The Groundwater Resources of Wayland Massachusetts by Wayland Surface Water Quality Committee

-·

; -~

.. \

: ....

THE

GROUNDWAT~-~--,-=:~~B-~SP~ RCES ·-

'-,

.··~~· -':.,.

:)-"7;.~,..

- ,,.. ·.t.· · . , ..

.-=-·· . .,--'/" d-.--?··---

-.•u ~

WAYL~N-o,___i{!f~?S~g~~J~ETTS

1~ .-·.·~'"·"~r~~~,i~~

"'""--.

~ RlG:tlARO·

.., L; --· .FORl'lrt:·.:_·:_-:, .. _-'_ :..- ·..·/ ... I...

· .··: ...~.::~- ~·..:..,

=---·:.·: _.--· .

1./·~--~ --,lr-_.--_--. -=·· ... ·~..:. ~ ..-.. .::!_.:·,~ . -':"~: ~~-:_ ~

·•· ~.'-·-':::::'""

-----...- -

- ·- -......., ':::::-:1

·.:·-

~ \

:, .~,-~"~~' ._:_ --~~.:·-~ .-~.~~~- 'J

..,. I

{ -~-

/ ~.,"'' ~·

-.::-

THE GROUNDWATER RESOURCES OF WAYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS

by Richard L. Fortin MUA, Hydrogeology Boston University January 1981

To ~/J~,M..

fi?~l~ F~-

May 2011 Town of Wayland: - Scanned and maps reassembled by Alfred Berry - Processed for size, text searching and bookmarks by Mike Lowery Original author unable to be located.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my deep appreciation to the following people for having been extremely helpful to me during the course of this study. For Technical Information: Mr. John Roche, Superintendent Wayland Water Department Mr. Bruce Hansen U. S. Geological Survey, Boston D. L. Maher Company North Reading, MA State and Municipal Governments Referenced in this report.

For Review of Text and Maps: Dabney W. Caldwell, Ph.D. Geology Department Boston University Mrs. Sarah R. Newbury Wayland Conservation Commission Mr. Lewis L. Bowker, Jr. Wayland Engineering Department

CONTENTS I.

INTRODUCTION

A. B.

c. D.

II .

7 8 8

Pre_-Gl aci a l Setting . . . . . . Glacial Deposits . . . . . . . . . Aquifer Characteristics . . . . Defining Groundwater Parameters . . . . . . Hydrologic Properties of Glacial Sediments. Analysis of Well Hydraulics . . . l. Aquifer Drawdown in General. 2. Methodology . . . . . . . . -. Campbell Road Well . . . . . 3. a. Geologic Description . . b. Drawdown Analysis . . . c. Area of Well Influence. 4. Meadow View Well . . . . . . a. Geologic Description. . Drawdown Analysis . . . b. c. Area of Well Inf luence.

10 11 14 18 20

24 24 25 26 26 26 30 32 32 32

Historical Trends in Use. Well Yields . . . Water Quality . l. Iron and Manganese 2. Nitrate-Nitrogen . . 3. Sodium and Chloride.

39 41 45 45

47 48

CONCLUSIONS A.

2 6

MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY A. B.

IV.

1 2

GROUNDWATER HYDROGEOLOGY A. B. C. D. E. F.

III.

Purpose and Scope . . . . Description of Study Area 1. Natural Environment . 2. Man-made Environment . . . Data Collection and Evaluation . . . . . . . . ... . . Geologic Studies and Related Hydrologic Investigations . Ongoing Research . . . . . . . . . 1.

Water Supply. 1. Quality. 2. Quantity

51 51 52

RECOMMENDATIONS

Water Supply.

CONTENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS (continued) B.

C. VI. VI I. VII I.

Protection Techniques . 1. Education-Conservation . 2. Land Use Regulations . . a. General Background. b. The State• s Role. . c. The Town• s Role . . d. Existing Local Regulatory Authority e. Adoption of New Regulatory Authority. . . f. Strengthening Existing Local Regulatory Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recommendations for Further Technical Investigations.

BIBLIOGRAPHY DEFINITION OF TERMS APPENDIX

A. B.

c. D.

Profiles Tables Figures Plates

I-V I-XII I-IX I-VIII

58 58 58 58 59 60

61 61

62 64

Introduction A. B.

Purpose and Scope Description of Study Area 1. Natural Environment 2. Man-made Environment

C. D.

Data Collection and Evaluation Geologic Studies and Related Hydrologic Investigations l. Ongoing Research

INTRODUCTION A.

Purpose and Scope

In the late lBoo•s Wayland developed a reservoir for wa t er supply to the Cochituate area. The reservoir was created by constructing an earth and stone dam in the upper reaches of the Snake Brook watershed. On t he lower side of the dam a gatehouse was built to control t he main water line leading south. By the 1920 1 s the reservoir could no longer serve as the Town•s water supply. The gravel infiltration beds had become clogged and runoff from upland swamps carried dissolved iron and organics into the reservoir resulting in poorer water quality . Consequently, the Town began to look for other sources of water and initiated an aggressive testing program to find productive well sites.

The results of this program are evident today. The Water Department has seven wells in operation and another site confirmed for future use . In the past some of the wells were threatened by contaminants from various sources, but fortunately these problems have been corrected . Other communities have been less fortunate . A report by the Massachusetts Division of Water Resources (1976) lists numerous well sites abandoned because of pollution . For example, in the 196o•s and 197o•s water supplies were contaminated by road salt, landfill leachate, sewage disposal and pesticides. Within the last two years, hazardous waste disposal has been recognized as a very serious threat to groundwater resources in New Eng land and throughout the United States.

-1-

Pollution of water supplies has increased in developed areas where land use controls are lacking. Therefore, it has become very important for communities to understand the occurrence and movement of groundwater so that effective protection and management strategies can be adopted. This study was initiated in order to assist Wayland in this regard. The purpose and scope of this report are:

To provide an understanding of where, when and how groundwater occurs within the Town, including a delineation of physical conditions and an evaluation of hydrogeologic relationships.

To review records of past and present use of water in the Town in order to determine important trends and suggest useful water management strategies.

To analyze the hydraulic characteristics and spatial relationships of certain municipal wells currently in use.

To recommend techniques for controlling and improving land use practices for the protection of surface and groundwater resources.

To recommend additional studies and site investigations for developing a better understanding of the hydrogeology in areas where current information is inadequate.

Description of Study Area 1.

Natural Environment

The Town of Wayland occupies 15.9 square miles of the inland coastal plain in eastern Massachusetts. Located approximately 20 miles west of Boston, Wayland borders Sudbury on the west, Lincoln on the north , Weston on the east and Natick and Framingham on the south (see Figure 1) . Wayland experiences four seasonal variations in cl imate due to the influence of the earth's rotation, orientation and the preva i l ing westerl y air currents. Cold fronts move into this region from the northwest, whereas moist weather patterns originate from the south . The ocean often influences these weather patterns by moderating both summer and winter temperatures. -2-

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

WAYLAND

Figure 1:

Locus map of Wayland, Massachusetts.

The mean annual temperature is about 50Â°F. Wide variations occur during warm, humid summers and cold, wind-chilled winters. Dramatic fluctuations are common even within the short span of a week or a day. Average annual precipitation is about 42 inches. Records of rainfall since 1960 published by the USGS (1978) indicate \'Jet years in 1972, 1975, 1978 and 1969; dry years in 1965, 1966 and 1963, listed in decl~easÂ ing order of severity . 11

The average monthly distribution for the years 1961 to 1978 is shown in Figure 2. If records for a longer period were used, the distribution of rainfall would be nearly the same for each month. r-r--

4 1-

--r-

.s:::.

-- __ ..--- - -------- ..--- - ---AVERAGE r1-

1---1--r---

3 1-

-= ....J ....J

l 1-

0 Oc

Figure 2:

No De

Fe Mo Ap Mo Ju Jl

Average monthly distribution of rainfall recorded at a station in Framingham, MA during the years 1961-1978, (USGS, 1978). -3-

Seasonal changes in precipitation affect the amount of water drainage from each watershed in the study area. Fluctuations in monthly streamflow can be sho\.'m by a typical annual hydrograph, Figure 3a. Similarly, groundwater levels respond to the annual distribution of precipitation as shown in Figure 3b. Surface and groundwater levels decrease through the summer to a low in the fall. In the winter and spring the trend is reversed.

PEAK

FLOW

I PEAK LEVEL I I

CD CD

I l

0 ...1

1&.1 ID

Oc No

Figure 3a:

De Ja

Fe Ma Ap Ma Ju

Au Se

Typical annual hydrograph of monthly runoff.

Oc No De Ja

Fe Ma Ap Ma Ju

.Figure 3b:

Typical annual hydrograph of groundwater fluctuations.

These hydrographs are nearly the same shape except that the peaks are out of phase in the spring. Peak flow conditions occur in streams during March and April whereas maximum groundwater levels occur later in April and May. The physiography of Wayland consists of upland hills to the east and the Sudbury River to the west. The river fl O\"IS south to north unti 1 it joins with the Assabet River to form the Concord River. The river surface drops only about two feet from Stonebridge Road to Sherman's Bridge Road. Because of the broad, flat meadows and adjacent swamps comprising 24 percent of Wayland's total area (determined by the 124 msl contour), the flood plain provides a vast area for storage of storm runoff.

-4-

To the south Reeves Hill (406 msl) and Turkey Hill (382 msl) are the highest points in Town. Ridges formed by these and other lower hills define the watershed limits and drainage patterns. A general east-west topographic profile directs runoff towards the Sudbury River via the following brooks: Trout, Hazel, Mill, Hayward, Pine and Snake Brooks and numerous unnamed tributaries . The watershed areas are shown on Plate I and their acreage is given in Table I in the Appendix . . Note that some of these watersheds extend into adjacent towns. Both the soils and vegetation in Wayland have been inventoried and reports are available in the Town Office Building. The soil survey report (USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS), 1965), includes a description of the soil conditions and interpretations for specific land uses. The different types of soils are grouped into four associations : Marsh-muck (organic) 13%, Narragansett-Hollis-Paxton (stoney, bouldery on glacial till) 25%, Enfield-Windsor-Hinckley (sandy, gravelly) 56%, and Windsor-Hinckley (sandy, gravelly) 56%, and Hinckley-Merrimac (sandy, gravelly on steep slopes) 6%. The percent is based on the total area of the Town. The soils included in the SCS report comprise the upper 3 to 5 feet of the land surface and are derived from the parent materia 1 otherwise known as gl aci a1 drift. 11

Soils with good infiltration characteristics are important for groundwater recharge and attenuation of storm runoff. Recharge is enhanced where the soils overlay parent material consisting of permeable sands and gravels. This is significant for Wayland since over half the soils are underlain by well drained glacial drift, i.e., the Enfield-Windsor-Hinckley and HinckleyMerrimac Soil Associations. Vegetation affects infiltration and runoff by interception, evaporation and transpiration of moisture. A comparison of the 1951 and 1971 inventories of vegetation type and land use (MacConnell and Cobb, 1974) is given in Table II in the Appendix. The report shows a 13% decrease in forested areas, a 17% drop in agricultural land, and a 17% increase in urban land use (light residential). The trend from low to high runoff coefficients (woodland and farmland to urban areas) results in a larger portion of the total annual precipitation flowing from upland areas into

-5-

the Sudbury River. The degree of change in runoff rates and volumes varies within each .watershed depending on many factors relating to both natural and artificial drainage conditions. 2.

Man-made Environment

In 1979 the population of Wayland was recorded at 12,542 persons. This represents a decrease from 1972 when the population peaked at 13,800. In the last few years, the population has remained at a fairly constant level even though movement in and out of Town has been quite prevalent. Ninety-eight percent of the Town's land area is zoned for residential use (Table III in the Appendix). The number of homes now exceeds 3,800. Growth was slow during the past 10 years following a period of rapid development in the 1950 1 s and early 1960 1 s. The average density today is about 1.2 persons per acre or 1.0 house per 2.7 acres. In the southern part of Town, the density is considerably greater. By comparison, more thickly settled areas pose a greater potential threat to water resources because of waste disposal, water consumption and urban runoff problems. On-site sewage disposal systems are used throughout the Town. When properly located and constructed three important advantages are provided: 1) recharge of water back into the ground within the local watershed, 2) dispersion of nutrients over a large portion of the soil environment, and 3) controlled development within the assimilative capacity of the land. The degree of natural treatment provided by soils and plants varies depending on their physical, chemical and biological characteristics and the effluent load placed on them. Approximately two percent of Wayland is zoned for business, commercial and industrial uses. Land designated for such use is located primarily in Wayland Center, Cochituate Center, and along Route 20 east and Route 30 east. Wayland Center is a sensitive area because of its location in the flood plain. Land use in Cochituate Center is a significant concern because of the potential influence of urbanization on the quality of water in Snake Brook and Lake Cochituate. -6-

Wayland has approximately 47 miles of paved roads within its corporate limits. The major traveled roads, both local and commuter traffic, are Route 126, Route 27, Route 30 (all two lanes) and the Massachusetts Turnpike (a four lane toll road). This road network affects surface and groundwater resources in several respects: 1) water quality is impacted by the discharge of sand, salt, grease, oils and other impurities from storm drainage systems and paved surfaces; 2) groundwater recharge is reduced because of the increased amount of impervious cover on upland soils; and, 3) storm runoff in streams and rivers is altered where road crossings restrict channel capacity. The effects on flow rate, volume and local flood levels vary depending on the watershed characteristics and hydraulic structures along 'the watercourse. C.

Data Collection and Evaluation

Most of the data used in this study was provided by the Wayland Water Department. The information included well logs, aquifer tests, drawdown measurements, watel~ quality, well design and yield . ~路Jell logs ~vere also acquired from adjacent towns and from the United States Geological Survey (USGS), Boston Office. Data was sought on private wells through a survey questionnaire mailed to owners believed to have a well and by direct contact with well drillers, particularly the D. L. Maher Company of North Reading. Other useful depth profiles and boring logs were received from the Metropolitan District Commission (MDC), ~路1assachusetts Department of Public Works, Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, Boston Edison Company and Raytheon Company. Seismic profiles and boring logs were retrieved from studies of the old and new landfill sites. A Data Supplement Section consisting of a catalog of this information has been compiled as a separate report for reference. More than 300 data points were used for interpreting subsurface conditions. Plate II gives the location of these points and shows the location of Subsurface Profiles I-V, included in the Appendix. Shallow subsurface soil characteristics and water table measurements were obtained through an examination of sewage disposal system plans on file in the Wayland Board of Health Office. Over 400 of these points, water tabl e readings from well logs and boring logs were considered in determining average maximum groundwater elevations throughout the study area. -7-

The surficial geology has been mapped by Koteff (1964) and Nelson (1974). Nelson also mapped the bedrock geology in the Natick Quadrangle (1975). The work of both authors was combined into a composite surficial map labeled Plate III and a description of the geologic units is given in Table IV in the Appendix. A small portion of Wayland located in the.Maynard Quadrangle was mapped by Hansen (1956). The 1965 and 1970 USGS 7.5 minute series topographic maps (l :24,000) were used as a base map and for general reference. Aquifer drawdown tests were used to determine the hydraulic properties, i.e., permeability, transmissibility and storage of the well sites. Methods for evaluating steady and non-steady flow were developed by Thei m (1906), Theis (1935), Jacob and Cooper (1940). All of these works draw on the observations of Darcey (1856) which were concerned with groundwater flow. Formulas for these methods are given in Table V in the Appendix. Also included are the assumptions applicable to each one. D.

Geologic Studies and Related Hydrologic Investigations

Geology and hydrology reports for the Hudson and Maynard Quadrangles (Hansen, 1956), the Town of Sudbury {Motts, 1977) and the To...m of Concord (I.E.P., 1979) were correlated with this study. Additional hydrogeologic i nformation has been developed by several studies related to the Town 1 s landfills. Test wells were installed at the old site by Reed (1978) to determine the presence of surface and/or groundwater contamination. The new landfill was investigated by Weston Geophysical Engineers, Inc. (1970), Haley and Aldrich, Inc. (1972) and Linenthal, Eisenberg, Anderson, Inc. (1979) to assess its suitability for waste disposal purposes. 1.

Ongoing Research

The USGS is currently working on a groundwater favorability study in the Sudbury River watershed. This work \vi 11 encompass most of \~ayl and except for the small area located in the Charles River watershed. A similar study has already been completed for the Assabet River valley (Pollock et.al., 1969). In addition, the USGS has been evaluating surface and groundwater conditions in theCochituate Lake area. -8-

Through the Water Department, a consultant will study surface and groundwater data in order to determine the hydrauli c relationship between the well fields and the Sudbury River. Because of the proximity of the wells to the river, it is believed that aquifer recharge may occur during spring high water (or floods), or that surface water may be induced into the aquifer as groundwater is pumped out of the wells. This study wi l l become an important part of the Townâ&#x20AC;˘s overall understanding of its groundwater supply. The Metropolitan District Commission has pro jected the need for more water in order to meet the present and future demand of the cites and towns in Massachusetts served by its water supply system. The Metropolitan District Commission is now considering a plan to divert an average of 22 mil lion gallons per day from an upstream reservoir in the Sudbury River watershed. A detailed environmental impact report is necessary i n order t o determine the effects of withdrawing water from the ri ver system. This study is expected to begin in the near future.

-9-

II.

Groundwater Hydrogeology Pre-Glacial Setting A. B. Glacial Deposi t s C. Aqui f er Characteristics D. . Defining Groundwater Parameters E. Hydrologic Properties of Glacial Sediments F. Analysis of Well Hydraul i cs 1. Aquifer Drawdown in General 2. Methodology 3. Campbell Road Well a. Geologic Descripti on b. Drawdown Analysis c. Area of Well Influence 4. Meadow View Well a. Geologic Description b. Drawdown Analysis Area of Well Influence c.

GROUNDWATER HYDROGEOLOGY A.

Pre-Glacial Setting

Geologists believe that prior t o the advance of gl aciers, t he New England coastal plain sloped toward the southeast and mos t streams f l owed in that direction. Runoff flowed overland conforming t o fractures, fol iation planes and weathered surfaces where erosion channel s cou l d easily develop . Clapp (1901), Crosby (1939 ) and Hansen (1953) beli eve t hat present day rivers, the Sudbury, Assabet, Concord and Charles, fol l ow channels which in some areas are quite different than st reambeds of f ormer val l eys. The system of buried valleys is believed to consist of 1) t he pre-gl aci al Assabet transecting from the northwest via Boon's Pond i n Stow and Hop Brook or Pantry Brook in Sudbury towards Heard Pond; 2) t he pre-glaci al Sudbury oriented west to east f rom Westboro to t he pre-gl aci al Ass abet near the north end of Lake Cochituate; and, 3) a major tri butary val ley aligned north-south from West Concord, through White Pond and Pan t ry Book to t he pre-glaci al Sudbury. Beyond the confluence of t hese buried valleys, a broad deep valley called the pre-glacial Sudbury- Charl es turns north through Wel lesley and then follows an easterl y course to t he Boston Bay. An appro ximate location of the pre-glacial system is shown i n Fi gure 4. -10-

APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF BURIED VALLEYS

' '

Rt. 20

/ /

Assobe~t

Pre-glacial \

Valley

I I

r, l

\ \ I

-"'

- ~- \ I r

"':..,. Sudbury-Charles ' Pre-glociol Valley

Figure 4:

Approximate locatio n of the pre-glacial buried valley system as reported by Clapp (1901), Crosby (1939) and Hansen (1953) .

