Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project Final Report

Prepared by:

121 S. Jackson St. Moscow, ID 83843 Web Site: www.terragraphics.com

And

Ralston Hydrologic Services 1122 E. B St. Moscow, ID 83843

January 31, 2011

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

ii

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project Final Report

Prepared for:

1300 NE Henley Ct., #6 Pullman, WA 99163

Grant G1000293 between the Washington Department of Ecology and the Palouse Conservation District

Prepared by: TerraGraphics Environmental Engineering, Inc. 121 S. Jackson St. Moscow, ID 83843 www.terragraphics.com

and

Ralston Hydrologic Services 1122 E. B St. Moscow, ID 83843

January 31, 2011

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

Table of Contents

Executive Summary...... xiv Section 1.0 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Purpose and Objectives...... 1 Section 2.0 Task 2 – Compilation ...... 5 2.1 Collection...... 5 2.1.1 Documents Included ...... 5 2.1.2 Documents Excluded ...... 5 2.1.3 Search Locations...... 5 2.1.4 Related Documents Not Found...... 6 2.2 Compilation ...... 6 2.2.1 Electronic Copies of Documents...... 6 2.2.2 Collection of Information ...... 7 2.3 Database Organization...... 10 2.3.1 Database - Tables...... 11 2.3.2 Database - Forms ...... 11 2.3.3 Database - Queries ...... 11 2.3.4 Database - Reports ...... 12 2.3.5 Database User ...... 12 2.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control ...... 12 Section 3.0 Task 3 – Synthesis...... 17 3.1 Introduction...... 17 3.2 Geologic Framework ...... 17 3.2.1 Introduction...... 17 3.2.2 Geologic Nomenclature ...... 18 3.2.3 Regional Geologic Characteristics...... 18 3.2.4 Palouse Basin Geologic Characteristics...... 19 3.2.4.1 Pullman-Moscow Subarea ...... 19 3.2.4.2 Northern Subarea ...... 21 3.2.4.3 Western Subarea ...... 22 3.2.5 Description of Stratigraphic and Structural Features...... 22 3.2.5.1 Crystalline Basement Rocks ...... 22 3.2.5.2 Imnaha Formation...... 24 3.2.5.3 Grande Ronde Formation...... 24 3.2.5.4 Wanapum Formation ...... 26 3.2.5.5 Saddle Mountains Formation...... 26 3.2.5.6 Structural Features ...... 27 3.3 Hydrogeologic Framework...... 28 3.3.1 Introduction...... 28 3.3.2 Aquifer Identification and Temporal Growth of Knowledge ...... 28 3.3.2.1 Aquifer Identification...... 28 3.3.2.2 Temporal Growth of Knowledge of the Aquifers...... 30

ii

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

3.3.3 Characteristics of the Lower Aquifer...... 33 3.3.3.1 Water-Producing Zones ...... 34 3.3.3.2 Hydraulic Characteristics...... 35 3.3.3.3 Aquifer Boundaries...... 38 3.3.3.4 Horizontal and Vertical Hydraulic Gradients ...... 40 3.3.3.5 Temporal Water-Level Changes...... 40 3.3.4 Characteristics of the Upper Aquifer ...... 42 3.3.4.1 Water Producing Zones...... 42 3.3.4.2 Hydraulic Characteristics...... 42 3.3.4.3 Aquifer Boundaries...... 43 3.3.4.4 Horizontal and Vertical Hydraulic Gradients ...... 43 3.3.4.5 Temporal Water-Level Changes...... 43 3.3.5 Ground-Water Flow Systems...... 43 3.3.5.1 General Flow System Theory ...... 43 3.3.5.2 Ground-Water Flow Systems in the Palouse Basin ...... 44 3.4 Water Balance...... 45 3.4.1 Introduction...... 45 3.4.2 Surface Water Gain/Loss ...... 46 3.4.3 Surface Sediment Water Balance...... 49 3.4.3.1 Ground-Water Recharge ...... 49 3.4.3.2 Ground-water Discharge...... 54 3.4.3.3 Change in Storage...... 54 3.4.4 Upper Aquifer Water Balance...... 54 3.4.4.1 Ground-Water Recharge ...... 55 3.4.4.2 Ground-Water Discharge...... 56 3.4.4.3 Change in Storage...... 57 3.4.5 Lower Aquifer Water Balance ...... 58 3.4.5.1 Ground-Water Recharge ...... 58 3.4.5.2 Ground-Water Discharge...... 59 3.4.5.3 Change in Storage...... 60 3.4.6 Ground-Water Isotope Analysis ...... 60 3.5 Numerical Models...... 63 3.5.1 Introduction...... 63 3.5.2 Barker (1979) Model...... 64 3.5.2.1 Model Boundaries...... 64 3.5.2.2 Representation of the Aquifers ...... 65 3.5.2.3 Representation of the Recharge to the Aquifers ...... 65 3.5.2.4 Representation of Discharge from the Aquifer...... 66 3.5.2.5 Predicted Relationship of Pumping to Water-Level Decline...... 66 3.5.2.6 Water-Budget Analysis...... 67 3.5.2.7 Recommendations...... 68 3.5.3 Lum et al. (1990) Model ...... 68 3.5.3.1 Model Boundaries...... 69 3.5.3.2 Representation of the Aquifers ...... 70 3.5.3.3 Representation of Recharge to the Aquifers ...... 70 3.5.3.4 Representation of Discharge from the Aquifers ...... 71

iii

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

3.5.3.5 Model Calibration ...... 71 3.5.3.6 Predicted Relationship of Pumping to Water-Level Decline...... 72 3.5.3.7 Water-Budget Analysis...... 73 3.5.3.8 Recommendation ...... 73 3.5.4 Post Lum et al. (1990) Model Analysis ...... 74 3.5.4.1 Brown (1991) Analysis...... 74 3.5.4.2 Johnson et al. (1996) Analysis...... 74 3.5.5 Comparison of Field Data to Numerical Model Predictions...... 74 3.5.5.1 Summary of Barker (1979) Model Predictions...... 74 3.5.5.2 Summary of Lum et al. (1990) Model Predictions ...... 75 3.5.5.3 Summary of Historical Pumping Rates and Water-Level Decline ...... 76 3.5.5.4 Comparison of Barker (1979) Numerical Model Predictions to Field Data...... 76 3.5.5.5 Comparison of Lum et al. (1990) Numerical Model Predictions to Field Data ... 77 3.5.5.6 Discussion of Model Results ...... 77 Section 4.0 Task 4.5 – Preliminary Data-Gap Investigation: Mass-Water Level Measurements ...... 172 4.1 Introduction...... 172 4.2 Selection of Study Area ...... 172 4.3 Selection of Target Wells ...... 172 4.4 Review of List of Target Wells...... 173 4.5 Field Measurement Project Plan...... 173 4.6 Field Results ...... 174 4.6.1 Well 14N/44E-02M01 ...... 174 4.6.2 Well 14N/44E-03P01...... 174 4.6.3 Well 14N/44E-05F01...... 174 4.6.4 Well 14N/44E-10B01 ...... 174 4.6.5 Well 14N/44E-10B02 ...... 175 4.6.6 Well 14N/44E-16P01 LE12...... 175 4.6.7 Well 14N/44E-24J01 ...... 175 4.6.8 Well 15N/44E-05A01 ...... 175 4.6.9 Well 15N/44E-19B01 ...... 176 4.6.10 Well 15N/44E-21C01 ...... 176 4.6.11 Well 15N/44E-26L01...... 176 4.6.12 Well 15N/44E-33B01 ...... 176 4.6.13 Well 15N/44E-35E01...... 176 4.6.14 Additional wells measured...... 177 4.7 Discussion...... 177 4.7.1 Bottom-Hole Elevation ...... 177 4.7.2 Water-Level Elevation Versus Bottom-Hole Elevation...... 178 4.7.3 Water-Level Elevation Versus Time...... 179 4.7.4 Rates of Water-Level Decline...... 180 4.7.5 Comparison to the Barker (1979) Study ...... 180 4.8 Conclusions...... 180 4.9 Recommendations...... 181

