Supply: Siting, Drilling, and Construction Water Wells

Siting, Drilling, and Construction
of Water Supply Wells
Frederick Bloetscher, Ph.D., P.E.

Albert Muniz, P.E.
John Largey
First Edition
American Water Works

Association
Science and Technolocry
AWWA unites the entire water community by developing and distributing authoritative scientific and
technological knowledge. Through its members, AWWA develops industry standards for products and
processes that advance public health and safety. AWWA also provides quality improvement programs for water
and wastewater utilities.
Copyright (C) 2007 American Water Works Association All Rights Reserved
Copyright 02007 American Water Works Association.
All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.
Project Manager/Senior Technical Editor: Melissa Valentine

Production: Glacier Publishing Services,Inc.
No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information or retrieval
system, except in the form of brief excerpts or quotations for review purposes, without the
written permission of the publisher.
Disclaimer
This book is provided for informational purposes only, with the understanding that the pub-
lisher and authors are not thereby engaged in rendering engineering or other professional
services. The authors and publisher make no claim as to the accuracy of the book's contents,
or their applicability to any particular circumstance. The authors and publisher accept no
liability to any person for the information or advice provided in this book, or for loss or
damages incurred by any person as a result of reliance on its contents. The reader is urged to
consult with an appropriate licensed professional before taking any action or making any
interpretation that is within the realm of a licensed professional practice.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-PublicationData

Bloetscher, Frederick.
Siting, drilling, and construction of water supply wells / Frederick Bloetscher, Albert
Muniz, John Largey.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978- 1-58321-516-6
1. Wells-Design and construction. I. Muniz, Albert. 11. Largey, John. 111. American Water
Works Association. IV. Title.
TD405.B56 2007
628.1'14-dc22
2007038967
ISBN 1-58321-5 16-6

ISBN 978-1-58321-516-6
6666 West Quincy Avenue

American Water Works Denver, CO 80235-3098
303.794.771 1
Association
Contents
List of Figures vii

List of Tables xi
Dedication xiii
Acknowledgements xv
Chapter 1 Basic Concepts 1

Sources of Groundwater 1
Benefits and Advantages of Groundwater Use 4
Considerations for Siting Wells 4
Reference 11
Chapter 2 Regulations Regarding Well location, Protection,

and Water Quality 13
Safe Drinking Water Rules 13
Water Quality Considerations 20
Use of Risk in Regulatory Environments 31
Permits 32
References 33
Chapter 3 Drilling Methods 37

Types of Wells and Their Construction 38
Bucket-Type Drilling 41
Cable-Tool Method 42
Hollow Stem Auger 45
Hydraulic Rotary Drilling 47
Reverse-Circulation Rotary 59
Reverse-Air Circulation 60
Dual-Tube (Reverse-Air) Method 61
Down-the-Hole-Hammer 63
Coring 65
Drilling Method Selection 67
References 69
Chapter 4 Geophysical Logging and Field Testing 71

Lithologic Logging 72
Borehole Geophysical Logging 73
vi Siting, Drilling, and Construction of Water Supply Wells
Surface Geophysical Methods 74

Subsurface Geophysical Methods 77
Field Testing 9 1
Step-DrawdownTesting 101
Water Quality Sampling 108
Silt, Sand, and Colloids 109
Microbiological Issues 113
Methods for Monitoring Groundwater Quality 115
References 117
Chapter 5 Well Design 1 19

Predesign 119
Wellfield Design 129
Well Design 130
Basic Design Decisions 139
References 142
Chapter 6 Well Construction and Development 143

Casings 143
Screens 152
Gravel Packs 154
Cement Grouting 160
Well Development 161
Well Development Methods 164
Well Development Protocol 165
Sanitary Protection 167
Surface Equipment 168
References 170
Chapter 7 Operation of Wells 1 71

Well Performance 171
Water Quality Monitoring 176
Well Redevelopment Protocol 185
References 186
Chapter 8 Summary 189
Index 195
About the Authors 222
Basic Concepts
SOURCES OF GROUNDWATER
Groundwater is water that may have recently entered the soil as a result of rainfall or
snow melt, or it may be an ancient source found in geologic formations well below
the surface. This water is a portion of the hydrologic cycle (see Figure 1-1) where
water falIs to the earth and seeps into the soil and flows downward by gravity until it
contacts a layer of impervious strata. Groundwater typically flows down gradient,
taking the path of least resistance. Therefore, if high permeability underground
conduits or channels are present, the water will tend to flow along these pathways.
These formations may yield substantial quantities of water.
A body of rock that is sufficiently permeable to conduct groundwater to yield
economically significant quantities of water to wells and springs is called an aquifer.
Water that is located near the land surface, exposed to atmospheric pressure, and has
no overlying confinement is called the water table or surficial aquifer. The surface of
a water table aquifer tends to follow the surface of the ground, although some
conditions cause exceptions. Aquifers will recharge creeks, lakes, or rivers whose
bottoms are deeper than the top of the water table, and aquifers may be recharged by
those same water bodies where the surface of the aquifer is beneath the creek, lake,
or river bottom.
A spring forms when groundwater flows naturally from an aquifer to the
surface, such as near a creek, lake, or river. Water flowing from a spring may have
traveled hundreds of miles (kilometers) from where it seeped into the ground, or it
could be from a surface water source only a few yards away.
Water table aquifers that are located up to four ft (1.5 m) below the surface may
be subject to evaporation. Because there is little resistance to migration ofwater into
water table aquifers, they are also more susceptible to contamination than deeper
aquifers, a major consideration in locating wellfields. Below the water table aquifer
may be other aquifers. These aquifers will be separated by a layer of material such as
dolomite, clay, or other material that prevents or limits the exchange of water
2 Siting, Drilling, and Construction of Water Supply Wells
recipitation on Evaporation
recipitationon
l/ I \‘o
/
h
Evaporation
Groundwater Flow
A A A
Impervious Strata
Figure 1-1 Hydrologic cycle
between the aquifer layers. Such limiting formations are called confining units or
aquitards.
Aquifers that are located further beneath the surface and have low permeability
formations above them are called confined aquifers. These aquifers may be under
pressure and are termed artesian aquifers if their water surface rises above the
bottom of the overlying confining bed when exposed to atmospheric pressure. The
termflowing artesian aquifers refers to those aquifers where the water surface rises
above the overlying confining unit and flows at land surface. An example is the
Floridan aquifer in southeast Florida that will “flow” 30 ft (10 m) above the ground
surface. Some confined aquifers are buried river valleys or the beds of an ancient
lake. Examples exist in the Midwest, where such buried rivers are highly permeable
and may yield large quantities of water.
The flow velocity and flow direction of groundwater depends on the elevation
of the recharge source, the permeability of soil and rock layers, and the relative
pressure of the groundwater. The movement of water through an aquifer is generally
quite slow; however, the long-term movement of water through the rock may
dissolve the formation. Eventually, this allows large cavities to interconnect and
form underground rivers or caverns that can be tapped as a public water supply
Basic Concepts 3
Table 1-1 Porosity of rock formations
Strata Porosity (%) Specific Yield (%) Specific Retention (“3)

Soil 55 40 15
Clay 50 2 48
Sand 25 22 3
Gravel 20 19 1
Limestone 20 18 2
Sandstone 11 6 5
Granite 0.1 0.09 0.01
Basalt 11 8 3
Source: AWWA, 2003
source. At the same time, this water retains the dissolved minerals that often need to
be removed for water supply purposes.
When attempting to identify water supplies, one must evaluate the productivity
and water quality of each aquifer because the quantity and quality of water in the
aquifers may vary greatly. The quantity and quality of groundwater depends on
factors such as confinement, depth, aquifer thickness, rainfall, and geological
formation. For example, because their relatively high permeability provides
significant productivity, sand, shell, and gravel aquifers are more suitable for public
water system than clay, granite, or dolomite. Sandstone is porous and often yields
water of good quality in sufficient quantity to supply public water systems.
Limestone has moderate porosity but often contains cracks and cavities that can
provide substantial quantities of water ( A W A , 2003). Table 1-1 shows the
porosity of rock formations.
Throughout North America, groundwater can generally be found from a few
feet to hundreds of feet (or meters) below the land surface. However, except along
the coastlines, deeper waters tend to have poorer water quality as a result of minerals
dissolving into the water over many years. Deep formations are likely to be more
distant from recharge areas, so the water will be older and have been in contact with
the rock for a longer period of time. A balance must be struck in such areas between
the decreased water quality from deeper aquifers (which might require additional
treatment) and the potential for more productivity in a given well. Deep wells also
have higher construction costs but are less susceptible to contamination. Therefore,
while some deep aquifers may be prolific, the quality of water obtained from a well
may not be usable for drinking water without substantial treatment.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has created
designations for aquifers based on water quality. While it is technically possible to
treat almost all water to obtain acceptable quality, treatment may not be economical
- ”f
or practical for waters with greater than 1O,OOO mg/L of total dissolved solids. Such
waters are generally not potential “underground sources of drinking water.” All
other aquifers are regulated as they may at some point be used for drinking water
purposes.
BENEFITS AND DISADVANTAGES OF GROUNDWATER USE

Groundwater can have significant advantages over more traditional surface water uses.
Advantages of groundwater use include the following:
Water has less exposure to contamination (assumingnot a water table aquifer).
Water quality is stable.
Water temperature is stable.
Water quality changes are slow to occur.
Evapotranspiration losses are insignificant.
Less treatment is typically required.
However, groundwater sources suffer from the following disadvantages:
Difficult to cleanup once contaminated.
No early warning of contamination-unseen plumes of contaminants can
migrate into a wellfield without warning unless sentinel wells are constructed.
Conflicts with land use with competing urban industrial, commercial,
agricultural, irrigation, and ecosystem users in the same area.
Sustainableyields are difficult to estimate.
Water levels are not obvious.
Recharge has limitations.
Supplies are often limited in basins.
0 Control of aquifer recharge may be outside of users’ jurisdiction.
Saltwater intrusion can occur in coastal areas.
In addition, aquifers are not available everywhere, just as surficial sources may not be.
CONSIDERATIONS FOR SITING WELLS

Considerations for siting production wells include the following four issues: (1) site
availability, (2) water supply, (3) water quality, and (4) wellhead protection
limitations. Many small water systems have made cost the prime consideration in
selecting sites for public water supply wells, but water quality may have a longer-
term impact. Therefore, one must balance and consider both water quantity and
Figure 1-2 Typical well installation
quality. The water supply system must balance factors including well depth, geology
of the area, characteristics of the rock formations, and dissolved minerals in the
aquifer.
In most places, locating productive wells may be accomplished using local,
expert knowledge of the geology of the region and the experience with existing
wells. Figure 1-2 is an example of a well installation. Having noted the benefits of
groundwater supplies, these principles can provide guidance in searching for well
sites. There are several steps involved in identifying potential groundwater sources.
The first is to locate the literature, prior investigations,local or regional water supply
plans, and on-site activities of neighboring water purveyors with regard to
groundwater use. If groundwater is available, others will likely know about it. Oil
and gas drilling logs often identify formations that may be potential sources.
Agricultural interests are often the first to tap groundwater supplies.
The United States Geological Survey (USGS) has extensively studied
underground formations for the presence of suitable water throughout the United
States. For studies within the United States, the literature search should begin with
the USGS's Summary Appraisals of the Nation? Ground Water Resources (1978-
1982). Individual reports covering the region of interest can be obtained. Other
published reports on groundwater resources are available from federal and state
agencies that provide a summary of quantity and quality of available groundwater in
various geographic regions, including major basin areas and state, county, and local
regions.
Source: www.bcpa.net
Figure 1-3 Industrial aerial map
Figure 1-4 Residential aerial map
Basic Concepts 7
Figure 1-5 Undeveloped area aerial map
Regional water authorities or neighboring water purveyors may study potential

groundwater basins for their sources. Most of this information is available in the
public record and provides an excellent start in determining the potential for water
supply availability and for the design of a wellfield. Local engineers, geologists, or
hydrogeologists will also likely have a significant amount of information on water
quality parameters and drilling conditions. However, such reports should not be
relied on exclusively as even fairly site-specific reports are often general in nature,
and many local details may be omitted.
The next step is to review the land use. Figures 1-3 through 1-5 show three
aerial photographs downloaded from the Broward County property appraisers
website. Such photographic images are routinely available online. Figure 1-3 is a
heavily industrialized area. Land value in such areas may be very expensive. The
availability of land to locate a well may be severely restricted as a result of surface
activities, such as stormwater management related to buildings and parking areas. In
addition, such areas contain businesses that use a variety of chemicals and processes
that may potentially contaminate the groundwaters. Reviews of industrial
pretreatment records for wastewater plants, hazardous materials licenses, and
chemical inventories provided to environmental agencies may provide information
on the chemicals that may possibly be accidentally discharged to groundwater.
Potential pollution sources of this type must be avoided if at all possible. As a result,
industrial sites are rarely acceptable as potential well locations without incurring
significant expense for monitoring wells, monitoring industrial practices,

wastewater pretreatment processes, and ongoing dialogue with the businesses. Most
utilities typically avoid such sites.
Figure 1-4 is a residential site. Wells may be located in residential sites, but
many of the same problems exist with residential sites as industrial sites. Residents
rarely want wells located in their yards, nor the well access that is required. In
addition, land costs are not inexpensive. Residential areas that utilize septic tanks
may pollute groundwater with household chemicals, microbiological contaminants,
salts, and nitrates. Residents also use a variety of pesticides, fertilizers, solvents, and
other chemicals that, while in much smaller quantities than industrial complexes,
may also contaminate the aquifer. It should be noted that monitoring programs
rarely exist for residential development with regard to chemical contamination. As a
result, care must be exercised in selecting well sites in residential areas-such sites
should be pursued for deeper wells that are unlikely to be affected by surface
activities.
Figure 1-5 shows a remote site that is well outside development. The land is
unlikely to have been affected by industrial activity, but agricultural activity should
be investigated. Agricultural use of land can also affect groundwater quality because
of pesticide, herbicide, and waste runoff. Sites that are well outside development
areas should be less expensive than sites in urban areas, but this cost differentialmust
be weighed against the cost of transmission. Monitoring of remote sites should be
included in any design as site visits will be less frequent. Ecosystem effects may be
limiting factors if wetlands are located in the projected cone of depression. In
addition, the site may not remain outside of expanding development forever, as Fort
Lauderdale’s Peek-Dixie wellfield, installed in 1926 shows (see next section).
Aerial photographs are useful but may not provide all the information needed
to assess whether the land is a potential well site. Figures 1-6 through 1-8 are
examples of surface features in undeveloped areas. Figure 1-6 is a waterfall in north
Georgia. It routinely has copious amounts of water, and the area is relatively
undeveloped (north of Atlanta, Ga.). However, once on the site, it is clear that the
rock formations are granite, offering little capacity for groundwater sources. Also,
the dammed lake in Figure 1-7 (also in north Georgia) appears to be a significant
source of water to recharge the neighboring formation. However, a site visit
demonstrates that the underlying rock is unlikely to have significant recharge
potential unless direct accesses to the lake via fractures exists. Figure 1-8 is a familiar
site in the desert of eastern Utah. There is little development within miles of this
site, but the groundwater supply is far below the surface and provides little
indication of its existence from the surface. In each case, aerial photographs are
inappropriate for siting wells.
In addition to site visits to determine the potential for groundwater, the
historical land use practices must be reviewed at the site. As land uses change,
Basic Concepts 9
Figure 1-6 Helton Creek Falls, Blairsville, Go.
aquifer quality may deteriorate with development, so potential development and

effects of that development should be considered, which requires a good
understanding of urban and industrial growth and zoning of the area associated
with the groundwater supply. Wells and wellfields in developed areas should be
located up-gradient of or down-gradient at an appropriate distance from potential
threats to the water quality. More frequent testing for pollutants may be appropriate.
Establishing early-warning monitoring (sentinel) wells at various depths may be
required to maintain groundwater quality ( A W A , 2003). Property appraisers
offices and local planning departments are good sources for evaluation of historical
land uses.
The third step in identifying groundwater sources is to determine if the
potential well site is sustainable. The term sustainable has a number of connotations,
Figure 1-7 Lake Winfield Scott, Blairsville, Ga.
Figure 1-8 Delicate Arch, Arches National Park, Utah
Basic Concepts 11
but the focus for this book is on the ability to ensure long-term availability of the
water supply. The issues involved in determining sustainability include
0 Ongoing, consistent recharge of the aquifer,
Variability in water levels,
0 Water quality variability, and
0 Competing users.
Ongoing recharge of the aquifer can be discerned through the use of well
testing to monitor fluctuations in water levels with regard to rainfall. Locations
beside lakes and streams that flow consistently throughout the year may provide
good sites if no adverse environmental effects are experienced. Step-drawdown tests
(discussed in chapter 4 ) also are needed to determine how significant the impact of
the well may be to the aquifer locally and areally. Water rights access, a major factor
in 18 western states, and water use or consumptive use permits in the southeast limit
withdrawal amounts. Typically, development of new wellfields must demonstrate no
infringement on existing water rights or competing water uses. Field investigations
(as outlined in chapter 4) must be performed to confirm site-specific characteristics.
Water quality considerations (chapter 2) are important when deciding whether a
well site will provide water capable of potable use with reasonable treatment and
delivery cost. Deterioration of water quality can have significant financial
consequences because of higher treatment costs or the need to abandon the water
supply wells. Therefore, some exploratory work should be done to provide needed
details regarding water quality.
In conjunction with the evaluation, the following factors should be considered:
0 The location of the well sites in areas where the demands are highest
The cost to develop the water supply for the region
The conveyance and treatment costs
The potential revenue generation as it relates to construction and operating costs
Environmental concerns, such as for endangered species and critical habitat
0 Location of future growth
REFERENCE
AWWA (American Water Works Association). 2003. Manual M21-Groundwater.
American Water Works Association: Denver, Colo.: AWWA.
Regulations Regarding Well Location,
Protection, and Water Quality
Until the 1960s, it was assumed that groundwater was not &ected by surface
activities. However, in the 1960s, the United States government found that nearly a
quarter of the country's wellfields were affected by surface contaminants ranging
from minerals to solvents and other hydrocarbons. This discovery provided
documentation that water table aquifers can be easily contaminated by spills from
surface activities. These problems led directly to the passage of the Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA) in 1974. Improved methods of chemical analysis and more
complete sampling of well water has revealed a large number of public water supply
wells contaminated by careless use and disposal of synthetic chemicals (Bloetscher,
et al., 2005). One example that has plagued water suppliers is leakage from
underground fuel tanks that have contaminated hundreds of sites across the
United States.
SAFE DRINKING WATER RULES

SDWA and its associated amendments are focused on protecting the public health
from various contaminants in potable water supplies. Whether surface waters,
groundwaters, or via operation and treatment, SDWA has basic requirements that
must be met. SDWA authorized the United States Environmental Protection
Agency (USEPA) to establish health-based national drinking water regulations by
setting maximum permissible levels of a significant number of pollutants in drinking
water (see Tables 2-1A and 2-1B). USEPA developed monitoring requirements to
demonstrate compliance with the regulations. These monitoring requirements are
permitted to change over time as improvements are made to treatment equipment,
analytical techniques, and instruments.
During the ensuing decades, the efforts of the USEPA focused on metals and
synthetic organic chemicals resulting from industrial contamination of surface water
Table 2-1A Primary drinking water standards
Contaminant MCLG (mg/L) MCL (mg/L)

Cryptosporidium Zero -
Giardia Zambia Zero -
Legionella Zero -
Total coliforms Zero 5%
Bromate - 0.01
Chlorite - 1
HAAs - 0.06
T H M total Zero 1.1
Chloramines - 4.0
Chlorine - 4.0
Chlorine dioxide - 4.0
Antimony .005 0.005
Arsenic Zero 0.01
Asbestos 7 7
Barium 2 2
Beryllium 0.004 0.004
Cadmium 0.005 0.005
Chromium 0.1 0.1
Copper 1.3 1.3
Cyanide 0.2 0.2
Fluoride 4 4.0
Lead Zero 0.015
Mercury 0.002 0.002
Nitrate 10 10
Nitrite 1 1
Selenium 0.05 0.05
Thallium 0.0005 0.002
Gross alpha Zero 1 5 piC1L
Beta emitters Zero 4 mremlyr
Radium 2261228 Zero 5piCIL
Uranium Zero .03
Table continued next page.
supplies. The USEPA reported that over 1,000 synthetic organic compounds (SOCs)
have been found nationwide in drinking water samples. Although the potential risk
for the majority of the population was minimal, it was noted that many of the
contaminants detected were suspected carcinogens.
In the early 1980s, USEPA’s focus turned to volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
commonly used as solvents and found in groundwater systems throughout the US.
While the majority of VOCs were present at very low levels, pollution had occurred
in water supplies previously thought to be pristine. In the mid-l98Os, USEPA’s focus
turned toward the legal use of pesticides because numerous pesticides had been
Regulations Regarding Well Location, Protection, and Water Quality 15
Table 2-1B Secondary drinking water standards (continued)
Contaminant Secondary Standard

Aluminum 0.05 to 0.2 mg/L
Chloride 250 mg/L
Color 15 (color units)
Copper 1.0 mg/L
Corrosivity Noncorrosive
Fluoride 2.0 mg/L
Foaming agents 0.5 mg/L
Iron 0.3 mg/L
Manganese 0.05 mg/L
Odor 3 threshold odor number
PH 6.5-8.5
Silver 0.10 mg/L
Sulfate 250 mg/L
Total dissolved solids 500 mg/L
Zinc 5 mg/L
~~ ~
Source: www.epa.gov
MCLG - Maximum Contaminant Limit Goal
MCL - Maximum Contaminant Limit
NOTE: Table does not include a myriad of organics,VOCs, and SOCs. Refer to USEPA website for these
constituents(numberingnearly 100).
found in both surficial and groundwater supplies. Efforts are still underway to
survey and assess the extent of pesticide contamination in water supplies.
Throughout the period, the USEPA continued to also focus on microbiological
outbreaks and the use of disinfectant techniques. From 1972-1981, there were 335
reported outbreaks of waterborne disease involving 78,000 people. Viruses
contributed to 11waterborne outbreaks involving 5,000 cases. However, while these
levels are historically low and continue to decline, concerns over Giardia LambLia
and Cryptosporidium bacteriological contaminants and viruses persist.
As part of the 1986 amendments, SDWA required the USEPA to specify
procedures compliance with the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) and the use
of the best available technology for those utilities that cannot comply. A priority list
of contaminants that may have adverse impacts on the health of people and are
known to, or are anticipated to, occur in public drinking supplies was also compiled
as a requirement of the 1986 amendments. Possible sources of these contaminants
include industrial and chemical production and use sites; landfills; septic tanks; and
run-off areas. The 1986 SDWA Amendments gave USEPA the authority to allow
states to acquire primacy, the responsibility for SDWA enforcement, upon
compliance with specific federal criteria. In addition, a series of separate regulations
were promulgated that affect utilities under the auspices of SDWA. These are
discussed in the following sections.
Underground Injection Control Program Regulations

SDWA requires the USEPA to protect underground sources of drinking water.
USEPA’s permitting authority to govern underground injection programs results
from rules promulgated in 1981 pursuant to SDWA under the Federal Register 40
CFR 144 and 146. These regulations were aimed at regulating disposal of waste via
underground injection, especially the injection of hazardous materials. Hazardous
wastes are commonly injected as part of oil refinery and industrial processes. Texas
has hundreds of such wells. The regulations focus on design, construction, and
operation of injection wells and monitoring the impact of the injectate.
Surface Water Treatment Rule

If the source water is surface water, the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR),
implemented in 1989, requires utilities to filter and disinfect their water to
inactivate viruses and remove Giardia lamblia cysts. The concept of SWTR is for
the removal of turbidity and suspended solids that interfere with the disinfection
process. The indication of significant amounts of suspended solids require
additional chlorine be used, which may also create conflicts with the Disinfection
By-Products Rule portion of SDWA. Waters with considerable amounts of
suspended solids are generally required to be filtered to reduce chlorine demands
and remove potential pathogens.
Disinfection By-products Rule

The Disinfection By-Products Rule regulates trihalomethanes and other
carcinogenic organic compounds that can be produced from chlorine disinfection.
These regulations apply to all drinking water. The major problem this rule poses is
that to achieve the disinfection desired for raw water, the amount of chlorine by-
products is significant, creating a conflict between violating fecal coliform and
disinfection by-product standards.
Ground Water Rule

If the source water is groundwater, the Ground Water Rule may require that the
water be disinfected on withdrawal unless the water meets the requirements for
“natural disinfection” or if the system qualifies for a variance. This rule was passed in
1992, ostensibly to deal with unchlorinated well systems.
Wellhead Protection
Wellhead or source water protection regulations were created to reduce the threat to
water supplies from contaminants in runoff or as a result of surface activities.
Watershed protection is a requirement of the SDWA Amendments of 1986 (Section
1428). Under Section 1428, each state must prepare a wellhead protection program
and submit it to the USEPA for approval. The protection of public water supply
-- ~ I
I __ -~ I _ -- 1__^ _-
wells from contamination through wellhead protection programs is considered an

important component of comprehensive state groundwater protection programs.
However, many states have promulgated minimal rules, while delegating specific
implementation of the program to regional water management districts and/or
counties.
While the best practice is to first locate wellfields where contamination is
unlikely, one must also protect the wellfield from surficial impacts. This is hard to
do without acquiring large amounts of property around the well. The issue becomes
nearly impossible when the well needs to be located in a developed area. As a result,
states and provinces have implemented regulations to protect underground sources
of water. These actions include
New requirements for installation and testing of underground storage tanks;
Increased regulation for handling, using, and transporting toxic chemicals to
reduce the possibility of spills;
Greatly increased regulation of landfills and other waste disposal sites:
Tighter control of the use ofpesticides and agricultural chemicals;
Samplingand monitoringof identifiedgroundwatercontaminationlocations: and
Action to remove contamination (Bloetscheret al., 2005).
All of these actions will affect land use and local constituents. Delineation of a
wellhead protection area is typically done through the use of numerical computer
groundwater modeling of travel time of the pollutant (solute) transport. These
numerical models, which are very complex, indicate large areas where many land
uses are restricted or prohibited, conflicting with private property rights objectives.
In some states, the conflicts with source water protection exist within private
property rights laws that indicate that if the property is damaged more than ten
percent, the regulating agency must compensate the land owner according to
condemnation or “taking” rules. This could be a significant impediment to the
implementation of wellhead protection programs in developed areas. Wellfield
protection ordinances prohibit the use and/or storage of certain hazardous
materials in zones around wells.
Figure 2-1 is an example of the wellhead protection zones in Broward County,
Florida where some form of wellfield protection has been implemented. For
example, Broward County’s Chapter 27 wellhead protection rule outlines three
regulated areas around wells. Zone 1 is within the 10-day travel period of a
contaminant within the cone of influence. All new nonresidential activities are
prohibited in these zones, and many existing ones have been terminated. However,
hazardous material wellfield licenses are granted for activities that have been
grandfathered into the property rights and are subject to all requirements for
Zone 2 licenses.
-_ I I ~ _I
Source: Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., Boca Raton, Fla.

Figure 2- 1 Broward County wellfield protection zones
Zone 2 encompasses areas between the 10- and 30-day travel times within the
cone of influence. Hazardous materials are allowed in Zone 2 but are subject to 100
percent containment, daily inventory records, records of storage and use, emergency
plans for spills, acquisition of emergency control devices to continue the use,
monitoring of groundwater, reporting of spills, and certain other paperwork
requirements.
Zone 3 permits any use but requires a hazardous materials license above a
certain specified (or threshold) quantity. Zone 3 does not require notification of the
utility whose wellfield might be affected.
The following is an example of why wellhead protection is so important for
water suppliers. Figure 2-2 shows the Fort Lauderdale Peek-Dixie wellfield. At the
time of construction (1926), the city had a population of approximately 8,000 and
had little competition for water. The first production wells were located
approximately four miles inland away from any potential users or conflicts. This
wellfield was located in an isolated area of the county and thought to be an ideal site
for water supply. Figure 2-3 shows the area currently around this wellfield. The
wellfield is located in a neighborhood, and a golf course has been built around the
wells. Figure 2-4 shows a model developed to indicate the drawdowns of the well. Of
concern is the fact that the wells draw water from the south, where there is a

Figure 2-2 Diagram of well locations for Fort Lauderdale's Peele-Dixie Wellfield (the
northern half of the well are the original wells installed in 1926 that are now on the golf
course of Fort Lauderdale Country Club)
Figure 2-3 2003 aerial map of vicinity of Fort Lauderdale‘s Peele-Dixie Wellfield.
Compare to Figure 2-2.
potential contamination site despite the fact that the aquifer is very productive and
the wells have small zones of influence. If constructed today, the industrial site that
may contaminate this wellfield would not be permitted because it is in the 30-day
travel zone (see Figure 2-1).
In conjunction with wellhead protection efforts, water systems should identify
any groundwater sources they are using that may be directly affected by surface
water. The concern is that if there is minimal filtration occurring between the
surface and the water withdrawn from wells, contaminants, especially
microbiological constituents, may contaminate the water source. Water sources that
meet this criterion are considered “groundwater under the direct influence of
surface water.” If an aquifer is determined to be groundwater under the direct
influence of surface water and therefore vulnerable to contamination by disease-
causing organisms found in surface water, the well water must be treated under the
same requirements as a surface water system, meaning mandatory disinfection and
filtration.
WATER QUALITY CONSIDERATIONS

Pathogens
Traditionally, the impurities that have affected the quality of a groundwater supply
have included naturally occurring minerals in the form of dissolved inorganic salts.

Figure 2-4 Drawdown map of Fort Lauderdale's Peele-Dixie wellfield site (potential
contamination source is located south of interchange)
High quantities of minerals mean low quality water. A significant relationship exists
between mineral content and depth of groundwater; the mineral quality 'of
groundwater generally declines with depth. In many sedimentary basins, where the
older and deeper sediments were deposited by oceans, mineral content can change
very abruptly. Poor-quality water can be drawn upward after production begins
(upconing),even if a production well does not penetrate a saline zone. Similarly,

operation of coastal production wells can induce saltwater intrusion into freshwater
aquifers (Bloetscher et al., 2005).
Currently, many forms of contamination exist. Synthetic and naturally
occurring organic compounds, solvents, petroleum products, refined minerals, and
heavy metals must be considered when evaluating the development potential of a
groundwater resource to meet SDWA requirements. Microbiological substances,
especially in membrane treatment applications, are increasingly a concern. In many
cases, construction, maintenance, and operation of facilities to remove these
substances are more costly than finding a new water source.
There are over 100 microorganisms that are human pathogens (Feacham, et al.,
1981), most of which are introduced into the body via ingestion, inhalation, dermal
contact, or entry through wounds or body orifices (Hurst, 1996). Infected persons
excrete large numbers of these pathogens, which often find their way into ground-
and surface water systems via septic tanks or sewer systems. Each organism has a
different dose-response relationship with vastly different threshold doses for
infection. Typically, very high quantities of these organisms are required to cause
bacterial infections, while with certain viruses, one organism may be sufficient to
cause infection. Available studies indicate that bacteria are generally removed during
wastewater treatment and disinfection, but depending on the treatment process
employed, viruses may only experience a SO percent removal (Yates, et al., 1987).
Microorganisms associated with waterborne disease can be broken into three
groups: protozoans, bacteria, and viruses. Each has unique environmental fate and
effect characteristics in groundwater. Protozoans and their cysts are common in
surface waters and are much larger than either viruses or bacteria. The cyst stage is
an encapsulation that protects protozoans from harsh environmental conditions.
Cryptosporidium and Giardia lamblia are the two protozoans most studied because
of their presence in drinking water (generally unfiltered surface water), and their
recent link to waterborne illness outbreaks (Milwaukee, 1993).
Giardia lamblia is believed to be the most common protozoan pathogen
present in surface waters. Its population appears to remain constant throughout the
year in surface water impoundments (Rose and Carnahan, 1992). Neither
Cryptosporidium nor Giardia lamblia appears to be a common problem for
groundwater except in those groundwater systems under the influence of surface
waters, where the surface-groundwater connection allows them to enter the aquifer
and potentially contaminate wells. Agricultural operations, sludge and manure
fields, and recently turned cropland where manure has been placed are potential
sources of this contamination. While these are generally believed to be too large to
move significant distances in groundwater systems, they are serious issues for surface
waters and where groundwaters have direct connection to surface activities.
Disinfection is generally not effective in destroying protozoans.
__~__1
Bacteria are the most widely distributed life form on Earth (Chapelle, 1993).
Chapelle notes that bacteria are extremely important to consider in groundwater
projects as bacteria inhabit virtually every subsurface environment, producing
methane gas and consuming rich organic soils. The key bacteria families responsible
for waterborne diseases include gram-negative bacteria such as: Legionella, the
Pseudomonads, Klebsiella, Escherichia coli, Shigella, Enterobacter, Salmonella, and
Kbrio cholerae. Most of these pathogenic bacteria are approximately 0.4 to 14 vm
long and 0.2 to 12 pm wide, which mean they are much smaller than protozoans,
thus making it easier for them to move in the subsurface.
Bacteria have their own enzymes and most are mobile, allowing them to move
in the subsurface. Bacteria reproduce by splitting into daughter cells, each of which
continues to split, forming additional bacteria and eventually, a biomass. The
respiration ability of bacteria permits them to survive in soils and aquifers. There are
three respiration types:
1. Bacteria that use inorganic chemicals to serve as electron acceptors such as
oxygen, ferric iron, and sulfates.
2. Bacteria that are aerobic-requiring oxygen.
3. Bacteria that are facultative anaerobes-capable of fermentation or using
oxygen as electron receptors (Chapelle, 1993).
The respiration mechanism is important because it affects the ability of bacteria
to colonize wells and the aquifer; it also affects the growth rate of bacteria
indigenous to the aquifer as a result of the constituents introduced by surface
activities.
Bacteria will commonly colonize wells because of the nutrients that are brought
into the borehole by pumping. One example is Pseudomonas aeroginosa, one of the
most common opportunistic bacterial pathogens. It has a colonization rate of 2.6 to
24 percent of the human population (USEPA website) and is the most common
infection in hospitals. Pseudomonas aeroginosa is an extraordinarily versatile
organism that will live in nearly any environment. Pseudomonas aeroginosa requires
no specific vitamins, growth factors, or amino acids; it is a facultative anaerobe.
However, the most important concern about this pathogen is its ability to create a
slime matrix that encapsulates other bacteria and protects them from otherwise
harsh aquifer conditions.
Commonly found bacteria in the subsurface include Gallionella and
Desulfovibrogallionella. These are obligate aerobes that obtain energy by oxidizing
dissolved ferrous iron to form ferric oxyhydroxides-meaning it will be a problem in
wells constructed with steel materials (Chapelle, 1993). Desulfovibro is a sulfur-
reducing bacterium that uses hydrogen or simple organic compounds as an energy
source and sulfates as the terminal electron acceptor, which leads to hydrogen
sulfide gas formation (Chapelle, 1993). Sloughing events may introduce significant
quantities of these bacteria into the treatment plant. Other bacteria may also
colonize the slime matrix (Bloetscher, et al., 1997). Bacteria are generally removed
by filtration and destroyed by disinfection, although the Pseudomonads are resistant
to chlorine.
Viruses are molecular entities that possess little or no enzymatic capabilities, no
energy capability, and no mechanisms for synthesis. They are small-20 to 300 nm
in size. They cannot reproduce; they require a host cell to multiply. All viruses are
composed of nucleic acid and either RNA or DNA (but not both), which allows
them to replicate in other cells, including bacteria-where they are called
bacteriophages (Chapelle, 1993). Pathogenic viruses tend to be smaller than other
viruses and can only be seen with an electron microscope. Most are 27 to 70 nm in
size and are symmetrical in shape. Viruses are obligate parasites, always searching for
the correct host cell that will allow the virus to multiply. Viruses cannot survive or
infect without such a host organism or cell (Chapelle, 1993). The majority of
viruses tend to be resistant to chloroform but may be inactivated to various degrees
during wastewater treatment processes or by chlorine, bromine, ozone, ultraviolet
light, or formaldehyde (Block, 1989).Viruses are conserved at -20°C (Block, 1989).
Human viruses found in natural waters are almost always associated with fecal
material eliminated from the bodies of infected individuals. Therefore, virus
concentrations in wastewater are high, and groundwater that may be influenced by
treated wastewater or septic tanks may be contaminated. Major viruses of concern
are: Hepatitis A, Coxsackie, Echo, Norwalk, rota- and reoviruses (Block, 1989).
While vaccines may be available for some viruses, the wild strains never disappear
from the environment (Bouwer, 1991).
Communities with poor hygiene and a high proportion of children have
provided opportunities for a series of studies attempting to characterize the survival
times of various pathogens. The studies confirm that in groundwater, filtration by
straining is the most effective method for reducing bacterial presence in an aquifer
(Powelson, et al., 1993), while virus depletion is affected by adsorption to soil
particles (assuming there are no fractures or fissures in the rock that might cause
viruses to move significantly further from the source water, making them harder
to find).
Viruses and bacteria have been shown to live 28 to 90 days in groundwater and
move 7 to 30 meters routinely (Asano, 1991; Teusch, et al., 1991). In tests for viral
contamination under sludge land application sites, both Norwalk virus and hepatitis
A viruses have been known to move in the groundwater environment (Gerba and
Bitton, 1984). Vaughn et al. (1983) detected viruses originating in septic tanks that
had passed through 3.6 m of unsaturated soil and 67 m of saturated soil (Powelson,
et al., 1993).Schaub and Sorber (1977) recovered bacteriophage #2 in 47 percent of
samples after 72 hr, after it had flowed through 18 m of unsaturated, silty soils
(Powelson, et al., 1993). Janson, et al. (1989) recorded Echovirus 11 m deep, 14 m
Table 2-2 Factors affecting survival of enteric bacteria in soil
Factor Comments
Moisture content Survival time increases with moisture and high rainfall
Moisture holding capacity Survival time less in sandy soils with lower moisture content
Temperature Survival time longer at lower temperature
PH Survival time shorter in acidic soils than alkaline soils

Sunlight Survival time shorter in the presence of sunlight
Organic matter Increase survival time and rate of regrowth with high amounts of
organic matter
Microflora antagonism Increased survival time in sterile soil
Adapted from Yates, et al., 1987
from a recharge basin for reclaimed water (Powelson, et al., 1993).In a Waldo, Fla.
migrant camp, the survival of indigenous populations of total coliforms and fecal
streptococcus in situ was over 70 days, and a link was shown between the same
septic tanks and the presence of Echoviruses 22/23 (Feacham, et al., 1981).
Table 2-2 outlines the factors that can be expected to remove bacterial particles
successfully over a short distance. Filtration is useful because the bacteria are
relatively large and filter theory indicates that filtration will remove particles
successfully up to 1/2Oth of the pore size (Gerba and Bitton, 1984). Therefore,
smaller pores equal faster removal. Because of this correlation, the physical process
of particle removal in saturated soils is fairly well understood and is probably
adequate for predicting removal, except in fractured rock formations. Virus removal
faces the same problem with rock fractures (Yates, et al., 1987). The shape of the
bacteria also is a factor in removal via filtration (Gerba and Bitton, 1984).
Bacterial survival increases with increased moisture content, increased moisture
retention capability of the rock, warmer temperatures, higher pH, and increased
nutrient capacity (Teutsch, et al., 1991). It is not surprising that bacterial counts are
highest in areas having wet, organic-rich soils (Teutsch, et al., 1991). Sorption can
also play a role in bacterial survival. Clays are fine particles with negative charges
that are very conducive to sorption (Gerba and Bitton, 1984). The repulsing factors
resulting from these negative charges are reduced when sorption occurs. Cations in
solution (Fe+2,C U + and ~ , Zn+2)play a role in removal of bacteria, while anions have
little effect (Gerba and Bitton, 1984). Where soil is absent, the benefit of filtration
is eliminated, but the benefits of rock filtration and reduced surface biomass matter
may provide better indications of survival times (Bouwer, 1991).
While bacterial removal is preferentially accomplished in the soil via filtration,
sorption, or biodegradation, virus removal is most efficiently accomplished via soil
sorption although increases in temperature significantly affect viral survivability as
Table 2-3 Summary of maximum viral travel distances in groundwater
Maximum Movement Maximum Movement

Organism Horizontal (m) Vertical (m)
Coliphage T4 1,600 -
Coliphage 174,T4 900 18
Coliphage f2 189 18.3
A. aerogenes Type 2 phage 680 -
Enterovirus 35 -
Polio vaccine <40 -
Adapted from Gerba and Bitton, 1984
well (Gerba and Bitton, 1984). Inactivation ofviruses also appears to be dependent
on the efficiency of adsorption sites, temperature, and the initial number of viruses
discharged. Other factors include soil conditions, pH, moisture content, aerobic or
anaerobic conditions, particle size, clay content, organic content, cation-exchange
capacity, virus type, and rainfall (Keswick, et al., 1982). Table 2-3 shows the
maximum horizontal and vertical movement of a series of viruses.
True field studies are difficult to conduct because the use of actual viruses
injected into the ground is not viewed favorably, and lab studies often cannot
replicate the actual aquifer condition. What is known is that the survival of viruses
and bacteria in the subsurface is determined in part by their retention on soil
particles, which are generally dependent on temperature and rainfall. Table 2-4
outlines these factors.
Because viruses are sensitive to UV light, they are likely to be active longer in
groundwater than in surface water because UV rays do not penetrate the aquifer
system (Chapelle, 1993). Groundwater is assumed to be isothermal (constant
temperature) (Yates, et al., 1985). However, viruses can survive for years in
refrigerators at 41°C (39.2"F), and it appears for every 10°C increase, the virus die-
off rate doubles (Gerba and Bitton, 1984). Above 30°C (8G"F),temperature is the
controlling factor for virus survival (Gerba and Bitton, 1984). Gerba and Bitton's
(1984) multivariate study concluded that temperature could explain 77.5 percent of
the variation in die-off rates between samples (Yates,et al., 1985).
Example Walkerton, Ontario

This brief example focuses on all the facets explained in this book. The city of
Walkerton, Ontario is a community 4,800 people in a predominately rural area. The
city relies on wells for its water supply. In the spring of 2000, nearly half the residents
became ill with what was identified as E. coli 0157:H7, and seven residents died of
the infection. A formal inquiry of the matter was undertaken by Justice Dennis
- - -
Table 2-4 Factors influencing virus fate in soils
Factor Importance for Survival Importance for Migration

