record. The Sparling site has
heen pumped since the 1950's. Until older historic data are compiled, it seems
reasonable to assume a gradual ramp..up to the current pumping rates over time.
· Precipitation \vas above average in 1995~ 1999 and has been below average from 2000~
present
· Recent trends toward stabilization suggests that f:,'Toundwater mining is not oceuning at
the site.
· Given that recent changes in pumping rates appear to be minor, it is most likely that the
groundwater level decline is related to the transition from above-average precipitation to
below-average precipitation.
4. The likelihood of a climatic cause could be further confimled by measuring water levels in
wells that have some historic monitoring record. Similar declines in wells distant from the
Sparling site ,,,"ould support the conclusion of a climatic basis.
Options for Ad4ilional Ground\vater Supply
1. Pump more ,vater froIn existing Sparling Well ("Sparling Well T).
· Pro: Sparling Well 2 has significant unused pumping capacity~ declining trends .appear to
be climatic rather HUUl pumping-related. If a higher capacity pump is required. it would
be cheaper to buy a new pump than to buy a Jl'ew welL
Pac~lic Gl'mmdHi:li.'r Group
· Con: \Vater quality tt'om shallow' production zone requires extensive treatment (recent
sampling results showed iron @, 4 mg/l. manganese @: 0.5 mgil. total organic carbon @'~ 2
m[;/l); cxpanding treatment plant \vouldcost about S 1.2-$ 1.4 million; pumping more
from existing well would not provide the PUD with backup source; pumping from
LOG ITEM
# 7ft
Pagt3~ of~ .
Aug.ust 3, 2005
Page 1
4rr. M:, 7
shallow zone would have more impact on Chimacurn Creek than pumping from deeper
lone (although both are allowed ,,\,!thin the PUD's water right).
2. Drill new "deep \"ell" al Sparling Site
· Pro: \Vatcr quality could be bctter than Sparling \Vell 2 (requiring less treatmenO~ new
\vell provides backup pumping source should Sparling Well 2 encounter problems,
deeper well would have less impact on Chimacum Creek.
. Con: Cost of constmcting a dcep well ($40k~$60k for well. $20k-$25k fi.)r llydrogeology
and well design); exploratory nature of well (deep aquifer could be absent); \vater quality
could be worse than Sparling Well 2.
3. Drill new "shallow well" at Sparling Sitc
Note: Ifdeep well does not eneQultter sufficient ~vatt?r. the deep well could be cOllverted
to a SIWI/OH' l1/ell.
· Pro: New shallow ,"vell would provide additional backup source in case of problems at
Sparling \Vcll.
· Con: Cost of constnlcting a nev...' well vs. (lower) cost of fitting Sparling \-Vell #2 \vith a
higher capacity pump.
!2rUling Strategy for Deep Well
1. A deep \vcIl can ahvays be convelled to a shallow' we]) (hack filled) if a deep water-bearing
zone is not encountered.
2, Wen design will depend on conditions encountered at depth. There are two important faclors
that are UnknO\\11 until the well is drilled:
· If the deeper water-bearing zone has a static water level significantly deeper than the
shallow water-bearing zone, it is necessary to install a seal (along the casing) between the
1\\'0 zones.
· If the water-bearing sediments are comprised of fine sand or are gap-graded (gravel and
fine sand with nothing in between), a s.'Uld pack might be needed around the screen.
3. PGG recommends ~i weU design that uses a combination of 12" and 8" casing diameters
bec,ause it oiTers flexible design options. An 8" casing diameter is the minimum required to
obtain the desired production minimum of 300 gpm (based on the pump diameter).
HO\Vl'VCr, we do not recommend drilling the well emirdy \'lith 8" casing f()r two reao.;ons;
· Pump capacity is limited in an 8" casing, Although an 8" screen is acceptable. more
yield can be obtained \\lith a larger pump set in a larger casing diameter.
Pacific Grullmhnltcr Group
August 3, 2005
LOG ITENi
# 7,S
Pagf3__ G, ot.:age 2
/,
/~#-'L. i-
f ~K
/. (. 11
I+' ( j' ~J2r J/-,..'Cr-
--:;:.
/ z:.'-,;
llVb"' '/"
. If the static water level in the deep zone differs significantly from the static \vater level in
th(~ shallow zone. an 8" casing diameter would not allow installation of a (necessary) seal
bchveen the l\vo zones. EXh:nding a IT casing down beyond the shallow \'vater-bearing
zone will sllppon a seal between the shallow and deep zones if needed.
4_ There are t\\lO strategics for drilling the well and maintaining the ablJity to seal between
aquifer zones:
. Option A: drill the I Teasing dO\,,'tl to just belo,,, the shallow water-bearing unit (c.g.
150 leet). reduce to S" casing to drill to depth. 'lbe shallow water-bearing unit would be
scaled offby the underlying lower pCnlleability sediments.