iv

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

Section 5.0 Task 4.5 – Preliminary Data-Gap Investigation: Surface-Water / Ground-Water Interaction ...... 205 5.1 Introduction...... 205 5.2 Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model of a Losing Stream ...... 205 5.3 South Fork of the Palouse River in Pullman Relative to the Lower Aquifer ...... 207 5.3.1 Hydrogeologic Setting ...... 207 5.3.2 Hydrograph Analysis ...... 207 5.4 Palouse River in the City of Palouse Relative to the Lower Aquifer ...... 209 5.4.1 Hydrogeologic Setting ...... 209 5.4.2 Hydrograph Analysis ...... 209 5.4.3 Aquifer Water-Temperature Analysis...... 209 5.5 Paradise Creek in Moscow Relative to the Upper Aquifer...... 211 5.5.1 Hydrogeologic Setting ...... 211 5.5.2 Hydrograph Analysis for High Flow Events in Paradise Creek ...... 211 5.5.3 Hydrograph Analysis for Low Flow Events in Paradise Creek...... 212 5.6 Union Flat Creek at Klemgard Park Relative to a Well Completed in Basalt of the Grande Ronde Formation ...... 212 5.6.1 Hydrogeologic Setting ...... 212 5.6.2 Hydrograph Analysis for High Flow Events at the Klemgard Park Site ...... 213 5.7 Conclusions...... 213 Section 6.0 Task 4 – Data-Gap Investigation...... 237 6.1 Introduction...... 237 6.2 Delineation of Data Gaps...... 237 6.2.1 High-Priority Data Gaps ...... 238 6.2.1.1 Hydrogeology West of Pullman...... 238 6.2.1.2 Surface-Water / Ground-Water Interaction Northwest of Pullman ...... 238 6.2.1.3 Maximizing Upper-Aquifer Pumping in the Pullman-Moscow Subarea ...... 238 6.2.2 Medium-Priority Data Gaps...... 238 6.2.2.1 Ground-Water Monitoring Program ...... 238 6.2.2.2 Lower-Aquifer Continuity in the Kamiak Butte to Angel Butte Gap...... 239 6.2.2.3 Hydraulic Sub-basins Within the Pullman-Moscow Subarea...... 239 6.2.2.4 Relationship Between Pumping and Water-Level Decline ...... 239 6.2.2.5 Well-Log Database ...... 239 6.2.3 Low-Priority Data Gaps...... 239 6.2.3.1 Ground-Water Conditions in the Colton, Uniontown, and Genesee Areas ...... 239 6.2.3.2 Ground-Water Conditions in the Garfield Area...... 240 6.2.3.3 Ground-Water Conditions in the Colfax Area...... 240 6.2.3.4 Surface-Water / Ground-Water Interaction Near Colfax...... 240 6.3 Details of High-Priority Data Gaps ...... 240 6.3.1 Hydrogeology West of Pullman...... 240 6.3.1.1 Purpose and Objective ...... 240 6.3.1.2 Proposed Project Location ...... 241 6.3.1.3 Project Description...... 241 6.3.1.4 Project Cost Estimate...... 242 6.3.2 Surface-Water / Ground-Water Interaction Northwest of Pullman ...... 243

v

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

6.3.2.1 Purpose and Objectives...... 243 6.3.2.2 Proposed Project Location ...... 244 6.3.2.3 Project Description...... 244 6.3.2.4 Project Cost Estimate...... 245 6.3.3 Maximizing Upper Aquifer Pumping in the Pullman-Moscow Subarea...... 245 6.3.3.1 Purpose and Objectives...... 245 6.3.3.2 Proposed Project Location ...... 246 6.3.3.3 Project Description...... 246 6.3.3.4 Project Cost Estimate...... 246 6.4 Details of Medium-Priority Data Gaps...... 247 6.4.1 Ground-Water Monitoring Program ...... 247 6.4.1.1 Purpose and Objectives...... 247 6.4.1.2 Proposed Project Location ...... 247 6.4.1.3 Project Description...... 247 6.4.1.4 Project Cost Estimate...... 248 6.4.2 Lower-Aquifer Continuity in the Kamiak Butte to Angel Butte Gap...... 248 6.4.2.1 Purpose and Objectives...... 248 6.4.2.2 Proposed Project Location ...... 248 6.4.2.3 Project Description...... 248 6.4.2.4 Project Cost Estimate...... 249 6.4.3 Hydraulic Sub-Basins Within the Pullman-Moscow Subarea ...... 249 6.4.3.1 Purpose and Objective ...... 249 6.4.3.2 Proposed Project Location ...... 249 6.4.3.3 Project Description...... 249 6.4.3.4 Project Cost Estimate...... 250 6.4.4 Relationship Between Pumping and Water-Level Decline ...... 250 6.4.4.1 Purpose and Objectives...... 250 6.4.4.2 Proposed Project Location ...... 250 6.4.4.3 Project Description...... 250 6.4.4.4 Project Cost Estimate...... 250 6.4.5 Well-Log Database ...... 251 6.4.5.1 Purpose and Objectives...... 251 6.4.5.2 Proposed Project Location ...... 251 6.4.5.3 Project Description...... 251 6.4.5.4 Project Cost Estimate...... 252 6.5 Summary and Conclusions ...... 252 Section 7.0 Task 5 – Conclusions and Recommendations...... 264 7.1 Conclusions...... 264 7.1.1 General Conclusions ...... 264 7.1.2 Specific Conclusions...... 265 7.2 Recommendations...... 266 Section 8.0 List of References...... 267

