[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
TOWN OF BCD"ROCK AQUIFER STUDY/ BACKGROUND RESEARCH AND DATA COLLECTION To TOWN OF FREEPORT COASTAL ZONE INFORMATION CENTER 4 By Robert G. Gerber, Inc. Consulting Civil Engineers and Geologists 17 West Street Freeport, Maine 04032 May 1986 GB 1199.3 I J, M2 T65 1986 ROBERT G. GERBER. INC. 17 WEST STREET e FREEKMT. MAINE 04032 207-865-6138 9 May 1986 Mr. Dale Olmstead, Town Manager Town of Freeport Freeport, Maine 04032 Re: Transmittal of report on literature review and analysis of well questionnaire data for Freeport Bedrock Aquifer Study Dear Mr. Olmstead: We are pl e ased, to present the second and third tasks of our Freeport Bedrock Aquifer Study. These tasks include a compil-ation of all of the water supply questionnaire data received, a compilation of the Dept. of Human Services well water quality data, and a discussion of the literature pertinent to the identification of high-yield bedrock aquifers. Statistical analyses and surficial and bedrock geologic maps constitute part of the work product. We should be completing the photolineament study within the next week. In reducing the. map prepared by the Greater Portland Council of Governments showing the well locations and ID numbers, we find that the legend and well numbers become illegible 'at the final reduced scale at which the report figures will be presented. We suggest, therefore, that GPCOG re-number the wells in a larger, more legible format, and also re-do the legend in a larger letter size format so that the final report maps will not detract from the overall quality of the report. We are leaving one of the two required draft copies with you in the Town office and are dropping off the other copy plus blueprints of the full size pl an maps at GPCOG. You should be receiving an invoice under separate cover soon for our Tasks 2 and 3. Sincerely, Robert G. Gerber, P.E. & Certified Geologist Enc: draft maps.and report cc: GPCOG 7- TOWN OF FREEPORT BEDROCK AQUIFER STUDY, BACKGROUND RESEARCH AND DATA COLLECTION To TOWN OF FREEPORT By Robert G. Gerber, Inc. Consulting Civil Engineers and Geologists 17 West Street Freeport, Maine 04032 May 1986 Finan @,tance-- fo" report was ded by a gran t@from a, sti funding ed by ifie,u.s. cia ssi. r t@@a a 1;:. - d D" r 0 v--, ''p - -@@ er pro :of C o m r@ ;:::o fOc e an,. t R al esource-. 6 -Co" under' the Coa m ' '-" 'AP:@-..9f a o.ne-,. anagement e 7 ------ TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 METHODS 1 2.0 SURFICIA'L GEOLOGY 2 2.1 PREVIOUS WORK 2 2.2 SURFICIAL DEPOSITS AND THEIR HYDRAULIC CHARACTERISTICS 2 2.2.1 Glacial Till (GUC 1) 3 2.2.2 Glacial Ice-Contact Deposits (GUC 2) 4 2.2.3 Glaciomarine Clay-Silt (GUC 3) 4 2.2.4 Glacial Outwash Sand (GUC 4) 4 3.0 BEDROCK GEOLOGY 5 3.1 INTRODUCTION ID 5 3.2 BEDROCK TYPES 6 Vassalboro Formation (GUC 5,6) 6 Cushing Formation (GUC 7,8,9,10,11) 7 Granitic Intrusives (no GUC assigned) 7 3.3 BEDROCK FRACTURES 8 3.4 TOPOGRAPHIC LINEAMENTS 8 4.0 GROUND WATER AND WELL SUPPLIES 9 4.1 ANAYSIS OF BEDROCK WELL DATA 10 4.1.1 Introduction 10 4.1.2 Bedrock Well Yield 10 4.1.3 Bedrock Well Depths 10 4.1.4 Water Quality 11 4.1.5 Hydraulic Characteristics of Bedrock Geologic Units 11 4.2 WATER QUALITY 12 4.2.1 Methods 12 4.2.2 Discussion of Basic Water Quialiity Parameters 12 4.2.3 Results from Health Engineering Laboratory Records 13 4.2.4 Resulsts from Well Questionnaire 14 BI BLIOGRAPHY 15 FIGURES Figure 1 Well Location Map Figure 2 Surficial Geology of Freeport Figure 3 Bedrock Geology of Freeport Figyre 4 Freeport Well Type Distribution Figure 5 Bedrock Well Yield Distribution Figure 6 Bedrock Well Depth Distribution Figure 7 Bedrock Well Distribution vs GUIC TABLES TABLE 1 Legend for Well Type and Geologic Unit Code TABLE 2 Bedrock Well Yields in Freeport as a Function of Geologic Unit Code APPENDICES APPENDIX A Freeport 1986 Well Survey Data APPENDIX Al Explanation of Computer Printout APPENDIX B Data Obtained from Maine Dept. of Health Engineering TOWN OF FREEPORT BEDROCK AQUIFER STUDY PHASE 1 REPORT BACKGROUND RESEARCH AND DATA COLLECTION 1.0 -INTRODUCTION This report summarizes our background research and data collection for the "Town of Freeport Bedrock Aquifer Stud y11* 1.1 METHODS The data presented in the following sections were obtained from the various sources listed in the bibliography and from our previous geological mapping in the Freeport area. The first portion of this report discusses the surficial and bedrock geology of the:area. as it relates to the hydraulic characteristics of the individual aquifer units. The latter portion of the report discusses the water source and the water quality information obtained from questionnaires, published literature, and water quality test data, respectively. Several steps were involved in performing the background research and data collection for this study. The first step of data collection consisted of preparing and circulating water well questionnaires to all Freeport residents. Those questionnaires that were returned were transmitted to the Greater Portland Council of Governments (GPCOG),, which plotted the corresponding well locations onto a project base map (Figure 1). Following this, geologists at Robert G. Gerber, Inc. (RGGI) established state plane grid coordinates of each plotted well using an enlarged U.S.G.S. map of the Freeport area. Data obtained from the questionnaires were tabulated by RGGI in a computerized data base and analyzed statistically. Concurrent with that process, RGGI made an independent search of Maine Geological Survey well information which was plotted, tabulated and analyzed. Water quality data were obtained by RGGI from the files of the Maine Department of Human Services, Division of Health Engineering. We compiled test results on water samples taken in Freeport. Those test results which failed to meet state standards for safe drinking water were collected and included in a file separate from that of the questionnaire responses. - RGGI conducted a literature search of pertinent bedrock and surficial geological data and created a project bibliography. The geological information gained from this literature was used by RGGI to prepare maps of the area and assign Geologic Unit Codes to each of the plotted wells on the project base map. RGGI prepared several tables and appendices which synthesize the information in a way that is useful and supports the discussion in this report. The investigators involved in this project were Jim Hillier, who performed much of the data and literature research,, Robert Gerber, who provided supervision and prepared the final report, and Steven Pinette, who compiled much of the data and prepared the maps. Jackie Cohen coordinated technical work performed by the GPCOG. 2.0 SURFICIAL GEOLOGY The surficial deposits of the Town of Freeport are not so important as the bedrock as aquifers in terms of their potential to provide water for domestic use. Approximately one-third of the water supplies surveyed by questionnaire of Freeport residents are obtained from dug wells and springs in soil. While this is a significant fraction of the total sources, data indicate that these sources generally produce low yields and are more frequently contaminated. The conditions that usually should be present to provide a reliable dug well include a saturated soil depth of at least 5 to 10 feet, and a recharge area of 10 or more acres. The soil cover material is very important, however, in determining the rate of recharge to the bedrock aquifer. Unless the bedrock is exposed, all precipitation must pass through soil to reach and recharge bedrock aquifers. The texture, compactness, and thickness of the soil directly determine the rate of recharge to or discharge from a bedrock aquifer. In the following sectio ns, the term "soil" is used rather loosely to include all surficial material. However, pedologists normally restrict the term "soil" to only the top several feet of the surficial material that has been weathered and has developed specific soil "horizons". 2.1 PREVIOUS WORK Leavitt and Perkins (1934) were the first 'to investigate the surficial deposits of Maine in any systematic manner. The next useful soil mapping was that done by the Soil Conservation Service which published their soil survey in 1974. Although these pedological maps deal only with the upper several -feet of the surficial units, we have found them useful in delineating areas of thin soil over bedrock, and areas of glaciomarine fine sands and clay-silt. Robert Gerber, John Rand and others (1975) prepared a report titled "Natural Resources Inventory for Freeport" for the Freeport Conservation Commission. As part of this report, maps of surficial geology and hydrology specific to Freeport were presented and discussed. The Surficial Geology map that was prepared for that report is presented as Figure 2. designating these units in terms of the soils' hydraulic characteristics. The U.S., Geological Survey published the results of a hydrol ogi cal investigation by Glenn Prescott, Jr. (1976) titled "Ground-Water Favorability and Surficial Geology of the Windham - Freeport Area, Maine". Other surfici.al geology maps were published by the Maine Geological Survey and "Sand and Gravel Aquifer Maps" covering the area were published in 1979. 