Glacial Deposits

With t he advance of the last glaciers (Late Wisconsin Ice Adva nce about 22,000~ B.P. ), bedrock surfaces and pre- glacial sediments were shaped i nto new topographic features by the deposition of glacia l drift (soil and rock picked up and t ransported by i ce) . Glacial drift is separated into t wo types because of the way i t was formed and because of its

-11-

physical characteristics. Drift deposited by active ice is called till, while路 stratified drift refers to glacial material laid down by meltwater flowing from or within an ice mass. In Wayland, two types of till are present. Glacial debris deposited under the ice became compacted into a hard, lower till consisting of finer sediments. Above this layer an upper till is present comprised of loose, sandy, bouldery drift formed during deglaciation, also called ablation or melt-out till. The upper till is exposed at the surface in many places throughout the eastern half of the study area. In a few locations till was formed as drumlins and may be several hundred feet thick. In buried valleys, well logs show till less than 20 feet in depth. Till underlies swamps and bogs where the water table intersects the land surface and supports wetland growth . During deglaciation, meltwater streams flowed from the ice sheets and deposited stratified drift on the sides, in front of and in crevasses within the glaciers. Soil and rock were graded over the land surface and into lakes formed when meltwater was temporarily dammed by glacial drift or large blocks of stagnant ice. Streams flowing into glacial Lakes Charles, Sudbury and Concord formed large deltas, several of which are found in Wayland . Fine silt and sand was redistributed as a thin blanket (eolian) throughout most of the study area. ~~ithin the last 10,000 years, younger deposits of organic matter accumulated in wetland environments and alluvium settled along streams and rivers. The morphological sequence concept was derived by Jahns (1941) to describe the progression of glacial landforms deposited . from a retreating ice margin with each feature having distinct characteristics depending on how it was made. Deposition was controlled by the current velocity and sediment load of the meltwater streams and by the presence of glacial lakes. The landforms consist of stratified sand, silt, gravel and clay laid down in fluvial (stream), lacustrine (lake) or marine environments. In general, particle s1ze decreases further downstream from the source and sorting increases . This concept is helpful in identifying the distribution and progression of coarse, medium and fine sediments. Frequently, ice

-12-

marginal positions, located by a steep ice-contact slope facing to the north, mark the beginning of a morphological sequence. Glacial fluvial deposits are most easily seen in the southern portion of Wayland adjacent to upland areas covered by till. The fluvial deposits store large volumes of groundwater which are important for maintaining the base flow of Pine Brook and Snake Brook. Exposures in these deposits show coarse, gravelly textures, although the degree of sorting is poor. The best example of a well-graded fluvial landform can be viewed off Rice Road north of the old reservoir. I.E.P. (1978) described the surficial geology of this area in considerable detail. Glacial lacustrine deposits exist throughout Wayland. They consist of stratified sand, gravel, silt and clay carried into a lake by a glacial stream. Extensive deltas were formed varying in depth from a few feet to more than 100 feet. The deltas characteristically have coarse to fine topset and foreset beds and fine bottomset beds. The topset beds are graded above the lake level; bottomset beds formed as particles settled in the lake. Both have relatively flat topographic expressions. Foreset beds formed below the lake level as the sloping face in front of the delta. The horizontal line formed by the intersection of the topset beds over the foreset beds represents the level of the glacial lake at the time the delta was formed. A good example of a delta is located in the Bow Road area. Lake bottom sediments occupy a large part of the flood plain area north of Heard Pond. Wetland deposits have accumulated over most of these sediments, except for an area north of Route 27, which is overlain by an extensive blanket of sand and gravel outwash. South of Heard Pond the stratigraphy of glacial sediments is more complex. Throughout most of the flood plain area, sand and gravel is frequently interbedded with silt and clay. The existence of one or more former glacial lakes during deglaciation is probably responsible for.such wide variability in the horizontal stratification in this area. South of the subsurface fied medium to for a depth of

Dudley Pond several well logs provide some information about conditions . On the northwest side of Lake Cochituate., straticoarse sand and gravel occupies most of the geologic column about 190 feet. Directly east of the lake and Old Connecticut

-13-

Path the vertical profile changes considerably. The upper strata consist of coarse, well-graded materials to an approximate depth of 50 feet, elevation 100 feet msl. Below elevation 100 feet msl the sediments are much finer for at least another 50 feet. Near West Plain Street-and Bent Avenue the well-graded layer occurs down to elevation 160 feet msl before clay sediments are encountered. At Cochituate Center the clay layer is closer to the surface and finally becomes exposed in the area of Snake Brook Road. Along Snake Brook the fine sand and clay averages about 30 feet deep. This information indicates that glacial sediments were deposited from an ice-contact slope near Old Connecticut Path towards the lower course of Snake Brook. At first only a shallow glacial lake existed in front of the ice. Later the lake level rose to about elevation 100 feel msl. As sediments washed into the lake the level continued to rise and the depth of the bottomset beds increased further from the ice-contact slope. The boring near Bent Avenue shows the level (160 feet msl) reached at this location. Eventually the lake drained or became almost completely filled and the topset beds graded across the clay strata becoming thinner towards Snake Brook. Data west of Lake Cochituate show a similar clay formation at 160 feet msl and below, Figure 5. While these sediments were deposited, Lake Cochituate was occupied by ice which eventually melted to form the lake as seen today. Because of the presence of a clay area south of Dudley Pond, groundwater movement towards Lake Cochituate is severely limited. Observation wells at the west end of Dudley Pond indicate that groundwater is moving towards Pod Meadow. The confining influence of the clay materials south of Dudley Pond probably contribute to the maintenance of a higher water level in the pond as compared to the level in Lake Cochituate. The difference is approximately ten feet. C.

Aquifer Characteristics

An aquifer is generally considered to be a porous formation of soil and/or rock bearing water in a fully saturated condition. For water supply purposes, an aquifer may be visualized as only the highly permeable portions of a porous formation even though saturated conditions extend well beyond -14-

CROSS- HATCHED AREA UNDERLAIN BY CLAY SEDIMENTS AT DEPTH

LAIC! C.OCHITUATE

Figure 5:

Locus map of the fine sand and clay sediments underlying a surface gravel stratum which thins towards Snake Brook . !IIC

0 0

. -.:.•

,.,

. . ... -.... . , ... . . .....··...· .: ..• ., .. ... ' . , ·- ·... . ....·. , . .. : .· -... ~

160

•

• • • COARSE

•

GRAVELS '~

a: Cll

• • '• •

•

• ,. "\

~ a::

:::l

...J

9 UJ lJl

:z: 1a. UJ c

BEDROCK

Profile A-B of the progression of gravel to fine sand clay sediments from west to east as shown on the locus map above. -15-

these limits. To be more inclusive, the area of an aquifer is determined by boundaries formed by bedrock and/or impermeable glacial sediments. An aquifer may be freely connected to the atmosphere (unconfined) and receive direct precipitation, or it may be artesian (confined) more or less sealed from above by an overlying layer of semi-permeable material. It is not uncommon to find a water table aquifer located above an artesian aquifer with little or no hydraulic connection between them. Precipitation falls on the land surface and water is introduced in!o ground throughout the year. This process is referred to as recharge and occurs at its maximum between October and April, although it is somewhat limited during January, February and March when the ground is likely to be frozen. Recharge can take place under several hydrologic conditions: 1.

On upland areas where the water table is below the surface throughout the year. Flat stratified sand and gravel deposits provide the best opportunity to recharge. Recharge areas have been identified for Wayland and are shown on Plate V. An explanation of how the geology and topographic conditions were interpreted is given in the Appendix, Table VIII.

Along the banks of streams where temporary flood levels exceed the elevation of the water table and the ground is saturated by influent flow. It is possible that intermittent recharge of this type occurs along watercourses in Wayland, particularly where natural or artifi cial restrictions in the stream channel cause temporary backwaters (pending). This relationship is believed to occur in areas along the Sudbury River, although no data has been collected to verify influent conditions. Flood levels in the River need to be compared with the adjacent groundwater levels to determine the hydraulic connection and direction of movement.

From wetland environments elevated temporarily or permanently above the groundwater table. The geology of an area may be such that a streambed is not intersected by the water table, which is at some depth below the land surface. Water in the stream will therefore saturate the ground over which it flows. This type of recharge occurs in the area north and south of Woodridge Road near the intersection with Cochituate Road. Influent recharge can also occur under lakes or ponds. For example, there is some evidence that Dudley Pond may have this type of hydrologic setting. Measurements taken near Mansion Road show the water table to be as much as 12 feet below the -16-

level of the Pond. Although sufficient information is lacking, it appears that the groundwater table slopes east to west and Dudley Pond lies in whole or in part within the flow path depending on the extent of groundwater fluctuation during a given year. The map of ground watersheds shows the Pond located in the northeast corner of its groundwater province. Baker, ~t.al . (1964) reported on evidence which suggests that infrequent recharge can take place from swamps into the underlying glacial sediments. Seepage would be possible in the fall when the surface of the swamp is saturated by rainfall and runoff, yet, the groundwater table has not risen sufficiently enough to fully saturate the underlying material. Recharge could also occur during a major storm when flood waters rise above the water table in adjacent areas. 4.

Drainage from an adjacent aquifer. Groundwater can leak from an unconfined aquifer through a semiimpervious layer into a confined aquifer. Under pressure of a hydraulic head, seepage may occur from fractured bedrock into unconsolidated deposits.

Recharge can be manipulated artificially through pumping water into or out of an aquifer. Water introduced into the ground through sewage disposal systems, storm drain~ge~leaching structures and leaks in underground water conduits are some examples.

The opposite function of recharge is discharge. Discharge is the release of groundwater at the point where the water table intersects the land surface. (Note that discharge can also take place into fractured bedrock from overlying saturated sediments.) Sites of groundwater discharge include streams, ponds, springs, swamps and other wetland features. Seepage may be continuous or intermittent during the year depending on available storage and elevation difference in the water between inflow and outflow areas. For instance, as the gradient in the water table between upland and lowland areas becomes less steep, head pressure is reduced and groundwater movement to surface wetlands is reduced. Discharge conditions prevail in the spring and diminish through the summer to low flows in the fall. Groundwater discharge (base flow) can be approximated by measuring the flow in a stream throughout an average year of precipitation. This is done by plotting a flow hydrograph of discharge vs. time as shown in Figure 6.

-17-

100

STREAM

DISCHARGE

,.~

.,,,/

Figure 6:

BASE

No Oe Ja Fe

FLOW

MG Ap Ma Ju J I

Au Se

Typical hydrograph of stream flow showing the base flow component in an average 11 Water year 11 â&#x20AC;˘

Defining Groundwater Parameters

In developing a groundwater supply, the aim is to locate an underground reservoir which is capable of yielding good quality water at a productive, sustained rate. To meet this objective all available geologic and hydrologic data can be assimilated into a series of maps which delineate specific groundwater characteristics. Each map portrays a component of the groundwater regime, i.e., bedrock surface, water table and saturated thickness, which in combination allow an interpretation of the spatial arrangement of subsurface conditions. The water table topography map, Plate I, shows the elevation, slope and the overall direction of groundwater movement, i.e., perpendicular to the contour lines. Other minor flow systems are not shown because the map scale limits such fine detail. The contour lines represent the best approximation of average annual maximum water table elevations. The groundwater varies in depth below the land anywhere from a few inches to more than

-18-

40 feet in upland gravel formations. Unless specified, the water level data determined via deep hole tests assumes actual groundwater table and not perched conditi ons . In some locations perched conditions are suspected although they could not be confirmed with the available information. The bedrock topography map, Plate IV, shows the location of preglacial buried valleys within the Town. A major channel winds from north to south under the present Sudbury River flood plain . In some cases the pre-glacial stream follows a much different course than the present-day river. Two other large tributary pre-glacial valleys trend from the east . One is found under the Lincoln Road area and the other is below the Town Center. In the Lake Cochituate area the major buried valley is very deep and wide, probably representing the confluence of more than one pre-glacial stream (Assabet and Sudbury), as described in an earlier section of this report. Beyond Lake Cochituate the pre-glacial val ley fol l ows a course southeast through Natick. The map does not specifically show where the pre-glacial Sudbury and Assabet valleys enter \~ayland, although it appears (based on available data) that the former occurs southwest of Lake Cochituate below the toll road interchange and the latter appears from the west between Stonebridge Road and Pelham Island Road. Motts (1977) bedrock map shows a pre-glacial valley under Wash Brook entering Wayland north of Pelham Island Road. The location of buried valleys at the north. end of Wayland and Sudbury is unclear because the flood plain area above is very broad and subsurface data is scarce. It is possible that the pre-glacial . valley under t he Sudbury River is very wide or that several deep channels exist. This suggestion is based on the fact tha t Lincoln has a potential well site east of the Sudbury River in deep saturated sediments and Sudbury has an active well considerably west of the river, also in deep saturated deposits. 1

The difference in elevation between the water table and the bedrock surface determines the depth of the saturated zone. The saturated thick ness map, Plate VI, shows where the deep glacial deposits are located as compared to the shallow upland areas. The range in saturated thickness varies from zero to over 100 feet. The extent of the saturated zone is restricted in some areas by subsurface bedrock ridges. These ridges are helpfu l i n -19-

delineating the groundwater divides which are shown in Plate IV. In some cases the ground watersheds correspond to the surface watersheds. A further step in evaluating groundwater occurrence is to classify surface areas in terms of their recharge and discharge function. Discharge areas are classified uniformly throughout the area, al though outflow does vary in volume and rate depending on the particular hydrologic setting. Recharge areas are divided into four classifications as described in Table VIII in the Appendix. Each class is established based on the topographic expression and grain size characteristics. The depth to the water table should be several (two or more) feet below land surface throughout the year, so that there is adequate void space for water recharge. The best recharge areas have medium to coarse fine sands and gravels, a flat topographic expression, low evapotranspiration potential and low runoff due to impervious surfaces. By comparison, till is generally less permeable and usually occurs on steep slopes. High recharge is common whe.re runoff from upland till drains into an adjacent sand and gravel formation . The map of recharge areas does not account for the effects of vegetation or impervious surfaces. Using the four maps previously described, an assessment of the groundwater availability or favorability can be made. The classification scheme presented in Table IX was applied to the study area in order to rank the aquifers in terms of favorability for groundwater deve lopment, illustrated in Plate VII. The most favorable aquifers consist of a large grou nd watershed, deep-saturated sedi men ts, high transmissibility, hydraulic connection with a primary recharge area and proximi ty to a discharge area, i.e., stream or pond. Several areas along the Sudbury River exhibit these characteristics and are currently being used as productive well sites . E.

Hydrologic Properties of Glacial Sediments

Earlier discussion has focused on how topography, soils, vegetation cover and l and use can affect the balance between infiltration and surface runoff. After precipitation enters the ground, its disposition is -20-

influenced primarily by the physical characteristics of the geologic materials. In a typical vertical profile, water percolates down th rough sediments by means of the openings between individual grains of rock. These void spaces may remain dry or become partially wetted f or a certain dep t h below the land surface. This area is commor.ly referred to as the zone of aeration. With increasing depth the openings become compl ete ly filled by groundwater. This section is called the zone of saturation. The water table surface is the boundary between these two zones which fluctuates depending on the climatic, geologic and hydrologic conditions. Once precipitation has reached t he saturated zone, the hydro logic properties of the sediments determine the storage and movement of gr oundwa t er. The water bearing capacity of glacial drift or fragmented rock is dependent on the void spaces or porosi-ty. Porosity is determined by the number, size, shape and arrangement of these openings . Porosity is higher in sediments tlhich are well sorted and more uniform in shape, i.e., simi l ar to uniform spheres packed end to end in three dimensions. Sorting represents the range of grain sizes . Glacial deposits are well sorted i f they have a narrow distribution of grain sizes; poorly sorted if they have a wide range of grain sizes. An example of the grain size distribution fo r various materia ls sampled in Wilmington, Massachusetts (Baker, et . al . , 1964) i s s hown in Figure 7. PARTICLE

(millimeters)

SIZE

IUat

...J

SORTING

u.,ID 0

..-- Decreases ~ __._ Increases ....,_/

ILio ~~ LU

Q..

.·/

.·:/

:::E (/)0

LEGEND

Wind Blown - - Til l Outwash Ice- contact

----

/ .002

Figure 7:

.02

- ..

• • • .;...>'"

. 12!5

•.

•

1.0

4.0

32.0

Particle size distribution curves, Wilmington, Mass . (Baker, et.al., 1964) -21-

Water drains from the saturated zone by gravity or artificial pumping. Under the force of gravity only a portion of the total volume of water is actually released. This amount is known as the specific yield. The water remaining and held tightly to the sediments is the specific retention. Values for both specific yield and specific retention vary depending on 路the size, packing and adhesion strength (capillary and osmotic forces) of the sediments as a collective unit. By comparison, a deposit with a clay or silty-clay content will hold water more tightly than a deposit consisting of sand and gravel. For this reason, the smallest (also called the effective diameter) ten percent of the total grain size distribution controls the rate at which water can flow through glacial deposits. Groundwater flow is three dimensional. Vertical and ment occurs because of the difference in elevation along a table and because of a difference in equipotential forces, pressure increases with depth below the land surface. The path of groundwater is shown in Figure 8a.

horizontal movesloping water i.e., the water typical flow

Permeability is controlled by the soil properties which affect porosity and specific yield. The movement of water through the soil can be calculated by Darcey's Law (as explained in the Appendix) in connection with the coefficient of permeability. Coarse sediments with a high degree of 路i nterconnection and low resistance to flow will have a much higher permeability than finer, poorly sorted materials. Horizontal permeability is often more ity because glacial deposits are stratified surface, and pore spaces are aligned in the groundwater flow can vary from a few inches day depending on the hydraulic conductivity values for different geologic materials are

rapid than vertical permeabilnearly parallel to the land same direction. The rate of per year to several feet per of the sediments. Average given in Table VII.

Permeability multiplied by the thickness of the aquifer gives a value for transmissibility. The transmissibility (T) is a measure of how well water can flow throughout the entire thickness of an aquifer. A high T value indicates that an aquifer can transmit a larger volume of groundwater. If T is large, the water table drawdown will be small, but the cone -22-

REGIONAL DIVIDE

PLAIN

STREAM OISCHAR

-~~ ~~~x '/''K I I

,-:

BEDROCK

Ba:

I I I

_W.UER-l.Af!. ___ - - - -

...._,; I

-1

BEDROCK

Schematic profile showing groundwater movement in different hydrologic settings. RECHARGE I BOUNDARY-,

â&#x20AC;˘

B -.

INDUCED

INDUCED --R IVEA FLOW

-l- -c~W!!_D__WN

j-1- ;::- :>, ?<~J

I ,-"' ""' - /~ I' ~~ .>< ~, ~1\ I

I 1/ ,~ ~"\

\ \\\\..n

!;/ ~ ?.!Wilri\~\Yifi~'

BEDROCK

Figure Bb : Unconfined aquifer pumped with drawdown reaching impermeable boundary and extending beyond induced flow from stream.

Figure Be : Unconfined aquifer pumped and induced infiltration received from river acting as recharge boundary.

BEDROCK

Figure Sd: Withdrawal of groundwater from confined aquifer, only.

of influence (or depression) will cover a large surface area. The opposite results would occur in the same aquifer having a l ow value for T, assuming no change in other fa ctors which can influence drawdown, (Groundwater and Wells, 1975). Examples of these conditions are shown in Figure 9.

HIGH

_____ ....,.

SHALLOW : \ DRAW DOWN

------Figure 9:

(

TRANSMISSIBIUTY

CONE LARGE INFLUENCE OF

------

-----

LOW

TRANSMISSIBILITY

DEEP~ ~MALL DRAW DOWN

____ ,.. -------

CONE OF INFLUENCE

---...

----

Comparison of the shape of the cone of depression with different rates of transmissibility. Pumping rate and aquifer characteristics are the same in both cases, (Groundwater and Wells, 1975).

Analysis of Well Hydraulics l.

Aquifer Drawdown in General

Upon withdrawal of water from an aquifer, initial drawdown of the water table occurs near the well as water is removed from storage. The boundary between the saturated zone and dewatered zone develops into a cone shape with its apex pointing down. The form and size of the cone diffe rs depending on the pumping rate, duration and aquifer characteristics within the area of influence of the well. With continued pumping the cone of influence (or depression) expands to a wider area and increases in dep th , thus it is able to intercept a greater volume of water with each increment of enlargement. The expansion rate diminishes until it reaches a point where no further change takes place, thus, a condition of equilibrium is established. The volume of groundwater flowing into the well equals the rate of withdrawal. Equilibrium is reached because 1) aquifer storage was sufficient to sustain a constant discharge without any further increase in the cone of influence, 2) the cone intercepted a surface water body inducing water into the aquifer, 3) the cone increased to a broad area under the land surface and received recharge from precipitation, or 4) the cone - 24-

received water from an overlying, adjac~nt or underlying aquifer which may not have been connected under normal flow conditions (Ground Water and Wells, 1975). Depending on the hydraulic properties of the aquifer, equilibrium conditions can be established within a few hours, days or weeks after pumping ~egins. Several examples of drawdown cones are shown in Figure Sb-d. 2.

Methodology

After the cone of influence becomes steady, the aquifer characteristics can be determined by the equilibrium method developed by Theim (1906) for confined and unconfined conditions. If the cone of influence does not reach stability after prolonged pumping, the Theis (1935) non-equilibrium and Jacob (1940) modified non-equilibrium methods are used. Various authors have derived for.mulas for calculating hydraulic characteristics under equilibrium and non-equilibrium conditions. The formulas pertinent to this study are those presented by Heath and Trainer (1968), Ground Water Manual (1977) and Ground Water and Wells (1975), which are more fully described in the Appendix. The non-equilibrium methods are primarily suited for confined aquifers, although they can be used with care in unconfined aquifers if the assumptions are fulfilled. With Jacob's modified non-equilibrium method, two analytical techniques are possible. The distance drawdown approach relates water level change in at least three observation wells with distance from the discharging well. The time drawdown approach relates water level change in one or more wells with time since pumping started. In both cases the relationship can be plotted on semi-logarithmic paper as a straight line. From these graphs the transmissibility, storage coefficient, and cone of influence can be determined. Aquifer characteristics and test procedures can complicate drawdown data such that the methods described above will not give adequate results. The effects of impermeable or recharge boundaries and leakage from other aquifers have been previously discussed. Other factors which can affect the cone of influence in response to discharge include well design (pipe diameter, size and pattern of well screen openings), penetration depth, -25-

groundwater entrance velocity, radial flow, delayed drainage conditions and well interference. A more complete explanation of these factors is given in Ground Water Manual (1977) and Ground Water and Wells (1975). Using aquifer test data, subsurface logs and other information available for the Campbell Road and Meadow View wells, drawdown analyses were completed and are more fully described in the following sections . Aquifer analyses have not been done for the Happy Hollow and Baldwin Pond well fields because of the lack of drawdown test data. 3.

Campbell Road Well a.

Geologic Description

The Campbell Road well is located in the Trout Brook watershed at the north end of Wayland. The well penetrates to an approximate depth of 55 feet. Vertical stratification consists of a layer of fine sand and clay overlying fine to medium sand and gravel. Below these materials a thin veneer of till covers the bedrock surface which is at 65 feet be low ground level (Profile 1). Because part of this aquifer has a semipermeable layer overlying coarser sediments, groundwater occurs under artesian conditions . When test wells penetrated through this layer, water projected four feet above the land surface due to a head pressure forcing water out of the ground. The height to which this rise occurred is referred to as the piezometric level. b.

