INVESTIGATION OF SODIUM AND

CHLORIDE IN THE WATER

SUPPLY

TOWN OF REDDING
REDDING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
REDDING, CONNECTICUT

PROJECT NO.: 31401077.000

DATE: JUNE 2018

WSP USA
4 RESEARCH DRIVE, SUITE 204
SHELTON, CT 06484

PHONE: +1 (203) 929-8555

FAX: +1 (203) 926-9140
WSP.COM
SIGNATURES

PREPARED BY:

Michael J. Shortell
Lead Environmental Engineer

PREPARED BY:

Thomas P. Cusack, CPG

Senior Supervising Hydrogeologist

Investigation of Sodium and Chloride in the Water Supply WSP USA

Project No. : 31401077.000 June 2018
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1

2.0 WATER QUALITY ........................................................................................................ 1

3.0 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF SODIUM AND CHLORIDE IN GROUNDWATER ......... 3

4.0 OPTIONS TO IMPROVE WATER QUALITY ............................................................... 3

5.0 DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................. 6

6.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................. 8

7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................. 9

Investigation of Sodium and Chloride in the Water Supply WSP USA

Project No. : 31401077.000 June 2018
Page ii
TABLES

TABLE 1: Summary of Groundwater Quality Results

TABLE 2: Summary of Distribution System – Water-Quality Results

FIGURE

FIGURE 1: Site Plan

FIGURE 2 - Site Plan – Production Well Location

APPENDICES
I Well Log – Well 2
II Water Quality
III R.J. Gallagher Jr. & Associates, Well Water Treatment Backwash Plans and Specifications

Investigation of Sodium and Chloride in the Water Supply WSP USA

Project No. : 31401077.000 June 2018
Page iii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
WSP USA (WSP) has prepared this report to present the findings of an investigation that was
conducted to attempt to identify the source of excessive sodium and chloride concentrations that have been
detected in Well 2 at the Redding Elementary School (RES), located at 33 Lonetown Road in Redding,
Connecticut. In addition, the report presents potential options to improve the quality of the water supplied
to the RES.
The existing water-supply system consists of two bedrock water-supply wells (Well 1 and Well 2),
a 10,000-gallon atmospheric storage tank and two re-pressurization transfer pumps. Well 1 and Well 2
each have an estimated yield of approximately 13 to 15 gpm (gallons per minute). Water treatment includes
the injection of sodium hypochlorite for disinfection and iron filtration to reduce the iron concentration in
the water supply. The sodium hypochlorite is injected prior to the atmospheric storage tank and the iron
filtration is located after the atmospheric storage tank. The iron filtration consists of two 20 cubic-foot
mixed bed iron filters with one iron filter being located in a pit on the exterior of the school and the other
iron filter being located in the boiler room. The iron filters utilize a backwash feature to allow for media
regeneration and the backwash water is directed to the onsite septic system that serves the school. A well
log for Well 1 is not available; however, a well log for Well 2 indicates that Well 2 is a 6-inch well that was
drilled to a depth of 455 feet below land surface, bedrock was encountered at 18 feet and 42 feet of 6-inch
casing was installed. The well log for Well 2 is attached as Appendix I and a site plan that displays the
locations of Well 1 and Well 2 is included as figure 1.
The average daily demand for the RES is approximately 4,500 gallons per day and the school
currently uses bottled water to meet the consumptive demand for the school and utilizes the onsite bedrock
water-supply system for sanitary purposes. In addition, maintenance activities for the water-supply system
include quarterly cleaning of the 10,000-gallon storage tank to remove sediment/particles that have settled
in the bottom of the storage tank. With regard to the iron filters, the media within the vessels has not been
changed-out within the last 10 years. Typically, in many situations the recommended media change-out
frequency is five to seven years. It is understood that Well 2 was deactivated during November 2016 and
Well 1 is the sole source that is supplying potable water to the school. The water quality concerns that were
evaluated as part of this investigation include sodium, chloride, lead, copper, turbidity, iron and manganese.
The sodium and chloride were investigated because elevated concentrations were detected in Well 2.
Elevated concentrations of sodium and chloride in a water supply can result in corrosion of the plumbing
system. Lead and copper were investigated to determine if the sodium and chloride in the water supply
have had a corrosive effect on the plumbing system within the school. The turbidity, iron and manganese
were evaluated because these parameters have been detected at concentrations that exceed regulatory limits
in raw water samples from Well 1 and Well 2. The focus of the turbidity, iron and manganese evaluation
was to determine if the existing iron filtration system is effective at improving the water quality and to make
recommendations for improvement, if any.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

2.0 WATER QUALITY

Water-quality samples have been collected from Well 1 and Well 2 and from sampling points
within the school, and then analyzed for physical parameters and inorganic compounds; of particular
interest being sodium, chloride, lead, copper, turbidity, iron and manganese. The laboratory reports indicate
that the sodium concentration in Well 1 has been gradually increasing since 2016 from a low of 23 mg/l
(milligrams per liter) to a high of 36 mg/l, with the highest concentration being detected on March 12, 2018.
The Connecticut Department of Public Health (CTDPH) Guidance level for sodium is 100 mg/l and the
Notification Level of 28 mg/l. Therefore, the sodium concentrations that have been detected in Well 1 are