vi

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

List of Figures Figure 1-1 Current boundary of the Palouse Ground Water Basin...... 4 Figure 2-1 Print screen of the Tables object within the database...... 14 Figure 2-2 Table relationships as depicted by Microsoft Access...... 14 Figure 2-3 Print screen of the Forms object within the database...... 15 Figure 2-4 Print screen of the Queries object within the database...... 15 Figure 2-5 Print screen of the Reports object within the database...... 16 Figure 3-1 Generalized geologic map of the Palouse Basin showing subareas (from Bush, 2005d)...... 80 Figure 3-2 Map of area covered by the Columbia River basalts (from Hooper, 1982)...... 81 Figure 3-3 Stratigraphic units of the Columbia River Basalt Group in the Palouse Basin (from Bush, 2008)...... 82 Figure 3-4 Altitude of the top of crystalline basement rocks (from Lum et al., 1990)...... 83 Figure 3-5 Emplacement of R1 of the Grande Ronde basalt (from Bush, 2005d)...... 84 Figure 3-6 Emplacement of N1 of the Grande Ronde basalt (from Bush, 2005d)...... 85 Figure 3-7 Emplacement of R2 of the Grande Ronde basalt (from Bush, 2005d)...... 86 Figure 3-8 Emplacement of N2 of the Grande Ronde basalt (from Bush, 2005d)...... 87 Figure 3-9 Emplacement of Roza Member of the Wanapum basalt (from Bush, 2005d)...... 88 Figure 3-10 Emplacement of Priest Rapids Member of the Wanapum basalt (from Bush, 2006b)...... 89 Figure 3-11a East-west geologic cross section (from Bush and Garwood, 2005f)...... 90 Figure 3-11b East-west geologic cross section (from Bush and Garwood, 2005f)...... 91 Figure 3-12 Panel diagram of the Palouse Basin (from Bush and Garwood, 2005h)...... 92 Figure 3-13 Geologic cross section through IDWR (Moscow) Well #4 (from Bush, 2006a)...... 93 Figure 3-14 Geologic cross section through Pullman Well #7 (from Bush et al., 2001a)...... 94 Figure 3-15a Stratigraphy of the Pullman – Moscow area (from Conrey and Wolff, 2010)...... 95 Figure 3-15b Stratigraphy and geologic cross section of the Pullman – Moscow area (from Conrey and Wolff, 2010)...... 96 Figure 3-16 Locations of cross sections in the Northern and Western subareas (from Bush and Garwood, 2005f)...... 97 Figure 3-17 Cross sections A-A’ and G-G’ in the Northern subarea (from Bush and Garwood, 2005f). .98 Figure 3-18 Cross sections E-E’ and F-F’ in the Western subarea (from Bush and Garwood, 2005f)...... 99 Figure 3-19 Cross section from Pullman to Colfax (from Leek, 2006)...... 100 Figure 3-20a Preliminary structural contour map on the upper Grande Ronde surface; focus on Pullman – Moscow Subarea (from Bush and Garwood, 2005j)...... 101 Figure 3-20b Preliminary structural contour map on the upper Grande Ronde surface (from Bush and Garwood, 2005j)...... 102 Figure 3-21 Map showing depth to the top of the Grande Ronde Formation (from Robischon, 2010a). 103 Figure 3-22a Location map showing production wells in the Palouse Basin...... 104 Figure 3-22b Well lithology and construction information on wells within the Pullman-Moscow subarea (from Fiedler, 2009)...... 105 Figure 3-23 Water-level elevation data for the lower aquifer in the Pullman – Moscow subarea (from Barker, 1979)...... 106

vii

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

Figure 3-24 Plot of altitude of water level plotted versus altitude of the bottom of the well for wells in the Pullman – Moscow subarea (from Barker, 1979)...... 107 Figure 3-25 Hydrograph for WSU test well (Robischon, personal communication, 2010)...... 108 Figure 3-26 Hydrographs for wells completed in the loess, upper aquifer (Wanapum aquifer), and lower aquifer (Grande Ronde aquifer) in the Pullman – Moscow subarea (from Leek, 2006)...... 109 Figure 3-27 Hydrographs for wells completed in the lower aquifer in Pullman and Palouse (from PBAC, 2001) ...... 110 Figure 3-28 Assumed water-level elevation map of the upper aquifer prior to development (from Barker, 1979)...... 111 Figure 3-29a Map locations for springs, wells, streamflow gaging stations, and in-stream piezometers along the South Fork of the Palouse River and Paradise Creek (from Sinclair et al., 2009)...... 112 Figure 3-29b Darcy flux estimates of potential streamflow gains and losses along Paradise Creek and the south Fork Palouse River, by seepage reach and river mile, for August 14-17, 2006 (from Sinclair et al., 2009)...... 113 Figure 3-30 Map locations for springs, wells, streamflow gaging stations, and instream piezometers along the Palouse River (from Sinclair et al., 2009)...... 114 Figure 3-31 Roza/Priest Rapids contact relative to ground-water discharge zones (from Heinemann, 1994)...... 115 Figure 3-32 Estimated recharge distribution for predevelopment land-use conditions for the modeled zones imposed on the ground-water model grid system (from Bauer and Vaccaro, 1990)...... 116 Figure 3-33 Estimated recharge distribution for current land-use conditions for the modeled zones imposed on the ground-water model grid system (from Bauer and Vaccaro, 1990)...... 117 Figure 3-34 Digital elevation model of part of the Palouse Basin and its location in the Pacific Northwest (from O’Geen et al., 2005)...... 118 Figure 3-35 Spatial representation of recharge rates for major hydrostratigraphic units identified from the SSURGO database (from O’Geen, 2005)...... 119 Figure 3-36 Location maps of core holes drilled for the Fairly et al. (2006) study...... 120 Figure 3-37 Plot of average yearly water level decline in USGS observation well versus average yearly pumpage from upper aquifer for 5 year moving periods, 1955-1987 (from Baines, 1992)...... 121 Figure 3-38 Static water level elevations for the upper and lower aquifers (from Robischon, personal communication, 2010) ...... 122 Figure 3-39 Combined yearly pumpage from upper aquifer, Moscow and University of Idaho (from Baines, 1992)...... 123 Figure 3-40 Locations for measured municipal and private wells in the Viola and Moscow West quadrangles (from Provant, 1995)...... 124 Figure 3-41 Change in water-level between August 1994 and January 1995 for wells completed in the upper aquifer (from Provant, 1995)...... 125 Figure 3-42 Long-term change in water-level between August 1994 and measurements conducted in 1955, 1964, 1972, and 1975 (from Provant, 1995)...... 126 Figure 3-43 Graph of upper aquifer (i.e. Wanapum) pumping rates and water level data in Moscow well #2 and the USGS well from 1938 to 2009 (from Robischon, personal communication, 2010)...... 127 Figure 3-44 Isopach map of overburden thickness in the Palouse Basin showing lower aquifer sampling points (from Douglas, 2004)...... 128 Figure 3-45 Discharge from the lower aquifer and the voluntary 1% annual increase target, 4 major entities combined (from PBAC, 2009c)...... 129

