City of \Vilsonville, Oregon
SOURCE \VA TER ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE SURFACE WATER SUPPLY
September 2002
Prepared For
City of Wilsonville 30000 SW Town Center Loop East \Vilsonville, OR 97070
Prepared By
M\VH 671 200 TABLE OF CONTENTS
CITY OF WILSONVILLE SOURCE \VA TER ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE SURFACE \YATERSUPPLY
Description Page No.
SECTION -EXECUTIVE SlJMMARY ...... 1 . 1-1
Overview ...... 1-1
Objectives ...... 1-1 Summary of Findings ...... 1-1
SECTION 2-INTRODUCTION ...... 2-1
Background ...... 2-2 Site Description ...... 2-2
SECTION 3-DELINEATION OF THE PROTECTION AREA ...... 3-1
Methodology ...... 3-1 Results ...... 3-2
SECTION IDENTII Methodology ...... 4-1 Sensitive Area Setbacks ...... 4-1 High Soil Erosion Potential ...... 4-1 High Permeability Soils ...... 4-2 High Runoff Potential Soils ...... 4-2 Additional Sensitive Areas ...... 4-2 Results...... 4-3 SECTION - INVENTORY OF POTENTIAL CONTAJVIINANT SOURCES ...... 5-1 5 . Methodology ...... 5-1 .. . Results ...... 5-3 . SECTJON 6--SUSCEPTIBILITY ANALYSIS...... 6-1 7- SECTION - REFERENCES SITED ...... 8-1 8 APPENDIX A APPENDIX B LIST OF TABLES Table No. Description Page No. 5-1 Summary of Zoned Land Uses in Drinking Water Protection Area ...... 5-3 5-2 Potential Contaminant Sources by Land Uses and Activities ...... 5-4 5-3 City of Wilsonville Potential Contaminant Source List...... 5-14 6-1 Potential Contaminant Sources Sensitivity by Location ...... 6-2 LIST OF FIGURES Following figure No. Description Page No. 3-1 City of Wilsonville Willamette River Water Treatment Plant and 8-Hour Time of Travel Drinking Water Protection Area ...... 3-1 4-1 Sensitive Area Delineation by Soils Type ...... 4-3 4-2 Sensitive Area Composite Delineation ...... 4-3 5- 1 Oregon Land Use Data ...... 5-3 5-2 Potential Contaminant Sources in Drinking Water Protection Area ...... 5-3 11 SECTION 1 EXECUTIVE SUl'vlMARY OVERVIE\V In April 2002, the City of Wilsonville, Oregon began using a water treatment plant (WTP) with a surface intake on the Willamette River, The WTP intake is in the Middle Willamette Subbasin of the Willamette Basin. Treated surface water is now the primary drinking water source for the City, which previously had been provided solely from groundwater from the City's wellfield. This wellfield now serves as a backup and supplemental water source. The public water system serves approximately 15,000 people. Two Source Water Assessment Reports (S\VAR) have been prepared by MWH. This SWAR addresses the assessment of the surface water source area upstream of the new WTP intake. A second SWAR has been prepared to address the groundwater supply source area. The plan was prepared by l\1WH staff for the City of Wilsonville in accordance with the guidelines and requirements of the Oregon Source Water Assessment Plan, prepared by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ, 1999). OBJECTIVES The piimary objectives of this SWAR are to: Delineate the watershed upstream of the WTP intake • • Delineate the Diinking Water Protection Area within the watershed for the WTP intake Within the watershed's Drinking Water Protection Area, delineate sensitive areas requiiing • special consideration for protecting water quality • Pe1form an inventory of existing potential contamination sources (PCSs) within the protection area, with special attention to the sensitive areas Assess the susceptibility of the d1inkingwater supply to contamination • • Prepare a document that summaiizes the findings and will serve as a foundation for a source area protection plan. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS The major findings of this SWAR are listed below: The Willamette Valley watershed upstream of the Wilsonville intake encompasses an area miles, an travel \Vat er. source area and reaches rni!es prc,ter:tnm zone em:mnp:as:ses an area of34_4 7 un'1r0.Bm 1-I on the Willamette River. Tributary flows occur from Mission Creek, Champoeq Creek, Case Creek, Yergen Creek, Ryan Creek, Spring Brook, Mill Creek, Jim Tapman Creek, Corral Creek, and several small unnamed intermittent channels, • The mean water surfa ce elevation of the Willamette River at the WTP intake is approximately 59 fe et, and the elevation of the highest point in the watershed source area protection zone is Parrett Mountain at 1,247 feet Sensitive areas include a l .000-foot buffer zone along each side of the Willamette River • and along each side of the tributaries. Additional sensitive areas were identified based on potential for severe erosion, high runoff, high permeability (and therefore higher potential for contaminant transport), and higher landslide/debris flow potential. Most of these sensitive soils areas are along slopes adjacent to the tributaries, especially north of the Willamette River. • Land uses identified in the Drinking Water Protection Area include agricultural (primarily orchards, tree farms, livestock pasture, and irrigated crops), managed forestry, parks and recreation areas, rural residential, and some urban areas. existing PCSs were identified within the Drinking Water Protection Area. Of these, 13 • 26 PCSs were identified in the delineated sensitive areas and include underground storage tanks, facilities which handle and store hazardous materials, solid waste transfer, sewage facilities, and a petroleum pipeline crossing under the Willamette River. • Additional non-point sources for contamination were identified by land use but not quantified or differentiatedby site. Each of the land uses identified has potential for non point source contaminant runoff. Sensitive areas within the watershed's source area protection zones are generally • moderately susceptible to contamination from erosion of sediments, fuel spills, hazardous material releases, pesticide or nutrient runoff from farmland, and biological contamination from livestock waste. Relatively high erosion potential exists on steeper slopes, particularly when disturbed by human activity and/or during intense precipitation events or flooding, Relatively high runoff potential exists during periods of intense precipitation. Susceptibility to potential contamination from accidental releases, improper management practices, or nonpoint source runoff is moderate except for PCSs involving storage and disbursement of fuel and/or solvents (all UST/LUST sites and the petroleum pipeline crossing). This Source Water Assessment Report provides a tool for the City of Wilsonville to use in the future to review any potential impacts that might affect water quality and will serve as a foundation for development of a Drinking Water Protection Plan. SECTION 2 INTRODUCTION In 1996, Congress amended the Safe Drinking Water Act, implemented some new requirements, and provided resources for state agencies to assist communities in protecting the sources of their public water supplies, The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed guidelines for implementing the new requirements to conduct "source water assessments" (EPA, 1997), In Oregon, the Oregon Health Division (OHD) and the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) are responsible for the source water assessments, The OHD is responsible for source water assessments for groundwater systems, and the DEQ is responsible for surface water assessments, Moderate to large cities (greater than I 0,000 population) are encouraged to participate preparation of source water assessments, The City of Wilsonville, in an effort to proactivelym protect its cuffent and future water supplies, has elected to prepare source water assessments for both its existing groundwater supply and its new surface water supply, The new surface water supply, which went online in April 2002, withdraws water from the Willamette River and treats the water for potable use, The City of Wilsonville desires to protect this new and valuable water supply as well as its groundwater supply, even though cuffent regulations do not require preparation of a source area assessment for new water systems brought on line after implementation of the SW AP in 1999, Therefore the city has undertaken preparation of a source water assessment for both the surface and groundwater systems, The groundwater supply wellfield will be maintained as an emergency backup and supplemental system, This source water assessment addresses the source area for the new surface water system, A separate assessment is being prepared for the existing groundwater supply system, The requirements for source area assessments include delineating the source area supplying the public water system, identifying areas "sensitive" to contamination, and conducting an inventory of potential contamination sources in the area, Using the results of the inventory and sensitive areas, the susceptibility of the public water system is detem1ined, Sources of infonnation reviewed during this assessment included U,S, Geological Survey (USGS) documents/websites, Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly Soil Conservation Service) documents/websites, DEQ reports, EPA and DEQ databases, and other readily accessible reports, The procedures used to conduct and prepare this assessment were based upon State guidelines (Source Water Assessment Plan, 1999). Recognizing that no assessment can identify every potential contaminant source or problem, an effo11 has been made to identify those areas most sensitive to the possibility of contamination and those potential contaminant sources with the possible has been The report prepared surface DEQ (DEQ, and to 2 I Using the results of this assessment and the groundwater system assessment, the City of Wilsonville will voluntarily develop and implement a Drinking Water Protection Plan which will address both surface and groundwater protection. This plan will be designed to protect against potential contamination, raise awareness in the local community of the risks of drinking water contamination, and provide information to them about how they can help protect the system. BACKGROUND Wilsonville is located in Clackamas County, Oregon, about 12 miles south of Portland. As of April 2002, an intake on the Willamette River supplies the drinking water for Wilsonville. Prior to the surface water system, a wellfield consisting of 8 production wells provided the City's water supply. The wellfield is currently maintained as an emergency backup and supplemental water supply. The public water system serves approximately 15,000 citizens. The intake is located in the \Villamette River watershed in the Middle Willamette sub-basin, Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 17090007. The coordinates for the surface water intake are latitude 45.293611 N, # longitude 122.782778 W. The study area for evaluating the extent of the Wilsonville Drinking Water Protection Area (D\VPA) was identified using DEQ's preliminary Geographic Information System (GIS) map of the Wilsonville watershed. US Geological Survey seamless 7 minute quadrangle topographic 1/2 maps on CD-ROM for the Wilsonville area (USGS, 2001) were used to refine the definition of the watershed. Site Description Wilsonville is located immediately north of the Willamette River and is bisected by Interstate 5. Most of the city is located on flat to moderately sloping ground and is adjacent to the Parrott Mountain area immediately to the west. The Willamette River flows on gently sloping river floodplain. South of the Willamette River, the terrain is defined by a flat to gently sloping te1nce, with the most prominent relief defined by stream channel gulleys and one small but steep hill associated with the Parrott Mountain system across the Willamette River. The highest point in the subbasin is Parrott Mountain, at an elevation of 1,247 feet above mean sea level (MSL). The mean water elevation at the intake of the new water treatment plant is the lowest unsubmerged point in the subbasin at an elevation of approximately 59 feet MSL. The climate in the Wilsonville area is characterized by moderate annual temperatures and substantial variation in precipitation. The average annual temperature is 52.l degrees F for the period of 1961-1990, with a low monthly average of 39.2 degrees Fin January and a high monthly average of 66.2 degrees F in August. Winters are cool and wet, with temperatures usually staying above freezing. The area gets an average of 3.2 inches of total snowfall per year, primarily at higher elevations within the watershed, but snowfall rarely accumulates to measurable