2.2 SURFICIAL DEPOSITS AND THEIR HYDRAULICCHARACTERISTICS For the purposes of this section we are interested primarily in differentiating the surficial units `6n the basis of horizontal and vertical hydraulic conductivities as well as on the basis of texture. Consequently, we have differentiated the deposits according to their average hydraulic conductivities. -2- All but two (swamp deposits and floodplain deposits) of the surficial deposits found in Freeport were formed during either the advance or retreat of the last major continental glaciation of Maine. An ice cap formed over northeastern North America--the Laurentide Advance of the Wisconsinan Stage of the Pleistocene Epoch--and expanded within Maine about 22,000 years ago. By 17,000 years ago, the ice sheet had reached its maximum extent (Georges Banks) and by 13,000 years ago, the ice had receded to the Maine coast. The weight of glacial loading had depressed the surface of the earth and the earth was slow to rebound during glacial melting. Fine sand, silt and clay were deposited on the land. when it was under sea water which was temporarily as much as 240 feet above present sea level. Eventually the land rebounded so that Casco Bay had risen above present sea level by about 10,000 years ago. During the process of sea level lowering,, small beaches developed at various levels on what are now upland hills and terraces Wave action re-worked materials such as glacial till and left local san@ and gravel deposits over the surface of bedrock or other underlying surficial units. The following soil units are the primary units found in Freeport. We have assigned each surficial unit a unique "Geologic Unit Code" (GUC) for use in data base management. Refer to Table 1 for a summary of the Geologic Unit Code correlations. 2.2.1 Glacial Till (GUC 1) Glacial till is identified as Geologic Unit Code 1. Geologic Unit Code is abbreviated as GUC throughout this report. Glacial till was deposited directly during the passage of the major ice advance or a smaller ice lobe advance during the period 22,000 to 13,000 years ago. As ice moved along the base@of the glacier, it gouged out bedrock, ground it into material of different sizes, and mixed many materials together. These rock fragments, sand,- sil.t, and clay were embedded under or within the ice and were plastered onto the. land at various places, and then overridden and compacted by the weight of as much as several thousand feet of ice, or let down to the land surface when the glacier melted. The percentage of silt and clay in a soil sample is one of the most important factors controlling permeability. Another major controlling factor is the density of the material. An additional very important factor is the presence of joints or fissure planes. Although we did not compile soil permeability test data on the tills occurring in the Freeport area as part -of this study, we can infer their average properties. by reference to other studies for which testing has been performed. We estimate that thp, hydrauliC conductivity of the till in the study area to be between 10-' and 10 1 cm/sec; however, a fissured clay-till may have a bulk permeability that is 10 to' 100 times greater than an unfissured clay-till. We estimate the average effective porosity to be about 25 to 35%. The average recharge rate for the thick glacial till is approximately 10% of the average annual precipitation, or 0.23 gallons per minute (gpm) per acre. The average recharge rate for thin.till (<51 thick) is approximately 15%, or 0.34 gpm per acre. This also represents the maximum rate that ground water can be passed on to underlying bedrock aquifers. Till, thin -3- till, and exposed bedrock are combined in the Surficial Geology Map because till is relatively scarce in Freeport. 2.2.2 Glacial Ice-Contact Deposits (GUC 2) Glacial ice-contact deposits are stratified coarse sand and gravel deposits formed against the edge of retreating glaciers. They are often found perched on hillsides. They may overlie marine clays or bedrock, and in turn may be overlain by thin outwash sands and marine clays. These coarse deposits are highly permeable. We estimate that they can accept and transmit 50% of average annual precipitation or 1.14 gpm per acre. 2.2.3 Glaciomarine Clay-silt (GUC 3) During the time when the last glacier had retreated north of the Casco Bay region, but when the sea level was st.ill elevated relative to the present day level, the silt and clay that was carried in the glacial meltwaters was settling to the ocean floor in much the same fashion that muds accumulate in the bays today. This particular 'Geologic Unit, known as the "Presumpscot Formation", overlies approximately 75% of Freeport. The clay-silts have 80 to 100% silt and clay content. Where the soil lies below the permanent water table, it is a sticky soft blue-gray material referred to as "blue marine clay". Where it lies above the permanent water table, it is a stiff, fissured olive-colored soil that becomes brick-hard during droughts. Fine sand lenses may occur within the unit. Below the permanent water table, clay-silts, unlike some tills, will usually not be fissured. Therefore, the bulk permeability of the clay-silts will usually be ten times less than that of the lowest permeability till. Although the porosity'of the clay-silts is high--about 50%--its specific yield is only about 3%. We estimate that 5% of average annual precipitation will infiltrate through the thick clay-silt deposits, which represents about 0.11 gpm per acre. Because of their low permeability and specific yield, clay-silt deposits usually make very marginal sites for a dug wells, unless sand lenses are present. 2.2.4 'Glacial Outwash Sand (GUC 4) Glacial outwash sand deposits are rather uniform, stratified medium to fine sands with a variety of drainage conditions. They occur both under and above silty clay deposits. Outwash has a relatively high permeability, but is relatively thin in Freeport. The "Desert of Maine" is an area of glacial outwash that has been reworked by winds into an aeolian deposit. These deposits readily conduct water and form excellent aquifers for Jug wells where sufficient 'rechar,e area is present and salt-water intrusion is not a problem. We estimate that they can accept and transmit 40% of average annual precipitation, or 0.91 gpm per acre. -4- 3.0 BEDROCK GEOLOGY 3.1 'INTRODUCTION Intact masses of crystalline bedrock are essentially impermeable, prohibiting the passage of enough ground water to develop a successful household well. It is the "fracture porosity" caused by both the numerous openings along lamination partings and the less frequent openings on cross-cutting joints that render the bedrock first, capable of transmitting and releasing ground water for human use; and second, receptive to recharge by downward percolating rainfall and snow meltwater. Typical fracture apertures measure 10 to 100 microns across. A representative bedrock fracture porosity in the unweathered crystalline Maine rock is 0.1%. In other words, one-tenth of one percent of the bedrock mass consists of openings through which ground water can migrate. In areas of bedrock masses where the laminations in the schist or gneiss are tightly bonded and few cross-cutting joint fractures occur, little ground water will be available for the development of a successful bedrock well. Conversely, in areas of rock types where the rock parts readily along laminations and/or is closely broken by cross-cutting joints, the high fracture porosity will permit the development of high-yield bedrock wells. A representative bedrock fracture porosity of the latter rock mass in Maine is 1% to 10%. While the greatest volume of bedrock ground water travels along laminations oriented parallel to the grain of the thinly-layered schists, the bedrock is also broken from place to place by "joints" which are planes of fracture which commonly occur as sharp, steeply-inclined cracks cutting across the laminated grain of the bedrock. Since joint fractures commonly contain somewhat wider openings between their walls than the openings found along the narrow lamination partings in the layered rocks, bedrock wells which encounter joints may yield more ground water than those which encounter only lamination openings. However, because the non-fractured interval between joints is normally much greater than that between lamination partings in the Casco Bay area rocks, several times as much ground water in the bedrock aquifer as a whole may move northeast or southwest along the lamination partings than move@ east or west along the cross-cutting joint fractures. Richard (1976) estimated that there are 30 to 40 times more lamination or foliation partings than joints per volume of rock at High Head in Harpswell located to the southeast of the study area. Modelling by Gerber and Rand (1980) with field verification in the Cape Elizabeth Formation in Wiscasset indicated that aquifer transmissivity was 5 to 10 times greater along the direction of the rock foliation than perpendicular to foliation in a rock that was not heavily jointed. The major topographic elements of Freeport are controlled by the underlying bedrock structure, stnce the soil cover is thin throughout much of the town. This, coupled with the fact that about two-thirds of the Freeport wells for which we have well survey questionnaire data are drilled into bedrock, means that the bedrock geology of Freeport is very important in terms of the Town's present and.future potable water,supply. -5- The bedrock geology of the Town of Freeport has been mapped by Professor Arthur M. Hussey II of Bowdoin College and the Maine Geological Survey (Hussey, 1981). Professor Hussey identified two (2) different formations of metamorphic bedrock in the area. These metamorphic rocks were created by the transformation and recrystallization of original ly-bedded deposits of mud, sand, and volcanic materials. The-portion of Hussey's map that represents the structural geology of Freeport is presented in Figure 3. Most of the bedrock in the northern and central portions of Freeport area is classed generally as "granofel -gneiss", a medium- to fine-grained metamorphic rock with limited foliation and lineation. Bedrock mapped in the southern and eastern portions of.town are typically mapped as granofels or schist. "Schist" is