EPA-660/2 74 019
APRIL 1974
Environmental Protection Technology Series
North Fork Alluvial Decontamination
Project Hubbard Creek Reservoir
Watershed
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING' SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and
Monitoring, Environmental Protection Agency, have
been grouped into five series. These five bread
categories were established to facilitate further
development and application of environmental
technology. Elimination of traditional grouping
was consciously planned to foster technology
transfer and a maximum interface in related
fields. The five series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5- Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY series. This series
describes research performed to develop and
demonstrate instrumentation, equipment and
methodology to repair or prevent environmental
degradation from point and non-point sources of
pollution. This work provides the new or improved
technology required for the control and treatment
of pollution sources to meet environmental quality
standards.
EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the Office of Research and
Development, EPA, and approved for publication. Approval
does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the
views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency,
nor does mention of trade names or commercial products consti-
tute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
EPA-660/2-74-019
April 1974
NORTH FORK ALLUVIAL DECONTAMINATION PROJECT
HUBBARD CREEK RESERVOIR WATERSHED
By
Billy L. Jacob, P.E.
Project 14020 EHW
Program Element 1B2040
Project Officer
Leslie G. McMillion
Environmental Protection Agency
National Environmental Research Center
P. 0. Box 15027
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
Prepared for
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. GoTenmient Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 95 cents
-------
ABSTRACT
A detailed demonstration project was performed to determine the
effect that dewatering of a polluted alluvial aquifer and subsequent
recharge by rainfall would have on the decontamination rate of the
polluted alluvium. The alluvial deposits within the project area
were polluted by years of brine water disposal from oil field
operations into unlined earthen pits, secondary oil recovery oper-
ations, and abandoned and improperly plugged oil wells. Secondary
benefits of the project were to determine the effect that removal of
contaminated alluvial water would have on downstream water quality,
and on the quality of water in a municipal water supply located
downstream from the project site. Contaminated water withdrawn
from the alluvium was disposed of in a deep disposal well having
a depth of 5, 700 feet.
An evaluation of the project indicated that contaminated water from
alluvial deposits can successfully be collected and disposed of.
Decontamination of the alluvial deposits was determined to be at a
very slow rate, and would take years to show significant improve-
ment. No appreciable reduction in chlorides in the reservoir
resulted from the three years operation of the project.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Project Number 14020
EHW by the West Central Texas Municipal Water District under
the (partial) sponsorship of the Environmental Protection Agency.
Work was completed as of May 1973.
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Abstract ii
List of Figures iv
List of Tables v
Acknowledgements vi
Sections
I Conclusions 1
II Recommendations 3
III Introduction 4
IV Background Salt Water Pollution Investigations 6
V Purpose of Project and Project Objectives 10
VI Description of Installation and Operation of
Decontamination Project 14
VII Monitoring and Testing 28
VIII Projection Discussion 31
IX References 49
111
-------
FIGURES
No. Page
1 Location Map 13
2 Project Layout 15
3 Diagramatic Illustration of Water Injection Well 18
4 Typical Detail of Collection Sump 20
5 Location of Observation Wells 22
6 Location of U. S. G. S. Monitoring Stations 29
7 Weighted Average Monthly Chlorides in
Sumps No. 1, 3 & 4 35
8 Relationship Between Flow in Hubbard Creek
and Chloride Content • 47
IV
-------
TABLES
No. Page
1 Observation Well Data 23
2 Typical Chloride Content of Samples from
Observation Wells 26
3 Record of Pumpage from Collection Sumps 32
4 Monthly and Yearly Precipitation for the
Project Area 36
5 Summary of Project Data 38
6 Annual Chloride and Dissolved Solids Loadings
(U.S. G.S. Station 8-0861.50) 41
7 Annual Chloride and Dissolved Solids Loadings
(U.S. G.S. Station 8-0862. 12) 42
8 Annual Chloride and Dissolved Solids Loadings
(U.S. G.S. Station 8-0861. 0) 42
9 Chloride Content of Hubbard Creek Reservoir 46
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The support and continuing interest of Mr. Leslie G. McMillion,
EPA Grant Project Officer, was instrumental in guiding the work to
a conclusion. Mr. George Putniki of the EPA Regional Office in
Dallas, Texas, was instrumental in the development and initiation
of the project on the Federal level.
The work performed on investigational studies by Conselman, Jenke
and Tice, Consultants, and Conselman, Jenke Associates, Consul-
tants to the Water District on investigational studies and during pro-
ject development and construction, from which considerable informa-
tion was used in this final report, is particularly acknowledged.
Assistance from the United States Geological Survey, in providing
records of flows and water quality to the Water District, was sub-
stantial in the project evaluation.
Assistance given to the author by the staff personnel of the West
Central Texas Municipal Water District, during completion of the
final report, is appreciated.
The operation and maintenance of project facilities was performed
by Mr. Roy Matthews. During most of the project period, the pro-
ject was under the directorship of Mr. Austin P. Hancock, who was
manager of the West Central Texas Municipal Water District.
After Mr. Hancock's retirement from the District in September
1971, the project was directed by Mr. Victor Jaeggli, who is the
present manager of the District.
VI
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
This demonstration project, on the removal of contaminated
groundwater from alluvial deposits and subsequent decontam-
ination by natural fresh water recharge, has led to the following
conclusions:
The alluvial material, located in the North Fork of Hubbard Creek,
can successfully be dewatered by construction of collection sumps,
or trenches, and pumping systems.
Contaminated water can successfully, and with relative ease, be
disposed of by subsurface injection into deep, highly saline
formations.
Continuity of the alluvial material, along North Fork of Hubbard
Creek, does not exist; consequently, contaminated water does
not flow freely within a common alluvium for the length of the
drainage basin.
Rate of decontamination of the alluvium, upon dewatering will
be at a very slow rate and would occur over a period of many
years.
Chloride content of water withdrawn from the alluvium was
considerably lower than expected; consequently, the effect of
removal of contaminated waters on downstream water quality,
and on the quality of water in Hubbard Creek Reservoir, was
insignificant.
The effect of chloride concentrations in the North Fork alluvial
waters have little effect on the quality of water in Hubbard Creek
Reservoir as compared to the effect by evaporation and tran-
spiration.
The chloride concentrations that are deposited on or near the
surface of the topsoil, or alluvial deposits, and the storage of
water with high chloride content in the stream beds have a
significant effect on the quality of initial runoff from the water-
shed.
-------
The cooperative action of the Railroad Commission of Texas, oil
operators, and the Water District which brought about improved
methods of secondary oil recovery operations, brine water disposal,
plugging of abandoned oil wells, and the elimination of surface
storage pits, appear to be the major influence in water quality
improvements within the drainage basin of North Fork and Cook
Creeks since 1966. These activities were stimulated significantly
by the initiation and conduct of this project.
-------
SECTION II
RECOMMENDATIONS
Experience that the West Central Texas Municipal Water District has
gained during this demonstration project could be valuable to other
areas facing the problem of salt water contamination of water sup-
plies. Specific recommendations are:
Contamination of alluvial deposits by sodium chloride occurs fre-
quently across the United States in either a small centralized area or
on a more regional basis. Efforts to decontaminate such alluvial
deposits, or otherwise reduce the encroachment of contaminated
waters on a more widespread basis, would be more successful if
observation and test wells, similar to those constructed in this pro-
ject, were installed prior to project initiation. Step drawdown
aquifer tests could be performed during the time of observation well
installation to determine the expected yield from the alluvium.
Small yields and low chloride concentrations would probably indicate
non-productive decontamination efforts.
Efforts that have been made in the cleanup of surface pollution should
be continued by both the West Central Texas Municipal Water District
and the oil industries operating within the Hubbard Creek watershed.
Water-quality and water-quantity data that have been obtained demon-
strates that water entering the Hubbard Creek Reservoir during low
flows is high in dissolved solids, especially chlorides. A substan-
tial amount of the low flows are from subsurface infiltration waters.
Water-quality data further demonstrates that after the initial wash
off of the watershed, high flow runoff is relatively free from such
dissolved solids.
It is possible that through weather modification operations, runoff
can be increased significantly and thereby improve the quality of
flows into Hubbard Creek Reservoir.
-------
SECTION III
INTRODUCTION
The West Central Texas Municipal Water District was organized
under Charter from the State of Texas to construct Hubbard Creek
Reservoir, located in Stephens County, Texas, for the purpose of
providing municipal water for the cities of Abilene, Albany, Anson,
and Breckenridge. Each of these cities is a member of the
WCTMWD and each has a direct interest in the quality of water from
the reservoir, since presently or in the future, they will depend
upon the reservoir to meet a portion or all of their municipal and
industrial water demands. To date, the City of Breckenridge is the
only customer that has utilized water from Hubbard Creek for
municipal purposes. This use was begun in 1972 when Lake Daniel,
the historical water supply for the city, became dry.
Construction of Hubbard Creek Reservoir was begun in 1961 and
construction for the dam, emergency spillway, and outlet works
was completed in 1962. Initial impoundment of water began in
September 1962. Conservation storage pool of the reservoir was
filled in May 1969. The reservoir is located in the Brazos River
Drainage Basin.
Hubbard Creek Reservoir receives its runoff from a watershed
containing an approximate drainage area of 1, 078 square miles.
The watershed is situated in portions of Callahan, Eastland,
Shackelford and Stephens Counties. The two principal tributaries
are Hubbard Creek, draining the area to the west and southwest of
the reservoir and Big Sandy Creek, draining the area predomi-
nately south and southwest of the reservoir.
