09/26/94 Fraser/Kalispell North Water Well-THC)MAS, DEAF- ": HOSKfNS 1
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
No. 6 Sunset Plaza • Kalispell. Montana 59901 • 406) 752-5246 • FAX (406) 752.5230
September 26, 1994
John Wilson, City Engineer
City of Kalispell
P.O. Box 1997
Kalispell, MT 59903-1997
RE: Kalispell North Water l eo,-
Dear John:
e1)605
Please find enclosed the Supplemental Design Report for the
Kalispell North Water prepared as a comparison of the DSL well and
college site.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us.
MWF:mj
K94-28-9
Encl:
a:jw.ltr
Very truly yours,
THOMAS, DE �;712�
&C.
Vh4
W. Fraser
OFFICES IN GREAT FALLS, BOZEMAN, KALISPELL AND SPOKANE
A comparison of Department of State Lands Well
and New Wells
Introduction
The City of Kalispell has developed the hydrological analysis and
recommendations for construction of two 12" diameter wells on the
college property with the potential for supplying 2,000 gpm to the
upper zone. An evaluation has also been completed on the potential
of utilizing a large diameter irrigation well located on the
Department of State Lands (DSL) property as a supplemental source
for the upper pressure district in lieu of the two 121, diameter
wells. A joint comparison of the alternative wells with an
evaluation of the benefits and drawbacks as well as costs must be
completed to provide the City adequate information for determining
the best source for meeting the needs of the upper pressure
district. Basic groundwater criteria will be used as a comparison
of the two alternatives to provide the basis for recommendation.
The evaluation will generally follow the criteria established by
the Water Quality Bureau in Circular One for Ground Water
Development.
Quality
Both wells hydrologically would withdraw water from the same
aquifer. This aquifer is apparently the aquifer currently being
tapped by the Buffalo Hill well. All chemical criteria are in
compliance with State and EPA rules. The City has every reason to
believe either alternative source would have the same quality and
meet the rules.
Well head protection is also an issue which must be addressed.
Well head protection will become a more stringent requirement over
time. The college site is sewered by the City and has historically
had agricultural uses limited to farming. The nearest industrial
use is NUPAC, approximately one mile north. Groundwater flow is
from the north to south. Industrial uses on the NUPAC site are
limited and would probably not pose a risk to wells on the college
property.
The Department of State Lands well (DSL) is immediately north of an
agricultural feed operation and is surrounded by agricultural
properties similar to those north of the college property. There
are no known chemical spills or contamination sites near or
adjoining this site. The City have every reason to believe there
are no potentials for contamination.
The aquifer is very similar throughout these sections of the
Flathead Valley. The data available on the DSL well indicates a
3,000 gpm test pump but over a very limited time period. The
quality of the aquifer would indicate 2,000 gpm is available at the
site.
The hydrological evaluation of the college property indicates the
available water, 2,000 gpm, is expected to be produced at the
college site with minimal impact on the aquifer. Well production
is limited by two factors other than the aquifer capability, inlet
velocities and test pumping. The DSL well is perforated and based
upon the well log and calculations the inlet velocity is 7.6 times
the velocity allowed by the standards. A deviation from the
standards would be required to allow this well's use as a public
water supply. There is also a concern over long term production
from the well at excessive velocities which could cause crustations
in the openings and over time reduce the efficiency and yield of
the well. The excessive inlet velocity also creates greater
drawdown to produce the same quantities of water and therefore
decreases the efficiency of the well which results in an increase
in pump horsepower and long term energy costs.
Construction of two new wells on the college property meeting the
requirements of the standards would result in efficient wells with
adequate area so the inlet velocities are less than the standards.
Additional perforations may be added to the DSL well for a cost.
It is doubtful enough perforations could be added to provide inlet
area to meet the standards. Adding additional perforations to the
well would also result in the need to further develop the well at
a cost.