depths the elevations. Average annual precipitation is inches per year, 41 with most as rainfall in winter (Oregon 2002). SECTION 3 DELINEA TJON OF THE PROTECTION AREA J\1ETHODOLOGY The Willamette River Watershed incorporates an area of the Willamette Valley in west-central Oregon and includes an area of approximately 8,400 square miles. The Willamette River Watershed is shown in Figure 3-1 (inset). Although the Willamette River Watershed constitutes the ultimate source area for the Wilsonville surface water system, the area is too large to be effectively managed or under the influence of the City. By agreement with DEQ and in compliance with the guidelines provided in the SW AP, a protection area was delineated hy identifying an 8-hour time of travel (TOT) within the <£Ourcearea subbasin. The 8-hour TOT Drinking Water Protection Area was developed by evaluating historic USGS flow and stage data for the Wilsonville gaging station, HUC 17090007 (USGS, 2002, and unpublished field records). This gaging station is no longer monitored by the USGS but was used from 1948 to 1973. Because this gage is the only gage in this reach of the Willamette River with adequate data to correlate flowrate, channel depth, and streamflow velocity, and because this reach of the river has not been significantly modified since the gaging station was decommissioned, it was considered to be the most representative measure of flow and stage data for this segment of the river. Using USGS reported flowrates and field measurements of water elevation, a stage-flowrate relationship was established for the Wilsonville gaging station. This provided sufficient data to calculate in-stream velocities at various flowrates. Velocities were then plotted against the flowrates and a linear regression curve was developed. At the mean flowrate of 28,585 cfs, the mean velocity of 1.44 ft!sec was identified. The data and graph used to develop the mean velocity are included in Appendix A. Using the mean velocity and an 8- hour TOT, a distance of 7.85 river miles upstream of the surface water intake was determined to be included in the Drinking Water Protection Area. Tributaries to the Willamette River upstream of the intake within the 8-hour TOT were identified. Because all significant tributaries to the Willamette River on the north side of the river were within a few miles of the intake, the entire subbasin watershed contributing to those tributaries were included in the Drinking Water Protection Area. On the south side, large tributaries with relatively low stream gradients flow into the Willamette River near the upstream end of the 8-hour TOT. These include Mission, Champoeg, and Case Creeks, which coalesce into the Champoeg Creek channel; and Ryan Creek. No direct flow measurement data was available for these tributaries, but stream segment elevations from USGS topographic mapping showed that slope of tributary streams was this segment of the the these little steeper than that the therefore v0!i0e!tv was used to cstirnate the sc£1m•enl The watershed areas contributing to these 8-hour TOT flows was defined by identifying the topographic divides between tributary drainages within the range contributing to the 8-hour TOT in the stream channels. Areas conttibuting to runoff for the strearnflows within the 8-hour TOT were then included in the Drinking Water Protection Area. The Drinking Water Protection Area falls within the watershed subdivisions defined by the State of Oregon as the fifth-field watersheds of 02 and 03 (i.e. HUCs 1709000702 and 1709000703). RESULTS The total area included in the Drinking Water Protection Area is 34.4 square miles. The Drinking Water Protection Area is shown in Figure 3-1. City of Wilsonville Willamette River Water Treatment Plant 8-Hour Time of >r-,,,�, Drinking Water Protection f'lrinkinn Water Intake Drinking ProtectionW a!er ( 8-hr TOT Area DWPA Willamette Watershed Wilsonville lntc:tl.rn"h.'""' ! Mifes Figure SECTION 4 IDENTIFICATION OF SENSITIVE AREAS METHODOLOGY After delineating the watershed Drinking Water Protection Area, the "sensitive areas" within the watershed were identified. The objective in determining the sensitive areas for surface water sources is to provide information to the community and public water system that is useful in developing and prioritizing protection strategies. Sensitive areas were determined using the guidelines developed by the DEQ advisory committee (SWAP, 1999). The sensitive areas within a drinking water watershed include both setbacks (land adjacent to stream) and other natural or manmade factors that increase the risk of contamination of the surface water. The result is an identification of a subset of the entire watershed. The sensitive areas are those where potential contamination sources land use activities, if present, have a greater potential to impact the water supply. or There are five individual characteristics that determine the sensitivity of areas within the drinking water watersheds in the Source Water Assessment Plan (1999) procedures for Oregon water systems. Brief descriptions of the sensitive area characteristics and the sources of the GIS data are included below. Sensitive Area Setbacks The first sensitive area is a 1,000-foot setback from the Willamette River and perennial tributary streams. The sensitive area setbacks are intended to identify those areas where there are higher risks of contamination by spills or other releases, simply due to their proximity to the water body. Although the SWAP requires only a 1,000 foot setback from the centerline of the river, because of the width of the Willamette River in some places, a more conservative setback of 1,000 feet from each river bank was used. For the tributaries, a 1,000-foot setback from centerline was used. High Soil Erosion Potential The soil erosion potential is determined by combining the effects of slope and the soil erodibility factor (" K-factor"). Slopes within a watershed are evaluated using Natural Resources Conservation Service soil reports. The K-factor used is a weighted average of only the value for the surface layer of the map unit. Jn the watershed, only soils with "high" erodibility ratings were mapped as sensitive areas. Soils that classify as "high" include soil both with slopes greater than 30% and K-factors greater than 0.25. This rating system is based on the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation from the USDA Agricultural Research Service as defined in the Washington's Standard for Conducting (Washington Forest l 4- High Permeahility Soils Soils within the Drinking Water Protection Area which are identified in NRCS soil survey reports with moderately high permeability or greater are mapped as sensitive areas due to the higher potential for groundwater recharge adjacent to the stream. These areas may be very vulnerable to rapid infiltra tion of contaminants to groundwater and subsequent discharge to a stream. High RunoffPotential Soils The potential for high runoff rates was evaluated using NRCS soil survey reports. Soils classified as Hydrologic Group D soils, which are defined as soils with very slow infiltration rates, were mapped as sensitive areas within the boundaries of the drinkingwater protection area. Map units are assigned to hydrologic groups based on their majority component. A Group D soil is typified as clayey, has a high water table, or an impervious layer occurs at a shallow depth. Soils with these characteristics would have the potential for rapid runoff and subsequent transport of sediments and possible contaminants to the surface water body supplying the public water system. Additional Sensitive Areas The DEQ S\VAP makes provision for including other areas within the designated sensitive areas. These designations would be based upon site-specific considerations, such as high landslide potential, high snow runoff snow zones, high-risk land use, high concentrations of potential contaminants adjacent to sensitive area setbacks, or other factors. An investigation of landslide and debris flow risk was performed by inspecting Oregon Department of Forestry landslide and debris flow maps (Oregon Dept. of Forestry, The 2000). potential for landslide and debris flows within the Drinking Water Protection Area was scanned to identify potential areas of higher risk. DEQ has provided a land use map which shows primary land uses for the Drinking Water Protection Area. This map was nsed to investigate areas of potential high-risk land use. The potential contaminant source survey (see Section 5) was used to identify proximity of high- 1isk contaminants to potentially sensitive areas. Consideration was given to including areas of higher potential contamination risk within the sensitive areas if they were outside the sensitive area but within close proximity and if other conditions (slope, runoff patterns, etc.) warranted inclusion in the sensitive areas. The wa ershed map for the public water system intake includes a composite all sensitive final of the watershed" This composite or overlay will enable the identifiedt within communities and ag 4-2 RESULTS Setbacks of feet from each bank the Willamette River and from the centerline of the 1,000 of tributaries were included as sensitive areas within the Drinking Water Protection Area. Areas where the surface soils were classified as having higher erosion potential, higher permeability, or higher runoff potential were also included in the sensitive areas. A list of these soils is included in Appendix B. Oregon Climate Service records for the North Willamette Experimental Station for 1961 to 1990 show average annual accumulations of only about 3.2 inches of snow. It is apparent that risks associated with snow runoff are low. No snowpack runoff designations were included in the sensitive areas. Although some identified land uses have the potential for medium to high risk, the identified land uses (discussed in Section 5) did not appear to warrant special consideration solely on that basis. No areas were included in the sensitive areas on the basis of land use. The PCS inventory identified potential source areas within and without the designated sensitive areas associated with the other factors identified above. No PCS sites were identified which required modification of sensitive area delineation. The PCS inventory is discussed in greater detail below. A map showing stream setbacks, sensitive soils, and potential landflow or debris flow areas within the Wilsonville Drinking Water Protection Area is shown in Figure 4-1. A composite map of all sensitive areas is shown on Figure 4-2. These include the setbacks from the main stem and all perennial tributaries, areas with high soil permeability, areas of high soil erosion potential, areas of high runoff potential, and areas of moderate landslide potential. tN ) , I /" / 111111111 River WillametteStreav{s .1 Tributary [.:JrStream Butt 11/ CZJ 8-hr TOT �clne · @ Intake L;ication Sensitive.Ssils lllll HigtyErosionPotential High Ill RunoffPermeability Potential Ill... lanslideHjgh Hazards Areas qty of Wilsonville · Drinking Water Protection Area N Location @ 8-hr TOTZone Comp<;>site Sensitive Areas i�amette River - Tributary\f\'. Streams City of Wilsomi:ille Water Protetfkin Area, rlrlnkilrm Area "'"'""'mv·« SECTION 5 INVENTORY OF POTENTIAL CONTAMINANT SOURCES METHODOLOGY The primary intent of a PCS inventory is to identify and locate significant potential sources of any of the contaminants of concern within the Drinking Water Protection Area. Significant potential sources of contamination can be defined as any facility or activity that stores, uses, or produces the contaminants of concern and has a sufficient likelihood of releasing such contaminants to the environment at levels that could contribute significantly to the concentration of these contaminants in the source waters of the public water supply. Inventories are focused primarily on the potential sources of contaminants regulated under the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act. This includes contaminants with a maximum contaminant level (MCL), contaminants regulated under the Surface Water Treatment Rule, and the microorganism Cryptosporidium. The sites identified in the PCS inventory were obtained from the DEQ "Facilities" and "Underground Injection Control" databases. The inventory was designed to identify several categories of potential sources of contaminants including micro organisms (i.e., viruses, and fecal bacteria); inorganic Giardia