defined as a strongly foliated, laminated rock type which splits readily into thin flakes or sheets due to the well-developed parallelism and relatively high content of platy minerals (such as mica). "Marble" is present as two (2) relatively thin units in the north-central portion of the study area. As reflected by the strong north-northeast fabric of the islands and peninsulas of South Freeport, the trend of the bedrock layering or banding also is oriented northeasterly. Due to ancient mountain-building forces, the bedrock layers have been tilted to strongly dipping attitudes, so that laminations in the schists extend from the surface at steep angles (30-85 degrees from the horizontal) down to great depths. Much of the rain and snow meltwater that percolates downward into cracks and fractures at the surface of the layered bedrock then migrates as ground water along passageways created where the rock has split along its grains parallel to laminations or banding. The significance of the foliated, laminated, or banded character of the bedrock, therefore, is that the multitude of narrow partings along the bedrock layers contain and transport ground water which can be t@pped and pumped from wells drilled into the bedrock.. The bedrock mass which contains this recoverable ground water is referred to as the "bedrock aquifer". It is important to note that "high-yield" bedrock aquifers would not normally rely on foliation planes for the high rates of ground water transmission. Rather, high-yield aq,uifers occur in zones of highly fractured rock. The large rock porosity occurs due to closely-spaced jointing or to faulting often associated with rock weathering. 3.2. BEDROCK TYPES The two bedrock formations found in Freeport are- further divided into 7 lithologic units, all of which are enumerated for this study as potential bedrock aquifers. The bedrock units present in the study area are described as follows (modified after Hussey, 1981): VASSALBORO FORMATION Vassalboro SOv (GUC 5): Medium dark gray salt-and pepper-textured quartz-plagioclase-biotite hornblende granofels with sporadic thin interbeds of medium greenish gray hornblende-diopside calc-silicate granofels. -6- Vassal boro SOvl (GUC 6): Diopside and hornblende-bearing marble, in places moderately sulfidic. CUSHING FORMATION Cushing EOc (GUC 7): Non-rusty to slightly rusty-weathering light to medium gray quartz-plagioclase-biotite granofels; light , gray quartz-plagioclase-muscovite-biotite schistose granofels locally with relict coarse fragmental structure; minor amp4ibole and calc-silicate granofels. Highly migmatized west of the Flying Point Fault. Cushing EOca (GUC 8): Amphibole; both fine- and even-grained, and coarse-grained. Cushing EOct (GUC 9) Tory Hill Member: Very rusty weathering muscovite-biotite-quartz-sillimanite-graphite schist Cushing EOcl (GUC 10): Fine-to coarse-grained calc-silicate granofels and skarn-like coarse grained rock. Cushing EOcm (GUC 11) Merepoint Neck Member: Very qrusty weathering muscovite-biotite-quartz schist and quartz-plagioclase muscovite-biotite granofels. Rare feldspathic quartzite beds. GRANITIC INTRUSIVES. (no GUC assigned): Numerous granitic intrusive rocks occur in the Freeport area. The largest of these include granite and pegmatite masses that may occupy several .acres Several abandoned q*uarries in granite and pegmatite can be found in Freep@rt. These felsic granitic rocks are relatively "tight" at depth and usually do not yield much water to bedrock wells. Mafic dikes and sills occur as thin tabular bodies throughout the area. These dikes, such as diabase dikes, may be highly fractured and provide a ready avenue for ground water movement. However, ground water passing through these dikes may be high in iron,and manganese. The differences in bedrock types which are used to discriminate between the two metamorphic rock formations relate predominantly to the mixture of minerals contained in the rock. The Vassalboro Formation is primarily composed of medium-textured quartz, plagioclase, biotite and hornblende. The predominant minerals in the Cushing Formation are quartz and plagioclase feldspar with relatively minor biotite mica. The Cushing Formation also contains beds or belts of thin-bedded or gneissic -7- amphibolite, a layered rock made principally of the mineral hornblende, a dark-green to black silicate mineral having a relatively high iron content. 3.3 BEDROCK FRACTURES Bedrock fracture.s are roughly planar openings in the rock through which ground water can migrate. The three types of fractures which are of consequence in evaluating the bedrock ground water regimes in the study area are partings along the bedding or foliation planes in the schists and gneiss, joints in all rock types, and faults in all rock types. While the greatest volume of bedrock ground water moves along steeply-inclined, north northeast -trending lamination partings, joints and faults may locally yield significant volumes to drilled wells. Joints are tensional fracture separations in the bedrock along which no relative movement has occurred. Faults are fractures along which the rock on one side of the fracture has moved relative to the rock on the other side of the fracture. Joint fractures in the Freeport area include very steeply-inclined cracks which cut almost directly across the north-northeast trend of the bedrock layering. They are commonly spaced on the order of <1 to 51 one from another. Relatively flat-lying (sub-horizontal) joints are also present, particularly in the granitic rocks. Much ground water flow may occur at shallow depths in those joints; however, these joints become more widely spaced and more closed with depth. Because of their high fracture porosity, joint zones may not only constitute important high-yield bedrock aquifers but also offer - ready avenues for human or salt-water contamination. Fault fractures occur in the bedrock at several locations in Freeport. Most are very minor cracks of short length along which the bedrock displacement is on the scales of inches. The faults mapped by Hussey (1981) are shown on Figure 3. Two major faults are mapped in the Freeport area: a pre-metamorphic thrust fault and the post-metamorphic Flying Point Fault. The older fault parallels U.S. Route 1 and separates the Vassalboro and Cushing Formations. The Flying Point Fault trends through Casco and Maquoit Bays locally traversing Flying Point where it was first observed. Major faults such as these can be important bedrock aquifers if the structural deformation caused by the fault movement was sufficiently intense to create a zone of bedrock crushing and fracturing in and adjacent to the plane of fault -slippage, to create a zone of high fracture porosity. 3.4 TOPOGRAPHIC LINEAMENTS Topographic lineaments are straight or gently-curved depressions or topographic "Ireaks" in the ground surface that may reflect trends or zones of closely-spaced fracturing in the underlying bedrock. Such zones may have sufficiently high fracture porosity to constitute important bedrock aquifers. Our viewing of the Freeport study area on satellite imagery, side-scan radar, and stereo-paired aerial photos has revealed numerous photo lineaments which may reflect zones where the bedrock is relatively closely fractured. (Our photo lineament analysis is preliminary at this stage and will be completed along with a map of potentially high yield bedrock zones in our next phase of work.) -8- 4.0 GROUND WATER AND WELL SU PPLIES A survey of the Freeport private water supplies was performed in conjunction with the Greater Portland Council of Governments. The process consisted of distributing well survey questionnaires to the residents, collecting and plotting the locations of responses, and compiling the resulting information into a data base. The' Town of Freeport mailed 1446 well questionnaires, one for each tax lot, to the property owners in the areas of Freeport not served by public water supply. A sample questionnaire is presented in Appendix C. No distinction was made with regard to developed and undeveloped parcels when distributing the questionnaires. There were a total of 269 respondents to the questionnaire--approximately 18% of the total number of questionnaires distributed. Twenty-seven of these were not useful, however, due to lack of information, leaving 242 questionnaires to be used in the study. The water source locations obtai-ned from the survey were plotted by GPCOG on a base map at a scale of I inch equals 1,000 feet. Robert G. Gerber, Inc. entered all of the available data into the project data base that is presented in Appendix A. Additional well data pertinent to Freeport were obtained by RGGI from the Maine Geological. Survey. These data, originally compiled by Caswell and Lanctot (1978), and published in Ground Water Resource Maps of Cumberland County, included eighty (80) wells which were located in Freeport. Descriptive data of well depth, yield, and water level were included in this source of information. After reviewing the locations of these wells to prevent duplication of data, they were plotted on the project base map and included in the ground water data base. Compilation of data from the two sources of Freeport well questionnaires and literature review have resulted in a data base of 322 wells which have been described by several parameters including state plane grid coordinates, ground elevation,, Geologic Unit, type of well construction, yield, depth, and water level. The tabulated results of this compilation are presented in Appendix A. See Table 1 for an explanation of the Well Type code. Of the wells and springs for which we received completed questionnaires, approximately 67% were drilled wells (artesian wells) into bedrock. The remaining water supplies were mostly dug wells. A bar graph indicating the relative percentages of the four water source types included in the questionnaire is presented in Figure 4. Although the information obtained from lay people in a survey such as this is obviously not so accurate as that. which would be obtained from trained geologists, the informati-on is nevertheless useful for many types of analysis. When handling this much data, a few errors will occur, such as in plotting of well locations, but the overall conclusions will not be affected. -9- 4.1 ANALYSIS OF BEDROCK WELL DATA 4.1.1 Introduction Appendix A summarizes the numerical data collected for this study of domestic water supplies in Freeport. The information summarized by Appendix. A was derived primarily from -Water Supply Questionnaires submitted by individual landowners, and was supplemented with other pertinent well data obtained from the Maine Geological Survey. 