The watershed of Hubbard Creek Reservoir is unique in nature in
the sense that it includes one of the most heavily drilled oil and gas
areas of the United States. Over 13, 000 wells are known to have
been drilled in the watershed throughout the oil-producing history,
dating back to the early 1920's. In addition to the oil and gas wells
that have been drilled within the watershed, numerous seismograph
shot holes and core holes have also been drilled. There are no
historical records available to indicate the actual number, location,
or depths to which most of these seismograph holes were drilled.
-------
Many of the wells that were and are presently used for oil and gas
production are relatively shallow well productions.
One of the typical by-products associated with the production of oil
in this part of West Texas has been the production and recovery of
brine water. Since there has been no commercial market for the
brine it was disposed into surface watercourses during the early
years of oil production in the area. Eventually, it was disposed
into unlined surface^ pits. Each of these disposal methods allowed
substantial volumes of highly saline water to percolate into the
subsoil and shallow subsurface alluvial deposits.
Compounding the problem of brine-water recovery associated with
the production of oil, was the increasing trend toward waterflooding.
As the quantity of oil becomes depleted in a field, secondary oil
recovery, by waterflooding, is being utilized more frequently by
many operators. This involves the re-injection of water into the oil-
bearing formation, at high pressures and in a manner to concentrate
the oil into an area making recovery possible. Investigations by
Conselman, Jenke & Tice, ' and Conselman, Jenke Associates, *
have shown that in areas of "careless" secondary oil recovery
operations leakage occurs and highly concentrated brine water is
discharged into surface watercourses, or into shallow alluvial soils,
by means of natural geologic outlets provided by fracturing or
faulting of the overlying rocks, variations in overburden pressure
produced by topographic relief, and by man-made outlets created
earlier by exploration and production activities. Chlorides that
have been deposited on the surface, and in alluvial deposits in the
Hubbard Creek watershed by previous years of "careless" salt
water disposal methods, are transported to the reservoir by low
flows brought about by subsurface water seepage and by wash off of
the watershed during rainstorms. Concentrations of chlorides in
the runoff waters into Hubbard Creek Reservoir were recognized
during the early stages of construction of the lake by the Water
District and prompted several hydrological investigations to be
performed to determine the extent of salt pollution within the water-
shed of the reservoir.
These earlier investigations eventually became the basis for the
North Fork Alluvial Decontamination Project.
-------
SECTION IV
BACKGROUND SALT WATER POLLUTION INVESTIGATIONS
Available data concerning the historic quality of water from the
watershed of Hubbard Creek Reservoir was limited prior to 1961.
Quality data of flows measured near the dam site, however, indi-
cated that chlorides were 50 to 300 milligrams per liter (mg/1).
In early 1961, the Water District became concerned about the quality
of water to be stored in the reservoir and engaged the firm of
Conselman, Jenke & Tice, Consulting Geologists, Hydrologists, and
Engineers, Abilene, Texas, to conduct investigations within the
watershed for the purpose of locating sources of salt pollution and
presenting general recommendations to enhance the quality of water
that is discharged into the reservoir. During this period of time,
the Texas Railroad Commission, United States Geological Survey,
and other State and local agencies began a concentrated program of
water-quantity and water-quality analysis within the watershed.
Also during this period of time, the Consulting Engineering firm of
Freese, Nichols and Endress of Fort Worth, Texas, was performing
a chloride routing study for the reservoir and reported on June 14,
196E, that, "the chloride contamination in Hubbard Creek, in times
of drought, would lead to chloride concentrations in Hubbard Creek
Reservoir higher than the limit of 250 part per million (ppm) rec-
ommended by the U. S. Public Health Service. " Recommendations
to the District were to take the necessary measures to control man-
made pollution on the watershed, with the goal of lowering the aver-
age chloride content of the runoff to 50 ppm or less.
In the report prepared by Conselman, Jenke & Tice, many aspects
of salt water contamination were presented including geological
formations, effects of industrial oil and gas development on water
quality within the watershed, and analyses showing the chloride
concentration at various points within the watershed area. Conclu-
sions reached in the report were that chief sources of abnormal
chlorides were industrial brine produced in connection with oil and
gas operations and that the industrial brines reached the watershed
from: "(1) surface leakage of salt water pits, producing wells,
water injection wells, lease lines, tanks, heaters, treaters, and
abandoned dry holes, (2) leaching of salt-impregnated areas by
-------
runoff, (3) seepage from salt water pits into the shallow subsurface,
(4) subsurface seepage from salt water disposal wells pumping
brine into the annulus, with pressures and volumes in excess of the
capacity of subsurface reservoirs, (5) waterflood injection wells
which unintentionally inject brine into reservoirs other than those
to be re-pressured, (6) abandoned shot holes and core holes which
receive lateral salt water migration from other sources, and (7)
occasional, deliberate disposal of brine by dumping into surface
watercourses. "
Significant importance to water quality of the reservoir in the
reports by Conselman, Jenke & Tice, was in the projections which,
although based on meager information, indicated that the chloride
residual expected in the lake waters would approach 260 mg/1
during the first ten years of reservoir life. The report by Consel-
man, Jenke & Tice, specifically mentioned eighty-six (86) problem
areas of salt water pollution within the watershed area.
The general problems of salt water contamination in the reservoir
watershed as presented by Conselman, Jenke &c Tice, and the
chloride routing study by Freese, Nichols and Endress, prompted
the District into further investigational studies. Conselman, Jenke
Associates, Geologists, Hydrologists and Engineers, Abilene,
Texas, made additional investigations on the extent of chloride pollu-
tion within the watershed and efforts of their work was presented
in their "Report of Investigations; Hubbard Creek Reservoir Water-
shed, West Central Texas Municipal Water District", in January
1966.
In the 1966 report by Conselman, Jenke Associates, efforts were
directed more specifically to the critical areas of salt water pollu-
tion that had been established in the earlier reports. It was found
that Hubbard Creek and its tributaries, consisting of: North Fork,
Cook Creek, Salt Prong, Jeter Draw, Cruddy Creek, Getright Draw,
Matthews Branch, Humble Dam area, and Snailum Creek were the
most significant in the chloride pollution of the reservoir.
Results of water-quality monitoring in the reservoir, as presented
in the report, indicated that highest chloride residual in the lake
was on August 22-23, 1964, amounting to 198 mg/1, at a time when
the lake level was relatively low. The lowest chloride residual of
86 mg/1 was observed on May 31, 1965, immediately after a major
-------
inflow which more than tripled the lake volume. Chloride content
in December 1965, was about 116 mg/1.
Results of unpublished records prepared by the U. S. G. S. indicated
that chloride pollution was distributed unequally throughout the
watershed with the greatest concentrations of chlorides being found
in the North Fork-Cook Creek-Salt Prong subdivision. The data
presented by Conselman and Jenke showed that for the period Febru-
ary 1, 1962, to May 31, 1965, this drainage area represented 13
percent of the upper drainage area and produced 38 percent of the
total chlorides, while flows for the area represented only 9 percent
of the total water discharge measured at the Hubbard Creek below
Albany monitoring station. Further significance of pollution in the
North Fork valley was presented from reports of the U. S. Geolog-
ical Survey, which indicated that of the total chloride increment
entering the reservoir during the period October 1, 1963, to May 31,
1965, 25. 7 percent of the chlorides came from the North Fork valley
west of Albany, which produced only 3. 4 percent of the water dis-
charge.
In discussion of watershed contamination factors, Conselman and
Jenke noted that the valleys of all the streams in the watershed con-
tained various amounts of alluvial fill, which in most instances was
contaminated with varying amounts of residual chlorides and brine
water.
An interesting experiment that was being performed at that time by
an oil operator was noted in their report. The oil operator had con-
structed a sump in the alluvium valley of Cook Creek and had in-
stalled a suction system which permitted the removal of collected
water from the sump for injection into a depleted underground reser-
voir. The system had been in operation for approximately five (5)
months, and the operator reported a cumulative injection of 18, 584
barrels of groundwater, which, during the month of December 1965,
averaged 4, 275 mg/1 of chlorides. This amounted to approximately
twenty-three (23) tons of salt equivalent diverted from the reservoir,
if based on the assumption that all of the groundwater ejected would
have eventually found its way to the surface watercourse and into the
reservoir.
3
Recommendations by Conselman, Jenke Associates, as presented
to the Water District in 1966, was in part: ". . .The District should
8
-------
install, as promptly as funds and circumstances permit, a series of
water disposal systems in contaminated alluvial areas, where pollu-
tion has already accumulated in amounts too extensive to be accept-
able in the reservoir, and where no other party can be considered
responsible. These areas include:
a. North Fork at Albany
b. Humble Dam
c. South Eolian
d. West Moran
e. Snailum Creek (?)
Some of these systems may be installed when the opportunity exists
for doing so at minimum expense, as by acquiring a suitably loca-
ted dry hole or abandoned producer for use as a disposal well.
However, the Albany sump and disposal system should not be
deferred. .. n
-------
SECTION V
PURPOSE OF PROJECT AND PROJECT OBJECTIVES
PURPOSE OF PROJECT
In eemiarid regions, such as is the location of this project site,
large impoundments of water are necessary in order to obtain reser-
voirs capable of producing dependable yields. The reservoir must
store water for long periods of time to maintain yield projections
during extended drought periods; consequently, water quality of the
reservoir is subject to degradation brought about by the effects of
evaporation and transpiration. The quality of water stored in reser-
voirs constructed under these conditions will fluctuate and is largely
dependent on the elements of time, quality of inflow, quantity of in-
flow, quality and quantity of outflow, and usage from the reservoir.