Moisture content Survival time increases with Increases with saturation
moisture and high rainfall
Temperature Survival time longer at lower Unknown

temperature, longer in winter than
summer
PH Stable viruses between p H 3 and 9; Increases with ionic concentration

prolonged survival near pH 7
Sunlight Survival time shorter in the presence Unknown

of sunlight
Organic matter Increased survival and regrowth with Soluble organic matter competes with
high amounts of organic matter viruses for adsorption sites
Microflora Some viruses inactivated readily in Unknown

antagonism presence of certain bacteria-
bacteria can also protect
Hydraulic Unknown Migration increase with hydraulic

conditions loading
Virus type Inactivation varies by species Adsorption on soil sites and capsid
surfaces affect migration
Virus Improves survival Increases migration

aggregation
Soil properties Inactivation based on sorption Decreased migration with higher

sorption availability in soil
Salt content Cations protect certain viruses Increased migration with higher cation
concentrations, but same may increase
sorption
Adapted from Yates, et al., 1987
O’Connor over the ensuing 2 years. Ultimately the investigation focused on a

particular well that appeared to have a surficial connection that allowed
contamination from run-off from a nearby field upon which manure had been spread.
Among many findings of the investigation, Justice O’Connor noted the
following deficiencies in operating the system:
Insufficient wellfield protection (manure field in the cone of influence of
the well);
Failure of the utility to address wellfield protection efforts as required:
Poor operations by the utility staff (the water was insufficiently disinfected);
Misrepresentation of water quality by operators, includingconcealingfecal coli-

forms in the water:
Utility commissioners failure to respond to 1998 report of deficiencies by
the province;
City council did not appropriate adequate funding:
Province’s legislative budget cuts reduced funding for routine lab services and
enforcement despite knowledge of improper utility and private lab practices
and warnings of health consequences; and
Province’s Office of Environment did not adequately inspect treatment facility.
Much can be learned from this example, and most of the points covered in this
handbook address these issues: the need for regulatory response (wellhead
protection efforts and water quality monitoring); staff oversight: planning (or lack
thereof); the need for fiscal responsibility (or failure to fund): and emerging issues
(a new strain ofE. coli). By conforming to the points covered in this book, a utility
should be able to minimize well contamination and ultimately negative public
perceptions.
Endocrine Disruptors
After three decades of focus on conventional priority pollutants, especially heavy
metals, acute toxins, and carcinogens caused by herbicides, pesticides, or high
volume industrial wastes, regulatory focus appears to be reorienting toward
endocrine disruptors. These regulatory concerns are a result of the effects of very
low levels of anthropogenic endocrine disrupting chemicals present in the
environment on aquatic wildlife. The USGS has recently completed a multiyear
project to study the occurrence of these chemicals in rivers (Koplin, et al., 2002).
Their results found endocrine disruptors, especially pharmaceutically active
substances (PASs), in many water bodies. The endocrine disruptors receiving
attention from the USGS and USEPA include polychlorinated biphenyls,
phthalates, alkylphenols, and PASs, such as drugs, estrogens, diagnostic agents,
personal care products, fragrances, and sunscreens.
Wastewater treatment plant secondary effluents contain measurable
concentrations of more than 1,000 man-made compounds, including a variety of
pesticides, herbicides, cleaning solvents, laundry detergents, household products,
surfactants, and PASs and their residues. These are only a portion of which have
been identified (Harries, et al., 1996). Initial screening of endocrine activity of
herbicides, PCBs, and pesticides has identified over 50 compounds as being
endocrine disruptors, most of which appear to have an estrogenic (feminizing)
effect of aquatic vertebrates. Plastic products like phthalates, bisphenol A and
phenylphenol, and PCBs are weak estrogens, as are laundry detergents, household
cleaning products, and surfactants that break down to alkylphenols. All are weak
estrogens found in the 10-9 (pg/L) range.
To date however, research conducted by the USEPA, USGS, various state
agencies, the Water Environment Research Foundation, and the Awwa Research
Foundation remains focused on detection methods and finding chemicals in the
environment, not on treatment. Little research has been focused on removal or
inactivation of the chemicals as a result of the lack of adequate screening methods to
determine removal efficiency of treatment.
The concentration of PASs in the environment is low compared to
conventional priority pollutants-in the pg/L or ng/L range. Until analytical
methods were developed to detect low levels of pharmaceuticals in the environment
and the associated responses were found, PASs were not viewed as a potential
environmental problem. Creating detection methods for all PAS formulations is
unreasonable because many formulations are not available because of patent
limitations and proprietary knowledge. However, it is now understood that
noticeable environmental responses can be elicited from aquatic organisms in the
1 ng/L ( range, which raises questions about the cumulative effects of the
hundreds of PASSthat may be present in wastewater (Daughton and Ternes, 1999).
It is evident that the regulation of PASs will be a major focus of regulatory
limitations and research in the near future.
Municipal wastewater effluent containing PASs may constitute a major
pollution source in the aquatic environment. Unused prescriptions are also often
disposed of through the sewage system. It is also not uncommon for 40 percent of a
drug dosage to be excreted to the sewage system after normal therapeutic use. The
actions of these chemicals may be compounding (Harries, et al., 1996), because
PASs are by nature biologically active compounds that are used and excreted in large
quantities by modern society. Naproxen, estrogens, clofibric acid, and diclofenic
were frequently detected downstream of treated effluent discharge in surface waters
at the pg/L level in Europe (Stumpf, et al., 1999).
While wastewater facilities are major contributors to water contamination, they
are not the only ones and perhaps not even the major one. Agricultural enterprises
practicing animal husbandry (chicken, turkey, hog, cattle, and dairy farms) have
made significant contributions. Over 70 percent of antibiotics used in the United
States are used on chicken farms. Estrogens are used to improve growth rates and
fecundity of animals.
Table 2-5 outlines the major PAS families and observed impacts to organisms.
These PASs are discharged to the environment, where they remain available to other
organisms. Aquatic organisms are particularly at risk, and have been studied the
most. The impact of discharge into a water body upstream of a source for drinking
water supply has not been studied, nor has the recharge area for groundwater that is
a groundwater supply. The long-term effects on organisms in the receiving water,
Table 2-5 Summary of PAS occurrence and activity levels
Substance Use Quantity Impacts

Estrogenic compounds Contraceptive 1-5 pg/L Feminization
Steroids Muscle development, > 1 pgIL Masculinization
various
Antibiotics Reduce bacterial Varies Resistant pathogens
infection
Blood lipid regulators Cholesterol control to 0.165 pglL Unknown
Nonlipid analgesics Anti-inflammatory 0.5-1 pg/L Unknown
Beta blockers 0.2 pg/L Stimulate reproduction
Antidepressants Increase serotonin, Varies Stimulate reproduction
control behavior
(Prozac, Ritalin)
Anti-epileptics Epilepsy control to 6.3 pg/L Unknown
Anti-neoplastics Chemotherapy 0.017 pg/L Toxicity, birth defects
Impotence drugs Erectile dysfunction, Unknown Unknown
blood stimulant
Retinoids Skin diseases, Unknown Birth deformaties
anti-aging, cancer
Contrast media chemicals X-rays, CAT scans, 15 pg/L None
diagnostics
Fragrances and musks Perfumes, colognes to 0.4 pg/L Toxicity
Preservatives Antimicrobial Unknown Feminization
Disinfectants Bactericides 0.05-0.15 pg/L
Herbal remedies Various Varies Various
Sunscreens Protect skin from Unknown Unknown
U V light
Source: Bloetscher and Fergen, 2001
including on humans, is a concern. Two PAS groups have received the most
scrutiny-steroids and antibiotics-as they have existed in the environment the
longest and have the most obvious effects.
The PAS family that has attracted the most attention from a toxicological
perspective is the estrogen family. Both natural estrogens and synthetic compounds
that mimic estrogens reach the environment. Natural estrogenic compounds, such as
those used in estrogen replacement therapy, milk production enhancement,
prescribed growth enhancement in animals, athletic performance enhancement, and
oral contraceptives were among the first PASS detected. Unlike plastics and
pesticides, what little data exists indicates that these drugs are strongly estrogenic at
concentrations of (ng/L) and have been shown to alter local biota. The
synthetic steroids most commonly found in wastewater discharges are 17’gestadiol

(natural estrogen) and 17a-ethynylestradiol (the “pill”).
USE OF RISK IN REGULATORY ENVIRONMENTS

What quantities of a contaminant is permissable in drinking water? The answer is
unclear, which is why there are risk factors and safety factors built into the current
regulatory standards. Risk and risk assessments are buzzwords used in Washington,
D.C. and many state regulatory agencies. The use of these terms and their placement
into laws and regulations does not mean that anyone necessarily understands how to
conduct a risk assessment; however, it does create a tool for the regulatory
community to use in an attempt to quantify the effects of a given activity. The most
important aspect of risk is that there are no zero-risk alternatives. Only comparative
risks can truly be calculated-the preference of one alternative over others and the
choice by utilities to strive to minimize those risks that may exist.
Because there are no zero-risk alternatives, and because there are finite limits to
the amount of resources that can be used to either define risk or maximize risk
reduction, the concept of acceptable risk has been developed. According to USEPA,
an acceptable risk is the 1:1 million lifetime chance that an impact will occur to the
general public as a result of an activity. Acute responses (immediate impacts), for
instance microbial water quality regulations, may be written according to the
probability that less than 1 in 10,000 will contract a disease from drinkingwater in a
given year. Carcinogens tend to use the 1:I million lifetime (chronic) risks more
frequently than acute exposures, because the effects may not manifest themselves for
many years. Regulations are typically written according to these acceptable risks.
In environmental impact assessments, risk-cost assumptions may be used.
Figure 2-5 shows an example of such an analysis whereby the acceptable risk is
defined, and the associated cost of compliance is calculated. As risk decreases, the
cost rises. To some, much of the focus is whether the acceptable risk or the cost
should be the limiting factor in determining acceptable risk. Obviously, if cost is
used as the limit, the risk would likely be much higher. Political conflicts over
resources are one of four problems encountered when determining acceptable risk.
Limited data and conflicting data create confusion and uncertainty in the risk
assessment process.
Risk assessments generally include two parts: the scientific investigation and
the risk management portion. Scientific assessment methods include measuring the
effects of exposure or the activity to the ecosystem or humans, determining the level
at which the impacts are negligible, and creating methods to replicate and measure
the impacts. Management of the risk includes taking the steps necessary to limit
exposure. The latter is for local officials and includes the proper training of
employees, maintaining appropriate records of operations, and providing those
facilities and tools needed to minimize risks to the community. When making local
Log of Risk Value
Figure 2-5 Risk-cost analysis
decisions on expenditures, it should be noted that neither the preface to the Clean
Water Act nor the 1996 amendments to the SDWA mention cost as a part of the
laws, only protection of the public health and the ecosystem.
PERMITS
Permits are required for any well drilling operation. Exploratory drilling permits
must be secured and fees paid, generally at the state or county level. Obtaining
permits is usually the responsibility of the well driller or the engineer or
hydrogeologist in charge of the project for the owner. A hydrogeologist normally
supervises the work in the field, including the procurement of well construction
materials, well logging, conducting or overseeing geophysical logging, interpreting
logs, well designing, and certifying as-built well construction drawings.
After the exploratory work is completed, the production wells are drilled. To do
so, permits must be filed, fees must be paid, and monitoring must be conducted.
Federal, state, and local laws require information to be filed on a periodic basis
throughout the well construction process. Documentation of initial investigations,
pilot testing, and water supply development must be detailed and complete.
Multiple copies of reports pertaining to groundwater development may be required
by different agencies for differing purposes. A permit is generally required for well
completion reports, results of logging during construction, and field testing reports.
In addition to drilling and well completion reports, water quality reports
should be developed. More extensive testing of groundwater for contaminants that
may impact future implementation of regulatory requirements is recommended.
Information must also be filed with various government agencies involved in
groundwater monitoring of facilities that produce, handle, store, treat, or dispose of
chemicals determined to be hazardous to health or the environment. This
information, when combined with information provided by the groundwater well
developer, can increase understanding of the regional groundwater system under
study and its potential and reliability as a water supply.
Regulatory agencies are concerned about well construction and closure of a
well because of the possibility of cross contamination between shallow zones and
deeper high-quality aquifers. Reports that document field work can be very valuable
in later phases of groundwater development or protection. Proper land survey
location, global positioning system locations and description of the wells, and
complete as-built drawings of construction are desirable.
Permits, reports, and drawings should be planned as a part of the project. There
is a cost to provide this service on the part of engineers and hydrogeologists. Where
there is the potential for conflicts over water use, it may be desirable to consult an
attorney knowledgeable in aspects of the law involving groundwater and permit
procedures. Reports from the drilling process may be of great value in litigation and,
therefore, should be prepared with care and be subjected to appropriate legal,
technical, and managerial review.
REFERENCES
Arcand-Hoy, L.D., and Benson, W.H. 1998. Fish Reproduction: An Ecologically Relevant
Indicator of Endocrine Disruption. Environmental Toxicology und Chemistry,
17(1):49-57.
Asano, T. 1991. Planning and Implementation of Water Reuse Projects. Water Science and
Technology,24(9):1- 10.
Block,J.C. 1989. E s e s in WaterSupplies-Detection and Identification. New York: VCH Press.
Bloetscher, F., and Fergen, R.E. 2001. Are Pharmaceutically Active Substances (PASS)the
Next Major Water Pollution Issue?In Proc. of the Florida Section American Water Works
Association Annual Conference, Orlando, Fla.
Bloetscher, F., Muniz, A., and Witt, G.M. 2005. GroundwaterInjection:Modeling, Risks and
Regulations.New York: McGraw-Hill.
Bloetscher, F., Witt, G.M., and Dodd, A.E. 1997. Bacterial Issues in Raw Water Treatment.
In Proc. of the Florida WaterResource Conference, Orlando,FLa.
Bouwer, H. 1991. The Role of Groundwater Recharge in the Treatment and Storage of
Wastewater for Reuse. WaterScience and Ethnology, 24(9):259-302.
Chapelle, F.H. 1993. GroundwaterMicrobiology and Geochemistry.New York: John Wiley

& Sons.
Daughton, C.G., and Ternes, T.A. 1999. Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products in the
Environment: Agents of Subtle Change?EnvironmentalHealthPerspectives, 107(Suppl.6):
907-938.
Depledge, M.H., and Billinghurst, 2.1999. Ecological Significance of Endocrine Disruption
in Marine Invertebrates. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 39( 1-12):32-38.
Feachem, R., Garelick, H., and Slade, J. 1981. Enteroviruses in the Environment. Tropical
Diseases Bulletin, 28(3): 185-230.
Fogel, B.S., Schiffer, R.B., and Rao, S.M. 1996. Comprehensive Neuropsychiatry.
Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins.
Gerba, C.P., and Bitton, G. 1984. Groundwater Pollution and Microbiology. New York: John
Wiley & Sons.
Harries, J.E., Sheahan, D.A., Jobling, S., Matthiessen, P., Neall, P., Routeledge, E.J., Rycroft,
R., Sumpter, JJ,,and Tylor, T. 1996. A Survey of Estrogenic Activity in United
Kingdom Inland Waters. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry,15(11):1993-2002.
Hirsch, R., Ternes, T.A., Haberer, K., and Kratz, K-L. 1999. Occurrence of Antibiotics in the
Aquatic Environment. Science ofthe TotalEnvironment,225( 1-2):109-118.
Huang, C-H., and Sedlak, D.L. 2000. Analysis of Estrogenic Hormones in Municipal
Wastewater Effluent and Surface Water Using ELISA and GYMS. Unpublished paper
provided by Sedlak.
Hurst, C.J., ed. 1996. Modeling Disease Transmission and its Prevention by Disinfection.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Janson, J., Edmonds, L.W., Speight, B. and Bucens, M.R. 1989. Movement of Viruses After
Artificial Recharge. WaterResources, 23:293-299.
Keswick, B., Gerba, C.P., Secor,S.I., and Cech, I. 1982. Survival ofEnteric Viruses and Indicator
Bacteria in Ground Water.Joul: EnvironmentalScience Health,A17(6):903-912.
Koplin, D.W., Furlong, E.T., Meyer, M.T., Thurman, E.M., Zaugg, S.D., Barber, L.B., and
Buxton, H.T. 2002. Pharmaceuticals, Hormones and Other Organic Wastewater
Contaminants in U.S. Streams 1999-2000: A National Reconnaissance.Environmental
Science and Technology, 36(6): 1202- 1211.
McQuillan, D., Mullany, J., and Parker, J. 2000. Drug Residues in Ambient Water: Initial
Surveillance in New Mexico, USA. New Mexico Department of Health. Available:
<http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/gwb/drugs.htmb. [cited June 20011
Powelson, D.K., Gerba, C.P., and Yahya, M. 1993. Virus Transport and Removal in
Wastewater During Aquifer Recharge. Water Resources, 27(4):583-590.
Rose, J.B., and Carnahan, R.P, 1992. Pathogen Removal by Full Scale Wastewater Treatment.
Tampa, Fla.: University of South Florida.
Schaub, S.A., and Sorber, C.A. 1977. Virus and Bacteria Removal from Wastewater by Rapid
Infiltration Through Soil. Applied and EnvironmentalMicrobiology,33(3):609-619.
Stumpf, M., Ternes, T.A., Wilken, R-D., Rodrigues, S.V., and Baumann, W. 1999. Polar
Drug Residues in Sewage and Natural Waters in the State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Science of the Total Environment, 225( 1-2) :135- 141.
Ternes, T.A. 2000. Pharmaceuticals and Metabolites as Contaminants of the Aquatic

Environment, An Overview. In Proc. of the San Francisco National Meeting. 219th
American Chemical Society National Meeting, San Francisco, March 26-30
Columbus, Ohio: American Chemical Society.
Timm, G.E., Maciorowski, A.F., and Fenner-Crisp, P.A. 2000. Status of Implementation of
the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program Developed by the US Environmental
Protection Agency. In Proc. of the San Francisco National Meeting. 219th American
Chemical Society National Meeting, San Francisco, March 26-30 Columbus, Ohio:
American Chemical Society.
Teutsch, G., Herbold-Paschke, K., Tougianidou, P., Hahn, T., and Botzenhart, K. 1991.
Transport of Microorganisms in the Underground-Processes, Experiments and
Simulation Models. Water Science and Technology, 24(2):309-3 15.
USGS (US Geological Survey). 2000. Endocrine Disruptors in Fish Focus of New USGS
Studies. Available: <http://biology.usgs.gov/pr/newrelease/1996/ 11-21.html>. [cited
June 200 1]
USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency). 2001. Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care
Products <http://www.epa.gov/safewater/mcl/html>.[cited June 20011
Vaughn, J.M., Landry, E.F., and Thomas, M.Z. 1983. The Lateral Movement of Indigenous
Enteroviruses in a Sandy Sole-source Aquifer. Microbial Health Considerations of Soil
Disposal of Domestic Wastewaters. USEPA Publ. No. EPA-600.9-83-017, Washington,
D.C.: USEPA
Yates, M.V., Gerba, C.P., and Kelley, L.M. 1985. Virus Resistance in Groundwater. Applied
and EnvironmentalMicrobiology, 49 (4):778-78 1.
Yates, M.V., Yates, S.R., Wagner, J.M., and Gerba, C.P. 1987. Modeling Virus Survival and
Transport in the Subsurface.Jour. ContaminantHydrology, 1:329-345.
Drilling Methods
Wells can be viewed as large holes in the ground, deeper than they are wide, and the
water supplied by them is relied on by water customers, agriculture, and other
interests. In addition to providing available water supply reliably, wells are designed
to last for 50 years or more, and the steps initially taken to design and drill the well
play a large role in the longevity of a well. Proper well construction should be based
on a thorough engineering study and designed to best accommodate existing
conditions and requirements.
There are many drilling and well construction methods that have been
developed depending on the purpose for which the well is to be constructed. Some
purposes for wells include
Water production (the focus of this handbook),
Oil and gas wells,
Geothermal wells,
Injection/disposal wells,
Aquifer storage and recovery wells, and
Environmental remediation and monitoringwells.
Environmental remediation wells are the shallowest of this group, often less than
20 feet deep, but oil and gas wells may be tens of thousands of feet deep. Water
supply wells fall somewhere in between.
Just as there are many purposes for wells, there are even more options for their
construction, including the following:
Hand dug Large diameter auger
Cable tool 0 Screened stem auger
Hollow stem auger Solid flight auger
Hydraulic rotary Bucket-type drilling

Reverse-air circulation Direct-air circulation
Casing hammer air rotary Reverse circulation
Rotary down-the-holehammer Percussion hammer
Dual-tube rotary Horizontal/directional/angle
Directpush Sonic
Mudrotary Jetting and driving
Reverse circulation (mud)
Many of these drilling methods are used for construction of water supply wells.
Selection of the proper drilling method depends on many variables including
Well diameter and depth,
Capacity of drilling rig,
Height of drilling mast, and
Types of formations.
TYPES OF WELLS AND THEIR CONSTRUCTION (from A W A , 2003)

A variety of wells have been used at times for water supply purposes, albeit most are
used only for small installations and under certain conditions. These include dug,
bored, driven, or drilled wells.
Dug Wells
Hand digging wells is the oldest method of water well construction. As is to be
expected, hand digging a water well is extremely labor intensive, dangerous, and
time consuming. A dug well is frequently excavated using a pick and shovel, and a
hoist with a bucket. They are large in diameter, but relatively shallow (i.e., less than
30 ft in depth). Most dug wells are circular because this shape adds strength and is
usually easier to dig. Such wells can furnish relatively large supplies of water from
shallow sources. Depending on the formation, the well may be able to stand without
reinforcement, but more commonly, pilings, concrete, or bricks are used to create
support walls.
Once the top of the water table is encountered, it is very difficult to advance the
depth of the well into the aquifer. The limited production horizon severely limits
the quantity of groundwater available for extraction. The narrow production zone
also leaves the well vulnerable to changing water level elevations. During times of
little precipitation or drought the water table will become lower and lower.
Eventually the tap of the water table will be located below the bottom of the open
Drilling Methods 39
Well-Point Pump
Water Table Level
Well Points
‘‘9
Figure 3-1 Operation of well points
hole, resulting in a dry well. The negative impacts of a well “gone dry” on a local
community are obvious.
Hand dug wells are rarely adequately protected from contamination. Impacts to
the well from surface run off, airborne material, animals, insects, and objects falling
into or finding entrance into the well are common. Concrete curbs are commonly
constructed around the edges because dug wells are easily polluted by surface water.
Although hand dug wells are still constructed in many parts of the world, they are
not commonly used as a source of groundwater for a modern water supply system in
developed countries and are rarely used in the United States.
Driven Wells
A driven well consists of a pointed steel screen, called a drive or wellpoint, and
lengths ofpipe attached to the top of the well point (see Figure 3-1). Well points are
driven into the formation with a weight, derrick, and pulley system. The driver
weighs between 30 to 75 lb and well points can be mechanically driven as deep as 50 ft.
If the diameters are small, they can occasionallybe installed by a hand driven system.
Figure 3-2 presents instruction as provided by the C.L. North Company of El Paso
Texas for the installation of driven wells. When constructing a driven well, an outer
casing is first installed by pounding the pointed screen into the formation. The steel
tip breaks through pebbles and thin layers of material and opens a passageway for
the screen. For small municipal water supplies, the driven well may be used in thin
deposits of sand and gravel found at shallow depths. The outer casing protects the
inner casing to which the pump is attached.
Figure 3-2 Installation of driven well points
In sand and gravel formations, the outer casing should extend to just above the
drive point. The outer casing can be driven with a sledgehammer, or for larger pipes,
a tripod and pulley can be used. The tripod and pulley set-up raises and lowers a
heavy block onto a drive cap placed on top of the outer well point casing. Extra
heavy pipe should be used to withstand the load. If the ground is clay, the outside
casing should be set in a hole prepared by an auger prior to inserting the well point.
After the outer casing is set, the annular space between the bore hole and the outside
of the casing should be sealed with cement grout.
Driven wells range from 1 to 4 in. in diameter and rarely are driven more than
30 ft. The screen is an integral part of the portion driven into the ground, therefore,
only soft materials are easily penetrated. As a result, the production rate of driven
wells is limited. Instead of a single well, a battery of well points, with the wells
located a reasonable distance apart and connected by a common header to the
pump, can develop sufficient water to supply a small community. However, driven
wells are typically used to dewater construction sites.
California
The California, or stovepipe, method of well construction was developed in
California for water wells drilled in unconsolidated alluvial materials. Large wells,
Drilling Methods 41
16 to 20 in. (400 to 500 mm) in diameter and up to 300 ft (90 m) in depth, are
constructed using this method. The California drilling method uses the same
general principles used for cable tool rigs. Short lengths of sheet metal, either riveted
or welded together, are used for casing. After the casing is in place, it is perforated
using a Mills knife or similar device that tears the metal. The openings must not be
too large or the area perforated too much.
Jefting
Jetting is used to construct wells when water is found in sand at shallow depths,
although the method is applicable for deeper wells. Jetting equipment consists of a
drill pipe, or jetting pipe, that is equipped with a cutting bit on the bottom end.
Water is pumped into the well through the drill pipe and out of the drill bit against
the bottom of the drill hole. The casing usually is sunk as drilling proceeds. Jetted
wells are usually small in diameter, therefore deeper well construction becomes more
difficult to manage and control. To solve this problem, several lengths of casing with
different diameters may be telescoped one inside the other to reach the full depth.
Certain conditions make this method of well construction difficult. Rock and
boulders are barriers that cannot be overcome by water pressure, regardless of how
high the pressure might be. Formations of clay and hardpan become soft and sticky.
BUCKET-TYPE DRILLING
Although the previously described methods are used in many areas, they are rarely
used to supply treatment facilities serving local communities. The following methods
are more commonly used to establish well fields capable of meeting local demands.
Bucket-type drilling uses a rotating cylindrical bucket. Cutting blades mounted
on the bottom of the bucket cut the sediments, and the pieces of sediment are
retained in the bucket. When the bucket is full, it is withdrawn from the borehole,
swung to the side, and the hinged bottom is opened releasing the cuttings. Bucket-
type drilling can be used to drill wells from 10 to 60 in. in diameter and to a
maximum depth of about 100 ft.
Sediment samples recovered during borehole advancement are used to identify
the penetrated formations. Bucket drilling requires little or no fluid to be added to
the borehole during drilling, allowing for the recovery of water samples for analysis.
Bucket-type rigs are relatively simple in design and are capable of drilling quickly.
Figure 3-3 shows an example of a bucket-type drilling rig. Often, casing is advanced
into the borehole as part of the drilling activity. An advantage of this method is the
reduced possibility of cross contamination of fluids during drilling.
Bucket-type drilling produces a large quantity of cuttings and, once the
saturated zone has been penetrated, large volumes of fluids. Generally limited to
poorly lithified cohesive sediments, bucket drilling may be continued into sand and
sometimes gravel if the casing is advanced into the borehole during drilling, or if the
1. Power Unit: provides the power

to turn the table and kelly
2. Kelly: the rod running through the

table that tools are attached to
3. Table: connected to power unit,

turns kelly
4. Tool: bits, buckets, etc. that go

down the hole
5. Carrier (Crane): carrier or

main component
Source: http://images.google.com and www.fhwa.dot.gov

Figure 3-3 Bucket-type drilling rig and close-up of bucket
borehole is kept full of water. Once even moderately lithified sediments are
encountered, they will usually prove to be too resistant for bucket-type rigs to
penetrate.
The use of bucket-type drilling is dependent on the sediment types anticipated
to be encountered. Good results can be realized on generally unlithified cohesive
formations, such as glacial tills. Formations consisting of large boulders, competent
shale, chalk, or sandstone are extremely difficult if not impossible to penetrate using
this method, and it is impossible to penetrate well-lithified sediments, igneous, and
metamorphic rocks.
CABLE-TOOL METHOD
Cable-tool methods are also called percussion, spudder, and solid tool methods. The
cable-tool method was used as early as 300 BC to drill salt wells in China to depths as
great as 3,000 ft. Cable-tool drilling methods are commonly used today for shallow
wells but can be used for wells as deep as 1,000 ft. Cable-tool methods are
straightforward. The technical expertise required is less than for some other
methods although the details of construction and operation of the drilling machines
Drilling Methods 43
Sourre: www.esd.lbl.gov
Figure 3-4 Cable-tool drilling
vary widely. This drilling method is older than most other methods and is well
understood.
All cable-tool rigs create the borehole using the percussion and cutting action of
a drill bit. Figure 3-4 shows a cable-tool drilling rig. Cable-tool drilling is
accomplished by alternately raising and dropping a heavy drill bit (Figure 3-5)
suspended at the end of a cable, thereby pulverizing the formation below. As shown
in Figure 3-4, a casing is often used to keep the hole open when drilling in loose
material. The drill bit, a club-like, chisel-edged tool, breaks the formation into small
fragments. The bit turns with each blow. The bit is then returned to the bottom of
the borehole and the process is repeated until the desired depth is achieved. Cable-
roo1 wells can be from 4 to 18 in. in diameter. The length of the drill cable is
adjusted so that the bit will strike with the right amount of weight and stroke. The
cable is monitored to determine how well the tools are operating. The length of
stroke and rapidity of blows are continuously adjusted to maximize the rate of
penetration.
After several feet (one to two meters) of borehole are drilled, the bit and drill
string are pulled from the hole and swung aside. A bailer is used to remove the slurry.
The bailer consists of a 10- to 25-ft (3- to 8-m) long section of tubing with a check
valve in the bottom (see Figure 3-6). The bailer is smaller in diameter than the drill
hole so that it can move up and down freely ( A W A , 2003). Once the borehole has
Column Pipe (outlet)
Direction of Stroke
Check Valve-Valve Open With Water

Force Against It From Bottom (down stiroke)
t
Water Force
Source: http://mo.water.usgs.gov
Figure 3-5 Cable-tool bit Figure 3-6 Bailer
been cleared of cuttings the bit is returned to the bottom of the borehole, and the
process is repeated until the desired depth is achieved.
The borehole must be straight and vertical, or plumb, for ease of operation and
for installation of casings, pumps, screens, and column pipes. In extreme cases,
lowering a pump into a well or pulling i t out may become impossible if the well is
not plumb. The first indication that the hole is not plumb is that the drilling tools
begin to stick. When this happens, drilling should stop and the hole realigned.
Although used less frequently, cable-tool rigs have certain advantages. The
ruggedness and simplicity of the drill rigs makes them easy to move across rough
terrain. Ease of repair also makes them ideal for isolated areas without access to
repair parts or power. Because little or no outside drilling fluids are introduced to
the well during drilling, representative water and formation samples can readily be
recovered as drilling progresses. Water is usually not necessary as drilling mud is not
used during operations, minimizing plugging of the formation and simplifying
development of the well. The use of a bailer to remove the cuttings from the well
aids in keeping the native formations clean of sediments produced during drilling.
Each time the bailer is removed from the borehole it is filled with cuttings and
formation fluids. Removal of these solids and fluids allows the formation fluids to
flow from the formation into the borehole, keeping the borehole wall clean. Most
types of formations can be drilled unless they are either very hard or very soft (clays).
Limited damage to the formation adjacent to the borehole occurs as the borehole
force is downward. In most cases, a cable-tool rig is light and can traverse rough
country easily.
Cable-tool drilling methods are slow, providing poor productivity in hard
formations or deep wells. The limitation of diameter may be a concern for high
productivity needs. The casing must often be advanced with the drill bit to maintain
Drilling Methods 45
the competency of the borehole and to prevent formation fluids and previously
drilled sediments from migrating within the hole. The action of the bit can damage
the borehole wall, resulting in a lower well efficiency than desired.
Caisson Well Construction

Caissons are used in shallow, very loose and permeable alluvial formations because
of the potential to lose large quantities of drilling fluid or mud into the loose
formation. A hole is made by sinking a very large (typically concrete) diameter
casing to about 15 ft (4.6 m). The next casing is installed in a concentric manner,
one size smaller in diameter than the previous, using the same bailing method
(Figure 3-6) until it is extended another 15 ft below the first casing. This process is
continued until the bottom of the desired formation or the desired depth is reached.
The last casing installed should be of the minimum diameter of the bore hole
designed or specified. The concept of ever smaller casings inside and below the prior
casing is termed telescoping. Drilling may only be involved in the later stages of
caisson construction as well as radial wells, an extension to caisson construction.
HOLLOW STEM AUGER

Several types of augers are used in the drilling industry including large diameter
augers, solid flight augers, screened stem augers, and hollow stem augers. Of these
various auger methods, the hollow stem auger is most commonly used in the
construction of water production wells.
Hollow stem augers use continuous flight augers generally up to 14 in. in
diameter that use mechanical methods to remove drilled materials from the
borehole. Axial openings in the center of the auger, up to 10.25 in. in diameter,
allow access to the bottom of the hole without removing the augers. The augers also
act as a temporary casing during well construction allowing for recovery of soil and
water samples as well as aiding in construction of the well. This well drilling method
is generally used for small diameter, shallow wells up to 150 ft (45 m) deep.
Hollow stem auger methods of drilling are commonly used for short-term wells,
such as for construction dewatering or for recovery wells for cleaning up
groundwater contamination. Each section, or flight, of augers is usually 5 ft in
length. As shown in Figure 3-7, a cutting bit is attached to the first flight. Either a
plug, or more often a pilot bit, is inserted through the hollow stem of the augers.
The pilot bit, held in place by drill rods, helps cut the formation and also prevents
cuttings from entering the bottom of the auger.
Once the desired depth is reached, the drill rods and pilot bit can be removed
from inside the augers, allowing split spoons or thin walled samplers to be used for
sample recovery as shown in Figure 3-8. Water samples may also be recovered from
inside the augers using a sampling device such as a Hydro-punch. The pilot bit is
placed back inside the auger and drilling can resume. Once the desired total depth
Next Page
Reprinted from Ground WaterMonitoring & Review with permission of the National Ground Water Association.
Copyright 1987.
Figure 3-7 Hollow stem auger
has been achieved and the pilot bit has been removed, the well screen and riser can
be easily lowered down through the center of the augers. The well-screen gravel pack
is placed as the augers are pulled, not rotated, out of the borehole.
Advantages of the hollow stem auger drilling method include the following:
Drilling fluids are not introduced.
The borehole is drilled and the casing can be placed simultaneously.
Representative samples of aquifer fluids and formation material are easily
collected in uncontaminated condition.
0 The'drilling technique is fast.
However, hollow stem drilling methods are limited to softer formations, such as
loose sand, gravel, or unconsolidated formations. An auger can be used only where
formations, though relatively soft, will permit an open hole to be bored to depths
ranging from 25 to 60 ft (8 to 18 m) without caving. The most suitable formations
for bored wells are glacial till and alluvial valley deposits. The depth and diameter
are limited as well. Wet formations, such as running sands, will make drilling nearly
Previous Page
Drilling Methods 47
ra
Pilot P
Source: Scalf, et al., 1980

Figure 3-8 Split spoon sampling devices
impossible and will contaminate water quality samples and formation samples.
Generally speaking, this type of well is not used for municipal supplies.
HYDRAULIC ROTARY DRILLING

Rotary drill rigs have a long history. They were used by the Egyptians for cutting
stone for the pyramids (Lehr, et al., 1988) and in the 19th century for well drilling.
Hydraulic rotary drilling methods are used for larger production wells and where
construction methods must proceed faster. Extensive use of hydraulic rotary drilling
for oil and gas exploration has led to many advances, some ofwhich are applicable to
water well drilling. However, the method requires more technical equipment and
expertise than cable-tool and hollow stem auger methods. Hydraulic rotary
methods, as the name suggests, involves the introduction of fluids to improve
drilling efficiency. Water and drilling mud are typically used, but in some cases air or
foam are used as the drilling fluid. When the fluid used is drilling mud, the method
is usually referred to as mud rotary.
The drill string usually consists of a bit, drill collars, stabilizers, and drill pipe.
Rotation is transmitted from the surface along the drill string to the bit. As shown in
Figures 3-9 and 3-10, as the bit is rotated, drilling fluid is pumped down through the
Rig
J
Drill Pipe
Mud Flow
*
Figure 3-9 Mud rotary circulation
drill string and out of the bit. The cuttings are returned to the surface by the drilling
fluid as it rises in the annular space between the drill string and the drilled
formation. The drilling fluid is cleaned and recirculated through the drill string.
Bit selection depends on the anticipated formations to be encountered. Figure
3-1 I shows a cutaway view of a typical tricone mill-tooth rotary drill bit. The bit size
is roughly the diameter of the borehole drilled. Different types of bits are used
depending on rock hardness and composition. Figure 3-12 shows a chart for bit
selection. Figures 3-13 to 3-15 show various bits and the type of rock for their
appropriate use. Drag bits have no moving parts: the blades (see Figure 3-13) are
designed to cut into soft formations, such as clay and poorly consolidated sands.
Mill tooth tricone bits (Figure 3-14) are used for moderately hard formations, while
tricone bits with carbide button inserts are used for harder formations, such as well-
cemented sandstone, micritic limestones, and dolomites. For very large diameter
drilling applications flat bottom bits are used (Figure 3-15). These are large drill bits
with many cutting heads.
Drill collars are heavy walled pipe machined from solid bars intended to keep
the borehole straight and plumb by placing weight directly on top of the bit (see
Figure 3-16). Drill collars allow weight to be placed directly downward to keep
pressure on the bit and force it into the rock. The combination of directing weight
Drilling Methods 49
Source: Adapted with permission of the Energy

Institute, UK Source: www.torquato.com
Figure 3- 10 Mud rotary method with Figure 3-1 1 Typical rotary drill bit and drill
cuttings carried to surface collar
Well Drilling Selection Guide

TvDe of Information
Rotary Drill
Air or Foam Rotary

Carbide
Tooth Bits-
L S t e e l Tooth Bits t
Source: www.globalsecurity.org
Figure 3-12 Chart for bit selection
Source: wwwsorquato.com
Figure 3-1 3 Drag bits for unconsolidated and soft sediments
Source:John Largey
Figure 3-14 Tricone bits for moderately hard to hard formations (rear, mill tooth;
front, button)
downward and preventing bit wandering improves the efficiency of the bit action in
crushing the rock. Stabilizers (Figure 3-17) are positioned at various locations
within the lower part of the drill string. They are used to maintain borehole
geometry by keeping the bit and drill collars straight and plumb.
The drill pipe is normally in 20 or 30 ft sections referred to asjoints of pipe (see
Figure 3-18). It is usually made of manganese-carbon steel or a molybdenum alloy
steel. Drill pipe used for water well drilling is generally is 2.375 to 4.500 in. in
diameter. Proper size is important to minimize friction loss and therefore reduce
power required to rotate the drill string. The drill pipes are connected together with
threaded tool joints, which should be cleaned and lubricated before each connection
to prevent the threads from seizing.
Drilling Methods 51
Figure 3-15 Flat bottom bit for large diameter drilling applications
Figure 3- 16 Drill pipe and drill collars
As previously mentioned, the drill string is hollow to allow fluid to be pumped

to the bit at the base of the borehole. The fluid migrates up the annulus carrying the
cuttings to the surface. When drilling in clay soil or mud, fluid of sufficient viscosity
is required to lift cuttings to the surface. For soft formations, less dense fluids can be
used, but in many cases, drilling mud is used. In addition to removing the cuttings
from the borehole, drilling mud serves to cool and lubricate the bit and drill string,
build a filter cake on the borehole, prevent fluid loss into upper formations, and
prevent borehole collapse. Figure 3-19 shows a typical basic mud circulation system
that has been used for quite some time. It must be noted that ditches, settling pits,
Figure 3-17 Three stabilizers and a 42-in. drill bit (left)
Source:John Largey
Figure 3-18 Picking up drill pipe
Drilling Methods 53
- -
x
I _ "
Mud Suction Hos
Drill Rod Overflow Pipe Settling Basin Overflow Mud Pit
NOTE:The overflow pipe, settling basin, and mud basin generally sit on the surface (as shown) or are cut 2-3 ft
into the surface
Figure 3- 19 Typical mud circulation system
and storage pits are simply dug into the ground and not lined. In many locations,
this type of circulation system is prohibited to prevent discharges that may affect a
surficial aquifer.
Drilling fluids perform four primary functions (Lehr, et al., 1988)
1. Remove the cuttings below the rotating bit,
2. Transport the cuttings up the borehole to the surface.
3. Maintain borehole stability.
4. Cool the bit.
In addition, additives such as drilling mud (Lehr, et al., 1988) assist to
Prevent fluid entry from the porous rocks,
Reduce drilling fluid losses into the formation,
0 Lubricate the mud pump, bit bearings, and drill string,

0 Reduce wear on the drilling equipment, and
0 Control formation fluid pressures.
One of the primary purposes of the drilling mud is to form a seal, known as a
)her cake, on the borehole wall. The density of the mud is related to the ability to
form a proper filter cake, thus increasing borehole stability and reducing fluid loss to
the formations being penetrated. The density of the mud, measured in pounds per
gallon, is generally designed to be pumped into the borehole at a slightly higher
hydraulic head than the surrounding formation pore pressure, thereby allowing both
the formation of a proper filter cake and control of artesian pressures. Proper
monitoring of the mud density (mud weight) is important as mud weight will
prevent the proper formation of a filter cake, and too high a mud weight may result
in high fluid loss and plugging of porous formations while a too-low mud weight
will not bring cuttings to the surface. When highly porous formations are
encountered, the drilling mud may stop returning to the surface and flow directly
into the surrounding sediments. This condition is known as lost circulation. Several
additives, known as lost circulation material, are available to plug the formation
pores and help regain circulation of the mud to the surface.
The drilling mud is usually prepared using a hopper attached to a suction pit
located near the drill rig. The preferred drilling mud material is commercial
colloidal material (bentonite clay base) that is purchased in powdered form and
mixed with water. Controlling the mud during drilling is an important factor in
borehole control and conditioning the borehole for logging. Too much mud caked
on the borehole will make logging inaccurate, while too little will not properly seal
the borehole to prevent the intrusion of mud into upper formations or loss of the
mud into fissures above the bit. Key factors in preparing drilling mud include
0 Mudweight
0 Mud viscosity
Gel strength
Sand content of the mud
The lightest mud weight possible should be used considering potential
formation pressures and potential for borehole collapse. Lighter weight drilling mud
will intrude into permeable zones less than heavier mud, making development of the
well easier. Addionally, unwanted mud may be formed by normal drilling operations
when native clays are encountered. In other formations, clay additives may be used
initially to increase mud viscosity.
Viscosity is related to up-hole velocity of the drilling mud and the ability of the
drilling mud to carry cuttings to the surface. The intent is to have a mud that is
Drilling Methods 55
Source: John Largey