viii

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

Figure 3-46 Geographic distribution of 18O values in groundwater samples for the Larson (1997) analysis (from Larson, 1997)...... 130 Figure 3-47 Arithmetic plot of 14C concentration versus elevation of the producing zone for ground water samples collected from the lower aquifer (Grande Ronde) and upper aquifer (Wanapum) systems (from Douglas, 2004)...... 131 Figure 3-48 Shaded-cell map of ground water carbon-14 (pmc) concentrations in the lower aquifer system (from Douglas, 2004)...... 132 Figure 3-49 Location map for the Barker (1979) numerical model...... 133 Figure 3-50 Boundary identification map for the Barker (1979) numerical model...... 134 Figure 3-51 Calibrated transmissivity map for the Barker (1979) numerical model...... 135 Figure 3-52 Confining layer thickness map for the Barker (1979) numerical model...... 136 Figure 3-53 Differences between model predicted and assumed pre-development water levels for the Barker (1979) numerical model...... 137 Figure 3-54 Comparison of model predicted and measured water levels in 1975 for the Barker (1979) numerical model...... 138 Figure 3-55 Comparison of model predicted and measured water levels for selected wells for the Barker (1979) numerical model...... 139 Figure 3-56 Predevelopment water-level and water budget map for the Barker (1979) numerical model (flow in acre-feet per year)...... 140 Figure 3-57 Model predicted pre-development vertical leakage map for the Barker (1979) numerical model...... 141 Figure 3-58 Model predicted 1975 water-level and water budget map for the Barker (1979) numerical model (flow in acre-feet per year)...... 142 Figure 3-59 Model predicted 1975 vertical leakage map for the Barker (1979) numerical model...... 143 Figure 3-60 Model predicted recharge and discharge changes for the Barker (1979) numerical model. 144 Figure 3-61 Model predicted water-level declines at the 1971-1975 average pumping rate of 6,600 acre- feet/year for selected wells for the Barker (1979) numerical model...... 145 Figure 3-62 Model predicted water-level declines in from 1975 to 2000 if the 1971-1975 average pumping rate is doubled between 1976 and 1999 for the Barker (1979) numerical model...... 146 Figure 3-63 Model predicted water-level declines in from 1975 to 2000 if the 1971-1975 average pumping rate is tripled between 1976-1999 for the Barker (1979) numerical model...... 147 Figure 3-64 Comparison of boundaries and hydraulic coefficients for the Barker (1979) and Lum et al. (1990) numerical models...... 148 Figure 3-65 Depiction of the model layers for the Lum et al. (1990) numerical model...... 149 Figure 3-66 Delineation of boundary conditions and areal distribution of recharge to the loess for predevelopment (left) and for current conditions (right) for the Lum et al. (1990) numerical model...... 150 Figure 3-67 Model grid and cell explanations for the upper aquifer (Wanapum) layer of the Lum et al. (1990) numerical model...... 151 Figure 3-68 Model grid and cell explanations for the lower aquifer (Grande Ronde) layer of the Lum et al. (1990) numerical model...... 152 Figure 3-69 Location and configuration of cross sectional models for the Lum et al. (1990) numerical model...... 153 Figure 3-70 Horizontal hydraulic conductivity and the ratio of horizontal to vertical hydraulic conductivity for the Lum et al. (1990) numerical model...... 154

ix

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

Figure 3-71 Calibrated water-level elevations for the time averaged period of 1974 – 1985 for the Lum et al. (1990) numerical model...... 155 Figure 3-72 Comparison of observed and simulated water levels in wells for the Lum et al. (1990) numerical model...... 156 Figure 3-73 Simulated water levels in Pullman and Moscow from the Lum et al. (1990) numerical model...... 157 Figure 3-74 Schematic of recharge and discharge to each layer of the Lum et al. (1990) numerical model (taken from Johnson et al., 1996)...... 158 Figure 4-1 Barrier zone as postulated by Barker (1979)...... 183 Figure 4-2 Wells targeted for water-level measurement program in summer 2010...... 184 Figure 4-3 Graph of water-level elevations for the period of record in wells believed to be located in the upper aquifer. Well 14N/44E-10B01 may be in the lower aquifer...... 185 Figure 4-4 Graph of water-level elevations for the period of record in well 14N/44E-05F01. Well is believed to be located in the lower aquifer but the scale is far below other upper aquifer wells. Elevation scale is still 200 feet...... 186 Figure 4-5 Graph of water-level elevations for the period of record in wells believed to be located in the lower aquifer...... 187 Figure 4-6 Bottom-hole elevations for all proposed wells overlain on the Bush and Garwood (2005j) structural contour map of the top of the Grande Ronde Formation...... 188 Figure 4-7 Graph of water-level elevation (measured in 2009 or 2010) versus bottom-hole elevation. .189 Figure 4-8 Map of water-elevation data collected in 2009 found in Synder and Haynes (2010) and 2010 for this program...... 190 Figure 4-9 Graph of water-level elevation versus time...... 191 Figure 4-10 Map of feet of water-level decline per number of years based on range of water-level measurements, most recently in 2010...... 192 Figure 4-11 Map of rate of water-level decline based on the two most recent water level measurements...... 193 Figure 5-1 Map showing the working boundary for the Palouse Ground Water Basin and study sites for surface-water/ground-water interaction investigation...... 216 Figure 5-2 Comparison of Spokane River stage and water levels in selected wells completed in the Spokane Valley/Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer (Caldwell and Bowers, 2003)...... 217 Figure 5-3 Location map for the South Fork of the Palouse River at Pullman (Anderson et al., 2008)..218 Figure 5-4 Cross sections for the South Fork of the Palouse River at Pullman (Anderson et al., 2008). 219 Figure 5-5 Hydrographs for WSU test well and Pullman well #8 in comparison to the discharge record for the South Fork of the Palouse River at Pullman...... 220 Figure 5-6 Hydrograph for the Cornelius well comparison to the discharge record for the South Fork of the Palouse River at Pullman...... 221 Figure 5-7 Locations of wells and cross sections in the vicinity of the City of Palouse (Bush and Garwood, 2005f)...... 222 Figure 5-8 Cross sections A-A’ and G-G’ in the vicinity of the City of Palouse (Bush and Garwood, 2005f)...... 223 Figure 5-9 2007-2008 hydrograph for the City of Palouse wells in comparison to the discharge record for the Palouse River at Potlatch...... 224 Figure 5-10 2008-2009 hydrograph for the City of Palouse wells in comparison to the discharge record for the Palouse River at Potlatch...... 225