4.1.2 Bedrock Well Yield Statistical analyses of bedrock well yields have been performed on the data compiled in Appendix A, including data both from questionnaire responses, and from supplemental bedrock well data obtained from the Maine Geological Survey. The graphic results of this analysis are presented in Figure 5. Table 2 summarizes the statistics on bedrock well yield according to Geologic Unit Codes. The median. yield i's the best estimator for the "typical" well yield, since the mean is skewed by a few high yield wells. Although the majority of wells reported in this study yield less than 10 gallons per minute (gpm), numerous high yield bedrock wells are reported to yield over 10 gpm, including 28% of the total bedrock wells for which yields were reported. Of these wells, 16% yield over 25 gpm, seven (7) wells yield 50 gpm or greater, incl'uding one well that is reported to yield 100 gpm. This information corresponds closely with well yiel'd data analyses performed in other coastal Maine communities. Gerber and Rand, .1982, determined in a study of groundwater resources in nearby Harpswell that a median yield of 5 gpm was typical of that area with the exception of Orr's Island where yields were somewhat higher. Caswell (1978) reported in the Ground Water Handbook for the State of Maine that "Average yield from most of the bedrock in Maine is less than @10 gpm, and sufficient only for supplying dwellings and limited agricultural needs. Caswell goes on to say "Investigations to date suggest that the highest bedrock-well yields occur in the vicinity of mapped or inferred faults, in what are termed hi,h-yield zones." It is interesting to note on Table 2 that wells located in the small area of Geologic Unit Code 9 (Cushing Formation, Tory Hill member) have a significantly higher average yield than do wells in other areas of 'Freeport. Although only 6 wells are reported in the GUC 9 Area, the standard deviation of the yields is of the same order as the standard -deviation in the. other zones; therefore, the difference in the means is significant. 4.1.3 Bedrock Well Depths A statistical analysis was performed on the well data base to determine typical bedrock well depth in Freeport. The graphic results of that analysis are presented in the bar graph of Figure 6. Table 2 summarizes well depth information according to Geologic Unit Code. Forty-seven _10- percent (47.5%) of the total number of bedrock wells reporting depths were included in 100-200 feet depth range. Typical mean well depths for all but GUC 9 wells are 174 to 207 feet which is similar to Harpswell' and the Maine coast as a whole. Higher yield wells often go to shallower depths since the driller does not have to go so deep to get an adequate yield for the homeowner. 4.1.4 Bedrock Geologic Unit Codes Each -water source included in this study has been assigned a Geologic Unit Code (GUC). Drilled wells were assigned Geologic Unit Codes as determined by the bedrock formation, from which they draw water. -Descriptions of the Geologic Units that pertain to bedrock wells can be found in Sction 3.1. In order to determine the relative number of bedrock wells in each GUC in Freeport, a statistical analysis was performed. The results of this analysis is presented in the bar graph on Figure 6. Table 2 summarizes the statistics. These results indicate that Geologic Units 5 and 7 have by far the most wells. To illustrate the reason for this2 we can refer to Figure 3 which shows the aerial extent of the bedrock Geologic Units in the Freeport area. From this map it is apparent that the relative frequency of a well in a particular Geologic Unit is more closely related to the size and location of the. Geologic Unit rather than the hydrogeol ogi c characteristic of the unit. In order to correlate bedrock unit code, i.e. bedrock type, with hydraulic characteristics, we must statistically analyze each group of wells in each bedrock Geologic Unit and correlate that information to well yield and depth. 4.1.5 Hydraulic Characteristics of Bedrock Geologic Units In order to locate areas which demonstrate a potential as high yield bedrock aquifers, several statistical analyses have been performed: first, to establish what are typical cases of well type, well depth, and well yield; and second, to identify and define Geologic Units that may have an effect on the amount of water received by and transmitted through various types of bedrock. The third step of photo-lineament analysis will, in the ollowing phase of work, identify zones in.bedrock where much higher rates of ground water yield may occur. In developing the statistical data on wfell yields and geologic conditions, it has been possible to develop correlations between these data and determine, to a limited degree, hydraulic characteristics of the bedrock Geologic Units. Table 2 presents statistical data relating to bedrock well yield and well depth which has been sorted by Geologic Unit Code, and analyzed for mean, standard deviation and median value. These statistics make it possible to determine and compare the average yield and depth of wells, that produce water from these specific- bedrock types. It is apparent from studying the resulting data that a typical well located in Geologic Unit 5, has been drilled to a greater depth to yield an equivalent amount of water than was required in Geologic Unit 8. This has geographic significance in that Geologic Unit 5 of the Vassalboro Formation is located in the central, north, and west parts of Freeport while Geologic Unit 8 of the Cushing Formation is located only in the south and east portions of Freeport. Ground water yield observed in Geologic Units 5, 7, and 8 is normal for Maine;' however, Geologic Unit 9 has a mean and median that is several times higher than typical. Geologic unit 9 represents the Tory Hill member of the Cushing bedrock formation. This rock tyupe is described as a very rusty muscovite-biotite-quartz-sillimanite-graphite schist. This type of rock may exhibit foliation more distinctly than the gneisses and granofels of other rock types in the area. The Tory Hill Formation is located adjacent to and paralleling a major thrust fault that trends to the northeast through central Freeport. This ancient fault zone marks the irregular contact between the Vassalboro and Cushing Formations. Preliminary photo linear analysis has identified a higher concentration of mappable linear features in GUC 9 than in other portions of Freeport. These combined data describing this particular Geologic Unit suggests that it may be a generalized zone worthy of further investigation as a high yield bedrock aquifer. 4.2 WATER QUALITY 4.2.1 Methods Our water quality data obtained for this study were derived from files of water quality tests at the Maine Department of Human Services, and from water quality tests reported by the residents of Freeport in the questionnaires. Records maintained on file at the Dept. of Human Services document the results of tests performed from 1969 through 1985. Over this period, more than 1,500 tests requested by Freeport residents were performed and recorded. In order to expedite the review process, we tabulated data pertaining only to water quality test results which failed to meet State drinking water standards. By taking this approach, the number of test results worthy of evaluation was reduced to 211 or 14% of all samples tested. Of the 211 failing test results, 65 tests or about 31% pertained to drilled wells in bedrock. Since this is disproportionately low compared with the apparent ratio of drilled to other well types (67%), this may imply that bedrock ground water is of better overall quality than ground water from surficial aquifers. These data, which are most relevant to the Freeport Bedrock Aquifer Study, have been included in this report in Appendix B. 4.2. 2 Discussion of Basic Water Quality Parameters The important water quality parameters to consider in each of these data sources and their respective concentration levels which we believe indicate signs of deteriorated water quality are listed as follows: Nitrate >1 mg/1 Iron >0.25 Chloride >50 Copper >0.01 Manganese >0.05 Coliforms >1 colony per plate -12- It is important to note that copper is usually derived from copper plumbing and not from the environment. Maximum contaminant levels for copper for secondary drinking water standards set by the Maine Department of Human Services are 1.0 mg/l. The Nitrate-N drinking water limit set by the Maine Department of Human Services, Division of Health Engineering, is 10 mg/1 but concentrations in "contaminated" ground water are usually >1 mg/l Nitrate and coliform concentrations in ground water are generally relate to the amount of biological decomposition and septic wastes present in the environment. Concentration limits for manganese and iron are Secondary. Drinking Water Standards (not health-related) set by the Maine Department F -Human Services as 0.05 mg/1, and 0.25 mg/l, respectively. Iron and manganese concentrations are generally related to the decomposition of an iron- and manganese-rich sulfide mineral present in the bedrock. The secondary drinking water standard for chloride is 250 mg/1 but chloride concentrations commonly correlate with sodium concentrations in the environment. Chloride concentrations in excess of 50 mg/l generally j indicate salt water intrusion, road salt contamination, or sewage contamination. The associated sodium concentrations may exceed the recommended limit of 20 mg1l standard for sodium in public drinking water supplies. 