Figure 3-20 Collection cuttings at the shale shaker
viscous enough to carry the cuttings to the surface given a certain up-hole velocity,
but to drop the cuttings quickly once it is returned to the mud system. Drilling fluid
viscosity is measured with a Marsh funnel. The drilling fluid is poured into the
funnel and the viscosity is determined by the amount of time (in seconds) it takes to
drain one quart out of the funnel. Lehr, et al. (1988) indicates that a good Marsh
funnel viscosity ranges from 35 to 45 sec. If the circulating mud begins to pick up
sand, the weight will increase, and viscosity will decrease. Under such conditions,
additional water or other additives should be mixed into the mud.
Settling is needed to remove the cuttings and allow recovery of the cuttings for
professionals to determine formation type and to make decisions about the
formations most likely to yield water. Once the mud is returned to the surface, it is
directed to the cleaning portion of the mud system. Shale shakers are used to first
remove the large cuttings (see Figure 3-20). Upon returning to the surface, the
drilling mud is directed over vibrating screens. In sandy formations, de-sanders can
also be used to remove excessive sand from the drilling mud (see Figure 3-21).
Drilling mud that is too thick will be difficult to clean and to remove from the
borehole wall once drilling is complete, extending the amount of time required for
well development. Low viscosity mud often has 10 to 15 percent solids, composed
mostly of heavy sand. If the viscosity is too low, cuttings will not be brought to the
surface, and lubrication will be inadequate for the drill bit and collars. Such a
situation increases the likelihood of the drill string getting stuck and the loss of
drilling fluids into the formation. Observation of the recovered cuttings can provide
insight into the efficiency of the mud cleaning system. Because the drilling mud
continuously circulates through the hollow drill pipe to the bit and back to the
surface, sand grains that are recirculating will become smaller and more rounded.
Source: John Largey

Figure 3-21 De-sanding operations
In highly porous formations, the low viscosity mud can migrate into cavities in
the formation prior to the mud building up on the borehole wall. This loss of
drilling mud can be a significant problem for the drill crew and may create
regulatory compliance concerns. At the same time, the sand content may decrease
where clays or other fines are introduced into the mud and not settled in the settling
basin. In such cases, the mud may need to be reconditioned.
Gel strength is a measure of the ability of the mud to suspend the cuttings in the
mud. Proper gel-strength drilling mud will suspend the cuttings in the mud when
circulation is stopped to add another section of drill pipe (make a connection),
thereby preventing the cuttings from settling on the bit, potentially causing it to
seize. However, if the gel strength is too high, large volumes of mud will be lost over
the shale shakers and the cuttings will not settle in the settling pit.
Mud rotary drilling systems use two basic drive systems. Rotary table drives rely
on a rotary table recessed into the floor of the drilling rig. A kelly bushing fits into
the rotary table. A multisided pipe, called the k d y , is attached to the top of the drill
string and slides through the kelly bushing. The rotational forces are transferred
from the rotary table, to the kelly bushing, to the kelly and through the drill string.
Top drive rigs have a hydraulic motor suspended from the traveling block. The drill
Drilling Methods 57
Figure 3-22 Top-head hydraulic drive system
string is directly connected to the hydraulic drive motor (see Figure 3-22). Rotary
table systems use higher rotation speeds with lower torque resulting in higher rates
of penetration, but they also have a greater tendency for the borehole to deviate
from a vertical track. Top head drive systems, with lower rotational speeds and
higher torque, tend to drill a little slower than rotary table systems but generally drill
a more vertical hole.
Mud rotary drilling systems have a number of advantages over cable-tool and
auger systems. The first advantage is that they are much faster and can drill deeper
holes with much larger diameters. Good quality lithologic samples can be gained if
careful attention is paid to the amount of time it takes for the drilling fluid to reach
the surface (lag time). Because a casing is not installed during the drilling operation,
high quality geophysical logs can be conducted on open-hole sections.
However, mud rotary drilling has several disadvantages over cable-tool and
auger systems. Extensive knowledge of and experience with drilling mud properties
and interaction with various types of formations is essential. Problems with rotary
drilling methods occur when lost circulation zones are encountered and large
quantities of the mud are lost in highly porous formations, caverns, and fractures,
and become difficult to remove during development. Sidewall pressure is not
Next Page
”-
maintained under these circumstances, thereby allowing the potential for the
collapse of the borehole. A thick filter cake may also reduce upward velocity of the
drilling fluid and may interfere with the movement of the drill pipe and the installation
of casing, Use of drilling mud requires a significantlylarger site to stage, service, and
condition the mud. Potable water is also required, a problem in undeveloped areas.
Likewise, the mud must be brought in and hauled out after use, another problem in
many areas. Water samples cannot be secured during drilling operations-a packer
test must be used on completion of the drilling operation to isolate potential water
production zones.
Extensive development is required for mud rotary drilling operations because
of the introduction of drilling mud into permeable formations (the ones that are
most likely to yield water). The inability to remove the mud will reduce aquifer
yield. Monitoring the mud, mud quality, and drill string are among the reasons that
more technical expertise is required on the drill rig for rotary drilling methods.
Caution must be exercised when planning for the use of the mud rotary method
in an active well field. In such a situation, the borehole may intercept the cone of
influence of nearby producing wells. This can cause drilling mud to migrate from
the borehole being drilled toward the active wells, resulting in contamination of
these wells and a reduction in the yield from the aquifer. As a precaution, it is
recommended that active wells be taken out of service during the drilling of the new
wells. Preplanning and coordination with the facility affected by shutting down the
production wells will result in smoother running field operations.
A variation of the mud rotary method is the air rotary method. Air rotary
drilling entails using air as the drilling fluid instead of mud. Air rotary systems have
higher operating costs as a result of the power required to force air into the borehole
with enough force to dislodge the formation materials. Over time, these costs have
decreased. Pressures are 40 to 50 psi. Annular velocity is 2,000 to 5,000 ft per
minute for dry air. The annular velocity is based on borehole size, drill pipe size, and
air compressor capacity. Although air rotary drilling can result in very high drilling
costs, this drilling process can only be used where borehole stability is not a concern.
Introduced in the late 1970s, drilling with foam is also an option. Foam is
created by aerating the drilling fluids. It increases penetration rates when compared
to mud rotary drilling and does help stabilize the borehole to some degree. The
foaming agents must be a biodegradable liquid mixture of anionic surfactant, which
is added to fresh, hard water. The slow-moving foam has greater capacity for
carrying cuttings to the surface when compared to conventional air rotary drilling.
Other advantages include
Reduced air volume,
Reduced pressure requirements,
Increased well cleaning capabilities,
Previous Page
Drilling Methods 59
0 Reduced hydrostatic head, and

0 Reduced loss of drilling mud.
REVERSE-CIRCULATION ROTARY
The reverse-circulation rotary method is virtually identical to the hydraulic rotary
method of drilling except that the drilling fluid circulates in the opposite direction.
Reverse-circulation drilling is best for large diameter, high capacity wells for large
water use projects. It is also less expensive than some other methods. Lehr et al.
(1988) notes that many wells have diameters of at least 24 in., with some having
diameters of more than 60 in. The reverse-circulation method typically uses clear
water with no mud additives. A pit is constructed so that the drilling fluid will flow
down the annular space between the bore hole and the drill pipe and return through
the bit and the inside of the drill pipe to the surface, carrying the cuttings with it. A
high-capacity pump is attached to the drill pipe to keep the fluid moving at high
velocity.
The borehole is stabilized by the hydrostatic pressure of the fluid in the
borehole. The fluid level is maintained at the ground surface. Keeping the borehole
open requires a large volume of water to maintain a head above the natural static
water level, which results in a flow into the formation. This higher head prevents the
wall from caving. Significant damage or collapse of the borehole may occur if fluid
circulation is lost. Caving may result from movement of fluid down the borehole
when formation materials will not accept water. If the formation is highly
permeable, the required head will be difficult to achieve. In such cases, processed
clays may be added to create a filter cake similar to the straight rotary process.
However, this defeats the primary advantage of the reverse-circulation method of
construction. In wet clay soils, collapse is a problem. Caustic soda is used to raise the
pH. Another option is to increase the amount of sodium silicate in the mud.
Bentonite mud can also be used to prevent collapse of clay formations. In some
instances, 20 to 50 gpm of make-up water may be needed in highly permeable soils.
This is in addition to the 500 gpm circulation rate of the mud.
Advantages of the reverse-circulation method include its ease of use in
situations where artificial-gravel-pack wells are specified because less mud cake
forms on the face of the borehole. Less development time is required because mud
does not intrude into porous formations. Test wells can be drilled and abandoned at
a minimum expense by plugging. The reverse-circulation method is also generally
faster than cable-tool drilling for drilling larger diameter wells, greater than about
18 in. However, the reverse-circulation method may prove problematic in soft,
loose, unconsolidated materials, such as dune sand and quicksand, because the water
pressure cannot keep the hole open.
Figure 3-23 Reverse-airdrilling method
REVERSE-AIR CIRCULATION
Reverse-air drilling methods have many of the characteristics of hydraulic rotary
drilling except that drilling mud is not used: air is. With reverse-air drilling, a small
steel or PVC air line connected to an air compressor is run inside the drill pipe. The
formation cuttings and formation water are lifted inside the drill pipe (see Figure 3-23).
Reverse-air drilling is capable of drilling large diameters wells in many formation
types. The wells can be drilled quickly and high quality lithologic samples can be
gathered. High quality water samples can also be obtained because there are no
drilling fluids recirculated into the borehole.
Advantages of reverse-air drilling include speed of drilling and the ability to
drill a wide variety of formation types. Reverse-air circulation is highly effective in
cavernous and karstic formations. Uncased formations from reverse-air drilling
permit excellent geophysical logs to be obtained. Sampling of water and obtaining
high quality cuttings are major reasons for pursuing reverse-air circulation methods.
The disadvantages of this method include the potential for bit plugging, cross
contamination of the aquifer, and intermixing of unconsolidated sediments in the
borehole. Stability of the borehole in deep, unconsolidated formations may be a
problem as no mud cake forms on the borehole.
Drilling Methods 61
Outside of Drill Pipe
Thickness of Outside Wall
Holes Between Pipe Walls

Where Air Flows Downward
Flow for Air Upward
Internal Pipe Wall
Figure 3-24 Dual-walled drill pipe
Dirty Water, Air, and Debris
Movement of Water
(and Air) and Soil
Scouring Velocity of Water

or Air at Bottom
New Bottom of Hole
Figure 3-25 Dual-tube circulation system
DUAL-TUBE (REVERSE-AIR) METHOD

Dual-tube/air circulation is a variation of the reverse-circulation drilling method.
The drill bit and stem are rotated by a top head hydraulically driven drive. Reverse-
air, dual-tube drilling methods are similar to reverse-air circulation. Instead of an air
line inside the borehole, a dual-walled drill pipe is used (see Figure 3-24).As shown
in Figure 3-25, the air channel delivers the air to the base of the borehole through
the bit. Figure 3-26 shows a typical dual-tube drill rig and how samples come out of
the sampling cyclone, respectively. The air and cuttings return to the surface
through the inner tube to a sample cyclone where lithologic samples are recovered
(see Figures 3-26 and 3-27). Significant cores of the formation are recoverable with
Source: John Largey

Figure 3-26 Typical reverse-air, dual-tube drill rig with cyclone
Source: John Largey

Figure 3-27 Sample from cyclone on typical reverse-air, dual-tube drill rig
Drilling Methods 63
reverse-air, dual-tube methods. Excellent quality lithologic samples are obtained by

this method. A small diameter well can be installed through the inner tube as well. As a
result, the dual-tube method is also successfully used for test wells.
Additional advantages of the dual-tube method include
Fast drilling rate and minimal impact to aquifers.
Well installation can be accomplished on small sites.
Accurate, continuous water and formation samples can be recovered.
A clean borehole when drilling is complete.
The loss of circulation is minimized.
Reduced potential of cross contamination.
The method is commonly used when high quality wells, with high quality
water quality and lithologic samples are needed. However, because of the precision
required for reverse-air, dual-tube methods, the cost is high, and there are
limitations to the depth and size of the well. Other disadvantages include
Limited availability of equipment.
Large quantities of pressurized air are required.
Sloughing of the formation and water saturated sands may cause the drill pipe
to bind and become stuck.
A high volume of formation fluids are generated as a result of the drilling
method.
Dud-tube is not applicable to certain types of formations, such as clays.
Plugging of the formation is possible, so extensive development of the well may
be needed.
DOWN-THE-HOLE-HAMMER
As with many other industries, well drilling has seen the introduction of new
methods in recent years. One of the more popular, and useful, is the down-the-hole-
hammer (DTHH) method shown in Figure 3-28. This drilling method combines
some of the elements of hydraulic drilling with those of the cable-tool method. The
turning action of the rotary rig is combined with the percussion action of cable-tool
drilling. A pneumatic drill is located at the bottom of the drill string. Air delivered
from an adequately sized compressor actuates a down-hole air piston, transmitting
blows from the bit to the formation. The repeated blows are similar to those
delivered by a cable-tool rig. The air used to actuate the hammer also removes the
cuttings from the borehole similar to reverse-air rotary drilling. Occasionally, as in
air rotary drilling, foaming additives are added to aid in removal of the cuttings.
This eliminates the need to remove the bit from the borehole and recover the
Cutting (up center rod)
Air Flow (downhole)
Slot for Cuttings
Movement of Cuttings
Soil
Downhole Hammer
. Bit
Figure 3-28 Down-the-hole-hammer method
cuttings by using a bailer. As the blows are delivered, the drill pipe is slowly rotated
by either a top head drive or a rotary table. The rotating motion and the removal of
the cuttings allow the bit to deliver each successive blow to a different, clean surface
instead of repeatedly striking the same surface or previously cut rock fragments.
DTHH works well in situations where hard formations are anticipated and
borehole stability is not an issue. Wells drilled using this method are commonly
6 in. in diameter although hammer sizes range to about 17 in. in diameter.
Advantages of the DTHH method include
Rapid removal of cuttings,
Drilling mud not used,
High penetration rates in resistant formations,
High quality water and lithologic samples recovered,
Excellent geophysicallogs obtained, and
Drilling Methods 65
Source: John Largey Source: John Largey

Figure 3-29 Core sample Figure 3-30 Boxed core
0 Yield estimates obtained at selected depths during drilling.

Disadvantages of the DTHH method include
0 Restricted to semiconsolidated to consolidated formations,
0 High volumes of air needed to activate the pneumatic hammer, and
0 High volumes of water produced during drilling.
CORING
Coring, which is not a primary method of drilling, is used extensively to collect high
quality lithologic samples. Cores are cylinders of rock recovered from the formation
(See Figures 3-29 and 3-30). A number of tests maybe conducted on cores,
including hydraulic conductivity, porosity, permeability, and compressive strength.
This information will help professionals determine the appropriate factors to
include in designing the well pumps and determining the safe yield of the well. To
recovet a core, the following procedure is used:
0 Drill a pilot hole to the top of the formation where the core is to be recovered.
0 Trip out drill bit and drill pipe.
0 Trip in core barrel and drill pipe (see Figure 3-31).
0 Cut the core out of the formation where the core is desired. It is essential that
the core be cut, not pushed into the barrel.
0 Trip out the core barrel and drill pipe.
0 Recover the core.
" W Series Rod Connections
API Design Threads
Borium or Laser Hard-Wear Strips
External Greasing
Simple Adjustment
Double-Race Bearings or
Heavy-Duty Bearing Assembly
Relief Ball Valve
Large Annular Clearance
Outer Barrel Protection
Chrome Plated InnerTube I.D.
Variety of Bottom End

Assemblies
Small Large
Diameter Diameter
Barrels Barrels
Source: Adapted from Christensen Products www.Christensenproducts.com/ste/html/core-barrel.htm

Figure 3-31 Core barrels
The core should be placed in a box and labeled with core recovery date, depth,
well, and relevant observations at the time of collection. For core recovery, it is
essential that an experienced driller be used.
Drill to the next point where a core is desired.
Drilling Methods 67
During drilling of an exploratory well and any subsequent supply well, it is

often useful to collect geologic samples and rock cores of formations penetrated
during drilling. Formation cores should be taken at selected intervals. The cores are
typically 10 to 30 ft long and 4 in. in diameter. The recovered core should be
described by a qualified geologist, and the data, samples, and descriptions should be
submitted as directed by the regulatory agencies.
In addition to the description of the geologic strata and structural features,
vertical and horizontal porosity tests should be performed on the samples at
appropriate core intervals (i.e., the formations of concern). Porosity, compressive
strength, modulus of elasticity, and specific gravity should be recorded. When the
pilot hole is completed, geophysical logs and a survey involving the lowering of a
camera down the well should be conducted on the borehole.
DRILLING METHOD SELECTION

When preparing to drill a well, the appropriate drilling method must be selected.
Often a combination of methods may be required. A professional engineer,
professional geologist, hydrogeologist, or a combination should specify the methods
appropriate for a particular project. For example, bucket-type drilling may be used
in setting relatively shallow starter casings for large diameter water wells, and mud
rotary methods may then be used to drill to a predetermined depth above the
production zone. After the second string of casing is set and cemented into place,
the drilling mud will be displaced with potable water. Reverse-air methods may be
used through the production zone. During the drilling, cuttings should be collected
and analyzed by a competent hydrogeologist. Composite samples are used to
determine formation characteristics over a predetermined interval of the formation.
Grab samples maybe used for specific analysis. However, in either case, knowing the
depth in the borehole where the sample was recovered is important. Without
knowing the depth, the information derived from the samples is of limited value.
In addition to determining the borehole data, planning is needed for the
proposed site for the well construction activities. Overhead and buried utilities must
be located and accounted for before drilling commences. Large well diameters and
deep wells require large drill rigs. Drill rigs for large wells may be very tall, requiring
Federal Aviation Administration clearance near airports. Casing must be delivered
to the location and staged prior to installation. If geophysical logging is required,
additional areas will be required. Utilities and potable water supplies are useful for
the drilling project, and access to them should be considered during drilling
operations.
The type of drilling method used will impact the amount of area needed for the
drilling process. Hydraulic rotary systems with mud will require more lay-down area
for mud separation than reverse-air, dual-tube drilling. Table 3-1 outlines the
benefits and issues with the methods discussed. Disposal ofwater, mud, and cuttings
is also an issue that must be planned. Waste cannot be placed on the surface or
disposed of on the ground. For instance, saltwater usually must be trucked off-site
for treatment. Sewers are not often availablewhere wells are being drilled and if they
are, the utility may not want drilling fluids in the sewer system. Federal, state, and
local regulations should be consulted prior to initiating a drilling project.
Table 3-1 Summary of drilling methods, benefits, and limitations

Drilling
Method Uses Applications Benefits Limitations
Driving Small, shallow Dewatering Simple and easy Small wells
wells
Jetting Small, shallow Dewatering and Simple
wells single family
homes
Cable tool Up to 18-in. Water supply Minimal aquifer impact, Slow, casing must be
diameter and favorable sampling, advanced with drill bit,
1,000 ft in depth applicable to most pulverizes formation
formations, relatively
simple
Hollow stem Up to 8-in. Water supply Good sampling, auger Limited to unconsoli-
auger diameter and keeps borehole clean, dated formations,
300 ft in depth high quality sampling, limited to depth and
does not introduce size, running sand
drilling fluids limits
Hydraulic Deep and large Water supply Fast, most common, no Requires fluid (mud),
rotary diameter wells formation limitations, large bit sizes needed,
multiple drill bits, good possible need for
quality cuttings, high fluids, mud disposal,
quality borehole for samples not of high
logging for uncased quality, aquifer
boreholes pkging
Reverse air Large diameter, Water supply Aquifer resting Borehole may
depth can vary possible during drilling, collapse, possible cross
high water quality and contamination of
formation sampling, aquifers
fast, excellent logs,
supports telescoping
Reverse air Small diameter, Water supply Aquifer testing possible Cost, volume of
dual-tube limited depth and test holes during drilling, high cuttings, plugging
water quality and while drilling
formation sampling, fast,
excellent logs, supports
telescoping
REFERENCES
AWWA (American Water Works Association). 2003. Manual M21-Groundwater. Denver,
Colo.: AWWA.
Hackett, G. 1987. Drilling and Construction Monitoring Wells With Hollow-Stem Augers;
Part 1: Drilling Considerations. Ground WaterMonitoring 6Review, 7(4):51-62.
Lehr, J., Hurlburt, S., Gallagher, B., and Voytek, J. 1988. Design and Construction of Water
Wells: A Guide for Engineers, National Water Well Association. New York: Van
Nostrand Reinhold.
Scalf, M.J., McNabb, W., Dunlap, R., Crosby, R., and Fryberger,J. 1980. Manualfor Ground
Water Sampling Procedures. Ada, Okla.: R.S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory,
Office of Research and Development.
Geophysical Logging and Field Testing
Once the potential sites for the well location have been selected, a series of tests
should be run to better define the parameters of the subsurface environment,
including the quantity and quality of available water. These initial subsurface
investigations generally begin with construction of an exploratory or test well. The
goal of exploratory wells is to locate productive aquifers that yield sustainable high-
quality water. The initial test wells are used for lithologic logging, geophysical
logging, aquifer testing, and to collect cores and cuttings of the formation.
Lithologic sampling is the protocol used to obtain core samples and define the
formation type by depth. Geophysical logging consists of a variety of electronic
instruments used to define the rock types, water quality, porousness, and other
aquifer characteristics. Geophysical logs were developed by the oil and gas industries
for exploration. Depending on the needs from the well, a number of formations may
yield sufficient quantities of water for some period of time. However, for water
supply production wells, large, rechargeable aquifers are desirable. The following
aquifer formations are more likely to provide sufficient water for public water
supplies:
0 Shell, unconsolidated sands, and gravels of alluvial or glacial origin
0 Sandstones and conglomerates
0 Limestone
0 Porous or fractured volcanic rocks
Exploratory wells are drilled to determine an aquifer's characteristics,including
hydraulic conductivity, water quality, thickness, and areal extent. Newly drilled wells
can be used for borehole geophysical logging and aquifer testing. The drilling
method is dependent on the type ofwater samples desired and formation types that
are expected to be encountered during drilling (see chapter 3). As noted in chapter 1,
hydrogeologic reports already exist in many regions. From these interpretations,
~I
/f pebbles mn855iw sand 'with shale patings fining up

10 10
i!&*?&F$%2k%ep,2?Kgp
iuninated shale biack fining up
20 20
sandyshde with led fossils continuous

30 30
sandfshde with leaf fossils continuous
40- - ~ 40 ma5siYesandwith shdepwtings fininyup

siitpwtinj in$iasFiT
m%s~ve-an mmcceo ylningup
wit 251 t rand n e i n g up
'0 . ... . .. ..
laminatedshale blank finingup
60 60 smdyshale with iral iossils continuow
sandyshale with l e d fossils continuous

70 70 sandyshde with led fossils continuous
sandyshde with led fossils omtinuom
sandyshde with ieaf fossils emtinwxds
sandyshsie with leaf iossils continuous
100 I00
msssiwsand ,with shale partingsfiningup
I10 110
120 120
smdyshafr tu,ith lexf fossil+ o n t i n u o w
130 130
sandyshde with l e d fossils Cmtinuws
140 140 msusiwsandwith shafepwtings fining up

si2qarting i n r a s t i y tmP cesr;eneing up
m sive an wit 51I mvne iningup
150 150
laminatedshale black iiningup
160 160 ssndyshxle with ieaf fossils cantiniinu~
sandyshde &h leaf fossils mntinuous

170 170 swdyshde sith leaf fossils continuws
sandyshde with ieaf fossils continuous
180 180 sandyshalewith iesl fossils continuous
140 140 sandwhale with led fossils omtinuom
Source: Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., Boca Raron, Fla.

Figure 4- 1 Example of lithologic log
potential aquifers can be identified. However, the increase in the need for new water
sources requires investigation in areas where little historical information is available.
Exploratory drilling efforts can fill in the details of the specific local hydrogeologic
environment in which drilling is proposed.
LITHOLOGIC LOGGING
The information required to develop lithologic logs is gathered while drilling is in
progress. Cores, cuttings, water samples, drill response, and other methods are used
to identify the different formation types encountered while drilling. The result will
be a lithologic log similar to that shown in Figure 4-1, which summarizes the
encountered subsurface formations. As noted in chapter 3, to accurately identify the
formation, the methods for drilling the well may be limited. Care must be exercised
by the driller in collecting water and formation samples. As the cuttings rise, the
quality of the cuttings may be affected by many variables such as the drilling
Geophysical togging and Field Testing 73
method, the time it takes for the samples to reach the surface (lag time), and
contamination from formations already penetrated. Therefore, the actual changes in
lithology may be only generally known. While useful for targeting further
investigations, only limited information about the aquifer parameters can be gained
from the cuttings and cores. Most hydrogeologists use lithologic logs to identify
specific areas where usable water is likely to be encountered in large quantities and
therefore requiring further investigation and geophysical logging.
BOREHOLE GEOPHYSICAL LOGGING

Geophysical logging is the science of applying the principles of physics to
investigations related to the structure and properties of rock formations.
Geophysical methods use electrical instruments whose readings represent different
properties of the formations to identify physical properties of the rock, such as
porosity, water content, and metallic content. The variation of the logging results
may permit interpretation of the formation without seeing the actual formation
(AWWA, 2003), provided experienced people are performing the interpretations.
Rather than lithologic logging, geophysical logging is useful in identifying the
appropriate depths to drill wells and set casings and can aid in accurately locating the
depth of variations in hydrogeologic characteristics.
While there is no established order for application of exploration methods, a
planned and a balanced program of appropriate combinations will produce the most
useful information. Knowledge gained through a geophysical investigation
compliments the information gained from test drilling and sampling. Advantages to
geophysical logging include (AWWA, 2003)
0 Rapid results
0 Relativelylow cost (for most logging methods)
Qualitative and quantitative results
Evaluation of the aquifer over a large depth
At the same time, interpretation of the geophysics by an appropriate scientist is
important as the results may be ambiguous or conflicting when first reviewed.
Experienced people will be able to
Interpret the logs based on assumptions of the materials, material homogeneity,
and formation properties;
Validate calibration of tools;
0 Understand the contrasts in the logs; and
0 Define the accuracy or precision of the logs. Experience with logging
formations in the same area or of the same type is especiallyiiseful to determine
nuances in the logging results.
The purposes and uses of various geophysical logs are outlined in the following
sections. Borehole logging is highly technical and quite involved, and no lay person
should use the information provided herein to attempt to interpret logs based solely
on the information provided. Log interpretation requires the use of experts using
specialized equipment. Accurate lithologic logging during drilling is crucial, so an
experienced geologist, hydrogeologist, groundwater engineer, and driller experienced
in well logging should be employed. Often it is wise to retain the expertise of a
logging specialist to evaluate logs. The equipment that is used is both extensive and
expensive. Specialty companies are usually hired to perform the logging and
interpretation the well site (see Figure 4-2). The discussion herein is designed to
provide insight on the capabilities and limitations of the logging tools found to be
most useful for groundwater exploration and to help water professionals understand
why certain logs should be used.
Geophysical logging is extensively used in the oil industry, and it is for oil
exploration that most of the logging techniques have been developed. As a result,
the focus of many logs and the geophysical logging industry in general is geared
toward petroleum, not clean water, which is rarely encountered in conjunction with
oil. Most of the texts on borehole logging present information tailored toward
petroleum exploration. The presence of low or nonsaline water in a formation
mandates the use of special analyses for interpretation. For a detailed discussion of
this subject, the reader is referred to Borehole Geophysics Applied to Groundwater
Investigation$,published by the National Water Well Association (Keys, 1989).
Single logs in a well are almost useless because there is limited basis on which to
interpret the log variations. Therefore, the use of multiple logs (a suite of logs) in a
single well will provide confidence in interpretations. Each type of log measures
different physical properties, and a combined analysis may resolve ambiguities that
might exist from a single log. The greater the number of wells logged in an area, the
greater the statistical confidence in the data and interpretations as being
representative of the subsurface environment. In addition, there are both surface and
subsurface methods that may prove useful. Surface methods are used to guide
subsurface logging.
SURFACE GEOPHYSICAL METHODS

Surface geophysical methods, principally electrical resistivity and seismic reflection
and refraction logs, can be used to provide a picture of subsurface structure, given
some prior knowledge obtained from surface geology and lithologic logs. The
lithologic log outlines a model of the subsurface geology as a basis for a proper
interpretation of the surface geophysical data. The successful use of any surface
geophysical method depends on the presence of sharp changes in the physical
properties of the formation (such as clay to limestone). The detectable physical
properties provide indirect estimates of the likelihood that the formation may yield
Geophysical Logging and Field Testing 75
Source: John Largey

Figure 4-2 Specialized equipment and companies perform borehole geophysical logging
water in sufficient quantities. The accuracy of geophysical estimates depends on

how closely the physical properties can be separated from one another. Formations
that often do not lend themselves to surface geophysical methods include areas
consisting of large cobbles in alluvium, areas of severely distressed stratigraphy (areas
where there is upheaval of the rock strata), or areas in which (in geologic time) high
hydraulic energy was dissipated.
Electrical Resistivity
Electrical resistivity is probably the most commonly used surface geophysical
method for groundwater investigations. To gather data, electrodes placed into the
surface of the ground transmit current through the earth, and the voltage potential
is measured between two points near the center of the generated field (see Figure 4-3).
With the most common electrode arrangements, such as the Schlumberger array
and Wenner array, readings can be gathered using constant electrode spacing
(horizontal profiling), or the readings can be gathered at one location with
expanding electrode spacing (electrical sounding). The first method will show
apparent resistivities of materials at roughly the same depth along the transect
(two-dimensional),while the second method produces a depth profile of resistivity
(three-dimensional:AWWA, 2003).
Electrical resistivity is strongly affected by water content. As a result, data
collected involving the unsaturated zone can make interpretation of the saturated
zone quite difficult. Resistivity is largely determined by the rock-matrix density and
porosity, or by the saturating-fluid salinity (electrical conductivity). Coarse sediments
with low clay content will generally have higher resistivity than fine-grained
Power Source
I =Amperage
"Smart" V = Voltage
Electrodes A, B, M, N =indicate points
on the electrode
Figure 4-3 Surface resistivity method ( A W A , 2003)
sediments. Old streambeds are often laden with silt and clay, so as a result, the
variations in response allow for surface detection and mapping of buried stream
channels or the depth profiling of shale-sandstone sequences.
Surface resistance methods are generally limited to use in
Simple geologic environments, with two or three distinct layers;
Areas where depth ofpenetration is limited to about 1,500 ft (460 m);
Areas where the depth to groundwater is small, because of the complications of
unsaturated materials; and
Non-urban or undeveloped areas as a result of the presence of buried metal
pipes, wires, and similar obstructions, which dominate measurements with
unwanted noise in developed areas.
Seismic Refraction and Reflection

The cost of seismic methods is high, but the information generated can be very
useful to hydrogeologists. Seismic methods use the contrasts in the velocities of
elastic wave propagation in different materials.
A variety of methods are used to generate seismic waves. One is the use of
explosive shots in shallow borings. Truck-mounted hydraulic earth vibrators
(thumpers)can also be used although these are generally used for oil exploration and
raise significant environmental concerns because of the damage they can inflict on
the surface.
Geophones are distributed on the ground surface to detect and record the
travel times for sound waves refracted or reflected from subsurface lithologic
boundaries. The travel time records are analyzed to produce a model of the
subsurface. As with all surface geophysical methods, the interpretation of seismic
data requires an assumed model of subsurface structure; the more preexisting
information from surface geologic data and borehole logs that is available, the more
reliable the results will be from seismic surveying. Unconsolidated sands and gravels
exhibit low propagation velocities, whereas crystalline rocks exhibit the highest
propagation velocities. Propagation velocities are higher in saturated materials,
providing detection of the water-bearing strata.
SUBSURFACE GEOPHYSICAL METHODS

Borehole logging techniques are one of many tools that should be used in evaluation
and identification of underground environments. Geophysical logs that are
commonly used in water exploration include
Caliper
Resistivity
0 Spontaneous potential (SP)
Naturally occurring gamma radiation
0 Neutron porosity
Acoustic
Fluid resistivity
Temperature
Determining the types of logs to be used in an investigation is often difficult.
Most groundwater investigations obtain adequate information using caliper,
resistivity, SP, natural gamma, and lithologic logging. The cost of these techniques
should be evaluated regarding the time available, accuracy needed, and the basic
purpose of the survey. Resistivity, gamma, and caliper measurements are the most
widely used.
All geophysical log measurements are obtained by lowering a probe down the
borehole and recording continuous measurements with depth. Logging is normally
performed during drilling operations and is often conducted in a small diameter
pilot hole. The results of analyses of the logs by qualified personnel provide the basis
for decisions regarding well construction and completion, including depth of casing
and screened intervals. Some types of logs can be conducted in existing, cased wells,
which are useful if expansion of a wellfield is planned. Certain logs can only be
performed in an uncased hole, which prevents the use of drilling methods requiring
casing to be advanced during drilling if these logs are desired. It should be noted that
the method of drilling may dictate the appropriate type of geophysical log
employed. For example, temperature and fluid resistivity logs are not very useful in
mudded boreholes.
Surface
Depti-
Diameter
Figure 4-4 Example of caliper log
Caliper Logs
Caliper logs are among the simplest logs and can reveal useful information for
interpretation of other logs. A multiarmed probe is lowered into the well to
determine the geometry of the borehole and variances in diameter. Caliper logs can
provide indications of the presence of high permeability fractured or cavernous
zones (by the arms extending outward indicating a larger and rougher borehole), as
well as the occurrence of swelling clays (the arms will tighten and indicate that the
borehole is smaller than the diameter of the bit used to drill as a result of the
expanding clays) and locally well-lithified layers in friable or unconsolidated rock or
sediment (the changes in the diameter of the borehole may be significant in a very
narrow horizon; see Figure 4-4). Caliper logs are important because the
interpretation of other geophysical logs vary with the borehole diameter. A good
quality caliper log will identify where compensations must be made.
Caliper logging is conducted using a probe that usually has either three or four
levered arms. As the probe is brought up through the hole, a record of the depth and
degree of extension of the arms is made. The results provide information about the
variations in the diameter of the borehole after drilling. Asymmetry of the borehole
can be measured using the four-armed probe but not with the three-arm probe.
Inductor Capacitors
/ \I I
_IL
Constant AC
Current Generator
Voltage Recorders (mV)
Electrode A
Figure 4-5 System used to make conventional single-point resistance and SP logs
Therefore, caliper logs are not useful for estimating diameter inside a casing as the
calipers only measure the casing diameter. They can, however, be used to determine
unknown well diameters and to determine the integrity of casings (i.e., collapsed
casing). It is recommended, whenever possible, to run a caliper log before setting the
casing as it will provide an indication of the annular space volume that must be filled
with grout and provide an estimate of the cement requirements.
Electrical Resistivity Logs

Subsurface electrical resistivity logging is only slightly different than surface
resistance logs. Resistivity logs are based on the principles of Ohm’s law:
R = E/I (Eq. 4-1)
Where:
R = resistance in ohms
E = potential in volts
I = current in amps
The simplest and least expensive electric resistivity log is the single-point
resistance log. The single-point resistivity log measures the potential drop between a
surface electrode and a down-hole electrode, which are also the current electrodes
(see Figure 4-5). The single-point resistivity log is used primarily for geological
correlation and the location of bed boundaries, changes in lithology (rock
characteristics), and fracture zones. Single-point resistivity logs have a very good
Table 4- 1 Electrical resistivity of selected aquifer materials
Material Resistivity (ohms - m)

Granite 5,000-1,000,000
Basalt 1,000-1,000,000
Sandstone 100-4,000
Shale 20-2,000
Porous limestone 100-10,000
Dense limestone 1,000- 1,000,000
Clay 1-20
Wet sand 20-200
Dry sand 500-100,000
Fresh water 10-100
Sea water 0.1
Reprinted with permission of National Groundwater Association Press, copyright 1989
vertical resolution of lithologic changes but do not provide quantitative data on

formation porosity or the salinity of formation water ( A W A , 2003). High
conductivity in the formation is proportional to the potential voltage differential
created in the formation. Silt, clay, and shale rend to have the lowest resistivities;
sands, granite, basalt, sandstones, and limestones with nonsaline pore waters have
the highest resistivities. For single-point resistivity logs, interpretation is required to
determine the meaning of the results. Single-point resistivity logs will change with
variations in the borehole diameter requiring a caliper log to compensate for these
differences. Table 4- 1 outlines the resistivity of common formation materials.
Normal resistivity logs function on the following variant of Ohm’s law:
R = rxS/L (Eq. 4-2)

Where:
R = resistivity
r = resistance
S = cross-sectional area normal to the flow
L = distance in the formation
Normal resistivity logs measure the apparent resistivity of a volume of the

formation perpendicular to the borehole electrodes. The probes are commonly
configured so that short normal (16-in. electrode spacing) and long normal (64-in.
spacing) resistivities are measured simultaneously. Normal resistivity logs are
commonly used in groundwater investigations as a source of qualitative information
on water quality. True formation resistivity and salinity can be calculated from the
Resistivity (ohm-rn) at Varying NaCl Concentrations
Figure 4-6 Example of temperature corrections required to electrical conductivity log as a

result of increasing resistivity due to salt concentration in the aquifer water
measured apparent resistivities, but the calculations require the application of a

number of mathematical equations to reach the actual salinity and resistivity
( A W A , 2003). Normal resistivity logs also require adjustments for temperature
(see Figure 4-6). Other resistivity log types that are less commonly used in
groundwater investigations are discussed by Keys (1989).
Spontaneous Potential Logging

SP logs measure the natural electrical potential of the lithology in millivolts. In
practice, SP logs will show increasing salinity by increasingly negative responses (see
Figure 4-7).The results are similar to a gamma log. Measurable differences in SPs
occur where beds of different types of geological materials occur, such as between
shale and sandstone beds. Negligible response may occur with certain localized
sediments. SP logs provide information on bed-thickness determination and
changes in lithology.
The SP logging apparatus consists of a surface and down-hole electrode
connected to a voltmeter. The SP logging equipment is usually incorporated into
the electric resistivity log apparatus. Log definition depends on the contrast in fluid
conductivity between the borehole and the geologic formation penetrated. While
SP logs are the most common logs used, if the borehole contains water that is fresher
Surface
I
Deptt-
0
Diameter Resistance
Figure 4-7 Example of caliper and electrical resistivity log for borehole
than the formation, the logs will not yield useful results, so this log should be used in
conjunction with other logs noted in this chapter.
Electrical Conductivity
Electrical conductivity (EC) logs are based on a relationship between the specific
conductance and the concentration of dissolved solids in the water. In most cases,
calibrated logs will show that there is a relatively linear relationship between the
two-more dissolved solids means higher conductivity (see Figure 4-8). The
conductivity of specific ions are known, and a water quality analysis will permit
investigators to determine if the logging results match the water quality and where
there may be other constituents of concern.
Gamma Logs
Gamma logs measure the total gamma radiation that is naturally released from the
formation. No radioactive materials are introduced into the well. Many naturally
occurring elements have radioactive isotopes that are harmless to humans but
measurable by gamma logging tools. The most significant natural source of gamma
Specific Conductance @IS)

Temperature Constant
Figure 4-8 Conductivity relationship to dissolved solids for specific conductivity logs
radiation is the decay of potassium-40 isotope and the daughter products of the
uranium and thorium decay series. Rocks and sediments with relatively high
concentrations of potassium, uranium, and thorium have high gamma response.
Gamma logs measure the ratios of three basic isotopes to one another: uranium-238,
thorium-232 and potassium-40. Table 4-2 shows the energy for each. Gamma
results increase linearly with silt and clay content (see Figure 4-9)
Clay-rich rocks, shales, and phosphatic rocks yield a high gamma response,
whereas nonphosphatic limestones and dolomites, and quartz sandstones tend to
yield low gamma responses ( A W A , 2003). The gamma log is the most commonly
used nuclear log. Gamma logs can be correlated with rock types based on the
radioactivity of the formation, cuttings, and cores. The amplitude of gamma logs
can be modified by changes in the density of the material through which the gamma
rays pass. As a result, the gamma log measures porosity as proportional to bulk
density. The following will inhibit the usefulness of gamma logs:
0 Large diameters wells,
0 Wells constructed with cable-tool methods, and
0 Wells already completed with casing and cement.
Table 4-2 Energy for gamma logs

Energy ofMajor Gamma
Peaks (million Photons per Average Percent Percent of Total
Element electron volts) Second per Gram in Shale Gamma Intensity
Potassium-40 1.46 3.4 2% 19
Uranium-238 1.76 280,000 6 PPm 47
Thorium-232 2.62 10,000 12 PPm 34
Reprinted with permission of National Groundwater Association Press, copyright 1989.
I
Silt and Clay Percent
Figure 4-9 Gamma response to increasing clay and silt content
Figure 4-10 shows an example of a gamma log in conjunction with a caliper log.
Limestone, alluvium, coal, gypsum, and anhydrite are all materials where the gamma
log shifts to the left, while granite and other hard rocks shift to the right. The latter
are not rocks likely to have much water useful for production. Figure 4-11 shows
that as the silt and clay content increases, the gamma pulses also increase (shift
right). SP logs used in conjunction with gamma logs will react similarly.
Geophysical logging and Field Testing 85
Surface
Deptt
/
5 Salt Water
0
Diameter Resistance Gamma
Figure 4-10 Example of comparison of gamma, resistivity, and caliper logs through shale
60 Gamma Radiation (pulses/sec) I

30
/ i,
I--
, Gamma Log
i=+=--- Measured Percent Silt and Clay
0 Silt and Clay (percent) 90

Figure 4-1 1 Relationship between gamma radiation and silt and sand
I
Radium/Potassium
Figure 4-12 Comparison of radium/potassium gamma response to calcites
Gamma-gamma Logs
Gamma-gamma logs are radioactive tracer logs or surveys that are obtained by
introducing a gamma radiation-emitting material into the borehole (usually
cesium-137 or cobalt-60) and measuring the intensity of the backscattered
radiation. Gamma-gamma logs provide information on lithology and porosity but
should not be used in groundwater investigations because of their high costs and
liabilities associated with the potential loss or rupturing of the radioactive source
within the aquifer.
Gamma Spectrometry Logs