Investigation of Sodium and Chloride in the Water Supply WSP USA

Project No. : 31401077.000 June 2018
Page 1
less than the CTDPH Guidance level but exceed the Notification Level. With regard to chloride, the
laboratory results indicated that the chloride concentration has been gradually increasing since 2016 from
a low of 124 mg/l to 173.6 mg/l, with the most recent detection on March 12, 2018 being 124 mg/l. The
maximum contaminant level (MCL) for chloride is 250 mg/l. The laboratory reports for Well 2 indicate
that the sodium concentration in Well 2 was gradually increasing since September 6, 2016 from 63.9 mg/l
to a high of 157 mg/l in a sample collected on March 27, 2017, with the most recent detection on March 12,
2018 being 117 mg/l. With regard to chloride, the laboratory results indicated that the chloride has been
detected in the water samples at concentrations ranging between 238 mg/l to 535 mg/l. The most recent
water sample, collected on March 12, 2018, identified a chloride concentration of 393 mg/l which exceeds
the MCL. The laboratory results are summarized on table 1.
The sampling history for turbidity, iron and manganese from Well 1 and Well 2 is sporadic. The
water-supply wells have been sampled twice since September 6, 2016 for turbidity, iron and manganese;
however, each sampling event identified turbidity, iron and manganese that exceeded the regulatory limit.
The most recent water sample was collected on March 12, 2018 and the laboratory report indicated that
turbidity, iron and manganese were detected in Well 1 at a concentration of 13.1 NTU, 4.9 mg/l and
0.90 mg/l, respectively. The MCL for turbidity is 5.0 NTU and the secondary maximum contaminant level
(SMCL) for iron and manganese is 0.30 mg/l and 0.05 mg/l, respectively. Therefore, turbidity, iron and
manganese were detected at concentrations above the MCL and SMCL. The most recent water quality
sample collected from Well 2 contained turbidity, iron and manganese concentrations of 41.3 NTU,
3.9 mg/l and 0.04 mg/l. Therefore, turbidity and iron were detected above the MCL and the SMCL. The
laboratory results are summarized on table 1 and the laboratory reports are included in Appendix II.
Water quality samples have also been collected from sampling points within the school to evaluate
the quality of the water in the distribution system. The sodium concentrations detected in the distribution
system ranged from 37 mg/l to 65.7 mg/l, which is below the CTDPH guidance level but above the CTDPH
Notification Level. The chloride concentrations detected in the water samples range from 180.7 to 259
mg/l, with the most recent water sample (March 12, 2018) indicating a chloride concentration of 198 mg/l,
which is below the MCL. Lead and copper have been sampled numerous times with the earliest samples
of record dating back to September 25, 2006. However, only, results within the last 10 years are being
reviewed for this evaluation and the laboratory results indicate that the lead concentration ranged from a
low of 0.007 mg/l in 2015 to a high of 0.011 mg/l in 2012. The MCL for lead is 0.015 mg/l. With regard
to copper the laboratory results indicate that the copper concentration ranged from a low of 0.07 mg/l in
2013 to a high of 0.33 mg/l in 2015. The MCL for copper is 1.3 mg/l. The laboratory results indicate that
neither lead nor copper have been detected at concentrations that exceed regulatory criteria. The turbidity
concertation has ranged from 0.02 NTU to 1.80 NTU which is less than the MCL. The iron concentration
in water samples collected from the distribution system has ranged from 0.01 mg/l to a high of 1.04 mg/l,
with the most recent water samples (two samples, collected on March 12, 2018) identifying a concentration
of 0.63 mg/l and 0.97 mg/l, which exceed the SMCL. The manganese concentration has ranged from
0.01 mg/l to 0.16 mg/l, with the most recent water samples (two samples, collected on March 12, 2018)
identifying a concentration of 0.11 mg/l and 0.16 mg/l, which exceed the SMCL. The laboratory results for
the distribution system samples are summarized on table 2 and the laboratory reports are included in
Appendix I.
An additional water sample was collected from the bedrock water-supply well located at the Town
of Redding Department of Public Works (DPW) facility where a salt storage facility is located. The DPW
property is located approximately 800 feet to the southwest of the school which is cross-gradient
(approximately the same elevation). The water sample was analyzed for physical parameters and inorganic
compounds. The turbidity, iron and manganese were detected at concentrations above the MCL and SMCL.
In addition, the laboratory report indicates that the sodium and chloride concentrations detected in the water
sample were 14.8 mg/l and 129.5 mg/l, respectively, which are less than the CTDPH guidance and the
MCL.

Investigation of Sodium and Chloride in the Water Supply WSP USA

Project No. : 31401077.000 May 2018
Page 2
3.0 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF SODIUM AND
CHLORIDE IN GROUNDWATER
Sodium and chloride occur naturally in groundwater. However, sources of sodium and chloride
may be present which result in elevating the sodium and chloride concentrations in groundwater. The
sources of sodium and chloride can include salt storage, road salting activities and backwash water from
water softeners that is discharged to septic systems or leaching galleys.
With regard to RES, the Town of Redding maintains a salt storage facility at the DPW
approximately 800 feet to the southwest of the onsite water-supply wells. In addition, road salt is applied
during winter weather to the parking areas that surround the water water-supply wells and Route 107
(Lonetown Road) is located approximately 500 feet to the east of the water-supply wells. With regard to
backwash water from water softeners, we are not aware of any water softeners in the area; but it cannot be
ruled out as a contributing factor. It should be noted that backwash water from an iron filtration system
would not be considered a source for sodium and chloride in groundwater.
Based on the site inspection and review of the available data, it is not possible to identify any of
the sources of sodium and chloride as the primary source and to a certain degree, all the sources identified
may be contributing factors. However, based on our experience at other properties, salt storage facilities
are typically significant sources of excessive sodium and chloride in groundwater.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

4.0 OPTIONS TO IMPROVE WATER QUALITY

Any options to improve water quality should also account for being protective of the plumbing
system within the school. Excessive sodium and chloride can result in a corrosive condition that could
cause the leaching of metals from the plumbing system. If the option that is selected does not address the
level of sodium and chloride in the water supply, a corrosion control system would be protective of the
plumbing system. While the lead and copper concentrations detected in the distribution system to date
would not suggest a corrosive condition, an increase in the sodium and chloride in the water introduced into
the distribution system could result in a corrosive condition.
The options to improve the water quality at the RES include the following and each option is
discussed in greater detail below.
· Install water treatment equipment to reduce the sodium and chloride.
· Install water treatment equipment to mitigate potential corrosive effects to the distribution system
from the groundwater.
· Install water treatment equipment to reduce turbidity, iron and manganese.
· Locate and drill a new water-supply well.
· Connect to a public water supply system.
· Reduce the level of salt application to the parking lots and walkways on school grounds and
determine if the Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT) and/or the Redding
Department of Public Work (RDPW) can reduce the level of salt applied to Lonetown Road during
winter storm events.