x

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

Figure 5-11 Winter water temperature data for City of Palouse wells (Gregory, personal communication, 2010)...... 226 Figure 5-12 Summer water temperature data for City of Palouse Wells (Gregory, personal communication, 2010)...... 227 Figure 5-13 Moscow area location map (modified from Bush, 2006a)...... 228 Figure 5-14 Geologic cross section through IDWR (Moscow) Well #4 (Bush, 2006a)...... 229 Figure 5-15 Cross section through the INEL well (Kopp, 1994)...... 230 Figure 5-16 2006-2009 hydrograph for the INEL-D and IDWR-3 wells in comparison to the discharge record for Paradise Creek at Moscow...... 231 Figure 5-17 Hydrograph for the INEL-D and IDWR-3 wells and discharge record for Paradise Creek at Moscow for the 2007-2008 water year...... 232 Figure 5-18 Location map for Klemgard Park along Union Flat Creek (Gregory, personal communication, 2010)...... 233 Figure 5-19 Hydrograph for the Klemgard Park well in comparison to the discharge record for the South Fork of the Palouse River at Pullman (Gregory, personal communication, 2010)...... 234 Figure 6-1 Barrier zone within the lower aquifer as postulated by Barker (1979)...... 255 Figure 6-2 Map showing the proposed study site for the investigation of the Pullman area hydrogeology...... 256 Figure 6-3 Depth to water data for WSU Knot Dairy Farm wells...... 257 Figure 6-4 Possible monitor well locations within the Wilber Creek and Union Flat Creek Valleys. ....258 Figure 6-5 Stream gain–loss characteristics (Sinclair and Kardouni, 2009)...... 259 Figure 6-6 Field measurement sites in the Pullman area for the WDOE stream gain-loss study (Sinclair and Kardouni, 2009)...... 260 Figure 6-7 Map showing depth to the top of the Grande Ronde Formation and the proposed surface-water / ground-water study area (After Robischon, 2010a)...... 261 Figure 6-8 Working boundary for the Palouse Ground Water Basin showing study site for the upper aquifer study (after PBAC, 2009c)...... 262 Figure 6-9 Generalized geologic map of the Palouse Basin showing the Kamiak Butte – Angel Butte gap study area (Bush and Garwood, 2005d)...... 263

xi

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

List of Tables Table 3-1 Municipal and university well inventory (4 pages) ...... 160 Table 3-2 Surface-water discharge balances for the South Fork Palouse River and Paradise Creek stream corridor (from Sinclair et al., 2009)...... 164 Table 3-3 Surface-water discharge balances for the Palouse River (from Sinclair et al., 2009)...... 165 Table 3-4 List of recharge values reported in the literature (2 pages) ...... 166 Table 3-5 Barker (1979) water budget information for pre-development and 1975 conditions...... 168 Table 3-6 Barker (1979) predictive water budget information for 1976 pumping rate and two different rates of pumping increase...... 169 Table 3-7 Lum et al. (1990) summary of water budget for time-averaged simulation...... 170 Table 3-8 Lum et al. (1990) simulated average flow into selected rivers and measured stream discharges...... 171 Table 4-1 Historical water-level measurements from the US Geological Survey (5 pages)...... 195 Table 4-2 Wells in the program that were not able to be measured in 2010...... 200 Table 4-3 Well and water-level measurement data for wells measured in 2010 (2 pages)...... 201 Table 4-4 Rates of water-level decline (2 pages)...... 203 Table 5-1 Well inventory for surface-water/ground-water interaction task...... 236

Appendices Appendix A - Data quality assessment of reviewed documents technical memorandum Appendix B - Well logs Appendix C - Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) Appendix D - Comments to drafts and response to comments

xii

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ASR aquifer storage and recovery amsl above mean sea level bgs below ground surface CRBG Columbia River Basalt Group dpi dots per inch GIS geographical information system GRB Grande Ronde Basalt IDWR Idaho Department of Water Resources IWRRI Idaho Water Resources Research Institute m meter ma million years ago NA not applicable PBAC Palouse Basin Aquifer Committee pdf portable document format PMB (Pullman-Moscow Basin) QA quality assurance QA/QC quality assurance/quality control QC quality control RASA Regional Aquifer System Analysis RHS Ralston Hydrologic Services S&T Summary and Tracking South Fork South Fork of the Palouse River SQL Structured Query Language SR state route [road] TerraGraphics TerraGraphics Environmental Engineering, Inc. UI the University of Idaho USGS United States Geological Survey WDNR Washington State Department of Natural Resources WDOE Washington State Department of Ecology WSU Washington State University

xiii

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

Executive Summary The Palouse Ground Water Basin includes the portion of the Palouse River Drainage Basin above the confluence of the North Fork and South Fork of the Palouse River that is underlain by basalt as defined by the Palouse Basin Aquifer Committee (PBAC) at the time of this project (see Figure 1.1). The Basin also includes a portion of the Union Flat Creek drainage. The Palouse Ground Water Basin is hereafter called the “Palouse Basin” or “Basin.” Two main aquifers exist in the Palouse Basin: the upper and lower aquifers. Drinking water for the municipalities and universities is mostly from the lower aquifer, where ground-water levels have been declining over the last 100 years. The Framework Project was developed to compile existing ground-water research, evaluate the status of knowledge, and provide recommendations for future work that will aid in a greater understanding of the aquifers for better ground-water management decisions. The Framework Project entails four primary tasks. These tasks include 1) a compilation task of assembling Palouse Basin geologic and hydrogeologic documents and creating a database, 2) a synthesis task of reviewing and synthesizing the documents, 3) a data-gap task of identifying areas of deficiency in the hydrogeologic literature, and 4) a conclusions and recommendations task. An additional task, Task 4.5, entails a preliminary data-gap investigation involving two projects: 1) surface-water / ground-water interaction and 2) mass water-level measurement study in the area west/southwest of Pullman. Compilation Task The Compilation task consisted of the following subtasks:  Searching for and collecting relevant documents, where “documents” refer to all forms of information (e.g., reports, videos, maps, etc.).  Creating digital versions of the documents.  Developing a Microsoft Access database to contain metadata information on the hydrogeology of the Palouse Ground Water Basin.  Conducting quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) activities. All documents related to hydrogeological research conducted within the defined boundaries of the Palouse Basin that were acquired were reviewed and are included in the database. The database contains information on 339 reviewed documents, including geologic and geophysics studies, hydrogeologic studies, shallow sediment studies, and surface-water studies that are related to ground water. Thirty-six (36) documents with limited relation to the Palouse Basin have basic information included in the database but were not thoroughly reviewed because they were not directly relevant. Approximately nine studies conducted outside the Basin (i.e., the University of Idaho (UI) Troy research site) are included in the database because the work was deemed relevant to the Palouse Basin. Summary and Tracking (S&T) sheets were utilized to record pertinent information on each document. The S&T sheets were used internally to house the information that would be entered into the database and are not part of the product of Task 2. The following information, when available, is provided for each document:  Reviewer

xiv

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

 Review date  Title  Author(s)  Year  Source  Type  Location  Scale  Subject  Data tracking  Data quality  Keywords  Well construction data  Comments  Source location  Ranking  Description – Brief description of the document, written by the reviewer  Author’s conclusions – Either taken verbatim or summarized  Author’s recommendations – Either taken verbatim or summarized Each document was ranked into one of the following five categories: o #1 Primary source documents – These are the most important documents related to the major topics of importance to the Palouse Basin (hydrogeology, geology, surface-water/ground-water interaction, geophysics and management). Examples include Barker (1979) and Lum et al. (1990). o #2 Secondary source documents – These documents include useful information related to the major topics of importance to the Palouse Basin. This category includes selected university theses, basic data and summary reports created by professionals, and large scale geologic studies. o #3 Analysis of source documents – This category includes articles and presentations based on work reported within primary or secondary documents. Examples include journal articles and/or Microsoft® Office PowerPoint presentations based on university thesis projects. o #4 Limited applicability documents – This category includes those papers and/or reports that provide information on a specific aspect of the Palouse Basin but do not add significantly to understanding the Basin hydrogeology. Examples include