Zambia, Cryptosporidium, compounds (i.e., nitrates and metals); organic compounds (i.e., solvents, petroleum compounds and pesticides) and turbidity/sediments. Contaminants can reach a water body (groundwater, rivers, lakes, etc.) from activities occurring on the land surface or below it. Contaminant releases to water bodies can also occur on an area-wide basis or from a single point source. \Vhen identifying potential risks to a public water supply, it is necessary to make some "worst case" assumptions to identify potential risks, not just probable risks. The worst-case assumption that is made when considering potential risks to water bodies is that the facility or activity is not employing good management practices or pollution prevention. Under today's regulatory standards and environmental awareness, the majority of the identified activities and land uses employ best management practices (BMPs) in handling contaminants or preventing water quality degradation from their operations. It is important to note that while this assessment will list all POTENTIAL risks, many of these do not present actual risks to the water system. Environmental contamination is not likely to occur when contaminants are handled and used properly, or when BMPs are employed. The day-to-day operating practices and environmental (contamination) awareness varies considerably from one facility or land use activity to another. Jn-depth analysis or research was not completed to assess each specific source's compliance status with local, state and/ or Federal programs or laws. Also, the inventory process did not include an attempt to identify unique contamination risks at individual sites such as facilities (permitted or not) that do not safely store potentially hazardous materials. conditions other than those identified in the No attempt was made to infer possible DEQ the identified some land are 5-l and urban activities. Various potential contaminants may be released from these land uses under some conditions. Potential contaminants include fuel spills and releases, solvents for equipment and paints, sediments from surface erosion, pesticides and herbicides, nutrients, and microbiological contaminants. among others. Potential sources of contaminants were identified through a variety of methods and resources. In completing this inventory, readily available information was used, including review of DEQ, EPA, and other agencies' databases of currently listed sites, interviews with city personnel, and field observation as discussed below. The process for completing the inventory for Wilsonville's drinking water protection area included the following steps: Collected relevant information as of March 2002 from applicable state and federal I. regulatory databases including the following lists: DEQ Environmental Cleanup Site Information System (ECSI) which includes the U.S. EPA National Priorities List (NPL) and the U.S. EPA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLA) list; -DEQ leakingunderground storage tank (LUST) list; DEQ registered underground storage tank (UST) list; -DEQ Active Solid Waste Disposal Permits list; DEQ Dry Cleaners list; -DEQ Site Information System (SIS) which includes Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitted facilities; DEQ Solid Waste Management Sites (SWMS) list; DEQ Underground Injection Control (UIC) list. Because of the way various state and federal databases are set up, the specific locations of listed sites are not always given or accurate within the database. The presence and approximate location of several PCS sites and land uses within the drinking water protection area were verified by consulting with City of Wilsonville personnel and/or by driving through the area (windshield survey) as discussed below in subsequent inventory steps. Not all sites were located in the field. Jn these instances, the DEQ locations identified on the DEQ website "facility locator map" were accepted as accurate unless the database contained obvious location errors. 2. Conducted a windshield survey by driving through the DrinkingWa ter Protection Area to field locate and verify major potential contaminant source activities. The windshield survey was conducted primarily in the sensitive areas near the Willamette River and within the City of Wilsonville. Access to outlying areas of the Drinking Water Protection was not constraints of this survey, and all locations Area practical within the not were contam]nant source Gr Produced final summary of the inventoried sources and the GJS base map, which are 4. presented in this report . RESULTS A summary of zoned land uses identified in the Drinking Water Protection Area is provided in Table 5-L A list of potential contaminant sources by land use is found in Table 5-2. The PCS list in Table 5-2 is from DEQ's SWAP (1999). As shown on the land use map provided in Figure 5-1, most of the Drinking Water Protection Area land use is agriculture, forestry, parks, and rural residential, with much smaller areas where land use consists of urban residential/industrial. Table 5-1 shows various types of possible land uses for each of these general categories, together with the relative risk of each type of land use. As shown in Table 5- 2, some higher-risk non-point source land uses are found in the Drinking Water Protection Area. These include (but are not necessarily restricted to) livestock grazing, stables, irrigated crops, and managed forest lands. TABLE 5-1 SUMJ\1ARY OJ< ZOJ\rED LAND USES IN DRINKING WATER PROTECTION AREA Description Agriculture Irrigated crops; orchards; vineyards; tree farms; nurseries; dairies; livestock pasture and stables Forestry Timber growth and harvesting Rural Residential Non-urban residential; non-industrial businesses Parks and Recreation State parks Urban Single-family residential; multi-family residential; public facilities; commercial and industrial businesses Table 5-3 shows the list of potential contaminant sources identified within the Drinking Water Protection Area. The locations of the potential contaminant sources are shown on Figure 5-2. A total of 26 potential contamination sources were identified from the database. These include underground storage tanks (both leaking and nonleaking), hazardous materials storage, sewage handling, and miscellaneous facilities. Jn addition, a petroleum pipeline crossing under the Willamette River observed confluence of the Wiliamette with Corral Creek. was near River @ lntak.e' Location pata: DEO .. srs & WPCF ECSI HVVMS 1111 i in Crossing Pe:troleui'rl el P p e Roads Railroad Site De:sigrcOtk:ns: Cityof W!lsonvi;!Je DEQ Contaminant Sources p,,t.,,,:ntl:�i Water Orifnkint1 TABLE 5-2 POTENTIAL CONTAMINANT SOURCES BY LAND USES AND ACTIVITIES RESIDENTIAL MUNICIPAL LA!\1D USES I GW SW ID Type of Activity Potential Water Quality Impacts i Risk I Risk ROl Airport- Spills, leaks, or improper handling of fuels, de- H I M Maintenance/Fueling Area icers, and other chemicals during transportation, I ! iI 1 use, storage and disposal may impact the I I drinking water supply. _ I ,!------I R02 Apartments and Improper use, storage, and disposal of L L i Condominiums I household and facility maintenance chemicals I I I including cleaners, vehicle maintenance I products, pool chemicals, pesticides and fertilizers may impact the drinking water I supply. Stormwater run-offor infiltration may I carry contaminants to drinking water supply. Campgrounds/RV Parks L M , R03 II Leaks or spills of automotive fluids I improperly managed septic systems orand wastewater disposal may impact drinking I Ii water supply. Heavy usage along edge of I I waterbody may contributeto erosion, causing turbidity. I R04 c;:;;;eteries - Pre-1945 Embalming fluids (for example, arsenic) and M L Ii I I decomposition by-products may impact I I . drinking water su ly, I II i ROS , Drinking Water Treatment Treatment chemicals and equipment M M Plants maintenance materials may impact groundwater 1 or surface water source. R06 Fire Station Spills, leaks, improper handling of chemicals L L and other materialsor during transportation, use, storage and disposal may impact the drinking ______ater su _ l _ _ \V __�P�P- �v_. ----�----- R07 Fire Training Facilities __JImproper use of fuels and other chemicals M M ,__ ___,I during fire training may impact the drinking , -�-'! I water supply. :ROS [' Over-application or improper handling M M 1 Golf Courses I of pesticides or fertilizers may impact drinking I . water. Excessive irrigation may cause transport I i ts to groundwater or su a e water - - �- _ _ __ ------I _l _ __ r ______. � l l l �: �;������� : : I 5-4 RESIDENTIAL MUNICIPAL LAND USES I ·-·--·------c- -. -; r . GW ' JD Type of Activity Potential Water Quality Impacts -r Risk i i ['---·-· R09 I Housing ·High Density . lmproper use, storage, and dispo�-al of I M l House/0.5 Acres l household chemicals including cleaners. vehicle , .. I > I maintenance products, pool chemicals, pesticides and fertilizers may impact the \I drinking water supply. Stormwater run-off or I , infiltrationmay carry contaminants to drinking \ _w_ ate�r__suJp.� l"-. ------RIO Landfill/Dumps I Water_ percolating through the landfill waste -+I H -+ �---1---.=c------+/ � _., ·1 j I material may transport contaminants to I I groundwater or surface wate. --� R 11 I Lawn Care - Highly I Over-application or improper:.r.::s=u=l:;,:.·-----1-----1--- handling of , M ,j' Maintained Areas I pesticides or fertilizers may impact drinking water. Excessive irrigation may cause transport 1·' of contaminantsto groundwater or surface water throu h runoff I R 12 Motor Pools Spills, leaks, or improper handling of fuels and M M I other chemicals from vehicle service and parking areas may impact the drinLing water j sup ly. Storrnwaterrun-off or infiltration may I ontaminants to drinLingwater. R13 · Parks , Over application or improper handling of M M I pesticides� or fertilizers may impact drinking Ii water. Excessive irrigation may cause transport I of contaminants to groundwater or smface water through runoff. Heavy usage along edge of I I. I II waterbody may contributeto erosion, causing I turbidity. 1I I I R14 Railr_o_a_d---�� I Spills, leaks, or improper handlin .of fuels and H H Yards/Maintenance/ , other chemicals during transportation,g use, I Fueling storage and disposal may impact the drinking • I j I �1 Areas water sunnly. Rl5 Schools I Over-application or improper handling of L M I1 cleaning products, pesticides or fertilizers used on the school grounds may impact drinLing i water. Vehicle maintenance wastes may I contribute contaminants. I I R · 16 Septic Systems High If not properly sited, designed, installed, and H M I I Density l/Acre mamtamed, septic systems can impact drmkmg I - > water. Cumulative effects of multiple systems in I II an area may impact drinking water j , supply. ___ L 1 . I "I RESIDENTIAL MUNI CIPAL LAND USES I �l , GW SW JD Type of Activity Potential Water Quality lmpacts i,I I,i msk Risk Close - _d_, -a;d· H M -i Rl 7 s�wer Lines - If not properly designed, inst�lle J_ TProximity to PWS maintained, sewer lines can impact drinking--- I i I water, especially adjacent to a waterbody or I r I· I within the 2-year time-of-travel zone for Ii I drinking water wells. I... I S ,I --, -_ __ _._ -_ _ _----·� - � � --. �- _ �1_n_ - _ _ _ -�---��--1�.- �--+-��-t------0 cc---+ Rl utility _Stations _ Il SpiIJs . leak_ s_ , or_ i pro_pe_ r handling of chem cals H H I -r Maintenance Transformer and other materials including PCBs during I Storage f transportation, use, storage and disposal may \ impact the drinking water supply. ····-----f-----f------l I l 9 Waste Transfer/Recycling , Improper management of water contacting M H \RI, \' Stations I waste material may impact the drinking water \ I Il--- , -'!-=c---·-----�--�'\ -su�p�p_lY� ------1-----i-----< , 1 · I i R20 I Wastewater Treatment Improper management of wastewater, treatment . M \ H \ Plants/Collection Stations chemicals, or equipment maintenance materials \ I mav imoact drinkine water sunn]v. ) R50 Others (List) The impacts to this potential contaminant source 1· \ will be addressed during the enhanced i \ II I ������������_i_nv_e_n_to_ry_·�- \ -��--�� COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL LAND USES \ I _j GW SW \ ID Type Of Activity Potential Water Quality Impacts Risk Risk i CO! Auto - Body Shops I Improper management of vehicle paints, H M \i thinners, and primer products may impact the drinkin water su l ' I I C02 Auto - Car Washes Improper management of vehicle wash water M M 1· may result in soaps, oils, greases, and metals impacting the drinkin water su 1 . I C03 I Auto - Gas Stations H M I \ I I Auto - Re air Shops I p rco4 I Boat Services/Re air/ Refinishing !I p ·---· --· COMMERCIAL/ Jl\1)USTRIAL LAJ\1)USES S\V JD Type Of Activity Potential Water Quality Impacts icwI • l L -+ Risk Risk I \ C06 -C-�e -m-e;.,-t/-C-.o-nc-re-te-P-la-n s-t -- -S-p_ i_ll_s_, l·-e-ak_ s_,_or_ -in_1p_ ro_p_ _er_h_ a_ n-dl_ -in-g-of chemicals M 1 lvl ' \ . and high turbidity wastewaters during II 1 1 transportation, use, storage and disposal may I l I impact the drinking water supply. \ C07 Chemical/Petroleum \ Spills, leaks, improper handling of chemicals H H �--!