4.2.3 Results from Health Engineering Laboratory Records Of the 65 "failed" bedrock well water quality tests compiled from Health Engineering records, half were due to the presence of coliform bacteria. This relatively high number of coliform-contaminated samples may be due in part to a common error of contaminating the sample either by well construction or by, sampling technique. The data obtained from the "failed" Freeport bedrock well water quality test results are summarized as follows: Parameter No. of Cases Showing Signs % of Failed Samples of deteriorated water quality Nitrate 11 16.7 Iron 14 21.2 Chloride 13 19.7 Copper 0 0 Manganese 17 25.8 Coliforms 33 50.0 As discussed above, iron and manganese are natural ly-occurring elements in rock and, when measured in water quality tests, tend to reflect greater than- usual fractions of minerals in the bedrock aquifer, and/or reflect stagnant ground water conditions that allowed the rock to be in contact with the ground water for a longer time- than normal. Numerous high concentrations of iron and manganese indicate that bedrock types i n some portions of Freeport contribute high concentrations of these minerals. Nearly 20% of the tabulated tests failed on the basis of high chloride contents. Included in the data obtained from Health Engineering were results of tests performed for the Maine Department of Transportation (MDOT) on domestic water supplies located in Freeport. The intent of MDOT's testing program is to detect potential contamination of wells which -13- are located near roads tha t receive applications of salt and are suspected of being contaminated by road salt. It is apparent from these data that chlorides have contaminated some water supplies in Freeport but that the percentage of affected wells is probably exaggerated here by the non-random way in which the data were included in the data base.. 4.2.4 Results from Well Questionnaire Of the 151 wa ter quality tests described in questionnaire responses by the Freeport residents, 99 or approximately two-thirds of the cases related to wells drilled in bedrock. This ratio correlates with the ratio of drilled wells to other source types in Freeport which is also about two-thirds of the total . Of the 99 water tests reported for bedrock sources, 29 cases were reported where the water contained "excessive concentration" of some contaminant. Parameter No. of Cases with % of Total Samples "Excessive Concentrations" Nitrate 1 1.0 Iron 25 25.3 Chloride 1 1.0 Copper 0 0.0 Manganese 0 0.0 Coliforms 5 5.1 Six percent of the bedrock wells have nitrate or coliform levels which exceed Safe Drinking Water Standards. Since levels of these 2 parameters are related mainly to the amount of biological decomposition and septic wastes, roughly 6% of the bedrock wells surveyed in Freeport appear to be affected by biological wastes of some sort such as septic system effluent or manure. High concentrations of iron were reported as the leading reason for low quality of domestic drinking water. A total of 25 of the 99 (25%) water supplies on which water tests were performed reported excessive iro n concentrations. Iron content is related more frequently to inherent characteristics of bedrock than to human activity, although it can be released into the ground water in the vicinity of landfills, leachfields, and other waste disposal areas. Both of the bedrock formations mapped in Freeport (i.e., the Vassalboro and Cushing Formations) contain large fractions of iron-bearing minerals and are known to impart iron to ground water as detected by these tests. Further analysis of these data in the following phase of work will correlate water quality with Geologic Unit type in order to relate areas of high ground water yield with water quality, -14- BIBLIOGRAPHY Bureau of Health, Health Engineering Division, Maine Department of Human Services--records of the quality of individual water supplies in Freeport, Maine, from 1969 to 1986. Caswell, W.B., 1978, Ground water handbook for the State of Maine. Maine Geological Survey, Augusta, Maine. Caswell, W.B., Prescott, G.C. Jr., and Brewer, T., 1979, Sand and gravel aquifers, map 11, Cumberland County, Maine. Maine Geological Survey, Augusta, Maine. Caswell,- W.B., and Lanctot, E.M., 1978, Ground water resource maps of Cumberland County. Maine Geological Survey, Augusta, Maine. Maps at scale 1:250,000. Gerber, R G., and Rand, J., 1975, Natural resource inventory for Freeport, prod@ced in conjunction with the Freeport Conservation Commission, Freeport, Maine. GerberV R.G., and Rand, J.R.,. 1982, Ground Water, resource analysis, Harpswell, Maine. A consultant report to the Town of Harpswell. Hussey, A.M. . 11, 1981, Reconnaissance bedrock geology of the Freeport 15 minute quadrangle, Maine. Maine Geological Survey, Augusta, Maine. Hussey, A.M.' 11,, 1985, The bedrock geology of the Bath and Portland 2 degree map sheets, Maine. Maine Geological Survey, Augusta, Maine. Jordan Co., Inc., E.C., 1976, Land cover maps, Freeport area, for Greater Portland Council of Governments, Portland, Maine. Leavitt, H.W., and E.H. Perkins, 1934, A survey of the road materials and glaci-al geology of Maine. Bul. 30, Maine Technology Experiment Station, Univ. of MaineD Orono. Prescott, G.C., J r., .1976, Maine basic-data report no. 9, ground-water series, Wi ndh am-Freeport -Port land. . U.S. Geological Survey, Augusta, Maine. Prescott, G.C., Jr., 1977, Ground-Water favorability and surficial geology of the Windham-Freeport area, Maine. U.S. Geological Survey, Augusta, Maine. Prescott,- G.C., Jr., and Thompson W.B., 1977, Reconnasaince surficial geology of the Freeport quadrangle, 7.5 minute map. Mai ne Geol ogi cal Survey, Augusta, Maine. Richard, J.K., 1976, Characterization of a bedrock aquifer in Harpswell, Maine. Unpublished Masters Thesis, Ohio State University, 141 pages and plates. -15- Smith, G.W., and Thompson, W.B., 1977, Reconnaissance surficial geology of the Freeport quadrangle, 15 minute map.' Maine Geological Survey, Augusta, Maine. Soil Conservation Service,. 1974, Soil survey of Cumberland County. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 20250, 94 pp, maps at scale 1:20,000 Thompson, W.B., and Borns, H.W. Jr., 1985, Surficial geology map of Maine. Maine Geological Survey, Augusta, Maine, map at scale 1:500,000. -16- FREEPORT, ME WELL SURVEY DATA 411 NJ Ni, Fff"v. mAwt -On ilk. q X1@ -y. '7 A kN RIO MAOUOIT SAY 11C lee (> 7.- CASCO DAY o .... ...... JUIY 1973 LO-DATO JMSAW t981 council of go-ents 1000 0 1.4 F.4 - 49 3mcoo- 'po 380.000 380.000- IN, -370.000 -3mooo 360000- A7 SURFICIAL GEOLOGY LEGEND GEOLOGIC GRAPHIC DESCRIPTION OF AVERAGE RECHARGE RATE FOR THE UNIT CODE SURFICIAL INTO REDROCK TOWN OF FREEPORT I Gloc.01 141 023 GPM per ove FREEPORT BEDROCK AQUIFER STUDY 2 Gloc.01 ce-co-loct 1 14 GPM P" ocfe Roamr a GE'lms'R INc. 3 Glociamorme 01 cloy 0. 11 GPM per octe CONSUMV0 CIVIL jfAt6fNM?S 4NO GCOLO&SrS MmvRr, "Amf Gloval Ml@osh SWd 0 91 GPM Per ocre 4 DATE MAY. igar, FIGURE 2 IN, #01 30100m 390,001)- 10 sov sao= N'. so coc 0 v coc Coca 460CO 460CI C ca coct /Z c0cm -NO.000 36DA00- Oc Oc COCM LEGEND GEOLOGIC BEDROCK GEOLOGY BEDROCK FORMATION ROCK TYPE UNIT CODE sov Vassalboro Gray 9,mofels, SYMBOLS FOR THE Geologic COMMI TOWN OF FREEPORT 6 SOVI %Mswbwo mwbIe High CNIP 10,At FREEPORT BEDROCK AQUIFER STUDY 7 coc Cust--g Nori-"Iy 9,ariolels loull coca C.Sh-9 ATphbalte BY 6 -A- Folown RoaFRr G GERBrn INc. 9 coct C.Sh.Q Rusty SCIVS1 Bedging strike and dip CONSUL rING. CIVIL JAIGINFERS 4ND Gf*OLOGfSrS 10 Cod Cushimg Cale-S.11cale 9tomfels FREEPORT WELL TYPE. DISTRIB BASED ON QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES 180- 170-. 160- 66.7% CL 150-/ 0 140- X 13o- 120- iio-/ z 100-/ 90- CL 80- CL 70- 24.4% 60-/ 50 40- 30- z 20- 6.8% 10 0 DRILLED DUG SPRING TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY X FIGURE BEDROCK WELL YIELD DISTRIB FREEPORT BEDROCK AQUIFER STUDY 100- go- 80- 39.7% 70- V) 60- w 50- z 40- 18.0% 30- 14.4% 11.9% 20- 00, 0 10- 0- 0-1 1-5 5-10- 10-25 GALLONS PER MINUTE FIGUR BEDROCK WELL DEPTH DISTRIB FREEPORT BEDROCK AQUIFER STUDY 120- 110- 4 7.- 55. 100- 90 80- 70- 60- 24.9% z 50- 40- 13.8% 30- 10.1% 20- 10 0 A 0-100 100-200 200-300 300-400 DEPTH IN FEET FIGURE BEDROCK WELL DISTRIBUTION V 120-1 BASED ON DRILLED WELL DATA, APP. A 46.6% 110 90 .38.0% 80@- 70- 60- 50- 40- 30- 20- 10- 0.4% 0 5 6 .7 8 GEOLOGIC UNIT CODE (SEE TABLE 1) TABLE 1 LEGEND FOR WELL TYPE AND GEOLOGIC UNIT CODE Well Type Legend 1 drilled (artesian) well in bedrock 2 dug well in soil in which the ground water seldom.or never overflows 3 spring developed in soil in which the ground water overflows the ground at least part of the. year 4 spring developed in bedrock where the ground water flows out of the bedrock and overflows the ground surface during at least part of the year 5 well point (in soil) Geologic Unit Codes Soils (applied to dug wells, soil springs, and well points): I Glacial Till and thin-soils and exposed Bedrock 2 -Glacial Ice-Contact Deposits 3 Glaciomarine Clay-Silt 4 Glacial Outwash Sand Bedrock u'n.its (applied to drilled wells): 5 Vassalboro SOv: Gneiss, thinly-bedded 6 Vassal boro SOvl: Marble 7 Cushing EOc: Schist and Gneiss with grahofels 8 Cushing EOca: Amphibolite. 