xv

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

a number of the University of Idaho and Washington State University (WSU) theses that address specific topics in localized areas (e.g., a dissolved oxygen study in shallow wells). o NR – Not Reviewed – This category includes documents that are not directly related to the Palouse Basin. These documents were not thoroughly reviewed; only minimal information is provided in the database. A Microsoft® Office Access database was developed for containing the document information listed above, complete with tables, forms, queries, and reports. The database was designed to be continually updated as new documents are produced and recorded. Synthesis Task The purpose of the synthesis task was to synthesize or summarize the pertinent Palouse Basin hydrogeological documents. The synthesis chapter is divided into the following subsections:  Geologic Framework o Geologic nomenclature o Regional geologic characteristics o Palouse Basin geologic characteristics o Description of stratigraphic and structural features  Hydrogeologic Framework o Aquifer identification and temporal growth of knowledge o Characteristics of the lower aquifer o Characteristics of the upper aquifer o Ground-water flow systems  Water Balance o Surface-water gain/loss o Surface-sediment water balance o Upper-aquifer water balance o Lower-aquifer water balance o Ground-water age-dating analysis  Numerical Models o Barker (1979) model o Lum et al. (1990) model o Post Lum et al. (1990) analysis o Comparison of field data to numerical model predictions

xvi

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

Preliminary Data Gap Investigation Task A preliminary data gap investigation task was added during the Framework Project to further investigate certain preliminary data gaps identified during the synthesis task. Two preliminary data gaps were identified and the associated projects conducted. These were: o A surface-water/ground-water interaction study conducted within the current boundary of the Palouse Basin. o A mass water-level measurement project conducted west-southwest of Pullman to investigate the theory of a ground-water barrier zone postulated by Barker (1979). Surface-Water / Ground-Water Interaction The purpose of the surface-water/ground-water investigation was to compare stream-flow records to hydrographs from selected wells to ascertain the degree of hydraulic connection between surface water and ground water at selected sites within the Palouse Basin. The analysis includes consideration of three stream segments in connection to two aquifers. The focus of this study is on periods of high flow within each of the target streams. The locations are as follows: o South Fork of the Palouse River in Pullman in relation to the lower aquifer, o Palouse River in Palouse in relation to the lower aquifer, o Paradise Creek in Moscow in relation to the upper aquifer, and o Union Flat Creek in relation to a well believed constructed in basalt of the Grande Ronde Formation. Hydrographs for wells completed in the lower aquifer are compared to the flow record for the South Fork of the Palouse River for two wells within Pullman (WSU test well and Pullman well #8) and one well near the river about six miles southeast of Pullman (Cornelius well). There is no discernible impact of high flow in the South Fork of the Palouse River on the water level in any of the three wells during the period of record examined. The flow record for the Palouse River is compared to hydrographs for the two City of Palouse wells completed in the lower aquifer (Palouse wells #1 and #3). Similarly, there is no discernible impact of high flow in the Palouse River on the water levels in either of the City of Palouse wells completed in the lower aquifer. Although temperature signatures within the wells correspond in part to temperature fluctuations in the river, this occurrence explained by the position of the data logger within the well. Given the hydrogeologic setting of the Moscow area, it is logical to evaluate the potential hydraulic connection of Paradise Creek with the upper aquifer. It has been shown that shallow wells located in the upper aquifer at the UI Groundwater Field Laboratory respond to water-level fluctuations in Paradise Creek. However, the hydrographs for two upper aquifer wells that are completed near the bottom of the aquifer (INEL-D and IDWR-3) do not show any response to high-flow events in Paradise Creek. The hydrograph for the Klemgard Park well, which is located close to Union Flat Creek and completed opposite a basalt flow in what is believed to be the Grande Ronde Formation, is compared with the flow record for the South Fork of the Palouse River in Pullman. This analysis is based on the assumption that precipitation events affect the creek and river similarly. There is

xvii

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

no stream gauge on Union Flat Creek. The hydrograph does show a correlative response to a high-flow event, suggesting a hydraulic connection exists at that location. Mass Water-Level Measurements Barker (1979) conducted a mass water-level measurement project in an area west of Pullman, Washington in 1973 and 1974. He postulated that lower hydraulic conductivity in the lower aquifer in this area acted like a ground-water “barrier zone.” Ground-water levels were measured during June-August 2010 in wells with historical data in order to investigate this “barrier zone.” Thirty-seven (37) wells were targeted in this area. Twelve (12) of these wells were measured in 2010. The remaining wells could not be measured due to a number of factors including: the current well owner could not be located or would not give permission for the well to be measured; the selected well could not be identified in the field, had been destroyed, or had collapsed; and field conditions made it impossible to obtain a water- level measurement. Four of the 12 wells may be completed in the lower aquifer. One well has the same characteristics (geologic completion, water-level elevation, and rate of water-level decline) as the lower aquifer wells in Pullman. The remaining three wells had either higher ground-water elevations than expected or a lower rate of water level decline, or are completed shallower than expected. The different characteristics of these wells may be related to the “barrier zone” as postulated by Barker (1979). Data Gaps A large body of knowledge has been accumulated relative to the hydrogeology of the Palouse Ground Water Basin, particularly the Pullman-Moscow subarea. Although the 339 documents collected and reviewed provide a great deal of information, they do not necessarily provide the basis to respond to a number of important hydrogeologic questions, particularly those related to long-term water supply. The data gaps analysis included delineation of a prioritized list of data gaps and guidance relative to investigation programs needed to satisfy the high- and medium-priority information needs. Data gaps associated with surface water, including water sources for aquifer storage and recovery projects, are not addressed in this document. The data gaps listed in this report meet two criteria:  The data gap must be directly related to long-term utilization of ground water as a water supply with particular emphasis on the Pullman-Moscow subarea.  The data gap must be defined such that the investigational program has a reasonable chance of success. The data gaps are classified by priority as high, medium, and low as listed below.  High-priority data gaps: o The hydrogeology west of Pullman. o Surface-water/ground-water interaction northwest of Pullman. o Maximizing upper-aquifer pumping in the Pullman-Moscow subarea.

xviii

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

 Medium-priority data gaps: o A ground-water monitoring program. o Lower-aquifer continuity in the Kamiak Butte to Angel Butte gap. o Hydraulic sub-basins within the Pullman-Moscow subarea. o Relationship between pumping and water-level decline. o Create a well-log databank.  Low-priority data gaps: o Ground-water conditions in the Colton, Uniontown, and Genesee areas. o Ground-water conditions in the Garfield area. o Ground-water conditions in the Colfax area. o Surface-water/ground-water interaction northeast of Colfax. The first two of the three high-priority data gap studies should be conducted before any of the other studies. All of these suggested studies involve drilling additional wells. The construction of new wells is an essential aspect of improving hydrogeologic knowledge of the Palouse Basin.