. Option B: Drj]) the I T casing down to the total depth of the well. If a deep watcr-
bearing zone is encountered that has a deeper static water level, install an S-inch screen
and riser to land surface. pull hack the J 2" casing and install a seal in the J 2"/8" annulus.
If a deep water-bearing zone is encountered with static water levels similar to the shallow
water-bearing zone. pull back 1 T casing only far enough to expose screen (no additional
seal required).
5. Explomtion of Option A: ShalJO\v 12"/S" Reduction at I 50 Feet
· Pro: minimum cost \:vell desib1)l (c_g_ S40k)
· Con: advancing S" casing into a deep production zone could compromise our ability to
install a sand pack in this zone. An 8" borehole \",'ould only support a 4'" or Y' sand-
packed screen and might not afTer sufficient production capacity_ If a gap-graded deep
production zone indicates the need for a sand pack, the lower yield of the available sand
p,acked screen might preclude installation of the deep \\tell (in which case the boring
could be converted to a shallow well.
6. Exploration of Option B: Deep 12" Well with Contingency Seal InstaUation
· Pro: flexible approach that would allow installation of sand pack under all likely
condhions and \\'ould possibly allow a 12" diumetcr screen (increased production
capacity).
· Con: drilling cost would be about $SOk to install at 12" '\"cH and about $60k if H is
necessary toin5tall S" casing, pull back the 12" casing, and install a seal.
Attachments: Plot ohvater level elevations. precipitation and pumping
Well logs for original Sparling \VeU (#1) and new Sparling \Vell (#2)
Conceptual design fix Sparling \Vell #3
Pacific Cirouru/wata Group
Augus! 3, 2005
LOG ITEl\li
# L.,.,l.-b.
Pag'? __3.:.tef
Page J
50
45
40
i 35
;: 30
0
i
'5. 25
'~
D-
ei 20
::J
=
C
<( 15
10
5
0
1995
80
::r
(/)
:i
i
~ 60
c
0
i
a;
W
40
Water Level Etevations In theSparting Well
120
L..nd SI,lfflle& Elevation
~ ,- ~. -- - ,-- -. -~. ~ ~~. ~ ~.-- ~ ~ ~ ~
100
,.-.- Static WL Elevation
,".. Pumpjll9 WL Elevation
20
$Crhnodlnlimlll'
. -
o
1995
1997
1998
2002
2003
2004
1996
1999
2000
2005
2001
AnnoatPreclpltation and Pumping
. PrecIpitation
.mJ Pumping
1996
2004
2005
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
1997
1998
# LO-tJl~ P
Pag'3 __311- ot_,
.'.'./:.""
l' ~., ~ ...
,j\,
0.5
is
C
0.4 ~
c:Il
I:
Q.
e
03 i.
iii
:::J
C
~
0.2 t
~
c(
Ot
o
G
Conceptual Design for Sparling Well #3
50
CD , 00
Q)
-
~
Q)
o
o
1: 150
:::s
w
"0
C
:3
~ 200
C)
~
o
Q)
.0
r:. 250
-
c.
4)
o
300
350
400
GEOLOGIC UNITS
o
Shallow Water Bearing Unit
Lower Permeability Sediments
Deep Water Bearing Unit
,
WELL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
!
W~IJ cop
16-ineh Surface 5.01
17-inch Casing
uta-inch Annular S.ol
12-inch Driye Shoe
-- IS-Inch Sleel C(lSing
LOG ITEM
# L l.-~
Pag~._liof___
K-Poclter end Riser Pipe
SCn!tllfl Assembly
T oil Pipe and Boll Bottom
8~lnch 0'1". Stlo.
p
G
.... . .~... , v. ...... WI" -- -.. ~ - v .... ca.I': W02998 i
~t).~-:::.::.c.r- WATER WELL REPORT -........u... ACF4M
......c:.., - 0-... c:..,
....... c..,-o......c." STATE OF ~ _.............. .. 329TA
ro 0WMI!It: -.. CITY OF PORT TOWNSENO ..... 540 WATER STREET. PORTTOWNSEHDlWA. 983-
~M!U.; ~ JEfFERSON . NW ,. SE U1~t aN ,It 1W Wi&,
I~ADOIlES:IOfWEU..___ 21 KENNEOVRD. PORT HADLOCK. W~ J.. ~ I , W - :1 f< "")
C') PROPCSID USE; 0 ~ ----:J ...... de 110) WILL s.co . U.NJOJ 1"IHT PftOtEDUN ~'flUIN
0..,.... J
o 0IIillIW ...... 0 0J00!r \!I ~ 0-..119 -. ---...... -----....... -",.......
_.. ~",,,,,"''''''''''''''''.--.l-.''' _...,_..