--Processing/Storage------and other materials during transpo1tation, use, I ! I or \ 1. storage and disposal may impact the drinking I \ water supply. 1· - - \ COS Drv Cleaners -----+-Spills, leaks, or improper handling- of- dry- -·-+----+H ----4M I cleaning solvents and other chemicals during 1 I transportation, use, storage and disposal may \ I \ � I 1I I 1 impact the drinking water supply. i C09 \ El""'"VE'"""" -c--c--f-- I I I k I spill,, ' b"dl ' \ and other•�h, materials '' during' transportation, use, I m "' " " "' '"'"'""" H -r-11,-i I storage, and disposal may impact the drinking 1j I water supply. . I et/Truckine/Bus Spills, leaks, or improper handling' of fuels, H M Terminals '� grease, solvents, and other materials" from I h.,J:;""'""'""\ vehicle service, fueling,and parking areas may I II impact the drinking water suppl)!. II \i I Food Processing I CJ I Spills, leaks, or improper handling of chemicals M M I and other materials du1ing transportation, use, \ storage and disposal may impact the drinking I water supplv. Cl2 I Furniture/Lumber/P arts I Spills, leaks, or improper handling of hazardous M M Stores II chemical products and other materials in I inventory during transportation, use, storage and I I disposal may imDact the drinking water sunnly. I i 1cl3 Home Manufacturing Spills, leaks, or improper handling of chemicals H H I \I I • . (modular) and other materials during transportation, use, I I storag e and d'1sp · o s al ma· 1mpactt hed nn' k'mg 1\ , y ___.l3ater supply. . _ _ Cl4 I, Junk/Scrap/Salvage Yards I Spill'�-.-le� a� k�s-. o- r_ i_m_pr_o_per_ _ h_ an_ - d-lin_ g_ of_ H H I . . + I automotive chemicals, battenes, and _____other waste j1 I materials during storage and disposal may I b\1 1I impact the drinking water supply. 11• r---! Cl5 , Machine Shops Spills, leaks, or improper handling of solvents, H H ii jI I ; metals, and other chemicals or materials during -� transportation. use.. storage. and disposal may 11 I impact the drinking water supply. i Cl6 [' edical/Yet Spills, leaks, or improper handling of x-ray, +--LI1. I M Offices I/ M- - \ I biological, and radioactive wastes and I - / ! other j-- n1aterials use, I and 1 · I ---�- --�----�--�---- ______�-- 1 l_�?-��rs �!PP�_-_ ,- COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL LAND USES I 1 �··G W -�···v- I ID . Type Of Activity Potential Water Quality Impacts I Risk . ·sk -J I II ,..., I Metal Plating/Finishing/ ! Spills. leaks, or improper handling of solvents H �� 1. � \eI n Fabrication and other cberrncals durmg transportallon, use.--+---� I�-\ storage and disposal may impact the drrnkrng 1. I \• w_•ater supply. ' _ Mines/Gra�el Pits-----+- Spills, leaks, or unproper handlrng of chemicals !-H -+----H -< II II II and wastes generated in mining operations or ) from heavy equipment may rmpact the dnnkmg 1·1 f [1 \1 m111 water supply. . I . Cl9 Office Spills. leaks, or improper handling of chemicals L L 1 \ Buildings/Complexes . and other materials stored and used in I I\ maintenance or fromparking areas may impact \ I the drinking water suppl):. II C20 I Parking Lots/Malls · 50 I Spills and leaks of automotive fluids in parking H H �ces . > \ lots mai:impact the drinking water sunnly. C2 Photo Processing/Printing Spills. leaks. or improper handling of I I I H H photographic chemicals during transportation, I I use, storage and disposal may impact the I\ r , dnnkingwater sunnly. I· C22 Plastic/Synthetics I Spills, leaks, or improper handling of solven 1 H H . I I Producer and resins during transportation, use, storage I and disposal may impact the drinking water �I I sunnly. C23 Research Laboratories Spills, leaks, or improper handling of laboratory H H fI chemicals and wastes during transportation, use, storage and disposal may impact the drinking I I I I water sunnlv, I1 C24 RV!Mini Storage 1 Spills, leaks, or improper handling of L L I automotive fluids and other materials during I I transpoitation, storage and disposal may impact the drinking water sunnlv. C25 I, Wood/Pulp/Paper Spills, leaks, or improper handling of chemicals H 1 Processing and Mills and other materials during transportation, use, I I . storage and disposal may impact the drinking 1 I I __ __ . 1 1 water supply. HI C26 I, Wood Preservingffreatine Spills. leaks, or improper handling of wood H H I!--- --+I . .. ,_J . 11 � preservatives and other chemicals during · . I transportation, use, storage and disposal may , 1 im act the drinking water supply. I 1 I , 1 _ I. I. C50 !I Others (List) Spills, leaks, or improper handling of chemica_ ls-+----+I - 111 and other materials during transportation, use, i"I1 11 storage, and disposal may impact the drinking ! \v ater supply l L-----/ ----'-I ------·---·----- J�---�/ I AGRICULTURAL FOREST LAND USES I GW SW 1 ID Type Of Activity Potential Water Qnality Impacts -�·_J1 Risk Risk I AOJ Auction Lots · Improper storage and management of animal H H ) I \·1 wastes and wastewater in areas of concentrated livestock may impact drinking water. i 'A02 ! Boarding Improper storage and management of animal M H I j Stables I wastes and wastewater in areas of concentrated -�-·----- ·-----'t--li_vestock may impac.t_dr_i_nkin�g� _wa._ter_. \1 j _ __ _ 03 Confined Animal Feeding Improper storage and management of animal H H . ------+-----+-----; \A 1. Operations (CAFOs) I wastes and wastewater in areas of concentrated I ) livestock may impact drinking water. . A04 \ Crops ·Irrigated . Berries, \ Over-application or improper handling of M* I Hops, Mint, Orchards, j pesticides or fertilizers may impact drinking I Vineyards/Nurseries, [ water. Excessive irrigation may cause transport Green Houses, Vegetables, .1. of contaminants or sediments to M etc. groundwater/surface water throngh runoff. I NOTE: *Drip-irrigated crops such as vineyards I and some vegetables, are considered to be a low . risk. Crops - Nonirrigated - I Over-application or improper handling of -+----+------!L L 1 . Chr1s.t mas T rees. G.rains" pes 1c1d es or fe rtT 1 1zers may 1mpact d r . ki ng 1 f m • Grass Seeds, Hay, Pasture water.. Some agricultural practices may result in I excess sediments discharging to surface waters, • • I I but non-irrigated crops are generally considered I I I \ a low risk to groundwater and surface I I I a r A06 Farm Machinery Repair Spills,� leaks, or improper handling of solvents I H I M \i �and�= petroleum products during transportation, I use, storage and disposal may impact the . drinking-water sul'ply. A07 I Grazing ,Animals - 5 I Improper storage and management of animal M H Large Animals or > wastes may impact drinking water supply. I \I EqnivalentlAcre I Concentrated livestock may contribute to I I I I erosion and sedimentation of surface water I I I -tbodies. AOS Lagoons/Liquid Wastes Improper seepage or overflows of liquid wastes H H 1 I I ! I l 1 -"n=1ac.J-..' "'1m=p"-acc..tc.th=.c..e d..cr.c.mc..k..c1ccn.&g._"- 'c...a.cte.c.r.c.suxcl'xcPc,y. _, __ ___ - r- --+ - ----··---+ _ _ A09 Land Apphcat10n. . sJtes. Improper management o f s 1 udge an d wastewater I M H . - I---- - !I _,.�----+1. 11 [ I may impact drinkin water sup ly. . 1 g p I . __J1 AJO · Managed Forest Lands - Over-application or improper handling of L �M /I I , I 1' Broadcast Fertilized Areas j pesticides or fertilizers may impact the drinking Ii ! water source. ___ 1 I 1 r---r--·------. Managed-c� Forest-.-. Lands-:- I Cutting and yarding of trees may contribute to M I All I "-- H I Clearcut a te - erosion, resulting in turbidity and I 1 H d 35 increased I ; chemical waler suppiy. I rves - < · I Over-appHcation or pro \ yrs mi p of ,II I I 1nav impa::t \ :i \ pe,;ticid;1s or fertilizerms er unnKrn•F 5.9 AGRICULTURAL FOREST LAND USES I ------ID Type Of Activity Potential Water Quality Impacts i------,.-- -- - i ! -� -- - Al2 ( Managed Forest Lands - \I Cuttmg and yardmg of trees ma) contnbute to----J-- M H L--'I I _ _,______, Partial Harvested ----<10 yrs - increased erosion, resulting in turbidity and _ __ _ ! \ chemical changes (ex: nitrates) in drinking ;�� ��� \ 1 water supply. Over-apphcauon improper \ i II \' handling of pesticides or fertilizersor may impact _ \ drinking water source. \ ___--+ _ __ _ _ i A l 3 \-M-a naged_F_o _r e-- s-t_L a_n_d s __ _ Road building, maintenance, and usage may M \, ! I Road Density - mi/sq contribute to erosion and slope failure causing ,r-, > 2 I turbidity in drinking water supply. Vehicle I i llll ! \ � I usage increases the risks of leaks or spills of 1 \I petroleum products and other hazardous . ! I materials. \ I I I H Al5 H ! A50 Others (List) The impacts of this potential contaminant 1 source will addressed during the enhanced be I , nventory. '1· '1· l I 1 I MISCELLANEOUS LAND USES SW ID Type Of Activity Potential Water Quality Impacts -- Risk Risk I MO! 1 Above Ground Storage Spills, leaks, or improper handling of stored M M I I, Tanks materials may impact the drinking water supply. M02 I Channel Alterations - Construction or maintenance of channel may L H Heavy cause erosion, resulting in increase in turbidity of surface wateL Improper stream alterations may also contribute to increase in potential for I flooding. M03 Combined Sewer Outfalls Combined sewer overflows contribute untreated L H ' wastewater at the outfall. i , M04 • Storm\vater Outfalls Stormwater run-off may contain contaminants L i i I H - from residential (homesites and roads), :I I i commercial/industrial, and agricultural use I I I areas, I Composting Storage and improper handling ! .,Ir MOS ! I of organic Fac liti s waste, and \ i e i material, animal waste\.vater may __ __ -----�-��--��-�------�------"·---- iL _j_____ i I'! g_:::�� i111pac!_�]: �kin ter L L H M disp s of i M 11 Kennels 20 Pens Improper storage, management, and o al L M - > ;! animal wastes and wastewater in areas of concentrated animals may impact drinking I ! water , i/ _ +--_ ,_ __ ' M12 I Military Installations Spills, leaks, or improper handling of chemicals_ _ _ _ _ ' H__ _H I and other materials during transportation, use, Ji I1 storage and disposal may impact the drinking / water supply. May also contain ordnance or 11, I I I waste landfills/dump sites, as well as other potential contaminant sources. I I Ml3 Random Dumpsites Illegal trash and debris containing chemicals M H I I and hazardous materialsmay cause I contamination to groundwater or surface water 'Iii supply. I __ _ --l'v-1-4- 4-_v_· _ _ -- ---at---- _ _ _v_ _l _ ��-�__ _ _ - ______--w-· -- _ s ______.. ___ --+-----1I 1 11' Ri er Recre ion Hea y I nadequate disposal of human aste may L M Use contribute bacteria and nutrients to the drinking . I water supply. Heavy use may contribute to I1 r l streambank erosion causing turbidity. Fuel spills i, 1· and emissions may also contribute to I I , contamination of the drinkingwater supply, I' 1I ���� -t- --; -Ml5 1·I Sludge Disposal Areas Improper management of sludge and �· vastew_ a_ -te-r --M--,__-H_ may impact drinking water supply. Il I ______,_ __,__ _ -; ' Stormwater Retention Stormwarer run-off may contain a wi_d e_var-ie_t _y __M H_- Basms I of contam1nants fron1 res1denhal, commerc1al/ 1-MJ6 II 'i I industrial, agric ura use ar�_�s < _ L.-----1---��-�---��------�it � ' l ��! 5-_ll MISCELLANEOUS LAND USES iI ___ _ !_�_ Type Of Activity Potential Water Quality Impacts '·-c-, ,-v- 'i_s_w Risk , Risk I M Transmission Lines - ;- Const�uction and corridor maintenance may i L H I I Right-of-Ways contribute to increased erosion and turbidity in �D17 \ \ [ I drinking water supply. Over-application or I I I improper handling of pesticides or fertilizers \ I may impact drinking water supply. 