At the beginning of this demonstration project, the only beneficial
use of water from the reservoir was in small quantities for irriga-
tion. Evaporation and transpiration accounted for substantially all
consumptive use from the reservoir. The resultant residual chlorides
increased the chloride concentration of the reservoir. Chloride
problems in Hubbard Creek Reservoir, therefore, are a result of
high evaporation rates in conjunction with inflows of relatively high
chloride concentrations and small amounts of usage.
The investigations of chloride contamination on the Hubbard Creek
watershed by Conselman, Jenke & Tice, and Conselman, Jenke,
Associates, located many areas of the watershed that were respon-
sible for the chloride pollution of Hubbard Creek Reservoir. The
magnitude of chloride contamination problems in the watershed and
the prediction that chloride contamination could eventually make
the reservoir unfit for use, insofar as the then existing U.S. Public
Health Service recommendations for chloride concentrations were
concerned, caused the Water District to initiate methods for com-
bating the chloride problem.
The major problem areas of chloride pollution were determined to
lie within the Hubbard Cre-ek arm of the watershed and, as pointed
out by Conselman and Jenke, three major technical problems need-
ed to be solved if inflow to Hubbard Creek Reservoir was to be re-
10
-------
duced to 50-mg/l. These were: "(1) cleaning up or draining con-
taminated alluvial material, which contains brine spillage accumu-
lated over the years, (2) preventing new pollution from entering the
watershed, and (3) fixing responsibility and arresting contamination
when it occurs. "
As a result of the investigations and analyses presented to the Water
District, the decision was made to attack the chloride pollution prob-
lem from the standpoint of arresting pollution caused by low flows
containing high chloride concentrations. Most of these highly saline
low flows were the result of subsurface seepage.
The purpose of the North Fork Alluvial Decontamination Project, was
to decrease the problem of chloride pollution of Hubbard Creek Reser-
voir caused by seepage from alluvium deposits located in the North
Fork of Hubbard Creek.
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The valley of North Fork, west of Albany, contains approximately
3, 089 acres, much of which is underlain by varying thicknesses of
alluvial sands, gravels, silts, and clays. The alluvial deposits re-
present sources for storage of groundwater that has been contami-
nated by chlorides from saline inflow resulting from oil field opera-
tions. Part of the chlorides, within the alluvium and groundwater,
infiltrate into the surface watercourses and are carried downstream
to Hubbard Creek Reservoir.
The amount of contaminated water that is discharged from the
alluvium is not known; however, prior to the beginning of the project,
it was believed that flow from the alluvium was of considerable
amount and that the chloride content, expressed in milligrams per
liter, would be substantial.
Primary objective of the project was to demonstrate the procedure
for removal of contaminated water from the alluvial deposits and the
disposal of the polluted water by injection into a deep disposal well.
Data of chloride concentrations in waters of the alluvium was obtained
to provide information on the rate of decontamination of the alluvium
by natural recharge.
Location of the Decontamination Project was selected to be on the
11
-------
North Fork of Hubbard Creek near Albany, Texas, in Shackelford
County, because of the historic inferior -water contributed by this
drainage area. Location of the project area, and its relation to
Hubbard Creek Reservoir, is shown in Figure 1.
12
-------
.
Figure I. Location map
-------
SECTION VI
DESCRIPTION OF INSTALLATION AND OPERATION OF
DECONTAMINATION PROJECT
DESCRIPTION OF INSTALLATION
According to the terms of the grant, the project was to consist of the
construction of collection sumps within the alluvium of the North Fork
valley for the collection of brine water; construction and installation
of a piping and pumping system to carry brine water collected to a
holding reservoir; and the completion and furnishing of a deep well
with pump, for the purpose of disposing of the brine water into the
Cambrian Greensand at a depth of approximately 5, 700 feet. Location
and layout of the collection sumps and disposal well are shown in
Figure 2.
DISPOSAL WELL
Disposal of the collected brine water into the Cambrian sandstones
required access to strata at the base of the sedimentary geological
column, which are encountered at depths of about 6, 000 feet in the pro-
ject area. No wells close to the project had been drilled to this depth,
and only a few wells had been drilled through the Cambrian and into
basement rocks.
A dry well that had been drilled and plugged in June 1966, was near
the project site, and upon review of the electric logs of the well by
Conselman, Jenke Associates, Consultants to the Water District, the
decision was made to re-enter the well and deepen it from the original
depth of 4, 710 feet to the base of the Cambrian.
Conditions of the grant called for plans and specifications to be pre-
pared on the deepening of the disposal well and for the contract to be
awarded on a competitive bid basis. On March 4, 1969, bids were
opened by the District, and only one contractor submitted a bid meet-
ing the conditions and specifications. The amount of the bid was
$86, 543. 60, and was substantially above original estimates of the pro-
ject.
In order to remain within budget estimates for the project, negotia-
14
-------
.iro/mr^
Collection Sumps
2 34 500
f— Surface Storage Res'r
•-,
H
^,-~Pump House
,- 5OO BbL Storage Res'r
i
t*n
^v~l-Injection Pump
========,? I
-J-- Injection Well
U.S. HWY. 180
To Albany: I ml-
Figure 2. Project layout
J
-------
tions were entered into with the contractor which eliminated the con-
tractor's obligations for coring and core analysis, drillstem tests,
2-stage cementing, sand fracturing and squeezing, reducing require-
ments for centralizers, advanced logging, perforations, and acidizing.
It was decided that these items should be paid for at the normal rates
and requirements typical of well completion in the area. The contract
was then awarded to John H. Chalmers for the amount of $64, 505. 67.
On July 18, 1969, Megargel Drilling Company, under subcontract to
John H. Chalmers, commenced with drilling operations for the dis-
posal well.
Re-entry of the existing well was considered to be the most risky and
potentially troublesome portion of the disposal well. Drilling out the
concrete plugs in the top and bottom of the existing surface casing,
and washdown and reconditioning of the hole was accomplished without
incident and in a minimum amount of time. Actual drilling of the new
hole began on July 20, 1970, and on July 26, the maximum depth of
5, 730 feet was reached in the Cambrian granite at the approximate
depth that was anticipated by Conselman, Jenke, Associates.
All drilling operations, drillstem test, logging, coring, acidizing,
tubing and casing installations, setting of packers and other opera-
tions necessary for completion of the well was under the supervision
of Conselman, Jenke, Associates, Consultants to the Water District.
Basic formation that the collected brine water was to be disposed in
was the Wilberns Green sand. Water injection test of the disposal
well, upon completion, indicated that further acidizing needed to be
made in order to obtain the desired injection rate of 5, 000 barrels
per day at a pressure of approximately 1, 000 psi. After reacidizing
and another water injection test, it was determined that porosity had
increased adequately for the well to perform satisfactorily under the
desired injection rates and pressures.
The disposal well was completed with 5, 742. 57 feet of 5-1/2 inch
casing; 5, 650 feet of 2-7/8 inch operating tubing; hold-down packer,
and the cementing of casing pipe from 4, 000 feet to the bottom of the
hole.
16
-------
General schematic of the disposal well and injection pump system is
shown in Figure 3.
Summary of cost for completion of the disposal well is as follows:
COST
1. Revised Contract, John H. Chalmers
2. Coring
Day Work (33 hrs. @ $41. 67}
Diamond Coring, Inc. (including
bit damage)
American Mud Co.
Core Laboratory, Inc.
Reaming bit
3. Drillstem Testing
Day Work (32 hrs. @ $41. 67)
American Mud Co.
Halliburton Services
4. Initial Completion
Enjay Chemical Co. (Corexit)
Halliburton (acid)
Halliburton (test)
Hale Service Co.
5. Re-acidization
Halliburton
McDonald Well Service Co.
Joe T. Smith
Baker Oil Tool
TOTAL COST
$ 1, 375. 00
1,461.60
303. 57
72.00
233.00
1,333.33
303.58
502.00
133.10
212. 00
134.83
598. 48
1, 544. 00
537.00
241.00
58. 18
$ 64, 605.67
3,445. 17
2, 138.91
1,078.41
2,380. 18
$ 73, 648. 34
COLLECTION SUMPS, COLLECTION PIPING, STORAGE AND
INJECTION PUMPS
Construction and installation of the collection sumps and piping,
water storage, sump pumps, and the deep well injection pumps were
performed under a separate contract from that of the contract for
17
-------
from
Collection
Sumps—
500 BBL.
WATER STORAGE
GLASS"BED FILTER
TRIPLEX PUMP, 235 6PM
SURFACE CASING,
108' , 8 5/8"
TOP OF CEMENT,
4000'
ELLEN6URGER
GROUP
PACKER,
PERFORATIONS
CAMBRIAN SAND
( WILBERNS
GREENSAND)
V'', r'/?-'1>'v;t—PRECAMBRIAN GRANITE
< % i, t» •" t
TOTAL DEPTH, APPROXIMATELY 57421
figure 3. Diagram of disposal well
18
-------
completion of the disposal well. Bids were received by the District
on March 4, 1969, with a low bid for the project submitted in the
amount of $143, 191. 25, This bid was substantially over the project
budget; consequently, the scope of the project was negotiated with the
low bidder and was reduced by eliminating five upstream collection
sumps and sump pumps, and by eliminating the collection system
piping that was required by the upstream sumps. Negotiations re-
sulted in reducing the total inplace cost of this phase of the project
to $87, 106. 99.