(4) '1"YPE OfF ~ ~ :::::.."''' 2+ .....", '" 1 LI -
"ilIiIlI AI.. J.......... dC ....... ~ 0" .... 0
0.--; n ..~~ ~ TOPSOIL GRAVEL
"--___..0 ....,0 ~o SANO M..c. BROWN
CIl 011 ~ ~.,.. 16 INN& SANO F-M. GRAVEL FINE
OIIIM 113..... o.,a-.......- 112.5 It. GRAVEL F-C. TRACE SAND
· GRAVEL F-M. SAND F-C. TRACE SILT
· SILT. BROWN TO BLUE-GRAY
. SAND F-M.I t(A~C ~
· GRAVEL F..c. W/SAHD M-:..c
tit c:::oMITIIUC'I' DEULS:
~~ 16.
Erui ,t
~-
lMIL _
~-
OL. 82.5 t.
79.5 It. . -82 5 ...
10'Z .~.lt.. 117. S L
"'""~~~ .... 0 !'1M C}(
'-.,,.,,........ NO~E
91Z1!" jloo.o~ r u
p...
...
jlo.-I' -
jlVtI..il. ....
'"'-'* .,.,. [I "" 0
------....... lfOUsrON
.,.,.. ST~I.~LESS STee~
~ -H.--- ,nn .. 84.5
- ~..... ...
.....,.....c .. 0 -Ill ........
..",....... ~-. It..
.......-: * Gl Nt 0 'Ill.........,
.......w ........ RF:NTnNfTF!
0lIt..,_____-' ,., 0 Hli 0<
T"..1I1I~ ~oI'"
.....",......- ..
...... ... 304
U. ,Uz-::? It.
L -I." I "'i .... .-.
18 :\,
(7) PUlP: ~....
~
kit;
(II 1IW1fR 1D1!LS: ==.;.:.
........ , 40 ,......_..... CiIIIIJ :\1:'\197
~- _..__.... lliIIIJ
~_.--.." ,
"-=~
.. wriiU. TESTS: ~. _...........................
..........._'l.....OC' ...0 .....iIr...., DRILLER
~ 1500 f'I!I-hIIIIL - 4 ~ ~.... 124 -.
..
~-r-""" --..... ,.....\imlNfIIl c-........------
.- -......
...... --...... "'- -...ra.-.t .... Wllti!r......
0.__ MAR(';H a. f991
..... - _~.. It............
J=--- :nm::~~"~A~ :a
II:Y__,,,,~ u,
rt!tO
~
,..
o
2
11
23
38
51
62
75
93.5
105
111
u.:s
SILT. DENSE WIGRAVELS AND SAND
SAME AS ABOVE-LOOSER
..
lL NO WATER AT 10S*TO 1U'
..
IL
· DENOTES WA'teRBEARlNG FORMA nor
It.
~"(
10
Z
11
23
~
.$1
62
15
93.5i
105.:
111
113
..
-- .......
112Ot97 ... ClIIIIIIIIIIIII
~t.,.-
WlU.CONI'rJIUC'f\'M~
. ~ ...,. __ '_IJ idJlIIr ....__ *r...........
ClliIIIIII!IINlMft all Yl1IIY.~ .... ~... ... ....... ....... ... ..
,. ...11-............. ...........,.............,bIIIL
~ Tac:cnntl p~...~~~~JN:a-~~
- !1!:".~.... ..'tPff....E Graha..!ft. 1 W. A 98338
- ~;;J.:,{;&/)I)L4 ..-.. ~ =-
eo._,... ..
~.....
,., Tll~ou'm?n~p!: DMII ~~1. "_
(USE~SHEETSIF~
,...,
""'*"
&GIogJ .... fp.lIIiI ~ ani Mm)ll.1 Ai::toft~ For....
CIat 1ICC(liI10I/~ ,...., c:or-.a .. ............... ~".(2l:IIIJ
<I01.-:xL TN T1X) ~ iii {2011......
LOG ITEM
# 'L-lt?
Pag'3._~oot_.
FIGURE 4 BORING LOG OF SPARLING WELL
APPROX. ELEVA110N
(ft above msl) NOTES
125
Topsoil
Hardpan with coarse gravel
105
Hardpan with gravel
and boulders
\l
-V- 85
\Vater level
Hardpan with finer
gravel, softer
Fine sand with some water
Heaving sand
65
Coarse sand, water .~
""..... .. 4-
Peat ;,,=.1- ....,..,~.' ..,.,...~"-
Heaving sand ----====,..:..#....:f.li-.,..'%
~ ..!.." ...~.~..;.t.:..};::;
C'lay .. ... 80 . _ :.. .t.. ~.: #0 ..-.;
. ...~":-:~; ~.....r",,:..:,.....,.
C '~\. . ......~.~~.
o arse gra. v.e~ . :. ;.... .'" '.....
. '. .. :.. :~."...t ........-.; ./t .....
Heaving sand .... "'--" '. ~~ :
Medium gravel with
mixed sand
Upper Water-
Bearing Unit.
45
Pea gravel, water-bearing
Screened
intervals
-----'.
",- .- -- - -
'"'-_........-'-'-"'-#
.- ---"'"
-----
-- ----
---
~ ----
~.......--.....