Drawdown Analysis

In April 1962, drawdown measurements were taken in three observation wells while the aquifer was pumped for a period of 166 hours. Afte r several days of continuous pumping, the cone of depression approached a steady state as water levels continued to decline very slowly. The values for transmissibility (T) and storage coefficient (S) were determined by using the Jaco b modified non-equilibrium method . Distance drawdown and time drawdown graphs are plotted in Figure 10. Based on the distance drawdown line using observati on wells A and B and the time drawdown lines for observation wells A, B and C, Twas 220,000 gpd/ft and values for S were very small indicating artesia n condi tions. -26-

'lJ

Ill 0 ~

Ill 1-t QJ

.....j;>

Log Numbers

18 14

..0 0..

A•

u I

1 60

160

e 120

120

::::.Ul .....

sd + gl

Q) Q)

f-t.J

.....~ ~

0 ..... .....

j:0

Bedrock

:> QJ

...-<

'lJ

Ill

SCAL.E: 1 = 1000

Log N umb ers

1 8 19 14

9 B•

Profile l:

Profil e o f Gelogic Conditions B ased on In terpretati on of W e ll +Bor ing Logs in the Campbell Road Area.

;::< Ul

-e

160

120

.....

f-t.J

.....~ ~

N 'I I

0 ..... .....

Ill

:> QJ

...-<

ril

'i I

0l !

Figure 10: ·

i. 1 I I

dampbell ,~ Road :w :ell. IJ I I ' ' I' ' I

ancl ; Tfrp:e d~y aquif~r

;

.qi~tap:ce

.. I

vJells. :

I . • '2,

I 4 1 {'\ -___,.

· I

I ''

•

...,

C1J C1J

f.LJ

r.:

~ 3

'1J

I' t .

«<

I •

I , .. .

t 1

1-i

I I 1.~· I

I I

i I

• I

I' : I: I

i ,, I •

I ;

;

I :'

I. '

W, e~l

;

. 11

; C

;

i,:. o

,..... , ..,.. y

' . '

.... ,

- - _,, •

•• -

-- ...... '"" .....

- .

=' 6

6.9

.i I

I I

I' 10

' I I ·o 1. v. 10-5 I

220, QOO i gpd(ft. •S= • 3 (~20, 000)(2 x (12Q) 2

8 -~ ~

' I

•

10 -lo)!

)(-

•

~- ! I . , ..

iI ~~ '{-~·-·..:.1 ~~-~(~· --

l0r10

..... ~

-, ' t<!

' ; ( ' ------

1(-

['\.)

I'" '' ..

J(~·~- ! )( I

...... )('_.lit

IU<

i I

)("'- '

....,

I I

TIME I

I I

:I' !

I •

l' '

., . I

I I

;I .. I'' I i I.;

f.LJ

i!:

C1J Q)

e::>

I' ' '

(,--1

! :.,.

;I Observation I' I ,.-

1:1 !

·'

·.-l

, I

C1J

' I

•

I 1' : !i

)

'I i ll. I

·2

I . : ,'j

I '" .

I I '

Values ;for ' I

100

Pumping Well

Distance (Feet)

10,000

Using the distance drawdown analysis for observation wel ls A and Cor the steeper slope of the time drawdown lines which occurred near the end of the aquifer test~ values for transmissibility dropped to 98 ,876 gpd/ft and 101,538 gpd/ft, and the storage coeffi cients approached val ues more indicative of an unconfined aquifer. From available information on the geologic sediments in this area, fine sand and clay are found north and east of t he well, while coar se, highly permeable sand and gravel are located to the south and west. The differences in the T and S values may be due to a change in permeability as the drawdown cone expanded further into the aquifer and encountered finer materials . A second consideration is the possibility of a change in the performance of the aquifer from confined to unconfined conditions. This could occur if the aquifer is dewatered to the extent that the piezometric level is lowered below the stratified sediments which produce the confining effect. More testing is necessary to ascertain the reason for these di f ferences. When the test well was pumped for a long period, the piezome tric level was lowered. It remained i n this position after the pumping stopped (and the aquifer became stabilized ) because a certain volume of groundwater had been removed from storage. In order for the piezometric level to have risen above this position, the aquifer must have been recharged by an outside source. Several possible sources of recharge were precipitation , infiltration from overlying unconfined surface water or groundwater, or infiltration from the adjacent Sudbury River flood waters. Several years after Campbell Road well was installed, t he drawdown level within the cone of depression began to drop significantly as large quantities of water were removed from the aqui fer . For example, very high use of the well from 1969 to 1971 resulted in the greatest drawdown reco rded for thi s aquifer, i .e., 18 feet. After 1971, the Campbell Road well was used very little and the aquifer was able to recover to a range of drawdowns from 8 to 12 feet. In recent yea rs, the drawdown measurements have been normal fluctuating 3 to 5 feet below t he l and surface datum.

-29-

Area of Well Influence

It is important to know how far out from the discharging well the cone of influence extends when the aquifer is being pumped. For discussion purposes, the cone is visualized as having a circular shape on a plane parallel to the earth 1 s surface. Yet, it should be noted that quite often the cone assumes an irregular shape because the aquifer is not homogeneous and permeability varies throughout the geologic deposits. For the Campbell Road test well, the cone of influence was determined from the distance drawdown line that provided a value of 98,876 gpd/ft for transmissibility. By extending this line until it intersects zero drawdown on the semi-logarithmic paper, the radius of the cone of influence can be determined for the pump rate and period of discharge . The Campbell Road well as currently installed was designed with a 400 gpm pump rate. Using this figure and the T value stated above, a se0es of distance drawdown lines have been graphed for several time increments of discharge. In Figure 11, the radii of the cones are shown for periods of continuous discharge lasting 4, 8, 10, 14, 20 and 24 hours. For example, if the well discharges for a period of 8 hours at a rate of 400 gpm, the influence of the cone may extend 5,738 feet. The confined nature of the aquifer and the extreme flatness of the drawdown slope are reasons for the far-reaching influence of the drawdown cone. A range of 4,000 to 6,000 feet for the cone of influence under normal use of this well indicates that the water level (corresponding to the piezometric level) in the upland area near Route 126 would be lowered upon withdrawal of water from this aquifer. As a final note, by plotting the radii duration of pumping, a curve can be prepared from ence can be read directly for any given period of this relationship is shown in Figure XVIII in the

-30-

at zero drawdown with which the cone of infludischarge. A graph of Appendix.

.r.

--' I

Meadow View Well a.

Geologic Description

The Meadow View well is located along the southwest boundary of the Town in the flood plain approximately 600 feet from the Sudbury River . Test wells show approximately 53 feet of stratified f i ne to medium sand and gravel with traces of clay. The bedrock floor is estimated at a depth of 70 to 80 feet. Installed in 1972, the present well is positioned on the edge of a broad, pre-glacial, buried valley comprising a large groundwater reservoir, Profile 2. b.

Drawdown Analysis

In May 1966 an aquifer test was conducted fo r a continuous five day period. Note that this test was done near the end of a 3 to 4 year drought which was at its worst in 1965. Three observation wells were installed north, east and southeast of the discharging well to measure drawdown levels.. The cone of influence expanded until it reached a steady shape and water levels approached equilibrium conditions. From these data aquifer analyses have been done using the Thei m and (Jacob) distance drawdown methods. From the straight line graphs, Figure 12, values for trans missibility were 32,000 to 33,000 gpd/ft; the storage coefficient by the Jacob method was .019. Measurements of groundwater levels before and after pumping showed a drop from observation well A to B and from B to C. Wel l A was closest to the river and well C was farthest away representing a gradient from the river into the underlying formation. Under these conditions, the river was serving as a source of recharge to the aquifer, although the rate and volume of this contribution are unknown. Normally the graph of drawdown data would show the infl uence of river recharge on a discharging well. The time drawdown line wou ld become nearly horizontal when the cone of influence intercepts a recharge boundary. A boundary effect v.tas not reflected by t he drawdown data becaus e the hydraulic connection with the river was not sufficient to sustain a high volume of induced infiltration. Therefore, the cone of influence extended out into the aquifer beyond the bed of the river after pro l onged pumping. -32-

11! L

Log

.-<

(/]

160

Q)Q)

120

138 137 13 6 139 140

Nun~he rs

135

131

132

129

12 6

o, -

130

.-<

160

120

(:..:.,

1:1 0

•.-I

~ :>Q)

.....

ril

Bedrock

w I

SCALE: 1 11 =1000'

M 13 6

.....

160

Log Numbers 134 144 145

135

151 160

(/]

Profile 2: Profil e of Geologic Con ditions Based on Interpr etation of Well + Boring Logs in the Meadowview I Happy Hollow Area .

c- f

Q) Q)

(:..:.,

12 0

120

1:1

+ gl

c-f sd + gl

•.-I

1:1 0

:0 ro

.....

:>Q)

ril

Bedrock 0

o I . ol -·1 I

I i I

I I I

~ II

I I

• I

I j

I : I i I

-I II I ~ I

.j..l

I I

~ !

Q 'T.l

!$ rd H

41,

(.:) II i I I t

! . i I

•

i I I.

; I

~ ~ I

I ~ I' , I~ I

I I

lf!om Pumpin g

Area of Well Influence

The Meadow View well has been designed to pump at a rate of 400 gpm. The radii of the cones of influence expected for this discharge rate, given various durations of pumping, are shown in Figure 13. The radii at zero drawdown plotted with duration of pumping is given in Figure XI, in the Appendix. The circumference of the cones are nearly circular in shape except for some distortion southeast of the well as the distance from the river increases. The approximate location of several cones of influence are shown on the 200 scale locus map, Figure 14. Figures IV and V illustrate the relative degree to which groundwater fluctuations were affected by well discharge and re l ated hydrologi c factors. The influence of precipitation, upland runoff-recharge and river flow on groundwater levels can be interpreted from Figures VII, VIII, and IX in the Appendix. Several observations about the relationship between the Meadow View and Happy Hollow wells can be made based on a comparison of this infor路mation. Between 1973 and 1975, precipitation and runoff in the Sudbury River followed a normal pattern. In addition, groundwater fluctuations at Cochituate State Park showed a similar rise and fall during these years. Yet despite these normal trends, drawdown measurement s at Meadow View dropped as much as four feet from 1973 to 1974. This decrease was not attributed to a dramatic change in well discharge because Meadow View yielded about 100 million gallons per year from 1973 to 1975. The lower groundwater levels are believed to be caused by a very large increase in the use of Happy Hollow #1 and #2 from 1973 to 1974. A similar comparison can be seen for the first six months in 1976. In a broader context by comparing the use of Happy Hollow #1 and #2 before and after 1974, Figure V shows a definite transition from low to high yields. Simultaneous with this general increase in use, t he tre nd in groundwater fluc t uations at Meadow View dropped to lower l evels. These comparisons give rise to the conclusion that bot h the Happy Hollow and Meadow View wells are discharging wa t er from the same underground

-35-

J '

;"" ::)

.r. :!

5 I

01 I

.:j路 ': I 路~ 路

:: i'

i;'

... /

/ .

.v-

"' ' \,___

"' ..

MEADOW _yjf_yJ -. a= 400 gpm

WELL

.lit

~~\~-\- ---

p1~

------

>~<-

.II<

JIL

tee\--\-

'~18 fee,-

,a.

471

')/L. -

.J<..

· .ol.

~ ·~··3-·1 .,._____

.....

\ -

\ - -

Ji.,

- .II<

'-I

-·-

1 -r--

,)A-.

.II:.

J-1

- --.!c L~~II ,/ -

Figure 14: Meadow Vi ew Well . Showing approximate location of cones of influence at zero drawdown after 8, 10 and 16 hours otcontinuous pumping at a rate of 400 gpm. Slight ly i rreg ula r cone shape due to recharge effect closer to the river and a wa te r table gradient sloping to the south .

reservoir and furthermore, that the surficial geologic deposits are hydraulically connected. Another reason why drawdown levels at Meadow Vi ew were deeper than other municipal wells is because of the aquifer s low transmissibility. In order for groundwater to be pulled into the well under less permeabl e conditions, the cone of depression develops a steeper slope which provides the hydraulic head necessary to maintain a sustained flow. 1

-38-

III.

Municipal Water Supply A. B. C.

Historical Trends in Use Well Yields Water Quality 1. Iron and Manganese 2. Nitrate-Nitrogen 3. Sodium and Chloride

MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY A.

Historical Trends in Use

The total annual yield of water pumped by t he Water Department reached a peak of 625 million gallons in 1977. The demand for water has increased during the last several decades because of rapid suburban growth beginning in the early 1950 1 S, Figure 15. Prior to 1954 consumption remained below 100 gallons per person per day, yet since 1967, this figure has steadily increased reaching 135 gallons per person per day in 1978 . The trend towards higher consumption was attributed to the widespread use of modern appliances, swimming pools and similar residential conveniences. Growth in the number of homeowners using water for gardening and landscaping has also been a contribut ing factor. To meet the increasing demand, Wayland established seven wells at four different locations along the Sudbury River flood plain. Insta lled between 1947 and 1972, the wells are commonly referred to as Campbel l Road #1, Baldwin Pond #1, #2, #3, Happy Hollow #1, #2 and Meadow View #1. The pumping capacities of these wells are given in Ta ble X in the Appendix. In the last few years, total annual yield has fluctuated around 600 million gallons. All wells are gravel packed design and are located in deep unconsolidated (granular ) deposits above the bedrock surface ranging approximately 50 to 60 feet deep. They are linked by a network of water mains to t\-Jo standpipes (enclosed storage reservoirs) on Reeves Hill. From these standpipes water is distributed throughou t most areas in Town.

-39-

Ill

.-.--

12 -

rrl Cl

S-. QJ Cl....

;:J

Ill

:::1

111500 c

Total Mill i on Gallons Pumped

0 r-

.-rrl

â&#x20AC;˘r-

Ill

c 0 .--

_p;. 0

QJ ;:J

QJ _Q

-a E

a..

.-1

I I

-a

S-. QJ

Total Population

<::(

Cl....

0 0 0

.--600 r-

Ill

--w

rrl QJ

>..c u rrl w c

rrl

c.!J

:::E: r--

rrl

+-> 0

/ /

I / / I

+->

rrl

.-;:J

0. 0

a..