Gamma spectrometry logs are also used to measure radioisotopes in the formation.
Counting gamma pulses can be useful in identifying many additional, slowly
degrading elements. By knowing their gamma energy characteristics, specific
elements can be identified. By identifying the elements and the ratio of elements,
clay and shale can be differentiated from limestones and other water-bearing
formations. Figure 4-12 shows an example of how the calcium carbonate percent
and the radium/potassium ratio can be used to identify specific formation types.
Table 4-3 Neutron collisions for selected materials
Average Collisions per

Neutron (million Maximum
Element electronvolts) Energy Loss Atomic Number Atomic Weight
Calcium 37 1 8% 20 40.1
Hydrogen 18 100% 1 1.0
Oxygen 150 21% 8 16.0
Carbon 115 28% 6 12.0
Chloride 318 10% 17 35.3
Silicon 26 1 12% 14 28.1
Neutron logs
Neutron logs are used to find changes in porosity of the rock and sediments, which
may be related to the amount of fluid in the formation. The concept is based on the
emission of high energy neutrons from beryllium and an alpha-emitter (commonly
americium). The emitted neutrons interact with hydrogen atoms and release gamma
radiation, which is measured by a detector on the logging tool. The intensity of the
measured gamma radiation is proportional to the hydrogen atom concentration and
thus water content and the porosity of saturated rocks. Table 4-3 shows the neutron
response for a number of common elements with an initial energy of 2 million
electron volts. Calibration of neutron logs is critical to obtaining useful
information.
Neutron logs work very well to indicate lithology by identifying suspected
formations of sand, limestone, and sandstone that have pores and vugs that would
indicate high porosity. These pores are usually filled with water, which contains
hydrogen, a strong neutron absorber. However, coal, shale, and other formations
with high hydrogen content will provide false readings despite yielding results that
would indicate high porosity. The same problems that affect gamma-gamma logs
also affect neutron logs. EC logs help to show where these formations provide false
readings because the hydrogen effect is not a driving factor. As a result, the EC logs
will deflect in the opposite direction from the neutron log. Shale or clay will be
evident when a gamma log is used in conjunction with neutron logs because the
bound water will reflect high water content, which the gamma log will not. Neutron
logs are suggested to help determine how much of the conductivity is the result of
salinity from salt (NaC1).
Table 4-4 Compression wave velocity transit time
Transit Time
Material Velocity (feet per second) (pec/feet)
~~~
Sandstone
Slightly consolidated 15,000- 17,000 58.8-66.7
Consolidated 19,000 52.6
Shale 6,000-16,000 62.5- 167
Limestone 19,000-210,OOOt 47.6-52.6
Dolomite 21,000-24,000 42.6-47.6
Anhydrate 20,000 50
Granite 19,000-20,000 50-52.5
Gabb'ro 23,600 42.4
Fresh water 5,000 200
Sea water 5,300 189
Adapted from Keys, 1989
1018 in. Drill Acoustic Formation

/ Loa
SandlAIluvium
Sandstone
Limestone
Sandstone
Shale
Sandstone
Limestone
Note Line Where Sandstone
Acoustic Log Shows
Granite and Limestone
are Similar Granite
Figure 4- 13 Response of sediments to acoustic waves. Note that the granite and limestone
give similar results.
Acoustic logging
Acoustic or sonic logging involves the recording of the transit time of acoustic pulses
radiated from a tool in a borehole to one or more receivers also located on the tool.
Acoustical techniques can be used to send sound through a formation to determine
Figure 4- 14 Acoustic velocity and caliper log example
changes in lithology and types of formations. Table 4-4 shows an example from Keys
(1989). Table 4-4 and Figure 4-13 show that acoustical logging cannot be used alone
as granite and limestone have similar velocities for the sound waves (because
sedimentary rocks, cement, and hardness have similar responses), while the water
bearing characteristics are vastly different. Transit times for the acoustic waves are
related to formation mineralogy and the porosity of the rock. Most rock types have
a limited range of acoustic travel times, which allows for acoustic logs to be used to
determine lithology. The cement-bond log is a type of acoustic log that is used to
determine how well a casing has been cemented to the formation.
Acoustical logging is useful for consolidated formations and provides useful
information in uncased, fluid-filled boreholes. Figure 4-14 shows an example of an
acoustic log in conjunction with a caliper log. Saltwater will shift the response
slightly to the right. Limestone and granite provide similar responses so other logs
must be used to confirm which is present. Limestone will generally yield water while
granite generally will not.
Fluid Logs
Fluid logs include temperature, fluid resistance, and flowmeter logs. The tool used
for temperature logs usually contains a glass bead thermistor. Temperature logs can
be used to identify the boundaries of aquifer zones in boreholes; as water flows
through permeable zones, the normal geothermal gradient will vary. Temperature
logs are developed using a down-hole run. Temperature logs are useful in
conjunction with EC logs as temperature changes often occur where there is moving
water. Changes in conductivity in conjunction with changes in temperature logs

would tend to indicate flowing water across the borehole. Temperature logs can also
be used to detect interaquifer flow. The presence of cement grout in the annular
space of a well can be determined by running a temperature log within 24 hr of
grouting because the heat of hydration of the cement raises the fluid temperature
inside the casing in cemented areas.
Flowmeter logs are used to measure flow velocity within the wells. The most
common flowmeter logging tool is the impeller-type, where the rate of rotation of
the impeller is proportional to the relative flow velocity of the tool. The relative flow
velocity includes the actual flow velocity of water in the well and the rate at which
the probe is raised or lowered into the well. Caliper logs must be run in conjunction
with the flowmeter log because the flow velocity is a function of the cross-sectional
area of the borehole. The relative contribution of individual aquifer zones to the
total flow from a well can be calculated using data from flowmeter and caliper logs
(AWWA, 2003).
log Suites
In no case should only one log be used because in no case can one log adequately
describe the lithology and hydrogeology of the well. Individual geophysical logs do
not provide unequivocal lithologic information. A high gamma response could be
produced by a shale bed or phosphatic limestone layer. By running a suite of logs,
more accurate qualitative and quantitative information of formation porosity,
hydraulic characteristics, and fluid conductivity can be measured. Figure 4-15 shows
a series of logs for a borehole (Bloetscher, et al., 2005). In a log suite, occurrences
such as shale layers are identifiable by a low resistivity and high gamma log response,
where those logs singly would provide no specific information indicating that the
layer was shale.
Further details of the logs are summarized in several reference books, most
notably Keys (1989). In determining which logs and tests should be required, the
following geologic logs should be considered for surface casing intended to protect
underground sources of drinking water:
Resistivity (long and short, normal and single-point); spontaneous potential;
gamma: and caliper logs before the casing is installed; and
A cement bond, temperature, and density log after the casing is set and the
annular space cemented, depending on casing material. If the hole is drilled
without the use of drilling muds or other additives, the fluid resistivity
flowmeter and temperature log should be performed under static and pumping
conditions.
No radioactive source should be placed down-hole in the underground source of
drinlung water or where water for potable use or human consumption is anticipated.
0.00
Sand
Sandstone
20.00
Limestone
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
Sandstone
120.00
140.00
160.00
Clay and Sandstone

Limestone
180.00
0 2 4 6 0 20406080 0 100 200 15 PO 25 0 5 10 0 5 10
Caliper Log Natural Gamma SP Res’ Res 16” Res 64N”
(inches) (apt-gr) (mV) (ohm) (ohm-m) (ohm-m)
‘Some values exceeded the upper limit of the graphed range.
Source: Bloetscher,et al., 2005

Figure 4-15 Typical suite of logs
Table 4-5 outlines the application of types of geophysical methods that should
be used based on the formation type and investigation desired. Table 4-6
summarizes the response of four logs to porosity, an important property when
looking for water supply sources. Table 4-7 outlines a set of criteria suggested by
Keys (1989) for selecting logs to be run on a given project. It should be noted that
the same suite of logs may not be appropriate or cost effective in every instance.
Instead, careful consideration should be given to selecting the logs that will provide
the most useful information for making decisions based on the anticipated
geological environment where the wells are proposed to be constructed. In all cases,
a caliper log should be run. Other information that maybe gathered includes a radial
and side-view color television survey of the borehole under flowing and no-flow
conditions to help identify flow zones and sanding problems (see Figure 4-16).
Other geophysical logs should be considered depending on the formation,
availability of tools, cost of the project, and perceived hazards.
FIELD TESTING (from A W A , 2003)

Aquifer testing is very useful during construction of test holes, and many effective
methods are now available for performing such testing. In the simplest form, a
record of the water flow rates produced at different depths while drilling using the
Table 4-5 Recommended geophysical logs

Ground
Seismic Electrical Penetrating Cross-hole Electro-
Material Refraction Resistivity Radar Seismic magnetics Magnetics Gravity
Subsurface
X
geology
Rock density X
Groundwater
X X
location
Karst formation X X X X
Groundwater
X
pollution
Fracture zones X
Metallic objects
X X X
buried
Nonmetallic
X
objects buried
Seismic risk X
Foundation
X X X
design
Table 4-6 Response of logs to porosity

Response to Spurious Matrix
Property Response to Total Response to Secondary and Fluid
Log Measured Porosity Effective Porosity Porosity Responses
Resistivity Resistivity and No current flow in Response only to Detects secondary Boundary effects
volume or fluid isolated pores effective porosity porosity, shape of
connected pores pores effects results
Gamma- Electron density Best response with Does not Does not Matrix
gamma highly porous rocks distinguish distinguish from composition, high
primary porosity salinity = error
Neutron Hydrogen Best response with Does not Does not Bound water and
content minimal porosity distinguish distinguish from other neutron
primary porosity absorbers. Pores
must be saturated.
High salinity.
Acoustic Average Relates only to Does not Does not No signal in gas
compression total porosity distinguish distinguish from ,
wave speed when primary and secondary porosity
intergranular under most
conditions
Table 4-7 Criteria for selection of logs
Borehole
Type of Log Property Measured Application Condition Limitations
Spontaneous Electric potential Lithology, water Uncased borehole Need salinity
potential caused by salinity quality, and water with water differences
content
Single-point Resistance of rock, High resolution Uncased borehole Not quantitative,
resistance water, and filled lithology and with water borehole diameter
voids fractures impacts results
Multi-electrode Resistance of rock Quantitative date Uncased borehole Normal logs do not
and fluids on salinity and with water measure thin bed
lithology thickness correctly
Gamma Natural gamma Lithology, use clay Any borehole None
radiation in rock and silt content for less than 24 in.
permeability diameter
Gamma-gamma Electron density Bulk density, Uncased borehole Severe borehole
porosity, moisture diameter effects
content, and
lithology
Neutron Hydrogen content Saturated porosity, Uncased borehole Borehole diameter
moisture content and chemical effects
and lithology
Acoustic Acoustic reflectivity Orientation of 3 to 16 in. fluid Does not detect
of borehole wall fracture, dip of bed filled borehole secondary porosity
Caliper Diameter of Lithology and All conditions None
borehole voids
Temperature Temperature of Flow and tempera- Fluid-filled Accuracy varies
water ture gradient borehole with probe
Conductivity Fluid resistivity Water quality, Fluid-filled Accuracy varies
contamination borehole with probe
location
Flow Fluid movement Flow in borehole Fluid-filled Accuracy varies
borehole with probe
reverse-air method is a form of aquifer testing, yielding valuable information. Packer

tests are used to determine transmissivity and storage coefficients for isolating
water-producing formations. They can be used on both tight and permeable
formations for comparative purposes in identifying confining beds. The diameter of
the cone of depression and the drawdown varies with the size of the well, pumping
rate, and the flow rate of water through the aquifer. In porous sand and gravel, the
Next Page
Courtesy ofyoungquist Bros. Inc.

Figure 4-16 Example of borehole photograph
cone of depression may be small. In tighter materials, the cone of depression may be
very significant.
Wells are normally placed far enough apart so that their cones of depression do
not overlap significantly. Wells should be sized to minimize drawdown so that the
aquifer can rebound quickly. Permanent drops in water levels can occur when the
aquifer is pumped too much, a phenomenon called mining of the aquifer. The Black
Creek aquifer in eastern North Carolina is such an example. When recharge to the
aquifer is inadequate, a new water source will need to be located.
Ideally, wells should be pumped continuously without permanent drawdowns
occurring. Where this is not possible, it is common practice to pump wells that have
a significant drawdown for only a few hours each day to allow the aquifer to recover.
An artesian well may be under enough pressure to cause the water to rise above the
confining unit, which may eliminate the need for pumping initially. However, after
an artesian well has been used for a period of time, the artesian pressure may reduce
until the water no longer flows to the surface.
It is more important to determine the appropriate casing depth than to locate
the pump depth. An improper casing depth may seal off highly productive zones.
Determining the casing depth is dependent on the results of the design
considerations, geophysical logs, and data collected during drilling. The data
required to determine casing depth includes
Lithology
Coredata
Borehole geophysics
Previous Page
Aquifer performance testing

Water quality
Drilling rate of penetration relative to weight on bit
Cuttings
Lost circulation zones
The first three were previously discussed. Determining transmissivity or the
storage coefficient of an aquifer by any means other than actual performance tests in
the field is expensive, time consuming, and of questionable accuracy. Field testing
methods for determining these values have been developed and are well
documented. All of these methods apply a regulated stress (pumping) to the
formation and measure the effects (changes in water level) produced. These data are
analyzed, and the transmissivity and storage coefficient are calculated.
To obtain the required data, one or more monitor wells tapping the aquifer
serve as observation points in the area of investigation. The location of all wells must
be accurately plotted on the area map so that the lateral distance and direction from
the pumping well and the relative position with respect to other wells can be
included in the analysis. No set number of wells is required but having more wells
reduces the likelihood of making an error. For best results, the test well should fully
penetrate the formation and be open only to the aquifer to be used as a source while
the testing the well.
Cuttings are useful when retrieved during the drilling process to define the type
of rock formation that lies beneath the surface. Chemical composition may be an
issue-for instance, formations with high quantities of pyrite are often sources of
leaching arsenic. Cuttings will indicate clay, voids, and other useful information for
clarifying geophysical results. The more data that can be gathered from different
sources, the more efficient the investigation. Caliper logs will help identify zones
where significant voids may exist. They often are flow zones as well.
Water level Measurements

The first step in determining the transmissivity and specific capacity of the aquifer is
to create a method to determine water levels prior to pumping. A surveyor’s
benchmark should be used to determine the elevations of the wells using a level and
survey rod. By accurately measuring water levels with respect to surface elevations,
groundwater gradients prior to commencement of pumping can be determined.
Before a pump test is run, static water levels should be taken for several days to
determine if there are any ongoing changes in the aquifer that should be considered.
Once the static, prepumping water levels are determined, these water-levels serve as
a reference point that can be used for the collection of water-level data during an
aquifer performance test. During the aquifer test, water levels must be recorded for
each well. Data sheets should be used to record the water level changes during the
pump test that include the date, time, depth to water, and casing elevations. Other
data should be gathered and correlated to specific wells.
Water levels can be measured using a hand-held tape with a weight attached to
the end to hold it straight and taut. The tape should be metal, and graduated in feet
and in tenths and hundredths of a foot, or some similar metric unit. Such
graduations facilitate calculations by eliminating conversion of fractions to decimal
equivalents. By chalking the lower portion of the tape and lowering it into the water
until an even foot graduation coincides exactly with the reference point, the precise
distance to water from the reference is made by subtraction. The wetted chalk is
easily identified, and direct readings to one hundredth of a foot can be made
( A W A , 2003).
Other methods of collecting water-level data include an electric tape that has an
insulated wire with an open-end weighted electrode on the end. When the electrode
enters the water, it completes a circuit that actuates a light, buzzer, meter, or other
signal device. The distance to water is then read directly from graduations on the
wire line. However, the graduations are not usually fine enpugh to permit a very
accurate reading without some supplementary device. Float-actuated recording
devices provide a means of collecting data continuously, but the time drive is not fast
enough for the early periods of a test program. Pressure transducers combined with a
data logger can provide an excellent record ofwater levels. Air-line devices have little
value for controlled tests, except where water-level fluctuations are very large.
Collection Schedule (from A W A , 2003)

While the aquifer test is run (pumped), water-level readings should be obtained
using the following collection schedule:
1 reading at zero time total elapsed time = 0 min
1 reading each 1 min for 10 min total elapsed time = 10 min
Such a standard schedule can be easily followed and provides adequate data. All
times are calculated from the precise instant that the pump is turned on or off,
which is designated as zero. If the test extends beyond 24 hr, subsequent
measurements can be made at 4-hour intervals. The timing of measurements at the
onset of the test is critical. Each well should have at least one observer equipped with
measuring devices and a synchronized stopwatch. After 180 min, measurements do
not have to be made at a designated instant, but they must be accurate with regard to
the exact time that each measurement is maintained.
The data collected provides information on the aquifer performance, not well
performance. Each method involves turning a pumped well on or off and observing
what happens to the water level in nearby observation wells. All methods use the
Theis nonequilibrium formula or modifications thereto, which takes into account
the time that has elapsed since pumping began or ceased.
Ideally, all wells used in the analysis should fully penetrate the aquifer. Some
departures from this requirement can be tolerated, but the construction details of
the partially penetrating wells are required, and modifications to the equations are
required. Any wells in the area that are not involved in the test should be stabilized
before an aquifer test and maintained at the same pumping rate for the duration of
the test. During the aquifer test, well pumping should be at a steady, unvarying rate
and carefully measured. The pumping rate and water-level data should be carefully
computed and plotted. Each method uses the Theis formula to analyze variations in
drawdown with time, or variations in drawdown with distance from the pumped well.
A family of curves has been developed to facilitate aquifer evaluation under a
variety of conditions. The equations used for aquifer parameters are:
T = 114.6QW(u)/s (Eq. 4-3)
Where:
T = the transmissivity of the aquifer, in gpd/ft
Q = the discharge rate of the well, in gpm
u = for any given formation, is proportional to the ratio of Y2/T
W(u)= the “well function of u,” is determined from calculated tables
for each value of u
s = the drawdown at any point under study in the vicinity of the
discharging well, in ft.
u = 1.87r2S/Tt (Eq. 4-4)
Where:
r = the distance from the dischargingwell to the point where the
drawdown is being observed, in ft
S = the aquifer storage coefficient
T = the transmissivity of the aquifer
t = the elapsed time since discharge began, in days.
The equations assume an aquifer that

0 Is a confined or an artesian aquifer,
... . ..... .
..~
Has confinement that occurs above and below by relatively impermeable

materials, and
Is homogeneous and isotropic-uniformin structure, with the same physical and
hydraulic properties in all directions.
In practical terms, the thickness and actual extent of the aquifer should be
known to permit the best possible interpretation of the test data. The formula is
modified for leaky artesian conditions based on the conditions for confined aquifers
and on several assumptions.
The aquifer is confined between an impermeable bed and a bed through which
leakage can occur.
Leakage is vertical into the aquifer and proportional to the drawdown.
No water is stored in the confining bed.
The hydraulic head in the deposits supplyingleakage remains constant.
An unconfined, or water table, aquifer does not have water confined or under
pressure beneath impermeable rocks. Water is derived from storage by gravity
drainage of the interstices above the cone of depression, by compaction of the
aquifer, and by expansion of water in the aquifer. Properties of an unconfined
aquifer can be determined by the Theis method with some limiting conditions. One
of the basic assumptions of the Theis solution is that water is released from storage
instantaneously with a decline in head. In a water table aquifer, this is not always
true, because water is derived partly from gravity drainage, and the effects of gravity
drainage are not considered in the Theis formula. However, with long pumping
periods, the effects of gravity drainage become negligible so that the Theis solution
can be used.
Drawdown Method of Calculation (from A W A , 2003)

When the drawdown method of calculation is used to determine transmissivity, one
well is pumped while the water levels are observed in two or more nearby wells.
Figure 4-17 is a hydrograph-a plot of water level versus time-for observation
well 1 (only the left half of Figure 4-17 should be considered at this point). Water-
level measurements are taken in conformance with the schedule outlined previously.
Baseline testing should occur for a minimum of 48 hr before the start of the test to
identify any preexisting trends that would need to be considered during the test. If
no upward or downward trend of water levels is found in the wells, the
measurements are plotted as a horizontal line.
The drawdown represents the difference between the water level observed in
the well and the level at which the water would have stood had no pumping
occurred. Aquifer transmissivity and storage coefficients can be determined by
comparing a logarithmic curve of time versus drawdown against one of a series of
100
,--. 100 1,000 10,oco

-3
2
0.01 -
0.001 -
0.0001 -
0.00001 -
0.000001
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1,000 10,000 100,000
1IU
Figure 4-17 Type curve for confined aquifer (AWWA, 2003)
type curves developed from the Theis formula. The type curve is superposed over
the field-data plot, keeping the respective graphical axes parallel. The curves are
adjusted horizontally and vertically to obtain the best match of the two curves. An
arbitrary match point is selected on the two graphs, and the field-curve and type-
curve coordinates for substitution in the appropriate equation are selected. A
different form of the type-curve solution is'the distance-drawdown method. In this
analysis, drawdowns in three or more observation wells at different distances from
the pumped well are compared with one another to observe trends in the drawdown
at each well in response to pumping.
An alternative solution is available for analyzing aquifer test data that is an
approximate version of the type-curve solution. For this solution, well-test data is
plotted on semilogarithmic paper and variations of the basic formula are used to
compute the aquifer transmissivity and storage coefficient. The drawdown data tend
to follow a straight line when plotted on semilog paper (Figure 4-18).
Recovery Method of Calculation (from A W A , 2003)

The recovery method is exactly the same as the drawdown of calculation, only in
reverse. The recovery method of analyzing aquifer test data involves shutting off a
pumping well and observing the recovery of water levels in nearby observation wells.
Recovery is the difference between the observed water level in the well at some time
after pumping has stopped and the level at which the water would have been, had
r = Distance of Well From Pumped Well = 400 R (122 m)
1 - Predicted Drawdown After 720 min

of Continuous Pumping = 3.5 ft (1.I rn)
I
1 10 100 1.000
Time Since Pump Started (min)
Source: Johnson Screens, Inc., 1986

Figure 4-18 Example of'alternativesolution for drawdown response
pumping continued. The same curve options are available for this method of
calculation as for the drawdown method, except that the concept has been inverted.
The inverted curve indicates the rising levels in the observation wells. The recovery
curve is compared with the inverted drawdown curve to determine the
transmissivity and storage coefficient. The values should be similar to those
obtained using the drawdown calculation method. The same time periods for the
recovering water levels should be observed as for the drawdown method.
A straight-line solution can also be used. As in the drawdown methods, the data
curves are plotted on semilog paper, showing a rising trend in the recovery period.
With these modifications, the curves become straight lines. The same abbreviated
equations are used to compute the transmissivity and storage coefficient. In practice,
the recovery test is essentially the reverse of a drawdown test, therefore one
drawdown curve and one straight-line plot will serve equally well for either kind of
test data. Both kinds of data can be recorded on the same plot to check their
agreement ( A W A , 2003).
Caution needs to be used in analyzing recovery data. Water extracted from the
aquifer may recover very slowly from drainage from the unsaturated zone above.
Therefore, when it is anticipated that the amount of time for full recovery is
significantlygreater than the duration of the pump test, a reduction in the pump test
rate is recommended so that the test pumping rate is proportional to the ratio of
pumping time to recovery time.
x x
The reverse is also true. If a surface water source of infiltration or aquifer

leakage is present, the recovery may occur more rapidly than the drawdown. In such
cases, the pump test is unlikely to yield useful data. Further investigation is needed
to determine the appropriate maximum water yield available.
Specific Capacity Method

An abbreviated well-performance evaluation can be performed using a relatively
short test to determine the specific capacity of the well. The specific capacity
method divides the total drawdown in a well into two components-drawdown in
the aquifer and drawdown related to well loss. The drawdown in the aquifer is
dependent on the aquifer's ability to transmit water. Drawdowns of this type do not
usually change unless the aquifer is depleted. However, the drawdown caused by
well loss may change considerably over time as a result of changes in flow regime
(laminar to turbulent in the screen or column pipe) or changes in head loss as the
water passes through the screen or well bore from corrosion, failure of the well
screen or gravel pack, pump efficiency losses, water quality changes, and other
factors. The potential for these changes to occur is the reason all wells should be
tested annually for specific capacity to determine whether significant changes in
well performance have occurred. Correction is recommended when capacity
decreases by more than 50 percent. Tests for specific capacity should not be
substituted for the more involved tests previously described when a more complete
well and aquifer evaluation is necessary.
STEP-DRAWDOWNTESTING (from AWWA, 2003)

The purpose of step-drawdown testing is to evaluate the performance of the well. A
step-drawdown test is performed on a well to determine aquifer characteristics. The
data collected during the step-drawdown tests are used in the evaluation of the
performance, efficiency, and specific capacity of wells at the different pumping rates.
The data is also used for the calculation of the transmissivity and hydraulic
conductivity of the aquifer; to quantify the deterioration in well performance over
time; and yield information regarding well efficiency, well development, and well
screen/borehole clogging. Step-drawdown testing should be performed yearly on
each well and should be performed in conjunction with sand testing. Step-
drawdown testing should also be performed prior to and after well disinfection.
This procedure will allow evaluation of the effectiveness of the disinfection
procedure. The results also help determine possible rehabilitative procedures and
optimum pumping rates.
Step-Drawdown Testing Procedure

Step-drawdowntesting involves pumping a well for a predetermined amount of time
(approximately 60 min), until water level stabilization is reached, at each of three
increasing pumping rates. Ideally, the three rates should be at 50, 100, and 150
percent of the design pumping rate. Before each increase in pumping rate, water
levels are allowed to recover to static levels for at least the same amount of time as
the well was pumped. The changes in water levels within the well are measured with
an electric water-level probe (M-scope) during both the drawdown and recovery
periods. It is imperative that the M-scope be disinfected before use in each well and
after use in each well. The time increments for measurements are as follows: 1 min-
readings for the first 10 min, 2-min readings from 10 to 20 min, and 5-min readings
from 20 to 60 min and/or the end of the test.
From a measurement standpoint, the most important test measurements are the
first and last water-level measurements. If for some reason the well does not stabilize
at 60 min, the test readings should be measured until the well is stable. Each
successive rate (and recovery period) must be extended out to at least the longest
previous time interval, and a measurement must be obtained at the same time as the
end of the first drawdown step. The recovery period should be equal to the longest
time period in the drawdown step. Example: If step 1 lasts for 60 min, but the
second step indicates the well is still drawing down at 60 min, readings should
continue until the well is stable (for example, 100 min). Readings will then be
obtained at 60 min and at 100 min. The recovery for the second and third step must
also be 100 min, while recovery must be at least 100 min and readings must be
obtained at 60 min and 100 min for each step and recovery period.
Discharge from the well should be controlled by a gate valve and should be
measured using a calibrated flowmeter and/or an orifice manometer assembly. The
total drawdown (measured in the field) in a well is a function of the drawdown due
to aquifer characteristics and the drawdown due to the loss of efficiency from the
well. Total drawdown(s) can be written as the following equation (Dawson and
Istok, 1991):
s = BQ+CQ2 (Eq. 4-5)

Where:
s = drawdown in the well casing, ft
Q = pumping rate, gpm
c = well loss coefficient, sec2/ft5
B = (264/T)l o g [ ( O . 3 T t ) / ( ~ Sgpd/ft
)],
and
T = transmissivity, gpdlft
t = time, min
r = radius of the well, ft
S = storage coefficient, dimensionless
Because the transmissivity and storage coefficient of an artesian aquifer or a leaky

aquifer are constant, the BQterm in the equation does not affect the determination
of well loss using Equation 4-5. In a water table aquifer, the transmissivity, storage
coefficient, and specific yield values change (decrease) as the aquifer saturated
thickness decreases. The drawdown equation does not compensate for the effects of
partial penetration of the aquifer. However, if the degree of dewatering is small,
changes in transmissivity, storage coefficient, and specific yield are negligible and
can be ignored. Assuming that the well is not developing, the total drawdown can be
used to determine transmissivity. However, this method gives lower transmissivity
values than those calculated without accounting for drawdown caused by well loss.
Specific Capacity Calculation

The productivity (quantity ofwater produced) of a well can be expressed as specific
capacity. The specific capacity of a well is defined as the ratio of the pumping rate to
the drawdown at a given time, as illustrated in the following equation:
c, = Q (Eq. 4-6)
S
Where:
C3= specific capacity of the well,.gpd/ft of drawdown at a unit of time
Q = pumping rate, gpm
S = drawdown, ft
Estimating the specific capacity of a well requires determining the drawdown
from a static water level to a pumping water level within the well at a known
pumping rate after a known span of time. Specific capacity is measured in gallons
per minute per foot of drawdown at a given period of time (gpm/ft at a unit of time)
to calculate well efficiency. The higher the specific capacity, the more efficient the
well, as long as all other factors are equal. Specific capacity changes in a nonlinear
fashion with increased pumping rates because a well cannot, in reality, be 100 percent
efficient. Slight decreases in the specific capacity with increased pumping rates are to
be expected in wells that have fully stabilized and are no longer developing. If the
specific capacity increases at higher pumping rates, the well is still developing.
Well Loss Constant

Well loss is defined as head loss attributable to well inefficiency caused by the
turbulent flow of water through the well screen and/or inside the casing to the
pump intake (Jacob, 1946).Well loss can be expressed as a well loss constant (C) and
the well loss in feet (Sw).The well loss constant is derived from a comparison of the
drawdown data at the various pumping rates of the step-drawdown test. This
constant is in turn expressed as well loss in feet or as well efficiency. The value of C
.".." "-
may be computed from step-drawdown test data using the following equation
(Jacob, 1946):
(Eq. 4-7)
Where:
c = well loss constant, sec2/ft5
I = any given pumping step
A& = incremental drawdown associated with step i, ft
AQi = incremental pumping that produces incremental drawdown
(32) associated with step i, ft3/sec
Changes in Cvalues are affected by changes in discharge rates, shifting of the gravel
outside the wells, and/or development of the formation.
Equation 4-7 assumes that the production well is stable and that the value of C
does not change during the well production test. New wells, improperly designed
and/or constructed wells, and old wells can be unstable, therefore the calculated
value of C can be affected by changes in the discharge rate. The value of C calculated
for flow rates 1 and 2 of the step-drawdown test may be greater or less than that
calculated for flow rates 2 and 3. Sand and gravel often shift outside the production
well during discharge periods under the influence of high discharge rates. This may
result in either the development ot clogging of the pores of the well face. If the value
of C for steps 2 and 3 is considerably less than the value of C for steps 1 and 2, it is
probable that development of the well has occurred during the well production
(step-drawdown) test. A large increase in the value of Cwith higher discharge rates
indicates clogging has occurred during the well production test. Clogging may occur
for several reasons: fine-grained material clogging boreholes, the presence of
bacteria, and/or formation collapse. Formation collapse may be an indication of
sinkhole formation. If the production well is unstable, C may be calculated with
Equation 4-7 and data for flow rates for steps 1+2 and 3 or 2+3 and 1.
Borehole clogging as a result of incomplete well development or well
deterioration by bacteria or other concerns is generally negligible when Cis less than
5.0 sec2/ft5. Values of C between 5.0 and 10.0 sec2/ft5 indicate mild clogging or well
deterioration, and clogging or well deterioration is severe when C is greater than
40.0 sec2/ft5 (Walton, 1962, p. 27). Deteriorated wells may be returned to near
original yields by one of several rehabilitation methods. The success of the
rehabilitation can be appraised with the results of well production tests conducted
prior to and after rehabilitation.
Well Loss in Feet

Well loss is used to calculate the well efficiency. It is computed in feet using the
following equation (Jacob, 1946):
5, = c@ (Eq. 4-8)
Where:
sw = well loss, ft
c = well loss coefficient, sec2/ft5
Q= production well discharge, ft3/sec
Well Efficiency Calculation

Well efficiency is defined as the percentage of total drawdown that is attributable to
well loss. This number can be obtained by dividing the theoretical drawdown by the
total drawdown and multiplying by 100 to obtain the percentage.
2S x 100 = Percent Efficiency (Eq. 4-9)

Where:
s t = theoretical drawdown, ft
s = actual drawdown, ft
For the purposes of this text, the theoretical drawdown is calculated as the total
(measured) drawdown minus the well loss in feet. The actual drawdown is the
drawdown as measured in the well.
The term well eflciency, in this context, can be misleading because is does not
indicate that the efficiency (productivity) is caused by both the well characteristics
(well loss) and aquifer characteristics (theoretical drawdown). Therefore, wells with
lower well efficiencies should not be thought of as necessarily inferior to wells with
higher well efficiencies. Well efficiencies of greater than 100 percent indicate that
the wells are developing.
Identification of Aquifer Boundaries

No aquifer is infinite, although for the purposes of calculation, aquifers that have
extensive area may be assumed to be infinite. Most aquifers have, at some point,
identifiable boundaries. Where the boundaries are close to the well, the drawdown
test data will be plotted differently.While there are a number of potential boundary
scenarios, there are two that are common: the impermeable barrier and the
recharge barrier.
The effect of an impermeable barrier around an aquifer shows in the drawdown
test when plotting in the manner previously outlined. The new graph, instead of
Theoretical Straight-Line Plot
Data Plot \ \
l8 \
’\
\
\
\
\
\
\
b\
\
\
\
.,
\
\
\
Source: AWWA, 2003

Figure 4-19 Example of drawdown response at impermeable boundary
staying on a straight line, now curves and eventually defines a new straight line
having twice the slope of the original (see Figure 4-19).This phenomenon is known
as reflection. The aquifer is cut off by an impermeable barrier caused by the rising
side of a buried valley or intruded, impermeable formation. This situation is quite
common in the northern, once-glaciated parts of the United States. The effect is the
same as having a second well located across the barrier at the same distance from the
barrier as the actual well, pumping at the same rate. Data gathered and plotted in
this manner will indicate the presence, location (distance), and type of aquifer
boundary with respect to the pumped well.
A recharge zone creates the opposite phenomena from an impermeable
boundary. Instead of being cut off by an aquifer barrier, the aquifer is cut off by a
recharging stream-a situation that is often found in the field. The data plot begins
as expected, with a curved portion leading into a straight line. However, instead of
continuing on the straight line, as the data theoretically should for an infinite
aquifer, the plotted data curves above it and eventually defines a horizontal line
12 -
Legend
0 Observation Well No. 1
4 I , , I I I I l l I I
Source: AWWA, 2003

Figure 4-20 Example of drawdown response at recharge boundary
(see Figure 4-20). The rate of drawdown caused by the withdrawal well lessens
because of the water contributed to the aquifer by the stream and gradually
approaches a fixed value. The effect is the same as if a well, identical to the pumping
well, is introducing water to the aquifer instead of withdrawing it. The reflective
well is located at an equal distance from, and on the opposite side of, the recharge
boundary from the withdrawal well.
Comparisons
To provide a baseline for testing the well design procedure, Nuzman (1989)
developed some rule-of-thumb ratios between transmissivity and well specific
capacity (ATscnslrA, 2003):
Confined Aquifer Q/s = T/2,200 (Eq. 4-10)
Semiconfined Aquifer Q/s = T/ 1,700 (Eq. 4-11)

Unconfined Aquifer Q/s = T/1,200 (Eq. 4- 12)
These ratios were developed for a typical well radius of influence of 0.5 mi, and
effective well diameter of 24 in., and assuming a storativity coefficient typical for the
aquifer characteristics defined and the general assumptions of a theoretical aquifer
(homogenous, isotropic, instant release from storage, infinite area extent, and no
leakage or recharge). The equations are provided for purposes of comparison only
and should not be used exclusive of good field testing. Once the geological data is
secured, design information-size, materials, casing purpose-can be used to
determine the appropriate depth of the casing and screening.
WATER QUALITY SAMPLING (from Bloetscher, et a[., 2005)

Performance of groundwater monitoring and the development of periodic reports
of such monitoring should be standard practice for all well systems. These analyses
include the routine testing of the raw water quality of the proposed production
zones. Water quality sampling is an integral part of proper maintenance of wells.
Water quality samples should be analyzed by a licensed, state-certified, or USEPA-
certified laboratory. The sampling period should be determined by the stability of
the water quality results in the well; how often, if ever, the parameters change and
the amount of the change; and in accordance with federal, state, and local
regulations. Changes in water quality are usually an indicator of problems with wells
and, if the changes are great, they may disrupt the water production process. In
addition, certain changes in water quality can cause adverse environmental impacts.
ASTM standard D-4195-03 requires water analyses to be performed on raw
water for the parameters in Table 4-8. It is recommended that for all water
production programs, analyses be conducted for the same parameters. Standard
sampling methods (ASTM, 2002) and chain-of-custody protocols should be used to
collect and analyze the water samples. Temperature, pH, and silt density index (SDI)
should be measured on-site at the time the sample is collected. Other chemical and
physical parameters may require testing in certain regions based on specific
groundwater quality of the area.
Geochemical considerations may impact the long-term viability of the
groundwater program in some aquifer systems. One concern is the potential for
fresh and saltwater interaction. Also, fractures or other head or boundary conditions
that lie outside the zone of the aquifer testing program may be issues. These
interactions may include ion exchange, which can occur where significant clays may
be present.
Redox processes may cause carbonate precipitation (or formation dissolution),
ion exchange, suspended solid clogging, and biofouling. Redox processes are caused
by oxygen consumption in the aquifer, typically an indication of either chemical
oxidation or microbiological activity that is using the oxygen. Chlorine oxidation is
also common in potable water systems. Air binding, either dissolved oxygen or
entrained air, will lead to clogging problems. Withdrawal velocities may cause
Table 4-8 Summary of parameters to be analyzed in water quality testing
Aluminum (Al) (total and dissolved) Oxygen ( 0 2 )

Barium (Ba) PH
Bicarbonate (HCO3-) Phosphate (Po4-) (total)
Calcium (Ca) Potassium (K)
Carbon dioxide ( C 0 2 ) Silica as silica dioxide (Si02-) (total and dissolved)
Carbonate (CO3-) Silt density index (SDI)
Chloride (C1-) Sodium (Na)
Fluoride (F-) Strontium (Sr)
Free chlorine (Cl2) Sulfate (so4-)
Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) Temperature
Iron (Fe) (totaled, dissolved, and ferrous) Total dissolved solids (TDS)
Magnesium (Mg) Total organic carbon ( T O C )
Manganese (Mn) (total and dissolved) Turbidity (nephelometric method)
Nitrate (NO3-)
wearing and encrustration of excessive formation dissolution. Pressure differences

between the formation and fluids may cause dissolution to occur or microfracturing.
Temperature differences may also lead to dissolution problems.
SAND, SILT, AND COLLOIDS (from Bloetscher, et a!., 2005)

Drilling methods and well development play a major role in identifying clogging
potential. Proper selection of drilling equipment and performance of adequate
pump tests, with optimal well development time, will indicate if sand, silt, or solids
present an ongoing problem. The larger the pore size, the less potential there is for
plugging, although filter theory indicates that particles 1/2Oth of the pore size may
be effectively filtered out (i.e., may become part of the clogging matter). Inadequate
well development is a frequent problem with new or refurbished wells.
Sand, silt, and colloids are relevant to measuring potential impacts to the
aquifer formation, including plugging and fouling problems. Plugging and fouling
problems are caused by a number of hydrogeologic, geologic, engineering, and
construction related factors, including
Hydrogeologic constraints that are not evaluated at the time of design and/or
change over time, such as: sand, clay, or rock layers that are unstable and
collapse into the well boreholes; naturally occurring and/or man-made
fracturing/faulting; long-term water quality changes caused by changes to the
hydraulic regime, such as dams; water hammer to the aquifedformation; man-
induced influences (mining the aquifer, introduction of chemicals and/or
microorganisms); and naturally occurring phenomena (sinkholes, karst terrain

features, and/or faulting);
Poor well design and/or construction practices, including insufficient
placement of grout, improper design of pumps, valves, and fittings; and
excessive drawdown allowances;
Poor operating and/or maintenance procedures;
Mechanical failures, including failures of electrical motors and pumps, and
failure ofvalves; and/or;
Failure to develop the wells fully, or interfingered sand or silt layers that have
not or cannot be sealed off from the borehole or corrected in well design.
Most of these issues can be mitigated to some extent in the field. Determining the
amount of resulting problems can be found by video surveying of the wells; pump
testing; and water quality testing for silt, sand, and colloidal material.
The purpose of sand testing is to determine the amount of sand being pumped
from a well. This is important because sand, especially quartz sand, can adversely
affect the longevity of pumps, motors, column pipes, and pipelines because of its
ability to abrade steel. The abrasion has the ability to create points of potential
corrosion by both electrolysis and bacteria. Sand testing should be performed on
each production well on a yearly basis and should be performed in conjunction with
step-drawdown testing. Two types of sand testing equipment can be used to perform
sand testing. The first type is a Rossum sand tester, and the second type is a Lakos
Lava1 sand separator.
Sand production is also an indicator that there may be structural concerns with
the well and/or well screen. Continued sand production can cause catastrophic
collapse of the formation around a well and is a serious concern. Under normal
operating conditions, the concentration of sand produced by a water supply well
should be less than the AWWA Standard for Water Wells Al00-06 of 5.0 mg/L
during a two-hr pumping cycle when pumping at the design rate. Any
recommendations for limiting sediment concentration must take into account
the water use, the method of treatment, the type of sediment, and the source of the
sediment. Properly designed wells can meet 1.0 mg/L. The USEPA and the
National Water Well Association (1975) have recommended the following limits:
1 mg/L-water to be used directly in contact with, or in the processing of, food
and beverages.
5 mg/L-water for homes, institutions, municipalities, and industries.
10 mg/L-water for sprinkler irrigation systems, industrial evaporative cooling
systems, and other uses where a moderate amount of sand is not especially
harmful.
15 mg/L-water for flood-type irrigation and where the nature of the water-
bearing formations and the overlying strata are such that pumping this amount
of sand will not seriously shorten the useful life of the well.
The limits suggest reasonable goals that can be achieved if good well design,
construction, and development practices are followed. In older wells or wells in
problem aquifers, a well may pump unacceptable amounts of sediment. If the well
cannot be redeveloped by conventional techniques, a special sand separator can be
installed as a permanent part of the well system. Although sand separators are
efficient, they may not remove all sediment and should not be used as a substitute
for good well design and construction practices. In addition, if sufficient sand is
removed, this removal could cause catastrophic collapse of the formation. The
testing procedure for a Rossum sand separator is well documented in AWWA
literature. While the Rossum sand tester is the method accepted by AWWA, the
authors’ experience has indicated that the use of a Lakos Lava1 sand separator
provides a better method of quantifying sand produced from a well.
The amount of sand produced in milligrams per liter for each individual
pumping rate is determined by the following equation (Witt and Andrews, 1993):
SWt(l,OOO>
S = (Eq. 4-13)
3.785Qt
Where:
S = sand content, mg/L
Swt = weight of sand, g
1,000 = equation constant, mg/g
3.785 = equation constant
Q = rate through the sand separator, gpm
t = time, min
The well should be pumped at its design rate for 2 hr, and sand samples should
be collected at 5,30,60, and 120 min without stopping the pumping. Sand samples