140 ---=-..-.....:;- _ ~
- -:-- -C ---
--
- -, -.....
~..,_~._oi',"'-}f'!t "':~
=--::-~~ :~
.-..---~--
~'":;"""'-"""""""--=......
160 "4' n. .., -:::~
~".. ~..~. ; '!:. ~:.,~
'".. JI.-'" ~..;;.......
,,......".... ;.....:.. ,as -.J'P
~.1f ". .. '.. .......
,." ._t~ ~~--:-_(.... :#/~~
.'" --~""",._..;.,,.~
=?:.:;:~ ....-;-:!...r-:r.;:;~
~~~~~.,.,~~--;.~
180=- - - -::.::-
~~~_; -i
Blue clay
-15
Coarse sand
Blue clay
Coarse sand and pea gravel
-35
Lower Water-
Bearing Unit
Clay and sand
TR1~ARE.A GROUNDW ^ TER STIJDV
CH2M HILL
Clay
~S5
# L~
Pag~_1JLQf__
Page 1 of 1
Nancy DorQan
From:
To:
Sent:
Subject:
"Julie Matthes" <jmatthes@co.jefferson.wa.us>
"Nancy Dorgan" <ndorgan@waypoint.com>
Friday, March 17,2006 7:21 PM
RE: Records Request
Nancy -- I have researched the soee minutes and agendas for 2004 and have reviewed the PUD and wuee
issue files in our office. There weren't any references or records related to the soee's review/approval of the
PUD's water service area changes.
Julie Matthes
Deputy Clerk of the Board
Jefferson County Commissioners
P.O. Box 1220
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Phone: (360) 385-9122
Fax: (360) 385-9382
-----Original Message-----
From: Nancy Dorgan [mailto:ndorgan@waypoint.com]
Sent: Monday, March 13,20069:39 PM
To: Julie Matthes
Subject: Records Request
Julie,
I would like to examine and perhaps copy all records related to the BOCC's
review/approval of the the PUD's water service area changes that were recommended
for approval by the Jefferson County Water Utilities Coordinating Committee on April 21 ,
2004.
I'll fill out a standard records request form when I come in to review the documents.
Thanks,
Nancy
t4-rr. No c(
# LOt~~_
pagl3__~f.
4/17/2006
SUPERIOR COURT OF W ASIDNGTON
COUNTY OF JEFFERSON
vs
JEFFERSON COUNTY PUD NO.1,
MUQicipal corporation,
Defendant.
)
CONSERVE WATER FIRST, a )
Washington nonprofit corporation; CARRIE)
And REX RICE, husband and wife, )
And WAYNE and NICOLE CHIMENTI, )
Husband and wife, )
Plaintiffs, )
)
)
)
)
)
)
NO. 04-2-00155-1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT
WATER FOR MARROWSTONE, a)
Washington nonprofit corporation; KELLY)
And GLORIA HAYS, husband and wife; )
And RALPH and ANNE RUSH, husband )
And wife, )
Intervenors/Defendants. )
)
)
I. PARTIES:
Conserve Water First is a Washington nonprofit corporation. It and two marital
communities constitute the Plaintiffs in the above matter. Plaintiffs are property owners
on Marrowstone Island. They are opposed to the Defendants' plans to construct a water
utility to serve the island pursuant to a LUD.
Defendant Jefferson County PUD No. 1 is a public utility district organized
under the laws ofthe State of Washington. The PUD seeks to build a water distribution
Memorandum Opinion on summary Judgment
\\JIM\SHAREDOOCS\CONSERVEI.DOC
1
LOG ITEM
# ~"2 C;;
Pag'3 __'i;~ of__
Arr, ~ r
.
the other hand, if the PUD had been unable to proceed to LUD formation due to a
sufficient number of protests being filed, for example, there would be no need to amend
the water system coordination plan. It makes little difference for the purposes of the
Water System Coordination Act whether the PUD chose to proceed to amend the plan
first, or instead choose to determine the viability of the proposed LUD first.
The Court finds that formation ofthe LUD is not precluded even though at the
time of the formation of the LUD the specific improvements contemplated were not
within the specific provisions ofthe public water system coordination act or the PUD's
own water service plan. Those plans must be amended; however, prior to any
4-
construction of the proposed LUD.
ISSUE NO.4: The formation of LUD 14 was invalid because the exclusion
of Fort Flagler from the LUD was arbitrary and capricious.
RCW 54.16.120 is the statue which authorizes a district to establish and define
the boundaries of local assessment districts. That statute authorizes a district to levy
and collect "in accordance with the special benefits conferred thereon" assessments and
reassessments on ''property specially benefited thereby, for paying the cost and expense
thereof, or any portions thereof, as herein provided..."