â&#x20AC;˘ r-

.--

1201- 200

Gallons Consumed Person Per Day

rrl

+-> 0

2 1-

1001- 100

~~~--~~~~~--~~--~~--~~--~~~

1945 Figure 15:

1950

1955

1960

1965

Comparison of population growth and water use for the years 1945 to 1979.

1970

1975

Well Yields

From pumping records provided by the Water Department, average monthly yields (from 1967 to 1979) were calculated and plotted in Figure 16 . The total yield for all wells shows that the change in use corresponds to seasonal variations in climate. Peak demand has generally occurred throughout the summer reaching a maximum in July. By comparing the yield of each well, it is evident that the Town had relied primarily on Happy Hollow #2 and Baldwin Pond #3 between 1967 and 1979. Prior to 1962, Happy Hollow #1 and #2 and Baldwin Pond #3 were the on ly wells in operation. Records indicate a total of 368 million gallons pumped in 1961. This is more than half of the total amount pumped today with seven well s in operation. Baldwin Pond #1 and #2 were used very heavily in the spring and summer months when compared to the fall and winter. Meadow View and Campbell Road were operated to a lesser degree in terms of average monthly withdrawal, but the range in yield was narrow throughout the period of record. For instance, Meadow View fluctuated between 6.5 and 9.5 million gallons, whereas the use of Baldwin Pond #1 and #2 varied widely from 2. 5 to 10.5 mil l ion gallons. Since this graph only represents average conditions, the actual dai l y yi eld coul d have been much higher or lower. A comparison of yield on ayearly basis is shown in Figure 17. Production at Meadow View and Happy Hollow #1 has been fairl y consistent from 1967 to 1979. During the last five years peak use has occurred at Happy Hollow #2 and to a lesser degree at Baldwin Pond #3. In 1970, Campbell Road well was pumped heavily and the aquifer was extremely dewatered . Since then it has been used on a limited basis and allowed to recover. More consistent use within the limits of normal, annual groundwater replenishment is necessary in order to maintain a long term available water supply. Average monthly yield, Figure 16, can be compared wi t h average monthly drawdown, Figure 18. Although Meadow View was not pumped as much as the Happy Hollow or Baldwin Pond sites, the average drawdown was much higher throughout each month of the year. In additi on, the range i n water level f luctuations was greater than in the other wells for reasons described in the previous section of this report. -41-

60 0"1

"'0 r-

Q) .,.....

>>, r-

..J::

;- ---- _....

+-'

c 0

:::E: Q)

I rn:l

+-'

/ /

I I

__,

12 ll Ul

rrn:l

c 0

•rrr-

·::: c: "'0

•r-

>, ..J::

+-'

\ ,.-

' __ .- j /7

,'\

v' /

;...

~~\

\'./·'-·-. :\

/ \

~~\

\ (\/ -<.

' \

n:l

'"··\

', Happy Hollow Well #2

0'1

> c::x:

d-/-' '\\-, I -- - -~-- :---/ \'>,

\\ .//-.__p/ \/ /

:::E:

\//

\_ ....

0'1

Total For A11 ~~ells

n:l

;...

> c::x:

0'1 Q)

,.,.,.",

\ ',

/ /'

Meadow View ~~el · --------(1972-1979) Happy Holl ow

_..-wen

'--~--

/Bal dwin Pond

We ll #3

Baldwin Pond

~e 11s #1 and #2

Campbel l Road

2 1

~e ll

Jan. Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec . Month Figure 16: Average monthl y yield- comparison of individual well and total wel l use during the years 1967-1979 . -42-

/ ·--

240

---

\ \

220

200 I

180

.......

c..

:::l 0...

140

c 0

rr-

I _.,.

w I

120

ttl (!)

c 0

•r-

rr-

•r-

::E:

',,

I I

/ v '

' j

X')--. - -<--

1 ,/·'I

60 ·-

~Jel l --,,,~. \ , Meado\'Jwln View Pond \·Jell #3

---

/ Ba 1d ·

K / /

Happy Hollow Well #2

'\//

\ '- . 1

"- '

\ I

,t / ""-..

- - - - vl -- \ 1\ ,/" '--,-,,, ,', ;''I I

100

I' "! :/ --~, / \/ \ j \ /'

lll

\ \

-o

160

_, .....

\ \//

ppy Hollow Well h and f/2 Ba 1d · Ha Wln Pond Wells #1

Campbell Road Well

Year Figure 17:

Comparison of the annual yield of individual wel l s for the peri od 1967-1979 .

7 8

Campbell Road Well (1966-1979)

9 10 11 .;..> QJ QJ

t::

â&#x20AC;˘r-

0..

:::1

0.. Ol

t::

â&#x20AC;˘r-

!>.. :::1

t::

3 0

(lj

!>.. Cl

>, r..t::

.;..>

t::

:::E: QJ

.,....,.-- ...

-----

--------,\ \

(lj

!>.. QJ

c:t::

\ \

I \ \ \

22 23

Apr.

May

Meadow View Well (1973-1978)

June July Aug. Sept. Dec. Month Figure 18: Average monthly drawdown during pumping for individual well fields during the years specified.

-44-

Average monthly fluctuations in the Campbell Road drawdowns were limited to a narrow range of a few feet which is not unusual for groundwater under confined conditions. Drawdowns in May and December probably reflect times during the record period when the well was used very little. C.

Water Quality

Records of groundwater quality have been collected for all municipal wells since their initial operation. A summary of these data is included in the Data Supplement report. A compilation of the range of water quality parameters measured in all the wells is shown in Table l. In a majority of the wells standard tests were run on samples collected (at most) four times a year until the early 1970 1 s when this was reduced to one or two times per year. Exceptions occurred when more information was needed to monitor a suspected contamination problem. The lack of more frequent testing limits this evaluation to a review of trends and general relationships. The results of the testing program show no suspect problems with regard to turbidity, color, odor, sediment load, pH, alkalinity, hardness, calcium, magnesium, silica, sulfate, copper, potassium and free amonia. Noticeable changes did occur in measurements of iron, manganese, nitrate-nitrogen, sodium, chloride and specific conductance. Additional data was collected in 1979-1980 by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering. A program was initiated to test for hazardous chemicals in groundwater supplies throughout the Commonwealth .. Wayland S wells were sampled in February 1980 and all wells were found to be free of any hazardous materials. 1

Iron and Manganese

Iron and manganese are normally found in groundwater in the New England area . Usually the concentration of manganese is lower than iron. Iron and manganese content in groundwater is related to the kind of rock constituents and the acidity of the water. Carbon dioxide produced by the decomposition of organic matter and as a by-product of photorespiration at night, can enter the groundwater, increase the acid concentration (H 2co 3 ) and, under anaerobic conditions, dissolve iron and manganese from the -45-

TABLE 1:

MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM WATER QUALITY MEASUREMENTS

Comparison of parameters in Town wells based on samples col lected within the indicated period of record. Camebell Road Ill

Parameter

-+:-

0'1 I

Min.

Max.

Min.

0. 0 1. 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 1.0 6.2 7. 1 68 24 136 44 24.0 11.2 3. 2 5.9 10.0 5.0 0. 1 0.0 0.78 0.00 19.0 9. 0 58.0 21.0 23 .0 9.0 160 250 . 001 . .000 0.2 1.9 0.05 0.00 3.0 1.7 . 05 0. 00

4.0 2.0 75.0 3.0 7.4 70 107 32.0 7. 8 12 .0 0.36 0.47 21.0 53.0 24.0 280 .007 5.2 0.12 4.1 0. 12

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.3 15 37 13.0 4.5 6.5 0.01 0.00 9.4 10.5 7.0 180 .000 0.0 0.00 0.6 0.00

Max.

(ppm)

Turbidity Sediment Color Odor pH Al ka 1inity Hardness Calcium Magnesium *Sod ium *Iron *Manganese Silica Sulfate *Chloride *Spec. Cond. Nitrite *Nitrate Copper Potassium Free Amonia

Period of Record ---1970- 1980 路k

1953-1980

Baldwin Pond #2 ~1ax. Min. 4.0 2.0 15.0 2.0 7. 5 62 107 32.0 7.8 12.0 0.50 0.47 21.0 53.0 24 .0 280 .007 6.0 0.12 3.9 0.07

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2 6 30 13.0 4.5 6.5 0.00 0.00 9.4 14.5 4.2 180 .000 0.0 0.00 0.6 0.00

1955-1980

112

Max.

Min.

Max.

Min.

Max.

Min.

Max.

Min.

1.0 0. 0 7.0 1.0 8.4 54 110 38.0 6.2 13.0 0. 12 0.14 21.0 50.0 21.0 290 .015 9.3 0.06 2.2 0. 04

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 29 46 13 . 8 2.9 6.0 0.00 0.00 10.0 17.0 10.0 110 .000

4.0 1.0 10.0 2.0 6.9 45 94 25.0 6.5 23.0 0.4 0.06 17.0 34.0 41.3 297 .006 5.2 0. 16 3.1 0.02

0.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 10.0 3.0 0.0 6.1 7.0 23 52 48 134 16.5 37.0 10.0 4.1 11.0 38.0 0.0 0.25 0.00 0.04 7.2 22.0 14.0 32.0 6.2 135.0 200 380 .000 .009 0. 8 5.6 0.00 0.06 1.4 8.0 0.00 0.05

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.3 17 52 19.2 5.5 17 .0 0.00 0.00 11 .0 15.0 6.2 220 .000 0.3 0.00 1.4 0.00

1.0 0.0 5.0 1.0 7. 1 61 91 27.0 5.9 18.0 0.10 0.07 20.0 36.0 40.0 260 .004 3.7 0.22 5.0 0.03

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6. 3 38 57 .15 . 4 3. 2 8.0 0.00 0.00 11.0 16.0 13.0 190 .000 1.0 0.00 1.8 0.00

Q. 1

0.00 1.3 0.00

1970-1980

1953-1980

Indi cates parameters which are specifically discussed in the text of this report .

. Source:

Water Quality Data Collected by the Wayland

Meadow View

Haeei: Hollow

l~ater

Department.

1956-1980

1972-1978

unconsolidated rock. When this groundwater solution is exposed to air or bicarbonate, iron and manganese are precipitated out of solution. Certain bacteria are also known to change soluble forms of iron and manganese to an insoluble hydroxide . These minerals, whether soluble or insoluble, are not considered to be a health hazard although they can be highly objectionable. Precipitated forms can clog well screens, water mains, pipes, etc., and can stain plumbing, clothes, etc. Iron and manganese have not appeared in any significant amounts in the Meadow View or Happy Hollow wells, although in 1970 concentrations began to increase in the Baldwin Pond wells. Some accumulation of iron and manganese deposits have already been observed in water mains l~ading from the main pumping station . Wetlands directly adjacent to the Baldwin Pond wells are probably the primary source of organic acids within the cone of influence of these wells. During pumping these acids are pulled into the aquife~ where they dissolve iron and manganese which is later precipitated upon withdrawal. Elevated levels were also present in the Campbell Road well in 1970 due to high pumping rates. The Meadow View and Happy Hollow wells are located in aquifers overlain, partly or wholly, by wetland deposits, yet there has been no significant accumulation of these minerals. Either iron bearing minerals were lacking, acid production was limited or it was neutralized by alkaline minerals, or there was little hydraulic connection between the wetlands and underlying deposits. Each year the river inundates these wetlands and accumulation of these dissolved minerals at the surface are likely to be flushed downstream. Testing in other locations in the Town has revealed groundwater with high iron and manganese content. For example, east of the new Wayland landfill a test well penetrated through 30 feet of peat into fine sand and clay containing high levels of iron. 2.

Nitrate-Nitrogen

Nitrate-nitrogen is a common constituent in groundwater (usually at low levels), because it is an end product in the breakdown of wastes and other materials. Nitrate is readily soluble in water and therefore can remain in solution in groundwater for a long time. Nitrate content can -47-

vary considerably depending on its source such as plant material, animal waste, human waste (sewage systems), fertilizer and certain bacteria and related factors. The recommended l imit for nitrate in drinking water is 45 ppm because of possible hazards to human heal t h. Nitrate in all . the Town wells has not exceeded the State standard of 10 ppm. The Happy Hollow wells have experienced a slight increase during the period of record, Figure I in the Appendix. This increase appeared during the mid to late 1960 S and there is no clear reason why this came about. The highest increase in nitrate occurred in Baldwin Pond #3, Figure III. Baldwin Pond #1 and #2 have also been affected when prolonged pumping of these wells pulled nitrate into the cones of influence. The Water Department suspected the cause to be a nearby stockpile of manure, which is known to contain large quantities of organic nitrogen. Subsequent to the stockpile S removal, the nitrate concentration dropped to a lower level. 1

One other example of high nitrate was found in the Castle Hill area. It was attributed to animal waste from a pheasant farm that had previously existed in the vicinity of the test well. 3.

Sodium and Chloride

Sodium and chloride is normally found at low levels in the groundwater. Both are highly soluble once they dissolve and remain in solution almost indefinitely. The standard limit for sodium in drinking water is 20 ppm. Records show that the concentration of sodium in all wells other than Happy Hollow has always remained below this level. In 1970 Happy Hollow #1 and #2 exceeded 20 ppm because of salt contamination. Other common sources of sodium in groundwater include mineral deposits, sewage disposal systems and sea water. Chloride is usually found in concentrations of 10 ppm or less. When chloride content exceeds 20 ppm, sources of contamination such as road salt, sewage disposal systems or animal wastes may be affecting groundwater quality. A chloride content greater than 250 ppm is considered to be undesirable for municipal water supply. Chloride has never reached this limit in any of Wayland s wells. Although in the late 1960 5 and early 1970 S, chloride content in the Happy Hollow well rose very sharply due to a nearby 1

-48-

stockpile of road salt. The highest recorded level of chloride reached 135 ppm in Happy Hollow #2 in April 1971. Even after the salt was removed, chloride remained in the aquifer at high levels for several years. After nine years of flushing by precipitation, chloride content is not a problem, although it still measures 40 ppm. In 1971 Happy Hollow #1 showed a chloride level of 38 ppm. Since that time, the concentration has increased to nearly the same level as Happy Hollow #2. A comparison of the February 1980 measurements shows Happy Hollow #1 with 41.3 ppm and #2 with 42.0 ppm. One interesting point to note is the corresponding relationship between chloride fluctuations in the Happy Hollow wells and the Meadow View well, Figures I and II in the Appendix. There are no water quality data for Meadow View prior to 1972. Beginning in March 1972, there is a sharp rise and subsequent fall in chloride in both Happy Hollow #2 and Meadow View, and to a lesser extent in Happy Hollow #1. This is partly due to the similarity of sampling dates. Yet, because chloride levels are moving up and down in both wells during the same months, this is a further indication that the two areas are hydraulically connected. There is approximately 4000 feet between the Happy Hollow wells and the Meadow View well located near the Sudbury River. Because of this separation, a certain amount of lag time would normally be expected for a plume of dissolved chloride to move through the aquifer from the Happy Hollow area to a point near the river. A careful look at this relationship reveals that in the spring of 1970 and 1971, records of discharge in the Sudbury River show average or below flow conditions in response to moderate precipitation the previous winter. Recharge to the aquifer in t he Happy Hollow area was no t extensive as evidenced by greater drawdowns throughout the year. The first plume of dissolved chloride was was hed into the aquifer and began to move towards the river. The following spring of 1972 was a much wetter year, i.e., river discharge was greater and groundwater levels were elevated by increased recharge. A second plume of chloride infiltrated into the ground at Happy Hollow. The arrival of the first plume in the Meadow View well occurred around August 1973. The chloride content had dropped from 135 ppm to 40 ppm as it spread through the groundwater. The second plume was less

-49-

concentrated and apparently did not show up at a level high enough to be distinguished as a peak increase. In 1975 and 1977 large volumes of water were pumped at Meadow View and chloride rose to above normal levels. This was probably due to the interception of a large amount of residual chloride in a plume moving through the aquifer at a greater distance from the well. Note in Figures I and II that the fluctuations as described above were reflected by similar trends in the sodium levels. Chloride content in the Baldwin Pond aquifer has increased slowly during the past 10 years to around 20 ppm . Figure III, Baldwin Pond #1 and #2 show slightly higher concentrations than #3. Because chloride levels fluctuated so frequently, it appears that one or more outside sources may be involved. The manure stockpile discussed earlier could have generated some chloride, yet the chloride trend did not follow the nitrate trend. When nitrate was high and chloride low in the #3 well, the reverse was true for wells #1 and #2. Other possible sources of chloride were sewage systems, road salt or dissolved chloride in the Sudbury River. Sewage systems are scattered, therefore they could not have been a problem. Road salt may have been a possible source because of winter application along Route 27 which is located near the well. Salt runoff into the River at the old landfill just upstream on Route 20 could have been another possible source if surface water was induced into the aquifer during pumping. Since the available data is not very extensive for any given year, a firm conclusion cannot be made. Further testing and subsurface investigations are needed to identify the influence of these wells during pumping.

-50-

IV .

Conclusions A.

Water Supply l. Quality 2. Quantity

CONCLUSIONS A.

Water Supply 1.

Qua 1ity

At th.e present time the quality of water derived from Wayland's wells can be described as good to excellent. The quality of groundwater can be affected by poi路nt and non-point sources. of pollution from local land use practices. In Wayland the pattern of land use in relation to the water supply aquifers is such that the potential risk of groundwater contamination is low. This is because a certain degree of protection is provided by low density residential zoning in upland recharge areas and by flood plain zoning in the lowland areas surrounding the wells. In addition, commercial-industrial uses are in watersheds which are not directly involved with the water supply areas. Roads and res i dences with in the important recharge areas and within the influence of the discharging wells should not present any major problems to groundwater quality, so long as sewage disposal systems and road salt are used with proper care. Sewage systems should meet acceptable design standards, be adequately ma intained and used only for domestic waste. The practice of disposing toxic cleaners, solvents, oils, thinners, pesticides and other chemicals i nto sewage systems should be discontinued. Even though the topographic, hydrogeologic and cultural features pertaining to the present siting of t he Town's wells constitute a lesser threat to the water supply, several specifi c land uses should be recognized as a potential hazard to the groundwater resources. In Plate VIII, different types of point and non-point sources of pollution are identified. The potential threat of pollution from the landfill sites, west of the Sudbury River, to the Baldwin Pond well field, east of the river, cannot be ignored

-51-

even with the extent of assurance provided by earlier hydrologic investigations. Previous conclusions were based on the expected movement and time of travel of contaminants from the landfill sites towards the Sudbury River, but there has not been any analysis of well influence and possible inducement effects. Observation wells should be installed to monitor water quality and drawdown during pumping. 2.

Quantity