are removed from the sand separator and analyzed. The amount of sand pumped
during normal operation is reflected in the fourth (120 min) sand sample. This
sample is a realistic figure for the quantity of sand that will be produced during
normal well operations. 1.0 mg/L is the desired maximum. More sand, especially
after proper development of the well, may indicate grouting problems or a sand vein
in the production zone that may cause damage to the well and pumping equipment.
Large discrepancies in the amount of sand collected at the 5-min sample as
compared to the amount of the 120-min sample are of concern and may be an
indication of water hammer to the formation. Water hammer is a phenomenon
whereby the turn-on or turn-off of the well causes large pressure fluctuations in the
aquifer. Such fluctuations will dislodge sand and silt, and may cause damage to
limestone and sandstone. Water hammer often indicates operational failure of the
valves in a well and/or at the plant. It should be noted that the Lakos Lava1 sand
separator only removes sand particles in the range of 74 pm with 98 percent efficiency.
This means that particles less than 74 pm will pass through the sand separator.
Colloidal testing should be performed prior to well disinfection and after well
disinfection. This procedure will allow evaluation of the effectiveness of the
disinfection procedure. The filter pore spaces are 5.0 pm in size. This filter size
allows for the capture of most clay- and silt-sized particles. Clay- and silt-sized
particles can clog the gravel pack and well screens, causing increased drawdown, loss
of production, and increased operating cost. Continued withdrawal of silts and clays
can, like sand, cause sinkhole formation. The production of clays and silts may also
be an indication of structural concerns with the well casing and the screen. A
pressure gauge on each side (in-flow and out-flow) of the filter apparatus allows the
measurement of the change in pressure across the filter cartridge. The following is an
outline of the procedure to set up the cartridge filter:
1. Disinfect the filter holder with unscented Clorox' bleach and attach the
colloidal test apparatus to the side of the discharge line.
2. Flush Clorox' out of the cartridge filter holder by opening the valve to the
discharge line.
3. Insert the cartridge filters into the holder without touching the filter. (Open
an end of the plastic bag and insert the filter, then remove plastic bag.)
4. Turn on water to run through the filter.
5. Check and note the discharge rate after 5 min; check and note the pressure
in (Pin) and pressure out (Pout).
6. Check and note Pi, and Pout at least once a day. Note any color changes in
the filter and/or any growths on the filter. Once the pressure differential
between Pin and Pout increases to more than 28 psi, remove the filter using
plastic gloves.
The filter should be visually inspected and stored in a polyvinyl chloride (PVC)
container and any odor noted. Culture swabs may be obtained and sent for
microbiological analysis. The filters should be placed in PVC containers and sent
for x-ray diffraction and microscopic analysis by a qualified professional.
SDI testing, as defined in ASTM Standard D-4189-94, is an empirical
measurement to test for the potential of silt, colloidals, bacteria, colloidal silica,
organic molecules, and/or corrosion products that foul well screens and gravel
packs. The SDI test simply measures the decay in flow rate through a 47-mm
diameter, 0.45-pm pore-size membrane. The 0.45-pm membrane is used because it
is more susceptible to clogging from colloidal matter than from hard particles, such
as sand and scale. Furthermore, the 0.45-pm size is smaller than the 5.0-pm size of
the prefilter and therefore measures particles that would pass through the prefilter
and clog the membrane. (The membrane is approximately 0.5 pm in size.) The
measured decay in flow rate is converted to a number between 1 and 100.
The SDI number is a function of the rate at which the filter (membrane) clogs
with colloidal material. The larger the SDI number, the greater the fouling tendency
of the water. To perform the SDI test, a Millipore SDI or fouling index test kit or an
equivalent is required. The SDI equipment includes the following: 47-mm filter
holder, pressure regulator, pressure gauge, valves, fittings, tweezers, 0.45-pm
membrane filter discs, a stop watch, and a 500-mL graduated cylinder.
To calculate the SDI of a given water, the following formula is used:
T
SDI= (Eq. 4-14)
( 1 - T,)2 xlOO+TT
Where:
SDI = silt density index (an empirical number between I and 100)
Ti = the initial time to fill 500 mL, sec
TF= the final time to fill 500 mL, sec
TT= the total time test is performed, min
It is important to note the color of the filter because coloration is an indication
of the clogging medium. If microorganisms are suspected, it is important to preserve
the filter in a sterile container, such as a petri dish. This filter should be sent for
microbiological analysis.
One method of controlling the SDI is through the regulation of the uphole
velocity of water in the well. Decreasing the velocity will decrease the SDI of the
water. For water supply wells, an uphole velocity of less than 5.0 ft/sec is
recommended. Suspended solids create difficulty in the aquifer, generally causing
well plugging and a reduction in aquifer permeability, especially if the aquifer has
any chemical reaction with suspended solids or the ions among the solids. In many
cases, suspended solids can bypass filtration tests, thereby creating a buildup within
the wells that is unknown on the surface. To solve suspended solids problems, it is
best to redevelop or pump the wells to remove the suspended solids.
MICROBIOLOGICALISSUES
Understanding the microbiological activity can help with understanding the
chemical changes of the injected water. In stark contrast to public perception that
aquifers are “pristine” environments, bacteria naturally exist in most aquifer systems;
most aquifers with an organic content will have some degree of bacteriological
activity. The typical agents for microbiological fouling include iron, sulfur-reducing
and slime-producing organisms, although many others exist. As stated in chapter 2,
some of these organisms are opportunistic pathogens, which is an additional
concern. As a result, biological contamination is an ongoing problem often

overlooked by engineers and hydrogeologists.
Microorganisms occur naturally in most aquifer systems, especially surficial
systems. Most microorganisms require nutrients, such as organic carbon, nitrate,
and phosphate, in order to grow and flourish, and to meet cell-building needs and
general food source demands, all of which are available in abundance from surface
activities. Casing and column pipe materials should be carefully considered because
iron and certain other metals are required for healthy microbe populations. Of
special concern from an operational perspective is one microbiological species that
may impact human health or may cause biofilm growth that will clog the well screen
or gravel pack. Certain of these species will aggressively attach to the ferrous metals
often used for casings and column pipes. The organisms produce polysaccharide
films that can cause microbiologically induced corrosion as they are generally acid-
formers. Additional discussion on bacteria in wells is presented in chapter 7.
Iron bacteria, such as Gallionella,are common in aerobic environments where
iron and oxygen are present in the groundwater, and where ferrous materials exist
(such as steel ot cast-iron wells). These bacteria attach themselves to the steel and
create differentially charged points on the surface, which in turn create cathodic
corrosion problems. The iron bacteria metabolize the iron that is solubilized in the
process. Iron bacteria tend to be rust colored or cause rust-colored colonies on the
pipe surfaces. Sulfur reducing bacteria are often responsible for the hydrogen sulfide
smell released when raw water is aerated. These bacteria are common where sulfur
naturally exists in the formation and will tend to form black colonies on pipe
surfaces. While anaerobic, they will exist in environments where aerobic conditions
can lead to symbiotic relationships with aerobic organisms.
The slime-producing bacteria are found in surface waters and in soil. Members
of this genre are often used to protect farm crops from fungal growth and as a result
are to be expected in groundwater that has organics. However, these bacteria are
highly adaptive; research done several years ago indicated that the bacteria would
grow in any environment into which they were introduced. The Pseudomonas
genera are facultative anaerobes that can persist in oxygen-depleted environments by
breaking down complex hydrocarbons for the oxygen. In some circumstances, they
will use nitrogen in the absence of oxygen.
Pseudomonas bacteria can permanently affix themselves to laser-polished 316L
stainless steel in a matter of hours, so attaching to steel or lower grades of stainless
steel is easily accomplished. Given that the Pseudomonas sp. are adhering bacteria,
they are capable of producing a polysaccharide matrix (biofilm) that can act as a
barrier protecting the bacteria incorporated in the films from harmful substances
such as disinfectants and, in some cases, oxygen. Biofilms also act to protect the
bacteria from the shearing effect of turbulent flow and can provide an environment
for other species. Periodic sloughing occurs when the biofilm gets too thick.
The microbiological accumulations or biofilms pose several significant

concerns. First, the accumulations on the metallic surfaces create anodes and, in
conjunction with reactions caused by dissimilar metals, can lead to a steady cathodic
deterioration over time (with or without iron bacteria). Because the Pseudomonads
are acid-formers, ferrous materials are particularly vulnerable to deterioration,
especially in the presence of iron bacteria.
Because of the potential for microbiological problems, routine microbiological
sampling of production wells is important. Biological agents can cause corrosion of
the well casing, pumps, column pipes, and valves. Bacteria can clog gravel packs, well
screens, and the formation, causing excessive operational costs by requiring higher
pressures (heads) to obtain and treat water. Microbiological agents can circumvent
treatment systems and can be released into the distribution system, causing clogging
of irrigation systems and creating public health concerns. It is important to sample
raw and finished water for microbiological contaminants.
There are two types of microbiological sampling. One should be routinely
performed: each well should be sampled for fecal and nonfecal coliform bacteria
and hererotrophic plate counts (HPCs) should be done on a monthly basis in the
raw water. The presence of coliform bacteria is an indication that a well is
biologically contaminated and may pose a threat to human health. If coliform
bacteria is detected, the well should be retested. Should a second test show this
presence, the well should be disinfected and should not be used until it clears a
subsequent coliform test. It is not uncommon to have sampling errors in
bacteriological sampling. Therefore, sampling protocol is important. Sampling jars
should be dedicated to each well, and each jar should be sterilized before sampling.
The second type of microbiological sampling is speciation of the bacteria. Such
sampling analysis is necessary to determine the presence and/or absence of
microorganisms that could adversely impact treatment systems and/or could
potentially threaten human health if adequate treatment of the recovered water is
not provided. Organisms to be analyzed include growths of certain types of slime-
forming bacteria, fungi, and algae. This process of microbiological growth is
commonly referred to as biofouling. In many cases, the main source of biofouling
organisms is feed water. The presence of these organisms will adversely impact the
treatment process. In addition, some organisms, if not removed in pretreatment and
posttreatment, may adversely impact the quality of the water.
METHODS FOR MONITORING GROUNDWATER QUALITY

Before developing a groundwater supply, the water quality must be currently
acceptable and expected to remain so in the foreseeable future. Otherwise the
investment is not warranted. After the initial water quality assessment is performed
and groundwater development is assured, a system for monitoring water quality
should be maintained, and a reassessment of up-gradient contamination risks
should be performed periodically. Where contamination risks are significant, or

where the water supply is critical, sentinel monitoring wells should be installed.
Sentinel wells are located at various depths to define the initial groundwater
assessment. In the future, sentinel wells can be used to detect changes in water
quality and water elevations before they affect the water supply wells, serving as an
early warning system.
The most common size for monitoring wells is 4 in. in diameter, constructed
with PVC casings. However, the number of wells needed, and their locations, depths
of completion, and construction details must be specified as part of an integrated
wellfield monitoring plan. Increases in water usage may increase the contamination
threat in the future, which may indicate a need for additional monitoring wells. This
potential for development demonstrates the importance of continual evaluation of
changes that might affect the groundwater supply. The wellfield monitoring plan
should account for likely sources of contamination, local hydrogeology, and the
hydraulic effects of the proposed groundwater development. For example, what was
previously considered down-gradient from the well can become up-gradient either
after pumping begins or as influenced by nearby surface water. These changes should
be simulated with computer modeling to aid in designing a monitoring-well network.
Samples taken from monitoring wells should be analyzed for suspected
contaminants that may impact the end use of the water. Historically, it has been the
mineral quality of water that limited possible water uses. For instance, water
containing high concentrations of sodium or boron will be unsuitable for irrigation.
Today, biological issues and endocrine disruptors have been added to the
carcinogens and minerals of the 1970s and 1980s as noted in chapter 2.
The sources of endocrine disruptors may appear benign (such as from
agriculture). A wide variety of constituents, which can be harmful even in extremely
low concentrations, have become a concern. Just as the concept that the biological
quality of deeper groundwater usually has less surface impacts, testing for fecal
bacteria and other microbiological indicators as well as emerging constituents
should be performed periodically.
A list of the minimum required chemicals to be tested may be obtained from
federal, state, and local regulatory officials. Indicator parameters, referred to as
priority pollutants, often can be used to determine the likely presence or absence of
chemicals that are a concern to groundwater development, but they are not
guarantees of water quality. Fortunately, groundwater quality does not generally
change rapidly as a result of slow movement as compared with surface water quality.
Therefore, once water quality has been established, the frequency of groundwater
sampling normally need not exceed quarterly or even semiannual checks, except for
potable water sources or areas of suspected contamination.
REFERENCES
American Water Works Association ( A W A ) . 2003. Manual M21-Groundwater. Denver,
Colo.: AWWA.
APHA, AWWA, and WEF (American Public Health Association, American Water Works
Association, and Water Environment Foundation). 2002. Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater. 19th ed. Washington, D.C.: APHA.
Bloetscher, F., Muniz, A., and Witt, G.M. 2005. Groundwater Injection: Modeling, Risks and
Regulations. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Dawson, K., and Istok, J. 1991. Aquifer Testing: Design and Analysis OfPumping and Slug
Tests, Chelsea, Mich.: Lewis Publishers.
Jacob, C.E. 1946. Drawdown Test to Determine Effective Radius of Artesian Well.
Transactions, ASCE, 112:1047-1070.
Keys, W.S. 1989. Borehole GeophysicsApplied to Groundwater Investigations. Dublin, Ohio:
National Water Well Association.
Nuzman, C.E. 1989. Well Hydraulic Flow Concept. In Recent Advances in Groundwater
Hydrology. Minneapolis, Minn.: American Institute of Hydrology.
National Groundwater Association. 1998. Manual of Water Well Construction Processes.
Westerville, Ohio: National Groundwater Association.
Scrivener, R.C., Shepard, T.J., and Garrjoch, N. 1986. Ore Genesis at Wheal Pendarues and
South Crotty Mine, Cornwall-A Preliminary Fluid Inclusion Study. Proceedings of the
Ussher Society, 6412.
Walton, W. C. 1962. Selected Analytical Methods for Well and Aquifer Evaluation. Illinois
State Water Bulletin 49.
Witt, G.M., and Andrews, L.J. 1993. Reverse Osmosis Membrane Technology Water Chemistry
and IndustrzalApplications.Edited by 2.Amjad. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Well Design
All well projects go through a series of steps: predesign, field testing, regulatory
criteria, design, construction, and testing and operations issues. The issues involved
with predesign, field testing, and design include the required demands for water
supply, measuring the impacts of competing users, and optimizing efficient and
reliable operations that may limit groundwater opportunities. It should be noted
that most testing occurs once some form of construction has begun-usually via a
test well. Results from this testing provide engineers and hydrogeologists with the
information needed to define the appropriate zones in the formation in which to
place a casing and those to leave open.
Installing wells to provide water supplies are feasible from a technical perspective
provided that certain subsurface conditions exist. These conditions include a
formation that is areally extensive and porous enough to permit water flow to the well.
Initial data to be collected at a potential well site was discussed in previous chapters.
After the initial investigation and confirmation of the presence of water-bearing
materials, the amount of water that can be withdrawn must be determined. The
basic aquifer parameters that must be evaluated are hydraulic conductivity1
transmissivity and storage coefficient. In addition, drawdown, the extent of the cone
of influence, flow, and specific yield must be defined. Aquifer testing provides data
on the response of the aquifer to step-drawdown tests and other pump tests. Specific
well design issues regarding up-hole velocity, screen size, well losses, casing burst
strength, and other parameters must be determined so casings and screens can be
properly placed.
The most significant aquifer parameters for predesign purposes are porosity,
transmissivity, specific yield and specific retention, hydraulic head, and gradient.
The first three describe the rock formation and quantities of water existing in the
formation. Head and gradient determine how water moves through the formation
and represent the mechanics of horizontal and vertical recharge to a well being
pumped. Head and gradient are also used to analyze the transport of pollutants that
may migrate to a well (AWWA, 2003). Hydraulic conductivity and transmissivity
indicate how easily water will move in the formation. Hydraulic conductivity is the
basic, three-dimensional parameter required for modeling purposes, but
transmissivity is the most commonly used term by hydrogeologists.
Porosity
Porosity is the ratio of openings (voids) to the total volume of a soil or rock. Porosity
is expressed either as a decimal fraction or as a percentage as follows:
(Eq. 5-1)
Where:
n = porosity, as a decimal fraction
yt = the totaLvolume of a soil or rock sample
V , = the volume of solids in the sample
& = the volume of openings (voids).
If the porosity determined using the above equation is multiplied by 100, the result
is porosity expressed as a percentage.
Table 5-1 outlines the porosity of various formation materials. Soils are highly
porous materials that are caused by loose soil particles, root holes, and animal
burrows. The porosity of unconsolidated sand and gravel depends on the range in
grain size, degree of sorting, and on the shape of the rock particles. Fine-grained
materials tend to be better sorted and have the highest porosity values. Clay has a
high percentage of voids, but because the voids are so small, clay transmits virtually
no water.
Specific Yield and Specific Retention

Specific yield is the portion of water in a formation that will drain under the
influence of gravity. Specific yield is important for determining the amount ofwater
that can be withdrawn from a formation and should be checked on an ongoing basis
throughout the life of the well. Specific yield is calculated as follows:
s = -vd (Eq. 5-2)

K
Where:
S
, = specific field
& = the volume of water that drains from a total volume of yt
yt = total volume of a soil or rock sample, and specific retention
Well Design 121
Table 5- 1 Values of porosity for various geologic materials
Material Porosity (%)

Sedimentary
Gravel, coarse 24-36
Gravel, fine 25-38
Sand, coarse 3 1-46
Sand, fine 26-53
Silt 34-61
Clay 34-60
Sedimentary rocks
Sandstone 5-30
Siltstone 21-41
Limestone, dolomite 0-20
Karst limestone 5-50
Shale 0-10
Crystalline rocks
Fractured crystalline rocks 0-10
Dense crystalline rocks 0-5
Basalt 3-35
Weathered granite 34-57
Weathered gabbro 42-45
Adapted from Davis, 1969;Johnson and Morris, 1962
Specific retention is the opposite of specificyield. Specific retention is the water

that is retained as a film on rock surfaces and in very small openings that is not likely
to be recovered in wells. The physical forces that control specific retention are the
same forces controlling the thickness and moisture content of the capillary fringe, as
expressed in the following equation:
sr = Vr
- (El. 5-3)
V,
Where:
S, = specific retention
J$ = the volume of water retained in a total volume of yt
f i = total volume of a soil or rock sample.
Table 5-2 lists selected values of specific yield.
Hydraulic Head and Gradient

In an unconfined or water table aquifer, the depth to the water table affects the
development of water supplies. Where the water table is shallow, the aquifer may fill
_II "I
Table 5-2 Values of specific yield for various geologic materials
Material Specific Yield in Percent (%)

Gravel, coarse 23
Gravel, medium 24
Gravel, fine 25
Sand, coarse 27
Sand, medium 28
Sand, fine 23
Silt 8
Clay 3
21
Sandstone, fine-grained
27
Sandstone, medium-grained
14
Limestone
38
Dune sand
18
Loess
44
Peat
26
Schist 12
Siltstone 6
Till, predominantly silt 16
Till, predominantly sand 16
Till, predominantly gravel 21
Tuff
Adapted from Johnson (1967)
to the surface during wet weather, making the area unsuitable for development
without some form of drainage (as is commonly found in part of the southeastern
US and particularly south Florida). Where the water table is at a great depth, the
cost of constructing wells and pumping water for domestic needs may be
prohibitively expensive.
Potentiometric head is the water surface in a confined aquifer. As noted in
chapter 1, this is the point above the confining unit to which the water level rises.
In either case, the highest head occurs where the aquifer is recharged. The change in
head over the distance between the point of recharge and the point where a well is
proposed to be installed is the gradient. These water levels are determined from a
fixed measuring point. Typically, the referenced standard is the National Geodetic
Vertical Datum (NGVD) of 1929, also commonly referred to as sea level.
The gradient between any two observation points is found as follows:
d h / d l = A(z, - z,)/AL (Eq. 5-4)

Where:
z = elevation of the water table or the potentiometric head, whichever applies
I = distance between measuring points 1 and 2
The hydraulic gradient can be determined if the following data are available for
three wells located in any triangular arrangement:
0 Relative geographic position of the wells
Distance between the wells
0 Total head at each well
Total head is the sum of elevation head, pressure head, and velocity head. Because
groundwater moves relatively slowly, velocity head can be ignored. Therefore, the
total head at an observation well involves only two components: elevation head and
pressure head. Groundwater moves in the direction of decreasing total head, which
may or may not be in the direction of decreasing pressure head.
The equation for total head, ht, is:
h, = z + h p (Eq. 5-5)
Where:
z = elevation head, the distance from the datum plane to the point where
the pressure head, hp, is determined.
Flow and Hydraulic Conductivity

The factors controlling groundwater movement are defined by Darcy’s law as follows:
dh (Eq. 5-6)
Q = KA(a)
Where:
Q= the quantity ofwater per unit of time
K = the hydraulic conductivity, which depends on the size and
arrangement of the water-transmitting openings (pores and fractures)
and on the dynamic characteristics of the fluid (water), such as
kinematic viscosity, density, and the strength of the gravitational field
(also referred to as the coeflcient ofpermeability)
A = the cross-sectional area, at a right angle to the flow direction, through
which the flow occurs
dh/dl = the hydraulic gradient
Unlike rivers and streams, groundwater tends to move slowly. As a result, unlike
rivers and streams, groundwater flows under laminar conditions, which means that
_ x
Table 5-3 Typical values of hydraulic conductivity and permeability
Permeability Pervious Semipervious Impervious
Aquifer Good Poor None
Soils
Clean Clean sand or Very fine sand, silt,
gravel sand and gravels loess, loam, solonetz
Stratified
Peat Unweathered clay
clay
Good Breccia-
Rocks Oil rocks Sandstone limestone
granite
dolomite
-log,,R(cmZ) 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
log,,k(md) 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5
Adapted from Bear, et at., 1969
the individual water particles tend to follow discrete streamlines and not to mix
with particles in adjacent streamlines. As a result, the quantity ofwater, Q, is directly
proportional to the hydraulic gradient, db/dl.
If Equation 5-6 is rearranged to solve for K, the following is obtained:
-_
-
K - Qd'? - ( m 3 / d > ( m > (Eq. 5-7)
( m2)(m ) d
The units of hydraulic conductivity are those of velocity (or distance divided by
time). However, the velocity units are less obvious in Darcy's law because the
definition of hydraulic conductivity includes the volume of water, Q, that will move
in a unit of time (gpd) assuming a unit hydraulic gradient (such as ft/mile) through
a unit area (such as ft2). Expressing hydraulic conductivity in terms of a unit
gradient rather than an actual gradient at some place in an aquifer allows values of
hydraulic conductivity for different rocks to be compared.
Table 5-3 outlines the ranges of hydraulic conductivity through 12 orders of
magnitude. Hydraulic conductivity will vary by type of rock and likely will be
different from place to place in the same rock (see Table 5-4). If the hydraulic
conductivity is essentially the same throughout an area, the aquifer is considered to
be homogeneous. If the hydraulic conductivity differs from one part of the aquifer
to another, the aquifer is considered to be heterogeneous.
Water typically flows preferentially in one direction. As a result, the hydraulic
conductivity may be different along different axes in an aquifer. If it varies by
Well Design 125
Table 5-4 Ranges of hydraulic conductivity for various rock types

Material Hydraulic Conductivity (m/sec)
Sedimentary
Gravel 3 x 10-4 3~ 10-2
Course sand 9x to 6 x 10-3
Medium sand 9x10-7 to 5~ 10-4
Fine sand 2 x 10-7 to 2 x 10-4
Silt, loess 1 10-9 to 2 x 10-5
Till 1 x 10-12 to 2 x 10-6
Clay 1 x 10-11 to 5 x 10-9
Unweathered marine clay 8 10-13 to 2~ 10-9
Sedimentary rocks
Karst and reef limestone 1 x 10-6 to 2 x 10-2
Limestone, dolomite 1 x 10-9 to 6x
Sandstone 3x to 6x
Siltstone 1 x lo-" to 1x 10-8
Salt 1 x 10-12 to 1 x 10-10
Anhydrite 4 10-13 2 10-8
Shale 1 10-13 2 10-9
Crystalline rocks
Permeable basalt 4 x 10-7 2 x 10-2
Fractured igneous and metamorphic rock 8x10-9 to 3 ~ 1 O - ~
Weathered granite 3x10-6 5 x 10-5
Weathered gabbro 6x to 4 x
Basalt 2 x 10-l1 to 4~ 10-7
Unfractured igneous and metamorphic rocks 3 x 10-14 to 2~ 10-10
Adapted from Dornenico and Schwartz, 1990
direction, such as differences between conductivity in the vertical and horizontal

directions, the aquifer is anisotropic. If the hydraulic conductivity is essentially the
same in all directions, the aquifer is isotropic. While convenient to assume that
aquifers are both homogeneous and isotropic, these aquifers are rare.
Transmissivity is related to hydraulic conductivity. Transmissivity is the
capacity of an aquifer to transmit water. The transmissivity, of an aquifer is equal
to the hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer multiplied by the saturated thickness of
the aquifer as shown in the following equation:
T = Kb (Eq. 5-8)
Where:
T = transmissivity
K = hydraulic Conductivity
b = aquifer thickness
Table 5-5 Units of hydraulic parameters of aquifers

Porosity Unit Cube of Material Unit Prism of Aquifer
Transmissive capacity Hydraulic conductivity ( K ) Transmissivity ( T )
Available storage Specific Yield (S,) Storage coefficient (S)
As with hydraulic conductivity, transmissivity is also defined in terms of a unit

hydraulic gradient.
Storage Coefficient
The storage coefficient is the ability of a formation to store and transmit water.
These are the formation's most important hydraulic properties. These properties are
given either in terms of a unit cube of the material or in terms of a unit prism of an
aquifer, depending on the intended use. These abilities, as they relate to the two
units of measurement, are shown in Table 5-5 (AWWA, 2003).
The storage coefficient, S, is defined as the volume of water an aquifer releases
from or stores per unit surface area of the aquifer per unit change in head. The
storage coefficient is a dimensionless unit, as the following equation shows, in which
the units in the numerator and the denominator cancel:
volume of water
S = (Eq. 5-9)
(unit area)(unit bead change)
The size of the storage coefficient depends on whether the aquifer is confined
or unconfined. If the aquifer is confined, the water released from storage when the
head declines comes from expansion of the water and from compression of the aquifer.
In a confined aquifer having a porosity of 0.2 and containing water at a temperature
of about 59°F (15"C),expansion of the water alone releases about 3 x m3 of
water per cubic meter of aquifer per meter of decline in head. To determine the storage
coefficient of an aquifer caused by expansion of the water, the aquifer thickness must
be multiplied by 3 x If only the expansion of water is considered, the storage
coefficient of an aquifer 300-ft (100-m) thick would be 3 x lop5. The storage
coefficient of most confined aquifers ranges from about to The
difference between these values and the value caused by expansion of the water is
attributed to compression of the aquifer (AWWA, 2003).
Capillarity and Unsaturated Flow

Most recharge of groundwater systems occurs during the percolation of water
through the unsaturated zone of soil. This movement ofwater is controlled by both
gravitational and capillary forces. The capillarity forces result from the mutual
attraction (cohesion) between water molecules and the molecular attraction
(adhesion) between water and different solid materials (AWWA, 2003). Because
Well Design 127
most pores in granular materials are of capillary size, water is pulled upward into a
capillary fringe above the water table to a height, hc, above the water level. In a
steady- state condition or conditions in which the moisture content remains
constant, flow of water in the unsaturated zone can be determined from a modified
form of Darcy’s law, as shown in the following equation:
(Eq. 5-10)
Where:
Q = the quantity of water
Ke = the hydraulic conductivity under the degree of saturation existing in
the unsaturated zone
A = the cross-sectionalarea through which flow occurs
(b, - z)/z = the gradient caused by capillary (surface tension) forces
dh/dl= the gradient caused by gravity
The plus/minus sign accounts for the direction of movement: plus for downward
and minus for upward. For movement in a vertical direction, either up or down, the
gradient caused by gravity is 1. For lateral (horizontal) movement in the unsaturated
zone, the gravitational gradient can be eliminated.
Because transmissivity depends on both K and b, its value differs between
aquifers and from place to place in the same aquifer. Estimated values of
transmissivity for principal aquifers the vs range from less than 1 gpd for some
fractured sedimentary and igneous rocks to over 1,OOO,OOO gpd for cavernous
limestones and lava flows (AWWA, 2003).
In a related issue regarding transmissivity, Nuzman (1989) accepted that the field
coefficient of permeability represents the limit of laminar flow through the
formation at a given temperature and viscosity of the water (AWWA, 2003). The limit
of laminar flow through the borehole wall is defined by the following equation:
Q = ndLk (Eq. 5-11)
This equation assumes uniform vertical flow that does not actually occur in
wells. It has been found by field experience that the beginning of turbulent flow
through the formation borehole was is approximately 2.35 times the laminar flow
limit (AWWA, 2003). Williams (1985) defined the point where the flow transitions
from predominately turbulent flow to predominately laminar flow, as
(Eq. 5-12)
Where:
re = critical radius (in.)
Q/L = specific aquifer discharge (gpm/ft)
Q = discharge rate (gpm)
L = length of screen (ft)
d = mean grain diameter (in.)
8 = effective porosity
It should be noted that Williams (1985) defined the Reynolds number at the point
where the flow regime changes from laminar to turbulent as being 30.
Flow volumes can be derived for design purposes from monitoring wells and
drawdown information for equilibrium conditions from one of two formulas
developed by Theim. For water table aquifers
Q = K(H2-h2) (Eq. 5-13)
R
1,055log-
r
Where:
r = distance to observation well (ft)
R = borehole diameter (ft)
K = hydraulic Conductivity (gpd/ft)
H = drawdown at the borehole
h = drawdown at observation well (ft)
For confined aquifers
Q = K6W-b) (Eq. 5-14)
R
5281og-
Where: r
r = distance to observation well (ft)
R = borehole diameter (ft)
K = hydraulic conductivity (gpd/ft)
b = formation thickness (ft)
H = drawdown at the borehole
h = drawdown at observation well (ft)
Well Design 129
Pumping Well #I Pumping Well #2
Source: AWWA 2003

Figure 5- 1 Interfering drawdowns between wells
WELLFIELD DESIGN (from Bloetscher, et al., 2005)

The proper design of wells and wellfields is possible through measurable field data.
A small-diameter test well is usually constructed to ascertain the depth and
thickness of the aquifer, a pumping test conducted, and the data analyzed to
determine the transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity and if the water quality can
be satisfactorily treated. Once the aquifer parameters have been field tested and
predesign assumptions resolved with the field findings, the most desirable spacing
between wells in a wellfield, the effects of new wells on existing wells, and the
optimum pumping rates and schedules can be made. The field tests will provide the
parameters for thickness and extent of an aquifer, its transmissivity and storage
coefficient, and the nature and location of boundaries. These parameters are very
useful when making an overall appraisal of the groundwater resources of an area and
the potential for future water supply development.
Wellfield Interference
Possible interference between wells should be determined before locating multiple
wells in a well field. Determining interference between pumping wells will allow the
design engineer and/or hydrogeologist to optimize spacing and pump capacity to
determine the most efficient placement pattern and pumping rates. The total
interference drawdowns estimated for various pumping rates are as shown in Figure 5-1.
Pumping Rates
When numerical values have been assigned to transmissivity and the storage
coefficient, the drawdown effects of pumping can be determined. These effects are
for any quantity of water at any reasonable distance from the pumping well. A
graphic representation should be plotted of water levels against the logarithm of
distance from the center of pumping for a given time period. A minimum
continuous pumping period of 100 days is usually used as a conservative safety factor.
WELL DESIGN
Once the wellfield spacing and pumping rates are determined, the proper design of
wells and specification of materials are made. Decisions regarding materials,
screened interval length, screen openings, casing and column pipe diameter, and the
need for sand or silt removal can be made once the field parameters are understood.
A series of calculations must be made to ensure the proper size borehole, casing,
screen, and screen spacing are designed. Typically, the client has a need for a specific
water yield and well. The designer must bring these inputs together to design a cost
effective and efficient well.
Up-hole Velocity
The maximum velocity criteria imposed on withdrawal wells is 10 ft/sec, which
affects casing diameters. However, this velocity is too high for many wells because it
tends to entrain sand and other particles if proper screening is not provided (see
Entrance Velocity section). High velocity will also exert wear on the casing.
Theoretical withdrawal velocities and pressures can be calculated for a maximum
day flow rate using the following equation (Heald, 1994, p. 3-6):
V = 0.4085x (gpm ) (Eq. 5-15)

d2
Where:
V = velocity of flow, fps
d = inside diameter of the injection casing, in.
gpm = injection rate, gpm
Friction Loss (from Bloetscher, et al., 2005)

There are also pressure (head) limitations in a well. The total pressure head consists
of three components: (1) friction loss (head loss) through the column pipe: (2) head
caused by the formation; and (3) the pump driving pressure. The loss of pressure and
upward buoyant forces decrease radially from the well. Therefore, the greater the
distance from the well, the more the pressure remains in the formation.
Pressure (head) is friction loss through the pipe. Friction losses through a pipe
are a function of the diameter of the pipe, the rate of flow through the pipe, and the
roughness of the pipe referred to as the frictionfactor (or coeflcient offriction). The
head losses through the pipe are most commonly calculated using the Hazen-
Williams formula, as follows (Heald, 1994,p. 3-7):
Well Design 131
hf = 0.002083 x L x 8655
(Eq. 5-16)
Where:
hf= head loss due to friction (ft)
L = length of pipe
C = friction factor for Hazen-Williams (dimensionless)
gpm = flow (gpm)
d = inside diameter of the pipe (in.)
Density Differential (from Bloetscher, et al., 2005)

The density differential is calculated using a derivation of the Ghyben-Herzberg
principle, which is stated as follows (Fetter, 1994, p. 370-371):
(Eq. 5-17)
Where:
z(x,y~= depth to the saltwater interface below sea level at location (xg)(ft)
pf= density of fresh water (g/cm3)
ps= density of salt water (g/cm3)
hfx,y)= elevation of the water table above sea level at location (x,y) (ft)
This equation can be converted into the following, more practical, form:
(Eq. 5-18)
Where:
hd = head due to density differential (ft)
ps = density of salt water (g/cm3)
pf= density of fresh water (g/cm3)
L = length of column of ftesh/salt water (ft)
In this equation, L is comparable to z of the Ghyben-Herzberg equation.
Bottom-Hole Pressure (from Bloetscher, et al., 2005)

As the withdrawal rate increases, the bottom-hole driving pressure (head) from the
injection zone decreases. The inverse is also true. The bottom-hole driving pressure
(head) is defined as the change in pressure (head) in the formation caused by the
withdrawal of the water. The bottom-hole driving pressure (head) is primarily a
function of the pumping rate, assuming the following:
0 Storage coefficient changes in the aquifer.

Leakage changes in the aquifer.
0 The transmissivity of the aquifer near the borehole is constant and does not
change with time as a result of natural and/or man-made phenomena.
The hole-bottom driving pressure would be related to withdrawal rate as follows
(Witt and Ameno, 1989, p. 8-10):
(Eq. 5-19)
Where:
hA = bottom-hole driving pressure at the injection rate
hB = bottom-hole driving pressure at the injection rate of QB (psi)
QA = injection rate (gpm)
QB = injection rate, equation variable (gpm)
Total Dynamic Head (from Bloetscher, et al., 2005)

The total dynamic head (injection pressure) at the well head is calculated by as follows:
h , = hf+ h,; h, (Eq. 5-20)

Where:
hT = total dynamic head at well head (ft)
by= head friction loss (ft)
hd = head density differential (ft)
h~ = head bottom-hole driving pressure (ft)
The three components were described in the previous 3 sections.
Head-to-PressureConversion (from Bloetscher, et al., 2005)

To convert feet of head into psi, the following formula is used (Heald, 1994, p. 2-14):
psi = h
~
SPgr (Eq. 5-21)
2.31
Where:
psi = pressure (psi)
h = head (ft)
spgr = specific gravity of fluid (water is assumed 1.00)
h = head (ft)
Well Design 133
Collapse Strength (from Bloetscher, et al., 2005)

In addition to the requirements of velocity and pressure, adequate surge or water
hammer protection to the well must be addressed. The theoretical collapse strength
of a well casing is calculated as follows ( A W A ,1964, p. 58):
(Eq. 5-22)
Where:
Pa= critical collapse pressure (psi)
E = modulus of elasticity for steel pipe (30,000,000)
,a = Poisson's ratio (usually taken as 0.30 for steel)
d = outside diameter of the pipe (in.)
t = wall thickness of the pipe (in.)
Table 5-6 outlines the collapse strength of steel pipe. Similar tables can be found for
PVC and fiberglass.
Water Hammer Analysis (from Bloetscher, et al., 2005)

Adequate surge or water hammer protection must be incorporated into the design
of the pumping system. Pressure surges associated with water hammer have been
observed at several older and inadequately designed facilities. The potential for
water hammer pressures resulting from instantaneous pumping stoppage at
maximum rate should be analyzed. Water hammer is calculated using the following
equation (A'scrwA,1964, p. 62):
(Eq. 5-23)
Where a can be reduced to:
4,660
a = (Eq. 5-24)
and:
a = wave velocity
h = pressure rise above normal (ft ofwatet)
d = inside diameter of the pipe (in.)
e = thickness of pipe wall (in.)
e = velocity of flow (fps)
e = acceleration due to gravity (32 ft/sec)
Table 5-6 Collapse strength of steel well casing
Outside Inside
Nominal Diameter Wall Thickness Diameter Diameter Weight Collapsing Strength
in. (mm) in. in. (mm) in. (mm) in. (mm) lb/ft (kg/m) psi ft water (kg/cm2)(m water)
8 Y4 0.250 (6.35) 8.625 (219.08) 8.125 (206.38) 22.36 (33.28) 755.54 1,745.29 (53.20) (531.96)
8 5/16 0.3125 (7.94) 8.000 (203.20) 27.74 (41.29) 1,191.21 2,751.70 (83.87) (838.72)
10 Y4 0.250 (6.35) 10.750 (273.05) 10.250 (260.35) 28.04 ( 41.72) 461.08 1,065.10 (32.46) (324.64)
10 5/16 0.3125 (7.94) 10.125 (257.18) 34.84 (51.84) 760.25 1,756.18 (53.53) (535.28)
12 Y4 0.250 (6.35) 12.750 (323.85) 12.250 (311.15) 33.38 (49.67) 306.09 707.06 (21.55) (215.51)
12 5/16 0.3125 (7.94) 12.125 (307.98) 41.514 (61.78) 520.68 1,202.78 (36.66) (366.61)
14 Y
4 0.250 (6.35) 14.00 (355.60) 13.500 (342.90) 36.71 (54.64) 242.43 560.02 (17.07) (170.69)
14 5/16 0.3125 (7.94) 13.375 (339.73) 45.68 (67.98) 418.68 967.15 (29.48) (294.79)
14 z/s 0.375 (9.53) 13.250 (336.55) 54.57 (81.21) 636.10 1,469.39 (44.79) (447.87)
14 Y4 0.250 (6.35) 14.50 (368.30) 14.000 (355.60) 38.05 (56.62) 221.82 512.41 (15.62) (156.18)
14 5/16 0.3125 (7.94) 13.875 (352.43) 47.35 (70.47) 385.11 889.59 (27.11) (271.15)
14 w 0.375 (9.53) 13.750 (349.25) 56.57 (84.19) 588.19 1,358.72 (41.41) (414.14)
16 % 0.250 (6.35) 16.00 (406.40) 15.500 (393.70) 42.05 (62.58) 172.25 397.90 (12.13) (121.28)
16 %6 0.3125 (7.94) 15.375 (390.53) 52.36 (77.92) 303.15 700.27 (21.34) (213.44)
16 w 0.375 (9.53) 15.250 (387.35) 62.58 (93.13) 469.53 1,084.62 (33.06) (330.59)
16 Y4 0.250 (6.35) 16.625 (422.28) 16.125 (409.58) 43.72 (62.58) 155.89 360.11 (10.98) (109.76)
16 736 0.3125 (7.94) 16.000 (406.40) 54.44 (81.02) 275.69 636.84 (19.41) ( 194.1 1 )
16 w 0.375 (9.53) 15.875 (403.23) 65.08 (96.85) 429.18 991.40 (30.22) (302.18)
Table 5-6 Collapse strength of steel well casing (continued)
~~~ ~~~
Outside Inside
Nominal Diameter Wall Thickness Diameter Diameter Weight Collapsing Strength
18 0.250 (6.35) 18.00 (457.20) 17.500 (444.50) 47.39 (70.53) 126.48 292.16 (8.90) (89.05)
18 0.3125 (7.94) 17.375 (441.33) 59.03 (87.85) 225.76 521.49 (15.90) (158.95)
18 0.375 (9.53) 17.250 (438.15) 70.59 (105.05) 354.92 819.86 (24.99) (249.89)
18 0.250 (6.35) 18.625 (473.08) 18.125 (460.38) 49.06 (73.01) 115.51 266.84 (8.13) (81.33)
18 0.3125 (7.94) 18.000 (457.20) 61.12 (90.96) 206.95 478.05 (14.57) (145.71)
18 0.375 (9.53) 17.875 (454.03) 73.09 (108.77) 326.64 754.54 (23.00) (229.98)
20 0.250 (6.35) 20.00 (508.00) 19.500 (495.30) 52.73 (78.48) 95.46 220.52 (6.72) (67.21)
20 0.3125 (7.94) 19.375 . (442.13) 65.71 (97.79) 172.25 397.90 (12.13) (121.28)
20 0.375 (9.53) 19.250 (488.95) 78.60 (116.97) 273.98 632.89 (19.29) (192.90)
20 0.4375 (11.11) 19.125 (485.78) 91.41 (136.03) 399.05 921.82 (28.10) (280.97)
20 0.250 (6.35) 20.625 (523.88) 20.125 (511.18) 54.40 (80.96) 87.86 202.96 (6.19) (61.86)
20 0.3125 (7.94) 20.000 (508.00) 67.79 (100.89) 159.00 367.28 (11.19) (111.95)
20 0.375 (9.53) 19.875 (504.83) 81.10 (120.69) 253.68 586.00 (17.86) 178.61
20 0.4375 (11.11) 19.750 (501.65) 94.33 (140.38) 370.69 856.3 1 (26.10) (261.00)
22 0.250 (6.35) 22.00 (558.80) 21.500 (546.10) 58.07 (86.42) 73.75 170.37 (5.19) (51.93)
22 0.3125 (7.94) 21.375 (542.93) 72.38 (107.72) 134.22 310.05 (9.45) (94.50)
22 0.375 (9.53) 21.250 (539.75) 86.61 (128.89) 215.46 497.71 (15.17) (151.70)
22 0.4375 (11.11) 21.125 (536.58) 100.75 (149.94) 316.88 732.00 (22.3
. 1), (223.11)
.
Outside Inside
Nomind Diameter Wall Thickness Diameter Diameter Weight CollapsingStrength
in. (mm) in. in. (mm) in. (mm) in. (mm) Ib/ft (kg/m) psi ft water (kg/cmz) (m water)
22 (559) Yi 0.250 (6.35) 22.50 (571.50) 22.000 (558.80) 59.41 (88.41) 69.37 160.25 (4.88) (48.84)
22 0.3125 (7.94) 21.875 (555.63) 74.05 ( 1 10.20) 126.48 292.16 (8.90) (89.05)
22 0.375 (9.53) 21.750 (552.45) 88.61 (131.87) 203.44 469.94 (14.32) (143.24)
22 0.4375 (11.1 1) 21.625 (549.28) 103.09 (153.41) 299.84 692.62 (21.11) (211.11)
24 0.250 (6.35) 24.00 (609.60) 23.500 (596.90) 63.41 (94.37) 58.13 134.28 (4.09) (40.93)
24 0.3125 (7.94) 23.375 (593.73) 79.06 ( 1 17.65) 106.51 246.04 (7.50) (74.99)
24 0.375 (9.53) 23.250 (590.55) 94.62 (140.81) 172.25 397.90 (12.13) (121.28)
24 0.4375 (11.11) 23.125 (587.38) 110.10 (163.84) 255.34 589.84 (17.98) (179.78)
24 0.250 (6.35) 24.50 (622.30) 24.000 . (609.60) 64.75 (96.36) 54.92 126.88 (3.87) (38.67)
24 0.3125 (7.94) 23.875 (606.43) 80.73 (120.14) 100.79 232.82 (7.10) (70.96)
24 0.375 (9.53) 23.750 (603.25) 96.62 (143.79) 163.26 377.13 (11.49) ( 1 14.95)
24 0.4375 ( 1 1.1 1 ) 23.625 (600.08) 112.43 (167.32) 242.43 560.02 (17.07) (170.69)
26 0.250 (6.35) 26.00 (660.40) 25.500 (647.70) 68.75 (102.32) 46.61 107.67 (3.28) (32.82)
26 0.3125 (7.94) 25.375 (644.53) 85.73 (127.59) 85.88 198.38 (6.05) (60.47)
26 0.375 (9.53) 25.250 (641.35) 102.63 (152.73) 139.73 322.78 (9.84) (98.38)
26 0.4375 (11.11) 25.125 (638.18) 119.44 (177.75) 208.48 481.59 (14.68) (146.79)
26 (660) Y4 0.250 (6.35) 26.50 (673.10) 26.000 (660.40) 70.09 (104.30) 44.21 102.13 (3.11) (31.13)
26 (660) %6 0.3125 (7.94) 25.875 (657.23) 87.40 (130.07) 81.56 188.41 (5.74) (57.43)
26 (660) 34 0.375 (9.53) 25.750 (654.05) 104.63 (155.71) 132.89 306.97 (9.36) (93.56)
26 (660) 7/16 0.4375 (11.11) 25.625 (650.88) 121.78 (181.23) 198.55 458.66 (13.98) (139.80)
Outside Inside
Nominal Diameter Wall Thickness Diameter Diameter Weight CollapsingStrength
28 Yi 0.250 (6.35) 28.00 (711.20) 27.500 (698.50) 74.09 (110.26) 37.94 87.63 (2.67) (26.71)
28 %6 0.3125 (7.94) 27.375 (695.33) 92.41 (137.52) 70.22 162.21 (4.94) (49.44)
28 % 0.375 (9.53) 27.250 (692.15) 110.64 (164.65) 114.83 265.25 (8.08) (80.85)
28 7/16 0.4375 (11.11) 27.125 (688.98) 128.79 (191.66) 172.25 397.90 (12.13) (121.28)
28 ?4 0.250 (6.35) 28.50 (723.90) 28.000 (711.20) 75.43 (112.25) 36.1 1 83.41 (2.54) (25.42)
28 %6 0.3125 (7.94) 27.875 (708.03) 94.08 (140.00) 66.91 154.55 (4.71) (47.11)
28 z/s 0.375 (9.53) 27.750 , (704.85) 112.64 (167.63) 109.53 253.02 (7.71) (77.12)
28 7/16 0.4375 (11.11) 27.625 (701.68) 131.12 (195.14) 164.51 380.01 (11.58) (115.83)
30 % 0.250 (6.35) 30.00 (762.00) 29.500 (749.30) 79.43 (118.21) 3 1.28 72.26 (2.20) (22.02)
30 5/16 0.3125 (7.94) 29.375 (746.13) 99.08 (147.45) 58.13 134.28 (4.09) (40.93)
30 % 0.375 (9.53) 29.250 (742.95) 118.65 (176.57) 95.46 220.52 (6.72) (67.21)
30 7/16 0.4375 (11.11) 29.125 (739.78) 138.13 (205.57) 143.85 332.20 (10.13) (101.28)
30 ?4 0.500 (12.70) 29.000 (736.60) 157.53 (234.44) 203.44 469.94 (14.32) (143.24)
30 % 0.250 (6.35) 30.50 (774.70) 30.000 (762.00) 80.77 (120.20) 29.86 68.99 (2.10) (21.03)
30 5/16 0.3125 (7.94) 29.875 (758.83) 100.75 (149.94) 55.55 128.31 (3.91) (39.11)
30 z/s 0.375 (9.53) 29.750 (755.65) 120.65 (179.55) 91.31 210.91 (6.43) (64.29) '
30 7/16 0.4375 (11.11) 29.625 (752.48) 140.47 (209.04) 137.73 318.15 (9.70) (96.97)
30 % 0.500 (12.70) 29.500 (749.30) 160.20 (238.41) 194.99 450.43 (13.73) (137.29)
Well losses
Drawdown values obtained for a single pumping well using the Theim formulas
represent only the head losses suffered by water movement through the formation
under laminar flow conditions. The actual pumping level of a particular well cannot
be calculated without considering high velocities and turbulence losses during
pumping. At and near the well face, fluid velocities may become large enough that
turbulent flow conditions exist. The magnitude of turbulence losses varies with each
well because of differences in formation characteristics, screen slot sizes required,
degree of well development, well diameter, and quantity of water being pumped.
There are so many unknown quantities involved in the calculation of these
individual factors that they are usually lumped together under the heading of welllosses.
One method of approximating the well losses for a particular well is to use the
step-drawdown equation as defined by Equation 4-5. The values of B and C
(formation and well losses) may be calculated if proper test data are available. To
collect such data, the finished well must be pumped at three to five increasing rates
for equal periods of time and the drawdown measured for each pumping rate. When
a full-scale aquifer performance test is not conducted, however, a step-drawdown
test can differentiate the observed losses in the pumping well. Additionally, this test
makes it possible to quickly compare the magnitude of well losses to determine
when a well needs cleaning or other repair work. Irregular increasing well loss with
increasing pumping rates indicates unsatisfactory development of a new well, or
deteriorating aquifer or well conditions in an old well. Small regular increases in well
loss or decrease in well specific capacity as a result of transition to turbulent flow in
the aquifer are normal.
Entrance Velocity
Water entrance velocities through the screen openings should be between 0.1 and
0.2 ft/sec (0.03 and 0.06 m/sec). Such velocities will minimize head losses and
chemical precipitation. For design of well screens installed in a radial collector well,
an average velocity of about 0.033 ft/sec (0.01 m/sec) is used. Screen entrance
velocities are computed by
v = Q/A (Eq. 5-25)