Plaintiffs argue that the property of Fort Flagler, a Washington State Park, was
excluded from the LUD even though it will be specially benefited by the LUD. The
LUD contemplates using water distribution facilities currently owned by the State Parks
Department (an underwater transmission line to Marrowstone Island) and using
Memorandum Opinion on Summary Judgment
\\JIM\SHAREDIXXS\CONSERVEI.IXX
19
LOG.. IT.E;M.
# 1-1-6
Pag~~_:f:fUf_.
Jefferson Countv Shoreline Master Prog:ram Uudate:
Shoreline Inventorv and Analvsis
CZM306 Grant G0400080
Task 5
Deliverable 3
By
Neil Harrington, MS
Jefferson County Department of Community Development
621 Sheridan St.
Port Townsend W A 98368
nharrington@co. iefferson. wa. us
(360) 379-4484
Revised: August 2, 2005
Funding provided by:
~.~."..,,~~
1__.:r ..."
"" ,..
~ ~
'-2' 0:
. "
""". ~ 't"
~'''''''~'~
LOG ITEM
# L2:~
Pag~._~f
---"
I'f rr.;.Ia. 10
.
y
Restoration Opportunities
The salt marsh at Olele Point could be partially restored. There is a restoration plan to
increase access to the Oak Bay County Park salt marsh, although this has been put on
hold as it has naturally opened to the bay due to storm conditions.
Public Access
There are DNR tidelands south of Oak Bay County Park accessible by boat. Oak Bay
County Park has beach and salt marsh access, shellfish beds and camping.
Preliminary Nearshore Reaches
West Olele: Drift cells JE-3 and JE-4;
South Oak Bay: Drift cell JE-2
Southwest Oak Bay: Divergent zone JE-lI JE-2.
Oak Bay: origin of drift cell JE-I to beginning of spit at Oak Bay County Park.
Oak Bay Spit: Spit at Oak Bay County Park.
Oak Bay Salt Marsh: Salt Marsh at Oak Bay County Park.
South Indian Island and Marrowstone Island
Indian and Marrowstone Islands are situated between Port Townsend Bay and Admiralty
Inlet (Map 14). Except for the southern shore that is a county park, Indian Island is
owned by Naval Magazine Indian Island, a naval munitions base for forces stationed in
Puget Sound hence is not within county jurisdiction. Connected by a causeway build on
fill to Indian Island, Marrowstone is primarily rural residential with state parks at both the
northern end (Fort Flagler) and at the south end at Kinney Point (accessible only by boat).
Growth on Marrowstone has been slowed by the general lack of fresh water although this
may change with the construction of a public water system. Between the two islands is
Kilisut Harbor and Scow Bay with rich shellfish beds, herring spawning grounds and
large concentrations of over wintering waterfowl. Johannessen's 1992 detailed study of
drift cells stopped at 48'N. Previous work by Kueler 1988 mapped the drift cells north of
48' N. Detailed narratives were not part of Kueler' s work although depositional and
accretionary areas were mapped. For the remainder of this report drift cell descriptions
are taken from Kueler's work with the geological background taken from the Coastal
Zone Atlas.
Ecolof!ical Backl!round
Drift cell JEF-2 extends from a zone of divergence between Kinney and Lip Lip
Points on Marrowstone Island northwestward to the rip rap jetty on the east side of the
Portage Canal. Sediment to this drift cell is supplied by erosion in the zone of divergence
and contributing bluffs on southeastern Marrowstone Island in the Lip Lip and Kinney
Point reaches. Major depositional areas occur in the South Indian reach, on the barrier
52
LOG.. .ITf;M
# L ~L':J
Pag'3._~~.'Jr
spit fronting a lagoon between the islands and on the barrier beaches protecting salt
marshes in the last kilometer of the drift cell.
The east side of the Portage Canal is an area of no net drift and in the northern
half contains bluffs comprised of hard shale and mudstone (WDOE 1978). Sand lance
spawn along the southeast shore of the Portage Canal and at two pocket beaches between
the north end of the Portage Canal and the navy property boundary (penttila 2000).
Patchy eelgrass beds occur throughout drift cell JEF-2 (WDNR 2001). There is a
bald eagle nest on Kinney Point. This part of Oak Bay serves as an over wintering area
for waterfowl including Brant (WDFW 2004). Except for a small amount of development
on Southwest Marrowstone including a bulkheaded section in front of the "Ecologic
Center" resort this is a rather pristine reach of shoreline with intact, protected, feeder
bluffs and extensive salt marshes.
Juvenile salmonids are found in South Indian Island marsh (Hirschi et al. 2003).
Migratory habitat could be improved by replacing undersized culverts under the road
between Marrowstone and Indian Islands to allow for the passage of juvenile salmonids
(Correa 2003). In the county park on South Indian Island riparian vegetation has been
preserved and as are extensive salt marshes. South Indian Island is a popular area for
recreational clam digging (Speck personal communication 2003). Sand lance spawn on
the barrier beach connecting the islands and along the central portion of Indian Island's
southern coast (Long et al. 2003 and Penttila 2000). A salt marsh is protected by an
extensive barrier beach along the southern part of the Portage Canal (WDOE 200 1).