xix

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

Section 1.0 Introduction

The Palouse Ground Water Basin, hereafter called the “Palouse Basin” or “Basin,” is located in eastern Washington and northern Idaho. Figure 1-1 shows the current working boundary of the Basin. Note that the boundary is not coincident with the drainage basin of the Palouse River as it excludes some portions of the basin that are not underlain by basalt and includes a portion of the Union Flat Creek basin. Ground-water users within the Basin include the cities of Pullman, WA, Palouse, WA, Colfax, WA, and Moscow, ID; Washington State University (WSU); the University of Idaho (UI); and private well owners. The general geology consists of sediments overlying layers of basalt. The two basalt aquifers in the Basin are the upper aquifer and the lower aquifer. The lower aquifer supplies 64-81% of the water to Moscow, most of the water used by UI, and all of the water used by Pullman, Palouse, Colfax, and WSU. The upper aquifer supplies 19-36% of the water to Moscow and a portion of the water used by UI (Robischon, personal communication, 2010). Since the first area wells were drilled in the 1890s, water levels in the basalt aquifers have declined because of ground-water pumping. In the earliest report dated from 1897, Russell describes the construction of wells in Pullman and Moscow and suggests restricting the discharge from the flowing artesian wells. Since then, hundreds of geologic and hydrogeologic studies have been conducted in the Basin.

1.1 Purpose and Objectives

The overall purpose of the Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project is to compile, make available, and evaluate the current knowledge of the Palouse Basin and to identify data gaps and critical future projects. Objectives of the project as stated in the project proposal are to: “compile, review, and evaluate the completeness of information on the ground- water resources in the basin in anticipation of conducting a future full-scale site characterization project.” Specific objectives include conducting the following tasks. These are:  Task 1 – Project Management: Administrative preparation of the project.  Task 2 – Compilation: Compile all the geologic and hydrogeologic reports, maps, and cross sections. This includes searching, documenting, scanning, reviewing, summarizing, and creating a metadata database of these documents.  Task 3 – Synthesis: Synthesize the pertinent work that has been conducted in and about the Basin, and evaluate the quality of the documents.  Task 4 – Data Gaps: Develop data gaps based on knowledge gained in Task 3.  Task 4.5 – Preliminary Data Gap Investigation: Investigate and report on preliminary data gaps found during Tasks 2 and 3. This task was added to the scope of work during the project. The first preliminary data gap investigation was a mass water-level measurement project; the second was an investigation of the surface-water / ground-water connection in the Basin at specific locations.  Task 5 – Conclusions and Recommendations: Present a discussion, conclusions, and recommendations for future work.

1

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

Draft reports for Tasks 2, 3, 4, 4.5, and 5 were submitted over the course of the project. Comments on the draft reports were received and incorporated into this final report. Appendix D includes a list of comments and a response to comments.

2

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

Chapter 1 Figures

3

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

Figure 1-1 Current boundary of the Palouse Ground Water Basin.

4

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

Section 2.0 Task 2 – Compilation

Task 2 data compilation consisted of the following subtasks: 1) searching for and collecting relevant documents, 2) creating digital versions of the documents including scanning of oversize hard copies, 3) developing a Microsoft Office Access® database to contain metadata information on the hydrogeology of the Palouse Ground Water Basin, and 4) conducting quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) activities. “Documents” refer to all forms of information (e.g., reports, videos, maps, etc.).

2.1 Collection

2.1.1 Documents Included TerraGraphics carried out an extensive search for existing documents related to hydrogeological research conducted within the basalt portion of the Palouse Basin. All relevant documents acquired were reviewed and are included in the database. The database contains information on 339 reviewed documents, including geologic and geophysics studies, hydrogeologic studies, shallow sediment studies, and surface water studies that are related to ground water. Thirty-six (36) of these documents have limited relation to the Palouse Basin and have basic information included in the database but were not thoroughly reviewed because they were not directly relevant. Approximately nine of the 339 studies conducted outside the Basin (i.e. the University of Idaho Troy research site) have details included in the Task 2 database because the work was deemed relevant to the Palouse Basin.

2.1.2 Documents Excluded Topics of information generally not included in the database consist of: 1) hydrogeologic studies conducted in the crystalline rock with the exception of surface water runoff, 2) less-related shallow sediment studies, 3) water quality studies, 4) surface water studies unrelated to ground water or water supply, and 5) studies conducted outside the Palouse Basin. The studies of crystalline rock areas such as Moscow Mountain were excluded because they have no direct bearing on ground water resources in the basalt and associated sediments. Shallow sediment studies such as soil surveys also were excluded because of a lack of relevance. Studies of surface water chemistry were uniformly excluded whereas studies of isotope ground water chemistry related to age dating were included. Surface-water flow studies were excluded except for those that pertained to flow gains and losses from ground water. Finally, studies had to have at a minimum a partial focus on the Palouse Basin to be included. Exceptions to this include geologic reports that pertain to the source areas of the basalt and reports resulting from studies of ground water in loess at the UI research site located near Troy, Idaho. In the latter case, the results of the loess hydrogeology studies are believed to be transferable to the Palouse Basin.

2.1.3 Search Locations Documents were collected from a variety of locations and individuals including:  C. Kent Keller  City of Moscow  City of Pullman

5

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

 Dale Ralston  Geological Society of America  Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR)  Idaho Geological Survey  Idaho Water Resources Research Institute (IWRRI)  Latah County  Palouse Basin Aquifer Committee (PBAC) Library (format received sometimes distinguished only for this source) o CDs o Electronic format o Hard copy format  Paul McDaniel  United States Geological Survey (USGS)  University of Idaho (UI) Library o General Reference o Government Documents o Idaho Waters Digital Library o Interlibrary Loan o Special Collections  Washington State Department of Ecology (WDOE)  Washington State Department of Natural Resources (WDNR)  Washington State University (WSU) o Civil Engineering Department o Library – General Reference . WSU Library Palouse Digital Project o Library – Special Collections  Whitman County Requests and/or searches were also made to the following entities but no additional related documents were found:  City of Palouse  City of Colfax  UI Physical Plant

2.1.4 Related Documents Not Found In a very few instances, documents cited in a reviewed hydrogeologic document could not be located. Generally, this was because the citation was incomplete or the item in question was an unpublished historical document.