Where:
V = velocity,in ft/sec
Q = well capacity, in ft3/sec ( I ft3/sec = 449 gpm)
A = effective area of screen, in ft2
The effective screen area must be estimated carefully. It is standard practice to

assume that 50 percent of the screen slots are plugged by particles after proper well
Well Design 139
development. The total open area required must be determined by adjusting either
the length or diameter of the screen, because the slot size is not arbitrary.
A significant factor in well loss for sand and gravel wells is an open screen area
when the percentage of open area is substantially less that the specific yield of the
aquifer. Research by Williams (1985) has shown that when the open area of the
screen is greater than the specific capacity of the formation, the actual head loss
across the well screen is insignificant until the velocity through the screen exceeds
2 ft/sec (0.6 m/sec). In an attempt to limit turbulent flow losses around the well
borehole, many regulatory agencies have prescribed screen velocities between 0.1
and 0.2 ft/sec (0.03 and 0.06 m/sec) and a minimum thickness of gravel pack
resulting in large-diameter well construction. High velocity turbulent flow through
the formation borehole results in higher pumping and maintenance costs. In this
case, velocity is a function of quantity and area and is easily approximated in the
design stage. For membrane applications where sand may become an operational
problem, the velocity should be reduced.
BASIC DESIGN DECISIONS

Once the previous calculations have been made, the design engineer can evaluate
the materials and sizing of the components. In choosing a supply well diameter, the
minimum casing and screen diameter should be at least one pipe-size larger than the
largest diameter of the pumping equipment to be installed. This gap allows
adequate space for pump installation and removal, efficient pump operation, and
good hydraulic efficiency of the well. If a shroud needs to be installed around a
submersible pump and motor, appropriate allowance in diameter needs to be made.
If additional equipment is to be installed, such as a transducer or water-level
controls, then an increase of two pipe-size diameters may be needed.
Because the quantity of water to be pumped from a well, Q, is more correctly
established using formation loss and well interference, the open area of screen is the
basic parameter to consider. Screen slot size should be selected for accurate sampling
and proper sieve analysis. Thus, the screen diameter and length are the two variables
in design. Screen-length selection should incorporate more than a casual
recollection of the aquifer thickness. The definition of transmissivity,
incorporates flow through the total thickness of water-bearing material. If less than
the total thickness is used, the value of T should be decreased. The Theis equation
indicates that as Tdecreases, the formation drawdown will increase, although not in
direct proportion. If the screened portion of the formation is significantly less than
one half of the formation thickness (partial penetration), the additional drawdown
suffered may be significant. Therefore, it is recommended that as much of the
aquifer as practical should be screened to minimize reduction in yield.
If gravel pack construction is used, the borehole should meet minimum
thickness requirements of 4 in. (16 mm) larger than the screen as specified in
AWWA Standard Al00-06. If the average hydraulic conductivity, length of well

screen and minimum borehole diameter, and the limit of borehole diameter are
input, the limit of laminar flow can quickly be calculated. This value may appear to
be very low. A flow yield of approximately 4 to 6 times the laminar flow rate may be
cost effective. So some high-capacity wells may be operated in the turbulent flow
range but may not be permitted by regulatory agencies. The gravel pack thickness
can be increased to the available yield. Unfortunately, in low permeability aquifers,
the maximum practical well borehole diameter will limit the water yield. Other
limitations such as saturated thickness, available drawdown, and static water-level
depths affect the available yield.
The well casing material and grout used in the construction of each newly
drilled well must be designed for the life expectancy of the well. The type of pump
installed should provide optimal service over a prescribed number of years, when
pumping under specific conditions.Before selectinga pump, different types of pumping
arrangements should be investigatedto ensure the ultimate needs are met. For instance,
vertical turbine pumps should not be used when the treatment involves membranes as
the entrainment of oxygen at start-up may encourage fouling of the membranes.
There are a number of pumping options.
0 Piston pumps are low capacity wells used for hand-pumped wells. They do not
meet the needs of public water systems.
0 Ejector pumps are small pumps widely used for private home wells. They do not
have sufficient capacity to meet the needs of most public water systems.
0 Suction pumps work on the principle of creating a vacuum and to pull the water
up to the pump level. This type of pump can only be used with relatively
shallow wells because the principles of physics limit suction to about 21 ft.
0 Turbine well pumps are commonly used for water supply wells. They have a
vertical shaft motor located at the ground surface and a long drive shaft
extending down the well to operate the pump suspended below the water level.
Turbine pumps are available in a wide variety of capacities, can be designed to
produce almost any desired pressure, and the motor is easily accessible at the
surface for maintenance and repair as well.
Submersible pumps combine a turbine pump with a waterproof motor.
Submersiblepumps are located at the bottom of the column-pipewell down the
borehole. The pumps require a discharge pipe, power wires, and a lifting cable.
Submersiblepumps are made in sizes ranging from small pumps used for private
home wells to very large units for public water systems. These pumps are very
common and proGide long useful lives efficiently.
Throttling pumps to match flow demands will cause the systems to run at very
low efficiency during low demand periods. To address the problem for continuous
Well Design 141
operation, a pressure-regulatingvalve or variable-speed drive is used that can match

the pump output with the system demand. The overall cost of equipment and
operation should be thoroughly analyzed before adopting such a system. Electric
motors are usually selected according to National Electrical Manufacturers’
Association standards,which include requirements for enclosures and cooling methods.
Pump selection should ensure that over-pumping of the aquifer, and damage to
the casing, pump, formation, and column pipe is minimized. Pumps are available in
steel, stainless steel, and bronze. Bronze pumps tend to be resistant to
microbiological fouling, while stainless steel and steel may pose problems. Well and
pump screens should be installed at the discretion of the hydrogeologist.
Additionally, the well must be properly designed and developed before installing the
production pump to minimize sand pumping. Often submersible pumps are used.
Submersiblepump usage requires
Settings that prevent motor burial in sand or silt,
Water temperature and flow past the motor to provide proper cooling,
Use of cable and splices that meet the amperage and voltage requirements,
Pipe tightening to prevent unscrewing by motor-starting torque,
Clamping of cable to delivery pipe,
Proper controls and protections,
Necessary checks before, during, and after installation, and
Adequate electrical power and backup.
A submersible pump is actually a turbine pump with its motors close-coupled
beneath the bowls of the pumping unit and installed within the well under the
minimum expected water-level point. This construction eliminates the need for
the surface motor, long drive shaft, shaft bearings, and lubrication system of the
conventional turbine pump. Submersible pump motors are cooled by water flowing
vertically past the motor to the pump intake. The motor is usually longer and of
smaller diameter than a surface motor of the same horsepower. When a large-
capacity submersible pump is needed, the manufacturer should be consulted for
specific design and installation recommendations.
The costs for a submersible pump depend on setting depth, required head and
capacity, corrosion resistance, and other factors. Operating costs will depend on
motor efficiency, column bearing, hydraulic losses, cable losses, setting depth, and
similar factors. A thorough analysis of all factors should be performed to compare
surface and submersible motor-driven deep-well pumps for a specific installation.
Submersible pumps are especially useful for high-head, low-capacity applications,
such as domestic water supply.
REFERENCES
AWWA (American Water Works Association). 1964. Manual M1 1-Steel Pipe Design and
Installation. Denver, Colo.: AWWA.
AWWA (American Water Works Association). 1998. ANSIIAWWA A100-06-Standard
f . r Water Wells. Denver, Colo.: AWWA.
AWWA (American Water Works Association). 2003. Manual M2 1-Groundwater. Denver,
Colo.: AWWA.
Bear, J., Zaslavsky, D., and Irmay, S. 1968. Physical Principals of Water Percolation and
Seepage. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO).
Bloetscher, F., Muniz, A., and Witt, G.M. 2005. Groundwater Injection: Modeling, Risks and
Davis, S.N. 1969. Porosity and Permeability in Natural Materials. In Flow Through Porous
Media. Edited by R.J.M. Dewiest. New York: Academic Press.
Domenico, P.A., and Schwartz, F.W. 1990. Physical and Chemical Hydrogeology. New York:
John Wiley & Sons.
Fetter, C.W., Jr. 1994.Applied Hydrogeoloa,3rd ed. New York: Macmillan College Publishing.
Heald, C.C., ed. 1994. Cameron Hydraulic Data. Liberty Corner, N.J.: Ingersoll-DresserPumps.
Johnson, A.I. 1967. SpeciJic Eeld-Complication of Speczfc Eelds for Various Materials. US
Geological Survey, Water Supply Paper 1662-D. Washington, D.C.: USGS.
Johnson, A.I., and Morris, D.A. 1962. Physical and Hydrologic Properties of Water Bearing
Depositsfrom Core Holes in the Los Banos-Kettleman City Area, Cali&rnia. USGS Open
File Report. Denver, Colo.: USGS.
Nuzrnan, C.E. 1989. Well Hydraulic Flow Concept. In Recent Advances in Groundwater
Hydrology. Minneapolis, Minn.: American Institute of Hydrology.
Rorabaugh, M.I. 1953. Graphical and Theoretical Analysis of the Step Drawdown Test of
Artesian Wells. ASCE Proceedings, 362:79.
Williams, D.E. 1985. Modern Techniques in Well Design.Jour. AWWA, 77(9): 68-74.
Witt, G.M., and Ameno, J.J. 1989 City ofplantation Northwest TreatmentPlant: R.O. Reject
Injection WellPreliminary Design. Plantation, Fla.: Camp, Dresser & McKee.
Well Construction and Development
The components common to most wells include well casings, cementing or grouting
of wells, well screens, gravel packs, and sanitary seals. Considerations for these
components include material specifications, sizing, and most important, the depth
of the casing/screen to allow the appropriate water source into the well. Once the
well is completed, it must be developed. Development may be the most overlooked
issue in well construction, but good development practices will provide an efficient
well with long life and low maintenance costs.
CASINGS
Purpose of Casings
There are two main purposes for the casing. The first is to provide structural
reinforcement and stabilization for the borehole. Casings also serve to seal out
contaminated water from the land surface and undesirable water from formations
above the aquifer. A third benefit of the casing is to identify construction parameters
(i.e., well diameter, screen length, etc.) that are used to establish baseline data for
determining the optimum pumping rates given other aquifer parameters and
logging results. This initial information is used to establish baseline conditions for
future evaluation of pump and well performance.
Setting the Casing (from AWWA, 2003)

Setting the casing is related to the drilling method used to construct the borehole.
There are five basic methods for setting the casing
1. Driving
2. Vibrating
3. Cable tool
4. Dual tube
5. Rotary
__
Table 6-1 Casing sizes for small wells based on yield

Recommended
Casing Diameter Drilling Method
Yield* (in.) Jet Double Jet Submersible
Less than 8 gpm 2 d d
3 d d d
4 J d d
5 d d
6 d
8 to 16.5 gpm 2 d d
3 d d d
4 J d d
5 J J
6 J
Greater than 16.5 gpm 3 J
4 i i i
5 i J
6 i
*Yield at 50 ft of drawdown
Driving the casing has the benefit of not requiring grouting, but it is limited to
softer rock and soil formations and limited depth. Jetted wells or well-points are
such examples. When drilling a well using the cable-tool method, the casing should
be driven when the ground formation could begin caving. A drive shoe, attached to
the lower end of the casing, keeps the hole from collapsing. Drive shoes are threaded
or machined to fit the pipe or casing, and the inside shoulder of the shoe butts
against the end of the pipe. Drive shoes are forged of high-carbon steel, without
welds, and are hardened at the cutting edge to withstand hard driving. Some
regulatory agencies do not accept casings that are not cemented in place because
they do not positively seal the borehole. Table 6-1 shows casing sizes and pump
types for small wells.
Casings are driven using drilling tools, drive clamps, and a drive head. Where
the well penetrates water-bearing rock underlying unconsolidated material, the
casing is driven into the rock to obtain a good seal. Unfortunately, a tight seal that
will prevent pollution or unconsolidated material from entering the well from above
is not guaranteed, so a grouted seal is usually required. A length of casing is attached
to the casing previously installed by threaded coupling or welding. A drive head is
then attached to the upper end of the casing to protect it from the driving blows of
the drive clamp, which is attached to the drill stem. When the drill is lowered into
Well Construction and Development 145
the length of casing and subsequently raised and lowered, the action of the dropping
clamp on the drive head forces the casing into the drill hole. The concept is similar
to drilling the well and uses the same drilling rigs. Additional protection can be
gained by driving the casing down to stable rock and under-reaming the borehole
beneath the casing to a diameter 2 in. (50 mm) larger than the outside diameter of
the shoe for a depth of 10 ft (3 m) below the casing.
The under-reamed portion of the drill hole is filled with cement grout, and the
casing driven to the bottom of the hole. Before drilling is resumed, the cement grout
is allowed to set for several days, providing a good seal. Once drilling is restarted, the
cement inside the casing is drilled out. An open, uncased hole is constructed in the
water-bearing rock below this point. Vibrating the casing into the aquifer does not
require cementing; however, the same limitations that apply to driven casings also
apply to vibrating casings into place.
While cable-tool methods limit data collection on the formation because the
casing is immediately installed, dual tube and rotary methods minimize disruption
of the aquifer when setting the casing. For collection of geophysical data, rotary
methods are the preferred method for setting the casing. Wells constructed using
rotary methods are not usually cased until drilling is completed. Because the casing
is smaller than the drilled hole, no driving is required. In some instances, a casing is
installed concurrently with drilling, such as with the use of dual-rotary drilling
methods.
Types of Casings
The well casing is a lining for the drilled hole that maintains the open hole from the
land surface to the water-bearing formation. For the casing to be entirely effective, it
must be constructed of suitable materials and be properly installed so as to be
watertight for its entire depth. If the formation could likely cave over the full depth
of the well, a single casing is usually sufficient. In these situations, the sand and
gravel caves in around the outside of the casing and closes the space between the drill
hole and the casing. However, single casings are usually restricted to smaller, surficial
wells. In deeper wells, it is preferable to have multiple casings as this makes drilling
easier in formations that may collapse. Likewise, using multiple casings may be
desirable in aquifers that are corrosive or polluted.
If one or more outer casings are installed in a well, the annular space between
the casings is filled with cement grout. With this type of installation, the outer
casing may be either left in place or withdrawn completely. Ifwithdrawn, the grout is
placed as the temporary casing is removed. Each outer casing is generally one pipe-
size larger in diameter than the outside diameter of the couplings of the protective
casing. This type of grouted installation may also be used where the water-bearing
formation underlies clay, hardpan, or other stable formations.
.+
I- +34
I I tZ4
42
-1 1 1
Casing Diameter (in.)
50
_ I l l
JLandSurface
10: $== (Wall Thickness = 0.375 in )

Nominal 62-in Hole
50-in. Conductor Casing

(Wall Thickness = 0 375 in )
Nominal 50-in. Hole

600
700
800
900
42-in. Intermediate Casing
(Wall Thickness = 0 375 in )
1,000 - 989 ft.
1,100 -
1,200 - Nominal 42-in. Hole
1,300 -
1,400 -
34-in. Intermediate Casing
1,500 - (Wall Thickness = 0.375 in.)
1,600 -
1,700 -
1,800 -
1,900 -
2,000 - 1,990 ft.
2,100 -
2,200 - Nominal 34-in. Hole
2,300 -
2,400 -
2,500 -
2,600 -
2,700 -
2,800
2,900
4 2,880 it. 24-in Final Casing
(Wall Thickness = 0.500 in.)
z:1 yj
3,000
3,100
3,400
3,500 - Total Depth Approx. 3,499 ft.
Injection Well No. 2

Figure 6-1 Telescoped well
There are several types of casing (pit, surface, intermediate, final, and tubing).
A pit casing is the initial casing installed at the surface to prevent the introduction of
contaminants from the surface and provide containment for the drilling operation
at the surface. The pit casing should be steel and extend through the surface soils.
The surface casing is the next casing installed. The surface casing typically seals the
surficial formation from the rest of the well. The surface casing is not used for water
table aquifers because the surface formation is the aquifer. A series of intermediate
casings may be installed to seal off successive formations where the water is not
desired or not available. Each successive casing is 6 in. smaller than the prior casing.
Figure 6-1 shows an example of a well with a series of casings. This concept is
referred to as telescoping. The final casing string is the one that seals off all
formations except the one where the water is desired. The final casing will be filled
with the water to be withdrawn. The column pipe and pump is installed inside the
final casing.
In fractured formations, care should be taken to identify where there are
connections to poorer quality water sources than those desired for water supply or
polluted water as a result of vugs and fractures in the formation. It is preferable to
use these formations only where a competent layer of low-permeability rock overlays
the aquifer. Under such circumstances, the well can be protected if it is watertight to
a depth greater than that of the deepest existing well of questionable construction in
the area and substantially below the lowest anticipated water level. The watertight
construction is achieved by drilling the hole in the fractured rock 2 in. (50 mm)
larger than the outside diameter of the casing couplings and filling the annular space
between the drill hole and the outside of the casing with cement grout. In some
areas, such construction may not be realistic because available water is cased-off.
Other methods of assuring adequate water quality protection may be necessary.
Casing Materials
Casings are usually one of four materials: carbon steel, stainless steel, fiberglass, or
PVC. Fiberglass and PVC have been used extensively in recent years for installations
in shallow wells or where corrosion and/or bacteria may be an issue. Ingot iron is
used in constructing gravel-wall wells or other large-diameter wells. In selecting a
suitable material, the stress that the casing experiences during installation and the
corrosiveness of the water and soil must be considered. All casings will provide
satisfactory service given the correct groundwater and stress environment.
Many grades of casings are available, so specifying casings must include more
than the nominal diameter of the casing. Tables 6-2 through 6-6 show examples of
the standard casing sizes for steel, fiberglass, and PVC as outlined in AWWA
Standard Al00-06. Carbon and stainless steel are the most common casing
materials (see Figure 6-2).Carbon steel has a number of benefits that make it useful:
Table 6-2 Wall thickness for steel casing
Casing Diameter (in.)

Wall Thickness (in.) Weight (Ib/ft)
Nominal Wall Thickness
Size (in.) External Internal (in.) Ends Collars
2 2.375 2.067 0.154 3.560 3.710
2.5 2.875 2.469 0.203 5.790 5.880
3 3.500 3.068 0.216 7.580 7.670
3.5 4.000 3.548 0.226 9.110 9.270
4 4.500 4.026 0.237 10.790 11.010
5 5.563 5.047 0.250 14.620 14.900
6 6.625 6.065 0.250 18.970 19.330
8 8.625 8.071 0.250 27.700 25.400
10 10.750 10.192 0.279 31.200 32.200
12 13.750 12.090 0.330 43.770 45.400
14 14.000 13.250 0.375 54.570 55.800
16 16.000 15.250 0.375 62.580 64.080
18 18.000 17.250 0.375 70.590 72.370
20 20.000 19.250 0.375 78.600 80.700
Source: AWWA A100-06 Standard for Water Wells
Table 6-3 Steel well casings fabricated from standard plates
Standard Plate Well Casing Sheets

Diameter (in.) Thickness (in.) Gauge Thickness (in.) Gauge
6 0.1046 12 0.1094 12
8 0.1046 12 0.1094 12
10 0.1046 12 0.1094 12
12 0.1345 10 0.1406 10
14 0.1644 10 0.1406 10
16 0.1644 8 0.1719 8
18 0.1644 8 0.1719 8
20 0.1644 8 0.1719 8
22 0.2500 - __ 10.
24 0.2500 - - 1o*
30 0.2500 - - 8.
'Double Thick
ability tos weld, high yield and tensile strength, and high burst strength. Carbon
steel provides the most amount of protection against borehole collapse because the
strength of the material is greater than fiberglass and PVC. However, carbon steel is
subject to corrosion from galvanic and microbial contamination. Therefore, careful
consideration to the materials used in the well must occur to limit galvanic action.
Table 6-4 Fiberglass casing sizes

Casing Diameter (in.) Pressure
Nominal Size Wall Thickness Weight Rating-
(in.) External Internal (in.) (Ib/ft) Internal (psi)
Future Pipe Industries, Inc., Red Box 1500
4 3.75 3.33 0.21 2.3 1,500
5% 4.96 4.42 0.27 3.8 1,500
6% 6.10 5.43 0.34 5.7 1,500
7 6.97 6.21 0.38 6.9 1,500
10% 9.94 8.85 0.54 15.3 1,500
13% 13.29 11.97 0.66 23.7 1,500
16 16.08 14.48 0.80 35.0 1,500
Burgess Well Company, Inc. “EON”Fiberglass Column Pipe
4 5.00 4.50 0.250 4.5 400
6 6.625 6.00 0.310 5.8 400
8 8.625 8.00 0.310 7.8 300
10 12.75 10.00 0.375 10.5 250
12 12.75 12.00 0.375 12.6 225
Table 6-5 Small diameter PVC casing sizes-SCH 80

Nominal Size Outside Diameter Inside Diameter Minimum Wall
(in.) (in.) (in.) Thickness (in.)
1.5 1.900 1.720 0.090
2.0 2.375 2.149 0.113
2.5 2.875 2.601 0.137
3.0 3.500 3.166 0.177
4.0 4.500 4.072 0.214
Table 6-6 large diameter PVC casing sizes-SCH 4 0

Nominal Size Outside Diameter Inside Diameter Minimum Wall
(in.) (in.) (in.) Thickness (in.)
5 5.563 5.047 0.258
6 6.625 6.065 0.280
8 8.625 7.981 0.322
10 10.750 10.020 0.365
12 12.750 11.938 0.406
Figure 6-2 Steel casing materials
Aquifers with high microbial populations or high chlorides may not be appropriate
for steel casings.
Stainless steel has the same benefits as carbon steel. Stainless steel is an upgrade
that attempts to solve the corrosion problems but is still subject to both galvanic and
microbial contamination. In some cases, the stainless steel may be more susceptible
to microbial contamination. It is also significantly more expensive that the other
options.
Fiberglass is lightweight and corrosion resistant (see Figure 6-3)-neither
galvanic nor microbiological activity will damage it. Fiberglass is less expensive than
steel. However, fiberglass has less burst, tensile, and yield strength than steel, so
deeper wells are unlikely to use fiberglass casings (column pipes may also be
fiberglass).
PVC is the least costly and lightest weight of the potential casing options (see
Figure 6-4). Its use is becoming the more common in shallow wells as it is not
subject to corrosion or microbiological attack. Galvanic activity is not a factor. PVC
has less burst, tensile, or yield strength than steel or fiberglass. Care must be taken
during construction of wells with PVC as the heat created during the grouting
operation may buckle PVC casings.
The lighter materials (PVC and fiberglass) may be used for test wells or
temporary casings. Temporary casings may be used as forms when a grout seal is
placed around the outside of the permanent casing. The temporary casing is
withdrawn as the grout seal is placed.
Joints for permanent casings should have threaded couplings or should be
welded (in the case of steel-see Figure 6-5) to ensure water-tightness from the
Source: John Largey
Figure 6-3 Fiberglass casing materials
Source: John Largey
Figure 6-4 PVC casing being installed
Source: John Largey
Figure 6-5 Welding a casing pipe
bottom of the casing to a point above grade. This precaution will prevent surface
contamination or undesirable groundwater from entering the well from formations
above the water-bearing formation through the casing.
SCREENS
Once the casing is placed and grouted in place, the column pipe and screen, if
required, are placed. Screens are needed in most wells, especially where sand and
fine materials may enter the borehole. The screen is designed to eliminate fine
particulates that may damage downstream pumps and treatment equipment, while
allowing the maximum amount of water from the aquifer to enter the well with a
minimum of resistance. Generally, wells completed in unconsolidated formations,
such as sands and gravels, are equipped with screens. In competent rock that will not
release fines, such as limestone or granite, screens may not be required. Screens are
sometimes installed in fractured formations that may collapse into the borehole and
trap equipment.
Although a screen prevents sand from entering the well during pumping, a
screen may allow fine formation particles to enter the well during the development
process so they may be removed by bailing. At the same time, the large particles of
sand are held back, forming a permeable, graded natural-gravelpack around the well
screen itself. In this way, the hydraulic conductivity of the water-bearing formation
around the well screen is greatly increased, resulting in lower velocity head loss and
higher capacity per foot of drawdown.
Proper screen selection is extremely important in the design of a well drawing
from unconsolidated aquifers. Selection is often a complicated matter that demands
Source: Variperm (Canada) Limited

Figure 6-6 Well screen
a highly specialized knowledge of well construction and operation. The size of

screen openings, or the slot number, is usually expressed in thousandths of an inch.
Screens have many sizes of openings, as shown in Figure 6-6. The proper screen slot
size is determined through
Collection and analysis of representative samples of the formation to be used
for water production;
Identification of the lithologic properties of the formation; and
Laboratory analysis of grain-size gradation.
The width of the slot, or slot size, is best determined using a mechanical sieve
analysis of a sample from the water-bearing formation. Representative samples of the
formation must be selected for mechanical grain-size analyses. The largest slot
opening practical is normally specified, subject to meeting the goals of maximizing
the amount of water withdrawn while minimizing screen losses and the
introduction of fines. Depending on the type of well construction, the slot size is
selected to permit a percentage of the formation material to pass through it. For
naturally developed wells, this amount usually ranges between 35 percent and
65 percent, depending on uniformity of the material and the overlying formation
( A W A , 2003).
The design criteria for water entering through the screen opening that has been
adopted by many regulatory agencies for well construction is between 0.1 and
0.2 ft/sec (0.03 and 0.06 m/sec). The very low screen velocity criteria promoted the
use of large-diameter well screens and more efficient well construction. However,
research indicates that the actual head loss across the screen is minimized as long as
the thickness of the well screen and the percentage of open area in the screen is equal
to or greater than the specific yield of the aquifer, until the flow velocity through the
screen exceeds 2 ft/sec (0.6 m/sec) (Williams, 1985). Therefore, the most
important factor is the degree of turbulent flow that may be generated in the water
flow through the formation and gravel-pack material surrounding the well screen.
Turbulent flow head losses around the borehole increase by the velocity
squared. In laminar flow conditions, the head loss is linear with the velocity. In
properly constructed and properly developed wells of high capacity, the well loss in
head can be quite significant because of the turbulent flow in the well screen.
Turbulent flow causes movement of sand particles, mechanical plugging of the
gravel pack, as well as mechanical blockage and chemical precipitation of minerals
around the outside of the well screen.
GRAVEL PACKS
All gravel-packed wells have screens. A gravel pack is included to act as a filter to
permit the use of larger slot sizes in the well screen than would be possible if the area
surrounding the screen were not gravel-packed.When a well screen is surrounded by
an artificial gravel wall, the size of the openings is controlled by the size of gravel
used and by the types of openings.
A gravel-wall well must be carefully designed. Table 6-7 outlines the typical
grain sizes used in gravel packs. Selection of the gravel pack material is dependent on
the aquifer formation. The material used in the gravel filter must be clean, washed
gravel composed of well-rounded particles. Like the screen, the intent of the gravel
pack is to prevent fines from plugging the screen or entering the borehole in large
quantities. Gravel packs can consist of pea gravel, sand, or other rock. The filter size
depends on the size of the natural formation and the intended slot openings of the
well screen. Without proper gravel size, fine sand will not be prevented from
entering the well, and the yield of the well will be reduced. The size of individual
grains of gravel filter material should be four to six times larger than the median size
of the natural material. At the same time, the uniformity coefficient of the gravel
treatment should be similar to that of the formation material. The slot size for the
screen should retain 90 percent of the pack material. An artificial gravel-pack filter
can also be installed around the lateral well screens in a radial collector well to match
finer-grained formation materials. Figure 6-7 shows a grain size curve for two
materials Material A is much more uniform than Material B and preferable in a
gravel pack.
Table 6-7 Various size grade scale in common use

USDA and Soil USCOE and
German Scale Science Society of Bureau of
Udden-Wentworth Values (after Atterberg) America Reclamation
Cobbles 200 mm Cobbles Boulders
64 mm -6 80mm 10 in.
Pebbles Gravel (kies) Cobbles
3 in.
4 mm -2 Gravel Gravel
4 mesh
Granules Coarse sand
2 mm -1 2 mm 2 mm 10 mesh
Very coarse sand Very coarse sand
1 mm 0 1 mm
Coarse sand Coarse sand Medium sand
0.5 mm 1 Sand 0.5 mm
Medium sand Medium sand 40 mesh
0.25 mm 2 0.25 mm
Fine sand Fine sand Fine sand
0.125 mm 3 0.10 mm
Very fine sand Very fine sand 200 mesh
0.0625 mm 4 0.0625 mm 0.05 mm
Silt Silt Silt Fines
0.0039 8 0.002 mm 0.002 mm
Clay Clay Clay
The gravel pack is placed between the outside of the well screen and the
borehole. After the outer casing is in place, the screen is lowered to the bottom of
the well and centered. Selected gravel is added to the annular space between the
screen and the casing through a small-diameter tremie pipe. The gravel is placed
evenly around the screen in 2- to 4-ft (0.6- to 1.2-m) layers. As the gravel is added,
the casing and tremie are slowly raised. The procedure continues until the entire
screen is surrounded with gravel and the pack extends several feet (0.5 to 1 m) above
the top of the screen. The outer casing is pulled back high enough to expose the
entire screen section. As a rule, the screen is attached to an inner casing, extending to
the land surface, into which the pump is placed. About 25 ft (8 m) of the outer
casing is required to provide a seal against contamination by surface water. If the
entire casing is removed, the gravel treatment must not extend to the land surface.
Slot Number
(thousandth of an inch) Gauze Number
.,.,
8 70
10 60
12 50
14
16
18 40
25 30
30
35 20
40
50
125 118 in
Figure 6-7 Well screen size chart (from A W A M2 1, Groundwater)
The annular space between the working casing and undisturbed earth must be
sealed with cement grout or puddled clay to prevent contamination from seeping
into the formation. After the gravel filter has been placed, a pipe is often installed in
the finished pump base or foundation to allow additional filter materials to be
added if the gravel filter settles as a result of normal pumping operations, well
development processes, or well rehabilitation procedures (AWWA, 2003).
Sealing the Well

Once the casing has been placed in the borehole, it must be sealed in place. Grouting
provides structural reinforcement to the casing while sealing off the formation. The
Source: John Largey

Figure 6-8 Dump methods for grouting
grout also provides some protection to the casing from potential deterioration from
microbiological activity. Grout material should be placed uniformly into the
annular space after water or drilling fluids have been circulated sufficiently to ensure
any obstructions in the annular space have been cleared. In shallow wells, grout can
be placed by dropping it from the surface (rude and crude-see Figure 6-8) or a
bailer. The rude-and-crude methods should only be employed when the interval to
be grouted can be seen from the surface. This generally limits usage of this method
to intervals of less than 30 ft.
The dump-bailer method is perhaps the simplest method for grout placement.
The cement grout is lowered in a dump bailer that discharges its load when it
reaches the bottom of the hole. The bailer is placed in the annular space 1 ft above
the bottom of the hole. After the grout is placed in the well, the casing is pulled up
so that the shoe is above the grout. A plug is placed in the bottom of the casing,
which is then driven to the bottom of the hole, displacing the grout into the annular
space around the outside of the casing. Bailer methods permit the grout to be placed
in stages. The elapsed time between dumps should not be more than 10 min.
However, in deeper wells, grouting the casing in place can be a challenge. If the
annular space outside the casing is large enough to accommodate a grout (tremie)
pipe, an air- or water-pressure drive is used. The tremie pipe should extend from the
~ ii ~ ~x - ___
_ _ i
Source: John Largey