9 Cushing EOct: Very rusty Schist 10 Cushing EOcl: Granofels and skarn-l.ike rock Cushing EOcm: Very rusty Schist and Granofels TABLE 2 BEDROCK WELL YIELDS IN FREEPORT AS A FUNCTION OF GEOLOGIC UNIT CODE GEOLOGICUNIT CODE STATISTIC YIELD WELL DEPTH (gpm) (feet) GUC = 5 Median 4 Mean 10.8 207 Std. Dev. 17.3 122 No. Cases 97 103 GUC = 7 Median 3 Mean 10.7 174 Std. Dev. 15.5 86 No. Cases 74 81 GUC 8 Median 5 Mean 10.7 175 Std. Dev. 11.7 84 No. Cases 20 27 GUC 9 Median 32.5 Mean 24.9 144 Std. Dev. 15.3 101 No. Cases 6 8 COMBINED GUC 7,8,9 Mean 11.5 172 Std. Dev. 15.1 87 No. Cases 100 116 APPENDIX A R." APPENDIX A FREBOT 1986 WELL MEY DATA WELL YEAR IST DISTANCE ITY WATER YIEL,@-' WELL WELL TAX LOT N COORD E COORD ORD ELEV GLC TYPE USED FROM RD TESTED? BACTERIA NITRATE CHLORIDE IRON OMICS OTHER FILTER (GPK DEPTH I 5A 51 358400 528500 10 2 2 1950 1300 0 0 22 2 21 45B 37SO00 514200 165 5 1 1980 350 1 RADON 0 265 3 21 70A 380800 511700 185 3. 2 1976 600 0 29 18 4 23 35 364900 513000 147 .3 2 1965 300 0 9 5 19 24-5 369100 5305W 70 7 1 1985 1000 0 1 225 6 28 11 356600 513400 45 8 1 1978 15 0 200 7 18 92 379700 529700 150 7 1 1977 500 0 0 12 179 8 25 54C 355250 510050 70 7 1 1980 5280 0 9 18 54 38M 523300 160 5, 1 1980 30 0 .250 0 2 248 10 24 so 360700 522M 20 8 1 1971 rio 0 1 -1 98 11 19 30A 366800 530800 76 7 1 1966 100 1 0 i 197 12 21 52A 380000 514500 215 5 1 1985 35 1 0 2 los 13 18 3 38M 5262'00 180 3 2 1957 100 1 0 25 14 19 55 381100 529100 98 7 1 1250 0 0 6!1 100 15 24 48 366100 521800 15 3 2 1961 3000 1 0 1 23 16 19 59D 370800 527700 110 7 1 1981 100 1 0 3 155 17 54 19A 353700 526400 5 7 1 1974 30000 0 0 59 18 19 5 372400 535200 75 3 2 1911 100 0 0 30 19 21 5A 396500 512400 3 2 1979 1500 1 20 25 58B 0 20 352650 509200 84 7 1 1985 400 1 1 1 3 204 21 5 ro 359400 M5.2m 28 5 1 1969 12 0 0 123 22 21 42D 376600 515200 165 6 1 1972 100 1 0 23 17 34 386100 517500 260 5 1 1984 30 1 SAND 0 275 24 19 72 374500 529900 105 3 2 1965 150 0 1 18 25 22 511 377300 506800 184 5 1 198-27 100 1 0 150 26 26 20C 364800 504800 45 4 2 1971 200 0 0 14 27 5A 35H 356100 526200 10 7 1 1983 40 1 0 198 28 17 20 384500 520300 142 4 2 1968 1200 0 0 12 29 20 89 365700 519500 10 7 1 -22200 0 0 30 20 77 371900 520400 24 7 1 50 1 0 31 21 59E 381600 515000 200 3 2 1969 125 1 0 16 32 21 59D 514700 381200 230 1 2 1973 125 0 33 21 88A 507300 378200 155 5 1 1972 so 0 100 34 17 33G 519000 386800 11% 5 1 1979 50 1 240 :35 17 28C-5 518200 38M 255 5 1 1979 30 1 0 167 36 17 50 519100 301000 195 3 2 1978 300 0 0 15 37 5A 33 358100 526700 15 7 1 1978 400 1 0 15 97 38 24 73 364100 529400 42 3 2 1859 70 1 1 26 39 23 79 357800 511500 15 3 2 1900 0 0 3D 40 17 47D 391700 519600 183 5 1 1985 400' 1 0 300 41 27 3H 356700 510800 95 7 1 1980 125 0 1 150 42 17 87A 389900 516800 238 5 1 1985 75 0 0 11 300 43 17 87 390100 317000 240 1 2 1968 100 1 1 1 0 32 44 21 19-2 383700 518400 205 5 1 1985 1000 1 0 2 198 45 21 19-3 38M 518M 212 5 1 1985 1000 1 1 0 350 46 18 95A 379000 530600 155 1 2 1880 300 1 1 0 12 47 21 13A 385200 514300 242 5 1 5 0 1973 IF 0 1 298 48 22 58 375300 506-IN 214 5 1 1978 100 1 0 1 211 2 309 49 17 61D 394100 525000 238 3 2 1975 1000 1 0 12 50 22 7A 373700 504100 130 5 1 1973 0 APPENDIX A FREEPORT 1986 WELL SURVEV DATA WELL YEAR IST DISTANCE QUALITY WATER YIEL WEL WELL TAX LOT N COORD E COORD ORD ED GLIC TYPE USED FROM RD 1ESTED? BACTERIA NITRATE DiLORIDE IRON ORGANICS OTHER FILTER DEP GT 51 5 57 360000 529700 20 7 1 is 0 0 52 19 73 374200 530000 Q8 7 1 2200 0 53 19 20A 369600 532700 84 7 1 1971 150 1 1 1 54 360000 52M 30 8 1 1973 50 1 0 5 55 21 90A 377800 509200 227 2 2 1961 50 1 0 56 24 45B 364700 5-nooo, so 1 2 15000 0 0 57 21 15 384600 514500 203 3 .2 300 1 0 58 5 61 363900 530100 18 8 1 1966, 1 0 2 1 59 22 15-1 372100 506300 250 5 1 1965 200 1 0 4 60 24 56A 366'-)(* 523400 75 7 1 1977 100 1 1 1 1,20 1 61 5 91A 359000 52M 30 5 1 81 0 62 21 70B 381500 511400 202 3 2 1968 300 0 &1 5 62 359600 529500 15 7 1 1964 35 0 1 64 24 45 364000 52" 35 1 2 1950 675 0 0 65 22 57-3 377100 506500 175 5 1 1983 250 1 0 1 66 5 37 360700 5292200 25 7 1 1968 75 1 0 5 2 67 5 94 359600 527600 15 8 1 1979 185 1 1 0 68 128D 358900 Y27900 24 8 1 1984 30 1 1 0 1 69 19 28 3667DO 531600 46 7 1 1943 100 1, 0 14 1 70 21 42A 376500 514800 150 4 2 1961 40 1 1 1 71 19 26 367100 531700 58 7 1 1974 35 1 1 1 3 71A 19 26 366500 533100 22 7 1 1971 1 72 017 079B+C 395100 518600 235 4 1969 200 1 0 73 5 43 360900 529600 25 7 1 1966 37 1 0 .1 1 74 21 49 380500 516900 140 8 2 lo I 1 0 75 17 15 38M 516400 264 1 2 1975 80 1 76 18 2A 388200 526800 178 5 1 1983 30 0 1 0 48 1 77 27 9H 356600 512000 62 8 1 1970 -vo I 1 0 1 78a 5 20a 359800 529300 25 7 1 1972 so 1 0 5 1 79 22 6 372900 504300 130 5 1 1947 100 0 0 1 80 19 69A 373000 528100 80 7 1 1983 200 1 1 1@il o I 81 5A .36 358100 526900 15 5 1 1979 350 1 1 1 35 1 82' 22 4 370700 503400 100 5 1 1965 40 0 0 20 1 83 21 4 38M 512200 170 3 2 1940 100 1 1 84 22 58-5 376400 507000 182 5 1 1978 350 0 0 3 1 85 5A 15 356300' 526300 10 7 1 1955 30 1 1 1 3 1 86 21 46 379400 515500 170 3 2 200 1 1 0 87 5 9 366900 529200 75 7 1 1969 0 88 5A 71 356600 526700 10 7 1 1960 50 0 0 4 89 23 68A 363000 500100 118 5 1 30 1 0 1 Q 50 27 4 356900 511800 55 7 1 1977 loo 0 0 3 91 19 37 366400 52192100 83 1 2 1949 100 1 0 92 17 64 395900 52202700 262 1 2 1960 120 0 0 93 25 43 509700 357800 50 3 2 19596 100 1 1 94 21 63A 379700 514300 205 5 1 1?79 60 0 1 95 5A 35E 358700 527800 24 8 1 1969 300 1 0 2 1 96 23 31C 365400 514100 122 9 2 1966 150 1 1 0 97 -72 4B 371300 503600 102 5 1 1976 400 1 0 3 2 98 22 7B-7 375100 504400 180 5 1 1980 50 1 1 919 19 19 3700M 5r-SW 85 7 1 1950 300 1 0 6 ---------- L Oz se 001 0 009 1261 1 L 8z oOcoZS 0088SE 09 VS W 9861 L z ? 0 m LUT z v 09 0OOC09 008L9C cz 9z StT Z9 fac z I SC4 6L61 1 9 06 ooztoq 00 1 ZLC ut zz LVI 986 1 6 9 1 oz oz 0 0 4, GO I LS6 I z z &Z Oov6zS 00 1 W." TZ 9 9tT t ZI 9 otl PIZ 1 0 00C ZA61 I L OL OWN 00069C 19 6T Stl L9 OOF 0 1 001 Z36T I S 9L OOCTIS ON I Lc., 86 Z7, t@l 9 8 81 0 1 OCT 8961 z t tZ7, OOV6TS OODPIC 6Z LT CVT 09 YX u 0 1 0001 V96T I L cz NEWS 000JE91- ZT-9TV 9z zv I OL SS6T I L lz 00C89C 0018zg 99 vs DI ON 1 0 CUCIP T' v 0 1 ol c c Ozz 006619 00, E[S., Ll Otl oOOoZr t,861 9 v I 1 0 1 006 096T c z z9z a 000966 HLL LT 6cl C861 6 s ZT 0 1 OR 0680 1 z t ooz 00690S 0009LE Ss ZZ, 8cl 0 1 001 z I Ooz OOc9z9 WSW 36t 8 1 LET v Oz Oz gs 0 1 006 OS61 S t 001 00809 OOCLL/c I v TZ 9ET t 8C OOCKIS 000c9c C-OCT 9z SET 986T S zz 9z ZZI @7, 0 1 ot OL61 I L &Z OOO&7S OOL69C 11 S tcT 9961 t I so ON 9z 0 1 91Z 9961 1 8 Sz OOS6z9 Oozm SL bz EET 9861 0 8s UT Qs 0 1 009 V861 I L Oz 008809 00866 387, tz ZET 1 0 0 99 061 1 6 061 OOTLT9 WILE C6 Oz ICT 9 s 8 0 0 OE r.61 t 9 8LI OOtzTs 008s9S ev EZ Oc I I OOSLOS 0097,96 9861 1 09 1 96Z 09 0 1 SIT LL6T 1 9 Z6 te 9Z 6ZI 6961 Ez L6T 0 1 LS 6961 1 9 OL 006909 OOQz9c TP, 9z WT 8L61 9 Sa 9 OSz I I OSZ OL61 1 8 8t OOczTs OWSC X6 LZ LZT 1 7 ooz qT 0 0 ST L6T 1 8 zz 009ZIS OOD9SC 3H 8Z 9ZI C961 t86T 6 Oc OT OCT z 0 IZI Z161 I I Ot OIZIII 0199C 6 PIZ SZ1 001 e. 0 os V96T I L oz COWS OOSOrc, st 9 vzT 01 96T i " I of IL6T I L Oil OOL9ZS OOCILC 89 Oz czI 8961 S I I Zk I 31VM Oc 8961 1 9 OTT OOcOZG OOS9LC" viz Oz ZZT Z, 0 0 OOL S961 z c 891 008zig OOrVL8S S Iz IN 001 9L6T I I W OWN 009ZLE ST-ZG Oz OZT OST 0 1 &Z OV6T I S 06T OOTZTs OOL18C U TZ 6TT S86T 9 9 07, 0 1 001 096T z I 98T 00019 OOSME 091 TZ 81T 6L6T L TZ 09 0 1 ot 6961 1 L &Z Oos8z& 0086SE V6L 9 LIT I OOS LE61 E c 91T 00mg OOSILS S9 OZ 9TT ES61 V 6 so OT 0 1 OOT CS61 1 9 stl OOLIZs 00to8c 89 8T ST I OC se OSE I 831M 1 006 SL61 1 9 EST OOZ-91S 0096LC Lt TZ HI 0 ot I S 811 006809 OOOM TV 9z SIT LOZ 0 1 00H ?961 1 L 86 Ooms OOIOLC 6 61 ZIT 9L61 I zi Oz OZT 81 0 1 001 9L61 1 9 8TZ OO8tTS 0088C VZ6 Ll ITT OT Z91 zi 0 0 008 t86T I t ST 0090TS 00ONE VZ9 Gz Oil 4 0 1 08L 9961 S v 8 -OOSTTS OOCZGC OT9 S961 ST ol L SZ 60T V861 Oc 61Z 0 NOM I OTT CUT I S zOz OOzSOS OOSSLE ts zz 80T SUT OT E 9 0 1 0&1 ZL6T Z I sa OOZTZ& 00986 t1te 81 LOT E86T 08 0 1 Ov 1 8 Oz OOOLZG OOto9c zil 9 90T 9T 091 0 1 GOT MT z c 08T OOs9zS OO9L8c 9 8T GOT 0 0 OOCT T861 I' L Oz 00660S OOC8SC 98Z tz toT E Oz H 9ZI 0 0 1 WE 8961 1 1 Oz 008ZT9 009M ST 8z EOT 896T v W 0 1 ZT L961 I t 911 Oom 00918C V06 .81 ZOT of 981 0 1. Oz U61 I L SOT OOOLZS OOOZZLC 99 61 TOT 6UT 9 9 9z Ezi D 0 0 00C U61 1 9 OLT 000tis Ooms C6 LT 001 AuaW3 amm amsm Bin HIRM HUM (Wd9) Milli DUO SOINV980 NOSI 3alSO-IiJ 31VUlN VI83DUS MS31 aS WOSJ o3sn 3dAi om mmaw amm 3 amm N 0 101 XV1 T13M 9d3A HM M1VH ONIStrJ T13M &BIA SiVM Aill" 3ONVISla ISI SUB T13M vitta A3AH% 113M 9861 lwcmw V XlGN3ddV APPENDIX A FREEPORT 1986 WELL SfURVEY DATA Wal. YEAR IST DISTANCE MkiTy WATER YfELD WELL WELL TAX LOT N COORD E COORD ORD ELU GUC TYPE USED FROm RD JESTED? BACTERIA NITRATE CHLORIDE IRON OWAICS OTHER FILTER 4m) DEPTH m 5 67 359400 529200 20 3 2 1960 25 0 0 18 151 '225 ISA 35M 508100 148 9 1 1960 300 1 0 152 20 83 370600 520400 15 .7 1 1976 800 0 1 347 153 25 41D-8 351500 50.7500 20 4 2 1970 5300 0 10 154 19 24-1 368200 531400 85 8 1 1984 500 0 5 290 155 18 104 381500 532000 183 7 1 1980 200 0 1 156 17 33C 385500 518800 197 3 2 1982 700 1 ALGAE 056 8 157 23 36 365200 513200 140 4 2 60 1 .0 17 158 24 68 @364800 528700 80 7 1 1966 75 0 RADON 1 2 420 159 28 22 356700 513WO 59 8 1 1970 100 1 0 1 280 160 21 37B 380000 51QM 155 3 2 1963 33 0 14 161 27 9D 355500 510650 60 8 1 1969 15 1 30 162 162 22 64 377100 509500 198 3 3 1920 400 2 163 5A 37 358100 527300 22 8 1 1974 200 1 0 to 100 164 07 20 367600 521OW 62 165 21 49B 3806W 517900 138 3 3 IQ59 200 0 0 12 166 22 53B 374800 506100 218 5 1 1974 150 1 30 147 167 5A 66 358M 528400 10 7 1 1971 .125 0 4 123 168 23 33 364900 513400 138 4 3 1925 300 1 1 0 169 17 32B 35M 52M 202 3 3 1970 120 1 0 6 170 22 12 371600 505300 100 3 3 300 1 0 4 171 17 S9 302500 520500 190 3 3 1975 550 0 0 9 172 17 43 3Q0200 510000 195 3 3 1620 450 1 0 5 6 173 ra 32 364800 51 M 140 8 1 1980 