Features of this phase of the project, as built, included the construc-
tion of five collection sumps within the alluvium; 1, 400 feet of collec-
tion system piping; one lined surface pit for central collection of
water from the sumps; a pump station for conveying the collected
brine water to a 500-barrel steel storage tank located near the injec-
tion well, and the pump station for the injection well.
The collection sumps were constructed within the alluvial material,
along the North Fork valley, with the bottom of each sump being ex-
cavated to a depth as required to maintain a bottom consisting of an
impervious material. The alluvial material in this area is underlain
with a shale which has low permeability; consequently, each sump was
excavated to the shale bed. Depth of the alluvial material varied from
12 to 18 feet at the location of each sump.
Each collection-sump trench had an 8-inch perforated pipe installed
along its bottom, and the pipe was backfilled with a select gravel to
a point two feet above the top of the pipe. The remaining trench was
then backfilled above the gravel with the porous alluvial material that
was excavated from the trench. Length of the perforated pipe in the
collection sumps varied from 75 and 125 feet. A pump was installed
in each sump for pumpage of the collected water to the central storage
pit which was located near the center of the withdrawal area. As
shown in Figure 4, Sump No. 5 was constructed adjacent to the creek
with perforated pipe laid across the creek bed; then the trench was
completely backfilled with select gravel.
The collection system consisted of polyvinyl chloride pipe with the
size varying between 1-1/2 inches to 6 inches. Capacities of the
sump pumps were approximately 22 gallons per minute. Each sump
pump was equipped with a meter to provide pumpage records for
project analysis.
19
-------
\ PUMP
ALLUVIAL MATERIAL
C9UP
COLLECTION
BACKFILL
***+» 'f«fr,:V^cfcrcg
IMPEPVIOUS
Figure4. Typical detaihof collection sump
-------
Basic features of the water injection pump station consisted of a high-
head triplex injection pump with glass-bed filters. The triplex pump
was rated at 235 gallons per minute at a head of 1385 feet. The 500-
barrel storage tank located near the injection pump served as pump
storage and allowed a good operating cycle for the pump.
OBSERVATION WELLS
Numerous observations wells were installed throughout the limits
of the project area to serve as data control points and to permit
monitoring of chloride concentrations of the underground water. A
total of 74 observations wells were drilled at locations as shown in
Figure 5.
Each of the observation wells was drilled to a depth sufficient to ex-
ceed the depth of alluvial material and into the impervious shale.
Depths of the wells ranged from 5 feet to a maximum of 36 feet with
most of the wells being less than 20 feet. The observation wells,
which were drilled in alluvial deposits with water carrying capabil-
ities, were cased with 5-inch perforated pipe and with gravel placed
between the pipe and hole.
Data showing depths of the observation wells, groundwater conditions,
and chloride content of groundwater at the time the wells were in-
stalled, is shown in Table 1. Observation wells prefixed with "NF"
in Table 1 and Figure 5, indicate wells located on the drainage area
of North Fork of Hubbard Creek, and wells prefixed by "C" indicate
wells located on the drainage area of Cook Creek, a tributary of the
North Fork of Hubbard Creek. Data of chloride concentrations mea-
sured in the observation wells during the project period is shown in
Table 2.
21
-------
Figure 5. Location of observation wells
-------
Table 1. OBSERVATION WELL DATA
Hole
no.
NF 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
C 14
NF 15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Date
drilled
1-16-69
11
it
ii
it
it
ii
1-17-69
it
ii
ti
ti
ii
ii
it
ti
1-21-69
ii
ii
ii
ii
1-22-69
u
ii
n
n
n
n
n
ii
ti
1-23-69
u
II
II
Grd.a
elev.
1419.4
1411.9
1417. 1
1421.7
1427.8
1427.5
1432.2
1419.2
1422. 1
1417. 1
1437.0
1440.4
1441.7
1443.7
1439.6
1442. 8
1446.6
1456.3
1457.0
1473.6
1492.7
1490.1
1493.9
1485.8
1480. 9
1485. 1
1470.7
1474.8
1481.6
1493.3
1498.8
1521.9
1531.5
1551.8
1594.6
Totalb
depth
13.
15.
23.
24.
24.
20.
24.
16.
24.
24.
24.
26.
21.
15.
24.
26.
24.
10.
18.
15.
15.5
16.
13.
16.
22.
24.
5.
18.
10.
12.
10.
13.
18.
15.5
20.
3ase
soil
3.0
2.5
7.0
12.0
6.0
1.0
2.5
5.0
3.5
4.0
2.5
3.0
1.5
2.0
1.0
3.5
4.5
2.5
5.0
5.0
3.0
4.5
1.0
3.0
2.0
2.5
1.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.5
2.5
1.5
5.0
4.5
Baseb
alluvium
8.5
12.5
19.0
19.5
17. 0
11. 0
22.5
12. 0
21. 0
18.0
19.5
23.0
19.0
9.0
14.0
16.0
22.0
16.5
12.5
9.5
13.6
10.8
10.0
11.5
17.0
18.5
None
9.5
7.5
9.5
9.0
10.5
16.0
15.0
13.0
Totalb
casing
10.0
16.5
23.5
23.5
22.5
15.0
24.5
16.5
22.5
20.5
23.5
24. '5
19.5
10.5
15.5
18.5
24.0
None
16.5
13. 0
13.5
13.0
12.5
13.5
19.5
20.5
None
12.0
11.5
11.5
11.5
14.5
17.5
16.5
14.5
Amount
fluid when
drilled
Dry
Dry
Moderate
Dry
Dry
Dry
Damp
Dry
Abundant
Abundant
Damp
Abundant
Dry
Dry
Dry
Dry
Damp
Dry
Dry
Dry
Slight
Dry
Dry
Dry
Moderate
Dry
Dry
Dry
Dry
Dry
Abundant
Dry
Dry
Damp
Dry
Initial
chloride,
ppm
5905
3045
2700
5400
140
2905
1295
1360
3630
2345
1785
8150
1765
1470
23
-------
Table 1 (continued
Hole
no..
NF 36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
C 44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
Date
drilled
1-23-69
it
ii
ti
it
it
1-24-69
it
ti
ii
ii
ti
ii
1-27-69
it
ii
n
M
ii
n
n
M
II
1-28-.69
n
M
it
M
M
n
it
it
l-29-6<
n
M
n
n
Grda
elev.
1510.4
1507.0
1557.5
1563.7
1553.3
1562.6
1456.3
1449.7
1453.. 6
1452.4
1460.1
1462.3
1473.4
1482.2
1486.8
1496.5
1507.6
1516.9
1511.6
1519.2
1524.4
1529.9
1549.4
1573.5
1540.0
1555.4
1569.4
1558.0
1588.0
1573.8
1571.5
1580.0
1571.9
1602.0
1583.4
1594.5
1597.8
Totalb
depth
19.
17.
16.
22.
18.
10.
21.
18.
24.
15.
18.
19.
19.
16.
15.
11.
15.
10.
12.
15.
19.
16.
21,
16.
19.5
20.
15.
18.
20.
17.
21.
21.
16.
13.
19.
26.
36.
. OBSERVATION WELL DATA
Baseb
soil
3.0
1.0
1.0
3.0
3.0
0.5
1.5
0.5
0.5
2.0
1.0
3.5
1.5
4.5
4.5
1.0
1.0
2.5
2.0
2.5
4.0
4.0
3.0
3.5
5.5
7.5
1.0
3.5
5.0
1.5
2.2
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.0
2.5
4.0
Baseb
alluvium
16.0
13.0
12.0
18.0
14.0
7.0
17.0
13.0
14.8
12.0
15.0
16.5
11.0
12.0
12.5
7.0
12.5
8.0
10.0
12.0
18.0
9.5
15.0
5.5
18.0
17.0
10.0
15.0
None
10.0
12.0
12.0
12.0
9.1
12.5
25.0
18.0
Totalb
casing
16.5
14.5
None
19.5
15.5
None
22.5
14.5
17.5
12.5
17.5
19.5
15.5
14.5
14.5
8.5
14.5
8.5
10.5
10.5
19.5
12.5
16.5
None
19.5
17.5
12.5
17.5
None
12.5
14.5
14.5
15.5
10.5
13.5
27.5
27.5
Amount
fluid when
drilled
Moderate
Damp
Dry
Damp
Dry
Dry
Abundant
Dry
Dry
Dry
Abundant
Moderate
Dry
Dry
Dry
Dry
Dry
Damp
Moderate
Moderate
Damp
Dry
Dry
Damp
Dry
Damp
Dry
Dry
Dry
Dry
Dry
Trace
Dry
Dry
Dry
Abundant
Slight
Initial
chloride,
ppm
1085
2750
2550
3740
2930
5675
2860
3470
24
-------
Table 1 (continued). OBSERVATION WELL DATA
1
Hole
no.
C73
NF74
Date
drilled
1-29-69
u
Grd. E
elev.
1609. 1
1415.4
Totalb
depth
24.
24.
Base
soil
2.0
2.0
Base
alluvium
22.0
20.2
Totalb
casing
19.5
21.0
Amount
fluid when
drilled
Moderate
Abundant
Initial
chloride,
ppm
1670
2980
a Elevation above mean sea level in feet
b
Depth in feet
25
-------
Table 2. TYPICAL CHLORIDE CONTENT OF SAMPLES FROM TEST WELLS
(mg/1)
We 11 No.