The remainder of Indian Island will not be covered by this report. It is owned by
the US Navy, thus is not under county jurisdiction. However, briefly it should be noted
that habitat on Indian Island is regionally significant as it is an important nesting area for
Bald Eagles (8 pairs) and its beaches are host to numerous spawning sites for surf smelt
and sand lance (Bill Kalina personal communication 2000, Penttila 2000 and Long et al.
2003).
The East Marrowstone reach is concurrent with drift cell JEF-3 that begins at the
zone of divergence with JEF-2 and net shore drift is generally northward along the entire
eastern side of Marrows tone Island. The drift cell terminates at the cuspate spit at
Marrowstone Point (Kueler 1988). In general, the uplands are stable, however the
immediate blufffaces along most of this segment are unstable and marked by many small
slides (WDOE 1978). North of Sound View Cemetery, for example, there are a number
of houses now very close to the bluff edge (several meters) where the bluff has shown a
steady retreat due to many, rather small, block slides coming off a steep bluff of
compacted fine, silty, Vashon advance outwash. Each slide taking down only a couple of
meters of bluff top, but, in aggregate, creating a serious threat to property. Lack of bluff
top vegetation, ground and surface water erosion and bluff toe erosion all appear to have
contributed to this problem (personal observation).
Eelgrass beds are patchy to continuous along East Marrowstone Island. Riparian
vegetation is fragmented due to clearing for views in the southern portion (south of East
Beach Co. Park) but is mostly intact in the northern portion (Correa 2003). An interesting
rocky intertidal zone occurs at Nodule Point where there is an outcropping of tertiary
sandstone. Sand lance spawn on the depositional beach along Marrowstone Point
(penttila 2003). There are bald eagle nests at Nodule Point, near East Beach and near the
end of Schwartz Road (WDFW 2002).
53
LOG ITEM
# L'-S-
Pag'3._':f3:0t__
.
The next two drift cells JEF-4 and JEF-5, concurrent with North Flagler and
Flagler Campground North reaches respectively, occur completely within Fort Flagler
State Park and govern net shore drift on the northern shore of Marrows tone Island. Both
drift cells begin at a large feeder bluff a half mile east of Marrows tone Point (Flagler
Bluff reach). Sediment is derived from 100 ft tall bluffs comprised of Vashon Till
overlying advance outwash sediments. Net shore drift in the North Flagler reach is to the
east from this feeder bluff and terminates at the cuspate spit at Marrowstone Point. Net
shore drift in JEF-5 extends from the same feeder bluff as JEF-4 for two miles to the
southwest tip of Rat Island (Kueler 1988). Rat Island was originally a spit but was
breached some time in the middle part oflast century, it is its own reach (Correa 2003).
Eelgrass is absent along this segment of shoreline, except for patchy beds around
Rat Island (WDNR 2001). Bald eagles nest above the feeder bluff in Flagler Bluffs reach
(WDFW 2003). Riparian vegetation is largely absent from the high bluff areas, however,
it is present in the lower bluff areas in the along this shoreline. Also, large woody debris
is recruited off of the tops of the high bluffs as they erode. Rat Island is a haul out and
pupping site for harbor seals and a nesting area for gulls (WDFW 2004). The parking lot
and campground at Fort Flagler is constructed on fill placed on top of approximately 22
acres of historic salt marsh (Correa 2003). A brackish marsh at Marrowstone Point
apparently did not have an outlet to Admiralty Inlet (Correa 2003). Marrowstone Point is
home to prairie plants including menzies larkspur (Delphinium menziesii) and chocolate
lily (Frittilaria lanceolala).
Drift cell JEF-6 originates at a zone of divergence one mile north of Mystery Bay
and net shore drift extents about two miles to the north to terminate inside the spit at Fort
Flagler. This drift cell is within relatively sheltered Kilisut Harbor with limited southern
fetch (Kueler 1988). Sediment is derived from eroding bluffs near the origin of the cell
and alongshore (WDNR 2001). Depositional beaches occur in the middle of the cell (in
the North Kilisut Reach) and at the terminus (in the Flagler Campground South Reach)
(Keuler 1988).
Eelgrass occurs in patchy beds throughout this drift cell (WDNR 2001). Herring
spawn on eelgrass throughout Kilisut Harbor. Surf smelt spawn in the northern part ofthe
Kilisut Harbor Reach (Penttila 2000 and Long at el. 2003). There is little riparian
vegetation in the North Kilisut and Kilisut reaches (WDNR 2001). The depositional
beach in the North Kilisut Reach encloses a salt marsh. This part ofKilisut harbor is also
an important over wintering area for brandt and other waterfowl (WDFW 2002).