11' Transportation Corridors - I Vehicle usage increases the risks for leaks or M -- :I --H1 Freewavs/State Hicrhwavs \ spills of fuelsand other hazardous materials that I ' I I' I .; b .; R I �\ . may impact drinkingwater. oad building, I I , maintenance, and usage may contribute to I[ I I 1 increased erosion and slope failure causing turbidity m drinkingwater source. Over- I I application or improper handling of pesticides I I 1 or fertilizers may impact the drinking water I 1 MJ9 Transportation Corridors - r nsport increases the risks for leah or M H I Railroads spills of fuels and other hazardous matenals that 11 I may impact drinkingwater. Installation and � · �· '1 ::�lmaintenance :� of tracks mav contribute to 1· \I. increased erosion and slope failure causing , I turbidity in drinking water source. Over- I I application or improper handling of pesticides I adjacent to tracks may impact the drinking I water I1 supply. M20 Transportation Corridors Over-application or improper handling of M H Right-of- Ways - - pesticides may impact drinking water supply. '[1 I I I Herbicide Use Areas [ T ransportati- on Corridors------+-Heavy------river usage may contribute to riverbank --1----L -,- - 1 River Traffic - Heavy - erosion and increased turbidity in drinking water supply. Fuel and other chemical leaks, · 1' spills and emissions may also contribute to M I 11 drinking water contamination. ; Transportation Corridors - \ Road building, maintenance, and usage may L H I Stream Crossing contribute to erosion and slope failure causing I I - I Perennial / turbidity in drinkingwater source. Vehicle I usage increases the risks of leaks or spills of I fuelsand other chemicals in highly sensitive areas. Over application or improper handling of 'I pesticides in right-of-way may also impact drinking water source. - I - - - I M23 UST , Confirmed Leakiu'w-Q +! J ccEc cxcci c.st'-in"'g"--con� t. cae,n c,n'_n"a'ti-'..co. -n f_T_o _m_s p_ i_ll_s _, -le_a _k -s .-, or- -+ --H----1 M l I Tanks - DEQ Lrst improper handling of stored materials may ______\I l11 ir11J:lact the drinking water supply. I Historic impact drinking L I ic._ ,_,1. - l)ecommiss1oned spills leaks may the L ---� i ------,-�------_ ------�--,- -- -- ,i 1\-124 I UST j \vater supply, or \ i I· r---;:.-:-----r--�--, ! I -- I i iv1 L) ! UST Non-Regulated leaks, or of stored 1 H · M 1 - ! ' ' ______m�;:_i_!!pj1CtJ!�-�r1 n k�:_i_g __\V a!�!:_ly :-1______�______L j_�!�����--=-�J_,_lS�_Jf��-�--- _L_��i�_!_s L 12 MISCELLANEOUS LAND USES ""I f--,,,-,- GW- SW \i ID Type Of Activity Potential Water Quality Impacts I Risk Risk : I (-,M26 I H M I UST , Not Yet Upgraded ) Spill;�leaks, or improper handli1;g of stored : l I' : / or Registered Tanks materi als may impact the drinking water supply. ,_L M27 l L L I k UST - Upgraded and/or 1 Spills improper handling during tank filling '\ '\ ! or I Registered , Active I or product distribution may impact the drinking \ I water supply, M28 H M _LUST Status nk o n Spills le ks or improper handling of stored , U n "· 1-1 = a I ___ =,,="","'"-'==, '-"'""'-"''-"' _ ' - "'"-==�'--"'"""'' =""""' : M29 - materials may impact the drinking water suppl'-+----+y, --M- -4 _-- II � Upstream Reservoirs \ During major storm events, reservoirs may L contribute to prolonged turbidity for ! downstream intakes for drinking water. I I I Construction, fluctuating water levels, and I I j heavy \:vaterside use can increase erosion and f--c'C"'l-=--c------C"C�-- turbidity in reservoir/drinking water source. M30 [ H Wells/Abandoned Wells I Improperly installed or maintained wells and I abandoned wells may provide a direct conduit I. \ I for contamination to groundwater and drinking M3 I \v ater source. J H M l Large Capacity Septic I If not properly sited, designed, installed, and I \ �; stems -Class V UIC maintained, septic systems can impact drinking i�l >20) \ /i :\ I , I M50 I erves water. I �Others (List) The impacts of this potential contaminant I be \ I: source will addressed during the enhanced : I) inventor . I I 13 •'·•,, TABLE S-3 CITY OF WILSONVLLE POTENTIAL CONTAMIN ANT SOURCE LIST 1 2 Risk Sit.e Name Address Risk id Re1narks Sire Lat Long Type No. Rankin!! Inc 45.29050 -122.80450 ---- I. Trojan C50 Enterprises Wilsonville ECSl High Nature of contamination unknown; assu1ne high risk because of - . 35960 M24 2. 45.25556 -122.87056 �L'";";,,!t1 Julie NE Wilsonville Rd HOT Low Cleanup completed Newberg 17817 45.29083 -122.86028 Rl9 3. km Control SW Corral Creek Rd HWMS High Trucking/garbage collection facility Sherwood - B. 36860 45.25694 -122.86083 M23 4 Bishop. NE Wilsonville Road HOT. LUST Medium Wilsonville ------· 8536 45.26417 -122.84000 M23 5 n , Store l Butteville Rd NE LUST Medium . --·- 235Aurora12 4 5.26000 -122.82944 M23 6. Chaffey & Sons, Inc. Schultz Road NE LUST Medium Aurora . ... ,.. �-,., ' 0691 45.22361 -122.84194 M24 7. IC; ( I I;"' .Jary Main St NE LUST Low Cleanup completed Donald!0650 45.22361 -122.84250 M24 8. Judy's Country Store Main St LUST Low Cleanup completed 33925Donald 45.28083 -122.89111 M23 9. Porter Farm NE Kramien Road HOT, LUST Medium Cleanup in process Newberg 12300 45.29000 -122.76000 M23 10. Task, Steven SW Moffitt Court LUST Medium Wilsonville 5- 14 1 2 Risk Site Address Lat Long Type Risk id Remarks Site Name Ranking No" 7628 Champoeg Road NE 45.25167 -122,90639 HOT, LUST M23 Medium I I. , " J. 1, Saint Paul ''······--� Meado\vs 1570 Blue Heron Lane NE 45.26556 -122.82528 SIS R20 High High risk because of 2. •.. . J " Inc. Aurora potential for t y ·"". wastewater spill Dairy Inc. 19527 Case Rd. NE Aurora 45.2 l889 -122.87583 A07, A08 High Dairy operation,-- 3. Milky SIS assumed to have large grazing livestock and wastewater lagoons �- Wilsonville 45.30071 -122.7921 l � SlS C50 Medium 'Assumed n1ediun1 \11 'Todd C:nnstruction risk because nature of site activities unknown ·------! --·-·-·--�---- J: le 30000 SW Town Center Loop E. 45.29403 -122.77561 UIC MIO Medium Soccer field {{L I (' ;it-flfWilsonvi Wilsonville ---�------Stop JB Short Stop 45.29160 -122.80490 lJIC MIO Medium 17. l.JBShort Wilsonville Sons, Inc. 23512 Schultz Road 45.26000 -122.82944 UST, LUST M23 Medium 18. Chaffey& Aurora NE ··-·---- USA Inc. 1915 SE Harrison 45.29290 -122.80370 UST, LUST M23 Medium I 9. Chevron Wilsonville i,iving Enrichment 5 I 00 Crater Lake A venue 45.29298 -122.81396 UST M27 Low - \ )-d,f Wilsonville c cmc:i 9205 SE Holgate 45.28960 -122.80862 HWMS, UST R50/M27 Medium Nature of hazardous-- 21. 1 W D !nc Wilsonville materials unknown; assume medium risk 5- 15 =· -=-·= 1 2 Risk Site Address Lat Long Type Risk id Remarks Site Name Rankin2 No. ·· " " Inc Jewell 45.28990 -122.805 10 !!WMS, UST R50/M27 Medium Nature of hazardous n. Trojan ' ..,, .,,...."."'"" v' Wilsonville materials unknown; assun1c medium risk Linn Wilsonville 11265 SW Wilsouville Road 2J. 45.29000 -122.76000 UST M27 Low West District c.i."'1 Wilsonville Callahan 29500 SW Grahams Fen-y Road 45.29306 -122.81389 UST M24 Low Release cleanup William A Wilsonville completed c·enter "" • Pipeline Wilsonville High ··------·Not on DEQ list hut 25. "u• "";�. included due to local.ion under Willamette River upstream of WTP intake 7679 Champoeg Road, NE 45.25528 -122.92028 WPCF R03 Medium RV parks and 26. • Parks & v"-1''"' Department Saint Paul can1psitc sewer " svsten1s Notes: Pt�S Inventory Cutegory: ECSl • Environmental Cleanup Site Information System J.IWM'S ::::: I�T azardous Waste Materials Storage Oil Tank SISHOT =Water Quality = Solid Waste Management Site SWMS tllC � Underground Injection Control WPCF = Water Pollution Control Facility Identification Nutnber as identified in Table ) 5-2. Risk 5-16 SECTION 6 SUSCEPTIBILITY ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY Susceptibility can be defined as the potential for contamination in the drinking water protection area to reach the intake on the surface water body being used by a public water system for drinking water purposes. Whether or not a particular drinking water source becomes contaminated depends on three major factors: the occurrence of a facility or land use that 1) releases contamination, 2) the location of the release, and 3) the hydrologic andlor soil characteristics in the watershed that allow the transport of the contaminants to the surface water body. A susceptibility analysis is performed by overlaying the results of the potential contaminant source inventory with tbe map of the designated sensitive areas. The results of the inventory are analyzed in terms of land uses; the potential contaminant source time-of-travel relationship or proximity to the intake site; and their associated risk rating. When several high or medium risk sources are located within the sensitive areas, the public water system may also be said to have a high overall susceptibility to contamination. If a public water system's drinking water source is determined to be of high susceptibility, it is recommended that the system identify those condition(s) that lead to the high susceptibility and take steps to protect the resource (e. g., reducing soil erosion, working directly with facility operators to implement sound management practices, etc.). Water systems with a low susceptibility should consider all identified factors that could lead to higher susceptibility in the future and take action to prepare a strategy to protect the resource in the future. RESULTS The results of the potential contamination source inventory are combined with the locations of the sensitive areas to determine the most susceptible areas within Wilsonville's Drinking Water Protection Area. The total number and types of potential contaminant sources within the sensitive areas are summarized in Table 6-1. TABLE 6-l POTENTIAL CONTAMINANT SOURCES SENSITIVITY BY LOCATION Total Number Number Number Outside \V ithin Drinking Description Within of Sensitive Water Protection Sensitive Areas Areas Area ---· Higher and medium risk PCS 10 10 20 sites Higher risk PCS sites 1 6 5 Medium risk PCS sites 14 5 9 Lower risk PCS sites 3 3 6 Total PCS sites identified 13 13 26 Those areas where the moderate-to higher-risk potential contaminant sources fall within the sensitive areas are the most vulnerable. In general, potential contaminant sources within the sensitive areas show that the City ofWilsonville's surface water supply is moderately susceptible to contamination from the identified PCS sites. Six of the 10 medium to high risk PCS sites in the sensitive areas are associated with underground storage tanks. lf properly managed, the real risk to surface water quality is relatively small. These sites pose a greater threat to groundwater quality than to surface water quality. Because the dominant soil types in this area are fine grained, the likelihood that groundwater contaminated from underground storage tank releases would result in surface water contamination is perhaps less than the susceptibility analysis procedure would suggest. Nonetheless, the susceptibility analysis provides the City water system managers with information on where the greatest risk occurs and where to focus resources for protection. SECTION ? SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS This assessment provides a basis for focusing limited resources within the community to protect the d1inking water source. The delineation provides the community with information regarding the location of the land area that directly supplies the surface water intake, i.e., the Drinking Water Protection Area. The sensitive areas are those where potential contamination sources or land use activities, if present, have greater potential to have an impact on the water supply. The results of this Source Water Assessment and the recommendations based on the results are summarized below. • The City of Wilsonville's public water system historically produced groundwater from a wellfield. This wellfield now serves as an emergency backup and supplemental water system. A separate Source Water Assessment Report has been prepared for the groundwater supply wellfield. The new surface water system draws water from the Wilsonville River. The source of this • water is the Willamette River Watershed. Wilsonville's Drinking Water Protection Area extends upstream a total of approximately 7.85 miles to include the area within the estimated 8-hour time of travel to the intake and encompasses a total area of approximately 34.4 square miles. Included in this area are all or portions of a number of tributaries to the main stem, including Corral, Mill, Spring Brook, Champoeg, Mission, Case, Ryan, and ergen Creeks. Y Within the Wilsonville Drinking Water Protection Area, there are large areas identified as • sensitive to contamination. Areas that are adjacent to the streams/river, areas that have high