Wayland currently uses 600 million gallons of groundwater on an annual basis. As the community continues to grow there will likely be an increased demand for water. The land resources available for further development may be known, but the question of an adequate water resource base has not been answered. Many factors influence the water budget within the Town, and the foremost of these is the total amount of direct precipitation falling within, or storm runoff flowing through, the study area. The principal source of surface flow is the Sudbury River. The river and groundwater regimes represent the maximum available water supply during any given year. An estimate of groundwater flow from the major watersheds in the Town can be made using a method applied by Cervione, et.al . (1972). This method has been improved in recent years as a result of extensive studies on groundwater discharge from small drainage areas in Connecticut. Motts (1977) utilized this procedure to estimate groundwater availability and long term sustained yield in Sudbury, Massachusetts . Based on Cervione's work and additional information collected by Motts, an evaluation of groundwater outflow in Wayland was completed and is listed in Table 2. In Table 3, the computed groundwater outflow is shown in relation to total well yield. Comparing the average, maximum and worst case total yield figures with the long term recommended potential groundwater outflow, i.e., 438 million gallons per year, it is clear that the recharge areas in the upland watersheds associated with these wells cannot satisfy the Town's needs . During the period 1967 to 1979, the average use was 586 million gallons per year. A maximum usage of 624 million gallons occurred in 1977. This figure was determined by combining the highest recorded yield from all the wells -52-

TABLE 2:

Stream Watershed (Name and Acreage) ( 1) 1.

2. 3. 4. 5. I U1

w I

7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

Trout Brook (400) Hazel Brook (727) t~i 11 Brook ( 1 ,057) Hayward Br. {1,269) Pine Brook (1,245) Snake Brook (1,469) Dudley Brook (643) Sudbury River I ( l 06) Sudbury River II (448) Sudbury River I I I ( 264) Lake Cochituate (305} Charles River (202) TOTALS:

Notes:

COMPUTATION OF

GROUND~!ATER

OUTFLOW FROM WATERSHED AREAS

Percent Stratified Drift (2)

Average Groundwater Outflow (gpd/mi2) ( 3)

Average Groundwater Outflow Total Watershed (gpd) (4)

86.5 72.7 71.6 37.7 38.8 39.5 78.8 86.8 33 . 3 76.5 100.0 67.3

792,000 729,000 724' 500 549,000 553,500 558,000 760,500 793,800 519,300 745,200 855,000 702,000

495,000 828,098 1,196,557 1,088,564 1 ,076 '730 1,280,784 764,064 131 ,473 363,510 307,395 407,461 221 ,568

198,000 331 ,239 478,623 435,425 430,692 512,313 305,625 52,589 145,404 122,958 162,984 88,627

415,800 695,602 1,005,107 914,393 904,453 1,075,858 641,813 110,437 305,348 258,212 342,267 186 '117

297,000 496,858 717,934 653,138 646,038 768,470 458,438 78,884 218,106 184,437 244,476 132 '941

8,161,204

3,264,479

6,855,407

4,896,720

8,135

Total Groundwater Outflow (gpd) ( 5)

Column (5) gives Long Term Minimum Outflow Column (6) gives Outflow Exceeded 7 Years in 10 No determination has been made of ground\'/ater recharge from the Sudbury River

Reference:

By Cervione and others, 1972.

Total Groundwater Outflow (gpd) (6)

Reconunended Long Term Potential Yield (gpd} _(7)

TABLE 3:

COMPARISON OF HISTORICAL YIELDS AND DRAWDOWNS WITH RECOMMENDED POTENTIAL YIELDS AND MAXIMUM DRAWDOWNS FOR THE GIVEN WELL AND RELATED UPLAND WATERSHED

Average Annual Yield in MG 1967-79 MG

Maximum Yield and Drawdown 1977 MG

Highest Yield for Each We 11 and Maximum Drawdowns

DO (FT)

Year MG

DO (FT)

Long Term-Total Groundwater Outflow From Table XII (MG) MG

Recorrunended Recommended Long Term Maximum Drawdown Based Yield From on Approximate Groundwater Well Depth x .60 Outflow Table XII MG Depth {FT) DO (FT)

Happy Hollow Ill

14'9 11

1977

14'9"

112

179

249

14' 9 11

1977

249

14'9"

1971

135

14'8"

118

103

14' 9"

197 1

112

14'8"

121

24 '11"

1977

121

24'11"

fll

13 '1 0 11

1970

162

18 1 0 11

Totals

586

624

from Sudbury River III Watershed

151 from Trout Brook Watershed

108

613

438

from Dudley Brook &Sudbury River II Watersheds

235

from Sudbury River I Watershed

328

Baldwin Pond #1 #2 #3

Meadow View

Ill

Campbell Road

Note:

849

Recharge to the wells from the Sudbury River surface and groundwater regime is not reflected in the projection of groundwater outflow computations .

during that year. Looking at the worst case (maximum annual discharge f or each well during this period), the yield reached 849 million gallons. If the demand were present, it is possible that this volume of water could be produced because each well record has demonstrated that these maximum yi~lds are possible without any effects from well interference. Since the upland areas cannot provide up to 600 million gallons annually, then groundwater stored in aquifers connected with the Sudbury River must contribute a portion of the total yield discharged for the wells. The presence of this river is therefore a valuable component in fulfilling the Town's water supply needs. Despite the Sudbury River's contribution, every effort should be made to maintain peak storage in upland ground watersheds. Both the historical and recommended maximum drawdowns for each well are shown in Table 3. Drawdowns should not exceed 32 to 33 feet of the entire saturated thickness of the aquifer. This determination in made based on the fact that peak aquifer yield occurs around 60% to 67% of well depth in groundwater and decreases sharply thereafter (Groundwater and Wells, 1975). According to maximum drawdown levels, none of the aquifers have been pumped to their maximum potential. Drawdowns to a depth of 32 feet are not advisable unless it is evident that there will be sufficient recharge in the area to restore groundwater levels and thereby avoid a long term loss of storage.

-55-

Recommendations A. B.

Water Supply Protection Techniques 1. Education-Conservation 2. Land Use Regulations a. General Background b. The State's Role c. The Town's Role d. Existing Local Regulatory Authority e. Adoption of New Regulatory Authority f. Strengthening Existing Local Regulatory Authority Recommendations for Further Technical Investigations

RECOMMENDATIONS A.

Water Supply

In Part III of this report, the historical use of water in the Town was discussed with specific emphasis on the relative use of each well. Happy Hollow #2 and Baldwin Pond #3, with the highest discharge rates of 700 gpm and 650 gpm, respectively, were shown as having provided,on the average, a greater portion of the total water supply during the years 1967 to 1979, Figure 16. The disparity between individual well use during this same period is reflected in Figure 17. Based on these observations it appears that a program is needed for withdrawal of groundwater from the Townâ&#x20AC;˘s water supply aquifers. A simple management plan including a schedule of well use based on recharge potential, aquifer characteristics, well design and performance could provide guidance to the Town for better control of groundwater production and use. In this way the available water supply can be regulated to meet the Town's needs and to sustain the highest potential yields on a long term basis. The hydrologic cycle and the yearly trend in consumer use are important factors to consider in adopting a water management plan. In the winter, water surplus is normally present both in groundwater and surface water reservoirs, e.g., ponds, streams and rivers. In the summer, surface water availability is usually much less than groundwater. Consequently, a -56-

scheme for water utilization in Wayland should consi der taking advantage of surface water during wet seasons, and conserving groundwater storage for drier periods. The wells determined to have the best hydrauli c connection with the Sudbury River and flood plain could be reli ed upon in the spring while the other wells are rested. When demand peaks in the summer and river flow is reduced, a shift could be made to the less active wells. Implementation of this kind of strategy would vary based on the physical limitations within each aquifer. One important advantage of following a utilization plan for all the wells is that a maintenance program can be suited to the level of wel l use. The frequency of routine work and inspections should reflect t he age and condition of each pump, performance of the gravel pack well and duration of pumping. Timel y maintenance could help to avoid problems of encrustation, clogged well screens, loss of aquifer permeability or pump efficiency and unexpected shutdowns. The map of aquifer favorability, Plate VIII, shows the areas of deep saturated thickness where the best opportunity for developing additional groundwater supplies are located. The installation of test wells in the future should be concentrated in these areas because of the vast amo unt of groundwater storage. The difficult challenge is f inding glacial materials which exhibit good permeable characteristics. Most of t he deep aquifer areas are classified as moderate or high favorability, and have already been tested for possible well sites . Other locations with t he s ame designations are limited because of nearby residential development. Future investigations for water supply should begin in the favo ra ble areas, particularly at locations where existing wells are found and addi t ional yield may be possible. On Plate VIII an area around each well has been highlighted for groundwater protection. Each designation contains importan t upland and lowland sand and gravel recharge areas and the cones of infl uence expected with normal use. In these areas an effort should be made to educate the landowners about t he importance of good land use pract i ces.

-57-

Protection Techniques 1.

Education-Conservation

For many years Wayland residents have been fortunate in rece1v1ng a seemingly endless supply of good quality water. The public's .general consumption increased to a peak level in the last few years and for this and other reasons, the need for consumers to develop a better understanding of water resources became evident. Today people are now more aware of the importance for protecting surface and groundwater supplies and should begin to adopt good conservation practices. Public response can be developed through informative and persuasive programs initiated by the Town . Some approaches which the Town may pursue are described below. (1)

Prepare educational pamphlets, letters, diagrams, etc., to distribute in a Town-wide mailing or with the water bills. This would be an expansion on the current efforts by the Water Department to inform the public about water use. Ideas like water-saving devices, conservation practices and voluntary land use controls could be emphasized.

(2)

Seek voluntary cooperation from business, industry, recreation (golf courses) and municipal facilities to reduce excess water consumption.

(3)

Local newspapers could be a good source for disseminating information like a monthly report on the water supply situation, special problems or requests.

(4)

Libraries and other municipal buildings could be used for educational programs, displays, etc. The school system could provide additional programs in this regard.

(5)

Implement water conservation techniques such as increased fees, surcharges during peak usage or schedules for high volume users. In times of drought more severe steps such as water bans or use limitations may become necessary.

Land Use Regulations a.

General Background

In the early 1970's, both Federal and State governments recognized the need to address water pollution problems and set out to deal with them by enacting the Clean Water Acts and similar water resource

-58-

protection legislation. The responsibility of investigating and controlling large sources of municipal and industrial contamination was initiated by agencies within these governments, but the magnitude of the job frequently exceeded available manpower. In many cases this resulted in the inability of the Federal and State officials to deal with pollution problems particularly at the local level. As the interest in protecting surface and groundwater resources became more widespread in Massachusetts, new laws were enacted and existing regulations strengthened. The laws currently applicable to wetland environments are the State Clean Waters Act, Coastal and Inland \~etlands Restriction Act and Wetlands Protection Act. The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering has promulgated regulations for controlling contaminants in drinking water supplies, and for permitting sewage disposal systems in accordance with Title 5 of the State Environmental Code. These laws and regulations have some provisions which bear on groundwater values in a general respect, but none adequately cover the protection of groundwater resources. The DEQE has a requirement that public water supply wells (gravel packed) must have all the land area within a 400 foot radius under the control of the municipality. Acquisition of the property is the best method for controlling land uses within this area. Although the 400 foot protection district is valuable, it is often insufficient because discharging wells can influence areas over a much greater distance. b.

The State 1 S Role

A major problem for communities in adopting effective land use regulations is the lack of legal and administrative leadership from the State. According to Lapping (1980) very little work has been accomplished throughout the New England states to deal with water supply, quality, allocation and use. In 1977 Massachusetts issued a Water Supply Policy Study to encourage communities to develop strategies for water resource protection and utilization, but response has been slow. Lapping (1980) reported that researchers have examined the institutional network and management processes in state governments and concluded that there is a lack of comprehensive planning, agency coordination and legal framework for water resource protection. The report indicates that 11 Massachusetts has no

-59-

legislatively or administratively mandated, integrated comprehensive water resource planning or management mechanisms. 11 and, 11 • • • no administrative mechanism to assess and resolve v.Jater resource issues 11 • This has created difficulties for many communities that need strong controls to protect their local water supplies . c.

The Town s Role 1

In some towns the residents have taken it upon themselves to adopt local bylaws to regulate land use, and when challenged, the issue of constitutionality has been pursued in the courts. One of the most significant issues raised in opposition to local control has been 11 taking without just compensation 11 • Landowners claim a loss of value by the imposition of use regulations. Although the legality of municipal authority to regulate has been questioned, several cases have been upheld by the courts. In Tui'·npike Realty Co. v. Town of Dedham (362 Mass. 221, 1972), the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court allowed the municipality 1 s use of 11 police power 11 to regulate flood plains and wetlands for the health, safety and welfare of the community. In a more recent court case, Loveguist v. Gardner (1979), the Town of Dennis 1 wetlands bylaw was upheld when challenged by a developer. The court ruled in favor of protecting the local groundwater supply because of the potential impacts related to the proposed wetland alterations. The inability of State agencies to provide direction to the cities and towns and the difficulties local communities face in establishing legal controls is largely due to the lack of technical understanding of the groundwater regime. Only recently has the need of hydrogeologic · investigations come into real focus for the communities subject to development pressures . Many studies have now been initiated (some completed) and the State of the art has been developed to the point where legislative and administrative mechanisms could be implemented by the State. The cost of implementing groundwater resource protection will be high and may even seem prohibitive for some communities. Yet, the number and extent of local water supplies are limited and, if lost, the cost of seeking alternative sources may be even greater. 11

-60-

Existing Local Regulatory Authority

Wayland is one of many communities in the Commonwealth that has no formal mechanism for groundwater protection. The current flood pla in bylaw pertains primarily to the Sudbury River. It is administered by the Zoning Board of Appeals through the office of the Building I ns pector . Alterations of land or water in the Flood Plain District (FPD) requires a special permit. Before a permit can be issued, the proponent must file an application and plans with the Appeals Board, which holds a public hearing and subsequently renders a decision based on the merits of the proposal and potential impacts on the environment. The Flood Plain District includes the lower portions of several of the major brooks flowing towards the Sudbury River. In order t o extend local wetland protection further upstream on these watercourses, the Town also adopted a Watershed Protection District (WPD). The provisions of this bylaw are similar to, 路although less stringent than, the f lood plai n regulations and only apply to a narrow strip of land along each side of the main brooks and smaller tributaries. In order to protect wetland areas beyond the WPD, the Town must rely on the app licability of the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (WPA), M.G.L. Chapter 131, Section 40, which gives regulatory authority to the local Conservation Commission. In addition, the WPA can be applied to wetlands included in the FPD and WPD. e.

Adoption of New Regulatory Authority

The laws and regulations currently available to the Town are very useful, but are clearly not adequate to provide the kind of protection necessary for preserving the Town' s water supply . The Town can pursue the adoption of new zoning regulations under authority of t he Zoning Enabling Act and the Home Rule Amendment to the State Constitution . Non- zoning water resource protection techniques can also be passed by the Town under general municipal powers pursuant to the M.G.L. Chapter 40, Section 21. Several towns have passed non-zoning wetlands bylaws which para l lel the State Wetlands Protection Act. This mechanism was first started by the Town of Denni~ and is now being considered by many other communities across -61-

the State. The procedure for appeal under this kind of bylaw is to the courts rather than through the administrative procedures required by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality Engineering. In order for Wayland to consider impl ementing zoning or nonzoning regulations, a very important step must be accomplished fi.rst . The Town should begin to develop a comprehensive land use plan which would set forth policies and goals that are in the interest of. the health, safety and welfare of the community. The plan should specify the land and water resource values that need to be protected, and present formal and informal mechanisms by which these interests can be preserved. Once a viable plan is formulated, it should be approved by the Town . The best forum for adopting a comprehensive land use plan is at Town Meeting . Once accepted, the plan can then be implemented through the passage of zoning and nonzoning bylaws. Such bylaws should be supported by technical studies and information which will justify future Town action and provide a stronger defense if challenged in court. Recent court decisions have been favorable to bylaws which are based on l and use plans adopted by communities . It is therefore highly recommended that Wayland begin the process of developing a comprehensive land use plan for the purpose of adopting any f uture water resource protection techniques. f.

Strengthening Existing Local Regulatory Authori t y

With the aid of this groundwater study, Wayland shoul d begi n to strengthen its existing local bylaws and administrative procedures. It is important that land use in the affected drawdown areas around the Town wel l s and the productive recharge areas be properly control led. In the significJnt groundwater areas, standards for the installation of sewage disposal systems should provide a greater degree of protection. For instance, t he regula t ions could consider: (l)

The replacement of highly permeable soils with a finer more absorptive soil. Currentl y there is no limitation on the maximum percolation rates allowable for system construction .

- 62-

(2)

The substitution of larger holding tanks. This permits a greater storage capacity for solids to be decomposed and can extend the life of the leaching fields.

(3)

The requirement of greater vertical clearance above the water table to allow for more soil filtration and treatment of effluent.

(4)

The initiation of a yearly inspection program and regular maintenance when required.

(5)