NF 1
2
3
4
5
7
9
1.0
15
16
17
21
22
23
24
25
26
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
3/26/73
6,500
2,950
2,, 520
5,280
2,700
400
1,700
1,860
-
2,500
-
1,780
3,470
11..500
2,670
3,380
3,180
1,230
690
1,720
415
655
1 , 420
106
1/24/72
6,800
2,425
1,850
4, 100
1,700
740
1,120
1, 120
-
2,300
2,330
1,810
2,360
6,150
2,040
2,880
2,045
12,000
690
1,580
1,020
490
1,750
100
12/27/72
7,450
3,365
2,420
4, 160
2,290
410
2,010
2,040
-
2,490
2, 890
1,840
2,510
4,760
1,820
2,980
2,800
10,500
590
2,640
1,475
380
1,800
80
5/25/71
_
2,590
2,255
3,860
_
-
1,810
600
-
1*470
-
1,700
3,550
9,900
2,550
2,700
2,060
-
1,150
-
-
905
1,510
•-
6/15/71
.
1,200
1,200
3,455
_
450
700
1,.400
2,100
1,435
1,375
1,965
2,325
5,850
2,550
2,180
1,250
11,600
70
-
-
700
1,110
90
8/17/71
2,060
1,950
3,700
••
620
1,090
1,220
-
1,580
1,240
1,750
3,275
4,050
2,780
3,110
1,830
13,250
840
_
_
880
1,350
-
9/7/71
2,410
690
3,960
_
-
550
1, 100
-
1,540
560
1,870
3,000
4,225
2,325
3,350
1,980
14, 325
640
-
_
740
1, 030
120
11/18/71
7,400
2,500
1,900
3,700
_
680
855
690
-
2,050
2,240
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
975
-
-
660
1, 130
75
12/19/71
.
2,680
2,510
4,650
_
1,250
2,250
1,000
:
2,350
2,700
2,150
3,925
12,450
3,100
3,050
2,850
-
1,550
-
-
1,200
2,000
-
2/28/69
8,575
3,650
2,925
4,875
_
2,925
820
1,420
2,240
-
2,505
1,940
2,155
14,900
2,420
7,575
3,220
5, ,525
1,075
1,000
1,.520
765
1,625
187
11/7/69
.
2,750
2,650
5,150
-
780
1,650
1,710
2,800
2,400
2B450
1,700
2,400
12,250
2,550
3,450
3,000
MM
960
-
-
1, 100
1,950
435
M
-------
Table 2 (Continued). TYPICAL CHLORIDE CONTENT OF SAMPLES FROM TEST WELLS
Well Net
NF 36
37
42
43
C 45
46
47
48
50
53
54
55
56
57
60
63
67
68
70
71
72
73
NF 74
3/26/73
680
9,900
1,595
2,590
210
2,350
2,465
5,825
2,875
9,075
1,070
810
7,000
2,480
3,580
4,700
7,550
-
5,680
2,895
4,030
-
rtt
1/24/72
650
4,500
1,850
3,310
-
-
-
2,950
2,290
5,360
4,300
4,650
5,650
1,925
3,000
7,800
15,650
3,600
3,000
2,450
2,500
1,300
2,000
L 2/27/72 15/25/71
620
2,400
2,190
3,880
170
2,, 9 00
2,900
5, 100
3,750
7, 950
4,460
4,120
5,800
1,840
1,965
7,950
5,650
•
1,600
2,270
3,860
1,190
1,750
810
4,250
-
-
250
2,350
1,040
3,680
2,320
4,380
5,500
3,560
2,000
4,500
4,200
6,600
5,300
3,600
2,070
3,050
1,200
2,380
6/15/71
175
890
2,370
1,230
330
1,340
750
(
3,550
1,870
2,185
4,360
655
3,960
2,250
4,200
1,780
1,225
3,975
3,500
1,710
2,150
375
2,250
8/17/71
330
3,,020
2,450
1,950
290
1,980
480
1,000
2,175
-
7,550
4,700
3,900
2,050
4,600
3,850
750
3,950
3,750
2,050
2,300
1 , 070
1,950
9/7/71
190
3,500
2,080
2,820
319
1,250
1,865
4,050
2,200
-
5, 850
4,425
4,500
1,390
4,600
3,250
750
4,250
3, 100
1,950
1,930
470
1,760
11/18/71
.
-
1,,750
3,250
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
...
-
-
'
-
-
1,750
12/19/71
1,250
5,600
2,600
2,900
305
2,800
3,500
4,650
2,750
6,500
3,800
5, 150
3, 100
1,800
5,000
5,000
5,950
6,500
4,700
2,500
3, 100
1,600
2,650
2/28/69
1, 180
4,025
2,980
3,400
278
2,730
3,870
5,325
3,560
6,375
3,575
6,300
3,250
3,500
5,750
6,000
8,700
6,625
3,425
3,675
1,810
3,060
11/7/69
700
5,350
2,800
2,375
220
2,300
2,900
4,900
2,900
5,700
3,600
5,350
3,450
1,850
1,550
4,550
6,850
4,200
2, 100
2,450
1,450
2,650
-------
SECTION VII
MONITORING AND TESTING
Upon completion of construction and installation of facilities for the
project, a comprehensive monitoring and testing program was estab-
lished to determine the effect of the project operation on ground-water
contamination in the project area as well as water quality down-
stream from the project.
Laboratory facilities in the offices of the Water District and offices
of Conselman, Jenke, Associates, Consultants to the District, were
utilized to determine chloride content of samples taken from the ob-
servation wells, collection sumps, storage facilities, and North Fork
of Hubbard Creek within the project area. Analysis of downstream
flows and water quality was obtained by use of permanent monitoring
stations that were installed and maintained by the United States Geo-
logical Survey.
U. S. Geological Survey stations utilized for monitoring quantity and
quality of flows downstream from the project site were Stations 8-
0861. 5, North Fork near Albany; Station 8-0862. 12, Hubbard Creek
below Albany; Station 8-0861. 0, Hubbard Creek near Albany; and
Station 8-0864. 0, Hubbard Creek Reservoir. Locations of the U. S. G.
S. monitoring stations are shown in Figure 6.
Flows measured at Station 8-0861. 0 are not affected by flows from
the project area. Quantity and quality of flows measured at this sta-
tion were reviewed for comparison with flows from the project area
as reflected in flow records from Station 8-0861. 5.
The procedure utilized by the Water District in monitoring and test-
ing water quality, was to obtain samples from the observation wells
and collection sumps on a routine basis. These samples were analyzed
to determine the rate of decontamination caused by dewatering and
subsequent refill of the alluvium from fresh water runoff.
As mentioned previously, each of the sump pumps that was installed
in a collection sump was equipped with a flow meter. Volume of
water pumped from the alluvium was recorded on a daily basis. A-
mount of chlorides, expressed in tons, could therefore be calculated
28
-------
0 I
PROJECT
AREA ^ 8-0861.5
Figure 6. Location of U.S.G S monitoring stations
-------
on a daily or monthly basis by use of the formula:
Volume x 2. 72 x C.
Tons of Chlorides =
2,000
where Volume = number of acre-feet pumped
C. = chloride content of water, expressed
in milligrams per liter.
30
-------
SECTION VIII
PROJECT DISCUSSION
Construction of the project facilities was completed during the last
part of March 1970, with operations of withdrawal and pumpage from
the collection sumps beginning on April 1, 1970.
During the first few months of operation, four of the collection
sumps produced water at the total rate of about 101, 000 gallons per
day. During the first four months of operation, Sumps No. 1, 2, 3,
and 4 consistently produced a supply of water for injection to the
disposal well; however, during July 1970, the daily withdrawal rates
from Sumps 2, 3, and 4 began to decline, and production dropped to
zero at these three sumps before the end of the month.
Collection Sump No. 5, which was constructed across the creek bed
of North Fork, was expected to be the major collector of alluvium
water flows, since it would intercept low flows in the North Fork, as
well as local underground water in the alluvium. During the first
two months of operation, Sump No. 5 did not yield any water pri-
marily due to pump malfunction; however, upon correction of these
problems, this sump pumped 1. 03 million gallons of water during
the last few days of May and during the month of June. After June
1970, this sump produced only a small amount of water for the
duration of the project as is shown in the pumpage records, Table 3.
Primary reason that this sump did not yield water is suspected to
have been due to clogging of the collection trench by silt and clay.
Records of water withdrawal and pumpage from each of the collec-
tion sumps on a monthly basis is shown in Table 3. As evident
upon review of Table 3, Sumps No. 1 and 3 were the only sumps
that produced water on a consistent basis as well as being capable
of removing a significant amount of "water from the alluvial deposits.
Sump No. 4 produced water on a rather sporadic basis, indicating
that the alluvial material that it was draining was local in nature and
did not intersect the alluvial deposits drained by Sumps No. 1 and 3.
Sump No. 2 produced water for about four months before production
declined to zero and did not yield water for the duration of the pro-
ject.