Figure 6-9 Tremie pipe
surface to the bottom of the annular space. Grout is then pumped into the tremie
pipe (see Figure 6-9). As the grout is placed, the pipe is slowly withdrawn to the
surface, circulating around the casing to ensure a smooth and consistent pour all the
way around the casing. The tremie pour should be continuous, and the tremie pipe
discharge should be submerged in the grout at all times. The tremie method requires
a minimum annular space of 3 in. (7.6 cm) between casings. The minimum tremie
pipe diameter is generally 2 in. (5.1 cm), although concrete grout tremie pipes
should be a minimum 3 in. (7.6 cm) to prevent clogging. Grout material placed
using the tremie method should occur after water or drilling fluid have been
circulated to clear obstructions.
A variety of pumping methods can be used but may be limited to site-specific
applications. Pressure grouting involves forcing grout into the annular space. Grout
pumping methods begin with the installation of a pipe inside the casing. The casing
Next Page
Drill Rig
Drill Tube
Drill Hole
Drill Mud
Pumped
Underground
-
Figure 6-10 Pumping grout (above ground and below ground methods)
is suspended slightly .above the bottom of the borehole, and a suitable packer
connection is provided at the bottom of the casing. The packer allows removal of
the grout pipe, and prevents grout leakage into the interior of the casing.
The continuous injection method requires the grout to be placed with a float
shoe with a back-pressure valve. Tubing is run to a float shoe to carry the grout.
When the annular space is deemed clean and free of obstructions, the grout is
pumped down the tube into the bottom of the annular space (see Figure 6-10).
When the space is filled, the grout pipe is removed. Work on the well is not resumed
for at least 7 2 hr, after which time the packer connection and plug are drilled out
(AVVWA, 2003). Pumping should be continuous until the entire annular space is
filled with grout. Concrete grout cannot be used with this method. As the tubing
and shoe are not withdrawn, they must be drilled out, a complicating factor with
this method. Pressure grout has the potential problem of exceeding the burst
strength of the casing pipe if not monitored.
After grouting, an acoustic sonic log (i.e., cement bond log) should be run in
the well to determine the competency of the cement bond to the casing and
formation (or second casing, whichever is appropriate). The log should be run from
the top of the casing to the bottom at least 7 2 hr after the grouting operation but
before further construction commences.
Previous Page
CEMENT GROUTING
Water wells are cemented, or grouted, and sealed for the following reasons:
To protect the water supply against pollution,
To seal out water of an unsatisfactory chemical quality,
To increase the life of the well by protecting the casing against exterior corrosion,
To stabilize soil or rock formations of a caving nature, and
To prevent entry of stormwater run-off around the casing.
As noted in previous sections, an annular space normally surrounds the casing.
The annular space is the most likely source of contamination from the surface if not
properly sealed. Unless this space is sealed, a channel exists for the downward
movement of water. In loose caving formations, such as sand, the opening may be
self-sealing, but in stable formations, this space must be cemented to prevent
contamination from the land surface or porous formations connecting with the
surface.
Three materials are commonly used for grouting: concrete, sand cement, and
neat cement grout. Concrete grout is a mixture of portland cement (ASTM 15),sand,
coarse aggregate, and water in the proportion of at least 5 bags of cement (94 lbs/cf)
per cubic yard of concrete, and not more than 7 gal of water per sack of cement.
Bentonite and other admixtures (ASTM C 4 9 4 ) are commonly used to reduce
shrinkage, increase viscosity, and reduce permeability (Lehr, et al., 1988). A
minimum of 2 percent and a not-to-exceed maximum of 12 percent, by weight, of
bentonite clay should be added to neat cement grout to compensate for shrinkage.
Regardless of the materials used, cement, additives, and water must be mixed
thoroughly.
Sand cement grout consists of sand, portland cement, and water. The sand to
cement ratio is 2:l. Water content remains the same as do admixtures. Neat cement
is made of only portland cement and water in the ratio of 7 gal of water per sack of
cement ( 9 4 lbs/cf in each bag). Admixtures are similar to those used in concrete
grout (Lehr, et al., 1988). Curing time before further construction is based on the
type of portland cement used. Type I cement has a minimum curing time of 72 hr.
Type 11 portland cement has a curing rime of 36 hr and is preferred for many
installations as a result.
When formations located below the depth of the protective casing are known
to yield water of an unsatisfactory chemical quality, these formations may be sealed
off with liners set in cement grout for their entire length, which may be several
hundred feet deep. When a casing is extended to a consolidated formation lying
below an unconsolidated formation, the most effective way to prevent sand or silt
from entering the well at the bottom of the casing is cementing. The casing exterior
is protected against corrosion by encasing it in cement grout, as described earlier in
the section on casing installation. A minimum of a 2-in. (50-mm) thickness of grout

is recommended; more may be required by some regulatory agencies.
The grout should be applied in one continuous operation if possible; however,
it often must be placed in stages to ensure a satisfactory seal and be entirely in place.
The grout must always be introduced at the bottom of the space to be grouted to
avoid segregation of materials, inclusion of foreign materials, or bridging of the
grout mixture, and if above the fluid level, to avoid leaving large packets of air in the
annulus. An air pressure test (i.e., 7 to 10 psi) should be applied to the grout seal for
a period not less than 1 hour to determine if any leakage exists. If the pressure drops
during the I-hour test, the necessary repairs and resealing of the grout should be
made and the new seal retested.
WELL DEVELOPMENT
Well development may be the most important part of the well drillingprocess and is
often underestimated with regard to the time required to properly develop the well.
As a result, many wells suffer from incomplete development from the start, which
makes them less efficient and less productive than they were designed to be. In the
long-term, this causes additional client time and both capital and operating expense
that are unnecessary.
The goals of well development are
To clear fine materials from the face of the borehole;
To clean and stabilize the formation by removing drilling mud, sand, and other
foreign materials that are pushed into the formation by the drilling process
(thereby improving porosity);
To correct damage caused by the drilling process; and
To improve ease ofwell disinfection.
The well development procedure includes all steps necessary to accomplish
these goals, including subjecting the aquifer to high levels of energy and pressure to
dislodge and remove materials that may clog the formation and reduce well
efficiency. Not all wells are developed in exactly the same way. Gravel-pack wells and
open-hole wells require different approaches, and the material moved in the open-
hole well are far different than those of the gravel-pack. The rotary and cable-tool
drilling methods have different impacts on the aquifer during construction.
Clear Fines From the Borehole

Removing fine-grained materials from the borehole involves removing the clay-sized
particles that either naturally exist in the aquifer or are introduced or created as a
result of the drilling process. The benefit is a reduction of wear on the mechanical
parts of the well, as well as limiting future blockage of the screen and gravel pack.
Insufficient development will permit migration of near-borehole fines to the screen

or gravel pack. For certain types of treatment process, such as membranes, the
'introduction of small particles may have adverse affects on the treatment process.
Clean and Stabilize the Formation

The intent of cleaning the formation is to create a zone of increased porosity
adjacent to the borehole. If the near-borehole formation is cleared of fines, sand, and
debris, the screens and gravel pack are less likely to clog. Less clogging will keep the
specific capacity of the well high and limit potential mechanical damage on the
system. Removing fines and debris will also stabilize the formation and prevent
collapses from above. This assumes the proper seals are in place and that competent
rock exists on top of the aquifer.
There are a number of things that can lead to a reduction in aquifer porosity
and permeability near the well. Excessive pumping or pumping that removes
substantial amounts of fines (because the screen size is incorrect) may cause the
aquifer to compress, thereby narrowing flow paths, or possibly collapsing the
borehole. In addition, in alluvial or sand formations, the compaction may occur
because of reorientation of the grains as a result of pumping. Figure 6-1 1 shows a
cube with a series of similar-sized grains in a cubic arrangement. The porosity of the
cube exceeds 40 percent. However, the grains reorient in a rhombohedra1 fashion,
which would reduce porosity to less than 25 percent (see Figure 6-12).
Sediments composed of well-sorted grain size will maintain initial porosity
even if different layers have different grain sizes, but if the grain sizes vary, the
porosity can drop to less than 10 percent. The well may subside at the surface as a
result of formation collapse (see Figure 6-13). In all of these cases, if the voids in the
formation are clogged during the drilling process, the permeability and efficiency of
the aquifer will diminish.
Unconsolidated sediments, such as sand, gravel, and alluvial formations, have
significant potential to have compaction, grain reorientation, and clogging through
the movement of fines. If the materials are significantly compacted, the well may
subside at the surface (Figure 6-13). Limestone, sandstone, and dolomite are
unlikely to have grain reorientation but still may suffer from migration of fines into
the aquifer and some compaction if over-pumped.
Correction of Damage Caused by the Drilling Process

For a well to function properly, the remnants of the drilling process must be
removed from the borehole. Development of the well removes sand, drilling mud,
and cuttings from the borehole and adjacent aquifer. Proper development will
remove lost drilling mud from cavities and permeable formations, thereby restoring
the initial aquifer condition and flow paths. Proper development provides the
baseline efficiency for the well.
Figure 6-11 Cubic packing Figure 6-12 Rhombohedra1packing >25% porosity

>40% porosity
Figure 6- 13 Formation collapse
Improve Disinfection
Clean boreholes will have a minimum amount of surface contamination and a
limited amount of colonization of native or surface bacteria in the well. As a result,
disinfection of the well can be accomplished more easily and more quickly than in wells
that are not clean or that have not removed the biological component of the aquifer.
WELL DEVELOPMENT METHODS

Well development principles are designed to maximize the efficiency and specific
capacity of the well efficiently. The well development protocol should be modified
based on well type, aquifer type, grain size distribution, available equipment, well
construction methods, and installed materials and equipment.
There are a variety of methods for well development.
Over-pumping
Raw-hiding
Pump surging
High-velocity jetting
Air surging and pumping
Mechanical surge blocks
0 Double-flanged swabbing
0 Chemical additives
Each method has its advantages and disadvantages. Over-pumping is the easiest
method to use and may be satisfactory in many cases. This method pumps the water
at much higher rates than the anticipated production rate to draw fines, drill
cuttings, and other contaminants out of the formation. This takes time, especially
when drilling mud is introduced into the production zone. Over-pumping has the
tendency to preferentially develop the more permeable zones at the time of well
development. For example, if a very permeable zone has been significantly intruded
with drilling mud, the well may not be developed properly. However, there are risks
to over-pumping in loose formations or where fine sands may exist. The fines may be
removed, and the grains, in poorly consolidated formations, reoriented. In either
case, there is a potential to damage the formation around the borehole, collapse the
borehole, or cause bridging of the fines outside the screen, effectively sealing off the
well. Over-pumping should be used with care in situations with unconsolidated
formations and sand.
Raw-hiding is a variation of over-pumping that involves placement of the pump
near the screen. The pump is turned on and run until the water is clear. The water is
then reversed so it pushes into the formation, loosening adjacent particles. The
process is repeated until no turbidity is found in the water. The method is inexact
and not appropriate for most installations. It requires a deeper aquifer to get enough
back-siphonage to dislodge formation materials.
Pump surging involves turning the pump on and off for short periods. This
develops a mild water hammer in the well to dislodge the cuttings and other
materials that need to be removed. Surging may also involve pumping water into the
formation and then reversing the pump to draw it out. This method solves two
problems with over-pumping-it breaks up the bridging of small particles and is less
likely to pull sands and fines to the well. However, surging does create pressure and
may damage friable formations, creating more fines and sediments that need to be
removed. Fines will continue to migrate toward the well once pumping starts so
development may be incomplete.
Air purging and mechanical block surging are essentially the same concept
using different materials. With air purging, the air pumped into the borehole
through a drop pipe or air line is replaced by water. With mechanical blocks,
specific parts of the borehole are purged as opposed to the entire borehole. The
same benefits and concerns apply to air purging and mechanical block surging as to
pump surging.
High-velocity jetting is a means to scour the borehole and remove particles.
The jetting occurs as the well is being pumped, so loose materials are moved to the
surface. Jetting has advantages in hard formations where it may quickly remove
materials on the borehole wall and screen. Soft formations should not be subjected
to jetting because the formation could be damaged.
Double-flanged swabbing can be used to develop the well and to scrub the well
to remove materials on the borehole wall. A typical swab consists of two rubber discs
sandwiched between three wood or steel discs. The swab is constructed so that the
outside diameter of the rubber disc is equal to the inside diameter of the screen,
fitting closely to the inner surfaces of the well screen and casing. The swab is
mechanically raised and lowered along the casing and well screen to draw drilling
fluids and fines through the gravel pack and into the borehole. An air-lift may be
used in conjunction with the swab to clear the borehole, or the swab may be fitted
with a one-way valve allowing removal of development water and fines.
A variety of chemicals can be used to help in well development. Acidization is
common to remove materials that cannot be swabbed or scoured off. Dispersing
agents can also be used, but most chemical action is unnecessary for initial
development. Chemical use is more appropriate for well maintenance (see chapter 7).
WELL DEVELOPMENT PROTOCOL (from Bloetscher et al., 2005)

Records of well development should be maintained. Establishing an efficient and
timely protocol for development will ensure a smooth operation in the field. Such a
protocol might be as follows:
1. Measure and record flow.

2. Measure and record pumping distance to water level.
3. Turn pump off and wait 5 min.
4. Record static water level.
5. Calculate drawdown (pumping water level minus static level).
6. Calculate specific capacity.
7. Develop the well by surging or air lifting.
8. Repeat steps 1-7.
9. If the well specific capacity increases significantly (at least 25 percent), dis-
infect the well and place it back into service. Otherwise keep repeating
steps 1-7.
Any development effort, whether for plugging or not, will create a wastewater
product that may contain chemicals, silt, sand, or other debris. The quality of this
wastewater may require treatment. In each case, the waste stream characteristics
must be identified, including
pH of the water,
Chloride level,
Toxic substances,
Silt,
The quantity of the water to be discharged,
The time element for which the discharge will occur (i.e., a relatively consistent
flow over a period of time or surges),
The new water quality of the wells, and
The uptake of metals, SOCs, or VOCs that might violate air or water
standards.
There may be a potential for environmental problems if chemicals are used in
the redevelopment process. Otherwise, the major concern will be the potential for
flooding areas near the well as the redevelopment water is discharged to the ground.
This discharge will contain silt, sand, and other debris. If highly turbid, this water
may require treatment. Regulatory agencies that may be involved in any discharge
may include the USEPA, state agencies, and local environmental agencies.
Discharges to a sanitary sewer system will involve local utilities.
Redevelopment
Periodically, the well will need to be redeveloped to remove accumulated
precipitants in the screen, biological masses, and sediment buildup. Redevelopment
will restore much of the initial aquifer efficiency. The same basic procedure is used
to redevelop a well as was used to initially develop it. Further discussion is found in
chapter 7.
SANITARY PROTECTION
Once the well has been constructed and developed fully, the final sanitary
protection should be provided along with disinfection of the borehole, pump,
casing, pipe, and fittings. Where the minimum depth for withdrawal varies with soil
formations and surrounding conditions, the well casing should extend at least to the
depth where protection from surface contaminants is anticipated. The screen
should be set below that point. The sanitary seal prevents contamination from
migrating downward to the screen from the surface.
The sanitary seal is usually constructed of neat cement. Every well casing should
be grout sealed from land surface to the full depth. Many regulatory agencies require
a minimum of a 6-ft-square concrete pad around the well casing, sloped at 1 in. per
yard away from the well. Where a well is installed to a depth less than where
protection can be assured, the well needs to be located in a wellhead protection zone
as defined in chapter 2. It is suggested that in the immediate vicinity of the well, an
impervious layer of well-compacted clay or neat cement at least 2-ft (0.6-m) deep
should be placed on the land surface around the well. This barrier will minimize
percolation from surface water to the withdrawal point.
Another means of protection is to submerge the well screen below the pumping
level of water in the well. The pumping level of the well should never be allowed
below the top of the screen as aeration of the well screen may promote aerobic
bacteriological activity. The cascading water causes air entrainment and possible
cavitation to the pump.
Disinfection (from AWWA, 2003; Bloetscher, et al., 2005)

During the process of well drilling and construction, the borehole is subject to
contamination from the land surface. Contamination can also be introduced by
tools, drilling mud (in the case of the rotary method), the casing and column pipes,
and the screen. While extended pumping may rid the well of this contamination,
disinfecting the well with chlorine is faster and provides more assurance. Most
regulatory agencies will require disinfection of the well and a period of clearance
testing from fecal coliforms prior to the well being put into use for water supply
purposes.
Many disinfection methods are available although most involve chlorine in
some form (typically, hypochlorite). Disinfection is achieved by pumping chlorine
into the well casing and producing a mix by alternately starting and stopping the
pump. As a general rule, a concentration of at least 50 mg/L of chlorine must be
present in the well after introduction of the disinfection fluids. The disinfectant
pumped into the well should be thoroughly mixed with the water in the well casing
and must come in contact with the pump and discharge piping.
A gravel-pack well may prove difficult to disinfect. The material used for gravel
treatment, even though washed and clean, still carries contamination. To resolve the
problem, a tablet or powdered calcium hypochlorite can be occasionally added by
hand to the gravel-filling tube as the gravel is placed.
Even with disinfection, the water pumped from a well may still show evidence
of contamination. Under such circumstances, a chlorinator can be installed at the
well to treat all the water discharged to the system. In time (perhaps as long as three
or four months), normal pumpingwill usually rid the well of contamination. During
this period, a free chlorine residual will make it possible to use the water. Additional
information on disinfection is available in AWWA Standard A100-06.
SURFACE EQUIPMENT
The final piece of well construction is the installation of the surface equipment.
Surface equipment for wells is generally limited to some piping, a meter, and some
sample taps or probes to monitor water quality. Figure 6-14 shows an engineering
drawing for a wellhead that includes the well (top only), an air release valve, meter,
butterfly valves for flow control, a check valve to prevent backflow, piping, and pipe
supports. This installation is above ground and is shown in different perspectives.
Figure 6-15 shows an example of an installed wellhead similar to the drawing shown
in Figure 6-14. Surface equipment should be designed by a competent professional
engineer. The design should include
Lightning and transient voltage surges protection, including lightning arrestors,
surge capacitors, or other similar protection devices, and phase protection;
Access for repair and maintenance purposes that will not cause interrupted
operation;
Protection against surge and water hammer to protect the integrity of the
well system;
Operational reliability and flexibility in the event of damage to or failure of the
pipeline or a well;
Access to the well for geophysical loggingwithout disruption of operations;
Necessary screening for floatable solids prior to withdrawal to avoid plugging of
the injection horizon; and
Vandalism protection.
W e l l Construction and Development 169
NOTES:
1 . Furnish and instail flange isolation kit consisting of isolating and sealing gasket,
bait isolating sleeves and isolating washers. Kits shall be manufactured by
Pipeline Seal and insulator, Inc. Houston,Texas or qual.
2. Harness dresser coupling shall have an interior coating of novocoat SP-ZOOOW
;,:\
in accordance with section 15006.
3. Restrained MJ gland shall be ebba iron or equal. Eye bolts shall be used to
connect the harness dresser coupling tie-rods to the restrained MJ gland.
b
- -
rump Lonrroi
. ,
Meter
Pressure Sustaining
Hydraulic Check Vaiw
6' 90" FL Bend 7 ,-3 90" FL Bend
112" Threaded Penetration r f
in Flange for Automatic~ ?/. ~ 6" Pipe to R
Depressurization System
Transmission System
Surface Plate 112" Stainless Stell
Ball Valve, (Typ. of 3)
Well Casing
I 1R" Check Valve

I 1 / 2 Stainless Steel Piping
Pump (TYP.)(Note 1)
Discharge
Column
NOTE:
1. Field run piping with assistance of engineer.
Provide linings and pipe support as required.

Figure 6- 14 Drawing of wellhead

Figure 6- 15 Photograph of wellhead
REFERENCES
Colo.: AWWA.
AWWA (American Water Works Association). 2006. Al00-06 Standardfor Water Wells.
Denver, Colo.: AWWA.
Bloetscher, F., Muniz, A., and Witt, G.M. 2005. GroundwaterInjection:Modeling, Risks and
Regulations.New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lehr, J., Hurlburt, S., Gallagher, B., and Voytek, J. 1988. Design and Construction of Water
Wells: A Guide for Engineers, National Water Well Association. New York: Van
Nostrand Reinhold.
National Groundwater Association. 1998. Manual of Water Well Construction Processes.
Westerville, Ohio: National Groundwater Association.
Williams, D.E. 1985. Modern Techniques in Well Design.Jour. AWWA, 77(9): 68-74.
Operation of Wells
WELL PERFORMANCE
Once the well is designed and constructed, two issues must be monitored on a
regular basis: well performance and water quality. Well performance issues include
the routine maintenance of pumps and motors and record-keeping of withdrawals.
Water quality monitoring and record-keeping are generally straightforward and
often dictated by regulatory agency requirements. However, ongoing issues with
fouling and microbiological activity appear to be common with wells, so those
topics will be covered in more detail.
Pump and Motor Maintenance (from Bloetscher, et al., 2005)

For each pump, issues to evaluate include the initial cost, cost of installation, cost of
operation, cost of maintenance, and expected equipment life. Proper selection of
system components can ensure system performance, but changing conditions
sometimes justify altering or reselecting components to maintain economical
operation. The range of expected operating conditions must be checked against the
pump manufacturers' information to ensure reliable operation, including the
ambient air and water temperature ranges, pressures, flow, corrosive and abrasive
factors, power supply variation, duty cycle, and protective devices. The pump must
be installed according to the manufacturer's instructions.
Continuous operation of a pump is generally preferable to intermittent
operation, but varying water demand usually requires some combination of off- and on-
time. For improved well performance and pump life, system components and storage
capacity should be designed to minimize the number ofpump starts and stops per day.
At the same time, the pump must be sized and set so that it will never run for even a
few minutes at "no delivery",as this will cause damage to the pump bearings by the
overheating and failure of the submersible motor. If the well drawdown or the
delivery system causes the pump to run at little or no delivery, protection should be
provided to the pump. This protection could include a well-level switch that would
,.".".,."" ",,", ,"
shut off the pump or sound an alarm if the flow or water level dropped below a safe
minimum level. Routine maintenance is often specified by the manufacturer and
will include greasing bearings, polarity checks, and alignment checks.
Record-Keeping (from Bloetscher, et al., 2005)

As part of the proper operation of a groundwater system, gathering, compiling, and
recording of a wide variety of data must be performed to document the operating
history of the wells. These data are used to detect a loss of production efficiency and
possibly the cause of a loss, to schedule maintenance at opportune times to avoid
breakdowns, to evaluate the cost of water production, and to schedule capital
improvements. The forms used for record-keeping are not critically important-the
key is that the records must be collected and maintained in a logical fashion
regardless of the form that is used. A W A ' s Groundwater Manual (M-21) contains
information recommended for data collection, including design, construction, and
operational data. This information is summarized the following sections ( A W A ,
2003). A log tracking the dates and time for work is essential.
The data collected and compiled relating to the well design should include
Detailed individual well (geologic)logs,
Well diameter,
Proposed total depth,
Position of the screens (or portion of the open hole if constructed in rock),
Method of construction and materials,
Pump design,
Water-quality analyses,
Static (nonpumping) water levels in the aquifer,
Design pump discharge pressures, and
Other data developed during the design phase.
When the production well has been constructed, "as-built" records of the well
should be recorded. These records should include
Method of construction used to drill the well,
Driller's log of the materials encountered during drilling,
Detailed individualwell lithologic logs,
Geophysical logs,
Diameters (and materials of construction) of well casingand screens,
Slot sizes of the screen,
Operation of Wells 173
Gravel-packmaterial,
The depths (settings) of the casing and screen, and
The total depth of the well.
Pump data should include
The type (and make) of the pump installed,
The type and horsepower of the motor (driver),
The pump setting (depth to the pump intake),
The setting of the air line or other device for measuringthe water level in the well,
Notation for the point (and reference elevation) used for measurement of the
water level, and
All information provided by the pump and motor manufacturer, such as
capacity and efficiency data.
The total pumpage for each well is generally required by permit to be recorded
daily and reported monthly on operating reports. These numbers can be graphed to
illustrate the seasonal and yearly production rates. This data can be used for future
projection of water withdrawal rates and to monitor the actual volume of water
produced from each well. Data can usually be recorded from a totalizer on
flowmeters installed in the discharge piping for each well.
Records of water levels in the well during periods of nonuse (static) and during
pumping should be recorded to provide a baseline for determining the amount of
drawdown. The static levels can identify changes in the amount ofwater that may be
available in the aquifer with time or at any given time.
Because temperature is often indicative of changes in flow regimes in aquifers,
the groundwater temperature should be recorded and plotted. As the temperature of
the groundwater varies, the capacity of the well fluctuates as a result of the viscosity
of the water. In projects where recharge to the aquifer may come from infiltration of
surface water, the temperature of the adjacent surface water body should also be
recorded.
Operations personnel should evaluate any well failure or long-term decline in
performance to determine if physical or mechanical problems are causing the
decline. Specific capacity is a method to monitor well performance. As noted in
chapter 5, specific capacity or the ratio of the yield of each well to its drawdown is
used to plot the operational trend of each well. The specific capacity of a well should
be calculated annually to identify the potential need for maintenance, plugging
problems, or water supply concerns as outlined in chapter 4.
If specific capacity decreases, it may be the result of a drop in pumping water
levels or a reduction in pumping yield caused by microbiological fouling, chemical
precipitation, formation, well screen or gravel-pack plugging, pump corrosion, or
biofouling. Water level declines can be caused by regional water level declines or
reduced hydraulic efficiency in the well, most commonly plugging or incrustation of
the borehole, screen, or gravel pack. Other specific yield problems may relate to
Changes in the water-bearingzone,
Insufficient development of the well at time of drilling,
Pump wear; and
0 Impeller detachment from the shaft.
Proper study and comparison of data enable the operator (or consultant) to
anticipate maintenance and repair needs. Comparative data pertaining to the physical
condition of the pump unit should also be collected. This data should include
0 Water level measurements made before, during, and after the (drawdown)
pumping test,
A record of the pumping rate,
0 Hydrographs generated during the test, and
0 Any raw data collected (manual or computer generated).
Well maintenance activities should also be recorded. This data can be used to
predict times when maintenance needs to be performed, identify possible causes of
well decline, and plan for annual budgets for wellfield management when compared
to the initial test data. These records should include
0 Dates that maintenance was performed;
0 Results of pre- and postmaintenance pumping tests;
0 Methods (and materials) used in the maintenance procedures; and
0 Other factors such as the coloration of the pumped water, amounts of sand
removed, odors, and water quality analyses.
It is recommended that similar tests be rerun after any repair or maintenance work.
Design problems become evident from several operational conditions: over-
pumping (which results in lowering of the water table), clogging or collapse of a
screen or perforation of a screen section, corrosion, incrustation, and wear
aggravated by excessive intake velocities. Other problems include poor selection of
well materials (that lead to significant corrosion or collapse),incorrect specification
of pumps and poor construction (casing damage, breaches in the grout,
misplacement of screens and gravel pack, and misalignment).
Over-pumping can damage the well by reducing the storage and production
capacity of a groundwater system as described in chapter 6. In granular formations,
the water-bearingformation may consolidate. Where this occurs, it results in a lower
water table, less water storage space, reduced yield from individual wells, and can
collapse the well casing. Wear in the screens or pumps may be a result of entrance
velocity, as water passes through the well screen (or the edge of the formation
depending on the type of well). As the entrance velocity increases, sand, silt, and
colloidal matter can enter the flow stream.
Other problems include suction breaks and electrical surges. No pump should
operate at a rate at which it breaks suction as it may cause severe damage to both the
pump and the aquifer as a result ofwater hammer (see chapter 5). Surgingin the well
may collapse the well if it was not properly stabilized. Surging can stimulate sand,
silt, and colloidal activity or dislodge corrosion and precipitates. Air bubbles may be
entrained into the wells, which can damage the distribution system piping by
causing air pockets. The solution is to remove a bowl or slow the motor speed, not to
close the valves to reduce pumping. Lightning strikes and poor grounding may cause
electrical surges that damage motors and pumps. Appropriate lightning attenuation
should be installed where required.
Well Abandonment
Regulatory agencies generally require utilities to abandon wells no longer in use.
The well must be abandoned in accordance with the regulatory guidelines. The
following is a general outline of a well abandonment plan. The plan is subject to
modification based on the nature and cause of the abandonment.
The head in the well will be suppressed by pumping a solution of sodium
chloride (salt) and/or barium sulfide (barite) into the well (if required). Blow-
out prevention equipment will be on site, should it be necessary for controlling
the well.
The well will be geophysically logged and television surveyed prior to
abandonment. The nature and extent of the geophysicalloggingwill depend on
the value and cause of the well being abandoned. The following are logs that
may be used:
- Electric logs: single-point resistivity, long- and short-normal resistivity,
and spontaneous potential,
- Gammaray,
- Caliper,
- Fluid conductivity,
- Temperature,
- Flowmeter,
- Dual induction,
- 3-D velocity log (sonic log), and
- Cement bond log (if necessary).
All geophysical logs should be performed from the bottom of the borehole to
land surface (for those logs that can be effectively performed in the cased
portions of the well). All logs that can be performed only in open holes should
be run from the bottom of the borehole to the bottom of the casing.
The bottom of the borehole should be filled with clean, washed, and
chlorinated (disinfected) gravel. The gravel should be tapped periodically to
ensure proper placement. A bentonidsand cap should be placed on top of the
gravel 5 ft below the bottom of the casing. The hole is then filled with neat
cement grout from the bentonite/sand cap to land surface.
All fluid displaced during cementing must be contained and disposed of in an
environmentallysafe manner.
A final well abandonment plan should be submitted to the appropriate
regulatory agencies at the time of application for a well abandonment permit,
subject to field modification based on logging and conditions encountered
during the abandonment.
WATER QUALITY MONITORING (from Bloetscher et a[., 2005)

As operations personnel review changes in static and drawdown levels to identify
any trends, they should be cognizant of changes in specific capacity and water levels
in the aquifer. Long-term reductions in water availability in the aquifer or
limitations in specific capacity of the mechanical system caused by pump wear,
clogged screens, or formation of bacterial fouling may be indicated. Repairs to
correct mechanical problems should be scheduled before they become serious, but
problems that are not mechanical may be more challenging.
Regulations require periodic monitoring of microbiological and chemical
quality. As noted in chapter 4, intensive water quality monitoring should occur after
the well has been completed to establish a baseline that can permit the water system
operator to reduce the frequency of groundwater sampling and indicate if long-term
changes in water quality are occurring. Fortunately, groundwater quality in many
locations does not change significantly with time because the movement of
groundwater is generally very slow compared with surface water. When changes do
occur, potentially serious problems could be present.
Where contamination risks are high, sentinel monitor wells should be installed
for this purpose. Sentinel wells, located at various depths, will provide definition for
the initial groundwater assessment. Sentinel wells also serve as an early-warning
system to detect changes in water quality and water elevations before they affect the
water supply wells.
Source: John Largey

Figure 7- 1 Sand entering a borehole
Particulate Plugging
Plugged screens increase the entrance velocity of the raw water, which can increase
particle movement as well as drawdown. Sand, silt, and other particulates may clog
the screen, providing less area to draw the water. When this happens, the capacity of
the well decreases, the pumps become less efficient, and operations costs for
electricity increase. Figure 7-1 shows a borehole with sand entering a pumping weIl.
Sand will also increase wear on pumps and settle in large pipelines. Sand is
problematic for membrane processes.
Removal of sand can be a delicate process because it is possible to damage the
screen. Water samples from wells developed in sand aquifers should also be
periodically inspected for the presence of sand. The presence of sand in a well may
be an indication of eventual collapse of the well, collapse of the formation and, in
extreme cases, sinkholes. These problems are generally repairable but require
appropriate expertise to review the situation.
In most cases, particulate plugging is caused by poor well design or
construction, including insufficient development of the well or inadequate
formation sampling leading to poor screen selection and/or location. In some cases,
the logging may not have been sensitive to thin layers of sand, silt, or colloidal
matter that may be exposed with time. In wells with gravel packs, incomplete
development or over-pumpingmay be indicated by plugging of the gravel pack and
the screens.
Plugging by Iron and Manganese

At a pH less than 5, iron and manganese ions remain dissolved as Fe+3and Mn+2 in
the water supply. However, in the presence of 2 or 3 mg/L of dissolved oxygen or a
higher pH shift, these metals can be precipitated around the well screen in an
insoluble mass. Hard nodules will form from this precipitate, which collect
additional ferric or manganese precipitates. Oxygen encourages iron precipitation.
Acidic groundwater (pH less than 7) may dissolve calcium carbonate from the
formation materials, causing migration to the well screen or increased turbidity.
Calcium Carbonate
One of the most common well problems is incrustation of the well screen or of the
gravel pack around the screen. This may be caused by the release of dissolved
minerals from the native water, geochemical reactions, or microbiological activity.
Calcium carbonate forms a scale on the screen and cements together particles of
sand and gravel. Calcium carbonate incrustation can usually be removed by a
chemical process.
Corrosion
Three general types of corrosion involved in water wells are hydraulic, chemical, and
galvanic. Hydraulic corrosion is caused by turbulent flow, hard particulates, and/or
wearing flow velocities, which abrade well components. Hydraulic corrosion
enlarges screens and opens holes in the casing that allow larger particles into the
casing. As deterioration accelerates, the casing material diminishes and potentially
collapses.
Hydraulic corrosion is generally caused by particulate matter from incomplete
well development or fine material within the formation that is not screened out.
Cavitation caused by turbulent flow will aggravate corrosion by flaking off pieces of
metal. Pumping at rates higher than design flow is the primary cause of hydraulic
corrosion.
Chemical corrosion is a problem in older wells because of materials used in the
past. Chemical corrosion is caused by ionization of metallic elements, typically zinc
or iron, through carbonation or oxidation reduction (redox) reactions. Chloride
ions that exist in raw water can form weak acids that react with metallic ions or
attack metals. Sulfide ions also create acids in certain environments that may attack
metal surfaces. Oxidation and reduction reactions occur in groundwater
environments and can accelerate corrosion in a well. The presence of high
concentrations of dissolved oxygen may accelerate desiccation of brass or other pipe.
Galvanic corrosion is caused by the generation of electric currents in dissimilar
metals. Galvanic corrosion is often a problem with stainless steel pumps that are
connected to steel column pipes with bronze centralizers in a steel casing. Newer
technologies and the use of stainless steel, bronze, and plastics over standard steel
Corroded End (Anode)
Magnesium
Magnesium Alloys
Zinc
Aluminum 25
Cadmium
Aluminum 17ST
Steel or Iron
Cast Iron
Chromium-Iron (active)
Niresist
18-8 Chromium-Nickel-Iron (active)
18-8-3 Chromium-Nickel-Molybdenum-Iron (active)
Lead-Tin Solders
Lead
Tin
Nickel (active)
Brasses
Copper
Bronzes
Copper-Nickel Alloys
Monel
Silver Solder
Nickel (passive)
18-8 Chromium-Nickel-Iron (passive)
18-8-3 Chromium-Nickel-Iron (passive)
Silver
Gold
Platinum
Protected End (Cathode)
Figure 7-2 Galvanic series
grades have reduced galvanic corrosion, although stainless steel grades may have
some of the same inherent problems in high chloride waters (Bloetscher, et al., 2001,
2OO2a, 2002b). Figure 7-2 shows the galvanic series. The higher the conductance
that exists between two metals, the greater the potential for galvanic action. This
corrosion is typically found where casing screen is joined, where the submersible
pumps are joined to the column pipes, or where bronze spiders exist. Poor pump
alignment, stressed threads as a result of poor assembly, or poor welds may
encourage this type of corrosion.
Microbiological Fouling (from Bloetscher, et al., 1998)

Microbiological fouling is generally interrelated with physical and chemical
processes. Microorganisms can encrust or corrode the system enhancing physical
and chemical well deterioration problems involving some microbiological fouling.
The typical symptoms of microbiological fouling problems are
0 Decrease in the water quality,

0 Increased drawdowns,
0 Reduced specific capacity,
0 Change in the amount of iron or manganese in the water supply, and
An apparent increase in microbiological densities, such as an observance of
slimes or staining from the raw water.
Microbiological fouling encourages changes in the electrical potential and
pattern of the well casing by using C02 on metallic surfaces to transfer ions. The
bacteria attach to the steel pipe walls in the form of biofilms. As noted in chapter 2,
a biofilm is an active ecosystem, providing an environment for survival to a variety of
microorganisms by storing and transporting nutrients. As the bacteria in the biofilm
absorb nutrients, they form tubercles and films that reduce the capacity of pumps
and casings and may clog the well screen. Precipitates of iron, sulfur, and manganese
can also exist within the biofilm. The biofilm also protects the bacteria cells from
external reagents, such as chlorine, but traps iron, sulfur, manganese, and other
nutrients.
It should be noted that certain microbiological activity is normal. Table 7- 1
shows the bacteria found in several south Florida aquifers. Aquifers are not the
pristine environments the public may believe. Bacteria find aquifers to be the ideal
environments as there is tremendous surface area for colonization, the temperatures
are relatively constant and moderate, the flow of water provides a consistent nutrient
supply, and except for the immediate pumping zone, the water is not disturbed
(Bloetscher, et al., 1998). All spaces within the aquifer formation are potential areas
for colonization. Vugular formations and formations with air pockets are ideal for
creating large biofilms within the aquifer, but never indicate severe plugging because
of the size of the organisms in comparison to the vugs.
Monitoring bacteria population is important. Figure 7-3 is an example of a well
in Venice, Fla. where sulfur-reducing bacteria (SRB), iron-reducing bacteria (IRB)
and slime-forming bacteria (SFB) are monitored. When a biofouling problem has
begun, little can be done to remove it. Control of the colonies is the best strategy.
Several steps should be followed to look for bacteria. A down-hole camera
should be used to look for the colony seeds. Any equipment that is pulled out of the
wells should be thoroughly cleaned so other wells are not contaminated. Operations
personnel may need to obtain microbiological samples for analysis from nonwater
sources (e.g., samples from the colloidal filter or from a slimy material growing on
the pump or column pipe). For these analyses, swab samples should be collected.
Sterile collection swabs for bacterial samples should be obtained by the operations
staff and used to collect the specimen to be analyzed.
Table 7-1 Bacteria found in South Florida aquifiers

Isolated From
South County
Isolated From Regional Isolated From
Bacteria Biscayne Wellfield Wellfield Floridan Wellfield
Acinetobacter anitratus d d d
Acinetobacter baumannii d d
Acineto bacter calcoaceticus d d
Acinetobacter haemolyticus d
Acinetobacter 1wofli d d
Actinomyces/Streptomy ces sp. d
Aeromonas hydrophila d d d
Alcaligenesfaecalis d d
Alcaligenes xylosoxidans d d
Bacillus sp. d d d
Burkholderia (pseudomonas) cepacia d d d
Chryseomonasluteola d d
Citrobacter diversus d
Citrobacterfreundii d d
Citrobacterperfi-ngens d d
Citrobactersepticum
Citrobactersordellii
Citrobactersporogenes
Clostridium bifermentans
Corynebacterium sp. d
Crenothrixpolyspora
Desulfovibrio sp.
Enterobacter aerogenes d
Enterobacter agglomerans d d
Enterobacter cloacae d
Escherichia coli d
Flavobacterium odoratum
Flavobacterium sp.
Gallionellaferruginea
Klebsiella oxytoca
Klebsiellapneumoniae
Table 7-1 Bacteria found in South Florida aquifiers (continued)
Isolated From
South County
Isolated From Regional Isolated From
Bacteria Biscayne Wellfield Wellfield Floridan Wellfield
Kluyvera sp. d
Micrococcus luteus d d
Micrococcussp. d d
Plesiomonas shigelloides d
Pseudomonasaeruginosa d d d
Pseudomonasalcaligenes d J d
PseudomonasJluorescens d d d
Pseudomonaspickettii d
Pseudomonas pseudoalcaligenes d
Pseudomonasputida d
Pseudomonasstutzeri d d
Rhodococcus equi d
Runyon Group Ivmycobacterium d
Salmonella sp. d
Serratia marcescens J
Shewanella (pseudomonas)putrefaciem d
Sphaerotilus natans d
Sphingomonaspaucimoblis d
Staphylococcus aureus d
Staph-coagulase negative d d
Stenotrophomonas (xanthomonas) d d d
maltophilia
Source: Bloetscher, e t al., 2000a
Water and swab samples should be sent to a microbiological laboratory. The

conclusions based on the results of the microbiological analysis and the
recommendations for control, if microorganisms are identified, should be
performed by a qualified hydrogeologist with the assistance from a qualified
microbiologist.
The following analyses should be performed on each water sample:

0 Total coliform count
Jul-92 Oct-92 Jan-93 Apr-93 JuI-93 Oct-93 Jan-94
NOTE:CFU = colony formingunits

Figure 7-3 Bacterial quantities in a well
0 Fecal coliform count

0 Heterotrophic plate count
0 Bacterial identification
Total fungal count
Fungal identification
0 Algal identification
0 Protozoa
The following analyses should be performed on each swab sample: bacterial
identification, fungal identification, and algal identification. Cryptosporidium sp.
and Giardid sp. should be analyzed for evidence of surface water interaction or if the
water supply is surface water. Biological Activity Reaction Test (BART.0 ) tests are
useful, but they are not conclusive for identifying biofouling problems. Speciation
of bacteria is required because most environments yield a matrix of bacterial species.
An individual BART@test only looks for limited species.
Resolving Operations Problems

Proper design will reduce potentially excessive entrance velocities or improper
screen placement that can allow fine-grained particles to migrate into the wells.
Proper materials, such as plastics or fiberglass, instead of steel or stainless steel
should be used in water where microbial activity or high chlorides are present.
Dissimilar metals should not be used in close proximity. Improper construction,
poor grouting, excessive screen and casing damage, or the removal of protective
sealants can lead to physical deterioration of the well. The improper application of
certain chemical reagents, especially chlorine, and sequestering reagents or those
used during redevelopment, may exacerbate deterioration. Overly aggressive
pumping for redevelopment, over-pumping of the system, or the improper use of
surging may cause structural damage to the well in the long term.
Many older wells were installed using methods and materials no longer in use
and do not meet current standards. In these cases, the problems probably cannot be
fully corrected. For many older wells, acidification, typically using sulfamic acid, can
improve performance. Sulfamic acid solution will remove or loosen incrustation in
the screens or the column pipe, although it will not remove much biofouling.
Physical agitation or surging is a method that often removes incrustation or
reduces fine material entering the well screen or gravel pack. Tools are used that
push water down into the well and pull it out, just as old hand-pumped well systems
worked. Initially, the surge device is operated at less than 3 strokes per minute at 6 in.
to 10 in. per stroke. Over time, the frequency and the stroke should be increased,
which increases the surging. Care must be taken: if the casing or the formation is weak,
or the screens damaged, the well structure can collapse during surging.
The addition of chemicals to the well is the most common treatment. Chlorine
is used as a biocide for microbiological fouling, although in most cases it does not
kill all the bacteria, it only serves to control the biofilm. A 12 percent sodium
hypochlorite solution or commercial calcium hypochlorite provides the chemical
strength needed for chlorination of the bacteria. In some cases hydrogen peroxide
may be used to address biofouling problems, but certain bacteria, such as the
Pseudomoms species, may be able to use the oxygen to their benefit, increasing
rather than decreasing biological activity.
Another option is acidification, dropping the pH to less than 2. Hydrochloric,
sulfuric, and nitric acid are used, but these chemicals must be used carefully.
Sulfamic acid is preferred by some hydrogeologists for this reason. Deterioration of
the well materials must be weighed against the removal of the biofilm or the
incrustation. The addition of phosphates has been used, as it makes water “more
slippery” and increases total well capability. However, phosphates provide a nutrient
for biofilm. In all cases with chemical use, a plan for handling hazardous material
and disposal must be made. None of these chemicals should be discharged to the
ground: they must be hauled to an approved disposal site.
Another method, carbon dioxide injection (also hydraulic fracturing), uses
gaseous carbon dioxide and liquid carbon dioxide under 100 psi of pressure. This
technique causes the carbon dioxide to enter the formation, dropping the pH
through a conversion of the CO;?to carbonic acid. The water freezes, cracking and
loosening incrustation. The formation may also crack and loosen, which can free the
fractured zones or crack the bedrock formations and potentially increase yield. After
the carbon dioxide is injected, the well is surged and redeveloped.
"-
Sonar jetting is a relatively new method used to remove incrustations and may
reduce biofilms. A sequence of small blasting caps is suspended and exploded,
sending shock waves through the casing. Incrustations generally are blasted off the
well screen, formation, and casing. After sonar jetting, surging and full
redevelopment of the well must occur to remove all of the excess debris.
Acidification improves the process to remove the encrustration to some extent. The
problem with this process may be the inability to get permits to do the blasting, and
the potential damage to the casing, cement seal, and/or the screens that may occur.
Other methods that show some promise in certain specific cases are sectional flow
control devices and inner sleeve installations within the casing, using entrained air
to reduce fouling.
Owners and operators of wells that have increasing levels of contamination
should immediately begin assessing their alternatives for correcting the problem.
The major choices that may be considered in attempting to locate the source of
contamination are to
Determine if correction or removal of the source will allow the aquifer to return
to normal;
Determine whether the plume of contamination flowing toward the well can be
blocked or intercepted;
Determine if it is economically feasible to treat the water to remove the
contamination;
0 Investigate whether altering the well to draw water from a different aquifer
is possible;
Investigate the feasibility of drilling a replacement well at another location
where there is no contamination:
0 Investigate whether water from the contaminated well can be blended with
water from an uncontaminated source to bring the finished water-level below
the MCL;
Investigate changing to a surface water source; OK
Investigate purchasingwater from another water system.
Although groundwater quality does nor vary much with time, certain quality
features do gradually change.
WELL REDEVELOPMENT PROTOCOL