2.2 Compilation

2.2.1 Electronic Copies of Documents Electronic copies of all the documents listed in the database are provided as a deliverable. Filenames are included within a corresponding field of the database. A chronological list of documents is provided at the end of this report. Each document was collected in electronic

6

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report format or scanned from hard copy. All black and white scans have a resolution of 300 dots per inch (dpi). Most documents are provided in portable document format (pdf), with the exception of videos, Microsoft® Office PowerPoint presentation slides, Microsoft® Office Excel spreadsheets, Microsoft® Office Access databases, and supporting document files (e.g., geographical information system (GIS) files, survey files, etc.). These are provided in the same format as TerraGraphics/Ralston Hydrologic Services received them to allow additional flexibility for the user. Plates downloaded from the USGS are also provided in djvu format, which has a better resolution than pdf. The file name nomenclature has first the year, followed by the author(s), and lastly either the beginning of the title or a short description of the document.

2.2.2 Collection of Information Summary and Tracking (S&T) sheets were developed in Microsoft® Office Word 2003 and utilized to record pertinent information on each document. The S&T sheets were used internally to house the information that would be entered into the database and are not part of the product of Task 2. The following information, when available, is provided for each document:  Reviewer – Either Dr. Nimmer, Dr. Ralston, or Mr. Lahiri conducted initial reviews of the documents and completed the S&T sheets. Dr. Nimmer and Dr. Ralston together reviewed all the S&T sheets for consistency prior to entry into the database.  Review date – Date of initial review.  Title – Official title of the document when provided or unofficial title if no title was provided.  Authors – Author(s) of the document.  Year – Year published or year completed if unpublished.  Source – Reference for the document.  Type o Abstract o Database o Personal o Thesis communication o Article o Dissertation o Poster o Video Correspondence Map Presentation o o o slides Cross section Meeting minutes Reference list o o o Data Ordinance Report o o o  Location – Location of study area.  Scale o Individual well scale – Reports that deal with the construction or testing of an individual well or a very localized site study, such as infiltration at a single site.

7

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

o Local scale – Reports that include information on a small area, less than one square mile. Examples include the construction of the Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) monitoring wells located north of the Palouse Empire Mall, and studies at the UI Groundwater Research Site or at the Whitman County Landfill site. o Intermediate scale – Reports that cover areas approximately between 1 and 10 square miles. Reports dealing with all of the wells for the City of Moscow or the City of Pullman are included in this category. o Sub-basin scale – Studies of large areas but less than approximately 75 percent of the Palouse Basin. An example would be a study of the Idaho portion of the Basin. o Basin scale – Studies that include more than 75 percent of the Palouse Basin. The Lum et al (1990) numerical model studies of the Basin would be an example. o Greater than basin scale – Reports or geologic maps and studies of the Columbia Basin that include the Palouse Basin in both Idaho and Washington. o NA (not applicable) – Studies conducted outside the Basin but important to the analysis of the hydrogeology of the Basin (e.g., at the UI Troy research site).  Subject o Aquifer boundary – Studies that evaluate the boundaries of the aquifers. o Aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) projects – Studies of ASR and artificial recharge projects. o Borehole video log – Borehole video logs of wells within the Basin. o Geologic mapping – Surface geologic maps on a wide range of scales and detail. o Geologic cross sections – Cross sections that are diagrammatic and those that are based on analysis of individual wells. o Geologic stratigraphic interpretation – Analysis of the stratigraphic section in an individual well but also general stratigraphic analysis, as well as all other geologic studies (geophysics, geochemical, etc.). o GIS files – Reports or data that include GIS files. o Ground-water contour mapping – Maps of ground water contours. o Ground-water management –Studies of various ground water management alternatives such as declaration of critical ground water areas. o Ground-water pumping analysis – Studies of pumping by individual entities ranging up to Basin-wide analysis. o Ground-water supply – Ground water related studies that do not fit into other subject categories. o Hydrogeochemistry – Studies on ground water geochemistry.

8

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

o Individual well hydraulic analysis – Aquifer tests conducted on individual wells would be included under this subject. o Multiple well hydraulic analysis – Aquifer tests and tracer tests in which multiple wells are used. o Numerical modeling – Reports on numerical models of Basin hydrogeology. o Recharge analysis – Studies ranging from soil-water balance such as work at the UI and WSU research sites to Basin water level interpretations. o Reference list – Reports listing documents pertaining to the hydrogeology and geology of the Palouse Basin. o Surface-water/ground-water interaction – Studies of stream gain and loss as related to ground water. Water balance and water quantity reports are also included here. o Surface-water supply – Surface water studies related to water supply. o Water balance – Studies of a water balance (water inputs and outputs). o Water dating – Isotope studies used to determine the ages of ground water. o Water-right analysis – Water rights for entities or individuals within the Basin. o Water-temperature analysis – Studies on ground water or surface water temperature. o Water use – Studies on the use of water.  Data tracking o Original data o Non-original data  Data quality o Collected by professionals – Field data collected by geologic and hydrogeologic professionals. There is an underlying assumption that a stated or unstated QA/QC program was followed. o Collected by students – Field data collected by students. The field data collected by students are likely of considerable value; however, they are not as reliable as those collected by professionals.  Keywords – Selected pertinent words that describe the document. A lengthy list of keywords can be found in the database under the object “Tables” then “key_words.”  Well-construction data – Noted if well construction data are provided.  Comments – Provided when a specific comment is warranted (e.g., if a map in a report is missing and not found).  Source location – Location where the document was found.  Ranking

9

Palouse Ground Water Basin Framework Project FINAL report

o #1 Primary source documents – These are the most important documents related to the major topics of importance to the Palouse Basin (hydrogeology, geology, surface-water/ground-water interaction, geophysics, and management). Examples include Barker (1979) and Lum et al. (1990).

o #2 Secondary source documents – These documents include useful information related to the major topics of importance to the Palouse Basin. This category includes selected university theses, basic data and summary reports created by professionals, and large-scale geologic studies.

o #3 Analysis of source documents – This category includes articles and presentations based on work reported within primary or secondary documents. Examples include journal articles and/or Microsoft Office PowerPoint presentations based on university thesis projects.

o #4 Limited applicability documents – This category includes those papers and/or reports that provide information on a specific aspect of the Palouse Basin but do not add significantly to understanding the Basin hydrogeology. Examples include a number of the UI and WSU theses that address specific topics in localized areas (e.g., a dissolved oxygen study in shallow wells).

o NR – Not Reviewed – This category includes documents that are not directly related to the Palouse Basin. These documents were not thoroughly reviewed; only minimal information is provided in the database.  Description – Brief description of the document written by the reviewer.  Author’s conclusions – Either taken verbatim or summarized.  Author’s recommendations – Either taken verbatim or summarized.

2.3 Database Organization

The database was created in Microsoft® Office Access. When the file is initially opened a “Menu” window is at the forefront. Within the Menu there are six buttons to help navigate through the database in a simplified manner. The first is “Enter Data”; this opens a form in which one can enter new data. The “Search” button allows the user to search for a document and display information for a particular document. There are four canned report buttons. These include: “Bibliography by year,” “Bibliography by author,” “View all document data,” and “Save all data to Word.” A more in-depth description of the following objects can found on the left-hand side when the database is opened: TABLES, FORMS, QUERIES, and REPORTS. Some of the items within these objects were used to develop the database and others are to be used by the database user. The nomenclature used henceforth is