31
-------
Table 3. RECORD OF PUMPAGE FROM COLLECTION SUMPS
(million gallons)
April 1970 to March 1973
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
April
May
June
Years
1971
1972
1973
Total
1971
1972
1973
Total
1971
1972
1973
Total
1970
1971
1972
Total
1970
1971
1972
Total
1970
1971
1972
Total,
Sump #1
0
1.489
2.121
3.610
0
1.3053
1.9693
3. 2746
0
1.237
0
1.237
1.3417
0
0.9177
2.2594
0.2853
0
1.1722
1.4575
1.3272
0.1694
1.2033
2.6999
Sump #2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0. 6494
0
0
0. 6494
0. 3497
0
o
0. 3497
1. 1672
o
0
1.1672
Sump #3
0
1.9578
1.9133
3.8711
0
1.442
1.7482
3.1902
0
1.2457
o
[ 1.2457
0.8058
0
1.0172
1.8230
s
0.2373
0
1.2638
1.5011
1.109
0.8059
1.5164 ;
3.4313
Sump #4
0
0
0. 5047
0.5047
0
0
0.9198
0.9198
0
0
0
0
0.7659
0
0
0.7659
0. 1434
0
0
0. 1434
1.0125
0
0.2339
1.2464
Sump #5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0. 1743
0
0
0. 1743
0.858
0.032
0
0.890
32
-------
Table 3 (continued). RECORD OF PUMPAGE FROM COLLECTION
SUMPS
(million gallons)
Month
July
August
Sept.
Oct.
Years
1970
1971
1972
Total
1970
1971
1972
Total
1970
1971
1972
Total
1970
1971
1972
Total
1
Nov. 1970
Dec.
1971
1972
Total
1970
! 1971
1972
Total
PROJECT
TOTAL
Sump #1
1.7083
0. 3298
0.7488
2.7869
0.018
0.3033
0.5291
0. 8504
0.3196
0.3438
0.5843
1.2477
0.1637
0. 6242
0. 8524
1.6403
0.0317
0.9229
1.914
2.8686
0
Sump #2
0. 325
0
0
0. 325
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
! 0
0.9152 0
2.0738
2.989
0
0
26.9213 2.4913
Sump #3
1.7864
0.1624
0.6277
2.5765
0.009
0.0775
0.7096
0.7961
0. 1554
1.1798
0.8998
2.235
0. 0452
1.8226
1.4321
3.2999
0
1.5973
1.1041
2.7014
0
1.8311
1.8358
3.6669
1
30.3382
Sump #4
0. 1234
0
0
0.1234
0
0.115
0
0.115
0
0.1797
0
0.1797
0
0.0706
0
0.0706
0
0
1.6262
1.6263
0
0.0924
0.8592
0.9516
6. 6468
Sump #5
0. 0347
0
0
0.0347
0
0.0256
0
0.0256
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.1246
PROJECT TOTAL OF ALL COLLECTION SUMPS: 67.5222 MG
33
-------
Testing of water samples to determine chloride concentrations in
the alluvial water at each sump was performed by the Water District
for the duration of the project. The weighted average chloride con-
tent, by month, is shown in Figure 7. Chloride content of water
samples from Sumps 2 and 5 are not depicted in Figure 7 because
these two sumps were dry, except for the first few months of opera-
tion.
During the period from January 1970 to July 1971, the alluvial ma-
terial contributing to each sump was almost completely dewatered as
indicated in the pumpage records of Table 3 and in Figure 7. De-
watering of the alluvial deposits was helped considerably because of
the extremely dry weather that was experienced in the project area
from October 1970 to May 1971. The small amount of rainfall that
fell on the North Fork watershed during this period did not produce
any runoff and occurred during the month in such small amounts that
the topsoil of the alluvial material was hardly more than moistened.
Records of annual rainfall at Albany, Texas, located adjacent to the
project site is shown in Table 4.
These extremely dry conditions, and dewatering of each collection
sump, offered the ideal condition to aid in the demonstration for
determining the rate of decontamination of the alluvium by dewater-
ing and subsequent recharge.
Rainfall within the project area began to increase during May 1971,
and a period of very wet weather conditions continued until January
1972. Wet weather conditions occurred again from April 1972 to
January 1973. Intensity of rainfall in this period was moderate,
allowing the alluvium to be recharged at almost a continuous rate for
the last 20 months of the project period. As shown in Figure 7,
chloride content of the alluvial waters withdrawn from the sumps
made a pronounced decrease upon recharge of the alluvial aquifer.
In June 1972, Sump No. 1 experienced a chloride reduction of 21
percent, and Sump No. 3 had a reduction of 38 percent as compared
to the previous chloride content reported in December of 1971.
Correlation of the monthly chloride content of water from the
alluvium with monthly rainfall indicates that as the monthly rainfall
increases, the chloride concentration will decrease, but will depend
upon the water-holding capacity of the alluvial deposit contributing
to the source of pressure or volume relief. For example, during the
34
-------
I '
-------
Table 4. MONTHLY AND YEARLY PERCIPITATION FOR THE PROJECT AREA,
From U, S. Weather Bureau,Records At Albany, Texas
Water
year
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967 :
1968
196:9
1970
1971
1972
1973.
Oct.;
1.44
•91
,87
3.19
1.24
-
:
2.41
; -_
0 . 24
2 . 44
1.62
2. 73
6.87
Nov.
,1.06
6.09
3.83
.22
,38
2. 15
3.65
.91
.16
.2
.80
Dec.
1. 19
.60
.32
1.56
.09
•2.55
:
.66
3.49
•
.22
.2.37
. 08
Jan.
.04
2.58
1 . 7.5
1.76
". 0.0
8.13
.68
0
.05
.00
2.98
Feb.
.31
2.77
1.66
.79
.29
,2.87
2. 87
2. 01
. 80
.25
March
. 08
:
1.51
.48
1.49
.85
2.16
3.67
1.68
.09
1
.
.25
April
3.43
1.47
4.53
6.98
1.52
2.43
2. 36
:
6. 02
1. 01
3. 15
•;
May
4.78
3.71
7.99
2.73
:5.19
2.31
7.30
1.94
4.93
3.99
i
June
2.9
1.5
2.41
1.5
2.54
3.26
4.56
. 10
1.32
1.51
1
1
July
' • . .
.98
.05
'
.22
.41
1.21
3.68
T
T
2. 16
1.56
August
1 . 67
y
3.29
1.97
6.34
1.43
.32.
1.38
1. 93
4. 79
4. 35
•
Sept.
1.74
3.69.
3. 82
4. 87
6,72
1
. 31
4.68
4. 17
4.43
4.40
Total
19,62
28. 17
29.85
31. 84
21.46
,32. 58
32.05
24.69
21.58
24.76
-------
months of June and July 1972, rainfall for the month was 1. 51 and
1. 56 inches, respectively, and the chloride concentration of Sump
No. 3 remained fairly constant at about 1650 mg/1. Monthly rainfall
then increased during August, September, and October to a maximum
of 6. 87 inches then decreased to less than an inch in November.
Chloride concentrations in Sumps No. 3 and 4 showed a marked de-
crease during the wetter months and a pronounced increase as the
rainfall decreased. -,
Chloride content in Sump No. 1 did not show the pronounced decrease
with the increase of rainfall as experienced in Sumps 3 and 4, giving
reason to believe that the capacity of the alluvial deposit being drain-
ed is larger than that drained by Sump No. 3. Consequently, more
time is given to the leaching of chlorides from the alluvium as the
water travels through the alluvial deposits.
The higher value of chloride concentrations from Sump No. 1, as
compared to Sump No. 3, also gives reason to believe that continuity
of the alluvial deposits in the project area does not exist and that
small pockets of alluvial material have been deposited throughout the
area containing varying water-holding capacities and degrees of salt
water contamination. This condition is also indicated in the records
of chlorides for each of the observation wells as shown in Table 3.
Figure 7 indicates that the chloride concentration of water withdrawn
from the sumps was virtually the same at initiation and completion of
the project.
Results of the dewatering of the alluvium within the project area, and
subsequent recharging that has taken place during the last 20 months
of wet-weather conditions, indicate that decontamination of the al-
luvium from residual salts will take place at a very slow pace over a
period of many years. It is not likely that the chloride concentra-
tions of the alluvium water will be reduced to 50 mg/1 in the fore-
seeable future.
A summary by months showing the weighted average chlorides from
all the collection sumps, amount of water injected into the disposal
well, tons of chlorides injected, and monthly cost for operations
during the project period is shown in Table 5. It is noted that monthly
operating costs, as shown in the table, include only the cost of the
project operator, facility maintenance, and power for pump operation.
Capital cost of the facilities and supervision by the Water District
personnel are not included.
37
-------
Table 5. SUMMARY OF PROJECT DATA
Month
Apr,7C
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan. 71
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan. 72
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Jan. 73
Feb.