Even without plugging problems arising, wells should be redeveloped periodically to
ensure efficient operation. Records of this redevelopment should be maintained.
Establishing an efficient and timely protocol for redevelopment will save the utility
money. A redevelopment protocol will be basically the same as the initial

development protocol outlined in chapter 6.
I. Measure and record flow.
2. Measure and record pumping distance to water level.
3. Turn pump off and wait 5 min.
4. Record static water level.
5. Calculate drawdown (pumping water level minus static level).
6. Calculate specific capacity.
7. Redevelop the well by surging or air lifting.
8. Repeat steps 1-7.
9. If the well specific capacity increases significantly (at least 25 percent),
disinfect the well and place it back into service. Otherwise keep repeating
steps 1-7.
This protocol should be followed annually. As in the initial development
process, the withdrawn water may contain chemicals, silt, sand, or other debris. The
quality of this water may be such that it requires treatment. As a result, the following
should be monitored in the withdrawn water during development:
pH of the water,
0 Chloride level,
0 Toxic substances,
0 Silt,
0 The quantity of the water to be discharged,
0 The time element for which the discharge will occur (i.e., a relatively consistent
flow over a period of time or surges),
The new water quality of the wells, and
The uptake of metals, SOCs, or VOCs that might violate air or water standards.
There may be a potential for environmental problems if chemicals are used in
the redevelopment process or if excessive silt, sand, and other debris are in the waste.
The same procedures and regulatory limitations as in the development process must
be adhered to. Caution should be taken to minimize the potential for flooding areas
near the well as the redevelopment water is discharged to the ground.
REFERENCES
Colo.: AWWA.
Bloetscher, F., Bullock, R.J., Fergen, R.E., Witt, G.M., and Fries, G.D. 2002a. Is It Time for
Water Plant Engineers to Revisit the Selection of Stainless Steel Grades in Water and
Wastewater Treatment Environments, Part 1. Water Engineering and Management,
149(5):36-44.
Bloetscher, F., Bullock, R.J., Fergen, R.E., Witt, G.M., and Fries, G.D. 2002b. Is It Time for
Water Plant Engineers to Revisit the Selection of Stainless Steel Grades in Water and
Wastewater Treatment Environments, Part 2. Water Engineering and Management,
149(6):12- 15.
Bloetscher, F., Bullock, R.J., and Witt, G.M. 2001. Brackish Water Supply Corrosion
Control Issues Using 316L Stainless Steel. In Proc. of the ASCE-EWRI Annual
Conference, Orlando, Fla. Reston, Va.: ASCE.
Bloetscher, F., Fergen, R.E., Witt, G.M. 2000a. Biofouling Concerns from Raw Waters
Sources in Membrane Water Treatment. In Proc. of the American DesaltingAssociation,
Lake Tahoe, Nev. Stuart, Fla.: American Membrane Technology Association.
Bloetscher, F., Muniz, A., and Witt, G.M. 2005. Groundwater Injection:Modeling, Risks and
Bloetscher, F., and Witt, G.M. 1996. Well Plugging Problems: Case Studies in Collier
County, the City of Venice and the City of Hollywood, Florida. In Proc. of the A W A
Annual Conference.Denver, Colo.: AWWA.
Bloetscher, F., and Witt, G.M. 2000. Effects of Silt, Salt and Other Fouling Mechanisms
Affecting Groundwater Treatability. In Proc. of the A W A Annual Conference.Denver,
Colo.: AWWA.
Bloetscher, F., Witt, G.M., Dodd, A.E., and Dodd, C.P. 2000. Brackish Water Supply
Corrosion Issues Using 316L Stainless Steel. In Proc. of the Florida Section A W A
Annual Conference.
Bloetscher, F., Witt, G.M., Dodd, C.P., and Dodd, A.E. 1998. Prevention of Biofouling in
Membrane Water Treatment Plants. In Proc. of the A W A Annual Conference. Denver,
Colo.: AWWA.
Chapelle, F.H. 1993. GroundwaterMicrobiology and Geochemistry, New York: John Wiley
& Sons.
Gerba, C.P., and Bitton, G. 1984. Groundwater Pollution andMicrobiology.New York: John
Wiley & Sons.
Summary
Groundwater is water that flows downward by gravity until it contacts a layer of rock
or other impenetrable material, creating, an aquifer. This water may have entered the
soil as a result of rainfall or snow melt, or it may be an ancient source found well
below the surface. Groundwater moves downhill, taking the path of least resistance
to the flow. Therefore, if underground conduits or channels (i.e., voids and/or
fractures that lead to high permeability) are present, the water will tend to flow in
these pathways. These formations may yield substantial quantities ofwater to wells.
Groundwater can' have significant advantages over more traditional surface
water uses. These advantages include:
0 Less exposure to contamination (assuming not a surficial aquifer);
0 Water quality is stable;
Water temperature is stable;
Water quality changes are slow to occur;
0 Evapotranspirationlosses are insignificant; and
Less treatment typically is required.
However, groundwater sources have the following disadvantages:
Difficult to clean up once contaminated;
No early warning of contamination-unseen plumes of contaminants can
migrate into a wellfield without warning unless sentinel wells are constructed;
Competing uses from urban industrial, commercial, agricultural, irrigation, and
ecosystem users in the same area;
Determining the safe yields of material often is uncertain;
0 Water levels are not obvious;
Supplies are often limited in basins, which is why most large utility systems rely
on surface supplies, not groundwater.
Well siting considerations include four issues: site availability, water supply,
water quality, and wellhead protection limitations. Many small water systems also
include land costs as a prime consideration when selecting sites for public water
supply wells; however, this may overlook significant water quality or water quantity
issues. Selecting suitable water quantity and quality are intertwined. The water
system must balance factors including well depth, geology of the area, characteristics
of the rock formations, and dissolved minerals in the aquifer.
The SDWA and its associated amendments are focused on protecting the
public health from various contaminants in potable water supplies. This has impacts
on groundwater use- the groundwater rules, wellhead protection programs, and
water quality requirements all have impacts on the selection and treatment of
groundwater supplies. Whether surface waters, groundwaters, or via operation and
treatment, SDWA has basic requirements that must be met.
There are many drilling methods and many methods of well construction that
have been developed for wells. The following are a variety of wells that serve many
purposes:
Water production (the focus of this'document)
Oil and gas wells
Geothermal wells
Injection/disposal wells
Aquifer storage and recovery wells
Environmental remediation wells
Environmental remediation wells are the shallowest of this group, often less
than 10 ft deep, while oil and gas wells may be thousands of feet deep. Water supply
wells fall somewhere in between. The following are the primary drilling methods for
water supply wells:
Cable tool
0 Hollow stem auger
Hydraulic rotary
Mudrotary
Reverse-air circulation
Dual tube
All well projects go through a series of steps: predesign, regulatory criteria,
design, construction and testing, and operations issues. Most testing occurs once
Summary 191
some form of construction has begun-usually with a test well. Once the
exploratory or test well is complete, geophysical logging can commence.
Appropriate drilling, geologic, geophysical, and video logs and other tests, such as
caliper and packer tests, must be conducted during the drilling and construction of
new wells. Results for this testing permit engineers and hydrogeologists to define
the appropriate zones in the formation to case, and those to leave open. When
construction is complete, well development may be the most important part of the
well drilling process and is often underestimated with regard to the time required to
properly develop the well.
Once the well is designed and constructed, two issues must be monitored in a
wellfield on a regular basis: well performance and water quality. Well performance
issues include the routine maintenance items for pumps and motors and record-
keeping of withdrawals. Groundwater withdrawal wells provide good service to
most utilities for many years, but all wells are subject to fouling and other
performance problems. These concerns include
Mechanical failures, including failures of electrical motors and pumps, and
failures of valves,
Poor operating and maintenance procedures,
Poor well design and construction practices, including insufficient placement of
grout; improper design of pumps, valves, and fittings; and excessive drawdown
allowances,
Hydrogeologic constraints that cannot be evaluated at the time of design or
change over time, such as:
- sand, clay, or rock layers that are unstable and collapse into the borehole;
- naturally occurring or induced fracturing and faulting;
- long-term water quality changes caused by changes to the hydraulic regime,
such as dams;
- water hammer to the aquifer;
- effects caused by mining of the water or introduction of chemicals and
microorganisms; and
- naturally occurring phenomena (such as sinkholes, karst terrain features,
or faults).
High silt or sand content caused by failure to develop the wells fully, or
intercepting sand or silt layers that have not or cannot be sealed off in the
borehole or corrected in well design.
All of these problems may exist in conjunction with, or as a result of,
microbiological fouling problems in wells. As treatment technologies advance, the
need to review and correct well performance problems, especially fouling concerns,
has taken on greater significance.
All wells can plug or foul because of hydrogeologic, geologic, engineering, and
construction factors. The problems are usually physical, mechanical, or
environmental in nature. For example, performance problems are typically caused by
fouling or sand and silt production in wells. These problems and their likely causes
are outlined below.
Water level decline in the well
- reduced hydraulic efficiency in the well, most commonly plugging or
incrustation of the borehole, screen, or gravel pack
- regional water level declines
- well interference or plugging of a gravel pack by sand, silt, or clay
Lower specific capacity
- drop in pumping water level
- reduction in pumping yield caused by incrustation, formation plugging,
pump corrosion, and biofouling
Lower yield
- dewateringor caving in of a major fracture or other water-bearing zone
- insufficient development of the well
- lack of connection to water-bearingfractures
- pumpwear
- impeller detachment from shaft
- incrustation, plugging, or corrosion and perforation of column pipe
Sand/silt pumping
- presence of sand or silt in fractures intercepted by well completed open-hole
- leakage around casing bottom
- inadequate screen and filter-pack selection or installation
- screen corrosion
- collapse of filter pack caused by excessive vertical velocity and wash-out
Silt/clay infiltration
- inadequate seal around the well casing or casing bottom
infiltration through filter pack
- mud seams in rock
Summary 193
-"
Many of these performance problems can be traced to inadequate design and/or

construction of the well. Several operational conditions that are warnings of design
problems are over-pumping (which results in lowering of the water table), clogging
or collapse of a screen or perforation of a section, and corrosion and incrustation
aggravated by excessive intake velocities. Other design and construction errors
include:
Poor selection of materials that leads to significant corrosion or collapse of the
well casing or screen;
Poor construction-casing cracks or leaks, leaking or missing grout,
misplacement of screens and gravel pack, misalignment (enhanced corrosion or
collapse can result);
Lack of well development-poor well yield, turbidity and sand pumping,
biofouling, incrustation, and excessive drawdown can result.
Long-term maintenance of wells should include periodic redevelopment and
specific capacity monitoring to ensure efficient operation. Records of this
redevelopment should be maintained. Establishing an efficient and timely protocol
for redevelopment will save the utility money and protect the well for the long-term.
About the Authors
Dr. Bloetscher is currently an assistant ~rofessorin the Civil Engineering

Department at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton, Florida, and the president
of Public Utility Management and Planning Services, Inc. (PUMPS). PUMPS is a
consulting firm dedicated to evaluation of utility systems, needs assessments,
condition assessments, strategic planning, capital improvement planning, grant and
loan acquisition, interlocal agreement recommendations, bond document
preparation, consultant coordination, permitting, and implementation of capital
improvement construction. Dr. Bloetscher is previously an adjunct faculty member
at the University of Miami in Coral Gables, Fla., and a former utility director and
deputy director for several large water and sewer systems. He is currently the chair
for the Water Resource Division Trustees for the American Water Works
Association Groundwater Committee, and past chair of the AWWA Groundwater
Committee. He can be contacted at P.O. Box 221890, Hollywood, FL 33022-1890.
Mr. Albert Muniz is currently a vice president with Hazen and Sawyer, P.C.,
managing their Boca Raton office. Hazen and Sawyer is one of the top
Siting, Drilling, and Construction o f Water Supply Wells
environmental engineering firms in the western hemisphere, involved in water

resources, water supply, water treatment, wastewater treatment, and injection
programs. Mr. Muniz has over 26 years experience with injection well programs,
including water supply and disposal injection programs. Mr. Muniz is currently
chair of the AWWA Groundwater Committee and is an adjunct professor at Florida
Atlantic University. Mr. Muniz can be reached at 2101 N.W. Corporate Boulevard,
Suite 301, Boca Raton, FL 33431-7343.
Mr. John Largey is currently a hydrogeologist with Hazen and Sawyer, P.C.,
based in Boca Raton, Fla., managing field operations for diverse drilling programs.
Hazen and Sawyer is one of the top environmental engineering firms in the western
hemisphere, involved in water resources, water supply, water treatment, wastewater
treatment, and injection programs. Mr. Largey has over 20 years experience
involving all aspects of drilling wells for a variety of applications including water
supply; Class I, Class 111, and Class V injection wells; oil and gas; geotechnical
investigation; environmental investigation; and environmental remediation. Mr.
Largey can be reached at 2101 N.W. Corporate Boulevard, Suite 301, Boca Raton,
FL 3343 1-7343.
Dedication
Dr. Bloetscher dedicates this work to his parents, Frederick and Virginia Bloetscher
in Tamarac, Fla. They are the initial (and continuing) proofreaders of all of the
documents.
Mr. Muniz dedicates this work to his family, especially his wife, Dr. Lori S.
Muniz, who has supported his efforts throughout his career, and to his children
Natalie, Albert0 (Tony), and Alexis.
Mr. Largey dedicates this work to his wife, Diane Mason-Largey, who has
lovingly endured the many long days and nights in the life of a field geologist, and to
Alice B. Largey, a true rock hound.
...
Xlll
Figures
1-1 Hydrologic Cycle 2

1-2 Typical Well Installation 5
1-3 Industrial Aerial Map 6
1-4 Residential Aerial Map 6
1-5 Undeveloped Area Aerial Map 7
1-6 Helton Creek Falls, Blairsville, Ga. 9
1-7 Lake Winfield Scott, Blairsville, Ga. 10
1-8 Delicate Arch, Arches National Park, Utah 10
2- 1 Broward County Wellfield Protection Zones 18
2-2 Diagram of Well Locations for Fort Lauderdale's Peele-Dixie
Wellfield 19
2-3 2003 Aerial Map of Vicinity of Fort Lauderdale's Peek-Dixie
Wellfield 20
2-4 Drawdown Map of Fort Lauderdale's Peele-Dixie Wellfield Site 21
2-5 Risk-cost Analysis 32
3- 1 Operation of Well Points 39
3-2 Installation of Driven Well Points 40
3-3 Bucket-type Drilling Rig and Close-up of Bucket 42
3-4 Cable-tool Drilling 43
3-5 Cable-tool Bit 44
3-6 Bailer 44
3-7 Hollow Stem Auger 46
3-8 Split Spoon Sampling Devices 47
3-9 Mud Rotary Circulation 48
3-10 Mud Rotary Method With Cuttings Carried to Surface 49
3-11 Typical Rotary Drill and Drill Collar 49
3-12 Chart for Bit Selection 49
3-13 Drag Bits for Unconsolidated and Soft Sediments 50
3-14 Tricone Bits for Moderately Hard to Hard Formations 50
3-15 Flat Bottom Bit for Large Diameter Drilling Applications 5 1
3-16 Drill Pipe and Drill Collars 5 1
3-17 Three Stabilizers and a 42-in. Drill Bit 52
vi i
...
Vlll Siting, Drilling, and Construction of Water Supply Wells
3-18 Picking Up Drill Pipe 52

3-19 Typical Mud Circulation System 53
3-20 Collection Cuttings at the Shale Shaker 55
3-21 De-sanding Operations 56
3-22 Top-Head Hydraulic Drive System 57
3-23 Reverse-Air Drilling Method 60
3-24 Dual Walled Drill Pipe 61
3-25 Dual-Tube Circulation System 61
3-26 Typical Reverse-Air, Dual-Tube Drill Rig With Cyclone 62
3-27 Sample From Cyclone on Typical Reverse-Air, Dual-Tube Drill Rig 62
3-28 Down-the-Hole-Hammer Method 64
3-29 Core Sample 65
3-30 BoxedCore 65
3-31 Core Barrels 66
4-1 Example of Lithologic Log 72
4-2 Specialized Equipment and Companies Perform Borehole
Geophysical Logging 75
4-3 Surface Resistivity Method 76
4-4 Example of Caliper Log 78
4-5 System Used To Make Conventional Single-Point Resistance and
SPLogs 79
4-6 Example of Temperature Corrections Required to Electrical
Conductivity Log 81
4-7 Example of Caliper and Electrical Resistivity Log for Borehole 82
4-8 Conductivity Relationship to Dissolved Solids for Specific
Conductivity Logs 83
4-9 Gamma Response to Increasing Clay and Silt Content 84
4-10 Example of Comparison of Gamma, Resistivity, and Caliper Logs
Through Shale 85
4-1 1 Relationship Between Gamma Radiation and Silt and Sand 85
4-12 Comparison of Radium/Potassium Gamma Response to Calcites 86
4-13 Response of Sediments to Acoustic Waves 88
4-14 Acoustic Velocity and Caliper Log Example 89
4-15 Typical Suite of Logs 9 1
4-16 Example of Borehole Photograph 94
4-17 Type Curve for Confined Aquifer 99
4-18 Example of Alternative Solution for Drawdown Response100
4-19 Example of Drawdown Response at Impermeable Boundary 106
4-20 Example of Drawdowns Response at Recharge Boundary 107
5-1 Interfering Drawdown Between Wells 129
6-1 Telescoped Well 146
6-2 Steel Casing Materials 150
6-3 Fiberglass Casing Materials 151
6-4 PVC Casing Being Installed 151
6-5 Welding a Casing Pipe 152
6-6 Well Screen 153
6-7 Well Screen Size Chart 156
6-8 Dump Methods for Grouting 157
6-9 Tremie Pipe 158
6-10 Pumping Grout (above ground and below ground methods) 159
6-11 Cube Packing >40%Porosity 163
6-12 Rhombohedra1 Packing >25%Porosity 163
6-13 Formation Collapse 163
6-14 Drawing of Wellhead 169
6-15 Photograph of Wellhead 170
7-1 Sand Entering a Borehole 177
7-2 Galvanic Series 179
7-3 Bacterial Quantities in a Well 183
Tables
1-1 Porosity of Rock Formations 3

2- 1A Primary Drinking Water Standards 14
2-1B Secondary Drinking Water Standards 15
2-2 Factors Affecting Survival of Enteric Bacteria in Soil 25
2-3 Summary of Maximum Viral Travel Distances in Groundwater 26
2-4 Factors Influencing Virus Fate in Soils 27
2-5 Summary of PAS Occurrence and Activity Levels 30
3-1 Summary of Drilling Methods, Benefits, and Limitations 68
4-1 Electrical Resistivity of Selected Aquifer Materials 80
4-2 Energy for Gamma Logs 84
4-3 Neutron Collisions for Selected Materials 87
4-4 Compression Wave Velocity Transit Time 88
4-5 Recommended Geophysical Logs 92
4-6 Response of Logs to Porosity 92
4-7 Criteria for Selection of Logs 93
4-8 Summary of Parameters To Be Analyzed in Water Quality Testing 109
5-1 Values of Porosity in Various Geologic Materials 121
5-2 Values of Specific Yield for Various Geologic Materials 122
5-3 Typical Values of Hydraulic Conductivity and Permeability 124
5-4 Ranges of Hydraulic Conductivity for Various Rock Types 125
5-5 Units of Hydraulic Parameters of Aquifers 126
5-6 Collapse Strength of Steel Well Casing 134
6-1 Casing Sizes for Small Wells Based on Yield 144
6-2 Wall Thickness for Steel Casing 148
6-3 Steel Well Casings Fabricated From Standard Plates 148
6-4 Fiberglass Casing Sizes 149
6-5 Small PVC Casings Sizes-SCH 80 149
6-6 Larger PVC Casings Sizes-SCH 40 149
6-7 Various Size Grade Scale in Common Use 155
7-1 Bacteria Found in South Florida Aquifers 18 1
xi
INDEX
Note: f. indicates figure; t. indicates table.
Index Terms Links
Acidification 184
Acoustic logging 88 88f. 88t.
in conjunction with caliper logs 89 89f.
Aerial maps 6f. 7 7f.
Air-line devices 96
Aquifer testing 71 91
and casing depth 94
and cone of depression 94
and cuttings 95
drawdown method of calculation 98 99f. 100f.
identification of aquifer boundaries 105 106f. 107f.
monitor wells 95
Packer tests 93 191
and pump depth 94
ratios between transmissivity and specific
capacity for different aquifer types 107
recovery method of calculation 99
reverse-air method 91
specific capacity method 101
step-drawdown testing 101
and storage coefficient 93 95
and transmissivity 93 95
transmissivity equation 97
This page has been reformatted by Knovel to provide easier navigation.
Index Terms Links
Aquifer testing (Cont.)

water level measurements and collection
schedule 95
well efficiency 105
well loss constant 103
Aquifers 1
anisotropic, and isotropic 124
artesian 2
confined 2 126
electrical resistivity of selected aquifer
materials 80t.
flowing artesian 2
homogeneous and heterogeneous 124
impermeable barriers 105 106f.
mining of 94
and porosity of rock formations 3 3t. 119
quantity and quality of water in 3
recharge 11
recharge barriers 105 106 107f.
surficial or unconfined (water table) 1 98 128
Aquitards 1
Artesian aquifers 2
ASTM standard D-4135-03 108
AWWA, Standard for Water Wells
A100-06 110 139
Bacteria 22 23 113
coliform 115
found in South Florida aquifers 180 181t. 182t.
Index Terms Links
Bacteria (Cont.)
iron 114
monitoring 180 183f.
presence in aquifers 180
removal by soil 25
slime-producing 114
speciation 115
survival time 25 25t.
Walkerton (Ontario) E. coli case study 26
See also Biofilm; Microbiological fouling
Bacteriophages 24
Biofilm 114 180
See also Bacteria;
Microbiological fouling
Biological Activity Reaction Test (BART) 183
Boreholes
clearing fines from 161
geophysical logging 71 73 75f.
photography 91 94f.
plugging 177 177f.
thickness 139
Boron 116
Bottom-hole pressure 131
Broward County (Florida) wellhead
protection zones 17 18f.
Bucket-type drilling method 41 42f.
Index Terms Links
Cable-tool drilling method 42 43f.

bailer 43 44f.
bit 43 44f.
Caisson construction method 45
Calcium carbonate 178
California drilling method 40
Caliper logs 78 78f. 191
in conjunction with acoustic logs 89 89f.
in conjunction with flowmeter logs 90
in conjunction with gamma logs 84 85f.
Capillarity 126
Carbon dioxide injection 184
Casings
depth 94
diameter 139
fiberglass 149t. 150 151f.
and fractured formations 147
intermediate 147
joints 150 152f.
materials 140 147
pit 147
purpose of 143
PVC 149t. 150 151f.
setting 143
sizes for small wells based on yield 144 144t.
steel 147 148t. 150f.
steel collapse strength 133 134t.
steel wall thickness 148t.
Index Terms Links
Casings (Cont.)
surface 147
telescoped 146f. 147
types 145
welding 150 152f.
Chemical corrosion 178
Clay
causes of infiltration 192
gamma log response to 83 84 84f. 85f.
Clogging potential 109
Coliform bacteria sampling 115
Collapse strength 133
of steel casing 133 134t.
Colloids 109
testing 112
Cone of depression 94
Cone of influence 119
Confined aquifers 2
flow equation 128
ratio between transmissivity and specific
capacity 107
storage coefficient 126
Confining units 1
Construction
casings 143
gravel packs 154
grouting 156
installation of surface equipment 168 169f. 170f.
Index Terms Links
Construction (Cont.)
screens 152
See also Sanitary protection; Well
development
Contaminants 22
See also Dissolved
inorganic salts; Endocrine disruptors;
Maximum contaminant levels;
Pathogens; Pesticides; Synthetic
organic compounds; Volatile organic
compounds; Waterborne diseases
Coring 65
boxed cores 65 65f.
core barrels 65 66f.
core samples 65 65f.
Corrosion 178
Cryptosporidium 15 22 183
Darcy’s law 123

Density differential 131
Design 119
performance problems caused by errors in 193
predesign 119
well-specific issues 119
wellfields 129
wells (basic decisions) 139
wells (predesign calculations) 130
Desulfouibro gallionella 23
Index Terms Links
Disinfection 167
improving 164
Disinfection By-Products Rule 16
Dissolved inorganic salts 20
Down-the-hole hammer drilling method 63 64f.
Drawdown 119
and impermeable barriers 105 106f.
method of calculation 98 99f. 100f.
and recharge barriers 105 106 107f.
and specific capacity method 101
wellfield 18 21f.
See also Step-drawdown testing
Drilling methods 37 190
air rotary 58
bucket-type 41 42f.
cable-tool 42 43f. 44f.
caissons 45
California (stovepipe) method 40
comparison 68t.
down-the-hole hammer (DTHH) 63 64f.
drive points 39 39f. 40f.
driven wells 39 39f. 40f.
dual-tube (reverse-air) 61 61f. 62f.
foam 58
hand digging 38
hollow stem auger 45 46f. 47f.
hydraulic rotary 47 48f. 49f. 50f.
51f. 52f. 53f. 55f.
56f. 57f.
jetting 41
Index Terms Links
Drilling methods (Cont.)

reverse-air circulation 60 60f.
reverse-circulation rotary 59
selection 67 68t.
selection variables 38
telescoping 45
well points 39 39f. 40f.
See also Coring
Drinking water standards 13 14t.
Drive points 39 39f. 40f.
Driven wells 39 39f. 40f.
DTHH. See Down-the-hole hammer
drilling method
Dual-tube (reverse-air) drilling method 61 61f.
samples and sample cyclones 61 62f.
See also Reverse-circulation rotary
drilling method
E. coli 26
Electric tape 96
Electrical conductivity (EC) logs 82 83f.
in conjunction with neutron logs 87
in conjunction with temperature logs 89
Electrical resistivity
log adjustments for temperature 81 81f.
of selected aquifer materials 80t.
single-point log 79 79f.
subsurface 79 79f. 80t. 81f.
surface 75 76f.
Index Terms Links
Electrical surges 175

Endocrine disruptors 28 116
Entrance velocity 138
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
See United States Environmental
Protection Agency
Field testing. See Aquifer testing

Float-actuated recording devices 96
Flow 119 123
for confined aquifers 128
equation 127
laminar 127 140
turbulent 127
for water table aquifers 128
Flowing artesian aquifers 2
Flowmeter logs 89
Fluid logs 89
Fluid resistance logs 89
Fort Lauderdale, Florida
well location diagram 18 19f.
wellfield and urban growth 18
wellfield drawdown map 18 21f.
wellfield’s surrounding area 18 20f.
Fouling 191
See also Microbiological fouling
Friction loss 130
Index Terms Links
Gallionella 23 114
Galvanic corrosion 178
Galvanic series 179 179f.
Gamma logs 82
in conjunction with caliper logs 84 85f.
in conjunction with neutron logs 87
energy for 83 84t.
response to clay and silt 83 84 84f. 85f.
Gamma-gamma logs 86
Geophones 76
Geophysical logging 71 73 191
See also Lithologic logging; Subsurface
geophysical methods; Surface
geophysical methods
Ghyben-Herzberg principle 131
Giardia lamblia 15 16 22 183
Gradient 119 121
defined 122
equation 122
Gravel packs 140 154 155
grain sizes 154 155t.
materials and selection 154
and screens 154 156f.
Ground Water Rule 16
Groundwater 1 189
advantages and disadvantages of use 4 189
aquifer types 1
defined 189
Index Terms Links
Groundwater (Cont.)
flow velocity and direction 2
and hydrologic cycle 1 2f.
information sources 5
and pollution from underground fuel
tanks 13
water quality 3
Grout 140 145 156
acoustic sonic log to determine
competency 159
cement 160
concrete 160
continuous injection 159
dump-bailer method 157
materials 160
neat cement 160
pumping 158 159f.
purpose 160
rude and crude 157 157f.
sand cement 160
tremiepipes 157 158f.
Hand digging 38
Head. See Head loss; Head-to-pressure
conversion; Hydraulic head; Total
dynamic head; Total head
Head loss, and screens 154
Head-to-pressure conversion 132
Heterotrophic plate counts 115
Index Terms Links
Hollow stem auger drilling method 45 46f.

split spoon sampling devices 45 47f.
HPCs. See Heterotrophic plate counts
Hydraulic conductivity 119 120 123 126t.
and directional preference of flow 124
equation 124
ranges for various rock types 124 125t.
typical values for rock types 124 124t.
Hydraulic corrosion 178
Hydraulic fracturing. See Carbon dioxide
injection
Hydraulic head 119 121
elevation head 123
potentiometric 122
pressure head 123
total head 123
Hydraulic rotary drilling method 47
advantages and disadvantages 57
air rotary method 58
bits and selection 48 49f. 50f. 51f.
cuttings 55 55f.
de-sanding 55 56f.
drill collars 48 51f.
drill pipe 50 52f.
drill string 47 51
drilling fluids and circulation 47 48f. 49f. 51
53f.
drive systems 56
filter cake 51 54
foam method 58
Index Terms Links
Hydraulic rotary drilling method (Cont.)

gel strength 56
joints of pipe 50
kelly pipes and bushings 56
lost circulation 54
lost circulation material 54
mud rotary 47 48f. 49f.
rotary table drives 56 57
stabilizers 50 52f.
top drives 56 57f.
See also Reverse-air circulation drilling
method; Reverse-circulation rotary
drilling method
Hydrographs 98 99f. 100f.
Hydrologic cycle 1 2f.
Impermeable barriers 105 106f.

Indicator parameters 116
Iron and managanese 178
Iron bacteria 114
Jetting 41
Lakos Lava1 sand separator 112

Lithologic logging 71 72 74 191
sample log 72f.
Index Terms Links
Managanese 178
Maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) 15
Microbiological fouling 179
chemical treatment 184
and electrical potential and pattern of
well casing 180
and sonar jetting 185
treatment by acidification 184
treatment by carbon dioxide injection 184
See also Bacteria; Biofilm
Microbiological issues 113
and sampling 115
Mineral pollutants 20
Mining of the aquifer 94
Monitor wells. See Sentinel monitor wells
National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 122

National Water Well Association 110
Neutron logs 87
in conjunction with gamma and EC logs 87
neutron response for selected materials 87 87t.
NGVD. See National Geodetic Vertical
Datum of 1929
Index Terms Links
Ohm’s law 79 80
Over-pumping
problems caused by 174 193
in well development 164
Packer tests 93 191

PASs. See Pharmaceutically active substances
Pathogens 22
survival time studies 24
Percussion drilling method. See Cable-tool
drilling method
Permits 32
Pesticides 14
Pharmaceutically active substances 28 29
antibiotics 29 30
detection methods 29
estrogens 30
major families and impacts 29 30t.
steroids 30
Pollutants. See Contaminants
Porosity (aquifers) 3 3t. 119
definition 120
equation 120
response of logs to 91 92t.
values for various geologic materials 120 121t.
Pressure transducers 96
Primary drinking water standards 13 14t.
Index Terms Links
Priority pollutants 116

Protozoans 22
See also Cryptosporidium;
Giardia lamblia
Pseudomonads 24
Pseudomonas 114
Pseudomonas aeroginosa 23
Pumps and pumping
data collection and record-keeping 173
depth 94
maintenance 171 191
minimizing stops and starts 171
over-pumping 174
rates 129
suction breaks 175
types and selection 140
Recharge barriers 105 106 107f.

Recovery method of calculation 99
Redox processes 108
Regulations. See Disinfection By-Products
Rule; Ground Water Rule; Permits;
Risk; Risk assessment; Risk–cost
analysis; Safe Drinking Water Act;
Surface Water Treatment Rule;
Underground Injection Control
Program; United States
Environmental Protection Agency;
Wellhead protection regulations
Index Terms Links
Reverse-air circulation drilling method 60 60f.

See also Hydraulic rotary drilling
method
Reverse-circulation rotary drilling method 59
See also Dual-tube (reverse-air)
drilling method; Hydraulic rotary
drilling method
Risk 31
acceptable 31
Risk assessment 31
Risk-cost analysis 31 32f.
Safe Drinking Water Act 13 190

See also United States Environmental
Protection Agency
Sand 109
causes of pumping 192
and plugging of boreholes 177 177f.
production equation 111
Sand separators 112
Sanitary protection 167
disinfection 167
sanitary seal 167
Screens 141 152 153f.
diameter 139
and gravel packs 154 156f.
and head loss 154
length 139
Index Terms Links
Screens (Cont.)
selection 152
slot size 153
SDI. See Silt density index
SDWA. See Safe Drinking Water Act
Sea level 122
Secondary drinking water standards 13 15t.
Seismic refraction and reflection 76
shots 76
thumpers 76
Semiconfined aquifers (ratio between
transmissivity and specific capacity) 107
Sentinel monitor wells 9
for aquifer observation 95
for water quality sampling 115
Silt 109
causes of infiltration 192
causes of pumping 192
gamma log response to 83 84 84f. 85f.
SDI testing and equation 112
Silt density index
equation 113
testing 112
SOCs. See Synthetic organic compounds
Sodium 116
Solid tool drilling method. See Cable-tool
drilling method
Sonar jetting 185
Index Terms Links
Specific capacity
calculation 103
causes of decline in 192
as indicator of well performance 173 193
method of drawdown calculation 101
ratios with transmissivity for different
aquifer types 107
and water quality monitoring 176
Specific retention 119
definition 121
equation 121
values for various geologic materials 121 122t.
Specific yield 119 126t.
definition 120
and drawdown equation 102
equation 120
Spontaneous potential (SP) logging 81 82f.
Springs 1
Spudder drilling method. See Cable-tool
drilling method
Step-drawdown testing 11 101 119
equation 102
procedure 101
Storage coefficient 93 95 119 126
126t.
and confined aquifers 126
defined 126
equation 126
Index Terms Links
Storage coefficient (Cont.)

and water level 95
Stovepipe drilling method. See California
drilling method
Subsurface geophysical methods 77 191
acoustic logging 88 88f. 88t. 89f.
borehole photography 91 94f.
caliper logs 78 78f.
criteria for selection of logs 91 93t.
electrical conductivity (EC) logs 82 83f.
electrical resistivity logs 79 79f. 80t. 81f.
fluid logs 89
gamma logs 82 84t. 84f. 85f.
gamma spectrometry logs 86 86f.
gamma-gamma logs 86
logsuites 90 91f. 92t. 93t.
94f.
neutron logs 87 87t.
recommended logs for different conditions 91 92t.
response of logs to porosity 91 92t.
spontaneous potential (SP) logging 81 82f.
Summary Appraisals of the Nation’s Ground
Water Resources (1978–1982) 5
Surface and subsurface electrical resistance.
See under Electrical resistivity
Surface equipment 168 169f. 170f.
Surface geophysical methods 74 191
electrical resistivity 75 76f.
seismic refraction and reflection 76
Index Terms Links
Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) 16

Surficial aquifers 1
Synthetic organic compounds 13
Tape measures 96
Telescoping 45
Temperature
logs 89
record-keeping 173
Test wells 129 190
Total dynamic head 132
Total head
defined 123
equation 123
Transmissivity 93 95 119 120
126 126t.
defined 125
difference in values from place to place 127
equation 97 125
ratios with specific capacity for different
aquifer types 107
and water level 95
Tremie pipes 157 158f.
Index Terms Links
Unconfined aquifers (ratio between

transmissivity and specific capacity) 107
Underground Injection Control Program 16
United States Environmental Protection
Agency (USEPA)
maximum contaminant levels 15
monitoring requirements 13
and pesticides 14
primary drinking water standards 13 14t.
secondary drinlung water standards 13 15t.
and synthetic organic compounds 13
and volatile organic compounds 14
and waterborne diseases 15
United States Geological Survey (USGS)
endocrine disruptor study 28
Summary Appraisals of the Nation’s
Ground Water Resources
(1978–I982) 5
Up-hole velocity 130
Velocity
entrance 138
up-hole 130
Viruses 22 24
removal by soil sorption 25 27t.
sensitivity to UV light and temperature 26
Index Terms Links
Viruses (Cont.)
survival time 24
travel distances in groundwater 26 26t.
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 14
Walkerton (Ontario) E. coli case study 26

Water hammer 111
equation 133
Water level decline and causes 192
Water level measurements 95
collection schedule 96
record-keeping 173
Water quality
groundwater 3
microbiological issues 113
sampling 108 109t.
sand, silt, and colloids 109
and wells 4 11
Water quality monitoring 171
calcium carbonate 178
corrosion 178
microbiological fouling 179
particulate plugging 177 177f.
plugging by iron and managanese 178
sentinel monitor wells 115 176
and specific capacity 176
and water level 176
Water table 1 98
Index Terms Links
Waterborne diseases 15 22
and microorganisms 22
Well abandonment 175
Well development 161
air purging 165
chemical additives 165
cleaning and stabilizing formation 162 163f.
clearing fines from borehole 161
correction of damage caused by drilling 162
double-flanged swabbing 165
goals 161
high-velocity jetting 165
improving disinfection 164
mechanical block surging 165
methods 164
over-pumping 164
protocol 165 185
pump surging 165
raw-hiding 164
redevelopment 166 185 193
See also Construction
Well efficiency 105
Well loss 138
constant 103
defined 103
in feet 105
and well efficiency 105
Index Terms Links
Well performance 171 191

chemical treatment of biofilm 184
and comparative data 173
and electrical surges 175
investigating contamination 185
older wells 184
physical agitation or surging in removal
of incrustation 184
pump and motor maintenance 171
recording maintenance activities 174 193
record-keeping 172
resolving operations problems 183
sonar jetting in removal of incrustation 185
specific capacity as indicator 173
Well points 39 39f. 40f.
Wellfields
drawdown 18 21f.
interference 129 129f.
pumping rates 129
testwells 129 190
and urban growth (Fort Lauderdale) 18 19f. 20f. 21f.
Wellhead protection areas 17
Broward County (Florida) zones 17 18f.
Fort Lauderdale (Florida) wellfield and
urban growth 18 19f. 20f. 21f.
Wellhead protection programs 16
and modeling of pollutant (solute)
transport 17
state responsibility 16
and surficial impacts 17
Index Terms Links
Wellheads 168 169f. 170f.

Wells 37
borehole thickness 139
bottom-hole pressure 131
casing diameter 139
collapse strength 133 134t.
density differential 131
entrance velocity 138
friction loss 130
head-to-pressure conversion 132
and land use 6f. 7 7f.
permits 32
predesign calculations 130
purposes 37
sanitary protection 167
screen diameter 139
screen length 139
sentinel 9
and site availability 4
siting considerations 4 190
and surface features 8 9f. 10f.
and sustainability 9
total dynamic head 132
typical installation 5 5f.
up-hole velocity 130
water hammer analysis 133
and water quality 4 11
and water rights 11
and water supply 4 9
and wellhead protection limitations 4
Index Terms Links
Yield
casing sizes for based on 144 144t.
causes of decline 192

Supply: Siting, Drilling, and Construction Water Wells

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Supply: Siting, Drilling, and Construction Water Wells

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Supply: Siting, Drilling, and Construction Water Wells

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Siting, Drilling, and Construction

of Water Supply Wells

Frederick Bloetscher, Ph.D., P.E.

American Water Works

Project Manager/Senior Technical Editor: Melissa Valentine

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-PublicationData

ISBN 1-58321-5 16-6

6666 West Quincy Avenue

List of Figures vii

Chapter 1 Basic Concepts 1

Chapter 2 Regulations Regarding Well location, Protection,

Chapter 3 Drilling Methods 37

Chapter 4 Geophysical Logging and Field Testing 71

Surface Geophysical Methods 74

Chapter 5 Well Design 1 19

Chapter 6 Well Construction and Development 143

Chapter 7 Operation of Wells 1 71

Chapter 8 Summary 189

Figure 1-1 Hydrologic cycle

Table 1-1 Porosity of rock formations

Strata Porosity (%) Specific Yield (%) Specific Retention (“3)

BENEFITS AND DISADVANTAGES OF GROUNDWATER USE

CONSIDERATIONS FOR SITING WELLS

Regional water authorities or neighboring water purveyors may study potential

significant expense for monitoring wells, monitoring industrial practices,

Figure 1-6 Helton Creek Falls, Blairsville, Go.

aquifer quality may deteriorate with development, so potential development and

Figure 1-7 Lake Winfield Scott, Blairsville, Ga.

Figure 1-8 Delicate Arch, Arches National Park, Utah

SAFE DRINKING WATER RULES

Table 2-1A Primary drinking water standards

Contaminant MCLG (mg/L) MCL (mg/L)

Table 2-1B Secondary drinking water standards (continued)

Contaminant Secondary Standard

Underground Injection Control Program Regulations

Surface Water Treatment Rule

Disinfection By-products Rule

Ground Water Rule

wells from contamination through wellhead protection programs is considered an

Source: Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., Boca Raton, Fla.

Source: Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., Boca Raton, Fla.

WATER QUALITY CONSIDERATIONS

Source: Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., Boca Raton, Fla.

(upconing),even if a production well does not penetrate a saline zone. Similarly,

Table 2-2 Factors affecting survival of enteric bacteria in soil

PH Survival time shorter in acidic soils than alkaline soils

Table 2-3 Summary of maximum viral travel distances in groundwater

Maximum Movement Maximum Movement

Example Walkerton, Ontario

Table 2-4 Factors influencing virus fate in soils

Factor Importance for Survival Importance for Migration

Temperature Survival time longer at lower Unknown

PH Stable viruses between p H 3 and 9; Increases with ionic concentration

Sunlight Survival time shorter in the presence Unknown

Microflora Some viruses inactivated readily in Unknown

Hydraulic Unknown Migration increase with hydraulic

Virus Improves survival Increases migration

Soil properties Inactivation based on sorption Decreased migration with higher

O’Connor over the ensuing 2 years. Ultimately the investigation focused on a