Investigation of Sodium and Chloride in the Water Supply WSP USA

Project No. : 31401077.000 May 2018
Page 3
Sodium and Chloride Water Treatment Equipment
Water treatment options to reduce the sodium and chloride would include ion exchange, reverse
osmosis and electro dialysis. While all the options are effective at reducing sodium and chloride, each
option would generate a concentrated backwash water or wastewater that would require discharge to a
sanitary sewer, a subsurface leaching galley or a storage tank for evaporation or offsite disposal. There is
no sanitary sewer in the area of the school, therefore, this is not an option. A leaching galley could be
designed and constructed if a treatment system were installed. However, the discharge of a concentrated
sodium and chloride solution would not be a recommended practice because the discharge could then be
considered a source of pollution that would migrate downgradient and potentially negatively impact offsite
water-supply wells. Therefore, treatment utilizing a leaching galley is not considered a viable option for
sodium and chloride. With regard to using a storage tank, a storage tank could be installed to accept the
backwash water. The backwash water could then be directed to an evaporator which would result in the
creation of a disposable solid or the backwash would could be transferred from the storage tank to a tanker
truck for disposal at an appropriate waste disposal facility. Typical rejection rates for a reverse osmosis
unit could be 50%, therefore, to meet the average daily demand of RES, 9,000 gallons of water would need
to be pumped from the water supply well and 4,500 gallons per day of wastewater would be generated. The
capital cost associated with the use of a storage tank to collect the backwash water for evaporation or offsite
disposal would be in excess of $50,000. The operational cost associated with an evaporation system would
include the electrical charge to operate the equipment, maintenance of the evaporator and disposal of the of
the solid. The operational cost for an evaporation system would need to be further evaluated to provide a
precise estimate. With regard to the disposal of a liquid waste, the estimated transportation and disposal
cost could range between $0.50 to $1.00 per gallon, which results is $2,250 per day to $4,500 per day.
Therefore, the Town of Redding would need to determine if this is an option that they wish to pursue further.

Corrosion Control Mitigation Treatment Equipment

If sodium and chloride cannot be eliminated or reduced from the water supply, a corrosion control
system could be installed to mitigate corrosion of the plumbing system. If corrosion of the plumbing system
were to occur, leaks in the plumbing system may occur, and lead and copper may leach from the plumbing
system and impact the quality of the water in the distribution system. A corrosion control system would
consist of the injection of an orthophosphate based product that would prevent the corrosion of the metallic
piping system. An approximate cost for a corrosion control system could range between $10,000 to
$20,000. This cost would include the engineering, permitting, the equipment and the contractor cost for
installation.

Turbidity, Iron and Manganese Treatment

There are several different options to reduce iron, manganese and turbidity including coagulation,
lime softening and media filtration. The school currently utilizes two 20-cubic foot mixed media iron filters
that are positioned after the 10,000-gallon atmospheric storage tank. The existing system does not appear
to be functional based on turbidity, iron and manganese that have been detected in water samples collected
from the distribution system. Coagulation and lime softening would be more suited for treatment
technologies associated with a surface water treatment plant and would not be appropriate for further
consideration. Media filtration is a proven technology that can reduce iron, turbidity and manganese from
the water supply and ideally it should be located prior to the atmospheric storage tank. Media filtration
would incorporate a backwash to allow for regeneration of the media. The backwash would need to be
conducted on a routine basis (daily or every other day) and the volume of backwash water generated would
typically range from 250 gallons per backwash to 500 gallons per backwash. Any backwash water
generated would need to be directed to a sanitary sewer or leaching galley because the Connecticut
Department of Public Health (CTDPH) will not permit the backwash to be directed to the onsite septic

Investigation of Sodium and Chloride in the Water Supply WSP USA

Project No. : 31401077.000 May 2018
Page 4
system for the school. As indicated above, there is no sanitary sewer in the area of the school, therefore,
the backwash water would need to be directed to a leaching galley. An engineering evaluation (plans and
specifications) of a leaching system has been completed by R.J. Gallagher Jr. & Associates of Danbury
Connecticut. The evaluation identified a location for the installation of the leaching area that has the
potential to accept a maximum daily flow of 810 gallons per day, which is greater than the volume of water
that would be generated during a backwash cycle. The plans and specifications should be submitted to
qualified contractors to obtain cost proposals for the installation of the leaching system and the plans and
specifications are included as Appendix III. The capital cost for the iron filter could range from $5,000 to
$7,500; however, cost proposals for the installation of an iron filter should be obtained from qualified
contractors. The engineering and permitting associated with preparing the plans and specifications for a
new iron filter could range from $2,500 to $5,000.

Locate a New Water-Supply Well

Locating a new water-supply well could potentially improve the quality of water that is supplied to
the school. However, if a new water-supply well were to be drilled, the yield and the quality of the water
could not be determined until the well is drilled and tested. As part of drilling a new source of supply to
address sodium and chloride contamination, the shallow bedrock fractures are typically isolated to prevent
groundwater in these fractures from entering the well and these fractures would be isolated by setting the
well casing to a greater depth than under normal circumstances. The goal would be to draw water from
deeper fractures that may be less impacted by sodium and chloride. Under normal circumstances, a new
source of supply would be constructed with a 6-inch well casing that is typically set 10 feet into competent
bedrock. At the RES, we would recommend installing at least 200 feet of casing to isolate the shallow
bedrock fractures. In addition, we would want to locate the new source of supply at the most distant point
away from the salt storage facility, the parking areas and Lonetown Road. It is important to understand
that by setting the casing deeper, it is reasonable to expect that some yield would be lost because of isolating
water that would otherwise enter the well through shallower bedrock fractures. The average daily demand
of the school is approximately 4,500 gallons per day which translates into a well yield (over a 24-hour
pumping basis) of 3.2 gallons per minute.
The cost associated with connecting a new source of supply would initially include the preparation
of a Well Site Application for submission to the CTDPH. After issuance of the CTDPH Well Site Approval,
the well could be drilled. As a well is being drilled, the driller can estimate the well yield, which would
allow a preliminary assessment if the well could potentially meet the demand of the school. In addition, a
water sample could be collected and analyzed for inorganics and physical parameters to determine the initial
sodium, chloride, turbidity, iron and manganese concentrations to assess if the water quality is acceptable.
If the preliminary yield and water quality are acceptable, the next step in the process would be to conduct
the CTDPH required pumping test. As part of the pumping test, a water sample would be collected for
analysis for all the parameters that are required by the CTDPH for a new source of supply. This would
establish the yield of the well and the water quality in the new source of supply and provide a baseline for
both yield and water quality. The next step in the process would be the development of plans and
specifications that identify the water-supply well equipment (submersible pump, riser pipe, etc.), the piping
route from the water-supply well to the school and construction details that identify how the new water-
supply well would be connected to the existing water-supply system. The estimated cost associated with
the CTDPH permitting to obtain authorization to drill the well would be approximately $2,500 to $5,000
which includes supervision of the well drilling process. The estimated cost to drill the new water-supply
well would range from $15,000 to $20,000. Analysis of the preliminary water samples would be
approximately $100. It should be noted that cost associated with connecting the new source of supply to
the existing water-supply system could range from $100 to $150 per foot. Figure 2 identifies the location
of a prospective production well. The well is located approximately 700 feet to the north of the northern
most onsite structure on the property. Therefore, if this minimum distance were used to estimate the cost