soil erosion potential, high runoff potential, high permeability, moderate to high landslide or debris flow potential, or higher-risk land uses associated with high potential contaminant source risk should all receive special cunsiderations for protection. • A review of the inventory and the sensitive areas indicates that the Wilsonville public water system has 26 identified potential contaminant sources within its Drinking Water Protection Area and 10 PCS sites identified as high or medium risk sources within the sensitive areas in the Drinking Water Protection Area. Due to the streamlined procedures conducting the source water assessments, the results for could potentially create a misperception that the "human activities" within the watersheds are higher risks than natural conditions disturbances such as landslides and storm events. or it be communities to conclude that their source For would eJToneous for water risk conditions that there potential was not from natural if were no sources identified at the those to ensure the ts in this assessment and any other additional areas identified by the community) within the watershed are considered when developing strategies forprotection. • The primary intent of this source water assessment is to provide the background information for the community to use in developing a local D1inking Water Protection Plan. The City of Wilsonville intends to assemble a team to assist in the development and implementation of a Drinking Water Protection Plan. / SECTION �- 8 REFERENCES CITED Environmental Protection Agency, 1997. State Source Water Assessment and Protection Programs Guidance, US EPA Office of Water, EPA8l6-R-97-009, August 1997. http://www.epa.iwv/ogwdw/swp.html Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). Soil Survey Geographic Database (SURGGO), National Cartography and Geospatial Center, Fort Worth, Texas. http://www. ftw. nrcs.usda.gov/ssurgo.htm I Oregon Climate Service (OCS), 2002. College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon. http://www.ocs.orst.edu Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 2000. Source Water Assessment Report, Seaside Water Department, Oregon. Oregon Department of Forestry, 2000. Debris Flow Hazard Maps. http /www. odf. state. or. us/gi s/ debri s/htm l :I Source Water Assessment Plan: Implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act 1996 Amendments, 1999. Sheree Stewait, Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, and Dennis Nelson, Oregon Health Division, February 1999. http://www. waterguality. deg.state.or. us/wg US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Conservation Service, 1979. Soil Survey of Clackamas County Area, Oregon. Prepared in cooperation with U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, and the Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station. USDA Soil Conservation Service, 1972. Soil Survey of the Marion County Area, Oregon. Prepared in cooperation with the Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station. USDA Soil Conservation Service, 1974. Soil Survey of the Yamhill Area, Oregon. Prepared in cooperation with the Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station. USDA Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey the Washington County Area, Oregon. l 981. of Prepared in cooperation with the Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station. US Geological Survey, Oregon Hydrologic Units. httn://oregon.usgs.gov/data dir/orehuclist.html Survey, US Geological data< for \Vatershed 8·-1 °' "'.<"""'":!_on V•'fl lC,lJ SuA... "''YATER RESOURCES OfVISION) J GEOLOGICAL . "4-�/9_�9'.q· _o SfATES ,.. ..,ARTMENT Of' THE fNTERlOR . Fili No. \ . --- - · Portland Oreg . firh,_ Su Di strict, "' _ . . o' ,!{ __ ol for t,v'.,/la.»?e?" r.e Rn.,ef" a./ M /� o,,_v,/le.,. Q,-,.J.· . a!lntt • • ;;i ,from c?c .f. I, ,/9 6z_ ,lo ,19 ,from 19 ' 19 ' lo • DifJf!f Oaun DHfor· IJall'c Q�I:':;� Differ·11nce DitI111r. O&l:r------,. � DI r, -- � llnoo �ti°* w RY/l:!I> fH�h�rflll - &noo 1 1 enoo &aC!l euoo Gap D!{for· Oiill'fl l . \ !llffN· Dflhr- n1x::hl}rvn _____ bllllfht �-)f!fth!lrtfl--- ·- ·--- height h111lght Dl� ebtrr" 'h11!11bt Dbcharfo tielaht Dlscbarve height Fed - -- . - t - 1-- Cf, /ltrl . C/1 C/1 Fat Cf• ( <:fa G}t1 C/1 C/1 . C/i Ful . Cf: Cja • Fat C/1 Cfi Fut cy, . . t:> . " . .. 0 ef-iP...e> �- ,__ 1�.00 .ft.§:<>. . _, . . ol • . 00 " ...... i.r3.oo. ss :oo n.oo 4,.,, c.1 e �""'. £.;;>P!?.C?.1 600 ,...... rn . 10 . •• . . .!P.:.". . z.",.7/!L . . .. . '° . " .£�.6.02 " '° -t.£ . '.!11 .... . " .L. 14..'!.£!!'!.'?. "' . . . t:> ... .. • ...... "' . .. "' . ·'"' .I . . · . . . . . t· . .. .w .l!f.C!.. . . _ 1. !;;/¢.!'!.. 1'. ?:_ "?/' f1 4a,_ (<> <>__ . . .io . � . . . '· ,.[� 'f'/." ...... _ " I 4 t!; . " ...... 1...... JO . . I oo :in •'° L . . ,,, J"i,..2.5:{£<:""''-1...... I . . . _,f.t,.o_o.c;_ j . . ., 10 1...... � 4,f? �.! . :?.!.' '" "' . . ,£! fl . . . . �zlC.&f.o. . . . ?'�;1'.0<> . , . . . • •,e a: ,7 ;/.9.<;:?1_ . . . ! . ! 1 ...... !1 . 7 . ?'.?,§!(o � 70 . . io .f{..J!a -'",,, I ·��'LC? .. . . . 0 . . 0 . · ° " . f .ef.?'.'! . j ' .:ft.�.0.(). . '6'0. . ! � L J. . pI - - .. 19 ...... lo... 19 .. • ;w oN') ' '" ,00 ) �/)/\ ) < •• ' 0 ' if.C,.oo . " • • •• . :w l·-'·-•,.v.o:;c. "' 1 �?.-1""- ., ..:rz """- . 20 Ll!.?_.eft!f!. . 1il ----· -.-- · ·4·- , ·"'1- -••• /,,£. :.� -I 1..$.? !.<'.<'.' . "' .. 'lZ. ?..f.'g - _ - - - � _ ... . � •'° 1--'-'r'·-'"'·I ... 1.1'.,;.�"'- 2 1.l.•.!.'.(,f.,_o t;f,.l"""i;> •. _ � . '° 1 .W l--'·'r' ·-�:1.-:. 1 50 t.t !.�- � _ 'rhfo tabla is applicable :::;��: and:: is!�� ]! k1.P.'.l"".['ve il defined�;:· between _els nnd cfo. r, omp " by .Z.:!'f:: b� " ' Ckd by Jtn4: . . Mt'.;u • \ Sh." p : d- �ean•1 /'Gage In No. D"'tr Made by- Width Area �loci" --��- REMARKS • j height Duchargc- - rate , -·�·Cfs- � ··p:;;t ercent F1 t1 Ft�-, - adj. di ff � . - - .. - . . ___ (_{)_ -- -- -··-- ____ _ , ------______- '!-J.�YL a:'/:1::_ ££. H . �?;Jr? .-/.';: -:OJ � t , . - -- - . .G.!1:�Jl.2'.<'.'C!1. 7,.1:-LJQ. - . ------·------·------' ------. ------_-.,. ------6-- I 1 ------. ------·--- . ______, _ _ . ______.? __7_ __ - · ££Q I ,5_]_ 55. /J, .- /J �{)::_'! - !c.4 i- -o�i .T 9-_?1:-Q -: o :; ::.4. _J) _ _ �-i--- k_{rL l7,J_p12 !/. . '. !lit1:::z;t k!'c.�-�,---- J'f;1:at2. %'l- 't'l ! J c..11.i.!e. . _ _ . · __ !J_C,,Jc_(,J_(!__ . _ . ______. . alli�,J111oee _, 9._ 1 Z:. 2:8 0 � , .men£. . -�¥.. Z<5'ltYor.K ,AI 7. za. 13,.C!tU?. J .!7_,C.ao _ -::,_fo r+.1-t,:!£ J}, %:. j IJR of _J ______. ------, ... . 'IL-1.f/.l "/k�L. , z,.:YE. .r.s: - Z,<, o_ .l:.?.. . · - - - - J,.,. " -G�i{:;fif. 0 . -:!· ID_ -:_o_.!f --�: r_ ..[ 0 - _ _ _ _ . :1:0. 5_!/:_JD_ - _ _ _ _ _ ------·· ------_ -_O_I_ " (q& Q l"JQQ G_() {} z.t. " . tl?..ls:t �. 1 --:/2_o_ + } .L.C?.. 1": �- � . __ . .. 1 . ..l ___ n I . �r=� tl 1nt{.'f, {.,11.k1e!.l.ots!t-1Jsftf,,,_r.aJ-i-- m. 4 {$/!_ .!S,_ Zd !.'I.e. 5'/, J. . J_t_, g.1'. a -:/.2-0. t.tJ'.,:; _i_J -:az J,5 £.L i ------··------______----·------... . . ------· Had t,,to r7 zoo .t,.5 --:>t, .oo 11 100 -;. :;o +o.c; 27 I- � F _, - - l . f l I�-�e - -.oz. D -----'------1- ...... J .. cy< ·· ··... j t ·· " 1 "' � "' · . ... '···�'''"J :i·'.�':�L I� " ,,. 0 ... . ______\l. s. r..O YUllOIUIT �-nfT!�<; QfflC( : 01'-�&•�ou ... .. , '° Computed by Checked by . 1'.J.fl._/,f.. 9. 17. 69' 0 =------�;;[:, 3 ::1:;�[!,':: fr:r.:r�J!; /, zo7Z . .· e 0· ov:;�-v �. { -;- 52 . bls 0'1>?>&) jg 5 5 7 JI 1c { 'Ii (l� Q ( UNITED STATES DL- :c MENT OF THE INTERIOR ··::r Statim/ .JA�.t2.a( RESOUllCES DIVISION! ;j GEOLOGICALPortland 5URV� Sub- :-> (WA.Telldistri ct, Oreg . . ------. _ . _ i_i_�_l. •. ______. ______, ______- R!-_y_�J.:__ �J:_ J'{tJ_�_C?.!1X� ------··------Sept. �t t;: l; Q_;'_t!:&.• - - - � '1 l t - - . ----, during the year end'ing 30, 19. g . .. .. Di0<:i!nmc rncasui-ements of �lA� __ __ . Meanr ·Gage , y - h Made b - W idth V loci.. ty ' h! I'/ Met od Num- h e1g t . e heig e Area -� �P rr,ent . mea!!.rec- changt: 1 I � �,. t No. Dute 1 Di!lChargc . ions . h REMARKS - - ff. ·- · ···-i- --+-···--·-·--· --·-····--····- - Shift - ·-- - ·· ·--· ·•-�,..-J---f-- .I •••• •. eet -j L-Ue<-O J---r7�rr- +-p,,-,,c-, -J---S,,-qJ "l -+'-,,F�p1 F,,;f adj, di F fi ut --:;;- . . . C. F _ _ "] l Z11CJ. I C!.O. -:;az, .. C.,fJJ. 7, fJA t. £1JJ. J,l .. -::/,§!:>. .'!:f. Z.7 f, 5 £ ' ' . �i:?.S 2< t t _ _ __ . •" . " {J_, � ' ..,k.'J. . Ls,. �/)_ . /...a12.5JJ.£-. u,:i.o.a-:-:.8'. t;; z7 ./.. G...�...... _ · _ ...... ·'Jv"Jif;f;;, . . :£ ,, /1 :zj.a":C21 Cl �' 13'. , 8 Z.,. i2 .r. [ .... J:larr� .... . 7. zs,za i� '- 11 � }tJ.E,, JJ.Qa -:;fa. I, . 2'7. ./. £ .. .. ) ...... ········· " " 18/lle.c:,... "••···········. ····· ·········· ·····"······ ...... · ········ f.""······ . '··· ...... ••··· ····"·.····-'··-··· "' , K.ie./J...,�11. · · -- · " . "' t ...... · · fl ... .. jJ1'�.51 . · ·· · . te. Q · . .J8.J!2� . ······ · ···· ···· - " 1t:� ..1.· .. . ..-�9,].. :Q .. . .. · · _6, r··. . r ..· . . .. . :;:;; . .. :n . . S/; c Ca-bit!. .'5'. .... lla.t:.t. . IR S r� . Z..i?, lP.P.. . •.. ;:·j�j.'?ar..k--�.- ·. . . .; .9, L.'2 L�;-l . . .�-:.� ... ··"···"·::. .. �: -�::· -�:3... ..-�:-�-- ...... C:. . . .. 1 . J . . . ······-······· ... _z. z...... "�'.e T . .. .i�.':'°-�-fL'I?. s:z..0.11:. Jt.§.a.�. ··= . J... _::C)Z._ J.Z. Lf". L J . L!<'.i;:...... j1trc t .. -�fif?--� . . :-:-: }:.'!. ·� :::;_(l� . 3.a.c...... 0 ---�'-o. .1zt:.1?.aJ..a .s:{. lfl,.t?.{.!/? .. ... s. 111 1.+JG.. L . . 1. J ...... · . . .,.,., 1tr.z::yvA�.£1i·i fJ!:f �su. . Ji o . . �·".f· £.�a. !£, 'la . & 55. 1 . ..11,.t;. .. l-0?. �,.'l. >-�- t-7 .. . /.:&.G�L . . J . .. L.3.a.ec...... � . . . _ , ...... "' .�: !J.°. f .. N /?!?lV11l11L /�f- it;:;;�,�-- {�€ /'r.£!?.r?.,59. . ,gt;_s . .. 4l.£'1 tl_ 7. ·_%_'?1 . fl. ./..-!::.:'7 .. L . J J3ac...... �fLJ;?,f · .. . . . . .. . . �. K- --·············· ...... s£j:;_�t�J-�:;1��t£;�J;z�[: ;_h.�-�J�-��JiiI�;L:::. .. I · .. "' � · I::::::JG.�::::::::::.::: "' �;;�J;���L;;;� c o - _ _ - ---.------+. - --- ,.. - - - - - •• - •••••, ••• -- 1 - - -· · - �- + - - - l- i ---i------l------.J- ,i.. ------1-- - - - "·- ---- ·------�- - N c• '· '° . .. \l,'i, oovu11 utr '"!llYING Ol'f'!C( ' !10 0 Computed by.§d� ,�1'�...... E.4'.��� --W.-t.I:'::.... Checked by .. Ol'-111-0� "' �-��t�--. . _:f'.4t:...... Qf7·a93 c . r UNITED STATES DE( TMENT OF THE INTERIOR __11,� }_9_8_1 l--6!!1 IWATEJI llfSOUA;C£5 DIVISION! · ;,, p Statior - Gt:OlOGICAl SURVEY . . W��-��rg��!:-� .. �J:��-:t; ��--�-::! .i���-Y.tJ J:�, . . ------.. . __ . .Q. ��g�--...... -- il ischzrge rneasurcrnents of ·�-· during the year ending Sept. 30, 19, a11ng ber Gage ===71=-==:= --�=�-- ···- - Mean G.'lge - Wldth Area D1xhar e · Method meas, hci hi ' g . Q 1 0--? I '_Cl . � co,.,. -�rs K� ...-r ovea.. ,, , 11,,.� I !?e d- - iJ,.i_,v: 11 11 kielto"" I, }f..;,z D_.'- /- 1 !f" j z_a_•_ . -- _-:-:' -_Bo fl 1117?' 11 l,ZJz_a_\-: ______' -� ;_,/f.,""·'.t_L :l,:z_s-: zg, _9_(JQ ' tr:< _ An-A Mea1. Diteharge Rating _z.._ M,.,hod j REMARKS th� MAdc by� d Time Wi th ��y ���. rated - ' - I Sm i I p,., I �',_/ l.L:J..IQ.l'- _£_(,5__ /. .tfJJ/u. I.. i'1f.t20Ji?,Sj]£i;,9. . .. i . -- · · · · · ·· · .i ", · · . · · .• . · _ - t j UlU.<.:/-f--•· ./I· · - -l7 ;1 ,C£l- -.... ·f �;7��:/- �;.· · •1;.:�1%1:::: .1: ::::1: :::::: :::·-- :·::::.::·:: . :. t.J J · - ....K1 f._S:.t..fhc!I"�-:':·.+5._ __ .Jo_o__;;fl:.__ ;���: . :�;; . �b.:;.J .7:,. .�-� 2:lf. f_ qi?Jii. .6- Z§,j_tzfL J, �.'!'..\_6'7A 5i: _?.:�1.QJ?. !L . .. � ...... '} . -:::::.. �7_]__ . § J t . ;�:��- 1 1 . . t . . , --· · · ·· ·· ... ----···· ···--- ··-···r······ ·;q:u:'.7f;;'1{.7_?'·t-1; /7 "q·;;;/ . --·;· . -�- . __ ! ...... --- . . . . · c ::: :z: Zil. :az, . ... "".Z£. 0 1 1 s,,,,:-11, 19.5.ztJ. .sjJ. ££ ,.r:"-Q.. :::- f� !. -�. !.£. J3 . f . :: ..... ff:J..aa.L!?f 0 . . . .. _i,,. .:s3 1 . ' -- ·;ii:�['.���:: I � - l:Jaec . ..k.i !'! .:z. � $ .t..�J.ee . ·2,-(1...... y ...... ;/'(!, . ·/.· S·· ...... 6 , r;15_tiz.,saa_ ! ········ ····· · ·· · .8 ZB j nL.LC. ,.r.t-�1 .... 0 . ______...... · . . . . ______...... _ "·h__k ___ __ .. •. . _. _ .. . 0 ,.../ -- 2 . . .. . !_,,,.. ,,_;_1 s,1-?". !:Li9. 2 .:r.s.e.7. . ?.4, .'-� <:... q[ . . c: C ?. 6 . + ...... , , ...... _t .--� L- �o.o.?. .[l.!,z,k.&. e.1 I . ;;: ://.. -��i: L.;:,1! . l '. l k�«.tt. h'I . . . __ lfJ,.t.C>.Q . . J.._1_.;lJ!'J /.� . l!.eil . . .• ... 7_0_ .. - '- - - . __ __ ...... _-!..,,.:J.f.. . _r,_ f £ .. •. f_(. £D. C> _!(fd!?_ �, 7_ �� i!? • " ' .I�--,_2 1-(,. . L l.� f<:f'. ) j l f " _____ ...... "' ..\ >h'1# .1I dk' .. . H -L-�.:?.<.> L.t.�..;7.tl J/,,.