Total
Average
Weighted
average
chloride
ppm
1990
1780
2145
2490
2535
2620
2985
3110
0
0
0
0
0
0
1560
2045
' 2150
1298
1298
1519
1486
1609
1809
1953
2166
1971
1992
2181
1927
1818
1635
1671
2037
2274
2267
2011
Ac. Ft.
water
ejected
11.96
3.79
18.79
12.44
3.92
1.46
0.64
0.10
0
0
0
0
0
0
3.09
1.51
1.6
5.22
7.72
7.73
8.71
10.58
8.43
7.61
5.94
7.47
9.06
4.22
3.80
4.55
7.01
14.25
14.63
13.92
14.23
214.38
6.13
Tons
chloride
ejected
32.4
9.2
54.9
42. 1
13.5
5.2
2.6
.4
0
0
0
0
0
0
6.6
4.2
4.68
9.24
13.64
15.98
17.02
23.17
20.76
22.41
17.44
19.99
24.49
12.49
9.94
11.23
15. 54
32.31
40.45
42. 97
43.78
568.63
16.25
Monthly
operating
cost
$ 844.23
3,802.08
1, 161.05
904.85
835.96
862.57
400.00
533.00
584.85
705.45
1,400.00
400.00
533.00
533.00
573.03
575.51
705.02
571.16
481. 92*
627.48
925. 751
785.85
795.55
684.95
666.23
703.79
904.50
645.37
629.36
590.93
668.56
861.11
1,000.92
964.95
1,683.62
£30, 070.45
$ 859. 16
Cost per
barrel
water
ejected
$0.009
.137
.008
.009
.0274
.0763
. . 0844
.7059
0
0
0
0
0
0
.0239
.0491
.0568
.0127
..0080a
.0105
.0137b
.0096
.0122
.0116
.0145
.0121
.0128
.0197
.0213
.0167
.0122
.0077
.0088
.0089
.0152
.0181
Cost per
ac. ft..
water
ejected
$ 70.59
1,003. 19
61.79
72. 74
213.26
590.80
625.00
5, 330. 00
0
0
0
0
0
0
185.45
381. 13
440. 64
109.33
62.42a
81.17
106.29*
74.28
94.37
' 90.01
112. 16
94.19
99.84
152.86
165.62
129.82
95.41
60.45
68.42
69.30
118.35
140.27
Cost per
ton
chloride
ejected
$ 23.00
431. 00
21. 15
21.49
61.92
165. 99
153.85
1,332.50
0
0
0
0
0
0
86.82
137.03
150.65
61.84
35.33a
39.27
54.39b
33.92
38.32
30.56
38.20
35.22
36.93
51.67
63.34
52.63
43. 01
26.65
24.74
22.45
38.46
52.88
a No electric power charge included in this figure.
b Electric power cost for two months included in this figure.
38
-------
The project summary indicates that 568. 63 tons of salt have been
withdrawn from the alluvium that contributed contaminated water to
the five sumps during the operation of the demonstration project. It
is obvious that a portion of this salt load would have been discharged
into North Fork and eventually deposited into Hubbard Creek Reser-
voir. How much of this salt load would have reached the reservoir
is a question that remains unanswered. The effect that this chloride
reduction could have conceivably made on the quality of water in
Hubbard Creek Reservoir can be generalized by review of the annual
chloride and dissolved solids loads that have been recorded at the
monitoring stations downstream from the project site. Tables 6, 7,
and 8 contain data on the annual flows and chloride loadings measured
at monitoring stations downstream from the project site. Data shown
is compiled from published and unpublished records made available
to the Water District by the United States Geological Survey, and is
subject to revision. Table 6 shows the historic record of chloride
concentrations in the North Fork of Hubbard Creek from 1963 to 1972.
This table indicates that the total chloride loading measured at this
monitoring station is extremely variable from year to year, and is
dependent on the amount of water discharged and the chloride concen-
tration of streamflow. Comparison of average daily discharge and
chloride loadings measured at this station for the years of 1964 and
1971, with 1963 and 1972, indicates that reduction of yearly chloride
loadings brought about by the demonstration project was substantial.
It should be pointed out, however, that in 1964, the Railroad Commis-
sion of Texas issued the "No Pit11 regulation, which placed a prohibi-
tion on disposal of oil-field brine into unlined earthen pits; and that
in the period from 1964 to 1966, all of the then existing surface stor-
age pits were abandoned and covered over. Also during this period
of time, many abandoned oil wells that had been improperly plugged
were reworked and replugged, and improvements in secondary oil
recovery operations and brine disposal operations were experienced
within the watershed of North Fork and Cook Creeks.
Correlating flow and chloride loading data measured at Station 8-0861.
5, North Fork near Albany, Table 6, with Station 8-0862. 12, Hubbard
Creek below Albany, Table 7, indicates that flows from North Fork
contributed 6. 6% of the flow measured at Station 8-0862. 12 during the
period 1969 thru 1972, and contributed 8. 1% of the chloride loading
at this station. This represents a considerable reduction in the
39
-------
Table 6. ANNUAL CHLORIDE & DISSOLVED SOLIDS LOADINGS3
U. S. G. S. Station-8-0861. 50
North Fork Hubbard Creek Near Albany
Year0
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
Avg. daily
dis charge,
cfs
0.7
1.4
5.0
4.9
. 0. 87
12.7
8.31
1.99
1.3
0.51
Chlorides
m,/l«
1,860
1,370
649
710
1, 270
673
534
701
505
780
ton/?
1,170
1,830
3,200
3,430
1,090
8,440
4,371
1,374
645
390
Dissolved solids
m£/J
3,170
2,290
1,200
1,290
1,270
-
2,851
2,772
2,129
1,470
tons
1,970
3,170
5,900
6,230
1,890
-
8,281
2,470
1,263
730
Discharge,
ac. ft.
507
1,013
3,618
3,546
629
9,191
6,011
. 1,440
938
369
b
c
From published and unpublished records of United States Geological
Survey.
Water Year - October to September
Weighted Average
40
-------
Table 7. ANNUAL CHLORIDE & DISSOLVED SOLIDS LOADINGSa
U. S. G. S. Station -8-0862. 12
Hubbard Creek Below Albany
Yearb
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
Avg. daily
discharge
cfs
15.6
182. 1
91.2
63.34
23.44
6. 15
Chlorides
mg/lc
116
165
131
210
155
410
tons
2,090
29,700
11,800
13, ,126
3,571
2,500
Dissolved solids
mg/lc
370
542
408
803
tons
-
33,700
33,559
9,347
5,040 ;
Discharge
ac. ft..
11,290
131,760
66,000
45,838
16,965
4,451
a From published and unpublished records of United States Geological
Survey.
Water Year - October to September.
c Weighted Average.
Table 8. ANNUAL CHLORIDE & DISSOLVED SOLIDS LOADINGS'
U. S. G. S. Station -8-0861.00
Hubbard Creek Near Albany
Year0
1969
1970
1971
1972
Avg. daily
discharge
cfs
63.36
39.92
19.01
5.98
Chlorides
mg/lc
129
197
98
250
tons
8,077
7,750
1,831
1,460
Dissolved solids
mg/lc
391
564
322
570
tons
24,223
22,190
5,981
3,380
Discharge
ac, ft..
45,853
28,890
13,757
4,328
a From published and unpublished records of United States Geological
Survey.
" Water Year - October to September.
c Weighted Averages.
41
-------
chloride loading contributed by North Fork when compared to the
387o chloride loading from the North Pork area for the period 1962 to
1965. Percent of flow contributed from the North Fork was fairly
consistent during the two periods, with the percentage being 6. 6 from
1969 thru 1972, and 9% from 1962 to 1965. Review of data shown in
Tabled, Station 8-0861-0, Hubbard Creek near Albany, reveals
varied data on flows past this station. It does not appear that any
significant improvements or changes in water quality measured at
this station occurred during the project period. Problems of salt
water pollution on the drainage area of this station were not as
serious as those on the North Fork-Cook Creek drainage area, there-
fore, it is believed that efforts to clean up smaller areas of pollution
brought about by the "No Pit" regulation did not affect water quality
as much as the larger concentrated areas of pollution such as were
found on the North Fork watershed.
The relatively small amount (569 tons) of chlorides injected into the
disposal well during this project, indicates that the major improve-
ment of water quality has occurred through clean up of highly polluted
surface areas rather than removal of contamination from the allu-
vium.
Effect of the chloride removal from the alluvium during the course
of the project had on the water quality of Hubbard Creek Reservoir
could theoretically be determined by using the relationship of inflow
into the lake, chloride loading, and evaporation rates for a selected
period of time. Effect can more simply be shown by use of a hypo-
thetical case; assuming the lake at capacity, chloride load into the
lake of 569 tons, and no inflow. Comparison of chloride concentra-
tions in the lake with the 569 tons chloride loading that was removed
during the project and the chloride residual that would be caused only
by evaporation can demonstrate and approach the actual conditions of
quality of water in the reservoir.
This hypothetical condition was almost simulated during the extreme-
ly dry period of October 1970 to April 1971, when practically no in-
flow into Hubbard Creek Reservoir was recorded. Assumption of
chloride residual of the lake waters will be selected as 161 mg/1, as
this was the actual condition in the year 1969 when the lake was at
capacity and was just prior to the project period. Evaporation rate
will be assumed to be 2. 63 feet, which was the rate for the period of
October to April for year 1964 to 1965, as presented in the Texas
42
-------
Water Development Board, Report 64, for quadrangle E-8.