Investigation of Sodium and Chloride in the Water Supply WSP USA

Project No. : 31401077.000 May 2018
Page 5
of connecting the well to the RES water-supply system, the estimated cost to install the subsurface piping
could range from $70,000 to $105,000. However, the actual cost to connect this prospective well to the
water-supply system could be significantly greater than the stated range because the plumbing would need
to be extended to the area where the existing water treatment system is located. The options to extend the
plumbing include standard below grade trenching or extending the water line through the building. If there
is continued interest in developing a more precise cost, the specific route would need to be determined and
evaluated both economically and technically to determine the feasibility.
There are uncertainties associated with drilling a supply well that also would factor into any
decision. First, there is no guarantee that the desired yield will be obtained and drilling a second location
or using multiple wells to obtain the desired yield are possibilities. As previously mentioned, the water
quality will not be known until the well is drilled. Additionally, while the water quality may initially be
satisfactory, there is the possibility that with continued operation of the well that some of the poorer quality
water could be pulled into the well.

Connect to a Public Water Supply System

This option would involve the extension of a water main from the closest public water supplier in
the area. If the water supplier has excess water and supports the request to serve, the entity requesting the
water would be responsible for paying for the design and construction of the water main extension. The
proximity of the water main to the entity requesting service could impact the engineering and construction
cost. In developing the plans and specifications for a water main extension, it would be necessary to
understand the depth of bedrock along the proposed water main extension path. Shallow bedrock would
impact the engineering and construction costs because a water main must be installed at a minimum depth
and if bedrock were encountered at a shallower depth than the minimum depth of the water main, the
bedrock would need to be removed in some manner. Therefore, engineering costs could range from $25,000
to $50,000 depending on the proximity of the water main to the school. Construction costs could range
from $250 to $500 per foot depending on whether bedrock is encountered along the path. Therefore, the
construction cost could range from $1,320,000 to $2,640,000 per mile. The nearest water supplier in the
area would be Aquarion Water Company and they do not have a water main within one mile of the school.
Based on the cost associated with extending a water main, this option is considered less desirable.

Reduce the Level of Salt Application

The Town of Redding, CTDOT and the RDPW would need to be contacted to determine if it is
feasible, from a public safety perspective, to reduce the level of salt application to the onsite walkways and
parking lots and to Lonetown Road. If this can be accomplished, continued raw water quality monitoring
would be needed to determine if this would be effective.
Best management practices should be implemented to make every effort to prevent increasing the
sodium and chloride concentration in groundwater. Consideration should be given to the application of
blended road salt and sand. Typically, the mixture is 3:1, sand to salt, and other deicing chemicals should
be considered.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

5.0 DISCUSSION
Water-quality parameters collected from Well 1 have been found to exceed the MCL for turbidity
and the SMCL for iron and manganese. With regard to Well 2, water quality parameters have been found
to exceed the CTDPH Guidance Level and CTDPH Notification Level for sodium, and the MCL for

Investigation of Sodium and Chloride in the Water Supply WSP USA

Project No. : 31401077.000 May 2018
Page 6
turbidity and chloride and SMCL for iron and manganese. The water samples that have been collected
from the sampling points within the distribution system indicate that iron and manganese have been detected
at concentrations that exceed the SMCL. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
defines a MCL as an enforceable standard which has been established to protect the public against
consumption of drinking water contaminants that present a risk to human health. A MCL is the maximum
allowable amount of a contaminant in drinking water which is delivered to the consumer. The USEPA
defines a SMCL as non-mandatory water quality standard that the USEPA does not enforce and were
established as guidelines to assist public water systems in managing their drinking water for aesthetic
considerations such as taste, color and odor. These contaminants are not considered to present risks to
human health at the SMCL. These criteria would suggest that with Well 1 as the sole source of supply, the
recent water samples collected from the sampling points within the school document that the water supplied
to the school is potable with respect to the water-quality parameters that were analyzed. Therefore,
supplying bottled water for consumptive purposes is voluntary.
The source of the sodium and chloride could not be determined from this investigation and none of
the typical sources of sodium and chloride could be eliminated as a potential source. While the water
sample collected from the DPW water-supply well did not identify excessive sodium and chloride in the
water supplied to the DPW, it cannot be concluded that the salt storage is not a source of the sodium and
chloride in Well 1 and Well 2. Invasive geologic investigations, that would include the construction of
monitor wells, could be conducted to establish the source of the excessive sodium and chloride
concentrations in the groundwater; however, the length of time needed to fully evaluate the hydrogeology
and the associated cost would be difficult to justify. Therefore, we would not recommend any additional
hydrogeologic investigation to identify the source of the excessive sodium and chloride in the groundwater.
Treatment of the water supply for sodium and chloride, and extending a water main from a public
water supplier were considered less desirable as options to address the sodium and chloride because of
either technical or economic factors. The only remaining options would be to drill a new source of supply
or continue to meet the consumptive demand of the school using bottled water and the sanitary demand
from the existing water-supply wells. Any new water-supply well that would be drilled should be installed
with a minimum of 200 feet of well casing and be drilled at a point that is most distant from the salt storage
facility, the parking areas and Lonetown Road. Drilling a new water-supply well has the potential to
improve all, some or none of the water quality concerns and it cannot be determined, without drilling a new
water-supply well, if there would be an improvement in the water quality. With regard to the well yield, it
cannot be determined if the new water-supply well will have an adequate yield to meet the demand of the
school without drilling the well and obtaining a preliminary well yield from the driller during the drilling
process. However, driller yield estimates can be inaccurate; therefore, the driller’s yield estimate would
need to be validated with a pumping test and water samples collected to determine the baseline water
quality. In addition, if the new water-supply well is constructed and the baseline water quality data indicate
low levels of sodium and chloride, it is possible that with pumping of the new water-supply well over time,
water with higher concentrations of sodium and chloride in the groundwater could be drawn into the new
water-supply well. This is important to understand because the sodium and chloride concentrations in
Well 1 have been increasing over time with the highest concentration being detected in the most recent
sampling event. Considering that Well 2 is not operational, the data could suggest that operating Well 1 as
the sole source of water could be drawing groundwater with elevated concentrations of sodium and chloride
into Well 1. Options to prevent the sodium and chloride concentrations from increasing further could
include pumping Well 2 to waste to prevent (or block) groundwater with higher sodium and chloride
concentrations from reaching Well 1. However, there is insufficient data to determine if this would be
effective. Also, identifying a discharge location that could accept any water that is pumped to waste would
be difficult. Further evaluation and testing would need to be completed to determine if pumping Well 2 to
waste would prevent groundwater with elevated sodium and chloride concentrations from impacting
Well 1. Further evaluation and testing would consist of developing a computerized groundwater model to
simulate the pumping of Well 2 as a “blocker” well. We are not recommending the development of this