Drift cell JEF-7 originates in the same zone of divergence JEF-6. Net shore drift
is to the south for one mile into Mystery Bay, terminating in the vicinity of Mystery Bay
State Park (Kueler 1988). Sediments are derived from Vashon till and advance outwash
deposits (WDOE 1978). A depositional spit at the northern tip of Mystery Bay encloses a
salt marsh lagoon (WDOE 1978). Another salt marsh is protected behind a barrier beach
within Mystery Bay State Park. Within Mystery Bay there is no net shore drift. A small
salt marsh is isolated by driveway fill at the southern tip of the bay (Correa 2003).
Eelgrass is nearly continuous north of, and within, Mystery Bay except for patchy
beds at the head of the bay (WDNR 2001). Sand lance spawn on the beaches just north of
Mystery Bay and just south of, and in, the State Park (penttila 2000). Kilisut Harbor and
Mystery Bay are regionally significant over wintering areas for diving ducks. Significant
development around Nordland has eliminated riparian vegetation on the eastern shore of
54
LOG ITEM
# 7L~
Pag'3._~ot_
-
the bay; in contrast, about 65% of riparian vegetation remains on the western shore
(WDNR 2001).
An area of divergence occurs from the relatively tall bluffs cut into shale and
mudstone on northern side of Griffiths Point. Kue1er shows some net drift occurring to
the east into Mystery Bay, however the current DOE Coastal Zone Atlas shows this as an
area of divergence but no significant drift to the east (Kue1er 1988 and WDOE 2003). To
the west and then south from this zone of divergence, drift cell JEF-9 encompasses net
shore drift for 1.7 miles into southern Scow Bay. Sediment is derived from mixed
shalelmudstone and glacial till feeder bluffs in southern Kilisut Harbor (Kueler 1988).
Riparian vegetation along this segment is fragmented due to clearing for views
(WDOE 2001). Eelgrass is continuous along the Scow Bay reach (WDNR 2001). Surf
smelt and sand lance use this shoreline for spawning (Long et al. 2003 and Penttila 2000).
This is an important over wintering area for waterfowl and spawning grounds for herring
(indeed herring roe is important food for diving ducks). There is commercial aquaculture
in Scow Bay. Southern Scow Bay has extensive salt marshes (Scow Bay March Reach),
The value of this salt marsh habitat for migratory juvenile salmonids could be improved
by increasing the water flow under the causeway by building a bridge or replacing the
culverts (Correa 2003).
Shoreline Alterations
There is a bulkhead that extends into the high water in front of the "Ecologic Center"
resort on South Marrowstone. The parking lot for South Indian Island County Park is
constructed on fill placed behind a riprap bulkhead on the beach. Little or no armoring
occurs on East Marrowstone except for the bulkhead protecting the parking lot at East
Beach County Park. An abandoned pier at Fort Flagler State Park interferes with along
shore transport of sediment; its removal would improve sediment transport to the south
side of Marrows tone Point.
A riprap bulkhead protecting the coast guard facility interferes with sediment
transport along the north side of Marrow stone Point in the North Flagler Reach. The
terminus of drift cell JEF-5 in front of the campground at Fort Flagler is altered:
historically Rat Island was a spit extending from the point. In the 1940's this spit was
breached by dragging boats over it during military exercises (Hirschi et aI2003a). Since
that time a combination of currents and the interruption of sediment transport has kept
Rat Island separated from Marrowstone Island except during low tides. This interruption
of along shore sediment transport has been caused by the little used boat ramp on the
north side ofthe point (Hirschi et aI2003a). In addition, this spit enclosed what was
historically an approximately 22-acre salt marsh where the campground now sits (Correa
2003).
On the inside of Kilisut Harbor there is a boat ramp and dock at Fort Flagler with
some nearby associated bulkheading. However, this drift cell, JEF-6, is not highly altered
and its there is very little armoring of its contributing and feeder bluffs Within the North
Kilisut and Kilisut reaches. To the south there is extensive bulkheading in front ofthe
feeder and contributing bluffs in drift cell JEF-7 (South Kilisut Reach) amounting to
32.5% of the total length ofthe drift cell (Hirschi et al. 2003b). This could lead or have
already contributed to erosion of the along-shore and depositional spits just north of
55
# LOSL~
Pagt3._~o!.._
~
Mystery Bay State Park. Within Mystery Bay State Park there is a dock and boat ramp. In
the Nordland Reach there are three docks associated with the town of Nord land and
several building and filled areas intruding into the nearshore. Just south and north of the
Nordland Store, State Highway 116 is bulkheaded, possibly eliminating shallow water
habitat for juvenile salmonids. At the head of Mystery Bay a driveway truncates a salt
marsh. In Scow Bay there is a smattering of residential bulkheading amounting to 16.1 %
of the total length of the drift cell JEF-9, a small house built on stilts over the intertidal,
and eleven staircases. At the head of Scow Bay the causeway that connects Marrowstone
Island to Indian Island interrupts tidal flow.