150 1 0 3 152 174 25 22D 356400 507500 77 9 4 1985 600 1 1 4 22 175 21 &3C 379400 514400 1 F02 5 1 1980 0 0 150 176 21 55 380000 615400 175 300 1 COPPER 177 27 8 356400 511700 58 1950 75 0 178 25 1 41 353200 506-IW 65 600 0 179 25 41B 352800 507300 23 9 1 1000 00 250 180 20 24 376500 520900 115 175 1 0 74 181 21 55B 321800 515000 185 5 1 1978 400 1 0 6 350 182 25 25 357200 507100 too 1 2 1930 50 1 0 10 163 19 20D 369400 532600 82 1 1 1972 60 1 RADON I 184 58 359100 529500 20 7 1 1984 15 1 0 4 198 1851 25 71 354100 515100 8 7 1 1965 1 0 3 107 186 27 3A 356700 511500 40 7 1 1979 25 1 1 165 187 25 70 3 5 M, 515000 8 7 200 1 0 136 188 26 '00 4A 3663 5oIQ00 120- 3 3 1700 600 1 0 12 189 18 55 88 3 5 600 0 0 10 3/8800 523000 190 20 53D 373700 524800 so 7 4 1935 100 0 4 191 19 16 370300 533500 78 8 1 1934 150 RADON 0 2 76 192 19 14A 370000 534400 40 1981 1000 0 193 21 1 0 91 371300 511500 215 3 2 1974 100 1 0 12 194 18 55A 379100 522500 Ila 3 2 1969 175 0 1 2 10 195 24 51 3665N 5221600 20 7 1 1967 2640 0 12 201 196 19 80 376300 531800 Ila 7 1 1934 500 1 RADON 0 5 97 197 19 80A 386100 53-Mo 99 .3 2 1968 100 1 1 0 2 12 198 25 61R 3552000 811400 5 5 1965 800 1 199 25 6 18 61D 35222M 511000 5 5 1965 Soo I 6 18 . ........... . .. . APPENDIX A FRElPORT 1986 WELL SURVEY DATA WELL YEAR IST DISTANCE M& ITY WATER YIELD WELL WELL TAX LOT N COORD E COORD RD ED GUC TYPE USED FROM RD TESTED*) BACTERIA NITRATE CHLORIDE IRON ORGANICS OTHER FILTER (GPK) DEPTH 200 22 loc 371000 504400 75 5 1 1981 18 1 0 25 173 201 25 11 358100 505900 90 5 1 75 1 1 0 202 19 15 370000 533700 .120 203 5 73 359100 529100 20 7 4 1957 40 o 0 3 72 204 27 7 357200 512400 30 7 1 1969 50 0 30 121 205 25 IOB 35M 506600 lie 9 1 1970 60 0 0 206 26 58A 360000 SD6400 77 5 1 1982 1 0 80 373 207 5 106 350000 526900 20 8 1 20 1 0 60 208 5 60 359800 529500 20 7 1 1982 40 0 5 150 209 5 55 360200 529700 20 7 1 1973 20 0 0 @4 175 210 21 76 38M 510200 175 4 2 200 1 0 12 211 22 58-3 377000 507200 182 5 1 1983 150 1 1 0 11. 300 212 21 42C 377100 515300 180 5 1 24 0 213 26 33 3627W 507200 90 5 1 1965 100 1 1 200 214 20 21 376200 rjl9qoo 105 5 1 1970 300 1 1 50 210 215 IS 47A 381100 524000 ISO 5 1 1970 tri 1 0 3 121 216 5A 31 3YF500 526500 10 7 1 1968 0 0 3 112 217 5A 10 356200 526100 10 7 1 1960 1000 1 1 1 1 6 50 218 19 21A 369300 533000 80. 7 1 1970 50 1 1 1 30 219 18 39 372900 5226,00 170 5 1 1985 150 1 0 .10 135 220 25 20A 353200 50M 103 1 2 1958 60 1 0 18 221 26 35 30,900 507900 1 (rd 5 1 1 0 7 140 222 5A 28 357100 526,500 10 7 .1 1954 200 1 1 0 3 55 223 22 35 371800 511900 so 3 3 100 0 224 17 43 389800 520200 185 .125 1 1% 225 23 28 3660100 514100 9 1 1966 1500 0 37 45 226 22 21 570300 510200 80 3 2 1912 800 1 0 50 12 227 5 78 358700 528800 20 7 1 Im 110 1 0 165 - -2 7 1 1970 40 0 3 113 M 5 35 360300 528300 1) 3 22-*,:?A 26 13C 36'400 504000 44 5 1 1973 224 0 229D 26 13C 363200 504000 42 1 1978 500 90 121 C' a 230 5A 120 526700 20 7 1 1975 30 1 0 4 90 231 22 18 371200 506300 100 5 1 1960 20 1 0 so 232 29 10 CAN'T LOCATE 1 1961 1 li, 0 0 200 233 19 80 376800 W-1000 110 3 2 1930 -.1000 1 3 16 234 22 7B-6 375300 504100 10 5 1 1981 40 1 0 2 1 373 r35 25 41D-9 362000 515500 50 7 1 1969 3?00 1 0 3 175 236 17 36A 358500 523100 176 3 2 600 1 0 15 237 24 M YoS300 517800 35 7 1 1983 1 0 30 198 -00 24 2s 356700 5181-fio 20 7 1 1978 150 1 0 5 148 230 24 43 363800 5522400 62 1 2 1964 10 0 0 2 10 240 ?4 42 363800 5-27800 62 7 1 1961 too 1 0 2 240 241 24 37 363000 522142300 62 7 1 1978 20 1 0 2 248 242 395300 519800 260 5 1 10 134 243 395900 519700 270 5 1 5 50 244 3396500 52W10 2so 5 1 2.5 581 245 '398000 519QOO 290 5 1 3 65 246 VIM 520700 260 5 f 1 298 247 3981000 521Q00 2240 5 1 o.s 373 24 394900 5192200 240 5 1 222 APPENDIX A Ff@EEPORT IQ86 WELL SUMVEY DATA Wal. YEAR IST DISTANCE QUALITY WATER YIE 'LD WELL WELL TAX LOT N COORD E COORD ORD ELEV GUC TYPE USED FROM RD TESTED? BACTERIA NITRATE CHLORIDE IRON ORGANICS OTHER FILTER (CM) DEPTI 249 39-M 519300 180 5 1 @4 2Z 250 304600 520000 230 5 1 10( 251 388400 519100 210 5 1 20 13: 252 384800 519000 220 '5 1 4 19, 253 380600 319100 160 5 1 6.25 17'( 254 380500 385600 ISO 5 1 @O 35 255 380000 51,52200 200 5 1 0.5 10( 256 383000 514000 190 5 1 .55 22 257 386200 513600 220 5 1 0 40( 258 381500 512500 230 5 1 6 17, 259 3 MOO 510900 180 5 1 0.9 44 260 388900 513200 200 5 1 44 261 385500 524800 220 5 1 0.75 28 262 524700 220 5 1 6 24 263 387300 525700 220 5 1 1.1 .30 264 386000 524500 218 5 1 10 M 265 386200 524700 220 5 1 Ot5 30 266 3864600 526600 210 5 1 M 23 267 380400 523100 140 5 1 5 12 268 3880700 52V00 140 5 1 1 lz 269 381500 524500 160 5 1 15 24 270 28M, 530600 180 5 1 6 271 380900 531200 200 5 1 4 23< 272 370600 5-31700 190 5 1 31@ 5 15 273 370600 529600 Qo 7 1 12 274 371700 534700 70 8 1 26 275 371200 534200 so 7 1 @2 17 276 367400 523000 10 7 1 22 20 277 367100 522800 20 7 1 220 278 370600 519406 50 8 1 279 370400 518600 70 7 1 4 3M 280 363600 518200 20 7 1 a 541 281 364300 517700 20 7 1 4 16 292 364300 517700 20 7 1 M 283 368400 518000 25 8 1 5 3 58 0 14 513000 QO 9 1 36 So 3p - 19 285 367500 514900 1210 9 1 r -96 368400 512000 160 5 1 60 32 287 369300 513700 150 5 1 70 22( 1 375500 514700 120 5 1 m 3 2z 289 375-700 514700 Ito 5 1 1,5 22 290 374800 515200 120 5 1 0. @5 38,' 291 377300 515400 180 5 1 3415 22 292 277300 5!5400 ISO 5 1 I@o 12 2Q3 375500 513300 140 5 1 5 14 294 375600 512800 130 5 1 9@2 29( 295 377400 519300 130 5 1 lit 24 296 377600 521800 too 5 1 2[5 121 f 4 a 4 297 377300 521900 50 5 1 6 2 10 375600 1521300 90 9 1 . .. ..... ---- APPENDIX A FREEPORT 1986 WELL SUW DATA WELL YEAR IST DISTANCE GUILITY WATER YIELD WELL X LOT N COORD E COORD GRD ELEV GUC TYPE USED FROM RD TESTED? BACTERIA NITRATE CHLORIDE IRON ORGANICS OTHER FILTER (GPM) 299 379000 r22 6800 170 7 1 0.75 300 379300 526800 170 7 1 16 301 373200 521600 30 8 1 31 302 360000 515600 60 7 1 1.8 303 361400 515300 40 7 1 10 304 360800 514600 70 7 1 1 305 357400 513400 20 8 1 1 306 360100 513000 50 7 1 0 307 360000 5122900 40 7 1 6 308 35KC10 514300 20 7 1 15 30Q 3748W 5042100 160 5 1 8 310 372700 509500 103. J 1 1.7 311 377600 509700 2101 5 1 312 363700 5CIS900 110 5 1 4 313 363600 508400 110 5 1 6 314 363300 509300 110 5 1 4 315 357200 504400 .50 5 1 13 316 3570CIO 504100 30 5 1 9 317 T55500 506000 100 9 1 30 - 507000 110 5 1 318 357700 3 319, 351000 508600 ?0 a 1 7 320 352000 50400 70 8 1 3 321 352400 510200 30 7 1 5 322 361400 50800 90 5 1 3 EXPLANATION OF COMPUTER PRINTOUT Description of Well Tabulation_Headings WELL--unique well number assigned to the well; the Freeport ORGANICS- indi cat ion as to whether the wat bedrock wells are plotted according to this system TAX 1--tax map lot number on respective town tax map; left blank organics according to recommended dri if not known left blank if no or not known. -I- I reported N COORD--Maine State Grid northern coordinate OTHER--indicatfon as to whether the wate E COORD--MaIne State Grid eastern coordinate other constituents according to rec GRO ELEV--estimated ground elevation at well, referenced to mean Sea Level (NGVD) standards; left blank if no or not kn GUC--geologic unit code (see Table 1) level was reported WELL TYPE--type of well or spring (see Table 1); left blank if WATER FILTER-- indi cation as to whether a wa not known treatment system is used to treat the YEAR IST USED--the year the well or spring was first used or no or not known. "I* if yes developed for a water supply; left blank if not known YIELD (GPM)--rated yield of the well in gal DISTANCE FROM RD--distance in feet between the nearest public blank if not known road and the water supply; left blank if not known WELL DEPTH--total depth of well in fe@t; lef QUALITY TESTED?-- Indication as to whether the water from the CASING LENGTH--total length of well water supply has been tested by a laboratory; '1* if yes, depth to bedrock in feet; left blank if not left blank if not known, WATER LEVEL--distance from ground su BACTERIA--indication as to whether the water contained excessive level In feet; left blank if not known coliform bacteria according to recommended drinking water MONTH MEASURED--month of the year in standards; left blank if no or not known, '1* if excessive level Is measured; left blank if not known level was reported YEAR MEASURED--year In which the st NITRATE --indi cation as to whether the water contained excessive measured; left blank if not known nitrate nitrogen according to recommended drinking water YEAR DRY--a year in which the well we standards; left blank if no or not known. *1" if excessive not known level was reported CHLORIDE--indi cation as to whether the water contained excessive chloride according to reconmended drinking water standards; left blank if no or not known, *11 if excessive level was reported IRON--indi cation as to whether the water contained excessive iron according to recommended drinking water standards; left blank if no or not known. Ill if excessive level was reported APPENDIX At EXPLANATION OF COMPUTER PRINTOUT Description of Well Tabulation Headings WELL--unique well number assigned to the well; the Freeport bedrock wells are plotted according to this system TAX #--tax map lot number on respective town tax map; left blank if not known N COORD--Maine State Grid northern coordinate E COORD--Maine State Grid eastern coordinate GRD ELEV--estimated ground elevation at well, referenced to Mean Sea Level (NGVD) GUC--geologic unit code (see Table 1) WELL TYPE--type of well or spring (see Table. 1); left blank if not known YEAR 1ST USED--the year the well or spring was first used or developed for a water supply; left blank if not known DISTANCE FROM RD--distance in feet between the nearest public road and the water supply; left blank if not known QUALITY TESTED?