Investigation of Sodium and Chloride in the Water Supply WSP USA

Project No. : 31401077.000 May 2018
Page 7
groundwater model because we cannot definitively identify the source of the larger sodium and chloride
concentrations in the groundwater. Consideration should be given to the cost and risk associated with
drilling a new water-supply well. However, WSP has been successful at drilling replacement wells resulting
in a reduction of sodium and chloride in the water supply. If drilling a new bedrock water-supply well is
not completed, the existing bedrock water-supply system should be upgraded to include a corrosion control
system to mitigate the potential for corrosion of the distribution system within the school to protect the
plumbing within the school.
The laboratory results of the water samples collected from the distribution system did not identify
lead and copper at concentrations that exceeded regulatory standards. Therefore, there is no evidence to
indicate that the water supplied to the school has corroded the plumbing system. However, installation of
a corrosion control system will be beneficial at mitigating any future corrosion that may occur, especially
if sodium and chloride concentrations in Well 1 continue to increase.
With regard to turbidity, iron and manganese, the quarterly cleaning of the 10,000-gallon
atmospheric storage tank suggests that a certain amount of the turbidity, iron and manganese are being
removed as a result of the settling effect associated with the atmospheric storage tank. With regard to the
recent water-quality sampling from the distribution system, it appears that either (or both) the 10,000-gallon
storage tank requires cleaning or the iron filters are no longer capable of removing the iron and manganese
from the water supply. Considering the media within the iron filters has not been changed out in a
significant period of time, it should be assumed that the iron filters have lost a certain level of functionality
and are in need of replacement. However, replacement of the media would not be recommended because
the filters are located after the 10,000-gallon atmospheric storage tank and would not eliminate the need for
quarterly cleaning of the 10,000-gallon atmospheric storage tank. The most appropriate means of
addressing the turbidity, iron and manganese (and the existing iron filters) would be to upgrade the existing
water treatment system to include filtration media before the 10,000-gallon atmospheric storage tank and
disconnect the existing iron filters from the water-supply system. The installation of the new iron filter
would reduce the turbidity, iron and manganese in the water that flows into the 10,000-gallon atmospheric
storage tank thus eliminating the need for quarterly cleaning. The existing iron filters should be physically
disconnected from the water-supply system to prevent any bacterial contamination that may be introduced
from the dormant equipment. Any media filtration equipment would require backwashing to regenerate
the media and the backwash would need to be directed to a leaching galley. A previous investigation
conducted, by R.J. Gallagher Jr. & Associates, has identified an area that can accept the backwash water
from a new iron filter.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

6.0 CONCLUSIONS
1. RES currently provides bottled water for consumptive purposes. This action is voluntary.
2. The water supplied from Well 1 meets all MCLs with the exception of turbidity; however, iron and
manganese have been detected at concentrations that exceed the SMCL and sodium has been
detected at a concentration that exceeds the CTDPH Notification Level.
3. The water supplied from Well 2 exceeds the MCLs for chloride and turbidity, the CTDPH Guidance
Level and Notification Level for sodium and the SMCLs for iron and manganese.
4. The concentrations of sodium and chloride in Well 1 have been increasing since 2016.
5. Water samples collected from the distribution system within the school verify that the water in the
distribution system is potable; however, exceedances of the SMCL for iron and manganese have
been recently detected.

Investigation of Sodium and Chloride in the Water Supply WSP USA

Project No. : 31401077.000 May 2018
Page 8
 6. Installation of a water treatment system to reduce sodium and chloride is considered less desirable
because of the potential to cost and impact to offsite water-supply wells from any backwash.
7. Extension of the water main from a public water supplier is considered less desirable because of
the cost associated with extending a water main.
8. The drilling a new bedrock water-supply well is a potential option to improve the quality of the
water supplied to the school. However, there are uncertainties associated with this approach. It
cannot be determined without drilling and testing the water supply well if this option is feasible
relative to obtaining the desired yield and quality. In addition, it cannot be determined if operating
the new water-supply well over time would induce groundwater with larger concentrations of
sodium and chloride to the new well. The cost associated with connecting a new bedrock water-
supply well would need to be further evaluated to develop a precise estimate.
9. The installation of a corrosion control system could be considered as a protective measure against
the future potential for corrosion of the existing distribution system.
10. Turbidity, iron and manganese are settling in the 10,000-gallon atmospheric storage tank which
results in the need for quarterly cleaning. In addition, the existing iron filters may not be
functioning properly and the filter media has not been changed-out in over 10 years.
11. A leaching area that can accept the backwash water from water treatment equipment has been
identified, and tested and determined to have adequate capacity to accept backwash water from a
new iron filer.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Consideration should be given toward the drilling and testing of a new bedrock water-supply
well.
2. A corrosion control system should be installed on the existing water-supply system.
3. Additional water samples to evaluate corrosive potential of the water supplied to the school
should be collected.
4. Cost proposals from contractors should be obtained to determine the cost to install the leaching
system that can accept backwash water from water treatment equipment.
5. Cost proposals for the installation of an iron filter that is located before the 10,000-gallon
atmospheric storage tank should be obtained.
6. The existing iron filters should be disconnected from the water supply system as part of
installing a new iron filter.

cmm
June 22, 2018
H:\Redding Elementary School\Investigation of Sodium and Chloride.docx

Investigation of Sodium and Chloride in the Water Supply WSP USA

Project No. : 31401077.000 May 2018
Page 9
TABLES
 TABLE 1

REDDING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

REDDING, CONNECTICUT
_________________

Summary of Groundwater Quality Results

Sodium Chloride Manganese Iron Turbidity

Location Sample Date
(mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (NTUs)
RES - 9/6/2016 23 124 0.88 4.38 42.20
Well 1 11/8/2016 25.3 127 NS NS NS
1/5/2017 29.1 145 NS NS NS
1/9/2017 29.7 NS NS NS NS
1/27/2017 30.2 NS NS NS NS
3/1/2017 31.8 173.6 NS NS NS
3/27/2017 34.3 171.0 NS NS NS
3/12/2018 36.0 124 0.9 4.90 13.10
RES - 9/6/2016 63.9 319 0.49 5.81 73.50
Well 2 11/8/2016 56.9 239 NS NS NS
1/5/2017 81.1 238 NS NS NS
1/9/2017 72.6 NS NS NS NS
1/27/2017 94.1 NS NS NS NS
3/1/2017 123.6 441.5 NS NS NS
3/27/2017 157 535 NS NS NS
3/12/2018 117 393 0.04 3.90 41.30

US EPA MCL NE 250 NA NA 5.00

US EPA SMCL NA NA 0.05 0.30 NA
CTDPH Notification Level 28 NA NA NA NA
CTDPH Guidance Level 100 NE 0.05 0.20 NE

* No established MCL for Copper and Lead. Action Levels represented.

NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Unit
mg/l Milligrams per liter
US EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
CTDPH Connecticut Department of Public Health
MCL Maximum Contaminant Level
SMCL Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level
NS Not Sampled
NE Not regulated under this criteria.
NA Not Applicable

H:\Redding Elementary School\RES - Well Summary - Table 1.docx

WSP USA
 TABLE 2

REDDING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

REDDING, CONNECTICUT
_________________

Summary of Distribution System Water Quality Results

Sodium Chloride Manganese Turbidity

Location Sample Date Iron (mg/l)
(mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (NTU)

Main Office Bathroom 9/22/2016 49.3 206 NS NS NS

Room 2 9/22/2016 50.4 208 NS NS NS
Room 202 9/22/2016 49.8 208 NS NS NS
Cafeteria Kitchen 9/22/2016 51.6 203 NS NS NS
Room 308 9/22/2016 52.4 203 NS NS NS
Room 12 9/22/2016 52.4 204 NS NS NS
Room 2 9/28/2016 48.5 211 0.02 0.15 0.08
Main Office 9/28/2016 47 210 0.03 0.25 0.19
Cafeteria Kitchen 9/28/2016 47 212 0.01 0.08 0.06
Room 308 9/28/2016 47.4 211 0.02 0.03 0.13
Room 201 9/28/2016 45.6 213 ND<0.01 0.01 0.02
Room 12 9/28/2016 44.8 213 0.02 0.13 0.16
Main Office Bathroom 11/8/2016 65.4 259 NS NS NS
Shop Sink 11/8/2016 64.7 257 NS NS NS
Bathroom 3/1/2017 37 183.4 0.14 1.04 1.40
Old Boy's Room 3/1/2017 37.7 183.6 ND<0.01 0.03 0.13
Kitchen 3/28/2017 37 184.7 0.01 0.10 0.20
2nd floor - Bathroom 3/28/2017 37.5 180.7 ND<0.01 0.01 0.10
Bathroom 3/28/2017 38.1 182.3 ND<0.01 0.08 0.20
Main Office Bathroom 3/12/2018 48 208 0.16 0.97 1.61
Room 19 3/12/2018 64 198 0.11 0.63 1.80

US EPA MCL NE 250 NA NA 5.00

US EPA SMCL NA NA 0.05 0.30 NA

CTDPH Notification
28.0 NA NA NA NA
Level
CTDPH Guidance
100 NE 0.05 .20 NE
Level

NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Unit

mg/l Milligrams per liter
US EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
CTDPH Connecticut Department of Public Health
MCL Maximum Contaminant Level
SMCL Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level
NS Not Sampled
NE Not regulated under this criteria
NA Not Applicable
H:\Redding Elementary School\RES - Distribution System Summary Table 2.docx

WSP USA
FIGURES
O:\DWG\Town of Redding\Redding Elementary School\F1_SitePlan.dwg, Layout1, 4/23/2018 9:32:15 AM, AcroPlotTempDWF11484.pc3

TOWN OF REDDING
REDDING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
33 LONETOWN ROAD
REDDING CONNECTICUT
SITE PLAN
DATE REVISED PREPARED BY:

WSP USA
4 Research Drive
Suite 204
0 200 Shelton, Connecticut 06484
(203) 929-8555
SOURCE:
MILONE & MACBROOM "SITE PLAN" DWG NAME: REDDING ELEMENTARY FULL, SHEET NO. 1, DATED JUNE 2005, JPEG. SCALE IN FEET DRAWN: RAC CHECKED: MS DATE: 04/2318 FIGURE: 1
 GALLO
WS HIL
L ROAD

GA
L LO
WS
H IL L
RO
OAD

AD
OTTR

EX
N ABB

TE
CO
DEA

NS
ION
PROPOSED WELL LOCATION

LO
NE
TO
WN
RO
AD
O:\DWG\Town of Redding\Redding Elementary School\F2_Aerial.dwg, Layout1, 6/11/2018 1:41:55 PM, PDF-XChange for AcroPlot Pro.pc3

WELL 1
GR

LEGEND
E
AT

WELL 2 PROPERTY BOUNDARY

OA
KL

WELL LOCATION
AN
E

TOWN OF REDDING
REDDING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
33 LONETOWN ROAD
REDDING CONNECTICUT
SITE PLAN - PRODUCTION WELL LOCATION
OL
DS
TA

WSP USA
GE

4 Research Drive
CO

E Suite 204
L AN DPW SALT STORAGE FACILITY
AC

OK Shelton, Connecticut 06484

RO
GB
H

IN (203) 929-8555
RO

D
WI N
AD
APPENDIX I
APPENDIX II
Client: Redding Elementary School
System: CT1170352 - REDDING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Sample ID Sample Date Site Source Site ID Analyte Result Units