� .!:.Z.fl. � 7. . . . "' ·-� •-1--��•-•w•--·-�I· �•••••••� "' :#$'<'td•f':1<:!>W . .. � . . � ./,_J.. .%.4. , ___.f.. _�"Ji± �----L�1�_J_L? ______•. . ' !:.� ( ) ...... N C• ���:.1_£,��J��,2d._L,.t�� --l��-zqJ �€ [ �.J�r..L.0.� J. .. l.� .• . . U,5. OOVHtflftlfT ,UlfT!llfl; Ol'f'ICl ' !N� Of-HI-GU "'... Computed by_ '" --��---·-····· �,¢.lo. •C..... Checked by . -··· � 17. !193 '" I . <±':.�.:. · 0 UNITED STATES DEl-A�" "'.l:NT OF THE INTERIOR FORM: Station N (Revo GEOLOGICAL SURVEY R£sou1CE$ cuv1s10N1 ""<1::::.li.8.tZ (>,,,,,,ea . Sept. .• _ __ .m . t;;_;_(,r.,_,,r.;/.!.e...... ending __ . .,... � o.. DISCHARGE MEASUR EMENT SUMMARY SHEET ______m·m----·--m------·-- . . f.______1 .. . JN.i.ll� fi. mt.�1H.c ---,-- '"."":'.'..'."'.'.'� . 0r.f!·.Y.,.:::::_=·m . . during the year 30, 19 JJ --v � Num- Shift Peru..nt • ' ,. Raung ""'·'leebcr• Gage"' •,o ' ·-�--T--· rattx1 II Na, 0. �· - - .:::� :; ..,, 0.�. ··� '" - ""'·I •·> I � . cnnngc . •dj, ddf """' __ . _ _ . . _;;'?!.. -- _ - __ /.. 1 . __ _ ?:,_ _�_7_ _ .. L __ ?$._ - c-----·>- -- . .. - - . ___ . �:�;t1� i...... 1�- 7/L c.1:.�L(f.. --··----·-:;a: ·----�;,· ...... ::...... ------.!.�:·.sL..------:; ------______. F:...... ,_/ . ;...... , . . . .. + ...... ,I I -� . I z _____ I . . . . . __ .. _ __ _ -- . . r • _:;_<>_q /,3_ ""i. 2_ >_ J . .. . , ... i.J,r ,_.Lt,.�.<, " ...... - _/i,JJ:.,'f_ ..Zc. 'k:...... 1 j.Af�-!,.'�- . --�.tf.5§_ ii ___ z _ _ �_:zz.: . . •. l,_l:Ll./.8,J!.�!'. ____ . .... ___ - __ . .J7. d;t;, /:1, __ ...... F. . .. ,_/'.)______------. ____ _/l_,_7.fL . . ZP,.SCl9... LfH -�o,>.ll. . .";' . L .. . 3 .. ?�. I . ,:;h . .;i'.8,.La<> . <(_. !? t U z I /L j 'L __l,_ 7.5. . - Jg ._ -� z7 . . --:: ______.. __ 1!::�7.j.�"'"''-:Z.9. Hv�..,,,/ . .. ,_._:£_ __t,_ .9.�. _ <._ f._._16.. z --'--1------<----·· .<:c /' .f.""..,,i.1.£ . ,z.i.�£. s,.i:Q.�. .:-::-:-:-:: . �z . ..0.'!. : ' /J"f " • ·�. ••v .• �" � - ·-·-" ·-----··------· ------• • - ___ __ --- • ------)-· r-- :�; : :�: ._ ---� I I ,I - •I I i 4------..+ ! � � ------.j.•• - ' - ---·------._j.. --�. - ---�------·------l 0 -- >".H"' ...... "" " . -- · -·-H•• 0 ••• ---· __ -- - -·--.. . ·-. - - . ------t �- �---- - . . - . , :::.:::.::!::::=.'::.':' .. . 0 .. - - , - , ' ' U. I, COO't( l lll(WTl'tll lll'T. l1"- Of'"Cl j. j. +- _ f. . \...... __ 68 4•lH16 Computed by .S.UliL...... Checked hy . ' !Hf Ol"-'Jf•....,Q '� 0 f..ff..J, - "" � - FVI' ltu• UNITED STATES DEPAR"l' '�NT Of THE INTERIOR ' •• Station N•, "t�J_<)_BQ_(l• GEOLOGICAL ,c:• IESOUllCES DIVISIONI SURVt;V j\;. � � ...... -- --DISCHAR- - . GE. . MEASlffiEMENT� -L . 1 . . __ SUMMARY sm:ET n1u�JUUl"ementt . Y!A�-�-f!.�.:':�!=��- i:Y..�;- �� �l?.9l1 �JJ Q z during the year ending Sep4. 19.1.J. uu�"''"" of . Y � r� 30, ng Ga e Gage g No. OI:.� M.oot: by- Width Area ean Mt'.thod Num-rncaJ. height M R.ati · ·r. � 11echer Meu. I �, o h Tune velocity height Di.c arge p A;,, REMARKS S ru.n e�t change r•ted adj. d1ff, doru FM Sqjl Fjn Fnt Cf to FHt Fut Hr ...... __ ,_ _ _ r; _ %_ ___ •. _ _ ,_ _ __ .J..�?. l.7,.Z:.09. .9.k4 £$.._ 9. 7. (1 { <:> l { ;s . q cl /g :8 J ____ z1J - ...• ..S:Y. ______. ... ______. . . ______I __ .L�L ,1 7 15 ,IL �1,-t];_; :•:: 1 ;j8 .L:, 7JL: : L.t�: 1:J.. . : : �,�: J-1,_ala · ��;�:��::�1:t1:�:1 ;:�:: _ _ , ______.. .41.�'- 23 v'. - , � 0 QQ r t 7i �--- __ _ _ _ . ______.______::;:��-:: :�;:: :;,��:.. !; . . �: -::�.<� _:� :: :� :: �� : :;,_; 1��,,_Q :'U!. 7D_ U•.;8-'!.C! (J_ '. -�-7. :t:'.'.ZI. . I.!L ::�c;::r::::1:::::L , aE,.li.�_f.f, : .. i. fl --- · ·. ----··- · - -- .. ...• __ __ • _: __ _ ' ' . .. . i .Ul,_tO.C> 6-?:°.!. ! '"?t �h_ � P_Z: ?, �------·------__ -'' """' ?l 00 Q/J tl_a_ -·�- 1 ___ __ ,_ . __sy_._ y, _ ___ ,_ _ ___ • __ .1?,.!.� ': c. S .1'2. .?. . I 1 � fo �- ' .. .. ______------·- _ ,_ ------·-·-·-- u.!ll.Jt:l::1111'Ll!JJJ'..-L-- �-�;- tj� �f!�- +�t- �------li/Jaal._*- 5-'h '/J ---�Zla j_J Z1 .l1:. G . ·--· .. _ _ ; ______-·--··-- _____'f: 1------·------______, ______...... t------. --- +- if . sh .1.0n .avs.c a //Jz v. I�. .13. J - • • • • - • • - • - - • • -· • - • • · - - · · - ·•••I • • · .. • • • • ·+··· •• • - - •• • •• ----•·· ---·· ----· ------··•··· ··-----··· jJ,./l"IJ - • ---- > · Jo. · - � - --f- -· ·i- ·t - • - - ••••• • - ••••• - • - • -- •• - - • -- • - • - ______--___., ------. ------_,., -· - -- f --- --J _,_ -�------' ------��--�� ------��--�------� .. ---·�--··------. . - -·J 1 --- •• - • - ---- , ---• - -- . - •• ------·------· 1 + �-- - -- .4 ---- ...... - -·-- - + ------4------�------� - - -·------· ------______----· - - ·- •• - - - • -· -- •• -- ••• ·--�------. ·------�------·-.- ·------·--· - - �------·---. ------. ----. -· - •• -- - -· ··-· - • ------..!- - - -- i - ---� ·------�----- • .,. ------+------__ ...... - - ·- . ... . -- ...• • - " - --. -�- ··-____ •. -- --• - - • •• - •• � ---f - -- ... - � ..._ -4- �- - --....._ ..-· .. --- - - • • ------� ------�------_.j.,.____ --. - --• ------••••_ ...______.. _____ • • - •• ·-. - --• ·-. - - ---• ------+ - - .. j ------�- -�--- - + ·------�------�-- --+ - Computed by...... 1911 0 - - U. S. GOVEHNME'NT PRWTtNO QF"f!CE : ·HI· \41 . Checked bv--·-·------Willamette River at Wilsonville, Q vs V . ·- · ··-··---· ··- ---·-·------·- ·--· --· ·· -· 1 - - . - ----·-·--- - - ,-- ·-· · ··-·· -·-·- ···-· -··· ---· ···----··· · - .. -· ··· ···· -1 . · 1 • -- V1.207 � 7* 2 � 0 = 1 855 -- - -- - - ·-- � 2 - - R = 0.9961 - -- - - 3 I - 1, � 2 Cd 'bbO /�� a () [) :: / c;Y /t� 0 1 �------··---,-----···- -.,.. -·--.------�- - ·---�-- -· -- ·,-···-- ········ ··········r -·-··- - 1 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 Velocity, V (ft/s) Flow Rate Velocity Relationship Willamette River at Wilsonville --·------. -----·--·------· --·- --·--· ··--···- ··- i;;:u.ouu · r ------··-- • 1 VV,,JVV 557x12072 Y = 1 8 2 R = 0.9961 < 28,860 Average Flow = els I I-· ... .. ·- -� I o�0 0.5 1 1 .5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 River Velocity (ft/sec) Sensitive Soils with High Erosion Potential (Sorted by Soil Type) Area Area - Soil Type Description County Area (m'2) (mi'2) (acre) JORY SIL TY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Washington 18,943 0,007 4,68 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Washington 0,041 26,33 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 64,742 0,025 16,00 106,571 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 0,025 16, 14 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas ,249 0,045 28,97 65,323 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 39,569 0,015 9,78 117 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 39,541 0,015 9,77 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 136 - 0,03 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 8,908 0,003 2,20 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 93,745 0,036 23, 16 JORY SIL CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 195,178 0,075 48,23 LAURELWOOD SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 18,538 0,007 4,58 TY LAURELWOOD SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 17,808 0,007 4,40 LAURELWOOD SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 248,641 0,096 61 ,44 LAURELWOOD SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 103,620 0,040 25,60 LAURELWOOD SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 97,058 0,037 23,98 LAURELWOOD SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 32,169 0,012 7,95 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 105,072 0,041 25,96 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 58, 137 0,022 14,37 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 146,240 0,056 36,14 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 72,664 0,028 17,96 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 65,467 0,025 16,18 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 50,842 0,020 12,56 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 501,418 0,194 123,90 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 101,817 Q,039 25,16 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 71 ,336 0,028 17,63 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 44 - 0,01 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 109,141 0,042 26,97 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 16,442 0,006 4,06 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 12,528 0,005 3,10 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 28, 111 0,011 6,95 SA.UM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 98,472 0,038 24,33 Total 2,705,468 1.041 668.52 Sensitive Soils with High Runoff Potential (Sorted by Soil Type) ·- Area Area Soil Type Description County Area {m"2) {mi"2) (acre ) COVE SILTY CLAY LOAM Clackamas 14,095 0.03 18.31 COVE SILTY CLAY LOAM Clackamas 63,320 0.02 15.65 COVE SILTY CLAY I.CAM Clackamas 546,438 0.21 135.03 COVE SILTY CLAY LOAM I Clackamas I 105,371 0.04 26.04 DAYTON SILT LOAM Clackamas 15,656 0.01 3.87 DAYTON S!L LOAM Clackamas I 44,392 0.02 10.97 At..A!TY SILT LOAM Clackamas 5 AMITY SILT LOAMT Clackamas 279 O.Q? AMITY SILT LOAM Clackamas 799 0.20 AMITY SILT LOAM Clackamas 27,530 0.01 6.80 AMITY SILT LOAM Clackamas 9.412 0.00 2.33 AMITY SILT LOAM Clackamas 7,598 0.00 1.88 AMITY SILT LOAM Clackamas 40,469 0.02 10.00 AMITY SILT LOAM Clackamas 57,519 0.02 14.21 AMITY SilT LOAM Clackamas 29,660 0.01 7.33 AMITY SilT LOAM Clackamas 247.627 0.10 61.19 AMITY SILT LOAM Clackamas 24,094 0.01 5.95 AMITY SILT LOAM Clackamas ' 104,083 0.04 25.72 HUBERLY SILT LOAM Clackamas 56,228 0.02 13.89 HUBERLY SILT LOAM Clackamas 70,804 0.03 17.50 HUBERLY SILT LOAM Clackamas 45,632 0.02 11.28 HUMAOUEPTS, PONDED C!ackarnas 53,333 0.02 13.18 HUMAOUEPTS, PONDED Clackamas 181,283 O.Q? 44.80 HUMAOUEPTS, PONDED Clackamas 17,346 0.01 4.29 HUMAOUEPTS, PONDED Clackamas 83,523 0.03 20.64 MCBEE VARIANT LOAM Clackamas 334,584 0.13 82.68 MCBEE VARIANT LOAM Clackamas 92,087 0.04 22.76 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Clackamas 127,344 0.05 31.47 WAPATO SILTY CLAYLOAM Clackamas 49,577 0.02 12.25 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Clackamas 42,6i0 0.02 10.53 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Clackamas "17,505 0.01 4.33 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Clackamas 13,873 0.01 3.43 XEROCHREPTS AND HAPLOXEROLLS, VERY STEEP Clackamas 2.071 0.00 0.51 XEROCHREPTS AND HAPLOXEROLLS, VERY STEEP Clackamas 778,299 0.30 192.32 XEROCHREPTS AND HAPLOXEROLLS, VERY STEEP Clackamas 90,751 0.04 22.43 XEROCHREPTS AND HAPLOXEROLLS, VERY STEEP Clackamas 76,708 0.03 18.95 XEROCHREPTS AND HAPLOXEROLLS, VERY STEEP Clackamas 40.180 0.02 9.93 XEROCHREPTS AND HAPLOXEROLLS, VERY STEEP Clackamas 1,026,375 0.40 253.62 XEROCHREPTS AND HAPLOXEROLLS, VERY STEEP Clackamas 111,962 0.04 27.67 XEROCHREPTS AND HAPLOXEROLLS, VERY STEEP Clackamas 267,056 0.10 65.99 XEROCHREPTS AND HAPLOXEROLLS, VERY STEEP Clackamas 57,905 0.02 14.31 XEROCHREPTS AND HAPLOXEROLLS, VERY STEEP Clackamas 143,627 0.06 35.49 AMITY SILT LOAM Yamhill 20,630 0.01 5.10 AMITY SILT LOAM Yamhill 21 ,366 0.01 5.28 AMITY SILT LOAM Yamhill 49.754 0.02 12.29 AMITY SILT LOAM Yamhill 12, 113 0.01 2.99 BASHAW CLAY Marion 408, 102 0.16 100.84 DAYTON SILT LOAM Marion 120,521 0.05 29.78 DAYTON SILT LOAM Marion 40,550 0.02 10.02 DAYTON SILT LOAM Marion 17,758 0.01 4.39 DAYTON SILT LOAM Marion I 58,731 0.02 14.51 DAYTON SILT LOAM Marion i 6,337 0.00 1.57 DAYTON SILT LOAM Marion 42,824 O.Q2 10.58 DAYTON SILT LOAM Marion 8,350 0.00 2.06 DAYTON SILT LOAM Marion 13,914 0.01 3.44 DAYTON SILT LOAM Marion 16,764 O.D1 4.14 DAYTON SILT LOAM Marion 11,553 0.00 2.85 DAYTON SILT LOAM Marion 22,550 0.01 . 7 DAYTON SllT LOAM 21 ,648 0.01 5 5 I'--'-" !'-''� !M1viarionadon 5.35 " I SILT LOAM O.Oi 3.54 "LT ! nMA Marion 1 ����� nn.n TT an Area Area Soil Type Description County i Area (m"2) {mii'2) (acre) DAYTON SILT L0Atv1 Marion 0.00 2.18 DAYTON SILT LOAM Marion L i0,597 0.00 2.62 DAYTON SILT LOAM Marion 8.823 O.Oi 3.29 DAYTON SILT LOAM Marion 442 0.00 0.36 HOLCOMB S!LT LOAM Marion 13,297 0.02 15.64 LABI SH SILTY CLAY LCAM Marion 191 ,946 \ 0.01 4.93 SEMIAHMOC MUCK Marion 63,27934.483 O.Q1 8.52 WAPATO S!LTY CLAY LOAM Marion , 37 0.03 20.59 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LCAM Marion 0.01 6.74 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Marion 8328.3093 0.01 7.00 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Marion 27.2775,220 0.00 1.29 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Marion 6,758 0.00 1.67 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Marlon 73,636 0.03 18.20 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Marion 39,278 0.02 9.71 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Marion I 52,139 0.02 12.88 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Marion 925,644 0.36 228.73 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Marion 399,959 0.15 98.83 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Marion 55,581 0.02 i3.73 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Marion 238.801 0.09 59.0i WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Marion 116,408 0.05 28.76 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Marion 214,216 0.08 52.93 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Yamhiil 5,688 0.00 1.41 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM YamhiH 54,287 0.02 13Ai WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Yamhi!! 