The adoption of measures to prevent the disposal of chemicals, oils, acids and similar contaminants into the system and ultimately into the ground.

Subdivision regulations can be administered so as to protect water resources by: (1)

Controlling impervious coverage and storm drainage design so as to minimize the loss of infiltration and maximize recharge .

(2)

Encouraging overland flow to increase soil-water contact and enhance natural purification.

(3)

Requiring revegetation to control erosion and sedimentation, delay runoff rates and purify water runoff.

(4)

Clustering or coordinating new construction on less sensitive areas of a development site.

(5)

Incorporating the use of conservation restriction or easements on important hydrologic areas.

(6)

Restricting site alterations to prevent wetlands destruction and modification of groundwater conditions.

(7)

Restricting on-site disposal of waste materials as to substance, location and clearance above the water table.

Zoning regulations can be used to protect water resources by: (l)

Controlling the density and intensity of development over important hydrogeologic areas.

-63-

(2)

Limiting the spread of impervious surfaces (pavement, buildings, etc.) on land zoned for business and commercial uses, where such uses may impact groundwater resources.

(3)

Restricting encroachment within wetlands and flood plains.

(4)

Controlling gravel removal sites to avoid detrimental impacts on local surface and groundwater conditions .

(5)

Incorporating procedures and guidelines for the proper installation of underground fuel, waste, or chemical storage faci l ities.

(6)

Adopting bylaw provisions for controlling the transportation, storage, use and illegal disposal of hazardous wastes.

In addition to working within existing regulatory authority, the Town could consider adopting a mechanism for protecting its groundwater supply . Other communities within the Commonwealth are looking at aquifer zoning as a specific overlay protection district on existing land uses and zoning requirements. The basic components of an aquifer zoning bylaw are criteria for delineating protected areas, li st of permitted and prohibited uses and provisions for gran~ing special permits . Some of the reasons for establishing aquifer zoning are embodied in the points raised in the previous section. The general purpose i s to promote l and uses (within the influence of the Town wells) which are compatible with the Town's water supply. C.

Recommendations for Further Technical Investigations

Previous discussion has already indicated the need to obtain additional data on wells where information is inadequate or unavailable; and to quantify the river recharge-well discharge relationships in each wa~er supply aquifer. This could be accomplished by installing observati on wells within the cones of influence and measuring drawdown response. The wells would also be useful to monitor changes in water quality and storage . A list of specific questions which should be answered for each wel l site is given below: -64-

(1)

The frequency and duration with which river flow (high and low) affects groundwater storage and replenishment in each aquifer.

(2)

The percent of total volume discharged from w.e ll that consists of upland groundwater as water derived from river flow computed on a The emphasis is to quantify well dependence River depending on flow and flood levels.

(3)

The maximum practical drawdown level each aquifer can sustain without any serious detrimental effects on aquifer performance, water quality and long term yield.

(4)

The extent and significance of well interference when more than one well is discharging from the same or contiguous aquifer.

(5)

The potential for development of additional wells in existing production areas without significantly affecting the available water supply .

each pumping compared to monthly basis. on the Sudbury

An inventory of the flood plain sediments should be completed in order to identify areas where the river is hydraulically connected to the underlying aquifer. This could be done in the summer through visual inspection and shallow hand auger borings. The results could be mapped in relation to Plate VII for future studies. Within each major watershed, the water budget components should be estimated to compare the proportion of total rainfall lost as storm runoff with the amount recharged into the groundwater regime. Storm drainage systems should be reviewed to determine major discharge points, local flood potential and relative pollution loads. An inventory of the storm systems has already been completed and is available for this recommended study. The Water Oepartment S program of testing for new well sites should concentrate on those areas identified in this report as having optimum groundwater potential. Because of the presence of the Sudbury River and deep buried valleys, the Town can continue to take advantage of any recharge influence on these underlying aquifers. 1

-65-

BIBLIOGRAPHY Baker, John A., Henry G. Healy and 0. M. Hackett, 1964. Geology and Ground-Water Conditions in the Wilmington- Reading Area, Massachusetts. USGS Water Supply Paper 1694, 77p. Bradley, Edward, 1964. Geology and Ground-Water Resources of SouthEastern New Hampshire. USGS Water Supply Paper 1695, 79p . Brown, R. H., et.al. (Editors), 1972. Supplements 1-3, UNESCO, Paris.

Ground-Water Studies .. including

Cervione, Michael A., David L. Mazzaferro, Robert L. Melvin, 1972. Water Resources Inventory of Connecticut, Part 6, Connecticut Water Resources Commission. Connecticut Water Resources Bu lletin No . 21. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, DEQE, 1977.

Drinking Water Regulations, 4lp.

Crosby, Irving B., 1939. Groundwater in the pre-glacial buried va ll eys of Massachusetts. Journal of New England Water-Works Assoc iation 53 : 372-383. of Public Works, 1979. Personal Communication. Boston, Massachusetts, Boring Logs.

Depal~tment

D. L. Maher Company, 1979. Personal Communication . North Reading, Massachusetts, Well Records .

Bridge Division,

Water SupplyContractors,

Dunne, Thomas and Luna B. Leopold, 1978. Water in Environmental Plann ing. W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, 818p . E. R. Sullivan Well Contractor, 1979. Massachusetts, Well Records .

Personal Communication .

Bolton,

Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, 1968. Water Quality CriteriaPublic Water Supplies: Report of the National Technical Advisory Committee to the Secretary of the Interior: Federa l Water Pollution Control Administration, pp. 18-26. Feth, J. H., 19 . Water Facts for Planners and Managers Urban Environment, 29p . 11

Water i n the

Flint, Richard F., 1971. Glacial and Quaternary Geology, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 892p. Fortin, R. L., 1979.

Town-wide Well Data Survey.

Wayland, Massachusetts.

Goldthwait, James W., 1905. The sand plains of glacial 1 ake Sudbury. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard College, Vol. XLII, Geological Series vol . VI, No . 6, pp. 265-301 .

Ginsberg, Edward, 1979. Personal Communication. Metropolitan Di~trict Commission, Framingham, Massachusetts, Aqueduct Boring Logs. Groundwater and Groundwater Law in Massachusetts, 1976. Division of Water Resources, 92 p.

Massachusetts

Ground Water Manual, 1977. A Water Resources Technical Publication, U. S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 480p. Ground Water and Wells, 1975. Minnesota, 440p.

Johnson Division, UOP Inc . , Saint Paul,

Haley and Aldrich, Inc., 1972. Pollution Study Proposed Sanitary Landfill. Wayland, Massachusetts, 4p. plus maps and logs. Hansen, Bruce, 1979. Personal Communication. Well Records and Boring Logs.

USGS, Boston, Massachusetts,

Hansen, Wallace R., 1953. Late Tertiary and Pleistocene drainage changes in the Hudson and Maynard Quadrangles, Massachusetts. Journal of Geology, 61: 353-362. Hansen, Wallace R., 1956. Geology and Mineral Resources of the Hudson and Maynard Quadrangles, Massachusetts . Geological Survey Bulletin 1038, l04p. Heath, Ralph C. and Frank W. Trainer, 1968. Introduction to Groundwater Hydrology, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 284p. Hem,

J. D., 1959. Study and Interpretation of the Chemical Characteristics of Natural Water. USGS Water Supply Paper 1473, 269p.

I.E.P . , Inc., 1978. The Base Flow Value of the Glaciolacustrine-Glacialfluvial Deposits, Snake Brook Headwaters; and Hydrologic Impact of Gravel Excavation and Proposed Pond, Mainstone Farm Development, Wayland, Massachusetts, 12p. Koteff, Carl, 1974. The morphologic sequence concept and deglaciation of southern New England: in Glacial Geomorphology. D. R. 路coates, Editor, Publications in Geomorphology, State University of New York, Binghamton, N.Y . , 398p. Koteff, Carl, 1963. Glacial lakes near Concord, Massachusetts. Paper 475c, pp. 142-144 .

USGS Prof.

Koteff, Carl, 1964. Surficial Geology of the Concord Quadrangle, Massachusetts. USGS Map GQ-331.

Lapping, Mark, B., 1980. The State of Water Resource Planning and Management in New England--An Overview of Insti tuti onal Frameworks and Issues, Water Resources & Economic Development Conference, Ashland, Mass achusetts . October, 1980, 17p. plus tables. Leopold, L. B., 1968. No. 554.

Hydrology for urban land planning .

USGS Circular

Linenthal, Eisenberg, Anderson, Inc., 1979. Sand Hil l Sanitary Landfill Report, Wayland, Massachusetts, 55p. and maps. MacConnell, William P. and Marcia Cobb, 1974. Remote Sensing 20 Years of Change in Middlesex County, Massachusetts, 1951-1971. Bulletin No. 622, pp. 148-149. Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, 1979. Personal Communication. Massachusetts, Highway Boring Logs .

Well es ley ,

Moon, Dr. Kenneth A., 1970. Municipal waste disposal and groundwater po l lution. Massachusetts Audubon Society, 43p. Motts, WardS., 1977. Hydrology and groundwater resources of Sudbury , Massachusetts, 233p. and maps. Nelson, Arthur E., 1974. Surficial Geologic Map of t he Natick Quadrangle, Middlesex and Norfolk Counties, Massachusetts. USGS Map GQ-1151 . Nelson, Arthur E., 1974. Surficial Geologic Map of the Framingham Quadrangle, Middlesex and Norfolk Counties, Massachusetts. USGS Map GQ-1176. Nelson, Arthur E., 1975. Bedrock Geologic Map of the Natick Quadrangle, Middlesex and Norfolk Counties, Massachusetts. USGS Map G2-1208. Pollock, S. J., D. F. Farrell and W. W. Caswell, 1969. Water Resources of the Assabet River Basin, Central Massachusetts. USGS Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-312. Reed, Donald E. (Consulting Geologist), 1978. Leachate Investigation Existing Sanitary Landfill, Wayland, Massachusetts, lOp., tables, maps and logs. Roche, John, 1979. Personal Communication. Massachusetts, Well Records.

Water Department , Wayland,

Water Department, 1979. Well Records.

Personal Communication.

Framingham, Massachusetts,

Water Department, 1979. Well Records.

Personal Communication.

Natick,

t~assachusetts,

Weston Geophysical Engineers, Inc., 1970. Geophysical Survey-Seismic Results Proposed Wayland Dump Site for Refuse Disposal Pl anning Committee . 8p. and profiles.

DEFINITION OF TERMS Cone of Influence (depression)--Space within the saturated zone that is dewatered by a pumping well such that the water table surface or piezometric level conforms to the shape of an inverted cone around the well. Confined A uifer artesian)--Saturated zone which has an overlying confining (impervious layer such that water in the aquifer is under pressure . If penetrated by a well, water will rise to a level until it is in equilibrium with the atmospheric pres sure . Th is level is called the piezometric water level. Consolidated Material--Solid rock consisting of natural materials tightly bonded together, i.e. bedrock, ledge. Drawdown--Lowering of a water level as water is withdrawn from a well. Groundwater Discharge--The release of water from the saturated zone to the land surface. Groundwater Recharge--Precipitation that falls on the earth, infiltrates into the soil and becomes part of the saturated zone. Hydraul ic Gradient--The change in static head per unit of distance in a given direction. Hydrograph--A graph showing stage (height), flow, velocity or other property of water with respect to time. Permeabilit - h draulic conductivit )--The capacity of a pervious material soil or rock to transmit water under pressure (hydraulic head) . Expressed in terms of coefficient of permeability defined as the rate (ve locity) of flow of water in gallons per day through a cross sectional area of one square foot under a hydraulic gradient of 100% at a temperature of 60째F. . Porosity--The percentage of the total volume of material (soil or rock) occupied by openings. Expressed as the ratio of the volume of pores to the total volume of porous material. Saturated Thickness--Thickness of an aquifer below the water table. Specific Retention--The water held in a material (soi l or rock ) after all the water capable of draining by gravity has been released. Expressed as the percent of volume of water retained by molecular attraction to the total volume of the fully saturated material. Specific Yield (storage capacity)--The capacity of a material (soil or rock) to release water from storage under a f orce of gravity. Expressed as the percent of volume of water drained by gravity to the total volume of f ull y saturated material.

DEFINITION OF TERMS (contâ&#x20AC;˘d.)

Transmissibility (transmissivity)--The capacity of an aquifer to transmit water. Expressed in terms of a coefficient of transmissibility defined as the rate of flow of water in gallons per day through a vertical strip of aquifer under a hydraulic gradient of 100% at the prevailing water temperature. Unconfined Aquifer (water table aguifer)--The saturated zone is free of any confining influence such that the water is at atmospheric pressure and can fluctuate up or down. Unconsolidated Material--Loosely packed materials consisting of sand, gravel, silt and clay size granules.

APPENDIX A.

List of Profiles I. II. II I. IV. V.

List of Tables I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VI I. VIII. IX. X. XI. XII.

Surface Watershed Areas Summary of Land Use Inventory Wayland Zoning Breakdown Description of Geologic Materials Methods for Hydraulic Analysis of Well Sites Ground Watershed Areas Permeability of Geo 1ogi c Materia 1s Surface Area Classification Aquifer Favorability Classification Well Design and Pumping Capability Water Quality Limitations Surficial Geologic Deposits for the Given Watershed

List of Figures I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX.

Castle Hill/Spruce Tree Lane Area Baldwin Pond Area Sand Hi 11 Area Pod Meadow Area Cochituate Lake Area

Graph of Water Quality Data--Happy Hollow Wells #1 and #2 Graph of Water Quality Data--Meadow View Well Graph of Water Quality Data--Baldwin Pond Wells #2 and #3 Drawdown and Discharge--Meadow View Well Drawdown and Discharge--Happy Hollow Wells #1 and #2 Graph Showing Cones of Influence vs. Pumping Duration for Meadow View and Campbell Road Well Sites Graph of Rainfall, Framingham, Massachusetts Graph of Sudbury River Discharge, Framingham, Massachusetts Graph of Groundwater Levels, Cochituate State Park Well #2, Wayland, Massachusetts

List of Plates I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII.

Water Table Topography and Surface Watersheds Subsurface Data Surficial Geology Bedrock Topography and Ground Watersheds Surface Area Classification Saturated Thickness Aquifer Favorability Aquifer Protection

nl 0

p::j

59 58 5 6

Log Numbers

c 37

160

4 2 4 3 34 3 6 3 5 39 40 41

160

...-< [Jl

....C!.l

1 20

120 f sd

C!.l

IJ-t

1=1

·r-l

l=l 0

Bedrock

r-l

J:il

0 SCALE: 1 11 =1000 1 "0

nl 0

D ;::< [Jl

s -1-l

C!.l

160

Log Numbers

44 43 41 45

33 .

p::j

Log Numbers

7 5 10 4 1 11 14

E' 160

p::j

120

IJ-t l=l

•o-l

l=l 0

•o-l

-1-l

?Q)

Bedrock

r-l

r.LJ

0 Profile I : Profile of Gelogic Conditions Based on Interpretation of Well +Boring Logs in the Castle Hill/ Spruce Tree Lane Area.

C1)

l=l

.....:>

1-<

.-1

F 1 60

s 1 20 L

.__

C1)

.....l=l l=l 0

;::;..... C1)

~l t -路

C1)

. " lf;-.,._

sd l+ g l j_

. . .~

\J / 11 I

Log Numbers p...

>C1) ..... 7 7 ,_g

.....l=l

::1 0

76 75

'"0

'"0 ,......

::1

I 12

~~-

-~路

拢 sd

J 160

lfl

I ,......._ I

7~~

\ Pond

p:{

Log Nmnb ers

'"0

I I

I \

r 1'r-..

.11

A'. -l 1 20

crll .t-

O'l

f\ -1 80

I ,('

1::

J 40

:d rd

> C1)

,...... ~

0 L

'?A. 'l'lll A'

Bedrock

-40

t路

-.....s

Profi l e II: Profile of Geologic Conditions Based on Interpretation of Well + Boring Logs in th e Bal dwin Pond Area .

f)..

160

Till

74 73

160

120

C1) C1)

.... l=l .........0 ~

:> C1)

,...... ~

0 B edrocl~;:

-J

-40

Bedrock

Log Nurnbers

SCALE 11 1 11 =1000 1

,......

- - + - - - - - - - - - ; ('

Log Numbers I

~ Log Numbers 0 ~ 85 87 88

100

r--1

160

- 160

-1-l Q) Q)

120

1=1

•.-l

1=1 0

.... -1-1

Ill

Q) r--1

Bedrock

r.L1

SCALE: 1 11 =1000 1 r-< Ul

160

l- 81

rr-r-r-rrJ

Log Nmnbers 86

r<:•

84 160

-1-l

Profile III: Profile of Geologic Conditions Based on Interpretation of Well + Boring Logs in the Sand Hill Area.

Q) Q)

....1=1 1=1

120

120 80

.... 0

-1-l

Ill

:>Q)

G:i

Bedrock 0

~~-

H QJ

156

-s ,_...

1 60

1 55

153

....

148

146 14 7

~ ~

160

~ ~

120

·r------,. I ~--------~~--~--~~~--------~--------,-?(

120

·1-' Q) Q)

151

til

1'-l

N•

Log Numbers

....:>

f sd

'.d Rl :>QJ ~

r.LJ

Bedrock SCALE: 1 11=1000 1

o•

Log Numbers

160

161

164

200

200 Profile IV: Profile of Geologic Conditions Based on Interpr e tation of Well + Boring L ogs in l:be Pod Meadow Area .

,..... Ul

160

....

120

+ gl c sd

!=:

+ gl

·.-I ~.J

C1l

QJ ,.....

r...l

~40

.....

{j)

1=1 ......

.....I'd

,.!4 ......

192 160 ,....; Ul

...,

lli

Log Numbers

lli

ui 194 191 ~193190

184

189

183

1 82

i:i. I

160 Lake Cochituate

120

Q) Q)

1=1 ...... 1=1

0 ...... .....

slt

rll

:> ..-. Q)

-40

Bedrock

-40

SCALE: 1 II= 1000'

Profile V: Profile of Ge ologic Conditions Based on Interpretation o f Well in the Cochituate Lake Area.

Boring Logs

TABLE I SURFACE WATERSHED AREAS

Watershed

Area i:o. Wayland (Acres)

Area in Other Town (Acres)

Total Area (Acres)

Trout Brook

294

106

400

Hazel Brook

591

136

727

Mill Brook

1 ,050

1 ,057

Hayward Brook

630

646

1 ,276

Pine Brook

867

378

1 ,245

Sudbury River 106 448 264

None None 55

106 448 319

643

None Not Determined Not Determined Not Determined

643

I II III

Dudley Brook

Snake Brook

La ke Cochituate

305

Charles River

202

10.

Remaining Sudbury R. TOTALS:

1 ,469

3,299 10,168

1,328

1 ,469 305 202 3,299 11 ,496

TABLE II SUMMARY OF LAND USE INVENTORY 1951-1971 1951 Area/acres Percent

Forest Agriculture & Open Land Wetland Urban Land Outdoor Recreation Mining, Waste Disposal Reference:

1971 Area/acres Percent

Percent Change

4,604

4,318

3,011 1,565 988

30 15 10

1 ,319 1 ,527 2,724

13 15 27

235

+ 2

+ 1

- 3 -17 less than +17

MacConnell, William P. and Marcia Cobb, 1974 . Remote Sensing 2Q Years of Change in Middlesex County, Massachusetts 1951-1971, Bull. No. 622, pp. 148-149.

TABLE II I WAYLAND ZONING BREAKDOWN Zone Designation Residence 20,000 Residence 30,000 Residence 40,000 Residence 60,000 Limited Commercial Industrial Business A Business B Rufuse Di sposa 1

Acres

Percent

14.81 7.34 43.32 32.90 .98 .04 .32 .11 .18

10 '168

100.00

2,452 356 81

24. ll 3.50 . 79

1 ,506 746 4,405 3,345 100 4

33 11

Overlay Zoning Flood Plain Zone Planned Unit Development Historic District

TABLE IV DESCRIPTION OF GEOLOGIC MATERIALS GLACIAL DEPOSITS Lake/Spillway Elevation (msl) I.

Lake Sudbury: Wayland Stage

Q1sl

200 +

High Level Weston Stage

Qls2* Qc4

195

High Level Cherry Brook Stage

Qlsl*

160

Low Level Weston Stage

Qlsw

157 '

Qls2 Qls3 Qls5 Qlsc Qlsb

155' 165' 155 155' 155

Low Level Cherry Brook Stage

II.

Description

177

(Qlsl , Qlsl*, Qls2, Qls2* Qls3, Qls5, Qlsw, Qlsc)

Lake Charles

Glacial lake and stream deposits consisting of sand, gravel and si l t, poor to moderately sorted and stratified in the form of deltas, knobs , kettles, terraces and outwash. (Qc4) Meltwater deposits consisting of sand and gravel in contact with stagnant ice, poorly sorted and stratified occurring in the form of kettles, knobs, eskers and ice channel fillings . (Qlsb) Glacial lake bott om deposits consisting of well sorted and stratified fine sand, silt and clay size granu les.