Restoration Opportunities
A larger culvert or culverts could be placed under the causeway between Marrowstone
and Indian Islands to improve tidal exchange between Scow Bay and Oak. Bay. This
would improve migratory habitat for juvenile salmonids (Correa 2003). Moving the
parking lot at East Beach County Park to an upland site would increase shallow water
habitat for migratory salmonids (pinks and chum). Removal of an abandoned pier at Fort
Flagler along with random creosote pilings in this area would improve transport of
sediment north to the terminus of drift cell JEF-3 at Marrowstone Point and decrease
toxin input to the water from creosote. The removal of the bulkhead and restoration of
the salt marsh at Marrowstone Point would improve beach habitat and increase migratory
salmonid habitat. This may entail the removal or relocation of the USGS laboratory at
Marrowstone Point and! or the automated Coast Guard light (Correa 2003). Ifthe little
used boat ramp on the north side of the spit, by the campground at Fort Flagler was
removed it would improve sediment transport to the terminus of the drift cell on Rat
Island (Hirschi 2003b). Restoring at least part of the historic saltmarsh at the campground
at Fort Flagler could improve habitat for juvenile salmonids and other saltmarsh
dependent species.
In the South Kilisut reach the removing bulkheads within drift cell JEF-7 would
improve sediment recruitment and could help sustain beaches north of Mystery Bay.
Removal of fill within a salt marsh in the North Kilisut reach would increase salt marsh
habitat (Correa 2003). A driveway truncating the salt marsh at the head of Mystery Bay
could be removed to provide access to salmonids and other creatures- a neighboring
driveway can be used for access (as is evident from the WDOE shoreline photos).
Unused creosoted pilings could be removed from Mystery Bay State Park to decrease
possible toxin input into the water (Correa 2003).
Public Access
At the southern tip of Marrows tone, Kinney Point is owned by Washington State Parks
and the tidelands are owned by DNR (DNR -404A). Although currently only accessible
by boat this State Park property abuts the end of Baldwin Road, so upland access could
be possible with parking and road improvements. On the east side of Marrows tone Island
there is beach access at East Beach County Park. Fort Flagler at the north end of the
island provides access to miles of shoreline along with a campground, shellfish beds and
a boat ramp. Mystery Bay State Park in Nordland has about 700 feet of public access
56
LOG ITEM
# L2~.
PAl'l'3 ~. . -
-~ ~_~\)f,__.
....
..
shoreline, a boat ramp and dock. In Scow Bay there is DNR shoreline accessible by boat.
There is a street easement extending to the water at Strawberry Lane to the west of
Flagler Road where public access from land might be possible, but parking may be a
problem due to lack of space between the bluff and the road. The entire south shore of
Indian Island is public access and there are several parking areas at South Indian Island
County Park off of Highway 116.
Preliminary Nearshore Reaches
Ship Canal: Southern end of ship canal jetty north to the edge of Naval Magazine Indian.
Island.
South Indian Island: Ship canal jetty east to edge of Marrows tone Island
South Marrowstone Island: East to edge of Marrows tone Island to the western
boundary of Kinney Point State Park property.
Kinney Point State Park: Kinney Point State Park property.
Lip Lip Point: Northeastern edge of Kinney Point State Park property to origin of drift
cell JEF-3.
East Marrowstone: Origin of drift cell JEF-3 to Marrowstone Point.
North Flagler: Drift cell JEF-4 and eastern part of divergent zone.
Flagler Bluffs: Feeder bluffs in zone of divergence JEF-4/JEF-5.
Flagler Campground North: Drift cell JEF-5.
Rat Island
Flagler Campground South: State Park boundary north to the end of the spit by the
campground.
North Kilisut: Origin of drift cell JEF-6 north to the State Park boundary.
Kilisut: Area of divergence JEF -6/ JEF -7.
South Kilisut: Origin of drift cell JEF-7 to the north edge of the salt marsh enclosed by
the alongshore spit north of Mystery Bay State Park.
Mystery Bay Salt Marsh: The salt marsh lagoon enclosed by the alongshore spit north
of Mystery Bay State Park.
Mystery Bay West: from the eastern edge of the salt marsh to the western edge of
Mystery Bay State Park;
Mystery Bay State Park.
Nordland: From eastern edge of Mystery Bay State park to the head of the bay (where
the driveway truncates a salt marsh).
Scow Bay: From the head point to the terminus of drift cell JEF-9 in Scow Bay.
Scow Bay Marsh: The area ofundefmed drift at the head of Scow Bay.
Port Townsend Bav
This area contains the most intense development within the county's jurisdiction at Port
Hadlock and by the Port Townsend Paper Mill as well as the relatively undeveloped areas
south of Hadlock and between Chimacum Creek and Glen Cove (Map 15). The
significant watershed of Chimacum Creek enters Port Townsend Bay at Irondale. This
shoreline is within the watershed of the Tri-area UGA around Port Hadlock and Irondale.
There are five drift cells within this area and a portion of another. Climate for this area is
57
LOG ITEM
# 2-Zc.;
e:-f , f~--'
Pag ~ .':".lL U. _, ~..., (