102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 1 - RES001 - CAF DBL SINK R Copper 0 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 10 - RES020 - NURSES OFFICE Copper 0.08 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 2 - RES005 - CRS RM 201 Copper 0.05 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 3 - RES006 WF RM 222 Copper 0.09 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 4 - RES009 - STAFF LOUNGE Copper 0.12 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 5 - RES011 - RM 205 Copper 0.12 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 6 - RES012 - WF ART RM Copper 0.04 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 7 - RES013 - WF B GYM Copper 0.02 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 8 - RES016 - WF RM 305 Copper 0.03 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 9 - RES017 - WF RM 305 Copper 0.08 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 9 - RES017 - WF RM 305 Lead 0.009 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 8 - RES016 - WF RM 305 Lead 0.003 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 7 - RES013 - WF B GYM Lead 0 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 6 - RES012 - WF ART RM Lead 0 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 5 - RES011 - RM 205 Lead 0.002 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 4 - RES009 - STAFF LOUNGE Lead 0 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 3 - RES006 WF RM 222 Lead 0.003 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 2 - RES005 - CRS RM 201 Lead 0.002 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 10 - RES020 - NURSES OFFICE Lead 0 mg/L
102741 9/25/2006 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 1 - RES001 - CAF DBL SINK R Lead 0 mg/L
108767 4/19/2007 Entry Point - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Point of Entry Chloride 97 mg/L
108767 4/19/2007 Entry Point - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Point of Entry Copper 0.06 mg/L
108767 4/19/2007 Entry Point - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Point of Entry Lead 0 mg/L
108767 4/19/2007 Entry Point - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Point of Entry Sodium - Public Water Supply 20.1 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 01 - Kitchen Sink Copper 0.14 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 02 - Staff Lounge Copper 0.19 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 03 - South Wing Art Room Copper 0.28 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 04 - Gym Copper 0.27 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 05 - West Wing Bathroom Copper 0.16 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 06 - South Wing Special Ed Copper 0.17 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 10 - Hall Bathroom Copper 0.2 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 07 - 3rd Floor Water Fountain Copper 0.25 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 08 - Main Office Bathroom Copper 0.17 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 09 - Kindergarden Bathroom Copper 0.14 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 09 - Kindergarden Bathroom Lead 0.005 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 08 - Main Office Bathroom Lead 0.005 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 07 - 3rd Floor Water Fountain Lead 0.006 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 10 - Hall Bathroom Lead 0.003 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 06 - South Wing Special Ed Lead 0.006 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 05 - West Wing Bathroom Lead 0.004 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 04 - Gym Lead 0.022 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 03 - South Wing Art Room Lead 0.009 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 02 - Staff Lounge Lead 0 mg/L
133551 8/24/2009 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Distribution 01 - Kitchen Sink Lead 0 mg/L
140867 4/26/2010 Entry Point - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Point of Entry Chloride 103 mg/L
140867 4/26/2010 Entry Point - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Point of Entry Copper 0.07 mg/L
140867 4/26/2010 Entry Point - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Point of Entry Lead 0 mg/L
140867 4/26/2010 Entry Point - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Point of Entry Sodium - Public Water Supply 28 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 01 - Nurse's Office Sink Copper 0.15 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 02 - W.F. Art room 7W Copper 0.16 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 03 - West Wing Handicap BR Copper 0.18 mg/L
 Sample ID Sample Date Site Source Site ID Analyte Result Units
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 10 - RM 202 Sink Copper 0.1 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 08 - RM305 Copper 0.14 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 09 - Sink Rm 222 Copper 0.1 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 04 - Water Fountain RM 4 Copper 0.16 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 05 - Staff Louge Sink Copper 0.15 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 06 - West Wing Girls Bathroom in Center Island Copper 0.1 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 07- RM 310 Copper 0.1 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 07- RM 310 Lead <0.001 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 06 - West Wing Girls Bathroom in Center Island Lead <0.001 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 05 - Staff Louge Sink Lead 0.003 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 04 - Water Fountain RM 4 Lead 0.006 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 09 - Sink Rm 222 Lead <0.001 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 08 - RM305 Lead 0.011 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 10 - RM 202 Sink Lead <0.001 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 03 - West Wing Handicap BR Lead 0.004 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 02 - W.F. Art room 7W Lead 0.01 mg/L
167723 7/11/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 01 - Nurse's Office Sink Lead 0.002 mg/L
168778 8/23/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 10 - RM 202 Sink Copper 0.1 mg/L
168778 8/23/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 09 - Sink RM222 Copper 0.08 mg/L
168778 8/23/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 07 - RM 310 Copper 0.11 mg/L
168778 8/23/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 06 - West Wing Girls BR in Center Copper 0.11 mg/L
168778 8/23/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 06 - West Wing Girls BR in Center Lead 0 mg/L
168778 8/23/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 07 - RM 310 Lead 0 mg/L
168778 8/23/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 09 - Sink RM222 Lead 0 mg/L
168778 8/23/2012 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 10 - RM 202 Sink Lead 0 mg/L
178571 7/23/2013 Entry Point - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Point of Entry Chloride 150 mg/L
178571 7/23/2013 Entry Point - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Point of Entry Copper 0.07 mg/L
178571 7/23/2013 Entry Point - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Point of Entry Lead 0 mg/L
178571 7/23/2013 Entry Point - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Point of Entry Sodium - Public Water Supply 17.5 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 10 - K-Area Custodial Closet Copper 0.18 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 08 - South Wing Art Room Copper 0.23 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 09 - First Bathroom West Wing Copper 0.15 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 04 - Kitchen Copper 0.26 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 05 - 3rd Floor Bathroom South Wing Copper 0.33 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 06 - Gym Copper 0.22 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 07- Main Office Copper 0.15 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 01 - West Wing Room #1 Copper 0.13 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 02 - South Wing Room 204 Copper 0.26 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 03 - West Wing Bathroom Far End Copper 0.22 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 03 - West Wing Bathroom Far End Lead 0 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 02 - South Wing Room 204 Lead 0.003 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 01 - West Wing Room #1 Lead 0 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 07- Main Office Lead 0 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 06 - Gym Lead 0.002 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 05 - 3rd Floor Bathroom South Wing Lead 0.001 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 04 - Kitchen Lead 0 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 09 - First Bathroom West Wing Lead 0 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 08 - South Wing Art Room Lead 0.007 mg/L
200825 7/21/2015 Dist. System - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Redding Elementary 10 - K-Area Custodial Closet Lead 0.001 mg/L
207577 5/2/2016 Entry Point - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Point of Entry Chloride 153 mg/L
207577 5/2/2016 Entry Point - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Point of Entry Copper 0.02 mg/L
207577 5/2/2016 Entry Point - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Point of Entry Lead 0 mg/L
207577 5/2/2016 Entry Point - 33 Lone Town Rd., Redding Point of Entry Sodium - Public Water Supply 48.8 mg/L
212740 9/22/2016 Special Samples Main Office Bathroom Lav Chloride 206 mg/L
 Sample ID Sample Date Site Source Site ID Analyte Result Units
212741 9/22/2016 Special Samples Rm 2 Right of sink lav Chloride 208 mg/L
212742 9/22/2016 Special Samples Rm 202 Mrs. McGee Chloride 208 mg/L
212743 9/22/2016 Special Samples Cafeteria Kitche far Rt sink Chloride 203 mg/L
212744 9/22/2016 Special Samples Rm 308 Mrs Pimentel Lav Sink Chloride 203 mg/L
212745 9/22/2016 Special Samples Rm 12 Mr. Feroleto Lav Chloride 204 mg/L
212740 9/22/2016 Special Samples Main Office Bathroom Lav Sodium - Private Well 49.3 mg/L
212741 9/22/2016 Special Samples Rm 2 Right of sink lav Sodium - Private Well 50.4 mg/L
212742 9/22/2016 Special Samples Rm 202 Mrs. McGee Sodium - Private Well 49.8 mg/L
212743 9/22/2016 Special Samples Cafeteria Kitche far Rt sink Sodium - Private Well 51.6 mg/L
212744 9/22/2016 Special Samples Rm 308 Mrs Pimentel Lav Sink Sodium - Private Well 52.4 mg/L
212745 9/22/2016 Special Samples Rm 12 Mr. Feroleto Lav Sodium - Private Well 52.4 mg/L
212916 9/28/2016 Special Samples Rm 12 Mr. Feroleto Lav Chloride 213 mg/L
212917 9/28/2016 Special Samples Rm 201 Ms. McGee Chloride 213 mg/L
212918 9/28/2016 Special Samples Rm 308 Pimentel Lav Chloride 211 mg/L
212919 9/28/2016 Special Samples Cafeteria Kitchen far Right Sink Chloride 212 mg/L
212920 9/28/2016 Special Samples Main Office Bathroom Lav Chloride 210 mg/L
212921 9/28/2016 Special Samples Rm 2 Right Sink Lav Chloride 211 mg/L
212916 9/28/2016 Special Samples Rm 12 Mr. Feroleto Lav Sodium - Private Well 44.8 mg/L
212917 9/28/2016 Special Samples Rm 201 Ms. McGee Sodium - Private Well 45.6 mg/L
212918 9/28/2016 Special Samples Rm 308 Pimentel Lav Sodium - Private Well 47.4 mg/L
212919 9/28/2016 Special Samples Cafeteria Kitchen far Right Sink Sodium - Private Well 47 mg/L
212920 9/28/2016 Special Samples Main Office Bathroom Lav Sodium - Private Well 47 mg/L
212921 9/28/2016 Special Samples Rm 2 Right Sink Lav Sodium - Private Well 48.5 mg/L
214394 11/8/2016 Special Samples Well 1 Chloride 127 mg/L
214395 11/8/2016 Special Samples Well 2 Chloride 239 mg/L
214396 11/8/2016 Special Samples Main Office Sink Treated Chloride 259 mg/L
214397 11/8/2016 Special Samples Shop Sink Treated Chloride 257 mg/L
214394 11/8/2016 Special Samples Well 1 Copper 0.02 mg/L
214395 11/8/2016 Special Samples Well 2 Copper 0.04 mg/L
214396 11/8/2016 Special Samples Main Office Sink Treated Copper 0.09 mg/L
214397 11/8/2016 Special Samples Shop Sink Treated Copper 0.07 mg/L
214394 11/8/2016 Special Samples Well 1 Sodium - Private Well 25.3 mg/L
214395 11/8/2016 Special Samples Well 2 Sodium - Private Well 56.9 mg/L
214396 11/8/2016 Special Samples Main Office Sink Treated Sodium - Private Well 65.4 mg/L
214397 11/8/2016 Special Samples Shop Sink Treated Sodium - Private Well 64.7 mg/L
215511 12/15/2016 Special Samples After Storage before Treatment Chloride 131 mg/L
215511 12/15/2016 Special Samples After Storage before Treatment Copper 0.06 mg/L
215511 12/15/2016 Special Samples After Storage before Treatment Sodium - Private Well 35 mg/L
216200 1/5/2017 Special Samples Well #2 Chloride 238 mg/L
216104 1/5/2017 Special Samples Well 1 Chloride 145 mg/L
216200 1/5/2017 Special Samples Well #2 Sodium - Private Well 81.1 mg/L
216104 1/5/2017 Special Samples Well 1 Sodium - Private Well 29.1 mg/L
216205 1/9/2017 Special Samples Well 2 Chrome Sodium 72.6 mg/L
216206 1/9/2017 Special Samples Well 1 Chrome Sodium 29.7 mg/L
216804 1/27/2017 Special Samples Well 1 - Chrome Tap Sodium 30.2 mg/L
216805 1/27/2017 Special Samples Well 2 - Chrome Tap Sodium 94.1 mg/L
218386 3/27/2017 Special Samples Well 1 (WSFID: 10537) Chloride 171 mg/L
218387 3/27/2017 Special Samples Well 2 (WSFID: 52456) Chloride 535 mg/L
218386 3/27/2017 Special Samples Well 1 (WSFID: 10537) Sodium - Public Water Supply 34.3 mg/L
218387 3/27/2017 Special Samples Well 2 (WSFID: 52456) Sodium - Public Water Supply 157 mg/L
APPENDIX III
 628
630