Happy Hollow Stage

Qc2

151'

Morses Pond Stage

Qol Qo2

137 ' 137'

East Natick Stage

Qlc2

166'

(Qc2) Same as Qc4 .

Cochituate Stage

Qlc3 Qlcc

156' 156

(Qlc2, Qlc3, Qlcc) Same as Ql s 1 , etc .

(cont ' d. )

TABLE IV (continued) GLACIAL DEPOSITS Lake/Spillway Elevation (msl)

Description ( Qo 1 ) Qo2)

Glacial stream deposits consisting of medium to coarse sand and gravel) well sorted and stratified occurring as outwash or terraces in association with ice contact deposits. II I.

Undi fferenti路ated

Qsg

(Qsg) Stratified deposits of sand, gravel and silt with variable characteristics and forms of origin.

IV .

Till

(Qt) Ice laid deposits over bedrock or other till consisting of mixed combinations of gravel, boulders) sand, silt and clay size materials, poorly sorted with little or no stratification .

Holocene Deposits

(Qs)

Swamp/Muck

All i vi urn

Qal

Artificial

Peat, muck, silt and sand overlying older deposits. (Qa 1) Poorly stratified sand, silt, gravel and clay granules washed from older glacial materials and deposited in low lying flood plains. (A f)

Areas where geology has been altered by cuts or fills.

TABLE V METHODS FOR HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS OF WELL SITES NON-EQUILIBRIUM METHOD (Theis, 1935) (From Heath and Trainer, 1968) Permits an analysis of aquifer conditions before equilibrium between the rate of withdrawal and rate of recharge is reached.

**T = 114.60 W(u) h

- h

** Formulas primarily applicable to confined aquifers . T = coefficient of transmissibility in gpd/ft s = storage coefficient Q = pumping rate in gpm h -h = drawdown in feet at any point in the vicinity of the well 0 discharging at a constant rate distance in feet from the discharging well to the point = where drawdown is measured in days since pumping started t = time 11 W(u) = Well function of U11 r

MODIFIED NON-EQUILIBRIUM METHOD and Wells, 1975

Jacob and Coo er, 1940) (From Ground Water

Permits analysis of aquifer conditions before equilibrium between the rate of withdrawal and rate of recharge is reached when values of W(u) are sufficiently small, i.e. less than 0.05.

** Distance Drawdown Formula

**Time Drawdown Formula T = ---;-"""'"2..:....64-+Q-.--

change in h

...

. o.3 Tt 0

T = ---;--5=28;:.___;.. .0-.--

change in h

= 0.3

r 2 0

** Formulas primarily applicable to confined aquifers . T, s, Q = Same as above to = intercept of the straight line at the zero drawdown, in days r = distance in feet from the pumping well to the observation well where drawdown measurements were made change in h = drawdown in feet across one log cycle .... I. = time in days since pumping started = intercept at the zero drawdown of the extended straight line, r 0 in feet

Note :

At least three separate observation wells at different distances from the pumped well with simultaneous measurements are needed to use the Distance Drawdown Formula. (cont 1 d.)

TABLE V (continued) TIME DRAWDOWN RECOVERY METHOD (From Ground Water and Wells, 1975) -

264 0

change i.n s'

T, Q = Same as above s' = change in feet in residual drawdown per logarithmic c values of t/t' (minutes), (t) is the time since pumping started, (t') is the time since pumping stopped. Note:

At least one observation well i n the vicinity of the pumping well is needed to use this method.

EXPLANATION OF DARCEY'S LAW (1856) (From Heath and Tra i ner, 1968) Defined as the lami nar flow rate through a proous medium is proportional to the head loss and inversely proportional to the length of the flow path. Equation: Q K

A h

Q=KA_Q_ 1

= volume of flow per unit of time = coefficient of permeability of a porous medium ( gpd/ ft 2 ) = cross-sectional area of a porous medium normal to the flow =

head l oss (vertical)

= length of the flow path (hori zontal ) h/ 1 = hydraulic gradient 1

*E UILIBRIUM METHOD From Heath and Trainer , 1968)

** From Ground Water Manual, 1977) ** Confined Aqui f ers

T = transmissibility in gpd/ft Q = pumping rate in gpm r = distance in feet f r om the pumping well to the observation well (s) h = dr awdown in feet in the observation well(s)

Unconfined Aquifers

h = piezometric pressure at the circume ference of the area of influence hw = piezometric pressure at well r e = radius of area of i nfl uence rw = radius of well log e = natural log h' = saturated thi ckness of aqu i fer at e the circumference of area of influence h'w = saturated thickness at well

TABLE V (continued) ASSUMPTIONS MADE WHEN USING THE NON-EQUILIBRIUM METHOD 1.

The aquifer is homogeneous in character and constant permeability, uniform in thickness, and infinite in aerial extent.

The pumping well is infinitesimally small in diameter, penetrates and receives water from the full thickness of the aquifer .

The water is discharged from storage instantaneously with a reduction in head pressure due to drawdown.

Groundwater flow to the well is radial and horizontal.

The aquifer receives no recharge during pumping.

ASSUMPTIONS MADE WHEN USING THE EQUILIBRIUM METHOD 1.

The aquifer is homogeneous in character and constant permeability , uniform in thickness.

The pumping well penetrates and receives water from t he full thickness of the aquifer.

The cone of depression has reached equilibrium, i.e., there is no further change in the drawdown or radius of influence with continued pumping at the given rate.

Groundwater flow to the pumping well is horizon tal, radial and laminar within the radius of influence of the pumping well .

The wel l is pumped at a constant rate and is 100 percent efficiently pumped.

TABLE VI GROUND WATERSHED AREAS

Sudbury River I

286

Area in Other Town (Acres ) Not Determined

Sudbury River II

253

None

253

Sudbury River III

386

None

386

Sudbury River IV

147

None

147

Sudbury River V

577

None

577

Sudbury River VI

768

None

768

Sudbury River VII

404

None

404

Trout Brook

363

139

502

Hazel Brook

925

220

1 , 145

10.

Mill Brook

661

No ne

661

11.

Pine Brook

1,208

400

1 ,608

12 .

Hayward Brook

169

620

789

13.

Snake Brook

1,377

l ,469

14.

Lake Cochituate

863

136

999

15.

Charl es Rive r

191 8,578

44 1 , 651

235 10,204

Remaining Sudbury R.

1,590

1 ,590

10,168

11 ,819

Watershed

TOTALS:

Area in Wayland (Acres )

Total Area (Acres) 286

TABLE VI I PERMEABILITY OF GEOLOGIC MATERIALS Comparative Values of Permeabi l ity Materia 1

Column l (ft/day)

Coarse Gravel Medium Gravel Gravel Fine Gravel Sandy Gravel Sand and Gravel Very Coarse Sand Coarse Sand Medium Sand Fine Sand Very Fine Sand Silty Sand Sand and Silt Sand, Silt and Clay Si 1t Si lt and Clay Clay Loess Glacial Till

400-670 270-670 200-400 200-400 135-400 135-335 135-400 105-335 33-135 7-67 3-20 10-16 3-10 3-6 3

2-3 1

Column 2 (m/day)

Column 3 (m/day)

1,000-10,000

gt 1 ,000

0.3-10

100-1,000

10-3,000

10-1 00

0.01-10

0.1-10 0.0001-0.1

0.0001-1 0.00001-0.0001

References: Co 1umn 1:

Cervi one, M. A. , et. a1., 1972. ~Jater Resources Inventory of Connecticut, Part 6, Upper Housatonic River Basin, Connecticut Water Resources Bulletin #21, 84 p.

Column 2:

Dunne, Thomas and Luna B. Leopold, 1978. Water in Environmental Planning, W. H. Freeman and Company, 818 p.

Column 3:

Ground Water Manual, 1977. A Water Resources Technical Publication, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 480 p.

TABLE VIII SURFACE AREA CLASSIFICATION Primary Recharge: Areas with optimum characteristics for accepting and transmitting water from the surface into the groundwater system. They exhi bi t the highest degree of infiltration and vertical permeability. Features identified for this classification include flat to moderate sl opes , stratified medium to coarse sand and gravel deposits and a water table above surrounding areas. Secondary Recharge: Areas with high or intermediate characteristics for accepting and transmitting water from the surface into the groundwater system. They exhibit a high degree of infiltration and good vertical permeability. Features identified for this classification include moderate t o steep slopes, stratified fine to medium sand and gravel deposits and a wa t er table above surrounding areas. Limited Recharge: Areas with a low potential for accepting and transmitting water from the surface into the groundwater system. They exhibit a limi t ed degree of infiltration and vertical permeability. Features identified in this classification include flat to moderate slopes, shallow sand and gravel type deposits, primarily fine to medium grain sizes (limited coarse grains) wi th the possibility of confining layers at depth (i.e. clay hardpan ), and a water table above surrounding areas. Till and Bedrock: Areas consisting predominantly of thin till overlying bedrock with limited potential for accepting and transmitting water from the surface into the groundwater system. Slopes are moderate to steep with high runoff rates. Discharge Areas: Areas where the predominant water movement is from the groundwater system to surface flow during most of the year. These areas are characterized by wetland environments sustained by a water table at or near the surface. In areas where groundwater elevations fluctuate up and down to a large degree, discharge areas may function to some extent as recharge areas, yet for lack of specific water level measurements, only the discharge functi on has been identified.

TABLE IX AQUIFER FAVORAB I-LITY CLASSIFICATION

Deep Aquifers l.

Highest favorability and potential yiel d for municipal water supply. Generally have greater than 60 feet of saturated thickness, sand and gravel deposits with coarse grains and are closely associated with primary and secondary recharge areas.

Moderate favorability and potential yield for municipal water supply. Generally have greater than- 60 feet of saturated thickness, sand, gravel and clay deposits with fine grains limiting groundwater flow; and frequently are closely associated with primary and secondary recharge areas .

Low favorability and potential yield for municipal water supply. Generally have greater than 60 feet of saturated thickness, primarily fine sand, clay with some gravel sediments. High storage but low permeab ility .

Intermediate Aquifers 1.

High favorabil ity and -potentia 1 yi e1d in terms of supp 1ementi ng groundwater flow into the deep aquifers. Generally have greater than 40 feet of saturated thickness, sand and gravel deposits with coarse grains and are associated with primary and secondary recharge areas . Good for domestic water supply.

Low to moderate favorability and potential yield in terms of supplementing groundwater flow into the deep aquifers . General ly have greater than 40 feet of saturated thickness, sand, gravel and clay deposits with fine grains limiting groundwater flow; and are associated with some primary but mostly secondary and limited recharge areas.

Shallow Aquifers 1.

Highest importance to the maintainance of stream and wetland environments in upland areas in terms of base flow and water quality. Generally have greater than 20 feet of saturated thickness~ sand and gravel deposits with coarse grains and are associated with primary and secondary recharge areas.

Moderate importance to the maintainance of stream and wetland environments in upland areas. Generally have greater than 10 feet of saturated thickness, sand and gravel deposits with coarse grains; and are associated with secondary and limited recharge areas.

Low importance to the maintainance of stream and wetland environments in upland areas. Generally have greater than 10 feet of saturated thickness, sand, gravel and clay deposits with fine grains limiting groundwater flow; and are associated with limi t ed and secondary recharge areas .

Limited favorability for stream and wetland environments. Less than 10 feet of saturated thickness; bedrock, till or shal low stratified deposits.

TABLE X WELL DESIGN AND PUMPING CAPABILITY Station

Year

Diameter

Horsepower

Rate (gpm)

Baldwin Pond #1

1962

18 11

400

1962

24 11

500

1955

24 11

650

Happy Ho1low #1

1947

24 11

500

1953

24 11

700

Meadow View #1

1972

24 11

400

Camp be 11 Road #1

1968

24 11

400

Information provided by John Roche, Superintendent, Wayland Water Department, Apri 1 11, 1980.

TABLE XI WATER QUALITY LIMITATIONS (Values are in ppm or mg/1) Permissible, Desirable and Standard Concentrations of Constituents in Dri nking Water Supplies Throughout the United States . Standard Approved For Drin king Water Permissible Desirable Town Tested Su~plies Level Leve l Constituent low Turbidity low Sediment <1 0 75 Color none Odor 6.0- 8.5 6.0- 8.5 pH >30 500 Al ka 1i ni ty <150 Hardness <145 200 Calcium 200 <120 125 125 Magnesium <20 20* Sodium 20 none 1.0 1.0 Iron 0.05 0. 05 0. 05 Manganese <72 Silica <200 250 250 Sulfate 250 <200 250 Chloride Spec. Cond. Nitrite) 10* 45 10 Nitrate) 1.0 none 1.0 Copper <30 Potassium Free Amonia Other Constituents 500 <500 Total Solids 500 Antimony 0. 05 Arsenic 0.05 none 0.05* 1.0* Barium Bicarbonate 500 20 Boron Cadmium 0.01* 0. 05* Chromium Cyanide 0. 01 0.2 Fluoride 0.8 1.5 Hydrogen Sulfide 1. 0 Lead 0. 05* 0.01* Selenium 0.05* Silver <5 5 Zinc *Maximum level allowed by Mass. DEQE Regulation Standards for Public Water Supplies. Reference: Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, 1968. Water Qual ity Criteria-Public Water Supplies: Report of the National Technical Advisory Committee to the Secretary of the Interior : Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, pp . 18- 26. Also: Feth, J.H . , 19 . \~ater Facts fo r Planners and Managers , Water in the Urban Environment, 29 p.-contains drinking water standards of the World Health Organization (1971) and U.S. Public Hea lth Service ( 1962) .

TABLE XII SURFICIAL GEOLOGIC DEPOSITS FOR THE GIVEN WATERSHED

Watershed l.

Ti 11 (Acres)

Trout Brook (Wayl and) (Li ncoln)

Stratified Lake Bottom Drift (Acres) (Acres)

Wetland All i vi urn Total (Acres) (Acres) (Acres)

240 106

294 106

106 18

591 136

Hazel Brook (Wayland) (Weston)

48 26

437 92

Mi 11 Brook (Wayland) (Weston)

130

750 7

1 ,050 7

Hayward Brook (Wayland) (Weston)

126 204

320 159

108 97

76 179

630 639

Pine Brook (Wayland) (Weston)

267 239

381 103

146

73 15

867 378

Sudbury Rive r I II III

101

92 149 202

7 172

7 26 44

106 448 264

Dudley Brook

507

Snake Brook

790

580

Lake Cochituate

l 0.

Charles River

643

1 ,469

305

136

202 6,869

Remaining Sudbury R. TOTAL Note:

3,299 10 '168

This table was used for application of stratifi ed drift acreage in the computation of groundwater outflow from surface watershed.

100

Happy Hollow #1 (dashed lines)

80 ·70

Happy Hollow #2 (solid lines}

60 ·-

s p.. p..

l=l

:!]

chloride

40 -

"'"' /J---~~-'_/ l II

30 ·-

1-<

-1->

l=l

(!)

tl ~

/---

10 I~

·-----"'

,, --~'loride/

/ ''I

'-..../

,.._. '

---

........ .,.,.

--.---

' ,1

sodium

---.......

..............

.............

I I ,I

4 ·-

I I

1\ t \

~ ·---_I

I I

,----/· ........... ~ ·t te ' 'V

1- - , ;

~/-\/ U/

/f\

--~/

0 I

1960

0 l-6 ·-

111

/~ ', ' ----_, / '

_...

',__,

1961

1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 19 6 7

1968 1969 1970 Year

1971

1972 1973 1974 1975

Figure I: Graph of water quality data for the indicated parameters at Happy Hollow #1 and 1/2. Records coli ected by the Wayland Water Departrnent.

1976

1977

1978 1979

p.. p.

50 路40

:ard

Meadow

View

' lo......

- -.... - --'I-

u ~

20 路-

10 路-

,. /

-- j

1967 1968

1969 1970

1971

sodium

'-- ---; '' I

19 72 1973 1974 1975 Year

...

/- - ---l

1976 1977

..... .....

.....

1978

1979 1980

Figure II: Graph of water q uality data for the indicated pa ramete rs at Meadow View. Records collected by the Wayland Water Depa rtn1ent.

4 Âˇ-

0 I

lv I

â&#x20AC;˘

4:'

\...----r

1 96 1 1962 1963 19 64 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 197 1 1972 1973 19 74 1975 1976 Figure III (pa rt 1) : Year Graph of wat er quality data for the indicated parameters at Baldwin Pond 1/2. Records collec t ed by t h e Wayl and Wate r Depar hnent.

1977 1978

24 22 -r- - --1

20 18

Baldwin Pond #3

p.. p..

14 l:l 0

:D nl

1--l

4-J

l:l Q)

sodium

l:l

/ \

fl.

/\ I

2 /

路- -

196 1 1962 1963

I 1

,_ --

....

I I 1 I 1 1 I I

\J I

- I_

/""

"' 路 "I

v " nitrate

I I

I I \

\.-. -路 _.( I

: I I I

I I

\.'

,I ,I 1

1 f

,'/

\.~ / I _ ----~路- -----~--------L------~--------L-------~------~-------L------~--------L-------~----~-LA

1964 1965 1966 1967

1968 1969 1970 1971

1972 1973 1974

Year Figure III ( part 2 ): Graph of wat er quality data for the indi cated parameters at Baldwin Pond #3 . Records coll ected by the Wayl and Water Department,

1975 1976 1977 1978

II I

Meadow View

.....Ill

.-'

...-'0. .

]

I I

bO ,._.

I I

II '/ i

3 I路 uUl

... .

( I

r, , I

1 路-

I I 1 I I II I I I ,' 1 I \I I 'I I

-1

\_I

\ I '1

I I

v,lt \J I

I I

1 1 I

'./1 I I

I I

\ I

I I

I \ I \ 1

i'-~

I I

I II ll

I \1

\ \

/ I

I I

I I I l

I ... I

-路 ,t \

1/ ~ ~ I' ' ' II ',J \J

Dis charge Measurements

I, 1\\1 /1I

\1 \

I I I

-i2 4

t/rl2 6

I I

-~2 8

\ I

I I

\ I

1 \ I

-122

I I

,20

'\-,

~ ,._. I Q -1 18

I I I

I \I

/"-..

I I

(

-h 6

I '0

' ' I II

.' \

,1 1 ., I \

-n 4

.I I I

~ I

...c:

I I

~ ~

II I I I I

-!!

~------------~------------~--------------~------------~------------~--------------~----------~ 1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

197 8

Year Figure IV: C omparison of drawdown measurements in an observation well with d ischarge data for th e indicated w ell during pumping, Records collecte d by the Wayland Water Department.

1979

Drawdown Measurements

....,

lll lll '+-<

"'v'__;'~~"-~;J

0 "0

Ill

14 Q'"'

:::

II~\

/' ,

I ~路

Happy Hollow #1 (dashed lines)

,.... 0

Ill bD

Happ y Hollow # 2 (solid lines)

-路a

/'v'-

.....

Discharge Measurements

I\ I I I I I

lll

'Ill"'

..c u

.....Ul

A 1\ '1 I 1

1 I

I I

I I I I I,

,, 'I

I I I

I \

I I

11 II

I I

I \ I I I I I I I I I I I II I

1,/

I '

' l

I I I

II 1 \

II I

i'-

1970

197 1

1972

1973 Year

19 74

Figure V (part 1): Comparison of drawdown m ea surements in an o bservation wall wHh discharge data for the indicated wells during pumping. Records collected by t he Wayland W ater Department.

I~ I

II ~~ I \

/'v'\

\ I

Drawdown Measurements

' I

""'-

II I I I

Happy Hollow #1 I I (dashed lines) I1

(solid . lin~~

I I I I

Happy Hollow #2 ' I I

I I

! I I I

I I

n A

\ I

f',

I I

I I I

I 1

I I

I \

\ I \ I

I~ I I

I I I 1

r I

I \ I

1 II\/

-....

I 1

Disch arge Measuremen t

I 1

.'\ I

\ I

/1 I I I I I 1l

,, ' I

A tl

I I

I .

\.- â&#x20AC;˘./\

I I I

If I

I I I I

I. \

\_,

\I \ I

I I

--~--------------~------------~--------------~--------------~------------~ 0 1975 1976 1977 1978 19 79 Year Figure V (part 2): Com parison of drawdown measuremen ts in an obser vation well with discharge data for the indicated wells during pumping. Records c ollec t ed by the Wayland Water Department.

. l l ~·.,

"I .,

~- ~.

. ; Q

"., •••

- ·

In I

(

r I' I' r· I

I I

l •l

•••

C')

I I I _ I ,. I '

;::

•. , I

I ''

I •I