--indi cation as to whether the water -from the water supply has been tested by a laboratory; "I" if yes, left blank if not known BACTERIA--indi cation as to whether the water contained excessive coliform bacteria according to recommended drinking water standards; left blank if no or not known, '11" if excessive level was reported NITRATE --indi cat ion as to whether the water contained excessive nitrate nitrogen according to recommended drinking water standards; left blank if no or not known, "I" if excessive level was reported CHLORIDE--indi cation as to whether the water contained excessive chloride according to recommended drinking water standards; left blank if no or not known,, 6111 if excessive level was reported IRON--indi cation as to whether the water contained excessive iron according to recommended drinking water standards,; left blank if no or not known, 11111 if excessive level was reported - ORGANICS--indi cation as to whether the water contained excessive organics. according to recommended drinking water standards; left blank if no or not known, 11111 if excessive level was reported OTHER--indi cation as to whether the water contained excessive other constituents according to recommended drinking water ,standards; left blank if no or not known, "I" if excessive -level was reported WATER FILTER-- indi cation as to whether a water softener or other treatment system is used to treat the water; left blank if no or not known, HV$ if yes YIELD (GPM)--rated yield of the well in gallons per minute; left blank if not known. Page A-1 WELL DEPTH--total depth of well in feet; left blank if not known CASING LENGTH--total length of well casing, or, if known, depth to bedrock in feet; left blank if not known WATER LEVEL--distance from ground surface to static water level in feet; left blank if not known MONTH MEASURED--month of the year in which the static water level is measured; left blank if not known YEAR MEASURED--year in which the static water level is measured; left blank if not known. YEAR DRY--a year in which the well went dry; left blank if not known Page A-2 IN, I -, I = I 0 11 I .-I APPENDIX B 1.1 11 I 11 11 I I . I i 9 I I F-!@P;pr, T :@QU-=R 3-, T. C EEPR I i m tj@y. DATA OBTAM FROM MATNE HEALTH ENGIN W DEP WELL TYFES: ,r-Ti E-,Lwj', 3 = SPIRING, 4 = OTHER "ELL ELL 4 'L YE T -HLOR '4T.- SOD- WE F-, 4F. rlct- llUP- HARD i A, NTT- COP- IMANG RTT No. TYPE GEF Ti T M-S OR BB PH NESS 1 PES EP3 .-RA TE " F E R' ]PON AINESE Fill D 1 1 -n 1-76 -.M7C 1@ "s C. :1. ... 1 -0-1 2 1 273 1 Q80 CG 6. 21 1 64 1 -;-; 3' 00 5 14. '00 6.9 89 14 005 1.105 4 1 160' 19 5; S' 5 1 '7, ,.08 19"T T NTC (.0. -j X-5 6 1 TNT, c 6.2 !9 0 0 5 r., 0 5 0. 68 0. _22 7 1 1977 PiT,-' 6.7 0(1= 1-,. 1 I @Do i 5 0 005 9 1 17@ -rNTr 0 10 SO 1 6 TNVC 005 0 05 I I I A 10--- TNTC C. 0 0 CIC-15 300 1, S2 . 12 1 2 ': 019 7 =1 Pl T C C. 005 <. 003 13 1 175 1964 TNTC 005 el. 005 14 1 30. 1 ?62 T.N-1 C iC . (00 5 ". 005 15 1 300 1 ?83 2TNTC <. 0051 lp- ul 0 01 16 1 350 1975 TIN T if- (.005 <. 005 17 1 0 15 22'. 00 6. 3 4 7 183 < . tX' 5; <. C-05 0 . 0 3' 4.710 0.4.1 is 1 '243 il;183 cri 0 0.60 7 28 0.02 1 . 65 0.00 0. 19 0.09 11 I 1 300 1982 0 55 11 005. 0. 5r;l 20 1 1?61 22" 0 10 21 1 400 V.-FEW 0 0 0.20 7.6 54 CIO 5 005 1 1. 50 7.2 i@lr 22 0 51 600 100 5 3-j 0 0 24.00 0.00 0.10 0.! 1 188 1969 TNTC 7.4 )0 40 .005 <. 0015 i.80 0.16 24 327 1976 0 005 ,. 0 0 s- 21' 5 1 273 i9al o 005 <. 005 26 1 1-60 19718 TNT 9 43 OA5 4. 56 ic 18 27 1 TNTC <. 065 e.. 0.015 1 2%50 IF, 9 cc, 0 0 29 1 148 1977 -3 0 7 2 8 68 0 0 0. '22 0.20 0.48 30 1 173 0 7.1 218 0 0 - U, 0.21 28.30 2.75 31 1 0 7.2 207 69 cl 0 32 1 183 1984 0 .10 2.00 7 502 239 0 3.07 0.50 0.60 0.27 33 1 185 1978 0 5 4. 30 7.1 117 82 0 0 0.01 0.95 0.53 2 4 34 1 365 1 r83 CG 10 0.25 6.8 182 26 (.005 3.7 0.17 (). 25 0.05 8 35 1 so 0 6.9 228 34 (.005 <.005 0.40 0.05 36 1 64 0 0 0.30 7.1 110 14 (.005 U05 0.01 0.04 0.17 37 1 230 1975 0 7.8 00 62 (.005 <. 00,5 1.46 0.34 0. V0 38 1 6 23"' 1976 2 <.005 (.005 39 1 95 1967 0 0 1.00 60 (.005 <.OCFJ 0.21. 41 1 136 1951 3 0 0*00 215 105 1,015 2,9 41 1 160 1953 0 S 2.00 <. 005 <.005 0.22 0.09 42 1 200 1975 1 (. 005 (.005 43 1 V_Q 0 6.6 99 <. 005 <.005 44 1 196 1972 0 0 0.00 C,05 -. C, 0 5 45 1 100 1976 10 <.005 U05 46 1 145 1954 0 0 0.00 70 (.005 1.7 47 1 l9k. 1974 0 0 0.00 to (.0051 U05 48 1 300 1976 0 6.6 99 (.005 C 0055 0.29 0.53 49 1 300 1976 8 6.5 117 &05 <.005 0.30 0.62 so 1 250 2 91 29 (.005 (.0005 51 1 37/6 1 ri 5 0 10 3.00 7.4 164 29 C 0055 U05 0.312 -0.59 FREEPORT AQUIFER STUDY. DATA OBTAINED FROM MAINE DEPT. OF HEALTH ENGINEERING WELL TYPES: 1 = DRILLED, 2 = DUG, 3 = SPRING, 4 = OTHER WELL WELL WELL YEAR COLE COL- TUR- HARD CHLOR- NIT- NIT- COP- MANG- S0D- No. TYPE DEPTH 1ST FORMS OR BID pH NESS IDES RITES RATES PER IRON ANESE IUM 52 1 0 6.6 (.005 (.005 1.60 53 1 1971 0 0 0.00 7.5 91 14 (.005 (.005 1.40 54 1 247 1973 24 15 1.00 (.005 (.005 0.27 0.28 55 1 1951 0 5 2.00 7.2 227 290 (.005 (.005 56 1 1974 0 5 3.00 6.1 11 (.005 (.005 0.75 0.04 4.3 57 1 100 1976 20 0 254 271 (.005 2.2 58 1 240 1971 60 (.005 (.005 59 1 65 1934 0 20 24.00 (.005 (.005 1.95 0.11 60 1 100 1970 12 (.005 (.005 61 1 110 1959 0 5 475 384 (.005 (.005 62 1 75 1953 5 6.6 51 (.005 (.005 0.58 0.24 63 1 260 1963 0 0 0.00 7.6 65 (.005 (.005 64 1 110 1960 0 20 15.00 6.3 500 430 (.005 (.005 65 1 0 179 (.005 (.005 66 1 TNTC (.005 (.005 -N I I I I I I I I APPENDIX C I I I I I I I I I I WATER SUPPLY QU ESTIONNAIRE -- FREEPORT, MAINE. GROUND WATER STUDY Less than half the Town of Freeport Is served by public WELL CROSS SECTION water supplies. The remainder of the Town residents must obtain their water supplies from individual wells, springs, or streams that are located on their own lots. With the casing Ground rapid growth that has occurred in Freeport during the past few years, the demand on public 'water supplies has exceeded surface capacity and water Is being purchased from Yarmouth. There are only two additional known gravel aquifers in Freeport that would be feasible to develop as public water supplies. 0 One of these sources is presently being developed near the SOIL Webster Road. Additional sources for public water supplies (sand, clay, must be found and the ability of property owners to develop static gravel, or a water supply that Is of drinking water quality must be water hardpan). protected. - The purpose of this study is to acquire I information on the existing water supplies in the Town, level particularly those artesian wells In bedrock. so that bedrock aquifers capable of yielding large quantities of water can be located and protected not only for the benefit of present users. but for future generations. This questionnaire Is being circulated by the -Town of Freeport, with financial assistance provided by a grant from 0: KAINE-S COASTAL PROGRAM. through fundinq provided by the U.S. Dept. of' Commerce. Office of Coastal Zone Management, under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. Surface of Town Manager Oale Olmstead Is Project Manager of this study. bedrock or Consultant Robert G. Gerber, Inc., will compile and analyz ledge the* questionnaire returns and prepare a report for th: public on the results of the study. Greater Portland Council M of Governments will also be assisting in the project. Please fill out the questionnaire as completely as you can. ROCK R K leaving blank any questions for which you. do not know the answer. To aid in your understanding of what some of the questions mean, at the left- we have drawn a small cross section of a typical drilled well. The letters in the diagram correspond to some of the questions identified by the same letters in the right margin, opposite the questions. Please fill out separate forms for each well or spring on your property th-al-Ts-1eing now. or has been ole used in the past, as a water supply. Questions concerning drilled in the form or the study may be addressed to: Robert G. ledge Gerber, Inc., 17 West Street, Freeport, Maine 0403Z,. V 207-865-6138. You may return the form directly to him by mail or drop It off at the Town Office. Please return by February 211th. Thank you. Property Owner Freeport Tax Map Number A (See mailing label) questionnaire Respondent Freeport Tax Map Lot B North Coordinate (Please leave blank) C East Coordinate (Please leave blank) D Estimated Ground Elevation (Please leave blank) - E Geologic Unit Code (Please leave blank) F Type of water supply? Answer "I* if drilled artesian well and supply nam tell driller . * I duQ ban or ackhoe; 030 if spring In bull; -q- if S1prXg'1nw1e'dge; V an of a If well point; 060 If ot her, and describe G Year in which the water supply was first developed or used H Approximate distance, In feet. frommearest public road to water supply I Has the water supply been tested? Enter 020 If excessive coliform bacteria; 12* if excessive nitrate--fffr-ogen; 030 if excessive chloride; "41 If excessive iron and/or manganese; 05* If gas, oil. or other organic chemicals were detected; "60 if other excessive constituents. and describe J Do you have a water softener or other type of treatment system? How many gallons per minute is the water supply reported to produce? (Check with your well driller for this. If you know who he is) L What is the total depth of the well or spring, in feet, below ground? What is the depth to ledge, or length of well casing, if a drilled artesian well? (Again. you could check with your well driller or -look at the bill he ga ve you for drilling the well) N When the pump is off, how many feet below ground Is the water level 92 In your well? (this Is called the Ostatic level") 0 S IL o (s andIClay. ravel , or r9h.rd Pa.) If you answered the previous question. In what month and year was the level measured? p In which years has your water supply run dry. If ever? I Please indl(.ate the approximate location of ;our well on- the map that is printed on the back of thir, form; The lot lines are taken from the Freeport tax maps. 11111191111111111191 3 6668 14102 7302