Construction
The DSL well is constructed with 20" and 161, casing. Casing
thickness meets the standards. Well logs do not indicate a surface
seal is present. One would have to be added or a deviation
obtained to meet the standards. The log does not indicate a seal
is present between the 161, and 201, casing. One would have to be
added or a deviation obtained from the standards. The test pumping
does not meet the standards. An additional test pumping would have
to be completed to meet the standards and to determine the actual
yield of the well.
Construction of wells on the college property would be according to
the standards. At the completion of the construction the wells
would be useable for the City with no additional work, with the
assurance that all the features meet the requirements of the
standards.
Well head development is the pumping and transmission improvements
necessary to bring the water to the City to be utilized in the
system. The college property adjoins a 12" line and a very short
length of main would be necessary. One pump house would be built
which would provide the metering and future chlorination facilities
for the wells at the college.
The DSL well is well over a mile from the City. Because of this
distance a 16" main is recommended to reduce the friction and head
losses and improve the efficiency of transmission. The cost of
this main is considerably greater than the cost of the connection
improvements for the college property.
Costs
Two separate cost estimates have been prepared for the alternatives
and are enclosed as an attachment to this report. Development of
the wells on the college property provide the greatest economy both
in construction and efficiency for the City.
Recommendations
Over all the DSL wells suitability and immediate availability is
unknown, since it is currently committed as part of the lease hold
improvements to agricultural user. It could be utilized as part of
an expansion of the Cities system at the time the property is
acquired, which may be several years away. The need for additional
supply is eminent within the north upper pressure zone. Delaying
the supply for several years could result in loss of essential
service during critical time periods as well as place a undue
strain on the Buffalo Hill Well.
When all factors are considered, the continued development of the
wells on the college property appears to be in the best interest of
the City. The utilization of the DSL well should also be held as
a benefit to the property as a fair grounds site. This benefit may
either be as irrigation water or as additional supply to an ever
expanding City system.
Prepared By:
THOMAS, DEAN & HOSKINS, INC.
Utv�
Michael W. Fraser
K94-28-9
A:SUPPLEME.DSG
UXT '-
Test Well
Production Wells
Construction $ 66,500.00
Contingency 6,650.00
Engineering etal 10,400.00
Subtotal $ 83,550.00
;;0
Contingency0000
LegalAdmin. 26,200.00
Subtotal $ 229,675.00
Piping, Pumphouse
& Telemetry $ 180,580.00
Contingency 18,100.00
Engineering, Legal Admin. 36,200.00
Subtotal $ 234,880.00
TOTAL PROJECT $ 548,105.00
May 12, 1994
DEPARTMENT OF STATE LANDS
PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
Phase I - Well Evaluation
Estimated
Unit
Item
Description
Quan/Unit
Price
Amount
1.
Install Meter for
Test Pumping
Lump Sum
$ 2,000-00
2.
Test Pumping
& Monitoring
(Labor Only)
48 Hrs. $
90.00
4,320-00
3.
Remove and Replace
Pump
24 Hrs.
125.00
3,000.00
4.
Television
Inspection
400 L.F.
15.00
6,000.00
Subtotal
$ 15,320.00
Contingency
6,000.00
Engineering, Legal,
Administration
and Construction
4,800.00
TOTAL
$ 26,120.00
Phase II - Well Improvement
Estimated
Unit
Item
Description
Quan/Unit
Price
Amount
1.
Perforations
100 L.F.
200.00
$ 20,000.00
2.
Surface Seal/
Grout
50 L.F.
Lump sum
10,000.00
3.
Casing Seal
1 EA
Lump Sum
6,000.00
Subtotal
$ 36,000.00
Contingency
7,200.00
Engineer, Legal
and Administration
4,400.00
TOTAL
$ 47,600.00
September 22, 1994
1. Piping, Pumphouse
Telemetry I EA Lump Sum $180,580.00
2. Transmission Main
16" PVC 7600 L.F. 40.00 304,000.00
3. Connection at
Grandview including
Bore 1 EA Lump Sum .21,500.00
Subtotal $512,080.00
Contingency 51,208.00
Engineering, Legal, Administration,
and Construction 85,000.00
TOTAL $648,288.00
TOTAL PROJECT $722,008.00