Hr ,,. I !....1. 1---- _.. _,l ... . ' ·'I .'H j.,,,,., ! i '• f . • . , ·I .l·, ,.,,, , ;,Iiii:1,,11!! ,I, ,· : ' ~ ,!~,,-,',w~!·:~~~: ,:;· ,~,1 1 :~ : 1 1: ; i! ::~'''!!i: i,,:,I ~~~~: ,: ::;i:i +. ,,I; ,li.. ',:, ~:~,,\ ,; ~~,l,,,::~ l''rt'~·, , ,:i'1i i·,.,"i:!.:,,, 'I I I~ ,. I' 'I I I,I'!i. I . ' I r ,, ' ; ~ o,o' ' ~ ~~ "'II',·,:i:l:l', ; ''I. I ,' ,I oil ,.~,,, • ..,- -.' I I I : II I I I ' r I : . : ' .I I d I I ! : i I i j , : I . ! I: I -I --,I --~-~ ~- _~!JI . _ _',,)'ill'I··r' Jll~ -1- JTI M.-,f-'- LT' L_ ---. J., -~ J -··· J_~,. -·-r- r..- --,r ,... ·- __ _.._J ...TITI -~--,-j ~-~-~-1 1''- T ' : ,,l_lL......i: 1. I_1,], Ij '' ~j ljll'ji t • ' i l 'I' I II , 'I I Ji j' ~:r-- 'll 'i lj;lJI :J j' i.l !' l'l i !' ''T rryl j!J IIJI 'jlll I I I 1 - j i i! ! II i'!! Iiii i ll l!~ 1: ,:! i!i,: i! :! :i! I !! : ~I: : ;;i! IJl l :,' :::~ ~ , ; * !i ! l :lil,i,,;l!i!; I iI i !·Ii I ! 'li 1,.;111,'il ll,' l'lj; ,,; !',' l :;di!!:i'l · 11 . I I I 'I! ! ,, iii ,. ,, :; ! I i !! I d ! :' I I ' ·· ' . !i !:1 I! I I ! i , I it I· l 1 !:II ! 1 -~· -~ -~-·j ll I ., , , .I! . I. :i ,1·1! ,., J .i.,! Lr· ~~ll'"l ·q l ;::, ;·' . !· .. , T 1-- .. , Lt r . I ' ;: .!·· L, -· .. !·:I ~~ ··:It'd ·-[ T 1-r, r ,.. i 1--I ' li rl l -'·! . "I'' .,, 1,1;; 1!'1 il i· l 'ljl . 1 1 !' I!IJ.l i !: il,l q:·!:_ ; 1·1 'j; ; IJ ! I. : '! 111 !! 1 ' Jjj! 1' ''i J !!j' ~ i!:' · il l' il !'l1 11·' · , · fi!:l;.ln -I J'l , J! i1 l!~i i : 1 : : ;p ,,:, j:·h!':··. ~"il 1 : '·' ,, , , i ·;J! h 11. ;1: 1 1 ~.~~~~·, ~ ~ ~ .-J , 111 ''~! , ,~,~ ~~,~ ~ ! , !l',ll ~~~,;,.,,'r'h! _1 1 t, 1 1 1 ! L j 1ljti 1: ·1'1' 11 J;,'!J' I ''I ·. IH' II ·lu' l 'jjtll '. i,l· l·i·:, · !!I!J·· •, I• !'hi f'... 1! : 1 l i t l. P l i , l ' 1 t''l··I. ·.'1··,1, ,I·-n,~, -~ , -·' '"'· . .,...11. -t---- -..,..-~ .. - -L - -~- Lt. - ·- - -·,;-LJ-r:..al til ·-· 1 -1 I 'I '1 II ,·, , , '! II:,;:·· I ,. II : I!! ' : ,,,., I ::: I, ;' ,1 ., ,1 '1 :!I i!l :1! I , . I I ! ll l,ll. ,.:T td ! Iil·--r-· ,lll ,, , . ,'. '. ,.r:I -'I•:- ·--·+11'i! ';il , !,·:'!:~ ··' ' ' . . 1 1 1 1 I_ _ 1 !, ,1 1 !!I! ::j; ·,··:,. , . : 1'1' :'~1' 'j!'· i!l: !;'·:. - ~ ·1 1 ,!1, ',· N---..: · •.Vl .' 1 ~d11 1, !11 il1 ii1 rll, . · I . 'q ,i,l!t.:~l '. 1 1 !1 ..., 1 , 1 1 r... 1.! i . ~ :jl r ,! !..,,!:; , ,.; :, 1:! ',iijr L1'1.1 P ! .e:'~ il ! w v, 1e ,. • , ' 1 •• , 1 I : 1--~ !]·· II: · . ll'l'''j· . ' ·l ' ·: . r!rro''.ildl, .,: . -, 1 i i r· · · ~; 1 ; ; ~d r·:j· · -·!·r--+~-Hr h~, ~ ~ ~ f-; --1 --~ ·rh 1 '· ·rl 'I'' -1. 1·11'· ·· ;'··I·'I'' 1 I1 11 . 1 ,.,,.,,!,,,, ' 1' 1 ' " .I, !. • . • •ji i ~T~\ 111 1 .• ' 11,. ! 'l . 1 l-t l!NJ I,I''·I ,, ,.,,, · 1 1 1 1 1 1 : ~ !,!IJ ii! : l jll! 1JIIj !!!! ~· !'i;i:!: 1;_ , ; : il!! ·1. ·1 ! 1.· rS.·i ..~'i::." ·· '.j'l ,!!l. . ·! •i!!i, , !!~l - ~q .g~f : :l ! , ,~ :~i1, 'i l' IJII·j 1l l:i :'·:.'.. :;·11t, • • , • ,~, • 1: , 1r , 1 1 11 1 • • .., 3 , s 1 i4 , o a1 !f 1, • 1 1· 11 1 00 . 1 I ' , I 1 1 1 1 II ,., .. ,., , , , , , I I ·-· ,-r-·I, --. Tf' . ... . l ~-I ' -~-- . . .-~- '·I-1i 1-' I,, -r,.::1.t.T!' - -~--. --rI· .-~, I- --~-· ..o,: -,-• ~~J. .I.-rl!~T-· .. ' •·~--..1~--.I .•- ---I.'•. 'liil~ '-·-1. . ---,----J j l -.---,-~I I li '!' ' 1 'I! ,' ...,1 s1 ~-. I I rr, ~ I 1 ,, i I' : I I - --r----1i .I' ~'1 - -~ · I' , .·, 1 '''I · I!~' ill! I I! :•••...·:,-,,,.~!,· 1 I ] Ii i !! I!' ! :!;!j, . ll i ~J::I· d', ;: :i· I: I: :,,.. i·•, 'j'i' '·!it;, ·~ li: ·''I. : ~ ; ,:, ",I I· I! f 111 1 11 , 1 I ~~ I .,.,,_,:;.· I ·I lfJ 'J·Irl :,lI · · 'J! I·I • •: ';' l l l j ' '·, :, ., · ~o~ · •, I ~ l.,·:j-1' I I ,1:,': •! ';ll', j, ;':·li , , I I I Jj I'1 1!' 1; 1 I __[__!,,, , , ··1·1-··IJ j·.: '·' · ,:,,. t-1 . ·' r'··I'I'··"JI· . • · . . . , .1.,,. ; .. :-., ... .... . ,,I . , 1 ~. ~ , _ , .,. T.,. -1 '-lj·!, i,., ),r ' ; l : ,, ~ .. ,, .. . , ... 1! ' , , l! '''lri 'lll . ,, : ~, · t l i 1 1 1 1 '':'. :! I .!: ''11:.,: :,11 1' 1 ;' ,;. 'II ·!.j:li .I I I jl: i I q, .. 1 I I I I'' i I ll\ .I ,, 'J' I Ii'' !l!ili-1' ·:' 11i , !i: ' l l: i, ~ ll!ii!'J·, :': ,;: ·: .. 'l i :·,:::::::~ : .,,,,,:·"'·i:· ., 1 ~~I , lj!di, li l ~ l· :~ li,'iq l i'· . ..:. l'- -r-i -- --~I · l TIi -li';i ! l,l ... lj'¢l !,i:! ; 1 ~ o·O:· :; : 1!'' c~ I? '~' ·::Rq~,l L , lilil:::l'::l: I l·li ' l:l ~ i · l !i, ~ l l: ;· ~:··· · ·- - . · · ·-~~ I .. .lr 1 1-·· . ~·· · ! J · ~ · ,.!." ·-..--1·· ,·rl,. _ , -.. ~ l?J .... ., t ,--- '~ -r~ ~~! -.-l' · --·II·. .., .J.. ,I --.. , , 1 . . , .. . I· , .. , ... . ,.,,. . .L, .. ·, ---..L. · · ... ::r. "' ·1". --·, --1-ll I . I ' JJ,, ,, I ,i" ,··'IIi···, . .,,. .!,,.. I ' ' ··: ·. ! ! ! o , ,, ··l" :,j,ll I I ' ',,. IQ.,..' i 4 p I i ··,.·;,!'I I J--H-n .,, . '.il',;!i ij! ; ~~1!':!iL;:!:i{:! ' ! !1,:: 'r+l !9·~:~a.v(1~~c f.£~ ~ ~!! ~ : 1·l i :·j i ! 'l' 1l ljl1 1 ·1li li' 'j' il ii l! ii ~~ ! ,:;i:·,·, I,· - i'I~· · 'r Jl!· ·I 1: i'11·1' ·111!1 lj j .t..i: '·'1 1.. ;'•. •;..;,,. ;: r·, ·:t-· ·! 1 'I'' ,, , .. 1' ~• 'jt ,:. , 'K'I ' 1 I 1 I ' ' ' " I1!'1 ,;, rl l!l'K r• '·I ··•· S= OfOl" ,.,:I ,~ ·· .. · ·:• · ! I ' I '1 I . ··, I l q : I 1: i ! . !I' I,1 II' ,, ! I ill! ,. !''· 1I·111 ·· I I!! Ifij' ~1::,1' '1 11ilz!··' .II!•·o, iP· II I, : I'' I!: '!I ,,'' I IIij11, ••. ·•,.I, •..,• !·, :;.• ·, j'I! !I',~ ·, !:;.1•,·~, 1!',. !''I::·· 11"~i\ ;• I, , ,: I I'1'I 'i I, 1'• ',• 1·1, !It:li'., ,..,,,,,, ,·.l11;: I'll!' ,!Ill,1 , \.,. . •~ ~ · I : ':'II ' 111 'r r • · II ' '1' · ·, 1 -:: I 1 ' 1. I~f . III 1'I•,II !' 'I I .. I . I . J·~· T TIQ I . · .. . t·•.. · . _ .. ·-· . I .. .. .. .. --r · . · .. · . .. 1-,1-,.1 l. . , .j , . ''. . .. ' • .I .... ... . , . . . -. ·. .,, • t: .!ei:::! I' ' " I r , , ·• 'I ' , , • 1 , I 11111!' ' , , ..:,:,,: I 1·, •, I·,, ::.!, ·· , . ···r..: · . ~~.-~~- i, . · 1 •• : ,, · '··1 ,!i . ~, ;·· :i"I ..; J .~., ... \ , , ., 1,,·1 1 1 II ,• •• 1 I I I I ,,IIJI . I Ill' I I',. I,• II' .. 1·1'1! .. , , :, ,.. ' · I I 'Ill ,,,,,., ' ' ··· · 1 ' 1 ·,,, \ 'I.,,., !''! . . ' .Q ' ,I' t'l''l'l' •ji 'I . i' ... ,.! •I I . q· •.i\ ; I' . . :II• • ; I ' I I ' ·, . : 1 I I I I I . '· • • I' I I r:::: II' : ."' ., .' .·.· 1..1 .I, I' l-1 I I II : 'I I : I :- I. 1 ,_ I, I' . :'I''1' . .i tl·'I' ; I I ' ; ti I :I..I' I I \UII ' .. , ·I '" 1 • I' '. . . I' .' I 'I I I I ' " :''• .! .. I ' .,, ....... I ' I , , • . I ... . Ill I 10 1 III JI I , .', . I., , ,. ,,' !j ,I• ~ l!!roi1".' '~'I' pii: :''',, .I!I Ii !' :' '' I'III 'i .; I. : ' I ! •. ,1:· I l ' I''' .,,~,! . Iii, .,ii' i':,'!J! ' :. '! Ii I I Il :'. i I' I:I I:' : ; i IIII' ;'1 : .' I , ' I .,' I i'I': I •.1! jtJ..1!l .:;; :! U l i,j !J! .j:!IJZ~O·O : II I I, , ,., . ,··;,; .. .•. i ,,,,I . ,_, ,, I . ' I II .· ' '·· ·•· .• •' !'1 I r, , 'I ''li'' J 'illl ' 'l' 'l' ~~~~~·.:1'~ iIl I., '' ' Il l' I!!' "'·[ ill·j·' j•···l. ' :: I:1 .,,11 ' . 1: ''. 'I '' , , .~ - ~ 'i . .. ,I ' · ~ P···.: ! I' I''' , ' I 1'·1 I .'I' '!' ::11! I , I !lilt'.: ;! 1:j '111 :1: 1 ,·I·! :' ill iil-1 ;,•,.!1 ·· 9: .I , , ,,, 111 , !·I·, !IIi .·,l·t l'i' jl , •. ' . 'I II I 'I '' 'II' 'I'' ' I I I ' .. . , I • " ' ~ ' I I II ,, 'I' I I ' ,,. ,•. • I' · 1ri' 1 ).~ ,Smpe ' P l n 'i t ted Yi ). l · .. 1. ,: I • , , ·, . ; ''I .· I I I 111 1 ! ' 1 .1 . 1 1• I'· 1 , ,,,; , .. t', 11 1 1 .. , . l I;I ,J !1.1 1':·.J·i I -;. .. ; l,:r .. 1!JI:Ii' il 1 l ll,jl·j·:;I:J!.,"I .· ·1'1.! l' l !: ' j'l i!: J! !j ,:,, .,1••.. 1 ' ._ !, !1 lr Ji! •t l· ,, ' , I 'I ,JI ,' :11' 1,1,1,!1'1:i• :11 .·,d 1'.,It j l ,· 'l,1i,· 11, l J il l 'ijldl 1 -j' !l1;:' !!•;.. I ..:!: ·d. ·: ·,,· ,~ .,'"' •. I'' 1 l.,'l:P~ Vl: : l l · ' I 'II 1 , ' : I · ·1' 1 I !Ill !· •: :1 :, · i I I 1 ____IJL1J.LJ !!U ! U~ iHJ::. !J.L· I~.L ~:?-p/1_jl '~h9w~~~ J1)dif.l,t_~ 9t~ti qaa.:n!b9_~!~ ;-~do:_r.! :?n~-~ t:~ l, !: ~t·r,,i~t~edp?tEf ]jjt<\:r~MIq, : ah.Efl>~~v~~ l __t:. ,:_: . '•' . '11 Tj

I :1·1

.ii

'§ jil .... :.. ..,

-r-

' I .:

: .

I';! I

I :· _,

·-· . '

lol

'. , I T .. ...-~ 0

, IJf ,J

TI - . •

- ____

' .

•

••

•

I I' "'I ·' •I'

lj l:

• I

I I

•. ·

1 s:j I:,'

'•·

''1

'·I!.

, •

I 0

1I ; ,

-._. ·-.·- ' I

•

1 °

I I ''

, ,

•

1 '

1 •• J

I I

, I

. I

•

u. .. .. , , :

I "

• .

" ' ' ' ••

, ., ,. ,

•

• ..

I·

•

, ... -

1 ,

'. , . '

•

• I '

•

. I

'l'"l ·l i "~' j · : I,· J ,,,

' i.

•

••

·:,:''

•

;

' !.

I • . ,,

-·

•

••

!' •

• ••. • . ,I I

•

• ,,

I !

' '

I I

I ,

•

'I ' d ~

I .

j l

s tnce p ump tng was s ar ·e and Cam po e ll R o a d well s .

f ,.

ase

., ,

I '

I ! I II

•••

1 ..

; i'l ,,j

' t

·1

I ~

on a q u1 e r

•

I I

a a

I I

1 'I

•

,• • ,

•

!I . ' ,,, ' 'II ' I• ,, I • • I

• ':

II,

•

,.•.

•!

•

•'

111

• •••

1 :.

..,

. I I .'

I I

•

'· I

: ,,

;

•

I I

1 I•

•

:.•.:

·i'

' '•I

, - ,1' 1' • 1 I I ; 'I jl 'I' I I',. II •I • i I ' : II · ' I

. , , ,I , I

,..

, ,,

. I ' .

I I I

l' il t: ,l j:, , - I , ·I. ~ ·L·~ffi~lj lf: ,"l~-~ fjl l ~ •: I

I I

•

- ., ... , • • • t ! I 1I

,. •. ,. _

-,-11

~II;

• I I I'

I. : .

I >

•

! II I '

· ---

'•

'., . , • • I I· : 'I

.•. I!

• '

! '

I • •

•

, ,~~ ~, . . . . . .

I '

;

0 :.

1. . .

I•

I 'I

•

, • ',

dtl

,.1

I' • •

,•

•

- r: .. . •

. +> '

I ,.

I I

· - - -' ·

•

1 , i 1 . ..

•:.·.

•' I

•

. ,.

•

,.,.I

1 • .•,It 1 '· ~ ··'•' ' ·'·"'' I. I • •• ! 1I I i II

'I ! ;

, 1

..,

·-- m-·-

:,,

. .

Jl_,_j __

o,;

: "

ea ow

; .

• I

leW

• •

•

• I I

9 8

6 (I]

.au

...... ...... (tj

.....~

......

.....(tj~ p:;

2 1

1964

1965

Year

1966

1967 8 7

6 (I]

...c:

u .....!::

...... ......

4 ......Cl!

.....!::

Cl!

3p:;

2 1

~~------------~--------------~--------------~------------~--~ 0 19 68 1970 1969 1971 Year Figure VII ( p art 1): Graph of rainfall from reco r ds collected at Framingham, Massachusetts and published by the USGS.

9 8

7 C1l

..=: u ....s:: ...... ......

I'd

......

....s::I'd rr;

2 1 0

1972

1973

1974

197 5

Year 8

7 0' Ul

..=: u ....s::

,..... ......

I'd ......

....I'ds::

3 2

19 76

1977

1978

Year F i g u re VII( p a r t 2) : Graph of r a i n fall fro m r ecords c oll ected at Framingh a m , Massachusetts and pub li s hed by the USGS .

::>cd

.... QJ

350

0.. Cll

s::

300

250

0 ..... .....nl

s:: 0 ..... ..... .....

.....

200

....

150

..cu .....Cll

100

ell

50 0

1964

1965

1966

1967

Year

350 300 250 200 150 100

1968

1969

Year

1970

1971

Figure Vill (part 1): Graph of Sudbury River discharge f rom records collected at Framingham, Massachusetts and published by the USGS.

50 0

400

>. ro '0

350

!-< QJ

0.. C1l

300

....... .......

tlD

250

t=:

...........0 ..........

s QJ

bO !-<

ro ...c: u

....Q C1l

200 150 100

so 0

1973

1972

Y ear

1974

197 5

350

>. ro '0

!-< Q)

300

0.. C1l

250

...... .......

tlD

200

...........0

..........

150

tlD

!-<

ell

100

..c u .....C1l 0

I 1977

1978

Y ear Figur e VIII (part 2): Graph of Sudb u ry Riv e r di s c h arge f r om recor d s c oll ected at F ranringham, Mas sachuset ts and publi s h e d by th e USGS.

1965

1966

Year

1967

1968

1969

1970

Year

1971

1972

Figure IX (part 1): Graph of water table level below land surface datum f rom reco rds collected at #2 well, Cochituate State P a rk, W ayland , Mass ac husetts.

1973

1974

Year

1975

1976

1977

1978 1979 Year Figure IX (part 2): Graph of wate r table level below land surface datum from reco rds collected at # 2 well, Cochitua te State Park, Wayland, Massachusetts.

i).lq(t.\~

"? \Vc;...

"10\ \ C - 1 - • -

'""""-•tl~

SJ.\e>. /"1 A;o..- 1-'.>12 n)

.jj

....

1984

1984 JUNE

JULY

AUGUST

SEPTEI-!BER

OCTOBER

NOVEMBER

DECEMBER

114,8

114.5

111.7_

114.3

112 . 1

113.7

112.7

112.3

112.0

113.7

114.1

114.2

113 .3

112.7

112.5

112.3

112.1

111.9

111.1

111.0 +/-

110.8

110.5

110 . 5

110.0

110.4

110 . 5

110.0

112.4

111.7

111.0

111 . 0+/-

1985 JANUARY

FEBRUARY

MARCH

APRIL

MAY

·-r

./ v'tl~

·-- ,tj"'

_; (.1 /

ALL MONTH 112.0

113 . 2

112.8

112.4

112.2

112.0

111.6

111.2

110.9

1/C. ~..~ '/7 l it: .j

.2-1

/ IC. /

.:1..

,1/fJ.. j

.Jc c:ober-

l l

I QY.H

SUDBURY RIVER WATER EL EVATIONS Narch

14 ·· ro.9 .. s 11- .. l.fo.s

December

1984 January

February

11 6. 1

115.8

11 1 . 0

11 6. 1

111.5

11 6 . 5

112 .0

117.1

111 . 8

116 .8

111.7

116 . 8

111.0

117 .1

110.9

11 7 .4

110.8

118.1

110.8

118 . 1

111 . 4

117 . 9

lll. 2

117 . 7

112.0

117.4

111. 9

115 . 9

112.2

115. 9

112.9

115 . 9

113.3

11 5 . 3

113.5

114. 6

113.4

11 5.3

115. 3

11 5 . 0

116.3

115 . 1

116. 6

113. 9

11 6 . 5

11 3 .7

114.8

113 .7

114.5

113.9

113. 2

11 4 .8

113.0

11 6 . 5

114 . 0

11 9 .1 AH

114. 4

119 .2 PH

11 4.9

11 9.4

115.7 M1

119 . 2

116.1 PH

11 9. 1

116.6

118.5 Ml

116 .9

118.0 Pt-1

116.5

117 .5

116. 6 M l

116. 6

11 6 . 8 No•J n

1 16. 3

11 5 . 8

April

...

11 6 . 8

November

t .

Hay

June

I '•

ll :i . :·

113 .l

I '•

II R. 2

112.9

I (,

I I H. 0

112.4

I l 7 .8

111 . 5

..? I

l l / .4

111.2

-·l

) <'

I I 7. 0

111 .l

11 b. 9

111 .1

11 6 . 3

111 .1

11 6 . 0

111.3

116 . 0

111.4

111 .1

..?

..,..-, :.

_; Apr il

t .

,'·.

~ l ay

June

11 5. 6

11 5. 5

111.0

11 6 . 2

111.2

11 6 . 5

111.3

116. 5

111.1

116 . 5

110.7

11 6 . 2

110.7

116. 5

110.5

11 6. 9

110.5

lt 7 . 2

110. 4

1 17 . 2

110.4

11 7 . 1

110.4

116 .4

110. 3

11 6 . 4

110.4

11 5. 8

110. 3

11 5 . I

110. 3

114 . 9

110.0

114.7

110.0 +

114.5

July

109.8

114.3

110.0 +

113 .5

110.0 +

113.5

111.0

11 3. 9

111.1

114.2

Ill. 4

114.3

111.4

114.3

110.3

114.2

110.1

11 4 . 1

109 .8

113.9

109 .8

113.7

109.8

August

Se ptember

: 1. 1'.'

June

_: I

I I :: . ~

I 12. 2

-~ I>

11 2 . .l

I 12 . 5

'.'.7

l J:.' . I

11 2 . 7

'.'. 8

111. 9

l 12. 7

112.0

I 12 . 6

111. 5

112 . 2

Ill. 7

111. 8

112. 0

114 . 2

115.2

116.7

118.5

J 19 . 6

120.0

~·.

•

10 12

August

Sept.

Oct.

119 . 7 119.0

118.65

118.3

118. 0

116.8

116.5

116. 3

116. 0

11 5. 1

114.5

1\ridgv

Nov.

110.8

ll 0. 5

110 +

110 .3 +

110 +

112. 2

112.0

111. 7

111.5

ICf~' ;.

110.5 to 111. 5

Ill. 5

111. 5

11 2.5

112. 5 111.3 to 111.8

Hon th

Jan.

No Record

114.0

114. 5

11 5 . 5

114 . 3

115 .0

11 3 . 0

115.2

111. 5

114 .8

111. J

115.3

Ill. 0

114 . 4

11 I . 0

110. 7

l I 0. 8

I I5. )

l I2 . 0

I l f,. (,

11 4 . 4

Mar c h 2

11 0.0

110.5 to 111 . 5

Dec.

Feb .

l l '3 . J

Stonebridg e 113 . 8

25 - 29

11 ,, . 4

July

I 14 .

Shermans Bridge

120. 15

iJgl'

Sl~t ~ rman.s

( ·

'·

SL<Ji i t · br

114.8

!ilii>I',III\Y 1\IV EH W,\TJ-:i{ EI.E\'!\T ill N AT IWUTI~ 27 ---- ·- - -·---- ---·-- - ---- ·- . . ·---- - - ------·- --· 198 I

I 10. 8

11 5. 5

11 0.8

II C1. 4

:2(,

I II . 5

11 6. 9

11 I . 8

116. 5

11 2. 0

11 6. 7

Ill. 8

116 . 7

I ll. 6

1 16.5

111. 4

1 15 . 6

111. 2

115.3

ill. 0

115 .2

111.0

114. 8

112. 3

114. 4

112.8

I ·

113.5

113 . 7

113.6

113. 8

114 . 4

114.0

114.5

113.9

11 4. 6

11J. 5

114. 7 ( 115. 9 Stonebridge)

11 4. 1

114. 6

114 . 6

1JLL J

lll.. 5

11 4.2

1 14. 1

114 .0

1982

Jan.

11 5. 7

116.6

116 . 9

114 . 1

11 7. 1

114. 5

11 '/. 1

I II•. U

I I r,

111.. 6

115.5 + ice on rnf d -

114 . 4

:2.5

114. 5

11 L. . 2

211

I I t, . '~

II J . R

:'h

I I l. I

.' I

I I I . .!

.' /1

I I l . .'

1 14. 1

April

i C( :

<J II

1'0

.cl

. ~ Sh c r mn llridgc)

(117.8 S ton b r i d g c ) ( I I h

113 .0

:·larch I

Dec.

I I'•. 5

I I 0. 6

Nov.

,..

llcto!Jcr 20

PLATE N

. - ~') .--

B. £.'.\f ·· ·;

l UV:t 10

,_. !, .'1·~

F ~- r

rrt· 'iE.l

L t. • EL

'=C 'IfCL O

PHEe",.11..

~t.; RF.1CE

!:!.!:

-----

....

,~o

.> ':--·· ··· .

.··

......

·.

·. •

TROUT

BROOK

•• 0

....

..... 0

•

:· .... "'

....

.....

.. .

··... ' ..... .....

? BROOK .-·; TE.RSHEO.

'·

.·

·. , . ..' .

SCA~E IH rEET

•uSSACH USETTS

.. ...

·. ....

.•

... .. .

·. ·. .... ...

• •

•

• 0

'•

• ·....

•

...

•

'Jt

,..

~.,...-..

•

-·

... .

...-

. .. ..

...

,.,

.. N

3 .

·'

·5 6

7 ••

·2

PLAT E II ,·

LOCATION

•

TES T WELLS

AN D BORINGS

'·

IN GLACIAL

DEPOS I TS ' II

..' .

INFOR MAT ION

GEOLOG IC

.. ,

. a'

9 '·

LOCATI ON OF SUBSURFACE

...... • 12

AI-

PROFILES

• 10

•II · 13

!· CROSS - SECTION

THE

'•

•

SHOWN

14• • 17 IS' ' 19

REPORT

.1 5

• 16

• 21

...

20 A'

'· I

•

•.3 2 3

•2 2

•

•.

t •,._· ·-·

(.- -:--::- ,_,:

v<;

SCALE It< FEET WA SS ACHU S£TTS WAlLANO,

•

·•

-··

5 6,

~ ,35

~·· f 63

37· 3~~~45 E

404 ' 36 39 • • 4 3

~e 57 s

•

:·.:~

· -·

t - I.

>-D'

•54 1

.;.;/""

.,,.. I·

F 7

.. \

,i I

- --t .

, '.!

............_.

-· ,- . "

. 102

..•

·.; 109

.•

07 .

•

,1• 106

Ill •

' '

(

-----

,. '

;

•

144

... '

. .....

....

A-ued.~ct

Prof ile

I I

.......

. ..

q , ..

cr. ,

----~

I I

..fJI7

•

·.·

.·I

120'

•

130

~12 9

145 · . ......-:::

·'

126

) ... •, ~

. /. ....

113

. 133

' II

·.

(

132

... .. ...•

'•

. :

•

116

"['·- ,l ~.\ __ ,,..:

141 142 .' .. • 143 ----~

112.

\- .J ' •

. 'j

._.:

.. ··~

• •• •.•. 110

.·

; ··/

·-

.. //

· ·~.,, /j.·:\ . . : .

·'

•'

r.. •• :

, 236 .197 •196

BASE

MAP FROM

236 · .237

CONCORO(I970) NAT ICI< (I970 ) FRAMINGHAM(I965) MAYNARD(I965) U.S.G.S.

QUADRANGLES (1: 24,000)

·.:..... . ·: .. •; ,. ;:. r.:•:.....tt ~, ..tv;.s;tJ.. . .:.·•,dz.r-.;- £·····-··'#·.: ··--.,s j... :

. r•

I Jt

• _. ' c.

PLATE Ill N

SURFICIAL GEOLOGY Lake Sudbury Gt..t.CIAL STREA iol WAY1.ANO

Ot:POSITS : 01> 1

SiAG£

HI GH l.E VEL

W ESTON

STAGE

HIGH

CHERRY

BROOK

LEVEL

GL.\CIAL

LA K E

•

OltZ, Oc4 ST.\CE

0 11. 1 •

DEPOSITS:

LOW

LEVEL

WESTOII

STAGE

LOW

LEV EL

CHERR'f

BROO K

Oh" SiAG E

Oh 3 O!s2:,Qi s 5,01tc

Ol• b

....

Lake Charles

' ....

GLACIAL STREAiool HAPPY

HOLLO'N

t.IORSES GLACIAL EAST

POND LAKE

NAT ICK

SiAGE

Ot2

STAGE

Dol, Oo<!

SWA N P

ARTIF'ICIAL FROiool BY

_.Af

.... ....

(cao t, muck, sand, Jilt) OJ

( s ill, >and )

U H DIFF'ERE NT IATEO

~--'. .

Qlc 3,01CC

STAGE

DEPOSITS

ALLUVIU iool

~. i ' a _·otsb

Olt<!

S TA GE

TI LL. ( gro Ye l , l Ond , s lit , eloy, bou ld lr))

Qls3

'\.._

DEPOSITS :

COCHITUATE

DEPOSITS:

9'0

Oa I

( a and , l iii ,QrOHI)

0>9 AI

FILL

SURFICIAL

GEO LOGIC

NELSON ( 197 4)

ANO

QUADRANGLE

KOTEFF (196 4 ).

"' APS

_....r'

; - ._ ___,I:

SCALE IH fEET WAYLAND, MASSACHUS(HC

Qlsb

·.

Qlsw

I I Ql

.......

·• Qc2.

_<'>

C(' C!-fr -ruATE

<, : R~£'

Qlcc

.•

.... ....

Qlc3

Qlc2

,.BASE

MAP FROM

QUADRANGLES (I: 24,00(

_, .

:.c.

PLATE IV N BE DROCK

TOPOGRAPHY

ELEVATION IN FEET MEAN SEA LEVEL ~0 FOOT CON TOUR IN TERVAL

--~o- ABOVE

GROUN D

WATERSHEDS

•• • • • · •• GROUIIDW;H ER

DIVID ES

'~------__.1 ~

...

-... .. .

·'

~k===~~o~~~t~o~oo~~.~o~~~.~oo~o~~.o~@

wa •

SCALE IN FEET

WAYLAND,

MASSACH USETTS

BROt

.. ..

RIVER WATERSHED

B ASE MAP FROM CONCORO(I970) NATICK(I970), FAAMINGHAM(I965),MAYNARD(I965) U.SGS. QUADRANGL ES (1: 24,000). i!P?¥- ?Aa·M& ft$ki@§ ·kfr-d;d91& ... I 5' em# W% 4 ,sg 6 ft i I 58 ,•e:-?6 if I 'do ¥-"?"a ?&l§JI s4#4''%·!ff.;;Fat:St#¥!.?,,.;?d 9 &ei5' w:a':itt'·bF;tMl%..:S;e;;;; e-=e.,

. . ·- -. ........ .

. . --

...

·'

PLATE V SURFACE

AREA

CLASSIFICATION

PRI N A'IY

RECHARGE

SECOIIDARY LIMITED TILL

RECHARGE RECHARGE

MID

DISCHARGE

BEDROCK AREA

' --.....:.;_..:..----

• 1

I\ ,/

.. . ... . . . . .. . -.. - .. .•. .. . .. . .. . .··

,..fy··

•

![~

·'

• ••

~ •

.I .I

BASE

MAP FROM

CONCORD(I970), NATICK(I970), FRAMINGHAM (1965) MAYNARD{I965) U.S.GS.

QUADRANGLES ( I :

·~·· · · ·-

'}.... .. ... . .. --. • ,..·-;.. ..

·~

·<::!.· ·-

• ' ·"!""

.. . ..

......

;-~~

. ..

.....

PLATE VI N SATURATE D DEPTH

( In l ctl )

ABOVE

T HE

THICKNESS SATUR.t.T£0

BE DROC K

lo lo lo 40 lo 60 lo

80 I O 100

qr•o l.r t hon

c:::::J I.\'"SI . ESJ . ITITI

0 10 20

!oiATERI AL

SURFACE

zo 40

60 100

' ..:h

~k==~.o~o~o==~.o~o~o~~.~ooo~~.~oo~o~~~~M~ SCALE IH FEET WAYLAND, ldASSACHUSEnS

I . I· I

.I I

.. . :. :.. .-· -• •

• _- Jl

·I

.1 :

r r I

.. l

. .. ' 1·

BASE

MAP F ROM

CONCORD(I970) NATICK(1970), FRAMINGHAM(I965} MAYNARD(I965} U.S.G.S.

QUADRANGLE S (1: 2 11,00 0}

PLATE VII AQUIFER DEEP

FAVORAB ILITY Claro• <tolum e of qro-.~nd •oltr '" •t o roo e)

A QUifERS

A. HIGHEST B. NOOERATE C. LOW

INTERMEDIATE

AQUIF ERS

(mod or ol o to

'fOfu:m e Ot qroundwot U

~ (•:o •I

lotqo 1R SIOf'OQ• )

0. HIGH

E. MODERATE

SHALLOW

LOW

AQUIFERS (modtrof t Ia low VQIVm t of qround wot er '" aloroqe)

F: HIGH G. MODER ATE li. LOW I.

LIMITED

0'-===;;;~==7,~~~:::;;;;==::;;::;==;:;:3 ' ~la \)" 1ooo zooo looo •ooo ao£ SCALE IH FEET loiASSACHUSEnS WAYLAND,

.I .•.• . J . .

•• •

.. ,., •

•1

•

:. : : '- : : I .: ·:.:~ :' '(

. ·::. : . ,: . I • ·.

rI ..::

•

.. 0

BASE

MAP FROM

CONCORD{I970) NATICK(I970) FRAMINGHAM (I965) MAYNARD(I965) U.S.GS.

QUADRANGLES

.. .

.· ..

~·

.._ . .. <O't--. ' .

... .

-~.

;..

·"~-

.......

.. ·.

_.-. .

.. -

PLATE VIII AQUIFER •

r;.:·:;:J .

PROTE CTION:

E XIST ING MUNICIPAL WELLS PROPOS ED MUNICIPA L WE L L AREAS DESI GNATED FOR PROT E CTIO N OF GROUNDWAT ER SUPP LY TO MUNIC IPAL WELLS

POTENTIAL GASOLINE

POLLUTI ON STORAG E

HAZARDS :

TA NKS

BELO W GROUND

ltss fho n .5 00 oa llon s QUI Oter than 500 Qollon • g rto l er I hCI n 1, 0 0 0 oo llon • ;rt o hr than 10,000 q ollons

~0,0 0 0 oo l l o n 3

grtole r than

FUEL

OIL

@) @

TANKS

hss tha n q r t ol er ore ot e r oreater or t o ter

BE L OW ~00

GROUND

g allo ns

~00

than th.on

gall o ns

I,DOO g a llo n! I han 4, 0 00 gall ant tha n 6, 000 oo fl o n t pr sa e nt bu t undergrou nd lonk t no Inf ormatio n owollo bl t

~ EXISTING ..._....

P OTENTIAL

d ire c ti on

DI S CHARGE

movema n f

fUTUR E WELL

SCALE IN FEET WAY L AND, IAASSACIWSETT S

R040

I I

®0

·]! I

(f)

<fl.

/@@ I

(f)

_,,

\\~ \

:r: ,

<. C a

\ \

"'I

~ ;f.--J I

I L AJ<E CD CHI T UA TE I

BASE

MAP FROM

CONCORD(I970) NATICK(i970) FRAMINGHAM ( 1965 ) MAYN AR0(19 6 5) U.S.G.S.

QUADR A NGLES (