HYPOTHETICAL CASE 1: RESERVOIR AT CAPACITY
Calculations for determining the concentrations of chlorides expected
in the reservoir; considering no inflow, a chloride loading of 569 tons
and the effects of evaporation for the period of October 1970 to April
1971, are as follows:
where
VR = SA x ER
(1)
VR =
SA =
ER =
reduction of lake volume caused by evaporation, acre-
feet
surface area of reservoir, acres
evaporation rate, feet
VR = 15,000 x 2.63
VR = 39, 450
V = A - VR
where V = volume of reservoir after evaporation, acre-feet
A = volume of lake when full, acre-feet
VR = reduction of volume caused by evaporation
V = 317,800 - 39,450
V = 278,350
(2)
TCR _ C x VF x 2. 72 + 569
2000
(3)
where TCR = chlorides in reservoir after evaporation, including
chlorides disposed of during project, tons
C = chloride content of reservoir in October 1970,
mg/1
VF = volume of full reservoir, acre-feet
TCR _ 161 x 317,800 x 2.72 + 569
2000
TCR = 70, 154
43
-------
_ TCR x 2000
cc —
Vx2.72 (4)
where CC = concentration of chlorides expected in April 1971,
mg/1
TCR = chlorides in reservoir after evaporation, including
chlorides disposed of during projections
V = volume of reservoir after evaporation, acre-feet
_ 70,154 x 2000
CC 278,350x2.72
CC = 185.3
^T CC - C x 100
CI = —C (5)
where CI = percent of chloride increase from October 1970 to
April 1971
CC = calculated chloride concentration for April 1971,
mg/1
C = chloride content of reservoir in October 1970, mg/1
185.3 - 161 x 100
CI= 161
CI= 15.1
HYPOTHETICAL CASE 2: RESERVOIR AT CAPACITY
Calculations for determining the concentrations of chlorides ex-
pected in the reservoir considering no inflow and the effects of
evaporation for the period of October 1970 to April 1971 are made
excluding the chlorides removed during the project for comparison
purposes. Calculations for the hypothetical case are as follows:
= Cx VFx 2. 72
TCR 2000 (6)
44
-------
Where TCR = chlorides in reservoir after evaporation, tons
C = chloride content of reservoir in October 1970, mg/1
VF = volume of full reservoir, acre-feet
. 161 x 317, 800 x 2.72
2000
TCR = 69,585
_ TCR x 2000
Vx2.72 (7)
where CC = concentration of chlorides expected in April 1971,
mg/1
TCR = chlorides in reservoir after evaporation, tons
V = volume of reservoir after evaporation, acre-feet
_ 69,585 x 2000
CC " 278, 350 x 2.72
CC = 183.8
r-y CC - C x 100
CI= C (8)
where CI = percent of chloride increase from October 1970 to
April 1971
CC = calculated chloride concentration for April 1971,
mg/1
C = chloride content of reservoir in October 1970, mg/1
_ 183.8 - 161 x 100
CI 161
CI = 14.2
These hypothetical conditions demonstrate that loading of the reser-
voir with the chlorides removed during the project period would
theoretically increase the chloride concentration in the reservoir by
45
-------
0.9 percent, or 1.5 mg/1, over and above the increase of chlorides
that would be contributed by surface evaporation alone. Surface
evaporation would, therefore, be considered as the major factor for
increased chloride residuals in the reservoir.
Table 9. CHLORIDE CONTENT OF HUBB ARD CREEK RESERVOIR
U. S. G. S. Station 8-0864. 0
Chlorides,
Date ; rng/1
July 15, 1969
July 15, 1970
June 15, 1971
September 12, 1972
March 23, 1973
161
198
240
284
284
Table 9 shows the actual concentrations of chlorides in the reservoir
as determined from data available from Station 8-0864-0, located in
the reservoir. It is interesting to note that chloride concentrations
in the reservoir, as shown in this table on July 15, 1969, and July 15,
1970, increased very closely to that as calculated in the hypothetical
condition.
The insignificant effect that the alluvium waters appear to have on
the chloride content of the reservoir is demonstrated further by re-
viewing the relationship between chloride content and streamflows.
Figure 8, shows this general relationship at Station 8-862. 12, Hub-
bard Creek below Albany. This figure shows that the relationship
between flow and chloride concentration was very eratic. This is
presumed to be caused by the many variable factors of the watershed
itself as well as the unpredictable amounts of rainfall in the West
Texas area. Review of the daily records of flow and chloride con-
centrations for the period 1969 to 1972 will reveal that the difference
between chloride concentration of low flows versus high flows appears
to be smaller for the year 1972 versus 1969. It also indicates that
antecedent conditions result in a large variation of flow versus chlo-
ride content. For example, most of the low chloride concentration
that is experienced with low flows, as indicated in Figure 8, are pre-
46
-------
100200300400
500 600 TOO 800
CHLORIDES (mg/l.)
47
-------
ceded by several days of relatively high flows caused by high intensity
rainfall. Also according to the U.S. G. S. data, the larger flows, such
as 50 cfs and above, are generally associated with chloride concen-
trations of 120 to 340 mg/1. This appears to be rather unique, since
normally it would be expected to receive relatively small concentra-
tions at such large flows. Evaporation of brine water on and near
the surface, and years of surface saturation with brine water, con-
tributes to this situation.
One important observation shown on Figure 8 is that chloride concen-
trations decrease with an increase in flow, although very seldom does
it decrease to the 50 mg/1 recommended by the chloride routing study
for obtaining a lake chloride concentration of under 250 mg/1.
Efforts of work performed in conjunction with this demonstration pro-
ject, and data collected on water quality and quantity, indicate that
low flows of North Fork of Hubbard Creek, and Hubbard Creek, still
contain chloride contents that vary from 450 to 1300 mg/1. Chloride
content of those flows under 10 cfs decrease to less than 450 mg/1 at
times; however, this decrease usually occurs after the initial wash-
off of the watershed that is associated with higher flows.
The high chloride content of low flows contribute to the chloride load-
ing of the reservoir; however, the relationship of quality and .quantity
of flows into Hubbard Creek Reservoir reduces the overall effect of
low flow chloride loadings on the reservoir. For example, during
the 1972 water year, from October 1971 thru September 1972, the
total flow measured at Station 8-0862. 12 was 4, 451 acre feet. Total
chloride loading at this station was 2, 500 tons. Flows under 10 cfs
were experienced 91. 2 percent of the time and contributed only 25
percent of the chloride loading measured at the station.
Low flows that are caused by subsurface seepage appear to be associ-
ated with flows under 2 cfs. Flows under 2 cfs contributed only 8. 9
percent, or 225 tons, of the chloride loading measured at Station
8-0862. 12 during the 1972 water year.
It does not appear that efforts to reduce chloride pollution of Hubbard
Creek Reservoir by eliminating highly chlorinated low flows will make
significant improvements in the water quality of the reservoir.
48
-------
SECTION IX
REFERENCES
1. Conselman, Dr. Frank B. , Arthur L. Jenke, and Orbon H. Tice.
Conselman, Jenke & Tice, Consultants. Preliminary Report,
Hubbard Creek Reservoir Basin, West Central Texas Municipal
Water District, Stephens and Shackelford Counties, Texas.
February 28, 1962.
2. Conselman, Dr. Frank B. , Arthur L. Jenke, and Orbon H. Tice.
Conselman, Jenke & Tice, Consultants. Final Report, Hubbard
Creek Reservoir Watershed, West Central Texas Municipal Water
District, Shackelford, Stephens, Callahan, and Eastland Counties,
Texas. May 22, 1962.
3. Conselman, Dr. Frank B. , and Arthur L. Jenke. Conselman,
Jenke, Associates. Report of Investigations, Hubbard Creek
Reservoir Watershed, West Central Texas Municipal Water
District. January 1, 1966.
4. Kane, John W. . Monthly Reservoir Evaporation Rates for Texas,
1940 through 1965. Texas Water Development Board, Report 64.
October 1967. page 59.
49
«U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:1974 546-318/376- 1-3
-------
SELECTED WATER
RESOURCES ABSTRACTS
INPUT TRANSACTION FORM
11. Report No.
2.
.?. Accession No,
w
•' T:>!" NORTH FOBS ALLUVIAL DBCGHEAMDIA3ION PROJECT,
HUBBARD CHEEK RESERVOIR WATERSHED
7. Author(s)
Jacob,
L,
9. Organization
WEST CEBTBAL TEXAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
5, Keport Date
S. 1 v Ttormiug Organization
Report No.
10: Project No.
11. Contract/Grant No.
14020
15. Supplementary Notes
Environmental Protection Agency Report Nuniber EPA-660/2-74-019, April 1974
t A detailed demonstration project was performed to determine the effect that
of a polluted alluvial aquifer and subsequent recharge by rainfall would have
the decontamination rate of the polluted alluvium. The alluvial deposits within the
•Jeot area were polluted by years of brine water disposal from oil field operations lnt<
unlined earthen pits, secondary oil recovery operations, and abandoned and improperly
oil wells* Secondary benefits of the project were to determine the effect that
of contaminated alluvial water would have on downstream water quality, and on the
.ty of water in a municipal water supply located downstream from the project site.
ontandnated water withdrawn from the alluvium was disposed of in a deep disposal well
aving a depth of 5,700 feet,
m evaluation of the project indicated that contaminated water from alluvial deposits can
luccessfully be collected and disposed of* Decontamination of the alluvial deposits was
Letendned to be at a very slow rate, and would take years to show significant improvemen
o appreciable reduction in chlorides in the reservoir resulted from the three years oper
it ion of the project.
this report was submitted in fulfillment of Project Number 14020 Efftf by the West Central
fexas Municipal Water District under the (partial) sponsorship of the Environmental Pro-
tection Annoy. Work was completed as of May 1973.
17a. Descriptors
"Injection wells, *Brine disposal, *Ground water, "Pollution abatement,
Water pollution control, Aquifers, Reservoir evaporation, Secondary
recovery (oil).
17b. Identifiers
"Aquifer rehabilitation, Alluvial aquifer, Brazos River Basin,
Brine-disposal pits, Oil-well plugging.
lie. COWRR Field & Group
- ______
is. .':;:
Send To;
WATER RESOURCES SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CENTER
U.J DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
WASHINGTON, D. C. 2024O
Abstractor Billy L. Jacob
I institution West Central Texas Municipal Water District
WRSIC !O2 (REV JUNE 1971)
------- |