13i ,723 0.05 32.55 Totals: 8,833,1 12 3.41 2,182.73 Sensitive Soils with High Permeability Area Area Area Soil Type Description County (m'2) (mi'2) (acre) NEWBERG FINE SANDY LOAM Clackamas NEWBERG FINE SANDY LOAM Clackamas 81 ,423 CANDERLY SANDY LOAM, TO PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 0.031 20.12 44 ,116 0.017 10.90 Total: 297,737 73.57 0 3 172.198 0.066 42.55 0.11 Areas of Moderate Landslide Hazard (Sorted by Soil Type) Area Area Soil Type Description County Area (mA2) (mi'2) (acre) JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 2 TO 7 PERCENT SLOPES Washington 0.6 0.000 0.00 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 2 TO 7 PERCENT SLOPES V'V ashington 3,141.0 0.001 0.78 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 7 TO 12 PERCENT SLOPES Washington 13.4 0.000 0.00 HELVETIA SILT LOAM, 3 TO 8 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 4,098.8 0.002 1.01 HELVETIA SILT LOAM, 3 TO PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 1.408.2 0.001 0.35 HELVETIA SILT LOAM, 8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 4.429.3 0.002 1.09 8 HELVETIA SILT LOAM, 8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 2,190.1 0.001 0.54 HELVETIA SILT LOAM, 8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 52, 120.3 0.020 12.88 HELVETIA SILT LOAM. 8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 4,462.2 0.002 1.10 HELVETIA SILT LOAM, 15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 3,644.9 0.001 0.90 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 8TO15 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 37,153.2 0.014 9.18 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 30,379.4 0.012 7.51 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 8TO15 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 13,368.8 0.005 3.30 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 222.5 0.000 0.05 JORY SIL CLAY LOAM, 15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 16,367.6 0.006 4.04 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 0.4 0.000 0.00 TY JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 64,742.3 0.025 16.00 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 117,248.7 0.045 28.97 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 39,569.1 0,015 9.78 JORY SILTY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 135.9 0.000 0.03 LAURELWOOD SILT LOAM, TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 1,585.5 0.001 0.39 LAURELWOOD SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 18,538.3 0.007 4.58 8 LAURELWOOD SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES C!ackan1as 248,640.6 0.096 61.44 LAURELWOOD SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 103,619.9 0.040 25.60 NEKIA SILTY CLAY LOAM, 2 TO 8 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 17,151.0 0.007 4.24 NEKIA SILTY CLAY LOAM, 8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 13,184.2 0.005 3.26 NEKIA SILTY CLAY LOAM, 8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 65,379.8 0.025 16.16 SALEM SILT LOAM, 0 TO 7 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 2,787.0 0.001 0.69 SAUM SILT LOAM, 3 TO 8 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 11,136.3 0.004 2.75 SAUM SILT LOAM, 3 TO 8 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 3,451.0 0.001 0.85 SAUM SILT LOAM, 3 TO 8 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 12,651.0 0.005 3,13 SAUM SILT LOAM, 3 TO 8 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 26,367.9 0,010 6.52 SAUM SILT LOAM, 3 TO 8 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 3,603.9 0.001 0.89 SAUM SILT LOAM, 8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 10,155.5 0.004 2,51 SAUM SILT LOAM, 8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 44,232.4 0.017 10.93 SAUM SILT LOAM, 8 TO 15 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 36.411.2 0.014 9.00 SAUM SILT LOAM, 15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 9,584.0 0.004 2.37 SAUM SILT LOAM, 15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 474.3 0.000 0.12 SAUM SILT LOAM, 15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 213.4 0.000 0.05 SAUM SILT LOAM, 15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 135,149.0 0.052 33.40 SAUM SILT LOAM, 15 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 4,586.1 0.002 1.13 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 58,136.6 0.022 14.37 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 72,663.5 0.028 17.96 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 65,467.2 0.025 16.18 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 50,842.3 0.020 12.56 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 71 ,335.9 0.028 17.63 SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Clackamas 44.0 0.000 0.01 1SAUM SILT LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES C!ackamas 16,441.7 0.006 4.06 XEROCHREPTS AND HAPLOXEROLLS, VERY STEEP Clackamas 2,071.0 0.001 0.51 I XEROCHREPTS AND HAPLOXEROLLS, VERY STEEP Clackamas 76,707.7 0.030 18.95 JORY CLAY LOAM, 2 TO 7 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhil! 2, 198.1 0.001 0.54 CLAY LOAM, 2 TO 7 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 31 ,249.0 0.012 7.72 CLAY LOAM, TO 7 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 37,377.2 0.014 9.24 CLAY LOAM, TO 7 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 637.3 0.000 0.16 2 CLAY 2 TO 7 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 2,462.4 0.001 0.61 2 CLAY LOAM. 2 TO 7 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 8,734.9 CL.1\Y LOA�LOAM,i!, TO 7 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 1,67 Y LOAM, TO 12 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhm 10,475.7 0.004 2.59 ·�JORY CLAY LOAM, TO 12 PERCENT SLOPES Yamh!H 4,356.8 0.002 1.08 JORY CLAY LOAM, 7 TO 12 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 941,0 0.000 0.23 !JORY CLAY LOAM. 7 TO 12 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 423.7 0.000 0. 10 JORY CLAY LOAM, 7T7 O12 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 3,278.4 0.001 0.81 JORY CLAY LOAM, 7 TO 12 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 1 ,207 .5 0.000 0.30 !JORY CLAY LOAM, 12 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhm 26,742.9 0.010 6.61 JORY CLAY LOAM, 12 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 35,781.7 0.014 8.84 JORY CLAY LOAM, 12 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 1,055.5 0.000 0.26 JORY CLAY LOAM, 12 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 26,334.9 0.010 6.51 JORY CLAY LOAM, 12 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES YamhH! 952.3 0.000 0.24 JORY CLAY LOAM, 12 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 8,826.8 0.003 2.18 JORY CLAY LOAM, 12 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 15,81 1.0 0.006 3.91 JORY CLAY LOAM, 12 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhm 42,487.9 O.G16 10.50 JORY CLAY LOAM, 12 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 4,297.8 0.002 1.06 JORY CLAY LOAM, 12 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 7,996.2 0.003 1.98 JORY CLAY LOAM, 12 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhm 22,978.7 0.009 5.68 JORY CLAY LOAM, 12 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES YamhiU 6,433.7 0.002 1.59 JORY CLAY LOAM, 12 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 635.0 0.000 0.16 JORY CLAY LOAM, 12 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 11,887.8 0.005 2.94 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 1,758.7 0,001 0.43 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 13,272.8 0.005 3.28 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhm 3.7 0.000 0.00 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 19,492.7 0.008 4.82 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhi!! 35,589.7 0.014 8.79 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhm 7,067.6 0.003 1.75 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 810.7 0.000 0.20 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhtll 20,801 .3 0.008 5. 14 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 23,367.4 0.009 5.77 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 7,998.3 0.003 1.98 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 7,656.2 0.003 1.89 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 1,549.7 0.001 0.38 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 4.3 0.000 0,00 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 8,851.7 0.003 2.19 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES YamhiU 1,796.1 0.001 0.44 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 39,868.0 0.015 9.85 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 7,678.3 0.003 1.90 JORY OLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 14,195.3 0.005 3.51 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 1,249.4 0.000 0.31 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 5,939.0 0.002 1.47 JORY CLAY LOAM, 20 TO 30 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhm 6,874.7 0.003 1.70 JORY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO PERCENT SLOPES Yamhm 141 ,072.0 0.054 34.86 JORY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhm 208.7 0.000 0.05 JORY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 345,414.2 0.133 85.35 JORY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhll! 103.4 0.000 0,03 JORY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 4,356.3 0.002 1.08 JORY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhm 47,693.8 O.G18 11.79 JORY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 101 ,030.3 0.039 24.97 JORY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 141,777.3 0.055 35.03 JORY OLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhll! 103,894.0 0.040 25.67 JORY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhm 53,044.0 0.020 13.11 JORY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 3,017,6 0.001 0.75 JORY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhil! 3,303.6 0.001 0.82 JORY CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhill 11,531.9 0.004 2.85 CLAY LOAM, 30 TO 60 PERCENT SLOPES Yainhil! 68,390.6 0.026 16.90 SILTY LOAM Marion 30,037.9 0.012 7.42 Yamhill 3,263,5 0.001 0.81 CLAY LOAM,CLAY Yamhil! 2 TO 7 PERCENT SLOPES CLAY LOAM, 72 TO 207 PERCENT PERCENT SLOPES SLOPES YamhHJ 164,961.4,783,0 CLAY LOAfLOAMJL , 7 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Yarr1hHfYamhi!I 26,752,14,349,5 I CL.b-V LOA1\!\, 7 TO 20 PERCENT SLC>PES 20 PERCEf'-,;'T SL()PES I Area Area Soil Type Description County Area (m"2) (mV2) (acre) -·-"' I I i NEKIA CLAY LCAM, 7 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhi!i I i7,541,3 0.007 4.33 INEKIA CLAY LOAM, 7 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Yamhm 4,824.5 0.002 1.19 I NEKIA CLAY LOAM, TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES I Yarnh1H 8,345.7 0.003 2.06 i NEK!A CLAY LOAM, 7 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES I Yamhm 8,095.4 0.003 2.00 7 STONY LAND I Yamhill 230.8 0.000 0.06 STONY LAND YamhHI I 177.5 0.000 0.04 STONY LAND Yamhill 22,237.4 0.009 5.49 STONY LAND Yamhill 14,377.0 0.006 3.55 ! I 8,669.8 0.003 2.14 STONY LAND Yamhi!l TERRACE ESCARPMENTS Marion 151,327.2 0.058 37.39 WAPATO SILTY CLAY LOAM Marlon 6,758.1 0.003 1.67 WOODBURN SILT LOAM, 3 TO 12 PERCENT SLOPES I Marion 2,786.0 0.001 0.69 WOODBURN SILT LOAM, 12 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Marion 64.2 0.000 0.02 WOODBURN SILT LOAM, 12 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Marion 54,006.1 0.021 13.35 YAMHILL SILT LOAM, MODERATELY SHALLOW, 7 TO 20 PERCENT SLOPES Yam hi!! 770.5 0.000 0.19 Total Area: 3,715,116.4 1.43 91 8.04