636
634
632

8
63

D.T.
#3

D.T.
#2

P1 2
64
D.T.
#1

0
63
4
64

6
64

GRAPHIC SCALE

R.J. GALLAGHER JR.

& ASSOCIATES

LONETOWN ROAD RT. 107

COVER SHEET

16050-1
 GENERAL NOTES

640
635
630
625

PROPOSED LEACHING FIELDS ARE TO BE INSTALLED NO LOWER THAN 2" BELOW EXISTING GRADE TYP.
PROPOSED 2,000 GALLON SEPTIC TANK DETAIL VICINITY SKETCH
PROFILE SECTION A-A

628

630

636
634
632
MANTIS 536-8
LEACHING SYSTEM DETAIL

8
63

D.T.
#3
D.T. 0
64
#2
P1
2
64

D.T.
#1

DISTRIBUTION BOX (DB-4) DETAIL

SPECIFICATIONS 63
0 SILT FENCE DETAIL
4
64

6
64

GRAPHIC SCALE

DEEP TEST DATA

R.J. GALLAGHER JR.

& ASSOCIATES
PERCOLATION TEST DATA LEGEND DESIGN CRITERIA DESIGN FLOW

29
0
SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PLAN
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN

500

16050-2-R1
 628

630

636
634
632
3 8
6

D.T.
#3
4 0
D.T. 6
#2
P1
4 2
6

D.T.
#1

0
63

4 4
6

4 6
6

R.J. GALLAGHER JR.

& ASSOCIATES

SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PLAN

EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN

16050-3-R1